212 FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
would agree with the present text of Genesis ii.,
iii., though not, according to Sievers, with the
original text of all the sources incorporated in
ii. and iii.
It would be unwise to condemn the whole of
Sievers' analysis of Genesis on account of the
improbably large amount of conjectural emenda-
tion needed to carry through the rhythmical
reconstruction in Genesis i. and some other
passages: the strength of his case is seen rather
in such facts as that, for example, in chapter xxiv.
eight consecutive similar rhythmical periods may
be found in the present text.
Nevertheless Sievers' results in general seem
to me insecure, and their insecurity due to these
considerations: (1) the vocalisation on which
they depend is, as I have pointed out in a previous
chapter,^1 hypothetical, some elements in it being
probable, others most uncertain; (2) the number
of conjectural emendations required solely in the
interests of the theory is very large; (3) the
analysis of narratives in Genesis and Samuel
requires a constant recurrence of "non-stop"
lines and enjambed clauses. Not only are the
lines "non-stopped," so that, e.g., a verb may
stand at the end of one, its accusative at the
beginning of the next line, but the well-marked
caesuras within the lines, so prominent in the
parallelistic poetry, frequently disappear, while
1 See above, pp. 147-149.