146 FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
that xl has nothing like the need of emphasis
and stress here that it has in the lines previously
cited from Isaiah i. 3, where fdy xl is antithetic
to fdy in the previous distich. I should therefore
think it most probable that the lines were three-
stressed and not four-stressed ; but apart from
the' bearing of the rest of the Psalm on the question
we cannot determine the point unless we are
justified in calling in such a theory as that of
Sievers. Now it is perfectly true that even on
that system monosyllabic feet are possible, and
that xl in particular at times, as in Isaiah i. 3,
stands by itself as a foot; but if the anapaest is
the basis of the rhythm, we cannot naturally
divide each of the two perfectly normal anapaests
fdy-xl and bwy-xl into a monosyllabic and a
dissyllabic foot; on Sievers' theory the only
natural way of reading the two lines is with
three stresses; they are, to use Dr. Briggs'
terminology, trimeters, not tetrameters.
Sievers' theory, then, if established, would
reduce the number of lines which, measured. with
exclusive reference to the stressed words or
syllables only, are ambiguous. Is the theory,
then, as a matter of fact, so firmly establish ed on
perfectly certain data that it does actually
diminish the number of uncertainties that are
left when we attempt to count stressed syllables
simply without very closely defining either the
position which such stressed syllables must