LAMENTATIONS, BOOK OF
1. Occasion.—In b.c. 586 Nebuchadnezzar captured Jerusalem, put out the eyes of Zedekiah, slew the princes, burned the Temple and palaces, razed the walls, and deported the inhabitants (save some of the poorest sort) to forced labour in Babylon (2Ki 25:1-30). These events and their religious meaning are the theme of the five complete hymns in the Book of Lamentations. The poet looked on these calamities as the death of the Jewish people; and he prepares an elegy for the national funeral.
2. Date.—It need not be supposed that Jeremiah went about composing acrostics while Jerusalem was burning; on the other hand, the language of the poems is not that of some Rabbinical versifier after Nehemiah’s time. Between the desolation of b.c. 586 and the restoration of b.c. 536 is the time limit for the production of this book.
3. Form.—The form of these elegies has been recognized to be the type of Hebrew poetry which is peculiar to threnody. Its metrical character depends on the structure of the single line. The line has not the exact measure of a Latin hexameter or pentameter, but consists of five to seven words, making on an average eleven syllables. The line is divided by sense and grammar into two unequal parts, as 6:5 or Lam 4:3; the first part being more emphatic in sense, and the second forming an antiphonal supplement to the first. Thus Lam 1:1—
‘Ah now! she sits alone—the populous city,
Husbandless doomed to be—the foremost of peoples.
Once the princess over states—a serf in a gang.’
Such is the qînâh-metre, found also in parts of Amos, Isaiah, and Ezekiel.
4. Arrangement.—These Hebrew elegiacs may stand singly, as in Lam 3:1-66, or in two-lined stanzas, as in ch. 4, or in three-lined stanzas, as in chs. 1 and 2. But there is also in Lam. a more artificial embellishment. The 22 stanzas of chs. 1, 2, and 4 are introduced by the 22 letters of the Hebrew alphabet in regular order, except that 2 and 4 place the letter Pe before the letter Ayin. This inexplicable variation in the order of the letters has been held to imply a difference in authorship. Again ch. 3 has 66 verses, the lines beginning aaa; bbb, etc. Ch. 5 has 22 verses, but no acrostic; and its lines are of a slightly different structure. As this chapter is a prayer, these external marks may have been felt to be inappropriate. The poetic form of Lam. is thus the result of elaborate effort; but this need not imply the absence of genuine feeling. The calamity in remembrance seemed to call for an adequate form of expression, and to invite the resources of technical skill.
5. Contents.—The contents of the five hymns are not pervaded by clear lines of thought; but the nature of the subject forbids us to look for the consistency of a geometrical theorem. The cruel scenes, the pity and horror they occasioned, the religious perplexity at the course of events, are depicted sometimes by the poet himself, again by Jerusalem, or by the personified community. Ch. 1 describes the ruin of Jerusalem and the humiliation of the exiles—Lam 1:1-11 in the words of the poet, while the city itself speaks in Lam 1:12-22. The second hymn finds the sting of their sufferings in the fact that they are inflicted by Jehovah, their ancient defender. Ch. 3, ‘the triumph song of ethical optimism,’ recounts the national misery (Lam 3:1-18), perceives the purpose of Jehovah in their calamities (Lam 3:19-47), and calls the people to penitence (Lam 3:48-66). Ch. 4 contrasts the past history of Zion with its present condition, and ch. 5 is a prayer for mercy and renewal of ancient blessings. The hope for Judah was the compassion of the Lord; ‘therefore let us search and try our ways and turn again to the Lord’ (Lam 3:40). It forms a curious contrast to the consolation offered to Athens in her decline and fall through the comedies of Aristophanes.
6. Authorship.—No author is named in Lam. itself. In 2Ch 35:25 we read that ‘Jeremiah lamented for Josiah, and all the singing men and singing women spake of Josiah unto this day; and they made them an ordinance in Israel: and behold they are written in the lamentations.’ This statement is 300 years later than the fall of Jerusalem; and Lam. has nothing to do with Josiah. But it ascribes standard elegies to Jeremiah. The LXX
Again it is asked, Would one author make five independent poems on one and the same subject? If several authors treated the theme independently, it is not likely that their work would hear juxtaposition so well as the collection in Lamentations. Jeremiah’s life ended some 6 or 7 years after the Captivity began; and Lam 5:20 implies a longer interval since the devastation. If we assign, with Thenius, chs. 2 and 4 to Jeremiah, and suppose that some disciples of the prophet imitated his model in 1, 3, and 5, then perhaps the differences and similarities in the several hymns may be accounted for. When Jerusalem was destroyed by Titus in a.d. 70, there was no new qînâh; the elegies seem to presuppose a personality of Jeremiah’s type as their originator.
7. Names.—The Hebrew name of Lam. is ’Ekhâh (‘Howl’), the first word in the book. It is also called Qînôth or ‘Elegies.’ The LXX
8. Position in the Canon.—In Hebrew Bibles Lam. is placed in the third division of the OT Canon. Its place is generally in the middle of the five Megilloth, between Ruth and Ecclesiastes. The Jews recite the book on the Black Fast (9th of Ab)—the anniversary of the destruction of Jerusalem. In the Greek OT and the other versions Lam. is attached to the prophecies of Jeremiah, in accordance with the current belief in his authorship.
D. M. Kay.
1. Name:
This is a collective name which tradition has given to 5 elegies found in the Hebrew Canon that lament the fate of destroyed Jerusalem. The rabbis call this little book
2. Form:
The little book consists of 5 lamentations, each one forming the contents of a chapter. The first 4 are marked by the acrostic use of the alphabet. In addition, the
3. Contents:
These 5 hymns all refer to the great national catastrophe that overtook the Jews and in particular the capital city, Jerusalem, through the Chaldeans, 587-586 BC. The sufferings and the anxieties of the city, the destruction of the sanctuary, the cruelty and taunts of the enemies of Israel, especially the Edomites, the disgrace that befell the king and his nobles, priests and prophets, and that, too, not without their own guilt, the devastation and ruin of the country - all this is described, and appeal is made to the mercy of God. A careful sequence of thought cannot be expected in the lyrical feeling and in the alphabetical form. Repetitions are found in large numbers, but each one of these hymns emphasizes some special feature of the calamity. Lamentations 3 is unique, as in it one person describes his own peculiar sufferings in connection with the general calamity, and then too in the name of the others begins a psalm of repentance. This person did not suffer so severely because he was an exceptional sinner, but because of the unrighteousness of his people. These hymns were not written during the siege, but later, at a time when the people still vividly remembered the sufferings and the anxieties of that time and when the impression made on them by the fall of Jerusalem was still as powerful as ever.
4. Author:
Who is the author of these hymns? Jewish tradition is unanimous in saying that it was Jeremiah. The hymns themselves are found anonymously in the Hebrew text, while the Septuagint has in one an additional statement, the Hebrew style of which would lead us to conclude that it was found in the original from which the version was made. This statement reads: “And it came to pass, after Israel had been taken away captive and Jerusalem had been laid waste, that Jeremiah sat weeping, and uttered this lamentation over Jerusalem and said.” The Targum also states that Jeremiah was the author. The rabbis and the church Fathers have no doubts on the subject. Jerome (compare on Zec 12:11) thinks that 2Ch 35:25 refers to these hymns. The same is said by Josephus (Ant., X, v, 1). If this were the case, then the writer of Chronicles would have regarded Lam as having been written because of the death of Josiah. But this misunderstanding is not to be ascribed to him. It was easily possible that he was acquainted with lamentations of such a nature, but which afterward were lost. At all events, Jeremiah was by nature adapted to the composition of such elegies, as is proved by his book of prophecies.
Only in modern times has the authorship of these hymns by Jeremiah been seriously called into question; and it is now denied by most critics. For this they give formal and material reasons: The language of these lamentations shows many similarities to the discourses of Jeremiah, but at the same time also many differences. The claim that the alphabetical scheme is not worthy of Jeremiah is a prejudice caused by the taste of our times. Hebrew poets had evidently been making use of such methods for a long time, as it helps materially in memorizing. At the time of the first acute suffering on account of the destruction of Jerusalem, in fact, he would probably not have made use of it. But. we have in this book a collection of lamentations’ written some time after this great catastrophe. The claim has also been made that the views of Jeremiah and those of the composer or the composers of these poems differ materially. It is said that Jeremiah emphasizes much more strongly the guilt of the people as the cause of the calamity than is done in these hymns, which lament the fate of the people and find the cause of it in the sins of the fathers (Lam 5:7), something that Jeremiah is said not to accept (Jer 31:29 f). However, the guilt of the people and the resultant wrath of God are often brought out in these hymns; and Jeremiah does not deny (Jer 31:29 f) that there is anything like inherited guilt. He declares rather that in the blessed future things would be different in this respect. Then, too, we are not to forget that if Jeremiah is the author of these patriotic hymns, he does not speak in them as the prophet and the appointed accuser of his people, but that he is at last permitted to speak as he humanly feels, although there is no lack of prophetical reminiscences (of Lam 4:21 f). In these hymns he speaks out of the heart that loves his Jerusalem and his people, and he utters the priestly prayer of intercession, which he was not allowed to do when announcing the judgment over Israel. The fact that he also evinces great reverence for the unfortunate king and his Divinely given hereditary dignity (Lam 4:20), although as a prophet he had been compelled to pronounce judgment over him, would not be unthinkable in Jeremiah, who had shown warm sympathies also for Jehoiachim (Jer 22:24, Jer 22:28). A radical difference of sentiment between the two authors is not to be found. On the other hand, a serious difficulty arises if we claim that Jeremiah was not the author of Lamentations in the denunciations of Lamentations over the prophets of Jerusalem (Lam 2:14; Lam 4:13). How could the great prophet of the Destruction be so ignored if he himself were not the author of these sentiments? If he was himself the author we can easily understand this omission. In his book of prophecies he has spoken exactly the same way about the prophets. To this must be added, that Lam 3 forces us to regard Jeremiah as the author, because of the personal sufferings that are here described. Compare especially Lam 3:14, Lam 3:37 f, 53 ff, 61, 63. What other person was during the period of this catastrophe the cynosure of all eyes as was the prophet, especially, too, because he was guiltless? The claim that here, not an individual, but the personified nation is introduced as speaking, is altogether improbable, and in some passages absolutely impossible (Lam 3:14, Lam 3:48).
This little book must accordingly be closely connected with the person of Jeremiah. If he himself is the author, he must have composed it in his old age, when he had time and opportunity to live over again all the sufferings of his people and of himself. It is, however, more probable, especially because of the language of the poems, that his disciples put this book in the present shape of uniform sentential utterances, basing this on the manner of lamentations common to Jeremiah. In this way the origin of Lamentaions 3 can be understood, which cannot artificially be shaped as his sayings, as in this case the personal feature would be more distinctly expressed. It was probably compiled. from a number of his utterances.
In the Hebrew Canon this book is found in the third division, called
Literature.
Comms. of Thenius, Ewald, Nagelsbach, Gerlach, Keil, Cheyne, Oettli, Lohr, Budde; article by Robertson Smith on “Lamentations” in EB.
Book consisting of five poems that constitute a formal dirge lamenting the fall of Jerusalem.
Preview
• Author
• Date
• Purpose and Theological Teaching
• Content
Author
The book of Lamentations has been traditionally ascribed to the prophet Jeremiah. This ascription is supported by the Latin Vulgate and the Septuagint.
The Jeremaic authorship of the book has been questioned by many scholars, however. The chief reasons for this are the different literary styles of the books of Jeremiah and Lamentations and the alleged conflicting viewpoints in the two books.
The literary styles of these books are strikingly different. The prophecies of the book of Jeremiah are flowing pronouncements that create an impression of spontaneity and are quite unlike the contrived literary structures of Lamentations. But it is somewhat arbitrary to assert that Jeremiah could not have written the book of Lamentations on the basis of style. The choice of the acrostic form would naturally limit the scope of the writer’s freedom and profoundly affect his style. It is clear from 2 Chronicles 35:25 that Jeremiah composed the same type of material as that found in Lamentations. Since the sermons of the book of Jeremiah were intended for public proclamation, they would naturally have a spontaneity that the book of Lamentations would not possess. Certainly, the sensitive nature reflected in Jeremiah’s prophecies characterized the author of Lamentations as well.
Typical of the alleged differences of viewpoint used to deny Jeremaic authorship is the role of the nations in the destruction of Jerusalem. In his prophecy Jeremiah saw the invading Babylonians as a tool of God’s punishment, and appealed to the Jews to surrender to the invaders (Jer 28:3). The book of Lamentations seems to make God the direct author of the punishment and sees the enemy nations only as onlookers who will also experience God’s wrath (Lam 1:21; 3:59–66). It must be noted, however, that the enemies referred to in Lamentations are not only the Babylonians but all of the hostile powers that threatened Judah and gloated over its destruction (1:21). The assurance that God will judge these enemies is not a denial of the message of the book of Jeremiah, for it would be artificial for Jeremiah to suppose that the Babylonians, even though they were an instrument of God’s anger, were exempt from punishment. Such a concept is at variance with Jeremiah 12:14–17.
A number of phrases used in the book of Jeremiah are found in Lamentations as well. The expressions “terrors on every side” (Lam 2:22; cf. Jer 6:25; 20:10) and “wormwood” (Lam 3:15, 19; cf. Jer 9:15; 23:15) are examples of these. This fact lends support to the concept of Jeremaic authorship of the book.
Other reasons cited for the denial of Jeremaic authorship are the absence of the name of Jeremiah in Lamentations and the position of the book in the Writings, not the Prophets, in the Hebrew Bible. The absence of Jeremiah’s name is not a cogent argument against his authorship; there are a significant number of OT books whose authors are not cited. Since the book of Lamentations is a formal dirge, and is thus unlike the book of Jeremiah with its numerous autobiographical references, one would not expect personal allusions by the author.
The position of Lamentations in the third division of the Hebrew Bible is sometimes appealed to by those who question Jeremaic authorship. Since Jeremiah is in the second division, it is argued that Lamentations was written too late for it to have been authored by Jeremiah. It should be noted, however, that there is a lack of unity in the early lists of the canonical books in the third division. It is difficult to assign a late date to a book of the third division only because of its inclusion in that division. The early church father Jerome indicated that Lamentations was once on the same scroll with Jeremiah.
Date
If the book of Lamentations was written by Jeremiah, the time of writing would be shortly after the fall of Jerusalem (586 BC). It is extremely difficult to imagine an author living in later times writing such a poignant lament over Jerusalem’s fall. The vivid descriptions of the suffering endured by the inhabitants of Jerusalem support the position that the book was written by an eyewitness to the events.
Background
After many months of siege by the Babylonian armies, Jerusalem fell, and the final deportation of the people of Judah took place. Extrabiblical confirmation of the devastation caused by the Babylonian invasion may be found in the Lachish letters, which record the message from a soldier in the field who indicates that he is watching for the signals of Lachish but cannot see the signals of Azekah (cf. Jer 34:7).
The time preceding Jerusalem’s fall was one of internal strife and political intrigue. Jeremiah counseled surrender, while the chauvinistic leaders of Jerusalem tried to encourage the Judahites to fight on against the Babylonian onslaught. The role of Jeremiah in those final events was a tenuous one. His life was threatened, and he suffered numerous imprisonments.
The fall of Jerusalem meant more than ignominious defeat and exile. While these would have been hard to bear, the theological emergency brought about by the event would have been the most difficult thing for believing Jews to comprehend. The fall of the city in which God chose to reveal himself would have signaled the end of God’s promises. The OT clearly set forth a glorious future for Jerusalem. It was to be the center of the messianic kingdom in the end time (Mi 4). The destruction of the city would cause many to question the veracity of God’s Word. The laments in this book are not only for the suffering that accompanied the fall of the city but also for the deep spiritual questions posed by its demise.
Structure
Each poem has a distinct symmetrical pattern. The first (Lam 1) is an elaborate acrostic composed of three-line segments. There are 22 segments, each beginning with a different letter of the Hebrew alphabet, proceeding in order from the first to the last. The second poem (ch 2) is similar except for a transposition of two Hebrew letters. The third poem (ch 3) is also composed of three-line segments, but each line begins with a different letter of the Hebrew alphabet, rather than only the first line of each segment as in the first two poems. The same Hebrew letters are transposed. The fourth poem (ch 4) is an acrostic composed of two-line segments. The first line of each segment begins with the appropriate Hebrew letter. The last poem (ch 5) is not an acrostic, but it contains the same number of letters as the Hebrew alphabet.
The reason for this complex structure is unknown. It has been suggested that it is a device to aid memorization. Another suggestion is that the Hebrews may have seen the alphabet as representing the concept of totality or completeness. This idea derives from the fact that the Hebrew alphabet represented numbers as well as letters. This concept of totality may be reflected in the reference to the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet in Revelation 1:8: “I am the Alpha and the Omega.” It is quite possible that the expression of lamentation in the structure of the Hebrew alphabet could have represented the full range of sorrow felt by the author as he pondered the fall of the city of Jerusalem.
Purpose and Theological Teaching
A major purpose of the book of Lamentations was to give expression to the deep grief that Jeremiah felt as a result of Jerusalem’s catastrophe. By writing the book, he expressed the grief of all the Jews of his time and gave them a vehicle that would give vent to their sorrow.
The book does not contain only lamentation, however, for it expresses hope and comfort as well. Thus another of its purposes was to lift the hearts of the people and point them to God, the source of all comfort. One of the greatest expressions of hope in the book is found in 3:22–23: “The unfailing love of the Lord never ends! By his mercies we have been kept from complete destruction. Great is his faithfulness; his mercies begin afresh each day” (nlt).
Perhaps the most important purpose of the book was to explain the theological reason for the catastrophe. The book places the reason for Jerusalem’s fall in clear focus and demonstrates what can be learned about God from this. The reason given for Jerusalem’s demise is the sin of the people (1:8–9, 14; 4:13). The fall of the city is a vivid illustration of God’s justice in not overlooking sin even in those who are his own (1:18). It demonstrates the fact that God may seem like an enemy to his people when they are disobedient (2:5–7). It shows that the catastrophe was not outside the purposes of God (v 17) and vividly describes the results that can come from willful disobedience. But God is envisioned as a God of mercy and faithfulness as well. Even though Jeremiah saw his beloved homeland crumbling about him, there remained one great element of stability: God’s loyalty to his promises. Jeremiah knew that this was not the end, for he trusted in the steadfast love of the Lord and learned to wait quietly for God to act in his time (3:22–27).
Content
The first chapter is a lamentation over the captivity of the citizens of Jerusalem and the resultant desolation of the city.
The author alludes to Deuteronomy 28:64–65 at the beginning of the first lamentation (Lam 1:3). In that passage Moses warned the people that their disobedience to God would result in their dispersion among the nations, with no resting place. Lamentations 1:3 says that this warning has been realized.
The cause of Israel’s misfortune was their sin (1:8a). This is a remarkable example of the results of disobedience to God. The dire results of sin permeate this first lamentation in a series of pictures of deep pathos (vv 11–12, 16–17). In the midst of this suffering Israel confesses that God was in the right (v 18). The righteousness of God involves his acting in integrity. He punishes sin even in his own people.
The first lamentation ends with a prayer in which the people cry out for God’s judgment on their enemies (1:21–22). Such imprecations are the OT believer’s way of expressing his longing for an end to evil as it was personified in the godless nations.
The second lamentation also concerns the destruction of Jerusalem but places more emphasis on God’s judgment. The tone is more strident than in the previous lamentation. Throughout the passage words expressing anger appear (2:1–3, 6–7). It is as though the terrible wrath of God evident in the destruction of the city is still vivid in the mind of the writer.
The author lays the blame for God’s anger squarely on the false prophets (2:14); but he does not exempt the people from guilt, as is clear from other passages (e.g., 1:5, 8). It was the false prophets of the time who failed to warn the people of the results of their sin (2:14). Because of this, destruction came, and the writer can give no comfort to the people (v 13).
The second lamentation begins with a reference to God’s footstool (2:1), probably referring to the ark of the covenant (1 Chr 28:2). The ark was the focal point of God’s revelation of himself. This verse reflects the theological emergency of the time; the writer laments the fact that God has not remembered his “footstool.” Even the holy ark, which marked God’s presence with his people, has not prevented God from destroying Jerusalem.
The same thought is expressed in verses 6–7, where the traditional aspects of Israelite worship, as well as the sanctuary, are seen as having been destroyed by God. This important truth demonstrates the viewpoint of the whole book, which sees God as the direct cause of the misfortune.
The third lamentation is very personal. At its conclusion, sorrow and complaint pass into a prayer of assurance (3:61–66). In the first 18 verses of this chapter, the writer describes how the Lord has afflicted him. He refers to God in the third person, not addressing him as Lord until he speaks the words of verse 18. Only after he has poured out his grief in this fashion can he speak the name of the Lord. This poignant grief suddenly changes to an expression of joy. He can affirm the covenant faithfulness of the Lord, and in the midst of the deepening sorrow, he sees God’s mercies as new every morning (vv 22–24). The chapter closes with a sudden burst of assurance (vv 58–66), in which the writer affirms his belief that God will vindicate him before his enemies. Only after he meditates on the nature of God’s loving-kindness (vv 22–27) can he speak these words. The desperate isolation and separation from God expressed in verses 1–17 give way as he affirms God’s goodness. Assurance comes as he reflects on the nature and goodness of God.
The fourth lamentation emphasizes the fact that the judgment was well deserved. The author describes the various classes of the population (4:1–16) and indicates how each has been affected by Jerusalem’s downfall. Verses 12–20 affirm that the judgment of God is a direct consequence of sin. This lamentation also becomes a joyous statement of hope (vv 21–22), as the writer affirms that God will punish Israel’s enemies. Israel’s sin will be forgiven, and the guilt of “the daughter of Edom” will be punished. The “daughter of Edom” undoubtedly stands for all the enemy nations. (Edom is used in Isaiah 63:1 in the same fashion.) This salvation of the nation of Judah will not take place until their guilt is atoned for. It occurs when God conquers the godless nations. This conquest of the nations is an event that takes place in the end time, according to numerous OT and NT passages. It represents the manifestation of God’s total sovereignty over his creation.
The last chapter is a poignant prayer in which the author describes their sufferings and asks God to restore the fortunes of the people. It begins with a request to God, asking him to consider all that has befallen the people (5:1–18). Part of the ignominy of the captive Jews is that “slaves” rule over them (v 8). This is an apparent reference to the Babylonian captors, who themselves were subject to despotic rule for many decades. The author’s perspective changes in verse 19, where he affirms that the Lord reigns forever. While Jerusalem, the earthly dwelling place of the Lord, has come to an end, the Lord’s throne endures forever. Because his throne is everlasting, the author asks, “Why do you continue to forget us? Why have you forsaken us for so long? Restore us, O Lord, and bring us back to you again! Give us back the joys we once had! Or have you utterly rejected us? Are you angry with us still?” (5:20–22, nlt). The question is based on the belief that because God’s reign is eternal, he cannot utterly forsake his people. He will restore his kingdom.
The book of Lamentations is neglected by many Christians. It deserves to be studied more. Its powerful statement concerning the blessings that may come from tragedy is a relevant message in any age, and it is one of the most powerful illustrations of the results of sin to be found in the OT. Its theology is clear and precise, painting a brilliant picture of God’s faithfulness against the dark background of the collapse of the city of Zion.
See also Jeremiah (Person) #1; Jeremiah, Book of.
Aquifer Open Bible Dictionary © 2026 Mission Mutual, an adaptation of the Tyndale Open Bible Dictionary © 2023 Tyndale House Publishers. Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0.