poetic style and parallelism in the creation account

8/4/2019 Poetic Style and Parallelism in the Creation Account

1/30

P O E T I C S T Y L E A N D P A R A L L E L I S M I N T H EC R E A T I O N A C C O U N T (GENESIS 1.1-2.3)

Frank H . Polak

This paper advocates a poetic reading of the creation account inGenesis I . 1 T he decision to read a text as prose or as poetry affects th ereader's attitude towa rds the text: its rhyth m , subtleties, repetitions and,by implicat ion, th e m ean i n g s t h at it ev o k es . F o r this reason th eresponsible reader must base his stance on careful evaluation of a largenumber of data, before forming an opinion on the outlook implied inthe text. E xegetical studies of the creation accoun t in Gen esis oftencontrast this text to hymns l ike Psalms 8 and 104, in order to highlightits prosaic character. H owev er, each text should first and foremost beviewe d in i ts own right. H ence, this paper will attempt to define thegenre of the creation account, to point out its prosody, to indicate someof the ideas suggested by its form, and finally to deal with its Priestlyaffiliation. T he last point mu st come last, s ince judg m ent in advancem ay lead to stereotyping and prejudice.M o d er n sch o l ar s h ip w av er s in its at t i tude towards th e creationaccount in Genesis 1. Skinner bewails the juristic character of its style,and even excuses the prose narrator for the lack of real poetic sub-limity,2 while Wellhausen praises i ts 'majestic repose and sustainedgrandeur ' .3 Gunkel 's character izat ion is ambivalent . While he findsevidence of an ancient mythical hypogram (Vorlage) in such terms as

l , D im and which represent for him mythic elements and

1. I am grateful to M s C . E d e nb u rg w ho imp r o v e d m y E n g l i s h and suggestedsome clarifications.

2. J. S k i n n e r , A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Genesis ( I C C ; E d i n -b u r g h : T . & T . C l ar k, 2nd edn, 1930), p. 1 1.

3 . J . W e llh a u s e n , Prolegomena to the History of Ancient Israel (N e w Y o rk :M e ri d ia n , 1957), p. 297.

and


2/30

P O L A K Poetic Style and Parallelism in the Creation Account 3'uralte Sprache',4 he nevertheless highlights the sober monotony of thealmost scientific account of the Priestly teacher, which is conceived ofas a hypergraph (Uberlagerung).5 Even then he knows to appreciate themonotonous digni ty of the narrative. But the distinction between themythical hypogram and the Priestly hypergraph remains problematic,since, for example, Gunkel artificially attributes different aspects of theSabbath to each stratum: the interest in the Sabbath he characterizes asPriestly,6 while he ascribes the notion of divine rest on the Sabbath tothe mythical background.7 By implication, then, the mythical notionwas of interest to the Priestly teacher. Thus, it seems preferable to aban-don th e distinction between these strata. Indeed, th e characteristic fea-tures of this accountits 'monotonous dignity', 'majestic repose', and' sus ta ined grandeur 'all make for its poetic sublimity, highlightedlong ago by Pseudo-Longinus , 'On the Sublime'.8 Morever, Albright,Loretz, Kselman and Andersen all have noted a number of poeticpatterns and characteristics of poetic language.9 While the present studywill note additional examples, it focuses on the poetic code suggested

4. H. Gunkel , Genesis ( H K A T ; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht , 2nd edn,1902), pp. 90-91, 104-106; (3rd edn, 1910), pp. 118-19. However, he emphasizesthat the ancient, poetic elements reflect the Vorlage rather than the P riestly author.

5. Gunkel , Genesis, 1902, pp. 103-104; 1910, pp. 117-18 ; the latter point ofview is preferred by G. von Rad, Genesis (OTL; London: SCM Press, 1961), pp.45-47 ,61 .6. Gunkel , Genesis, 1902, p. 104; 1910, p. 118.

7 . Gunkel, Genesis, 1902, pp . 102, 105; 1910, p. 115.8 . ' L o n g i n u s ' , On the Sublime (ed. with intro. and com. by D.A. Russel l ;Oxford: C larendon Press, 1964), pp. 11-12 (Tiepi t>\|/ou


3/30

4 Creation in Jewish and Christian Traditionby the creation account as a whole, and in particular its prosodicalstructure. Study of these elements w ill show that the basic character ofth e creation account is hymnic, with only few and superficial adapta-tions to prose language.Characterization of a text as poetic should be based on external andinternal attributes alike. >From th e point of view of content and expres-sive power, a text should be viewed as poetic if the qualities of its lan-guage evoke an image that is too grand and too strong to be expressedby casual or expository discourse.10 From th e formal point of view, th edistinctive feature of poetic language is its prosody,11 while its informalhallmark is the use of metaphor, imagery and a particular lexical andgrammatical register.12

1. Hymnic FeaturesThe creation accoun t is pre-em inently dom inated by a number of formalpoetic elements, in the lexical and gram m atical register, as well as inprosody.13 In the follow ing d iscussion we shall pay ample attention to

10. As Valery puts it 'cette partie des idees qui ne peut pas se mettre en prose,se met en verse. Si on le demande en prose, elle demande le vers et semble un versqui n'a pas pu se faire encore' (P. Valery, 'Calepin d 'un poete', in Oeuvres, I [ed.J. Hytier; Paris: Gallimard, 1962], pp. 1447-56, esp. p. 1450).

11. In the book of Job, for instance, the prose tale is characterized as prose bythe lexical register and the lack of imagery and metaphor, although from a formalpoint of view it is closer to poetry than any other biblical prose text, as shown byF.H. Polak, 'On Prose and Poetry in the Book of Job', JANESCU 24 (1996), pp. 61-97, esp. pp. 61-76. In my opinion, the informal characteristics of poetry have notbeen taken sufficiently into account in such studies as J.C. de Moor, 'NarrativePoetry in Canaan', U F 20 (1988), pp. 149-171; idem, T he Poetry of the Book ofRuth ' , Orientalia 53 (1984), pp. 262-83; 55 (1986), pp. 16-46; J.C. de Moor andW.G.E. Watson (ed.), Verse in Ancient Near Eastern Prose (AOAT, 42 ; Kevelaer:Butzon & Bercker; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1993).

12. On archaic elements and other lexical and morphological particularities ofpoetic language see W.G.E. Watson, Classical Hebrew Poetry: A Guide to itsTechniques (JSOTSup, 26; Sheffield Academic Press: Sheffield, 1984), pp. 49, 51;W. von Soden, 'Der hymnisch-epische Dialekt des Akkadischen ' , ZA 40 (1931), pp.163-227, esp. pp. 163-65; ZA 41 (1933), pp. 90-183, esp. pp. 160-81.

13. Some of these points have been noted previously, in particular by U. Cas-suto, who stated that 'the special importance of the subject' leads to 'an exaltationof style approaching th e level of poetry': A Commentary on the Book of Genesis. I.From Adam to Noah (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1961), pp. 10-11. Kselman (see


4/30

POLAK Poetic Style and Parallelism in the Creation Account 5these matters. However, our first concern is the overall character of thetext. Wellhausen's judgment concerning the 'majestic repose and sus-tained grandeur' of the creation account and Gunkel's evaluation of the'lapidare Grosse' of its style,14 support the view of the creation accountwith its pow erful images, as poetry, and , more spe cifically, as a hy m n.

The purpose of hymnic poetry is to praise and celebrate the mightydeeds of God. The creation account fulfills this function in a distinctiveway, since it presents the divine praise of the world as created by God.Divine self-praise,15 not unlike the self-praise of Dame Wisdom (Prov.8.22-36), is conveyed by the series of clauses(1.10, 12, 18, 21, 25), which opens with(1.4), and closes with praise of the creation in its entirety (Gen. 1.31):

16In addition the first stanza, which describes the divine acts of the first

day, contains a number of poetic features, to begin with the phrase

a.Significantly, this phrase is found in a number of poetic passages:

note 8 above) points to a number of elements of poetic language and prosody.C. Westermann speaks of a particular m ixture of prose and poetry, w ithout notingany poetic feature in particular: Genesis 1-11: A Commentary (London: SPCK;Minneapolis: A ugsb urg, 1984), pp. 90-91. A n attempt at a reconstruction of somefragmentary remains of the ancient poetic text, comprising seven bicola withparallelism, is offered by L oretz (see note 8 above).

14. Gunkel, Genesis, 1902, p. 103; 1910, p. 117. For Wellhausen's view seenote 2 above.15. In Sumerian hymnody divine self-praise is a conventional theme, e.g.,Enki's self-praise in C.A. Benito, ' "Enki und Ninm ah '" and "Enki and the WorldOrder"' (PhD dissertation, University of Pennsylvania; 1969), lines 61-82 (pp. 89-91, 117-19); Ina nn a's self-presentation in G. Farber-Fliigge, Der Mythus 'Inannaund Enki' unter besonderer Berucksichtigung der Liste der Me (Studia Pohl, 10;Rome: Biblical Institu te Press, 1973), lines 6-26 (pp. 16-17); N an na 's self-presen-tation in A.J. Ferrara, Nanna-Suen's Journey to Nippur (Studia Pohl, Series Maior,2; Ro m e: Bib lical Ins titute P ress, 1973), line s 8-16, 260-308 (pp. 44-45, 82-83,98-102).

16. See also the late verses Jer. 33.1; Ps. 106.1; 107.1; 109.21; 118.1,29; 135.3;136.1; 147.1 as well as Ps. 34.9; 69.17; 84.11; 100.5; Prov. 24.13. The passage inGen. 49 has been noted by Albr ight , 'K i Tob' , who focuses on the use o f ' , incomparison with th e Akkadian.


5/30

Creation in Jewish and Christian TraditionGen. 49.15Isa. 3.10Ps. 52.11Ps. 54.8

The fact that the latter two examples are hymnic in character warrantsthe conclusion that the refrain is couched in hymniclanguage. Its sustained recurrence indicates a poetic figura, a o%f)fia,rather than prosaic repetitiousness. The poetic background of the seven-day pat tern , found in the Babylon ian epic of Gilgamesh , and theUgaritic epics of Ba'lu, Aqhatu and Kirta, is by now well known.

17Additional features of poetic language in the first stanza include the

refrain as such, as well as the common pairthe use of liltf as a cardinal, the use of andof irp-i.b.The refrain likewise has a poetic background. First ofall, the contrast ing nouns : and belong to the poetic register oflexical associates, as shown by a large number of passages, forexample,18

Gen. 49.27Isa. 17.14

c. The Lack of the ArticleIn the creation account this phrase generally does not contain th e defi-nite article, for example,

17. See S.E. Loewenstamm, 'The Seven-Day-Uni t in Ug aritic Epic Literature ' ,in Comparative Studies in Biblical and Ancient Oriental Literatures (AOAT, 204;Kevelaer: Bu tzon & Bercker; N eukirche n-V luyn: N euk irchene r Ve rlag, 1980), pp.192-209. Loewenstamm also discusses the combination with the three-day patternin Gen. 1.10, 12-13.18. So also Ps. 30.6; Zeph. 33 (Janus p aralle l ism ); Pss. 55.18; 65.9; 90.6; Job42.0; Eccl. 11.6. Paralle l is tic con struc tions are found in such prose pericopes asExod. 16.8, 13; De ut. 28.67; 1 Kgs 17.6 ; Ezek. 24.18; 33.22; Est. 2.14. Also notesuch clauses as (Lev. 6.13; cf. 2 Kgs 16.15). Themeristic phrase occurs in Exod. 18.13, 14; 27.21; 24.3 (cf. Dan.8.14, 26; 1 Chron. 16.40; 2 Chron. 2.3; 13.11; 31.3) . In a n u m b e r of passages theclause opens with ' and closes with ( N u m . 9.15; cf. Deut. 16.4; 1 Chron.23.30).

6


6/30

P O L A K Poetic Style and Parallelism in the Creation Account 1Gen. 1.8A nd it became evening /and it became morn in g / the second day.

This detail is significant, since th e definite article, which does not existin Akkadian and Ugaritic, and is of limited use in Phoenician, is rare inbiblical Hebrew poetry.19 In the refrain, then, the lack of the definitearticle reflects the poetic register, notwithstanding this particle's highincidence in the pericope as a whole.20 This finding is all the moreim po r ta n t in view of the lack of the article in the opening clause,

, a p h e n o m e n o n m o s t plausibly explained as a poeticfeature.2 1

19. Statistical data for the different books are offered by F.I . Andersen andA . D . Forbes, '"Prose Particle" Counts in the Hebrew Bible ' , in C.L. Myers andM. O'Connor (eds . ) , The Word of the Lord Shall Go Forth: Studies in Honor ofDavid Noel Freedman ( W in o n a L a k e, IN : Eisenbrauns, 1983) , pp . 165-83. In thecorpus of ancient b ibl ical Hebrew poetry (Gen. 49.2-27; Exod. 15.2-17; 15.21;N u m . 21 . 17-18; 21.27-30; 23.7-10; 23.18-24; 24.3-9; 24.15-23; Deut .32 .1 -43; 33.1-29; Judg. 5.2-30; 2 Sam. 22.2-23.7; Pss. 2.1-72.17) no more than 1 84 instances ofthe definite article have been found by means of the computer program Accordance3.0 (Va nco uver: Gram cord, 1997). O f these occurrences, 22 were found in Genesis-Deuteronomy (4 in Gen. 49.14-21; 3 in Num . 21.17-30; 5 in Num . 23.15, 21; 24.21;8 in Deut. 32-33, inc ludin g the prose op ening in 33 .1); and 16 in Judges-2 Samuel(7 in Judg. 5, and 9 in 2 Sam. 22-23, including the prose opening of 23.1). In Ps.2.1-72.17 1 47 cases have been found . N o examples of the article have been foundin Exod. 15; Gen. 49.2-13; Deut. 32.5-43; 2 Sam. 22.2-7, 9-30; 23.2-7; and (allow-in g for the headings 5 . 1 ; 6.1; 30.1) Pss. 3.1-8; 4-7; 15-17; 23; 26-27; 30; 39; 43;53; 55; 60; 64; 67; 69; 72.1-14. The following Psalms contain two instances ormore (apart from the heading): Pss. 8; 19; 25; 29; 33-35; 40 ; 44-45; 47; 49-50; 52;56-57; 59; 63; 66; 68; 71 . If the search is confined to the definite article followedby c o mmo n n o u n or adjective, the overal l numb er of instances is 145, 119 of whichare found in Psalms, 15 in Genesis-Deuteronomy and 11 in Judges-2 Samuel.

20. In the en tire unit, from Gen. 1.1 to 2.4a, we encounter 75 instances of thedefinite particle. Only th e notes on the sixth and the seventh day contain a formwith th e article, and that in the attribute (1 .31; 2.3). In biblical poetry this syntagmis also found in Ps . 104.18, but since it is characteristic of rabbinic Hebrew, asnoted by S.R. Driver , A Treatise on the Use of the Tenses in Hebrew ( Ox f o r d :Clarendon Press, 3rd edn, 1913), pp. 281-83, it could reflect postexilic language,e.g. (2 Chron . 2 3 . 2 0 ) , ' (Ezra 10.9), as we l l as Zech. 4.7;14.10; as against these instances Driver notes i (Gen. 21.29); 30.37;41.26; Num. 11.25; 1 Sam. 14.29; 16.23; 17.17. In Driver 's v iew, then, the roots ofthis syntagm are to be looked for in pre-exil ic H ebrew.

21. The syntactic register of poetic language is also implied by the interpretationof th e c lause as an asynde t ic relat ive clause, a


7/30

8 Creation in Jewish and Christian Traditiond.As to the lexical register,22 th e exceptional use of the cardinal asordinal in v. 5b is matched by Ugaritic poetic texts.23 The alleged sche-matic refrain, then, turns out to embody the stylistic norms of biblicalpoetry.

A nother point worthy of notice is syno nym ous parallelism, compris-in g semantic correspondence (three terms in the same semantic field,and both cola contain one and the same verbal form,VP1); syntactic congruity ( + subject in both cola) and rhythmicalisometry betw een three cola, the third of which contains a ballast variant

phenomenon that is characteristic mainly of poetry (e.g., Gen. 49.27; Exod. 1.17;Num. 2 1 . 1 8 ; D e u t . 32.14, 1 5, 17, 1 8, 35, 37; 33.22, 29; Judg. 5.18; Isa. 11.9; 40.20;42.1, 1 6; 48.17; 51 .1 , 1 2; 54.1; 55.13; 56.2; 61.10-11; 64.2; 65.1; Jer. 2.6, 8, 11 ;23.29; Hos. 4.14; 6.3; Mic. 5.2; Hab. 2.14; Mai. 2.16; Pss. 4.8; 7.7, 16; 14.4; 18.3;25.12; 32.2; 33.12; 34.2; 49.13, 14, 21; 56.4, 1 0; 58.5; 65.5; 68.31; 71.18; 74.2;78.6; 80.18; 81.6; 83.15; 88.2; 90.15; 141.9; Prov. 8.32; 30.17; Job 3.3; 6.17; 7.2;9.26; 11.16; 13.28; 28.1; 29.12, 1 6; 31.12; 38.26; Lam. 1.10, 1 4, 21) . In the domainof 'Ancient Poetry' as defined above occurs 45 tim es (on 3,475 verbs; 1.29 percent; if the book of Psalms is not taken into account we have 7 instances, on 694verbs; 1.01 per cent). It is not found in Gen. 49; Exod. 15 (at Num. 21.30 MT iscorrupt); 2 Sam. 22-23; it occurs on ly once in Ba laam 's sayings (Num . 24.4), in theSong of Moses (Deut. 32.38) and twice in Moses' blessing (33.8, 29); Judg. 5.27 isambiguous In the book of P salms we note 102 instances of therelative (on 5,803 verbs; 1.76 per cent), as against 411 in Genesis (on 5,056 verbs;8.13 per cent), 305 in Exodus (on 3,753 verbs; 8.13 per cent), 295 in Numbers (on3,187 verbs; 9.26 per cent) ; and 584 in Deuteronomy (o n 3,551 verbs; 16.45 percent). The asyndetic relative clause is rarely found in prose texts (apart from Hos.1.2): Gen. 39.4 (not so according to LXX and SamP); Exod. 4.13; 6.28; 9.4; 18.20;Lev. 7.35 (possibly read N um . 3.1; Deut. 4.15; Isa. 6.6 (poetic prose); Jer.36.2. On this use in the book of Chronicles (also Ezra 1.5; Neh. 8.10; 13.20; P s.119.136)seeGC155d.

22. B ut note Gen. 2.11 following (v . 10).23. S.E. Loewenstamm, 'The Development of the Term "First" in the Semitic

Languages ' , in Comparative Studies in Oriental Literature, pp. 13-16. Loewen-stamm notes that (a) in the string ' the first day, the second day ' Ugaritic has 'ymwtn', without the first ordinal; (b) for the phrase 'on th e seventh day' Ugaritic usesthe cardinal 'm k bSb' ym'.24. On the definition of parallelism see below.


8/30

P O L A K Poetic Style and Parallelism in the Creation Account 9G e n . 1.5b

A n d it became eve n ing /and it became morn ing/ th e first day.Moreover , the first i ns tance of this refrain (v. 5b) fol low s imm ediate lyafter a l ine in which th e parallelism of iden tical ve rbs stan ds out:Gen . 1 .5a

A n d G od called the l ight 'Day,' and the darkn ess he called 'Night 'The an tithetical balan cin g of an d and is rem arkable .In this line, then, parallelism is unmistakable .25 In short, the first versesof the creation account include m a n y elements that are particular topoetic language.

2. The Poetic OpeningThis view partly accords with Gunkel's recognition of the mythic remi-niscences in the description of the chaos, reminding him of the 'uralteSprache' of myth .26 I n d e e d , the en t i r e pe r icope seems to contain asmuch as 15 features of poetic language.a.O f particular importance is G un ke l 's i ns ight that the use of is n otso much typical of the Priestly writings as of the creation theme,27 asdemonstrated by the doxology of Amos 4.13, where this verb occurstogether with and 28

25. Three di f f e r en t aspects of paralle l ism are e v i d e n t in th is l ine : s emant ic ,syntact ic (gappin g w i thou t ba lance var ian t ) , an d rhythmic (in accents : 4-3; insyllabic coun t: approximate ly 9-8).26. G unke l , Genesis, 1902, p. 90; 1910, p. 102

27. O the r ins tances of this verb in allusions to the creat ion theme : P s. 89.13, 48;Isa. 45.7-8, 12, 18; and as a r eminder of divine majesty: Isa. 40.26, 28; 41.20; 42.5;see also: Isa. 4.5; 43.1, 7, 15; 48.7; 54.16; 57.19 ; Je r. 31.22; Ezek. 28. 15; M ai. 2.10;P s. 102.19; 148.5. In the post-Isaian allusion s of Isa. 65.17-18 the creation them e isapplied to the a n n o u n c e m e n t of the comin g salvat ion .

28. G u n k e l , Genesis, 1902, p. 106; 1910, p. 120; the poetic diction of the dox-ology does n ot conta in an y sign of late com posit ion .


9/30

10 Creation in Jewish and Christian TraditionSee, he that formed the mountains, and created the wind, and announcedm an what his wish is / who makes darkness into daybreak, and treadsupon the high places of the earth the Lord, the God of hosts, is hisname.

However, in a number of passages is not related to this theme:Ps. 51.12

Create a pure heart for me, O God; And renew a steadfast spiritwithin me.

Y ou were in Eden, the garden of God, covered with every preciousstone (...)29 prepared for yo u on the day that you were created.

It is apparent in Ps. 51, as well as in Ezekiel's satire on the primevalwise king of Tyre, that this verb is not directly connected to the creationnarrative. The verb then, belongs to the lexical register of poetry,rather than to the creation theme as such.30b.The poetic register is also attested by the verb meaning 'tohover over' something, and used for the movements of vul ture andeagle in the Song of Moses (Deut. 32.11) and in the Ugaritic epic ofAqhat (CAT 1.18. 4. lines 30-32).c.This phrase embodies a fixed common pair in prophetic poetry (Isa.34.11; Jer. 4.23).31

29. The many textual difficulties in the listing of the precious stones do notaffect the clear meaning of the end of this verse.

30. Outs ide of poetry it appears mostly in elevated prose (balanc ed coupl ing, inth e terminology, adopted below): Exod. 34.10; Num. 16.30 (pre-P), and oftenrelated to the creation them e: G en. 5.1-2; 6.7 (assigned to J); Deut. 4.32.

31. Gunkel , Genesis, 1902, pp. 91, 105; 1910, pp. 103, 119. alone is fre-quent in poetry as a description of space in state of disorder (Isa. 45.19; Ps. 107.40;Job 6.18; 12.24; and paral lel to the poetic phra se 26.7); of the desertwilderness (Deut. 32.10); and as a metaphor for the naught (Isa. 24.10; 40.17, 23;41.29; 44.9; 49.4; 59.4). In the latter function it occurs once in poetry as an imagefo r idolatry (1 Sam. 12.21; cf. Isa . 44.9). does not occur alone.

Ezek. 28.13


10/30

P O L A K Poetic Style and Parallelism in the Creation Account 11d .Since (vv. 6-8, 14-15, 17, 20) is a cosmic term, it is no surprisethat it is main use is poetic:32Ps. 19.2

The heavens proclaim the glory of God, and the f irmament declareshis handiwork.

Isa. 42.5God the Lord, w ho created th e heavens and stretched them out,w ho spread out the earth and what it brings forth.

In view of the fact that does not occur further in texts attributedto the Priestly source (e.g. in the Deluge narrative, where it would havebeen relevant),33 it seems that its usage here should not be consideredevidence of the Priestly style, but rather of the poetic register.

In Gunkel's opinion the poetic overtones are limited to the descrip-tion of chaos in the first stanza.34 These strophes, however, are not to beviewed in isolation. In modern poetics the opening pericope is con-sidered formative for the rhetorical attitude of the reader and/or listener.A constellation in which almost the entire first stanza consists of poetryevokes the poetic code, entailing a rhythmic, balanced reading, ratherthan a prosaic stance that centres on the action sequence. As we shallsee later, almost the entire opening of the creation account can be readas poetry, maybe apart from the the divine praise of the light (v. 4).T h u s the poetic code imposes itself upon the reader.

3. Additional Features of the Poetic DictionFurther examples of poetic language are found in the continuation ofth e creation account, namely in the phrase , in the use of

32. In cosm ic context: Isa. 44.24; P s. 136.6; Job 37.18. The daily life usage of, in the meaning 'to s tamp' or 'to beat out ' , is found in prose in Exod. 3.3;

N u m . 17.3; Ezek. 6 . 1 1 ; 25.6; and in poetry: 2 Sam. 22.43; Isa. 40.19; Jer. 10.9.33. occurs frequently in Ezekiel 's opening vision (Ezek. 1.22-23, 25-26).This fact m ight constitute evidence for Priestly language, if the picture of the divinechariot (the i could be attributed to the prophet 's priestly background, and if

(Ezek 1.4, 7; 8.2) would belong to the t radit ional Priestly register. That,however , is not the case. For poetic usage of see P s. 150.1 ; Dan. 12.1 ; th edivine chariot, with is found in the poetic description of the theophany in 2Sam. 2 2 .11-13; Pss. 18.11-13; 68.5, 18.34.

34 . Gunkel , Genesis, 1902, p. 104; 1910, p. 118 .

d


11/30

12 Creation in Jewish and Christian Traditionof of , and of and

As noted long ago by Albright, th e grammatical aspect of the poeticregister is found in the phrase (v. 24),35 in which the ancientcase ending in the status constructus reminds one of the same feature inthe hymnic-epic dialect of Akkadian, characterized by such phrases asmuSarbi zikru babilim ('who has made the name of Babylon great',Codex Hammurapi, Prologue 2.5-6), for the standard phrase zikirbabilim.36 Similar constructions are found in a number of Psalms:

The lexical register in the continuation of the creation account alsoseems close to poetry.

The noun &Q"! (vv. 24, 25, 26) occurs repeatedly in poetic context:37

Thus its use in texts attributed to the Priestly source seems context-dependent rather than characteristic for the lexical register of thePriestly sociolect.

38

35. Albright, 'Ki Tob', p. 22, with GKC, 90, as against D. Robertson, TheMorphemes -Y(-I) and -W (O) in Biblical Hebrew' , VT 19 (1969), pp. 211-23, esp.pp. 221-23. Although the data for the verbal forms with the -y affix remain prob-lematic, this analysis is unimpeachable for the nom inal forms w ith both the -y andthe -w affix.

36. Von Soden, 'Dialekt', pp. 210-13; for the -i phoneme in this position (whenthe entire phrase is in the genitive) see pp. 209-11. According to A. Dillman n, DieGenesis (KEH; Leipzig: Hirzel, 1892), p. 30, this form is chosen because of theelevated character of divin e speech.37. See also Hos. 2.20; Ezek. 38.20; Pss. 69.35; 148.10. In non-priestly proseone also notes 1 Kgs 5.13 (in wisdom context); Deut. 4.18 (vv . 16-17 con tain ma nyphrases reminiscent of Gen. 1). In Gen. 1 the verb occurs in vv. 21, 26, 28, 30.

38. The no un occurs (a) in cultic prescriptions (Lev. 11.44, 46; 20.25; note alsoEzek. 8.10), (b) in the Deluge tale, in pericopes attribu ted to P (Gen. 6.20; 7.14, 21 ,

Hab. 1.14Ps. 104.25

b

Ps. 79.2Ps. 104.11Ps. 104.20

a


12/30

P O L A K Poetic Style and Parallelism in the Creation Account 13

Another notable detail is the construct state (Ge n. 1.11, 12),consisting of two syno ny m ou s nou ns that form a fixed pair in poetry:Deut. 32.22 K g s 19.26Prov. 27.25In the Hebrew Bible, the use of is restricted to poetry,39 whileis found mainly in poetic (or semi-poetic) contexts.40

d.Another phrase that hints at poetic speech is > (1-21). Here thetautological attribute is no more than an epitheton ornans. Similarusage is found elsewhere in poetry:Ps. 78.27A nother idiom of this type, (every bird, every w ing),occurs in Ezekiel's parables and in the Deluge narrative:41

In the Deluge tale the phrase follows the stereotyped

The balance created by this way of doubling has a poetic ring.

23; 8.17, 19; 9.2, 3), and in passages in which this attribution seems problematic(6.7; 7.8).

39. In a distichon: Jer. 14.5-6. A s a separate noun: 2 Sam. 23.4; Isa. 66.14; P s.23.2; Job 6.5; 38.27; the fixed pa ir Isa. 15.6; P s. 37.2; and also 2 K gs19.26 (= Isa. 37.27); Prov. 27.25; the fixed pair 2 Kgs 19.26 (= Isa.37.27); Isa. 15.6; P s. 37.2. A s a denom inative verb occurs in Joel 2.22.

40. For poetic usage see Isa. 42.1 5; Jer. 12.4; A m os 7.2; Mic. 5.6; Zech. 10.1;Pss. 72.16; 92.8; 102.5, 12; 104.14; 105.35; 106.20; Job 5.25; Prov. 19.12 (Dan.4.12, 22, 30; 5.21). In prose one notes th e collocation with (Gen. 2.5; 3.18;Exod. 9.22, 25; Deut. 11.15; cf. in poetry: 2 Kgs 19.26; Jer. 12.4; Zech. 10.1) and

(Exod. 10.12, 15; cf. A m os 7.2; Pss. 72.16; 105.35; Job 5.25; Dan . 4.12);another frequent collocation comprises and! Gen . 9.3; see also Deu t. 29.22.

41. Cf. Deut. 4.17; Ezek. 39.4, 17; Ps. 148.10; Eccl. 10.20 (in parallelism).

C.

Ezek . 17.23

Gen. 7 . 1 4


13/30

14 Creation in Jewish and Christian Tradition

In thephrase (1:26) the n o , 'likeness',has been considered as more abstract than the concrete term'image'.42 Nowadays, however , it is obv ious that also has theexact meaning of 'statue', as shown by the ancient Aramaic inscriptionfrom Tell Fekheriye (mid-ninth-century):43line 1

The statue of Hadd ys'y w hich he placed before Hadad of Sikani ' .Hence, like so many Aramaic words in biblical literature this word alsoseems to belong to the poetic register.44 This conclusion is supported bythe asyndetic junct ion of the two synonyms , a well-know n pattern in biblical poetry.45f.Furthermore, in the clause (l:26b) onenotes th e metaphoric use of as a symbol of domination, as foundmore than once in poetry:46

42. E.g. Dil lmann, Genesis, p. 31; von Rad, Genesis, p. 56.43. A. Abou-Assaf , P. Bordreuil, and A.R. Millard, La Statue de Tell Fekheriye

et son Inscription Bilingue assyro-arameenne (Etudes Assyriologiques 7; Paris:Editions Recherches sur la Civ ilisation, 1982), pp. 23-24 (line 1; see also line 15; inline 12 the wo rd is used ). For the propo sal of a date betw een 850-825 BCE seep. 112.

44. G.R. D river, Hebrew Poetic Diction (VTSup, 1; Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1953),pp. 26-39; A . Hurvitz, The Chronological Significance of "Aramaisms" in BiblicalHebrew, IEJ 18 (1968), pp. 234-40.

45. See Y. Avishur , Stylistic Studies of Word Pairs in Biblical and AncientSemitic Literatures (AOAT, 210; Kevelaer: Butzon & Bercker; Neukirchen-Vluyn:Neukirchener Verlag, 1984), p. 122.

46. For ' tram pling' as a m etaphor for conquest and victory see also Nu m . 24.19(rather literal); Isa. 14.2; Jer. 5.31; Ezek. 29.15; Pss. 7.8; 49.15; Lam. 1.13; in theelevated, rhythmic prose of curse and prayer see Lev. 26.17; Neh. 9.28; and in thedescription of Solomon as ruling over all kings of Western Asia (1 Kgs 5.4), apassage that seems dependent on Pss. 72.8; 110.2. As a picture fo r enslavement seeEzek. 34.3; and in legal context: Lev. 25.43, 46, 53; 1 Kgs 5.30; 9.23; 2 Chron.8.10. The dis t inction between the latter usage and the poetic style is that the me ta -phor in prose is limited to one fixed context, whereas in poetic languag e it changesfrom verse to verse.

e.


14/30

P O L A K Poetic Style and Parallelism in the Creation Account 15P s. 72.8Isa. 14.6Ps. 110.2 '

The noun stringwhich follows th e verb also seems close to poetic language:47

In short, th e lexical and grammatical register of the creation accountcontains far more poetic features than customary in plain prose texts.Some features, such as the use of the archaic case ending, are neverfound in biblical prose. Thus it should come as no surprise that th e cre-ation account also includes some clear prosodic patterns.

4. Prosodic Patterns: Prose or Poetry?The most obvious instance of a prosodic pattern is found in the verse onth e creation of mankind (1.27). This verse contains a threefold repeti-tion structure, which is constituted by the recurrence of identical verbs

i in each of the three clauselets:

In addition one notes th e concatenation of andthe epiphora and the delicate counterpoise of opening

and closure . The rhythmic balance is remark-able. In each clauselet the first part contains 6 syllables:

i The opening clauselet contains 13 syllables (3-3, 4-3), while the last tw o clauselets contain 10 each (6-4). In terms of

47. See also Jer. 4.25; 9.9; 15.3; Ezek. 29.5; 31.6, 13; 32.4; 38.20; Hos. 2.20;7.12; Pss. 79.2; 104.12; Job 12.7; 28 .21 ; 35 .11 ; Eccl. 10.20. Phrases of this type arefrequent in the elevated rhythmic prose of curses and poetic narrative, e.g., Deut.28.26; Gen. 2.19, 20; 1 Sam. 17.44, 46 (contrasting with 2 Sam. 21 .10) ; and inDeuteronomic context: 1 Kings 14.11; 16.4; 21.24; and in prophetic prose speeches:Jer. 7.33; 16.4; Jer. 19.7; 34.20.

Hos. 4.3

Zeph. 1.3

g. and


15/30

16 Creation in Jewish and Christian Trad itionword accent, the three clauselets embody the 4-4-4 pattern. The con-vergence of this intricate rhythm ic pattern and the rhetorical structuresuggests the sublime design of poetry rather than th e monotony ofrepetitive prose.These findings and those concerning the opening stanza, seem to callfor a closer examination of the prosody of the entire account. Suchexamination requires a definition of parallelism,48 in view of theambiguous nature of 'synthetic parallelism' in the classical account,which may be found in prose as well as in poetry.49For the present purpose parallelism is defined as the typical divisionof the textual unit into lines (sticks) and balanced cola (half-sticks),50linked by overlapping correspondences on three constitutive planes,namely, (1) semantics,51 (2) syntactic structure, (3) the number of wordsand/or accents and/or syllables (isometry).52 A parallelistic line

48. The use of parallelism as specific distinctive has been rejected by J.L.Kugel, The Idea of Biblical Poetry (New Ha ven: Yale Univ ersit y Press, 1981), pp.49-63. Kugel argues that prose also may contain parallelistic clauses (pp. 59-62).This argument, however, fails to convince, as any prose text in any language maycontain phrases in poetic prosody , e.g. m etre. The problem is w hether these featuresrepresent a norm that is violated by lack of observance, or an extraordinary expres-sive function.

49. A discussion of this problem may be found in Polak, 'Prose and Poetry', pp.62-66 (see note 10 above).

50. This definition is based on B. Hrushovsky, 'Notes on the Systems ofHebrew Versification', in T. Carmi (ed.), The Penguin Book of Hebrew Poetry (Har-mondsworth: Penguin, 1981), pp. 57-72, esp. pp. 58-60; idem, 'Prosody, Hebrew',EncJud, XIII, cols. 1195-245, esp. cols. 1200-203. The recognition of 'planes' issimilar, in a way, to the differentiation between 'aspects' of parallelism in theanalysis of A. Berlin, The Dynamics of Biblical Parallelism (Bloom ington: IndianaUniversity Press, 1985), pp. 26-29, and the perception of 'kinds' of parallelism byD. Pardee, Ugaritic and Hebrew Poetic Parallelism: A Trial Cut ('nt I and Proverbs2) (VTSup, 9; Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1988), pp. 178-79.

51. The semantic correspondence may relate to (a) the lexemes used (includingrepetition), (b) the information conveyed by the correspondent clauses as a whole.Thus parallelism is a semiotic and not a linguistic phenomenon.

52. The isometric component has been rejected by M. O'Connor, Hebrew VerseStructure (W inon a Lake, IN: Eisen braun s, 1980), pp. 33-37; Pardee, Parallelism,195, whereas it is emphasized by Hrushovsky, 'Prosody', col. 1203. For the argu-ment that its role is indicated by the 'ballast variant ' see E.L. Greenstein, 'Aspectsof Biblical Poetry', in Jewish Book Annual 44 (1986-87), pp. 33-42, in particularpp. 36-38. A statistic estimate of the amount of non-isometric lines (23 per cent of


16/30

POLAK Poetic Style and Parallelism in the Creation Account 17typically consists of two cola, which contain a number of semanticallyrelated lexemes (repetitive, synonymous, antonymic, hyponymic-hyper-onymic, subcontrary, in short, belonging to the same semantic scale),53and reveal the same clause structure.

The correspondence implied by parallelism may involve all threeplanes, in the same order of words or in chiastic arrangement:

Deut.32.2Ps. 29.5

This kind of parallelism may include compound sentences, that is, anumber of clauses in which not all syntactic constituents are visible inall clauses (gapping), but are implicitly present by force of syntacticcoordination. In order to supplement the number of accents and sylla-bles an additional element (often a modifier) may be introduced as'ballast variant', for example, in the phrase moti-vated by the ellipsis of the predicate; the predicate of the first clause

dominates the second clause as well:Deut. 32.13b

In most cases parallelism involves two constitutive planes out of thethree:54

(1) Semantic-syntactic equipollence, for example,2 Sam. 1.20Isa. 1.4b

th e material) is given by S.A.Geller, Parallelism in Early Biblical Poetry (HSM,20; Missoula: Scholars Press, 1979), p. 371.53. A systematic treatment of the semantic relationships between parallel cola

an d stichs is given by Geller, Parallelism, pp. 31-37. The semantic aspect of thedefinition is rejected by O'Connor (Verse Structure, pp. 50-53), since in his opinion'meaning' is not a linguistic entity (even though th e difference between phonemesis defined by means of differences in meaning) . For the definition of 'meaning' see,e.g., B. Russell, An Inquiry into Meaning and Truth (Harmondsworth: Penguin,1965), pp. 28-123, 158-93, esp. pp. 179-80.

54. Hr ushovsky ( 'Prosody ' , cols. 1200-201) states info rm ally that 'in mos tcases there is an overlapping of several such heterogeneous parallelisms.. .so thatno single element, m eanin g, syntax, stress, m ay be considered as completely dom i-nant or as purely concom itant ' .


17/30

18 Creation in Jewish and Christian TraditionIn these verses both parallel cola are couched in similar terms withregard to syntactic structure and semantic content, but they contain adifferent number of accented words (and syllables).55

(2 ) Semantic-rhythmic congruity, for example,D e u t . 3 2 . 1 "s -io rin D a t i m

In this verse the similarity relates to semantic content ('listen' versus'hear', 'heaven' versus 'earth', and 'let m e speak' versus 'the words ofmy mouth') but not to syntactic structure: 'the words of my mouth '

is object, whereas 'let me speak' forms an inde-pendent c lause; 'heaven' i is vocat ive with the imperative'listen', as against 'the earth' which serves as subject to thejussive

In these tw o categories the balancing of the clauses is obvious, eventhough their correspondence is less outspoken than when all threeplanes are involved. Problems arise when the semantic component isabsent, leaving the field to the syntactic and rhythmic compon ents.(3) Syntactic-rhythmic complementation prevails when the secondcolon balances the first one, while complementing it syntactically.56Lowth categorizes cases of this kind as 'synthetic ' or 'constructive'parallelism, but fails to give a general definition.57 In this con figuration

55. In these examples the lack of isometry is the result of the presence of anexpanded phrase , com mon ly used as a compensatory'ballast variant ' , even though such compensation is not necessary in these verses(so also Isa. 41.9).

56. According to E.L. Greenstein, in this case syn tactic congruen ce is preservedby deep structure: 'How Does Parallelism Mean?', in S.A. Geller (ed.), A Sense of aText: the Art of Language in the Study of Biblical Literature ( JQRSup ; Winon aLake, IN : Eisenbrauns, 1982), pp. 41-70. However, not always is parallelism domi-nated by underlying deep structure. For instance, in Deut. 32.6b the re la t ionshipbetween 'h e is your father' and 'he made you' is a matter of semantics.

57. In such cases ' the sentences answer to each other...merely by the form ofconstruct ion' : R. Lowth, Lectures on the Sacred Poetry of the Hebrews (ET; Lon-d o n , 1787), pp. 48-49. This concept has been criticized fiercely by T. Collins, Line-Forms in Hebrew Poetry: A Grammatical Approach to the Stylistic Study of theHebrew Prophets (Studia Pohl, Series Maior, 7; Rom e: Pon tifical Biblical Institute,1978), p. 126; Geller, Parallelism, pp. 370, 383; O' Connor, Verse Structure, pp.29-30.


18/30

P O L A K Poetic Style and Parallelism in the Creation Account 19th e division into cola is defined by the caesura,58 which is obvious wheneach colon consists of a different clause, for example,59

Isa. 42.1P S . 23.1If the second stretch actually continues the first one, the caesura is

given by sentence structure, the first colon containing the core sentence,and the second one the lesser constituents, for example, 60

Isa. 3.14This verse forms one clause. The Eigenstdndigkeit of the secondcolon is indicated by the indirect objec t , as against the

clauselet of the first colon. Another instance of this configuration isfound in the well-know n royal psalm:

Ps. 2.6The caesura separates the verbal phrase (1) from the modifier (2), a

noun phrase consisting of headword and apposition. The semantic enti-ties of both parts of the sentence are distinct from each other since theone refers to the elected king and the other to the holy mountain,al though on a higher plane they actually belong to one semanticcategory.6 1

58 . This construction is confirmed by those examples of l ine paral lel ism inwhich the one line consists of two correspondent modifiers and the other one of twocongruous clauses, fo r example 2 Sam. 1.22: (1 )

(2). In cases like this the caesura inl ine (1) is given by the syntac tic-sem antic correspondence between the twomodifiers (so also Ps. 2.2; Mic. 1.4; and in Ugaritic: CAT 1.17, II, lines 27-30).

59. So also, e.g., Pss. 3.7; 15.4; 19.4, 5, 6; 22.2; 23. Ib , 4a; 26.6, 11, 12; 27.6;137.1b; Mic. 1.3. Some of these cases meet Geller's criteria for a looser semanticrelationship, e.g. cause-consequence (Parallelism, pp. 31-37); th e problem is thatsome of these apply equally to prose an d thus are not distinctive.60. To a certain extent, this analysis is analogous to the distinction drawn infunctionalist linguistics between the 'core' and the 'periphery' , fo r which see R.D.van Valin Jr., 'Synopsis of Role and R eference Grammar', in Advances in Role andReference Grammar (A msterdam: Benjamins, 1993), pp. 4-7. Rejection of the pre-sent analysis entails the acceptance of more than two explicit constituents in one'line' , against the restrictions postulated by O'Connor, Verse Structure, pp. 29-30.

61. The same analysis could be applied to such passages as Pss. 23.3b, 4b;137.la , 2, 4, 6b, 7, 8, and even to Isa. 1.2b, 6, 8, 14a, 21, 23a (cohesion by parono-


19/30

20 Creation in Jewish and Christian Trad itionIn some cases the first colon consists of a fronted constituent (oftenincluding modifier or object), while th e second colon presents th e otherconstituents, for example,Exod. 15.1Judg. 5.20

Thus, th e position of the caesura may be plausibly identified when thetw o parts of the sentence are marked by syntactic features and semanticindications,62 as well as a rhythmic balance that sets the line apart fromprose.63

The verse line (the stick) consists of two or three cola. In a tripartiteverse one of the cola may be exceptional, introducing the stich as 'firstmember', or closing it as 'third member ' , for example,64

Ps. 74.9third member

Isa. 1.25 first member

Parallelism between two lines, each consisting of two cola, ispossible as well. 65 A special case is parallelism between two lines(1)(2), such that the two cola (c//d) of stich (2) form the syntactic com-plement of the two cola of stich (1), fo r example,Ps. 2.2

masia; so also Ps. 137.3b). A sy ntacto-seman tic caesura of this kind does not existin such stretches as 1 Sam. 2.14aa.62. That is the analogy between syntactic-isometric regularity and semantic

correspondence. I wonder whether this condition is still covered by Jakobson's'compulsory syntactic pause' at the end of the line of Southw est Slavic and Russianoral poetry; see R. Jakobson , 'Slavic Epic Verse Studies in Comparative Metrics',in his Selected Writings, VI, Slavic Epic Studies (The Hague: Mouton, 1966), pp.414-63, esp. pp. 418-20.

63. Since parallelism is a code rather than a norm of prosody, the recognition ofsyntactic-isometric complementation is warranted if the surrounding text containsindications of semantic parallelism.

64. Cf. M . Weiss, The Bible from within: The Method of Total Interpretation(Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1984), pp. 251-55 (on Isa. 1.4c); Collins, Line-Forms,pp. 223-225 ('tripartite lines').

65. Cf. Avishur, Stylistic Word Pairs, pp. 77-78; parallelism within the colon( 'half-l ine' parallelism) also relates to semantic, syntactic and rh yth m ic correspon-dence.


20/30

P O L A K Poetic Style and Parallelism in the Creation Account 21Generally speaking, parallelism is to be viewed as a code which

imposes a balanced reading and cohesion between the two cola. It isthis code which suggests th e correct understanding of the text, forexample,

P s. 11.4Isa. 1.3

In Isa. 1.3, the reader's insight that the verb serves as the predicatein th e second clause as well, with as subject ( 'gapping') , followsfrom the recognition of parallelism, supported by the ballast variant andthe structure of the second line. Otherwise one might understand thatthe donkey is metaphorically conceived of as his master's feedingtrough (as undergraduates occasionally suggest). In Ps. 11.4 the clause-let could be taken to mean that God's eyes look in general;only the second colon discloses the object.

In prose texts balanced verses may occur, but when they are notbuttressed by additional parallelistic structures, rhyth m ic features andelements of the poetic register, they do not seem to evoke the poeticreading. Fixed pairs are found frequently in a syndetic (or asyndetic)junction within a single syntactic constituent with no consequences forsentence structure, for example,

In parallelism, on the other hand, the members of the pair are mostlysplit up and spread out over the cola of the line, fo r example,

Job 24.3Joel 2.242 Sam. 1.21

Thus, prose may be almost as rhythmic as poetry, but therealways remains a difference regarding parallelistic structure, rhythmic

66. So in prose also: Gen. 32.6; Exod. 20.17; 22.3, 8, 9; 23.4, 12; Deut. 5.14,21; 22.4, 10; 28.31; Josh. 6.21; 7.24; Judg. 6.4; 2 Sam. 12.3; 15.3; 22.19; and inpoetry: Isa. 1.3; 32.20; Job 24.3.

67. So also Nu m . 18.27, 30; Deu t. 16.13 ; 2 K gs 6.27; and in poetry: Hos. 9.2;Joel 2.24.68. in prose here only; in poetry Deut. 32.2; 2 Sam. 1.21; Job 38.28.

Exod. 21.3366Deut. 15.14671 K gs 17.168


21/30

22 Creation in Jewish and Christian Traditionregularity, and lexical register. Such structures, which are tangent onparallelism, withou t actually realizing full para llelism and lacking th eappropriate lexical register, are better characterized as 'balancedcoupling' ,69 Balanced coupling may dominate a prose narrative, as inthe tale of Job, where parallelistic structures are far more prominentthan one expects, and rhythm ic regularity is even striking. Howe ver, thelexical register of the Job story is strongly prosaic, and differs sharplyfrom the highly sophisticated diction of the poetry of Job, and for thatreason the tale should not be defined as poetry.70The Paradise narrative also opens with some lines of highly poeticstructure and diction:

However, in the following verses a poetic reading w ould necessitate theassumption of a large number of cola which contain five accentedwords or more.72

The section concerning the creation of the wom an is almost entirelycouched in plain prose, particularly in the long lines of vv. 21a, 22a:73

Taken altogether, these findings suggest that the opening of theParadise tale is phrased almost as poetry, and then is followed by arhythmic, balanced, prose tale in which divine discourse is further

69. On 'balanced coupling' see Polak, 'Prose and Poetry', pp. 64, 66-68.70. See Polak, 'Prose and Poetry in the Book of Job', pp. 62, 68-76.71. Note the fixed pair72. In v. 5a th is assumption is not necessary in view of the construct states73. Other verses in which isometry is not perceptible include 3.1, 3, 8, 11, 24. In

a large numb er of verses the partition into isom etric stichs entails th e recognition oflong cola.

Gen. 2.21

Gen. 2.22

Gen. 2.7Gen. 2.8

Gen. 2.5Gen. 2.671


22/30

P O L A K Poetic Style and Parallelism in the Creation Account 23distinguished by poetic stylization.74 In this narrative, then, the dictionshould be characterized as 'balanced coupling' or 'poetic prose', ratherthan as poetic in the strict sense of the word.

5. The Hymn of Creation: Prosodical StructureIn contrast, nearly the entire account of the creation of heaven and earthcan be construed as poetry. Only a few verses fail to yield an acceptabledivision into balanced cola. In the following analysis the poetic struc-ture will be specified by the terms introduced above, with 'ident' (forthe occurrence of identical verbs or nouns in both cola) as addi-tional label. The following abbreviations are used: 'synt' for syntactic;'semant' for semantic; 'rhyt' for rhythmic. 'Line parall' indicates par-allelism between two consecutive lines; we also indicate first member,third member, gapping, epiphora, anaphora, opening colon, and closingcolon. Where parallelism remains doubtful, the indication 'hardly' isused.

74. On this subject see F.H. Polak, 'The Style of the Dialogue in BiblicalNarrat ive ' , Te'uda, 16-17 (Tel A v i v : Tel Avi v Universi ty, 2001), pp. 47-102(Hebrew; English summary).

1 .1 synt-rhyt1.2 semant-rhytsynt-rhyt1 .3 first membersemant-ident1 .4 synt-rhyt-ident1.5 sem ant-syntsemant-synt-rhytthird member1 .6 first membersemant-rhyt-ident1 .7 first membersynt-rhyt-line parall/epiphorathird member1 .8 hardlysemant-synt-rhytthird member


23/30

24 Creation in Jewish and Christian Tradition1.9 first memberhardly75closing colon1.10 ident-syn t-rhytthird mem ber1.11 first membersynt-semanticsynt-semanticthird member1.12 synt-semanticsynt-rhythmicthird member1.13 se man t-synt-rhytthird member1.14 first membersynt-rhytsynt-semantic1.15 ident-syntthird m emb er1.16 synt-rhytgapping / line p arall /double anaphorathird member1.17 synt-rhytthird m em ber1.18 synt-rhytthird m e m b e r1.19 semant-synt-rhytthird m emb er1.20 first membersynt-rhyt76semant-synt-rhyt1.21 hardlysynt-rhyt77third member1 .22 first membersemant-syntthird member

75. In v. 9 one may, however , no te the anti thesis of and76. In v. 20 one notes the figura etymologica, not unl ike Ps. 126.1.77. I t is a pr inc ipal weakness that this division of v. 21 matches a relative clause

with a cont inuat ion of the m a i n clause. Bu t this s t ructure i s corroborated by theepiphora of


24/30

1.23 semant - syn t - rhy tth i rd member

P O L A K Poetic Style and Parallelism in the Creation Account 25

1.24 first m e m b e r78gapping/ identthi rd member1.25 hardlyha r d ly 7 9third m e m b e r1.26 first m e m b e rsynt - rhyt1.25 hardlyha r d ly 8 01.27 ident -synt - rhytth i rd member1 .28 seman t - syn t- rhy tsemant - syn tsemant -synt -gappingl ine paral l1.29 first m e m b e rhardlyhardlyhardlylast member1 .30 semant-synt - rhytsynt - rhyt 8 1l as t memberclosing colon1.31 syn t - rhy tthi rd membersemant-synt - rhytth i rd member2 .1 syn t - sernan t -gapp ing2 .2 syn t - rhy tsynt-rhyt- / l ine- ident2 .3 synt - rhyt - semantsynt - rhyt

7 8 . N o te t he e p i phe r i c r e pe t it i on o f and the repe t i t ion o f79 . In th i s l ine o n e no te s th e s t r i k i ng e p i pho ra , a l t hough th e s y n t a c t i c - r h y t h m i c

d iv i s ion se e ms doub t fu l .8 0 . T h e s y n t a c t i c - r h y t h m i c d i v i s i o n o f v . 2 6 m a y s e e m d o u b t f u l , b u t i s

corrobora ted by the e p i pho ra o f81 . Th i s a na l ys i s o f vv . 29-30 is based o n t h e s u s t a i n e d g a m e w i t h a n a p h o r a

a n d e p i p h o r a o f t he va ri ous no un p hra se s .


25/30

26 Creation in Jewish and Christian TraditionDespite a few doubtful cases that are marked as such (vv. 8-9, 21, 25,26, 29), the proposed prosodical structure seems well established. Thenumerous da ta o n which this structure is based could never b eaccounted for in a prose tale, even if one al lows for a high number ofcases of 'ba lanced coupl ing ' . Thus it is impossible to categorize th ecreation account of Genesis as prose, or even as 'elevated, rhythmic 'prose, all the more so as the lexical and grammatical register of thisaccount also belongs to the domain of poetry. Definition of this peri-cope as hymnic poetry is far more plausible, even though in some linespoetic structure seems doubtfu l . If the n u m b e r of these lines is con-sidered to o large for a poetic text, th e present findings could be inter-preted as indicative of a slight prose revision of a poetic text, affectedonly incidentally by the rewording, probably mainly in the long enum er-ations of vv. 21, 25, 26.82 The basic structure, ho wev er, is provided bythe poetic hymn. Any discussion of the meaning of the creation accountmust take the hymnic poem as point of departure.

6. The Hymn of Creation: A Sense of MeaningThe hymnic poem contrasts the picture of the primaeval void prior tothe creation of light with the divine rest of the seventh day, followingthe completion of the creation. The blessing of the Sabbath, the lastword uttered by God in the creation, stands over against the first word,the command 'Let there be l ight ' , on the first day. Both these divineproclamations affect th e universe in its entirety, since th e blessing ofthe seventh day pertains to time and therefore to the entire creation,while the primaeval light illuminates the entire cosmos.A steady progression leads day after day from this divine act to theculminat ion on the seventh day. The point of departure for this pro-gression is marked by the opposition of the two primaeval elementsand Divine decree pu ts an end to the cosmic darkness,and after l ight has been called into being, th e human w or ld , in all itscomplexity, is created step after step. This process is controlled bydivine approval, and the blessing of the animals andmankind, and culminates in the blessing of the entire creation and theseventh day. The wo rld thu s created is depicted in all its excellence and

82. In this respect , then, the resul ts of ou r ana lysis differ from the view ofAlbright , 'K i Tob', w ho regards the creation account as a prose paraphrase o f apoetic hypogram.


26/30

POLAK Poetic Style and Parallelism in the Creation Account 27beauty, day after day and stage after stage, th e ultimate source of allthis excellence being the divine word and the divine light. The closedtempus of the first week represents the perfection of the universe, epito-mized in the perfection of the divine rest on the seventh day. It is thisweek that is celebrated in the one great image that encompasses theentire process of the creation of the world in which man is placed.

7. The Sabbath and the Priestly SourceH ow are we to depict the relationship between this hymn and theassumed Priestly source, which it supposedly opens? This questionrelates to a number of issues. First, one must determine whether thecreation account contains any specific element of the characteristicsociolect of the Priestly writings in the Pentateuch. Actually, only fewfeatures are specifically related to these strata. A notable styleme is theuse of to indicate a variety of subspecies, a usage found also inLev. 11.14-16, 19, 22, 29; Deut. 14.13-15, 18; Ezek. 47.10. In additionone notes the use of J and (Gen 1.20, 21), lexemes that arealso found in the Deluge tale, the Exodus narrative, and cultic law.83The syndetic junction also has Priestly connections, occurringas it does in cultic law, in the genealogy of Adam's descendants (Gen.5.2), in the Deluge tale, and in the post-Deuteronomic homily (Deut.4.16).84 An element which could be considered priestly, is the verb

,85 indicating completion of the Tabernacle:86Exod. 40.33

A similar note is found in Exod. 39.32, in a clause that is not repre-sented in the LXX(39.10), and probably originates in a later recension.This context supplies an additional parallel to Exod. 2.1-3, namelyMoses' blessing of the Israelites who enabled him to complete thisenterprise (Exod. 39.43; = LXX 39.22). However, since these pericopes

83. Gen. 7.21; 8.17; 9.7 (cf. Ezek. 47.9); Exod. 1.7; 7.28 (matched by Ps.105.30); Lev. 5.2; 11.10, 20, 21, 23, 29, 31, 41, 42, 43, 44, 46; 22.5; Deut. 14.19.

84. Gen. 5.2; 6.19; 7.3, 9, 16; Lev. 3.1, 6; 12.7; 15.33; 27.5-7; Num. 5.3.85. This verb also occurs in Num.7.1, but this chapter belongs to a later expan-

sion of the EncampmentComplex.86. In this verse the L XX does not reflect ' but the final

clauselet is representedby the Greek.


27/30

28 Creation in Jewish and Christian Traditionprobably represent late additions to the Tabernacle account, it is likelythat these verses derive from the creation account of Genesis 1, or asimilar text,87 and not the other way around.Secondly, as a matter of principle, no opposition needs to existbetween the recognition of the poetic character of the creation accountand its inclusion in the Priestly writings. As shown by M. Paran, manypoetic features are found in these writings (which he still considers as'the Priestly source ') . 8 8 However, closer inquiry reveals that suchfeatures are frequent only in part of these w ritings. In the D eluge taleth e opening pericopes are probably as close to poetry as the creationaccount (Gen. 6.9-15), but the continuat ion is hardly based on paral-lelism (6.16-21). Additional characteristic residues of poetic texts havebeen detected in the description of the opening of the flood (7.1 lb).89

synt-semantResidues of a similar construction are found in the description of theend of the flood (8:2):

synt-semant-gappingThis verse, however, does not preserve the predicate of the secondcolon, so that in the presen t text the two sub jects, and

, constitute one long noun phrase, dependent on the one remain-ing verb, . Probably this reduction reflects the adaptation of thepoetic text to plain prose language.90

87. It is not sound to analyse the relationship between Exod. 25-31 and Exod.35 -0 without preceding discussion of the recension reflected by the Septuagint.

88. M. Paran, Forms of the Priestly Style in the Pentateuch: Patterns, LinguisticUsages, Syntactic Structures (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1989), pp. 40-61, 98-136(Hebrew; English summary on pp. viii-xi), basing himself on the work of Cassuto,Kselman (note 8 above) and S. McEven ue.

89. The expression is found in Amos. 7.4; Ps. 36.7; Isa. 51.10; th ephrase occu rs in Isa. 24.18 (all poetic sections). The particularcharacter of this verse has already been recognized by Dillmann, Genesis, p. 144.For a comparison with th e epic of Atramhas ls see M. Weinfeld, 'Gen. 7.11, 8.1-2against the Background of the Ancient Near Eastern Tradition', WO 9 (1977), pp.242-48.

90. In Jub. 5.29 this verse is quoted in full parallelism, as shown by S.E.Loe we nstam m 's discussion of the vestiges of parallelism in Gen. 8.2b: 'The Flood',in Comparative Studies, pp. 93-121, esp. pp. 112-13, 115; see also idem, 'TheW aters of the Biblica l Deluge: T heir Onset and Their Disappearance ' , idem, From


28/30

POLAK Poetic Style and Parallelism in the Creation Account 29Furthermore, parallelistic structures are prominent in the Complex of

L aw Proclamation (Lev. 18-22; 26, the 'Holiness Code') in the com-mandments of Leviticus 1991 (e.g. 19.2b-4) and in the blessings andcurses of ch. 26,92 (e.g. 26.1-5). In the Priestly writings, then, paral-lelism is limited to some particular pericopes. In the Deluge narrativeand the conclusion of the 'Complex of Law Proclamation' (Lev. 26)this style seems to be related to the genre (covenant blessings andcurses) and the prototypes used.

Thus, it would be hard to defend the notion that the highly individualstyle of the Hymn of Creation issues from the Priestly style. Alter-natively, it may be maintained that the redactor of the genealogicalframework of the Pentateuch (the T6ledot work) used some Priestlylanguage (as well as the closure of 2.4a) in order to adapt the hymn tohis prose history. A similar prosaic intrusion into a poetically balancedline is found in the blessings of Deuteronomy (Deut. 28.4)

LX X E-uX oyrineva id eKyova x r \ c , Koiliaq aou KOI id yevrpaTa xr\q jf\q ao\)id po\)Ko^ia T W V P O C O V aoi) KOI id 7ioi|ivia T W V Tipopdicov aov

The Greek does not represent the phrase which could beviewed as explanatory of the next phrase. Thus the LX X probablyreflects a shorter reading, with an excellent poetic balance. Similarexpansions could account for the intrusion of prose elements into thepoetic hymn.Thirdly, the climactic position of the Sabbath in the Creation Accountof Genesis, where it stands over against the light preceding the creation,seems, on the face of it, to support an argument for its ascription to thePriestly writings. The connection between the divine rest following the

Babylon to Canaan: Studies on the Bible and its Oriental Background (Jerusalem:Magnes Press, 1992), pp. 297-312, esp. pp. 300-302.91. In Lev. 19 parallelism permeates most sections, e.g. vv. 2b-4, 7-19, 26-32,34-36. Some of the exceptions seem connected with rule formulation (v . 32), butmost of them relate to detailed laws originating in different corpora, e.g. 19.5-6,20-24.

92. Parallelism is systemic in Lev. 26.2-2, 3-13, 14-21, 22-26, 27-33, 36-40, 42;in vv. 34-35, 41, 43-45 this style is far weaker. It is important to note that paral-lelism is at most weak in the blessings and curses of Lev. 20.22-25 (as againstv. 26).

MT


29/30

30 Creation in Jewish and Christian Traditioncreation and the Sabbath is mentioned in the preliminary admonitionclosing the first part of the Tabernacle Complex (Exod. 31.13-17):

31.15

31.17

These verses are extremely close to the style of the cultic pre-scriptions and the Complex of Law Proclamation

poetic style and parallelism in the creation account

Documents