OFPfiSg; 36,52 an i)^t p0lg Striptitns 0f t^c #Itr antr UNDER THE EDITORSHIP OF The Rev. CHARLES AUGUSTUS BRIGGS, D.D. Professor of Theological Encyclopedia and Symbolics Union Theological Seminary, New York The Rev. SAMUEL ROLLES DRIVER, D.D. Regius Professor of Hebrew, Oxford The Rev. ALFRED PLUMMER, M.A., D.D. Late Master of University College, Durham n The International Critical Commentary On the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments EDITORS' PREFACE THERE are now before the public many Commentaries, written by British and American divines, of a popular or homiletical character. The Cambridge Bible for Schools, the Handbooks for Bible Classes and Private Students, The Speaker's Commentary, The Popular Commentary (Schaflf), The Expositor's Bible, and other similar series, have their special place and importance. But they do not enter into the field of Critical Biblical scholarship occupied by such series of Commentaries as the Kurzgefasstes exegetisches Handbuch zutn A. T. ; De Wette's Kurzgefasstes exegetisches Handbuch zum N. T. ; Meyer's Kritisch-exegetischer Komtnentar ; Keil and Delitzsch's Biblischer Commentar iiber das A. T. ; Lange's Theologisch-homiletisches Bibelwerk ; Nowack's Handkommentar zum A. T. ; Holtzmann's Handkommentar zum N. T. Several of these have been translated, edited, and in some cases enlarged and adapted, for the English-speaking public ; others are in process of translation. But no corresponding series by British or American divines has hitherto been produced. The way has been prepared by special Commentaries by Cheyne, Ellicott, Kalisch, Lightfoot, Perowne, Westcott, and others; and the time has come, in the judgment of the projectors of this enter- prise, when it is practicable to combine British and American scholars in the production of a critical, comprehensive Commentary that will be abreast of modern biblical scholarship, and in a measure lead its van. The International Critical Commentary Messrs. Charles Scribner's Sons of New York, and Messrs. T. & T. Clark of Edinburgh, propose to publish such a series of Commentaries on the Old and New Testaments, under the editorship of Prof. C. A. Briggs, D.D., D.Litt., in America, and of Prof. S. R. Driver, D.D., D.Litt., for the Old Testament, and the Rev. ALFRED Plummer, D.D., for the New Testament, in Great Britain. The Commentaries will be international and inter-confessional, and will be free from polemical and ecclesiastical bias. They will be based upon a thorough critical study of the original texts of the Bible, and upon critical methods of interpretation. They are designed chiefly for students and clergymen, and will be written in a compact style. Each book will be preceded by an Introduction, stating the results of criticism upon it, and discuss- ing impartially the questions still remaining open. The details of criticism will appear in their proper place in the body of the Commentary. Each section of the Text will be introduced with a paraphrase, or summary of contents. Technical details of textual and philological criticism will, as a rule, be kept distinct from matter of a more general character ; and in the Old Testament the exegetical notes will be arranged, as far as possible, so as to be serviceable to students not acquainted with Hebrew. The History of Interpretation of the Books will be dealt with, when necessary, in the Introductions, with critical notices of the most important literature of the subject. Historical and Archaeological questions, as well as questions of Biblical Theology, are included in the plan of the Commentaries, but not Practical or Homiletical Exegesis. The Volumes will con- stitute a imiform series. The International Critical Commentary A CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL COMMENTARY ON MICAH, ZEPHANIAH, NAHUM, HABAKKUK, OBADIAH AND JOEL BY JOHN MERLIN POWIS SMITH, Ph.D. WILLIAM HAYES WARD, D.D., LL.D. JULIUS A. BEWER, Ph.D. NEW YORK CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS 1911 Copyright, iqh, by CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS Published November, 191 1 PREFACE. IN 1890 the late Pres. William R. Harper agreed to write a commentary on the Minor Prophets in two volumes for this series of commentaries. But later on this was found to be impracticable, and it was agreed to allow him three volumes for the work. The first volume, containing Amos and Hosea, was published in 1905. Dr. Harper was at work upon the second volume when he was taken from us by death. His pupil and associate, Prof. J. M. Powis Smith, who had assisted him in his preliminary studies, was asked to complete the commentary on Micah and now assumes the entire responsibility for that work. He wishes to make grateful acknowledgment of his indebtedness to the late Pres. William R. Harper for invaluable inspiration and much help in the work on Micah, and to Mrs. William R. Harper for the free use of Dr. Harper's papers and books and for permis- sion to incorporate some of his results in the present commentary. These appear chiefly in the general comments on Micah, chs. i and 2 and 6'"*. The delay in the preparation of the volumes was so great that it seemed best to distribute the work remaining to be done among several scholars. Accordingly, Zephaniah and Nahum were un- dertaken by Prof. Charles P. Fagnani, who, however, was obliged after some years to give them up on account of ill health, when Prof. J. M. Powis Smith kindly assumed the task. Habakkuk was assigned to Dr. W. Hayes Ward, Obadiah and Joel to Prof. Julius A. Bewer. These six prophets are published in this vol- ume. The remaining prophets, Haggai and Zechariah by Prof. Henry G. Mitchell, Malachi by Prof. J. M. Powis Smith, and Jonah by Prof. Julius A. Bewer, will be published soon in a third volume completing the commentaries on the Minor Prophets. IV PREFACE The order of arrangement of the Minor Prophets in these vol- umes dififers, not only from the traditional arrangement found in our Bibles, but also from that proposed by Dr. Harper in his orig- inal plan. Dr. Harper departed from the traditional arrangement in his volume by placing Amos before Hosea, and also in his plan for the remaining volumes stated in the preface of his commentary. The traditional arrangement was not a chronological one, even from the point of view of traditional theories of authorship, and from the point of view of modem criticism it has little if any pro- priety. It would be exceedingly difficult and, so far as the edi- tors are concerned, impracticable to insist upon any chronological scheme, especially in view of the great number of different writ- ings of different dates combined under the names of these Minor Prophets, where indeed there is ample room for differences of opinion. We were compelled therefore to consider the views of the several authors, and at the same time respect the traditional arrangement wherever practicable. The order finally agreed upon in this commentary is not therefore an ideal one, but the best that we could make under all the circumstances. The several authors have their own special preferences in doing their work, and there are therefore differences in these commenta- ries such as would have been avoided if any one author had com- posed them all. All the commentaries, however, conform to the general plan of the series. It was thought best to publish the work of the several authors un- der separate sub-titles, each with its own separate pagination. This volume is thus really composed of three little volumes bound in one, each author being responsible only for his own work. The editors are not responsible for the opinions of the authors or for the details of their work, but only for the choice of the authors and such gen- eral supervision of their work as to insure its conformity to the plan of the series. CONTENTS PAGE PREFACE iii-iv ABBREVIATIONS v-xvii INTRODUCTION TO MICAH 5-29 § I. The Book of Micah 5-16 1. The Text 5-6 2. The Style 6 3. Poetic Form 6-8 4. Component Parts 8-16 5. The Formation of the Book of Micah . 16 § 2. The Prophet Micah 17-19 1. His Name 17 2. His Home 17-18 3. His Character 18-19 § 3. The Times of Micah 19-23 1. The Date of His Prophecies 19-21 2. The Background of Chs. 1-3 21-23 § 4. The Message of Micah 23-26 § 5. Recent Literature on the Book of Micah . . . 26-29 COMMENTARY ON MICAH 30-156 INTRODUCTION TO ZEPHANIAH 159-181 § I. From the Fall of Thebes to the Fall of Nineveh 159-165 §2. Zephaniah AND His Times 166-171 1. The Man 166-167 2. The Times 167-171 § 3. The Book of Zephaniah 171-176 1. The Contents 171-172 2. Later Additions . 172-174 3. Poetic Form 174-176 § 4. The Message of Zephaniah 177-180 § 5. Literature on the Book of Zephaniah 180-181 V VI CONTENTS PAGE COMMENTARY ON ZEPHANIAH 182-263 INTRODUCTION TO NAHUM 267-283 § I. The Book of Nahum 267-274 Its Contents 267-268 Its Unity 268-270 Its Poetic Form 270-274 § 2. The Times of Nahum 274-279 § 3. The Man and the Message 279-282 The Man 279-280 The Message 280-282 § 4. Literature on the Book of Nahum 282-283 COMMENTARY ON NAHUM 284-360 INDEXES TO MICAH, ZEPHANIAH AND NAHUM . . 361-363 I. Index of Hebrew Words 361 II. Index of Subjects 362-363 INTRODUCTION TO HABAKKUK 3-7 Authorship and Date 3-7 Topical Analysis 7 COMMENTARY ON HABAKKUK 8-28 INTRODUCTION TO OBADIAH 3-18 § I. The Composition of the Book 3-5 § 2. The Date of the Book 6-9 § 3. The Interpretation of the Book 10-13 § 4. The Prophet and His Book 13-14 § 5. The Text 15 § 6, The Metre 15-17 § 7. Modern Literature 17-18 COMMENTARY ON OBADIAH 19-46 INTRODUCTION TO JOEL 49-72 § I. The Composition of the Book 49-56 § 2. The Date of the Book 56-62 § 3. The Interpretation of the Book 62-67 § 4. The Prophet 67-68 § 5. The Text and Metre 68-71 § 6. Modern Literature 71-72 COMMENTARY ON JOEL 73-144 INDEXES TO OBADIAH AND JOEL 145-146 ABBREVIATIONS I. TEXTS AND VERSIONS A = Arabic Version. Aq. = Aquila's translation, cited from Field's Hexapla. Arm. = Armenian Version. AV. = Authorized Version(i6ii). Bab. Cod. = Prophetarum posleri- orum codex Baby- lonicus Petropoli- tanus. Ed. H. L. Strack (1876). E' = Origen's Quinta. Eth. = Ethiopic Version. C5 = The Septuagint, in the received Greek Ver- sion. ^A — Codex Ale.xandrinus. ^Aid = Aldine Text. (S^' = Codex Sinaiticus. (gB = Codex Vaticanus. (SQ = Codex Marchalianus. (&^ = Codex Taurinensis. HP. = Texts of Holmes and Par- sons. 3 = Jerome's Version. Kenn. = R. Kennicott, Veius Tes- tamentum Hebraicum cum variis lectionibus (1776-80). Kt. = Knhibh. 21 = The Old Latin Text of the Minor Prophets, Lu. cited from Oesterley's edition in the Journal of Theological Studies, vol. V (1903). Luther's Version. m = The Massoretic Text. Mas. = Masora. NT. = New Testament. OT. = Old Testament. Qr. = Q^ri. RV. = Revised Version. RVm. = Revised Version, margin g> = The Peshitto, cited from the Paris Polyglot. ^^ = Syro Hexaplar text. Slav. = Slavic Version. 2 = Symmachus's translation, cited from Field's Hex- apla. (3 = The Targum, cited from the Paris Polyglot. 9 = Theodotion's translation, cited from Field's Hex- apla. ■ TS = The Vulgate, cited from Hetzenauer, Biblia Sa- cra Vulgalce Editionis (1906). Vrss. = Versions. vu Vlll ABBREVIATIONS II. BOOKS OF THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS Am. = Amos. Jos. Ju. = Joshua. = Judges. BS. = The Wisdom of Jesus Jud. = Judith. Ben Sira, or Eccle- 1 I, 2 K. = I, 2 Kings. siasticus. La. = Lamentations. I, 2 Ch. = I, 2 Chronicles. Lk. = Luke. Col. = Colossians. Lv. = Leviticus. I, 2 Cor. = I, 2 Corinthians. Ct. = Canticles = The Song Mai. = Malachi. of Songs. I, 2 Mac. Mi. = I, 2 Maccabees. = Micah. Dn. = Daniel. Mk. = Mark. Dt. = Deuteronomy. Mt. = Matthew. Ec. = Ecclesiastes. Na. = Nahum. Eph. = Ephesians. Ne. = Nehemiah. I, 2 Esd. = I, 2 Esdras. Nu. = Numbers. Est. = Esther. Ex. = Exodus. Ob. = Obadiah. Ez. = Ezekiel. Phil. = Philippians. Ezr. = Ezra. Pr. = Proverbs. Gal. = Galatians. Ps. = Psalms. Gn. = Genesis. Rev. = Revelation. Hb. = Habakkuk. Rom. = Romans. Heb. = Hebrews. Ru. -= Ruth. Hg. = Haggai. 1,2 S. = I, 2 Samuel. Ho. = Hosea. I, 2 Thes = I, 2 Thessalonians. Is. = Isaiah. 1, 2 Tim. = 1,2 Timothy. Jb. = Job. Tob. = Tobit. Je. = Jeremiah. Wisd. = Wisdom of Solomon, Jn. = John. Jo. = Joel. Zc. = Zechariah. Jon. = Jonah. Zp. = Ze haniah. III. AUTHORS AND WRITINGS Abar. = Rabbi Izaak ben AE. = Rabbi Abraham ben Juda A barb anel Meir ibn Ezra (ti5o8). (tii67) ABBREVL\TIONS IX AJSL. AJTh. A OF. Am. Bach. Bae. Barth, NB. Bart. BAS. Bauer BDB. = American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures. = American Journal of Theology. = Altorientalische For- schungen, von H. Winckler. = W. R. Arnold, The Coviposition of Na. I•-2^ ZAW., XXI, 225-65. = J. Bachmann, Zur Text-Kritik des Propheten Zeph- anja, in SK., 1894, pp. 641-55. = F. Baethgen. = J. Barth, Die Nom- inalbildung in den Semitischen Spra- chen (1889-91). = G. A. Barton. : Beitrdge zur Assyri- ologie und Semiti- schen Sprachwis- senschaft. ■■ G. L. Bauer, Die klein- en Propheten iiber- setzt u.s.w. (1786). = A Hebrew and Eng- lish Lexicon of the Old Testament, with an Appendix containing the Bib- lical A ramaic, based on the Lexi- con of William Ge- senius as trans- lated by Edward Robinson, edited by Francis Brown, with the co-opera- tion of S. R. Driver and Charles A. Briggs(i89i-i9o6). Beer = Article Zephanja, in PRE} Bew. = J. A. Bewer. Bick. = G. Bickell, Beitrdge zur semit. Metrik (1894). Bick.» = Idem, in ZDMG., XXXI V( 1880), 559 ff. or Carmina Vet. Test.Metrice{i&82), 212 f. Boch. = S. Bochart. Bo. = F. Bottcher. Br. = Breiteneicher, Ninive und Nahum (1861). Brd. = C. J. Bredenkamp. Bu. = K. Budde. Bu.Gesch. = Idem, Geschichte der althebrdischen Lit- ter atur (1906). Cal. Casp. CB. Che. CIS. Con. Cor. Calvin's Commenta- ries on the Twelve Minor Prophets. Caspari, Der Prophet Obadja, 1842; Ueber Micha den Morasthiten und seine prophetische Schrift (1852). Critica Biblica, Part II : Ezekiel and Minor Prophets, by T. K. Cheyne (1903)- T. K. Cheyne, Micah [Cambridge Bible, 1882]. Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum. R. P. Condamin. C. H. Cornill, Einlei- tung in die kanon- ischen Biicher des Alten Testaments ABBREVLVTIONS Cor. — Continued. (6th ed., 1908; Eng. txansl. of the 5th ed. = Intro- duction to the Ca- nonical Books of the Old Testament, 1907). COT. = Cuneiform Inscrip- tions and the OT. (Eng. trans. KAT.-). = K. A. Credner. Cred. Dathe Dav. DB. De. dcR. deW. Dl. Dl.Prol. = J. A. Dathe, Proph- etcB minores ex re- censione text us He- braei et versionum antiquarum . . . il- lustrati (1773). = A. B. Davidson. = A Dictionary of the Bible, edited by James Hastings, 4 vols. (1898- 1 902) and an "Extra Volume" (1904), cited here as vol. V. = Franz Delitzsch. = J. B. de Rossi, Varia lectiones Veteris Testamenli, etc., vol. Ill (1786); and Scholia critica in Veteris Tes- tamenli libros (1798). = W. M. L. de Wcttc. = Friedrich Delitzsch. = Idem, Prolegomena eines neuen He- hr disch- Aramdis- chen Worterbuch s zum A hen Testa- ments (1SS6). 131.HWB Dr. Dr.^ Dr.Intr. Dru. Du. EB. Ehr. Eich. Einl. Elh. Idem, A ssyrisches Hajidworterbuch. S. R. Driver, The Mi nor Prophets: Nahum, Habak- kuk , Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechari- ah, Malachi. In- troductions, Re- vised Version, with Notes, Index, and Map [The Cen- tury Bible, 1906]. Idem, A Treatise on the Use of the Tenses in Hebrew (1874; 3d ed., 1892). • Idem, An Introduc- tion to the Litera- ture of the Old Testament (Revised ed., 1910). = Drusius, CommetUary on Minor Prophets, in Critki Sacri, etc. (1660). = B. Duhm, Die zwolf Prophcten in den Versmassen d e r Urschrifl iibersetzt (1910). : ErKyclopmdia Bibli- ca, ed. by T. K. Cheyne and J. Sutherland Black, 4vols. (1899-1903). = A. B. Ehrlich. = J. G. Eichhorn. = Einleitung in das Alte Testament. -- II. J. Elhorst, De propJietie van Mi- cha (1891). ABBREVL\TIONS XI Enc. Brit. = Encyclopedia Bri- Gie. = F. Giesebrecht tannica (9th ed.). Gr. = H. Graetz, Emenda- Eus. = Eusebius. tiones in plerosque Ew. = H. Ewald, Die Proph- Sacra Scriptural elen des Alien Bun- Veteris Testamenti des (1840; 2d ed., libros, etc. (1893). 1867; transl. as Gray = G. B. Gray. Commentary on the Gre. = E. J. Greve, Vaticinia Prophets of the Old Nahumi et Hab., Testament; 5 vols., editio me trie a 1875-81)- (1793)- Ew.5 = Idem, Ausfiihrliches Grimm = K. J. Grimm, EupJie- Lehrbuch der He- mistic Liturgical brdischen Sprache Appendices in the des Allen Bundes Old Testament (8th ed., 1870). (1901). Exp. = The Expositor, ed. by Grotius = Annotata ad Vet. Test., W. R. Nicoll. vol. II (1644). Expos. T. = The Expository Times. Gu. = H. Guthe, Der Pro- Fag. = C. P. Fagnani, Tlie phet Micha, in Structure of the Kautzsch, Heilige Text of the Book of Schrift (3d ed.. Zephaniah, in Old 1909). Testament attd Sem- Gunk. = H. Gunkel, Schop- itic Studies in fung u. Chaos in Memory of W. R. Urzeit u. Endzeit Harper, II, 260-77. (1895). GASm. = George Adam Smith, H.5 = W. R. Harper, Ele- The Book of the ments of Hebrew Twelve Prophets Syntax (1888; 5th (1897-98). ed., 1899). Geb. = Gebhard, Criindliche H.AH = Idem, Cotnmentary on Einleitung in die Amos and Hosea, zwolf kleinen ICC, 1905. Propheten (1737). Hal. = J. Halevy, Recher- Ges. = Wilhelm Gesenius. ches bibliques : Le Ges.* = Wilhelm Gesenius's livre de Michee; Hebrdische Gram- Le livre d' Oba- matik, vollig um- dia, in Revue Sc- gearbeitet von E. mitique, vols. XII Kautzsch (1909-'). and XIII (1904/.). English trans, by Le Livre de Na- Collins and Cow- hum, ibid., vol. ley, 1910^. XIII; Le livre de Xll ABBREVIATIONS Hal. — Continued. Sophonie, ibid., vol. XIII. = O. Happel, Das Buck d. Proph. Nahum (1902). = Micha neu ilhersetzt und erldutert{\ 800) . = Kurzer H andcom- mentar zum AT. — E. Henderson, The Book of the Twelve M inor Prophets translated, etc. (1868). = Herodotus. Hesselberg = Die zwolf kleinen Propheten ausge- legt (1838). = F. Hitzig, Die zwolj kleinen Propheten (1838; 4th ed. by Steiner, 1881). = H. Holzinger. = C. F. Houbigant, Biblia Hebraica cum notis criticis, etc., 4 vols. (1753). Hpt. = (i) Paul Haupt, Notes on Micah, in American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures, July and Oct., 19 10. = (2) The Book of Na- hum, in JBL., XXVI (1907), 1-53- HWB.^^ = Gesenius's Hebr. und aram. Handwbrter- buch iiber das AT., ed. F. Buhl. ICC. = I nternaiional Criti- cal Commentary, edited by C. A. Hap. Hartmann HC. Hd. Hdt. Hi. Holz. Houb. B r i g g s , S. R. Driver, and A. Plummer. 7.1 05. = Journal of the Ameri- can Oriental Soci- ety. JBL. = Journal of Biblical Literature. JE. = Jewish EncyclopcB- dia. Jer. = Jerome (t42o). JMPS. = J. M. Powis Smith. Jos. = Fl. Josephus. JOS.A"' = Idem, Antiquities. JOS.B' = Idem, Bell. Jud. JQR. = Jewish Quarterly Re- view. JRAS. = Jourtml of the Royal Asiatic Society. Jrm. = A. Jeremias, in BAS., III. JTS. = Journal of Theologi- cal Studies. Jus. = K. W. Justi, Micha neu ilbersetzt und erldutert (1799; 2d ed., 1820). Kalinsky = Valicinia Habacuci et Nahumi, etc. (1748). KAT.^ = Die Keilinschriften und das Alte Testa- ment, von Eb. Schrader. Dritte Auflage . . . neu bearbeitet von H. Zimmern und H. Winckler (1902). Kau. = E. Kautzsch, Die hei- lige Schrift d. AT.^ KB. = Keilinschrifttiche Bib- liothek. ABBREVIATIONS XIll Ke. = C. F. Keil, Commen- tary on the Minor Prophets in Keil und Delitzsch, Bibl. Kommentar, vol. IV (1866; transl. 1880). Kent = C. F. Kent, The Ser- mons, Epistles and Apocalypses of Is- rael's Prophets, etc. [Student's Old Testament, 1910]. Ki. = Rabbi David Kim- chi (ti23o). Kirk. = A. F. Kirkpatrick. Kit. = R. Kittel. Kl. = Paul Kleinert, Com- mentaries on Mi- cah, Nahum, and Zephaniah in Lan- ge's Bibelwer k (1868; Eng. transl. 1874). Knabenbauer = Com. in pro ph. minor es (1886). K6 = Ed. K5nig, His- torisch-kritisches Lehrgebdude der He- brdischen Sprache, vols. I-III (1881- 97) ; reference is made to the Syn- tax (vol. Ill, 1897) unless otherwise in- dicated. Kol. = A. Kolmodin, Profeten Nahum, Ofversdtt- ning och Utldgg- ning (1898). Kre. = E. Kreenen, Nahumi Vaticinium phi- lolog. et crit. Exposi- tum (1808). Kue. Lag. Lohr Marg. Marti Mau. Me. Mich = Abraham Kuenen. = P. de Lagarde. = Max Lohr, Zwei Beispiele von Kehr- vers in den Proph- etenschriften des Allen Testaments, in ZDMG., LXI (1907), pp. 3-6. Max L. Margolis, Micah [The Holy Scriptures with Commentary, 1908]. K. Marti, Dodeka- propheton [Kurzer Handcommentar zum Allen Testa- ment, 1903]. Maurer, Commenta- rius grammaticus historicus criticus in prophetas mi- nor es (1840). A. Merx. J. D. Michaelis, Deutsche Ueberset- zung des Allen Tes- taments u.s.w. (1782). Mich., C. B.= C. B. Michaelis, on Obadiah and Mi- cah, in J. H. Mi- chaelis's Biblia He- braica cum A nnott. (1720). J. B. Michaelis. J. H. Michaelis, Biblia Hebraica, etc. Mittheilungen der Vorderasiat isch en Gesell.chaft. Mich., J. B. Mich., J. H. MVAG. XIV ABBT^EVIATIONS NCB. = New Century Bible. New. = Newcome, An At- tempt towards an Improved Version, Metrical Arrange- ment and Explana- tion of tlie Twelve Minor Prophets (18^6). No. = Theodor Noldeke. Now. = W. Nowack, Die kleinen Propheten iibersetzt und er- kldrt [Handkom- mentar zum Alten Testament, 1897; 2d ed., 1903]. Now.K = Idem, Duodecim Pro- pIietce/mR.K'itteVs Biblia Hebraica (1906). Ols. = J. Olshausen. OLZ. = Orientalistische Lit- eratur-Zeitung. Onom. = Onomastica Sacra, ed. Lagarde. OortEn>- = H. Oort, Textus He- hraici Emendati- ones, etc. (1900). Or. = C. von Orelli, Die zwolf kleinen Propheten ausge- legt (1888; 3d ed., 1908; Engl, transl., 1893). Os. = Osiander, Ezechiel, Daniel, Osee, Joel, Amos, etc., juxta veterem sen Vulga- tam tramlationem ad Hebrceam veri- tatem emendati, etc. (1579)- Pet. Pont PRE. PSBA. Pu. Perles = F. Perles, Analekten 2ur Textkritik des Alten Testaments (1895). = Norbert Peters. «=• J. W. Pont, Micha- Studien, in Theolo- gi s c he Studi'en (1888-89, 1892). = Herzog's Realency- clopddie fUr protes- tantische Theologie und Kirche.^ = Proceedings 0/ the So- ciety of Biblical Archaeology. = E. B. Pusey, The Minor Prophets, with a Commen- tary (1865 /.). Ra. = Rashi (Jarchi fiios). RB. = Revue biblique. Reinke = (i) Der Prophet Ze- phanja (1S68). = (2) Ziir Kritik der alter en Versionen des Proph. Nahum (1867). Reuss = Das Alte Testament iibersetzt, eingelei- tet und erldutert. Band II: Die Propheten (1892). Ri, = E. Riehm, Handwor- terbuch d. bibl. Al- terthums. Ro. = T. Roorda, Commen- tarius in Vaticini- um Michae (1869). Rosenm. = C. F. K. Rosenmiiller, Scholia in prophe- tas minores (1836). Roth. =J. W. Rothstein, Translation of ABBREVIATIONS XV Roth. — Continued. Zephaniah with notes, in Kautzsch's Heilige Schrift? Rub. — P. Ruben, Critical Remarks upon Sortie Passages of the Old Testament (1896). Ry. = V. Ryssel, Untersuch- ungen iib er die Textgestalt und die Echtheit des Buches Micha. Ein krit- ischer Kommentar zu Micha (1887). Sanctius Say. Schegg Schleus. Schnurrer Schw. Seb. = Com. in pro ph. mi- nores (1621). = A. H. Sayce. = P. Schegg, Die klei- nen Propheten ubersetzt und er- kldrt (1854/.)- = J. F. Schleusner, Opuscula critica ad versiones Gracas Veteris Testantenti pertinentia (18 12). = A nimadversiones philologicce criticcB ad vaticinium Mi- chae (1798). = F. Schwally, Das Buch Ssefanyd, eine historisch- kritische U nter- suchung, in ZAW., X (1890), 165-240. — M. Sebok, Die Syr- ische Uebersetzung der zwolf kleinen Propheten u. s. w. C1887). Siev. Sm. SS. Sta. Sta.GVT Sta.^ Stei. Stek. Stk. Ed. Sievers, Metrische Studien; Alttesta- mentliche Mis- cellen: 6. Zu Joel; 7. Zu Obadia; 8. Zu Zephanja. 10. Zu Micha [Berichte iiber die Verhand- lungett der Konig- lichen Sdchsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig. Philolo- gisch - historische Klasse, Band LIX, 1907]. R. Smend, Lehrbuch der AUtestament- lichen Religionsge- schichte (1893; 2d ed., 1899). C. Siegfried und B. Stade, Hebrdisches Wdrterbuch zum Alten Testamente (1893). B. Stade (ti9o6). Idem, Geschichte des Volkes Israel (18S7). Idem, Lehrbuch der Hebr. Grammatik (1879). H. Steiner (see s. v. Hi.). Schuurmans S t e k - hoven, De Alex- andrijnsche V er- taling van het Do- dekapro pheton (1887). (i) W. Staerk, Das Assyrische WcU- reich im Urteil der XVI ABBREVIATIONS Stk. — Continued Propheten (1908). For reff. in Micah. (2) Idem, Ausge- w a kite poetische Texte des Alien Testaments in me- trischer und slro- phischer Gliederung zum Gebrauch in Vorlesungen und in Seminarilbungen und zum Selbststu- dium. Heft 2: Amos, Na hum, Habakkuk (1908). Strauss = Nahumi de Nino Vaticinium (1853). Struensee = Neue Uebersetzung der Weissagungen Jesaias, Joel, A mas, Obadja und Micha nach dem Ebrd- ischen Text mit Zu- ziehung der griech- ischen Version (1773)- Taylor = John Taylor, The Massoretic Text andthe Ancient Ver- sions of the Book of Micah (1891). Theiner = Die zwblf kleinen Propheten (1828). ThLZ. = Theologische Litter a- tur-Zeitung. ThStk. = Theologische Studien und Kritiken. ThT. = Theologisch Tijd- schrift. Um. = Umbreit, Praktischer Commentar iiber die kleinen Propheten (1844). van H. Vern. Vol. Volz A. van Ploonacker, Les douze petits propheies (1908). M. Vernes. K. VoUers, Das Do- dekapropheton der Alexandriner, in ZAW., IV (1884). Die vorexilische Jah- ■weprophetie und der Messias (1897). We. = J. Wellhausen, Die kleinen Propheten iiber setzt und er- kldrt (1892; 3d ed., 1898). Wkl. = H. Winckler. Wkl.Unt. = Idem, Alttestament- liche Untersuchun- gen (1892). WRS. = W. Robertson Smith, The Prophets of Israel (1882; new ed., with Introduc- tion by T. K. Cheyne, 1895). WRS.R"'- = Idem, Lectures on the Religion of the Sem- ites (2d ed., 1894). Wii. = A. Wiinsche. ZA. = Zeitschrift fur Assyr- iologie. ZA W.; ZA TW. = Zeitschriftfur die A Ittestamentliche Wissenschaft. ZDMG. = Zeitschrift der deiit- schen morgenldndi- schen Gesellschaft. Zim, = H. Zimmern. Z6. = Otto Zockler. ZwTh. = Zeitschrift fiir ivis- senschaflliche The- ologie. ABBREVIATIONS XVII IV. GENERAL, ESPECIALLY GRAMMATICAL abs. = absolute. crit. = critical, criticism. abstr. = abstract. cstr. = construct. ace. = accusative. d. f. = daghesh forte. ace. cog. = cognate ace. def. = defective. ace. pers. = ace. of person. del. = dele, strike out. ace. rei. = ace. of thing. difif. = different, difference. ace. to = according to. dittog. = dittography. act. = active. dub. = dubious, doubtful. add. = added, addition, ad- ditional. ed. = edition, editor, edi- adj. = adjective. torial. ad loc. = ad locum. eg- = for example. adv. = adverb, adverbial. elsw. = elsewhere. aTT. = S.ira^ \ey6fj.evov, word esp. = especially. or phr. used once. etal. = et aliter, and else- alw. = always. where, or et alii. apod. = apodosis. and others. Ar. = Arabic. Eth. = Ethiopia. Aram. = Aramaic, Aramean. exc. = except. art. = article. /•,/• = and following. Assy. = Assyria, Assyrian. fem. = feminine. Bab. = Babylonian. fig. = figurative. b. Aram. = biblical Aramaic. f. n. = foot-note. bibl. = biblical. foil. = following. freq. = frequentative. ch., chs. = chapter, chapters. fut. = future. c. = circa, about. caus. = causative. gen. = genitive. cent. = century. gent. = gentilic. cf. = confer, compare. Gk. = Greek. cod., codd. = codex, codices. gram. = grammatical. cog. cohort. = cognate. = cohortative. haplo. Heb. = haplography. = Hebrew. coll. = collective. Hiph. = Hiphil of verb. com. = commentary, com- hist. = historical. mentators. Hithp. = Hithpael of verb. concr. = concrete. conj. = conjunction. id. = idem, the same. cons. = consonantal. i. e. = id est, that is. consec. = consecutive. impf. = imperfect. constr. = construction. imv. = imperative. cp. = compare. indef. = indefinite. XVlll ABBREVIATIONS inf. = infinitive. pron. = pronoun. ins. = inscription, inscrip- proph. = prophet, prophetic. tions. prtc. =^ participle. intrans. = intransitive. Pu. = Pual of verb. Intro. = Introduction, intro- ductory. q. V. = quod vide, which see. rd. = read. juss. = jussive. refl. = reflexive. 1., 11. = line, lines. rel. = relative. Lc. = loco citato, in the rm. = remark. place before cited. S. = South, southern. Ut. = literal, literally. Sab. = Sabean. marg. masc. = margin, marginal. = masculine. sf. sg- = sufEx. = singular. metr. = metrical. sq. = followed by. St. = state. mod. = modern. str. = strophe, strophical. ms., mss. = manuscript, manu- scripts. subj. = subject. subst. = substantive. mt. = mount (ain). mtr. cs. = melrica causa, be- Syr. = Syriac. cause of the metie. S. V. = sub voce. t. = times (following a N. = North, northern. number). n. = note. tr. = transpose. NH. = New Hebrew. trans. = transitive. Niph. = Niphal of verb. transl. = translate, translation. obj. = object. text. = textual. oft. = often. v., vv. = verse, verses. cm. = omit. V. = vide, see. orig. = original. vb. = verb. p., pp. = page, pages. V. i. = vide infra, see below part. = particle. (usually textual parall. = parallelism. note on same pass. = passive. verse) . pers. = person. viz. = videlicet, namely, to perh. = perhaps. wit. pf. = perfect. voc. = vocative. Pi. = Piel of verb. vul. = volume. pi. = plural. vs. = versus, against. pred. = predicate. V. s. = vide supra, see above preg. = pregnant. (usually general rc- prep. = j)rej)Osition. mark on same prob. = probable, proI)al)ly. verse). ABBREVIATIONS XIX V. OTHER SIGNS V indicates all passages cited. parallel, of words or clauses chiefly synonymous. equivalent, equals. plus, denotes that other pas- sages might be cited. = the root, or stem. = sign of abbreviation in He- brew words. = iDui, and so forth. = Yahweh. * indicates that Massoretic text has not been followed, but cither Vrss. or conjectural emendations. Biblical passages are cited accord- ing to the Hebrew enumeration of chapters and verses: where this dif- fers in the English, the reference to the latter has usually (except in textual notes) been added in parentheses. A CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL COMMENTARY ON THE BOOKS OF MICAH, ZEPHANIAH AND NAHUM BY JOHN MERLIN POWIS SMITH, Ph.D. ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF SEMITIC LANGUAGES AND LITERATURES IN THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO A CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL COMMENTARY ON THE BOOK OF MICAH INTRODUCTION TO MICAH. § I. THE BOOK OF MICAH. I. The Text. The book of Micah stands sixth in the list of the Minor Prophets as given in the Hebrew Bible, but third as found in (^. The text has come down to us in a bad state of corruption. Of the Minor Prophets, Hosea alone has a worse text. In the following com- mentary, it has been found necessary to make more than eighty corrections of the text as fovmd in M, in order to secure satis- factory sense. Almost half of the errors are in chs. i and 2, while chs. 4 and 5 are remarkably free from them. In the correction of M., (^ is of the most value. It offers a larger number of textual variants than all of the remaining ver- sions combined. In many cases the text presupposed by (g's rendering is superior to iH. More than one-third of the emenda- tions here adopted are based upon ®. ^ affords relatively little help, being chiefly dependent upon ^. Only seven corrections are made on the basis of ^, apart from ($. H and Aq. furnish one each. The characteristics of the various versions of Micah are in general the same as in the case of Amos and Hosea. Cf. H.-*^-, clxxiii-clxxvi. Certainly (ii's rendering of the Minor Prophets as a whole seems to be the work of one translator throughout. The errors of m are those which commonly appear in the trans- mission of texts, viz., wrong division of words, e. g., 2^" 6^; dit- tography, e. g., 2' 5^ 6'°; haplography, e. g., 5^- * f; wrong pointing, e. g., i^- ° 3^° 5^; confusion of similar consonants, e. g., jU. 12 ^4 ^4. transposition of words or phrases, e. g., 2* 4^; con- fusion of suffixes, e. g., 2° 7^^; and deliberate theological change, e. g., i^. But the source of some corruptions is inexplicable, S 6 MICAH e. g., 7^. The preponderance of errors in chs. 1-3 is due partly to the large number of proper names in this material, partly to the greater age of this portion of the prophecy and probably also in part to the denunciatory character of the message which later editors sought to soften. 2. The Style. The style of Micah, as revealed in chs. 1-3, is direct and force- ful. It is characterised by rapidity of movement, picturesque phraseology, vivid description and boldness of utterance. It re- flects clearness of vision, keen insight and profound feeling. At first sight, this seems inconsistent with the indulgence in parono- masia found in i'" ^- ; but the Hebrew prophets were able to couch their most biting denunciations in this form. Cf. Is. 3'^^'. The logical development within each prophecy in chs. 1-3 is also admirable. Not only so, but there is an evident logical progress in the succession of the various prophecies constituting these chapters. Upon leaving this section of the book, the atmosphere changes. With few exceptions, the style becomes less forceful and direct. It loses in vividness and passion. The contrast is something like that existing between Isaiah, chs. 40 jf., and the genuine utterances of Isaiah. The movement is calm and placid and the tone reflec- tive rather than denunciatory. But there is greater variety and unevenness of style in chs. 4-6 than in chs. 1-3. 3. Poetic Form. That the book of Micah is in poetic form is indisputable. Yet relatively little attention has been bestowed upon this phase of its study. Ewald (1840) contributed a strophical analysis of the book. Francis Brown {JBL., 1890, pp. 71-82) used Micah, chs. 1-3 and 711-20^ to illustrate the value of poetic form as a consideration in the determi- nation of the composite character of a writing. In 1891, Elhorst pre- sented a strophic reorganisation of the prophecy involving revolution- POETIC FORM 7 ary transpositions and intended as a defence of the unity of the book. D. H. Miiller, in Die Propheten in ihrer urspriinglichen Form (1896), treated chs. 3, 5«-'^ and 7 to an application of his compUcated theory of strophe, antistrophe, responsion, inclusion, concatenation, etc.. Sievers included ch. i in his Studien zur hebrdischen Metrik (1901), where he showed too great respect toward UJ. Francois Ladame reconstructed chs. 4 and 5, according to the theory of Miiller and Zenner, in the Revue de theologie et de philosophic for 1902. Condamin, belonging to the same school of metricists, would place 2^-- '^ after 4^; see RB., XI (1902), 383-6. Duhm, in EB., Ill (1902), 3800, arranged 3'-'2 poeti- cally. Marti makes the poetic and strophic form the basis of his com- mentary (1904). Lohr presents 3'-<- '-'^ as a literary and poetic unit in ZDMG., LXI (1907), 3-6. Sievers, in his AUtestamentliche Miscellen, published in Berichte ilher die Verhandlungen der Konigl. Sdchsischen Gesellschqft zu Wissenschaften, LIX (1907), 76-109, applies his metrical system to the whole book of Micah. Here he casts veneration for M to the winds and, on the basis of Marti's critical conclusions, reconstructs the text in accordance with the requirements of his system. The con- clusions concerning the poetic form of Micah which are incorporated in the following commentary have already appeared in J. M. P. Smith's Strophic Structure of the Book 0/ Micah, published in Old Testa- ment and Semitic Studies in Memory of William Rainey Harper, II (1908), 415-438, and also in AJSL., XXIV (1908), 187-208. Since that publication there has appeared P. Haupt's Critical Notes on Micah, AJSL., July and October, 1910, containing a strophical reconstruction of the text. But Haupt's rearrangement is so subjective and arbitrary as almost to warrant the suspicion that he regards the book of Micah as a quarry from which stones may be hewed for any kind of a build- ing. B. Duhm has also published a poetical version of Micah in Die zwolf Propheten in den Versmassen der Urschrift ubersetzt (19 10); in this too much insistence is laid upon the necessity of four-lined strs.. No attempt is made here to stretch the text of Micah upon the Procrustaean bed of a metrical system. Neither Bickell, Grimme, Sievers nor Rothstein seems as yet to have evolved a system that does not do violence to the text. In the present stage of metrical study, certainly no existing system can be accepted as a safe guide to the nature and form of Hebrew poetry. The reconstruction here presented aims to follow the guidance of the parallelism and the logic. On the basis of the former, lines are discovered which are of approximately equal length, measured by the number of tones, or accents, in the line. The same length of line persists 8 MICAH in general throughout a given piece. The constantly recurring measures are trimeter, tetrameter and pentameter, with frequent dimeters. There is less evenness and regularity in the length of lines than in Amos, but close affinity with Hosea in this respect. There is no marked difference in metre between the three main sections of the book. The logical development of the thought within a given piece resolves itself into a number of thought-groups, i. e., strophes, each with a given number of lines. The four-line strophe prevails in the greater part of the book, in chs. 1-3 there being only three strophes of different length, and in chs. 6 and 7 only one. In chs. 4 and 5 the six-line strophe prevails. There are in all nine strophes of six lines each, three of eight lines each and one of ten lines. The poetic form will be found frequently to have added another argument in favour of critical conclusions already arrived at upon the basis of other considerations. Only rarely has it been used in this commentary as an argument sufficient in itself to determine the source of a passage or phrase. 4. Component Parts. The book of Micah falls naturally into three parts, the existence of which has long been recognised. They are chs. 1-3, chs. 4 and 5 and chs. 6 and 7. They are differentiated from each other by their contents, tone and point of view and to some extent by their poetic form {v. s.). Chs. 1-3 contain almost exclusively denuncia- tions of sin and proclamations of approaching punishment; chs. 4 and 5 are devoted almost as exclusively to words of hope and cheer; while chs. 5 and 6 combine these two elements. But within these three main divisions the point of view and background change frequently; consequently many scholars have denied the unity of the book. Chs. 1-3, with the exception of i^- " and 2^^- " (q. v.), constitute the nucleus of the book and furnish a touchstone by which the genuineness of the remaining chapters may be tested. Stade and others have sought to athetize i"*, but, as it seems, without sufficient reason; see in loc. The situation with reference to chs. 4-7 is quite different. The HISTORY OF CRITICISM 9 general condition here may be suggested by the following words from Halevy, an ardent supporter of the unity of the book ; his statement is particularly applicable to chs. 4-6: "The book of Micah has reached us in a critical state even worse than that of the books of Hosea and Amos. To say nothing of internal cor- ruptions of words, many verses, and even groups of verses, have been torn from their context and inserted haphazard in passages which have no sort of suitable connection with their subject-mat- ter." * This hypothesis of Halevy's, however, does not solve the problem. A bird's-eye view of the history of the criticism of these chapters will place the difficulty squarely before us. For the sake of clearness and convenience, the two groups, chs. 3-4 and 5-6, will be treated separately. The criticism of chs. 4-5. — Chs. 4 and 5 were first brought into prom- inence by Ew. who, on the basis of differences of style between them and chs. 1-3, for a time regarded them as belonging to some prophet con- temporary with Micah. Later, however, Ew. returned to the defence of Micah's authorship, urging similarities of form, thought and diction, and especially the fact that the denial of chs. 4 and 5 to Micah (as well as chs. 6 and 7) would remove all the Messianic element from Micah's utterance. Casp. followed with a detailed defence of the unity. In 1871, Oort {ThT., V, 501-512) characterised 4*-'- "-" as an insertion by some pious reader who considered Micah a false prophet and tried to correct his errors. The ground for this was the fact that with the re- moval of these verses the connection becomes smooth and the improba- bility that Micah would have inserted a message of hope in the midst of an unfinished call to repentance and a threat of punishment. To this Kue. replied {ThT., VI, 45-66), defending the connection of 4'-', on the ground that the prophet here transports himself in imagination to the last days, and acknowledging that 4"-'5 describes existing conditions and cannot therefore stand where it does, notwithstanding that it belongs to Micah. De Goeje {ThT., VI, 279-284) then proffered a weak de- fence of the connection of 4"". Kue., in a second article {ThT., VI, 285-302), suggested that some of the differences between chs. 1-3 and chs. 4-5 were due to the fact that the former deal with the godless lead- ers while the latter are addressed to the people as a whole who have some claim to pardon. He also emphasised the mobility and vivacity of Micah's style, to which De Goeje had referred, as exempting him from submission to strict logical requirements. We., also, called attention * Revue simitique, XIII (1905), 2. lO MIC AH (Bleek's Einl., 4th ed., p. 425) to the contradiction between 4' '• and 4". In 1881 appeared Sta.'s epoch-making article (ZAIV., I, 161-172), in which he denied Micah's authorship of chs. 4-5 in toto. The follow- ing considerations are urged in support of this view. It is improbable that Micah would have weakened the effect of his utterances in chs. 1-3 by introducing a message of directly opposite import in chs. 4-5. The content of this section departs widely from the ideas of Isaiah, while chs. 1-3 show close affinity to them; chs. 4-5 are, indeed, in full accord with Joel, Deutero-Isaiah and Zechariah, chs. 12-14. The section is full of postexilic conditions; e.g., 4'- '" presupposes the Exile as having occurred; s'-' gives an indefinite, apocalyptic vision of the Messianic age, while pre-exilic ideas of the Messiah spring immediately out of the ex- isting historical situation. The inconsistency and lack of connection within the chapters point to composite origin; e. g., 4"-5' is wholly in- consistent with 4'"', but it connects well with 4'-< and is continued in 5«-'<. These three passages constitute the contribution of a later writer who desired to brighten the dark picture left by Micah; into this addition a later writer, thinking it to be a part of Micah's prophecy, inserted 4'-"' 5<- " in order to harmonise it with the actual course of events and with the development of prophecy. Sta.'s discussion has greatly influenced all later scholarship. Giese- brecht {ThLZ., 1881, p. 443) followed him in rejecting ch. 4, but held to the genuineness of ch. 5 on the ground that without it Micah's prophecy would be too one-sided. W. R. Smith, in 1882 (Proph., 2d ed., pp. 430/.), followed Oort in rejecting 4"■'^ but refused to go further. In 1883, Sta. {ZAW., Ill, 1-16) gave further arguments in support of his view, e. g., that Bethlehem and Ephratha (5') are never identified except in postexilic literature. Cor., in 1884 {ZAW., IV., 89), was the first to place himself unreservedly on Sta.'s side. Now., in the same year (ZAW., IV, 277-290), yielded 4'-' "" to the interpolator, but rejected Sta.'s claim that chs. 4-5 as a whole were inconsistent with pre-exilic prophecy, citing Is. 18' 19" ii'" s- as parallels to the description of the coming of "many peoples " to Jerusalem, and Is. 11* "• 9'- • as parallels to the picture of idyllic peace in 4'*. As parallel to the fact that these chapters oppose masseboth and asherim, to which Isaiah made no objec- tion. Now. cites 3" and the well-known attitude of Isaiah toward Jeru- salem. Wildeboer, in 1884 {De Project Micha; so also in Lelterkunde des Ouden Verbonds, 3d ed., 1903, 145/.), grants that Sta.'s objections might apply to the spoken word, but declares them inapplicable to the written word. Che., in his commentary (1885), rejects 4'"' 5'' on grounds of logic. Ry. discussed these chapters fully in his commentary (1887), gathering up and reinforcing the arguments of his predecessors in favour of unity. He explained the difficulties of the section as due HISTORY OF CRITICISM II to a redactor who arranged scattered utterances of Micah in an order of his own which is to us no order at all. He also urged the general con- siderations that our knowledge of Hebrew history is too defective to enable us to determine whether a given thought was or was not possible at a certain time, and that the mere fact that a thought is much empha- sised in some particular period does not preclude the possibility of its having been uttered previously. In 1889, Pont {Theol. Studien, VII, 439-453) reaffirmed the unity, reiterating the old arguments. In the same year, Kue. again {EM., II, 360-3) expressed himself upon these chapters, declaring it improbable that 3'^ was Micah's last word. Hence the authenticity of the following promises was probable. But inconcis- tencies, the lack of logical sequence and the presence of undoubtedly pre-exilic utterances alongside of others presupposing Judah's captivity made it probable that ^^-^^ " " were postexilic, while 5'-'< had under- gone a thorough working over at a late day. In 1891, Elh. put forth an ingenious but fanciful theory in defence of the unity of the entire book. In accordance with this, chs. 4-5 should follow chs. 6-7 and should be rearranged thus: 4'-8 5'-' 49'* 58-14. How- ever, even thus, 4^ is treated as a gloss and 4'-'^ 5* as postexilic additions. We., in his commentary (1892; 3d ed., 1898), finds possible remnants of genuine utterances of Micah in 4'- '"• '< 59-'3. He emphasises the use of n^^N-i' (47) as a technical eschatological term, the mutually exclusive con- ceptions of 4'- '0 and 4"", and the allusion in 5\to Is. 7'^ which has ap- parently become a classic. In 1893, Kosters {ThT., XXVII, 249-274) aligned himself with Sta., making the two chapters postexilic. He re- garded 5*-8 as the continuation of 4^-8. He suggested also that the pres- ent book of Micah was a result of two independent recensions of the original. The one consisted of chs. 1-3 + chs. 4-5; the other contained chs. 1-3 + 6-7; later these two were combined. In the same year, We. {Kleine Propheten, 2d ed.) surrendered all but 49- '"■ ^* ^^-^^. In 1896, GASm. rejected only 52^. 7-9 as inconsistent with Micah's times. In 1897, Volz {Die vorexilische Jahweprophetie, 63-67), following We., granted to Micah 49-10" • 14 ^a-u^ and ^*-^ as a badly distorted fragment. 2 12 £.46 f. lOb- 13 ^6-8 are assigned to a later editor, while 48 51. 3. 2>2>f-) ^"d Du. {Zwolf Propheten, 1910). Cor., however, for a time maintained the authenticity of these chapters {ZAW., IV, 1884, 89 /.; so also Kirk., Doctrine of the Prophets, 1892, pp. 229/.; and van H., 1908), urging (i) that everything which may be brought forward in support of their origin in Manasseh's day applies equally well to the time of Ahaz (2 K. 16'; cf. Mi. 6'). (2) That the origin of the book would be inexplicable if Micah's work ceased with ch. 3, for chs. 4-5 are enough to offset the gloomy tone of chs. 1-3 — why then should there be added a section from the time of Manasseh having no inner con- nection with chs. 4-5 ? On the hypothesis of the late origin of chs. 6-7, they should immediately follow chs. 1-3, since they give reasons for the drastic punishment there threatened. (3) That 6'-7° shows traces of the author of chs. 1-3, having perfect parallels in them {e. g., i'- •' = 6") as well as in the addresses of Isaiah from the reign of Ahaz. (4) That a late working over of 7 '-2° must be granted. Now. at once replied {ZAW., IV, 288/.) to Cor. (i) that chs. 6-7 contain no thought not expressed in chs. 1-3 which could serve as a reason for the threat in 3'=; reasons enough are stated in chs. 1-3; any- thing further would be superfluous; (2) that ch. 6 cannot be regarded as a continuation of 3'^ since the representation in 6' "• is wholly different from that in i' s- and scarcely consistent with it; (3) that the judgment in 3'^ comes because of the sins of the leaders, priests and prophets, whereas in 6-7 the charge is quite general (7^) and against no special classes ; (4) that if chs. 6-7 come from the time of Ahaz, as Cor. declares, ■they can hardly state the grounds for the judgment in chs. 1-3, uttered in the time of Hezekiah (Je. 26'*); (5) that the prophet who so sharply 14 MICAH antagonises the wicked leaders in the time of the comparatively good king, Hezekiah, would not be likely to let them pass almost unnoticed in the reign of Ahaz, an exceedingly wicked king; (6) that "my people " is the object of the prophet's compassion in chs. 1-3, but in chs. 6-7 it is the object of his wrath. Wildeboer, in 1884 {De Profeet Micha, p. 57), adheres to Micah's authorship, stating (i) that differences in artistic structure and manner of presentation do not necessarily involve different authorship; (2) that as there was human sacrifice under Ahaz and also under Manasseh, it is quite probable that there were some who practised it, at least in secret, in the time of Hezekiah; (3) that in 7' the words "prince," "judge," "great one" are used collectively and thus disprove the charge that the leaders are not denounced in these chapters. In 1887, Ry. defended the authenticity of this material on the following grounds. The chapters were written in the beginning of Hezekiah's reign when conditions were essentially the same as under Ahaz. The religious formalism alluded to in 6^- '• '"-'^ is wholly out of keeping with the reign of Manasseh. 7'-' is an independent section and the immorality there described was possi- ble in Hezekiah's day; but if it must be interpreted literally, it is intelligi- ble neither as coming from Hezekiah's reign nor from that of Manasseh. The hope of return from Assyria and Egypt is indicative of pre-exilic origin; in Deutero-Isaiah the place of exile is always Babylon and Chal- daea. But if the chapters must be assigned to Manasseh's reign, it is still reasonable to assign them to Micah, who may have been still living. In 1887 also, Sta. {Geschichte d. Volkes Israel, I, 634), expressed his conviction of the postexilic origin of ch. 6. In 1890, Gie. {Beitrdge zur Jesaiakritik, 216/.) declared himself with Ew. as to 6'-7«, but assigned ^7-20 to postexilic times. Elh. (1891), on the other hand, endorses the arguments of Cor. and Ry. in behalf of authenticity and attempts to ease all difficulties of connection by placing chs. 6-7 immediately after chs. 1-3 and by rearranging the text in this order: 6'-' 7'-' 6'-'^ 7" 7'-" 7X-20. In 1892, We. again puts himself on record {Kleine Proph., 2d ed.), stiU maintaining the possibility of Micah's authorship, even in the age of Manasseh, for 6'-', declaring 6'-'« independent of its context and without indications of definite date, assigning 7'-« to the period of Malachi, and following Gie. with reference to 7 '-*<". In 1893, Kosters, in connection with a searching review of Elh.'s commentary {ThT., XXVII, 249-274), suggested the postexilic origin of these chapters, citing many words and phrases as characteristic of postexilic language and thought. These chapters were written to explain the fall of Jerusalem as due to the cor- ruption of the generation contemporary with that disaster, it being no longer believed that the children are punished for the sins of the father. The position of GASm. (1896) is near to that of We., for he holds to Micah's authorship of 6'*, is undecided as to 6»-" and 7'-" and regards HISTORY OF CRITICISM 15 yi-io as a psalm composed of fragments from various dates, of which jH-n points to the eighth century B.C. by its geographical references, and 7" to the period between the fall of Jerusalem and its rebuilding. Now., in his commentary (1897; 2d ed., 1905), considers the reign of Manasseh a possible date for 6^-7^, but denies Micah's authorship even were he then alive. He would locate 7 '-2° in the period between the decree of Cyrus and the journey of Nehemiah to Jerusalem. Dr.'""'- is inclined to agree with Ew. and to deny the necessity of separating 7 '-20 and assigning it to a later age. Che. (EB., art. Micah), makes both chapters postexilic and finds them concerned with the ubiquitous Jerahmeelites. Sta. gives a long list (ZAW., XXIII, 1903, 164-171), of postexilic parallels to y''-'^" and assigns the whole of 6-7 to the post- exilic age (in Bibl. Theol. d. Alt. Test., 1905, p. 230). Marti (1904) calls chs. 6-7 "a conglomerate, held together by the con- viction that deliverance must finally come, though the sins of the present demand the continuance of God's wrath." Of this conglomerate 6'-^ is editorial expansion; 6*-' belongs probably to the fifth century, possibly to the sixth; and ch. 7 to the second century B.C. Bu. also resolves the two chapters into fragments and places them all in the postexilic age {Gesch., 1906). The last commentator, van H. (1908), insists upon the unity of the chapters and upon Micah's authorship, basing it all upon the hypothesis that the two chapters are concerned with Samaria, not Jerusalem, and finding it necessary to transpose 7"i>-i3 ^ follow 7^ (see ad loc). Hpt. (1910) allows Micah only 2i2,\ lines of text in chs. 1-3. Chs. 4-7 are assigned to the Maccabaean period (170-100 B.C.), while i'-' is a poem written in celebration of the destruction of Samaria by John Hyr- canus in 107 B.C. This represents a step beyond the conclusions of the foregoing critics, in that Hpt. leaves Micah less than any previous scholar and is confident in his assignment of the non-Micah material to the Maccabaean period and even to the specific years to which the several poems belong. Unfortunately, this confidence cannot be shared by scholars at large until more definite and convincing considerations are forthcoming. The conclusions arrived at in the following commentary may be briefly summarised. There is no logical unity within chs. 6 and 7 ; they resolve themselves into seven sections, no one of which connects closely with either its preceding or its following sections. The possibility of Micah's authorship remains open for d*"'* and 7^"®, but is wholly excluded for the remainder. These two sections, together with 6^'^, might be placed in any period of Hebrew history subsequent to the appearance of the great prophets. 6^^ seems l6 MICAH to reflect the wisdom of the sages and to belong in the earlier half of the postexilic age. 7^*'° and 7""^" come apparently both out of the same conditions; Israel is suffering but hoping, looking back with longing upon the good old days and praying for vengeance; they are best located in the later postexilic period, after the work of Nehemiah and Ezra. 7"''', however, is wholly detached from its context and is to be explained as coming from the period after the fall of Jerusalem, but before the rebuilding of the city walls. The two chapters thus seem to be a collection of miscellaneous fragments, coming from widely scattered periods and from at least four different authors. 5. The Formation of the Book of Micah. Various attempts have been made to trace the growth of the book of Micah, starting from chs. 1-3, its original nucleus. The views of Kosters and Elhorst have been already mentioned. Marti con- siders 4^"^ and 6""^, joined together by 4'^ the first addition to chs. 1-3 ; since they reveal the closest sympathy with the ethical tone of Micah. This constituted the book as it existed in the fifth century B.C. Somewhere between this period and the second century B.C., by various unknown stages, 4^-5" and 6^-7^ were incorporated. Finally, in order that the prophecy might not end with denuncia- tion, the Maccabaean psalms in 7^''" were added. Cornill {Einl.) follows Kosters in part, making 6^-7^ the first addition to chs. 1-3. This combined product imderwent two revisions, first receiving as insertions 4'"*- "*" 5*'^- ^", and being completed by the addi- tion of 2*2 • " 4^-1" 5^- ^ f-^\ from the hand of the final redactor. Sievers, however, finds the growth of the book connected with the length of the various poems which constitute it. In chs. 4-7, as rearranged by Sievers, it happens that the longest poem comes first in each chapter, and the succeeding ones are added in the order of their length. It is quite evident that all attempts of this sort are futile, and that in the absence of any definite data it is impossible to secure general acceptance of any scheme, however ingenious. This portion of the history of the book is lost beyond recovery. THE PROPHET MICAH I7 § 2. THE PROPHET MICAH. 1. His Name. Little is known of the man Micah. Our sources of information regarding him are very limited, being confined to chs. 1-3 and Je. 26^*. The name Micah was doubtless common among the He- brews; more than a dozen individuals bear it, in one form or an- other, in the Old Testament. The possession of this name, mean- ing " Who is like Yahweh ?", is no indication of any unusual degree of religious fervour on the part of the prophet's parents or family; names containing the name of a deity are very common in all Semitic literature, and in the Old Testament are not infrequently borne by individuals whose parents were not noted for religious zeal; e. g., the children of Ahab and Ahaz, to- wit, Hezekiah. No allusion to his family is made in the superscription or elsewhere, a fact which may argue for his humble origin as a man of the people, like Amos; or may merely be another indication of the self-efifacing character of the prophets. Concerning the lineage of no less than six of the prophets nothing is recorded. 2. His Home. The appellation "Morashtite" (i^ Je. 26^^) is applied to Micah to distinguish him from the many other bearers of his name ; and particularly from his predecessor, Micaiah ben Imlah, with whom he is confused in i K. 22^^, where a phrase from his book is ascribed to the earlier Micaiah. This descriptive term apparently identi- fies his home with Moresheth-Gath (i"). This name implies a location in the low hills bordering upon Philistine territory. The list of towns in i^"^- over which the prophet pours out his grief seems to have been selected from the same region and so to confirm this location of Moresheth. Furthermore, in the Ono- masticon and in Jerome's preface to Micah, Moresheth is declared to be a small village to the east of Eleutheropolis, the modem Beit-Jibrin. l8 MICAH This region and its significance in the training of our prophet are thus beautifully described by GASm.: "It is the opposite exposure from the wilderness of Tekoa, some seventeen miles away across the watershed. As the home of Amos is bare and desert, so the home of Micah is fair and fertile. The irregular chalk hills are separated by broad glens, in which the soil is alluvial and red, with room for cornfields on either side of the perennial or almost perennial streams. The olive groves on the braes are finer than either those of the plain below or of the Judean table-land above. There is herbage for cattle. Bees murmur everywhere, larks are singing, and although to-day you may wander in the maze of the hills for hours without meeting a man or seeing a house, you are never out of sight of the traces of ancient habitation, and seldom beyond sound of the human voice — shepherds and ploughmen calling to their flocks and to each other across the glens. There are none of the conditions or the occasions of a large town. But, like the south of England, the country is one of villages and homesteads breeding good yeomen — men satisfied and in love with their soil, yet borderers with a far outlook and a keen vigilance and sensibility. The Shephelah is sufficiently detached from the capital and body of the land to beget in her sons an indepen- dence of mind and feeling, but so much upon the edge of the open world as to endue them at the same time with that sense of the responsibilities of warfare, which the national statesmen, aloof and at ease in Zion, could not possibly have shared." 3. His Character. A man of the countryside, like Amos, Micah was gifted with clearness of vision and time for thought. The simplicity and se- clusion of his rustic Ufe were conducive to "plain Uving and high thinking." He was not misled by false standards of value to place too high an estimate upon those things which perish with the using. He had Amos's passion for justice and Hosea's heart of love. Knowing his fellow-coimtrymen intimately, and sympathising pro- foimdly with their sufiferings and wrongs, his spirit burned with in- dignation as he beheld the injustice and tyranny of their rich op- pressors. He was pre-eminently the prophet of the poor. He was absolutely fearless as their champion. He would denoimce wick- edness in high places even though it cost him his life. The fear- lessness and force of his character and message deeply impressed his contemporaries, so that even a century later his e.xample was cited as establishing a precedent for Jeremiah's freedom of speech THE TIMES OF MICAH 1 9 (Je. 26*^). A man of this type must necessarily go his own way; he cannot slavishly follow where others lead. Breaking away from the prophets of the day who promise only blessings from Yahweh, he dares to "declare to Jacob his transgression and to Israel his sin," and to point out the inevitable connection between sin and punishment. To the citizens of Jerusalem, proud of their capital and blindly confident of Yahweh's protection, he unflinchingly announces the overthrow of their city. Completely dominated by a vivid consciousness of God and a fervid devotion to the highest interests of his country, he goes forth to his task unshrinking and invincible. To this man of keen perception and sensitive soul, the voice of duty was the voice of God. As with Amos and Hosea, neither angel nor vision was necessary to arouse in him the prophetic spirit; he found his divine call in the cry of human need. § 3. THE TIMES OF MICAH. I. The Date of His Prophecies. The superscription of the book places Micah "in the days of Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah." This would make him a younger contemporary of both Hosea and Isaiah. But there is good reason to believe that the superscriptions of all three of these books, in their present form at least, are due to the hand of an editor. The super- scription of Micah is supported in part by Je. 26^^, which declares, "Micah the Morashtite was prophesying in the days of Hezekiah, king of Judah." This agrees admirably with the content of some of his utterances, e. g., i*""^^ which seems to sketch the course of Sennacherib's army. But the question arises whether or not Micah prophesied in the reigns of Jotham and Ahaz. His total silence concerning the Syro-Ephraimitish war, the appeal of Ahaz to Assyria and the subsequent deportation of the inhabitants of "all the land of Naphtali" to Assyria (2 K. 15^^), makes it improbable that he prophesied contemporaneously with these events of such momentous interest to both kingdoms. This confines his prophetic activity to the period following 734 B.C., i. e., the reigns of Ahaz 20 MICAH and Hezekiah. His first prophecy (i^"^) concerns itself with the approaching destruction of Samaria, with which is coupled immi- nent danger to Jerusalem. There is no evidence in either Assyrian or biblical records that Jerusalem and Judah were jeopardised in 721 B.C., when Sargon overthrew Samaria. Nor does Isaiah seem to have anticipated any immediate danger to Judah in connection with that event. Indeed, Judah was at that time paying its regu- lar tribute* to Assyria and hence safe from harm. But the men- tion of Samaria as still standing and doomed to destruction does not confine us to the period prior to 721 for the date of this first prophecy. As a matter of fact the kind of destruction threatened by the prophet in i^ was not experienced in 721 by Samaria. Neither the biblical (2 K. 17^) nor the Assyrian records speak of any de- struction of the city (Sargon 's ^n»a/^, 11. I'i.ff-). Indeed, the latter distinctly says, "the city I restored and more than before I caused it to be inhabited." But Sargon 's kindness was but poorly repaid, for in 720 B.C. Samaria joined a coalition of Syrian states, viz., Hamath, Arpad, Simirra and Damascus in one more effort to shake off the yoke of Assyria.f In 715, Sargon settled Arabian tribes in Samaria;! the process of repopulating and thereby thoroughly sub- duing Samaria was continued by Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal, according to Ezra 4^- ^- ^°. An Assyrian governor was resident in Samaria as late as 645 b.c.§ It is, therefore, probable that Micah's prophecy was spoken after 721 b.c. and in the light of the rebel- lious attitude of Samaria up to and after that date. The specific occasion of the discourse may have been the conspiracy that called Sargon to Ashdod in 7 13-7 11 b.c, or perhaps better, that which * This is practically certain in \ncw of the fact that Ahaz paid tribute in 734 B.C., while Sargon {Prism-Fragment, II. 29 jf.) enumerates Judah with Philistia, Edom and Moab as peoples under obligation to pay tribute who united with Ashdod in revolt in 713. The reference in Sar- gon's Nimrud-Insrr., 1. 8, to his subjection of Ja-u-du is best explained of the northern Ja'udi, rather than of Judah, since the statement is made in immediate connection with an account of the overthrow of Hamath and other regions in northern Syria. Were the reference to Judah, it must have been in connection with the revolt of Hanno of Gaza in 720, for the Nimrud-lnscr. belongs to the year 717 B.C. and Sargon was engaged in other parts of his empire from 719-717. But it is difficult to see why Judah only should have been selected for mention, when Gaza was also involved in the revolt and evidently played a more prominent part. C/. KAT.*, pp. 67 /., 271. t Sargon's Annals, 1. 2$, and K. 1340, II. 17 ff.\ see AOF., I, 403. and KAT.*, 66. t Annals, 11. 95 ff. t C. H. W. Johns, Assyrian Deeds and Documents, II, 137; III, 108. THE TIMES OF MICAH 21 resulted in the campaign of Sennacherib, 704-701 B.C. It is more than probable, in view of the previous history of Samaria, that she was involved in both attempts to throw off the yoke of Assyria. In either case, the prophet is talking of a destruction of Samaria that is in the future, which he sees to be a prelude to the overthrow of Jerusalem. This is more in consonance with the language of i^ ^• than the view that the prophet looks back upon the events of 721 B.C. and makes passing allusion to them in order to give weight to his denimciation of Jerusalem.* The whole of the genuine mate- rial in chs. 1-3 belongs to one period and that of short duration; it may have been the product of a few weeks or months at a time of great crisis, such as that of Sennacherib's invasion. 2. The Background of Chs. 1-3. The situation in Judah in the period from 715 to 701 B.C. was one of absorbing interest. The air was full of plots and counter- plots. Syria was the bone of contention between Assyria and Egypt, the rivals for world-dominion. Assyria was in possession; Syria was restless under her heavy yoke; Egypt was alert to foment dissatisfaction and aid in freeing Syria from her burden, hoping thereby to supplant Assyria. Jerusalem was naturally a hotbed of intrigue. Political feeling ran high. A pro-Assyrian and a pro- Egyptian party fought for pre-eminence in the councils of the weak king, Hezekiah. Success attended the adherents of Egypt, and revolt against Assyria was organised in 713 and again in 705 B.C. But the result on both occasions was but to weld the bonds of As- syria more tightly upon Judah. Isaiah, resident in Jerusalem and probably related to the leading families, was deeply concerned in all this political turmoil and an active participant in much that was going on at court. Cf. e. g., Is. 20^ ^- 18^ ^- 30* ^- 31^ ^- 10^ ^•. Micah, however much he may have been stirred by these events, eschews politics in his public utterance, and confines himself to distinctively religious and ethical considerations. Micah portrays a social and economic situation in Judah very similar to that of Samaria as described by Amos in the years im- ♦ So e. g., Wc, and Smend, Rel.^, 237 /. 22 MICAH mediately preceding the overthrow of the northern kingdom. Cf, H/^", p. ciii. There is the same luxury and indulgence engendered by the possession of great riches. The plunder carried away by Sennacherib after the siege of Jerusalem in 701 B.C. is tabulated by him as follows (Taylor- Cylinder, col. 3, 11. 34-40): "Thirty talents of gold, eight hundred talents of silver, precious stones, . . . large lapis lazuli, couches of ivory, thrones of elephant skin and ivory, ivory, ushu and urkarinu woods of every kind, and his daughters, his palace-women, male and female singers, to Nineveh, my royal city, I caused to be brought after me." A degenerate aristocracy, mastered by greed and fattening upon tyranny, makes life unbearable for the tiller of the soil and the wage-earner. The possession of wealth is looked upon as the summum bonum; nothing may stand in the way of its attainment. The ordinary demands of justice and righteousness are trampled underfoot. The quality of mercy is swallowed up in avarice. The custodians and administrators of law abuse their powers. Jus- tice is for sale to the highest bidder (3"). Under due process of law widows and orphans are expelled from their ancestral homes, that a few acres may be added to the estate of the neighbouring landlord (2^- ®). In the lust for wealth, the substance and sus- tenance of the poor are devoured, so that they are reduced to the lowest depths of misery and degradation (3*"^). Even the sacra- ments and consolations of religion are on the market; priests and prophets cater to the rich and browbeat the poor (3^^' "). Simi- lar conditions are exposed in contemporary utterances of Isaiah (e. g., i'« f- 28^ f- 292" '■). Making all necessary allowances for the prophetic point of view, it still remains true that affairs in Judah were on the down grade. Intimate contact with Assyrian and Egyptian civilisations in com- merce and politics had brought in new standards of living and changed ideals. Secularisation of life was making rapid progress. Commercial ideals were supplanting those of ethical and spiritual origin. Appearances were becoming more important than real- ities. Character was of less repute than power. The fatal vac- illation which led Judah into a practical distrust of Yahweh and made her fate the shuttlecock of conflicting political parties was THE MESSAGE OF MICAH 23 also sapping the moral strength of the nation. Loyalty to the old Hebrew ideals which had obtained in dealings between man and man was crumbling rapidly away before the desire to ape the splendour of foreign courts and live the life of sensuous ease. At such a time there was dire need of the prophetic cry calling men back to God and duty. § 4. THE MESSAGE OF MICAH. The prophet Micah marks no great epoch in the history of proph- ecy. He is not the apostle of any new teaching; he does but reit- erate the great truths proclaimed by his predecessors. But he is no mere imitator; he has forged his message in the passion of his own soul, and stamped upon it the impress of his own personality. Working amid conditions similar to those which confronted Amos, his message is necessarily also similar. But the preaching of Amos lacks the personal touch so distinctly felt in that of Micah, whose message quivers with feeling. Micah knows by experience whereof he speaks; he has been a victim of the circumstances against which he protests. Himself a peasant, he becomes the spokesman of peasants. Micah's task was to open the eyes of the blind and to unstop the ears of the deaf. But none are so blind as those that will not see. In spite of the preaching of Amos and Hosea, Israel persisted in cherishing an illusion. The key to the situation is furnished by Mi. 3". A wrong conception of God held sway over the minds of the people. "Yahweh is in the midst of us; therefore disaster cannot befall us." This was to look upon the relation of Yahweh to his people as necessary, and not voluntary on his part. It was to conceive of that relation, moreover, as vmconditioned by any high demands. There was no essential difference between this conception of God and that common to the nations surrounding Israel. The language of 3" is, of course, not to be taken as liter- ally exact. Israel had experienced too many chastisements at the hands of Yahweh to suppose that it possessed any guarantee against further afflictions. Yahweh might become angry at his land and vent his wrath upon his people for some real or fancied slight, even 24 MICAH as Chemosh executed his anger upon Moab {Mesha Inscription, 1. 5). But he would not definitely abandon his people to destruc- tion ; he could not remain obdurate and insensible to holocausts of oxen and rivers of oil. On his great day, the day of Yahweh, he would repent himself of his anger and manifest himself on behalf of his people in destructive might against their foes and his. Cf. Am. 5*^. For people so minded, sacrifice and oflFering were the substance of religion. Let the ritual be exact and gorgeous and the sacrificial gifts numerous and costly and Yahweh could desire little more. Cf. Is. i" ^•. Against this whole attitude toward God, the prophets of the eighth century set themselves resolutely. Micah joined with Amos- Hosea and Isaiah in an effort to purify religion by elevating the popular conception of God. This he does by emphasising the true nature of Yahweh's demands upon his people. He seeks justice and mercy, not oxen and sheep. He desires right character rather than right ritual. Herein lies Micah's whole interest; he plays the changes upon this single string. He does not suppose himself to be announcing anything new to the people, nor indeed was he so doing. Israel had long credited Yahweh with ethical interests. But they we/e given only secondary significance, where- as Micah would make them the supremely important element in the divine character in so far as it concerns men. Divine favour consequently at once ceases to be an affair of purchase at any price, and becomes a matter of striving after the attainment of divine ideals of righteousness and justice. Micah's message naturally assumes the form of denunciation of sin and threatening of punishment. Yahweh being just and righteous requires the same quaUties from his people. But they have not yielded them; hence punishment must be inflicted upon them. The sins are charged primarily against the ruling classes in Jerusalem. They have been guilty of injustice and cruelty toward the poor; they have bought and sold the rights of men ; they have violated the moral law as laid down by Yahweh himself. Even the religious leaders have not escaped the general corrup- tion. They have dared to prostitute their high calling for the sake of gain. They make a mockery of religion by allying themselves THE MESSAGE OF MICAH 2$ with the rich and powerful in the oppression of the poor. They whose duty it is to expose sin cast over it the cloak of religion, and wax rich. This attitude on Micah's part toward the prophets of his day reveals the same cleavage in prophecy that had become evident in the days of his predecessor, Micaiah ben Imlah (i K. 22), is alluded to by Amos (7'^^^), placed Jeremiah in peril of his Hfe (26'° ^•) and continued to the last days of prophecy (Zc. 13^"®). Micah, standing almost alone and in an unpopular cause, dared to denounce all the vested interests of his day. Apparently, Micah entertained no hope of repentance on the part of those whom he upbraided. He sees nothing ahead of them but punishment. Samaria and Jerusalem alike are to be de- stroyed, and that utterly. The cities are the scene of destruction, being the home of the ruling classes. Micah is the first of the prophets to threaten Jerusalem with total destruction. A pro- nunciamento of this kind is indisputable evidence of the prophet's initiative and courage. That Yahweh's splendid temple, which had stood as the visible reminder of his presence since the days of Solomon, should pass into the hands of a pagan nation to be desecrated and destroyed was a statement altogether incredible to the citizens of Jerusalem, and one which only absolute and unswerving loyalty to Yahweh and his will could possibly have enabled Micah to make. Not a word of Micah's is preserved for us concerning hopes for Israel's future. Yet that he should have had no such hopes is psychologically and religiously unintelligible. His conception of Yahweh, even though as Lord of heaven and earth and able to move the nations at his will (i^- *• ^''-i^), never for a moment in- cluded the possibility of Yahweh transferring his love to another nation. Were Israel as a whole to perish, Yahweh would be left without a representative among the nations of the earth. But while Micah saw the scourge of an invading army prostrate the countryside and destroy the capital, there is no evidence that he looked for the annihilation of the nation as such.* Living apart from the glamour and power of the capital, he did not identify the fate of the nation with that of Jerusalem. He may have given over * Cj. Sm., Rd.h 2o7 /. 26 MICAH the corrupt capital to destruction without a moment's hesitation as to Israel's future, believing it lay in the hands of the simple-minded country folk rather than with the degenerate leaders of church, state and society in Jerusalem. Furthermore, Yahweh was great enough to win glory for himself apart from the temple and the cap- ital. He was not shut up to one way of manifesting himself among his people. He in whose presence the mountains quake and dis- solve is surely able to vindicate himself in the sight of the world even though Jerusalem fall. What the immediate effect of Micah's preaching was we have no means of knowing. True, Je. 26**- ^^ preserves a tradition that Hezekiah's reformation was due to the influence of Micah. But however true that may be, neither the record of Je. 26*^- *^ nor the accoimt of Hezekiah's reform accords closely with the contents of Micah's message as known to us. For Micah seems to have de- nounced the nobles and councillors of the king rather than the king himself as the face of the narrative in Jeremiah would imply; and his preaching was concerned primarily with social wrongs rather than with idolatry and cultus as in 2 K. 18^ ^•. In any case his words were cherished among the people of the land for whom he laboured and his example of sturdy independence and freedom of speech in the name of Yahweh established a precedent that was of good service to Jeremiah, the bearer of a similar message. § 5. RECENT LITERATURE ON THE BOOK OF MICAH. For discussions of the poetical form of Micah, see § i. Only the more important literature can be mentioned here. I. On the Text. K. Vollers, Das Dodekapropheton der Alexandriner, ZAW., IV (1884), 1-12. V. Ryssel, Die arahische Uebersetzung des Micha in der Pariser tmd Londoner Polyglolte, ZAW., V (1885), 102-38. Idem., Untersiichiingen fiber die Textgestalt und die Echtheit des Bitches Micha. Ein kritischer Kommentar zu Micha LITERATURE ON MICAH 27 (1887). M. Sebok, Die Syrische Uebersetzung der zwolf kleinen Propheten und ihr Verhaltniss zu dem Massoretischen Text und zu den dlteren Uebersetzungen namentlich den LXX und dem Targuni (1887). Schuurmans Stekhoven, De Alex. Vertaling van hel Do- dekapropheton (1887). H. P. Smith, The Text of Micah, in He- braica, IV (1888), 75-81. J. Taylor, The Massoretic Text and the Ancient Versions of the Book of Micah (1891). H. Graetz, Emendationes in plerosque Sacrae Scripfurae Veteris Testamenti libros, etc. (1893). P. Ruben, Critical Remarks upon Some Pas- sages of the Old Testament (1896). H. Oort, Textus Hebraici Emendationes quibus in Vetera Testamento Neerlandice usi sunt A . Kuenen, J. Hooykaas, W. H. Kosters, H. Oort; edidit H. Oort (1900). W. O. E. Oesterley, The Old Latin Texts of the Minor Prophets, in Journal of Theological Studies, V (1903), 247-53. Idem., Codex Taurinensis (1908). Agnes Smith Lewis, Codex Climaci Rescriptus (Horae Semiticae, No. VIII, 1909), pp. 2 and 22 (giving a Palestinian-Syriac Version of Mi. 4^"^). B. Duhm, Anmerkungen zu den zwolf Propheten, in ZAW., XXXI (191 1), 81-93. 2. On Introduction. All the standard handbooks of Introduction to the Old Testa- ment have sections on Micah. Special attention may be called to Driver (new ed., 1910), Konig (1893), Kuenen (2d ed., 1885/.), Wildeboer (3d ed., 1903), Comill (6th ed., 1908; Engl. transL, 1907) and Budde, Geschichte der Althebrdischen Litteratur (1906). Good summaries are furnished also by the encyclopedia articles, viz., those of Cheyne, in Encyclopaedia Biblica; Nowack, in Hastings's Dictionary of the Bible; and Volck, in Protestantische Realencyklo- padie (3d ed.). To these must be added, by the careful student, Caspari, Uber Micha den Morasthiten und seine prophetische Schrift (1852). Stade, Bemerkungen Uber das Buch Micha, ZAW., I (1881), 161-72. Idem., Weitere Bemerkungen zu Micha, IV-V, ibid.. Ill (1883), 1-16. Nowack, Bemerhmgen uber das Buch Micha, ibid., IV (1884), 277-91. Stade, Bemer- kungen, on Nowack's article, ibid., IV, 291-97. Ryssel, op. cit. (1887). Pont, Micha-Studien, in Theologische Studien, 1888, pp 28 MICAH 235-46; 1889, pp. 431-53 ; 1892, pp. 329-60. Kosters, De Samen- stelling van het boek Micha, in ThT., 1893, pp. 249-74. Volz, Die vorexilische Jahweprophetie und der Messias (1897), 63-67. K. J. Grimm, Euphemistic Liturgical Appendixes in the Old Testa- ment (1901), 78-81, 94/.. Stade, in ZAW., XXIII (1903), 163- 71, on Mi. I-"* and 7''^°. See also the literature cited in § i of Introduction. 3. On Interpretation. The modem movemeut in the interpretation of Micah began with Ewald's commentary (1840; 2d ed., 1867). Among later commentators may be mentioned Roorda, Commentarius in Vati- cinium Michae (1869), a keen textual critic. Reinke, Der Prophet Micha (1874). Hitzig-Steiner, Die zwolf kleinen Propheten (1881). Cheyne, Micah, with Notes and Introduction (1882). Orelli, The Twelve Minor Prophets (1888; 3d ed., 1908; Engl, transl., 1893). Elhorst, De Profetie van Micha (1891). Well- hausen. Die kleinen Propheten fiber setzt und erkldrt (1892; 3d ed., 1898). G. A. Smith, The Book of the Twelve Prophets (1896). Nowack, Die kleinen Propheten ilber setzt und erkldrt (1897; 2d ed. 1904). Marti, Dodekapropheton erkldrt (1904). Halevy, in Revue semitique, XII and XIII (1904/.). A. van Hoonacker, Les douze petits prophUes (1908). Margolis, Micah (1908). Special phases and passages receive consideration in the follow- ing: H. Oort, Het Beth-Efraat van Micha V : i, in ThT., V (1871), 501-11. Kuenen, De Koning uit Beth-Ephrat, ibid., VI (1872), 45-66. Oort, Ter verklaring van Micha III-V. Nog iets over Beth-Efraat en Migdal-Eder, ibid., VI, 273-79. M. J. de Goeje, Ter verklaring van Micha III-V. Proeve van verk- laring van Micha IV : i-V : 2, ibid., VI, 279-84. Kuenen, Ter verklaring van Micha III-IV. Nalezing, ibid., VI, 285-302. Duhm, Die Theologie der Propheten (1875), pp. 178-93. Wilde- boer, De profeet Micha en zijne beteekenis voor het verstand der profetie onder Israel (1884). W. R. Smith, The Prophets of Israel and Their Place in History (2d ed., 1895). Guthe's Translation and Notes in Kautzsch's Heilige Schrift des Alten Testaments (3d ed., 1909). Kent's Translation and Notes in Sermons, Epistles LITERATURE ON MICAH 29 and Apocalypses of Israel's Prophets (19 10). M. Rahmer, Die hebrdischen Traditionen in den Werken des Hieronymus. Die Commentaru zu den zivolf kleinen Propheten. Heft 2, Obadja, Jona, Micha. (1902). A COMMENTARY ON THE BOOK OF MICAH. A. CHAPTERS 1-3. § I. The Superscription (i*). This states the authority of the utterance and the author's name and clan, together with the period of his activity and the subject- matter of his writings. I. The word of Yahweh] This term is usually employed for the work of the prophet. F. H.'^", 201 /.. — Which came unto] This use of the verb is common in prophetic utterance: in the superscriptions of Ho., Jo., Jon., Zp., Hg., Zc, Je., and also Hg. 2I. 10. 20 2c. i7 48 510 ^4. 8 gi js 2813 38^; and exceedingly common in the books of Jeremiah and Ezekiel. It is part of a larger usage representing the meaning come into existence, become. Cf. Gn. i^ and Mi. 7*, where it is parallel to i^M2—Micah] Little is known of the life of this prophet, except that he was of rustic origin, preached in the days of Hezekiah and made so profound an impres- sion as to be still remembered in the days of Jeremiah, nearly a cen- tury later (Je. 26'^). — The Morashtite] Of the eight men named Micah, or Micaiah, in the Old Testament, the two leading ones are the Micah of our book and Micaiah ben Imlah (i K. 22* *'•), a con- temporary of Ahab.* The appellation of Morashtite, distinguishing the former and occurring only here and in Je. 26'^, is a gentilic adjective derived from the name Moresheth (i"), which in all prob- ability was the prophet's home. — In the days of Jotham, Ahaz, Hezekiah, kings of Judah] A later addition,! for the substantial truth of which evidence is furnished by Je. 26*^; but no sufficient grounds exist for believing Micah to have prophesied in the days of Jotham. — Which he perceived] This emphasises the character • V. H.^", Iv, Ivi. t V. ».; and Introduction, § 3. 30 I 31 of the prophet's message as a divine revelation. — Concerning Sa- maria and Jerusalem] An accurate summary of the contents of Micah's prophecies, whether the destruction of Samaria spoken of in i^"^ be already past or yet to come. The superscription seems to be of Judean origin, since no mention is made of the contemporary kings of Israel. But it cannot in its present form be credited to Micah himself, for none of the contents of the book can be assigned to so early a date as the reign of Jotham; the use of ntn in the sense of "utter" or "announce" is a sign of late origin {cf. H.'^", 4; Hoffman, ZA W., Ill, 95) ; and the latter part of the superscrip- tion is similar to the editorial additions in Ho. i", Is. i'. The original legend, therefore, was. The word of Yahweh which came to Micah, the Morashtite (so We., Now., Marti, Du.; cf. Che., in CB.). 1 . H'ln -itfN nini 13-1] (g, and the word of the Lord came (so 2,0, A), a free rendering, rather than a different text; Jonah is the only prophetic book beginning '1 12T ''nil, though isolated oracles are not infrequently so in- troduced, e. g., Je. I* Ez. 3'5. Some codd. of (^ (87, 91, 228 and ^") re- produce M literally. — riyn] The interpretation of this name as mean- ing. Who is like {this child)? (Gray, Hebr. Prop. Names, 157; cf. Kjip, 2 S. 9"), is hardly probable, for such a name leaves too much to be supplied by the imagination. It is better taken as a shorter form of n;rp (so Kt., Je. 26'8); cf. in;rp (2 Ch. 17') and -iniri? (i K. 228) meaning. Who is like Yahu? Cf. v\^, the form of the divine name in the Assouan Papyri and the form v found both as prefix and as affix on the ostraca recently discovered at Samaria. Analogous forms are '^no'D, and the Assyrian mannu-ki-ilu-rabu = who is like the great God? and mannu-ki-Adad = who is like Adad (Gray, Hebr. Prop. Names, 157; Fried. Delitzsch, Prol., 210). The longer and the shorter forms are used interchangeably in the later literature. Cf. (&, 'yieixalav; Kt. and Qr. in Je. 26'8 2 K. 22'2and2 Ch. 34"; and Ju. 17'- <, wherein a long form appears, while the short form prevails in the rest of chs. 17 and 18; in 17'- < (S^ reproduces the long form of M, SI has the long form in v. ', but the short in v. <, and 06'^ 13 ^ have the short form in both verses. There is no good reason to suppose that this equivalence does not rest upon sound tradition. — ina'iD] Cf. i'*. (&, t6v toO MupaffOel, treating it as a patro- nymic; in Je. 26" 05 has 6 Mupadlrrji, several mss. omit the 3 = 'nnp), Zc. 2"' (where M, j.'3-ind = (&, 'inc) and Mai. I'" (where :0 ip = (S ':). The conjecture of Ry. that 05 originally read X67oi;s irdm-as is without any support and is unnecessary. & all 0/ yoM(soDu.); but in Jb. i7'o& makes the same change. iS is substanti- ated by I K. 22'8b^ a verbatim quotation of this phrase. — O'rpn] In codd. Kenn. 30, 96, 224, 13 — ; in the same codd. and in 4, loi, 145, 150 (cf, C5 & B) 'pni; but both of these variations are due to scribal correction. — hnSci] (S freely, and all who are in it; & with her fulness. — nirr" >jin] Om. 'a with (55^ and A; it is superfluous to the metre, and is either a gloss on nin> or a dittog. from the following line (so also Marti, Now.*^, Siev., Stk., Du.. — 1}''^] 2 Pt<-£n (so H. P. Smith, Seb., Taylor, Elh., Pont, Gr., Gu., GASm., Now., We.). — 6. ntvn ij,-'^] Rd. ^7,^'':', omitting '•■>* (so Marti, Siev., Gu.) as a gloss. 05, els dirwpocpvXdKiov dypov; f^,for a house of the country, the field, connecting r\-\'Z'n with the following instead of the pre- ceding context. We., 'tfn lyS (cf. 3" Ez. 21'; so Now.), or 'r^ •^>yh {cf. I S. 27'). Hi., 'c n»jjS, connecting mi- with following words (r/. &); but n^y would be air.. — ^3^] Rd. n'-jS with 6 codd. (Kenn.); n lost through I" 35 haplo,. (5, eli x'^of- "^y Quasi acervum lapidum in agro. Gr. 'n SjS. — 7. ins"] d, KaTaK6\pov(n, an active form with indefinite subject, equivalent to the passive. Cf. French on, German man (so Ry., contra Bauer, Jus., Hi., Vol., who posit a different pointing for M). — ^^anti]^, locationes. We. nniTN (so Oort^™-, Marti, Gu.), but this would require a fem. form of the vb. (Hal.). Hal. n^jon. — nxap] Rd., with & SI Iff, isap to conform with ma'' and requirements of grammar (so Dathe, Ew., Taylor, Elh., We., Pont, Gr., GASm., Now., Hal., Marti, Siev., Gu., Du.). Cf. 05, ffw^yayev. — 8. 05 places all vbs. in 3d pers. sg., & in 2d pers. sg. fem., 21 in 3d pers. pi. masc. — hdSin] Qr. and some codd. of Kenn. noSs. — hh-'Of] Qr. and 31 codd. (Kenn.) SSir. — :!»>;?{<] 05*, Trotijo-erai Kal iroL-fiffaiTe. — n^jn^] 05, ws dpaKdvTuv; so B. Aq., aeip-^vuv. 0, \ebvT03v, #, a jackal. Cod. 96 (Kenn.) pjns. — njp nuj] 05, dvyar^pwv ^ Zc. ii'" Ho. 10"), as appears from the parallel expression, O earth and her fulness] which always designates the world as a whole and never any special portion. Cf. Dt. t,?,^^ Ps. 24\ The nations are summoned not as witnesses {cf. Am. 3^ Dt. ^26 2^19 jg j.2^^ 1^^^ ^g vitally interested auditors whom it behooves to consider diligently what they hear, for Israel's case is part and parcel of the world's case. The logical object of the verbs hear and hearken is the whole of the succeeding oracle, beginning, Yahweh will become a witness against you] Not among you,X for Micah certainly would not conceive of Yahweh as a fellow-witness with the heathen of Israel's calamities; but rather of these calamities as bringing home to their consciences a condemning sense of their own guilt and a warning to flee from the coming wrath; i. e., Yahweh through his punishment of Israel will testify against the nations, * So Rosenm., Ew., Ke., Casp., Hd., Pu., Or., Che., We., GASm., Now., Marti. t So Ki., Hi., Stei., Hal.. t So GASm.. 36 MICAH who are even more guilty.— Ht^ holy temple] i. e., his dwelling in the heavens,* not the temple at Jerusalem,! as the language of vv. ^- * shows. Cf. Hb. 2^" Zc. 2'' Is. 63'^ Ps. 11^. For similar views in early times regarding Yahweh's habitation, cf. Ex. 13"^ ^- 14*®- -^ J lib. 18. 20 Str. II introduces Yahweh himself upon the scene of action. — 3. Yea, see! Yahweh is coming forth from his place] The pic- ture becomes more vivid; the judgment is on the verge of execu- tion! The place is the heavenly temple. Cf. Ho. 5^'^ Ps. 14^ Is. i8\ — He will descend upon the heights of the earth] For the omission of the phrase, and tread, v. s. For a similar thought, cf. Am. 4^^ (a late passage). — 4. And the mountains will melt, etc.] The ima- gery here is based upon the phenomena of earthquakes or volcanic eruptions {cf. Is. 24^^ Zc. 14^ Na. i"), and is not descriptive of a thunderstorm; the description of the rending of the valleys forbids the latter interpretation. — Like wax before the fre, like waters poiired down a declivity] A later addition {v. s.). The volcanic stream of lava is the basis of this comparison. Str. Ill states the cause of Yahweh's fearful wrath. — 5. For the transgression of Jacob is all this] Jacob is here applied to the northern kingdom, as appears from 1. 3. All this refers to the foregoing cataclysm, not to the threats of v. ^. — And for the sin of the house ofJudah] The prophet couples Israel and Judah in the bonds of iniquity. The coming punishment will include both. C/. w. ®- ^. — What is Jacob's transgression? Is it not Samaria?] The name of the capital, the centre of the nation's corrupt and li- centious life, sums up the offence of Israel. — And what is Judah' s sin ? Is it not Jerusalem ?] The two capitals are denounced by the prophet of the countryside not only for their ovm inherent sin, but also because they serve as sources of corruption infecting the whole land. Str. IV presents the climax of the oracle in the clearly marked dirge-rhythm. The total destruction of Samaria is announced in terrible tones. — 6. Therefore will I turn Samaria into afield] M ruin is not suited to the following word, field, nor to the parallel ♦Theiner, Rosenm., Hi., Mau. Hd., Ke., Che., Or., Now., G.\Sm., We., Marti. t Os., Geb., Hal., el al.. I'-' 37 phrase, a planted vineyard. Now.'s reading, the forest of the field, is too far removed from the received text and does not quite meet the demands of the parallelism ; the term forest is not elsewhere em- ployed to denote desolation. Samaria is to become an utter waste, a ploughed field {cf. 3^^, a vineyard in cultivation. A vineyard is the type of arable land less easily utilised for building purposes than any other, because of the great labour and loss involved in the transplanting of the vines (so Hal.). The hill of Samaria was very fertile and well adapted to vine-culture. — And I will pour down her stones, etc.] Cf. i K. 16^^. On the destruction of Samaria here foretold, v. i.. A total destruction of the city such as is here de- scribed was effected by John Hyrcanus {v. Jos., Ant., XIII, 10, § 3). This, however, constitutes no valid argument for transfer- ring this section of Micah to the Maccabaean period {contra Hpt.). 7. This verse forms a five-line strophe, detailing the destruction of idolatry which is to accompany the downfall of Samaria. It is an expansion of Micah's message from the hand of a later scribe who interpreted the fall of Samaria as a judgment upon idolatry (y. s.). — And all her idols will he shattered] These were idols carved from stone or wood; shattering demonstrates their power- lessness. Samaria was notorious among later prophets for her idolatry. Cf. Is. 2^" 10^" ^- 27^ ^- 30^^ 31^. — And all her images will he burnt with fire] For the rendering images, v. i.. The usual rendering, harlot-hires, is wholly unsuited here to the vb. hurnt and to the demands of the parallelism. For various attempts to escape the difficulty by changing the text, v. s.. — And all her idols I will lay desolate] A third word for idol appears here ; Hebrew has no less than twelve words for this conception. — For from the hire of a har- lot they were gathered], i. e., not that the images were obtained by means of the gains of prostitutes,* but that they were made pos- sible through the material prosperity which the people attributed to the favour of the Baalim {cf. Ho. 2^).t — And to a harlot's hire they will return] If it be asked how these idols already shattered and burned can again become hire, the answer is that we must not con- fine a poet too strictly to prosaic fact. He evidently here is thinking of the use made by the heathen conqueror of the trophies of war; * So Hal., et al.. t So We., Or., Now.. 38 MICAH these are presented to their deities in acknowledgment of their favour in bestowal of victory, and thus are designated by the prophet as harlot's hire. Str. V reveals the prophet's anguish as he contemplates the fate of the city.* — 8. For this] Not for the immediately preceding de- struction of idols certainly, but for the destruction pictured in v. ®, and because this destruction carries with it injury of the most seri- ous character to the southern kingdom in which, of course, the prophet was especially interested. Calamity to Samaria means panic in Jerusalem. — Let me lament and wail] This dirge-like ut- terance, with its many terms for lamentation, is characteristically oriental in its vigorous and concrete expression of emotion ; the repetitions secure emphasis and variety. The form in which the vbs. are used (with H-r) makes the lament even more tender and plaintive. This is one of several instances in which the man as patriot bewails most grievously the event which as prophet he is bound to announce. Cf. Je. 9^^-. — Barefoot and stripped] Not naked, but in the dress of one in sorrow (2 S. 15^°) ; here and else- where (Is. 20^^) the reference is to a symbolic act in which the per- son thus garbed represents a captive. f The garment discarded was the outer cloak or tunic. Cf. Jb. 22® Ex. 22^^ Am. 2^.— Like the jackals] The wail of these animals is a long, piteous cry (cf. Is. 13^^), and may be heard almost any night in Palestine, where the jackal is now the most common beast of prey. — And mourning like tJie daughters of the desert] The comparison is to the noisy, hid- eous screech of the ostrich. Str. VI gives the justification for the prophet's grief which lies in the hopelessness of Samaria's outlook and in the fact that the calamity will include his own city, Jerusalem. — 9. For her stroke is incurable] The reference is probably to the fall of Samaria in 721 B.C., together with the subsequent calamities which had befallen the city prior to the prophet's time {v. i.), and not to any one specific event. — Yea, it comes even to Judah] This is the burden of the * The change of speaker (from Yahweh to the prophet) is not sufficient reason for suspecting that V. « is foreign to this context {contra Gu.)- The vivid style of the prophets frequently leaps from one speaker to another without warning. t Yet on Assyrian reliefs male captives are frequently represented as totally devoid of cloth- ing. Sec, e. g., the scenes on the bronze ornaments of the gates of Balawat. I'-" 39 patriot's soul, his all-consuming grief. — It reaches unto the gate of my people] Jerusalem is so designated as the seat of the central market-place of Judah and of the highest judicial tribunal, the natural gathering-point of Judah. — Even unto Jerusalem] The situation in the mind of the prophet is evidently that arising out of the campaign of Sennacherib* {v. i.), not that in connection with Sargon's expedition against Egypt ending in the battle of Raphia (719 B.C.) .t The historical conditions amid which this oracle (i'-') was spoken are in dispute. Most interpreters have assigned it to the days immediately pre- ceding the fall of Samaria in 722-721 B.C.; so, e. g., Ew., Hi., Or., Dr.'""-, GASm. (725-718 B.C.), Hal., Now. (who thinks that the denunciation of Samaria was originally uttered prior to 722 B.C., but was later in its present form incorporated for greater effect in an oracle against Judah spoken in connection with Sennacherib's campaign). Others place it in the period of Sennacherib's invasion, 705-701 B.C.; so, e. g., We., Sm. (^Rel., 237/.), Cor., Marti. The narrative certainly looks upon the chastisement of Israel and Judah as something yet to come; there is no hint that Sama- ria has already been destroyed; the vbs. in v. « are indisputably future (contra GASm.). The two lands are indissolubly linked together in the coming destruction; their fate constitutes two acts of the same drama (Now.). The prophet may be standing on the verge of Samaria's fall in 721 B.C., and with keen insight into the meaning of the situation pointing out its ultimate significance for Judah, the fate of which he deems immi- nent. B ut the vividness of the descriptton ini ' ^ • is more easily accounted for on the basis of calamities actually in progress in Judah than of events only anticipated in imagination. It seems better, therefore, to locate the prophecy in connection with the campaign of 705-701 B.C., and to sup- pose that the final destruction of Samaria occurred in connection with that event (so Cor., Marti). The desolation here described is not the result of a siege and deportation such as occurred in 721 B.C., but stops short of nothing less than total destruction such as did not take place till some later time. For further discussion, v. Introd., pp. 18-19. 2. 'iJi ijjctr] These words have been borrowed by the editor of i K. 22" as appears from (i) their omission in OS's rendering of i K. 22'^, (2) their utter lack of connection there. — uhj] For other cases of dSo with 2d pers., V. I K. 222s Jb. 17"' 2 Ch. 18"; for very common lack of con- gruence of persons after a vocative, v. Ko. ^ ^' '• '" f ; cf. No., Syr. Cram.*, Msoc, Ges. ^ '"' cites "'nsoan, and nn^ as parallel cases of the loss of force in the sf.; but Brockelmann, ZA., XIV, 344/. explains nn'' by refer- ence to the old adverbial ending il; while '31 and ''JIN did not wholly lose ♦ So We., Now., Marti; contra Hal., Stk„ t G.\Sm.. 40 MICAH the force of the sf. in classical Heb.. The possibility remains that the process was hastened in the case of a'r'j and its transition to almost ad- verbial usage was facilitated by the similarity to the common adverbial ending in DJCN ,D|-;n.,oSiN DDiMDJn. Cf. Ko. "-"si., — ,,-,,,] j^ss, in- stead of impf. for rhythmical reasons (Ges. ^ "" •') ; here also to avoid un- pleasant assonance with the immediately foil. nin\ — 3. icipcc] Here parall. with Sain (v. 2). In early Semitic and Heb. literature 'n = shrine, e.g., Gn. 28" Je. 7'2 Is. 18' 2 K. 5"- '»; it came to be identified with the deity himself in the Mishna, Tosefta, Gemara, and Midrashic literature. Its application to Yahweh's heavenly temple is common in OT., e. g., Ho. 5" Is. 26" Hb. 2" (so J. A. Montgomery, JBL., XXIV, 17-26).— 4. D'C3 . . . Jjnr] Use of generic art. in comparison in '1:, but omitted in'Ds; note recurrence of d in *'^ — O'lJo] dir.. Hoph. of ijj; We. sug- gests T>J = Assy, gardru, run, flow (so Hal.), while Hpt. connects it with ij:r, to fall, as Pu. prtc. with initial d om.. — The omission of <*=• '^ {v. s.) obviates the difScuIty which leads Siev. to posit the omission of two lines from the original text of v. '. — 5. 'c] Used for nn only when the un- derlying thought refers to persons as here, Ges. ^ •" ». Cf. i S. 18" 2 S. 7'8. — 6. TiDtt'i] Of future action, Ges. i"^*. — ma ^ptar] Cf. the Assyrian phrase ana tilt u karmi tUir = into a mound and a ruin I turned it. — 7. in?.''] So-called Aram. Hoph. (Ges. ^"e); rather than impf. Qal. pass. (Bottcher, Ges. ^ ""). — mjjnN] A S^dd (Dt. 7^), or an nii-N (Dt. 12'), or even a ns3 (2 K. 23 '5) may be burned, but not a harlot's hire; hence the suspicions against the text {v. s.). The best solution of the difficulty is to assign it to a new root, ]jn having the meaning resemble, be equal, whence come for jjns the signif. image, and hire (so Halper, AJSL., XXIV, 366 jf.). Satisfactory evidence for such a root is fur- nished by Arabic tdnna (III. conj. of tanna), he measured, made comparison, and the noun tinnun, an equal, a like. Support for the ascription to ]jnN of these two conceptions, resemblance and compensation, is found in the usage of the parallel roots hot and niK*; Heb. nnT = image, like- ness; Syr., dmayd = value, price; in Syr., Aram., and Arab., r^vc; = was equal, like, worth. Jjn is thus closely related to njc = repeat, rather than to |nj. From this point of view the use of \iT\n here is seen to be paro- nomasia, very characteristic of Micah. — '"ixjip] On-j. for -^, v. Ges. % "'. Cf. Ew. ^ ""d (= Pu. with Y for u); but the Vrss. and the syntax require the Pu'al plural. — 8. naS'N] Fully written vowel only here, Ez. 35' and Ps. 72'*; V. Ges. ^ «"'• ■'°'°. — SS^r] Kt. SS'C* is ott.; elsewhere SS^b^ with Qr. (Jb. 12"- "); cf. analogous formations, ^^^i; and aav^'; the Kt. finds no certain analogies in Heb., though they are numerous in Arab. Cf. Barth, NB, p. 54. The "<—. here is probably due to the influence of the two preceding forms. — mj33 . . . D^jna] On pi. in comparisons, Ko. ^ "< >>. — 9. n\-ii3n] On pi. here, cf. Ko. *»!»<'. — PJJ] On sg. masc. with fem. pi. subject as in iO, cf. Ko. ^ ><' <•. 41 § 3- Lamentation Over Israel's Doom (i*°"^"). In four strs. of four lines each, the prophet pictures desolation as it sweeps across the countryside with the march of an invading army. Wherever the blow falls, the piercing note of the dirge arises, (i) A call to some of the more northern towns to give them- selves to mourning. (2) Disaster sent by Yahweh will smite the cities of Judah. (3) Let the inhabitants of Lachish and its en- virons flee in hot haste before the impending judgment. (4) Is- rael's territory will be in the hands of the foe, and her inhabitants will be carried into exile. •yELL it not in Gath; In Baca, weep bitterly; In Beth-ophrah, roll yourselves in the dust; Pass ye over from Shaphir in nakedness. "yHE inhabitant of Zaanan comes not forth from her fortress; Beth-ezel is taken from its site. How has the inhabitant of Maroth hoped for good! For calamity has come down from Yahweh to the gates of Jerusalem. "DIND the chariot to the steed, O inhabitant of Lachish; For in thee are found the transgressions of Israel. Therefore thou givest a parting gift to Moresheth-Gath. Beth Achzib has become a snare to the kings of Israel. T WILL yet bring the conqueror to thee, O inhabitant of Mareshah. Forever is Israel's glory to perish. Make thyself bald and shave thee for thy darlings; Enlarge thy baldness like the vulture's, for they will go into exile from thee. This piece is the most remarkable, as well as most difficult and obscure of Micah's oracles. It is a dirge, the characteristic measure of which does not appear until Str. II, nor is it then perfectly sustained. On ac- count of the uncertain state of the text, any attempt at reconstruction is extremely hazardous; hence this arrangement is presented with much hesitation. The only material excluded is v. •"', a gloss which inter- rupts the connection between "» and ""=, in both of which direct address is employed. The arrangement by Siev. in seven strs. of two lines each, in perfect Qina measure, is attractive, but it omits material arbitrarily and handles the text too roughly. The poem as a whole is denied to Micah by Marti (whom Siev. follows) on three grounds: (i) that it shows reflection upon the events it describes such as is inconsistent with stirring and painful times like the days of Micah; (2) that the use of the name Israel as including Judah is late; (3) that v. " contradicts v. ' *>. But the 42 MICAH puns of the passage furnish no occasion for questioning the deep feeling of the author, since such usage was not inconsistent with great grief and was the furthest possible remove from any suggestion of humor. Its aim was rather to strike forcibly the attention of the listener. Similar usage in Am. 5' and Is. lo"-" bears witness to this, for Marti's rejection of these two passages as late rests solely upon the fact that they contain paronomasia, an insufficient basis. Cf. Is. 5' 6" 7' Gn. 49' '• '• "• ". Westphal well says {Jahve's Wohnstdtten, 1908, p. 174): "For the ancients the word, the name, had a wholly different significance than for us. Puns were not for them mere plays upon words; but just as the name had a connection with the thing named so intimate as to transcend our perception, in like manner there was in the similarity of sound between two words a mystical connection of the things themselves; nomen et omen is a conception that developed upon the soil of antiquity." The name Israel as applied to Judah is characteristic of Micah (7;. 3'- '• '). The supposed contradiction between v. " and v. « is only such as is due to the free impetuous utterance of the poet-prophet, which is not to be re- strained within geometrically defined limits. In any case the exact sig- nificance of v. " eludes us. 10. n>jn Sn nja] jn Sn nSj2. But M seems established by the duplicate in 2 S. i^". — wan Sn 132] Rd., loan 133 **???> dropping Sx as dittog. from prec. line. CS, ol iv 'Ak€Ih (&", codd. Q marg., 87, 91, 310, Aldine ed., iv /Sa/ceZ/u) fi.r] dfoiKodoneire. Some codd. ^v 'AKfcapei/i. Comp. iv ^clkuv. But iv ' AKel/x, as (S's reading, is supported by C, in Acim, and A. (6's fvaKiiix recalls its rendering of a^pj;' in Dt. 2"'- "• " Jos. 14"- » ii"- " as Che., EB., 1646, suggests. In support of the emendation N323 may be urged (a) the reading iv ^aKein, the last letter of which is a dittograph; (b) the pun thereby recovered; (c) the location of Baca in the region with which Micah is dealing; (d) the ease with which it might have dis- appeared from the Hebrew text. Reland, Pal., 'ui 13>13 (so Zunz, Ew., Hi., Kl., Ro., Che., Taylor, Gu., GASm., van H.). In support of this are urged the analogies, nptt-j = nyp-^j, Am. 8'; ^3 = ^'3; nSo = n^y3, Jos. 19' 15"; ^dS = iDj;'?, Ps. 28'; and the probability that the last letter of (&, iv ' AKef/i, is a dittog. from following /xi). Against this Ry. well argues (i) that in the analogies cited the essential portion of the word has not been lost as here, except in '3, a much-used particle whose position at the beginning of its clause assures its proper recognition; (2) the remaining puns involve not merely the sounds of the words played upon, but also their sense; (3) the location of Acco, north of Carmel, is outside of the region with which Micah is immediately concerned, viz., the western slope of Judah. Mich., ovJa: (c/. Ju. a'- »; so Vol., Elh., Wkl.^""-, i86; Che., JQR., X, 573; We., Now., Oort.^^"-, Du.); Elh. and We. also om. ^x, while We. changes the impf. to an imv. 122. Gr., ri'^j? a'Nsaa 'n. Hal., usn Sn -133 xj^?. For 133, 18 mss. of Kenn. noa. — 13;' mD;S n''33] Rd., with ^, -\y; mp^; noa. Cf. Q, 'Ocppd. (g, i^ otKov Karay^KuTa yTJv, which seems to reflect some form of -ion. Cf. Kar^yeX- ao'^Tja-oi'Tai = nsmin 3^ "Z, drinking-bowls. Elh., 'j? n^DjjS nia3; so van H.. Pont, 'ui piap; so van H.. Oort^"'-, i3>'3 may n'^j. Gr., Vx-n-'aa r\-Miy\ Wkl., AOF., I, 103, nc;; SN-n''33, om. mDy as dittog.. — >na''?Dnn] Rd. iB'Sann, with (&, Karairaffaffde; so & B, Hartmann, Ro., Elh., We., Pont, Wkl., Gu., Now., Marti, Siev., van H., Gu.. Qr,, 12 codd. of Kenn. and several of de R., ''li'Sspn (so Schnurrer, Bauer, Tay- lor, Gr.). The pi. is demanded by the parallel vbs. of v. •" and by C3^, v.". — 11. ddS >->3>] Rd. "^ n3>:, with some Heb. codd., 13 ®,Aq.,S, Hal.. :; cf. &. Siev. n*;" n'^ps; so Gu.. — Tot:' D2'iff'<] Rd. "I'SE'n, om. nstyi as dittog. from foil, line; the loss of D from M was due to its occurrence in immediately preceding o^'^. 05, KaToiKovcra koXcDs. H, habitalio pulchra. Hal., 'i:* n33'rD. — Pi:'3 rT'iy] Om. ruo, with 05, as gloss upon n''-\;'; so Ges. ^"i^. C/". Siev. 05, tois iriXets ayr^s. 0, ■^ ir6\is ai/TTj atVxi^*''?- "&, con- fuse ignominia. Elh., Pttbn >nv'; so Pont, van H.. Hal., nc'3-i nin;?, Siev. and Gu. om. n';'3 as dittog. of n3S'> and rd. n!>!-\; for nnp. Marti, n>3;; nB'3 = uei/eJ in shame. Che. {JQR., X, 573) conjectures for the line: 'Dir '"^^ ITl??* ^?v'? "*?JJ- — ?J**^] ®> Sej/vadp; some codd. Sevvd*/; others Satvvd;'. Aq., Savawv. 0, Zavuhv. 2, ey^rjj/oCfro. B, inexitu. il, inaelam. & = Zoan. 2 codd. of Kenn. and 4 of de R., i:n:u>; cf. 2. Van H., jns. — -tEDc] Rd. n^pD?:. (6, Ko^paffOai.. H, planctum. Van H., ip:j^ or HQC. — SxNH no] (6, oTkov ix°l^^''°'' i'^'T'^s. 21, domum juxta earn. 2, e^^s. B, domus vicina. B S om. art. n. ^ treats 'nh '3 'oa as sub- ject of the clause. Elh., Pont, Sxsn n>3; c/. Zc. 14*. — np>] Gr., n,?;. — irnay c;"] Rd. t^cvm, 3 being due to confusion with s (c/. on i^) and dittog.. (&, i^ iifiGiv vXrjyrjv ddvvi]^; 2 codd. irXrjv 68ijv7]s. H, ex vobis plagam doloris. U, ex vobis quae stetit sibimet. & renders 'cj? == its blow, the rendering of & for nra in v. '. One cod. of de R., inicn; so 21, Stei.. Ro., foil. Bauer, in^n a3D, correcting 05 to ir\i]y^v airiii (so Taylor). We., n^iro p^d, regarding i^ iifidv as a doublet in ®. Gr., apnirn D3n, using '3 of v. ''. Oort^™ •, nnir:;.'D nn;?';, for the last three words of iSI. Cf. Hal., nnn nj D3DT|-5''. Che. {JQR., X, 573) restores lines i and 2 of Str. II thus: — vS'XN UDD ini^S 'nh n>33 iddd jjns nsa" jj-'sn aS^;'^. Siev. conjectures: — ''mDj;. '?XN.r''? '^^ ^''^.^ '^5'?'? '^* '''^'' ^^Vt ^'^ ^HT,- — 12. nSn 13] Rd. n^n«a; cf. (6, rls i^p^aro = nSnn >a; for confusion of 3 and D, V. on I*. S, 6rt ivbiuffev. 0, dva/i^vouo-a. Aq., -n^ptiffrriffev. B, gu»o 44 MICAH infirmata est; similarly &. Taylor, nS^nn. Cf. Pont, n'^inn. Oort'^"-, ^^P' J^p. We., Now., and Marti, rhr\\ 13. Siev. and Gu., nSni. n-ic. Che. {JQR., X, 573) nn';'n ^o.— 3iqS] Gr., naioS. Houb., nic';'; so Che. (/. c). Hal., 310 {<*?. — pnc] (JJ, dUva^. 9, e^ Pfos = mci. 2, ■^ irapairiKpalvovaa. Aq., Mapato^. 0, Z7j^o, confusing 1 and "i. B, m amaritudinibus. d, n]?"in nets'. Gr. and Che. (/. c), mm''; c/". Jos. 15". — TT' ■'o] Siev. om. ■'o. — iptf'?] Rd. '•njnrS with 3ni. Siev. and Gu., nj^-iD*? on") K'a";!. — coS n3::"i] ® # treat as subj. of foil, clause. — •■yis'D] Hal., "'jx'ij. — 14. ^jnn] C5 H = in\ S, r"!ic*n. Ro., Oort^™-, ^j.nn. Marti, unr; so Now.^^, Siev., Gu.. — ainiSe'] (§, i^airoffreWon^vovs. H, emissarios. ® Aq., 2 0 = gifts. — Vjr] Marti, i^Sj;; so Now.'^. — ntf -nn. (5 ]3 & 3 = possession or iw- heritance. Gr., n-^nsn, or dittog. from v. ". Hal., transposing (■S!<=) Sy niyniD. Che. (/. c), p^x pj 'ipniDS — Tia] Rd. no, with Che. (/. c). — 2V2t<] 05 B & = (iece/i or vanity. Q, i^ avdyKTjs = iras (Ry.).— aroxS] Ro., arpsS.— >dSdS] Gr., "iSd^; so Che. (/. c), Now. —15. ij'] (6, ?ws= 13;; so We., Che. (£x/>. 1897, p. 368), Now., Elh., Siev., Gu.. — B'-\vn] Che. (Exp.), ty^Np, — 7^ '3n] ., 1897, p. 368), Siev., Gu.. Gr.,So^(?). Hal.,Di3\ Elh., after '2\ inserts oS-ig. nac', carrying '•> '33 over to v. '« (so also Ro.). — 16. inmp] C5, XVP^O'" = widowhood, probably an error for Kovpdv (so Schnurrer, Schleus., Ry.)- — '''^■'] Gr., I'^J'. Str. I issues a general call to lamentation. — 10. Tell it not in Gath] A vivid appeal to those fleeing from before the invading army not to humiliate their native land by making its ruin known to their hostile neighbours. These words, freely quoted from the elegy on Saul and Jonathan (2 S. i^''), at once indicate the char- acter of the oracle and constitute an appropriate opening of this dirge. There is no sufficient reason for omitting them as a margi- nal note, either by Micah himself * or by later readers,t intended to call attention to the parallel between this and the earlier lament. The resemblance between the two is hardly close enough to have suggested such a parallel to any reader. It is more probable that the phrase had taken on proverbial force and was used by Micah as an opening line which at once would suggest the nature of his poem. It seems almost certain that Gath had fallen prior to the time of Amos (6^) and that it never recovered from this blow. It is not mentioned with the other four cities of Philistia either by Amos (i^'), Zephaniah (2^'), Jeremiah (47), Zechariah (9'"^), or the books of the Maccabees.— 7» Baca weep Utterly] M., weep not at all, is open to the objections that it is inconsistent with the form of phrase in the parallel lines where a verb is in each case coupled with a noun, that it is exactly the opposite of what the prophet might have been expected to say under such circumstances as these, and that it makes it difficult to account for the rendering of (g (y. s.). The name "Baca" is applied to a village on the northern border of upper Galilee {v. Gu., Bibelatlas, map 13), to a wady discovered by Burckhardt near Sinai and to a portion of the valley south-west of Jerusalem extending toward Bethlehem and men- tioned in Ps. 84^. This last is the only one of the three that at all suits the requirements of this context. — In Beth-ophrah roll your- selves in the dust] The Beth-le-aphrah of H is a name otherwise unknown; it likewise constitutes the only case of a preposition fol- lowing Beth in a proper name. The form Beth-ophrah here adopted is preserved in ^ and ©. The correction involved is a slight one and preserves the paronomasia so characteristic of this passage, and therefore seems preferable to the reading "Bethel" {v. s.). The action called for symbolises a frenzy of despair. — ^lla. Pass ye over from Shaphir in nakedness] M. in this line is badly corrupt; every word is more or less doubtful. But the general sense is clear and supports the translation here offered. The picture is that of a band of exiles being led away by their conqueror. The location of Shaphir is uncertain. The most probable identification is with * So Ry.. t So We., Now., Marti, 46 MICAH Sawafir, SE. of Ashdod; it is less likely an error for Shamir (jos. 15^^ Ju. lo^- ^), a city in Judah. — Li nakedness], i. e., in the garb of a captive, deprived of the outer robe {v. on i*). Str. II sets forth the conditions which enforce the call to mourn- ing.— lib, c. The inhabitant of Zaanin comes not forth from her fortress] Here the punning continues as in Str. I. Zaanan is per- haps identical with \yi (Jos. 15"), which was in the Shephelah. ^ thinks of jyi,', i. e., Tanis or Zoan in Egypt. The suggestion is that of a people barricading itself in its city, afraid to face the oncoming foe. — Beth-ezel is taken from its site] fU, with the addition of the last word in the previous line, is translated by RV., the wailing of Beth-ezel shall take from you the stay thereof. But this is unintel- ligible, as is every other attempt to translate iB- Cf GASm., the lamentation of Beth-ezel takes from you its standing. The above rendering rests upon an emended text (v. s.). The description is that of a city razed to the ground. The town Beth-ezel is nowhere else mentioned (cf. v^X, Zc. 14^), and was evidently unknown to the Greek translators (v. s.) . — 12. How has the inhabitant ofMaroth hoped for good!] But the help longed for has failed to come. Maroth (= bitterness) is a wholly unknown village or town; it would seem to have been in the vicinity of Jerusalem in view of the close connection of this line with the following. RV. renders HI, For the inhabitant of Maroth waiteth anxiously for good; but it should rather be is in agony for good, which yields no satisfactory sense. — For calamity has come down from Yahweh to the gates of Jerusalem] Yahweh is here represented as enthroned in the heav- ens {cf i^), whence he sends down chastisement upon his wicked people. It is not necessary to suppose a siege of Jerusalem act- ually in progress; the prophet rather in this way pictures the im- minence of the danger that threatens. Str. Ill continues the elegiac measure begun in the last two lines of Str. II. Here are described the flight of inhabitants and the loss of territory. — 13. Bind the chariot to the steed, O inhabitant of Lachisli] The paronomasia here is in the similarity of sound be- tween lyiDI, chariot, and u^'^h- The translation, bind, is somewhat conjectural, but seems required by the context. Lachish is identi- cal with Tell-el-Hesy, sixteen miles NE. from Gaza and two miles I"-" 47 S. of Eglon ;* it was formerly incorrectly identified with Umm Lakis, a little farther north. Tell-el-Hesy lies at the base of the foothills of the Shephelah in a fertile valley opening off the road to Egypt. Lachish thus constituted a frontier fortress between Judah and Egypt, and was always a place of strategic value. Rehoboam for- tified it (2 Ch. 11^) and Sennacherib captured it and established temporary headquarters there during the campaign of 701 B.C. (Is. 36^ 37^)- A bas-relief now in the British Museum portrays his capture of the city. — She is the chief sin of the daughter of Zion] This parenthetic statement seems foreign to the context, and is probably a marginal note by some reader or editor (v. s.). The grounds upon which so serious a charge is based are unknown; some have supposed that Lachish was the seat of some grossly li- centious cult;f others base its guilt on the supposition that it was one of the chariot cities established by Solomon (i K. 10^^ 2 Ch. i" 8^)4 The best hypothesis is that "as the last Judean outpost toward Egypt, and on a main road thither, Lachish would receive the Egyptian subsidies of horses and chariots, in which the poli- ticians put their trust instead of in Jehovah." § Cf Ho. 14^. Until we know more definitely the nature of the charge against La- chish or the circumstances under which it was uttered, the possi- bility must remain open for the rendering, "she is the beginning of sin, etc." — For in thee are found the transgressions of Israel] The address is to Lachish, not to the daughter of Zion.** The use of "Israel" is not to be explained as meaning that the sins responsi- ble for Samaria's downfall are now regnant in Judah.f f "Israel" rather indicates the whole of Yahweh's people and territory of which Judah is now the more important part; on this use of "Is- rael," V. s.. The order of words would seem to show that the thought is not that Lachish is characterised by such sins as are com- mon to all the cities of Israel, but that the responsibiUty for the gen- eral guilt rests largely upon Lachish; this is in harmony with the gloss in the previous line. No hint is given as to the nature of the * See F. J. Bliss, A Mound of Many Cilies, or Tell-el-Hesy Excavated, The excavations were begun by J. F. Petris and completed by Bliss. t So, e. g., Now.. t So, e. g., We., van H.. § GASm., 384 /.. ** Contra van H.. tt Contra van H.. 48 MICAH sin laid to the account of Lachish. It is, of course, possible that this oracle was uttered after Hezekiah had sent tribute to Sen- nacherib at Lachish (2 K. 18'^"'"), and that Micah here expresses his judgment concerning that transaction. — 14. Therefore, thou givest a parting gift to M oresheth-Gath] This is better than to treat ' Gath ' as a vocative,* or to consider Moresheth-Gath as the one addressed, f which necessitates a change of text, or to transpose the preposition and render, "thou shalt give Moresheth as a parting gift to Gath." % The address is to the daughter of Zion who is now to dismiss with the proper present one of her villages. The word used here for gift is that employed in i K. 9^^ to designate the dowry given by Pharaoh to his daughter. There was proba- bly an intentional play here on the words ri'jllD and nt^INC (betrothed).^ Judah will lose the town and pay tribute besides. The site of Moresheth-Gath can only be conjectured. The form of the name would imply proximity to Gath, but unfortunately Gath's location is doubtful. Moresheth-Gath was probably near the Philistine border; Jerome declares that a small village near Eleutheropolis (Beit-Jibrin) on the east bore the name in his day. This is the region in which Lachish lay. Micah's appellation, "the Morashtite," was probably derived from this place. Much depends upon this interpretation, for other^vise no information is at hand concerning the prophet's home or origin. — Beth Achzib has become a snare to the kings of Israel] M, the houses of Achzib. Achzib is not the old Phoenician town (Jos. 19^^ Ju. i^^),** as might appear from the phrase kings of Israel. Israel here represents Judah as in line 2, and the plural kings is generic. Achzib has been and still is for Israel's king a false hope, a brook whose waters have dried up. Cf. Je. 15^*. The play on words here is between achzib and achzab. The exact site of Achzib has so far eluded discovery. Jos. 15^^ locates it in the Shephelah of Judah, in the vicinity of Libnah, Keilah and Mareshah. How so comparatively unim- portant a place as Achzib evidently was (for it plays no part else- where on the pages of Hebrew history) could have been a snare to * We.'. t So We., Now., Marti. t So Hal.. § So Hi., We., Now., Marti, van H.. *♦ C/. Ew. and Re, who find here an allusion to both towns, the northern and t!ie southern. i"-^" 49 the kings of Israel must remain a mystery. The view of Hitzig, that Achzib had been in the possession of Philistia since the reign of Ahaz and that Judah had always entertained the hope of its re- covery which is now doomed to disappointment, is wholly without foundation. Str. IV. continues in the elegiac strain, and reaches its climax with an announcement of the doom of exile. — 15. / will yet bring the conqueror to thee, O inhabitant of Mareshah] The play here is on yoresh and Mareshah. Even Mareshah, rejoicing in its name, a possession, shall noc escape the hand of the conqueror, the dispossessor. The modem Merdsh, two miles S. of Beit- Jibrin, an- swers the geographical requirements for the site of Mareshah as in- dicated here and in Jos. 15^* and by Eusebius, who locates it two miles S. of Eleutheropolis. But the excavators have thrown doubt upon its identity with the ancient Mareshah (v. i.). It is evidently to be distinguished from Moresheth-Gath. The places with which the prophet has been concerned in this oracle are thus seen to be in all probability those in the immediate vicinity of his own home, places with which he had been familiar from childhood. They were scarcely of any significance in the great world, but to him and his fellow-villagers they represented home, country and religion, all that they held dear. — Forever is Israel's glory to perish] M, unto Adullam shall Israel's glory come, defies interpretation; that most generally accepted is, the nobility of Israel shall take refuge in a cave. Cf. 1 S. 22^ ^•. Adullam, perhaps the modem 'Id-el- mije, six miles NE. of Beit- Jibrin, was originally the seat of a Canaanitish prince (Jos. 12^^), but was captured by Israel and in- corporated in the territory of Judah (Jos. 15^^). Of the various at- tempts to improve the text, that of Cheyne seems the best and is here adopted. The glory of Israel is probably the wealth and power of Judah which constitute the seal of Yahweh's approval upon her. — 16. Make thyself bald and shave thee for thy darlings] Zion is here addressed as a mother and bidden to go into mourning for the loss of her beloved children. Cf. Je. 3 1^". Reference is had to the cities and villages she has lost, with their inhabitants. — Enlarge thy bald- ness like the vulture's] The vulture is distinguished from the eagle by its bare head and neck. Shaving of the head was a common 50 MICAH mourning custom. Cf. Am. 8'" Is. 3^\ Originally instituted, in all probability, as a sacrificial offering to the departed spirit, it later came to be obnoxious to the sensitive religious conscience of the prophets, who would permit no divided allegiance among the fol- lowers of Yahweh. Such practices were therefore prohibited by the Deuteronomic Code (Dt. 14^; cj. Lv. 21^). The fact that this verse summons Judah to such a rite, even figuratively, attests its origin in days prior to the enactment of the Deuteronomic law.* This verse, moreover, seems to grow right out of the preceding con- text and so adds strength to the argument for Micah's authorship of this whole passage (i^""^®). — For theywill go into exile from thee] Thus ends in familiar but terrible fashion the lamentation over Judah's approaching punishment. The warning note sounded first of all by Amos and Hosea in northern Israel now finds its echo in the southern kingdom. With this picture of an invading army, giving the advance in detail, village by village, is to be com- pared the similar passage, Is. 10^*"^^. 10. nj3] The location of Gath is uncertain; the OT. data are too fragmentary to make identification possible; nor are the Assyrian or Egyptian records any more satisfactory. The two sites most attractive are Beit-Jibrin and Tell-es-Safi. In either case Gath was the nearest of the five chief Philistine towns to the border of Judah. The excavations at Tell-es-Safi by Mr. Bliss in 1899 unfortunately yielded little, the greater part of the mound being occupied by the modern village and two grave- yards, under which excavation is absolutely prohibited. The town stood "as a natural fortress between the plain and the rolling country." The origin of the town goes back as far as the seventeenth century B.C. accord- ing to Bliss. Cf. F. J. Bliss and R. A. Stewart Macalister, Excavations in Palestine During the Years 1898-1900 (1902), pp. 28-43 ^.nd (>2 ff.. Jerome says that Gath lay on the road between Eleutheropolis and Gaza; hence Hpt. suggests 'Araq el-munsiyah, less than two hours from Tell- cl-Hesy. — idj] For the form, cf. lirj; (Je. 4i« 7') and inn (Is. 6»). — Sn 133P] This and i K. 3" are the only cases of Sn and an infin. abs. modi- fying a finite vb., and in both cases the neg. follows the regular rule for kS and other negatives in standing immediately before the finite form. — •■noy':'] Ophrah, the home of Gideon, in Manasseh (Ju. 6"- « 8"- ") is out of the question as too far removed from the scene of Micah's thought. Another Ophrah, mentioned in Jos. 18" and i S. 13", is usu- ally identified with Tayyibeh, five miles N. of Bethel. But this latter, ♦ So even Marti, who assigns vv. '"i* to a later hand. lying outside of Judah on the north, seems too remote to be satisfactory here. The same objection holds for the reading 'Bethel,' if the north- ern town is meant, which lies ten miles from Jerusalem and about twenty-five miles from the region of Micah's home. For those who incline toward this reading, it is safer to regard the Bethel referred to here as the one listed among the towns of the Negeb in i S. 30" Jos. i5'o ((gB); cj. Jos. i9< I Ch. 4'». The suggestion of GASm. that our ' Ophrah is reflected in the name of the Wady el-Ghufr, lying south of Beit-Jibrin, is most attractive. — Tic'Tflnn] This form is prob- ably due to a desire to pun on the name Philistia. Qr., ^v'~'QT\7\^ is prob- ably due to the singular forms of v. ". — dd'? 'n3>'] For a similar lack of agreement in gender and number, K6. 5 34 6s cites Je. 13"; but there the text is exceedingly doubtful, for the Qr., many mss. and the Vrss. make the agreement regular. — ntt'a .ti;"] Apposition, Ges. ^""=; K6. ^2860, — ^DDc] iSl is here unintelligible. By connecting 'd with the pre- vious line (z'. 5.), nNi-> is there furnished with its necessary complement and this line is relieved of a troublesome element. "nDD {v. s.) is a noun conjecturally restored on the basis of Assyrian supuru, 'enclosure' (of a walled city, e.g., Erech); v. DI.h^^'^-, 509, Muss-Arnolt, 779. — n,-i>] For the sense take away, carry off, cf. Ez. 3'*. — imny D3c] There is nothing in the immediate context to which the pron. ns can refer. It is easy to account for a 3 between two c's as a dittog. of D in the old script. Furthermore, r\-y-;:y is air., yields no sense in M,, and was evidently not present to the eye of (ii 21 8". Preflxing the c's restored from d^d the form nDyso is recovered without difBculty, and may be derived from 1D57D, station, post, or from in^c, standing-ground. — 12. nnn] The Meroth in upper Galilee which Josephus mentions {Wars, III, 3, i) is certainly not meant here. But no southern locality bearing that name is available. — ■"''^"""'3] According to M, 'a must be given the meaning verily, for there is no subordinate relation to the preceding or following context, 'n means writhe in pain and is wholly unsuitable before 2\d'^. — -lytrS] For the sg. as in M, cf. Taylor, Cyl. of Sennacherib, col. 3, 11. 22 /., "the exit of the great gate of his city I caused to break through." — 13. arnj For other cases of the masc. form in an address to a fem. subj., cf. Ges. ^ "" •', Ko. ^ '"*■=. It is better pointed as an inf. abs. having the force of the imv.. The translation bind is reinforced by the Assy. ratamu = wrap, bind (v. Muss-Amolt, 991) and the Arab, equivalent which in the fourth form = tie a thread upon the finger as a reminder. — PNsn '-\] Van H. renders, the beginning of the expiation of, etc., but the meaning expiation for 'n is not attested earlier than Zc. 14'', a postexilic passage, and is closely related to the late priestly use of the word in the sense sin-offering. — 14. D^'niSi:'] i.e., the dowry given with the bride by her father. Cf. document C of the Assuan Papyri, published by Sayce & Cowley, where the custom is witnessed to as current among the Jews 52 MICAH of the Dispersion as early as the sixth century B.C. CJ. Code of Hammu- rabi which evidences the same practice in Babylonia as early as 1900 B.C.. The use of the term here is suggested by the similarity of ncnb to n^i«p, betrotlied; it is one of the earliest allusions to the existence of the custom in Israel. Cf. Ju. I'^-'s Gn. ag^"- ". — SjjJ After inj more common preps, are h and Sx; perhaps Sy is used here in the sense wUh, along with. — nj ntymc] Analogous names cited by GASm. are Atroth-Shophan (Nu. 32'- 35), Chisloth-Tabor (Jos. 19"- 's), lye-Abarim (Nu. S3** '"). ^"d Helkath (Jos. 19^'). — 15. ij?] Not again, but still, even yet. The change to nj? (with (6) makes necessary corresponding changes in the remainder of the line which yields reasonable sense as it stands. — ''3n] For other cases of omission of n, v. Ges. ^ '< ^. — niy-in] The modern Mer^sh seems to date no further back than Roman times, if we may judge by the slight depth of debris upon the site. The actual site of this ancient town may be represented by the modern Tell-Sandahannah, one mile SE. of Merash. The remains of an ancient town are evident there, and it is no uncommon thing for a town name to migrate to a new site along with the inhabitants, as, e. g., in the case of 'Umm Lakis. Cf. F. J. Bliss and R. Stewart Macalister, op. cit., pp. 67/.. — zh^-;] The cor- rection to aSiy {v. s.) removes one of the grounds for changing ^j.' to ij? in 1. I {v. s.), and for supposing B'■\^^ to represent the name of a town (We., Now.). § 4. The Oppression of the Poor (2*""). In six strs. in which the elegiac strain is predominant, Micah de- nounces the tyranny of the rich and warns them of coming judg- ment. Str. I, the prophet speaks: Woe to those who plot night and day to despoil their neighbours of houses and lands. Str. II, Yah- weh speaks: For this reason I am about to bring upon this people a humiliating and imbearable yoke. Str. Ill, Yahweh continues: Then the wail of the mourner will arise among you, ' Our land is allotted to others; we are wholly undone!' Str. IV, the rich op- pressors speak: Cease prating of such things. We are immune from calamity. Is Yahweh impotent, or can he mean anything but good to his own people? Str. V, Yahweh retorts: But ye are de- stroyers of my people, robbing and plimdering them and driving the women and children into slavery. Str. VI, Yahweh pronoimces sentence: Rise and begone! Because of your sins, ye shall be hopelessly destroyed. 2^-" 53 VU^OE to those who devise iniquity upon their beds; In the morning hght they execute it, because it is in their power. Yea, they covet fields and seize them, and houses and carry them off. So they crush a yeoman and his house, a man and his heritage. [Therefore thus saith Yahweh:] ■PEHOLD I am devising disaster. Which ye cannot remove from your necks; Nor will ye be able to walk erect, For it will be a disastrous time. TN that day a taunt-song will be raised concerning you; And a lament will be wailed, as follows: The portion of my people is measured with the measuring line, and there is none to restore it. To our captors our land is allotted; we are utterly devastated. F^O not keep harping on such things. Shame cannot overtake the house of Jacob. Is Yahweh impatient, or are such his deeds? Do not his words mean good to Israel? "DUT ye have become my people's foe; ye rise up against those that are at peace. Ye strip off from those passing by in confidence booty of war. The women of my people ye drive away from their pleasant homes; From their babes ye take away my glory forever. A RISE and go! For this is not your resting-place. Because of uncleanness ye shall be destroyed with an irremediable destruction. This section is dramatic in form, three different speakers being brought forward, viz., the prophet, Yahweh, and the greedy oppressors. Its unity and artistic form are both strongly marked. The prevailing move- ment in the six strophes is that of the Qlna, except in Str. II, where the announcement of coming disaster is in short and sharp phrases. The closing str. pronouncing final sentence drops to two lines. The prosaic character of the first two lines of Str III and their lack of conformity to the metre of the balance of the str. raise the question whether they do not constitute the prose introduction to a new section ; but the close connec- tion of the thought of this str. with that of the preceding and the regular interchange of speakers throughout the entire passage seem to prohibit a division of the poem at this point. The more important textual changes which affect the form are the following: the omission of iSytji V\ from v. •, and of nxrn nnoa'Dn Sj? from v. 3; Sta.'s reconstruction of v. *; the omission of v. ^ as a prosaic interpolation (so Ru., Now., Marti, Siev., Gu.); the omission of iicnh from v. ' and of iin from v. '; the treatment of v. " as a prosaic gloss originally belonging to v. «; its relation to v. « was already recognised by Dathe (1773 a.d.) and, more recently, by Hal., who transposes v. « to follow v. ". The introductory words in v. ' lie outside of the poetic form. Siev. omits much material from this section in his effort to restore anapaestic hexameters here, and then finds his scheme break down in vv. ^•■''. 54 MICAH 2'. Mn]vT7jv x^ipoL aiiTwv. Cod. 24 (de R.), S^nS. Siev. om. the phrase. — 2. 17'Ji] & om.; so also Siev.. (S adds 6p4>avoii% as obj., probably as a free rendering. — mP^yy, for nvi is nowhere else rendered by /caraSi/j'acrTfi/etv, nor is p!fj> elsewhere represented by Siapird^eiv; whereas Ka.Ta5vva* Ne. 3'. — HDn] (S adds i^al, as subj. of the foil. vb.. — icn] Rd. ien'?, with Sta., Taylor, We., Pont, Ru., Now., Oort^n-., Siev., Stk., Gu.; cf. (6\ "Kiyuv; "M, dicentium. Ro., ncs (so Hal.) or iDNn (so Elh.). GASm., idni (?). — UTJ-J nntt'] Tr., with Sta., to the end of the verse; so Ru., Now., Stk.. & = UTv''. unless due to confusion of the Heb. preform, i with the Syr. preformative of the 3d pers.. — Ty pSn] Marti, Siev. and Gu., up.'rri. Van H., ■'oy. 'n. — i^c] Rd., with Sta., 'I'^na ia', foil. 05, Karefierpi/idT] iv (Txoiv/v; similarly 0; so Gu., Ru., Now.. San is obtained here from v. ', whither it probably dropped by error. This reading of the vb. is accepted also by Ew., Stei., Taylor, We., Pont, GASm., Oort'^"'-, Marti, Siev., 2*-' 55 Stk., Du.. Gr., nnv Hal., ifa\ — T'n] Rd., with Sta., ps'i, foil. C5, Kal ovk ^v, and d; so Pont, Ru., Now., Oort^"-, Stk.; also Dathe, We. and Du., dropping ]. Hal., ri>ti. — tt-T'] Rd., with Sta., 3ie'C, foil. <8, o ko\6'? iSifc. Du., 3tt*iD. — •>':] Om.withj&asdittog.; soSta.,Ru.,Now.,Stk.. (g=iS; so Taylor, Oort^'"-, Du.. ©, ]inS. VanH., xS, Gr., u'^. — 33vi'S] Rd., with Sta., iraiir^; so Pont, Ru., Now., Oort^'"-, Stk.. (S S 0 treat as an infin. depending upon tt''D\ Aq., Tors 7«^ro(rt. 'M,cumrevertatur. g»QIom. S. Marti, ■ij''3vj', Gr., narSi. Siev., n.nir. — una-] (S-*-^ SI = d.?''1K'. — pSn''] Rd., with Sta., pVn^; so Pont, Gr., Ru., Marti, Stk.. nt'. — 5. nS pS] Elh., ^iVi. — iS] Pont, ddS; so Ru., Marti. Oort^"-, uS. — Siua 'n ^^'7t^•c] Tr. hjn to v.* (^'. s.). #, one tw/io ««7/ measure by line and divide by lot. Ru. om. 3 San. — 6. iD''an Sn] Rd. t]t2n Sn, with Ru., Siev.. — ]^D•'t3^] Rd. n''OJ, with Taylor. (S, Sd/c- /jufftj'; so &. !ff, loquentes. Aq., ffTaX«£foyTey. S, ^a»' iiriTLfi'fiffTjTe. Ru., Difiiaj. Elh., cccc. — ic^i nS] Om. as dittog.. ^ = sd pers. la^an; so codd. 295 (de R.) and 154 (Kenn.). 13, non stillabit. Ru., 'a'' nSi. — JD^] Rd., with Gr., i^%'\; so HWB.^\ Marti, Now."^, Siev., Gu., Hpt.. (5, dirtifferai = j'Di; so Ru., van H., Du.. "B, comprehendet. ^, overtake you. Aq., KaToK^fifrj. Codd. 224 (Kenn.) and 554 (de R,), jd^; codd. 150, 226 (?), 201 (second hand) of Kenn., and 2, 380, 993, 1257, 411, 211 of de R., y:f\ Elh., Jb'\ Hal., wt;-'\ — ninVa] 14 codd. (Kenn.), nip -h^. Elh., ninS?. Ru., o';'iaJ. — 7. iidnh] Rd. "iD^?. — ■'•12-1] Rd., with (5 and cod. 305 (de R.), vnai; so Gr., Gu., Ru., Now., OortE™-, Marti, Siev.. — iSn ityn] Rd. '?N-(tt'>, with Now., Oort^""-. (^, Kal 6p0ol TreirSpevvrai.. Taylor, i3Sn'\ Ru., iS In'^^K'j nD,-;i. Marti, Now.^^ and Gu., iDj? '?N";if\ Hpt., innN ^'7n^ 'in, — 8. VinnNi id;'] Rd. iny.S ariNi, with WRS., Proph., 429, and GASm.. Cod. 89 (Kenn.), SnnNi. Cod. 159 (Kenn.), SicnNn. Cod. 300 (Kenn.), ViD-nNi; so Ro., Taylor, Elh., Pont, Hal.. Hi., Sid-Sni. Oort^"*-, SicnNs, taking 3 from v. '. We., 'y *?]? ansi; soNow., Siev., VanH., Du.. Marti, anNi, omitting S as dittog. from j^nS, and transferring icy as iDg to end of V. '. Gu., DHKi, and om. Ty h\ — DDipi] Rd., with We., -iD-ipn; Now., Marti, Siev., Gu.. WRS., aipi; so Taylor, Elh., Pont, Gr.. HWB.'> and van H., diC|-5, giving 1 to 31N as sf. \ Cf. GASm., Du., Di'ji. — Vine] Rd., $6 MICAH with Marti, H\ We., S;:*:; so Gr., Now., Siev.. — nnSr] Rd., with We., D'S^U'; so GASm., Now., Marti, Gu.. 05, t^s elp^vrjs avrov = nuhv; so &, WRS.. OortE"-, nb^u* (c/. Ps. 7'). Ro., nc*?r. Elh., Pont, oSit*. Hal., oSr. Van H. joins with foil, word and reads nxNjoSa' = Shalma- nezer. — tin] Om., with Marti, as gloss on noStt'; so Now.'', Siev.. (5, rijv 5opdiv avToO, giving 'n its Aramaic force (so Biichler, ZAW., XXX, 64/.) as in Gn. 252^; so &. WRS., n-i.^N; so Taylor, Gr.. Elh., nnsn; so Pont. Hal., Ti.Nn. — c^ajjc] <&, toO d(pe\i(r6ai = D>-!^3>v:; so &. Ru., lOj^nS. Siev., iaj?n. — oif] Rd., with We., i;r; so Now., Marti, Siev., van H., Gu., Hpt.. Cod. 17 (Kenn.), ■'3B'. (B, ffwrpin/xdv ~ lac. V, convertistis. ^, and ye turn. ^, dfieplfjLvui, Hoffmann (Z^PT., HI, 103), 131U'. Taylor, iTac* (so Elh.) or o-^' (so Ges., ">"?). Gr., '•njip. Ru,, i^rr. OortE""-, n^r. Matthes, with foil, word, acnS Do^-j-; so Elh., Pont. — 9. '•a'j] (S, 7]yo6/ji€voi = 'nicj. (E, nt'ij?, i/j« assembly. — n>2i:] We., ''J33 (c/. I'"); so Now., Marti, Siev., Gu.. — n^jj^n] Rd., with & (6, ]\}V.yiJ}; soGr., Ru., Marti, Now.", Siev., Gu., Hpt., Du..— n>SSjf] Rd., with & (S "H, it';;'?}; ; so Gr., Ru., Marti, Now.k Siev., Gu., Hpt., Du.. (S, tA TTOvrjpd. iirLTfiBevixaTO. avrdv i^w12 is imique, while vlli, lot, is common in such a connection; perhaps ^DPI here belonged originally to v. *, where it has been supplied above on the basis of (g. Str. IV expresses the indignant protest of the rich who regard such preaching as disloyal and irreligious. The elegiac rhythm is continued. — 6. Do not keep harping on such things] Treatment of this kind was no new experience for prophecy; it antedated Amos (2^^), and Amos himself was bidden to keep silence (5'" 7'°"'^), as also Isaiah (28^- ^°). By the time of Manasseh it had developed into actual persecution (2 K. 21^^ cf. Je. 11**-^^ 26^° ^■). The verb employed here is practically synonymous with J<2i, the ordinary word for prophesy, yet lends itself readily to an imfavourable con- notation by reason of its original meaning, viz., drip, drop, i. e., of ♦ Van H.. t Hi., Now. (?). t Ew., Ke., GASm.. 6o MICAH the foam from the mouth of ecstatic, epileptic nebVim. M of this line has been variously treated, e. g., using the last two words of v. ^ "In the assembly of Yahweh do not prophesy" (an address to Micah and his associates by his opponents, to which Micah repHes) : "Whether they {i. e., the prophets) preach or do not preach to such as you, shame, etc." * Or again, as the utterance of two or three of the audience taken up by Micah into his address, i. e., one says, "You must not speak," a second replies, "O, let them speak," while a third adds, "They must not speak such things as these." f Yet again, as a protest of the rich cited by Micah, "prate not," they prate, "let none prate of such things." { This latter is the best interpretation and the most widely accepted one, but it does not account for the interchange of bi^ and J^"?, nor render the change from 2d to 3d pers. anything but abrupt. — Shame cannot over- take the house of Jacob] This includes the first words of v. ''; for text, V. s.. The rich continue speaking here. The thought out of which this confidence springs is that of Am. 3^: Israel is Yahweh's chosen people and therefore safe from harm. Cf. 3". It is the creed of the established regime, which is ever too ready to identify God's interests with its own. From the point of view of the rich, Micah is guilty of both treason and blasphemy. A single word, "ICKn, attached as a marginal note to call attention to the fact that the "house of Jacob" is the speaker in this and the following lines, has crept into the text here and caused much difficulty. The first part of the line as in iK may perhaps be rendered, reproaches do not de- part, though the verb HID elsewhere always conveys an element of disgrace as attending the movement expressed by the verb, e. g., 'backslide,' or 'be driven back in defeat,' or 'prove recreant'; the second part eludes explanation as may be seen from the various attempts to make sense, e. g., "O thou who art called the house of Jacob"; § "O words of the house of Jacob"**; "What a word! O house of Jacob" tt; "O thou that speakest thus to the house of Jacob " tt ; " Should it not be said, 0,etc."§§ ; " Shall one say to the * Ro.. Cf. van H. t M. Jastrow, in Frankel's ilonatschrijt, 1872. X GASm., el al.. § Cal., Ke.. *♦ Roscnm., Mau.. ft Ew., Casp., Stci., Urn.. tt GASm.. §§ Hi.. 2^-' 6l house of Jacob?"* ; "Is this the talk of the house of Jacob ?"t- — 7. Is Yahweh impatient or are such his deeds ?] Is not Yahweh " slow to anger" (cf. Ex. 34®), and has not our entire history demon- strated his beneficent purpose toward us ? — Do not his words mean good to Israel?] This was the difficulty encountered by all the prophets — the failure on the part of the people to realise that Yah- weh's favour was conditioned upon the character of his people, and that no amount of ritual or protestations of loyalty could supply the lack of truth and justice. The great task of prophecy, therefore, was to inform the national conception of God with moral content. m reads here, do not my words mean good to him that walketh up- rightly ? But this necessitates joining the line as an utterance from Yahweh with v. ^ and constitutes very bad Hebrew for the last clause. Of the various emendations {v. s.) offered, the foregoing best suits the demands of the context. Str. V, in the words of Yahweh himself, makes crushing reply to the protest of the rich oppressors, "How can you expect good when your deeds are evil?" The elegiac strain continues. — 8. But ye have become my people's foe] The Hebrew text of this verse is badly corrupt; for the emendations adopted, v. s.. As emended it is an address to those who have been so loud in their resentment of Micah's message of woe. 'You yourselves are Israel's worst enemies.' M, Formerly my people as an enemy raised up, etc., offers no proper object of the transitive 'raise.' — Ye rise up against those that are at peace] The rich make hostile plans against the imsuspecting poor to compass their spoliation and de- struction. The most common treatment of M, is to connect the verb 'rise up' with the first line, to draw plDtS'Sn from the following line to this one, and translate, /row upon the garment ye pull off the robe. The outer and more expensive garment is seized as security for debt, in violation of Ex. 22^^- ^^. But the preposition hi'Q regu- larly means 'in front of,' and the word 17.^ » ^^^ occurring elsewhere in this sense, is better considered as an error for the ordinary word ri"i7X, which was added on the margin by some reader as a more specific designation of the garment in question after the original D'^D^w' had become nD7ti'. — Ye strip off from those passing by in * Dr., Exp., 1878. t Or.. 62 MICAH confidence booty of war] The words of this line are not to be taken literally; the prophet is not necessarily speaking of actual highway robbery; his thought is rather exactly parallel to that of the pre- ceding line : " You take advantage of innocent, trusting neighbours and plunder them as though they were enemies." JH is very diflS- cult; the best rendering of it is, if nilX may be connected with this line, the mantle ye strip from those who pass by in security, averse to war; but ""^"ISy is not found elsewhere, and the meanings given to it have been many and various. — 9. The women of my people ye expel from their pleasant homes ; From their babes ye take away my glory for ever] i. e. in their greedy haste to "join house to house and lay field to field," they do not hesitate to render families homeless or even to sell the fathers into slavery for debt. Wellhausen, et al., substitute "children" for "homes" {v. s.), and interpret the verse of selling into foreign servitude which deprives the little ones of ever living in the land of Yahweh. But it is very questionable whether so heinous a crime is referred to here; the laws on slavery seem not to have contemplated such a dire possibility, for they make not the slightest allusion to it; the only case in the Old Testament is the sale of Joseph to the Midianites by his brethren — an altogether abnormal transaction. Furthermore, the phrase "my glory" can- not well mean 'the glory of dwelling in Yahweh's land,' for this does not reflect glory upon Yahweh, while the thought of 'glory granted to the people by Yahweh' would be more natvu^ally desig- nated "their glory." Then too, the vb. 'expel' suits 'home' better than 'children,' and the preposition 'from upon' suits better the removal of fathers from their children than the taking away of the privilege of residence from the latter. For the use of the term 'glory' as applied to men, cf. Is. 5^^- ". The yeomen of Israel might well be designated as Yahweh's glory. Str. VI is Yahweh's curt, summary dismissal of the guilty to their irrevocable doom. — 10. Arise and go I for this is not your resting- place] Those who have driven out others are now themselves to be driven out. — Because of uncleanness, ye shall be destroyed with an irremediable destruction] Men strict in their observance of ceremonial law, no doubt, are here brought face to face with their own inner depravity and Yahweh's insistent and terrible demand 2«-" 63 for "clean hands and a pure heart." — 11. If a man walking in a spirit of falsehood lies, saying, "I will prophecy to thee of wine and strong drink," he becomes the prophet of this people] This verse is a later addition as shown by its prosaic form and by its lack of con- nection with its immediate context. It seems to have been suggested partly by the contents of v. ^ and partly by the severe terms of v. '°. In contrast to the denunciatory Micah with his relentless message, a picture of the popular prophets is presented. To them Micah pays his respects in 3^^'. This rendering of v. " adopts a use of ■]St quite common {v. i.) and treats ^iptl'l V\T\ as a case of hendia- dys. An alternative rendering for the phrase is "walking in van- ity (or emptiness) and falsehood"; for this use of mi, cf. Is. 41^^ Jb. 7' 15^ Ec. i". To "walk in a spirit of falsehood" and preach lies is to deceive people deliberately, and is far worse than to de- ceive unwittingly. The substance of the false teaching is the prom- ise of material prosperity and blessings of the most sensuous char- acter. This is the only thing that will content the populace; they will not listen to the words of the true prophet whose message, how- ever unpalatable, is bom of supreme devotion to their highest good. To change "j^in to the perfect tense as some do {v. s.) in- volves either an awkward asyndeton for the verb ;3TD or else the separation of the phrase Iptt'T mi between the two verbs thus, "if a man walk in wind and falsely lie, saying, etc." The Iptl' however is redimdant as a modifier of 3TD and the phrase is much better taken as a unit and modifying "j^in. 1. y"\ •'Syci] For the meaning 'prepare,' 'work out in advance,' ref- erence is had to such passages as Ps. 7'* 58= Is. 41^ This thought is certainly present in Ps. 58^, if the text is sound ; but even there the idea of 'planning' is not in the vb. Sj,'d itself, but is plainly expressed by the phrase ' in the heart ' which is attached. The question at issue is whether 'd may have that sense in itself, without such modifying phrase. It is clearly not required in Is. 41*, where the two vbs. 'd and nB'>' are more naturally treated as exact equivalents, being rendered 'who hath wrought and done it.' Nor is there any reason in Ps. 7>< for departing from the usual sense; when the psalmist says that Yahweh 'makes his arrows,' he surely does not imply that Yahweh 'devises' or 'plans' them beforehand. — ^n] In the sense of 'strength,' 'power,' Sn is found only in this id- iom. Nor can this meaning be definitely connected with the \/ Sin. But the context of the various occurrences of the phrase seems to demand 64 MICAH this sense; - plicable to Israel by foreigners (Nu. 22<) or to foreigners by Israelites (i S. 17*')' '^'' 'p here is synonymous with "the people of Yahweh," or 2^-" 65 "the inheritance of Yahweh." — 6. id'D^ n"? iib^o^ ifi^on *?«] On orig. force of iian, t;. ZAW. Ill, iig. Or. accounts for change from Sn to nS by making Micah begin to reply with '•> nS in the form of a question, "shall one not preach to such as these?". If M be retained, the only treatment of '' nS is as a positive prohibition by the rich, "they shall not preach such things." For inf. abs. Qal with Hiph. impf . as in emended text, V. Ges. ^ "^ ". — jD''] For other cases of vb. in sg. masc. before a fem. pi. subj., Ges. 5'«°; K6. ^348i. — On the intensive pi. pidS;] K6. §261 h. the change to sg. (Now.) is unnecessary, nor need '^ no be made the subj. (Marti). — 7. niDNn] As it stands, this can be only a Qal pass, prtc, either with the article, or with n interrog. (Ges. 5 loo °; Ko. ^ ^ss w) with gerundive sense, "is it to be said?" Cf. Ko. ^^ "* ^- '" " ^. But V. s.. — Dx] This indirect question does not propound two alternatives, but rather two phases of the same thought; Ges. ^'^o ''; Ko. ^^^^ °. — aj? iSin nji'in] An adv. use of Ti'i "one walking as the righteous," i. e. righteously. But the order of words is difficult. Jb. 31^6, ^Sn np> nn\ is not a parallel case, for there nT" is the main word to which 'n ip> is attached as an attendant circumstance, while here the main word is ^S^ and comes last. Not only so, but the use of the article with -w^ is an ad- ditional difficulty. Indeed in Jb. 3126 there is no reason for treating ip^ as other than an ordinary adjective and rendering ' a glorious moon as it passed along ' Ko. ^ "2 i^ cites the analogy of the Hal clause in Arabic, which permits this order when the governing word is a participle as here. On the use of article with iB" and its absence from iSin, cf. Wright, A rah. Cram. °- pp- "^ »• «i' ». — 8. SicnNi] This word is without force in this context; Micah is concerned not with the dead past, but the living pres- ent.— ''Di'] It is not unlikely that this is a dittog. of aj." in the last clause of V. '', or has been dislodged from its place after SN-ia^ {v. emended text) ; so Marti, Now.^. Such an arrangement yields a smoother sentence here, but is not indispensable. — anp''] M requires tj? as subject, but as a transitive form it requires also an object which is not forthcoming. Furthermore, the succeeding vbs. are all in 2d pers. pi.. — Sice] The col- location of four d's is suspicious, as also the unsuitability of this prep.,= from in front of, to the noun noStt'] This designates the ordinary outer garment, while "nt^], to be read mix (n being lost before 'dp; so BDB.), applies to the mantle, or cloak, worn as an overcoat. But this seems too detailed and petty in the present context. — •'^ir] On the gen. rela- tion instead of a prep., cf. Ko. ^ s^e mj on the pass. prtc. denoting a state or quality, cf. Ko. ^ "* ^. But the harshness of this cItt. idiom seems to call for correction of the text; v. s.. The most serious objection to the emen- dation 13B* is that in its ordinary sense of 'captives' or 'captivity' it does not constitute a suitable object for ]\£VBr>. But Am. 4'", a3''DiD ^z^ o?, furnishes a use of ^2V very close to that called for here. — 10. nxr:-^] Some Heb. mss. followed by Baer read '^x'?,'p, i. e. pf. 3d sg. Qal; but this 66 MICAH is difficult after "Ma;'3, whereas the inf. cstr. of HJ is a normal construc- tion foil. prep.. But smoother sense results from the noun-form nsca, uncleanness (HWB.^^), which it is better to follow than to posit the irr, noun nxpo (BDB.). — 11. nn •\hr\] An ace. designating the goal or sphere of the action, Ko. ^"O", cf. •\vn 'n, Jb. 29'; ipB'j 'n, Je. 23'*; 'n n£5 n^ypy, Pr. 6". There is no need to change the text (v. s.) ; the idio- matic use of ' walk' as designating a manner of life is common enough to justify M. § 5. The Return of the Exiles (2''- '^). A later editor, in a single eight-line str., prevailingly trimeter in movement, offsets the announcement of exile made in § 4 by a promise of Israel's return from exile under the protection and leadership of Yahweh. T WILL surely assemble Jacob, all of him; I will surely gather the remnant of Israel. I will put them together like a flock in the fold, Like a herd in the midst of the pasture. The breaker will go forth before them; They will break through the gate and go forth thereat; And their king will pass on before them; Yea, Yahweh at their head. This arrangement involves two modifications of M; (i) the omission of the last two words of v. '^ as a gloss, (2) the omission of nayi from v. " as a dittograph of -i3>'M in the following line. The str. shows a gradual diminution in the length of its lines, from tetrameter through trimeter to dimeter (in the last line only). Marti obtains a ten-line str. by retaining all of M and beginning his eighth line with ly^' notwithstanding its close relation to the preceding vbs. as object. Siev, secures four of his indis- pensable ' sevens' by omitting rmK-.r and the last two words of v. " and supposing a loss of one foot after nytt*. The difficulty of establishing any connection between these verses and 2'-" has long been felt. The history of interpretation records various treatments. Among others, it has been interpreted as a continuation of the threatening language of v. '", i. e. "I will gather them to destruction, etc."; so e. g. Ki., Ephraem Syrus, Theodoret, Grotius, Tarnovius, Cal., and in recent times van H.. Again, as the teaching of false prophets, either spoken by Micah himself, viz. 'if I prophesy to this people of wine, etc., and say to them, "I will gather, etc." ' (so e. g. AE., Mich., Struensee); or as a marginal note by Micah or an early reader representing the contents of false prophecy (so e. g. Ew.); or as an interruption of Mi- cah's utterance by the false prophets themselves (so e. g. Kl., Ro., Or.). But against all three alternatives lies the fatal objection that these verses 212-13 6; presuppose the exile as a matter of fact — whereas the popular prophets never admitted the possibility of exile (c/. 3"). Furthermore, the con- tent of the verses is thoroughly in keeping with the teachings of the true prophets of certain periods {v. i.). Another supposition is that, though belonging to Micah, the verses are out of their original connection; so c. ^. Ry., Ko. £/«/. 327, Dr.; Stei. who places them after 48; Condamin, RB. 1902, who makes them foil. 4'. The evidence, however, seems convincing for the exilic or postexilic origin of 2"- ". The total lack of connection and the presupposition of the exile and the dispersion; the lack of any moral or religious prereq- uisites on Israel's part to the restoration of Yahweh's favour; the use of 'remnant' to designate returning exiles {cf. Gie., Beitrdge 2. Jesaia-Krilik, 37 jr.); and the parall. in phraseology and conception to such late pas- sages as Ho. 2^ Is. II" 3- 5212 je. 318^ all combine to mark the passage as late (so Sta. ZAW. I, 162 /.; Kue. Einl. II, 359 /•; Cor. 340; Che. in WRS. Prop/f.s, XXIII; We.; Now.; Onmm, Lit. App.; Marti; Siev.). Possibly these verses have displaced a more severe ending for the chapter, with which the -\cni of 3» originally made good connection (so Kue., Now., Grimm). 12. iDs.v] (g shall be gathered, perhaps a free rendering (Ry.). — 3|-,;<] 51 = ^NTi'\ d^ this people. — 1^3] Rd., with We., i^; so Now., Oort"^'"-, Marti, Hal., Siev., Gu.; cf. (S ffiiv ■Ko.aiv.—M'O^Vii] ® adds as obj., rT]v diroaTpo(pT]v avrou {cf. ®'s similar addition with raps); hence Taylor would insert in>2r. — n-\x3] Rd., with Wetzstein (in De. Jesaia\ 705) mv^3; so Now., Oort^""-, Marti, Siev., Gu., HWB.^^; cf. IS in ovili. "Z Q iv dxvp'ilJ-o.rL. ); so Dathe, Taylor, van H.. Hal. miJX Hpt. n-^x33. Against the reading m^xa, Hpt. makes the point that we should hardly expect m^s here, when the equivalent form mv^a occurs in Gn. 25>« Nu. 3i'o Ez. 25^ Ps. 69=6 i Ch. 639; but cf. the equivalent forms nxo and -\i:j. — ^•\2■^n] Rd., with Ro., n3->n, carrying 1 over to foil, word; so Ry., SS., Elh., Pont, Gu., Now., Oort'=^"'-, Marti, Siev., Hpt.. (& their lair. H caularum. S 6 t^j ip-liy.ov; hence Gr., Hal. nann. Van H. lann.— njD^nn] Rd. nj\cnni; so We., Gr., Now., Oort^"-, Marti, Hal., Gu.. (S they shall escape. § is concealed. Van H. "nji incnv— ans-c] Van H. d-jnd.— 13. ins^ ^^>] <§ Std T^s StaKOTTTjs = \'-}Br\ •?>;. — li'ic] & sg.. A omits with remainder of the verse. — noi'^i] Om. as dittog. from foil, line; it is tautologous between ii'ii3 and 1NSM, and likewise superfluous in the metre. — -i>";'] # om.. 12. Jacob, all of him . . . the remnant of Israel] By these two terms the whole of the Hebrew people is embraced, the latter phrase probably referring to the survivors of the northern kingdom. The exile and dispersion are here treated not as possibilities, but 68 MICAH as actually existing facts. Passages like this and 4^"*, written in periods when everything visible to the human eye was fraught with discouragement and gloom, reveal the extraordinary capacity of the Hebrew soul for faith — faith in its God and in its destiny. The pronoun of the 2d person, as in M, must give place to that of the 3d person (v. s.), in view of the parallel pronouns of the remainder of the poem. It is impossible to find anything but words of en- couragement and comfort here.* — Together will I put them like a flock in the fold] ' Put together ' is here synonymous with the pre- ceding 'assemble' and 'gather.' It refers not only to the two halves of the nation heretofore separated but also to the more or less widely scattered groups of exiles in various lands. The 'dias- pora' began early, as is demonstrated by the existence of a Jewish colony at Assuan on the Nile at least as early as 550 B.c.t RV.'s sheep of Bozrah yields no satisfactory sense; nor is it safe to render * flock of the fold,' for botsrah does not have the meaning * fold ' else- where, cannot be assigned to any root which yields such a sense, and lacks the preposition ' in ' which the parallelism seems to re- quire. It is therefore necessary to adopt a slightly different read- ing from M; V. s.. — Like a herd in the midst of the pasture] The similes employed imply not merely the bringing together of Israel from its different places of exile, but also the thought of Yahweh's protecting care after the return; cf. Ps, 23\ — And they will be tumultuous with people] These two words are a later expansion as shown by the looseness of their connection, by the diflaculty of the grammar, and by their redundance in the metre. J The sub- ject apparently is the 'fold' and the 'pasture.' For the figure in the Hebrew, literally 'they will roar on account of men,' as des- ignating great masses of people, cf. Is. 17". — 13. The breaker will go forth before them] The figure of the flock and herd is still re- tained, but the scene now shifts from Palestine as the fold and pas- ture to the land of exile as a prison. Thence will Yahweh lead them forth, going before them like the ram of the flock to break down every barrier and remove every obstacle. That Yahweh is * Contra van H. {v. s.), who finds it necessary to eliminate lines i, 2 and 8 as glosses made by one who misunderstood the tenor of the passage, t V. JMPS. in Biblical World, XXXI (iqo8), 448 fi.. X So also Sicv., though working upon a diflcrcnt metrical basis. 2''-'^ 69 the ' breaker ' is shown by the parallel terms in lines 7 and 8, which seem fatal objections to any attempt to identify the ' breaker ' with some particular part of the Israelitish army after the analogy of I S. 13^^ Ju. 20^^ ^- Jos. (p- ^- ^^.* The same verb is used to describe Yahweh's activity in Ex. 19"- '^ 2 S. 5-° i Ch. 14" Ps. 80'^. — They will break through the gate and go forth thereat] The words 'and pass on' which iU presents immediately after 'break through' are redundant and render the following 'go forth' belated and superfluous. Furthermore, the rendering 'pass on to the gate' (so RV.) leaves the preceding verb without an object, while the sense 'pass through' is difficult without a preposition. When to these diflSculties is added the metrical redundance, it seems nec- essary to relegate the phrase to the margin. — And their king will pass on before them, Yea — Yahweh at their head] The 'king' and Yahweh are here identical, as in Je. 22^ Zp. 3^^ Is. 33^^ 41^^ 43^^ 44** Ps. 89*^. To interpret 'king' as designating the Messianic ruler or the exiled monarch would involve a double headship and leader- ship of the returning procession such as finds no parallel elsewhere in the Old Testament. For other pictures of similar tone, cf. Je. 31" ^- Is. 40^ ^- 52^-. 12. I'-'z] For this use of S3, cf. on i'. — niix'^:'] Found prior to Isaiah and Micah only in Gn. 45' (E), 2 S. 14' Am. i^ s'', i. e. twice in the sense of posterity, once of the few surviving Philistines, and once of decimated Israel. Isaiah is the first to introduce the thought of a holy remnant and to apply it to returning exiles; cf. Meinhold, Der heilige Rest (1903). — mi-3] Ordinarily taken as from 1x2, be inaccessible (common to Heb. and Ar.) and given the meaning fold; v. s.. The reading nnxa is supported in part by (5 S* and furnishes a good parallel to nina. The noun r\yis is a by-form of nn'^a, corresponding to the Ar. stra, and applied in Heb., Ar. and Syr. to the low stone wall surrounding an encampment, or to the encampment itself, or to a sheepfold similarly protected. — main] For other cases of art. with sf., cf. Ges. ^'"'; Ko. § »03e. — njn>nn] M derives this from Din, but the existence of the Hiph. of this vb. is doubtful; the derivation from ncn (v. s.) is better. The fem. pi. because the subjects n-i>s and i3t represent ^/mm^5. — 13. rh-;] Proph. pf.; often used of return from exile, e. g. Ho. i" 2'^ Is. ii'*; cf. Na. 2'. — iNv] On proph. pf. continued by waw consec. with impf., cf K6. ^ »'; Dr. ^ «'. * Contra Dr. Exp. 18S7, pp. 259 /.. 7© MICAH § 6. Denunciation of the Leaders and Prophets (3*'*). Of the seven four-line strs. constituting this poem, three are devoted to the secular leaders, three to the reUgious, and the last to Micah himself. Str. I charges the leaders of Israel with having perverted their calling — they who should love and honour justice are devoted to the pursuit of wickedness. Str. II in highly figurative language pictures their oppression of the poor and helpless. Str. Ill an- nounces a day of disaster when these leaders will reap the due re- ward of their deeds and find that Yahweh turns a deaf ear to their cry for help in their distress. Str. IV turns the charge against the prophets of the day who being actuated by mercenary motives are leadmg Israel astray. Str. V, imder the figure of an eclipse, de- clares the time to be at hand when the impotence of these prophets will become manifest — prophets without vision. Str. VI describes the shame and confusion that will overwhelm them when they discover that God heeds not their cry. Str. VII sets forth, in sharp contrast to the powerlessness just described, Micah's conscious- ness of his own authority and power to denounce the sins of Israel. I-JEAR now, ye heads of Jacob, And rulers of the house of Israel: Is it not yours to know justice, Ye who hate good and love evil? ■QUT they eat the flesh of my people. And their skin from upon them they strip off; And their bones they lay bare and break them up. Like meat in the pot, and flesh within the caldron. 'FHEN will they cry unto Yahweh, And he will not answer them; But will hide his face from them. Inasmuch as they have made their deeds evil. [Thus has Yahweh said:] (CONCERNING the prophets who lead my people astray, Who when they bite with their teeth preach peace; But as for him who puts not into their mouths — Against him they declare war. T^HEREFORE, it will be night for you without vision, And darkness for you without divination. Yea, the sun will set upon those prophets. And the day will become dark over them. 3"' 71 A ND the seers will be ashamed. And the diviners will blush. And they will cover the upper lip, all of them, Because there is no answer from God. "RUT I, indeed, am full of power, And justice and strength. To declare to Jacob his transgression, And to Israel his sin. The symmetry of the poem is apparent. In both groups of three strs. each, the opening str. contains the address and the general charge, the 2d str. presents a series of bold figures, and the closing str. declares the same climax — Yahweh's refusal to hear the cry of the wicked. Further- more, Strs. Ill and VI alike are made up of short trenchant lines, an- nouncements of doom which fall like the blows of a sledge-hammer. This arrangement presupposes the omission of v. '*>• " as a variant of v. ' (so We., Now., Marti, Gu.; cf. Lohr, ZDMG. LXI, 3-6); the treatment of N^nn nj;3 in v. ■"' as a repetition of tn in v. ■*» (so Marti, Siev.); the excision of nim nn nx from v. ' as a gloss (so We., Now., Marti, Siev., Gu., Du.) ; and the exclusion of the introductory formulas in w. '-^ as extraneous to the poetic form. Lohr and Siev. agree in excluding w. ^-^ from this piece and including w. '-'2, but this fails to do justice to the symmetrical relations between w. '■< and 5-8 on the one hand, and the logical and formal independence of w. '-" on the other. Furthermore, their metrical arrangement (Lohr, 4+3 + 3; Siev. 7 + 3) takes too great liberties with the text, removing no less than twenty-five words from the M of w. '-8, i. e. nearly one-fourth of the material, and adding two words at the opening of v. ^ 1. iCNi] (&fb = iCNi; We., Marti, Gu., Hpt. om. as gloss; sot, un- less in tempore at the close of 2'' represents it. — .sj-iycii'] (g ® add nxi, as in v. '. — apy] (^fb"^ and 12 codd. of Kenn. and de R., '' no, as in v. '; so Hal.. — ■"J'Sp] (5 ol /caraXonroi; so also in v. '. — 2. njj-i] Rd. pn, with Qr.. — aiiy] Gr. \pjj -\iy. — oniSpo] Hal. oipn> Sy.D. — omnxy] Hal. pudSn. — 3. -iC'Ni] C§> tv rpb-irov. & 3J om. 1. Taylor, •^nc'-i. — ani'?yc] (S'^-Q iirh Twp 6'c] Some Heb codd. n.:.g^; soQ5&. — DinS.s] (5 oiJtwi' = Dri'i'i^N; & = dhiSn D''n'^N. — 8. dSini] (6 ^av m^? = nn rx nr] Om. as gloss,'' 'i tn, with We., Now., Marti, Siev., Du., Hpt.. Gie. Berufsbegabung, 123, om. HN na. Oort^""/' nnj nj. — mnji oeirci] A om.; so cod. Reuch. of 21; so Taylor, Pont, Siev.. Chrysostom om. bqb'CI. — '?{'i accompany each other just as regularly as njia and nyi; v. Ps. 52^ 38" 35'= Pr. 163" Nu. 24". — 3. inxs] air; not from A.^i, to break (so BDB. and HWB.^^), but from >^»~»ii, to lay bare (so Bevan, cited by Marti), ordinarily used in Ar. to denote the exposure of vices or faults; v. Lane, Lex. 2410. — urnsi] = and spread out, which does not suit the following similes; it is better taken as a by- form of DID, used in Qal of the breaking of bread and in Hiph. of the dividing of the hoofs of animals; cf. No. ZA. I, 417/.. The sequence of tenses here demands 'fl»i. — isoj] On absence of article, cf. Ko. 5"''. — nnSp] Only here and i S. 2 ", but context in both cases renders its gen- eral sense quite clear; cf. Lagarde, Ubersicht, 88; Erman, ZDMG. XLVI, 121. — 4. inD^i] The jussive, as in M, is without any of its characteristic force here; it is most easily accounted for as a case of defective writing of the normal indicative form, Dr. ^ >'<; but cf. Ko. 5 isad^ which attrib- utes e to "the vowel-oppressing influence of the consonantal environ- ment"; Ges. ^ "" '', which expldins forms of this kind as often caused by necessities of rhythm; and Hpt. who calls it an Aramaicism. — -ib'xd] For similar usage, c/. Ju. 6" i S. 28'8Nu. 27K2K. i7««; v.Ko.^^^e—Q, a^'OB'jn] Serving as the protasis of a condition, Ges. ^ "« ^. — 6. npirni] On 3d pers. sg. fem., as in M, used for natural phenomena, c/". Ges. 5i44t; Ko. "^szak. But the parallelism demands a noun. — 7. ddij*] Lit. = mustache; cf. 2 S. 19" {(g /xvcrra^); on root, cf. Barth, ZDMG. XLI, 633 and Jensen, ZA. VII, 218. — 8. mn> nn m] On function of pn here, cf. Ko. ^ ^sso^ The 'thing with which' is usually found in the ace. after nSc, when used in the Qal, and without the sign of the ace. even when the noun is defined; e. g. Dt. 34' Jb. 20"; but cases with pn, as here, are not wanting, e. g. Ex. 8" Ez. io<. Less likely does pn have prepositional force 'with,' 'by,' 'through,' as perhaps in Gn. 4'. 78 MICAH § 7. The Doom of Israel (3"-'=^. This is the climax of Micah's utterances. He here groups to- gether the three leading classes in Judah, the princes, priests and prophets, and lays upon them the full responsibility for the ap- proaching downfall of the capital city which he foretells. Str. I repeats the address and the charge with which the preced- ing oracle opened, but adds to them a further specific accusation to the effect that Judah's rulers have tried to establish the prosper- ity of Jerusalem upon the basis of oppression and murder. Str. II declares that princes, priests and prophets alike have all used their oflBces for their own enrichment through the encouragement of bribery and fraud, and exposes the fallacy and fatuity of their reliance upon the favour of Yahweh for protection from all harm. Str. Ill pronounces sentence : because of their evil deeds Jerusalem will be totally destroyed and become a waste and desolation. tJEAR this, now, ye heads of the house of Jacob, And rulers of the house of Israel; Who abhor justice, And pervert all that is right; Who build Zion with blood. And Jerusalem with iniquity. XJER chiefs judge for a bribe, And her priests give oracles for hire. And her prophets divine for money; Yet upon Yahweh they lean, saying, "Is not Yahweh in the midst of us? No evil can befall us." 'THEREFORE, on account of you, Zion will be ploughed as a field. And Jerusalem will become ruins. And the mountain of the house a high-place in a forest. This is the first departure in the genuine material of Micah from the norm of the four-line str.. Du. {EB. 3800) and Marti organise such strs. here; but to do so is to violate the logical connection. 'J3 of v. '" is a continuation of the direct address employed in v. ', while v " passes over into the 3d pers.. The three classes mentioned in v. " belong together in one str., being all charged with the same crime; princes, priests and prophets form the great triumvirate of transgressors from which the prophets may not be segregated. Lohr and Siev. in their attempts to 39-12 ^9 carry through a4+3 + 3or7 + 3 movement do great violence to the text. Both omit lines 1-3 of Str. II, simply because of the 3 + 3 + 3 movement there found (so also Gu., who urges the change of person as interrupting connection between v. ■" and v. "•^); likewise t^S from the opening of Str. III. Not only so but Lohr finds it necessary to invent an additional word in each of three lines in w. '• '" for the sake of the metre, while Siev. accomplishes the same end by repeating " after »^ and transposing '<* to follow •<"'. All this seems arbitrary and superfluous in a text that reads as smoothly as M does here. 9 . PNt] Om. by Marti, Lohr, Siev., Hpt., Du.; cf. v. K — n^a] Om. by We., Marti, Lohr., Siev., Du.,Hpt.; c/.v.i.—'s 3pr] Interchanged by (gA__,j,xp,] d as in v. 1.— m-^-n] (g & IJ ul pi..— 10. nj^] Rd. \J3, with eg ol oiKodofiovvTe^; so & B ® and We., Gr., Oort^™-, Now., Du., Alarti, Hal., Lohr, Siev., van H., Gu..— 11. nnr] /i;c/■.3.— ^1D3S] Rd. nca*:, with 2 els vfos and 9 etj ^ovv6v; so We., Now., Oort^"-, Du., Marti, Hal., Gu.. (^ has ei's dXa-os, a grove (so also in Je. 26"; elsewhere it represents mew); cf. # j-^i^^ h . n\ , a wooded region, which does not necessarily presuppose a reading no, but is better ex- plained as due to the influence of <$. The use of the sg. in (5 is not conclusive in itself, since (6's renderings of nca are so varied in charac- ter (at least thirteen different ones in the OT.) and relatively heedless of number; cf. e. g. 1 Ch. 21" Dt. 32'3 Nu. 22" Is. 14'* 15^ 1612 Je. 731. S on the other hand, so far as it can be tested, is faithful to the form of its original in its treatment of this word {e. g. 2 S. i" i K. 1232 133J i^u 2 K. 179- « 23'- "). Str. I charges the leaders of Judah with betraying the trust re- posed in them as the guardians of truth and justice. Lines i and 2 are a verbal repetition of the corresponding lines in Str. I of the previous section ; 3 and 4 are a paraphrase of the latter half of the same str.; while 5 and 6 add a new figure. — 9. And pervert all that is right] Lit. 'twist all that is straight'; apparently by insolent defiance of law rather than by Jesuitical interpretation thereof. Cf. Is. 5^". — 10. Who build Zion with blood and Jerusalem -with iniquity] The prophet denounces a material prosperity which is based upon the spoUation of the poor and the confiscation of the property of the innocent condemned to death; f/". i K. 21 Am. 5" Ho. 4' Is. i'' Je. 22" Ez. 22". 8o MICAH Str. II first brings an accusation of bribery against all the lead- ing officials of government, civil and religious; then contrasts with their depraved moral state their false security in Yahweh's pro- tecting presence and power. 11. Her chiefs judge for a bribe] Judicial functions were exercised by the highest officials; cf. 2 S. 15^". Bribery has always been one of the most prevalent vices of oriental government; every official has his price;* cf. f Is. i^' 5'^. In such a system the poor man has no chance. — And her priests give oracles for hire] The only allusion to priests in the book of Micah ; cf. Ho. 6' 10^ Is. 28^ The most difficult cases were brought to the priests that they might obtain the judgment of Yahweh upon them; cf. Ex. 18^^ ^- Is. 28^ Dt. 17^- ^ 21^. Similar usage still exists among the Bedouin. The prophet thus makes the terrible ac- cusation that the priests manipulate the oracle in such cases in the interest of the rich and powerful and to their own enrichment. — And her prophets divine for money] Cf. note on v. ^. It is not merely that pay, even when offered and received with the purest of motives, is a constant menace to the absolute independence and freedom of thought and speech without which true prophecy can- not live; but these soothsaying diviners have deliberately sold them- selves to the highest bidders. All three of the influential classes are money-mad. — Yet, upon Yahweh they lean, saying] These men are not Godless miscreants; on the contrary, they wear the livery of religion and they congratulate themselves upon having the support of Yahweh. — 7^ not Yahweh in the midst of us ? No disaster can befall us] Cf. Am. 3^. This was the crux of the con- flict between the prophetic and the popular conceptions of God. This conviction on the part of the people in general made the preaching of Amos, Hosea and Micah sound like treason and dis- trust of Yahweh. It is not improbable that the presence of the temple in Jerusalem as the headquarters of Yahweh gave added strength to this popular belief; cf. Je. 7^"^. The common concep- tion of Yahweh was not yet informed with the ethical ideal. Per- formance of the ceremonial was thought to be the essence of religion; Yahweh cared for little more. Against this error, the * No. Sketches jrom Eastern History, 133 /.; Doughty, .Arabia Descrla, I, 607, II, 20; GASm. 398. ^11.12 3i prophets with one consent insisted that Yahweh's supreme inter- est was ethical, not ritualistic. His demand for righteousness was more insistent than his love for Israel. CJ. 6^-^ Is. i^"-" Am. 5^1-" Ho. 6". Str. Ill turns once more directly to the offenders, as in Str. I, and hurls upon them the responsibility for the impending ruin of Jerusalem. — 12. Therefore^ on account of you] The sense of indi- vidual responsibility for sin had not yet developed sufficiently to raise any question in the prophet's mind as to the jusdce of de- stroying a whole city for the sins of the leading citizens. But even so, the sins of the populace at large cried out for judgment with no uncertain sound. Micah does but iix the responsibility for lead- ing the way in sin and thereby bring home guilt to the consciences of those in power. — Zion will he ploughed as afield] A figure for total destruction; cf. Ps. 129^. Zion was the name of the Jebusite stronghold captured by David (2 S. 5^"^). This was probably lo- cated on the southern slope of the hill to the east of the Tyropoean Valley. But the name soon came to be applied to the entire city, in which sense it is employed here in parallelism with 'Jerusalem' and also in v. ^". — And Jerusalem will become ruins] Micah was the first prophet to threaten Judah with the annihilation of its capital; but he does so without a tremor. Jerusalem as the centre of cor- ruption and pollution (i^) must be cut out of the body politic, lest the entire nation become corrupt and perish. His heart goes out to the peasant farmers of the hillsides of Judah in passionate sym- pathy with them in their misery and wrong, but he can condemn their oppressors to death with unshaken voice. — And the mountain of the house a wooded height] The temple mount now thronged with worshippers will become a deserted hill-top like the summit of Mt. Carmel. This is the climax of the threat. That Yahweh would permit the destruction and desecration of his own chief shrine must have sounded like blasphemy to Micah's hearers. But it was the most stunning blow that could be dealt to the old con- ception of God. It shows also how thoroughly Micah was freed from slavery to rites and institutions. He had certainly learned that 'God dwelleth not in temples made with hands.'* ♦ On the signifioiBce of the citation of v. '^ jn Je. 26", see Introduction. 82 MICAH 9. ii:'|i;"] On force of impf. continuing a prtc, cf. Ges. ^ "«*; on tran- sition to 3d pers. after the vocative, cf. Ko. ^^i* '• ■". — 10. nja] Is diffi- cult of explanation either as a collective (van H.) or as applied to a typical individual of the class denounced. The reading \J3 is supported by the fact that the Vrss. all have the pi., by the close likeness to ."ijb in form, by the parallel prtc. aoi'Pcn, and by the pi. form of iB'pp> vs^hich it continues. — 11 . nniio] 3 pretii, Ko. 'i '" ". — uanpa T\\r\<\ Cf. ^NUSi:, Is. 7» and F. C. Porter, JBL. XIV (1895), 19-36.— 12. mr] Ace. of effect or product, Ges. <> '2' J; Ko. ^ "* ". — I'v] Aram. pi. due to a copyist; cf. Je 26'*; note the suggestion that the error was facilitated by the fact that J was more easily articulated before the following n (Ges. ^"''). — ncj'^] Usual form of cstr. pi. is Tnca, but cf. Nu. 2i'"' Ez. 36^ Ho. lo^. The pi. is hardly appropriate as applied to the temple mount, and (S has sg. both here and in Je. 26'*. The meaning 'hill-top' gives a stronger contrast here than is afforded by 'high-place.' B. CHAPTERS 4 AND 5. Chs. 4 and 5 have given much trouble to interpreters, great vari- ety of opinion existing as to what portions, if any, may be attributed to Micah and as to the origin and date of the portions not thus as- signed. All agree, however, that the chapters as they now stand are wholly lacking in logical continuity within themselves and must be regarded as composed of a series of more or less unrelated frag- ments. By some, this lack of logical imity is urged, with other considerations, as warrant for denying these chapters to Micah, in whole or in part. By others, it is held to be consistent with Micah's authorship, either on the ground of the vivacity and mobility of his style, which is not to be confined within logical limits;* or be- cause the spoken word permits of greater freedom from logical re- straint than does the written word;f or on the hypothesis that the present order is due to the work of a redactor who arranged frag- ments of Micah's addresses in an order which is for us no order. J * So de Goeje. ThT. VI, 279-84; Kue. ThT. VI, 283-302. t Kue., Wildeboer, GASm.. t Ry.. Elh., Pont. For more detailed treatment of these questions, sec the discussions of the individual sections, and the general Introduction, § 2. 4*-» 8s § 8. An Ideal of Yahweh's World-Dominion (4*''). Three six-line strs. in trimeter movement, with a later expansion (w. *' ^), announcing the coming world-wide supremacy of Yah- weh and the beneficent results involved therein. Str. I states the fact that the temple of Yahweh in Jerusalem is to become the religious rallying-point of the nations. Str. II indicates their motive in coming as the desire to learn of Yahweh's ways at the only source of instruction. Str. Ill declares that Yahweh will be the world's arbiter, and that the weapons and art of war will per- ish. The appendices add details to the picture of idyllic peace. TT will come to pass in the issue of the days, 7 That the mountain of Yahweh's house will be J Established at the top of the mountains, \ ^f',me^«r And it will be lifted up from the hills, J )^o^ei»*ev\^ . And peoples will flow unto it, 7 (3 li"'* '••» <^f*^' ^** ) ,Q ^Yea, many nations will come, and say: 3 r^OME, let us go up to the mount of Yahweh, And to the house of the God of Jacob; That he may teach us of his ways. So that we may walk in his paths. For from Zion goeth forth instruction. And the word of Yahweh from Jerusalem. -^A ND he will judge between many peoples. And will arbitrate for strong nations, And they will hammer their swords into ploughshares, And their spears into pruning- hooks. They will not lift up the sword, nation against nation. Nor will they any longer learn war. The progress of thought is clear in this poem, and points unmistakably to six-line (so Du.) rather than four-line (Marti) strs.. The direct dis- cmirse_l)eginning in v. ^b distinctly marks the point of departure for a new str. and so establishes the six-line norm. The arrangement of Siev. fails to discover any strophic formation and does violence to the parall., in addition to its omission of three lines from w. ' • ^ solely on metrical grounds. The original material ceases with v. '. Interpreters in general now concede the separation of v. *; so e. g. Cor., GASm., Now., Marti, Siev., Gu., Du.. It sustains no close relation to vv. '•■•. Marti and Gu. also athetize v. *'^; but in view of the absence of the whole verse from the parallel passage in Is. 2^-*, and of the further fact that it is composed of stock phrases which add nothing essential to the description in w. '-', 84 MICAH it seems safe to assign all of v. * to editorial expansion; so Che. Intr. to Is., on 2'-<; Skipwith, JQR. VI, 23, 583 ff.; F. Ladame, Revue de Ihcolo- gie et de philosophic, 1902, pp. 446^.; Du.. The only change in iH of w. '-' required by the metre is the omission of pmi ly from v. ">, as a gloss not present in Is. 2*. The repetition of these verses in Is. 2^-* has occasioned much discus- sion as to their origin. Four views have found currency at various times: — (i) that the passage was original with Isaiah and borrowed from him by Micah (so e. g. De. on Is. 2^*; Ro., Kl., Cor. ZAW. IV, 88); (2) that it was original with Micah and borrowed by Isaiah or an editor of Isaiah (so e. g. Hartmann, Ke., WRS. in Enc. Brit. art. Micah; RyO; (3) that it was an older oracle borrowed alike by Isaiah and Micah (so e. g. Ros., Mau., Ew., Hi., Reuss, Or.); (4) that it was a later interpolation both in Isaiah and Micah (so e. g. Sta. ZAW. I, 165 jf.; Kosters, ThT. 1893; Kue. Einl.; Che. Intr. to Book of Isa., g-16; Cor., We., Now., Marti, Gu., Du.). That it neither originated with Micah nor was incorporated by him from an earlier source seems certain. The tran- sition from 3'2 to 4'-< is too abrupt; there Jerusalem lies waste, here it is the centre of pilgrimages from all parts of the world; not a word is spoken of the restoration of the city involved in the latter description. The spirit of 4'-' is incompatible with that of 3'-'2; here Jerusalem is the nation's pride and glory, there the prophet's love centres in the country people while the city represents to him all that is bad. Je. 26'8 tells against the early origin of this passage, for it is unlikely that such an impression of Micah's message would have existed in Hezekiah's time, if Micah had cancelled the effect of 3 "by the comforting words of 4' »-. It is apparent also that 3" was spoken in Hezekiah's reign and that 4' ^- therefore are still later, which fact shows that the passage has no rightful place in Is. ch. 2, which is in any case earlier than Hezekiah's reign. Furthermore, the ideas of the passage are those characteristic of the postexilic age. The thought of the conversion of the nations appears nowhere else in the book of Micah, but is first found in monotheistic vmtings of the exilic and postexilic periods, e. g. Is. 56"- ' 60 66" 11'° and Jonah. The pil- grimage to Mt. Zion is a postexilic idea, cf. Zc. i4'8 ff-, and its ne- cessity could hardly have been felt until late in the postexilic age when the teachings of Deuteronomy and the Priestly Code had found such wide acceptance as to render the existence of local shrines like that of Ele- phantine impossible for the zealous follower of the law. The expres- sion C'C^T P^insa as denoting the opening of the Messianic era is first met with in Ez. ^8^K The conditions reflected in 4' «• are best satis- fied by assigning the passage to the Greek period. 1. P-a] (6 om. here and Is. 2'. Marti tr. to precede C'n->2. — ]^2:] In Is. 2» preceding "i^n^; so Marti; the metre shows the position in Micah to be preferable. (8's double rendering here, in as in 4^-=^ 85 Isaiah and ^roifiov standing as in Micah, together with the position of ti3J in Isaiah and in and thus ignores any inter- vening 'n P'2. (&'s text of Isaiah may easily be accounted for as due to some prosaic glossator who felt the difficulty of a physical elevation of Mt. Zion and so substituted the house of Yahweh. — a'N-\2] 4 pi.; so GASm.. Elh. B'N-iS.— Nin] Om. in Is. 2^; so Siev..— nnji] The PaL- Syr. fragment published by Mrs. Lewis offers the rendering and will be gathered = cj?] Is. 22 OMjn S3 (so Gu.). S> and some mss. of Mi- cah insert S3. — 2. a>u] Is. 2^ D^ny. — a^ai] Siev. om.. — ncNi] Du. (on Isaiah), Marti and Hpt. om..— n'^j.ui] (g & "H om, 1.— no Sni] 1 is om. in Isaiah and in some mss. of Micah. Siev. om. all this line. — mvi] d here = ijnii; but in Isaiah sg. and also in the Pal.-Syr. version published by Mrs. Lewis. — VD-nc] (B sg. and ignores D. U de viis. — Siev. om. the last two lines of this str. because they do not yield a seven- tone line. — 3. vszn] S> and &" take "the law" as subj. of this vb.. — co-\ D^c>'] Isaiah o^un; Siev. om. D"i3-\; so g*. — n^^ini] 1^ et corripiet. — DTXj) D''''j'^] Isaiah dot cnpS. Siev. om. DiDxy. — pirn nj?] Om. as a gloss with Isaiah; so Briggs {Mess. Proph.), Du., Marti, Siev., Gu., Hpt.. — oninann] Isaiah onann; so Siev.. — nS] Some codd. nSi; so C6 & lJ._ixty,] Sg. in Isaiah; so . . . n>ni] The subj. clause lacks an introductory parti- cle.— 11:3: . . . n'n>] Late usage; Ges. 5"«'. — v*?*'] Uiterally, upon it ; stronger than vSn, Is. 2'. — 2. id*^] Including the speaker, K6. *»"«. — aiiy> vn'TN] The only occurrence of this title in the book of Micah; so also 'as ni,T> in v. *. — Nxn] If fut. it belongs in mouth of the prophet; but better taken as present of an existing fact. — 3. a^nN^] Found only in I S. 13" '• Jo. 4"'; the latter sheds no light upon the meaning; in the former the list of agricultural implements begins with intnnc, plough- ♦ Contra Ry.. t Contra Pont. share, hence it is unlikely that tn carries the same meaning; it is proba- ble also that in 2 K. 6' '^^n-r^ should read 'n rx and be rendered "the axe of iron." ® renders by iporpov, plough, except in i S. 13", where the indefinite o-^eDoj, tool, appears. § 9. The Doom of Exile and a Promise of Restoration {4^'^°). This section reflects a period when Jerusalem was in imminent danger from an invader. It foretells capture and exile as the in- evitable outcome of the situation, but hastens to assuage the grief by the declaration that Yahweh will intervene, bringing deliver- ance from captivity and restoration to the home-land. It can be treated as a unit only by transposing w. ^- ^° to precede w. *"*; V. i.. Str. I pictures Israel's bitter suffering and gently satirises the futility of human leaders. Str. II declares that even greater calamity is coming, but that Yahweh will thereupon deliver Israel from its foes. Str. Ill announces that Yahweh will then gather together the exiles. Str. IV promises their re-establishment as a mighty nation under Yahweh as their eternal king. Str. V reaches the climax with the assurance that Jerusalem will be restored as the nation's capital. "THEREFORE, now, dost thou cry so loud? Is there no king in thee, Or, has thy counsellor perished, That agony has seized thee like one in childbirth? ■^yRITHE and bring forth, O daughter of Zion, like one in childbirth. For now thou must go forth from the city and dwell in the field. And go to Babylon; there shall thou be rescued. There Yahweh will redeem thee from the hand of thine enemies. TN that day, it is the oracle of Yahweh, I will gather the halt. And the outcast I will assemble, And her whom I have afllicted. A ND I will make the halt a remnant. And her that was sick a strong nation. And Yahweh will be king over them in Mount Zion. From now on even forever. A ND thou, O tower of the flock. Height of the daughter of Zion, Unto thee will come the first dominion; Yea, there will come the kingdom of the house of Israel. 90 IMICAH The prevailing measure in this section is trimeter, but there are many variations. Str. II is in the rhythm of the dirge. Though the metre is on the v/hole very broken, the parall. is clear and furnishes the only safe guide to the length of lines and the formation of strs.. Siev.'s ar- rangement in three strs. of 3 + 3 + 2 seven-tone lines ignores this guid- ance, as is evident from the fact that n->' 7\py (v. ') appears in the middle of one of his strs., and even of one of his lines, instead of starting a new line and str. as it clearly must. In the present arrangement, vv. '• ><» are placed before vv. «•« in response to the demands of the logic. They furnish the presuppositions requisite to the understanding of the message of vv. «-». The resulting movement of thought is clear and straight- forward throughout the piece. It seems unnecessary to assign vv. «' and •• •" to different authors and periods as has been done by Kue., We., Volz, Now., Marti, Hpt., et al.. As here arranged, vv. '• '<> furnish the neces- sary preparation for w. «-8. The order of events becomes perfectly natural — downfall of Jerusalem, exile, deliverance, restoration to power. The date of the prophecy cannot be definitely determined, but it would seem to have originated in the dark days just prior to the fall of Jerusalem in 597 or 586 B.C.. Those who claim vv. »• '" for Micah (Kue., et al.) are under the necessity of excising "and thou shalt go to Babylon " (v. '"), but this phrase is demanded by the poetic form of v. '", and is, further- more, in harmony with the background of the whole section. In sup- port of the period suggested by this phrase may be urged the advanced stage in the conception of the 'remnant' {v. i.), the significance of the phrase "tower of the flock" {v. i.), and the general Messianic tone of the passage. The only serious alternative to this date is suggested by the not altogether unlikely view that this is a vaticinium post evenium (so We., Marti; but v. i.), in which case a period after Deutero-Isaiah and the return may be sought. 6. '•> on:] Siev. om..— nj-Si-n] ^the distant ones; similarly (E.— "r^V^n -\u'ni] ^ Kal 06s dirwffdfjLrjv. Now. om.; so Siev.; c/". Zp. 3". Ro., Elh. iu'N Tu'Ni 'n. Ko. 'I <'""om.-irN and points •■niinrii. Gr. adds 3"l2"'N. Du.'in 'n2Tni. — 7. nKSnjm] Rd., with We., n'^njni; soNow., Marti, Gu., Du.. "Bet earn quae laboraverat = hn'^jhi; so Stei., Gr., Oort^""-, Hpt.. (&^ kolI rrjv diru(Ttx^vT]v. Siev. nVnni. — jvs nna] Perhaps a marg. n.; cf. ft's ad- dition of and in Jerusalem. — 8. Sd>] The Vrss. have confused this with ^DS; so Aq. (TkotwStjs; (& avxf^<^5r}s; B fiebulosa; S dTr6Kpv(f>oi; 21 T'?::; ^dark. — nnsr] Ry.om. as gloss upon hnj; so Taylor, Pont, Du.. — r^n2^] Tr., with Ro., to precede rs'^cc; so Elh., Now., Oort^'"-, Marti. Hpt. om. as gloss on nr NT. — nsSrc] Cod. Kenn. 40m.. Marti, n3';'ccri, (^ adds ix Bo/SdXwi/os. — z^z'^•\> r^:h] Rd., foil. We., Now., Du. Sxns'^ r^S Cod. Reuch. of SI offers Sxitt''' for DScn\ Oort^™-, Siev. and Gu. om. ra*^. — 9. nn;] Siev. and Gu. om.. — n "■yin] 05 i-^vio^ AfaK(£=>n 'ynr. & doest thou evil, taking vb. as Hiph. of r;-\ and reading yn as obj., with n II. (J con- nectest thou thyself with peoples. — ixyv] (§ 17 §ov\-f) aov; so also in Pr. II'* Is. 95. & ul pi.. — 10. ^nji iSin] (S &5Lve kuI dpSpi^ov Kal e77ife, of which dvdpl^ov is to be taken, with Ry., as a duplicate rendering of '''^in, which was wrongly connected with S;n; while e77tfe represents a confu- sion of ■'nj with •'j.';j. &'s rendering of ^Sin corresponds to <6's dvdpi^ov. ^^ £ and codd. 87, 91, 97, 228, 310, &" om. Kal €771^6. >nj is rendered by H, ia^a^e; 21 '>ir. Elh. and Che.cB uni; c/. Je. 483'. HWB.'^ ■'>:di; c/" Is. 42"; so Now., Gu.. Pont, >n^3r\. Gr. and Marti 'n^Nrii. — 'Sxjn] ® pifferal ae. — '\^ij. — jvs n2] /. e. the people, not the town; Ko. ^"". — 6. hddm] Qal * So We., Now.. 96 incAH impf. of ']Dtt, treated as n'd vb., and often confused with Hiph. of fiD\ The n _ (4 times in 2 lines) is probably used for poetic assonance, and not with any specific meaning. — ny'^xn] The fem. used as a coll.; Ges. 4i22s_ — 7, nNSn:n-J A Niph. prtc. from a denom. vb. nSh not elsewhere used, but the existence of such a vb. is very doubtful; the Vrss. had difB- culty with the word, <&^ ® rendering it just like nmjn of v. «, (6^ using a slighdy different word {i^uan' for atruan'), 11 rendering as if from hn*^, and S> using same words here as for n;''^x and nmj in v. ^ but in transposed order; Jj has expulsam in v. ' and projectam here, but this is only for the sake of variety as appears from the renderings adflictam and contribula- tam for the one word r\'s'^-ir^ in the two verses. The proposed reading nSnjn accounts well for the corruptions of M and 3, and its position together with its similarity to nmjn might easily have misled <&. — 8. -np Vijc] Gn. 35-' (J), the only other place where this title occurs, evidently refers to a locality between Ephrath and Hebron, and appa- rently nearer to the former than to the latter. But Ephrath was in the vicinity of Bethel, hence the application of the term is different from its usage here. Similar names are -iJ Vijd (Jos. 15"), pjjSn 'u (Ct. 7*), '0 •tnijo (Ju. 8"), 33tt' 'd (Ju. 9<«), Ss '-a (Jos. ig'*). — Sc;'] If used here as a proper name {v. s.), it designates a place on the southern slope of the eastern or temple hill; cf. GASm. Jerusalem, I, 152 ff.; Paton, Jerusa- lem in Bible Times, 64. The basal idea of the word is 'swelling,' 'pro- tuberance,' as appears from the Arabic root and from its use in i S. 58- 9- >2 Dt. 28". The Assy, ublu, boil, ulcer (Dl."^^^) should perhaps be read uplu (Jensen, ThLZ. 1895, p. 250). — r^rnr'] The use of this Aramaic word might perhaps be urged against Micah's authorship; but it is unnec- essary to go further down than Jeremiah's time for Aramaisms, in the light of the general and widespread use of Aramaic revealed by the discovery of the Assuan papyri and by the Aramaic dockets on Assyrian and Baby- lonian contract tablets dating as early as the time of Sennacherib. On preformative ^^, as regularly in Aram., instead of 6,cf. Ges. ^ f^^'. — n3':'cc] On cstr. before prep.,c/. Ges.^"''",Ko. ^"«'''. The function of the prep, is to define the relation between cstr. and gen. specifically; H. ^ ^■'^^. Thus the meaning here is not ' kingdom over ' but ' kingdom for,' or ' belonging to.' — D^ti'iT' ro] no may easily have been written na as in MeSa-Inscr., 1. 23, Phoenician, Palmyrene, Sabaean; and, through the influence of jvx na in 1. 2, oSiyn^ displaced '^n-ib'^. § 10. The Triumph of Israel (4"""). In two strs. of six lines each and in trimeter measure, the prophet describes the scene of Israel's fmal vindication at Yahweh's hands. Str. I depicts the assembling of the nations of the earth for the 4"-" 97 purpose of crushing Israel, whereas Yahweh's purpose is to use Israel to crush them. Str. II shows Israel turning upon her foes and, with Yahweh's aid, vanquishing them and dedicating their booty to Yahweh. A ND now there are gathered against thee Many nations, who say: Let her be desecrated, And let our eyes fasten upon Zion. But they know not the purposes of Yahweh; Nor do they understand his plan, That he hath gathered them like grain to the threshing-floor. A RISE and thresh, O daughter of Zion; For thy horn I will make iron. And thy hoofs I will make bronze. And thou shalt crush many peoples. And thou shalt devote their spoil to Yahweh, And their wealth to the Lord of all the earth. This passage reflects other conditions than those with which w. '• ■"• •-8 deal. In both descriptions Jerusalem is in a state of siege; but there the result of the siege is the fall of the city and the exile of its inhabitants; deliverance comes only after captivity has begun. Here, Jerusalem turns upon its foes and conquers those who came confident of victory. There, the enemy is evidently the Babylonian; here, the whole pagan world gathers against Yahweh's people. This last feature was first in- corporated in the prophetic descriptions of the 'latter days' by Ezekiel (38'^ 39*'^' '^) and in such a way as to indicate that it was original with him. Hence this oracle must belong to a late exilic or a postexilic date. The whole spirit of the passage is consonant with such a date. In view of 3'' alone, Micah's authorship of this section seems out of the question. The text of the passage is well preserved. The two strs. present each a distinct phase of the situation and together constitute a complete rep- resentation of the scene. The metre is regular except in lines 2 and 4 of Str. I, where tetrameters appear. To separate Str. I from Str. II on this account alone, with Siev., seems to be placing too much stress upon con- siderations of form. The two are bound together into one prophecy by identity of situation and point of view. 11 . nnyi] § om. 1. — tljnn] 05 iTnxa-poiixeda. B lapidetur. Aq. (ace. to §") will fall into wrath. ^ treats irx as subj. of lonn, and M-'ry as subj. of tnn, for which it supplies a pron. as obj.. We. finon. — ij>j''y] 4 mss., S" 13 QT sg., Myg. 13 01, isr; so Taylor, Pont, Now., Marti, Gu.. "L irid-q. Hal. 'cr. Ro. BU'; c/. Ry. p.82.— 12'] Hal. ''rn. — -jd-j'] (6 ras Tri/Xas. & shepherd, perhaps = C3C. Cod. 548 (de R.) ■'i?pu'; so Dathe, Gr.. Van H. •'•czv, foil. <8. Hpt. oduo. 14. Now thou art cutting thyself severely] Zion is addressed, not Babylon nor Assyria. Cutting of one's flesh was an element in the old Semitic mourning-cult and was long retained by the Israel- ites; Dt. 14'. It was resorted to also as an act of worship and en- treaty in cases of dire necessity; cf. i K. 18^^.* The usual render- ing of M. is, "Now, thou shalt gather in troops, O daughter of * Hpt. denies the relislous significance of the act of cutting oneself in mourning and declares it a symbolical perpetuation of thc early custom in accordance with which mournirs scratched themselves till the blood ran in order to show their grief. But on this suppfisition the prohibi- tion in Dt. 14' Lv. i(j2' 2 1' is hard to account for. Nor can the custom be dissociated from such practices as appear in i K. i8-'. 5'-' loi troops," referring to the assembling of Zion's army to resist the as- sault about to be made. But Je. 5' offers the only case where nnjrin must mean "assemble," and there it is far better to follow d KareXvov and read mlHril*, make themselves at home.* This ref- erence to a practice forbidden by the Deuteronomic law may point to an early date before the religious consciousness of Israel had branded the custom as heathenish, or it may be due to the fact that the prophet is merely describing what is actually taking place, and neither commanding nor approving it. — A siege they lay against us] The prophet now identifies himself with his suffering people. The plural IDIT is required by the corresponding 13\ A similar situation is depicted in Is. i^- *. — With a rod they smite upon the cheek the ruler of Israel] The pun upon tOStt^ and tD3tt^ is clear, the former being used rather than "^^D or h^^ to make the parono- masia; cf. Am. 2^. Such treatment was grossly insulting; cf. i K. 22^* Jb. 16^". It may refer to the insults heaped upon Hezekiah (Is. 36*"^°) by Sennacherib's general, or to the fact that the arro- gance of the foe was an insult to Israel's greater king, Yahweh. § 12. The Messianic King (5*"'). This eight-line str., secured by omitting v. ^ as a gloss, an- nounces the coming of the Messiah, sprung from an ancient line, who shall rule as Yahweh's representative and in his might over the entire world. A ND thou, Beth Ephrathah, The least among the clans of Judah, From thee one will come forth for me, Who will be ruler over Israel, Whose origins are from of old, from ancient days. And he will stand and shepherd (his flock) in the strength of Yahweh, In the majesty of the name of Yahweh, his God; For now he will be great unto the ends of the earth. The trimeter movement of this str. is somewhat uneven; 1. 3 forms a light trimeter while 11. 5 and 8 are extremely heavy. The reconstruction includes the omission of a word each from II. i, 2, and 8 {v. i.), in addi- tion to the excision of v. '. The arrangement in pentameters by Siev. includes all of these omissions except that in I. 8, but likewise finds it * So e. g. Gie., Du., Cor., Dr.. I02 MIC AH necessary to suppose the loss of three words from v. '. V. * is om. by Du. (on Is. 7'<), G. H. Skipwith {JQR. VI, 584); Now., F. Ladame, Marti, Siev., Gu., Hpt.. It interrupts the connection between w. ' *"'' ', and changes from the first person of v. • ("V) to the third in v. » (aon"'), where Yahweh is evidently intended. The date of vv. '• ' cannot be decisively settled. The attitude of re- spect for the ancient Davidic dynasty and the largeness of the Messianic expectation make it reasonably certain that the oracle must be assigned somewhere in the postexilic age. The period of Haggai and Zechariah when Messianic hopes were gathering around the name of Zerubbabel furnishes the kind of background necessary to such an utterance as this. On v. ', V. i.. 1. n.--\D!< anS r^a] Om. onS as a gloss; so cod. 161 (Kenn.), Ro., Pont, We., GASm., Now., OortE">-, Marti, Siev., Gu., Du., Hpt.. (& B($\^efi o/koj 'E0pd5a. Mt. 2' BedXdfi yfj 'Ioi;5a. Comp. oT/cos roO Bed\^€/x ToO Evcppdda. — nvi] Rd., with Hi., -\'';;i^; cf. (S 6Xi7oS] ft and Mt. 2^ om.; so Stk.. — Sii'D nvn'^] (^^ Tjyov/j.evos toO elvai eh dpxovra. — Mt. 2' renders the last part of verse loosely; /yom thee shall come forth a leader who shall shepherd my people Israel. — 2 . cj.— '] (J has vb. in 3d pers. pi.; A in 2d pers. sg. fem.. — rns] (5 (5 A, pi. sf.. — S>-] We., Now., Marti, Stk., Hpt. 'jn. — 3. nyn] (g has a doublet, 6\{/fTai Kal iroi- fxavei rb iroi/xvLov avrov. Gr., GASm., Siev., Gu., foil. (S, add an obj., e. g. n-ij;.- — pt!-i3V — rnS.s] (S has pi. sf.. — i^^'n] Om. as a gloss, or as a dittog. from jiav^-' in v. '. 'i" as due to haplo.. Fr. Schulthess, ZAW. XXX, 62 /., following ^ = 'apharid, would preserve M intact here, and treat 'c.s' as epitheton ornayis, related to the Aram. iVJOn and Assy, apparu which mean 'pasture- land,' 'marsh.' But the character of the region around Bethlehem does not warrant the application of such an epithet, nor can one clear case of the use of this word as an appellative be cited from either Heb., Ar., Syr., Aram, or Assy.. It is equally true, of course, as Schulthess points out, io6 MICAH that nothing is known elsewhere of a Beth-Ephrathah, yet the formation of names with ' Beth ' is one of the most common. — I'i'x] Position in sentence is against this being in predicate relation to nrx; better as an appositive. On the adj. with art. as having superlative force, Ges. ^ '" «. The masc. form is no indication that Bethlehem is used as representing its people and not as designating a place, for town-names with n''3 not in- frequently take the masc. instead of the fem.; Ko. hino.mo. t Nor is it true that 's applies only to persons (Hal.); cf. Dn. 8» (of a horn), Je. 49^° (of sheep), and the place-name, n-r-yx, 2 K. 8". — SsriD nvrh nx^] It is difficult to make 'd 'n'? the subj. of Nif (Now., Marti); it is better to assign an indefinite subj. and treat 'd '^ as expressing purpose, i. e. "one will come forth to become ruler"; on indef. subj., Ges. ^ '" <*; on h with inf. to express purpose, Ges. ^ "< '-k. — rnixxin] av. in this sense; but cf. Assy. mUsil, used e. g. of the sources of the Tigris. A nominal clause with relative force; cf. Ko. ^'"p. — 2. Djn>] For meaning "deliver up," cf. Ju. 2o'3 I S. ii'2 and BDB. 679b. — rnSv nj?] A noun in cstr. rel. with a sentence, equivalent to a noun limited by a temporal clause; cf. Ges.'i'wd.ies i,_m^>] put. pf.; Dr. ^'^ Ges. i '»« <> Ko. ^ '".— Sj?] = Sn; cf. BDB. 7S7a; it is unnecessary to change the text. The meaning "along with," "together with," which some prefer here (e. g. BDB.), is usually found only where hy connects closely with a noun (e. g. S^ DN a^j3, Gn. 32''), not where it governs a phrase modifying a vb. as here (so Now.). — .lim] Not uncommonly used fig. of the activity of a ruler; but only here without an obj. expressed. Assy, re'u commonly means "to rule, reign," and 'i here seems to have that force. — nny] Used of fut. time as in 4'. § 13. Israel's Protection against Invasion {$*• ^). A ten-line str., the three closing lines of which are almost identi- cal with its three opening lines. When the invader sets foot upon Israelitish soil there will be no lack of valiant leaders to repel him and to carry the war into his own territory. In contrast with the present defenceless, helpless condition, the Israel of the com- ing golden age will be adequately equipped to defend her own interests. A ND this will be our protection from Assyria: When he comes into our land, And when he treads upon our soil, Then we will raise up against him seven shepherds — Yea, eight princes of men, And they will shepherd the land of Assyria with the sword, 5'- ' I07 And the land of Nimrod with the drawn sword. And they will rescue from Assyria, When he comes into our land, And when he treads upon our border. The metre of this str. is irregular; II. 1,4 and 6 are in tetrameter, the rest in trimeter, though 2 and 9 might be classified as dimeters. L. 6 may have been originally a trimeter, i'-ix-pn having come in by error from the foil, line; cf. C6. Siev.'s attempt to secure four seven-tone lines here involves the omission of the last three words of 1. i and the insertion of the subj. after N3'' in 1. 2. These verses are assigned to Micah by some modem scholars, e. g. Volz, GASm., and the specific mention of Assyria seems to settle the question. But the name Assyria is used by later writers, as the name of Israel's first great foreign oppressor, to designate typically later peo- ples, e. g. Babylon (La. 5^), Persia (Ezr. 6"), Syria (Zc. 10" Is. 27"''* Ps. 83' ^■'). The name Assyria clung to the territory long after the fall of Nineveh; cf. the Talmud's name for the Aram, script employed throughout the regions formerly controlled by Assyria, viz. ma'N 3-3; and Hdt. VII, 63, where the names Assyria and Syria are declared to be synonymous; v. Buhl, Kanon u. Text, 201. In some such way Assyria is used here. For it is hardly conceivable that Micah could have spoken of the Assyria of his day in the terms employed in v. ^. Nor is the con- fident, warlike spirit at all compatible with Micah's attitude toward the future and to Assyria in chs. 1-3. The verses seem to reflect later times when the Apocalyptists painted glowing pictures of the future with little reference to present conditions or to the possibility, from a human stand- point, of their ever being realised. Until we know more of historical conditions in Judah during the postexilic period than is now accessible, we need not follow Marti and Gu. in assigning this passage to the Macca- baean age, with which it has no necessary connection, even though the reference of the "seven or eight princes" to Mattathias vrith his five sons and grandsons is alluring [so Hpt. Transactions of the Third Inter- national Congress for the History of Religions, I (1908), 268]. In any case it is quite clear that vv. *-^ do not belong ■with vv. >-3; for the Mes- siah who is the dominant figure there is ignored here. Instead of the one great leader, there are here seven or eight, and these are not raised up by the Messiah but by the populace. Moreover, whereas in v. ' the rule of the Messiah is to extend unbroken to the ends of the earth, here we find "Assyria" invading the territory of Israel. The point of view is thus distinctly different from that in w. '-3. Cf. van H., who treats vv. <• '• as a gloss; and Du. who considers w. *^- "» a gloss upon the word "Assyria" in v. "', while w. *»• ^b form a four-line str. belonging to 5'- ». 4. ni] & om.. — aiSr] Schnurrer, oiW; so Laufer, Gautier. Siev. OiSe'. Siev. and Gu. eliminate the phrase 'z'H '^t' n:^ as a superscription which has been mistakenly incorporated in the body of the poem. — Io8 MICAH 11CN] Rd. lie's'?, the loss of c from iJI being due to haplo.. For jD oiVc* = protection from, v. Zc. 8"> Jb. 2i». Taylor tr. to foil. n3i, re- garding the position in j31 as due to influence of the order in v. '; cf. Siev.'s insertion of tWN in the same place mtr. cs.. — usiNa] ns5; so Taylor, Pont, Now., van H.,Du., Hpt.. (& iv ry Tdpifi aiiTrjs. "TS in lancets ejus; so Aq. E'. & in his wrath. Ro. n'n\723. Gr. and Marti, r\y^}^n>^l02, Hi. ninno3; so Elh., Gu., Oort'^"'-, Marti. — S^sm] Rd. ''^•"i^y, so Elh., Gu., Now., Siev.. Ro. '?''?nv Oort'^'"- uS^i-nS. Hal. S?n\ We. uiS'sni (so Marti), or 'ij';''xni. J. Herrmann, in OLZ. XIV (191 1), 203, suggests that v.»'>/iji S''xni,wasa true correction of v."", which should read oiSti' nr n^ni 'ui "iiK'ND S'xni. The correction was placed on the margin alongside of the error and finally came into the text in the wrong place. This is plausible; but the use of ai'^;:' is difScult and the Messiah seems su- perfluous alongside of the "princes of men." 4. And this will be the protection from Assyria] M is usually rendered, "and such shall be our peace. Assyria, etc"; but the connection thereby established is very harsh and abrupt. By some, the first words are connected with w. ^'^ and rendered, "and such an one shall be our peace." * But the description of the Messiah as abstract 'peace' is unusual. The translation here adopted furnishes an admirable sense in this connection and in- volves only the slightest textual change. This refers to the fol- lowing, not the preceding context. Assyria stands as representa- tive of the great world-tyrant of the time, whether Babylon, Persia, or Syria (v. s.). — When he comes into our land, and when he treads upon our soil] The invasion is not conceived of as a remote possi- bility, but rather as an event likely to occur and therefore needing to be reckoned viath. — Seven shepherds, yea — eight princes of men] This collocation of two numbers, the second being greater than the first by a unit, is employed to express the idea of indefiniteness; cf. H.^^, 2 1 .f The supply of leaders will be equal to all demands that ♦ So Kl., Ro., Or.. The application of nt to the Messiah began with Ki.. t The view of Gressmann, Eschat. 284, that seven and eight are to f)c added together yield- ing fifteen, which is the number of Ishtar (AM T?, 454) the goddcss-mothcr of the Messiah, can only be counted among the curiosities of the history of interpretation. may be made. Shepherds and princes of men are equivalent terms, both designating military leaders; cf. Jos. 13^^ — 5. And they imll shepherd] i. e. in sensic malo, exercise punitive power over her. — The land of A ssyria and the land of Nimrod] " Nimrod " is chosen as a synonym for "Assyria," perhaps, because of its suggestion of the root marad, "to rebel." The only other references to Nimrod (Gn. lo*"" I Ch. i*^) show that the whole Babylonian-Assyrian em- pire was classified as the territory of Nimrod, the foimder of Baby- lon.— And they will rescue from Assyria] M, "he will rescue," referring to the Messiah of w. *"^; but this ignores all the interven- ing context. Van H.'s solution of the difficulty by dropping this context as a later addition is too drastic treatment. The whole progress of thought here requires the plural. 4. nt] Eerdmans, ThT. XLI (1907), 502, would give nr here the meaning of Ar. dzu, lord of; but this rendering is necessary nowhere else, not even in Ju. 5^; nor does it belong to the Syr., Aram., and Eth. equiv- alents.— utiijcin] is hardly appropriate here. The prophet is pictur- ing a condition when the enemy will never be permitted to do more than cross the border; entrance of the palaces is out of the question; cf. v. ^ and (6 &. — ois ^TOi\ i. e. "princely men"; cf. Pr. 152" 'n '?^p?, "a foolish man"; c/. Ges. ^ '^s'. — 5. n'^npc] i. e. "in its entrances," establishing a blockade; or "in its passes," pursuing the fugitives to their mountain fastnesses. But the parall. calls for a weapon; hence it is better to read some form of nn>ns, drawn sword, as suggested by Aq. E' and B. § 14. The Divine Emergence and Irresistible Alight of the Remnant (5^^). Two strs. of six lines each, in trimeter movement, set forth the glory of the remnant, as exhibited in its marvellous rise to power and in its victorious career. V. * is a marginal note on v. ^ {y. i.). Str. I likens the emergence of the remnant, from among the nations whither Israel has been scattered, to the silently falling dew and to the showers which enable the grass to grow independently of human aid. Str. II presents the remnant under the figure of a roaring lion, ravaging defenceless flocks of sheep with none to say him nay. no MICAH A ND the remnant of Jacob will be among the nations, In the midst of many peoples, Like the dew from Yahweh, Like the showers upon the herbage, Which waits not for man, Nor tarries for the children of men. VEA, the remnant of Jacob will be among the nations. In the midst of many peoples, Like the lion among the beasts of the forest, Like the young lion among the flocks of sheep. Who, if he pass over, Tramples and tears, with none to deliver. This piece is quite generally denied to Micah. In contrast to the prophecy of the eighth century, its interests are not in the present but exclusively in the future. The diaspora is a familiar idea and has at- tained wide extent. The remnant is no longer the weak handful of Isaiah, but is endowed with invincible might, none can stand before it. There is no connection between this passage and vv. <• '; there Israel occupies its own territory whence it repels the invader; here Israel is scattered among the nations of the world. Nor does it connect with the following context; for while Israel is the victorious avenger over the nations here, in vv. « ^- Israel becomes the victim of Yahweh's punitive wrath. This passage thus, like vv. <• s, is a fragment entirely indepen- dent of the surrounding context. Not only so, but v. « is very loosely connected with vv. «■ ', and is best considered as a marg. n. on v. ' (so Siev., Gu., Hpt.); v. i.. Cf. Du. who puts 5' between 4"* and 4"''. Some also would separate v. ' from v. *, on the basis that the two verses present diametrically opposite aspects of Israel's activity; so Ladame, Hal., Stk.; but this is dependent upon the interpretation given to v. «; v.i.. The symmetry of form between v. « and v. ' is noticeable; the first two lines of each are identical, the third and fourth contain similes in both cases, and the fifth and sixth a relative clause. It results from this that the series of consonants opening the successive lines is the same in both strs., viz. 3 ,3 ,3 ,N ,1 ,1. Such resemblance may, of course, be due to identity of authorship, or to imitation, though the latter is less likely than the former. It is difficult to fix the time of the origin of this section within any nar- row limits. The only certain basis for a date is furnished by the extent of the diaspora herein reflected and the idea of the remnant that dom- inates the whole passage. The wide scattering of Israel "among the nations, in the midst of many peoples " would seem to call for a date after the fall of Jerusalem in 586; while the conception of the irresistible might of the remnant as the representative of God among the peoples points to a time later than Deutero-Isaiah and the return from captivity. The only terminus ad quern available is furnished by the close of the prophetic ^6-8 J J J. canon. But there is nothing in the content of the passage that makes it necessary to come down so far for the origin of this prophecy. It might well belong to the middle or latter part of the Persian period. 6. 3r;''] Add D^J?, with C6d, cod. Kenn. 154 and v. '; so Ro., Elh., Pont, Gu., Now., Siev., van H.. Oort'^'"- adds aiun -\-\n2. — 't '•; 3-ip;:] Siev. om. here (so Stk.) and in v. ' mtr. cs., as a gloss. — ao''2n^] (£ ws &pves. All Vrss. and many Heb. mss. prefix 1 here and before •t'sdj in V. '. — ni,i"'] (g avvaxO^ = np\ — m** ''J^S] Siev. om. mtr. cs.. — 7. -i;-^] B 0/ the flock. — ^-i-i>3] & sg.. — 8. Din] Rd. aii, with (S; so We., Now., Oort^"-, Marti, Siev. (?); cf. 35 codd. (Kenn.) ann. Hal. Dinn. Str. I expresses the conviction that Yahweh himself will bring Israel to her rightful place of power. — 6. And the remnant of Jacob will be among the nations, in the midst of many peoples] "Jacob" is used as representing the people of Yahweh as a whole, not those of northern Israel, nor those of Judah merely. The exile and scattering of the people are presupposed either as an ex- isting fact, or as conceived of in the prophet's mind; the former is the more natural interpretation; v. s.. The use of the term "rem- nant" is parallel to that in 4^, another late passage. — Like the dew from Yahweh, like the showers upon the herbage] Opinions vary- as to the exact point of the comparison here. Is it in the sud- denness of the fall of the dew? Just so suddenly shall Israel fall upon its foes and smite them.* This furnishes a sense in harmony with the unmistakable meaning of v. ^. Or is it that Israel in the Messianic age will be as innumerable as the drops of dew and rain ? f Or again, is it found in the refreshing influence of the dew to which Israel's moral and religious influence among the nations is parallel ? J This, however, yields a sense for v. ® entirely at variance with that of v. '^, for Israel which is here a blessing is clearly there an agent of destruction. Or yet again, is it in the divine origin of the dew and rain, which are wholly independent of human aid ? § So will be Israel's rise to power over the nations. Or finally, must we confess our inability to discover the meaning ? ** The key to the meaning of the simile seems to be given by the fol- lowing clause, viz. which waits not for man, nor tarries for the chil- dren of men] The antecedent of the pronoun is not the dew nor * So Hi.. t So Now., Hpt.. % So Stk.. § So e. g. Casp., Ke., Now., Marti, Hpt.. ** So We.. 112 MICAH the rain,* but the herbagef (z'. i.). The force of the comparison thus appears to be that just as the dew and rain faUing upon the grass cause it to grow and render it independent of human irriga- tion, so through the favour and might of Yahweh the remnant of Israel among the nations will rise to power, notwithstanding the absence of all human help. Israel's future depends solely upon Yahweh. Str. II goes on to say that this divinely produced remnant will overthrow all opposition. — 7. Like the lion among the beasts of the forest, the young lion among the flocks of sheep] Wild beasts and domestic animals alike are defenceless before the lion ; so Avill Is- rael's power be supreme among the nations. — Who, whenever he passes through, tramples and rends, with none to deliver] A pic- ture of wanton destruction on the one hand, and utter defenceless- ness on the other. — The two strs. thus interpreted fit together ex- cellently, the second taking up the description where the first drops it. There is not the slightest necessity for segregating v. '. — Fired by this vision of triumph, some reader added the patriotic and pious comment constituting v. 8. — Thy hand will he high above thine enemies and all thy foes will he cut off] iH's "may thy hand, etc." is improbable, since what is declared to be an assured fact in V. ' would hardly be prayed for in v. ^, unless the latter were wholly unrelated to the former. Interpreters have always differed as to the person addressed, some holding it to be Yahweh, J others the remnant.§ The biblical usage of such phraseology as "thy hand is high" may be cited for either interpretation; cf. Is. 26" Ps. 89" Nu. T^f Dt. 32^^ Ex. 14^. But a closer connection with V. ' is obtained by taking the words as addressed to the remnant. For similar sentiments, cf. Is. 49^ ^- 60^^ Zc. 14'^ ^- Ps. 149^ ^•. 6. nnNtt'] Treated as masc. {cf. sf. in v. »), since the term is thought of as practically identical with nation and people. — nip^ nS i^'n] Syn- tax may be satisfied here in either of four ways, (i) rel. clause with ante- cedent yi'V, (2) rel. clause with antecedent Si: , an^an being regarded as subordinate or parenthetical; (3) rel. clause with antecedent 0''3''3i, but * So Ew., Hi.. Hd.. Ke., Casp., KI., Or., Now., Marti, el al.. t So Bauer, Theiner, Rosenm., Ro., van H., et al.. X So e. g. Mau., Hd.. § So e. g. Rosenm., Ew., Ke., Kl., Ro., Or., Now., Marti. 5"" "3 number of vb. is determined by acp the nearest noun; (4) an explanatory clause stating the content of the resemblance, viz. "the remnant shall be, etc. ... in that it shall not wait, etc."; cf. i'D. — 12. i>ni3XDi] & = /^y high-places, or altars; cf. (S BvcriaffT-nplov in Ho. 3*. — nryc] ^ pi.. — 13. inia'N] ^ the groves = an^CN, again confusing 3 and D. & thy plants. — Tiij;] 01 thine enemies, i. e. ins; so also Che., Elh.. Hi. y-^'ny {thy tamarisks). Krenkel {ZwTh. IX, 275), q^^jf. Van H. i^xy {thy trees). Stei. q\?xy.; so Kosters, Gr., Gu., Now., Marti, Siev., Du.; cf. 2 Ch. 24". — 14. 'iji nS ntt'x] OS 'avO'' Zv ovk k.t.\. !H quae non, etc.; so §. Str. I threatens Israel with the destruction of every source of human confidence and help. — 9. And it will come to pass in that day, it is the oracle of Yahweh] An introductory statement in prose. The last phrase occurs again only in 4^, a late passage; it is common in Amos. — That I will cut off thy horses, etc.] A similar prophecy in Zc. 9^*^; cf. Dt. 17^® 20^ Ho. 14*. — 10. And I will cut off the cities of thy land and lay waste all thy fortresses] The mention of forti- fied cities is hardly sufficient warrant for placing the prophecy in the Maccabaean age as Marti does; cf. Ho. 10** Am. 5^ Is. 17^ 22^** 25^^ 34^^ 2 Ch. 11" 26^. Sennacherib (Taylor Cylinder) testifies to the large number of cities in Judah; " but as for Hezekiah of Judah, ft'ho had not submitted to my yoke, forty-six of his strong walled cities, and the smaller cities round about them, without number, ... I besieged and captured." Though Yahweh will destroy all Israel's means of defence, it is not to leave her defenceless; he him- self will be her strength and shield. But she must be brought to realise her absolute dependence upon him. Str. II declares that Yahweh will destroy all supposed sources of divine help other than himself so that Israel may come to "see their futility. — 11. Sorceries] The exact content of this term is uncer- tain; it is apparently a general designation of all sorts of magi- cal rites. — Soothsayers] This is an equally obscure word; it probably denotes those who practise various arts of divination. Both sorcerers and diviners alike totally fail to reaHse the true and only way to communion with God. — 12. Thine images and thy pillars] Graven images are meant, such as were common in early Israel (cf. Ju. 17^- * Ho. 11^ Is. 10^'' 21® Je. 10"), and continued in exilic and postexilic times (Is. 30^ 48^), but were prohibited by all three codes (Ex. 20* Dt. 12^ Lv. 26^). The "pillars" were con- Il6 MICAH secrated stones set up beside altars and at graves or as boundary- stones, and originally supposed to serve as the residence of deity; cf. Gn. 28'^ 3 1'^- ^^ 3s"- 20 Ex. 24*. They were a common Semitic institution, having been found at Gezer, at Petra, in Cyprus, and having existed also among Phoenicians and Arabs. They were first prohibited by the Deuteronomic Code, Dt. x(P\ but remained in good standing as legitimate elements in the Yahweh-cultus long after in the minds of many; cj. Is. 19*^- ^", a late passage. — A'iid, thou wilt not how down any more to the work of thy hands] This does away at one stroke with all idolatrous worship of images. Notwithstanding the prohibition in the Decalogue, the prophets found it necessary to wage imceasing war upon image-cults; cJ. Ho. 132 2 K. 23" Ez. 8'- 5- »2 Is. 448-2o_ To v. ^^ has been attached a gloss, or marginal note, supple- menting the statement there made. — 13. And I will uproot thine asherim from the midst of thee] The asherah was a sacred wooden post that constituted a part of the equipment of the place of worship, both among the Canaanites (Ex. 34" Ju. 6^) and the Hebrews (2 K. 23* Is. 17^), perhaps taken over by the latter from the former. They were forbidden by the Deuteronomic Code (Dt. f 12^ 16^*; cf. Ex. 34", in a late stratum of J) ; but, like the accompanying "pillars," they survived the prohibition for some time {cf. Je. I'f Is. 27^). The precise nature of their origin and function are not yet known. — And I will destroy thy cities] This adds nothing to v.^°^; hence it is emended by many to "thine idols," but this is vain repetition of v. ^^. In either case, it is more easily assigned to a glossator than to the author of vv. ^"". — Taylor recon- structs vv. ^^- ^ thus: "I will cut off thine images and thy pillars, and I will uproot thine asherim from the midst of thee, and thou wilt no more bow down to the work of thy hands," omitting the last word of ^-^, inserting "* after *^^, and dropping *^^. This furnishes good progress of thought and preserves the proper cli- max, but it destroys the symmetry of Str. II and makes no real contribution to its content. 14. And I will execute vengeance, in anger and wrath, upon the nations which have not hearkened] An addition by an editor who was unwilling that a prophecy denouncing Israel's idolatry should close without a word of condemnation upon the great idolatrous, heathen world. The only way of escape for the nations is to sub- mit themselves to Yahweh and his people, putting away their own gods; the failure to do this arouses Yahweh's anger and involves their total destruction. Yahweh will be satisfied with nothing less than a world-wide kingdom. 11. d-idcd] Only here and 2 K. 922 Is. 47 ^ Na. 3'. ']V2 in Assy. = (o practice magic; in Ar. to cut; cf. Syr. in Ethpc^ to pray {i.e.cut oneself; cf. I K. 18"). Zim. (KAT.^, 605, 650) maintains that it is a loan-word from Assy ; but it is not likely that a word of this kind known in Ar., Assy, and Syr. would not be current in Heb., designating as it does a common Semitic custom. Furthermore, the vb. occurs in Ex. 22'^ which antedates the Assy, period of Heb. history. — dijji>2] Forbidden in Dt. iSi"; but mentioned in Je. 27' Is. 57'. Exact function, and the orig. mean, of root are unknown; cf. CI dirocpOeyydfievoi; Aq. KkTjdovi- ^bfievoL; S, atjfieioa-Koirovixevoi; ^ diviners, or necromancers. Cf. Ju. 937.— 13. i>iv^x] Full writing of _; so also in Dt. 7^ 2 K. 17^^; cf. ^yypJ, Jos. 9". On relation to the Canaanitish goddess ASirtu or A^ratu, V. refs. in BDB., HWB.^' and EB. 331. — I'ly] Various meanings have been proposed in order to avoid repetition of v. 'O", e. g. enemies (01, Ra., Ki., Cal., Ro.); sacred forests (of Ar. origin; Theiner, Mich.); witnesses, used of trees, pillars, etc., as signs of altars (reading t for 1; so Hi.). — 14. apj . . . ^"1^ ::•>■] The construction is unusual in that the noun as obj. is so far removed from its vb., and is unique in that 'i '•; is followed by pn with the ace. of the person upon whom vengeance is executed; i. e. the compound expression is treated like the simple vb. opj; cf. Jos. 10" Lv. i9'8. — •y^a] Better treated as rel. part, with antecedent a^'un than as causal part., or as rel. with antecedent op:, i. e. vengeance such as, etc. C. CHAPTERS 6 AND 7. That these two chapters as they stand could not belong to the eighth century B.C. has been generally recognised since the days of Ewald. Opinion has been divided however as to the time to which they do belong. Ew., followed by many interpreters, as- signed them to the reign of Manasseh as a product of Micah's old age. Recent scholarship has been more inclined to place them in the postexilic period. In any case they do not constitute a logical unit, but must be interpreted as representing different points of view and reflecting varying backgrounds. For detailed discussion ii8 itncAH of these questions reference is made to the Introduction, § 2, and to the introductory statements at the opening of the various sec- tions into which the chapters are here analysed. § 16. Yahweh's Controversy with Israel (6**®). Fovu- strs. of four trimeter lines each, seek to bring home to the conscience of Israel the obligation resting upon her to be loyal to Yahweh in return for his great goodness to her. Str. I. Let Israel in the presence of the moimtains present her case. Str. II. Let these mountains "full of memories and associations with both parties to the trial" be witnesses in the controversy between Yah- weh and his people. Str. III. Yahweh has given Israel cause not for complaint but for thanksgiving; witness, the deliverance from Egypt. Str. IV. Let Israel only recall the period of the wanderings in the desert, in order to be reminded of the mighty interpositions of Yahweh in her behalf. UEAR, now, the word Which Yahweh has spoken: Arise, plead unto the mountains. And let the hills hear thy voice. UEAR, O mountains, the controversy of Yahweh; Yea, give ear, O foundations of the earth; For Yahweh has a controversy with his people; Yea, with Israel he will enter into argument. TV/TY people, what have I done to thee? And wherein have I wearied thee? Answer me. For I brought thee up from the land of Egypt, And from the house of bondage I rescued thee. lyrY people, what did Balak counsel? And what did Balaam answer him? Remember, now, "from Shittim to Gilgal," That thou mayest know the righteous deeds of Yahweh. The poetic form of this piece has been fairly well preserved by M. It is necessary only to add a word in '», with (8; to eliminate <• as a gloss; to transpose nj— >;t from '• to ' = ; and to omit 'a I'^s from 5» and "n;3 p from ^''. The rhythm then becomes smooth and harmonious. Marti, Siev., and Gu om. v. ' as a historical expansion; but it consti- tutes an excellent close for this phase of the thought and it conforms to the metric and strophic norm. The change from ist pers. (v. '•) to 3d pers. (v."*) is too common in Heb. prophetic utterance to serve as valid reason 0"" 119 for athetizing the verse in which it occurs. Du., however, treats both w. *■ 5 (and Hpt. vv.^"' ') as a later prose expansion. But this leaves vv. *-' hanging in the air. The contents of vv. i-' furnish slight evidence of any specific date for their origin. In themselves, the verses might belong to almost any period of prophecy, Du., indeed, assigns vv. '-^ to Micah, together with the most of ch. 6. But the fact that in chs. 1-3 the religious and political leaders were the objects of denunciation as leading the people astray, while here the people as a whole is reproved, points to different authorship. More- over, the presence of this passage in this context and in the collection of oracles making up chs. 6 and 7 is a sign of late origin. '1JI ijJDtt'] Siev. om. vv.'»- ^- *»• ^ as superscriptions forming no part of the poem. — nj] H om.. — .^n] Add, with (B, "^iiri; so one ms. of Kenn., Marti, Now."^, Gu.. — ni,T> t^n] (B^ Kvpios K^pios. ^a. 26. 126 Kvplov & 6 K^pios. — -\cn] Rd. ncN, with ® dwev; so Marti, Now.'^, Gu.. — rx] Rd. Sn, with 05 ivpbs, and B adversum; so Hi., Stei., We., Gr., Now., OortEm-, Marti, Siev., Du., Gu.. — 2. Dnn] (g \aoi, (g-^Q ^ovvol. — D>j.-iNni] Rd. ipiNHi, with We.; so BDB., Or., Now., OortE""-, Marti, Hal., Siev., Gu., Du., Hpt.. i and n were sufl5ciently alike to be easily confused in the old script; while D arose through dittog. of foil. d. Pres- ence of art. with pn, though lacking from Dnn, makes JH suspicious. (S al (pdpayyes {mountain clefts) ; similarly g>. H fortia. Cf. Elh. D''jnNn mn '1 jn-nx lyntt*. — 3. iinNSn hdi] (& t) tI iXdirrica ere ^ tI irap7]vit)x^V<^^ <'■<", a double rendering. — 4. jnnx] d ^ 15 = 'ni. — 5. Nr-i3T] Tr. to precede D^acn p in v. 5°; this renders ^a parallel in structure to the corresponding line of Str. Ill, and also makes ^'^ sus- ceptible of sensible interpretation. Cf. Hi. who would repeat nj— id: before 's'n-jD. — TJ?^ nc] (& adds Kara ffov; so ^. — 3N1D iSd] Om. mtr. cs., with Now.^ and Siev.; so also -\v;2 p. — a^Biin |c] Je. 5^ «• g'-\ It oper- ated exactly like the sale of indulgences under the popes of the Middle Ages. The whole prophetic teaching concerning sacri- fices and offerings was an endeavour to show that such gifts and ceremonies were of themselves without value in the sight of God. The term "God of the height," i. e. the heavens, is used in contrast to the verb ''bow" to emphasise the humility and dependence of the worshipper. It is in harmony also with the priestly thought of God as ineffably holy and transcendent, far removed from the sins of men; cf. Ho. 5^^ Is. 18^ Mi. i^ ^- Je. 25^". The title may have grown up in response to the effort to exalt Yahweh above the host of foreign gods clamouring for admission into Israel.* — Shall I come before him with burnt-offerings, with calves a year old ?] The fact that the burnt-offering is mentioned rather than the sin-offer- ing is no satisfactory proof of the pre-exilic origin of this passage; first, because it is improbable that the sin-offering first came into existence and prominence in the exilic period, even if the literature first recognises it at that time. The ritual of the Holiness Code, Ezekiel and the Priestly Code was not the creation of those writings but was an inheritance in large part, which it was the task of exilic and postexilic law-makers to codify and inform vnth new meaning, in so far as it failed to express the best religious thought of the age. Second, because the thought of the prophet here is not concerned with any particular offering as such, but rather with the whole sacrificial system, the eflScacy of which in and of itself he wishes to deny. Calves were eligible for sacrifice from the age of seven days on (Lv. 22^^); cf. Ex. 22'**. A yearling was, of course, relatively valuable; cf. Lv. 9^ Gn. 15®. Str. II continues the rhetorical question, the possible gifts to * Cf. Westphal, Jahwes Wohnstdtlen (1908), 265. 126 MICAH Yahweh becoming more costly with each succeeding question. — 7. Will Yahweh be pleased with thousands of rams, with tens of thousands of streams of oil?] In neither this nor the preceding interrogation does the negative answer involved imply that the prophet thought of Yahweh as displeased vnth sacrifice per se ; cf. H.^^, 136/.. He would merely repudiate the thought that sacri- fice is all that Yahweh desires. For sacrifices on a large scale, cf. I K. 3^ 8^. Oil was an acceptable gift to deity among Egyptians and Babylonians as well as Hebrews; cf. Gn. 28** 35" Ex. 29^- *^ Lv. 2^- * 7^^ 14'°^-. There is no mention of oil in connection with the sin-offering (Lv. 5*^')-* — Shall I give my first-horn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my sotd} Human sacrifice existed in Israel from the earliest times down to a rela- tively late date; witness, the law of the redemption of the first-ljom (Ex. 13"); the story of the contemplated sacrifice of Isaac (Gn. 22*^); the fulfilment of Jephthah's vow (Ju. 11^^ ^■); the sacrifice of the sons of Ahaz (2K. 16^) and Manasseh (2 K. 21^ ^•) ; the denun- ciations by the prophets (Je. 7^^ 19^ Ez. 16^" 20^* Is. 57^); and the prohibition in the law (Lv. 18^^ 20^) ; cf. also the act of Mesha, king of Moab, and its apparent effect upon the Israelitish army (2 K. 3-^). The practice was not equally prevalent at all times, but seems to have attained its greatest prominence in the days of Manasseh. Our passage evidently conceives of it as a possible method of pleas- ing Yahweh, putting it upon the same plane as burnt-offerings and libations of oil. A mere formal, external, mechanical conception of religion does not give rise to nor sustain the custom of human sacrifice. It is the acme of religious zeal. It is the expression of the religious emotions of men who agonise with longing for the divine blessing, and are willing to yield their hearts' dearest treas- ures in order to secure it. The prophet here recognises this fact, and his words, therefore, reflect an unmistakable depth of sympa- thy and tenderness toward his people. But the practice grows out of a wholly wrong idea of the character of God, and therefore can never be pleasing to him. The phrase sin of my soul has been taken by many as sin-offering of my sold ; but this cannot well be, for the parallel word transgression never has the meaning guilt- * On the place of oil in early ritual and its primitive significance, cj. Now. Arch. II, 208 /.. 6'-'' 127 offering, and the technical sin-offering of the later law certainly never contemplated the possibility of human sacrifice as one of its constituent elements. The term soul here designates the psychic it- self, the seat of the desires and the will, and is used in deliberate contrast to the term/n«7 of my body. In Str. Ill the oracle rises to its climax, with the beautifully simple statement of the essence of religion. — 8. // has been told thee, O man, what is good] The preceding questions have been raised only to be answered in the negative; the positive statement is now to be made. The address is to mankind in general, not to any particular individual. The "good" referred to is accessible to the whole race, without restriction. The verb might also be rendered, "He (i. e. Yahweh) has told thee"; but in view of the absence of any near antecedent for the pronoun and of the fact that a new str. begins with this phrase, which should therefore be com- plete in itself, the indefinite form of expression seems preferable. — And what does Yahweh seek from thee] The "good" is identified with the performance of the will of Yahweh. This is the view of the OT. throughout. Religion furnished the dynamic of ethics. The saints of Israel knew nothing of doing good for good's sake; virtue was not an end in itself, but only a way of approach to God, the embodiment of the highest good. — But to do justice and to love kindness and to walk humbly with thy God ?] Nothing new is said \/ here. Amos had emphasised Yahweh's insistence upon justice (e. g. f^; cf. Dt. 16^^^"); Hosea had exhibited the virtues of love (e. g. 6^) and the whole book of Deuteronomy is permeated by the thought of it (e. g. 10^^^^ 14^^ 15^^* 22^"'); reverence and humility before God was no new ideal — Moses was credited with it in a sur- passing degree (Nu. 12^); cf Am. 2'^ Zp. 2^ Is. 6 29^^. But it is, nevertheless, a great saying surpassed by nothing in the OT. and by but little in the New. It lays hold of the essential elements in religion and, detaching them from all else, sets them in clear relief. It links ethics with piety, duty toward men with duty toward God, and makes them both coequal factors in reHgion. In this respect it anticipates the famous saying of Jesus (Mt. 22^^"^°), and it marks a wide breach with the popular religion of the prophet's own times. With the latter, religion was pre-emi- y 128 MICAH nently a matter of obligation toward God, and this obligation was looked upon as consisting mainly in the proper performance of sacred rites and in a liberal bestowal of sacrificial gifts. But this y prophet makes religion an inner experience which determines whole sphere of human activity. Religion becomes not merely 1/ the action, but also, and chiefly, character. 6. nsg] On d. f. inn, Ges. ^'"^K— 7. ■'Jjc-d] jnj with two ace. hav- ing the meaning "give something in exchange for, in compensation for something"; so Ez. 271^ (cf. 27^^- '3. le. 17. 19. 22). -phis is better than to make 'd an ace. of purpose or effect and to create for it the meaning 'guilt offering' which it nowhere else possesses; contra Ko. ^'^' \ — ns-jr] has the meaning 'sin-offering' first in 2 K. 12'', where it denotes a pay- ment of money to the priests. From the time of Ezekiel on, this meaning is very common in the legal literature and in Chronicles. But it is not appropriate here because of (i) the parallel word and (2) the nature of the gift here spoken of. — 8. lun] On the indefinite subj. expressed by 3d pers. sg. mase., Ges. ^^ "^ <>. — noi] On change to direct question, Ko. ^"7d^ — ^yjx.i] An adv. use of inf. abs., denoting here manner; cf. KoJ*"^^- 89«n. 223 b. The meaning of |/ seems to be "modest"; cf. Pr. 11'; it is the reverse of 'arrogant,' 'conceited,' 'self-sufficient.' Its idea suggests the parable of Lk. 18'" «• § 18. The Sin of the City and the Punishment to Come (6®""). This section gives a vivid poetical description of Israel's wicked life and of the disasters which Yahweh must bring upon the nation as punishment. Yahweh himself is represented as speaking, and his utterance falls into five four-line strs. of prevailingly trimeter movement, Str. I addresses the city in Yahweh's name and char- acterises it as an abode of violence and deceit. Str. II asserts that the riches of the town have been acquired by cheating and fraud in ordinary commercial transactions. Str. Ill announces that Yahweh's hand will soon begin the task of chastisement and that all attempts at escape vsdll be futile. Str. IV details the various forms which the chastisement will assume, all of them involving famine. Str. V states that all this terrible wickedness is due to persistence in the sins of the past and that the inevitable result is destruction. The first two strs., thus, denounce the city's sins, the second two announce the consequent doom, while the last str. summarises both sin and punishment. b"-'" 129 UARK! Yahweh is calling to the city: Hear, O tribe and assembly of the city, Whose rich men are full of violence. And her inhabitants speak falsehood. r^AN I forget the treasures in the house of the wicked, And the accursed scant measure? Can I treat as pure him with the wicked balances. And with the bag of false weights? "RUT I, now, will begin to smite thee, To lay thee in ruins on account of thy sins and thy ... in the midst of thee. And thou shalt try to remove but shall not rescue, And what thou rescuest I will bring to the sword. T^HOU shalt eat, but not be satisfied; Thou shalt sow, but not reap; Thou shalt tread out the olive, but not anoint thyself with oil; And the must, but thou shalt not drink wine. ■pOR thou hast kept the statutes of Omri, And all the activity of the house of Ahab; In order that I may give thee to ruin, And her inhabitants to mockery. This piece has undergone much change in its transmission. The ar- rangement here given involves the omission of w. ">• ^^'- '«"■ ', and the transposition of w. '^a. b to follow v. ' and of v. '<» to precede v. i^. The reconstruction is almost identical with that offered by Marti, but the elision of v. "> and the two transpositions were decided upon before the appearance of Marti's commentary. Siev. (followed closely by Gu.) retains only w. '»• •=• '"■ "• ", dropping v. '' as a gloss, and athetizes w. •<»• " as a separate poem, dropping v.^*^- <=• ^ as a gloss, and trans- posing V. '^»- ^ to follow 5<, with V. 16c. d. e as a gloss. The passage as it stands in M defies all attempts to trace any logical continuity, but such radical treatment is unnecessary. The movement of thought in the poem as here reconstructed is perfectly natural and simple; and met- rical considerations of themselves, unsupported by other evidences, do not warrant extreme measures in textual criticism. This section is wholly independent of the preceding one. There the tone is one of sympathy and instruction; here it is denunciation of sin. The date and origin of this prophecy are problems that have not been solved. Stk., van H. and Du. assign it to Micah; Marti places it in the postexilic period, urging the linguistic usage and the historical reminis- cence in V. •« as evidences of late date; while We., Now. and GASm. are undecided as to its time. The fact is that the utterance might belong to any period of Israelitish history subsequent to the reign of Ahab, Parallels to it may be found all through the history of prophecy. The sins specifically mentioned are characteristically urban and would argue 130 ivncAH equally well for the authorship of Micah who was indignant against the oppression and vice of the great city, or for the last days when Jerusalem was the centre of all Jewish interests and trade and commerce had come to occupy a large place in Jewish life. The prophecy would seem most fitting at a time when some disaster to the city was imminent, or was thought to be so; but such periods were only too frequent both before and after the exile. Tradition claims the passage for Micah and cannot be proved wrong; but, on the other hand, the surrounding context, which is certainly not due to Micah, is likewise claimed for him by tradition; hence, the question must remain open. 9. Kip"'] 05 iTriK'Kr]6ricr€Tai. — n'',;'iPi] (B xal ffilxxei = 3;''U*ini. Hal. ns "^ "^t^- — ^^y] Rd. nN-)>, with Ew., Hi., Pont, Gr., Or., Now., GASm., Oort^'"-, Marti, van H., Gu., Du.; cf. (& o^ovix^vovs; so 13 &. Four codd. of Kenn. and3 of de R. ■'NT'; so Theiner, Rosenm., Gu.. Taylor, "'NI/'^. We. nN-;\— nD!£'] (S & ® = ^cf; so Ro., Taylor, Pont, We., Gr., Gu., OortE™., Now..— lycB-] (gg'Ulsg.; so Du.. Ro., Gu. v.?V'-— ™-] ® * B, vocative. Ro. inBD. — mj? nnyi ici]. Rd., with We., T'j;n n}:;ni; so Perles, GASm., Now., Marti, van H., Du., Hpt.. ci. Ro. TiS' >ip n>j?n. Gr. T'^jS mjj'' ici. Hal. pin n^c-). Oort^'"- om. 'n iij? as dittog. from mj7>. Siev. and Gu. n-ijJiis-i T';?ri ntJD. Elh. T'jr.n ij;^ 13 mapi. — 10. Viir\] Rd., with We., n;i;*Nn, impf. of r^z':; so Now., Mard, Siev., van H., Hpt., Gu.. 'tt'-\ ijixca] (K ^i* fuTv dvofios = a'jiNCj j?B*-\. — 12. n^nicj'] \:";. — n>n-\] (go yxj/iisd-q-ri-^ (gAQ {j\l/(!)dr]. — 13. ipi^nn] Rd. v7''Snn, with QJ (Sp^oMat; so B & Aq., Bauer, Struensee, Ro., Elh., We., Pont, Gu., GASm., SS., Oort"^'"-, Now., Marti, Siev., Du.. Cf. 11 codd (Kenn.) viSnn; 9 Kal air dpxv^ iyd) elp.1 6s ^KdXeaa. S tTifi(j)py)avtu) ae; so &. B perditione; so Aq., 2 . 9 i^iar-rjcrav. — 14. "inu'M] ($ 9 ffKorda-ei = ^ot;!!. (SQ, several mss. and ft" Ka2 i^ilxrui ae. Aq., /cai /cara^ureiy^w 6"-" 131 pn, Hpt. jd:\ — aSon] Ro. io^'SDn; so Ry., Elh.. — 15. pi nnt:^^] (S om. noun and has vb. in pi., perhaps reading ivnu'n; so Ro., Ry., Taylor. S> also om. ]••% but retains vb. in sg.. — 16. -i?3nB'ii] Rd. -\bvr\-\, with Ro., We., Gu., Or., GASm., Now., Oort^™-, Marti, Siev., van H., Du., Hpt.; foil. (8 & ® B 6. "B custodisti; so & 01 6. C5 has a double rendering of the phrase, viz. Kal d(f>avi(xd'qcTeTai v6fii.ua 'KaoO fwv Kal i(ptj\a^as ri diKaic!)fjLaTa Zafx^pel. One cod. of Kenn. iccii. Taylor, '\'\^'C'\\ Elh. ncu'M. Gr., Marg. nprni. — najpo] (5 & 01 Aq., pi.. — loSm] We., Or. and Gu. sg.. — ipn] & = nns; so Now.. Hal. ddpn. — n^aa"'] Hartmann, yzy^; so Pont, OortE">., Du.. — noin] ^ 01 pL. — ^cy] Rd. o^d;:, -with (S Xowv; so Schnurrer, Struensee, Hartmann, Bauer, Ro., Che., Taylor, Elh., Pont, We., Gr., Gu., Or., GASm., Now., Oort^n'., Marti, Hal., Siev., Du., Hpt.. In Str. I the prophet introduces Yahweh who addresses the city, declaring it to be full of oppression and trickery. — 9. Hark 1 Yahweh is calling to the city] Jerusalem is certainly meant, as the city par excellence for all Jews.* — And it is success to fear thy name] A glossf as is clear from its parenthetical character and the use of the word "success" which is characteristic of the wis- dom literature, though found also in Is. aS'**. M can only be trans- lated, "and he who sees thy name is strong"; and this unique expression has given rise to a wide variety of explanations, none of which are satisfactory. With the thought of the text as corrected, cf. Pr. i' 9^° 14^^ Ps. 34" 1 11^*'. — Hear, O tribe, and the assembly 0/ the city] Judah is the tribe addressed, and the assembly is the general meeting of the citizens of Jerusalem for the consideration of all matters affecting the welfare of the city as a whole. It prob- ably corresponds roughly to the " to^vn-meeting " of New England. The presupposition of the prophet that in addressing the popula- tion of Jerusalem he speaks practically to the tribe of Judah seems to reflect a period when Jerusalem had come to be the centre of Jewish interest and life. M is to be translated "hear the rod and * Cj. The use of urbs = Rome, cited by Marti. t So Hartmann (1800), Grimm (7.405. XXII, 36), GASm., Marti, Siev., Gu., Du., Hpt.. 132 MIC\H tfae one who a^^ninted it," '* the rod " being a cancrete designation of the dusdaoneiit to be inflicted by Yahweh; but this involves asmg *'hear" in the double sense ''hear about" and "listen to," il makes the feminine suffix refer to a masculine antecedent, and ittreats the indefinite noun ''rod" as definite. Hence the text as correctjed, in accordance with n-. t So CaL, IteriK. R Jirmn , ffi., Mao.. Ew.. Tm.. ILL. Or., Hd_ Casj^ tc a dL etc.";* or "fire devours the houses, etc.," cf. (S-f Or, yet again, "are there yet foundations in the house, etc. "J For the corrected text, V. s.. — And the accursed scant measure?] In days when no fixed and unvarying standard for weights and measures was known and when no police power existed for the enforcement of such laws, knavery of this type was doubtless very common; cf. Am. 8^ Dt. 25". But Yahweh's curse is upon all such dealings (Dt. 25^^); he demands justice and fair dealing between one man and another. 11. Can I treat as pure him with the wicked balances, and with the bag 0/ false weights ?] Cf Dt. 25^^ Ps. 18^^ This closes Yahweh's appeal to the moral consciousness of Israel. He has pointed out the moral impossibility of his permitting wickedness to go vmpun- ished. According to m the verb must be rendered, "can I be pure with, etc." This has usually been interpreted either as repre- senting Yahweh asking how he could be considered pure and holy, if he permitted such unfair practices; or as dependent upon an unexpressed thought such as "let each one ask himself." But neither interpretation makes good Hebrew usage. Str. Ill begins the description of the punishment involved by the sins just exposed. A hostile army will invade Israel. — 13. But I, indeed, will begin to smite thee] For a similar idiom, cf. Dt. 2^^ The pronoun refers, not to the individual guilty of the offences just described, but to the "tribe" (v. ^) as a whole. M reads, "but I, indeed, will make sore thy smiting"; cf Na. 3** Je. 30". But this use of the verb "make sick" is not paralleled elsewhere, hence the change of pointing suggested by C| seems preferable. — To lay thee in ruins on account of thy sins] The pro- nominal object is not expressed in the Hebrew text, but is clearly implied in the context: — 14b, c, d. And thy . . . in ilie midst of thee] The meaning of the main word in this phrase is wholly vm- known ; no help is to be derived from the Vrss.. In its present con- text, parallel as it is \\ath "thy sins," some such meaning as "trans- gressions" or "abominations" seems called for. In its context as in M, the meaning "hunger" or "emptiness" is usually conjec- tured for the noun; but the presence of the sufl5x is hardly in harmony with such a rendering. The cognate languages know * So AE., Ra., Abar., Struensee. t So Mich.. J So Ro.. 134 MICAH no such word. Hence no assurance is possible as to its meaning, — And thou shall try to remove hut shalt not deliver ; and what thou dost deliver, I will give to the sword] The first part of the state- ment apparently refers to property, none of which will be saved; the second, to the women and children who, though temporarily carried to a place of refuge, will finally meet death at the hands of the enemy. Margolis, following Ibn Ganah, adopts the rendering, "and she shall conceive, but shall not bear; and whomsoever she beareth I will give to the sword." On the basis of this Margolis suggests for the preceding phrase, "and thy wife in her body" (v. s.). But against this must be urged the harshness of the idiom, "thy wife shall conceive in her body"; and the fact that 3Dn nowhere else in the OT. approximates the meaning 'conceive'; the regular verb for this idea is ""in. Str. IV continues the description of the coming disaster, by pointing out with a few bold strokes how all of Israel's labour shall count for naught. — 14a. Thou shalt eat, but not be satisfied] The thought of an invading enemy is still in the prophet's mind. Pent up in the city by siege and reduced gradually to the last extremi- ties, Israel will know all the agonies of starvation; cf. 2 K. 6^ Je. 52® Lv. 26^ ^•. The transference of this line to this place in Str. IV is made imperative by the break which it causes in the connec- tion between v. ^^ and v. "'', by the admirable connection thereby established between v. "^ and v. *^, and by the ease with which it solves the problem of the strophic structure. — 15. Thou shalt sow, but not reap] The process of harvest will be prevented by the ad- vance of the enemy; cf. Dt. 28^* ^•. — Thou shalt tread out the olive, but not anoint thyself with oil] This is the only direct mention of the treading out of olive-oil; cf. Jo. 2^*. The finest oil was "beaten" (Ex. 27^" Lv. 24^); but the bulk of the olive crop was trodden out into oil vats. Anointing with oil was a toilet custom common to all hot climates; cf. Am. 6^ 2 S. 12^" 14^ Ru. 3' 2 Ch. 28'^. — And the must, but thou sJialt not drink wine] All the joy of life will be cut oflF. Allusions to the treading out of wine are very common; cf. Ju. 9" Am. 9*^ Is. i6*° 63^ Je. 25^" Jb. 24" Ne. I3^^ Str. V closes the poem summarising the sin of Israel and declar- hig it to be the occasion of the disaster which Yahweh will send. — 16. For thou hast kept the statutes of Oniri] No special *• statutes of Omri " are elsewhere mentioned, and it is doubtful whether this expression is meant to apply to definite laws. Omri is harshly condemned by the Deuteronomist in i K. 16^ ^•. But he is prob- ably mentioned here as the founder of the strongest dynasty of northern Israel, and thus as representative of the type of life characteristic of that kingdom and responsible for its downfall in 721 B.C. In Assyrian records after the reign of Omri, the northern kingdom was commonly designated bit Humri. — And all the work of the house of Ahab] In view of the charges made in w. ^''"^^, it is probable that reference is had here to the judicial murder of Naboth (i K. 21), as typical of the methods of self-aggrandise- ment common to Ahab and the tyrannical rich men of Jerusalem. — And ye walk in their counsels] This adds nothing to the thought, is extraneous to the metrical form, and uses the plural of the verb, whereas the preceding and following context has the singular. Hence it is best considered as a gloss.* For similar phraseology, cf 2 K. 16^ Je. f* Ps. i^ 81^- I S. 8^. — In order thut I may give thee to ruin] In accordance with a common Hebrew usage, the prophet ironically attributes what was an inevitable but unde- signed consequence of a course of action to the deliberate pur- pose of the actor. — And her inhabitants to mockery] The pronoun must refer to the city, as in v. ^^^; the sudden change of person is abrupt and confusing, but finds many parallels in Hebrew; cf. Gn. 49* I K. i^" Is. 22^^ 23^ 31^. That there may be no possible doubt as to the source of the mockery, a reader has added the gloss,f and the scorn of the peoples ye shall bear] The evidence for the secondary character of this line is identical with that for the later origin of the addition to v. ^^^. This threat represents the lowest depths of humihation to the proud and sensitive Hebrew spirit, m's "scorn of my people" has occasioned great fertility of exegetical ingenuity, e. g. Israel will not be pimished as heathen are but far more severely in proportion to their privileges,! or the suffering brought upon the people of God by their rich oppressors will now be inflicted upon the rich themselves by the foreign foe;§ * So Marti, Now.^, Siev., Du.. t So now Du.; but v. AJSL. XXIV, 187 f}., where this suggestion was first published. t Cal.. § Dathe, Rosenm.. 136 MICAH or, the heathen will delight in humiliating the nation representing the ideal of "the people of God," but this disgrace will justly be endured by the present representatives of the ideal who are re- sponsible for its being brought into disrepute;* or, the disgrace which my people has brought upon my name will be borne by you;f or, Israel must bear the disgrace of being the people whom I have rejected;! or, the chastisement borne by the people as a whole will also be borne by each one of you individually. § But none of them are satisfactory solutions of the difficulty occasioned by the essential identity of the subject of the verb and the phrase "my people." 9. n>s'in] On meaning and etymology, cf. Grimm, JAOS. XXII, 35-44, who rightly connects it with Assy, asd, "to support, to help," as a tuqtilat form. — hni^] Ko. ^ 'O" ■• explains IM as due to the Masso- retes having supposed an ellipsis of i:"n; cJ. Ko. ^k":, where all infs. in n _ are cited. — .itac] Of masc. gender ace. to Ex. 4"; the fact that the pi. ending is ni_ (Nu. 17") is, of course, no indication of fem. gender; cf, niaN , ,"nND. — 'd] Usually rendered him who, but this would require ns'N; ;;c, cf. Jb. 30" Nu. 16- Is. 14" Lam. i'5. — 10. CNH ni>'] 'y precedes interrogative only in Gn. 19", but there in- terrogative is a pronoun which often yields first place in the sentence to some more important word. If Vii = B*;, cf. Ges. ^ <"> on interchange of K and % and the regular usage in Aram.. 2 S. 14" is, perhaps, an- other example of the confusion of these two words, but the text there is by no means certain; cf. also Pr. iS^^. — yv-\ no] = '-\ n^aa; cf. -\->2, Ho. 6»; an ace. of place in which, Ges. ^"'8. — natN] The Pi'el does not else- where have the forensic force of "declare pure" or "treat as pure"; but since it occurs only three times, and since the Qal does carry the fo- rensic idea (Ps. 5i«), this can hardly be considered a serious objection to the reading proposed. — ''J3n] Weights were commonly of stone, as may be seen by an examination of the fine collection in the Haskell Museum. — nnnc] Very common in the Psalms, and Wisdom Literature; but also in early books, cf. Am. S' Ho. 12 • Je. 5".— 13. oss-n] In M both this and man are substs. and in relation of obj. to ■•n^'^nn; but in cor- rected text, they are supplementary infins. with verb, force. — 14. ins"] B derives from ■\/ nrvv, as a noun formation with prefix \ Old ety- mology was to connect it by metathesis with Ar. i£j,^.j, he famished (soc. g. Ges., Hi., Ew.); Hd. proposed ^-^; =the Syr., dysentery; but • Ke., Casp.. t Ry- X Schegg. S Hi., Reinke, van H.. 6"-" 137 neither of these meanings combines well with the sufl5x, and the context as reconstructed demands an entirely different sense. — JpnV] On juss. in protasis, cf. Dr. ^^ isss-Jics obs._ Hiph. of jid elsewhere is always used of the displacement of a boundary; but Hiph. occurs in all only 7 times, and in the Qal, Niph. and Hoph. no such restriction of its scope of ac- tivity appears. — aSon . . . O'''7on] Hiph. only here and Is. 5^'; used for sake of variety; there is no necessity for correcting the text to produce identity of form; the related vb. c'^d likewise shares the meaning "de- liver" between Hiph. and Pi'el. — 15. liD.-^] Always of the anointing in the toilet; with the ace. of material here and 2 S. 14* Dt. 28^". nrc is used of both secular and religious anointing; cf. Am. 6^ Je. 22" Lv. 7'6. — 16. lanc'M] Masc. sg. of vb. with two subjects, nearer of which is in fem. pi., Ko. ^*" i . M9 »; but this, difficult as it is, is not in keeping with the meaning of the Hithp. in Ps. iS^^ (= 2 S. 22"); nor can mpn be treated as ace. after the Hithp.. The consecution of vb. forms in Ul of w. '5. i« js abnormal, viz. simple impf., impf. with ], impf. with \ Impf. with \ is better at beginning of v. '« since reference is to a definite fact of the past and present. — i;?""^] On force of purpose clause, cf. Dt. 29" Ho. 8^ Am. 2\ and K6. 5s96e, — ,i|-nr] Always in parall. with ncu>. Cf. Wkl. AOF. II, "jifff. who connects it with the Assy, larraku, to which he assigns the value "desert," "wilderness"; but see Muss-Arnolt, Diet. s. v., where the meaning "thief" is clearly established for iarraku by the passages cited. § 19. Israel's Lamentation Over the Faithlessness Among Her People (7'-"). This section is a group of six four-line strs. which bewail the general depravity in Israel. Str. I laments the state of general weakness into which Israel has fallen. Str. II accounts for this weakness by describing the wickedness universal in Israel. Str. Ill exposes the covetousness and bribery prevalent among the ruling classes. Str. IV declares their condition to be hopeless and their day of punishment to be close at hand. Strs. V and VI rise to a chmax in the denimciation of sin, by showing that no man dare trust even his most intimate friends and nearest relatives. YVOE is me! for I am become Like the gatherings of summer fruit, like the gleanings of the vintage. There is not a cluster to eat, Not an early fig that my soul desires. TTHE pious has perished from the land, And of the upright among men there is none. All of them lie in wait for blood, Each hunts his brother with a net. 138 MICAH nrO do evil they have made ready their hands; The prince demands a bribe, And the great man expresses the desire of his soul; He . . . and they weave it. 'T'HE best of them are like a brier; The most upright of them like a hedge. The day of their visitation comes; Now will be their havoc. pUT no confidence in a friend; Trust not an intimate; From her that lies in thy bosom, Guard the doors of thy mouth. T70R a son insults his father; A daughter rises up against her mother; The daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; A man's enemies are the men of his own house. The measure of the poem is prevailingly trimeter, falling occasionally to dimeter as in Str. IV, lines i and 2, and rising once to tetrameter, viz, Str. II, line 4. The text of Str. Ill is badly preserved and has thus far defied restoration. The strophic norm of the piece is already fixed by vv. '• 2 which fall naturally into four lines each (c/. Siev., Du.); the same metre fits well throughout, with the exception of Str. Ill, where the text is beyond recovery. The fact that the style changes in v. ^ from that of a lament to that of an address is insufiicient reason for separating w. «• • as a parallel from the original piece (w. •■*), with Marti {cf. Du., Hpt.), or for eliminating V. 5 and transposing v. « to follow v. ', with Siev. and Gu.. Change of persons is a very common phenomenon in Hebrew discourse {cj. Ko. Slilistik, 238 ff.), as is also the change from one style of address to an- other, e. g. from apostrophe or direct address to narrative (Ps. 34<-« 45'--'* Is. 24" '■). Looked upon as an announcement of coming disaster, the piece, of course, finds its most natural conclusion in Str. IV. But dis- aster is only incidental in this prophecy. Its main burden is rather that of grief for Israel's pitiable plight. Vv. ^- « consequently form an emi- nently fitting conclusion. The picture of universal disloyalty, even in the most sacred and intimate human relationships, is the true climax. What can compare with this as a just cause for lamentation ? The time to which the prophecy belongs is difficult to discover. This section is wholly independent logically of both the preceding and the fol- lowing. Yet it is generally conceded that 6'-'^ and 7'-' might easily have come from the same time and the same pen. The same moral and re- ligious situation in general is reflected in both passages. The fact that the judgment is looked upon as still to come (7*) is consistent with origin in the time of Micah; but it is not inconsistent with postexilic origin (cf. Zc. 13' "■ 14' '■ Mai. 3^ ' ). The charge against the ruling classes (v. ») yl-« 139 is likewise explicable upon either basis {cf. 3' «• Zc. ii^ «• Zp. 3'). The general condition of depravity pictured here, and especially the faithless- ness so widely prevalent are more easily accounted for in the postexilic period than at any previous time {cf. Is. 59'-' 56^-57= Mai. 2" «• 4= Ps. 12, 14). But a fuller knowledge of the history of Israelitish life than is now accessible to us might show other periods when such conditions prevailed. 1. •'SpNr] (g evvdyuv; so 13; hence Elh. nps^ or ^DDsr; so Now., van H., Du., Hpt.. Siev. >n?Dsp, i. e. prtc. with old fem. ending; so Gu.. Hal. >DDN3.— nSS>'D] Now. nSSpi.' Hal. rh^m so van H.. Elh.nSSy \ops3. Pont, nSSjj, dropping 3. Siev. ^-pSSyn?, fem. prtc; so Gu.. Hpt. ^SVyp. — nmx] <& otfjioi = HMN, or >ix.— mioa] Gu. '3 r^*— 'B-sJ] Marti, VDi, foil. (S. Nine codd. of (S have a double rendering, viz. v ^pvxv l^ov otfwi fvx-^.—2. ^3N] Aq., S O eKXA.onr€^.— 3>c-i'-] & om. but substitutes the cog. ace. after i3-ik\— mx^] (g SiKd^ovrat = 13^1;.— pn] Gr. Sx.— nix'] (S iKdMpovffiy = nix\— ain] «S ^/c6'Xi^5, perhaps a free rendering. H ad mortem. (S S> to destruction. Aq., "2, dvad^fiarL. Du. mnn. Perles, D:n; soMarti,Now.K(?),Gu..— 3. pin h-;] Rd., with Marti, ynn';'; so Now.k Siev., Gu., Du., Hpt.. H treats as in cstr. with 'fl3, notwithstanding the article, and makes the whole phrase the obj. ace. of 3>a>n.— 0^33] Rd. Dn>23, with « H *; so Dathe, Bauer, Seb., We., Ru., Now., OortEn>., Marti, Siev., Gu., Hpt.. Hal. a^jb.— 3>D^nS] Rd. o^a^n, with (S iroi- lui^ovffiv, H dicunt bonum; so Bauer, Taylor, We., Marti, Now.k Siev,, Gu., Hpt.. g- ul insert a negative before the inf. and treat inf. as a prtc. or 'finite form. » has double rendering of 3vo^n, viz./or evil they make ready their hands, and they do not ^ooi.— Vxtf] §> adds, give.— '3 Ba-i'ni] Om., with Marti, as a gloss on Ti-n; so Now.^, Siev., Gu.. S> SI and the judge says. Now. adds car. Van H. om. 1 and makes 'v obj. ace. of Snc— BiSc'3] (& eipvvLKois Uyovs. 1 in reddendo est. S iv avTairodSffei. B give a &n&e.— Snjn] (g om.— ->3i] ^ i'Kd\v. S XaXe?.— mn] One cod. mx; so Gr.. Mard, Now.^ v-jn. Siev., Gu. p-,n._j,in ^z^D:] Marti, L^rf ?n; so Now.^. Siev., Gu. ^E'b:? osrci. mP3);M] eg Kai i^e\ovfmi. 3 conturbaverunt earn. & connects with v. ■> and renders, and they reject their good = i3i-n^i. S Kal kotA rds daffeU V Sacri^Tijs avrov. We. ninirv, so Gr., Marti, Now.^. Siev., Gu. n-ir- Hal. -mnixii. Ro. miry, so Elh., Pont, van H.. Du. mir;.— xin] Hpt. vm\ — 4 . D31B] Ro. connects with v. \ foil. &, and reads D>3ion, using the suffix of the preceding vb.; so Elh., Pont, van H., Hpt..— pinD] (g v,denv'mgiTom.ri22,weep; sim- ilarly &. B vastitas eorunt. Cod. 17 (Kenn.) Dnoian; so Ru.. Hal. npiac, — 6. IiSn . . . p->] (5 & pi.. — (K B render v. "> very freely, e. g. (&, from thy bedfellow, beware of entrusting anything to her — 6. 'J'n] Str. I introduces Zion bewailing in figurative speech the total absence of righteousness and truth among her people. — 1. Woe is me ! for I am become like the gatherings of the summer fruit, like the gleanings of the vintage] Zion is the speaker; the language is wholly inappropriate in the mouth of Yahweh ; nor is it to be easily attributed to the prophet himself. Zion is as when the fruit harvest and the vintage are completely gathered. — There is not a cluster to eat, not an early fig that my soul desires] It is unneces- sary to drop the suflSx and render "that any one desires," with Marti. The figure is perfectly intelligible as it stands in UJ. This clause shows that Zion does not identify herself with or liken herself to the bare vineyards and orchards, but rather to one appearing upon the scene seeking fruit after it is all gone. This pregnant use of the particle of comparison is common in Hebrew, e. g. Ps. 18^^ Jb. 38^« Gn. 34^^ Str. II expresses the same thought as Str. I, but in plain, im- mistakable terms. "There is none that doeth good, no not one." — 2. The pious has perished from the land, and of the upright among men there is none] CJ. Ps. 12^ Is. 57*. The term "pious" does not appear prior to the time of Jeremiah and Deuteronomy; it occurs chiefly in Psalms. It emphasises the practical side of re- ligion as it finds expression in kindness and loyalty toward men. The "pious" and "upright" are the grapes and figs of Str. I. The term "land" applies to Israel only, not to the world at large; and the comprehensive term "man" includes only such representa- 7'-' 141 tives of the race as are to be found in Israel. The prophet has no concern here with the world in general and passes no judgment upon it. Israel absorbs all his interest. — All of them lie in wait for blood] Cf. Ho. 6^- ®. The figure of the hunter and his prey is here applied to the devices whereby one Israelite takes advantage of another for his own profit. — Each hunts his brother with a net] Cf. Hb. i^^ ^- Ec. f\ The hunter's net rather than the fisher- man's is probably meant here. The greed of the people stops short at nothing; fraternal obligations are ignored and violated in the mad rush for gain. Str. Ill specifies distinctly the kind of crimes the prevalence of which Zion is bewailing, viz. bribery of the courts of justice and consequent perversion of law and justice. — 3. To do evil they have made ready their hands] iH is untranslatable. It has been rendered: "besides doing evil thoroughly with their hands";* "on account of the misdeed of the hands — to make it good — the prince, etc." ;f "their hands go out to evil, to do it earnestly"; J "they reach out both hands after evil to make it good";§ "their hands are upon that which is evil to do it diligently."** But the grammatical diflficulties are insuperable. The thought of the text as emended is that of Je. 4^^ 13^. It is the deliberate purpose of the accused to do evil; they have trained and equipped themselves to that end. — The prince demands a bribe] i. e. in his capacity as judge; cf. 2 S. 15^ *^- i K. 3*^ ^•. Bribery is still the outstanding vice of oriental governments. M. inserts and the judge after "the prince," a gloss indicating the prince's judicial function. An interesting at- tempt to interpret M, is that of Prof. Morris Jastrow,f f who would assign to the participle 7Xty the meaning "priest," i. e. one who seeks oracles, and would treat Dl^w^^ as a corruption of some verb, so getting the rendering, "the prince, the priest and the judge. . . ." But ingenious as this is, it fails because such a use of this parti- ciple in Hebrew cannot be established, and because the parallel by^ypi with its participle "I^IH demands a similar construction here. — And the great man expresses the desire of his soul] The rich and powerful make known their wishes, and these are carried into * Rosenm.. t Ew.. t Or.. § Urn.; similarly Casp., Ke.. ♦* RV.. tt JBL. XIX, 95 /.. 142 MICAH eflfect by the courts, whose judgments are for sale to the highest bidder. The word "desire" is always used of evil wishes. It is possible that "the great man " is an official and that the meaning of the phrase is, "the great man decides according to his own wicked desires." The pronoun t^in must be taken with this line if M is correct; the rendering then would be, "and as for the great man, he expresses the desire of his soul," the pronoun being emphatic; but the length of the line thereby produced and the unnecessary em- phasis are against iK's arrangement. The pronoun has been taken as intensifying the suffix, viz. "desire of his own soul"; but this is un-Hebraic. It seems best to regard i] (jg T(J3 (TUTTJpl fiov; so & U. Siev. supposes the omission of a trimeter line from £11 at this point. — 8. '>S] Siev. tr. to precede ''PTH; cf. (5. — •'S -iin] (g (puTiei |iot; so9JiI&; several mss. <^ws fi.oi. — 9. t^'n ly] Du. ^1>. — nN-\N] Some Heb. mss. nN^NV, so B. — 10, vn] We. n>N; so Now., Oort^™-, Siev.. — nini] ^ om.. — n.-ijj] Oort^'"- nj;. Siev. 13. Str. I serves warning upon Israel's foes that her present mis- fortunes will soon give place to honour and glory from Yahweh, her God. — 7. But I will watch expectantly for Yahweh, I will hope for the God of my deliverance ; my God will help nte] The original connection of this verse with another context is shown by the man- ner in which it evidently contrasts "I" with something that has gone before, though there is no fitting contrast in the present con- text.* The presence of this fragment here may be due to an effort to establish some connection between w. ® and *. The speaker here is apparently not an individual, but the oppressed community, which gives expression to its unquenchable faith in Yahweh as the source of ultimate deliverance. For similar phra- seology, cf Ps. 5^ 18" 255 38'^ 43^ Hb. 3l^ The original poem begins with v.®. — 8. Rejoice not, O mine enemy, over me!] "En- emy" is collective here, including all of Israel's foes; cf. Ob. '^^• * Cj. Du. -who attaches v. ' to vv. ^- ^ 146 MICAH Ps. 25^ 35'^ — Though I am fallen, I shall arise] Faith under diffi- culties, the certainty of 6nal vindication, was characteristic of all the exilic and postexilic prophets; cf. Is. 60* ^- Ez. 37-39 Zc. 14. — Darkness . . . light] A common figure for calamity and pros- perity; cf. Am. 5'« Is. 62>«- 9'«f- 58"> 59» Jb. ^o^^ In Str. II the speaker declares himself ready to bear patiently the well-merited punishment of Yahweh until such time as Yah- wch may choose to release him. — 9. The anger of Yahweh I must bear] This is in accord with all Semitic thought which always explained disaster as due to divine wrath.* From the time of Josiah's untimely death on, the consciousness of being under the wrath of Yahweh was a heavy burden upon Israel; cf. 2 K. 23^^ ^- 24-° Is. 42^* ^•. — For I have sinned against him] A par- enthetical statement of the occasion of the divine anger. Sin and pimishment are indissolubly united in Hebrew and Semitic thought. There is in this ascription of the disasters of Israel to Yahweh's anger because of her sin a direct rebuke of the foes who have failed to realise in their unholy glee that they are but in- struments in the hand of a just God. — Until he shall take up my cause and execute my right] There is a limit to Yahweh's wrath; cf Ps. 103^. Though he is now angry at Israel, yet when his punitive purpose is accomplished he will take his place as Israel's avenger over against her foes. As compared vvdth them, Israel is righteous; Yahweh therefore will not allow them to push her to destruction; cf. Zc. i'^ ^•. Str. Ill contrasts the fact of Israel's vindication with its neces- sary corollary, the public humiliation of her foes. — 9e, f. He will bring me forth to the light ; I sliall gaze upon his righteousness] The "righteousness" of Yahweh, as in Is. 40-55, is here identical with the vindication of Israel. Israel being more nearly in accordance with the divine will than the nations are who triumph over her, it is required of the justice of Yahweh that he deliver his people and punish their oppressors who have exceeded their commission of chastisement upon Israel. The destruction of Israel by the heathen nations would be wholly inconsistent with the character of the God of justice. His righteousness demands Israel's triumph over * Cj. Mesa-Inscriplion, 1. s ; the Stele oj Nabonidus, I. i fj. her foes. — 10a, b. And mine enemy will see, and shams wUl cover her] Israel's vindication would be incomplete apart from the dis- grace of her enemies. The latter is involved in the former. But to say with Caspari that Israel's joy is a holy exultation over the overthrow of the enemies of God does not tell the whole story. Such an element is imdoubtedly present, but there is coupled with it the element of revenge for wanton and gross insults long en- dured; cf. Na. 3 Ps. 109 and Ob.. Str. IV announces the complete and final overthrow of the ene- mies of Israel and Yahweh. — lOc-f. Where is Yahweh, thy God ?] A proverbial expression indicative of the powerlessness of Yahweh; cf. 2 K. 18'^ Jo. 2^^ Ps. 79*** 115^. Among peoples entertaining a limited conception of deity as the champion of a particular nation, the continuous disaster of a nation must always be interpreted as due to the weakness of its patron deity. — Mine eyes will gaze upon her] She who doubted Yahweh's power, if not his very existence, will now feel that power in her own person. The "gaze" is one of gloating hatred; cf. Ob. '^- *^ Ez. 28" Ps. 22^^ — Now will she be for trampling] A final note of triumph over the prostrate foe. — Like the mire of the streets] An editorial expansion, as is shown by the metre;* for similar additions, cf. 1*. 8. ^na^N] Fem. as collective, Ges. ^"^s^ — 9, t^yq Of anger of '1, only here and Is. 30'"; a stronger term than the more common qN ,a;'i and may. — •'•iDdvo hb'j;] i. e. do me justice, give judgment in my favour ; cf. Ps. 9^ — 10. N^ni] An abnormal form and accentuation, but found also in Zc. 95 and Gn. 41" (in some mss.). According to Ges. ^"p due to desire to avoid hiatus before foil, n; but perhaps better treated as re- flecting Aramaic usage, Ges. ^"hh, On the force of the tense, cf. Ko. §364 f., — vn] Correction to n>N is unnecessary in view of 2 K. 19" Is. 19" Je. 37"; the sf. vividly anticipates the subj.; cf. Ko. ^s^"'. — nrNnn] D. f. affectuosum, as in nj:3?n, Ju. 5"; Ges. ^ " ". There is no room here for a sf.. ♦ So Marti, Now.^, Siev., Hpt.. But c}. Du., who retains it and drops " mine eyes will gaze upxjn her." 148 MICAH § 21. The Restoration of Jerusalem and the Return of Exiles (f'-'^). A single eight-line str. tells of the time when the city's walls will be rebuilt, her borders extended and her citizens brought back from every quarter of the earth; while the heathen world will receive drastic punishment for the sin of its inhabitants. A DAY will there be for rebuilding thy walls. On that day the border will be distant. A day will there be when unto thee will they come, From Assyria even unto Egypt, And from Egypt even to the river, And from sea to sea and from mountain to mountain. But the earth will become a desolation, On account of its inhabitants, because of the fruit of their deeds. Tetrameter rhythm prevails in this oracle as it is found in iH; but the text is doubtful at several points. The connection within the str. is very close, except between vv. " and •', where contrast must be under- stood to make any connection possible. But since good connection may be secured in this way, it seems unnecessary to separate v. ", either in order to connect it with v. " (Marti) or with v. * (Siev.). There is not the slightest link of connection between this passage and its context on either side. The proposition of Marti (so also Now."^) to secure connec- tion with vv. '■"> by changing the sf . of the 2d pers. here to that of the ist pers. does not commend itself, for such promises for the future are ordi- narily spoken to the community or concerning it by a prophet and do not emanate from the community itself. Van H.'s proposal to place w. iib-13 immediately after v. ', involves an impossible exegesis of v. ". The passage is, therefore, a fragment lacking close relationship to the other fragments of which chs. 6 and 7 are composed (so also Du.). The time of the writing of this piece is clearly revealed as falling within certain limits. The terminus a quo for its origin is necessarily the fall oi Jerusalem in 586 B.C., at which time the walls of the city were razed (2 K. 2 5 '") ; the terminus ad quem is evidently the year of the rebuild- ing of the walls under Nehemiah. The prophet apparently looks for- ward to the rebuilding as close at hand; hence we might place the proph- ecy shortly before that task was actually begun. But it is impossible to say how many times prophetic hopes of this character may have been kindled only to meet with disappointment. It is unsafe, therefore, to specify any time within the first century and a half after the fall of Jerusalem for the utterance of this prophecy. 7"-" 149 11. Dv] Add Nin, with Marti and Now. '^i as copula; cf. v. •*. Che.^^, Sinn DV3. — mnS] 05 dXoi^^j -kXIvBov = nuaS Siev. nu3n. — T'■^^J] (S i^iXei\f'ls ffov. Marti, "''\V,; so Now.*^, Siev.. Hal. T?.V- — f*^^^ ov] Siev. om.. — pn pm>] (& Kal &-n-0Tpl\pfraL v6fjiifid jd'7; so iJ. — D'i] Elh. nD>i. — nni] & = nni; c/. Nu. 20«. Elh. nnni. — inn] Rd. nnp, with 05 H, Taylor, Elh., We., GASm., Now., Marti, Hal., van H., Du., Hpt.. This short poem is full of movement, — the rebuilding of walls, the exiles returning in great numbers from every quarter, and over against this scene of joyous activity the desolation of destruction upon the pagan world. — 11. A day will there be for rebuilding thy walls] The city of Jerusalem is addressed. The language of the str. as a whole shows that the literal rebuilding of the city's walls is meant, rather than any such general idea as the restoration of the fortunes of Israel. — On that day will tJie boundary be far distant] i. e. Is- rael's territory will be very extensive. For pm as applied to the extension of boundaries, cf. Is. 26*^. The boundary referred to may be either that of the city or that of the land; cf. Zc. 2*. The text here is somewhat suspicious; pn without the article or other token of definiteness is unusual, and the repetition of QT' and DT* ti] "and unto thee," i. e. "when unto thee"; cf. H. 44, 3. — iixc] EIsw. only Is. 196 2 K. 19!^ (= Is. 37"). Perhaps intended to suggest by its pointing the common noun, siege. Wkl.^'"'-, 170, proposes to point -nx^p or ivi-::, which he would connect with Ali-is-sa-ri of the Tel-el-Amarna letters; v. Letter of Ashur-uballit, 1. 2, and that of Tar-hundaras of Arsapi, 1. i. — ->nj] Ab- sence of art. = poetic usage, Ko. * "s g. For similar refs. to the Euphrates, cf. Zc. pio Ps. 728 I K. 4"- 2< 1415 2 S. ioi6 Gn. i5'8 Dt. i'.— 13. y\nn] As denoting all non-Israelitish territory, cf. the corresponding use of din in contrast with huTZ'^ in Je. 32'", cited by Stei. and Now.. § 22. A Prayer for Yahweh's Intervention (7""^"). Three strs. of four lines each, in qina rhythm, call for Yahweh's manifestation as the deliverer of his people and base the appeal for deliverance upon his mercy. Str. I is a prayer to Yahweh for the resumption of his former attitude of favour toward his people. Str . II prays for the utter humiliation of the heathen nations and their complete subjection to Yahweh. Str. Ill recalls the well- known character of Yahweh and reminds him of his oath to the patriarchs concerning the glory of Israel. CHEPHERD thy people with thy staff, the flock of thine inheritance, That dwells alone in a jungle, in the midst of a garden. May they feed in Bashan and Gilead, as in the days of old. As in the days of thy coming forth from Egj'pt, show us wonderful things. TVTAY the nations see and be ashamed of all their might. May they lay hand upon mouth, and may their ears be deaf. May they lick dust like the serpent, like crawlers of the earth. May they come trembling from their dens, may they quake and fear on account of thee. 'VX/'HO is a god like unto thee, forgiving iniquity and passing by transgression ? And thou wilt cast into the depths of the sea all our sins. Thou wilt show faithfulness to Jacob and kindness to Abraham, As thou hast sworn to our fathers from days of yore. The qtna rhythm is clearly marked in this poem. Only three lines need pruning to bring them within the limits of the metre {v. i.), and the 152 AnCAH gloss-like character of these additions is very apparent. The three strs. are sharply differentiated one from another, the first dealing with Israel, the second with the nations, and the third with God. Siev. sets Str. Ill apart as an independent poem, but the identity of form and the good logical connection seem to require its junction with w. '<••', Sta. {ZAW. XXIII, 164 ff.), followed by Now. and Marti, has recognised that vv. '">• "• interrupt the close connection between w. '»» and'"" {v. i.). But these fragments have no real connection with v. ", where they are attached by Sta. and Marti. To put them there involves the appli- cation of v. " to the land of Israel, and a contrast between the condition portrayed in vv. "■'* and that actually existing as described in v. ", which is hardly conceivable in the absence of any particle indicating the changed time relations. They are better treated as a variant or parallel to vv. "»• '"'. The general tone of this passage marks it as belonging to the later days. Israel is in distress; the land is only partly in its possession; the people have suffered many things at the hands of their enemies, upon whom they call down vengeance. The attitude of the author is quite similar to that revealed in vv. '-"', and the two passages might well come from the same period, if not from the same pen. The return from exile seems to lie in the past; the people are dwelling in Canaan, but their territory is of narrow limits. The days when Bashan and Gilead were occupied (eighth century B.C.) are "days of old." This indicates a time after the return movement under Ezra and Nehemiah and the accom- panying development of particularism. Many terms common in the later Psalms occur in these few verses (v. t.). 14. >j3B'] 3. Van H. nj?;, may it be established. — 15. inKx] f^ 21, sf. in 3d pi.. — o>-iXD \-\'tf< with (8; so Marti, Siev., Du.; the metre supports this. — ijnix] Rd. iJN-;n; so We., Taylor, Elh., Pont, Or., GASm., Now., Che., Oort^™-, Marti, Hal., Siev., van H., Du., Hpt.. (& SftaOt. ^ 01 sf. of 3d pers. pi.. Some codd. of 05 5e/|w airols. Ro. UNin; so Gu.. — 16. Sac] , mtr. cs.. — ivo . . . p>](8 0Ipl.. Siev. adds Tcy after ru", mtr. cs.. — inVnj nous's] Om. as gloss, with Now., Marti, Du.. Siev. and Gil. 7"-" 153 •\rhr\3 DHan-hy, and omit remainder of verse as gloss. — pvnn] ^ 2d pers. sg. — IV*?] OJ eli tuapripiov = ^yh. — yon] & has 2d pers. sg. of vb.. — 19. Siev. and Gu. insert nnN at opening of verse, and change all vbs. to 2d pers. sg.. — \P^22^] 9 and he will gather together. — I'Sfni] & ST H 3d pers. sg. active. (6 xal iiropi', the main noun to which INX is added parenthetically; or as due to ]xx itself being treated as masc, as in Gn. 30^9% because of its relation to d>'. — ij?^] Ace. of place in which, as after 2Z'^ in Gn. i8'. — 15. un^.s'] Treated by Ew. ^"s as Aram, form of imv. ; this was objected to by Ew.'s contemporaries because an Aramaicism in the language of Micah was improbable; but this objec- tion loses its force with the prevalence of the view of the late origin of this 156 MICAH material. In any case it might have been due to a scribe who spoke Aram.. But more probably it was intended as first person of impf. by a scribe who conceived of v. '* as the beginning of Yahweh's answer to Israel's petition, a view which is irreconcilable with the presence of the sf. in 1DD (v. "), — 16. no Sy i^] A common idiom, hence without art., Ko. ^"^'•. — 18. 'd] An example of the near relation of question to ex- clamation, Ges.^'"". — I'cn] Verbal adj., rather than Qal pf., as shown by addition of Nin. — 19. cod^] This isolated usage of no 3 suggests the possibility of a confusion with D33, which would furnish excellent sense here and an idiom frequent in the OT.; cf. Is. i'^ Je. 4'< Ps. 5i<- •. 033 is used with the sense wash away, only in Lv. 13" '•; cf. v^"', Is. 4*. Hpt. makes this same suggestion in AJSL, July, 1910; but the preceding sentences were written a year before the appearance of that article. — 20. nc'N] = niPto, as in Je. 332* 48' Is. 54" Ps. lod^. A CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL COMMENTARY ON THE BOOK OF ZEPHANIAH. INTRODUCTION TO THE BOOK OF ZEPHANIAH. § I. FROM THE FALL OF THEBES TO THE FALL OF NINEVEH. These two termini include the period of the decline and fall of the Assyrian empire. Within its limits belong the prophecies of both Zephaniah and Nahum. The difficulty and the greatness of their work can be properly appreciated only as we obtain an un- derstanding of the course of events of which it formed a part. Judah, under Manasseh, continued the vassalage to Assyria that had been inaugurated by Ahaz, through his panic-stricken recourse to the aid of Tiglath-pileser HI, and had been riveted upon Heze- kiah by Sennacherib. Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal maintained the high prestige of Assyria throughout western Asia. The former had established her dominion over lower Egypt as far south as Memphis in 670 B.C., and had died (668 B.C.) while on the march to Egypt to drive back the Ethiopian Taharka, who had incited the Delta to revolt and was actively engaged in the attempt to free Egypt from the Assyrian yoke. Ashurbanipal (668-626 b.c.) im- mediately took up the unfinished task of his predecessor. His reign was the last blaze of Assyria's glory. Taharka was driven back into Nubia and Assyria's sway re-established over the Delta. Twenty kings of the Mediterranean littoral and the neighbouring islands, including Manasseh of Judah, hastened to renew their submission to Assyria. The irrepressible Taharka resumed his intrigues with the princes of the Delta soon after Ashurbanipal's return home and again stirred up revolt. The traitors were all severely punished by Ashurbanipal, with the exception of Necho, prince of Sais, who was shown honour and appointed Assyria's representative in charge of the whole of the Delta, being granted a body of Assyrian troops with which to maintain his authority. 159 l6o ZEPHANIAH This plan of organisation worked well for some time after the death of Taharka (663 b.c). But in the third year of his successor, Tanutamon, negotiations were again opened between the princes of the Delta and the Ethiopian king, who attacked Necho and his Assyrian soldiers, inflicting defeat upon them and slaying Necho himself. In 661 B.C., Ashurbanipal despatched an expedition to Egypt which drove Tanutamon back into Ethiopia and seized and plundered Thebes, the ancient stronghold and capital. From this blow Thebes never recovered; though Tanutamon re-entered the city after the withdrawal of the Assyrian army and remained there until 654 B.C., when Psamtik, son of Necho and king of Sais and Memphis, expelled the Ethiopians and restored Thebes to Egyp- tian ownership. While the Egyptian campaigns were draining Assyria of blood and treasure, Ashurbanipal was also compelled to wage a bloody war against Elam, which had resumed her former hostility shortly after his accession. Two campaigns reduced Elam to temporary submission, under the rule of princes appointed as Assyrian vas- sals (665 B.C.). Another draught upon Assyria's resources was occasioned by troubles in the far west, where Ba'al of Tyre had to be besieged and Arvad and Tabal brought to submission and tribute. Shortly afterward, Assyria's aid was besought by Arvad, Tabal and Lydia against the Cimmerians who had become ag- gressive. An irremediable injury was done to the life of the Assyrian em- pire by the civil war instituted through the revolt of Ashurbanipal's brother, Shamash-shum-ukin, king of Babylon. The struggle was fierce and of seven years' duration, ending in 647 b.c. with the com- plete triumph of Ashurbanipal, who became king of Babylon under the name Kandalanu. Thereupon followed a series of campaigns against Elam, which had aided Shamash-shum-ukin. These re- sulted about 640 B.C. in the total destruction of Elam as a nation. The western peoples, who had eagerly seized upon the opportunity offered by the revolt of Babylon to rid themselves of the oppressive burden of vassalage to Nineveh, also required chastisement. The Arabian tribes, including the Kedarenes and Nabata^ans, who had aided Shamash-shum-ukin, were brought into subjection by Ashur- FROM 66l TO 606 B.C. 161 banipal in a series of battles, in the course of which his troops overran the territory of the Kedarenes, Nabatasans, Edom, Moab, Ammon and the Hauran. Ushu and Acco, in Phoenicia, were also unmercifully punished. If any credence may be given to the Chronicler's story of the captivity of Manasseh of Judah, it is safe to say that the events which brought it about must be placed in connection with this same revolt of the western peoples. In ad- dition to these foes on the east and west, the peoples of the north and north-west initiated hostilities and persisted in them. Among others the Mannai and the Cimmerians were smitten by Ashurban- ipal. Not until about 640 B.C. was peace restored throughout the Assyrian empire. For twelve years Assyria had been engaged in a desperate struggle for life, which she won, but at terrible cost. Meantime, Egypt, left to her o'wn devices and led by the energetic Psamtik I, had expelled the Ethiopians, made alliance with Gyges of Lydia and so strengthened herself and increased her resources that Ashurbanipal made no further efifort to reduce her to sub- mission. The last fourteen years of the reign of Ashurbanipal are shrouded in obscurity. Since the accession of Manasseh, Judah had been passing through a period of reaction. The ideals exalted by prophets like Isaiah and Micah had suffered eclipse. A relation of vassalage to Assyria had been inherited from Hezekiah's reign. Heavy tribute taxed the resources of the people to the utmost and fretted the freedom-loving spirit of these hill-dwellers almost beyond endur- ance. It is probable that, when the neighbouring peoples entered into the conspiracy with Shamash-shum-ukin against Ashurbani- pal, Judah did not stand aloof. In any case, high hopes were raised by the general revolt throughout the empire only to be dashed to the ground with the collapse of the whole movement. This political maelstrom of dissatisfaction, restlessness, intrigue, hope and despair was intensified by the cross-currents of the social and religious life which ran fast and furious. Foreign customs and practices were welcomed with open arms. Manasseh himself led the reactionary movement in religion which sought to reinstate the old deities and shrines that had been discredited by Sennacherib's invasion. The Baalim and Asherah, so generally worshipped 1 62 ZEPHANIAH throughout Syria, were restored to favour in Judah. Sun-worship too was officially approved and practised. That all this was due to something more than mere religious indifference, easy-going toleration or even diplomatic acceptance of the cults of the neigh- bouring peoples allied with Judah in the common desire and pur- pose to obtain freedom from Assyria, is evident from the fact that Manasseh is said to have offered up one of his own sons as a burnt- offering. . This means agonising endeavour on the part of a super- stitious and idolatrous people and its king to secure the favour and help of Heaven in their endeavour to better their lot. Despairing of success with the aid of Yahweh alone, they turned eagerly to the other gods of the local pantheon in the hope of securing their co- operation. They were willing to pay the highest price for such aid, withholding not their own heart's blood. The precise sig- nificance of the statement in 2 K. 21^^ that "Manasseh shed inno- cent blood very much, till he had filled Jerusalem from one end to another" is undiscoverable. It may refer to frequent resort to in- fant sacrifice, though it is imlikely that Manasseh would have been held solely accountable for this; or to a bloody persecution of the prophets of Yahweh (r/. Je. 2^°) ; or even to acts of tyranny, like the judicial murder of Naboth the Jezreelite in Ahab's time, oc- casioned by the desire to replenish the royal treasury or to remove influential opposition to the royal policy. The interplay of such conditions and influences produced a high degree of ferment in Jerusalem. With the passing of Manasseh and Amon and the accession of Josiah about 638 B.C., new influences began to come to the fore in Judah. The principles inculcated by the earlier prophets were bearing fruit and were to receive official endorse- ment when the boy king came to maturity of judgment. While the new regime was establishing itself in Judah, new forces and strange faces began to appear in the larger arena of western Asia. The Scythians, breaking loose from their mountain fast- nesses in the north, came pouring down upon Assyria's territory, sweeping everything before them.* In the extreme west they en- countered Psamtik I of Egypt, who had for years been occupied with the siege of Ashdod, which he was now forced to abandon by * Hdt., I, 103 jj.. FROM 66 1 TO 606 B.C. 163 the advance of the new foe. Crowded back across his own border, there he held the barbarians at bay, whether by force* or by pay- ment of a large amount of goldf is an open question. They seem to have left Jerusalem untouched, both on the way down to Egypt and on the return. But echoes of their march are heard in the prophecies of Jeremiah and Zephaniah, both of whom were called into public life probably by this great invasion. In the eastern half of Assyria's domain, Nineveh was undergoing a siege at the hands of Cyaxares, the Mede, when the Scythians appeared upon the scene. Cyaxares was continuing a struggle between Media and Assyria, the opening stage of which had closed with the defeat and death of Phraortes, his father. The son, again tak- ing the aggressive, had gathered a new army, defeated the Assyrian forces in pitched battle and encamped before the walls of Nine- veh itself (625 B.C.). The entrance of the Scythians into Media forced Cyaxares to raise the siege of Nineveh and return to the defence of his own land. J There he was defeated and rendered hors de combat for nearly twenty years, while the Scythians held his kingdom. This timely relief for Nineveh did but postpone for a little the inevitable downfall of Assyria. The successors of Ashurbanipal, viz., Ashur-etil-ili and Sin-shar-ishkim, were unable to recreate the blood and treasure that had been so lavishly ex- pended by their predecessor on the one hand, and so ruthlessly de- stroyed by the Scythians on the other. The damage done to the fabric of Assyrian power was irreparable. Weakened as Nine- veh was, Babylon under Nabopolassar was able once more to as- sert her independence and to maintain it. The exact course of events immediately preceding the fall of Nineveh is not on record. It can only be conjectured from three varying sources of information, viz., the narrative of Herodotus, the Babylonian tradition received by Berossus and preserved in citations from him by later Greek writers, and the cuneiform rec- ords of Babylonia. § Herodotus relates that Cyaxares, the Mede, treacherously murdered his Scythian masters, drove out their fol- * Cf. Breasted, History oj Egypt, 581. t So Hdt., /. c. % Hdt., /. c. § The Persian tradition preserved by Ctesias is wholly untrustworthy. The tradition of Berossus was copied by Polyhistor {c. 50 B.C.) and transmitted by Abydenus. The latter, however, vitiated the tradition by combining it with the tales of Ctesias in such a way as to render practically futile any attempt to dififerentiate precisely between the two elements. l64 ZEPHANIAH lowers from his land and then proceeded once more against Nine- veh which now fell into his hands. Berossus tells us that Sin-shar- ishkun (Saracus) heard of the approach of a numerous army from the sea toward Nineveh. Thereupon, he sent his general Busa- lossorus to check their advance. The latter, however, deserted his king, made alliance with the Medes, giving his son in marriage to the daughter of the Median leader, and then turned against Nineveh. Sin-shar-ishkun then set fire to his own capital and perished in the flames. Still another strand of the tradition of Berossus represents the king of Assyria as having been shut up in his capital for three years by the combined forces of the Medes and the Babylonians. The Tigris then swept away part of the city's walls and the king offered himself and his wives upon the fimeral pyre. The stele of Nabonidus, the last king of Babylon, in relating the overthrow of Assyria says that the king of the Umman-manda came to the help of Babylon and that he laid waste the land of Assyria like a cyclone, ruined the temples of the Assyrian gods and destroyed the cities on the border of Babylonia which had not sup- ported Babylon in the struggle. The vandalism of this ally is said to have grieved the king of Babylon, who had himself re- frained from desecrating any of the shrines. The league between the Medes and Babylonians seems to have been brought about by the fact that while Nabopolassar was absent in the north of Meso- potamia attacking the Subaru, the Assyrian king had taken ad- vantage of the opportunity to enter Babylonia and cut off the re- turn of the absent king and his army.* In this dilemma, Nabopo- lassar called upon the Umman-manda for aid, which they were only too glad to give. Whether or not the Babylonians partici- pated in the siege and capture of Nineveh itself is uncertain; but it is quite clear that the fall of the empire was directly due to the combined efforts of the Babylonians and Medes (with whom the Umman-manda are probably to be identified; at least, the Medes constituted the most influential element in the hordes of the Um- man-mandaf). The view that Babylon aided in the overthrow ♦ So Mcsscrschmidt, Mitlhrilunf^en der vorderasiatischcn Gesellschajl, I (1896), 7 ff.. t But Rogers, History oj Babylonia and Assyria, II, 289, identifies the Umman-manda with the Scythians; so also Sayce, Lchmann, el nl.. FROM 66 1 TO 606 B.C. 165 of Assyria is corroborated by two Neo-Babylonian letters which seem to refer to the events of this period.* One of them reports to the king concerning a campaign against Assyria which has re- sulted in victory for Babylon; the other, probably referring to the same campaign, makes it clear that there were two commanders of Babylon's forces and that one of them was a foreigner, — per- haps a general of the Medes. Even before life was extinct in the body politic of Assyria, greedy hands were laid upon her estate. Necho II, successor of Psamtik in 609 B.C., set out at once to seize Assyria's possessions in the west. Gaza and Askalon fell before him. On his way to the north he was met by Josiah of Judah, probably at Megiddo (608 B.C.). The inhabitants of Judah, knowing of course that Assyria was powerless and almost certainly doomed, were in a state of ex- ultant confidence in themselves and in Yahweh, their God. He who had at last brought the proud foe and cruel tyrant to ruin was with them and ready to protect them. In this frame of mind, the prospect of replacing Assyria's yoke now broken with one of Egyptian make was not to be tolerated. But the result of the battle with Necho dashed all their hopes to the ground. Necho proceeded on his victorious way as far as the Euphrates, bringing the entire west into subjection to Egypt and upon his return march placing an Egyptian vassal upon the throne of David. With her territory already gone on every side into the hands of Egyptians, IMedes and Babylonians, Nineveh herself gave up the hopeless struggle about 606 B.C. and the Assyrian empire fell to rise no more. Two hundred years later, when Xenophon led his band of Greek adventurers past the site of Nineveh (401 B.C.), he found no recol- lection of the name of the former mistress of the world (A nabasis, III, 4, 8-i2).t * Published in Cuneiform Texts on Babylonian Tablets in the British Museum, XXII, 46 /.. C/. Meissner, OLZ., IX (1906), 444 #., who first connected them with the fall of Assyria. t An excellent study of the last half century of Assyrian history is furnished by P. Kleinert, Nahum und der Fall Nineves, SK., LXXXIII (1910), soi ff- Cj. also T. Friedrich, Nineve's Ende und die Ausgdnge des assyrischen Reiches, in Festgaben zu Ehren Max Biidinger's von seinen Freunden und Schiilern (1898), where a close study of the ruins of Nineveh is made and the conclusion reached that the fall of the city was caused by a flood due to the high waters of the Tigris and its tributary streams. So also Lehmann-Haupt, Israel : Seine Enlwicklung im Rahmen der Weltgeschichte (igu), p. 149, who testifies to a tradition among the natives that the wall of Nineveh was broken through by the river Khusur. /^ l66 ZEPHANIAH § 2. ZEPHANIAH AND HIS TIMES. I. The Man. The traditions regarding Zephaniah, aside from the super- scription of his book, are wholly valueless. His prophecies con- stitute the only other source of information ; and what they furnish is painfully slight. As in the case of so many of the prophets, his personality lies hidden behind his message. He seems to have been an inhabitant of Jerusalem, in view of his familiarity with the topography of his capital (i^"^), his knowledge of religious and social conditions within the city and the fact that he identifies it as his own standing-place in i^ The apparent claim of the super- scription that he was a member of the royal family is supported somewhat by the fact of his familiarity with the manner of life in the princely households and his courage in denouncing the upper classes (i*- ^ 3^) . Moreover, his complaint is almost wholly against these privileged classes, the rich and the powerful ; yet he does not pose as the spokesman of the poor and there is lacking in his utterances that note of sympathy with their sufferings which is so evident in Amos and Micah, a lack easily explained if he himself were a member of the aristocracy and had never felt the pinch of poverty, Pseudepiphanius {de vitis propheiarum, ch. 19) declares him to have been "of the tribe of Simeon from the field (or hill) of Sabaratha (or Baratha)" and to have "died in an apocalypse of the Lord and been buried all alone on his own land."^ An apocalypse ascribed to Zephaniah is known to have existed by reason of a quotation from it preserved in the Stromala (V, 11, § 77) of Clement of Alexandria, vi^., "And a spirit took me and carried me into the fifth heaven, and I saw angels, called lords, whose diadem was placed upon them by the Holy Spirit, and the throne of each of them was seven times brighter than the light of the rising sun and they were dwelling in temples of salvation and singing hymns in praise of the inexpressible God, most high."v Pseudo-Athanasius re- fers to the same apocalypse. Two fragments of an apocalypse in Coptic, ascribed to Zephaniah and discovered at Akhmim [published by Bouriant in Mcmoires de la mission archcologique an Caire (1885); cf. Stern, Zeilschrift Jiir Mgypt. Sprache (1886)] may also have belonged ZEPHANIAH AND HIS TIMES 167 to it; V. Schiirer, Gesch. d. jud. Volkes^, III, 271/. According to Din'' ni3N, his tomb was in Gibeah of the Lebanons. The traditional rep- resentation of him in art shows him carrying a lamp in his left hand; but cf. Sargent's Frieze of the Prophets in the Boston Public Library. Schw. seeks to discount the probability of the ancestor Hezekiah hav- ing been the king, which arises from the unusual length of the genealogy, by calling attention to the fact that long genealogies are frequent in the OT. and that their lack in the superscriptions of the prophets may be purely accidental. However, when only one of sixteen prophetic books exhibits a striking variation, the probability seems to lie on the side of that variation having been deliberate rather than accidental. Further- more, long genealogies are indeed characteristic of priestly writings (Ezr., Ne., i, 2 Ch.), but are not common in the corresponding pro- phetic histories (Ju., i, 2 S., Ki.), being found only in i S. i>. 2. The Times. The date of Zephaniah's prophetic activity, according to the superscription, was in the reign of King Josiah (639-608) . Scholars, with one exception,* have accepted this as correct. There is no good reason to suspect the statement; it accords well with the con- tents of the book, yet it could not easily have been conjectured upon the basis of the book. It is natural to suppose that it rests upon an independent tradition that goes back to fairly early times. The question that may profitably be discussed concerns itself with the particular portion of Josiah's reign to which the prophecy should be assigned. Did Zephaniah do his work before or after the cul- mination of the great Deuteronomic reform in 621 B.c.Pf The answer to this question must be sought in the prophet's own state- ments as to the conditions prevailing in Judah in his day and in his outiook for the future. His denimciations of syncretism in worship, apostacy from Yahweh, the worship of the heavenly bod- ies, the aping of foreign customs in religion and in dress (i*"®- *• ^), and the practical scepticism rebuked in i^ seem to accord per- fectly with the state of affairs as it was during the reigns of Manas- seh and Amon (2 K. 21^®-^^ ^■). and as it may be supposed to have * Viz., Ko.Einl., who places him in the reign of Jehoiakim. t In favour of the later period may be cited De. (on Habakkuk), Kl., Schw., Schuiz and Lippl. But the great majority of scholars is in favour of the earlier period; so, e. g.. Hi., We., Or., Dav., GASm., Now., Marti, Beer, Cor., Kennedy (£>£.). l68 ZEPHANIAH continued during the early portion of Josiah's reign, before he had arrived at an age when he could exercise any powerful influence upon the currents of life and thought in his kingdom. It is unsafe to argue, as Lippl does, that the movement for reform must have begun with Josiah's accession, since the conspirators who slew /-^ Amon were supported by the prophets and priests. The motive for the assassination of Amon as a matter of fact is unknown and need have had no connection with his attitude toward religion. The intricacies of the politics of Jerusalem at that time are hid- den from us. Opposition on Amon's part to some policy, home or foreign, endorsed by popular sentiment may well have caused "the people of the land" to rise against him. The lad Josiah was an unknown quantity and, perhaps, developed into a totally differ- ent kind of ruler from what those who enthroned him had hoped for. In any case, during his early years religious interests prob- ably remained for the most part in the hands of those who had con- trolled them under Manasseh and Amon. Effort has been made to account for the conditions reflected by Zephaniah's utterances as indicative of the period of Josiah's reign after 621 B.C. But it seems improbable that such irregularities of cultus could have been openly practised and tolerated in the period immediately after a reform, the main outcome of which was the purification of the cultus. Josiah was a zealous worshipper of Yahweh and no record has reached us of any cooling of his zeal after the reform. Passages from Jeremiah are sometimes cited to show that conditions were as bad in Judah after the reform as they are declared to have been by Zephaniah in his day. Three facts render this argument inconclusive. Jeremiah's early denun- ciations apparently lay relatively little stress upon the impurity of the cultus which is emphasised by Zephaniah. Many of Jere- miah's prophecies so confidently assigned to the first years after the reform probably belong to his latest work. None of his proph- ecies were viTitten dowTi until the fourth year of Jehoiakim (36^ ^■), and it is practically certain that in the process of transcription they were largely coloured by the prophet's later thought and by the conditions amid which they were written. Other considerations urged in favour of the post-reformation ZEPHANIAH AND HIS TIMES 169 date fail to make it probable. The phrase "remnant of Baal" (i^) is said to presuppose the almost complete destruction of Baal- ism in 621 B.C. But the phrase is equally well translated "Baal- ism to the last vestige" as in Am. i^. Cf. n''inX in Am. 4^ 9^ In like manner, the phrase "sons of the king" (i*) is under no com- pulsion to mean the sons of Josiah. In accordance with a very common usage of the word "son " in Hebrew, it may and probably does denote those characterised by the fact of membership in the royal family, viz., imcles and cousins of Josiah and the like. CJ. the similar phrase "sons of the prophets. " Again, the total silence of Zephaniah as to the king, though denouncing other members of the royal family, is just as easily understood on the basis of the king's youth as it is on the supposition that Josiah's well-known piety after 621 B.C. rendered him immune from all criticism. Nor does the fact that counsel was sought of Huldah, the prophetess, at the time of the discovery of the book of the law force us to con- clude that at that time Zephaniah was not yet known as a prophet. The same kind of reasoning would dispose of Jeremiah who had then been in public life for eight years. Zephaniah may have died before 621 B.C., or have been absent from the city at that particu- lar juncture, or not have been in the confidence of the party push- ing the reform. Anything which would account satisfactorily for Jeremiah having been ignored would be equally applicable to the case of Zephaniah. The occasion of Zephaniah's appearance as a prophet seems to have lain in some imminent danger to his nation. He evidently regarded the day of Yahweh as close at hand (i^). In accord- ance with the character of earlier prophecy in general and of the day of Yahweh prophecies in particular, it is probable that Zephaniah interpreted the approach of some foreign army as heralding the dawn of Yahweh 's day.* The event that best meets the requirements of the situation is the Scythian invasion.f The exact date of the appearance of the Scythians upon the horizon of Palestine cannot be surely fixed. Psamtik I of Egypt began his * V. JMPS., The Day oj Yahweh, AJTh., V (1901), s°5 ff-\ <^f- Gressmann, Der Vrsprung d. isr.-jud. Eschalologie (1905), 142 J.. t This connection was first suggested by C. F. Cramer, Scythische Denkmdler in Paldstina (1778); it is now the prevailing view. lyo ZEPHANIAH operations in western Asia in 640 B.C.; and since the Scythians put an effectual stop to his advances in Syria, and Herodotus reports that Psamtik was engaged in the siege of Ashdod for twenty-eight years, it is practically certain that his encounter with the Scythi- ans was nearer 620 than 640 B.C. Cyaxares, the Mede, who became king in 625 B.C., was forced to raise the siege of Nineveh about 620 B.C. by the descent of the Scythians upon his own territory. Somewhere then between 630 and 620 B.C. it is probable that the Scythian raid upon the north and west provinces of the Assyrian empire took place.* The Greek tradition declares the Scythian domination of western Asia to have lasted twenty-eight years. Since their final expulsion was effected somewhere between 599 and 590 B.c.,f this gives 627 B.C. as the earliest date for their ap- pearance in that region. This coincides with the year of Jere- miah's call (Je. i^) and furnishes the necessary external stimulus for the emergence of both Jeremiah and Zephaniah. The widespread activity of the Scythians corresponds with Zephaniah's vision of the coming judgment as extending from Assyria on the north-east to Ethiopia on the south-west. The speed with which the Scyth- ian hordes swept everything before them seems reflected in certain of Zephaniah's utterances {e. g., i" 2*). That neither Assyria nor Egypt was thought of by Zephaniah as the agent or forenmner of the coming judgment is clear from the fact that they both are rep- resented as falling victims to it. J These being out of the question, the Scythians remain as the most likely candidate for the doubtful honour of world-destroyer. The Babylonians cannot have bulked large in the prophet's mind until shortly before 606 B.C., and other considerations render it unlikely that the prophecy belongs to so late a date (v. s.). The fact that neither Assyria nor Egypt was destroyed by the Scythians, but that, on the contrary, Nineveh was temporarily saved by them, only proves that the expectations of the prophet were not fully realised. Ezekiel (38*^) distinctly im- * V. J. V. PrdSek, Gesck. der Meder u. Perser, I (1006), 141 )?.. Hdt., indeed, makes the march against Egypt jolUnu the attack upon the Medes; but it seems difficult to reconstruct the history on that basis. t PrdSek, op. cil., 152. X Schw., in spite of this, seeks to identify the expected'destroyer with Egypt. This would be possible only by eliminating i'^ or by discriminating sharply between Ethiopia and Egypt as Zephaniah probably did not do. 2EPHANIAH AND HlS TIMES 17I plies that certain former prophecies of disaster had not been ful- filled and looks to Gog, of the land of Magog, as destined to bring the final realisation of these predictions. Gog and his hosts, more- over, very closely resemble the Scythians in their character and actions. The reference of Zephaniah to the inability of Jerusalem to ransom herself from the coming foe (i^*; cj. i") is no proof that he knew of the success of Egypt in buying herself free from the Scytliians, as Herodotus reports. He may well have arrived at his conclusion on the basis of the reports that reached him of the ruthlessness of these barbarians. Indeed, Herodotus's statement regarding Egypt's escape may not tell the whole story. At any rate, threats similar to that of Zephaniah were made by other prophets who certainly did not have any thought of the Scythians {e. g., Is. 13^^ Ez. 7^^ cf. Je. 4^). On the whole, therefore, it seems probable that Zephaniah prophesied on the verge of the Scythian invasion of Syria. It is not necessary to suppose that he conceived of them as exhausting the divine anger in their chastisement of the nations. They seem rather to have been thought of as furnishing the prelude to the great drama of destruction. Human and divine forces were to co-operate in this as in other judgment scenes depicted by the prophets (e. g., Am. 5" 8^- ^). In the approach of the Scythians, Zephaniah saw signs of the breaking up of the existing world- powers and hastened to proclaim it as the great judgment day of Yahweh, the God of Israel and the God of justice. § 3. THE BOOK OF ZEPHANIAH. I. The Contents. The thought of the book is centred upon one great theme, the coming of the day of Yahweh, As the book now stands, this theme is presented under four successive phases. Ch. i sets forth the first of these, viz., the announcement of the near approach of the great day with its overwhelming terrors which are to involve the world in general and Judah in particular. The prophet's primary interest naturally is in the fate of his own people; hence 172 ZEPHANIAH his message is addressed to them. Ch. 2, the second phase of the subject, announces the coming of this same great day upon the neighbouring peoples, viz., the Philistines, Moabites, Ammonites, Ethiopians or Egyptians, and Assyrians. In the third division, ch. 3*-^, the prophet returns to his own people and contrasts their sinfulness with the righteousness of Yahweh. In this contrast lies the cause of the disaster coming upon Jerusalem. In the fourth and final stage of the presentation, ch. 3^"^*^, the thought leaps for- ward to the future, and declares that after the process of the puri- fication of the people of Yahweh is completed, the nation will en- joy world-wide fame as the redeemed of Yahweh, the mighty God. 2. Later Additions. Critical study of the contents of the book during the last half century has resulted in the setting apart of certain portions of the text as belonging neither to Zephaniah nor to his times, but as due to accretion in later days. A presentation of the considerations which have produced this change of opinion may be found in the following commentary in connection with the various passages in- volved. Here we may present only a sketch of the history of this critical movement and a summary of the conclusions reached in this commentary. The process of criticism began with Eichhorn (1824), Einl.*, and Theiner (1828), who decided against 2'3-'5 as alien to the thought of Zephaniah. Forty years later, Oort, in Godgeleerde Bijdragen for 1865, pp. 812 ff., set aside 2'" and 3»-2o as secondary matter. His view of the latter passage has now won general recognition. Sta.*^^' (1887), 644, followed by denying the whole of ch. 3 to Zephaniah and question- ing 2>-'- ". Kue., Ofiderzoek (1889), responded by denying the force of the arguments against all but 3X-2". In 1890, Schw. made an elab- orate investigation of chs. 2 and 3, coming to the conclusion that Zeph- aniah wrote only 2"-'5 and possibly 2'-<, while an exilic hand con- tributed 25-'2 and a postexilic, 3'-'". We. endorsed the views of Sta. and Schw. on ch. 3, athetized also 2'" and expressed doubt as to 2'- '. Bu. {SK., 1893, pp. 393 ff.; so also in Gesch., 1906) separated 2<'5 2». 10. i4.!o from the genuine material. Dav. made a careful examination of the arguments of all his predecessors and was content to give Zepha- niah credit for all except 3'"- '<-2». Now. eliminated only 23- '••«• s-'i THE BOOK OF ZEPHANIAH 173 214-20 (similarly also Baudissin, Einl., 553 ff. and Selbie, art. Zephaniah, DB.). GASm. accepted Bu.'s view of ch. 3, but dissented as to ch. 2, regarding all but a^-'i as genuine. Dr. [EB., IV (1903), 5406 /.; so also in his commentary (1906); in Intr. (1910) he adds 3I8-20 to the passages that are "very probably later additions"], with customary caution, con- ceded the probability of the late origin of 2"'. u 39. 10 and refused to de- cide as to 3"-'"', the latter part of which, viz., 3"-^'', he considered "more open to suspicion than 3»-n," Marti, with enviable certainty as to the exact dates of the various additions, agreed with Sta. in taking away from Zephaniah the whole of ch. 3, but in ch. 2 deprived him only of 23. 8-11. 15^ aside from numerous glosses. Cor. accepted the view of Now. for the most part, setting aside 2'''- <=• s" 314-20, Van H., a schol- arly Catholic, contended for the unity of the book as the product of Zephaniah's preaching, with the exception of a few glosses (e. g., 2'-'<'- n). In the same year (1908), Beer gave essential adherence to Sta.'s position, rejecting 2 '»-"'• '*, with the whole of ch. 3, and questioning 2'-^. The conclusions of Fag. are practically the same. Lippl, with Catholic caution and sound learning, concedes the later origin of only 2'"- °- '^^ 3'9- '0, though granting a reasonable doubt as to the originality of 28-11 j^ its present form. Du., the most recent writer, follows closely after We., dropping 2'"- *>. 6b. c. s-ii. is and the whole of ch. 3. In this commentary, the foUowang materials, in addition to minor glosses, are treated as of secondary origin. The oracle against Moab and Ammon (2^- ^) is relegated to later times since its phrase- ology presupposes the conditions of the exile as actually existing. An expansion of this oracle is found in 2^"- ". The fall of Nine- veh is taken for granted in 2^^, which is therefore placed after that event. In the third chapter the only original matter is found in vv. *'^. Vv. ^- ^ may possibly be old material; but in that case they are out of place in their present context. Vv. ^"" are a post- exilic addition, in which is now included a gloss (vv. ^^^) revealing a different attitude toward the heathen and interrupting the con- tinuity of thought between w. ^ and ". Vv. "'^^ are another ad- dition from postexilic times, which has likewise undergone some inner expansion. The allowance of time necessary for the various additions to the book, together with the still later glosses upon those additions, necessitates placing the completion of the prophecy in its present form well along in the postexilic period. The final touches may have been given as late as the Greek period. The history of the 174 2EPHANIAH growth of OT. books shows that they were all subject to this kind of treatment, at least until they were recognised as canonical. In- deed, it is by no means certain that canonicity in its early stages guaranteed immunity from such modifications. The Book of the Twelve was, in all probability, the last candidate to secure ad- mission to the prophetic canon. 3. Poetic Form. The honour of having been the first to announce the discovery of a special poetic metre in the book of Zephaniah belongs to Budde,* who declared that 2*'^^ and 3''" were written in the dirge- rhythm, i. e., in lines of 3-^-2 beats each. In 18S6, Dr. C. A. Briggs {Messianic Prophecy, 221-225) had printed a translation of Zp. i'- '• "-" 2'-' 3'--° arranged in poetic lines, but without special consideration of the question of poetic form. The next scholar to discuss the question was D. H. Mtiller {Die Propheten in ihrer ursprilnglichen Form, 1896), who hailed this book as the first prophecy to which it had been possible to apply his scheme of strophic analysis throughout. Treating the book as a unit, with the exception of 3'^-^'', and laying undue emphasis upon incidental resemblances, he wrought out a system of "inclusion," "concatenation" and "re- sponsion" {V. H.'^", clxv), yielding seven strs. in ch. i, with 5-1-7-1-7 + 7-f-6-|-6-t-6 lines each respectively. Ch. 2 fell into five strs. having 7-f-7-|-8-f-8-f-4 lines, and ch. 3 yielded seven more strs. having 7-1-74-7 + 7 + 3 + 7 + 7 lines each respectively. An example of the artificial char- acter of this scheme is furnished in the fact that 2" is separated from 2"> and with i'*-'* is organised into an eight-line str. GASm., without any attempt at strophic reorganisation, followed Bu. in printing 2<-'- "" as poetry written in elegiac rhythm. Marti was the first to attempt to restore in the various oracles both the metrical and the strophic uni- formity which he supposed to have belonged to them originally. The genuine material in chs. i and 2 he organised into strs. of four lines each, in trimeter movement (or two lines each in double trimeter). In ch. 3 he discovered three different poetic forms, viz., 3'-' = strs. of six lines each in dimeter; 3*-" = strs. of four gma-lines each; and 3X-20 = strs. of four lines each in interchanging trimeter and dimeter. Hal., disre- garding both metre and str., indicated his recognition of the material as poetry by printing it according to the parallelism. Siev. thus far has made the most serious attempt to reduce the text to rigidly poetical * SK. (1893); cj. Cesch. (1906). THE BOOK OF ZEPHANIAH 175 forms. But the result is by no means self-authenticating. Ch. i, for example, is presented in two sections; the first is composed of w. ^-^■ 8-13. 17 and is organised into seven strs. of two heptameter lines each; while the second is composed of vv. '■ '<-" and comprises four strs., each of two lines, one heptameter and one tetrameter. But in the first sec- tion, Str. I breaks down metrically; Str. IV transposes materials as fol- lows, w. •''• ">• '"• •»; and Str. VII brings together w. "• and "; while in the second section, Str. IV lacks the requisite tetrameter line. Again, 3'-' is presented in five strs. of two lines each, one of eight beats and one of four. But to make this possible, a total of eighteen words is omitted at six different points and most of them for no reason but that of metrical necessity. This is too high a price for so slight a boon. Cor. satisfies himself with stating that the genuine materials in Zephaniah may all be reduced to strs. of twelve lines each (i. e., six double lines). Strophic uniformity of this kind can be secured only by rejecting as ungenuine all that does not readily conform to this strophic norm. Fag. offers a strophical reconstruction of the book which differs only in slight details from that of Marti. Lippl attempts no strophic structure, but prints in lines based upon the parallelism and points out the numerous changes necessary to reduce the various lines to uniformity even within the sepa- rate sections of the prophecy. Du. finds strs. of four lines each all through the book, except in the case of a few glosses and additions, and applies the qina-ihythm throughout. In this commentary, effort is made not to lay tmdue emphasis upon considerations arising from the poetic form. The science of Hebrew metre is as yet in an inchoate state, notwithstanding the praiseworthy and painstaking studies of Sievers, Rothstein, et al.. Consequently, conclusions as to the integrity of a text which are based solely or primarily upon metrical considerations are inevi- tably open to grave suspicion. The parallelism has been followed here as the only safe guide to the length of lines and the logical grouping of the thought as the primary consideration in the forma- tion of strs..* For a statement of the views here controlling in reference to metre and str., reference may be had to H,^ clxvi ff.. Attention may be called to a slight variation in usage here, whereby the distich, rather than the single stichos or line, is made the basal imit of the str.. This seems required by the fact that the thought is completely presented only in the distich and that in some cases there is no clearly marked cassura within the distich {e. g., Mi. * C}. Intr. to Comra. on Micah, § 1. 176 ZEPHANIAH 7*** Zp. i*^ 2®^- "•^ T,''^). It may be noted also, that while there can be no doubt that the number of poetic feet in a stichos was de- termined by the number of tone-phrases,* and that as a rule the same number of feet per stichos or distich prevailed throughout a poem, yet cases are plentiful in which changes of measure occur within a poem {e. g., Zp. i^"^^ 2^'^ 3*'^). To reduce these variations to metrical uniformity involves such arbitrariness in textual crit- icism as to discredit the whole process. A large degree of freedom in the use of poetical forms seems to have been exercised by the prophetic poets. The book of Zephaniah, as here analysed, consists of eight po- etic oracles of varying length. It is scarcely probable that these represent the entire literary output of this prophet. Nor is it likely that any of the eight constituted a complete sermon; they are rather selections from a larger body of materials. The metres used are three, viz., hexameter (3 : 3), qina (3 : 2) and tetrameter (2:2). Of these, the qina is the most commonly used; for an an- nouncement of chastisement and affliction, it is the most suitable measure. The length of the strs. varies from two distichs to eight; but, with two somewhat uncertain exceptions (3^"^ and 3"'^'*), the strophic unit within a poem is constant. Zephaniah can hardly be considered great as a poet. He does not rank with Isaiah, nor even with Hosea in this particular. He has no great imaginative powers; no deep insight into the human heart is reflected in his utterances; nor any keen sensitiveness to the beauties of nature. His harp is not attuned to the finer harmonies of life like that of Jeremiah. He had an imperative message to deliver and proceeded in the most direct and forceful way to dis- charge his responsibility. What he lacked in grace and charm, he in some measure atoned for by the vigour and clarity of his speech. He realised the approaching terror so keenly that he was able to present it vividly and convincingly to liis hearers. No prophet has made the picture of the day of Yahweh more real. ♦ c/. H.A^, /. c. zephaniah's message 177 §4. THE MESSAGE OF ZEPHANIAH. Zephaniah spoke at a time when wise and courageous leadership was needed in Judah. Whatever enthusiasm and loyalty to Yah- weh had been aroused by the preaching of Isaiah and by the de- liverance of Jerusalem from Sennacherib in 701 B.C. had died out during the long period of distress and humiliation under Manasseh. Lacking the incentive of a great devotion to Yahweh, the people had fallen away into all kinds of idolatry and corruption. No- where is the religious and moral situation of the times more clearly portrayed than in Zephaniah's prophecies. He directs his blows against a syncretism in religion that does not hesitate to couple the worship of the Baalim, of Milcom and the host of heaven, with that of Yahewh (i*- ^). In Zephaniah's eyes, such conduct is tanta- mount to apostacy from Yahweh (i^). Indeed, he charges cer- tain leaders with a kind of practical scepticism, or atheism; they count upon the inertia of Yahweh, alleging that he does nothing, neither good nor bad; they therefore proceed to the furthest lengths of wickedness. This indifference to religion and its claims on the part of those who were "settled on their lees" was accompanied, as in all similar cases, by a corresponding materialism which had no sense of justice. Hence Zephaniah denounces the prevalent violence and trickery, the tyranny of the rulers, the perversion of justice by the judges themselves, the prostitution of religion to base ends by the priests and prophets and the aping of foreign styles by the rich (i«- ' 3*-"). The religious indifference and eclecticism on the one hand, and the materialistic selfishness and injustice on the other, were a natural reaction from the exalted ideas and ideals of the previous generation. The expectations and high hopes of Isaiah and his contemporaries had failed to materialise. Yahweh's people was still under the heel of the oppressor. The yoke of Assyria was as heavy and as galling as ever. In despair of deliverance through Yahweh, his followers were seeking to supplement his weakness by having recourse to other gods in conjunction with him, or were abandoning him altogether. The naive faith of that earlier time 178 ZEPHANIAH was outgro\Mi. Its driving power was gone. A new interpreta- tion of history was the need of the hour. New conceptions and ideals must be substituted for those outworn. Zephaniah was not the man to supply this need. He had no new ideals. He furnished no new constructive principles. He saw no further into the meaning of current events than his pre- decessors. He was content to apply the interpretations that had long rendered good service in the hands of the prophets. His preaching was not positive and constructive in tone, but wholly negative and destructive. Denunciation and threatening consti- ' tute his message. As Amos and Hosea were called out by the approach of danger from the north, so it is probable that Zephaniah and Jeremiah were aroused by the imminence of the Scythian invasion. As earlier prophets had seen in the Assyrian army the herald of the day of Yahweh, so Zephaniah interpreted the approach of the Scythian hordes; this was the one great absorbing theme of his prophecy. Again, like Amos, he saw the day of Yahweh as fraught with de- struction, as near at hand and as coming not only upon other nations, viz., Philistia, Egypt and Assyria, but also, and pre-emi- nently, upon Yahweh's own nation (i^^- '• " 2*^- "^•). Unlike Jeremiah, his contemporary, who uttered warnings of coming catastrophe while his heart was breaking, Zephaniah betrays no sympathy, compassion or emotion of any kind over the im- pending fate of his people. He speaks almost as a disinterested spectator. The purpose of the approaching judgment as understood by Zephaniah was moral. It was a condemnation of sin and an expression of the ethical righteousness of Yahweh. Yet this ethical motive finds expression only in the annoimcement of the judgment upon Judah; it plays no part in the threats against the nations. In these latter utterances, the old narrow particularism seems to find free course. The nations are overthrown as enemies of Israel and Israel's God. Out of the general catastrophe, a remnant of Israel will survive to worship Yahweh in imdisturbed serenity. The spirit which will characterise this group, as noted by a later hand, will be one of humility, meekness, straightforward- zephaniah's message 179 ness, trust in Yahweh and genuine piety (3"- "). It is the type of religion enjoined in Mi. 6®"^. In only one particular has Zephaniah ever been credited with originality. Until within recent years he has been generally ac- knowledged as the first of the prophets to announce the coming of a universal judgment. It is doubtful, however, whether this claim for him can now stand.* For a prophet who displays no capacity for constructive thought elsewhere, so great an advance step as this seems unlikely. The feature of the day of Yahweh which holds the foremost place in his thought is evidently a war ^ji6-i8 2i2^^ presumably the Scythian invasion, not a world-wide catastrophe. The latter is only the dark background against which the concrete impending disaster is shown in lurid colours. The catastrophic, cataclysmic subversion of the physical universe seems rather to be a part of the eschatology of the times to which he fell heir. This phase of the judgment has no definite aim; it is totally lacking in moral discrimination; it exhibits a certain in- consistency of presentation (e. g., i^; cf. i^); and it is without any definite warrant, no reason being offered for its coming. It bears the marks of its origin in the misty realm of myth ; and myths do not arise in the clear light of history. The conception of a world- destroying judgment belongs in the same category with the story of the Deluge. Like the latter, its origin probably dates back to prehistoric days. Zephaniah, like his predecessors (e. g., Am. i^ ^''^ ^18-20 ^4-6 jjq_ ^3 j^-_ j3f. jg_ 2^"^-), does but endeavour to ad- just the old conceptions to the new conditions created by the ap- proach of the Scythians. The essential sanity and clear vision of Zephaniah and his predecessors is evinced in the fact that they lay their emphasis not upon the old, unethical and cataclysmic features of the ciurent eschatology, but rather upon the definite historical forces of their own time, which are interpreted by them as great ethical agencies for the purificatory chastisement of Israel at the hand of Yahweh. The conception of a day of imiversal judgment does not in and of itself demonstrate a monotheistic idea of God. The Deluge *Cf. Gunk., Zum religionsgesch. Versldndnis dts N, T. (1903), 21 ff.; Gressmann, Escha- tologie (190s). 144 #.. l8o ZEPHANIAH myth in Babylonia arose in the midst of a crass polytheism; and the story found a hospitable reception in Israel long before mono- theism was developed. Nor does Zephaniah's attack upon the syncretism in the religion of his day (i*^-) guarantee his monothe- ism; this attitude of mind had long been characteristic of the proph- ets, who had always insisted upon exclusive loyalty to Yahweh as over against foreign deities. Yet these views are not at all in- consistent with a view of Yahweh as the Lord of lords and the only God. That such was Zephaniah's view is rendered probable by the emphasis he lays upon the ethical requirements of Yahweh, for it was by this route that Israel arrived at monotheism. This prob- ability is reinforced by the fact that the religious writings of his contemporaries, e. g., Jeremiah and Deuteronomy, reflect a mono- theistic theology. It may be, indeed, that Zephaniah himself was one of the group who wrought out the Deuteronomic Code and aided in the promulgation of the reform. Whether or not he was directly engaged in this enterprise we have no means of knowing; but it may be readily granted that his preaching had much to do with preparing the minds and hearts of the people and the court for the reformation. § 5. LITERATURE ON THE BOOK OF ZEPHANL\H. I . Commentaries, The more important commentaries of recent times are: Ewald (1867), Reinke (1868), Hitzig-Steiner (1881), Orelli (1888; 3d ed., 1908), Wellhausen (1892; 3d ed., 1898), Davidson (1896), Nowack (1897; 2d. ed., 1903), G. A. Smith (1898), Marti (1903), Halevy (1905), Driver (1906), van Hoonacker (1908), Rothstein (in Kau., 1909), and Lippl (1910). 2. On Introduction. The chief writings on isagogic problems are cited in § 3^. Special attention may be directed here to the studies of Stade, Schwally, Budde, van Hoonacker and Lippl. Useful summaries LITERATURE ON ZEPHANIAH l8l will be found in the well-known "Introductions" of Driver, Cornill, Konig, Kuenen and Wildeboer; in the Dictionary arti- cles by Selbie (DB.), W. R. Smith and Driver (EB.), and Beer (PRE.^; and in E. Besson, Introduction au Prophete Sophonie (1910). Discussions of the poetic form and character of the book are listed in § 3^. 3. The Teaching. In addition to the sections in the commentaries and "Introduc- tions" setting forth the thought and teaching of Zephaniah, ex- positions of this subject that are worthy of mention will be found in T)uhm, Die Theologie der Propheten (1875), 222-25; Kuenen, The Prophets and Prophecy in Israel (1875), 171/-; Orelli, Old Testament Prophecy (1885), § 34; Marti, Geschichte der israeli- tischen Religion^ (1897), 1^45 Smend, Lehrhuch der alttestament- lichen Religions geschichte^ (1899), 243/.; R. H. Charles, A Critical History of the Doctrine of the Future Life in Israel, in Jtidaistn and in Christianity (1899), 97-99; Stade, Biblische Theologie des Alien Testaments (1905), 250/.; Gressmann, Der Ursprung der israel- itisch-jiidischen Eschatologie (1905), 141; Koberle, Silnde und Gnade (1905), 195/.; Staerk, Das Assyrische Weltreich im Urteil der Propheten (1908), 165-170; Cheyne, The Two Religions of Israel (191 1)> 44-46. A COMMENTARY ON THE BOOK OF ZEPHANIAH. § I. THE SUPERSCRIPTION (i'). This introduces the author, traces his lineage, declares the source and authority of his message and states the period of his public activity. The statements of the superscription are supported by the contents of the book at least so far as any evidence is forthcoming. Yet in view of the slight stress laid upon authorship in early Hebrew literature, much of it being anonymous, and in the light of the superscriptions to the remaining prophetic books, the majority of their titles being certainly of late origin, the probability is that this one is likewise from the hand of an editor {contra Hi.). There is no basis, however, for Marti's supposi- tion that the chronological clause is of later origin than the remainder. I. The word of Yahweh] V. H.^"' '"^ ^■— Which came unto] V. on Mi. i^ — Zephaniah] Nothing is known of him except what is to be learned from his book (v. Intr., § i). — The son of Cushi, the son of Gedaliah, the son of Amariah, the son of Hezekiah\ This is the most extended of the prophetic genealogies. Eight of the prophets are left without any family history;* the fathers of six others are named ;t while Zechariah's father and grandfather are both recorded; but Zephaniah is traced two generations still further back. This variation is certainly not without reason and the most natural explanation is that offered by the view that the Hezekiah here listed was the king by that name.| This proba- bility is supported by the fact that the name Hezekiah is not borne ♦ Viz., Dn., Am., Ob., Mi., Na., Hb., Hg., Mai.. t Viz., Is., Je., Ez., Ho., Jon,, Jo.. X So, e. g., AE., Hi., We., Schw., Dav., Now., GASm., Marti ; conlra Abar., De., Cor., Or. tt al.. I' 183 by any other pre-exilic person on record and that all the names of the genealogy, save Cushi, are formed with the aflfix "yah" which formation seems to have been specially common in the royal fam- ily.* The only two objections to this view are (i) that Hezekiah is not here designated as king and (2) that the genealogy cites three generations between Hezekiah and Zephaniah, whereas between Hezekiah, the king, and Josiah in whose reign Zephaniah proph- esied there are only two. In reply to the first objection, it is suf- ficient to say that at the time the superscription was attached it is probable that it was taken for granted that it would be understood as indicating the king, and the word 'king' was not added since its presence would have occasioned an unpleasant repetition. As to the second, it will be remembered that the reigns of Manasseh and Amon extended through fifty-seven years and that Manasseh was forty-five years old when Amon was bom (2 K. 21*- ^^). If Ama- riah was of adult age, or nearly so, when Manasseh began his long reignf and if we allow a lapse of twenty years between the birth of each father and that of his first son, Zephaniah may easily have been from fifteen to twenty years old when Josiah ascended the throne and thus of mature age when he began his ministry. Un- fortunately, the exact date of Hezekiah's death is uncertain, and consequently the birth-year of Manasseh cannot be determined with precision ; but the period between the birth of Amariah and that of his great-grandson may be reduced to not more than forty- eight years, and the genealogy will still be not improbable. For Jehoiachin, king of Judah, was bom when his great-grandfather Josiah was but forty-eight years old (2 K. 21^^ 22* 23^'*^- ^^'^^).t Zephaniah's royal ancestry is rendered probable also by his ap- parent familiarity with the conditions at court in his own day. Cf. Intr., § 2^. — In the days of Josiah, son of Amon, king of Judah] The designation as "king of Judah," rather than as simply "the king," is insufficient reason for making this portion of the super- scription of later origin than the rest; for oriental kings were not in- frequently so designated by their contemporaries and even by them- ♦ V. G. B. Gray, Studies in Hebrew Proper Names, 261. t Manasseh was not necessarily older than Amariah, since the succession did not always fall to the eldest son, especially in polygamous families. X V. G. B. Gray, Exp., July, 1900, pp. 76-80. 184 ZEPHANIAH selves.* The accuracy of this date for the activity of Zephaniah is not open to legitimate doubt {v. Intr., § 2). Yet it is going too far to say that since no editor could have derived his information from the book itself the chronological statement must be correct.f The probability of its truth would seem to be even greater indeed if there were clear and unmistakable indications in the following prophecy of the period to which it belonged. 1 . rT'jDi], i. c, '•■ is protector. It occurs also as the name of a priest in Je. 21' 29". 29 52'^ and in the fuller form ^n^iD^ in 2 K. 25'8 Je. 37'; as designating a returned exile in Zc. 6'<'- '^, and a Levite in i Ch. 6^'. The Elephantine papyri (C 20, D 32) furnish still another n>:flx; and a He- brew gem in the British Museum (No. 1032) carries the legend imnc'^ iH'jBX 13. The same root occurs as the second part of a proper name in j£3X''''N (Nu. 34") with its variant jdxSn (Ex. 6'' Lv. 10'*); 05 in all three places has E\iav. Similar formations occur in Carthaginian inscriptions; e.g., Sy3:sx in CIS., Nos. 207, 371, 415, as the name of a woman; and in Assyrian; e.g., Baal-sa-pd-nu, Gir-sa-pCl-nu, Giri-sa-pu- ni, Ba'li-sapdna, Ba'il-sapQna and Sapdna, all of them apparently west-Semitic names {KAT.^, 479). The place-names psx Spa (Ex. 142) and |1DX (Jos. 13" Ju. 12K?)); the personal names pes (Nu. 26"), jrsx (On. 46'"); and especially the Phoenician pox nap (CIS., 265; Euting, 192), and Jfls 13 {CIS., 208), and the divine name on the so- called Job-stone, found east of the Sea of Galilee, which is probably to be read jdxxjdin (v. Erman, Zeitschrjfl fur /Egypt. Sprache, XXXI, 100/.) make it probable that ]dx was originally the name ?f a Semitic god whom the Hebrews ultimately came to identify with Vahweh ex- actly as they had treated the Baalim {e. g., n''Sj,'3, i Ch. 12^; cf. Ho. 2'*) and as the Babylonians of later times treated their various deities whom they came to consider as but partial manifestations of the supreme god, Marduk (Pinches, Journal of the Transactions of the Victoria Institute, XXVIII, 8/.; cf. Zimmern, KAT.\ 609; Baethgen, Beilrage z. sent. Re- ligions geschichte, 22; H. P. Smith, AJSL., XXIV, 56). — ^riD] Else- where a gentilic, except probably in Je. 36"; it also occurs, as Schw. has noted, in an ins. from Ipsambul {CIS., No. 112) as a man's name, td. — n^'icN] This son of Hezekiah is otherwise unknown. The most plausible view of 2 K. 20" makes it a late expansion, referring to "sons" ♦ Cf., e. g., the opening lines of the inscription of Nebuchadrezzar I, who is there entitled "King of Babylon"; so also in the inscription of Ashurnafirpal from the temple of Balawat, the monolith of Shalmanescr II, the Nimrud inscription of Tiglath-pilcser III, the cylinder inscrip- tion of Sargnn, the Taylor cylinder of Sennacherib and several inscriptions of Esarhaddon, Ashurbanipal and Nebuchadrezzar II. t Contra Cor.. f-' 185 in the looser sense of "descendants," the words tSlh nirx being a gloss. In any case, the captivity of the royal family there mentioned is only a partial one, and, on the hypothesis of the literal accuracy of the narrative as it stands, we may either suppose that Amariah escaped entirely or that it did not occur until after the birth of his son Gedaliah. — n^prn] ^ = ^;i"?t~5 so Kenn. 178, 155, 201, 224, 225, and de R. 341, 346. Cf. an Arm. ms. cited by HP. as reading viov ToSoXtoi/ x^^'^"''- — V^^] ^^ A and Kenn. 258 = yiDN. § 2, THE DAY OF DOOM UPON JUDAH AND JERUSALEM (i^-^). A single str. of eight lines announcing with prophetic finality the approaching day of judgment upon the world in general and Judah in particular. T WILL utterly sweep away all from upon the face of the ground; it is the oracle of Yahweh. I will sweep away man and beast; I will sweep away the fowl of the heavens and the fish of the sea; And I will stretch out my hand against Judah, and against all the inhabitants of Jerusalem; And from this place I will cut off Baal to the last remnant, and the name of the idol-priests; And those prostrating themselves upon the roofs to the host of the heavens; And those prostrating themselves before Yahweh, who swear by Milcom; And those who withdraw from following Yahweh; Even those who have not sought Yahweh, nor inquired of him. This Str. stands at the head of Zephaniah's prophecies, announ- cing the general theme of them all. It has suffered somewhat at the hands of editors, but the additions are easily recognisable. — 2. I will utterly sweep away all from upon the face of the ground] A day of doom for the entire world. The judgment is wholly un- discriminating and all-comprehensive. For a similar approach by way of the universal toward the particular, cf. Mi. i^^- Am. i^^. — // is the oracle of Yahweh] The most solemn form of an- noim cement {v. H.^^- ^^. Metrical considerations are insufficient warrant for the omission of these words as a gloss.* — 3. / will sweep away man and beast; I will sweep away the fowl of the heav- * Contra Marti, Siev., Fag.. 1 86 ZEPHANIAH ens and the fish of the sea] For similarly all-inclusive pictures of destruction, cf. Ho. 4^ Is. 2'"' Ez. 38^^ The fish escaped in the Noachian deluge (Gn. 7''"^. Universal depravity demands uni- versal destruction. The subordinate creatures share the fate of man, their ruler. — And I will cause the wicked to stumble] This is a gloss* from some reader who felt the injustice of an indiscrimi- nate punishment. M can be rendered only, "and the ruins with the wicked," which, as von Orelli notes, seems to be suggestive of an earthquake as constituting the disaster. The rendering of RV., "stumbling-blocks," involves a change of text (v. i.) and fails to improve the sense. In any case, any kind of allusion to "the wicked" at this point is premature. — And I will cut of mankind from upon the face of the ground; it is the oracle of Yahweh] This is a gloss,f which adds nothing to what has already been said in w. ^- ^*. Some seek to save this line for Zephaniah by reading "the wicked "J or "the men of wickedness" § with (g. But the reading of (B is more easily explained as due either to free transla- tion or to an inner Greek corruption than as representing the orig- inal text from which M has been derived. — 4. And I will stretch out my hand against Judah and against all the inhabitants of Jeru- salem] The real object of the prophet's interest and Yahweh 's wrath now emerges. The world-judgment forms only the stage- setting for the tragedy of Judah's afBiction. For the figure of Yahweh's hand uplifted for punishment, cf. Is. 9"- ^^- ^^ 10* 5^ j^26. 27^ 'pj^g emphasis laid upon the wickedness of Jerusalem by Zephaniah is only slightly less than is the case with Micah. For both prophets alike, the capital city is the head and front of Judah's offending. The difference between the two is that for Micah the outstanding crimes of Judah were in the ethical and social sphere, while for Zephaniah they fall within the narrower sphere of re- ligion proper. — And from this place I will cut off Baal to the last remnant] The more familiar translation here is "the remnant of Baal," which would imply that Baalism had been reduced to small proportions by the time of Zephaniah. Such a diminution of its • So We., Dav., Now . but the historicity of that nar- rative is open to serious question. Baalism died hard in Israel. Yahweh never had the sole and undivided allegiance of Israel in the pre-exiHc age. J Notwithstanding the bitter opposition to Baalism on the part of Elijah, Hosea and all the succeeding proph- ets, it still called for the prophetic wrath of Zephaniah. Nor is it necessarily a diluted form of Baalism with which we have here to do, a Baalism cloaking itself under the guise of Yahwism, a syn- cretism wherein the outer shell of Yahwism was filled with the inner spirit of Baalism. It was rather an unadulterated Baalism which Zephaniah denounced. The out and out idolatry named in the following verse points in this direction. So does the tes- timony regarding the idolatrous reaction under Manasseh and Amon (2 K. 21), which continued without serious check until the time of the Deuteronomic reform. The phrase "from this place" is treated by some as a gloss; § but the metrical basis upon which this is urged is not sufl&ciently strong. The place meant is Jerusalem which is thus designated as the headquarters of Baal and all his works. Zephaniah was at least in the city when he used this phrase even if his home were not there. — And the name of the idol-priests] A designation for idolatrous priests found only here and Ho. 4^ 10^ 2 K. 23^; cf. H.^^- ^^*'^-. Name and person- ality were so intimately connected in Semitic thought that to de- stroy the former was to destroy the latter also. This expression is not infrequently used to indicate a most complete and thorough- going destruction. — With the priests] A gloss** intended to supple- ment or explain the rare word "idol-priests." The best witnesses * So, e. g., Mau., Hi., Ke.. t So Schegg, Reinke, We., Or., Dav., Now., van H., et aJ.. t V. Toy, JBL., XXIV, gi-io6. § So Marti, Now.K, Siev., Stk., Fag., Roth.. ** So Schw., Dav., Bach., Marti, Now.k, Roth., Kent. l88 ZEPHANIAH to (g omit this phrase (v. i.) ; it adds nothing essential and is super- fluous metrically. 6. And those prostrating themselves upon the roofs to the host oj the heavens] Here begin three specifications under the general charge made in v. *. The worship of the sun, moon and stars is given first place. It was prevalent throughout the period of Manasseh and Amon (2 K. 21^- ^- ^*), and continued into the days of Josiah (2 K. 22,^- *^). It was denounced by the prophets and the Deuteronomists as a current practice (Je. 7'^ 8^ 19^' 44""^ Dt. 4^* 17^ Ez. 8'^). Hints as to its character are supplied by Je. 44'"""' Ez. 8^° Jb. 31^°, and the fact that»it was practised upon the house- tops (cf. Je. 32^®) shows that it was offered directly to the heavenly bodies themselves, rather than to any representations of them. The Deuteronomic editor of the books of Kings attributed the fall of the northern kingdom, in part at least, to the prevalence there of this worship (2 K. 17^^; cf. Am. 5-^. Its prevalence in Judah at this time is generally attributed to the close contact, dating from the time of Ahaz (2 K. 16***^), between Judah and Assyria, where such worship had been carried on from time immemorial. It must be remembered, however, that the worship of the heavenly bodies, and especially that of the sun and moon, was a custom common to the ancient Semitic world* and hence likely to have persisted in Israel from early times.f Furthermore, such names as Baal-sha- mem {CIS., No. 7), En-shemesh, Beth-shemesh, Har-heres, Heres, Timnath-heres and Jericho make it clear that the Canaanitish Baalism, with which Israel had come into the closest possible con- tact, was vitally concerned with the worship of the heavenly bod- ies. J The reaction under Manasseh, due in part to the stimulus of foreign cults, did not introduce sun-worship as a new cult, but rather revitalised a worship which had long been known in Israel, though it had lain more or less dormant, or had been confined chiefly to the rural population, having had no official recognition.— A nd those prostrating themselves to Yahweh who swear by Milcom] M introduces another "who swear" immediately after "them- ♦ Baethgcn, Bcilrdge zur sent. RdigionsgeschichU (1888), 61 f}., t Cj. Hal., ad loc. X Cj. C. F. Burney, EB., 4784; G. F. Moore, EB., 3354 /.; L. B. Paton, Encyclopedia oj Re- ligion and Ethics, II, 288 /.. I* 189 selves," thus rendering the structure rough and broken and creat- ing a Hebrew syntactical usage otherwise unknown. Another seri- ous diflBculty with M is that it makes the prophet put worshippers of Yahweh on the same level with worshippers of Milcom, both alike being doomed to destruction. Zephaniah's charge against his countrymen, however, is not that some of them have forsaken Yahweh for Milcom, but that in general they do not yield undi- vided allegiance to Yahweh, but worship Milcom and other gods alongside of Yahweh. The whole struggle of the prophets, on its strictly religious side, was in behalf of the idea that Yahweh alone was Israel's God. The masses of the people, however, did not reach this point of view imtil after the Exile. Indeed, the re- cently discovered papyri of Elephantine include a list of gifts for religious purposes by the Jewish colonists which shows that as late as the fifth century B.C. Yahweh was still imder the humiliation of seeing the devotions of his people shared by two other deities, one of whom was the goddess Anath.* Another of the same group of papyri reveals a Jewish woman in a legal transaction taking oath both by Yahweh and by Sati, an Egyptian god.f The atti- tude of Zephaniah is in striking contrast with that of Elisha in the case of Naaman, the Syrian (2 K. 5^® ^•), and thus illustrates the growth in the Hebrew thought of God. The proposal of Nestle to read "to the moon" instead of "to Yahweh" is attractive, but not convincing; moon- worship has already been included in the word against "those worshipping the host of the heavens" and needs no further consideration; while the change to the third person involved by the introduction of "Yahweh" is no vm common oc- currence when a prophet is speaking as the representative of Yah- weh (e. g., i«- " s'- « Am. 3^- ^' '■ ' Ho. 4'- '' '" Mi. 2''- '^ 4'). M has "their king" in place of "Milcom," the difference being only one of vocalisation. The Vrss. unite in supporting the read- ing "Milcom" {v. i.), and on the whole this is preferable. Mil- com was the god of the Ammonites (i K. ii^- ^ 2 K. 23^') who with other gods shared Judah's hospitality toward all cults. Cf. Ez. 23^^ ^•. In case the reading of M is right, the essential mean- * V. Sachau, Die Aramaiscken Papyrus aus Elephantine (1911). t Sayce and Cowley, Aramaic Papyri jrom Assuan, Papyrus F, 1. 5. igo ZEPHANIAH ing is the same. The title "king" is then applied not to Yahweh, King of kings and Lord of lords, but either to the various local deities throughout the land, each of whom was entitled "king" of his special city, the word of Jeremiah being in point here, viz., "ac- cording to the number of thy cities are thy gods, O Judah" (2^*) ;* or to the Phoenician god Milk (whose name is regularly distorted to Molech in OT. and is thus made to suggest bdsheth =sha.me), whose very name meant "king" and whose cruel cultus was prac- tised in Judah in Zephaniah's day (2 K. 23^" Je. 7^* 32^^ Ez. i6^° '•; cf. Lv. 18^* 20^) .f The chief objection to Milcom lies in the fact that after the time of Solomon who built high places to Mil- com for his foreign wives (i K. ii^- ' <*• 33 2 K. 23") no reference is made to his worship in Israel. J But this at best is only an argumentum e silentio. Furthermore, while Milk and Milcom are in one passage clearly differentiated (2 K. 23^°- ^^), it is probable that fundamentally they were closely related, being simply diflfer- ent members of the Baalistic pantheon {cf. Je. 32^^), § and that the rites offered to them were closely similar.** — And those who with- draw from following Yahweh] This verse does not merely sum- marise in a general characterisation the practices of those con- demned in w. *^- ^,tf nor does it contrast the apostate Jews of "^ with the godless heathen of ®^;t J but it adds a new class to the fore- going, viz., those who do not merely divide their loyalty between Yahweh and other gods, but rather actually reject Yahweh out and out; cf. i^^. It is something worse than religious indifference; §§ it is open and downright apostasy. — Even those who have not sought Yahweh, nor inquired of him] This does but repeat in negative form what has just been said positively. There is hardly suffi- ♦ So Hal., who urges in further support of this view an interesting interpretation of the legends n3Vi> i'^:;S .n^ij; iSdS .inan i'^dS .1^' iVd*^, stamped upon old Hebrew jar-handles (Bliss and Macalister's Excavations in Palestine, 116-121) to the effect that the "kings" here named were the tutelary deities of their cities. Cj. rnpVo t = nnp "]'^D), god of Tyre. t So Dav., GASm., Or.; G. F. Moore, EB., 3085. X Other allusions to Milcom are 2 S. 12^° (& Je. 49'- '. § Cj. the name ^j.od'^:; for a Phoenician deity in CIS., Nos. 147, 194, 380. *♦ Cj., e. g., the king of Moab's sacrifice of his oldest son (probably to Chemosh, his god) with the Hebrew rites in honour of Molech (a K. y"); v. also Lagrange, Etudes sur Us relig- ions sfmiliques-, 09 If- tt Contra Hal.. tX Contra Marti ; similarly, Or., Hal.. §§ Or., Dr.. l'-' 191 cient basis for the rejection of this verse as an interpolation* The change to the third person has already occurred in v. ^ {q. v.); the metre of this str. is too irregular to warrant the elimination on the ground of the poor balance of this verse ; and the thought though somewhat repetitiously expressed forms a fitting climax to the str.. The metre of this str. is rough and uneven, being a mixture of hexa- meter and pentameter; but the paralleHsm is regular and clearly marked, thus indicating plainly the poetic lines. The arrangement here pre- sented involves the setting aside of the latter part of v. ^, beginning with mVa'aDm, and also the dropping of the phrase Dunrn oy from v. * as a gloss. A threefold objection holds against the phrase nx mSa'ODni D^ys'in in v. ', viz.: (i) no such discrimination between the righteous and the wicked is implied in the threats of the immediate context; (2) it lies outside of any possible metrical scheme; (3) the presence of the asterisk in 06'^. The remainder of v. » does but weakly reiterate what has al- ready been said in the opening words of the verse. 2. 1)0^] (S, ^/cXe/^ei. "B, congregans. Four codd. of Kenn. I1DN. — r\Dif\ This can only be a Hiph. juss. from ']^o. But this is open to three objections, viz.: (i) the Hiph. of this vb. occurs only here and in Je. 8'3 where the text is almost certainly corrupt; (2) the juss. is un- called for here; (3) the use of the inf. abs. from a different root. An anal- ogous case of the inf. of one vb. with the finite form of another occurs in Is. 28^", iJE*n<_ trnx; but a rootiyis is otherwise unknown and the text is probably corrupt, unless Barth, NB.^*^^, be correct in supposing that forms like lbs and B'^n are survivals of a primitive Hiph. inf. abs. form of the ^ 'y vb.. Rd. ip« as ist pers. sg. impf. of ^dx, with Stei., Or., Schw., We., Now., Ges.'i"", Marti, Siev., van H., Stk., Fag., Roth., Kent. For similar forms, cf. i S. 15' 2 S. 6' Mi. 46 Ps. 1042'. Cf. Ges.^"''- '"".—'^3] C6BY and Kenn. 245 om.; so Roth.(?).— 3. tipx] Rd. IDS both times as in v. *. Vrss. render as in v. \ Stk. t]bs, omitting it the second time as do also Fag., Kent. — a^'ptrn,? pn niScDDni] Rd. 'uvnWDrn; so GASm., OortE""-, Now.^ van H., Roth., Kent. C5, Kal d(r6ev:^(Tovfftvol iffe^eh (j,'ttnn] A word much more common in exilic and postexilic writings than in earlier times; but its occurrence in pre-exilic literature is frequent enough to make it unsafe to base an argument for the late date of a passage upon this word, especially when the writing in question is as close to the exile as Zephaniah. — aiNn-rN] (6, roiis avbixov^; so Schw.. GASm., yrT D"in. (& may have arisen through ocous as an abbreviation for dvdpw-rrovi; in any case neither 't nor ""i;" can easily have been changed to aiN, — 4. in::'] 05, rd 6v6fx,a.Ta = au'; so 2 codd. of Kenn. and one more in margin; so also Schw. {cf. Ho. 2"), Oort'^"'-, Marti, Siev., Dr. (?), Stk., Roth.. But M deserves preference as the harder reading and be- cause if (S were correct we should have expected or with a'^jnon also. — D2'-nN] Rd. Btt'-nNi, with (5 & B ®, and many Heb. codd.; so Or., Marti, Siev., Fag., Roth.. We., on basis of asyndeton of M, suggests om. of Bir-nN as a variant of -iXB'-nN; so Stk.. — annrn] A word occurring in Strassburg Papyrus i', in the Elephantine papyri published by Sayce and Cowley (E 15) and by Sachau (i^, and on the Teima Stone; always applied to non-Yahwdstic priests. It was a common Semitic word be- ing now known in Hebrew, Aramaic, Syriac, Nabataean, Punic (v. G. A. Cooke, North-Semitic Ins., Nos. 64, 65, 69, 98; Lidzbarski, Handbuch d. nordsem. Epigr., 297) and Assyrian (a high Babylonian official is called Kamiru in Amarna Letters, No. I, 15, 33; and an Arabic priestess is entitled Kumirtu'm an ins. of Ashurbanipal; v. KAT.^, 467). — -aj; O'ljnDn] ^BA j^ om.; in marg. of &" with asterisk; but found in HP. 22, 36, 42, 51, 62, 68, 86, 87, 95, 97, 147, 185, 228, 233, 238, 240, 310, Com- plut.. Arm., Slav.. — 5, nujn] S^, Uo\a. Eight mss. of Kenn. and 7 of de R., mjjn. — ,-nn''S a^y^tt-jn onnna-nn pni] ®a ^^ jjp_ ^^^ jq^^ j^,^ 233 om.; while &" has all of it in marg. under asterisk and only Vcn-PNi is om. by (gQ, HP. 23, 26, 36, 40, 42, 51, 62, 86, 95, 97, 114, 130, 147, 185, 238, 239, 240, 311 and Arm.. "Swearing by ''" was a perfectly legiti- mate proceeding as appears from Is. 19'* 45" 2 Ch. 15", in all of which it means 'worship 'v' But the phrase S 'c'jn here encounters three diffi- culties, viz.: (i) it is a useless repetition of the thought of the immediately preceding word; (2) it renders the sentence heavy and awkward; (3) if niniS were correct after 'tt'jn, we should expect aoVoS likewise. The state of (& indicates very much uncertainty as to the text at a relatively early date. The omission of aMnna'rjn as a dittog. would leave an ad- mirably balanced line; but nyn-f^ follows it more easily than it does 'rjn in this context. Hence the latter is better om., with We., Schw., Oort^"- , Now., Or., Marti, Dr. (?), van H., Fag., Roth, and Kent, as a dittog. or a marg. correction of the foil, 'trjni. — nin'''?] Or. adds pin3X. Nestle suggests n*:.;^; so Marti, Now."^, Stk.; cf. Dt. 17' Je. 8' Jb. 31^ — 0'j?3B'jni] Om. 1 with (g^A. go Hi., Stei., We., Now., Marti, Dr. (?), Stk.. The om. of hn here points to the absence of i originally. The whole word is om. by (SQ*, HP. 26, 130, 311. Eth. reads, "and those swear- ing in the name of '■> their king deceitfully"; similarly, 21. — ddSd3] Rd. d';Sc3, with (gY HP. 22, 36, 51, 95, 185, 238 (all = /MeXxofi), B H; so Hi., Stei., We., Now., Marti, Siev., van H., Stk., Fag., Roth., Kent. (&Q """«; HP. 62, 86, 147, fxo'Kox. &", by the king their God. (F, their idols. HP. 114, KttTct ToO MeXxow; 240, Kara MoXxo/t. — 6. intyii] (S, dvre- XOfiivovs ToO Kvpiov. For a comparison of tfm with ifpa, v. H.^", 113. § 3. THE TERRORS OF THE DAY OF YAHWEH (i^-^«). A vivid picture of the terrible judgment now so near at hand. The poem falls into eleven short strs. of two lines each, as though the burden of the message were too heavy to be borne by strs. of greater length. Str. I announces the near approach of the dread day (i^); II pronounces judgment upon the king's counsellors ^jSa. 9bj. Ill (jeals with those who practise social and religious customs of foreign origin (i^''- ®^); IV describes the woe to come upon every quarter of the city (i*"- "^) ; V vividly represents the impossibility of the escape of any guilty man (i*-'^- b). yi shows how such men will realise their mistake in disregarding Yahweh ^ji2c. i3a^. Yjj reiterates the announcement that Yahweh's day is near (i"); VIII and IX characterise that day with its terrors ^ji5. 16^ . ^ describes the pitiful condition of mankind on that day (i'^) ; and XI closes the poem with the threat of a most complete destruction (i^^^- ^). CILENCE in the presence of the Lord Yahweh, for Yahweh's day Is near at hand! For Yahweh has prepared a sacrifice, he has consecrated his guests. A ND I will punish the princes and the king's sons, Who fill their master's house with violence and deceit. A ND I will punish every one who leaps over the threshold. And every one who clothes himself with foreign raiment. UARK! a cry from the Fish-gate, and a wail from the New-Town; And a great crash from the hills, and a wail from the Mortar. "pOR at that time, I will search Jerusalem with a lamp. And I will punish those who are at ease, thickened upon their lees; 'T'HOSE who say in their hearts, "Yahweh does neither good nor bad"; And their substance will become a ruin, and their houses a desolation. 194 ZEPHANIAH "VTEAR at hand is Yahweh's great day, near and speeding fast; Near at hand is Yahweh's bitter day, hastening faster than a warrior. A DAY of wrath is that day, a day of distress and straitness; A day of desolation and waste, a day of darkness and gloom. A DAY of cloud and thunder-cloud, a day of the trumpet and battle-cry, Against the fortified cities and against the lofty battlements. A ND I will press hard up)on mankind and they shall walk like blind men, be- cause they have sinned against me; And their blood shall be poured out like dust, and their flesh like dung. "MEITHER their silver nor their gold can deliver them; For a full destruction, yea, a fearful one, will Yahweh make of all the inhabi- tants of the land. Str. I, in a striking figure, declares that the day of Yahweh is close at hand, all preparations having been made. — 7. Silence in the presence of the Lord Yahweh!] By this command for a solemn hush, the prophet vividly conveys his feeling of the immediate proximity of God. At the same time, the silence he enjoins was probably a characteristic feature of the sacrificial ritual, which is here used figuratively. We are reminded of the Latin favete Un- guis (Horace, Odes, 3 : i, 2; Vergil, Mneid, 5 : 71).* Smend de- clares that the Arabs also "stood around the altar a long time still and silent after the performance of the sacrificial slaughter " and that this was the time when the deity was thought to approach the altar.f For similar injunctions to silence in the presence of Yah- weh, cf. Hb. 2^° Zc. 2" Am. 6^". — For near at hand is the day of Yahweh] The thought of this dread day bulks larger in Zephaniah than in any preceding prophet. f It is the black shadow that over- casts all of his message. He agrees with Amos, the creator of the ethical conception of the day of Yahweh, in supposing its advent to be imminent {cf. i") and in making it a day of judgment. The ethical aspect of the judgment is less prominent in Zephaniah than in Amos; but, on the other hand, more stress is laid upon its uni- versal scope (i^- ^ 2^"®- ^^- "3*'). The probability is that as Amos connected the day of Yahweh with the operations of Urartu or As- syria in the west, so Zephaniah 's expectation of the day was aroused by the onslaught of the Scythians {v. Intr,, § 2). But neither Amos • So Schw.. t Rtl.\ 140. } For a sketch of the historical development of this idea, v. JMPS., AJTh., V, 505-33. C/. H.*^, 131 /.; Grcssmann, Eschalologie, 141 ff.. I' 195 nor Zephaniah looked upon the invasion of the foreigner as ex- hausting the terrors of the judgment. War, drought, pestilence and cataclysmic convulsions of nature were all to contribute toward the appalling catastrophe. Natural events were but the forenm- ners of more terrible supernatural phenomena. The near ap- proach of the end of the age, the indispensable prerequisite of the da^^^l of the new and better day, is a constant feature of the pro- phetic idea of Yahweh's day {e. g., Am. 6^ Is. 13® Jo. i^^ 2*). — For Yahweh has prepared a sacrifice] This is the first instance of Yah- weh's judgment upon Israel being represented as a sacrificial feast. The figure is taken up and expanded by Ezekiel (39^^ ^- ; cf. Is. 25® 34^ Je. 46^° Rev. 19*^ ^•). The victim, of course, is Judah. — He has consecrated his guests] Such preparation, involving puri- fication from all uncleanness, was necessary to participation in the sacrificial meal; cf. i S. I6^ The participant must pass from the sphere of the profane into that of the holy. Wild beasts and birds of prey constitute the 'guests' in Ezekiel's representation; but here the guests are left undetermined. Some would identify them with the Chaldeans;* others prefer the Scythians ;f while GressmannJ declares that guests and victim are the same, viz., Judah. Davidson feels a certain inconsistency in the figure, in that it represents Yahweh as slaying the sacrifice, whereas the real slaughterers are the guests themselves, viz., Israel's foes. All such attempts to interpret the figure in every detail seem to ignore the ideal element in the representation. The only essential feature of the figure is the picture of Judah as a sacrificial victim about to experience the punitive wrath of Yahweh. The remaining features are but accessory circumstances, necessary to the round- ing out of the view, but never intended to be taken literally. § For evidence that guests were invited to participate in sacrifices, cf. I S. g'^-^ 2 S. 6*^ 15" I K. i» Ne. 8^" and the common usage among the Arabs.** The argument for removing v. '' from its present position to another, whether preceding v. ^ as the opening sentence of the prophecy,f f or preceding v. " and there opening a * So Abar., Jer., Rosenm., Mau., Hd.. t So Ew., Dr.; c/. We.. t Eschatologie, 136 /.. § So van H.. ** \VRS.'^«' , 236 /.; Wc, r.esle d. Arab. Heidenthums, 114 /.. tt So Marti, Fag., Kent. 196 ZEPHAKIAH new poem,* is not sufficiently strong. The use of the third per- son between the verbs of v. * and v. *, which are in the first person, is not a serious consideration in view of prophetic usage and in any case is not obviated unless v. ^ be also eliminated. Even then, matters are not helped much, when v. ^ in the third person is transferred solely for that reason and placed before v. ^, which is in the first person. Str. II, threatening the king's household with punishment, is introduced by a line in prose, contributed by some editor,t viz., 8a. And it will come to pass in the day of YaJiweh's sacrifice] A slight emendation would make this read, "in the day of my sac- rifice," and do away with the difficulty felt by some as to the use of the third person ; but this difficulty would not be a serious one, even if this line were a part of the original text. — / will punish the princes and the king's sons] Lit., 'visit upon,' a common idiom for 'punish,' especially in Je. {e. g., 5^ 9^ ii'^ 25*^ 36^*; c/. 23^- ^^). The royal family and the members of the court are here held respon- sible for the wickedness of the times, the king himself having been too young probably at this time to have taken the reins of government into his own hands; cf. 2 K. 22*. In any case, the reference here cannot be to the sons of Josiah, the eldest of whom was not bom until six years after Josiah assumed the crown (2 K. 23''^ 22*) and was not old enough to have wielded any influence un- til well toward the close of Josiah's long reign. Zephaniah's relationship to the royal family {v. on i^) gave him a position at court which enabled him to keep in touch with all that was going on and to expose the secret machinations of those high in authority. — 9b. Who fill their master's house] i. e., the king's palace, not the temple of Yahweh as in ®. The charge is not that they use the palace as a storehouse for stolen goods, nor even primarily that they enrich the royal treasury through fraud and oppression; but that they themselves by their conduct and character make the king's house a symbol and synonym of all that is bad. Where righteousness should reign, iniquity abounds. — With violence and deceit] This is the true prophetic cry. Cf. Am. 3^° Is. 3" '• Mi. 22. 8. 9 ^1-3. 9. 10 £2. 22"--«. Here and in i'^- >» Zephaniah shows ♦ So Sicv.. t So Marti, Siev., Now.^, Fag., Du., Kent. !«-• 197 that he too, like his great predecessors, was sensitive to the mis- eries and wrongs of the poor. For the justification of the trans- position of V. ^^, V. i.. Str. Ill devotes itself to the denunciation of certain practices of foreign origin, the adoption of which indicates disloyalty to the old, long-established customs and ideals. — 9a. And I will punish every one who leaps over the threshold] The precise significance of this action is unknown. Many have been the interpretations placed upon it. (S's rendering yields no sense. ®, with many successors, finds the meaning furnished by i S. 5^, where the wor- shippers of Dagon are said to avoid stepping upon the threshold of his sanctuary, because of the fact that Dagon had fallen across that threshold and been broken to pieces in the presence of the ark; a similar custom has now come into vogue in the temple of Yahweh; cf. Is. 2®. Jerome also interprets the custom of the threshold of the temple, but finds the blame in the arrogance with which the worshippers tread the courts of Yahweh. Hitzig refers the custom to the threshold of the king's palace and cites the testi- mony of travellers to the efifect that the Persians crossed the king's threshold without touching it and with the right foot forward.* W. Robertson Smithf and Driver see here a reference to the foreign body-guard of the Jewish king, his Philistine janissaries (2 S. 15** 2 K. i^^). Another series of interpretations refers the cus- tom to the palaces of the rich, making Zephaniah condemn, for example, the eagerness with which the servants of the rich rush out of their palaces to seize the property of the less powerful; J or the guardians of the portals of the palaces of the great (2 S. i®- *^ 15^ ^■), who abuse their position by extorting money from those who would seek their master's aid.§ Kimchi, on the other hand, finds the reference to the thresholds of the poor, the doors of whose houses are burst open by the rich in their search after the goods of their weaker neighbours.** It is unlikely, however, that Zephaniah would charge the great and powerful nobles with petty larceny. The threshold of the house has been regarded as a favourite abode * So in the time of della Valle and Olearius. t Old Testament and the Jewish Church\ 261 /.. t So, e. g., Hd.. § So, e. g., van H.. *♦ So also de W., Ew., Ke.. 1 98 ZEPHANIAH of demons and spirits among practically all races.* It seems probable, therefore, that the prophet spoke of some superstitious practice (perhaps, though not necessarily, of foreign origin) which was now in vogue particularly among the rich. It is more likely to have been connected with private houses than with either the temple or the royal palace exclusively. The next line, at least, concerns itself with a custom primarily of social rather than re- ligious significance. — In that day] i. e., the day of Yahweh. This is a gloss added by some zealous hand;t it overburdens the line and adds no essential thought. — And every one who clothes him- self with foreign raiment] i. e., the fops of the day, who followed after the latest imported styles. The serious aspect of the prac- tice was the evidence it afiforded of the decay of the national spirit and pride. Furthermore, the nation and its god were inseparable, and to abandon or neglect distinctive national customs was to be disloyal to Yahweh. Imported garments were naturally expensive and could be obtained only by the wealthier classes (2 S. 13^* Mt. 11^). The prohibition in the law (Dt. 22" Lv. 19'®) commonly cited in connection with this passage has no bearing whatever upon the question here, since it springs out of a different circle of ideas. Str. IV strikingly presents a picture of the distress that will overwhelm Jerusalem on Yahweh's day. The str. is introduced by a line of prose, probably of editorial origin. J — 10. And it will come to pass in that day, it is tJie oracle of Yahweh] The introduction of this line blunts the edge of the cry that follows, which left in its original abruptness is stardingly vivid. — Hark! a cry from the Fish- gate] This was one of the entrances to the city of Jerusalem on the north side, the exact location of which we cannot determine. It probably corresponded to the present Damascus Gate, opening upon the roadway along the bed of the Tyropoeon \' alley. § Ac- cording to Ne. 3^ 12^^ it stood between the "Old Gate" and the "Sheep Gate," near to the tower of Hananel. According to 2 Ch. * V. H. C. Trumbull, The Threshold Covenant (1896), io#.; Baur, Millhcilungen und Nachrichlcn d. Deutschen Pal. Vereins, for 1899, p. lo. t So Marti, Now.K, Siev., Fag., Du., Kent. Gr. om. as dittog. from v. '", while Schw. tr. it to the beginning of v. '. t So Marti, Fag., Du., Kent. Siev. om. all but the opening n^ni. § V. GASm., Jerusalem, I, 201 /.; Merrill, Ancient Jerusalem, 359; Paton, Jerusalem in Bible Times, 120/.. I" 199 33", it was a part of the new wall built by Manasseh. It may have been identical with the "Middle Gate" of Je. 39^"^, standing in the middle of the line of the north wall. The name Fish-gate may be accounted for by the fact that Jerusalem depended largely upon the fishermen of Tyre for its fish supply (Ne. 13^^) ; and these probably entered the city by this gate as affording the nearest entry or giving ^.hem easiest access to the fish-market.* The prophet in imagination places himself in the midst of the coming scene of desolation and listens to the sounds of grief and ruin that fill the air. — And a wail from the New-Town] Lit., the second (town). A section of the city located probably near the Fish-gate. We have no precise information concerning the site of this part of the town; it is mentioned elsewhere only in 2 K. 22" (=2 Ch. 34^^) and possibly in Ne. 11^. But it probably was that portion added to the city by the building of Manasseh's wall, constituting the oldest suburb on the north. Lying on lower ground than the older city and so more easy of access to an invader, it would naturally be the first to suffer at the hands of an enemy. As a matter of fact, the natural defences of Jerusalem rendered her impregnable on every side but the north and every siege of the city has been laid against that side. — And a great crash from the hills] These are not the hills lying around Jerusalem, but those within the city itself; whether those in the south and south-west quarters occupied by the temple, the palace and the houses of the rich, or those in the higher por- tions of the north end of the city, or the hills of the city as a whole, cannot be exactly ascertained. It is possible that some of the higher portions of the town were known as "the Hills" or "the Heights." The use of titles for the other quarters here named seems to point in that direction. The "crash" is probably that caused by the downfall of walls and buildings re-echoing from hill to hill. — 11a. And a wail from the Mortar] M reads, "Wail, O inhabitants of the Mortar." But the parallelism seems to call for a fourth member constructed of a noun and a prepositional phrase as are the three preceding members. What part of the town was known as "the Mortar" is wholly uncertain, since the name is nowhere else employed. Jerome thought of the vale of Siloam; QI * Cj. GASm., Jerusalem, I, 317 /.. 2CX> ZEPHANIAH of the valley of the Kidron; and Josephus (JVars, V, 4, i) connected it with the Tyropoeon Valley. Maurer, on the other hand, de- clared it to be a figurative name for Jerusalem as a whole {cf. Je. 21'^), which, surrounded by higher hills, was to serve as a mortar for the braying of her inhabitants. Most modem interpreters iden- tify it with the upper part of the Tyropoeon, partly because of the fitness of the title as applied to that region, partly because the con- text seems to make the Mortar a centre of trade and industry and the Tyropoeon furnishes an excellent site for a market,* and partly because both Fish-gate and Mishneh were on the north and the Maktesh probably lay in the same general region. The last con- sideration, however, is not a legitimate one; the prophet may have been picturing the desolation and grief which were to overwhelm the entire city rather than some one special quarter therein. The Fish-gate and the Mishneh, it is true, probably lay on the north side; but "the Hills" and "the Mortar" are completely unknown. Hence, it is unsafe to confine the distress described by the prophet to the north side alone. — ^The remainder of v. " seems to be a later interpolation, interrupting the flow of thought by the introduction of unnecessary detail and departing too widely from the metrical norm of the context to be brought into harmony with the form of the rest of the poem.f — ^llb. For all the people of Canaan are destroyed] The speaker may mean Phoenician traders who were the merchants of the oriental world ;t or better still, the merchant class among the Jews themselves, which enriches itself by unjust measures and trickery of every sort.§ For the use of the term "Canaanite" as denoting the trader and merchant, cf. Ho. 12* Is. 23" Ez. 16'' 17' Pr. 31='' Jb. 41" and, perhaps, Zc. 14". The parallel line seems to show that a class of financiers is meant, whether of native or of foreign origin. — lie. Cut off are all those who weigh out money] Not money-changers especially, but the whole merchant class in general. The weighing of the silver was necessitated by the fact that there was no Hebrew coinage prior to the Exile. Indeed, it is not certain that there was a fixed coinage * V. Merrill, Ancient Jerusalem, J91-307. t So Marti, Siev., Fag.. Cj. Du., who erects 1'° " into an independent poem. t So, e. g., Dr.. § So most interpreters. I 20I anywhere in the Semitic world piior to the time of the Persian empire. In Babylonia, as far back as the time of the first dy- nasty (c. 2000 B.C.), stamped money was in use.* Later on, As- syrian ingots stamped with the head of Ishtar served as recognised currency; while Sennacherib, in a recently discovered inscription, alludes to "casting half-shekel pieces," f which even if not coins in the technical sense evidently served the purpose of coins. J It is doubtful whether Zephaniah himself would have shared such a hostility to trade and commerce as is reflected in this verse, though it is true that the old prophetic spirit was opposed to the increasing complexity and luxury of life involved in the advance of civihsation and stood firmly for a return to primitive nomadic simplicity. Str. V sets forth the thoroughness with which Yahweh will search for the wicked in order that he may visit their sins upon them. — ^12a. And it will he at that time, that I will search Jerusalem with a lamp] Like Diogenes, Yahweh will go up and down the streets of the city. The figure expresses the thought of the im- possibility of escape from the avenging eye of Yahweh. Cf. Je. 5^ Ez. 22^*^ Ps. 139'"^^. The figure is probably borrowed from the cus- tom of the night-watchman carrying his lamp and may involve also the thought of the diligent search of Jerusalem that will be made by her conquerors in their quest for spoil. Cf. Is. 45^ Lk. 15^. The houses of the orient being small and dark, a thorough search re- quired the aid of artificial illumination. — 12b. And I will punish those who are at ease] M reads " the men " for " those at ease " ; but this would be poor Hebrew, unless men were to be distinguished from women and children, which can hardly be the prophet's thought. The epithet "at ease" is applied to the same class of people in Am. 6* Is. 32'- " Zc. i^' Ps. 123*. It denotes freedom from anxiety and a complete satisfaction with oneself. They are further characterised in the following suggestive figure. — Who are * V. Meissner, BAS., II, 559 /•. Cj. Sayce, Contemporary Review, August, 1907, p. 259. t The new Sennacherib prism. No. 103,000, col. vii, 18; copied and translated by L. \V. King, Cuneijorm Texts jrotn Babylonian Tablets in the British Museum, part xxvi (1909). X Cj. C. H. W. Johns, Did the Assyrians Coin Money? {Exp., 1899), pp. 380-400. Leh- mann-Haupt, Israel: seine Enlwicklung im Rahmen der Weltgeschichte (1911), p. 162, claims that the coinage of money was invented by Alyattes, king of the Cimmerians, in the sixth century B.C.. 202 ZEPHANIAH tliickening upon their lees] The metaphor is based upon the treat- ment of wine in the process of its ripening. Cf. Is. 25®. The usual treatment is well set forth in Je. 48"- '^ These men have been left undisturbed in their false security; they have not been "poured from vessel to vessel." Just as wine left too long in such a condition thickens and loses strength, so these men have sunk into weak self-indulgence, having lost all interest in and concern for the higher things of life and being solicitous only for their own bodily comfort and slothful ease. Str. VI further describes these indifferent citizens and pro- nounces judgment upon them. — 12c. Those who say in their hearts, " Yahweh does neither good nor bad"] The terms "good" and "bad" here are not used in an ethical sense, but in the sense of "favourable" and "unfavourable." In accordance with a well- kno\\'n Hebrew idiom, the phrase in reality says that Yahweh does nothing at all; he is without influence upon human affairs and may be ignored by practical men. Similar phrases coupling to- gether two terms of opposite meaning and subsuming everything under them in order to express the idea of totality are "the shut up and the freed" (Dt. 32^' i K. 141" 21^' 2 K. 9^ 14^'), "the moist with the dry" (Dt. 29^^), "the deceived and the deceiver" (Jb. 1 2*") .* The state of mind indicated by the prophet means practical atheism. While not proclaiming their thought upon the house- tops, these men by their actions show that in their heart of hearts they deny God any part in the affairs of men. This has ever been the temptation of a cultured and commercial age. As man's place and power in the world increase, God decreases. Discerni- ble only by the spiritual vision, he is ever in danger of being hid- den from the eyes of the mass of men by the increasing bulk of their material interests. This same attitude of mind is attested by Je. 5^^ ^- Mai. 2^^ Ps. 10'' 14^ The charge of powerlessness or non-participation in human affairs, here preferred against Yah- weh, is one used with telling effect by the later prophets to dem- onstrate the futility of idolatry (Je. 10^ Is. 41"). — 13a. And their wealth will become a ruin and their houses a desolation] Those who have lived in careless disregard of God will be rudely awakened ♦ V. Dr., Dl. {ICC), 376, where the idiom is illustrated from the Arabic. I"-" 203 from their fatuous ease by being brought face to face with indis- putable evidence of his power. The treasures they have accumu- lated and the palaces they have reared will fall into the hands of an invading foe. That for which they have laboured and in which they have trusted will fail and forsake them in their day of need. The God whom they have ignored will force his un- welcome presence upon them in avenging justice. The remainder of this verse is redundant, being due to a marginal citation of a passage very common in the prophetic writings which was sug- gested by the language here.* — 13b, c. And they will build Jiouses and not inhabit them, and plant vineyards and not drink their wine] Cf. Am. 5" Mi. 6^^ Dt. 28''^- '" Ez. 28'" Is. 65-' f-. The day of Yahweh as announced in i^'" would seem to have been too close at hand in the mind of Zephaniah for him to have contemplated the possibility of suflacient time elapsing for the building of houses and planting of vineyards. Str. VII starts a new section of the poem which is devoted to a description of the terrors of Yahweh's day. Its immediate prox- imity is first re-emphasised. — 14. Near at hand is Yahweh's great day, near and speeding fast] What has already been said in v. ^ is here "amplified vdth increased energy of language." f The great- ness of this day and its terror are standing features of the prophetic pictures of judgment. Cf. Jo. 2"- ^^ Mai. 4^. — Near at hand is Yahweh's bitter day, hastening faster than a warrior] For text, V. i.. "Bitter" is an epithet not elsewhere applied to the day, but one thoroughly representative of its character. Cf. Am. 8^". The text of this line according to M is very diflScult and furnishes no close paralleUsm with the preceding line. The usual rendering is "Hark! (or "the voice of") the day of Yahweh! The mighty man crieth there (or "then") bitterly." For similar representa- tations, cf. Is. i3''- ^ Je. 30^"''. Another rendering rims, "The sound of (or "Hark!") the day of Yahweh is bitter; the mighty man crieth there (or "then")." But such renderings fail to over- come the difficulties, viz.: (i) the adverb "there" is without any antecedent to which it can easily be referred, while the meaning "then" for this particle is not well established; (2) the order of * So Schw., GASm., Now., Marti, Siev., Fag., Du., Kent. t Ew.. 204 ZEPHANIAH words in the latter part of the line is wholly abnormal, and that without any corresponding gain in strength that is appreciable; (3) the term "strong man" is undefined; (4) if "bitter" be taken with the first half of the line, it forms an unsuitable predicate to "sound," and when treated as predicate to "day," the resulting sentence "the day of Yahweh is bitter" furnishes an inappropriate contin- uation of the particle "Hark"; if "bitter" be connected with the second half of the line, the rhythmical balance of the line is dis- turbed. The emendation here proposed furnishes a line which is exactly parallel to the preceding line, reiterating its thought in stronger terms. The final clause may mean either that the on- rush of the day of Yahweh is swifter than that of the warrior upon his foe, or that it will be too swift for the warrior to escape. Str. VIII piles up epithets descriptive of the terrors of Yahweh's day. — 15. A day of wrath is that day] Dies ircB dies ilia, H's trans- lation of this sentence, forms the opening phrase of the great hymn on the Last Judgment, by Thomas of Celano {c. 1250 a.d.). For similar emphasis upon the divine anger in connection with the day of Yahweh, cf. v. '« Is. 13^ Ez. 7^^ Pr. 11* Jb. 21^". The ef- fects of Yahweh's wrath are enumerated in the following clauses. — A day of distress and straits] This and the following clause are examples of the paronomasia so common in prophetic literature. This kind of a day was exactly contrary to the old popular expec- tation (Am. 5'*) . — A day of desolation and devastation] The same phrase recurs in Jb. 30^ 38". The primitive chaos will once more hold sway. The parallelism would be improved here by trans- posing this clause to the beginning of v. *^ as Marti suggests. — A day of darkness and gloom] This and the following clause are found again in Jo. 2^, The terrors of darkness are a standing feature of the prophets' day of Yahweh. Cf. Am. 5'®- ^^ Is. 13'" Ez. 34". The figure was probably learned from observation of eclipses of the sun, though it may reflect the darkness that so fre- quently precedes and accompanies a great storm. Str. IX continues the description, passing from the terrors of nature to those of war. — 15e. A day of cloud and thunder-cloud] The same phenomenon is described in Ez. 34*^, where the refer- ence is to the fall of Jerusalem and the deportation which lay be- I'"*-'" 205 hind the speaker. This is a characteristic frequently connected with theophanies in OT. ; the word "cloud" occurs no less than fifty-eight times in such connections.* — 16. A day of the trumpet and battle-cry] The prophet now turns to the horrors of war. The combination of the blowing of homsf and shouting is found also in Am. i^^ 2^ Je. 4^^ Jos. 6\ Cf. Ju. 7^^- ^^ — Against the fortified cities and against the lofty battlements] Cf. Is. 2^^. The word rendered "battlements" is literally "comers," but here and in 3® 2 Ch. 26*^ BS. 50^ it probably denotes special fortifications con- structed for the protection of the angles of the walls.J The char- acter and strength of the walls and fortifications of ancient cities in Palestine may now be learned not only from an examination of the walls of Jerusalem, but also those of Jericho, Gezer, Lachish, Taanach, Megiddo, Tell-Zakariya, Tell-es-Safi and Samaria. § The number and size of such fortresses may be inferred from the fact that Sennacherib in his report of the campaign against Heze- kiah claims to have captured "forty-six of his strong cities, for- tresses and smaller towns without number." Not only so, but the great fortress of Jericho as revealed by the recent excavations was only about eleven hundred feet long and five hundred feet wide. Str. X leaves the fortresses and turns attention to their occu- pants.— 17. And I will press hard upon mankind and they shall walk like blind men] Men will be reduced to such straits by Yah- weh that their attempts to discover a way of escape will be like the uncertain and hopeless steps of the blind. Cf Dt. 28^^ Na. 3" Is. 59^*^ Jb. 12^. There is no causal connection in the prophet's mind between the darkness of v. *^ and the groping here predicted.** "Mankind" here does not comprise the human race as a whole, but rather sets human beings in contrast with city walls and forti- fications. As a matter of fact, the citizens of Judah are in the fore- ♦SoBDB.. tV. H/H43/.. t Tacitus describes the walls of Jerusalem as, " per artem obliquos et introrsum sinuatos ut latera oppugnantium ad ictus patescerent" (Hist., lib. V, cap. ii, § 5). § For reports on Jericho, v. Mittheilungen d. Deutschen Orienl-Gesellschafl, Nos. 39 and 41. For Taanach, v. E. Seliin, Tell Ta'anek. For Megiddo, v. G. Schumacher, Tell-el-Mutesellim. For Lachish, v. F. J. Bliss, A Mound of Many Cities. For Tell-es-Safi and Tell-ZakarSya, v. F. J. Bliss and R. A. S. Macalister, Excavations in Palestine, 1898-1900. C/. Dr., Modern Research as Illustrating the Bible, 54 #., 92. The work at Samaria is not yet finished, but pre- liminary announcements appear from time to time in the Harvard Theological Review. ** Contra Hi.. 2o6 ZEPHANIAH front of the prophet's thought, if they do not even exclude all others from consideration. — Because they have sinned against me] This sin is practically rebellion against Yahweh; for a similar usage of the word 'sin' as = 'rebellion,' cf. 2 K. 18" and the reg- ular sense of its Assyrian equivalent, htlu. This clause is omitted as a gloss by several interpreters* on the ground that the change to the third person {M, = against Yahweh) is too abrupt so soon after the occurrence of the first person and that it is superfluous met- rically. The emendation of the text necessary to conform it to the first person is very slight {v. i.) and at the same time eases the metrical difi&culty. — And their blood shall be poured out like dusi] Cf. Ps. 79^ 18*^. Human life will be as worthless as the dust of the streets. For a radically different estimate of the value of the peo- ple of God, cf. Ps. 72". — And their flesh like dung] Cf. Je. 9^' 16* Ps. 83^" Jb. 26'. The word "flesh" occurs only here and in Jb. 2cP, where the text and meaning are as uncertain as here. It has been variously rendered, e. g., viscera,f carcasses, { vigour, § sap.** The rendering ' flesh ' ff rests upon (g {v. i.) and is supported also by the usage in Arabic. Str. XI brings the poem to a close with a representation of the completeness and inevitableness of the coming destruction. — 18. Neither their silver nor their gold can deliver them] The things they have held most dear will be of no avail in the great day. Cf. Is. 13'^, where the Medes, the agents of Yahweh, are said to care nothing for silver and gold. The Scythian invasion, according to Herodotus, was halted at the borders of Egypt by the receipt of a great sum of money as ransom. But Yahweh cannot be turned aside from his punitive purpose by such means; cf. Pr. II^ This line and the following clause occur also in Ez. 7*^, where it is an interpolation and does not appear in (|. — In the day of the wrath of Yahweh and in the fire of his zeal, all the earth will be consumed^ Tliis line is made up of elements appearing also in i*^ 3*. It is probably a later expansion, interrupting as it does the close con- nection between the first and last lines of this verse and being * So, e. g., Marti, Now.^, Siev., Fag., Roth., Du., Kent. t So, e. g., Mau., Dl.'''«'-. "s, BDB.. t So van H.. § So We.. »♦ So Ew.. tt So, e. g., Hd., Dav., GASm., Dr.. v-'" 207 identical in meaning with the latter * The judgment here an- nounced is probably universal, as in i^- ^ 3^. Cf. Is. 28^^. — For a full destruction, yea, a fearful one, will Yahweh make of all the in- habitants of the land] Cf. Is. 10^ Je. 5^* 46^^ Ez. 1 1" 20". For the text, V. i.. M may be rendered "altogether fearful" (cf. Dt. 16'^ 28^® Is, 16^) ; but the reading of the Vrss. is preferable. The use of the third person here furnishes insufficient warrant for treat- ing the whole verse as a later addition, f or for changing it to the first person ;J v. on v. ^. The remaining considerations urged in favour of discarding the verse are of slight weight. The fact that the first line occurs also in Ez. 7^^ proves nothing in itself as to the priority of either passage; but the structure of Ez. 7*^ throws doubt upon the originality of that passage as it now stands. The custom of buying dehverance from an attack was so common (cf. 2 K. J ^16-20 J. ^7-9 i8i3-i6)§ that it is hardly necessary to suppose that this must be an allusion to the manner in which Egypt escaped the scourge of the Scythian invasion. The claim that those who are represented as dead in v. ^^ cannot be thought of in v. ^^ as attempt- ing to buy their deliverance makes no allowance for the agility of thought. The indefiniteness of our knowledge regarding the de- velopment of Hebrew eschatology is no basis for saying that the idea of a universal destruction here presented demonstrates the late origin bf the passage. It is by no means certain that the destruction here contemplated is thought of as universal. The thought in w. ^^- ^^ concerns itself with Judah and Jerusalem and the language here does not forbid the same limitation of the judgment. But if, as seems probable, the thought of universality is present, such a conception is not at all out of keeping with the authorship of Zephaniah himself (v. Int., § 4). A smooth, regular and uniform metre throughout this poem can be produced only by taking undue liberties with the text. The parallelism, fortunately, is very marked and thus indicates the poetic lines clearly. The metre of the first four strs. is prevailingly pentameter or qina. * So Marti ( ?). Schw. hesitates between '^'' and '^'i Fag. om. '8=; Kent om. both; Du. om. all after "zeal." t So Marti, Now.^ ( ?), Siev.. t So Now.^ ( ?), Fag.. § It was a frequent experience in the campaigns of such conquerors as Tiglath-pileser I, Shalmanezer II, Sargon and Ashurbanipal. 2o8 ZEPHANIAH Through the remainder of the poem, hexameter prevails. The move- ment of thought from str. to str. is easily recognisable and the whole closes with a splendid climax of universal doom. The arrangement here presented involves few textual changes that are not called for on grounds wholly independent of the poetic form. From the reconstructed poem, the following materials found in M are lacking, viz., i*» ("and it shall be in the day of '''s sacrifice") »» ("in that day"), >" • ("and it shall be in that day, it is the oracle of ■> "), " t. o. 13b. «. 18 b_ -phe first two of these are simple prosaic introductions by some editor. The third is shown to be extraneous to the movement of thought by the interruption it occasions between " *> and '', in both of which the speaker deals with Jerusalem; and also by its marked varia- tion from the metrical movement of the context. The fourth addition (ijb. e) js betrayed by its hackneyed phraseology as well as its metrical variation. The last one (" ^) is plainly identical in thought with " =; but the latter makes a little closer connection with " » than '« ^ does and, therefore, has the right of way. It is worthy of notice also that '"' is practically a duplicate of 3'"'. The rearrangement of w. '• » here accepted was first proposed by Schw. and followed by Now. and Fag. (cf. Siev. who rearranges thus: vv. 6. 8 b. 9 b. 8 c. 8 ». 10). The reason for the transposition is found in the excellent sense thereby secured; in the fact that v. ' », as it stands in M, lacks the necessary balancing clause, stating the cause of the judgment it announces; and in the further fact that the two clauses dealing with foreign practices are thus brought together. 7. on] ^, fear. Gr. adds -\V2 So as in Zc. 2'. — not] (g = mat. — cnpn] & invited. — 8. nScn ^ja Syi] H om. — ':2] (6 = n>a; so We. (?), Gr., Dav., GASm., Oort^"-, Now., van H., Fag.. For the same inter- change, cf. Gn. 45" Ex. 16^' Jos. i7>' 18' i Ch. 2'» Ne. 7=8 Je. i65- » Ez. 2' Ho. I^ Cf. the use of no in v. ». — o^u-aSn] Rd. BoSn; so Schw., Now., Fag.; D is a dittog. from the foil, word; cf. jSnn. — 9. jSnn So Sj; IPDcn-'^;'] (gf^AQ ^H^ ^,ri Trdvras ^/x0avtDs ivl to. irpSirvKa. (&^ om. So Si'. S, iirl Trd^Toj Toi/s iiri^alvovTas k.t.X.. TB, super omnem qui arroganter ingreditur super limen. &, upon all extortioners and spoilers. {T, all those who walk in the laws of the Philistines. Wkl., AOF., Ill, 381^., would render, "against all who mount the throne." This involves a new meaning for both words. jSn is connected by Wkl. with the Arabic drg and made to mean 'mount' or 'climb.' Cf. 2 S. 22'"' where 'scale' furnishes an admirable meaning for the Pi'el. But 'skip,' 'dance' or 'leap' is required by Is. 35' Ct. 2'BS. 36" and is suitable both here and in 2 S. 22". Furthermore, the meaning 'mount' or 'climb' is doubtful for the Arabic drg, aside from some derived stems where it is used figuratively; the ordinary usage is 'walk slowly.' jncn is taken by Wkl. as designating primarily the pedestal upon which the image of the .7-14 I 209 deity was placed (i S. 5«- ')» ^1^^ secondarily, the king's throne. The phrase as a whole would thus point to the king's advisers, those who stood upon the steps of the throne. But though this meaning of 'c would yield good sense in i S. 5^- ' Ez. 9' 10* • ", it hardly suits in Ez. 46' and is im- possible in Ez. 47'. Furthermore, neither on the numerous Babylonian and Assyrian seals nor in any known relief is a god represented as placed upon a pedestal, or a royal throne as raised upon a dais; the god and the king alike sit in a chair of state with a footstool attached. — oh^jin] (g 31 = aninSx i-\n; so &. — ny:;vn] (S & If == seco7id (gate). — 11. cnonn lad^ ^h•j7ae. ft transliterates as a proper name. ®, by the brook Kidron. A, S, Twy 6\nu)v. 9, ^J* TV /3ci^ec. — ncij] (S, wfj-oidtdTf. — |JJJ0] 9, /jLera^6\u)v. — iSiBj] C6, ol iiri]pixivoi. E, JMJ exaltantur (in argento et aurd). U, involuti. The word is otp. and is ordinarily treated as a passive formation = "weighed down" {cf. t'SB' , n''a'D , D^Dy); but it is better taken as active (c/. -i^-'D ,i^X|"> ,->^Dn); -y. Barth, TVB. <> '«.— 12. CijnN] (S^, HP. 36, 51, 97, 238, have a double rendering, viz., I will search Jerusalem with a lamp and I will visit Jerusalem with a lamp {and I will visit, etc.). Marti, B'DnNv, so Siev., Now.^, Fag.. — nnja] Rd., vrith 05 ft, "ija; so Schw. (?); Marti (?), Fag., Roth., Kent. Eth., with a lamp of wisdom. — o-'tt'jNn] Rd., with Now^, D^JJNU'n; so Fag., Kent. — O'lNopn] 31, qui coniemptores sunt. H, defixos. ft, those despising. — annca'] (&, tA v\dyfiaTa avTuiv. HP. 86 mg. ^deXvynara. JI, ne custodiant mandata. H, in faecibus suis. JT, who in tranquillity enjoy, 't' is always in the pi., v. Is. 25' Je. 48" Ps. 75'. The meaning is clear, but the root uncertain. HWB.^^ connects it with 'r, to keep; may it not, however, be better traced to Assy. Samdru, 'to rage,' being so named as that which causes turmoil either in the process of fermentation or in the brain of the drinker? — 13. ncirnS] (&, eU SiapKay^v. H, in direptionem. — nsf"'] ^ ft add in them. — 14. mm dv] Marti suggests ■'DV in both cases because of the 1st pers. in v. "; so Fag.. — nnci] ($, Kal raxeto. Rd., vrith Schw., nnoDi; so We., Now., Marti, Siev., Fag., Roth.. Bach., ny:rf oi'n. M was formerly treated as an inf., the impf. that ordinarily accompanies such a construction being understood (Ew. ^^O'; Hd.) ; but this is without analogy. For a similar case of a prtc. without initial », v. jnd (Ex. 7" 9' io<); cf. Ges. ^ ^^'. HWB.^^ treats it here and in Is. 8'- » as a verbal adj. (so Or., GASm.) ; but it is better here to correct the text. — Sip] Kenn. 145, anp; so Marti, Now.^, Fag., Roth.. Siev. om.. — nc] Rd., with Marti, "»cn; so Now.^, Fag., Roth. (?), Du., Kent. (5, viKKd. — as' mx -\13J] Rd. "i^aJD E'n, dropping nx as dittog. of m-i in foil. line. This yields a text in perfect conformity with the corresponding portion of » ». 2IO ZEPHANIAH Cf. "i?n and Snjn , rn and incs. Note the same juxtaposition of en and 1.1S in Is. 8'- '. For other cases of vertical dittography, cj. 2' Mi. !» o. II . 2" ''5"' Ez. !"•" 7" '•. This correction is based upon the sug- gestion of Miiller, SK., LXXX, 309 /., who reads lUJp tn nx. d, koX aK\t]pa. T^raKTai dwarij (5' being joined with v. '^). U, tribulabilur, etc.. Gr.^"^, -i>3Ji! n-yi\ Marti, oj (for o-i'); so Now.^ (?), Siev. (?)^ Roth. (?). mx occurs again only in Is. 42", but this with the Assy. sardhu, 'cry aloud,' renders its meaning clear. — or] Of the passages usu- ally cited in support of a temporal sense (so here, e. g., Hi., Mau., We. ( ?), Now. ( ?), HU'B.^^, Du.) several are due to a corrupt text (viz., Ps. 66^ Je. 50' Jb. 23'), while in others a local sense is equally good, if not better {e. g., Jb. 35" Ps. 145 36'3 66« 132" 1333 Pr. 8" Ho. 10' Ju. 5").— 15. 'ci nnx] The same phrase occurs in Jb. 152^; other formations from the same root are conjoined in Is. 30^ Je. 19' Dt. 28"- ". 57 pj-, jj?^ Such cases are due to the Hebrew liking for assonance. — 'ci nxi:'] Also in Jb. 30' 38'' BS. SI'". In addition to the assonance, increased emphasis is secured by such junction of two slightly different formations from one root; e. g., npi3ci npi3, Na. 2"; ncB'Si ncDiy, Ez. 33"; n^^\ Rd. ■'S— IDw'i] (g, khI ixxee?, but in HP. 36, 51, 62, 86, 95, 97, 147, 185, 228a, iKX€<^; cf. ?n, effundam. — cm'-] Some mss. ncn'^, but better without dag.; v. Baer and Ginsburg. The meaning is wholly uncertain. Dl.''"'" •" derives from on^, 'be close, firm' (so BDB.), and renders Eingeweide, which fits better here than 'flesh,' but is unsuitable in Jb. 20". No., ZDMC, XL (1886), 721, sug- gests the meaning 'wrath,' connecting it with Syriac Ihm, 'to threaten'; this is fitting in Jb. 20", but wholly out of place here. The rendering 'flesh,' against which both Dl. and No. urge weighty objections, suits fairly well here, but is inadmissible in Jb. 20'^. The text there is almost certainly corrupt (cf. (B, 65vvas) and the same difficulty may exist here. (g, Tk^ad.pKa'i avrdv. Schw. (?) TmS (from \/ nnS), cf. adj. n^ Gr.^"'-, oS^m (?). Bach., □-.'? mh. Schw., onh; so Now., Marti, Roth., Du.; cf. Je. II". — cSSjs] "BjSicut stercora; so&. ^, ws |36X/3tTa. %, sicul slercora bourn. Bach., O'-Ssj?. — 18. iPNjp . . . mni maj.'] Fag. changes to ist pers., viz. ^rmp . . . T'J^y.- — 1^] Rd. qs, with (&, Kal and &; so Schw., Gr-E-n •, We., G ASm., Now., Marti, Hal., Dr., Du., Kent. Cf. "B, cum.— n'^r\2i] (&, ffirovS-nv. Gr.Em. nSna; so Now. (?), Marti, Roth.. But this is unnecessary since the prtc. makes excellent sense and the same construction 2 211 occurs in Is, lo" 28" Dn. 9". — pn hb'jj^ . . . nSa] The vb. takes two ace, or the first ace. is so closely welded to and identified with the vb. that the combined expression is treated as a vb. and takes an obj. in the ace; so also Je. 5" (rd. BDrs") 30'' 46" Ez. 11" 20" Ne. 9". Now.'^ changes ncy to nr^'s. § 4. A DAY OF DOOM UPON PHILISTIA (2*-'). In a poem that has suffered many things at the hands of editors, the prophet foretells woe upon the Philistines. The reasons for the divine anger against Israel's ancient foe were apparently so well known to the prophet's audience that they did not need to be rehearsed here. The poem is composed of four strs. of two lines each. Str. I sounds the note of warning to Philistia in view of the near approach of her day of judgment (2^- ^^). Str. II specifies four of the five great Philistine towns as doomed to destruction (2^). Str. Ill announces the complete depopulation of the whole Philistine coast (2^). Str. IV represents this former abode of men as given over to the pasturage of flocks (2^- ^^). A SSEMBLE yourselves, yea, assemble, O nation unabashed! Before ye become fine dust, like chaff which passes away. T70R Gaza will be forsaken and Ashkelon a waste. As for Ashdod — ^at noon they will drive her out; and Ekron will be uprooted. '\\7^0E to the inhabitants of the coast of the sea, the nation of the Cherethites; For I will make thee perish, without an inhabitant, O land of the Philistines. A ND thou wilt become pastures for shepherds and folds for flocks; By the sea will they feed; in the houses of Ashkelon at evening will they lie down. Str. I calls upon Philistia to brace herself for the shock that awaits her. — 2^ Assemble yourselves, yea, assemble] This rendering is somewhat uncertain, being directly supported only by (g §> ® B 2 {v. i.). The verb does not occur elsewhere in the forms here used, but in another stem it is used of the gathering of straw and sticks. Various renderings have been proposed for it here; e. g., 'end your- selves, etc.';* 'turn pale and be pale';t 'test yourselves, yea, test'; I 'crowd and crouch down';§ 'gather yourselves firmly to- * E. g., Mau., Hd., Ke.. t Ew.. J De W.. § Or.. 212 ZEPHANIAH gather and be firm';* 'purify yourselves and then purge others ';t 'conform yourselves to law and be regular.' | But none of these finds adequate support either in the Hebrew usage of this root, or in the related dialects, or in the Vrss.. Several scholars aban- don as hopeless the attempt to interpret. § The least objection- able of the emendations proposed yields the meaning, 'get you shame and be ye ashamed'; but this is scarcely possible for two reasons: (i) it is difficult to see how so clear and easy a reading could have given way to so difficult a one asiM now offers; (2) the thought of v. ^ presupposes in v. ^ either a call to flee from the wrath to come, or to repent and so escape, or an ironical summons to prepare for the coming conflict. ' Be ashamed ' seems too mild a term for this context. For the difficulty of the translation here given, V. i.. For similar calls to assemble in order to ward off in- evitable destruction, cf. Jo. i^ 2,^^ 3" Je. 4^. — O nation unabashed!] Here again we can attain no certainty as to the meaning. The obscu- rity lies in the word rendered 'unabashed.'** Among many other renderings, we may cite 'undisciplined,' ff ' unlovable,' |t 'that does not desire to be converted to the law,' §§ 'that never paled {sc. with terror),*** 'not desired (= hated),' fff 'that hath no long- ing.' tt J Here again the attempt to discover the sense is abandoned by some.§§§ The Hebrew usage of this word affords no basis for any other meaning than 'not longing for,' 'not desirous of; cf. Ps. 84^ 17^^ Jb. 14^^ Gn. 31^°. But this is too vague and indefinite in the present passage.**** The idea of 'shame' is associated with this root in Aramaic, in late Hebrew and in colloquial Arabic. This furnishes a good meaning in this place and, in default of anything better, may be adopted. The nation addressed is probably not the Jewish ;fttt nor is it the pious element within the Jewish na- tion,JUJ for Zephaniah would scarcely address a mere fragment of • Stei.. t Filrst {Concordance). t Van H.. S Schw., We., Dav., GASm., Stk., Roth.. ** So many interpreters, e. g., Rosenm., Dav., Or., GASm., Dr., Fag.. tt « &. n v. §§ at. •♦* Mau.. Ew., Ke.. ttt Hd.. Ht RVm.. §§5 E. g., Schw., We., Now., Marti, Stk., Roth., Kent. ♦♦♦* Cf. V, which retains this sense here, but puts it in the passive, whereas elsewhere it is always active. tttt Conlra Hd., Or., Schw., We. Dav. GASm., Marti, van H., el al.. JttI Contra Dr., Stk., el al.. 2 213 the people as 'nation.' It is rather the Philistines, against whom the bulk of this section is directed. This becomes much clearer after the secondary elements in vv. ^'^ are recognised. — 2. Before ye be- come fine dust] The Philistines are now addressed as individuals and warned to seek some way of escape before it is too late. The figure in itself might picture either the completeness of the coming destruction (Ps. i8^^), or the worthlessness of the vanquished (i^^ Zc. 9^), or the wide dispersion of the stricken people. In view of the added comparison to chafif, the latter is probably the real point of the simile; cf. Is. 29^ 41^. For the text upon which this transla- tion rests, V. i.. M is open to objection on the ground of serious grammatical difficulty and the inappropriateness of the terms used. A literal rendering of M, yields, "before the bringing forth of a decree," which might mean either "before a decree brings forth" {cf. Pr. 27^), or "before a decree is brought forth." It has been variously interpreted, e. g., "before the decree brings forth,"* i. e., before the events befall you that are decreed by God; "before the term is bom,"f i. e., before the day fixed by God breaks forth from the dark womb of the future; "before the law bring forth," J i. €., the Mosaic law fulfilling the curse it pronounces in Dt. 31". But these all leave too much to the imagination of the interpreter. — Like chaff that passes away] Everywhere that refer- ence is made to chaff, except possibly in Is. 41^^, it is as a simile of scattering (e. g., Is. 17*^ Ho. 13^ Jb. 21'® Ps. i'). The text of