ADDITIONAL NOTE 295
appears to me to offer as the starting-point of
sound exegesis, are these: Psalms ix. and x.
are a single poem; the original poem consisted
of eighty-eight lines of three or four accented
words ; the equivalent of four or five of these
lines has been lost—the equivalent of two or
three between ix. 6 and ix. 10, two lines exactly
between x. 1 and x. 4. On the other hand, at
no point between ix. 2-5 or ix. 10-17 or x. 6-18
has the text received addition or suffered loss
to the extent of more than a word or two, but
several such small losses or additions or corrup-
tions of words are indicated by the abnormal
length of the lines or the impossibility of the
style.
ADDITIONAL NOTE ON THE REPETITION OF
TERMS IN PARALLEL LINES
[See page 254, note 2.]
The clearest proof that some instances at least of repetition (in
the present Hebrew text) of the same term in the two parallel
lines of a distich are due to scribal error is furnished by the
double text of Psalm xviii. = 2 Samuel xxii. Thus in v. 7 in
Samuel the verb xrqx, I call, occurs in both lines ; but the
second xrqx is an error, and probably a relatively late error, for
the LXX in Samuel has different verbs—e]pikale<somai in the
first, boh<somai in the second line. The original Hebrew text is
preserved in the Psalm, which has xrqx, I call, in the first, fvwx, I cry
for help, in the second line. Similarly in v. 32 ydflbm, save, occurs
in Samuel in both lines, in the Psalm in the first line only, ytlvz,
except, being used in the second line. Here the LXX has plh>n