But your iniquity, Daughter Edom, will he prosecute,
lay bare your outrages.
The opening "Alas!" recalls the first two poems;
it is swiftly reinforced in the second half of v.2.
As with all three preceding poems, this, too, can work as two voices,
although here as first-person singular (most) and first-person plural (17–20 or 17–22).[27] Unlike them, however, the personalised perspective is neither female (as in Lam.1 and 2) nor male (Lam.3),
but rather various groups within the population.
And whereas the addressee in 1 and 3 had been the Lord,
and in 2 had been mostly the city,
here there is no specific addressee until the personified cities in the closing verses.
While the narration of 1–16 is predominantly observational
of the inhabitants ("my Daughter People")
it is punctuated at three places, vv.6, 11 and 16,
by theological reflection and interpretation
of perhaps an over-reliance on Zion theology.[28] It might be regarded as a third voice.
Visually, a unique aspect of this chapter is the striking use of colour
in the opening eight verses and its erasure as the degradation of the siege takes hold.[29]
It starts with the impossible.
Pure gold cannot tarnish under normal circumstances.[30] Yet here it does.
The city, temple and king had been believed to be safe under the Lord's protection;
defeat and devastation were unthinkable.
Yet here all this can fall, and does.[31] Things are so bad that even nature, God's own created order, is out of kilter.
And it continues into the human realm,
including the horror of mothers cannibalising their own God-given children.
"Blessings of the covenant become human carnage."[32]
From an inner-biblical perspective, just as the opening verses of Lam.3
seem to pull in tension against Psalm 23,
so here are other contrasts, and even overturnings of other passages:
v.2: the rare term "children [sons] of Zion" leads us to Psalm 149:2[33] which in turn draws us to contrast this chapter overall with themes in that psalm