Lamentations, Book Of – Lane

Lamentations, Book Of

lam-en-ta'-shunz,--The Lamentations of Jeremiah:

1. Name:

This is a collective name which tradition has given to 5 elegies found in the Hebrew Canon that lament the fate of destroyed Jerusalem. The rabbis call this little book 'Ekhah ("how"), according to the word of lament with which it begins, or qinoth. On the basis of the latter term the Septuagint calls it threnoi, or Latin Threni, or "Lamentations."

2. Form:

The little book consists of 5 lamentations, each one forming the contents of a chapter. The first 4 are marked by the acrostic use of the alphabet. In addition, the qinah ("elegy") meter is found in these hymns, in which a longer line (3 or 4 accents) is followed by a shorter (2 or 3 accents). In Lamentations 1:1–22 and 2 the acrostic letters begin three such double lines; in Lamentations 4:1–22, however, two double lines. In Lamentations 3:1–66 a letter controls three pairs, but is repeated at the beginning of each line. In Lamentations 5:1–22 the alphabet is wanting; but in this case too the number of pairs of lines agrees with the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet, i.e. 22. In Lamentations 2:1–22; Lamentations 3:1–66 and 4, the letter `ayin (`) follows pe (p), as is the case in Psalms 34:1–22. Lamentations 1, however, follows the usual order.

3. Contents:

These 5 hymns all refer to the great national catastrophe that overtook the Jews and in particular the capital city, Jerusalem, through the Chaldeans, 587-586 BC. The sufferings and the anxieties of the city, the destruction of the sanctuary, the cruelty and taunts of the enemies of Israel, especially the Edomites, the disgrace that befell the king and his nobles, priests and prophets, and that, too, not without their own guilt, the devastation and ruin of the country--all this is described, and appeal is made to the mercy of God. A careful sequence of thought cannot be expected in the lyrical feeling and in the alphabetical form. Repetitions are found in large numbers, but each one of these hymns emphasizes some special feature of the calamity. Lamentations 3 is unique, as in it one person describes his own peculiar sufferings in connection with the general calamity, and then too in the name of the others begins a psalm of repentance. This person did not suffer so severely because he was an exceptional sinner, but because of the unrighteousness of his people. These hymns were not written during the siege, but later, at a time when the people still vividly remembered the sufferings and the anxieties of that time and when the impression made on them by the fall of Jerusalem was still as powerful as ever.

4. Author:

Who is the author of these hymns? Jewish tradition is unanimous in saying that it was Jeremiah. The hymns themselves are found anonymously in the Hebrew text, while the Septuagint has in one an additional statement, the Hebrew style of which would lead us to conclude that it was found in the original from which the version was made. This statement reads: "And it came to pass, after Israel had been taken away captive and Jerusalem had been laid waste, that Jeremiah sat weeping, and uttered this lamentation over Jerusalem and said." The Targum also states that Jeremiah was the author. The rabbis and the church Fathers have no doubts on the subject. Jerome (compare on Zechariah 12:11) thinks that 2 Chronicles 35:25 refers to these hymns. The same is said by Josephus (Ant., X, v, 1). If this were the case, then the writer of Chronicles would have regarded La as having been written because of the death of Josiah. But this misunderstanding is not to be ascribed to him. It was easily possible that he was acquainted with lamentations of such a nature, but which afterward were lost. At all events, Jeremiah was by nature adapted to the composition of such elegies, as is proved by his book of prophecies.

Only in modern times has the authorship of these hymns by Jeremiah been seriously called into question; and it is now denied by most critics. For this they give formal and material reasons: The language of these lamentations shows many similarities to the discourses of Jeremiah, but at the same time also many differences. The claim that the alphabetical scheme is not worthy of Jeremiah is a prejudice caused by the taste of our times. Hebrew poets had evidently been making use of such methods for a long time, as it helps materially in memorizing. At the time of the first acute suffering on account of the destruction of Jerusalem, in fact, he would probably not have made use of it. But. we have in this book a collection of lamentations' written some time after this great catastrophe. The claim has also been made that the views of Jeremiah and those of the composer or the composers of these poems differ materially. It is said that Jeremiah emphasizes much more strongly the guilt of the people as the cause of the calamity than is done in these hymns, which lament the fate of the people and find the cause of it in the sins of the fathers (Lamentations 5:7), something that Jeremiah is said not to accept (Jeremiah 31:29 f). However, the guilt of the people and the resultant wrath of God are often brought out in these hymns; and Jeremiah does not deny (31:29 f) that there is anything like inherited guilt. He declares rather that in the blessed future things would be different in this respect. Then, too, we are not to forget that if Jeremiah is the author of these patriotic hymns, he does not speak in them as the prophet and the appointed accuser of his people, but that he is at last permitted to speak as he humanly feels, although there is no lack of prophetical reminiscences (of Lamentations 4:21 f). In these hymns he speaks out of the heart that loves his Jerusalem and his people, and he utters the priestly prayer of intercession, which he was not allowed to do when announcing the judgment over Israel. The fact that he also evinces great reverence for the unfortunate king and his Divinely given hereditary dignity (Lamentations 4:20), although as a prophet he had been compelled to pronounce judgment over him, would not be unthinkable in Jeremiah, who had shown warm sympathies also for Jehoiachim (22:24,28). A radical difference of sentiment between the two authors is not to be found. On the other hand, a serious difficulty arises if we claim that Jeremiah was not the author of Lamentations in the denunciations of Lamentations over the prophets of Jerusalem (2:14; 4:13). How could the great prophet of the Destruction be so ignored if he himself were not the author of these sentiments? If he was himself the author we can easily understand this omission. In his book of prophecies he has spoken exactly the same way about the prophets. To this must be added, that Lamentations 3:1–66 forces us to regard Jeremiah as the author, because of the personal sufferings that are here described. Compare especially Lamentations 3:14,Lamentations 3:37 f,53 ff,61,63. What other person was during the period of this catastrophe the cynosure of all eyes as was the prophet, especially, too, because he was guiltless? The claim that here, not an individual, but the personified nation is introduced as speaking, is altogether improbable, and in some passages absolutely impossible (Lamentations 3:14,Lamentations 3:48).

This little book must accordingly be closely connected with the person of Jeremiah. If he himself is the author, he must have composed it in his old age, when he had time and opportunity to live over again all the sufferings of his people and of himself. It is, however, more probable, especially because of the language of the poems, that his disciples put this book in the present shape of uniform sentential utterances, basing this on the manner of lamentations common to Jeremiah. In this way the origin of Lamentaions 3 can be understood, which cannot artificially be shaped as his sayings, as in this case the personal feature would be more distinctly expressed. It was probably compiled. from a number of his utterances.

In the Hebrew Canon this book is found in the third division, called kethabhim, or Sacred Writings, together with the Psalms. However, the Septuagint adds this book to Jeremiah, or rather, to the Book of Baruch, found next after Jerusalem. The Hebrews count it among the 5 meghilloth, or Rolls, which were read on prominent anniversary days. The day for the Lamentation was the 9th of Abib, the day of the burning of the temple. In the Roman Catholic church it is read on the last three days of Holy Week.

LITERATURE.

Comms. of Thenius, Ewald, Nagelsbach, Gerlach, Keil, Cheyne, Oettli, Lohr, Budde; article by Robertson Smith on "Lamentations" in EB.

C. von Orelli

Lamp; Lampstand

lamp'-stand (nir, ner, lappidh, Phoenician lampadh, whence lampas; luchnos is also used): Ner or nir is properly "light" or "a light-giving thing," hence, "lamp," and is so rendered in the Revised Version (British and American), but often "candle" in the King James Version. Its use in connection with the tabernacle and the temple (Exodus 25:37 2 Chronicles 4:20 f), where oil was employed for light (Exodus 35:14; Leviticus 24:2), shows that this is its proper meaning. Lappidh is properly "a torch" and is thus rendered generally in the Revised Version (British and American), but "lamp" in Isaiah 62:1, where it is used as a simile. the King James Version renders it "lamp" usually, but "torch" in Nahum 2:3 f; Zechariah 12:6. In Job 12:5 the Revised Version (British and American) renders it "for misfortune," regarding it as composed of the noun pidh, and the preposition l-. Lampas in Greek corresponds to it, but luchnos is also rendered in the Revised Version (British and American) "lamp," while the King James Version gives "candle," as in Matthew 5:15 and corresponding passages in the other Gospels.

1. Forms and History:

Lamps were in use in very remote times, though we have few allusions to them in the early history of Egypt. There are indications that they were used there. Niches for lamps are found in the tombs of Tell el-Amarna (Archaeological Survey of Egypt, Tell el-Amarna Letters, Part IV, 14). Lampstands are also represented (ibid., Part III, 7). Torches were of course used before lamps, and are mentioned in Ge (15:17 the Revised Version (British and American)), but clay lamps were used in Canaan by the Amorites before the Israelites took possession. The excavations in Palestine have furnished thousands of specimens, and have enabled us to trace the development from about 2000 BC onward. The exploration carried out at Lachish (Tell Hesy) and Gezer (Tell Jezer) by the Palestine Exploration Fund has given ample material for the purpose, and the numerous examples from tombs all over Palestine and Syria have supplied a great variety of forms.

2. Figurative Use:

"Lamp" is used in the sense of a guide in Psalms 119:105; Proverbs 6:23, and for the spirit, which is called the lamp of Yahweh in man (Proverbs 20:27), and it of course often signifies the light itself. It is used also for the son who is to succeed and represent his father (1 Kings 15:4), and it perhaps is employed in this sense in the phrase, "The lamp of the wicked shall be put out" (Job 21:17; Proverbs 13:9; and perhaps Job 18:6).

The early Canaanite or Amorite lamp was a shallow, saucer-like bowl with rounded bottom and vertical rim, slightly pointed or pinched on one side where the lighted end of the wick was placed. This form continued into Jewish times, but was gradually changed until the spout was formed by drawing the rim of the sides together, forming a narrow open channel, the remainder of the rim being rolled outward and flattened, the bottom being also flattened. This was the early Hebrew pattern and persisted for centuries. The open bowl was gradually closed in, first at the spout, where the rim of one side was lapped over the other, and finally the whole surface was closed with only an orifice in the center for receiving the oil, and at the same time the spout was lengthened. This transformation is seen in lamps of the Seleucid period, or from around 300 BC. These lamps have usually a circular foot and sometimes a string-hole on one side. The next development was a circular bowl with a somewhat shorter spout, sometimes being only a bulge in the rim, so that the orifice for the wick falls in the rim, the orifice for filling being quite small at the bottom of a saucer-like depression in the center of the bowl. There is sometimes a loop handle affixed on the side opposite to the spout. Sometimes the handle is horizontal, but commonly vertical. This form is called Roman, and the bowl is often ornamented with mythological human or animal figures (Fig. 5). Other forms are elongated, having numerous wick holes (Fig. 6). The mythological and animal forms were rejected by the Jews as contrary to their traditions, and they made lamps with various other designs on the bowl, such as vine leaves, cups, scrolls, etc. (Figs. 7-11). One very marked Jewish design is the seven-branched candlestick (Exodus 25:32) of the temple (Fig. 12). The lamps of the parable of the Ten Virgins were probably similar to these (Matthew 25:1). The latest form of the clay lamp was what is called Byzantine, the bowl of which has a large orifice in the center and tapers gradually to the spout (Fig. 13); they are ornamented commonly with a palm branch between the central orifice and the wickhole, or with a cross. Sometimes there is an inscription on the margin (Fig. 13). The words on this read Phos ku(riou) pheni pasin kale,"The light of the Lord shines to all (beautifully?)." Others read, "The Lord is my light"; "beautiful light," etc. These inscriptions determine the period as being Christian. In Roman times, and earlier also, bronze was much used for the finer lamps, often with covers for the orifice and sometimes with chain and ring for hanging. Very elaborate designs in this material occur.

These terra-cotta lamps are found in the tombs and burial places throughout Palestine and Syria, and they were evidently deposited there in connection with the funeral rites. Very few are found in Canaanite tombs, but they become numerous in later times and especially in the early Christian centuries. The symbolism in their use for funeral purposes is indicated by the inscriptions above mentioned (see PEFS, 1904, 326 ff; Explorations in Palestine, by Bliss. Maclister and Wunsch, 4to, published by the Palestine Exploration Fund). These lamps were used by the peasants of the country down to recent times, when petroleum has superseded olive oil for lighting. The writer has seen lamps of the Jewish and Roman period with surface blackened with recent usage. Olive oil was commonly used, but terebinth oil also (Thomson, LB, III, 472).

H. Poster

Lampsacus

lamp'-sa-kus.

See SAMPSAMES.

Lance; Lancer; Lancet

lans, lan'-ser, lan'-set. See ARMOR, III, 4, (3); 1 Kings 18:28 the Revised Version (British and American) "lances."

Land

((1) 'erets;

(2) 'adhamah;

(3) sadheh,

"a piece of land";

(4) ge, "earth";

(5) agros, "field";

(6) chora, "region";

(7) chorion, diminutive of chora;

(8) xeros, "dry land";

(9) 'ezrach, "native" the King James Version "born in the land," "born among you," the Revised Version (British and American) "home-born" (Leviticus 19:34; Leviticus 14:16; Numbers 15:30); "like a green tree in its native soil" (Psalms 37:35)):

'Erets occurs hundreds of times and is used in much the same way as 'adhamah, which also occurs often: e.g. "land of Egypt," 'erets mitsrayim (Genesis 13:10), and 'adhmath mitsrayim (Genesis 47:20). The other words occur less often, and are used in the senses indicated above.

See COUNTRY; EARTH.

Alfred Ely Day

Land Laws

See AGRARIAN LAWS.

Land-Crocodile

(Revised Version (British and American))

land-crok'-o-dil (koach; Septuagint chamaileon, Leviticus 11:30; the King James Version Chameleon): Koach is found only here, meaning an animal, the fifth in the list of unclean "creeping things." Elsewhere is it translated "strength" or "power," and it has been thought that here is meant the desert monitor, Varanus griseus, a gigantic lizard, which is common in Egypt and Palestine, and which attains the length of 4 ft. "Chameleon," which the King James Version has here, is used by the Revised Version (British and American) for tinshemeth (the King James Version "mole"), the eighth in the list of unclean "creeping things" (compare nasham, "to breathe"; translated "swan" in Leviticus 11:18 margin). While it is by no means certain what animal is meant, there could be no objection to "monitor" or "desert monitor." "Land-crocodile" is objectionable because it is not a recognized name of any animal.

See CHAMELEON; LIZARD.

Alfred Ely Day

Landmark

land'-mark (gebhul, literally, "boundary"): The boundary may have been marked, as at present, simply by a furrow or stone. The iniquity of removing a landmark is frequently insisted on (Deuteronomy 19:14; Deuteronomy 27:17; Proverbs 22:28; Proverbs 23:10; Job 24:2 gebhulah), its removal being equivalent to theft.

Lane

lan (rhume): An alley or bypath of a city. Occurs once in Luke 14:21, "Go out quickly into the streets and lanes of the city"; elsewhere translated "street," e.g. Matthew 6:2; Acts 9:11; Ecclesiasticus 9:7; Tobit 13:18.