covenant people, and with one another, by the common worship of the Lord, and live in the most peaceful intercourse; so is the genuineness of this portion, even thereby, sufficiently established. But in the passage before us the difficulty is only apparent. The prophet speaks solely of the Ephraimites. For them Egypt and Assyria had actually been exclusively the most dangerous enemies of former time; therefore they only, and not the Chaldeans, who did not make their appearance until the extinction of the kingdom of the ten tribes, were suited to be a type of their enemies in general. Zechariah here occupies the same point of view as Hosea, who, chap. 11: 11, in reference to the Israelites, prophesies, 'they will return out of Egypt and Ashur." Finally, the prophet certainly had directly before his eyes the cited passages, in which Egypt and Ashur are connected in the same relation with each other as here. - The whole argument serves at the same time to show how little reason there is to protest against understanding the restoration to the promised land figuratively. If it cannot be denied that the lands, out of which the Israelites are brought back, are to be understood only as types, what objection can be urged, if the land to which they shall be restored, is, in like manner, regarded as a type?- The land of Gilead and Lebanon is here not a designation of the whole ised land, as most interpreters suppose, but specially of the former country of the ten tribes. This was divided into two parts, that beyond the Jordan, the land of Gilead, and that on this side, which extended to Libanus, and therefore might suitably receive its name from it. -The verb p occurs also, Num. 11:22, and Josh. 17: 16, (comp. Maurer on the passage,) in Kal and Niphal, in the sense to suffice, so that it is not necessary here to assume an ellipsis (non invenietur eis, scil. locus sufficiens), which is inadmissible in those passages.

prom

V. 11. "And the Lord goes through the sea, the distress, and smites in the sea the waves, and all the floods of the Nile are put to shame, and the pride of Ashur is overthrown, and the staff of Egypt shall yield." The former deliverances of the covenant people served them as a pledge of those that were future; since they revealed, at the same time, the power and the will of the Lord to help them, who is at all times the same. Nothing, therefore, is more natural than that the prophet in the description of the future should bring to memory the past, and thus, as it were, call upon the Lord, not to be unlike himself, and also strengthen the faith of the people in the

promises which contradicted indeed the appearance of things. This frequently happens when the past and future are brought into comparison, comp. e. g. Is. 51 : 9, "Awake, put on strength, thou arm of Jehovah, awake as the days of former times, as the ancient generations." "Art thou not it who driedst up the sea, the water of the great deep, who madest the depths of the sea for a way on which the redeemed went through?" But, in like manner also, they often employed the past as a type for the future; they frequently transferred the former in its individual character to the latter, which is explained partly from the flowing together of figure and reality, proper to poetry in general, and partly from the nature of prophecy in particular. Thus it is said, Jer. 31: 2, "The people find favor in the wilderness, who remain of the sword; the Lord goes to bring Israel to rest:" as the Lord once pitied his people, when sorely plagued in the wilderness, on account of their continual apostasy, and led the remnant of them to Canaan; so also will he pity them in their present distress, of which they are themselves the cause, and lead them back into their native land. Thus Hos. 2: 16, 17, "I lead her into the wilderness, and speak to her heart, and give her her vineyards there, and the valley of Achor, for a door of hope;" for, as I comforted Israel aforetime in the wilderness by promises of prosperity, and then, at the very entrance into the land of Canaan, filled them with joyful hopes by a sight of the fruitful region; so will I also in the future comfort and richly bless them." Especially remarkable, however, is the passage, Is. 11:15, 16, which Zechariah has so plainly imitated, that it must of itself be sufficient to render very suspicious the idea, that the second part was composed by an earlier writer, especially as it also serves at the same time to prove other later prophets, between whom and Zechariah a similar agreement is found, particularly Jeremiah and Ezekiel, to have been independent in relation to him. In reference to the subject of ay interpreters are not agreed. Several regard as such . So Calvin "transibit in mari afflictio," Flügge, a plague passes over the sea," against which it is a sufficient objection, that never indicates active, but always passive distress. The people is commonly taken as the subject; then however the change of persons, which immediately occurs without any notice, since the following and he smites must refer to the Lord, is unnatural. The truth was seen by Mark. It is the Lord, who, at the head of the Israelites marches boldly through the sea, and strikes down their proud opposers, the

roaring waves.

"He goes through the field of floods, the victorious hero." A complete parallel is furnished by Ps. 114, where the sea, as it sees the Lord advance in front of the Israelites, quickly flees, the terrified Jordan turns back. It was unnecessary expressly to mention the Lord, Him, who was continually present to the soul of the prophet, who alone could accomplish such deeds, the only deliverer of his people. Altogether similar is Is. 2:4, Mic. 4:3. In respect to the interpretation of 7 there is great diversity, though it is not difficult, since only one explanation of it can be grammatically justified. After the Seventy (v Daháoon otevý), Jerome (in maris freto), several, even Jahn, connect with the foregoing D, in the sense narrowness of the sea. But against this the simple grammatical reason is sufficient, that D could not then have the article, and besides, to render prominent the narrowness of the sea, were here in the wrong place, since it would rather serve to diminish the miracle; lastly, always occurs of narrowness in a metaphorical sense, never in a physical. How little in such cases the etymology suffices to prove a meaning, may be exemplified by our word anguish. Others, as Mark, Köster, (1. c. p. 44,) explain: "Jehovah transit per mare cum anxietate." But this interpretation belongs to the time when every preposition was supplied at pleasure, which was thought to be necessary, and moreover, as has been already remarked, ny is never spoken of an active, but always of a passive oppression. It only remains, therefore, with Ch. B. Michaelis, to take as standing in apposition; "he goes through the sea, the distress." It is, therefore, not merely a crude cleaving to the letter, regardless of all analogy and the whole substance of the prophecy, when the Jewish interpreters, as Jerome relates, refer the word to a future wonderful passage of the Israelites through the strait between Byzantium and Chalcedon; it is at the same time a gross misunderstanding of the letter itself. Finally, the explanation of Jonathan (fient eis miracula et virtutes, sicut facta sunt patribus eorum in mari), shows, that this misunderstanding was not universal, even among the Jews. - The article in D22 points to a definite sea, the Arabian gulf, the same through which the Israelites had already once been led, comp. Is. 11: 15, " The Lord lays a curse upon the tongue of the sea of Egypt." In the words, he smites the waves in the sea, a personification of the wave, as the enemy subdued by God, lies at the foundation. The words, all the floods of the Nile are ashamed, contain a manifest allusion to the passage through the

VOL. II.

19

Jordan. This comparatively small stream, however, is not sufficient for the prophet; he mentions instead of it the Nile, as Is. 11 : 15, the Euphrates. The latter, several interpreters, as Grotius and Mark, would here also understand by i; Jahn takes it for the Jordan. But both suppositions are inadmissible. It is true, that Jeor, Job 28: 10, occurs in the sense stream, in general; in Dan. 12: 5 sq., of the Tigris. But in the passage before us, the omission of the article, which is found in Daniel, shows, that the word stands as a proper name. As such, however, it can mean only the Nile.. That in the last words, Ashur and Egypt, as the most powerful oppressors of the Israelites formerly, stand merely as types of their tyrannical rulers in general, has already been shown. sages are Is. 10:27, 14: 25, 9:3.

Parallel pas

V. 12. "And I strengthen them in the Lord, and in his name will they walk, saith the Lord." In in the Lord is designated, as he on whom the strength of Israel depends. The use of the noun instead of the pronoun is emphatic. It calls the attention to what it means," to receive strength from the Lord, the Almighty, and the living one." The name of the Lord signifies the whole compass of his perfections as it is designated by his name, the image and the expression of his being. A walking, which is in the name of the Lord, is one in which his perfection reveals itself in all its strength. Walking, according to the context and parallelism, cannot here relate to the conduct, but must be taken literally.

CHAP. 11.

Hitherto had the prophet chiefly (comp. however, chap. 5) copied in his prophecies only the joyful side of the great picture of the future condition of the covenant people; here another scene suddenly presents itself, and, in describing it to his hearers and readers, he completes the correct, indeed, but partial representation of the future, which he had hitherto given, and guards against the abuse to which it might be liable by the carnally minded. Very appositely Calvin: "Videntur hæc inter se pugnare; sed oportuit priore loco Judæis proponi dei beneficia, ut alacrius incumberent ad templum ædificandum, et scirent non frustra se operam consumere. Nunc

etiam adjungi oportuit diversam admonitionem, ne hypocritæ fallaci illarum promissionem fiducia obdurescerent, quemadmodum fieri solet. Deinde ut fideles sibi metuerent in tempore, atque ita solliciti incederent coram deo : quia nihil magis exitiale est, quam securitas; ubi enim grassatur peccandi licentia, impendet dei judicium."

The whole portion may be divided into three parts, V. 1-3, which serve as it were for a prelude to the rest, describe the desolation of the whole land by foreign foes. The relation of a two fold symbolical action of the prophet, which took place in vision, gives a deeper insight into the causes of this event. In the first, (v. 414,) the prophet supplies the place of the great angel and revealer of the Lord, and typifies his future actions. Israel devoted to destruction by the divine decree, appears as a flock destined to the slaughter. The prophet makes an attempt to rescue them; he undertakes the office of a shepherd over the poor flock, and labors to deliver them from the evil shepherds, who would lead them to destruction. But the refractoriness of the shepherds and the flock compels him to give up his office, and abandon the flock to the full misery, from which they had hitherto been preserved by himself. He now demands his reward; they give him the contemptible one of thirty pieces of silver. In this way is the last manifestation of the Lord's mercy towards his people by the Messiah, and the rejection of him typified. The prophet then represents, at the command of the Lord, in a second symbolical action, the wicked shepherds, who will consume and destroy the flock, after the rejection of the good shepherd. V. 1. "Open, O Lebanon, thy gates, and let fire devour thy cedars." The representation is altogether dramatic. The prophet instead of announcing to Lebanon its future desolation, commands it to open its gates. Calvin: "Induit personam fecialis, qui minatur atque denuntiat, jam adesse ultimam dei vindictam." Gates are attributed to Lebanon, as a natural bulwark. Calvin: “Cur autem jubeat Libanum suas aperire portas, in promtu est. Paulo post vocat sylvam munitam, quæ tamen carebat mænibus et portis." The ? shows the material on which the fire operates. The sense therefore is, "Thou, O Lebanon, wilt be stormed and devastated by the enemy." The inquiry now arises, whether this verse, as well as the following, is to be understood literally or allegorically. The allegorical interpretation, according to the testimony of Jarchi, Kimchi, and Abenezṛa, is very ancient among the Jews. From a passage of the Talmud, (Joma, 396,) it appears, that by Lebanon was