Chapter 11 of Recovering Ancient Hebrew PDF

Recovering Ancient Hebrew Scribal Numerical and Acrostic Techniques
Samuel Zinner
(DRAFT)
Copyright ©2019 by Samuel Zinner Pag. 1

CHAPTER 11
An Examination of Acrostic and Numerical Elements

In the Torah Psalms (1, 19, 111, 119) and Royal Psalms (2, 18, 45, 89, 110, and 132)1
Part I
The Question of Ps 110 as an Acrostic Psalm
Several early 20th-cent. exegetes believed Ps 110 contained a hidden acrostic text
referring to Simon Maccabaeus or to the high priest Simon. On this claim, John Day remarks:
“The older view that Psalm 110 actually contains an acrostic on the name of Simon, still
maintained by Marco Treves, was convincingly rejected by John W. Bowker long ago.”2
However, Day probably somewhat inaccurately portrays the status quaestionis here, given that
Bowker actually concludes with a respectful concession: “This is not to say TREVES is
necessarily wrong: the case may remain open. But it is evidence and argument that is needed.”3
In any event, Day adds a few simple yet quite weighty, although not necessarily absolutely
decisive, arguments against the Simon acrostic claim: “As for Simon, the Hasmonean priest-
king, a date of 140 BCE seems impossibly late for Psalm 110 (not long before LXX and the
earliest Qumran Psalms manuscript, and the textual obscurities of v. 3 tell against it).”4
To test Treves’ claim concerning Ps 110 I first supply the MT and the JPS 1917
translation.

1
I wish to thank Margaret Barker, Charles Häberl (Rutgers University), Robert P. Gordon
(University of Cambridge), and Keith L. Yoder (University of Massachusetts-Amherst) for
reading various versions of this paper and offering comments that led to its improvement. Any
remaining defects are of course my own.
2
John Day, “Some Aspects of the Monarchy in Ancient Israel,” in Rannfrid I. Thelle, Terje
Stordalen, Mervyn E. J. Richardson, eds., New Perspectives on Old Testament Prophecy and
History Essays in Honour of Hans M. Barstad (Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2015), p. 164. Day
footnotes Marco Treves, “Two Acrostic Psalms,” VT 15 (1965): pp. 81–90, and John W.
Bowker, “Psalm cx,” VT 17 (1967): pp. 31–41.
3
John W. Bowker, “Psalm cx,” p. 41.
4
John Day, “Some Aspects of the Monarchy in Ancient Israel,” p. 164.

Ps 110 JPS and MT
1 A Psalm of David. ‫ד־א ִ ֥שׁית‬
ָ ‫ימ ִינ֑י ַע‬
ִ ‫ְל ָד ִ ֗וד ִ֫מזְ ֥מוֹר נְ ֻ ֚ אם יְ הוָֹ ֨ה | ַ ֽלאד ֗ ִֹני ֵ ֥שׁב ִ ֽל‬
The LORD saith unto my lord: “Sit thou at ‫א ֶ֗יְביָך ֲה ֣ד ֹם ְל ַרגְ ֶ ֽליָך‬
ֹ ֽ֜
My right hand, until I make thine enemies
thy footstool.”
2 The rod of Thy strength the LORD will ‫יְביָך‬
ֶֽ ‫א‬
ֹ ֽ ‫ַמ ֵ ֚טּה ֻעזְּ ָ֗ך יִ ְשׁ ַל֣ח י֖ ְהוָֹ ה ִמ ִציּ֑ וֹן ְ ֜ר ֵ ֗דה ְבּ ֶ ֣ ק ֶרב‬
send out of Zion: “Rule thou in the midst of
thine enemies.”
3 Thy people offer themselves willingly in the ‫ילָך ְבּ ַה ְד ֵרי־ ֖קֹ ֶדשׁ ֵמ ֶ ֣ר ֶחם ִמ ְשׁ ָ ֑חר ֜ ְל ָ֗ך‬
֥ ֶ ‫ַע ְמָּך֥ נְ ָדב ֹ֘ת ְבּי֪ וֹם ֵ֫ח‬
day of thy warfare; ‫ַ ֣טל יַ ְל ֻד ֶ ֽתָך‬
in adornments of holiness, from the womb of
the dawn, thine is the dew of thy youth.
4 The LORD hath sworn, and will not repent: ‫ל־דּ ְב ָר ִ֗תי‬
֜ ִ ‫עוֹל֑ם ַע‬
ָ ‫נִ ְשׁ ַ ֚בּע יְ הוָֹ ֨ה | וְ ֬ ֥ל ֹא יִ נָּ ֵ֗חם ַא ָתּה־כ ֵ ֹ֥הן ְל‬
“Thou art a priest for ever ‫י־צ ֶדק‬
ֽ ֶ ‫ַמ ְל ִכּ‬
after the manner of Melchizedek.”
5 The Lord at thy right hand doth crush ‫יוֹם־א ֣פּוֹ ְמ ָל ִ ֽכים‬
ַ ‫ל־יְמינְ ָך֑ ָמ ַ ֖חץ ְבּ‬
ֽ ִ ‫ֲאד ָֹנ֥י ַע‬
kings in the day of His wrath.
6 He will judge among the nations; He filleth ‫ל־א ֶרץ ַר ָ ֽבּה‬
֥ ֶ ‫יָ ִ ֣דין ֖בַּגּוֹיִם ָמ ֵל֣א גְ וִ יּ֑ וֹת ָ ֥מ ַחץ ֜ ֗ר ֹאשׁ ַע‬
it with dead bodies, He crusheth the head
over a wide land.
7 He will drink of the brook in the way; ‫ל־כּן יָ ִ ֥רים ֽר ֹאשׁ‬
֗ ֵ֜ ‫ִמנַּ ַחל ַבּ ֶ ֣דּ ֶרְך יִ ְשׁ ֶ ֑תּה ַע‬
therefore will he lift up the head.
Before proceeding, the translation of v. 3 should be addressed. A comparison of the MT

with the LXX suggests that the verse has been modified in transmission by the Masoretes.
Flusser argues that the original Hebrew text of Ps 110:3 understood Melchizedek to have been
directly conceived in his mother’s womb by the word of God.5 According to Flusser, the
Masoretes modified the text as part of the polemical exchanges with Christians, objecting to
the Church’s Christological use of Ps 110:3. However, if this were the reason for the
Masoretes’ modification of the text, then why didn’t they also modify the cognate Ps 2:7, a text
the Church invoked Christologically just as freely as Ps 110:3? As I explain later in this
chapter, Ps 2:7 was not textually modified by the Masoretes because there is no presence in it

5
Judaism and the Origins of Christianity (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1988),
See David Flusser,
pp. 190, 192, and idem, Bemerkungen eines Juden zur christlichen Theologie (München: Chr.
Kaiser Verlag, 1984), p. 55.

of a parallel to Ps 110:3’s troubling female mythological entity Šaḥar. That the LXX’s ἐκ
γαστρὸς πρὸ ἑωσφόρου ἐξεγέννησά σε, “From the womb, before Morning star, I brought you
forth,” (NETS) preserved the original reading “I brought you forth” is attributable to the
translators being able to understand “the womb” and “Morning star” metaphorically. By the
time of the Masoretes, Ps 110:3’s language was not as easily understood metaphorically by
Jews, giving rise to the current standard MT version.
However we might explain the verse, since the MT modification of Ps 110:3 pertains to
its second part it consequently does not affect any potential acrostic one way or another. Thus
the claim of modification in this case, in contrast to Ps 2, does not have anything to do with
any possibility of all too conveniently (re)constructing what might be a phantom acrostic. And
there is the important difference that we have an abundance of actual mss and versional
evidence for suspecting textual corruption in Ps 110:3.
In my view the most cogent restoration of v. 3’s final clauses is that suggested by
Miriam von Nordheim, although I do not share her opinion on Ps 110’s dating. As this author
elucidates, Song 6:10 praises the feminine celestial entity Šaḥar, so that this verse’s Dawn is
not a mere poetic metaphor: “Who is this that looks forth like Dawn (Šaḥar).”6 Similarly, in Ps
110:3 the dawn is not a poetic metaphor, but the mythically personified dawn, Šaḥar, here the
mother of a son, the ruler who is named Dew (since he is the mythical personification of dew),
and who is also the Day Star. This Šaḥar of Ps 110 is again, as in Song 6:10, a personified
feminine celestial entity.7
Von Nordheim explains: “So findet sich im hebräischen Text die Konstellation in V.3,
dass JHWH, die höchste Gottheit, gemeinsam mit der Göttin ‘Morgenröte’ ein Kind zeugt.
Dieses Kind ist der König, der als Tau angeredet wird.” That is, “Thus one finds in the Hebrew

6
Miriam von Nordheim, Geboren von der Morgenröte? Psalm 110 in Tradition, Redaktion
und Rezeption (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2008), p. 82.
7
und Rezeption, p 83. Kabbalists could of course through a pious anagogical approach interpret
this as the union of the Holy One of Israel, blessed be he, with his Shekhinah. Yet, as von
Nordheim observes, the closest Tanakh parallel to Ps 110:3c is Isa 14:12’s King of Babylon who
is identified as the “Day Star” (Venus) who is the “Son of Dawn.” The myth implicit here is
cognate to that which underlies Ezek 28’s denunciation of the prince of Tyre, who in v. 14 is
identified as Eden’s cherub upon the mountain of God, the latter paralleling Ps 110:3’s
mountains in some Hebrew mss, attested also in Jerome.

text the constellation in verse 3 that YHWH, the highest divinity, together with the goddess
Dawn begets a child. This child is the king, who is addressed as Dew.”8
Accordingly, Ps 110:3c is arguably to be restored as follows: “From the womb of Dawn I
have begotten you as Dew.”9 This reading of “I have begotten you” agrees with the language of
Ps 2:7, where it similarly appears in a citation of what is clearly a somehow cognate10 divine
oracle:11 “I will tell of the decree:12 the LORD said unto me: ‘Thou art My son, this day have I
begotten thee.’” (JPS) The reason Ps 2:7 was spared the type of textual corruption we see in Ps
110:3 is that the former lacks the latter’s embarrassing personified female entity Šaḥar.
Knauf in his review of von Nordheim’s Ps 110 study rightly points out its chief defects.
However, he rejects the widely agreed upon (based partly on the supporting LXX and other
versional evidence) corruption of Ps 110:3. For Knauf, the LXX and other early versions
should be understood “as early exegesis and not used for the reconstruction of her Ps 110*,
which is nothing but an alternative reading of the Hebrew text. . . . An alternative reading of
the consonant text is not a ‘reconstruction’—the Masoretic vowels are just one reading
tradition among others, and not part of the ‘text.’ Every possible reading of the consonant text
might be regarded as equally intended—the biblical scribes did not suffer from the Greek
delusion of an ‘autonomous individual’ and its ‘unity of intention.’”13 I think most exegetes

8
und Rezeption, p. 86.
9
und Rezeption, p. 89. Ps 110:3a is understood by the LXX as “With you is [or, be] rule on a
day of your power.” (NETS)
10
As for the relation between Ps 2 and Ps 110, one should not simply assume the latter is
earlier than the former in terms of dating.
11
On the Psalter’s royal psalms and divine oracles in general, see Scott R. A. Starbuck, Court
Oracles in the Psalms: The So-Called Royal Psalms in their Ancient Near Eastern Context
(Atlanta, Georgia: Society of Biblical Literature, 1999). I am not convinced the royal psalms’
divine oracles reflect actual earlier existing oracles. It seems plausible to hold that they might
represent merely literary oracles created as ornamentations for the various royal psalms at the
time of the latters’ compositions. A supporting piece of evidence for this argument are the
psalms that introduce prayers or aphorisms with the formula, “I said,” which by no means
necessitates an actual earlier text is being cited. See Pss 30:7, 32:5, 39:2, 40:8, 41:5, 116:0-11.
We are dealing here with a dramatic literary convention.
12
“Decree,” ‫חק‬
ֹ ֥ , a Torah synonym that in plural form occurs throughout Ps 119.
13
See Ernst Axel Knauf, “Review: Miriam von Nordheim, Geboren von der Morgenröte? Psalm
110 in Tradition, Redaktion und Rezeption (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2008).

would judge that at least some cases where the LXX diverges from the MT reflect pre-MT
Hebrew readings and not just LXX-stage exegesis/eisegesis, especially in view of the abundant
agreements between LXX readings and the Samaritan Pentateuch over against the MT.14
In any case, if we grant the argument to Knauf, the marked difference between the MT
text and the LXX exegesis thereof has to be interpreted and explained in any case. It seems to
me that even in this scenario the most satisfying explanation would be one that involved a
significant amount of time passing between Ps 110:3’s LXX version and the MT. In any
scenario, the theological reasons behind the MT reading must still be taken into account and
explained. The problem cannot be simply explained away with the observation that both the
LXX and MT are simply two different reading traditions “equally intended.” Of course they are
equally intended, but the question of identifying the theological intentions involved has to be
faced.
Pace Knauf, I fail to see any connection between Ps 110:3c’s “dew” and the mentions of
dew in Gen 27:28 and Deut 33:13, although admittedly I may be overlooking something that
Knauf sees more clearly.15 By contrast, Knauf’s claim that Ps 110:3c is partly shaped by Prov
8:22ff. strikes me as more intriguing. To be added to this is Prov 3:19-20, which anticipates
Prov 8:22.ff. Whereas the latter lacks a reference to dew, this does appear earlier in Prov 3:19-
20: “The LORD by wisdom founded the earth; by understanding He established the heavens. /
By His knowledge the depths were broken up, and the skies drop down the dew.” (JPS) Several
passages in Prov 3 have influenced the praises of Lady Torah in Ps 19:8ff. What is more, Prov
3:18, “She is a tree of life to them that lay hold (‫ )למחזיקים‬upon her, and happy is every one
that holdest her fast,” has a parallel in Song 7:9: “I said: ‘I will climb up into the palm-tree, I
will take hold (‫ )אחזה‬of the branches thereof; and let thy breasts be as clusters of the vine, and
the smell of thy countenance like apples.” In another passage, Song 6:10, we have a parallel to
Ps 19, and as I will show this will turn out to be significant for this discussion. Not to be

Pp.xii, 340. Hardcover. €49.90. ISBN 978-3-7887-2276-0.,” Journal of Hebrew Scriptures 9
(2009): <http://www.jhsonline.org/reviews/reviews_new/review364.htm>; retrieved 22 Dec.
2018.
14
On the relationship between the Samaritan Pentateuch and the LXX, see Benyamin
Tesadaka,The Israelite Samaritan Version of the Torah: First English Translation Compared
with the Masoretic Version. Coedited by Sharon Sullivan (Grand Rapids, Michigan/Cambridge,
U.K.: William B. Eerdmans, 2013). See also Robert T. Anderson, Terry Giles, The Samaritan
Pentateuch: An Introduction to its Origin, History, and Significance for Biblical Studies
(Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2012).
15
Ernst Axel Knauf, “Review: Miriam von Nordheim, Geboren von der Morgenröte? Psalm 110
in Tradition, Redaktion und Rezeption (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2008).”

overlooked is Job 38:28-29, where it is implied that God has begotten the dew, and that from a
womb was born the ice. This seems more relevant than Knauf’s two Torah references.
Kam-Yau Chan presents another possibility: “The word ‫ טלי‬can mean ‘child’ in the
Aramaic sense according to Kissane. The Aramaic element (‫ )טלי‬should not surprise any
interpreter because in Ps 2:12, an Aramaic word ‫‘( בר‬son’) appears, also in the context of birth
(‫ יְלִדְ תִּ יָך‬in Ps 2:7). Accordingly, the meaning of v. 3 can be rephrased as follows: ‘With you (is)
nobility, in the day of your strength, in holy array, from the womb of the morning, to you
(like) a child, I give birth to you.’”16 If we accept this Aramaic interpretation, which indeed
seems very plausible, it would imply a late date for both psalms. Kam-Yau Chan notes that
Delcor, who shares Kissane’s Aramaic interpretation, claims we are dealing with a later
Aramaic gloss that has crept into the text. This, however, seems to be a desperate attempt to
preserve an earlier dating for Ps 110. In any case, this Aramaic interpretation would not be
incompatible with a simultaneous complementary use of ‫ בר‬in Ps 2:12 as a deliberate
anticipation of Ps 19:9’s ‫ברה‬. Notice how Ps 2:11’s ‫ ְבּיִ ְר ָ ֑אה‬not only artfully anticipates 2:12’s ‫בר‬,
but how 2:11’s ‫בּיִ ְר ָ ֑אה ְ ֜ו ֗ ִגילוּ‬,
ְ “with fear and rejoice,” also anticipates Ps 19:10’s ‫יִ ְר ַ ֚את‬, and 19:9’s
‫מ ַשׂ ְמּ ֵחי‬. ֖ 17 Additionally, Ps 2:10’s ‫ַה ְשׂ ִ ֑כּילוּ ִ֜הָ ֽוּ ְס ֗רוּ‬
ְ Compare also Ps 2:11’s ‫ ִע ְב ֣דוּ‬with Ps 19:12’s ‫ע ְַב ְדָּך‬.
‫ ֣שׁ ֹ ְפ ֵטי‬is of interest, for these respectively could tie into Ps 19:8’s ‫ימת‬
ַ ‫מ ְח ִ ֥כּ‬,
ַ 19:12’s ‫נִ זְ ָ ֣הר‬, and
ִ Consequently, 19:12’s ‫ נִ זְ ָ ֣הר‬could simultaneously mean both enlightened (the
19:10’s ‫מ ְשׁ ְפּ ֵ ֽטי‬.
LBH sense) and admonished.18

16
Alan Kam-Yau Chan, Melchizedek Passages in the Bible: A Case Study for Inner-Biblical and
Inter-Biblical Interpretation (Warsaw/Berlin: De Gruyter Open Ltd, 2016), p. 116.
17
Perhaps also compare Ps 2:11’s ‫ ְבּיִ ְר ָ ֑אה ְ ֜ו ֗ ִגילוּ‬with Ps 110:1’s ‫ל ַרגְ ֶ ֽליָך‬.
ְ
18
Kam-Yau Chan proposes (correctly in my view) that Pss 1 and 2 be read “interactively” as an
integrally dyadic introduction to the finished Psalter. However, when he claims that Ps 2:12’s
‫ אשׁרי‬is designed to move the reader’s focus away from the Torah piety linked to Ps 1:1’s ‫אשׁרי‬,
and that this is basically now replaced with trusting in the messianic “son” (Alan Kam-Yau
Chan, Melchizedek Passages in the Bible, p. 130), one cannot help but suspect the influence of
what ultimately reflects Christian anti-Torah ideology; cf. p. 131: “the Torah ultimately points
to trusting in Yahweh’s messiah.” On the contrary, that the Torah and the king are
complementary, and enduringly so, is indicated by Ps 2:12’s ‫ בר‬anticipating Ps 19:9’s Torah
term ‫ברה‬. Kam-Yau Chan’s “the Torah ultimately points to trusting in Yahweh’s messiah”
gives us a very good parallel to Gal 3:24, “the law was our custodian (παιδαγωγὸς) until Christ
came.” That παιδαγωγὸς here (RSV “custodian”) does not bear the meaning “tutor” but
“guardian” in the sense of prison guard is congruent with v. 23’s ἐφρουρούμεθα συνκλειόμενοι,
“we were under arrest, having been incarcerated” by “the law,” that is, the Torah. Although
even v. 23’s ἐφρουρούμεθα συνκλειόμενοι can admittedly bear a more positive valence,

Now, back to the topic of Ps 110’s supposed Simon acrostic. Telling against an acrostic
of the name Simon would be the following considerations. First, for the acrostic to work, the
first letter shin has to be located not in the superscription at the beginning of v. 1a, but at the
beginning of the divine oracle that v. 1b cites, “The LORD saith unto my lord: ‘Sit thou (‫)שׁב‬
֥ ֵ at
My right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.” However, this in itself, pace
Bowker,19 would not present an insuperable difficulty, as long as one makes it clear that the
claim advanced is that the acrostic is contained within the confines of the cited divine oracle/s.
Also, Bowker’s observation about the necessity of the acrostic having a proper “metre (if
any),”20 doesn’t seem necessary to me if again the allusion is of a cryptic nature and confined
to the divine oracle/s being cited. There is no need to change any of the meter in Ps 110,
neither in the superscriptions nor in the oracles cited. Not to mention the blunt fact that HB
poetry actually has no meter, as Dobbs-Allsopp’s recent ground-breaking and path-clearing
work has demonstrated quite clearly.21 This demonstration has the salutary effect of
undercutting more than a century of haphazard scholarly emendations of HB poetry based on
the empty claim that the MT has in any number of instances too few or too many words in a
particular stich to fit with the supposed meter claimed to be present.
It is already quite clear that the divine oracles Ps 2 cites belong to the core of the
question under consideration. In the end, the main complicating issue that will remain will be

nevertheless the earlier v. 22’s “But the scripture consigned (συνέκλεισεν) all things to sin”
arguably suggests a similarly negative tone for the next two verses’ respective ἐφρουρούμεθα
συνκλειόμενοι and παιδαγωγὸς. Profoundly gratuitous is Kam-Yau Chan’s methodologically-
contorted claim that Ps 119 is not the centre of Psalter Book 5, given that Ps 119 has only 176
verses, compared to 265 verses of Book 5’s “Davidic psalms.” The fact remains that not only is
Ps 119 the longest chapter in the Tanakh, it is the longest psalm in the entire Psalter, and this
striking feature cannot be minimized by comparing it to the total number of verses in several
combined psalms. Kam-Yau Chan’s reference to Millard (p. 150) supplies no justification at all:
“Our comparison of the number of verses between psalms or psalm-groups is not innovative in
biblical study. Millard also notes and compares the extensive verses of Psalm 119 to its
neighboring psalm-groups. . . .” Finally, we read on p. 151: “Psalm 119 points to the revelation
of the need of the messiah. . . .” Again, this is Christian theology, not dispassionate Psalter
exegesis.
19
John W. Bowker, “Psalm cx,” p. 31, “. . . in order to make the acrostic begin with ‫ ש‬the
superscription to the Psalm ‫ נאם יהוה לאדני‬is omitted, yet the heading to the second part of the
Psalm, ‫ נשבע יהוה ולא ינחם‬has to be included.”
20
21
F. W. Dobbs-Allsopp, On Biblical Poetry (Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press, 2015).

that of the unclear parameters of these divine oracles the psalmist integrates into the text.
Until these could somehow be delimited with certitude, there will remain doubt about the
presence of any cryptic acrostic in the text’s quoted divine oracles. I personally do not see any
consensus forthcoming on the issue. Consequently, in my comments I will discuss the divine
oracles’ possible parameters as clearly and methodically as possible.
The next letter of the supposed Simon acrostic, namely, mem, would be supplied by v.
2’s first letter: “The rod (‫)מ ֵ ֚טּה‬
ַ of Thy strength the LORD will send out of Zion: ‘Rule thou in
the midst of thine enemies.’” An immediate objection would be the following question: Why
continue the acrostic in v. 2a with its first word (‫)מ ֵ ֚טּה‬,
ַ which, at least according to the JPS
punctuation (lack of quotation marks and introductory colon :) belongs to the superscription,
rather than beginning with the first word of the divine oracle cited (again implied by the JPS’
quotation marks) in v. 2b, “‘Rule thou (‫)ר ֵ ֗דה‬
֜ ְ in the midst of thine enemies’”? The latter
procedure of beginning with the cited divine oracle instead of with the superscription would
be consistent with having similarly started the acrostic not with the superscription of v. 1a but
with the first word of v. 1b’s citation of the divine oracle, “‘Sit thou (‫)שׁב‬
֥ ֵ at My right hand.”
I would actually give this one to Treves, because I do not think the JPS’ quotation
marks that place the beginning of the divine oracle at verse 2b are clearly justified or
necessary.22 The entirety of v. 2 plausibly could be viewed as a continuation of v. 1’s divine
oracle.23 In support of a longer text of the first divine oracle is that the LXX suggests that v. 3

22
As Charles Häberl commented here: “Also, by unnecessarily interjecting another
subscription we lose what appears to me to be an obvious parallel between ‫ נְ ֻ ֚ אם יְ הוָֹ ֨ה‬and ‫נִ ְשׁ ַ ֚בּע‬
‫ יְ הוָֹ ֨ה‬in lns. 1 and 4, which are not merely verba dicendi but particularly performative types of
speech: utter (a prophecy), swear (an oath), etc.”
23
We could read the text together by changing the punctuation as follows: “Sit thou at My
right hand! Until I make thine enemies thy footstool, the LORD will send the rod of Thy
strength out of Zion.” Regardless of the punctuation, in this posited extended reading, the first
divine oracle would consist up to this point of fifteen words. Charles Häberl remarked on this
point: “We could indeed change the punctuation, and I would in fact argue that we should just
go ahead and ignore it altogether to see what comes from it; the original readers presumably
did, after all.” Apropos of this, consider Fred L. Horton Jr, The Melchizedek Tradition: A
Critical Examination of the Sources to the Fifth Century A. D. and in the Epistle to the
Hebrews (Cambridge/London: Cambridge University Press, 1976), pp. 30-31. Horton, who
after careful analysis rejects a Simon acrostic in Ps 110 (dating it to David’s reign, which I do
not consider a viable option), nevertheless gives the claim a degree of plausibility. After
comparing 1 Macc 14:41 and Ps 110:4, Horton points out that Ps 110 does not actually identify
the ruler as a king, which could be congruent with Simon being not king but governor. Horton

also belongs to the oracle as well, since God directly addresses the ruler in the declaration that
ends with, “I have begotten you.” It would therefore make sense to read the first divine oracle
as stretching from v. 1’s ‫ ֵ ֥שׁב‬to v. 3’s ‫יַ ְל ֻד ֶ ֽתָך‬, the latter being reconstructed as ‫ילדתיך‬. The oracle
would then consist of exactly twenty-six words,24 congruent with the gematria of YHWH, the
actual speaker.25 Moreover, the psalm has a total 63 words,26 but adding the title’s two words
‫ ְל ָד ִ ֗וד ִ֫מזְ ֥מוֹר‬would bring up the total to 65 words, congruent with the gematria of ‫אדני‬.27

adds: “Attempts to discredit this as an acrostic have been shallow, such as the statement by
Briggs and Briggs that the acrostic ‘is based on arbitrary arrangement and is against the usage
of the acrostics’. In point of fact, any arrangement of a psalm into poetic format is arbitrary to
some degree as is shown by the way in which the psalms were written in ancient texts. There
is no rearrangement of the text involved here, and Duhm’s translation of the psalm shows that
the arrangement which he uses is at least possible. Although in practice acrostics are built
upon an alphabetical scheme, there is, in principle, no reason why an author might not have
selected some other scheme. We must give this position its just due and say that there is a
possibility from the evidence presented so far that the psalm might indeed be dated in the
170th Seleucid year (142-141 B.C.).”
24
The use of numerical techniques in the psalms is not limited to hints at the gematria values
of divine names. For instance, the divine oracle that concludes Ps 91 in vv. 14-16 contains a
combined total of precisely ninety-one letters (28+36+27=91). This suggests that this psalm
was either a pre-existing text later redacted to serve as the ninety-first psalm, or what to me
seems more likely, that it was composed to serve specifically as the ninety-first psalm of the
Psalter. A similar observation can be applied to Ps 5, which contains a previously overlooked
pentadic acrostic, which suggests the psalm was composed, and not merely redacted, to serve
as the Psalter’s fifth psalm. See ch. 7 of the present monograph. With regard to Ps 91, it
apparently employs hints at gematria values of divine names as well. Its total of 112 words is
congruent with YHWH 26+ ʾElohim 86.
25
This is, as I will document, congruent with a parallel numerical pattern involving Ps 2’s two
divine oracles.
26
This results from counting, in agreement with a plethora of mss, v. 4’s ‫י־צ ֶדק‬
ֽ ֶ ‫ ַמ ְל ִכּ‬as two
words, “my king of righteousness,” which has support at Qumran. See Gard Granerød,
Abraham and Melchizedek: Scribal Activity of Second Temple Times in Genesis 14 and Psalm
110 (Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter, 2010). The LXX reads the one-word name
Melchizedek in v. 4, which results in a shorter word count of 62. This is the basis of the fact
that despite their markedly different versions (Mark 12:35-37; Matt 22:41-46; Luke 20:39-44),
each of the three synoptic gospels in their discussion on Ps 110 contains exactly sixty-two

Van der Lugt’s following claim regarding Ps 110 is problematic: “The first canto (vv. 1–
3) contains two divine oracles, vv. 1c–d and 2b–3,10 spoken by an (imaginary?) ‘cult/court
prophet’, each with their own introduction (vv. 1a and 2a).”28 On the contrary, v. 2a does not
read as an introductory superscription, “The rod of Thy strength the LORD will send out of
Zion.” This lacks basic structural and textual resemblance to the two undisputed
superscriptions in v. 1a, “The LORD saith unto my lord” and v. 4a, “The LORD hath sworn,
and will not repent.” Each of these two last verses uses a verb of speech, ‫ נְ ֻאם‬and ‫נִ ְשׁ ַבּע‬
respectively. V. 2a resembles instead a verse like no. 5, “The Lord at thy right hand doth crush
kings in the day of His wrath.” Neither of these sounds like an introductory superscription;
they both strike one as being part of the divine oracles the psalmist cites.
Van der Lugt adds in a qualifying way: “The oracles in vv. 1b–d and 4b–c, at the
beginning of the cantos, in both cases are composed of 7 words. Vv. 2b–3 is probably another
part of these oracles (see § 4.1 about yldtyk in v. 3c) and has 14 words.”29 Nevertheless, this
qualification is unclear, “Vv. 2b–3 is probably another part of these oracles.” To which oracle
does v. 3 belong according to van der Lugt? He doesn’t specify which one, but certainly v. 3
cannot be part of the second divine oracle, which begins only later with v. 4b. V. 3 must
perforce belong to the first divine oracle which begins at v. 1b, so that the first oracle must
continue to the end of v. 3.
In any case, the parallel to Ps 110:3 in Ps 2:7 is contained within the second of two
divine oracles Ps 2 cites. The first oracle is located in Ps 2:6, “‘Truly it is I that have established
My king upon Zion, My holy mountain,’” which consists of seven words, ‫ל־ציּ֗ וֹן‬
ִ֜ ‫ַ ֽו ֲא ִנֽי נָ ַ ֣ס ְכ ִתּי ַמ ְל ִ ֑כּי ַע‬
‫ר־ק ְד ִ ֽשׁי‬
ָ ‫ה‬.
ַ The second divine oracle in Ps 2 indisputably stretches from v. 7 to v. 9, and consists

words, which is inspired by the LXX interpretation of ‫ מלכי־צדק‬as a single word, the name
Μελχισεδεκ.
27
Cf. Pieter van der Lugt, Cantos and Strophes in Biblical Hebrew Poetry III: Psalms 90–150
and Psalm 1 (Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2014), p. 228: “Once God is called ’dny (‘Lord’; v. 5a).”
Kam-Yau Chan offers a detailed analysis of Ps 110, including word and syllable counts,
without, however, recognizing any significance in the total word count; only the word counts
for each verse are listed (p. 107). See Alan Kam-Yau Chan, Melchizedek Passages in the Bible,
pp. 97-118. Kam-Yau Chan points out the anatomical inclusio constituted by v. 1’s “foot” and
v. 7’s “head.”
28
Pieter van der Lugt, Cantos and Strophes in Biblical Hebrew Poetry III: Psalms 90–150 and
Psalm 1, p. 230.
29
Psalm 1, p. 228.

of nineteen words. When the two Ps 2 oracles are combined, they have together a total of
twenty-six words, again congruent with the gematria of YHWH.
Ps 110:2’s third person reference to “the LORD” does not militate against this portion
being a part of the divine oracle being cited.30 The phenomenon of a person referring to
himself/herself in the third person is by no means unattested in the Tanakh (e.g., Gen 4:23),31
and certainly modern notions of perfect consistency should not be sought in ancient texts of
this nature.
I am aware of no compelling or necessary reason why not to continue the divine oracle
that begins in Ps 110 v. 1 throughout the entirety of v. 3, whose first word begins with ʿayin,
the third letter of the name Simon. The problem with the proposed Simon acrostic really
begins in v. 4, which rather clearly reveals that v. 3 ends the citation of the first divine oracle.
V. 4 explicitly introduces via a superscription a second divine oracle rather than continuing the
earlier one. In this instance, the presence of a third-person divine self-reference in v. 4a does
not strike one as convincing: “The LORD hath sworn (‫)נִ ְשׁ ַ ֚בּע‬, and will not repent: ‘Thou art
ַ a priest for ever after the manner32 of Melchizedek.’”
(‫)א ָתּה‬
So, in order to be consistent, we would have to continue the acrostic not with v. 3’s first
word ‫נִ ְשׁ ַ ֚בּע‬, as does Treves, but with the first word of the second divine oracle citation, ‫א ָתּה‬.
ַ
Bowker’s reservation based on Treves’ inconsistent methodology regarding a supposed Simon
acrostic remains valid: “. . . in order to make the acrostic begin with ‫ ש‬the superscription to
the Psalm ‫ נאם יהוה לאדני‬is omitted, yet the heading to the second part of the Psalm, ‫נשבע יהוה‬
‫ ולא ינחם‬has to be included.”33 In any case, one would expect a waw before the terminal nun in
the name Simon/Simeon.34 A shortened or abbreviated version of the name claimed for the
supposed acrostic feels like “cheating.”35 In any case ‫ שמען‬is not the name Simon/Simeon but a
plural imperative form of the verb ‫שמע‬, “hear.”

30
As Charles Häberl reminded me: “YHWH refering to himself as YHWH: perhaps most
famously in the case of the Decalogue, in which he repeatedly does this!”
31
This verse actually has the only instance in the Tanakh of the verb form ‫שמען‬, “hear ye. . .!”
32
“Manner,” ‫ ;דברתי‬this is understood as ‫דיבורו‬, “speech,” in bNedarim 32b. In this way, the
portion of the second divine oracle in vv. 5-7 seems to be thought of as an oracle of
Melchizedek, who is famously called “your God” in 11Q13. In any case Ps 110:6’s “nations”
and 110:7’s “he will lift up,” ‫יָ ִ ֥רים‬, are artful allusions to Abraham, so that indeed this psalm
seems to portray Abraham as Melchizedek’s successor.
33
34
Neither Bowker nor Lindars mentions this detail in their rejoinders to Treves.
35
There is no reason to exclude the possibility that the Maccabees actually may have read into
Ps 110 a defective acrostic of Simon that in fact the psalmist did not originally intend. We have

To review, for any supposed acrostic we would seem to be left so far with shin, mem,
ʿayin, ʾalef, not with shin, mem, ʿayin, nun. V. 5 is similar to vv. 2-3, that is, v. 5’s “the LORD”
could be a divine self-reference within a continuation of the divine oracle cited beginning in v.
4. By itself, v. 4’s short statement “Thou art a priest for ever after the manner of Melchizedek”
seems rather short for a divine oracle in view of what is quite likely the substantially more
lengthy oracle that evidently stretches from v. 1 to v. 3. If v. 5 continues the second oracle
begun in v. 4b, then we could add the first letter, ʾalef, of v. 5’s first word ‫אד ָֹנ֥י‬,
ֲ to our list of
letters for any possible acrostic. Extending the second divine oracle in this way would make its
length somewhat more comparable with the first divine oracle’s length in the extended reading
I proposed above.
The difficult question is whether we can prolong the second divine oracle into the
concluding vv. 6-7. Treves included both these verses in order to obtain the acrostic ‫שמען אים‬,
“Simon is terrible.”36 Treves adds in a footnote, “The first word of the acrostic was discovered
independently by G. MARGOLIOUTH and G. BICKELL, and recognized by T. K. CHEYNE, W. F.
COBB, C. F. KENT, S. BERNFELD, N. H. SNAITH, R. H. CHARLES, R. H. PFEIFFER, etc.”37
However, as we will see, as Bowker explains, ‫ אים‬is a very rare word and is unattested for
Simon Maccabaeus, and as I have already pointed out, the waw for Simon is lacking.
If the first divine oracle consists of twenty-six words, stretching from v. 1b-3b, then an
argument could be made that the second divine oracle might similarly consist of vv. 4b-7b,
which would give us a somewhat comparable length of thirty words.38 The question arises as

a clue from 1 Mac 14:41’s diction (“And the Jews and their priests decided that Simon should
be their leader and high priest for ever, until a trustworthy prophet should arise,” emphasis
added) that Ps 110 (see v. 4, “Thou art a priest for ever”) was apparently applied to Simon
Maccabaeus. Perhaps this type of forced acrostic reading could have even played a decisive role
in the decision 1 Mac 14:41 records. Cf. John W. Bowker, “Psalm cx,” p. 32, footnote 3.
36
Marco Treves, “Two Acrostic Psalms,” p. 86.
37
Marco Treves, “Two Acrostic Psalms,” p. 86.
38
Ps 110’s second divine oracle contains thirty words, which are introduced by four words.
This agrees with the pattern of a famous Torah passage. As Labuschagne writes: “The story
about the Israelites putting the Lord to the test at Massah and Meribah in Exod 17:1–7
contains one divine speech consisting of 30 words (5–6a), which together with its 4-word
introduction has 34 (2×17) words.” Casper J. Labuschagne, Numerical Secrets of the Bible:
Rediscovering the Bible Codes (North Richland Hills, Texas: BIBAL Press, 2000), p. 81.
Available online: <https://www.labuschagne.nl/z%26oz/Numerical_secrets_2008.pdf>. The
significance of 17 is that it is associated in tradition with the Tetragrammaton; see ibid., pp.
89-90.

to whether these thirty words were meant to be divided between twenty-six words, in an
allusion to the Tetragrammaton, plus the concluding four words ‫ל־כּן יָ ִ ֥רים ֽר ֹאשׁ‬
֗ ֵ֜ ‫ע‬,
ַ “therefore will
he lift up the head.”39 If we treat the two oracles together and divide them into 26 + 4 + 26
words, the middle four words that would join the two groups of twenty-six words each would
be v. 4b’s first four words, ‫עוֹל֑ם ַעל‬ ַ “Thou art a priest for ever after,”40 which does not
ָ ‫א ָתּה־כ ֵ ֹ֥הן ְל‬,
seem to be a meaningful connecting link, since it ends with ‫על‬,
ַ “after”/“according to,” a
fragment of the phrase “after the manner of Melchizedek.” Neither does dividing the second
oracle into 13 + 4 + 13 words result in a clear semantic centre.
Thus, while the first divine oracle’s twenty-six words give us a clear agreement with the
Tetragrammaton’s gematria, the second oracle’s thirty words seem to have a different or at
least additional concern. The second oracle is clearly divided between the seven-word address
in v. 4 on the one hand and the remaining twenty-three words of vv. 5-7 on the other hand.
However we divide the words’ number groupings, the second divine oracle’s initial
letters would be ʾalef, ʾalef, yod, mem. It is now time to turn to a vital point Bowker makes:
“‫ אים‬is not a common word, which makes it all the more necessary to establish its use in
connection with Simon.”41 Indeed, ‫ אים‬occurs only three times in the entire Tanakh, in Song
6:4, 10, and Hab 1:7. In Hab 1:7 ‫ אים‬is used synonymously with ‫נורא‬, “dreadful”/“fearful.” The
use here is pejorative: “They are terrible and dreadful (‫נוֹרא‬
֖ ָ ְ‫;)א ֹ֥ים ו‬
ָ their law and their majesty
proceed from themselves.” (JPS) The two other Tanakh instances of ‫ אים‬in Song 6:4 and 10 are
positive in valence and application, and they are used to describe the poem’s female beloved
who is likened to none other than Šaḥar, YHWH’s Dawn with whom he begets the king in Ps
110:3. Song 6:10: “Who is she that looketh forth as the dawn (‫מוֹ־שׁ ַחר‬
֑ ָ ‫)כּ‬,
ְ fair as the moon, clear
as the sun (‫)בּ ָר ֙ה ַ ֽכּ ַח ָ֔מּה‬,
ָ terrible (‫יֻמּה‬
֖ ָ ‫)א‬
ֲ as an army with banners (‫”?)כּנִּ ְדגָּ ֽלוֹת‬
ַ (JPS) The same
phrase occurs previously in Song 6:4: “Thou art beautiful, O my love, as Tirzah, comely as
Jerusalem, terrible as an army with banners (‫יֻמּה ַכּנִּ ְדגָּ ֽלוֹת‬
֖ ָ ‫)א‬.”
ֲ
According to Bowker, S. D. Goitein proposed that ‫ נדגלות‬refers not to an army but to
֖ ָ ‫ ֲא‬as “splendid like the brilliant stars.”42 This is congruent
the stars, and translated ‫יֻמּה ַכּנִּ ְדגָּ ֽלוֹת‬

39
For whatever the observation might be worth, four is the number of the Tetragrammaton’s
letters.
40
Notice how the second divine oracle’s first four words and last four words partially echo
each other phonetically: ‫עוֹל֑ם ַעל‬
ָ ‫ ַא ָתּה־כ ֵ ֹ֥הן ְל‬/ ‫ל־כּן יָ ִ ֥רים ֽר ֹאשׁ‬
֗ ֵ֜ ‫ע‬.
ַ
41
42
John W. Bowker, “Psalm cx,” p. 32. The reference is to S. D. Goitein, “Ayumma Kannidgalot
(Song of Songs vi.10): ‘Splendid like the Brilliant Stars,’” Journal of Semitic Studies 10 (1965):
pp. 220–221. For a discussion, see J. Cheryl Exum, Song of Songs: A Commentary (Louisville,
Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, 2011), pp. 218-219.

with Song 6:10, and pace exegetes such as Exum,43 I do not see why it would not work in 6:4
ְ as ἐν
as well. In any case, it is noteworthy that the LXX understands Ps 110:3b’s ‫בּ ַה ְד ֵרי־ ֖קֹ ֶדשׁ‬,
ταῖς λαμπρότησιν τῶν ἁγίων, “among the splendors of the holy ones.” (NETS)
To sum up at this point, the first divine oracle produces three possible acrostic letters,
shin, mem, ʿayin. Given the MT verse divisions, the second divine oracle produces a series of
four initial letters, ʾalef, ʾalef, yod, mem. The first divine oracle’s three letters, shin, mem,
ʿayin could make sense as “hear.” Of the second oracle’s four letters ʾalef-ʾalef-yod-mem, the
final three make sense as “splendid”/“brilliant.” The first ʾalef presents a challenge. If we were
to join it to the earlier shin-mem-ʿayin, we would get the name ‫שמעא‬, in the Tanakh an older
brother of David (the father of Jonathan). This doesn’t seem to make sense; what possible
connection could one of David’s brothers have with Ps 110? It would seem better not to mix a
letter from the second oracle with those of the first oracle.
The only possible solution that occurs to me, which admittedly is not entirely
satisfying, is to interpret the first ʾalef as standing for the word it actually forms a part of,
namely, ‫א ָתּה‬,
ַ “Thou art” (cf. Song 6:4’s “Thou art,” ‫)א ְתּ‬.
֤ ַ But I am aware of no precedent for
this claim.44 This ʾalef is in any case followed by the further acrostic letters ʾalef-yod-mem, ‫אים‬,
“splendid”/“splendorous,” a synonym of v. 3’s ‫הדרי‬. We would then have the acrostic text,
“Hearken! Thou art splendorous.” Unlike in Song 6:4, 10 here we have the form ‫אים‬, not the
fem. form ‫אימה‬. So in effect, the acrostic would be applying to either the LORD or, perhaps
much more likely, to the ruler, a trait of the LORD’s female consort Šaḥar of v. 3. This would
make sense, for after all, the ruler is the son of Šaḥar.45
Yet we should not lose sight of the fact that the ʾalef of ‫ אים‬would be derived from v. 5’s
divine ʾAdonai. Interestingly, the second divine oracle’s two ʾalefs come from the words ‫ַא ָתּה‬
ֲ which if read together could produce the prayer-like address, “Thou art ʾAdonai.”
and ‫אד ָֹנ֥י‬,
Van der Lugt’s point about the fluidity between the earthly king as ʾadonai in v. 1 and the
celestial YHWH as ʾAdonai in v. 5 comes to mind: “At the beginning of the first canto, the
king is designated ’dny (v. 1a)—conspicuously enough not mlk (‘king’)—and invited to sit at

43
See J. Cheryl Exum, Song of Songs: A Commentary, pp. 218-219.
44
Cf. Charles Häberl’s comment: “There’s an otiose suffix, -ā, that appears on the MS
imperative sometimes. It doesn’t appear to change the meaning. As far as I know, it always
appears as ‫ה‬. In Job 32:10, we get ‫ ִלּי‬-‫;שׁ ְמ ָעה‬
ִ similarly in Dan 9:19 we get ‫;אד ֹנָ י ְשׁ ָמ ָעה‬
ֲ that’s not
quite ‫שמעא‬, but perhaps we’re dealing with something similar?”
45
As Knauf keenly observes, Ps 110:3c in part “alludes to . . . Hokhmah-Torah in Prov 8:22-31.
. . .” See Ernst Axel Knauf, “Review: Miriam von Nordheim, Geboren von der Morgenröte?
Psalm 110 in Tradition, Redaktion und Rezeption.” In effect, Ps 110:3c is applying traits of
Lady Wisdom to the king of Israel.

God’s right hand (v. 1b); but at the beginning of Canto II, it is God who is designated ’dny and
now He is at the right hand of the king (v. 5a). That is to say, it is a basic constituent of the
overall framework of the psalm that God and the king are mutually exchangeable.”46
Curiously, the very next psalm after 110, Ps 111, is a straightforward acrostic, with
twenty-two cola corresponding to the twenty-two letters of the Hebrew alphabet. Brettler has
identified Ps 111 as a mostly previously unrecognized fourth Torah psalm of the Psalter that
should be added to the standardly cited triad of the Torah psalms 1, 19(b), and 119.47 Just as
the Torah Ps 1 immediately precedes the royal Ps 2, so the royal Ps 110 is placed adjacent to
the Torah Ps 111. And just as Pss 2 and 110 share striking structural and dictional parallels, so
do Pss 1 and 111.
As van der Lugt explains in his commentary on Psalm 111, its first canto consists of vv.
1-4, which contain twenty-five words. The second canto, vv. 5-8, contains twenty-seven words.
Together this gives us a total of 52 words, that is, an uneven distribution of 26x2,48 which
could allude twice to the Tetragrammaton, whose gematria value is 26. Vv. 9-10 contain a final
group of twenty words (in the uneven distribution of 9+11), bringing the total to 72 words.
There are a total of forty-six nouns in Ps 111. If we subtract these from the total of 72 words,
we are left with twenty-six remaining words, 72-46=26, which could be congruent with
another subtle allusion to the Tetragrammaton.
While we are able to link the acrostic term ‫ אים‬from Ps 110’s second divine oracle with
the Šaḥar of Ps 110:3 and Song 6:10, what of the ‫ שמע‬of Ps 110’s first divine oracle? As already
intimated, the Psalter has a tendency to pair its Torah psalms together with royal psalms. E.g.,
consider the pairs Pss 1-2, Pss 18-19, and Pss 110-111. Of the three royal psalms 2, 18, and
110, forms of the verb ‫ שמע‬occur only in Ps 18, once in v. 7 and twice in v. 45. Forms of ‫שמע‬
occur in the Torah psalms just as rarely, once in Ps 19:4, and once in Ps 119:149, the latter
psalm being the only Torah psalm without a generally recognized accompanying royal psalm.
However, kings and princes are mentioned within Ps 119 in vv. 23, 46, and 161.49

46
Psalm 1, p. 231.
47
Marc Zvi Brettler, “The riddle of Psalm 111,” in Deborah A. Green, Laura S. Lieber, eds.,
Scriptural Exegesis: The Shapes of Culture and the Religious Imagination. Essays in Honour
of Michael Fishbane (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009), pp. 62-73.
48
Psalm 1, pp. 238, 258.
49
With regard to the numbers 23, 46, and 161, notice that 46 is simply 23 doubled (23x2=46),
and that 161 is a multiple of 23 (23x7=161). Ps 119:161 is the first verse of Ps 119’s Shin
acrostic section, whose fourth verse, no. 164, contains this psalm’s only occurrence of the

A form of ‫ שמע‬occurs only once in the Song of Songs, in 2:12. But to return to Song
6:10: “Who is she that looketh forth as the dawn, fair as the moon, clear as the sun ( ‫ָבּ ָר ֙ה‬
‫)כּ ַח ָ֔מּה‬,
ֽ ַ terrible as an army with banners?” We have here a double link to Ps 19, first to Ps 19a’s
sun (via its synonymous ‫שמש‬, vv. 5-7) and to 19b’s Torah, whose commandment is ‫בּ ָ ֗רה‬,
ָ֜ and
which enlightens the eyes, v. 9. ‫ בר‬in the sense of “pure”/“clear” is rare in the Tanakh, which
makes the double link between Song 6:10 and Ps 19 all the more significant and striking. It
also occurs in Song 6:9, “she is the choice one of her that bore her,” ‫וֹל ְד ָ ֑תּהּ‬
ַ ֽ‫בּ ָ ֥רה ִ ֖היא ְלי‬.
ָ Not to be
overlooked is that the term ‫ דגל‬that occurs three times in the Song of Songs, in 5:10, 6:4, and
6:10, is found only one other place in the entirety of the Tanakh, in v. 6 of Ps 20, adjacent to
our Psalm 19. I should also point out that although Song 6:10 uses the term ‫ ַח ָמּה‬for sun, in
contrast to Ps 19:5’s ‫שׁ ֶמשׁ‬,
ָ֫ nevertheless, the word ‫ ַח ָמּה‬is used to describe the sun in Ps 19:7.
Ps 19:9’s ‫ ָ֜בּ ָ ֗רה‬harks back to Ps 2:12’s ‫בר‬:
ַ֡ “Do homage in purity (‫)בר‬,
ַ֡ lest He be angry,
and ye perish (‫אבדוּ‬ ֗ ֶ when suddenly His wrath (ֹ‫)א ֑פּו‬
ְ ֹ ‫ )וְ ֬ת‬in the way (‫)ד ֶרְך‬, ַ is kindled.” This verse
shows lexical links with Ps 110:5’s ‫ ַא ֣פּוֹ‬and 110:7’s ‫בּ ֶ ֣דּ ֶרְך‬.
ַ In turn, the term ‫ דרך‬appears already
in Ps 1 and then later in the Torah-centred Ps 119. Ps 1:6b’s “but the way of the wicked shall
perish,” ‫אבד‬
ֽ ֵ ֹ ‫וְ ֶ ֖ד ֶרְך ְר ָשׁ ִ ֣עים תּ‬, anticipates Ps 2:12’s “and ye perish (‫אבדוּ‬
ְ ֹ ‫ )וְ ֬ת‬in the way (‫)ד ֶרְך‬.”
֗ ֶ The
same trope appears in Ps 112:10, “the desire of the wicked shall perish (‫אבד‬
ֽ ֵ ֹ ‫)תּ‬.” Ps 112 is
universally recognized as being in some way a companion to Ps 111. As I like to describe these
two texts, Ps 111 is about the nature of the Torah, while Ps 112 is about how a person
practices the Torah, and how such a person even embodies traits of the Torah.
What we see here is a web of connections that links the Psalter’s royal and Torah-
centred psalms together with Song 6. This suggests that Ps 19’s Lady Torah (she is
constructed partly out of elements of Prov 8’s Lady Wisdom, who later in Sir 24 and Bar 3-4
becomes identified with the Torah scroll) is hovering in the background of Ps 110:3’s Šaḥar.
That is, Šaḥar is a specialization or mode/manifestation of Lady Torah. Put another way, Lady
Torah is, like Šaḥar, the consort of YHWH.50
Lady Torah’s titles and synonyms in Ps 19:8-10 are further developed and expanded in
Ps 111. Ps 111 also shows lexical links with Ps 110. E.g., Ps 111:3’s ‫ ֽהוֹד־וְ ָה ָ ֥דר‬harks back to Ps
ְ Ps 111:3a, “His work is glory and majesty,” ֹ‫הוֹד־וְ ָה ָ ֥דר ָ ֽפּ ֳעל֑ ו‬,
110:3’s ‫בּ ַה ְד ֵרי‬. ֽ is related to Ps 19:8,

number “seven”: “Seven times a day do I praise Thee, because of Thy righteous ordinances.”
(JPS) Cf. the two instances of “mercies” in Ps 119, in vv. 77 and 156. The figure 156 seems
possibly to involve a doubling of 77 (77x2=154) with another two added into the mix for some
obscure reason (perhaps to hint at 26x6=156).
50
Cf. Prov 8:17, “I love them that love me, and those that seek me earnestly (‫ )וּ֜ ְמ ַשׁ ֲח ַ ֗רי‬shall find
me.” (JPS) What the verse literally says is that those who seek Lady Wisdom early at dawn
(‫ )וּ֜ ְמ ַשׁ ֲח ַ ֗רי‬will find her.

“The law of the LORD is perfect,” which in turn, like Ps 111:3a, is based on Deut 32:4, “The
Rock, His work is perfect,” a verse whose continuation shows multiple links with Ps 19:8-10.
Again, one senses that the personified Lady Torah is present implicitly in Ps 110:3. In view of
the links between Pss 110 and 111, it is worth pointing out the relation between 110:7a, “He
will drink of the brook in the way,” and Ps 111:5a, “He hath given food unto them that fear
Him.” Here “food” functions as a Torah synonym;51 it should not be viewed as a stretch
therefore to detect an allusion to the Torah in Ps 110:7a’s “the brook in the way.” Ps 110:7b’s
“therefore will he lift up (‫ )יָ ִ ֥רים‬the head” anticipates Ps 111:1b, “in the council of the upright
(‫)יְ ָשׁ ִ ֣רים‬, and in the congregation,” which in turn links back to Ps 1:5’s “the congregation of the
righteous.” Not to be overlooked is Ps 111:9’s ‫נוֹרא‬
֣ ָ ְ‫ו‬, the same synonym of ‫ ָאי ֹ֥ם‬encountered in
the previously discussed Hab 1:7.
With these exegetical results in hand, when we turn to Prov 8 we find forms of the verb
‫ שמע‬used by Lady Wisdom in vv. 6, 32-34. An examination of all four of these verses will show
that they have left traces in various ways in the Psalter’s four Torah psalms. The verb ‫ שמע‬can
indeed be classified as a wisdom term; consider Prov 8:33, with its classically typical wisdom
terminology: “Hear (‫)שׁ ְמ ֖עוּ‬
ִ instruction, and be wise, and refuse it not.” (JPS)
In Ps 110 might not the possible acrostic ‫ שמע‬serve to evoke the LORD’s Torah
which/who must be hearkened to, especially as required in the Šemaʿ Yisraʾel in Deut 6:4ff.,
whose opening line contains two instances of the Tetragrammaton? Could this be coordinated
somehow with Ps 110’s apparent interest in the Tetragrammaton?
I have spent some effort showing that the possible acrostic in Ps 110 would seem to
have a particular theology, involving a nomos-ology, associated with it. To wrap up this stage
of the investigation, let us take a larger, overall view of the possible acrostic elements in Ps
110. The ‫ שמע‬could very naturally call to mind the Šemaʿ Yisraʾel. While the ʾalef that follows
remains an interpretative challenge, the ʾalef-yod-mem that we then encounter are quite
striking indeed, given that the very rare term ‫( אים‬used only three times in the Tanakh) is in
fact associated with Šaḥar in Song 6:10, a verse which can be lexically linked not only with Ps
110:3’s Šaḥar, but with both parts of Ps 19 as well.
In brief, first the ‫ שמע‬acrostic in the first divine oracle seems congruent with the
oracle’s straightforward text, whose two instances of the Tetragrammaton (in vv. 1a and 2a)
might bring to mind the Šemaʿ Yisraʾel’s opening line. Second, from a Tanakh perspective, the
second oracle’s acrostic ‫ אים‬can be correlated via Song 6:10 with the straightforward text of Ps
110:3’s Šaḥar. Third, the second oracle’s first acrostic letter ʾalef remains an interpretative
challenge, but a clue to its significance might be supplied by Song 6:4’s “Thou art,” which
perhaps can be correlated with Ps 110:4b’s “Thou art.”

51
Cf. Marc Zvi Brettler, “The riddle of Psalm 111,” pp. 62-73

There is one further possibility to cover, not because I necessarily think it is probable,
but only for the sake of completeness. We know that on his coinage Simon bar Kokhba (d.
135/136 CE) abbreviated his name in the form ‫שמע‬, which as Hendin has persuasively argued
was a deliberate play on the Šemaʿ Yisraʾel.52 If this ‫ שמעון‬abbreviation ‫ שמע‬was based on any
earlier precedent, then perhaps the alternative possibility should be investigated that Ps 110’s
acrostic could conceivably refer to the legendary High Priest Simon, famously celebrated in Sir
50:1-21.53 Yet I am completely unaware of a precedent for any use earlier than Bar Kokhba of
the ‫ שמעון‬abbreviation ‫שמע‬, which would be the weakness of any Simon the Just hypothesis for
a Ps 110 acrostic.
However, in this context I call to mind a reference cited by Robert P. Gordon in a
private communication, namely, Ackroyd’s essay on Isa 12,54 which suggests that the threefold
occurrence of √ ‫ ישע‬in Isa 12:2-3 may be plays on the name of the prophet Isaiah.55 To use
Gordon’s language, this could be viewed as an example of “ways of signing/signature in HB.” I
believe this may indeed be the case, given Isa 12:2’s unusual (intentionally so is my suspicion)
Yah YHWH, whose Yah also seems to play on the name ‫ישעיהו‬. So, would it be comparable if
someone were to allude playfully to the name ‫ שמעון‬by means of the verb ‫ שמע‬in HB?
It is noteworthy that Isa 12 contains two citations, not of divine oracles, but of what
might be called brief psalms. Isa 12’s first psalm, vv. 1b-2, consists of twenty-two letters,
curiously an acrostic number. The second psalm, vv. 4b-6, has twenty-nine words. If in the
first psalm we include v. 3, contrary to JPS punctuation, then it would contain a total of
twenty-seven words, which would make it more comparable to the second psalm, and together
the two psalms would then have a total of fifty-six words, congruent with the gematria of
“day,” ‫יום‬, which occurs in the superscription for each of the two brief psalms (vv. 1, 4).
However, 56 is also the gematria of v. 4’s centrally-placed ‫( ַ ֽליהוָֹ ֙ה‬see below for details), and this
may be a better candidate than ‫יום‬, especially because the latter occurs in both vv. 1 and 4 with
an initial bet, which brings its gematria up to 58. The middle verse 3 consists of twenty-six
letters, evidently an allusion to the Tetragrammaton, which occurs twice in each brief psalm.

52
David Hendin, “On the Identity of Eleazar the Priest,” Israel Numismatic Journal 18 (2014):
pp. 155-167.
53
The debate endures as to whether this figure is Simon I or Simon II. See Otto Mulder,
Simon the High Priest in Sirach 50: An Exegetical Study of the Significance of Simon the High
Priest as Climax to the Praise of the Fathers in Ben Sira’s Concept of the History of Israel
(Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2003).
54
Peter R. Ackroyd, “Isaiah I-XII: Presentation of a Prophet,” in Congress Volume Göttingen
1977 (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1978), pp. 16-48.
55
See ibid., pp. 38-39.

This is reinforced by the fact that v. 3’s first word is Isa 12’s 26th word. V. 2’s Yah YHWH are
Isa 12’s 21st and 22nd words. The number five seems to play a predominating role in the
placement of the Tetragrammaton in Isa 12, where it occurs as the 5th, 22nd, 35th, and 45th
words.
The initial letters of Isa 2’s two brief psalms, ‫אהו הזצ‬, do not seem to constitute any
meaningful acrostic text. However, it does strike one as curious that with regard to the second
brief psalm, the initials ‫ הז‬bring to mind the first two letters of v. 4’s ‫הזְ ִ֕כּירוּ‬.
ַ Concerning v. 6’s
initial ‫צ‬, one first notices that it is immediately preceded by another ‫ צ‬at the end of v. 5, ‫ה ָ ֽא ֶרץ‬,
ָ
and that v. 6’s initial ‫ צ‬is soon followed by the third and final ‫ צ‬in Isa 12, here in the word
“Zion.” Regarding the initials ‫אהו‬, rearranged these could spell ‫הוּא‬,
֔ “that,” which occurs in the
superscriptions in vv. 1 and 4, but this doesn’t seem meaningful. On the other hand, it does
seem likely that the two sets of three initials each could relate to phonemic or literal elements
in the straightforward text of the two brief psalms. With regard to the second psalm, the
ִ 56
initials ‫ הזצ‬could conceivably serve as abbreviated hints at v. 4’s ‫ ַהזְ ִ֕כּירוּ‬and v. 6’s ‫ציּ֑ וֹן‬.
The structure of Isa 12’s two psalms could be represented as 27 + 2 + 27 words, with
the middle two connecting words being the first two words of the second brief psalm, ‫הוֹד֚ וּ‬
‫ליהוָֹ ֙ה‬,
ֽ ַ which certainly would make eminent sense as a meaningful centre. Moreover, the
gematria of ‫ ַ ֽליהוָֹ ֙ה‬is 56. As I explained, Isa 12’s two brief psalms are divided between
27+2+27=56 words, which agrees with the gematria of ‫ליהוָֹ ֙ה‬,
ֽ ַ 30+10+5+6+5=56. In the first
brief psalm, the nineteenth word is v. 2’s Tetragrammaton. In the second brief psalm, the
nineteenth-to-the-last word is v. 4’s ‫שׁ ֽמוֹ‬,
ְ which would seem to indicate a chiastic structure in
this regard between the two brief psalms. Looking at Isa 12’s six verses, we see a repeated
pattern: The Tetragrammaton occurs in the first two verses of each of the two brief psalms (vv.
1-2; 4-5), while it is omitted in each concluding verse (vv. 3, 6). Some of the numerical features
of Isa 12’s two psalms tell against Ackroyd’s suggestion that we are dealing here with only a
single cited psalm text with a single superscription, namely, v. 1a.57

56
Whether or not these abbreviating phonetic traits could lend weight to the suggestion that
some letters in hidden acrostic texts could stand for whole words, as discussed previously with
regard to Ps 110:4b’s ‫ ַא ָתּה‬and 110:5a’s ‫אד ָֹנ֥י‬,
ֲ is a good question. The same type of abbreviating
phonetic traits seem to occur in Ps 89, as I document in Part II of this essay.
57
Peter R. Ackroyd, “Isaiah I-XII: Presentation of a Prophet,” p. 36. Ackroyd makes too much
of the second superscription’s (v. 4a) plural form in contrast to v. 1a’s singular form. Isa 12’s
two superscriptions are far more similar than the varying superscriptions in Ps 110. The
difference between Isa 12:1a’s singular ‫ וְ ָ ֽא ַמ ְר ָ֙תּ‬and 12:4a’s plural ‫ ַ ֽו ֲא ַמ ְר ֶ֞תּם‬has nothing to do with
the determination of a superscription. That is, the mere fact of a difference between a singular

At this point it would be helpful to recall Bowker’s remark cited previously: “But it is
evidence and argument that is needed.” Bowker rightly observed that a central weakness in
Treves’ case for a Simon acrostic in Ps 110 was the lack of attestation of the very rare term ‫אים‬
for Simon Maccabaeus. In contrast to Treves, I have been able to show that there is attestation
elsewhere, in Song 6:10, for this quite rare term that relates to the straightforward text of Ps
110:3.
Bowker, who actually cited and discussed Song 6:10 (and 6:4), failed to realize the link
to Ps 110:3 via their shared Šaḥar. This link is quite significant, given that Song 6:10 is
paralleled in both main parts of Ps 19, a Torah psalm with parallels in the Torah Psalm 111
that is coupled with our Ps 110.
I trust that I have presented evidence and argument for the presence of a potentially
real acrostic message in Ps 110, which while not closing the case might at least further advance
the discussion at least to some modest degree.
Part II
The Question of Divine Oracle Acrostics

In the Royal Psalms 2, 89, and 132
In view of the apparent acrostic texts in Ps 110’s two divine oracles and the well-known
similarities between Pss 2 and 110, the question naturally arises as to whether there might be
an acrostic in one or both of the two divine oracles cited in Ps 2. The first oracle appears in Ps
2:6: “Truly it is I that have established My king upon Zion, My holy mountain,” ‫ַ ֽו ֲא ִנֽי נָ ַ ֣ס ְכ ִתּי ַמ ְל ִ ֑כּי‬
‫ר־ק ְד ִ ֽשׁי‬
ָ ‫ל־ציּ֗ וֹן ַה‬
ִ֜ ‫ע‬.
ַ Because this seven-word oracle is basically self-contained within a single verse,
there doesn’t seem much that can be done with its first letter, waw, in the way of a possible
acrostic text.
After a two-part superscription in 2:7a, “I will tell of the decree: the LORD said unto
me,” the second divine oracle begins in 2:7b: “Thou art My son, this day have I begotten thee,”
ְ The oracle’s first letter is bet. The oracle continues in v. 8: “Ask of Me,
‫בּ ִנ֣י ַ ֑א ָתּה ֲ֜א ִ֗ני ַהיּ֥ וֹם יְ ִל ְד ִ ֽתּיָך‬.
and I will give the nations for thine inheritance, and the ends of the earth for thy possession,”
‫י־א ֶרץ‬ ְ Thus far we now have bet-shin for the first two
ֽ ָ ‫שׁ ַ ֚אל ִמ ֶ֗מּנִּ י וְ ֶא ְתּ ָנ֣ה ג֖ וֹיִם ַנ ֲֽח ָל ֶ ֑תָך ַ ֽ֜ו ֲא ֻח ָזּ ְֽת ָ֗ך ַא ְפ ֵס‬.
letters of a possible acrostic text. The oracle ends in v. 9: “Thou shalt break them with a rod of
iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel,” ‫יוֹצ֣ר ְתּנַ ְפּ ֵ ֽצם‬
ֵ ‫שׁ ֶבט ַבּ ְר ֶז֑ל ִכּ ְכ ִ ֖לי‬
֣ ֵ ‫תּר ֵ ֹֽעם ְבּ‬.
ְ We

and plural form cannot determine whether a statement is or is not a superscription in this
case.

end up with bet-shin-tav for a possible acrostic text, ‫בשת‬, perhaps “shame,” which would seem
congruent for those who are broken and dashed to pieces in v. 9.58
The straightforward term ‫ בשת‬is an infrequent one in the Psalms, occurring but seven
times, in 35:26, 40:15, 44:16, 69:20, 70:4, 109:29, and 132:18. Since Ps 2 stands near the
Psalter’s beginning, my instinct upon detecting its possible ‫ בשת‬acrostic was to examine the
Psalter’s last straightforward occurrence of ‫בשת‬, in 132:18. This immediately delivered
arguably significant support for a possible actual Ps 2 ‫ בשת‬acrostic, because Ps 132 actually is,
like Ps 2, one of the Psalter’s royal psalms, the penultimate one in fact (Ps 144 being the final
one). Not only that, but Ps 132 shares structural, thematic, and dictional points of contact with
both Pss 2 and 110.
Ps 132 even contains two divine oracles, the first one in vv. 11-12 (with a total of
nineteen words—the same number of words in Ps 2’s second divine oracle), the second one in
vv. 14-18 (with a total of thirty-three words). Consequently, just as Ps 2’s apparent ‫בשת‬
acrostic seems to be cryptically embedded in its second divine oracle, so the same term occurs
explicitly and straightforwardly in Ps 132’s second divine oracle. Ps 132’s two divine oracles
together contain a total of 19+33= 52 words, which is compatiple with 26x2, congruent with a
double allusion to the Tetragrammaton, which occurs once in each of the two oracles’
superscriptions in vv. 11 and 13 respectively.59 The first of these two Tetragrammatons, in v.
11, is actually Ps 132’s 65th word, congruent with the gematria of ʾAdonai, a divine name that
occurs in the cognate Pss 2 and 110.
As I pointed out previously, Ps 110 consists of 63 words, but when the title’s two words
are added the total would go up to 65. As van der Lugt points out, Psalm 132’s 63rd word is
‫יחָך‬ ְ “Thine anointed.”60 Ps 132’s 123rd word is a second occurrence of “anointed,” ‫יחי‬
ֽ ֶ ‫מ ִשׁ‬, ֽ ִ ‫;ל ְמ ִשׁ‬
ִ
123 is suspiciously quite close to 63x2=126, involving a difference of only three in rank. This

58
There could also be an allusion in this to Saul’s son Ish-bosheth, rival to King David. As
Miriam von Nordheim, Geboren von der Morgenröte? Psalm 110 in Tradition, Redaktion und
Rezeption, p. 307 documents, Ps 110 cannot be adequately interpreted without reference to the
whole Saul-David saga.
59
I have not been able to detect any acrostic in Ps 132’s two divine oracles, whose initial letters
are respectively mem-ʾalef and zain-ṣadi-waw-shin-ʾalef. This is a good example of the
incorrectness of the claim that one can find intentional-looking but actually random word
formations anywhere one looks in the Tanakh, or anywhere else for that matter. I would not
deny that there are abundant random patterns in any text, in the Bible as well as in Moby
Dick, that look intentional at first sight.
60
Psalm 1, p. 411.

difference of three may have something to do with van der Lugt’s observation that Ps 132 has
two halves, each of which consists of 63 words (perhaps an intentional doubling of Ps 110’s 63
words)61 joined by three additional connecting words: “On word level, v. 11a, nšb‘ yhwh ldwd,
represents the centre of the psalm (> 63+3+63 words).” Van der Lugt adds: “Labuschagne
points out that 63 is the numerical value of the 63rd word of the poem, mšyḥk (‘your
anointed’; 13+21+10+8+11 = 63).”62
It bears pointing out that the gematria value of 63 for mšyḥk and of 65 for ʾAdonai
involve two different gematria systems. The first, ordinal gematria (mispar sidduri), assigns
the values 1 to 22 to the Hebrew alphabet’s twenty-two letters, while the second represents the
standard system wherein kaf = 20, not 11, lamed = 30, not 12, and so on. In the first system,
mšyḥk (=63) minus the suffix –k (=11) leaves mšyḥ with the value 52, double the
Tetragrammaton’s value. (Could this be part of the reason why Ps 132’s 65th word is YHWH
rather than ʾAdonai?).63 Despite the two different counting systems involved,64 in any case, the
close proximity between the anointed (63rd word) and the LORD (65th word) with a hint at the
numerical value of ʾAdonai brings to mind again van der Lugt’s point that on account of its

61
Ps 132 contains six Tetragrammatons, the same combined total number of instances of
YHWH in Pss 2 and 110, each of which contains three Tetragrammatons.
62
Psalm 1, p. 411.
63
Incidentally, Ps 132’s 52nd word is v. 9’s ‫ ֽכֹּ ֲה ֶנ֥יָך‬, “Let Thy priests,” a key term in Ps 110.
64
The use of two different systems in such close proximity can feel like “cheating,” but in this
instance it would seem that any “cheating” may have been done by the ancient scribe. One
might be tempted to compare it to the capricious mentality that manifests itself to the present
day in the often tendentious manipulations of esoteric gematria in kabbalah. Such
tendentiousness has ancient and medieval precedents. The exotic multi-lingual gematrias of
Abraham Abulafia (b. 1240) spring to mind. However, upon further reflection, one might
counter that the psalmist was in part simply availing himself of a variety of available gematria
systems in order to impart a maximal degree of clever artistry to his work. Moreover, the
underlying principle for employing two different systems of gematria might not have been
anything comparable to “cheating,” since it may have been simply that ordinal gematria values
may have been used largely by default for words with larger standard gematria values because
the latter are much more difficult to hint at by means of word count placements in texts as
brief as most of the psalms. For example, as I have pointed out before, one cannot hint at the
standard gematria value of torah (twrt), 1006, by placing it as the 1006th word of a psalm when
said psalm contains less than even a hundred words. The ordinal value of torah (twrt), 70,
would present many more possibilities in this regard in brief texts like most of the psalms.

naming both the king and God as ʾadonai in Ps 110 “God and the king are mutually
exchangeable.”65
It is also worth pointing out that Ps 132’s 129 total words is curiously close to the
number of the psalm itself. When we add the title’s two words, the total increases to 131
words, just one from the number 132. However, 131 actually agrees with this psalm’s
enumeration in the LXX, where it in fact appears as Ps 131.
As Labuschagne points out, Ps 2’s “arithmetic centre is constituted by the two words
ָ ‘he said to me’ in vs. 7a,”66 which introduces the divine oracle ‫בּ ִנ֣י ַ ֑א ָתּה ֲ֜א ֗ ִני ַהיּ֥ וֹם יְ ִל ְד ִ ֽתּיָך‬,
‫א ַ ֣מר ֵ֖א ַלי‬, ְ
“Thou art My son, this day have I begotten thee.” Similarly, Ps 110:3’s divine oracle that ends
ֵ of Šaḥar, as Dew I have begotten you”67 belongs to the centre
with “From the womb (‫)מ ֶ ֣ר ֶחם‬
portions of the text. As Van der Lugt writes concerning Ps 110: “The middle verselines (vv. 3
and 4) are tricola. These tricola represent the numerical centre of the psalm. . . .”68 Finally, as
Van der Lugt remarks concerning Ps 132: “V. 11 represents the middle strophe (> 4+1+4
strophes). The noun bṭn (‘womb’; v. 11c) probably highlights its central position. . . .”69 The
JPS translates 132:11c as “Of the fruit of thy body ( ֑‫)ב ְטנְ ָך‬
ִ will I set upon thy throne,” but
“womb” is a better translation. All three verses, Pss 2:7, 110:3, and 132:11 seem to be
variations of the same divine oracle. Interestingly, Ps 110:3’s maternal rḥm, “womb,” that of
the mother Šaḥar, becomes in Ps 132:11 the synonymous bṭn, “womb,” of the man David.70

65
Psalm 1, p. 231.
66
C. J. Labuschagne, “Psalm 2—Logotechnical Analysis.”
<https://www.labuschagne.nl/ps002.pdf>; retrieved 22 Dec. 2018.
67
A similar paradigm wherein God gives birth via a female entity is attested in Jas 1:18, where
we read that the masculine father of lights (v. 17) “brought us forth by the word of truth,”
alētheia (fem.). The allusion is to the Torah described in Ps 119:43 as “the word of truth.”
Elsewhere James calls this maternal Word of Truth the Wisdom that comes down from above
(see Jas 3:17), which indicates the Word of Truth is the personified Lady Wisdom of Prov 8,
who is thought of as a personified Lady Torah, as in Sir 24 and Bar 3-4. This all would seem to
be relevant for detecting Lady Wisdom in the background of Ps 110:3c.
68
Psalm 1, p. 227.
69
Psalm 1, p. 411.
70
Perhaps Ps 110’s luminous Šaḥar, Dawn, has partly inspired Ps 132:17’s “lamp for Mine
anointed” and v.18’s “upon himself shall his crown shine.”

To be complete, I must mention Ps 89, a final royal psalm cognate especially to Pss 110
and 132. Ps 89 contains two divine oracles, one in vv. 3-5, and another uniquely quite
extensive one in vv. 20-38. The first oracle has debatable parameters. The JPS understanding
of the MT implies a single citation stretching from v. 3 to the end of v. 5, despite the fact that
this would entail a second person divine self-reference:
3 For I have said: “For ever is mercy built; in the very heavens Thou dost establish Thy
faithfulness.
4 I have made a covenant with My chosen, I have sworn unto David My servant:
5 For ever will I establish thy seed, and build up thy throne to all generations.” Selah
(JPS)
This is partly supported by the LXX, which begins the divine oracle in v. 3 with the
superscription addressing God. The NETS presents v. 3b as the words of the psalmist,
resuming the divine oracle in v. 4a:
3 Because you said, “Forever mercy will be built.”

In the heavens your truth will be prepared.
4 “I made a covenant with my chosen ones;
I swore to Dauid my slave:
5 “Forever I will provide offspring for you
And I will build your throne for generation and generation.” (NETS)
However, an argument can be made that v. 3’s first divine statement should be understood as,
“Forever is mercy built in the very heavens,” followed by the psalmist’s declaration, “Thou dost
establish Thy faithfulness in them” (‫ב ֶ ֽהם‬,
ָ that is, in the previously mentioned heavens): ‫ָתּ ִ ֖כן‬
‫מוּנ ְֽתָך֣ ָב ֶ ֽהם‬
ָ ‫ ֱא‬/ ‫וֹלם ֶ ֣ח ֶסד ָיִבּ ֶנ֑ה ָשׁ ַ֓מיִם‬
ָ ‫ע‬.
֖ This would result in eighteen words for oracle 1, in an
interrupted pattern of 4 + 14 words.
The parallelism between v. 3, “For ever (‫וֹלם‬
ָ ‫)ע‬
֖ is mercy built in the very heavens (‫;)שׁ ַ֓מיִם‬
ָ
Thou dost establish (‫)תּ ִ ֖כן‬
ָ Thy faithfulness ( ֣‫מוּנ ְֽתָך‬ ֱ in them,”71 and the conclusion to the
ָ ‫)א‬
second divine oracle in v. 38 is evident: ‫עוֹל֑ם וְ ֵ ֥עד ַ֜בּ ַ֗שּׁ ַחק ֶנ ֱֽא ָ ֥מן‬
ָ ‫כּיָ ֵר ַח יִ ֣כּוֹן‬,
ְ “It shall be established
(‫ )יִ ֣כּוֹן‬for ever (‫)עוֹל֑ם‬
ָ as the moon; and be stedfast (‫ ֶ)נ ֱֽא ָ ֥מן‬as the witness in the sky (‫)בּ ַ֗שּׁ ַחק‬.”
ַ֜ (JPS)
If we include v. 38’s concluding ‫ס ָלה‬,
ֽ ֶ then that verse would consist of seven words, in
agreement with v. 3’s seven words (when abstracting the superscription’s two words). This
parallelism arguably suggests that already v. 3 belongs to the first divine oracle, that the latter

71
JPS 1917, punctuation modified, and “in them” added.

does not begin only later in v. 4. If despite its unusual possible second person divine self-
reference we were to include v. 3b in the first oracle, this would result in twenty-two words for
the first oracle. The second divine oracle clearly contains 126 words (=63x2, a structure similar
to what we have already encountered in Ps 132; cf, Ps 110’s total of 63 words). Because the first
oracle’s parameters are not clear I do not feel comfortable in offering a proposed total number
of words for both oracles combined.
Ps 89’s first divine oracle’s three initial letters, ʿayin, kaf, ʿayin, do not seem to form any
meaningful acrostic. The second oracle’s initial letters start off with an intriguing shin-mem-
ʾalef-lamed, congruent with “Name of God,” which would accord with the second oracle’s
straightforward text (v. 25, “My name”), but then the remaining initial letters seem
meaningless for any acrostic, which would seem to cast doubt on anything intentional being
present in the first four initial letters as well: waw-waw-waw-he-ʾalef-lamed-waw-ʾalef-ʾalef-
waw-waw-lamed-ʾalef-zain-kaf. However, there does seem to be something deliberate going on
with the three consecutive waws in vv. 24-26, for all six of these verses’ cola begin with waw,
and five of the cola end with waw:
‫וּמ ַשׂנְ ָ ֥איו ֶאגּֽ וֹף‬

ְ /‫תּוֹתי ִמ ָפּ ָנ֣יו ָצ ָ ֑ריו‬
֣ ִ ‫ וְ ַכ‬24
‫ וּ֜ ִב ְשׁ ִ֗מי ָתּ ֥רוּם ַק ְרנֽ וֹ‬/‫ ֶו ֱֽא ֽמוּנָ ִ ֣תי וְ ַח ְס ִ ֣דּי ִע ֑מּוֹ‬25
‫יְמינֽ וֹ‬
ִ ‫וּבנְּ ָה ֥רוֹת‬/‫וֹ‬
ַ ‫ וְ ַשׂ ְמ ִ ֣תּי ַביָּ ֣ם יָ ֑ד‬26
‫וּע ִ ֽתי‬
ָ ‫ ֵ֜א ֗ ִלי וְ ֣צוּר יְ ֽשׁ‬/‫ ֣הוּא י֖ ְִק ָר ֵאנִ י ָ ֣א ִבי ָ ֑א ָתּה‬27
These three initial waws are followed by an initial he in v. 27. I wonder if there is an
esoteric hint, via permutation, at the Tetragrammaton in vv. 24-27. V. 25 explicitly refers to
the divine name. Waw and he are both Tetragrammaton letters, and in this particular sequence
are indeed its last two letters. He has the gematria value of 5, waw of 6. In vv. 24-26 there are a
total of six initial waws for the six cola, in agreement with waw’s gematria. Yet only five of the
cola end with waw; is this an esoteric hint at he (= 5)? And not to be overlooked is that verse
26 is a part of the four verses. However, we must bear in mind that v. 1 is the psalm’s title, so
that v. 27 is actually the 26th verse of the psalm text proper. This would in effect mean that the
possible esoteric hint at the Tetragrammaton here would actually culminate in what is in fact
this psalm’s 26th verse, which would be eminently congruent with an allusion to the
Tetragrammaton’s gematria.
Is waw-waw-waw-he then some sort of esoteric permutation of the Tetragrammton? V.
24 consists of twenty-six letters (nota bene!); v. 25 of twenty-eight; v. 26 of twenty-three
letters; v. 27 of twenty-eight letters. The four verses have a total of 105 words, one more in
rank than the gematria value of four Tetragrammatons (26x4=104 + 1= 105). In fact, the very
next two initial letters (vv. 28-29) are another ʾalef-lamed, congruent with a reference to
“God.”

From v. 30 to v. 38 we have waw-ʾalef-ʾalef-waw-waw-lamed-ʾalef-zain-kaf. In the three
waw verses we see again a prominent use of waw. All six cola begin with waw; in marked
contrast, however, to the waw verses 24-26, in vv. 30, 33-34 only two cola also end with waw:
‫ימי ָשׁ ָ ֽמיִם‬
֥ ֵ ‫ ְ ֜ו ִכ ְס ֗אוֹ ִכּ‬/‫ וְ ַשׂ ְמ ִ ֣תּי ָל ַע֣ד זַ ְר ֑עוֹ‬30
‫וּבנְ גָ ִ ֥עים ֲעוֹ ָנֽם‬/‫ם‬
ִ ‫שׁ ֶבט ִפּ ְשׁ ָ ֑ע‬
֣ ֵ ‫וּפ ַק ְד ִ ֣תּי ְב‬
ֽ ָ 33
‫וְ ֥ל ֹא ֲ֜א ַשׁ ֵ ֗קּר ֶ ֽבּ ֱא ֽמוּנָ ִ ֽתי‬/‫א־א ִ ֣פיר ֵ ֽמ ִע ֑מּוֹ‬
ָ ֹ ‫ וְ ַח ְס ִדּי ֽל‬34
In contrast to the previous set of waw verses, I am at a loss on how to comment on this
abstracted set, especially since it is interrupted.
From v. 30 to v. 34 we have waw-ʾalef-ʾalef-waw-waw. I am again at a loss to give any
comment here other than that waw is a letter of the Tetragrammaton, and ʾalef is a letter of
“God.” But how could any relation between these two letters and LORD and God respectively
be drawn or demonstrated confidently?
The concluding zain-kaf strikes me as potentially relevant for v. 21’s oil of anointing,
and “thine anointed” in vv. 39 and 52, since the relatively rare term ‫זך‬, “pure,” “clear,” is used
of oil in two out of the eleven instances where it occurs in the Tanakh. On the other hand,
here ‫ זך‬is preceded by lamed-ʾalef, ‫( לא‬notice the straightforward word ‫ לא‬that actually begins
v. 35) and the sequence could be read ‫לא זך‬, “not pure.” Although the initial kaf of v. 38 brings
us to the final verse of the second divine oracle, nevertheless, if we continue with v. 39 we have
an initial waw, which if joined to the previous two results could be read as ‫לא זכו‬, a sequence
found twice in Job, in 15:15 and 25:5, where we read respectively that the heavens and the
stars are not clean in God’s sight.
Continuing beyond the second divine oracle in Ps 89, the initial letters of vv. 40-43 spell
‫נפשה‬, cf. “her soul.” We could of course leave off the he and just have ‫נפש‬, a word that in fact
occurs straightforwardly quite near in v. 49. Vv. 47-49 have the initial letters ʿayin-zain-mem, a
sequence that occurs nowhere straightforwardly in the Tanakh with the sole exception of Ps
ֻ “For Thou art the glory of their strength (ֹ‫)ע ָזּ֣מו‬.”
89:18a’s ‫ע ָזּ֣מוֹ‬, ֻ Again, we could leave off the
final mem and stick with just ‫עז‬, “strength.” Finally, the initial letters of vv. 51-53 stand out,
zain-ʾalef-bet, ‫זאב‬, “wolf,” which might be congruent with the enemies that taunt (‫ ;חרף‬cf. the
verb ‫טרף‬, “tear,” which in Hebrew can be used with reference to wolves) the psalmist in vv. 51-
52.
Because of their apparently scattered and non-continuous nature, the presumption
should be that these results, especially those outside the verses of the two divine oracles, are
either just random patterns or they are something akin to scribal literary flourishes that
artfully interact with the accompanying straightforward text. Evidence I will supply later will
suggest the latter possibility is the more probable one. The same two possibilities, randomness
or scribal literary flourishes, should apply for a lesser number of apparent patterns in Ps 89’s

first part. Nothing in the initial letters stands out there until v. 8, which begins with the word
‫אל‬,
֣ ֵ “God.” The first word of the next verse, no. 9, is the Tetragrammaton, followed by “God of
hosts,” ‫א ֹ֘ל ֵ ֚הי ְצ ָב ֗אוֹת‬.
ֱ Both vv. 10 and 11 begin with the word ‫א ָ ֣תּה‬,
ַ “Thou.” The interesting
initial letters now begin with v. 11’s ʾalef and v. 12’s lamed, which at first seem to reproduce v.
8’s straightforward ‫אל‬.
֣ ֵ However, these two initial letters of vv. 11-12 may be instead an
ֱ This is because the initial letters of vv. 15-17, ṣadi-ʾalef-bet,
abbreviated hint at v. 9’s ‫א ֹ֘ל ֵ ֚הי‬.
look suspiciously like a slight scramble of the first three letters of v. 9’s ‫ ְצ ָב ֗אוֹת‬which follows
ֱ The intervening vv. 13-14 have the initial letters ṣadi-lamed, which look like ‫צל‬,
‫א ֹ֘ל ֵ ֚הי‬.
“shadow.”72
To review the results for Ps 89’s second divine oracle, the following possible acrostic
elements are potentially present:
vv. 20-23: “name (of) God” ?

vv. 24-27: wwwh (Tetragrammaton permutation?)
vv. 28-29: “God” ?
vv. 30-33: ?
vv. 34-38: “not pure” ?
If any of the above is intentional, we would not be dealing with an acrostic of the
traditional variety, but something of a much more subtle complexion. My initial general
impression was that there does not seem to be any intentional acrostic texts in Ps 89. This
would be congruent with the results for the cognate Ps 132 as well. It would therefore seem
that possible acrostics may be present only in the divine oracles of Pss 2 and 110. However,
upon further research and reflection I found it plausible to suspect that there is a degree of
noticeable intentional interplay between some of Ps 89’s initial verse letters and nearby verse
straightforward text, a trait we also saw in Isa 12. In my own terminology, what we have in
these instances is not an acrostic message, consisting for example of a complete sentence,
name, or title, but what I call apparent scribal literary flourishes that cleverly and artfully tie
elements of the surrounding straightforward text together with patterns in the initial verse
letters. Although this scribal technique involves vertical letter patterns, it is similar to the
horizontal technique (e.g., the initial letters of a set of consecutive words within a verse or
stich/s) that Sasson calls “visual wordplay” and Manguno “acronomy.”73
What is needed is a systematic analysis of initial verse letters in Biblical Hebrew poetic
texts. As a sample base I explored in this respect the entirety of the Psalter, Job, and Isaiah,

72
Perhaps cf. in close proximity Isa 51:15, “LORD of hosts” and 51:16 “shadow of My hand.”
73
See John M. Manguno Jr., “Accident or Acronymy: The Tetragrammaton in the Masoretic
Text of Esther,” Bibliotheca Sacra 171 (October–December 2014): pp. 440–451.

especially the latter’s chs. 40-66, the so-called Deutero- and Trito-Isaiah. The only other
scholar I am aware of who has conducted any examination along these lines in a controlled
and critical manner is Klaus Seybold.74 Seybold seems similarly to have gone through the
Psalter with an eye to possible unusual patterns in initial verse letters. He notices the
unusually large number of initial yods that begin Ps 72’s verses: “ein zu hoher statistischer
Wert, als dass man ihn als zufällig abtun könnte. Steht dahinter eine bestimmte Absicht, und
wenn ja: welche?”75 Seybold then hesitatingly wonders whether Ps 72’s unusually high
frequency of yod and waw might function as cryptic abbreviated allusions to the
Tetragrammaton.76 This seems a plausible suggestion, and would accord with my own

74
Also to be mentioned is Victor Avigdor Hurowitz, “Additional Elements of Alphabetical
Thinking in Psalm XXXIV,” Vetus Testamentum 52/3 (2002), p. 327: “It has been suggested
that Ps iv contains a reverse sentence or name acrostic in ‫בנר זרובבל‬, but this identification
seems to have been rejected or ignored by most scholars writing on acrostics.” Hurowitz does
not tell us who has done the suggesting here, nor does he tell us how to interpret ‫בנר‬. In my
view, the most natural interpretation would be “with a lamp,” given Zech 4’s menorah vision
involving Zerubbabel. This suggests a likely postexilic date for Ps 4. Hurowitz also refers to a
possible (“perhaps”) hidden biblical acrostic in Lam 5:1-2 referring to Zechariah the Prophet,
namely, ‫זכריהו חנביא‬. I do not find this supposed Zechariah acrostic as convincing as Ps 4’s
Zerubbabel acrostic. Hurowitz also discusses mezostics, telestics, and reverse acrostics in Ps 34
and in Akkadian poetry (see p. 329). Another sign of lateness is the addition of a pe acrostic
after tav in texts like Pss 25 and 34, in order to hint at the late verb ‫אלף‬, learn, teach.
75
Klaus Seybold, Studien zu Sprache und Stil der Psalmen (Berlin/New York: Walter de
Gruyter, 2010), p. 247.
76
Ibid., p. 248. Seybold’s complete carefully worded statement reads as follows: “Einen letzten
Gedanken auszusprechen zögert man, weil nicht ganz sicher ist, ob er nicht nur eine
Assoziation des modernen Auslegers ist. Man könnte annehmen, dass die in diesem Text so
häufige Folge der Konsonanten Jod und Waw (‫ )יו‬etwas mit dem Tetragramm ‫ יהוה‬zu tun hat
und mit der (ursprünglichen) Epiklese ganz am Beginn des Psalms in V. 1 zusammenhängt.
Doch wäre sicherlich als Abkürzung für das Tetragramm die Form ‫( יה‬Jh) naheliegender. Wie
immer es sich verhalten mag, die graphische Funktion dieser Form der Akrostichie ist
ungleich wichtiger als die eventuell zusätzliche Verwendung als eine etwas kryptische
Abbreviatur.” See also Klaus D. Seybold, “Zur Geschichte des Vierten Davidpsalters (PSS 138-
145),” in Peter W. Flint, Patrick D. Miller Jr., eds., The Book of Psalms: Composition and
Reception (Leiden/Boston: Brill 2004), pp. 368-390.

observations on Ps 89. Similarly, Victor Avigdor Hurowitz suggests a link between Tanakh
acrostics and the Tetragrammaton as expression of divine unity:
. . . one might suggest that the alphabet in its entirety can be symbolic of YHWH,
expressing his infinity, all inclusiveness, omnipresence, and omniscience. This could
find late expression in the alpha and omega as descriptions of God in Christian sources
(Rev. i 8, 11; xxi 6; xxii 13; cf. Is. xliv 6; xlviii 12 ‫)אני ראשון ואני אחרון‬, or the Rabbinic
statement that God's personal seal is inscribed with the word ‫אמת‬, which consists of
the first, near middle and final letters (Jerusalem Talmud, Sanhedrin 18a). The ‫אל״ף‬
alone could symbolize God’s primacy either as Creator or as first in rank among other
divine beings. Although gematria developed too late to be a factor here, the possibility
should not be excluded that representing God by the letter ‫אל״ף‬, the first letter in ‫אחד‬,
“one,” expresses God’s oneness and uniqueness.77
To anticipate my own findings, it does seem to me that there may indeed be initial
verse letter sequences in Psalms, Isaiah, and Job that do present esoteric permuted forms of
the Tetragrammaton. However, beyond the esoteric nature of such divine names, my other
main finding is that the scattered acrostic words and phrases found throughout these same
books do not constitute secret messages or any type of “hidden codes.” Rather, they seem to
represent a skilful artistic scribal technique that playfully interacts with the surrounding
straightforward text in a way that might be likened to an artistic flourish in literary mode.
Some of these scattered words and phrases will be entirely random, but others, especially
those that are congruent with the accompanying straightforward text, will have a higher
degree of probability as to intentionality.
First, after exploring Ps 89 and obtaining the above results, I examined the initial letters
of all the other 149 psalms in order to see if a systematic examination of their initial letters

77
Victor Avigdor Hurowitz, “Additional Elements of Alphabetical Thinking in Psalm XXXIV,”
p. 332. The common view expressed here by Hurowitz, which sees gematria as a post-Tanakh
development in Judaism, is simply not sustainable in view of the actual evidence that emerges
once one simply takes the time to count letters and words, especially in the Psalter, as I
document throughout the present contribution. A relatively recent contribution to Vetus
Testamentum also suggests gematria pertaining to divine names may have been a closely
guarded secret among Hebrew scribes already in the pre-Hellenistic period; see Israel Knohl,
“Sacred Architecture: The Numerical Dimensions of Biblical Poems,” Vetus Testamentum 62
(2012): pp. 189-197.

would yield similar letter patterns in comparable numbers. Overall, the results seemed quite
meager, yet some of the results struck me as sufficiently tantalizing to justify the suspicion
that some psalm texts might actually indulge in plays between initial verse letters and nearby
straightforward text.
Based on my Ps 89 research, in my examination of all 150 psalms’ initial verse letters, I
took especial care to document all instances in which two consecutive verses begin respectively
with the letters ʾalef and lamed, congruent with a conceivable hint at the divine name ʾEl. As I
began my examination, I expected to find profuse instances of such consecutive ʾalef-lamed
sequences. I was quite surprised to discover that the entire Psalter contained only twenty-three
such cases in a total of twenty-one psalms, which I present in Table 1.78
Table 1
Psalter Consecutive Initial Verse Letter ʾAlef-Lamed Sequences
Book 1 Book 2 Book 3 Book 4 Book 5
(1-41) (42-72) (73-89) (90-106) (107-
150)
Psalms Verses Psalms Verses Psalms Verses Psalms Verses Psalms Verses
3 6-7 49 5-6 74 15-16 94 12-13 108 8-9
16 2-3 60 8-9 78 3-4 101 2-3 116 16-17
26 6-7 64 4-5 89 11-12 102 25-26 136 9-10
27 12-13 67 2-3 22-23 139 14-15
38 10-11 68 23-24 28-29
40 8-9
Some curious properties in Table 1 stand out, the most noticeable being that the sum of
the Book 1 psalm numbers turns out to be 150, the total number of psalms in the Psalter:
3+16+26+27+38+40=150.

78
There is dispute about the developmental stages and number of the Psalter’s divisions, but
the view of its fivefold division is indisputably already ancient. For various discussions on the
topic, see R. Dean Anderson Jr., “The Division and Order of the Psalms,” Westminster
Theological Journal 56 (1994): pp. 219-241; Nancy L. deClaissé-Walford, ed., The Shape and
Shaping of the Book of Psalms: The Current State of Scholarship (Atlanta: Society of Biblical
Literature, 2014); Peter W. Flint, Patrick D. Miller, The Book of Psalms: Composition and
Reception (Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2005).

Doubtless, we should start with the assumption that most or all of these Psalter ʾalef-
lamed sequences are likely random. However, a small group of cases gives us pause for
thought. I refer to the following, in addition to the unusual aspects involving Ps 89 already
discussed. Ps 26:6-7’s ʾalef-lamed initial letters are immediately followed by v. 8’s opening
word YHWH. With regard to Ps 38:10-11’s ʾalef-lamed initial letters, the ʾalef begins the word
ֲ Ps 40:8-9’s pair of initial letters ʾalef-lamed bring to mind v. 9’s ‫ֹלהי‬
‫אד ָֹ֗ני‬. ֣ ַ ‫א‬.
ֱ In the case of Ps
68:23-24’s ʾalef-lamed initial letters, v. 23’s second word is ‫אד ֹנָ י‬.
ֲ֖ Ps 102:25-26’s ʾalef-lamed
initial letters are intriguing in light of v. 25’s second word being ‫א ֗ ִלי‬.
ֵ When these examples are
added to some of the unusual numerical properties in Table 1, then the suspicion grows that at
least some of the Psalter’s ʾalef-lamed initial verse letter sequences may likely not be random
after all.
Concerning initial verse letters in the Psalter that seem possibly to play off nearby
straightforward text in a manner somewhat similar to the cases previously discussed in Ps 89,
Ps 19 is especially noteworthy. Ps 19:13’s first word is the hapax legomenon ‫יאוֹת‬
֥ ִ‫;שׁג‬
ְ it is
therefore all the more noticeable that vv. 14-15 begin respectively with gimel and yod, which
means that vv. 13-15’s initial letters seem to highlight the first three letters of ‫יאוֹת‬
֥ ִ‫שׁג‬.
ְ Earlier,
the initial letters of vv. 9-12, pe-yod-he-gimel, seem to anticipate v. 15’s ‫פי וְ ֶהגְ י֣ וֹן‬,
ִ ֡ “of my mouth
and the meditations.”
Psalm 19:9-15
‫ירת ֵע ָינֽ יִם‬
֥ ַ ‫הוֹ֥ה ָ֜בּ ָ ֗רה ְמ ִא‬
ָ ְ‫י־ל֑ב ִמ ְצַו֖ת י‬
ֵ ‫הוֹ֣ה י֖ ְָשׁ ִרים ְמ ַשׂ ְמּ ֵח‬
ָ ְ‫וּדי י‬
֚ ֵ ‫ ִפּ ֘קּ‬9
‫הוֹ֥ה ֱא ֶ ֑מת ָ ֽצ ְד ֥קוּ יַ ְח ָ ֽדּו‬
ָ ְ‫עוֹמ ֶדת ֫ ָל ַ ֥עד ִמ ְשׁ ְפּ ֵ ֽטי־י‬
֪ ֶ ‫הוֹר ֘ה‬
ָ ‫ יִ ְר ַ ֚את יְ הוָֹ ֨ה | ְט‬10
‫צוּפים‬
ֽ ִ ‫וּמתוּ ִ ֥ קים ִ֜מ ְדּ ַ֗בשׁ וְ ֹ֣נ ֶפת‬
ְ ‫וּמ ָ ֣פּז ָ ֑רב‬
ִ ‫ ַה ֶנּ ֱֽח ָמ ִ ֗דים ֖ ִמזָּ ָהב‬11
‫ם־ע ְַב ְדָּך נִ זְ ָ ֣הר ָבּ ֶ ֑הם ְ֜בּ ָשׁ ְמ ָ ֗רם ֵע ֶ֣קב ָ ֽרב‬
֖ ַ‫ גּ‬12
‫י־יָבין ִמנִּ ְס ָתּ ֥רוֹת נַ ֵ ֽקּנִ י‬
֑ ִ ‫יאוֹת ִ ֽמ‬
֥ ִ‫ ְשׁג‬13
‫יתי ִמ ֶ ֥פּ ַ ֽשׁע ָ ֽרב‬
ִ ‫יתם ְ ֜ונִ ֵ ֗קּ‬
֑ ָ ‫לוּ־בי ָ ֥אז ֵא‬
ִ ֖ ‫ל־יִמ ְשׁ‬
ְ ‫ ַ ֚גּם ִמזֵּ ִ ֨דים | ֲח ֬שְׂך ַע ְב ֶ ֗דָּך ַא‬14
‫צוּרי וְ ֹֽג ֲא ִ ֽלי‬
֥ ִ ‫י־פי וְ ֶהגְ י֣ וֹן ִל ִ ֣בּי ְל ָפ ֶנ֑יָך ְ֜יהוָֹ ֗ה‬
ִ ֡ ‫ יִ ֽ ְהי֥ וּ ְל ָר ֨צוֹן | ִא ְמ ֵר‬15
Curiously, there seems to be some connection between these aspects of Ps 19:9-15 and
the opening verses of Pss 48-49. Pss 19, 48, and 49 are the only psalms in the Psalter that have
two consecutive verses that begin respectively with the letters shin-gimel. Pss 19 and 48 are
the only two psalms in the Psalter that have three consecutive verses that begin respectively
with the letters shin-gimel-yod. The evidence suggests the rarity of these shared letter
sequences would seem to be deliberate.
Ps 48’s first four verses, including v. 1’s heading, have the initials shin-gimel-yod-ʾalef,
the first four letters of Ps 19:13’s ‫יאוֹת‬
֥ ִ‫שׁג‬.
ְ There seems to be no thematic connection between
these two psalms in their straightforward texts. Before turning to Ps 49, I need to point out
that Ps 48:3’s first two letters are yod-pe. Now when we go to Ps 49, skipping v. 1’s heading

(which begins with lamed), vv. 2-4 have as their initial letters shin-gimel-pe-ʾalef, the same as
in Ps 48:1-3 with the exception of Ps 49:4 which begins with pe rather than yod. However, Ps
49:4’s first two letters are pe-yod (the word ‫פּי‬,
ִ “my mouth”), the opposite sequence of 48:3’s
yod-pe. While there is no thematic similarity between the straightforward texts of Ps 19 and
48, the case is different with Ps 49, whose v. 4, “My mouth shall speak wisdom, and the
meditation of my heart shall be understanding,” ‫פּי יְ ַד ֵבּ֣ר ָח ְכ ֑מוֹת וְ ָהג֖ וּת ִל ִ ֣בּי ְתבוּנֽ וֹת‬,
ִ which features
lexical links with Ps 19:15a’s “Let the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart be
ִ ֡ ‫י ְֽהי֥ וּ ְל ָר ֨צוֹן ִא ְמ ֵר‬.ִ Ps 49:3, the gimel verse, features even more striking
acceptable,” ‫י־פי וְ ֶהגְ י֣ וֹן ִל ִ ֣בּי‬
parallels to Ps 19: “Both low and high, rich and poor together,” ‫י־אישׁ ֜ ַי ַ֗חד ָע ִ ֥שׁיר‬
֑ ִ ֵ‫ם־בּנ‬
ְ ַ‫ם־בּ ֵנ֣י ָ֖א ָדם גּ‬
ְ ַ‫גּ‬
‫וְ ֶא ְביֽ וֹן‬. The double ‫ גַּ ם‬and the ‫ ֜ ַי ַ֗חד‬parallel the introductory ‫ גַּ ם‬of Ps 19:12 and 14 and Ps 19:10’s
‫יַ ְח ָ ֽדּו‬. One notices that Pss 19 and 49 are enumerated apart from each other by an even
difference of thirty (49-19=30).
In Ps 24, it catches the eye that the first and last letters of the phrase ‫ ְשׂ ֚אוּ ְשׁ ָע ִ ֨רים‬that
opens vv. 7 and 9 seem to repeated in the initial letters of vv. 7-9, which give the sequence ‫ש מ‬
‫ש מ‬. In Ps 61:1-4’s initial letters are ‫לשמכ‬, which might bring to mind ‫לשמך‬, “to Thy name,”
which would be curious given that both vv. 6 and 9 contain the word ‫שמך‬. If we disregard v.
1’s initial letter lamed on the grounds that this verse is a heading rather than the first verse of
the psalm proper, we would indeed be left with vv. 2-4’s shin-mem-kaf sequence.
Other examples from the Psalter could be given, but we must move on now to Isaiah.79
The clearest instance of an intentional acrostic word in Isaiah is ch. 58’s first three verse’s
initial letters, which are qof-waw-lamed, which actually repeat v. 1’s straightforward qol, from
the famous phrase “lift up thy voice (qwlk).”80 The same word, qol, is then repeated
straightforwardly in v. 4. Not to be overlooked is that Isa 58:1 itself contains a horizontal verse
acrostic of the word q-w-l that actually overlaps with its straightforward occurrence: ‫קוֹלָ֑ך וְ ַה ֵגּ֚ד‬
ֶ
‫מּי‬ ְ 81The remaining initial verse letters are he-he-he-he-ʾalef-ʾalef-waw-waw-waw-ʾalef-ʾalef.82
֙ ִ ‫ל ַע‬.

79
Cf. Klaus Baltzer, Peter Machinist, Deutero-Isaiah: A Commentary on Isaiah 40-55.
Translated by Margaret Kohl (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2001), p. 348, which posits that
“cryptic acrostic-like links” that may be intentional or random seem to connect the words
“Abraham,” “promises,” “dryness,” “joy.”
80
The word qwlk occupies v. 1’s twenty-third to twenty-sixth letter positions. The verse
contains a total of fifty-two letters. Both figures, 26 and 52, are congruent with allusions to the
Tetragrammaton.
81
Cf. the similar structure in Ps 18:7: ‫קוֹלי ְ ֜ו ַשׁוְ ָע ִ֗תי ְל ָפ ָנ֚יו‬.
ִ֑
82
Surprisingly, Seybold leaves completely unmentioned vv. 1-3s’ acrostic ‫ ק־ו־ל‬and vv. 4-14s’ ‫ה־‬
‫ ה־ה־ה־א־א־ו־ו־ו־א־א‬in his commentary on Isa 58 in Klaus Seybold, Poetik der prophetischen
Literatur im Alten Testament (Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer, 2010), pp. 236-242.

These eleven initial letters are interestingly arrayed, first four hes, then three waws flanked by
two sets of two ʾalefs. This seems to involve a pattern of 4+7. However we divide them, the
figure of 11 would be congruent with the gematria of -WH, the Tetragrammaton’s second half.
Performing a vertical ʾalef-lamed and then yod-he search in Isaiah’s initial letters
revealed that there are only three (yes, only three) consecutive ʾalef-lamed initials in all of
Isaiah’s sixty-six chapters, specifically in chs. 41:19-20, 42:6-7, and 45:5-6.83 What then is very
intriguing is that among the total of five yod-he sequences (the Tetragrammaton’s first two
letters) in Isa, three of them are in the same chs. 41 (vv. 22-23), 42 (vv. 12-13), and 45 (vv. 7-
8).
Now, both ch. 41 and 45 have ʾalef-lamed sequences followed by yod-he-he-he (the ch.
41 example has a qof intervening between the lamed and the yod). Not only does y-h-h-h look
like a possible Tetragrammaton permutation, but 41+45=86, the gematria of ʾElohim. What is
more, as Table 4 documents, the four verses in which these two ʾalef-lamed sequences occur
are 41:19-20 and 45:5-6; if we add the numbers of the concluding verses, 20+6, we obtain the
gematria of YHWH. Add to this that the two respective yod-he sequences in the same chapters
occur in the verses 41:22-23 and 45:7-8. If we perform the same addition of the concluding
verses, 23 and 8, we obtain 31, the gematria of ʾEl. Consequently, the hint at the gematria of
LORD is apparently contained in the ʾalef-lamed sequence verses, while the hint at the
gematria of God is contained in the yod-he sequence verses, suggesting a theological
equivalence for these divine names.
Incidentally, Isa ch. 45 contains one of only two horizontal acronyms of the sequence y-
h-w-h in Isa in the initial letters of a portion of a verse’s consecutive words, namely, in v. 18’s
‫“( י ֵֹ֨צר ָה ָ ֚א ֶרץ וְ ע ָֹשׂ ֙הּ ֣הוּא‬that formed the earth and made it, He”), from the statement, “For thus
saith the LORD that created the heavens, He is God; that formed the earth and made it, He
established it, He created it not a waste, He formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD, and
there is none else.” This is very similar to Ps 96:11 (more on this verse below), where we find
the initial word letter sequence ‫י־ה־ו־ה־י־ה־ו‬: ‫וּמל ֹֽאוֹ‬
ְ ‫יִ ְשׂ ְמ ֣חוּ ֖ ַה ָשּׁ ַמיִם וְ ָת ֵג֣ל ָה ָ ֑א ֶרץ יִ ְר ַ ֥עם ַ֜ה ָ֗יּם‬, “Let the
heavens be glad, and let the earth rejoice; let the sea roar, and the fulness thereof.”84 There is a
reverse acrostic of the sequence y-h-w-h in Isa 45:20’s ‫ ִה ָקּ ְב ֥צוּ וָ ֛בֹאוּ ִ ֽה ְתנַ גְּ ֥שׁוּ יַ ְח ָ ֖דּו‬, “Assemble

83
These and most of the results that follow are based on charts graciously supplied to me by
Keith L. Yoder, whose database is a corrected version of the 2004 CCAT edition of the 1989
WLC 1.0 Tanakh database.
84
The only other y-h-w-h acronym within a set of consecutive words in a verse in Isa is in ch.
16:3’s ‫יתי‬
ִ ‫ ֵע ָצ ֙ה ֲע ִ ֣ש ֹו ְפ ִל ֔ ָילה ִ ֧שׁ‬, “counsel, execute justice; make,” from the larger statement, “Give
counsel, execute justice; make thy shadow as the night in the midst of the noonday; hide the
outcasts; betray not the fugitive.”

yourselves and come, draw near together, ye that are escaped of the nations; they have no
knowledge that carry the wood of their graven image, and pray unto a god that cannot save.”
Table 2
Isaiah 41 and 45
ʾAlef-Lamed and Yod-He Initial Verse Letter Sequences
ʾAlef-Lamed sequences Yod-He sequences
Ch. 41 Vv. 19- Ch. 41 Vv. 22-
20 23
Ch. 45 Vv. 5-6 Ch. 45 Vv. 7-8
41+45=86 20+6=26 41+45=86 23+8=31
If we add the numbers of the concluding verses for all five instances of the vertical letter
sequence yod-he in Isa, in chs. 1:3-4, 37:16-17, 41:22-23, 42:12-13, and 45:7-8, we obtain
4+17+23+13+8=65, which coincides with the gematria of ʾAdonai, which also agrees with the
combined gematria values of YHWH YHWH ʾeḥad (based on Deut 6:4), that is, 26+26+13=65.
Isa 41’s acrostic ʾalef-lamed (vv. 19-20), yod-he-he-he (vv. 22-25, with intervening qof
in v. 21) is followed by the letter sequence m-r-w-h (vv. 26-29, which takes us to the chapter’s
end), which could mean “saturated,” and could be understood as a metathesis of mwrh. Such a
metathesis is suspected by Finley in Joel 2:23’s ‫מּוֹרה ִל ְצ ָד ָ ֑ קה‬ ַ 85 A parallel to Joel 2:23 is then
֖ ֶ ‫ה‬.
actually found in Isa 45:8, precisely in the area that contains the acrostic sequence ʾalef-lamed-
yod-he-he-he. It would not seem fortuitous that Isa 41:22-25’s possible Tetragrammaton
permutation takes us to the edge of verse number 26. The ch. 45 parallel acrostic sequence
yod-he-he-he falls in vv. 7-10, with the ʾalef-lamed in vv. 5-6.
In Isa 42 the initial letter sequence y-y-y-h in vv. 11-14 seems possibly to be a different
Tetragrammaton permutation; note that the third yod is straightforwardly that of YHWH. The
ʾalef-lamed sequence comes from the very famous vv. 6-7: “I the LORD have called thee in
righteousness, and have taken hold of thy hand, and kept thee, and set thee for a covenant of
the people, for a light of the nations; To open the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from
the dungeon, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison-house.”
Incidentally, the Psalter contains the initial letter sequence he-yod-yod-yod in Pss
118:1-4 and 121:4-7 (with a fourth yod in v. 8). Ps 97:4-7 has the initial letter sequence he-he-
he-yod, while Ps 148:1-7 has he-he-he-he-yod-waw-he. All of these sequences could represent
esoteric Tetragrammaton permutations.

85
See Colin Toffelmire, A Discourse and Register Analysis of the Prophetic Book of Joel
(Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2016), p. 69.

The initial letters of the verses in several of Job’s poetic chapters contain a good number
of comparable intriguing patterns, including the following scattered possible intentional
acrostic configurations that might be likened to clever scribal literary flourishes. The initial
letter sequence ‫ אור‬occurs in Job 33:23-25; cf. the straightforward ‫ אור‬in the nearby vv. 28, 30.
With Job 28:27’s ‫אז ָ֖ר ָאהּ‬,
֣ ָ cf. the letter sequence in Job 33, ‫ראההאז‬, which looks like a
֣ ָ joined by an extra he. Cf. Job 33:28, ‫בּ ֥אוֹר ִתּ ְר ֶ ֽאה‬,
transposition of the two words ‫אז ָ ֖ר ָאהּ‬, ָ and the
already mentioned acrostic ‫ אור‬in same chapter. The letter sequence ‫ משל‬occurs in Job 4:9-11;
37:22-24; and 42:3-5. The letter sequence ‫ אכל‬surfaces in Job 9:31-33; ‫ אכל‬occurs
straightforwardly in the nearby v. 26. The acrostic ‫ אכל‬occurs again at Job 28:23-25; cf. also the
letter sequence ‫ אכילת‬at Job 34:22-26; the term occurs straightforwardly earlier in Job 34:3,
‫ל ֱא ֽכֹל‬.
ֽ ֶ One finds the letter sequence ‫ זכה‬in Job 36:24-26; ‫ זכה‬occurs straightforwardly in Job
16:17. Four out of the eleven occurrences of ‫ זכה‬in the Tanakh appear in Job. Cf. the acrostic
‫ זכם‬at Job 4:7-9.
Consider also the possible acrostic ‫ למד‬at Job 41:4-6; cf. the famous straightforward
instance of ‫ למד‬in Job 21:22a: “Shall any teach God knowledge?” ‫ד־דּ ַעת ַה ְל ֵ ֥אל‬
֑ ָ ‫יְ ַל ֶמּ‬. At Job 33:3-6
we find the acrostic ‫יראה‬, which could be read either as a reference to seeing (as in Job 28:27’s
‫ ָ֖)ר ָאהּ‬or to fear; cf. the famous Job 28:28: “And unto man He said: ‘Behold, the fear (‫ )יִ ְר ַ ֣את‬of
the Lord, that is wisdom; and to depart from evil is understanding.’” (Consider as well the
repeating initial letter sequence y-r-w-y-r-w at Job 24:20-25). At Job 35:7-9 we find the letter
sequence ‫אלם‬, which if understood as to be silent, mute, would be quite fitting in Job. Equally
fitting would be to understand Job 38’s letter sequence ‫ אמללה‬in the sense of languishes,
withers, decays.
At Job 28:11-14 we have the acrostic ‫( מ־ו־ל־ת‬cf. ‫)מולת‬, which could mean
“circumcision,”86 immediately preceded by ‫( ל־ב־ב‬cf. ‫)לבב‬, “heart,” which in turn is preceded
by ‫א־מ־נ‬, cf. ‫אמן‬. Job 17:3-5 and 29:19-21 have the letter sequence ‫שכל‬, a word present only
sixteen times in the Tanakh. ‫ שכל‬occurs in Job 17:4 straightforwardly. Overlapping with one
instance of the letter sequence ‫ שכל‬is the letter sequence ‫( ראשכל‬Job 17:1-5), which could be
read as ‫( ראש כל‬cf. Numb 1:2’s ‫ל־ע ַ ֣דת ְבּ ֵנֽי־יִ ְשׂ ָר ֵ֔אל‬
ֲ ‫אשׁ ָכּ‬
֙ ֹ ‫)ר‬. Job 34 has the letter sequence ‫ ;יוההארכ‬if
‫ יוהה‬is a Tetragrammaton permutation, then we could divide these letters as ‫)יוהה ארך( יוהה ארכ‬
which would seem to supply an allusion to Numb 14:18’s famous opening two words, ‫יְ הוָֹ ֗ה ֶ ֤א ֶרְך‬.
Particularly poetic is the apparent acrostic ‫עז ואד‬, cf. “might and mist,” at Job 19:2-6. The
straightforward term ‫ אד‬in the sense of mist is extremely rare in the Tanakh, occurring only in
Gen (2:6) and Job (36:27).

86
On the interpretation of Job 19:26’s “my flesh” as involving an allusion to circumcision, see
Elliot R. Wolfson, “Circumcision, Vision of God, and Textual Interpretation: From Midrashic
Trope to Mystical Symbol,” History of Religions 27/2 (1987): pp. 189-215.

Job 32 has a letter sequence consisting of a string of six instances of waw followed by a
double ʾalef and double lamed, ‫וווווו אאלל‬. Do the waws represent a multiplication of the
Tetragrammaton’s waw, followed by a doubling of the letters of ʾEl? Or is it all coincidence?
More suggestive is Job 9’s initial verse letters that show a string of four ʾalefs then ʾalef-lamed.
Do the four ʾalefs give a permutation of the Tetragrammaton, followed by ʾalef-lamed for ʾEl?
In the entirety of Job, the consecutive letter sequences ʾalef-lamed occurs in eight chapters:
Job 7:4-5
Job 9:17-18
Job 15:18-19
Job 17:13-14
Job 32:8-9
Job 33:16-17
Job 34:27-28
Job 35:7-8
The initial verse letter sequence yod-he is found in a total of ten chapters in Job,
occurring twice in the first and last instances (a curious pattern), producing a total of twelve
yod-he sequences.
Job 3:3-4, 5-6

Job 4:16-17
Job 6:18-19
Job 15:6-7
Job 21:26-27
Job 24:4-5
Job 33:11-12
Job 38:21-22
Job 39:7-8
Job 40:22-23, 30-31
To come full circle, I now present in Table 3 my search results for the initial verse letter
sequence yod-he in the Psalter:

Table 3
Psalter Consecutive Initial Verse Letter Yod-He Sequences
Book 1 Book 2 Book 3 Book 4 Book 5
(1-41) (42-72) (73-89) (90-106) (107-
150)
Psalms Verses Psalms Verses Psalms Verses Psalms Verses Psalms Verses
14 1-2 55 11-12 80 5-6 104 31-32 107 23-24
19 10-11 59 7-8
28 8-9*
*Ps 28:7’s initial letter is also a yod; both vv. 7 and 8 begin with YHWH.
As we learn from Table 3, the Psalter contains eight instances of the letter sequence
yod-he in its initial verse letters. The first observation to make about Table 3 is that not a
single instance of the letter sequence yod-he occurs in any of the psalms containing the letter
sequence ʾalef-lamed (Table 1); there is no overlap whatsoever. The second observation to
make regarding Table 3 is that the letter sequence yod-he manages to be present in all of the
Psalter’s five Books.
Looking back at our systematic analysis of Ps, Isa, and Job, the question arises as to
why the vertical results concerning divine names were limited to the two letter sequences ʾalef-
lamed and yod-he, rather than the fuller forms ʾalef-lamed-he-yod-mem and yod-he-waw-he.
Given its brief four-letter sequence with one repeated letter, one might expect the letters of the
Tetragrammaton to occur simply by chance a number of times among the initial verse letters
in a text as long as the Psalter. But in fact, such a sequence is to be found nowhere either in
the Psalter’s 150 chapters, or in Isa’s and Job’s combined 108 chapters. Neither is the five letter
vertical sequence ʾalef-lamed-he-yod-mem to be found anywhere. Especially with regard to the
Tetragrammaton, an explanation for its absence when we might reasonably expect it to be
present at least a few times by chance lies at hand, namely, it would seem to have been scribal
policy, perhaps based on some ritual notion, to avoid the fuller forms of the two main divine
names at least vertically among initial verse letters.87

87
Similarly, one might think that the initial verse letter sequence mem-shin-he, cf. the name
Moses, would one would expect to occur by chance at least a handful of times in a book as
long as the Psalter. But in fact it occurs but once, in Ps 30:10-12, matching the one
straightforward occurrence in a superscription, Ps 90. There are seven mentions of Moses in
the main texts of Pss 77, 99, 103, 105, 106 thrice, for a total of eight explicit mentions of
Moses in the Psalter, congruent with the eighth day symbolizing the covenant. The reverse

Part III
Horizontal Intra-Verse Acrostics in the Psalter and Tanakh
Many of the above statements pertain to vertical letter groupings. There is, however, a
single instance in the Psalter where we do find the horizontal letter sequence read right to left
yod-he-waw-he in the initial letters of a single verse’s words (there are seven others if we want
to read final letters left to right, or in reverse, which arguably increases statistical probability
of randomness against intentionality), namely, in Ps 96:11. However, before looking at this
verse, a remark about statistics is in order. While the vertical letter pattern ʾalef-lamed is found
with relative paucity in the Psalter, just over twenty times, once we move to a horizontal
analysis of initial letters in consecutive sets of words within individual verses, then the statistic
for the letter sequence ʾalef-lamed increases markedly to just under 200 for the entirety of the
Psalter. We could therefore on average expect to find (presumably) simply at random a
horizontal ʾalef-lamed sequence at least once in just about each individual psalm. In contrast
to the Psalter’s vertical ʾalef-lamed sequences, I have been unable to find any potential patterns
in the locations of the nearly 200 horizontal ʾalef-lamed sequences.
According to Turner: “It is commonly held that ‘acrostics, especially those that spell out
God’s name, are very rare. Jewish copyists carefully guarded against the accidental acrostic that
might spell out this divine name.’ However, the evidence points in the opposite direction. Each
of the acrostic configurations of the divine name alleged for Esther occurs frequently
throughout the Hebrew Bible.”88 Yet one must be very careful and precise not to mix statistical
results for vertical and horizontal acrostics. The fact is that there is not a single vertical
YHWH acrostic in the Psalter. It does indeed seem that vertically considered, it might still be
argued plausibly that “Jewish copyists carefully guarded against the accidental acrostic that
might spell out this divine name.” However, this is not the case when horizontally considered,

vertical sequence, he-shin-mem, cf. “the Name,” is found only in Pss 17:7-9 and 53:5-7. There
is one vertical mem-shin-he letter sequence in Job, in 13:5-7 (cf. the sequence shin-he-mem in
vv. 17-19). There is only one instance of the vertical letter sequence shem-mem in Job, in the
adjacent ch. 12:21-22, found in the longer eight-letter sequence mem-mem-mem-mem-shin-
mem-mem-mem (vv. 17-24). There is similarly but one instance of the vertical letter sequence
shin-mem in all of Isa, in ch. 14:5-6.
88
Laurence A. Turner, “Desperately Seeking Yhwh: Finding God in Esther’s ‘Acrostics,’” in
James K. Aitken, Jeremy M. S. Clines, Christl M. Maier, eds., Interested Readers: Essays on the
Hebrew Bible in Honor of David J. A. Clines (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2013), p.
189.

as Turner clearly documents. The question then becomes whether or not the whole matter is
one of pure randomness, given the marked increase in the number of words in the horizontal
in contrast to vertical data sets.
Turner supplies the following statistics for the total number of horizontal occurrences
of the letter sequence y-h-w-h in the Tanakh: Initial consonants, left to right, 33; right to left,
24; final consonants, left to right, 25; right to left, 38.89 The total comes out to 120 instances.
Turner’s essay concentrates on supposed YHWH acrostics in Esther. He argues that because
the letter sequence y-h-w-h occurs frequently throughout the Tanakh that therefore we can
conclude the Esther acrostics are random, not intentional. However, Turner fails to raise some
important methodological questions. Above all, on what basis does he judge 120 instances of
the (horizontal) sequence y-h-w-h to be “frequent”? The Tanakh is a vast literary corpus, with
over 900 chapters, more than 23,000 verses, and well over half a million words (more than
593,000). Some might see 120 instances of the horizontal sequence y-h-w-h as rather
infrequent in such a huge data set. Not to mention that as Turner adds, the (horizontal) letter
sequence ʾalef-lamed-he-yod-mem (cf. ʾElohim) is found only seven times in the entirety of the
Tanakh, in Josh 11:20, Isa 41:13, Isa 61:8, Zech 4:13, Lam 2:13, 1 Chr 22:19, 2 Chr 30:24.90
Second, one has to carefully study the distribution of the 120 horizontal sequences of y-
h-w-h throughout the Tanakh (Torah thirty-three times, Prophets fifty-five times, Writings
thirty-two times). Looking at Tables 4-6 , one wonders why in the Writings the horizontal
sequence y-h-w-h predominates in Psalms and 1 Chron. Why is it almost to completely absent
from so many books in the Writings? To an extent, statistically viewed this could be explained
by the brevity of texts like Lam, Ruth, etc., but then what about Job with its forty-two
chapters? And why does Esther, with ten chapters, have half the number that the Psalter
contains with its 150 chapters (Esther has four instances, Ps has eight instances)?
Third, can we really safely dismiss all, most, some, or any of the Tanakh’s 120 y-h-w-h
sequences (which occur in a total of 23+43+28=94 chapters) without examining each one
closely, both individually and contextually testing for potential signs of randomness or design?

89
Laurence A. Turner, “Desperately Seeking Yhwh: Finding God in Esther’s ‘Acrostics,’” p.
190.
90
190.

Table 4
Horizontal Y-H-W-H Letter Sequences in the Torah
Gen Exod Lev Numb Deut
11:9 3:13 8:15 1:51 10:7
LTR f RTL l LTR f LTR f LTR f
12:15 4:3 8:29 5:12 11:2

RTL l LTR l LTR l RTL l RTL f
19:13 4:14 9:9 5:18 20:8

RTL l RTL f LTR f LTR f LTR f
19:25 4:16 21:22 13:30 24:5

RTL f LTR f LTR f LTR l RTL l
24:58 16:7 13:32 30:12

LTR l LTR l RTL f RTL l
38:7 16:22 19:12 31:29

RTL l RTL l LTR f RTL l
43:10 25:23 24:13

RTL l LTR l LTR l
49:31 37:10
LTR l LTR l
Total Total Total Total Total

8 8 4 7 6
LTR f: Left to Right first letters ; RTL f: Right to Left first letters;
LTR l: Left to Right last letters; RTL l: Right to Left last letters.

Table 5
Horizontal Y-H-W-H Letter Sequences in the Prophets
Josh Judg 1 Sam 2 Sam 1 King 2 King Isa Jer Ezek Hos Joel Zech
2:15 14:2 20:21 15:14 7:12 7:2 16:3 9:11 1:27 11:10 2:7 1:5
LTR f LTR l LTR l LTR l RTL f LTR f RTL l LTR l RTL l RTL l LTR f
x2
LTR l
RTL l
10:18 16:16 18:3 8:42 10:1 30:26 9:17 23:8 2:17 8:19
RTL l RTL l RTL l RTL f RTL f LTR f RTL l RTL l RTL l LTR f
11:16 19:24 18:4 13:26 33:22 30:2 9:17

LTR f RTL l RTL l RTL l RTL l RTL l
x2
LTR f
RTL f
18:28 20:18 16:7 35:2 15:19 31:15

LTR f RTL l RTL l LTR f RTL l RTL l
19:47 20:41 18:3 45:18 31:7 46:1

LTR l RTL l LTR f RTL f LTR f
x2
LTR f
RTL f
24:18 18:37 45:20 33:20

LTR f RTL f LTR f LTR f
24:27 48:2
LTR l LTR l
49:19
x2
LTR l
RTL l
50:15
LTR l
50:29
LTR l
51:31
RTL l
Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total
7 5 1 4 6 2 7 11 6 1 2 3
LTR f: Left to Right first letters ; RTL f: Right to Left first letters; LTR l: Left to Right last letters; RTL l: Right to Left last letters.

Table 6
Horizontal Y-H-W-H Letter Sequences in the Writings
Ps Ruth Lam Eccl Est Dan Ezra 1 Chron 2 Chron
18:8 1:21 3:33 3:17 1:20 12:1 8:19 5:12 20:34
LTR f LTR f LTR l LTR f LTR f LTR f LTR l RTL f RTL f
57:7 5:4 8:39 23:6

RTL l RTL f RTL f LTR f
73:15 5:13 16:31 26:11

RTL l LTR l RTL f RTL f
96:11 x2 7:7 18:8 27:3

LTR f RTL l RTL f RTL f
RTL f
106:1 21:17
LTR l LTR l
107:24 22:18
RTL l RTL f
115:11 23:11
RTL l RTL f
23:17
RTL l
23:19
RTL f
26:4
RTL f
27:30
LTR f
Total 8 Total 1 Total 1 Total 1 Total 4 Total 1 Total 1 Total Total 4

11
LTR f: Left to Right first letters ; RTL f: Right to Left first letters; LTR l: Left to Right last letters; RTL l: Right to Left last letters.
Looking at Table 4, let us test the first occurrence of a y-h-w-h acrostic in the Torah, in
Gen 11:9, ‫ל־ה ָ ֽא ֶרץ‬
ָ ‫ל־פּ ֵנ֖י ָכּ‬
ְ ‫ל־ה ָ ֑א ֶרץ וּ ִמ ָשּׁ ֙ם ֱה ִפ ָיצ֣ם יְ הוָֹ ֔ה ַע‬
ָ ‫הוֹ֖ה ְשׂ ַ ֣פת ָכּ‬
ָ ְ‫י־שׁם ָבּ ַ ֥לל י‬
֛ ָ ‫ל־כּן ָק ָ ֤רא ְשׁ ָמ ֙הּ ָבּ ֶ֔בל ִכּ‬
ֵ֞ ‫ע‬,
ַ
“Therefore was the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the
language of all the earth; and from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of
all the earth.” There are six elements in this text that suggest intentionality in contrast to
randomness. The first feature that catches the eye is that its y-h-w-h acrostic’s yod is that of a
straightforward YHWH. A second sign of intentionality is that from the acrostic’s yod to the
verse’s end there are fifteen letters (15=the gematria of YH). Sign three is that the remaining
letters of the acrostic span thirteen letters (13=half of 26). Sign four is that from v. 6’s YHWH
there are fifty-two (cf. 26x2=52) words to the acrostic’s first word in v. 9 (v. 5’s YHWH is the
chapter’s word 52). Sign five is that from the yod of v. 8’s YHWH to the end of the acrostic

(the second he of the letter sequence y-h-w-h) there are sixty-five letters (cf. the gematria of
YHWH+YHWH+ʾeḥad, 26+26+13=65). Sign six is that from the yod of v. 8’s YHWH letter 78
(cf. 26x3=78) is then the yod of the y-h-w-h acrostic, which is also the yod of v. 9’s
straightforward Tetragrammaton.
This chapter’s length will not allow an exploration of all thirty-three instances of the
acrostic sequence y-h-w-h in the Torah. Suffice it to say that in my examination not all of the
occurrences possess numerical features like the Gen 11:9 case, which may suggest that some of
the acrostics in the Torah are intentional and some the result of coincidence. Space allows
mention of two other intriguing instances in Table 4. First is Exod 3:13, ‫ֹלהים‬
ִ֗ ‫ל־ה ֱא‬
ֽ ָ ‫משׁה ֶא‬
ֶ֜ ‫אמר‬
ֶ ֹ ‫וַ ֨יּ‬
‫־שּׁ ֔מוֹ ָ ֥מה א ַ ֹ֖מר ֲא ֵל ֶ ֽהם‬
ְ ‫וֹת ֶיכ֖ם ְשׁ ָל ַ ֣חנִ י ֲא ֵל ֶיכ֑ם וְ ָ ֽא ְמרוּ־ ִ ֣לי ַמה‬
ֵ ‫ֹלהי ֲא ֽב‬
֥ ֵ ‫ל־בּ ֵנ֣י יִ ְשׂ ָר ֵאל ֒ וְ ָ ֽא ַמ ְר ִ ֣תּי ָל ֶ֔הם ֱא‬
ְ ‫ִה ֨ ֵנּה ָ ֽאנ ִ ֹ֣כי ָב ֘א ֶא‬
“And Moses said unto God: ‘Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say
unto them: The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me: What is
His name? what shall I say unto them?’” Rather striking is this verse’s placement of the y-h-w-
h acrostic sequence in the specific portion “and they shall say to me: What is His name? what
shall I say unto them?” From the acrostic’s yod to the end of the verse there are fifteen letters
(15=the gematria of YH). In the verse, seventy-eight letters precede the final he of the acrostic
y-h-w-h. The verse contains a total of eighty-six letters, congruent with the gematria of
ʾElohim.91
Second is Deut 30:12, ‫יְמ ֙ה וְ יִ ָקּ ֶ ֣ח ָה ֔ ָלּנוּ וְ יַ ְשׁ ִמ ֵ ֥ענוּ א ָ ֹ֖תהּ‬
ָ ‫מר ִ ֣מי ַ ֽי ֲע ֶלה־ ָ ֤לּנוּ ַה ָשּׁ ַ֨מ‬
ֹ ֗ ‫֥ל ֹא ַב ָשּׁ ַ ֖מיִם ִ ֑הוא ֵלא‬
‫וְ ַנ ֲֽע ֶ ֽשׂנָּ ה‬, “It is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say: ‘Who shall go up for us to heaven, and
bring it unto us, and make us to hear it, that we may do it?’” The yellow highlighting identifies
the letter sequence y-h-w-h, while the blue highlighting points out the acrostic sequence m-y-
l-h,92 which would seem to play off v. 6a’s straightforward mention of the circumcision of the
heart, ‫ת־ל ַ ֣בב זַ ְר ֶעָ֑ך‬
ְ ‫ת־ל ָ ֽב ְבָך֖ וְ ֶא‬
ְ ‫ֹלהיָך ֶא‬
֛ ֶ ‫הוֹ֧ה ֱא‬
ָ ְ‫וּמל י‬
ָ֨ , “And the LORD thy God will circumcise thy heart,
and the heart of thy seed.” The relevance of v. 6 for v. 12 is actually supported by further
acrostic sequences in the latter verse, whose first two letters actually form the acrostic l-b,
“heart,” and then starting from the mem of the m-y-l-h acrostic, reading in reverse we have
what looks like a fragmentary acrostic of the same sequence, m-l-h, ‫מר ִ ֣מי ַ ֽי ֲע ֶלה־‬
ֹ ֗ ‫֥ל ֹא ַב ָשּׁ ַ ֖מיִם ִ ֑הוא ֵלא‬
‫יְמ ֙ה‬ ֤ ָ 93 The sequence m-l-h can also be understood in the sense of “word,” synonymous
ָ ‫לּנוּ ַה ָשּׁ ַ֨מ‬.

91
One also notices that from v. 14’s beginning, there are twenty-six swords to v. 15’s YHWH,
then another twenty-six words to v. 16’s YHWH.
92
Deut 30:12’s circumcision acrostic is mentioned in Barry J. Blake, Secret Language: Codes,
Tricks, Spies, Thieves, and Symbols (Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press, 2010), p.
118.
93
Further notable numerical features of Deuteronomy 30 include vv. 3-4 which contain
respectively fifteen and eleven words, matching the gematria values of the Tetragrammaton’s

ַ The same portion in v. 12 contains the acrostic yod-resh-ʾalef (red
with v. 14’s ‫ה ָדּ ָ ֖בר‬.
highlighting), ‫יְמ ֙ה‬
ָ ‫מר ִ ֣מי ַ ֽי ֲע ֶלה־ ָ ֤לּנוּ ַה ָשּׁ ַ֨מ‬
ֹ ֗ ‫ל ֹא ַב ָשּׁ ַ ֖מיִם ִ ֑הוא ֵלא‬,
֥ congruent with the straightforward verb
‫ירא‬, fear (as a synonym of love), in the nearby Deut chs. 28 (v. 58) and 31 (vv. 12-13). Cf. Deut
30:11, which ends with the acrostic m-w-r-h, ‫וא‬
֙ ‫ִכּ֚י ַה ִמּ ְצָו֣ה ַה ֔זּ ֹאת ֲא ֶ ֛שׁר ָ ֽאנ ִ ֹ֥כי ְמ ַצוְּ ָך֖ ַהיּ֑ וֹם ֽל ֹא־נִ ְפ ֵ ֥לאת ִה‬
‫א־רח ָ ֹ֖קה ִ ֽהוא‬
ְ ֹ ‫מ ְמּ ָ֔ך וְ ֽל‬,
ִ “For this commandment which I command thee this day, it is not too hard
for thee, neither is it far off.” In Deut 30:13 the circumcision and fear acrostics resurface, the
sequence m-l-h (which again could also be understood as “word”) occurs in an overlapping
way twice in two reading directions (yellow and blue highlighting), while yod-resh-ʾalef occurs
in reverse (red highlighting), ‫ל־ע ֶבר ַהיָּ ֙ם וְ יִ ָקּ ֶ ֣ח ָה ֔ ָלּנוּ וְ יַ ְשׁ ִמ ֵ ֥ענוּ א ָ ֹ֖תהּ‬
֤ ֵ ‫ר־לנוּ ֶא‬
ָ ֜ ‫מר ִ ֣מי ַי ֲֽע ָב‬
ֹ ֗ ‫א־מ ֵ ֥ע ֶבר ַל ָיּ֖ם ִ ֑הוא ֵלא‬
ֵ ֹ ‫וְ ֽל‬
‫וְ ַנ ֲֽע ֶ ֽשׂנָּ ה‬, “Neither is it beyond the sea, that thou shouldest say: ‘Who shall go over the sea for us,
and bring it unto us, and make us to hear it, that we may do it?’”
As a further test case, in the Writings let us examine Esther’s four y-h-w-h sequences
one by one. Esther 1:20’s reverse (LTR first letters) y-h-w-h sequence begins twenty-six letters
from the verse’s end (yellow highlighting), congruent with the gematria of YHWH, 26. The y-
h-w-h sequence spans twelve letters and ends at word 13 from the verse’s beginning and word
9 from the end; the y-h sequence in blue highlighting ends at word 13 from the y-h-w-h
acrostic’s yod:
‫ד־ק ָ ֽטן‬
ָ ‫יהן ְל ִמגָּ ֖דוֹל וְ ַע‬
ֶ֔ ‫ל־הנָּ ִ֗שׁים יִ ְתּנ֤ וּ יְ ָק ֙ר ְל ַב ְע ֵל‬
ַ ‫כוּתוֹ ִ ֥כּי ַר ָ ֖בּה ִ ֑היא וְ ָכ‬
֔ ‫ל־מ ְל‬
ַ ‫ר־י ֲֽע ֶשׂ ֙ה ְבּ ָכ‬
ַ ‫וְ נִ ְשׁ ַמ ֩ע ִפּ ְת ֨ ָגם ַה ֶ ֤מּ ֶלְך ֲא ֶ ֽשׁ‬
Esther 5:4’s RTL (first letters) y-h-w-h sequence starts twenty-one letters from the
verse’s beginning, and ends at letter twenty-one from the verse’s end. I am not sure of the
significance of the figure 21, but the placement involving a double 21 looks potentially
intentional. The y-h-w-h sequence spans thirteen letters; cf. the gematria of ‫אחד‬, “one,” which
is 13:
‫יתי ֽלוֹ‬
ִ ‫ר־ע ִ ֥שׂ‬
ָ ‫ל־ה ִמּ ְשׁ ֶ ֖תּה ֲא ֶשׁ‬
ַ ‫מן ַהיּ֔ וֹם ֶא‬
֙ ָ ‫ל־ה ֶ ֖מּ ֶלְך ֑טוֹב יָ ֨בוֹא ַה ֶ ֤מּ ֶלְך וְ ָה‬
ַ ‫ם־ע‬
ַ ‫אמר ֶא ְס ֵ֔תּר ִא‬
ֶ ֹ ‫וַ ֣תּ‬
Esther 5:13’s reverse (LTR last letters) y-h-w-h sequence starts at letter 15, then ends at
letter 5. There is a span of 156 words that encompass the y-h-w-h sequences in 5:4 and 5:13.
Significantly, 156 is a multiple of 26 (26x6=156), but why 26x6 and not 26x4, for instance? The
sequence in 5:13 spans eleven letters; cf. the gematria of the Tetragrammaton’s second half,
WH=11. But why the second half? Could it have something to do with the above-cited 1:20’s y-
h sequence (blue highlighting)?:

two halves, 15+11=26. The allusion to the Tetragrammaton is supported by these two verses’
respective letter counts of 60 and 44, which produce the sum 104, congruent with 26x4=104.
The verses’ respective word counts of 15+11 can be interpreted as standing for one YHWH,
and the letter count of 104 stands for four YHWHs, and in fact in vv. 1-4 there are a total of
five YHWHs.

‫יוֹשׁב ְבּ ַ ֥שׁ ַער ַה ֶ ֽמּ ֶלְך‬
֖ ֵ ‫הוּדי‬
֔ ִ ְ‫ת־מ ְר ֳדּ ַכ֣י ַהיּ‬
ָ ‫ל־עת ֲא ֶ֨שׁר ֲא ִנ֤י ר ֶֹא ֙ה ֶא‬
ֵ ֗ ‫ל־זה ֵא ֶינ֥נּוּ שֶֹׁו֖ה ִ ֑לי ְבּ ָכ‬
ֶ֕ ‫וְ ָכ‬
Esther 7:7’s RTL (last letters) y-h-w-h sequence begins at the verse’s letter 65 (cf. the
gematria of ʾAdonai), and its conclusion is immediately followed by letter 78; cf. 26x3=78. The
sequence spans thirteen letters; cf. the gematria of ‫אחד‬, “one,” which is 13. The sequence ends
with word 21; cf. the role of the figure 21 in Esther 5:4’s y-h-w-h sequence .
‫י־כ ְל ָ ֥תה ֵא ָל֛יו‬

ֽ ָ ‫שׁוֹ ֵ ֽמ ֶא ְס ֵ ֣תּר ַה ַמּ ְל ָ֔כּה ִ ֣כּי ָר ָ֔אה ִכּ‬
֙ ‫יתן וְ ָה ָ ֣מן ָע ַ֗מד ְל ַב ֵ ֤קּשׁ ַעל־נַ ְפ‬
֑ ָ ‫תוֹ ִמ ִמּ ְשׁ ֵ ֣תּה ַה ַ֔יּיִ ן ֶאל־גִּ ַנּ֖ת ַה ִבּ‬
֙ ‫וְ ַה ֶ֜מּ ֶלְך ָ ֤קם ַ ֽבּ ֲח ָמ‬
‫ָ ֽה ָר ָ ֖עה ֵמ ֵ ֥את ַה ֶ ֽמּ ֶלְך‬
The two respective instances of the letter sequence y-h-w-h in Esther 1:20 and 7:7 seem
most suggestive for possible intentionality. Adding to this suggestiveness is the quite evident
peculiarity that Esther’s four y-h-w-h sequences include one example each of the four types of
sequences Turner discusses, and note the pattern in the order of the four types in Esther: First
LTR first letters, followed by RTL first letters, then LTR last letters, ending with RTL last
letters. The regularity in the pattern of the four types is striking and I have not been able to
identify a comparable parallel to this feature in the remaining 116 horizontal y-h-w-h letter
sequences in the Tanakh.
Turning now to the Psalter, in the previously mentioned Ps 96:11 we encounter the
initial word letter sequence ‫י־ה־ו־ה־י־ה־ו‬: ‫וּמל ֹֽאוֹ‬
ְ ‫יִ ְשׂ ְמ ֣חוּ ֖ ַה ָשּׁ ַמיִם וְ ָת ֵג֣ל ָה ָ ֑א ֶרץ יִ ְר ַ ֥עם ַ֜ה ָ֗יּם‬, “Let the heavens
be glad, and let the earth rejoice; let the sea roar, and the fulness thereof.”94 This is one of the
Tanakh’s most interesting Tetragrammaton acrostics first because y-h-w-h is then followed by
the short form y-h-w, bringing to mind the Aramaic Yahu/Yaho and Greek IAŌ, and second
because YHWH is also present in reverse in the portion ‫ה ָשּׁ ַמיִם וְ ָת ֵג֣ל ָה ָ ֑א ֶרץ יִ ְר ַ ֥עם‬.
ַ ֖ In effect, in the
forward reading what is the Tetragrammaton acronym’s first he becomes the reverse reading’s
second he. The RTL yhwh acrostic ends at letter 15, while the yhw acrostic ends at letter 26.
15 agrees with the gematria of the Tetragrammaton’s first half, YH=15, while 26 accords with
the gematria of the full form YHWH. Sixty-five letters after the yod of v. 11’s yhwh acrostic
(cf. the gematria of ʾAdonai) is the yod of v. 13’s YHWH.
It seems to me that this Ps 96:11 acrostic is more likely to be intentional than random
for more than one reason. First is the fact that the sequence y-h-w-h does not occur at random
frequently, only eight times in the entire Psalter (personally, eight instances in 150 chapters
does not strike me as “frequent”), it seems to be purposefully avoided for the most part, yet
not entirely, second, it is followed by y-h-w. A third reason is that elsewhere in the Psalter
there do surface acrostics that one would be hard-pressed to deny are more likely intentional
than random, and that these begin already in the very first psalm renders the appearance of

94
I owe this identification to Keith L. Yoder, private communication 2 July 2018.

intentionality all the more likely in Ps 96:11. It is at this point that we must move beyond an
exclusive focus on y-h-w-h (horizontal) acrostics, intentional or random, to more clearly
intentional horizontal acrostics in the Psalter and beyond in the Tanakh, to get a sense for how
horizontal acrostics in these texts might be constructed and deployed.
ֵ֬ whose initial letters y-b-w-l are immediately
I refer first to Ps 1:3’s ‫יִתּן ְבּ ִע ֗תּוֹ ו֖ ְָע ֵלהוּ ֣ל ֹא‬,
followed by ‫יִבּוֹל‬:
֑ ‫יִתּן ְבּ ִע ֗תּוֹ ו֖ ְָע ֵלהוּ ֣ל ֹא ֑יִבּוֹל‬,
ֵ֬ “bringeth forth in its season, and whose leaf doth not
wither.” Very striking is Ps 85:12’s ‫א ֶמת ֵמ ֶ ֣א ֶרץ ִתּ ְצ ָ ֑מח‬,
ֱ whose compactness seems to indicate
intentionality: ‫א ֶמת ֵמ ֶ ֣א ֶרץ ִתּ ְצ ָ ֑מח ְ ֜ו ֶ֗צ ֶדק ִמ ָשּׁ ַ ֥מיִם נִ ְשׁ ָ ֽ קף‬,
ֱ “Truth springeth out of the earth; and
righteousness hath looked down from heaven.” Goitein and Friedman mention the word ʾemet
being used as an abbreviating acrostic for Ps 85:12a, but neglect to add that the stich is itself
an acrostic: “In addition, the Hebrew word {emet} for Truth often was written on the head of
an order of payment. . . . As may be remarked in passing, the Hebrew word for Truth was
regarded in this connection as an acrostic or abbreviation of Ps. 85:12 ‘Truth springs out from
the earth’ in the meaning: any misuse of the order will be discovered in due course.”95 Ps
85:12a’s ʾemet acrostic inspired the very use of the word ʾemet to abbreviate this verse; any
number of other Tanakh verses that mention truth could have been used on business
documents instead, but the striking acrostic in Ps 85:12a must have determined the choice.
Ps 85:12’s ʾemet is the psalm’s word 78, congruent with the combined gematria of the
three YHWHs (26x3=78) that occur before v. 12, in vv. 2, 8, 9. The sum of these verse
numbers is 19 (2+8+9=19), which happens to coincide with the number of words from ʾemet
to the end of the psalm. Cf. v. 2’s YHWH (the psalm’s first Tetragrammaton), with nineteen
letters from its yod to the verse’s end). From the same ʾemet, twenty-six letters precede the
YHWH of v. 13, the psalm’s fourth and final Tetragrammaton. There are twenty-six words
from v. 9’s “God” to v. 12’s ʾemet. Twenty-six letters intervene between v. 9’s “God” and v. 8’s
YHWH. V. 9’s YHWH begins with the verse’s letter 15, congruent with the gematria of the
Tetragrammaton’s first half, YH-, 10+5=15. The final he of v. 2’s YHWH is followed by the
psalm’s letter 26. Similarly, v. 5’s “God” is immediately followed by the psalm’s word 26. Fifty-
two words precede v. 9’s ‫ה ֵ ֪אל‬,
ָ congruent with a hint at the combined gematria value of two
YHWHs, 26x2=52, yet the psalm contains two mentions of God, therefore apparently
suggesting a theological equivalence between the LORD and God. Fifty-two words follow v. 8’s
YHWH to the end of the psalm, and in those fifty-two words there are two instances of
YHWH (26x2=52).
Ps 85’s final YHWH (v. 13) is the psalm’s word 85, a seeming hint at the psalm’s
enumeration, which incidentally is one less in rank that the gematria of ʾElohim. Seventy-two

95
S. D. Goitein, Mordechai Akiva Friedman, India Traders of the Middle Ages: Documents
from the Cairo Geniza (‘India Book’) (Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2008), p. 15.

words precede the psalm’s first mention of ʾemet (v. 11), the first of two, the second occurring
in. v. 12. The ordinal gematria of ʾemet is 36 (1+13+22=36), and 36x2=72. Word 72 is v. 11’s
ḥesed, whose standard gematria is 72 (8+60+4). (Consider also that the combined gematria of
Ps 85’s two mentions of God, v. 5’s ‫ֹלהי‬
֣ ֵ ‫ ֱא‬and v. 9’s ‫ה ֵ ֪אל‬,
ָ 46+36=82). After v. 8’s ‫ח ְס ֶ ֑דָּך‬,
ַ there are
twenty-six words to v. 11’s ‫ח ֶסד‬,
ֽ ֶ and from v. 8’s ‫ ַח ְס ֶ ֑דָּך‬to v. 9’s ‫ידיו‬
֑ ָ ‫ח ִס‬,
ֲ there are fifteen words,
respective hints at the gematria values of the Tetragrammaton’s first half, YH=15, and its full
form YHWH=26. The psalmist manifestly treats God’s ḥesed and ʾemet as Tetragrammaton
equivalents. From v. 9’s ‫ידיו‬
֑ ָ ‫ ֲח ִס‬to the end of the psalm there are thirty-six words, that is, half of
72. From v. 5’s ‫ֹלהי‬
֣ ֵ ‫ ֱא‬there are seventy-two words to the end of the psalm. Incidentally, there
are twenty-six letters in v. 5.
Consider also Ps 90:3, ‫י־א ָ ֽדם‬
ָ ‫אמר ֣שׁוּבוּ ְב ֵ ֽנ‬
ֶ ֹ ‫ד־דּ ָ ֑כּא ַ ֜ו ֗תּ‬
ַ ‫שׁב ֱ֖אנוֹשׁ ַע‬
֣ ֵ ‫תּ‬,
ָ “Thou turnest man to
contrition; and sayest: ‘Return, ye children of men.’” Ps 94:19’s ‫ שבת‬acrostic is particularly
congruent with the surrounding straightforward text, ‫ֽשׁ ַע ְשׁ ֥עוּ נַ ְפ ִ ֽשׁי‬
ֽ ַ ְ‫חוּמיָך י‬
ֶ֗ ְ‫בּ ֣ר ֹב ַשׂ ְר ַע ַפּ֣י ְבּ ִק ְר ִ ֑בּי ַ֜תּנ‬,
ְ
“When my cares are many within me, Thy comforts delight my soul.”
Ps 119:1 seems to repeat in an abbreviating way in the form of a reverse acrostic (yellow
highlighting) the straightforward text’s ‫ימי‬
ֵ ‫ת ִ ֽמ‬:
ְ ‫הוֹה‬
ֽ ָ ְ‫תוֹרת י‬
֥ ַ ‫י־ד ֶרְך ַ֜ה ֽהֹ ְל ִ֗כים ְבּ‬
֑ ָ ‫ימ‬
ֵ ‫א ְשׁ ֵ ֥רי ְת ִ ֽמ‬,
ַ “Happy are
they that are upright in the way, who walk in the law of the LORD.” Quite similar to this is an
example involving Ps 119:3, ‫א־פ ֲעל֣ וּ ַעוְ ָל֑ה ִבּ ְד ָר ָ ֥כיו ָה ָ ֽלכוּ‬
ֽ ָ ֹ ‫אף ל‬,
ַ “Yea, they do no unrighteousness;
they walk in His ways.” The very next verse, Ps 119:4, contains a reverse acrostic that repeats
v. 3’s term derek: ‫אד‬
ֹ ֽ ‫מר ְמ‬
ֹ ֥ ‫יתה ֜ ִפ ֻקּ ֶ ֗דיָך ִל ְשׁ‬
ָ ‫א ָתּה ִצִ ֥וּ‬,
ַ “Thou hast ordained Thy precepts, that we
should observe them diligently.” V. 3’s ‫ ִבּ ְד ָר ָ ֥כיו‬starts at letter 13; v. 4’s derek acrostic ends at
letter 13. Interesting is Ps 119:7’s b-r-k (cf. bless) acronym that overlaps with the synonymous
straightforward “I will give thanks”, ‫א ְוֹדָך ְבּ ֹ֣י ֶשׁר ֵל ָ ֑בב ְ֜בּ ָל ְמ ִ ֗די ִמ ְשׁ ְפּ ֵ ֥טי ִצ ְד ֶ ֽ קָך‬,
ֽ “I will give thanks unto
Thee with uprightness of heart, when I learn Thy righteous ordinances.” The blue highlighting
identifies another acrostic, l-b, that repeats the straightforward l-b-b. The b-r-k acrostic seems
to anticipate v. 12’s straightforward text, ‫בּ ֖רוְּך ַא ָ ֥תּה יְ הוָֹ ֗ה ַל ְמּ ֵ ֥דנִ י ֻח ֶ ֽקּיָך‬,
ָ “Blessed art Thou, O LORD;
teach me Thy statutes.” Ps 119:96 contains the Tanakh hapax legomenon ‫תּ ְכ ָלה‬:
ִ ֖ ‫יתי‬
ִ ‫ְל ָכל ֖ ִתּ ְכ ָלה ָר ִ ֣א‬
‫אד‬
ֹ ֽ ‫קץ ְר ָח ָ ֖בה ִמ ְצָ ֽו ְתָך֣ ְמ‬,
֑ ֵ “I have seen an end to every limit; but Thy commandment is exceeding
broad” (JPS modified), which just so happens to occur as a reverse acrostic in the same psalm
in v. 151: ‫ל־מ ְצו ֶ ֹ֥תיָך ֱא ֶ ֽמת‬
ִ ‫הוֹה ְ ֽו ָכ‬
֑ ָ ְ‫ק ֣רוֹב ַא ָ ֣תּה י‬,ָ “Thou art nigh, O LORD; and all Thy commandments
are truth.” Ps 119:126a, “It is time for the LORD to work,” contains the acronym ‫עלל‬, ‫ֵעת ַ ֽל ֲע ֣שׂוֹת‬
‫יהוֹ֑ה‬
ָ ‫ל‬,
ֽ ַ a synonym of the straightforward verb ‫ע ָשׂה‬.
ָ Ps 119:130, “The opening of Thy words
giveth light; it giveth understanding unto the simple,” contains the reverse acrostic ‫נר‬, “lamp,”
‫;פּ ַתח ְדּ ָב ֶ ֥ריָך יָ ִ֗איר ֵמ ִ ֥בין ְפּ ָתיִ ֽים‬
֖ ֵ cf. Ps 119:105, the only other verse in this psalm besides v. 130 that
straightforwardly mentions light: ‫ר־ל ַרגְ ִ ֥לי ְד ָב ֶ ֑רָך ְ ֜ו ֗אוֹר ִלנְ ִ ֽת ָיב ִ ֽתי‬
ְ ֵ‫נ‬, “Thy word is a lamp unto my feet,
and a light unto my path.”

Ps 116:3 is noteworthy, ‫וּמ ָצ ֵ ֣רי ְשׁ ֣אוֹל ְמ ָצ ֑אוּנִ י ָצ ָ ֖רה וְ יָ ג֣ וֹן ֶא ְמ ָ ֽצא‬
ְ ‫י־מוֶ ת‬
ָ֗ ‫א ָפפ֚ וּנִ י | ֶח ְב ֵל‬,
ֲ “The cords of
death compassed me, and the straits of the nether-world got hold upon me; I found trouble
and sorrow.” Prov 23:15 contains a clever reverse acrostic ‫ ח־כ־מ‬that overlaps with its
straightforward ‫ח ַ ֣כם‬:
ָ ‫ם־אנִ י‬
ֽ ָ ַ‫ם־ח ַ ֣כם ִל ֶ ֑בָּך יִ ְשׂ ַ ֖מח ִל ִ ֣בּי ג‬
ָ ‫בּנִ י ִא‬,
ְ “My son, if thy heart be wise, my heart
will be glad, even mine.”
Ps 19:13 contains what looks like a ‫ ָשׁ ַ֫מיִם‬acrostic, ‫יאוֹת ִ ֽמי־יָ ִ ֑בין ִמנִּ ְס ָתּ ֥רוֹת נַ ֵ ֽקּנִ י‬
֥ ִ‫שׁג‬,
ְ that links
Ps 19b together with Ps 19a’s ‫ ַה ָשּׁ ַ֗מיִם‬of v. 2 (see also v. 7’s ‫)ה ָשּׁ ַ֨מיִ ם‬.
ַ
Not to be overlooked is the already mentioned Isa 58:1-3, which contains an
overlapping horizontal and vertical acrostic q-w-l reflecting v. 1’s straightforward ‫קוֹלָ֑ך‬:
ֶ
‫אתם‬
ֽ ָ ֹ ‫וּל ֵ ֥בית ַי ֲֽע ֖קֹב ַחטּ‬
ְ ‫מּי ִפּ ְשׁ ֔ ָעם‬
֙ ִ ‫קוֹלָ֑ך וְ ַה ֵגּ֚ד ְל ַע‬
ֶ ‫שּׁוֹפר ָה ֵ ֣רם‬
֖ ָ ‫ל־תּ ְח ֔שׂ ְֹך ַכּ‬
ַ ‫רוֹן ַא‬
֙ ָ‫ְק ָ ֚רא ְבג‬
‫י־צ ֶדק‬
ֶ֔ ‫ֹלה ֙יו ֣ל ֹא ָע ָ֔זב יִ ְשׁ ָאל֙ וּנִ ֙י ִמ ְשׁ ְפּ ֵט‬
ָ ‫וּמ ְשׁ ַ ֚פּט ֱא‬
ִ ‫ר־צ ָד ָ ֣ קה ָע ָ֗שׂה‬
ְ ‫יוֹם יִ ְדר ֹ֔שׁוּן וְ ַ ֥ד ַעת ְדּ ָר ַ ֖כי יֶ ְח ָפּ ֑צוּן ְכּ ֞גוֹי ֲא ֶשׁ‬
֙ | ‫אוֹתי י֥ וֹם‬
ִ֗ ְ‫ו‬
‫ֹלהים יֶ ְח ָפּ ֽצוּן‬
֖ ִ ‫ִק ְר ַ ֥בת ֱא‬
‫ל־ע ְצּ ֵב ֶיכ֖ם ִתּנְ ֹֽגּשׂוּ‬

ַ ‫אוּ־ח ֶפץ וְ ָכ‬
ֵ֔ ‫ית ִע ִנּ֥ינוּ נַ ְפ ֵ ֖שׁנוּ וְ ֣ל ֹא ֵת ָ ֑דע ֵ ֣הן ְבּי ֚וֹם ֽצ ֹ ְמ ֶכ ֙ם ִתּ ְמ ְצ‬
ָ ‫ָ ֚ל ָמּה ֙ ַצּ ְמ ֙נוּ וְ ֣ל ֹא ָר ִ֔א‬
Quite artful are the acrostics of Job 15:26, ‫יָ ֣רוּץ ֵא ָל֣יו ְבּ ַצָוּ֑אר ַ ֜ ֽבּ ֲע ִ֗בי גַּ ֵ ֥בּי ָ ֽמגִ ָנּֽיו‬. First, ‫יָ ֣רוּץ‬, “he
runs,” can be read in reverse as “my rock,” which then appears in a RTL acrostic. The
straightforward ‫ ־צאור‬seems to play off the acrostic ‫צ־ו־ר־י‬. Next, the acrostic ‫ב־ג‬, ‫בּ ֲע ִ֗בי גַּ ֵ ֥בּי‬,
ֽ ֜ ַ is
simply the reverse of the ‫ גב־‬of ‫גַּ ֵ ֥בּי‬. Noticeably, each word ends with bet-yod. The final word’s
gimel, ‫מגִ ָנּֽיו‬,
ֽ ָ reinforces the gimel element of the previous word ‫גַּ ֵ ֥בּי‬.
As a final example, I offer Prov 6:1-2, whose v. 1 straightforwardly mentions the word
ben (horizontally of course), which then seems to be hinted at vertically in the first letters of
the two verses:
‫ם־ע ַ ֣ר ְב ָתּ ְל ֵר ֶ ֑עָך ָתּ ַ ֖ ק ְע ָתּ ַל ָזּ֣ר ַכּ ֶ ֽפּיָך‬
ָ ‫ְבּנִ י ִא‬
‫י־פיָך‬
ֽ ִ ‫י־פיָך ֜ ִנ ְל ַ֗כּ ְד ָתּ ְבּ ִא ְמ ֵר‬
֑ ִ ‫נוֹ ַ ֥ ק ְשׁ ָתּ ְב ִא ְמ ֵר‬
Prov 6:1 My son, if thou art become surety for thy neighbour, if thou hast struck thy
hands for a stranger—
Prov 6:2 Thou art snared by the words of thy mouth, thou art caught by the words of
thy mouth—
Although given its brevity the final example from Prov 6:1-2 is not as clearly intentional
as the earlier examples, the latter are all strong to quite strong candidates for intentional

horizontal acrostics, and such examples could be multiplied. Among these would be 1 Chr
22:19, which Turner cites, 96 and which in my view contains an intentional ʾElohim acrostic:
‫ת־א ֣רוֹן ְבּ ִ ֽרית־יְ הוָֹ ֗ה‬

ֲ ‫ֹלהים ְל ָה ִ֞ביא ֶא‬
ִ֔ ‫הוֹ֣ה ָ ֽה ֱא‬
ָ ְ‫ת־מ ְק ַדּ ֙שׁ י‬
ִ ‫וּב ֙נוּ ֶא‬
ְ ‫יהוֹ֣ה ֱא ֹֽל ֵה ֶיכ֑ם וְ ֗קוּמוּ‬
ָ ‫ַע ָ֗תּה ְתּנ֚וּ ְל ַב ְב ֶכ ֙ם וְ נַ ְפ ְשׁ ֶ֔כם ִל ְד ֖רוֹשׁ ַ ֽל‬
‫הוֹה‬
ֽ ָ ְ‫ֹלהים ַל ַ ֖בּיִת ַהנִּ ְב ֶנ֥ה ְל ֵ ֽשׁם־י‬
ִ֔ ‫וּכ ֵ ֙לי ֣קֹ ֶדשׁ ָ ֽה ֱא‬
ְ
Now set your heart and your soul to seek after the LORD your God; arise therefore, and
build ye the sanctuary of the LORD God, to bring the ark of the covenant of the LORD,
and the holy vessels of God, into the house that is to be built to the name of the
LORD.
In 1 Chr 22:19 the respective yods of the first two YHWHs span twenty-six letters. Twenty-six
letters later comes the yod of the verse’s third YHWH. After this third YHWH’s second he,
there are another twenty-six letters to the yod of the verse’s fourth and final YHWH. The alef
of ‫ֹלהים‬
ִ֔ ‫ ָ ֽה ֱא‬in 1 Chr 22:19 is the verse’s letter 86. These patterns not only indicate an intentional
acrostic, but also constitute quite clear evidence that gematria is a Tanakh feature, and not a
post-Tanakh development in Judaism.
Quite noteworthy is also Isa 41:13, ‫ירא ֲא ִנ֥י‬
֖ ָ ‫ל־תּ‬
ִ ‫ֹלהיָך ַ ֽמ ֲח ִז֣יק יְ ִמ ֶינ֑ ָך ָ ֽהא ֵ ֹ֥מר ְלָך֛ ַא‬
֖ ֶ ‫הוֹ֥ה ֱא‬
ָ ְ‫ִ֗כּי ֲא ִנ֛י י‬
‫עזַ ְר ִ ֽתּיָך‬,
ֲ “For I the LORD thy God hold thy right hand, who say unto thee: ‘Fear not, I help
thee.’” In this verse, from the yod of YHWH to the alef of ‫אל‬,
ַ where the acrostic begins/ends
(depending on whether one counts RTL or LTR), there are twenty-six letters.
The case of Lamentatioms is particularly interesting, given that it contains one
horizontal YHWH acrostic, one horizontal ʾElohim acrostic, and one straightforward mention
of God (ʾEl). Lam 2:13 contains the ʾElohim acrostic: ‫וּשׁ ֔ ַלם ָ ֤מה ַא ְשׁוֶ ה־ ָלּ ְ֙ך‬
ָ ‫ָ ֣מה ֲא ַד ֶמּה־ ֗ ָלְּך ַה ַבּ ֙ת יְ ֣ר‬
‫א־לְך‬
ֽ ָ ‫ת־ציּ֑ וֹן ִ ֽכּי־גָ ֥דוֹל ַכּ ָיּ֛ם ִשׁ ְב ֵ ֖רְך ִ ֥מי יִ ְר ָפּ‬
ִ ‫תוּל֖ת ַבּ‬
ַ ‫ודְך( ַ ֽו ֲא ַנ ֲֽח ֵ֔מְך ְבּ‬
֞ ֵ ‫ידְך )כתיב ֲא ִע‬
֞ ֵ ‫ה־א ִע‬
ֲ ‫מ‬,
ֽ ָ “What shall I take to
witness for thee? What shall I liken to thee, O daughter of Jerusalem? What shall I equal to
thee, that I may comfort thee, O virgin daughter of Zion? For thy breach is great like the sea;
who can heal thee?” Lam 3:33 contains the YHWH acrostic: ‫י־אישׁ‬
ֽ ִ ֵ‫כּי ֤ל ֹא ִענָּ ֙ה ִמ ִלּ ֔בּוֹ וַ יַּ ֶ ֖גּה ְבּנ‬,
֣ ִ “For He
doth not afflict willingly, nor grieve the children of men.” Lam 3:41 contains the text’s sole
straightforward mention of God: ‫ל־אל ַבּ ָשּׁ ָ ֽמיִם‬
֖ ֵ ‫ל־כּ ֔ ָפּיִם ֶא‬
ַ ‫נִ ָ ֤שּׂא ְל ָב ֵ֨ב ֙נוּ ֶא‬, “Let us lift up our heart with
our hands unto God in the heavens.” It is noteworthy that Lam 2:13’s ʾElohim acrostic is
immediately followed by an ʾEl acrostic, in accord with the straightforward ʾEl in Lam 3:41. As
previously discussed, Lam 3:41 is the text’s 85th verse, and that 86 immediately follows
suggests a hint at the gematria of ʾElohim, 86. Similarly, the YHWH acrostic is in Lam 3:33,
the text’s 77th verse, followed immediately by 78, congruent with 26x3=78.

96
190.

The following textual evidence suggests to me that the divine name acronyms in Lam
are intentional. First, from the end of Lam 3:33’s YHWH acrostic to v. 41’s straightforward ʾEl
there are fifty-two words; cf. 26x2=52. Next, the yod of v. 36’s ʾAdonai (gematria 65) is placed
sixty-five letters from the yod of v. 33’s YHWH acrostic. Finally, after Lam 2:9’s
straightforward YHWH, there are again fifty-two (again, cf. 26x2=52) words to 2:13’s ʾElohim
acrostic.
Part IV
Revisiting the Question of Acrostics in Ps 2

And Inter-Textual Allusions in the Acrostics of Torah Psalms
With the necessity in mind of exploring samples in the Psalter for possible intentional
looking but actually random sequences, I also revisited the question of an acrostic in Ps 2.
Treves posited that both Ps 2 and Ps 110 contained acrostics, claiming that Ps 2’s acrostic is to
be read as, “Sing ye to Jannaeus the First and his wife,”97 an assertion that Barnabas Lindars
countered with an abundance of quite persuasive historical, linguistic, and logical evidence
(e.g., how could Jannaeus have anticipated a future successor Jannaeus the Second?).98 Treves
writes that the Jannaeus acrostic in Ps 2 is “still legible despite some corruption.”99 The
corruption claim, however, is vulnerable to the charge of being potentially all too convenient if
not supported by some mss or versional evidence.100 In any case it immediately creates the
suspicion that what Treves is seeing in the psalm text may be no more than just mere
coincidence. However, I cannot help escape the suspicion that Horton’s observation about
claims for acrostics in Ps 110 might apply to Ps 2 as well, “Attempts to discredit this as an
acrostic have been shallow. . . .” I would not in the end exclude the possibility that these two
psalms might indeed contain Simon and Jannaeus acrostics.
Knauf’s relatively recent attempt to revive the Jannaeus Ps 2 acrostic claim in a different
form entails at least four textual emendations. The fact that Knauf represents these as “minor

97
Marco Treves, “Two Acrostic Psalms,” p. 83. Treves notes that an acrostic of Jannaeus was
identified by R. H. Pfeiffer, The Books of the Old Testament (New York 1957), p. 198.
98
Barnabas Lindars, “Is Psalm ii an Acrostic Psalm?” VT 17 (1967): pp. 60-67.
99
Marco Treves, “Two Acrostic Psalms,” pp. 82-83.
100
Compare Charles Häberl’s comments on this point: “I think we should adhere to the ideal
of ontological parsimony: the simplest explanations for a given phenomenon are often (though
not always) the most accurate. Vague appeals to corruption raise more questions than they
answer, so those making such claims should be ready for a simple explanation for the
proposed corruption.”

redactional activity” doesn’t soften the blow of so many proposed emendations.101 Knauf writes
of Treves’ acrostic reading, “‘sing to Jannaeus the First and his wife’, a proposal which made it
easy for Barnabas Lindars, Is Psalm ii an Acrostic Poem? VT 15 (1967), 60-67 to silence it
together with Pfeiffer’s earlier attempt. Lindar’s critique does not apply to the reading
proposed here.”102 This still overlooks the methodological problem posed by the necessity of
so many textual emendations without any textual mss support. And pace Knauf, some points
of Lindar’s critique (in VT 17, not 15 as Knauf incorrectly lists) arguably do apply to his new
reading.
For example, regardless of whether or not one wishes to argue for an acrostic in Ps 2, or
however one would wish to read such, Lindars’ argument is that this psalm, like Ps 110,
“cannot be tied to a particular situation in the Hasmonean period.”103 Further, both Treves and
Knauf use Ps 2:12’s initial letter nun in their proposed acrostic interpretations, but Lindars
points out that this letter “is in any case doubtful, because of the textual corruption at this
point.”104 I find Lindars’ claim problematic here, and see no reason to conclude v. 12 did not
originally begin with nun.105 Lindars also points out, not entirely persuasively, that one would
not expect the diminutive ‫ יני‬in an acrostic psalm of such solemnity.106 One could expand the
list of Lindars’ points that could apply equally to Treves’ and Knauf’s proposed acrostic
readings for Ps 2.
Knauf understands vv. 6-7’s ʾalef-waw as a disjunctive “or” as in Gen 24:50 (“the bad or
the good”), which he renders as “For Yannai on one side and his wife on the other.” Why not
simply, “For Yannai or his wife”? Perhaps I am simply overlooking something, but both

101
See Ernst Axel Knauf, “Salome Alexandra and the Final Redaction of Psalms,” Lectio
Difficilior 2 (2009): <http://www.lectio.unibe.ch/09_2/pdf/knauf_salome_alexandra.pdf>;
retrieved 22 Dec. 2018.
102
Ibid.
103
Barnabas Lindars, “Is Psalm ii an Acrostic Psalm?” p. 60.
104
Barnabas Lindars, “Is Psalm ii an Acrostic Psalm?” p. 62.
105
Cf. Carsten Vang, “Ps 2,11-12—a new look at an old crux interpretum,” Scandinavian
Journal of the Old Testament 9/2 (1995): pp. 163-184.
106
See Barnabas Lindars, “Is Psalm ii an Acrostic Psalm?” p. 63. Lindars’ argument on this
point is open to debate; cf. Charles Häberl’s comment: “I am not convinced that the actual
speakers of these languages would find diminutives to be insufficiently solemn, as Lindars
apparently does, and one would like to see the work here. What may be diminutive to one
generation often becomes lexicalized as unmarked form to the next (for example, Lisa was
formerly a diminutive of Elizabeth, although most Lisas would not necessarily make that
connection).”

renderings strike me as slightly unusual. And what to do with vv. 11-12’s ʿayin-nun without
resorting, like Knauf does, to what seems like the trick of adding the final letter of the psalm
to the acrostic in order to produce [‫ענ]ו‬, which Knauf interprets as a “‘lowly’/Pharisee’”?107 And
as for Knauf’s proposed emendations, without some kind of textual support or logical
necessity, they can get one anywhere, which in effect means nowhere.
Ps 2:2-6’s initial letters ‫ יניאו‬could just as well mean, “they turned away” (cf. Numb
32:9). The same verb, ‫נוא‬, hinder, restrain, frustrate, is applied to wives in Numb 30:9, a
chapter that uses this verb four times. It thus arguably would be more natural to read the
possible acrostic in Ps 2:2-10 as “they restrained his wife.” This would at least avoid what some
might consider the extravagance of importing “Yannai” into the acrostic, a name form that is
not attested in 1st-cent. BCE Hebrew, as Knauf concedes. And as Lindars pointed out in his
rejoinder to Treves, the diminutive form ‫ יני‬does not agree with Jannaeus’ attested official use
of ‫יהונתן‬. However, even if we accept the appropriateness of the reading ‫ יניאו אשתו‬with the
diminutive, this still leaves the problems of v. 1’s ‫ ל‬and of vv. 11-12’s ‫ענ‬. In my view, this
creates the impression that the sequence ‫יניאו אשתו‬, like Ps 89:34-43’s initial verse letter
sequences ‫ולא זכו נפשה‬, “and they are not pure, her soul,” may not constitute full acrostic texts,
but rather the flourish-like technique I posited earlier, whereby a scribe would artfully and
playfully have initial verse letters interact with the surrounding straightforward text.108
Granted, these flourishes could be called partial acrostics or acrostic words and/or phrases.
Prima facie, given that Pss 2 and 110 are cognate somehow, if one of them can be shown to
contain at least a partial acrostic, as arguably seems to be the case in Ps 110, then arguably the
chances increase that there might be acrostic features in Ps 2 as well.
The question arises, if Ps 2 has a partial acrostic that refers to the restraining of a wife,
then whose wife could this be? I do not think we can identify anyone by name, for to do so
would be perilous, but the context of the straightforward text arguably suggests that it would
be the wife of one of the pagan kings persecuting Israel. There is an alternative possibility, for

107
I have no problem with presenting arguments involving unprecedented phenomena, but I
think, like my wondering if in an acrostic ʾalef can stand for a word (“Thou”), that such should
be presented with a healthy dose of reservation and attendant questions.
108
As Charles Häberl interjects here, “But who are they? and who is she? Could this be a Piel
(‘they did not purify/make clean her soul,’ whatever that might mean)?” These are very good
questions, and any attempt at answers should be founded on Ps 89’s straightforward text. First
to be mentioned would have to be Ps 89:49’s ‫נַ ְפ ֖שׁוֹ‬, “his soul”: “What man is he that liveth and
shall not see death, that shall deliver his soul from the power of the grave? Selah.” The acrostic
‫ זכ‬could be an abbreviation of the ‫זְ ָכר‬, a word that begins both nearby verses 48 and 51. These
two pieces of data would have to be the springboard for any attempted answers in this context.

if we look at the verses in which the initial letters of ‫אשת‬, wife, woman, occur, namely, vv. 7-9,
intriguingly they begin with talk of a divine begetting. The parallel to this in Ps 110:3 more
clearly includes a divine maternal dimension of birth. What one is to make of all this
exegetically is a good question, but one that lies beyond the present essay’s concerns.
There is another possibility for Ps 2’s letter acrostic sequence ‫אשת‬. Given the cognate
relationship between Pss 2 and 110, it may be that Ps 2’s acrostic ‫ אשת‬could be related to Ps
110:1’s verb ‫א ִ ֥שׁית‬,
ָ which incidentally is artfully linked to 110:7’s ‫יִ ְשׁ ֶ ֑תּה‬. Ps 2’s acrostic ‫ ליני‬might
then take on the appearance of a fragmentary allusion to Ps 110:1’s ‫ימ ִינ֑י‬
ִ ‫ל‬.
ֽ ִ As for Ps 2’s acrostic
‫ע־נ‬, there is one horizontal acrostic sequence ʿayin-nun in Ps 110, in v. 3’s ‫ע ְמָּך֥ נְ ָדב ֹ֘ת‬,
ַ a verse
that is quite similar in tone to Ps 2:11-12, where we find the sequence ʿayin-nun. In this
scenario, Ps 2’s initial verse letters would give us a fragmentary message something along the
lines of, at my right I will set you, the people will serve, based allusively on Ps 110’s
straightforward text. This line of exegesis finds support in a noteworthy connection between
ְ When we abstract the conjunctive waw of Ps 2:1’s ‫וּ֜ ְל ֻא ִ֗מּים‬, notice
Ps 2:1 and Ps 110:1’s ‫ל ַרגְ ֶ ֽליָך‬.
the Ps 2:1 horizontal acrostic resh-gimel-lamed-yod (yellow highlighting): ‫ָל ָמּה ָ ֽרגְ ֣שׁוּ גוֹיִ ֑ם וּ֜ ְל ֻא ִ֗מּים‬
‫גּוּ־ריק‬
ֽ ִ ‫יֶ ְה‬. Note the overlapping reverse acrostic ‫( קום‬blue highlighting), the opposite of Ps
110:1’s “sit” (cf. Ps 2:4’s ‫)יוֹשׁב‬.
ֵ֣ Ps 2:2’s contains a reverse acrostic, ‫י־א ֶרץ וְ ֽרוֹזְ ִנ֥ים‬
ֶ֗ ‫יִ ְֽתיַ ְצּ ֨בוּ | ַמ ְל ֵכ‬, that
parallels fragmentarily Ps 110:2’s ‫;מ ִציּ֑ וֹן‬
ִ cf. Ps 2:10’s reverse acrostic ‫הָ ֽוּ ְס ֗רוּ ֣שׁ ֹ ְפ ֵטי ָ ֽא ֶרץ‬.
ִ֜ Ps 2:5’s
initial letters, ‫יְב ֲה ֵלֽמוֹ‬
ֽ ַ ‫וּב ֲחרוֹנ֥ וֹ‬
֖ ַ ‫אז יְ ַד ֵבּ֣ר ֵא ֵל֣ימוֹ ְב ַא ֑פּוֹ‬,
֚ ָ may in a scrambled fashion play off Ps 110:1’s
ֹ ֽ֜ . Lastly, Ps 2:9’s reverse initial letter sequence y-l-ṭ-m calls to mind Ps 110:3’s RTL m-l-ṭ-
‫א ֶ֗יְביָך‬
y.
Whatever one makes of these various acrostic and straightforward parallels that might
link together Pss 2 and 110, in the end the most intentional looking one remains standing out,
namely, Ps 110:1’s ‫ ְל ַרגְ ֶ ֽליָך‬and Ps 2:1’s acrostic ‫ר־ג־ל־י‬. This suggests the possibility that a
relation between other pairs of psalms considered somehow cognate to each other might
possibly receive support or even be confirmed by the presence of acrostics. I will mention only
one example, given that it involves a pair of psalms whose relationship is not usually
recognized or emphasized, namely, Pss 19 and 45. That these two psalms were linked together
already in antiquity is shown by the evidence of the Parables of Enoch.109 The most obvious
thematic link between these two psalms is Ps 19’s depiction of the Sun as a “bridegroom” and
Ps 45’s marriage theme.
Although contested, both of these psalms can be classified as hieros gamos hymns. In
Ps 19 the bridegroom is the Sun of vv. 5-7, and the bride is the personified Lady Torah of vv.
8-10. Their earthly counterparts are the king and queen of Israel. In Ps 45, the earthly king and

109
See Samuel Zinner, “Psalms 19 and 45 in 1 Enoch, Jewish Liturgy, and the Book of
Revelation,” Journal of Higher Criticism, forthcoming.

queen of Israel are respectively the earthly counterparts of ʾElohim (v. 7, ‫ֹלהים‬
ִ ‫)א‬
ֱ֖ and his ‫( ֵשׁ ָג֥ל‬v.
10). It just so happens that Ps 45 is the only text in the entire Psalter that contains the LTR
first letters acrostic ‫( ש־מ־ש‬cf. ‫)שׁ ֶמשׁ‬,
ָ֫ not once, but twice in its verses praising the king. This
acrostic is found first in v. 7, ‫כוּתָך‬
ֽ ֶ ‫שׁ ֶבט ַמ ְל‬
֣ ֵ ‫עוֹל֣ם וָ ֶע֑ד ֵ ֥שׁ ֶבט ִ֜מי ֗שׁ ֹר‬
ָ ‫ֹלהים‬
ִ ‫כּ ְס ֲאָך֣ ֱ֖א‬,
ִ “Thy throne, O God,
is for ever and ever; a sceptre of equity is the sceptre of thy kingdom” (JPS modified), and
appears a second time in v. 9, ‫יכ ֵלי ֜ ֗ ֵשׁן ִמ ִנּ֥י ִשׂ ְמּ ֽחוָּך‬
ְ ‫ן־ה‬
֥ ֵ ‫ל־בּגְ ד ֶ ֹ֑תיָך ִמ‬
ִ ‫מר ַ ֽו ֲא ָה ֣לוֹת ֖ ְק ִציעוֹת ָכּ‬
ֹ ֤ , “Myrrh, and
aloes, and cassia are all thy garments; out of ivory palaces stringed instruments have made
thee glad.” What is more, there seems to be a scramble of these same acrostic letters in the
intervening v. 8, ‫ֹלהיָך ֶ ֥שׁ ֶמן ָשׂ ֗שׂוֹן ֵ ֽמ ֲח ֵב ֶ ֽרָך‬
ֶ ‫ֹלהים ֱ֖א‬
֣ ִ ‫ל־כּן | ְמ ָ ֽשׁ ֲח ָ֡ך ֱא‬
֚ ֵ ‫א־ר ַשׁע ַע‬
֗ ֶ ָ‫א ַ ֣ה ְב ָתּ ֶצּ ֶד ֘ק וַ ִתּ ְשׂנ‬,
ָ “Thou hast
loved righteousness, and hated wickedness; therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with
the oil of gladness above thy fellows.” If Ps 45 depends on Ps 19, then it would appear possible
that the predominance of shin and mem in 45:7-9’s description of the king may have been
inspired by Ps 19:5-7’s ‫שׁ ֶמשׁ‬.
ָ֫
This supporting evidence in the form of acrostics for Ps 45’s dependence on Ps 19 will
in turn then help identify how some of Ps 45’s straightforward text is based on Ps 19’s
straightforward text. A telling example of this is how in Ps 45 the king’s attributes are actually
constructed out of the attributes of Lady Torah in Ps 19. This becomes rather clear in Ps 45:5
when compared with Ps 19:8-10, as the color highlighting in Table 7 documents by pointing
out the various cognate terms. Table 7 also lays out parallels between Ps 45:2 and Ps 19:2-4:
Table 7
Ps 45 and Ps 19
Ps 45:2 Ps 19:2-4
‫סוֹפר ָמ ִ ֽהיר‬
ֵ֬ | ‫שׁוֹני ֵ ֚עט‬
ִ֗ ‫ָ ֘ר ַ ֚חשׁ ִל ִ֨בּי | ָ ֘דּ ָ ֚בר ֗טוֹב א ֵ ֹ֣מר ָ֖אנִ י ַ ֽמ ֲע ַ ֣שׂי ְל ֶ ֑מ ֶלְך ֜ ְל‬ ‫וּמ ֲע ֵ ֥שׂה ָ֜י ָ ֗דיו ַמ ִגּ֥יד ָ ֽה ָר ִ ֽ ק ַיע‬
ֽ ַ ‫בוֹד־אל‬
ֵ֑ ‫ַה ָשּׁ ַ֗מיִ ם ְמ ַס ְפּ ִ ֥רים ְכּ‬
‫ה־דּ ַעת‬
ֽ ָ ֶ‫א ֶמר וְ ַ ֥ליְ ָלה ֜ ְלּ ֗ ַליְ ָלה יְ ַחוּ‬
ֹ ֑ ‫יַבּ ַיע‬
֣ ִ ‫י֣ וֹם ל֖ ְיוֹם‬
‫קוֹלם‬
ֽ ָ ‫א ֶמר וְ ֵ ֣אין ְדּ ָב ִ ֑רים ְ֜בּ ֗ ִלי נִ ְשׁ ָ ֥מע‬
ֹ ֖ ‫ֵ ֣אין‬
My heart overfloweth with a goodly matter; I say: ‘My The heavens declare the glory of God, and the
work is concerning a king; my tongue is the pen of a firmament showeth His handiwork;
ready writer.’ Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night
revealeth knowledge;
There is no speech, there are no words, neither is their
voice heard.
Ps 45:5 Ps 19:8, 10
‫יְמ ֶינֽ ָך‬
ִ ‫ר־א ֶמת וְ ַענְ וָ ה־ ֶצּ ֶ֑דק וְ ֽת ְוֹרָך֖ נֽ ָוֹר ֣אוֹת‬
ֱ֖ ‫ל־דּ ַב‬
ְ ‫ַו ֲֽה ָ ֬ ֽד ְרָך | ְצ ֬ ַלח ְר ַ֗כב ַע‬ ‫ימת ֶ ֽפּ ִתי‬
ַ ‫הוֹ֥ה ֶ ֽ֜נ ֱא ָמ ָ֗נה ַמ ְח ִ ֥כּ‬
ָ ְ‫ימה ְמ ִ ֣שׁ ַיבת ָנ ֶ֑פשׁ ֵע ֖דוּת י‬
ָ ‫הוֹ֣ה ֖ ְתּ ִמ‬
ָ ְ‫֘תּ ַ ֚וֹרת י‬
‫הוֹ֥ה ֱא ֶ ֑מת ָ ֽצ ְד ֥קוּ יַ ְח ָ ֽדּו‬
ָ ְ‫עוֹמ ֶדת ֫ ָל ַ ֥עד ִמ ְשׁ ְפּ ֵ ֽטי־י‬
֪ ֶ ‫הוֹר ֘ה‬
ָ ‫יִ ְר ַ ֚את יְ הוָֹ ֨ה | ְט‬
And in thy majesty prosper, ride on, in behalf of truth The law of the LORD is perfect, restoring the soul; the
and meekness and righteousness; testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the
and let thy right hand teach thee fearful things. JPS simple. / The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring for
modified. ever; the ordinances of the LORD are true, they are
righteous altogether.

Other parallels begin to fall into place, e.g., the shared ‫ גִּ ֑בּוֹר‬and ‫ ְ֝כּגִ ֗בּוֹר‬of Ps 45:4 and Ps
19:6 respectively. Cf. 45:7’s ‫ ִ֜מי ֗שׁ ֹר‬with Ps 19:9’s ‫ ;י֖ ְָשׁ ִרים‬Ps 45:12’s ‫יִת ָ ֣או‬
ְ ְ‫ ו‬with Ps 19:11’s
synonymous ‫;ה ֶנּ ֱֽח ָמ ִ ֗דים‬
ַ Ps 45:14’s ‫בוּדּה‬
֣ ָ ‫ ְכּ‬with Ps 19:2’s ‫;כּ ֽבוֹד‬
ְ Ps 45:14’s ‫ זָ ָ ֣הב‬with Ps 19:11’s ‫מזָּ ָהב‬.
ִ֭
Interesting is the Ps 19:6 reverse acrostic sequence ‫צ־ר‬, ‫כּגִ ֗בּוֹר ָל ֥רוּץ‬,
ְ֜ which brings to mind
Ps 45:13’s straightforward ‫ ֨צֹר‬, Tyre, anticipated by Ps 45:5’s acrostic ‫צ־ר‬, ‫צ ֬ ַלח ְר ַ֗כב‬.
ְ Ps 45:8 then
contains a fuller acrostic, ‫צ־ו־ר‬, ‫א־ר ַשׁע‬
֗ ֶ ָ‫צּ ֶד ֘ק וַ ִתּ ְשׂנ‬,
ֶ which brings to mind Ps 19:15’s
straightforward ‫צוּרי‬.
֥ ִ Might it be that Ps 19’s divine title Rock has generated Ps 45’s Tyre? In
any case, Ps 45:8’s ‫א־ר ַשׁע‬
֗ ֶ ָ‫ ֶצּ ֶד ֘ק וַ ִתּ ְשׂנ‬seems in turn to be aware of Ps 1’s own ‫ צ־ו־ר‬acrostic, in its
concluding v. 6’s ‫צ ִדּי ִ ֑ קים וְ ֶ ֖ד ֶרְך ְר ָשׁ ִ ֣עים‬.
ַ It is noteworthy that Ps 1 contains this ‫ צ־ו־ר‬acrostic in its
final verse, given that Ps 19’s straightforward ‫ צור‬occurs in the latter’s final verse as well. What
is more, Ps 45 seems to be aware not only of the Torah-centered Pss 1 and 19, but Ps 45:5’s
‫ר־א ֶמת‬
ֱ֖ ‫ ְדּ ַב‬is matched only one other place in the Psalter, in yet another Torah psalm, namely,
in 119:43’s ‫ר־א ֶ ֣מת‬
ֱ ‫ד ַב‬.ְ The horizontal RTL first letters acrostic sequence ‫ צ־ו־ר‬is found in the
Psalter only in Pss 1 and 45.
A few additional remarks will help strengthen the claim that we are indeed witnessing
intentional acrostics in Ps 45. Ps 45:15, which praises the queen’s garment, contains the
reverse acrostic ‫ת־כ־ל־ת‬, an acrostic found only here in the entire Psalter: ‫תּוּבל ֫ ַל ֶ ֥מּ ֶלְך‬
֪ ַ ‫מוֹת‬
֘ ‫ִל ְר ָק‬
‫וּב ֣אוֹת ָ ֽלְך‬
ָ ‫יה ֖מ‬
ָ ‫עוֹת‬
֑ ֶ ‫יה ֵ ֽר‬
ָ ‫בּתוּל֣ וֹת ֖ ֽ ַא ֲח ֶר‬,
ְ “She shall be led unto the king on richly woven stuff; the
virgins her companions in her train being brought unto thee.” Ps 45:14 is also relevant here,
‫בוּשׁהּ‬
ֽ ָ ‫֑ימה ִמ ִמּ ְשׁ ְבּ ֖צוֹת זָ ָ ֣הב ְל‬
ָ ‫ת־מ ֶלְך ְפּ ִנ‬
֣ ֶ ‫בוּדּה ַב‬
֣ ָ ‫ל־כּ‬
ְ ‫כּ‬,ָ “All glorious is the king’s daughter within the
palace; her raiment is of chequer work inwrought with gold.” Ps 45:14’s ‫מ ִמּ ְשׁ ְבּ ֖צוֹת‬,
ִֽ
“interwoven,” appears elsewhere in the Tanakh only in Exod 28’s and 39’s descriptions of the
high priestly garments with their gold. The term ‫תכלת‬, “blue,” is found in both Exod 28’s and
39’s remarks about the blue fringes of the high priestly garments. Both the straightforward text
of Ps 45:14-15 and v. 15’s unique Psalter acrostic ‫ תכלת‬all suggest that Ps 45’s queen’s
garments are inspired by Exodus’ high priestly garments. We thus witness in Ps 45 a rich
literary tapestry wherein the king has taken on attributes of both the Sun and of Lady Torah as
described in Ps 19, and the queen’s garments are based on those of the high priest.
Taken as a whole, the presence of acrostics and their interaction with straightforward
and acrostic elements linking together a number of different psalms opens up an area for
fruitful research in exegesis facilitated by the modern technology of Tanakh computer software
programs that can swiftly identify the presence or absence of particular acrostics throughout
the Psalter’s Hebrew text.


Chapter 11 of Recovering Ancient Hebrew PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Chapter 11 of Recovering Ancient Hebrew PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter 11 of Recovering Ancient Hebrew PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Recovering Ancient Hebrew Scribal Numerical and Acrostic Techniques

Copyright ©2019 by Samuel Zinner Pag. 1

An Examination of Acrostic and Numerical Elements

The Question of Ps 110 as an Acrostic Psalm

Before proceeding, the translation of v. 3 should be addressed. A comparison of the MT

The Question of Divine Oracle Acrostics

3 Because you said, “Forever mercy will be built.”

‫וּמ ַשׂנְ ָ ֥איו ֶאגּֽ וֹף‬

Copyright ©2019 by Samuel Zinner Pag. 26

Copyright ©2019 by Samuel Zinner Pag. 27

vv. 20-23: “name (of) God” ?

Copyright ©2019 by Samuel Zinner Pag. 32

Job 3:3-4, 5-6

Copyright ©2019 by Samuel Zinner Pag. 37

Horizontal Intra-Verse Acrostics in the Psalter and Tanakh

12:15 4:3 8:29 5:12 11:2

19:13 4:14 9:9 5:18 20:8

19:25 4:16 21:22 13:30 24:5

24:58 16:7 13:32 30:12

38:7 16:22 19:12 31:29

43:10 25:23 24:13

Total Total Total Total Total

Copyright ©2019 by Samuel Zinner Pag. 41

11:16 19:24 18:4 13:26 33:22 30:2 9:17

18:28 20:18 16:7 35:2 15:19 31:15

19:47 20:41 18:3 45:18 31:7 46:1

24:18 18:37 45:20 33:20

Copyright ©2019 by Samuel Zinner Pag. 42

57:7 5:4 8:39 23:6

73:15 5:13 16:31 26:11

96:11 x2 7:7 18:8 27:3

Total 8 Total 1 Total 1 Total 1 Total 4 Total 1 Total 1 Total Total 4

Copyright ©2019 by Samuel Zinner Pag. 43

‫י־כ ְל ָ ֥תה ֵא ָל֛יו‬

Copyright ©2019 by Samuel Zinner Pag. 48

‫ל־ע ְצּ ֵב ֶיכ֖ם ִתּנְ ֹֽגּשׂוּ‬

Copyright ©2019 by Samuel Zinner Pag. 49

‫ת־א ֣רוֹן ְבּ ִ ֽרית־יְ הוָֹ ֗ה‬

Revisiting the Question of Acrostics in Ps 2

Copyright ©2019 by Samuel Zinner Pag. 55

Copyright ©2019 by Samuel Zinner Pag. 56

You might also like