According to this hypothesis, we have the works of three different prophets collected into one book, and passing under one name: (a) Ch. ix-xi, the book of Zech- ariah I, a contemporary of Isaiah, under Ahaz, .about 730; (i) ch. xii-xiv, author iniknown (or perhaps Uri- jah, a contemporary of Jeremiah), about (507 or 006; (c) ch. i-viii, the work of the son (or grandson) of Iddo, Haggai's contemporary, about 520-518. We have, then, two distinct theories before us. The one merely affirms that the last six chapters of our present book are not from the same author as the first eight. The other car- ries the dismemberment of the book still further, and maintains that the last six chapters are the work of two distinct authors who lived at two distinct periods of Jewish historj'. The arguments advanced by the sup- porters of cacli theory rest on the same grounds. They are drawn partly from the difference in style, and partly from the difference in the nature of the contents, the historical references, etc., in the different sections of the book ; but the one sees this difference only in ch. ix-xiv as compared with ch. i-viii ; the other sees it also in ch. xii- xiv as compared with ch. ix-xi. We must accordingly consider (i) the difference generally in the style and con- tents of ch. ix-xi vas compared with ch. i-viii; (ii) the dif- ferences between ch. xii-xiv as compared with ch. ix-xi.
(A.) A rr/umenis af/ainst the Integriti/ of the Book. — The difference in point of style between the latter and former portions of the prophecy is admitted by all crit- ics. Kosenmiiller characterizes that of the first eight chapters as "prosaic, feeble, poor," and that of the re- maining six as " poetic, weighty, concise, glowing." But without admitting so sweeping a criticism, and one which the verdict of abler critics on the former portion has contradicted, there can be no doubt that the general tone and character of the one section are in decided con- trast with those of the other. " As he passes from the first half of tiie prophet to the second," says Eichhorn, "no reader can fail to perceive how strikingly differ^it are the impressions which are made upon him by the two. The manner of writing in the second portion is far loftier and more mysterious ; the images emplo\'ed are grander and more magnificent; the point of view and the hori- zon are changed. Once the Temple and the ordinances of religion formed the central point from which the prophet's words radiated, and to which they ever re- turned; now these have vanished. The favorite modes of expression, hitherto so often repeated, are now, as it were, forgotten. The chronological notices which be- fore marked the day on which each several prophecy was uttered now fail us altogether. Could a writer all at once have forgotten so entirely his habits of thought? Could he so completely disguise his innermost feelingsV C(udd the world about him, the mode of expression, the images employed, be so totally different in the case of of one and the same writer ?" {Einleit. iv, 443, § 605).
ZECHARIAIT, BOOK OF 10V3 ZECHARIAH, BOOK OF
(T.) Ch. i-viii are marked by certain peculiarities of idiom and phraseology wliicli do not occur al'tervvards. Favorite expressions are : ''The word ot'Jehovali came unto," etc. (i, 7; iv,8; vi,9; vii. 1,4,8; viii, 1, 18); "Thus saith Jehovah (God) of hosts" (i, 4, 16, 17 ; ii, 1 1 ; viii, 2, 4, 6, 7, 9, 14, 18, '20, '23) ; " And I lifted up mine eyes and saw" (i, 18 ; ii, 1 ; v, 1 ; vi, 1) : none of these modes of expression are to be met with in ch. ix-xiv. On the other hand, the phrase ''In that day" is entirely confined to the later chapters, in which it occurs fre- quently. The form of the inscriptions is different. In- troductions to the separate oracles, such as tliosc in ix, 1 ; xii, 1, do not present themselves in the earlier por- tion. Zechariah, in several instances, states the time at which a particular prophecy was uttered by him (i, 1, 7 ; vii, 1). He mentions his own name in these pas- sages, and also in vii, 8, and the names of contemporaries in iii, 1 ; iv, 6 ; vi, 10; vii, 2 : the writer (or writers) of the second portion of the book never does this. It has also been observed that after the first eight chapters we hear nothing of " Satan," or of " the seven eyes of Je- hovah ;" that there are no more visions ; that ch. xi contains no allegory, not a symbolic action; that here are no riddles which need to be solved, no angelus inter- pres to solve them.
(II.) Ch. ix-xi. These chapters, it is alleged, have also their characteristic peculiarities:
1. In point of style, the author resembles Hosea more than any other prophet; such is the verdict both of Knobel and Ewald. He delights to picture Jehovah as the great captain of his people. Jehovah comes to Zion, and pitches his camp tliere to protect her (ix, 8, 9). He blows the trumpet, marches against his ene- mies, makes his people his bow, and shoots his arrows (ver. 13, 14) ; or he rides on Judah as his war-horse, and goes forth thereon to victory (x, 3, 5). Again, he speaks of the people as a flock, and the leaders of the people as their shepherds (ix, 16 ; x, 2, 3 ; xi, 4 sq.). He describes himself also, in his character of prophet, as a shepherd in the last passages, and assumes to himself, in a sym- bolic action (which, however, may have been one only of the imagination), all the guise and the gear of a shep- herd. In general he delights in images (ix, 3, 4, 13-17 ; X, 3, 5, 7, etc.), some of which are striking and forcible.