244 LECTURES AND ESSAYS [1870- 



(Neh. vi. 10 sqq.) . There was even a certain mixture with 

 idolatrous nations (Ezra ix.). But there is no polemic in 

 the post-exile prophets or in Ezra and Nehemiah against 

 idolatry, and such a national idolatry as is here depicted 

 seems inconceivable at this epoch. Here, too, Hengsten- 

 berg allegorises : &quot; This is nothing more than Zechariah s 

 usual (?) mode of depicting the one main idea. The 

 people are led away by deceivers who draw them away 

 from the source of all truth, the revealed will of God.&quot; 



8. Most complete is the departure from the historical in 

 terpretation in ch. xi. Here the symbolical actions do not 

 in any sense represent, according to Hengstenberg, Keil, 

 etc., the prophet s own activity, but in general Jahveh s 

 dealings with His people. The three herdsmen are the 

 civil authorities, the priests and prophets deposed from 

 their office during our Lord s ministry on earth (Hgstbg. 

 ch. iv. 28 sqq.), or the rulers of the three world monarchies 

 (Keil). The &quot;month&quot; remains a stumbling-block, and 

 Keil can only suggest that ten days are given for the 

 destruction of each shepherd. What follows is referred 

 directly to the rejection of Christ by the Jewish people 

 and the calamities following. Finally, the foolish shepherd 

 who follows the rejection is, to Hengstenberg, collectively 

 the bad rulers of the Jewish nation, to Keil the master of 

 the world-power. This is not the place for a full discussion 

 of these interpretations ; but every one sees that by thus 

 shutting out the prophet s own person and age, and 

 finding a direct instead of a typical Messianic interpreta 

 tion, the commentators just quoted lose themselves in the 

 usual confusing alternation between the Kingdom of 

 God in the universal sense and the literal nation of 

 Israel. Part of the prophecy applies to the one, part to 

 the other. This in the by -going. But what must be 

 admitted from the instances just adduced is, that if the 

 concrete colouring of the picture is to be interpreted 

 historically that is, according to the analogy of prophecy 

 in general the prophet must have stood before the exile. 



