12 And speak unto him, saying, Thus speaketh the LORD of hosts, saying, Behold the man whose name is The BRANCH; and he shall grow up out of his place, and he shall build the temple of the LORD;

13 Even he shall build the temple of the LORD; and he shall bear the glory, and shall sit and rule upon his throne; and he shall be a priest upon his throne: and the counsel of peace shall be between them both.

bind it me as a crown," it seems to be used of a single crown, or fillet. This word (in the singl.) is sometimes used of a royal crown, e.g. by "their king's crown” (on the metheg see

(2 Sam. xii. 30)

Excurs. II. A. 2).

Verse 12.

LXX. have here σrepávovs.

not "the man," but ". a man of distinction" (comp. Is. xxxii. 12, Zech. viii. 23), avỳp (but see note on xiii. 5). — is placed Words, &c. before mittachtáv because the preceding clause includes the idea of some such word as "is coming" (see note on ii. 10).denotes "from his place," the expression is found again only in Ex. x. 23, comp. tachtéha "in her place" (Zech. xii. 6, xiv. 10).— Observe the intentional use of the verb yiçmách with the name Cémach.

אוּלַי אִבָּנָה (2 .is used figuratively, comp. (Gen. xvi בנה The verb

"perhaps I shall be built up of her." The expression hecál YHVH is also used figuratively (see Remarks below), as are also " (Hos. viii. 1), and ♬ (Hos. ix. 15, Numb. xii. 7), viz. of the spiritual community of Israel (comp. oikos coû Heb. iii. 6, 1 Tim. iii. 15).

The

Verse 13.

Constructions.

is in both cases emphatic, and is used to distinguish Ç'émach from the crowned High-Priest, who merely preWords and figured him. The verse should be rendered: "Yea He will build the temple of YHVH [i.e. He will be the true builder], and He will bear majesty, and will sit and rule upon His Throne, and will be a Priest upon His Throne, and a Counsel of Peace will be between Them twain." The expression is difficult. We see no way of interpreting it, except of the only two Persons mentioned in the verse, viz. YHVH and the Priest-King (but see Versions and Remarks). We should rather have expected the expression "between Him and His GOD": as the words stand they must have sounded most enigmatical to the Prophet's hearers.-77, while it is employed in a variety of other significations, is especially used of royal majesty (Ps. xxi. 6, Jer. xxii. 18, Dan. xi. 21).—It seems more natural to take the suff. of cis'ó "His throne" as referring to

ובין

אלהיו

14 And the crowns shall be to Helem, and to Tobijah, and to Jedaiah, and to Hen the son of

Zephaniah, for a memorial in the temple of the LORD.

the Subject of the whole sentence, than to refer it to YHVH. D (which seems to have been originally a quadrilateral, comp. Arab. cursiy, Syr. cursyō) means an ordinary seat (1 Sam. i. 9, iv. 13), where it is accidental that it was a High-Priest who is mentioned as sitting on it. But the word is used chiefly of a royal throne, e.g. NDOT (Gen. xli. 40), ND (Deut. xvii. 18), &c.- sometimes means "a prince" (as in 2 Sam. viii. 8), but the expression "HighPriest" (ver. 11) precludes that interpretation here.-Another rendering of the last half of the verse is grammatically admissible, viz. “And there shall be a priest near his throne, and a counsel of peace shall be between them twain" (comp. LXX.). For this use of comp. iv. 14. This rendering has one advantage over the other, viz. that the interpretation of ben sh'nēhém is rendered easier, by supposing the King and the Priest to be different persons. But, on the other hand, since the construction of v'hāyah is exactly the same as that of v'yashábh and umāshál, it seems much more natural to suppose that the subject of vhāyáh is the same as that of the other verbs (see Remarks).

Versions.

Targum paraphrases ver. 12 thus: "Lo the man, The Messiah His name, is destined to be revealed and anointed [comp. Verses 12, 13. Targ. Y., Lev. iv. 3, &c.], and shall build the temple of YHVH." The next verse is literally rendered, as we have done (but there are two readings "and shall be a High-Priest," or "and shall be a ministering Priest "). Syr. omits the last words of ver. 12 ubhānáh eth-hēcál YHVH, while LXX. omits the first words of ver. 13 vhú yibhnéh eth-hēcál YHVH: both translators seem to have regarded the words as dittographed, through their not having observed the emphatic force of -For the last half of ver. 13 LXX. give κai čoraι iepeùs ék δεξιῶν αὐτοῦ, καὶ βουλὴ εἰρηνικὴ ἔσται ἀνὰ μέσον ἀμφοτέρων, substituting 1 by for IND by, and regarding 'Avaron and iepeùs as two

different persons.

(ver. 10). One of

.(10 .ver) חֶלְבִּי

seems to be simply a corruption of David's heroes was called Cheldáy (1 Chron. xxvii. 15), and this name is written (1 Chron. xi. 30), and

Verse 14. Words and LXX.

(2 Sam. xxiii. 29). Here the same name has become : for the

given in Talm. Babl. Bracoth 4a.-LXX. render the name by Toîs ὑπομένουσι, reading it as

,מיחלים

:: T

in the sense of חול pres. partic. of חָלָם

', comp. (Gen. viii. 10).- may be rendered, as by LXX., eis xápita or "for Chén," another name for Yòshiyyáh (ver. 10), so Targ. But Syr. reads as in ver. 10.-For lziccarón LXX. eis valuóv, either translating conjecturally, or reading 1 as 17;

(26 .Kings viii 2) בן עשרים ושתים שנה similarly the two readings Chron. xxii. 2) are supposed to have 2) בן־ארבעים ושתים שנה and

(2

arisen from a confusion between 20, and 40.

In spite of the contrary opinion being expressed by such Hebr. commentators as Rashi, Qimchi, &c. we maintain that to

Verse 15. Constructions.

and this * וזאת תהיה לכם as equivalent to והיה render

shall happen unto you" is contrary to the usage of the language. The expression v'hāyáh im shāmó“ tishman seems to be borrowed directly from Jer. xxxi. 24, where (as in every other passage where a similar expression occurs, viz. Deut. xi. 13, xxviii. 1, Ex. xv. 26, xix. 5, xxiii. 22) there is an apodosis. Consequently, unless with Hengstenberg we look on this verse as an abrupt aposiopesis, we have no choice

פסקא באמצע פסוק) but to regard it as a case of a lacuna in the text

see Josh. iv. 1, &c.), the existence of which has not been handed down by Tradition.

vi. 9--15. Remarks.

Zechariah is now commanded to go to the house of Josiah son of Zephaniah, who was entertaining certain Jews, who seem to have come from Babylon with gifts and offerings for the House of the LORD. From these men he was to take gold and silver, and to cause to be made thereof a composite diadem, with which he was to crown Joshua the High-Priest. We cannot, of course, venture with EWALD to insert the words "and upon the head of Zerubbabel" after the words "upon the head of Joshua"; and to insert the name "Joshua" in the clause " and will be a priest upon his throne." Even if such an arbitrary alteration of the text were admissible, it would be most inappropriate.

For, as PUSEY has well remarked, had a crown been placed on the head of Zerubbabel, such an act would have aroused false hopes in the minds of the people of a restoration of the temporal kingdom, which had already been finally abolished (Jer. xxii. 30, Ezek. xxi. 31, 32). The crown was removed "until he should come whose right it is," viz. "the king who shall reign in righteousness" (Is. xxxii. 1) "and prosper,' as "a Branch of righteousness" (Jer. xxiii. 5). Since Zerubbabel is not even mentioned in this passage, Joshua himself must have felt that the Prophet's words referred to One greater than himself, and that the building spoken of was a spiritual one, to symbolize which the material building was allegorically introduced.—The interpretations of ver. 13 are various—we will note the chief of them. HITZIG holds that the Messiah and an ideal priest are referred to in the clause "counsel of peace shall be between them both." But we cannot see how the thought of some ideal priest and king, who would coincide in some unity of purpose, could have occurred to the minds of the Prophet's hearers. There would be, moreover, no special reason for speaking of unity as existing between a king and a priest for, as a matter of history, the priests and kings were seldom at variance, though the prophets and kings were frequently so. ROSENMUELLER considers that the offices of priest and king are alluded to. But "a counsel of peace" could not be spoken of as existing between two abstracts, KEIL takes the words as referring to the two characters of ruler and priest combined in the person of the Messiah. But in this case the clause would be superfluous. Why should there not be unity between two such characters combined in one such person? KOEHLER thinks that the reference is to the two offices of the Messiah, and that the prophecy speaks of a plan devised by the Messiah in His double character, whereby peace and salvation should be secured to His people. But this is in accord with the modes of thought of neither Old nor New Testament. Such an idea would have been incomprehensible to the Prophet's hearers; and in the N. T. any such unity of design for the salvation of mankind is spoken of as existing between the Father and the Messiah (not between two of the offices of the Latter), e.g. John vi. 38, x. 15—18, iii. 16, 17, Col. i. 19, 20. The opinion of JEROME, VITRINGA, PUSEY, WRIGHT, &c., is that which we have adopted above in our notes. Seeing that the regal dignity of the Messiah must have been generally recognised in the Prophet's time (see Jer. xxiii. 5, &c.), and that, from Ps. cx, the combination of the priestly with the kingly office in the person of the Messiah must have been expected by his contemporaries, it seems to us that they would have understood the Prophet to have referred to the same person as " sitting and ruling upon his throne," and as 66 being a priest upon his throne": and that, however they may have taken the words of Isaiah ix. 6, "Wonder Counsellor, El gibbor, Abhi Olam, Prince of Peace," such words must have somewhat prepared them for the statement, "the Counsel of Peace shall be between Them twain." To us, who have the advantage of later revelation, there is a fitness apparent in the phraseology, which would have been hidden from them,

Z.

CHAPTER VII.

ND it came to pass in the

AND

fourth year of king Darius, that the word of the LORD came unto Zechariah in the fourth day of the ninth month, even in Chisleu;

Verses 1-3. Words and Constructions.

וישלח

2 When they had sent unto the house of God Sherezer and Regemmelech, and their men, to pray before the LORD,

3 And to speak unto the priests

THE BETHEL DEPUTATION (chaps. vii. viii.).

“viz. in Cislév." The usual constr. is that of i. 7 IO "that is the month Sh'bhát." B'cislév is in apposi

tion with, comp. such a construction as

לבנו ליוסף

(Gen. xlvii. 29), where the noun in apposition is repeated with the same preposition that is prefixed to the noun with which it is in apposition. But since the of lachódesh is used only because it is preceded by the number of the day of the month, Cislév takes “in,” avoiding the somewhat awkward construction with "of.”— "then there sent" seems to denote an event subsequent to the revelation spoken of in ver. 1. Comp. 1 Kings xiv. 5, where the prophet Ahijah receives warning of the coming of the wife of Jeroboam.Bethel seems to stand for "the inhabitants of Bethel," just as "Jerusalem" often means "the inhabitants of Jerusalem." edits correctly with (not ); it is mentioned as a name of one of the sons of Sennacherib (Is. xxxvii. 38), and Nergal-Sarezer occurs (Jer. xxxix. 3). The name is Assyrian [Nirgal]-sar-usur "May [Nergal] protect the king" (Schrader). Ewald and Koehler take the clause "Sarezer, and Regem-melec and his men" as in apposition with Bethel, and look on these persons as being some of the chief inhabitants of Bethel, who sent the deputation. Keil, on the other hand, takes the clause as the acc. after the verb vayyishlách, and regards these names as those of the deputation sent. It is true that in the very similar passage

22),

Baer שראצר

וישלח המלך יהויקים אנשים מצרים את אלנתן (22 .Jer. xxvi) is prefixed to the names of את the particle ,בן עכבור ואנשים אתו...

the people sent; but it is not absolutely necessary that it should have been expressed, though certainly the presence of the particle makes the sentence much clearer.-Vayyishlach is in the masc. sing. agreeing with

-.(1 .Numb. xii) ותדבר מרים ואהרון .the subject nearest to it, comp

comp. (2 Sam. ii. 3) WN IN)-On the whole we pre