Add parallel Print Page Options

ה (He)

Her foes subjugated her;[a]
her enemies are at ease.[b]
For the Lord afflicted her
because of her many acts of rebellion.[c]
Her children went away
captive[d] before the enemy.

ו (Vav)

All of Daughter Zion’s[e] splendor[f]
has departed.[g]
Her leaders became like deer;
they found no pasture,
so they were too exhausted to escape[h]
from the hunter.[i]

ז (Zayin)

Jerusalem remembers,[j]
when[k] she became a poor homeless person,[l]
all her treasures
that she owned in days of old.[m]
When her people fell into an enemy’s grip,[n]
none of her allies came to her rescue.[o]
Her enemies[p] gloated over[q] her;
they sneered[r] at her downfall.[s]

Read full chapter

Footnotes

  1. Lamentations 1:5 tn Heb “her foes became [her] head” (הָיוּ צָרֶיהָ לְרֹאשׁ, hayu tsareha leroʾsh) or more idiomatically “have come out on top.” This is a Semitic idiom for domination or subjugation, with “head” as a metaphor for leader.
  2. Lamentations 1:5 tn The nuance expressed in the LXX is that her enemies prosper (cf. KJV, NASB, NRSV, NLT).
  3. Lamentations 1:5 tn Heb “because of her many rebellions.” The plural פְּשָׁעֶיהָ (peshaʿeha, “her rebellions”) is an example of the plural of repeated action or characteristic behavior (see IBHS 121 §7.4.2c). The third person feminine singular suffix (“her”) probably functions as a subjective genitive: “her rebellions” = “she has rebelled.”
  4. Lamentations 1:5 tn The singular noun שְׁבִי (shevi) is a collective singular, meaning “captives, prisoners.” It functions as an adverbial accusative of state: “[they] went away as captives.”
  5. Lamentations 1:6 tn Heb “the daughter of Zion.” This phrase is used as an epithet for the city. “Daughter” may seem extraneous in English but consciously joins the various epithets and metaphors of Jerusalem as a woman, a device used to evoke sympathy from the reader.
  6. Lamentations 1:6 tn Heb “all her splendor.” The third person feminine singular pronominal suffix (“her”) functions as a subjective genitive: “everything in which she gloried.” The noun הָדָר (hadar, “splendor”) is used of personal and impersonal referents in whom Israel gloried: Ephraim (Deut 33:17), Jerusalem (Isa 5:14), Carmel (Isa 35:2). The context focuses on the exile of Zion’s children (1:5c) and leaders (1:6bc). The departure of the children and leaders of Jerusalem going away into exile suggested to the writer the departure of the glory of Israel.
  7. Lamentations 1:6 tn Heb “It has gone out from the daughter of Zion, all her splendor.”
  8. Lamentations 1:6 tn Heb “they fled with no strength” (וַיֵּלְכוּ בְלֹא־כֹחַ, vayyelekhu beloʾ khoakh).
  9. Lamentations 1:6 tn Heb “the pursuer” or “the chaser.” The term רָדַף (radaf, “to chase, pursue”) here refers to a hunter (e.g., 1 Sam 26:20). It is used figuratively (hypocatastasis) of military enemies who “hunt down” those who flee for their lives (e.g., Gen 14:15; Lev 26:7, 36; Judg 4:22; Pss 7:6; 69:27; 83:16; 143:3; Isa 17:13; Lam 5:5; Amos 1:11).
  10. Lamentations 1:7 sn As elsewhere in chap. 1, Jerusalem is personified as remembering the catastrophic days of 587 b.c. when Nebuchadnezzar destroyed the city and exiled its inhabitants. Like one of its dispossessed inhabitants, Jerusalem is pictured as becoming impoverished and homeless.
  11. Lamentations 1:7 tn Heb “the days of her poverty and her homelessness,” or “the days of her affliction and wandering.” The plural construct יְמֵי (yeme, “days of”) functions in the general sense “the time of” or “when,” envisioning the time period in which this occurred. The principal question is whether the phrase is a direct object or an adverb. If a direct object, she remembers either the season when the process happened or she remembers, i.e., reflects on, her current season of life. An adverbial sense, “during” or “throughout” normally occurs with כֹּל (kol, “all”) in the phrase “all the days of…” but may also occur without כֹּל (kol) in poetry as in Job 10:20. The adverbial sense would be translated “during her poor homeless days.” Treating “days” adverbially makes better sense with line 7b, whereas treating “days” as a direct object makes better sense with line 7c.
  12. Lamentations 1:7 tn The third person feminine singular suffixes on the terms עָנְיָהּ וּמְרוּדֶיהָ (ʿonyah umerudeha, “her poverty and her homelessness,” or “the days of her affliction and wandering”) function as subjective genitives: “she became impoverished and homeless.” The plural noun וּמְרוּדֶיהָ (umerudeha, lit. “her homelessnesses”) is an example of the plural of intensity. The two nouns עָנְיָהּ וּמְרוּדֶיהָ (ʿonyah umerudeha, lit., “her poverty and her homelessness”) form a nominal hendiadys in which one noun functions adjectivally and the other retains its full nominal sense: “her impoverished homelessness” or “homeless poor” (GKC 397-98 §124.e). The nearly identical phrase עֲנִיִּים מְרוּדִים (ʿaniyyim merudim, “homeless poor”) is used in Isa 58:7 (see GKC 226 §83.c), suggesting this was a Hebrew idiom. Jerusalem is personified as one of its inhabitants who became impoverished and homeless when the city was destroyed.
  13. Lamentations 1:7 tc The BHS editors suggest that the second bicola in 1:7 is a late addition and should be deleted. Apart from the four sets of bicola here in 1:7 and again in 2:19, every stanza in chapters 1-4 consists of three sets of bicola. Commentators usually suggest dropping line b or line c. Depending on the meaning of “days” in line a (see note on “when” earlier in the verse) either line makes sense. The four lines would make sense as two bicola if “days of” in line 7a is understood adverbially and 7b as the direct object completing the sentence. Lines 7c-d would begin with a temporal modifier and the rest of the couplet describe conditions that were true at that time.
  14. Lamentations 1:7 tn Heb “into the hand of.” In such phrases “hand” represents power or authority.
  15. Lamentations 1:7 tn Heb “and there was no helper for her.” This phrase is used idiomatically in OT to describe the plight of a city whose allies refuse to help ward off a powerful attacker. The nominal participle II עוֹזֵר (ʿozer) refers elsewhere to military warriors (1 Chr 12:1, 18, 22; 2 Chr 20:23; 26:7; 28:23; 26:15; Pss 28:7; 46:6; Ezek 12:14; 30:8; 32:21; Dan 11:34) and the related noun refers to military allies upon whom an attacked city calls for help (Lachish Letters 19:1).
  16. Lamentations 1:7 tn Heb “the adversaries” (צָרִים, tsarim). The third person feminine singular pronoun “her” is supplied in the translation for the sake of clarity and good English style.
  17. Lamentations 1:7 tn The verb רָאָה (raʾah, “to look”) has a broad range of meanings, including “to feast the eyes upon” and “to look down on” or “to gloat over” fallen enemies with exultation and triumph (e.g., Judg 16:27; Pss 22:18; 112:8; 118:7; Ezek 28:17; Mic 7:10; Obad 12, 13). This nuance is clarified by the synonymous parallelism between רָאוּהָ (raʾuha, “they gloated over her”) in the A-line and שָׂחֲקוּ עַל־מִשְׁבַּתֶּהָ (sakhaqu ʿal mishbatteha, “they mocked at her downfall”) in the B-line.
  18. Lamentations 1:7 tn Heb “laughed” or “sneered.” The verb שָׂחַק (sakhaq, “to laugh”) is often used in reference to contempt and derision (e.g., Job 30:1; Pss 37:13; 52:8; 59:9; Lam 1:7).
  19. Lamentations 1:7 tc The MT reads מִשְׁבַּתֶּהָ (mishbatteha, “her annihilation”) from the noun מִשְׁבָּת (mishbat, “cessation, annihilation”), which is derived from the root שָׁבַת (shavat, “to cease”). The LXX mistakenly connected this with the root יָשַׁב (yashav, “to dwell”), reading μετοικεσίᾳ αὐτῆς (metoikesia autēs) which reflects שִׁבְתָּהּ (shivtah, “her dwelling”). The MT is favored on the basis of internal evidence: (1) The MT is the more difficult reading, being a hapax legomenon, (2) the LXX is guilty of simply misunderstanding the root and wrongly vocalizing the consonantal text, and (3) the LXX does not make good sense contextually, while the MT does.tn Heb “her cessation” or “her annihilation.”