1And it came to pass in the eleventh year, in the third [month], on the first of the month, that the word of Jehovah came to me, saying: 2Son of man, say to Pharaoh, the king of Egypt, and to his tumult, To whom art thou like in thy 3greatness? Behold, Asshur [was] a cedar tree upon Lebanon, beautiful of foliage, and a shadowing thicket, and high of stature, and between the clouds was his 4top. Waters made him become great, the flood made him high, with its streams it went round about its planting, and it sent forth its canals to all the trees of 5the field. Therefore his stature became higher than all the trees of the field, and his branches became many [great], and his foliage-branches [boughs] became long, from many waters in his spreading himself forth. In his branches nested 6all the fowls of heaven, and under his boughs every living thing of the field 7brought forth, and in his shadow dwelt all the many nations. And he became beautiful in his greatness, in the length of his twigs [shoots], for his root was on 8many waters. Cedars darkened him not in the garden of God; cypresses were not like his branches, and plane trees were not like his foliage-branches [boughs]; 9all wood in the garden of God was not like him in his beauty. Beautiful had I made him in the multitude of his shoots; and all the trees of Eden, which were 10in the garden of God, envied him.—Therefore, thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Because thou becamest high in stature, and he gave his top even to between the 11clouds, and his heart raised itself in his height; Therefore will I give him into the hand of the mighty one of the heathen; he will do, do to him: in [on account of] 12his wickedness I drove him out. And strangers hewed him down, the violent ones of the heathen, and left him upon the mountains; and in all the valleys his shoots fell, and his foliage-branches [boughs] were broken in all hollows of the earth; and all the nations of the earth went down out of his shadow and left 13him. On his ruins all the fowls of heaven alight, and on his boughs is every living creature of the field. 14To the end that none of the trees of the waters become lofty in their stature, nor give their top up between the clouds, and that no drinkers of water should remain standing by themselves in their height; for they are all given to death, to the underground, among the children of men, to those who go down to the grave. 15Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, In the day of his going down to hell [sheol] I caused to mourn [I made a mourning]; I veiled on account of him the flood, and stayed its streams, and there were many waters held back; and I made Lebanon dark over him, and all the trees of the field sank in weakness over him. At the sound of his fall 16I made the heathen quake, in that I made him go down to hell with those that go down to the grave; and all the trees of Eden, the choice and good of Lebanon, all drinkers of water, comforted themselves in the underground. 17They also went down with him to hell, to be pierced through with the sword, namely, those who, his arm, dwelt in his shadow among the heathen 18nations. To whom, then, art thou like in glory and in greatness among the trees of Eden? And thou art cast down with the trees of Eden to the underground; in the midst of the uncircumcised shalt thou lie with those pierced through by the sword. This is Pharaoh and all his tumult. Sentence of the Lord Jehovah.
Eze_31:8.
Êõðáñéóóïé ôïéáõôáé ïὐê ἐãåíçèçóáí ἐí ô
.
ðáñáäåéóù ô
.
Öåïõ ê
.
ðéôõåò
—Vulg.: Cedrinon … altiores … abietes non adæquaverunt summitatem ejus—(Another read.:
ëôàøúéå
or with
á
.)
Eze_31:9. Sept.:
äéá ô
.
ðëçèïò ô
.
êëáäùí áὐôïõ
.
Ê
.
ἐæçëùóáí
…
ôçò ôñõöçò ô
.
Èåïõ
. Vulg.: quoniam speciosum feci … et multis condensisque frondibus … omnia ligna voluptatis—
Eze_31:10. ...
ἐäùêêò ô
.
ἀñ÷çí óïõ
…
ê
.
åἰäïí ἐí ôù
̣
ὑøùèçíáé áὐôïí
Vulg.: … sublimatus est … summitatem suam virentem atque condensam.
Eze_31:11.
ê
.
ðáñåäùêá áὐôïí
…
ἀñ÷ïíôïò ἐèíùí
,
ê
.
ἐðïéçóåí ô
.
ἀðùëåéáí áὐôïõ
. (Other read:
ëøùòå àéì
.)
Eze_31:14. Vulg.: Quam ob rem non elevabuntur … inter nemorosa atque frondosa. (Other read.:
àֵìéäí
fortes eorum: sibi, super se,
òìéäí
. For
àì éåøãé
, there is a reading
àú é×
.)
Eze_31:16.
åἰò ëáêêïí Ê
.
ðáñå÷áëïõí áὐôïí
…
ô
.
îõëá ôçò ôñõöçò ê
.
ô
.
ἐêëåêôá
—qui descendebant in locum. Et consolata sunt … ligna voluptatis egregia et prælara—
Eze_31:17. …
ἐí ôñáõìáôéáéò ìá÷áéñáò
,
ê
.
ôï óðåñìá áὐôïõ ðáíôåò ïἱ
…
ἐí ìåóù ô
.
æùçò áὐôùí ἀðùëïíôï
. Nam et … descendent … et brachium uniuscvjusque sedebit sub—(Another read.:
éֵùáå
,
éֵøãå
.)
Eze_31:18.
ὡìïéùèçò
;
Êáôáâçèé ê
.
êáôáâéâáóèçôé
…
îõëùí ôçò ôñõöçò
…
ê ðáí ô
.
ðëçöïò ôçò ἰó÷õïò áὐôïõ
—Cui assimilatus es, O inclyte atque sublimis inter ligna voluptatis? Ecce … cum lignis voluptatis—
EXEGETICAL REMARKS
Egypt (Pharaoh) and Assyria.
The whole chapter is taken up with this prophetical allegory, which the indication of time in Eze_31:1 places not quite two months later than Eze_30:20 sq. (Schmieder: therefore one month and eight days before the conquest of Jerusalem). In accordance with the antithesis there, a highly poetical parallel now follows, which might work in a more powerful manner upon hearers and readers, as it was taken from the still fresh experience of his contemporaries; for in 606 Nineveh had been laid prostrate by the combined attack of the Babylonians and Medes, and the kingdom which had domineered in Asia above five centuries had reached its end. The year after that was the year of the battle at Carchemish; and thus had the fate of Assyria become palpable shortly before the calamity which was threatening Egypt. Comp. besides the juxtaposition of Assyria and Egypt elsewhere, Isa_7:18; Isa_27:13; Jer_2:36; Hos_12:2 [1]; Zec_10:10.
Eze_31:2. The commencement is made properly by the question which is addressed to Pharaoh and his tumult (
äָîåֹï
, see at Eze_30:10; Eze_29:19), in the answer to which the prophet sets forth a prognostication for himself and his people. Hengst.: “The matter has respect not to an opinion, but to a real resemblance.” Hitzig limits the reference to the “official Egypt,” being that “which made tumultuous noise in the land, which had something to say and to order; the governing classes and ranks (Isa_3:2-3), in contrast to the quiet people in the land (Psa_35:20), who keep silence and obey.” According to Schmieder, the question calls for the answer: No one! “Thou art incomparable, alone of thy kind. This was also the feeling of Pharaoh Hophra. But Ezekiel,” etc.—
ðּåֹãֶì
(along with
ëáåã
in Eze_31:18), not = “strength,” but also not precisely: fancied greatness huge self-elation (Raschi), as at Isa_10:12 of Assyria, for Egypt’s very ancient culture already gave him still a real precedence, and in other respects also placed him before Assyria.
Eze_31:3-9
. Assyria’s Glory
Eze_31:3. Behold, a call to attention, introducing the answer which the divine word has to give. Hengst.: “the future in a historical dress, as at Ezekiel 19 the history of Jehoahaz and Jehoiachim.”—
àַùּׁåּø
(comp. Eze_27:6) is taken by Ewald for a definite kind of cedar, the highest of its kind; against which compare the convincing proof of Hitzig. Häv. also justly remarks against the construction of the word, as an adjective, that the most distinguished characteristic for a cedar tree is the accompanying designation: upon Lebanon; comp. besides, Eze_17:3. It is a common image for people of great might, princes. The Sept. renders
àֶøֶæ
by
êõðáñéóóïò
.—Because
çֹøֶùׁ
, “thickness,” may signify a forest, Hengst. translates here (taking
îöì
as partic. Hiphil from
öìì
), “shading the forest” or wood. The representation is carried out farther
òָðָó
, as well as by between the clouds, etc.; also by
÷åֹîָä
(from
÷åí
, “stature”)
âְáַäּ
.—Upon
òַáֹúִéí
, see at Eze_19:11; on
öַîֶּøֶú
, comp. Eze_17:3.
Eze_31:4. Explanation of such growth.—What is said of the waters, that they made him become great, fits too well to the image of the cedar for one to be able to get something still better by a reference to the description of paradise (as Häv.), or by bringing into account the situation of Nineveh, which was important for the history of Assyria, with the Tigris on the west, the Zabatos (Lykos) on the south, with its neighbouring stream Bumodus on the east, and the brook Khosr on the north.—Still more, the flood (not the rain: comp. Isa_44:14) contributed to the prosperity. The designation, therefore, previously, of the Lebanon was epitheton ornans.
úְּäåֹí
is the water-treasure in the depths pouring itself forth in springs, etc. Hitzig: image of the multitude of men flowing together into Assyria, on the basis of which the political power rose. More correctly Hengst.: “the water and the flood denote what the world calls good fortune, the divine blessing.”—
àֶúÎ
, either: with, or taken accusatively: what concerns.—Hence
úäåí
is here kept feminine; the streams are those of the flood, and the masculine
äֹìְêְ
, which is likewise to be referred to the flood, is justified after this manner, that
úäåí
can also be used as a masculine; and the masculine in the present case, as Hengst. remarks, is the more suitable, being preceded by
îéí
.—The planting (Eze_17:7) can scarcely be referred, with Hengst., through the fem.
îèòָäּ
, to Assyria as a tree; but is conceived of with reference to the flood, whether it might be because this had a share in the prosperity spoken of, or, which the
ñáéáú äìê
recommends, because it streams around this cedar-planting, the place on which it grows. The
úְּòָìåֹú
, first coming into consideration in the second line, are to be understood of the overflowings of the water-fulness that rises up (
òìä
), just as the all trees of the field are distinguished from the cedar tree described; and this, in Eze_31:5, is raised into prominence over against them. Hengst. takes the subjects to be designated by the expression; Hitzig applies it to other lands and princes. Of the inhabitants of Egypt we are as little to think as, with Rosenmüller, of the Nile.
Eze_31:5.
òַìÎëֵּï
, from his overflow of water his greater height than all the trees finds its explanation, Eze_19:11 (
âáäà
, Aram, for
âáää
)—(
ñøòôä
, Aram. for
ñòôä
, with
ø
inserted).—
ôְàøֹúָéå
, under which must here especially be understood the fruit-bearing ones, Eze_17:6.—
áְּùַׁìְּçåֹ
, Hengst.: “because in his time of shooting he had many waters.” [Häv.: “at his sending forth, namely, the twigs on all sides.” Tautology. Vulg. connects it with Eze_31:6.]
Eze_31:6. Eze_17:23. The closing words give the signification of the figure (Dan_4:9). “Bird” and “living thing,” in contrast to domestic creatures, the Assyrians themselves. The imperfect
éֵùׁáåּ
expresses, in contradistinction to the preceding perfects, the incomplete, the continuous, the progressive. [Ewald: “sat gladly all the many,” etc.]—
ëìÎâåéñ øáéí
, Bunsen: all great peoples (?); Keil: all sorts of great nations; Rosenm.: the entirety of many peoples.
Eze_31:7.
á
, through, on account of.—Eze_17:6.
Eze_31:8 carries still higher the pre-eminent glory brought prominently out in Eze_31:5, through the diversified comparison and the designation “in the garden of God,” on which comp. Eze_28:12. That
ìֹàÎòְַîָîֻçåּ
(to “darken” = excel) separates this nearer designation from
àøæéí
, is very impressive (Häv.): even such as were found in paradise. Hitzig: “in an eminent sense, planted by God, Gen_2:9; Num_24:6.” What still has not been expressed is more distinctly indicated in Eze_31:9, that what God had done to Assyria even transcended the trees of paradise, therefore the eminent divine planting was even more marked in the case of Assyria. The paradise-creation was, after all, only nature, symbolizing grace, consequently might be the similitude for a state-creation, without, however, being like the latter, as little as also the most glorious trees themselves. Every tree, namely in this, in a natural respect, so that the tree of life and the tree of knowledge (Genesis 2.), as being of a spiritual nature, are exempted, and the simply parabolical allusion to Eden and to the garden of paradise is clear. [Hengst. makes the totality of the great men of the earth as stately trees in the garden of God as a counterpart of paradise, since all human greatness has its origin in God. Klief. (Raschi) regards the garden of God directly as “the world-planting,” since all peoples and kingdoms of the world have been planted as trees by God. Grot.: in Babylonia, where formerly paradise stood. Osiander: no king of the people of God was like him!]—[“This parabolical representation, as formerly in the case of Tyre, Ezekiel 28 combines the historical with the figurative. While the cedar that represents the king of Babylon is called a cedar of Lebanon, it is presently transferred in the prophet’s imagination to the land of primeval beauty and perfection, the Eden in which was the garden that God had planted. There this cedar is described as growing and flourishing, till it overtopped in magnificence and beauty all the trees around it. … But it was only that it might afford another specimen of that instability and transitoriness which belong to all on earth, when the good bestowed by Heaven is abused to purposes of selfishness, and the creature begins to thrust himself into the place of his Creator.”—P. F.]
Eze_31:9. This “beauty” is here explained as having been made by God, as a historical creation act (
òùéúéå
), and expresses, while at the same time bringing the similitude to a close, the impression which the striking elevation of the Assyrian grandeur was fitted to produce.—That the trees of Eden, as in the larger sense they are called (in respect to local position), should be designated as those which belonged to the garden of God, distinguishes them still more; it is an ascension. Kliefoth takes “trees of Eden” freely, as equivalent to “trees of beauty,” lovely trees. That more is meant by the expression, while still paradise is thought of merely in the way of similitude, appears from Eze_31:16.
Eze_31:10-14
. The Judgment executed on Assyria.
Eze_31:10. This verse transfers us into the midst of the things already in fact brought to pass. We might render
ëä àîø
: thus said to him, etc.—
ìëï
: He who made the Assyrian so beautiful, even He, announced to him the overthrow that should take place, because of what he made out of himself.—The whole passage expresses the cause of the judgment of Jehovah upon Assyria, namely, that with such a glory from God (Eze_31:5; Eze_31:3) the position of the heart was not in correspondence; there was not humility in all the greatness, but high-mindedness on account of it. The commencing address, Thou, in the life-like character of the representation, becomes changed into a declaration respecting him—and he.—
åְøָí×
, Deu_8:14. Only in conformity with the gift, not in accordance with the grace. Comp. Eze_31:14.
Eze_31:11. Here the sentence of judgment, as just going to be pronounced for the first time, is, by the use of the imperfect, placed more distinctly before us. Hengst: “which was the more suitable, as the like in Egypt was shortly to be repeated.”—
àֵì ðּåֹéִí
is Nebuchadnezzar, “the mighty” (
àåּì
), not God. [Hitzig:
àַéִì
, ram, for prince, champion, under which Cyaxares is to be thought of.]—What he will do to him discovers itself in what follows; it will be nothing but doing; for Asshur it remained merely to suffer.—
âֵּøַùְׁúִּéäåּ
Piel, with reference to his paradisiacal glory (Gen_3:24). The perfect agrees with the quieter mode of speech.
Eze_31:12. As what was said last has taken place, there is now by means of the historical tenses a narration; consequently the execution of the pronounced judgment carried out. (Others make it future, with application now to Egypt, now to Assyria.)—Eze_30:12; Eze_30:11.—
ðָèַùׁ
is: “to let go,” therefore either: to let him lie (Hengst.), or: to push away, to throw down (Eze_29:5). Throwing down is already indicated in the hewing, and is expressed through the “falling;” and on the other hand, “the leaving” is again resumed at the close, while it is extended to “all peoples.” The “mountains” prepare for the “valleys,” and the “falling,” the “being broken” in all hollows (Eze_6:3). Still, in its overthrow, the greatness as well as lofty elevation of this cedar tree is vividly displayed.—
åַéֵøְãåּ
abides closely by the image, according to Eze_31:6, partly of birds which had nested in its branches, partly also of beasts which had brought forth under its boughs, which, according to Eze_31:12, had its place on the mountains, so that in both respects the “going down out of his shadow” is clear, and there is no need, with Hitzig, to read
åַéִּãְּãåּ
, from
ðãã
, to fly, for which
òַîִּéí
would otherwise present no obstacle; but here, as at Eze_31:6, the reality at the close breaks through the figure.
Eze_31:13. If
îִ÷ּåֹì îַôַּìְúּåֹ
in Eze_31:16 refers to
òַìÎîַôַּìְúּåֹ
here (Eze_26:15; Eze_26:18; Eze_27:27), there is no necessity, with Raschi, Kimchi, and later expositors, to think of the substitution of the image of a corpse (carcase, Jdg_14:8), and of eagles, ravens, and other beasts of prey which rend and gnaw the members of Assyria, signified by his boughs (Hitzig); but
îַôֶּìֶú
, from
ðôì
, is with Gesen. simply: the fallen or hewed-down stem, which is, as it were, a living ruin (Hengst.).—
éִùְׁëְּðåּ
, otherwise than at Eze_17:23, as is shown also by the immediately following and on his boughs is; since those who had nested and brought forth there (Eze_31:6) now betook themselves away from him, taking, perhaps, whatever they could of his fruit, reaping the greatest possible advantage from the mighty catastrophe.
Eze_31:14, by way of conclusion, expresses the divine intention, the practical aim, the moral, and that with respect to Egypt. To the end that (since Eze_31:12-13 may be regarded as parenthetical expansions) can be connected with Eze_31:11.—
òֲöֵéÎîַéִí
signifies primarily: those standing on the waters, what afterwards is more nearly indicated by
ùֹׁúֵé îַéִí
(
ùúä
, just as Sanscr. “padapa,” designating the tree as drinking with its foot, through its root): those which attain to height and glory from the position granted to them by God—of which description was Egypt, from its relation to the Nile (Ezekiel 29). Hengst.: “the great of the earth, to whom God gives joyful prosperity.”—Comp. on Eze_31:10. As there: “and his heart raised itself,” etc., so it is said here:
åְìֹàÎéַòֲîְãåּ àֵìֵéäֶí
, therefore to be understood of self-assumption, as in Sept.
àֵìéäí
instead of
àֲìéäéí
is no hindrance; as is also Keil’s ultimate conclusion, since
àֵìֵéðåּ
is common, and
àֵìֵéîåֹ
poetic, Psa_2:5.—[Other expositions: “and their strong ones do not continue in their high-mindedness all water-drinkers”; or, “and their oaks (terebinths, Isa_61:3) do not stand there (remain standing) in their elevation, all,” etc. Rosenmüller: “and stand not to them, that is, allied to them in their height, where they had grown so high, all, namely, the other water-drinkers, that is, powerful and rich princes.” Klief.: “and that henceforth among all their strong trees that drink water no one may remain in his height.” Ewald: “and no water-drinkers assail (! !) their gods in their pride” (!), which he afterwards more particularly explains: So that trees, beings who might raise themselves ever so high, are still always dependent on their nourishment, and cannot live of themselves in a spirit of contempt toward their Creator, nor, again, arrogantly war with their superior (their Creators, gods), since they still are all destined to go down as common men to the lower world.] Comp. Eze_26:20. They could give themselves nothing, since they themselves were given away, as such were already appointed; therefore also could not remain standing where they were standing, and assumed the airs of continuing to stand, but must go down to the lower world, therefore be brought low, be humiliated, though not before humble, come to stand on a footing with the children of men. The expression: among the children of men, is to be regarded as parallel with: given to death; and: to those who go down to the grave, with: to the underground. Those that go down, men continually dying, even the highest; or, “those that have gone down,” as Ewald: those sunk into the grave.
Eze_31:15-18
. The Impression and Close.
As at Eze_26:15 sq. Eze_31:15. (
øֶãֶú
, inf. constr. of
éִøã
) The connection is made with what immediately precedes, so that the reference is not (as Hitzig) to Eze_31:13. Upon
ùְׁàֹì
, see Doct. Reflect.—The “mourning” is immediately defined more nearly without
ëִּñֵּúִé
being asyndetically joined to it, as Häv., Ewald, Hengst.: “to cover with mourning,” “to veil in mourning,” “I made it veil itself for mourning.” The mourning which Jehovah effects through His judgment upon Assyria touches primarily the flood, in thorough accord with Eze_31:4, as that which in the first line contributed to the cedar its increase. Therefore
òָìָéå
, “on his account.” That the flood was covered upon him, as the Syriac, Arab., and Vulg., is at least not indicated in what precedes (Eze_31:12). Comp. on the contrary, Eze_26:19. We must (it was thought) suppose a historical reference, since the siege of Nineveh was protracted to two years, while in the spring of the third year, in consequence of a sudden swell in the Tigris, raised by excessive falls of rain, the mighty flood in one night tore down the wall next the stream, and so laid open a wide breach to the enemy (Duncker, 1. p. 806; Nah_1:8; Nah_2:7 [6]). However, in this passage the discourse is not properly of the overthrow of Assyria in process of accomplishment,
Eze_31:15 giving no representation of the judgment itself, as Häv. maintains,—but of the impression of the same as one already accomplished; and
ëñä
as “to veil” is, even without
ùַׂ÷
, perfectly intelligible, but how it is meant in respect to the flood is made sufficiently plain by the
åָàֶîְðַò×
(not future). Hitzig: “In mourning, people commonly draw themselves in and hold back, the loose garment is changed into the narrow
ù÷
; and so the flood also withdraws its waters into itself, which it had hitherto joyfully poured forth and spread abroad”—which Hitzig applies to the influx of people come to a standstill. Theodoret: to the refusal of tribute. Comp. on the figure, Eze_31:4.
îַéִñ øַáִּéí
points back to Eze_31:5-7.—The mourning produced by Jehovah next affects Lebanon (comp. Eze_31:3), therefore the height as well as the depth.
àַ÷ְãִø òָìָéå
, parallel with
ëñúé òìéå
, Hiphil from: to be “dark,” “black,” therefore: to darken, as much as: to make sad, to cause to mourn. Lebanon is otherwise the white mountain. [According to Hitzig, the other princes must be indicated by this; according to Hengst., the kingdoms of the heathen.]—The trees of the field (Eze_31:4) are the third party whom the mourning affects, which is therefore also represented as far and near,
òָìָó
, in Pual, “to be covered;” transferred to the consciousness: to become powerless.
òֻìְôֶּä
has been explained as a verbal from Pual with derivative
ֶ
—
ä
, “languishing,” or instead of
òֻìְּôָä
, fem. of the preterite Pual, since from the connection a perfect seems to be required (Ewald), the plural construed with the feminine singular.—Keil, as Umbreit, makes all nature (?) be painfully moved by Assyria’s fall, whereas the impression of this fall is merely kept in the figurative style of Eze_31:3-4.
Eze_31:16. Eze_26:15. Since that is the same expression (
îôìúå
) as in Eze_31:13, and in Eze_31:15 his going down was spoken of, so we are carried back to Eze_31:12. The “going down of the peoples out of his shadow” in that passage is explained; at the same time, however, the
åִãְúּåֹ
of Eze_31:15 is comprised in the
áְּäåֹøִãִå
, and referred to the Sheol.—Now, according as
åַéִðָּçְîåּ
is translated “comforted themselves,” as reflexive of Piel, since here still another feeling than in Eze_31:15 may be expressed, or the Niphal “and they sighed” is what is to be understood (Ewald, Hengst.), we have either a distinction between the lower world and the trembling people of the upper world, or the two are parallel the one to the other. For the first interpretation speaks the comparison of Isaiah 14. Hitzig understands by the trees of Eden princes carried down with Assyria; in particular the Assyrian war-princes, who feel themselves comforted because the much more powerful one for whose cause they have fallen, their murderer, shares their fate; while Hengst. more correctly understands by them the former great ones of the earth, those who resembled the trees of paradise in glory. As paradise was itself a thing of the past, those who were likened to the trees of its region were contemplated as now existing in the realms of the dead. The allegorical character of the expression is proved by the exegesis: the choice and good. Besides, comp. at Eze_31:14.
Eze_31:17. They also are not those last named in Eze_31:16, but the parties presently going to be described more closely—already, indeed, indicated in Eze_31:16 as those with whom Jehovah made Assyria go down to hell (
àú
, not
àì
, as in Eze_31:14). “And his arm” defines more exactly the “they also” as the subject of “the going down,”—his help, his assistant, the vassals, subject-kings, commanders, and such like, to whom the words: who dwelt in his shadow among the heathen, very well suit, and not less that they are associated with those pierced through with the sword. Assyria was not only a political, but also a military power among the nations. [If
äֵí
must apply to “all the trees of Eden” in Eze_31:16, so must “with him” be made equal to “not less than he,” just as Hengst., looking away from simultaneousness, views them as already in Sheol when Assyria arrives there. Therefore: they also, like him, went down before, etc. Ewald reads with the Sept.:
æַøְòåֹ
, “and his seed” (!).]
>Eze_31:18. This verse gives the conclusion, pointing back to Eze_31:2; it makes the application to Pharaoh, who is the party addressed.—
ëָּëָä
, Hitzig: “in such a fashion, in circumstances of such a kind,” when this cedar after such a manner went down. The reference among the trees belongs to the to whom—Comp. at Eze_28:10. From this passage, also, there appears to emerge the opposite of what is commonly found in it, viz. that the Egyptians appear as uncircumcised with our prophet. According to Herodotus, the practice of circumcision was actually of Egyptian origin. Origen confines it to the priesthood among the Egyptians. The kings certainly were not uncircumcised; so the vis of our passage shines clearly out: This is Pharaoh, sq. Hitzig: so shall it happen to Pharaoh.
äåà
is the predicate.
DOCTRINAL REFLECTIONS
1. Although the prophecy in Ezekiel 29 is of a general character, yet by the reference to Nebuchadnezzar, and especially from Eze_29:17 onwards, it gets a more specific character. We have therefore to hold by a fulfilment through the Chaldeans, and, indeed, in connection with what is said respecting Tyre. Apart from the circumstance that we have here to do with a prophet of God, we could not judge otherwise simply on this account, that a little reflection upon the inevitable disgrace of such a self-deception as would have been the case in respect to Tyre must alone have kept Ezekiel—instead of merely suppressing the prophecy in question while the book was still in his own hand—from wishing now to compensate for the mistake by awakening like inconsiderate and rash expectations concerning Nebuchadnezzar in regard to Egypt. For one to whom the prophet is nothing but a writer must still at least credit him with this much of worldly prudence in respect to his literary honour. And if Ezekiel must needs prophesy ex eventu (as Hitzig, for example, conceives), then prophecies like those contained in Ezekiel 26 and some following ones are purely unthinkable, so far as they remained unfulfilled; since it cannot but be supposed, that when our prophet closed his book, matters must have stood before him widely different from what they are presented in his prophecy. The “dogmatic criticism,” however, cannot once admit now that a prophecy has been fulfilled,—a limitation of the standpoint which is not improved by the circumstance that the truth of the divine word (2Pe_1:21) is made dependent on the statements or the silence of profane writers, and even of such as have given notoriously imperfect reports. The false prophet, he whose word did not come to pass, has by God’s word (Deu_18:22) been as clearly as possible excluded from the canon.
2. The reward for work, which, as Hitzig rightly enough says, had still to be given to Nebuchadnezzar, raises no question as to the conquest and, as could not fail to happen after a thirteen years’ siege, the destruction of Tyre. If the booty might have been thought of for the army, for Nebuchadnezzar it is necessary to think of Egypt. The song of triumph demanded by Hitzig for the fulfilment of the prophecy against Tyre is the double lamentation which we find in Ezekiel 27, 28. Every one has his peculiar manner. But as regards the so-called “historical witnesses,” who should speak the decisive word on the fulfilment or non-fulfilment particularly of the prophecy of Ezekiel in respect to Egypt, they are “the Greek historians, at the head of whom stands Herodotus, and they know absolutely nothing of a Chaldean invasion of Egypt—nay, their narration is opposed to anything of the kind” (Hitzig). This is imposing; let us reflect, however, that Herodotus had also learned nothing from his Egyptian informants of the defeat at Carchemish. We need only mention farther, that this Greek historian himself reproaches the priests of Egypt, and precisely in regard to this particular time, with embellishing the history of their country. Now, according to Herodotus, Pharaoh Hophra—in consequence of the defeat which his army sustained from the Cyrenians, against whom it was to have rendered help to the Libyans, and of the revolt which in consequence thereof, and of the foreign mercenary troops retained in Egypt, broke forth on the part of the Egyptian warrior-class against Amasis, who, instead of bringing back the rebels to obedience, suffered himself to be proclaimed king by them—lost freedom and his throne, and by the infuriated people was even murdered. Tholuck, who, “if the cattle with the ark of the Lord should once turn aside, would not obstinately drive forward,” remarks that as a witness Herodotus alone comes into consideration; before whom, however, the testimony of Ezekiel, himself a contemporary of the events, has no need to be abashed. “If Herodotus readily received intelligence of the prosperous battle fought by Necho at Megiddo, but none respecting the much more important defeat sustained by him on the Euphrates from the Chaldeans, should it be thought strange if the priests observed silence also regarding the irruption of the Chaldeans into their own land? yea, if the miserable end which Hophra suffered through the foreign conqueror should have been rather represented by them as the deed of his own people?” (So also Rawlinson’s Herod. B. ii. appen. c. 8.) With a fair appreciation of the historical representation of Herodotus, the cause there assigned, especially the revolution among the warrior-class of Egypt, might suffice for the overthrow of Hophra. Yet the hatred of the Egyptian people, not only expressed in Herodotus, but confirmed by monumental evidence (Rossellini points in this connection to a by-name of Hophra on the monuments: “Remesto”)—such a hatred as is described in Herodotus toward Hophra (ii. 161–169), manifested in respect to a native ruler, is scarcely to be explained from what is stated, if it did not come into some sort of connection with a Chaldean invasion of Egypt, whereby the haughtiness of Hophra might well appear all the more hateful to the Egyptian people, as the misery of the land and the inhabitants, occasioned by him, stood in sharpest contrast to the previous prosperity and splendour. The grudge of the Egyptian warrior-class against the foreign mercenaries could not be of such moment as some have supposed, since even Amasis, who thereafter held possession of the throne till his death (forty-four years), and was succeeded in it by his son, took lonians for his bodyguard, and generally granted to the Greeks still greater favour and privileges than his predecessor. Besides, as generally held, there is also the outline of the prophecy against Egypt in Ezekiel 29, which exhibits a distinction between Eze_29:6 sq. and Eze_29:4 sq.—in the one, the sword constitutes the figure (Eze_29:8); in the other, overthrow with reference to the wilderness. Especially if Hitzig’s interpretation of “the fish” (Eze_29:4) as denoting Pharaoh’s men of war is accepted, and under “the wilderness” there is couched an allusion to Libya, what is said in Eze_29:4 sq. might be explained by the narration which is reproduced by Herodotus, and Eze_29:6 sq. would, with the sword of Nebuchadnezzar, be such a supplementing as the conquest of Tyre to the siege of that city, also given elsewhere. Out of the miserable condition in which Hophra perished, Amasis would then have raised Egypt. Anyhow, as Tholuck brings out, the death of Hophra falls exactly into the time in which the occupation of Egypt by Nebuchadnezzar must have occurred; and thus the position of matters approaches to that which is wont to be extracted from Josephus in confirmation of our prophecy—contr. Ap. i. 19. It is there stated that Berosus reports of the Babylonian (Nebuchadnezzar) that he “conquered Egypt, Syria, Phœnicia,” etc. Again, in Ezekiel 20, he states that Megasthenes placed Nebuchadnezzar above Hercules, since he had subjected to himself a great part of Libya and Iberia (comp. Antiq. x. 11. 1, and Strabo xv. 1. 6; see also Häv. Comm. p. 435, against Hitzig’s remarks). In the 10th book of the Antiq. Eze_9:7, Josephus expresses himself to this effect, that “in the fifth year after the destruction of Jerusalem, which was the twenty-third of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, he made an expedition against Cœlesyria; and when he had got possession of it, he made war against the Ammonites and Moabites; and when he had brought these nations into subjection, he fell upon Egypt in order to overthrow it, and did indeed slay the king who then reigned, but set up another; after which he took those Jews that were there captive, and brought them to Babylon,” etc. The ten years’ time, which Hitzig doubts as the period of the earlier warlike expeditions, is maintained by Tholuck. The fifth year after the taking of Jerusalem would be 581; the thirteen years’ siege of Tyre would fall into the period 586–572 or 573. For the different actions which were in part parallel as to time, we have only to suppose various divisions of the army employed, so that the whole might of Nebuchadnezzar did not at the same time lie before Tyre. The forty years of the Egyptian oppression, Tholuck, like Niebuhr, extends over the entire space that lies between the disaster at Carchemish and the overthrow of Hophra (thirty-six years), “during which Egypt, through the continued and in great part unfortunate warlike enterprises of Hophra, must have been much depopulated and extremely weakened, till at length the inroad of the Chaldeans consummated the oppression.” Tholuck thinks that, “as the prophets in the beginning of the fulfilment comprehended the future (Jer_13:18; Eze_30:24), in the last and completed fulfilment they also comprehended the earlier incomplete ones.” The symbolical explanation of the forty years is not thereby denied (see the exposition). The worth of the statements of Josephus may be questioned, as is done by Hitzig; but for the relation of profane history to our prophecy, it suffices that Hophra miserably perished (Eze_29:4 sq.; Jer_44:30 sq.), and that Egypt again revived, as took place under Amasis, although as a kingdom it was fit to be compared neither with its ancient glory nor with other great monarchies (Eze_29:13 sq.). As regards the resuscitation of Egypt, Duncker mentions that, according to a return of the priests, it then reckoned 20,000 country towns and cities (Herzog’s Realencyc. 1 p. 150), though it was “the last period of Egypt’s glory;” and Lepsius says of the same, that Egypt succumbed to the first pressure of the Persian power, and remained from 525 to 504 a Persian province; that afterwards it became again for a short time independent, until in 340 it was reconquered by the Persians, and in 332 fell under Alexander the Great, etc.
3. Upon the importance of Egypt for the revenge of Nebuchadnezzar, see the exposition of Eze_29:18. Also generally for the Chaldean policy the transition to Egypt is rendered plain to us from Eze_29:17 sq. (Häv.: “if Nebuchadnezzar would make the possession of Phœnicia once for all sure, Egypt must be completely broken.”) Of the importance of Egypt by itself, its characteristic importance, some notice has already been taken, toward the close of the introductory remarks to Ezekiel 25; as also of the distinction, indicated with correct feeling by Keil, between Egypt and the other nations mentioned by Ezekiel. But what Egypt signifies in its connection here, this must be discerned from its relation to Israel. It is quite true that the charge laid against Ammon, Moab, etc., also against Tyre, for spiteful joy, hostility, envy toward Israel, is not mentioned in respect to Pharaoh and Egypt. It may be said that Egypt’s guilt in regard to Israel was that rather of a false, treacherous friendship. If, on the other hand, the excess of proud self-sufficiency must be regarded as the characteristic of Egypt, the same sort of self-elation meets us in the king of Tyre (Ezekiel 28); and in this respect Tyre formed a fitting transition-point to Egypt. The distinction between Tyre and Egypt might perhaps be found in this, that while in particular the kingdom of Tyre had had its time of sacred splendour and past greatness, as we have seen, in its former connection with the kingdom of David, Egypt on its part acquired importance on account of the sojournings of the pilgrim-fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and still more on account of the formation of their descendants into a people. Above all, the idea of redemption was associated with the land of Egypt. Here, therefore, the inverse relation holds good: Tyre has gone with Israel to school; Israel, on the other hand, was at school in Egypt, as was evidenced in manifold agreements and contrasts exhibited in their peculiarity as a people, without our needing on that account to ride off on the Spencerian principle [namely, of a servile borrowing from the institutions of Egypt]. More than from anything else, may be understood from Israel’s reminiscences as a people, and the impress of Egyptian style and manner even upon their sacred things, their abiding sympathetic turning back toward Egypt. That Israel could not let Egypt go out of sight had its root in human nature; we must learn even from the children of this world (Luk_2:6). But it had also its dangerous side. It was Israel’s worldliness, relapse, since Israel had been delivered by Jehovah from this world, and Jehovah had through Moses threatened them in connection with Egypt with the greatest evils (Deu_28:68). We have tribulation in the world, and we may have fear before the world; such fear, however, may be salutary in its operation. But dangerous is the stay that is sought in Egypt, trust and confidence therein. In this respect Egypt is designated a remembrancer of iniquity (Eze_29:16), since for Israel it had, and not as of yesterday, but from of old (comp. also Eze_16:26; Eze_23:8; Eze_23:19), the fatal significance of a pride which resists Jehovah and leads away from Him, of a consciousness of worldly power, which amid the characteristic Pharaonic arrogance expressed itself just as distinctly (Eze_29:3; Eze_29:9) as in Exo_5:2, and had this the more seductively, as a self-conscious abiding worldly power is in fact fitted to impose on people. Friendship with Egypt is the most contemptuous relation in which Israel can be thought of, on account of the indifference which it necessarily implied on the part of the Israelitish people not only in regard to their former house of bondage, but also to the mighty deliverance obtained from it, and generally in what concerned their relation to Jehovah, on whom, as their own and their fathers’ God, they had been thrown from their state of childhood. To make account of this specific historical position in respect to each other, according to which the growth, bloom, and decay of Israel were closely interwoven with Egypt, the prophecy of Ezekiel “dwells at greater length on Egypt than on the other nations” (Häv.). Still more, however, it serves to explain the representation of the judgment upon Egypt as strikingly parallel with that on Israel, and to the last carried out (comp. Eze_29:5; Eze_29:9 sq., 12, 13, etc.). Not less remarkable, because singular, is the prospect and declaration in regard to the resuscitation of Egypt, and of it alone, which have been introduced into the prediction of our prophet; by this also is Egypt quite expressly kept parallel with Israel. The reminiscence which brings up Egypt so distinctly is not simply that of the house of bondage, or of iniquity, but it is Joseph’s post of honour, and the corn granaries of Jacob, together with his family. Comp. also Deu_23:7.
4. The interpretation of Neteler strikes out what is certainly a quite different path, strikingly reminding one of Cocceius, only with a specially Catholic tendency. According to him, the prophecies against the foreign nations constitute four groups, each of which contains four pieces: the first, Ezekiel 25; the second, the overthrow of the Canaanitish culture - development, standing in contrast to the higher calling of Jerusalem, and reaching its culmination in Tyre. The prophecy against Sidon he severs from Tyre, in the interest of this fourfold division; it belongs to the Egyptian group, inasmuch as “Sidon’s bloom falls into the time in which Egypt was the bearer of the Hamitic power and culture,” and “the Sidonian development was a shoot of the Hamitic-Egyptian.” The promises for Israel in this third section (Eze_28:20 to Eze_30:19) must stand parallel with those of the same kind in the first group, wherein punishment is threatened to the four nations with reference to Israel; as the first group, “through Ezekiel 21 (Ammon), is placed in connection with the first destruction of Jerusalem,” so “the third stands, through the opening of the mouth which occurs in it, in closer relation to the symbol of the second destruction of Jerusalem.” The four last prophecies against Egypt are “mere symbols,” according to Neteler. As Ammon “drove the surviving remnant, after the destruction of Jerusalem, out of Judea,” so had “Moab decoyed Israel into gross idolatry before their entrance into Canaan;” and so, in the prophecies against Ammon and Moab, the beginning and end of Israel in regard to Canaan are connected together. The punishment of Edom and the Philistines must point to the “re-establishment of the house of David.” In regard to Tyre Neteler expresses himself thus: “The command given to Israel to root out the Canaanites, but by them neglected to their destruction, God will execute on Tyre through Nebuchadnezzar;” and this command must stand in a noteworthy relation to the historical development of the last period of 800 years before Christ, in which “those to the west (Carthaginians, Greeks, Romans) brought a real advance, while those to the east (the Hamitic kingdoms of Ethiopia and Egypt, the Semitic kingdoms of Assyria and Chaldea, the Japhetic Medians and Persians) repeat the development of the two earlier periods in smaller measure, yet as if thereby the problem of the western circle should be solved.” He says: “If Israel, through the extirpation of the Canaanites, according to Num_36:6-9 (!), had entered into the place of the Ph
