ipS-SMia';:" <^ hr: r,iivi? Division Section ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES, I IN RELATION TO MODERN-tRITICISM : "^ i CONSIDERED -^ . - ^ Criikal iinb ^rammatkal Comnunlaru /^ NEW TRANSLATION. ^ EIGHT LECTURES DELIVERED BEFORE THE UNIVERSLTY OF OXFORD LN THE YEAR 1878, ON THE FOUNDATLON OF THE LATE REV. JOHN BAMPTON, M.A., CANON OF SALISBURY. BY y V charle:s henry Hamilton wright, b.d., Of Trinity College, Dublin; M.A. of Exeter College, Oxford ; Phil.D. of the University of Leipzig ; atid Incumbent of St. Mary's, Belfast. E. P. BUTTON & CO., 713, BROADWAY. MDCCCLXXIX. ) Enthr Cp' Tar.rcr, The Sclwood Printing: Worlcs, Frame, and London. ERRATA. P. 131 — Line i of note i, read " Daniel ii." for Daniel iii." 0 0 7 -^ -x o y •>-> p. 186— Note I, read the Syriac |vo\^o jcou ]l^i] "^^io P. 295 — Line 5 from the top, erase the name " Delitzsch." P- 303 — Line 3 from bottom, " Tablai " ought to be read for " Tavlai," though the latter form is used by McCaul. P. 328— Note I, hne 3, erase the " ?" in " But this is doubtful ?" P. 347 — Line 5 from bottom of page, read w for c3. In the same note two broken 7s appear. P. 353 — Line 8, read "renderings" instead of "readings." P. 362 — Second line from bottom, a broken ~i occurs in ?1^"1. P. 395 — The " von " is omitted in some places in the name of " von Baudissin." P. 460 — Line 18, read " Theodoret " instead of "Thedoret." P. 508 — Line 9 from bottom, a broken d occurs in ascend. P. 527 — Line 12 from top, b'^'^VD with broken 7. EXTRACT FROM THE LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT OF THE LATE REV. JOHN BAMPTON, M.A., CANON OF SALISBURY. " I give and bequeath my Lands and Estates to the " Chancellor, Masters, and Scholars, of the University of Oxford " for ever, to have and to hold all and singular the said Lands " or Estates upon trust, and to the intents and purposes here- " inafter mentioned ; that is to «say, I will and appoint that " the Vice-Chancellor of the University of Oxford for the " time being shall take and receive all the rents, issues, and " profits thereof, and (after all taxes, reparations, and necessary " deductions made) that he pay all the remainder to the en- " dowment of eight Divinity Lecture Sermons, to be estab- " lished for ever in the said University, and to be performed " in the manner following : — " I direct and appoint, that upon the First Tuesday in " Easter Term, a Lecturer may be yearly chosen by the Heads "of Colleges only, and by no others, in the room adjoining to " the Printing-house, between the hours of ten in the morning " and two in the afternoon, to preach eight Divinity Lecture " Sermons, the year following, at St. Mary's in Oxford, between " the commencement of the last month in Lent Term, and the " end of the third week in Act Term. IV EXTRACT FROM WILL OF LATE REV. JOHN BAMPTON. " Also I direct and appoint, that the eight Divinity Lecture "Sermons shall be preached upon cither of the following " subjects — To confirm and establish the Christian faith, and "to confute all heretics and schismatics — Upon the Divine " authority of the Holy Scriptures — Upon the authority of " the writings of the primitive Fathers, as to the faith and "practice of the primitive Church — Upon the Divinity of our " Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ — Upon the Divinity of the " Holy Ghost — Upon the Articles of the Christian Faith, as •" comprehended in the Apostles' and Nicene creeds. " Also I direct, that thirty copies of the eight Divinity " Lecture Sermons shall be always printed,\vithin two months " after they are preached ; and one copy shall be given to the " Chancellor of the University, and one copy to the Head of " every College, and one copy to the Mayor of the City of " Oxford, and one copy to be put into the Bodleian Library ; " and the expense of printing them shall be paid out of the " revenue of the Land or Estates given for establishing the " Divinity Lecture Sermons, and the Preacher shall not be " paid, nor be entitled to the revenue, before they are "printed. " Also I direct and appoint, that no person shall be quali- " fied to preach the Divinity Lecture Sermons, unless he hath " taken the degree of Master of Arts at least, in one of the two " Universities of Oxford or Cambridge ; and that the same " person shall never preach the Divinity Lecture Sermons " twice." The Very Rev. ROBERT PAYNE SMITH, D.D., Dean of Canterbury, formerly Regius Professor of Divinity in the University of Oxford and Canon of Christ's Church; Bampton Lecturer, 1859; Editor of the " Thesaurus Syriacus," and of other Syriac and Tlieological works ; A sound theologian, an eminent Orientalist, and a constant friend : WILLIAM WRIGHT, Esq., M.A., LL.D., D.D., Ph.D., Fellow of Queens' College, Professor of Arabic in the University of Cambridge, formerly Professor of Arabic in the University of Dublin ; Author of " A Gram- mar of the Arabic Language," and Editor of many works in Arabic, Syriac, etc. ; A Shemitic scholar of the highest class, whose personal friendship the Author has enjoyed for many years, having had the honour and advantage of studying Oriental Languages under him at Trinity College, Dublin ; The Rev. FRANZ DELITZSCH, D.D., Ph.D., Professor of Theology in the University of Leipzig, formerly Professor in the Universities of Rostock and Erlangen ; one of the foremost Hebraists of the day, a distinguished theologian, and an eminent commentator ; In acknowledgment of many personal kindnesses, and of Christian regard and esteem for the Lutheran Churches of Germany, especially that of Saxony, and of deep obligations to the scholars of the great "Fatherland " : This attempt to follow in their footsteps, " baud paribus gressibus," and to promote the study of the Old Testament on a philological and grammatical basis, IS DEDICATED BY THE AUTHOR. PREFACE. In sending forth this volume it may be well to state that, in the treatment of my subject, I considered it best to avoid altogether the form of sermons. So far as delivered, how- ever, the Lectures now published appear in the form in which they were actually preached from the University pulpit, although it was absolutely necessary (as is usual on such occasions) to read only a portion of each Lecture. In order to make the work complete as a commentary on the entire book of Zechariah, chapters have been added on those portions which had to be wholly passed over in the course of the Lectures. In the note below I have mentioned what portions of the work is embraced by these additions.^ A work written amid the necessary duties and cares connected with the sole pastoral charge of a large and 1 Chapter I. formed the first Lecture, delivered on St. Patrick's Day, March 17th, 1878. Chapter II. was preached on March 24th, Chapters III. and IV. as one Lecture on April 28th, and Chapters V. and VI. together on May 5th. Chapter VII. was not dehvered before the University. Chapter VIII. was the Lecture delivered on May 12th. Chapter IX. was not preached. Chapter X. was delivered on May 19th, Chapter XL on May 26th, and Chapter XII., being the eighth and concluding Lecture, on June 2nd. Chapter XIII. was added to complete the work. Vlii PREFACE. populous town parish, may be expected to exhibit some traces of its having been so composed. At no time, ex- cept during the short period of my residence at Oxford, have I had that leisure which is generally desirable in such cases. I trust, notwithstanding, that the work, such as it is, may help some to a better understanding of one of the books of the Minor Prophets which has always been con- sidered among the most obscure and difficult portions of Holy Scripture. In accordance with the object of the pious founder of the Bampton Lecture, this work has naturally an apologetic character, and has been written with the view of taking a calm survey of the results of modern criticism as affecting the most important book of the Minor Prophets. I was, how- ever, fully prepared to have altogether abandoned the tradi- tional view as to the authorship of the second part of the book of Zechariah, had the arguments against its integrity appeared to me to demand such a course. I have honestly endeavoured to weigh, as carefully as possible, the evidence presented by eminent modern critics on this point, although I have felt constrained to differ from their conclusions. In the treatment of other questions of even greater import- ance, namely, the Messianic prophecies, I have endeavoured fairly to state the opinions on both sides. If, in the judg- ment of any one, I appear to have failed in doing so, I trust my failure will not be ascribed to an improper cause. I have held aloof from the condemnable practice of abus- ing those critics from whose views I conscientiously dissent, PREFACE. IX and I have, therefore, abstained from characterizhig such scholars as " Rationahsts " or " unbehevers," some of them being v^ery unfairly regarded as such. I hope I have profited by the study of writers of all the various schools of thought. Even the works of the few modern Roman Catholic divines who have written on Zechariah, such as Reinke, Theiner, and Schegg, have afforded me much assis- tance, and I rejoice to be able to acknowledge the un- sectarian spirit and scholarlike manner in which they have treated the subject. Of the works of scholars of the other schools of criticism I need not here speak particularly, as a list of the books which have been consulted is given in the Introduction, § 8. The critical and grammatical commentary appended to the Lectures, though fuller on such points than anything which has yet appeared in England, is not as complete as I would have wished to have made it, had time and space permitted. A large number of the notes given under the text of the Lectures properly belong to that part of the work. The new translation will, I hope, help to a better under- standing of the meaning of the original. As regards such translations, I fully agree with the remarks of Dr. Perowne, in the Preface to the Second Edition of his valuable work on the Psalms ; and as I expect to be accused, as he has been, of "needlessly departing" from our Authorised English Version, I cannot do better than refer to what he has said on that subject. As the translation here given is not in- tended to supersede our A.V., or to be viewed as a revision X PREFACE. thereof, I have felt myself free to act without constant reference to that version. In any revision of a National Version for general use, I should advocate as few altera- tions as possible, but the object of the translation accom- panying this work is very different. Words necessary to complete the sense, or to express it more fully, have been added within brackets, as well as occasional explanations, and in some cases alternative ways of translating a passage. The paragraphs adopted are those of the Hebrew text, except in chapters iii. and v. Under the text will be found a number of various readings, but the critical com- mentary must be generally consulted for such, as many other readings are there given. I have endeavoured, espe- cially in the poetical portions, by a freer use of commas than usual to express some of the peculiarities of the Hebrew accentuation. ^7^ Throughout this work the form Jahavch (to be pronounced ^ Yahaveh) has been adopted for the sacred name, instead of '"«*'. Jehovah, though the latter is almost consecrated by use in this country. The latter form has been indeed recently de- fended by Hoelemann, but is certainly erroneous. The name is properly speaking an imperfect kal of the \-crb mn or tTTT as explained in Exod. iii. 14. From the form ^J}^, all the other forms of the sacred name, used in composition, or otherwise (such as ri\ ^r\\ or in\ V), can be explained, as well as the 'Ia/3e of Theodorct and Epiphanius. The form "Jahaveh" is better suited to the rhythm than "Jahve," adopted by Ewald and most German scholars. Had this PREFACE. XI work been designed for the masses, I would scarcely have ventured on this change, which will be regarded as an in- novation in England. But as the work is intended for an intelligent class of Biblical students, I do so with less reluctance. I may note that there is nothing in the Lectures themselves which cannot be understood by an intelligent English reader, even though unacquainted with Hebrew. The want of uniformity in expressing Hebrew proper names in English will, I hope, be excused as it has in great measure arisen from a desire to use forms familiar to the English reader. It may be well to observe that in some of my remarks I have had in view a class of prophetical interpreters, who have, indeed, produced no work of learning which could be referred to, but whose views, put forth in pamphlets and popular discourses have obtained currency in certain quarters. In order to enable the work to be published with as little delay as possible, it was sent to the press in sections before the whole manuscript was completed. Its publication would necessarily have been delayed for more than a twelvemonth, had any other course been adopted. This plan, how- ever, has been attended with peculiar difficulties. Some cor- rections will be found in the translation, and especially in the critical and grammatical commentary, e.g. on ch. iii. 3, iv. 7, X. II, xi. 8, II. In the crit. comm. on ch. iv. 7, I have corrected a mistake wrongly imputed by me to Wiinsche in his treatise on Die Leiden des Mcssias. Con- xii PREFACE. siderable additions on various points have been made in that part of the work. I desire to return my warmest thanks to Prof. WiUiam Wright of Cambridge, and Prof. Dr. Franz DeHtzsch of Leipzig, for their great kindness in revising the proof-sheets of this book while passing through the press, and for the valuable suggestions made by them which have been in- corporated in the work. Dr. Delitzsch has also very kindly verified for me the references to the old Jewish literature. These scholars are, however, by no means to be held respon- sible for any of the views adopted, or for any critical errors which the work may contain. My old friend, the Rev. Wm. Macllwaine, D.D., Incumbent of St. George's, Belfast, and Canon of St. Patrick's Cathedral, Dublin, has also kindly revised the proof-sheets. Belfast, Jan. 2$th, 1879. ■•■] • tf tt f -f - .4.) CONTENTS. PAGE Introduction : — § I, Notices of the Prophet Zechariah . . xv. § 2. The Name of the Prophet . . . . xx. § 3. The Date of his earlier Predictions . . xxi. § 4. External Evidence as to the Unity of the Book xxii. § 5. Sketch of the Rise and Progress of Critical' Opinion on the Question of its Integrity xxv. § 6. The Differences between the First and Second Portions of the Book xxviii. § 7. Considerations in favour of its Integrity and Genuineness xxxv. § 8. Apparatus Criticus xlii. New Translation of the Book of Zechariah . . xlix. CHAPTER I. The First Three Visions (Zech. i. ii.) .... 3 CHAPTER II. The Fourth Vision (Zech. iii.) — Joshua before the Angel, 45 CHAPTER III. The Fifth Vision — The Golden Candlestick (Zech. iv.) 81 CHAPTER IV. The Sixth Vision — The Flying Roll, and the Woman in the Ephah (Zech. v.) 105 XIV CONTEXTS. PAGE CHAPTER V. The Seventh Vj«n — The Four Chariots (Zech. vi. i-S) 122 CHAPTER VI. The Crowning of the High Priest (Zech. vi. 9-15). . 145 CHAPTER Vn. The Deputation from Bethel.— Addresses of Zech- ARiAH TO THE People (Zech. vii. viii.) .... 161 CHAPTER VHI. The Preparation of the Land. — The Coming of the King (Zech. ix.) 199 CHAPTER IX. The War of the Sons of Zion. — The "Lost Tribes" (Zech. X.) 265 CHAPTER X. The Good Shepherd and his Rejection — The Evil Shep- herd AND his Doom (Zech. xi.) 299 CHAPTER XI. The Trials and Victory of Israel. — The Great Mourn- ing (Zech. xii.) 355 CHAPTER XII. The Reaction against False Prophets. — The Great Transgression (Zech. xiii.) 409 CHAPTER XIII. The Eschatology of Zechariah, or " The Last Things " as seen in the light of the Old Dispensation (Zech. xiv.) 449 Critical and Grammatical Commentary . . . 525 Index of Texts Illustrated 599 General Index 603 INTRODUCTION. § I. Notices of tJic Prophet ZecJuiriah. According to the statement in chap. i. i, Zechariah was the son of Berechiah and the grandson of Iddo (see crit. comm.). He was called the son of Iddo as well as the son of Berechiah, probably because the latter died at a comparatively early age, or was a man of little note. We assume in this statement that the Iddo alluded to in the book of Zechariah, and whose son the prophet Zechariah is called in Ezra v. i and vi. 14, is to be identified with the Iddo mentioned in Neh. xii. 4, who was one of the priests that went up from Babylon with Zerubbabel and Joshua, and whose son Zechariah is also spoken of in Neh. xii. 16. It is unnecessary, with Jerome and Cyrill, to have recourse to conjecture in order to explain the simple fact that the same person is styled both " son of Berechiah " and " son of Iddo." For the Hebrew word for " son " is frequently used in the sense of "grandson," for which latter idea there is no special term in Hebrew. There is, there- fore, no cause to regard the words " son of Berechiah " as an interpolation. The conjecture of Knobel and von Ortenberg, approved of by Bleek and Wellhausen, namely, that the book of Zechariah is made up of the writings of three distinct prophets, one of them Zechariah the son of Iddo, who lived after the captivity, and another Zechariah the son of Berechiah or Jeberechiah, a contemporary of Isaiah, se- lected by that prophet to act with Uriah the high priest as xvi INTRODUCTION. § I. a ■witness (Isaiah viii. 2), is ingenious, but is entirely based on a denial of the unity of the book. Zechariah appears to have been still young when called to fulfil the office of a prophet. It is, indeed, a mistake to suppose him to be specially referred to in chap. ii. 8 (E. V. chap. ii. 4) as "this young man/' though that view has been taken b\' many commentators Although, however, that passage ought to be explained otherwise, the youth of Zechariah may be fairly inferred from the fact that his grandfather, Iddo, is mentioned as a person of some im- portance in the da}-s of Joshua the high priest, having been one of the priests who returned with Zerubbabel and Joshua from Babylon, and that Zechariah, is spoken of as having prophesied during the high priesthood of Joshua, most probably in the lifetime of his grandfather Iddo ; while in the days of Joiakim, the successor of Joshua in the high priest's office (Nch. xii. 10), Zechariah is mentioned as being then the head of the family. His father Berechiah must, therefore, have been already dead. But if Zechariah en- tered on his prophetic work during the lifetime of his grand- father, he must have been young at the time ; and his grandfather being at that period the head of the family, Zechariah was naturally termed " the son of Iddo." Nothing is really known regarding the length of time during which he acted as prophet. The common tradition that he lived to a good old age had probably some historical basis of which we now know nothing. According to Jewish tradition, mentioned by Rashi and Abarbanel, Haggai and Zechariah were members of the Great Synagogue, to whose labours the Jews ascribe the reorganization of the Jewish Church and the arrangement of the Canon of Scripture. The line of succession from the time of Moses is said in the Aboth of R. Nathan, to have been Joshua, the Elders. Judges and Trophets, Ilaggai and Zechariah, and, lasth', the men INTRODUCTION. § I. Xvii of the Great Synagogue, which the Mishnah regards as having consisted of those teachers who received the tradition from the prophets, and preserved it down to the time of Simon the Just.^ The accounts given of the prophet in the early Christian writers of the 4th and 5th centuries cannot be regarded as probable, being too plainly legendary in their character, and contradicting, as they do, clear deductions from the notices in the canonical books. The Pseudo-Epiphanius {De Proph. 21) says that Zechariah was a very old man when he came from Babylon, in which place he confirmed the prophecies which he delivered by many signs. He is said to have prophesied to Jozadak the birth of his son Joshua, and to have predicted that that son would discharge the office of priest in Jerusa- lem. He is also said to have foretold to Salathiel the birth of Zerubbabel, and to have informed him of his son's future career. He predicted to Cyrus the victory which he after- wards obtained over Croesus, as well as what Cyrus accom- plished at Jerusalem. He died in Judsea in extreme old age, and was buried in a tomb near that of Haggai. Such is the account given by Epiphanius. That given by Dorotheus is almost identical. The latter adds that the place of the pro- phet's sepulture was near Eleutheropolis, and states that he was the Zechariah the son of Berechiah mentioned by Isaiah in chap. viii. This seems to have been the view of the Jews, though it involved a gross anachronism as they understood it. For according to some traditions the same Zechariah pro- phesied in the second temple (see Furst's Kanon des A. T. nacJi den Ueberlieferungen in Talmud u. Midrasck, pp. 44, 45). The same tradition is found in Hesychius, whose words are in several clauses identical with those of Epiphanius. Hesy- chius states in addition that the prophet was of the tribe of ' On the men of the Great Synagogue, see Buxtorfs Tiberias, cap. x. ; Jost's Geschichte des Isr. Volkes ; and Taylor's Sayings of the yewish Fathers (Cambridge University Press, 1877). b xviii INTRODUCTION. § I. Levi, and was born in Gilcad. The name Zcchariah is ex- plained by him as signifying /ji^vvm 'Ty\r[(TTov, which is pos- sible, or Nt.Kr]Ti]' afii]v, 0 eVrt jevocTo, yipotro. eKel ovv diridave, kol iTd(f)7j TrXrjalov rwv lepecov iv86^oi<;. 816 XijofieV dX\i]\ovia, 6 ecrrtv v/xvo<; ^Ai.€vai, Kal vvv ; kclItol aKoiaa^ tou 'lepe/xCov \eyovTOS, &tl ?/catrros rriv KaKiav tou irXrjaiov avTov fiq Xoyl^ecrde ev rah Kapdiais vfj-Qv. See the text in Bunsen's Christianity and Man- kind, vol. vi., being vol. ii. of the Analeda Ante-Nicana, p. 117. The passage from KairoL onwards does not occur in all the Greek forms, but is given by Bunsen after the more extended version. xxvi INTRODUCTION. § 5. opinions were strongly opposed by various scholars, especially by Blayney (1797), and were ultimately regarded in England with little favour. The doubts expressed by English scholars were, however, transplanted to German soil, and Fliigge in 1784 opposed the traditional view of the unity of the book, and was followed by Seller, G. L. Bauer, Augusti and Doederlcin. J. D. Michaelis also expressed himself doubtful as to the unity of the book. Bauer, however, though inclined to hold that the second part was not the composition of Zechariah, regarded that portion in his Klcinen Prophctcn (1786, 1790) as containing a pre- diction of the times before and after the Maccabcan era. He appears to have modified his views at a later period. Eichhorn in his Einlciticng followed in the main this in- terpretation, and considered the second portion to contain a clear description of the times subsequent to Alexander the Great, and, therefore, to have been composed by an author at a time considerably later than that of Zechariah. Very similar views are expressed by Corrodi, and H. E. G. Paulus, as also later by Gramberg (1830), Vatke (1835), and still more recently by Stahelin, Abraham Geiger, and Bottcher. Stahelin, however, defends the unity of the book. Other opinions, however, began to prevail in Germany after the publication of V>Qx\ho\<\'C?, Ei7ileitung\\\ 18 14. The con- jecture there put forward, that Zechariah the son of Jebere- chiah was the author of a part of the second portion (see pp. XV., xvii.), received the approval of Gesenius in his Comm. on Isaiah ; and other scholars followed in his wake, who, how- ever widely they may have differed in details, agreed in thinking that the author or authors of the second portion lived at some date previous to the Babylonish captivity. The most important advocates of this view were Forberg (1824) ; Rosenmuller in the second edition of his Scholia (1828) ; Hitzig, first in the Studicu and Kritikcn (1830), and afterwards INTRODUCTION. § 5. xxvii in his Ziv'dlf kl. Propheten (ist ed. 1838, 3rd 1863); Kno- bel del'- PropJictismiis dcr Hebi'der, 1837 ; Maurer, Coinni. Gramm.-Crit. in V. T., vol. ii., 1836; Bleek, in the Stud, tind Krit., 1852, and in his Eiiileitiing (2te Ausg., 1865) ; Ewald in his Proph. des A. B. (2te Ausg. 1867, 1868) ; v. Ortenberg (1859) ; and Bunsen in various works, especially in his Bibel- werk, vol. ii. {Die Prophete}t), i860. Similar views have been advocated by Dr. Samuel Davidson in his Introduction to the Old Test., 1863 ; by Dean Stanley in his Lectures on the Jezvish Church ; and by Wellhausen in his revised edition of Bleek's Einleititng (Berlin, 1878). Other eminent scholars, as Herzfeld, Hupfeld, Thenius, Movers, Schrader, have also expressed like opinions, though they have not written at any length on the question. Notwithstanding the boastful language made use of by some, as if the contest had already resulted in a decisive victory for the scholars of the modern critical school, " adJinc sub judice lis est!' The unity and post-exilian origin of the book have been ably defended by Koster [Meleteniata Critica, etc., 18 18), de Wette in the latest editions of his Einleitung, Jahn, Burger [Etudes excg. et critiq. sur le proph. ZacJi., Strassburg, 1841), Umbreit, Havernick, Hengstenberg, Stahelin, von Hofmann, Ebrard, Sandrock, Kliefoth, Keil, Delitzsch, Kohler, Lange, Pusey, and by the Roman Catholic scholars, Theiner, Schegg, and Reinke. Prof, (now Dean) J. J. S. Perowne in SniitJis Bibl. Dictionary, and after him Drake in vol. vi. of the Speaker s Commentary, can scarcely be said to have arrived at any definite conclusion on the subject. Henderson, and the American scholar Cham- bers, in his comm. attached to the English translation of Lange's Bibelwerk, defend the traditional view. Just as able scholars are to be found in the ranks of the defenders as in those of the opposers of the traditional view, and the reckless taunts thrown out by some as to the lack of scholarship on xxviii INTRODUCTION. § 6. the part of the defenders of the genuineness of the book are as unfounded as they are ungenerous. Such charges ought not to be made on either side. Indeed one cannot help re- marking that in such disputes a disposition quietly to bow to the authority of those "held in reputation" is as remarkable a characteristic of " the rank and file " of the followers of the school which opposes traditional \dews, as of those on the conservative side. § 6. The Differences betiveen the First and Second Portions of the Book. It must be admitted that the style of the second portion of the book is in many respects very different from that of the first part. If the visions related by the prophet in the larger portion of the first part were really beheld by him, it is not surprising that the description of them given by him should be drawn up for the most part in ordinary prose. The question assumes a very different aspect if it be maintained on the other hand (and an assumption is made on one side as well as on the other), that the writer merely put forth his own ideas on the subjects of which he treats under the form of a vision, without having actually seen such ; just as Bunyan set forth his ideas on Christian experience under the similitude of a dream. It is quite clear that Zechariah speaks of the visions as having been actually seen by him, and records several inquiries which he made of the angel concerning certain points, the meaning of which he was unable to comprehend. Are we to suppose such inquiries are introduced simply for the purpose of effect.' If we ap- proach the examination of an}" book of Scripture with a resolute determination to discard all that savours of the superhuman, our judgment even on a question of st}-lc will INTRODUCTION. § 6. xxlx be very different from what it will be if we commence our investigations in a different spirit, even though we may be fully prepared to discover in each book distinct proofs of the sacred writer's individuality, and of the times and cir- cumstances under which he wrote. It is only fair that these considerations should be borne in mind. We are far from ascribing what Dr. Samuel Davidson has termed " bad motives " to those scholars who maintain that the book of Zechariah contains the writings of at least three distinct authors, and may honestly affirm that, if we be- lieved the internal structure of this book demanded such a conclusion, we would unhesitatingly have adopted it ; but believing, as we do, that the prophet depicts in the greater part of the first six chapters a vision actually beheld by him, which consisted of several parts, we cannot consider it strange that the description of that vision of the night season lacks the " elevated and imaginative style " of the later pro- phecies, where the writer, though predicting facts and ideas communicated by Divine inspiration, was yet free to give scope to his own individuality. Assuming the unity of the book, as testified to by all external evidence, until the traditional opinion be duly over- thrown by critical investigation, we may compare the prose description of the visions in the first part with the simple prose in which the allegory set forth in chap. xi. is recorded, and with the prosaic description of chap. xiii. i-6, and we might almost add of chap. xiv. If the writer of chaps, ix., x., xi. 1-3 (if not verses 1-6) exhibits considerable poetic powers, chap. ii. 10-17 may be instanced as also breathing a poetic spirit ; and it should be remembered that that is almost the only portion in the first part of the book in which such a spirit could possibly have been displayed. It need not sur- prise us that the exhortations of the prophet recorded in chap. vii. and chap, viii., delivered in answer to the inquiry XXX INTRODUCTION. § 6. of the deputation from Bethel, should, for the most part, be composed in ordinary prose. Many of the objections urged against the post-exilian authorship of the later chapters have been already considered in connexion with the interpretation of those portions. We must refer, generally, to those chapters for our reply to the objections adduced ; and we may be permitted to express our opinion that it is impossible to give a fair and intelligible explanation of the several sections of the second part on the hypothesis of those portions having been composed before the exile. The attempts made by various scholars to explain those sections as pre-exilian appear to us to be failures. Dr. S. Davidson lays much stress upon the assumed fact that "the historical standpoint of chap. ix. i-6 and x. lo is very different " from that of the earlier portion. This ob- jection, as urged by him and other scholars, has been so fully met in the body of the work, that it is unnecessary to do more than refer to what is there written. So also as regards the mention of Ephraim and Judah in the second part of the book. Israel is a name often given to Judah alone, and is so used in the post-exilian prophets. If the inscription of Mai. i. I be called in question, as it is by some, it must be borne in mind that Malachi speaks in chap. ii. ii of " Israel and Jerusalem" as identical with Judah. Davidson asserts that "the mention of a king or kingdom in chaps, xi. 6, and xiii. 7, does not suit the age of Zechariah." He admits, however, that it is true, as Havernick affirms, that no mention is made of the family of David as being still in actual possession of the throne. He maintains, however, that "to say that the places are Messianic is irrelevant." No argument as to the authorship can be derived from chap. xi. 6, as it is tolerably clear that passage does not refer to Jewish but to Gentile kings. The invalidity of the argument sought to be derived from chaj). xiii. 7 will be best seen by an exami- INTRODUCTION. § 6. xxxi nation of our interpretation of that passage in connexion with its context. It has often been argued that the mention made of the " house of David " in chap. xii. 7-xiii. i is utterly inconsistent with the supposition of the authorship of Zechariah. This objection is strongly urged by v. Ortenberg, who also con- siders that " the shepherds " spoken of in chaps, x. and xi. refer to native rulers. This interpretation will not suit the several passages. As to the mention of " the house of David," it must not be forgotten that even Ezekiel, writing at a time when the kingdom of Judah was totally overthrown, speaks of " my servant David" as destined in the distant future to be the great shepherd who was to rule over both the people of Israel and Judah (Ezekiel xxxi v., xxxvii.). The allusions made by Zechariah to that house are, as pointed out on pp. 2,68, 371-374, peculiarly suited to the circumstances of the time in which that prophet lived. The thought expressed by the prophet in chap. xii. 7, that the glory of the house of David and that of the inhabitants of Jerusalem would not be able to magnify itself over Judah is one which could never have entered into the conceptions of a prophet writing before the exile. (See p. 367.) The allusions to idolatry and false prophets are m.uch dwelt on by those who deny the authenticity of the second portion. These allusions, as we have pointed out at sufficient length in our remarks on chap. x. 2 and chap, xiii., are no proof whatever of a pre-exilian date. In addition to the remarks there made it may be observed that even Malachi speaks of " sorcerers " plying their trade in his days (chap. iii. 5), and Josephus speaks of such arts being practised at a later period {Antiq. viii. 2, § 5, comp. Acts xiii. 6). The arguments derived from the mention made of "Satan" and of " the Seven Eyes " of God in the first part, while no mention is made of either in the latter portion, are plainly xxxii INTRODUCTION. § 6. inconclusive ; though some have maintained that tlie first portion of the book must be regarded as composed after the exile, when such notions were introduced from Baby- lon, and that the second portion, being free from all such allusions, is to be assigned to a date before the exile. No reference to either point is made in the prophecies of Haggai or in those of Malachi, nor, we might add, in the exhorta- tions of Zechariah himself in chaps, vii. or viii. The number "seven" occurs too often in a symbolical sense in the Old Test, for its use in Zechariah to strike us as novel ; and there is no necessity whatever to suppose that in the mention of the Seven Eyes any allusion is made to the seven highest spirits (Tobit xii. 15), or that they are spoken of after the analogy of the seven high councillors of the Persian monarch (Ezra vii. 14), who were called " the ears and eyes of the king" (Xenoph. Cyropcsd. viii. 2, 10, comp. viii. 6, 16). It has been further urged by Hitzig, and the objection is repeated by Davidson, that the author of the second part cannot be the same as that of the former, inasmuch as " in the first part everything is shrouded in visions which are not easily understood. The second part is not symbolic. The eleventh chapter contains an allegory, not a symbolical transaction. In the second part there is no enigma that needs explanation; no angel to act as interpreter.'" These objections do not seem well-considered, for though we speak of the first part as containing " visions," it must not be for- gotten that it really describes but one vision consisting of seven parts more or less closely connected with one another. Moreover, the first part of the book also comprises chap. vii. and chap, viii., in which there are no visions and no allusion to angels. Yet the latter facts have never been considered to be any objections to the view that the author of chaps, i-vi. and of chaps, vii. viii. is one and the same. It is no doubt quite true that certain phrases and pecu- INTRODUCTION. § 6. XXxiii liarities of expression occur in the first eight chapters which are not found in the concluding six chapters of the book ; such as the introductory formulas " the word of Jahaveh came unto Zechariah," or " unto me," (chaps, i. i, 7, iv. 8, vi. 9, vii. 1,4, 8, viii. I, 18), and "thus saith Jahaveh of hosts" (chaps, i. 4, 17, ii. 12, viii. 2, 4, 6, 7, 9, 14, 18, 20, 23). Moreover, in the first part Zechariah often specifies the exact time at which he received the word of Jahaveh (chaps, i. i, 7, vii. i), mentioning his own name (chap. vii. i) and the names of some of his contempo- raries, such as Joshua and Zerubbabel (iii. i, iv. 6-10, vi. 11) or others (chap. vi. 10, vii. 2); whereas such statements do not occur in the second part, nor are any contemporaries of the prophet there mentioned. But it is sufficient to reply that prefatory formulas with a precise mention of time and date were necessary in introduc- ing a special vision like that of Zechariah, and also in the case of exhortations addressed to the people in reply to a direct inquiry made as to certain points. Similar headings with the dates assigned to them are found prefixed to the vision of Isaiah (vi. i) and to those of Ezekiel (i. 1-3, viii. i, 2, xl. i, 2) ; and dates are very frequently found in the prophets where answers are recorded as given by Divine command to certain inquiries addressed to them. Introductory formulas are made use of by Hosea in the first five chapters of his book, such as " the word of Jaha- veh," "saith Jahaveh," "then said Jahaveh," "Hear ye the word of Jahaveh," " Hear ye this, O priests," etc., which are completely wanting in the last nine chapters ; and yet no doubt is entertained of the integrity of that book. The style moreover of that prophet is very different in chaps, i.-iii. from what it is in chaps, iv.-xiv. ; and the style of Ezekiel iv., v. is totally different from that of chaps, vi., vii., or of xxvii., xxviii. It is not then surprising, as Keil, Stahelin and others have observed, to find that the style of Zechariah varies in chaps. c xxxiv INTRODUCTION. § 6. i.-viii. from that in chaps, ix.-xiv., as the subject matter treated of in the two portions is so radically different. In the former portion the prophet had to narrate a series of visions seen b}' him in one night, and to record divers exhortations of a practical kind suggested by the inquiry of the deputation from Bethel ; in the second portion he speaks of the distant future. In the former he might be expected to write in simple prose, in the latter he might at times rise to lofty heights of poetry. Moreover, and this must not be forgotten, it is exceedingly probable that the second portion was composed many years after the first ^ long after the temple had been completed, and matters had assumed a kind of normal condition as regards the Jewish colony : and also at a time when the realization of the bright hope of attaining their national independence seemed to be as far off as ever. See our remarks on pp. 199, ff., and also our exposition of chaps, ix.-xi., in which we have pointed out the many indications of post-exilian authorship, and have replied in detail to the objections adduced by modern scholars. For similar reasons we can sec no great difficulty in the fact that certain other expressions are found in the first part which do not occur in the second, such as "the Lord of the whole earth " (chaps, iv. 14, vi. 5) in the first part, or the phrase " in that day " found in the later chapters. The phrase " the people round about " (chap. xii. 2, 6) could not be expected to occur in the first part ; and the facts that "the house of David " is not spoken of there, that the princes of Israel, or, as we maintain, the Gentile rulers, are not there called "shepherds," nor the people spoken of as a " flock," are no real objections to the unity of authorship. We might equally well deny that the author of chaps, -vi. was the writer of chaps, vii., viii., or assert that the author of chap, vii. was distinct from that of chap, viii., as difterences of phraseology can be detected even between those chapters. INTRODUCTION. § J. XXXV § 7. Considerations in favour of the Integrity of the Book and the Authorship of Zcchariah. One of the most important arguments in favour of the unity of authorship is that in both parts there are numerous quota- tions from, or allusions to, earlier prophets, and that the second portion contains several distinct references to the later prophets. In chap. i. 4-6, reference is made generally to "the former pro- phets," and so also in chap. vii. 7-17. The exhortation to " flee from the land of the north " in chap. ii. 1 1 (E.V. ii. 6), is based on that in Isa. xlviii. 20, "flee from the land of the Chaldeans," or on the similar commands in Isa. Hi. 1 1, Jer. Ii. 6, 9. The men- tion in chap. ii. 12 (E.V. ii. 8), of "the apple of the eye" has affi- nities with Ps. xvii. 8, though the phrases used are not identical. In verses 13 and 15 of the same chapter (and in chap. iv. 9) the expression "ye shall know that Jahaveh of hosts sent me " seems borrowed from Ezek. vi. 7, 10, etc. The allusion to the vine and fig tree in chap. iii. 10 is taken from Micah iv. 4. In the use of the name " Branch," as an appellation of the Messiah (chap. iii. 8 ; vi. 12), allusion is made to the pro- phecies of Isaiah and Jeremiah (see our remarks on those passages). Ps. ex. is evidently referred to in chap. vi. 13. Chap. vii. 9 is, as noted on p. 174, based on Ezek. xviii. 8, and Jer. vii. 5-7, xxii. 3. The imagery in verse 12 appears to be derived from Ezek. xi. 19. Verse 13 of the same chapter is almost a quotation from Jer. xi. 1 1, and verse 14 from Jer. ii. 19 ; while chap. viii. 3 reminds us of Jer. xxxi. 23, verse 4 of Isaiah Ixv. 20, verse 6 of Jer. xxxii. 17, 27, and verse 7 of Isaiah xliii. 6. Verse 8 of the same chapter recalls to mind Hosea ii. 21 (E.V. verse 19) and Isaiah xlviii. i. Chap. viii. 20-22 may, as far as its substance is concerned, be compared with Micah iv. I, 2 ; Isa. ii. 3. The prophecy of the four chariots is evi- dently based on that of Daniel's four empires (Dan. ii., vii.), though it must not be forgotten that this is not admitted by XXXvi INTRODUCTION. § 7. our opponents. In the allusion to the boasted wisdom of Tyre there seems to be a reference to Ezekiel's ironical description of the prince of Tyre, as "wiser than Daniel" (chap, xxviii. 3). The language of chap. ix. 3 refers to i Kings x. 27. The prophecy concerning the cities of Philistia (chap. ix. 5, 6) is akin to Zeph. ii. 4, 5. The promise "by the blood of thy covenant I have sent forth thy prisoners out of the pit, wherein is no water" (ix. 11), seems modelled after Isa. li. 14, " the captive exile hasteneth that he may be loosed, and that he should not die in the pit." In chap. ix. 12, "return to the steep rocks, prisoners of hope," there is, perhaps, a refer- ence to Isa. xlix. 9, " that thou mayest say to the prisoners. Go forth; to them that are in darkness. Show yourselves." The last clause of the same verse, "double I will restore to thee," is almost a quotation of Isa. Ixi. 7, " for your shame you shall have double ... in their land they shall possess the double," or taken from Jer. xvi. 18, "first I will recom- pense their iniquity and their sin double." The prediction of the cutting off of the horses and chariots in the Messianic days (chap. ix. 10) is clearly borrowed from Micah v. TO (see p. 241) ; and the statement as to the extent of Messiah's rule is evidently founded on Ps. Ixxii. 8. The language of Zechariah concerning "the shepherds" and "the goats" (chap. x. 3) is taken from Ezek. xxxiv. 2, 17. The whole allegory of chap, xi. seems to be borrowed from Ezek. xxxiv. (compare chap, xi. 4 with Ezek. xxxiv. 3, 4, and chap. xi. 16 with the same). The expression " the pride of Jordan " (chap. xi. 3) is plainly taken from Jeremiah, who is fond of using that phrase (Jer. xii. 5, xlix. 19, 1. 44, in all of which passages our A.V. has incorrectly " the swelling of Jordan "). The phrase in chap. xi. 5, " are not punished " or " do not feel themselves guilty," seems also taken from Jer. 1. 7 (sec our crit. comm.). Zech. xii. i, where Jahaveh is spoken of as spreading forth the heavens and founding the earth, is plainly connected with INTRODUCTION. § /. XXXvil Isa. li. 13. Zech. xii. 6, where the princes of Judah are likened to a pan of fire among faggots and a torch in a sheaf of corn, is a reminiscence of Obadiah 18, "the house of Jacob shall be a fire, and the house of Joseph a flame, and the house of Esau for stubble, and they shall kindle in them, and devour them." Zech. xiii. 2, where Jahaveh promises to cut off "the names of the idols out of the land, and they shall be no more remembered," is a quotation from Hosea ii. 19 (E. V. 17), "for I will take away the names of Baalim out of her mouth, and they shall no»more be remembered by their name." In Zech. xiii. 8, 9, two parts of the people are spoken of as doomed to be cut off while a third part is left in the land. This is based on Ezek. v. 2, 12, where Ezekiel is bidden to divide his hair into three parts, each part to be dealt with differently, which act is explained as signifying that the people of Jerusalem were to be punished in different ways. The closing sentence of Zech. xiii. 9, "and they shall say, Jahaveh is my God," is almost literally quoted from Hosea ii. 25 (E.V. ver. 23). The mention made of the "living waters" in Zech. xiv. 8 is evi- dently taken from the vision of the living waters in Ezek. xlvii. 1-12 (see p. 487). Zech. xiv. 10 is closely connected with Jer. xxxi. 38, 40, where not only the "tower of Hananeel" and "the gate of the corner" are spoken of, but where the same idea also pervades the passage. In speaking of the nations going up to worship the Lord in Jerusalem (chap. xiv. 16-19), Isa. Ixvi. 23, and Isa. Ix. 12 were plainly in the pro- phet's mind. In predicting that even on the bells of the horses there should be inscribed " holiness to Jahaveh," the same thought is expressed, though in other words, as in Ezek. xliii. 12, "this is the law of the house : upon the top of the mountain the whole limit thereof round about shall be most holy." The closing words of the prophet, " the Canaanite will not be any more in the house of Jahaveh in that day," are akin to those in Ezek. xliv. 9, "no stranger, uncircumcised in XXXviii INTRODUCTION. § /. heart, nor uncircumcised in flesh, shall enter into my sanc- tuary, of any stranger that is among the children of Israel." We have referred to these texts at greater length than usual in order that the casual reader may see for himself how little Davidson's statement is to be relied on, that " most of these reminiscences or borrowings prove doubtful when ex- amined." It will be observed that the latter part of Zechariah has more references to the former prophets than the earlier portion. It is in vain to assert with Bleek and Davidson that Zechariah is the original and that the other prophets quoted from him. The evidence to the contrary was so con- clusive to de Wette's mind that, though in the earlier editions of his Einleiitiug he had adopted views opposed to the tra- ditional thecjiry, he felt himself compelled to change his mind and to admit that the evidence for the post-exilian authorship was overwhelming. As to the assertion that Zechariah may have been the original, Perowne has well remarked, " It must be confessed that it is more probable that one writer should have allusions to many others than that many others should borrow from one, and this probability approaches certainty in proportion as we multiply the number of quotations or allusions." In the case under consideration the probability almost amounts to certainty. Among the traces of unity of authorship which ma}' be discovered by a comparison of the two portions may be men- tioned the utter absence of allusion to any king over Israel or Judah. The references to "the house of David " cannot be fairly considered as such (see p. xxxi.). The only king men- tioned in the two parts is the Messiah, who under the name of the "Branch" is spoken of as king alike in chap. vi. I3, 13 and in chap. ix. 9. On Kucnen's view see our crit. conmi. on chap. iii. 8. The statement in chap. vi. 12, 13, must be con- sidered in connexion with that in cliap. ii. 14, 15 (E.V. verse 10, 11), and the latter has a vcr}' close similarity to chap. ix. 9, INTRODUCTION. § /. XXxix 10. The attempts made to discover essential differences in the picture given of the Messianic age in the first and second portions must be viewed as faikires. In both parts the house of Israel and Judah are spoken of as essentially one; e.g., in chap. ii. 2 (E.V. i. 19) and viii. 13, and in the second portion in chap. ix. 9, 10, 13, x. 3, 6, 7. So also the bonds of " brotherhood " are represented in chap. xi. as existing even after the good shepherd had been rejected by the people. Zechariah promises a future to both portions of the covenant people united, as Jeremiah (xxiii. 6, 1. 20) and Ezekiel (xxxvii. 16-19) did before him. The legend of the " lost tribes " of Israel, as we have several times pointed out, is a myth unworthy of serious attention ; and as Dr. Pusey has well observed, " the captivity, in God's Providence, ended at once the kingdom of Israel and the religious schism, the object of which was to maintain the kingdom." In the latter days of the northern kingdom many of the people of that kingdom embraced Hezekiah's invitation to come up to the passover at Jerusalem (2 Chron. xxx. 10, 11, 18) ; and after the captivity of the larger portion of the northern tribes, which took place during Hezekiah's reign over Judah, we read of "all Judah and Israel " as keeping the great passover in the days of Josiah and as styled collectively " the children of Israel " (3 Chron. xxxv. 17, 18). The edict of Cyrus, too, permitting the exiles to return to their own land, was published "through- out all his kingdom" (Ezra i. i), and, therefore, in all those parts where the Israelites, properly so called, had been carried away captive. We have also shown that a considerable num- ber of them did actually return to Palestine. See pp. 279, ff., and pp. 243-5. A certain correspondence may be traced between the last six chapters and the first six, though we are not inclined to go as far as Lange has done in that direction. That com- mentator seems too subtle in discovering correspondences xl INTRODUCTION. § /. between the two portions. But there is a general Hkcncss traceable between them, and Stahelin is right in seeing in both the same announcement of the Messianic times, and of the trials of the people which were to result at last in the glory of the theocracy. The differences which Davidson and others have endeavoured to point out between the descriptions of each portion are no more than might be reasonably expected in prophecies delivered under different circumstances. Certain peculiar forms of expression are found in both parts f the book. The rare phrase 2.'^'^') "^2^^ occurs in vii. 14 and in ix. 8. See note 3, p. 176 and p. 221. "T*Ili*n in the sense of to remove, occurs in chaps, iii. 4, xiii. 2. XWTV DJ*}J, which is used in fourteen places in the first part, occurs also in the second in chap. x. 12, xii. i, 4, xiii. 2, 7, 8. The whole people are similarly styled "the house of Israel and the house of Judah" (chap. viii. 13), or "the house of Judah and the house of Joseph" (chap. X. 6), or " Judah, Israel and Jerusalem," ii. 2 (E.V. i. 19), or "Judah and Ephraim" (chap. ix. 13), or "Judah and Israel" (chap. xi. 14). "There is in both parts," notes Dr. Pusey, "the appeal to future knowledge of God's doings to be obtained by experience, chap. ii. 13, 15 (E.V. verses 9, 11) ; in both, internal discord is directly attributed to God, whose Pro- vidence permits it (chaps, viii. 10, xi. 6) ; in both the prophet promises God's gifts of the produce of the earth (chaps, viii. 12, X. i) ; in both he bids Jerusalem burst out for joy ; in the first, ' for lo ! I will come and dwell in the midst of thee ' (chap. ii. 14, E. V. verse 10) ; in the second, * behold thy king cometh unto thee.' " The language of both parts is on the whole pure Hebrew. No stress can be laid upon the few Chaldaisms which occur, some of which are open to dispute. The prophet, though living in the days of the Restoration, formed his written language after the purest type of that spoken by the ancient prophets. Great stress must be laid upon the internal evidence afforded INTRODUCTION. § /. xli by a consistent interpretation of the book. A considerable part of the second portion is utterly inexplicable on the supposition of its having been written before the exile. The references to the Greeks cannot on any fair principles of in- terpretation be made to square with the hypothesis of the pre-exilian origin of that portion. See our remarks on chap. ix. 13, ff., and chap. x. In our opinion the decision as to the integrity of the book is not so uncertain as Perowne seems to regard it. Our view of the question would be considerably modified if we had come to the conclusion that the writings of the pro- phets of Israel ought to be regarded as ordinary writings with no real claims to Divine inspiration as such a principle could not but seriously affect our exposition of various passages. It is time, however, for modern critics to give up the assump- tion which is too often made, that a writer who uses prose on one occasion may not also at another time be the author of poetry. It is, moreover, highly improbable that the com- pilers of the Canon could have been ignorant with regard to the writings of a prophet who lived so near to their own times, or that they could have so easily confounded with his genuine productions the prophecies of two other prophets who lived previous to the Babylonish captivity. Davidson and other critics consider chap, xii.-xiv. (with the exception of chap. xiii. 7-9) to have been written by one author, and composed in the time of Jehoiakim, about B.C. 600. So von Ortenberg, who, however, considers chap. xiv. as of a somewhat later date than chap, xii.-xiii. 6, and to have been written at a time when the confidence of victory expressed in the earlier chapters was considerably lessened on account of the more threatening position of political affairs, and the writer was led to fear that some judgment would fall upon Jerusalem. If, however, any prophet could have de- livered such predictions at the period referred to, he must xlii INTRODUCTION. § 8. have been a " false prophet," Hke Hananiah (Jcr. xxviii.), and one of those of whom Jeremiah speaks as proclaiming "peace, peace, when there was no peace" (Jer. vi. 13, 14, viii. 10, 11, xiv. 13, xxiii. 16, 17). The true character of such prophecies must have been well understood at the period of the exile, if not earlier ; and it would have been impossible, as Kohler observes, that any such writings could have obtained a place in the collection of the Jewish sacred writings made shortly after the restoration from captivity by persons fully aware of their real signification. § 8. Apparatus Criticns. The following are the works which have been principally made use of, though reference has been necessarily made to many others, as may be seen from the Index. Arnheim, H. Translation in the German Version of the Old Test, by Zunz, Arnheim, Fiirst and Sachs. 8th edit. Berlin, 1863. Bauer, G. L. Die kleinen Propheten mit Comm. (2 vols.). Leipzig, 1786, 1790. Baumgarten, Prof. M. Die Nachtgesichte Sacharias (2 vols.). Braunschweig, 1854, 1855. Blayney, Benj. Zcchariah, a new Trans, with notes critical, phil. and exeget. 4to. Oxford, 1797. Bleek, Fried. Einlcitung in das Alt. Test. 2te Aufl. Berlin, 1865, and 4te Aufl. by Wellhausen, Berlin, 1878. There is translation into English of this work by Rev. E. Venables, Resident Canon of Lincoln. ,, Das Zeitalter von Sacharja, Kap. 9-14, in the T/nvl. Studien ?/. Kritiken for 1852. Bunsen, C. C. J. VoUstandiges Bibelwerk fiir die Gcmcinde. 2te Theil. Die PropJictcii. Leipzig, i860. His Golt in dcr Ccschichtc I know only at second hand. INTRODUCTION. § 8. xHii BOTTCHER, Fried. Neue exeg.-kritische Aehrenlese zum A. T. (2 vols.). Leipzig, 1863, 1864. „ Proben alt-test Schrifterklarung. Leipzig, 1833. „ De Inferis rebusque post mortem futuris ex Heb. et Grsec. opin. Dresden, 1846. Calvini, Io., Praelectiones in Duodecim Proph. Minores. Geneva, 1610. CAPPELLl,Lud. Comm.etNotaeCrit. inVet.Test. Amst., 1689. Critici Sacri. 7 vols, folio. Francofurt, 1695. The quotations to Grotius, Di^usius, and others are made from this work. Chambers, Dr. T. W., of New York. The Book of Zechariah expounded, in the English edition of Lange's Com- mentary on the Old. Test. 1874. Dathe, J. A. Prophetae Minores Latine versi notisque phil. et crit. illust Halse, 1790. Davidson, Dr. Samuel. Introduction to the Old Testament (3 vols.). Williams & Norgate, 1862, 1863. Delitzsch, Prof. Dr. Franz. See Index. Drake, Rev. Wm. Comm. on Zechariah in the Speaker's Commejitary, vol. vi. London, 1876, EWALD, Prof H. Die Propheten des alten Bundes. 2te i\.usg. in drei Banden. Gottingen, 1867, 1868. „ History of Israel, English trans, by Martineau and Carpenter, 1 867-1 874. Furst, Prof Julius. Der Kanon des alt. Test, nach den Ueberlieferungen in Talmud u. Midrasch. Leipzig, 1868. Geschlchte der bibl. Literatur (2 vols.). Leipzig, I 867-1 870. Geiger, Dr. Abraham, Urschrift u. Uebersetzungen der Bibel. Breslau, 1857. Havernick, H. a. C. Einleitung in das alteTest. 2te Aufl. von C. F. Keil, Frankfort, 1854. xliv INTRODUCTION. § 8. Henderson, E., D.D. The Minor Prophets, trans, with comm., crit., phil. and excg. London, 1845. Hengstenberg, E. W. Christology of the Old Test. Eng- lish trans. (4 vols.). T. & T. Clark, 1 863-1 865. „ Dissert, on the Genuineness of Daniel and the Integrity of Zech. English trans. T. & T. Clark, 1848. HiTZiG, Dr. Ferd. Die zwolf kleincn Propheten. 3te Aufl. Leipzig, 1863. „ Die Prophetischen Bucher des A. T. ubcrsctzt. Leip- zig, 1854. VON HoFMANN, Dr. J. C. K. Weissagung u. Erfullung in alt. u, neuen Test. (2 vols.). Nordlingen, 1841. Der Schriftbeweis (3 vols.). Nordlingen, 1852-1855. Keil, Prof. Dr. C. F. Comm. iiber die zwolf kl. Propheten. 2te Aufl. Leipzig, 1873. KiMCHI, David. Comment, on Zcchariah, trans, from the He- brew, with notes by the Rev. A. McCaul. Lond., 1837. Kliefoth, Dr. Th. Der Prophet Sacharjah ubersetzt und ausgelegt. Schwerin, 1862. Knobel, Aug. Der Prophetismus der Hebraer (2 vols.). Breslau, 1837. KoHLER, Prof Dr. August. Die nachexilischcn Propheten (4 parts). Erlangen, 1860-1865. Lange, Prof. Dr. J. P. Die Propheten Haggai, Sacharja, Maleachi, Theol.-hom. bearbeitet, in his Bibelwerk. Bielefeld and Leipzig, 1876. :\IARCKII, lo., in Proph. Min. Comment. Amst., 1696-1701. ]Maurer, F. J.V. D. Comm. Gram.-crit. in Vet. Test. (4 vols.). Leipzig, 1835-1847. Mede, Joseph, B.D., Works of. London, 1677. Newcome, Archbp. The Minor Prophets trans., etc. New edition. London, 1836. Neumann, Wilhelm. Die Weissagungen dcs Sakharjah. Stuttgart, i860. INTRODUCTION. § 8. xlv VON Ortenberg, E. F. J. Die Bestandtheile des Buches Sacharja. Gotha, 1859. Perowne, Prof., now Dean, J. J. S. Article on ZecJiariah in Smith's Biblical Dictionary. London, 1863. Pressel, W. Comm. zu Haggai, Sacharja u. Maleachi. Gotha, 1870. POLI, Matthjei, Synopsis Criticorum. Folio (4 vols.). London, 1 669- 1 674. PusEY, Dr. E. B. The Minor Prophets, with a Commentary explan. and practical. Oxford and London, 1877. Rashi, or R. Sal. Jarchi (Salomo ben Yizhak) Comm. Heb. in Proph. Maj. et Min. etc. Latin, vers. J. F. Breithauptii, 1713- Rosenmuelleri Scholia. Prophetse Minores, editio secunda. Leipzig, 1827, 1828. Reinke, Laur. Die Messianischen Weissagungen bei den gross, u. kl. Proph. des A. T. (5 vols.). Giessen,i 859-1 862. Sandrock, H. L. Prior, et post. Zach. part. Vaticinia ab uno eodemque auct. profecta. Dissertatio. Vratisb., 1856. Stahelin, J. J. Specielle Einleitung in die kanon. Bucher des A. T. Elberfeld, 1862. „ Die Messianisch. Weissagung. des A. T. Berlin, 1847. Schegg, Prof. Peter. Die kleinen Propheten iibersetzt u. erklart (2 vols.). Regensberg, 1854, 1862. Soulier, J. Die zwolf kl. Propheten. 2te Ausg. Nordlingen, 1876. Theiner, Dr. J. A. Fifth Part of his Comment, iiber die heilige Schrift des A.T. Leipzig, 1828. Tremellius & Junius. Biblia Sacra. 1607. Umbreit, F. C. W. Pract. Commentar iiber die kl. Propheten (2 parts). Hamburg, 1844, 1846. Venema, Herm. Serm. Acad, vice Comm. ad libr. proph. Zach. Leovard., 1787. xlvi INTRODUCTION. § 8. Wordsworth, Bishop. The Mhior Prophets in the Auth. Version, with notes and introductions. London, Rivingtons, 1875. Koster's Melet. crit. and excg., Burger's Coinmeut. on ZecJi., and a few others, have been quoted by me at second hand. The Church Fathers cited will be seen by reference to the Index. I have generally quoted them from the Bibliotheca Pafrnm, but sometimes at second-hand. I have used von Otto's edition of the works of Justin Martyr (Jena, 1876). My object has not been, however, to give a sketch of the Patristic interpretations, however interesting that might be. Besides the above works I have used Gesenius' TJiesaiirus completed by Rodiger; the latest edition of" his Wdrterbuch edited by Miihlau and Volck (Leipzig, 1878) ; and Fiirst's Heb. unci Cliald. Handzvorterbttch (Leipzig, 1863), an English translation of which has been edited by Dr. S. Davidson, and a revised edition in 1876, by Dr. Victor Ryssel. On questions connected with prophecy in general, I have con- sulted Davison's Discourses on PropJiecy (Lond., 1839) ; Duhm's TJieologie der Propheten (Bonn, 1875) ; Drummond's (Jas., B.A., Prof in Manchester New College, London) JciuisJi Messiah (Longmans, 1877) ; Tholuck, Die Propheten ii. iJirc Weissagungcn (Gotha, i860); Riehm (Prof Dr. Ed.), Mes- sianic Prophecy, trans, from the German (Edinb., T. & T. Clark, 1876); Kuenen (Dr. A., of Leyden) The Prophets and Prophecy in Israel (authorized English translation, London, 1877) ; and Dr. R. Payne Smith's Prophecy a P reparation for Christ, the Bampton Lectures for 1859. I have also made use of Wunsche's (Dr. Aug.) interesting treatise on Die Leiden des Messias (Leipzig, 1870); Dean '^X.diViXo.ys Lectures on the Jewish Church (London, 187 5- 1877); Prof Count V. Baudissin's Studien zur Se^nitischen Religionsgeschichte, Heft I, Leipzig, 1876; Heft 2, Leipzig, 1878 ; Schrader, Die INTRODUCTION. § 8. xlvii Keilinschrifteu n. das alte Testavient (Giessen, 1872), and his Keilinschriftcn wid GeschicJitsforscJiung (Giessen, 1878); Turpie (David McC, M.A.), The Old Testament in the Nezv (London, 1868), and TJic Neva Testament Vi'eza of the Old (London, 1872). On questions affecting tlie Hebrew text I have consulted De Rossi's Varicu Lectiones, which have been used to verify Davidson's RevisioJi of the Hcb. text ; Strack's valuable Pro- legomena Critiea in Vet. Test. Heb. (Lipsiae, 1873); Dr. Gins- burg's edition of Levitds Massoreth Jia-Massoreth; and Baer's recently published critical edition of the Hebrew text of TJie Minor Prophets, with preface by Delitzsch (Leipzig, 1878), whence I have taken the readings of the Babylonian Codex, as time did not permit me to collate minutely the text of that codex in Strack's magnificent edition, nor was such a colla- tion necessary for my immediate purpose. On grammatical points I have consulted the last edition of Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar edited by Kautzsch (Leipzig, 1878), as well as the 20th edition edited by Rodiger (the 2 1st edition, 1872, I have not seen). English students will find, for ordinary purposes, no difficulty in using any of the later editions. I have also used Gesenius' Lehrgebdiide der Heb. Sprache (18 17), and given frequent references to Kalisch's Hebrew Grammar, the sections numbered with Arabic numerals referring to his first part, and those marked with Roman numerals to his second. References are also given to Ewald's Ausf. LeJirbnch, 8th edition (Gottingen, 1870); and on some points to Olshausen's Lehrbneh der Heb. Sprache (Braunschweig, 1861), to Bottcher's great work, his Ausfiihrl. Lehrbneh (Leipzig, 1866, 1868), and to Driver's (S. R.) very excellent Treatise on the Use of the Tenses in Hebrezv (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1874). I had intended to have gone more minutely into the points discussed by Mr. Driver, but the limits assigned to my work prevented xlviii INTRODUCTION. § 8. mc from doing so. Similar reasons have hindered me from entering upon the various questions connected with the metheg as set forth in Baer's treatise in Merxs Archiv, and from giving notes on the Hebrew accentuation ; for to have done so would have required considerably more space than it was possible to afford, as well as necessitated the postpone- ment of the publication of this work for a considerable time. It only remains to note that the text of the LXX. used is that of Tischendorf, but that much valuable help has been derived from Field's masterly edition of Ongeu's Hexapla (Oxon., 1875), from which the readings of Aquila, Symmachus and Theodotion, as also of the Syriac Hexaplar text (when referred to) have been taken. For the Syriac Peschitto I have used the text of Lee, compared with that in the London Polyglott, from which latter work the Arabic version has been taken. The Itala has been quoted from the great work of Sabatier. For the Targum, the text of the London Polyglott has been compared with that of de Lagarde, in his ProphctcB Clialdaicc e fide codicis raicJdiniani (Leipzig, Teubner, 1872). THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET ZECHARIAH. NE W TRA NSLA TION. CHAPTER L I In the eighth month, in the year two of Darius, was the word of Jahaveh to Zechariah, the son of Berechiah, the son of Iddo the prophet, saying — 2, 3 Jahaveh was indeed angry with your fathers : And say unto them, Thus saith Jahaveh of hosts, Return unto me, ('tis) the utterance of Jahaveh of hosts, that I may return 4 unto you, saith Jahaveh of hosts. Be not as your fathers, unto whom the former prophets cried, saying, Thus saith Jahaveh of hosts, Return now (or, return, pray) from your evil ways, and from your evil deeds, but they did not hear, and attended not to me, ('tis) the utterance of Jahaveh. 5 Your fathers, where are they ? and the prophets ? will they 6 live for ever .-• Only my words and my decrees, which I commanded my servants the prophets, have they not 5 Or, " and the prophets — do they live for ever ? " The Syr. has " and my prophets." , 6 The LXX. supply ^T\\> after "decrees," translating ir\T)v roi)s \ljyov% fioxi Kal rb. v6iiifj.d /MOV Sexe(Tde. So the Arab. , but not the Syr. After " I commanded my servants the prophets," the LXX. add if Trvevfj.ari fiov, which may be regarded as an interpretation. The LXX. render the clause "have they not overtaken your fathers "by ol KareXaSocra]' tous waripas vixuiu, rendered by Schleusner " who lived at the time of your fathers. " d "1 THE BOOK OF ZECHARIAII, i. 6- 1 6. overtaken your fathers ? And they turned and said, As Jahaveh of hosts designed to do to us according to our ways and according to our deeds, so hath he done with us. 7 In the twenty and fourth day of the eleventh month, that is the month Shebat, in the year two of Darius, was the word of Jahaveh to Zechariah, the son of Berechiah, the son of Iddo, the prophet, saying — 8 I saw in the night, and lo ! a man riding upon a red horse, and he (was) standing, between the myrtles which were in the valley, and behind him horses, red, bay (or cJiest- 9 7iut) and white. And I said, What are these, my lord } And the angel that talked with me said, I will shew thee what 10 these are. And the man who was standing between the myrtles answered and said, These are they which 1 1 Jahaveh sent to walk up and down on the earth. And they answered the Angel of Jahaveh, who was standing between the myrtles, and said, Wc have walked up and down on the earth, and behold, the whole earth is sitting and resting {i.e., 12 resting tranquilly). And the Angel of Jahaveh answered and said, Jahaveh of hosts, how long hast thou not pity for Jerusalem and for the cities of Judah, against which thou 13 hast been angry these seventy years.? And Jahaveh answered the angel who talked to me (with) good words, 14 words (which were) consolations. And the angel that talked to me said to me. Proclaim, saying. Thus saith Jahaveh of hosts, I am zealous for Jerusalem and for Zion 15 (with) great zeal. And with great wrath am I wroth against the nations which are at ease (or, in security, or pi'oud, on account of such security), because I was angry for a little while, but they helped for evil. 16 Therefore thus saith Jahaveh, I have returned to Jeru- 6 ^jnX- Theod. vylv, and so vixdv for ^fi.(iiv in the preceding clause. 16 Cod. I and Syr. have at the commencement of the verse ' ' Jahaveh of hosts." The LXX. add in. (nW) at the end of the verse. THE BOOK OF ZECHARIAH, 1. l6-ii. 6. H salem with mercies, my house shall be built in it, ('tis) the utterance of Jahaveh of hosts, and a line shall be stretched 17 over Jerusalem. Moreover, proclaim, saying, thus saith Jahaveh of hosts, Again shall my cities overflow with good (or, prosperity), and Jahaveh shall comfort again Zion, and choose again Jerusalem. CHAPTER II. (In our Authorized English Version the first four verses are assigned to chap. i. after the LXX. and Vulgate.) 1 And I lifted up mine eyes, and saw, and behold four 2 horns. And I said to the angel that talked with me, What are these t and he said to me, These are the horns which scattered Judah, Israel, and Jerusalem. 3, 4 And Jahaveh showed me four smiths. And I said, What are these coming to do .'' and he said, saying, These are the horns which scattered Judah, so that none lifted up his head, and these are come to terrify them, to cast away the horns of the nations that are lifting up the horn against the land of Judah to scatter it {i.e., the people there). 5 And I lifted up mine eyes, and saw, and behold a man, 6 and in his hand a measuring line. And I said. Whither art thou going } And he said to me, To measure Jerusalem, to see how great (should be) its breadth, and how great its 17 The LXX. add at the beginning of the verse koX elire irphs ixk 6 dyyeXot 6 \a\wu iv ifioL They are followed by the Arab., but not the Syr. 2 After " what are these ?" the LXX. add Kijpie. 3 The LXX. T^KToues, Vulg. fabri ; see p. 32. 4 After "and he said," some MSS. add vN, which is expressed by the LXX. (cod. Alex.) and Syr. The LXX. and Syr, omit the following "saying." 1K3''1. LXX. Kcd i^7]\do ovtol tou o^vvaL, See crit. comm. The LXX. add after "scattered Judah," ^at rbv 'laparjX /car^a^ai', " and have broken Israel," followed by the Arabic, but not by the Syriac. For "the land of Judah" the LXX. read ^jrt ttju yrjv Kvplov, Hi THE BOOK OF ZECHARIAH, H. 6-I4. 7 length. And behold the angel that talked with me gocth 8 forth, and another angel goeth forth to meet him. And he said to him, Run, speak to this young man, saying, Jeru- salem will remain as villages, on account of the multitude 9 of men and cattle in her midst. And I will be to her, ('tis) the utterance of Jahaveh, a wall of fire round about, and will be as glory in her midst. 10 Ho ! ho ! and flee from the land of the north, ('tis) the utterance of Jahaveh, For as the four winds of the heavens I have spread you abroad, ('tis) the utterance of Jahaveh. 11 Ho ! Zion ! deliver thyself, O dweller with the daughter of Babel. 12 For thus saith Jahaveh of hosts, After glory, he hath sent me, to the nations who are spoil- ing you, For he who touchcth you, toucheth the apple of his eye. 1 3 For behold I swing my hand over them. And they shall be as spoil to their servants, And ye shall know, that Jahaveh of hosts sent mc. 14 Rejoice and be glad, daughter of Zion, 7 The LXX. render NV by elar-^Kei, stood up, namely, to measure Jerusalem. 8 The LXX. insert before " run," Xiyuv. 9 The Syr. adds "in her midst," after " to her," as at the end of the verse. 10 Instead of y3^^0 several MSS. have VSIXIi. This can, however, scarcely have l)een the reading of the Vulg. jn quatuor vetttos, or of the Syr., which would require y3"15< a 12 D^1Jn"?X. R. Nathan 'J"?y in his Concordance. The Oriental reading is D^Un 7y, and so Codd. The LXX., Syr. and Targ. are quoted as supporting this reading, but this is more than doubtful. l^Jl Codd. rj33. The LXX. would appear to h.avc had this reading, as they translate ws 6 aTrrdiievo's. 71333. Some Codd. read 7133, but incorrectly. See Elias Levita's Massoreth-ha-J\Iassorelh, edited by Ginsburg, p. 219. 13 Dnn3yA So correctly Baer, after all the old editions and very many MSS., and so our A.V. The third edition of the Rabb. Bible (Ven. 1568) has the read- ing Dn*"13yp, which came from thence into Athias' edition, and thence into those of V. d. Ilooght and Ilahn. It is found also in many MSS., and is sup- THE BOOK OF ZECHARIAH, 11. 14-iii. 5. liii For behold I am coming, and I will dwell in thy midst, ('tis) the utterance of Jahaveh. 15 And many nations shall join themselves to Jahaveh in that day, and shall be to me for a people, And I will dwell in thy midst, And thou shalt know, that Jahaveh of hosts hath sent me to thee. 16 And Jahaveh shall inherit Judah as his portion, on {i.e., in) the holy land, And choose again Jerusalem. 17 Hush! all flesh before Jahaveh, For he hath raised up himself, from his holy dwelling. CHAPTER III. 1 And he showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the Angel of Jahaveh, and the Adversary standing 2 on his right to act as adversary to him. And Jahaveh said to the Adversary, Jahaveh rebuke thee, O Adversary, yea Jahaveh rebuke thee, who delighteth in Jerusalem. Is 3 not this a brand plucked from the fire.'* And Joshua was clothed with filthy garments, and standing before the 4 Angel. And he answered, and said unto those standing before him, saying. Take off the filthy garments from upon him ; and he said to him, See, I have removed thy iniquity from thee, and have clothed thee with 5 changes of raiment. And I said, Let them put a clean mitre upon his head. And they put the clean mitre upon * 7 c ported by the LXX. roli Sovkevovcrcv aindlt. The Syr. render .oou'^iii^ " thei?' works." 4 Codd. 5 read "T'JIl?. The LXX. also express the plural. 5 And I said. The LXX. omit these words, and translate the words follow- ing in the second pers. pi. /cat iiridere Kidapiv KaOapdv. Two INISS., Vulg., Syr., " and be said," See p. 63. liv THE BOOK OF ZECHARIAII, iii. 5-iv. 4. his head, and they clothed him with garments. And the Angel of Jahaveh was standing by. 6 And the Angel of Jahaveh protested unto Joshua, 7 saying, Thus saith Jahaveh of hosts, If in my ways thou wilt walk, and if thou wilt keep my testimony (or, command- ment), then thou shalt also judge my house, and also keep my courts, and I will give to thee walks {i.e., open ways, 8 free ingress) among these (angels) standing (here). Hear now, Joshua the high priest, thou, and thy companions who sit (or, those sitting) before thee, for men of portent are they, for behold I am bringing forth my servant Branch 9 (or. Shoot). For behold the stone which I have placed be- fore Joshua, upon one stone (are) seven eyes; behold, I am graving its graving, ('tis) the utterance of Jahaveh of hosts, and I will remove the iniquity of this land in one day. In 10 that day, ('tis) the utterance of Jahaveh of hosts, ye shall call (or, invite) each man his companion under the vine, and under the fig tree.' CHAPTER IV. 1 And the angel which talked to me returned, and waked 2 me, as a man who is awaked from sleep. And he said to me. What art thou beholding > And I said, I see (or, I have seen), and behold a candlestick entirely of gold, and its bowl upon the top of it, and its seven lamps upon it, seven and seven pipes to the lamps which are upon its top. 3 And two olive-trees above it, one at the right of the bowl, 4 and one upon its left. And I answered, and said to the angel who talked with me, saying. What are these, my 5 The LXX. transl. '\12V in the last clause as if it were the perfect, (drr-fiKti) but it is pointed in the Hebrew as the participle to indicate that the Angel was standing by during the whole transaction. 2 "And I said." See crit. comm. TFIE BOOK OF ZECHARIAH, iv. 5-14. IV 5 lord ? And the angel that talked with me answered, and said to me, Dost thou not know what these are? and I said, 6 No, my lord. And he answered and said to me, saying. This is the word of Jahaveh to Zerubbabel, saying, Not by might, and not by power, but by my spirit, saith 7 Jahaveh of hosts. Who art thou, O great mountain ! Be- fore Zerubbabel, for a plain ! and he shall bring forth the top-stone, (amid) shoutings, Grace, grace to it ! 8, 9 And the word of Jahaveh was to me, saying, The hands of Zerubbabel have founded {i.e., laid the foundation of) this house, and his hands shall finish it, that thou mayest 10 know that Jahaveh of hosts hath sent me to you. For who despiseth a day of small things.-' For {i.e., seeing that) there have rejoiced, and seen the plummet (lit., the stone, the tin) in the hand of Zerubbabel, these Seven, the Eyes of Jahaveh, they are running to and fro in all the 1 1 earth. And I answered and said to him, What are these two olive trees, upon the right of the candlestick and upon 12 its left } And I answered a second time, and said to him, ■ What are the two branches of the olive trees which by means of the two channels of gold, are pouring forth the gold (i.e., the golden oil) from out of themselves } And 13 he said to me, saying. Dost thou not know what these 14 are "^ And I said. No, my lord. And he said, These are the two sons of oil, which are standing before the Lord of all the earth. 7 ''D. Cod. I has '•S. 9 nnM. Codd. have DnUTM. The plural is also expressed by the Syr., Targ. and Vulg. n'2'h^. Cod. i has T'Sx, and so the LXX. 10 Or, "there rejoice and see," taking the perfects as presents. Codd. 5 omit nion. The Orientals read PnilT ^3Q7 instead of 7211? n"'3 in the kethibh, and have the latter as the k'ri reading. So the Babylonian Codex. 13 Codd. insert T\'OT\ before n?X. 14 Codd. 3 read 'h^ nDKM. THE BOOK OF ZECHARIAH, V. I -9. CHAPTER V. 1 And I turned and lifted up my eyes, and I saw, and 2 behold a roll flying. And he said to me. What art thou beholding ? And I said, I see a roll flying, its length 3 twenty cubits, and its breadth ten cubits. And he said to me, This is the curse which is going forth over the face of the whole land, for every one that stealeth shall be cleansed away on this side according to it, and every one that sweareth shall be cleansed away on this side (on the other 4 side) according to it. And I will bring it forth, ('tis) the utterance of Jahaveh of hosts, and it shall enter into the house of the thief, and into the house of him who swear- eth by my name, falsely, and shall lodge in the midst of his house, and shall consume it, and its timbers and its stones. 5 And the angel that talked 'with me went forth, and he said to me, Lift up now thine eyes and see what is this 6 thing which is going forth (or, appearing) ? And I said. What is it ? And he said. This is the ephah which is going forth (or, appearing). And he said, This is their eye 7 in all the land. And behold a talent of lead was being lifted up {i.e., carried), [and I saw] and this (was) one 8 woman, sitting in the middle of the ephah. And he said. This is Wickedness; and he flung her down into the middle of the ephah, and he flung the weight of lead {i.e., the talent weight) on her mouth. And I lifted up mine 9 eyes, and I saw, and behold, two women going forth, and (the) wind was in their wings, and they had wings, like the wings of the stork, and they lifted up the ephah between the earth, and between the heaven. And I said to the angel that talked with me. Whither are they bringing the ephah } And he said to mc, To build for her a house THE BOOK OF ZECHARIAH, V. Q-vi. 10. Ivii in the land of Shinar, and (if) it shall be established, then she shall be set there upon her base. CHAPTER VI. 1 And I lifted up mine eyes again, and I saw, and behold, four chariots going forth from between the two mountains ; 2 and the mountains (were) mountains of copper. In the first chariot red horses, and in the second chariot black horses. 3 And in the third chariot white horses, and in the fourth 4 chariot horses speckled, strong. And I answered and said to the angel that talked with me, What are these, my lord ? 5 And the angel answered and said to me, These are the four winds of the heavens, going forth from standing before 6 the Lord of the whole earth. That in which the black horses are, (they) are going forth to the land of the North ; and the white, (they) have gone forth to that which is behind them ; and the speckled, (they) have gone forth to 7 the land of the South. And the strong went forth, and they sought to go forth to walk to and fro through the earth ; and he said, Go forth, walk to and fro through the earth, and they walked to and fro through the earth. 8 And he cried to me, and said to me, saying. See these (horses) going forth to the land of the North, (they) have caused my anger (lit., iny spirit) to rest upon the land of the North. 9, 10 And the word of Jahaveh was to me, saying, Take from the captivity, from Heldai, and from Tobiah, and 5 l^'TiriD. Codd. 2 LXX. {TrapaaTrivai), Ax., Syr. , Vulg. {ut stent) read 3Vnn7. But this reading is against the sequel of the narrative. lo ni^lD nXJOI. So Baer has rightly edited, instead of TIXIS on the authority of many MSS., LXX. (see crit. comm.), Aquil. , Syr., Targ., Vulg. 1K3. Codd. 2, Syr., LXX., read i<3, in the singular. So the Targ., according to the Lond. Polygl., but de Lagardehas the plural. Iviii THE BOOK OF ZECHARIAII, vi. lO-vii. 2. from Jedaiah, and go thou on that day, and go, to the house of Josiah the son of Zcphaniah, who are come from 1 1 Babylon. And take silver and gold, and make a crown, and place it on the head of Joshua the son of Jehozadak 12 the high priest. And say unto him, saying, Thus saith Jahaveh of hosts, saying. Behold a man, Branch (or. Shoot) is his name, And he shall branch up (or, shoot up) from his place, And build the temple of Jahaveh. 13 And he shall build the temple of Jahaveh, And he shall bear majesty. And sit and rule upon his throne. And be priest upon his throne, And the counsel of peace, (it) shall be between them both. 14 And the crown shall be for Helem, and for Tobiah, and for Jedaiah, and for the kindliness of the son of Zepha- 15 niah, for a remembrance in the temple of Jahaveh. And those from far shall come, and build in the temple of Jahaveh, and ye shall know, that Jahaveh of hosts sent me to you — and it will be, if ye verily hearken, to the voice of Jahaveh your God. CHAPTER VII. 1 And it was in the year four of Darius the king, the word of Jahaveh was to Zcchariah, in the fourth (day) of 2 the ninth month, in Kislev. Then sent Bethel, (that is) 1 1 JT'tJ'yi. Kimchi, in his Michlol, 6 b, 7a, mentions the reading n^ti'l?! as that of Ben Naphtali. 12 Codcl. omit the first 1DN? {sayiug), which is not expressed by the LXX., Syr. and Arab., but this does not prove that they had a different reading. " From his place," lit., "from under liim." 14 Codd. 2. n:''nn plural. 2 Baer has edited 7Sn*3 in one word, instead of 7S"n*3, on the authority THE BOOK OF ZECHARIAH, vii. 2-12. Hx Sarezer, and Regem-melek, and their men, to intreat the 3 favour of Jahaveh (Ht., to stroke the face of f), saying (with directions to say) to the priests who (belonged) to the house of Jahaveh of hosts, and to the prophets, saying, Shall I {i.e., the city of Bethel and the inhabitants thereof) weep in the fifth month, using abstinence, as I have done, for how many years ? 4 And the word of Jahaveh of hosts was to me, saying, 5 Speak to all the people of the land, and to the priests, saying, When ye fasted and mourned in the fifth and in the seventh (months), even now (or, and this) seventy years, 6 — have ye then fasted me (or, to 7)ie), ME ? And when ye eat, and when ye drink, are not ye (the persons) who eat, 7 and ye (they) who drink ? (Do) not (ye know) the words which Jahaveh hath proclaimed by means of (lit, by the hand of) the former prophets, when Jerusalem was dwelt in and was safe, and her cities round about her, and the South and the Lowland were (lit. luas) inhabited .^ 8 And the word of Jahaveh was, to Zechariah, saying, 9 So saith Jahaveh of hosts, saying, Judgment of truth judge ye. And mercy and compassion Do ye each to his brother. 10 And widow and orphan, stranger and poor, do not ye oppress, And evil against each one's brother Do not ye conceive in your heart. 1 1 But they refused to hearken, and they gave a refractory shoulder, and their ears they made heavy in order that 12 they might not hear. And their heart they made (hard of MSS. The word is often so written in the best MSS. in other books. On Sarezer see note on p. i68. 3 "•^'Dnn- So Baer on the authority of MSS. 4 Codd. 2 with the Syr. and Targ. omit niX2V. 5 The Babylonian Codex and an Erfurt MS. omit "I before HT. See Baer. Ix THE BOOK OF ZECHARIAII, vii. I2-viii. /. as) a diamond, in order that they might not hear the Law, and the words which Jahavch of hosts sent through his Spirit, by means of the former prophets. So there was great wrath from Jahaveh of hosts. And it was as he 13 called and they did not hear, " so they shall call, and I will not hear," said Jahaveh of hosts. "And I will toss 14 them over all the nations which they knew not, and the land shall be desolate after them, so that there shall be no one passing through or returning." Thus they made a pleasant land as a desolation. CHAPTER VIII. 1 And there was the word of Jahaveh of hosts, saying, 2 Thus saith Jahaveh of hosts, I am zealous for Zion with great zeal, and with great anger am I zealous on behalf of 3 her. So saith Jahaveh, I have returned to Zion, and I am dwelling (or, I zv ill dwell) in the midst of Jerusalem, and Jerusalem shall be called a city of the truth, and the mountain of Jahaveh of hosts, the holy mountain. 4 Thus saith Jahaveh of hosts. Old men and old women shall yet sit in the streets of Jerusalem, and each (with) his staff in his hand on account of the number of (his) 5 days. And the streets of the city shall be full, of boys and girls playing in its streets. 6 Thus saith Jahaveh of hosts, If it be wonderful in the eyes of the remnant of this people, in those days, shall it be also wonderful in my eyes.'* ('tis) the utterance of Jahaveh of hosts. 7 Thus saith Jahavch of hosts. Behold, I am about to save my people from the land of the rising (of the sun), I Codd. mult., Syr., Targ. insert vX, but the Masura notes that it ought not to be read here. 3 Codd., Vulg. insert niN2V after Jahavch. THE BOOK OF ZECHARIAH, viii. 7-17. Ixi and from the land of the entrance of the sun (into its rest, 8 i.e., the west). And I will bring them, and they shall dwell in the midst of Jerusalem, and they shall be to me for a people, and I will be to them for a God, in truth and in righteousness. 9 Thus saith Jahaveh of hosts, Let your hands be strong, ye who hear in these days these words from the mouth of the prophets, who were in the day the house of Jahaveh of hosts was founded, the temple, in order that it should 10 be built. For before those days there were no wages for man, and there was no hire for the cattle, and for him who went out and for him who came in there was no peace on account of the oppressor, and I let loose all of the men 1 1 each one against his companion. And now am I not as in the former days for the remnant of this people } ('tis) the 12 utterance of Jahaveh of hosts. For the seed of peace, the vine, shall give its fruit, and the earth shall give its produce, and the heavens shall give their dew, for I will make the remnant of this people to possess all these 1 3 things. And it shall be, as ye were a curse among the nations, O house of Judah and house of Israel, so will I save you, and ye shall be a blessing ; fear not, let your hands be strong ! 14 For thus saith Jahaveh of hosts, As I purposed to do evil to you, when your fathers provoked me to anger, saith 1 5 Jahaveh of hosts, and I did not repent (it) : so have I again purposed (or, / purpose again) in these days to do good to 16 Jerusalem, and to the house of Judah. Fear not. These are the things which ye shall do : Speak truth each man with his companion, Truth and judgment of peace Judge ye in your gates. 17 And do not devise in your hearts each evil against his companion, Ixii THE BOOK OF ZECIIARIAII, viii. I7-ix. I. And love not a false oath. For all these things are what I hate, (Tis) the utterance of Jahaveh ! 1 8 And the word of Jahaveh of hosts was to me, saying, 19 Thus saith Jahaveh of hosts, The fast of the fourth (month), and the fast of the fifth, and the fast of the seventh, and the fast of the tenth, shall be to the house of Judah for gladness and for joy, and for good {i.c. joyful) seasons. Therefore truth and peace love ye. 20 Thus saith Jahaveh of hosts. It will yet be (happen) that peoples will come, and inhabitants of many cities. 2 1 And the inhabitants of one (city) will go to another, saying, " Let us go constantly to intreat the face of Jahaveh, and 22 to seek Jahaveh of hosts." " I will go also." And many peoples and strong nations will go, to seek Jahaveh of hosts at Jerusalem, and to intreat the face of Jahaveh. 23 Thus saith Jahaveh of hosts. In those days, (it will happen) that ten men shall take hold, out of all the languages of the nations, even take hold of the skirt of a man (who is) a Jew, saying, " Let us go with you, for we have heard God is with you." CHAPTER IX. I The oracle of the v/ord of Jahaveh on the land of Had- rach, And Damascus is its resting-place. For to Jahaveh (will) the eye of man (be directed), 17 Codd. omit "l"'X. It is not expressed in the LXX., Syr. and Arab. 20 "After D^Oy insert D"'2"1, Codd. 2, LXX., Xx."— Davidson's Hchrc^u Text Rcuiscd. 23 D^n'pX. Codd. 2, DTI^S ""a. The Versions express the *3, but it is n t necessary to concUide that they liad that reading. Cod. i has mn^ ^3. I Two MSS. of Baer have ^"lin. Codd. 2, IDTOp, see note. THE BOOK OF ZECHARIAII, ix. I-9. Ixiii And of all the tribes of Israel. 2 And even Hamath shall border on it, Tyre and Sidon, Though they be very wise. 3 And Tyre built for herself a fortress, And heaped up silver as the dust. And gold as mire of streets. 4 Behold the Lord will dispossess her. And smite her might in the sea, And she shall be burned with fire. 5 Let Ashkelon see it, and she will fear. And Gaza, and she will tremble (or, lurithe) exceedingly. And Ekron, for her expectation shall be put to shame ; And a king shall perish from Gaza, And Ashkelon shall not remain. 6 And a mongrel (people) shall dwell in Ashdod ; For I will cut off the pride of the Philistines. 7 And I will take away his blood from his mouth, And his abominations from between his teeth. And even he will remain for our God, And be as a prince in Judah, And (or, even) Ekron as a Jebusite. 8 And I will encamp for my house against an army, So that no one shall go to and fro (over it). And no taskmaster shall pass through (over) them again, For now have I seen with my eyes. 9 Rejoice greatly, daughter of Zion, Shout, daughter of Jerusalem, Behold thy king shall come to thee {or, for thy good), Righteous and Saved is he. Afflicted, and riding upon an ass, •*" 2 LXX. 5t(5rt i(pp()vr)aav (T(p6Spa. 8 Or, against the passer by and him who retumeth. Ixiv THE BOOK OF ZECHARIAH, Ix. 10- 1 5. And upon a colt, a foal of she-asses. 10 And I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim. And the horse from Jerusalem, And the battle-bow shall be cut off; And he will speak peace to the nations, And his rule shall be from sea to sea, And from the River {i.e., Euphrates) to the ends of Earth. 1 1 Even thou ! through the blood of thy covenant, I send-forth (or, / have sent-forth) thy prisoners out of the pit In which there is no water. 12 Return to the steep-rocks (lit., the steepness), Ye prisoners of hope ; Even to-day, I announce it, double I will restore to thee. 13 For I will bend (or, draw) for me Judah as a bow, I will fill it with Ephraim, And I will lift up (as my spear) thy sons, Zion, against thy sons, Javan ! {i.e., Greece) And I will make thee as the sword of a mighty one, 14 And Jahaveh shall be seen over them. And his arrow go forth as the lightning, And the Lord Jahaveh will blow with the trumpet. And walk forth in the storms of the south. 15 Jahaveh of hosts will shield them. And they will eat, and they will tread down sling-stones. And they drink, and rage as with wine, 9 Or, as Chambers, " the she-asses' foal." II See p. 249 and note 2 there, as also crit. comm. 13 Or, according to the Hebrew accentuation, "I will bend (as a bow) for me Judah, I will fdl the bow with Ephraim." But see crit. comm. Cod. I, LXX., Arab, read "]?, inste«f *?. 15 ^Dni. So Baer has edited after MSS. and a manuscript of the Masora parva. He notes also that tlie ]irinted ISIasora mjntions three cases in wliich this word occurs with the copula (IDm), namely, Jcr. v. 22, li. 55, and this pass.ige. Many MSS. have this reading, and so Kimchi and Abarbancl. THE BOOK OF ZECHARIAH, ix. 15-X. 3. Ixv And be filled (with blood) as the sacrificial-bowl, As the corners of at^ altar. 16 And Jahaveh their God will save them in that day, his people as a flock, For (they will be as) stones of a diadem Shining forth upon (or, over) his land. 17 For how great (lit., ivJiat) is his (Israel's) beauty, and how great is his goodness ! Corn shall make the young men increase, And wine the maidens. CHAPTER X. 1 Seek ye from Jahaveh rain in the time of latter rain ; Jahaveh maketh the showers : And copious rain will he give to them, For each one grass in the field. 2 For the teraphim speak falsehood, And the diviners see lies. And dreams speak vanity, They comfort in vain. Therefore they departed (or, migrated) as sheep, They are afflicted (or, oppressed), because there is no shep- herd. 3 Against the shepherds my anger is kindled. And the he-goats I will visit (in judgment), 16 Not " crowned trophies," as Newcome after Houbigant and Cappellus, or " consecrated stones," as Blayney. See p. 260 and the note there. 1 Codd. have DD? " to you " instead of " /«? them; " soH^r. 2 See on this verse p. 268 and note. Codd. 13171 "and they are afflicted," and so all the versions. 3 On '^ visit in judgment" see note on page 271. Some MSS. and editions insert badly 1 {and) before " the house of Judah." Ixvi THE BOOK OF ZECHARIAII, X. 3- 10. For Jahaveh of hosts visitcth (in mercy) his flock, the house of Judah, ^ And maketh them As his state-horse in the battle. 4 From him corner, from him nail, From him battle-bow, From him proceedeth every oppressor together. 5 And they shall be like heroes trampling (their enemies) In the mire of streets, in the battle, And they shall fight. For Jahaveh is with them, And riders upon horses shall be ashamed. 6 And I will strengthen the house of Judah, And the house of Joseph, will I save ; And I will bring them back, for I have compassion upon them, And they shall be as if I had not loathed them. For I am Jahaveh their God, and I will answer them. 7 And Ephraim shall be like a hero. And their heart shall rejoice as with wine ; And their sons shall see (it) and be glad; Let their heart rejoice in Jahaveh ! I will hiss for them, and will gather them, for" I have redeemed them. And they multiply as they multiply {i.e., as fast as they desire). 9 And I will sow them (as seed) among the nations. And in the distant lands they will remember me. And live with their sons, and return. 10 And I will bring them back from the land of Egypt, And from A^ria will I gather them, And to the land of Gilead and Lebanon will I bring them. 6 "I will bring them back," or " I will place them." Both readings have the authority of MSS. See the note, p. 276. THE BOOK OF ZECHARIAH, X. lO-xi. 5. Ixvii And (place) will not be found for them. 1 1 And he (Jahaveh) passeth through the sea (where is) affliction, And smiteth the waves in the sea, And all the depths of the River {i.e., the Nile) dry up, And the pride of Assyria is brought down. And the sceptre of Egypt passeth away. 12 And (or, For) I will strengthen them in Jahaveh, And in his name shall they walk. ('Tis) the utterance of Jahaveh ! CHAPTER XL 1 Open, Lebanon, thy doors, And let the fire devour thy cedars ! 2 Howl, cypress, for the cedar js fallen ! Because the glorious ones are laid waste. Howl, oaks of Bashan, For the inaccessible wood descends (goes down) 3 A voice of lamentation of the shepherds ! For laid waste is their splendour. A voice of the roaring of lions ! For wasted is the pride of Jordan. 4 Thus saith Jahaveh my God : Feed the flock of slaughter, 5 Whose buyers slay them, and are not punished, (or, do not feel tJiemselves ginlty). And they who sell them, say each, " Blessed be Jahaveh, that I am rich ! " And as for their shepherds, (Each) spares them not. II See on this verse pp. 294, ff. Ixviii THE BOOK OF ZECIIARIAII, xi. 6-1 5. 6 For I will not spare further the inhabitants of the earth, ('tis) the utterance of Jahaveh. And behold I am delivering over mankind, Each into the hand of his neighbour and into the hand of his king, And they shall lay waste the earth, And I will not deliver from their hand. 7 So I fed the flock of slaughter, therefore the most miser- able flock. And I took to me two staves, the one I named Beauty, and the other I named Bands (or. Binders), and I 8 fed the flock. And I cut off the three shepherds in one month, and my soul was wearied with them (the sheep), 9 and even their soul loathed me. And I said, I will not feed you ; that which is dying, let it die, and that which is perishing, let it perish, and as for the rest, let them eat 10 each one the flesh of its companion. And I took my staff. Beauty, and cut it asunder, in order to break the covenant, 1 1 which I had made w^ith all the nations. And it was broken in that day, and the wretched flock knew accordingly, they who observed me, that it was the word of Jahaveh. 12 And I said to them. If be it good in your eyes, give me my wages, and if not, forbear. Then theywxMghed out 1 3 for my wages thirty pieces of silver. And Jahaveh said to me, Fling it to the potter, the glorious price, at which I was priced by them. So I took the thirty pieces of silver, and I flung it, in the house of Jahaveh, to the potter. 14 Then I cut in sunder my second staff. Bands, in order to break the brotherhood, between Judah and between Israel. 15 And Jahaveh said to me, Take unto thee yet the in- strument of a foolish shepherd. 13 Codd. read DSvI'D "by you," instead of " by them." 15 Cod. I reads the plural y?- The plural is generally expressed by the THE BOOK OF ZECHARIAH, xi. l6-xii. 3. Ixix 16 For behold I am raising up a shepherd in the land, The perishing he will not visit, the scattered he will not seek, The broken he will not heal, The strong (lit., the standing) he will not care for. But the flesh of the fat he will eat. And he will break in pieces their hoofs. 17 Woe, worthless shepherd, forsaking the flock ! (May) a sword (descend) upon his arm, And upon his right eye ! His arm verily will wither. And his right eye be verily blinded ! CHAPTER XII. 1 Oracle of the word of Jahaveh concerning Israel. ('Tis) the utterance of Jahaveh, who spreadeth forth the heavens, and foundeth the earth, and formeth the spirit of man in his midst {i.e., within him). 2 Behold I am making Jerusalem a bowl of reeling to all the peoples round about. And also over Judah shall be (the reeling) in the siege against Jerusalem. 3 And it shall be in that day, I will make Jerusalem a stone of burden to all the peoples, Every one lifting it up shall verily be lacerated, And against her shall be gathered together All the nations of the earth. 16 Codd. read "1^3111, " and the scattered.'''' On the transl. see note on p. 350. So also Codd. 112^3111, " and the strong.'''' 17 See notes on p. 347 and p. 348. 2 See notes on p. 361 and p. 362. Ixx THE BOOK OF ZECIIARIAII, xii. 4- 10. 4 In that day, 'tis the utterance of Jahaveh, I will smite every horse with terror, And his rider w^ith madness, But upon the house of Judah will I open mine eyes, And every horse of the peoples I will smite with blindness. 5 And the princes of Judah shall say in their heart, A strength to me are the inhabitants of Jerusalem, Through Jahaveh of hosts, their God. 6 In that day I will make the princes of Judah as a pan of fire among faggots, And as a torch of fire in a sheaf, And they shall devour upon right and left all the peoples round about ; And Jerusalem shall still dwell upon her base in Jeru- salem. 7 And Jahaveh w^ill save the tents of Judah first, In order that the glory of the house of David may not magnify itself, And the glory of the inhabitant of Jerusalem, over Judah. 8 In that day, Jahaveh will defend the inhabitant of Jeru- salem, And he that is tottering among them in that day shall be as David, And the house of David as God, As the Angel of Jahaveh before them. 9 And it shall be in that day, I will seek to destroy all the nations Which come against Jerusalem. 10 And I will pour out upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitant of Jerusalem, 8 Cod. I -[X'PDI '' atid (/ic Angel,'" ^ic. 10 See note on p. 3S3. THE BOOK OF ZECHARIx\H, xli. lO-xiii. 2, Ixxi The spirit of grace and of supplication ; And they shall look unto me, (him) whom they pierced, And they shall mourn over him, As the mourning over the only son, And they shall make a bitter mourning over him, As one is bitter (in grief) over the first-born. 1 1 In that day the mourning shall be great in Jerusalem, Like the mourning of Hadadrimmon in the valley of Megiddon. 12 And the land shall mourn, Families by families apart ; The family of the house of David apart, and their wives apart. The family of the house of Nathan apart. And their wives apart — 1 3 The family of the house of Levi apart. And their wives apart — The family of the Shimeite apart. And their wives apart — 14 All the families which are left, Families by families apart, And their wives apart. CHAPTER XIIL 1 In that day, there shall be a fountain opened, for the house of David, and for the inhabitants of Jerusalem, for sin and for uncleanness. 2 And it shall be in that day, 'tis the utterance of Jahaveh 1 1 The word Hadadrimmon is variously written in MSS, as p?3~mn. }1D''"l"in. pD-nn, |in-)-nn, pOI lin, Cod. i iimmn, Vulg. Adadremmon. After Ha- dadrimmon Codd. 5 insert pCTltS p, but incorrectly, as this reading has crept in from the Targum. See note i, p. 392. Codd. IIJ^O. I On the LXX. see note on p. 409. Ixxii THE ROOK OF ZECHARIAII, xiii. 2-8. of hosts, I will cut off the names of the idols from the land, and they shall not be remembered again; and even the prophets, and the unclean spirit will I cause to pass 3 away from the land. And it shall be, when a man shall still prophesy, then they shall say to him, his father and his mother, they that bare him, " Thou shalt not live, be- cause thou hast spoken lies in the name of Jahaveh;" and they shall pierce him through, his father and his mother, they that bare him, on account of his prophesying. 4 And it shall be in that day, that the prophets shall be ashamed each of his vision, on account of his prophesying, and they shall not put on a hairy garment in order to 5 deceive. And he will say, " No prophet am I, a man a tiller of the ground am I, for a man purchased me (as a 6 slave) from my youth." And he will say to him, " What are these wounds between thine hands.''" And he will say, "Those with which I have been wounded in the house of my friends." 7 Sword, awake, against my Shepherd, And against a man, my fellow, ('Tis) the utterance of Jahaveh of hosts ; Smite the shepherd that the sheep may be scattered, And I will turn back my hand upon the humble ones. 8 And it shall be in all the land, ('tis) the utterance of Jaha- veh, That (two parts in it) Shall be cut off, shall expire. And the third part shall be left in it. 4 Codd. insert TlV aflcr lu'^T. Tlie Taiguiii .ind Kinichi seem to have had this reading. 5 See note on p. 426. 6 See p. 427, and the note there. 7 On " w_j'/'//<7Ty," see p. 435. Baer edits ''na*J'm, perf. consecutive with the tone on the ultimate, on the authority of MSS. and editions. Tlieile's text is TlTJ'ni, with the accent on the penult. Tlie word is then the ordinary perf., and may be regarded as a perf. proph. On ''the humble ones" see p. 440 and crit. conim. THE BOOK OF ZECHARIAH, Xlll. 9-XIV. 5. 1 9 And I will bring the third part through fire, And I will try them as silver is tried, And I will prove them as gold is proved, They shall call on my name, and I will answer them, I will say, they are my people. And they shall say, Jahaveh (is) my God. CHAPTER XIV. 1 Behold, a day is coming for Jahaveh ; and thy spoil is 2 divided in thy midst ! And I will gather all the nations to Jerusalem, to the battle ; and the city shall be taken, and the houses shall be plundered, and the women defiled; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the remnant of the people shall not be cut off from the city. 3 And Jahaveh shall go forth, and fight against those nations, 4 as in a day of his fighting, in a day of battle. And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mountain of the olives which is before Jerusalem eastward, and the mountain of the olives shall be split from its middle, eastwards and westwards (lit, seawards), a very great valley ; and half of 5 the valley shall move northwards, and half of it south- wards. And ye shall flee to the valley of my mountains, for a valley of mountains shall extend very near ; and ye shall flee, as ye fled from before the earthquake, in the days of Uzziah, king of Judah; and Jahaveh my God shall 9 In the last three lines the singular is used in the original. I See note on p. 455. 3 On the LXX. see note on p. 464. 5 " A valley of mountains," see note on p. 471. On "ye shall flee," see p. 475 and crit. comm. Or " shall extend to Azal " see note on p. 476. Many MSS. 731, "a)idany The copula is expressed in all the versions. Cod. I, Syr., Targ., VE^lp, "■ his saints." Many MSS. ^W, " ivith him;"' and so all the versions. See note on p. 479. Ixxiv THE BOOK OF ZECHARIAH, xiv. 6-I4. 6 come, all the saints with thee ! And it shall be in that day, there shall be no light, the precious (things, i.e., the 7 lights) shall be contracted. And it shall be one day, it is known to Jahaveh, not day, and not night ; and it shall be that at eventide there shall be light. 8 And it shall be in that day, living waters shall go forth from Jerusalem, half of them towards the eastern sea, and half of them towards the hinder (western) sea ; in summer 9 and in winter shall it be (so). And Jahaveh shall be as king over all the earth ; in that day Jahaveh shall be one, and 10 his name one. All the land shall be changed (so as to become) as the Arabah, from Geba to Rimmon, south of Jerusalem ; and she shall be lifted up, and shall dwell on her base, from the gate of Benjamin to the place of the first gate, even to the gate of the corners, and from the tower 1 1 of Hananecl even to the king's wine-presses. And they shall dwell in her, and a curse shall be no more, and Jeru- 12 salem shall dwell safely. And this shall be the plague, with which Jahaveh shall smite all the peoples which go forth against Jerusalem : (namely) to consume (or, waste) their flesh, while they are standing upon their feet ; and their eyes shall waste away in their sockets, and their tongues shall waste away in their mouths. 13 And it shall be in that day, there shall be a great con- fusion from Jahaveh among them; so that they shall seize each one the hand of his companion, and his hand 14 shall be lifted up against the hand of his companion. And 6 See note on p. 481, and p. 482. 10 Many MSS. read nSIU^ instead of niiyD. Baer has on the authority of four MSS. pointed nmi?? instead of '1^3, that is, without the article, and so he has edited in Isa. xxxiii. 9, after the best authorities. If this reading be adopted, we must render " as a plain." But see pp. 491, fT. 12 In the original the singular is chiefly used in this verse ("his flesh," "his feet," "his eyes," "his tongue," but "their mouth"), but the words are evidently employed collectively. THE BOOK OF ZECHARIAH, xiv. I4-2I. Ixxv even Judah shall fight at Jerusalem ; and the wealth of all the nations round about shall be gathered (by 15 them), gold, and silver, and garments in great abundance. And thus will be the plague of the horse, the mule, the camel, and the ass, and of all the cattle, which shall be in 16 those camps, as this plague. And it shall be, every one who is left of all the nations which come against Jeru- salem, that they shall go up year by year, to worship as 17 king Jahaveh of hosts, and to keep the feast of taber- nacles. And it shall be, they who go not up of the families of the earth to Jerusalem to worship as king Jahaveh of hosts, — that there shall be no rain upon them. 18 And if the family of Egypt go not up and do not come, there (shall) not (be) upon them (any rain) ; the plague will be (upon them), with which Jahaveh shall smite the nations, who go not up to keep the feast of 19 tabernacles. This shall be the sin (or, punisJiuient) of Egypt, and the sin (or, piinishmeni) of all the nations, who 20 go not up to keep the feast of tabernacles. In that day there will be upon the bells of the horses " Holiness to Jahaveh ; " and the pots in the house of Jahaveh, (shall be) 2 1 like the sacrificial-bowls before the altar. And every pot in Jerusalem and in Judah, shall be holiness to Jahaveh of hosts ; and all those who sacrifice shall come, and take of them, and cook in them ; and no Canaanite shall be any more in the house of Jahaveh of hosts, in that day. 18 Codd. 4 omit S71 before DHvy, and so LXX. and Syr. Codd. 2 omit tlie copula, reading Ka Very many MSS. insert ?3 before W''\^T[,^^ all the nations, ^^ but the Targ. and Syr. have not this reading, though it is found in the LXX., Vulg. and Arab. The Oriental Jews read D''?3yn"?3"nX, "«// the peoples." Some Codd. D''0yn"?3. The verse is wanting in some copies. See on this verse the note on p. 508. 20 See note on p. 511. For ni7^*Q many MSS. read defectively D^VD. " Codd. mult, in the sing. So the versions. Codd. niPDD. Codd. 5 m?''D10." Davidson. CHAPTER I. THE FIRST THREE VISIONS. B CHAPTER I. Ilaggai's sermon to the Jews and its effect, 3 — Commencement of the building of the temple, 4 — Significance of the twenty-fourth day, 4 — Visions of Zechariah, 4 — Dreams, 5 — Not mere poetic fancies, 6 — The prophetic horizon, 6 — Method of discussion, 7 — The First Vision. — Its scene, 8— View of Hitzig and P^wald, 8 — Objections to their view, 8 — Myrtle trees in temple, 9 — Valley of Vision, 10 — The angelic riders, 11 — Rider on the red horse, 11 — *' Angel that talked with me," 12 — Angel of Jahaveh, 11, 21 — Fancied correspondence of first and seventh visions, 12 — The riders in the Revelation, 13— The colours of the steeds, 12 — Colours used simply to mark off the three divisions of riders, 12, 20 — Keil's explanation of colours as symbolical, 14 — View of Kohler, 15 — Views of Ewald and others, 16 — Objections, 16 — Kliefoth's interpretation, 17 — As- serted correspondence with Nebuchadnezzar's dream of the metallic image, 17 — Kliefoth's reply to objections, 18 — Report of the celestial riders, 20 — Interces- sion of the angel, 21, 23 — The seventy years, 22 — Answer of Jahaveh, 23 — Pur- port of proclamation, 24 — God angry for a little while, 25 — ^Sin of Gentiles, 25 — Promises, 25 — The Second Vision. — The four horns, 26 — Different views, 27 — Signify hostile kingdoms, not the four kingdoms of Daniel, 27 — View of Ewald and Hitzig, 27— Pressel's interpretation, 28 — "Judah, Israel and Jerusalem," 28 — Different views, 29-31 — Strange interpretation of Kliefoth, 30 — The four smiths, 31 — Different views, 31,32 — Why smiths specially were seen in the vision, 32 — Explanation of the vision, 33 — The Third Vision. — Man with measuring line, 33 — Why forbidden to measure the city, 34, 35 — Young man not the prophet, 35 — The growth of Jerusalem, 35, 36 — Exiles ordered to flee out of Babylon, 37 — ^Judgments on Babylon, 38, 39 — Rock of Behistun, 38 — Conversion of the Gentiles, 39, 40 — Advent of Jahaveh, 39 — The spiritual Jerusalem, 40 — Judah and Israel, 40 — The " Holy Land," 41. ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. CHAPTER I. THE FIRST THREE VISIONS. The day of the New Moon, that is the first day of the month of Elul, or September, in the second year of Darius Hystaspis (B.C. 520), was a day of peculiar importance to the Jewish exiles who had, in accordance with the decree of Cyrus, returned to the land of their forefathers. As the day of the New Moon was a day in which the Jews were wont to gather themselves before God, and to offer up sacrifices on the altar which had been erected among the ruins of the temple of Solomon, the time was a peculiarly fitting one in which to remind them of the continued desolation of the house of God, and of their duty in respect thereto. Filled with the Spirit of God, Haggai, called to be a prophet in Israel, preached on the occasion a remarkable discourse, in which he stirred up the people to repentance, and especially exhorted their leaders to " consider their ways." His sermon seems to have produced an instantaneous effect The heads of the Jewish colony, who had previously been wont to excuse their own tardiness by pointing to the serious hindrances placed in the way of the rebuilding of the temple by the adversaries of Judah and Jerusalem, were aroused to consider their own negligence, and forthwith took counsel together with respect to the restoration of the sacred building. Ere the month 4 ZECHARIAH AND HIS TROPHECIES. [Ch. i. 1-7. came to a close, on the twenty-fourth day, or within three weeks of the appeal of Haggai, the people, headed by Zerubbabel, the pasha of Judah, and Joshua, the High Priest, " came and did work in the house of Jahaveh of Hosts," the God of Israel. 1 The twenty-fourth day of the month was a day of very peculiar significance to the restored colony. On that day the people recommenced the work on the ruins of the temple (Hag. i. 14, 15), probably by removing the accumulated rubbish, and by making preparations for the extensive build- ing operations. The Lord, who had given a manifold proof of his presence with his people (Hag. i. 13) by raising up one prophet among them, raised up a second likewise. In the eighth month Zechariah was filled with the spirit of prophecy, and preached, as Haggai had done, a sermon calling the people to repentance. In the succeeding month (December, or Kislev), on the twenty-fourth day, the same day three months after the work had been recommenced, Haggai received both his third and fourth revelation, being the last revelations vouchsafed to him (Hag. ii. 10, 20). It was no doubt owing to the work done in connection with the re- storation of the temple that the twenty-fourth day of the month attained its special importance, and was honoured by being made a day of Divine revelation. Two months later, therefore, on the twenty-fourth day of the month (the month Shebat), Zechariah saw the wonderful visions, which form the chief portion of the first six chapters of his book. It was likewise on the twenty-fourth day of the first month, after having previously fasted and mourned for three full weeks, that Daniel had received the vision of the "things noted in the scripture of truth " (Dan. x. 21). ^ The time intervening was no doubt a season of earnest prayer on the part of the prophet Haggai, though it is fanciful to seek to compare this instance with the three weeks' fast of the prophet Daniel, or even to compare with the latter the three weeks inferentially alluded to in Hag. ii. i, as Liaunigarten has done. Ch. i. 1-7.] INTRODUCTORY. 5 The visions of Zechariah are introduced by the phrase, " The word of Jahaveh came to Zechariah, the son of Bere- chiah, the son of Iddo, the prophet, saying," inasmuch as it Avas through the visions which the prophet saw that the will of Jahaveh was communicated to him. As Isaiah and Amos are spoken of as having seen the word which they were com- missioned to deliver concerning Judah and Jerusalem (Isa. i. I ; ii. I ; Amos. i. i), so the prophet Zechariah styles the visions which he saw, " the word of the Lord which came to him." 1 The visions were seen by Zechariah on the night with which, according to the Jewish mode of reckoning, the twenty-fourth day commenced. The phrase, " I saw in the night," probably indicates this (Keil), though it can scarcely be translated by, " in this night," as some have proposed.^ Ewald and others consider that Zechariah received his visions in a real dream of the night season, while Hengsten- berg thinks that the prophet saw them in a waking condition during the night, when his mind was more susceptible of heavenly impressions. The expression, "in a dream, in a vision of the night" (Job xxxiii. 15), or in "a dream of a night vision " (Isa. xxix. 7), is not used, and, therefore, it ' The expression "saying" is sometimes used to introduce what is written, as well as what is spoken ; 2 Kings x. 6 ; 2 Chron. xxi. 12, where ItOJ^p is used ; and comp. i Mace. viii. 31, Luke i. 63, where its equivalent, Xeyioy, occurs, as also Joseph. Aittiq. xi. 4, § 7. 2 So Rosenmiiller, Pressel, etc. It can scarcely indicate the whole night through (as Lange seems to consider), nor does the translation of our Authorised Version seem to us to express the sense of the original, "by night," i.e., in the night season, as if stress were laid upon the season, as that in which the spirit of man is more withdrawn from the outward world and, therefore, is more susceptible for receiving visions from above. The translation, "by night," is that of the Vulg., Jer. and Luth., and is adopted among modern critics by Ewald and Kohler. The translation proposed by Baumgarten and Neumann, ' ' I saw out into the night," making the night the object of the verb preceding (after the analogy of Gen. i. 4), is decidedly fanciful. The night in such a translation must be regarded as used emblematically, either in reference to the darkness of the visions afterwards recorded (Jerome, Calov.^, or of the times then present (Neumann), or of the times to come. 6 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. i. 1-7. is more natural to suppose that the visions were seen in a prophetic ecstasy, or trance. The use of such words as " I saw," " I hfted up mine eyes," is not by any means con- clusive against Ewald's view, though Pressel seems to regard it as being so. In dreams we imagine that we make use of our bodily organs. Nor is even the statement " he waked me as a man is waked out of his sleep " (chap. iv. i, 2) opposed to this idea; for it must not be forgotten that even in ordi- nary dreams it occasionally happens that one dreams that he dreams, and may dream too of being awakened out of that dreamy slumber. That the prophet was in a somnambulous state is an idea which must be altogether rejected. Persons in such a state do not remember what they have seen or done, while the very opposite was the case of the prophet ; and, moreover, the sickly state of such a condition is utterly unsuited for any true revelation from above (Pressel). The visions of Zcchariah were not mere creations of the mind, like those of Dante. The prophet was himself ignorant of the meaning of much which he saw in the visions, and had to seek to have it explained. He recounted what he had seen or heard. Yet, at the same time, the visions all bear the impress of the prophet's own personality, and of the times in which he lived and worked (Pressel). Because the rationalist has sought to deny or explain away all traces of the super- natural in Holy Writ, we ought not to seek to obliterate all traces of the natural. We cannot, however, agree with Riehm that every prophet was so far limited as to his foresight, that his historical horizon circumscribed his prophetic vision. The horizon of a prophet, according to Riehm, only ex- tended so far as the prophet's present, considered in the light of the Divine counsels, bore in its bosom the events of the future. But while we do not coincide with this view, we maintain that the prophetical visions of the Old Tcstamen_t^ naturally arise from the ground of the prophets' own present, Ch. i. 1-7.] INTRODUCTORY. 7 and that even when distant future is depicted, it is depicted in the Rght and with the colours of their own day. The horizon of the Old Testament prophets was the first advent of the Messiah, and though occasionally they may appear to pass beyond that grand event, to which they looked as the great object of expectation, the exception proves the rule, for "the last things" were presented to their view as imme- diately connected with the manifestation of the Messiah. This principle is remarkably illustrated in the prophecies of Zechariah, and those writers widely err who fancy that minute details of events destined to occur in the end of the world are predicted in the Old Testament, although passed over in silence by our Lord and His Apostles. It must be borne in mind that many a point connected with what is termed " the higher criticism," must needs be here omitted, which will come under examination elsewhere. Our intention is to survey the book of Zechariah as a whole, in connection with the various conflicting interpretations of its several passages ; several questions connected with the authorship and composition of the book will be reserved for treatment in our Introduction. If on any point we appear unfairly to assume what ought first to be proved, it is because our proofs will be adduced elsewhere, and not because we wish to shrink from the due examination of the points in dispute. We shall endeavour fairly to state the views of those from whom we may differ, without ungenerous insinuations as to the ground on which that diff"erence of opinion is based. The best apology for what we regard to be the true interpre- tation is not to present it alone by itself, but to compare it with the various other explanations which have been sug- gested. If we err in any particular, our error will thus be more easily detected ; and if our interpretation be correct, its truth will more clearly be seen. The more calmly such points are discussed the better, although we do not mean to 8 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. i. 8. conceal our opinion that some of these points arc of the very highest importance. The scene of the visions is supposed by Ewald and Hitzig to have been the tabernacle of God, the heavenly palace, in the courts of which, after the analogy of the earthly temple, there were seen myrtle trees, those trees being peculiarly suitable to be described as growing in its courts, on account of their dark and glittering green colour, and of the sweet odour with which their flowers perfume the air. That such trees were actually planted in the courts of the temple at Jerusalem, has been asserted on the authority of two passages in the Psalms, and from a passage in 2 Mace. But it is by no means certain that any such conclusion can be really drawn from those passages.^ Ewald thinks that the prophet saw the angels who had patrolled the earth during the day- time, riding towards the heavenly tabernacle, on horses of various colours, from the four quarters of heaven, in order to ^ The passages are Ps. lii. lo (ver. 8 in E.V. ) ; xcii. 13, 14 ; 2 Mace. xiv. 4. Grotius in his note on 2 Mace, renders that passage by, "moreover, of the boughs solemnly consecrated in the temple," and notes that there were many offerings belonging to the temple, among which there were not a few imitations of trees in gold, etc. In his notes on I.uke xxi. 5, Grotius adduces further proofs from Philo and Josephus, and makes special mention of the golden vine given by Herod the Great, and of that previously belonging to the temple, presented by Arislobulus to Pompey (Joseph. Antiq. xiv. 3, § i ; Tac. Hist. v. 5). But see crit. comm. In that case the constmction of the words in 2 Mace, Trpos hk roi^rots tC:v fo/xi^-o/x^vuv daWuv toO IfpoO, must be regarded as equal to rims twv 6a\\uiv tQv Tov lepov pofii^o/j.^vuv (Vulg. qui tevipli esse videbanhir). Grimm objects to this explanation, that it is scarcely likely that the temple, at such a period, so shortly after the desolations of Antiochus Epiphanes, could have had many such votive offerings ; that Alcimus had no admission to the temple and therefore could not liave taken away such votive offerings ; and, moreover, that to express such a meaning, OaKKCiv should have been placed before twv voiii^oixivwv , and not after it. Hence he prefers to translate the passage, with De Wette, "of the customary olive-twigs of the temple," i.e., those which used to be brought from the temple to a king when homage was done to him on his entrance upon his government. According to Grimm's explanation the olive trees must have been grown in the temple courts. But where is the custom referred to elsewhere spoken of? The passage is too doubtful to found much upon it ; 6a\\o(, though used of olive branches, might also indicate palm branches. Ch. i. 8.] THE FIRST VISION — THE ANGEL-RIDERS. 9 give in their report of what they had seen on earth, and to receive directions from the Lord of all. This is not the picture of the scene which would be na- turally drawn from the words of the original, as they appear in the ordinary Hebrew text, or as translated in any of the ancient versions. The view of Hitzig and Ewald is com- pletely novel. In order to obtain any basis on which to build such an opinion, a punctuation of the Hebrew text must be adopted which is supported by no ancient authority. To adduce the expression, " His pavilion round about him," in Ps. xviii. 12 (ver. ii in E.V.), or "the noise (thunder) of his tabernacle " (Job xxxvi. 29), in support of the reading " taber- nacle " here, is vain, as a different word is used in both these passages.^ However ingenious the interpretation, it is toler- ably plain that the view adopted has suggested the alteration of the Hebrew punctuation, and then the latter is used in its turn to support the theory. Few persons acquainted with the common use of symbolical and figurative language in the sacred writings will be disposed to agree with Hitzig, when he seeks to account for the residence of God in heaven being represented as a tent, by asserting that the tabernacle, after it had long vanished from history, was considered to have been caught up to heaven, with the ark of testimony and the pot of manna, w^hich statement he vainly attempts to prove from two passages in the Revelation (Rev. xi. 19, and ii. 17). Much more simple and in accordance with the original is it to suppose that the scene of the first vision is described as a shady and deep valley. The article may be satisfactorily ' It is strange for Hitzig to argue that the use of the article with the word translated in our A.V., "the bottom " (but by Hitzig and Ewald, "■ the tent"), is a proof that the prophet speaks of something well known, not of anything here mentioned for the first time. For the existence of the article is only indicated by the Masoretic vocalization, and if that pointing needs correction, as Hitzig main- tains, in one part of the word, how can any argument be derived from that vocali- zation in another syllable of the same ? (See our crit. comm. on this verse. ) 10 ZECHARIAH AND HIS TROPHECIES. [Ch. i. 8. accounted for as denoting the special valley seen by the prophet in the vision (so Kliefoth, Kohler, Keil). It might indicate some particular valley presented to the prophet's view ; a valley where myrtle trees grew in considerable numbers, and which was well known to the inhabitants of Jerusalem in that day. If such a shady valley existed not far from Jerusalem, it would have been peculiarly suitable to have been represented as the scene of this first vision ; as in this vision Jahaveh's gracious return to His people and city is described.^ In this deep valley the prophet saw a man riding on a red horse, who was halting among the myrtle trees. Behind him were a number of horsemen, mounted on steeds of different colours. The riders, indeed, on these horses arc not expressly mentioned, but verse lo clearly implies that riders were seen sitting on the horses. The riders themselves are not specially mentioned, because (as Hitzig conjectures) the horses on which they sat would naturally first come into view ; and the colour of the horses, whereby the band was seen to be composed of three distinct divisions, was the point of chief importance. ' No other explanation is needed of this feature in the vision. Ewald's idea, suggested by the translation of theLXX., that the myrtles spoken of here are to be thought of as growing between the two mountains of brass mentioned in chap, vi., which correspond to the two chief mountains of Jerusalem, must be considered elsewhere. It is entirely based on the idea of the assumed correspondence of the two visions, which view cannot be considered as proven. Many other expla- nations have been given, such as that of the Targum, followed by Kimchi, that the valley represented Babylon, to which the Jews had been deported on account of their sin, and that the myrtle trees represent the Israelites in Babylon, who possessed the sweet odour of the commandments of God. Venema, after Jerome, adopts this view as to the signification of the myrtle trees, and adduces various reasons why saints are described as myrtles ; — because the myrtle is ever green ; because it abounds with sap, symbolising the operations of the Spirit, and because that sap is bitter, opposed to corruption, indicating the principle of immortality. We consider such expositions as sacred trifling. Or that the valley represents the kingdom of God in its outwardly depressed condition, but still under the gracious protection of the Angel of the Lord {Hcitgstaibcrg). Or that that vale depicts the abyss-like power of the kingdom of the world (Biutiitgartcii). Nor can we agree with Keil that the myrtle thicket is " undoubtedly " (which is rather Ch. i. 8, 9.] THE FIRST VISION — THE ANGEL-RIDERS. 1 1 The rider on the red horse, who is specially noted, was in advance of the others, who are represented as having been " behind him." He must not be identified, as many commen- tators imagine, with the Angel of Jahaveh, who stood also between the myrtle trees, and to whom both he and his fellow riders reported the condition of the Gentile world. If the Angel of Jahaveh was really identical with the rider on the red horse, that rider would have been represented as standing opposite to the other horsemen, and they would not have been spoken of as " behind him." Moreover, though the rider on the red horse was the leader and chief of the band of angelic riders, he was also a member of one of the sub- divisions of which that band was composed, inasmuch as he was mounted upon a steed of a red colour, and not of a colour distinct from the rest. We must not, if we desire to avoid endless confusion, permit ourselves to be led by the authority of eminent commentators to identify either the Angel of Jahaveh or the rider on the red horse with the interpreting angel so often spoken of in the first six chapters. The in- terpreting angel generally stands as it were outside of the visions, and seldom takes any other part in them, than strong language) an image of the theocracy, or of the land of Judah, as a land dear and pleasant of the Lord (comp. Dan. viii. 9 ; xi. 16), because the myrtle is a favourite plant for decorations ; and that the depth in which the myrtle wood lay can only be a figure of the deep humiliation of that land. It might indeed be used as a suitable figure of the oppressed condition of Israel, as a symbol of misfortune, as Lange, Rosenmliller, and others think. Lange appeals to Ps. xxiii. 4 (ver. 5 in E.V.), and Ps. Ixxxiv. 7 (ver. 8 in E.V.) It might possibly refer to the ravine of the fountain of Siloah (v. Hofmann, PVeis. u. Erf., i. 333), if only myrtles actually grew there at that day. The picture of a valley may have been given because of the myrtle trees, which generally grow best in valleys and by streams, as Virg. Georg. ii. 112, litora myrtetis latissima, and iv. 1 24, amantes litora myrti. Hitzig's suggestion needs only mention, namely, that the trees are here alluded to as those to which the angelic riders could bind their steeds. As equally fanciful, though in another direction, we must regard the suggestion of Neumann, that the valley represents the fields of everlasting salvation, perfumed by heavenly love, inasmuch as the myrtle is used among the Jews as a symbol of heavenly love, and the pious Jews sometimes adorn themselves with three sprigs of myrtle on the Sabbath days. Myrtles were indigenous to Palestine, see Smith's Bibl. Diet, 12 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. i. 8, 9. to interrogate other angels, and to point out to the prophet the special features of a vision or the signification thereof The interpreting angel is frequently characterised through- out the book by " the angel that talked with me," as our Authorised Version has correctly translated it. Dr. Pusey and others have called attention to the phrase in the original, which might be rendered " spake in me." Dr. Pusey observes that this " very rare expression seems meant to convey the thought of an inward speaking, whereby the words should be borne directly into the soul, without the intervention of the ordinary outward organs." It must, however, be noted that the phrase in question is used in the sense of to speak of a person (i Sam. xix. 3 ; Deut. vi. 7), to speak against one (Num. xxi. 7), and to speak tJiroiigJi one as an interpreter (Num. xii. 2, etc.). It is also used of communing ivith a person (Num. xii. 6, 8 ; I Sam. xxv. 39), and even of speaking to a person (Hos. i. 2 ; Hab. ii. i). Ewald considers that the preposition used conveys the idea of the address of a superior to an inferior (see crit. comm.). The Targumist has correctly given the sense found in our Authorised Version, though the LXX. and Jerome seem to have regarded the expression as peculiar. Puscy's idea is scarcely correct ; for what the prophet heard from the angel is narrated as communicated to him by word of mouth. Nor is there any propriety in one angel being denoted as " the angel that spake in me," nor that "talked by me" (Drake), for, inasmuch as the visions narrated are purely subjective, all the speeches might have been similarly so described. The variety of colours in the horses is no doubt signifi- cant ; but there is a considerable diversity of opinion as to what one of the colours mentioned actually is, and as to the signification of the colours in general. An attempt has been made to identify the horses in this vision with those mentioned in the seventh and last ; but the Ch. i. S-ii.] THE FIRST VISION THE ANGEL-RIDERS. 1 3 seventh vision is in its character and scope very dififerent from the first. White and red horses were seen in both the visions ; but with that feature all similarity ends. The place at which the riders on horses are seen to arrive in the first vision, and that from which the persons driven in chariots go forth in the latter, are entirely different. It needs no little ingenuity and critical" torturing of both texts to make out any such correspondence between the two visions as would justify the interpretation of the terms used in one as ex- planatory of those used in the other, or to justify the attempt to supply the gaps, assumed to exist in the first vision, by the incidents recorded in the latter. In the latter black horses are spoken of, which do not appear in the first vision ; even if (without any authority whatever) we should seek to identify the colour which is named third in the first chapter with that mentioned in the fourth place in chap. vi. Three colours only are mentioned in the first vision ; four at least are spoken of in the seventh. It is more natural that attempts should have been made to compare those passages in the book of the Revelation, in which similar symbols occur, with this vision of Zechariah. The riders mentioned in the first four seals of the Revelation are represented as going forth on their different errands on horses of four dififerent colours (Rev. vi. i-8). And at the close of the book (chap. xix..ii, 14), the armies of heaven are spoken of as following their leader on the white horse, who was named Faithful and True, and riding forth like him on white horses. But much caution must be exercised lest what is only similar be regarded as identical. For it does not necessarily follow that the symbols in a later prophet are to be regarded as explanatory of those which may occur in passages of an earlier writer ; unless, indeed, it can be proved that the ob- ject of the writers is necessarily identical.^ ^ In the consideration of the vision before us, we pass over the bold and original 14 ZECHARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. i. 8-11. As to the colours red and white, there is little difiference of opinion save as to their shades. The third colour has been rendered by our Authorised Version " speckled," apparently on the authority of the ancient versions. But the meaning assigned in our margin, namely " bay " or " chestnut," is no doubt the true one, and is substantially that approved of by Gesenius, Hitzig, Ewald, and Fiirst. Possibly a somewhat clearer red than is signified by the first adjective may be indi- cated. The fact that a reddish colour of some kind is implied by the word renders it impossible to refer to the " pale " horse of Rev. vi. in explanation of the vision. The Hebrew word does not mean " ashen-gray " (Pusey), and though we freely grant that "a mingled colour like chestnut is not sug- gestive of any symbol " (Pusey), it is not our business to construct symbols, but to interpret the vision as it is. The machinery of the vision of Zechariah is totally different from that employed in the first four seals of the book of Revelation. The colours of the horses in the latter have evidently a symbolical signification, in Zechariah they are simply employed to mark the division of the angelic riders into three distinct bands. Keil, and other eminent commentators, consider that the celestial riders are represented as going forth to take an ac- tive part in the shaking of the nations, which God had already promised by the mouth of Haggai, and to conduct any agitations and tumults which might occur among the nations to the definite end appointed by Providence. According to this theory the riders were to act severally in the manner symbolically indicated by the colours of their respective iie Messiattisc/un IVcLssagungen dcs alien Tl-^A pp. 11 8-9. Ch. ii. 12 (ii. i6).] THIRD VISION — ADDRESS OF THE ANGEL 4 1 inherit (the tense is the prophetic perfect) J udah as his portion upon {i.e. in) the holy land." The first words are almost a quotation from Deut. xxxii. 9, " For the portion of Jahaveh is his people, Jacob is the lot of his inheritance ;" and their use tends to prove that by the name J udah in this place all Israel is signified. But the verse immediately preceding that state- ment in Zechariah says that the people of God and the people of the covenant were not to be confined to " Israel after the flesh." Judah seems to be used here as a name for Israel in general, because by far the larger portion of the returned exiles belonged to that tribe, and its name ultimately became that of the nation. But the blessings promised to Israel, and especially the promise of becoming the Lord's portion and inheritance, are blessings not confined to " Israel after the flesh," but are part and parcel of the glorious privi- lege of "the Israel of God" (Gal. vi. 16). The term " holy land " is found only in this single passage. Synonymous expressions, such as the land of Jahaveh (Isa. xiv. 2 ; Hos. ix. 3), the land of Immanuel (Isa. viii. 8), occur elsewhere, and the term " holy cities " is used for the cities of the land of Israel (Isa. Ixiv. 10; comp. Ps. Ixxviii. 54). Jeru- salem is also termed the " holy city " (Isa. lii. i ; Neh. xi. i), and frequent mention is made of the "holy mountain," etc. The land of Palestine is no doubt primarily meant in Zech. ii. 12, but as the land is holy where Jahaveh dwells (Exod. ill. 5), and as the people of the Lord are expressly mentioned by the prophet as destined ultimately to consist of all " the nations of the earth," the passage will bear a more extended reference. The prophecy was fulfilled in the blessings granted to the Jews in their own land, and in the honour placed upon that land by the advent and ministry of the Lord Jesus Christ. Kohler fancifully maintains that part of the prophecy was fulfilled in the days of Zerubbabel, and part in the days of our Lord ; that the promised glory was withheld in its fulness 42 ZECHARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. ii. 12. at our Lord's first advent on account of the unbelief of the Jewish nation ; that, therefore, its full accomplishment is reserved for a still future day, when Jerusalem shall be no longer trodden down of the Gentiles, the times of the Gentiles having been fulfilled (Luke xxi. 24). CHAPTER II THE FOURTH VISION— JOSHUA BEFORE THE ANGEL. CHAPTER II. Introductory — The High Priest before the Angel, 46 — Hengstenberg's view, 46 — Objections of Pressel, Kohler, and Pusey, 47— View of Kohler and Pressel, 47 — The High Priest engaged in some sacerdotal duty, 47 — Ewald's view of the passage, 48 — Objections of Hitzig, 49 — Dean Stanley's comments, 49 — Objec- tions, 50 — The filthy garments, 50 — The Adversary rebuked, 51, 52 — The brand plucked from the fire, 52 — Jewish legend, 51, note — Neumann's view of Satan, 52, note. Rebuke mentioned in Epist. of Jude, 53 — Differences between Jude and Zechariah, 53 — Legend mentioned by Oicumenius, 54 — The "Assump- tion of Moses," 54, 55 — Contests between Sammael and Michael, Sammael and Moses,' 55 — Legend of death of Moses, 55 — View of von Hoffman, 56 — Difficulties in supposing Jude to have referred to the " Assumptio," 56, 57, 59 — The body of Moses and the body of Christ, 57 — Heidenheim's view, 57, note — Baumgarten's view of the connection with Jude and Zechariah, 58 — The burial of Moses, 58, 59 — ^Joshua the representative of Israel, 60 — The filthy garments removed, 60, 61 — The change of raiment, 61 — The clean mitre, 61, 62 — The cry of Zechariah, 63— Close of the scene, 64 — Adjuration of the Angel, 64. CHAPTER II. THE FOURTH VISION — JOSHUA BEFORE THE ANGEL. The third vision had brought vividly before the prophet's mind the fact of the coming of the Lord to Israel, and the momentous consequences with which that coming was fraught. Israel was once more to be the people of the Lord, and the holy city was to be enlarged. But the people of the covenant were no longer to be confined to persons of the stock of Abraham, but to consist of " many nations." The fourth vision, recorded in the third chapter, is connected with the prophecy of the coming of Jahaveh recorded in the second chapter, in a way similar to that in which the puri- fication of the sons of Levi, spoken of by Malachi, stands related to the prophecy of the coming of the Angel of the Covenant predicted by that prophet (Mai. iii. 1-4). It is unnecessary to examine at any length by whose instrumentality the fourth vision was pointed out to the prophet. The matter cannot be decided with any degree of certainty. The subject to the verb "showed," in the first verse, is most naturally considered to be the interpreting angel. It cannot be proved that the office of that angel "was to explain, not to show the visions" (Pusey, Kohler, and Keil). The interpreting angel in the very next vision, is represented as showing the vision as well as interpret- ing the same.^ It is more in accordance with the analogy ^ Nor does the passage in chap. i. 20 prove that the vision of "the four smiths " was exhibited by the Lord to the prophet without the intervention of the interpreting angel. It is better to explain even the statement of that verse, in the context in which it occurs, as signifying that the interpreting angel was the medium of the revelation. 46 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. iii. 1-3. of the visions of Ezckicl, and with those of St. John in the New Testament, as well as with the general scope of this vision, to view the interpreting angel as the person who ex- hibited the various scenes to the prophet. In the vision before us Joshua the high priest was seen to stand before the Angel of Jahaveh. At the right hand of the high priest appeared the Adversary (for the use of the article proves that the word is not to be regarded as a regular proper name, as in i Chron. xxi. i ; Ps. cix. 6 ; see crit. comni.), opposing in some way the action of the high priest, or accusing him to the angel. Joshua was meanwhile clothed in filthy garments, and stood before the angel. It is not clearly intimated for what purpose the high priest was thus standing before the angel. For the phrase, " to stand before one," is used in a judicial sense, both of the plaintiff (Num. xxvii. 2 ; i Kings iii. 16) and the defendant (Num. XXXV. 12 ; Dcut. xix. 17 ; Josh. xx. 6)} But it is also used more frequently in a ministerial signification, of an inferior standing before his superior for service, and in order to minister to him (Gen. xli. 46 ; Deut. i. 38 ; i Kings i. 2 ; I Kings X. 8, etc.). Hengstenberg is of opinion that the high priest was seen in the sanctuary engaged in the work of his priestly office (comp. Jud. XX. 28 ; 2 Chron. xxix. 11), and that the Angel of the Lord, to testify his approval, condescended to appear in the temple attended by a company of angels (see ver. 7). Satan, beholding with envy this restoration of gracious relations between the people of God and tlicir Lord, sought to damage the high priest by his accusations. But the accusations of Satan, though true (as proved by the filthiness ' These passages are quite sufficient to refute tlie very incautious statement of Hengstenberg, that this exjiression is never used of the appearance of a de- fendant before a judge, but always of a servant before his lord. Hengstenberg, however, no doubt regarded these passages in a different light. Ch. iii. 1-3.] FOURTH VISION — JOSHUA BEFORE THE ANGEL. 47 of the garments in which the high priest ministered), were repelled by a gracious manifestation of God's pardoning grace, declared through the Angel of the Lord. Pressel goes too far when he asserts that this exposition (adopted among the moderns not only by Hengstenberg, but by Schegg and Baumgarten, and held by Theodoret among the early expositors) scarcely requires refutation. Dr. Pusey considers it a decisive objection against the view taken by Hengstenberg, that though " the angel speaks with au- thority, yet God's Presence in him is not spoken of so distinctly, that the high priest could be exhibited as stand- ing before him, as in his office before God." In the course of the vision, it is true, no mention is made of any act of wor- ship performed on the part of the high priest, nor of any intercession made by him. Throughout the scene he appears rather in the character of one accused. But the force of all these objections can be broken by a very slight modification of this view. Kohler's objection, that the high priest would not have been represented as venturing to appear before God to perform the duties of his sacerdotal function in filthy garments (Exod. xix. 10), is rather out of place, when it is remembered that the whole is a vision. It has been maintained that the only alternative is to regard Joshua as standing before the judgment-seat of the angel (Kohler, Pressel). Satan is supposed to have occupied the ordinary position of an accuser of the high priest, by standing at his right side, in accordance with the practice on such occasions, depicted in Ps. cix. 6. But no regular judicial process is described in the vision, and no mention is made of the angel's sitting on a throne of judgment. The reference made by Hitzig to such passages as Ps. ix. 5, Isa. xxviii. 6, does not prove this point. The high priest was probably seen in the vision, busied about some part of his priestly duties. While thus engaged, 48 ZECIIARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. iii. 1-3. he discovered that he was actually standing as a criminal before the angel, and while the great Adversary accused him, the truth of that accusation was but too clearly seen by the filthy garments with which he then perceived that he was attired. The scene is not described with sufficient fulness to allow us to decide with certainty as to the locality in which it took place. The high priest, as Lange notes, in an ideal sense stood always in the presence of God. But the express mention of his being clad in filthy garments, clearly indicates that he ought to have been clad in clean and white robes, such as those which the high priest was commanded to wear on special occasions. Wherever he may have been standing, he appeared in the character of God's high priest. His appearance in filthy official robes (which would have been a gross transgression of the Law of Moses had it occurred in fact) symbolized the transgressions with which the high priest was defiled, and rendered him an easy prey to the malicious accusations of the Adversary of Israel. Ewald's interpretation of this passage must be rejected as purely fanciful. According to his view, the high priest was actually accused at the time, or was then dreading an accusa- tion, at the Persian court. This accusation is supposed to form the superstructure on which the vision is built. Zech- ariah, with peculiar sympathy, depicts the high priest as suffering under grievous accusations, and promises him a glorious acquittal. The garments of the high priest are repre- sented as dirty, because robes of that character were usually worn by accused persons as indicative of mourning. The ardent hopes of the prophet were, according to Ewald, soon justified by the event. On receipt of the governor's report, which presented an impartial statement of facts, an inquiry was instituted by authority into the case, the accusation was repelled, and the decree of Cyrus which had given permission Ch. iii. 1-3.] FOURTH VISION. — JOSHUA BEFORE THE ANGEL. 49 for the rebuilding of the temple was duly confirmed and ordered to be carried into execution. The passages in Ezra relied upon by Ewald in support of this interpretation (Ezra v. 5, vi. 13), do not really support it. Nothing is said in them of any personal accusations preferred against Joshua as the representative of the people. Hitzig has rightly considered it fatal to Ewald's interpre- tation that Zerubbabel, not Joshua, was the real represen- tative of the Jewish people. For the former was the civil governor of the colony, and the real leader in the work of restoration (Ezra iv. 2 ; see also Zech. iv. 7, 9). Moreover, as Hitzig further argues, there is no mention in Zechariah of any accusation made at the Persian court ; the accusation alluded to in this chapter is an accusation preferred before Jahaveh, or his Angel, and it can in no way refer to a charge made before the tribunal of an earthly monarch. Further, as has often been observed (Kohler, etc.), the custom of accused persons presenting themselves before a tribunal in sordid attire was in accordance with Roman usage, but opposed to Jewish habits. Josephus informs us that in such cases persons were wont to appear habited in black garments {Antig., xiv. 9, § 4). But the garments of Joshua were not black robes, but robes defiled with abominable filth, as the expression in the original most distinctly indicates. Still more fanciful is the short comment on the passage by Dean Stanley, based on Ewald's interpretation. " The splen- did attire of the high priest, studded with jewels, had been detained at Babylon, or, at least, could not be worn without the special permission of the king ; and until the accusations had been cleared away this became still more impossible (i Esdras iv. 54; Ewald, v. 85). But the day was coming, as w^as seen in Zechariah's dream, when the adversary would be baffled, the cause won, and the soiled and worn clothing of the suffering exile be replaced by the old magnificence of E 50 ZECIIARIAH AND HIS rROPIIECIES. [Ch. iii. 1-3. Aaron or Zadok." ^ It is a pity that such unproved assump- tions should be put forward as sober history. Apart from all other considerations, the " filthy garments " described in the vision cannot have been " soiled and worn clothing," nor can the counter expressions signify " the splendid attire of the high priest." The filthy garments worn by the high priest denote the sins by which he was encompassed. Thus we read in Isaiah " We are all as the unclean, and all our righteousness as a defiled garment" (Isa. Ixiv. 5); "When the Lord shall have washed away the filth of the daughters of Zion " {Isa. iv. 4) ; and mention is made in the Proverbs of " a generation clean in its own eyes, and it is not washed from its filthiness " (Prov. XXX. 9). In all these passages the noun is used with which the adjective found in our text is connected.- It has been argued (Kohler, Pressel) that the sin referred to was none other than the neglect of the rebuilding of the temple, in which no doubt the high priest, from his position, had a heavy share. But though this may have been one of those sins of which Joshua was guilty, and of which he was accused by the Adversary, there is little doubt that, while Joshua's own personal sins added their quota to the filthiness of his garments, he is represented in the vision not merely as laden with his own sins, but with those of the people whose representative as high priest he Avas before God. For the high priest was the representative of the priesthood, and the priests representatives of the people of Israel, who were " a kingdom of priests and a holy nation " (Exod. xix. 6). Joshua's sin is therefore spoken of in verse 9 as "the sin of the land," whereby the whole people were defiled (Hitzig). " Since, - Lectures on iheyavish Church, vol. iii. p. 103. Second Edition. ^ No less emphatic are other passages, such as " and they were defiled in their own works (-IKPP'I) " Ps. cvi. 39. Comp. tlie kindred expressions in Rev. iii. 4, vii, 14 (see crit.comm.). Ch. iii. 1-3.] FOURTH VISION. — JOSHUA BEFORE THE ANGEL. 5 I also, the whole series of visions relates to the restoration from the Captivity, the guilt for which Satan impleads him with Jerusalem, and Jerusalem in him, includes the whole guilt, which had rested upon them, so that for a time God had seemed to have cast away his people " (Pusey). ^ That this is the true view of the case appears by the words of the angel with which he rebuked the Adversary. " Ja- haveh rebuke thee, O thou Adversary, even Jahaveh rebuke thee, he who delights in Jerusalem ; is not this a brand plucked out of the fire .'' " In other words, because the Lord delights in Jerusalem, notwithstanding the offences of the people, the priesthood of Levi which ministered for the people in holy things would be rendered once more acceptable in his sight. Hence God had already delivered both priests and people from captivity as brands plucked out of the fire.^ ^ The Targumist, and the Jewish commentators R. Salomo-ben-Yizhak (Rashi), Kimchi and others, are guilty of an anachronism in supposing the guilt alluded to to be that Joshua's sons had married strange wives (Ezra x. 18). Those marriages took place at least sixty years later than the vision of Zechariah. Jerome does not exactly state his agreement in this opinion, but he writes as if he were not aware of the anachronism involved. "Quod autem sequitur, Jesus erat imbutus vestibus sordidis, tripliciter interpretantur vel ob conjugium illicitum, vel ob peccata populi, vel propter squalorem captivitatis." ^ Jewish tradition has concocted a stoiy, based on the statements here made regarding Joshua, and those respecting Ahab and Zedekiah, the false prophets, in Jer. xxix. 20, 23. The story is in itself a strange tissue of anachronisms. Accord- ing to it Sennacherib's daughter accused Ahab and Zedekiah of tempting her to violate her chastity. They pleaded in excuse a Divine direction. Sennacherib thereupon determined to try them by fire, stating that if their words were true they would no doubt be delivered as Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. On their pleading that they were but two persons, and so might not thus be saved, the king gave them liberty to select a companion to be cast into the fire with them. They selected accordingly Joshua the high priest, hoping to be delivered through his merits, but perished in the flames, while Joshua was saved, though his garments were consumed. On the king asking the cause of this fact, since the garments of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, were not affected by the fire, Joshua replied that it was because of the united merits of the three men. The king rejoined that Abraham, though likewise cast into the fire of the Chaldeans, had escaped though a single individual. Whereupon Joshua answered that his garments were de- stroyed because they were defiled by his companionship with the evil men in whose company he had been cast into the flames. The moral of the strange story is 52 ZECHARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. ili. 1-3. The reference in the last clause must^ after the analogy of Amos iv. II, be interpreted as referring to the heavy judg- ments of God, by which the people had been consumed as in a furnace. The bondage in Egypt is spoken of elsewhere as an iron furnace {Deut iv. 20 ; i Kings viii. 5 1 ; Jer. xi. 4), and the captivity in Babylon likewise is termed (Isa. xlviii. 10) "the furnace of affliction." Kohlcr considers the fire to refer to the guilt under which the nation lay on account of their neglect of the rebuilding of the temple. This neglect had rendered the people " un- clean " in the eyes of the Lord (Hag. ii. 11-15) and brought down on them God's heavy displeasure. Out of this state of indifference they had been graciously revived, and both priests and people had been stirred up to " consider their ways " by the preaching of Haggai and Zechariah. God, who had had mercy on them in their lowest estate, would not now cast them off on account of that sin and guilt from which he had saved them by his grace. But, as Keil remarks, if Satan's accusation had been based chiefly on the neglect of restoring the temple, the accusation would have been rather late, for the active resumption of the work of rebuilding the holy edifice had taken place five months previously to the vision (comp. Hag. i. 15 with Zech. i. 7). Moreover, though guilt may lead to ruin, it cannot be suitably described as a fire, nor can the removal of that guilt be pictured as a deliverance out of the fire. " Fire is a symbol of punishment not of sin " (Keil). The deliverance commenced with the rebuke of the Ad- versary, No railing accusation w^as adduced against him, but he was rebuked with solemn dignity, llis accusations were indeed true ; but they proceeded from malice on his part.^ that the pious few on emth often sufifer in this world by reason of the sins of those about them, but shall be saved in the world to come. See Buxtorfs Lex. Chald. and Ta!m., under the word D''p.. ' The idea of Neumann, that Satan is to be regarded not as a distinct evil Ch. iii. 1-3.] FOURTH VISION. — JOSHUA BEFORE THE ANGEL. 53 His malice insured his own overthrow. " The rebuke of God," as Pusey has well observed, " must be with power." It carries destruction in its train. " Thou hast rebuked the nations, thou hast destroyed the ungodly" (Ps. ix. 5). "The nations shall rush (roar) like the rushing (roaring) of many waters : but he shall rebuke them, and they shall flee far off, and shall be chased as the chaff of the mountains before the wind, and like a rolling thing (rather, like chaff) before the whirlwind " (Isa. xvii. 13). The rebuke here administered by the angel to Satan is. identical with that mentioned in the Epistle of Jude (ver. 9), where Michael the archangel is spoken of as contending about the body of Moses. The " Angel of Jahaveh " in Zechariah is probably identical with the angel called by the name of Michael in the book of Daniel (comp. Josh. v. 14 and Dan. xii. i), for that angel is represented as having authority over other angels, and as bearing the name of Jahaveh, and standing up for the people of the Lord.' The only difference between the passages in Zechariah and Jude is, that the subject matter of dispute in the New Testament is said to have been about " the body of Moses," while in the Old Testament it was concerning Joshua the high priest. Origen, Didymus of Alexandria, and Apollinaris " expressly state that the quotation in Jude is from an apocryphal book, the title of which, as given by Origen and Didymus is, " the Ascension," or " Assumption, of Moses." ^ spirit, but as a personification of the wrath of God, which is here represented as overcome by God's mercy, does not merit serious examination. Neumann cites in its defence several curious opinions of Jewish authorities, as, for instance, that the old serpent, Sammael, at the end of the world shall be changed into Messiah, the destroyer of Leviathan, an idea based on the fact that the numerical value of the letters in the word for serpent E^HJ corresponds with that of the word Messiah. ' But see Note on the Angel of Jahaveh, on p. 21. - See the passages given in full in Fritzsche's Libri Apocryphi Vet. Test. Grace (Lips. 1871), in Prjefatio, pp. 34, 35. The book in question is called by Origen 'Ai/d/Sacrts tov Mwtr^ws, or, as it is 54 ZECHARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES, [Ch. iii. 1-3. It has been also supposed that CEcumenius (hi Judac ep. Bibl. Patr. iv. p. 336) quoted from this apocryphal book ; but this is by no means certain, for CEcumenius does not men- tion the book, and the dispute between Satan and Michael which he relates (from whatever source he derived it) was a dispute regarding the burial of Moses, which Michael was sent to perform, but which Satan opposed on the ground of the murder of the Egyptian, of which Moses had been guilty in his early career. Some fragments of an apocryphal book of this name were published by Fabricius in 1722, but were too small to enable any judgment to be formed as to the nature of that book. In 1 86 1, however, Dr. Ceriani, the chief librarian of the Ambro- sian Library at Milan, published a large consecutive portion from an ancient palimpsest, considered by competent scholars to be of the date of the sixth century, if not earlier. Since the publication of Ceriani's work, the book has attracted the attention of many eminent scholars,' who are agreed that it was com.posed in the first century after Christ, if not earlier. - translated in Rufinus' translation of Origen's work, known as " Origen De Prin- cipiis," iii. 2, as the Greek original is lost, the " Adscensio Mosis," and quoted as the 'Avd\7j\pLS Mucriws (Mwi'o-ftos) by Gelasius (Coviiii. Act. Council. A'ictcni, ii. 20), called by Didymus of Alexandria in the Latin translation, "Moyseos Assumptio." The book is quoted also by Clement of Alexandria, Evodius and Gelasius, without, however, any reference being made to the dispute in question. See the quota- tions in Fritzsche's work. It is likewise mentioned as one of the apocryphal books of the Old Testament in one of the doubtful works of Athanasius, namely, the " Synopsis .Sacra; Scriptura;," and by Nicephorus of Constantinople in his " Stichometria" appended to the Chronicon of Eusebius. Nicephorus mentions that it contained 1400 verses, i.e. that it was as large as the Revelation of St. John, to which the same number of verses was attributed (see Ililgenfeld, Nov. Test, extra Canoncmrcccpt. Lips. 1866 : Mosis Assumpt. p. 98), in which case we have perhaps nearly one-third of the work still extant, see also note next page. ' Fritzsche, to whose introductory preface we must refer, gives a considerable list of books and articles from eminent scholars, among whom we may mention the names of Ililgenfeld, Volkmar, Schmidt and Merx, Langcn, Haupt, Riinsch, Wieseler, Colani and Ileidcnheim, to which must be added the articles by Ewald, (GiUtinc^.j^dchr. Anzeigen, 1862), v. Gutschmid, and Weiss, refened to by Ililgen- feld and Merx. 2 Wieseler considers tliat it dales from two years before the Christian era ; Ch. iii. 1-3.] FOURTH VISION — JOSHUA BEFORE THE ANGEL. 55 From the portion discovered it is very doubtful whether the book in question ever contained any account of a dispute between Michael and Satan touching " the body of Moses." ^ The account of the contest between Sammael, the Angel of Death, and Michael, given in the Debarim Rabbah, was one respecting the soul of Moses, not about his body after death. The Angel of Death, says that legend, wished to take away the life of Moses, while Michael bitterly grieved at the thought. The conversation between the two could not have been that referred to by Jude, as it was not properly speaking a dispute, nor is Michael said in the legend to have used the words of rebuke quoted by the apostle. Mention, however, is made in the same legend of an actual contest which took place afterwards between Moses and the Angel of Death, whom Moses put to flight by striking him with his rod, on which was inscribed the sacred name of Jahaveh. The legend closes with the statement that God at last descended with Michael and two attendant angels, stripped off the garments of Moses, and with a kiss drew forth his soul from his body. Ewald assigns it to the date a.d. 6 ; Hilgenfeld ascribes it to A. D. 46 ; while Sclimidt and Merx think it must have been written between A. D. 54 and 64. It is agreed that its composition must have been of a date prior to the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus. ^ Hilgenfeld's remarks on p. 115 of his edition prove that he has his doubts on this point, though he gives Jude 9 among the fragments of the Alosis Assiuiiptio. Drummond in his yewish Messuih asserts the fact as if it were not doubtful. But Schmidt and Merx {Archiv fiir wisscnschaftl. Erforschiing des A.T., Band i. p. 126) express decided doubts on the subject. They refer to a note in the margin of the MS. written by one who had the whole book before him, in which it is stated that the work contains the prophecies of Moses in Deuteronomy, i.e. is a prophetico-historical expansion of Deut. xxxii., and that Moses is throughout the chief speaker, which would lead us to the conclusion that the book does not refer to circumstances after his death. The matter cannot be decided with certainty. Fritzsche seems also to have the same doubts, and to consider that Jude refers only to a tradition current among the Jews (Prjef. p. xxxv.). Schmidt and Merx note that the book, as far as one can judge from its re- mains, has less affinity to the fantastical Haggada as it is given in the Debarim Rabbah (quoted above from Cappellus' notes on Jude in the Critici Sacri, and from Norck's Rabb. Parall. in Jude 9, pp. 365, 366) than with a Midrashic account of which we find traces in the Targum on the Canticles. 56 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. iii. 1-3. The soul of Moses was placed by the Almighty beneath his throne with the cherubim and seraphim, while the body of the lawgiver was interred by the angels. The Targum Jerushalmi on Deut. xxxiv. 6, speaks of the grave of Moses as prepared and adorned by Michael and Gabriel and others, but no allusion is made there to any contest with Satan. As Huther has noted (in Meyer's Krit. mid exeg. Comin. on Judc), there is no trace of any story like that in Jude to be found in the Rabbinical writings or in the book of Enoch. Nor are there any grounds but critical con- jecture for the opinion expressed by Schmid, v. Hofmann {Schriftb. i. p. 295), and Luthardt, that the cause of the con- tention between Satan and the Archangel was that Michael would not suffer the devil to exercise his power over the corpse of Moses, but rather sought to preserv^e that holy body from corruption. The extreme uncertainty (i) whether, notwithstanding the statement of the Fathers, who may have spoken from hearsay, " the Assumption of Moses," ever contained any account of a conflict between Michael and Satan respecting " the body of Moses " ; {2) the possibility that, if such a contest was narrated in that book, it Avas substantially identical with that already quoted from Jewish sources relating to the sold of Moses ; for the legend about Moses' body mentioned by Qicumenius cannot be traced to an earlier period or to a Jewish source ; (3) the probability that the Church Fathers referred to the well-known Jewish legend, although that legend casts no light whatever on the passage in Jude ; (4) the utter absence of all proof, even on the supposition that a similar dispute was actually related in " the Assump- tion of Moses" that the special words quoted by Jude as spoken by the archangel were found in that apocryphal book; (5) the facts on the other hand that a dispute be- tween Satan and the Archangel is mentioned by the prophet Ch. iii. 1-3.] FOURTH VISION. — JOSHUA BEFORE THE ANGEL. 57 Zechariah, in which (6) the very words quoted by St. Jude do occur : all these reasons combined incHne us to beheve that there is more than is generally admitted in the opinion, rejected indeed by De Wette, Huther and Alford, but held among the ancient expositors by Severus and Bede, and among the more modern by Junius and Hammond, namely, that the expression " body of Moses " in Jude is to be under- stood in an allegorical sense, in which case it may well signify, as Junius supposed, the Church and people of Israel. It is true that no instance can be cited in which " the body of Moses," or any similar expression, is used for the people of Israel,^ but it is possible that the phrase might have been employed by St. Jude in that signification in imitation of the expression " the body of Christ," which is used in re- ference to the Church of Christ in the epistles of St. Paul, and in view of the fact that the Jewish Church in the writer's day had become bitterly opposed to the Church of Christ, while it looked back to Moses as its teacher, a claim which might well be admitted as true in the most real sense of the Jewish Church in the days of Zechariah. ^ ' Junius, as quoted . in Poll Synopsis, refers to 2 Mace. xv. 1 2 as an instance in point, where he says that use is made of the expression ' ' tlae body of the Jews " (corpus Judasorum) for the Jewish people. But the plirase in 2 Mace. xv. 12 is Tu5j''Iou5a/wj' (T^xjT'qixa, which is certainly no parallel to the rod Mwtr^wj crcS/xa of Jude. 2 Dr. M. Heidenheim in an interesting article in his Vicrteljahrschrift, Band iv. (Ziirich, 1 871), entitled " Beitrage zu bessern Verstandnissder 'Ascensio Moysis,'" considers St. Jude to refer to some tradition which was afterwards incorporated with "the Assumption of Moses." The real oi'igin of the legend or tradition must, he thinks, be ascribed to a general allegorical interpretation of Zech. iii. The filthy garments of Joshua were, according to this interpretation, explained to repre- sent the body of man, which, as it has been defiled by sin, must be changed into the new body of the resurrection. The action of Satan in Zech. was explained as an attempt to hinder the resurrection of man. The contest might very naturally be supposed to have occurred with reference to the body of Moses, more especially on account of the statement that the Lord buried him (Deut. xxxiv. 6). The language of St. Paul about the "body of sin" (Rom. vi. 6) and " the body of death" (Rom. vii. 24), as well as his expressions in i Cor. xv. 43, are in accordance with such an explanation. Heidenheim might also have added to his Pauline references 2 Cor. v. 1-4. Note the view of Baumgarten given above, pp. 58, 59. 58 ZECIIARIAII AND HIS PROniECIES. [Ch. iii. 1-3. Baumgartcn cannot then be wrong in maintaining that Jude must have had the passage of Zechariah in view when he wrote his epistle. Baumgarten does not indeed assert that the subject of contention narrated by the Old Testament prophet and by the New Testament apostle are to be viewed as identical ; but he rightly maintains that both cases at least fall under one law. No higher proof could be given of the inviolability of the law of God, and that that law knew no respect of persons, than the fact that Moses the law- giver had himself to die. The death of Moses was indeed a triumph of Satan, who through sin had brought death into the world (Rom. v. 12), and of whom the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews (ii. 14) speaks as having " the power of death." If he, to whom God had spoken face to face as a man speaketh to his friend (Exod. xxxiii. 1 1 ; Num. xii. 6-8), whose face had often shone with the glory of the Lord (Exod. xxxiv. 29), who had twice in the presence of Divine Majesty fasted forty days and forty nights (Exod. xxiv. 18 ; xxxiv. 28) — if such a man fell at last under the curse of death, and had to die like the other Israelites in the wilder- ness without having been permitted to tread the land of promise, there was much to favour the idea that Satan, the Adversary of Israel, and not God the Redeemer of Israel, had gained the victory. To prevent such a conclusion being arrived at, Jahavch himself buried Moses, and concealed the place of his sepulture (Deut. xxxiv. 6). Thus the assurance was given to Israel that even in a case where the great enemy had done his worst, and Satan seemed to win the day, the Divine power at last intervened, and wrested the victory from the l'2vil One. hy burying the body of Moses, the Lord delivered it from the power of Satan, and declared that the Evil One had no more claim over it. The passage of Zechariah exhibited to Jude the mode in which a siniihir result was brought about by God. In that Ch. iii. 1-3.] FOURTH VISION. — JOSHUA BEFORE THE ANGEL. 59 passage Joshua the high priest was exhibited as placed in a position similar to that of Moses, that is, exposed like him to the power of the great Adversary. Who could save from ruin the high priest, discovered on the most solemn occasion, in the presence of Jahaveh, clad in filthy garments, with the enemy at his right hand to charge him with the guilt which was in itself so terribly apparent ? But if Joshua the high priest had been condemned, Israel must also have been con- demned with him, and the Adversary would have gained his desire, namely, the destruction of the whole people of God. As by an exercise of Divine grace and love the impending ruin was averted in the case of Joshua, so, according to Baum- garten, did Jude consider the great Archangel to have dealt with the Adversary in earlier days, when with words of like rebuke he hindered that Evil One from wreaking his vengeance on the body of the great lawgiver of Israel. It must not be forgotten that the special object for which this instance is cited in the Epistle of Jude is to show how lofty dignity even in its utter ruin was respected by angels, and the very same object would have been attained by a quotation from the Old Testament prophet. Why then should the_a20stle, have gone out of his way to quote either Jewish tradition or some recent Jewish book .'* Why should he not rather have quoted the instance from the book of Zechariah which must have been present to his mind ? All this tends to con- firm the opinion that the passage in Zechariah was really that cited by Jude. That the enemy was merely rebuked and not destroyed proved that the vengeance which was to be meted out to him was to be executed in God's good time and in God's own way. On the other hand, the people of Israel had been chosen by an act of God's free love (Deut. iv. 37, vii. 7, 8, X. 15 ; 2 Chron. vi. 6; Ps. cxxxii. 13, etc.), and, because they were thus chosen, God would fully accomplish his work of love, and re-establish them in spite of their sin and rebellion. 60 ZECIIARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Cli. iii. 4. For Joshua appeared in the vision of Zechariah as the representative of Israel, and what was done to him was a type of what God purposed to do to his people. The Ad- versary was rebuked, because what he desired to see accom- plished was opposed <^to the gracious purposes of Almighty love. Israel as a people were not to be abandoned to the consequences of their sins. They were to have an opportunity afforded them to exhibit the works which were "meet "to follow such an exhibition of Divine grace and love. The priests, in the person of Joshua, were to be exhorted to ob- serve in future the laws and ordinances of their God. " For the priest's lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the law at his mouth : for he is the messenger of the Lord of hosts " (Mai. ii. 7). Unfaithfulness to their privileges and blessings might indeed at last change those blessings into a curse (Mai. ii. 2). The close connection between the warnings addressed to the priests of Israel by the prophets Zechariah and Malachi, and the solemn fact that when the great Messenger of the Covenant came unto his own, his work was opposed specially by the members of that priesthood, his sacred person treated with contumely, and he himself at last delivered over to a shameful death, is a point, however inter- esting, which can only be glanced at here. The vision of Zechariah did not close with the rebuke which put to shame the Adversary of Israel. The guilt of which Satan had accused the high priest and his nation had to be entirely removed. Hence, by an exercise of Divine grace, the filthy garments were taken off from the high priest, and he was clothed with a change of raiment. The prophet could not fail to see in this action a picture of God's pardon granted to Israel in the person of its high priest, or to learn thereby a lesson of God's love to an undeserving but ransomed people. The Angel of Jahavch at once commanded the ministering angels, who (whether visible or not) arc always considered to Ch. iii. 4' S-] FOURTH VISION.— JOSHUA BEFORE THE ANGEL. 6l be present and ready to execute the will of God, to " take away the filthy garments " from Joshua. Ewald understands by these words that the angel com- manded the ministering priests in attendance on the high priest to perform the required office. But no such priests were alluded to in the vision, nor were priests always in attendance on the high priest of Israel. On the contrary, in the most solemn function which that high priest had to perform, he was quite unattended. Alone, and clothed not in his gorgeous garments, but in holy garments of plain white linen, such as Joshua should have worn, the high priest entered once every year into the holy place, as well as into the holiest of all (Lev. xvi. 17). ^ No absolute proof can, indeed, be given that the word rendered correctly in our Authorised Version " change of raiment," indicates specifically high-priestly robes. The exact word (JlliJ^nQ) used in this passage only occurs in one other place (Isa. iii. 22), though a synonyme from the same root ( ilik vPT ) occurs elsewhere in the sense of " spoils " stripped from the slain (Jud. xiv. 19; i Sam. ii. 21). The word may mean /cstal robes, or robes of Jwnoitr ; it may also mean only change of raiment. The context alone can decide. The Arabic equivalent (^*U.) is used not only for such robes of honour, but also for any garment which a man pulls off or takes off, from himself (see Lane's Arab. Eng. Lexicon, s. v.). Nor has the expression which occurs in ver. 5, and is rendered in our Authorised Version, " a fair mitre," any necessary connection with the " mitre " worn ' Hitzig notes that Ewald would refer the suffix in VJS?, '^ befo7-e hiin^'' in ver. 8, to Joshua. But he rightly objects to this, because the reference to the subject ot jI?M, " and he answered," lies so much nearer, while if the he in p^l, " and he answered,^'' is to be regarded as referring to a different person from the him in V3S?j *'' before him,^' the writer to avoid ambiguity should have written iJS? rjf^n'', i.e. *^ before yoshtia." But Hitzig adds, somewhat incongruously, "when one, who is not expressly named, gives a command to servants, one naturally expects that it is to his own servants, not to those of others." 62 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. iii. 'y by the high priest. It certainly indicates more than a mere ordinary turban, something more akin to that worn by princes and kings. ^ At the same time, when we re- member that the adjective "fair" in ver. 5 ought rather to be rendered " c/can; " that the contrast between " filthy " and "clean " is most distinctly seen in white garments ; and that the " filthy " character of the high priest's robes was the point which attracted the attention of the prophet, himself a priest ; we cannot resist the conviction that the high priest was re- presented to Zechariah on this occasion as habited in the linen garments which were commanded to be used on the Day of Atonement, and that he was conceived to be engaged in the work of making atonement for the people, possibly in some rude tent erected amid the ruins of the holy temple. In visions or dreams no note is taken of the times and seasons in which the dream or vision may occur, and hence it is no objection to this view that the month in which the priest- prophet saw his vision w^as not the month in which the Day of Atonement actually occurred. The gross impropriety, both morally and ceremonially, of the high priest being attired in " filthy garments," would under such circumstances be most striking. The white linen garments directed to be worn on such occasions were holy garments (Lev. xvi. 4), and by their purity and whiteness were designed to represent " the right- eousness of saints" (Rev. xix. 8). The dress which the high priest wore on that day indicated no superiority on his part above his fellow priests save as regards the white turban which he wore on his head. For on that linen mitre, as well as on the more gorgeous mitre which he wore on other occasions, the plate of gold with the inscription " Holiness to * See Job xxix. 14 where the word (fl''3V) seems to mean a diadem, as in Isa. Ixii. 3, where the Kcri has f]^jy but the text ^Vi not ^ll^y It is however used of a head-dress of women in Isa. iii. 23, if the word there be not, as Fiirst thinks, the phiral of the fern. n£''^V. Ch. iii. 5.] FOURTH VISION. — JOSHUA BEFORE THE ANGEL. 63 the Lord " was directed to be placed (Exod. xxviii. 2^, 38, and xxix. 6). Hence the anxiety, expressed by the priest-prophet as he gazed upon the vision, to behold the transformation fully completed by the white diadem being placed on the brow of the high priest of Israel. As Isaiah was unable to behold the wonders of his vision without being deeply affected by the sight, and without expressing that feeling by an exceeding bitter cry (Isa. vi. 5), so Zechariah was forced to give vent to the feelings pent up within his heart (feelings so natural to one of the priestly order) — " And I said, Let them place a clean mitre on his head." In translating the word in this clause by " mitre," we, of course, give not only a translation but an interpretation. There are no real grounds to consider the reading of the Hebrew text as incorrect, or to compel us, with Ewald and others, to adopt the reading of two MSS. and of the Vulg. and Syr., namely, " and he said," in which case the words would have to be regarded as a command of the angel.^ The 3rd pers. imperfect, used in the original ("let them place"), is pre- ferably regarded, as Hitzig observes, as expressing the wish of the prophet, rather than as the command of the angel to his subordinates. Thus was the high priest formally reinstated in God's favour, and, in his person, the guilt of Israel was removed, and an assurance given that the offspring of Judah and Jerusalem would be pleasant unto the Lord as in the days of old and as in former years (Mai. iii. 4). It is rather fanciful to regard (with Hitzig, v. Hofmann and Pressel) the words rendered in our version, " and the ^ Von Hofmann strangely imagines that the angel intended that Joshua's head should remain for a while without a covex"ing, as a crown was later to be put upon it (chap. vi. 9-15), but that the prophet, not understanding this, begged that a turban or mitre should be put on it, which the angel agreed to out of con- descension to his weakness. The vision does not speak of the exaltation of the high priesthood to the royal dignity as foreshadowing the kingdom and priest- hood of our Lord Jesus Christ. The introduction of such a thought here would be inappropriate. 64 ZECHARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. iii. 5-7. angel stood by," to signify that, after the high priest had been clothed with the " change of raiment," and "the clean mitre " had been placed on his head, the Angel of Jahaveh rose up from the judgment seat, on which he had previously been sit- ting, and stood, in intimation that the trial was now at an end. The words of the original more naturally convey the meaning suggested in our Authorised Version, namely, that, while the change was being effected in Joshua's appearance, the angel stood by, looking on in token of satisfaction and approval. The vision was brought to a close by a solemn adjuration addressed to Joshua by the Angel of Jahaveh, which con- tains a prophecy of future events, The high priest was solemnly adjured to walk in the way of the Lord and to keep his testimonies. He was assured that if he did so the Lord would grant to him the right to judge his house, and to guard his courts ; while a further blessing was also promised, into the meaning of which we shall presently inquire. The accent which usually divides the two principal parts of a verse in the Hebrew text is placed on "my courts." Kimchi, Dathe and von Hofmann, accordingly make the apodosis to begin with " I will give thee, etc." But the Hebrew accentu- ation would be the same even if with Ewald and the great majority of modern critics, we consider our Authorised Ver- sion to be correct, which makes the apodosis of the verse to commence with the words "then thou shalt also judge my house." This latter construction is most agreeable to the laws of Hebrew syntax, and to the context of the passage (see crit. comm.). Satan's accusation was brought forward in order that Joshua and his fellows, as being polluted, might be put away from the priesthood. The angel having commu- nicated to the high priest the Divine absolution, and having in token thereof clothed him with a complete change of raiment, confirmed him and his fclknvs in their sacerdotal offices on the simple condition of obedience for the future. Ch. iii. 7.] FOURTH VISION— JOSHUA BEFORE THE ANGEL. 65 The words " my house," in ver. 7, seem to have been chosen to correspond with " my courts " in the parallel clause. Though the two ideas are closely related, they are not identical in meaning. The expression " my house," is prob- ably to be understood in a metaphorical sense for ^^iny peopW" (comp. Num. xii. 7 ; Jer. xii. 7 ; Hos. viii. i, ix. 15), because the verb judge (l^) takes an accusative after it of the person and not of the thing, with the exception of an accusative of cognate meaning, as "to judge judgment" (Jer. v. 28, xxx. 13, and xxi. 12. The word "house" may possibly have been chosen in preference to that of " people," to avoid giving oftence, as the people were then under the Persian rule (Schegg). If the word house be understood metaphorically, the sense is that the high priest was to direct the people in all things respecting the law of God, and especially to judge those who ministered in the sanctuary (Hitzig, Pressel, etc.). Others think that the temple then in course of construc- tion is referred to (Hengstenberg, Keil, Kliefoth, Pusey). In the latter case the meaning is not very different, namely, that the high priest was to rule and direct the services of the sanctuary and holy of holies, and to keep away every kind of idolatry and ungodliness from its outer courts (Hengsten- berg). There is no little variety of opinion as to the translation and meaning of the last promise contained in verse 7. This is not the place to enter into any critical discussion as to the translation of the disputed word (see crit. comm.). But it must be noted that the passage has been rendered by Gesenius, Hengstenberg, etc., " I will give thee leaders among those that stand by." The promise would in this case mean that the Lord would grant angel-guards to Joshua and the other priests, to defend and protect them from the dangers to which they were exposed. Something, however, more definite than such a promise of general protection would naturally be F 66 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. iii. 7. expected here. Independently of other difficulties, the ob- jection of Hitzig, to wit, that the word bctn'ctii can scarcely- mean " out of the number of," seems fatal to this interpreta- tion.^ The word can only fairly be rendered " walks," " ways." It has been explained by the Targumist (followed by Drusius and others) to mean that Joshua after the resurrection should, as the reward of faithfulness in his office on earth, walk among the seraphim above in heaven. Dr. Pusey seems to adopt this view." But the promise of the angel seems rather to be one the accomplishment of which was to be looked for in this world ; and a reward after death does not well suit the context. The meaning is rather, as Hitzig explains it, "I will give thee walks (i Sam. xviii. 16; i Kings iii. 7, xv. 17) among the angels," so that thou shalt enter freely unto God as his high priest (Deut. x. 8 ; Jud. xx. 18 ; 2 Chron. xxix. 11), even between them that stand in God's immediate presence (r Kings xxii. 19). This does not mean, as Hitzig imagines, that, in the restored commonwealth of Israel, the priests should have the rank of angels, an idea not supported by his references (Mai. ii. 7 ; and Hag. i. 13). The expres- sion rather signifies that " open ways," " free ingress and egress " to Jahaveh himself, would be afforded, even through the midst of the angels which stood directly before God's throne — so that the high priest Joshua, like his predecessors in happier days, would be able to bring his petitions and requests on behalf of Israel directly before God. Such is the interpretation of the words which would have suggested itself to the Jews, to whom the prophet first nar- ' Von Ilofmann's translation "ioalke7-s" by which he thinks the angels constantly plying between Jahaveh and his priests are signified, is open to as grave objections, and even were the translation itself correct, the meaning v. Ilofniann puts on it would not necessarily follow. ^ He remarks, however, that " even in this life, since ' our conversation is in heaven' (Phil. iii. 20), and the life of priests should be an angel-life, it may mean, that he should have free access to God, his soul in heaven, while his body was on this earth." Ch. iii. S.] FOURTH VISION — JOSHUA BEFORE THE ANGEL. 6/ rated the vision. The words, however, bear a still deeper signification. The thought must have occurred to those Israelites who pondered over the meaning of the vision, that if sin had indeed separated them from their God, if it was so defiling in its nature as to expose the high priest in the discharge of his most solemn functions to the just accu- sations of Satan (from the consequences of which the high priest had been delivered only by a marvellous exhibition of Divine grace), there was no security at all that the door of access to God would remain always open. They might well reason that, if free access to a throne of grace was to be granted only on the due performance of the conditions laid down by the Angel of Jahaveh, there was but little real con- solation in the vision, and much to arouse the gravest appre- hensions for the future. They would naturally explain the passage, in the light of the closing words of verse 9, as referring to some future atonement, whereby the iniquity of Israel would in reality be removed, and a secure access be for ever opened to the Divine throne. To rightly understand the clauses that follow in verse 8, the point must be insisted on that the words were addressed to Joshua the high priest alone, and not to other priests sup- posed to be present. The verb " hear " is in the singular, a fact not indeed in itself conclusive, but which is of importance, when coupled with the use of the third person plural in the next clause (which is also not absolutely conclusive), and when compared with the statements of verse 7, in which only the high priest is mentioned. If the other priests had been seen in the vision, they, as well as the high priest, should have been in some way represented as " defiled with iniquity." For they, like their chief, were symbolical person- ages, and the filthy garments which he wore did not, as we have seen, indicate merely his personal transgressions. No valid argument can be built on the use of the expres- 68 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. iii. 8. sion, " those that sit before thee," in proof of the notion that the friends and colleagues of the high priest were represented in the vision as actually present, and that they were also addressed by the angel. The words do not indeed exclude such an interpretation (comp. Gen. xliii. 33 ; 2 Sam. vii. 18 ; I Chron. xvii. 16 ; Jud. xx. 26), but they can be otherwise explained. The phrase does not seem to point to any committee formed for the sake of temple restoration, of which the high priest was president. It indicates those priests, who in the discharge of their office often sat before the high priest to receive his directions, and sat with him in the frequent councils of the priests held in matters affecting their ofifice and religion (see Lightfoot, Hor. Heb. on Matt, xxvi. 3). The expression is used of the sons of the prophets who put themselves under the directions of Elisha (2 Kings iv. 38, vi. i), and of the elders of Israel who often came to converse with and receive instruction from the prophet Ezekiel.^ The settlement of this point will lead us to a right con- clusion as regards the special import of the address of the angel. In it we must note the force of the expression " men of portent " or "men of a sign." The rendering of our Author- ised Version, "men to be wondered at," is ambiguous, and might be explained to denote that the deliverance of Joshua and his fellows from Babylon might well create wonder and astonish- ment. The translation might also convey the idea of Luther, that the men were so termed, inasmuch as all who really embrace religion are an astonishment and wonder to the world. But such interpretations can scarcely be judged satis- factory. Just as unsatisfactor)', however, is the view of Ewald and Hitzig, who maintain that the expression used indicates that the presence of those priests as witnesses of ' Ezck. viii. r, xiv. i, xx. i, xxxiii. 31. Probably this, as Rosenmiiller thinks, may be the meaning of tlic phrase in Isa. xxiii. 18. Ch. iii. S.] FOURTH VISION— JOSHUA BEFORE THE ANGEL. 69 the promise of the angel was a sign of its certain fulfihnent. Ewald thinks it meant that, as surely as the priests had stood there and heard the angel's words, the Messiah should come. The priests should by their very existence point forward to this great future hope. But why (we may ask with Pressel) should the fact of the priests standing there (if the priests were actually represented as present, for that is assumed throughout) have such a peculiar significance .'' If the angel simply meant to call attention to the fact of the priests being witnesses to the promise, why should he have used such a peculiar expression .-' And is not an allusion to witnesses in a vision peculiarly incongruous ? The word rendered " wonder," " miracle," ought to be here translated a si£-;i, a portent, a type of future events. Thus Isaiah and his children (Isa. viii. 18) were spoken of " as signs and portents in Israel," and the high priest and his fellows were such, as being persons who in some way shadowed forth future events (Gesenius). This they did by virtue of their priestly office, especially the high priest, as the special duty of the priests was to make atonement for transgression (Hengstenberg, Kohler, etc.). The atonement by means of " the blood of bulls and goats " could not be more than symbolical; it was a typical, not a real reconciliation. The sacerdotal office kept up in Israel the remembrance of sin on the one hand, and the expectation of pardon on the other. It pointed to a pressing need, and created a longing for the supply of that necessity. Nor is this all. We are justified in considering (with Kliefoth and Keil) that there is also a reference made here to the previous incidents of the vision. It was in reference to them that Joshua and his fellow priests were styled " men of portent," or " men of a sign." The vision had pictured to the eye of the priest-prophet the manner in which the priesthood of Israel, represented by Joshua, though defiled with iniquity, 70 ZECIIARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. iii. 8. had been cleansed by Divine grace and rendered acceptable to God. By that grace priests and people had been snatched like half-burnt brands from the fire of a well-deserved punish- ment. That deliverance was, however, typical of a greater salvation, which the angel was now about to reveal. Hence Joshua and his fellows were typical men. What had been done to them in the vision pointed to " things to come." For the reasons already noticed, which can be supported by critical arguments, the passage is best rendered, " Hear now, Joshua the high priest, thou and thy companions {^^y"!}) which sit before thee, verily they arc men of portent — for lo! I am bringing forth my servant Branch. For lo ! the stone which I have placed before Joshua, upon one stone are seven eyes ; lo ! I am graving its graving, and I will remove (proph. perf.) the iniquity of this land in one day." It is satisfactory that the critics of the modern school co- incide with the majority of the ancient interpreters in referring the term " Branch " to the expected Messiah. The name "Branch " (HD^i) is used by Zechariah as a proper name. It first occurs in reference to the Messiah in Isaiah (iv. 2), " In that day shall the Branch of (mn^ HQ^) Jahavch be beautiful and glorious for them that are escaped of Israel." The same idea (though the words are different) recurs in Isa. xi. i, where the Messiah is described as the rod ("I^H) which was to come from the trunk of the tree of Jesse, and the shoot (l^iil) which was to spring up from its roots. From the former passage of Isaiah Jeremiah no doubt derived the term, when he prophesied that the days should come when "Jahaveh shall raise up unto David a righteous Branch (niD!i pniS), and a king shall reign and prosper, and shall execute justice and judgment in the earth. In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely, and this is the name whereby he shall be called, Jahaveh our Righteousness" (Jer. xxiii. 5). The same title of the Messiah is repeated by Ch. iii. 8, 9.] FOURTH VISION — JOSHUA BEFORE THE ANGEL. 7 1 Jeremiah in a later chapter (xxxiii. 15) : " In these days and in that time I will cause to branch unto David a branch of righteousness (Uplii HOit IVO T]''i^)ii^), and he shall do judg- ment and righteousness in the earth." The title " my servant " is also borrowed from the earlier prophets, and specially refers to the great prophecy of " the servant of Jahaveh " in the latter part of Isaiah ; and the words "my servant Branch" (HQII ^"^^Jl?) may be a remi- niscence of the expression in Ezekiel, "my servant David" ("^n ^^^^' ^^^^- XXX vii. 24.) The last words in the address of the angel, namely, " I will remove the iniquity of the land in one day," clearly refer to the work of the Messiah. As the section begins (verse 8) with a distinct promise of the Messiah's coming, and closes (verse 10) with a statement of the result of that coming to Israel, it is only natural to view the middle portion as having reference to the same event. The passage in verse 9, which speaks of the stone laid before Joshua, has, therefore, been correctly explained by many of the Church Fathers, and by the Reformers, to refer to the Messiah as the foundation stone of the eternal temple, upon whom the hopes of an everlasting peace depended. So also Kliefoth and Pressel. It is probable that at this stage of the vision a stone was actually seen by the prophet lying at the feet of the high priest, most likely the foundation stone of the second temple, which had been laid years before (Ezra iii. 8-13). Though we cannot credit all that is said about this stone by the Rabbis, it is clear that it must have been a stone of consider- able size and importance. According to the Talmud (Tract. Yoma, V. 2), this stone took the place of the ark of the covenant in the first temple, and Maimonides asserts that it was that on which the ark rested in that temple, and before which the pot of manna and Aaron's rod were de- 72 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. iii. 9. posited. It is further stated that upon this stone, which stood iji the holy of hoHes in the second temple, as the ark of the covenant was wanting, the blood of atonement was duly sprinkled, and upon it the high priest placed the burning censer with which he entered into that most holy place. Whatever absurdities there may be in the other legends re- garding it, there is nothing improbable in this. Amid the ruins of the ancient temple, the Jewish builders, engaged in rearing the second temple, would naturally look out for some impor- tant stone of the first to use as the foundation stone of the second. And what more likely than that they should have chosen a mighty block from the ruins of the holy of holies for that purpose ? According to Jewish tradition, that stone was visible in the holy of holies, where it rose about three fingers' breadth above the level of the pavement. These traditions (wfiich are given in greater extent by March) are not only interesting in themselves, but prob- ably are historically correct ; though of course they cannot be made the basis of any positive argument. That the stone laid in vision before Joshua represented the jewels belonging to the high priest's breastplate (the Urim and Thummim), or even some single precious stone which supplied the place of the jewels that were lost (Baumgarten), appears altogether fanciful. The stone can scaixely typify the people of Israel who were to be the foundation of the new order of things (as Schegg, Kohler, Keil think). Nor does the view of Hengstenberg commend itself to our judgment, according to which the stone represents the kingdom or people of God, outwardly insignificant when compared with the great mountain (chap. iv. 7), which symbolizes the power of the world. That the stone here represents the entire collection of materials required for the erection of the temple (as von Hofmann, Weis.undErf., i. p. 341; Stalielin, Mess. Weiss., pp. 1 19-120) can scarcely be reconciled with the precise Ch. iii. 9.] FOU'RTH VISION — JOSHUA BEFORE THE ANGEL. 73 expression used in verse 9, " one stone" (nPIJ^ pi^"7i^). Von Hofmann altered his opinion in his Schriftbeweis (ii., i, p. 363), in which he considers that special reference is made to the stone in the holy of holies, which took the place of the ark of the covenant in the second temple. The stone seen in the vision seems to have been the foundation-stone of the temple, which typified the Messiah, who in the writings of " the former prophets " (chap. i. 4), with which Zechariah was well acquainted, was set forth under such symbols. Thus the Psalmist says that " the stone which the builders refused is become the head of the corner" (Ps. cxviii. 22). And Isaiah (chap, xxviii. 16) says, "Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a corner stone, a sure foundation." Such passages make it easy, without doing any violence to the language of the prophet, to understand the Messiah to be here referred to ; an idea supported by those passages of the New Testament in which the Messiah is set forth as a stone, a foundation, and believers as living stones built up on him (Matt. xvi. 18, xxi. 42 ; I Cor. iii. 11 ; Eph. ii. 20-22 ; i Pet. ii. 4, 5). Ewald considers that this stone (on which, he thinks, seven eyes were actually engraved) was the stone destined to crown the edifice of the finished temple, and that the seven eyes represented the seven highest spirits (Rev. i. 4). The stone was " a wonder-stone, towards which the whole Divine care and love, as well as all the seven spirits or eyes of Jahaveh were directed, and, therefore, the seven eyes were engraven thereon as a token of the fact." The expression, " upon one stone shall be seven eyes," may mean (with Ew^ald) that seven eyes were actually en- graved upon the stone, or that the seven eyes of God rested upon it, i.e., were directed towards it to watch and protect it. Comp. I Kings viii. 29. If the stone be supposed to symbo- lize the Messiah, the sense of the passage would be, that 74 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. iii. 9. God's watchful providential care would so guard his Servant that he would be manifested in due time. The Divine power would protect that stone and the quarry in which it lay hidden until the time came to cut it out, without human instrumentality, and shape it so that it would become the foundation-stone of his Church and people. According to the translation which supposes the seven eyes themselves to have been seen upon the stone, the significa- tion might almost be the same. For the seven eyes on the stone might indicate that the stone on which they were drawn or engraved was under the care of those seven eyes, which in the next vision are represented as running to and fro throughout the whole earth. This appears to be the meaning which Ewald puts on the passage, and it is not unlikely to have been the view which the Jews of the prophet's day would have taken. So far as it goes, this interpretation would be correct. On the other hand, with New Testament guid- ance, we cannot avoid thinking of a deeper meaning, and regarding the stone with the seven eyes as a stone anointed with the sevenfold spirit of Jahavch, whose seven powers are mentioned in Isa. xi. 2.^ Klicfoth explains the eyes on the stone to mean, that through him whom the stone signified all the operations of the Spirit of God would be carried on from the day on which that stone should be laid as the foundation of his Church. If, however, we are to interpret the passage according to New Testament ideas, we prefer to compare the statement in the Evangelist St. John, " God giveth not his Spirit by measure unto him;" which truth seems indicated by the appearance of the Lamb in the book of the Revelation, with the seven horns and the seven eyes, which arc the spirits of God sent forth into all the earth (Rev. v. 6). Keil thinks that the opinion that " the seven c}'cs " were ' Sec Dclitzsch's remarks on that passage in Iiis Coniin. un Isaiali, ami particu- larly in his System of Biblical Psychology. Ch. iii. 9.] FOURTH VISION — JOSHUA BEFORE THE ANGEL. 75 actually beheld in the vision on the stone itself, is opposed to the statement which follows : " I will engrave (or I am graving) the graving thereof" For the phrase in the original does not indicate a fact that had taken place, but rather one that was to take place in the future. The objection, however, is not valid. For though the stone is represented in the vision as already laid, yet the Messiah represented by it was yet to come. And though for the purposes of symbolical representation it might have been seen with the seven eyes actually engraved on it, the fact intended by that symbol was still future, and the language in question may well refer to that future fact. . We pass over in silence many strange interpretations given to the sentence just referred to (but see crit. comm.), especially as the translation already given is that approved by the great majority of modern critics. In the picture presented to the prophet, the " seven eyes " were probably seen by him drawn upon the rough surface of the stone, but not as yet cut or engraved. Hence the phrase, " I will grave the graving thereof," may retain in all respects its natural meaning. The words can scarcely mean that the rough stone would be cut into a beautiful and precious stone (Keil). They rather indicate some distinct inscription or carving cut into the stone itself. No inscription can, however, be here signified, and the carving can only be that of " the seven eyes " cut into the stone. The mention made of the graving of the stone is devoid of mean- ing, if the translation, " upon one stone are seven eyes directed," be accepted, and this seems conclusive in favour of the idea that " the seven eyes " were represented in the vision as drawn upon the stone itself placed before Joshua, the cutting or carving out of which was to be executed at a future period by the Divine power. Pressel has noted, that in the case of a foundation-stone, ornamentation (even if that idea could be conveyed by the 'j6 ZECHARlAIi AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. iii. 9. phrase) is a matter of secondary importance. But upon such stones certain marks are often wont to be made, indicating either the name of the builder or the object of the structure about to be built thereon. The foundation-stone of the second temple, which, as the Talmud informs us, was some inches higher than the level of the holy of holies, had also according to that authority inscribed on it the sacred Tetra- grammaton or the four letters of the name Jahaveh (mn''). Christ, who was the true foundation-stone of the spiritual temple, received by Divine command the name " Jesus," which name indicated the great work he came to perform, and for which he was anointed with the Holy Ghost and with power (Acts x. 38). The full meaning of that name no one knew but himself {Rev. xix. 12). But he felt its full significance when he said, " I came down from heaven, not to do my will, but the will of him that sent me, and this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and bclicveth on him, may have everlasting life ; and I will raise him up at the last day " (John vi. 38, 40). The laying of this stone, and the manifestation of the Messiah prefigured thereby, were to result in the removal of the iniquity of the land for ever. " And I will take away the iniquity of this land in one day." ^ The " one day," on which such emphasis is here laid, is most easily explained as identical with the "once" (e^aTra^) so often emphasized in the ICpistlc to the Hebrews (Ilcb. 1 Kohler rclat4terun^:; der Evang. aus Talm. u. Midrasch, quotes another passage, "Samuel said, If the Government says, pluck u/> nioimtaiiis (^1112 SJIpL') i.e. when it demands something extraordinary and impossible, then pluck up mountains (mt2 "Ipl?), for it will not take back its word." But this phrase is not to be found in the jilacc in the Talmud to which Wiinsche refers. See also Langc's excellent remarks on this passage (Matt. xxi. 21) in his Bibekvci-k. Ch. iv. 7-9.] FIFTH VISION — THE GOLDEN CANDLESTICK. 97 The word of Jahaveh delivered to the priest-prophet was not, however, entirely expressed in figurative language ; Zerubbabel was informed in plain language that, as his hands had laid the foundation-stone, so his hands should place the topstone on the completed building. That topstone should be reared and placed in its right position by his own hands amid the loud acclamations of a rejoicing people. Shoutings of " grace, grace unto it," should rend the air, as the stone was being raised to its proper position in the edifice, " all favour from God unto it, redoubled favour, grace upon grace" (Pusey). Such should be the loud exclamations of the people on the occasion, praying that the work accomplished should have a blessing from on high, inasmuch as it had been begun and completed under the gracious power of Jahaveh.* Zerubbabel was to have the honour, as a son of David, not only of commencing but of finishing the work. This w^as stated by the angel in these words : " The hands of Zerub- babel have laid the foundation of this house, and his hands shall also finish it ; that thou mayest know that Jahaveh of hosts hath sent me unto you." By the fulfilment of this promise, Zechariah would have a distinct proof that the inter- preting angel had been commissioned by Jahaveh to announce this prophecy unto him (LXX. Trpo? ere), and through him unto Israel. Compare chap. ii. 13, 15. (Kohler.) The words that follow (verse 10) have been very differently translated and explained. On the translations of the ancient versions, see ourcrit. comm. That oiour Authorised Version, though differing from them in details, agrees so far as that it does not make the seven eyes of Jahaveh the subject of the verb "rejoice," which, however, is the preferable translation. Ewald, ' The Targum thinks that the Messiah is here predicted, and so Pusey and others. The Messiah is called n|S, the corner-stone, used as a foundation (Isaiah xxviii. 16), also HSS C'NI (Ps. cxviii. 22), but not as here nSi^XIH pXH, the stone which crowns the building. H 98 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. iv. lo. whom Bunscn follows, renders the passage thus : "For they who have despised the day of small things, they will rejoice and see the lead-stone in the hand of Zcrubbabel ; these seven are the eyes of Jahaveh roaming through (durchstreif- end) the whole earth." He strangely explains it thus : those who mocked at the day when the foundation of the temple was laid under weak beginnings, would yet with joy behold in the hand of Zerubbabel the corner stone adorned with the leaden inscription (comp. Job xix. 23). Apart from the critical difficulties connected with this translation, especially as respects the rendering and interpre- tation of the words rendered " the lead-stone," which transla- tion we hold, with Hitzig and Kohler, to be incorrect, con- sidered from a grammatical point of view (see crit. comm.), there is another point which must be noticed, namely, that this rendering identifies the stone mentioned in the former vision with the corner stone mentioned in this, for which identifi- cation no evidence can be adduced. The Hebrew expression cannot signify a stone into which lead has been molten, but must mean a stone the substance of which is lead, and, therefore, is correctly explained in our Authorised Version by " the plummet." The most probable translation is that given by Hitzig, Keil, Pusey, etc., in accordance with the Masoretic accentuation, taking the pronoun as interrogative : " For Avho hath despised the day of small things .•* And [lc. seeing that] these have rejoiced, and seen the ptimmet in the hands of Zcrubbabel, these seven, the Eyes of Jahaveh, they are running to and fro in all the earth." The answer to the question was ex- pected in the negative. No one who seeks to perform or ac- complish anything great ever does despise the day of small things (Keil). The words that follow signify that the Seven Eyes of the Lord which run to and fro in all the earth had already rejoiced to behold the plummet in the hands of Zcrub- Ch. iv. lo.] FIFTH VISION — THE GOLDEN CANDLESTICK. 99 babel. But if the Spirit of the hving God, who saw all things and knew all that was done, rejoiced to behold Zerubbabel performing that work which he aroused him to undertake, the people of the Lord had good reason likewise to rejoice. " The day of small things " was no doubt understood by the hearers of the prophet to refer to the circumstances under which the rebuilding of the temple was begun. When the foundation stone of that second temple was laid, though the young men, who had not beheld the glory of the first temple, rent the air with their shouts of joy, there arose at the same time loud wailings on the part of the old men that had seen the first house in its glory (Ezra iii. 12, 13). The day of great things, on the other hand, was that which was looked for when the house of the Lord should be fully restored and sanctified (Kohler). It may be urged against this interpretation, that the days which saw the temple building actually completed were as dark and gloomy as those that saw its foundation laid. That, therefore, the day of small things refers to the whole time from the days of Darius until the coming of the Messiah, who first would accomplish great things (Keil). In a certain sense this is no doubt true, but the day which was then looked for- ward to with earnest longing was the day when the restora- tion of the temple should be completed ; and although the political condition of the Jewish people was not very different in the sixth year of Darius, when the house of God was duly dedicated, from their condition in the second year of Darius, that dedication festival was indeed a day of great things and was kept with great joy (Ezra vi. 14-22). This is the only natural sense in which to understand the words of the vision. It is not impossible that some of the expressions made use of in this vision may be taken in a wider meaning and with a deeper signification. We have already pointed out this fact in connection with the mention of the two olive trees that 100 ZECIIARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. iv. lo. supplied the oil required for the golden candlestick. But the main object and end of this vision seems to have been to cheer and inspirit the Jews who had already begun the work of rebuilding the temple, and who, amid the constant opposition they met with in their work, needed Divine consolation and encouragement to induce them to prosecute that work unto its end. It is unnecessary to seek special references to Messianic days in all the phrases which the prophet uses with reference to the things of his own day, the literal meaning of which could scarcely be mistaken by his countrymen whom he addressed. " Who is there left among you that saw this house in its first glory, and how do ye see it now .-' Is it not in your eyes in comparison of it as nothing .'' " (Hag. ii. 3). So spake the prophet Haggai, of the second temple, in " the day of small things." Haggai appears to have regarded the first advent of the Messiah as nearer than it really was. As St, Paul^ seems to have expected, at one time at least, the second advent to occur in his own day, so Haggai speaks of Mes- sianic days as closely connected with the restoration of the temple. The prophet was permitted to see by faith the glory that should be revealed in the second time, though the day of the manifestation of that glory was more distant than he imagined. With reference to the days of the INIessiah, Haggai predicted : " The latter glory of this house " (this is the cor- rect rendering, and not " the glory of the latter l^ouse") " shall be greater than the former (glory), and in this place will I give peace, saith Jahaveh of hosts " (Hag. ii. 9). ^ ^ This is the rendering of Ilitzig, Ewakl, Kolilcr and Keil. If the adjective "latter" qualified the noun "house," the pronoun in the Hel)rew would, as Ilitzig has correctly noted, have been placed after that adjective and not before it, as in this verse. The distance of the adjective from the word " glory" is no objection to this construction. For tliat noun is in the const, state, and the adjective follows the genitive by which the noun is conditioned. Conip. 2 Sam. xxiii. i ; Isa. xxxvi. 9 ; see Ewald, § 2S9 a. Ch. iv. 10.] FIFTH VISION — THE GOLDEN CANDLESTICK. lOI Notwithstanding the great difficulties which beset the rebuilding of the second temple, and the political perplexi- ties in which the Jewish people were involved, that temple had a glory far higher than that possessed by the temple erected by Solomon. Its courts were trodden by the long- expected Messiah, his voice was often heard within its walls. If that temple was indeed destined to be destroyed by the hands of the destroyer, and its candlestick to be carried away by the Romans among the spoils of its holy places, the light of the symbolical candlestick was extinguished only in order that the light from the true candlestick (whose lamps were fed and supplied by the oil from the two olive trees of Jewish and Gentile Christianity) might shine forth the more brightly among the nations. Even in the days of its political insigni- ficance, one might almost say of its non-existence as a nation, Israel was ever the " priestly nation," the "royal people " in the loftiest sense of that term. While art and philosophy and literature came from the Greeks, and the Romans tamed the spirit of fierce nations by their laws, as they had subdued them by their arms, the Jews, who before Christ came were as lights shining amid the spiritual darkness of the world, have through the religion of Christ (which w^as first preached to the Jews and then by Jews to the nations) proved themselves to be the real priests of the world. CHAPTER IV. THE SIXTH VISION— THE FLYING ROLL AND THE WOMAN IN THE EPHAH CHAPTER IV. Vision of the flying roll, 105 — The curse, 105 — Its dimensions, 105 — Meaning of its size, 106 — Opinion of Ilitzig, Pressel, etc., 106 — Supposed reference to the porch of the temple of Solomon, 107 — The dimensions those of the Holy Place of the tabernacle, 107 — Significance of this fact, 107 — The measure of the sanctuary, 107 — Connections of the fourth, fifth, and sixth visions, 107, 120 — The whole land, 108 — Thieves and perjurers, 109 — Jews transformed into a com- mercial people, 109 — The sins of commerce, 109 — The cleansing of the land, no — Punishments for sin, no — The ephah appearing to the prophet, in — The talent-weight, not a leaden cover of the ephah, in — -Objections to that view, 112 — The woman sitting in the ephah, 112 — " Wickedness " and her instni- ments, 113 — " This is their eye," 113 — Different views, 114 — Ewald's render- ing, 114 — Objections to his translation, 114 — Real meaning of the phrase, 115 — The woman and the talent-weight, 1 15 — Her punishment by the angel, 116 — Her rescue from destruction, 117 — The stork- winged women, 117 — Their signi- ficance, 117— Pressel's view, 118 — The land of Shinar and the land of Israel, 118 — Christ as the Purifier of his people, 119 — General import of the vision, 120. CHAPTER IV. THE SIXTH VISION — THE FLYING ROEL AND THE WOMAN IN THE EPHAH. The vision of the flying roll and that of the woman in the ephah are so closely connected, as to form properly but one vision, though some scholars have regarded them as being two. The arguments adduced on behalf of the latter opinion do not, however, appear to us satisfactory. The two visions together form a striking picture of the result of sin, and the end of transgression, A roll was first beheld by the prophet flying in the air. It was of strange and unnatural dimensions. On it were in- scribed the awful curses denounced against transgressors. It is probable, as Fressel thinks, that the curses referred to were those pronounced by Moses (Deut. xxviii. 15, ff.), and afterwards alluded to in the singular as " the curse " (Deut. XXX. i), although the word rendered "the curse" in the passage of the law and in the writing of the prophet are not identical. The opinion of Pressel, however, is not capable of any proof. If correct, the roll seen by the prophet was the roll of the law. The dimensions of the roll, which was seen as expanded and not rolled together, appeared to the prophet to be twenty cubits long and ten cubits broad, Hitzig considers that it was so large because it was represented as containing the whole sum of the Divine curses.^ Something more than enormous size ^ He remarks the dimensions given are more suitable to its having been seen rather in the form of a book than in that of a roll, and suggests that it may have been seen as written on papyrus with leaves, though the latter are not mentioned. I06 ZECIIARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. v. 1-7. (Kohler) seems to be intimated by the special dimensions given. Pressel (aftfr Marck) thinks that the roll was thus represented as bearing in its outlines the appearance of the Holy Land, the proportions in length and breadth being identical, though the roll had those proportions in a reduced size. Still more fanciful is the idea of Jerome that these numbers indicate the age at which our Lord commenced his public ministry, i.e. thirty years or 20+10. The dimen- sions assigned to the roll are those of the porch of the temple of Solomon (r Kings vi. 3), and the Jewish expositor Kimchi and others have considered that there is a reference here to that place. For the porch of that temple, as Hengstenberg observes, was the outer part of the temple proper, and was the place where God was supposed to enter into intercourse with his people, even as Solomon judged the people of Israel in the hall of his palace (i Kings vii. 6). Hence before that porch, in the outer court of the priests, stood the altar of burnt offering, and there "between the porch and the altar," priests and people in times of public calamity were wont together to entreat the mercy of the Lord (Joel ii. 17). Lias- much, therefore, as the roll had the dimensions of that porch, the judgment pronounced in it was represented as the result of the theocracy. Von Hofmann considers that Joshua was represented in the fourth vision as standing before the Angel of Jahaveh in the holy of holies. He supposes that the scene of the fifth vision was laid in the holy place, and that of the present vision in the porch of the temple. While agreeing with v. Hofmann gene- rally as to the special localities in which the fourth and the fifth visions were exhibited to the prophet, it appears to us that. For as Egypt belonged, in the days of Zechariah, to the Persian empire, the customs of that country were known to strangers. As, however, no mention is made of the thickness of the book, and as moreover it is represented as flying, Hitzig concludes that it is more correct to regard it as one leaf, and thus to ex- plain its extraordinary size, and that an actual roll was seen by the prophet. Ch. V. 1-3.] THE SIXTH VISION — THE FLYING ROLL. 10/ if the vision under consideration was to be regarded as seen in the porch of the temple, some more definite intimation would have been given than the fact that the dimensions of the roll were identical with those of the porch of the temple. As no distinct proof can be adduced that the porch of the temple had any special symbolical meaning (though its dimen- sions were perhaps borrowed from the Mosaic tabernacle), it is better to regard the dimensions of the flying roll as refer- ring to the holy place of that tabernacle. The roll is not to be considered, however, as coming forth from the holy place, and as, therefore, of the same size, in order to signify that the curse came from the sanctuary where Jahaveh was enthroned (Isa. Ixvi. 6). It would be strange if the fact that the roll corresponded in size with the sanctuary were sufficient to indicate that it came forth from the sanctuary itself. Kliefoth seems to have assigned the true reason for the roll having the dimensions of the sanctuary, namely, that the measure wherewith sin was to be measured was the measure of the sanctuary, and hence " the curse" commences first at the house of God (comp. Ezek. ix. 6; and i Pet. iv. 17). Men are not to be judged as to sin by their own measures or weighed in their own false balances. The measure of the sanctuary is that by which actions are to be weighed (i Sam. ii. 3). In the fourth vision the cleansing of the priesthood (and of the people whom they represented) had been set forth. They had been pardoned and justified by Divine grace. The golden candlestick of the sanctuary as represented in the fifth vision, once more, therefore, shed forth its bright and glorious light. The light of good works had been exhibited by the people of God, after that the grace of God had been displayed towards them. The sixth vision represents sin itself as condemned, and all wicked doers, persisting in their I08 ZECIIARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. v. 3. ungodliness, as "cleansed away,"^ and cutoff from the city of the Lord " (Psalm ci. 8). The transgressors that still ventured to remain among the people of God should be consumed by the curse ; against them should the anger of the Lord wax hot, the curses should lie upon such (Deut. xxix. 20,21), and sin should not find any more an abiding place among the congregation of Jahaveh. The curse is represented as going forth "over the face of the whole land," or " earth," as it is rendered in our Author- ised Version. The latter meaning has been defended by several commentators, but it does not appear to be appro- priate here. For as " the land " is contrasted with the " land of Shinar " mentioned at the close of the vision, the land of Israel must be referred to." * The verb nj?? is here the niphal. The piel is alike in form. The probable meaning of the root is to cai~ve out, to hollow, then to be empty, to be pure. Hence the niphal is used in the sense of to be pure, free from fault, followed by JD. Luther has taken it here in this meaning, translating, " for all thieves shall accord- ing to this letter be pronounced pious" (werden fromm gesprochen). That is, it is a curse upon the land that theft and perjury are regarded no more as crying evils, nor as deserving of punishment. Similarly Syr. But this is evidently not the meaning. The modern critics rightly render it, shall be cleared or cleansed aiuay. The verb is used of a city being emptied of its inhabitants, i.e., laid waste and ruined (Isa. iii. 26). The Arabic verb occurs in this signification in the Xth conj., as Gesenius notes. The verb here may be employed in the sense of being rendered solitary, emptied of society, driven out of communion (Fiirst), or as signifying extirpated (Gesenius). It has probably the signification of cleansing aiuay, 7i% the Greek Kadapi^(>) in Mark vii. 19, as Pusey suggests, or as iKKadaipu, in i Cor. v. 7, as Pressel has given. On the ancient versions, see crit. comm. The verb is nowhere else used in this signification. Hence it is strange that Dr. Pusey should remark that Gesenius had missed "the moral meaning of the Hebrew word " by his translation. Dr. Pusey's references to I Kings -xiv. 10, xxi. 21, Deut. xiii. 6 (verse 5 in E.V.), etc., may misle.id some, inasmuch as the word used in those passages is not identical with that here found. Those passages, however, illustrate the sense. " But it does not follow (as Rosenmiiller thinks) that the prophecy refers to the captivity in Babylon which had terminated, or that it predicts, as Hcngstcnberg seems to imagine, the captivity of the Jews by the Romans. Though " the land " here most naturally signifies the Holy Land in its geographical sense, and was, no doubt, so understood by the Jewish colony at Jerusalem, to whom Zcchariah first related these visions, it does not follow that it may not also have a reference to the Church of Christ (Keil). But the idea that the expulsion of all sinners from the Ch. V. 3.] SIXTH VISION — THE FLYING ROLL. 109 " The curse " was written on both sides of the flying roll, and was specially directed against thieves and perjurers. For the expression " he that sweareth " must be understood as explained in the following verse of swearing falsely by the name of Jahaveh, though the approximation here to the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. v. 34) is note- worthy. Theft and perjury are the two most notable examples of open transgression against the commandments of God. Perjury, or lying in its grossest form, is a sin against the first table of the law, being a breach of the third commandment. Theft is a breach of the second table, the violation of the eighth commandment. These special sins are often wont to retain their power, and to be more or less indulged in by many who belong to the congregation of the Lord, even after the grosser transgressions of the law, such as idolatry and murder, have in a great measure ceased. These sins were violations of the law but too common among the Jews who returned from the Captivity. Their peculiar position during the long years of banishment from their own land had driven that people to engage more gene- rally in commercial occupations. They were thus exposed to peculiar temptations to commit such sins. They had been in a great measure cured of their propensity to idolatry during their bitter exile. The desire of preserving their nationality among the nations had in a great degree led them to maintain the purity of their faith. After the restoration, however, the Jews never again became the agricultural nation they had been before that event. They had been, no doubt, entangled in the sins peculiar to that course of life in the days of Zechariah, and hence the special mention made of them in this place. According to the curse represented in the vision, the thief was condemned by the one table" of the law, which was Holy Land at the commencement of the millennial era (v. Hofmann) is referred to finds no support in the language of this prophecy. 1 10 ZECHARIAH AND IIIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. v. 3, 4. written " on this side " of the flying roll, as a transgressor who ought to be cleansed away, according to it, from the con- gregation. The perjurer was likewise to be cleansed away according to the solemn curse written on the other side. The awful results of that curse are strikingly pictured in the words that follow. The curse itself is represented as brought out of the Lord's treasures of wrath (Deut. xxxii. 34, 35), and as lodging for the night in the house of the thief or perjurer, i.e., abiding there " until it accomplish that for which it was sent, its utter destruction" (Pusey).^ God will not endure the practice of immorality in the midst of those that are his people. The justified must be sanctified. His people must be righteous. He sits to purify and to refine the house of Israel. Visibly or invisibly, he ever separates the chafif from the wheat, and executes judg- ment in the midst of his people. The book of the Proverbs abundantly proves this. Theft and perjury are sins near of kin to one another, the one almost invariably producing the other, and these sins often in this life experience Divine chastisement. The ungodly may flourish for a season, but soon he is sought for and can nowhere be found (Ps. xxxvii. 35, '^6). That such crimes should have been special objects of Providential judg- ments among the people who had returned from Babylon is ' The well-known instance of Glaucus, mentioned by Herodotus (Book vi. 86), maybe given as an example. His name stood once high for integrity, and hence a Milesian came to him to deposit a sum of money on trust. The deposit was ac- cepted by Glaucus. But when the money was required by the sons of the deposi- tor, who presented the tallies in support of their claim, Glaucus hesitated to restore it. He consulted the oracle of Delphi whether he might perjure himself and make a prize of the money. The priestess told him that it was best for the present to do as he desired, for that death was the common lot of the honest and dishonest. "Yet Oath hath a son, nameless, handless, footless, but swift he pursues until he seize and destroy the whole race and house." On hearing this Glaucus begged to be pardoned for his question, but the priestess replied that it was as bad to have tempted the god as to have done the deed. Glaucus ultimately restored the money to its owners. Yet it was noted that his whole family be- came extinct, which was considered as a punishment for having consulted the god whetlier he might perjure himself for gain. Ch. V. 4-7.] THE SIXTH VISION — WOMAN IN THE EPHAH. 1 1 1 highly probable. All such instances of Divine judgments on earth must be regarded as mere premonitory droppings of the tempest of wrath which will one day overwhelm the ungodly. The history of sin is, as Kliefoth notes, by no means finished when the open sinners have been separated from the congregation of the holy. That history has a further sequel. Accordingly, after the interpreting angel had explained the purport of the flying roll, he left the prophet's side for a moment ; and thus having by his movements awakened special attention, he called upon the prophet to observe the new scene that was now passing before him.^ As the prophet lifted up his eyes, he saw an ephah going forth, that is, emerging from the mist, and coming clearly into view. The ephah was a dry measure in common use among the Hebrews, corresponding very nearly to our bushel, although there is still much difference of opinion as to its exact size and capacity. Whatever its precise dimensions may have been, it was the largest dry measure in ordinary use, and hence it is mentioned here with a special purpose. In close conjunction with the ephah, "a talent of lead" is spoken of in verse 7, or, as it is termed in verse 8, " the stone of lead," in other words, a leaden weight of the weight of a talent. The majority of expositors have considered the words to signify " a cover of lead" with which the ephah was closed. But if the ephah had a cover of lead, that cover would scarcely have been termed " the stone of lead," or " the leaden stone " (verse 8). The rendering " leaden cover " obscures the real significance of the vision. The Hebrew word rendered "talent" does, indeed, literally mean "a circle,"^ and the ^ This appears the most natural explanation of the statements in verse 5, though the idea of Dr. Pusey is quite possible, namely, that the interpreting angel came forth from the choirs of angels among whom he had retired in the interval. During the entire of the vision the interpreting angel seems to have been the speaker. ^ beeGen7~xiii. 10, xix. 17, 25 ff., where our Authorised Version has ren- dered it by the plain. It means in these places the circumjacent tract of country. 112 ZECIiARIAII AND IIIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. v. 7. expression " a circle of bread " is used to denote a round loaf (Exod. xxix. 23 ; i Sam. ii. 36). The word is not found in the signification of a cover, though that is a possible signification. It is constantly used in the sense of a fixed weight by which gold, silver, and other things, were weighed and measured, and is naturally spoken of in such a meaning here in connexion with the ephah, as the latter was the usual measure of capacity. The talent was the standard measure of quantity, and the weight was made of lead as the most common heavy metal, and was used in all commercial transactions for weighing out money. Even assuming that the ephah was of the largest dimen- sions which have been assigned to it, it would have been utterly impossible for a woman to have been pressed down inside such a measure, and covered up with a lid. That is what is generally supposed to have been seen by the prophet in the vision. But the vision, instead of speak- ing of the woman as crushed up within the narrow bounds of an ephah, speaks of her as seen (in verse 7) sitting in the middle of an ephah. This is not the way in which the writer would have expressed himself had he intended to represent the woman as raising herself up after having been crushed down beneath a heavy cover. Moreover, it would have been utterly incongruous to have represented a woman crushed down inside an ephah, which was not by any means large enough to contain a woman. Even if the ephah had been large enough to contain a woman forced on her side, the phrase "sitting in the midst of the ephah " could scarcely be used of a woman lifting up herself from such a position. That phrase seems rather to indicate a posture of repose. A woman could be represented as sitting inside the ephah in a somewhat crouching posture, the larger portion of her body being visible above it. Pressel is correct in regarding Ch. V. 6-8.] SIXTH VISION — WOMAN IN THE EPHAH. II3 the woman in this vision as thus represented. As she sat in the ephah, the largest dry measure, she carried in her lap a talent of lead, the largest measure used in the computation of money. Both measures were needful in the most ordi- nary commercial transactions. The prophet was directed to notice the ephah. He soon observed the woman sitting in it, and the talent which she carried. " This woman," said the interpreting angel, " is wickedness." The ephah and the talent were the instruments used by her in the pursuit of trade. The vision recalls to mind the expression used by another and earlier prophet with regard to unrighteous traders, " making the ephah small and the shekel great, and falsifying the balances by deceit " (Amos viii. 5), and the many solemn warnings against false weights and balances, and the deceitful devices of ungodly traders, so abundantly reprobated in the book of the Pro- verbs. Jerome imagines that the sin of the people is represented in this figure as gathered together into one heap into the ephah, in order to be cast away from the land. But in that case there would be no special fitness at all in the mention of an ephah, nor in the comparison of the sinners, that is the thieves and perjurers mentioned before, to such an ephah and its contents. Nor would there be any special reason why the talent should be called a talent of lead, even supposing the lid of the ephah was alluded to,' The remarkable expression which occurs in verse 6, " This is their eye " Vulg. hsec est oculus eorum, must be here considered. This is the literal translation of the words. The LXX. either had actually a different reading, or, not com- ' Von Hofmann views the passage as giving a picture of the fate of those that rebel against God's commandments. But this interpretation is not explicit enough, and makes the second part of tlie vision respecting " the ephah " to be little more than a repetition of that taught by " the flying roll." I 114 ZECHARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. v. 6-S prehending the Hebrew, altered the text, and read, " this is their iniquity in all the earth," i.e., this ephah represents their iniquity. Similarly the Syr., " this is the measure in which is contained the sin of all the earth." This reading has been approved of by Hitzig and other critics, under the idea that the ephah represents the sin of Israel compressed into one mass. But as that does not appear to be the meaning of the vision, there is no need to alter the Masoretic text.^ Ewald renders " this is their spectacle, that is the spectacle of the people in the whole land, which all could see as a warn- ing example," in allusion to the woman shut up, as he thinks she was represented, in the dark inside of the ephah, and kept down by the heavy leaden cover. The woman was, however, later to be exhibited and exposed to the contempt of all, as a wild animal taken away in a cage. Ewald explains " this is their eye, their look, that which they would willingly see " (comparing Okarpov, i Cor. iv. 9). But the demonstrative pronoun would in this case refer more or less distinctly to the woman in the ephah, and not to the ephah itself, which latter is primarily what was meant. Moreover, as Hitzig observes, if this was the meaning, the woman would have been more naturally represented as confined in an open cage. The reference of the vision is clearly to the ephah and its contents. The meaning of the phrase is, therefore, "this is their eye," i.e. this is that to which they have an eye.- ^ The translation of our Authorised Version, " this is their resemblance," is that adopted by Luther, and by several moderns, as Rosenmiiller, Maurer, and Bunsen. The meaning in that case is, " that which you see contains a picture of those things which the Hebrews did, and what they suffered. It is not something future which is exhibited, but a thing past, in order that the Jews might avoid for the future bringing upon themselves similar punishments" (Rosenmiiller). In such a case the reference is not only to what the prophet had seen, but to that which he would see in the course of the vision. ' So Hengstenberg, Kohler, Pressel. It does not, however, signify that " the efforts of the whole nation are directed to the filling up of the measure of its sin" (Hengstenberg). Ch. V. 6-8.] SIXTH VISION — THE WOMAN IN THE EPHAH. II5 This ephah is that towards which all those who dwell in the land (the thieves and perjurers already mentioned) look with longing eyes. Wherever thieves and perjured persons are to be found throughout the land, and in all the earth, their eyes are ever to weights and measures, their whole thoughts are turned towards the acquisition of earthly gain. They are en- amoured of "wickedness " sitting in the ephah, by which that which they sell is measured out, and bearing in her lap the leaden weight by which they reckon their gains. The Targum was, therefore, not far wrong in its paraphrase of this passage, " These are the people who receive and give false measures " (see crit. comm.). In the translation of the whole passage we coincide in the main with Pressel. " And behold a talent of lead was being lifted up, i.e. (carried)," and I saw, " and this (was) one woman," so Rashi (see crit. comm.), " sitting (that is, as she sat) in the middle of the ephah." There is no need to sup- pose that the weight was seen as lifted up.^ The woman does not seem to have been noticed before by the prophet. She, however, soon riveted his chief attention. " This " woman, said the interpreting angel to the prophet, naming her by her true name, " is wickedness." Well might she be thus named, having in her hand the leaden weight with which she was wont to traffic, and sitting crouched down in an empty bushel or ephah, as if that were her true seat and throne. The false measure, says Neumann truly, is her seat, the place of her devising and working. It was a special form of " wickedness " that was here pourtrayed, namely, un- righteousness as it manifests itself in matters of weight and measure, or, to designate it in our Lord's own words, " unfaith- fulness as regards the unrighteous mammon " (Luke xvi. 11). ^ The Hebrew accentuation forbids us to translate "and this one woman was sitting in the midst of the ephah." Nor would such a translation afford a good sense, as the woman was not previously mentioned. Il6 ZECIIARIAII AND IIIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. v. 8,9. This is represented as a woman, because of the power it displays as a temptress, whereby it exercises such an enticing and dangerous influence over the souls of men. Grotius was not far wrong when he said that wickedness is here described as a woman, because she is "the mother of thefts and perjuries and of all crimes." But " with the same measure that ye mete withal, shall it be measured to you again " (Luke vi. 38 ; Matt. vii. 2). The very instrument v/hich the woman used for her unholy work was to be the means of her confusion. The ephah in which she sat was made the chariot in which she was removed from the land ; and the angel, with righteous indignation, seized the woman herself, dashed her down into the ephah as she was about to rise from her sitting posture, and, taking hold of the leaden weight, flung the heavy " stone of lead " upon her mouth. Thus did the angel indicate that "wickedness" would be a subject of Divine wrath. He smote her in the mouth wherewith she had so often uttered words of lying and fraud ; and did so with the very instrument with which she was wont to measure her ungodly gain. Thus was her mouth stopped (Ps. cvii. 42 ; Job v. 16), and the instrument of sin was made the instrument of her punishment. This is the natural explanation of the words of verse 8, and is that given by the Ga'eek translators, the Jewish commentator Rashi, Rosenmiiller, etc. Others (as Maurerand Ewald) follow Kimchi in understanding the moutli to signify not the mouth of the woman, but that of the ephah upon which the heavy leaden cover was cast.^ Comp. Gen. xxix. 2 ; Ps. cxli. 7, etc. The woman in the vision was, however, delivered from the complete destruction which seemed to be impending over her by the sudden aid of two winged women. These women were apparently her aiders and abettors. They came rapidly ' Pressel in order to soften down the apparent harshness of tlie expression, arljitrarily translates " into htr bosomj Ch. V. 9-II.] SIXTH VISION — THE WOMAN IN THE EPHAH. 11/ towards her, with such rapidity that the wind seemed to be in their wings, so quickly were they borne through the air. The wings of these women were like those of a stork, which is named as being a well-known bird of passage with wide-spreading wings, and noted moreover for its skill in constructing its nest. The stork is a bird which would be at home in the well- watered land of Babylon. The wings of the women may possibly have been likened to those of storks, because that bird was unclean (Lev, xi. 19), though in this case that fact seems scarcely to be a sufficient reason. The stork-winged women lifted up the ephah and its contents, and bore it off between heaven and earth. When the prophet asked the angel whither they were bearing the ephah in which the woman was, he received the answer, " To build for her a house in the land of Shinar, and it shall be established, and she shall be placed there upon her own base." These two women can scarcely be regarded as instru- ments of God, used to remove sinners from the congregation of his people. Nor is it likely that women were introduced into the vision because a woman had to be carried off, and two women at least were needed to carry so heavy a burden (Keil). They rather typify instruments of evil, who for a time delivered the evil woman from the vengeance which was about to destroy her. By reason of the curse described as overtaking all who followed in her wicked ways, no place was left for her any longer in the land of righteousness, among a people forgiven for past transgression, and sancti- fied so as to bring forth fruit unto holiness. The winged women therefore bore off the evil one to the land of Shinar, there to build for her a house and a home. The curse had been levelled specially against two classes of sinners ; those who were sinning against the first table of the law, violating their duty to God by the profanation of his holy name, and also against such as were sinning against ItS ZECHARIAII and his prophecies. [Ch. v. 9-II. the second table, by appropriating as their own that wliich was not theirs. It, therefore, does not seem unlikely that the two stork-winged women were intended to be personifications of those sins which were represented in combination by the woman sitting in the ephah with the weight of lead. Pressel's suggestion may therefore be accepted, namely, that these two women, who helped the evil one to escape for a time from her angel-adversary, symbolize godlessness on the one hand, and lawlessness on the other, the one the sin that tramples under foot the commandment relating to duty to the Most High, claiming that " our lips are our own, who is Lord over us ? " (Ps. xii. 4), the other the transgression that disregards the rights of a fellow-man, by robbing him of that which is his. In the mention which is made of the house to be built for the evil one in the land of Shinar, the vision does not appear to refer to the bygone days of the captivity in Babylon, nor to any new captivity wherewith Israel was threatened. The picture is simply an ideal one. The land of Shinar is an ideal land, contrasted with the land of Israel. The former was the land of unhoHness, the latter was the holy land (chap ii. 12). The picture represents sin and transgression as removed from the land of Israel, the land of the people of God, driven to find its resting-place in the land where Babylon had once been built, driven into the land of the world-power which was anta- gonistic to God ; just as Cain in earlier days, when forced by his sin to leave those who dwelt in the land near Eden, had to betake himself to the land of Nod, or wandering (Gen. iv. 16). The division and separation of the evil from the good, which is here depicted (as Keil observes), was most strikingly seen when the Messiah appeared among men. Then occurred the great refining predicted by Malachi (iii. 1-5). But that process of the great Refiner goes on through all times of the exten- sion and development of the Church of the Messiah, whether Ch. V. 9-II.] SIXTH VISION — THE WOMAN IN THE EPHAH. II9 that Church be set up among Israel or among the nations. Christ separated by his words of power between the evil and the good as they existed in the land of Israel. By holding forth the truth, he drove with the scourge of denunciation the hypocritical Pharisees and Sadducees from his spiritual temple, as he had already driven the buyers and sellers out of the temple at Jerusalem with the scourge of small cords (John ii. 15). He caused the traitor Judas to cut himself ofif from the congregation of the holy ; and, when the traitor had left the upper room where the Master partook of the passover feast with his disciples, Jesus uttered those remarkable words : " Now is the Son of Man glorified, and God is glorified in him" (John xiii. 31). Christ, who from his throne in the sanctuary above (Mark xvi. 20) still carries on his work, compels by the power of his Spirit many who have tarried too long in the professing Church, at last to separate themselves, as "sensual, not having the Spirit" (Jude 19). They go out from us, because they are not of us, for if they were of us they would no doubt continue with us, but they go out that they may be made manifest that they are not all of us (i John ii. 19). The picture in the vision of Zechariah has received many remarkable fulfilments in the history of the Church of Christ ; but we cannot agree with those who think that it has a special reference to events supposed to occur in millennial days. Such is the general import of the vision of the flying roll and the woman in the ephah. The latter figure does not seem to us to represent the filling up of the measure of iniquity, as has been supposed by some commentators. For, as Kliefoth has noted, no indication whatever is given of such a signification, nor is the ephah represented as so full that it could contain nothing more. The filling-up of iniquity is not the result of the curse of God, but God's curse is the result of the filling-up of the measure of iniquity I20 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. v. 9-1 1. (Kliefoth). The picture of the woman with the ephah and the talent, borne away by the two stork-winged women, is a representation of one of the consequences of the going forth of the curse. The curse of God is described as meeting and destroying those individuals who venture to continue in open transgression, and ultimately as leading to the expulsion of sin itself with its instruments (false measures and false weights) from the midst of the people of God. The picture does not (as Kliefoth supposes) delineate the gathering together in a bushel of all the individual seeds of evil scattered through the world, so as in the end to constitute one individual mass opposed to the Church of God, The vision does not depict the erection of the kingdom of Antichrist. In such a case there would be no special signi- ficance in the introduction into it of an ephah, independently of other considerations. In the interpretation already sketched out (an interpretation which in its main features coincides with that of Pressel), the ephah, the woman and the talent, and the other peculiar features of the vision, are seen to be peculiarly appropriate to the object in view. The sixth vision then exhibits an ideal picture, in advance of that depicted in the fifth. It shows how the curse of God compels sin to pass judgment on itself, and forces sinners to cut themselves off from the land and congregation of the Lord. The vision was one peculiarly applicable to the condition of the returned exiles. It is a parable whose teachings are suitable to the Church in all the various stages of its history. It is but the outline of a picture the details of which will be filled in when " the Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend and them that do iniquity" (Matt. xiii. 41). CHAPTER V. THE SEVENTH VISION- THE FOUR CHARIOTS. .CHAPTER V. The two mountains of brass or copper, 123 — Importance of the article, 123 — Strange view of Hitzig, 123 — The false prophet Elxai, 124 — Mountains ex- plained by some as Zion and Moriah, 124— Svedberg's view of the mountains of Dalarne, 124 — Different Views, 125 — The mountains probably Zion and Mount of Olives viewed ideally, 126 — Valley of Jehoshaphat, 126 — The four chariots, 126 — Compared to the winds, 127 — Not the winds themselves, 127, 137 — The horses of the chariots, 127 — Difficulties in the vision itself, 127 — Views of Hitzig, Maurer, Ewald, etc., 127-9 — Hengstenberg on the strong horses, 129 — Views of Kliefoth and Keil, 129 — Objections, 129 — The strong and speckled steeds, 129 — Explanations of the chariots as Daniel's four empires, 130 — Various explan- ations of the colours of the horses, 130 — Objections to Kliefoth's view, 131 — » Objections to view of von liofmann and Volck, 132, note — The kingdom of "Antichrist" not the strongest, 132 — Keil's explanation of the colours by reference to Rev. vi., 133 — His attempt to meet the difficulties of the vision, I33~4 — Objections to his view, 134 — Colours of horses in Zechariah not those in Rev. vi., 134 — Colours of no symbolical significance, 135 — Used to mark off" one chariot from another, 135 — The four empires and the four chariots, 135 — Baumgarten on the number four, 136, note — Speckled and strong steeds, 136 — Difficulties met, 136 — Signification of vision, 137 — The four chariots not the four winds, 137 — Ewald's view, 137 — Schegg on the scene in general, 138 — — The valley between the mountains, 138 — The view presented to Zechariah, 138 — Verse 8 explained, 139 — The resting of the spirit, 139 — Judgments, 139 Ewald's different view, 140 — Objections, 140 — Objection to Pressel's interpre- tation, 140 — Kohler's view of the last vision in its relation to the first, 141. CHAPTER V. THE SEVENTH VISION — THE FOUR CHARIOTS. In the seventh and last vision which the prophet saw on that eventful night, he beheld four chariots rushing forth at full speed from between the two mountains which constituted the side-scenes of the picture presented to his view, and which mountains the prophet noted were "mountains of brass " or rather " of copper." From a defile between these moun- tains the chariots seem to have appeared rushing forth into a plain (Hitzig). The article in the phrase, " between the two mountains," has been overlooked in our Authorised Version. It is of im- portance as indicating that the mountains were well known. The phrase is too definite to admit of such general interpreta- tions as that of Hengstenberg, who supposes the mountains to represent the power of God which shields and protects his people (comp. Ps. cxxv. 2), or that of Baumgarten, that they repre- sent the east and west as the two central points of the world- power, which in Zechariah are rather the north and the south. Inasmuch as these chariots went forth from standing before the Lord of the whole earth, Hitzig maintains that the moun- tains must be regarded as near to the dwelling-place of the Most High. In order to illustrate the idea which he imagines to be contained in this passage of Zechariah, of mountains being regarded as near God's abode, Hitzig adduces a state- ment from the extant fragments of the pseudo-prophet Elxai, who lived in the time of Trajan. In the passage referred to, Elxai asserts that he saw the Holy Ghost in female form 124 ZECHARIAH AND IIIS rROPHECIES. [Ch. vi. i-8. " above a cloud," and " standing in the midst of two moun- tains." But this reference to Elxai is pecuHarly inappropriate, inasmuch as in another passage of the same false-prophet, pre- served by Epiphanius, it is plain that Elxai spoke of the two mountains in his pretended vision merely because they afforded him some criterion from which he was able to calculate the size of the Divine appearance.^ Hitzig further adduces in favour of this idea a statement of Epiphanius in another place (Vit. Hiercm.), that Jeremiah hid the tabernacle and ark of the covenant " between the two mountains between which Moses and Aaron were buried " (comp. 2 Mace. ii. 4, 5). This apo- cryphal statement Hitzig seeks further to elucidate by com- paring Rev. xi. 19, where mention is made in symbolical language of the temple of God being opened in heaven and the ark of the covenant being seen, which language Hitzig evidently supposes the writer to have regarded as the language of fact and not of symbol, in which he is joined by some of our latter-day expositors, who delight in the marvellous. Passing by this learned trifling on the part of Hitzig, we note that " the two mountains " have been explained to be (v. Hofmann, Prcssel, etc.) the mountains of Zion and Moriah. Others have regarded them as representing the place and seat of the theocracy (Umbreit), or as the mountains whence God should send forth his last great judgments upon the world (v. Hofmann). Others have conjectured that Mount Zion was seen by the prophet as the seat of David's throne, and Moriah as the temple mountain ; for from these two moun- tains in Messianic days the kingdom of God should be spread abroad (Prcssel). The opinion of Jasper Svedberg, the father of the renowned Emmanuel Swedenborg, may be mentioned as a curiosity of exposition, which has a lesson for those who harp upon literal interpretations. That scholar considered * Sec Ililgcnfcld, "Elxai Libii fiaj;mcnta," p. 15S, appended to his edition of Ilermas Pastor, in his Noz'ii/n Testainciitiim extra Cation, rcccpt. Ch. vi. i-S.] SEVENTH VISION — THE FOUR CHARIOTS. 12$ that the prophet in speakhig of mountains of brass or copper evidently alkided to the country of Dalarne, in Sweden, which he thought was destined to be of great importance in " the latter days." The chariots were not seen in the vision to go forth from the mountains, but from a defile between them. The statement that they went forth " from standing before the Lord of the whole earth " might simply mean that the chariots went forth to their various destinations at the bidding of the Lord. For, as Jahaveh was the Lord of the whole earth, wherever the chariots stood they in reality stood before him. In the vision, however, they must be considered as coming forth from some place where the Divine presence was specially manifested. Though the mountains are represented as "moun- tains of brass," and therefore in some respects z^^«/ and not real mountains, yet a distinct geographical idea seems to lie at the foundation of the symbol (Keil).^ An unsatisfactory attempt has been made to explain the expression " mountains of brass," by a reference to the "brazen walls" spoken of by Jeremiah (i. i8), and to consider them to mean (as Jerome imagined) mountains which could not be ascended, which were so strong and insurmountable that they could not be destroyed by any length of time, and so firm that they could not be shaken. Kliefoth adopts this view ; but as he considers the mountains to be symbols re- spectively of the world-power and of the kingdom of God, he lays himself open to the objection of Keil, that, if this were the meaning, the world-power would be represented as being as strong as the kingdom of God. It is better to regard the mountains in the vision as referring ' It is unnatural to explain the mountains to denote the kingdom of the world and the kingdom of God. The reasons assigned to prove this are insufficient, viz., that the world-power may be referred to under the symbol of a mountain in chap. iv. 7 (though that is doubtful), and that the kingdom of God is likened to a mountain, or rather to a stone which became a mountain, in Daniel ii. 35. 126 ZECIIARIAH AND HIS TROPHECIES. [Ch. vi. i-S. to Mount Zion and the Mount of Olives, viewed as ideal moun- tains and as the place from whence God's judgments go forth over the world. The Mount of Olives is spoken of in that character in Zech. xiv. 4, and Mount Zion is also represented by the prophets as a place from which the Lord executes his judgments (Joel iv, 16). Between these two mountains lies the valley of Jehoshaphat, which the prophet Joel describes as the place of judgment for the world (Joel iv. 2). The valley lying between the two mountains was probably (as Keil and Pusey consider) the place from which the chariots were seen to go forth. They are represented as going forth from a place situated between the lands of the north and south, i.e., from Palestine, and from that place in the holy land where Jahavch was wont to display his gracious presence. Jahaveh's fire was in Zion, his furnace in Jerusalem (Isa. xxxi, 9). From Jerusalem blessings were to go forth to the nations, and from it also judgments should proceed. " The powers symbolized by the four chariots are pictured as closed in on either side by these mountains, strong as brass, unsurmountable, un- decaying, in order ' that they should not go forth to other lands to conquer until the time should come, fixed by the counsels of God, when the gates should be opened for their going forth.' The mountains of brass may signify the height of the Divine wisdom ordering this, and the sublimity of the power which putteth them in operation ; as the Psalmist says, ' Thy righteousness is like the mountains of God ' (Ps. xxxvi. 6.") (Pusey.) The four chariots which the prophet saw going forth from between the two mountains were probably war chariots. Kimchi thinks that each of them was drawn by four horses, but of this there is no indication in the passage. The notion that the chariots were represented as actually carrying forth the spirit of God with heavy judgments is based upon a mistaken view of an expression in verse 8. The chariots Ch. vi. 1-8.] SEVENTH VISION — THE FOUR CHARIOTS. 12/ are termed by the angel "the four winds of the heavens," in other words, they are compared to the winds. God is re- presented in the Psalms as using the winds as his angels or messengers (Ps. civ. 4, see Delitzsch), and in Isaiah as riding upon a swift light cloud, driven with speed by the wind, as he went forth to execute judgment upon the land of Egypt (Isa. xix. i). He is also spoken of as riding upon the wings of the wind (Ps. xviii. 11), for the stormy wind, and the east wind fulfil his directions and perform his will (Ps. xlviii. 8 ; Ps. cxlviii. 8). The four winds are used by him to scatter a ■people (Jer. xlix. 36), and to infuse new life into the slain (Ezek. xxxvii. 9). We shall see in the sequel that the four chariots cannot be regarded as actually representing the four winds themselves (Hitzig, Kohler). The chariots were drawn by horses of different colours, red, black, white, and speckled. The steeds of the fourth chariot in verse 3 have a further descriptive adjective affixed, which we must provisionally translate by " strong." This last appellation has caused considerable perplexity. In the first vision, angelic riders are described mounted on steeds of different colours, two of which (the red and white) re-appear in the vision of the chariots. The words used for the other two colours in this vision, as well as the epithet we have re- ferred to, are entirely different from those used in the descrip- tion of the first vision. Two difficulties must here be noticed, (i) In the explana- tion of the interpreting angel no allusion is made to the first chariot, which is drawn by the red horses ; and (2), while the fourth chariot drawn by the speckled steeds is described as going forth on a special mission, the " strong " horses (re- presented in verse 3 as coupled together with the speckled steeds) are spoken of in verse 7 as if they belonged to a different chariot, and as anxious to go forth on a different mission. 128 ZECIIARIAII AND HIS rROPIIECIES. [Ch. vi. i-8. Hitzig thinks that such difficulties as these (which he as- cribes to tlic carelessness of the writer) prove that the chariots simply signify the winds of heaven, and that the colours of the steeds have no deeper significance. Maurer and Ewald attempt to remove the difficulties by substituting in verse 7 the "red " horses in place of the "strong" (which latter adjective has been rendered in our Authorised Version by " the bay "), and Maurer suggests that the different word used in verse 7 arose from a blunder of an early copyist. On the other hand, many scholars, from Bochart downwards, have sup- posed that the adjective at the end of verse 3, rendered by us provisionally as " strong," is the name of a colour, used in verse 7 as equivalent to the red colour mentioned in the former verse. This identification, however, rests on very doubtful grounds. Moreover, it is a serious difficulty in the way of this explanation that the same word would then be used in verse 3 and verse 7 in two totally different significa- tions; in the former as an additional description of the " speckled " steeds, and in the latter to denote the " red." Hengstenberg maintains that the word in question can only mean "strong" or "powerful," and that it is used in that signification in verse 3, not as applying to the horses of the fourth chariot as contrasted with those of the other three, but as an adjective describing all the steeds equally, though "only formally connected with the fourth." He maintains further, that in verse 7 the epithet is applied in a peculiar manner to the horses of the first chariot, as the strong among the strong. But such an exposition, for grammatical reasons, (which cannot here be discussed) has been well pronounced by Kohlcr " impossible."^ ' For in the first case, if D"'■VP^? in verse 3 were intended to be referred to nil the steeds, the phrase would, as Kiihlcr notes, have been expressed by D?3 D*V??X.- Secondly, as to Hengstcnbcrg's argument that the article in D^VpSH in verse 7 is to be regarded as emphatic, it must not be forgotten that all the .atljectives used in reference to the horses when first mentioned naturally occur without the article, but Ch. vi.6, 7-] SEVENTH VISION — THE FOUR CHARIOTS. 1 29 On the other hand, Hofmann, Khefoth and Keil main- tain that the chariot with the red horses was, indeed, for special reasons, passed over without mention by the interpret- ing angel. They regard the fourth chariot represented in the vision as drawn by two teams of horses, the one characterised as " speckled," the other as " strong." This latter idea is at- tended with peculiar difficulties. According to this view, the same chariot must have been seen by the prophet as going forth first with " the speckled horses " towards the south country, and then going forth a second time with another set of horses on a more extensive tour. For one can scarcely suppose that the last-named steeds went forth without being yoked to a chariot. If such were the only interpretation which could be given to the text as it stands, we should be driven, with Ewald and Maurer, to view the text as corrupt. We agree with Keil and v. Hofmann in considering that for certain reasons (to be afterwards considered) the chariot drawn by the red horses is not specially referred to in the exposition given by the interpreting angel. With Hengstenberg, too, we think that the last adjective in verse 3 must be rendered in its well-known signification as " strong." In verse 3, the steeds of the fourth chariot are described as not only "speckled " in colour, but peculiarly "strong " in appearance. The speckled steeds were represented going forth as directed into the land of the south, and then as asking a further per- mission afterwards to traverse the whole world. The perfect tenses used in verses 6 and 7 are to be regarded as condi- tioned by the participle in verse 6, with which the recital com- mences. They are, therefore, not to be viewed as pasts, but as prophetic presents. The south was too small a portion of the when spoken of by the interpreting angel are all used, most naturally, with the article. The use of the article with the adjective in verse 7 can no more be re- garded as emphatic than its use with the black, the white, and the speckled. D''VOX is similarly used at first without the article, but when mentioned the second time it takes the article, just as the other adjectives. K I30 ZECHARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. vi. 6, 7. earth for the " speckled " steeds attached to the fourth chariot to be confined to. Hence they are represented as desiring a further field for their operations. Hence, too, when spoken of as anxious that a wider sphere should be afforded to them, they are described by the second adjective used in reference to them in verse 3, that is, as " the strong." And, inasmuch as they possessed this special characteristic in such a marked manner, they obtained their desire, and were sent forth to trample down the world under their hoofs. From a date as early as the days of Jerome, the four chariots have been interpreted as the four world-empires of Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome. Kimchi adopted this view, and the opinion has recently found defenders. It has often fallen into disrepute on account of the fanciful reasons assigned for the colours of the steeds by which the four chariots were driven. These colours have been often explained as signifying the several characteristics of the four empires ; " red " as denoting the Babylonian, because it was cruel and sanguinary ; " black " as designating the Medo- Persians, with special reference to the edict of Ahasuerus (Jerome), and "the heavy lot inflicted by them" (Pusey), inasmuch as the Medo-Persian empire had been represented in Daniel's vision by a beast to which it was said " Arise, devour much flesh" (Dan. vii. 5). The "white " colour has been sup- posed to indicate the Grecian monarchy, under whose rule the times of the Maccabees occurred (Jerome), or because of the wisdom of Alexander the Great (Saadiah), or on account of his benevolence to the Jewish nation (Pusey). The " speckled " steeds have been explained to denote the Romans, some of whom were clement to the Jews, and some were persecutors (Jerome), or because of their mingled character, so prominent in the fourth empire of Daniel (Pusey).^ Nor can Kliefoth's ex- ' Kliefoth's interpretation does not appear more successful. He thinks the Babylonian empire was indicated by the colour "red "on account of its saii- Ch. vi. 6, 7.] SEVENTH VISION — THE FOUR CHARIOTS. 131 position of the adjectives " speckled and strong," in reference to the horses of the fourth chariot, be regarded otherwise than as fanciful. He explains the " speckled " or " piebald " colour to refer to the mixed character of the fourth kingdom, which had been represented by the iron and clay intermingled in the toes of the metallic image of Daniel, and even, as he imagines, in the "two legs" of the same.^ The horses were termed " strong " in his estimation " not only because they go over the whole earth, but also because the kingdom of Anti- christ was to arise from the fourth, who, according to Daniel, should be mightier than any one before him." It is strange that this scholar has not borne in mind that the part of the metallic image which was formed of iron and clay represented an age of decline in the fourth world-monarchy, and not an age of strength. In that symbol, the Roman empire is represented as strong in its first stage, but as com- paratively weak and divided in its second. The strength of that empire, as set forth in Daniel, did not consist, as Keil observes, in its division into a number of kingdoms, but in the compact unity which it originally possessed. The divisions spoken of in Daniel were decided marks of its decline. If the " speckled and strong " horses of Zechariah's guinary character. Black, he says, was used for the Medo-Persian instead of "speckled " as in the first vision, because in a prophecy which refers not to the immediate future, but to far distant days, the divided character of that empire was not necessary to be dwelt upon. White he regards as being used for the Mace- donian empire for the reason already given on page 19. His explanation of the " speckled," or " piebald," or " spotted " horses in the fourth vision is noticed above. ^ With respect to the two legs of the metallic colossus of Daniel iii., the fact is too often forgotten that if an image be divided into four parts, the legs of such an image would naturally constitute the fourth part of the whole. If, therefore, such an image be used as a symbol, it does not follow that the duality of the legs must necessarily have any meaning, unless such be actually assigned to it. The inter- preter of Daniel is bound to account for the ten toes, for they are mentioned as significant, but he is not bound to assign any significance to the ten fingers or the duality of the feet, any more than to explain the eyes, ears, nose, etc., for none of those parts are alluded to as significant in the book of Daniel. 132 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. vi. 6, 7. vision had any such significance, the " strong " steeds should have appeared in the first rank, and the " speckled " in the second rank of those steeds which were harnessed to the Roman war-chariot.^ It has been too often assumed that the kingdom of Anti- christ, supposed to be predicted by Daniel, is described by that prophet as stronger and mightier than all the kingdoms which preceded it. Whatever its strength may have been represented, considered in relation to the Church of God, the second stage of the fourth kingdom in the vision of the metallic image is described as the very weakest stage of the last world- monarchy. Nor does the vision of Daniel vii. set forth any other view; for the description of the fourth beast as " dreadful and exceeding strong" (in verses 7 and 19) is the descrip- tion of the last monarchy in its earliest stage, and is not a picture of that monarchy in its last phase. On the contrary, even in that chapter (verse 24), the latter times of that power are represented as weak, so far as material strength is concerned, however violent its rage against " the saints of the Most High." Keil seems to have felt the fanciful character of the various ' The efforts made to explain the double adjective used concerning the horses of the fourth chariot, on the supposition that that chariot meant the Roman empire, ex- hibit a great deal of ingenuity. Von Hofmann and Volck consider that the double team represents the Seleucidian dynasty, on the ground that, while in Dan. ii. and vii. four kingdoms are mentioned, in Dan. viii., between the third and fourth, a new kingdom is spoken of, having a strange resemblance to the fourth. This kingdom was the Seleucidian power, especially as represented by Antiochus Epiphanes. Hence those commentators think that the kingdom of the Seleucidce is indicated by the " speckled " steeds because of its similarity in several respects to the Roman, with which it came into contact in Egypt. Kliefoth has rightly objected to this interpretation, that it would be strange if a kingdom which is correctly described in Dan. viii. as an offshoot of the Grecian monarchy, should be represented in Zechariah's vision by steeds yoked to the Roman chariot. If the variety of ele- ments of which the kingdom of the Seleucida; was composed forms any just ground for its being depicted by "speckled" steeds, wc might fairly, as Keil remarks, expect the steeds harnessed to the Grecian chariot to be represented as steeds of the same type. The whole interpretation of v. Hofmann can scarcely be regarded otherwise than as an exhibition of critical ingenuity. Ch. vi. 6, 7-] SEVENTH VISION — THE FOUR CHARIOTS. I 33 attempts to assign a symbolical significance to the colours of these horses in the vision of Zechariah, based on the suppo- sition that the four empires of Daniel are referred to. He has, therefore, with apparent reluctance abandoned that ex- position, and has sought to explain those colours by a refer- ence to the four riders in the first four seals of the book of the Revelation. According to this view, he considers red as the colour of blood, shadowing out war and slaughter ; black to represent mourning, in consequence of sore judgments like those detailed in the Revelation ; zuhite to symbolise victory ; and the spotted or speckled steeds to correspond to the pale horse ridden by Death, in the latter book. The vision in general, according to Keil, represents the chariots of the Divine judgments driven to their allotted destina- tions by various spiritual powers which create commotions of various kinds on the earth, the spirit which each chariot is represented as conveying being in each case that termed in Isaiah iv. 4 "a spirit of judgment," which not only annihilates what is ungodly, but strengthens what is godlike in the world. In explanation of the difficulty caused by the " red " horses being passed over in the angelic interpretation, and of the " speckled and strong " steeds being divided from one an- other (in verses 6, 7), as if attached to two distinct chariots (while both are mentioned as belonging to the fourth chariot in verse 3), Keil submits the following considerations : (i) In all the visions no complete explanation is given of all the single points, but merely indications whereby the general object of the vision may be discerned. Thus he notes that in this vision the horses which go forth to the north country are alone mentioned as bringing thither the spirit of Jahaveh, though the other chariots carry also with them the self-same spirit to their several allotted destinations. We shall presently see that this idea of Keil, that the chariots are represented as laden with the spirit, is entirely incorrect. 134 ZECHARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. vl. 6, 7. (2) The second point to which Kcil calls attention is of real importance, namely, that the north and the south, specified as the localities whither the chariots go forth, were the chief seats of the world-power hostile to Israel, and represent that power in general (compare Dan. xi., where the kings of the north and south represent the powers north and south of the Holy Land). Inasmuch, however, as the enemies of God's people were not confined to those localities, a chariot is described in Zechariah as going forth into all the earth. (3) In the third place Keil tries to account for the want of correspondence between the vision and its interpretation (namely, that in the latter the " red " horses are omitted, and in place of them the " strong " horses are spoken of, which are named the "speckled and strong" in verse 3), by ob- serving that it seemed of more consequence to express the thought that the judgments of God in all their full strength were sent forth upon the earth, than by any special mention of the red horses to emphasize the bloody nature of those judgments. This interpretation is based on the assumed correspondence of the colours of the steeds in Zechariah with those men- tioned in the book of the Revelation. But this is the very point where it breaks down. It requires no small amount of ingenuity to make out any correspondence whatever be- tween the Hebrew w'ord rendered "speckled," "spotted," or " piebald " (a term applied to goats, as well as to horses), and the Greek 'yXwpo'^, rendered "pale" in our luiglish Version of the book of the Revelation. This is a point of criticism which cannot be here discussed (sec crit. comm.). The reason assigned for the red horses having been passed over in the interpretation of the angel is a strange one, for according to it the chariot with the red horses must have been the most remarkable of the four. Moreover, we deny entirel}- that the vision contains any such incongruity, as that the Ch.vi. 6, 7-] SEVENTH VISION — THE FOUR CHARIOTS. I35 fourth chariot drawn by the spotted and strong horses is divided into two by the interpreting angel. The truth seems to be that the colours of the horses har- nessed to the four chariots, like the colours of those ridden by the angels in the first vision, are of no symbolical significance. The variety of colour, as shown in our discussion of the first vision, is simply of importance as serving to distinguish one chariot from another. In the first vision three divisions of celestial riders were thus distinguished from one another. In this vision four chariots had to be similarly distinguished. As horses are made use of in the symbolism of both visions, the colours assigned are those commonly belonging to horses. But in order to prevent any confusion of the first and seventh visions, though the common colours red and white are spoken of in both, some special colours peculiar to each of the two visions are made use of in order to give to each a certain dis- tinctive character, and thus to prevent • the one vision from being confounded with the other. Commentators of all shades of opinion have displayed an uncommon amount of ingenuity in their eff*orts to assign symbolical meanings to each variety of colour; but the very unnatural explanations to which they have been forced to have recourse tend to prove the unsound- ness of this method of interpretation. With the single exception that we assign no symbolical meaning whatever to the colours of the steeds, we coincide with the traditional interpretation of the vision, namely, that it has a reference to the four empires of Daniel. There is nothing strange in the fact that the same four empires, spoken of twice or three times in the book of Daniel, should be depicted in the visions of Zechariah ; in which the state of the Gentile world and its relation to the people of Israel is so vividly pourtrayed. Though Babylon had been humbled, and its world-empire taken away, it was still a state of con- siderable importance, which gave no small trouble to thq 136 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. vi. 6, 7. Medo-Pcrsian empire in the days of Zcchariali. It was, therefore, represented as one of the war-chariots, which (though it had indeed been driven in triumph over the land and people of Judah) had at the same time prostrated in the dust many of the hereditary foes of Israel. The Babylonian war-chariot was, therefore, for completeness' sake, introduced into the vision. But inasmuch as the day of its real power had passed away, and it had been supplanted by another empire, it was, as Jerome expresses it, " most suitably " passed over in the interpretation which is in the main taken up with what was then future.^ The steeds harnessed to the fourth chariot are described as "speckled" in colour, and as " strong " in appearance. The ingenuity of scholars has been ineffectually expended in try- ing to make out that the latter adjective denotes a colour, as some colour would have been naturally expected in the posi- tion in which the word occurs. The conjunction "and" would also have been expected between the two adjectives " speckled and strong," in place of which the text has only " speckled, strong." This is a difficulty, but it is not a serious one, for such unevennesses of construction are not unfrcqucntly found, and it is clear from the context that the word " strong " is a description only used in reference to the " speckled " steeds. It does not follow that the other steeds appeared to the prophet to be weak. But the vision of the four chariots is based upon that of Daniel's four empires, and it cannot be forgotten that strength was predicated especially of the fourth * It is remarkable, as Baumgarten has noticed, that the number four appears twice in connection with tlie capitals of the two world-l). He renders, "yes, still will peoples come," referring for the position of "lU in the beginning of the sentence to Micah vi. 10, wliich is scarcely a case in point. The "Iti'S is, however, better rendered here as the conjunction t/iaL So Ewald, § 336 a, and Fiirst in his Wdrterbuch. The view which Gesenius maintained, that the relative was sometimes used as a sign of the apodosis, on which principle he explained this and other passages, has been abandoned by later scholars, and the sup- posed instances of this usage given in his Lexicon, have been explained either by considering the word actually to be used as a relative referring to a preceding noun, as in Isaiah viii. 20, or by the omission of the substantive verb as in this passage. See the new edition of Gesenius' IVdrterbtick by Miihlau and Volck, Leipz., 1878. The rendering above has the support of Maurer, Ewald, Keil, etc. The Vulg. has " usquequo (reading ir) veniant populi." 2 The construction here used, namely, the imperfect in the cohortative form followed by the infin. absol. denotes the desire of going continually (Ges. § 131, 3, b ; Kalisch, § 97, 7. The construction has been explained by Rosenmiiller to indicate intensity, " all together and with great eagerness." So also Schrocder, Inst. ad. fund. Ling. Ilcb. de synt. verb., § 3, R. 91. IJut in sucli a case the infinitive generally precedes the verb. Ch. viii. 21-23.] ADDRESSES OF ZECHARIAH TO THE PEOPLE. I93 hold, out of all the languages of the nations, even take hold ^ of the skirt of a man (who is) a Jew, saying, Let us go with you, for we have heard that God is with you." The prophecy foreshows a state of things which would be the result of the dwelling of Jahaveh in the midst of his people of a truth. That it was fulfilled in great measure shortly after the prediction was uttered is clear from the language of Ps. cxxvi. 1-4, " When Jahaveh brought back the captives of Zion we were like them that dream. Then was our mouth filled with laughter and our tongue with singing ; then said they among the nations, Jahaveh hath done great things for them ; yea, Jahaveh hath done great things for us, therefore we are glad." No doubt when the Psalmist sang that psalm there were still captives to be brought back, but the language of such a psalm ought not to be left out of mind. More- over there were other days of blessing for Israel, which were noted and observed by the nations around, and by the nations among whom they dwelt ; such as the wonderful deliverance vouchsafed in the days of Esther, and the still greater deliverances in the days of the Maccabees. On all of these occasions there were considerable accessions to their numbers from the heathen round about them. The prophecy speaks of the going up of the nations of the earth to Jerusalem in somewhat similar language to that used in Isa. ii. 2, 3 ; Mic. iv. 2, and other places. Compare such other passages as Isa. xlv. 14, 15. There is little doubt that when the nations are said to go up to seek Jahaveh of hosts in Jerusalem, such language in Old Testa- ' The verb is repeated here in another form, and preceded by the conjunction for greater clearness, as the verb in the first clause is so distant; more distant in the original than can be suitably expressed in an English translation. There does seem also some degree of emphasis intended. Hitzig strangely considers that the use of the copula with the latter verb shows that it is not to be considered as a mere iteration of the former, but used with some difference of meaning. But observe the similar repetition in chap. vi. 10, 11 of N12 and Pip?. O 194 ZECIIARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [CI1.vui.21 23. mcnt times would naturally be explained of the nations going up to the solemn feasts held in Jerusalem. Hitzig, therefore, appears to us to be correct in saying that the author had those feasts in view. When Isaiah similarly predicts the conversion of the Gentiles, he paints the picture after the ideas of the old dispensation, and speaks of the Gentiles as going up to the feasts at Jerusalem (Isa. Ixvi. 20-23). The literal fulfilment of such passages is a sheer impossibility. Under such figures the conversion of the nations is predicted, and the glorious hope set forth that they will form with Israel one fold under one shepherd (John x. 15, 16). In this way may Israel's foes become Israel's friends, and the days of mourning because of the desolations wrought by the Gentiles become days of rejoicing because of their union with the chosen people of God. When ten men of all langua^^es of the earth are said to take hold of the skirt of every man who is a Jew, it must be remembered that the number ten is used for any large number. Comp. Gen. xxxi. 7 ; Lev. xxvi. 26 ; Num. xiv. 22. The skirt is spoken of as caught hold of in order to de- tain the Jevv^, and to obtain his permission to accompany him in his journey. Thus we read of Saul seizing hold of Samuel's skirt to detain him (i Sam. xv. 27 ; comp. the allu- sion to the skirts of the priests in Hag. ii. 12). The remark of Pusey, that " little children, if they would follow their fathers, lay hold of the hem of their dress, and aided by the touch and hanging from their dress, walk steadily and safely," is scarcely suitable to the passage. Nor is there any ground whatever to assert that the language used especially betokens the humble confession on the part of the Gentiles, that ac- cording to their former conduct they did not deserve that the Jews should attend to their request (Pressel). Nor can the passage be considered directly to refer to the Messiah as the person termed here "a man, a Jew," which strange view of Ch.viii.23.] ADDRESSES OF ZECHARIAH TO THE PEOPLE. 195 Jerome is upheld by Dr. Pusey, who remarks on "the start- ling condescension of the passage." This attempt to discover prophecies of the Messiah, even in the most out of the way corners, is in our opinion most damaging to sober evangeHcal exegesis, and to the real interpretation of the word of God. The prophecy has been already fulfilled in the remarkable fact that the religion introduced by a Jew, the religion which consists in faith in the person of one who was indeed a Jew, namely, our blessed Lord, is that which has been embraced by a large part of the nations, and is destined in God's due time to be the religion of the world. The Gentiles have learnt from the Jews true religion. The apostles and all the most illustrious of the early teachers of Christianity were Jews, and instead of those nations who, in early times, accepted the religion of Christ having been prejudiced against the Jew, they were only too much inclined to accept even the burdens of the Mosaic law in addition to the gospel of Jesus. Had the Jews only accepted Jesus of Nazareth as their Messiah their state would have been glorious. But notwithstanding that sad rejection of Christ, a day of blessing is spoken of by St. Paul (Rom. xi.) as in store for Israel in the future. CHAPTER VIII. THE PREPARA TJON OF THE LAND.- THE COMING OF THE KING. CHAPTER VIII. The closing portion of Zechariah — Opinion of modern critics, 199 — Reason of the special predictions, 199 — Stahelin's view of the period, 200 — Cause of judg- ments being denounced against Syria, Phoenicia, and Philistia, 20i — " Burden" and "oracle," 202 — Land of Hadrach, 202 — Different views of scholars, 203 — Hadrach, near Damascus, 204 — Name found in Assyrian inscriptions, 205 — Resting-place of the oracle, 206 — Conflicting translations of chap. ix. i, 206 — Probable meaning of passage, 208— The eyes of all men to be directed towards Jehovah by his judgments, 208 — Chamberlain's view, 209 — Reference of the prophecy, 209 — Siege of Tyre by Nebuchadnezzar, 212 — Destruction by Alexander, 212 — Judgment on Ashkelon, 213 — Overthrow of Gaza, 214 — Gaza ruled by a titular "king," 215 — Evidence of Ilcgesias, Josephus and Arrian, 215 — View of Bleek, 2i6— The "bastard," or rabble in Ashdod, 216— Humili- ation and conversion of the Philistines, 217 — Blood taken away from his mouth, 218 — Ekron as the Jebusite, 218 — Nethinim, 219— Absorption of Phi- listines into Israel, 220 — Jehovah encamping round his house, 221 — Passing by and returning, ver. 5, 221 — No taskmaster any more, 222 — The Lord's behold- ing oppression, 223— Josephus' story of Alexander's visit to Jerusalem, 224 — Favour shown by Alexander to the Jews, 226 — Bleek's view of chap. ix. as pre- exilian, 227 — Pressel's view as to date of prophecy, 231 — Reply, 231 — Pro- phecy not fulfilled before the exile, 230, 232 — View of Maurer, etc., 231 — Sale of Lsraelite captives, 232, 252 — Prediction of the Messiah as a king, 233 — Prophecy now acknowledged as Messianic, 234 — Objection to view of Pressel, 233 — "Righteous and saved," 234 — "Afflicted" or "lowly," 235 — Messiah riding on an ass, 236 — Why a colt was used, 236 — Riding on an ass not the sign of humility, but of absence of pomp, 237, ff. — Difficulties of early Jewish commentators, 238 — The two Messiahs, 238 — Christ's entry into Jerusalem, 239 — Prophecy depicts Christ's advent in general, not his special entry into Jerusalem, 239 — Lnportance of that act of Christ, 239 — Messiah causes wars to cease, 240 — Destroys his people's weapons, 240 — Then speaks peace to Gentiles, 241, 247 — Loss of Jewish independence, 241 — Rejection of Messiah, 242 — Men- tion of Ephraim no proof of pre-exilian date, 242, 246 — The twelve tribes one great whole, 243 — The return from captivity, 244 — Genealogical registers, 244 — Mixing of Jews and Gentiles, 245 — Name "Jew" applied to all the tribes, 246 — Jews called children of Lsrael, 244 note. — The victories of Messiah, 247— Limits of his rule, 248 — The blood of the covenant, 249, 250 — The pit without water, 251 — The blessings in store, 252 — ^Jews to possess military power, 252 — War of the " Sons of Zion " against the " Sons of Greece," 253 — Jewish intercourse with Greece, 254 — Pressel's view of verses 13, 14, 254 — Wars of the Maccabees, 255 — Description given in verses 14, 15, not too vivid, 256 — Bishop Wordsworth's strange exposition, 256 note. — Chamberlain's view of the war with theSonsof Greece, 257 note. — His depreciation of the Maccabean exploits, 257 note — Maccabean conflicts a war of Israel, 256 — The great blank in Jewish annals, 257 — Israel devouring as a lion, 258 — Subduing sling-stones, 259 — Stones of a diadem, 260 — Israel's beauty and increase of population, 261. CHAPTER VIII. THE PREPARATION OF THE LAND. — THE COMING OF THE KING. The prophecies contained in the ninth and following chapters of Zechariah were no doubt composed at a different period from that in which the prophecies of the former part of the book were written, and are in several particulars unlike the earlier predictions of Zechariah. Hence these later chapters have been considered by many critics of the modern school to belong to another author, and have even been assigned by some scholars to two or three different authors who are sup- posed to have lived at some period previous to the Baby- lonish captivity. In order fairly to discuss the various arguments adduced in support of the latter opinion, it will be found more convenient to start from the supposition that the traditional view is correct, namely, that Zechariah was the author of the later as well as the earlier portions of the book. The arguments in favour of the pre-exilian date of certain passages can in many cases be more fairly considered in connection with the context in which those passages occur, while other arguments in favour of this hypothesis will be more suitably treated in our general Intro- duction. The glorious prospects presented to the view of the restored exiles in the earlier visions of Zechariah were not soon realized. Notwithstanding the exhortations of Zechariah and Haggai, a very large number of Israelites preferred to remain as volun- tary exiles in the land of their captivity, while many of those who had returned to the Holy Land, forgetful of their peculiar 200 ZrXIIARIAH AND HIS PROPIIECIES. [Cli. ix. i-8. position, intermarried with the Gentile nations who inhabited the land, and thus recognised the equal right of those aliens to possess the land, which had been granted by the Divine decree to the posterity of Jacob. In place of gifts from all nations being poured into the treasuries of the temple, as had been promised by Haggai (ii. 7), and the holy city thereby be- coming rich and powerful, its Jewish inhabitants still felt bitterly that they were but servants of the Persian kings (Neh. ix. 36, 2i7)y to whom they had to pay tribute, while at the same time they were harassed on all sides by the Gentile nations among whom they dwelt (Neh. iv. 7). They also, no doubt, suffered considerably during the cam- paigns carried on by Cambyses against Egypt (B.C. 525), and still later during that of Xerxes (B.C. 484), for in their march to Egypt the Persian hosts harassed the land of Judaia, and caused much inconvenience to the Jewish settlers. The house of David, round which the hopes of the Jewi.sh nation centered, seems to have fallen into political insignificance after the death of Zerubbabel, while on the other hand the political importance of the Phccnicians rose considerably, owing to their maritime power; and while there was no king in Israel, Phoenician kings were permitted to retain their regal dignity (Herod, viii. 6"/), a privilege which seems to have been granted also to the cities of Philistia (Zech. ix. 5). Damascus, too, the ancient capital of Syria, was at this period the residence of a high Persian official, whose authority was superior to that of the Jewish governor. Such were the circumstances (as Stahelin notes, lilcss. Weiss. p. 126) under which it became of importance for the prophet in his later years to seek to raise the drooping spirits of the colony at Jerusalem. It need not surprise us that prophecies uttered under such peculiar circumstances, and in all proba- bility many years after those recorded in the earlier chapters of Zechariah, should, even if supposed to be written b\- the Ch. Lx. i-S.] THE PREPARATION OF THE LAND. 201 same author, be composed in a somewhat different style from that of his earher productions. Tlie later prophecies, however, contain many distinct references to those in the earlier part of the book, which earlier prophecies had been delivered with the special object of encouraging the people to rebuild the temple of the Lord. The reason why at this special period Zechariah should have been divinely commissioned to announce judgments against the cities of Syria, Phoenicia, and Philistia, was, as Kohler has observed, that all the cities mentioned in the prophecy lay within the territory granted by Divine promise to the children of Israel (Gen. xv. i8 ; Exod. xxiii. 31 ; comp. Numb, xxxiv. 1-12). The territories alluded to had been actually ruled over by David {2 Sam. viii. 6, 9, 10) and Solomon (i Kings v. 21), and properly belonged to the people of the covenant. Hence on their return from exile those lands belonged by right to the Israelitish people, and would ultimately have been pos- sessed by them, had the nation more generally availed itself of the permission freely granted to them by Cyrus to return to the land of promise. The limits of the land marked out by the Divine decree as the portion of the people of Israel did not, however, comprehend the country of several of those peoples over whom David and Solomon had ruled (2 Sam. viii.). For the limits assigned in the Law excluded the territories of the Edomites, Moabites, and Ammonites {comp. Deut. ii. 4, 5, 9, 19), and these people are accordingly not re- ferred to in this prophecy, though they were as bitterly hostile as their forefathers to Jewish interests (Neh. iv. 3, 7 ; i Mace, v. 1-3, etc.). The object of the prediction of Zechariah was to encourage the people of Israel by the thought of God's protecting care over them, notwithstanding their harassed con- dition, and by the assurance that God's judgment would soon descend upon the nations who occupied the inheritance which had been originally assigned to Israel. Hence, remarks 202 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. ix. i. Kohler, all the heathen within those ideal boundaries of Israel were judged by Jahaveh, and judged, too, not merely because of their sins against the people of Jahaveh, but on account of their own godless and God-estranged doings (comp. vv. 2 and 7). The judgment threatened, however, had not as its object the complete extermination and blotting out of the nations mentioned as about to be overtaken by it, but the ulti- mate recovery of those nations from their sinful and barbarous habits, and their conversion unto Jahaveh, the God of Israel. The prophecy of the ninth chapter commences with an ex- pression respecting which there has been no small difference of opinion. The translation " burden," which occurs in our Authorised Version, is upheld by the authority of the majority of the older expositors, and by all the ancient versions, except the LXX. It has also been ably defended by recent eminent commentators. But the majority of modern Biblical critics follow what may be regarded as the opinion of the Greek translators, and render the word by "utterance," "sentence," " oracle." The word is unquestionably used in ordinary Hebrew in the sense of a burden, and the prophecies to which it is affixed are mainly prophecies of woe and disaster. This need not surprise us, however, as the denunciation of wrath against ungodliness and sin was one of the most ordinary duties of the prophets. Zech. xii. i, may be considered in some respects an exception to this, and other reasons incline us to accept the general opinion of the modern critics (see crit. comm.). In Prov. xxx. and xxxi., the word appears to be used as a proper name of a district or country. ^ The oracle now before us chiefly concerns the land of Ilad- rach, and the cities of Syria and Phoenicia, and those of the Philistines. The expression " the land of lladrach " occurs ' See Miihlau's confirmation of Hitzig's view, that a king of Massa is there meant, in his treatise Dc Proverb, qiue diiuntur Agnri ci Leinudis origine atquf indole. Leipzig, 1869. Ch. ix. I.] THE PREPARATION OF THE LAND. 203 only in this passage, and was for a long time a critx comnicn- tatorum. Bleek, Gesenius and others explained it as the name of some Syrian monarch supposed to have occupied the throne of Damascus between Benhadad III. and Rezin. This con- jectural explanation was sometimes considered to afford an indication of the time when the prophecy was composed, namely, not later than the reign of Jotham, and consequently before either the Assyrian or the Babylonian captivity. Mo- vers imagined Hadrach to be connected with Adar or Asar, the name of the Assyrian god of fire. The opinion of Hitzig varied at different times, while Kohler thought that the land designated by this name was a district not far from Damas- cus, which was called after some Syrian deity. The Targum translated the expression by " the southern land," and certain scholars, following this translation in principle, regarded the word as an appellation, some explaining it as " the land lying round thee," and understanding thereby the holy land itself (Trem. and Junius). A still larger number of expositors of different ages supposed the word to be a symbolical de- signation. Accordingly some Jewish expositors regarded it as a compound name of the Messiah, signifying " sharp-tender," used to indicate his severity towards the heathen and his mercy towards Israel. Several modern critics, as Hengstenberg, viewed it as a name of the Persian empire, which they sup- posed was termed " strong-weak " because its strength was by the Divine decree so soon to be overthrown. To the latter class of expositions it was always considered a serious objec- tion that the various significations of all such allegorical terms, as Dumah, applied by Isaiah to Edom (Isa. xxi. 11), Oholah and Oholibah, names given by Ezekiel to Samaria and Jerusa- lem (Ezek. xxiii. 4), and Sheshak, as Jeremiah terms Babylon (Jer. XXV. 26, li. 41), are more or less distinctly indicated in the passages where such names occur ; whereas no such indication is given in the present passage, nor has the signification of the 204 ZECIIARIAH AND HIS rROPIIECIES. [Ch. ix. i. word, so often supposed to be allegorical, been understood up to the present day. Despairing of attaining any satisfactory result from the diverse theories propounded from time to time, some scholars not unnaturally viewed the text as corrupt, and suggested various ways in which it might be corrected. Among the best of these conjectures is that proposed by Olshausen and von Ortenberg, namely, the substitution of the name Hauran in place of Hadrach, Hauran being a district south of Damascus (Olshausen, Gr. § 216 d, p. 411), which is mentioned also in connection with Hamath and Damascus in Ezek. xlvii. 16, 18. But the old opinion, maintained by Theodore of Mopsuestia in the fifth century, by Cyrill and Theodoret, and by Rabbi Jose, quoted by Kimchi and other Jewish commentators, has at last been discovered to be the true one, namely, that Had- rach is the name of a district not far from Damascus, in which there was a city of some importance of the same name. Rabbi Jose ben Durmaskith, who, as his name signified, was the son of a Damascene mother, reproved sharply R. Je- hudah, who had explained the term as a designation of the Messiah, in these words: "O Jehudah, how long wilt thou trouble us with such perverted explanations of Scripture .'' I take heaven and earth to witness, that I am from Damascus, and that there is a place there which is called Hadrach."^ In confirmation of this view, J. D. Michaelis cites the distinct testimony of Joseph Abassi, a noble Arab from the country beyond the Jordan, who stated to him that there was a dis- trict there known by that name. Hcngstenbcrg, however, has pointed out that the Arab in question confused Hadrach with Adraa, the ancient Edrei, one of the capital cities of Og, the king of Bashan, and has cited other instances in * The dispute between R. Jehiulah and R. Jose is given by Kohler in full from Yalkut Shimeoni, i, fol. 258, § 575. The original place where it occurs is Si/re on Dcut. i. i, on the name ^HT H. Ch. ix. I.] THE PREPARATION OF THE LAND. 205 which these names were thus confounded. But although the researches hitherto made in ancient classical and Arabic geography, and the accounts of modern travellers in Syria and its environs, have failed to discover a district known by that name in modern times, such a district and city have been found in the Assyrian inscriptions. In the list of Assyrian eponyms, that is, the list of the various officers after whom the Assyrian years were named in a certain definite order, the kings themselves acting in due course as eponyms, we read in B.C. 772 in the eponymy of Assur-bel-uzur, governor of Calah, of an " expedition to Had- rach" (Ha-ta-ri-ka).^ This statement immediately follows the name of the governor of Sallat (according to Smith, or Sal- mat, as Rawlinson and Schrader give the name), who was the eponym in the previous year, when an expedition was made to the city of Damascus. In B.C. 765, in the eponymy of Ninip- mukin-nisi, governor of Kirruri, another expedition to Had- rach also took place, and a pestilence occurred in the same year.^ Another expedition to Hadrach is spoken of as having occurred in B.C. 755, in the eponymy of Kisu, governor of Siphinis (Smith, p. 64), or Michinis (Mi-hi-ni-is), as the name is written by Schrader, p. 326, 15. Moreover, in the inscription of Tiglath Pileser II., which describes the war of that monarch with Azariah king of Judah, about B.C. 739, we read : " The mountain which is in Lebanon obeyed me, the land of Bahali- zephon as far as Ammana (Ammon), the land of Izku and Saua, throughout its whole extent, the district of Karanim, the city of Hatarika"^ (Hadrach). In another fragment of the war in Palestine mention is made of " the city of Hatarika, as 1 Smith's Assyrian Canon, p. 63. In .Schrader's Keil-inschriften ti. das alte Test. the lists of Rawlinson are given with the Assyrian text and translation, in the former of which we find the Assyrian ana viat Ha-ta-ri-ka (pp. 324, 325). 2 Smith's Assyrian Canon, p. 63, also pp. 46-47. The name of the governor is transliterated Nabu-iikin-nisi by Rawlinson and Schrader (Schrader, p. 327). ' See transl. by Rev. J. M. Rodwell in Records of the Past, vol. v. p. 46. 206 ZFXIIARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Cli. ix. i. for the land of Saua."^ Moreover, Sir H. Rawlinson says that " in the catalogue of Syrian cities, tributary to Nineveh (of which we have several copies in a more or less perfect state, and varying from each other, both in arrangement and extent), there are three names, which are uniformly grouped together and which we read Manatsuah, Magida [Megiddo], and Du'ar [Dor]. As these names are associated with those of Samaria, Damascus, Arpad, Hamath, Carchemish, HadracJi, Zobah, there can be no doubt of the position of the cities." ^ The resting-place of the oracle was to be the city of Damascus, that is, as the sequel of the prophecy shows, the judgments of God mentioned therein were to commence at that cit)^ The pronoun his or its (verse i, rendered "thereof" in the Engl. Vers.) must refer to the oracle. This is clear, whether the expression "his rest"^ be understood, in a good sense, to indicate the conversion of the people of that city or ' Records of the Past, vol. v. p. 51. 2 Sir H. Rawlinson in the Athencsum for Aug. 22, 1863, quoted by Dr. Pusey in his Minor Prophets, p. 550. Sir H. Rawlinson says in a note, also quoted by Pusey : " From the position on the lists I should be inclined to identify it (Hadrach) with Plorus or Edessa, which was certainly a very ancient capital (being the Kedesh of the Egyptian records), and which would not otherwise be represented in the Assyrian inscriptions." M. Adolf Neubauer in his GeographU dji Talmjtd, pp. 297-8. says that Cyrill of Alexandria places Hadrach between Hamath and Damascus, and notes that Ptolemy knows of a locality Adarin in the environs. In a note M. Neubauer observes tliat the Karaite lexicographer David ben Abraham, of the lOth century (comp. Pinsker, Likkute Kadmonioth, p. 117 of the text, and Neubauer's Notice of Hebrew Lexicography, Journ. As. 1861, t. ii. p. 465, ff.) also places Hadrach at Damascus. He notes too a statement made in the MS. Oxford Bodl. 0pp. Add. fol. 25, that there was at Damascus a fine mosque called Mcsdjcd cl-Khadra, which had given the name to that city (see crit. comm.), Hadrach, according to this lexicographer, was a suburb of Damascus. 3 The original word translated "rest" is indeed "commonly used of quiet peaceful resting, especially as given by God to Israel" (Pusey). But it seems scarcely possible to regard the prophet "purposely to have chosen a word of large meaning, which should at once express (as he had before IT'jn, Zech vi. 8) that the word of God should fall heavily on Damascus and yet be its resting-place" (Pusey) ; or to hold that there is any reference whatever to the fact that " Damascus on the conversion of S. Paul became the first resting-place of the word of God, the first- fruits of the Gentiles whom the Apostle of the Gentiles gathered from east to west throughout the world " (Pusey). See also our remarks on Zech. vi. 8. Ch. ix. I.] THE PREPARATION OF THE LAND. 20/ neighbourhood (as the Targum seems to think), a fact which would scarcely be spoken of in such an enigmatical manner ; or whether the descent of the oracle, "its rest," be used in the signification of the lighting down of God's wrath and anger, as in Jer. xlix. 38, where in allusion to his judgment impend- ing over Elam, God says : " I will set my throne in Elam."^ The words that follow assign the ground why Damascus and the land of Hadrach were thus to be visited with judgment. But in the translation of the second clause there is a con- siderable variety of rendering. Passing over the conjectural emendations proposed by Fliigge, Michaelis, and others, which have been rejected by later scholars, as destitute of all authority, we note that, so far as translation is concerned, the easiest rendering of the passage and that most in accord- ance with the Hebrew accentuation, is that which occurs in our Authorised Version, " When," or " for," " the eyes of man, as of all (or, "and of all ") the tribes of Israel, shall be toward the Lord." This supposes an antithesis to be drawn between inati in general and the tribes of Israel in particular, i.e., between Jews and Gentiles (comp. Jer. xxxii. 30). The passage thus translated has been supposed to speak of the conversion both of Jews and Gentiles (Pusey). But such a signification is op- posed to the context. Von Hofmann's translation, " Jahaveh is the fountain of Adam, i.e., of humanity, and of all the tribes of Israel," deserves no more than mention. The other trans- lation, supported by the LXX., the Syr., and the Targ., is adopted with slight variations by Rosenmiiller, Ewald, Hitzig, Hengstenberg, and Kohler : " For to Jahaveh is an eye (that is, Jahaveh has an eye) overman and all the tribes of Israel," 1 Umbreit regards the expression "Damascus is his resting-place " to be ironical, referring the suffix his to Jahaveh, as much as to say, the Lord's resting-place was once Jerusalem (Isa. xi. 10), now it will be Damascus because it is so beautiful, the thought, however, being conveyed beneath the words that the Lord will dwell there indeed to punish the people of that place. But this opinion is scarcely ten- able. 208 ZECHARIAH AND HIS rROPIIFXIES. [Ch. ix. i. i.e., Jahaveh sees what man is doing, both the Gentiles and also his people Israel ; he sees the pride and idolatry of the Gentiles and their crimes against his people, and hence the sentence of judgment pronounced against the Gentiles in the oracle, which is a denunciation of wrath, though no doubt intermingled with prophecies of the future repentance of the Gentiles and of their reception into the number of the people of God. But while immediate judgments were threatened against the Gentiles, gracious promises are made to the members of the family of Israel. This translation has the advantage of coinciding with the context in which the passage occurs, and it can be justified, as far as its meaning is concerned, by a reference to other pas- sages, such as Jer. xxxii. 19, where the Lord is described as " great in counsel and mighty in work, for thine eyes are open upon all the ways of the sons of men ; to give every one according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings." The construction is, however, decidedly harsh, as even Hitzig confesses, though instances may be cited of similar genitives of the object (see crit. comm.). It is, however, possible, by a slight modification of the ren- dering given in our Authorised Version, to avoid the difficulties by which that translation is surrounded, and to bring the whole passage into harmony with the prophecy which follows. Thus Klicfoth translates, " For to Jahaveh is (that is, belongs) the eye of man {I.e., all men), as of all the tribes of Israel," which he thus explains : all men will have to look to Jahaveh, just as Israel does, and so also will Hadrach and Damascus have to look to him, and to expect judgment as well as mercy from the word of his mouth. Or it might be even more simply rendered : " For to Jahaveh will the eye of man be directed, and that of all the tribes of Israel," i.e., when the fulfilment of the oracle takes place upon Hadrach and Damascus, and the wrath of God descends upon those cities and districts, the eyes Ch. ix. I, 2.] THE PREPARATION OF THE LAND. 209 of the nations as well as those of the people of Israel will look towards Jahaveh, and marvel at the wonders of judgment which will then be performed in their sight in accordance with the solemn warnings of the prophet. This latter appears to be the more easy interpretation. Thus the prophecy need not be regarded as predicting the conversion of the several Gentile nations referred to, still less as setting forth the conversion of all Israel at the end of the Messianic dispensation, as Chamberlain has asserted. Such prophecies would be out of place in this context. It merely states that, when the judgments threatened would be executed, both Jews and Gentiles would observe that such visitations came from the hand of God. The Jewish captives in Babylon and the Israelite captives by the rivers of the Medes took the deepest interest in all the events connected with Nebuchad- nezzar's attack on Judah and with his siege of Jerusalem, and at one period many of them regarded that struggle with hope- ful anticipations. Nor can it be doubted that, wherever Jews or Israelites were settled throughout the vast extent of the Persian empire, they must also have listened with awe and wonder (as well as the nations in whose midst they were settled) to the story of the triumphant progress of Alexander the Great as he swept aside one by one all the various obstacles placed in his path, and proceeded from conquest to conquest, along the sea coast of Syria and through the various cities of the Holy Land. Bound by all the ties of patriotism and reli- gion to the land and city of their forefathers, even though they had not chosen to return thither themselves, the dispersed Israelites must have heard with awe how the holy city had been preserved among the troubles of that period, while the proud cities of Syria, Phoenicia, and the Philistines, experienced the powerful lighting down of the conqueror's arm. The clause, "and even Hamath shall border on it," is not to be regarded as independent, but as closely connected r 2IO ZECIIARIAEI AND HIS rROI'IIECIES. [Cli. ix. 2-4. with " and Damascus shall be its dwelling-place." The pro- noun " it " probably refers to Damascus. The meaning of the clause is thought by some to be, that Hamath, being near Damascus in place, and like that city in character, should also share in the judgment denounced against that district (Pusey). As, however, the verse speaks further of Tyre and Sidon, it is more natural to regard the words, " the oracle of the word of the Lord upon," to be understood before each of the cities specially mentioned. In the latter verse the clause must be rendered, " and even upon Hamath which borders upon it," that is, whose boundaries are near to those of Damascus. Or, we might mentally supply after each the words, " shall be the rest or dwelling-place thereof/' which would come to the same thing.^ The phrase has been understood by the Targum, Kimchi, and others, to indicate that the various places mentioned by the prophet should be ultimately " included among the cities of Judah, and should be in the faith of Israel " (Kimchi). But the lighting down of the oracle upon (comp. Isa. ix. 7, 8) Hamath and Damascus must necessarily be understood as similar to the descent of the prophecy upon Tyre and Sidon, etc. In the latter case a descent of wrath and not of mercy is referred to, and such, therefore, must be understood when Hamath and Damascus are spoken of. Having mentioned the Syrian cities over which the threat- ened storm was to burst, the prophet next speaks of Tyre and Sidon. These cities, for the phrase seems to be used distri- butively of both (see Ges. Gr., § 146, 4), were in their own esteem, and in that of others, "very wise." Their wisdom was seen in the riches they had heaped up for many }^cars, and in the case of Tyre, in the powerful fortifications by * Schcgg translates " Hamath also lies in its borders," that is, forms a portion of that land upon which the burden of tlie Divine judgments should spread itself. Compare Vulg. " Onus verbi Domini in terra lladrach, ct Damasci requiei ejus." Ch. ix. 3, 4] THE PREPARATION OF THE LAND. 211 which that great merchant city sought to secure her wealth. " And Tyre built for herself a fortress,^ and heaped up silver as the dust, and gold as the mire of the streets." Tyre, though a colony of Sidon, had far surpassed the mother city in riches and power, and in order to be doubly secure, the Tyrians had constructed a city and fortress on the small island which was opposite to the city on the mainland. Bot i were strongly fortified. But the prophet announced the in- sufficiency of all such human wisdom. " Behold the Lord will take possession of her (or will dispossess her, drive her out of her possessions— the word is capable of various trans- lations), and will smite her might {i.e., her military power, or her bulwark, bastion) in the sea." The latter clause may refer to the maritime power of the Phoenicians (Hezel), or may be understood to refer to the island fortress of Tyre in which the chief strength of the city consisted (Kohler)." The ultimate fate of the island city was summed up by the prophet in one expression, " and she shall be burned with fire." If the reference of a prophecy can be judged of by the event, there can be no doubt whatever to what period this prophecy must refer. The judgments denounced against Damascus, Hadrach and Hamath, are expressed in such general terms that several events which occurred at very different periods might be adduced as fulfilments of the prophecy. But the prophecies referring to Tyre were not accomplished until the capture and destruction of that city by Alexander the Great. Tyre was unsuccessfully attacked during the supremacy of the Assyrian power, by Shalmanezer. ^ The paranomasia in the original may be somewhat imitated in our language by translating, " Tyre built for herself a tower" though it must be remembered that the Hebrew word has a much wider signification than the English " toiuer." * See for Ewald's translation, and the objections to it, our crit. comm. His rendering also of the noun in the second clause of n?''n as her riches is doubt- ful, because it is questionable whether the word occurs in that signification, and because the phrase to strike riches would be a strange one, and would scarcely be used in the sense of casting riches into the sea. 212 ZECIIARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. ix. 3, 4- It was again besieged for many years by Nebuchadnezzar, and it is still a matter of doubt whether it was actually taken by that monarch. It is indeed highly probable that Nebu- chadnezzar, though he failed in his attack on the island for- tress, was so far successful as to gain possession of the city on the mainland, which was possibly denuded of all that was valuable, and that the Tyrians after the loss of the city on the mainland made peace with the Chaldean monarch on favourable terms. But it is certain that if Tyre was captured at all by Nebuchadnezzar, it was not then burned with fire, her sea-girt fortress was not destroyed, nor her naval power ruined. Though she may have lost her independence, she did not lose the important position she occupied as the greatest commercial and naval city in the world, and the naval power of the Phoenicians proved in the Persian period of the greatest possible importance to that empire. The case was very different when Alexander the Great, having completely shattered the might of Persia in the decisive battle of Issus, marched with his victorious army into Syria. Alexander directed the main division of his army against Phoenicia, while he dispatched Parmenio with a strong detachment to operate against Damascus. Damas- cus, where Darius had deposited his riches, opened its gates to that general, who overran all the land of Iladrach, and must also necessarily have occupied Hamath, which probably ubmitted without a struggle. Sidon surrendered without making any resistance, but Tyre, after a vain attempt at negotiation, ventured to resist. Proudly confident in the strength of their island fortress, the Tyrians mocked the attempts of Alexander to reduce their city. Every engine of war suited for defence had been stored up in their bul- warks, and every device which their skilful engineers could suggest was had recourse to, and for a time with marked success. " Ye despise this land-army through ^confidence in Ch. ix. 3-5] THE PREPARATION OF THE LAND. 213 the place that ye dwell in is an island, but I will show you that ye dwell on a continent" was the language of Alexander. (Q. Curtius, De Rebus Gest. Alex. Magn. iv. 2). The shallow channel between the mainland and the island was at last bridged over by a huge dam of earth erected after repeated failures, and the city which had stood a five years' siege from the Assyrians, a thirteen years' siege from the Chal- daeans, was taken after a short siege of seven months by Alexander. Ten thousand of its brave defenders were either massacred or crucified, the rest were sold into slavery, none escaped save those who were concealed by the Sidonians in the ships. Q. Curtius adds distinctly (iv. 4) that " Alexander having slain all, save those who fled to the temples, ordered the houses to be set on fire." The city of Tyre was afterwards repeopled by fresh settlers, and recovered some of its prosperity. During the reigns of the Seleucidian monarchs it rose again to considerable importance. But the prophecy of Zechariah had been fulfilled to the letter. The city lost its insular position ; for the mole of Alexander was never removed, and covered over and strengthened by deposits of sand and other matter, it remains even to this day, a monument of the execution of the Divine wrath upon the proud, luxurious, and idolatrous city. But mention is made not only of the judgments which fell upon the cities of Phoenicia and on those of northern Syria, but also of the calamities which at the same time befel the cities of Philistia. " Let Ashkelon see it, and she will fear, and Gaza, and she will tremble (writhe in an agony of terror); and Ekron, for her hope (expectation) shall be put to shame, and a king shall perish from Gaza, and Ashkelon shall not remain," or " be inhabited." ^ ^ The meaning of the phrase ^V.'D ^ is uncertain. It may signify "shall not remain," that is, in her present condition as an inhabited city. Gesenius regards it as used intransitively in Isa. xiii. 20; Jer. xvii. 6, 25 ; Ezek. xxvi. 20; and also Fiirst. The verb does not occur in Jer. xxxiii. 16, a reference given by mistake in 214 ZECHARIAII AND HIS rROPIIECIES. [Ch. ix. 4, 5. The overthrow of Tyre, especially after such a siege, must have caused great consternation among most of the cities of the south. They thought, no doubt, that the strength of Tyre would form a bulwark under which they might find protection from the Macedonian invasions, but when they saw her fall they at length lost all hope (Cyrill ap. Hengstenberg). No special mention is made of Ashkelon or Ekron in connection with the march of Alexander, though they must naturally have been occupied by the Macedonian troops. The case of Gaza was very different.^ Strongly fortified and occupying an important position, its very name, " the strong," testified to its natural strength. Despite, therefore, of the terror caused by the overthrow of Tyre, Gaza ventured to resist Alexander, and was not reduced to submission until after five months. Its king perished, and the city lost that semi-independence, which it seems to have had under the Persian empire. For the Persians, like their prede- the last edit, of Gesenius' Lex., by Miihlau and Volck, for J^t^^ is tliere used. Zech. vii. 7 is a better instance of the intransitive use of tiie verb, for which Jer. 1. 13, 39, have also been cited. In most of these passages "sit," or "remain," is preferable, and it is the translation given generally by Ewald. Jer. xvii. 6 has been translated by Kohler, " And he will dwell in a barren place in the wilderness, and in a land which is salt, and where thou canst not dwell." Kohler and Ewald both translate in Zech. ix., " shall not remain." The matter is too uncertain to allow any such argument to be drawn from it as Chamberlain has clone (in his Notes on the Restoration and Conversion of Israel), that, because Ashkelon has not been utterly destroyed, therefore the prophecy is to be reckoned as one which refers to a still future age. The language used of cities is generally designed to refer to their inhabitants, and the inhabitants of Ashkelon and their city did not remain in a quiet condition at the era referred to. Ashkelon was taken by Jonathan Maccabeus without resistance (l Mace. x. 86), and is spoken of afterwards as being friendly disposed to the Jewish patriots (i Mace. xi. 60, xii 33). The modern town of Ashkelon, which Herod adonied and which became afterwards of importance in post-biblical times, was situated on the shore, and probably occupied a different site from the ancient city of that name. Jer. xlvii. 7 is not sufficient to prove that Ashkelon was originally a maritime city. ' Four of the five cities of the Philistines are mentioned here. Gath is not spoken of in the later prophets. It seems sometimes to have belonged to the kingdom of Judah (2 Chron. xi. 8), and at other times for long intervals to have been a Philistine city. It may ultimately have been incorporated with the king- dom of Judah. But note 2 Chron. xxvi. 6. Ch. ix. 4, 5] THE PREPARATION OF THE LAND. 215 cessors, the Assyrians and the Babylonians, were wont to permit many of the cities and districts which formed a por- tion of their empire to retain a state of semi-independence. Hence frequent mention is made of kings subject to the Persian king of kings. Herodotus, in his description of the battle of Salamis, mentions the kings of Tyre and Sidon and the other sovereigns of the nations who sat in a prescribed order round the throne of Xerxes {Herod., viii. 67). He too, speaks of Damasithmys the Calyndian king (viii. Z']), and of Queen Artemisia (vii. 99). Other writers give similar in- stances. Xenophon mentions the wife of Syennesis the king of the Cilicians {Auab., I. ii. 12) ; Diodorus Siculus (xvi. 42) and Arrian (ii. 20) speak of the vassal kings of Cyprus ; the latter writer also of the king o{ Aradus and the king of Byblus. Similarly Josephus, in narrating Alexander's march to Jeru- salem after the capture of Gaza, speaks of " the kings of Syria " who were in his train {Antiq. Jud., xi. 8, § 5). Special mention is made of the king of Gaza having been brought alive to Alexander by Leonatus and Philotas after the capture of that city.^ Hegesias seems to refer to Betis, or Batis, whom Dionysius himself styles only a leader {;))'ye[jb(iiv,) but apparently without seeing anything strange in the same man being also styled " king " by Hegesias. Josephus, in- deed, calls this same individual only the commandant ((f)poupap)(^o etc. The promises set forth in the fifth verse are all described in the prophetic perfect ; the construction that is used in the verse following is that of the perfect with the vav con- versive followed by the imperfect. The latter construction is used to indicate emphasis, and to express the intimate con- nexion of the thing promised Avith what has been already spoken of The house of Joseph was not to be forgotten, since Ephraim and Judah formed essential parts of one great whole. If Judah was to be made the majestic war-horse ridden by Jahaveh to victory, the prophet does not forget to note that the divine blessings were not merely to be bestowed upon that portion of the covenant people. Both portions alike should have a blessing ; therefore the promise proceeds, " And," or " so, I will strengthen the house of Judah, and the house of Joseph will I save, and I will bring them back," or, " I will cause them to dwell," scil. in safety (as Jer. xxxii. 37), or, " I will place them," ^ scil. in their own homes * The reason of this uncertainty of translation is that the verbal form which occurs here, C'rif^t^'ln, may he explained in two ways. First as an irregular hiphil from 3tJ'^, for D*ri3L""(n (IIos. xi. 11), which latter is actually the reading of some MSS. The form is a mixed one, and partakes of the peculiarities of both verbs v'2, and IT. In this case the copyist had probably the similar form D''rn3''C*in in his mind. See Ges. Lchrg., p. 464, Olshauscn, § 225 c. This is the Ch. X. 6, 7.] THE WAR OF THE SONS OF ZION. 277 (as Hos. xi. 11). The salvation of Ephraim is not, however, stated to be brought about by Judah. Whatever translation of the verb be preferred, the pronoun must be taken to relate to the two parts of the covenant people. To both the words refer : " for I have compassion upon them, and they shall be (both verbs are prophetic perfects) as if I had not loathed them, for I am Jahaveh their God, and I will hear them " (compare chap. xiii. 9 ; Isa. Iviii. 9) ; namely, when they call upon me for aid in their distresses, though the latter idea is not exactly stated in words. Ephraim is spoken of in this connection with Judah, not as indicating that the members of the other tribes would rejoice at Judah's victory, and at the Lord's compassion vouchsafed to the nation in general, while they should have no share in the previous struggle. The very opposite is rather the case. That which was affirmed of Judah in the former chapter (verse 15) is here also affirmed of Ephraim. The Ephraimites would not be excluded from any of the blessings promised, but would have their part in the contest, as well as rejoice in the victory. " Ephraim, therefore, shall be as a hero, and their heart shall rejoice as with wine, and their children and their sons shall see it and be glad ; let their heart rejoice in Jahaveh."^ They would be made strong view taken by the LXX., Maurer, Hengst., Bleek, etc. Secondly the word also may be regarded as an irregular hiphil from 31E^', which is the opinion adopted by the Vulg., Targ., and Syr., and supported by Ewald, § 196 b, note, as well as in his remarks on this passage in his Proph. d. A. B. Both views are equally admissible ; see Bottcher's Lehrb., § 466, 4 ; Kalisch, § Ixvii. A. 3, e. 3. Possibly the word was so pointed to indicate an original difference of reading. In Jer. xxxii. 37 the two regular forms from the two verbs occur almost side by side in the same passage, which may have floated before the mind of the prophet. Double punctuations, as well as double accentuations, occur in the Decalogue (Exod. XX. 3, 13 ; Deut. v. 7, 17), and have been supposed to indicate an ad- missible difference of reading. See Olshausen, § 37 b. But see Delitzsch's article " Dekalog " in the new edition of Herzog's Rcal-encyclopiidic. Hitzig prefers to read D''rihti'n "I will bring them back," which he thinks more suited to the context. ' This is one of the instances often cited as a case in which the jussive is used 2/8 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. x. 7, 8. strong as heroes to fight in the common cause ; and, in- vigorated as a giant refreshed with wine, they would fight the battle of their common Lord (comp. Ps. Ixxviii. 65, 66). Their joy in the fight would communicate itself to their children, and all would rejoice together because God was with them of a truth. The prophet further declares God's goodwill towards these lost ones of the house of Israel. " I will hiss for them (the sense of the Hebrew form of the verb can best be expressed in English by a slight emphasis), and I will gather them, for I have redeemed them " ; their liberty was decreed already by God, hence the perfect tense ; " and they multiply as they multiply." ^ The words are best understood to refer to both parts of the nation, though more especially used with respect to Ephraim. Numbers of Jews, as well as Israelites, were still scattered throughout the lands of the Gentiles. The Lord promised to hiss for these, that is, call them loudly as with a pipe, in order to bring them back to their own land.- Such signals God gave in Ihe sense of the imperfect. But the jussive probably retains its ordinary signifi- cation even here, and is used to express the sympathy which the prophet feh in the scene which he depicts. See Driver's Hebrew Tenses, § 58. Kohler explains the jussive as used here rather in reference to the purpose of Jahaveh himself. 1 This last clause of the verse has been explained by Kohler, Keil, and others, as containing an allusion to the increase of population once granted to Israel in Egypt (Exod. 1. 7, 12). In such a case the first perfect here used in the phrase •m ID? -I^ll must be regarded as a prophetic perfect, and the clause be rendered, " and ihey sliall increase as they have increased" (A.V.), or "were increased." If such were the intention of the prophet we would rather have expected an im- perfect in the first clause. It cannot be proved that the copula here is the vav consecutive, or conversive (as Kuhlcr thinks), as the tone proves nothing in the 3rd pers. plur. perf. in verbs H"?. Hence it is safer to explain the second perfect as the mere repetition of the first, and both as used in the same signification. The passage is equivalent to " they will be as numerous as ever they wish." So Ewald, and also Delitzsch [Comm. iibcr Genesis, 4te Ausg. p. 476). See Ewald, Le/irb., § 350 b- 2 The allusion contained in the verb p1li^' may, however, be to the manner m which those in charge of bees make a noise' in order to induce the bees to settle down in a desired locality. Comp. the verb in Isa. vii. 18 and Delitzsch on Is. V. 26 ; also Virgil Georg. iv. 54. It has been suggested by the reader for the Ch. X. 7, 8.] THE WAR OF THE SONS OF ZION. 279 again and again by his gracious providence during the days of the prophet, at the period of the disasters which came upon Babylon, by the noise of the overthrow of the Persian empire, and later by the victorious struggles of the Macca- bees. Such providential calls were again and again re- sponded to by bands of believing Jews and Israelites, who at various intervals, often widely separated from one another, returned to their own land. A great deal of confusion with respect to the restoration which took place in the days of the prophet has been created by a commonly received opinion that the ten tribes did not share in that restoration, but that the restoration to Palestine, the beginnings of which are described in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, was confined to the members of the tribes of Judah and Benjamin in general. This point has already been referred to in chap, vii., and we shall have occasion again to recur to it. By the terms of Cyrus' decree the members of the ten tribes were as freely permitted as the people of Judah and Benjamin to return to the land of their forefathers. It has, however, been repeatedly asserted that though a few individuals of these tribes may possibly have been found among the first bands of exiles who came back to Palestine, no large number of the people of these tribes can have re- turned with Zerubbabel. The truth of this oft-repeated as- sertion is, however, by no means evident. ^ The books of Ezra and Nehemiah, as well as the later book known as the 3rd Ezra, or ist Esdras in our Apocrypha, agree in giving the sum total of the Jews who returned with Zerubbabel as 42,360. The number assigned, however, in those three books, in the detailed lists of the descendants of those who had been carried away captive to Babylon, when press that the reference may be to some such sound as that used on the Conti- nent to attract attention, so much like hissing, e.gr., the German /j'/'. The Greeks too, when calling a companion, make a sound like hissing, ps, ps. ^ See our remarks on p. 243-245 in connection with the statements of chap. ix. 10. 280 ZECIIARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [ Ch. x. 8. added together, by no means make up such a total. The detailed numbers given in Ezra (chap, ii.) only make up 29,818. The figures given in the list found in Nehemiah (chap, vii.) amount to a somewhat larger number, namely to 31,089; while those in 3rd Ezra (ist Esdras), possibly derived in part from another tradition, when added to- gether, according to the several numbers given in Tischen- dorf's text (1850) of the LXX., only make 30,143, a number slightly in excess of that given by Nehemiah. Mistakes are very apt to be made in ancient MSS. with respect to num- bers. The substantial agreement, therefore, of these three lists is remarkable. Moreover, according to these authorities, a very large body, in proportion to the whole, consisted of persons whose names were not to be found in the genealogies then extant, and who could not be definitely assigned as belonging to any special portion of the Holy Land. And be it noted that this unassigned body of exiles amounted to some 11,000 or 12,000, out of a grand total of 42,360.^ It has been maintained as a possibility by Berthcau, Schulz, and others, that the statement of 3rd Ezra (ver. 41) is correct, and that the larger number ought to be regarded as that " of Israel from them of twelve years old and up- ward." The insertion of the clause, " from them of twelve years old and upward," may possibly have been designed to explain the difference perceived to exist between the sum total, and the sum of the various numbers assigned to the different families. In this case, the lesser numbers would be those of the persons from twenty years old and upward. But this attempt to explain the difference is by no means satis- factory, nor is it at all clear that this was the real intention of the writer of 3rd Ezra. It is more probable that the view ^ The totals, as j^iven by Michaelis, whose statement has been followed by Fritzsche in the Kurzgef. exeg. Ilamibuch zii den Apocryphcu, aie incorrect ; the correct sums are those above, yiven by Bcrtheau in his Coiniii, on Ezra and Nclicmiak. Ch. X. 8.] THE WAR OF THE SONS OF ZION. 28 1 of Rabbi Saloino ben-Yizhak, and other Jewish commentators, is correct, namely, that the difference between the grand total and the sum of the numbers given in detail in the several lists, was the number of the individuals of the ten tribes who came up with the families of Judah and Benjamin, but who could not be assigned definitely to any special cities in the Holy Land. The number of exiles who went to Jerusalem with Ezra at a later period was far smaller than that of the first body led by Zerubbabel ; but it is deserving of note that the letter from Artaxerxes in favour of the rebuilding of the Temple at Jerusalem was not only read by Ezra to the Jews in Babylon, but, if we may believe the testimony of Josephus {Antiq. Jud. xi. 5, § 2), was sent by Ezra to the members of the ten tribes who were dwelling in Media. The statement which Josephus makes in the same place respecting those Israelites, bears on its very face the stamp of improbability. It was evidently based on the vaguest rumour, and not made from his own actual knowledge. For Josephus speaks of the Israelites as existing in his own day in countless myriads beyond the Euphrates (fxvpuiSe^ airecpoi, Kol apiOfiw jvcoa-dfjvai, fX7] Svvd/j,evai). But if they had been then in existence in such numbers, they certainly would have been taken notice of by other writers. The statement of Josephus, as Evvald has suggested, ^ probably had its origin in the language of the prophets, which men were anxious to explain literally. The wild statements of the writer of 4th Ezra (2 Esdras xiii. 39-50) are, of course, of no value, except as showing, as Ewald observes, that in the first century after Christ a large host of Israelites was believed to exist in some remote country situated in the north-east. ^ ^ See Ewald's History of Israel, English Translation, vol. v. pp. 90-96. 2 The fanciful notions which every now and then are put forward by some dreamer who imagines that he has discovered the supposed lost tribes, scarcely deserve much attention. Isolated bodies of Jews or Israelites may, no doubt, from 282 ZECIIARIAH AND HIS rROPIIECIES. [Ch. x. is. It is certain, however, as far as our knowledge extends, that no hindrances were placed in the way of the return of either Jews or Israelites to their own land. While a large number of Jews did actually return, a very considerable number even of the people belonging to the two tribes did not return up to the time of the prophet Zechariah. These the prophet urged to flee out of Babylon, and to them he announced the calamities which would fall upon that city (chap. ii.). We may well believe that many obeyed the directions of the prophet, though we have no distinct his- torical notice of their return to the holy city. It must be remembered, as already noticed (p. 257), that the annals of the Jews concerning that very period present a blank of nearly two centuries. The people also of the ten tribes, like their brethren the Jews, preferred in the majority of cases to remain in the lands where they had settled for generations, and which they had learned from infancy to regard as their home. On the other hand, it is not unlikely that, since the political reasons which had divided the two portions of the covenant people from one another had ceased to exist, on account of the captivity of both portions, those Israelites who time to time be discovered in remote countries. Several interesting works have been written on such, as for instance the little work of Mr. Finn, late H. B.M. Consul at Jerusalem, on The Orphan Colony of Jews in China (Nisbet, 1872), and others, some of which are referred to by Evvald. But the recent attempt to trace the Anglo-Saxon race to an Israelitish origin, which has been made by some English enthusiasts, filled with national pride on the one hand, and with an igno- rant contempt for any other form of Evangelical Christianity than that which they have seen and learned to value in their o\\x\. land, arises only from spiritual pride, and must be treated with contempt. The theory of the identity of the Anglo-Saxon race with the ten, or any one of the tribes of Israel, is one which could only be propounded by men ignorant of history and philology, and of the lessons to be learned from a careful study of such departments. Such theories are injurious, because they are often readily embraced by a portion of the unlearned mass of the public, and they fre(iuently cause others to entertain an undescn'ed contempt for that evangelical teaching which is often dear to the adherents of such fanciful opinions. They tend also to divert many from a sober and pains- taking study of the Word of God. Ch. X. 8.] THE WAR OF THE SONS OF ZION. 283 did not amalgamate with the heathen among whom they dwelt, as many no doubt did, became gradually known in common by the name of Jews. The exiles who returned with Zerubbabel and Ezra, though mainly appertaining to the remnant of the people of Judah, were often termed by the common name of " the children of Israel " (see p. 244). The prophets had frequently spoken of a day when the nation, after its return from exile, should no longer exist as two divided portions, but should form one covenant nation. When the kingdom of Israel was overturned by the Assyrians, years after the greater portion of that people had been transported from their land and planted beside the rivers of Media, the remnant of the people of those tribes which still remained in the land were by no means unwilling to enter into religious communion with the people of Judah (2 Chron. xxxiv. 9). It is highly probable that what happened at that period occurred to a greater extent afterwards. The faithful remnant of the northern tribes in all probability united themselves readily with their Jewish brethren, possibly even in the land of exile, and returned as one people, known on the one hand by the general appellation of "the chil- dren of Israel," the term properly belonging to the whole nation, and on the other by that of " Jews," as more distinctly indicating their religion, whose central- point was, as it ought ever to have been, fixed at the Jewish capital, Jerusalem, The people of the two tribes, the Jews proper as they may be termed, seem to have preserved their genealogies with greater care than their brethren of the other tribes ; but even the Jewish genealogies were to a great extent fragmentary. The people of Judah were, however, able for the most part to hand down to their children, even in the land of their captivity, the tradition of the various cities to which they had severally belonged in the land of Judah. Hence the 284 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. x. 8. exiles were arranged in many cases net according to fami- lies, but according to the cities in which their forefathers had dwelt. It ought also to be remembered that the exiles mentioned in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah were not the only bands of Jews who returned to the country of their forefathers. Large numbers must have returned in smaller troops at dif- ferent periods. Many, no doubt, returned from Babylon after the prophetic warning given by Zechariah, and many others at a later time, when the predicted troubles occurred, made haste to flee from that land. The favours granted to the Jews in the days of Alexander must have caused still larger numbers to flock to their country, though no chronicler has recorded the story of their march from the east or the north. The fame of the Maccabcan victories, which was soon spread abroad in all the bazaars of Asia, must have caused still more of the Israelites to join themselves to their kindred. For though many Jews remained at a distance from Jerusalem, those exiles kept up constant intercourse with their people in that city. Some portion of the ten tribes were not, as we have seen, carried away captive from their own land (2 Chron. xxxiv. 9), and a considerable number of them may have re- mained even after the Babylonish captivity. A portion of this remnant in process of time was no doubt incorporated with the Samaritan people, while those who resisted such amal- gamation probably united themselves with the Jews, and were called by their name. The story of " the lost tribes " mnst be regarded in the main as a mere legend, though it may be very true that large numbers did not return from the land of their exile. Yet even in their land of exile all Israelites were generally known as Jews, to whatever tribe they might have originally belonged. We do not deny that some traces of the northern Israelites may be found among the Nestorian Jews, described by the American missionary Dr. Grant, or even Ch. X. 8, 9.] THE WAR OF THE SONS OF ZION. 285 among the Karaites and other Jews, who here and there exist in the south of Russia^. (See pp. 243 ff.) The people of Israel in general are spoken of by St. Paul as " our twelve tribes " (Acts xxvi. 7), and St. James writes also to " the twelve tribes scattered abroad." No countenance what- ever is given in the New Testament to the fables of Josephus, or of the writer of 4th Ezra (2nd Esdras), already- alluded to ; though had there been any real foundation for their statements, it would have been only natural that some allusion should have been made to such a remark- able fact. The people of all the twelve tribes did actually form one nation, as predicted, and were known as forming such. If they did not return in greater numbers to Pales- tine, the fault lay with themselves. The blessing was there, had they availed themselves of it ; and greater blessings, had they embraced Jesus of Nazareth as their Messiah. The predictions of this chapter were fully realized in the trials, struggles, and victories of Israel during the glorious period of the Maccabees. The statement of ver. 9, " I will sow you among the na- tions," has been variously understood. The word in the ^ See Dr. Asahel Grant's The IVestorians, or tJit Lost Tribes, London : 1844 ; as also Prof. Dr. Chwolson's Achtzehn hebrdische Grabinschriften aus der Krim, St. Petersburg, 1865. But Harkavy in his Catalog, and Dr. H. L. Strack in his tract, Firkoivitsch und seine Entdeckungen : ein Grabstein den hebr. Grabschriften der Krim, 1876, have maintained that none of these inscriptions in their present form can be considered as genuine, but that they have all been designedly falsified by Firkowitsch. These scholars seem, however, to have gone too far. Chwolson, in his interesting "Mittheilung " appended to the third Heft of the ZeitscJirift der D.M.G. for 1878, still maintains the genuineness ofmany of the assailed inscriptions. He gives there an account of a visit he paid to Tschufutkale during the summer of this year, and of his excavations in the cemetery in which the inscriptions were found. The result of his investigations has been in his opinion completely to demonstrate the genuineness of some of the very inscriptions which have been called in question. It is at any rate highly probable that there is much truth at the bottom of the assertion made in these inscriptions of the descent of the Karaites of the Crimea from those Israelites who were carried away captive by Shalmaneser. 286 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. x. 9. original, unless this passage be regarded as an exception, is never used of dispersion in a bad sense. Even the passage in Ezek. xxxvi. 9 cannot, if its context be regarded, be viewed as an instance in which a passive form of the verb is used in that signification. Notwithstanding, therefore, that Ewald and Hitzig adopt this view, . and the latter scholar even considers this passage so translated as a proof that the captivity alluded to could not have taken place in the past, we must (with Kohler, Keil, Pusey, etc.) adhere to the iisus loquendi, and render the verb " to sow." The word is used in a good sense of the increase of Israel, even in a state of exile among the nations, as in Hos. ii. 25 ; Jer. xxxii. 27. The in- crease promised in the verse before was a blessing, and that blessing was to be vouchsafed to Israel, even though scattered among the nations. That blessing would lead them to re- member the Lord their God. For among the nations, they should live (comp. Ezek. xxxvii. 14) with their sons, for the blessing would not be merely transient ; even in Gentile lands they would preserve their own distinctive nationality, and thence they would return. As Israel increased in Egypt, and the very increase of the people in that country was a sign that the time which had been foretold was at hand, when God would lead them forth out of that land, so the mul- tiplication of the holy nation in the various Gentile lands among which they were scattered would lead the people to think of that God who had so wonderfully protected them, and whose will it was that they should return to their own land. Kliefoth considers that the prophecy sets forth that Israel, after it should have emerged victoriously from the wars with the Grecian power as a numerous people, should be strewn as a seed among the nations in the most distant lands of the earth, in order that in those far distant regions they might think of the God who had delivered them, and be witnesses to Ch. X. 9, lo.] THE WAR OF THE SONS OF ZION. 28/ his power and glory among those nations. He rightly objects to the opinion propounded by von Hofmann, namely, that the prophecy refers to the dispersion of the Jewish people, which was the result of the crucifixion of our Lord ; for if the prophecy related to such a dispersion, it would have been expressed in very different language. The interpretation of von Hofmann is not only against the uniform usage of the special word, but not even in harmony with the general tenor of the passage. Kliefoth considers the prophecy to contem- plate the sowing of the people among the nations as a fact which was to last for a long period, and that the object of such a sowing of Israel among the nations was to call the heathen unto Christ. He thinks that the prophecy was fulfilled when thousands and tens of thousands of Jews i believed in Christ in the early ages of the Christian Church, 1 as such believers, scattered among the peoples, composed in the majority of instances the basis of the Christian Churches founded by the Apostles. He goes, however, further, and considers that as this " scattering " among the peoples was for a definite object, when that object, namely the gathering of the nations to Christ, should be attained, God would again gather his people. This gathering of the people of God out of all the world at the end of days is that which is, according to Kliefoth's view, described in the last two verses of this chapter. But, inasmuch as he maintains that the names of Assyria and Egypt which occur in those verses can be considered as used only in a typical signification, the places in the Holy Land there mentioned must be viewed as also typical, and the bringing back of God's people to the land of Canaan is to be regarded as really signifying the bringing in of the people of God to that blessed resting-place which will be the ultimate abode of the people of God belonging to every tribe and nation. Though there may be something in this view, it is better 288 ZECHARIAH AND HIS TROPHECIES. [Ch. x. 8-10. to regard the prophecy as speaking first, of the gathering together of the people of the twelve tribes in common, and of the increase of Israel among the nations in the land of their exile ; and secondly, of the increase of the same people after they should have been brought back to their own land. The blessing spoken of was promised to the whole Israelitish people, to Judah as well as Ephraim. Had the nation more generally hearkened to the sound of Jahaveh's call (ver. 8, see note 2, page 278), and returned in larger numbers to their land, the Jewish State would have been far more powerful and independent than it ever actually became. The love of ease and riches marred to some extent the promise. Yet a rich blessing was actually bestowed. The restoration of the Jews was a marvel. What occurred to them did not occur to any other people. The Israelites increased among the nations, and, as the book of Esther points out, became in many parts of the Persian empire an important power in the state. Their restoration to their own land, incomplete as it was through their own fault, was a preparation for the coming of the Messiah. Both among the nations, and afterwards in their own land, the Jews were witnesses to the truth of God, and by their example eminent preachers of the doctrines of monotheism. The successful struggle for independence un- der the Maccabean leaders, a struggle undertaken, however, more for the .sake of their religion than for political in- dependence, forms a glorious page in the history of the Church of Israel. Their non-adherence to the directions of the law as regards the High Priesthood of Israel, and the mistake they made in uniting the secular and ecclesiastical power, was a new illustration of that carnal polic}-, which in another form had proved the ruin of the kingdom erected by Jeroboam in earlier days. It seemed for a time to have been a consummate stroke of worldly wisdom, but it proved ulti- mately the ruin of the State, and the downfall of the Church Ch. X. lo.] THE WAR OF THE SONS OF ZION. 289 It was a policy in opposition to the law of Moses. But in the struggle with the Grecian power the Jews were wonder- fully successful, and even after they had begun to decline from the truth, they were for a considerable period sustained by God's gracious Providence. As " the holy seed " among the nations, the Jews prepared far and wide the way for the victories of Christianity. It must not be forgotten that a large number of that nation, a number far larger than that of any other nation under heaven in apostolic days, accepted Jesus as ' their Messiah and Deliverer, and that these Jewish converts formed the groundwork of the Church of Christ which wasj laid on the day of Pentecost. Had not "the god of this world ^ blinded the minds " (2 Cor. iv. 4) of the ecclesiastical rulers of the nation in general, though even " a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith " (Acts vi. 7), the blessings which the Jewish people would have received cannot be calculated. In the remarkable position occupied by Israel in the early Christian Church, — for our Lord and his apostles were Jews, and the majority of the early evangelists were men of this nation, — in the wonderful fact that the Jews, though politically crushed beneath the Gentile yoke, con- quered the nations of the earth by means of that religion which sprang from their midst, — in such facts this prophecy, and other similar prophecies, found a most glorious and real fulfilment. The nations have been enlightened by the Jews, and books written by Jewish pens have become the laws and oracles of the world. It is necessary to notice here some of the special difficul- ties connected with the closing verses of this tenth chapter. The mention of Assyria in verse 10 in place of Babylon has been considered by many scholars, such as Bleek and von Ortenberg, to be a clear proof that the prophecy was composed before the Babylonish captivity. It may, however, be argued on the other hand, that special mention is made of Assyria, u 290 ZECIIARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. x. 10-12. because the return of the northern tribes is specially spoken of, and these tribes were originally carried away captive to Assyria (2 Kings xv. 29, xvii. 6). It is unsatisfactory to assert that Assyria and Egypt are used in this passage not as the names of powerful empires, but as the names of the places whence the exiles were to come ; for " the pride of Assyria, the sceptre of Egypt," are specially alluded to in verse i r, which shows that those nations themselves are referred to. But it has been well observed that, though those kingdoms were subdued under the yoke first of Baby- lon and afterwards of Persia, the relation in which the people of those lands stood to the exiles in their midst remained unaltered by these various conquests, and they may have in many cases exercised their authority in a tyrannical manner over the Israelites and Jews. On the other hand, it must also be borne in mind that in post-exilian times the king of Babylon was sometimes styled " the king of Assyria" (Ezra vi. 22 ; 2 Kings xxiii. 29 ; Judith i. 7, ii. i ; comp. Herod, i. 178, 188), inasmuch as his authority extended over Assyria. In later books the ex- pressions, "king of the Persians," and "king of Assyria,'* are interchanged. Compare 3rd Ezra (i Esdras) ii. 30 with vii. 15. The king of Persia is also styled king of Babylon (Ezra v. 13 ; Neh. xiii. 6), and references are sometimes made to Assyria when Babylon is really signified, or when, as in this passage, allusion is made to the enemies of the covenant people north and south of their land (comp. Lam. v. 6 ; Jcr. ii. 18). The restoration of Ephraim is generally spoken of in connexion with that of Judah, because the restoration of both formed integral parts of one great event. When their united restoration is spoken of by the prophets, refer- ence is frequently made to the bringing up of Israel out the bondage of Egypt. Therefore, when Israel is spoken of as delivered out of the hands of those enemies, who from Ch. X. IO-I2.] THE WAR OF THE SONS OF ZION. 29I the north and south were so often wont to oppress them, mention is made of a recovery from the hand of Assyria, as the first great enemy that subjugated them from the north, and from the power of Egypt, which had so often harassed Israel by invasions from the south. Allusions, more or less distinct, are frequently made to the wonderful drying up of the waters of the Red Sea on the occasion of the first great deliverance of that people, which was to be regarded as a type of the deliverance to be expected in future days. See Isa. xi," II, 12, 15, 16, xxvii. i, 12, 13 ; Mic. vii. 12-15. In the last-named passage, worshippers are spoken of as coming to Jerusalem "from Assyria and from the cities of Egypt," (not " the fortified cities " as in our Authorised Version), and from Egypt (incorrectly rendered in our Authorised Version " the fortress "), " even to the river," that is, the Euphrates. The mention made of the bringing down of the pride of Assyria may be regarded as fulfilled when Assyria and Babylon were finally crushed by Darius, after repeated rebel- lions. The victories over those enemies Darius commemor- ated in the great rock inscription at Behistun (see pp. 38 and 39, note). Those nations were finally absorbed in the sea of the surrounding peoples by the conquests of the Macedonians. The passing away of the sceptre of Egypt was accomplished when that country, which had also revolted against Darius, was finally subdued by Xerxes, and placed under a harder yoke than Darius had laid upon it (Herod, vii. i, 7). The prophecy was more fully accomplished when Egypt was transformed into a Grecian kingdom. In the special men- tion of " the sceptre of Egypt," a reference may be made, as Lange has suggested, to the tyranny of Pharaoh in early days, which was the great type of all future oppressors of the people of God.^ ' The prophet Hosea speaks of the ten tribes as destined to become in part exiles in the land of Egypt; Hos. viii. 13, ix. 3, 6. Compare the emphatic declaration 292 ZECHARTAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. x. 10-12. It is not unlikely, as Kohlcr has observed, that at the time of the invasions of Tiglath-Pilneser and Shalmaneser, numbers of the ten tribes fled to Egypt. That country was often resorted to as a place of escape from dangers arising in the land of Israel (i Kings xi. 40 ; Jer. xxvi. 21). There was a party favourable to Egypt at the court of the later kings of Israel, as well as one more inclined to form an alliance with Assyria. This appears from the book of Hosea; and it is quite natural to suppose that, when the king of Assyria invaded the land of Israel, many fled into Egypt. The same conflict of parties prevailed at the court of the kings of Judah, and after the captivity many of those Jews who had been left in the land fled to Egypt, in consequence of the treacherous assassination of Gcdaliah by Ishmael, in order to avoid the vengeance of the Chal- daeans (Jer. xli. 17, xliii. 7). As a common slave-mart of the world, many Israelites as well as Jews may have been often deported thither "in ships" (Dcut.. xxviii. 65), and sold for bondmen and bondwomen. This was a notorious fact in later times, and it no doubt occurred also at earlier periods. Kimchi has in this manner explained the passages in Hos. viii. 13 and ix. 3. On the latter he remarks, that " although the kingdom of Ephraim was carried into cap- in Deut. xxviii. 65. Zechariah is supposed by some to refer to such prophecies. The latter declaration (Hos. xi. 5), " he shall not return to Egyi:)t," has often been considered to be in direct contradiction to Hosea's earlier prophecies. Some propose therefore, on the authority of the LXX., to erase the negative in that text, while others (as Ewald) prefer to treat the sentence as interrogative. "Shall he not return to Egypt ? " to the land of bondage under the Pharaohs. Interroga- tive sentences without any interrogative particles form one of the peculiarities of Hosea's diction. So in Hosea xiii. 14, " Shall I not rescue them from the hand of Sheol ? " Nor can we consider that the mode of explaining the difficulty is satisfactory, which is resorted to by Wiinsche and Keil, namely, to explain Egypt as spoken of typically as the land of bondage in the first passage (Hos. viii. ix.), while it is taken literally in the latter ; for the return of Ephraim to Egypt is distinctly implied in Hos. xi. II. Ch. X. IO-I2.] THE WAR OF THE SONS OF ZION. 293 tivity by the king of Assyria, yet there were many of them who before that captivity returned to Egypt, in consequence of famine and the trials they met with in their own land. There were also some of the Ephraimites who remained in their own land until the captivity of Judah and Benjamin, with whom they returned into Egypt, although the prophet Jeremiah would have kept them back in the name of the Lord."i A second difficulty in the passage arises from the men- tion which is made in it of the " land of Gilead and Leba- non " as the place whither the exiles should return. This has been regarded by von Ortenberg and others as an " in- contestible " proof that the prophet must have referred to the deportation by Tiglath-Pileser, and consequently that the prophecy must be assigned to a period considerably earlier than the Babylonian captivity. Bleek maintains with Maurer and Ewald, that though it is possible for Gilead to be used to signify the portion of the territory of Ephraim east ot the Jordan, Lebanon cannot, as Hengstenberg has asserted, be taken to signify the territory of Ephraim west of the Jordan, but only its most northern. portion. The prophecy of Zechariah, according to their view, must, therefore, have been composed at a time when the northern part of that Israel- itish territory was depopulated by the king of Assyria, who, in consequence of the treaty of alliance which he made with Ahaz king of Judah (2 Kings xv. 29 ; i Chron. v. 6, 26), ravaged that part of the territory of Israel, and carried away a large portion of its population. To this argument in favour of a pre-exilian date being assigned to this portion of the book, Kohler gives a satis- factory reply. If Gilead could, on the principle of a part for the whole, be used to designate the territory of Israel ^ Kimchi on Hosea, quoted by Wiinsche, Der Prophet Hosea iihersetzt und erkldrt. Leipzig : Weigel, 1868. 294 ZECHARIAII AND HIS TROrHECIES. [Ch. x. 10-12. on the other side of Jordan, of which it only formed a small portion, the land of Lebanon might on the same principle with equal propriety signify that portion of the land which lay on the other side, designated from its highest range of mountains. In Ezekiel's parable of the eagles (chap, xvii.) the whole land of Palestine is described as Lebanon, and the king of Judah as the foliage of the cedar of Lebanon. Similarly in Mic. vii. 14 "the wood of Carmel " is used as a designation of Palestine on the west of the Jordan, while "Bashan and Gilead " denote the possessions of Israel on the other side of that river. The translation of verse 1 1 is attended with difficulties. The simplest rendering perhaps is, "And he (Jahaveh)^ shall pass through (perfect proph.) the sea, (that is, or where is) affliction," the last word being viewed as in apposition to the noun preceding it. So Umbreit, C. B. Michaelis, and Keil. The translation, "sea of affliction," is ungrammatical, though the meaning is almost the same. The passage might also be rendered as an exclamation, "and he shall pass through the sea, affliction ! " {i.e. trouble arises !) So Kohler ; but this is not a natural translation. On the other hand, Maurer, von Ortenberg, and Kliefoth consider the word to be a verb. The verb does not actually occur in this signification in Hebrew, but is used in Aramaic in the sense of to divide, and derivatives are found in Hebrew from the verb in that signification. According to this view, the passage may be rendered, " And he passes through the sea, he divides, and strikes the waves in the sea." This afiords a fair sense. ' Lange considers that the Messiah is here distinctly referred to. He tliinks tliis is evident from the works which the Messiah here performs, namely, making a pas- sage as Moses through the sea, and smiting the waters as Elijah. If such, however, were the meaning of the passage, Zechariah wouldhardly have introduced the verb without even a pronoun as its subject. We cannot, therefore, believe tliat what fol- lows is represented as the special work of the Messiah. As the Messiah is, however, the Great Servant of Jahaveh, what is represented as done by Jahaveh himself may be considered as done by him who perfomis all Jahavth's good will and pleasure. Ch. X. 10-12.] THE WAR OF THE SONS OF ZION. 295 The only objection which can be made to it is, that the verb itself does not actually occur in the remains of Bibli- cal Hebrew.^ The word tl1)i misrht also be regarded as an adverbial accusative, thus : " he passes through the sea, with affliction." So Marck, Koster, Delitzsch. The explanation of Hitzig is most arbitrary. Retranslates, "and he passes through the Sea Affliction and strikes the Sea Surging ( Wogend, properly, he notes, waves, surges), and all the deeps of the Nile dry up, and the sceptre of Egypt yields." Hitzig understands the prophet to refer to two seas, one symbol- izing Assyria, and the other Egypt. In the Hebrew word rni, rendered " affliction " or " trouble," he conceives there is a play upon the name of Egypt (")ii{12); and by "waves," in the second clause, he understands the river Euphrates. One sea, however, is alone referred to in the passage, namely, the sea of Egypt, and one river, that is, the Nile. Some of the difficulties of the passage would be solved by the adop- tion of Ewald's suggestion, namely, to read in both clauses, in place of 0^2 with the article, D^2l without the article. The clauses then would be rendered "a sea of affliction" and "a sea of waves." The latter expression, " a sea of waves,'^ would signify a stormy sea, and the terms might be ex- plained to refer to the Red Sea and the Euphrates, as severally indicating Egypt and Assyria, or to the Red Sea and the Nile, in which case both would signify Egypt. The Euphrates, however, cannot here be regarded as spoken of, for the word used in the expression " the depths of the river "^ ("'*'^!) is almost exclusively used of the Nile. ' Drake., in the Spcakt^'s Commentary, has translated " and he shall pass over by the narrow sea, literally by the sea, narrowness, meaning the Red Sea, and shall smite by the rolling sea, literally by the sea, rollers." He appeals to Jonah ii. 3, but that passage does not support his interpretation. This would require C^D "^"t^, per angiistam (angustias) maris ; "1^ as in Isaiah lix. 19, "as a stream dammed-up " which having broken through is driven forward by a mighty wind. See DeHtzsch on that passage. 2 Scarcely to be rendered with Drake " the floods of the Nile," especially if such 296 ZECHARIAH AND HIS rROPHECIES. [Ch. x. 10-12. This fact proves that the reference is really to the great deliverance from Egypt, which is used as the type of fu- ture deliverances. In the picture, therefore, which is drawn, the later foe, Assyria, is dropped almost out of view, or figuratively referred to under the symbol of Egypt. Under the symbol of an exodus from Egypt and from under its power, and a march through a sea and river, such as occurred in the days of the first triumphal march of Israel, the great truth is set forth, that amid all trials and afflictions the covenant people would be delivered by the protecting hand of God. The deliverances of the past had been indeed glorious, and he who dried up the Avatcrs of the great deep could make a way out of every difficulty, in order that his ransomed people might pass over to their allotted inheri- tance. Compare Isa. li. 9-1 1. For though the pride of Assyria and Babylon would be humbled, and the sceptre of Egypt depart, " I will strengthen them in Jahaveh, and in his name they shall walk," that is in his strength and by his power (see Mic. iv. 5). Deprived of the blessing of God, Israel was weak and helpless ; but with the blessing from above, and walking steadily in God's ways, Israel would indeed be strong, and tread upon the high places of all their foes (Deut. xxxiii. 29). a rendering be supposed to convey a reference to the overflowing of that river, ■which would be contrary to the usage of the word in other places. CHAPTER X. THE GOOD SHEPHERD AND HIS REJECTION— THE EVIL SHEPHERD AND HIS DOOM. CHAPTER X. The opening of chapter xi., opinion of critics, 299 — Objections, 300 — The expres- sions not to be regarded as symbolical, 300 — The destruction of trees spoken of by the prophets, 301 — The prophecy one of the literal desolation of the land, 302 — The desolation affecting north and south, 302 — Remarkable traditional interpretation, 303, note — The actions of the prophet represent the actions of God, 304 — The sheep of slaughter, different opinions, 305 — Feeding the flock, 306 — The shepherds foreign oppressors, 306 — The inhabitants of ' ' the land " or "the world," 307 — The punishment of the nations, 308— The shepherd and his staves, 308 — The prophecy supplemental to the preceding, 309 — The times to which it refers, 310 — Mercies vouchsafed to Israel after the restoration, 311 — The cutting off of the three shepherds, 312 — The kings of the Gentiles, 313 — Difficulties arising from the term, " one month," 313 — Review of various exposi- tions, 313-316, 320, note — The "month" as a symbolical term, 317 — The thirty years of the Maccabees, 317 — Attempts to explain prophecy as pre-exilian, Davidson's view, 318 — Hitzig's, 318 — View of Ewald and Dean Stanley, 320 — The weariness of the shepherd, 321 — His solemn decision, 322 — The breaking of the staves, 322, 342 — The covenant with the nations dissolved, 322-324 — "The most wretched sheep," 325 — "Those who observed me," 325, ff. — Sugges- tion of Hitzig, 326 — " Psalter of Solomon," 327 — The demand for wages, 328 — The proffered remuneration, 329 — " Fling it to the potter," 329 — The command performed in the temple, 330 — Different translations, 331 — Objections to the view of Ilengstenberg, 332- -Review of Kliefoth's exposition, 333— The citation in St. Matthew, 333-338, 342 — No difficulty in admission of a mistake, 337 and note — The prophecy of Zechariah an allegory, 338 — Christ as the shepherd, and his rejection, 339 — The fulfilment as noticed by St. Matthew, 341 — The quotation a free one, 342 — The brotherhood broken, 343 — Review of opinion of modem critics, 343, ff. — The fulfilment, 345 — The Micked shepherd, 346 — " Idol shep- herd," an erroneous translation, 346, note — The ir(?tnuncnts of the evil shepherd, 347 — Folly and sin, 348 — Opinion of modern critics, 34S — The Roman oppres- sor, 349, ff. — The destruction of the evil shepherd, 351. CHAPTER X. THE GOOD SHEPHERD AND HIS REJECTION — THE EVIL SHEPHERD AND HIS DOOM. The opening of the eleventh chapter is couched in dramatic language — " Open thy doors, O Lebanon, and let the fire devour thy cedars." There is no doubt a connexion between this prophecy and that which precedes it ; but it is not so close that the one can be fairly viewed as a direct continua- tion of the other. The denunciation of the anger of Jahaveh against the shepherds who did evil instead of good to the sheep committed to their charge is similar to that which occurs in the preceding prophecy (x. 3). Moreover, while Lebanon and the land of Gilead are spoken of in the pre- vious chapter (x. 10), Lebanon, Bashan, and the Jordan are mentioned in this. Some scholars, as Bleek, Knobel, and von Ortenberg, main- tain that the first three verses of the eleventh chapter form an independent prophecy, without any connection with the prediction in the latter part of the chapter. These three verses are viewed by these critics as a prophecy of the cam- paign of Tiglath-Pileser, king of Assyria, against the allied forces of Syria and Israel, then commanded by their respec- tive monarchs, Rezin, king of Syria, and the wild and savage Pekah, king of Israel. The invasion of the Assyrians into Syria and Israel was made by Tiglath-Pileser at the urgent request of Ahaz, king of Judah, who had become a vassal of the great king, and sought his assistance against his northern enemies, who pressed him sore. As the Assyrian campaign was carried on chiefly in the north of Israel, a portion of the 300 ZECHARIAH AND HIS rROPHECIES. [Ch. xi. i, 2. language of this prophecy would fairly enough agree with that theory. But when examined more closely, these verses appear to describe a desolation not merely affecting the northern portions of the land, but also its southern districts, and, therefore, the theory of Bleck and Knobcl cannot be re- garded as a satisfactory explanation. Nor can these verses be considered as forming a suitable close of the prediction immediately preceding them. The expressions found in them are far too vague to permit us to regard them as an independent prediction of any special invasion of the Holy Land ; for the language made use of might be applied to any invasion whatever undertaken against the Holy Land from the north, if such an invasion aff'ectcd also the southern portion of the country. Hence the opinion of Hitzig, Ewald, etc., is to be preferred, namely, that the verses in question are to be regarded as introductory to the prophecy which follows. We agree with Bleck and Kcil in thinking that the vivid description of these opening verses is not to be regarded as figurative or symbolical. The cedars of Lebanon, oaks of Bashan, and other kindred expressions, need not be in- terpreted to signify rulers and great men of the earth. The great difference of opinion which has always existed in the interpretation and application of these supposed symbols tends to prove, as Bleck has well remarked, that the alle- gorical interpretation is by no means so clear as has been asserted by some commentators.^ No doubt parallel pas- 1 Thus the Targum and Kimchi understand these expressions to mean the kings of the Gentile nations who oppressed the covenant people, and this opinion has been defended by v. Hofmann and Kliefoth. On the other hand, Hitzig, Maurer, and Ewald have explained the terms to denote the later kings of Israel and their nobles. They do so, of course, on the supposition of the pre-exilian authorship of the prophecy. Ilengstenberg, KiJhler, and others, have regarded them as signify- ing the rulers of the Jewish nations in later days. Others have maintained that they mean the Pharisees and Sadducees of New Testament times. The use of the expression the mighty ( Dl/l!!? ) in verse 2 is not by any means so conclusively in Ch. >i. I, 2.] THE GOOD SHEPHERD AND HIS REJECTION. 30I sages can be cited where trees are used in a symbolical sense (Ezek. XX. 47, 48, xvii. 22-24), and where despots and ty- rants are figuratively termed "lions" (Ezek. xix. 2-7). But it is very questionable whether a single clear passage can be adduced where tyrannical rulers are referred to (without a distinct interpretation being given as in Ezek. xxxi. 3) under the imagery of cedars of Lebanon, cypresses, or oaks of Bashan (Isa. ii. 13 is not a case in point), though the imagery in itself cannot be considered as altogether destitute of analogy. But there is no necessity whatever to regard the language as figurative. The prophet Isaiah uses similar expressions in allusion to the march of Sennacherib into the Holy Land : " With the multitude of my chariots I am come up to the height of the mountains, to the sides of Lebanon, and will cut down the tall cedar trees thereof, and the choice fir trees thereof, and I will enter into the lodgings of his borders (i.e., his most distant lodging place, in Isaiah, " his highest peak,"), and unto the forest of his Carmel " (i.e., his fruitful grove) — 2 Kings xix. 23 ; Isa. xxxvii. 24. The same prophet, in his exquisite song over the downfall of the king of Babylon — often terribly misapplied and perverted, as if it contained any prophecy of the Antichrist of a latter day — thus poetically describes the joy of the trees in being freed from the fear of continual destruction : " Yea, the fir trees rejoice at thee, and the cedars of Lebanon, saying. Since thou art laid down, no feller is come up (or will come up) against us" (Isa. xiv. 8). It is therefore more natural to regard the prophecy of Zechariah as graphically depicting the physical desola- tion which was to befal the land. Lebanon is bidden to favour of the symbolical interpretation as Hengstenberg and Kliefoth imagine, who maintain that by it is signified the nobles of the nation. For though that adjective is often applied to individuals, it is likewise applied to the waves of the sea (Ps. xciii. 4), and to trees, as vines and cedars (Ezek. xvii. 8, 23), which is the most natural explanation of the expression in this passage of Zechariah. 3b2 ZECHARIAH AND HIS rROPHECIES. [Ch. xi. 1-3. open its doors, that is, its steep mountain paths, in order that the fire of the enemy might consume its cedars. The firs, or cypresses, are called upon to howl and lament because the cedars are fallen, for if the more excellent and valuable trees were felled without mercy, the poor firs and cypresses must needs expect a similar fate (comp. Isa. xxxii. 19, in the original Hebrew). From the heights of Lebanon the des- tructive storm sweeps down on the land of Bashan, and the oaks, the pride of the land (with their kindly shade from the burning heat), are likewise felled by the enemy to meet the wants of the invading army, and to construct his means of offence and defence. Thus the wood hitherto practically inaccessible is brought low (see crit. comm. on verse 2). The desolating storm sweeps from the high lands to the low lands. The very shepherds are forced to howl, because their splen- dour is laid waste, namely, the pasture lands in which they were wont to tend and feed their flocks in the days of peace and quiet. The conflagration extends even to the south of the land. Judah is wrapped in flames. The close thickets which fringed the Jordan river as it ran along through the territory of the southern kingdom are consumed by the fire. The thickets which shut in that stream so closely that its waters could not be seen till the traveller was close on its banks, which were wont to be the abode of lions and other beasts of prey in those days, are likewise described as des- troyed. " The pride of Jordan" is rendered desolate, and hence the voice of the roaring of lions is heard wailing over the general ruin. The destruction is thus really presented as one affecting both the north and south of the land. The terms in which it is described are not such as would be used to describe a calamity that was to fall only on the northern part of the country. The language does not, therefore, suit the invasion of Tiglath-Pileser. But the prophecy is couched in such Ch.xi.i-3.] THE GOOD SHEPHERD AND HIS REJECTION. 303 general terms that it might describe any invasion which em- braced in its limits the north and south of the land, though it would most naturally refer to such an invasion coming from the northern quarter. The cedars of Lebanon, and the firs and oaks of Bashan, were always in requisition for the siege works of any army, whether Assyrian, Babylonian, Greek, or Roman. But if the cedars, oaks, and other trees were des- troyed, Lebanon and Bashan would be thoroughly laid waste. " The splendour of the shepherds " can only signify their pasture-lands, and if the thickets of Jordan were consumed, much more must the fertile lands be also considered as laid waste. Hence the prophecy really depicts the whole land as desolated, as it would be if all its trees and thickets were consumed.^ After announcing in general terms the judgment that was coming on the land of Israel, the prophet proceeds to describe the causes which would ultimately bring upon the land this terrible visitation, similar to that which had occurred in the days of old. In setting forth the sins of the people, Zechariah, after the analogy of the earlier prophets, describes certain symbolical actions as performed by himself, which actions ^ A remarkable traditional exposition of this passage, though it is one which cannot be regarded by a scientific expositor as otherwise than fanciful, is that which supposes the prophecy to refer to the destruction of the second temple, which was constructed, like the first, in great part of the cedars of Lebanon. The tradition is referred to by Kimchi, and is thus given by McCaul from the Talmud Bab. Yoma, 39, col. 2 : " Our Rabbis have handed down the tradition that forty years before the destruction of the temple, the lot (for the goat that was to be sacrificed on the day of Atonement) did not come out on the right side ; neither did the scarlet tongue (that used to be fastened between the horns of the scapegoat) turn white (as according to tradition it used to do, to signify that the sins of the people were forgiven) ; neither did the western lamp burn ; the doors of the sanctuary also opened of their own accord, until R. Johanan, the son of Zakkai, reproved them. He said, O sanctuary, sanctuary ! why dost thou trouble thyself ? I know of thee that thine end is to be left desolate, for Zechariah, the son of Iddo, has prophesied against thee long since, ' Open thy doors, O Lebanon, that the fire may devour thy cedars. ' R. Isaac, the son of Tavlai, says, Why is the temple called Lebanon (white mountain) ? Answer : Because it makes white the sins of Israel, etc." — AlcCauVs transl. of Kimchi, note on p. 119. 304 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch.xi.i-8. shadowed forth events that were to come. His language had, no doubt, a reference to the past ;' but it pointed in the main to the future. The actions recorded in the chapter are not to be regarded as done by the Angel of Jahaveh. In the earlier prophecies of Zechariah that angel is, indeed, spoken of as being an actor in the visions which the prophet beheld. But no intimation whatever is given in this chapter, that either the Angel of Jahaveh, or the future Messiah, is to be regarded as the doer of the things related. The prophet, and the prophet alone, must needs be considered as the doer of them. Nor can we regard the prophet as typifying or representing the Angel of Jahaveh in such a way that he is to be regarded as speaking sometimes in the name of that angel and sometimes in the name of Jahaveh. This is, indeed, the view of Hengstenberg, but there is something strange in. considering the prophet to act as the representa- tive of an angel who is not named in the prophecy. We have no right to assume that the prophecy is a continuation of the visions in the earlier part of the book. The simplest view of the whole is that which is given by Kliefoth, namely, that God communicated to the prophet what he designed to do to Israel and the world, but in such a way that the prophet is described as doing and saying that which God really did in his own person. The actions of the prophet, therefore, though represented as done by him, are to be regarded as the actions of God. Jahaveh himself is the true shepherd of his people, as is beautifully described in the prophecy of Isaiah (xl. ii). He is the Righteous One who is repre- sented as destroying the three shepherds in one month. He it is who asks from an ungrateful people his hire for having discharged the office of a shepherd, and complains of the low and unworthy price at which his services were estimated. The prophecy is, we believe, one of a peculiarly Messianic character. What Jahaveh is said to perform through his Ch. xi. i-S.] THE GOOD SHEPHERD AND HIS REJECTION. 305 prophet, was done in very deed by the Messiah. But this is no objection to the view already stated ; for, as Kliefoth remarks, the coming of the Messiah is often spoken of as the coming of Jahaveh. If again, at the close of the chapter, the prophet represents the character of a foolish shepherd, that foolish shepherd is, from the stand-point of the vision, re- garded as in reality raised up by Jahaveh himself, a judgment permitted and, therefore, sent forth by God. In both cases the prophet must be regarded as acting as the representative of Jahaveh. This view is, on the whole, the most consistent with the statements of the text. It is unnecessary to discuss the question whether the symbolical actions of the prophet are to be viewed merely as the form into which the prophet himself cast the revelation given to him by God, the more vividly to depict the impression communicated to his own mind ; or whether the prophet describes a vision which he saw, and in which he himself appeared to perform the actions here set forth as done by him. For though by the light of the New Testament, we are led to regard the prophecy as Messianic in the highest sense of the word, it does not follow that the prophet himself acted consciously as a repre- sentative of the Messiah, the great servant of Jahaveh. The prophet describes the sheep, which he, as the repre- sentative of Jahaveh, was commanded to feed, as " the sheep of slaughter." The phrase may signify either a flock which is already being slaughtered, or one marked out for slaughter at a future day. Both interpretations of the text have found defenders. The former, however, appears to be the sense intended. It best harmonises with the statement which follows: " Whose buyers slay them and are not punished, and those who sell them say. Blessed be Jahaveh that I am rich, and their shepherds spare them not." " To feed a flock " is always used in Scripture in the sense of guarding and X 306 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. fCh. xi. i-8. protecting it in all its needs and difficulties (Ps. xxiii. and John X.), and cannot well be understood in the signification of preparing it for slaughter. Though the flock may be intended for slaughter, its ultimate destination is not that which is thought of when we speak of a shepherd feeding his flock. The shepherd's care over and attention to the wants of the flock is that to which attention is directed, not the destination of its several members. Nor can the command to feed the sheep be understood to mean, " feed the flock for the last time " (Kliefoth). In the course of the prophecy the ruin of the flock is, no doubt, depicted. But the ruin which ultimately overwhelmed the sheep is described as the result of their own ungracious conduct towards the good Shepherd, not as the consequence of any Divine decree. The commission which the shepherd received was " to feed the flock " given over to his care, and by so doing to rescue the sheep from the hands of those who were slay- ing them for their own selfish purposes. It was on account of this latter fact that the sheep are styled " the sheep of slaughter," that is, the sheep that are being slaughtered instead of being fed. In the early part of his prophecy the prophet speaks of the harsh treatment which Israel received at the hands of those who ruled over them. The people of the covenant had been tyrannized over, and trampled down by their oppressors. They who ruled over them had indeed caused them to howl (Isa. Hi. 5). But who were the oppressors to whom reference is made ? Were they the foreign rulers who bore sway over Israel, and into whose hands that people had been sold for their sin .-* Or were the oppressors referred to the native kings or rulers over Israel .'' Hengstenberg and others think that the native rulers are signified. But foreign oppressors are alluded to in the passage quoted from the book of Isaiah, and this seems to be the most natural meaning of the expres- Ch. xi. i-S.] THE GOOD SHEPHERD AND HIS REJECTION. 307 sions used in the present passage. " I will not spare any more the inhabitants of the world " (Ylh^H), among whom the flock had been located, and under whose power the sheep were placed ; " and behold I will deliver over mankind (D"IJton Lectures on tJie Evidences of Christianity. The value of the New Testament wi-itings as 338 ZECHARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xi. 13. .-- It might indeed be asserted, but there is no evidence to support the assertion, that the mistake originated not with the evangehst, but with one of his early copyists, inasmuch as copies of the entire writings of the prophets must have been extremely rare in that day. Lightfoot would solve the difficulty by appealing to the tradition of the Talmud, (Baba bathra 146) in which the order of the prophetic writings in the sacred volume is stated formerly to have bepn Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Isaiah. This order is actually found in many Hebrew MSS. Lightfoot concludes from this that St. Mat- thew simply quotes the passage as occurring in the roll of the prophets, which roll he cites by the name of the book which stands first in order. As an instance of such quotation he appeals to Luke xxiv. 44. That example, however, is not conclusive. Moreover all the other quotations found in St. Matthew's Gospel are made on a very different principle, and hence this explanation cannot be regarded as satisfactory, nor has it found defenders among modern scholars. The prophecy of Zechariah in some respects may be re- garded as an allegorical history of the manner in which the inspired by the Holy Ghost is by no means affected by such an admission. MoreovW the honest critic is bound by the laws of evidence to admit of mistakes occurring when he cannot otherwise explain passages. One must not be led by a priori assumptions in such matters, and so expose oneself to the charge of unfair dealing. When similar mistakes occur in other writings we are not slow to ascribe them to the author. Thus for instance, with regard to the very book on which we are commenting, we find Justin Martyr in his Dial, cum TrypJwnc, c. xiv., ascribing through a slip of memory Zech. xii. 10 to Hosea, though in other places, Dial. 121, and Apol. i. 52, he ascribes it to Zechariah. In the latter passage, he combines the text with sentences from Isaiah. Again, in Apol. i. 35, he ascribes Zech. ix. 9 to Zephaniah, while again in Dial. 53 he rightly assigns it to our prophet. Similar mistakes occur elsewhere. On what principle then are we to admit of mistakes occurring in Old Testament citations in Justin Martyr, and, CDntraryJto all the evidence which is forthcoming, refuse to admit such in St. Matthew ? Tlic Christian apologist will find that it is much safer to admit ^ the possibility of such mistakes, and to argue that snch are m no wise incompatible y/Ctv. with the fact that the Scriptures are an authoritative revelation from God. This t-Ut- 1^ is the strongest and safest line for him to take. His character for honesty is lost X when he refuses to submit to positive evidence. Ch. xi. 13.] THE GOOD SHEPHERD AND HIS REJECTION. 339 prophets in general were treated in almost every age by the people of Israel, who, on account of their sins against the Lord's prophets, were permitted to eat of the fruit of their own ways, and to be filled with their own devices (Prov. i. 31 ; 2 Chron. xxxvi. 16). But the prophecy attained its complete and final fulfilment, when, after a long period of expectation on the part of Israel, and of forbearance on the part of God, the Lord sent unto his people his only-begotten Son to receive of the fruit of the vineyard which he had planted on the very fruitfiil hill (Isa. v. i, 2 ; Luke xx. 9-15). He who had tended his people in former ages by his prophets, and preserved them by his watchful providence, came in the flesh to teach and instruct Israel in the things concerning the king- dom of God. The fulness of time arrived, and the house of Israel (Luke ii. 32) was called on to "repent and believe the gospel" (Mark i. 15), which was preached unto them by the lips of the Holy One of God. The truth of his Divine mission was proved by mighty works which none other man did (John xv. 24), by the deeds of power and acts of love which he performed in the cities and streets of Judaea. He taught as one that had authority, and not as the scribes (Matt. vii. 29). He expounded the true meaning of the Divine law, which had been so concealed by " the hedge " made up around it by "the men of old" (Matt. v. 21), with very probably the best intentions.^ But though he came unto his own people, who had been prepared for his advent by the predictions of so many prophets and holy men, and by the * Compare the saying in the Pirke Aboth : "Moses received the Law from Sinai and delivered it to Joshua, and Joshua to the elders, and the elders to the pro- phets, and the prophets delivered it to the men of the Great Synagogue. They said three things. Be deliberate in judgment, and train up many disciples, and (Hnin? yO -ibiyi) make a hedge for the law." The meaning of the last sentence is, impose such additional restrictions as to make men keep at a safe distance from the forbidden ground. See the Rev. Charles Taylor's critical edition of the Sayings of the Jewish Fathers, comprising Pirqe Aboth and Percq R. Meir, in Hebrew and English, with critical afid illustrati-de Notes (Cambridge, 1877). 340 ZECIIARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xi. 13. spirit-Stirring preaching of John the Baptist in the wilderness, "his own received him not " (John i. 11). The Pharisees could not endure that their traditions should be set at nought, the scribes that their false interpretations of the law should be made manifest to all men, the priests and rulers of the people that their selfishness, hypocrisy and irreligion should be so mercilessly exposed. Though the common people / rfy^i heard him gladly (Mark xii. 37), they listened too often to f? U-^ liis preaching as children, mainly for amusem_eiitL4Luke ^^, . fV'n. 31, 32), because it embraced topics the discussion- of which jT'must in themselves be ever more or less subjects of interest to all. They had, however, little inclination for the most part to take up the cross and to be his disciples. The manner in which he was received by the Jews but too plainly ex- pressed their feeling : " We will not have this man to rule over us " (Luke xix. 14). They were glad enough to be benefited by his works of mercy, but they were unwilling to accept his doctrine. His appearance and conduct were opposed to their false notions respecting the Messiah and his kingdom, for his kingdom was not of this world (John xix. 36), and came not with the external accompaniments of worldly pomp and show (Luke xvii. 21). Consequently, save during , a transient hour of fitful enthusiasm, he was not accepted as . the Messiah sent from God. The Jews rejected him as their ruler and deliverer, as their forefathers had once rejected Moses (Acts vii. 35). They denied the Holy One and the Just (Acts iii. 14). They denied him as their King in the presence of Pontius Pilate (Acts iii. 13). Their rejection of Christ was a fact performed in essence long before the awful day of its public avowal. The rejection of our Lord by the Jews as their Messiah might well be considered as having substantially fulfilled the prediction of Zechariah, even if the thirty pieces of silver had not been actually paid by the chief priests and rulers as the price of his betrayal. Ch. xi. 13.] THE GOOD SHEPHERD AND HIS REJECTION. 34I For, as in the prophecy the payment of those thirty pieces of silver to the prophet was designed only figuratively to indicate the ingratitude exhibited by the people towards Jahaveh, so the Jewish nation had plainly indicated their contempt for the leader and deliverer whom God had in his love sent to them, long before that day when in the bitterness of their hate they procured his death on the cross. The fulfilment, however, of the prophecy actually recorded by the evangelist was in itself most remarkable. The slight differences in the minor details do not in the least detract from its peculiar significance. The thirty pieces of silver paid to Judas by the chief priests and elders of the Jews were in reality the price at which those representatives of the Jewish nation valued the services of our blessed Lord. By fixing that as the price for his person they manifested how- much they despised him and his work. No prophet, as in the prophetic picture, but the traitor Judas it was who received that despicable price. But Judas as one of the chosen twelve might well in this particular be regarded as the representa- tive of our Lord. The money paid to him v/as virtually paid to his Master as a compensation for his toil. It is most remarkable that Judas was ultimately driven by remorse for the crime he had committed to bring the thirty pieces of silver into the tem.ple of God, and that he, when the chief priests listened coldly to his confession of guilt, should in very deed have dashed down the pieces of silver on the pave- ment of the house of the Lord. And it is even still more remarkable that those unfeeling priests did not venture to cast that money into the treasury, but deterred, notwith- standing their callousness, by the prohibition of the law ,in Deut. xxiii. 18, took counsel and bought with the paltry sum a potter's field, probably denuded of the clay which had once made it valuable. Thus it happened that the money literally passed into a potter's hand, one might' (' 342 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xi. 13, 14. I almost say, having been flung to him in the house of the Lord. All these facts certainly prove that foreknowledge is exhibited in the prophecy, and that the hand of an over- ruling Providence so directed the events that, though the prophecy had been essentially fulfilled when Christ was rejected by the Jewish people, a visible sign was given to all whom it concerned that the awful rejection of the Lord spoken of by Zechariah had become an accomplished fact when Jesus of Nazareth, having been betrayed into the hands of his enemies, suffered death upon the cross. It only remains to note in general that the quotation of the passage by the evangelist is a free quotation from the Hebrew, given, one might almost say, with a running com- mentary. The words in the Gospel (Matt, xxvii. 9), " they took the thirty pieces of silver," assume the place of " I took" in Zechariah, because the chief priests in this particular acted as Caiaphas before them (John xi. 49-52) in God's stead, and unwittingly fulfilled the Divine will. " The price of him that was valued " is (as Keil well expresses it) a free translation of the words in Zechariah, " a goodly price at which I was priced ;" and the clause that follows in the Gospel, viz., " whom they of the children of Israel did value," corresponds to the concluding words of the sentence in the prophet, " at which I was priced by them." Further the words in Matt, xxvii. 10, "and gave them for the potter's field," coincide with the words in Zechariah, " and I cast it to the potter in the house of the Lord," while the concluding words of the quotation in St. Matthew, " as the Lord appointed me," seem to refer to the original direction of the Lord concerning the money, namely, " cast it to the potter." The prophet Zechariah further describes the result of this^ contemptuous rejection of the Good Shepherd by his people. The staff of " beauty," or " favour," had long since been broken, and the Jewish nation had experienced the Ch. xi. 14.] THE GOOD SHEPHERD AND HIS REJECTION. 343 bitterness of no longer being led and tended thereby. The stafif of " bands " was now broken asunder, and the " brother- hood " dissolved between Judah and Israel. The " brother- hood " between Israel and Judah had been originally broken by the schism which occurred in the days of Rehoboam. That brotherhood was never afterwards restored, up to the time of the Babylonian captivity. An alliance indeed sub- sisted for a short time between the two kingdoms in the reign of Jehoshaphat, king of Judah, and afterwards during the reign of his son Jehoram ; but that friendship was but short- lived, and the alliance itself was condemned by the prophets. In fact, no real "brotherhood" could exist without agreement in matters of religion. And there was no agreement in the latter particular, even during the last days of the king- dom of Israel, during which period so many of the modern critics have attempted to prove that this prophecy was written. Verse 14 cannot refer, as Rosenmiiller imagines, to the old schism under Rehoboam. Such an idea has been condemned by Maurer as unnatural, and it is quite sufficient to notice it in passing without further discussing the matter. The majority, perhaps, of modern critics, such as Maurer, Hitzig and Ewald, consider the prophecy distinctly to refer to the rupture which took place between the kingdoms of Israel and Judah, when Pekah, the king of Israel, made an alliance with Rezin, king of Syria, and invaded the land of Judah. This view takes it for granted that the prophet con- sidered the kingdom of Israel previous to that rupture with Judah as standing in a covenant relation to God. But that kingdom never was regarded by the prophets as occupying such a position since the days of the great schism. Nor is there in the history of the breaking out of the war, to which reference is supposed to be made, the slightest hint given of any efforts having been previously made for a union, or brotherhood, between the two portions of the people, as 344 ZECHARIAH AND HIS TROPHECIES. [Ch. xi. 14. Hitzig seems to suggest, or that, in consequence of the failure of such attempts, the estrangement between the kingdoms became more bitter than before. For it must not be forgotten that, from the time of the great schism in the days of Reho- boam up to the time of the Assyrian captivity, a chronic state of more or less decided hostility existed between the two kingdoms, during which long period the intervals of peace were short, and there was scarcely ever any cordial alliance between them, save that already noticed as having taken place in the days of Jehoshaphat and Jehoram. But the restitution of the real " brotherhood " between Ephraim and Judah formed one of the objects of hope looked forward to even by the prophets of the exile (Ezek. xxxvii. 15-28). Such hopes were not altogether unrealized. In the war of the sons of Zion with the sons of Greece, and during the events pointed out in the tenth chapter, the union of all the twelve tribes of Israel actually took place. The prophet here predicts the breaking up again of the unity of the people on account of a rejection by the nation of Jahaveh as their Lord and shepherd. Zechariah did not announce that the unity of the nation would be broken up in a manner similar to that in the days of Rehoboam, and that two hostile nations would be formed out of the one people. The disruption of national unity which took place in the days of Jeroboam may indeed be referred to as an illustration of that which would occur again in a more serious form. The schism of Jeroboam had considerably weakened the nation of the twelve tribes. The dissolution of the brotherhood here spoken of was to result in its ultimate ruin; for Israel, deprived of the good shepherd, was to fall into the power of the foolish shepherd, or shep- herds, depicted in the close of the prophecy. Some modern commentators, such as von Hofmann, Ebrard and Kliefoth, consider that the prophecy depicts the breaking up of the Jewish or Israclitish nation into two Ch. xi. 14.] THE GOOD SHEPHERD AND HIS REJECTION. 345 parts, divided from one another by a great religious chasm, the one portion consisting of those who should preserve the true religion, the other of such as should follow paths of their own devising ; the one party corresponding to Judah, the other to Ephraim ; the former being partakers of the blessings, the r— latter of the curses. Kliefoth maintains that " Ju^ah " signifies 'CT/tre the Christian Church, which was essentially Jev/ish in its fx^^k origin. He further considers that the part of the nation which rejected Christ is designated under the more general term of "Israel"; the very name indicating that those who would thus reject the Christ of God were following in the steps of the insurgents in the days of Rehoboam, who ex- claimed, "what portion have we in David .?" (i Kings xii. 16). The objection which appears fatal to all such expositions is, as Kohler and Keil have noticed, that no mention is made in this prophecy of the faithful who adhered to the good shep- herd. The prophecy is entirely confined to a narrative of the rejection of the shepherd and his care by the nation in general. A faithful remnant does not come under the consideration of the prophet. The breaking up of the " brotherhood," which was to be in existence at the time to which the prediction refers, was the final result of the determination of the shepherd no longer to feed the people as his flock. The breaking up of that " brotherhood " cannot, therefore, be considered to be the separation of an " Israel after the spirit " from an " Israel after the flesh." We agree, therefore, with Hengstenberg, Kohler, and Keil, in considering that the prophecy refers to the fearful bursting forth of wild party spirit among the Jewish nation, so vividly described by the Jewish historian Josephus, and also among later historians in the pages of Milman. The story of the dissolution of all the bands of " brotherhood " during the great war with the Romans, and especially during the awful siege of Jerusalem, needs not to be repeated here. Among the 34^ ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xi. 15-17. curiosities of interpretation we may rank such explanations as that of Cocceius, which makes Judah to represent the Chris- tians under Presbyterian government, and Israel to depict the Christians adhering to Episcopal rule ; or even that of Vitringa, according to which the great schism between the Eastern and Western Churches is supposed to be here predicted. The people having finally rejected the good shepherd were given over by Jahaveh to the tender mercies of a foolish or wicked shepherd. The translation "idol-shepherd" in verse 17, given by our A. V. and by Luther is erroneous; and, conse- quently, all expositions founded upon such a rendering, which regard the false shepherd as setting himself up as an idol to be adored by his followers, are completely erroneous, whether the passage be considered to refer to some imaginary Antichrist of the future (Jerome and Dr. Pusey), or to the Pope of Rome as adored in the church of St. Peter by the cardinals after his election {Bishop Wordsworth). Though the adjective in the original of verse 17 (which literally signifies empty, vabi) is used with reference to idols (Lev. xix, 4, xxvi. i), as being in themselves things utterly vain and foolish, the word occurs here as a substantive (as is proved by the use of the article), and the construction is almost identical with that in Job xiii. 4, where the words of our A. V. are " physicians of no value," literally, physicians of vanity, that is, vain physicians, useless comforters. That this is the meaning of the word is evident from the fact that it is used as a synonym for the expression in ver. 14, " foolish shepherd," while no indication is given in the prophecy that the false shepherd claims or obtains any worship whatever from the miserable flock de- vastated by his means, ' ^ The phrase in verse 17 is Pv^^n ""^1. The word "?vS is used as an adjec- tive to describe idols as vain and useless. So in Lev. xix. 4, and xxvi. i ; Ps. xcvi. 5, etc. It is often used in the prophets as an equivalent for idols, as Isa. ii. 20, xix. I, etc. Fiirst in his IVbrterb. considers idolio be the original meaning, Ch.xi.i5-i7-] THE EVIL SHEPHERD AND HIS DOOM. 347 It is quite useless, as Maurer, Hitzig and others have pointed out, to inquire in what particulars the instruments of a foolish shepherd, which the prophet was bidden to take in order to represent that character, differed from those of a good shep- herd. The words simply indicate that the prophet having represented the one character should also personate the other. Nor is it necessary to suppose that what is here represented as done by the prophet was exhibited dramatically before the eyes of the people. It was a drama, or tragedy, set forth in words, not one pictured before the eyes of the people. There is no need, therefore, to imagine, with Hengstenberg, that the instruments of the foolish shepherd consisted of a strong stick mounted with iron with which the sheep were hurt and wounded, whereas the good shepherd was wont to keep the sheep in order with a thin staff and with gentle strokes. Such a picture is far from correct in its details, for even the staff of a good shepherd could not have been a thin stick. Nor need we "picture to ourselves a shepherd's bag full of holes, and containing nothing of any use to either shepherd or sheep " (Hengstenberg). The instruments of the false shepherd are and vain, worthless, the derived. The word is used in this passage as a noun, as is proved by the article whicli, though used with the genitive, qualifies tlie govern- ing noun. It also occurs as a noun in Job. xiii. 14, 7''?K "''^{S"1, and the K'ri reads the word in Jer. xiv. 14, instead of >175!?, which is found in the text, both alike giving the same sense " nothingness," or as our A.V. translates "a thing of nought " in reference to false visions and divinations. The phrase here means "the useless (or worthless) shepherd." It has been rendered " Hirt der Vernein- ung," shepherd of negation (compare Latin nihili, nequa/n), as referring to one who will embody in himself the opposite of the Divine, that is, an Infidel Anti- christ. This appears to us too modern an idea. The usage of the word is against this view. We do not agree with those who think that such an incarnation of evil is predicted anywhere in Scripture, much less here. The LXX. have in verse 15, TToc/xT]!' direipos, but in verse 17, they read the sentence in the plural, w oi TTOi/xaifoPTes Cyi) TO, fidraia, KaToKeXonroTes to, wpo^ara, though the singular is in the rest of the passage. The Vulg. has " pastor stultus" in v. 15, but here " O pastor, et idolum (reading ?''?N"1) derelinquens." The Syr. and the Targ. render alike in both places, the former by "foolish shepherd," the latter t5t^St3 NDJlSj "foolish ruler." On the form of '•1?") see crit. comm. 348 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xi. 15-17. simply spoken of in order to fill up the picture, and to form a suitable contrast to the staves of the good shepherd which were of such peculiar significance. But inasmuch as it was never intended that the prophet should act the vision before the people, we need not inquire as to what outward change in his appearance the prophet might in such a case have assumed. Of more consequence is it to note that the foolishness which is stated to have been the characteristic mark of this evil shepherd is equivalent to sin. Folly and sin in the eyes of the sacred writers were almost identical terms (Ps. xiv. i, ff ; Prov. i. 7, ix. 10, etc., compare also Job v. 3, where the word occurs which is found in verse 15). The bad shepherd, as Kohler notes, is depicted rather in the character of a foolish shepherd than of a wncked one, because, in acting as he did, he only brought down vengeance at last on his own head. God causes even the wrath of the false shepherd against the flock to praise him, and "restrains the remainders thereof," or "girds himself with it," m.akes himself to be glori- fied thereby (Ps. Ixxvi. 11, verse 10 in E. V.). God would raise up such a shepherd in the land in order to punish the nation of Israel for having rejected his love. Just as Assyria and Babylon were used as instruments to execute the Divine vengeance, and then punished for their own sin, so Israel w£is to be punished by the means of the evil shepherd, who in his turn was afterwards to fall beneath the vengeance of the Most High.^ It follows from what has been already said that the evil shepherd spoken of in the prophecy cannot be supposed to be ' Inasmuch as the prophecy speaks of Israel's sin and Israels punishment, the translation " I will raise up a shepherd in the land," adopted by Ewald, Umbreit, Ilengstenberg, Kohler, etc., is more correct than to render the last words by "in the earth," as proposed by Neumann and Kliefoth. Of course both trans- lations are possible. But even if we adopt the former rendering, it need not necessarily follow that the power of the foolish shepherd is to be regarded as confined to the limits of the land of Israel, though the land of Israel is the only country spoken of in the prophecy, Ch.xi. IS-I7-3 THE EVIL SHEPHERD AND HIS DOOM. 349 Menahem, as Hitzig imagines, or Hoshea, as Maurer sug- gests, or even Pekah, " the hard wild king who was then reigning " (Ewald). Not the slightest reason can be given why any of these kings should be depicted in the character here represented, except that those scholars who insist on .the pre- exilian composition of the prophecy must needs propose some interpretation for this portion also. No such correspondence has been made out between the predictions of this chapter and the events of the pre-exilian era as would justify any conclusion to be drawn in favour of the composition of the prophecy in pre-exilian times. Hengsten- berg's opinion as to the foolish shepherd is much more defen- sible, namely, that by it is meant the whole body of evil rulers who ruled the Jewish nation after their rejection of Christ, and Vv'ho were permitted to work out their own evil designs on that people, and so to bring about its destruction and their own ultimate ruin. Something, however, more definite seems designed by the picture. The term " shepherd " in this prophecy of Zechariah, except where the good shepherd is signified, is uniformly applied to the Gentile oppressors of Israel. Compare also Jer. vi. 3-5, and xxiii. 1-4. In the latter passage of Jeremiah a contrast is drawn between the heathen oppressors of Israel, the pastors or shepherds who destroyed and scattered the sheep, and the true shepherds who were to be set over the flock by Jahaveh himself. The same contrast is found in this passage of Zechariah. The true shepherd, represented typi- cally by the prophet, is contrasted with the foolish shepherd, or the Gentile oppressor of Israel. If the true shepherd was rejected by the flock, its members must needs fall under the dominion of the false shepherd. If he who had fed, and would still have fed them, was rejected ignominiously, he, whom in their blindness they said they preferred, would be permitted to exercise his authority to the full. If he who came in his 350 ZECIIARIAH AND HIS PROniECIES. [Ch.xi. 15-17. Father's name was not received by his people, he who came in his own name and in his worldly authority would be per- mitted to treat the people of Israel as his subjects (John v. 43). The Jews were allowed the choice of masters. They rejected him whose kingdom was not of this world (John xviii. 36) ; they accepted him who was the head and representative of • the world-power. In other words, they rejected Christ the king of Israel ; they accepted Caesar the emperor of Rome. In the madness of their rage against Jesus of Nazareth they cried out "we have no king but Cresar " (John xix. 15). They obtained their choice and found it bitterness in the latter end; for they rebelled against the king whom they had chosen, and the Romans came and took away both their place and nation (John xi. 48). The evil shepherd is represented not merely as neglecting the flock over which he had rule, but as actually destroying the same. The power with which he was entrusted by Divine providence was to be used by him without mercy. The dominion of any empire is permitted only for the good of those governed. Kings and emperors who do not act up to that character by which the epic bard loves to describe them, " shepherds of the people," will ultimately be destroyed, and empires which do not seek the good of those ruled over must finally perish. The Roman shepherd is described as one who did not look after the perishing sheep of his Jewish flock. The poor animal which was driven away (the expression does not signify " the young one " ^ as in our A. V.) he would not ' "lU3n is not tlic^w/;/i,% the tender, as Hengstenberg thinks, referring it to the lambs. The lambs which feed beside their mothers do not generally go astray. It is better to regard the word as Gesenius as an abstract used as a concrete, a driving ozit, for that which is driven out, the scattered. LXX. rightly rb icxKopwic- fiivov, Vulg. dispersttm, similarly the Syr. Hitzig proposes to alter the punctuation and read "iy.3n i.q. "li'??'!', the scattered, in which case the participle would be the only participle of the masculine gender in the verse. He tries to obviate this objection by noting that there arc rams also in a ilock. But the alteration is un- necessary. Ch. xi. 15-17.] THE EVIL SHEPHERD AND HIS DOOM. 351 seek, that which was broken he would not heal ; even those sheep which were strong and able to stand on their own legs he would not take care of. He ate the flesh of the fat, that is, consumed the rich among the Jewish people by his rapacity; and not merely consumed their flesh, but even tore the hoofs of the sheep's feet in order to devour that which might be between them, in order that nothing whatever of the animal might be lost which could possibly be consumed.' The Jewish nation was wasted by oppression, and their riches destroyed by the grinding rapacity and greed of their cruel Roman masters. The description is given in language suitable to the character of an evil shepherd, under which the Roman empire is described. It is strikingly similar in meaning to that given of the fourth or Roman world-empire, in the book of Daniel, as a wild beast more dreadful, terrible and strong than those beasts that were before it, furnished with great iron teeth and brazen claws, devouring, breaking in pieces, and stamping even the residue of its prey under its feet (Dan. vii. 7, 19, 23). But as the wild beast in Daniel is represented as ultimately slain, its body destroyed, and given to the burning flame (Dan. vii. 11), so Zechariah pronounces a curse upon the Roman shepherd for the tyrannical and cruel exercise of his power. Woe to the false shepherd who deserts the sheep ! May the sword of Jahaveh descend with power upon his right arm, the right arm of power which should have guarded and protected the flock ! May that sword strike the right eye of the shepherd which should have sought out pastures in which the flock might have fed, and thus have guarded the poor sheep from harm ! The arm of power should be dried up, the ' So Kohler and others. Hitzig and Ewald think the meaning of the phrase to be that the shepherd would destroy the hoofs of the sheep by driving them over rough and hard roads. But the other view is preferable. 352 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xi. 17. mighty strength paralysed ! and the hght of the right eye of that false and wicked shepherd of the people should be quenched in utter darkness !^ The last world-empire should perish as that of Babylon under the judgment of God ; its power and authority would pass away, the wisdom of its wise men would fail, and its strength be dried up under that sentence which ever rings out the death-knell of all human power and might, " I will overturn, overturn, overturn, till he come whose right it is, and I w'ill give it to him " (Ezek. xxi. 27). ' The latter threatening does not seem to correspond to the former ; but as Hengstenberg, Kohler and Keil have noted, the sword is only mentioned as an instrument of punishment, and the combination of different kinds of punishment is designed .to depict more vividly the terrible nature of the ultimate doom. CHAPTER XI THE TRIALS AND VICTORY OF ISRAEL— THE GREAT MOURNING. A A CHAPTER XL The superscription of the chapter, 335, note — God's general government over man, 356 — Views of the early expositors, 357 — The Prophecy considered as a con- tinuation of the preceding, 357 — Objections to the typical interpretation, 358, 375 — Other theories, 358 — Traverses the same ground as that preceding, 359 — Opinion of modern critics, 359 — Pressel's view examined, 359, ff. — The bow of reeling, 361 — Differences of translations of verse 2, 361 — ^Judah not opposed to Jerusalem, 362, 364 — The stone of burden, 364, 370— General view of the passage, 364-5 — Different readings of verse 7, 366 — Meaning of the passage, 367 — Deliverance to be granted first to Judah and then to Jerusalem, 367-8 — Reference to the Maccabees, 369 — Attacks upon Jerusalem injurious to the nations, 370 — The struggle of the Maccabees, 370-1 — The house of David at that period, 371 — The titular princes of the house of David, 372, note — The Ereviarium of the pseudo-Philo, 372, note — Remarkable allusion of the prophet to the house of David, 372^an indication of post-exilian authorship, 374 — The name of Judah and Israel, 374, 355, note — Hengstenberg's view of the prophecy, 375 — Explanation of Kliefoth, 376-7 — Objections to, 378 — Views of Maurer and Hitzig, 378 — v. Hofmann's attempt to refer it to the future, 379 — The pro- phecy fulfilled in days of Maccabees, 380 — Remarkable expression in verse 9, 380, ff. — Transition to the deliverance by Messiah, 381 — -Translation of the tenth verse, 383 — The pierced one, 384 — Different readings of tenth verse, 383 — Rival explanations, 384 — The Sent identified with the Sender, 3S6 — The mourning for the Representative of Jahaveh, 386 — Objections to Ewald's view, 387 — Reference to our Lord's crucifixion, 387 — Not to the special piercing of his side, 388 — The national mourning, 388 — Teaching of the Synagogue about the two Messiahs, 389 — ^Jewish interpretation similar to that of Ewald, 390 — Messiah's sufferings vicarious, 391 — The mourning of Hadadrimmon, 391 — Views of Hitzig and Pressel, 392 — Hadar-Ramman, 393, note — Article of Count von Baudissin, 392 — The mourning for Josiah, 394, ff. — Difficulties met, 395 — Peni- tential sorrow of Israel, 396 — The sorrow national and individual, 397 — Its fulfilment, 398, 403, ff. — The families mentioned, 398 — Nathan and Shimei, 399 — Bishop Ilervey's, view, 401 — View of Geiger, 402 — The mourning for Jesus of Nazareth, 403— The fulfilment of the prophecy, 403, ff. — The prophecy to have a larger not a more literal fulfilment, 405. CHAPTER XL THE TRIALS AND VICTORY OF ISRAEL — THE GREAT MOURNING. The similarity of the opening of the twelfth chapter to that of the ninth is very striking. It not only commences with a similar superscription, viz., "the oracle of the word of Jahaveh," ^ but with a like reference to the power of God. In the ninth chapter the eyes of men are spoken of as looking upwards to Jahaveh on account of his judgments, which should ^ Both chapters begin with mn'' ~\21 iil^"G, but in chap. ix. i those words are followed by f"lNZl, in chap. xii. by ?X"lt^*'' bv. As iUs" the prophet really means /ih/s. If mean and low habitations are suppo.sed to be signified by "huts," in opposition to buildings of a finer and nobler kind, the word /cn/s would not convey such an im- pression. It might refer to the " tents " of the Jews if viewed as combatants. Ch. xii. 7.] THE TRIALS AND VICTORY OF ISRAEL. 367 According to either rendering the passage indicates that the dehverance of the people of Judah would precede that of Jerusalem. This was to occur in order that all vainglorious boasting on the part of the inhabitants of the capital might be rendered impossible. According to the second reading, however, taken in connexion with verse 6, the meaning would most distinctly be that the deliverance of the nation in general would not be brought about by the sturdy resistance of the capital city, conducted to a successful issue by the natural leaders of the people. That deliverance would be achieved, as in former days, in the times of the Judges, by means of deliverers raised up from among those who were of less note and position in the land. This meaning might indeed be deduced from either translation ; for in most of the cases where such deliverers were raised up, the tribes to which they severally belonged were usually the first participators in the deliverance. The close of the verse is, however, more in harmony with that reading by which a distinct allusion is made to the mercies granted to the nation in former days. For the reason assigned why salvation should first com- mence at the tents of Judah is expressly stated to be " in order that the glory (DIKBD) of the house of David, and the glory (n")^i3D) of the inhabitants of Jerusalem, may not mag- nify itself over (the glory of) Judah." The reference is to martial glory like that which Barak ^ would have obtained in greater measure, had he gone forth alone to the battle at the bidding of the prophetess Deborah. The very mode in which the victory here prophesied should be obtained, and the deliverance be achieved, would prove that the victory was the Lord's. But there is no reason whatever to conclude from the passage that the deliverance promised would be wrought without human instrumentality or human weapons, ^ See Judges iv. 9, "imXSri- Compare, too, the same word used of martial glory, Isa. x. 12, xx. 5, and perhaps Ps. Ixxxix. 18. 368 7ECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xiL S. as Dr. Pusey seems to think. Compare the notable expres- sion used by David with regard to his contest with GoHath, although in that combat both human instrumentality and human weapons were duly made use of (i Sam. xvii. 47). The victory spoken of by Zechariah would be no less the Lord's even if human agency were used in gaining it. The deliverance manifested first to the people of Judah was to be likewise shared by the inhabitants of Jerusalem. " In that day," said the prophet, " Jahavch will defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and he that is tottering among them in that day shall be as David, and the house of David as God, as the Angel of Jahaveh before them." A deliverer, or deliverers, would be raised up from among the people of Judah, but not from the chiefs of the people nor from the royal family of David. In this deliverance, which should come from an unexpected quarter, the inhabitants of Jeru- salem would also share. Courage would be infused into their breasts by reason of the conviction that the Lord was with them; the tottering and the feeble would go forth boldly, as David did to the combat with Goliath ; and the house of David, those in authority, whether actually members of that regal family or persons occupying a similar position, would be filled with Divine enthusiasm, and would be as God, acting in his spirit and for his cause, even as the Angel of Jahaveh, the great representative of his person and power, which great angel would go before them and act invisibly as their leader and guide.i The prophecy, so far as has been as yet commented on, is 1 Elohim is regarded by von Ilofmann here as meaning other supernatural beings {Schriftb. i. 76). Comp. Ps. viii. 6, xcvii. 7; i Sam. xxviii. 13; Exod. xv. 11. In this case there would be a climax in the passage. Compare the expression in 2 Sam. xiv. 17. But the last clause, " as the angel of Jahaveh," is perhaps better regarded as explanatory of the preceding, as we h.ave taken it above. On the Angel of Jahavch as a leader, see Exod. xxiii. 20-23 5 Josh. v. 13-15. But i Sam. xxix. 9 is not a case in point. The expression there is "as an angel of God," not " as the Angel of Jahaveh." Ch. xii. 3.] THE TRIALS AND VICTORY OF ISRAEL. 369 a prediction of what actually occurred in the glorious days of Israel's revival under the Maccabee chieftains. Our con- viction on this point is so strong, that if we felt compelled to dissent from the traditional view with respect to the author- ship of the book, we should unhesitatingly adopt, not the view at present fashionable among scholars, led by the authority of such critics as Bleek, Hitzig and Ewald, but that maintained by Geiger and Bottcher, the latter an authority not inferior to Ewald in grammatical questions, and as acute a critic, namely, that so far from the book, whether considered as to its earlier visions or its later predictions, having been composed in pre- exilian times, the language of both parts bears strong traces of a later era. In fact, if the date of the book were to be deter- mined by clear references to facts of history, it would have to be assigned to a period not earlier than the time of the Mac- cabees. The events predicted in this chapter are not exactly the same as those mentioned in the prophecy contained in chap- ters ix. and x. Some events mentioned there are not noticed here, and vice versa. The prophecy does not speak of all nations being gathered together against Jerusalem, but merely announces that those nations or peoples that were round about Jerusalem should gather themselves together against her. It is strange that Kliefoth should have made an important point of all nations being gathered together against Jerusalem. "All the peoples " of verse 3 are to be identified with "all the nations around." There is no reason whatever to consider the pas- sage as predicting that all the nations of the earth are to be gathered against Jerusalem. Moreover such a gathering would be an impossibility. The expression (in verse 3) the earth, or the land (V"I^^), proves nothing, as that word is used more frequently in the narrower than in the wider signification. It is notorious that Jerusalem was indeed made a bowl of B B 370 ZECHARIAII AND HIS TROPHECIES. [Ch. xii. 3-6. reeling, or a burdensome stone, to the various nations, which, in the period between the restoration from the captivity and the coming of our Lord, sought to attack that city, or to destroy the Jewish rehgion. Iduma^ans, Philistines, Arabians, Am- monites, Moabitcs, Tyrians, Syrians and Greeks made various attempts against the Jewish people and against Jerusalem. They were sometimes successful for a short time, but never for any lengthened period. Their attempts were always foiled, often with great loss to themselves, sometimes to their utter ruin. These facts are well known to every student of the history of that time, and do not require to be specially recapitulated. If it be insisted on that the prophecy even speaks of Jews as forming part of those foes who should be- siege the holy city, — though we maintain that this cannot be fairly concluded from the words of the prophet, — the fact might be recalled to remembrance that during this period many Jews actually did engage in arms against their people and city. There were Jewish traitors, as Menelaus for instance, whose evil actions are narrated in 2 Mace. iv. and v., and others, who, for private ends and advancement, sought at that terrible crisis to procure the ruin of their country and of their faith. The result of the attempt to Hellenise the Jews and to subvert their religion, in the early days of Antiochus Epiphancs, was at first so considerable that for a time it seeemd likely to be successful. But the eyes of the Lord were over his people, and his ears were open to their cry. The want of common wisdom displayed by their heathen foes was remarkable ; and the victories gained by small and poorly equipped bands of foot-soldiers over well-appointed armies, strongly supported by a numerous cavalry, formed a most noteworthy feature of this remarkable struggle. Deliverance was vouchsafed through the instrumentality of the Maccabee heroes, who were raised up from among the people, and did not themselves belong to the nobles or princes of Jerusalem. Ch.xii. 6, 7.] THE TRIALS AND VICTORY OF ISRAEL. 37 1 Grotius has well observed in reference to this prophecy that the deliverance of Jerusalem and of the cities of Judsea did not come from Jerusalem, but was effected by means of the Maccabees from Modin. The Maccabee heroes, however, well understood the impor- tance of the city of Jerusalem as the centre of the national religion, and were not content with procuring their own safety or aggrandisement. They rescued Jerusalem and its inhabi- tants by force from the hands of the spoiler. They went forth to each of their battle-fields, fully recognising that they had no power or strength of their own, but that their hope and trust was in the Lord of hosts. Their courage was daunted by no dangers, they were fearless before the greatest number of their foes. Though occasionally unsuccessful, they fought and conquered. As a pan of fire can easily ignite and destroy any number of faggots among which it is placed, so their enemies were but fuel for them ; as a blazing torch in a bundle of corn rapidly consumes the sheaf, so did the Jewish heroes devour their enemies on every side (comp. Num. xiv. 9 ; Obad. 18). The desecrated city of Jerusalem was reconsecrated, the defiled temple purified^ and sanctified anew. The power of faith achieved the victory. By it they " escaped the edge of the sword, out of weakness were made strong, waxed valiant in fight, turned to flight the armies of the aliens " (Heb. xi. 34). The Jewish nation was delivered in such a manner that no occasion of boasting, nor any special martial glory was afforded to the inhabitants of Jerusalem. They were the rescued, not the rescuers. "The house of David," conspicuous as it was at the period of the return from Babylon, in the person of Zerubbabel, the prince of the house of David, and the Head of the Captivity, obtained no new honours in the remarkable struggles of the Maccabean era. After the death of Zerub- babel, the house of David seems to have contented itself with 3/2 ZECIIARIAII AND HIS rROPHECIES. [Ch. xii. 7, 8. r a mere titular dignity for ages, and ultimately fell into political insignificance. It lost even that titular position as one of the consequences of the mighty struggles which estab- lished the supremacy of the Asmonaean princes.^ This is a remarkable fact when viewed in connexion with the prophecy of Zechariah. For the prophet evidently con- 1 The following is tlie list as given by Ilerzfeld of the Davidic princes, who either exercised some real authority, or held a titular rank in the eyes of the Jewish people, down to the establishment of the Asmonteans. The authorities for the list are the Breviarium of the pseudo-Philo and the Seder-olam-zutta, which, though really apocryphal and unhistoric in many of their statements — the list of the latter is especially defective — yet, so far as the names given are concerned (as Herzfeld has ably shown in his Excursus Ueber die Abkommlitige Davids in toid iiach dem Exil), have drawn from historical sources. The numbers placed after the respective names are those of the years during which each prince exercised his authority. Those given in the first three cases are plamly legendary. The names as given in the Breviarium are : — Serubabel, 58; Resa Mysciollam (XCH uTi^), 66, I Chron. iii. 19; Joannes ben Resa, 53. Herzfeld shows that this latter was probably the brother of the former, Resa being a title, not a proper name. He was probably identical with Hananiah the son of Zerubbabel, I Chron. iii. 19. There seems here to be a gap, which Herzfeld would supply from the other source with the names of Meshesabel, Berechja and MeshuUam. Then follow in the Breviarium, Judas, the first with the surname Hyrkanus, 14 years; Josephus I., 7 years; Abner Semei, II; Elyh Matathias, 12; Asar (Iki'n) Maat, II; Nagid (T'Ji) Artaxat, 10 (possibly the same as ^07701, Luke iii. 25); Agai Helly, 8; Maslot Na,uni, 7 [these last two names are sus- piciously like those in Luke iii. 25]; Amos Syrach, 14; Matathias Siloa, 10; Josephus the younger, 60 ; and Jannceus, the second with the surname Hyrkanus, 16. Josephus the younger is mentioned in Jewish histoiy as honoured by Ptolemy. I He seems to have been identical with the Joseph ben Tobiah mentioned by Josephus ; (Antiq. xii. 4, § 2). The dignity of " prince " did not always descend from father to I son, as is proved, as Herzfeld remarks, by the fact that it is impossible for princes Ho have followed one another in direct descent at such short periods as those assigned in the list from Josephus L to Amos Syrach. The history of Hyrkanus, holes Herzfeld, as given by Josephus {Antiq. xii. 4, § 6), cannot be understood jimtil it is observed that he was the son of a prince who sought to attain itmto the same dignity as his father had before him. Josephus calls him simply Hyrkanus, but he must also have had a Hebrew name. His attempt to raise up the Davidic throne was opposed by Simon the Just, and was consequently un- successful. According to the Breviarium he was prince from 196 to 180, or from 179 to 162. From the Restoration down to the times of the Maccabees a descen- dant of the Davidic family held a kind of chieftainship; he was termed variously N'^fc'J, NtJ'n, IK', and "t^J3, which variety of title, Herzfeld thinks, points to a fluctuating authority. After the hopes of the Davidic family were finally crushed by the elevation of the Maccabee princes to the throne, some of the heads of that Ch. xii. 7, 8.] THE TRIALS AND VICTORY OF ISRAEL. 373 siders the family or house of David as of special interest and speaks of it as such in the close of this particular prophecy. For although that family was destined to play a very subordinate part in the deliverance here predicted, the prophet regards it as one which would possess peculiar im- family appear to have migrated to Babylon, and their chief was known there as the Prince of the Captivity. Makrizi speaks of an emigration to Babylon by a Jewish party about 300 years after the restoration of the second temple. See l^^xz{€id!% GescJiichte des Volkes Israels (1847-1857), vol. i. pp. 257-8, 378-387; vol. ii. 194, 396. Milman, in his History of the "Jenvs, vol. ii. p. 483, ff., also observes that the Prince of the Captivity in Babylon was descended from the house of David. It ought to be noted here tliat the writer of the Breviarium was of course not Philo, nor is the Breviarium to be found in the best editions of his works. It is, however, in the edition of J- Annius, and has been separately reprinted. It is described in Fabricii Bibl. Grcsca, Hamb., M.D.CCVIII., vol. iii. lib. iv. 4, § 2, 44. Fabricius notes that the author speaks of having brought down his third book, "usque ad Agrippam tertium Judseorum regem, quern ait auctor nugivendulus regnasse annis xxx. usque ad hunc ultimum annum aetatis mese decrepita:." Fabricius says further : " Hoc breviarium Philoni a Johanne Annio Viterbiensi suppositum, editum et commentario illustratum cum ceteris ejus commentis sjepe prodiit post editionem primam Romanam, anno 1498, fol. Vide Ilanckium libro laudato, p. 90 et 96 seq. Tantum addam in prresenti, quod R. Azarias in Meor Enayim, c. xxxii., idem breviarium Pseudo-Philonis, sive ut ipse Hebraice vocat, Jedidcei Alexandrini, sed hinc inde interpolatum retulit Hebraice, e quo latine conversum exhibet Guil. Henricus Vorstius in Commentario ad Chronologiam Da- vidis Ganz, p. 308-312. Neque aliud puto esse scriptum, quam hoc Pseudo-Phi- lonis breviarium, quod in catalogo Bibl. Bodleianae memoratur inter Philonis scripta liber de genealogia Christi latine cum commentario Joh. Annii, Paris. 1612." Mr. Thomas V. Keenan, B. A., Assist. Librarian of Trinity College, Dublin, has kindly furnished me with the title page of Annius' work, which reads: " Berosi Chaldaai sacerdotis reliquorumque consimilis argimienti autorum, de antiquitate Italian ac totius orbis. Cum F. Joan. Annij Viterbensis Theologi commentatione, et auxesi, ac verborum reriimque memorabilium indice plenissimo". 2 tom. Lugd. 1554-5, size 16°. He adds the following extract from the Breviarium as given by Annius, first volume, p. 416 : — " Regnavit hie primus Herodes Ascalonita tyranico prin- cipatu, annis triginta uno, & legitimo sex. Et filius ejus Archelaus, annis novem. Herodes autem Tetrarcha, annis vigintiquatuor : cuius vigesimoprimo anno Legatus i nostris ludseis ab Alexadria missus adolescens eram. Sequutus est hunc Agrippa priscus, annis septem. Agrippa iunior, annis septem & viginli. Et Agrippinus, qui & Agrippa vltimus, annis triginta, vsq ; ad hunc vltimum annum aetatis meae decrepitas," and adds that Brunet {Manuel dn Libraire) says that this is a new edition, of a work first published, under a somewhat different title, at Rome, in 1498. Brunet says it has gone through numerous editions, but he discredits the authority of Annius, whom he charges with interpolating wholesale in his extracts. He does not mention the Paris ed. of 16 12, referred to by Fabricius. 374 • ZECIIARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xii. 7, S. portancc in the period succeeding that special deliverance. The writer would scarcely have spoken so much of the family of David had he lived in the Maccabean era, when the glory of the house of David was completely eclipsed, and when no position in the Jewish state was conceded to them, inas- much as they had borne no conspicuous part in the religious revival of that day. If such allusions arc to be considered •as affording an indication of the date of the composition of the prophecy, then the prediction must be considered as composed at a time when the house of David occupied a prominent position, such as it possessed in the days of Zerubbabel. It is, however, remarkable that, imbued as the prophet was with the sense of the coming glory of the house of David (as is plain from verse 8), he should yet distinctly refer to a future national deliverance in which the leaders should be persons belonging to Judah, but neither inhabitants of Jerusalem nor members of the house of David. The name of Judah after the return from captivity was, as we have seen, the general name given to all the returned exiles, whether they belonged to the tribe of Judah or to the remnants of the other ten tribes. No valid objection, there- fore, can be made to this reference of the prophecy on the ground of the Maccabean chieftains having been members of a priestly family, and, therefore, appertaining to the tribe of Levi. They were leaders and princes of Judah, in the sense in which the expression is used in verse 5. "The ten tribes" is indeed in many respects a most unfortunate designation. At the disruption of the kingdoms the tribe of Levi natu- rally cast in its lot with the kingdom of Judah. Jeroboam created a special priesthood of his own for his new kingdom (I Kings xii. 31, 3.2, xiii. 33), and forasmuch as he disestab- lished the Levitical priesthood throughout his dominions, and took away their landed property (2 Chron. xi. 14), the Levites, whose adhesion to the new order of things might justly have Ch. xii. 4-8.] THE TRIALS AND VICTORY OF ISRAEL. 375 been suspected, were driven to migrate in a body to Judah and Jerusalem (2 Chron. xi. 13, 14, xiii. 9-11), together with many- other persons belonging to the other tribes (2 Chron. xi. 16). Graetz has argued that these disestablished and disendowed Levites formed the greater part of " the poor " and pious men, the Ebionites of the Old Testament, so often alluded to in the Psalms.^ Though we do not agree Avith the theory of Graetz, it is certain that the Levites and the families of the other tribes who then migrated to Judah became so com- mingled with the tribe of Judah that all alike were known by the name of "Jews." We may here pause to review the other interpretations which have been assigned to this prophecy, so far as it has been yet considered. Hengstenberg views the whole as a history of the Christian Church from the commencement of the period after the resurrection of Christ The Church he considers as having been from its very beginning " the legitimate continuation of Israel." One might very well understand such expressions as occur in verses 4 and 5 to refer to the struggle against Christianity in its early days, in which the nations of the earth took part. But it is not satisfactory to explain the names Judah and Jerusalem as contrasted with one another to signify " the inferior and superior portions of the covenant nation ; " and still less so to consider " the house of David " in verse 7 as signifying the royal family " as continued in the princes and potentates in the kingdom of God who become partakers of the Spirit." For the same expressions in verse 10 are explained to denote "the members of the covenant nation," and must there signify those who had been in rebellion against God. Nor can we see according to this interpretation any meaning in the special statements of verse 7. ' Graetz, Monaischrift des Judcnthiuns for 1869, Die Ebioniten des alten Testa- ments. l^G ZECHARIAH AND HIS TROPHECIES. [Ch. xii. 2-8. Klicfoth thinks that the prophecy commences with the period of Christ's rejection by the Jewish nation, spoken of in chap, xi., and that it reaches forward to a time still future when Israel as a nation shall turn in repentance to their long rejected king. The national conversion of Israel is, he thinks, clearly set forth in chap. xii. 10, ff. By Jerusalem and its inhabitants, and by the house of David, he considers " Israel after the flesh " to be meant, against whom the "burden" is announced in the first verse. Inasmuch as "Judah" is contrasted with Jerusalem, and the salvation of Judah is represented in verse 7 as earlier than that of the people of Israel, Kliefoth holds that the Christian Church is called by the name of "Judah" because it originated with the Jewish nation, though it was afterwards mainly com- posed of Gentile adherents. Just as a political and religious schism had taken place in the days of Rehoboam, and two rival kingdoms were set up, the one with a false worship, the other with a true one, so was it to be in the days of the Messiah. There would be a separation between the " Israel after the flesh" and the "Israel after the spirit," a schism of a darker and more terrible kind than that which rent in twain the kingdom of the twelve tribes. Starting from this general conception, Kliefoth explains the declaration (verse 2) that Jerusalem was to be made a bowl of reeling to all the peoples as referring to the siege of Jerusalem under Titus. The state- ment in the subsequent verse, where Jerusalem is spoken of as a burdensome stone to all peoples, he regards as fulfilled in the course of ages by the various crusades and the different political movements which affected Jerusalem and the Jewish nation. The prophecy of verse 2, which speaks of Judah as experiencing a similar fate, he regards as fulfilled in the troubles which about the same period fell upon the Christians, commencing with their flight to Pella during the temporary lull in the siege of Jerusalem. In all dangers God pro- Ch. xii. 2-8.] THE TRIALS AND VICTORY OF ISRAEL. 577 mised to defend his Church, even in days of persecution ; he would be with her amid all the blindness and madness of the nations (verses 4, ff ). Kliefoth understands by " the princes of Judah" (inverse 5) — which clause he renders "the friends," or "familiars of Judah" (a possible translation, to which no philological objection can be made) — as those from among- the Gentiles who should attach themselves to believing Judah, that is, the Christian Church. Such are spoken of in the verse in question (according to his exposition) as expressing their belief that the preservation of Israel was due to God's special providence, and as anticipating the day when that na- tion should form part of the Church of Christ. Verse 6 would then depict the victories of the Cross in various lands, while at the same time, in spite of all its trials, the city of Jerusalem was to exist on its own base. By the tents of Judah in verse 7, Kliefoth considers the Christians scattered throughout the world to be meant, and the prophet predicts that salvation should be bestowed first on the Gentiles, in order that the Jews might be prevented from boasting. The remainder of the prophecy, according to Kliefoth, refers to the future national conversion of the Jewish nation. In describing that event he observes that no special glory is spoken of as be- longing to Israel. The terms used in verse 8 of " the feeble one" being as David, and the house of David as God, etc., Kliefoth explains by reference to the expressions employed in I Pet. ii. 9, " Ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a peculiar nation" (comp. Rev. v, 10, and Matt. xi. 11). All that is denoted by such expressions in this prophecy is, in his view, that the kingly honours and the likeness to God which are granted to all believers shall be at last granted to con- verted Israel. The expressions are fully justified when used with regard to the conversion of Israel. The conversion of any people is a blessing and a gain for Christendom ; much more will be the conversion of Israel. 2,jS ZECIIARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xii. 2-8. Such is the exposition of the prophecy given by Kliefoth, traced upon the Hnes drawn by Ebrard. It is ingenious, but far too artificial. It rests mainly for its support upon the opposition, supposed to exist in the prophecy, between Jeru- salem and its inhabitants on the one hand, and Judah on the other ; and upon Kliefoth's interpretation of chap. xi. 14, ff., which we cannot regard as correct. The stress which Klie- foth lays upon the contrast throughout between Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem is the weak point in his ex- position. No such opposition can be proved. Judah is not contrasted with Jerusalem as a hostile power, although it is mentioned apart. In verse 7 there is a contrast so far drawn between them that the salvation spoken of is predicted as first granted to Judah and then to Jerusalem. In the pro- phets the Jewish kingdom and people arc often mentioned as "Judah and Jerusalem " (Isa. ii. i, iii. i, v. 3, etc.). Both are named as component parts of one whole, not as parts radi- cally and distinctly differing from one another, as required by Kliefoth's exposition. Those scholars who ascribe this prophecy to a pre-exilian author have considerable difficulty in assigning a date to its composition. Maurer thinks that it was written between the time of the death of Josiah (xii. ii) and the capture of Jeru- salem by the Chaldasans. Chap. xii. to xiii. 6, was, according to him, probably written in the fourth year of the reign of Jehoiakim, when the prophet expected that the enemy would be driven from the gates of Jerusalem; the latter prophecy, xiii. 7 — xiv. 21, after the battle of Carchemish, when darker fears intruded themselves into his mind. Hitzig's views are not very different, though it is somewhat difficult to comprehend his ideas respecting the details. Both scholars seem to regard the prophecies at the close of this book as expressing hopes of fortunate days, some of which were not fulfilled at all, and others very inadequately. No substantial reasons arc assigned Ch. xii. 2-8] THE TRIALS AND VICTORY OF ISRAEL. 3/9 for these opinions, and they may be here passed over. The views of these critics on the great passage, xii. lo, will, however, be noticed in due course. Nor can we regard the interpretations of those expositors as correct, who, like v. Hofmann, consider the events prophesied in these latter chapters of Zechariah to belong to the last stage of the world's history, and to stand in close con- ; nexion with the second coming of the Son of man. The ob- | jections to this mode of explaining chaps, xiii. and xiv. will ' be considered in our remarks on those chapters. It would ■ be strange indeed for the prophecy to pass on immediately from events connected with the rejection of the Messiah in chap. xi. to the time of the end. It would not indeed j surprise us to find events connected with the second coming ! of the Messiah spoken of as if connected in time with the i first advent, and especially such as might be viewed as the ; results of that advent. But it would be strange to find depicted on the prophetic page a detailed description of events immediately connected with the second advent, while all the great events which were to occur in the intervening j time are passed over in silence. A priori objections, however, such as this are not necessarily conclusive. According to v. Hofmann, the siege of Jerusalem spoken of in chap. xii. is the same as that more fully related in chap, xiv. But in chap. xiv. Jerusalem is described as actually cap- tured, while in chap. xii. it is described as delivered. The tribulation mentioned in the early part of chap. xii. is fol- lowed (not necessarily immediately) by a national conversion ; the tribulation of chap. xiv. has far different results. The tribulation mentioned in chap. xii. precedes the death of the Messiah, for whom the great mourning is described as taking place, and whose mysterious sufferings, brought about " by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God " (Acts ii. 23), are spoken of as followed by a terrible time of trial 38o ZECIIARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xii. 2-9. experienced on the part of those who rejected him (chap, xiii. y~g). But this latter tribulation must not be confounded with that mentioned in the former part. That the early part of the prophecy mu.st be considered as fulfilled in the days of the Maccabean revival has been already sufficiently pointed out. The prophecy seems to be as definite as is consistent with the purposes for which prophecy was afforded. Prophecy was never intended, as Chambers hns well observed, to be simple history written in advance. But after speaking of the deliverance to be accorded in those days of distress, the prophet makes a rapid transition to Messianic days. This transition occurs at the eighth verse. There the prophet announces that — when that deliverance should take place, which would be in such a way that the glory of the capital would not be superior to that of the inhabitants of the towns and villages in the land — the man who was ready to totter and fall should be as David the great hero of old ; and the house of David, though it would have borne but a small part in the deliverance of that period, should be as God, as the Angel of the Lord who led forth the people of Israel out of Egypt. Too little attention has generally been paid to the expres- sion made use of in verse 9, " and it shall come to pass in that day that I will seek to destroy all nations who come against Jerusalem." This passage is not an absolute promise of the utter destruction of the nations. For the phrase which here occurs, and which is often used in prose and poctr\-, does not necessarily denote that that which is sought for is ultimately obtained. It is often used of unsuccessful seeking, as well as of that seeking which has a successful issue. ^ It is only used ' The reader wlio may desire to collate passages in wliich llie same words as those in the text occur, or in which the same construction, the infinitive with ?, is used after the verb fo seek (t'p3), may refer among other passages to Exod. ii. 15 ; Deut. xiii. 11 (E.V. verse 10) ; i Sam. xi. 2, 20, xix. 2, xxiii. 10, 15, xxiv. 3 (E. V. verse 2) ; 2 Sam. v. 16, x.x. 19; i Kings .\i. 22, 40; Esth. vi. 2, vii. 7; Ch. xii. 9.] THE TRIALS AND VICTORY OF ISRAEL. 381 twice of God, here and in Exod. iv. 24, where it is said, " God sought to slay Moses," i.e., manifested clearly and distinctly his intention to kill him, if Moses had persisted in neglecting the appointed rite of circumcision. All, therefore, that this passage in Zechariah states is that Jahaveh would clearly manifest his design to destroy all the nations which should come against Jerusalem at the era referred to. It was, there- fore, quite possible that such a gracious design or determina- tion of God on behalf of his people might be thwarted by their continuance in sin, or by their ingratitude for the de- liverance vouchsafed to them. The promise was thus similar to that made respecting the destruction of the Canaanitish nations, which was but imperfectly accomplished, owing to the national apostasies of the Israelites (Josh, xxiii. 5, with verses 12, 13 ; Jud. i. 28, ii. 2, 3, 20-23). That which hin- dered the Israelites in the days of the Maccabees from obtaining the full victory over their foes, and maintaining the independence which they partially attained at the end of that glorious epoch, was their sin against Jahaveh, which was the cause of their ultimately losing what had been obtained by means of the noble efforts of the Maccabees. By the victories then vouchsafed to them, God manifested his gracious design of destroying their foes. National sins and general irreligion prevented the full attainment of the blessing. The remark- able phrase which occurs in the ninth verse does not seem to have been used without a distinct object and design. No such ambiguous phraseology is made use of when the final victory over the nations is predicted in the closing chapter of the book. The transition from an announcement of a temporal de- liverance of Israel to that of the great deliverance which the Messiah should effect (depicted from verse 10 to the end of the chapter) is in accordance with the general usage of the Ps. xxxvii. 32, xl. 15 (E.V. 14). Compare the similar phrases in tlie New Testa- ment, Matt. ii. 13 ; Luke xiii. 24, xvii. "t^t^ ; John vii. 25, viii. 37, etc. 382 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch xii. 10-14. prophets. When Isaiah prophesied the near rescue of Judah from the confederacy formed against her in his daj's by Israel and Syria, he was led onward to speak of Immanuel, the Child of the Virgin {Isa. vii. 8, 14-16), in such a way as if he expected the birth of the Messiah to take place in those troublous times. When at a later date he was led to predict the destruction of the Assyrian power, he again gave utter- ance to a prediction of the Child that was to be born, of the Son that was to be given to the people of God (Isa. viii. and ix. 1-7). And when in the distance he heard the noise of the hosts of the Assyrian army mustering for the in- vasion of his country, he was led first to foretell the ap- proaching fall of that mighty empire, which commenced with the failure of Sennacherib's attempt against Jerusalem, and after depicting in the most vivid manner the march of the Assyrian army upon the holy city, and the rebuke which it should there receive from the God of Israel, he announces in almost the same breath, that "a Rod should come forth out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch should spring up from its roots " (Isaiah x., xi. i), who should introduce a grand period of victory and bring in the reign of universal peace. Thus, too, when the return from the captivity in Babylon is depicted, the hope of even better things to come is vividly set forth, and in speaking of the joy of the returning exiles, the prophet introduces the great prophecy of "the Servant of Jahaveh" (Isa. li. — liii.). A large portion of the Messianic predictions might be adduced in illustration of this principle, and the prophecy before us is, as we think, a striking instance of the same. The special Messianic prediction in this prophecy of Zech- ariah is that contained in the loth verse, "And I will pour out upon the house of David and upon the inhabitant of Jerusalem the spirit of grace and of supplication, and they shall look to me Avhom they have pierced, and they shall Ch. xii. lo.] THE GREAT MOURNING. 383 mourn for him, as the lamentation for an only son, and they shall make a bitter mourning (or weeping) for him, as one is bitter (in grief) for the firstborn." The special construction used (perfect with vav conv.) shows that a new point is touched upon by the prophet — the conversion of the people is the result of a gracious outpouring of the Spirit of God. There is an allusion no doubt to the prophecy of Joel (chap, iii. I, ff., in the E. V. ii. 28, ff.), though similar predictions are found elsewhere, as in Ezek. xxxix. 29 ; Isa. xliv. 3, comp. Ezek. xxxvi. 26, 27. ^ The spirit of grace is that which pro- duces grace in the heart, the result of which is that earnest supplications are made for pardon and forgiveness. We need not translate the first word by loiw, as Ewald, nor render it as Hitzig by emotion, or, as v. Hofmann, by groaning. No examples can be adduced in favour of any of these trans- lations, though the word often occurs in Scripture. The ordinary translation "grace''' or "favo2ir" is correct.-^ The outpouring of God's Spirit alone renders a people gracious or acceptable in God's sight, and that altered condition is first evidenced by the spirit of prayer which is evoked. Jerusalem and its inhabitants are mentioned alone in our text, not as though the blessing of the gracious outpouring of ^ The phrase found in Zech. xii. 10 and in Ezek. xxxix. 29 is nil ^ri??^** In Isaiah the expression is '"PI'I"! p-VX. ^ There is no reason whatever to depart from the general meaning in which jH is used, i.e., favour, grace. The spirit is called the spirit of grace, because it causes such grace, that is, draws forth the Divine grace or favour (Maurer, Kohler), Compare the similar expressions in Isa. xi. 2, xxix. 10 ; Deut. xxxiv. 9 ; Eph. i. 17. It is not so termed here, as Hitzig thinks, because it is itself a gift of grace, though that is trae, because the connexion of nil with D''31Jnn as indicating the working of that spirit, would be harsh, which fact caused Hitzig to understand Jfl to mean emofwji or com/iassion (Hitzig gives J?u/irung inhis Comm. and Erbannimg in his Transl. of the Prophets). The latter is the rendering of Gesenius in the Thes. In many editions of his Lex. Man. he followed De Wette and Winer in rendering supplication, considering the word as a synonym of the following 'D. MUhlau and Voick adopt the ordinary rendering of grace, as Kohler. On the connection of m"l with the two genitives, Kohler compares Isa. xxxiii. 6, and on the paronomasia, Nah. ii. II ; Zeph. i. 15 ; Ezek. xxiii. 33. 3S4 ZECIIARIAII AND HIS I'ROPHECIES. [Cli. xii. 10. the Spirit was to be confined to them, but because Jerusalem is used as a designation for the whole people, and is pointed out as the place where the penitential sorrow was first to be manifested. The mourning which was to be caused in conse- quence of the effusion of the Spirit is spoken of as a mourning in which the whole land w^as to share. The house of David seems to be specified as a designation of the rulers of the people, the house of David being always thought of by the prophets as the lawful rulers of the nation. There has been no little dispute about the words, "they shall look unto me whom they have pierced." The subject of the first verb is admitted by all commentators to be the inhabitants of Jerusalem and the house of David. The attempts to make out that the subject of the second verb in the sentence is " the heathen," spoken of in the early part of the prophecy as attacking' Jerusalem, must be characterised as failures. Ewald maintains that the mourning pictured by the prophet is a mourning over the Jews fallen in the defence of their city as martyrs for their country and faith ; those slain in the battle-field he considers to be those pierced by the heathen. Ewald's reputation as a critic renders it necessary to consider any suggestions put forth on his authority, but the exposition does great violence to the lan- guage of the passage. His interpretation agrees substantially with that of the Jewish commentators. The difficulty of the passage lies in the expression, " they shall look unto me whom they have pierced." This reading is certainly correct. It has the support of all of the ancient versions, and of the great majority of the MSS., embracing all the better ones. It is easy to understand how the reading " they shall look unto him," arose as a correction of the former reading. Some of the MSS. have the reading "unto him" as a marginal reading Clp), and, as frequently happens in the case of such readings, that in the margin has, in many Ch. xil. lo.] THE GREAT MOURNING. 385 MSS., crept into the text. The assertion of Martini, made with the bitterness of the professed controversialist, is unfair ; namely, that this alteration occurred " through the perfidy of some modern Jews." The difficulty the Jews found in the original reading was quite natural, and need not be ascribed to any attempt to deprave the testimony given by the text to the divinity of the Messiah. The same difficulty was felt by Ewald, who has thus expressed his views : " The first person here is indeed entirely unsuitable ; it is at variance with the connexion with the following 'and they shall mourn for him,' and introduces the absurdity into the Old Testament, that one would weep bitterly for Jahve (Jahaveh) — for to Jahve alone can one refer the statement — as over one dead, as over a dead person who could never return again. The idea is rather that one martyr would not fall in vain, but would one day be lamented by univer- sal love ; which language then can be transferred to a much higher martyr, John xix. 37 ; Apoc. i. 7." This difficulty is not really solved by an assertion of the ip*^} twofold nature in Christ, or, in other words, by any attempt to use the passage as a direct proof of our Lord's divinity. The question is,_what sense could have been put upon the^'^^ passage by those persons who were primarily addressed by "y^^ n the prophet ^ That the passage may have a deeper significa- ^rr<>*.*^ tion than they put upon it is true, but the passage must have fi_^ been understood in some way or other by those to whom the ^T;:. ait words were originally addressed. No previous mention is ^^•*-<**' made in it of the double nature of the Messiah, and such a^--/^rt thought would not have suggested itself to the pious Jew oi'h^-Ao^ the days of Zechariah. He could not possibly have explained V. the passage of putting Jahaveh to death, as he was taught by'.,-; all the prophets the spiritual character of the God whom he ' worshipped. Nor can we think that the Angel of Jahaveh is here C C 386 ZECIIARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xii. lo. spoken of, as Hcngstcnberg, Kliefoth, Wunsche, and others have supposed. The mention of the piercing of the Angel of Jahaveh would have been almost as great a difficulty to the prophet's hearers, as to speak of the death of Jahaveh himself. " The passage is most easily explained," as Hitzig has remarked, from " the identification of the Sender with the sent, of Jahaveh with the prophet." This is the view sub- stantially held by E. Meier, Kohler, Kahnis, and Umbreit. The passage refers to the previous allegory of the good shepherd, identified in the former chapter with Jahaveh as his messenger and representative, and similarly here identified with his Lord. As St. John did not hesitate, when he quoted the passage *in reference to our Lord's crucifixion, to change the first "person into the third (John xix. 37), so the Jewish expositors, with equal good faith, have appended their marginal note. In adopting this interpretation, we do not in the slightest degree deny that, in the highest and deepest sense, this passage, as well as that in chap, xi., may find its full signifi- ; cance in the mysterious union of the human and the 1 Divine in the person of Christ. That doctrine cannot, how- ever, be proved from such texts, and no such idea could possibly have arisen in the minds of the Jews who first listened to its solemn words. The progressive character of Divine revelation on such mysterious points is too often lightly passed over by the dogmatist. The prediction when delivered must have been considered to refer to a national mourning over some one who stood in an intimate connexion with Jahaveh, and whose rejection and death was to be bitterly bewailed by the people of Israel. Such would have been the meaning conveyed by the passage to the Jews of the time of Zechariah. Assuming that the prophecy proceeded from the same author as that of the previous chapter, — and there are no sufficient grounds on which to deny it, — the rejection of the representative of Jahaveh, Ch. xii. 10.] THE GREAT MOURNING. 387 (namely, the good shepherd, whose rejection is there spoken of as followed by a terrible punishment), and the national mourn- ing described as taking place for one who should be, in some mysterious manner, " pierced " by the nation when acting in the capacity of the representative of Jahaveh, must both have been considered by the hearers of the prophet to refer to one and the same event. The explanation of Ewald would never have suggested itself to the minds of the Jews of that day. That scholar admits that the passage refers to some highly esteemed and well-loved person. He is even disposed to consider that some remarkable martyr to truth and religion is referred to, whose death had not met with due recognition. He appears, indeed, to have nearly planted his feet within the threshold of the temple of truth, when he says that one might be tempted almost to think of the great martyr of Isa. liii., if it were not that it is impossible for one to be referred to, who is not elsewhere mentioned in the prophecy. Ewald's difficulty is entirely caused by his arbitrary severance of this prophecy from that which precedes it. When once it is perceived that the two prophecies traverse in many points over the same ground, the difficulty disappears. The good shepherd of chap, xi., so shamefully treated for his tender care, is to be identi- fied with the great martyr portrayed in the pages of Isaiah as "the Servant of Jahaveh," and both must be identified with the Pierced one of the twelfth chapter of Zechariah. We agree with Keil in considering that the rejection and consequent crucifixion of our Lord is the event which the prophecy has in view. The quotation of the passage by St. John (xix. T)]), in the form " they shall look on him whom they pierced," and his special application of it to the incident of the soldier piercing the side of the Redeemer after he was already dead, is not to be understood as if that fact, and that only, was predicted by the seer. The incident itself 388 ZECIIARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xii. 10. was rather an illustration and example of what is here re- ferred to, than the point specially had in view in the prophecy. The piercing of Christ's side with the lance was regarded by St. John as the final act of indignity done to our Lord, as in fact the summing up of the rejection and death here darkly predicted. No stress must be laid upon the mention made of the pici'cing ^.s \\\\.\\ a spear ; for Zcchariah, in chap. xiii. 7, uses language, which, if its literal signification be insisted on, would imply death by the sword. The remarks made on chap. ix. 9 are fully applicable in the interpretation of this passage. The prophecy would lose much of its importance, as Hengstenberg has observed, if it were supposed to refer ^. ft^M.onXy to a single fact in the history of our Lord's humiliation, torf**<^«'namely, to the act performed by the Gentile soldier. It is lf^y,^,„uA. rather to be regarded as a general prediction of the death of iJ:i^l our Lord, which was brought about by the Jewish people. The I- hi'j:- literalists widely err when they lay stress upon such assumed ^''C*.*' literal fulfilments. They might be hard pressed, if stress were laid on the other side on those various points which were not fulfilled in the letter, though accomplished accord- , , ing to the spirit. The national mourning spoken of in the chapter was primarily fulfilled when the people, who beheld the death of Jesus on the cross and the signs that followed, smote their breasts in grief,^ and returned mourning to Jerusalem (Luke xxiii. 48). The crowds, who but a short time before had cried out " crucify him," then smote their breasts, over- powered by the proofs of the superhuman dignity of Jesus, and mourned for the Dead and for their own sin (Hengsten- berg). The contrition expressed by thousands of penitent Jews on the occasion of Peter's sermon on the Day of Pcnte- ' Hengstenberg notes that mention is made in Isa. xxxii. 12, of lamenting by smiting the breast in language similar to that of Zcchariah, and we may also re- call to mind the lamentation of the women recorded in Luke xxiii. 27, ff. Ch. xii. 10.] THE GREAT MOURNING. 389 cost was another fulfilment of the text. Thousands of Jews were then pricked (pierced) in their heart (KaTevvyrjcrav rrj KapSia). These were fulfilments of the prophecy, as were the further results of apostolic preaching recorded in Acts iii. — v., etc. And, as Keil justly notes, the prophecy has been ac- complished again and again in the Christian Church when conversions have taken place from Judaism, and will have its final accomplishment in the day in which the remnant of Israel shall return to the Lord their God. Wiinsche ' has pointed out that the teaching of the Syna- gogue with respect to the two Messiahs, Messiah ben Joseph and Messiah ben David, was originally derived from this passage. The Messiah ben Joseph, or Messiah ben Ephraim, was considered to be one destined to be born in poverty, and acquainted with ills, who was to lose his life fighting for his people in the great contest against Gog and Magog. The Messiah ben David, on the other hand, was regarded as the great Messiah who was to be the final conqueror, and to erect a kingdom over which he was to reign for ever. The doctrine of the two natures in the Messiah was unknown to the Syna- gogue, or, if known, set aside as ifnpossible. That doctrine! could alone reconcile in all their fulness the teachings of thei double set of prophecies, which speak, on the one hand, of a \ glorious, and, on the other, of a suffering Messiah. The doctrine of the two Messiahs seems to have sprung up after the Christian era, in order to explain in some way the pro- phecies adduced by Christians in proof of the Messiahship of our Lord. Wiinsche cites two passages which exhibit the connexion of this opinion with this passage in Zechariah. The Jerusalem Gemara (composed between A.D. 230 and 290) notes, in reference to this very text, that there were among \ ^ rT'tJ'Dn '•'l-ID.'', oder Die Leiden des Messias in ihrer Uebereinstimmting mil der 1 Lehre des Alien Testaments undden Ansprikhen der Rabbinen, etc. Dargestellt von Dr. Aug. Wiinsche. Leipz. 1870. 390 ZECIIARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xii. lo. the Rabbis two opinions, "one says that which they (the people) mourn is the Messiah ; and the other, that which they mourn is evil desire (original sin)." In the Babylonian Gemara (composed later, between A.D. 365 and the close of the fifth century) a fuller statement occurs in reply to the question : " What is the cause of this mourning .'' In this R. Dosa and the other Rabbis differ. The one said it wa?. for Messiah ben Joseph, who is to be slain ; and the other said it was for evil desire (original sin), which is to be slain. Let there be peace to whoever says that it is for Messiah ben Joseph, who is to be slain, verily, for it is written 'and they shall look to him whom they have pierced.'" {Tractat Succa, fol. 52, col. I, quoted in Wiinsche, p. 64.) Rabbi Salomo ben Yi.^.hak (Rashi) states in his commentary, that "the Rabbis explained this passage with reference to Messiah beri Joseph, whom they shall slay." ^ David Kimchi explains the words " whom they have pierced," by " because they have pierced." He objects to the Messianic interpretation, because the Messiah must be supposed to be "spoken of unconnectedly, without any previous mention at all." The interpretation he gives is not unlike that which has been defended by Ewald, namely, that in the war with their enemies the people of the Jews will be astonished if even so much as one man should fall among their ranks, and will look upon such a calamity as the beginning of a defeat, as when the men of Ai smote only thirty-six men of Israel. Hence they should look up to God for help, even in the smallest reverses. Such a view scarcely needs to be controverted, so opposed is it to the whole tenor of the passage. Nor will the Hebrew bear such a rendering (see crit. comm.)." ' He states that this was his own view in the words quoted by Wiinsche n^K'D ■|'?0 "pi; n'pX nniD'? TJ'DS* '•S*. " The place cannot be explained otherwise than as referring to Kinc; Messiah." Wiinsche, p. 53. McCaul says that Rashi ex- plained it otherwise in his commentary on the Bible (Trafisl. of Kinuhi, p. 161). ' Bohl, in his Alt-tcstatncntlklien Citate im Neuen Testament, p. Ill, notes that Ch. xii. lo, II.] THE GREAT MOURNING. 39I Wiinsche has proved, by a considerable induction of pas- sages from the non-controversial writings of the Jews, that the Synagogue in ancient times had a distinct idea of a suffering and an atoning Messiah. The belief that Messiah's sufferings j were to be voluntary, and that his death in some way or other! was to be an atonement for sin, pervades the early Jewish writ- 1 ings. It is natural enough that the modern Synagogue should have changed its views on these points, but it is not fair that attempts should be made to silence or misrepresent on such points the testimony of the older Jewish authorities. It is natural that Drummond in his recent work on TJie JezvisJi Messiah (p. 359) should, from his theological standpoint, exhibit a desire to defend the thesis he so confidently puts forward, namely, that "although the Jews were not without the general notion that the afflictions of the pious atoned for the sins of the community, they had no expectation of a suffering and atoning Messiah." That opinion is, however, at variance with the passages cited in his own work, as well as with the more numerous passages adduced by Wiinsche. The prophet in verse 1 1 compares the penitential mourning which was to take place in Jerusalem, with the mourning of Hadad-rimmon in the valley of Megiddo. It has been a question of much dispute what was the special mourning referred to. The translation of the LXX., " as the mourning of a pomegranate- orchard cut down in a plain," has arisen from a blunder. The Targumist supposes that two mournings are the Targum Jerushalmi, of which Lagarde has given some fragments in his edition of the Reuchlin Codex of the Prophets, sees here a piercing of the Messiah. It gives the following interesting paraphrase of Zech. xii. 10. " I will cause to dwell upon the house of David, and the inhabitants of Jerusalem the spirit of prophecy and of true prayer, and consequently Messiah the son of Ephraim will go forth to make war with Gog ; and Gog will slay him before the gate of Jerusalem ; and they will look unto me and pray to me, because the Gentiles have pierced the Messiah, the son of .Ephraim, and will mourn over him, as a father and mother mourn over an only son, and will be grieved for him, as they are grieved over a firstborn. " 392 ZECIIARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xii. ii. referred to ; the one the lamentation for Ahab, who was slain in battle at Jezreel, as they say, " by Hadad-rimmon the son of Tab-rimmon," identifying Hadad-rimmon with Benhadad;^ and the other, the great mourning for Josiah, who was slain in battle fighting against Pharaoh Necho in the valley of Megiddo. Hitzig formerly suggested that the reference might be to some mourning for Ahaziah, king of Judah, who was wounded by Jehu when the latter rebelled against Joram, and who fled to Megiddo (2 Kings ix. 27), and died there. This suggestion has been long since with- drawn by its author ; but it still deserves mention as an llustration of what fanciful interpretations are sometimes resorted to, when the simple sense of the passage is passed over. The opinion defended by him in his commentary, which has been adopted by some other scholars, is that there is a reference in the mourning of Hadad-rimmon to the mourning for Adonis, whose orgies seem to have had their origin in Phoenicia. This interpretation has been finally disposed of in the masterly article of Prof. Count von Baudissin.- Hitzig's idea was too far-fetched to obtain the ' LXX. (is KOTrerbs potSvos iv ireoiw iKKOTrToixivov, omitting 1'^T\, and regarding njD as a part. pass, of the Aram. 113 to cut dtnvn (v. Baudissin), or, as Schleus- ner suggested, reading 1^1???. The Syr. simply translates : "Like to the mourn- ing of the son of Amon [Josiah] in the valley of Megiddo." The Targ. is : " In that day shall the mourning in Jerusalem be gieater than the mourning for Ahab the son of Omri, whom Hadadrimmon the son of Tabrimmon killed, and than the mourning for Josiah the son of Amon, whom Pharaoh the lame killed in the valley of Megiddo." The Targ. evidently connected the appellation 1D3. or TO"^ (Necho) with nD3, as in D^^JT HD?, lame in the feet, 2 Sam. iv. 4. Com- pare I Kings XV. 18, where Tab-rimmon is given as the name of a Syrian king ; also Sayce's rendering of the name of Benhadad in the Assyrian inscription as Rimmon-hidri (or Benhadad), the name reversed. Grotius long ago thought this view probable. - Ilitzig has maintained that Hadad was the name of the Sun god of the Syrians and Rimmon that of a Syrian god united here with the former, the two names standing in apposition. The compound he regards as a Syrian epithet of Adonis, who was slain by a boar, and part of whose cultus consisted in a lamentation at a certain season. He considers the lamentation for Tammuz mentioned by Ezek. viii.(i4), to be a trace of the Adonis-worship. Thus here, he thinks the lanicuta- Ch. xii. II.] THE GREAT MOURNING. 393 approval of Ewald and his school. Pressel considers that the mourning to which reference is made was the wailing of the mother of Sisera over her son, the great chieftain of the Canaanites, who was slain by Jael after his defeat by Barak not far from Megiddo (Judg. v. 19). The recollection of this mourning was, Pressel thinks, kept alive among the people of Israel by the song of Deborah. The notion is novel and ingenious, but lacks all probability.^ It is now generally admitted that the mourning was that over the pious king Josiah. It is impossible to imagine that the prophet would compare the great penitential mourn- ing over Israel's ill-treatment of the representative of Jahaveh to the mourning over an idolatrous king, or to the wailing of idolaters in their rites, or to the lament of a tion predicted is compared to the lamentation over Adonis. The conjecture is in some respects ingenious. It has not, however, been adopted by Ewald or von Ortenberg, though approved of by Movers, Merx, and Wellhausen {Gotting. gelekrt. Anzeigen, 1877), and regarded vi'ith favour by other scholars. The opinion may be considered as finally disproved by v. Baudissin, who thinks that Schrader was correct in explaining fUST as identical with \ipV^, thunder cr, the 1? being dropped as in ^3 for ?1^5, and the JD doubled as a compensation. But Friedr. Delitzsch {Chalddische Genesis, p. 269) has since shown that the appellation Ramami or Iiamtnamim.es.n5 ^^ exalted," and Schrader himself has lately adopted that view. The correct mode of writing the compound is pi-obably piDTITH, Hadar-Ram- mon or jOTITH, Hadar-Ramman. In many cases the utmost confusion prevails in MSS. and Versions in names in which T and 1 occur. The first part of the compound is that which stands second in the name Ben-hadar (as Benhadad should be written), after the Assyrian inscription of Salmanassar II., where Bin- idri or Bin-hidri occurs (Schrader, Keilinsclwiften, p. loi). Sayce prefers to read the ideogramm Rimmon-'hidri {Records of the Past, vol. iii. p. 99, vol. v. p. 34). The sense of the compound Hadar-Rammon seems to be Glorious is the Ex- alted one. The name was never given to Adonis. It is used as the name of a place, so termed from the God worshipped there, possibly before the land came into the possession of the Israelites, or so called after the overthrow of the kingdom of Israel, by some Syrian or Assyrian colonists who settled in the locality. See von Baudissin, Studien zur Scniitischen Religionsgeschichte, Heft. i. Leipzig, 1876. ^ The idea of Lightfoot is a very strange one. He mentions in his Chr. Temp. V. &^ N. T., p. 47, in the folio edition of his works, that two mournings are here referred to ; the first that around the Rock of Rimmon (Judg. xx. 45), on account of the reduction of the numbers of the tribe of Benjamin, and the second that for Josiah. But there is not the slightest ground given in the text in support of the former idea. 394 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xiL ii. heathen mother over a son, who was a bitter and ruthless enemy of the people of God. The mourning for Josiah, re- ferred to in 2 Chronicles (xxxv. 25), was of a very different character, and was in reality a national mourning. In that national lamentation Jeremiah took part, and for it he com- posed special dirges, which are unfortunately lost. The battle in which Josiah fell was a battle fought " in the valley of Megiddo " (2 Chron. xxxv. 22), the identical words used in the end of the clause, " as the mourning of Hadad-rimmon in the valley of Megiddo." Josiah was not only lamented by the nation when he died, but for many years after that fatal battle the custom of lamenting this pious king was kept as an ordinance in Israel (2 Chron. xxxv. 25). There is probably a reference to this national mourning in Jer. xxii. 10. Hadad- rimmon, or Hadar-Ramman, which appears to be the correct form of the name (v. Baudissin) must be the name of some place not far from Megiddo. Jerome in his note on this pas- sage observes that "Adadrimmon is a city near Jezrccl, which was formerly called by this name, and now is called Maximian- opolis, in the place of Mageddon, in which the pious king Josias was wounded by Pharaoh surnamcd Necho." Baudissin notes that it is highly improbable that Jerome should, as Hitzig imagines, have taken the name Hadad-Rimmon for Maximian- opolis from this passage in Zechariah. The situation of the towns Megiddo and Maximianopolis seems now fairly ascer- tained. The former was probably on the site of the later Legio, the modern LedsJnin, and traces of the latter arc said to be found in the modern village Rummanch, little more than a couple of miles south of the other, in which name the old Hadar-Ramman may be preserved, though that is doubtful.i ' Lieut. Conder has informed me that Maximianopolis is placed by the Bordeaux Pilgrim ten Roman miles from Jezreel in the direction of Ca-sarea, and was iden- tified by Vandevclde with Rummaneh. Sec Condcr's Tent ]Vork in Palestine, vol. i. p. 129. Ch. xii. II.] THE GREAT MOURNING. 395 A slight difficulty arises with respect to the notices of the death of Josiah in the books of Kings and Chronicles. In the fuller account given in the latter book Josiah is said to have been brought wounded from Megiddo to Jerusalem, where he died (2 Chron. xxxv. 22-24.) How then could the mourning over him have taken place at Hadad-rimmon .-' In the shorter account in the book of Kings it is mentioned that the king was carried dead to Jerusalem. It is, however, quite possible to render the word translated " dead " (-HI?) by "dying" (compare Gen. xxxv. 18), as Ewald, Bertheau, and v. Baudissin have suggested, although Thenius {Coimn. iiber die Koiiige) is opposed to that translation. The mourning may be considered as having commenced at Hadad-rimmon, where the king received his deadly wound, even though the great national mourning took place at Jerusalem, whither his body was brought from the fatal field. Moreover (as Bau- dissin observes), " the mourning of Hadad-rimmon " may be explained as " the mourning over Hadad-rimmon," i.e., over the national calamity which took place there. ^ ^ It has been questioned whether the fatal battle in which Josiah lost his life actually took place at Megiddo. Josephus states that it occurred at the city of Mende (/cara M.ivhr\v -wSkw, Antiq. x. 5, § i). This Baudissin seems to regard as an error of writing (p3D for 11130). Herodotus (Book ii. 159) speaks of the battle as having taken place at Magdolus, which would most naturally be taken to signify the city Migdol (?i"13P) on the confines of Egypt, well known to the classical writers, and not far from Pelusium (Jer. xliv. I, xlvi. 14 ; Ezek. xxix. 10, XXX. 6, compare Exod. xiv. 2 ; Num. xxxiii. 7). This would have been a most natural place for the battle to have occurred. Herodotus, however, was much more likely to make a mistake in such a matter than the writers of the books of the Kings and Chronicles, and both place the scene of the battle at Megiddo. Ewald (Gesch. Israels, vol. iii. 3 Aufl. p. 762) conjectured that el-Medshdel (?i^^l!lO) is meant by Herodotus, which is south of Akko on the Nahr-d-AIdik (the king's river), which designation he suspects was given to it after the fatal battle. As far as locality is concerned, this conjecture is not at all improbable, the place being not far from the valley of Megiddo. The objection to it, as noticed by Baudissin, is that there is no trace of the spot in ancient authorities. Pharaoh Necho according to Herodotus was wont to make much use of his fleet for the purpose of transporting the army in drder to save time and lengthened marches by land, and Thenius and v. Baudissin think it most probable that he did soon this 39^ ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xii. 11-14. The objection brought forward by Hitzig, that the solemn mourning for Josiah took place, not on the battle-field where that Jewish monarch fell mortally wounded, but at Jerusalem, is of no weight. For the death of Josiah was the event which led to the utter discomfiture of the Jewish army, and the signal victory of Pharaoh Necho. The loss of the king must have been bitterly bewailed by his soldiers on the field of battle, as well as afterwards lamented by the nation at large, when the dead body of their monarch was brought to Jerusalem. The mourning in Jerusalem was but the con- tinuation of that began on the fatal field of Megiddo. The sorrow of the children of Israel which is described as taking place in the day of their national repentance, is then most suitably compared to the greatest national sorrow that ever befell that nation, when its most pious and beloved mon- arch was slain by the Egyptian archers on the bloody field of Megiddo. But the penitential sorrow of Israel for the great martyr was to be grief not only affecting the nation as a whole, but all the families of the nation in their individual character. The prophet therefore compares it not only to the national mourning which took place for Josiah, but also to the sorrow experienced when a firstborn and only son, the single hope of his parents, is borne to the silent grave. The mourning was one in which the whole land should take a part. It is strikingly pictured as one which should not only be manifested in public, but be participated in by each family apart. Families are spoken of as mourning occasion. In this case he would have landed his troops north of the territory of Judah, and his shortest course in marching against the king of Assyria from the sea coast of Palestine would have been thi'ough the valley of Megiddo. Hence it would be quite natural for Josiah, who seems to have possessed some authority over at least a portion of the ancient territory of the kingdom of Israel (i Kings xiii. 2 ; 2 Kings xxiii. 19 ; 2 Chron. xxxiv. 6), to march across his own frontiers in order to attack the Egyptian army on its flank. Ch.xii. 11-14-] THE GREAT MOURNING, 39/ apart from families, individuals as compelled, by the deep sorrow which should overwhelm them, to weep apart by themselves. The lamentation was to be greater than any former lamentation. Husbands would mourn apart from their wives, and wives apart from their husbands. The sorrow, though national, was also to have all the charac- teristics of individual sorrow. It was to be national and private at the same time ; it was not to be a mere ceremonial lamentation, but a genuine sorrow of heart. Each individual was to experience the grief so keenly as to desire to hide himself from the eyes of others. The nation in general, and each member of it in particular, was to experience the full bitterness of penitential grief The outpouring of the Holy Ghost on the Day of Pentecost caused the first outburst of such a sorrow. Many Jews were b. then partakers of that deep penitential grief, both in public and in private. The sin of having slain the Lord's Christ broke their hearts, although through Divine grace they were enabled to look by faith unto him whom they had pierced, as their fathers had looked unto the serpent of brass in the wilderness (Num. xxi. 9), and thus to mourn for him with a godly sorrow that worked repentance unto life (2 Cor. vii. 10). The tears of penitential sorrow for the sin which caused the death of the Redeemer have never from that day onward ceased to flow. Thousands and thousands of Jews wept for their sins then, and beheld by faith the Lamb of God who taketh away the sin of the world (John i. 29). The great national mourning of that nation in its fullest sense will take place when the fulness of the Gentiles shall have come in, and the children of Israel shall return to the Lord their God. In that penitential sorrow the Gentiles have had their share. Made children of Abraham by faith in Christ Jesus, they, too, have in the long vista of ages been led in thousands and tens of thousands, nationally and individually, to mourn 39S ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xii. 12-14. for sin, and to look to the Redeemer, in the sin of whose crucifixion they, too, have had their share. As Pressel has beautifully remarked in his meditations on the chapter, in a countless number of silent chambers, the sighs and prayers of individuals have ascended to heaven. Men and women of all stations and positions, of all families of the earth, have joined in this lamentation, princes and beggars, learned and un- learned, teachers and hearers. And " when he comes in the clouds of heaven, this lamentation will arise to heaven at once in all languages and tongues, until it is silenced before his throne of grace, and changed into that song of praise, ' Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and w^isdom, and strength, and honour, and glory, and blessing,' Rev. v. 12." (Pressel.) The families of the greater portion of the inhabitants of the land are summed up in the expression, " all the families which are left, family by family, apart, with their wives apart." Four families are, however, mentioned by name, two of them well known, though with respect to the other two there is much difference of opinion. The two well-known families are those of the house of David and of the house of Levi.i The others are the family of the house of Nathan, and " the family of the Shimeite," or " the family of the house of Shimei " Of the four, two, as we shall see, belonged to the royal house, and two were priestly families. The explanation given by Jerome, namely, that the family of David represents the royal tribe or Judah in general ; that of Nathan, the prophetic order ; that of Levi, the priests ; and that of Shimei, the teachers, " for the different orders of magistrates sprang from this tribe ;" points' to the Jewish tradition respecting the tribe of Simeon alluded to in the ' Ilitzig observes that it is strange that Levi appears only as a family, but he notes also that the word is used in a more extended signification, and is employed as a synonym of D2\y (a tribe^ in Judg. xviii. 19, as also in Josh. vii. 17. Ch. xii. 12-14.] THE GREAT MOURNING. 399 Targum Jerushalmi on Gen. xlix. 7. That tradition is, how- ever, devoid of any historical basis, though it is mentioned by Tertulhan {cont. JiidcEos, 10, and cont. Marcion, iii. 13). Nathan, is probably not to be regarded as the distin- guished prophet of that name, who flourished in the time of David, but rather as the name of one of David's sons^ (2 Sam. V. 14), who was an ancestor of our Lord (Luke iii. 31). The patronymic used by Zechariah, viz., " the Shimeite," cannot, as Hengstenberg and others have noted, mean the members of the tribe of Simeon, for which ''the Simeon- ite" (Num. xxv. 14) would have been used. ^ The latter objection is fatal to this view, independently of others which might be urged. The family of Shimei probably means the descendants of Shimei, the grandson of Levi, mentioned in Exod. vi. 17 ; Num. iii. 17, 18, 21 (Hengsten- berg, Kohler, v. Ortenberg, Kliefoth), which family is named as one of the subordinate branches of the sacerdotal line. The house of Nathan seems also to represent a subordi- nate branch of the royal house (2 Sam. v. 14; Luke iii. 41), mentioned along with that branch from which the kings of Judah were descended. The special mention of these two minor subdivisions of the house of David and of the house of Levi respectively may be supposed (as Hengstenberg has suggested) to indicate that the mourning spoken of was to pervade every family, from the highest to the lowest, of which predicted fact, these two subordinate " houses " are only given as examples. The prophet names specially the royal and priestly families in order to intimate that in the ^ In connexion with the opinion that Nathan was the son of David, it is ' ' worthy of note that Dehtzsch has shown that the Synagogue have partly traced!, the genealogy of the Messiah to that branch of David's family. See Delitzsch'sjj, Talmudische Studienin the Liith. Zeitschrift, i860, p. 640, ff. '•' ^ The patronymic from flUptJ' [Simeon) is ''Jy?pE^'^ Num. xxv. 14 ; Josh. xxi. 4 ; while that from ''V'OP (S/iivia') is '•rp^H, Num. ii. 21, as in this passage of Zechariah, That •'l)?DErn nnD£i>0 is equivalent to "'rOEJ'n-n''a ^'D is plain from the similar constructions in Num. xxvi. 5, 6. 400 ZECIIARIAII AND IIIS rROniECIES. [Ch. xii. 12, 13. crime of the nation, in the murder of the great martyr, to which reference is made, those families should bear a part, and that they, therefore, should have a special share in the great penitential mourning. Neumann thinks that the Shimei whose family is here spoken of was Shimei the son of Gera, the Benjamite, who cursed David with a heavy curse in the day that David fled from Jerusalem before Absalom his rebellious son. At that time Shimei charged David before the people with being " a man of blood," whose sins were justly visited upon his own head (2 Sam. xix. 16, ff.). Hitzig has adopted a somewhat similar view, for he considers the Shimcites to represent the tribe of Benjamin, and the house of David to represent the tribe of Judah. But this is improbable. Neu- mann supposes that the family of Shimei is mentioned as an example of God's pardoning grace, because Shimei, by cursing the Lord's Anointed, had exposed himself to the just sentence of death. The Shimeites, according to this view, represent the lost and abandoned sinners who by the power of the Spirit of God will at last be found among such as mourn pcnitcntially for the pierced Redeemer. But this explanation docs not suit the context, and the word can only be used as a simple patronymic. Lange has adopted the same view, and thinks that the prophet in speaking of " the Shimeites," and not of "the family of Shimei," has designedly withheld from them the more honourable title and appellation. This appears more than fanciful, and the criticism is doubt- ful (see note 2, p. 399). Kimchi considers that the families specified by name are mentioned prophetically as families which would become great and well known at the time when the prophecy would be fulfilled. This may also be dismissed from serious consideration. It may commend itself to some who yearn after so-called "literal interpretations," though they seldom reflect, that to render such fulfilments possible, it Ch. xli. 13.] THE GREAT MOURNING. 4OI would be necessary that Divine revelations should be given of long and involved genealogies. Dathe and Hezel think that there is a reference in all the names to the family of the Messiah. They observe that the four names occur in the genealogy of our Lord in Luke iii., namely, Simei in verse 26, Levi in verse 29, Nathan and David in verse 31. But, as Kohler observes, the Simei of Luke iii. 26 could not have been alive in the days of Zechariah. Hence the similarity of names proves nothing. Lord A. Hervey, the present Bishop of Bath and Wells, in his work on the Genealogies of our Lord, though he considers the Levites to be referred to by " the family of Levi," yet maintains that both Shimei and Nathan are to be regarded as descendants of David. He thinks that Shimei was the brother of Zerubbabel (i Chron. iii. 19), who bore such an important part in the restoration from the exile. Li I Chron. iii., however, no mention is made of any family of Shimei, the brother of Zerubbabel. That text, however^ seems to be peculiarly corrupt ; for though seven sons of Zerubbabel are actually enumerated in verses 19, 20, the number of Zerubbabel's sons is stated in the close of verse 20 to be but five. The mention made of Hattush in verse 22 as the fifth or sixth in descent from Zerubbabel (or according to the LXX. the ninth or tenth) presents a serious difhculty ; for Hattush is mentioned in Ezra viii. 2 as a member of the house of David who returned from Babylon with Ezra. But it is quite impossible in that case that so many generations as are stated even in the Hebrew text could have intervened between Hattush and Zerubbabel. It is probable, therefore, that the persons whose names are given in verse 21 have no connexion at all with the genealogy of Zerubbabel. Bishop Hervey thinks it possible that those names have been inserted in some way in their wrong place, " The sons of Shemaiah " in verse 21 he regardsas a simple repetition from the end of D D 402 ZECIIARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xii. 13. verse 20. He would further erase the words at the beginning of verse 22, " and the sons of Shechaniah, Shemaiah," which clause seems to be partly an accidental repetition of the words at the end of verse 21. Verse 22 would then com- mence with the clause "the sons of Shemaiah, Hattush, etc.," Shemaiah being in that case considered as identical with Shimci (the names being really the same in the Hebrew) ; and Shimei would then naturally be identified with the Shimei who in verse 19 is mentioned as the brother of Ze- rubbabel. In order to avoid the difficulty arising from the fact that the family of Shimei is mentioned in Zechariah after the family of Levi, and apart from the family of David, the Bishop supposes that Shimei, the brother of Zcrubbabel, may have remained in Babylon, though Hattush his son returned to the land of Judaea. The Bishop evidently feels that this difficulty is almost fatal to his entire theory, though he is un- willing wholly to abandon it. The explanation is ingenious, but it rests too much upon mere hypothesis to be regarded as probable. The separation of the names of Nathan and Shimei from one another in this verse was not thought by Rabbi Salomo ben Yizhak to be fatal to a similar theory propounded by that commentator, who maintains that the Shimei of Zcch. xii. 13 was identical Avith Shammuah the son of David. He says, " Sacred Scripture first speaks in general of the family of the house of David, and afterwards specially enumerates each (family)." The authority of Gciger may also be adduced in support of the opinion that " the family of Shimei " is to be regarded as the family of Shimei the brother of Zerubbabel {Urschrift, p. 59, footnote). But it must not be forgotten that Geigcr identifies Nathan in this place with the priest Jonathan, the father of Jaddua (Nch. xii. 11) and of Manasseh the Samaritan high priest. This, of. course, would be impossible, unless the composition of the Ch. xii. 12-14.] THE GREAT MOURNING. 403 prophecy were to be assigned to the times of the Maccabees, and there is little to support that view. As the house of Levi was mentioned by the prophet among those who should " mourn apart " the sin of rejecting the Messiah, it is interesting to call to mind the fact that a great number of the priests are expressly mentioned among those who mourned for the Redeemer in early days (Acts vi. 7). Members of the house of David also joined in that penitential mourning, which was awakened by the descent of the Spirit on the Day of Pentecost. If our Lord's brethren did not believe in him during the days of his humiliation, they were foremost among the disciples that afterwards worked in his cause, Cleopas, who mourned with a fellow disciple the decease of the Lord during that remarkable Sabbath day's journey to Emmaus (Luke xxiv. 18-21), was probably him- self a member of the house of David. Women, too, joined in large numbers the great company of penitents. They had wept for Jesus of Nazareth as he was borne along to his terrible death (Luke xxiii. 27) ; they wept bitterly at his cross (John xix. 25) and at his tomb (Mark xvi. 47 ; John xx. 1 1). But their sorrow was turned into blessed joy, and not a few of them rejoiced after their short days of sorrow, having re- ceived the end of their faith, even the salvation of their souls (i Pet. i. 9). There are those who consider that the prophecy of this chapter is to be regarded as one of those predictions which are as yet unfulfilled. They refuse to admit that the mourn- ing predicted is that great mourning for sin which has been exhibited by thousands and thousands of penitent Jews and Gentiles, and which, beginning at Jerusalem on the Day of Pentecost, was afterwards more or less shared by all parts of the land of Palestine. A literal fulfilment of this prophecy in the future would, as has been already ob- served, require as its preliminary a special revelation with 404 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xii. 12-14. respect to the genealogies of the Jews, which have been long since lost beyond hope of recovery. To dream that such a revelation will be vouchsafed for the purpose of making known the families to which the Jews severally belong, and with the view of specially distinguishing the descendants of David and Nathan and Levi and Shimei, is an idea too monstrous to be entertained by the sober expositor. Few realize to themselves what would be required in order to obtain a literal accomplishment of the prophecy. Even the great Messianic prophecies were not fulfilled in such a "literal" manner as some look for these supposed prophecies of the future to be accomplished. Nothing less than a miracle would be required in order to trace the families of David and of Levi in all their various ramifications. The age of genealogies is gone for ever. The royal line of David has probably been extinct for ages. The last certain trace discovered of that family in ecclesiastical history is most in- teresting, but the story tends to show at the same time that the family of David was almost extinct.^ Its course was run when the promised Son of David was caught up to God and his throne (Rev. xii. 5). The heads of the Babylonian Jews who still remained in exile, and who afterwards established schools of learning in Babylon, — the race of chieftains who kept up a shadowy court, and were known in early times by the old title of " the Princes of the Captivity," — may possibly have had some sli";ht ricjht to be regarded as members of ' We refer to the well-known incident narrated by Neander in his Church History (vol. i. p. 131, English translation published by T. & T. Clark of Edin- burgh), and by Robertson {^History of the Christian Church, vol. i. p. 6) on the authority of liegesippus ap. Euscb. iii. 19, 20. The emperor Domilian having been informed that some descendants of the house of David were living in Judiva ordered them to be brought before him, fearing that they might be disposed to rebel against the Romans. They were the grandchildren of St. Jude, the "brother" of our Lord. They showed the emperor their hands, homy with manual labour, and having thus convinced him that they were poor innocent countrymen, they were I)ermitted to depart in peace to their homes. Ch.xii. 12-14.] THE GREAT MOURNING. 405 David's line. But even that shadowy title and claim has long since passed away. Its very memory has well nigh perished. The literal fulfilment of the prophecy took place when thousands, awakened to a sense of the sin they had com- mitted in crucifying the Lord of life and glory, bitterly bewailed their transgression. The penitential sorrow of those days was not confined to Jerusalem, but pervaded the whole land of Judaea. Many thousands of the Jews believed (Acts xxi. 20), a fact too much lost sight of in the contem- plation of the rejection of the Gospel by the majority of the Jewish people. If the Pentecostal outpouring of the Spirit was an event of such importance as to be predicted by Joel, the mourning on account of our Lord's crucifixion was equally worthy to be noted by Zechariah. Both fulfilments were no doubt in some respects only inchoate ; both prophecies will yet have a grander, but not a more literal fulfilment. The fact is, that as the gift of the Spirit has not been with- held since its primal outpouring, so neither has the mourn- ing even of the Jewish people for their sin come to an end. There never has been a period in the history of the Church when some believing Jew has not mourned because of the sin of his people, nor a time when such a penitential mourner has not found comfort in Christ. Prophecy is wont to view the commencement and the end as closely connected, and both are often embraced in one grand picture. Were it not for St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans, and his distinct pro- phecy respecting Israel's final recovery, it might be argued that there was no reason to look for anything further as regards Israel. The prophecy, however, of verse 9, when expounded in the light of the prediction of the eleventh chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, leads us to expect a still further and more glorious day of blessing, when, in the language of Hosea, "the children of Israel shall return and 406 ZECHARIAII AND IIIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xii. 14. seek Jahavch their God and David their king, and shall fear Jahaveh and his goodness in the latter days " (Hos. iii. 5). "And so," in St. Paul's emphatic language, "all Israel shall be saved : as it is written. There shall come out of Zion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob " (Rom. xi. 26). CHAPTER XII. THE REACTION AGAINST FALSE PROPHETS, AND ITS CONNEXION WITH THE GREAT TRANSGRESSION, CHAPTER XII. The connexion with the previous chapter, the open fountain, 409 — The cleansing water, 410 — Different views of the open fountain, 411 — Objections to Pressel's view, 412 — The expression "in that day," 412 — The allusion to the past na- tional sins, 413, 415 — Danger of idolatry not past in Zechariah's time, 413 — False prophets and superstitions in post-exilian days, 414, 416 — No reference to a future apostasy, 415 — The change of feeling in the Jewish nation as to prophets, 417 — Instances given by Zechariah to show this, 417 — The son slain by his parents, 418 — Flaming zeal, 419 — Cessation of real prophecy, 419 — Reason why that gift was taken away, 420 — Reaction against sin leading to transgression, 421 — False prophets in secret, 421 — The haiiy ganiient, 422 — Jewish asceticism, 423 — Zechariah's second instance, 424 — The defence of the false prophet, 424 — The reference to Amos, 424 — Meaning of the false prophet's defence, 425, 429 — Difference of translation of fifth verse, 425 — Reply of the accuser, 426 — The wounds of the false prophet, 426 — Explanation of Kimchi, 427 — Fresh wounds, 428 — Idolatrous woundings, 428, 430 — Hengsten- berg's view of the passage, 429 — No reference to the wounds of our Lord, 430 — Pusey's statement of that view, 431 — Feeling of Jews against all claims to inspiration in our Lord's day, 432 — The fifth and sixth verses a suitable trans- sition to the seventh, 432 — Proposed transfer of that verse to chap. xi. 433 — The seventh verse commencing a new section, 433 — The sword of Jahavch, 434 437 — Titles of honour given to the Stricken One, 434 — My shepherd, 435 — My fellow, 435— Usage of latter term, 435 — Its significance, 436 — ^Jewish hatred against idolatry, 437 — The terrible sin, 437 — Kliefoth's view of passage, 438, note — The crucifixion of our Lord, 438 — The turning back of the hand of Jahaveh, 439 — The humble ones, 440 — The shepherd smitten because of the sin of the flock, 441 — The third part, 441 — Fulfilment of prophecy, 442 — Refer- ences in the New Testament to this prediction, 442 — The sheep scattered, 443 — The necessity of our Lord's death, 444 — The scattering of Israel, 445. CHAPTER XII. THE REACTION AGAINST FALSE PROPHETS, AND ITS CON- NEXION WITH THE GREAT TRANSGRESSION. The thirteenth chapter, so far at least as its earlier verses are concerned, is evidently a continuation of the great pro- phecy begun in the twelfth. That chapter closed with a description of the great mourning in the land of Israel on account of the crime of which the people of the covenant had been guilty in piercing him who was the representative of Jahaveh. The chapter now before us describes the gra- cious answer given by Jahaveh in reply to the earnest and contrite prayer of his people. The first proof of Jahaveh's gracious return to his people would be seen in his pouring out upon them the spirit of grace and supplication ; and, inasmuch as prayer aroused by the Spirit of God cannot long remain unanswered (Rom. viii. 26, 27), the spirit of supplication would be succeeded by the gift of pardon and acceptance. In the day when the nation of Israel should by Divine grace be led to see the nature and enormity of their trans- gression, " in that day," says the prophet, " a fountain will be opened for the house of David and for the inhabitants of Jerusalem for sin and for uncleanness." ^ By "the house of ^ The LXX. evidently read DfpD for TipD rendering iras towos, thereby confusing the meaning of the passage. The last words of the verse they trans- late eis T7}v fieTaKivrjaiv (al. exx. fieTOLKTjaiv) Kal et's rbv xwpt(TjOt(5j' fal. exx. pavTi(7/i6v). Possibly, as Schleusner suggests, the former rendering was derived from the original meaning of the verb NtOH, or they regarded the word as indicating the punishment inflicted for sin, which was deportation into exile. The latter opinion 410 ZECHARIAII AND IIIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xiii. i. David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem," the members of the covenant i:)cople in general are to be understood. For the mourning of the land (xii. 12) is identified with the mourning to take place in Jerusalem (xii. 1 1), which is more fully termed the mourning of " the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem" (xii. 10). The national sin is represented under the metaphor of uncleanness of a special kind (n"7^). Com- pare Ezek. xxxvi. 17, and, though the word used there is different, Isa. Ixiv. 6. The Jewish nation is represented as defiled with sin and uncleanness, just, as in the picture given in the earlier visions of the prophet, Joshua the high priest was exhibited as clothed with filthy garments (chap. iii. 3, 4). The water whereby that filth is cleansed away corresponds to the gracious command of the Angel of Jahavch in the earlier chapter, whereby the filthy garments were removed from the high priest of Israel. The illustration of water as cleansing and purifying from sin is found also in the prophet Ezekicl (chap, xxxvi. 25 ; compare also Ps. li. 9). The words of the original show that reference is here made to the water so constantly used by the priests and Levites for purification (Num. viii. 7), which was termed sin-zvater (/^^iI2^^ VO), or water whereby purification from sin was obtained. There may also be a reference to that water with which the ashes of the red heifer were to be mixed, which was to be used as " water of uncleanness " (n"71 ■'Q'?), or as "a sin-offering" (i^lH JlJ^'^n, Num. xix. 9, ff.). In Ezekicl the water is spoken of as sprinkled upon is favoured by tlie reading /j.eToiKT](rtv. Their translation of mj has been derived from the original signification of the root. The Arabic translator, possibly unable to attach any meaning to the passage as it appeared in the LXX. has omitted all the words following TIT H^Q? (^o the house of Davici). Acpiila renders Kal els rqv fieraKlvrjaiv Kal etj tov ^avTifffiSv. Either the word fieradvrjffn has been imported from the LXX., as Montfaucon thinks, or the words, as Field is inclined to believe, ought to be transposed, in which case neTaKLvrjjn is Aquila's translation of HIJ. Ch. xiii. I.] THE REACTION AGAINST FALSE PROPHETS. 4I I the individuals who are to be the subjects of grace. The figure here is much stronger ; a fountain of living water is opened in which the guilty can wash and be clean. In the " fountain opened " some have supposed that Zech- ariah refers to waters which are closed up, being designed only for the use of those persons to whom they belong. Thus the loved one in the Canticles (iv. 12) is compared to a spring thus secured, a fountain sealed, indicating that her loveliness was to be reserved for her beloved alone. Schultens, how- ever, is more correct in regarding the idea of the passage to be that the fountain is closed as long as it is hidden in the rock, but opened when it breaks forth. The same idea is presented in Isa. xli. 18, "I will open (nnSJhi) rivers in high places and fountains in the midst of the valleys," and in Isa. XXXV. 6, " in the wilderness shall waters break out, and streams in the desert." The Targum thinks that a reference is made to the Law — " the doctrine of the Law will be revealed as a fountain of waters." It sees in the passage an allusion also to the puri- ficatory water spoken of in Num. xix., for it adds : " And I will forgive their offences, as they are cleansed with the waters of sprinkling and the ashes of the heifer which is the sin-offering." The fountain for sin is, however, to be under- stood generally of the pardoning grace of Jahaveh (Kohler). That grace was manifested in former times to Israel by the sacrifices ordained of God, and a greater display of grace was to take place in Messianic days. The great manifestation of God's love in the days of the New Dispensation was no doubt the atoning sacrifice of the Cross of Calvary, where- by sin was removed and transgression forgiven. But the text can scarcely be regarded as a direct prediction of the effects of the death of Christ and of the pardon obtained thereby, as Hengstenberg and others seem to think. The believer in the New Testament will, however, consider that 412 ZECHARIAH AND IIIS PROniECIES. [Ch. xiii. i. fact as the true realization of the grace spoken of in this pas- sage in more general terms (John i. 29 ; i John i. y)} Pressel, who ascribes the prophecy contained in these chap- ters to a pre-exilian date, thinks that distinct allusions can be traced in the statements of the prophet to the events of his own day from whence Zechariah seeks to draw spiritual lessons. He considers the open fountain to refer to the Levitical arrangements for making atonement for sin. He observes that it is not the water itself which is spoken of, but the fountain whence it flowed. In this he thinks an allu- sion is made to the great works undertaken by Hezekiah for the purpose of providing Jerusalem and its inhabitants with water. Pressel is inclined to view the words of Isaiah (xii. 13) as referring also to those works of Hezekiah. There would be no objection to this view if it could be proved that the prophecy under consideration was composed in the time of Hezekiah. But an idea which has no basis except in the imagination of its author cannot be assumed as correct, and an argument drawn from it in favour of a pre-exilian date. The fallacy of arguing in a circle is certainly not con- fined to the conservative school of criticism. The expression " in that day," which occurs so frequently in the last three chapters of the prophet, does not signify that all the events spoken of as occurring " in that day " are to take place at the same time, or even within a short period of one another. The events stated to occur " in that da}' " are indeed conceived to belong to a special period, which may be either long or short according to the nature of the par- ticular case. The period referred to is always that which is * In Isa. xii. 3 and Iv. i llie grace of Jahavcli is viewed under a different aspect from that in tliis chapter of Zechariah. No reference to sacramental grace or to the water of Ijaptism is contained in the passage in Zechariah ; but as to whether the grace here spoken of maybe considered as contained in baptism will altogether depend on the standpoint from which that ordinance is viewed as a channel of Divine grace. Ch.xiii. 1,2.] THE REACTION AGAINST FALSE PROPHETS. 413 treated of in the special prophecy in which the phrase occurs, which space of time, viewed from the prophetic standpoint, is regarded as one day, or one definite period. It need not necessarily refer to a pre-Messianic or to a post-Messianic period, but may be a portion of time embracing parts of both. An examination of the places in which the phrase occurs, not only in Zechariah, but in the other prophets, is sufficient to prove this fact. Compare the frequent use of the phrase in Isa. ii. — iv. The exiles who returned from Babylon must often have been reminded by the prophets among them of those sins which had in the days of old brought down upon their fathers the heavy judgments of God. Of those national sins the most prevalent were idolatry on the one hand, and a disposition to give heed to false prophets on the other. It was, therefore, only natural, when Zechariah spoke of the banishment from the midst of the people of the evil practices which had formerly caused the nation's ruin, that he should specially mention those national sins (Heng- stenberg, Kliefoth, Reinke, etc). It is by no means necessary to suppose that those particular sins were common among the people in the days of the prophet. Still less are the words of the prophet to be regarded in the light of a prediction that previous to the arrival of the day of grace spoken of in this chapter such transgressions should once more prevail in Israel. The allusions made here to idolatry and false prophets have been, indeed, by many modern critics regarded as decisive proofs of the composition of this prophecy at a period pre- vious to the great exile (Ewald, Bleek, Pressel, etc.). Such "proofs" are, however, eminently unsatisfactory. But though it is not necessary to imagine that the prophet refers to the sins prevalent among the people of Israel in his own day, it is too much to assume that all danger of idolatry was past even at that period. Zechariah might very well have 414 ZECIIARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xiii. 2. feared that false prophets would rise up among Israel then as in the days of old. For mention is made in the book of Nehemiah (chap. vi. lo, 12, 14) of false prophets, plying their evil trade after the Restoration, though not perhaps in the same manner as before the exile ; and mention is made of intermarriages taking place with the Canaanitish and other heathen people of the country, the offspring of which marriages were unable to speak the Jewish language (Ezra ix. 2. ff ; Nell. xiii. 23). Such children could have been very imperfectly acquainted with the Jewish religion, and must have imbibed no small amount of the superstitions of their mothers. If it be a fact that heathen practices and super- stitions actually continued to be practised for ages among nations converted in early days to Christianity, ^ and that Tj fi. i distinct traces of such are found even in the present day in t^/r various Christian lands, though in many cases deprived of =»***' ' their most objectionable features; if heathen practices still ^/v''"' exist in many places even under the profession of Moham- medanism ; it is not surprising that idolatrous practices of various kinds should have been found among the Jews and Israelites at this period. The idolatry of the Chalda,'ans was, as Schegg has observed, in some respects peculiarly dangerous and enticing, and the superstitions of that people as regards soothsayers and magicians were easily incor- porated with the tenets even of a hostile religion. Chaldaean astrologers were well known throughout the Eastern A\orld, and the vaticinations of those who laid claim to prophetic skill were often believed by the people. It is not at all un- likely that many such superstitions were to be found among the Jewish exiles of Zechariah's period. Some of the Jewish ' See abundant proof of this fact in Chwolson's interesting volumes on Die Ssabicr unci der Ssabisinus. On the fact of ancient idolatrous practices still existing in Palestine, see M. Clermont-Ganneau's article on the Arabs in Pales- tine, as published in the Quarterly Statement for October, 1875, of the Palestine Exploration Fund. Ch. xiii. 2.] THE REACTION AGAINST FALSE PROPHETS. 415 popular beliefs of a later age are firmly imbedded in the book of Tobit, and similar superstitions may have prevailed to a considerable extent in the days of Zechariah. Distinct allusion is made to such in chap. x. 2, which verse would by itself be satisfactory evidence on this head, were it not that those scholars whose views we are here opposing maintain that the prophecy contained in that chapter also was com- posed in the pre-exilian period. It is true that the sin of idolatry and the sin of giving heed to false prophets were not the transgressions for which the prophets Haggai (i. 5-10) and Zechariah (i. 2-6) specially reproved the people of their day. But it must not be for- gotten that Zechariah, in alluding to the transgressions of former days whereby their fathers had provoked the Divine displeasure, distinctly referred to those great national sins. The history of the Jews in the days of Zechariah is frag- mentary, and we have no full account of the moral and religious state of the Jewish people during that period. The instances already cited prove that the danger arising from idolatry and false prophets was even in that day not an imaginary one, while the statements of the prophet are by no means inconsistent with the idea that the sins alluded to were no longer prevalent in the land. There is no reason to suppose that the prophet was opposing idolatrous practices carried on in secret among the people (Burger, de Wette), though it is likely enough that such practices did actually exist. The fact is even implied in the charge brought against those who had intermarried with the people of the land as doing " according to their abominations " (Ezraix. i). The view put forward by Kohler that Zechariah alludes to an apostasy of the Jewish people previous to their future national restoration is in our opinion a most forced in- terpretation to put upon the passage. If the prophet had meant to predict an apostasy, he would have announced it in 4l6 ZECHARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xiii. 2. distinct terms. The very notion of such a falling away again into idolatrous practices on the part of the Jewish nation is, we conceive, opposed to the prophecy of Hosea (iii. 4, 5). Lange has well observed with regard to all such theories that it is very convenient for those who can find no historical proofs in favour of literal interpretations to seek to transfer their difficulties to an unknown future. We must, however, dissent from Lange's own view of the passage, namely, that the prophet refers specially to idols of the imagination, which Lange seeks to prove from the phrase " the names of the idols." That theologian observes, that " without doubt the ideals of holiness of the Pharisees, Sad- ducees and Essenes belonged to such idols," as well as the false ideas with regard to the Messiah and the universal empire of the Jewish nation. The taking away, or cutting off, of the names of the idols simply indicates the utter de- struction of idolatry among the people (Hosea ii. 17), the events of the past or the present being often used by the prophets as types of the future. Hence we do not deny that such sins as Lange has mentioned may well be included under the phraseology made use of, though the idea present to the prophet's own mind seems to have been the abolition of actual idolatry. The prophets, the cutting off of whom from the land is here spoken of, are no doubt " false prophets " (so the LXX., Syr. and Vulg.) ; for they are spoken of in close connexion with the idols, and with " the spirit of uncleanness," which Jahaveh would also take away. The epithet " false " is not made use of by Zechariah, because the real character of the persons is clearly indicated by the context (compare chap. X. 2). " The spirit of uncleanness," mentioned in contrast to " the spirit of grace " spoken of at the close of the preceding chapter (xii. 10), is that "evil spirit" which had so often and so fatally manifested its power in the earlier Ch. xiii.2,3.] THE REACTION AGAINST FALSE PROPHETS. 417 days of the nation. The use of the article perhaps implies such a comparison. That evil spirit had been permitted by God's judgment to deceive the godless Ahab, and to lure him to his ruin on the field of Ramoth Gilead (i Kings xxii. 21-23). Our Lord has described the departure of that " unclean spirit " ("Trpeufia aKaOaprov) from the Jewish nation in one of his parables (Luke xi. 24-26), and similar "unclean spirits" are spoken of in the book of the Revelation (xvi. 14) as gathering together even in nominally Christian days the armies of the earth " to the battle of that great day of God Almighty." ^ The prophet cites some examples in order to point out how complete would be the change which in these respects would come over the Jewish nation, as compared with its state in the days before the exile. Not even the natural love of parents to their children would prevent the full penalty of the Mosaic law from being executed in future days upon all such as should assume the role of false prophets. By the Mosaic law parents were enjoined to deliver up their children to death if found guilty of the sin of enticing to idolatry. Such offenders were to be stoned, and the nearest relation, or friend, was commanded to cast the first stone at them (Deut. xiii. i-io). No instance has been put on record in the Sacred Writings in which these injunctions were actually carried into practice. But in the case adduced by Zechariah the parents are described in their burning zeal for the law as doing far more than that law required, and thereby themselves actually becoming transgressors. For the example given by the prophet is not that of a son found guilty of enticing his parents to commit the sin of idolatry ; the person is supposed to be guilty only of the crime of uttering a pre- ' Rabbi Salomo ben Yizhak or Raslii conceives that by " the unclean spirit " is meant the inclination to sin which is common to man. But, as Rosenmiiller ob- serves, the mention made of this spirit along with " false prophets" proves that the spirit which incited those prophets is the one here signified. E E 41 8 ZECHARIAII AND HIS TROPHECIES. [Ch. xiii. 3. diction in the name of the Lord which is assumed to be false. In the case of such a crime having been actually committed, and the guilt of the offender clearly demonstrated by the failure of his prophecy, then, but not till then, the man con- victed of uttering a false prophecy in the name of Jahaveh was to die (Deut. xviii. 19-22). No hasty judgment was to be made in such a case, no jealous relations, or zealots for the law, were rashly to take away life. Time was to be granted in order that the character of the prophecy might be duly tested by the event ; but when the untruth was plainly detected, the false prophet who dared to blaspheme the great name of Jahaveh was to die. The instance given by Zechariah is marked by a total neglect of all the provisions laid down in the law on this very point. "And it shall happen, when a man (or, any one) shall still prophesy, then they shall say to him, (even) his father and his mother, they that bare him, Thou shalt not live, be- cause thou hast spoken lies in the name of Jahaveh. There- fore they shall pierce him through, his father and his mother, they that bare him, on account of his prophesying." The passage thus describes a zeal for truth, but a zeal "not according to knowledge" (Rom. x. 2). Instead of friends having any prepossession in favour of the idea that a relative of their own might be honoured as an instrument of com- municating a Divine revelation, such friends and relations would regard the very idea with abhorrence, as an assumption manifestly false. Their zeal for the law would lead them in such a case to go beyond its directions, and without any in- vestigation whatever into the claims preferred b}- a kinsman, animated with the spirit of hatred at that which they would regard as an attempt to deceive them in the highest and holiest matters, even parents would be ready to pierce their own son through with a spear if he .should dare to pretend to be a prophet of Jahaveh. Ch. xiii. 3-] THE REACTION AGAINST FALSE PROPHETS. 419 This view of the passage, as we shall see presently, will remove some of the peculiar difficulties by which the state- ments of the context are attended. This illustration of Zechariah sets forth most strikingly the complete revulsion as to prophetic claims which would take place in popular feeling among the Jewish nation. The evil spirit which had stirred up so many pretenders to prophetic claims in former times should be so far exorcised, that pretensions to super- natural inspiration, instead of being a mode of attaining to influence, would prove a sure path to ruin. Zeal for the law should be so flaming as to consume all natural affection towards the nearest relations in the case of any such pre- tence to inspiration being put forward by them. Though the passage speaks only of false prophets ceasing out of the land, that fact is conveyed in such terms as imply that no more divinely inspired prophets should in this period be raised up among the people. Ewald and Hitzig have noticed this point, though the latter has added the incorrect observation, that the words of the writer convey the con- viction on his part that prophets in general were false. Hitzig considers the writer as refusing, like Amos (vii. 14), to place himself in the class of prophets, but, like Jeremiah, Ezekiel and others, as determined to oppose them as a wicked caste. But the statement of Amos (see p. 424) was made in a very different sense, and Jeremiah, when he opposed false prophets, himself distinctly assumed the cha- racter and title of "a. prophet" (see Jer. xxviii. 5, 10, 11, 12, 15, xxix. I, etc.). So far from Zechariah intending to make any such insinuation against the profession of prophets in general, he gives very clear and distinct marks in this pas- sage whereby a false claim to prophetic powers may be dis- tinguished from a true one. The cessation of prophecy, here incidentally alluded to, does not by any means imply that Israel should on account 420 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xiii. 3. of their sins be left to grope in spiritual darkness, until the day of national conversion spoken of in chap. xii. 10, in which no man .should any more teach his neighbour to know the Lord, but when all should know him from the least even to the greatest (Jer. xxxi. 34 ; Isa. liv. 13). No intimation is given that the gift of prophecy should be taken away on account of sin and apostasy. The prophetic gift, instead of being represented as at an end in the great days of bless- ing spoken of by the prophets, is represented as one to be then granted in greater measure than before (Joel ii. 28, 29). The gift of prophecy was no longer bestowed, when the object for which it was originally given was achieved. The work of the Old Testament prophets was accomplished when Malachi finished his testimony. It was not, however, in consequence of the sin of Israel that no further prophet was sent to the Jewish nation, either to arouse them to a sense of their sin in the days of the decay of national religion which followed, or to reanimate and sustain their courage and zeal in the glorious outburst of religious enthusiasm and patriotic heroism which occurred in the Maccabean period. The Jews had the Law and the Prophets, and they did hear them. Those writings kept alive the light of truth even in the days of religious indifference, and awakened and stimulated the martyr spirit which characterised the Church of Israel in the gloomy days of the persecution under Antiochus Epiphanes. The prophecy must not be regarded as arranged in strict chronological order, nor must the state of things in verses 2-6 be viewed as necessarily taking place after the national con- version of the Jewish people. Zechariah depicts the period which was to occur before the death of the great martyr referred to in verse 7, for whom the mourning previously spoken of (chap. xii. 10) was to take place. The sin of Israel, in the period spoken of by the prophet, would hinder the complete deliverance of the nation (chap. Ch.xiii.3,4-] THE REACTION AGAINST FALSE PROPHETS. 42 1 xii. 9), even as the sin of Israel had done in the days previous to the great captivity (2 Kings xiii. 18, 19). But a day of repentance should at last be granted to them in which they would mourn for the sins committed by them in killing the prophets in general, and more especially for the crime com- mitted in the murder of the great Prophet and Redeemer. The national sins which had in previous ages caused national disasters would indeed be banished from the land, even at the very period when the gracious efforts of the Lord on behalf of his people would be actually rendered ineffectual because of their sin (chap. xii. 9, xi.9). The unclean spirit of idolatry and false prophecy, which had once exercised such power, would be exorcised (chap. xiii. 2). The gift of true prophecy would cease, and the pretence to Divine inspiration would be too perilous to be indulged in by any except in secret. But the very reaction against the national sins of former days would ultimately hurry the nation into a more terrible crime (chap. xiii. 7), for which they would at last bitterly lament (chap. xii. 10), but for which sin they should be terribly visited (xiii. 8, 9). Days of gracious reconcili- ation would however follow, when God would extend his grace to Israel as a nation (chap. xiii. i), and Israel would become the people of the Lord in deed and in truth (chap, xiii. 9). The false prophets themselves are represented by Zechariah not as altogether ceasing to exist, but as plying their art in secret corners, and as confounded and ashamed when brought to the light of day. In former days they had been bold enough to assert their claims even in the very face of true prophets raised up by Jahaveh. Now popular feeling would run so strongly in an opposite direction, that persons would be ashamed of making any pretence to supernatural visions, and confounded when charged with having made such as- sumptions. Instead of being anxious to be considered as 422 ZECIIARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xiii. 4. prophets, they would rather seek in every way to avoid the reputation of such a dangerous and unpopular profession. Hence the hairy mantle or cloak worn by some of the great prophets of Israel, and afterwards adopted by those who pre- tended falsely to Divine inspiration, would be entirely aban- doned. Whatever other means the false prophets might adopt in plying their profession in secret, the old devices would be discarded, as the very profession would be viewed by the people generally with contempt and hatred. The false pro- phets are not, indeed, represented by Zechariah, as some have imagined, as " repenting truly for their sins past." The reply of the prophet to his accuser in verse 6 is not represented as the language of confession, but as a lying defence set up in order to avoid detection. Such defences are, however, tribute paid to the power of truth ; for hypocrisy in religious pro- fession, however odious in itself, may well be regarded as homage paid to the power of " true and undefiled religion." In directing attention to the lying pretences and false excuses whereby the false prophets would seek to screen themselves, Zechariah does not predict a time when such sin and wicked- ness would altogether cease, but rather means to describe a time when false prophets and soothsayers would be driven by a popular revulsion of opinion to deny that they ever followed such contemptible practices. The " hairy garment " worn by the ancient prophets has been described by Kohler as a cloak made of untanned skins. Pressel regards it rather as a garment formed of camels' hair, such as that worn by John the Baptist. These garments were the favourite clothing of the prophets. Vitringa {Covu)i. in Jesaiam, cap. x.x. 2) has maintained that such garments were worn to indicate a strict course of life and an abstinence from worldly pleasures. Hengstenberg, however, thinks that the " hairy garment " was worn by the prophets as a "sermo pro- pheticus realis," or an " outward symbol of the grief for the Ch. xiii. 4.] THE REACTION AGAINST FALSE PROPHETS. 423 sins of his nation and the consequent judgments of God." That it was used for this purpose on some occasions is prob- able. But, as Reinke remarks, the false prophets could not have used the hairy cloak for this purpose. For though in popu- lar estimation " the dress makes the man," such persons were remarkable for announcing things pleasing to the people, saying, " Peace, peace, when there was no peace" (Jer. viii. 1 1 ; Ezek. xiii. 10). Though the prophets were not "ascetics" in the mediaeval sense of the term, many of them having been married men, it appears that in some particulars, not per- haps easy to define, they did adopt a peculiarly strict course of life. Elijah seems to have been ascetical in his habits though he did not, like modern ascetics, abstain from the eating of flesh (i Kings xvii. 6) ; nor is there any indication of his having inculcated any notion of the virtue of celibacy, an idea which did not take any root among the Jews until in later times they imbibed such opinions from the Gentiles. John the Baptist, who assumed the old prophetic garb, was no doubt ascetic in his mode of life, and perhaps wore that dress in token either of mourning for the sins of his nation or as suited to his peculiar habits. The dress as referred to in Zechariah seems to have been indicative of a claim to peculiar sanctity. The false prophet, whose examination and lying defence is narrated in verses 5 and 6, is not said by Zechariah to have worn such a garment, though Schegg con- siders that the prophet intended to represent him as wearing such a garb, and as maintaining that he wore it only as being one of the common people. The text, however, does not lead us to any such conclusion. The prophet having shown the national opposition which would be exhibited to all such pretences in the period of which he treats, first by the instance of the young false pro- phet slain by his parents because of his pretence to Divine inspiration, and secondly by the general statement that false 4^4 ZECIIARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xiii. 4, 5. prophets would seek in every way possible to avert all sus- picion from themselves of having anything to do with such practices, proceeds to give, in verses 5 and 6, a further in- stance which more fully illustrates the state of the times. The case is that of a man accused of having followed the profession of a prophet. The accused is represented as stoutly denying the charge, and as asserting that he never belonged to such a class. So far, he says, from his ever having professed to be an inspired teacher of the people, he asserts that he was himself but one of the humblest class of the people. He was no prophet, and unable to aspire to such a position, for he was but a mere tiller of the ground. As such he had been employed from his very youth, and, therefore, had never received the training necessary for one of the prophetic order. The words made use of by the accused person in his at- tempt to repel the charge are very similar to those employed by the prophet Amos on a remarkable occasion. Amos had, by Divine command, prophesied against the false sanctuaries of Israel, and against the monarch that ruled over that king- dom. His daring prophecy against Jeroboam II., one of the ablest and most successful monarchs that sat upon the throne of the northern kingdom, excited the indignation of Amaziah, the high priest of the temple at Bethel, which was the chief sanctuary of the kingdom, and the chapel in which the king of Israel was wont to worship. Amaziah accordingly com- plained to the king, and commanded the prophet, if he had any intention of uttering any further prophecies of that kind, to leave the land of Israel and go to the land of Judah, where he could enjoy a quiet life, and make his livelihood by his profession, but on no account any more to dare to utter his predictions in Bethel. To this command of the high priest of Bethel, Amos calmly replied, " I was no prophet," or, " I am no prophet," "nor was I a prophet's son" — (that is, I was not Ch. xiii. 5 ] THE REACTION AGAINST FALSE PROrHETS. 425 trained up to be teacher in the schools of the prophets, or set apart for such a profession (comp. i Sam. xix. 24, and the fre- quent mention made of such pupils, who were termed " sons of the prophets," in 2 Kings) — "but I was a herdman and a cultivator of sycamore figs, and Jahaveh took me from following after the sheep, and Jahaveh said to me. Go, pro- phesy to my people Israel" (Amos vii. 14, 15). That is, Amos did not mean to deny that he was a prophet of the Lord, but, on the contrary, he asserted that, though he had not been trained for such a position, he was called thereto by direct inspiration, and was determined to speak that which the Lord put in his mouth, notwithstanding the threats of the priest and the power of the king. The passage in Amos casts some light upon that in Zechariah. It shows that the accused person, in asserting that he was a tiller of the soil, was in reality taking the most effective means he could to repel the charge of his accuser, and to remove from himself all suspicion of being one who professed to be a divinely inspired and a divinely appointed teacher of the people. Such a person was not likely to be found among the lowest of the people. To indicate still further the unlikelihood or impossibility of such a charge, the false prophet adds, " for a man bought me (or used me as a slave) from my youth." From my very youth, I was pur- chased as a slave for the purpose of being employed in agri- cultural work or among cattle. If a herdman or a plough- man was an unlikely person to be a prophet, how much more unlikely was it that a slave should be so. Amos was, in- deed, a remarkable instance of a herdman being a prophet, but no instance had occurred of a slave being one. It is a matter of secondary importance, as regards the general meaning of the passage, whether we translate the verb in the last clause " sold," or " purchased," or " used me as a slave." Kimchi renders, " a man, one of the common 426 ZECIIARIAH AND IIIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xiii. 5, 6. people, taught me to keep cattle from my youth," which can scarcely be regarded as a possible translation. Dr. Pusey seems to follow Kimchi's view, as he translates, " for a man hath taught me from my youth," and explains it, " there was no room for his having been a false prophet, since he had from his youth one simple unlettered occupation." Dr. Pusey's objection to the translation "bought," or "sold," namely, that it would have been contrary to the Levitical law for a Hebrew to have been held so long a slave, is far indeed from " decisive " of the question, as the Levitical law was in many points not always attended to, especially in such enactments (see Neh. v. 1-13, and comp. Jer. xxxiv. 8-22), and it is very conceivable that amid the disorders of the day such an excuse might appear valid. Hitzig's idea, that the words are to be considered as a confession of truth, and that the false prophet admits he was a runaway slave who had taken up the vocation of a prophet to get his bread without toil, needs only to be mentioned. ^ The accuser of the false prophet is, however, described as not so easily put off the right track by the plausible defence set up by the accused. Returning to the charge, the assail- ant asks the false prophet, if his statement were true, " what ' njp is a very common Hebrew verb, and is used in the signification of to found, to create, to acquire, to buy. The hiphil occurs only in this passage. Dr. Pusey's translation is possible, but it would scarcely bear the explanation he puts upon it. The hiphil is most naturally explained as a denominative from H^pD, a possession, obtained me as a possession, that is, procured me as a slave to serve him. The hiphil is sometimes found with the same signification as the kal, e.g. nn?n, which is identical in meaning with nn3. Comp. Ewald, § 122, r. But, as Kohler observes, the hiphil may have its usual causative force in this verb, in the sense of completing the purchase. The ancient versions are mostly wide of the mark. The Targ. has nWSQ '3^3i?tSt Xt?'JJ< *")X, "for a man made me a pos- sessor (of land?) from my youth." The LXX. have Sri dfOpunros iyivvrjai ne iK vebrrfTbi /xov, which Schleusner explains as "begat me as such," i.e., as a husbandman. This is, however, questionable. Aquila fra^^ fie, Symm. inipuri fie, Theod. ^5ei^i /xe. The Syr., connecting the verb with X3p, render, "and a man stirred up my zeal from my youth." The Vulg. strangely "quoniam Adam exemplum mcum ab adolesccntia mca." Ch. xiii. 6.] THE REACTION AGAINST FALSE PROPHETS. 427 are those wounds between thine hands?" The wounds be- tween the hands may possibly mean wounds on the palms of the hands, or on the arms/ or (as is far more probable) wounds on the breast, between the hands. Compare the use of the cognate expressions " between the arms " in 2 Kings ix. 24, and "between the eyes" in Deut. xi. 18, vi. 8. The phrase certainly cannot mean, as Rashi seeks to explain it, " between thy shoulders," where persons are wont to be scourged. Hitzig thinks that these words refer to the first case adduced in verse 3, and maintains that the false prophet of this verse is the same who is spoken of as pierced or run through by his parents, but who was not actually slain. Hitzig refers to Jer. xxxvii, 10, where the verb is used in the signification of wounding, but not mortally. The passage in Jeremiah is translated in our Authorised Version, "for though ye had smitten the whole army of the Chaldaeans that fight against you, and there remained but tvoimded men (men pierced through), yet should they rise up every man in his tent, and burn this city with fire." The false prophet is sup- posed by Hitzig to be seeking to excite the sympathy of his accuser by informing him that the wounds he had noticed were indeed received at the hands of those who ought to have loved him. But such an interpretation does violence to the language, and renders the passage extremely pointless. Kimchi explains the answer of the false prophet to mean, " these are the wounds with which I was wounded in the house of my friends, in the Beth Hammidrash (house of study) my friends beat me on account of my writing, when we used to write or were learning," in order to make me give up study and attend to my pastoral or agricultural ' In defence of this translation Rosenmiiller has cited the expression ni3n"in p3 in Prov. xxvi. 13, which means "in the midst of the streets," as expressed in Prov. xxii. 13, num linn. 428 ZECHARIAII AND HIS rROPIIECIES. [Ch. xiii. 6. employment. Rosenmiiller explains it as a confession of his having been punished in his parents' house for false prophecies, which opinion is not very ' different from that of Hitzig. The word here used for " wounds " denotes frcsJi zvounds, and not old scars, still less the marks of old castigations. The fresh wounds, in whatever part of the body they may have been noticed, whether on the hands, arms, or breast, are evidently referred to by the accuser as affording proof of the truth of his accusation. The wounds, there- fore, must have been regarded by the accuser as having been inflicted on his person by the prophet himself, in order to arouse his prophetic frenzy, or in connection with some idolatrous rites. It must not be forgotten that such rites were sometimes observed even where Jahaveh was acknowledged to be the highest object of adoration. In the idolatrous court of Ahab there were hundreds of false prophets who were wont to prophesy in the name of Jahaveh (i Kings xxii. 5, 6, 7, 1 1, 12), and yet at the same court priests and prophets of Baal cut themselves with knives and lancets until the blood gushed out upon them (i Kings xviii. 28) in order to procure answers from their god. That such practices were common among the Israelites in the days of apostasy is plain from the passage referred to, as well as from the prohi- bition of similar doings in Deut. xiv. i, in cases of mourn- ing for the dead, which were employed in later times by the Israelites (Jer. xvi. 6, xli. 5). Similar usages were found among the Philistines and Moabites (Jer. xlvii. 5, xlviii 37). Hitzigand others are quite right in asserting that the accused man cannot have referred to "wounds" which were self-in- flicted, inasmuch as the verb " I was wounded " is a pure passive, not a reflexive. This objection is fatal to the views of those who regard the words as a confession of some sort on the part of the false prophet. But though the accused Ch. xiii. 6.] THE REACTION AGAINST FALSE PROPHETS. 429 sought to account for his wounds by assigning an untrue reason for their existence, the accuser regarded those wounds as self-inflicted. We cannot, therefore, with Hengstenberg, regard the statement as signifying that the prophet acknow- ledged with the deepest shame his former folly, and that he speaks of himself either as having been wounded during some idolatrous rites in which the worshippers actually inflicted wounds on one another, or because, though he himself was the instrument, the real authors of the wounds were "his lovers," or the idols whom he worshipped. It is no doubt true, as Hengstenberg has observed, that the particular form of the verb which occurs here Clinj!;^^) is used only of impure love, and specially of idols. Still the objection of Hitzig is well founded, that, though a people might indeed call their gods by such a term (Hosea ii. 7, 10, 12 ; Ezek. xvi. t,2,, 36), a single person would scarcely use such a phrase. Though it be true that the special conjugation of this verb (piel) is used in all other cases of dishonourable love, there is nothing in the form of the verb to render that meaning necessary, intensity of love being all that is expressed thereby, and the expression might, as far as the form is concerned, be used with reference to parents, or any friends, whether good or bad. The simple meaning of the passage seems to be, that the false prophet, when pressed to explain how, if his statement was correct, he could explain the wounds in his hands or on his breast, at once, with a ready, if a lying excuse, replies, " I have been wounded in the house of my friends." It may be possible that he meant simply to suggest that the fresh wounds which were so suspicious had been accidentally in- flicted when with his friends, or he may have suggested that these wounds were received by him on the occasion of some carousal with boon companions. The words are too indefinite to allow us to decide what sort of friends are re- ferred to. It is clear, however, that the man denies com- 430 ZECHARIAH AND HIS TROPHECIES. [Ch. xiii. 6. plctcly that his wounds had anything whatever to do with any rcUgious rite, and equally clear that no reference is made to the parents spoken of in the eighth verse. It is unnecessary to d© more than allude to the numerous passages in the classical writers and in the Fathers of the Church, as well as in the works of later travellers, in which mention is made of wounds inflicted by worshippers on them- selves in connexion with idolatrous rites, and more especially in connexion with prophesyings of various sorts. The Latin poet Tibullus speaks of such in a well known passage, — Ipsa bipenne suos ca^dit violenta laccrtos Sanguineque effuso spargit iniilta deam, Statque latus pra^fixa veru, stat saucia pectus, Et canit cventus, quos dca magna monet. I. Eleg. 6, 47-50- Similar self-lacerations are spoken of in i Kings xviii. 28 in close connexion with the priests of Baal when they acted as prophets C^hJIl^ri^). Such voluntary torture was not had recourse to at all timcs^ but was regarded as a mark of more than ordinary devotion, and was used only on extraordinary occasions. Dr. Pusey's remark that "the idolatrous incisions have a technical name" (/ini^) ^•'^ "^ objection whatever to the opinion that the wounds spoken of were considered by the accuser to be of this kind. No doubt they were fresh wounds, not fully healed, wounds caused by the " cuttings " used by false prophets to arouse prophetic enthusiasm. The notion that a reference is made to the wounds in- flicted on our Lord on the cross is quite at variance with the entire context. Even modern Roman Catholic scholars, such as Schegg and Reinke, have abandoned this view as untenable. It has, however, been recently adopted by Dr. Pusey. He arbitrarily separates verse 5 from verse 6, and supposes the latter verse to refer to the Pierced One, of whom Ch. xiii. 6.] THE REACTION AGAINST FALSE PROPHETS. 43 1 the seventh verse treats. But who that desires to explain the passage according to its context and strict grammatical sense can give in his adhesion to the following ? " The most literal interpretation of the wounds in the hands harmonizes," says Dr. Pusey, "with the piercing before, and the smiting of the Good Shepherd which follows, of whom David, too, pro- phesied ^Aey pierced my hands and my feet (Ps. xxii. 16). What are these wounds of thy hands } . . . And He shall say : With these I zvas tvounded in the Jioiise of those who loved Me. O great sacrilege, sacrilegious homicide, that such wounds were inflicted in the house of those who loved. He will not say, ' with these I was wounded by those who loved Me,' but 'in the house of those who loved Me!' For they who inflicted them loved Him not. But they were the house of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and David, and the rest like them, who loved Me, and expected Me, Who was promised to them." Dr. Pusey makes no effort to point out any connexion between the former and the latter part of the prophecy, on the assumption of the truth of this exegesis. In the instances adduced Zechariah points out that one striking characteristic of the future days should be a popular mistrust and hatred of any claims to prophetic inspiration. There is much more described than a sound reaction against the pretences of false prophets. The age is represented as impatient of any such supernatural claims. This opposition to false prophets and idolatry was to be the natural result of the more general knowledge of the ancient prophetic writings on the one hand, and of the cessation of Divine prophecy on the other. It would lead the people to exhibit an antipathy against the peculiar sins into which their forefathers so often fell, but it would render them liable to be led away into the excesses of a blind bigotry. Reaction from sin in one direc- tion is often wont to predispose to transgression in another. Opposition on the part of the Jewish nation to all kinds of 432 ZECIIARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xiii. 5, 6. false claims to Divine inspiration would render that people liable, at the impulse of a blind fanatic zeal, to cry out against the Messiah, who had come to redeem and to save, " Crucify him, crucify him!" In the first instance given by Zechariah, the parents of the young false prophet, indignant beyond all bounds that a claim to Divine inspiration should be made by one whom they knew so well, are described as hurr}-ing him off at once (deserving though he may have been of his fate) to a too hasty death, without that calm and quiet examina- tion of his claims to such inspiration expressly provided for by the Law of Moses. Similar feelings actuated the minds of the people of Nazareth, who, when they had heard the wisdom and seen the mighty works which Jesus performed (Matt. xiii. 54), asked indignantly concerning the young car- penter whom they had known for years, probably as a young man of a silent and retiring disposition, but who then came forth in a very different character, " Is not this the carpenter's son .'' Is not his mother called Mary.'' and his brethren James and J OSes, and Simon and Judas? and his sisters, arc they not all with us ? Whence then hath this man all these things .'' And they were offended in him" (Matt. xiii. 55-57). The self-same feeling may have been that which led them on another occasion, as he was setting forth in the synagogue his claims to be regarded as a prophet like PLlijah and Elisha, and his right to be permitted to act in accordance with their examples, to rise up in a body and to thrust him both out of the synagogue and out of the city, hurrying him along in their rage to the brow of the hill whereon their city was built, that they might cast him down headlong (Luke iv. 28, 29). The fifth and sixth verses, when viewed in this light, are no unsuitable transition to the remarkable prophecy that follows in verse 7. The exaggeration of truth Avas to lead to the sin against him who was the Truth, and the change in the national disposition, from a fatal readiness to accept the Ch. xiii. 7.] THE REACTION AGAINST FALSE PROPHETS. 433 utterance of any pretender to supernatural afflatus, to an utter antipathy to all such claims, was ultimately to lead the Jewish nation to reject him who spake not his own words, but those of him who sent him, and who solemnly affirmed " I came down from heaven " (John vi. 42). Viewed superficially, verse 7 seems to be out of place in the position where it is found, and would appear more pro- perly regarded as the rightful conclusion of chap. xi. The sword was spoken of in chap. xi. (verse 17) as the instrument by which the evil shepherd, whose character is there por- trayed, was to be destroyed, while no shepherd is mentioned in the course of the present prophecy. We are not surprised that, looking to these points alone, Ewald and von Ortenberg should have been led to maintain that the verses following are out of their place, and that they ought to be transferred to the end of chap. xi. There a shepherd is depicted upon whom the sword of Jahaveh was to descend in vengeance ; here the sword of Jahaveh is called upon to do execution on a shepherd. The critical arguments by which this transfer is sought to be supported must be considered elsewhere. Even internal evidence is strongly in favour of the verses being retained in their present position. For the language of verses 8 and 9 is clearly connected with that in chap. xiv. 2 ; and Hitzig, as well as other commentators, has rightly rejected the arbitrary severance of this passage from its present connexion, which has no support whatever from MSS. or Versions. " Sword, awake against my shepherd, and against the man who is my fellow, 'tis the utterance of Jahaveh of hosts. Smite the shepherd, in order that the sheep may be scattered, and I will turn back my hand upon the humble ones." The verse does not begin a new prophecy, but commences a new section, which partly traverses the same field as that which precedes, being in some respects an enlargement of F F 434 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xiii. 7. what has gone before. The sword is addressed as a person wakened up from slumber, and bidden to rouse himself to his special work. A similar personification of the sword of Jahaveh is found in Jer. xlvii. 6, 7. The fact that the sword of Jahaveh should be called forth from its scabbard in order to strike, has been adduced by Hitzig, Maurer, Ewald, von Ortcnberg and others, as a proof that the person stricken must needs be considered as some one who had sinned against Jahaveh, and provoked him to anger. But Kohler, Keil and others, have justly observed that this conclusion by no means follows. " The servant of Jahaveh " is distinctly represented in Isa. liii, as bruised by Jahaveh, but not for his own sin (Isa. liii. 4, 5, 6, 8,9, 10, 12). Similarly the smiting of the shepherd is mentioned as a judgment which was indeed to descend on him personally, but was to be inflicted in order that the sheep might be scattered. The flock is that which in the previous prophecy (a prophecy intimately connected with the present one) was depicted as worthy of punishment, ' and as visited therewith. The smiting of the shepherd was a special judgment to descend on the flock. If the shepherd I was to be removed by the stroke of Jahaveh's sword, it is because his death, like that of the servant of Jahaveh in Isa. liii., though innocent, was viewed as a stroke from the hand of God. The striking passage in the Psalms must be recalled to mind, "Arise, O Lord, disappoint him, cast him down : deliver my soul from the wicked, which is thy sword " (Ps. xvii. 1 3). God is often said to perform that by his own consent and will which is accomplished through the means of the ungodly (Acts ii. 23. Sec note on p. 439). The expressions used in verse 7 are rightly regarded as appellations of honour — "my shepherd," and " the man that is my fellow." Such expressions might possibly be used in solemn irony, as some modern scholars have supposed ; but a special reason must be shown for the use of irony. We are Ch. xiii. 7-] THE REACTION AGAINST FALSE PROPHETS. 435 not at liberty, as Schegg has truly observed, to explain, according to our fancy, honourable epithets as ironical. No such reasons can be here shown. When mention is made of an evil shepherd in chap, xi., his character is distinctly stated. The reverse is the case here. The judgment that is depicted in the verses following is a heavy judgment on the land and its people, who are represented as godless, and, therefore, God -forsaken (verse 9). The expression " my shepherd " is indeed used of the heathen Cyrus (Isa. xliv. 28), and, apart from any other qualifying statement, might refer to any king appointed by God. When used with respect to Cyrus, the name was a title of honour, and Cyrus was so called because he was to per- form the special work of gathering again the Lord's scattered flock. The wild godless Pekah, the idolatrous Manasseh, the God-defying Jehoiakim, or the false and foolish shepherd of chap, xi., cannot be so designated, even though that shepherd was raised up in judgment by Jahaveh. The removal of such shepherds could only be a blessing to the flock, while the removal of the shepherd is here represented as utterly dis- astrous. The sense in which the title is used is more clearly defined by the words " the man who is my fellow." The word ren- dered " my fellow " (''/^^t3^) is used elsewhere only in Levi- ticus, though there is no proof whatever that it had become " entirely obsolete," and was " revived by Zechariah out of the Pentateuch," as Hengstenberg, Pusey and others have asserted. Its very use in Leviticus in laws which affected the ordinary relations of life, and which must have been fre- quently appealed to, was enough to keep the term alive in popular language, even though it does not occur in the extant literature of the Hebrews until the days of Zechariah. In the book of Leviticus it is used in the sense of a neighbour, a member of the same tribe, and as a synonym for " brother," 43^ ZECIIARIAII AND HIS TROrHECIES. [Ch. xiii. 7. when employed in reference to a fellow-member of the nation of Israel (Lev. xxv. 15). Its meaning in Leviticus must necessarily be the guide to its signification here. It was originally an abstract noun, but only used in a concrete meaning, and consequently it is safer to reject the rendering of Gesenius and Hitzig, " the man of my fellowship," though that is possible, and the second word is in the genitive.^ The word might, indeed, denote unity of essence with Jahaveh, a relation as close and intimate as that designated by the same term among men. Hence it may refer to that •i OL^I mysterious unity of being which existed between our Lord and the Father. The Christian believer may, with the teach- ings of the New Testament before him, naturally conceive that some such idea is conveyed. Such a sense, however, i:«^ vi-vi cannot be proven, and inasmuch as the prophet^ must have ""'' ■ used the term in some sense which he himself comprehended, it is more likely that the title is to be understood to mean similarity of position. Thus understood it indicates that the person of whom the prophecy speaks would be one who should stand in the same relation to the sheep which he fed as Jahaveh himself As " the shepherd of Israel," he was to be " the fellow of Jahaveh " (Ps. xxiii. i ; Isa. xl. 11; Ps. Ixxx. 2, or verse i in E.V.). We pause here to consider the fulfilment of this prophecy. The popular hatred against idolatry and false prophets — the good features of which sentiment were so remarkably displayed in the noble struggle against that sin in the days of the great persecution under Antiochus Epiphanes — would ultimately lead the nation on to great transgression. That feeling would compel the false prophets, who in secret sought to ply their evil pursuits, to resort to all sorts of untruths to ' See crit. comm. It is used in eleven passages in Leviticus — v. 21 (E.V. vi. 2) twice in the same verse ; in xviii. 20, xix. il, 15, 17, xxiv. 19, xxv. I4, twice in the verse, and in xxv. 15, 17. It always occurs with the suffixes. Ch. xiii. 7-] THE REACTION AGAINST FALSE PROPHETS. 437 conceal their actions. But with all the zeal of the people as to religion, the age which succeeded the mighty deliverance which the Lord granted in the era of the Maccabees was a time of religious declension. As it was said of the Redeemer that he could do no mighty work in a certain place because of the people's unbelief (Mark vi. 5, 6), so it is said in reference to the era after the Maccabees that the Lord would seek to destroy all the nations that were coming up against Jeru- salem, but would be hindered because of his people's sin (chap. xii. 9 ; see p. 380). Some great sins were indeed put away, but others were indulged in. One unclean spirit departed, but seven unclean spirits soon took its place (Luke xi. 24-26). In place of superstition there sprang up irreligion. Bigotry took the place of righteous zeal. The sword of judgment, which in a theocracy might justly have been unsheathed against the impostor, was 'drawn to smite the true Prophet of God. The shepherd of Israel, mysteriously identified with Jahaveh in chap. xi. 13, and whose con- temptuous rejection is there depicted — that mysterious per- son of whose martyr-death obscure hints are dropped in chap. xii. 10, and whose death was viewed there as a piercing of Jahaveh himself, which was to be bitterly bewailed by the nation — that shepherd termed here by Jahaveh " my shepherd and the man that is my fellow " — was to be stricken down by the sword of Jahaveh. That sword was to be drawn, not indeed, as the fulfilment shows us, directly by Jahaveh him- self. Wicked men, Jahaveh's sword, as they are styled (Ps. xvii. 13), were to execute, not Jahaveh's wrath, but his determinate counsel (Acts ii. 23). The servant of Jahaveh was to be led as a lamb to the slaughter, and cut off from the land of the living (Isa. liii. 7, 8). In the bitterness of his soul he was to cry, and for a time apparently in vain, " Deliver my life from the sword, my only one from the power of the dog" (Ps. xxii. 21, or verse 20, E.V.). The death which he 438 ZECIIARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xiii. 7. was to die was a death which was to be inflicted in the name of Jahavch, in professed accordance with the law of Jahaveh. The sword of Jahaveh was drawn against him, as against a false prophet who had spoken falsely in the name of Jahaveh, and the weapon of the Law (John xix. 7) struck down the Son of God, the very image and representative of Jahaveh. Condemned as an impostor, in avowed accordance with the law of God, Jesus Christ suffered on the awful charge of im- piety against his Father! His death was a judicial murder.^ This wonderful fulfilment fully explains the language used, which Zechariah no doubt understood to signify that on account of the sin of the people of the covenant, the man who was to be Jahaveh's fellow, and the shepherd of his flock, was to be taken away by a violent death. The sin of the nation, which led the good shepherd to demand his hire at the hands of the wretched flock, and led them to add insult to their neglect of his guidance, by offering him a con- temptible price, was permitted to work out its own punish- ment by finally culminating in the commission of the great ^ Kliefoth maintains that the smiting of the shepherd is not to be understood of the death of Christ, but as a prediction of the great apostasy which is, according to him, yet to come. By that apostasy, he considers, Christ will be cut off, so as to be no longer a power on the earth. We cannot here discuss his interpretation of the various texts to which he refers, which either speak of such an apostasy, or are supposed by him to do so. His mistaken view that the ex- pression |*"1Nn ?3, "the whole land," throughout this book is to be understood of "the whole world," has led him into strange notions, not in accordance, in our opinion, with the analogy of Scripture. He has a great difficulty to overcome in the fact that his exposition is directly contrary to the natural sense of our Lord's words in Matt. xxvi. 31, in which our Lord most plainly interprets this prophecy of his death on the cross. Kliefoth's attempt to get over this difficulty is most unsatisfactory. See crit. comm. His argimient that Zech. xiv. must refer to the future, because it speaks of a gathering of "all nations" against Jerusalem, will be discussed in our remarks on that chapter. No mention is made in that chapter of the cessation of day or niglit, or of an end being put to the constant change of seasons, as summer and winter, which Kliefoth imagines to be predicted in chap, xiv. 6-8. As his argiuuents do not rest so much on the textual criticism of Zech- ariah as on his views of other prophecies of Scripture, they may be the more ex- cusably passed over by us as beyond the main purpose of our present work. Ch. xiii. 7. J THE REACTION AGAINST FALSE PROPHETS. 439 national crime of crucifying our Lord. And, inasmuch as that crime was to be visited severely on the guilty nation, the death of Messiah, which was to be the prelude to national disaster, is represented as effected by the sword of Jahaveh. The flock which is referred to as scattered in verse 7 is most naturally explained to signify the sheep spoken of before in chap. xi. We cannot, therefore, with von Hofmann (in his Schriftbeiveis, ii. § 2, 565) and Ebrard, regard it to signify mankind in general and Israel in particular. Nor can we think, with Kliefoth, that the Christian Church as existing at the time of the end is that referred to, composed of believers and unbelievers, out of whose midst he imagines the apostasy ^ of the latter days is yet to take place. Nor can we even \°^[ regard it as signifying the early Christian Church, which view / shall be presently noticed. It rather denotes, as Hengsten- ' berg, von Hofmann himself in his earlier work, and the critics of the modern school, consider, though on very dif- ferent grounds, Israel in general, the people of the covenant. This is the flock of which mention is made in chap, xi., and there are no sufficient reasons to suppose that a different flock is referred to here. The expression which follows is one concerning which there is some difference of opinion, first as to the meaning of the phrase rendered in our A.V. "I will turn my hand upon," and next as to the translation of the word " the little ones." The phrase " to bring back one's hand " is generally used in the ^ Compare the numerous passages which speak of things permitted by God as done by his decree, though often brought about by the sin of man. Gen. xlv. 5, 1. 20 ; Exod. iii. 19, iv. 21 ; Isa. liii. 5-10; Acts ii. 22, 23 ; Luke xxii. 22, with 2 Cor. V. 21; Rom. xi. 11, 12. The sword, being a common weapon of warfare and instrument of inflicting death, is spoken of here, not as necessarily implying that the shepherd refen-ed to would fall by the sword. We read of Uriah as slain by the sword of the children of Amnion (2 Sam. xii. 9), though he really fell by the arrows of the Ammonites (2 Sam. xi. 24), and in that place the general expres- sion occurs " the sword devoureth one as well as the other." See also Exod. v. 21 ; Ps. xxii. 21 (E.V. verse 20) ; Matt. xxvi. 52. 440 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xiii. 7. signification of doing so in anger, as in Amos i. 8, " I will turn my hand (or, I will turn my hand back) against Ekron," or in Ps. Ixxxi. 15 (verse 14 in A. V.), where Jahaveh is de- scribed as saying, " I should soon have subdued their enemies, and turned my hand (back) against their adversaries " (see crit. comm.). But the same phrase is also used in a good sense, where Jahaveh is said to deal out his loving chastise- ment for the purification of his people, as in Isa. i. 25, " I will turn my hand (back) upon thee, and purely purge away thy dross, and take away all thy tin." In either case, how- ever, the constant use of the phrase employed implies that the turning back of the hand would be accompanied with chastisement, even though that chastisement might be designed for purposes of purgation. The word translated "little ones" (DH^i:) ought not to be so rendered. The verb is found in two places (Jer. xxx. 19; Job xiv. 21), and the word which occurs here, and here only, is properly the participle active of that verb, and is not to be regarded, as it has been too often, as an equivalent to the adjective Q''y)^)i (Jud. vi. 15 ; Ps. cxix. 141), which is derived indeed from the same verb, but is of a different grammatical form. Bottcher has correctly pointed out that the word in this verse signifies not those who are ////"A-, but those who appear as little, the patient, the humble. This signification of the word proves that the phrase " I will turn my hand back " must be here taken in a good sense.^ For the phrase is not equivalent to " the wretched of the flock," " the wretched flock" of chap, xi., as Kcil, Rcinke and others, think, • We cannot, therefore, with Kohlcr regard the sheep so termed as identical with the whole flock spoken of as scattered, or consider that they are styled ^^ little" small, or rvcak, as compared with other sheep which fai- exceed them in power and might on earth (comp. Jer. xlix. 20, 1. 45), under whose superior force they were to be subjected, inasmuch as they had themselves refused the good shep- herd's care. This need not imply that any comparison is here tacitly introduced with the Gentiles, who arc not spoken of under the similitude of sheep in Zechariah. Ch.xiii. 7,8.] THE REACTION AGAINST FALSE PROPHETS. 44I treating the word here as an equivalent to "li^^iJ, which occurs in the Hebrew text in Jer. xiv. 3, xlviii. 4, where the margin has the adjective ly^, which is found in Jer. xHx. 20, 1. 45 ; Ps, cxix. 141. Bottcher's opinion must be regarded as cor- rect, namely, that the phrase means the suffering, the humble, the poor, which is that also adopted, though for different reasons, by Hitzig. The ancient versions and readings are noted in our crit. comm. The text evidently signifies that the shepherd should be taken away on account of the sin of the people, in order to hasten their punishment. After his removal, the sheep in general were to be scattered. But mercy was reserved in store for a portion of the flock. The Lord would turn back his hand, outstretched in anger against the flock considered as a whole, in love and chastening grace upon the lowly and the humble. The latter would not, indeed, be free from chas- tisement, but in their case all trials would serve for the removal of their dross and tin. Judgment might indeed commence at the house of God (i Pet. iv. 17), or with the humble sheep. In the world they might have tribulation ; but if Jahaveh was with them in the times of trouble, and would give them the support of his sustaining and comforting grace, they ought indeed to rejoice (John xvi. 33). Their days of mourning would be short. For them a fountain would be opened for sin and for uncleanness. Their sorrow would be turned into joy, their mourning into gladness. The misery which was to accompany the dispersion of the flock is more fully set forth in the verse that follows : " And it shall come to pass in the whole land — 'tis the utterance of Jahaveh — that two parts in it shall be cut off, shall expire, and the third part shall remain in it." The expression " in all the land " must not be regarded, as Marck, von Hofmann, Neumann and Kliefoth imagine, to signify " the whole earth," but rather the land of Israel, in which the flock that was 442 ZECIIARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xiii. 7, 8. tended by Jahavch dwelt. So correctly Hengstenberg, Kwald, Bunsen, Kohlcr and Keil. The passage is somewhat akin to Ezck. v. 2, 12, where the nation is spoken of as divided into three parts, all of which were to be punished in a different manner. In 2 Sam. viii. 2, David is recorded as having thus dealt with the Moabites, destroying two parts and saving the third alive. Isaiah in his prophecy {vi. 13) repre- sents a tcntJi only as escaping. Zechariah speaks of a tJiird. Both are to be regarded as emblematical expressions for a fczo, not as describing the exact proportion of the remnant that should escape. This prophecy met with a striking accomplishment. The Shepherd was slain when Jesus of Nazareth was crucified, an act ascribed no less to the determinate counsel and fore- knowledge of God on the one hand than to the malice of men on the other. In consequence of this national sin the nation was given over to party spirit, which rapidly developed to an extraordinary degree. That party spirit was the means of delivering the people into the power of the cruel shepherd, who devoured instead of feeding the flock, that is, into the hands of the Romans. The Jews madly invoked on them- selves and upon their children the blood of the Messiah, and wrath indeed came upon them to the uttermost (1 Thess. ii. 16). It is needless here to do more than refer to the fearful manner in which the Romans quenched all the Jewish attempts at in- surrection. At the siege of Jerusalem by Titus upwards of one million one hundred thousand Jews are said to have perished, and during the revolt of Bar Kokhba, which occurred not long after, some six hundred thousand more were destroyed, and the whole land of Judaea was reduced to a desert. A remarkable reference to this prophecy of Zechariah concerning the smiting of the shepherd is found in our Lord's words (Matt. xxvi. 31 ; Mark xiv. 27). After our Lord had partaken of his last passovcr, and had instituted the ordinance Ch.xiii.7,8,] THE REACTION AGAINST FALSE PROPHETS. 443 of his Supper, he proceeded with his little band of dis- ciples on the way to the garden of Gethsemane. On the road he addressed them in these striking words : " All ye shall be offended because of me this night, for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock shall be ^ * scattered abroad : but after I am risen, I will go before you into '^ Galilee." From the use of the phrase " it is written," it is -^ evident that our Lord intended to refer to this passage of.,..^L Zechariah. The quotation, however, is a free one, and does ^^ not altogether agree with the Hebrew text on the one hand, /=>^ nor with the LXX. on the other. The smaller differences cannot be noted here. It may, however, be observed gene- rally that the address to the sword is entirely omitted, and the imperative changed into the future. The meaning of the passage is preserved unaltered. The closing words of our Lord, " I will go before you into Galilee," may possibly con- vey, as suggested by Reinke, the same thought as is expressed in the words of the prophet, " I will turn my hand upon the humble ones." If the observation be correct, it is plain that our Lord understood that phrase in a good significa- tion. The expression " the sheep shall be scattered " has been often regarded as a prediction of the flight of our Lord's disciples when he was arrested in the garden of Gethsemane. Justin Martyr considered that event as a complete accom- plishment of the Old Testament prediction, though Ambrose explains it of the scattering of the apostles in all lands, and Jerome of the multitudes of those who believed in Christ. The correct view appears to be that the desertion of the Lord in the hour of trial by his_niostJaitliful followers, whereby they were scattered every man to his own, and left the Saviour alone (John xvi. 32) — a desertion which added so much to the bitterness of "that " hour of darkness " — was indeed of importance in itself, but still more so as prefiguring 44+ ZECIIARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xiii. 7, 8. the desertion of Christ by the Jewish nation, and the terrible scattering of the flock of Israel. It was expedient for the sake of the disciples themselves that the Lord should go away from them (John xvi. 7), in order, among other things, to wean them from the false views which they entertained respecting his kingdom, as well as that by " his precious blood-shedding " atonement should be made for the sins of the whole world. Omitting all considerations concerning the necessity of Christ's death as an essential part of his redeeming work, the death of our Lord was also necessary for other reasons. It was necessary to teach the disciples the true nature of his kingdom. Their unbelief in his higher nature and mission, which manifested itself at times, notwithstanding the teaching of our Lord and the wonderful acts which he performed ; and the " hardness of heart" which prevented their acceptance of the essence of his teaching, namely, that self-denial was the law of his kingdom ; all rendered it expedient that the Master should be removed from the midst of his disciples, that the Shepherd should be smitten, in order that the disciples should hence- forth "know him no more after the flesh " (2 Cor. v. 16), and that they might learn practically that which they could not learn theoretically, namely, the vanity of all their carnal notions with respect to his glory and kingdom. Hence for these causes, as well as for others, Christ had to go "the way of the cross." The sin of his own disciples, therefore, in a peculiar sense necessitated his crucifixion, and consequently they, too, were to be chastened for their un- belief and hardness of heart, though in mercy and in love. Their confidence in themselves was to be rudch' shalccn, their faith in their Lord thereby confirmed. They were first to learn their own weakness and unspirituality. Afterwards, when "filled with the spirit" (Eph. v. 18), they were to receive power to be witnesses unto Christ both in Jerusalem and in Ch.xii.7-9.] THE REACTION AGAINST FALSE PROPHETS. 445 all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth (Acts i. 8). Hope had well-nigh died out in their souls when the third day dawned after the crucifixion of their Lord (Luke xxiv. 21). But even when the little flock was scattered, it was the Father's good pleasure to give them, when humbled, the kingdom (Luke xii. 32). Though they fell, they rose again, and though they sat for a time in darkness, Jahaveh was at last a light unto them (Micah vii. 8). In their case also the prophecy was to be fulfilled : " The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light : they that dwelt in the land of the shadow of death, upon them hath the light shined " (Isa. ix. 2). It was the gracious promise of the Redeemer that after his resurrection he would go before them into Galilee, where he was to exhibit himself to the Church in general, to the five hundred brethren at once (i Cor. xv. 16), as him who was dead and is alive for evermore (Rev. i. 18), as the Resurrection and the Life (John xi. 25). There on the mountain in Galilee was the Church to have indisputable proof of the resurrection of Jesus, and there all hesitation and doubt as to whether he ought to be worshipped by his followers was set at rest by his own words, which quenched the smoke of doubt, and kindled at the same time the flame of love, " All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost " (Matt, xxviii. 16-19). This interpretation does not, indeed, exhaust the meaning of the passage. The scattering of the sheep of Israel was in its full sense the dispersion of that people into all parts of the earth. The terrible disasters which befel the Jewish nation in the land of Israel have already been glanced at. But not even those fearful trials should cause "that genera- tion" to pass away or perish (Matt, xxiv. 34). A third part would still remain, which should " be left in it," i.e., " in 446 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xiii. 8, 9. the land," even as in the days of the carh'er captivity (Isa. vi. 13). These words, Hke the words of Isaiah which relate to the Babylonish captivity, are not to be pressed too literally. The so-called " literal interpretation " has proved too often destructive of all true comprehension of the spirit of the prophetic word. The words are rather to be re- garded as giving a description of the future exhibited in the colours of the past. Amid all the disasters and horrors of the national deportation to Babylon, the poor of the land had still been permitted in considerable numbers to abide in the land, until, through their own folly and sin, the greater por- tion of that remnant fled to Egypt, and brought upon them- selves more terrible misfortunes (Jer. xli.-xliv."). Amid the fearful calamities of the period of which Zcchariah speaks, a feeble remnant would still be left in the land as seed of future hope (Isa. vi. 13). Some few relics of the seed of Abraham would be found in the land of promise, and in that land, when purified by afifliction, and tried as gold in the fire, days of blessing would dawn at last for the ancient stock of Israel (Matt, xxiii. 37-39). CHAPTER XIII THE ESCHATOLOGY OF ZECHARIAH, OR ''THE LAST THINGS" AS SEEN IN THE LIGHT OF THE OLD DISPENSATION CHAPTER XIII, The New Dispensation the " world to come," 449 — Why called " the world to come," 450 — Conflicting views respecting the prophecy, 452 — The Roman war under Titus not the main subject of the prediction, 453, 460 — The prophecy not literal, 454, 460, 507 — View of modern critics, 455, ff. — '' Aday of Jahaveh," 455, note, 457, 516 — ^Jahaveh's fighting with the nations, 456, 464, 517,522 — The cap- ture of Jerusalem, 457, 459 — The gathering of the nations, 458 — The half of the remnant, 460 — The remnant not cut off from the city, 461, ff., 518. ff- — Parallel passages, 464 — Meaning of the phrase "to fight against" or "at," 464, note — The appearing of Jahaveh on the Mount of Olives, 465, ff., 472, 519 — Dean Stanley on the Mount of Olives, 467 — The phenomena attending the coming of Jahaveh, 468, ff., 478, ff. — The imagery of the prophets, 469— The earthquake, 469, 471 — The Mount of Olives only mentioned here in the Old Test., 470— The valley opened through it, 471, 472, 473, 475 — " My mountains," 471, and note 2 — The escape from Jerusalem, 461, 471, ff., 519 — The Mount of Cori-uption, 466, 470, 473, note 2, 519 — The flight into the valley, 473, ff. — The reading of the fourth verse according to the Oriental Jews, 475 — Different opinions regarding Azal, 476, and note. — The earthquake in reign of Uzziah, 477, ff. — The holy ones, 479 — The day of darkness, 480 — Different readings of the sixth verse, 4S1, and note, 482, and note, — Mistake of our A. V., 483—" One day" 483— The day "known" to, or " chosen " by the Lord, 484 — " Not day and not night," 485, 521 — Light at eventide, 486 — The "Regeneration" of the world beginning at Jerusalem, 487, 521 — The living waters, 487 — The rivers of grace and the day of blessing, 488, 521— Jahaveh a king, 488— The land of Judah referred to in ninth verse, 489 — Objection of Lange, 490 — Jahaveh one and his name one, 489, 490 — The change in the land, 490 — The Arabah, 491 — The elevation of the city of Jeru- salem, 493— Its limits, 494 — Its gates, 494, ff. — The king's wine-presses, 496 — The abolition of the "curse," 496 — The lilessings given to "the remnant," 497. 519— The destruction of the foe, 49S— Pcslilences, 499, IT.— Confusion and panic, 499, 500— Judah fights at Jerusalem, 500, ff. — Conflicting opinions, 501 — Spoiling of the foe, 502 — The plague of the animals, 502 — The nations wor- shippers of Jahaveh, 503 — Israel and the Gentiles, 504 — Supposed reference to Messiah, 504 — The pilgrimages to Jerusalem, 505, 506 — The feast of Taber- nacles, 505 — The punishment for disobedience, 506 — The mention of Egypt, 507, ff. — Its punishment, 510 — The bells of the horses, 511 — Opinions of the Jewish commentators, 512 — The pots in the temple, 513 — ^Jewish interpretations, 514 — The abrogation of ceremonial law, 512, 514 — The Canaanite no longer in the temple, 515, ff. — Concluding survey of the prophecy, 517 — The Messianic dispensation a state of light and darkness commingled, 520 — False views of Antichrist, 521 — The glorious future, 522. CHAPTER XIII. THE ESCHATOLOGY OF ZECHARIAH, OR, "THE LAST THINGS " AS SEEN IN THE LIGHT OF THE OLD DISPENSATION. The passing away of the dispensation of the law of Moses, which as limited in great part to Israel after the flesh, might well be called the Jewish dispensation, was justly regarded as " the end of the age " (97 avvreXeca tov al(bvoois, "shall fight in those nations." This translation wasone of the reasons why Theodoret and Cyrill considered the prophecy to refer to the destruction of Jeni- salem by the Romans. Theodoret expressly remarks, irapara^eTai dk ovk 'lovSaiuv vTrepfiaxCi>v dWa kut'' e/ceiVwv crpaTTjyCiv. The phrase 3 DH^J generally means to /ig/tt against, whether against a people or an individual, as in Exod. i. 10, 2 Chron. xxxv. 22 (bis) ; or against a city, Jud. ix. 45, i Sam. xxiii. i, 2 Sam. xii. 27. But the preposition is also used with the same verb to indicate the place at which the battle occurs, as Exod. xvii. 8, "at Rephidim " ; Jud. v. 19, "at Taanach"; 2 Chron. xxxv. 20, 22 (" at Carchemish," "in the valley of Megiddo "), The context of chap. xiv. 14 proves that the sentence there has been correctly rendered by the LXX., /catToi)5as Trapard^eTai iv 'lepovaaX-fjix, and so the Syr., not as the Vulg. , " sed et Juda pugnabit adversus Jerusalem." See our remarks on that passage. H H 466 ZECHARIAH AND HIS TROPHECIES. [Cli. xiv. 1-4. of his people, as standing on the hill opposite to Jerusalem, namely, on the mount of Olives. From thence he would first of all provide a place of safety for the remnant of his people, and from thence he would afterwards bring low the pride of their cruel foes. No mention is made in this prophecy of any personal appearance of Jahaveh in glory to be seen by all those assembled at Jerusalem. This has too often been assumed as a fact ; but the incidents related by the prophet are opposed to this idea. Such an appearance is inconsistent with the mention afterwards made of the pestilence which consumes the nations, and of the battle renewed at or in Jerusalem, in consequence of the new courage inspired into the heart of the men of Judah (verse 14) by reason of the return of him who of old was the captain of his army {Josh. V. 14). The advent of Jahaveh was to be a real coming, but not such an appearance in glory as would strike terror at once into the foe. He would come in other guise, but not less truly, to bring redemption to his people, and to lead them like a flock by his own hand, and not by that of another ; and as the God that doeth wonders and yet hideth himself (Isa. xlv. 15), he would appear as the God of Israel, the Saviour, with his mighty arm to redeem his people the sons of Jacob and Joseph (Ps. Ixxvii. 14-20). The thought, then, of the passage seems to be : Jahaveh would appear not in Jerusalem, conceived as profaned by the feet of the uncircumcised, but on that mountain which had in itself no claim to be regarded as holy, but rather the reverse. The false and unreal sanctity would vanish, Jerusalem once holy would be regarded as unholy, while the mount formerly so unholy and unclean, where temples had been erected by Solomon to the false gods of the heathen, would be the very spot where Jahaveh would choose to reveal himself Tlic glory of Jahaveh, which for a time was not to be manifested Ch.xiv.4.] "THE LAST THINGS" AS SEEN IN O. T. LIGHT. 46/ in the once holy city, is depicted as standing on the mountain on the east of the city, namely, on the Mount of Olives (Ezek. xi. 23). " The lasting glory of the Mount of Olives," writes Dean Stanley, and his words may perhaps suitably be introduced here, " belongs not to the Old Dispensation but to the New. Its veiy barrenness of interest in earlier times sets forth the abundance of those associations which it derives from the closing scenes of the sacred history. Nothing, perhaps, brings before us more strikingly the contrast of Jewish and Christian feeling, the abrupt and inharmonious termination of the Jewish dispensation [spoken of by Zechariah in this prophecy] — if we exclude the culminating point of the Gos- pel history — than to contrast the blank which Olivet presents to the Jewish pilgrims of the middle ages, only dignified by the sacrifice of ' the red heifer ' ; and the vision too great for words, which it offers to the Christian traveller of all times, as the most detailed and the most authentic abiding-place of Jesus Christ. By one of those strange coincidences, whether accidental or borrowed, which occasionally appear in the Rabbinical writings, it is said in the Midrash, [in the Midrash TeJiillim, as a saying of Rabbi Jannai, cited by Lightfoot, Cent. CJiorograpJi. Matt, prcevi., cap. xl.. Opera, tom. ii., p. 201] that the Shechinah, or Presence of God, after having finally retired from Jerusalem, ' dwelt ' three years and a half on the Mount of Olives, to see whether the Jewish people would or would not repent, calling, ' Return to me, O my sons, and I will return to you ' ; ' Seek ye the Lord while He may be found, call upon Him while He is near ' ; and when all was in vain returned to its own place. Whether or not this story has a direct allusion to the ministrations of Christ, it is a true expression of his relation respectively to Jerusalem and to Olivet. It is useless to seek for traces of his presence in the streets of the since ten times captured city. It is im- 468 ZECHARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xiv. 4. possible not to find them in the free space of the Mount of Olives." ^ The Mount of Olives had often been a source of evil to Jerusalem. From its heights the enemy was oftch wont to count the towers (Isa. xxxiii. 18) of the city, in order to devise a plan of levelling them with the dust. But the point of danger was to be the place whence help should come. That mountain was also the most serious impediment in the way of a rapid escape out of Jerusalem. It had been a hindrance in David's path when he fled from the face of his rebellious son (2 Sam. xv. 30). But the descent of Jahaveh on that mountain would make it to be no longer a hin- drance, but would convert the very obstacle itself into a way of escape. When Jahaveh came down on Mount Sinai to announce his law to Israel, his appearance was accompanied with an earth- quake, "the mount quaked greatly" {Exod. xix. 18). When David describes poetically the manifestations of Jahaveh to deliver his poor hunted soul from the hand of Saul, he too speaks of lightnings, thundcrings, and a mighty earthquake whereby even the foundations of the earth were disclosed, as suitable accompaniments of the Lord's appearance for his rescue (Ps. xviii. 8, 16 ; h^V. verses 7, 15). When the story of Elijah's meeting with God on Mount Horcb is related, mention is made of the same accompaniment of a great and strong wind that rent the mountains, of an earthquake, and of flashes of fire, preceding the still small voice of God (i Kings xix. 11, 12). Deborah, in her triumphal song, refers to the earthquake on Mount Sinai, whereby the earth trem- bled and the mountains were melted (Jud. v. 4, 5). When the Psalmist bursts forth in praises of the appearance of God in the sanctuary where the ark of the covenant was placed, he too recalls to mind the wondrous phenomena of nature ' Stanley's " Sinai and Palestine," p. 1S9. Ch.xiv.4.] "THE LAST things" AS SEEN IN O. T. LIGHT. 469 which attended the manifestation of the glory of the Most High in other days (Ps. Ixviii.). And when amid the gathering gloom of a day of affliction, which he perceived rapidly approaching, Habakkuk thinks of God's past de- liverances of his people, that prophet recounts not merely the deliverance at the Red Sea, but again speaks of the glorious manifestation at Sinai with its accompanying earth- quake (Hab. iii. 6, 10). When Nahum describes Jahaveh's going forth to judgment against Nineveh, he too remembers the mighty acts of the Lord, and speaks of mountains quaking, rocks rent, hills melting, and the earth itself being burned (Nah. i. 5, 6). The mighty earthquake which took place at the crucifixion of our Lord, whereby the rocks were rent and the graves opened (Matt, xxvii. 51, 52), and the similar phenomena manifested at his Resurrection (Matt, xxviii. 2) may also be noticed here. In accordance, therefore, with the Old Test, representations, and with the imagery used by psalmists and prophets, Zechariah, when describing Jahaveh's coming forth for the salvation of his people, " to still the enemy and the avenger " (Ps. viii. 3, E. V. verse 2), speaks of the Mount of Olives as split to its very centre by an earthquake, beneath the feet of the Mighty One of Jacob.^ Nor can it be forgotten that when Isaiah speaks of an earlier siege of Jerusalem, which he designates as Ariel (which probably means the " Altar of God," Jerusalem being under the Levitical dispensation the * The notion of Hitzig that the mountain is represented as splitting asunder from the weight of God is an idea utterly at variance with all the representations of the prophets of Israel. Grotius, referring the whole prophecy to the attack on Jerusalem in the days of the Maccabees, strangely explains the fourth verse as having reference to the feet of Bacchides, one of the most skilful generals of Antiochus Epiphanes. He remarks that the person referred to is often to be gathered from the sense of the passage ; but his notion has been justly rejected by all other expositors. The connexion of verse 4 with the preceding verse renders it almost impossible to refer the pronoun to any other than Jahaveh himself. 4/0 ZECHARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xiv. 4. only lawful place for sacrifice), the prophet depicts both the deep humiliation of that city and its wonderful deliverance, the might of the king of Assyria being shattered before its walls ; and describes the holy city as destined to be visited by thunder and earthquake and by a great storm and tempest and the flame of a devouring fire (Isa. xxix. 6). For as Haggai speaks of an earthquake accompanying the shaking of the nations (Hag. ii. 6, 7), so Ezekiel represents the de- struction of Gog as brought about in a similar way (Ezek. xxxviii. 19-22). Such language is too often made use of by the prophets in a figurative signification to be regarded as necessarily, or even probably, literal. The name Mount of Olives is mentioned only here in the Old Test, writings. The hill is elsewhere called " the ascent of the Olives" (2 Sam. xv. 30), where our A. V. incorrectly renders it " the ascent of Mount Olivet," though it indicates by the use of italics that the word " mount '' is not in the original. It is called "the mountain" in Nch. viii. 15, where it is spoken of as abounding with olives, oleasters, myrtles, palm trees, and other kind of trees. In i Kings xi. 7 it is noticed as " the hill that is before Jerusalem ;" in 2 Kings xxiii. 13 as " the mount of corruption" (see note 2 on p. 473), and in Ezek. xi. 23 as " the hill" or " mountain which is on the east side of the city." The term used here, " the mountain of the olives," is not to be regarded as a proper name, but as an appellation by which that hill w^as distinguished from others as specially noted for its olive trees. Hence the description of its locality given in Ezekiel is also added here, namely, " which is before Jerusalem on the east." Kohler considers the expression to suggest the thought that as the rising sun, when seen from Jerusalem, first appeared over the Mount of Olives, so deliverance should come from thence, and the Sun of Righteousness there arise with healing in his beams (Mai. iv. 2), to chase away the darkness resting over Jerusalem. He Ch.xiv.4.] "THE LAST THINGS" AS SEEN IN O. T. LIGHT. 47I observes that the glory of the Lord is represented in the prophet Ezekiel as coming from the way of the east to Jerusalem, and deliverance as arising from that quarter (chap, xliii. 2, xliv. i, 2). However that may be, the passage seems distinctly to indicate that what might have been expected to prove the great obstacle in the way of an escape from Jerusalem, should become the very means whereby " the remnant" should be delivered out of the hands of their oppressors. The mountain which stood in their path should be removed. It should be split by the earthquake in twain, from its very centre,^ into two equal parts. As the waters of the Red Sea had been divided, and that sea in the path of Israel proved a means of refuge instead of a place of destruction, so Divine power would create a valley through the .very midst of the Mount of Olives, so that the mountain would prove not indeed a place of refuge, but a road to a place of security. For the chasm in the mountain was to be formed so as to be opposite to Jerusalem on the east, and to afford a safe and wide valley with lofty and precipitous sides. The one part of the mountain was to move towards the north, and the other towards the south, and there would be a very great valley between them. The rocky heights on both sides of the valley are termed " mountains," and inasmuch as they were formed specially by Jahaveh, the valley is not only spoken of generally as " a valley of mountains," but also as " the valley of my mountains."^ The idea of Jerome and the ^ 1''VnP " from its middle." Compare Joshua x. 23, "in the middle of the heavens (D^D^H "•VHIl)," or Psalm cii. 24 (verse 25 E. V.), "in the midst of my days." 2 The omission of the article in D'''in"\3 ought to be noticed. The article could not gi-ammatically be used with the other expressions '''!!n"i<''3, but it must be understood, for the genitive is defined by the suffix and the noun governing it in the construct state cannot have the article. See Ges. § no, 2. The valley thus referred to is, of course, to be regarded as identical with "the valley of my moun- tains." " The valley of my mountains " has been understood by Jerome, Drusius, 4/2 ZECIIARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xiv. 4, 5. Church Fathers that the mountain was to be twice divided, first lengthways from north to south, and then again in its breadth from east to west, is not supported by the language of the prophecy. The valley is not to be viewed, as Schegg, Ewald, and others regard it, as the place of refuge for the people of God while God's judgments are being executed on the heathen. It is to be viewed rather as an open road into which the people flee in terror with some hope of attaining a place of refuge. Schegg asks why a miracle should be wrought to accomplish such an object.^ Why should the fugitives not rather be represented as fleeing by the way towards the south, where no mountain would stand in their road .'' But he has forgotten, with Reinke and others, the sharp declivities of Zion which exist on the southern side. Hengstenberg is no doubt correct when he says that "it is very obvious that the whole account is figurative, and that the fundamental idea, the rescue of believers and the destruction of their enemies is clothed in drapery borrowed from the local cir- cumstances of Jerusalem." The idea that our Lord will appear at his second advent on the Mount of Olives is founded on this passage and that in Joel iv. 2. Neither passage, when understood in con- Venema, and later by von Hofmann, to mean the valley of the Tyropoeon, between Moriah and Zion, which, tenninating at the Mount of Olives, might be supposed to lead into the valley opened by the earth(|uake, and to be the road whereby the fugitives would seek to gain an entrance to that valley. But " my mountains " can- not well designate Zion and Moriah. Only one mountain, as Kohler justly observes, is spoken of in the Old Test, as the mount chosen by God, and that is either desig- nated distinctly as Moriah, on which the temple stood (2 Chron. iii. l),or as Mount Zion, which more often signifies the entire of the heights on which Jerusalem was built, including therefore Moriah, which was the special temple mountain (Ps. xlviii. 2, 3, 12, E.V. verses i, 2, 11 ; Ps. Ixviii. 16, 17, E.V. 15, 16; Isa. Iv. 7). These two mountains are never contrasted with one another in the Old Testament. In later times such a contrast is spoken of, and Moriah is termed by Josephus " the Mount of the Lord." The expression " my mountains " is found in the prophets as a general designation of all the mountains of Israel (Isaiah Ixv. 9 ; Ezek. xxxviii. 21). Ch. xiv. 5.] " THE LAST THINGS " AS SEEN IN O. T. LIGHT. 473 nexion with its context, gives the shghtest support to the tra- ditional view, and our Lord's own statement, in Luke xvii. 24, 1 is rather opposed to the idea. It need scarcely be remarked that the words of the angels, recorded in Acts i. 10, 11, give; also no countenance to this supposition. The remnant that escape of Israel, and are not cut off in the iniquity of the nation, are represented as fleeing into the valley providentially opened by the gracious interference of the Most High. " And ye shall flee," writes the prophet, " to the valley of my mountains, for a valley of mountains (a mountain-valley, shut in by mountains on both sides) shall extend very near, and ye shall flee as ye fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah ; and Ja- haveh my God shall come, all the holy ones with thee ! " The translation, " into the valley," given by Kohler and others, is more natural than that advocated by Maurer and Hitzig, "ye shall flee through the valley of my mountains," although 2 Sam. ii. 29 ; Job xxii. 14, etc., are instances in which the accusative of place is used in that signification.^ In a later part of the prophecy the fugitives are represented as taking heart, and returning again to the battle (verse 14). The picture presented here is scarcely that given by Ewald that the refugees are described as flying into the valley " to the feet of the Almighty, and as under his protection." If such were the meaning a fuller description would have been afforded.- ^ The translation given by Luther, " vor solchem Thai," on accomit of (lit. before) such a valley, adopted by J. D. Michaelis and Schmieder, does not afford a good sense when taken in connexion with the context, and would require, as Kohler observes, 'n"i5\5"''JEp. 2 Hitzig considers that the writer refers to the opening of the Mount of Olives during the earthquake in the days of Uzziah, and thinks that the three summits of the Mount of Olives probably date from that time. He considers, too, that the name given to that mountain in 2 Kings xxiii. 13, namely "the Mount of Corruption," or '■ of destruction," (^''^E^'D) refers to some volcanic action whereby some deso- la.ion was wrought. Jer. li. 25 is in his opinion another illustration of this fact. 474 ZECHARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xiv. 5. The reason why the fugitives in their terror should flee in that direction is given in the next clause, whatever may- be regarded as its correct meaning. That clause has been variously understood. Some translate it " for a mountain- valley shall extend to Azal," which is supposed to be a place near to Jerusalem, or a part of Jerusalem itself, close to the spot where the remnant who were " not cut off from the city " are conceived as collected together. Azal is by others regarded as a place on the slopes of the Mount of Olives farthest off from Jerusalem ; and lastly the clause can be rendered, " for a valley of mountains shall extend hard-by," or " very near." Whatever view of the word in question be adopted, the verse clearly states that the opening of the valley through the Mount of Olives is the cause of the flight, as that valley presents an opportunity of escape to the terrified " rem- nant." Their terror is not, however, caused by any dread lest they as well as their foes should be swallowed up in the chasm caused by the earthquake (Hengstenbcrg). For while the passage docs not speak of the enemies being swallowed up in the chasm, it was evidently the intention of the prophet to depict the fugitives from Jerusalem as actually rushing into it. Nor need we suppose that the enemies are repre- sented as merely passive (Hengstenbcrg). Blind rage might lead them to pursue into the very valley those who were flee- ing before them, as the Egyptians pursued after the Israelites even into the bed of the Red Sea. But this is not stated, nor does it agree with what is described at the end of the chapter. For the foe there is represented as ultimately destroyed first by pestilence as the sword of Jahaveh, and secondly in war by the sword of the Lord's people. Zechariah merely But in 2 Kings the reference is r.itlier to the desolation brought about by idolatiy, and in Jeremiah to the desolations caused by Babylon in the world. In ncilJier place does any reference whatever seem to be made to volcanic action. Ch.xiv.4, S-] " THE LAST THINGS " AS SEEN IN O. T. LIGHT. 475 says that the terror occasioned by the earthqualce, for an earthquake is plainly supposed to take place, and that caused probably by reason of the cruelty of the foe, should compel the remnant to flee out of Jerusalem into the valley provided for them, as the Jews had fled before the earth- quake in the days of Uzziah. Jerusalem in this passage is represented as a place of danger whence the remnant would gladly seek to escape. And not till they reach a place of safety, and are secure as Noah in the ark, or Lot in Zoar, are the judgments of God to descend like an overwhelming flood upon their oppressors. The escape of the remnant out of the city is, therefore, a certain presage of the ruin of their enemies (Gen. xix. 22). The reading of the Oriental Jews in the fourth verse, in place of "And ye shall flee (Dnp^l) to the valley of my mountains," is "and the valley of my mountains shall be stopped up (D^ID^'I)." This reading is found in four MSS., the Targum, LXX., Symm., Syr.-Hex. (but not the Syr.), and several of the Jewish commentators. It does not, however, afford a good sense, as it can scarcely mean, as Kimchi has explained it, "that after the cleaving open of the Mount of Olives it will be .shut again, an hour or hours, a day or days after, and thus the miracle will be so much the greater, that it should be shut after splitting open ; for in common earth- quakes, by which the earth is split open, it does not close again." The valley thus miraculously opened was to extend very "near" or "hard by" the place in Jerusalem where we may suppose the remnant that had hitherto escaped were col- lected. The word which we render as a preposition has generally been understood as a proper name. It is so ren- dered not only by the LXX. and Targ., but by many recent critics, as Gesenius (both in his Thesaurus and in his Lexicoji), Maurer, Umbreit, Ewald, Hengstenberg, etc. Ewald con- 476 ZECIIARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xiv-S. siders Azal to be a place at the western end of the moun- tain on which the temple stood, a sense which would suit the passage remarkably well. This opinion, however, is purely- conjectural. Others think that there was a place called Azal on the other side of the Mount of Olives farthest off from Jerusalem. No such place is known to have existed. Cyrill, who is the only Church Father who mentions it, docs so from hearsay. He states that it was a village lying at the remotest part of the mountain. His words are : Kco/jiTj 8e avTT) 7rpo9 ecr^arLat'i, o)? X6yo<;, rov 6pov<; KeLfievr]. Jerome would certainly have mentioned such a village, in his commentary on this passage, had he been acquainted with it ; but, on the contrary, he has deliberately rejected the opinion that the word is a proper name, though it cannot be denied that that would be the easiest interpretation. Dr. Pusey has suggested that a village of the name of Azal may have been among those destroyed in the Roman war after the revolt of Bar Kokhab. For in that war, Dion Cassius states (Ixix. 14) that no less than nine hundred and eighty-five very well known villages were destroyed. Hengstenberg, Rcinke, Kliefoth, and Keil, regarding the noun as a proper name, have considered it identical with Beth-haezel ("^iiNin J1^2) in Micah i. 11, the Beth prefixed to such names being fre- quently dropped. But it is very doubtful whether the place referred to by Micah was nigh to Jerusalem, the passage of that prophet being in itself obscure.^ ^ Lieut Claude R. Condcr, R.E., who has achieved so nnicli in tlie recent ex- plorations of Palestine, has informed me that Azal is a place not known, but that M. Clermont-Ganneau has suggested that it may be the present Wady Asfil or Yasul, an affluent of the Kedron. Lieut. Conder notes, however, that the names are not very similar, and no ruin exists to which the name applies. The LXX. have expressed the word by 'Io(ri55, or more correctly, as in the cod. Alex, and other MSS. 'Ao-arjX, the capitals A and A having no doubt been confused. The latter is the reading of the .Syr.-IIex., Aq. 'AcrA, Theod. 'Aff^\. The Syr. translates " for the PC •> valley of the mountains siiall extend |i \o|l, io nurrinci/ifss," that is "lo a narrow place '^ Symm. 7r/)6s rh rrapaKtljj.ei'ov. The Vulg. translates "quoniam Ch.xiv.S.] "THE LAST THINGS" AS SEEN IN O. T. LIGHT. 477 The earthquake which occurred in the reign of Uzziah is not mentioned in the historical books. The account given of it by Josephus {Antig. ix. 10, § 4) cannot be considered as historical. According to him, this earthquake occurred at the time that Uzziah went into the temple of the Lord to offer incense (2 Chron. xxvi. 16-21), and at the very time when the priests were trying to prevent the king from com- mitting such a daring violation of the law of Moses. The words of Josephus are, " in the meanwhile a great earthquake conjungetur vallis montium usque ad proximum," which is explained by Jerome, "quia vallis ilia montis Oliveti . , . usque ad Templi montem qui sanctus est, suam voraginem trahet . . . et quoniam vorago ilia . . . tendetur usque ad Asael, h. e. usque ad Domum Dei." Tremellius and Junius translate, "turn fugientes vallem montium quum [Deus veniens] pertinget vallem montium, ad (montem contendetis quem) elegit," the words in parentheses being supplied. Cocceius, adopting a similar translation, considers the reference to be to the refuge which God had selected. Similarly the marg. rend, of our E. V., "when he shall touch the valley of the mountains to the place he separated." The verb ?V^ might, if no other translation were possible, be so explained (compare the proper name ■liT'^^V^ in i Chron. xxxiv. 8, and the construction be justified by an appeal to 1'? ''n'iJ''Dn"7N in i Chron. xv. 12. But that translation rests on the mistaken view that the people were to flee from the valley formed by the earth- quake, instead of into that very valley, which is the simple meaning of the passage. The second clause, also, cannot refer to Jahaveh. Other scholars, as J. D. Michaelis, Hezel, Theiner, have considered ?VX to be used, in the sense of the Arabic equivalent, of the roots or foot of the mountain, but as the valley was to run right through the mountain, the clause would have no definite meaning. 7VX is the pausal form of 7^^, which is generally used in the construct state ?)>$;{ • the latter form is once found in the absolute state, and as a proper name in Micah i. 1 1, referred to above. The word in the construct state is often used as a prepo- sition, denoting beside, near, at. Comp. 7T5 const., Ezek. xviii. 18, Koh. v. 7, from 7T5 absol.. Lev. v. 21 ; Isa. Ixi. 8. See Ewald § 213 b, Olshausen § 167 b. That the form which occurs here is the pausal form is shown from i Chron. viii. 38, where in the same verse the word is in the common and in the pausal form. The word occurs there as the proper name of a man (see Olshausen % C)i d). But it deserves notice that the ordinary form is found unchanged in pause in most editions in i Chron. ix. 44, and the peculiarity is noticed in the Hebrew footnote on that passage. Nouns in the accusative are often used in Hebrew as prepositions, and the word here may be well regarded as such. This was probably the view taken by the Syr., Vulg. and Symm., and it is that of Venema, who translates ^'ad apnd, ad z'iciniim,''' as well as defended by Kcihler, whose opinion is approved by Miihlau and Volck in their edition of Gesenius' Worterb. Similarly G. L. Bauer, " bis auf den Grund." See on the versions our crit. comm. 4/8 ZECriARIAII AXD HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch xiv. 5. shook the land, and, the temple being split asunder, the bright light of the sun shone forth and fell upon the face of the king, so that immediately the leprosy attacked him. But before the city, at the place called Erogc, the half of the mountain was broken which was towards the west (scarcely as Whiston, " the western half of the mountain " ' ), and having rolled for four stadia, it came to a stand at the eastern part of the mountain, so that both the roads were blocked up and the royal gardens." This narrative bears the impress of being the echo of a legend founded on this passage of Zechariah rather than a fact of history. The earthquake is, however, referred to in the book of Amos, and must have been of no ordinary violence (Amos i. i). Earthquakes were very common in Palestine ; con- sequently the one alluded to by the prophet must have been of a peculiarly terrific character, in order to have become an epoch from which events were reckoned. The allusion in this chapter to that earthquake cannot be considered as any proof that the writer must have been a contemporary of the pro- phet Amos. For the very fact of such an earthquake having been distinctly mentioned by Amos, and no earthquake of such a character being mentioned in any of the historical books, makes it easy to comprehend why it should have been referred to by a post- exilian writer, acquainted, as Zechariah undoubtedly was, with the writings of the earlier prophets. Inasmuch as the prophets and psalmists of Israel represent the coming of Jahavch, for any purpose whatever, as accom- ^ The words are irpb 5^ Trjs 7r6Xewj irpbs ng KoXovfi^fy 'Epwyrj, tou 6povs drro^payfjvai rb 7Jp.i^, precious, nor }1XSp thickness" (McCaul's transl.). He cannot possibly have meant that those words Ch. xiv. 6.] " THE LAST THINGS " AS SEEN IN O. T. LIGHT. 483 But Ewald, Umbreit and Bunsen, understand the passage as depicting not the terrors or horrors of the day, but the very- opposite, rendering " there will be no sunshine with cold and ice." Bunsen explains the passage to mean that the regular change of summer and winter, of light and darkness, shall cease, and there shall be constant sunshine. And Ewald refers to "the pure, unclouded, changeless light" (Rev. xxi. 23). Theiner adopts the translation of Ewald, but explains it to mean " the ambiguous, uncertain state of the nation ! " The difficulty in the way of these renderings is that there is no real antithesis between light and cold. Had such been his meaning, the prophet would rather have spoken of light and darkness, heat and frost. In no other passage of any of the prophets is there a word about cold and frost. Ewald's rendering " sunshine " is rather a strange rendering of the simple word " light " (TlK), which in the original does not convey the contrast which Ewald's translation expresses. Kimchi has given a different explanation of the reading of the k'ri, which has been adopted by our Authorised Ver- sion, " the light shall not be clear nor dark." This translation is recognised now as indefensible, though it was that adopted by many of the older post-Reformation critics, as Miinster, Calvin, Drusius, etc. It is unnecessary, therefore, to discuss whether its meaning is, as Kimchi says, " the day shall not be entirely light nor entirely dark, i.e., it shall not pass entirely in tranquillity nor in affliction, for they two shall be in it, and so he says afterwards, not day and not night;" or, as in the marg. note of our A. V., " it shall not be clear in some places and dark in other places of the world." The day, or period, of which the prophet speaks, was to be a day or period completely unique, " one " of wdiich there are to be regarded as predicates to IIS n\T^ N?, as such a connection would be grossly ungrammatical, but rather as genitives governed by "IIN, " there shall not be light of preciousness (lux pretiositatum — Vatabhis) nor of thickness (lit., coagu- lated light)." 484 ZECHARIAII AND HIS PROniECIES. [Cb. xiv. 6, 7. was to be no second. Compare the expression in Ezek. vii. 5, " an evil, one evil," which at once was to make such an end of Israel that no second stroke would be required. The numeral might almost be said to be used in the sense of "peculiar," "unique." Cant. vi. 9 and Job xxiii. 13 have been cited as instances of this signification, but they are somewhat doubt- ful. The idea seems to be that presented in Jer. xxx. 7, " alas ! for that day is great, so that none is like it ; it is even the time of Jacob's trouble ; but he shall be saved out of it." Rosenmuller, Hitzig and Keil thus explain the passage. Kohler considers that one single day is spoken of, but such an exposition does not seem to harmonise with the clause that follows, where the peculiarity of this " one day " is said to consist in its being neither day nor night, and in its evening ending not in darkness but in light. Nor does Hengstenberg's explanation, " a very short period " (tcmpus non longum — - Cocceius) seem to suit the context. The next clause has been translated by Hitzig and Kohler, " it will be chosen by Jahaveh." Compare the use of the verb rendered in our A. V. " known," in Amos iii. 2 ; Gen. xviii. 19. The construction of the verb in this place with the preposition / is an objection in the way of this trans- lation. Hengstenberg explains it as : " it is known to the Lord, it is under his supervision and direction. It does not come unexpectedly or interfere with his plans." But the verb can scarcely imply so much. Nor are we inclined to coincide with the view of Keil, that the nature of this day is known to the Lord, distinguished absolutely above all other days, though this sense would suit the previous clause, and might be taken as an explanation of it. We are rather inclined to agree with the rendering of Ewald, " it is known to Jahaveh," though we cannot exactly adopt his explana- tion : " it is a day which as yet no man has seen, but Jahaveh knows it ; it is possible with Jahaveh, and he will bring it." Ch. xiv.7.] " THE LAST THINGS " AS SEEN IN O. T. LIGHT. 485 Rather, "it is known to Jahaveh," he has a constant and abid- ing knowledge of this period, and he knows both its begin- nmg and its end, which man does not. The meaning of the phrase is similar to, though not exactly identical with, our Lord's expression concerning the day of his second coming, " Of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father " (Mark xiii. 32). The great day of judgment is not, however, that which is here intended. No mention is made of the great events of that day, or of the dissolution of the world at large. A period rather than a single day is signified, and the commencement and conclusion of that important period are said to be known only to Jahaveh. This period is described as " not day and not night." Kohler thinks that this means that the day is to be a confused mixture of both. Keil considers that the "day" spoken of really belongs neither to the day nor night, because the lights of heaven which severally rule the day and the night (Gen. i. 18), have lost their lustre, and because at the evening of the day to which Zechariah refers, when the darkness of night might have been expected, light appears. It is, however, per- haps better to adopt a modification of the view proposed by Kohler. This day, or period, should partake somewhat of the nature of night on account of the darkness which is prevalent, and somewhat of the character of day, by reason of the light which should be manifested throughout its course in spite of the darkness. The great period of the Messianic dispensation seems to us to be signified by the " day of Ja- haveh," that dispensation which in some respects may be considered as having commenced in darkness and judgment for Israel, but which is to end in blessing for that people, — its evening will be a time of light. This day is not a period of darkness, for the light has come, and the glory of the Lord has risen, even upon Jerusalem with all her 486 ZECIIARIAII AND HIS PROriiECIES. [Ch. xiv. 7. trials (Isa. Ix. i), by the advent of the Messiah. The dark- ness which covered the Gentile earth, and the gross darkness which enveloped the peoples, have been partially chased away. It is day, but not yet the perfect day, for though " the Light of the world" (John viii. 12) has come, the light shines in the darkness and the darkness connprehends it not (John i. 5). The promise that "at evening," just at the very period when it usually begins to grow dark, the threatening dark- ness shall be dispelled by a flood of light, is very beautiful. Pressel seems to be correct in his observation that this characteristic of the day of redemption for Israel is borrowed from the description of the day of creation (Gen. i. 5;. The usual order of things is inverted, the day does not terminate in darkness. A remarkable contrast occurs in Amos viii. 9, where, speaking of a day of judgment, mention is made of the sun going down at noon, and darkness coming over the land in clear day. But it is not said that the light of this glorious evening shall endure for ever, and never pale, as has been thought by several commentators. Keil, indeed, observes that this is not stated in words, but is to be con- cluded from a comparison with Rev. xxi. 23, 25. But though in some respects the same period may be considered as referred to, the picture presented by Zechariah is different from that in the Revelation. The natural processes of nature, winter, and summer, and rainy seasons, and consequently day and night, are represeated by Zechariah as still going for- ward (verses 8, 17). On the other hand, we can scared}' agree w^ith the idea of Kohler that the passage is to be explained, after the analogy of Josh. x. 12, 13, of the pro- longation of twilight, in which case the meaning would be that the day should be long enough therein to complete the great purposes designed to be accomplished. It neeci scarcely be observed that the passage is one which was not intended to be understood in a literal signification. Ch.xiv.S.] "THE LAST THINGS" AS SEEN IN O. T. LIGHT. 487 Having spoken of the day or period itself, and noticed its peculiarities, Zechariah next describes the beginning of the renovation and transformation of the world. That " re- generation" begins "at Jerusalem." The land is gradually- transformed in that glorious period by the " living waters " which "go forth from Jerusalem," "half of them towards the eastern sea, and half of them to the hinder (western) sea." " Living water" properly means in the language of the sacred writers that water which springs, or bubbles up, from the ground, the supply of which is lasting when compared with the rain water, which comes down in torrents in the East, and soon fills the valleys, but flows off rapidly towards the sea. The " living waters " are represented here as coming from Jerusalem, now once more viewed as the holy city (Isa. lii. i). Similarly a fountain is spoken of in Joel iv. 18 (E.V. iii. 18), as coming forth out of the house of Jahaveh ; and Ezekiel, in his vision of the waters which transform the whole face of the land, describes the river as flowing forth from the sanctuary (chap, xlvii. 1-12). Thus also the Apocalyptic seer represents the pure river of the water of life as proceeding out of the throne of God and the Lamb (Rev. xxii. i). For as a stream went forth out of Eden after watering that garden to refresh the whole face of the earth (Gen. ii. 10), and as the river of God's grace is represented, even in the old dispensation, by the Psalmist (Ps. xlvi. 5, E. V. verse 4) as making glad the city of God (comp. Ps. xxxvi. 9, E.V. verse 8); so the prophet describes the living waters as going forth out of Jerusalem to water the whole surface of the land. These streams are not merely to flow in the winter, in which time streams abound everywhere in Palestine, but are to be such as last all the year. Compare Job vi. 16-18, where the, failure of winter streams during the summer is vividly de- picted. The picture described by Isaiah is here realized. For that prophet predicted that in the day of the Lord, 488 ZECIIARIAH AND HIS rROPIIECIES. [Ch. xiv. 8. when the loftiness of man should be brought low {Isa. ii. ii), and the proud towers should fall ; in their stead there would be fruitful heights, whence fertilizing streams would proceed (Isa. XXX. 25). The two streams represented here as flowing east and west correspond to the four streams of Paradise spoken of in Genesis. The whole is to be viewed as an ideal scene, and not as a literal description. Comp. Isa. xli. 17, 18, xiiii. 20, xliv. 3, etc. The physical nature of the whole land would require to be changed to permit literal rivers to flow forth from Jerusalem. The prophet, indeed, describes such a ph}'si- : cal change in the position of Jerusalem (verse 10), but the I change must be considered as an ideal one. Rivers of grace are here signified, which are depicted as forming one mighty stream in Ezekiel and the Revelation. As all nature is repre- sented as mourning and sad in a day of God's wrath, for then the fertile fields become a wilderness, and the trees and plants wither, the cattle die, and the birds of heaven flee away ; so in a day in which the mercy and grace of Jahaveh are displayed, the wilderness becomes a fertile field, the trees clap their hands and are clothed with verdure, the birds sing in their branches, while the mountains and hills break forth into singing, and the lambs feed after their manner, no longer terrified by beasts of prey. (See Isa. v. 17, xxxv. i, 2, Iv. 12, 13, Ixiv. 10, with Jer. iv. 23-27, etc.). Compare the language of the apostle, one day to be gloriously realized, " the creation itself shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God " (Rom. viii. 21). In such a day of blessing, " Jahaveh shall be as a king over all the land " (verse 9). This has been generally ex- plained to mean " over all the earth." But Kohler, Keil, and Pressel are right in rejecting this view. For in the previous verse Zcchariah speaks only of the land of Judah, not even Ch.xiv.S,9.] " THE LAST THINGS " AS SEEN IN O. T. LIGHT. 489 of the whole of the land of Israel. In that which fol- lows (verse 10) he mentions the land of Judah under the same designation {Y"lKn b^), for its limits are expressly stated as reaching from Geba to Rimmon. It is almost im- possible to consider " the whole earth " to be meant in the intervening verse (verse 9). It is there stated that the reign of Jahaveh would first embrace Jerusalem and Judah. The great battle which was to result in victory is described as " beginning at Jerusalem " (verse 14). Judah is to acknow- ledge the true God, and to be victorious in his cause. Zecha- riah's description of the transformation of the Holy Land (verses 10, 11) presents evident marks of having been com- posed at a time when only the narrow district there named was in actual possession of the people of the covenant, and he accordingly describes the great blessing as commencing within that territory. Thus the description might be viewed as affording an indication of the date of the writer, who lived some years after the erection of the second temple, when that district only was in the possession of the Jews, and when there was much reason to fear a gathering of the nations around against Jerusalem. The prophets often saw the future on the background of their own present, and it was under such circumstances and amid such fears that Zechariah was inspired to portray this picture of " the last things " or " the latter days." The statement that " in that day Jahaveh shall be one, and his name one," is by no means superfluous. It may be com- pared with Jer. xxxi. i, "at the same time, saith Jahaveh, will I be the God of all the families of Israel, and they shall be my people." In the commencement of this prophecy of Zechariah, Jahaveh is described as acting against Jeru- salem on account of its sin. He is now represented as the one King and God of his ransomed people, recognised by them as such, his name only, and not that of other gods, 490 ZECIIARIAIT AND HIS rROrilECIES. [Ch. xiv. 9. being named by his people. No doubt Jahaveh was from the beginning the only God, " for all the gods of the nations are idols, but Jahaveh made the heavens " (Ps. xcvi. 5). But he was not recognised as such by his people, for they often forsook him and served other gods. The difficulty which Henderson seems to find in this translation of the verse, that it would make the passage teach cither that Jahaveh was not one be- fore, or that he would cease to be triune, is purely imaginar3^ Lange protests strongly against the view of those who consider verse 9 to refer only to the land of Judah. He forgets, however, that no one maintains that the prophet imagined the limits of Jahavch's reign would be confined to the limits of Judah, but only that he speaks of the Lord's king- dom as commencing in that place where his wrath would be most terribly poured forth on both Israel and the Gentiles. There, as the very result of that judgment, was Jahaveh first to be honoured and accepted as king by both Israel and the Gentiles, The latter are to be thought of as intermingled with Israel, for that which is only briefly related in verses 8-1 1 is described more in detail in verses 12- 17. Lange prefers to adopt the explanation of the last clause given by Hitzig, namely, that in consequence of the display of Jahaveh's glory, the heathen who had hitherto worshipped God under other names, such as Moloch, Baal, etc., should from henceforth honour and adore him as Jahaveh, under which name he had made liimsclf known to the people of Israel. The idea that the heathen under the various names of their gods really meant to worship Jahaveh appears to be an attempt to engraft modern ideas upon those of the Old Testament prophets. The prophet next proceeds to speak of the change in the configuration of the whole land. " All the land will change itself," or, " be changed, ^ (so as to become) as the * The form here found, 31D*, has been considered by Gesenius as a Chaldee Ch.xiv.g.io.] "THE LAST THINGS" AS SEEN IN O. T. LIGHT. 49! Arabah." ^ The clause cannot certainly be explained with Kliefoth, " as the plain from Gebah to Rimmon," for, as Keil notes, the whole of that country is composed ot mountains and hills.^ Kliefoth is not forgetful of this fact, but his idea is that the passage first describes the country around Jerusalem as sinking so as to become a plain with the city of Jerusalem towering aloft in its centre, and after- wards the whole of the earth as becoming in the future a plain like that plain, watered literally by streams from Jerusalem. But this is a most unnatural exposition, and need not be discussed here. The Arabah is the name of that remarkable depression which runs from the slopes of Hermon to the Red Sea, known as the deepest depression on the surface of the globe, the Sea of Galilee, situated within it, being 652 feet below the level of the Mediterranean, w^iile the Dead Sea, which is also fonn for 3D^ impf. kal. See Ges. § 67, 5, rem. Olshausen, § 243 d. But on the other hand Fiirst ^maintains it is a niphul. It would be then a mixed form, like that of verbs VT. liottcher, Lehrb. § 1 147 (vol. ii. p. 519 note), maintains this latter view. He observes that the imperfect of this form is distinguished from 3DJ in meaning, and is clearly used as a reflcMive, while 3D"* is never used in such a sense. Hence he agrees with those Jewish grammarians who consider the form to be a niphal. The masculine form of the vei-b is frequently used with a fem. subject as here, where the verb precedes its subject. See Ges. § 147 a. When constnied with 3 the verb signifies as here " so that it will become as." ' Though Ewald, Arnlieim, Bunsen, etc, translate with our A.V. "as a plain," and it is possible that the article might be explained as used often in Hebrew in comparisons where we make use of the indefinite (Ges. § 109, 3, rem. i), there is little doubt that the great plain known by the Arabic writers as the Arabah or the Ghor is that referred to. This is the view defended by Hitzig, Hengstenberg, Maurer, Lange, and Keil. Kohler also prefers this translation. It must, however, be noted that the more correct pnnctuation of ithe passage, according to the Maso- retic text, seems to be n3"iy3, without the article, and this reading is adopted by Baer in his critical edition of the Minor Prophets (Leipzig, 1878), as well as in his edition of Isaiah (xxxiii. 9). The majority of MSS., including the Babylonian codex, appear to express the article, and this is the more suitable reading as far as the sense is concerned. See our crit. comm. 2 The translation of Umbreit is the same as that of Kliefoth, but Umbreit does not understand the passage differently from Ewald, as he explains it to mean " the city of God will be situated high and glorious in a wide plain, throned as a queen, safe, etc." 492 ZECHARIAH AND HIS rROniECIES. [Ch. xiv. lo. included in its course, is 1,316 feet below that level, or the level of the Red Sea. Hitzig thinks that reference is made by the prophet to the fertility of that valley ; but though the Ghor has fertile spots, such as that once described in Gen. xiii. 10, its features are generally of the very oppo- site character,' and it is evident that it is to its great depth that the prophet here refers. The portion of the land mentioned as to be depressed to the level of the Ghor or Arabah is that which extends from Geba, the modern Jeba', probably Gibea of Saul, in the territory of Benjamin (Josh, xviii. 24), situated between Mich- mash and Ramah (Isa. x. 28, 29), which formed the northern boundary of the kingdom of Judah (2 Kings xxiii. 8), even to Rimmon south of Jerusalem. The latter place formed the southern boundary of Judah on the borders of Kdom, south of Eleutheropolis, probably Rimmon (Josh. xv. 32) belonging to the tribe of Judah, not far from Beersheba, now the ruin Umm er Rumamin. It afterwards belonged to the tribe of Simeon (Josh. xix. 1,7 ; i Chron. iv. 32), and is mentioned as south of Jerusalem, to distinguish it from the Rock of Rimmon (Rumman) in the territory of Benjamin (Jud. XX. 45, 47), and the town of Rimmon (now Rummaneh) in Galilee (Josh. xix. 10, 13). I While the whole country of Judea is thus represented as ' sunk to the level of the Arabah, the city of Jerusalem is represented as exalted,- and as firmly dwelling upon . that ' See the article Arabah in Smith's IhhUcal Dictiouary, and the description given of its lower portion, but not of that exchisivcly, in Prof. E. I'ahner's Desert of the Exodus. " HDN") may be regarded as fiom a veil) DX"I = D-'I"1, from whence DX1, the buffalo, and riD-IS"). a proper name (Gen. xxii. 24). So ("le.senius and Fiirst. Or it maybe considered with Ilitzig, Olshausen, Gr. § 233 « called in question the authenticity of the book of Zechariah.^ ■*"^- The view of Kohler is peculiar. He considers the prophet to refer to an objection which some one might in mockery ^ Among those interpretations which are now exploded is that of Grotius, who explains " the tribe of Egypt " as referring to the Jews scattered in Egypt, who went into that land with Onias, and erected the temple referred to above, Grotius understood the expression, "all nations," used in verse 19, to refer to the dis- persed Jews. This is quite contrary to the usage of that phrase. Bauer, also refers the expression "the families of the earth " to the families living upon Jewish soil, though he does not agree with Grotius in his exposition of verse 18. But the expression " families of the earth " evidently means the Gentiles, and not merely Jewish families, as in chap. xii. 12. See the use of that expression in Amos iii. 2 ; and also in Ezek. xx. 32. 510 ZECIIARIAII AND HIS rROPIIECIES. [Ch. xiv. iS, 19. adduce against the statement that God would punish the re- calcitrant nations by sending- them no rain. Such a scoffer might inquire liow such a penalty could be inflicted on the Egyptians, inasmuch as the fertility of their land did not de- pend on the rain or showers from heaven, but on the rise of the waters of the Nile. Against such an objector the prophet emphasizes the statement that evxMi the Egyptians would be punished with the same plague as the other nations. For the prophet may have been fully aware that the rise of the waters of the Nile depended entirely on the fall of rain in the highlands of the countries south of Egypt. Ikit this interpretation seems too artificial.^ The most natural translation of the following verse (verse 19) is : "This will be the punishment of Egypt and the pun- ishment of all the nations which do not go up to keep the feast of tabernacles." The word JlJ^IDn, which properly means sin, signifies also sin in its effects as bringing piinisJuncnt in its train. Such is the natural meaning of the sentence. Com- pare Isa. V. 18 ; Num. xxxii. 18. Sin and punishment are always closely connected. This is .substantially the view of Ewald, Keil, and Kohler. Nor is there any essential difference between Ewald's translation, " this will be the punishment of Egypt," and that of Hcngstenberg, " this will be the sin of Egypt," which he explains as sin looked upon in the light of its consequences. The meaning of the translation " sin-offer- ing," adopted by others, as Hitzig and Lange, is not very different, for punishment for sin is in that case figuratively regarded as the offering for sin ; though perhaps from a theo- * The veiy fact of such a plague being described as the pccuh'ar punishment of the nations for not going up to Jerusalem, proves that the prophecy is not to be regarded as absoluiely literal. For, as Lange observes, if the family of Egypt were to be punished by the deficiency of water, the Abyssinians, even though they attended the feast at Jerusalem, would have to suffer at the same time, as Egypt can only suffer from a scarcity of water in connexion with all the lands to the south of that countiy. Ch.xiv.i9,20.]"THE LAST THINGS " AS SEEN IN O. T. LIGHT. 51I logical standpoint this latter translation is objectionable. It might, however, be explained in an unobjectionable sense. Others have suggested that the meaning of the passage is, " this is the sin ;" and explain it as signifying that the chief or only sin of the age referred to would consist in such a refusal to keep the feast of tabernacles at Jerusalem. But this gives a very poor sense. The last verses of the chapter do not present any difficulty. They are decisive against the opinion advocated by some that v Jewish observances and rites are to be restored at the end of the Christian dispensation. No clearer statement than that found in these verses could be made to show that eveiything peculiarly Jewish should pass away. " In that day there will be upon the bells of the horses ' 'holiness to Jahaveh.' " For the mitre of the high priest had upon it a plate of gold witli this very inscription (Exod. xxviii. $6, 38, xxix. 6, see p. 62) ; and if the bells on the horses' trappings were in future to have such inscriptions, they would be regarded as being as sacred as that mitre. It is a well known fact that horses as well as other animals were adorned with bells in the east as well as in the west ; sometimes, instead of bells, small pieces of metal were used, which striking against each other gave forth a tinkling sound. The horses, which were ^ There is no uncertainty as to the meaning of the word DlP^'O, though it only occurs in this passage, as the signification of the root is clear, and another word formed from it (nJPJi'P) is used in the sense of cymbals, so called from their sound. Yet the LXX. render it by xct^"'<5s, Vulg. frenum, bit or bridle, and so Syr. ; while Aquila and Theod. give it fSvdos, depth, regarding it as identical with n?VP Zech. i. 8. Symm. has irepiiraTo^ crvaKios, shady going, either connecting it, as Aq. and Theod., with the word in Zech. i. 8, or with 7^*, shade. These latter render- ings give no sense. Jerome notes, " quod cum ab Hebrseo qusererem quid significaret, ait mihi non debere nos legere mesidoth sed mesaloth, quod signi- ficat phaleras equorum, et o) natiim bellicwu. The Targ. according to the Lond. Polygl. has '□ n5'1"l?> 'Ci\&coverlngs of the horses, but de Lagarde edits 'D DIIIS, more distinctly the saddle. All these translations, as well as that of Luther, which is derived from the Targ., namely, Riistung, trappings or armo2ir, are destitute of any foundation. Schegg incorrectly supposes that the ornaments upon the bridles are alluded to. 512 ZECHARIAII AND HIS rROPIIECIES. [Ch. xiv. 20,21. looked upon with disfavour in the Pentateuch, are stated by Zechariah as destined " in that day " to be ornamented with the holy inscription, formerly reserved for the forehead of the high priest. The horse, so often employed for pur- poses of war and luxury, was to be consecrated to the service of Jahaveh ; that which was used for the most profane services was to become most holy. The same thought is expressed under other symbols in Jer. xxxi. 40, where "the whole valley (formerly full) of the dead bodies and of ashes, and all the fields, unto the brook of Kedron," are predicted as becoming " holiness to Jahaveh." The Jewish commentators (Rashi, Kimchi, Ibn Ezra) have widely mistaken the import of this passage in Zecha- riah. They were, as Hengstenberg and Reinke have re- marked, led away from the natural interpretation by a clear perception of the fact that such an interpretation involved the admission of an abrogation of the ceremonial law. Some Christian critics, as Grotius, have, however, adopted their view of the passage. Kimchi's explanation will suffice as an example of such interpretations. He considers the text to signify that the bells of the horses were to be rendered holy to the Lord by being transformed into pots for the temple service. Kimchi notes that the horses were explained by some expositors to be those which perished in the plague (verse 1 5), so that their bells must be supposed to stand (a part for the whole) for the entire of the trap- pings (which is the view of Grotius). Other interpreters understood them to be the horses of the pilgrims who are to go up year by year to keep the feast of tabernacles. Such an explanation, however, is not in harmony with the following clauses, which show that the meaning of the pro- phet is that everything should be holy, and all ceremonial distinctions as regards external sanctity should be abolished for ever. Ch.xiv.20,2i.]"THE LAST THINGS" AS SEEN IN O. T. LIGHT. 5 13 Marck and others understand the passage differently. They explain its statements by the circumstance that things were often marked with the names of idols. Curtius (iii. 3) speaks of the chariot of Jupiter (or Ormuzd) among the Persians as having on it figures of the gods ; and, moreover, it was the custom among the Persians to write on the bells of their horses the names of their gods. Ac- cording to this view, the sense of the passage would be that the day would come when the nations would consecrate all those things to Jahaveh which before were consecrated to their idols. This explanation, though not so unnatural as that given by Kimchi, does not harmonise with the conclusion of the verse, where the very pots in the house of Jahaveh are spoken of as becoming as holy as the bowls before the altar.i The pots in the temple, alluded to by Zechariah, were no doubt those in which the flesh of the sacrifices was cooked for the priests and the laity to eat (i Sam. ii. 14 ; 2 Chron. XXXV. 15), which were therefore employed not only for sacred but for ordinary culinary purposes. Such pots were to be- come, in the time spoken of by the prophet, as holy as the bowls before the altar (Zech. ix. 15), from which the blood of the sacrifices was sprinkled upon the altar of burnt offer- ings (Num. iv. 14). But the priest-prophet announces even more than this; not merely should all the pots in the Lord's house be considered as holy as the bowls before the altar, but even " every pot in Jerusalem and in Judah shall be holiness to Jahaveh of ^ Dr. Pusey has suggested that perhaps the comparison made here between the bells of the horses and the plate on the high "priest's forehead was suggested by " the bells on the high priest's dress; not the lamina only on his forehead, but bells (not as his, which were part of his sacred dress), bells altogether secular, should be inscribed with the self-same title, whereby he himself was dedicated to God." The fact that a different word (jI'Dy?) is used when the bells on the robe of the high priest are spoken of does not exclude this view. See Exod. xxviii. 33, xxxix. 25, 26. L L 514 ZECHARIAIi AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Gi.xiv. 20,21. hosts, and all those who sacrifice shall come and take of them (the prep, in DHip is partitive, i.e., shall take one or more of them as required), and shall cook therein," to wit, the flesh required by the numerous persons who should partake of the sacrifices (comp. 2 Chron. xxix. 34), for all the utensils of the Lord's people should be holy. In other words, the difference between holy and profane should cease to exist b}- everything becoming holy, nothing common or unclean (comp. Acts X. 15, 28) ; and the beautiful thought expressed in dif- ferent words by Ezekiel, should be realized, namely, that the whole mountain on which the new temple should stand would become a holy of holies (Ezek. xliii. 12, xlv. 3, comp. Isa. iv. 3). The Jewish interpretation of this passage, as given by Kimchi, is "that the pots in the Lord's house shall be like the bowls, that is, as many in number, for the sacrifices shall be so many." Such is also the rendering of the Targum, " the pots in the house of the sanctuary of the Lord shall be as numerous as the bowls before the altar." But this interpreta- tion is manifestly incorrect. For the pots used for cooking the flesh of the sacrifices were always far more numerous than the bowls on the altar, used only for sprinkling the blood. The relative holiness of the several vessels, and nothing else, is the point of comparison. Having thus glossed over the chief difficulty, Kimchi could easily in- terpret verse 21 to mean that the pots should be increased on account of the multitude of the sacrificers, and hence that the Gentiles should use the pots found in Jerusalem and Judah in order to boil the sacrifices of the peace-offerings. There docs no doubt seem to be a reference made to the vast number of persons who should bring their sacrifices to the temple, but the real meaning of the entire passage is that everything alike should be holy, and that all such dis- tinctions as profane, holy, and most holy should completel)' cease in the era to which the prophet alludes. Ch.xiv.2i.] " THE LAST THINGS " AS SEEN IN O. T. LIGHT. 5 I5 The last clause of the verse, " and there will be no Ca- naanite any longer in the house of Jahaveh of hosts in that day," presents no difficulty. The Canaanite has indeed been understood to signify a merchant. For the Phoenicians were remarkable as traders, and as such showed no respect to the religious principles of the Jews {Neh. xiii. 16, 20). Grotius, Hitzig, Maurer, etc., take this view, following Aquila and the Vulgate, Thus also the Targ., " and there will not be any longer one plying merchandize in the house of the sanctuary." The word has this signification in Job xl. 30; Prov. xxxi. 24; etc. The merchants referred to were those who sold pots for .the use of the temple, and also the cattle required for the sacri- fices. Such traders our Lord drove on two several occasions out of the temple (John ii. 14-16 ; Matt. xxi. 12, 13). Kim- chi considers that the clause signifies that those who would devote their property to holy uses would be so many that a merchant would not be needed to sell such things to the pilgrims. The objection to this interpretation of the word is that there is no direct proof of the existence of a temple market in the days of Zechariah, though it is probable that such did exist; and, moreover, there is no evidence to show that such a trader was looked down upon with contempt. The latter is, however, not improbable. Others {Drusius, von Hofmann) think that the word means literally Canaanites, specially the Gibeonites and Nethinim, who were employed about the lowest services in the temple. Kliefoth adopts this view, and considers the prophet to say that there would be no persons condemned to perform only such menial work^ but that on the contrary all the nations of the earth should enjoy full communion with Israel, and equal participation in God and his service. It has been objected to this view that whatever their original status, the Nethinim were actually in high favour in the days of the Restoration, as is plain from the allusion in chap. ix. 7. Hence the majority, perhaps, 5l6 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xiv.2i. of commentators, among whom may be mentioned Cyrill and Thcodoret, Luther and Calvin, Venema, Hcngsten- berg, Ewald, and Kohler, take the name "Canaanite" as a symbolical appellation of open and notorious sinners, under God's curse, and devoted to destruction by the Divine decree, as were the Canaanites of old (comp. Ezek. xliv. 9 ; Rev. xxi. 27). It is possible, with Pressel, to combine the first and last interpretations, and to regard the passage as de- scribing the exclusion from the sanctuary of Jahaveh of those who traffic in holy things, and of the ungodly and pro- fane. Bunsen, who advocates the former view, considers that the point of reference is to the greed of the merchant- retailers, the hucksters who trafficked in such merchandize. That greed was just as likely to have been exhibited in those days as at a later period. Indeed, such a spirit was then abroad, as is evident from Neh, xiii. 16, 20, though that passage is not in all respects a parallel. Traffic in matters connected with the worship of God was, according to this idea, considered unworthy of the golden age described by Zechariah. There would be no longer any need for the sale of pots specially designed for sacred purposes when every one might use with acceptance his own household vessels for the service of the temple. The objection made by Bunsen to the word "Canaanite" being regarded as an equivalent to "the unclean" and "unholy," namely, that no instance can be cited elsewhere of such a meaning, loses its force when we remember the frequent reference made by Zechariah to the ancient enemies of Israel, as Egypt and the Egyptians, whose mention in the near context may have suggested the Canaanites to the mind of the prophet. It may be well at the close of our general survey of this re- markable prediction of Zechariah to give a sketch of what we believe to be its true interpretation, though our views have not been obscurely intimated throughout the discussion of Cii.xiv.i-2i,]" THE LAST THINGS" AS SEEN IN O. T. LIGHT. 517 the various portions, as well as indicated by the title prefixed to this chapter. The day of the Lord is, as has been already seen, not to be regarded as a natural day, but as a period of time of an indefinite length. Such a " day " may embrace a period of a longer or shorter duration, according as may be required by the nature of the prophecy. In this prophecy the period must necessarily include years, as one of the chief character- istics of the streams of living waters is that they should con- tinue to flow not only during the winter rains, but also during the parching heat of summer. A period consisting of sum- mers and winters is, therefore, expressly included under the expression " m that day." Again, the very means whereby the Lord is said to destroy the adversaries tend to prove the " day " to be a lengthened period. For the adversaries. against whom Jahaveh goes forth to fight are not represented as swallowed up by a mighty earth- quake, but as destroyed in three different ways, by pestilence, by internecine conflicts excited by a heaven-sent " confusion," and by the sword of the people of Judah. Moreover, " in that day " the conquered nations go up cheerfully to Jerusalem to worship Jahaveh as their King and God, and do so "year by year," which fact again shows that a lengthened period is in- cluded, during which Jahaveh is said to execute his judgments upon those nations, who, notwithstanding the universal know- ledge of God, prove themselves to be unthankful and unholy by refusing to go up to the feast of tabernacles in Jerusalem. The chapter as a whole is to be regarded as a history of that great " day," during which, as in that period described by our Lord in his prophecy of " the last things," wars, pes- tilences, and tumults occur. It is "a day of Jahaveh," for during its course the pride of man will be humbled, and the Lord alone exalted (Isa. ii. 17). The "day" commences with a terrible judgment executed on Israel by the Gentile 5l8 ZECIIARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch.xiv.1-21. nations, but closes with a glorious manifestation of God's love to his chosen people. The chapter throughout speaks of the city of Jerusalem and of the literal Israel and Judah. Jerusalem must not be regarded as signifying in one verse the actual city, and in another the Church of Christ. But that city is viewed ideally throughout the chapter, and almost identified w^ith the Jewish nation. The sorrows inflicted on her are represented under the picture of a siege and ultimate capture. The siege of Jerusalem by the Romans is not directly prophesied, though it was one of the greatest sorrows which were contemplated in the prophecy, — the solemn winding-up in judgment of the old dispensation. The prophet describes the city which was by name and profession holy (Isa. Ixiv. 10) as given up to be trodden under foot by the Gentile nations, because of its profanity and because of the sin depicted in the pre- vious chapter. Terrible as was the judgment inflicted by the Divine anger, the Jewish nation was not to be cast out of the sight of Jahaveh, as was the case in the great Babylonian captivity (Jer. xv. i). There would be some of that nation Avho would be in many respects unaffected by the cata- strophe; "the remnant of the people shall not be cut off from the city." For Zechariah views the " cutting off from the city," not in its political but in its religious aspect, as a cutting off out of the sight of the Lord's presence (see p. 462). This is a truth often strangely forgotten by those who view the Jews as under a special curse, which renders them less open to the influences of the gospel than other nations. The blessings purchased by Christ, and the grace procured through the work of the Redeemer, are as freely offered to the Jews as to any other people, and were largely accepted by numbers of that nation at the beginning of the Christian era. If the apostle speaks of a portion of the Jewish nation as blinded (Rom. xi, 7), he uses the same, if not a stronger expression, of Ch.xiv. I-2I.] "THE LAST THINGS" AS SEEN IN O. T. LIGHT. 519 the Gentile world (2 Cor. iv. 4). Moreover, Israel as a nation, though represented by the apostle as given over in part to blindness, is according to him only to remain in that state until the fulness of the Gentiles is come in, when " all Israel is to be saved " (Rom. xi. 25, 26). Meantime, while Jerusalem's day of judgment proceeds, a refuge is provided for " the remnant according to the elec- tion of grace," even for those who should not perish in the iniquity of the city. We may recall to mind how, ere the great day of the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans, the Jewish Christians were enabled by Divine Providence to escape to Pella in the mountains. That escape out of Jeru- salem was deemed worthy of special mention by our Lord in his great discourse of the last things, and may well be here alluded to, though we do not think that it is distinctly pre- dicted in this prophecy of Zechariah. The event was, how- ever, a remarkable illustration of the truth set forth by the Old Testament prophet. Ecclesiastical history relates how special blessings were granted to believing Israelites in the early days of Chris- tianity. For a considerable period all the great missionaries to the nations were men of that race. Ways and means of escape have again and again been opened for Jewish believers, amid the heavy sorrows which have fallen upon that unhappy people, God's favour has been often as clearly manifested to the believing " remnant," as if they had been living in their holy city during some of the glorious days of the theocracy. Jewish Christians have not been "cut off from the city." That verse 4 cannot be viewed as a literal prediction has already been pointed out. Regarded in an ideal signification, it conveys much precious truth. In the days of our Lord, when ungodliness reigned in Jerusalem, the Mount of Olives was specially honoured by his sacred presence. There in the open 520 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xiv. 1-21. air Christ taught his disciples without interruption from scofif- ing priests or mocking Pharisees. The Mount of Corruption was transformed by his teaching into a mount of blessing. On that mount he wept over the fatal obstinacy of Jerusalem, and pointed out the way of escape to his followers from the wrath impending over the city. Thus there Avas an actual manifestation of Jahaveh on that mountain, and the glory of Christ, " the glory of the only begotten son of the Father, full of grace and truth " (John i. 14) was exhibited in very deed when he ascended from the heights of Olivet to his Father in heaven. In an ideal but most true sense, as the feet of Jahaveh really stood in that day on the Mount of Olives, so Christ may be regarded as guiding and directing his people from that mountain in the various difficulties of their path, and in the struggles which they have had to undergo for his name's sake (Actsi. 8-12 ; Mark xvi. 20). The great national earthquake which removed the impediment of the continued existence of the "temple made with hands," and which assisted the Church to gain the mastery over the nations, was announced by Christ on that mountain (Matt. xxiv. 3), and his words of cheer and love spoken on that sacred spot have consoled, strengthened, and comforted many a one of the house of Israel. That Zechariah should have contemplated the glorious coming of Jahaveh in the midst of the sorrow which he fore- saw would overwhelm his people and his city, is quite in accordance with the progressive nature of Divine revelation. Nor need it surprise us, since a similar blending together of Christ's coming to destroy Jerusalem, and his coming to judge the world, occurs in the great discourse of our Lord to which reference has been so often made. The character of the Messianic dispensation until almost the period of its close is remarkably characterised as a period neither of perfect day nor of total night or darkness. As we Ch.xiv.i-2i.]"THE LAST THINGS" AS SEEN IN O. T. LIGHT. 52 1 have sufficiently explained the verses alluded to (verses 6, 7), it is only necessary to refer to our remarks (see p. 485). That the Messianic dispensation will close in light and glory, and not in darkness, is predicted by St. Paul in the Epistle to the Romans (xi. 2-12). This cheering truth, which is here also presented, has been sadly obscured by the fantastical views so often held regarding the apostasy of the latter times and the rule of Antichrist. For, as Mede well remarks, as " The Jews expected Christ to come when he did come, and yet knew him not when he was come ; because they had fancied the manner and quality of his coming like some temporal monarch, with armed power, to subdue the earth before him : So the Christians, God's second Israel, looked (expected that) the coming of Antichrist should be at that time when he came indeed, and yet they knew him not when he was come ; be- cause they had fancied his coming as of some barbarous Ty- rant, who should with armed power not only persecute and de- stroy the Church of Christ, but almost the world ; that is, they looked for such an Antichrist as the Jews looked for a Christ."^ Jerusalem, though viewed in the commencement of the chapter as a city suffering under a Divine judgment, is in verse 8 considered in relation to the nations of the earth as a city from which, at the appearing of Jahaveh, rivers of blessing would flow forth to the world at large. We need not expatiate on the well-known truth that the gospel of Christ was first published in Jerusalem, and from thence has gone forth to the world. The first publication of that gospel in all its fulness was on the day of Pentecost. Then those streams began to flow which, however diverted hither and thither in their course, have been perennial. The change described as taking place with respect to the physical position of the country of Judah, and the predicted restora- tion of the city of Jerusalem, both set forth under material ' RIede's Works, p. 647; Book iii. chap. ix. of his Apostasy of the Latter Times. 522 ZECHARIAH AND HIS rROniECIES. [Ch. xiv. 1-21. figures the truth that, important as has been the part which Jerusalem and the Jewish people have already played in the past in the enlightenment of the nations of the world, still more important will be the role to be assumed by Israel when the fulness of the Gentiles shall have come in, and when the reception of the Jews into the Church of Christ shall be as life from the dead to the world (Rom, xi. 12). The warfare of Jahaveh with the nations is depicted in this prophecy as long, and as carried on in various ways. It is not merely by fire and sword that Jahaveh is to plead with the nations, as represented in Isaiah (Ixvi. 16). Zechariah regards the warfare of Jahaveh as waged by pestilences and divers troubles, nation rising against nation, and perplexity of various kinds, as delineated in our Lord's discourse (Mark xiii. 8, fif. ; Luke xxi. 10, 11). The day of Jahaveh is a period of mercy and judgment combined, but one during which, how- ever, mercy prevails over judgment (James ii. 13), and the light proves stronger than the darkness. Sin has been per- mitted to act as the means of punishing sin, and nations have been punished by nations. The picture of the future has been drawn from the history of God's past dealings with Israel ; and the glorious result will be, not a great victory of the kingdom of darkness even for a season ; — but after a time, it may be, of stubborn conflict with evil, in which God's people shall receive greater courage for the battle as the hour of earth's redemption approaches, " The kingdoms of this world shall become the kingdoms of our Lord and his Christ, and he shall reign for ever and ever" (Rev. xi. 15). To) KaOrjfxivio ciri tov Opovov kcu tw apviio 1) eiXoyia kul rj Ti/xr) kol tj 86^a kol to Kpa.TO'i ets Tovs alwvas twv alwvuiy. CRITICAL AND GRAMMATICAL COMMENTARY. CRITICAL AND GRAMMATICAL COMMENTARY. CHAPTER I. I. On the months, see note on verse 7. C, B. MichaeUs considers that as the clay of the month is not named, the ordinal which quali- fies the month is also to be understood as marking the day. Hitzig maintains that in such a case that fact would have been expressly mentioned, as in Exod. xix. i, or be directly deducible from the context, as in Deut, xvi. i ; i Sam. xx. 5, But as CJ'in is often used for the day of the new moon, the first of the month, it might, as Kohlef notes, have that signification here. If this be so, Zecha- riah received his first recorded prophetic inspiration on a feast- day, as Haggai did, and exactly two months later than his fellow prophet. The Syr. translator was of this opinion, for he adds ''in the first day of the month." The Darius mentioned in Zechariah and Haggai cannot be any other than Darius Hystaspis, for Haggai speaks of some of the exiles as having seen the temple of Solomon in its glory. As that temple was destroyed in B.C. 587, this could not have been the case if the Darius referred to was Darius Ochus or Nothus, who ascended the throne of Persia in B.C. 424. Joseph Scaliger, who took the latter view, tried to avoid the difficulty arising from Hag. ii. 3, by an erro- neous translation of that passage. See Kohler's Comm. on Haggai, pp. 7, 8. The Hebrew ^VtI"? corresponds to the old Persian Darya- vush, found in the arrow-headed inscriptions of Persepolis and Be- histun. Son of Iddo. Zechariah is mentioned as a son of Iddo in 526 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. i. 2, 3. Neh. xii. 16. Iddo was one of the heads of a priestly family in the days of Joiakim the high priest, who was the son of the great high priest who with Zenibbabel headed the first band of exiles which returned to Jerusalem. Zechariah is also mentioned as the son of Iddo in Ezra v. i, vi. 14. p is used not merely of a son, but also of a grandson. Compare, besides the present text, 2 Kings xix. 14 with 20. See Introduction § i. The term " the prophet " no doubt refers to Zechariah, So the LXX, and Vulg. The Hebrew accentuation, however, connects it with " Iddo." This accentuation rests upon an old idea that when a prophet is specially distinguished by the addition of his father's name, the father so named was also a prophet. Kimchi adopts this view, without perceiving the gross anachronism of identifying the Iddo here mentioned with Iddo the seer who prophesied against Jeroboam I. (2 Chron. ix. 29). In the year two. On the cardinal for the ordinal, see Ges. § 120, 4 ; Kalisch § 91, 4. 2. ^VR- ^-'i^- When a verb takes as its object a noun from the same stem expressing the idea inherent in the verb, the action of the verb is expressed more vividly (Ges. § 13S, i, rem. i ; Kalisch § 102, 73 Ewald § 281, a). Its force in the present case is to add emphasis to the verb, and is well expressed by Ewald's rendering, which we have adopted. The phrase is not, however, to be regarded with Rosenmilller as altogether equivalent to that used in verse 15 and in chap. vii. 12, though the LXX. and Syr. have rendered them alike. An intransitive becomes transitive with the accusative of kindred meaning. Comp. verse 14, chap. viii. 2 ; Ps. xiv. 5 ; 2 Sam. xii. 16 ; 2 Kings iv. 13 ; 2 Kings xiii. 14, etc. 3. rnosi. Perf. with vav conv. (observe the tone, Ges. § 49, 3), used as a command without any imperative preceding, some such word as "go" being understood in this case; so 2 Sam. xiv. 10. Comp. Ges. § 126, 6, rem. i ; Driver § 119, ^; Ewald § 343, bzcci^c. '■'■Jahavch of hosts." The LXX. in this verse renders the first by iravTOKpaToyp, the Other two by twv Swa/iewv. ^•"iJi'^l.,, 27iat J may return unto you, or, and I will return to you, as LXX., Vulg., but the force of the \ is better rendered by that expressing a purpose; see Ewald, § 235, /'. The cohortative form would have been expected here, "^^-l'^'^^. ; comp. Jer. xxxi. 18; Mai. iii. 7 ; Neh. vi. 2, 7, 10. Lottcher thinks that the ^- is Ch.i.3-5.] CRITICAL AND GRAMMATICAL COMM. 527 dropped before words beginning with N ^ the verb is followed here by D3vX. But this is scarcely the cause. See Bottcher § 957, ^n CiH/P^?, Script, def for CrT'PX ; an inaccurate expression, as gram- matically it would refer to the fathers, to whom Zechariah was not sent. Lange has suggested that the use of the expression was occasioned by the fact that Zechariah, as a young man compared with the remnant of the former generation, might have considered them to represent as such the generation of the fathers. The pronoun is here used, though the noun to which it refers was not yet mentioned. Comp. Isa. ix. 21. 4. D3''7''71;di. The form to be read in the text, according to Gesenius, is 'V^P, a very rare nominal formation, which occurs also in Lam. iii. 6^, Dri3"'5^p, " their song." The form of the k'ri is ??yp. Hitzig and Fiirst maintain that we ought to read the text D5^^^^i^0 from Mu with the prep. IP. The plural of that word has elsewhere the fem. form. Several nouns have, however, a double plural. This latter is perhaps the preferable view, and is adopted by K5hler and Keil. If the text be read as Gesenius proposed, we must supply the preposition Pfrom the noun pre- ceding. The reading of the Oriental Jews was D3v''py^p-"ij and though the Babylonian Codex has the Western reading, it adds the other as an emendation, with the note "this is the correct read- ing." See Baer's edition of the Minor Prophets, Leipzig, 1878. Baer observes that as the Masora follows the Western pointing, this word is omitted in the list of those beginning with ^01. The words of Zechariah so closely resemble those of Jer. xxv. 5, that they are, perhaps, best regarded as a free quotation from that prophet. Jerome notices the calls to repentance made by Isaiah (xxxi. 6, Iv. 7), Hosea (xiv. 2), Joel (ii. 12), and Jeremiah (iii, 12, xviii. II, xxiv. 4, 5, xxv. 45), and their unsuccessful issue. Comp. Jer. xxv. 3-8 ; 2 Kings xvii. 13. 5. QD'i"'.*?:?. ''>?? shortened form of ^*.^ ; comp. ID and i^).!), where. With suffixes it includes the sense of the substantive verb, as n3*5^ "where art thou ?" (Gen. iii. 9), I''? " where is he ? " (Exod. ii. 20 ; Job. xiv. 10, XX, 7 ; 2 Kings xix. 13; Micah vii. 10, D^*^ "where are they?" Isa. xix. 12; Nah. iii. 7. The lengthened form seems used for emphasis. Jerome, Cyrill, and Luther consider that false prophets are here referred to, as in Jer. xxxvii. 19. But, as Rosenmiiller observes, the 528 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. i. 5-7. article shows that the same prophets are referred to who were before mentioned. The Targum takes the second question as a reply of the people to the question of the prophet, " Your fathers where are they ? and if you say, The prophets, do they live for ever? " So several of the Jewish comm., followed by Venema, Burger, etc. But in this case the perfect, or ^'"'.D, would have been expected rather than the imperfect. The idea of the passage seems to be : Your fathers suffered the penalty denounced against them, and are gone. So are the prophets also, but their Avords have been fulfilled after their decease, and therefore you do well to recall their words to mind, and to ponder over their fulfilment as a warning to yourselves. 6. And they turned. Not "they were converted." There was a change, but the change is not said to have been deeper than that they were led to acknowledge that the judgments threatened were really executed upon them. (Hitzig.) Syr., " Your fathers remem- bered and considered with themselves." "^^^ originally affirmative, then restrictive, otdy, yd, hoivever, as limiting what was said before (Ewald § 105 d), It is closely con- nected with ?, I?, p^. See Bottcher Lehrb. § 520. 131, used of threatenings, as Ezek. xii. 28; Jer.xxxix. 16. ""pri. Here not statutes, ordinances, but divinely appointed decrees (Ps. ii. 7 ; Zeph, ii. 2). JtJ'i only used in hiphil. It occurs with reference to blessings (Deut. xxviii. 2), and in the same chapter (verses 15, 45) also of curses. Designed to do. The prophet perhaps had Lam. ii. 1 7 in his mind. 7. I3n is revelation in general (chap. xi. 11), though taken in with the eye ; ntn^ and P^n^ though properly referring to visions, are also used of a revelation communicated through the ear. See p. 5. t23^. The names of the Hebrew months seem to have been changed after the captivity. The names which then came into use were of Assyrio- Babylonian origin, as is proved by a table of Assyrian months discovered in Nineveh and published by Norris in his Diet. The following list with the Assyrian names is based upon that given by Schrader {die Kcilinschriftcn vnd das A. 71'j-/. p. 247): (i) |D\3 Nisan (called in Pent, ^^nxn, Ahib), April, Neh. ii. i ; Esth. iii. 7 ; Ni-sa-an-nu. (2) "i*':^^ Vyyar (not Biblical, Talmudic), Ai-ru, May, Heb. "I?, Ziv, i Kings vi. 37. (3) iVP, Si7'aii, Si-va-nu,///w, Esth. viii. 9. (4) T-l^-? Tammuz (not Biblical as the name of a month, Talmudic), Du-vu-zu, July. (5) 2X Ab, A-bu (not Biblical, Ch. i. 8.] CRITICAL AND GRAMMATICAL COMM. 529 Talmudic), Augitst (6) ^-l^.^:^, 'Eliil, U-lu-lu, Neh. vi. 15, September. (7) n!r*'jyi, Tishn, Tas-ri-tu (not Biblical, Talmudic), October. Hebrew once. Q^^risn nnj?, " in the month of ever-flowing streams," Ethanim, I Kings viii. 2, (8) n^OI^, Marchesvan, originally called >"I2, But, I Kings vi. 38 {Joseph. Antiq. i. 3, § 3), A-ra-ah {i.q. ni^)sam-na (njb*^)^ i.e., the eighth month, November. (9) 1/?P3, Kislev, Neh. i. i ; Zech. vii. i, Ki-si-li-vu, December. (10) rilt?^ Tebeth, Ti-bi-tuv, Esth. ii. \(), January. (11) t03^, Sebat, or Shebat, Sa-ba-tu, Zechi. 7; I Mace. xvi. 14, February. (12) "il>^, Adar, Ad-da-ru, Esth. iii. 7, March, and "il^l, the intercalary month, Ar-hu ma-ak-ru sa Addaru {i.e., the month after the Addar). The English equivalents are only of course approximately true as the months were lunar. 8. TT'SI without a formal object, the whole vision being in fact the object. It scarcely means, as Umbreit, Kohler and Pressel, suppose, "/rc'^j-in the peculiar condition of a seer," or nsi^ as Samuel, the father of Old Test, prophets, is called. The njn introduces the special details of the vision. n?vn, ace. of time, by night or in the nighf, hardly indicating, as Keil and Lange think, " during the night," as if it meant that the whole night long was occupied with visions (Ges. § 118, 2 ; Kalisch § 86, 4/). On the article, see Ges. § 109 rem. at beginning, Kalisch § 79) 5 [6]- It might be rendered "in the night," but is scarcely equivalent to " this day," in which case it would have been HTn nP'^pri. See note 2, p. 5. As the Jewish day began at sunset, the night was what we would call the night of the twenty-third day. Night was frequently the season for Divine revelations, as in the cases of Samuel (i Sam. iii.), Solomon (i Kings iii. 5), Job (iv. 12, fif), Paul (Acts xvi. 9), etc. ^Dy Xinij might refer either to the man, "and he was standing between the myrtle trees," in which case the sufiix in Vinxi would refer to the same person, "and behind him ;" or, as Hitzig notes, if verse 10 were not in the way, it might refer to the horse, " and it was standing, etc.," and "behind it." Verse 10, however, shows that the reference is to the man. "The Jews," says Jerome, " suppose this man to be the angel Michael, who is the avenger of the iniquities and the sins of Israel." Fiirst {der Kanon des A.T.) notes that the Jewish opinion given in the Talmud is that the man on the red horse is God, that the red horse signifies blood and war, and that the myrtles in the deep valley M M 530 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. i. 8. where he halts represent the three pious men, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah (Dan. i. 6), who restrain God from executing his ven- geance. The deep there is explained as representing Babylon. The rendering of the LXX. Kai oSros eicrrv/Kei dm yxeVov Tajv (alia ex - enip. Twvovo) opeW(as if reading Q^i.^JiH P?) twv Karao-KtW (n7^'D3 TJ'S) seem to have arisen from a confusion of the first with the seventh vision in chap. vi. i, ff., the horses in both passages being supposed to be represented in the same place. The variations in the reading are given below. But the character of the two visions is totally different (see pp. 12, 13). Aq. and Symm. correctly twv /xupo-tvcojvwv, ///^ viyrtle groves. Syr., " and standing between shady trees." npyj?3. On the article see p. 10 and the note there. It has also been explained as akin to our phrases, "on the shore," "in the shade," Germ, "am Ufer," " im Schatten." The correct reading is as we have given it, (not nVvoa with daghesh in the ^), following Baer and Delitzsch in their critical edition of the Minor Prophets. They note that it is one of the forty-eight words only written once without vav. They observe that the note in the Rabb. Bibles, ^'JTi "lOn n''?, is correct, for t^'Jll means that ^ has daghesh, which fact distin- guishes this word from npivp? (Ps. cvii. 24). Hence its plural occurs with the script, plena in chap. x. 1 1. The Vulg. has in prof undo ; the Targ. gives an interpretation when it renders " in Babylon." Hence deep valley seems its proper meaning (the plural is used of the deptlis of the sea, Jonah ii. 4 ; of a river, Zech. x. 1 1 ; and of miry places, Ps. Ixix. 3), rather than shade, or shady place, in which case it should be written with the daghesh in the A Fiirst treats i^/VP or n^llip as put for i^?V9 and considers the word to signify a tent (com- paring nspj Ps. xviii. 1 2) represented as the dwelling place of God in heaven and symbolised by the earthly tabernacle (Rev. xi. 19, ii. 17), the myrtles denoting the olive trees which were in the court of the temple (2 Mace. xiv. 4). But see note p. 8. Very similarly Bottcher, who would read n?Vr|)3j in the shady roof (im Schatten-Dach),/'.('., under cover of the shade of the surroundings of the tabernacle in which God was supposed to dwell. He maintains that n?V^i^ cannot mean the sacred tabernacle itself, but rather the space before that tabernacle which was planted with trees. This is a mere fancy, and is strangely supported by a reference to Gen. iii. 8 ! The view of Hitzig and Evvald is not very dissimilar. (See p. 8). The LXX. and Syr. connect the word with the idea of shade, LXX. dva fxiaov twv opewv tCjv Ch. i. 8.] CRITICAL AND GRAMMATICAL COMM. S3 I Karao-KtW, reading for D^BIDn either Cli^i^, or Cinnqn, as Rosen- miiller and Schleusner, or perhaps Cl-np, which the LXX. translate in Isa. xlv. 2 by 6pr]. With respect to the golden vine alluded to in the note on p. 8, it ought to be observed that Josephus speaks of such a vine being stretched by Herod the Great upon the door of the temple {^Antiq. XV. II, § 3; Bell. /lid. V. 5, § 4). It has been, however, disputed whether the vine spoken of by Josephus as given by Aristobulus to Pompey ever belonged to the temple, and it has been supposed by some to have been a treasure or heir-loom of the Asmonsean family. So Hudson and Havercamp. The Talmud says that the golden vine was the gift of the Queen-mother Helene of Adiabene. On the significance of the colours see our remarks on p. 14, ff. Ibn Ezra considers the colours here to be of no significance, no more than the material of the cake in Judges vii. 13. That red is often used in a figurative meaning is shown by 2 Kings iii. 22, where the water which appeared red in the rays of the sun represented slaughter ; and the red garments of the rider spoken of in Isa. Ixiii. i, 2, are evidently symbolical. The question whether the colours are symbolical in Zechariah is a different matter, and the uncertainty about the colour signified by DV"'^, and the disagreement between commenta- tors as to the symbol intended, make us adhere to the view expressed in the chapter referred to. But in addition to the articles noticed in note I, p. 20, Delitzsch's interesting paper on " Die Talmud und die Farben " in the number of Nord u. Slid iox May 1878 ought to be mentioned. It is not clear what precise colour is designated by Q''i'^'r|?^. Rashi and Kimchi confess that they do not know what colour is meant. The word occurs in a slightly different form, Q''i'?-'l"i^, in Isa. xvi. 8, in the sense of the clusters or grapes of the vine. From the same root comes \>'y^ (Isa. v. 2 ; Jer. ii. 21), and np^.E^ (Gen. xlix. 11), a kind of noble vine, so called from the colour of the grapes. The root pli^, to be pale red, is to be connected with the Arabic "s; ^£9 to shine, which is used in the derived sense of becoinitig red. With the letters transposed there is yii«, from whence the common adjective -liiis) applied to both men and horses. ^ ' plb^ to card, to cofnb, is quite a different root. Pressel is decidedly wrong in seeking to connect the noun p^K* with the root in the sense of combing, carding, as if it meant the finely striped and fitte Jibred vine as contrasted with the 532 ZECIIARIAH AND IIIS rROniECIES. [Ch. i. 8. When applied to a man it denotes a ruddy complexion combined with fairness ; when applied to a horse (and the very word is used here in the Arabic translation) it denotes a sorrel colour, a yellowish red or brown, or a red colour inclining to a dull red. Though horses of this colour are said by some to be the best, Hariri says that the Arabs generally regard the colour as of evil omen (See Lane's Arab. Lexicon). Saadiah gives <3^^^-^ as an ec^uivalent for the Hebrew P!)!^, the vine, which is a mere transcription of the Hebrew, but Abu'l- walid speaks of ^^„^ — J I (or as it is in Neubauer's edition ^ .^() as the name of a most noble species of vine which grows m Syria. The ancient versions do not cast much light on the matter. The Targum has V^)P,, according to the London Polyglott, of whose meaning Buxtorf is uncertain, but which Bochart renders red. The Ethiopic for red is 4'jPrh: kayeh. Levy writes \'^\P, or I^Onp, which latter is the reading of de Lagarde, and which Levy considers to be probably the Greek KmvoxatVr/s, dark maned. The LXX. have koX \\iapoi koX ttolklXol, speckled and piebald^ though some MSS. omit the first epithet. Aq. $dv6oi, Vulg. varii. The Syr. has h^^^^, which, as it is used for the Hebrew ^^-^p in their translation of Gen. xxx. 32, must mean spotted, parti-colou7-£d. The Arab, version has five adjectives, " red, and sorrel, and black, and white, and grey," reading Tia'ppos for ij/ap6<;, which reading Jerome mentions (see Ges. T/ies.). Gesenius seems to be correct in regarding the Hebrew word here as identical with the Arabic equivalent which we have here translated sorre/, and which is a word used of horses and explained as above on the authority of Lane. In the passage in chap. vi. 3, respecting the horses of the the fourth chariot, the Arab, translates ^''^^JOS Dm3 by pja \Jo variegated, sorrel, where the LXX. have ttolklXol v/^a/joi, the Arab., perhaps, reading Trvppoi, which Jerome says was the reading of some copies, though not now found in any MSS. The D^vroxn of verse 7 is similarly rendered. Aquila in the latter passage has Trvpfwi Kohler translates D^pnb by fire-coloured or fiery-red, comparing the Chald. and Talm. P"ib or PID to paint, to rouge, of women, with transposition of letters ipD, whence ^"^P.^P, rouge. This is evi- dently connected with the Arab, root spoken of above. Keil's re- coarser sort in Jer. ii. 21, and then viewing the word in our text, when referring to horses, as iAgn\iy\ng finc-hainci, sleek-coatcJ. Ch. i. 9.] CRITICAL AND GRAMMATICAL COMM. 533 mark that the meaning " pale red " or " fiery red " is not provable in Hebrew is misleading, as it seems to leave out of sight the important fact that the word is nowhere else used except in the passages already referred to. Delitzsch thinks that pi"^ is to be explained as scarlet, corresponding to the colour of fire. He considers that the 'p!}^ was so called from its colour, and compares yj^, the red, or blood- coloured dA\tvc\onQ {La/ie). See Delitzsch's remarks on Isa. v. Comp- ^t£J« of a cloth stained with a red colour. The fern. iJ-Ais is used, as Lane notes, as a substantive {ox fire. The Arab, adjec- tive when applied to a camel means one " intensely red.'" There is no doubt a great temptation to try to explain the term here, as the ancient versions have apparently done, by a reference to the phrase in chap. vi. 2, or even to the colours in Rev. vi., and thus to seek to make out, with Keil, that the word is equivalent to the Greek p^A-wpos, in defiance of all philological considerations. The order, moreover, here is (i) the D^0^^*, red, rendered by the LXX. Trvftpoi; (2) the DVi^, LXX. xpapol Koi -rroLKiXoi; (3) the D^J2?^ 7vhite, LXX. XevKou In chap, vi. the order is (i) the red, as here, expressed by the same words in Hebrew and LXX. ; (2) the C'^'n?;', Mac^, so LXX., which colour is not found here; (3) the w/iite, expressed by the same words as here both in the Hebrew and the LXX. ; (4) the ^''"^^r', speckled, also not mentioned here, unless we arbitrarily consider that, though mentioned _/y//;'///, these horses are to be identified with the D''P"itJ^ mentioned second m. this place. These Q'^'ll^ have a further epithet, that of D"* V?3X, on which see p. 1 2 8, ff. and note. The LXX. render the two terms in chap. vi. 3 ttolkcXol xpapoi. Inasmuch as the cognate word in Arabic is used of the colour of horses, and the Hebrew adjective here describes such animals, and as the Arabic term is used of chestnut or bay horses, we feel compelled to adopt that signification. We do not deny the symbolism of colours in other places, but we cannot see that such symbolism is used in this passage. We observe that Drake, in the Speaker's Conwientary, agrees with the view defended in our Lectures as to the colour of the horses in chap. i. not being symbolical, though he inconsistently speaks of the colours as symbolical in chap. vi. 6. 9. The personal pronoun is sometimes used separately for the substantive verb when the present state of a person or thing is signi- fied, as •IJm nnx K'^K ^j? -I^b, Gen. xlii. 11, and here, n^X r\y:ir\ HD. See Ges. § 121, i, 2 ; Kalisch § 78, 4. Ewald regards the HDH at the end of the verse as peculiarly emphatic, Ewald § 297 b. The 534 ZECHARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch.i. 11-13. ncn is omitted in the first clause of the verse. Observe, too, the same usage in chap. iv. 4, and chap. iv. 5. '"T? expresses the inquiry after the kind, quaUty, or sort, ''P after persons, Ewald § 325 a. " The angel that talked zuith nie." LXX. 6 \akojv iv ifx-oi Jer. ^ui loquebatur in me. See our remarks on p. 12. Syr. ^o 'vwic^>. Dr. P. Zingerle says the same expression is found in the Apoca- lypse of Paul; translated by him in Heidenheim's Viei'teljahrsschrift, iv. I, p. 140, ff., see specially p. 145. Ewald considers that the force of the ? is to give the subordinate idea of the speech especially of a higher with a lower as his servant. He compares, for this sense of ?, the phrase ? 'l?!', to do work with, through any one, i.e. to force him to work. Exod. i. 14; Ewald § 217,7^ 3. Ti. n^pb') T\'^f\ Compare ni^^'-l T\y£'\ chap. vii. 7, and T\'C^\P\ n|^y-1, I Chron. iv. 40, also Jud. xviii. 7, where the people of Laish are described as ntp^p ^?P'''\ after the custom of the Sidonians noh-l t^iP.K'. Some regard the expression here as a hendiadys for dwelling trafigiiilly, but ^C' has sometimes that sense when used alone ; Mic. v. 3 ; Zech. x. 6. C. B. Michaelis, Rosenmiiller, and others suppose that the land of Judah was not included under the report alluded to inverse 11. Hitzig is of a contrary opinion. Inasmuch as the import of the vision seems to be to represent the Gentile world in a state of proud security, while Judah was in a state of misery, Lange thinks Judah must not be reckoned among the lands traversed by the angelic riders, as Hitzig imagines. But the quiet in the case of Judah was that caused by oppression and hopelessness, while the quiet of the nations was that of proud security. 1 2. nnoyr nii'S On the full form of the ending see Ges. § 44, 2, rem. 4. "it^'i< is the accusative governed by the verb, as in Isa. Ixvi. 14; Mai. i. 4. Drake considers the seventy years to de- note the years during which the temple lay desolate. But the deso- lations of the cities of Judah, including Jerusalem, are specially referred to by the angel in his prayer, as well as spoken of in the answer of Jahavch. 13. "'2 "inn is in apposition to "IX^On, as is indicated by the accents, and is not to be connected with the words following. D^niD Dnai Comp. i Kings xii. 7. Rashi thinks that Zechariah did not hear the reply of God to the angel, but understood its import from what the angel said to him. Ch. i. 14, 15.] CRITICAL AND GRAMMATICAL COMM. 535 D*5ri3. The ^ is marked with raphe as in Isa. Ivii. 18. This is noted in the Masora. The noun occurs without daghesh in Hos. xi. 8, |''^-inJ. It is not an adjective, as rendered in our A. V., " com- fortable words," but a substantive in apposition to D''"i3"i. Compare n*p"j |tk^p^ Ps. cxx. 2, 3, It is a piel verbal form, hence there is a daghesh implicitum in the n. The doubling of the third radical might be defended (see Ewald § 155 c), though it is better omitted as directed by the Masora. The noun is a plural, the plural of ex- tension, used not only to denote extension in space, as D''^t^', heaven, or in time as CTiW, youth, but also in thought, as C'Orn^ viercy, D"'Dm, consolation, D'^Dimn, id., D''3i:nn, supplication, Zech. xii. 10. See Bottcher § 689. 14, K"ip. Proclaim, cry aloud. Comp. Isa. xl. 6, Iviii. i ; Jonah i. 2, ^nxjp. Used of the zeal of love, as Joel ii. 18 \ Num. xxv. 11, 13. The perfect is best regarded here as an inchoative, as Josh, ii. 18, f2 •l^rn.ltn "/^y which yon are letting ns doiun^ See Ges. § 126, 3 ; Ewald § 135, b ; Driver § to ; KaHsch § 93, 3. The perf, is to be distinguished from the participle which is used in the next verse (1)?P). God's zeal is represented as already stirred up for his people ; the participle perhaps indicates that the wrath aroused was an enduring one (Keil). The root 'p properly signifies to be red and the verb is used in Hebrew of the burning of jealousy as seen in the glow of the countenance (Num. v. 14), then of envy gene- rally (Gen. xxvi. 14, xxxvii. 11). The red of the countenance may also arise from love and desire to assist, hence the verb is used of zeal, ijidignation {e.g., of the zeal of Phineas, and of Elijah, Num. xxv. 11, 13; I Kings xix. 10), and of compassion (Joel ii. 18). It does not refer here to the Lord's indignation against the former sins of Jeru- salem (as Luther and Hesselberg have considered), for 'P in that meaning is construed with the ace, as in Num. v. 14 ; Gen. xxvi. 14, or with ? against, as Gen. xxx. i, xxxvii. 11. When construed with ?, as in this passage, it signifies to be jealous, or zealous, on behalf of, in the cause of any one, as Num. xxv. 13 ; 2 Sam. xxi, 2 ; I Kings xix. 10 ; Joel ii. 18. 15. Compare on the subject matter of the passage, Isa. xlvii. 6, also Isa. X. 5, 7, 12-15. On the const, of the participle see note on verse 14. D''33Xt;'. A noun derived from pilel. Observe the retention of the a sound under the first radical, as in Arab, and Aram. See 53<3 ZECHARIAII AND HIS rROrilECIES. [Ch. i. 15, 16. Bottcher § 1021, 2. V^ulg. gaites opulaitas. LXX. inl to. tOvrj to. cruvcTTiTi^e/Acva, against the nations who devise plots, possibly reading D''NsJ*3n, as Schleusner has suggested, which is followed by the Syr. and Arab. "itJ'N. Because, as Gen. xxx. 18, xxxi. 49 ; i Kings xv. 5 ; Ges. § i55> I, e\ Ewald § 353, a ; Kalisch § 107, 3. \2iVl2. See note i on p. 25. Lange opposes the view of Kohler, w^ho regards the adverb as denoting time, and thinks it refers to the degree of wrath exhibited, which was small in comparison with that manifested against the heathen ; but his main argument against Kohler's view, namely, that the anger of Jahaveh did not commence with the seventy years, ai)pears to us weak. For though that fact is true, the angel in his intercessory prayer, to which Jahaveh here returns an answer, only alludes to that period as that in which God's wrath was poured out upon Israel. Kohler's view is not opposed to the fact that at the end of the seventy years God commenced to show mercy to his people. In one sense that was true, yet the oppression of Israel by the Gentiles in another sense still continued. nL'"i7 n:!;. Compare the meaning of T\V\7 in Jer. xliv. 11, and iT'np'Op -liW^ 2 Chron. xx. 23. It is not to be rendered, " they helped the evil," after the analogy of 2 Sam. viii. 5, in which case the article would have been used. Kohler, who considers that nyip in the one sentence corresponds with toyo in the other and forms a contrast, explains the meaning as " helped it for evil," by protracting the affliction longer than designed by God. But Keil's view is preferable, that "they helped it for evil," with an evil design ot destroying altogether the people of God, comparing Isa. xlvii. 6. 16. The building of the temple had begun, but it was not at that time far advanced. Tiac. This is regarded by Driver {Hclrriv Tenses, § 14, a) as a prophetic perfect, " I will return," and so Bottcher § 947j / Similarly LXX. cTrto-rpei/'w. But it is better, perhaps, to regard it, with Keil, as indicating a past action, the consequences of which continued to operate at the time the words were uttered, " I have returned," or " I am returned," and consequently the temple will be built. Compare also Driver § 8. nip, which occurs in the received text, must be pointed "^.Ji^ or nip. The word is found also in i Kings vii. 23 ; Jer. xxxi. 39, but the k'ri has in all these places 1|^ or 1p, which latter Baer has edited on the authority of MSS. and according to the Complut. and other Ch. i. i6, ii. I.] CRITICAL AND GRAMMATICAL COMM. 537 ancient editions. It means a measuring line which was used sometimes for the purpose of destruction (2 Kings xxi. 13 ; Isa. xxxiv. 11), and also for building up, as here, and in Job xxxviii. 5, is figuratively used in reference to creation. n3"n32''. The daghesh in the 3 is daghesh forte conj., though not to be strongly pronounced. Ewald § 91, d ; Ges. § 20, 2, a ; Kalisch § 5, 6, 17. n3>'-13j7l is for n3''V13ri the nun being doubled instead of the usual msertion of the ''7. Compare i^^p-l^ri *<^, Ezek. xiii. 19; n30"'nJilj Micah ii. 12; Ewald § 196, c; Kalisch § Ixv. 23, under P^- But Baer edits njyiarij without yod and with the nun with raphe, on the authority of MSS. and ancient editions, referring to Mic/ilol, 11 4, a. p2 occurs in another sense in chap. xiii. 7. On the subject matter of verse comp. Jer. xxxiii. 12, 13. The Targ. render the verb by 17'?^*, '■'■shall be filled" the LXX. ^La^Br](jovTai, Vulg. affluent. The Syr. JAriii _ic JAxJV^ _^VAmj W .^v. " henceforth cities shall be deprived \ • X "X of all goody Cin3 is not to be regarded as a niphil, and translated to have com- passion (as Ewald, Umbreit), as in that sense the word is construed with ?y, ?^ or ?. As it is active here, it is better to regard it as piel, in the sense of to comfort. ini can scarcely be regarded as having the signification of to love, as Gesenius, Ewald and others render it. The passages cited for that signification are more than dubious. The words n'?t^n''2 *nu "inn are very like those in Isa. xiv. i, ^XlC'n '^\V inn. The threefold occurrence of "11^ in this verse is to emphasize the fact that Judah and Jerusalem would again be restored to God's favour. "Zechariah thrice [here, ii. 12, iii. 2] repeats the promise given through Isaiah to Jerusalem, before the wasting by the Chal- djeans, reminding the people thereby, that the restoration, in the dawn whereof they lived, had been promised two centuries before " {Pusey). CHAPTER II. I. The Targ. renders " four kingdoms," and so in verses 2 and 4. Michaelis supposed the horns to refer to two oxen running wild in a field of grass, so high that nothing but their horns could be 538 ZECIIARIAII AND IIIS rROrilECIES. [Ch. ii.2-8. seen, who desist from their attack on the approach of the plough- men accustomed to fasten them to the plough. But see pp. 26, ff. 2. See remarks on pp. 28-30. 3. The four smiths are explained in the Shir ha-shirim Rabba chap. ii. verse 13, to be Elijah, the king Messiah, Melchizedek, and the priest anointed for war, or Messiah ben Joseph (see p. 389). They are differently explained in Succa, fol. 52, col. 2, by R. Channah bar Bisna, as the Messiah ben David, the Messiah ben Joseph, and Elijah and the priest of righteousness. ^'^H is there ■ taken in the sense of architect. 4. T'lnn?. LXX. tot) o^vva.1 ai'To. €t9 i^eipas avrCjv to. T€ j^ ^ . ; oilcca -j out.; " as the 7nouth of a man who does not lift tip his head'' 8. T?'!', that one, a strong demonstrative, contracted for ^.t?'!, masculine here and in Jud. vi. 20, but feminine 2 Kings iv. 25. It is compounded of ?^, afterwards used in its contracted form as the article, and HT. Gesen. § 54, rem. 2 ; Ewald § 103, d, and 183, b\ Olsh. § loi, e; Kalisch § xx. i. niTlD. See note 2, p. 35. Plural of extension (Bottcher § 694), used almost as an adverb (Gesen. 100, 2 ; Kalisch § 70, 3). LXX. KaTa/cdpTrw?, abundantly, Symm. u.T(.iyi(nw???, cavity, as if the phrase meant " the door or window of the eye," but is rather to be regarded as a natural word of endearment corresponding to the Lat. pupa, indicating a doll, daughter of the eye. See Miihlau and Volck's edition of Gesenius' IVorterb., and Fleischer's additions to Levy's Cliald. IVorterb., erster Band, p. 419. 14. '•^I. On the form of the imperative, see Ges. § 67, rem. 2 ; Kalisch § Ixii. 3, a ; Bottcher § 497, 10. Tl^at^'l^ perf with vav conv., after the participle ^'^, in the sense of the future, just as the 1''i^l in the preceding verse after ^''30. Driver § 113, i ; Ges. § 126, 6, ^. 15. II^JI. The LXX. incorrectly, but quoad sciisum, koX Kara- (f)€v$uvTaL Wvrj ttoXXo. cm tov Kvpiov, and similarly in Jer. 1. 5 (LXX. xxvii. 5), where the same phrase occurs in the Hebrew. Comp. Isa. Ivi. 3, xiv. i. ^nJSK'l, LXX. Kat KaTacrKrjVMdovaLV Iv /xicru) aov. 16. Drake translates, "shall take possession of Judah as his in- heritance for a holy ground." But this can scarcely be the meaning of 'n nonx hv, 17. on is not to be regarded as an apoc. imp. piel from HDn^ but as an onomatopoetic interjection used to enjoin silence. Arab. transposed, ^Uo. This interjection has however been treated as a verbal form, and a plural formed from it -IDD, Neh. viii. 11, as well as an imperfect, Num. xiii. 30; Ewald § loi, d, and § 106, a. Comp. the verbal root i^^'ijl, to be silent. LXX. cvXa/SiLa-Ou). A similar translation is given by them of the word and its derivatives in Num. xiii. 31 (Heb. verse 30) ; Hab. ii. 20 ; Ze])h. i. 7. The Syr. has " and all flesh shall fear," the Targ. " let all the wicked fear before the Lord." "ilW niphal from ^^^. See Ges. § 72, rem. 5 ; Ewald § 140, a, at the end. Compare on the subject matter of the passage, Ps. xliv. 24 (verse 23, E. V.). //Is holy dwelling. The same phrase is used of the temple in Ps. Ixviii. 6 (verse 5 E. V.) Comp. verse 36 (E.V. 35), and Ps. xxvi. S ; Ch.ii.i7,m.i.] CRITICAL AND GRAMMATICAL COMM, 543 2 Chron. xxxvi. 15, here used of heaven, as Deut. xxvi. 15 ; Jer. XXV. 30. See Bottcher, De Inferis, § 402, ff., p. 209. The LXX. translate here Ik vec^cXwv dyiW avrov. The following allusion is made to this prophecy, in connexion with that in Isa. xi., in the third book of the Sibylline Oracles, lines 785- 795, part of which book was probably composed by a Jew about B.C. 160. We quote from FriedlieU's Oracula Sihyllina, with crit. commentary and a German transl. (Leipzig, 1852), evcfipdvOrjTi, Kopr], Koi aydXXeo ' croX yap eSwKev evcf)po(Tvvrjv atwros, bs ovpavov CKTicre Kat yyv. Ev croi 8' otKr^cret • aol 8' ecraeraL dOdvarov ^ws. Ev ok kvKOL re koI apve<; iv ovpeaiv ajxixLy eSovraL ■y^opTov, 7rap8dXu<; t ept'^ots oL[xa /3o(rKy](rovTaL ' ApKTOL crw fx6(T)(0i<; vofxdSes uvA-ttr^Tycrovrai ' crapKojSopo? re Xewv d)(ypov ^aycrat eVt cf>dTvr]<;, 0)5 /3ovs ' Kat Tra'ioe'; [xdXa vrjinoi iv Secr/xolaiv a^ovfTL ' Trrjpov yap etti ^6ovl Orjpa Trot-qcreL. Koi /3pe(jiee(TcrL SpaKovres a/x.a c^icrt KOLjxrjaovTai, KovK a^LKrjCOvai ' X'^'-P T^P ®^ov €(ra£T ctt' avrovs. " Rejoice, O virgin, and be glad, for everlasting gladness hath he given to thee, who made heaven and earth. For in thee he will dwell, immortal light shall be to thee. Wolves and lambs shall to- gether eat grass on the mountains, and leopards shall feed together with kids ; bears shall herd grazing with calves ; and the flesh-eating lion will eat straw at the manger as an ox, and very young children shall lead them in bonds, for he will make the wild beast tame on the earth. And dragons shall lie down with infants, and not hurt them. For the hand of God will be upon them." CHAPTER III. I. T/ie Adversary. So we render on account of the article. See p. 40. So LXX. Kttt 6 StajSoXos, and also in verses 2, 4, where Aquila has 6 dvTtKet/x,€i/05, with Symm. and Theod. in verse 2. Satan occurs without the article as a proper name in i Chron. xxi. i ; Ps. cix. 6, in which latter passage mention is made of his standing at the right side of the accused. The Targ. renders Satan in verse i by HNtsn and in verse 2 by ^^^H!, both meaning ^^the Sinner" 544 ZECIIARIAII AND HIS rROPIIECIES. [Ch. iii. 2-7. I^i'. Participle used of continued action. On the phrase "stand before," see p. 46. Comp. Num. xxii. 22. t^pb'?. Note the in- finitive with suffix from a form iPV'*, the a being attentuated to /. Ges. § 6r, i, rem. ; KaHsch § xxxix. i. 2. On the word 7-ebuke, see the passages referred to p. 53. On the Rabbinical story concerning Joshua, see note 2, p. 51. When the same words are repeated and preceded by \ as here, ("1^3*1— 1^3') the conjunction is best expressed by "yea." Comp. Ps. xxvii. 14, .n:P.\ - r\^.; Job vi. 29, after the k'ri, -nc^l - •nc^^. "inarij who delights in. The participle denotes a present and yet a habitual action, is delighting in, or is choosing. Drake supposes that this is addressed ironically to Satan, and says this " seems requisite to satisfy the parallelism of the Heb. text ; " but in this he is mistaken. 3. On the Targum see note i, p. 51. ^'^^ HTi. On the con- struction see Ges. § 134, 2, ^; Ewald § 168, d. ; Kalisch § 100, 8. D\Si^» Dnn. Accusative. See Ges. § 118, 3; Kalisch § 86, 4, c. The adjective ^1^* only occurs in this and the next verse, but the noun HNV is of more frequent occurrence, and is used of human excre- ments (Isa. xxxvi. 12] 2 Kings xviii. 27). Note its use in Isa. xxxviii. 8, as well as in Isa. iv. 4, and in Prov. xxx. 12 (not xxx. 9 as referred to on p. 50). The same word is not used in Isa. Ixiv. 5. It is im- possible, therefore, to consider clothing worn and soiled with age to be intended. 4. ^^ Before him." See p. 61, note. '^'^r'^V On const, of inf al)sol. here see Ges. § 131,4, a; Ewald § 351, c ; Kalisch §97, 3. When thus used for the finite verb, the infinitive is to be rendered by the tense of the verb which it follows, and is used to express the contemporaneousness of the acts. The LXX. consider it as spoken to the angel attendants, and render accordingly, koX h'Svaan airov TToByprj, "and clothe him with robes fiowing down to the feet." Not so the Syriac. On the mvbna, see p. 61. 6. "ly*! imp. hiphil from "11^ with — on account of the guttural. See Ges. § 72, rem. 7 ; Kalisch § 65, 6 ; Ewald § 232, c. 7. That the apodosis is to be regarded as commencing with thou shalt also judge, etc., is clear from the emphatic nris before ri^^i. The change of tenses indeed commences with ^Jj)D?), but the perf is there construed with the vav. conv. (note the tone), and thus is to be regarded as subordinated to the preceding imperfect. The Ch. iii. 7,8.] CRITICAL AND GRAMMATICAL COMM. 545 CJJ, DJ [also, also) is used before the two imperfects to show that they form the apodosis of the sentence. The verb Tl was originally |-1'^, from which form the niphal part. *''"'J and imp. kal P'lJ (Gen. vi. 3) occur. Derivatives from this form are also found, as r1% according to the k'ri in Job xix. 29, piD and Itl^. The two forms are, however, found in the Hebrew Scriptures with a decided difference in signification, pT being intrans., pi transitive. See the Lexicons, and Bottcher § 1141, 1143, 3 ', also, on the phrase here, the remarks on p. 65. D''D?nD. Gesenius explains this word as a participle hiphil from "V^, of a Chaldee form, for the ordinary participle would have been D^3'>P1D. Hitzig's objection to this view is noted on p. 66. The latter participle actually occurs in chap. v. 10, and in eight other places. See Fiirst's Concord., under 1^\ On the other hand, the sing. ■'l^nP is found several times. The plural here would rather come from a form '=1^^'^, as 2''??nP would be the plural from the other form. In the former case, too, the prep. IP would have been used instead of P?. See Bottcher, De Iiiferis, §§ 447, 448, though in his Lchiincch he has returned to Gesenius' view, §§ 315, 12; 1013, b ; 1095, ^• Olshausen also defends the view given above; see § 258, a, p. 580, § 208, <5, p. 391. The LXX. have regarded the word as a participle, reading dv^o-rpe^o/teVous, and so Vulg. ambulatites and the Syriac. 8, XJ"1^DL^>. The force of ^^^ is to add emphasis to the imperative. The gaya or metheg under the ^ in Theile's edition is incorrect, and has been omitted by Baer in his edition of the Minor Prophets. See his article on " Die Metheg-Setzung," § 39, foot note, in Merx's Archiv. " Ihose that sit before thee." See p. 68. nsiD '•Ei'JX. See the remarks on p. 69, ff. LXX. repaTaa-KOTroi, well explained by the gloss quoted by Schleusner as o-qfxeLtiiTLKOL, o-i;/x,/SoAi- KOL, but regarded by Cyrill, quoted by Field in his edition of Or/gen's Hexapla, as meaning men desirous of seeing signs and wonders : TCpaTOCTKOTTODS y€ flT^V O.VTOV% 6vOfJidt,€i, TOVTe(TTLV (let (TrjjXUa ^rjTOVVTa^ opuv, Kal Toiv Tipdruiv iffne/jiivovi ' t^vcru yap ttws aet tolovtov i(rTt to Twv ToiiSatcov Wvos. Symm. Oavpiaa-Toi. The Targum paraphrases the text : " Hear now, Joshua the high priest, and Hananiah, Misael, and Azariah, thy companions (the London Polyglott omits these names, but they are given in de Lagarde's text), who sit before thee, for they are men, i^D^J pn"? -13^0? jn^B pi.^l^, worthy to have a wonder (Lond. Polygl. tvonders) done to them, etc." Kimchi has N N 546 ZECIIARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. ii. 8. followed this explanation. The mention of the names of Hananiah, Misael, and Azariah arises from the same anachronism which is found in the story given on p. 51, note 2. A further summary of expositions is given by Kohler, p. 125, note 2. Kohler understands the phrase nov ''12V to mean " my Servant who is the Branch," and objects to the latter word being considered as in apposition to " my servant," inasmuch as in that case the word should have the article. But, as Ewald says (§ 277, c), poets or prophets form sometimes new proper names after their own peculiar taste, and use such without the article to distinguish them from ordinary proper names. See, on the name, p. 70. Kuencn in his Prophets and Prophecy in Israel (authorized English translation, p. 206: Longmans, 1877) maintains that the name " Branch of Righteousness " is used in Jer. xxiii., xxxiii., as a collec- tive, and signifies simply "righteous kings," which the prophet expected to come from the Davidic dynasty. His idea is utterly opposed to the context of those passages, and leaves out of sight entirely the fact that the term " Branch " in Jeremiah has been borrowed from the earlier passage in Isaiah iv. Surely we must admit, from the lowest standpoint, that Zechariah was a fair exponent of the hopes of his nation. The object of Kuenen seems almost avowedly to be the reduction of all the Messianic predictions to the barest hope of some " grand day coming." We protest against this mode of treatment as most *' unscientific," though made under the assumption of being the only "scientific" mode of regarding such passages. The LXX. render nnv by dmroX?;, both here and in chap. vi. 12, which word they use sometimes in the sense of a shoot, as Ezek. xvi. 7, xvii. 10. 'N\i\g. orieiis; Arab. ^3-^."^ ^'^'^ ^^^^ '^ ^y^* ^^? sunrise, the Divine snnrise. The Syr. Hex. has also the same rendering. Dean R. Payne Smith notes in his Thcs. Syr. tliat this interpreta- tion of the Hebrew word is not to be despised, as noy is equivalent to L*lc„ the shining or splendour of the sun. To this phrase of Zccliariah Simeon alludes when he calls the Messiah |ico; ^; \k^i the rising coming from on high, Euke i. 78. Tlie Dean further notes that in Isa. iv. 2 '^'' nov is rendered by the LXX. eViXa/ii/^ct 6 6'£o's, Syr. [^pc » au*j j, but Vulg. germen Domini. From these places in the Syriac translation of the prophets the phrase is used, Ch. iii.8-iv.2.] CRITICx\L AND GRAMMATICAL COMM. 547 " the rising of the Messiah/' and the festival of Epiphany is called in Syriac " the feast of the rising." 9. See remarks on p. 71, ff. Observe the dual used for the plural 0!^.''^ nuat^*, clearly not to be taken as seven pair of eyes. See chap. iv. 10. Comp. D^itJ'r! Ci'P^ three teeth, i Sam, ii. 13, and D.''?^? ^?r^, six wings, Isa. vi. 2. See Ges. § 88, 2, rem. ; Kalisch § 77, 4; Ewald § 180, a. X''^ is here treated as a masculine ; so in chap. iv. 10 ; Cant. iv. 9 (kethibh). ^'' Behold I am graving its graving^ Kimchi understands this to mean, I will finish the stone in all its preparation for the building ; for he notices that the last thing in connexion with the preparation of a precious stone is the engraving — the ornamentation upon it. The Syr. translates " I will open its gates," possibly meaning the doors of the completed temple. The LXX. iSou eyw opwo-ca /360pov, *' behold I will dig a trench" possibly reading nng, an opening, as Schleusner, or perhaps rather rins^ a pit, which translation has been explained by Jerome and Cyrill as containing a reference to the wounds of Christ. Aquila, StayXu^w di/oty/xara avT^. The LXX. have ovk eV SwdfUL /xeyaXjy, which is simply a free translation. 7. pnjn "in. On the use of the article before the adjective and not before the noun, see Ewald § 293, a; Ges. § in, 2, a; Kalisch § Ixxxiii. 15, c. This construction is used in the older language when greater emphasis is to be placed on the adjective. Wiinsche is quite correct in stating that the passage referred to, p. 96, note 2, occurs in Baba bathra, 3 ^. This reference was printed in the proof-sheet as 36, hence our mistake. The passage occurs also in Arachin, 6, a. The citation is also given in Bacher, Agada der babylonischen Amor der, Budapest, 1878, p. 44. The Targ. is 5<^l1 ^53-"ilt oni^. N'Fi^'sp Nn-isbo "•pi'-i N3^^n T\yi. KD : KniD^O b? tDl'pEJ'M. TPIi'^^P ^''W? "fP**."!! NH'-K^ n:i "Oyy X'^'P'^P? "What art thou esteemed, O Rome, foolish kingdom, before Zerubbabel ? shall it not be as a valley ? and he will reveal the Messiah, whose name was spoken of from ancient times, and he shall rule over all the kingdoms." The Lond. Polyglott omits the name "Rome." The same interpretation is given in Bereshith Rabba on Gen. xxviii. 10, in connexion with this passage, "that mountain is the Messiah, and he has this name, because he is exalted above the Patriarchs." — Schottgen, De Messia, p. 100 (from Raymondus Martini). Such an interpretation is however opposed to the context, though Henderson explains the passage very similarly. ■ilE^''P7. The LXX. have toO KaropOwaai, regarding, perhaps, the Hebrew noun, as Schleusner conjectures, as a sort of infinitive. And he shall bring forth. The LXX. is almost unintelligible, and it is evident that they did not understand the meaning of the passage, 550 ZECIIARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Cli. iv.9, lo. Kat iioicro) tov XlOovtti^ KXT/povo/xias (Schleusner suggests that they read np'n^ for nJ^NTHj Aq. has tov TrpoiTevovTo) hnWrjTa )((ipLTo<; •^dpira av-nj'i. In the second part they seem to have connected niSt^n in some way with 1^}^. Aquila makes the same mistake, translating it i^ta-oxrci •X J y p •> ? BO r -»ir XaptTo?, and similarly the Syriac jvo^>;.r. jZa.a»> JA.^.; |j>|o\ ^021 jo "and he brought forth the most excellent stone of equality and mercy," and even the Vulg., "et educet lapidem primarium, et exsquabit gratiam gratios ejus." ^J;^'N■|^ pxn. The top-stone. P^n is not to be viewed as in the const, state, as even Kalisch (§ Ixxxiii. 13) regards it; nL*'X"in is rather to be taken, with Kohler, as standing in apposition to P'^'i, and is to be considered as a fem. formation from E^'fr'"'. The ending is marked with raphe to prevent its being taken for the suffix 1^7, and is, as Kohler notes, an instance which proves that when the fact of the raphe is specially noted by the Masorites, the ^7 is not always to be considered simply as the softened fem. suffix, as Ewald thinks (§ 21,/, 3 ; § 247, d), for it must here be the fem. termina- tion, since the word has the article, and the tone is on the ultimate. See Bottcher § 418, 2, foot note. niX'J'n is not the subject of the verb substantive understood, but the ace. of nearer definition, 7i.nth shoutings. Ewald § 204, a ; Ges. § 118, 3 ; Kalisch § 86, 4, c. 10. t? for p from T-12 as np for HO, Isa. xliv. 18. See Ges. § 72, rem. 8 ; Kalisch § Ixv. 23. m^np fem. used as a neuter, as frequently. Compare the singular in Num. xxii. 18. For a similar interrogation comp. Isa. xliv. 10. 1X11 inot^l. One compound notion is expressed by the two verbs, so that the first is almost equivalent to an adverb (see Ges. § 142, 3, a; Kalisch §104, i). These perfects can scarcely in this connection be rendered as prophetic, as our A.V., " for they shall rejoice and shall see, etc." There is a contrast, as Pusey remarks, drawn between the first and second part of the verse, and hence the verbs which express that contrast are placed first. 7n2n \1'^T\. Compare note on ch. v. 8. The second word stands in apposition to the first, " ///^ stone, the tin " (see Ges. § no, 2, c). It can scarcely be, as Ewald maintains (referring to chap. iii. 9, and comparing Job. xix. 24), a stone into which lead is molten. Compare an-jn nhb.^'n, "///^ rcwraths, the go/if" for '' t/w wreaths of gold" (Exod. Ch.iv. 11,12.] CRITICAL AND GRAMMATICAL COMM. 55I xxxix. 17) It corresponds, as Philippi notes (JVesen u. Ur sprung d. Status Const, p. 37), exactly with the Arabic c4_^j.)j Xx^^S ^^ the image, the gold" for the golden image. So also 2 Kings xvi. 14. T\^T\ly\ natOn. LXX. rov XiOov Tov Ka(T(Tnipivov, Symm. tov Ke^oipia-- fxivov, Vulg. lapidem stanneian. The Targ. understands the subject of the verbs '11 '^1 to be the persons alluded to as despising the day of small things in the begin- ning of the verse. It renders n'px r\Vi1V^ by T/?^? r??75 ^V^^, " seven rows (of stones) as these." The Targum translates the clause at the end of the verse by a very loose and inaccurate paraphrase, " the works of the sons of men in all the earth are revealed before the Lord." Vulg., '^Quis enim despexit dies parvos? (LXX. SioVt rts e^ovSeVcocrev ci's i^yae/jas [XLKpd. Gramm., vol. i. p. 288, 2nd edit.). Olshausen, however, takes a different view, § 81, a. \??.^ from B?^^', pi. ^ Vt}^, where the ~ preserves the 0 sound ; the construct v5t^ for v?t^' is simply to make the daghesh more audible. See Ges. § 10, 2, rem. Comp. Bottcher § 367, e. There is no neces- sity, as Bottcher notes in the same place (footnote 2), to assume, with Fijrst, a special form nSat^ on account of a supposed difference of meaning; ^^Ji* seems (see Miihlau and Volck's Gesem'us' Wor- te7-b.) to have the meaning of to hang down. The verb is used in the fifth conj. in Arabic of the heavens hanging doivn, beginning to rain, hence npbp' in the sense of a stream. Comp. the fact that the reservoir of rain in the heavens is termed in Ps. Ixv. 10 (E.V. verse 9), '■'■the brook of God'' (i^'''!'^^ H^)-, on which passage see Delitzsch, Hupfeld and Perowne ; the latter scholars cite the Arabic proverb regarding the rain mentioned by Schultens, namely, " when the river of God comes, the river Isa (in Bagdad) ceases." From the same idea of hanging down comes the meaning of ears of corn, and here the points of the olive twigs. Blayney is wrong in translating this 552 ZECIIARIAH AND IIIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. iv. 13, 14. word ^' ordercrs," which is simply an invented meaning, and in supposing that two beings in human shape were seen by the prophet. nt"ii"|i3.V masc, and probably from a masc. sing. '''?^V, as Gesenius has given it in his Thesaurus, for masculine nouns indicating tools, or utensils, have generally plurals in 01— It might also come from a fem. form nn^ilV, which Furst prefers. See however Bottcher § 7 16, 5. It is not to be rendextd presses, as Hengstenberg. The word is onomatopoetic, from the rusJmig, gurgling sound, and is clearly connected with "T'^V, a 7i, for Hjp, which is the reading of one MS. See P^wald § 38, b, y, § 173,/; Ges. § 73, 2, rem. i; Kalisch §xxxviii. i b ; Bottcher § 349,/, § 498, 17, § 928, 2. Though this is the only instance of such attenuation in the verb, it is found also in a participle nniT (Isa. lix. 5), and in other words. Bottcher suggests that the object of it was to give an air of lamenta- tion to the word. in731. 3rd pers. fem. Avith suff. for •inpi'3, see Ges. § 75, rem. 1 9. The perfects are to be viewed as instances of the proph, perfect. On the subject matter, comp. i Kings xviii. 38. 5. Targ. r?^ "QT^: \'0 \tni, " and see who are these who appear." 6. The Syr. gives an interpretation rather than a translation of the verse, " and I said, what is this ? And he said to me, this is a measure which is going forth, and in it are the sins of the whole earth." LXX. avTiq -fj dSiKta avTMv, as if reading DMV for Q^'J?. This is said to be the reading of one MS., that is, as far as regards the con- sonants, but query as to the vowel points ? Jerome lias noted that if the Hebrew word had a vav instead of a yod, "rccte legeretur OXAM ut LXX. putaverunt." Symm., more correctly, tt^os tovto aTro^XeTrovcrt. Other commentators, as Rosenmiiller, explain " this is their appear- ance," comparing Lev. xiii. 55; Num. xi. 7. See p. 114, ff. Duhm (£>ie Thcologie der Propheten, p. 317) has an extraordinary idea, that py is to be here taken in the sense of " spirit, angel," the woman being regarded as the personification of sin. The Targum paraphrases the rest of the chapter thus : " And he said. These are the peoples (^«^»oy de Lagarde) who received and gave false measures, and he said, Lo ! they are manifested before all Ch. V. 6, 7-] CRITICAL AND GRAMMATICAL COMM. 555 the dwellers on the earth. (7) And behold swift peoples shall carry them away with speed, and other peoples shall come and shall dwell in their place, because they received and gave false measures. (8) And he said, On account of this they were condemned and were brought away into exile, because they received and gave false measures, and other peoples came, and they dwelt in their room. (9) And I lifted up mine eyes, and behold two lands were seen," i;^l p;iP r^l^ii, i.e., Israel and Judah. The Lond. Polygl. adds, " among the kingdoms of the peoples of the earth," but these words are not in de Lagarde's text, — " and swift peoples took them away captive with speed as the eagle flieth [Deut. xxviii. 49], and they caused the people to migrate who received and gave false measures among the kingdoms of the peoples of the earth under the whole heaven. (10) And I said to the angel who talked with me, Whither are they removing the people who received and gave false measures? (11) And he said to me, To prepare for them a place in the province of Babylon, and they shall be kept and tarry there till their time shall come." 7. Ewald {^Lehrbuch, § 174, c, /3) seems to consider "i|3 as a feminine, when used in the signification of a " cover T As a noun signifying a portion of the earth's surface (as in Gen. xiii. 11), it would come under § 174, <^. But "13? is used as a fem. in all its significations, even where it denotes a 7ueight of metal. 2 Kings v. 5 is conclusive on this point. Pressel is wrong in stating that it is masculine (see Bottcher § 654). The word has two plurals, the masc. form D''!??, used for that which is valuable (i Chron. xxii. 14, xxix. 7), and the fem. form rin33, for that which is common or comparatively valueless, e.g. of bread, Judg. viii. 5 (see Bottcher § 712, y, and 719, y). nxb':. Participle fem. niphal (Ewald § 240, d). It might, as far as form is concerned, be perf. niphal 3rd pers. sing. fem. (i Chron. xiv. 2 ; Ewald § 194, F). A second pers. fem. cannot of course be thought of here. Kohler views it as used in a reflexive sense " lifted itself up." Pressel renders the second sentence, " and this one woman car- ried," supplying HXD'J from the preceding sentence, or a corresponding nxl"3. Rashi's rendering is better, '1J1 nns nL*'X n5 nOD nt. For how viany years ! The idea of " how niany years .?" cannot be otherwise expressed. HD (see Ewald § 330, a) is used as an exclamation of wonder. So Gesenius in Thes. ^^ jam, 0 qitot S7int aiiui! and in the last edition of his Worterhuch, " o wie viele Jahre schon ! " Comp. Ps. cxix. 84, and the opposite in Isa. ii. 22. The LXX. render here ■^St; iKam h-r). 5. '•Jno^'j scrip, def., comp. ''3n"'?l'nj Num. xx. 5. See on the con- struction, p. 171. On the repetition of the pronoun after the suffix, compare Gen. xxvii. 34; Num. xiv, 32; Ps. ix. 7 ; Prov. xxii. 19. See Ges. § 121, 3 ; Ewald§3Ti, a. In confirmation of Ewald's view, as pointed out in p. 171, comp. Job xxxi. 18, xl. 22 ; Isa. xliv. 2i,lxv. 5. TiSDI, inf. abs. See note on "tTJn, verse 3. nn. LXX. ^ai 180U. 6. D''72Xn. On the article, see Ewald § 206, a ; Ges. § 109, rem. in the beginning. 7. D^imrrns, See note i, p. 172. The expression T3, "by the hand of," had become so common in the signification of " by means of,'' that it is here used though preceded by ^'p,, to call. Comp. Hag. i. i. ri3C'\ Comp. chap. i. ir. See note on p. 173. ^t^•^ is used in the masc. singular as a predicate to the nouns which precede, though the noun immediately preceding is feminine. This Ch.vii.7-viii.3-] CRITICAL AND GRAMMATICAL COMM. 561 is a rare construction. See E.vald § 339, c ; Ges, § 148, 2. Comp. Prov. xxvii. 9. 8. See note i on p. 174. 9. See p. 174. 10. 1J. If the copula be omitted before "i3, the " widow and orphan" are considered as forming one class, and the "stranger and the poor " as forming another class of persons, sins against whom are peculiarly hateful (Kohler). The sense is slightly different if the reading "1JI be adopted, which is found in many MSS. and editions, and is expressed by the LXX., Targ. and Vulg. The Syr. paraphrases he words, "and to the poor and him that turns himself to me." 'N ti'^K ny-i. See note i, p. 175. 11. In the translation of the Vulg., " et averterunt scapulam recedentem," " averterunt " is to be regarded as a mistake of the copyists for "verterunt," which latter rendering Jerome gives in his Commentary. See Schegg. 12. The LXX. translate, quoad sensum, T'Oti'^ by aTret^^, referring to KapSiav. 13. The Syr. has "because I called," instead of "as he called." 14. D"iJ|DX1.. This is the ist pers. sing. imp. piel, from "i^D. The K, according to Aramaic usage, has the long vowel instead of the usual half-vowel, ~ or~. Comp. Ges. § 23, 3, rem. 2, and see Ges. § 52, 2, rem. 2; Ewald § 235, d ; Bottcher § 427, 3, g, § 1056, vol. ii. p. 370 j Kalisch § xvi. 4, d. On the chateph pathach under the second radical, see Ges, § 10, 2, rem. ; Kalisch § lix. 9. David Kimchi mentions that his father, Joseph Kimchi, considered the form to be kal, instead of ^l^P^ ; while Fiirst in his Concord, regards it as a niphal ; but the verb is intransitive both in kal and niphal (see Kalisch, Gr:, vol ii. p. 203, footnote.) Fiirst has, however, correctly regarded it as a piel in his Worterbiich. mJOn pX is a reminis- cence from Jer. iii. 19, which fact explains the omission of the article. CHAPTER VIII. 2, 'J nX3p 'Jp. Comp. note on chap. i. 2. 3. On the rendering of the perfects, see p. 178. Instead oi rendering them both as presents, "/ return to Zion, and I dwell, etc.," it is perhaps better, inasmuch as the second perfect is the perf. O O 562 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. viii. 3-9. with vav conv. (note the tone), to regard the first as a present- perfect and the second as a present. The perf. with vav conv. denotes here the definite act which is considered as the result of the action described by the perfect preceding (see Driver § 115, Obs.). The first perfect need not be regarded as a prophetic perfect. The Syr. renders "'H^CJ' by " I am comforted in ZionP noxn i^y The article probably qualifies i^, and not the preceding noun. The article is used before the abstract noun (see Gesen. § 109, 3, rem. i, c; Kalisch § 83, 11). The Syr. translates it by '' the holy city." 4. C^X. ^^ Each otie" (comp. Ezek. viii. 11; Gesen. § 124, 2, rem. i ; Kalisch § 82, 9), " On account of the imiltitiide of his days,^' i.e., his old age (Job xxxii. 7). The Targ. wrongly, " and the good works of each shall protect him from the multitude of days," or "from the troubles of old age." 5. The verb in this verse does not agree with its nom. in gender, as num, though feminine, is a feminine used in a neuter signification. Comp. Ezek. xxiv. 10; Ps. x. 8, xi, 4, etc. See Ges. § 146^ 3; Jer. XXX, 19, Bottcher § 936, a. The Targ., after the analogy of 2 Sam. vi. 5, has rendered D^nb'D by rri?i^'P, ''praising" scil. God. But this meaning does not suit so well here. 6. X73* ""S. On the ''3 at the beginning of the sentence, see Ewald § 362, a. 03 for Qin^ comp. i Sam. xxii. 7 ; see Ges. § 153, I. The Targ. misrepresents the meaning of ^^2^ in this pas- sage, "as my fear was had in honour (^J^ipn'^. "li^^n ns) in the eyes of the residue of this people in these days, so (|-"i"'i?^?. ^'P'Ji^. ^1^) before me they will be honoured." 7. Comp, on the subject matter Isa. xliii. 5. 8. "I will bring them back and they shall dwell " (comp. Isa. Ivi. 7). The LXX, render 1J3w"i by kox KaraaKrjvwo-w. " /7t'/// be to them a God." Comp. Jer. xxx. 22 ; Ezek. xxxvii. 27. 9. D''S;Dt^'^. Note the vocative with article. See Ges. § 109, 3, rem, 2. "•tJ'X. See note p. 185. The prophets here referred to were of course difi"erent from " the former prophets," i.e., those before the days of exile, mentioned in chap. vii. 7, 12, chap. i. 4. Hitzig, indeed, regards the word 73^"in (the temple) in the close of the verse as a gloss. Though the plural is used (Q''S''33n^ tlic prophets), it is not necessary to suppose that other prophets besides Haggai and Zech- Ch. viii.9-i4] CRITICAL AND GRAAIMATICAL COMM. 563 ariah are referred to. The Vulg. omits 1t^'X in its translation, " qui auditis in his diebus sermones istos per os prophetarum in die qua fundata est domus Domini, etc." Hitzig observes that the LXX. appear from their translation, dcfi ov (^KoSofxrjrai, to have read niJSnp 10. The suffix in i^^V^, which expresses the predicate, agrees with the genitive nQnarij instead of the governing noun. See Ewald § 317 c, who classes this case with the examples in i Kings xvii. 16 (compare verse 14) ; Lev. xiii. 9. Hitzig denies the simi- larity of the cases, as the predicate cannot here be properly affirmed of the genitive. He maintains that "•^EJ' is properly speaking of no gender, and that the masc. '"i^i^^ was used on account of Dl^n im- mediately preceding. ^^'n. Not ''f/ie affliction" as the A. V., after LXX., Targ., and Vulg., but rather with the Syr., " the oppressor." n?i?'i:?i. The 1 is not here the simple copula, but the vav conv. with the omission of the usual lengthening of the vowel as compensation for the daghesh which cannot occur in the 5^. Compare ^l^^^l, Jud. vi. 9, also XX. 6, 2 Sam. i. 10, etc. See Ewald § 232 h; Kahsch § xlix. 2. Hitzig observes that though it is better to regard the 1 as conversive, yet the use of the imperf with the ordinary copula might be defended as referring to a repeated action. The meaning is scarcely, with Ewald and Kohler, " I gave each man into the hand of the other," which would require ^1?, but perhaps rather, with Keil, " I drove each against the other," or, "//(?/ loose, etc." comp. Prov. vi. 14, 19, xvi. 28. 11. '"in D''D''3. On the construction see Ges. § 118, 3, rem. 12. On " the seed of peace" see note on p. 186. Dr. Pusey trans- lates the passage, " for the seed shall be peace." He remarks that " ' seed ' has no relation to the * vine.' " But, in addition to what is mentioned in the note referred to, Jer. ii. 2 1 may be cited, where the \>1V is indirectly called ^1, " a seed." 14. 'niona. Our A. v., following the LXX. koI ov fjiiTevorjcra, has " and I repented not." The verb has this signification in niphal and hithpael, and must likewise be considered as having the same in the piel, although this meaning is not given by Gesenius or Fiirst. Kohler and Keil regard it as reflexive. Perhaps it is better to translate with Ewald, "I repented it not." The tippecha is perhaps used with L . ^ 5- ^? for emphasis. The Syr. has, according to Lond. Polygl., Aa2)oi{o '^ and I ttinicd back" but Lee's edition prefixes the negative particle. 564 ZECIIARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. viiL 15-23. 15. TlOOT ^na:^', "/ have again purposed" (see Ges. § 142, ^b; Kalisch § 103, 2 ; Ewald § 285 b). The full form "•nonT, instead of ^nST (Jer. iv. 28), may be an indication of a late date. See Bott- cher § II18, I «. The LXX. have ovtws TrapaTcVay/Aat koX Siavci'OT;- fiai, perhaps reading ^ni'i^'n. 16. See note i, p. 189. 17. See note 2, p. 189. 19. The LXX. insert after D''3lt3 kol eicfipavO-qa-ea-Oe. See also on the verse the remarks on p. 191. 20. '1J1 "I'J'S ni;. See note i on p. 192. Rosenmiiller cites Ps. X. 6 as an instance of a similar omission of the substantive verb, but such cannot be the case in that special place (see Delitzsch). The accentuation is here in favour of the translation, "it will yet (be) that people will come," for "ly is separated from "li^'f^ by the dis- junctive yethibh. 21. nnX ^2L^''l''. LXX. KarotKowi/Tcs TreVre TroXet?. "Il7n n37J. See on the construction note 2, p. 192. n37X, See Ges. § 128, i ; Kalisch § 94, 11, 22. D^oivr DMJ1. LXX. WvT] TToXAa. They render DV^T also by iToXv in Gen. xviii. 18. 23. See note on p. 193. It^X, T/iat. The Vulg. regarded it as relative, hence its rendering, " in diebus illis in quibus apprehen- dent, etc." In the Yalkut Shinieoni, the statements of which concerning the sufferings of the Messiah are given by Wiinsche in his Leiden des Messias, the following reference is made to this passage: "And all of them (the nations) will come and fall down upon their faces before Messiah and before Israel, and will say, We will be to thee and to Israel for servants ; and every one of Israel will have two thousand and eight hundred servants, as it is written, ' In those days (it will happen) that ten men shall take hold, out of all the languages of the nations, even take hold of the skirts of a man (who is) a Jew, saying, Let us go with you, for we have heard that God is with you'" (pp. 82, 83). Wiinsche, in his note, explains the re- ference to the number of the servants, from R. Bechai's explanation of the Thora, fol. 168, col. 2, in the parashah V f^^"^' (Num. xiii. 2, ff.), as alluding to the 70 nations, ten men from each of whom would make 700 at each corner, which multiplied by the four corners makes 2,800 ! Ch. ix. I.] CRITICAL AND GRAMMATICAL COMM. 56; CHAPTER IX. Stahelin in his Einleitimg has well remarked from his standpoint, that the prophecy concerning the Gentiles contained in verses 1-7 of this chapter is one well suited to the Persian period. For the calamities here announced are such as were to fall on the territory along the coast, which was the usual road taken by the Persian armies in their march southwards. Moab and Ammon, or even Edom, against which Jeremiah directed certain of his prophecies^ might well be passed over by the prophet, inasmuch as these neighbours, being Persian subjects, could not do anything against a colony which, in the time of Darius, was specially protected by Persia. Though it is well to note Stahelin's remarks on this point, we prefer the view ad- vocated by Kohler, and adopted by us in our remarks on pp. 201 ff. I. NCJ'JD. See remarks on p. 202. The LXX. have X-yix/xa, an oracle (see Schleusner), which the Itala always renders by assicmptio. So here, chap. xii. i, and also in Jer. xxiii. t^t^, ff. ; Nah. i. i ; Hab. i. i; Mai. i. I ; Lam. ii. 14. Aquila, ap/x.a, a zveight, a burden. The LXX. elsewhere render it opa.'n^X nJDD), the green mosf/ue,and hence it has no connexion with Ttn. '1J1 pki'Dni. The Targum paraphrases, " and Damascus shall be turned to be of the land of the house of the Shekinah," and so the clause respecting Hamath in verse 2. inm^D. The LXX. render here Ova-ta avrov. This rendering may possibly be an interpreta- tion like that of the Targum. Compare, however, their rendering of the same word in 2 Sam. xiv. 17, where they must have read ^^^p. The Syr. has similarly onojoo. Aquil. has kol iv Aa/xaa-Kc^ di'dTrauo-t? avToG (see pp. 206, 207). " J^or to Jahaveh will be the eye of man, etc.'' LXX. correctly, quoad sensutn, Ston KvpLo^ icjiopa avOpiairov? K.r.X. Syr. | . • \-i \ » '"^^io t*o }ai«io ^.\ ■ " because men and all the tribes of Israel are manifest to the Lord." Similarly the Targ., *' because before the Lord the works of the children of men are revealed, and he is pleased Cl^l^i^*) with all the tribes of Israel." Drake translates, " for the eye of J. is over man, and over all the tribes of Israel." He suggests, after J. D. Michaelis, to read Q"iS instead of Dl^^, in which case the phrase DiJ^ V^ would mean, " the whole face of Syria" (comp. Exod. X. 15, Num. xxii. 5, 11). One MS. is said to have this reading. But the change is unnecessary, as are other changes which have been proposed. Pressel translates, " the circle of men," I.e., " all men round about." He appeals to the texts already quoted, which do not, however, justify that translation. See on the passage, p. 207. In support of his view that the genitive is to be viewed as objective, Hitzig refers to verse 12, Isa. xxv. 4, Jer, xxvi. II, though he confesses the construction is hard. 2. 131 nOn"D31. LXX. KOL iv 'H/xaO iv rots optots avr)j<;, Tvpo<: KOI 2. They seem simply to have translated (/uoad scnsum. Thus they render also the singular at the end of the verse by the plural, rightly considering that the clause refers both to Tyre and Sidon (see p. 210). The Targ. renders the last clause of the verse, " for it is very strong." Aquila has, Kacye 'H/xa^ opto^erv/tTerut Iv avnj. Symm., KUL iv H/xaO Tj) o/JLopox'a-r], kol Tvpio kol ^lSoivl. 4. For ''3"IX many MSS. read nin"", which Henderson would adopt. '13C^'11\ Owing to the diversity of meanings of the verb t^n* Fiirst has recognised a double stem. But this is unnecessary. The verb seems properly to take into possession, sometimes by violence, and hence to Ch. ix. 4>S-] CRITICAL AND GRAMMATICAL COMM. 567 drive away, as well as to possess, but also to impoverish. Hence Ewald's translation, "the Lord will impoverish her." ?''n or ^D, means the ditch of the fortress, or its bastion, as Is. xxvi. i ; Lam. ii. 8. If the word be taken from ?1D it might mean riches, as Ewald (comp. Ezek. xxviii. 4), and the form before suffixes is identical. But it is better, for the reasons given in note 2, p. 211, to take it in the sense of a fortification, for though originally it meant the ditch of the fortress, it seems to be used generally for the bastiojis. LXX. ovva/xLV avT'^s. 5. On verses 5-8, comp. the very similar passage in Zeph. ii. 4-7. ^IB. So Baer on authority of MSS. for i^"})^, impf. apoc. or jussive of nsn. On tlie form and the tone milra, see Ges. § 75, rem. 3, l> ; Kalisch § Ixvii. 15, ^3 Ewald § 62,d. Bottcher supposes that the peculiarity of the accent is caused by the word being pronounced in a threatening tone, Bottcher § 497, 9. The jussive has here the force of " fnust see." See Driver § 58; Bottcher § 961, A, 7. Note the paronomasia between ^1^ and ^T^j so also in Ps. xl. 4, Hi. 8 ; Isa. xli. 5. ''^n^l.. Ewald regards this as a jussive for ^nni, the verb ''•in being one of those which do not readily change the V into t, Ewald § 224, b, at end, but Bottcher {JV. Aehrenlese, 1015) thinks that it is better to regard the speech as passing over from the jussive into the prophetic future, " and it must tremble." Thus in the end of the verse we meet 13^^''. followed by 3;^n ^\, The imp. kal. of this verb is considered by Gesenius to have two forms, ''■in^ and ^TIJ. Fiirst in his Worterb. regards ?''n* as a hiphil, though with the signification of kal. In his Concord, he follows the opinion of Gesenius. t:'''?fn from t^'tS, Ewald § 122, e ; Olshausen § 255, i. p. 566 ; KaHsch § Ixvii. A, 3, 4. Gesenius in the Thcs. takes it as a hiphil of ^3\ The meaning would be the same. ^^P?? for npSD from t^BO (for t23;ip, stem t33J), expectation, hope, pathach shortened into seghol like "j^^-?? for "'^t?^, see Ges. § 27, rem. 2, a ; Ewald § 88, d, § 160, d; Kalisch § xvi. 9, footnote c. Bottcher § 498, 17, imagines that it is because the word was pronounced in the tone of lamentation. The LXX. have I-kX tw TrapaTTTw/xaTL avTrjs, as if they read "^^pn??, but perhaps they intended to give merely the sense of the passage. ^DTl iO, See note on p. 213. Mr. Chamberlain maintains that this prophecy of Zechariah was not fulfilled up to the year a.d, 1270, when the fortifications of Ashkelon " were at length utterly destroyed by Sultan Bibars." It 568 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch.ix. 5-7. is true that a Christian city, built on the site of the ancient one was the seat of a Christian bishop in a.d. 536. But though no mention is made of the destruction of Ashkelon in the days of the Maccabees, inasmuch as its citizens seem to have surrendered with- out resistance (i Mace. x. 86), and were afterwards friendly to the Jews (i Mace. xi. 60), it does not follow that it was not destroyed or deserted in the later troubles which fell upon the land. Benjamin of Tudela speaks of the new Ashkelon as being four parasangs from the ancient city, of the destruction of which we have no account. 6. "i.tP^. See p. 216. The word only occurs in this passage and in Deut. xxiii. 3 (E.V. verse 2). It is most probably derived from "ITO, unused in Hebrew, but equivalent to ".3^ to be cormpt, dirty, signifying one of impure descent, or it may be taken from the same root in the sense of mingle^ Talm. IIP, to mix threads, to spin. So Fiirst. Geiger maintains that it is equivalent to ""t ^-^P, ^^ of a foreign nation,'^ but instances of such a compound are wanting, that appealed to by Geiger being unsatisfactory. The LXX., in Deut., render it Ik 7r6pin]<;, Vulg., de scorto natiis, and so the other versions. LXX. here dAAoyeveis; Aq., Symm., and Theod., ixay^^p. Vulg., "et sedebit separator in Azoto." See Ges. T/ies., and Add. by Rodiger. The conjectures of Redslob and of Maurer need not be discussed here. The Targum has widely mistaken the sense of the passage : " and the house of Israel shall dwell at Ashdod where they were strangers." R. Salomo ben Yizhak explains it, " and a foreign people shall dwell in Ashdod, these are the Israelites who were strangers in that city." 7. See p. 217, fif, 230. The Targ. renders, "and the strangers," (or "prosc/ytes," '^'^''^15 used in both significations) "who shall be left among them, even they shall be joined to the people of our God." mn'-a Piks?. The term fj-I^S* is the peculiar name of the princes of the Edomites, and is applied only by Zechariah to Jewish princes or chieftains. It is connected with ^(X>, ^ thousand, and means the head of a thousand, ■yikKxpyy]'^, not <^v\6.pyr]%. The word is also used in the signification of friend, which does not suit here. See Delitzsch, Genesis, 4te Ausg., on chap, xxxvi. p. 439, and Kohler. V. Ortenberg proposes unnecessarily to change ^^^ into ^.^. And Ekron as the Jcbusite. See p. 219. The Syr. renders, "and Ekron shall be as Hebron." The Targ., "and Ekron shall be filled with the house (family) of Israel as Jerusalem." Ch. ix. S,9] CRITICAL AND GRAMMATICAL COMiM. 569 8, ■'ir'n? is " oil behalf of my house " (comp. the prep, in Ps. cxxi. i). i°'^'VP is intended by the Masorites to be regarded as equivalent to ^^'VP (which is the reading of some MSS.) or ^^V IP, not " without an army," but " against " or " on account of an army." Bottcher (iV! ^d7/r(?;//^i-^) unnecessarily proposes to read i^^'V^ (i Sam. xiv. \2) a garrison, considering the phrase to mean: "I encamp myself (with my host of angels) in my house as an entire garrison," i.e., like a regular garrison. Very similarly Blayney and Newcome : " I will encamp about my house (with) an army." The fem. nnyp is only found in i Sam. xiv. 12, elsewhere in that chapter the mascu- line noun 2-^^ is used. Wellhausen would, in i Sam. xiv. 12, on the authority of the LXX. (who read in that verse, as in all the other verses in that chapter, Meo-o-a^), change the feminine into the mascu- line form, which is used throughout that narrative. But Bdttcher (whom Thenius in his second edition follows) regards the fem. form as there expressly chosen for grammatical reasons, because the meaning is: "then called the men (from many points) of the whole garrison," the meaning of whole being expressed by the fem. form. See Bottcher's N. Aehrenlese on Gen. xxxviii. 18, 25, and hxsLehrb., § 642, (3. The LXX. have here dvaaT-qixa rov fLiq SiaTTopevecrOai ; Symm., KO)Xv(DV (TT/aaTctas TrapdyovTos ; Vulg., '■^ ex' his qui viilitajit mihi ;" Syr., '''■and I will cause a commander f'f.icQAo) to encamp about my house." The Targum paraphrases the whole passage, " and I will make the Shekinah of my glory to dwell in the house of my sanctuary, and the strength of my arm of power shall be like a wall of fire encircling it." {^'h. HP-P, de Lagarde; i^^ ^p-1^, Lond. Polygl.) i^^j. The LXX. render the word here, and in chap. x. 4, by e^eXawcoT/, and Aquila, in chap, x., by da-Trpaa-awv. So Vulg. in both places exactor. See pp. 222 and 272. On the land Paiastav of the Assyrian inscriptions, see Schrader Keilinschrift u. das A. T., p. 25, and his KcUinschriften u. Geschichts- forschung, p. 123. g. v''5, milra. The imperative is here accented, contrary to rule, on the ultimate; so ''Tiy, chap. xiii. 7. So ^IW ''711? in the first sentence of Jud. v. 12, while the second two imperatives are regular, n-iu nw. So Isa. li. 9 (see Delitzsch) and H-IV, Isa. xxi. 2. See Bottcher § 1134; Ewald § 228, d; Ges. § 72, rem. 2; Kalisch § Ixv. 15. '•yin. LXX., incorrectly, K-qpva-a^. Some copies have aXaka^ov. 5/0 ZECIIAKIAII AND HIS rROPHECIES. [Ch. ix. 9. Justin ]\Iartyr combines both, aXdXa^ov, Kypvcrcn, in Z)!a/. cum Try- phone, 53, but in Apol. i. 35, he has only K-qpvcrac. On account of "=]/ being preceded by i^l^* it is better to regard it with Kohler as put for T.i*^ (i Sam. ix. 12 ; 2 Chron. xxviii. 9; Job xxxiii. 22). Others, as Keil, take it as a dat. comm., "/or thme advantage." L'C'li. LXX. o-w^wv, actively. So Syr. and Vulg., which is in- correct. The participle niphal of this verb occurs only as a passive. The reflexive sense which the niphal often has will not help us here (see p. 234). ■'^V- LXX, -n-pav^, and similarly Targ. and Syr. Theod. iiraKovoiv, but the Vulg. has pauper. Symm. ■Kjwyo'i. The latter is correct. The word ''■?V is properly a passive of the form ''^Pi^ (Ges. § 84, 5) for ''''5V, hence its proper meaning is afflicted. I^Vj on the other hand, is active, lowly, meek. The distinction be- tween the two has not always been observed, but is correctly given in the last edition of Gesenius' Wortcrb. by INIiihlau and Volck. The k'ri has often Q^l^y, the afflicted, in cases where the k'thibh has ^''li^y, the lowly. This is the explanation given by the Sohar on Num. fol. 85, col. 332, "poor and riding upon an ass." So on Deut. fol. 117, col. 465, " the Messiah ben Joseph is poor and rides upon an ass;" and Bereshith Rabba cap. 75, fol. 74, col. 2, etc. See Schottgen, De Messia, p.42, and Wiinsche, Leide7i des Messias, pp. 50, 70, 71, 100, 105. niihi^"!?. Compare the similar expressions rif'"!^. "i''?? (Jud. xiv. 5), D>-;y T-y^ (Gen. xxxvii. 31). The plural is the plural of kind, '8<"P meaning a foal such as she-asses are wont to bear (see Bottcher § 702, a). It may, however, signify here the meaning given on p. 236. The LXX, render, quoad sensum, ttwAos ve'os. Aq., Symm., and Theod., more literally, ttwAos fio? ovaSwr, ttwAos v\o% ovuSo?, or ttwAos v\o% ovov. As regards the quotation of this verse in the New Test., in Matt, xxi. 5, the eiTrare T17 Ovyarpl ^twv with which it is introduced is gene- rally thought to be taken from Isa. Ixii. 11, where those words are found in the LXX. The quotation in St. John xii. 15 is introduced with the words, fxrj (jiojSov, which are not found in either the LXX. or Heb. Owing to the words taken from Isaiah, some MSS. in Matthew add rjcraiov after iTpo(^y]Tov, while others add ^axaptov. Bohl has some ingenious remarks in defence of his theory that the Greek of St. ALitthew is a translation of the Palestinian Volksbibel made from the LXX., which we cannot do more than refer to. They are not, in our opinion, at all convincing. Ch.ix. 10-12.] CRITICAL AND GRAMMATICAL COMM. 5/1 10. See p, 240, ff. Instead of 33"i."''n"r?ni., as in the usual text, where the tone syllable of the perf. with vav conv. is lost by the makkeph, Baer edits ''pl^ni. with darga. The Syr, renders the verb in the 3rd pers. " and he will cut off, etc." 'j'? Dl^t^ "i:!"!!. See p. 247, and note. LXX. render koI ttXtjOo'; kol dp-^vr) i^ iOvw. Schleusner conjectures that they read nan or 2"^, which is very doubt- ful. Aquila, kol XaX'^crec elprjvrjv rots Wveai. "1JI l/ti'OI. LXX. koL Kardp^et iSciTwv tcos OaXdaarj'i kol TroTajaoiv 8t€Kj8oAas y^s, reading 2.'''? for D'P. See p. 248. 11. r\ii,'Di has been diversely explained : first "as regards thee,'"' as contrasted with the heathen. Such a contrast scarcely exists here, though mention is made of peace being proclaimed to the nations, who are only spoken of in order to point out the wide extent of the Messiah's kingdom. Dj may be regarded as placed first for emphasis, and ^^ expressed in order to strengthen the suffixes either in inna D12 or "l'"i''DS, in accordance with Ewald § 308, a, § 309? ^) ^ 35~j ^ '} but in the former case it would imply that the covenant referred to is contrasted with some other covenant, or the prisoners of Israel contrasted with other prisoners of a different nation. Yet neither of these can be thought of. Maurer would connect SJ with the verb Tinbti'j " I will even send forth thy captives," in which case ^»? would be regarded as used absolutely. This is the view adopted by Kohler. See note on p. 243. DJ some- times refers not to the word which immediately follows, but to a word more remote in the sentence. See instances in Gesenius' IVorterb., and Ges. § 151, 3. It is quite possible to suppose, with Hengsten- berg, that Jji^?"Ci^ stands for "even thou," as CT-n D5 in verse 12, and the reference would then be to the miserable state of Zion, but not necessarily as contrasted with a former state. "'rinpp' lias been taken by LXX., Vulg., Syr., Luther, and others, as the full form of the second pers. sing, fern., " thou (fem. referring to Zion) hast sent forth." This form always appears before sufiixes in the inflexion of the regular verb, and often occurs in Jeremiah and Ezekiel, as ''^??0 Jer. xxxi. 31, where in the k'ri the usual form is given (Ges. § 44, rem. 4). There is no k'ri reading in this place, and moreover the first person suits the context better (see Ges. Lehrg., p. 266). The Targ. considers the passage to refer to the deliverance from Egypt and the passage through the desert. 12. IJI 131ti'. LXX, KaQyjcrecrOG iv 6xvp c.*vZ >ca. ,^ i^N*/o JlUqio? Jv-»ioj iim*^o goZ "remain in the fortress, ye bound of the congregation, and for one day I will repay two to you." The Targ. "return that ye may be as strongly fortified cities, ye captives who have hoped for deliverance " (Xj^l-isjj r^?P^1 ^P-'P^), " captives imprisoned " eV e'XTrtSi (Rom. viii. 21). ni'V? is a aTra^ Aey. properly meaning ^^ steepness" Comp. l-iva, chap. xi. 2, and "TJ-I^'? '^^'"^, a steep wally Isa. ii. 15; Deut. i. 28, and comp. Isa. xiv. 13-15. So Hitzig, Maurer and Kohler. The steep rocks of Palestine are contrasted with the ">13 (verse 11), or '^pit," the flat lands of Babylon. Ewald suitably renders it by " the dry land." See also p. 251. "T'iip. Bottcher would render impersonally, " one announces," comparing Isa. xvii. 5, xxi. 11. So Ewald § 200, <7, § 294, b, 2. The personal pronoun, however, is not unfrequently omitted in participial clauses (comp. Isa. xxvi. 3 ; Ps. xxii. 29 ; Job xxv. 2 ; see Gesen. § 134, 2, rem. 3, and comp. Hab. i. 5). The verb makes it plain that the pronoun of the first person is that which must be supplied. An impersonal rendering would be pointless. It is unnatural, as Kohler has well observed, to separate 2J from OVn^ and connect it with ^JJ^'OJ treating T'JO Ql^n as a parenthetical sentence : " I will even — to-day I declare it — render double to thee." See p. 252. 13. '1J1 Tism '•3. Perf as future. See p. 252, note 2. riv;'^ at the end of the sentence is to be viewed as in apposition to " Judah," not as an accusative governed by the following "Ti^^^P, as Hengstenberg. No doubt the punctuators have placed a zaqeph qaton over T\1'\r\'^^ but no other accentuation was possible ; and nii'P is separated from "Tixbo by the disjunctive yethibh. The con- struction of the first sentence would otherwise be too harsh. riL"p must, however, be supplied as the object of ''nx?0; one member of a sentence is often thus supplied from another. To suppose, as Hitzig does, an ellipsis of n^?, and to regard it as equivalent to the phrase in 2 Kings ix. 24, Exod. xxviii. 17, is too harsh. Our translation is that of Ewald, IMaurer, Kohler, and Keil. The phrase rilJ'i^. Njp Ch. ix. 13-15.] CRITICAL AND GRAMMATICAL COMM. 573 is only used here. The explanation of Gesenius, in his Thes. p. 788, after Schultens, as if the phrase were put for rit:/|"^n Tj'm.p s?p, is not so good. The Syr. has very erroneously explained the clause, *' for I have drawn my bow against Judah, and have fitted it against Ephraim." TlDu'l. The LXX. paraphrastically, kox if/r]\a(j)-^(ru> ae, " and I will handle thee as the sword of a warrior." See on the verse generally, pp. 253, ff. Grotius has remarked that the Jews called all the kings of Syria and Eg3'pt, P^ ''3??0 " kings of Javan," because of their Greek extraction. See note 2, p. 256, and the reference there to this mode of speaking in the books of the Maccabees. 14. nin'' '•jnx. The LXX. render Kuptos TravTOKpaTwp, as if it were nisa^*' nin\ Syr. \Lo--^ j-^i " Zord of lords." P^n Dn i^m. LXX. TTopeverai eV oraXo) (XTretA^s avTov, perhaps reading, as Kohler suggests, f0^i< (=inp''X) instead of JP'^. Syr. " he will go forth in a whirlwind to the south," taking 'n as the accusative of place. 15. 173X1 and 1t^'231. Perfects as futures in lively narration. On this verse see p. 258 and p. 259 note, also p. 260. '151 Iti'nai, LXX. Koi Karax^(Tov(TLv avToiv'i, k.t.X., "and they shall overwhelm them with sling-stones." Syr. " and they shall subdue the stones with a sling." '1^1 l^n inti'l. LXX. Kai eKTrtovrat airovs ws ohov, omitting I^H. Some copies (see Field's Hcxapld) add to alfxa avTuiv. The Syr. seems to have regarded l^n as a noun, 0 7 1 o ■>■ * -^ rendering jpo^ -*} |a*^qX» .oAjtJO "and they shall drink confusion as wine." '1^1 '^3 1X?D1. The LXX. have kui 7rAy;croi;crt Tas 4>idXa^ a>s Ova-Laa-T-qpiov, omitting thus n*1T|. This translation perhaps manifests a desire to tone down the strong figures of the passage, which is exhibited even by the Vulg. in its rendering, " et devorabunt, et subjicient lapidibus fundae (regarding ^^P ''^^X as an instrumental accusative) ; et bibentes inebriabuntur quasi a vino, et replebuntur ut phialse, et quasi cornua altaris." More especially is this tendency observable in the Targum, which renders : " The Lord of hosts shall pity them, and they shall rule the peoples, and they shall slay them, and shall consume the remnant of them just as those who cast stones with a sling, and they shall spoil their riches (piT'D^J), and they shall be satisfied with them, (Ifnip JW?'^''.!), as those who drink wine, and their soul shall be full of delights (ri?lJ?l!i) as a bowl is full of meal and oil (nt'^P-l ri>"iD, but de Lagarde has ^^^), and 574 ZECHARIAH AND HIS rROPHECIES. [Ch.ix. 15-X.2. they shall shine as the blood which shines on the wall of the altar" C^n?!^ ^^^^ '^^' "1OIPI). j>*_3)p, " from his Messiah." The translation by the LXX. of '» T\'^v> is also strange, to^ov eV OvixQ, reading according to Cappellus nonp. The Targ. renders this expression n''2"i|"? flfpJjl, the strength of his ivar^^ the archers being the most important part of an army. "i^l ^^*'' 130D, The Targ. renders N^D? ^•^1D3■)^ b J-iairi^. Pl^ap, " by him shall all his rulers be magnified together ; " Syr. " and from them shall all their princes proceed together." See pp. 273 fif. 5. "dl D''p13 'JD -Vni.. The subject of the verb is Judah, referred to in verse 3 (comp. verse 7). D'^plll is the participle kal, and the form is generally viewed as indicating an intransitive signification (comp. vV CPIp, 2 Kings xvi. 7). Elsewhere it is always construed with an accusative, which may, however, easily be understood here. The form, cannot be proved to be intransitive. The clear sound of the a has become obscured in later writers, and hence the 0. See Bottcher § 463, ^, § 1132, 9, /; Ewald § \^\,b -, Olshausen § 164, d; Gesen. § 72, rem. i. On the other hand, Kalisch regards such forms as intransitive (§ Ixv. i, r), and so Hengstenberg and Keil. Mic. vii. 10; 2 Sam. xxii. 43 ; Ps. xviii. 43, have been referred to as illustrating the passage, but in all these the expression is rilXin P''P|, and not as here, 'H P''P?, The rendering of the Vulg., " concul- cantes lutum viarum in preelio," is scarcely correct. The phrase seems rather to mean, " treading upon their enemies in the mire." The enemies can scarcely be regarded as compared to the mire itself. The clause might be rendered intransitively, " treading upon the mire of the streets." 6. On QTint^'in see note on p. 276. X'XD. ^^ As if" Zoxvv^. Isa. xxix. 8; Job x. 19. On the perfect DTinJI'i^?, expressing the contingent occurrence, see Driver § 18. 7. Dnsx— vni. Compare verse 5. On the const, with a plural verb s S76 ZECHARIAII AND HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. x. 7-xi. 2. sec Ges. § 146, i ; Kalisch § 77, 6. LXX., kol ta-ovTai > V y 0 c ■> of y ■>> LXX., iv OaXdcrcrrj crTevrj. Syr. JV;.'^ ^£)C7UO |j-Xoj JIc.aO }.:ilJO ti 7 "J |) \- " and affliction shall pass through the sea, and shall roll waves in the sea." Vulg., "et transibit in maris freto, et percutiet in mari fluctus." The Targ. paraphrases the verse, " and miracles (ppJ) shall be done to them, and great acts (P,''^^"'')) as have been done to their fathers when they passed through the sea (de Lagarde reads »<0"'3 limarDa, the Lond. Polygl. omits the first word), and they shall see the punishment ('D ri13y")-1D?) of their enemies, as their horses are covered in the waves of the sea, and all the kings of the peoples shall be confounded, and strength shall cease from the Assyrians, and the dominion of the Egyptians (or "of Egypt," as Lond. Polygl.) shall pass away" ('l^v)- I'^e LXX. render "if^s; 'D by Ta f3d6r) TTOTafxCiv. llt^'X. LXX., 'AcrcrvpiW* "AXXo';- (Syixari^ovToiv ; perhaps this latter rendering is that of Aquila, but see Field's Hcxapla. 12. The LXX., instead of nin^2j have iv Kvpiia 6c*^;|. N?"!. " And they do not feel themselves guilty I" Comp. Jer. ii. 3, 1. 6, 7 ; Hos. v. 15. DiT'i;"). It is strange that here we have the masc. suffix, though the feminine precedes and follows. Some MSS. have the fem., but this is evidently a correction, just as some MSS. have the masc. suffix instead of liT'Jp in the beginning of the verse, and Dnvl? instead of i^vy at the close. The change seems best explained, with Kohler, by supposing that the prophet for the moment thought of the people symbolised by the sheep, though he immediately afterwards continued his allegory. The "shepherds" are rightly explained by the Targum as the rulers. Schrader notes on this, in his Keilinschriften und das A. T., that " shepherd " occurs in the Assyrian inscriptions in the sense of "prince." Thus the "true shepherd " is one of the epithets assumed by Sargon, and ri'u (-1^1) is used frequently as an attribute of gods and kings, as well as the abstract word ri'ut (^■''^1), government. Comp. the Homeric 7rot/^€V€s Aawv. Kimchi [strangely regards the plural in this passage as the plur. excell. referring to God, as Ps. cxlix. 2 ; Job. xxxv. 10 ; and McCaul seems to approve of this exposition, which, however, would only introduce confusion into the passage. liT'py. This reading is the one mentioned by the Masora. The read- ing Dn"'7i; found in some MSS. is a correction. See Baer's edition. P P 5/8 ZECHARIAH AND IIIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xi. 6. 6. '1J1 X^VDD. '■'■ I am delivering over." The participle here may be best rendered as a present, that is as a present indicating an action which continues for a considerable time. The breaking up of the peace of the nations seems to be referred to (see p. 307). On the expression, compare 2 Sam. iii. 8. 'vXnTiS inriDI. Syr., wrongly, ^'and they shall divide the land." "1 1^2 ^^'^. On this expression see Ewald § 301, b; Ges. § 124, 2, rem. i \ Kalisch § 82, 9. See also on this verse, note on p. 307. 7. |N:;n *^:y p7. The LXX. translate cts t^v Xavaavtrr/v, reading pX n''3y337. Burger, after Flugge, proposes to read i^^^'H ""JWSb, explaining it, "Ics marchands ou courtiers du troupeau." The Vulg., propter hoc (namely, that which was stated in verses 5, 6), 0 patipcres gregis, and the Syr., " on account of the congregation of the sheep" take the 137 erroneously as a preposition. The Masora parva says that P? is feminine, i.e., stands for \^. So in our A.V., but this is arbitrary. Kimchi translates, "in truth," "truly," which meaning the word never elsewhere bears, and so Dathe, Rosenmuller, and others, with the margin of the E.V. Ewald notes that this particle, so frequently used by the prophets to denote the consequence of something mentioned before, is here used in the middle of tlie sen- tence. The new thought introduced lies, in his opinion, in the ex- pression 'if n '•'•JU and he consequently thinks that the " therefore " used in this uncommon manner is more clearly expressed by " yea verily." The P? '■'•therefore" can scarcely connect the clause with the statements of verses 5 and 6 (Hitzig, Hengstenberg), as in that case it would have stood at the beginning of the verse, nor even with the Divine command as given in verse 4 (Maurer), but must rather be connected with the i^^'n '•''iy as Ewald prefers (§ 353, b). The latter designation expresses that which is a logical deduction from the very name just given them, njinn JS^'TlX ; for because they were " a flock of slaughter," " slaughtered " and not " fed " by their shep- herds, therefore they were "the most miserable flock." Compare, on the superlative force of the expression, Jer. xlix. 20, 1. 45 ; 2 Chron. xxi. 17. The l^^^'n ^"•31? have been explained by others as a portion of the larger flock, either as part of the human race (von Hofmann), or the true children of God everywhere (Kliefoth), or the godly and pious in Israel, the ecclesia pressa. But the passages of Jeremiah re- ferred to show that it is quite lawful to explain the expression of the whole of the people. ii<^'n in this case does not stand for the Ch. xi. 7.] CRITICAL AND GRAMMATICAL COMM. 579 nJinn iS^f^ but is used generally as a description of all such sheep as are upon the earth (comp. John x. 16). In this view of the verse we agree in the main with Kohler. Keil takes the opposite view. On the expression " sheep of slaughter," compare Ps. xliv. 23 (E.V. verse 22). mppJD. Fem. plur. of ^i?.'?, a staff. The stem is not ?pO, as Gesenius and Fiirst give, but rather ??P, to be in motion. The form is like p^n from W"^, or more exactly like TP. from yV"!, See Dietrich's edition of Ges. Worterb., or that of Miihlau and Volck. Bottcher observes that the word is fem. when it signifies a fresh stick from the tree (Gen. xxx. 37), but masculine when it means a staff for a journey, or a rod to correct with (Hos. iv. 12). Hence here T\h\)p ^rf, while five MSS. have the fem. inS^iO 'hf. See Bottcher § 650, I, and § 656. Oyj. See note p. 308. LXX., KaAXos, Aq. and Sym. evTrpivraa. ^D*??-'', instead of the ordinary "'Ci^?'''- Cases of this punctuation in the abs. state are rare. See Ewald § 26^,^; Olshausen § 161, a ; Bottcher § 850, 2. But Kohler prefers to consider the word here as in the construct state before DHD understood. Gesenius also views the form as the construct state used for closer connexion (Ges. §116,6). Qv^n. LXX., Aq., and Symm., '^'\> -in.?!! '1^1, and the LXX. translation, koX iiraTaiav avrov Ke^Aaa/^ Kol iOavd- rwcrav avrov, kol i/SaaiXevcrev avr avrov, where Ke/3Aaa/A is jUSt a mis- understanding for Di^"?3p, de/ore the people, or rather before people, i.e., publicly, as Bottcher as shown. See Thenius' Comm. on the passage. The word is very variously written in the Greek MSS. See Pusey's note on p. 509 of his Minor Prophets. Ewald has inserted this imaginary monarch in his Geschichtstabellc I We have, however, erred in stating on p. 320 that Ewald's conjecture has been adopted by no critic of eminence except Dean Stanley, as the same view has been taken by Fiirst in his Gcsch. dcr bibl. Literatur, 2ter Band, p. 355- 9. The imperfects in the latter clauses of this verse are translated by Hengstenberg as futures, but it is better, with Kohler and others, to regard them as used in a jussive signification. The participles nn^n and n"].n?3n are here used in the signification of present participles (Bottcher § 997, 2, a; Ges. § 134; Kalisch § 100, 4). The feminine form is to be explained as collective, the feminines being used as neuters in a collective signification (Gesen. § 107, 3, d; comp. Kalisch § 77, 10). The flock is elsewhere referred to in this verse (D?tl^) and in the preceding (i^C?, Qp*?^-) as mas- culine, because the people symbolised thereby were uppermost in the mind of the prophet (comp. also verse 5). nniyi X'aTiX n*J'N. See Ges. § 124, 2, rem. 4; Kalisch § Zi, 12. On the subject matter of the verse, compare Jer. xv. i, 2, xix. 9 ; Deut. xxviii. 53. ID. y"!f>5j. ^^And I broke it:' The LXX., who render the imperfects with vav conv. in this verse as futures, translate here, aTropfnijyui, I will cast it away (so also in verse 14), as the broken staff was no doubt cast away. II. The LXX. render this verse, koI yvwaovrat ol X.avava'iot ra TrpojSara to. (f)v\aaa6fx€vd fxot Stort Aoyos Kvpcov 1*1''^, treasuj-er, as Gesenius in Thesaurus, etc. Two MSS. of Kennicott read "i^MXn"7X^ while five have "iVt*n ri''3 PX, See pp. 330, ff. '1J1 "ipM "ilX. Lit., " the glory of the price," i.e., a glorious or mag- nificent price, spoken ironically (see Ewald § 293, ^ ; comp. Gesenius § 106, i). LXX., Kat aKeij/ofjiai (reading ^^l^ instead of "^l?) ct SuKlflOV IcTTLV, OV TpOTTOV iSoKLfJidaOrjV VTTep aVTWV. mn'' n''3. Drake seems to regard with approbation the conjecture of Mede ( Works, book iv., epist. xxxi. ) that St. Matthew read in place of ^''2 the phrase JT]?. That phrase occurs in Ezra and Esther, and, as Mede observes, is literally Kara avvray/jia Kvpiov, and, he thinks, it is rendered freely by the evangelist, KaOa aweraie /xol KvpLos. The conjecture, however, is quite unnecessary. See p. 342. 14. mni<^*05< occurs in three MSS., but there is probably no change in its vocalization from the received text. The Targ. seems to endeavour to combine both the derivations, that from > is defended by Kennicott, Ewald, Geiger, Bunsen, etc. Many have asserted that it is supported by John xix. 37, Rev. i. 7 ; but St. John seems merely to have given the sense of the passage, and not quoted its actual words. Others, as J. D. Michaelis, Bleek, Reinke, point the word v^., and consider it as a preposition. So Bottcher {Nei(e Aehrenlese). The latter explains it thus, " Dann blicken sie auf das, was Jener war = auf die Person Jenes [den] sie erstochen," i.e. then they look upon that which that one was, or, upon the person of that one whom they pierced. So also Lehrb. § 897, 8. The form of the preposi- tion ""iP^? only occurs in the book of Job, and there but four times. The suggestion of von Ortenberg to insert the verb and copula •1^^?^"i. after 1 vX and before "I'^i^ nx is arbitrary. There is no trace of this reading even in the Targ., which paraphrases the verse, " and I will pour out upon the house of David and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of mercy and compassion and \>'^ ^^li^JP |W?:"l. ^^•f^y inj?pn^ ■h^^m'T), they shall pray before me because that 588 ZECIIARIAII AXU HIS PROPHECIES. [Ch. xii. lO. they have been driven away (from their land), and shall mourn for him." This a loose paraphrase of what the Targumist regarded as the sense. The translation given by v. Hofmann, in his Weissagung nnd Erfulliuig, ii. p. 152, is "they shall look to me with reference to him whom they had pierced." In his ScJu-iftbaveis, ii. 2, p. 562, he renders the clause " my heroes {i.e. the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem) see him whom they have pierced." 7^, Dv>? may possibly occur in the meaning of mig/ity, heroes, Job xli. 17 ; Ezek. xxxii. 21 (see Gesenius) ; though this is disputed by Furst, Hitzig and Hengstenberg, and not without cause. But even granting that the word has such a meaning, it never occurs with a suffix. jNIoreover, as Kohler observes, the verb t3''3n is commonly construed with ^X, and V^? must, therefore, naturally be taken as the prepo- sition with suffix of first person. Had the prophet wished to express the meaning of ^'heroes,'''' he could have used the simple "113^. But no such subject was required, as the sense of the passage would have been clearer without such an addition. X*S ni< is the object to the transitive verb 1"ip''. The trans- lation given by the LXX. is against the usage of the Hebrew. They render av^" mv KarwpxW^-VTo " because they insulted ;" Aquila renders ahu w l^eKivTqa-av ; Symm. e/jLTrpoaO^v €TTi.^(.K(.vTrja-av ; Theo- dotion alone, koX linfiXiipovTaL 7rp6). LXX., Kai e'pw. Syr., " and they shall say unto him." " Between thine hands." See p. 427. *n-Dn TC'X. Comp. Ges. § 138, i, rem. i and 3, and § 143, i. ■•QriXO JT'a. LXX., wrongly, cV tw oiko) tw ayaTrr/rw fxov. The Targ. renders the verse : " and he shall say to him, \Miat are these stripes (i^nnp) which have come upon us? Are they not on Ch. xiii. 6, 7.] CRITICAL xVND GRAMMATICAL COMM. 59I account of the work of our (so de Lagarde, but Lond. Polygl. reads " thy ") hands ? And he shall say, Deservedly have we been beaten on account of the sins which we loved." 7. "'"I'ly. On the tone, see note on chap. ix. 9. Compare as to the subject matter, Isa. lii. i, Ix. i. Though Ewald and v. Or ten- berg consider chap. xiii. 7-9 properly to be the conclusion of chap, xi., Bleek and Hitzig have rightly opposed that view. See p. 433. In addition to the arguments there alluded to, v. Ortenberg alleges that no prophet ever closed his prophecy with such a terrible description of woe as that in chap. xi. 17. But this statement is scarcely correct, for that chapter ends with a description of the de- struction to fall upon the oppressor of Israel, and, therefore, in- ferentially announces a blessing to the people of Jahaveh. It need not therefore be viewed as any exception to the general usage of the prophets. ''yT'py. LXX., eTTi Tous TTotfieVas /xou, pointing ''i^l. Hitzig suggests that ''^T!, " my friend" would be better. "I3J. A man, not, however, necessarily indicating the human in contrast to the divine, as Hengstenberg thinks. The word shows that an individual person is referred to, and cannot well be regarded as a collective designation, as Calvin, with the LXX., understood it. No article could have been used with this noun, as it is in the construct state, nor before the genitive following because it is qualified by a suffix. Hence the word is not necessarily indefinite. On the construct state, as used in apposition as here, see Ges. § 116, 5. Compare T^.'^PD ^'5^, Deut. xxxiii. 8 ; latlp Dy Ps. cxlviii. 14 ; " the people near him, the people of his near- ?iess" (see Delitzsch on that passage). LXX., eVt avhpa iroXiT-qv jxov. Aq., CTTt avSpa (rv/x(j>vX6v [J-ov. Symm., ctti avSpa tov Xaov jxov. Theod., cTTt avhpa 7rXr](TLov avrov. Vulg., siipcr viriim cohczrentem mihi. Syr., "against the man, my lover (u*.iaArf>)-" ■^n. Masculine, although ^"^n is feminine, as the sword is per- sonified and addressed as an individual in the first imperative ''1-iy. Compare Gen. iv. 7, where ntj*>o (see W. Wright's Arab. Grammar, vol. i. § 230, rem. a, d, with § 232, rem. c). The LXX. and Symm. render, €7riToi)s /aik/jous; some copies, as Cod. Alex., cTTi Toiis TTot/AeVas; Other copies, combining both readings, lirX roi's uiKDous TTOtueVas. Aquila, kin tous [Trot/AeVas] /Jpaxets. Theod., eVt Tous vcwrepors. Syr., j A V\ Vx, ''against the overseers.'' The Targum renders the verse, "Sword, show thyself (^?|ri^) against the king, and against the prince his fellow, who is as he, who is like him {^h ■'^ll '^"'^'1?"^.), saith the Lord of hosts ; kill the king, and the princes shall be scattered, and I will bring back the stroke of my power (""J^l-I^^ nnr? 2''ni^"i) against the seconds," i.e., those who rank next to the monarch. The text is quoted twice distinctly in the N. T., as well as referred to in other passages. In Matt. xxvi. 31, yeypaTrrat yap • Trara^w To\\-uOijxiya Koi hiaa-Kopina-Oy'ja-ovTaL rd Trpo/Jara tt/s 7rotp,v7ys, and similarly in INIark xiv. 27, save tliat rr^s iTOLjxv'q<; is omitted. The words in the N. T. are not therefore quoted in this case from the LXX. (see our remarks on p. 443), but they substantially agree with the Hebrew. The addi- tion of T7/S 7roip,v77s is considered by Bohl as " a real Targumic addi- tion," and to be in favour of his theory noticed in the note on p. 2,Z^- 8. D^5P'"''S. So Deut. xxi. 17 ; 2 Kings ii. 9 (see Ewald § 269, l>). Lit., a mouth of tioo, a mouth-portion for two, an expression founded upon the custom of placing a double portion of food before those whom it was intended to honour. Comp. Gen. xliii. 34 Ch. xili. 8-xiv. 2.] CRITICAL AND GRAMMATICAL COMM. 593 (Hengstenberg). •irn.3'' may possibly refer to death by the sword, and •ly^^?!' to death by pestilence, as Drusius, Hengstenberg, and Reinke think. The second verb may, however, be preferably con- sidered as defining the sense of the first more completely (Ges. § 142, 3, ^)- 9. On the idea of melting and purifying, compare Isa. i. 25, xlviii. 10 ; Jer. ix. 6 ; Mai. iii. 3 ; Ps. Ixvi. 10, etc. '131 N"ip^ XI n. The mascuUne is used because the purified remnant is treated as one individual. Similarly, though feminine, r\'''dh^r[ is construed in the preceding verse with "in-|1, while in the previous part of this verse it is spoken of as resolved into its component parts ; hence the use of the masc. plural suffixes. On the expression U^2. N"ipj comp. Is. Ixv. 24, and on the passage in general, see Hos. ii. 23 ; Jer, xxiv. 7, xxx. 22, etc. ^mDN, The accent is pashta, which is a postpositive, and hence repeated over the tone syllable, which is here the penultimate. The perfect is, however, used for the perf. with vav. conv., though the ordinary accentuation is retained. In lively narrative the perfect is often thus used without vav preceding. See Bottcher § 974, i?. CHAPTER XIV. 1, On the expression, " a day is coming for Jahaveh," see note 2, on p. 455. "Thy spoil." See the note on p. 458. 2. D''Jll3n. The munach is used instead of metheg, but not, as Ewald considers (§ 96, a, foot note 4), because the article in the ante- penultimate syllable appeared to the punctuators of less importance than the rare vowel in the penultimate. For metheg in general is not used with the article, as C:''»»n, Neh. ix. 6, unless in cases where the article is followed by a letter without daghesh and pointed with sh'va, '^??9P, Lev. iii. 3, to which usage there are certain exceptions. The metheg, or the munach which in this passage takes its place, is used to indicate that the kametz is long (a), not kametz-chatuph (5), as it is generally regarded. The metheg is used for a similar reason in nSN (munach for metheg) Gen. 1. 17. n3S*, Ps. cxviii. 25 (see the critical edition of the Psalms by Baer and Delitzsch). The word is not to be read hottim, as even Gesenius thought, but, as partly recognised by Rodiger, in the twentieth edition of Ges. Gram., Q Q 594 ZECHARIAH AND HIS PROPHECIES. Ch. xiv. 2-5. bCxiim, the daghesh after heavy nicthcg serving merely to distinguish C*n3, the participle plural of 013, This is proved by the syllable having sometimes an accent (as Exod. viii. 7, xii. 7), which it would not if the vowel was short. See Noldeke in Merx' Archiv. i. p. 456, and Baer, p. 66 ; also Miihlau and Volck in the last edition of Gesenius' Wortcrhuch. Kautzsch (Gesenius' Gr. § 66) remarks in addition to the reasons there assigned, that the Babylonian vocaliza- tion has finally shown that bdtun is the correct pronunciation. n^^j^Tl. The punctuators considered the verb ^^^ as an ob- scene expression, and hence have always substituted 3?*^. So here nn^acj'n, which from the k'ri has crept into the text of many MSS, Comp, Deut. xxviii. 30; Isa. xiii. 16; Jer. iii. 2. The vowels in the k'thibh in all these places belong to the k'ri reading and not to that in the text. Bottcher regards this as an instance of a passive form of kal and would read it Hip^'^'ri. The perfect occurs in Jer. iii. 2, and the imperfect is also found in Is. xiii. 16 (see Bottcher § 906, d). LXX., ixoXwO-^a-ovTau Schol., KOLTaa-Orja-ovTai.. n7l32— XV^I. See note on p. 459. 3. lonpn DV3. On the meaning of ?, see Ges. § iiS, 3. ^^i? is a poetical word, only found in prose in 2 Sam. xvii. 11. On the LXX. transl., see the note on p. 464. The Targ. thinks that the reference is to the victory at the Red Sea. ' 4. I'xp n^n^ K^a. Adverbial accusative (see Ewald § 280,^; Ges. § 118, 3). The construct case is occasionally used before adjectives qualifying nouns, especially with such as express the ideas of greaf, bad, and the like. So n2"l noq, Great HaJiiaih, Amos vi. 2 (the absol. state is n»D) ; also "^na n^3, 2 Kings xxv. 9 ; 15? ^"D?^ 2 Kings xviii. 17 (see Ewald § 287, a). Fiirst regards K*A as an absol. state of a noun of that form found only in this passage in the singular. This is unnecessary. The plural is ri1''X3. The transposed form is met once in the k'thibh, ri1i<''J, 2 Kings ii. 16, and must be read niK""]!. (Bottcher § 811), for which the k'ri put the usual form. The LXX. render the phrase here x^^^ H-h"- o'^o^P"» ^ ^'^O' Sf^(Ji chasm. The form i*''?. only occurs here and in verse 5 as the construct of 5^:^, the usual form being ^5. In Isa. xl. 4, a form ^^'5 also occurs. 5. Ul N^3 DnD31. The LXX., Kttt paxO)](reTat 17 pa)(6T^creTai. (here again the LXX., with Symm. and Syro-Hex., read D^P^l instead of !2^?31.) KaOm ive- np D13-in jnJV, namely, that some correct MSS. have the reading "all his saints with him" as the Targum translates. But Baer observes that the Masoretic reading was certainly C)''E?'lp. (as in the general text), for the Masora observes that 1''^1p. only occurs in Deut. xxxiii. 3, Ps. xxxiv. 10. Kimchi expressly states that "^^^ is the reading of this passage. 6. pXDp* rinp''. See note on p. 481. LXX., ovk eo-rat ^w?, koI ij^vxv KOL ■n-dyo'i(qu.'''!y?)"'iy Vd'^^_ ^Itn;; '•n^ i6 5^-inn xny? \n^i, " and it shall be in that time there will be no light, but cold and frost." 7. See note on pp. 483 ff. The Pesikta Rabbathi in Yalkiit Shimeoni, ii. fol. 129, col. 4, thus explains the day here alluded to : "As we have every seventh year a year of release, so God will give the Israehtes a day of release, which shall last a thousand years, as it is written, ' and it will be one day of the Lord,' that day is the seventh," i.e., the seventh period of a thousand years. This exegesis of the passage does not, however, agree with the context. 59<5 ZECIIARIAIl AND HIS PROrilECIES. [Ch. xiv. 7-9. The Pesikta RahbatJii, however, explains correctly the evening here spoken of as signifying the Messianic age. Similarly Pirke Eliczer, c. 28, " before the great evening will break in, the Son of David will double the light of Israel, as it is written, 'at evening it will be light.' " ^ 8. 'npn DTl'^X. LXX., £ts rrjv OdXao-a-av tyjv Trpiiyrrjv . . . Koi T^v $. T^v icrxaTTjv. So also they render the words in Joel ii. 20. ^ITinn-"!. LXX., iv eapi, as in other places. The suggestion of Michaelis is probably correct, that they render thus from an Egyp- tian standpoint, as winter is the season of spring in Egypt (see Schleusner's Lex.). 9. The Synagogue understood the Messianic dispensation to be signified by " in this day." In Sohar on Genes, fol. 22, col. 85, and fol. 37, col. 145, we read, " After the destruction of the temple follows that period which is termed "TiXT K3Dn, the time to co7ne.'" And in the cabbalistic commentary on the Thora it is said that " When the Matron will again return to her Lord in that time will the Lord be one." The Matron (^^n''J1")P0) which sometimes appears to be used for the Shekinah, seems almost at other times to indicate the Church of Israel. Thus, in a passage from Shir ha-shir'un Rabha, fol. 7, col. 3, quoted from Schottgen by Dr. Pusey, in his note on Zech. 9, there occurs this explanation of Cant. i. 4, "let us exult and rejoice in thee " : " The Matrona is like a royal bride, whose husband the king, her sons and sons-in-law, Avere gone beyond sea. When they brought her word that her sons were returned, she said, ' What cause of joy have I ? Let my daughters-in-law re- joice !' Another messenger came that her sons-in-law were returned. She answered, ' What cause of joy have I ? Let my daughters rejoice ! ' But when they told her that the king her husband was returned, she said, 'This is perfect joy, a joy above all joys !' So also in the time to come, the time of the Messiah, the prophets shall come to Jerusalem, and say (Isa. Ix. 4), ' Thy sons shall come from far ;' she will answer, 'What cause of joy have I?' The prophets will add, ' thy daughters will be nurtured by thy side.' She will answer in the like way. But when they shall say to her, * Be- hold, thy king cometh unto thee, just and a Saviour,' then she shall say, 'This is perfect joy;' as in, 'Exult greatly, daughter of Zion,' and elsewhere, ' Sing and rejoice, O daughter of Zion.' Then shall she say, ' I will rejoice greatly in the Lord, my soul shall be joyful in my God' (Isa. Ixi. 10)." Ch. xiv. 10-12.] CRITICAL AND GRAMMATICAL COMM. 597 10. "IJI 313.'' • On the form of the verb, see note on p. 490, and Kalisch § Ixii, 3, b. The LXX. consider Jahaveh to be the subject of this verb, and render, very unhitelligibly, kukAwv ij-aa-av ttjv yrjv koI ti^v ^prf/xov diro Tafik ecos 'Vifxix-iav Kara votov 'lepovcraX-qix. Similarly the Syr., '■'■ and he shall sicrround the whole earth as a plain.^'' The Targ. is "131 XTi,*"'n? SU"1X 73 nSi^.''j " and the whole earth shall be surrounded as the valley from Geba, etc!^ Vulg., erroneously, " et revertetur omnis terra usque ad desertum, de colle Reramon ad austrum Jerusalem." See also note i on p. 491, and on p. Ixxiv. '1J1 '"'D^^^1_J for nD^I.. See note 2 on p. 492. The V'y verb is treated as if ^"y. Comp. QXpl, Hos. x. 14, and so one of Baer's MSS. noxni., and Moses the Punctator with Ben Naphtali. The LXX. take '1 as a proper name, omitting the copula, 'Pa/xa Se cVt toVou juevet. The proper name, however, is nO"), The verb seems to be peculiarly inflected in order to avoid the confusion between the two words. The Syr. correctly regards it as a verb. The Targ. explains nnpx? n'-nni ''^irini., '<■ and it shall be exalted and inhabited in its place." '3 "lyti'P?. See p. 494. The compound |P/ is to be regarded as a mere strengthening of JP, not, however, as identical with *? IP, with Gesenius in Thesaurus, p. 807. The ^ is to be regarded as the ? indicating direction, though it is untranslatable in most cases. See Miihlau and Volck's edition of Gesenius' Wortcrb. ; Kohler, Comm. on Haggai, pp. lor, fF; Ewald § 218, ^. JID'Sin ~\W, Comp. for const, of article, chap. iv. 7. See Ges. § III, 2, a; Ewald § 293, a. 'n buai, for 715PP-1, the IP being probably omitted for euphony. Many MSS. have the fuller reading. 11. Q"^n. So Baer correctly, instead of D"?.i!''., as in the usual text (comp. Ewald § 146, b, footnote 2, p. 379)- Another read- ing 3"iri1. is found in some MSS. The Targ. is said to have had that reading, but this cannot be fairly deduced from its rendering, niy "in^ X? xbpi?, ^^ there will no slaying any more." On the expres- sion, see pp. 497 ff. 12. ppn. Inf. absol. of ?'?'^. See note 2, p. 499. njjppn Third pers. pi. niphal of ?\>'>^, instead of ^?^'?.PJil, with the dropping of the inserted ""t, and the omission of the daghesh in the P. Comp. njpV^, kal intrans., Jer xix. 3. See Ewald § 197, 328, 391. Duhm, xlii., 554. Earnestness among the returned Jews, I So. Earthquake, on Mount of Olives, 469, 471; in reign of Uzziah, 477, ff; 6o6 GENERAL INDEX. earthquakes accompaniments of Divine manifestations, 48, ff. Ebrard, xxvii., 344, 378, 439. Egypt, a general place of refuge, 292 ; mention of in chap, x., 295 ; in chap, xiv., 507, ff; the temple in, 509- Eichhom, xxvi., 248. Ekron as the Jebusite, 218. Elijah, 423. Elxai, Libn.fragm., 124. Ephah, vision of the, 1 1 1 ; woman in the, 112. Ephraim, gate of, 494 ; Ephraim and Judah partakers in the Maccabean struggle, 276, ff. Epiphanius, 124 ; notices of Zech. by • the pseudo-E., xvii. , xviii., xx. Eusebius, 54, 404, 460. Eventide, light at, 486. Exhortations, fruitlessness of former, 173. Exiles, the lists of returned, 279. Ewald, xliii., passim; Ajisf. Lehrb. passim ; Dichter des A. Bundcs, 28 ; History of Israel, 254, 281, 320, 395. 5^1- Fabricii, Bibl. Grceca, 373. Farrar's Life of Christ, 239. Fasting for national calamities, days of, 163, ff ; duty of the people as regards, 172. Fasts and feasts in God's sight, 171 ; Jewish tradition respecting the aboli- tion of, 191. Feeding the flock, meaning of, 305. Fellow, my, meaning of the term, 435. Field's edition of Origen^s Hexapla, xlviii. , passim. Filthy garments, 48, ff , 544. Finn's Orphan Colony of Jews in China, 282. Fire, brand plucked from the, 51, ff. Fleischer, 172, 542. Flight into the valley, the, 473, ff. Fliigge, xxvi., 207, 578. Forberg, xxvi. , 233. Fountain opened, 409 ; closed, 411. Four, significance of the number, 137. Friedlieb, Oracitla Sibyllina, 543. Fritzsche, Libri Apoc. V. T., 53, 54, 328 ; Hatidbuch z. d. Apoc, 280, 324. Fiirst, Julius, xliii.; Concord, passim; Heb. und Chald. Wortcrbiich, pas- sim; Kanon des A, T., xvii., xxiii., 529 ; Geschiehte dtr bibl. Lit. xxiii., 581. Gains, The New Testament, 156, Gaza, overthrow of, 214; ruled over by a titular king, 215. V. Gebhart, 582. Geiger, Abraham, Urschriff, xxvi., xliii., 362, 402, 541, 568, 581, 587. Geiger, E. E., der Psalter Salomd's, 582. Geviara, 389, 390, 481, see Talmud. Genealogical registers, 244; fragmen- tary character of, 283, ff. Gentiles, the sin of, against Israel, 25 ; conversion of the, 39, 40, 192 ; wor- shippers of Jahaveh, 503 ; keeping the feasts, 194 ; pilgrimages of, to Jerusalem, 505, 506 ; believing G. and Jews the olive branches, 93 ; punishment of the, 308 ; strangers from, 156 ; mixed with Jews, 220, 245 ; often became Jews, 188 ; to have equal rights in the land of Palestine in the future, 188. Gesenius, Grammar, xlvii., passim ; Lchrgebiiiide, xlvii., passim; IJeb.- Chald. IVorterbitck, xlvi., passim; Thesaurus, xlvi., passim. Ghillany, Menschenopfer der alt. Ile- hrder, 259. Ghor, the, 491, ff. Gilead and Lebanon, 293. Ginsburg, xlvii., Hi.; Glaucus, story of, no. Gog and Magog, 3S9, 391, 451. Grant's, Nestorians and Lost Tribes, 285, Graetz, 328, 375, 47S. Greece, war of the sons of Zion against the sons of, 253, 312 ; Jewish inter- pretation of, xxiii.; intercourse with, 254 ; known to Jews after the burning of Sardis, 255. GENERAL INDEX. 607 Greek culture and Jewish religion, 254, 255 ; Greek kings and Greek soldiers, 255, 257. 573- Hadadrimmon, mourning of, 391, ff. Hadar-Ramman, 393. Hadrach, land of, 202 ; different views, mistakes concerning, 203 ; name found in the Assyrian inscriptions, 205, 565. Haggai's sermon to the Jews, effect of, 3. Hairy garment, 422. Half of the remnant, 460. Hamath, 209, 228. Hananeel, Tower of, 494. Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah, 51, 530, 545, 546, 559- Hardness of heart, result of, 176, Harkary's Catalog, 285. Hariri, 532. Havercamp, 531, 539. Havemick, xxvii., xxx., xliii. Hecat£Eus, 539. Hegesias, 215. Hegesippus, 404. He-goats, 270. Heidenheim, Ascensio Moysis, 57, 534. Henderson, xliv., passim. Hengstenberg, xliv., passim. Herodotus, 36, 39, no, 200, 215, 291, 395- Hervey, Lord Arthur (Bishop of Bath and Wells), on the Genealogies o/mir Lord, 225, 401. Herzfeld, 372, 373. Herzog's Real-encyclopddie, 277. Herxheimer, 236. Hesselberg, 361, 505, 535, 590. Hesychius, xvii. Hezekiah, victories over the Philis- tines, 230; entry into Jerusalem, 233 ; waterworks of, 412. Hezel, 211, 401, 477, 506. High priest before the Angel of Jaha- veh, 46, ff ; engaged in some sacer- dotal duty, 47 ; his filthy garments, 50, ff, 544; Ewald's view, 48 ; gar- ments removed, 60 ff; mitre of, 61, ff ; to judge the Lord's house, 65, ff ; cro\vned by Zechariah, 148 ; the priest upon his throne, 151, ff. Hildesheimer, 539. Hilgenfeld, 582; Nov. Test. extr. Can. recept., 54, 55 ; Elxai Lib. fragm. 124. Hitzig, xxvi., xliii., passim. von Hofmann, xliii., passim. Holy land, the, 41 ; Holy Place, see Sanctuary ; holy ones, the, 479, 595. Horizon, the near and the distant, in- termingled, 451 ; the prophetic, 6. Horns, the four, 26 ; different views, 27 ; signify hostile kingdoms, but not the four kingdoms of Daniel, 27 ; views of Ewald and Hitzig, 27 ; of Pressel, 28. Horses in the first vision, 12, ff ; of the four chariots, 127 ; different explan- ations, 130, ff ; their colours of no symbolical significance, 18-20, 135, 531, ff ; used to mark off the several divisions of the riders, 12, 20; or one chariot from another, 135 ; speckled and strong, 136; use of, 236; bells of the, 515 ; plague on, 502. Hudson, 531, 539. Human sacrifices, 259. Humble ones, the, 440, 592. Hupfeld, 248 551. Huther, 56, 57. Ibn Ezra, 1S2, 235, 479, 504, 512, 530, 595- Iddo, XV., xvi., 526, Idolatrous practices still found in Pales- tine, 267. Idolatry, danger of, not past in post- exilian days, 267, 413 ; Jewish hatred against, 437. Inspiration, feeling of the Jews against claims to, in our Lord's day, 432. Isaac, Rabbi, Chizzuk Emunahy 582, 587- Isidore, xviii. Israel after the flesh and after the spirit, 376, ff ; the scattering of, 445 ; not blinded more than the Gentiles, 518 ; 6o8 GENERAL INDEX. a blessing and a curse, 187 ; devour- ing as a lion, 258 ; beauty and in- crease of, 261. Israelites, see under yews, Jewish. Jahaveh, pronunciation of the name ; xi. ; advent of, 39 ; answer to depu- tation from Bethel, 170 ff, 190; re- turn to Zion, 178; men's eyes directed towards J. by judgments, 208 ; camp- ing around his house, 221 ; beholding oppression, 223 ; the shepherd of Israel, 308 ; sword of, 434, 437 ; the shepherd of, 435 ; the fellow of, 435 ; turning back his hand, 439 ; a day of, 455, 457. 516; fighting with the nations, 456, 464, 517, 522; appearance on Mount of Olives, 465, ff, 472, 519 ; phenomena attendant on, 468, ff, 478, ff ; a king, 488 ; " one, and his name one," 4S9, 490. Javan, signifies Greece, 254. Jebusites, 218. Jehoshaphat, valley of, 126. Jehudah, dispute of R. Jose with R. , 204. Jerome, xviii., xix., xxi., 130, 337, 346, 357, 362, 364, 394, 398, 457, 458, 471, 476, 527, 532, 547, 556, 559, 561, 595- Jerusalem, captured three times by Nebuchadnezzar, 22, gi'owth in post- exilian days, 35, 36, 539 ; the spirit- ual, 40 ; a city of tmth, 179 ; Israel to dwell in, 184 ; a stone of burden, 364-370 ; attacks on, injurious to the nations, 370 ; capture of, 457, 459 ; escape from, 461, 471, ff, 519; re- generation of the world begins at, 487, 521 ; living waters at, 487 ; elevation of the city, 493 ; natural situation of, 494 ; its limits, 494 ; its gates, 494, ff ; Judah fighting at, 500, ff. Jew, the taking hold of the skirt of a, 194 ; name of Jew applied to all the tribes, 189, 246, 2S3, 374 ; a name of honour, 246. Jews, a commercial people after the exile, 109 ; improved state of, after the return, iSo, 185 ; depressed con- dition of, 200 ; honour bestowed on, 195, 289; called "children of Israel," XXX., 244, 2S3 ; to possess military power, 252 ; war against Greeks, 253, see under Greece, Greek ; bles- sings derived from, 289 ; mercies vouchsafed to, at the restoration, 311. Jewish captives, sale of, 232, 252 ; loss of independence, 241 ; blank in annals, 257; superstitions, 414, ff; history after the restoration up to the times of the Maccabees, 310. John the Baptist, 422, ff. Jordan, the pride of, xxxvi., 302. Josephus, 9, 36, 49, 165,215, 224, 231, 281, 372, 395, 477, 478, 529, 531, 538, 595- Joshua, thehigh priest, the representative of Israel, 50, 60 ; filthy garments re- moved from, 60, ff ; Jewish legend about, 51; the crowning of, 148, ff ; see under Zerubbabel. Josiah, the mourning for, 394, ff. Jost, Gesch.des Jiid., xvii., 165. Judah, Israel and Jerusalem, 28 ; dif- ferent views, 29-31 ; Kliefoth's inter- pretation, 30 ; Judah and Israel, 40, 187 ; J. the state-horse of Jehovah, 271 ; not opposed to Jerusalem, 362, 364, 378 ; deliverance first given to J. and then to Israel, 367 ; and Israel, the names of, 355. See also XXX., xxxix. , xl. Juda;a, change in the physical state of, 490, ff. Judas Iscariot, 341. Judginent of peace, 189. Jude, reference of, to dispute about body of Moses, 53, ff; no reference to Assutnptio Mosis, 56, 57, 59 ; the reference to Zechariah, 53, 58. Junius, 57 ; see Tremelliiis. Justin Martyr, xxiv., 338, 443, 570. Kalisch, xlvii., passim. Kahnis, 386. Karaites of the Crimea, 285. Kautzsch, xlvii., passim. Kcenan, Thomas V., 373. GENERAL INDEX. 609 Keil, xxvii., xliv., passim. Keim, 582. Kennicott, Hebrew Bible, passim. Kimchi, Comm. on Zechariah, xliv., passim , Michlol, Iviii. ,537- King, the Messiah a, 233 ; the king and priest of Ps. ex., 148. Kliefoth, xliv., passim. Knobel, xv., xxvii., xliv. Kohler, xviii., xx., xxi., xliv., passim. Koster, xxvii., xlvi. Kuenen, xxxviii, xlvi., 546. de Lagarde, xlviii. , Ivii., 391, 511, 532, 549. 554, 555. 558. 573, 577, 59i- Lamps, the lighting of the, 87, ff. 'L.?iX\.€'s, Arabic English Lexicon, 61, 532, 533- Land, wasting of the, 177 ; the " land " or the " world," 307. Lange, J. P., xliv., passim ; on S- Matthew, 96. Lapide, Corn, a, 457. Lebrecht, Dr. F., 164. Lee, Archdeacon, Inspiration of Holy Scripture, 333. Lee, Prof. Samuel, Syriac Bible, xlviii. Levy, Dr. M. A., Gesch. der Jud. Miinzen, 164. Levy, Dr. J., Chaldiiisch. Worterbuch, passim; Neuheb.undChald. Worterb., passim. Light at eventide, 486. Lightfoot, xix., 31, 68, 96, 163, 164, 238, 338, 393, 467- Lion, Israel like a, 258. Literal fulfilment of some prophecies impossible, 181, 184, 194, 454, 460, 507, 510- Luthardt, 56. Luther, German Bible, passim. Lying and deceit, warnings against, 189. Maccabees, wars of the, 255 ; not too vividly described by the prophet, 256 ; Chamberlain's attempt to depreciate, 257 ; their conflicts a war of Israel, 256 ; mistakes of, 288 ; era after, a period of declension, 437 ; prophecy concerning, 369 ; struggles of, 370, ff ; from Modin not Jerusalem, 371 ; why called princes of Judah, 374. Madden, F. W., Jewish Coinage, 164. Maimonides, 71. Makrizi, 373. Marck, xxi., xliv., passim. Martini, 385, 549. Maurer, xliv., passim. McCaul on the Angel of Jehovah, 22; see under Kimchi. Measuring line, man with the, 33 ; for- bidden to measure the city, 34, 35. Measure of the sanctuary, 107. Mede, XXV., xliv., 337, 521, 583. Megiddo, 565. Meier, E.,386, 586. Merx, 393, Archiv, xlviii., 55, 539, 545, 594- Metallic image, Nebuchadnezzar's dream of the, 17, 131. Messiah, as the. stone, 73 ; called the corner stone, not the top stone, 97 ; to build the temple, 149 ; glory and majesty of, 151 ; predicted as a king, 233; "righteous and saved," 234; " afflicted" and "lowly," 235 ; riding on an ass, 236, ff; as the Branch, 70, ff, 149 ; predictions respecting, 149, 233, ff, 305. ff, 381 ; his sufferings vicarious, 391 ; priest and king, 153 ; counsel of peace between him andja- haveh, 154 ; New Test, confirmation of this view, 155 ; causes wars to cease, 240 ; destroys his people's weapons, 240 ; speaks peace to the Gentiles, 241, 247 ; rejection of the, 242, 32S, ff, 340, ff ; victories of, 247 ; limits of his rule, id. Messiahs, Jewish opinion about the two, 238, 389. Messianic dispensation represented as "the world to come, "449, ff ; a mingled state of light and darkness, 520. Meyer, 56. Mijhael the archangel, 21, 53. Michaelis, J. D., xxvi., 26, 32, 207, 280, 473, 477, 537, 566, 587, 596. Michaelis, C.B.,294, 358, 525, 534. R R 6io GENERAL IXIjEX. Millennium, supposcil references to the, 119, 180, 181, 262. Miiman, History of the Javs, 165, 226, 257.345. 373- Minchah, the three parts of the, 86. Mitre, the clean, 61, 62 ; the inscrip- tion on, 62. Month as a symbolical term, 317; vari- ous interpretations of, 313-316, 320. Months, Jewish and Assyrian, 528. Moses, legend of the death of, 55 ; the body of Christ and body of, 57 ; burial of, 58. 59. Mount of Olives, see Olives. Mountain, levelling of the, 95 ; mean- ing of, 97. Mountains overturned, 96 ; of brass or copper in the seventh vision, 123 ; probably Zion and the Mount of Olives, 126. Mourning for the representative of Jahaveh, 386, 388, 396, ff, 403 ; national and individual, 397, ff; for Josiah, 394, ff; for Adonis, 392. Movers, xxvii., 393, 582. Miihlau and Volck, see Gesenius' Wbr- terbuch ; Miihlau, De Proverb. Agur, 202. Myrtle-trees in the vision, 8, 10 ; in tlic temple, 8. Naegelsbach, 26. Nathan, family of, 399. Concord, of R. Nathan, Hi. Nations, gathering of the, 458. Neander, 404. Nebuchadnezzar's siege of Tyre, 212 ; see Metallic Image ; his captures of Jerusalem, 22 ff. Nethinim, 219, 515. Neubauer, Adolf, Gcographie dti Tal- mud, ic£, 565 ; Abu!l-walid, 532. Neumann, xliv., passim. Newcome, xliv, Ixv. Nicephorus, 54. Night suited for Divine revelations, 5- Nile, the, 295. Noldeke, 594. Norris, 528. Numbers, symbolical treatment of, 31" ; see under Month, Day, Thtid-part, Half. Obedience, results of, 184. Oecumenius, 54, 56. Observed me, those who, 325, ff. Oil for burning and anointing, 552. Olive trees, in the fifth vision, 88, ff ; two fruitful boughs of, 91, ff; meaning of, 93 ; according to some, in the court of the temple, 9 ; in Scripture, 89. Olives, Mount of, appearance of Jaha- veh on, 465, ff, 472, 519 ; Dean Stanley on, 467 ; mention of, in the Old Test. , 470; valley through, 471, 472, 473, 475; Mount of Cor- ruption, 466, 470, 473, 519. Onias, 509. Oppert, 39. Origen, 53. von Ortenberg, xv., xxvii., xxxi., xli.. xlv., passim. Palestine and Philistia, 220, 568. Palmer's Dacrt of the Exodus, 491. Party spirit among the Jews, 442. " Passing by and returning, 176, 221. Peace, see Counsel, Seed. Fella, the escape to, 519. Perjurers and thieves, 109. Perowne, Dean, xxxviii., xl., xlv. ; on the Psalms, ix., 462, 551. Pestilences, 499, ff; of the animals, 502. Philippi, IVescfi it. Ursprung d. Stat. Const., 550, 551. Philistia and Phoenicia, prophecies against, 201. Philistines, conversion of the, 217, blood taken away from their mouth, 218 ; incorporated into the body of Israel- ites, 220 ; prophecies against, 229, ff. Philo, Brez'iarium of the Pseudo, 372. Pierced One, the, 384, ff, 387, 437. Pinsker, 206. Pipes of the candlestick, 83, 548. Pirke Aboth, 339. Pirke Eliczer, 596. Pit without water, the, 251. Pool, Matthew, xlv. GENERAL INDEX. 6ii Porch of the temple, 107. Potter, flinging to the, 329 ; view of Hengstenberg, 332 ; of KHefoth, ^^;^. Pressel, xlv., passim. Priest, see J/i«/i Priest. Prisoners of hope, 251. Promises, why not more largely fulfilled, 188. Prophecy, cessation of real, 419 ; why gift removed, 420. Prophet, actions of the, represent the actions of God, 304. Prophets, no insinuation against, in Zechariah, 419 ; imagery of the, 469, ff ; sons of the, 425 ; false p. and superstitions in post-exilian days, 414, 416; change of feeling as to, 417; instances given by Zech. to show this in the future, 417; (i) the son slain by parents, 418, ff ; (2) the defence of the false prophet detected, 424, ff ; false p. in secret, 421 ; hairy garment of, 422 ; wounds of false prophet, 426. Prophetic horizon, the, 6. Psalter of Solomon, 327, 582. Purifier, Christ the, 119. Pusey, xxvii., xl., xlv., passim ; Daniel the Prophet, 17, 21. Rab-mag, 169. Rahmer, 478. Rain, prayers for, 266 ; only to be made to God, 267 ; withdrawal of, 507, ff- Rashi (R. Salomo ben Yizhak), xvii., xlv., 51, 96, 115, 116, 252, 281, 390, 402, 417, 427, 512, 531, 534, 555, 557, 568, 595- Rawlinson, Rev. Prof., Herodottcs, 36, 39. Rawlinson, Sir Henry, 38, 205, 206. Reaction against false prophets, 410, ff; leading to transgression, 421. Records of the Past, 39, 205, 231, 393. Regem-melek, 168. Reinke, xlv., passim. Remnant, half of the, 460 ; not cut off from the city, 461, ff, 518, ff ; bles- sings given to the, 497, 519. Renan, 21, 482. Revelation, the riders in the, 13 ; see Horses, Colours. Ribera, 595. Rider on the red horse, li. Riehm, xlvi. ; on the prophetic horizon, 6. Rivers of grace, 487, ff, 521. Roberts' Discussions on the Gosfels, 336. Robertson, Hist, of the Christian Church, 404. Rodwell, Rev. J. M., 205. Rodiger, xlvi., xlvii. , 594, Roll, the vision of the flying, 105, ff. Rosenmiiller, xxvi., xlv., passim, de Rossi, xlvi., passim. Row's Bampton Lectures, 337. Rufus, Titus Annius, 165. Russia, 257. Riickert, 583, 588. Saadiah 130. Samairitans and Jews, 146, 245, 284. Sammael and Michael and Moses, 55 ; destroyer of Leviathan, 53. Sanctuary, the three parts of the worship in, 86 ; dimensions of, 107 ; measure of the, 107. Sandrock, xlv. Sapor, raillery of king, 238. Sarezer, 168. Satan accusing the high priest, 46, ff ; Neumann's strange view of, 52 ; rebuke of, narrated by Jude, 53 ; rebuke narrated in Zechariah, 52 ; mention of, x., xxi. " Saying, "meaning of the expression, 5. Sayce, 393. vSchegg, xlv., passim. Schrader, Keilinschriften d. A.T., xlvi., 168, 169, 205, 393, 528, 577 ; Keilin- schriften u. Geschichtsfor seining, xlvi., 565, 569- Schlier, xlv., 174, 313. Schleusner, Thes. Phil. Crit. sive Lex. in LXX., etc., xlix., 186, 392, 409, 536, 545> 549. 565, 571, 5S0, 596. Schmieder, 174, 361, 473. Schmidt, see Merx. Schottgen, De Messia, 549, 570, 596. 6l2 (iENERAI. INDEX. Scluiltens, 551, 573. Schroeder, 192, 508. , Kchiirer, 582. Seder-olam-zutta, 372. "Seed of peace," tlic, 186. Self-lacerations, 428, ff. Seleucidian dynasty, the, 132, Sermon on the mount, 109. Seven eyes on the stone, the, 73, ff, 98. Seventy years, the, 22, 171, 534, 536 ; seventy weeks of Daniel, 313. Severus, 57. Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego, see under Hanaiiiah. Sharezer and Regeni-melech, 16S. Sheep of slaughter, different explana- tions, 305 ; scattered, 443 ; the most wretched, 325. Shephelah, the, 173. Sliepherd and his staves, 30S ; weari- ness of, 321 ; his solemn decision, 322 ; breaking of the staves, 322, 342 ; demand for wages, 328 ; the remuneration offered to, 329 ; rejected, 329 ; " my shepherd," 435 ; shepherd smitten for the sin of the flock, 441, ff. Shepherd, the wicked, 346 ; " idol- shepherd " an erroneous translation, 346 ; instruments of, 347 ; folly and sin of, 348 ; opinion of modern critics, 348 ; the Roman oppressor, 349, ff; destruction of, 351. Shepherds, evil, foreign oppressors, 270, ff, 306, 349 ; the cutting off of the three, 312, ff. Shimeites, the, 399. Shinar, the land of, 118. Shir ha-shiriin Rabba, 538, 596. Shoulder, the refractory, 175. .Sibylline oracles, 543. Sidon, 210, 231. Sin, punishment for, no. Slaves bought, 425. Sling stones, 259. Small things, day of, 99. Smiths, the four, 31, ff; why smiths were seen in the vision, 45. Smith, DeanR. Payne, xlvi. Thesaurus Syriacus, 546. Smith, G. , Assyrian Canon, 205. ,, W., Biblical Dictionary, xlv., 26, 225, 492. Sohar, 570, 596. Solomon, The Psalter of ; 327, 582, 565, Spirit, the resting of the, 1 39 ; of un- cleanness, 416; exorcised, 421, Spoiling of the foes, 502. Stahelin, xlv., 72, 140, 152, 200, 565. Stanley, Dean, Lectures on the JeiLnsh Church, 49, 50, 226, 320, 581 ; Sinai and Palestine, 467. "Standing before" one, meaning of the phrase, 46. Staves of beauty and bands, 308. Stone, of burden, 364, 370, see Temple, Christ, Messiah ; stones of a diadem, 260. Storms of the south, 256. Strack, x\vu . , Prole^. Critica, 541 ; Fir- kowitzsch und seine Entdeckungen, 285. Stork, the, and stork-winged women, 117. Svedberg's notion concerning the mountains of Dalarne, 124. Swedenborg, 124. Synagogue, men of the Great, xvii. Syria, prophecies against, 201. Tabernacle of God, 8 ; candlestick in the, 82 ; see under Candlestick ; dimensions of the Holy Place in the, 107. Tabernacles, the feast of, 505. Tacitus, 9. Talbot, H. F., 231. Talent- weight, the, in. Talmud, 71, 77, 96, 163, 164, 165, 225, 303. 338, 3S9. 390, 4S1, 53». xvii., xix., xxiii. Taylor, Rev. C, Pirke Aboth, xvii. , 339. Taskmasters abolished, 222. Temple, commencement of the build- ing of, 4 ; foundation stone of the second, 71, ff; glory of the second, 100 ; porch of the, 107 ; the spiri- tual, 150 ; pots in the, 513; Canaanite no longer in the, 515, ff. GENERAL INDEX. 613 Ten tribes, see under T^velve, invited to return, xxxix. , 279 ; large numbers of the members of these tribes among the exiles who returned, 278, 281 ; myth of the lost, 281, 284. Tents of Judah, 366. Teraphim, 267, ff. Territories ruled over by David and Solomon, 201. TertuUian, 399. Theiner, xlv., passim. Thenius, 319, 395, 495, 56S, 581. Theodoret, 47, 204, 453, 460, 465, 505- Theodore of Mopsuestia, 204, 505. Third part, the, 442. Thirty shekels, the, 329 ; thirty pieces of silver given for Christ, 336, ff. ; 341- Thieves and perjurers, 109. Tholuck, xlvi., 235. Proph. 11. Hire Weiss., 559, 5S6. Tibullus, 430. Tischendorf, xlvi. Titus, candlestick on the arch of, 82 ; war of the Romans under, 453, 460, 461. Tremellius and Junius, xlv. Trees, destruction of, spoken by the prophets, 301 ; used for siege pur- poses, 303 ; spoken of as symbolical, 301, Turpie, xlv., 337. Twelve tribes one whole, the, 243 ; their return from captivity, 244 ; all called "Jews," 246; termed "chil- dren of Israel," xxxix., 244 ; united in the struggle of Maccabee days, 277, ff ; union of, 282-288; sown among the nations, 285 ; blessings granted to, 288, ff; 344; see under, Je-tV^ ye'iVS. Twenty-fourth day of the month, sig- nificance of, 4. Tyre, siege of, by Nebuchadnezzar, 212 ; destruction by Alexander, 212. U'mbreit, xlvi., passim. Unicorn, 26. Uzziah, leprosy of, 478 ; earthquake in the days of, 477. V^alckenaar, 337. Valley between the mountains, 138 ; valley of myrtles, 10; meaning of, 10 ; see under Mount of Olives. Venema, xlvi., passim. Vicariousness of Messiah's sufferings, 391- Vine " the seed of peace," the, 186 ; the golden, 8, 531. Virgil, 10, 278. Vossius, 575- Vitringa, 17, 346, 422. Volck, 132, 323, see Muhlau and Volck. Wagenseil, Tela Ignea Satani, 582, 587- Water of cleansing, 410 ; the living waters, 4S7, ff. Wellhausen, xxvii., xlii., 393 ; Der Text dcr B ticker Sam., 167, 569. de Wette, xxvii., .xxxviii., 57, 383, 415. While, God angry for a little, 25. Wickedness and her instruments, 113. Winds, the four chariots compared to, 127, ff ; do not signify ^the winds, 137 ; winds in Scripture, 127. Wine-presses, the king's, 496. Woman in the ephah, 112 ; with the talent-weight, 115; punishment of, 116 ; rescue, 117. Women, stork-winged, 1 17; signifi- cance of, 117. Wordsworth, Bishop, xlvi., 24^ 256, 266, 275, 346. " World to come," the, 449, 450. Wounding for idolatrous purposes, 42S, 430. Wright, Prof. W., Arabic Grammar, 551. 592. Wunsche, Erliiuteruiti; der Evangelien, 96, 564, 571 ; Leiden des Messias, xi., xlvi., 239, 389, 390, 549; Der Prophet Ilosca, 292, 293, 329. 6i4 GENERAL INDEX. Xenophon Anabasis, 215 ; Cyropxdia, xxxii. YalkiU Sliimconi, 564, 595, 596, Zeal, flaming, 41 S, ff. Zechariali's visions not mere poetic fancy, 6 : first vision, the angelic riders, 8, ff ; '•cond vision, the four horses, 26 ; tnuJ vision, the man with the measuring line, 33 ; fourth vision, Joshua before the Angel, 45 ; fifth vision, the golden candlestick, 80; sixth vision, flying roll and woman in the ephah, 105 ; seventh vision, the four chariots, 123. Zechariah not the young man of chap, ii. , p. xvi., 35 ; notices of in the Tal- mud and Church Fatliers, xv., fT; date of his earliest predictions, xxii., ff ; the name, xx. the martyr Zech- ariah, xix. ; the son of Jeberechiah, XV., xvii.; external evidence as to the unity of the book, xxii., ff; sketch of the rise and progress of critical opinion on the integrity of the book, XXV., ff; differences between the first and second part, xxviii. , ff; considerations in favour of its in- tegrity and genuineness, xxxiv. Zerubbabel and Joshua the two olive trees, 90 ; encouraged, 95 ; no crown placed on his head, 147, 148. Zingerle, Dr. P., 534. Zunz, 493, see Arnhcim. '• iHMiier. TIk Sell rriiiting Works, Fruiue, .luJ LuuJou. i! Jl^ Date Due^^'em/g^hi ^•;r8 "38 '■ ^ ^ W OvemigU r^rp 9 i i UL^ <^ »OV8ol^ 7?t^^^MfaHMttM|^^ ^^^^^jyJJJgU r ^ m ^ $) '•Vl''W';i ■ BSl665.W948c2 Zec^anahandh,sp.ophec.escons,dered ' (II iinii(ii|i)iiiiii