It is a long-held view that Ps 1, either alone or combined with Ps 2, performs the function of a preface to the "Book" of Psalms. Although supported by early Christian reception, much depends on how to understand in Ps 1, as well as how to understand the relation between the first two psalms and the concept of the "Book" of Psalms. This article aims to look at the issue anew and provide some reasons why Pss 1-2 should not be considered as a preface to the "Book" of Psalms. First, an analysis of in Ps 1: 2 is provided, and it is argued that the expression does not refer to any collection of psalms but to a torah related to Moses. Secondly, the first attestation of the psalm in Qumran is revisited, namely the pesher designated as 4Q174, and it is argued that it does not show any trace of a paratextual understanding of Ps 1, nor that it provides the earliest attestation of a combined reading of Pss 1-2. Finally, a textual variant in Acts 13: 33 is analyzed, as it provides an interesting window into the way Ps 1 came to be interpreted in the fourth century CE. Taken together, the observations challenge the well-established consensus that Pss 1-2 have been intentionally placed as a preface to the book.
