Thesis Proposal:
Several attempts have been made to define the category known as the Imprecatory
Psalms. Some of these have been cited widely by many scholars, such as A. Luc who has provided a detailed list of imprecations in the psalter, and D. Firth who has examined why the effort itself is problematic. However, there is no consensus on what is, and is not, an Imprecatory Psalm. This paper will examine several factors in an attempt to establish which psalms can be classified as imprecatory. In an effort to move towards an answer, three questions will be explored: 1) What does the term imprecatory mean?
2) What is an acceptable rubric to be applied to each psalm to determine if it should be classified as imprecatory? 3) In what context should this rubric be applied. For the first question, the word imprecario (imprecation or curse), will be evaluated and then discussed in terms of its ANE background. This will rely heavily on T. Crawford, A Kitz, and C. Mitchell who have surveyed the relevant research on this, as well as H. G. Peels who has also examined this in great detail, primarily as it relates to ם ק נ . Then, to establish a rubric for the second question, the most prominent problem is determining what constitutes a request in Hebrew when grammatical ambiguity exists. This, of course, relates primarily to the determination of a jussive verb in roots with no lexical distinction between a jussive and an imperfect. Finally, a discussion of which context is determinative for this evaluation will be given. This discussion will highlight the differences between the original composition, the canonical psalm, the canonical psalm within the purposeful arrangement of the psalter, and a variety of liturgical settings as it relates to the aforementioned rubric for determining an imprecatory psalm.