The interpretation timeline

Lam 2:2

How this passage has been read — the sources, oldest to newest.

From the early Church Fathers to now.

1 Jewish · 2 Reformed · 1 Methodist · 1 Catholic · 1 Lutheran

Lam 2:2 · Douay-Rheims
“Beth. The Lord hath cast down headlong, and hath not spared, all that was beautiful in Jacob: he hath destroyed in his wrath the strong holds of the virgin of Juda, and brought them down to the ground: he hath made the kingdom unclean, and the princes thereof.”
Scholastic c. 1100 – 1500
1105
A.D.
Rashi Jewish
1040–1105
“the habitations of Jacob Heb. נְאוֹת, the houses of Jacob, an expression of נָוֶה, a dwelling. He has struck [them] to the ground He humbled them to the ground. He has profaned the kingdom and its princes These are the Israelites, who were called (Exod. 19:6): “a kingdom of priests.” and its princes There is a Midrash Aggadah (Lam. Rabbah 2:5) [that states that] these are the heavenly princes [whose assignments] He changed. The one appointed over fire He appointed over water, and He changed all the appointees because there were among the wicked of Israel those who knew the Ineffable Name, and they relied [upon the fact] that they could adjure the heavenly princes to save them from fire, from water and from the sword. Now, when he would adjure the prince of fire by his name, he would reply, “This dominion is not in my hands,” and similarly, all of them.”
Source
666 years pass — nothing from this stretch is hosted yet
Post-Reformation c. 1650 – 1900
1771
A.D.
John Gill Reformed
1697–1771
“The Lord hath swallowed up all the habitations of Jacob, and hath not pitied,.... As he regarded not his own habitation the temple, nor the ark his footstool, it is no wonder he should be unconcerned about the habitations of others; as of the inhabitants of the land of Judea and of Jerusalem, particularly of the king, his nobles, and the great men; these the Lord swallowed up, or suffered to be swallowed up, as houses in an earthquake, and by an inundation, so as to be seen no more; and this he did without showing the least reluctance, pity, and compassion; being so highly incensed and provoked by their sins and transgressions: he hath thrown down in his wrath the strong holds of the daughter of Judah; not only the dwelling houses of the people, but the most fortified places, their castles, towers, and citadels: he hath brought them down to the ground; and not only battered and shook them, but beat them down, and laid them level with the ground; and all this done in the fury of his wrath, being irritated to it by the sins of his people; even the daughter of Judah, or the congregation thereof, as the Targum: he hath polluted the kingdom, and the princes thereof; what was reckoned sacred, the kingdom of the house of David, and the kings and princes of it, the Lord's anointed; these being defiled with sin, God cast them away, as filth to the dunghill, and gave them up into the hands of the Gentiles, who were reckoned unclean; and thus they were profaned. Jarchi interprets these princes of the Israelites in common, who were called a kingdom of priests; and makes mention of a Midrash, that explains them of the princes above, or of heaven.”
Source
1832
A.D.
Adam Clarke Methodist
1762–1832
“The Lord hath swallowed up - It is a strange figure when thus applied: but Jehovah is here represented as having swallowed down Jerusalem and all the cities and fortifications in the land: that is, he has permitted them to be destroyed. See Lam 2:6.”
1849
A.D.
1774–1849
“Unclean, or treated it as such. (Calmet) — Septuagint, “he hath accounted profane the kings.” (Haydock) — Joakim, Jechonias, Sedecias, and the royal family, were exposed to the greatest ignominy and sufferings. (Calmet)”
1871
A.D.
1871
“polluted--by delivering it into the hands of the profane foe. Compare Psa 89:39, "profaned . . . crown."”
1875
A.D.
Keil & Delitzsch Lutheran
1861–1875
“The Lord has destroyed not merely Jerusalem, but the whole kingdom. בּלּע, "to swallow up," involves the idea of utter annihilation, the fury of destruction, just in the same way as it viz. the fury is peculiar to עברה, the overflowing of anger. "He hath not spared" forms an adverbial limitation of the previous statement, "unsparingly." The Qeri ולא, instead of לא, is an unnecessary and unpoetic emendation. כּל־נאות, all the pastures of Jacob. According to its etymology, נוה means a place where shepherds or nomads rest, or stay, or live; here, it is not to be understood specially of the dwellings as contrasted with, or distinguished from the pasture-grounds, but denotes, in contrast with the fortresses (מבצרים), the open, unfortified places of the country in which men and cattle enjoy food and rest. "The strongholds of the daughter of Judah" are not merely the fortifications of Jerusalem, but the fortresses generally of the country and kingdom of Judah; cf. Jer 5:17; Jer 34:7. הגּיע לארץ, "to cast down to the ground" (used of the pulling down of walls, cf. Isa 25:12), is an epexegesis of חרס, as in Exo 13:14, and is not to be joined (in opposition to the accents) with what succeeds, and taken figuratively. For neither does חלּל need any strengthening, nor does הגּיע לארץ suitably apply to the kingdom and its princes. The desecration of the kingdom consisted in its being dishonoured by the disgraceful conduct of its rulers; cf. Psa 89:40.”
Source
Modern · 1953 →

The in-app commentary runs from the Fathers to the early-modern record, then stops — that's where the public-domain sources end, not where the reading does. For the modern reading, follow the sources directly.