May they feed in Bashan and Gilead, as in the days of old.
As in the days of thy coming forth from Egypt, show us wonderful things.
A/TAY 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.
"VXTHO 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 qina 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 MICAH
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 /.), 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. i»,
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. i.).
14. >j3e'] « » 1 01 pi. = ^ip; so Ro., Sta. {ZAW. XXIII, 169),
Elh., Now., Marti, Siev., van H., Hpt..— -ip^] & = sheep. Hal. p.j.. Or.
myo. Van H. ^y.^ may it be established. — 15. ipnx] B 01, sif. in 3d
pi,, — D'-iXD V"if<=] Rd. a^'-^xsc, omitting V^N with (i; so Marti, Siev., Du.;
the metre supports this. — y:n-\i>.] Rd. ijn-;^; so We., Taylor, Elh.,
Pont, Or., GASm., Now., Che., OortE"-, Marti, Hal., Siev., van H.,
Du., Hpt.. (5 difffOf. & OJ sf. of 3d pers. pi.. Some codd. of (5 Sei^u
aiiToii. Ro. UNin; so Gu..— 16. "^jc] <8 = Ssci.— i^] <S 01 pi.. —
ar\^nH] & 3 (S-^ and 3 Heb. mss. 'rKi; so Taylor, Pont.— 17. cms]
(6 B pi., but (gAJJ sg..— ^'^niD] <g om. 3.— on\-njDDO] <g B = 'dc3; (6
also has noun in sg.. ft from their paths.— f-^na^ ^yr^hn nin^-SN] Om.
irnSs ''-Sn, vnth Marti, Now.*^, Siev., as a gloss; this is shown by
the use of 3d pers. as compared with nos, and by the metre. It is not
improbable that the entire phrase including nnc is an editorial citation
from Ho. 3*. This would leave a smoother text and an easier metre
(c/. Siev.). — iNi'i] Siev. om. mtr. cs.. — inc] ft om.. — 18. i^cd] Siev. adds
mn\ mtr. cs.. — ■;vd . . . V"] <B 01 pi.. Siev. adds icy after ri;, mtr. cs..
— ip'jn; r''-\[<a''^] Om. as gloss, with Now., Marti, Du.. Siev. and Gu.
inSnj PNan-Sj.', and omit remainder of verse as gloss. — r>vnn] & 2d pers. sg.
— i>'V] (6 tli napTvpiov = iJiS. — Tcn] fr has 2d pers. sg. of vb.. — 19 . Siev.
and Gu. insert nnx at opening of verse, and change all vbs. to 2d
pers. sg.. — tt'i33>] & and he will gather together. — ^>'?C'n1] & Jil B 3d
pers. sg. active, (ft kolI iiropitp^ffoyrai; but in some codd. of (6, as in
M. Ro. om. t; so Marti. — anNan] Rd, U'Dwon, with <6 ^'B; so Ro.,
Elh., Pont, We., Gr., Gu., Now., Oort^"-, Marti, Hal., Siev., van H.,
Du.. — 20. ]rr] <6 5<i<ret. H dabis, so some codd. of 05. Siev. |Fini. —
•wvh] Gu. ib'X3. — T'c] (6 Karii rdj iin^pas = >D''r, confusing 3 and D as
inx*.
Str. I is a prayer for Yahweh's favour upon Israel in the restora-
tion to her of the territory once occupied by her. — 14. Shepherd
thy people with thy staff, the flock of thine inheritance] Yahweh is
addressed as the shepherd of Israel; cf. Ps. 23 28^ 80^ Gn. 49^\
On "flock of thine inheritance," cf. Is. 63" Je. 10^^ Ps. 74^ 95' Ioo^
Israel is frequently designated as Yahweh's "inheritance," i. e. as
his possession, in Deuteronomy and subsequent writings; cf. Dt.
^20 ^26. 29 228. — Dwelling alone in a jungle in the midst of a garden]
This is not a prayer that Israel may be kept apart from the pagan
nations,* but a statement of fact (as is shown by the participle)
which serves as the occasion for the request of the previous line.
Nor is it a description of Yahweh as having his home in a forest-
shrine on Carmel, the sacred moimtain.f It rather represents
Israel as occupying the hill-tops of Judah, while access to the
surrounding fertile plains is denied them, because the latter are
in possession of powerful enemies. The sense is not materially
changed if we translate, "dwelling alone, (like) a jimgle in the midst
of a garden"; but this division of the line is against the metre of
the qtna. The "jimgle" (GASm.) is here used as a symbol of
barrenness and desolation, as in 3" Ho. 2" Is. 21", and in Is. 29"
32*^ where it is contrasted with "garden" as here; cf. 2 K. 19^.
A reference to Israel as dwelling in the midst of Mt. Carmel would
be uninteUigible here. — May they feed in Bashun and Gilead, as in
days of old] The reference to these regions is not necessarily in-
dicative of the recent loss of this territory, and so proof of the
origin of this prophecy before the fall of Samaria. J The phrase
"days of old" renders this out of the question. The prophet liv-
* Contra Sta. ZAW. XXIII. 169. + So Hi.. t So van H..
154 MICAH
ing at a late day prays for the restoration of former glory, with re-
united Israel once more occupying all of its long-lost territory, even
that to the east of the Jordan.— 15. ^4^ in the days of thy going
forth from Egypt, show us wonders] HI "I will show him" is
impossible in this connection. The prophet longs for a miracu-
lous intervention; nothing else can give Israel the honour due her
as Yahweh's people. The exodus of Israel is designated as a
going forth of Yahweh, just as in Ju. 5^ cf. 2 S. 5^" Ps. 60'°.
Str. II indicates the character of the wonders which Israel
desires Yahweh to perform, viz. the complete humiliation and
demoralisation of the enemies. — 16. May the nations see, and he
ashamed of all their might] i. e. because their vaunted strength will
seem so puny in comparison vdth the mighty deeds of Yahweh.
— May they lay hand upon mouth] i. e. keep silent in astonishment
and terror; cf. Ju. 18'" Jb. 21^ 29^ 40' Pr. 30=^ Is. 52'^— ^«J may
their ears be deaf] Deprived of both speech and hearing by the
"thunder of his power" (Jb. 26").— 17. May they lick dust like
the serpent, like crawlers of the earth] i. e. prostrate themselves to
the earth before Yahweh in reverence. Cf. Gn. 3" Ps. 72" Is.
49^^ — May they come trembling from their dens] into which they
have fled terror-stricken. Cf. Ps. iS^^.—Unto Yahweh our God
may they come quaking] The phrase "unto Yahweh our God"
belongs with this verb rather than with the preceding, as appears
from the idiom hi< ^^2 which occurs also in Ho. 3^; this is recog-
nised in m by the position of the verse accents. — And may they fear
on account of thee] A fitting state of mind for those who have long
jeered at Yahweh and oppressed his people; cf. Ps. 33^ 67^ 102^".
Str. Ill closes the prophecy and the book with a tender appeal
to Yahweh as the God of mercy and pardon that he will be gra-
cious toward Israel in accordance with his ancient Covenant. —
18a. Who is a god like unto thee] A common thought in Psalms,
e. g. Ex. 15" Ps. 71'' 77'' 86' 89'- " 96' 97'. Elsewhere, the point
of the comparison is always the power of Yahweh; here only is
it foxmd in his quality of mercy. But Yahweh's power is the theme
of vv. ^^-" and thus constitutes the background of the thought
here.* — Forgiving iniquity and passing by transgression] Also
*SoSUi. ZAV/. XXIII, 171.
a common thought in tlte PsaUer, e. g. S6^- ^^ 99^ 103^- '■'' 130''. —
To the remnant of his inheritance] A gloss specifying and lim-
iting the application of Yahweh's forgiving spirit to Israel, his
chosen people. The inference to be drawn from this phase of
Yahweh's character is plainly stated in the following comments at-
tached by some editor. — 18b. He tvill not retain his anger for ever,
for he delights in kindness] The change from the qhia measure
to simple trimeter and from the 2d person in address to Yahweh
to the 3d person show the secondary character of this material.
Similar phrases are frequent in the Psalter, e. g. 25^" 30® 32^" 33^
34** 57^- ". — 19a. He will again show us mercy] Israel's past
experience of Yahweh's grace warrants this conviction as to his
purpose for the future. — He will tread down our iniquities] The
sins of Israel are poetically pictured as enemies of Yahweh whom
he will subdue and render powerless. The figure is striking and
without parallel in the OT.. 19b. And thou wilt cast into the depths
of the sea all our sins] This is the continuation of v. ^^^. The
prophet employs the strongest terms to express the conviction that
Yahweh will fully forgive his people and restore them to the en-
joyment of prosperity and power. — 20. Thou wilt show faithful-
ness to Jacob, kindness to Abraham] The names of the forefathers
of the nation are here apphed to their descendants; the kind of
treatment accorded the former may be confidently expected by the
latter. Cf. Ex. 34^. — As thou hast sworn to our fathers from days
of old] Referring specifically, perhaps, to Gn. 22^"^- 28'^^-, and
in general to all the promises through patriarchs and prophets
throughout Israel's history.
14. â– 'Joa'] So-called hireq-compaginis, really the old genitive end-
ing retained in the cstr. ; cf. Ges. ^ s" m; Ko. ^ ='2 b. c^ On account of difi&-
culty of masc. prtc. agreeing with JN'X (fem.), the reading as cstr. pi. is
commonly accepted i^. s.), in agreement with coll. noun; cf. i>i\ But
masc. may be explained as due to the force of d>, the main noun to which
JNS is added parenthetically; or as due to jns itself being treated as
masc, as in Gn. 30^'% because of its relation to ay. — -\y-] Ace. of place
in which, as after a - ' in Gn. iS". — 15. un^n] Treated by Ew. ^ 233 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 ^DD (v. "). — 16. r\D hy T'] A common idiom, hence without art.,
K.6,^ ***'•• — 18. >d] An example of the near relation of question to ex-
clamation, Ges.^*""=, — I'fln] Verbal adj., rather than Qal pf., as shown
by addition of Kin. — 19. tpy^y] This isolated usage of 1:03 suggests the
possibility of a confusion with D2d, which would furnish excellent sense
here and an idiom frequent in the OT.; cf. Is. i'« Je. 4'< Ps. $i*- '. dj3
is used with the sense wash away, only in Lv. 13" 'â– ; cf. v^i. 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. -iiyN] = -iB'N3, as in Je. 7,3'^ 488 Is. 54' Ps. lot^.
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, imder IManasseh, 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 dommion 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
i6o 2EPHANIAH
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 66 1 TO 606 B.C. 161
banipal in a series of battles, in the course of which his troops
overran the territory of the Kedarenes, Nabataeans, 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\\ti 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 effort 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 fiu-ious. 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 pohcy. 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 dovm 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 fj..
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.f 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-ishkun, 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-
* C/. 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 talcs of Ctesias in such a way as to
render practically futile any attempt to differentiate precisely between the two elements.
1 64 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