Thijs Booij, «Psalm 118 and Form Criticism», Vol. 96 (2015) 351-374
Psalm 118 was recited in the time of Nehemiah. The speaker in the first person singular passages is Israel's representative. The psalm, a communal song of thankfulness, belongs to a group of texts related to Succoth (Psalms 65; 66; 67; 98; 107; 124; 129; Isaiah 12; 25,1-5). These texts, dating from the later post-exilic period, do not constitute a welldelineated literary genre. Psalm 118 and Isaiah 12; 25,1-5, however, constitute a special category. Psalm 118,24 refers to Succoth as the time when YHWH judges the world and decides on the nation's well-being (v. 25) for the year to come.
02_Booij_351_351_374 30/10/15 13:01 Pagina 351
Psalm 118 and Form Criticism
Form criticism 1 as developed for Old Testament texts can help
us to understand the character of a text and to see its essence. The
method, however, has its limits and needs correction at some points.
A case illustrating this is Psalm 118. The tenor of the psalm and
some of its details will be discussed.
I. Form Criticism
Hermann Gunkel’s Einleitung in die Psalmen 2 has been a major
contribution to the study of the psalms. Its special virtue is the
offering of a careful inventory and description of the elements of
different psalm types (genres). Some of its assumptions, however,
are debatable. First among them is its conception of the relation
between psalms and cult. In Gunkel’s view the traditional psalm
types, namely the song of praise (Hymnus), the thanksgiving song
(Danklied), and the song of prayer (Klagelied), collective or individual,
stem from formulaic texts used in connection with cultic acts 3. Many
psalms, however, and most individual prayers, are considered to be
not cultic texts but spiritual songs 4. In Gunkel’s conception, psalm
literature went through a development that led from the cultic to
the non-cultic atmosphere. Two factors brought this about. First,
cultural development was such that in the course of time the indi-
1
The conventional name will be used in this article, although “genre criticism”
would be more adequate. Cf. E. BLUM, “Formgeschichte” — A Misleading
Category? Some Critical Remarks”, The Changing Face of Form Criticism
for the Twenty-First Century (eds. M.A. SWEENEY – E. BEN ZVI) (Grand Ra-
pids, MI 2003) 32-45.
2
H. GUNKEL, Einleitung in die Psalmen. Die Gattungen der religiösen
Lyrik Israels. Zu Ende geführt von J. BEGRICH (HAT II; Göttingen 1933).
Begrich aimed at carefully rendering Gunkel’s views; therefore, in a sense,
the whole Einleitung is Gunkel’s achievement.
3
See GUNKEL, Einleitung, 10-18, 59, 117-119, 175-180, 265-267, 315.
Cf. RGG2 IV, 1611-1612 (sub 2), 1620 (sub 10).
4
See GUNKEL, Einleitung, 18-19, 28, 180-183, 261-263, 277-279, 320-321.
Cf. RGG2 IV, 1617 (sub 7), 1624 (sub 15), 1621-1622 (sub 11).
BIBLICA 96.3 (2015) 351-374
FOLLOW US