Osborne 1

James E. Osborne

Professor Ulreich

English 533

05 September 2012

Milton’s Psalm 3 in Historical, Literary and Sacred Contexts

Milton rendered Psalms 1 – 8 “at the rate of approximately one per day” during the

second week of August 1653 (Campbell and Corns 265). Gordon Campbell and Thomas N.

Corns have characterized Milton’s motivations for producing these first eight Psalms as

“unclear” (265). This is in contrast to his work with Psalms 80 – 88 in 1648, which are

considered Milton’s “voic[ing of] his mounting anxiety” concerning the political events in

Britain that culminated in the initiation of the Second Civil War (Lewalski 213). In Margaret

Boddy’s opinion, Milton chose to work with Psalms 80 – 88 because they “are those that exalt

obedience to the will of God, even though surrounded by hosts of oppressors” (4). Contrary to

Campbell and Corns’ reading of Milton’s motivations for translating Psalms 1 – 8, Barbara K.

Lewalski finds background for their composition in Milton’s “comfort in millenarian

expectation” circa 1653. In Milton’s versions of the first eight Psalms, Lewalksi also avers that

he “refocuses the contemporary millenarian fervor attending the Barebones Parliament” (298).

Lee A. Jacobus asserts that the Psalms of 1648 are “more clearly of public use” than those of

1653, indicating that Milton’s “use of common meter, reflecting the Westminster Assembly’s

needs, demonstrates that [he] sought to produce a singable translation, a ‘public’ version of the

Psalms which would suit the needs of Presbyterian worship,” reflecting the “Presbyterian view

. . . that the Psalms were to be a cornerstone of public worship” (119). Rendering the Psalms as

public, recitative versions can be seen as a continuance of their ancient liturgical use, a use

Osborne 2

marked by the insertion of the word “selah” at various points in translations of the Psalms in

sacred texts such as the King James Version of the Bible, as well as at points in the Hebrew

Tanakh to indicate musical or other readings of the texts (JewishEncyclopedia.com).

If presumed clarity of motive concerning the composition of Psalms 80 – 88 separates

them from Psalms 1 – 8, another striking distinction between the 1648 group and that of 1653 is

in the metrical variation that Milton employs in the later set. The eight Psalms of August 1653

are each cast in different metrical forms, “inspired perhaps by the metrical variety in Calvin’s

Geneva Psalter or by the astonishing experiments with metrical and stanzaic forms in the

versions by Sir Philip Sidney and the Countess of Pembroke” (Lewalski 298). Lewalski

identifies the stanzaic form of Milton’s Psalm 3 as “a stanza of six iambic lines of varying length

rhyming aabccb” (638, n 110). Elsewhere, Milton’s Psalm 3 has been described, perhaps more

jarringly, as having been composed “in a peculiar six-line stanza of iambic quatrains and

trimeter” (Baldwin 97, n 2). Other stanzaic forms employed by Milton in his versions of the first

eight Psalms include, as indicated in our text (Kerrigan, Rumrich, and Fallon 124), the use of

terza rima in Psalm 2, the form used by Dante in his Divine Comedy as well as by Sidney in his

version of Psalm 7 (Lewalski 638, n 110). Also, as examples of Milton’s variation, in Psalm 5 he

employed “a four-line stanza of iambic tetrameter, trimeter, and pentameter” and in Psalm 6, “an

iambic pentameter quatrain” (Baldwin 97, n 2). In Psalm 1, “Milton (like Sidney) used rhymed

iambic pentameter couplets but [in Milton’s translation] with the sense running on from line to

line” (Lewalski 638, n 110). A close examination of Milton’s Psalm 3 might also lead to the

conclusion that the “sense” of that Psalm, rather than being locked in each of the separate

stanzas, also runs “from line to line.”

Osborne 3

Sidney in his rendering of Psalm 3 also used the rhyme scheme aabccb, but in six stanzas

of five lines each; however, the true difference in rhythmic sense between the Sidney and Milton

versions of Psalm 3 may be heard, and felt, in parallel readings of the two Psalms. The regularity

of the lines in Sidney’s version lead to stanza breaks that contain moments of pause and

reflection, allowing the reciter a moment or two to catch her breath before moving on. The

pleading quality of Psalm 3 is not lost, but its forward motion is suspended five times before

continuing. Milton’s version of Psalm 3, rendered in fewer stanzas but using the same rhyming

pattern, holds in the broken symmetry and irregularity of its lines a kind of paradoxical hesitant

kinetic energy. The allowance of a reasonable break between stanzas is evident, but the

dynamism of the lines compels the reciter (or reader) to move on and come to a conclusion. For

example, Sidney’s version contains a fifth stanza that is replete with stylized violence and the

wrath of God, which brings justice to the speaker’s foes:

For Thou, with cruel blowes

On jaw-bone of my foes,

My causeless wrongs hast wroken;

Thou, those men's teeth which byte,

Venom'd with godless spight,

Hast in their malice broken. (25-30)

His sixth and concluding stanza is both a summing-up and a realization that “Salvation doth

belong/Unto the Lord most strong” (31-32).

However, Milton’s fourth and final stanza condenses the brutality and supplication of

Sidney’s last two stanzas into one:

Rise Lord, save me my God, for thou

Osborne 4

Hast smote ere now

On the cheek-bone all my foes,

Of men abhor'd

Hast broke the teeth. This help was from the Lord;

Thy blessing on thy people flows. (19-24)

The emotional resonance of Milton’s fourth stanza is clear in its first line: the speaker does more

than implore the Lord to act on his behalf, he insists upon it (“Rise Lord, save me my God”). He

enumerates the qualities that the Lord brings to help his “people” in such strong language that

God’s actions seem more a kind of holy terror and divine vengeance than simple justice.

Milton’s diction is simpler and more straightforward than the elaborate, even distancing

rhetoric that Sidney uses. This is not to say that Sidney’s language is less powerful. Rather, the

directness of Milton’s diction, couched in the same rhyme scheme as the earlier poet’s, creates a

tension reflected in the jagged structure of the stanzas as well as in the relatively rough, though

distinctly poetic language. This rhetorical and emotional distinction is what separates Milton’s

work from Sidney’s.

Although the true “clarity” of Milton’s motivations for composing the 1653 Psalms may

not be entirely obvious, investigations into the poet’s state of mind during the composition of

these Psalms reveal a likely personal and political underpinning for the directness of his words.

Lewalski reflects that “[a] major theme of these psalms, set

Osborne 5

forth in Psalm 1, is God’s vindication and protection of the just and his wrath toward the

unrighteous” (297). The theme of grievous suffering undergirding the first eight Psalms, as well

as the Psalmist’s pleas for justice, are echoed by Milton in his versions; Milton’s own situation –

“grieving, weak, under attack by enemies but confident of God’s deliverance” – is reflected in

the first line of Psalm 3: “Lord, how many are my foes” (297). Milton’s second stanza indicates

the speaker’s firm belief that the Lord is his protector – “my shield, my glory” (7) – and his

confidence in God is reflected in that stanza’s concluding phrases: “Aloud I cried/Unto Jehovah,

he full soon reply'd/And heard me from his holy mount” (10-12). Although the Psalm’s speaker

– and by extension, Milton – may be surrounded by a multitude of “foes/ . . . that in arms against

[him] rise” (1; 3), God exists as the speaker’s protector and, as made evident in the concluding

stanza, an aggressive force to be reckoned with.

The intensity of Milton’s language and the irregular phrasing of Psalm 3 in particular

give rise to a two-part question, above and beyond the issue of Milton’s blindness, which by May

of 1652 was total, and which was brought up in our text (Kerrigan, Rumrich & Fallon 123-4).

Could the death in that month of Milton’s wife Mary three days after the birth of their daughter

Deborah, and the fact that after his wife’s death Milton was solely responsible for his newborn

infant and three other small children (Campbell and Corns 245), contribute to the sense of

beleaguerment and violent expressiveness of Psalm 3? These intensely personal motivations may

have controlled Milton’s rendering of Psalms 1 – 8 just as surely as his sense of political

encirclement motivated him to compose Psalms 80 – 88 in 1648. In the absence of direct

evidence that they did, however, speculation based on close readings of the Psalms, as well as

historical detective work, will have to suffice in the production of plausible answers.

Osborne 6

Works Cited

Baldwin, Edward Chauncey. “Milton and the Psalms.” Modern Philology. 17.8 (Dec., 1919) :

457-63. JSTOR. Web. 01 Sept. 2012.

Boddy, Margaret. “Milton’s Translations of Psalms 80-88.” Modern Philology. 64.1 (Aug.,

1966) : 1-9. JSTOR. Web. 04 Sept. 2012.

Campbell, Gordon, and Thomas N. Corns. John Milton: Life, Work, and Thought. Oxford:

Oxford UP, 2008. Print.

Jacobus, Lee A. “Milton Metaphrast: Logic and Rhetoric in Psalm I.” Milton Studies XXIII. Ed.

James D. Simmonds. Pittsburgh: U of Pittsburgh P, 1988. 119-32. Print.

Lewalski, Barbara K. The Life of John Milton: A Critical Biography. Malden, MA:

Blackwell, 2001. Print.

Milton, John. “Psalm 3.” The Complete Poetry and Essential Prose of John Milton. Eds. William

Kerrigan, John Peter Rumrich, and Stephen M. Fallon. New York: Modern Library,

2007. Print.

---The Complete Poetry and Essential Prose of John Milton. Eds. William Kerrigan,

John Peter Rumrich, and Stephen M. Fallon. New York: Modern Library, 2007. Print.

“Selah.” JewishEncyclopedia.com. The Kopelman Foundation. 2002-2011. Web. 01. Sep. 2012.

Sidney Philip. “Psalm III.” The Poems of Sir Philip Sidney. Ed. William A. Ringler, Jr. Oxford:

Oxford UP/Clarendon, 1962. Print.