Were Psalm 9 and 10 Originally One Psalm?

Back to Psalm 9 or Psalm 10

Introduction

"The principal problem pertaining to Pss. 9 and 10 concerns whether they should be treated as a unity, namely a single acrostic psalm, or whether they should be treated as separate and independent psalms".

The answer to this question affects exegesis—and therefore translation—in many places throughout the psalm, all of which will be illustrated and dealt with in the individual layers.

Another area this would affect, however, are paratextual features—how the psalm gets titled and versified.

• For example the BHTI titles this Psalm 10 as 'Salmo 10(9)', whereas the versification starts back at 1.

• The New English Translation of the Septuagint (NETS) reflects the the unified status of the psalm in the Septuagint through both the title and the versification. They title the psalm 'Psalm 9(-10)' and continue the verse numbers throughout Psalm 10, with the normal verse numbers in parenthesis. For example MT Psalm 10:1 in the NETS is presented as follows.

²²⁽¹⁾Why, O Lord, do you stand far off—

do you overlook at opportune times in

affliction?

The arguments for both treating Psalm 9 and 10 as separate psalms or as one psalm are as follows.

Argument Map(s)

Psalm 9 and 10 were originally one literary unit

===
model:
    removeTagsFromText: true
    shortcodes:
      ":C:": {unicode: "🄲"}
      ":G:": {unicode: "🄶"}
      ":A:": {unicode: "🄰"}
      ":I:": {unicode: "🄸"}    
      ":L:": {unicode: "🄻"}
      ":D:": {unicode: "🄳"}    
      ":M:": {unicode: "🄼"}   
selection:
    excludeDisconnected: false
dot:
    graphVizSettings:
        rankdir: LR
        concentrate: true
        ranksep: 0.2
        nodesep: 0.2
=== 
[One Psalm]: Psalm 9 & 10 were originally meant to be read as one Psalm.
 + <Acrostic>: 'There is an acrostic pattern...which begins in Ps 9 and concludes in Ps 10’ (Craigie 1986, 116 :C:).
  + <Psalter's Macrostructure>: Book I and Book V of the Psalms are the only groups that contain full acrostics. If 9–10 were counted as one psalm, each would have 4 acrostic psalms—9/10, 25, 34 and 37 in Book I; and 111, 112, 119 and 145 in Book V (Ho 2019 :A:)
  + <Fulfilment of Basic Conditions>: The psalm(s) meets the two basic conditions of an acrostic: (1) that each unit, for the most part, begins with a consecutive letter of the alphabet, (2) number of lines in each alphabetic unit is consistent (Hossfeld and Zenger 1992, 81 :C:)
   - <Too Many Inconsistencies>: As it stands, the number of lines per letter is inconsistent and the acrostic itself fails in several places; 'The acrostic order is not complete and is seen clearly only in 9:2–6, 9:10–18 and 10:12–18 (Culley 1967, 107 :M:).' #dispreferred
    -> <Acrostic>
    <_ <Not Uncommon>: Many acrostics are either incomplete (Nah 1:2–8), partial (Psa 145:11–13; Song 4:9–11; Psalm 155; see Watson 2001, 199 :M:) or missing letters (Psa 25 missing ק and ו; Psa 34 missing ו; Psa 37 missing ע; Psa 145 missing נ).
    <_ <Inconsistencies Intentional>: The missing litters of the acrostic were intentionally omitted for poetic reasons.
     + <Other Signs of Intentionality>: 'Ps 9 goes from א to כ (eleven letters) and Ps 10 continues from ל to ת (eleven letters) so that the alphabet is split evenly between the two...Furthermore, there are 164 words in Ps 9 and 162 words in Ps 10' (Benun 2006, 3 :A:); if the instances of סלה are left out of Psalm 9, then both psalms have 162 words.
    + <Word Count in vv. 8–17>: 'Analyzing word counts of four successive primary verses, we see that the ו verse (v. 8) has 6 words, the ז verse (v. 12) has 7 words, the ח verse (v. 14) has 8 words, and the ט verse (v. 16) has 9 words. Each of these verses contains the same number of words as the numerical value of the letter of the acrostic which begins that verse’ (Benun 2006, 4 :A:).
    + <Word Acrostic>: In psalm 9, the uncertain missing/misplaced letters spell out הדך 'the oppressed' —a key term in Pss. 9–10.
     + <דך>: The noun דך is rare in the the Bible. 2 out of the 4 occurrences are in pss. 9 and 10. 
    + <רשע destroys order>: All of the missing letters and short strophes coincide with the mention of the רשע, especially 10:2–11 which consists of an extended meditation on the wicked person. This iconically reflects the problem in the Psalm's plot: the wicked destroy order (see Benun 2006 :A:).
    + <Presence and Restoration of Order>: The only times all the missing letters in 10:2–11 are present within one verse are 9:5, before the first mention of רשע, and 10:18, after the last mention of רשע. These symbolically represent times of (the restoration of) order (Benun 2006 :A:).
   + <Inconsistent Spacing>:  The ו-line looks as if it occupies 6 lines (unless the text is emended and ה is restored at the beginning of v. 8); the י-line is only 2 lines long, unless, with Kirkpatrick (1897 :C:) one regards the ק in קומא (v. 9:20) as the כ–line; the ל–line is 6 lines IF one emends the text by moving נאץ יהוה to from 10:3 to 10:4, otherwise it is indefinitely long. #dispreferred
   + <Missing Letters>: The ה–line is missing at 9:8 unless the text is emended; the נ-line is missing unless one emends 10:3; the מ–line is missing; the ס–line is missing unless one emends מרום to סורו in 10:5; the צ–line is missing unless one emends the text by adding צדיק to v. 10 (so Craigie 1986 :C:). #dispreferred
 + <Shared Vocabulary>: Both psalms share unique key words and phrases. 
  + [Shared Vocabulary]: לְעִתּוֹת בַּצָּרָה (MT 9:10; 10:1); עני/עניים '(the) afflicted' (MT 9:13, 19; 10:2, 9, 17); אנוש 'mortal man' (9:20; 10:18); דך '(the) oppressed' (9:20; 10:18); זוּ 'that, which' (9:16; 10:2); דרשׁ 'to seek, call to account' (Psa. 9:11, 13; 10:4, 13); שכח 'to forget' (9:13, 18, 19; 10:11,12); ראה 'see' (9:14; 10:11, 14)
 + <Counter-statements>: Positive points raised by the Psalmist in psalm 9 are countered in psalm 10 as a poetic device by the the psalmist 'protest(s) their innocence or make it clear...that they are not deserving of the evil they are experiencing (Maloney 2009, 35 :M:).
  + [Counter-statements]:‘Those who know your name...are seeking you’ (9:11) vs. ‘the wicked person...will not seek’ (10:4); ‘the one who seeks blood remembers them’ (9:13) vs. ‘He says in his yeart, “You will never seek”’ (10:13); ‘(YHWH) does not forget the outcry of the afflicted...the needy person will not be forgotten forever’ (9:13, 19) vs. ‘He says in his heart, “God has forgotten”’ (10:11) (translations are those of Maloney 2009, 36 :M:, used here for the sake of illustration).
 + <Ancient Versions>: Some of the oldest Greek and Latin MSS group the two psalms together.
  + [Ancient Versions]:Vaticanus (Greek, 4th c.); Siniaticus (Greek; 4th c.), Alexandrinus (Greek; 5th c.), Amiatinus (Latin, 8th c.)
 + <Medieval Hebrew MSS>: A few medieval Hebrew MSS combine the Psalms into one literary unit
  + [Medieval Hebrew MSS]:‘X. Pars praecendentis in Ken. 142, 222, in meis 2, 244’ (De-Rossi 1788 4:4 :M:):  ‘Psalm 10 is part of the previous (psalm) in Kennicot's (MSS numbered) 142 and 222; in my (MSS numbered) 2, 244' 
 + <YHWH's Rule as Bracket>: 'Thematically, the Lord's rule holds the psalms together. It is the starting point and assumption of Psalm 9 (vv. 5, 8), and it is the conclusion and hope of Psalm 10 (v. 16)' (Miller 2004, 189 :A:)
 + <קום>: 'The call to the Lord, "Rise up!" which occurs ten times in the Psalter, is the dominent petition in both psalms (9:20 and 10:12)' (Miller 2004, 189 :A:; see also Hossfeld and Zenger 1992, 83 :C:).
 + <Nations and Wicked>: 'Both psalms identify the wicked and the nations with one another' (Miller 2004, 190 :A:).
  + [Nations and Wicked]: 9:6, 16–17, 18; 10:15–16
 

Psalms 9 and 10 were originally two literary units

===
model:
    removeTagsFromText: true
    shortcodes:
      ":C:": {unicode: "🄲"}
      ":G:": {unicode: "🄶"}
      ":A:": {unicode: "🄰"}
      ":I:": {unicode: "🄸"}    
      ":L:": {unicode: "🄻"}
      ":D:": {unicode: "🄳"}    
      ":M:": {unicode: "🄼"}   
selection:
    excludeDisconnected: false
dot:
    graphVizSettings:
        rankdir: LR
        concentrate: true
        ranksep: 0.2
        nodesep: 0.2
===
[Separate Psalms]: Psalms 9 & 10 were originally meant to be read as two separate Psalms. #dispreferred
 + <Striking Difference in Content>: '...the impression of two distinct psalms is initially reinforced by the contents: Ps 9 appears to be an individual hymn whereas Ps 10 appears to be an individual...lament' (Craigie 1986, 116 :C:; cf Kirkpatrick 1897, 41 :C:). #dispreferred
  + <Formulaic Language>: 'Psalm 9:2–15 is almost fifty percent formulaic language while the rest of 9 and all of 10 have almost none' (Culley 1967, 107 :M:), suggesting that these verses may have been part of another composition. #dispreferred
  <_ <Not Unusual for Lament>: 'It is not unusual for the psalm of petition or lament to commence with a laudatory introduction, which to us moderns may appear quite independent of the following lament and prayer' (Mowinckel 1962, I:95).
   + Ps. 27; 40; 90; 139
   <_ <Examples not Unified Psalms>: 'A similar situation applies in Psalms 27 and 40, but both of these are usually taken as combinations of two psalms' (Culley 1967, 107 :M:). #dispreferred
 + <Voice of Author>: 'The individuality of the writer, which is so prominent in Ps. ix (vv. 1–4 (=MT2–5); 13, 14 (=MT 14, 15)), disappears in Ps. x' (Kirkpatrick 1897, 41 :C:). #dispreferred
 - <Superscription and selah>: The juncture between the two psalms is the only time in book I (except for Ps. 33) where selah ends a psalm without a superscription beginning the next one (See Gunkel 1926, 32 :C:; Hossfeld and Zenger 1992, 81 :C:).
 + <MSS Unit Delimitation>: The model Tiberian Codices, a DSS fragment and one of the oldest Syriac witness to the MT group separate the two psalms. #dispreferred
  + <Dead Sea Scrolls>: The gap between 9:21 and 10:1 in 5/6Ḥev1b suggests that the psalms were thought of as separate. #dispreferred
   <_ <Convention>: The division in the Hebrew witnesses may simply reflect the fact that the alphabet was thought of as comprised of two halves. A scribe would have therefore had no issue with beginning a Psalm with ל.
     + <Ancient Abcediaries>: As early as the 1st century B.C. 'at Qumran the alphabet was taught in two halves, dividing after k' (Coogan 1974, 61 :A:). The composition of 9 and 10 therefore respects this division.
      + On an ostracon from Qumran on which a student was practicing the alphabet, the student deliberately starts with למנ etc before אבג (see De Veaux 1954, Plance X :A:). 
  + <Masoretic Codices>: Both the Leningrad and Aleppo codices divide the psalms. #dispreferred
   <_ <Convention>
  + <Syriac>: Milan, Ambrosian Library. B. 21 inferiore fol. 99v clearly separates the two psalms. #dispreferred
   <_ <Convention>

Conclusion

For us, the evidence that these Psalms were originally one composition or literary unit is overwhelming.

As far as textual evidence, many of the oldest Greek and Latin MSS group the psalms together as one. There is evidence at Qumran, however, that the psalms were thought of as separate. This separation was evidently widespread, since it is reflected in the Syriac tradition and was also picked up by mainstream Judaism, making its way into the main Tiberian codices. The division at Qumran, however, may simply reflect a certain view of the alphabet as being divided into two halves, א to כ and then ל to ת. Presumably, then, a Qumran scribe would have not at all thought it strange to begin a Psalm with ל. It also seems that towards the Middle Ages, some Jewish communities acknowledged the unity of the psalms, as reflected in later medieval manuscripts. Internal evidence supporting the unity of psalms 9 and 10 is that the fact that this is the only instance in Book I where a Selah ends a psalm without a superscription beginning the next psalm.

The psalms share an extraordinary amount of thematic material. The first indication of this is the number of unique words and phrases shared by the two psalms, such as לעתות בצרה 'troubling times'(MT 9:10; 10:1) and the word דך 'oppressed' (MT 9:20; 10:18). Another striking feature of the psalm is the number of counter-statements in both halves of the psalm, whereby a positive point raised in the first half is countered in the second half for rhetorical purposes. The dominant petition in both psalms is for YHWH to קום 'rise up!' (MT 9:20 and 10:12)—a phrase which occurs only 10 times in the psalter. In both psalms the nations are identified with the wicked and in both psalms YHWH's rule is seen as both the starting point for the psalmist's petitions/praise and his hope. These themes suggest the overall problem that the psalmist is facing herein. Wicked people are prevailing by afflicting the vulnerable and it seems that King YHWH's order is in jeopardy of breaking down. It is unconvincing to point out that Psalm 9 is a praise and Psalm 10 a lament, for this is not unusual in the psalms.

The most striking evidence for the psalm's unity is its poetic features. Structurally speaking, both halves of the psalm consist of 162 words. The foundation of all the poem's features, however, is the acrostic, which is clear and regular in vv. 9:2–6; 9:10–18 and 10:12–18. The acrostic, however, is also the most controversial part of the psalm since in the verses besides those just mentioned it is anything but clear and regular. The irregularities and inconsistencies are often thought to stem from textual corruption, and solutions usually take the form of many speculative emendations are proposed in order to restore the acrostic. None of these emendations are justified textually. Rather, it can be shown that the omissions are intentional and even integral to the message of the psalm. In the first half of the psalm, the inconsistencies concern the letters ה, ד, and כ, which spell out הדך 'the oppressed'; this is a very important word in this psalm and 50% of the noun's occurrences are here. All of the irregularities and inconsistencies happen in the presence of the word רשע, which iconically represents the psalms message: the wicked bring disorder. The largest group of missing letters (מנסעפצ in 10:2–11) coincide with a description of this wicked person. The only times all those missing letters are present in one verse, however, are 9:5, before the first mention of רשע, and 10:18, after the last mention of רשע, thereby symbolising times of order and restoration, respectively.

For these reasons we have chosen to take Psalms 9 and 10 as one psalm.

Research

Articles

Holm-Nielson 1960

An attempt at finding an alphabetical arrangement of the rest seems to me quite fruitless: the ד-line is completely missing; the ה-line can only be obtained by beginning V. 8 with the last word of v. 7. The כ-line follows immediately after the י-line, but in return it is followed by two lines. The same applies to the ל-line. The מ-line is completely missing, and an נ-line, again, is only obtained by using the two last words of the preceding line. Then, according to the present division into verses, four lines follow until we reach the next letter, which, however, as might be expected, is not ס, but פ. Thus a letter is again missing completely. ע does not appear until after פ and is followed by three lines. Finally the letter צ is missing.

Monographs

Mowicnkel 1962

The laudatory introduction has a double purpose, or perhaps rather, a double root. Firstly it is a primary expression of one aspect of the fundamental feeling in the person who is approaching the deity: the attraction, enthusiasm, confidence of him or her who ‘knows God’. But then it is also the expression of a more naïvely utilitarion attitude: the suppliant tries to gain Yahweh's favour and induce him to grant the following petition: it belongs to the ‘motivation of the prayer’...appealing to Yahweh's sense of honour and his obligations in regard to the petitioner's trust in him (pp. 95–96)

Maloney 2009

Interestingly, the roots ברך and הלל are also juxtaposed in Ps 145:2 which is the eighth of the eight alphabetic acrostics in the Hebrew Psalter. Ps 9/10 is, of course, the first of the eight acrostics (35).

Commentaries

Kirkpatrick 1897

In Ps. ix the pairs of verses begin with successive letters of the alphabet, with the exceptions that the fourth letter (Daleth) is missing; the fifth letter (He) is obscured by a corruption of the text in v. 7 ; and the eleventh letter (Kaph) is represented by Qoph in v. 19. Ps. x begins with the twelfth letter (Lamed); but the alphabetical arrangement is then dropped, and six letters are passed over. At v. 12 however the structure of Ps. ix reappears, and vv. 12, 14, 15, 17 begin with the last four letters of the alphabet in order.

The description of the wicked man (x. 3 — 11) may have been taken from another poem, for it is distinguished by other peculiarities, besides the absence of the alphabetic structure. We cannot tell whether verses beginning with the missing letters of the alphabet were displaced to make room for it, or whether it stood here from the first. The latter alternative seems most probable, for the concluding verses of the Psalm have links of connexion with vv. 3 — 11. Comp. 'helpless" in v. 14 with w. 8, 10; v. 13 with v. 4; v. 14 with v. 11.

Ps. ix however appears to be complete in itself, and it seems preferable to regard Ps. x as a companion piece rather than as part of a continuous whole.

The connexion of thought is clear. The Psalmist has watched the great conflict between good and evil being waged in two fields: in the world, between Israel and the heathen nations; in the nation of Israel, between godless oppressors of the weak and their innocent victims. He has seen the sovereignty of God decisively vindicated in the world by the defeat of Israel's enemies : but when he surveys the conflict within the nation, wrong seems to be triumphant. So he prays for an equally significant demonstration of God's sovereignty within the nation by a signal punishment of the wicked who deny His power or will to interpose.

Craigie 1983

Missing: ד, ם Restored: צ, ס, נ

(On restoring ס): '5.c. "Are removed": this translation (prompted by G) assumes the emendation of מרום to סרו (the ס mistaken for מ, and the final מ inserted by dittography). If this is correct, the ס–strophe in the acrostic pattern is restored.'

(On restoring צ): 'The first line of the verse is unusually short in the context of the psalm as a whole, and its position is such that one might expect it to begin the צ–strophe. Hence צדיק "righteous" has been inserted, though it must be admitted that this is a speculative restoration.'

Van Gemeren

Over against this, however, we observe that the acrostic pattern is incomplete and may have been imposed on the psalm. Psalm 9 seems to be a complete unit of itself. Moreover the acrostic moves from kaph (v.18) to qoph (v.19) to shin (v.20), skipping several letters. Psalm 10 also seems to be a unified whole. Its so-called acrostic pattern is incomplete: lamed (v.1), pe (v.7b), ayin (v.8b), and the final four signs of the Hebrew alphabet (vv.12-17). An analysis of the contents and the internal structure of each psalm is indecisive. Psalm 9 is an individual lament psalm, combining prayer with praise and telling of God’s just rule over the nations. Psalm 10 is an individual lament psalm in which prayer focuses on the enemies of the covenant, who have at one time belonged to the faithful.

Conceptually and linguistically, it seems that vv.12-18 fit most appropriately with Psalm 9. The acrostic is more complete, whereas vv.1-8 show little evidence of a clear acrostic. Many of the proposals to recover the acrostic pattern are based on changes in cola for reasons of balance (stichometric analysis). It may be that a section of the acrostic poem was lost and that vv.1-11 form a separate psalm that is set between two sections of the acrostic poem (9:1-20; 10:12-18). Because of changes in language, mood, and subject matter, Psalm 10 should be considered separately from Psalm 9

Hosfeld and Zenger 1992

Der Psalm wechselt mühelos zwischen dem Blick auf den einzelnen Armen (9.10.14.19 10.2.8.9.14.18) und dem Blick auf das Kollektiv der Armen (91319 IO10,1217). Die Armut hat viele Facetten: soziale Not und Ausbeutung (91013), Verfolgung (10.2), Rechtsnot (IO78) und Ausgeliefertsein an die hinterhältige feindliche Übermacht (109f). Der Beter bedenkt die Armut in all ihren Dimensionen und schildert die eigene wie die der Gruppe der Armen. Er überschaut Vergangenheit, Gegenwart und Zukunft und sieht die Armut sowohl unter sozialem als auch religiösem Aspekt.

Bezüglich des Gottesbildes entfaltet der Armenpsalm eine kleine Theologie der Königsherrschaft JHWHs. JHWH erhält vier Titel, die ihrerseits Aspekte des titular wie in Bildern dargestellten Königtums umschreiben. Er heißt der »Höchste« (9.3), insofern er Götterkönig ist, der auf dem Weltberg thront und diesen Thronsitz in Jerusalem aufgeschlagen hat. Er amtet als »Richter« (9.5) sowohl gegenüber dem einzelnen (9.5) wie gegenüber dem universalen Erdkreis (9.8f). Der Zion ist sein Thronsitz als »Zionsthroner« (9.12 ,5). Schließlich ist er beständiger, ewig fortdauernder »König« (10.16)- Seine Schöpfermacht wird mit einem Verb aus dem alten Motiv des Chaoskampfes assoziiert und auf das Gericht an den Völkern übertragen (gr »schelten« 9.6). Insofern wirkt JHWH als Schöpfer und Lenker der Geschichte.

References

9,100

Approved