are come to fray them, to cast out the horns of the Gentiles, which lifted up the horn over the land of Judah to scatter it." Zechariah informs us, that it was the Lord, Jehovah, who shewed him this portion of the vision. It should seem that the interpreting angel was not commissioned to raise the images presented to the prophet's mind, but only to point them out and give the explanation. The prior and higher office the Lord reserved to himself. The manner, in which the prophet expresses himself, indicates, that Jehovah was present, as I apprehend he was, through the whole of the vision, in the person of the Angel, who bears that title in the first part. That He had the power to affect the prophet's mind, as he saw fit, is certain; that it was consistent with his office and character, as patron and protector of God's people, to do it, is also certain, and that he would condescend to do it, is no less certain, since he deigned even to perform the office of interpreter; for although at the outset of the vision the interpreting angel said, in answer to Zechariah's first question, "I will shew thee what these be," yet it was the Angel of Jehovah, that is to say, Jehovah himself, who took up the interpretation and conveyed it to the prophet. But that the Lord is the person, to whom

Zechariah here applies for a solution of his doubts and from whom he receives that solution, I neither affirm nor think. For we find, that not only in the first part, but in every instance throughout the vision, where the prophet requests information, except in the single instance of the measuring angel, his request is addressed to the interpreter and from him the information is received; whereas during the absence of the interpreter, which occurs in the third and fourth parts, he never requests information at all. Hence we may conclude, that he intended us to collect from the general course of his narrative, that upon this occasion also his question was proposed and the answer received in the usual way.

Our english version instead of "workmen" has rendered the original word "carpenters," in which it has followed the Septuagint; Vitringa gives us "smiths," and Dr. Blaney, following Michaelis, has translated it "ploughmen." I have copied Archbishop Newcome in rendering it by a term of wider signification, workmen. Such is the simple and general meaning of the original word; and when it is used in any one of the particular senses above mentioned, it receives it only from the context*.

* Recte et vere hæc sub unam, artificis, artis periti, notionem alii jam collegerunt, &e. Michaelis Supplementa ad Lex. Heb. p. 962.

Zechariah does not ask, who the workmen are or what they signify; but that question is involved in the other, "What come these to do?” for the actions of those artificers must determine their character and office. The answer accordingly, after repeating with strong emphasis by way of introduction what had been said concerning the horns, informs the prophet that these are come to fray or scare them away.

Dr. Blaney* has expressed himself, as much offended with the image of fraying or scaring

*The following is Dr. Blaney's version. "And these are come sharpening their coulter, for to use upon the horns of the nations." Three different steps are taken to arrive at this version. By the first the letter Resh in the 7 is changed into Daleth; the change being grounded upon the great similarity of the letter admitted to that removed, and justified by the authority of the LXX. By the second, the vowel points of the word are displaced and others substituted. By the third, the word is deprived of the meaning commonly ascribed to it in the Lexicons and

versions.

To the first thing proposed it is sufficient to reply, that conjectures however happy or probable cannot be admitted into the text of scripture; and that the authority of the septuagint alone is far from being sufficient to justify an alteration in the hebrew text; and far less so in a case, where their own is liable to objection. To the second, no objection would lie, if there were any necessity for it, or a considerable advantage accrued from it. But who will deny, that to fray or scare away horns, q. d. horned animals, is quite as good and congruous a figure, as to sharpen a coulter to use upon them? As to the third step, it is to be supposed, that when Dr. Blaney denies to the word the sense of dejecit, he means to include in that denial the senses of jecit and projecit, which are so near akin to the former

away horns; and doubtless if they had appeared, as he seems to suppose, rising out of the earth, it would be incongruous enough. But if we admit the horns to have been on the heads of animals,

and of which the latter is the very sense, in which our translators have here rendered the word. In support of his denial he cites with approbation the observation of Taylor in his concordance, that "coming from, the hand, it may signify to exercise the hand vigorously in any way according to the sense and scope of the passage." But without stopping to shew, that the opposite derivation is equally easy and probable, and is indeed maintained by Cocceius, Simonis, and Parkhurst, though it be left by Michaelis "in incertis," it is obvious to remark, that instead of taking due advantage of Taylor's observation, Dr. Blaney is contented to give the general signification of the word, without applying it to the scope and tenor of the place;" according to which, being connected with the mention of a coulter, it should specifically be rendered, to plough up the horns, an expression little different in effect from casting them down, as might be done with equal facility "by a vigorous exercise of the hand" in many other ways. Dr. Blaney cites Jeremiah, 1. 14, which when examined seems to make against him. The following is his own version of it. "Order ye against Babylon round about, all ye that bend the bow; shoot[] at her; spare not the arrow." Doubtless that which they are exhorted not to spare, is that, upon which they are called vigorously to exercise the hand; and accordingly Dr. Blaney himself applying the word to the scope and sense of the place, in his translation of Jeremiah, actually renders it "shoot," that is to say, cast forth, projicite, a sense which in his note on Zechariah he denies to the word. It must however be confessed that is a word of not very frequent occurrence, except in the Hiphil form, in which it signifies to confess, to praise. In Kal it is sometimes used for the casting of lots; but since they were cast down or out of the vessels, that contained them, this use of the word plainly decides its true signification and vindicates the received translation of the passage.

and to be put by a figure for the beasts themselves, the incongruity vanishes away*. Moreover, if the workmen had been specifically carpenters, smiths, or ploughmen, furnished with proper instruments for the demolition of the horns, it is likely at least, that we should have had some account of their operations; whereas, if we understand that they came only to fray them, the silence of the prophet, as to their doing so, is explained by the facility and readiness of the act; since while the angel was speaking, the workmen would be advancing; and the beasts alarmed at their approach would take to flight, each pursued by his proper workman.

Thus the horns of the Gentiles, which had lifted up the horn, haughtily shaking the sceptre of arbitrary power, over the land of Judah to scatter it, by violence, injustice, and oppression, are represented to be scared away and cast out, driven abroad, like "the chaff of the summer threshing floors, so that no place was found for themt."

*The word in the hiphil form is applied to the scaring away of animals in Deut. xxviii. 26, and Jeremiah vii. 33. In Judges viii. 12 it is applied to the panic and tumultuous rout of the kings of Midian and their army before Gideon and the Israelites. Our translators have there rendered it "discomfited" in the text and terrified in the margin.

+ Daniel, ii, 35.