Commentari biblici

Ch. 47. An Ode on the Fall of Babylon

The strain of prophetic exhortation is here interrupted by an ironical elegy or “taunt-song” with a strong resemblance to the ode on the king of Babylon in ch. Isaiah 14:4-21. The humiliation of the city is represented by the graphic image of a delicate and luxurious lady of the harem, suddenly reduced to the shameful condition of a slave or a captive. This female personification of Babylon forms an effective, and no doubt intentional, contrast to the figure of Zion, the desolate and bereaved widow, who is soon to be restored to the honour and joys of motherhood (ch. Isaiah 49:14 ff., Isaiah 51:17 ff., Isaiah 54).—Although words of Jehovah occur in Isaiah 47:3; Isaiah 47:6, it is hardly natural to suppose that He is the speaker throughout. The singer is more probably either the nation of Israel (as in Isaiah 14:4 ff.) or the prophet speaking in his own name.

The poem is usually divided into four unequal strophes, commencing with Isaiah 47:1; Isaiah 47:5; Isaiah 47:8 and Isaiah 47:12. Dillmann finds in it a combination of several distinct poetic measures, and recognises the characteristic rhythm of the elegy only in the opening verses of the first three strophes (1, 5, 8). There is however an approximation to the structure of the qînah in many verses; and the question is suggested whether the departures from the regular form are not to be accounted for by errors in the transmission of the text. Duhm, omitting three clauses as interpolations (see below), makes out a division into five equal strophes (1–4, 5–7, 8–10 a, 10b–12, 13–15) of seven lines each, and with a few minor alterations the elegiac cæsura (see on Isaiah 14:4) is fairly well marked in nearly every line. The textual alterations may not commend themselves in each instance, but there is at least a presumption in favour of a stricter prosody than earlier commentators allow.

1. virgin daughter of Babylon] i.e. “virgin daughter, Babylon”; see on Isaiah 1:8, cf. Isaiah 37:22. The parallel phrase daughter of the Chaldœans is somewhat different. It describes Babylon as the city of (possessed by) the Chaldæans, the reigning dynasty. It might no doubt be a personification of the land of Chaldæa, like “daughter of Egypt” in Jeremiah 46:11; but this is less probable.

sit on the ground] A sign not of mourning, as in Isaiah 3:26, but of abject humiliation.

there is no throne] Render: without a throne, as R.V.

thou shalt no more be called] Lit. “thou shalt no more (be one whom) they call”; the peculiar construction being partly due to the Hebrew aversion to the use of the passive.

tender and delicate] See Deuteronomy 28:56, “the tender and delicate woman which would not adventure to set the sole of her foot upon the ground.”

1–4. The first strophe consists of a tristich (Isaiah 47:1) followed (on Duhm’s reconstruction) by two distichs. The leading thought is the degradation of Babylon from her position of ease and luxury.

2. Take the millstones &c.] The luxurious lady must betake herself to the occupation of the meanest female slaves in the household: Exodus 11:5; Job 31:10.

uncover thy locks] Rather: take off thy veil (Song of Solomon 4:1; Song of Solomon 4:3; Song of Solomon 6:7).

make bare the leg] remove the skirt. The last word does not occur elsewhere. pass over the rivers] Render: pass through streams, omitting the article. The words are commonly taken to describe the hardships of a journey into exile, but they may simply refer to the degradations which she would have to undergo in performing the drudgery of a common slave (so Dillmann).

3. Thy nakedness … seen] These words, which undoubtedly spoil the rhythm of the verse, are deleted by Duhm as a gloss suggested by the latter part of Isaiah 47:2.

and I will not meet thee as a man] The sense is very obscure. Either (a) “I will spare no man” (i.e. meet him with friendly intentions); the figure of the virgin being dropped: or (b) “I will not entreat any man (for help)”: or (c) the vowel-points being changed, “I will let no man intercede,”—all unacceptable on one ground or another. The difficulty lies in the word for “man”; this would be got rid of by simply changing ’âdâm into ’âmar (= “saith”) read by some MSS. of the LXX. as the first word of Isaiah 47:4. The verb then stands absolutely, and is best pointed and translated as Niphal tolerativum: “I will not (let myself) be entreated.” (Oort and Duhm). See further on Isaiah 47:4.

4. The verse as it stands interrupts the continuity of the poem, especially in the view of those who hold that the speaker is throughout Jehovah. Lowth and others regard it as the response of a chorus of Israelites to the words of God in Isaiah 47:3, while Dillmann and others unhesitatingly pronounce it to be an interpolation. But all reasonable objections are removed if we supply the word “saith” as in two Greek codices. Combining this with the other suggestion of Oort mentioned above, the last distich of the strophe reads thus:—

I will take vengeance and will not be entreated,—saith our Redeemer;

Jehovah of Hosts is His name,—the Holy One of Israel.

5. get thee into darkness] Darkness may be a symbol either of imprisonment (ch. Isaiah 42:7) or, more generally, of misery; Lamentations 3:2.

lady of kingdoms] Lit. “mistress” (Isaiah 24:2). The word is used of the queen in Jeremiah 13:18, in a connexion somewhat similar to this. Babylon is addressed as an imperial city holding the destinies of many kingdoms in her hands.

5–7. The second strophe commences anew with an apostrophe to Babylon. The keynote is struck in the words “mistress of kingdoms.” She is threatened with the loss of her imperial power, because she has so grossly abused it by her cruelty to Israel.

6. Jehovah speaks, charging Babylon with pitiless inhumanity towards His people when they were delivered to her for chastisement (for the thought cf. Zechariah 1:15).

I was wroth with my people] Cf. Isaiah 54:9, Isaiah 57:16 f., Isaiah 64:5; Isaiah 64:9.

I have polluted (R.V. I profaned) mine inheritance] Cf. Isaiah 43:28. “Profane” is the opposite of “holy;” as “holy to Jehovah” Israel was inviolable (Jeremiah 2:3), but when this relation ceased she passed under the power of the heathen.

upon the ancient] Better, as R.V.: upon the aged. Although the word is sing., there can be no doubt that it is used literally of the old men on whom the hardships of captivity fell most heavily (cf. Lamentations 4:16; Lamentations 5:12). The idea that Israel as a nation is meant is not to be entertained (see on ch. Isaiah 46:4). We have little knowledge of the circumstances of the Israelites in exile, but there is nothing improbable in the supposition that some of them were put to forced labour, and that cases of exceptional barbarity may have occurred.

7. Such inconsiderate cruelty can only be explained by the delusion that her supremacy was eternal, that no day of reckoning could ever come to her.

And thou saidst, I shall be &c.] Render (with a different division of clauses) And thou saidst I shall be for ever—a lady eternally (lit. “mistress of eternity”). The word here rendered “eternity” (‘ad) is taken in the received text as a conjunction (A.V. “so that,” strictly “until”). The rhythm requires it to be treated as a substantive in the genitive after “mistress.” It is used in exactly the same way in the name “Father of eternity” (ch. Isaiah 9:6).

these things] thy cruelties;—in what sense she failed to lay them to heart is explained by the following clause.

the latter end of it] or the issue thereof, i.e. the inevitable retribution.

8–10 a. The third strophe: Babylon’s careless confidence in her own future shall be put to shame by the suddenness of her calamities.

thou that art given to pleasures] thou voluptuous one (Cheyne). The word does not occur again. The remaining clauses of the verse recur verbatim in Zephaniah 2:15. (of Nineveh).

that dwellest carelessly] that sittest securely.

I am and none else besides me] Rather: I and none besides. The words express Babylon’s sense of her unique position. The vocalic ending of the word for “none” (’aphṣî from ’ep̣heṣ = cessation, nothingness) cannot be the poss. suff. of 1st pers., which would give the sense “I am no more,”—the opposite of what is intended. It is probably an old case-termination which has ceased to have any significance in the Hebr. of the O.T. So again in Isaiah 47:10.