THE SHEEP MERCHANTS OF ZECHARIAH 11 THOMAS J. FINLEY The MT of Zech 11:7 has a phrase which has been translated "hence the afflicted of the flock" (NASB). A nearly identical sequence of consonants occurs in v 11 and has been read. "thus the afflicted of the flock. " A survey of the versions and various interpretations shows a great deal of confusion over what the Hebrew actually meant. Further analysis reveals that the grammatical structure of both passages is unique in Hebrew. Therefore. an examination is made of a variant in the LXX which points t£? the phrase, "sheep merchants, .. in both passages. It is shown how the LXX gives the more difficult reading. Finally, analysis of the context shows that the LXX reading fits better than that of the MT. * * * Z ECHARIAH II is one of the more difficult passages of a some times enigmatic book. The chapter has been challenging to many because of its high demands on the interpreter's abilities in hermeneu tics, language skills, and command of other prophetic passages. Modern commentators have even found a knowledge of Sumerian literature helpful for a new insight on the familiar "thirty shekels of silver. Ml No less help has been found through the ancient versions. The debate still rages concerning the Greek and Syriac translations of the Hebrew term 'It'/ but a more far-reaching issue which involves the versions is the phrase IN:!ri] '~~}? 1~? in v 7 and IN:!rij '~~}? P in v II. 'The phrase occurs in the Sumerian uThe Curse of Agade" as a sign of contempt (A NET [3rd ed.; Princeton: Princeton University, 1969] 648, line 104). See E. Reiner, uThirty Pieces of Silver," Essays in Memory of E. A. Speiser (ed. W. W. HaUo; AOS 53; New Haven: American Oriental Society, 1968) 186-90. 'For a good summary of the three main views with reference to other literature see Joyce Baldwin. Haggai. Zechariah. Malachi (Tyndale OT Commentaries; Downers Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity, 1972) 185-86. 52 GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL There are two conflicting interpretations of these phrases which may be illustrated by the New American Standard Bible (NASB) rendition compared with that of the RSV: NASB: v 7-"hence the afflicted of the flock" v II-"thus the afflicted of the flock" RSV: v 7-"for those who trafficked in the sheep" v 11-"the traffickers in the sheep" The RSV interpretation is listed in the margin of the NASB as "another reading." Obviously, the two renderings are widely divergent. In the one case the flock itself is being discussed, while in the other the subject is those who control the flock through merchandising. Surely a correct interpretation of the passage must hinge on the right decision about this issue. Actually, the difference between the readings depends on a variant found only in the LXX. The Greek translator, apparently baffled by the Hebrew, simply transliterated the crucial portions: v 7-Ei~ njv Xavaavinv ("for the Canaanites") v II-ot XavavaiOl ,<i rrp6~am ("the Canaanites [shall know] the sheep "). 3 If the words of the MT are divided differently, it is possible to derive the LXX reading: v 7-q~:li1) "J:l7J:l, v II-T~:li1 "J:l7J:l The crucial point for the RSV interpretation (adopted also by the NEV and the lB, among others) is that the term "Canaanite" can bear the meaning "merchant." The BDB lexicon lists the meaning "merchant" under both T~~~ (Ezek 16:29; 17:4; Zeph 1:11) and '~~p (Prov 31:24; Zech 14:21). The development is explained, "because Canaanites, esp. Phoenicians, were traders. ,,4 A. Haldar, writing on "Canaanites" in the IDB, adds Isa 23:8 and Hos 12:8 (Eng. v 7). Additionally, he cites the inscription of Amenophis II, which contains the expression kyn'n. w in close connection with the maryana, "the Hurrian military aristocracy." Haldar concludes, "If kny'n. w is the 3There is some variation within the Greek manuscripts. See the edition by J. Ziegler for details (Sepruaginra [vol. 13; Duodecim prophetae: 2d cd.; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1967] 315-16). 'BDB (reprinted; Oxford: Clarendon, 1975) 488. FINLEY: SHEEP MERCHANTS 53 designation of a social group, it would most likely be the class of merchants. ,,5 Many recent commentators adopt the LXX reading and interpret the term "Canaanite" as "merchant." Rudolph notes that the MT is "meaningless," as a comparison with the Syriac, Vg, and possibly the Targum shows, and that the Greek points to the correct solution. He explains the development of the MT form as due to the negative attitude toward the "Canaanite" in Zech 14:21.' According to Joyce Baldwin, the reading "has found general acceptance. ,,7 Yet there are some moderns who still prefer the MT. Among them are Feinberg,' Unger,' and Leupold.lo Unger has the strongest statement against the LXX reading: "But this reading, besides being linguistically weak, glibly avoiding a difficult but correct reading, is colorless in its meaning .... " II The issue is stilI open and a detailed examination of the problem is imperative. In what follows I hope to raise some important issues that to my knowledge have not been considered previously and to discuss the different implications of the two readings. THE MT Of first consideration is the MT. Can the passage in question be interpreted in a manner which is exegetically sound? Is the judgment of David Baron true? "But the Hebrew text in this place [11:7 specifically though later applied to I I:I I] needs no emendation or alteration when properly understood. ,,12 Two lines of evidence will be examined. First, what are the various ways in which the verses have been interpreted? Second, is the reading of the MT grammatically feasible? The poor of the flock The expression which is common to both passages, pt::iLt ',~~~, is the easiest to explain. Wherever the MT has been followed, the phrase has been taken to mean "the poor (ones) of the flock." The 'Vol. I (Nashville: Abingdon. 1962) 494. 'w. Rudolph, Haggai- Sacharja 1-8-Sacharja 9-14-Maleachi (KAT 13:4; Gtitersloh: Gtitersloher Verlagshaus Gerd Mohn, 1976) 202. 7 Haggai. Zechariah. Malachi, 180. 'Cod Remembers: A Study of Zechariah (3rd ed.; Portland: Multnomah, 1977) 204-5. 'Zechariah: .Prophet of Messiah's Cion-(Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1963) 194. IOExposition of Zechariah (Columbus: Wartburg. 1956) 210. 11 Zechariah, 194. 12The Visions and Prophecies of Zechariah (London: Morgan & Scott, 1919) 391, n. 2. 54 GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL only controversy is whether the entire flock or only a portion of it is meant. According to the former view, the use of the adjective in construct is for the superlative.13 Wright translates "the most miser able flock" and says, "It is a description not merely of a certain portion of the sheep, but of the flock in general." 14 The Targum on v II points toward the other interpretation: "And they knew, so the humble ones, the poor of the people who had done my wiII, that it was the word of the LORD.,,15 A note in The New Scofield Reference Bible gives a similar interpretation: (11:11) The "poor of the flock" i.e. the "remnant according to the election of grace" (Rom. II :5), are those Jews who did not wait for the manifestation of Christ in glory but believed on Him at His first coming and subsequently. Of them it is said that they "waited upon me," and u'knew.,,16 ' In other words, the flock as a whole rejected the shepherd's ministry, but "the poor (ones) of the flock" accepted him. It is not necessary to decide the issue here. What is important, however, is that the main part of the phrase in question in both verses has a meaning which is obvious to anyone familiar with Hebrew. Yet, the very naturalness of the expression could be deceptive. The easy translation of 1K:liJ '~~~ could obscure any difficulty with the con junctions r;l? and 1;,1 which are used. The particle P? First we wiII treat P? of v 7. At least four different interpreta tions have been given. These may be classified as asseverative, conjunctive, prepositional, and pronominal. The asseverative inter pretation is known from David Kimchi's commentary, which was written about 1300. Kimchi comments: "'And I will feed truly the poor of the flock,' p?-In truth the poor of the flock I found them, when I took them to feed."I' Henderson, a commentator of the last century, adopts this view also. He takes the' as being "redundant" and derives p from the Arabic kwn ("to be"), which "implies reality, "See GKC (2d Eng. ed.; Oxford: Clarendon, 1910) §133g, h. "C. H. H. Wright, Zechar"ah and Hts Prophedes (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1879; reprinted, Minneapolis: Klock & Klock, 1980) 325. "My translation from A, Sperber (ed.), The Btb!e "n Aramak (vol. 3, The Latter Prophets according to Targum Jonathon; Leiden: Brill, 1962). "New York: Oxford University, 1967. 17A, M'Caul (translator), Rabbi' DayI'd K"mcht~ Commentary upon the Prophedes q( Zechar"ah (London: James Duncan, 1837) 121. FINLEY: SHEEP MERCHANTS 55 certainry, or the like, but admits of being variously rendered, accord ing to the context in which it is found.,,18 Taken with the" the meaning would be ~with respect to truth, i.e., truly.,,19 The KB lexicon gives the meaningfiirwahr or wohlan ("truly," "in truth') for P? in Judg 8:7 and I Sam 28:2. A cross reference listed in KB suggests a connection with a possible, though "sehr fraglich," affirma tive ~·".20 The BOB lexicon connects these passages with an idiom "in conversation, in reply to an objection, to state the ground upon which the answer is made.,,21 Additional examples cited are Gen 4:15; 30:15; Judg 11:8; I Kgs 22: 19; and Job 20:2. None of these examples have a structure which is similar to Zech II :7. Wright may be too strong P? when he says that the word "never elsewhere" has the meaning "truly,,,22 but the usage would be unique for a passage with the overall structure of Zech II :7. P? Another explanation takes as a conjunction which intro duces a closer specification of the "flock of slaughter." It is reflected in the NASB translation: "So I pastured the flock doomed to slaughter, hence the afflicted of the flock." Wright describes the P?: reas~n for the use of "The latter designation nN~D '~~~] expresses that wliich is a logical deduction from the very name just :-rrm given to them, TN::/'-n~; for because they were 'a flock of slaughter,' 'slaughtered' and not 'fed' by their shepherds, therefore they were 'the most miserable flock.' ,,23 P? Jerome's Vg takes as a conjunction which evidently refers back to vv 5 and 6. Then the "poor of the flock" is rendered as a vocative: et pascam pecus occisionis propter hoc 0 pauperes gregis.24 The thought is, "and I will pasture the flock of slaughter; on account of this [that is, on account of the wretched conditions described in P? vv 5 and 6] 0 poor ones of the flock." Such a use of conjunctive would be without precedent. A factor which has been overlooked by many is the syntactic P? structure of the first half of v 7. If is a conjunction, then it joins a clause with a verb to a construct noun phrase. A check of Mandel kern's concordance25 convinced me that such a case would be unique. "E. Henderson, The Book of the Twelve Minor Prophets (London: Hamilton, Adams, and Co., 1845) 421. "Henderson, The Twelve, 421. • 2Opp. 466, 482. "P.487. "Zechariah, 578. "Ibid. See also Feinberg, God Remembers, 204. 24 Biblia Sacra ;uxta Vulgalam Versjonern (ed. R. Weber and others; vol. 2; Stuttgart: Wiirltembergische Bibelanstalt, 1969). 2SS. Mandelkern, Veteris Testament; Concordantiae; Hebraicae Qlque Chaldaicae (revised by F. Margolis; Tel Aviv: Schocken, 1977; [reprint of 1925 edition]). 56 GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL The verses that Keil cites as parallels for his rendering "therewith" (Isa 26:14; 61:7; Jer 2:33)'6 are not really parallel syntactically. The P? closest comparison I could find is the frequent expression C~~ i1,i1'. The term Ctt~ is a noun ("utterance"), but the quotation of Yahweh which foli~ws is to be taken as the predicate. Another possibility is to take 11:7 as elliptical: "therefore (I fed) the poor of P? the flock." But there are no other examples of introducing a clause with ellipsis of a verb (or of a nominal predicate). P? A third way in which has been translated in v 7 is as a P? preposition. The particle cannot be used as a preposition, but despite this the Peshi!ta translated: "And I shepherded the small flock for the sake of [me!ul] the assembly of the flock. ,,27 The form me!u/ is usually combined with a demonstrative or the particle de when it P? translates Some editions of the Rabbinic Bible have a notation in the Masora parva that P? is a feminine word (i1:JpJ T'WI?).28 The nota tion is not in the manuscript which is the basis for BHS. According to this interpretation the term is not a conjunction but the preposition' with a second feminine plural suffix. The result is that "the poor of the flock" are addressed directly (as also in the Vg). The KJV apparently followed a similar tradition: "And I will feed the flock of slaughter, even you, 0 poor of the flock." This translation ignores the preposition completely, however. There is also a grammatical prob lem with this view. The vocative noun is a construct phrase of which the governing noun is masculine plural. Therefore there would not be P? proper agreement with as preposition plus feminine pronominal suffix. The particle p The various translations that have been given of v 7 suggest a certain amount of confusion. For v II the possibilities are more limited. The particle p can mean only "so" or "thus" in the present context. It connects the act of breaking the first staff with the realization that there was some relationship to "the word of the LORD." The Syriac does not translate p; otherwise there is no hint of any difficulty that the versions (other than the LXX) had with the passage. Perhaps the unusual word order and the possibility for the 26 Minor Prophets (Commentary on the OT in 10 Volumes by C. F. Keil and F. Delitzseh. 10; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. 1973 [reprint]) 361. 27My translation from The Old Testament in Syriac According (0 the Peshi!ta Version (Part 3, fase. 4, Dodekapropheton-Daniel-Bel-Draeo; Leiden: Brill, 1980). "For example, m7") mN'j:'O (vol. 10, 'lL'y ',n ?Nj:'Tn'; New York: Pardes, 1951). FINLEY: SHEEP MERCHANTS 57 conjunction w to function in' the same sense as Hebrew p led the translator of the Syriac to omit any equivalent rendering. It is the unusual word order (the Hebrew is literally, "and they knew, thus the poor of the flock") that is, however, crucial to the problem. The term p can function in one of two ways. It may serve as a constituent of a clause, usually as the object. An example is a clause of the type: p :J'p~~ 11)~~} ("and Jacob did so." [Gen 39:28]). This cannot be the function of p in Zech II: II. If it were, the objective clause which follows ("that it was the word of Yahweh") would have to clarify the content of p: "And they knew so, that it was the word of Yahweh. ,,29 However, in this usage of p, the particle refers back to something mentioned or implied previously in the context, not forward. In some cases the reference can be both backward and forward, but never forward only (see Isa 20:2; Ezek 12:7). The second function of p is as a conjunction meaning "so" or "thus." But wherever p has this function it is always the first word in the clause, though it may be preceded by the conjunction 1. In other words, the structure of p U'T} points to the meaning of 1;;l as an object, not as a' conjunction. Only two passages might be interpreted as exceptions to this pattern, and both have the verb "to be" as the predicte. They are Exod IO:IO and Amos 5:14, and in both cases the NASB translated p as a conjunction introducing the verb which it follows: Exod 10: I 0 O?I¥.!¥ ;";" P ';:1; Thus may the LORD be with you. Amos 5: 14 oryl~~ 'W~;;J O?f;11:\ • . . m;,' P-';:1" And thus may the LORD ... be with you, Just as you have said! An alternate translation of Exod 10:10 is given by Keil and Delitzsch, "Be it so; Jehovah be with you .... ,,30 In this case p functions as a clause constituent and points back to Moses' statement in v 9. The vacillation on the part of Pharaoh then becomes clear. First, he tells Moses to go and worship Yahweh, but he wants to know who will be going. Moses then says that everyone will go. To this Pharaoh at first assents ("Be it so"), but on reflection he changes his mind ("Not so[!] Go then, you men, and serve Jehovah,,).3! "Cf. the reading by W. H. Lowe, "And they knew that it was so [viz.] that, &c." (The Hebrew Student's Commentary on Zechariah [London: MacMillan, 1882] lOa). 307he Pentateuch (Commentary on the OT in Ten Volumes, I; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1973 [reprint]) 494-95. 31Keil and Delitzsch, The Pentateuch, 495; translation theirs. 58 GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL Similar constructions with the verb il'il are frequent (Gen 1:7, 9, 11, 15,24,30; Exod 10:14; Judg 6:38; 2 Kgs 7:20; 15:12; 2 Chr 1:12). The Vg is similar to the NASB rendering (sic Dominus sit vobiscum), while the LXX and Syriac translate in the same manner as Keil and Delitzsch. The latter translation seems superior because it makes a better connection with v 9 and because it follows the normal word order rule. Amos 5: 14 has been translated in two ways which differ from the PI NASB. The NEB and JB take as an adverb: NEB: that the LORD . . may be firmly on your side. JB: and that Yahweh . . may really be with you. Such a rendering finds some support from the KB lexicon, which classifies p into two entries, one of which can have the meanings "fest dastehend," "richtig," or "wahr." Against it is the 'W~~ which follows, implying "so ... just as you say." Wolff interprets the portion C;;ll:l~ . . . i11il' as a direct quotation of a saying of assurance used' in battle. His rendering of the entire verse is as follows: "Seek good, and not evil, that you may stay alive and (that) it may be so-'Yahweh [God of Hosts] is with you! '-just as you say. ,,32 Grammatically and contextually his sugges tion makes good sense. PI No certain examples of as a conjunction with the verb before it occur in Biblical Hebrew. The construction p 'YT1 most naturally means "and they knew thus," not "and thus they knew." The MT of Zech 11:7 has a reading which is difficult to interpret and which would be grammatically unique. At II: II a reading which contains the very same consonants save the initial , is also unique in its grammatical stucture. Surely there is justification for looking to the LXX reading for any help it might offer. THE LXX For TXlttr '~~~ P7 in v 7 the Greek has ei~ 'trjv Xavaavinv. The translator was obviously baffled by the text. The expression "into the P Canaanite (land)" presupposes a text with joined to the following word. The omission of TXlttr may be due to the translator's lack of understanding of the term "Canaanite." It was inconceivable to him that the shepherd would have done his work "for the Canaanites of the sheep." So he saw a place-name instead. Later hands made the reference to the "land" of Canaan more explicit by the addition of the "H. W. Wolff, Joel and Amos (Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977) 231. The square brackets are his as he takes the expression "God of Hosts" as a later addition. FINLEY: SHEEP MERCHANTS 59 word Yllv. The LXX translators were not familiar with the inter pretation "merchant" for lYl~. For all of the references listed above in this connection the translator either ignored the term (lsa 23:8; Ezek 16:29) or transliterated. In one passage (Job 40:30 [Eng. 41:6]) it was interpreted as "Phoenicians" (<l>OtViKOlV). In v II people are clearly in view, so the Greek translator used the term XavavaiOI ("Canaanites"), reflecting a Vorlage of "lYl~.33 But once again the odious "Canaanites of the flock" was avoided: "And the Canaanites shall know the guarded flock, because it is the word of the Lord." In order to arrive at this reading it was necessary to delete 'IJ~ ("me") and read a construct form as absolute. Possibly 'IJ~ was read as n~ for the direct object, though the word order would be entirely against it. T. Jansma suggested that the Greek Vorlage might have been written with a continuous script with no finalletters.34 That the script had no final forms seems possible, but it is unlikely that it was without word divisions. Word dividers are attested already in Ug aritic texts, and various means of word division are attested throughout the history of Northwest Semitic writing. For some inscriptions, such as those of Sefire/5. continuous script was used. But a Hebrew Biblical manuscript of the second or third century B.C. would surely have had some form of word division. The Qumran texts contain extra space between words. If there was liberty to divide the words it is unlikely that the Greek translator would have had such difficulty with the text. It is often stated that the more difficult textual variant is to be preferred. Unger implies that this rule supports the MT,36 but the opposite is true. Zech 14:21 states that in the future day when God dwells among men as king there will be no more "Canaanite" in the Temple. So how could it be that the prophet envisions the work of the good shepherd as being "for the Canaanites" or that the "Canaanites" would recognize God's word through the prophet? How much more appropriate if those concepts would be ascribed to "the poor of the "The spelling of the gentilic plural alternates between -1m and -iyylm. The latter spelling occurs in C'~":;I~::r (Exod 3: 18). Sometimes the Ketib has the consonants for the spelling ·-iyylm, but the Qere reads -iylm (C"11il~, Esth 4:7). I was unable to locate any examples of a gentilic in construct. This is not unu'sual, considering that gentilics are not common and are adjectives. However, they often take the article, and the form il'llll:l ("her merchants," Isa 23:8) has a pronoun suffix. • • .,. 34"lnquiry into the Hebrew Text and the Ancient Versions of Zechariah ix-xiv," OTS 7 (1950) 100. "See S. Segert, Aitaramiiische Grammatik (Leipzig: VEB Verlag Enzyklopadie, 1975) 58. "Zechariah, 194. 60 GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL flock"? The term "poor of the flock" is not attested elsewhere, but the word "poor" is coupled with "people" (Isa 10:2; 14:32; Ps 72:4). In a manuscript without final forms it would have been a simple, uncon scious process for the words to be divided wrongly in one verse and then influence the other verse by assimilation. The reverse process of changing the Masoretic reading to the Greek reading seems very difficult to accept. Both the MT and LXX readings can be traced back to approxi mately contemporary periods. The MT is supported by all the other ancient versions and is represented in a fragment of a Qumran commentary on Isaiah (4Q163 21). The latter contains parts of two lines quoted from Zech II: II and parts of Isa 30: 1-5. The editor gives the preserved part of line 7 as ;, 7l't'lm "lY p. From the photograph it is clear that the first two words are indeed "lY p with a final nun and a blank space for a word division.37 THE CONTEXT OF ZECH II :4-17 One final issue is the way in which the LXX reading fits into the overall context of Zech II :4-17. The passage is best described as an allegory in which the prophet is first commanded to represent a shepherd who takes positive action on behalf of his suffering flock.'8 After his rejection he is given a new command to represent a "foolish" or "useless" ('71~) shepherd. The question' of the role of the sheep dealers in this passage is interrelated with the role of the other participants. These include Yahweh, the prophet, and the flock. Also of great significance is the relation of Zech II :4-17 to the rest of Zech 9-14. That is a broader contextual question, and it will be treated first. Zech 9-14 has an obvious division into two "burdens" or "oracles" (l'tilm).39 The first burden consists of chaps 9-11. Within these limits ch~p II is clearly distinct from 9-10. There is uncertainty about the reference of 11:1-3, some taking it as a conciusion40 and others as an introduction.4l Perhaps the important elements of both views can be maintained by calling it transitional. 37J. M. Allegro. Qumran Cave 4; 1 (4Q 158-4Q 186) (DJD 5; Oxford: Clarendon. 1968), pI. 8. 38M. Rehm compares the form to Jer 25: 15-29 ("Die Hirtenallegorie Zach 11.4-14." BZ 4 [1960]186). Unger (Zechariah. 191) takes it as a symbolic action which was actually carried out: cf. M. Saeb0. Sacharja 9-14; Untersuchungen von Text und Form (WMANT 34; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1969) 234-52. 391 take the term in the negative sense (cf. P. A. H. deBoer, "An Inquiry into the Meaning of the Term N1!I~." ors 5 [1948] 197-214). "See Baldwin, Haggai. Zechariah, Malachi, 177-79; Rudolph. Sacharia 9·14. 199-200. 41See Feinberg. God Remembers. 197-200.