LAMENTATIONS. — Five poems concerning the destruction of Jerusalem, to which the Septuagint prefixed the title ἐφῆναι, which also passed into the Vulgate: Threni id est Lamentationes. In the Hebrew Bible the brief collection is indicated simply by the first word of the composition ('ēhāh), as also happens with the books of the Pentateuch.
In the Talmud (Bābhā' Bāthrā 15a) the five poems are called qñōth; qñāh denotes a funeral song or lament and entails a particular poetic metre, usually employed in an elegiac composition.
A more notable difference between the Hebrew Bible and the Greek-Latin Bible concerns the place occupied by the little book. In the Hebrew text it appears in the third part, among the Kēthābhām, whereas in Greek and Latin it is connected with the book of Jeremiah, which it follows as an appendix. Neither of these arrangements, and especially not the Hebrew one, is original. The earliest ecclesiastical writers (Origen, Melito of Sardis) who speak of the Hebrew canon unite L. with the larger book of Jeremiah. The Jewish historian Flavius Josephus does the same (C. Ap., I, 40). St. Jerome, in his Prologus galeatus, is the first to document that some (nonnulli) placed the L. among the hagiographa. While the Greek-Latin arrangement, even apart from the question of authorship, respects a chronological succession, the Hebrew-rabbinic arrangement is due to the liturgical practice of reading the book during the fast of 9 'ābh,
instituted to commemorate the destruction of Jerusalem in 587. For this reason the little book was placed among the other four with a clearly defined liturgical use (Song of Songs, Ruth, Ecclesiastes, Esther), which together with the L. form the five mōghillōth, “scrolls.” Moreover, the difference in the Greek translator shows that the little book was never perfectly joined to that of Jeremiah.
The content of the five poems is simple, and they develop an exceedingly tragic theme. The ideas are often repeated, and expressions of grief or bewilderment alternate; for this reason it is difficult to present a summary of the individual poems, since they lack a genuine logical development of concepts. From L. there emerges a highly developed theological idea of God, in harmony with the theology of the Old Testament. God is the protagonist of history, which owes nothing to chance or blind fatalism. The concept of guilt and collective responsibility is developed at length. As regards the problem of suffering, one may discern a solution similar to that proposed in the book of Job. Alongside the idea of punishment, the purifying value of suffering is also put forward.
From a literary standpoint the little book is usually highly esteemed. It is nevertheless acknowledged that the unity of the subject, however grandiose, and the rigid alphabetical scheme have at times hampered the poetic imagination and obscured its formal beauty.
Jewish and Christian tradition, unanimous until the beginning of the eighteenth century, indicated Jeremiah as the author of the L. Nowadays, however, the contrary opinion is dominant among non-Catholics (Driver, Sellin, Koenig, Loehr, Eissfeldt, Oesterley-Robinson, Pfeiffer, Rudolph, Weiser, Haller, etc.). Among Catholics there are also those who defend the traditional opinion (Knabenbauer, Ricciotti, Wiesmann, Paffrath), but some limit Jeremianic authenticity to certain poems (Göttsberger, Högli-Miller-Metzinger), while others incline toward the negative view (Nikel, Clamer, Nöscher, Dennefeld).
It must be acknowledged that the tradition, although unanimous, does not appear to be so authoritative. The Hebrew arrangement says nothing against Jeremianic authenticity, since it is secondary. On the other hand, the testimony of the Talmud (Bābhā Bāthrā 15a) is too late and is joined to other implausible assertions to command unconditional assent. The testimony of Flavius Josephus (Antig. Ind., X, 78) likewise loses some of its value because it connects the L. with the notice in II Chron. 35:25. The title prefixed by the Greek version is an excellent indication of the antiquity of the opinion, but it raises many doubts concerning its authenticity.
Intrinsic examination reveals no points of contact that make identity of authorship with the book of Jeremiah necessary; but neither can it be asserted that the three or four passages on which the opponents insist (1:9, 11; 2:9, 20; 4:17, 20; 5:7) exclude Jeremiah as author. If the difference in the alphabetical order (the inversion of 'ajn-pek) between poems 2–4 and the first, and the particular character of the final, non-alphabetical prayer, can be regarded—as seems reasonable—as signs of different authorship, then, for intrinsic reasons, the group 2–4 should be attributed to Jeremiah.
Jahnow, Das hebräische Leichenlied im Rahmen der Völkerdichtung (Beihefte zur Zeitschr. f. altst. Wissenschaft, 36), 1923; H. Wiesmann, Der planmässige Aufbau der Klagelieder des Jeremias, in Biblica, 7 (1926), pp. 146-61; id., Der Zweck der Klagelieder des Jeremias, ibid., pp. 412-28; id., Das dritte Kapitel der Klagelieder, in Zeitschr. f. kathol. Theologie, 50 (1926), pp. 515-543; id., Die Textgestalt des s. Kapitels der Klagelieder, in Biblica, 8 (1927), pp. 339-47; id., Die Bedeutung der Klagelieder des Jeremias, in Pastor Bonus, 38 (1927), pp. 167-82; id., Der religiös-theologische Gehalt der Klagelieder des Jeremias, in Theologie und Glaube, 20 (1928), pp. 455-72; id., Widersprechen die Klagelieder dem Geiste des Jeremias?, in Theolog. prakt. Quartalischr., 81 (1928), pp. 328-37, 498-510, 717-26; id., Zur Charakteristik der Klagelieder des Jeremias, in Bonner Zeitschr. f. Theol. u. Seelsorge, 3 (1928), pp. 97-118; id., Das Leid im Buche der Klagelieder, in Zeitschr. f. Aussee u. Mystik, 4 (1929), pp. 97-123; id., Der geschichtliche Hintergrund des Büchleins der Klagelieder, in Biblische Zeitschr., 23 (1935-36), pp. 20-43; id., Der Verfasser des Büchleins der Klagelieder. Ein Augenzeuge der behandelten Ereignisse?, in Biblica, 17 (1936), pp. 71-84.
Angelo Penna
THE « L. » IN THE LITURGY AND IN SACRED SONG. — In the Jewish liturgy, the modulated reading of the « L. », at least since the destruction of the Second Temple, has been among the obligatory readings and has been performed on the ninth day of the month of 'ābh (July–August). The text sung by the Jews who go to the famous « Wailing Wall », the last relic of the Second Temple of Jerusalem, is not taken from the L. of Jeremiah, but was composed by the rabbis as a paraphrase and in the style of those poems.
In the Catholic liturgy, from the beginnings of the organization of the canonical hours, the « L. » have been read on the last three days of Holy Week. The last L., entitled Oratio Ieremiae, closes the first Nocturn of the « Tenebrae » of Holy Saturday as an undivided unit; the other four are distributed successively among the first three lessons of the first Nocturn: the end of each pericope is marked by the concluding refrain: «Ierusalem, Ierusalem, convertere ad Dominum Deum tuum». A lengthy responsory sung by the choir follows each reading.
The melodic formula on which the text of the L. is recited is more expressive than the common modulation used for the readings of the Divine Office: in the L. it is a true musical recitative. A letter of the Hebrew alphabet, sung on a brief and uniform melisma, begins each new stanza (in the original Hebrew text, the successive letters of the alphabet begin the first word of the successive stichs). The stanzas are recited on a psalmic-type formula; the intonation is repeated after the various cadences; there is a single reciting note (la); two kinds of medial cadences are possible, according to the length of the text; the final cadence, like the medial cadences, has a tonic structure. Jeremiah’s prayer, in addition to the common formula of the L., also has an ornate recitative with pentasyllabic or tetrasyllabic cursive cadences and with two reciting notes (la and re).
The musical recitatives adapted to the text of the L. are numerous in the manuscripts. At first they began to be notated in the very codex that served throughout the year for the biblical readings of the choir: thus the codex Amiatinus (8th century), the oldest complete codex of the Vulgate, indicates, with points, commas, and other simple neumes, in Beneventan-Tuscan notation of a later date, a recitative not very different from that published in the Vatican edition. The melody now disseminated by the Vatican edition is the most frequent in the manuscripts (antiphonaries, Bibles, Breviaries) and seems to be the oldest. Others have been published, but are no longer legitimate in liturgical use.
D. Hesbert points out the poverty of the Beneventan repertory, which employed the same formula for the Exsultet and for the L., a fourth-mode psalmic recitative analogous to that of the Te Deum and the Gloria in excelsis, XV of the Vatican edition (cf. Paleog. Mus., XIV, pp. 417–418). The same Beneventan tradition also offers a single recitative for “Prayers” in general: thus the Oratio Ieremiae was sung like the prayer of Jonah or that of Azariah.
The North African bishop Verecundus (ca. 550) reports that the Oratio Ieremiae was among the biblical canticles sung in Africa, Spain, and Gaul (cf. Verecundus, Commentariorum super cantica ecclesiast. libri IX, in Spicilegium Solesmense SS. Patrum, IV, Paris 1858, p. 40; cf. also Brev. mozarab.: PL 86, 367). A Hispanic melody is found in the antiphonary of Silos, in Aquitanian notation, and in the Beneventan Bible of Naples (Biblioteca nazionale, VII AA. 3); it is also adapted to the Exultet (cf. Rass. greg., 9 [1910], p. 129). Mozarabic notation is found for the L. in at least the following three codices: the Bible of S. Pedro de Cardena, fols. 236–228 (Seminario di Burgos); the Bible of León (fols. 50–52); the Bible of Oña (cf. G. Prado, El canto mozárabe, Madrid 1929, p. 26). In Milan the L. are sung on the Friday preceding Palm Sunday; the melody is found in cod. Ambros. E. 51 infer. of the 12th century.
The relationship of the various Latin melodies of the L. to Hebrew chant has not yet been clearly established. It seems that there is a melodic foundation common to all the scattered synagogues, to be compared not with the melody of the Vatican edition, but with others that have now disappeared (cf. A. E. Milgram Sabaoth, The day of delight, Philadelphia 1946, p. 473; A. Z. Idelsohn, Jewish music, New York 1948, pp. 51–56).
The polyphonists of the 15th and 16th centuries, according to a less liturgical conception, took possession of the L.—simple readings declaimed aloud—in order to transform them into true motets, using the same contrapuntal procedures employed both for a Kyrie and for a responsory, thereby suppressing the opposition between the soloist (the reader) and the choir. It is true, however, that Palestrina had his L. for five or six voices performed by five or six soloists and not by the entire choir. The L. in the polyphonic style, published in 1506 by Petrucci in Venice, are anonymous. The collection of Le Roy et Ballard (Paris 1557) includes the names of Arcadelt, Pierre de la Rue, Antoine Févin, and others. The book of L. dedicated by Palestrina to Sixtus V in 1588 replaced, for the service of the Papal Chapel, the L. in use since 1515 and composed by Eléazar Genet, known as “il Carpentrasso.” Various revisions in the repertory of Holy Week led to the appearance in the Sistine Chapel of new compositions both of L. and of the subsequent responsories, by Victoria, Ingegneri, Allegri, and others.