sin laid to the account of Lachish. It is, of course, possible that this oracle was uttered after Hezekiah had sent tribute to Sennacherib at Lachish (2 K. 1814-16), and that Micah here expresses his judgment concerning that transaction.-14. Therefore, thou givest a parting gift to Moresheth-Gath] This is better than to treat 'Gath' as a vocative,* or to consider Moresheth-Gath as the one addressed,† which necessitates a change of text, or to transpose the preposition and render, "thou shalt give Moresheth as a parting gift to Gath." The address is to the daughter of Zion who is now to dismiss with the proper present one of her villages. The word used here for gift is that employed in 1 K. 916 to designate the dowry given by Pharaoh to his daughter. There was proba

מארשת and מורשת bly an intentional play here on the words

(betrothed). Judah will lose the town and pay tribute besides. The site of Moresheth-Gath can only be conjectured. The form of the name would imply proximity to Gath, but unfortunately Gath's location is doubtful. Moresheth-Gath was probably near the Philistine border; Jerome declares that a small village near Eleutheropolis (Beit-Jibrin) on the east bore the name in his day. This is the region in which Lachish lay. Micah's appellation, "the Morashtite," was probably derived from this place. Much depends upon this interpretation, for otherwise no information is at hand. concerning the prophet's home or origin.-Beth Achzib has become a snare to the kings of Israel], the houses of Achzib. Achzib is not the old Phoenician town (Jos. 1929 Ju. 131),** as might appear from the phrase kings of Israel. Israel here represents Judah as in line 2, and the plural kings is generic. Achzib has been and still is for Israel's king a false hope, a brook whose waters have dried up. Cf. Je. 1518. The play on words here is between achzib and achzab. The exact site of Achzib has so far eluded discovery. Jos. 15 locates it in the Shephēlah of Judah, in the vicinity of Libnah, Keilah and Mareshah. How so comparatively unimportant a place as Achzib evidently was (for it plays no part elsewhere on the pages of Hebrew history) could have been a snare to

* We.1.

So Hal..

† So We., Now., Marti.

§ So Hi., We., Now., Marti, van H..

Cf. Ew. and Ro., who find here an allusion to both towns, the northern and the southern.

the kings of Israel must remain a mystery. The view of Hitzig, that Achzib had been in the possession of Philistia since the reign of Ahaz and that Judah had always entertained the hope of its recovery which is now doomed to disappointment, is wholly without foundation.

Str. IV. continues in the elegiac strain, and reaches its climax with an announcement of the doom of exile.-15. I will yet bring the conqueror to thee, O inhabitant of Mareshah] The play here is on yôresh and Mareshah. Even Mareshah, rejoicing in its name, a possession, shall noi escape the hand of the conqueror, the dispossessor. The modern Merash, two miles S. of Beit-Jibrin, answers the geographical requirements for the site of Mareshah as indicated here and in Jos. 15" and by Eusebius, who locates it two miles S. of Eleutheropolis. But the excavators have thrown doubt upon its identity with the ancient Mareshah (v. i.). It is evidently to be distinguished from Moresheth-Gath. The places with which the prophet has been concerned in this oracle are thus seen to be in all probability those in the immediate vicinity of his own home, places with which he had been familiar from childhood. They were scarcely of any significance in the great world, but to him and his fellow-villagers they represented home, country and religion, all that they held dear.-Forever is Israel's glory to perish] M, unto Adullam shall Israel's glory come, defies interpretation; that most generally accepted is, the nobility of Israel shall take refuge in a cave. Cf. 1 S. 221 f.. Adullam, perhaps the modern ‘Id-elmije, six miles NE. of Beit-Jibrin, was originally the seat of a Canaanitish prince (Jos. 1215), but was captured by Israel and incorporated in the territory of Judah (Jos. 1535). Of the various attempts to improve the text, that of Cheyne seems the best and is here adopted. The glory of Israel is probably the wealth and power of Judah which constitute the seal of Yahweh's approval upon her.— 16. Make thyself bald and shave thee for thy darlings] Zion is here addressed as a mother and bidden to go into mourning for the loss of her beloved children. Cf. Je. 3120. Reference is had to the cities and villages she has lost, with their inhabitants.-Enlarge thy baldness like the vulture's] The vulture is distinguished from the eagle by its bare head and neck. Shaving of the head was a common

mourning custom. Cf. Am. 810 Is. 32. Originally instituted, in all probability, as a sacrificial offering to the departed spirit, it later came to be obnoxious to the sensitive religious conscience of the prophets, who would permit no divided allegiance among the followers of Yahweh. Such practices were therefore prohibited by the Deuteronomic Code (Dt. 14'; cf. Lv. 215). The fact that this verse summons Judah to such a rite, even figuratively, attests its origin in days prior to the enactment of the Deuteronomic law.* This verse, moreover, seems to grow right out of the preceding context and so adds strength to the argument for Micah's authorship of this whole passage (110-16).—For they will go into exile from thee] Thus ends in familiar but terrible fashion the lamentation over Judah's approaching punishment. The warning note sounded first of all by Amos and Hosea in northern Israel now finds its echo in the southern kingdom. With this picture of an invading army, giving the advance in detail, village by village, is to be compared the similar passage, Is. 1028-32

10. ] The location of Gath is uncertain; the OT. data are too fragmentary to make identification possible; nor are the Assyrian or Egyptian records any more satisfactory. The two sites most attractive are Beit-Jibrin and Tell-es-Safi. In either case Gath was the nearest of the five chief Philistine towns to the border of Judah. The excavations at Tell-es-Safi by Mr. Bliss in 1899 unfortunately yielded little, the greater part of the mound being occupied by the modern village and two graveyards, under which excavation is absolutely prohibited. The town stood "as a natural fortress between the plain and the rolling country." The origin of the town goes back as far as the seventeenth century B.C. according to Bliss. Cf. F. J. Bliss and R. A. Stewart Macalister, Excavations in Palestine During the Years 1898-1900 (1902), pp. 28-43 and 62 ff.. Jerome says that Gath lay on the road between Eleutheropolis and Gaza; hence Hpt. suggests 'Arâq el-munšiyah, less than two hours from Tellel-Ḥesy.-] For the form, cf. (Je. 418 75) and ' (Is. 6o).— 17] This and I K. 32 are the only cases of and an infin. abs. modifying a finite vb., and in both cases the neg. follows the regular rule for and other negatives in standing immediately before the finite form.] Ophrah, the home of Gideon, in Manasseh (Ju. 611. 24 827. 32) is out of the question as too far removed from the scene of Micah's thought. Another Ophrah, mentioned in Jos. 1823 and 1 S. 1318, is usu ally identified with Tayyibeh, five miles N. of Bethel. But this latter, * So even Marti, who assigns vv. 10-15 to a later hand.

lying outside of Judah on the north, seems too remote to be satisfactory here. The same objection holds for the reading 'Bethel,' if the northern town is meant, which lies ten miles from Jerusalem and about twenty-five miles from the region of Micah's home. For those who incline toward this reading, it is safer to regard the Bethel referred to here as the one listed among the towns of the Negeb in 1 S. 3027 Jos. 1530 (B); cf. Jos. 19' 1 Ch. 430. The suggestion of GASM. that our 'Ophrah is reflected in the name of the Wady el-Ghufr, lying south of Beit-Jibrin, is most attractive.—›nwhòn] This form is probably due to a desire to pun on the name Philistia. Qr., whɔnn, is probably due to the singular forms of v. ".-] For a similar lack of agreement in gender and number, Kö. § 6s cites Je. 1320; but there the text is exceedingly doubtful, for the Qr., many mss. and the Vrss. make the agreement regular.-nw] Apposition, Ges. 1; Kö. § 2850-DDD] is here unintelligible. By connecting ' with the previous line (v. s.), as is there furnished with its necessary complement and this line is relieved of a troublesome element. Dp (v. s.) is a noun conjecturally restored on the basis of Assyrian supûru, ‘enclosure' (of a walled city, e. g., Erech); v. Dl.HWB., 509, Muss-Arnolt, 779.—] For the sense take away, carry off, cf. Ez. 31.—iny Don] There is nothing in the immediate context to which the pron. > can refer. It is easy to account for a between two n's as a dittog. of n in the old script. Furthermore, ¬¬y is dπ., yields no sense in A, and was evidently not present to the eye of GLS. Prefixing the 's restored from the form yap is recovered without difficulty, and may be derived from pop, station, post, or from ppp, standing-ground.—12. пp] The Meroth in upper Galilee which Josephus mentions (Wars, III, 3, 1) is certainly not meant here. But no southern locality bearing that name is available.-] According to M, must be given the meaning verily, for there is no subordinate relation to the preceding or following context. 'n means writhe in pain and is wholly unsuitable before a. - For the sg. as in , cf. Taylor, Cyl. of Sennacherib, col. 3, Il. 22 f., "the exit of the great gate of his city I caused to break through." -13. Dh] For other cases of the masc. form in an address to a fem. subj., cf. Ges. 110k, Kö. § 205. It is better pointed as an inf. abs. having the force of the imv.. The translation bind is reinforced by the Assy. ratamu = wrap, bind (v. Muss-Arnolt, 991) and the Arab. equivalent which in the fourth form tie a thread upon the finger as a reminder.— non'] Van H. renders, the beginning of the expiation of, etc., but the meaning expiation for 'n is not attested earlier than Zc. 141, a postexilic passage, and is closely related to the late priestly use of the word in the sense sin-offering.—14. on”] i. e., the dowry given with the bride by her father. Cf. document C of the Assuan Papyri, published by Sayce & Cowley, where the custom is witnessed to as current among the Jews

=

of the Dispersion as early as the sixth century B.C.. Cf. Code of Hammurabi which evidences the same practice in Babylonia as early as 1900 B.C.. The use of the term here is suggested by the similarity of na to nand, betrothed; it is one of the earliest allusions to the existence of the custom in Israel. Cf. Ju. 112-15 Gn. 29. 29-y] After ¡n more common preps. are and; perhaps by is used here in the sense with, along with.— nan] Analogous names cited by GASm. are Atroth-Shophan (Nu. 323. ), Chisloth-Tabor (Jos. 1912. 18), Iye-Abarim (Nu. 334 1.), and Helkath (Jos. 192).—15. ÿ] Not again, but still, even yet. The change toy (with ) makes necessary corresponding changes in the remainder of the line which yields reasonable sense as it stands.—N] For other cases of omission of N, v. Ges. 74k.-] The modern Merâsh seems to date no further back than Roman times, if we may judge by the slight depth of debris upon the site. The actual site of this ancient town may be represented by the modern Tell-Sandaḥannah, one mile SE. of Merâsh. The remains of an ancient town are evident there, and it is no uncommon thing for a town name to migrate to a new site along with the inhabitants, as, e. g., in the case of 'Umm Lakis. Cf. F. J. Bliss and R. Stewart Macalister, op. cit., pp. 67 ƒ..—] The correction to by (v. s.) removes one of the grounds for changing toy in 1. 1 (v. s.), and for supposing ¬¬ to represent the name of a town (We., Now.).

84. The Oppression of the Poor (21-11).

In six strs. in which the elegiac strain is predominant, Micah denounces the tyranny of the rich and warns them of coming judgment. Str. I, the prophet speaks: Woe to those who plot night and day to despoil their neighbours of houses and lands. Str. II, Yahweh speaks: For this reason I am about to bring upon this people a humiliating and unbearable yoke. Str. III, Yahweh continues: Then the wail of the mourner will arise among you, 'Our land is allotted to others; we are wholly undone!' Str. IV, the rich oppressors speak: Cease prating of such things. We are immune from calamity. Is Yahweh impotent, or can he mean anything but good to his own people? Str. V, Yahweh retorts: But ye are destroyers of my people, robbing and plundering them and driving the women and children into slavery. Str. VI, Yahweh pronounces sentence: Rise and begone! Because of your sins, ye shall be hopelessly destroyed.