Skip to main content

Full text of "A critical and exegetical commentary on Amos and Hosea"

See other formats


Presented to 



Reverend Neill McRae 

Critical Cantnuntarg 

011 iln Ifclg Scriptures flf % (JDlfr aufr 



Kcgi us Professor of Hebrew, Oxford , 


Late Master of University College, Durham; 


Edward Robinson Professor of Biblical Theology, 
Union Theological Seminary, New York. 




















THE agreement to prepare the volumes on the Minor Prophets 
for this series was entered into in 1890, fourteen years ago. 
I did not then anticipate the serious obligations which were 
shortly to be assumed in other directions. But in all these 
years of administrative concern I have had recourse for change, 
comfort, and courage to my work on the Twelve Prophets. 
A large portion of the work had been finished as early as 
1897, when the essential results on the structure of Amos 
appeared in The Biblical World. It is a significant fact that 
during these fourteen years there have been given to the world 
the noteworthy contributions of Oort (1890), Mitchell (1893, 
1900), Miiller (1896), Cheyne (in W. R. Smith, Prophets*, 1895), 
Nowack (1897, 1903), George Adam Smith (1896), Volz (1897), 
Driver (1897), Wellhausen ( 3 d ed., 1898), Budde (1899), Lohr 
(1901), Sievers (1901), Baumann (1903), Meinhold (1903), and 
Marti (1903). 

The plan originally included two volumes for the Minor 
Prophets ; this has been enlarged to three, of which the pres 
ent volume, containing Amos and Hosea, is the first. Vol. II. 
will include Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Obadiah ; 
Vol. III., Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, Joel, Jonah. It is hoped 
that the second and third volumes will appear within the next 
two years, 

It cannot be said that the Twelve Prophets lack, either in 
the comprehensive relation which they sustain to the entire 
history of Hebrew life and thought, in the interest of the prob 
lems which they suggest, or in the almost infinite variety of 
these problems. In every field of study, the textual, the literary, 
the historical, the archaeological, and the theological, they fur 
nish facts and suggest questions than which few others, perhaps, 
possess greater significance. One need only mention, by way 


of illustration, the questions involved in determining the place 
of Amos in the development of Hebrew thought, the problems of 
criticism and interpretation which are suggested by the early 
chapters of Hosea, the text and historical distribution of the 
chapters now joined together under the name of Micah, the 
complexity of the data included in the several portions of 
Zechariah, not to speak of the fragmentary character of Oba- 
diah, the peculiar phenomena presented in Jonah, and many 
other equally puzzling but significant aspects of literary and 
theological inquiry. These facts and problems connect them 
selves with every important phase of the Old Testament activity 
between 900 B.C. and 300 B.C., in other words, with the entire 
creative period. 

The books which occupy our attention in this first volume go 
well together, not only because one follows the other chrono 
logically, but also because one supplements the other logically, 
the two presenting a totality of expression in the light of which 
each receives a clearer interpretation. It seemed necessary to 
take up, in connection with these first two of the immortal 
Twelve, mariy questions that concern just as closely the others. 
Especially was the force of this point felt in the Introduction ; 
for an introduction to Amos and Hosea is really an introduction 
to Prophecy. 

Nowhere is it more necessary to distinguish sharply between 
the actual words of an author and those that have been added 
by later writers than in the case of Amos and Hosea. The his 
tory of the Messianic idea, in whatever sense we employ that 
term, is fundamentally involved in this distinction. Care has 
been taken, therefore, to keep separate the quite considerable 
proportion of material (ascribed by tradition to these authors) 
which may confidently be treated as of later origin. This in 
the case of Amos is about one-fifth of the whole, and in the case 
of Hosea about one-fourth. 

It is unquestionably the first duty of a commentator to recon 
struct the text as best he may. The contributions to the text- 
criticism of Amos and Hosea, made within two decades, are 
striking; but not more so than the unanimity with which the 
more important emendations have received acceptance. More- 


over, many of the changes originally suggested, perhaps on 
one or another basis (e.g. grammar, history, the versions, or the 
strophic structure), have later received corroboration on other 
grounds than those on which they rested primarily. This has 
frequently occurred in my own experience ; and when I recall 
how often a twofold or even threefold substantiation of a con 
jecture has thus taken place, I am compelled to defend myself, 
and others like myself, against Professor Driver s suggestion 
that " it is precarious to base textual and critical inferences " 
upon the "strophe."* I venture to suggest that in the near 
future this comparatively new phase of critical study will be 
"brought forth into a large place."! It is worthy of notice 
surely that nearly every important piece of work on the Twelve 
Prophets in fifteen years has taken into consideration the ques 
tion of the measure and strophic arrangement (pp. clxv f.). 
My own interest in this subject was aroused in 1887 by the 
articles of Professor Briggs in Hebraica. No one can doubt 
the good results in general which have followed the turning of 
attention in this direction. It is unnecessary, and in a com 
mentary impossible, to take up this phase of treatment in all 
the detail worked out by Sievers ; but it is equally impossible 
now to study the thought of these prophetic sermons without 
recognizing fully this fundamental factor in their form of com 
position. As a matter of fact, " strophic structure " is only 
another name for " logical structure." 

The textual notes preceding the general treatment and the 
grammatical and philological notes following it have been in 
tended to furnish the student of ordinary advancement the 
more important data with which to reach his own conclusions. 
I fear that in some cases these suggestions are too elementary 
in their character; but I have had in mind that student of 
Sacred Scripture who, with such help, might enter into a fairly 
critical appreciation of the points raised ; and I have felt that I 
might advantageously omit a portion of this kind of material in 
the succeeding volumes. The presentation of different read 
ings which are not accepted, as well as of all the principal 

* Joel and Amos, p. 116. f V. p. clxix. 


interpretations in every case, seemed to me to be required by 
the emphasis which the editors of the series have placed upon 
the importance of providing the history of the interpretation. 
I am perfectly aware that the history of interpretation does not 
consist in placing one after another a series of differing interpre 
tations ; but it is quite clear that space would not permit a fuller 
discussion in every place, nor was such discussion necessary. 
At the same time, upon the basis of the interpretations as thus 
given, even when no comment is added, it is not difficult for 
one to construct the history. I have endeavored to note all 
opinions really worthy of consideration ; and I trust that the 
fulness of citation in some passages may not prove too weari 
some to the reader who is not a student. 

It is a source of great satisfaction to make acknowledgment 
of the indebtedness which I owe to those who have preceded me ; 
and especially to Baur, Wiinsche, Cheyne, Wellhausen, W. Rob 
ertson Smith, Nowack, Driver, George Adam Smith, Budde, 
and Kautzsch (v. his article, " Religion of Israel," in Hast- 
ings s Dictionary of the Bible). I have tried in each important 
instance to indicate the position taken by those who have dis 
cussed that particular case; and likewise to recognize the 
author who first suggested a reading or interpretation after 
ward adopted by others. I regret that my manuscript was 
already almost wholly in type before the appearance of No- 
wack s second edition and of Marti s commentary. Use has 
been made of these volumes in the revision of the sheets. I 
ought perhaps to mention that a considerable portion of my 
manuscript has been thrown out because I had transgressed the 
limits set for the volume. 

A word more concerning the Introduction seems to be neces 
sary. It appeared to me that a brief summary of pre-prophetism 
was required as the basis on which to place the work of Amos 
and Hosea. This would have been unnecessary if it were cer 
tain that all Hebrew thought really began with Amos. But this 
view I cannot accept, and so I have enlarged the Introduction 
to include a re"sum of the pre-prophetic activity. In the pres 
entation of this I have found myself greatly embarrassed for 
lack of space. 


The list of literature will be found fairly exhaustive as far as 
half a century back. Lists of the literature before that time 
are accessible in Gunning s De Godspraken van Amos, Driver s 
article on Amos in Smith s Dictionary of tlie Bible (20! ed.), 
Wiinsche s Hosea, and in Lange s Commentary, Vol. XVI. The 
reader is requested to note the Addenda and Corrigenda on 
pp. xv, xvi, as well as the abbreviations on pp. xvii ff. 

In conclusion, I wish particularly to acknowledge the help 
which has been given me in the preparation of the volume 
by my former pupil, now my colleague, Dr. John M. P. Smith. 
The assistance which he has rendered in gathering material, 
in verifying references, and in revising the manuscript and the 
printer s sheets, and the suggestions which he has made from 
time to time upon the subject-matter itself, have been of the 
greatest value. Without this help I doubt whether I should 
have been able to bring the work to a completion. My thanks 
are due also to my former pupil, Professor George R. Berry 
of Colgate University, for aid furnished, and to my colleague, 
Professor George S. Goodspeed, for important suggestions in 
connection with the historical material in Amos. 

The publishers have cooperated most generously in securing 
a typographical excellence which, I am confident, will be greatly 

I think that I realize most keenly some of the defects of 
this commentary. Doubtless many that I do not perceive will 
be pointed out to me. I shall hope to make good use of all 
such criticisms and suggestions in connection with the two 
remaining volumes. 




PREFACE ............ vii-xi 



INTRODUCTION xxxi-clxxxi 


i. The Pre-prophetic Movement in General xxxi 

2. Pre-prophetic Participation in the Revolt of Jeroboam I. . . xxxii 

3. Pre-prophetic Manifestation under Elijah s Leadership . . xxxiv 

4. Pre-prophetic Influences in the Time of Elisha xli 

5. The Pre-prophetic Societies xlix 

6. The Older and Younger Decalogues Iviii 

7. The Book of the Covenant ( = CC) Ixiv 

8. The Judaean (Pre-prophetic) Narrative (= J) .... Ixix 

9. The Ephraimite (Pre-prophetic) Narrative (= E) . . . Ixxix 


10. The Relation of Pre-prophetism to Mosaism .... Ixxxiv 
11. The Essential Thought of Pre-prophetism . . . . Ixxxviii 


12. The Personal Life of Amos ....... C 

13. The Message of Amos ex 

14. The Ministry of Amos . . cxxiv 

15. The Literary Form of Amos ....... cxxx 


1 6. The Personal Life of Hosea cxl 

17. The Message of Hosea . cxlvi 

1 8. The Ministry of Hosea ........ civ 

19. The Literary Form of Hosea clviii 




20. The Poetical Form of Amos and Hosea clxiv 

21. The Language and Style of Amos and Hosea .... clxx 
22. The Text and Versions of Amos and Hosea .... clxxiii 
23. The Literature on Amos and Hosea ..... clxxviii 

COMMENTARY. On Amos , 1-200 

On Hosea ....... 201-417 


L Subject 419 

II. Geographical . . 423 

ill. Hebrew . 423 


MAP .... At end of volume 


p. lv, line I. The first mention of Phoenician prophets is found in the report 
of Wenamon, an Egyptian envoy to Byblos, in the reign of Ramses XII., 
probably about noo B.C. SeeJ. H. Breasted, "The Report of Wena 
mon," AJSL. XXI. (Jan. 1905), pp. 101 f., 105. 

p. Ixxxix, line 14. For " Ju. 5 46 ," read "Ju. 5 4 V 

p. ex. On the teachings of Amos, Hosea, and preceding prophets of the 
eighth century, see Koberle, Siinde ttnd Gnade im religiosen Leben des 
Volkes Israel bis auf Christum (1905), pp. 96-153. 

p. 4, line 12. For (_jlLaJ, read ^jlsJ. 

pp. 15 ff. On the nations dealt with in Am. i 3 -2 4 , see the article "Semites," 
in DB. V., by J. F. McCurdy. 

*> 7 

p. 42, line 6 (from bottom). For ___lCCLxiO5, read 
p. 257, line 4. Omit against me, with J5, as a gloss ; see p. 256. 
p. 277, note For GVf. t read GI. 

p. 280, lines 27-29. The text of strophe I, lines 7 and 8, is better arranged 
as in the translation on p. 283, viz. : 

p. 281, lines I, 2. Transpose "6 lla is, of course, a gloss," to follow "In 
strophe 4 (6"-7 2 ." Dele "(0 v. llb is suspected, but v.t" For 
"v. 110 " read ( v. llft ." 

p. 287, line 2 (from bottom). P or J>O.*j^)(, read 

p. 291, line 15. For "also rejects," read "rejects all of." 

p. 313, line 20. Orelli reads Ncn^ ; see p. 320. 

p. 329, line I. Insert it after cat. 






literal, or literally. 


adverb, or adverbial. 

m., or masc. 





Niph al. 




omits, omit, etc. 

Ass., or Assyr 

., Assyrian. 



fa., or dr. 

circa, about. 




confer, compare. 






Pi el. 





cod., codd. 

codex, codices. 



cog., or cogn. 





commentators, or com 





pronoun, or pronominal. 






continue, continuing, etc. 







d.f., or dag. f. 

dagesh forte. 

S S- 




f. or fem. 





following, follows, etc. 








suggest, suggestion, etc, 




sub voce. 


Hiph il. 










vide, see. 




verb, verbal. 




vide infra, see below. 




vide supra, see above. 





A.V. Authorized Version (161 1 ). 

A. Aquila s translation, cited 

from Field s Hexapla. 

Bab. Cod. Prophetarum posteriorum 
codex Babylonicus Pe- 
tropolitanus auspiciis 
augustissimi Imperatoris 
Alexandri II. Edidit 
H. Strack (1876). 

Complut. The Complutensian Poly 

<S The Septuagint, cited from 

The Old Testament in 
Greek according to the 
Septuagint; edited by 
H. B. Swete; Vol. Ill 

(5 s Codex Sinaiticus. 

<-* Codex Alexandrinus. 

<& B Codex Vaticanus. 

<5Q Codex Marchalianus. 

(S 1 - Lucian s Recension. 

Kt. Kthtbh. 

1L The Old Latin Version, 

cited from Oesterley s 



Studies in the Greek and 
Latin Versions of the 
Book of Amos (1902) and 
"The Old Latin Texts of 
the Minor Prophets," 
Journal of Theological 
Studies, V. 76-88. 

The Massoretic Text. 
Old Testament. 
Q ri. 

Revised Version (1885). 
Revised Version, margin. 

The Syriac translation, cited 
from the Paris Polyglot. 

2. Symmachus s translation, 

cited from Field s Hex- 

Syr.-Hex. Syro-Hexaplar. 

& The Targum, cited from the 

Paris Polyglot. 

6. Theodotion s translation, 

cited from Field s Hex 

H The Vulgate, cited from the 

Paris Polyglot. 


Abar. or Abarb. Abarbanel (f 1508). 

ABL. Assyrian and Babylonian Literature. Selected Transla 

tions. Edited by Robert Francis Harper (1901). 

AE. Aben Ezra (f 1167). 

AJSL. American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures, 

edited by William R. Harper. 

AJT(h). American Journal of Theology, edited by the Divinity 

Faculty of the University of Chicago. 



Ba. Baur, Der Prophet Amos erkldrt (1847). 

Bach. Bachmann, Alttestamentliche Untersuchungen (1894) 

Bach. Pr. Pracparationen zu den kleinen Prophcten (1890). 

Bad. Badecker s Handbuch z. Paldstina und Syrien (5th ed. 

1900; English, 1894). 
Baethgen, Baethgen, Beitrage zur semitischen Religionsgeschichtt 

Sem. Rel. (1888). 

Barth, NB. J. Barth, Die Nominalbildung in den semitischen Sprachen 


Barth, ES. Etymologische Studien (1893). 

BAS. Beitrage zur Assyriologie und semitischen Sprachwissen- 

schaft, herausgegeben von Friedrich Delitzsch und Paul 

Haupt (i89off.). 
Baud. Einl. Baudissin, Einleitung in die Bucher des Alien Testamentes 

Baud. Rel. Studien zur semitischen Religionsgeschichte, I. (1876), II. 

Bauer, G. L. Bauer, Die kleinen Propheten iibersetzt und mit Com- 

mentarien erldutert, L, Hoseas bis Micha (1786). 

Baumann, Der Aufbau der Amosreden (Beihefte zur ZA W. VII. 1903). 

BDB. A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament, -with 

an Appendix containing the Biblical Aramaic, based on 

the Lexicon of William Gesenius as translated by Edward 

Robinson, edited by Francis Brown, with the cooperation 

of S. R. Driver and Charles A. Briggs (1891 ff.). Eleven 

parts have appeared thus far, extending as far as "ofr. 
Benz. I. Benzinger. 

Benz. Arch. Hebrdische Archdologie (1894). 

BL. Schenkel s Bibel-Lexikon. Kealw orterbuch zum Handge- 

brauch fur geistliche und Gemeindeglieder, 5 vols. 

Bl. Einl. F. Bleek, Einleitung in das Alte Testament (5th ed. by 

Julius Wellhausen, 1886). 
Bockel, Hoseas (1807). 

Bottcher, Ausfiihrliches Lehrbuch der Hebrdischen Sprache, I. (1866), 

II. (1868). 

Briggs, Hex. Chas. A. Briggs, Higher Criticism of the Hexateuch (1897). 

Brugsch, Hist. Heinrich Brugsch-Bey, A History of Egypt under the 

Pharaohs (1881). 
Brull, " Beitrage zur Erklarung des Buches Hosea," Jahrb. f. 

judischen Geschichte und Litter atur, 1883, pp. 1-62. 
BSZ. Wilhelm Gesenius Hebrdisches una Aramdisches Hand- 

ivorterbuch iiber das Alte Testament in verbindung mit 

Prof. Albert Socin und Prof. H. Zimmern bearbeitet von 

Dr. Frants Buhl, ijth ed. (1899). 



Bu. Karl Budde. 

Bu. Rel. Religion of Israel to the Exile (1899). 

Buhl, Pal, Geographic des alien Palaestina ( 1 896) . 

Burkius, Gnomon in 12 Prophetas Minor es (1753). 

Burney, Notes on the Hebrew Text of the Books of Kings (1903). 

8 W. The Biblical World, edited by William R. Harper. 

Cal. Calvin, Commentaries on the Twelve Minor Prophets; 

transl. by J. Owen. Vols. I., II. (1846). 
Cap(pellus), Critica sacra, sive de variis quae in sacris Veteris Testa- 

menti libris occurrunt lectionibus libri sex. Kecensuil 

multisque animadversionibus auxit Geo. lo. Lud.Vogel. 

Tomus I. (1775), II. (1778). 
Che. T. K. Cheyne, Hosea with Notes and Introduction (The 

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges, 1884). In 

the commentary on Hosea, " Che." always means this 

work, unless otherwise indicated. 
Co. C. H. Cornill. 

Co. Einl. Einleitung in das Alte Testament (1891; 4th ed., 1897). 

Cornelius a Lapide (f 1637), Commentarii (1664). 
COT. The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the Old Testament (1885; 

English transl. of KA 7V 2 ). 
Crit. Bib. or CB. Critica Biblica or Critical Notes on the Text of the Old 

Testament Writings, by T. K. Cheyne. Part II., Ezekiel 

and the Minor Prophets (1903). 
Crocius, Johannis Crocii . . . hypotyposes concionum in Prophetas 

Minores, etc. (1673). 
Cyril, Cyril of Alexandria (t444 A.D.). 


Da. , 

Da. Theol, 


Dathe or Dat. 


de R. 

A. B. Davidson. 

Hebrew Syntax (2d ed., 1896). 

The Theology of the Old Testament (1904). 

J. C. Dahl, Amos neu ubersetzt und erldutert (1795). 

Prophetae minores ex recensione textus Hebraei et versionum 

antiquarum latine versi notisque philologicis et criticis 

illustrati a J. A. Dathio (1773). 
A Dictionary of the Bible, edited by James Hastings. 4 vols. 

(1898-1902) and an "Extra Volume" (1904), cited here 

as Vol. V. 
A Dictionary of the Bible, edited by Sir William Smith and 

J. M. Fuller. 3 vols. (2d ed., 1893). 
Franz Delitzsch. 
de Rossi, Variae Lectiones Veteris Testamenti, etc., Vol. III. 

(1786), and Scholia Critica in Veteris Testamenti libra* 




DHM. Prcph. D. H. Miiller, Die Propheten in ihrer urspri mglichen Form, 

2 vols. (1896). 

Di. August Dillmann. 

Di. Theol. Handbuch der Alttestamentlichen Theologie (1895; edited 

by Kittel). 

DI. Friedrich Delitzsch. 

DI. Pr. or Pro 1. Prolegomena eines neuen Hebrdisch-Aramaischen Worter- 

buchs zum Alien Testament (1886). 
DI. HWB. Assyrisches Handworterbuch (1896). 

DI. Pa. or Par. Wo lag das Parodies ( 1 88 1 ) . 
DI. Hebr. Lang. The Hebrew Language (1883). 
Dr. S. R. Driver, Joel and Amos (The Cambridge Bible for 

Schools and Colleges; 1897). 
Dr. , A Treatise on the Use of the Tenses in Hebrew (1874; 3d 

ed., 1892). 
Dr. LOT. An Introdtection to the Literature of the O. T. (6th ed., 

Dr. Dt. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Deuteronomy 

(International Critical Commentary, 1895). 

Dr. Sam. Notes on the Hebreiv Text of the Books of Samuel (1890). 

Dru. or Drus. Drusius, Commentary on Minor Prophets, in Critici Sacri : 

s. doctissimorum virorum ad Sacra Biblia annott. et 

tractatus (London, 1660). 

Duhm, Theol. Bernhard Duhm, Die Theologie der Propheten (1875). 
Diisterdieck, " Beitrage zur Erklarung des Propheten Amos, mit beson- 

derer Riicksicht auf G. Baur, Der Prophet Amos," 

Theologische Studien und Kritiken, 1849, pp. 869-914. 

EB. Encyclopaedia Biblica, edited byT. K. Cheyne and J. Suther 

land Black. 4 vols. (1899-1903). 

Ed. Meyer, GA. Geschichte d. Alterthums, Vol. I. (1884). 

Eich. Eichhorn, Die Hebr dischen Propheten (1816 ff.). 

Elh. H. J. Elhorst, De Profetie van Amos (1901). 

Enc. Br. Encyclopaedia Britannica. 

Eph. Syr. Ephraem Syrus (f 373). 

Ew. Heinrich Ewald, Die Propheten des Alien Bundes (1840; 

2d ed., 1867; transl. as Commentary on the Prophets of 
the Old Testament, 5 vols., 1875-81). 

Ew. 8 Ausfiihrliches Lehrbuch der Hebr dischen Sprache des Alien 

Bundes (8th ed., 1870). 

Ew. Hist. Geschichte des Volkes Israel (3d ed., 1866), Engl. transl, 

History of Israel (1871). 

Exp. The Expositor, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll. (Superior 

figures indicate the series cited.) 

Exp. T. The Expository Times, edited by James Hastings. 



Furst, Lex. Hebrdisches und Chalddisches Handworterbuch uber das 

Alte Testament (3d ed., 1876). 

GAS. George Adam Smith, The Book of the Twelve Prophets 

(The Expositor s Bible, Vol. I., 1896). 

viAS. HG. Historical Geography of the Holy Land (1895). 

Gebo Gebhard, Grundliche Einleitung in die zwolf kleinen Pro- 


Ges. Thes. 

GFM. Ju. 


Gr. Gesch. 
Grimm, Lit. App. 

GSG. Hist. 


Gu. Gesch. or G VI. 



Abraham Geiger, Urschrift und Uebersetzungen der Bibel 
in ihrer Abhangigkeit von der innern Entwickelung des 
Judenthums (1857). 

Wilhelm Gesenius. 

\Vilhelm Gesenius, Thesaurus philologicus criticus linguae 
Hebraeae et Chaldaeae Veteris Testamenti (1829). 

George Foote Moore. 

Judges (International Critical Commentary, 1895). 

Beitrdge zur Jesaiakritik, nebst einer Studie uber prophe- 
tische Schriftstellerei (1890). 

Wilhelm Gesenius, Hebr dische Grammatik vollig umgearbei- 
tet, von E. Kautzsch (27th ed., 1902). 

H. Gratz, Emendationes in plerosque Sacrae Scripturae 
Veteris J^estamenti libros, secundum veterum versiones 
nee non auxiliis criticis caeteris adhibitis. Fasciculus 
secundus Ezechielis et Duodecim Prophetarum libros> etc., 
continens (1893). 

Geschichte der Juden (1853-76). 

Euphemistic Liturgical Appendixes in the Old Testament 

Annotata ad Vetus Testamentum, Vol. II. (1644). 

George S. Goodspeed, History of the Babylonians and 
Assyrians (1902). 

H. Guthe; when no specific reference is added, the trans 
lation of the Minor Prophets in Kautzsch s Die Heilige 
Schrift (1896) is to be understood. 

, Geschichte des Volkes Israel (1899). 

J. H. Gunning, De Godspraken van Amos (1885). 

W. R. Harper, Elements of Hebrew Syntax (1888; 5th ed., 

J. Halevy: (l) " Le livre d Osee," Rwue Semitique, X. 

(1902), 1-12, 97~ I 33 I93- 212 , 289-304. 

(2) " Le livre d Amos," ibid. XI. (1903), 1-31, 97-121. 

193-209, 289-300; XII. (1904), 1-18. 
J. C. Harenberg, Amos Propheta expositus interpretations 

nova latina, etc. (1763). 



HSv. Havernick, Handbuch der historisch-kritischen Einleitung 

in das Alte Testament (1837; transl. 1852). 

Hd. Henderson, The Book of the Twelve Minor Prophets trans 

lated from the original Hebrew, with a Commentary, criti 
cal, philological, and exegetical (1868). 

Hebr. Hebraica, Vols. I.-XI. (1884-95); continued as American 

Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures. 

Hes. Heinrich Hesselberg, Die zwolf kleinen Propheten ausgelegt 


Hi. Hitzig, Die zwolf kleinen Propheten (1838; 4th ed. by 

Steiner, 1881). 

Hirscht, "Textkritische Untersuchungen fiber das Buch Amos," 

Zeitschrift fur wissenschaftliche 1 heologie, Vol. XLIV. 
(1903), pp. 11-73. 

Hng. Hengstenberg, Die Christologie des Alien Testaments (2d 

ed., 1854-8; transl. 1863). 

Hoffm. Hoffmann, " Versuche zu Amos," Zeitschrift fur die Alttes- 

tamentliche Wisscnschaft, III. 87-126. 

Holzinger, Rinl. Rinleitung in den Hexateuch (1893). 

Horn. F. Hommel, The Ancient Hebrew Tradition as Illustrated 

by the Monuments (1897). 

Horn. GBA. Geschichte Rabyloniens und Assyriens (1885). 

Houtsma, " Bijdrage tot de kritiek en verklaring van Hozea," Theo- 

logisch Tijdschrift, IX. (1875), 55-75. 

Hux(table), Commentary on Hosea (Bible Commentary, VI., 1892). 

Jarchi = Rashi = Rabbi Solomon ben Isaak (f 1 105). 

Jastrow, Rel. The Religion of Babylonia and Assyria (1898). 

JBL. Journal of Biblical Literature. 

Jer. Jerome (f42o). 

Jew. Enc. The Jewish Encyclopaedia (of which 8 vols. are now pur> 


Jos. Ant. Flavius Josephus, The Antiquities of the Jews. 

JPTh. Jahrbucher fur Prot. Theologie. 

JQR. The Jewish Quarterly Review. 

Jus. C. W. Justi, Amos neu ubersetzt und erlautert (1799). 

K. E. Kautzsch. 

K. DB. V. Art. " Religion of Israel," by Kautzsch, in Hastings s 

Dictionary of the Bible, extra volume (1904). 
KAT* Die Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament, von Eb. 

Schrader (2d ed. 1883). 
KAT? Die Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament, von E. 

Schrader. Dritte Auflage . . . neu bearbeitet von Dr. 

H. Zimmern und Dr. H. Winckler (1902). 


KB. Kcilinschriftliche Bibliothek, herausgegeben von Eb. 

Schrader (iSSgff.). 
Ke. C. F. Keil, Commentary on the Twelve Minor Prophets in 

Keil and Delitzsch s Biblische Commentar, Vol. IV. 

(1866; transl. 1880). 
Kenn. B. Kennicott, Vetus Testamentum Hebr. cum variis lecti- 

onibus (1776-80). 

Kent, Hist. A History of the Hebrew People, I. (1896); II. (1897). 

KGF. Keilinschriften und Geschichtsforschung, von Eb. Schrader 


Ki. David Kimchi (11230). 

Kirk. Doct. or A. F. Kirkpatrick, Doctrine of the Prophets (1892; 3d ed. 

Proph. 1901). 

Kit. Rudolph Kittel. 

Kit. Hist. History of the Hebrews, 2 vols. (1888-92; English transl. 

by John Taylor, 1895-96). 
Klo. Klostermann. 

Kno. Knobel, Prophetismus der Hebr der (1837). 

K6. Konig, Historisch-kritische Lehrgeb dude der Hebr dischen 

Sprache, Vols. I.-III. (1881-97). Where there is no 

indication of the volume, the reference is to Part III., 

Historisch-comparative Syntax der Hebr. Sprache (1897). 
K6. Einl. Einleitung in das Alte Testament (1893). 

Ko. Hauptprobleme, Die Hauptprobleme der altisr. Religionsgeschichte (1884). 
K6. Stil. Stilistik, Rhetor ik, Poetik (1900). 

Kue. Abraham Kuenen. 

Kue. Einl. Historisch-kritische Einleitiing in die Bucher des Alien 

Testaments (2d ed. of Dutch, 1885 f.; German, 1887-93). 
Kue. Hibb. Lect. National Religions and Universal Religions (Hibbert 

Lectures, 1882). 
Kue. Proph. De profeten en de profetie onder Israel. Historisch-dogma- 

tische Studie (2d ed., 1875 ; English, The Prophets and 

Prophecy in Israel : an Historical and Critical Enquiry, 


Kue. Rel. The Religion of Israel (Dutch, 1869 f.; English, 1874 f.). 

Kurtz, Die Eke des Propheten Hosea, chaps. 1-3 (1859). 

Kusznitzki, Joel, Amos, Obadja qua aetate quibus de rebus sint locuti 

(Inaugural dissertation, 1872). 

Lag. Paul de Lagarde. 

Lag. BN. Uebersicht uber die im Aram dischen, Arabischen und 

Hebr dischen ubliche Bildung der Nomina (1889). 
Lag. Mit. Mittheilungen, Vols. I.-IV. (1884-91). 

Levy, NHWB. Neuhebr disches und Chald disches IVorterbuch uber die Tal 

mudim und Midraschim, von Jacob Levy (187689). 



Linder, "Bemerkungen iiber einige Stellen im Propheten Hosea," 

TheoL Studien und Kritiken, 1860, pp. 739 ff. 

Loftm. or Loft. Loftman, Kritisk under so kning af den Masoretiska texten 
till prof. Hoseas bok (1894). 

Lohr, Untersuchungen zum Buck Amos (Beiheft zur Zeitschrifl 

filr die Alttestament. \Vissenschaft, IV., 1901). 

Lu. or Luth. Martin Luther. 

Marti, Rel. or 


Maybaum, Proph 
McC. HPM. 




Miiller, SK. 



New. or Newc. 



Now. Arch. 

Manger, Comm. in Hoseam (1782). 

Commentariits in Duodecim Prophetas Minor es (1784). 

Dodekapropheton (1903). 

Geschichte der israelitischen Religion (3d ed., 1897 4^ 

ed., 1903). 
Maurer, Commentarius grammaticus historicus criticus in 

Prophetas minor es (1840). 

Die Entwickelung des israelitischen Prophetenthums (1883). 
J. F. McCurdy, History, Prophecy, and the Monuments. 

3 vols. (1895-1901). 
Studien zur israelitischen Religionsgeschichte. I., Der heilige 

Rest. Teil I., " Elias, Amos, Hosea, Jesaja " (1903). 
Commentarii locuptetissimi in vales quinque priores, inter 

eos qui minores vocantur (2d ed., 1695). 
J. D. Michaelis, Deutsche Uebersetzung des Allen Testament 

mit Anmerkungen fur Ungelehrte. Der erste TJieit 

welcher die zw olf kleinen Propheten enthalt (1872). 
H. G. Mitchell, Amos, an Essay in Exegesis (1893; 2( ^ e< ^-> 

" Textkritische Studien zum Buche Hosea," Theologische 

Studien und Kritiken, 1904, pp. 124-6. 
Commentary on Minor Prophets, in Critici Sacri (1660). 
Wm. Muss-Arnolt, A Concise Dictionary of the Assyrian 

Language (of which 16 parts, extending to Satru, arc 

now published). 
Gesenius s Hebr. u. Aram. Handworterbiich, nth ed. 

(1890) by Miihlau and Volck. 

Newcome, An Attempt towards an Improved Version, Met 

rical Arrangement, and an Explanation of the Twelve 

Minor Prophets (1836). 
Theodor Noldeke. 
W. Nowack, Die kleinen Propheten ubersetzt und erklart 

(Handkommentar zum Alten Testament, 1897; 2( ^ ec ^ 

1903 = Now. 3 ). 

Lehrbuch d. hebr. Arch dologie (1894). 
Der Prophet Hosea (1880). 



Oct. Oettli, Amos und Hosea. Zwei Zeugen gegen die Anwen- 

dung der Evolutionstheorie auf die Religion Israeli 

(Beitrage zur Forderung christlicher Theologie, Funfter 

Jahrgang, Heft 4, 1901). 

Ols. J. Olshausen, Lehrbuch der Hebr. Sprache (1861). 

OLZ. Orientalistische Litteratur-Zeitung, herausgegeben von 

F. E. Peiser. 
Oort, H. Oort, (i) "De profeet Amos," Iheologisch Tijdschrift, 

XIV. (1880), 114-58. 

(2) "Hozea," ibid. XXIV. (1890) 345-64; 480-505. 
Oort (.#/.), Textus Hebraici Emendationes quibus in Vetere Testamento 

Neerlandice vertendo usi sunt A. Kuenen, I. Hooykaas, 

W. H. Kosters, H. Oort. Edidit H. Oort (1900). 
Or. Orelli, The Twelve Minor Prophets (1888; transl. by J. S. 

Banks, 1893). 
Os. Osiander, Ezechiel, Daniel, Osee, Joel, Amos, Abdias, Jonas, 

etc,juxta veterem seuvulgatam translationem ad Hebraeam 

veritatem emendati, etc. (1579). 

PA OS. Proceedings of the American Oriental Society. 

Pareus, Hoseas proph. comm. illustr. cum transl. trip, ex Hebr. et 

Chald. (1605-09). 

Paton, Hist. L. B. Paton, The Early History of Syria and Palestine 


PEF. Quarterly Statements of the Palestine Exploration Fund. 

Perles, Analekten zur Textkritik des Alten Testaments (1895). 

Po. Edward Pococke, A Commentary on the Prophecy of Hosea 


PRE? Realencyklop ddie fur protestantische Theologie und Kirche, 

begriindet von J. J. Herzog; in dritter verbesserter und 
vermehrter Auflage . . . von A. Hauck (1896 ff.; 14 vols. 
are now issued). 

Preiswerk, Explication des douze derniers livres prophetiques de I An- 

cien Testament (1841). 

PSBA. Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archaeology. 

Pu. E. B. Pusey, The Minor Prophets with a Commentary, ex 

planatory and practical, and Introductions to the several 
Books. Vol. I. (1865). 

I R., II R., Ill Rawlinson s Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia, 

R., IV R., V R. 5 vols. 

Ra. or Ras. Rashi, i.e. Rabbi Solomon ben Izaak (f 1105). 

Redslob, Die Integrit dt der Stelle Ho. 7^ im Frage gestellt (1842). 

Reu. Ed. Reuss, Das Alte l^estament iibersetzt eingeleitet und 

erlaitiert, Band II, Die Propheten (1892). 



RFH. Robert Francis Harper (see ABL.\ 

Riedel, Alttestamentliche Untersuchungen, Part I. (1902), 1-36. 

Ri(ehm), HBA. Riehm s Handw drterbuch d. Biblischen Alterthums. 

Riehm, Einl. Einleitung in das Alte Testament, Vol. II. (1890), 

Rob. BR? or Pal. Robinson, Biblical Researches in Palestine, 3 vols. (2d ed., 

Ros. Rosenmiilleri, Scholia in Vetus Testamentum in compen 

dium redacta ; postauctoris obitum edidit J. C. S. Lechner. 
Vol. VI. scholia in prophetas minores continens (1886). 

RP* Records of the Past (new series), Vols. I-IV. (1889-92). 

Ru. Paul Ruben, Critical Remarks upon Some Passages of the 

Old Testament (1896). 

Riickert, Hebraische Propheten, ubersetzt und erldutert, Vol. I. ( 1 83 1 ) . 

Sanctius, Comm. in Proph. Min. (1621). 

Sayce, Bab. ReL A. H. Sayce, Lectures on the Origin and Growth of Reli 
gion as Illustrated by the Religion of the Ancient Baby 
lonians (Hibbert Lectures, 1887). 

Sayce, HCM. Higher Criticism and the Verdict of the Monuments (3d 
ed., 1894). 

Sayce, Pat. Pal. Patriarchal Palestine (1895). 

SBONT. The Sacred Books of the Old and New Testaments. A New 

English Translation with Explanatory Notes and Pic 
torial Illustrations, prepared by ... and edited, with the 
assistance of H. H. Furness, by Paul Haupt. 

SBOT. The Sacred Books of the Old Testament. A Critical edi 

tion of the Hebrew Text, printed in Colors with Notes, 
prepared by . . ., under the editorial direction of Paul 

Schegg, Die kleinen Propheten ubersetzt und erklart, Theil I. ( 1 854) . 

Schleus. J. F. Schleusneri, Opuscula critica ad versiones Graecas 

Veteris Testamenti pertinentia (1812). 

Schlier, J. Die zwolf kleinen Propheten. Ein Wegweiser zum Verst dnd- 

niss des Prophetemvortes fur die Gemeinde (2d ed., 1876). 

Schmo. Schmoller, Exposition of the Books of Hosea and Amos in 

Lange s Bibelwerk (1872; transl. by J. F. McCurdy 
[Hosea] and T. W. Chambers [Amos], 1874). 

Schmidt, Sebastian Schmidt, In Prophetam Hoseam commentarius 


Scholz, Commentar zum Buche des Propheten Hosea (1882). 

Schra. Eberhard Schrader (see KA T. and KB. and KGF.}. 

Schro. J. F. Schroder, Die kleineren Propheten ubersetzt und 

erldutert (1829). 

Schultz, Theol. Old Testament Theology (1869; 5th ed., 1896; English, 


Seb. Mark Sebok, Die syrische Uebersetzung d. zwolf kleinen 

Propheten und ihr Verhaltniss zu dem massoretischen 

Text und zu den alter en Uebersetzungen, namentlich 

den LXX. und dem Targum (1887). 
Seesemann, Israel und Juda bei Amos und Hosea nebst einem Exkurs 

uber Ho. 1-3 (1898). 
Sellin, Beitrage zur israelitischen undjudischen Religionsgeschichte 

(1896 f.). 
Sharpe, Notes and Dissertations upon the Prophecy of Hosea 

Sim. August Simson, Der Prophet Hosea erkl drt und ubersetzt 

SK. Theologische Studien und Kritiken, herausgegeben von 

E. Kautzsch und E. Haupt. 

Skinner, Kings (New-Century Bible, 1904). 

Sm. R. Smend. 

Sm. ReL Lehrbuch der alttestamentlichen Religionsgeschichte (1893 ; 

2d ed., 1899). 

HPS. O. T. Hist., H. P. Smith, Old Testament History (1903). 
SS. Siegfried und Stade, Hebraisches Worterbuch zum Alien 

Testamente (1903). 

St. H. Steiner (see under Hi.). 

Sta. Bernhard Stade. 

Sta. GVI. Geschichte des Volkes Israel (1887-89). 

Sta. . Lehrbuch der Hebraischen Grammatik (1879). 

Sta. SBOT. The Books of Kings Critical Edition of the Hebrew Text 

printed in Colors (1904). 

Sta. Akad. Reden, Ausgewahlte Akadeniische Reden und Abhandlungen (1899). 
Staudlin, Neue Beitrage zur Erlauterung der biblischen Propheten 

( I 790- 
Stek. Schuurmans Stekhoven, De Alexandrijnsche Vertaling van 

het Dodekapropheton (1887). 
Stru. Struensee, Neue Uebersetzung der Weissagungen Jesaias, 

Joels, Amos, Obadja und Micha nach dem Ebr d- 

ischen Text mit Zuziehung der griechischen Version 

Stuck, Hoseas Propheta. Introductionem praemisit, vertit, com- 

mentatus est (1828). 
SV. Skizzen und Vorarbeiten, von J. Wellhausen, Vols. I.-VI. 


Tay. J. Taylor, art. " Amos," Hastings s Dictionary of the Bible. 

Theiner, Die zwolf kleinen Propheten (1828). 

Theod. Theodoret, Bishop of Cyrus (t457) 

T(h}LZ. Theologische Literaturzeitung. 



Thomson, LB. The Land and the Book ; or Biblical Illustrations drawn 
from the Manners and Customs, the Scenes and Scenery, 
of the Holy Land, by W. M. Thomson, 2 vols. (1859). 

ThSt. Theologische Studi en. Tijdschrift onder redactie van F. E. 

Daubanton en C. H. Van Rhijn. 

ThT. Theologisch Tijdschrift. 

Torrey, (i) "On the Text of Am. 5 26 6 1 - 2 7 2 ," Journal of Biblical 

Literature, XIII. (1894), 61-3. 
(2) "Notes on Am. a 7 6 10 8 18 9 8 - 10 ," ibid. XV. (1896), 

Tott. Tottermann, Die Weissagungen Hosea s bis zur ersten 

assyrischen Deportation (/-6 s ) erlautert (1879). 
Tristram, NHB. Natural History of the Bible (1889). 
TSBA. Transactions of the Society of Biblical Archaeology. 







Umbreit, Praktischer Commentar uber die kleinen Propheten, 
I. (1844). 

Vater, Amos ubersetzt und erl dutert mit Beifugung des 
Hebraischen Textes und des Griechischen der Septua- 
ginta nebst Anmerkungen zu letzterem (1810). 

Valeton, Amos en Hosea (1894 ; German, 1898). 

Commentary on Minor Prophets, contained in Critici Sacri 

Die vorexilische Jahweprophetie und der Messias (1897). 

K. Vollers, " Das Dodekapropheton der Alexandriner," 
Zeitschrift fur die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft, III. 

(1883), 219-72; IV. (1884), 1-20. 

J. Wellhausen, Die kleinen Propheten ubersetzt und erklart 

(1892; 3d ed. 1 898 = We. 3 ). 

We. Prol. Prolegomena to the History of Israel. 

We. SV. Skizzen und Vorarbeiten, Vols. I. -VI. (1884-89). 

We. Hex. Die Composition des Hexateuchs und der historischen Buchcr 

des Alien Testaments (1889). 
Wkl. H. Winckler. 

Wkl. Untersuch. Alttestamentliche Untersuchungen (1892). 
Wkl. A OF. Altorientalische Forsch ungen ( 1 893 ff .) . 

Wkl. GL Geschichte Israels in Einzeldarstellungen, 2 vols, (1895- 


W. Max Miiller, AE., Asien u. Europa nach Altagyptischen Denkmalern (1893). 
WRS. Proph. W. R. Smith, Prophets of Israel (1882 ; new ed., 1895). 
WRS. Sem. Lectures on the Religion of the Semites (1889 ; 2d ed., 1894). 

WRS. OTJC? The Old Testament in the Jewish Church (1881 ; 2d ed., 



Wil Wiinsche, Der Prophet Hosea ubersetzt und erklart, mit 

Benutzung der Targumin der jiidischen Ausleger Raschi, 
Aben Ezra und David Kimchi (1868). 

ZA. Zeitschrift fur Assyriologie, herausgegeben von C. Bezold. 

ZA W. Zeitschrift fitr die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft, heraus 

gegeben von Dr. Bernhard Stade. 

ZDMG. Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenlandischen Gesellschaft. 

ZDPV. Zeitschrift d. deutsch. Palaestina-Vereins. 

ZKW. Zeitschrift fur kirchliche Wissenschaft und kirchliches 


ZL Th. Zeitschrift fur Lutherische Theologie. 

ZWTh. Zeitschrift fur ivissenschaftliche Theologie. 

Biblical passages are cited according to the English enumeration of chap 
ters and verses, except in the textual, strophical, and grammatical portions 
where the Hebrew enumeration is followed. 



FOR a proper understanding of the place of Amos and Hosea in 
connection with Hebrew prophecy it is necessary to consider 
briefly the principal manifestations, during the two preceding cen 
turies, of what may be called " pre-prophetisrn " ; * the basis of 
this movement and its chief characteristics ; likewise its funda 
mental thought (concerning God, man, worship, life, and the 
future),! as wrought out in this period. In the same connec 
tion some attention must be given to Assyria, which in these 
times touches Israel so closely and exercises so marked an in 
fluence upon the development of Israelitish thought. J With some 
of the data relating to these subjects in our possession, we shall 
be better prepared to take up the subjects connected with Amos 
and Hosea, viz. in each case the personal life, the message, the 
public ministry ; likewise the literary form of the prophetic work, 

* The distinction between prophetism proper (i.e. written prophecy) and that 
out of which it sprang is important, and may be maintained by using for the latter 
the word " pre-prophetism." For the same reason, we may use nabhi (pi. nebhiim) 
in speaking of those (not seers) who preceded Amos. Cf. the use of the terms 
Nebiismus and Prophetismus by R. Kraetzschmar in Prophet and Seher im Alien 
Israel (1901). 

t In other words, the theology of these times, as it has been preserved in con 
temporaneous writings and in tradition. 

J A striking characteristic of Israel, in comparison with its sister nations, was 
a readiness to receive, from the outside, contributions in the form of new institutions 
and new thought. Much of this was bad and in time was lost ; but much of it, 
being good, was retained. The gradual accumulation and assimilation of this 
outside material, under the guidance of an all-wise Providence, ultimately lifted 
Israel to a position of influence in world-history. 


the versions in which it has come down to us, and the more 

important literature.* 

The spirit of pre-prophetism was always alert and aggressive. Its manifes 
tations were frequent, strong, and of a unique character. These manifesta 
tions were factors in preparing the way for that "point in the history of 
prophecy at which this great religious phenomenon rises apparently, but 
surely not really on a sudden to a higher level" (Che. EB. 3855); in 
other words, the point at which Amos and Hosea appear upon the scene of 
action. Unless a better explanation of the forward step taken at this time by 
the so-called writing prophets can be furnished than that which Budde {ReL 
131) proposes (viz. their utter failure to impress the people by oral speech), 
the question is to be regarded as a problem still unsolved. 


The participation of the nebhVim in the revolt which resulted 
in the disruption of the united kingdom may be assumed,! not 
withstanding the late date of those portions of the narrative \ in 
which this participation is especially described. 

* Much is gained in thinking of Amos and Hosea as together presenting a single 
unit of thought ; for, while each is in sharp contrast with the other in tempera 
ment and in message, neither, by himself, is complete. They must both be taken 
to secure the whole idea. 

f Kue. (Rel. I. 198 f.) says, " The revolt of the ten tribes from the royal house 
of David was undoubtedly countenanced by the prophets, especially by those of 
Ephraim " ; We. (Prol. 458), declares that they " actually suggested and promoted 
it"; Kit. (Hist. II. 188) says, "Jeroboam was supported in his enterprise by a 
prophet, Ahijah of Shiloh "; Kent (Hist. II. 20) maintains that it was supported by 
prophets who selected the leader. So also Gu. (GVI. 130-132), Wade (O.T.Hist. 
313), Paton (Hist. 191). Cf. Che. (EB. 2406), who, though treating the narratives 
as unhistorical, regards it as possible that Jeroboam had friendly relations with 
Ahijah who lived at Shiloh, and certain that the northern prophets were on Jero 
boam s side; and contra Winckler ((77. I. 159 f., II. 273) and H. P. Smith (O. T 
Hist. 1903, pp. 177-80), who make no reference to prophetic influence; Sta. (GVI. 
I. 306 f.), who declares the narratives concerning the prophets to be without 
historical basis. 

t There are four stories : (i) Ahijah, i K. ii-40 f o f which vs. 29-31 may be early 
(so Kit. and Skinner) ; but all is considered late by Wkl. (Untersuch. 8f.), Kamp- 
hausen, Benz., and Sta. (SBOT.) ; (2) Shemaiah, i K. 1222-24, clearly late ; (3) " the 
man of God out of Judah " and " the old prophet at Bethel," i K. I3 1 - 32 , all of which 
is late; (4) the visit of Jeroboam s wife to Ahijah, i K. I4 1 18 , which, if early, has 
been thoroughly worked over by a later editor, the Hebrew text seeming to be a 
late recension of <&. 


This assumption is based upon (i) the fact that the early prophets in their 
intense conservatism stand opposed to every advance of civilization; cf. the 
general policy of Elijah (p. xxxvi), the attitude of the Judean narrative toward 
the beginnings of civilization in Gn. 4 16 " 24 , and the opposition of Isaiah (2 6f - 
3 16 " 26 ) to everything that seemed to favor luxury in life ; not to speak of the 
representation of this same idea by the Nazirites and Rechabites who were 
closely associated with nebhfism and prophetism (p. xxxi); (2) the probabil 
ity that the spirit which later actuated Elijah (as well as Amos and especially 
Hosea) in reference to the acknowledgment of other gods existed, at least 
in germ, in the minds of these earlier nebhi im (so e.g. WRS. Proph. 48 ff.; 
Bu. Rel. 102); (3) the consistency of this pre-prophetic action with that 
of Elijah and Elisha in the conspiracy against the dynasty of Omri, as well as 
with the alleged conspiracy of Amos himself (Am. y 10 - 13 ) against Jeroboam II., 
at which time the prophetic temper was at all events regarded as revolu 
tionary ; and (4) the extreme likelihood that the prophetic stories, while late, 
represent in the main a true tradition, since they, at least, indicate one school 
of later opinion, the other school, led by Hosea (cf. Ho. 8 4 I3 11 ) regarding 
the revolt or schism as a great blunder. 

The effect of the disruption, in so far as the pre-prophetic 
movement is concerned, appears (i) in the fact that this move 
ment takes place in the North, rather than under the Davidic 
dynasty in the South,* for until the last twenty years or so before 
the end of the Northern kingdom (721 B.C.) Judah produced 
little or nothing except the Judean narrative (p. Ixix). This was 
true in part, because (2) a much greater liberty existed in the 
North, as a consequence of the failure of the Solomonic regime to 
maintain in Israel the obligations which it succeeded in imposing 
upon Judah; and with this liberty, there was possible also (3) a 
far greater simplicity of life than in the South ; there existed, in 
fact, a more democratic atmosphere, the extreme class distinctions 
being less emphasized;! while (4) there was less interference 
from outside influence than would have been felt under a con 
tinuation of the Solomonic policy; likewise, (5) the disruption, 

* Che. (ER. 3863), after making the words " Gilgal," " Carmel," " Ephraim," 
"Jordan," " Ramoth-gilead," etc. (as they occur in the narrative), corruptions of 
the all-pervading Jerahmeel of North Arabia, and after assigning the homes of 
Elijah and Elisha, as well as of Amos, to this region, says, " We cannot therefore 
be certain that there were any settlements of prophets in Northern Israel." 

t Meinhold (p. 25) suggests that Yahweh was the champion of every Israelite 
against the despotism of Solomon, and that the nab hi , therefore, as in later times 
the prophet, took the side of the deity against the despot. 


in spite of the calves of Jeroboam, contributed very largely toward 
preparing the way for that ultimate separation of Yahweh irom a 
place among the gods of the nations, and his elevation into the 
god of the heavens.* The revolt, in a word, was in some slight 
sense an anticipation of the later and more radical steps taken by 
Elijah and Elisha. 


1. Prophetic interference in the affairs of state took place 
under Elijah s leadership in the days of Ahab (ca. 875-850 B.C.). 
In estimating the importance of this very notable and unique 
manifestation of the pre-prophetic spirit, account must first be 
taken of the different strata of material preserved. On this point 
students are practically agreed. 

Certain stories come from about 800 B.C., i.e. from within fifty years or 
so of Elijah s own times, viz. (a) the early trouble with Ahab and the 
drought; the contest on Carmel ; and the visit to Horeb (i K. ly -iS 3 "- 5 ~ 30 
jS^^a-m-si). () the story of Naboth s vineyard (i K. 2 i 1 - 20a - 27 ) i 
(<r) Elijah s encounter with Ahaziah s messengers (2 K. I 1 " 4 - 5 - 8 ). From a 
period twenty-five to fifty years later comes the account of Elijah s last days 
with Elisha and his translation (2 K. 2 1 " 25 ). To a much later time belong 
the story of Elijah s treatment of the companies sent out by Ahaziah (2 K. 
i*- 18 ) and certain additions to the early stories (e.g. i K. i8 36 - 4 - 31 - 32a 199^-110 
2I 9&. 26. 28f. Benzinger makes 2 K. I 5 ~ 8 also late, and Kamphausen the entire 
account, 2 K. i 1 18 ). So substantially Kit., Benz., Kamphausen, Burney, and 
Skinner ; but Sta. (SBOT.} calls all the Elijah and Elisha material late except 

I K. IS 31 32 " I 9 96.10.11.c. 2I 206.21f.24 2 K 2 la.2,56 ( cf- GVL J ^ note ) . 

Meinhold (pp. 17-21) places the stories about 750 B.C. on the ground that 
such legends could not have developed in fifty years ; and Todd (Politics and 
Religion in Ancient hr. (1904), 195 ff.) minimizes Elijah s significance and 
makes the entire Baal-story an allegory coming from Manasseh s times. 

2. In the interpretation of these stories, the earlier, as well as the 
later, must be acknowledged to show two tendencies of a decided 
character. The narrator s point of view is one strongly biassed by 
the attitude toward Baalism which prevailed in the times succeeding 

Cf. K. DB. v. 646 f. 


Jehu. The picture of Ahab and his relation to Baalism is greatly 
overdrawn, a very large legendary element having entered into it.* 
Besides this, Elijah, called nabhf, or prophet, only once in the 
entire narrative (viz. i K. i8 22 where no other designation could 
have been employed), is everywhere (especially in i K. i y 8 " 24 2 K. 
i 9 " 12 2 8 ) represented as possessed of magical powers. f 

3. But after making full allowance for these elements, we may 
feel confident that Elijah represents a true historical character of 
a remarkable type, and that a proof of his greatness is this very 
" stupendous and superhuman " image of him here sketched. \ 
We are not compelled to choose between the two extreme views, 
according to one of which, the prophet Elijah, while above the 
level of the nebhfim of his time, is presented in greatly magnified 
form, the prophets of this period having had no such prominence 
as the narratives assign to them ; while the other treats him as a 
Titanic character creating a new epoch in Israel s history, to be 
placed side by side with Moses himself. || His proper place may 
be determined by observing certain secondary points in connec 
tion with his contest with Ahab regarding Baalism, and with 
Ahab s relations to Naboth, and all of this must be studied 
in the light of the issue of the whole matter as it appears in the 
case of Jehu under Elisha s ministry. 

Among other points, outside of the two main stories, the following should 
not be overlooked: (i) Elijah (z/.j.) is not called nabhi\ because even at 
this time he is recognized as something different. He may not, however, be 
placed in the class of the writing prophets, because, unlike them, he has left 

* This is the unanimous voice of critical opinion ; cf. e.g. Kue. Einl. 25 ; 
Kit. Hist. II. 267; Addis, art. "Elijah," EB.\ We. Prol. 292 f. ; Co. Proph. 29; 
Che. EB. 3859 f. ; Meinhold ; Sm. Rel? 175 ff. ; H. P. Smith, O. T. Htst. 188 ; 
K. DB. V. 655. 

t This is in accordance with the earlier conceptions ot ncbMism which Israel 
held in common with other nations ; ct the power ol Moses with his magician s 
staff (Ex. 4 2 <f- 720 9 23 > etc.), that of Josnua and his spear (Jos. f and the use 
of the arrow in divining referred to in 2 K. 1315 ff. See K. DB. V. 650 f. ; Sm. 
Rel? 154; Kit. Hist. II. 266 f.; Che. EB. 3856 f. 

| Cf. Co. Proph. 29. 

We. Prol. 291; Sta. GVI. I. 526 f . ; Todd, op. cit. 195 ff.; H. P. Smith, O. 
71 Hist. 191 ff. ; Meinhold, 1-32. 

|| Co. Proph. 29; Kit. Hist. II. 266 f. ; Addis, art. " Elijah," EB.; Strachan, art. 
" Elijah," DB. 


nothing in written form ; and unlike them, he is closely associated with man* 
ticism and magic. On the other hand, the facts seem to make him both seer 
and nabhf. Witness the point already suggested in reference to manticism and 
magic, and, in addition, the fact of his close relationship with the societies of 
nebhi im, and his apparent leadership among them, his farewell visit to the vari 
ous headquarters of these societies, their strong interest in the occasion and the 
manner of his final departure ; and, still further, those great characteristics 
of sturdiness, strength, and courage which bespeak for him a place side by 
side with the seers of the past, viz. Moses, Joshua, Samuel. (2) The sud 
denness of his appearances and disappearances, so frequently a subject of 
comment (i K. i; 1 i8 7ff - 2 K. 2 ia ), is to be attributed to the lacunae of the 
narrative, rather than to any effort upon the part of the writer to cultivate an 
atmosphere of mystery. 

(3) The impression of a magical personality (cf. the story of Samuel and 
the witch of Endor) is conveyed, not only in the miraculous power ascribed 
to him in general, but also in his special power over dew and rain (i K. 
\f iS 1 - 41 - 45 ), the deference paid to him by Obadiah (i K. i8 7ff -),the use of an 
extra quantity of water to prevent suspicion (i8 33ff -), the physical performance 
in connection with his premonition of rain (i8 42 45 ), the ecstatic condition 
in which he ran five hours from Carmel to Jezreel (i8 4ti ), the magical power 
ascribed to his mantle (i9 19 , cf. 2 K. 2 8 - 13ff -), which Elisha may not resist, 
and with which the waters are divided ; and especially in the account of 
his marvellous translation by means of a chariot and horses of fire (2 K. 2 11 f ), 
a later expression of the feeling that his activity was enduring, and that his 
fellowship with God was "so close that its interruption seemed inconceiv 
able" (K. DR. V. 655). In close connection with all this is (4) the strongly 
pronounced nomadic spirit, which, naturally, stands opposed to everything 
that indicates progress in civilization. This spirit appears in the simplicity 
of his food and dress (i K. ig 6 - 13 2 K. I 8 ), in his isolation from his fellows, 
and in his opposition to the religious policy of Ahab (z/.z.). Perhaps this 
furnishes the explanation, also, of the sudden character of his appearances 
and disappearances (z/.5.) : it is surely in accord with this that he is repre 
sented as living by the brook Cherith, which flows into the Jordan (i K. 
I7 2 ~ 7 ); sojourning outside of his own country at Zarephath in Phoenicia 
(i K. I7 8ff -); paying a visit to Horeb, after a journey of forty days and forty 
nights (i K. I9 5 " 8 ); and moving about from place to place (2 K. I, 2); 
cf. the nomadic character of the Rechabites (p. lii), who arose about this 
time (z/.z.). (5) Not a little light is thrown upon the story of pre-prophetism 
by the two incidents in Elijah s life, in connection with which he left his 
native land and visited foreign countries. The earlier sojourn in Phoenicia, 
at Zarephath, together with the nature of the work performed, indicates, on his 
part, not only the nomadic tendency (in this case encouraged, doubtless, by 
fear of Ahab), but also an attitude toward non-Israelites which is broad and 
liberal, in spite of the narrow and intense zeal ordinarily attributed to him ; 
and besides, a leniency which meant that the hatred shown in connection 


with Baalism was not against that religion in itself, but only against its 
encroachment upon the realm of Yahweh (Sm. Rel? 178; Co. Proph. 31), 
who had now become recognized as, indeed, the god of the land of Israel, 
although not god also of Phoenicia. The visit to Horeb (i K. I9 8ff> ), while 
illustrative of many elements in the prophet s character (e.g. the longing for 
solitude characteristic of the nomad, and a deep spiritual nature, as well as a 
tendency to deep despondency), also calls attention to the prophet s idea of 
Yahweh s original home and dwelling-place, i.e. the place in which one can 
most easily secure his oracle ; and is better understood in the light of Ju. 5 5 
(cf. also Dt. 33 2 Hb. 3 3 Ps. 68 8 ). This journey, although undertaken in a fit 
of discouragement, and because of Jezebel s inimical attitude, cannot be easily 
explained on any other supposition than that the nab hi 1 , in accordance with 
the general conviction, makes this pilgrimage, in the fashion of all ages, to a 
place regarded as sacred from the oldest times, because there Yahweh had 
dwelt in the beginning (Bu. Rel. 18 ; K. DB. V. 626 f. ; Barton, Semitic 
Origins, 277 ; Sta. GVI. I. 130 ff.). 

(6) The chief elements in certain situations described in the Elijah-stories 
had already been anticipated in earlier history, eg. Solomon had erected 
sanctuaries for his foreign wives (i K. H 7f ) just as Ahab does for Jezebel 
(v.i.}, and probably this constituted one of the charges in the prophetic 
indictment of that monarch. Even earlier, Nathan had taken precisely the 
same stand against the abuse of royal power (2 S. I2 1 - 15 ) as that taken by 
Elijah in the case of Ahab. Still further, the thought of Yahweh s using 
Syria (i K. IQ 15 - 17 ) in order to punish Israel for wrong-doing, does not, of 
itself, imply that Yahweh is other than a national god, as is clear from the 
presence of this same conception not only in earlier Israelitish times (Nu. 
, 4 40ff. rj f E] Jos. 7 [J]), but also among other nations (cf. the part played 
by the gods in the fall of Babylon in the Cyrus Cylinder,* and the representa 
tions concerning Yahweh s power at the time of the Exodus [J, E], and in the 
confusion of tongues at Babel [in J] ; cf. Meinhold, 30 f.). On the further 
bearing of this, v.i. (7) Much turns upon the exact meaning assigned 
to the utterances concerning Yahweh and the Baalim in i K. iS 24 - 27 - 37 - 39 
(Sm. Rel? 178), v.t. 

4. The uncertainty of the facts in the story of Elijah s struggle 
with Ahab and the priests of Baal explains, if it does not justify, 
the varying interpretations which have been founded upon them. 
We may consider here those points which relate to the form of 

*The words of Sennacherib s general (2 K. i8 25 = Is. 36!) might also be cited, 
were it not probable that they represent a later Israelitish view rather than the 
thought of the Assyrian (cf. Sta., Benz., Marti, Duhm, in loc.}. It is hardly likely 
that the haughty Assyrian would represent himself as acting in obedience to the 
command of the god of a small, despised people. 


the story, the actual facts as nearly as they can be determined, 
and the problems raised by these facts. But since Elijah s contest 
is only part (or perhaps the beginning) of the great struggle which 
was closed, under the direction of Elisha, by Jehu, we shall state 
the problems and reserve a decision upon them until the additional 
help has been gained which is furnished by the events of Elisha s 
career and a consideration of the actual denouement (pp. xlviii f.). 

(i) Reference has been made to the date of the material (v.s.~), as we H as 
to its prejudiced character. We cannot fail to note also its fragmentary form, 
e.g. its failure to furnish any introduction to the story of the challenge, from 
which an adequate knowledge of the events leading up to it may be obtained; 
the lack, also, of the end of the story, in which one might have expected to 
find out how Elijah executed the commission given him at Horeb, for surely 

1 K. iQ 1 ^ 20 cannot be accepted as a fitting conclusion; and, still further, the 
absence of anything that will throw light on the fulfilment of the prediction 
in I K. I9 17 . Perhaps the story of Naboth was intended, as Wellhausen sug 
gests, to be the beginning of the judgment which overtook the worshippers 
of Baal. (2) The facts in the story itself are not always mutually consistent, 
and the statement throughout bears evidence of being too strongly colored 
against Ahab. The formal charge in I K. I6 30 " 33 represents him as being 
actually the greatest sinner that has yet occupied Israel s throne. But every 
accusation made, except that of building an altar in the house of Baal (v. 82 ), 
comes from the Deuteronomic period, nearly two and a half centuries later, 
when the official spirit had altogether changed. Was the extension of this 
courtesy to his wife worse than the similar act of Solomon ? And then, we 
may not think that Ahab had altogether forsaken Yahweh, or that Yahwism 
was in so bad a state, when we learn that of Ahab s children, three (i K. 22* 

2 K. 3 1 8 18 - 26 ) were given names containing the word Yahweh as one element; 
that Ahab is able to find four hundred Yahweh prophets in one place, when 
there is occasion for their service (i K. 22 6 ); and that the number of those 
who had not bowed the knee to Baal was seven thousand, while, on the 
other hand, all of the Bai \ adherents are able a little later to be accommo 
dated in one house (2 K. io 21 - 23 ). If, now, we add to this the statement of 
Jehu that Ahab served Baal only a little (2 K. io 18 ), and the evidence 
that Jezebel was, indeed, a malicious and vindictive woman, we may well 
suppose not only that the situation was less serious than it is represented, 
but also that Jezebel, rather than Ahab, was the chief sinner. Ahab, follow 
ing the policy of David and Solomon, sought to strengthen his throne and 
benefit the nation by alliance with outside powers, and did not appreciate the 
full meaning of the struggle as it presented itself to Elijah. He regarded the 
question as one in which the royal authority was involved, and, encouraged 
doubtless by the Tyrian influence, acted accordingly (WRS. Proph. 76 ff.). 
But, on the other hand, Jezebel was zealous and persistent in her efforts to 


build up the Baal-party, for political as well as for religious purposes. The 
Tyrian Baal-worship threatened to a greater or less degree the Israelitish 
Yahweh-worship. (3) But these facts, even in this simpler and less sensational 
form, represent a contest. What was the point at issue ? 

The question, in general, is this : Does Elijah here draw the line 
between the spiritual Israel (i.e. the seven thousand), and Israel of 
the flesh, who, though of the nation, are not members of the elect, 
known later as " the remnant " ? * Are the spiritual and the worldly 
here for the first time brought into conflict ?f Does Elijah, then, 
give evidence of a conception of God higher than any that has yet 
been held? Or, on the other hand, shall we throw out this entire 
narrative of the Baal-struggle as absolutely unhistorical ; \ and 
understanding that it had its origin a century or a century and a 
half later than was indicated above, regard it as consequently the 
expression of a time not earlier than that of Amos and Hosea ? 
In either case may we suppose that, after all, Elijah s position is 
nothing more than Ahijah might have taken against Solomon, the 
fact being that the struggle is on behalf of the old idea, viz. an 
undefiled cultus, through a correct performance of which Yahweh s 
demands are satisfied, and not in behalf of the new idea, empha 
sized by the writing prophets, that Yahweh s religion was something 
other than a cult ? Does Elijah represent Yahweh as about to 
bring great punishment on Israel, through Syria, because of failure 
to observe a pure cult, or because of ethical shortcomings ? This 
is the question at issue. The answer to it is of great con 
cern in determining the value of the contribution of Amos and 

5. The Naboth story is perhaps more significant than anything 
else connected with the life of Elijah, for here there is spoken the 
condemnation of governmental unrighteousness which receives so 
large a notice from later prophets. 

Some difficulties exist, likewise, in the form, as it is given us, of this 
story (i K. 21). It is easy to see that it interrupts the connection of chaps. 20 
and 22. If to this we add that in <& it immediately follows chap. 19, and that 
it has many points of affinity with the narrative in chaps. 17, 19 (e.g. the 

* We. hr, u. jild. Geschl 54, note. f Sm. Rel? 177 ff. 

J Sta. GVLl. 526 ff. ; Todd, op. cit. 195 ff. Meinhold, 24 ff. 


representation of Ahab as a weak man controlled by Jezebel; also the appar 
ent dependence of 2i 20a upon i8 17 ), sustaining no relation to chaps. 20, 22, 
we have a fairly strong case for the order given in (51 (v.s.). But now, if 
we put together the fact that Elijah is being introduced again by the same 
writer after his successor has been appointed (i K. IQ 15 21 ); the fact that the 
murder of Naboth contributed more largely to the ruin of Ahab s house than 
did his religious policy (Ew.Hist. IV. 71, 107; Co. Proph. 31 ff.; Skinner, 255) ; 
and the better understanding gained of the Carmel episode if we suppose the 
murder of Naboth to have preceded it, and to have excited the feeling of the 
people against Ahab (Skinner, 255; WRS. EB. 2670), we are compelled to 
assume either that chap. 21 originally stood between vs. 18and19 of chap. 19, 
or that it is an independent document (cf. its resemblance to I4 1 " 16 , and the 
view of Burney that it belongs to the same source as 2 K. gi-io 28 ).* 

Keeping in mind the difficulties which the form of the story 
presents, we may note in reference to its content : (a) that the 
main point, rebuke of the king for an outrageous act, is the 
same as that found in the Nathan-David story (v.s.), and forms 
one of the principal topics in the discourses of Amos and Hosea ; 
(b) that, after all, Ahab s act was not an unusual thing for an oriental 
monarch (v.s.) ; but, in this case, the ancient spirit of freedom is 
again aroused (as in the days of the disruption) against a personal 
despotism; (c) that it was this crime (v.s.*), rather than Ahab s 
defence of Baalism, that cost him his throne, a significant fact in 
the history of national ethics and of a true conception of religion. 
In this same connection we may observe further : (a) the thing 
which Yahweh is here represented as doing is something quite 
unusual ; the threat that Ahab s house is to be destroyed by a 
foreign power, viz. Syria, plainly makes Yahweh something other 
than a merely national god (v.i.) ; (b) the Naboth-story is to 
receive practically the same interpretation, whether we suppose it 

* To this may still be added the lack of harmony between chap. 21 and 2 K. 9 ; 
cf. the position of Naboth s "field" in 2 K. 9 16ff -, a little way from Jezreel, and 
Naboth s "vineyard" close to Ahab s palace (in Samaria?), I K. 2i 18 , and the 
variants of in v. 1 ; the visit of Ahab to his ill-gotten prize on the day after the 
murder in 2 K. g 26 , but apparently on the same day in i K. 21 ; also, the words of 
Jehu in 2 K. 9 26 tell us a fact not in i K. 2I 11 - 16 , viz. that Naboth s sons were killed. 
On the basis of these and other facts chap. 21 is assigned to an independent source, 
as an appendix to chaps. 17-1921, by Kue. Einl. IIL 78; Meinhold, 12 ff.; Gunkel, 
Preussische Jahrb. XXVI I. (1897) , 18 ff. ; Skinner ; but cf. We. Hex. 283 ff. ; WRS., 
art. " Kings," EB. 2670; Kit. 159-162; Benz. in loc. 


to have preceded the Carmel event, and to be closely connected 
therewith (furnishing, in fact, the basis of that popular uprising), 
or to have followed it and been entirely independent of it. In 
either case it is a cry for justice to those oppressed. Upon the 
whole, something tangible is gained if the two stories are joined 
together ; (c) with both stories there may be connected logically 
the opening message of Elijah to Ahab (i K. I7 1 ) containing the 
threat of drought ; for, after all, this is the question at issue ; Who 
grants rain? Who is God? Yahweh or Baal? The chief purpose 
of this threat was " to demonstrate that the God, whose servant is 
Elijah, is the sole ruler of nature, against whose will no power 
in heaven or earth can prevail" (Skinner). This, in brief, was 
Elijah s great message (v.s.). 


i. Close cooperation of the prophet with the government, a 
conspiracy against the government and its overthrow by the insti 
gation of the prophet, all this took place in the days of Elisha 
(ca. 850-800 B.C.). In this we have the completion of the work 
initiated by Elijah. 

The portions of 2 K. concerned with the life of Elisha may be classified : 

(1) 2 1 " 25 4 1 -6 23 8 1 " 15 I3 14 21 , a series of early prophetic narratives of a personal 
or biographical character, loosely strung together and laying special emphasis 
on Elisha s activity as a wonder-worker (to be designated by the symbol E 6 ) ; 

( 2 ) S 4 27 6 2 *-7~ 9 1 " 6 - 11 ~ 28 - 30 -io 27 , a different collection of early prophetic narra 
tives giving special attention to Elisha s influence in affairs of state and in the 
campaigns against Syria and other nations (E*) ; (3) 3 1 3 7 1 *" 20 8 16 - 24 - ^ 9 7 10 
IO 28-si. 32-36 5 a se ries of later additions chiefly from the pen of the Deuteronomic 
compiler of Kings. Cf. the comm. of Kit, Benz., Burney, Skinner; and Kue. 
Einl. I IL 80 ff.; We. Hex. 286-90; Addis, art. "Elisha," EB.\ Dr. LOT. 
196 f.; WRS. and K., art. " Kings," EB. 

This material presents some of the characteristics named above, notably, 
e.g. (#) the magical element (strikingly similar, and even stronger), but there 
is little or no basis for the opinion (H. P. Smith, O. T. Hist., p. 194, and 
others; cf. contra, Addis, EB. 1276; Strachan, art. " Elijah," DB.\ and the 
comm. of Kit., Benz., and Skinner) that the Elisha-memoirs are in large part 
a duplication of those of Elijah, and consequently unhistorical. () The lack 
of chronological order, as well as of chronological indication; and the result 
of this is to create a wrong impression of Elisha s career (cf. Addis, EB. 1276; 


Strachan, DB. I. 694; Benz. 129; Kit. 185); for who really gathers from the 
narrative that Elisha lived forty-five years after the revolt of Jehu? A. true 
conception of the case is prevented by the placing of this story at tne end, 
with all the anecdotes but one preceding. 

2. The following points, although of secondary interest, may 
not be ignored : 

(i) The first meeting, at which the call was extended (by Elijah, it would 
seem, rather than by Yahvveh himself),* took place at the home of Elisha s 
family (which must have possessed substance ; and consequently Elisha, like 
Amos, was not an ordinary nabhi^, some time after Elijah s visit to Horeb,f 
perhaps six or seven years before Elijah s final disappearance, \ in all a dozen 
years or so before the great revolution which unseated the dynasty of Omri. 
Elisha differed greatly from Elijah in appearance (cf. the phrase hairy man, 
2 K. 1 8 [unless with Kittel, Benzinger, and Skinner, we refer this to the hairy 
mantle], with the epithet bald-head, 2 K. 2 23 ) and in dress (cf. the mantle, 

1 K. I9 19 , which Elisha does not seem to have worn in later life; note an.n, 

2 K. 4 29 ). He used a staff, which, with the mantle, served him in his work as 
a magician. In a true sense he was a successor, since he it was who gave 
political effect to Elijah s teaching, or, in other words, faithfully and 
resolutely carried out the policy of annihilating Baal and all that belonged 
to Baal, which was Elijah s great legacy to the nation. || In this case there is 
no exegetical nor historical sense in calling Elisha a " demagogue, conspirator, 
revolutionist, and agitator " (Co. Proph. 33) ; the phrase " father and guide of 
the Northern kingdom" (Addis, EB. 1276) seems more appropriate (p. xliv)- 
(2) The story of the separation is late, and exhibits some peculiarities, two or 
three of which deserve mention ; e.g. how comes it that Elijah, who has 
always lived a solitary life, now sustains close personal relations with the pro 
phetic societies? Perhaps he sees fit to change his habits now that the end 
is coming (Ew. Hist. IV. 80); or does this document present a different 
conception of Elijah (Skinner) ? It is, rather, Elijah s emphatic way of intro 
ducing his successor, to whom he intrusts a task so terrible in its seriousness. 
The passage, therefore, has closer connection with the " Elisha-stories " than 
with the "Elijah-stories." The "double portion" (2 9 ) is not the portion 
of the first-born, Dt. 2i 17 (Thenius, Benz., Kit., Skinner, in loc. ; and Addis, 
EB. 1277); nor may we follow the literalizing view of Sirach (that Elisha 
performed twice as many miracles as did Elijah) ; ^f but rather it expresses 
Elisha s desire that, having an even larger enduement of the divine spirit 
than his master, he may be able to carry the struggle of Yahweh begun by 

* Cf. cases of second-hand inspiration noted by Sm. AW. 2 80, note. 

f Addis, EB. 1276 ; cf. Skinner, 242 ; Benz. 113 ; Kit. 153 f. 

t Strachan, DB. I. 693. WRS. Proph. 85. || Kit. Hist. II. 279. 

U EccluS. 48 13 , 1,-Pfl NS1D S3 


Elijah to a successful issue (Maybaum, Proph. 76). On the purpose of the 
picture, as a whole, v.s., p. xxxvi. (3) The fact that Elisha s habits were those 
of an agriculturalist at first, and later of a city dweller (in Jericho, 2 K. 2 18 , 
Samaria, 6 32 , Dothan, 6 13 , Shunem, 4 10 , Damascus, 8 7 ), plays an important 
part in contrast with Elijah s nomadic manner of life (p. xxxvi). It is not 
enoagb to observe simply that here, as frequently, those are associated who 
differ greatly from each other (c.g. Amos and Hosea, Isaiah and Micah) ; or 
that one kind of mind is needed for initiation, another for final execution. 
The case is incomplete, unless we realize the full significance, in this long 
ministry of, perhaps, fifty years, of Elisha s " easy familiarity " and gentle 
manners, not only when he is sought out by kings (2 K. 6 21 I3 14 ), but also when 
he is visited on new moon or Sabbath (2 K. 4-2 ff -) by the people who trust him 
implicitly. Was this demagoguery ? Then Jesus also must have been a 
demagogue. Elijah s whole career was a protest against civilization. Not so 
Elisha s ; but rather an example of wise and effective adjustment, in spite of 
his strict religious views, to the new environment created by Ahab. This 
suggests (4) other points of character which come out in connection with 
some of the smaller events, such as the remarkable spirit of toleration (cf. 
Elijah during his residence in Zarephath) in the advice given Naaman the 
Syrian (Strachan, DB. I. 694); of humaneness, in his attitude toward the 
Syrian captives (6 22 ) ; of intense love for Israel, in his reply to Hazael s 
question, Why does my lord weep ? (8 11 - 13 ) ; * of widely recognized sympathy, 
as shown by the coming to him of widows and orphans (4 1 ) ; of the tremendous 
energy and fruitfulness of his work, if we may accept the estimate placed in 
the mouth of king Joash (i3 14 ), for had he not been more to Israel than its 
chariots and horsemen ?f It will be noted that the data suggestive of these 
elements in Elisha s character lie, for the most part, outside of the field of his 
political activity, and the circumstances connected with the revolution, on 
which v.i. 

3. Nothing in prophecy, or indeed in the entire Old Testament 
scripture, is more suggestive of wonderland than the stories which 
recount Elisha s miracles. This idealization finds explanation in 
more than a single way ; e.g. the writer thus makes expression 
of the profound feeling of love and esteem entertained by the 
people for Elisha, as well as of an equally profound belief in the 
love of Yahweh for his people, a love exhibited in the beneficent 
activity of the great representative, Elisha. Whether emphasis 
is to be placed upon the first or the second of these ideas will be 
determined by one s final estimate of Elisha s work as a whole. 

* With the reading, oir>:, his face took on a fixed look of unutterable horror 
(Skinner, X.; cf. Klo., Kit.). t Addis, EB. 1278 ; Skinner in loc. 


We cannot tail to make three comparisons: (i) Of these miracles with 
those of Elijah (v.s. p. xxxvi) ; but here we should regard Elisha s miracles 
neither, on the one hand, as grotesque and vulgar in so far as they are not 
pure imitation, and as altogether lacking in sanctification and grandeur,* nor, 
on the other, as something altogether ideal and above criticism of any sort.f 

(2) Of Elisha s relation to Samaria during the Syrian wars, with Isaiah s 
relation to Jerusalem in 701 B.C. during Sennacherib s invasion; but in making 
this comparison, we must remember that a century and a half full of good 
teaching for Israel has elapsed, and that while Elisha, as a matter of course, 
appears to less advantage than does Isaiah, it may well be questioned whether, 
upon the whole, the latter event was more critical than the former, and 
whether, likewise, the doctrine of Zion s inviolability established in connec 
tion with Isaiah s preaching in 701 B.C. was not far more injurious to the 
Israel of the future, both ethically and politically, than the severe and, indeed, 
terrible measures apparently sanctioned by Elisha in the uprooting of Baalism. 

(3) Of Elisha s miracles with those of Jesus Christ; were they not of the 
same general character ? Omitting the treatment of the children slain by 
bears, do they not represent the single idea of beneficence, that is, love ? 
From no other source does prophecy receive a contribution which so defi 
nitely represents or anticipates the Christlike element (Addis, EB. 1277). 
Surely this thought of love is a new idea in Israel s religion. But is it just to 
attribute it to Elisha ? His life and work furnished the conception. Even if 
the stories are very late, and even if little historical fact may be found in them, 
they, at all events, reproduced Elisha s character as it appeared to the people 
of his own times and of those that followed. 

Much in these miracles relates to the pre-prophetic societies ( 5). Elisha 
was strengthening and developing these societies for purposes of propaganda 
(Che. EB. 3863). These societies were capable of exercising great influence 
on Israel. This method of warfare was more diplomatic than that of Elijah. 
It does not mean, however, that Elisha lacked courage (2 K. 3 13f> ). It is 
probable that in view of his feeling toward Joram, he did not use his house in 
Samaria to any great extent until after Jehu s accession, but lived much of 
the time with the societies. This work was to have great significance in the 
further development of prophecy. 

4. The political activity of Elisha is full of interesting problems. 
(i) Pre-prophetism, acting through him, now controlled the state. 
He was not merely an adviser like Isaiah. He was himself an 
active participant in the affairs of administration, "a decisive 
power in court and camp " (Addis, EB. 1277). In this he followed 
the example of all his predecessors. The time had not yet quite 

* So Co. Proph. 33 ; cf. Addis, EB. 1277. 
f So most of the older commentators. 


come for the introduction of a new policy, viz. that of non-inter 
ference except in so far as moral suasion might exert an influence. 
(2) His relations with foreign kings and potentates are of a re 
markable nature. They seek him out. His reputation must have 
been widespread. Meimhold is right in pointing out that Well- 
hausen underestimates the influence of the prophets in these 
times. It is quite inconceivable how certain writers * count Elisha 
as of so small a value to Israelitish thought. Greater justice is 
shown him by others. f 

(3) The account of the Moabite campaign of the king of Israel (2 K. 3 4 27 ) 
with his vassal kings of Judah and Edom possesses for us a larger interest 
even than that which its relation to the well-known Mesha inscription (a 
voucher for the historicity of this story) occasions, J because, being evidently 
from the series of political stories (p. xli), it assigns to Elisha an important role 
as political adviser, and, besides, refers to certain facts in connection with the 
prophet which aid us in formulating our estimate of him. We observe () the 
custom of making inquiry of the nebhfim concerning war (cf. I K. 22 6ff -),and 
when we recall the times of Saul and the beginning of the work of the 
nebhi j im, we find ground for the supposition that the primary aim of these 
dervishes was to awaken the spirit of the nation for purposes of war (Schwally, 
Semitische Kriegsaltertiimer, I. (1901), 103 ff.; K. DB. V. 653) ; but (b) Eli 
sha being discovered in the camp, the mere mention of his relation to Elijah 
(as the pourer of water on the hands = servitor) gives him standing in the 
eyes of the king of Judah, who in I K. 22 seems not to have known the 
Northern prophets. There is to be noted next (c) the statement of the king 
of Israel (v. 13 ) which implies that the kings, in this case as in i K. 22, 
have undertaken this expedition by prophetic advice for which Yahweh 
was responsible; but (d) Elisha, following Elijah s policy, will have no 
dealings with the king of Israel (whichever king it was) ; for the sake, 
however, of Judah s king he will speak. But he cannot speak except in trance, 
and so (e} as was his custom (HTP, and it used to be, is frequentative), he asks 
for a musician (v. 15 ) in order by the influence of music to excite himself into 
the ecstatic condition. This act, attested by I S. io 5 , alluded to frequently 
in Arabian literature (WRS. Proph. 392), and recognized to-day as a powerful 
incentive to religious emotion (cf. the influence of music on Saul s evil spirit, 
I S. i6 16 ), seems to bear witness to three things : that Elisha {contra Elijah) 

* Co., Sta., H. P. Smith, Marti. 

f E\v., WRS., Addis, Gu., Meinhold, Sm., Kit.; K. DB. V. 655 f. 

% Mesha s inscription relates to the revolt in which he secured independence 
from Israel. The campaign of Jehoram seems to have been an unsuccessful 
attempt to reduce Moab to submission again. 

$ Cf. comm. on 2 K. 3 7 , and L s substitution of Ahaziah for Jehoshaphat. 


is in close companionship with the nebhfim; that, while the spirit of Yahweh 
takes hold of Elijah spontaneously, artificial means are resorted to in Elisha s 
case ; and that consequently he belongs rather with those that preceded him in 
the prophetic work (i.e. a lower order) than with those who followed {i.e. Amos 
and Hosea). The first of these all will accept; but are the other inferences 
strictly legitimate ? May not this act in his case have been merely the con 
ventional way of announcing the oracle ? Is it really any more derogatory to 
his standing as a prophet than the ecstatic visions of Amos or Isaiah or Jere 
miah or Ezekiel (v.i.} ? (/) The method adopted to secure water (vs. 16 ~ 19 ) 
was adapted to the possibilities of the locality (known for its sand-pits) ; cf. 
the plagues of Egypt. (^) The evident recognition (3 26>27 ) of the efficacy 
of the sacrifice of the king s own son to Chemosh is of interest in fixing the 
theological point of view of the writer. 

(4) Evidence of Elisha s political activity is seen, still further, in the stories 
of the healing of Naaman (5 1 " 19 ), of the entrapping of the Syrians in Samaria 
(6 8 - 23 ), of the siege of Samaria by Ben-hadad (6 24 ~7 2) ), with each of which 
important difficulties are connected ; * but, in general, they show the high 
esteem in which Elisha was held by all classes of men, his international as well 
as national reputation, his almost unlimited influence at home and abroad, 
and, at the same time, the great breadth of his mind, and his entire devotion 
to the nation s God, Yahweh. We may not go so far as to infer that Elisha s 
international greatness and his international relations furnished the basis for 
the idea of an international god, which, in turn, prepared the way for Amos s 
position taken in chaps. I and 2; yet the high character of his work must be 

5. The great revolution instigated by Elisha and executed by 
Jehu, described in 2 K. 9, 10, is one of the most important events 
in Israel s history ; this importance relates to the political situation, 
but also, and especially, to the history of the pre-prophetic move 
ment, the relation, in that movement, of both Elijah and Elisha to 
the history of Israel s religion. This revolution placed on the throne 
the dynasty under which Amos and Hosea (in part) did their work. 
That Omri s dynasty had greatly strengthened Israel at home and 
abroad is universally acknowledged, f That seed was sown in this 
revolution, which in the end proved Israel s ruin, has not been 
denied since Hosea (i 4 ) first announced it. We may call Jehu 
ambitious and bloodthirsty, and, since he undoubtedly believed 

* E.g. the latter event is assigned to the reigns of Ahab (Benz.), Jehoram (We.; 
H. P. Smith, O. T. Hist. 196), Jehoahaz (Kue. Einl. IM- 81 f.). 
t Kit. Hist. II. 262; We. Prol. 458 f.; Sta. GV1. I. 518, 522. 


himself to be acting for and in the name of Yahweh, a fanatic.* 
Sacred history fails to furnish a more ghastly series of official mur 
ders, beginning with the shooting of Jehoram in his chariot, and 
closing with the horrible blood-bath of the Baal-worshippers in the 
temple. But there was prophetic precedent for the revolution, 
and the total destruction of the royal house, when dethroned, 
has been the regular routine in all Oriental revolutions.! Al 
though by the revolution there was gained a destruction of the 
Baal cult, and although it was strictly in accord with Oriental 
policy, from the political point of view it was a blunder. } 

It is more difficult to reach a decision as to the meaning of this 
event in connection with the pre-prophetic movement, and of the 
role played by the individual prophets. Apparently no great fault 
has ever been found with Elijah because of his share in it, and 
yet it was he who conceived and initiated the movement, indi 
cated the exact lines of its execution, and selected specifically 
the agents who were to complete its execution. On whom, then, 
rests the responsibility ? If one may judge Elijah s character by 
the impression which it produced upon his contemporaries and 
upon those immediately following him, he himself would have 
done, in detail, just what Jehu did; for did he not (i K. iS 40 ) 
actually slay the prophets of Baal (four hundred and fifty)? Did 
he not foretell the awful events which were to rid Israel of Baalism 

On the other hand, severe criticism has been meted out to 

* Cornill s characterization is too strong, viz. " one of the most contemptible 
characters known in the history of Israel" {Proph. 33). 

t Cf. Ju. g 5 i K. I5 29 i6 n ; the Panammu Inscription from Zinjirli, line 3, men 
tions a slaughter of seventy kinsmen of the king in a conspiracy against the throne. 
Che. EB. 2355. 

t Sta. GVI. I. 545; Gu. GVL 178; Co. Proph. 33. 

Bu. (Rel. 122), concerning the reason for the prophets support of Jehu, says : 
" There can be no doubt that the reason why Jehu was made the candidate of the 
prophets for succession to the throne was that he was known as a zealot for the 
pure worship of Yahweh. For this reason alone we might be sure that he and his 
successors were unremitting in their zealous endeavor to maintain the worship of 
Vahweh in Israel pure and uncontaminated. This inference is fully confirmed 
if we may trust the popular tales of the Second Book of Kings by the fact that 
for full two generations the prophet is found firmly established alongside the king, 
as the bulwark of the throne." Cf. also K. DB. V. 653. 


Elisha, who, it is maintained, is scarcely to be justified for his 
participation in the deeds of Jehu, even from the point of view of 
his own times.* It is suggested that he was entirely deceived as 
to Jehu s character ; f or, in any event, though meaning well, lived 
on that lower plane of religious life which, as in the case of the 
patriarchs, did not forbid intrigue and bloodshed. J Now, in 
making our estimate of Elisha, let us recall (a) the lack of any 
word of disapproval from the pen of the narrators ; (ft) the won 
derfully beautiful character portrayed by these writers, in which 
the features especially emphasized are humaneness, tenderness, 
compassion, and love, the very opposite of those ascribed to 
Elijah (who can imagine Elisha as suggesting or favoring the 
policy of Jehu, except under the constraint of a controlling reli 
gious conviction?); (c) the strangely solemn circumstances of his 
appointment to office, and of his reception of Elijah s legacy; (d) the 
opinion of Joash, when Elisha s life is just closing, a strong testi 
mony in favor of its magnificent value, while the estimate of Hosea 
is to be treated as we treat the anachronistic utterances of other 
prophets whose judgments concerning earlier events are deter 
mined by the sympathies and antipathies of a later age. 

With these points in mind, the question briefly stated is this : 
Was the religious crisis one of sufficient magnitude to justify the 
revolution ? We do not wish, in any sense, to justify the intrigue 
and bloodshed connected with the revolution. 

6. It remains to present, in the form of propositions, the answers 
to the questions that have thus far been raised (cf. pp. xxxviii ff. 
and xliv f.), all of which pei tain to the significance of the revolution 
in connection with the progress of Israel s religion. 

(1) The contest, initiated by Elijah and completed by Jehu 
under Elisha s direction, was one for which the higher prophetism 
of the period (860 to 800 B.C.) was responsible. It signified for 
pre-prophetism a great victory, and lifted it higher than it had 
before reached. 

(2) The contest was a struggle, not so much with the old 
Canaanitish Baalism, which had largely disappeared, but with 

* Co. Proph. 33; Addis, EB. 1278. 

t Cf. Kent, Hist. II. 68. t Kent, loc. cit. 


Phoenician Baalism, a new form of syncretism which, in view of 
all the circumstances, involved far greater danger to the interesis 
of the Yahweh-religion (v.s.~).* 

(3) The point at issue was nothing more nor less than that of 
Yahweh s existence ; it was not simply that of giving him a lower 
place, but rather of his complete rejection ; t for if Baalism had 
conquered, Yahwism would sooner or later have disappeared, just 
as Baalism disappeared after the victory of Yahwism. 

(4) The conception of Yahweh which the prophets represent is 
higher than that of the past. For them he is, to be sure, a 
national God, but he sustains relations also to other nations, and 
exercises over them a large controlling influence. This is moving 
in the direction of an international God, although it has not 
reached that point. 

(5) The religion for which they contend is something other 
than a cult such as had existed in the past, but with its corruption 
eliminated, j It may be elected or rejected. It is one which 
makes ethical demands. Its ideal life for men is that of sympathy 
and love. 

(6) The distinction is now for the first time drawn (though very 
vaguely) between the spiritual and the worldly, in other words 
between a true spiritual religion and nature-worship. 

The content of these propositions prepares the way for an 
examination of other pre-prophetic influences which antedated the 
work of Amos and Hosea ; but before it receives a final formu 
lation it requires a consideration of the other influences. 


i. The pre-prophetic societies constitute a phase in the devel 
opment of pre-prophetism which bears closely on later prophecy. 
Omitting many points which do not stand in close relationship 
with the later development, the following may be regarded as 
the essential features for our immediate purpose, viz. (i) the 
numbers of the ne&hi im, including the closely related sects of the 
Nazirites and Rechabites ; (2) the general purpose, character, and 

* K. DB. V. 647. f Contra Sm. Rel? 155 ; but cf. Meinhold, 28. 

J Contra Meinhold. \ Contra Meinhold; but cf. Sm. AW. 2 177 ff. ; We. 


habits of these associations; and (3) the question of their origin, 
their external and internal relations, and their place in history and 

2. That these societies represented a large movement (whether 
patriotic, or religious, or both) is clear from the great numbers of 
nebhVim referred to (viz. the one hundred hidden by Obadiah, 
i K. i8 3 ; the four hundred in conference with Ahab, i K. 22 6 ; 
the fifty or more residing at Jericho, 2 K. 2 7 - 16 ), as well as the 
citation of some by name,f among whom we must select Micaiah 
ben Imlah for special mention, since a true estimate will place 
him side by side with Elijah and Elisha, and, in some respects, 
above both. These numbers signify not only deep interest in 
Yahweh-worship, but also an intense excitement because this 
worship was in danger from the Baalism of Tyre. 

The failure of E p , which describes the public activity of the 
nebhfim, to make any definite reference to the societies (but 
cf. 2 K. 9 1 = E p , and i K. 2O 35 , probably late), as well as the 
silence of E b concerning any public activity on their part, is not 
to be interpreted either as destroying the value of the represen 
tations made in each (for the narratives need not be taken as 
mutually exclusive]:), nor as giving special weight to the opinion 
that the life of the societies was exclusively retired and devoted to 
worship and meditation, or, on the other hand, that it was largely 
public. As a matter of fact, it was both, the two narratives pre 
senting different phases of the life of the nebhfim. 

From the lack of any mention of the societies between the days 
of Samuel and those of Elijah and Elisha, a period of more than 
one hundred and fifty years, we may not assume that with the pass 
ing of the Philistine struggle they had died out and were later 
revived by Elijah. Against this may be urged, not only the num 
bers just mentioned, but also the standing which they had in 
Ahab s time as an order that must be consulted (i K. 2.2 8f -). 

* The most satisfactory treatments of this subject will be found in Kue. Proph 
ets and Prophecy, 46 ff., and ReL I. 193-202, 316 ff . ; WRS. Proph. 85 f., 389-392; 
GAS. I. 20-30; Maybaum, Die Entwickelung d. tsr. Prophetenthums (1883), 30- 
59 ; Da., art. " Prophecy," DB. IV. 109 f. ; Bu. ReL, 93-103; K. DB. V. 652 ff. 

f Viz. Micaiah and Zedekiah, i K. 22 llff -; Jehu, i K. i6 l . 

J Cf. K. DB. V. 656 f. ; note also the failure of the Elijah stories to mention the 


This silence may be accidental, or it may be due to the frag 
mentary and incomplete character of the narratives as they have 
come down. So few are the names of preexilic writing prophets 
preserved in the historical narratives (Isaiah alone, and in Je. 
26 18f> , Micah) * that, but for the preservation of their utterances, 
one might deny their very existence. 

In addition to the many nebh^im^ named and unnamed, and 
the societies which are so marked a feature of the times, cognizance 
must be taken of two sects, perhaps orders, viz. the Nazirites 
and Rechabites, the members of which, while not reckoned as 
nebhi im, share to some extent their ideas and their work as ser 
vants of Yahweh. 

The Nazirites (pp. 56 f.), rarely mentioned, were individuals especially 
consecrated to Yahweh, the consecration taking the form of a vow or dedi 
cation in which some restriction was assumed (<?.". in the case of Samson, 
his unshorn hair, the possession of which secured to him Yahweh s spirit ; 
note also the obligation placed upon his mother, during pregnancy, in refer 
ence to wine and unclean food). We are not here interested in the later 
codification (Nu. 6 2 8 - 13 - 21 ), but two things seem very suggestive : (a] the 
fact that Samson s Nazirate involved exhibitions of great strength against 
Israel s enemies, and was, in fact, a vow of abstinence solely for warlike 
purposes.t Was this perhaps the motive that led also to the organization 
of the bands of nebhfim (z/.z.)? (<) The reference of Amos (2 llf -) to Nazi- 
rites, in parallelism with prophets, who had been caused to drink wine, a sin 
as great as that which was committed in forbidding the prophets to prophesy. 
From this we must infer that the prohibition of wine (which was regarded 
by all nomadic tribes as a luxury belonging to agricultural life, J and was, like 
sensuality, a part of the routine of Baal-worship ), as well as that of cutting 
the hair was, at one time or another, the restriction assumed in the con 
secration ; but further, that this service was one which, like the prophetic 
service, received Yahweh s approbation and was worthy of being cited along 
with it. Whether, now, this abstinence represented merely a service in war, 
uninterrupted by periods in which one yields himself to pleasure, that is, an 
absolutely unbroken service, || or rather (as with the Rechabites, z>.?.) a 
sworn protest against Baalism (wine being a special product of Baal s land), 

* Bu. Rel. 103. 

f Now. Arch. II. 134; Schwally, Semit. Kriegsaltertumer, I. 101 ff. ; K. DB. V 
657 f- 

t WRS., Proph. 84, 389; Schultz, Theol. I. 163; Kue. Rel. I. 316 f. 

Cf. also the attitude of the ancient Greeks, and of Mohammedans to-day. 

|| Schwally, loc. cit. ; K. loc. cit. 


tne general meaning is the same ; for in both cases the purpose is protest, 
that is, consecration to war. 

Another society or sect which seems to have been prominent in these 
times was that of the Rechabites, who appear and disappear in Israelitish 
history almost mysteriously. Assuming * that the Jehonadab whom Jehu 
took up into his chariot and thus joined with himself in his bloody work for 
Yahweh (2 K. io 15f -) was the Jonadab cited in Jeremiah, chap. 35, as the 
ancestor of the Rechabites, who prohibited to his descendants the drinking 
of wine, we may make three assertions : (a) in Elisha s times a sect or family 
or perhaps order existed, pledged not to drink wine (the symbol of a cor 
rupted civilization), not to engage in agriculture or in the building of homes 
(that is, pledged to the primitive nomadic life); (6) this pledge was made in 
the service of Yahweh (cf. the names of those whom Jeremiah brought into a 
chamber of the temple, all of which end with Yah, and also Jeremiah s closing 
words, viz. that for Yahweh s service there shall always be sons of Jonadab) ; 
(<r) the life of this society was a protest against luxury, intemperance, and 
idolatry, and against the Canaanitish civilization of the times; and was a 
reaction toward the primitive simplicity of Israel. We may leave unsettled 
the question whether this order was founded on the model of the Kenites f 
(cf. i Ch. 2 s5 , Ju. i 16 , I S. I5 6 ), or was really a family descended from them. 
" They represented in either case a type of anchoritism " (Kautzsch) which 
was closely related in form, and especially in spirit, to that of the nebhfim 
and the Nazirites, the three together constituting a comparatively new and 
extraordinary propaganda for the old-fashioned idea of Yahweh as the god 
of the desert, and of storm and battle, an idea which carried with it sim 
plicity both of life and of cult. 

3. A few points relating to the general character and the habits 
of these prophetic associations deserve consideration. 

(1) While in Samuel s time these societies were bands of men 
roving from place to place (probably in order to draw others into 
their association by the contagion of their enthusiasm), in Elisha s 
time, they had adopted, more or less fully, a settled mode of life, 
their residences being at great sanctuaries like Gilgal (2 K. 4 s8 ), 
Bethel (2 K. 2 s ), or at political centres like Samaria, bands of fifty 
or more living together (2 K. 2 1 ), and sometimes at a common table 
(2 K. 4 s8 ), while some among them were married (2 K. 4 1 ). 

(2) Samuel, although a prominent adviser, was probably never 
really a head (notwithstanding i S. iQ 20 ), and surely never lived 

* So Bu. Rel. 120; Sm. Rel? 152 f. ; K. DB. V. 659. 

f Bu. Rel. 20, 30, and New World, 1895, P- 7 2 9> c *- Ew. Hist. IV. 79; Schra 
BL. V. 46; Sm. Rel? 93 f. ; K. DB. V. 659. 


with them (i S. iQ 18 ), unless Naioth means "dwellings" ; * while it 
was a common custom for them to sit before (2 K. 4 >38 , cf. 6 1 ) Elisha, 
as disciples before a master. 

(3) These associations have been improperly termed "schools" f 
since the members are already engaged in public work, and some 
of them are married, while no phrase occurs which would justify 
the use of the word. Moreover, the idiom of the title, sons of tlie 
nebhi im, together with Semitic usage, requires the conception of 
guilds or corporations. Nevertheless, we are warranted in sup 
posing that instruction was imparted (cf. 2 K. 4 38 6 1 ) ; and proba 
bly the prophetic technique and nomenclature which Amos found 
in existence had its origin among them. J 

(4) The members of the association did not prophesy as indi 
viduals, but jointly in a body, and in their processions (i S. io 5 ) 
they were, in fact, conducting a kind of public worship at the 
various high places or sanctuaries (cf. Is. 3O 29 ). 

(5) The ecstasy (i S. ig 18 " 24 ) was the physical and psychological 
condition in which they performed their service, "the hand of 
Yahweh" (i K. i8 4(J 2 K. 3 15 ) being upon them; and this "holy 
frenzy," which was frequently induced by music (cf. especially the 
case of Elisha), passed, according to E (Nu. n 17 - 251 *-), in part, 
from Moses to the seventy elders, and lifted them into the condi 
tion of ecstasy. Still further, it may be inferred from i K. 2O 41 
that the nebhi im bore a peculiar mark, which distinguished their 
service. || 

(6) In Samuel s time this uprising had its occasion in the Philis 
tine crisis, when Israel s existence was threatened, and the result 

*So Schultz, Theol. I. 241; WRS. Proph. 392; and most of the older com 
mentators ; but nij denotes a pastoral abode, and is hardly appropriate as a desig 
nation for a prophetic residence. Moreover, the absence of the article here counts 
against any appellative signification. It is now generally taken as the name of some 
locality in Ramah, the precise meaning being unknown. See especially, Dr. Sam. 
124 f., and art. " Naioth," DB\ H. P. Smith and Bu. on i S. 1918; Che., art. " Naioth," 
EB\ BSZ.,and BDB. 

t By Ew. Hist. III. 49 f. ; Da. DB. IV. 109; Kue. Rel. I. 195; but v. WRS, 
Proph. 85. 

J So Da. DB. IV. 109 ; cf. K. DB. V. 656. 

Bu. Rel. 100 f. ; Che. EB. 3872 f. ; Giesebrecht, Die Berufsbegabung d. alttest 
Propheten, 38-72. 

|| Kraetzschmar, Prophet u. Seher im alt. Israel, 9 ; K. DB. V. 656. 


was "a national religious enthusiasm," which again came forward, 
perhaps more strongly, in the crisis of the Tyrian Baalism in the 
times of Elijah and Elisha. These national disasters are the 
expression of Yahweh s anger; hence the reaction in the form 
of patriotic spirit, in other words, the spirit of battle. 

(7) That Saul is thought to be insane, Elisha s messenger "mad" 
(2 K. 9 11 ) ; that the word ]"l3n, to prophesy, means literally to drop 
(sc. foam\ i.e. to foam at the mouth; and that the insane were 
looked upon in all Semitic antiquity with respect and awe as being 
controlled by demons (cf., e.g., David at the court of Achish, 
i S. 2i 12ff ), all point to the presence of a large element of 
superstition upon the subject of prophecy, and also show its emo 
tional and ecstatic character. With these facts before us, we may 
conclude in general that the spirit of these associations, while 
intense and upon the whole correct, was nevertheless as narrow 
as it was intense, as crude as it was correct ; and that it partook 
largely of the spirit of the four hundred and fifty Baal-prophets, 
an association of very similar nature (zu.). 

4. The questions of their origin, their external and internal relations, are 
of great interest, (i) Concerning the origin we actually know little, but 
certain points may be grouped for consideration : The character of ancient 
Semitic life (v. e.g. WRS. Sent.; We. SV. III.; Barton, Sketch of Semitic 
Origins ; Lagrange, Etudes sur les religions semitiques) t especially as seen in 
its purest form in Arabia,* was but slightly changed in these early days of 
Israel ; and Palestine, like Arabia, with its desert life, its compulsory fasts 
(" in which the soul easily detaches itself and hunger lends the mind a curious 
passion, mixed of resignation and hot anger " [GAS. HG. 29 ; cf. Schultz, 
Theol. I. 102 ff.]), its habit of continuous war, its uniformity of religious life 
(growing out of the exclusive attention to a tribal god), was well fitted to 
produce and develop fanaticism, as is shown by every century of past history, 
and by the presence to-day in the Mohammedan world of the dancing and 
howling dervishes, who, by a peculiar life and in strange ecstatic cries, seek 
to secure and to express their religious exaltation. Amid such surroundings 
the religious feeling, if at all awakened, becomes intense, and tends to an 
" entire self-surrender," which finds concrete expression in a frenzied state, 
that sometimes involves self-mutilation, human sacrifice, and the tribute of 
maidens (Schultz, Theol. I. 104). 

* Every year since the work of WRS. brings Israel into closer relationship with 
Arabia; cf. the recent opinions of Barton, op. cit. 287 ff. ; S. I. Curtiss, Primitive 
Semitic Religion To-day ; and Che. s Jerahmeelite hypothesis in ED., CB., and 


(2) The presence of Baal-prophets among the Tyrians, together with the 
facts that most of the growth in Israel s ritual (and especially that of mantic 
and sorcery) came from the Canaanites, and that the idea of prophets or 
nebhtim first appeared at this time, leads us to suppose that the pre-prophetic 
societies also were originally Canaanitish.* The occurrence of the word nabhi 1 
in Phoenician, as well as in the Assyrian Nebo (= Hermes), points in the 
same Direction. The Israelites, observing the prophesying (that is, the trans 
port and frenzy) of the Canaanitish worshippers, adopted it, as they adopted 
many other rites (cf. the view that Yahweh himself was a Canaanitish god 
adopted by Israel ; so Land, TAT. II. 160 ff.; Wkl. Babel- Bibel und Bibel- 
Babel; but v. Kue. Rel. I. 398 ff.; K6. Neue kirchl. Zeitschriff, XIII. 828- 
883). This, of course, implies merely that the external form, as in the case of 
circumcision, was taken by the Israelites, for within a short time it was spirit 
ualized. The connection of all this with the spirit of war developed by the 
Philistine oppression has already been noted. Cf. I S. io 5 , in which Saul is 
represented as entering into the state of frenzy at the very place in which the 
garrison (so AV., RV.), or pillar (so <t, Thenius, Dr., Kit.; K. DB. V. 653), 
or administration (so H. P. Smith, BDB.) of the Philistines was placed. 

(3) While in the earliest times, priest, seer, and nabhf were one, they now 
begin to differentiate. But, until later, the relation of priest and prophet was 
very close, as, in these early days, was that of priest and seer (cf. Samuel, and 
the Arabic kdhin, denoting seer, or soothsayer, probably, in early times, one in 
charge of a shrine). In later days, when there seems to have been antagonism 
between priest and prophet, this difference existed, not so much between the 
two orders, as between the priestly order and individual prophets who had 
risen above their fellows, and represented the prophetic order in general as 
being on the same low level with the priests (cf. WRS. Proph. 85, 105 ff.). In 
Isaiah s time a priest (8 2 ) was selected to witness concerning a prophecy, while 
Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and other prophets of later times were themselves priests. 
It is probable, therefore, that in the early times the nebhiim were closely 
associated with the priests (McCurdy, HPM. 488, note), as was true of the 
priests and prophets of Baal, and in Judah ; cf. Je. 2O l - 2 with 2Q 26 Lam. 2 2> 
(v.i.}. The bearing of this upon the attitude of Amos and Hosea is significant ; 
cf. Am. 7 10 - 17 Ho. 4*- 9 5 1 6 9 . 

(4) The unity, or joint action, of the nebhVim has been mentioned (v.s.~). 
This was an essential element in their strength. Elijah and especially Elisha 
seem to have worked harmoniously with the various societies, although they 
stood far above them. In Elisha s own days, however, there lived a man who 
stood above and against his te\\QW~ne6AFitn, and to whom the word prophet 
in its later and higher usage might well be given. This was Micaiah ben 
Imlah, whose story is told in I K. 22 8ff - (EP).f The essential point for us in 

* K. DR. V. 653; Co. Proph. 13 f. ; Kue. Rel. I. 216 f., 317 ; Toy, New World, 
V. 139; contra Schultz, Theol. I. 240 f . ; K6. Offenbarungsbegriff d. A. T. I. 63 ff. 
f This is not from the narrative which furnishes the Elijah-stories, but from th 


this story is neither (a) the large number of prophets living at the time,* not 
() the fact that the word of Yahweh is called for through the body of 
prophets as if it were a matter of regular routine; nor (<:) the fact that their 
advice is asked in reference to a matter of war, and that they return a unani 
mous answer. These things are interesting, but they do not constitute the 
essential element, which is (</) that Micaiah (who not infrequently prophesied 
in opposition to the king s wishes, and was for that reason obnoxious to him), 
when sent for, delivers a message which is remarkable in the history of pre- 
prophetism. The position taken by Micaiah in opposition to the others 
deserves notice, since he is the first to break the unity which had thus far 
existed, "a cleavage in the ranks of the prophetic body, which runs through 
the whole subsequent history of the movement" (Skinner, in /<?<:.). The 
significance of this cleavage is enhanced by certain features in the narrative, 
viz. the attitude of the king (already mentioned) (v. 8 ); the earnest effort 
made by the messenger to bring Micaiah into harmony with those who have 
already spoken (v. 13 ); the symbolical action of Zedekiah to corroborate and 
support the prediction of the four hundred (v. 11 ) ; the statement of Micaiah 
that he will speak what Yahweh has sent to him (v. 14 ) ; and his first utterance, 
which, after all, is identical with that already given, and promises success (v. 15 ). 
This was probably a piece of irony, and was so recognized by Ahab. When 
adjured to speak the whole truth, and with the background thus indicated, he 
announces two visions, the first, a prediction of Ahab s death, and without 
special interest ; the second, a vision in which (a) he distinguishes between 
Yahweh on the one hand, and on the other a spirit, evidently recognized as a 
superhuman power, which produces the prophetic ecstasy; (/3) he clearly 
recognizes the independence of this agent, but this spirit, we are told, be 
comes a lying spirit in the mouths of the nebhi^im, and thus deceives them ; 
(7) he thus makes two strange representations, viz. that he, Micaiah, rather 
than the spirit, knows the will of Yahweh ; and further, that the falsehood 
which the four hundred have just spoken is to be charged, not " to the imper 
fection of its human medium," but to the superhuman agent acting with 
Yahweh s approval (K. DB. V. 656; Che. EB. 3859). In all this, however, 
it is to be understood that (5) he takes a position far above the ordinary 
nebhVim, that knowledge comes to him which they do not share; in other 
words, that there are grades, or ranks, in the order, some higher and others 
lower. These " lower " or " narrow " or " false " prophets are thus pointed out 
even at this early time, although they are still understood to be made use of by 
Yahweh (Volz, RB. 3874 f.). They have been called "prophets of a narrow 
range of vision" (Volz), "the belated representatives of an earlier stage of 

Ephraimite national narrative ; it contains no reference to Elijah, and, in view of 
the four hundred prophets of v. 6 , contradicts the impression (i8 22 ) that Elijah 
was the only Yahweh-prophet left (cf. also i8 13 I9 14 ). 

* Che. s assumption that four hundred here and in the case of the Baal-prophets 
is a corruption of Arab-Jerahrneel is altogether groundless. 


prophetic development," who " had closed their minds against the deepening 
of the idea of God to an unconditionally ethical conception, and were thus no 
longer able to penetrate into the depths of his counsel" (Bu. Rel. 131). We 
are immediately concerned with the bearing of this on the actual condition of 
the nebhfim in the days of Elisha, and on Elisha himself (for if he occupies a 
high place, one, for example, side by side with Micaiah, how can he, neverthe 
less, work harmoniously with the rest ?), and on the nebhi 1 im of Amos s day. 
It is not quite fair to say that " under the protection of Jehu s dynasty proph 
ecy so-called sank to depths of hypocrisy and formalism " (WRS.). A better 
statement would be that at this time pre-prophetism continued to occupy the 
low place which it had always occupied, save when some great personality 
like Elijah, or Elisha, or Micaiah was raised up ; or, better still, let us dis 
tinguish between prophecy, for which these great souls stood, and manticism 
(i.e. the nebhi iswus), which is all that the others yet knew or cared for 
(Davidson, O. 7 . Proph. in ff.; Kue. Rel. I. 196-7). Amos plainly shows 
his estimate of this crowd of nebhi im, when he maintains very forcibly that 
he is not one of them, and his words perhaps imply that it is no great honor 
to be regarded as one of their number (but v.i.}. 

5. It remains only to note the stages of this development and 
to indicate its place in the history of the pre-Amos time. Starting 
on the Israelitish side with seers (who are closely akin to priests), 
and on the Canaanitish side with nebhi im (or dervishes], we see the 
two classes gradually growing together. From among them, or in 
close association with them, there arise from time to time certain 
great characters who share their peculiarities and adopt their 
methods, but at the same time reach far above them in their 
knowledge of the divine will. These men, not yet prophets in the 
technical sense, are the forerunners of the prophets, the connecting 
link between the old and the new, which begins with the writing 
prophets. This is their place in the development. What did 
these societies of nebhfim do for the people among whom they 
lived? What influence did they exercise upon them? 

It is certainly unjust to characterize them as " hotbeds of sedition " and to 
limit their activity almost entirely to the sphere of politics (HPS. O. T. Hist. 
193), or to consider them "a species of begging friars," with but little influence 
among the people (Co. Proph. 13). It is with a truer appreciation of their 
services that Cheyne (EB. 3857 f.) declares them to have been "a recognized 
sacred element in society, the tendency of which was to bind classes together 
by a regard for the highest moral and religious traditions." Compare also 
the view of Kittel {Hist. II. 266), that their chief interest was the " fostering 


of religious thought," and that, as compared with the priests, they were "the 
soul, the latter the hand and arm, of religion"; the opinion of Marti (Rel. 
8 1 f.), that in times of peace they had little influence, but in national crises 
were invaluable in kindling a spirit of patriotism and devotion to Yahweh ; 
the estimate of Wellhausen (Pro/. 461; similarly, WRS. Proph. 85 ff.), that 
they were not of " first-rate importance," historical influence having been 
exercised only by exceptional individuals among them, who rose above their 
level and sometimes opposed them, though always using them as a base of 

They constituted one of Israel s greatest institutions, which, like 
many others, came by adoption from the outside. But in its com 
ing it was purified and spiritualized, and itself gave rise directly to 
an influence perhaps the most distinctive and the most elevating 
ever exerted on Israelitish life and thought. 


Two important documents known as decalogues were formu 
lated, and probably promulgated, in the pre-prophetic period. 
These decalogues now form a part of the Judaean and Ephraim- 
itic narratives, and might be considered in connection with those 
documents ; but they were originally independent of them, and 
their especial importance warrants a separate treatment. It is 
essential to ask : What was their origin? What was their message 
to the times in which they were published? What prophetic 
element do they contain? What is their relation to prophecy in 
general? We may not suppose that these, with the Book of the 
Covenant (7), are the only laws of this early period that have 
been handed down ; others are probably to be found in Deuteron 
omy and in the Holiness Code ; but these will be sufficient for the 
purpose we have in mind. 

i. The older decalogue* found in Ex. 34 12 " 26 , consists, as recon 
structed,t of ten regulations. These deal with the worship of 

* Cf. We. Hex. 331 ff. ; Bu. ZAW. XI. 216 ff. ; Bacon, Triple Tradition of the 
Exodus % iy)-it$\ Sta. GVI, 1.510; Holzinger, Exodus, 119 f. ; Stark, Deutero- 
nomium, 30 f. ; GFM. EB. 1446 f.; G. B. Gray, EB. 2733 f.; Bantsch, Exad-Lev.- 
Num. xlvi. f. 

f We. (Hex, 331) ; cf. Holzinger, Bantsch, Briggs (Hex. 189-210) ; contra 
K. DB. V. 633, who characterizes the so-called decalogue as " only an appearance," 
bein^ " ceremonial prescriptions [inserted by the Redactor] which can be recognized 
at the first glance as parallels to the laws of the Book of the Covenant." 


other gods, the making of molten images, the observance of three 
feasts and the sabbath, the offering of firstlings and first-fruits, and 
the avoidance of certain rites commonly practised in non-Israelitish 

This code, as well as the chapter of which it is a part, belongs to the Judaean 
narrative, but fits in badly with what precedes and follows it. It would seem 
to follow logically J s introduction to the Sinaitic Covenant (Ex. 1920-22.2.5^ f or 
one would scarcely expect new legislation to be given after orders had been 
received (cf. Ex. 32 34 33 1 3 ) to leave Horeb, In Ex. 34 28 it is called the ten 
words, and so naturally constitutes J s decalogue, corresponding to that of E in 
Ex. 20 and Dt. 5. (The discovery of this decalogue was made by Goethe in 
Zwei ivichtige bisher uncrorterte Fragen, 1773 A.D.) While there may be some 
doubt whether this decalogue was a part of J from the beginning or found its 
present place in J at the hand of the editor who much later joined J and E, no one 
disputes its very primitive character, and, consequently, its early age. Arising 
in connection with some Judaean sanctuary (GFM. EB. 1446), it represents 
a ritual of worship which is not only of an early age, but also indicative of a 
national religion. The very fact that it is so strongly ritualistic shows the pre- 
prophetic age ; and this is further attested by the pains taken to forbid cer 
tain rites (e.g. seething of a kid in its mother s milk) which were common in 
non-Israelitish religions. It is, as Moore (EB. 1446) says, "the earliest 
attempt with which we are acquainted to embody in a series of brief injunc 
tions, formulated as divine commands, the essential observances of the religion 
of Yahweh." But, on the other hand, it had its origin after the conquest of 
Palestine, because the background is agricultural throughout. 

The message of the Judaean decalogue might thus be expressed : 
"Worship Yahweh, and Yahweh alone, without images (such as 
Northern Israel uses) ; let the worship be simple and in accord 
with the old usage ; forbear to introduce the practices of your 
Canaanitish neighbors." 

This message, notwithstanding its extremely ritualistic content, 
shows a perfect consistency with the pre-prophetic thought of 
775-5 B - c -; f r m three of the ten injunctions (viz. "Thou 
shalt worship no other gods," "Thou shalt make thee no molten 
gods," "Thou shalt not seethe a kid," etc.) we have representations 
exactly in accord with the prevailing thought of the pre-prophetic 
reformers, while the other injunctions emphasize the simplicity 
of Yahweh s requirements in contrast with the elaborate and sen 
suous ritual of Baalism. 

The earlier, decalogue thus connects itself with the pre-prophetic 


movement as it has thus far found expression, and prepares the 
way for a higher expression later on. At the same time it was not 
instituted as a measure of reform, but rather as the codification 
of existing practice. The publication, however, was not simply 
for the sake of providing a law-book ; it was rather an expression 
of the general prophetic (sometimes called historical) spirit illus 
trated by J (cf. Gray, EB. 2732). 

2. The younger decalogue, found in two forms, viz., Ex. 20 (E 2 ) 
and Dt. 5 (D), presents a much larger field for conjecture and 
consideration.* This code consisted originally of ten injunctions, 
positive and negative, covering the relation of man to God and to 
his fellow-men. 

In Ex. 1988.9-19 we find, in a passage ascribed to E, the preparations lead 
ing up to the giving of the laws, and in 24 s " 8 occurs the ratification of the 
same. The intervening chapters contain two important pieces of legislation, 
the decalogue (chap. 20) and the Book of the Covenant (chaps. 21-23). t I n 
spite of the appropriateness of the present order (i.e. a body of general and 
fundamental principles, followed by a series of detailed laws dealing with the 
life of Israel in all its aspects), we are compelled to believe that the two codes 
have no direct relationship to each other, because (i) no such relationship is 
recognized in the historical part of the material ; (2) chap. 2O 18 ~ 26 contains no 
reference to CC; (3) chap. 24 shows no evidence for connecting the two; 
(4) chaps. 32-34 make no mention of CC; (5) Dt., while it adopts the deca 
logue as the basis of its code, shows no acquaintance with any other law given 
at Horeb ; (6) Jos. 24 makes no reference to any other law. In view of 
these facts, it may be concluded that E s original Horeb legislation was not 
CC, but the (later) decalogue. 

But we are confronted with two or three important questions : 
(i) Is there other E material which could possibly have been 
connected with the Horeb legislation? (2) Is the decalogue in 
its present form (either Ex. 20 or Dt. 5) the original? (3) How 

* That this decalogue was not an original constituent of the E narrative is held 
by Sta., Co., Carpenter and Battersby, who assign it to a Judaean recension of E; 
by Stark (Deuteronomium) t who finds the original decalogue of E scattered through 
the Book of the Covenant; by Kue., We. (SF. I. 68), Meissner (Der Dekalog), 
Bantsch, Sm. (Rel? 273), Marti (Rel. 174), Addis (EB. 1050), and Matthes (ZA W. 
XXIV. 17-41), who assign it to the seventh century. Holzinger (Exod., in loc.) 
places it in the latter half of the eighth century. 

f This may be called the Covenant Code, and represented by the symbol CC. 


early in the history of E did the original decalogue occupy its 
present position? 

(1) It is probably true * that there was an earlier legislation (E 1 ) of which 
only fragments now exist, viz. the account of the tent of meeting (33 7 ~ n ), 
with, perhaps, an account of the construction of the tent (for which P s elab 
orate description was substituted), and of the ark for which the tent was 
made, together with the ritual found in 2O 24 - 26 . It will be noted that this 
earlier legislation of E, according to this hypothesis, was supplanted, partly by 
P s material concerning the ark and the tent, partly by the decalogue (and the 
story of the golden calf, Ex. 32, which may be called E 2 ), leaving certain 
fragments only (v.s.). 

(2) The present form of the decalogue gives evidence of considerable 
expansion from the original ten words, e.g. the very striking differences in the 
two versions as given in Ex. and Dt., the great difference in the length of 
the injunctions, and the internal character of the material itself. The original 
ten words, stripped of all these later additions, were probably as follows : 

1. Thou shalt have no other gods beside me. 

2. Thou shalt not make for thyself any graven image. 

3. Thou shalt not utter the name of thy God for an evil purpose. 

4. Remember the sabbath day to sanctify it. 

5. Honor thy father and thy mother. 

6. Thou shalt do no murder. 

7. Thou shalt not commit adultery. 

8. Thou shalt not steal. 

9. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor. 
10. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor s house. 

(3) How early, then, is the younger decalogue ? (a) It cannot f come 
from the times of Moses, for tradition regards Ex. 34 as "the ten words"; 
it is unknown to CC ; it is in a measure inconsistent with the ritualistic religion 
of the pre-prophetic time. () Is it then as late as the days of Manasseh (cf. 
Mi. 6 6 " 8 ), \ and if so, is it the product of the ripest prophetic thought? The 
answer turns upon the fulness of interpretation given to the several command 
ments, the turning-point in the whole matter being the specific prohibition of 
the use of images in the second commandment, and the alleged highly devel 
oped ethical system underlying the whole. The former, it is claimed, cannot be 
earlier than the eighth century, for until this time there seems to have been no 
knowledge of such a prohibition. The latter must, it is thought, represent the 

* GFM. EB. 1445; Stark, De liter onomium, 40 ff. ; Meissner, Dekalog, 33. 
t So We. Hex. 331 ff. ; Bantsch, Bundesbuch, 92 ff. ; Sm. Rel. 273 f. ; Marti, 
Rel. 68 ; Addis, EB. 1050. 

t So Kue., Meissner ( Dekalog), Bantsch, Addis (EB. 1050). 


result of the prophetic teaching at least down to and including Isaiah. The 
question, therefore, of the prophetic character of the decalogue and of its 
relation to prophecy depends wholly on the date, and this on the degree of 
ethical development which it is found to contain. 

(V) We may not accept Eerdmans s suggestion (TAT. XXXVII. 18 ff., 
made with a view to placing the original as early as Moses) that some other 
commandment originally stood in the place of what is now the second (the 
present second belonging to the seventh century), or that in the original form 
there were seven instead often; but the principle underlying this suggestion, 
which has been accepted by Kautzsch (DB. V. 633*), is sound and is to be 
allowed a controlling place in our decision ; viz. that the commands and 
prohibitions of the decalogue " have not an absolute, but a relative scope " 
(K.). This means that the ethical conceptions which are connected with the 
decalogue in our modern times have been read into it, and were not originally 
so understood. The earlier thought was one not of morals but of rights. 
Eerdmans goes still further and limits the application of the commandments, 
e.g. the killing to one s countrymen, and the coveting to the appropriation of 
property that was ownerless. Nor is Wildeboer s criticism ( ThSt., 1903, 109- 
ii 8) of this valid when he says that thus the deeper moral sense of the 
decalogue is degraded. 

(d) Concerning the second commandment in particular, it may be said in 
passing : Its close association with the chapter on the Northern calves 
(Ex. 32) has some significance. The fact that the central sanctuary in the 
times of Eli, David, and Solomon seems to have had no image indicates the 
presence of a strong sentiment opposed to image-worship, if not an actual 
prohibition. The non-observance of such a prohibition in Northern Israel is 
no evidence of the non-existence of the law. Account must also be taken of 
the sentiment in the South (as represented by Isaiah in his early ministry), 
which must have existed some time before Isaiah. The presence of a similar 
law in the older decalogue of J supports the early origin of the prohibition. 

Upon the whole we shall be justified in assigning the formulation 
of the younger decalogue in its original form, even with the second 
commandment, to a period not much later than 750 B.C., the 
arguments for a still later date * not being convincing.! 

The message of this younger decalogue to its times was three 
fold : (i) Acknowledge (cf. in the older, worship) no other 
god, and follow not other religions in making images, or in using 

* Addis, art. "Decalogue," EB.; GFM. EB. 1447; Marti, Rel. 174; We.; 
Kue. ; Sm. Rel. 273 ; et al. 

f So Gray, EB. 2733 f.; Paterson, art. "Decalogue," DB.; K. DB. V. 634; 
Wildeboer, loc. cit.; Kit., Hist. I. 248 l. ; Montefiore, Rel. of Anc. Hebrews, 553-7; 
et al. 


the divine name for purposes of sorcery ; but observe the sabbath 
(as representing Yahweh s ordinances), and pay respect to Yah- 
weh s representatives. These are Yahweh s rights; do not do 
violence to them. (2) Do not do violence to the rights of your 
neighbor, as they relate to his person, his wife, his property, or 
his reputation. Still further, (3) do not even think of doing 
violence to any of your neighbor s rights. 

The younger decalogue thus harmonizes completely with the 
growth of the prophetic thought as thus far (760 B.C.) developed. 
With the higher conception of God (zu.) a more rigid adherence 
to him is demanded, and a more concrete separation from the 
ritual customs which had been in vogue. Still further, sorcery 
must be banished. While as a corollary it follows that the insti 
tutions of Yahweh in their simplicity must be observed ; and re 
spect will be shown Yahweh by honoring those who, in his place, 
have power of life and death.* The prophetic element, in the 
first table, is clearly seen in the first, second, and third command 
ments ; but did the prophets really advocate the observance of insti 
tutions ? Yes \ for (i) they could not do away with all institutions, 
and in the very act of rooting out the Baal ritual, they must fall 
back on something ; and besides (2) their connection with ritual 
is seen in J s including the earlier decalogue, in E s including 
another decalogue, in D s including an enlarged code of ritual. 
As to the fifth commandment, while we are unable to distinguish 
the extent to which the spirit of ancestor-worship still influences 
opinion, it can hardly be supposed that all trace of it has yet 

The original obligation in the fourth commandment was (not 
that which P or D later inserted) to treat the Sabbath as Yahweh s 
property, and therefore not put it to the profane uses which had 
formerly been customary in connection with the heathen cult f (ct. 
Am. 8 5 Ho. 2 11 ). 

* V. references on ancestor-worship, pp. 40 f., note. 

f The need of such a law and the prophetic character of it at once become ap 
parent, if the supposition be correct that the sabbath was taken over from the 
Canaanites, who had themselves gotten it from Babylonia (so Reu. Gesch.d.Alt. Test. 
71, Anm.; Sin. Rel? 160; Now. Arch. I. 144; Benz. Arch. 202, 465; Holzinger, 
Exodus, 73). The task of prophecy was to purify it from its Canaanitish associa- 


In the commandments of the second table the case is even 
clearer. With the examples of David and Solomon and Ahab, in 
connection with whom the prophets have actually said the same 
things that are found in the sixth, seventh, eighth, and ninth com 
mandments, it is easy to see that a prophetic redaction after Elijah 
must contain just these points (v.s. as to meaning of each). The 
important step forward which the tenth commandment contains, 
viz. not to think of violating one s neighbor s rights, is noticeable, 
but, after all, in harmony with the active intellectual effort of the 
times which produced the philosophical work of J and E (zu.). 

(6) With this understanding of the message, and of the pro 
phetic element in it, we can discover its close connection with 
the pre-prophetic movement. Its formulation can be ascribed 
to the intense religious feeling which is just beginning to recog 
nize the rights of Yahweh and of men ; it is in a sense the product 
of prophetic thought, but, more strictly, that of pre-prophetic 


The Book of the Covenant (= CC), to which reference has 
already been made, was promulgated, substantially in its present 
form, with prophetic sanction, as early as 800 B.C., or half a century 
before Amos and Hosea. We may ask, as before, as to its origin 
and marks of date, its message, the prophetic element in the 
message, and its relation to the pre-prophetic movement. 

i. This book (Ex. 21-23) contains two kinds of material. The 
first part (2i 2 -22 17 ) is a series of " hypothetical instructions, based 
presumably on precedent" (Gray, EB. 2734) ; in a single word, 
judgments (cf. Ex. 2I 1 , 24 3 , Nu. 35 24 ), or judicial decisions ; regu 
lations, seemingly intended for the use of judges, and dealing with 
questions of civil and criminal law.* The second part (22 18 -23 19 ) 
is a series (with some interruptions, e.g. 22 22 " 27 2 3 4f - 96 - 13 - 156 - 17 - 190 ) 

tions and to transform it into an institution thoroughly consonant with the spirit of 

* The following subjects are treated in this portion : (i) Regulations regarding 
slaves, 2i 2 -ii ; (2) personal injuries, 21 12 - 27 ; (3) injuries and damages in connection 
with cattle, 2 i28-36 ; ( 4 ) theft, 22!-*; (5) damages to crops, 22^-6; (6) breaches of 
trust, 22 7 " 1 - 5 ; (7) seduction, 22 16 


of precepts relating to life and worship,* evidently other than 
legal in character ; regulations of a moral and religious character, 
having especially to do with the deity and worship. f 

2. An examination of the material soon discloses that (a) the original form 
of this material has suffered both in the way of mutilation and in actual loss, J 
for all of which full allowance must be made; while () a considerable 
amount of new material, joined with the original text, must be set aside (v.s.) 
if we are to reconstruct the original document or documents; still further, 
(<:) the laws on ritual (23 14 ~ 19 ) are practically identical, even verbally, with 
34 18 " 26 (the earlier decalogue), and belonged originally in chap. 34, whence 
they have been transferred by an editor; (</) the second part (22 18 -23 19 ) is 
more diverse in character than the first, and is itself plainly a compilation of 
different elements, || some of which betoken a Deuteronomic origin; (e) the 
narrative (23 20 - 33 ), which in its present form is late, contains old material that 
originally stood in close connection with CC, viz. vs. 20 - 22 25< 2y , and especially 
vs. 28 31 ; ^[ (/) the regulations in 2O 23 26 have no connection with the preceding 
decalogue (vs. 1 " 17 ), and should be taken** with the "words" (cf. 22 28 ~ 31 ). 

3. CC, with such modifications as are involved in the preceding (cf. 2), 
now suggests two series of questions : (i) Did the author of the jttdgnients 
also collect the precepts ? or is CC, as we have it, a growth ? Various 
schemes of reconstruction have been proposed,ff of which G. F. Moore s is, 

* The chief subjects of this portion are : (i) three precepts on sorcery, bestiality, 
and worship of foreign gods, 22 18 - 20 ; (2) humanitarian laws, 22 21 ; (3) reverence 
and offerings, 22 28 - 31 ; (4) testimony, 23 1 - 3 ; (5) impartial administration of justice, 
236-9 ; (6) Sabbath and sabbatical year, 23 10 - 13 ; (7) feasts and offerings, 23 14 ~ 19 . 

f Kent, Student s O. T., in loc., describes 2Q23-26 22 29. 31 23 io-i9 as duties to Yahweh 
in connection with the ritual which constitute E s terms of the covenant with 

J E.g. 22 2 - 3 seems to be a fragment now misplaced ; so also 234 f 13 . 

GFM. EB. 1448; cf. Jiilicher, JPTh. VIII. 300 f. ; Briggs, Hex. 190 ff., 229 f. 
According to Bu. (ZA W. XI. 217 ff.), the presence of these laws in Ex. 34 after this 
transfer is due to another still later editor; cf. also GFM. 

|| GFM. EB. 1448 ; Gray, EB. 2734. 

1 GFM. EB. 1448. 

** Contra GFM. EB. 1444; cf. Kent, Student s O. T. 184. 

ft Sta. (GV/. I. 636) recognizes two divisions, viz. "words" and "judgments," 
questions whether they originally had any connection with each other, and suggests 
that the words originally all stood together under their own superscription ; and 
that when the latter was dropped the present confusion arose. Rothstein (Bundes- 
buch, 1888) regards CC as an expansion of the decalogue and attempts by a series 
of violent transpositions, resulting in worse confusion than that which now exists, to 
rearrange its contents in an order corresponding to that of the subject-matter in the 
decalogue. Stark (Deuteronomium, 1894, 32 ff.) finds three strata of laws : (i) six 
laws, somewhat later than, the J decalogue, viz. 2i 12 - 15 -i9; (2) the "judgments " of 


perhaps, the simplest, viz. there existed originally (a) a book of judgments; 
to this was added (6} the "main stock" of 22 18 -23 13 , i.e. the Horeb legis 
lation of E; then (<:) the ritual 23 1 * 19 (taken from J, 34 14fft ) was attached, 
probably by the editor who (a 1 } wrote the closing story (23 2a ~ 33 ). In this 
case the substance of CC is as early as E (7A.y.). 

(2) Some suppose that CC formed a part of the original E; * in this case 
CC would be : () the law given at Horeb as the basis of the Sinaitic Cove 
nant (but we have both what may fairly be regarded as the original basis (E 1 ), 
as well as the decalogue substituted (z^.j.) for the original); or () a con 
tinuation of the decalogue (Ex. 2O 1 - 17 ) and so a part of the Sinaitic Covenant 
( u.s. ); or (c} the document which led up to the renewal of the covenant 
and so was connected with Moses parting words in the plains of Moabf ; or 
(d} the " statute and ordinance " of Jos. 24 25 ~ 27 , thus representing the law 
given as the basis of the covenant made at that time, whence it was removed 
by R D to its present position. J But no one of these suggestions is free from 
difficulties, although the consideration in favor of the proposition is impor 
tant, viz. the general similarity of CC to E. 

It seems upon the whole easier to believe that CC was a separate book 
from E, inserted in E by the editor who was himself the compiler of CC. 

2i 2 -22 16 , from a later dale than the preceding; and (3) a group of ethical and reli 
gious laws, a sort of programme of the prophetic activity, viz. 2o 24ff - 22 1 *"- 2- 24 * % { - 
231-3. 6f. 10-12. 14. Bertheau (Sieben Gruppen Mosaischer Gesetze, 1840) first arranged 
CC in decades, viz. (i) 2o3-i7 ; ( 2 ) 2i2-n, (3) 2112-27, (4) 2128-2216, (5) 22^-30 
(6) 23 1 - 8 , (7) 23 1 *- 19 ; this involved the treatment of 2O 22 - 26 as four introductory com 
mands, 239-13 as an interpolation, and 2326-33 as a closing decalogue of promises. 
Briggs (Hex. 211-232) includes in the original CC only four pentades and one 
decalogue of " words," viz. 2O 23 - 26 22 >2 7-29 23 1 - 3 236-9 23 1 - 1 J . This was enlarged 
by the addition of two pentades, three decalogues, and a triplet of "judgments," 
viz. 2i 2 -n 2ii8-25 2i26-36 2 i^~-22^ 22* f- 22&-16. The remaining laws are later inser 
tions showing traces of Deuteronomic redaction. Paton (JBL. XII. 79-93), by 
supposing Ex. 34 to contain another recension of CC, from which he supplements 
defective decalogues in CC, by considering 2i 22 -25 22! f- n 23^- 9- M. 14. ise as later 
additions, and by restoring two pentades from Dt. 22, obtains an original CC 
consisting of ten decalogues, each being symmetrically divided into two pentades. 

* So Di. Exod. 219 f. ; Julicher, JPTh. VIII. 305 ; Kue. Hex. 152 f. ; Co. Einl. 
73 ff. ; Carpenter and Battersby, The Hexateuch, II. 113, et al.; contra Bantsch, 
Bundesbuch, chap. II. 

f So Kue., Co., Carpenter and Battersby, et al.; in this case either (i) R D (the 
editor who joined J and E with D) put D in the place formerly occupied by 
CC, at the same time removing CC to the earlier place which it now occupies; or 
( 2 ) RJE (the editor who joined J and E) took Ex. 34 (which was the basis of the 
Sinaitic covenant according to J) and used it as the basis of the renewal, at the 
same time pushing back CC to the decalogue and making the two (i.e. the deca 
logue and CC) the basis of the covenant. 

J Holzinger, Einl. 179. 

$ So Rothstein, Das Bundesbuch\ Bantsch, Bundesbuck, 77 ff.; We. Pro/. *ur 
Gesch. /jr. 8 420; GFM. EB 1449, 


The material in this case may have had its origin as follows (z/.j.)* : (a) Ex. 
2 3 14 ff- = 34 (J) ; () the judgments may have been a part of E standing 
after chap. 18, which itself originally stood later in the narrative; (/) the/r^- 
cepts, now somewhat obscured in 22 18ff - 23, were probably that part of the 
Horeb legislation (E 1 ) for which the decalogue (v.s.*) was substituted. 

It is to be observed that all of these various hypotheses agree in 
assigning to the substance of CC and in large measure to the form 
which we now have, an age contemporaneous with or preceding 
that of E (v.i.) CC embodies "the consuetudinary law of the 
early monarchy." | 

4. The presence of CC in E (or JE) is due to a religious purpose 
on the part of the author or editor ; this purpose, however, par 
takes of the historical spirit rather than of the legal or reformatory 
spirit. In other words, no effort was being made, as later in the 
case of the Deuteronomic code or the Levitical code, to gain rec 
ognition from the people for a new legislation. J This appears, 
not only from the small proportion of the whole of E which CC 
constitutes, but also from the fact that its laws are based on long- 
established usage, or codify moral precepts which had already 
been taught ; the presence of CC indicates also, from the point 
of view of E (or the editor), a complete harmony of thought 
between the content of CC and the material of E ; the message 
of CC, therefore, becomes a part of the larger message of E, and 
receives interpretation from the latter. 

The regulations ("judgments" and "precepts") are entirely 
consistent (i) in treating the deity as the direct and exclusive 
source of judgment and authority ; (2) in recognizing that a time 
has now come in the affairs of the nation when the rights of the 
community are to be considered, with a view to restricting the 
action of individuals in so far as they are injurious to the com 
munity (cf. the decalogue) ; (3) in continuing to accept certain 
principles which have long prevailed in Semitic life, e.g. (a) that 
of retaliation, which included the lex talionis, (&) that of blood 
revenge, and money compensation for injuries committed, there 

* As suggested by GFM. EB. 1449; cf. Bu. ZA W. XI. 218 1. 
f Co. Einl. 75; cf. Dr. DB. III. 68; WRS. 
I Cf. G. B. Gray, EB. 2731 f. 


being no punishment by way of degradation ; (4) in having as a 
basis on which everything rests the agricultural form of life. 

The regulations, as already indicated, (a) when studied from 
the point of view of worship, represent the customs of the past * in 
their comparative purity and simplicity, but at the same time 
emphasize the restriction of such worship to Yahweh (monolatry) ; 
nothing new is here presented ; ($) when considered from the 
point of view of ethics, emphasize two or three important points, 
viz. the setting apart of the sabbath as a day of rest, the giving to 
the poor of the produce of the land during one year in seven,f 
the distinction between murder and manslaughter, the securing 
of justice to the foreigner, the restoration of ox or ass to one s 
enemy, the urgency against oppression and maladministration of 

In general, then, the message was one of an elevating character 
in its moral attitude, advocating, as it does, absolute " rectitude 
and impartiality " in methods of administration ; mildness, pro 
tection and relief from severe life for the poor, the foreigner, 
and the slave ; a generous attitude even toward one s enemy 

(^3 n ). t 

5. The prophetic element is manifest ; so manifest, indeed, that 
many have regarded CC as the result of the later prophetic work. 
It is more correct, however, after making proper allowances for 
the Deuteronomic additions, to regard this as the expression of 
that religious and ethical development which had its source and 
strength in the movement of the times of Elijah and Elisha, and of 
J and E, and, therefore, as preparatory to the period of prophecy 
beginning with Amos and Hosea. This view is to be accepted 
because of ( i ) the marked linguistic and phraseological affinity of 
CC to E ; (2) the large proportion of the code given to the 
treatment of secular matters (cf. the similar nature of the Code 

* Viz. rude and simple altars, firstlings and first-fruits, three pilgrimages, no 
leaven, destruction of fat, burnt-offerings and peace-offerings, etc. 

f V. my Constructive Studies in the Priestly Element in the O. T. (1902), 108-118. 

JK. DB.M. 664*5, 665. 

So K. DB. V. 664 f.; Carpenter and Battersby, The Hexateuch, I. 119; Dr. 
DB. III. 68 ; Co.Einl. 75 ; WRS. OTJC* 340 ff. ; Bacon, Triple Tradition, no ff. ; 
Gray, EB. 2733 ; We. Hex. 89 f. ; Addis, Doc. of Hex. 1. 142 f. ; contra Sta. G VI. I. 
634; Steuernagel, Deuteronomittm u.Josua, 278; Bantsch, Bundcsbuch, 122; et a/. 


of Hammurabi), a sign of a comparatively early date ; * (3) the 
primitive character of many of the regulations and ideas, e.g. " the 
conception of God as the immediate source of judgment" 
(Driver) ; the principle of retaliation and the law of blood 
revenge, ideas still dominant among the Bedouin; the more 
primitive tone of 22 21 as compared with 34 20 ; and the conception 
of woman which appears in the provision for the estimate of a 
daughter s dishonor, as so much damage to property, to be made 
good in cash (cf. the higher ideal of Hosea). 


This narrative of world- and nation-history had its origin within 
the century 850-750 B.C., and, with the closely related Ephraimitic 
narrative, is at once an expression of the pre-prophetic thought 
and the basis for a still higher development of that thought. What 
may be gathered from this most wonderful narrative, throughout 
prophetic in its character, for a better understanding of the pre- 
Amos period ? 

i. Four propositions relating to the Hexateuch are now all but 
universally acknowledged and may be stated without discussion : 

(i) The Hexateuch is made up in general of three distinct 
elements, viz. the prophetic (JE), the prophetico-priestly, found 
mostly in Deuteronomy (D), and the priestly (P), these elements 
being joined together, first JE with D, and later JED with P.f 

* It is still a question whether the relationship of CC to the Code of Hammurabi 
is (a) one of direct dependence (as close, indeed, as the relation of the early stories 
in Genesis to the Babylonian legends), since, in a number of cases, the laws are 
practically identical (so Johnston, Johns Hopkins University Circular, June, 1903) ; 
or (2) one of racial affinity, i.e. of common tradition, without any direct influence, 
much less, borrowing (so Cook, D. H. Miiller, Kohler) ; or, perhaps, (3) one of 
entire independence, with CC, however, greatly influenced by a Babylonian envi 
ronment (so Johns, DB. V. 6ioff.). While the existence of such a code as that of 
Hammurabi, at the early date of 2250 B.C., strengthens the arguments for an early 
date of CC, it does not furnish any proof that CC could have existed in its present 
form earlier than the stage of civilization (viz. the agricultural) in which it is plainly 

t The details do not concern us in this connection ; for the most recent dis 
cussion of these details, v. Carpenter and Battersby, The Hexateuch, Vol. I. ; Hol- 
zinger, Einleitung in den Hexateuch; Dr. LOT.; and the introductions to the 
various commentaries on the Hexateuch by Gunkel, Steuernagel, Bantsch, G. F. 
Moore, Gray, Bertholet, Holzinger, and Driver. 


(2) The prophetic element, with which alone we are now con 
cerned, is itself the result of a union of two distinct documents ; 
and while these two documents may not be clearly distinguished 
from each other in certain phases, they nevertheless stand apart, 
in the greater portion of the material, to an extent which is no 
longer seriously questioned.* 

(3) J is a Judaean narrative, having its origin in the king 
dom of Judah, while E (v.i.} arose in Northern Israel. The 
evidence of J s Southern origin is not so clear as is that of E s 
Northern origin, but with the practical certainty of the latter, the 
probability of the former follows. This, moreover, is strengthened 
when we observe (a} the prominence attached to certain distinc 
tively Southern sanctuaries in the patriarchal narratives ; (^) the 
conspicuous place assigned to Judah among Jacob s sons (Gn. 
37 26 43 8 44 16 18 49 10 ), cf. the corresponding place assigned to 
Reuben and Joseph in E, and the absence in J of any very sure 
allusion to Joshua ; (c) the improbability that two such similar 
narratives as J and E circulated side by side in the Northern 
kingdom, and (d} the presence in Gn. 38 of traditions con 
cerning families of Judah, which would have little interest for a 

(4) J, although for the sake of convenience spoken of as a 
narrative, or indeed as a narrator, represents a school of writers 
covering a period of perhaps a century or more. It is necessary, 
therefore, in the use of J to distinguish with care the different 
strata. For practical purposes, however, we may speak of J 1 as 
the original J, and of the material assigned to J 2 or J 3 as ad 
ditions. I 

* Cf. the practical agreement existing among recent analysts, e.g . Carpenter 
and Battersby, Addis, Bacon, Driver, Kautzsch. 

tCf. Holzinger, Einl. 160-5; Kit. Hist. I. 83-5; E. Meyer, ZA W. I. 138; 
Sta. GVJ. I. 547; Co. Einl. 51 ; Carpenter and Battersby, The Hexateuch, 1. 104 ff. 

J Cf. Carpenter and Battersby, op. cit. I. 108 f. ; Holzinger, EinL 138-60. This 
material is of more than a single kind, including, as it does, (i) additions to the 
Urgeschichte, having a different point of view or background, e.g. the narrative of 
the Deluge, which is unknown to J 1 ; (2) parallels in the patriarchal narratives, e.g. 
the story of Abraham and Sarah at the court of Pharaoh is a later form of the tra 
dition as it appears in connection with Isaac and Rebekah at the Philistine court; 
(3) insertions pervaded by a loftier ethical and spiritual tone than the context, e.g. 
Gn. i8 17ff - ^b- 2&a EX. 346-9 Ku. i4 17 ; (4) editorial additions made in connection 


The time relations of J 1 seem to be those of 850 to 750 B.C., or possibly a 
little later. Only a few would assign a later date.* This unanimity of 
opinion rests upon (a) the fact that the prophetic character of J is less 
definite than that of Amos and Hosea, seeming, therefore, to belong to a more 
primitive stage in the development of the spirit of prophecy ; () the proba 
bility that Am. 2 9 Ho. 9 10 i2 3f - 12f - are based upon the written narrative of 
J ; (V) the literary style and the religious development found in Amos and 
his immediate successors imply the existence of religious writings with which 
they and their listeners were familiar ; (</) the fact that the narrative of J 
continues into the days of Joshua implies its post-Mosaic origin ; (<?) the 
national spirit everywhere characteristic of it did not exist until the age 
of the monarchy, when Israel for the first time realized its unity ; (/") the 
probability that the same school of writers has contributed to the Books 
of Samuel and Kings; () the friendly attitude toward the Philistines 
appearing in the narratives concerning the dealings of Abraham and Isaac 
with them could not have arisen until a long time after the hostilities 
of the reign of David ; (//) the reign of Solomon is evidently looked back 
upon as a sort of golden age (cf. Gn. I5 18 and I K. 4 21 ; Gn. 9 25 and 1 K. 9 20 ) ; 
() such names as Zaphenath-paneah and Poti-phera are unknown in Egyptian 
writings until the post-Solomonic period ; (/) Jos. 6 26 points back to the 
reign of Ahab ; cf. i K. i6 34 . 

2. The scope of J includes the history of the world from the 
creation of Adam down to Abraham, the history of Israel s 
patriarchal ancestors from the selection of Abraham down to 
the residence in Egypt, the history of the nation under the 
leadership of Moses and Joshua (?) down to the conquest of 
Canaan. It is altogether probable that the same school (v.s.) 
of writers continued the work down through the times of the 
monarchy, giving us the earlier portions of Samuel and Kings.f 

The general framework of the narrative from the story of Eden 

with the union of J and E, e.g. Gn. 22 15 ~ 1 8 Ex. 329-H; (5) Deuteronomic additions 
to the legislation of J, e.g. Ex. 1936-6. 

* Schra. (in De Wette s Einl*} places J between 825 and 800 ; Kit. (Hist. I. 86), 
between 830 and 800 ; Kue. puts J 1 in the latter part of the ninth or the first years 
of the eighth century, and J 2 in the latter half of the seventh century ; Bu. ( Urgesch.} 
assigns J 1 to the ninth century or the latter years of the tenth, and J 2 to the reign of 
Ahaz ; Di. dates J somewhat after 750 B.C., but prior to Hezekiah s reform ; Car 
penter and Battersby say, " J may, perhaps, be the issue of two centuries of literary 
growth, 850-650 B.C." ; Steuernagel, D enter onomium u. Josua, 280, names 900-700 
B.C. as the period within which J arose (so Holzinger, Genesis). 

t So Schra. in De Wette s Einl* 327-32 ; Bu. Richter u. Samuel ; GFM. 
Judges; Now. Richter-Ruth ; Sta. ZA W. I. 339 ; Co. ZA W. X. 96 ff. ; et a/. 


to the settlement in Canaan discloses a definite purpose in the 
mind of the author of this literary creation.* The purpose is 
twofold, relating on the one hand to the origin of Israel as a 
nation and Israel s relation to the neighboring nations, and, on 
the other, to the close connection of Yahweh with this origin and 
development. Nearly every story in the long series finds its true 
interpretation from this point of view.f This is in perfect har 
mony with the national motive which underlies the work of Elijah, 
Elisha, and other nebhi im ( 3-5), with the higher place which 
Israel is just at this period taking among the nations, and, like 
wise, with the new ideas of Yahweh which were appealing with 
such force to those who breathed the prophetic inspiration 
(p. xlix). This religio-political motive includes also the desire 
to give expression to new and larger conceptions of God and man 
and life (t.i.). This historical interest does not concern itself 
with matters of an institutional character (this was P s great 
responsibility). It is the heroes of ancient history and the scenes 
of the olden times that the Judaean narrative delights in. For this 
reason practically no care is given to providing chronological 
indications, and hardly more to the chronological arrangement 
of the material. J It is the spirit that controls throughout, nowhere 
the letter. It is not difficult to connect this expression of a true 
religious spirit with the reformation in Judah, almost contempo 
raneous (six years later) with that of Elisha and Jehu in Israel, 
which was, after all, only the conclusion of the former, resulting, 
as it did, in the overthrow of Athaliah, the daughter of Ahab and 

3. One of the principal problems of the Judaean narrative 
requires at least a passing glance, viz. that of the world-stories 
with which the narrative of J opens. What was their origin ? 
What was their place in the narrative as a whole? We cannot 

* Reuss ( Gesch. d. heil. Schrift d. A. T. $ 214) not inappropriately characterizes 
J as a " national epic." Dr. ( The Book of Genesis, p. xiv ) declares J to be " the 
most gifted and the most brilliant" of all the Hebrew historians. 

f This is true (contra Dr.) even of stories like that of the mission of Abraham s 
steward (Gn. 24). 

J V. the author s articles in Hebr. V.-VI. 

Viz. the stories of the Garden of Eden, Cain and Abel, the Deluge, and the 
Tower of Babel. 


longer deny the close formal connection of these traditions with 
the similar traditions of other peoples.* Nor can we suppose 
that the various forms which these same stories take on among 
other nations are derived from an original Israelitish form. Israel 
received this material from the same sources as those from which 
other nations received their stories. It is a heritage common to 
many nations. At the same time it is quite certain that Israel 
came into peculiar relations with the older Babylonian tradition, 
not so much in a direct way through the earliest ancestor Abraham,! 
as in a more indirect manner, viz. through the Canaanitish ele 
ment, which itself contained much that was Babylonian. J The 
transformation which these stories have undergone is strictly in 
accordance with the spirit of the narrative as a whole, and might 
well be taken to represent the whole, since it shows the prophetic 
motive, not only in general, but in detail, and illustrates practi 
cally every phase of that spirit. Moreover, these stories (found in 
Gn. 2-1 1 ) furnish not only the starting-point, but the basis, for the 
Judaean narrative, establishing at the very beginning the essential 
view-point of the narrative. This is seen especially (i) in the 
place assigned Yahweh in reference to the outside nations ; (2) in 
the importance attached to the conception of sin, and likewise 
that of deliverance ; (3) in the attitude shown toward the progress 
of civilization ; (4) in the preparation already made for giving 
Israel her place among the nations; and (5) in the details of 
prophetic method and procedure. 

4. This prophetic factor appears in several of the most important 
characteristics of the narrative. Only a few of these may be 
mentioned : 

(i) The purpose and spirit (v.i.) are distinctly prophetic, since 
the writer assumes to be acquainted with the plans of the deity, 
and in fact to speak for that deity under all circumstances ; e.g. he 
declares the divine purpose in the creation of woman (Gn. 2 18 ~ 24 ); 

* V. Lenormant, Beginnings of History ; Davis, Genesis and Semitic Tradition ; 
Gunkel, The Legends of Genesis ; and the enormous Babel u. Bibel literature result 
ant upon Friedrich Delitzsch s famous lectures. 

t Jastrow, JQR., 1901, p. 653. 

J So Gunkel, Genesis, p. xli ; Dr. Genesis, 31 ; Sayce, Wkl., Zimmern, et al. 

$ Dr. Genesis, pp. xxi ff. ; Holzinger, Einl. 129 ff. ; Carpenter and Battersby, 
Hex. I. 99. 


he assigns the cause and motive of Yahweh s act in sending the 
Deluge (Gn. 6 1 7 ) ; he knows the exact effect of Noah s sacrifice 
upon the divine mind (Gn. 8 21f< ) ; he sees the divine purpose 
in the confusion of tongues (Gn. n 6f- ) and in the selection of 
Abram (Gn. I2 1 " 3 ) ; he also describes the scene between Moses 
and Yah web on the top of Pisgah (Dt. 34 ld 4 ). 

(2) The national element, so prophetic in its character, dis 
plays itself (a) in the great prominence given to stories in which 
the principal heroes are reputed national ancestors, such as those 
concerning Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Judah, Joseph, Moses ; () in 
the recital of events which had to do with the national progress, 
such as the journey into Egypt, the Exodus, the covenant at Sinai, 
the conquest, the settlement, these being the very foundations 
of the national history ; (<:) in the evident desire to represent 
Israel as unique among the nations, since she, a direct descendant 
(through Noah, Abraham, and others) of the first man Adam, had 
been definitely chosen by Yahweh as his own peculiar people ; and 
to represent the affairs of the world as arranged in such a way as to 
secure the best interest of a single people, Israel ; * (</) in the naive 
and primitive method adopted to show Israel s superiority to their 
mort closely related neighbors, viz. by connecting some form of 
reproach with the origin of the nation concerned, e.g. Canaan in 
the srory of Noah (Gn. g 25 ^) as a slave to other peoples; Moab 
and Ammon (Gn. iQ 30 " 38 ) as the offspring of Lot by incest ; f 
Ishmae (Gn. i6 llff ) as the son of a handmaid; Edom as inferior 
in ability and character from the beginning ; various Arabian tribes 
as being descended from Keturah, Abraham s second wife, and as 
not receiving a share in Abraham s property (Gn. 25 1 " 5 ). 

(3) The predictive element is, of course, prophetic ; " the patri 
archal history is, in his (J s) hands, instinct with the consciousness 
of a great future" (Driver), (a) The history of sin is pictured 
(Gn. 3") with unerring accuracy, as a long and painful struggle 

* This conception is clearly found in J (cf. 13? 22 18 26 4 ) , although the word 
" choose " is used first of Israel in Dt. 4 37 . 

f Cf., however, Gunkel s conjecture that this story is of Moab-Ammonite origin, 
and in early times bore no tinge of reproach ; but on the contrary was a eulogy of 
the daughters of Lot, who took such heroic measures to secure children, and also 
preserved thereby the purity of ihe tribal Dlood. 


between humanity and the influences which tempt man to evil, 
a struggle which in the very nature of the case must mean victory 
for humanity ; * (b) Israel s relations to other peoples are pro 
phetically interpreted in Gn. Q 25 " 29 ; f (c) glimpses of Israel s 
future numbers and power are given to the patriarchs, Isaac 
(Gn. 27 27ff -), Jacob (Gn. 4 8 15 - 19 49 1 27 ) ; while (</) a forecast of 
Israel s future relations to the world at large is placed in the 
mouth of a foreign prophet (Nu. 24 17 " 19 ). 

These predictions represent the very thought of the prophet 
concerning the Israel of his own day, the position already gained, 
or that which, with the encouragement thus given (i.e. by the rhe 
torical and homiletical use of prediction), may be expected. They 
are, in other words, " prophetical interpretations of history " 

(4) The prophetic element is seen also in the idealism which 
permeates the narrative throughout. The writer makes word- 
pictures of events and characters in life, in order that his contem 
poraries, observing the ideal life thus represented (whether it is an 
ideal of good or an ideal of bad), may lift their life from the lower 
plane to a higher. 

The story of Abraham is a pen-portrait presenting the ideal of intimate 
acquaintance and communion with Yahweh, and consequent faithfulness and 
obedience (cf. Che. EB. 24). In the story of Joseph, he pictures the final 
victory of purity and integrity in spite of evil machinations on the part of 
those who are rich and powerful (cf. Dr. DB. II. 770). In the picture given 
us of Israel s oppression in Egypt, and deliverance from the same by the out 
stretched hand of Yahweh, we see Israel as a nation brought face to face with the 
mightiest power on earth, and triumphing over that power with all its gods. \ 

* This passage implies, if it does not promise, victory ; cf. Dr. Genesis, 48,57, 
and contra Holzinger, in loc.,w\\o denies to it ethical content and limits its meaning 
to an explanation of the well-known antipathy of man to the serpent family ; also 
Gunkel, who interprets it as explaining the perpetual hostility of man and the 
serpent family, as a punishment for their league against Yahweh. 

f Whether we understand (i) as formerly (also recently by Dr. op. cit. p. in) 
the three great powers of civilization, the Semitic, the Japhetic, and the Hamitic, 
or (2) with We., Sta., Bu., Meyer, Holzinger, merely Israel, Canaan, and Philistia 
or Phoenicia; or (3) with Gunkel (Shem =) the Aramaean-Hebrew peoples, 
and (Japhet=) the northern peoples (i.e. the Hittites). 

J On the Musri hypothesis of the Exodus this exalted conception of Yahweh s 
power disappears from the story in its original form, but, even if the hypothesis be 
accepted, the transformation into an Egyptian Exodus must have taken place prior 
to the times of J. 


Stories of this kind, and there were many such, were intended to lead men 
into a higher life, and to give the nation a confidence in its destiny.* 

(5) A true prophetic conception expresses itself in the attitude 
of the Judaean narrative toward the progress of civilization. Here 
J follows in the footsteps of those who preceded him, and joins 
hands with the Nazirite and the Rechabite (v.s.). 

This antagonism, a corollary of the views entertained concerning sin (..), 
shows itself in connection with (a} the story of the murder which accompanied 
the building of the first city (Gn. 4 3 - 16 ) ; () the beginnings of the arts, all of 
which led to the further spread of sin (Gn. 4 20 - 24 n 1 " 9 ); (c) the evident 
reproach joined to the beginning of the culture of the vine (Gn. 9 20 ff -); and 
(</) the beautiful representation everywhere made of the charm and simplicity 
of the pastoral life. 

(6) The Judaean narrative clearly presents the prophetic idea 
of the covenant relation entered into between Yahweh and the 
people of Israel, with the circumstances leading up to the making 
of the covenant, the basis on which it was to rest, and its formal 
ratification (Ex. i^ 25 24 1 " 9 34 1 " 28 ). We do not see the proof of 
the non-existence of this idea at this time in the assertion that 
the narratives (including that of E, cf. Ex. 20 and Dt. 5, and 
Ex. 24 20 " 24 ) are legendary and self-contradictory, that the early 
writing prophets make no use of the conception, and that, conse 
quently, we are to understand the entire covenant idea to be the 
result of prophetic teaching,! rather than one of its fundamental 
positions from the very beginning. 

This question will come up again, but it is well at this point to observe 
with Giesebrecht (Die Geschichtlichkeit d. Sinaibundes} : (a) that while 
references to the fact of a Sinaitic covenant outside of JE are few and 
doubtful (e.g. i K. I9 10 - 14 , in which nna is probably a later insertion, cf. &; 
on Ho. 6 7 and 8 1 v. commentary in loc. } until Jeremiah s time, this is not con 
clusive that such a covenant was unknown ; since (a) Hosea in chap. 1-3 

* This work of transforming appears all the more clearly, if we understand with 
Paton (AJT. VIII., Oct. 1904) that the real basis of these patriarchal stories is 
found in traditions concerning the relation and movements of the early tribes. 

f We. fsr. u. jud. Gesch. 12 f. ; Sm. Rel? 117; Schwally, Semitische Kriegsal- 
tertiimer, I. 2; Schmidt, art. "Covenant," EB. ; contra Giesebrecht, Geschichtlichr 
keit d. Shiaibutides (1900) ; and K. DB. V. 630 ff. 


plainly presents the fact of a covenant, although no name is used; (/3) the pri 
mary meaning of .^-n (cf. Val. ZA W. XII. i ff., 224 ft., XIII. 245 ff.; Kratz- 
schmar, Die Bundes-vorstellung im A. 7\; K. DB. V. 630; contra Schmidt, 
EB. 928 ff.) is covenant, agreement, the only way of putting a law into force 
being that of mutual agreement ; (7) the lack of more frequent reference to 
the existence of the covenant is explained in part on the ground that no writ 
ings from the older prophets have come down to us ; in part, because few 
particular occasions called for such mention, and, besides, after the expiration 
of so long a period it was unnecessary to make allusion to the initial act, 
especially when, as history shows, every great change in the national situation 
was accompanied by a new pledge of Yahweh s loyalty and love. Further 
more, (b) the leaders, in their continuous effort to use the cultus as an example 
of the demands growing out of the covenant-relation, and at the same time to 
adapt the instruction to the changing needs of the people, emphasized the 
new relations, rather than the old covenant made by Moses. And if it is 
asked why should such emphasis have been placed on it in the days of Jere 
miah, the answer is close at hand : Israel s religion is preeminently an 
historical religion ; the time had come when the covenant was to be broken; 
this fact necessarily brings the old covenant into great prominence. Concern 
ing the relation of Amos and Hosea to this covenant-idea v.i. 

(7) The prophetic element is seen still more strongly in the 
controlling place occupied in the narrative by the characteristic 
prophetic conception of sin and deliverance.* This factor seems 
to underlie everything else, beginning, as it does, with the story 
of the origin of sin in Eden and the forecast of its struggle with 
humanity (p. Ixxv), and continuing with each forward step in the 
progress of civilization, until because of its terrible growth the race 
itself (except a single family) must perish. Starting again in the 
new world, it reappears in the account of Noah s vine-culture and 
in the scattering of the nations : while the stories of the patriarchs, 
one after another, illustrate, for the most part, their deliverance 
by God s grace from evil situations consequent upon sin ; and the 
national stories seem to be chronicles only of sin and deliverance 
from sin, in other words, of disgraceful acts of rebellion and 
backsliding, and rescue from enemies who, because of such sin 
on Israel s part, had temporarily become Israel s masters. 

5. The message of the Judaean narrative was a rich and varied 
one, lifting the minds of the Israelites (of pre-Amos times) to the 
contemplation of : 

* Contra, Ten nan t in The Fall and Original Sin (1903). 


(1) Yahweh, as a God who had controlled the affairs of human 
ity, since he first brought humanity into existence; a God also 
who is celebrated for mercifulness and long-suffering, and for 
faithfulness (cf. Gn. 6 8 8 21f - iS 23 * 3 2 12 etc.); a God, not only 
all-powerful, but ever-present with his people (Gn. 26 3a 28 15 39 2 
Nu. i 4 96 ). 

(2) The origin of sin, and with it of human suffering ; the power 
of temptation and the terrible results which follow its victory over 
man ; the awful picture of the growth of evil in civilization ; and, 
likewise, the possibility of deliverance from evil and distress through 
the kindness and love of Yahweh. 

(3) Great characters, who, while not without fault, "on the 
whole maintained a lofty standard of faith, constancy, and upright 
ness of life, both among the heathen in whose land they dwelt, 
and also amid examples of worldly self-indulgence, duplicity, and 
jealousy, afforded sometimes by members of their own family " 
(Driver, op. >.). This life is intended to bring about the establish 
ment of a holy people in the world (Gn. i8 18f ). 

(4) A future mission in the world (perhaps not yet to the world), 
where Israel is to be conspicuous by reason of the special privileges 
accorded. These blessings will take the form of material pros 
perity (cf. the spiritual gifts so great as to attract the envy of all 
nations, suggested later in Gn. 22 18 26 4 [R.]). 

6. The place of the Judaean narrative in prophecy and its rela 
tion to the later prophets may receive only a brief statement. 

(1) The ideas of Yahweh as just and hating sin, as merciful, 
and as faithful, are the very ideas afterward emphasized, respec 
tively by Amos, Hosea, and Isaiah ; the representation of him as 
all-powerful, and ever-present with his people, precedes Amos s 
representation in chaps, i, 2, and that of Isaiah s Immanuel. 

(2) The conception of sin, and the statement of its evil effects, 
contain the very substance of all subsequent prophetic utterance. 

(3) The germ of the Messianic hope, here appearing, in later years 
is to occupy a large place in religious thought. (4) The concep 
tion of Israel s mission in the world ultimately develops into the 
doctrine of the servant of Yahweh. 

Besides this, the more specific allusions to J which are found 
in Amos and Hosea may be noted, e.g. : Am. 3 2 , cf. Gn. i8 19 ; 


Ho. 4 6 - 10 9 1 , cf. Nu. n 20 ; Am. 4 n Ho. n 8 , cf. Gn. iS 20 -^ 27 ; and 
the relation of the two conflicting estimates of Jacob in Ho. 
chap. 12 to J s attitude toward the patriarch. 

n M :il; j > id il r.frjtif on) 
. V-.Ji!. ::, .- ,:..-) ! - -IS b/ifi 


This narrative of Israel s early history took form as early as 
800 B.C., and, with the Judaean narrative already discussed,; fur 
nishes us a remarkable picture of the life and thought of the 


;/,.( - . ; ; : , -jriT ,:>.u ;,;." 

i. Certain preliminary points concerning E require brief consideration : 
(i) The evidence of E s Northern origin is found* in its interest in the 
sanctuaries of Northern Israel ; its assignment of the leadership in the Joseph 
story to Reuben (cf. J s assignment of it to Judah); its giving of a conspicu 
ous place to Joseph in Dt. 33, the account of his covenant with the tribes 
at Shechem, and the interment of his bones at Shechem ; the mention of the 
tombs of many prominent persons, especially those located in the North ; 
some points of contact with Aramaic in its language ; the prophetic spirit 
which breathes through it and is characteristic of the North, the home of 
prophecy, f 

(2) The date of E is 800 B.C. to 750 B.C.J The general historical situ 
ation of the writers seems to be the same as in the case of J, namely, the 
period of the monarchy. But the general theological standpoint of E is 
unanimously conceded to be more advanced than that of J ; e.g. the concep 
tion of the deity is less anthropomorphic (cf. especially, Ex. 3 14 ); the idea 
of progress in revelation appears ; the whole representation of the method 

* F. Carpenter and Battersby, Hex. I. n6f.; Dr. LOT. 122; Ho\zinger,inl. 

212 ff. 

t The oldest form of J has been assigned to the North by some scholars, e.g. 
Schra. in De Wette s Einl? 321; Reuss, Gesch. d. heil. Schriften d. A.T. t 213; 
Kue. Hex. 248 ff. ; but this view does not comme.nd itself. 

J That E was prior to J was the prevailing opinion until the appearance of We. s 
Gesch. Isr. (I. 370 ff.) in which the opposite view was adopted, which is now gen 
erally accepted. For the old view, v. Di. Num.-Dt.-Jos. 620 ff., 630 ff.; Kit. His f. 
I.76ff. Kue. (Hex. 248-52) dates El about 750 and E 2 about 650, B.C.; so Co. 
Einl. 51. Sta. (G VI. I. 58 f.) places E about 750 B.C., and maintains the possibility 
of additions to it after 722 B.C. (p. 582, note i). Holzinger (EM. 225 f.) puts E 1 in 
the latter half of the eighth century and E 2 early in the seventh century, drpenter 
and Battersby assign E 1 to the first half of the eighth century, and " affirm that E, 
like J, contains elements of various date, some of which may have been contributed 
to it after it had been adopted into the record of history and law preserved in 
Judah"; similarly Steuernagel, Deuteronomium, etc., 282 f. Wildeboer puts E 1 
about 750 B.C. and E 2 somewhere before 621. 


of the divine activity in the world is in the realm of the supernatural and 
superratioual ; the transcendent God makes known his will to men in 
dreams and visions and through angels, not by direct, personal speech as in 
J. Furthermore, in the case of stories common to J and E, not infrequently, 
the earlier form of the tradition is evidently that in J ; eg. in Gn. 26 26 33 (J) 
and 2i- 31 (E), according to E the covenant is binding upon posterity, the 
oath becomes one of exculpation, and seven lambs are introduced in an 
attempt to explain the origin of the name Beer-sheba (cf. also Gn. ^o 14 " 16 [J] 
with 3<D 17f - [E], and 3<D 24 [J] with jo- 3 [E]). For a tennimis ad quern 722 B.C. 
is the lowest possible date, since nowhere in E is there any allusion to the 
overthrow of the state, which a Northern writer must have mentioned had he 
been through that experience. The same may safely be said of the events of 
734 B.C. The whole character of E s narrative reflects a period of prosperity 
such as the reign of Jeroboam II.; the tone is one of confidence and hope, 
with no consciousness of recent disasters nor premonitions of approaching 
misfortunes. The points of contact between Hosea and E (z>.z.) also seem to 
point to the priority of the latter, and so confirm the assignment of E to the 
date 800-750 B.C. 

(3) In comparing the scope of E with that of J, we observe 
(a) that in E the relation of Israel s tradition to the outside world 
is altogether ignored, the barest allusion (e.g. Gn. 2O 13 Jos. 24-) 
being made to the Mesopotamian antecedents of Abraham s 
family ; but (/;) the history of the family, and later of the nation, 
proceeds on lines quite parallel to those of J. The more inter 
esting variations are (c) the story of the intended sacrifice of Isaac 
(Gn. 22), the fuller statement of Jacob s intercourse with Laban, 
the special attention given to the Joseph-episode, the very inde 
pendent account of Moses and his times, as well as of the cere 
mony at Horeb where the " ten words " are proclaimed and the 
covenant instituted, after which (Ex. 24 i ~ 8 ) follow the reception 
of the tables of stone in the mountain and the apostasy of the 
golden calf. Out of this came the establishment of the tent of 
meeting (Ex. 33 7 " 11 ),* in connection with which certain events of 
important prophetic significance occur (the prophetic inspiration 
of the seventy elders, Nu. n m ~ 30 , the vindication of Moses pe 
culiar prophetic office, I2 1 " 13 ). Thence the narrative passes on to 
the conquest and the distribution of the land and Joshua s final 

* E s description of the tent of meeting has been omitted to make place for the 
more elaborate account of P, 


leave-taking at Shechem (Jos. 24). The narrative unquestionably 
continues through Judges and Samuel,* thus reaching down at least 
into the early history of the monarchy, perhaps even to the Elisha 
stories in 2 Kings. | 

(4) The purpose of this narrative is evidently to magnify the 
office of the leaders, and these leaders are prophets, e.g. Abraham 
(Gn. 20 7 ), Isaac (Gn. 27* ), Jacob ^S 20 -), Joseph (so 25 ), and 
Moses (Nu. I2 1 " 15 ), to all of whom visions are granted of the future 
prosperity of the nation. Israel s government is a theocracy, in 
which the prophets speak for God. When Israel has obeyed the 
theocratic representatives, she has always been the recipient of 
divine favor, which signified peace and plenty. When Israel dis 
obeyed, the divine anger was visited upon her in the form of 
disaster. It is not the secular rulers upon whom her success 
depends, but the theocratic guides. This teaching, which the nar 
rative throughout was intended to convey, is admirably summed 
up in Joshua s farewell address (chap. 24). 

2. The prophetic element in E, as has been said, is most 
conspicuous ; \ and the narrative, for this reason, is of especial 
interest to us. We may recall the representation of Abraham as a 
prophet (Gn. 2O 7 ), the ascription to Joseph of the spirit of Elohim 
(Gn. 4 1 38 ), the unique place in pre-prophetism assigned to Moses 
(Nu. I2 1 " 14 ; cf. Dt. 34 10 " 12 ), the treatment of Miriam as a prophetess 
(Ex. is 20 ), the recognition of the non-Israelitish Balaam as a 
prophet (Nu. 2$ 5 ~ 24 ), the prophetic inspiration and authority 
accorded to the seventy elders (Nu. n^f. 246-30^ tne characteriza 
tion of Joshua as the minister of Moses and the servant of Yahweh, 
the forecasts of Israel s greatness made in the visions ascribed 

* GFM. futures, XXV. ff. ; Bu. Richter (Kurzer Hand-Comm. z. A. 7 1 .), XII.-XV, 
and Samuel (SBOT.}. 

t It is important to separate E 2 , so far as possible, from E 1 , for it is only the 
latter that preceded Hosea. Concerning the limits of E 2 , however, there is as yet 
little agreement, the exceedingly fragmentary character of E as a whole rendering 
it peculiarly difficult to determine definitely the different strata within the docu 
ment. The more important passages assigned to E 2 are : Gn. 34 35 1 - 4 Ex. 32!~336 
Nu. ill*. 16 f. 246-ao I2 2-8 2I 32-33 an d, by some, the Decalogue of Ex. 20 (but vj.). 
Cf. Kue. Hex. 251 f . ; Co. Einl. 48 ff . ; Wildeboer, Litter atur d. A. T. 140; Car 
penter and Battersby, Hex. I. 119 f. 

X V. Holzinger, Einl. 209-11; Carpenter and Battersby, Hex. I. 113. 


to dying patriarchs (Gn. 27 39f 46 3 48 20 ), the hero-stories which 
were pictures intended to serve as the ideals of the times in 
which the narratives were written, and, in fact, as anticipations or 
predictions of Israel s future glory, and the general representation 
of theocratic guidance and control which is always present. In 
all this the prophetic element is pronounced. Furthermore, the 
emphasis of E upon ethical matters and everything pertaining 
to the impartial administration, of justice is in keeping with its 
prophetic character ; cf. the large amount of legislation concern 
ing the rights of individuals and their mutual responsibilities incor 
porated in E, and especially the ethical character of E s decalogue 
(p. Ixi ff.) as compared with that of J, and the evident effort to 
remove from the old traditions everything detrimental to the repu 
tation of the prophetic heroes. This ethical interest is in the 
direct line of the development of thought which culminates in 
Amos and the writing prophets. E possesses also a larger interest 
in priestly matters than J, but this is wholly subordinate in com 
parison with his prophetic tendency. 

3. The message of E * is after all quite distinct from that of J, 
although it contains very much, indeed, that is the same : 

(i) The teaching concerning God is characterized by (a) a 
recognition of three different stages of growth through which the 
conception has passed, viz. that of Israel s early ancestors, poly 
theism (Jos. 24 2 ), that of Abraham and Jacob, cf. the reformation 
instituted by the latter after seeing Elohim s angels at Bethel 
(Gn. 35 2 " 4 ), and that connected with the revelation of Yahweh 
(Ex. 3 15 ) ; (<) the important place assigned to representatives 
(viz. prophetic spokesmen or angelic messengers Ex. i4 19 ), as 
agents of the deity in his intercourse with the people, and to 
dreams as a method of communication, and the consequent absence 
of the crude, though picturesque, anthropomorphisms found in 
J ; (c) the treatment of important events as the result, not of 
human effort in a natural way, but of the direct action of the deity 
(Ex. ly 8 - 11 Jos. 6 20 ), and in this same connection, the employment 
by the deity of men to accomplish his plans in spite of their igno 
rance or hostility (Gn. so 29 4S 58 ) ; (d) the use in connection with 

* V. especially Holzinger, Einl. 201-12. 


the deity of certain peculiar forms and phrases, e.g. the plural of 
the verbal form (Gn. 2O 13 3i 53 35*" Ex. 22 Jos. 24 19 ), the phrase 
"fear of Isaac" (Gn. 3i 42>53 ), the reference to the sacred stone 
(Gn. 28"), the pillar at the door of the tent speaking (Ex. 33), 
the stone of witness (Jos. 24-"), the "trying" of the people by 
the deity (Gn. 22 1 ). 

The whole idea of God is more theological and abstract (cf. the 
new interpretation given the word mrp, viz. JTHK "WK ,THK) than is 
the case in J. E s God is an exalted personality far removed from 
his people, and working almost entirely in the realm of the super 
natural. He is a God of transcendent power and majesty and of 
unchanging purpose. 

(2) Other characteristic elements in E s message, already mentioned, may 
be briefly summarized as follows : (a) A keener ethical sense than J s, as 
seen particularly in the evident desire to shield the reputation of the patriarchs 
by relieving them of the responsibility for certain transactions {e.g. Abraham 
expels Hagar only when commanded so to do (Gn. 21 12 ), Jacob in his shrewd 
dealing with Laban is acting under the direct guidance of God (Gn. 3i 24 - ^ 42 ). 
(b) A very definite recognition of the patriarchal cultus, with its tent of meet 
ing (Ex. 33 7 ~ u ) 5 placed under the charge of Joshua, rather than of Aaron and 
his sons (Nu. ii 16 - 30 ), together with altars and pillars (Gn. 28 18 - 22 Ex. 24 4 ), 
but no priests. (<:) An utter lack of interest in the outside world, or in the 
connection of Israel s history with the outside world. 

(3) E s message, briefly stated, was this : Israel s God is a being 
of wonderful majesty and exalted personality, with unlimited power. 
His purpose concerning the nation is unchanging. He is not close 
at hand to communicate with you in person, but makes known 
to you his will through definite agents, prophets, and messen 
gers ; there is no occasion to be ignorant of his wishes, which 
have been declared so clearly by these agents raised up to repre 
sent him. History has shown conclusively that when the voice of 
these agents has been heeded, the nation has had peace and pros 
perity ; but when there has been rebellion against their injunc 
tions, there have come ruin and disaster. In every important 
crisis of national history, Israel s God has shown his interest by 
direct action on Israel s behalf; but he has never hesitated to send 
punishment when Israel deserved the same. Israel may learn how 
Yahweh would have the nation act, if attention is given to the lives 


of the old patriarchal ancestors and to the great events of early 
national history. These experiences of honor and glory will again 
be enjoyed, if only Israel will give heed to the lessons of the past, 
improve the standards of conduct, and worship Yahweh as did 
their ancestors. 

4. The relation of E to other prophets is quite clear. It is 
more advanced and higher than J. In many points it is on a level 
with Amos and Hosea. It is like Hosea, rather than J and Amos, 
in showing little or no interest in the larger world-view. It is 
interesting to note that the broader conception is confined to the 
two documents of Judaean origin. E sees no such danger in the 
cult as is evidenced by Amos and Hosea. E s thought of sin is 
that of J. While E s ethical standards (cf. p. Ixxxiii) are higher 
than those of J, they do not reach the level on which those of 
Amos and Hosea rest. 

In E we have the close of the pre-prophetic movement, for with 
Amos, as all agree, real prophecy has begun. We may now ask, 
what was the basis and character of this movement, taken as a 
whole ? 



The question of the connection of pre-prophetism with Mosaism is 
as interesting as it is difficult. Such connection is taken for granted 
in J and E (likewise in D).* But does this assumption stand the 
historical test ? f The answer to this question bears most directly 

* Both J and E narrate the circumstances of Moses work with great minuteness, 
and on all the main points there is a fair agreement. They unite in ascribing to 
him (i) leadership in the deliverance from Egypt and in the journey to Canaan; 
(2) the position as the representative of Yahweh to Israel ; (3) the place as mediator 
in the making of a covenant between Yahweh and Israel ; (4) the honor of founding 
Israel s legislation. 

f Che. (EB. art. " Moses ") makes the name Moses that of a clan ; Wkl. ( GI. II . 
86-95) makes the entire Moses story a transformation of an original Tammuz myth ; 
but the historicity of the narratives, in a greater or less degree, is maintained by Sta. 
GVI. I. 130; We. Prol. 429-40; Sm. Rel* 15 ff. ; Kit. Hist. I. 227-39; WRS. 
0776.2303 ff . ; Giesebrecht, Geschichtl. d. Sinaibtindes ; Bennett, art. "Moses," 
>/A ; H. P. Smith, O. T. Hist. 56 ff. ; and many others. 


upon the estimate which we shall finally place upon the work of 
Amos ; for, in the fewest wor Is, the case may thus be stated : Did 
the ethical idea which formed the essence of prophetic teaching 
have its origin in Amos? or is there clear trace of its existence 
before the days of Amos? Is it seen in the transforming work of 
J and E in their stories dealing with world-history and nation- 
history (z/.j.)? Is evidence of its presence to be seen farther back, 
in the legal formulations found incorporated in J and E (z/.j.)? Is 
it seen still earlier, in the motives and methods of Elijah, Elisha, 
and the neblrfim, whose work began in the days of the seer 
Samuel? And is the germ of it all to be discovered in Mosaism? 
If we are to reach a safe conclusion concerning Moses and his 
relation to the subsequent history of Israel and Israel s religion, 
more, perhaps, is to be stated in the form of negation than in the 
form of affirmation. This is true, partly because so much that is 
unfounded has been affirmed, partly also because it is practically 
impossible to draw a sharp line between Mosaism and the pre- 
prophetic religion, or to trace with perfect satisfaction the relations 
between the two. 

1. It may safely be said that the pre-prophetic religion, even if 
this includes Mosaism as its basis, has little to do with Egypt or 
Egyptism ; * while, on the other hand, its relation to the desert of 
Sinai (or Horeb), and to the tribe of which Jethro was priest is 
very close. This locality, according to all tradition, was the scene 
and source not only of Moses education, but also of the call from 
the deity, as well as of the work of Jethro, who became the guide 
(religious and seculnr) of M. ^es and likewise his father-in-law) ;| 
and this, also, was the place, .u-corling to all tradition, in which 
Israel later entered into covenant with Yahweh (?>.s.). 

2. We must relinquish ihe conception (old and widely accepted 
as it nviy be; that Mosaism and the developments from it are 
identical, \ an idea which has been the occasion of much error 

* This is granted by those who bold to the Egyptian bondage, e.g. Sm. Rel.^yj ; 
Marti, AW. ^5! .; Sdiulr/,, Theol. I. 127 ff. ; Kne. /> 7. I. 275 ff. ; and foliows as a 
matter of course upon the adoption ot the Musii hypothesis. 

t For explanations of the two names Jethro and Hobab, sec the commentaries 
in loc., and the articles " Liobab" and " Jethro" in DB., /!/> ., find />RE* 

I iVnneu (/>/>. III. 146) rightly recognizes ihe necessity and the difficulty of 
making tins distinction. 


and confusion ; but we may regard it as established that Moses 
represents historically (a) the deliverance of Israel from Egypt,* 
() the union of several clans into one community (perhaps not 
yet a nation), f and (<r) a new conception of deity expressed in, 
or in connection with, the word "Yahweh." J 

3. We are no longer to argue, a priori, that the Moses of tradi 
tion must have been just what the tradition represented him as 
being, for, on this basis, we cannot explain "the ethical impulse 
and tendency, which, at any rate from the time of the prophet 
Amos (and Amos, be it remembered, presupposes that this impulse 
is no novelty), is conspicuous in the history of the Israelitish reli 
gion" (Cheyne); but we are entirely justified in believing that 
Moses was the founder of a religion, and " brought to his people a 
new creative idea (viz. the worship of Yahweh as a national God), 
which moulded their national life" (Stade, GVL I. 130; cLAkad. 
Reden.) 105 ff.). 

4. We may safely deny the ascription to Moses of literary work 
of any kind, even the songs with which his name is connected 
(e.g. Ex. is 1 " 18 Dt. 32 1 - 43 33 2 " 20 ), or the "judgments and precepts" 
of CC ( 7), and the decalogues of E (Ex. 20), and of J (Ex. 34) ; || 
but, without much question, we may hold him responsible for the 
institution of the tent of meeting as the dwelling-place of the deity, 
together with the ark, and the beginning of a priesthood, and this 

; * Ew. Hist. II. 75 ; We. Prol. 429 ff. ; Sm. Rel? 15 ff. ; Kit. Hist. I. 227 f. 
f See especially Eerdmans, TAT. XXXVII. 19 ff. ; Bu. Rel. 35 ff. 

J Bu., Rel. 35 f. ; K. DB. V. 624 ff. 

(if. We. (Prol.), " Moses was not the first discoverer of this faith (viz. that 
Yahweh is the God of Israel, and Israel the people of Yahweh), but it was through 
him that it came to be the fundamental basis of the national existence and history " ; 
WRS. (OTJC2 305), " He founded in Israel the great principles of the moral reli 
gion of the righteous Yahweh." Co. (Hist, of the People of Isr.) says of Moses* 
work at Sinai, " It is one of the most remarkable moments in the history of man 
kind, the birth hour of the religion of the spirit. In the thunderstorms of Sinai the 
God of revelation himself comes down upon the earth ; here we have the dawn 
of the day which was to break upon the whole human race, and among the 
greatest mortals who ever walked this earth Moses will always remain one of the 

,- :(( Moses was preeminently a man of affairs ; the strenuous nature of his activities 
as leader and organizer of the tribes of Israel left no opportunity for literary pur 
suits. His work was " rather practical than didactic, the influence of an inspired 
life rather than the inculcation of abstract dogmas" (Bennett, DB. III. 446). 


is the germ of much of the institutional element that follows 
in later years. 

5. We may find greater or less difficulty in discovering the basis 
of an ethical development in Mosaism, either (a) in the essentially 
ethical character of the claim upon Israel, which grew out of the 
great act of mercy performed by Yahweh at the crossing of the 
Red Sea, Israel s religion taking on gradually thereafter a moral 
character, because she is constantly impelled to pay due regard to 
the claim ; * or (&) in the new conception of God, viz. that he 
controls nature and history, involving the truth that Yahweh was 
not the God of a country but of a people, the relation of a deity 
to a people being more spiritual than that of a deity to a country ; t 
or (<:) in the mutual loyalty of the tribes to one another and their 
common loyalty to one God, in contrast with the individual heno- 
theism of Moab, Ammon, etc. 

It is probable, on the other hand, that a more reasonable hy 
pothesis will be found in the view j that this development has its 
roots in the fact that Israel s relation to Yahweh was not that of 
blood-kindred, as in the case of nature religions, nor that simply 
of long observance which had become something inevitable ; but, 
rather, a relation entered into by choice, one which, unlike that 
of a nature religion, could be broken, but also one which Israel 
was led to preserve, because Yahweh had wrought great works in 
her behalf. Budde s summary (p. 38) expresses this thought 
most exactly : " Israel s religion became ethical because it was 
a religion of choice and not of nature, because it rested on a 
voluntary decision, which established an ethical relation between 
the people and its God for all time." 

6. We may acknowledge quite freely the insufficiency and 
uncertainty of the materials at our command, and, as well, the 
difficulty of giving proper credit to the various agents and move 
ments concerned with the development of the great ethical ideas 
concerning righteousness, which had before been unknown ; but, 
at the same time, we cannot fail to recognize that certain facts 

* Che. EB. 3214. t Bennett, DB. III. 446. 

J So Tiele, Manuel de Vhistoire des religions (1880), 84, and Histoirc compares 
des anciennes religions (1882), chap. IX.; Sta. GVI. I. 130 ff . ; Bu. Rel. 1-38; 
Barton, Sketch of Semitic Origins, 275 ff. 


have been established which fit into hypotheses more or less satis 
factory, the fundamental factor in which is the close logical and 
historical connection between pre-prophetism and Mosaism. In 
deed, it may be asserted that Mosaism is as fundamental to pre- 
prophetism as is pre-prophetism to prophetism itself. 


Is it possible now to think of this movement in its unity, and, 
in spite of the many difficulties which exist, to separate and dis 
tinguish its thought from that which precedes and follows it? In 
making the effort to draw historical lines, we may observe : (i) That 
the case before us is, in some sense, a definite one, since we are 
concerned with Israel s religious thought during the period in 
which Yahwism is in contact with Baalism as a rival religion. 
This contact began when Israel entered Canaan ; it ended in the 
century in which Jehu, under the influence of the nebhfim, up 
rooted it.* We might go farther and say that we are dealing 
with Yahwism itself; for, pure Yahwism, at the end of this period, 
passes into prophetism, which, still later, becomes Judaism. 
(2) Consequently, our question is a threefold one : What was 
Yahwism at the time of the entrance into Canaan? With what 
did Yahwism have to contend in the centuries from noo to 
800 B.C. ? What had Yahwism become at the close of the con 
test? Two or three subsidiary questions will arise, viz.: How 
was it that, in the end, Yahwism became supreme? Is the differ 
ence between the Yahwism of 1 100 B.C. and that of 800 B.C. the sum 
contributed by the nebhi im ? or did Yahwism draw from Baalism 
itself much that was of vital significance? And further, were the 
institutions of Baalism made use of by Yahwism in securing this 
position of superiority? 

i. It is natural to consider first the idea of God. 

(i) When Yahwism, whatever may have been its origin,f came 

* The effects of Baalism continue down to Hosea and later; some of them are, 
indeed, incorporated in Yahwism (v.i.). 

f Whether, e.g. (i) in an original direct revelation (so most old interpreters) ; 
(2) in the old Arabian tribal religion (Schultz, et al.} ; (3) in the religion of the 
Kenites (Stade. Budde, et al.) ; or (4) in the esoteric monotheism of the Egyptian 


into Canaan, it was, so far as the conception of God was concerned, 
simple and primitive, very crude and naive, monotonous and severe. 

This appears in (a) the conception of Yahweh as the god of the mountain 
(Sinai), a conception which continued in one form or another until late in 
Israel s history (Dt. 33 2f I K. I9 8 Ps. 68 8 Hb. 3 3 ). () The more widely 
prevailing conception of Yahweh as the god of war, an idea which found 
strong justification in the issue of the contest with Egypt (cf. also, the war- 
song with which camp was broken, Nu. io 36 ), as well as that with the 
Canaanites (cf. the fear of the Philistines, I S. 4 7f -, on account of Yahweh s 
presence in the ark). This is seen also in the allusion to Israel s armies as 
Yahweh s armies (i S. ly 26 25 28 ), and in the very name, Yahweh Sabaoth 
(cf. 2 S. 5 10 ).* (0 The conception of him also as the God of the desert 
(i.e. of the nomad), and especially in connection with storms, eg. at the giving 
of the law (Ex. 19), in the battle of Deborah (Ju. 5 46 ), in the storm exhibited 
to Elijah at Horeb (i K. I9 llff )> an d m l ater times, v.s. It is here that the 
nomadic temperament of pre-prophetism (.j.) finds its basis.f (d} The 
conception of the ark, a materialistic symbol of Yahweh s presence, which 
plays a great role in this early period, % actually representing Yahweh, and 
not merely containing some image or symbolic stone. The history of its 
presence or absence in Israel s armies, its transportation hither and thither 
until at last it is deposited in the Temple (i K. 8 4 - 6ff -), is full of significance 
in showing the crude and crass conceptions of deity entertained, not only by 
the people, but also by the leaders. 

(<?) The use of images, involving family and clan conceptions of deity, 
distinct from that of Yahweh. Some of these images, unquestionably, were 
employed to represent Yahweh, e.g. the Sen, originally of wood or stone, and 
probably of human form (Ju. I7 3f ), || likewise, the "PON (p. 221), perhaps origi 
nally the garment used to clothe the image, and later, the image itself, and used 
in obtaining oracles. But \hzteraphim (p. 222), used very frequently of Yahweh, 
are also images of ancestors, of the tribal or family gods, as in the case of 
Rachel (Gn. 31^ 34f c f. 30.32^ an d O f the king of Babylon (Ez. 2I 26 ).^[ It is 
understood that all of these usages existed in the earliest times of the pre- 
prophetic period. 

* Cf. especially Schwally, Sem. Kriegsaltertumer, I. 4 ff. 

f Cf. Bu. Rel. 27, who adds, also, the representation of the burning bush, the pillar 
of fire and smoke, the lightning as Yahweh s " fire " or " arrow," the thunder as his 
" voice," the rainbow as his " bow." 

\ K. DB. V. 628 ; cf. his foot-note for a careful survey of recent literature. 

K. DB. V. 641 f. 

|| Not referred to in Ex. 34 17 , and probably not in Ex. 2O 4 - 6 . 

H So Schwally, Das Leben nach d. Tode ; Matthes, TAT., 1900, pp. 97 ff., 193 ff. ; 
1901, pp. 320 ff. ; but cf. K. DB. V. 614 f., 642, who wrongly denies the existence ot 
even survivals of ancestor-worship in Israel. 


(2) What, now, did Israel find in Canaan that required to be 
either assimilated or destroyed ? To what extent, and through what 
means, in the course of the struggle was Yahwism itself modified? 

(a) The distribution of the clans among the Canaanites in 
volved a serious risk, for they now acted more or less independently 
of each other, and much that had been gained by their union was 
lost. With Canaanites on every side of them, they were com 
pelled to give a certain recognition to the gods of the people, who 
were, likewise, the gods of the land; and especially was this true in 
view of the fact that they were unable to drive out the Canaanites, 
but lived with them side by side (Ju. i 5 i8 lff- ). How could they 
do other than express gratitude to the Baalim, i.e. the gods of the 
land, for the fruits which they gave ? 

() The new life, moreover, was an agricultural rather than a 
nomadic life, and demanded many modifications. The Israelites 
were the pupils of the Canaanites in all "the finer arts of field and 
vine culture," and the association needed for this could not fail to 
exert a great influence on Israel s life and thought.* 

(V) The nation for the first time came into touch with real 
civilization, and civilization was for them identical with Baalism. 
This explains why the nebhVim tended toward an isolated life, and 
seem in most cases to have opposed all progress toward civilization. 
The emblems of civilization, corn and oil, silver and gold, Israel 
believed, came from the Baalim (Ho. 2 8 ). 

(d) The nature of Baalism itself | was something peculiarly 
attractive to people of a sensuous type. The great emphasis 
placed on reproduction and everything connected with it, whether 
in the realm of vegetable or animal or human life, gave it a per 
vasive influence, for all life in the narrower, if not in the broader, 
sense was involved. The strength of the ideas thus included is 
evident from the hold they took upon many nations of ancient 
times. There was a stimulus in all this, a warmth which, although 
greatly abused, produced also some good results. 

(3) What actually occurred in the process of this long struggle 
was as follows : (a) Yahweh s residence is changed ; he gradually 

* Gu. GVI. 155 ff. ; Sta. Akad. Reden, 109 ff., 116 ff. ; K. DB. V. 645. 
fCf.A. S. Peake, art. "Baal,"Z>^; WRS. Sem? 93-113; WRS. and GFM n 
art. " Baal," EB.; Movers, Die Phonizier, I. 672-90. 


takes up his dwelling in the new territory. This means that the 
Baalim whom men worshipped at many different points, under vari 
ous names, Baal-Peor, Baal-Hermon, etc. (cf. also Baal-Berith, 
Baal-Zebub), were displaced by Yahweh, who was worshipped at 
all the sacred places and bore different names according to the 
place (e.g. cbw bx, the eternal God, Gn. 2I 33 ; bKTTS btt, the God 
of Bethel, si 13 35 ; atov , Yahweh Shalom, Ju. 6 24 , etc.). All 
this change has taken place before the times of J and E, for, as 
Kautzsch points out (DB. V. 646), the patriarchal narratives do 
not know of any Baal-worship in the land. Yahweh has taken 
Baal s place, but in so doing the Yahweh ritual has absorbed so 
much of Baalism as to become, practically, a Baal ritual. (U] The 
idea grows that Yahweh " is enthroned as God in heaven." This 
means much, for it implies that he is superior to all other gods. 
It is from heaven that he performs all those acts which indicate 
his power over the elements (e.g. rain, dew, fire, Gn. ig 24 ) and 
over the fruits of the soil. He is called the God of heaven (Gn. 
24 7 ). Messengers must now be employed to represent him, and 
these angels call from heaven (2i 17 22 11 ), and, indeed, go up and 
down on ladders which unite heaven and earth (28 12 ), the " house 
of God" being identical with the "gate of heaven." (c) His 
nature as the God of the desert is changed ; he is no longer hos 
tile to civilization. Yahwism could never have become without 
change the religion of a civilized people, still less of humanity. 
" He takes under his protection every new advance in civilization."* 
(W) His nature as destroyer (war-god) is changed, for he is no 
longer the deity of desolation and silence. He is in continual 
touch with man s activity, and everything is subordinated to secure 
his influence and blessing. The idea of beneficence and love has 
come. Warmth and color now exist, where all before was cold and 
stern, (e) Baalism, acting as a " decomposing reagent," brings 
unity, solidarity, in so far as like conditions exist, and thereby all 
cult and family images must disappear. Hence arises the oppo 
sition to image-worship which forms so large an element in 
prophetism beginning with Hosea. (/) Attempts are made to 
spiritualize the old physical conception of Yahweh. Among these 

* Cf. on this general subject, Bu. Rel. 72 ff. 


are to be counted (a) the expression, " angel of Yahweh " (J), 
which was at first used when Yahweh was represented as coming 
into contact with man (Gn. i6 7ff> cf. n ) ; in other words, a method 
of Yahweh s manifestation ; * (/?) the face of Yahweh (J), i.e. the 
person (Ex. 33 20 " 23 ), but not the full being, t and (y) the name of 
Yahweh (Ex. 2O 24 23 21 ), in which " name " is a " personified power, 
placed side by side with the proper person of Yahweh." j The 
use of these phrases is an attempt to substitute something 
more spiritual for the thought of the human form, and marks 
great progress in the conception of God. 

(4) The agencies which bring about this change are in part : 
(a) Those of the old Yahwism, the strength of which continues to 
be felt in spite of the additions that have been taken on ; (6) those 
also of Baalism, among the chief of which was prophetism, adopted 
and adapted by Israel (v.s.) ; but (^) the immediate occasion of 
the acute attack which enabled Yahwism to throw off the gradu 
ally increasing burden that had almost proved its ruin, was the 
attempt to force upon Israel a new form of this same Baalism, 
that of Tyre. The situation was now essentially different from 
that which existed in the early days of the conquest ; for at 
this time Yahweh had actually taken possession of the land, and 
the question was : Shall a foreign god, the deity of Tyre, who has 
already shown great power, come in and overpower the god of 
the land, who is now Yahweh ? || On the nature of this struggle 
in detail, v.i. The old Baalism had become so intimate a part of 
Yahwism that at this time it is lost sight of in the new Baalism 
which threatens Israel. This distinction makes clear what at first 
seems contradictory, viz. the idea that Baalism was actually uprooted 
by Jehu, and the idea, which also existed, that Baalism was still a 
corrupting element in Israel s religion. 

(5) At the close of the struggle, Yahwism is victorious;^" the 
conception of God which has now developed being as follows : 

* K. DB. V. 638 f. ; Kosters, Th T., 1875, PP- S 6 ? ff - t Cf. comm. in loc. 

\ Giesebrecht, Die alttest. Schdtzung des Gottesnamens u. ihre religionsgeschicht- 
liche Grundlage, 66; K. DB. V. 640 f.; F. J. Coffin, JBL. XIX. (1900), 166-188. 

6 The phrase " glory of Yahweh " probably arose in this period, but there is no 
certain evidence of its existence until a slightly later date; cf. i S. 4 22 Ex. 33 
(late J) Nu. 1422 (JE). || K. DB. V. 647. H Bu. Rel. 106. 


(a) Yahweh is a god irresistible in nature and among nations, the 
idea of a merely national god having been outgrown. This is seen 
in the power attributed to Yahweh over other nations, e.g. Egypt, 
and Canaan, as well as in the extra-national existence involved in 
his residence at Sinai, and likewise in the later conception of a 
heavenly residence (v.s.). The narrower idea of Yahweh as the 
god of a land has never existed. He has been and is a national 
god, i.e. Israel s God ; but he is also something more than this, a 
god who controls nations and nature in Israel s favor. It is not in 
this same sense that we may speak of Chemosh or Ashur. 

() He is, moreover, a god who is the moral ruler of his people ; 
this has not gone so far as to affect individuals, being still limited 
to families and nations. The interests of the individual are indeed 
conceived of as under the protection of Yahweh, but they are 
wholly subordinate to those of the nation, being in themselves of 
too slight importance to merit the especial and continuous con 
sideration of the deity, except in so far as they contribute to the 
national life and progress.* Yahweh s rule is characterized by jus 
tice, and his power to judge extends to heaven and to Sheol. Here 
we must estimate the true character of judgment in ancient times, 
for, although it came from Yahweh, it signified, not a "moral inves 
tigation and instruction," but "an oracular response obtained by 
means of a sacred lot" (Ex. 22 6ff< Jos. 7 16ff - ^ i S. 14).! This, as 
Budde says, is not moral, but intellectual knowledge. But this 
primitive judgment has nevertheless given place to the verdict 
against kings pronounced by Nathan and Elijah (v.s.). 

He is known for his personal interest and love, since he has 
shown himself to be, not only a helper and a friend, but, indeed, a 
father. J This signifies something very great, for he is no longer 
simply a natural or even national god, and therefore compelled to 
render such service. If deliverances have been wrought, they 
have come through his affection. There is a sense, likewise, in 
which he is a holy god, and disobedience of his regulations is sin. 
This is implied in the claim of Elijah, who treats allegiance to any 
other god as sin ; in representations of J and E, that disregard of 
Yahweh s will (cf. especially the story of the origin and progress of 

* Cf. Sm. Rel* 102 ff. f Bu. Rel. 33 f. J Cf. Sm. Rel* 96-101. 


sin given by J in Gn. 3-11) is deserving of severe punishment and 
inevitably followed by judgment ; in the decalogues, which present 
the ethical and the ritualistic demands of a god, himself holy, and 
therefore demanding an elevated character in those who serve him ; 
and in CC, the regulations of which are everywhere regarded as 
the expression of the divine will. 

(V) Yahweh alone is the God of Israel, and he only may be 
worshipped, this was the truth for which Elijah had contended, 
and his contest had been won. The significance of this victory 
can scarcely be overestimated. The fact that Yahweh had made 
and enforced such a demand in itself challenged attention. It 
emphasized the fundamental and far-reaching difference between 
Yahweh and the nature gods of Canaan and the surrounding 
peoples.* This difference consisted chiefly in the essentially 
ethical and spiritual nature of Yahweh, which must of necessity 
find expression in demands upon his people for a worship arising 
from the heart and a life devoted to ideals of justice and purity. 

2. In what has already been said, there is much that refers to 
the conceptions concerning man s duty to God, as expressed in 
worship. We may add the following brief statement : 

(1) The priest, hardly known before the entrance into Canaan, 
has attained an important place. The story of the priest-work 
of Micah (Ju. 17, 18), and that of Eli and his sons (i S. i 1 ^ 22 ), shed 
much light upon the early history of the priesthood. He was at 
first occupied with the care of the Ark (i S. 4 4 2 S. is 24 29 ), and 
with carrying or consulting the ephod (for no positive evidence 
exists that the priests participated in sacrifice |). Out of this 
function grew later the giving of directions, i.e. tdroth, in matters 
relating to law or ritual. But with the erection of the Temple, the 
priests took on larger service and rose to a higher place in society 
and in governmental affairs. Strong societies were organized, at 
first in Jerusalem, and later in Northern Israel (cf. Dt. 33 8ff [E], 
in which the priesthood is recognized as organized and as possess 
ing high dignity and power) . At the same time CC contains no 
reference to a priest ; the whole matter is custom, not law. 

(2) The high places taken over from Baalism are still employed 

* Cf. Kue. Rel. I. 367 f. t i S. 2 12 ff- does not prove this. 


without objection as the seats of popular worship. These repre 
sent the ancient holy places, and have now become thoroughly 
identified with Yahweh-worship, as distinguished from Baal-wor 
ship. The thought has not yet been suggested that worship shall 
be restricted to one place, Jerusalem. The impossibility of secur 
ing a pure worship at these high places has not yet been realized. 

(3) Sacrifice is, after all, the chief feature of worship. It appears in uie 
meal of communion (i S. I 4ff - 9 12ff ); the offerer may kill the victim, the fat is 
reserved for Yahweh, and a portion is given to the priest (i S. 2 13f -); the flesh 
may not be eaten with the blood (i S. I4 32f -). All sacrifices are gifts to the 
deity; the offerings of Gideon (Ju. 6 18ff -) and Manoah (Ju. I3 19 ) represent 
the usage of the times.* 

(4) The passover, Israel s only festival in pre-Canaanitish times, has now 
grown into several, among which are (a) the Sabbath (Ex. 34 21 23 12 Dt. 5 12 ), 
observed, however, with a humanitarian rather than a religious motive (v.s^} ; 
this same thing holds good also of () the seventh year, which is beginning 
to be observed. There are also (c) the new moon (i S. 2O 5ff - 24ff -), with 
festivities lasting for two days, and (</) the three festivals at which all males 
were to appear with gifts (Ex. 23 14ff - 34 18ff -); these were occasions of great 
joy and feasting, reaching even to excess, for sacred women at the high places 
prostituted themselves as a part of the religious ritual. Cf. Amos and Hosea 

(5) Custom has now in many cases been codified into law, for CC is clearly 
in existence (v.s,~). These precedents are now recognized as having divine 
sanction ; and while their scope is not broad, the essential content includes 
reference to many of the more important of the religious institutions. 

(6) The use of images continues, and oracles are consulted in order to 
ascertain the divine will. This was the use made of Urim and Thummim^ 
which, in some way not quite clear, represented the sacred lot. Cf. i S. I4 41 
(<>), and 143.18. 36^ j This usage, hardly consistent with a later and higher 
prophetism, was still a part of the system in vogue, and entirely consistent 
with that system. 

3. It is not easy to formulate, as the expression of this Canaan- 
itish-Israelitish age, the opinion which prevailed concerning the 
relation of man to his fellow- man, his obligations, or, in other 

* For further details v. Schultz, "Significance of Sacrifice in O. T. ( " AJT. IV. 
2 57-3i3; Now. Arch. II. 203 ff. ; Dr., art. " Offering," DB.; GFM., art. " Sacrifice," 
EB.; and my Priestly Element in O. T., 83-93. 

t On early Israelitish festivals, see my Priestly Element in O. T. t 94-7; Benz. 
art. " Feasts," EB. ; Now. Arch. II. 138 ff. 

t GFM., art. " Urim and Thummim," EB. 


words, the ethical standards which were in vogue. But certain 
things may be said, partly in the way of explanation, partly, also, 
in the way of interpretation : 

(1) It is unfair to the age, and to the subject, to base one s con 
clusions on the extreme cases of immorality. Such cases occur in 
our own day. The record of such cases (e.g. that of Judah and 
Tamar (Gn. 38), and that of David and Bathsheba (i Sam. 1 1, 12)) 
is evidence, not of their common occurrence, but of their heinous- 
ness in the sight of the prophet who makes the record. 

(2) While we may still hesitate concerning the actual basis of 
this ethical movement in Israel s history, and its origin, it is com 
paratively easy to point out, not only the elements in the remarkable 
growth which has taken place in this period, but also the occasion 
of the growth, viz. the advance in a true conception of Yahweh 
(pp. xc ff.). 

(3) The conception of higher ideals is still restricted to the 
community (i.e. the family or clan), and has not received appli 
cation to the individual. 

(4) This higher conception has influenced the attitude of Israel 
neither toward outside nations, nor, indeed, toward the stranger 
inside Israel s gates. This is not to be regarded as strange in view 
of the definitely hostile relations which existed for the most part 
between every ancient nation and its neighboring nations. Inter 
national comity and law must follow national law at a long distance. 

(5) Custom is still, in great measure, the standard of action, 
but this is more and more influenced by religious thought. And, 
as already suggested, custom has now been formulated into law. 
Crime is regarded as affecting Yahweh himself (2 S. i2 14 , following 
the reading of Lucian), and the enactments of CC, aside from 
its ritual content, take cognizance of the most common and 
important of the human relationships. 

(6) The later decalogue, properly interpreted (v.s.), marks 
the stage of advancement now reached. This is splendidly sup 
ported and, indeed, developed in CC (pp. IxivrT.). 

(7) But, after all, the stories of the patriarchs give us the truest 
idea of the morals of the period.* They represent the highest ideals 

*K. DB. V.66 3 


of the teachers of Israel at the time they assumed literary form (cf. 
pp. Ixxi, Ixxix f.). Abraham is the type of the truly pious Israelite, 
exhibiting the qualities of faith and obedience under the most try 
ing circumstances ; while Jacob is the successful man of affairs, 
whose prosperity is due, not alone to his own shrewdness, but also to 
his faithful adherence to his God. The moral delinquencies of the 
patriarchs must be estimated in view of (a) the fact that in large 
part the questionable transactions are in relations with foreigners, 
toward whom ethical requirements did not hold to such a high 
degree (v.s.) ; (b) the effort of E to minimize the faults of the 
patriarchs (v.s.}, which shows an ethical advance toward the close 
of the pre-prophetic period ; (c) the indirect condemnation some 
times found within the stories themselves (cf. Gn. 2o 9f 26 9f - 27 12 ). 

(8) The stories of the kings enforce similar truths upon the 
attention. The special position of the king as " the anointed of 
Yahweh " and the most powerful personage in the nation added 
emphasis to the use of his life-story for purposes of moral and 
religious instruction. If David and his successors could achieve 
success only in so far as they obeyed Yahweh and refrained 
from evil, how much less could the nation at large disregard 
Yahweh s will and prosper? The direct teaching of these stories 
is evident. 

4. Aside from the conceptions already considered, viz. those 
of God, of man in relation to God, and of man in relation to man, 
there are certain others with which the religious and ethical ideas 
are closely associated. These possess more of the speculative 
character and deal with the origins of things and the future.* 

(i) Ideas concerning the origin and nature of man had taken 
on quite definite form, e.g. (a) the body of man (Gn. 2 7 ) is of 
earth and at death returns to the earth (Gn. 3 19 ) ; while the 
breath (v.i.} is re-absorbed in the great Spirit of the universe , this 
body or flesh is transitory in its nature (cf. Is. 3i 3 ) and always sub 
ject to decay and destruction ; it is, moreover, the occasion of 
moral weakness ; but it is never represented as in itself sinful (i.e. 
as equivalent to o-ap) and unclean. 

(b) The blood is the life only in the sense that it is the source, 

* Di. TheoL 355 ff. ; the recent statement of Kautzsch (DB. V. 665 ff.) fur 
nishes an admirable survey of this entire field. 


or vehicle, or seat, of life ; consequently it must not be eaten 
(i S. i4 32ff - ; cf. Dt. i2 23 Lv. ly 11 ), for in so doing another life might 
be absorbed. The desire to bring about just such an identification 
of different lives was the basis of the earlier sacrificial meals, of 
which, however, no instance occurs in O. T. literature. The sig 
nificance of this conception of blood upon the later development 
of sacrifice is very evident. 

(Y) The breath or spirit (nT\) occupied a still larger place in the 
older thought. This breath represented life, and had its origin in 
the breath of Yahweh himself, which he breathed into the first man 
(Gn. 2 7 ). When this divine breath (the spirit of life) is called 
back by Yahweh to himself (i.e. re-absorbed), death ensues. Nor 
was this spirit restricted to human beings, for animal life (Gn. 2 17 ) 
had the same origin (Nu. i6 22 27 ; cf. Ps. io4 29f Jb. 34 14f ), although 
it was reckoned inferior, as is shown by the fact that man was 
treated more directly and individually in the act of creation, animals 
being animated, so to speak, as a species ; and further, although 
animals are represented as created for man s use, none of them is 
fit to be his "help." But now, this spirit, breathed into humanity 
once for all in the case of the first man ( = traducianism, rather 
than creationism), and including life of every kind, viz. thought, 
will, and action, is everywhere a manifestation of the divine spirit 
(cf. Acts ly 28 ).* 

(2) The origin and purpose of the universe does not occupy a 
large place in Hebrew pre-prophetic thought, and yet certain defi 
nite ideas are contained in J s statement in Gn. 2 4ff - Perhaps 
something also is to be learned from what this passage does not con 
tain (e.g. the lack of any mythical element) . (a) This narrative, 
of which a portion (dealing with the creation of heaven and earth) 
doubtless has been lost, clearly points to Yahweh as the former of 
man and of man s home (but this is only what other religious 
cosmogonies have done, each in its own way, and does not contra 
dict the position that the doctrine of Yahweh as Creator is exilic 
or post-exilic, i.e. subsequent to the acceptance of monotheism). | 

*Cf. Di. Theol. 359 ff. ; Da. O. T. Theol. 117-29; Briggs, JBL. XIX. (1900), 
132 ff. ; Shoemaker, JBL, XXIV. (1904), 13 ff., who finds no case of rvn = breath 
until exilic times (v. p. 24). 

t Sta. ZA W. XXIII. 178; Gunkel, Sekopfung und Chaos, 159; K. DB. V. 669, 


(6) The interest is centred in man, for whose benefit alone the 
animals are formed ; and when no suitable companion is found for 
him among them, woman is created by another and different pro 
cess ; while (V) the climax is found in the representation concern 
ing marriage.* 

(3) The origin and nature of sin is pictured in the story of the 
fall, for no other interpretation than that of a/#//f will satisfy 
the demands. Concerning all this, it was believed (a) that man, 
at one time, lived in close association and communion with the 
deity ; but (^) pride led him to overstep certain bounds that had 
been set ; (c) this act of disobedience was followed by trouble, 
misery, and suffering. } 

(4) The state after death is a subject concerning which neither 
pre-prophecy nor prophecy had much to say, partly because the 
saying of anything would give encouragement to the superstitious 
survivals of animism, and partly, also, because no adequate teach 
ing had as yet been worked out. That the ideas which prevailed 
in early Israel concerning Sheol came from the Canaanites (and 
perhaps farther back from Babylon) is probable ; in any case, the 
popular belief was closely associated with necromancy, and conse 
quently opposed to Yahwism. This belief (Gn. 37 35 42^ 44 29 - 31 
Nu. I6 30 - 33 , for which we are indebted to J) included, at least, the 
following points : (a) Sheol is a space to which one goes down; 
(b) no one ever returns ; yet (c) by the influence of necromancers 
a " form " may be brought up, as in the case of Samuel (i S. 28 11 ff ) ; 
while (d) only thick darkness prevails. (<?) It is a place of assem 
bly for the departed ; but (/) there is no such thing as fellowship 
(Gn. 3 y 35 ). (g) That which goes down is not the body (which 
decays in the grave), nor the spirit (which is absorbed by the 
spirit of God) ; but " an indefinable something of the personality" 
which (= shade, or manes) is invisible and does not live, but merely 

* On the question of Babylonian influence upon this and the other early stories 
of Genesis, cf. the recent voluminous literature on Babel and Bible. 

f Cf. the opinions that we have here: (i) an illustration of how sin arises in 
the case of every individual (cf. Di. Theol. 371) ; (2) the story of how humanity 
passed from rudeness to culture, or from unconsciousness to freedom (cf. Holzinger 
and Gunkel, in lac.} ; or (3) a culture-myth without moral content (Tennant). 

J On the relation of this to the Babylonian, and especially the Zend, cf. Sta. 
ZA W. XXIII. 172 ff. ; Zimmern, KA T? 527 f. ; K. DB. V. 667. 


exists. How far this popular belief was a survival of animism, and 
the extent to which it was really antagonized by Yahwism, cannot 
here be discussed.* 

5. The general character of the pre-prophetic movement may 
now be briefly summarized in view of its history up to this point, 
and, likewise, in view of the real prophetic activity which is to 
grow out of it and, at the same time, to follow close upon its heels : 

(i) This movement is not exclusively or essentially Israelitish, but 
is of Canaanitish origin, f although itself at a later time hostile to 
Canaanitism and directly responsible for its destruction ; and in 
the long process of its growth it incorporates many Canaanitish 

( 2 ) The struggle between pre-prophetism and Baalism is between 
the later idea of a relation with the deity, based upon a pact or 
covenant, and the earlier idea of a relation based upon the natu 
ral tie. In this case, the covenant idea lives and works several 
centuries with the nature idea, and, in the end, shakes it off, but 
only after absorbing all that was good in it. 

(3) The result of the movement, in so far as it concerns worship, 
is the endurance, if not the acceptance, of an elaborated cult, 
through which the religious sentiment has been enlarged and 
enriched, but in which Israel is soon to find that which will prove 
her ruin (cf. Judah and the doctrine of the inviolable Jerusalem). 

(4) The influence of the movement on conduct has been to 
raise the standard in a marked degree, and to define more closely 
the relations of man to man, without, however, going outside of 
Israel, or developing anything higher than that which pertains to 
the tribe or family. 

(5) The movement, in so far as it concerns the idea of God, 
is still henotheistic, not monotheistic. 


The facts of the life of Amos present many points of peculiar 
interest, i. His home was in Judah (cf. p. 3). 

* For the most important literature on this subject, see pp. 40 f. 
f So Kue. Proph. 554 ff. ; K. DB. V. 653 ; Gu. G VL 71 ; et at. 


This may be accepted, notwithstanding (0) his seeming absorption in 
Northern Israel (cf. p. cxxi for the view that he always had Juclah in mind as 
the home of Yahweh s religion in the future) ; * () the elevation of Tekoa, 
which is alleged to be too great for sycamore culture (p. 3) ; t 0) the lack 
of allusion to Judah in his writings; J (rf) the effort of Gratz to identify 
Tekoa with Eltekeh of Jos. IQ 44 , making him a Danite ; (<?) the suggestion 
of Oort that he really lived in the North, and went to Judah only after his 
expulsion from Bethel (p. 3) ; (/) the desire of Che. || to transfer Tekoa to 
the Negeb, and transform many of the proper names in such a way as to place 
the entire activity of Amos in this region, which Che. supposes to have be 
longed to Northern Israel. 

The location of Tekoa in the desert of Judah furnishes the possibility of 
just such a sense of natural grandeur ^[ as we are compelled to believe must 
have been the privilege through many years of one who was later able to 
express himself as did Amos. Nor may we deny the very great importance 
of the not far distant Arab influences, including the stimulating effect of the 
caravan routes close at hand (cf. the Dedanites, Is. 2 1 13 ), although we may 
hesitate to see** an actual Arabic idiom in crD D o- vy (4 10 ), or to regard 
Tekoa ft as a great Arab-Israelitish literary centre, the Book of Job likewise 
having been written here, or to believe that the inhabitants of this general 
region, under the lead of the Jerahmeelites, were the occasion of all ancient 
Israelitish life and activity. JJ 

There is nothing in 3 7 - 8 to show, as Cheyne thinks, that Amos 
must have left Tekoa before receiving his call. Here, almost 
within sight of Jerusalem, in or near a village fortified at one 
time by Rehoboam (2 Ch. n 6 ), and celebrated for the visit paid 
to David (2 S. i4 2ff ) by one of its wise women, which looked out 
upon a desolate, dreary, and savage world, in fact "an unmitigated 
wilderness," in an environment abounding in emptiness and still 
ness, was very naturally developed the being who was to possess, 
in fullest measure, the power of observation and reflection, the 
austere habits of the recluse, and the unpitying sharpness of the 
censor of his country s faults and vices. No mention is made 
of a father, or of family. Did he have no family record ? 

* Meinhold, 63; cf. Marti, 150. 

f Tekoa is about 2700 feet above sea level, while sycamores are never found in 
Palestine at a greater height than 1000 feet ; cf. i K. io 2 ? i Ch. 27 ; v. GAS. I. 77 ; 
Maspero, Dawn of Civilization, 26, 121 ; Post, DB. IV. 634 f.; M Lean, EB. 4831 f. 

t Cf. Marti, 146. $ Gesch. I. 403. || EB. 3888 f., and CH. II. 133 f. 

^ Che. EH. 148. ** With We., and Che. EB. 148. 

ft Stickel, Hiob, 269-77. II Che. EB. and CB. passim. GAS. I. 79-81, 


2. But if this was the home of Amos, when and under what 
circumstances did he occupy it and do his work ? We may not 
accept ( i ) the view recently suggested * that the book is subse 
quent to the exile, later even than Joel ; nor (2) its assignment to 
the date 744 or 745 B.C.,| on the ground that Assyria was inactive 
for twenty-five years previous to the accession of Tiglathpileser III. 
(745 B.C.) ; nor (3) the date indicated by Elhorst, viz. in the days 
of Josiah, 638-621. 

Students of Amos are all but unanimous in agreeing that Amos 
delivered these sermons between 765 and 750 B.C. (p. 5). t This 
view assumes the general accuracy of the statements made in 
chap. 7, and is in strict accord with the circumstances of this 
period as they are elsewhere found to exist. 

() The freedom of the people from anxiety on account of Assyria, and 
the vagueness of Amos in referring to Assyria || (5 27 6 14 ) are both clear, 
when we note that during the reigns of Shalmaneser III. (783-773 B.C.), who 
was all the time engaged with the people of Urartu (i.e. Ararat), and Asur-dan 
(772-755 B.C.), whose time was occupied principally in dealing with con 
spiracy and revolt at home, ample opportunity was afforded for the growth of 
Israel,^[ and the political situation was one which gave the people great 

* Edward Day and Walter H. Chapin, AJSL. XVIII. 66-93. This argument 
is based on (i) the presence of many insertions generally acknowledged to be from 
a later hand, but these in nearly every case plainly interrupt the thought and fail 
to harmonize with the main portion, and this difficulty is not relieved by making 
the main portion also late; (2) the presence in the genuine Amos portions of many 
words and phrases which are "late," and yet words are called "late" by these 
authors which are found in the Song of Deborah (Ju. 5), or the Blessing of Jacob 
(Gn. 49) ; (3) the general post-exilic tone of these supposedly original parts, but 
since this same post-exilic tone is said to characterize all of Isaiah as well as 
Hosea, the whole question is begged. The vagueness of the utterances of Amos, 
here used as evidence against the early date, is precisely the strongest possible 
evidence for that date. 

t Zeydner, ThSt., 1894,59; Valeton, Amos und Hosea, 10; concerning this, Che. 
(EB. 150) is correct in saying that to any one not blinded by a fanatical religious 
belief this inactivity must have appeared temporary; and, moreover, if written after 
the events of 745 B.C., the predictions of destruction would have been fuller and 
more specific. Cf. Now., p. 121. 

J So e.g. We., GAS., Now., Dr., Marti. 

Dr. (p. 101), Che., Now., Marti. 

|| The word " Assyria" is not mentioned unless we read with (gBAQ -^vjx instead 
of -HSTN (39). 

H Within this period Assyria troubled Syria as follows : In 775, they came to 


(3) The religious situation is most intense. The keenest possible interest 
is taken in the cultus. The zeal of the worshippers attracts attention. The 
service is full and rich (4 4b - 5 21 23 8 14 9 1 ). This is due, on the one hand, to the 
satisfaction with which the people regard the peace and prosperity they now 
enjoy since the wars with Syria have closed, and to the joy and gladness with 
which they hail the enlargement of the nation s territory; and on the other, 
to the anxiety aroused by earthquakes and pestilences (v.i.}, the melancholy 
recollection of the treatment recently accorded them by the Syrians and Am 
monites (i 3 - 13 4 6 " 11 ), as well as the fear that, unless worshipped in this gor 
geous fashion, Yahweh will bring back the troubles through which they have 
recently passed. 

(<:) The social situation is one in which the wealthy (and in these days of 
economic changes the number of the wealthy was large) are luxurious and 
given to debauchery (3 12 5 11 ), cruel and oppressive (2 Cf - 3 10 ), the women tak 
ing their full share (4 1 , cf. Is. 3 16 ). Ivory houses (3 15 ) and continual feasting 
(6 4ff -) furnish one picture; robbery, adultery, and murder (Ho. 411.13 f. yi-^f-), 
another; while the lack of brotherliness and the prevalence of injustice 
( 5 7. 10. 12 6 i2 8 4f.) give still a third. 

We cannot urge in favor of this date the interpretation of 6 13 suggested by 
\Ve. and adopted by Che. {EB. 149), that the people are rejoicing because 
of the capture of two cities in Gilead, Lo-debar and Karnaim (p. 156); but, 
at the same time, we do not find evidence against this date in I 5 , because in 
2 K. i6 9 the fulfilment is represented as literally taking place; Kir here is 
probably an interpolation,* while Kir of i 5 was perhaps suggested by the tra 
dition regarding Aram s origin (9 7 ), no stress being placed upon the locality 
of the captivity.f Nor is a correct interpretation of 6 2 (p. 144) opposed to 
this date. The conquest of Gath by Uzziah (2 Ch. 26 6 ; cf. 6 2 and the 
absence of any mention of Gath in i 6 " 8 ), the overthrow of Moab by Jehosha- 
phat (2 K. 3; cf. use of aoii rather than ^Sn in Am. 2 3 ), as well as that of 
Aram (2 K. I4 28 ), seem to be presupposed. 

Still further, notice may be taken of (^) the pestilences which prevailed in 
Assyria in 765 and 759 B.C., to which allusion, possibly, is made in 4 10 , although 
it is there styled "after the manner of Egypt"; (<?) the solar eclipse referred 
to in 8 9 , assigned by the Assyrian eponym list to 763 B.C.; J (/) the earthquake 
(i 1 ); this, was the earthquake spoken of much later in Zc. I4 4 (where the 
mention of it is possibly due to this superscription; cf. the statement of 

Erini (i.e. Mt. Amanus, near the Gulf of Antioch) ; in 773, to Damascus; in 772, 
to Hadrach; in 765, again to Hadrach; in 755, a third time to Hadrach; in 754, to 
Arpad; and not again till 745. Syria, thus, was engaged with Assyria. Israel was 
let alone, and in consequence Jeroboam II. and Uzziah were enabled to build up 
their kingdoms to a higher point than ever before. 

* So Benz., Kit., Oort, Che. (EB. 150) ; Kir is lacking in <S. 

t Che. EB. 150. 

J Schra. COT. II. 193; Sayce, TSBA. III. 149; Marti, EB. 790. 


Josephus, Ant. IX. 10, 4), and seemingly referred to in 4 11 as well as in 8 8 (not 
an interpolation, as We., Now., Elh., Che., maintain).* We cannot deny the 
occurrence of this earthquake, even though no other evidence for it is to be 
discovered. With the tradition thus substantiated, and with the recognition 
of the earthquake as a method of divine punishment found in 4 11 Is. 2Q 6 , we 
may well accept the truth of the assertion, although, it is to be conceded, 
no help is gained from it for the more definite determination of Amos s date. 

3. In the case of no other prophet is the question of occupation 
more interesting, since with this there stands closely connected 
the problem of Amos s preparation for his life-work. Four items 
require to be considered : (i) The prophet s own statement (7") 
that he was not a prophet by profession, nor a member of one of the 
pre-prophetic societies. This implies that he does not wish to be 
reckoned as one of the nebhfim, " the ecstatic enthusiasts," the 
crowd of diviners, who in recent years had come to have a defi 
nitely recognized professional position ; and, besides that, since he 
is not one of them nominally, his work is characterized by a pur 
pose and spirit different from theirs. What was this? I answer, 
that spirit of observation and recognition of general law, of 
philosophical insight and reasoning, which became the so-called 
wisdom-spirit when nationalism had passed away and the doctrine 
of individualism was beginning to assert itself. Amos, as it will be 
seen, is almost as much a sage as he is a prophet. He differs from 
the later sages in still being, like the nebhi im, limited to a point of 
view which is largely national ; but inside of his circle he exhibits 
the mood, the method, and the motive of the sage (v.i.). With 
this point in mind, it is easier to understand the other facts men 
tioned in the same passage (y 14 ). (2) The prophet s real occupa 
tion was that of a " dresser of sycamores." This was a humble 
employment, and proves that Amos, like Micah, was one of the 
people. The evidence at hand does not clearly indicate whether 
he was really poor, or, perhaps, fairly well-to-do. Did he own a 
plantation of sycamores?! In any case he was independent 

* Nothing could be more fanciful than G. Hoffmann s suggestion (ZA W. III. 
123, approved by Che. EB. 149; Marti), that the remark in i 1 is an inference of the 
editor, based upon the understanding that, according to j 3 - 6 (cf. 7 8 8 2 ), Israel s 
punishment hnd been delayed twice, for a year each time. 

f So Che. EB. 148. 


enough to leave home. Or was he a dresser of sycamores in 
Northern Israel ? and did he give up that occupation when driven 
out by Amaziah ? This bears upon the place of his home as well 
as the character of his occupation (zu.). It is immaterial whether 
Amos was a dresser or tender of the tree (p. 172), a collector 
and seller of the fruit,* or a pincher or scraper of the fruit, to 
insure a more rapid ripening, f We do not find in this occupa 
tion anything inconsistent J with his Southern origin. 

(3) The further statement that he was a shepherd, and had been taken by 
Yahweh from following the flock (cf. Elijah s call of Elisha), is entirely con 
sistent with the preceding, inasmuch as a shepherd might in those days, as at 
the present time, cultivate fruit trees (the sycamore, although the poorest, was 
the most easily grown), for the purpose of varying the monotony of his milk 
diet. Since the word ipj (i 1 ) is not the ordinary word for shepherd (the word 
used in HC of 7 14 , npa, being inconsistent with the following JNX, and so 
easily corrupted from ipj, is generally read npj ||), there is some doubt as to the 
exact idea meant to be conveyed; but, upon the whole, we may understand 
(v.i. on i 1 ) that Amos was a wool-grower, that is, something more than a mere 
shepherd. As such, he would naturally make journeys from time to time, and 
meet men coming and going from all parts of the world as it was known in 
his day.^[ 

(4) While the language of Amos is rich in figurative speech 
drawn from many sides of life, nothing is more apparent than the 
influence exerted on his utterance by the life and occupation 
which he followed. This is seen, for example, in 2 13 3 4f 12 4 lf 
s 11. 17. w 512 7 i.4 gi 9 3 g ut; tne influence of his rustic life and 
humble occupation was not limited to the symbols and figures in 
which we find this thought expressed. The thought itself had 
birth in this same environment. The separation of the man from 
human companionship, and his consequent lack of human sym- 

* G. E. Post, DB. IV. 634 f. t GAS. 

J So Oort and Gratz, on the ground that sycamores could not be cultivated so 
far above the sea as Tekoa is located (2700 feet) ; but it is easy to suppose that 
Amos, a nomadic shepherd, might have had opportunity at a place lower down, but 
within the general district of Tekoa, this name being applied to the whole territory 
down to the pasture-land on the shore of the Dead Sea. 

GAS. I. 78. || Contra, GAS. I. 76. 

U To such journeys " were probably due his opportunities of familiarity with 
Northern Israel, the originals of his vivid pictures of her town life, her commerce, 
and the worship at her great sanctuaries " (GAS. I. 79). 


pathy, may account, at least in part, for the absence from his 
message (v.i.}, as from that of Elijan, of anything that savors of 
tenderness or love. It is in the solitude of shepherd life that 
one gains most certainly the ability to concentrate attention even 
on the smallest details. Moreover, here it is that one most easily 
is " trained in that simple power of appreciating facts and causes 
which, applied to the great phenomena of the spirit and of history," 
constitutes the highest form of intellectual life. 

4. The shepherd was taken by Yahweh from following the 
flocks, as Elisha was taken from following the oxen with the plough. 
I Jut was there no call, definite and comprehensive, like those of 
Isaiah (chap. 6), Jeremiah (chap, i), and Ezekiel (chap, i)? 
And, in any case, where did this shepherd really obtain the 
intellectual preparation that justified the divine selection and is 
evidenced in his writings? 

(i) We shall see that Amos is not an unlettered rustic, although 
many attempts, beginning with Jerome, have been made to prove 
him such, (a) There is nowhere to be found in the Old Tes 
tament an example of stronger or purer literary style. He is 
absolute master of the language which he uses. Where did he; 
gain this mastery? () His knowledge of history and society 
is as marked as his literary style. He has seen things with his 
own eyes ; his perception is as delicate as his human interest 
is broad. He knows of nations, but also, in each case, of the 
national character. He is an ethnologist, informing his auditors 
of the origin of nations, as well as an historian ; a geographer, 
cognizant of the rise of the Nile, of the far distant Gush, and the 
equally distant Babylonia, as well as a sociologist. V. the Map of 
Amos and Hosea. (c) His conception of God and man and 
right (v.i.) is something that is thought to be marvellous. He 
is not credited with the ability to work miracles, as were his 
predecessors; but is he so detached from his environment, so 
abnormal in his attainments, so irregular in every way as to consti 
tute in himself a real miracle? * 

* We. (Pro!. 472) says, "Amos was the founder of the purest type of a new phase 
of prophecy." Co. (Proph. 46) says, "Amos is one of the most marvellous and in 
comprehensible figures in the history of the human mind, the pioneer of a process 
of evolution from which a new epoch of humanity dates." WRS. (Proph. 120) 


(2) He maintains for himself (7 14 ) that he was not called to his work by 
the usual technical methods, viz. through the prophetic societies. We do not 
understand, as many do,* that this statement indicates on the part of Amos 
an utter contempt for the order of nebhfim ; because (#) elsewhere he speaks 
(2 11 3 7 ) of the nabhV with great respect, f and in 7 15 he is ordered to go as a 
prophet. () While he might feel as did Elijah and Elisha toward the great 
mass of the nebki tw, he was, after all, too much like Elijah and Micaiah ben 
Imlah in natural disposition, training, and theological position to do other 
than respect them and others like them. (V) He himself uses the technique 
of pre-prophetism, which had long years been taking form (p. cviii). (W) He 
stood by no means alone, preceded as he was by J and E, having Hosea as 
his contemporary, besides others whose names have not come down to us. 
Amos here J merely emphasizes the fact that prophetism or ecstasy has not 
been his profession, and that, consequently, he is not to be identified with 
those who for so many generations have shown hostility to the government ; 
and further, that he should not be understood as uttering words such as he 
has spoken for the sake of reward or remuneration. He was, after all, in the 
line of the prophets, spiritually, if not literally. 

(3) Reference has already been made to the superior discipline that gave 
him " desert-eyes," which, in a " desert-atmosphere," furnished the best 
possible training for an observer of human affairs, a student of cause and 
effect ; likewise, to the unsurpassed opportunities afforded him in the prog 
ress of travels, which were undertaken in connection with his occupatioa 
(4) But, back of this, is the fact that in Eastern society superior culture is 
not uncommon in connection with the poverty of shepherd life. " At the 
courts of the Caliphs and their Emirs the rude Arabs of the desert were wont 
to appear without any feeling of awkwardness, and to surprise the courtiers 
by the finish of their impromptu verses, the fluent eloquence of their oratory, 
and the range of subjects on which they could speak with knowledge and dis 
crimination. Among the Hebrews, as in the Arabian desert, knowledge and 
oratory were not affairs of professional education, or dependent for their culti 
vation on wealth and social status. The sum of book-learning was small; 
men of all ranks mingled with that Oriental freedom which is so foreign to 
our habits ; shrewd observation, a memory retentive of traditional lore, and 
the faculty of original reflection took the place of laborious study as the 
ground of acknowledged intellectual preeminence." 

calls Amos "the founder of a new type of prophecy." Marti says, "Amos is one 
of the most prominent landmarks in the history of religion." Che. (EB. 155) says, 
" The book of Amos forms a literary as well as a prophetic phenomenon." 

* So e.g. Now. ; cf. Matthes, Modern Review, V, 421. 

f Riedel, SK. 1903, p. 163 f., following <E& and others (p. 171), uses the past 
tense, / was no prophet, etc., but, contrary to K. DB. V. 672, this does not make the 
case clearer. 

J So Marti. $ WRS. Proph. 126. 


(5) But are we quite certain that the more usual method of vision 
was not employed in the case of Amos ? It is worthy of notice that 
in Amos, as well as in the latest prophets, the vision plays an im 
portant part. Is it not probable that the first visions, viz. those of 
the fire, locusts, and plummet, constituted, not only the beginning 
of Amos s work, but also, in large measure, his actual awakening 
and incitement to the task which he endeavored so faithfully to 
perform ? * We cannot urge against this, that these initiatory 
visions are not recorded in the first chapter, for in Isaiah s case 
the call is found in chap. 6 ; and, further, we have no reason for 
expecting the sermons, in their written form, to be put in chrono 
logical order (zu.). 

(6) The antecedents of Amos s thought will be considered when 
we take up the substance of his message (zu.) ; but we must, at 
this point, again touch upon the external facts connected with 
Amos s position in so far as they relate to the problem of his prep 
aration ; Amos must have had models. What were they ? We 
may cite : (a) the prophets referred to by himself in 2 llf -, and rep 
resented as of high repute ; (&) Elijah and Elisha (v.s.) ; (c) the 
Judaean narrative and the Ephraimite narrative, in which, although 
mainly narratives, are contained many disconnected fragments of 
prophetic utterance ; (//) the personal acquaintance with prophets 
or prophetic experience implied in 3 7 ; (e) the priestly literature 
which (Ho. 8 12 ) had already taken written form, a striking prece 
dent for the prophet, cf. the decalogues and Book of the Cove 
nant ; (/) the prophetic formulas which, as employed by Amos, 
show long and technical usage, either written or handed down 
from mouth to mouth ; t (g) the great poetical pieces which had 
come down from times that would have seemed ancient even to 
Amos, e.g. Ju. 5 Gn. 49 Dt. 33. This material, which Amos must 
have known, furnished the background or basis from which a 
literary style as perfect even as that exhibited by him might have 
been developed. 

5. The character of Amos is quite plainly indicated in the facts 
already noted : (a) He was bold ; but this boldness was that of 
indifference and reserve, rather than of passion. His courage had 

So Meinhold, 39; H. P. Smith, O. T. Hist. 211. f Che. EB. 155 f. 


its origin, not in enthusiasm, but in a certain kind of fatalism. 
(fr) He was accurate in his observations and scientific in his habits 
of mind. He was able, not only to see the facts, but also to 
describe them as they actually were. It was this that made it 
possible for him to write out his utterances. This element in his 
character contributed greatly to the new impulse given through 
him to prophecy. This was the sage element. He recognizes 
law. His sermons are the proclamation of divine law, not the 
oracles of a soothsayer. He was more of a realist than an idealist. 
He does not permit his fancy to picture the future. His utter 
ance is a continuous, deadly monotone of ruin and destruction. 
(f) He was nomadic in his instincts ; like Elijah, hostile to the 
softer influences of civilization ; without the ties which bind 
a man to country, and so without patriotism ; without family 
bonds, so far as we can ascertain, and so without much human 
sympathy. To be sure, Northern Israel was to him a foreign 
country; but we can imagine that his disposition toward Judah 
would have been the same, (d) He was austere ; but could such 
a message as he was sent to deliver be other than austere ? Hosea 
announced the same doom in terms more terrible, but less severe. 
His conception of God was that of the Puritan ; his temperament, 
stern and uncompromising. "Amos s nature was not a sensitive 
or emotional one ; it was not one in which the currents of feeling 
ran deep : it was one which was instinct simply with a severe sense 
of right."* He sat as judge, unmoved by the awful character of 
the doom he was obliged to pronounce. In him justice does not 
contend with love.f (e} In what sense was he spiritual ? He 
was not a devout man like Isaiah, nor was he, like Hosea, emo 
tional. His spirituality, which was intense, consisted in loyalty to 
truth and in antagonism to error, in recognizing the character of 
Yahweh as spiritual, and as wholly inconsistent with that character 
the round of ritualistic routine which, in his day, constituted 
worship. The preacher who said, "Seek me and live," was a 
preacher, not only of righteousness, but also of the truest 

* Dr. HI. f GAS. I. 87 f. 



Amos s message is in some respects the most important of any 
conveyed by an Old Testament writer. Great interest centres in 
and about this message, because (a) it is the first of a series of 
writings which stand alone in the world-literatures ; (^) it places 
a stress upon the ethical side of religion greater than had before 
existed; (c) it marks a new epoch in the history of Israel s 
relations with the nations of the world the Assyrian period. 

1. The most general analysis of Amos s message discovers in it 
only two or three factors : (a) a profound conviction on certain 
subjects relating to God and human life ; (&) a knowledge of 
certain facts in national and international history ; (c) a conclu 
sion, which follows the putting together of the conviction and the 
knowledge of the situation.* 

The message of Amos must be obtained from words actually uttered or 
written by Amos himself. This involves the separation of insertions and 
additions coming from the pen of later prophets. Nearly one-fifth of the 
book which bears the name of Amos is thus to be set aside. It is to be con 
ceded at once that the omission of these passages modifies very considerably 
the nature and content of the message. It is most important, however, in 
the interest of a true historical development of Israelitish thought, to restrict 
ourselves to those portions of the book the authenticity of which is incontro 
vertible. The other portions have just as important a place to occupy in the 
later literature. 

2. The general circumstances under which the message of Amos 
was delivered have already been considered. It is necessary, 
however, to formulate more definitely the exact state of feeling 
and opinion against which the prophet felt compelled to array 
himself. We may call this the popular opinion ; but it was more 
than this, for it represented, not only the mass of the people, 
but also the royal family and the court, the priests, and the 
vast majority of the prophets themselves.! What, precisely, 
was the consensus of thought to which the prophet made oppo- 

* This has been well presented by GAS. I. 89. 

t Just as pre-prophetism is not to be confounded with the true prophetism, so 
this latter must be kept distinct from what may be called popular prophetism. This 
is sometimes wrongly called false prophetism. 


sition?* Or, in another form, What was the popular prophecy (or 
theology) from which true prophecy now separates itself as never 
before ? 

(1) The people held fast to the conception that Yahweh was 
one among other gods, invincible within the boundaries of his own 
land, and able to extend those boundaries against the power of 
other gods. He was no longer a deity whose residence lay outside 
of Canaan (i.e. at Sinai) ; for he had, with Israel, taken possession 
of the old sanctuaries in Canaan, and was now (especially since 
the rooting out of Baalism) in very truth the deity of the land. To 
be sure, he had, in idealistic fashion, been transferred to a resi 
dence in the heavens ; and this had influenced somewhat the 
popular mind. Yet what was essentially naturalism controlled 
the life and thought of the masses. 

(2) This involved the thought of Yahweh as exclusively inter 
ested in Israel, as satisfied, therefore, with a devotion which 
restricted itself to his worship. Service in the forms prescribed 
would secure the continued strength and existence of the nation. 
When " the day of Yahweh," thought to be not far distant, actually 
came, there would be relief from all difficulties, victory over all 
remaining foes. To think of Yahweh without Israel was absurd ; 
for what could he do, how would he conduct himself, without his 
people ? What would become of Yahweh if Israel were to perish ? 
Whether this was on the basis of naturalism,! or on the ground of 
a voluntary act in the form of a covenant, % it was none the less 
nationalism, and was accepted by the great body of prophets who 
had risen above what may have been the earlier and still more 
common belief in naturalism. But naturalism was itself a form 
of nationalism ; the latter, consequently, included the former. 
The people, led by nearly all the leaders, interpreted the present 
period of peace and prosperity, growing out of the victories gained 

* One might ask, Was Amos opposing an old order of things, or was he advocat 
ing something new ? The answer is, He did both. The new idea, or the old idea 
which he emphasized, was definitely opposed to the existing current opinion. The 
presentation of it by Amos made it, for practical purposes, a new idea, although he 
clearly represented it as something not unknown even to the people. 

t So e.g. We. Pro I. 469; Sm. Kel. n6f., 119; Schwally, Sent. Kr i eg s alter turner, 


1 So e.g. Giesebrecht, Die Geschichtlickkeit d. Sinaidundes ; K. DB.V. 631. 


in the Syrian wars, as definite indication of Yahweh s pleasure and 
satisfaction. What more could he ask ? Did he not himself share 
in this prosperity? Everything, as they viewed it, was in right 

(3) A corollary of nationalism (as well as of naturalism) was 
the belief that Yahweh was not only pleased to favor Israel, but 
also actually bound to protect their political interests, without 
reference to their moral conduct. He might show his anger 
for a time ; but sooner or later, without reference to right or 
wrong, he must identify himself with those who were thus bound 
to him by the closest bond, whether that of nature or of cove 
nant. To him was accorded no option in the matter. In other 
words, he could not act toward Israel on the basis of ethical 
consideration. The henotheism was non-moral, i.e. natural. The 
Israel of these times " neglected entirely his (Yahweh s) ethical 

(4) A second corollary of nationalism was the feeling enter 
tained concerning Yahweh s relation to other nations. It was his 
duty, in fact his highest function, to fight the battles of his people 
against their enemies ; and his strength, compared with that of 
other deities, was measured by the success or failure of such 
battles. But, aside from this, Yahweh had nothing to do with out 
side nations, who, in each case, had their own gods. He is con 
cerned with them only when they seek to injure Israel. For such 
injury he will use his best endeavor, in turn, to inflict injury upon 
them. He had thus shown his power against Egypt, in Canaan, 
and recently against Syria ; but his relationship to these nations 
ceased when peace was declared. In any dealings, therefore, 
with other nations, Yahweh acts directly and exclusively for Israel. 
Israel is wholly his ; he is wholly Israel s. 

(5) It was, still further, the conviction of the people that Yah 
weh s favor was secured and his anger averted by following out, in 
its various forms, the ceremonial or cultus which prevailed at this 
period. The holding of festivals, the presentation of sacrifices, 
was something, on the one hand, indispensable to religion ; and, 
on the other, altogether satisfying to the deity. What did he 
desire? Gifts, pilgrimages, and praises; since other things than 
these could hardly be expected. Yahweh demands these ; nothing 


more. The increasing costliness of these requirements promoted 
injustice and inhumanity.* 

(6) The corollary of the preceding is contained in the words 
just used, " nothing more." The people understood that moral 
delinquencies (in so far, indeed, as they recognized the existence 
of any such) were entirely overlooked by Yahweh ; provided, of 
course, they performed faithfully the routine of sacrifice. That 
they were not entirely ignorant of moral duties is clear, not only 
because certain moral distinctions were already known to all the 
world, but also because a code, largely moral in its character, had re 
cently been formulated (p. Ixiv). But notwithstanding their actual 
knowledge of right and wrong, at least in certain particulars, they 
did not believe that morality was a necessary factor in religion. 
It was, in fact, unnecessary, if the routine of worship was strictly 
observed. This conception was fundamental in the early Semitic 
religions,f and signified that moral defects were, upon the whole, 
comparatively unimportant. Perhaps the decalogue was not so 
clearly a moral code as we now regard it, or, if such, had not 
yet been taken as authoritative (p. Ix ff.). 

(7) Assyria was, of course, in the thought of the people; but 
they did not fear her. Why should they ? Had not Yahweh given 
suffident exhibition of his strength to warrant their supreme con 
fidence in his ability? Egypt and Syria were equally interested 
with Israel and Judah in standing out against Assyria s claims. 
And Assyria, surely, could not overpower four nations thus closely 
interested in each other s protection. Besides, Assyria was often 
seriously engaged with revolts in other sections of " her huge and 
disorganized empire." J In any case, Assyria did not uniformly 
sweep all before her. There was always a good chance of success 
ful opposition. Were the prophets themselves so confident of 
Assyria s place and future success as to make unambiguous men 
tion of her name in their predictions? 

3. The convictions of Amos on the subjects mentioned above, 
whatever may have been their source, were radically different from 
those of the people at large. His training in the desert, his travels 

* Che. EB. 156. 

f GAS. I. 103. It is too much to say that it had never been challenged, 

j Cf. GAS. I., chap. IV, " The Influence of Assyria on Prophecy." 


to other countries, his acquaintance with the ideals of former gener 
ations, together with his appreciation of their ideals, his study of 
Israelitish life, these, combined with the qualities of mind and 
heart bestowed upon him by an all-wise Providence, produced, 
under the direction of that same Providence, certain convictions 
which he was enabled to express in a form destined to influence 
most vitally the whole trend of religious thought. 

The thought of Amos is of two kinds: (i) Much is simply in direct antag 
onism with the prevailing thought. Knowledge of the popular feeling on this 
or that subject means knowledge also of the position taken by Amos, since 
the latter is the very opposite of the former. This, however, may not be 
called negative, for there is always to be seen the larger, fuller teaching which 
underlies. (2) Much, on the other hand, may be described as strongly 
positive, i.e. as the statement or restatement of everlasting truth. Was this 
the first statement, or only a restatement ? There were also some popular 
beliefs, afterwards condemned, concerning which he does not speak (zu.). 

(i) The god of Amos was Yahweh of Hosts (513-14.2: 6 s & .m.) .* 
this included the hosts of heaven as well as of earth, nature, and 
nations. One of his favorite expressions is " Lord Yahweh," f 
which occurs fifteen times. To Amos, then, Yahweh was all- 
sovereign, omnipotent. 

(a) His power over nature is seen in his control of rain, mil 
dew, locusts, and pestilence (4 6 ~ 11 ), as well as in the melting or 
quaking of the earth, J and in the rising and falling of the Nile 
(8 8 9 5 ) ; and in history it is manifested, not only in bringing Israel 
out of Egypt (9 7 ), but in bringing the Syrians from Kir, and the 
Philistines from Caphtor (i 5 ), and in the direction of the destiny 
which he assumes in the case of Philistia (i 6 " 8 ), Ammon (i 13 ~ 15 )> 
and Moab (2 1 " 3 ) ; and further, it reaches even to heaven and Sheol, 
along with Carmel and the bottom of the sea (9- 3 ), all this, in 
addition to the management of Israel s own affairs, both spiritual 
and material. We may not forget, however, that the nations 
referred to in these statements are those near at hand (this power 
is not said to be universal) ; that to the gods of other nations 
their worshippers attributed the same powers ; that both J and E 

* On interpretation of the phrase, v . p. Ixxxix. 

t Cf. Che. EB. 156 f. 

1 Other passages quoted (e.g. by Dr.) in illustration of this idea are late (v.i.). 


had localized Yahweh in heaven before Amos spoke ; that criticism 
has pronounced as late the passages of clearest import (v.i.) ; and 
finally, that in Amos, so far as we can discover, Yahweh has per 
sonal intercourse only with Israel, and that, too, with Israel as a 

(^) This suggests the question whether we have here real 
monotheism.! If Amos anywhere denied the existence of all 
other gods, the case would be clear. But where is there such a 
denial? The intermediate step between the conception enter 
tained by Israel and the later conception of monotheism was that 
of unlimited power. This in itself did not entirely shut out the 
idea that there were other gods. It is better, therefore, to under 
stand that it is " a belief in the unqualified superiority of Yahweh 
so absolute as to be practically a belief in his omnipotence," j or 
in other words, ethical monotheism not strictly, but " to all intents 
and purposes." 

(f) But what relation would these other gods sustain to Yahweh, 
now that he possessed this unlimited power ? If Yahweh brought 
the Philistines from Caphtor and the Syrians from Kir (as, indeed, 
he did bring Israel from Egypt), he must have acted in a way 
contrary to the will of the gods of those countries, for no god 
would willingly permit his people to be broken away from him. 
These and other like heathen gods are, therefore, inferior and 
subject to Yahweh. "They may for a time presumptuously 
imagine themselves to have independent power, but in reality 
they only carry out the will and commands of Yahweh " || (cf. 
Is. io 5ff ). Yahweh, then, is a God who in earlier times defeated 
the gods of Egypt, Philistia, Canaan ; in more recent times, he 
has overthrown the Phoenician Baal and the Syrians. It is easy 
to see how the history of the past and the work of Elijah and 
Elisha helped Amos to this point of view. 

(d) What is to be said of the anthropomorphisms employed 
in Amos, e.g. Yahweh as an armed warrior against Jeroboam s 
house (7 9 ) ; the change of purpose due to pity for his people 

* Duhm, Theol. 121 f. 

t So Taylor, DD, I. 86; Dr. 106 ff. ; Da. O. T. Theol. 65; K6. Hauptprobleme, 
chap. VI. 

t Bu. Rel. 123. $ Che. EB. 157. || Bu. Rel. 124. 


(7 3 ) ; the phrases " turn my hand " (i 8 ), "will not smell " ( 5 21 ), 
" eyes of the Lord Yahweh " (g 8 ") ; the representation of Yahweh 
as taking an oath (4 2 6 8c 8 7 ) ; and the appearance of Yahweh in 
the visions (y 1 4 7 8 1 9 1 ) ? These are not evidences of crude re 
ligious thought, but, like similar expressions in our own religious 
language,* arise from the difficulty which is inherent in any effort 
to represent the personality of deity. There is in this language 
no survival of the former nai ve belief that Yahweh had the form 
of a human body. " A clear formula for the notion of bare 
spirituality such as we find in John 4 24 was beyond the reach 
of the Old Testament."! 

(e) But did Amos pass by the image-worship, so large a factor in his day, 
without remonstrance ? We know that no objection was made to the use 
of images in early times (even Ex. 34 17 , the older decalogue, objecting only 
to molten images of metal), J and testimony to their use is found in the 
ephod, the presence in connection with the ark (Nu. IO 356 ), and the tera- 
phim (z^.z.). It is in the later decalogue that we have the first prohibition 
(t .s.*). Hosea (S 4 * 6 io 5 I3 2 ) enters protest against image-worship. But does 
Amos ? Not in 2 4 (their lies = their idols}, for this is unquestionably late ; 
nor in 8 14 , since the text is wholly unsatisfactory (pp. 181, 184). Elsewhere 
there is nothing to indicate his feeling on this point ; but we are by no means 
certain that he approved them. 

(/) It remains to notice Marti s interesting statement on the relation of 
Amos s monotheism to that of other nations. He says : " No one can fail 
to observe how, in this belief of Amos, monotheism is present in essence, even 
if not in name, and what an altogether different kind of monotheism it is 
from that to which the priests in Babylon and Egypt are said to have 
attained ! There in Babylon and Egypt a monotheistic speculation, which 
possesses no force and is wholly indifferent toward the polytheism of the 
mass, whose gods this theory allegorizes and dissolves in a general con 
ception ; here among the prophets in Israel a vigorous and vital faith in 
Yahweh, who suffers no gods alongside of himself, who watches jealously over 

* Cf. Duhm s remark ( Theol. 120 f.) to the effect that this does not indicate 
the nature religion, since nature religions do not anthropo-morp\\\ze; they rather 
physio-morp\\\ze, since the physical is the common ground upon which deity and 
humanity meet and become like each other. Our metaphysical abstractions con 
cerning the nature of God and the relations of God and Christ, their personality, 
etc., are much nearer physiomorphism than Amos s anthropomorphism. 

t K. DR. V. 679. 

J K. DB. V. 627; contra K6. ZKW., 1886, Heft 5, 6. 

Cf. also Che. EB. 157; WRS. Proph. 175 f.; contra Da. Biblical and Literary 
Essays, 120 f. (reprinted from Exp. t 1887)0 


his own exclusive worship, and directs the destinies of men as the only God. 
A relationship and dependence between the monotheism in Babylon and that 
in the Bible does not exist ; their radically different origin is the basis of the 
difference. In Egypt and Babylon monotheism is theory ; in Israel, strength 
and life ; there it is the product of a speculating abstraction, won through a 
fusion of the gods ; here the experience of a higher Being, the inner realiza 
tion of his moral and spiritual might, grown from a moral and religious 
deepening, from an intimate union with a special God who, moreover, does 
not disappear and dissolve, but remains the living one, and proves himself 
the only living one. There the empty concept of monotheism ; here, indeed, 
though the word (viz., monotheism) is not yet coined, the fulness of power 
and life which must indwell this faith, where it is a true faith. How vividly, 
however, Yahweh was experienced as power by Amos is shown by 3 4 ~ 8 , per 
haps, notwithstanding its simplicity, the most magnificent portion of his 
prophecy : not merely is God an hypothesis of the intellect, but the per 
ception of him is a result of the announcement of God himself." 

(2) Yahweh is never called " God of Israel " (v.i.) in Amos. 
He is, rather, the God of the world ; and yet he represents him 
(in common with all that precede) as sustaining a peculiar relation 
to Israel, and puts in his mouth the phrase, "my people" (f 5 ). 
This relation is not indissoluble ; it is, on the contrary, plainly 
conditioned, and will surely be annulled if the conditions are not 
complied with, (a) Amos does not grapple with the question, 
why Israel, rather than some other nation, was selected by Yahweh 
for this special relationship. It is evident that a deity so powerful 
among the nations as was Yahweh could have taken any other 
nation, e.g. the Philistines, whom he actually did bring from Caph- 
tor, or the Syrians, who were removed from Kir. But (<) accept 
ing this as a fact, he tells his contemporaries (3*) that on this very 
account (viz. that Yahweh knew Israel out of all the nations of the 
earth) he would judge them all the more strictly for the sins which 
they had committed. " Obligation is the complement of privilege ; 
punishment, of sin." * Moreover (<r), his interest is not in the world 
for Israel s sake, but rather in Israel for the world s sake. Israel, 
after all, is no more to him than are the Cushites (9 7 ). (d} If 
Israel will only seek him, the future will be safe (4 14 ) ; but the 
prophet has given up all hope that Israel, devoted as she now is to 
the sweet religion of the crowd, will ever do what he suggests (zu.). 

(3) The conception of Yahweh which Amos entertains is that 

* Bu. Rel. 134. 


of a god of justice. This thought Elijah (i K. 2i 18ff ) had already 
expressed, but Amos goes farther and makes the idea the very 
centre of his conception of God.* He is all the better able to 
reach this high point, because he has also conceived of Yahweh as 
standing in close relation to all nations. Yahweh s power being 
universal, it is necessarily impartial and consequently ethical. On 
the other hand, if Yahweh is ethical, he cannot be a national god, 
that is, show favor to Israel ; he must be a world-god. Righteous 
ness being a vital element in Yahweh s character, he not only will 
demand it in those who profess to be his followers, but also will 
enforce the demand. He cannot, however, have one standard for 
the nations and a lower standard for Israel. If, for any reason, 
Israel has enjoyed special privileges, the standard by which she 
shall be judged is to be placed all the higher. Two points, how 
ever, require notice, both pointed out by Duhm,f viz. (a) Amos 
has no adequate conception of sin ; to him the life of man and God 
should naturally express itself in good. This good is an objective 
matter, something regarded as present, while all departures from it 
arouse the anger of Yahweh. Everything is regarded concretely, 
and at the same time negatively (zu.). (b) There is no glimmer 
of a purpose on the part of Yahweh in the working out of this 
idea of righteousness, and " the ethical, apart from the teleological, 
remains unfruitful." 

(4) Yahweh s relation to the outside nations follows closely 
upon the idea, already indicated, of Israel s relation to Yahweh. 
In fact, it precedes. To have unlimited power is to control the 
world. This includes Assyria, as well as the nations living in 
closer proximity to Israel. Egypt had already felt the power of 
Yahweh s hand. So had Canaan in days past, and Syria more re 
cently. Does Yahweh s righteousness make demands of all these 
nations? Is it for lack of proper treatment of his nation Israel 

* Cf. Gn. i8 25 ; but this lofty utterance can hardly have preceded Amos. We. 
(Hex.vji.} treats iS 221 - 33 " as a late addition to JE; Kue. assigns it to J 2 ; Di. argues 
for its retention in J (so Dr.) ; Co. declares it to be " theologically about a century 
later than J " ; Bacon, Holzinger, and Gunkel also consider it a late expansion ; 
while Carpenter and Battersby ( The Hexateuch, II. 26) say that it " seems to belong 
to the group of probable additions in which the universal grandeur and sole sover 
eignty of Yahweh are again and again asserted in the most emphatic terms," e.g 

Ex. 810- 22 6 9 14-16. 29 6 f Theol. I2O ff. 


that he will punish them? or because of their idolatry? No ; but 
in each case is cited, as the direct occasion of the doom, the viola 
tion of some dictate of universal morality, some principle of 
the natural laws of humanity and mercy.* This is no narrow 
point of view. 

(5) It follows, still further, that Yahweh, in the opinion of 
Amos, cannot be affected even by the strictest observance of 
the ceremonial. In Yahweh s eyes, such observance is itself 
transgression (tftfB, 4 4 ). Israel s pilgrimages he hates ; he despises 
their feasts, their offerings he will not accept; their songs of 
praise he will not hear (s 21 " 25 ). But this is not all. He stands 
ready to destroy the nation s places of worship (3" 5 5 f), and 
to pursue to the bitter end those who worship at these places 
(9 1 " 4 ). What does Amos (pp. 129-136) really mean? Does 
he, perhaps, say more than he means? We must guard against 
attributing to him what he never said. This is done by those 
(p. 136) who wrongly interpret 5 25 as suggesting that in the 
days of the wilderness no sacrifices were offered.! What is it, 
now, that Amos denounces? To have opposed sacrifice in itself 
would have meant opposition to the only method yet known 
to humanity of entering into communion with deity, in a word, 
the abolition of all tangible worship. If the Old Testament, 
even when its day was finished, had no true formulation for the 
conception of God as a spirit, how shall we look for practically 
this same thing in the days of Amos? It was, therefore, not sac 
rifice in general that Amos opposed j J nor was it the belief that 
sacrifice when duly performed can change the mind of Yahweh. 
It was, rather, the belief that had become fixed, " a strange delu 
sion deeply rooted in Israel s heart," that the ritual of itself does 
or can satisfy an ethical deity. Shall one observe the ritual? 
Yes ; but one may not stop there. 

(6) Yahweh, then, has something to demand besides worship, 

* WRS. Prof A. 134. 

I A prophet who has nothing to say against the use of images will surely not go 
so far as to object altogether to sacrifice. Moreover, neither Amos nor any other 
Israelite, preceding the exile, could have dreamed of a period in Israel s history 
when no sacrifices were to be offered. This would actually have involved a purely 
vegetarian diet. 

I Contra Ew., Hi., We., Mit., Dr., Now., GAS. ; Che. EB. 158 ; Marti, et al. 


which has hitherto been understood to constitute the whole of 
religion. This grows out of Yahweh s ethical character, and is, in 
fact, an ethical demand (2 r - 8 3 10 4 1 57-10-15.24 51-6.12 ^ It is a 
demand for justice, which, in its simplest and most natural form, 
includes honesty, integrity, purity, and humanity.* (a) This, it 
will be noted, is concrete, and includes the elementary duties of 
life, such as are recognized by all nations who have risen to the 
point of governmental organization. f (<) It is only this which 
Yahweh demands of other nations, (c) The demand does not 
necessarily depend upon a code of legislation ; in other words, it 
is not legal justice, (d) It demands the utmost consideration of 
the poor and weak, moral justice, (e) The prophet promises life 
and prosperity (5 4 ) to those who meet this demand, while all disas 
ter is due to the wrath of Yahweh against those who fall short of 
this requirement (3 6 ). J 

(7) This brings us to the prophet s position, touching the 
nation s future, including his conception of the "Day of Yahweh." 
Israel, in very truth, must suffer punishment ; and the punishment, 
since everything else has been tried, will now be utter demolition. 
This is really the great thought of the message. Everything else 
is connected with this sentence. It is important (cf. Duhm), 
because no one had ever even dreamed of such a thing for the nation, 
and also because the overthrow contemplated was in no sense the 
plan of a party, nor had it anything of a political character. It is 
expressed many times and in many forms, always terrible and 
always irrevocable. It is the unmistakable expression of the 
condemnation of wicked Israel by the absolutely righteous Yahweh. 
The sentence of destruction, however, is not wholly unconditional. 
That Amos pointed out a way of escape, viz. repentance, open 
perhaps only to a few, is clear from 4* (i 5 I4f< ; that he should not 
have contemplated such a possibility of conversion is psychologi 
cally unintelligible, since it would leave his entire prophetic activity 
without a sufficient raison d etre. But whatever expectation he 
may have had at the opening of his ministry, it is practically cer 
tain that in the progress of his ministry all hope deserted him as 
he saw the utter lack of response to his message. 

* Dr., p. 109. t Duhm, Theol. 116. t <""f Dr., p. 112. 

Cf. K. DD. V. 691 f. ; WRS. rrofk. 129 ff. ; Dr., pp. ^- ... 


We cannot prove that Amos saw in the future a brighter picture 
in case of repentance (9 8 " 15 being surely of a later date) ; nor are 
we even reasonably certain that, being from Judah, he had it in his 
mind that Yahweh s true religion would be continued and devel 
oped by Judah after the destruction of Israel. The motto (i 2 ) 
would express this idea, if only it were from Amos s hand, but cf. 
pp. 9 f. On Amos s conception of the Day of Yahvveh, v. pp. 

. 3 i f. 

4. Did Amos and those who immediately followed him create 
liraelitish ethical monotheism ? Or can it be shown that, so far 
as essential content is concerned, Amos s teachings are rooted in 
the past ? 

(1) The answer determines, not only the place of prophecy in 
the progress of the Old Testament development, but also the whole 
course of that development. If Amos had little or nothing before 
him in the way of antecedents, he is to be assigned the place ordi 
narily given to Moses as the founder of the religion. No one, cer 
tainly, in these days is disposed to minimize the high place which 
he has come to occupy, but we may fairly ask ourselves whether 
the emphasis has always been placed upon just the right point. 

It is now clear that the Old Testament history, like other histo 
ries, was an evolution. Every period of great activity grew out of 
something that preceded. Was the wonderful movement which 
found expression through Amos, Hosea, and Isaiah entirely excep 
tional, in that it came forth without antecedents ? So some would 
have us believe.* This, at all events, is the real position of those 
who use the phrase " creators of ethical monotheism." It has 
been observed that Amos himself makes no direct appeal to 
something earlier than his own work. For example, he does not 
openly refer to a preexisting code of laws as the basis of his 
system, any more than to miracles or institutions. But does this 
prove that his ideas are not rooted in the past, and that his work 
and that of his times are not merely the fruitage of seed sown 
long before ? f 

(2) We cannot deny that the morality which forms the essence 

* Cf. We. Prol. 472 ff. ; Co. Proph. 45 f. ; Sm. Rel. 184 ff. ; GAS. I. 96. 
tCf. GAS. I. Q2. 


of his thought is, when closely analyzed, fundamental ; but it is also 
simple and of long standing. The demands made for justice, 
including honesty, humanity, etc., go back to the earliest days of 
history. He surely did not discover or invent them. These are 
ideas that have appealed to men of all nations for all centuries. 
Are they not the basis on which rests the prophet s condemnation 
of the neighboring nations ? Yet nothing more is asked of Israel 
than of them. But this is not all. Amos represents Israel as 
knowing these things, failing to do them, and, therefore, as de 
serving of punishment. Neither Israel nor the other nations 
would have merited destruction for failing to observe conditions 
or commands of which they were totally ignorant. " To neither 
man nor people can the righteousness which Amos preached 
appear as a discovery, but always as a recollection and a re 
morse." * Is this representation of Amos, then, an anachronism, 
or, perhaps, a piece of beautiful rhetoric, or, in plain words, a 
misrepresentation ? But those who call it an anachronism give 
it the highest place of value. This does not seem consistent. 
Moreover, if we recall that Amos resided within sight of Jerusa 
lem and, being the kind of man he was, must, therefore, have 
been in intimate relationship with much of the spirit as well as of 
the material of the nation s past experiences, it is fair to suppose 
on a priori grounds that Amos drew largely upon the accumula 
tions of this already celebrated past. But we need not rest the 
case on an argument of this character. 

(3) Amos actually shows a knowledge of the past history of 
Israel, and expresses this knowledge in a manner which indicates 
a supposition of knowledge on the part of the people ; cf. his 
references to the exodus and the conquest (2 9f - 3 1 5 25 g 1 ), to the 
religious history of his people (2 llf- ), to the series of past chastise 
ments inflicted by Yahweh (4 6 " 11 ), and his allusion to David (6 5 ).f 
Israel s ethics, in so far as they had yet developed, rested on the 
choice made of Yahweh, and the character of Yahweh (v.i.} as 
shown in history. Knowledge of history meant also acquaintance 
and familiarity, on the part of those who were at all intelligent, 
with this basis (v.s.). 

GAS. I. 98. f Cf. Dr., pp. 113 f. 


Moreover, the terminology of prophecy employed by Amos is 
the product of generations of prophetic activity.* Cf. his fre 
quent use of the established formulas mf l&X ro (i 3 - 6 - 13 2 L6 3 11 - 12 

5 3. 4. 16. 17. 27 7 17) afid ^ D ^ ( 2 11 ^0 ^. 58.14 gS ^ and of 

the strongly prophetic title niKSX m.T ; his employment of the 
vision as an impressive method of communicating Yahweh s mes 
sage to Israel ; and his recognition of the dirge as a most appro 
priate vehicle for his message of doom (5 lff- ). 

(4) We may be still more specific and note that in 2 9 " 11 reference 
is made to " consecrated personalities," for whom a keen appre 
ciation was manifested. Who were they? Not only Elijah and 
Elisha, but also J and E ; and how many more of whom we now 
have no record ! These make up the great pre-prophetic move 
ment which we have already tried briefly to describe ( i-n). 

(5) That Amos knew written documents, such as the decalogues 
and the Book of the Covenant, is certain. But this is not all ; for 

(a) national songs had already come into existence, which prepared 
the way, technically as well as spiritually, for his work, among 
them may reasonably be included Ju. 5,f Deborah s song; Ex. 
15 | (in its earliest form), the song of the Red Sea ; Gn. 49, the 
tribal blessing, as well as Dt. 32 (?) || and 33 IF; and besides these 

(b) there were ancient proverbs and folk-lore. Some of these 
were already incorporated in J and E, e.g. Gn. 26 23 2f b - 28>29 - 39- 40 ; 

* Cf. Kue. Pel. I. 207; Che. EB. 155. 

f G. F. Moore calls this "the oldest extant monument of Hebrew literature "; 
so practically all recent interpreters. 

. \ Carpenter and Battersby incline to a post-exilic date ; so Holzinger ; Baentsch 
declares it later than J and E, and perhaps later than JE. A genuine Mosaic 
kernel is discovered in it by Ew., De., Di., Strack, Dr. 

\ K.6., Wildeboer, and Dr. (Genesis, 380), assign this to " the age of the Judges, 
or a little later " ; Di., Carpenter and Battersby, and Gunkel place it in the Davidic 
period ; Sta. (GVI.l. 150) locates it in Ahab s reign ; Holzinger decides upon some 
time during the Syrian wars prior to the age of Jeroboam II. 

|| Placed about 780 B.C., by Knobel, Schra. (Einl. 205^), Di., Oettli, et al.; 
assigned by Ew., Kamphausen, and Reuss, to the period just before 722 B.C. ; by 
Dr., to the age of Jeremiah and Ezekiel; by Co., Steuernagel, Bertholet, and Car 
penter and Battersby, to the end of the exile. 

U Dr., Schra. (Einl. $ 204), Di., place this in the reign of Jeroboam I.; Graf, 
Bleek, Kue. (Hex. 13, note 16) , Sta. ( G VI. I. 150 ff.) , Co., Baudissin (Priesterthum, 
74 f., 266), Steuernagel, Wildeboer, Bertholet, and Carpenter and Battersby put it 
about 780 B.C. 


some, likewise, have probably been preserved in the collections of 
Proverbs, although it is, of course, impossible at this date to dis 
tinguish them ; some, indeed, Amos himself preserves, for not a 
little of the literary strength of his writings is due to his familiarity, 
not only with history and sociology, but as well with folk-lore and 
the speech and thought of the common people. 


With this summary of the work before us, we may consider the 
external form of Amos s work, his ministry. If his teaching 
forms an important part in the history of prophecy, his ministry 
should be expected to contribute largely to the history of 
prophetism. If Amos himself is responsible for the book which 
bears his name (either in the present form or in an earlier form 
of which the present is an edition enlarged and modified by 
a later prophet), the literary work is a part of his ministry. This, 
however, deserves separate and special consideration (p. cxxx ff.). 
The historical background of the work, as well as the prophet s 
personal life and the preparation for his ministry, have been 
considered in 12. 

i. It is unfair to Amos either to regard the story of the man 
of Judah (i K. 13) as a distorted account of his ministry,* or 
to accept the suggestion that the story of his ministry, like the 
story of Jonah (in the book of Jonah), is a later invention or 
fiction, f When we recall (a) that no miracle or wonder-story 
is connected with his work, either directly or indirectly ; (fr) that 
no ecstatic frenzy is in any way suggested ; and (c) that, on the 
other hand, all connection with that kind of thing is strongly 
denied (7 14 ), we may at once concede that one has entered upon 
his ministry who is a prophet in a new sense, at least in so far 
as the external work is concerned. He receives visions, to be 
sure ; but these are no ecstatic trances, for which music was 
needed, as in Elisha s case. They are rather like the visions 
of Isaiah and Jeremiah, manifestations of a lofty and sublime 

* So We. in Bleek s Einl* 244; Klostermann, Samuel und Konige, 349; Che. 
EB. 148; Benz. Konige, 91. 

t Cf. Day and Chapin, AJSL. XVIII. 66-93; Che. EB. 3864 f. ; Elh. 


character, made not in dream, nor in trance, but through spiritual 
enlightenment ; dealing not with this battle or that promotion 
to the throne, but with the fundamental truth of God. However, 
we are surely able to see in these visions, not only the lineal 
successors of the trance, but also an indication, if we note their 
number and character, of the practical adoption by the new 
order of the machinery of the old. If, however, Amos follows 
closely the old style in receiving his message by vision (although 
of a more elevated character),* he exhibits a more striking dif 
ference in the method of presentation. It is true that in many 
cases we still have what seem to be only brief oracles or texts, 
that is, fragmentary utterances. Even these differ from those 
of older prophets, " which offered a hard and fast decision of the 
moment for the moment ";f since in many cases they have now 
taken on the form of sermons, and in all cases they present teach 
ing concerning Yahweh s nature and his purposes for Israel. On 
the public preaching of the prophet, as distinguished from the 
writing of his sermons, v.i. 

2. A most significant factor in the ministry of Amos is the 
writing down of his sermons. In this service he is, perhaps, the 
leader. J The adoption of the new method, viz. that of writing, 
was the outcome of certain factors in the situation, and itself the 
occasion of certain others. 

(i) It is to be remembered that in this century Israel was, for 
the first time, enjoying the privileges of civilization. Many forces 
are set in motion in a nation when it rises into this stage of life, 
among others that of literature. There was not only an incentive 
to writing, but the opportunity for it, as provided in the long peace 
of Jeroboam s reign. || Torah-literature had already taken form 
(Ho. 8 12 ) in the laws that had been codified. Prophetic literature 
also had come into existence in the form of the great epics of old 

* We cannot suppose that these visions were used only as a method of presenting 
the prophetic thought to the people. Here, as in Isaiah and Jeremiah, we have 
survivals of the old trance, as the state in which the prophet received the message. 
Cf. K. DB. V. 676. f Bu. Rel. 133. 

\ The only rival for the honor is the author of Is. 15 and 16; but these chapters 
are probably later ; so Schwally, ZAW. VIII. 207 ff. ; Duhm ; Che. Introduction, 
etc., in loc.; Marti. For an early date v. WRS. Proph. 91 f. r 392; Di., GAS.; and 
Dr. LO T. 215 f. $ Sta. G VI. I. 556 ; Kit. Hist. II. 315 f. || ( iAS. I. 35. 


Israel, which J and E had taken pains to put together. Amos, 
after all, is not showing much originality in taking up the pen, for 
he is only following those who have already shown him the way. 

(2) Then, too, certain changes had come about which led 
inevitably to this step. Israel s religion had passed upward to 
an entirely new position. It was no longer a matter of worship, 
i.e. ritual. It stood for certain new ideas, which could not be 
expressed in an institution, but must find for themselves a written 
record.* The prophetic utterance was no longer a temporary 
matter, uttered for a special time or set of circumstances ; it had 
become something of eternal value, having to do with truth con 
cerning vital subjects. Moreover, the prophet himself has taken 
on new functions and new responsibilities. He sees more clearly 
his position as it bears upon human affairs in general, and not 
merely the affairs of a single nation, nor of a certain time. 

(3) The earlier prophets were men who sought to exert "an 
instantaneous influence." It was their business to act, as did 
Elijah, rather than to speak. And, then, it was a matter of 
supreme moment that now the prophet is expected to give a 
message with which the people will be displeased. He will no 
longer be the leader of the masses. His work will be outwardly a 
failure. His very ill success in reaching the hearts of the people 
actually forces him to put his words in writing, f 

(4) In order that there may be secured permanent influence, 
the prophets words must be read and studied. This, and this 
only, will bring a continuous development of Israel s religion, and 
a deepening of it in the hearts of the people. But to obtain this 
the prophet need not write out his words just as he had spoken 
them. He may give only the text of his address, or, possibly, a 
synopsis of it. The written form may omit much that had only 
local application. Nor did the writer himself always put his pro 
phetic speeches into written form. This may have been left to a 
band of disciples such as history tells us Isaiah had (Is. 8 16 ), men 
who desired to see the words of the master justified as only time 
could justify them (cf. Dt. i8 2 - 22 Je. 28* 9 ). 

Amos was first among the prophets to appreciate all this. 

* Kue. Rel. I. 209. t WRS. OTJC.i 295 f. ; Bu. Rel. 131. 


Although he probably expected the end of Israel to come within 
his own generation, he saw the advantage of giving his thought a 
definite place. He may also have had in mind the possibility of 
transmitting it thus through disciples. 

3. In his political activity, likewise, Amos exhibits variation 
from the older type of prophet, (i) The difference, however, is 
one, not in fact, but in method. He is as greatly interested in 
the national life as was Elijah or Elisha, but he makes no use of 
political influence. He himself is not an official of the govern 
ment (as were Samuel and Elisha), just as he was not an official 
prophet. He sustained no special relation to the king, as did 
Nathan or Micaiah. He was only a private citizen. His interest 
in affairs was intense, but he established no organization to exe 
cute his mission. He does only one thing, preach. 

(2) His political views (v.s.) concerning the nations near at 
hand he announces with consummate skill (p. 12), the method 
chosen being one which brings him into sympathetic touch with 
the Israelites themselves.* 

(3) But his political sagacity is displayed most keenly in his 
interpretation of Assyria s relation to the world of that day, includ 
ing Israel, and the use made of this interpretation. His mind 
was not at first clear in reference to the fall of Samaria, but cer 
tainly grows more definite with the progress of the visions. 

4. The chronological order of the various stages in the minis 
try of Amos is uncertain, and its determination will rest upon our 
final decision as to the structure of the book itself (p. cxxx ff.). 
The following is suggested as a possible hypothesis : 

(i) In connection with his early shepherd life in Tekoa, he 
visits many points of interest at home and abroad ; and in the 
course of these visits learns, as an outsider might learn, the methods 
and work of the neblrfim (3 7 )-t This was only a part of that 
information concerning the world at large which he obtained in 
these earlier years. 

* Such is the interpretation placed by many scholars upon the arrangement of 
the first two chapters, e.g. We. on Am. 2 14 ff - ; Mit,, Dr., Now., Marti. 

I Che. (ED. 157) says," Which (i.e. 3") Amos could hardly have written, unless 
he had had the most vivid and ocular evidence of the effects of a true prophetic 
impulse even before his own turn came to receive one." 


(2) A time came when in visions given him, like those which 
he had seen others have (v.s.), a definite call to preach was 
received.* This call grew out of the message contained in the 
vision of the plumb-line, viz., the irrevocable destruction of Israel. 
In the two visions which precede, although he saw the doom 
threatened, he believed it might be averted ; but gradually he 
becomes convinced that Assyria is the source of the danger (6" 
7 17 ), and that ruin is inevitable unless something extraordinary 
shall avert the catastrophe. He goes to Northern Israel, amazed 
that every one does not, like himself, foresee the coming disaster. | 

(3) Having reached his destination, the work is opened by 
the proclamation, with diplomatic skill, of one oracle after 
another concerning Israel s neighbors. J These may have been 
uttered on successive days, but, in all probability, were spread 
over weeks and months. When the proper time has arrived, to 
Israel (2 tHO ) itself is announced the dreadful future with the reasons 
therefor. In the course of his wanderings he arrives at Bethel. 
The climax is reached in the sermon of chap. 6, in which captivity 
is threatened. 

(4) This is probably followed by a popular interruption of his 
work. In any case, demand is made for his authority to utter such 
pessimistic denunciations, and to announce what really amounts to 
treason. In justification of his words, he tells the story of his 
call, as it came in the visions of locusts, fire, and plumb-line. 
This closes with a specific threat against Jeroboam the king. || 

* These (ecstatic) visions (i) connect Amos closely with the work of the 
nebhiim ; (2) are not satisfactorily explained as being merely the vehicle of the 
prophet s publication of his message (cf. p. cxxv, and K. DB. V. 676 a) ; (3) are 
presented after the oracles and sermons (l-6), as the justification of the prophet s 
mission (cf. Is. 6), and form the continuation of his work after Amaziah s inter 
ruption, f This (p. 74) is the proper interpretation of 3". 

J The resemblance of these utterances to the short oracles of the nebhiim can 
not be overlooked. Their pleasing character would surely commend the prophet 
to his auditors. One cannot imagine Cheyne s reasons (JSB. 154) for suggesting 
that these oracles could not have been spoken. 

This seems to be a reasonable inference in view of the necessity of explaining 
the present position of the visions, for only in some such way as this can one account 
for hope contained in the first and second, when the most absolute statement of 
destruction has just been uttered in 6 14 . 

|| The third vision indicates the position which Amos had held since coming to 
Northern Israel. 


(5) Then follows the official attack by Amaziah, and the 
prophet s explanation of his work, with a scathing rebuke of 
the priest for his interference.* Whatever the plans for the 
future may be, he continues for a while the work which he had 
come North to perform.! 

(6) Another vision (the fourth) is received revealing Israel as 
ripe for destruction, with an arraignment of the accused, a threat 
of earthquake and slaughter, followed by universal mourning, 
Yahweh s abandonment of his people, despair and destruction. 
A little later comes the fifth and last vision, the downfall of the 
sanctuary, with a picture of ruin which none may escape, and an 
assurance that the destruction will be complete. 

(7) The prophet goes back to Judah, perhaps to Jerusalem,]: 
where he puts his addresses into literary form and intrusts them to 
the disciples of Yahweh, for the use of those who are to follow him 
(zu., on his literary work, p. cxxx rT.). 

5. The turning-point in Amos s ministry, and, indeed, the only 
significant event that has been handed down to us, is the scene at 
Bethel. We cannot fail to appreciate : (i) The element of tragedy 
which it includes, for the throne of a king is at stake, the life of 
the priest is forfeited, and the fate of the nation is sealed. (2) The 
naturalness of it all, for is not Amos seeking to do just what his 
predecessors back to Samuel had done before him, viz. to unseat 
the king? How could his words be otherwise interpreted? How 
could king or priest fail to take cognizance of them? (3) The 
strange character of Amos s reply to this point. Is the prophet s 
language, in which he foretells Amaziah s doom, general or special? 
We answer, the former. The catastrophe which is soon to befall 
the whole nation will include the priest with the rest. 

* This arrangement is, on the whole, better than (i) that which introduces the 
attack before the visions immediately after 6 14 (so Baumann) ; or (2) that which 
places the attack after all the visions have been announced, and understands that 
Amos said nothing after his rebuke of Amaziah (so Lohr, Marti). 

t It is hardly possible to regard this interference as in any sense a friendly one 
(Or.). Nor can we easily suppose that Amos was strong enough to disobey what 
was evidently the king s command, and not go away at all. At the same time one 
can scarcely imagine so bold a prophet not doing what this hypothesis takes foi 
granted, viz. continuing to preach until he had finished his message. 

J Was this a second visit (cf. 6 1 ), as Che. (EB. 154) suggests ? 


6. In forming an estimate of the efficiency of Amos s ministry, 
we must note one or two facts : 

(1) There was in Amos a noticeable lack of the religious ele 
ment, in the ordinary sense of that word ; and certainly the ministry 
was not one that could reach very many minds. There were prob 
ably not fifty people in Northern Israel who could understand him. 
It is quite certain that he did not himself have in mind a clear 
conception of the issue involved in his preaching. He was indif 
ferent to everything that had to do with purpose or motive. As 
Duhm has said, the teleological element was lacking. The fact is, 
the new element in Amos was that which is represented by the 
sage. The union of a nabhi* and a sage in one person produced 
a prophet in the new sense, the sense in which Amos is entitled to 
that title. 

(2) Amos s ministry, then, signifies a breaking away from the 
old ; or, better, an infusion into the old of a new spirit, that of ob 
servation, philosophical inquiry, acceptance of law. His work fur 
nishes for future prophecy a new basis for development, one which 
will include thought, adjustment to environment, and growth of 
thought. Still further, although he was a moralist of an extreme 
type, requiring for the proper balancing of his ideas those of his 
contemporary Hosea, which were in striking contrast with his own, 
he nevertheless bequeathed to all mankind certain truths which 
time has shown to be unchangeable : 

"The truths that justice between man and man is one of the divine foun 
dations of society ; that privilege implies responsibility, and that failure to 
recognize responsibility will surely bring punishment ; that nations, and, by 
analogy, individuals, are bound to live up to that measure of light and knowl 
edge which has been granted to them ; that the most elaborate worship is 
but an insult to God when offered by those who have no mind to conform 
their wills and conduct to his requirements, these are elementary but eternal 


The present form of the book of Amos suggests several prob 
lems. How much of the book did Amos himself leave ? What 

* Kirk. Doct. 106. 


portions are of later origin, and what motive suggested their inser 
tion ? * Through what stages has the book gone ? What contact 
has it had with other literature ? And still further, what is the 
form of composition employed, and what special features of that 
form deserve attention ? 

1. The table on p. cxxxii presents the contents of the book, 
showing (i) the larger divisions, viz. oracles, sermons, etc., (2) the 
smaller sections, and (3) the original and secondary elements 
within each section. 

2. The secondary material indicated in the table on p. cxxxii 
includes the passages (with the exception of a few words or 
phrases, v.i.) which have been treated as interpolations in the 
commentary. An examination of these passages shows that they 
fall into five groups : 

(1) The Judaistic insertion, made after the promulgation of 
Deuteronomy, and referring to the approaching destruction of 
Jerusalem, viz. the judgment on Judah, 2 4f -.| 

(2) Historical insertions, from a post-exilic date, (a) adding 
judgments upon Tyre (i 9f ) and Edom (i llf> ), thus bringing the 
whole number (with Judah) to seven; j () adding reference to 
the fall of Calneh, Hamath, and Gath, 6 2 (cf. Is. io 9 n ). 

(3) Theological insertions, from a post-exilic time, similar in 
tone and spirit to certain passages in Job and Deutero-Isaiah. || 

* Men in later days of prophecy seem to have regarded it as a pious duty to 
illustrate older utterances by making application to their own times. If the older 
form of utterance appeared too harsh for the later age, it was modified ; if too 
obscure, it was explained. The intention was not to preserve and transmit what 
the prophet had actually said, but rather to indicate what, in the opinion of the 
later editor, he would have had to say in order " to fulfil the religious purpose 
which he once meant to serve " (cf. K. DB. V. 671 ; Carpenter and Battersby, 
Hex. I. no). 

t There is no basis for adding to this, with Marti, either 3 1 6 , for surely Amos, 
himself a Judahite, could speak of the " whole family" ; or 6 1 a , for was not Amos 
concerned also for Zion ? Even with these passages treated as insertions, there is 
no ground for supposing a special edition of Amos to have been issued for the 

J No good reason (v. in loc.} exists for regarding, with Marti, 2 10 as such an 
historical addition (to 2 9 , the difficulty involved in its position is entirely relieved 
by transposition), or 2 12 (to 2 11 ), or 526 (p. 130). 

\ E.g. 38* 25 ff - 31 . 34-38. 

\E.g, 4021 11.4512. 18 4 si2f.. 




- N 

ro ** 

10 vO t^ OO C^ O 

s s ? s- 













vV bJO 


.5 1 

g J 


1 7 

8 ! 


s s 



co > C 

c Q .2 

Q a> 



.2 o u- 


^ ^ v 

o -S 2 .a 

-*- "tj 


^ 2 

^ 4-J J~( 





a c3 M ^ 

Q g W u 

Jill it 

^ *S S 2 o 

ns of Destruction, 
ion and a Reply, 
ision, with Explan 
ion, with a Passioi 




! O 

co f> 

S g" 

E -S S 
SD j2 Si) 

3 3 
i > i > 

o _ rs to o ., 
^ B ,<$ *-* $ 



. tj > -a 
3 3 > 



H < <J <J 







eo ^ 





^ * 

e " 





3 2 

^-?o 1 

ti e f 

rH C^ 1C 

M M 

r^ cx3 ON 











S | 

-s S 

00 rt 

^ H T 

^ Cfc 1 ^ !>. ^ 

S ^ 

9 * 7 


IJ 5 


j 2 ^ t 


To ro ^- In l ^n to 

t^ t^ OO ON 





^o o* 

6 J 

s ^ 

O -s 


OJ ^ 

<u ^ 

<u *> 





Here belong (a) the heading of the book, i 2 (pp. 9 f.) ; (b) the 
well-known doxologies, 4 13 * 5 86 9 5f \t 

(4) Technical or archaeological insertions, which take the form 
of expansion, thus adding details to the more simple statement of 
the original. Here belong, (a) "each woman straight before 
her," in4 3 ; (b) "while yet there remained three months to the 
harvest," in 4 7a (p. 97), also, "together with the captivity of 
your horses," in 4 10 (p. 100) ; (c) " one field being rained upon," 
etc., ..." two or three cities staggering," etc., in 4 7 6> 8a (pp. 9 7 f.) ; 
(d) " and unto wailing those skilled in lamentation," in 5 16 (p. 127); 
"and the peace-offerings of your failings I will not regard," in 
S 22 (P- J 35) j ( e ) tne detail of the inner part of the house, 
in 6 (Mla> (p. 151) ; (/) "and lo ! there were full-grown locusts 
after the king s mowings," in 7 ld ; (g) the extra technique, in 
volving the question of Yahweh to Amos, in 7 8a 8 2a ; (h) "buy 
ing the poor for silver," etc., in 8 6 ; (/) " your images, the star of," 
in 5 26 , "and it devour," in 5 6 , "and the oppressions within her," 
in 3 9 , " O children of Israel," in 3 1 , " with a storm in the day of 
tempest," in 2 14 , "plumb-," in f, "for thirst," in 8 13 . 

(5) The Messianic additions found in "Behold the days are 
coming," in 8 lla , and the long closing passage 9 9 " 15 connected 
with what precedes by 9 8c , in which the interpolator announces 
that the original message of destruction was intended only for 
Northern Israel. 

(6) Certain phrases, "The Lord," "God of Hosts," " It is the 
oracle of Yahweh," " Has Yahweh said," which have been inserted 
arbitrarily to emphasize some favorite thought of a reader, e.g. 
i 5 - 8 2 16 3 13 - 15 4 3 5 16 f 8 9 . Cf. also, " in that day," 8 3 . 

3. The internal history of the book (i.e. the various steps in the 
process of its growth) was probably as follows : 

(1) Amos himself left, not a book, but certain addresses or 
groups of addresses in writing. 

(2) These became a book, in all probability through the work 
of his disciples, before the times of Isaiah (? ./.), who, says Cheyne, 
" steeped himself in the originality of Amos before displaying his 

*Che. (EB. 153) includes also 412 &. 

t We cannot include here, with Marti, 32 (p. 67), or 3? (also Duhm ; Che. EB. 
154; -v. p. 71), or 513 (p. 121), or 8 (p. 176), or 8U-" (pp. 183 f.). 


own truly original genius." * Since Amos probably issued his 
addresses in Judah, it is questionable whether Hosea ever saw 
them (v.t.). t 

(3) A Deuteronomic insertion consisting of 2 4f - was probably 
made in Jeremiah s time. This address would fit in just before 
the fall of Jerusalem, almost as appropriately as before the fall of 
Samaria. It is perhaps too much to call this a Deuteronomic 

(4) During the exilic experience (or a little after) important 
changes were introduced, viz. (a) those of an historical character 
(v.s.) in accord with the same spirit which gave rise to Obadiah 10 14 
(cf. Is. 34 Ez. 25 12 35 5 Ps. i$f) Jo. 3 2 " 6 19 ; and (7>) those of a theo 
logical character (v.s.) in accord with the same spirit which found 
expression in the descriptions of the deity that occur in Job and 
Deutero-Isaiah (v.s.). 

(5) In a later post-exilic period there was added the large 
number of technical and archaeological explanations and expan 
sions indicated above. At this time the superscription (i 1 ) 
probably had its origin. Many of these are glosses which found 
their way into the text without motive of any kind. Some, how 
ever, are the work of an editor who delighted to repeat in minute 
detail some point or description which had been passed over quite 
summarily. No definite line perhaps can be drawn between these 
two classes of additions. 

(6) Finally, in the spirit of the days of Zechariah and Zerubbabel, 
when men were thinking of the restoration of the throne of David, 
or perhaps still later, there was added the Messianic promise of 
9 8c " 15 (v.s.). This closed the internal history of the book. 

4. The general structure of the book as understood by the 
present writer is indicated in the table (v.s.). Its character is 
extremely simple : A series of judgment oracles ; a series of judg 
ment sermons; a series of judgment visions. These various series 
have each its own unity of thought and its own unity of purpose. 
These have already been fully discussed. 

It remains, however, to notice some of the more important hypotheses put 
forward in recent times which offer different explanations of Amos s structure. 

* EB. 154. f So We., Che. ; but cf. Ba. 


(1) Elhorst (1900) on the supposition that the text was originally written 
in parallel columns, the strophes being arranged so that I, 3, 5, etc., fell in 
Column I. and 2, 4, 6, etc., in Column II. and that some copyist transferred 
the columns consecutively instead of alternating between the two, proposes 
the following order: ji- 2. 11. 12. 3.5. 13-15.6-8 2 i-s l9 . 10 2 4.5.6 566.7 2 7.8 58.9 2 s-i2 

5 10-12 2 13-16 5 13-15 3 1. 2 5 1G. 17 38-8 5 18-20 3 <M4 ^1-25 4 l-3 $28. 27 4 4-ll 51-6 4 12 fc7 4^ 58 

5 i-3 59-11 5 4. 5 512. is 5 o 514 7 i-o. 10-17 gi-6 gi-G 87-14 9 7 -i5. ^yith this rearrange 
ment, the prophecy falls into four divisions: (#) i 1 -2 5 ; () 2 t; -6 14 ; (*) 7 1 - 17 ; 
(</) S 1 ^ 15 . 

(2) Lohr (1901) finds five main divisions; the first one consists of the 
introductory address, threatening Israel and her neighbors with punishment, 
and includes ji-S-is-is 2 i-3. 6-14. 10. The se cond one contains two addresses, 
announcing destruction because of the exploitation of the poor by the rich and 
powerful; the first address consists of 3! & 2-4 a. 5 a. 6. 8-is 4 i-s g4-M o.u-4^ the 
second address comprises $ l - Ga - 7 - w ~ 12 - 1C ~ 186 - 2 - 27 6 1 - 3 - 8 - n - 14 . The third division 
contains the mere fragment of a sermon against the sanctuaries and the ritual, 
viz. 4*- 12a - 3 14& - 9 la - 7 . The fourth division includes the four visions in 7 1 9 
8 1 " 3 ; and the fifth division consists of the historical episode in 7 1(M7 . 

(3) Riedel (1902), regarding the book as an anthology of the most signifi 
cant utterances of Amos, collected and arranged by a later editor, and treating 
7 10 - 17 as a later addition, makes the following analysis : I. A poem announcing 
Yahweh s judgment on the nations in general, and Israel in particular, chaps. 
I and 2. II. The central division (s^S 3 ), falling into three sections: (a) three 
addresses beginning with " Hear this word," 3 1 - 5 4 1 13 5 1 17 ; (/;) two addresses 
beginning with <( Alas," 5 18 - 27 6 1 14 ; (r) the four visions, 7 1 - 9 8 1 " 3 . III. The 
closing address (8 4 -9 15 ), likewise consisting of three sections: (#) 8 4 ~ 14 , which 
again begins with " Hear"; (^) 9 1 " 10 , again narrating a vision; (<:) 9 11 - 15 , a word 
of promise, in part looking back to the first address (cf. 9 12 with i llff -). 

(4) Baumann* (1903) finds five addresses, all of similar structure. Each 
of the last four addresses has three main divisions, the last division in each 
case summing up the entire speech, and the second division, with one excep 
tion, consisting of four sections. First address : I 2 ~ 8 - 13 ~ 15 2 1 - 3 - ^ l a - 12 - n 6 - 13 - 14 a - 
16 a. 14 6. is a* is &. 16& ( with an appendix, 39- 15 ). Second address: I. 31-6 6.6 a. 8. 

II. (a) 4 1 - 3 , (3) S 4 - 5 - 7 - 8 - 9 -! - 13 - 14 - 11 ^. Third address: I. 4 4 -*; II. (a) 46- 9-", 
( ^ 4 i2a 521-27. in. 5 4-6. Fourth address : I. 5 i. 2 - 3.16. 176. IL ( fl ) 518-20, 
(b} 6 1 , (0 6 3 - 7 , (^) 6 13 - 12 - 8 ; III. 6 14 - 11 - 126 - 9 - 10 . Fifth address: I. 7 10 - 17 ; 
II. (fl) 7 1 - 3 , () 7 4 - 6 , (0 7 7 - 9 , (</) 8 1 - 3 ; III. 9 la - 3 146 - 9 16 - 4 - 7 . Baumann sum 
marizes the thought in the form of a dialogue as follows : First division 
(Amos) : Yahweh will bring destruction upon Israel s foes and also upon Israel; 
for every crime demands punishment. (Israel) : How unheard of, to maintain 
that Yahweh would destroy his own people ! Who would listen to such folly? 
Second division (Amos) : What I speak is not folly, but the decree of God. 
Hear, therefore, especially you leaders in iniquity, of impending disaster. 

* With whom Now. 2 is in essential accord. 


(Israel) Our cultus at the sanctuaries will turn aside every sort of disaster. 
Third division (Amos) : Vain labor of love ! Have nut past calamities taught 
you that Yahweh demands a better service? Seek him through the practice 
of morality and justice ! But no, all warning is useless. Because you will not 
listen, you cannot be helped. Fourth division (Amos) : It remains only to 
raise the funeral dirge and to wail over the blind. Destruction is inevitable. 
P*ifth division (Amos s justification of his message in response to the protests 
of Amaziah and the people) : God, whom I have seen, has revealed to me 
what must come, and in spite of my earnest entreaties, has held fast to his 

(5) Marti (1903) finds in the original book (a) an announcement of 
judgment upon Damascus, Ammon, Moab, and Israel herself: I 3 - 5 - 13 ~ 15 
2 i-3. 6-9. 11. 13-ic. () a series of fragments of fourteen sermons : 3 1 a - 2 3 4 ~ 6 - 8 ^~ n 

o!2 -,14 6. 15 ^1-3 ^4-7 a a 8-12 a r 1-3 r * 5 a. 6. 14. 15 r7. 10-12. 16. 17 r 18. 20 6. 19. 21-25. 27 1. 3-6 a 7 

58-10 511. 12. 13 a. 66. is 6. 14. (y) the five visions and the historical episode: 7 1 9 
gi-3 9 i-4. 7 9 io-i7 f and some fragments within S 4 - 14 , viz. 8 4 - 5 - 7 - lla - 12 - 136 - 14 . 

5. The external history of the book of Amos may be traced 
briefly through four periods : 

(i) Direct evidence of an external acquaintance with it by 
other prophets is perhaps slight. The similarity of expression 
found in certain passages in Hosea,* as compared with Amos, 
proves nothing ; the two were dealing with the same historical 
traditions and were working in the same environment. The same 
thing may be said of the two or three passages in which Isaiah and 
Amos use similar expressions.! In Jeremiah, on the other hand, 
because the situation is a similar (although not the same) one, 
more definite trace is found of Amos s influence. J In Ezekiel, 
likewise, some points of external resemblance may be noted, espe- 

* E.g. between Am. 2 5 etc. (sending fire upon the palace) and Ho. 8 14 (which is 
late), Am. 2 10 (the rescue from Egypt) and Ho. I2 lof -, Am. y 17 (threat of captivity 
in an unclean land) and Ho. 9 3 , Am. 8 6 (corruption 01 Ephraim, unjust scales) and 
Ho. 128, Am. 88 95 and Ho. 4 3 , Am. 46 and Ho. 7!. 

fCf. Is. 30! with Am. 2"; Is. 3 y>9.ii.n (px-.) w ith Am. 6*; 316 with Am. 
4 1 ff - ; and 9~-io 4 -f 525-39 w ith Am. 44-13. 

J This is seen, perhaps, in the formulas employed at the beginning ("> *^CN nr) 
and at the end of the utterances against foreign nations ; cf. 47 2 48! 49!- 7 2S - 34 and 
Am. I 3 - 6 etc. ; also 48 25 - 44 49 2 - 6 - - 6 - 39 with Am. i 5 - 8. i~> 2 3 ; and in the similarities to 
be noticed in a comparison of Je. ij 27 with Am. 2 5 , 2i 10 with g 4 , 25 30 with i 2 , 49 2 ? 
with i 4 , 49 3 with iis, 46 with 2", 46" with 8, 48 24 with i 12 2-, 49- -^- - - with i 12 , 
48 7 49 3 with i 15 . The phrase " virgin Israel " is found only in Am. and Je.; " days 
are coming" occurs in no other prophetic book- c - 


daily in the passages directed against foreign nations.* In the 
other prophets, few cases of direct external influence may be 

But it is not in such external manifestations that we should 
expect to find traces of Amos s influence upon later prophets. 
That his ministry and message were known to them appears from 
several points in which they follow closely in his steps, e.g. in 
standing aloof from the great body of so-called prophets in their 
respective periods ; in adopting the method of writing down their 
utterances; in the continued development of the sermonic dis 
course introduced by him ; in following the fashion of directing a 
certain portion of their attention to the foreign nations ; j in bas 
ing their work on the fundamental doctrine of national judgment 
as presented by Amos ; in holding up and completing the new 
ideas propounded by Amos concerning God and his ethical 
demands upon humanity. 

(2) The external relation of the book of Amos to the wisdom 
literature is not indicated by anything that has come down to us. 
That its influence was felt can scarcely be doubted, since in it we 
have the first definite formulation of Yahweh s relation to the out 
side world, the idea which lay at the basis of all Hebrew wisdom ; 
the assignment of Israel to a place upon a level with other nations 
(cf. the absence of any reference to Israel in the book of Prov 
erbs) ; an example of Oriental learning in history, geography, so 
cial customs ; the very essence of wisdom, in the emphasis placed 
upon honesty, purity, etc. ; together with an almost total absence 
of the religious sentiment (v.s.). 

(3) In later times reference is made to the Amos-book in Ecclus. 
49 10 , where " the twelve prophets " are mentioned, showing that at 

* Cf. the introductory formula in Ez. 256- 8 - H- 15 26$- "^ etc., and the closing words 
in 257- 11. H 2 66. H. 21 ; also Ez. 272 28*2 322 with Am. 5!, 28 2 6 with 914, 355. 6 w ith ill, 
68 with 98, 72. 6 w ith 82, 2 818 with ii. 

t Cf. Zp. 2 4 , in which the same cities of Philistia are mentioned as in Am. i 6 - 8 
(Gath being omitted), and in the same connection a call issued for repentance in 
language almost like that of Am. 514-, also Zc. gi- 7 , in which Damascus, Phoenicia, 
and Philistia are threatened (Gath being again omitted in the list of cities) ; also 
Zc. 3 2 with Am. 4!!, Zc. 138 with 7 14 , Hag. 2 17 with Am. 4 9 . On the resemblance of 
Is. 42 5 457. 12 to Am. 4 13 5 8ff -, v. p. cxxxiv. 

t E.g. Is. io5. 13! . 1428 ff. 151-1925 21 23 Je. 46 ff. Ez. 25 ff. Ob., Na. 28-318 
Zp. 24-13 Zc. 9 i-7. 


that time there was a book of Amos ; in Tobit 2 6 , where the book 
of Amos is first mentioned by name and a citation is made from 
8 10 ; in Acts y 42 ^ where Am. t, 25 f - is quoted and assigned to " the 
book of the prophets"; and in Acts i5 1Gf , a quotation of 9" in 
connection with other " words of the prophets." 

(4) The place of the book in the Canon is naturally with " the 
twelve." Its position in the Hebrew Canon, viz., third (following 
Joel), is different from that in @, where it is second (Joel being 
placed after Micah). 

6. Partly on a priori grounds (it being thought impossible to 
conceive of a herdsman as a man of letters),* and partly on the 
ground of certain words which were wrongly spelled (these have 
more recently been discovered to be textual errors), f many ex 
planations of the uncultivated and, indeed, rude speech of Amos 
have been deemed necessary. The fact has long been recognized, 
however, that these estimates were wrong. Recent writers, espe 
cially since W. Robertson Smith in 1882, have vied with each 
other in appreciation of the simplicity and refinement, as well as 
of the vigor of Amos s literary style. \ The latest critics go even so 
far as to deny that the figures which he employs are prevailingly 
those of the shepherd-life. 

(1) The regular and simple structure of the book (p. cxxxii) 
exhibits at once Amos s style of thought. What could be more 
natural and easy than the series of oracles, the series of sermons, 
and the series of visions? It is unfortunate that some recent 
critics seem as blind to the simplicity of Amos s style of expres 
sion as were the older critics to its refined nature. 

(2) This regularity, or orderliness, exhibits itself in detail in the 
repetition of the same formulas for three transgressions, yea for 
four, etc., in the opening chapters (or, to put it otherwise, in the 
orderly arrangement of the nations) ; in the use of the refrain, 
but ye did not return, etc., in the poem describing Israel s past 
chastisements (4 4 " 13 )!) ; in the entire form of the first three visions 

* Jerome, in his introduction to Amos, characterizes Amos as imperitus sermone 
sed non scientia. 

t For these words, viz. p- jJD 2 13 , DDDiPia 5 10 , 3NHD 6 8 , 101DD 6 10 , pnti" 7 16 , v. 
in loc. % V. especially Mit. ; Che. EB. 155. Che. EB. 155. 

|| Isaiah followed closely this model in his celebrated poem 9 8 -io 4 5 26 - 30 , although 
a portion of this is probably later than Isaiah himself. 


(7 1 " 9 ) ; in the almost artificial symmetry of form seen in the accu 
sation (y 10 " 14 ) and the reply (7 14 ~ 17 ) ; in the series of illustrations 
employed with such effect in 3 3 ff - ; in the structure, in general, of 
the several pieces (#./.). Moreover, these various series, "while 
not so long as to become tiresome, are long enough to impress 
upon the mind of the reader the truths that they are intended to 
illustrate and justify the use of them by the prophet." There is 
here the skill, not only of the poet and the speaker, but also of the 
teacher. Every poem in the book is a notable example of this 
same direct, straightforward orderliness of thought. 

(3) The imagery of Amos, like that of Isaiah, is worthy of special 
study. Tradition has probably been wrong in emphasizing too 
strongly the prevailingly shepherd-characteristics (v.s.) which mark 
the figures employed by Amos. But no one will deny that he 
is especially fond of drawing his language from nature ; and what, 
after all, is this but the field of rural life? He not only cites 
certain facts of agricultural significance, e.g. the recent drought, 
blasting and mildew (4 7fL ), the oppressive taxation of crops (5 11 ), 
and the cheating of the grain merchants (8 5 ), but he finds pic 
turesque illustrations and comparisons in " threshing instruments " 
(i 3 ), the loaded wagon on the threshing-floor (2 13 ), the height of 
the cedars and the strength of the oaks (2 9 ), the roar of the lion 
in the forest (3 4 8 ), the shepherd rescuing remnants from the lion 
(3 12 ), the snaring of birds (3 5 ), the " kine of Bashan" (4 1 ), worm 
wood (s 7 6 12 ), the lion, bear, and serpent (5 19 ), the perennial 
stream ($**), horses stumbling upon rocks and ploughing the sea 
with oxen (6 12 ), swarms of locusts devouring the aftermath (y lf ), 
and the " basket of summer fruit " (8 1 ). 

(4) Other features of Amos s style, which may only be men 
tioned, are (a) its originality (sometimes called unconventionality 
or individuality),* as seen in a certain kind of independence, 
probably due to the fact that he was a pioneer in the application 
of waiting to prophetic discourse ; (b) its maturity, for nothing 
is more clear than that he had predecessors in this work who 
had developed, in no small degree, a technical nomenclature of 
prophecy (v.s.) ; (c) its artistic character, which is seen not only 

* Cf. Mit. 8. 


in strophes with refrains, but in the entire strophic structure of 
the various pieces, together with the measure and parallelism, v.i. 
It is probable that Amos s style, as well as the substance of his 
message, is to be explained largely by the circumstances of his 
environment (v.s.). 


The facts of Hosea s life, while altogether different from those 
relating to Amos, are equally interesting and instructive. 

i. There is no evidence to prove that the man Hosea was of 
the tribe of Reuben (a view based on the resemblance of his 
father s name, Beeri, to Beerah, i Ch. 5 6 ) ; * or of the tribe of 
Issachar (p. 202) ; or of the tribe of Judah, for the passages in 
which Judah is mentioned are for the most part doubtful, since 
they seem to be part of a plan (p. clix), and even if authentic 
would prove neither the prophet s Judaean birth,f nor the sugges 
tion that the book was written out in Judah, when the prophet 
(like Amos) had been sent away. J On the name Hosea, v. 
p. 205 ; on the bearing of the superscription i 1 , v. pp. 203 f. It 
is hardly to be questioned that he was a citizen of the Northern 
kingdom ; v. p. 202, to which may be added, as matter of detail, 
that (a} the interest in Northern Israel is seen in his intimate 
acquaintance with the historical conditions and foreign interests 
of the North, as well as with the policies of intrigue of the two 
political parties ; (b} the particular places with which familiarity 
is shown, all of which lie in North Israel, are Mizpah in the east 
and Tabor in the west (5 1 ), Samaria (frequently mentioned, 7 1 
8 f. I0 5.7 I3 i6^ Gilead ( 6 s I2 n^ shechem (6 9 ), Gilgal and Bethel 
( 4 15 9 15 io 5 - 15 i2 n ), Gibeah and Ramah (5* io 9 ) ; (c) the differ 
ence between Amos s point of view and that of Hosea illustrates 

* So, many Rabbis ; cf. Jer. Quaestiones in Paralipomena. 

t Jahn and Mau. ; v. p. 202. 

t Umb., Ew. 

$ Certain Aramaicisms, e.g. S- .nn (n 3 ), nru (5 13 ), axp (io 14 ), and the frequent 
use of the long form OJN, are commonly cited in support of Hosea s northern 
origin ; but too great stress may not be laid upon these ; cf. Kautzsch s Aramais- 
men in A. T., which recognizes no Aramaic words in Hosea. 


well the difference between a visitor and a resident ; (</) the great 
historical significance of the book of Hosea is largely affected by 
the question of his citizenship in the Northern kingdom. 

2. The date and circumstances of Hosea s life and work are, 
upon the whole, quite definitely settled. While the superscription 
i 1 (pp. 203 f.) is from a later date, it is in part consistent with the 
facts. Hosea sustains to the fall of the Northern kingdom the 
same relation which Jeremiah sustained a century and a half later 
to that of the Southern kingdom. 

(1) Can we, however, determine how early he began his work? 
or how late he continued to prophesy ? 

The following indications of date may be considered : (a) That he was 
preaching in 743 B.C. is certain in view of the threat concerning Jezreel (i 4 ), 
which must have been uttered before the fall of Jehu s house, that is, before 
the death of Jeroboam II.; for Zechariah s reign was very short, and imme 
diately thereupon came the period of anarchy. If i 4 was uttered in 743, the 
prophet s marriage and the birth of his oldest son must be understood to have 
preceded. (On the date of the writing of chaps. 1-3, v. 19.) (<$) That he 
lived in the midst of the period of anarchy which followed the death of 
Jeroboam II. (i.e. 743-736 B.C.) seems to be shown by the utterance found 
in 7" (perhaps also 7 3ff - 8 4 ), which reflects the condition of things in this 
period.* (c) The lack of allusion of any kind to the Syro-Ephraimitish war 
of Pekah and Rezin against Judah (Is. 7, 2 K. 1587.38) WO uld indicate that 
Hosea was not in active service at that time (734-733 B.C.), for one cannot 
imagine silence on his part with reference to events of such importance, f 
(af) Still further, Gilead in Hosea s day was still a part of Northern Israel (5 1 6 8 
I2 11 ); but in 734-733 B.C. Gilead and Naphtali passed under the yoke of 
Tiglathpileser. J 

The certain dates, then, are 743 B.C. and 734 B.C. How much 
earlier than 743 Hosea may have preached cannot be determined. 

(2) The historical events of the period just indicated (cf. 
2 K. 15) fit in admirably with the descriptions of Hosea s times 
found in his addresses. (a) In the earlier part, the times are 

* Zechariah, son of Jeroboam II., is assassinated within six months by Shallum, 
son of Jabesh, who, in turn, is killed after a month by Menahem, son of Gadi. 
He reigns about six years, paying tribute to Assyria for his protection. His son 
Pekahiah, after a reign of about two years, is assassinated by Pekah, son of Rema- 
liah (736 B.C.). f So Now., Marti, et al. 

\ On the impossibility of treating io 14 as an indication of date, thus bringing 
Hosea s work down as late perhaps as 725 B.C., v. discussion in loc. 


represented as prosperous, just as in the days of Amos ; evidences 
of wealth and ease are seen on every hand, and punishment is 
still in the future (2**- 9ff> ) ; () a little later the situation is greatly 
changed ; lawlessness is prevalent (4 2 5 1 y 1 ), the panic-stricken 
rulers are vacillating between Assyria and Egypt (5 13 7 11 I2 1 ), 
political dissolution has already begun (7 S 8 ), the povverlessness 
of the kings is generally recognized (io 3 13), the religious and 
political leaders are the worst violators of the laws (4 8f> 5 1 g 15 ), 
conspiracies and revolution are rife (5 13 7 11 io 6 I2 1 ), and anarchy 

(c) While the situations described by Amos and Hosea have 
much in common, there is also much that is different. Hosea 
actually sees the chaos and confusion, the decay, of which he 
preaches. Nor are the evils of the times, as seen by him, limited 
to those of the ruling classes (cf. 4 1 * 8 f - n 14 9 15 ), as for the most 
part in Amos. Moreover, Hosea seems to be himself a part of 
the situation, in a sense in which Amos, not being a resident of 
Israel, could not have been. He did not see so widely, but he saw 
more deeply. 

3. Concerning Hosea s occupation and social standing, we are 
able only to draw inferences of a more or less uncertain character. 
(a) Was he a member of the prophetic society? Nothing is to 
be found which would point in this direction.* (b) Was he a 
priest, and for this reason was he enabled to speak against the 
evil practices of his class as no one else could have done?| This 
is an interesting conjecture, with perhaps as little evidence in its 
favor as against it. His intimacy with life of every kind, in nature 
and among men, those of the country as well as those of the city, 
does not oppose this view. (Y) His acquaintance with life in 
general, and especially with that of the priests, taken in connec 
tion with his familiarity with the plans of both political parties, 
and his intimate knowledge of his country s history (pp. cliii, cliv), 
may reasonably warrant us in the opinion that he occupied a 
" distinguished position " as a citizen in his native land. 

4. Hosea s call and preparation constitute a tragedy in domestic 

* WRS. Proph. 156. 

t So Duhm, Theol. 130 f. ; cf. Sta. G VI. I. 577 f. ; Marti, p. a. 


life, and give us even a deeper insight into his career and pro- 
piietic work than we could obtain concerning Amos from the data 
in his book.* It is important, however, not to make use of later 
material in forming this estimate. We are to put aside, without 
hesitation, i 7 i 10 -2 1 2 2 - 4 - 6 - 7 - 10 - 1 *- 16 - 18 - 23 3 5 . This leaves us (v. pp. 
205 ff.) the story of Comer s harlotry (i 2 " 6 - 8 *" ), the story, continued, 
of her purchase as a slave, and her retention "many days," 3 1 "*. 
While 2 2.c.<*. 3 .5.8f.iif.i3.i7 are from the p r0 phet s own hand, they 
furnish us light upon his life only as this may be reflected in his 
own interpretation of that life in connection with Yahweh and 

1 i ) The story is this : He marries a woman who, afterward, 
proves unfaithful to him. At the birth of the first son (whose 
father is another than Hosea, although the latter is as yet ignorant 
of his wife s infidelity), Hosea calls him Jezreel (p. 211), a name 
of symbolical character (cf. the names of Isaiah s children). 
When the next child, a daughter, comes (also in sin), Hosea, now 
cognizant of his wife s unfaithfulness, names the child No-love. 
Still another son is born, who is called by Hosea Not-my-Kin. 
The woman, it would seem, now leaves home and falls into the 
hands of some man whose slave-concubine she becomes. But 
Hosea, who has loved her from the beginning and in spite of all 
her shame, purchases her at the price of a slave. The relation 
ship of wife, however, is not reestablished ; how could it be? She 
is placed where she will, in discipline, be shut off from inter 
course with men, even from the legitimate intercourse with her 
husband. This period of seclusion will last " many days." How 
long? No indication is given. 

(2) It is to be especially noticed that (a) the conclusion of the story is not 
given us. We do not know whether in the end she was finally restored to 
full companionship. () While according to Israelitish law and custom the 
wife was a part of the possessions or property of the husband, and the mar 
riage relation was based upon this idea, in Hosea s case the relationship was 
one of love, so strong that it forced him to do unheard-of things, (c) The 
period required for these transactions must have covered six or seven years. 
(d) The "tragic isolation" of Hosea through all these years is clearly evi- 

* On the various views entertained of the transaction in the first chapter and 
the literature of the same, v. pp. 204 ff. 



dent. (<?) The feeling which suggests the naming of the first child is widely 
different from that connected with the naming of the second and third 

(3) The truth of these representations concerning the domestic life of 
Hosea rests partly upon the general interpretation of the narrative which is 
adopted, and partly upon our acceptance of 3 1 " 4 as belonging to the original 
narrative, (a) Concerning the general interpretation and the objections to 
it, v. pp. 208-210. But these objections are largely imaginary; for it is pure 
assumption that a call to prophesy may come only in a vision, and that con 
sequently this must be a vision. The years required for all these events need 
not have exceeded six or seven (v.s.~), leaving abundant time for prophetic ac 
tivity. The fundamental point to be noted is that the principal contribution 
of the domestic experience was not the message concerning the destruction of 
Israel, but that concerning the great love of Yahweh in spite of faithlessness. 
It is just as easy to suppose that the prophet kept Gomer in his house after be 
coming cognizant of her infidelity, as to suppose that he imagined himself so 
doing. The fact that Comer s infidelity did not develop until after the mar 
riage is not ignored in the text, but plainly indicated in the use of the phrase 
-wife of "whoredoms (i 2a ) rather than njr (p. 207). The usage of speech, as well 
as the psychological conception involved in the command of Yahweh to marry 
a woman, who, as Yahweh knows, will break her marriage vows, is to be 
compared with representations concerning the hardening of Pharaoh s heart 
(Ex. lo 1 ii 10 I4 4 ), and the commission to Isaiah (6 9f -), these being really not 
commands, but events which in the light of later history are so interpreted. 
Still further, it was not the purpose of the marriage to teach that Yahweh 
was Israel s husband, nor is it so to be understood ; it was rather to teach the 
wonderful love on the part of one who was released from all obligations of 
nature or contract. Moreover, we may well understand that this experience, 
which was primarily a revelation to Hosea, also served in the prophet s work 
as a means of communicating to the people the thought which it first con 
veyed to the prophet himself. (//) In opposition to the view that 3 1 " 4 is from 
a later hand and to be treated wholly as allegory, I would urge (in addition 
to what has been said, p. 217) that the change in conception from the land 
as Yahweh s bride (i 2 and chap. 2) to the sons of Israel is only a rhetorical 
effort toward personification and individualization, common enough and thor 
oughly Hebraic. The phrase other Gods (3 1 ) refers to the Baalim (p. 218), 
whose existence Hosea, as well as Amos, certainly recognized (p. cxlviii f.), 
whatever may have been his feeling toward the images of Yahweh. It is 
unquestionable that the later utterances of Hosea are permeated through and 
through with the idea of Yahweh s love (p. cxlix), notwithstanding the large 
place occupied also by the opposite conception, viz. Yahweh s righteous indig 
nation. There is really nothing tangible that has been offered by any one to 
prove the later date of chap. 3. 

(4) The consideration of this domestic experience as the basis of the 
prophet s call or of his preparation for his message belongs properly under 


the topic of his message (v.i.} ; but in this connection two things may be 
mentioned : (a) The narrative of this experience, written some time after 
ward, shows, as do the similar cases of Isaiah (chap. 6) and Jeremiah (chap, i), 
that the prophet has interpreted into the narrative much of his later ex 
perience. In other words, the logical order was the experience, the great 
truth which it suggested, the narration of the experience in the light of 
this truth. (<) This is exactly analogous to the case of Amos; for while the 
one heard the voice of God in the rising Assyrian situation, which itself was 
the occasion of both the form and the content of his visions, the other heard it 
in the ruin of his home. It was in neither case merely a vision, but rather a 
psychological experience extending over a considerable period. 

(5) The basis of the prophet s own interpretation of his experience was 
found in that most common Semitic conception that the national deity was 
the husband of the land ; but he puts an entirely new thought into the old 
form of the conception (y.i.}. Love, as such, was not a necessary accom 
paniment of marriage in the olden times. Here the entire emphasis is placed 
upon this phase of the marriage experience. 

5. If one can imagine a character almost the opposite of that 
of Amos, he will have pictured Hosea to himself, (i) This picture, 
however, would be misleading if Hosea were thought of as weak. 
In this particular, as in all others, he was not inferior to Amos ; 
but his strength was of another kind. It was that of endurance 
under incalculable agony ; and also of persistence against the com 
bined forces of the leaders of his times. (2) His character was as 
complex as that of Amos was simple. There is manifestation every 
where of contending and conflicting feelings ; of tenderness side 
by side with indignation, of love and hate commingled ; of leniency 
passing swiftly into severity and the reverse, and of hope for the 
future actually turning before the gaze into an almost absolute 
despair. " The swift transition, the fragmentary, unbalanced utter 
ance, the half-developed allusions, that make his prophecy so 
difficult to the commentator, express the agony of this inward 
conflict." * (3) This means a nature strongly emotional. So 
true is this of Hosea (cf. the strikingly parallel case of Jeremiah) 
that not infrequently he seems to lose his self-control, and to 
become subject to these same emotions. (4) One side of this 
emotional nature is seen in his affectionate character, of which 
the entire family story is an expression. The depth of his affec- 

* WRS, Proph. 157. 


tion, the gentleness which characterized it, and, likewise, the 
passion, of which a glimpse is now and then obtained, all point to 
a personality unique in Old Testament history. (5) Still another 
phase, closely associated with the emotional, is his strongly 
marked religious temperament, in contrast with the ethical, as 
it is seen in Amos. " Amos is the stern moralist ; Hosea is the 
man of religious affection. Amos sees the righteous will of Yah- 
weh pronouncing and executing judgment upon Israel; Hosea 
has a vision of the loving heart of Yahweh grieving over his erring 
children."* (6) But Hosea was not illogical, as he has so fre 
quently been represented. His ability, notwithstanding conflicting 
feelings, to give expression to a system of theology which was to 
serve henceforth as the basis of all Israelitish thought, is a factor 
worthy of consideration in any estimate of his character. He was, 
in a strange and true sense, a typical Israelite, and his thought, as 
time shows, was the thought which Israel would accept. This 
must have come about, at least in part, because his character was 
fundamentally the Israelitish character, viz. strong, complex, 
emotional, religious. 


Hosea s message is hardly less important than that of Amos. 
The special interest lies in three facts, viz. : ,(i) the personal 
element which pervades it throughout, for one feels that, after 
all, the message is not so much a part of the political situa 
tion, nor, indeed, of the religious, as the man himself; (2) the 
supplementary relation which it sustains to that of Amos, both 
together giving the two sides of one great conception ; (3) the 
fact that in connection with the delivery of this message the 
end of Northern Israel is rapidly approaching, for within a dozen 
years all will be over. 

i. The general thought of Hosea s message is summed up 
briefly in connection with a very few propositions : (a) Israel is 
wicked through and through, and her condition morally is that of 
rottenness, (fr) Israel is politically doomed, the last stages of 
decay having now been reached, (c) Yahweh is Israel s father, 

* H. P. Smith, O. T, Hist. 221. 


with all a father s love and interest ; he is Israel s husband, with 
all a husband s love and devotion, (d} Israel fails to comprehend 
Yahweh ; has a totally wrong conception of him ; in short, Israel 
does not know Yahweh. (e) Israel deceives herself in her acts 
of repentance ; but there is a repentance which consists in turning 
back to Yahweh.* (/) Israel s present attitude toward Yahweh s 
love means, in the end, her total destruction. 

2. The question of insertions sustains even a closer relation to the message 
of Hosea than in the case of Amos. (For the passages which a scientific 
criticism denies to the original utterance, v.i. p. clx, and for the considerations 
which have led to the opinion thus expressed, v. each passage in loc., as 
well as p. clix.) There is involved in this, especially, the question whether to 
Hosea or to later writers we shall ascribe the strongly expressed teaching of 
Israel s restoration, which is found in the book as it is now constituted. The 
most careful consideration seems to show that this thought is non-Hoseanic 
(p. clix). 

3. Again it may be said : Hosea followed Amos. But what did 
that signify ? What did Amos do that Hosea need not do again ? 
What did Amos leave undone, which Hosea must now do ? | Amos 
aroused the conscience of Israel to a perception of the real state 
of affairs ; but, aside from the most general injunction, Seek Yahweh 
and ye shall live (Am. 5*), he refers neither to a restoration (9 12 " 15 
being late) nor to any plan for securing such a restoration. That 
Yahweh loved his people, and had manifested this love on many 
occasions of great national importance, was evident. This love 
was indeed the basis in some measure of the ethical develop 
ment thus far wrought out. But although this love was already 
recognized, there remained, in view of the emphasis which Amos 
lays on universal law, another problem to be solved, viz., " to 
prove in God so great and new a mercy as was capable of 
matching that law," J in other words, it is necessary for a prophet 
" to arise with as keen a conscience of law as Amos himself, and 
yet affirm that love was greater still ; to admit that Israel was 
doomed, and yet " (not " promise their redemption," but) show 
that redemption, i.e. repentance, is possible; and that the basis 

* A later writer (12^) includes also the maintaining of true love and justice, and 
the waiting continually on God. t GAS. I. 227 ff. J GAS. I. 229. 


of this redemption is as fundamental as is the basis of law itself, 
This was what Hosea had to do ; and in doing it he is marking 
out the lines (v.s.) of all subsequent prophecy. 3 1 " 4 (v. 5 being late) 
clearly involves (a) Israel s continued relationship with Yahweh, 
(fr) her days of punishment for the sake of discipline, (c) her 
acquisition of a new spirit and her return or redemption ; but, 
while (a) and (fr) are definitely expressed, (c) is only implied. This 
was left so, because the means and method were outside of Hosea s 
vision ; not so, however, the fact and its philosophy. 

4. The circumstances of Hosea s earlier life were practically 
the same as those under which Amos worked. But in the later 
period of his ministry everything had changed (v.s.). We are 
not to suppose, however, that the popular feeling (pp. ex ff.) on 
fundamental questions had been greatly altered. Hosea takes 
cognizance of certain phases of this opinion which Amos seems 
not to have noticed, e.g. image-worship, the platforms of the two 
great political parties, the national feeling as to the past history 
of the nation. These and other subjects constituting the popular 
usage or opinion which Hosea opposed will be taken up briefly in 
connection with the statement of his convictions (zu.). 

5. Hosea, when compared with Amos, is found to deal very 
differently with the same question. While Amos was broader, 
Hosea goes deeper; Amos is controlled solely by the ethical 
spirit, Hosea by the religious spirit. The more important 
details are the following : 

(i) The god of Hosea was omnipotent as truly as was that of 
Amos ; but this idea of power occupies no such place in Hosea s 
thought as in that of Amos. 

(#) Yahweh s power over nature is seen in the fact that not Baal, but Yahweh, 
had been the giver of Israel s gifts (2 8 ), in the affliction which the land and 
the beasts thereof are soon to suffer (4 3 9 2 ), as well as in the control of Sheol 
itself (i3 14 ). In history his hand has wrought many wonderful things which 
have occurred in Israel s own life as a nation {e.g. the deliverance from Egypt, 
ill I2 9 i3 4 - 5 ; tender guidance in their early history, n 3 - 4 ; the sending of 
prophets, I2 10 ); but Hosea exhibits no interest in the work of Yahweh 
outside of Israel. 

(b) Was Hosea more truly a monotheist than was Amos? It 
cannot be said that Hosea has a narrower conception of the 


deity ; but for him, as for his predecessor, Yahweh is a national 
god (3 4 9 3 i3 4 ), especially concerned with a single nation. His 
representation of this god, now as the light (6 5 ), again as a lion 
(5 14 T 3 7 )> or a gnawing worm (5 12 ), vividly expresses the writer s 
conception of the divine attitude and power. The anthropomor 
phism is strong and startling. Yahweh is always represented as 
speaking, there being only a single case in chaps. 4-14 of an in 
troductory formula (4 1 ). The representations of love on Yahweh s 
part (especially those of the father and the husband), and those 
also of indignation and threatened destruction (5 mi4f - i2 14 13) 
bespeak a poetic nature, but at the same time present ideas of the 
deity of a peculiarly fundamental character (v.s.). 

(c) The image-worship of these times, passed over in silence 
by Elijah, Elisha, and Amos (p. cxvi), is the subject of " incessant 
polemic " on the part of Hosea (8 5> 6 \ cf. i K. 1 2 28 Ex. 3 2 4 - 5 ). This 
idea, not altogether new (cf. the decalogues, pp. Iviii ff.), plays a 
large part in Hosea s conception. Hosea, looking deeper than 
those who preceded, sees in the traditional Yahweh-worship of 
his times what he believes to be the worship of other gods (3 1 ; v.s.), 
Yahweh regards it as sinful to make idols or to worship them (i3 2 ), 
and all this applies to the calf- worship of Hosea s times. Why 
was it Hosea rather than Amos who took this position? Because, 
as W. Robertson Smith has suggested,* while Amos looked at the 
national practices from the ethical point of view and that of the 
administration of justice, Hosea thought of them rather as they 
affected the personal relation of the nation to Yahweh himself. 
Israel, in idol-worship, shows no true conception of the love due 
Yahweh. She is, in fact, an adulteress. The worship given the 
calves is morally false, and therefore inadequate and injurious (zu.). 

(2) The fundamental idea of Hosea is his conception of Yahweh 
as a god of love (3 1 1 1 1 " 4 ). The word "ton love, kindness, " leal love " 
(never found in Amos), represents an act or feeling of dutiful or 
loyal affection (6 4 6 io 12 ). There is a relationship (6 7 ) between 
Yahweh and Israel which calls upon both to exercise this feeling 
toward each other. The obligation is not merely a legal one ; it 
is likewise moral. We may not overlook the fact that, although 

* Proph. 176 fc 


this relationship is in one sense multiform (viz. grace on the part 
of Yahweh to Israel, piety on the part of Israel to Yahweh, and love 
[equivalent to humanity] on the part of one Israelite to another), 
this multiformity was lost in the unity of the conception. Yahweh 
is not only the head of a state demanding justice, he is the head 
(i.e. the father) of a family, for which he has a deep and never 
ending love. This love is the basis and the principal factor of 
religion. Because Yahweh loves Israel, Israel should be true to 
him, i.e. moral.* 

(3) His most bitter complaint against his people is that they do 
not know Yahweh (2* 4*- 6> 5* 6 6 8 2 ; cf. in loc.).-\ In brief, we are 
to take know as meaning not only knowledge, but also the practical 
application which knowledge calls for. It is understanding, or 
comprehension, but more ; for to know God is to feel the force 
of the deity and to act accordingly, i.e. to have the feeling (of 
love, or duty, or whatever else) which a knowledge of God implies. 
To come to know God, then, means to come into a new state of 
mind. Now, (a) Hosea is not asking Israel to accept knowledge 
which the nation once possessed, but has lost; it is something 
really new in religion which he is holding out to them, although 
in i3 6 this ignorance is rhetorically styled forgetfulness ; more 
over, (&) he clearly indicates the obstacles in the way of their 
reaching up to this new knowledge, viz. their evil life (4 1 ff> ) and 
the failure of the religious leaders, priests and prophets, to do 
their duty (4 6ff - 5 lff- ) ; but (c) if these difficulties should be removed, 
how might Israel gain this true knowledge of Yahweh ? { Through 
the many deeds in which Yahweh has made manifestations of 
himself in history (#.j.) ; through the prosperity and abundance 
with which she has been blessed (2 8 ) ; and, still further, through 
the laws or teachings which have already taken formal shape (4 6 ) ; 
but, so hardened and insensible has Israel become to these and 
all similar influences, that Yahweh will be compelled to come 
upon them in violence and with disaster, in order to make im 
pression on their minds. This is the doom of the immediate 
future (i3 16 ). 

* Cf. WRS. Proph. 160 ff. ; GAS. I. 346 ff. ; Now. 9 f. ; Marti, 5 f. 
t An admirable discussion of the full meaning of know, as it is here used, will 
be found in GAS. I. 320 ff. + Cf. GAS. I. 326 f. 


(4) While the exact relation of Yahweh to Israel,* represented 
under the various figures described above, is that of a covenant 
(6 7 ), or a marriage (2 2ff - 3 lff -), or that of father and son (n lff -), 
what does Hosea understand his relation to be to the outside 
nations? To this question no definite answer can be given. As 
has been noted, Hosea concerns himself little with the world 
outside. He realizes that there is such a world ; he teaches that 
Egypt and Assyria will be used in the chastisement of Israel ; he 
gives, therefore, a place of superiority to Yahweh over the nations 
and over their gods. Further than this he does not go. This is 
in accord with the general fact that Hosea, unlike Amos, is not 
interested in state or nation history. He thinks of Israel, not as 
a state, but as a family ; not so much as a government, but as an 
individual, either child or wife. It is everywhere the personal 
attitude that is made most of. 

(5) The substance of Hosea s message on the cultus (4 13f- 6 6 8 11 13 , 
10 throughout, i3 1 ) is the same as that of Amos (p. cxix), and need 
not be dwelt upon.f It is only to be noted, as above, that because 
so much emphasis is placed upon the personal element, the faith 
lessness of Israel in the matter of acts of worship appears all the 
greater. The physical and sensual character of the cultus, taken 
over from the Canaanitish worship of the Baalim, was wholly foreign 
and repugnant to Hosea s conception of the truly spiritual relation 
of Yahweh to his people. His opposition to the calf-worship in 
particular was in large part due to its carnal tendencies. These 
things were fundamentally antagonistic to the new conception of 
Yahweh for which Hosea stood ; hence it is that the denunciation 
of the cultus occupies a much larger place in the utterances of 
Hosea than in those of Amos. 

(6) The immorality of Israel is pictured even more vividly by 
Hosea than by Amos. The situation was the darkest possible 
(v.s.) ; for the land is full of " harlotry " and " adultery." The 
fact that this general immorality is in part due to the Canaanitish 
influence makes the prophet s case all the stronger from his point 
of view. His lamentation is frequently and strongly expressed 

* Cf. WRS. Proph. 161, 162. 

tCf. GAS. I. 286 ff.; WRS. Proph. 175 f. ; HPS. O. T. Hist. 222; Sm. Rel. 
207 f. ; Duhm, Theol. 128 f. 


(4 8 5 L1 - 1S 6 4 ii 12 ). A heinous thing is the fact that the leaders, 
particularly the priests, encourage this immorality for the gain 
which they derive from it (cf. 4 6 ). The sanctuaries, he declares, 
are dens of thieves ; while the priests are the actual leaders in 
crime (6 9 ). Against all this Hosea (a) utters scathing rebuke, 
(b) makes earnest effort to stir the public conscience, and (<r) 
preaches *iDn, which means just as truly love to man, as love of 
God or love to God. The strange thing is that he finds in religion 
itself the responsibility for the situation. 

(7) The political situation* at home and abroad is treated in 
much detail. Hosea is convinced (a) that Israel s home policy 
from the beginning has been wrong. Israel s kings, as distin 
guished from those of Judah (8 4 ), are not of divine appointment. 
In other words, the schism is condemned, and while he does not 
" yearn for the healing of the schism by a Davidic king " (Cheyne),t 
he sees no future for a kingdom whose religion is represented by 
calves (8 5 - 6 ). Moreover, while 8 4 may refer to the original schism, 
it is general enough to include the kings who come one after another 
in his own day. His attack upon the anarchy and confusion of 
his day (cf. 8 4 " 13 ) is most violent (io 3ff - 7 1 7 8 7ff -). He declares 
that society is a " cake not turned " (7), i.e. half raw, half baked 
to a cinder ; j that Israel has no leaders worthy of the name ; that 
the strength of the people is worn out ; that they are actually held 
in contempt by the outside nations. This was the natural outcome 
of (b} their foreign policy, which was one of vacillation between 
Egypt and Assyria, one of half-hearted substitution of other 
gods for Yahweh, the result of which is seen in the actual deposi 
tion of their kings and the appointment of Assyrian vicegerents on 
the Israelitish throne. But another political party will not accept 
Assyrian supremacy and turns to Egypt. Thus they are divided 
among themselves ; and, whatever unity might have gained, all is 
lost in this conflict of interests. 

* GAS. I. 269-289; Che. 25 f. ; WRS. Proph. 183 f. ; HPS. O. T. Hist. 224 f. ; 
We. Prol. 417. 

t 3 5 is not from Hosea. + GAS. 

\ Menahem held his throne as a vassal of Assyria (2 K. 1517-20 ; Tiglathpileser s 
Annals, 1. 150), while Hoshea seems to have been an Assyrian appointee (Tig 
lathpileser s small Inscription, col. I., Is. 15 ff.; cf. KAT? 264 f.). 


(8) Hosea s mind dwells minutely on Israel s past history, 
which he interprets in the light of the situation of his own days.* 
This interpretation was carried forward, and became the basis of 
all later treatment of the past. This fact is one of the most sig 
nificant in connection with Hosea s career ; and in the influence 
thus exerted he proved himself, perhaps, the greatest of Israel s 
prophets. We have four great interpretations of Israel s early 
history, that of JE, which, after all, is hardly an interpretation in 
the sense in which we now use that term ; that of Hosea ; and, after 
him, that of the Deuteronomist and that of the priestly guild. Just as 
Israel is about to die, " Hosea sees the tenderness and the romance 
of the early history." f Did Yahweh select Egypt or Assyria or 
Phoenicia, all great nations? No; but Israel (n 1 ). Yet her 
whole career from the " days of Gibeah " has been one of con 
spiracy and bloodshed (i 4 5 13 ^ io 9 ) and rebellion against 
Yahweh (7 l3ff< ). The purity of the early days has been lost ( 9 10 ). 
Yea, from the very beginning the tendency to evil manifested 
itself (i2 3a ) ; while Yahweh has never ceased sending his mes 
sengers with the call to repentance (i2 9f- ). The prophet s point 
of view is clear ; how can Israel, after the great favors shown her, 
exhibit to Yahweh such ingratitude ? 

(9) Israel s immediate future is one of doom. Hosea has no 
bright message, for I4 1 8 is surely late, j If we could assure our 
selves that such passages as I 10 _ 2 1 - 14 - 16 - 18 - 23 ^ n 10f - were genuine, 
the case would be entirely different. Hosea saw more clearly 
than did Amos ; and his hope for the future of Israel, based upon 
the divine love, was more tangible and definite ; but he promised 
nothing. He contributed a conception of Yahweh which made 
such a future not only possible, but, indeed, probable ; whether he 
supposed Northern Israel might still enjoy the divine favor is a 
question, yet it is just as questionable whether he transferred the 
hope to Judah. He taught the possibility of repentance and the 
true nature of repentance if it would be availing (2 2 5 4 6 6 io 12 ) ; 
but would Israel, accustomed to a fitful repentance, ever enjoy 
the true experience ? Hosea scarcely expected Israel s deliver- 

* WRS. Proph. 183 ff. f GAS. 1 . 290. 

1 Cf. Meinhold s attempt to separate the work of Hosea into two periods, in the 
latter of which predictions of exile and return may be found, e.g. n8-n 141-8. 


ance from Assyria s hand. It was too late. There was a pos 
sibility, but it was only a possibility. Israel would not lift herself 
from the depths of degradation into which she had fallen. The 
future is altogether dark.* While Yahweh s heart was filled with 
love, it nevertheless burns now with indignation ; so let the worst 
come ! " Shall I deliver them from the hand of Sheol ? Shall I re 
deem them from death ? Where are (i.e. come with) thy plagues, 
O death ? Where (i.e. come with) thy destruction, O Sheol ? 
Repentance is hid from my eyes" (13"). 

6. Hosea was more intimately acquainted with the nation s 
past than was Amos. At all events he makes larger use of it. 
On what authority did he depend ? The documents J and E 
were already in existence ( 8, 9), and Hosea must be supposed 
to have known them. 8 12 presupposes his acquaintance with 
written laws such as the Decalogue and the Book of the Covenant, 
while the allusions in 9 106 i2 3a might well be based upon the nar 
ratives of J and E, though the possibility of oral tradition as the 
source is not excluded here,| and is probably to be accepted 
in the case of 8 13 9 al0a io 9 n 1 - 5 i3 4t> . That he was in possession 
of information not contained in any documents now existing is clear 
from n 8 , and his independence of judgment concerning the past 
appears in i 4 io 5 . 

7. The character of Hosea s message has already been indi 
cated in the character of the man himself. Whatever one was, 
that, also, was the other. Was the man a typical Israelite ? The 
message, as we have seen, was likewise a truly national expres 
sion, since its content is the basis of all succeeding Israelitish 
thought. If Amos s message was universal, Hosea s was more 
narrowly national ; if Amos s was ethical, Hosea s was religious. 
There is no lack of the tender and the spiritual element. " The 
two men are types of a contrast which runs through the whole 
history of religious thought and life down to our own days. The 
religious world has always been divided into men who look at the 
questions of faith from the standpoint of universal ethics, and men 
by whom moral truths are habitually approached from a personal 

* Cf. WRS. and Marti, EB. 2125 f. 

f Cf. Dr. LOTf> 123; Carpenter and Battersby, Hex. i. 107. 


sense of the grace of God. Too frequently this diversity of stand 
point has led to an antagonism of parties in the church. Men 
of the type of Amos are condemned as rationalists and cold 
moderates ; or, on the other hand, the school of Hosea are looked 
upon as enthusiasts and impractical mystics. But Yahweh chose 
his prophets from men of both types, and preached the same 
lesson to Israel through both." * 


In an examination of Hosea s ministry let us prepare ourselves 
for something as different as possible from that of Amos. It will 
be the ministry of a poet, not a philosopher ; of a man dealing 
with his own home and country, not a foreigner ; of a man living 
and working largely in privacy, rather than in connection with 
rulers ; of a mystic, not a moralist. 

i. His call, together with the message which he was to preach, 
came not in a vision, but in an experience, one of the saddest 
known in life.f As in most cases, long years were occupied in 
the communication of the truth which he was ultimately to preach. 
The experience was historical and psychological : historical in the 
sense that it had to do with external facts ; psychological in that 
it was more largely an operation of mind or soul, since both 
call and message were in reality a spiritualizing of an ordinary 
event, and an old tradition. We cannot be certain that Hosea 
did not have a vision of the ecstatic order ; but there is no testi 
mony which favors this, and all the facts are explicable without it. 

* WRS. Prop A. 163 f. 

f To the suggestion (cf. A. B. Davidson in DB.} that Hosea was already a 
prophet when the first child was born (as indicated by the name Jezreel) , and that 
at this time he had no knowledge of his wife s infidelity, and that consequently the 
experience had nothing to do with the call, it may be replied: (i) Unquestionably 
the prophet s knowledge of Israel s faithlessness and of Yahweh s goodness was a 
matter of historical observation ; likewise, the relationship of Yahweh as husband 
was an old Semitic idea; but (2) Hosea s prophetic mission (including his call) 
was not merely to foretell a coming disaster (Amos had done this) ; it was much 
more than this, viz. to picture Israel s wicked ingratitude over against the love of 
Yahweh, which had been manifested through centuries in spite of this ingratitude ; 
(3) the call to preach this message was one which only years of experience and 
reflection made certain and definite. 


As the crushing force of the home tragedy begins to touch this 
man, possessed of a deeply emotional and religious nature, he 
feels, in the very touch, a voice saying, " This experience of your 
married life is a reflection of Yahweh s experience with Israel " ; 
and the voice that speaks is Yahweh s voice. It did not come 
in a single day, nor in a year ; but extended itself over many 
years, becoming more and more distinct until he no longer 
doubted its tone or its truth. 

2. He seems to have presented his message in the ordinary 
way. Three or four details in the method employed may be 
noted : (i) He gives his children symbolical names, each of 
which conveys (to all who hear it) a significant teaching. In this 
method, as in many other points, Isaiah followed closely in his 

(2) He makes public recital of his disgrace and sorrow, not for 
the sake of sympathy nor with sensational motive, but because in 
no other way could he present his message. He thus employs 
a story (personal to be sure) through which to teach his fellow- 
countrymen. The unique thing is not the event itself, which is 
too usual, nor the story of the event, which in another s mouth 
would have been ordinary scandal ; but the telling of it by him 
who was the victim of the situation described. That this pro 
duced a profound impression is beyond any question, and this, we 
may well suppose, was the motive of the prophet in narrating it. 
Perhaps he wishes to explain just how he came into possession of 
the message (v.s.) ; but this, after all, was only to make the mes 
sage itself more definite and more authoritative. 

(3) He preaches, as did Amos, discourses (in all thirteen) which 
were intended to persuade the people to accept the new point of 
view which he, at bitter cost, had attained. These discourses 
(zu.), though modified by later insertions, yet more greatly by 
corruption of the text, still show the evidence of passion in their 

(4) Still another method of presentation was adopted after the 
example of Amos, when the prophet committed his addresses to 
writing, and thus secured their preservation for all time (v.i.). 
The suggestion of Marti that these prophecies were never spoken 
in public, but were originally written and intended for private 


reading among the people, lays too much emphasis upon their 
present form, and, in any case, finds insufficient basis in the mere 
fact that they consist of " poems which do not give the impression 
of having been popular addresses." Poetry was the most popular 
form of address before an Oriental audience. 

3. Hosea falls in with Amos in the new policy of political 
action. He holds no office, exercises no direct control. But 
more than this, he, like Micah, lives in an atmosphere more retired 
than that of Amos or Isaiah. The latter came into direct contact 
with the royal power, while the relations of the former were, at 
least, indirect. It was, in other words, a private rather than a 
public ministry, (i) His political views (p. clii) were more defi 
nite, perhaps, than those of Amos, and they had to do more 
distinctly with home affairs. This fact, together with the un 
pleasant prominence given him by his domestic relations, and 
especially the political character of the period (pp. cxli f.), made 
his work one of peculiar difficulty. The prophet must still have 
been accorded large freedom to have been permitted to speak so 
freely in times of such political confusion. (2) Hosea s readiness 
to differ from the prophets of earlier days, in reference to political 
matters, is noteworthy. To differ from Elijah and Elisha in con 
nection with the Jehu episode was a daring thing to do, but it 
was even more remarkable that he should go back and pass an 
opposing judgment as to the division of the kingdom (zu.). His 
political ministry thus passes in review the national history of two 
centuries. Time has shown the wisdom of his position. (3) His 
attitude toward the prophetic policy of the past is no more severe 
than that which he holds toward the priests and prophets of his 
own times (9 7 ). (4) With his political attitude toward Judah is 
involved the question of the Judaistic references now generally 
assigned to a later date (p. clix). 

4. The chronological order of the various stages in the ministry 
of Hosea is not even as clear as in the case of Amos, since neither 
the structure of the book nor the external events make contribu 
tions of a very definite nature. 

(i) At the time of his marriage (750 B.C.?) he was presumably 
a young man, and, if his occupation was that of a priest (p. cxlii), 
his mind had been dwelling on sacred things for many years. At 


first hand he gained his knowledge of the evil practices of his 
fellow-priests, and their close associates, the prophets. 

(2) Within two or three years (747 B.C.) he has satisfied him 
self as to the doom of Jehu s dynasty ; this is announced in con 
nection with the birth of his son (Jezreel). He, doubtless, expected 
Israel s collapse to be contemporaneous. 

(3) Within six or seven years the tragedy of his life has been 
enacted ; the real call to preach has come ; the great message has 
been received ; Jeroboam has died, and anarchy has set in ; im 
portant announcements concerning the future have been made (in 
the symbolic names given to the three children of his wife). 

(4) During the next six or seven years (742-735 B.C.), with his 
wife put away (for he cannot now live with her, however much he 
loves her), he preaches his impassioned sermons, breathing into 
them all the warmth and all the pain of an agonizing heart. 
These are the years of revolution and vacillation, of decay ap 
proaching close to death, years without any hope, yet with a 
faith in Yahweh that is strong and steadfast. 

(5) What next ? We do not know. It is improbable that, like 
Amos, he left home and went to Judah, there to put his writings 
into form, and to include the Judaistic references which are in the 
present book.* It is probable that he was spared the worst agony 
of all, that of seeing Samaria in ruins and Israel carried captive. 
We have nothing from his lips or pen later than 735 B.C. (v.s.). 

5. The efficiency of Hosea s ministry is even more clearly per 
ceived than was that of Amos. The fact stated above (p. cliv) that 
Hosea s teaching forms the basis of subsequent Hebrew prophecy, 
the fact that these utterances produced so great an impression as 
to find preservation, the additional fact that they were so strongly 
felt as to require for their elucidation and interpretation the com 
ments and amendments of later generations, prove an efficiency 
of service and a permanency of character of the highest order. 


The corrupt state of the text of Hosea makes the study of its 
literary problems both difficult and unsatisfactory. 

* Umb., Ew. 


1. The table on p. clx exhibits a view of the book as we now 
have it, with (a) the larger divisions,* and (^) a separation of the 
original and secondary elements. 

2. The secondary passages t in the following table fall into four 
groups : (i) References in Hosea to Judah are for the most part the 
work of a Judaistic editor. The basis for this decision is found \ 
in the fact that in the great majority of cases no sufficient motive 
can be discovered to explain their Hoseanic origin, while the 
motive of the later editor is clearly evident ; besides, these pas 
sages in nearly every case contain phrases which are late, or 
interfere with the rhythmic structure. The principal cases are 
the following : i 7 , exempting Judah from the coming destruction 
(p. 213), the change of "Israel" to Judah in 510.12.13.1454 I0 ii* 
I2 3(2) . ii <^ threatening Judah with judgment (p. 291) ; 8 14 , coup 
ling Judah with Israel in transgression (p. 324) ; i2 16 (n m ), 
contrasting Judah s faithfulness with Israel s treachery (pp. 376 f.). 
While Kuenen is certainly too conservative in his treatment of the 
Judaistic passages, we cannot agree with Marti (p. 8) that Hosea 
never in a single case referred to Judah ; one can scarcely con 
ceive the possibility of such a thing. In 4 15 and 5 5 there is noth 
ing which demands a later origin. 

(2) It is impossible to reconcile with Hosea s situation and 
declarations certain passages referring to Israel s future, the so- 
called Messianic allusions. The prophet plainly represents Isra 
el s ruin as close at hand (#./.). Moreover, it is apparently an 
irretrievable disaster (i3 9 ) which is threatened. In any case 
death and Sheol are first to do their work (i3 14 ), nor is Yahweh 
a man to repent (n 9 i3 14 ). These passages, therefore, are en 
tirely inconsistent with Hosea s point of view, and directly contra - 

* There is no ground for the suggestion of Gratz (Gesck. II. 93 ff., 214 ff., 439 ff.) 
that there are two Hoseas (chs. 1-3 and 4-14) with an interval of fifty years, for the 
great changes between the times of Jeroboam II. and those which immediately 
followed are entirely sufficient to explain the differences. Cf. Kue. Einl. II. 
324, who gives a brief list of expressions common to both divisions. 

t The integrity of the Book of Hosea was first impeached by Stuck (1828), 
who regarded 9 7 ~ 9 as displaced. Redslob (1842) rejected 46-774-10; Gratz (^53) 
made chaps. 4-14 late; while Sta. GVI. I. 577, prepared the way for Co., We., 
Che., Now., and others. 

1 Cf. We. Prol. 417 ; Sta. GVI. I. 577; GAS. I. 224-226; Co. ZAW. VII. 285- 
289; on the contrary Kue. Einl. II. 322 f. 



N ro -t u-> 

. DO 

s N 

<T> r) 




















c "ts 



" iJ i 







S 2 j2 







^ ^ ^ 







^ -S 







^ 5 1 






T^ 3^ ^ 




t -i^ 

i ^ ^ 





co E2 

(/3 ^ 


-*- 1 


2 S 


Superset iptio n . 
)try of Hosea s Wife, 
lase of Gomer as a Slave 
i s Harlotry and her Puni 
1 Voices describing Israel 

r eh s Contention with Isr 
of Priests and Princes. 

. Repentance Insufficient 











1 I 

3 p3 <3 

. s Wickedness as Great i 
i s Past History one of Si 

. loved by Yahweh as his 
s Falsity and Faithlessm 

. s Destruction Absolute. 

lim condemned to Sheol 




~ U V ^ 

& i 


S K * 3 

<s 3 
>< o 


C/3 C/2 CA 

w 2n 

ft </2 




2 ^ 

O ""] 


c4 S5 






1 5 







00 O\ 

Q Q 









e S 

S 00 





-s 8 


Ss s 

i , 


2 7 

* T 



"f T ; 

2 S 


00 00 7 

(N ^ 

e c^ 

9 Q 




^ ^ 



OO O*\ ON 





diet the representations which are fundamental in his preaching ; 
nor can it be shown that they are spoken, either, to a different 
audience (viz. the faithful for their encouragement), or at a later 
time in Hosea s ministry.* Besides, they interrupt the logical 
development of the thought in particular passages (v. in loc^ 
and show a definite connection with the thought of later prophecy. 
This material is unquestionably from exilic times. 

The more important pieces are the following: 2 1 3 (i 10 -2 1 ), promising res 
toration to Yahweh s favor, great increase of population, and the reunion of 
Israel and Judah under one king (pp. 245 f.) ; 2 8 - 9 ( 6 - 7 -) describing the discipli 
nary measures adopted by Yahweh to restore Israel to her senses (p. 236) ; 
216-18(14-16)^ setting forth Yahweh s purpose to restore Israel to the purity and 
joy of her first love (p. 238) ; 2 20 25 (18-23), picturing the universal harmony and 
prosperity that will prevail when Yahweh again betroths Israel to himself 
(pp. 241, 244) ; 3 s , announcing Israel s return to Yahweh and the Messianic 
King in the days to come (pp. 216, 223); u 86 - 9o - 106 - n , giving the assurance 
that Yahweh s anger is appeased and that he will recall the exiles from Egypt 
and Assyria (p. 372); i4 2 - 9 ( 1 - fi ), containing a call to repentance followed by 
a description of the great prosperity and peace consequent upon the restoration 
to Yahweh s favor (pp. 408 f.). 

(3) A third group includes, as in the case of Amos (p. cxxxiv), 
phrases and sentences of a technical, archaeological, or historical 
character, inserted by way of expansion and explanation. 

Here belong, e.g. 4 13d , " for good is its shade"; 5 6 , " with their flocks and 
their herds"; 7*, the comparison of the princes to an oven and a baker kin 
dling the fire; 7 16c , "this their scorn"; 8 86 , "as a vessel wherein none 
delighteth"; 9 16 , "corn"; 9", "as in the days of Gibeah"; 9 10 , "in its 
first season " ; io 5 , " on account of his glory because it has gone into exile 
from him"; io 146 , "as Shalman spoiled Betharbel in the day of battle"; 
I2 14 ( 13 >, magnifying the prophetic phase of Moses s work; I3 46 7 , presenting 
Jacob in a favorable light. 

(4) The fourth group will include miscellaneous glosses and 
interpolations for which, perhaps, no special motive may be 
discovered. As examples of the kind may be cited : 8 4 , " that 
they may be cut off" ; 8 5 , " how long will they be incapable of 


punishment"; S 10 - 1 ^ 1 ; 9 8 -, "with my God " ; 9", " enmity." 
(5) Ch. i4 1() stands by itself, and is a product of the later wisdom 
period (pp. 416 f.).* 

3. The internal history of the Book of Hosea was perhaps as 
follows : 

(i) Hosea himself prepared the collection of sermons (v.s.), 
together with the introduction explaining his call to preach. In 
this case the explanation of the call comes at the beginning (rather 
than, as in Amos, after the sermons of chaps. 3-6, or in Isaiah, 
after the sermons of chaps. 2-5) either because it was only a part 
of the book and had never been preached or made public, or be 
cause it was thought necessary to a proper understanding of what 
followed. (2) The fulfilment of Hosea s threats in the fall of 
Samaria (721 B.C.) must have given great prominence to the book 
in Judah ; in any case it was known to Isaiah, who follows Hosea t 
in using the words b Sa fW (Ho. 5 11 = Is. s* 9 ), the thought of 
Ho. io 8 in the refrain of his terrible prophecy on the day of judg 
ment (Is. 2 10 - 21 ), and the phrase D -no emto (Ho. 9 15 , Is. i 23 ). 

(3) At some time, the book was worked over in a kind of Judaistic 
revision. This was not preexilic, occurring in the days of Josiah, I 
but post-exilic ; because (a) i 7 is apparently inserted with refer 
ence to the deliverance from Sennacherib, and its point of view 
presupposes the lapse of considerable time since that event, 
(b) the inclusion of Judah in 8 14 reflects the disaster of the exile. 

(4) At a later time, following Ezekiel and Deutero-Isaiah, the 
Messianic insertions (v.s.) were made which entirely changed the 
character and function of the book. (5) From time to time 
during all these periods modifications of a less important charac 
ter were incorporated ; and the book did not take its present form 
until the Greek period, since 14 was probably not a part of it 
until that time. 

4. The general structure || of the book as understood by the 

* Cf. <S s addition to 13* (p. 392). f Marti, p. io. 

J Oort, Th T., 1890, pp. 345 ff. 

\ Marti. 

|| Cf. Marti, who denies the usual division between 1-3 and 4-14 on the ground 
that (a) 1-3 are not from an earlier period than 4-14, (b) chap. 3 was not a part of 
the original book, (c) chap. 2 has more in common with 4-14 than with i and 3. 


present writer has been presented essentially above. It includes 
three or four propositions : 

(1) i 2 " 9 3 1 " 4 is a story,, briefly and simply told, of the prophet s 
own family experience, narrated in part to make known how he 
came to see the message which he was to deliver to his people. 

(2) 2*~ 7 - 10 ~ 14> 18 - 19 is the prophet s suggestion of the meaning, 
obtained in the light of his own experience, in its explanation of 
Israel s situation. 

(3) Discourses uttered from time to time, put together without 
chronological or logical relationship,* a group of thirteen, pre 
senting, under varying circumstances, the double thought of guilt 
and inevitable punishment (4 1 -i4 1 ). 

5. The external history of the Book of Hosea may be briefly 
traced, (i) On its connection with other prophetic books, v. 
pp. cxlvii f. ; and on its more direct influence on prophetic 
thought, v. p. cxlvi. (2) In the apocryphal literature, Ecclus. 
49 10 mentions the " twelve prophets," and it is quite certain that 
Hosea constituted one of the twelve. (3) Philo quotes Ho. 14 
and i4 10 , while Josephus f speaks of Isaiah and " the others which 
were twelve in number," undoubtedly referring to the existing book 
of the twelve prophets. (4) In the New Testament : Ho. 2^ is 
quoted in Rom. g 25 *- (where the prophet is mentioned by name) ; 
6 6 in Mat. 9 13 1 2 7 ; io 8 in Luke 23 30 , Rev. 6 16 ; 1 1 1 in Mat. 2 15 ; and 
i3 14 in i Cor. i5 55 . (5) Its place in the Canon at the head of the 
Book of the Twelve is probably due to its comparatively large vol 
ume. J Its right to a place in the Canon has never been questioned. 

* GAS. I. 222 (following Hi. and Kue. Rinl. II. 319) exaggerates this charac 
teristic when he says, " It is impossible to separate the section, long as it is, into 
subsections, or into oracles, strophes, or periods." Cf. Ew. s division (for detailed 
refutation v. Sim. 30 ff.) into three parts, (a) 4-6 11 , God s arraignment of Israel ; 
(> ) 6 1 1 6 ~9 9 , Israel s punishment; (c) 9 10 -I4 10 , review of early history, with words of 
warning and comfort. Also Dr. s arrangement, (a) 4-8, dealing with Israel s guilt ; 
(b) 9-n 11 , threatening punishment; (c] H 12 -i4 10 , a fusion of the two preceding 
thoughts with a promise of hope. f Ant. X. 2, 2. 

% Cf. the Babylonian Gemara, Baba Bathra,io\. 14 -15 a: "The order of the 
prophetical books is Jos., Ju., Sa., Ki., Je., Ez., Is., the Twelve. Inasmuch as Hosea 
was the first, as it is written, the beginning of the word of the Lord by Hosea 
(Ho. i 2 ), we should expect the book of Hosea to occupy the first place, at least of 
the four contemporary prophets, Ho., Is., Am., Mi. But because his prophecy is 
written together with those of the latest prophets, Hg., Zc., and Mai., he is counted 
with them" (Wildeboer s translation in Origin of the Canon of the O. T., p. 13). 



1. The analogy of other ancient literature should have sug 
gested long ago the probability that Israel s early prophetic litera 
ture was poetry, and that its particular form was one adapted 
to its peculiar purpose and function. Its efficiency was deter 
mined in no small measure by its capability of transmission. If 
we keep in mind not only the character of early literary effort 
among other nations,* but also the wonderful series of poetical 
pieces in the O. T., beginning with Deborah s song (Ju. 5), we may 
not doubt that the old oracle-form would be followed by some 
thing of the same kind, but higher in art, as well as in thought. 
One will expect a much larger freedom in form in pieces which 
were spoken rather than sung, and likewise a greater variety. 
This it is that occasions the chief difference between prophetic 
poetry and psalm poetry. f 

2. As far back as 1813 a beginning was made by Kosters J 
in pointing out the indications of strophic formation. In 1840 
Ewald used the word " strophe " in describing the divisions of 
a chapter or piece of prophetic diction. In 1847 Baur recognized 
the presence of strophes in Amos, chaps. 1-4. Schlottmann, in 
1884, presented a treatise on the strophic structure in Hebrew 
poetry; and in 1887, Charles A. Briggs, in a series of articles, || 
opened up the subject more widely to the English-speaking world. 
The publication of Miiller s Die Propheten in Hirer ursprung- 
lichen Form (1895)^" aroused a new interest in the subject. He 
recognized the existence of strophes as divisions according to 

* The poetic character of ancient literature is illustrated by the Gilgamesh epic 
of the Babylonians and the Homeric poems of Greece. 

f Sievers, Metrische Studien, I. 93. 

j Das Buck Hiob und der Predlger Salomos nach ihrer strophischen Anordnung 
iibcrsetzt (1813). 

In Die Propheten des Alien Bundes (ist ed. 1840). 

|| Hebraica, IV. i6iff., 201 ff., being a development of the chapter on Hebrew 
Poetry in his Biblical Study (1883). 

U Followed in 1898 by his Strophenbau und Responsion, in the preface of which 
Zenner (Chorgesange im Buche der Psalmen, 1896) is charged with appropriating 
the idea and the terminology first used by Miiller. 


the thought, but maintained further that a new element existed 
which bound the strophes together in a discourse, just as parallel 
ism bound together lines in a verse. This he called Responsion* 
Before seeing Miiller s work, and Zenner s (1896) somewhat 
similar arrangement of Am. i 2 -2 16 , the present writer had pre 
pared and given to his classes the scheme of strophic structure 
(for Amos) presented in this commentary. The first chapters 
were published in January, 1897, and later the entire book in 
August, September, October, 1 898.1 The structure of Hosea as 
here presented, although finished in 1898, was first published in 
part in October, 1900. \ 

Contributions to the structure of Amos came very frequently in and after 
1900. (i) Elhorst (1900), supposing the book to have originated between 
638 and 621 B.C., advanced the view that it was written in two parallel col 
umns, the strophes alternating between the columns. Since both of his 
premises are wrong, the results do not prove satisfactory. The theory as to 
the date presupposes the essential unity of the book, and no additions are 
recognized. The column theory involves many transpositions, few of which 
improve the present connection, while some are distinctly inferior. In ad 
dition, irregularity in the length of lines is a marked feature of the arrange- 

* " In a case of responsion completely carried out every line of one strophe 
corresponds to its fellow in the next strophe either with verbal exactness or in 
thought, as a parallel or an antithesis" (Miiller, Die Propheten, I. 191). "Along 
two lines the thought endeavored to modify the form ; on the one hand in that 
responsion appears only partly made evident, though always in the same position, 
i.e. in corresponding lines ; on the other, in that it exhibits itself not in parallel 
fashion and in like words, but through antithesis and through like-sounding or 
similar words, which re-emphasize in a greater or less degree the same or similar 
thoughts" {ibid. 1.192). While this theory, which has failed to gain general 
recognition, contains much that is interesting, and, in some cases, may really cover 
the facts, two serious difficulties oppose the acceptance of it as a widely prevailing 
feature of the early poetry, viz. (i) the arbitrary measure assumed for lines, the 
line in each case being made as long or as short as the theory demands, e.g. in 
one strophe (Am. 3 9 " 12 ) are found heptameters, hexameters, and trimeters; in 
another (Am. 7 7 " 9 ) are found hexameters, pentameters, trimeters, and dimeters ; 
(2) the utter indifference of the author to the universally acknowledged results 
of lower and especially higher criticism. 

tSee AJT. I. (January, 1897), The Biblical World, XII. (1898), and the 
entire text with a parallel translation in my Structure of the Text of the Book of 
Amos (Decennial Publications of the University of Chicago, 1904). 

t AJSL. XVII. 1-15; the remainder of the text (chaps. 4-14) may be found in 
AJSL. XX. 85-94, XXI. i-2i ; and the corresponding translation in Biblical 
World, December, 1904. 


ment. (2) Lohr (1901) presents a scheme which has much in common 
with that of this commentary (cf. e.g. the two treatments of i 3 -2 3 and 
7 10 " 17 ). But his fundamental premise that the original order of the book has 
been much broken into and disturbed seems unwarranted. The transpositions 
suggested do not justify themselves (cf. e.g. his third address 3 1 " 15 4> 3 8 4 - 14 
91-40). (3) Sievers (1901)* gives a treatment of Hosea 1-2 and Amos 1-3, 
which brings out the possibilities of the poetic form in so far as this concerns 
the metre, i.e. the tone-phrase, the line, and the period. He practically 
ignores the strophic structure, although recognizing its existence (pp. I23ff.). 
This treatment is peculiarly defective in its failure to take into account even 
the most commonly accepted modifications of the text. (4) Condamin (July, 
1901) adopts Zenner s choral system, and arranges the text of Amos (with 
the exception of 2 6 -4 n 6 8 -7 17 ) in a series of strophes occurring constantly in 
the order : strophe, antistrophe, alternate strophe, supposed to have been 
chanted by two choirs alternately. In addition to the self-evident defects of 
the theory per se, Condamin gives no attention to the results of historical 
criticism, and shows an indifference to keen logical analysis ; e.g. 5 1 - 6 cannot 
be brought into close relation with 57.10-15. (5) Baumann (1903) proceeds, 
upon Lohr s theory of the present disorder of the Amos text, to reorganize it 
into five addresses (v.s.}. Aside from the unnecessary transpositions involved 
in the arrangement, this work is characterized by its careful application to 
the entire text of Amos of the metrical principles worked out by Sievers. 
(6) Marti (1903) bases his commentary on the strophic structure of the 
book, but has such frequent recourse to glosses and interpolations as to 
render his poetical structure very uncertain. The shattering of 3 1 -6 14 into 
fourteen fragments of addresses, and the treatment of the visions and the 
historical episode as mere prose, can certainly not be justified. (7) Nowack 
(August, 1903), in the second edition of the Hand-Kommentar adopts Bau- 
mann s presentation, but makes no practical use of the structure in his com 

Contributions to the structure of Hosea have not been so numerous. On 
Miiller (DH.),f Sievers (1901)4 Condamin (July, 1902), and Marti (1903), 
the same general statement may be made as that already presented concerning 
their respective treatments of Amos (y.s.}. As a matter of fact, only Miiller 
and Marti have really given any adequate consideration to this question. 

3. The standard unit in the system of Hebrew Poetry, as it is 
now most generally understood, may be called the foot, or tone- 
phrase, i.e. a word or combination of words having a single beat 

* See his Studien zur Hebraischen Metrik, pp. 467-71, 473-9. 

t Cf. Die Prophcten (1896), chaps. 5, 6, 10; Strophenbau (1898), chaps. 2, 4, 7. 

\ Op. cit., pp. 466-70, where chaps, i and 2 are treated. 

Revue Biblique, XI. 386-91, a rearrangement of chap. 2. 


or accent. The possible varieties of the tone-phrase are four, 
viz. : a word (accented) of one syllable, thus, .^, tfK (i 4 ) ;* one 
or two words making two syllables with the second accented, thus, 
_^, ia (i 3 ) or D^-DU (i 5 ); one or more words making three 
syllables, with the second or third accented, thus, _ _/_ _ or 

/., *?nan (i 3 ), "nn~p (i 4 ) ; one or more words making 

four (or more) syllables, with the third or fourth accented, 

thus, ^_ or ./, -pr6*rn*npb, narnaira (i 14 ). 

It is to be noted that (i) the essential thing is the tone, the 
number of syllables being a matter of no consequence. (2) The 
Maqqeph plays an important part in combining two or even three 
words into one. (3) In any effort to express the rhythmic move 
ment of a line, much care must be given to a consideration of the 
details connected, e.g. with Segholate forms (in which the helping 
vowel does not count in forming a syllable) ; the use of S e wa, 
which may or may not count as a vowel and thus form a syllable ; 
the treatment of particles (prepositions, conjunctions, adverbs, 
negatives, pronouns, etc.) as proclitics and enclitics ; the recession 
of the accent for various reasons ; the pausal forms. 

4. The line, in Hebrew poetry, is usually a combination of 
two or more tone-phrases. The possibilities of line-structure are 
numerous. Those most frequently found in Amos and Hosea are 
(a) the dimeter, made up of two tone-phrases, e.g. i 6e - 76 6 14c . 
The dimeter is found, for the most part, either as a shortened 
{i.e. brachycatalectic) trimeter (i 145 2 8d ), or in a combination of 
two dimeters, thus making a tetrameter (2 7c<d 4 lc d ), or in the 
Qinah-measure (,j2.d.3c. e .4&.c^ ^ By far tne most com mon 

movement is that of the trimeter, consisting of three tone-phrases, 
e.g. !TVp DIK Dtf 1^1 (i 5d ), TOB1 ^KrVS IKS (4 4a ), m^Kl mtfi Itm 
(5 14a )- 00 R arer combinations of tone-phrases are of four, i.e. 
tetrameter, with a caesural pause after the second (^ 2d ^ 25a ) ; 
five, i.e. pentameter (2 9c ), in most cases to be taken rather as a 
combination of 3 + 2 or 2 -f 3 ; six, i.e. hexameter (v.i.), which 
is either 4 + 2, 2 + 4, or 2 + 2 + 2 (5 19i ). 

5. The poetical period (ordinarily called parallelism) consists 
of two or more closely connected lines. We find a variety of com- 

* The examples cited are from Amos, unless otherwise indicated. 


binations; e.g. (a) The most common period is the bi-trimeter, 
i.e. double trimeter (i 2 4 4 ), which, in some cases, may easily be 
reckoned an hexameter (3 4>s ). (V) Much rarer is the bi-tetrame- 
ter, i.e. double tetrameter (4 lc - d 7 146 - c ). (c) Quite frequently 
there is used the combination of 3 + 2, rarely 2 + 3. This is the 
so-called Qinah-measure (pp. 108 f.). (d) Other combinations 
are that of 4 + 3 (s 150 6 ), rarely 3 + 4 (6 13 ), 4 + 2 (6 8c - d ), as well 
as 3 x 2 (i.e. triple dimeter) (6 14c ). 

6. The strophe is a combination of periods, or of periods and 
lines, which, in every case, constitutes a logical unit.* A variety 
of combinations occurs : (a) Groups, consisting only of periods, 
of which there may be two (3 4 - 5 5*), three (5 18 -- 21 ~ 24 - 25 ~ 27 ), four 
(Ho. 2 4ft ), five (57- iff. 12-14. 15-17^ or six ( Ha 4 i- 3 ^ (^ Groups, 
consisting of periods and independent lines, in various combina 
tions, e.g. bi-trimeter and trimeter, i.e. 3 + 3 and 3 (i 4 5a ) or 
bi-trimeter and dimeter, i.e. 3 + 3 and 2 (i 15 ), or three bi-trime- 
ters and a trimeter (Ho. 1 1 5 " 7 , etc.). (c} Groups, consisting of lines 
and periods, in combinations like those given above, e.g. a trime 
ter and five bi-trimeters (Ho. 9 1 " 4 ), a trimeter and a bi-trimeter 
(Am. 7"). 

It is to be noted further concerning strophes, (i) that in 
Amos the six-line strophe occurs most frequently, while the four- 
line strophe is next in order of frequency, and no strophe exceeds 
ten lines. In Hosea, on the other hand, the strophes are, as a 
rule, longer than in Amos, twelve lines being not an uncommon 
length, while eight-, nine-, and ten-line strophes are of frequent 
occurrence. (2) In a few cases the strophes are indicated by 
external signs, e.g. Am. i and 2 by the recurrence of certain 
introductory and closing formulas ; in Am. 4 4 " 13 by the recurrence 
of the refrain ; but in the remaining cases the thought is usually 
so distinct and separate as to render the strophic division com 
paratively certain. 

7. The many introductory and concluding expressions must be 
considered, each on its own merits. (a) It is frequently a ques 
tion whether the introductory words relating to the utterance^ 

* Cf. Sievers, pp. 134 f., who, however, lays greater emphasis upon the necessity 
of formal resemblance. 

t Eg. IDKM (Ho. i* 3!), "> IDN nu (Am. i 580). 


should be treated as a part of the poetical form, and consequently 
as one of the lines, or tone-phrases. It does not seem possible to 
lay down an absolute rule, as is done by Baumann.* In Am. 
jS.6. 9.11. 13 2 i.4.6 jt ma tters little whether these words are counted 
or not. In Ho. i 2 - 4 - 6 - 8 they stand outside of the strophe. In 
Am. 3 11 - 12 7 io- n - 12 - 14 - 17 they can scarcely be omitted, (b) There 
is the same question in the case of such introductory phrases as 
" Behold, the days are coming " (8 lla 9 13 ), " hear this word, etc. " 
(3 1 4 1 5 1 8 4 ). (c} The same question arises concerning similar 
phrases at the end. Some omit them entirely,! as in i 5 - 8 2 16 
3 i3. is 4 3 8 9 Others retain them. J 

8. A splendid example of the refrain occurs in Am. 4 4 " 13 , in 
which five strophes close with the words, " But ye did not return 
unto me it is the oracle of Yahweh." Cf. Is. 9 8 -io 4 (which was 
probably modelled after Amos) ; also Ps. 39 6 - 12 42 6 - 12 43 5 4 6 (4) 8 - 12 
49 13 21 57 6 12 59 6 12 18 - Something approaching to a refrain is seen 
in Ho. 5 3 6 10 , "Thou, O Ephraim, hast committed harlotry, and 
Israel is defiled." 

9. Textual criticism has found a great ally in this new work 
of metrical and strophic structure. Evidence of this appears 
in every recently published commentary. A new criticism has 
arisen, distinct from the textual (or lower) and from the historical 
(or higher). We may call this the strophic (including metrical) 
criticism. By the application of this criticism, (a) introductory 
and concluding formulas will be thrown out, e.g. i 5 - 8 2 16 3 15<13 ; 
(b) glosses and variants are detected, while repetitious phrases 
and unnecessary adjectives are given their proper place, e.g. 
5 23 7 8a 8 2a.i3. ^ lacunae are recognized, e.g. 2 m 13 f ^ ll 5 f 8 1 ; 
(</) additions made merely for explanation or by way of ex 
pansion are separated from the original text, e.g. i 14d 2 12c 3 1<9e 
4 s.7a.76.8a.io5 ^i6e . ^\^\ Q (^ as the most important service of all, 
the great divisions of thought are clearly marked (v.s.}. This 
criticism, while " lower " (having to do with the form) is also 
" higher," since it is largely a logical criticism. 

* Following Sievers, 240-246. f Sievers, Baumann. 

J Miiller, Condamin, Lohr. 

Cf. Sievers, 240-246; Da. O. T. Proph. 242 f. 



Reference has already been made to the character of the lan 
guage of these earliest prophets, as also to certain alleged Aramai- 
cisms in Amos (p. cxxxviii), and in Hosea (p. cxl). The general 
characteristics of the style of Amos have been noted (pp. cxxxix f.). 
It is entirely in accord with the sentiment of modern scholarship to 
designate the language of both Amos and Hosea as classic Hebrew. 
This becomes much more clear in Hosea s case, when one separates 
from the original Hosea the secondary material that belongs to a 
later age ; and especially when the original text of the separate 
pieces appears in its clearness and logical unity, after excluding 
the elements which, by their interpolation, have given an entirely 
wrong conception, as against the straightforwardness and lucidity 
of Hosea s method of expression.* 

i. Concerning Amos, in particular, certain facts of a linguistic 
character deserve consideration. Among these are : 

(1) Those elements which point to a fully developed, and, indeed, 
thoroughly artistic style, viz. : (rt) the rhythmical flow of the language, which 
moves on easily and smoothly in stately periods; this rhythmic factor is very 
marked and furnishes one of the strongest arguments for the poetic character 
of the book; (6) the use of chiasm, e.g. 2 6 - 14 4 7 55.10. 24 6 8.12 79.11 312 9!. 
(<:) the occurrence of paronomasia, e.g. 5 5 8 2 7 10 ; (</) the employment of 
assonance, e.g. 2 165 4 1 6 7 9 1 . 

(2) Those instances of phraseology or syntax which are either rare or very 
frequent, viz. : (a) rare phrases and constructions are seen in the use of 
the accusatives en? (3 12 ) and o jnfl (4) ; the construction of the numerals 
in 5 3 ; the sequence of tenses in ^mtODm and "racx (4 7 ), SDJO (4 9 ), and 
nSoNi (y 4 ) ; the various usages of S in ytrsS mn (4 4 ), nwhvh . . . npaS (4 4 ), 
not^i (8 4 ), and "m ptopnS (8 5 ); the adverbial use of >p in Dip 1 " ID (7 2>5 ); the 
use of S with the direct object as in Aramaic (6 3 8 9 ) ; the use of 3 with 
nnN in 5 21 (only here and Ex. 3O 38 Lv. 26 31 ; in Is. 1 1 3 probably a dittograph); 
and the phrase S HN^HD in 5 27 (only here and Je. 22 19 Gn. 35 21 ). 

() Among the favorite phrases and constructions are the following : The 
use of the participle is frequent, especially in descriptions, where it furnishes 

* Cf. on the one side, the clearness and smoothness of is 1 " 11 , which has preserved 
its original form with only slight corruption ; and on the other, the confusion of 
chap. 12, as found in jflSS, and the obscurity of chap, n, due to its corrupt text. 


a convenient substitute for a relative clause, e.g. 2 7 3 10 - 12 4 1 - 11 
51. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. is g4. 14 gi . elsewhere it is used as a vivid substitute for a perfect 
or imperfect, e.g. 2 13 5 1 6 8 - 14 f- 8 - 16 . The idiom -nj? rpDiN N >L > occurs in 7 8 - 13 8 2 
(cf. 5 2 8 14 ). The rhetorical question is made use of in ^- 8 5 20 - 25 6 12 - 13 8 8 9 7 ; 
and conciseness is attained by the use of the circumstantial clause with px 
in 3 4 -5 5 2.6. 

(<:) Examples of words, or usages of words, which are rare or frequent, e.g. : 
(a) words found only in Amos*: D>Sj?j, 2 6 8 6 (in dual); p>pn and pipe, 2 13 ; 
*na and P#cn, 3 12 ; nns (used of women), 4 1 ; rnxxnn (in this form), 4 1 ; 
nux and run, 4 2 ; nrpo (fern, pi.), 4 2 ; \-i, 5 16 ; SON, 5 20 ; nnxy (in pi.), 5 21 ; 
awon, 6 5 ; ipn?D (used of wine), 6 6 ; D^O Di, 6 11 ; t^pSn, 7 1 ; -px, 7 7 ; oSia, 
7 14 ; npptw (in Niph.), 8 8 ; oV3, 9 7 (pi. of this form only here). To these 
may be added words found in Amos, and only once elsewhere : anpj, 7 14 (i 1 ) 
2 K. 3*; pon, 2 9 Is. i 31 ; >3 ap;*, 4 1 2 2 S. I2 10 ; is, 5 11 (8 6 ) Ps. 72 16 (elsewhere 
-a); onjon, 6 3 Is. 66 5 ; nnr, 6 7 Je. i6 5 ; o^pa, 6 11 Is. 22 9 ; <aj, 7 1 Na. 3 17 ; 
aiS^, 8 1 - 2 Je. 5 27 ; DJ7X3, 9 1 Jo. 2 8 (in similar sense); and also words found in 
Amos, and only two or three times elsewhere : nixnn, i 3 Is. 28 27 41 15 Jb. 4i 22 ; 
-\^y, 2 13 Mi. 4 12 Je. 9 21 Zc. 12; nroj, 3 10 (in fern. sg. only here and Is. 59 14 ; 
in fern. pi. Is. 26 10 3O 10 ) ; o^ir, 3 12 (only occurrence outside of P) ; jpNa, 4 10 
Is. 34 3 Jo. 2 20 ; iis, 4 11 Is. 7* Zc. 3 2 ; j^Sac, 5 9 (ptcp. only here; cf. Jb. 9 27 
io 20 Ps. 39 14 ); D^wnc, 5 18 (ptcp. only here and Pr. I3 4 Nu. u 34 ); o<rnD, 6 4 - 7 
Ez. 176 23 15 Ex. 26 13 ; pane, 6 4 i S. 28- 4 Je. 46 21 Mai. 3 20 ; MJ, 7 1 Dt. i8 4 
Jb. 31^ Ps. 72 6 ; pr\v* for pnr, 7 9 - 16 Je. 33 26 Ps. IO5 9 ; njoSynn, 8 13 (in Hithp. 
only here and Jon. 4 8 Gn. 38 14 ) ; 8>n3, 9 3 (in mythological sense, also Is. 27 1 
Jb. 26 13 ); nyptr, 9 5 (in Qal only here and Je. 5i 64 Nu. n 2 ); D^ntfVp, 9 7 (this 
form of pi. only here and Gn. io 14 i Ch. I4 10 ). 

()3) Favorite words and ideas are the following: Expressions for the 
poor and needy, viz. p"ON, 2 6 5 12 8 4 - 6 ; a- 1 *?!, 2 6 4 X 5 11 8; DMJJ?, 2 7 4 X 8 4 . Words 
fa* justice, righteousness, viz. oe^c, 5 7 -i5.24 512. npiy, 5 7 - 24 6 12 . Expressions 
for destruction, viz. "send fire upon," i 4 , etc.; "kindle a fire," i 14 ; "cast fire 
on," 5 6 ; "break the bar," I 5 ; "cut off inhabitants, etc.," I 5 - 8 2 3 ; "go into 
exile," i 5 - 15 5 s - 27 6 7 yii-17; "turn my hand against," I 8 ; "slay," 2 3 4 10 ; "visit 
upon," 3 2 - 14 ; "the sword," 4 79.11.17 9!; "famine," 8 11 ; "end is come," 8 2 ; 
" groan," 2 13 ; "smite," 3 15 4 9 6 11 9 1 ; "taken with hooks," 4 2 ; "send pesti 
lence," 4 10 ; " overthrow," 4 11 ; " hurl down," 5 2 ; " pass through the midst of," 
5 17 ; "day of calamity," 6 3 ; "deliver up," 6 8 ; "crush," 6 14 ; "lay waste," 7; 
" darken the earth," 8 9 ; " put mine eye on them for evil," 9*; " destroy," 9* 
Titles of the Deity, viz. Yahweh (33 times), Lord Yahweh (15 times), 
Yahweh God of hosts (4 13 s 14 - 15 - 27 6 86 - 146 ), the Lord (f-* b 9!), thy God (4 12 ), 
God (4 11 ). 

2. Concerning Hosea, in particular, notice may be taken of 
the following phenomena : (i) Certain characteristics of linguistic 

* Cf. Carrier, Hebraica, V. 135 f. 


usage that indicate his possession of a mature and well-formed 
literary style : (a) While the rhythm of Hosea is on the whole 
inferior to that of Amos, there being many passages in which the 
movement is halting and broken, yet there are portions of which 
the rhythm is as marked and fine as that of Amos, e.g. 9 1 " 8 I3 1 9 . 

() Chiasm is of comparatively rare occurrence, but is definitely recog 
nized and employed, e.g. 4 4-9.i3d.e 5 3a.& yT&.e IO Ha.6. 

(c] A number of cases of paronomasia occur, e.g. SNJHP (l 4 ), px n>a (4 15 io 5 ), 
j?3B> "isaa lyaari Sxi (4 16 ), Nia and anax (8 9 ), na and onax (9 16 ), xna* 1 and 
nnex (i3 15 ), oa^ and as> (9 3 ), aw in two senses (ii 5 ), ^jS; and o Sj (i2 12 ), 
NX in two senses (i2 9 ). 

(rf) Assonance appears in 2 7 (repetition of suffix *), 3* 4 1 (repetition of 
I^N), 4 16a 5 1 (HBSD ... no na>na nan, also o^iyn nns ), S 76 9 66 (aispn onxo 
a-opn *ic), lo 1 - 2 (niaxc and ninarc), 9 15 (omo onn&>). 

(2) Syntactical usage, phraseology, and vocabulary : (a) Rare 
and irregular constructions are common in the Massoretic text 
of Hosea, but many of them disappear when the text is properly 
corrected (pp. clxxvi f.). 

Among those still remaining are : the ellipses before moa 1 ? (2 11 ) and 
nSjji (7 2 ), the omission of the object of urn (5 4 ), the force of p in DID nap? 
(6 8 ), the construction of nnnj (6 9 ), the force of S in NisinS (9 13 ), use of h with 
direct object (io 12 u 3 ), the force of a in -pr^a (i3 9 ), the construct followed 
by relative clause with relative omitted (i 2 ), the gender of HPIN (4 19 ), ^Va 
with a participle (y 8 ), use of S expressing time at which (9 5 ), and the use 
of the jussive HDi^ (9 15 )- 

(b} Among the favorite constructions of Hosea are his use of asyndeton 
(more frequent than in any other O.T. book), e.g. 2 13 - 14 4 6e - 7 - 10 - 18 56- 8 - J0 - " 15 
6-3.10 7 i2.ic 9 I0 i.26.6.nt.i3 *. the frequent introduction of clauses by 
nr>, e.g. 4 16 5 7 f 8 3 - 136 io 2a I3 2 ; verbal apposition, i 6 5"- 15 6 4 , and the fre 
quent use of p (especially with the meaning without) > 3 3 - 4 4 1 5 2 - 14 f- u 8 7 I3 4 . 

(f) Hosea s vocabulary is extensive and varied ; though speaking 
almost continually upon the same subject, he is ever finding new 
words in which to express his thought. Hence the number of 
" favorite " words is comparatively small. 

Among those most frequently occurring are : crjur (i 2 2 4 4 12 5*), njr (i 2 2 7 3 8 

4 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 18 5 3 6 10 9 1) } npfl (,4 2 16 4 9. 14 gl 3 9 7 - 9 I2 3 ), yv (2 10 5 3 4 - 9 6 3 f 
8 2.4 9 2.7 Il3 I2 4.5^ Dy ^ ^\ 53.8^ ^ NJ (3! 4 2. 13. 14) > n ^ ( 2 15 46 gl* 136), NOT 
(4 7 8 11 I2 9 I3 2 ), HXOT (48 9 7-9 I0 9 I3 12) ) ?v ( 4 8 56 7! g!8 c)7. 9 IQ 10 I2 9 ,312^ 

DOX (4 15 5 15 io 2 13! 14!), NDW (5 3 6 10 9 3 - 4 ), non (41 6 s - 6 io 12 ). 


Among the rarer words and forms in Hosea may be noticed those that 
occur nowhere else, viz.: -jnS (3 2 ), n>sosj (2 4 ), runs (2 14 ), nmSn (2 15 ), nr^aj 
(2 12 ), nnjp (5 13 ), napy (6 8 , in this sense), SSiarr (y 8 , in this form), np-\r (7*, 
intransitive), -VP (y 13 , as particle of denunciation), aoatt- (8 6 ), onan (8 13 ), 
(9 8 ), ppa (ic 1 , intransitive), mw on 1 ? (9 2 ), pjp (io 2 , in this sense), 
(ii 3 , in this form), nina? (ii 4 , in this form), nm (I3 1 ), nnsSn (i3 6 ), 
WD (138), om (i3 14 ), snfl (i3 15 ), onS (; 5 , in this form), -na (io 2 , in Po.), 
Sow (n 4 , in Hiph.), IT (7 16 ), unn and un> (8 9 ), trip> (9 8 ), o pox (9 14 ), vnvnn 

Of words that occur not more than three times outside of Hosea there are : 
wv* (3 1 Ct. 2 5f - 2 S. 6 19 i Ch. i6 3 Is. i6 7 ), max (3 2 Jb. 6 27 4O 30 Dt. 2 6 ), 
ipe> (2 7 Ps. 102 Pr. 3 8 ), D\jur (i 2 2 4 - 6 4 12 5 4 Ez. 23 11 - 29 2 K. 9 22 Na. 3 4 ), 
ap-i (5 12 , in this sense, Jb. I3 28 ), mtn (5 13 Je. 3O 13 ), ^aS> (4 14 Pr. io 8 - 10 ), 
nmnyiB (6 10 Je. i8 13 ), nnifl (y 11 Jb. 5 2 ), moa (4 4 io 5 Zp. i 4 2 K. 23 6 ), pn 
(ii 8 Gn. i4 20 Pr. 4 9 ), apj; (i2 4 - 8 Je. 9 3 Gn. 27 36 ), onnnn (i2 15 Je. 6 3i 16 ), 
nis (9" 2 K. I9 3 Is. 37 3 Je. I3 21 ), laJS D (i3 13 Is. 37 3 2 K. I9 3 ), atop (i3 13 
Is. 28 2 Dt. 32 24 Ps. 9i 6 ), inx (13^ Gn. 4i 2 - 18 Jb. 8 11 ), n>j (io 12 Je. 4 3 ), n^j 
(io 12 Je. 4 2 Pr. I3 23 ), nttr (io 14 Is. 33!, in Hoph.). 

Of other uncommon or poetical forms may be cited : the archaic ending fi 
( 9 ie IX 2 I3 2)^ ,j^ n .y, (515 6 3) t nnfl1D (g7), isiT (8 3 ), sScN (48), Mnarw (io 11 ), 
DNp (io 14 ), IDD (7 4 8 12 i3 7 ), ni^N (io 4 ). 

It cannot be maintained that the peculiarities of Hosea furnish 
any considerable data toward the hypothesis of a Northern dialect 
as distinguished from the Southern. 


i. The text of Amos is as well preserved as perhaps any text in 
the Hebrew Bible, the number of unintelligible passages being 
remarkably small (cf. 3 10 4 9 5" 6 1 - 2 f). 

The text of Hosea, however, is one of the most corrupt in the 
O. T., the number of passages which almost defy interpretation 
being extremely large. Among these are 4 18 5 2 - 8 - 11 - 15 6 3 - 5 - 9 f- G - l2c - 16 

g5a.l06 9 8.13 j Q 5. 9. 10 ^ j ^. 12 ^ ^36. RoSCa S TCpU- 

tation for obscurity is due in large measure to the corrupt form in 
which the text of his message has reached us. That this corrup 
tion began at a comparatively early date is evident from the fact 
that some of the errors of iJH(E appear already in (&, e.g. 7 12c , 
17ttty?, eV rfj aKoy ; 7 16 , bv *b, 19 ovOcv ; II 9 , TU? K13K, eiVeAevo-o/xai 
ets 7ToA.ii/. For the restoration of the original text much help may 


be derived from the versions, but in many cases resort must be 
had to critical conjecture. 

(i) In the correction of fH^T, (!! is most helpful. That the textual basis 
of ( is different from B2T appears from the large number of cases in which 
the reading of @ cannot have come from f$l&, e.g. Am. I 16 , Nin, ol iepets 
ai>T&v = wr\3; 2 U , D^pN, t Xa/3o p = n[3N; Ho. 2 17 , nipn, fftiveaiv avrys = nji3n(?); 
8 10 , Ntt DD, rou xpt LV n J DC; 4 18 , DtoD ^D, yptTurev Xavavatovs. <J| s render 
ing was evidently made before JH& had become the standard text. The 
character of ( s rendering is in general the same in Amos and Hosea as 
elsewhere.* The translation of Hosea seems to be inferior to that of Amos, 
but this is probably due, in large measure, to the greater difficulty of the text. 
Sometimes is very free, e.g. Am. 38-10.1^ PIJDIN, x^P ai > 5 21 > *> 3 nn N^, 
ov /J.T] cxrtypavdG) dvo~las fv rcus Travrjyvpeo iv v/j.u>v; Ho. 2 7 , "lptt>, iravra 8o~a fwi 
Kad^Ket; 5 13 , rbv^, Kal airto-TeiXev Trpto-peis; in other cases excessive literal- 
ness is aimed at, e.g. in Am. 7 2 - 5 the synonyms nSo and *?-<n are differentiated; 
5 18 , nr nnS, Iva. rL avrrj; Ho. 2 1 , itt N DipC3, tv ry rdirtf o; the idiom N*? 
Ui t^DiN is regularly rendered, ov /J.TJ irpoffd-fiaw, K.T.\., e.g. Ho. I 6 9 15 I3 2 , etc. 
Inaccurate renderings are of common occurrence, e.g. Am. 6 1 , O jjNr, tov6e- 
vovfft; 3 12 , ntDD PND2, KartvavTi TTJS 0uX^s; Ho. 9 10 , ."niD^r, o>s CTKOTT^V; 7 13 , 
111 , Se^Xatot; 5 11 , S Nin, ^p^aro; 7 6 , |" % VTTVOU tvcTrXriaOr). 

Occasionally ignorance of the meaning is shown by resort to transliteration, 
e.g. Am. I 1 , onpja, ei> AKKapeifj.; and, perhaps, 3 12 , an; , te/3e?s. 

When due allowance is made for the errors of (d, there still 
remain many passages in which its text is preferable to fH2L 
In this commentary ( has suggested corrections of $&$l in 
Am. 2 7 - 156 3 5 - 9 4 3 - 10 s 9 - 26 8 116 Ho. 2 8 4 4 - 10 - 19 5 8 - 1L15 6 1 - 8 - 5 - 9 y 1 - 6 - 12 - 14 8 12 

g2.9.13. 14 IQ 5. 12. 136. 15 jj2. 3.7 j 2 2 - 3 - 9 r -2. 4. 5. 6. 7. 9. 10. 14 j^.g^ 

(2) The remaining Greek versions present the same characteristics in 
Amos and Hosea as elsewhere.f (a) Aquila s pedantic literalness is illus 
trated by Am. I 2 , /Spuxiyo-ercu, JNE> ; cf. @ t<j}dtyaTo ; 2 16 , Kal 6 Kaprepbs 
Kapdiav avTov tv Surarots yvfjivbs 0e^erat ; Ho. 2 18 , exwv /xe = iS^3 ; 5 18 , 
diKa.a6fji.evov = m* ; 8 13 , 6vaias (ptpe <ptpe on^n ^n3T. His fondness for 
transliteration is frequently indulged, e.g. Am. 5 23 , vafiX&v (rou, "\ h^ ; 7 1 , T^S 
s, en VJ; 2 12 , Nafapafous, onvj ; cf. @ ^ytaav^j ous; 6 10 , 
on; Ho. 9 9 and io 10 , where njnjn is transliterated, though 
@ translates it in both cases. A. also translates many proper names, cf. e.g. 
Ho. 4 15 5 8 - 13 9 13 io 6 - 14 . His etymological tendency crops out often, e.g. 
Am. 3 10 , 6p66T7]Ta, HHDJ ; 7 1 , 6^t/ios, jypS. The rendering of Aquila presup- 

* See especially Swete, Introduction to the O. T. in Greek, 315-41. 
f See Swete, Introduction, 29-58. 


poses a text different from ff(2T in very few cases, e.g. Am. I 3 , vjro for xin; 
4 10 , DN3 for DN31 ; 8 3 , at 0-77)601776? nrvs, fifl^T niTtr ; 8 8 , <r/ce7ra(r^?j(7erat 
for nnSy ; Ho. 11" I2 5 - 9 I3 1 . The version of Aquila is thus of little value for 
the correction of iftflST. Readings of Aquila have been adopted only in two 
cases, Am. 4 10 (omission of i in DJDJOI) and Ho. n 7 (V for ^ of fSUE), both 
of which have the support of other versions. 

(b } The version of Symmachus is the very opposite of Aquila s in that 
it strives after an expression of the idea in pure and graceful language rather 
than an exact and literal reproduction of the Hebrew. Examples of this 
freedom may be found in Am. I 3 4 1 5 1 -. While using 1H2T as a basis, S. 
shows familiarity with , A., and especially G. He exhibits, however, a 
certain amount of independence. His rendering involves a different textual 
basis from fH^C in Am. I 14 4 10 8 8 (all agreeing with A., v.s.}; 5, NO" 1 for 
NU> ; 5 23 , nro for n-irD ; 6 1 , 3Oj??n for opj ; and Ho. 3 1 y 15 8 <J 1 1 4 - 7 I2 5 - 12 13-- . 
Readings of S. have been adopted in Am. 4 10 $ 2 > 6 1 Ho. ii 7 (two), in only 
one of which, viz. Ho. n 7 , inN-ni;;, is any independence of other versions 

(<r) Theodotion s version is a revision of , and of practically no inde 
pendent value for the correction of H2u That he had the Hebrew text 
before him is evident from his frequent transliterations, e.g. Am. I 1 , fV vwKedei/j., 
D npj:) ; y 7 , aSwrat, JTN. In no case does he furnish a text independent 
of both < and fH9T. He supports the readings adopted in Ho. 9 13 , ivn; 
io 5 , ^r:^ ; u 7 , 1 ?;. 

(3) The fragments of the Old Latin version are of much value for the 
correction of <J|. The version is on the whole a literal translation of (d, but 
presents many variations in agreement with the recension of Lucian. Its most 
significant departure from JH2T and is in Am. I 1 (q.v.~}. Little use of it 
has been made in this commentary, since it was not accessible till the textual 
work was practically finished and much of it in type. 

(4) The Syriac furnishes a fairly careful and accurate rendering. In 
general it follows , but shows frequent independence, e.g. Am. I 11 follows 
1H9T ; i 15 takes 3D s o as proper name ; Ho. 3* 2 10 - 2 4* 5 13 6 10 . It presupposes 
a different text * from E& and (g, e.g. in Am. I 11 - 14 2 8 - 10 - 16 f- r >- $> <J 5 16 

61. ". 7 yo gl. 3. 4 J Jo. I 6 32 4*. 12. 18 ,j4. 7 (ft. 10 76. 8. 11 g6 9! I O 7- W I i4. 8 j 2 l. 2. 5. 10. 12 

^i. 10. is. its readings have been adopted in preference to HC or in 
Am. i 11 3 11 5 16 6 1 Ho. 4 7.i2r.i9 51 f 8 6 9 1 ii 4 12--- 1: . 

(5) The Targum of Jonathan is a paraphrase rather than a translation, 
and is characterized by its adherence to the letter of the text, and by its 
theological point of view, e.g. all anthropomorphisms are carefully removed. 
Consonantal departures from J51ST are of rare occurrence, variations from the 
vocalization of fH9T being more frequent. No emendation has been adopted 
on the J>asis of tZT independently of <JI and other versions. 

(6) The Vulgate follows JHE very closely, but sometimes borrows Greek 

* For details see textual treatment in commentary. 


renderings. The literalness of A. is sought after at times, but, as a rule, the 
translation is made with considerable freedom, and this, together with Jerome s 
imperfect knowledge of Hebrew, which not infrequently caused him to err 
(e.g. Am. 5 24 , revelabitur, ^r] ; 6", factio, nnn), and the uncertain state of 
U s own text, renders U an unsafe guide to the original text. No readings 
have been adopted here on T s authority uncorroborated by that of other 

2. The following transpositions have been made: (i) In Amos: 2 2 , 
aNic pNS a Pen, follows -ntr 1 ? (2 1 ); 2 7 follows 2 8 , and 2 9 follows 2 10 ; 2 116 fol 
lows 2 12 ; 2 15 , Dion am, exchanges places with on? in 2 16 ; 2 16a follows aSo^ N 1 ? 
in 2 156 ; 3 15 follows 3"; 5 8a follows 5 1 ; 5 3c , Sane" noV, follows HND nNXvm; 
5 5c follows 5 4 ; 5" precedes 5 10 ; 5 8 , ici? mrp is placed at beginning of verse; 
6 86 follows 6 7 ; 6 146 follows 14c ; 8 3 follows S 9 . 

(2) In Hosea: 2 1() - n are connected with 2"; 2 14 follows 2 11 ; 2 13 precedes 
2 15. 2 19 is joined to 2 15 ; 4 14ti follows 4 4 ; 4 12a - 6 precedes 4 11 ; 7 12c precedes 
yii. S 56 precedes 8~ ja ; 9 3 comes between 9 4and5 ; 9 16 follows 9 11 ; 9 12c follows 
9 15 ; io 7 comes between io 8aand86 ; I2 13 is connected with I2 16 ; I2 15 comes 
between i 2 lland12 ; I4 4c follows I4 3 . 

3. The errors of fH3T may be classified as follows: (i) Changes in 
vocalization: Am. 2 7 8 4 , o^flNirn for DNDNB ?; 2 15a , ta^p for tajs .; 5 26 , n-irp 
for Pro; 6 1 , op; for oojasn ; 8 3 , nn^ for nnc ; , and ^Sirn for ^Srn; 9 10 , 
^>jn for K jn, and o^ipn for OI^P; Ho. 5 11 , pv^ for P^>, and yixn for yxn; 
5 13 > n -!?^ f r n; !?? ; 6 3 , nyi for nn>; y 6 , onrx for ansst; 7 12c , Dn;D^N for D^N; 
7 14 , n-ioj for -nio;; 8 4 , -it >; for ^t^; 8 6 , ooatf ^ for ooac r; 8 11 , ^n-yn for 
^nn^n; 9 8 , nnif for nok; 9 9 , .inner for inrw; io 2 , pSn for pSn; io 5 , n^J^S for 
SrjS, and ?5V ; for ^3*^; io 9 , PN^n for n&nn, and S^ for ^y; n 2 , IN^I J for ^N^I^J 
ii 4 , ^nns? for annr, and taxi for ONI; 1 1 7 , S^ for Sj?, and -inNinp> for viNnp.j; 
I2 2 , nsi; for -ian*, and Sav for -iSa "; I2 9 , ig.n for v^r, and Nipn for x^n; 
I3 l , Nt*j for N^rj; 132, ^nat for o^nai; I3 6 , -ij;p^ for j^air; I3 7 , ~WN for ^I^N; 
13, ripnr for ^nnr; I3 15 , a^nN for -ins, and &y) for ra^i, and -^N for -I^N; 
I4 3 , one for nip. 

(2) The consonantal corrections may be grouped under: (#) Incorrect 
division of words: Am. 6 12 , onpaa for a" ipaa; 7 2 , ^^3 c^ n>m for xn >n>> 
nS^D; Ho. 4 4 , ^anca nopi for vioaa -np; 5 2 , a^^ nantfi for O^BZTI nnei; 
6 3 , INXO paj intra for IHNXDJ p mnca; 6 5 , -\IN i^tootra for 11*0 wow; 8 1 , n^ja 
for nti>j ID; 8 6 , o^aac* ^ for o^aaira; n 2 , on^ao for an IJDD; I2 2 - 3 , am Sav 
for an iSav. 

(^) Dittography and haplography: Am. 5 6 , trxa for X, and n^a for n^aa; 
5 8 , r\^ for nSn*?; 5 11 , DDD^ia for DDDia; 6 2 , aaSajn nSiaj for aaSaj oSiaj?:; 
7 7 , *]JN PDin for nnin; 8 3 , on fhurn for "jV^n; 8 11 , nai for nan; Ho. 3 3 , JN for 
^^N; 4 5 , avn for acr; 4 18 , ian ianx for lanx; 4 19 , DPinarr for TDD; 5 8 , no for 
noa; 8 lla , NonS added; 9 1 , pi dittog. of pji; 9*, cnS for DDn 1 ?; 9 13 , J-\n SN 
for nj-\nS; ii 3 , vnynr for Pjnnr; n 4 , *y for Spo; I2 9 , py for ppS; I2 12 , onw 
for Dna S; 132, na? for onS o^nai oy; I3 9 , o for OJN ; I4 8 , *w for laifM, 
and vn> for vmi. 


(c~) Confusion of i and i: Am. 2 7 , niyjn for rnyjn; 5 16 , ^IN for p"w; 
Ho. 4 18 , ax3D ID for D 1 X3D ID; j 2 , ii;:xi for IIDJ?>; 7 12c , omyS for onixS; 7 14 , 
mui-p for mum; 9 2 , ajrv for ojrv; 9 13 , iixS for TxS; io 13 , pii3 for 13313; 
I2 1 2 , anw for an^S; I3 5 , TnyT for Tn^i. 

(V) Confusion of x and y. Am. 6 8 , axnn for ajjnn; Ho. 5 3 , nnp for nnx; 
7 2 , IIDX> for liny. 

(<?) Confusion of x and c>: Am. 5 6 , nSx 11 for nStt"; Ho. 5 11 , ix for xia. 

(/) Confusion of c* and r: Am. 2 1 , TfrS for nirS; Ho. 5 2 , a>C3fe for 
9 12c , i life a for m& ; 3. 

() Confusion of i and > : Am. 5 9 , X13 1 * for x>3">; Ho. 9 13 , nxS for 
I3 10 , 1 BBan for -])Bfljy>); I2 9 and 14, ^S for i 1 ?. 

(A) Transposition: Am. 3 12 , Si3 for -aS; Ho. 5 2 , IJXT for pxi; 7 3 , 
for in^n^; io 9 , m 1 ?;* for nSiy ; I3 10 - 14 , nx for n^x. 

(z) Confusion of 3 and 3; Ho. y 1 , >xci3 for txo-\3; 7 12c , ynj^a for 
9 4 , my for i3ij;\ 

(y) Omission or insertion of x; Ho. 4 6 , "JXDXDXI for "JDXDXI; 5 15 , lOPX" 1 for 
ice " 1 ; 8 5 , njr for ruts; io 15 , nry for ntyyx; n 3 , anp for onpx. 

(/) Confusion of suffixes; Ho. 2 8 , ~|3m for H3"n; 4 12c , njjnn for Di;nn; S 7 , 
1*7 for nS; 9 2 , na for D3; I2 5 , unp for my. 

(/) Omission or insertion of copula: Ho. 4 5 , >rPDt for ni; 6 1 , l^ for T*i; 
8 6 , xim for -n; 8 10 , ana> for tt i; I2 2 , nnai for -13; I2 3 , npflSi for f eh; I2 46 , 
1J1X31 for X3. 

(ni) Theological change: Ho. 7 16 , hy xS for S^aSj 9 10 , nu>3 for hyi. 

(n} Miscellaneous corruptions: Am. 2 2 , nDi for nnn; 3 5 , no for >JD; 4 9 , 
main for ^nainn; 5 9 , i^ for i3a>; 5 12 , D3^nxton for D3>xton; 9 10 , unya for UHJJ; 
Ho. i 9 , ODS for DD^nSx; 4 7 , I^DX for won; 4 10 , ixifli for isin>; 5 8 , tnnx for 
nnnn; 6 9 , ian for ix3n; 6 10 , xS nur for x n>:T; 7 2 , B33 1 ? 1 ? for Sa; 7 6 , taip 
for nj73; 7 14 , ani33^D for amn3Tc; 8 10 , iVnM for iSnm, and XIPDD for P^DD; 9 6 , 
vsSn for wS^, and ia>D for iitrx, and aS icna for 3 nnnD; 9 7 , nxwnn omitted; 
9 13 , nSintt for mtt ; io 1 , niB" for xij % ^i; io 5 iS^J 11 for iS^n 1 ; io 6 , nja3 for ntt3; 
io 12 , ^fiS for naS, and HUM for no; n 2 , >J3S for na; u 5 , xS for iS; n 6 , 
Dn^nwpnn for nnns3D3; n 7 , < -n3i^D i ? D^xiSn for vnawna >jxSn, and vh nm 
onn> for iDniS Snn xin; n 9 , xi3x for anx; n 10 , nnx i>y3 for nx3 "W; I2 2 , 
1^1 for xitt i; i2 5 , Sx for nx; I2 8 , ptPi S for apyS; I2 12 , ij; 1 ?^ ax for Sja, and vn 
for vvy; I3 2 , ajiana for aruiDro; 13, o for >D; i3 10 , iny ^33 for in^ Sai; 
I3 15 , a>nx pa for inx B>D paa; I4 8 , pi for pa vin. 

4. The more important special studies on the text of Amos and Hosea are: 
Vollers, "Das Dodekapropheton der Alexandriner," ZAW. III. (1883), 
219-72 ; Zeydner, " Bijdragen tot de textkritiek op het O. T.," ThSt. IV. 
(1886), 196-207 ; Sebok, Die syrische Uebersetzung d. zwolf kleinen Propheten 
und ihr Verhaltniss zu dem massoretischen Text und zu den alter en Ueber- 
setzungen, namentlich den LXX. und dem Targum (1887); Treitel, Die 
Alexandrinische Uebersetzung des Buches Hosea (1887; only chaps. 1-3); 
Idem, " Die Septuaginta zu Hosea," Monatsschrift fur Geschichte und Wissen- 
schaft de s Judcnthum s, 1898; Schuurmans Stekhoven, De Alex. Vertalingvan 


het Dodekapropheton (1887); Patterson, "The Septuagint Text of Hosea 
Compared with the Massoretic Text," ffebraica,Vll. (1891), 190-221 ; H. 
Graetz, Emendationes in plerosque sacrae Scripturae Veteris Testamenti libros, 
secunduni veteruni versiones nee non auxiliis criticis caeteris adhibitis. Fasci 
culus secundus Ezechielis et diwdecim prophetarum libros etc. continent (1893) > 
Bachmann, "Zur Textkritik des Propheten Hosea I.-VII.," Alttestamentliche 
Untersuchungen (1894), 1-37; Loftman, Kritisk undersokning af den Maso- 
retiska te*ten till prof, Hoseas bok (1894); Torrey, "On the text of Am. 5 2C 
6 1 -- 7 2 ," JBL. XIII. (1894), 61-63; J ki> "Notes on Am. 2~ 6 10 8 3 9 8 - 10 ," 
ibid., XV. (1896), 151-154; Ruben, Critical Remarks upon Some Passages 
of the Old Testament (1896) ; Oort, Textus Hebraici Emendationes quibus in 
Vetere Testamento Neerlandice vertendo usi sunt A. Kuerten, J. Hooykaas, 
W. II. Rosters, II. Oort; edidit II. Oort (1900) ; W. R. W. Gardner, " Notes 
on Certain Passages in Hosea," AJSL. XVIII. (1902), 178-83; Bewer, 
"Text-critical Suggestions" (Ho. I2 1 4 4 - 8 , etc.), JBL. XXI. (1902), 108-14; 
Idem, "Critical Notes on Am. 2 7 8 4 ," AJSL. XIX. (1903), u6f.; Hirscht, 
"Textkritische Untersuchungen iiber das Buch Amos," ZwTh. XLIV. (1903), 
11-73; Miiller, "Textkritische Studien zum Buche Hosea," SIC. 1904, 
pp. 124-26; and W. O. E. Oesterley, Studies in the Greek and Latin Ver 
sions of the Book of Amos (1902) ; Idem, "The Old Latin Texts of the Minor 
Prophets, I." (Hosea), Journal of Theological Studies, V. (Oct. 1903), 76-88. 
These last two studies are of especial value in the effort to determine the 
original text of <&, but were not received in time to .be of material assistance 
in the preparation of this volume. 


Of the older commentaries the more important are those of 
Jerome (| 420 A.D.), Aben Ezra (t 1167), Kimchi (f 1230), Luther, 
Calvin, Pococke (on Hosea, 1685), Mercerus (1698), Gebhard 
(1737), Harenberg (Amos, 1763), Manger (on Hosea, 1782), Vater 
(Amos, 1810); Stuck, Hoseas Propheta (1828); Maurer (1836) ; 
Hitzig (1838 ; 3d ed. 1863) ; Ewald (1840) ; and Umbreit (1844). 

From 1845 to 1880 may be mentioned: Baur, Der Prophet 
Amos erklart (1847) \ Diisterdieck, " Beitrage zur Erklarung des 
Propheten Amos," SK., 1849, pp. 869-914 ; Simson, Der Prophet 
Hosea erklart u. iibersetzt (1851); Kurtz, Die Ehe d. Propheten 
Hosea (1859); Linder, " Bemerkungen iiber einige Stellen im 
Propheten Hosea," SK., 1860, pp. 739-49; Pusey, Minor Prophets, 
I. (1861) ; Lowe, Beitrage zum Verstandniss des Propheten Hoseas 
(1863) ; Ewald, Propheten d. Alien Bundes (2d ed. 1867 ; English, 
1875) ; Wiinsche, Der Prophet Hosea ubersetzt und erklart mit 


Benutzung der Targumim u. der judischen Ausleger (1868) ; Hen 
derson, The Book of the Twelve Minor Prophets (1868) ; Schmoller, 
Exposition of Hosea and Amos in Lange s Bibelwerk (1872; 
English translation of Hosea by J. F. McCurdy, of Amos by 
T. W. Chambers, 1874) ; Duhm, Die Theologie der Propheten 
(1875), 109-41; Houtsma, " Bijdrage tot de kritiek en verkla- 
ring van Hozea," ThT. IX. (1875), 55-75 ; Hermann, " Exege- 
tisch-kritische Bemerkungen zu einigen Stellen aus Hosea," SK. 
III. (1879), 515-7 ; A. B. Davidson, "The Prophet Hosea," Exp. 1 
IX. (1879), 241-64; Tottermann, Die Weissagungen Hoseas bis 
zur ersten assyrischen Deportation erlautert (1879). 

During the last twenty-five years much attention has been 
given to the Minor Prophets in general, and more to Amos and 
Hosea in particular. The list of works includes : Oort, " De 
profeet Amos," ThT. XIV. (1880), 114-59; Nowack, Der Pro 
phet Hosea erklart (1880) ; Buhl, "Beitrage zur Erklarung des 
Propheten Hosea," ZKW. 1881, pp. 227-35 ; w - R - Smith, art. 
" Hosea," Enc. Br.XII. (1881) ; Keil, Minor Prophets, in Keiland 
Delitzsch s Biblische Commentary I. (1866; 2d ed. 1873; transl. 
1880, 2d ed. 1888) ; Hitzig-Steiner, Die zwolf kleinen Propheten 
erklart (4th ed. of Hitzig s Commentary, by Steiner, 1881) ; W. R. 
Smith, Prophets of Israel (1882 ; new edition, with Introduction by 
Cheyne, 1895 ) \ Scholz, Commentar zum Buche des Propheten Hosea 
(1882) ; Hoffmann, " Versuche zu Amos," ZAW. III. (1883) 87- 
126 ; Briill, " Beitrage zur Erklarung des Buches Hosea," Jahrb. 
/. jud. Geschichte u. Litteratur, 1883, pp. 1-62 ; Cheyne, Hosea, 
with Notes and Introduction (Cambridge Bible, 1884) ; Sharpe, 
Notes and Dissertations upon the Prophecy of Hosea (1884); 
Gunning, De Godspraken van Amos (1885); Zeydner, " Het 
Vaderland van Amos," Stemmen voor Waarheid en Vrede, 1886, 
pp. 548-53; de Visser, Hosea de Man des Geestes (1886); 
Cornill, "Hosea I2 1 ," ZAW. VII. (1887), 285-9; A. B. David 
son, "The Prophet Amos," Exp. 2 V. (1887), 161-79; VI. 161- 
73; Mitchell, "The Idea of God in Amos," JBL., Dec. 1887, 
PP- 33-4 2 ; Orelli, Die z-wolf kleinen Propheten (1888; transl. 
by J. S. Banks, 1893); Schuurmans Stekhoven, "Het Vader 
land van Amos," ThSt. VII. (1889), 222-8; Sayce, "The 
Book of Hosea in the Light of Assyrian Research," JQR. 


1889, pp. 162-72; Bachmann, Praeparationen zu den kleinen 
Propheten(i%<)Q)i Zeydner, " Nog lets over den prefect Amos," 
Stemmen voor Waarheid en Vrede, 1890, pp. 613-34; Oort, 
"Hozea," ThT. XXIV. (1890), 345-64, 480-505; Idem, " Het 
Vaderland van Amos," ThT. XXV. (1891), 121-6; Kirkpatrick, 
Doctrine of the Prophets (1892; 3d ed. 1901), 83-142; Well- 
hausen, Die kleinen Propheten ilbersetzt und erkldrt (1892 ; 3d ed. 
1898) ; Lagrange, "La nouvelle histoire d Israel et le prophete 
Osee," Revue biblique, I. (1892), 203-38 ; Smend, Lehrbuch der 
alttestamentlichen Religionsgeschichte (1893; 2d ed. 1899), 179- 
86, 204-18; Michelet, Amos oversat (1893); Mitchell, Amos, 
an Essay in Exegesis (1893; 2d ed. 1900) ; Billeb, Die wich- 
tigsten Satze d. alttestamentlichen Kritik vom Standpunkt der 
Propheten Amos und Hosea aus betrachtet (1893) ; Driver, art. 
"Amos," Smith s Dictionary of the Bible (2d ed. 1893); Kirk 
patrick, art. "Hosea," ibid.; Beer, "Zu Hosea XII.," ZAW. 
XIII. (1893), 281-93; Boehrner, "Die Eigenart des Heilspre- 
digt des Amos," SK., 1893, pp. 35 ff. ; Guthe, Translation and 
notes in Kautzsch s Heilige Schrift d. A. T. (1894 ; 2d ed. 1896); 
Valeton, Amos en Hosea. Een hoofdstuk uit de geschiedenis van 
Israels gods dienst (1894; German, 1898) ; N. Schmidt, "On the 
Text and Interpretation of Am. s 25 " 27 ," JBL. XIII. (1894), 1-15 ; 
Paton, " Did Amos Approve the Calf- Worship at Bethel ? " ibid., 
80-91 ; Cornill, Isr. Prophetismus (1894 ; English, 1898), 37-55 ; 
Skipwith, "Note on the Order of the Text in Hosea 1-3," JQR. 
VII. (1895), 480 ff.; Oettli, "Der Kultus bei Amos und Hosea," 
Greifswalder Studien (1895), pp. 1-34 ; Tesch, Setzt der Prophet 
Amos autoritatives Gesetz voraus ? (1895) j Paton, " Notes on Ho- 
sea s Marriage," JBL. XV. (1896), 9-18; George Adam Smith, 
The Book of the Twelve Prophets, I. (1896) ; Loftman, Kom- 
mentar till prof. Hoseas bok (1896) ; Nowack, Die kleinen Pro 
pheten itbersetzt und erklart (1897; 2d ed. 1903); Cheyne, 
"Notes on Obscure Passages of the Prophets," Exp? V. (1897), 
41-51 ; Idem, "A New German Commentary on the Minor Proph 
ets," ibid., VI. (1897), 361-71 ; Volz, Die vorexilische Jahwepro- 
phetie und der Messias (1897) ; Budde, "Die Uberschrift des 
Buches Amos und des Propheten Heimat," in Semitic Studies in 
Memory of Rev. Dr. Alexander Kohut (1897), 106-10 ; Driver, 


Joel and Amos (Cambridge Bible, 1897) ; Seesemann, Israel und 
Juda bei Amos und Hosea, nebst einem Exkurs uber Ho. i-J 
(1898) ; Hartung, Der Prophet Amos nach dem Grundtexte erklart 
(1898) ; Volz, " Die Ehegeschichte Hosea s,"Zze/7%. 1898, pp. 321- 
35 ; Taylor, art. " Amos," DB. I. (1898) ; Cheyne, art. "Amos," 
EB. I. (1899) ; A. B. Davidson, art. "Hosea," DB. II. (1899); 
Vetter, "Die Zeugnisse der vorexilischen Propheten liber den 
Pentateuch ; I. Amos," Theologische Quartalschrift, 1899, pp. 512- 
52 ; Vienney, Amos de Tekoa, son epoque et son livre (Dissertation, 
1899) ; Elhorst, De Prophetie van Amos (1900) ; Giesebrecht, Die 
Geschichtlichkeit des Sinaibundes untersucht (1900) ; Muss-Arnolt, 
"Amos 5^(21-27); Exp* II. (1900), 414-28; Houtsma, ThT. 
XXXIV. (1900), 429 ff. (review of Elhorst); W. R. Smith and 
K. Marti, art. " Hosea," EB. II. (1901) ; Procksch, Die Geschichts- 
betrachtung bei Amos, Hosea und Jesaia (1901) ; Budde, art. 
" Amos,"y<?w. Enc. (1901) ; Oettli, Amos und Hosea, zwei Zeugen 
gegen die Anwendung der Evolutionstheorie auf die Religion Isra 
els (Beitrage zur Forderung christlicher Theologie, Jahrgang 5, 
Heft 4, 1901) ; Grimm, Liturgical Appendixes in the Old Testa 
ment (1901), 60-78, 88-93; Da y an d Chapin, "Is the Book of 
Amos Post-Exilic? " AJSL. XVIII. (1902), 65-93 ; Nowack, " Die 
ZukunftshofTnungen Israels in der Assyrischen Zeit," in Theolo 
gische Abhandlungen (Festgabe fur H. J. Holtzmann, 1902), 33- 
59 ; Riedel, Alttestamentliche Untersudmngen, Heft I. (1902), 
1-36 ; Boehmer, " Die Grundgedanken der Predigt Hosea s," 
ZwTh. XLV. (1902), 1-24; Halevy, "Le livre d Osee," Revue 
Semitiqiic, X. (1902), 1-12, 97-133, 193-212, 289-304; Idem, 
" Le livre d Amos," ibid., XI. (1903), 1-31, 97-121, 193-209, 
289-300 ; XII. (1904), 1-18 ; Meinhold, Studien zur israelitischen 
Religionsgescliichtc, I. Der heilige Rest (1903), 33-88; Cheyne, 
Critic a Bib lie a, II. (1903); Marti, Dodckapropheton (Kurzer 
Hand-Commentar z. A.T., 1903); J. A. Montgomery, "Notes on 
Amos," JBL. XXIII. (1904), 94-96 ; R. F. Horton, The Minor 
Prophets, Hosea-Micah (The New-Century Bible, 1904); von 
Ryssel, art. " Hosea," Jew. Enc. (1904). 

Literature on the poetical form and the text is given in con 
nection with 20 and 22, pp. clxv f., clxxvii f. 






The Song of Deborah (Ju. 5). 
Nathan s Parable (2 S. 12 1 - 4 ). 
The Blessing of Jacob (Gn. 49). 
The Oracles of Balaam (Nu. 23, 24). 
The Stories of Creation, the Deluge, etc. 
The Song of the Exodus (Ex. 15, earliest 


The Patriarchal Traditions. 
Traditions of the Conquest. 
State Annals. 
Traditional Customs. 
The Order of Seers. 
The Nebhi im. 
The Xazirites. 

The Institution of the Kingdom. 
The National, or Patriotic, Spirit. 
The Life and Work of Samuel. 
The Prophet Nathan. 
Gad, the Seer. 
The Oracle, Ephod, Teraphim. 

The Book of Jasher (Jos. 10 13 ; 2 S. I 18 ). 
The Book of the Wars of Yahweh (Nu. 

21 14 ). 

Jotham s Fable (Ju. 9 7 r -). 
David s Lament over Saul and Jonathan 

(2 S. I 17 ") 

David s Lament over Abner (2 S. 3 33 r -). 
Early Proverbs (1 S. 10" r -; 24 13 ). 
Popular Riddles (Ju. 14 14 - 18 ; 15 18 ). 
Ancient Folk-lore. 
Ancient Legends and Songs e.g.: 

Lamech s Song (Gn. 4* f -). 

Song of the Well (Nu. 2 1 17 f -). 
Ancient Laws (e.g. 1 S. 30 24 ). 
Religious Institutions e.g.: 



The Sabbath. 

Clean and Unclean. 


The Ark. 

The Priesthood. 

Local Sanctuaries. 

The Temple. 


1 --c - ^ 




i* |^| ^ ^ rt IK- 
if.,*!* II "is 


?*-, ei * " i J^pH>~i T35 _-< 
H* *^ >W ** <^5 ^i.;^- 

> I 


H , 

2 i 

K ! O 

< 3 

tf S 

r/l K 


C o. 5 < SJ Z ^ ^ -fci ^-^"""O 73 











|| | 




|1| | 


^"^ C 

a^ I 
5rf i 





ii ^ 

Jehu s 

I 5 1 


3- s -g g 

x s rt & 

41 2 


J 3 

=5 e C 


*;*- X 


"^ >. 

~ ^ S -2 


I? | ^ 

S 05 
*. ^ 



Mil I lill i ^ilJ 

2 ; 

ap ! 



























J2 "C C 3 

1 S i| 

s 1 -i- 

1 S || 

lf! -a-s^-s 






OOoO * 

.s -s a 5-S o i 
.5 it a ^M % & 

jjj g .*|UII. s |l 

"o<; = ,- 

s,* 5 i>> 

|ld 1- s| 

111 12 li 




*C 2 OC 



Is Jl 

0, C2 

S S3 t - 

h- t^ t> 

3^S s.2o |s .i g &"--lfjj|/41i i 

"^-S^"^ < sH a-l SaS rt J S 1 "^ S l S" 
o^fet Q .-IfilSflLrt-eWrfiaJBi! 

h is 



>> "5 


Q M 

I al 

I i 

5 .l 

-5 *"3 c J2-- S, e8 

cc S 5 %, | | .g 

J M s 1, j ftPj jj 




* 8 

3 u c 





^ s 










IS i? 


00 CO 


23 gf! gf 


1. The superscription : Occupation and residence of Amos; 
date of his work. i 1 . 

The superscription contains the title, the author s name, his 
occupation, his home, the subject treated, and the date ; the last 
in two forms.* This is the most exact and complete of all the 
superscriptions to prophetic utterances, f Although it may well 
be supposed that Amos prepared, perhaps in Jerusalem, the 
edition of his sermons, which, with some modifications has been 
handed down to us, it is improbable that so early an author would 
have prepared such an elaborate superscription ; it is better to 
understand that it comes from a post-exilic period. \ The editor 
evidently makes Amos precede Hosea, since only Uzziah is men 
tioned among the kings of Judah. It is important to note that, 
whatever may be the age of the superscription, it is entirely con- 

* Uhland, Annotationes, 3-30; Juynboll, Disputatio de Amos, 1-8, 11-18, 27-32; 
Ba. 38-110; Oort, "De Profeet Amos," ThT. XIV. 122-7; Matheson, "Studies in 
the Minor Prophs.," Exp. III. (1882), 342-4; WRS., Prophs. 120 ff., 395; Sta. 
GVL I. 562-75; Da. Exp. V. (1887), 161-79; Stekhoven, " Het vaderland van 
Amos," ThSt. 1889, 222-8; Mit. 1-22; Gun. 13 ff. ; Now. 121 ff.; GAS. I. 67 f. ; 
Che. EB. I. 147 ff. ; Dr. 93 ff., 125 ff. 

f Ho. gives title, author, parentage, date; Mi., title, author, country, date, sub 
ject; Na., title, subject, author, country; Zp., title, author, parentage (fully), date; 
Hb., title, author, occupation (prophet) ; Hg., no proper superscription, the first 
verse contains date (to the day), title, author, occupation (prophet), those to whom 
his message was addressed ; Zc., date, title, parentage, occupation (prophet) ; 
Mai., title, subject (to Israel), author ; Ob., title, author ; Jo. and Jon., title, author, 

J So Che. EB. ; Tay. DB. ; Bu. Jew. Enc. Now. ; Houtsma, ThT. 1900, p. 432. 
B I 


sistent with the contents of the book and is to be accepted as 


1. onpja run ntp] a gloss; orig. text, words of Amos of Tekoa, cf. Ju. I2 8 
[Bu. in Kohut s Semitic Studies (1897), 106-10; id. Jew. Enc. I. 530; 
Now.; Lohr, 3]; present structure very awkward; but cf. Or. (fol. De.) who 
makes jnpn . . . T^N a later addition; and Oct. (p. 65) who suggests that in 
this case ^prn (2 S. 23 26 ) would have been used, onpja] @ tv AnKapcLfj., 
probably for ev NaK/ca/>efyi, initial v having been lost after tv [so Drusius, 
Grotius, Vol. Cf. the suggestion of Hirscht (ZivTh. XLIV. 45) that & is 
based on a marginal gloss anrx, added in explanation of onpj] ; cf. 
2 K. 3 4 ; some codd. of (JI Ka/ncttfiapefyt; A. 7rot/xj toTp60ois; S. rots T 

(= herdsmen}; Q. vuKedel/j.. & pru i^r. & 1|-2J, merely transliterating 
the Heb. SXT^] (JH lepova-aXrj/j., probably confusing similar abbreviations. 
& sons of Israel. Cf. the form of the superscription in IL: sermoncs Amos 
quos vidit super Hierusalem. 

1 a. The words of Amos ] The titles of the prophetic books * 
generally contain some reference to Yahweh, as the author of the 
words spoken, or some technical expression which implies such 
authorship (Na. i 1 Hb. i 1 ). This phrase (Je. i 1 Hg. i 12 ) con 
tains no allusion to a specifically active human element,f since 
the words are recognized as Yahweh s words. Nor does the 
plural designate the writing as composed of distinct prophecies, \ 
since every book is similarly made up of distinct prophecies. 
There is likewise no reason to suppose that the original super 
scription was limited to these words. The Amos of this book 
has sometimes been confounded with the father of Isaiah, || but 
for the most part tradition has rightly distinguished between the 
two. Concerning Amos see Introduction ( 12). Who had been 
among the shepherds ] v.s. That is, he was one of the shep 
herds in Tekoa ; not with the distinctive use of the preposition, 
viz. he was great among them.^f Here one must compare 7 14 

* Cf. (i) the similar introduction of Je.; (2) "the word of "> " of Ho., Mi., Zp., 
and Jo.; (3) " the burden " of Na. and Hb. ; (4) "the burden of the word of \" 
of Mai.; (5) "the vision" of Is. and Ob.; (6) the introductory formula "and it 
came to pass " of Ez. ; (7) " was the word of "> by Hg. the prophet" ; (8) " was the 
word of "> unto Z." f Cf. Ba. + Geb. $ Implied by Val. 79 ff. 

|| Clem, of Alex, and Pseudepiph (see Ba.). 

U Ki., Ephraem ; cf. Bu. (in Kohut, Semitic Studies, 20, io6ff.), who translates: 
who had been among the sheep breeders, (a man) of Tekoa ; so Che. in EB. I. 
147 ; but in Crit. Bib. he treats anpj as a proper name. 

in which Amos calls himself a herdsman (but see p. 8). Was 
Amos an owner of sheep, and wealthy? So most Jewish inter 
preters, who urge that this is implied in the use of the same word 
of the King of Moab (2 K. 3 4 ) ; and that if a slave or servant, he 
could not have left his work for an excursion of this kind ; but the 
fuller description in 7", in which reference is made to his indigent 
circumstances, the etymology of the word, and the answer made 
to Amaziah (7 15 ), "Yahweh took me, etc." point to a simple 
shepherd. There is no reason to suppose that he was a slave.* 
From Tekod\ This was certainly in Judah, although it has been 
placed in Zebulon,f in Asher, \ in the south of Palestine, but 
belonging to Ephraim, (i.e. the ten tribes). || In favor of 
Judah are (i) the evidences elsewhere found that Amos was 
of Judah, e.g., the command of the priest (7 12 ) to Amos to flee to 
Judah ; likewise " the exact scenery of his visions " which is seen 
from Tekoa ;t (2) the references in 2 S. if 2 3 26 Je. 6 1 2 Ch. 2O 20 
i Mace. g 33 . The place lies six miles south of Bethlehem (twelve 
miles south of Jerusalem) .** The hill, four or five acres, is broad 
at the top and not steep. The surrounding country is sterile and 
rocky, but rich in pasturage. The wilderness of Tekoa (2 Ch. 20 20 ) 
is part of the wilderness of Judah.jf The preposition " from " 
indicates that, like other shepherds, Amos came from Tekoa, but 
remained in the wilderness or vicinity. JJ While the Jewish fancy 
that Amos was wealthy has no basis, it is just as unfounded to 
say that Tekoa is mentioned as especially poor to show God s 
ability to confound the rich with the poor. Was Tekoa too high for 
the cultivation of sycamores? It is reasonable to suppose that the 
reference is to some low lying district in the Shephelah owned by 
Amos || || at some distance perhaps from Tekoa. Which he saw] 
This word originally marked the method of reception of the 

* F. Ba. f Pseudepiph. de vitis prophetarum, 245. % Ki. Cyril. 

|| Cf. Har. 45-9, who locates it on Carmel ; Graetz, Gesch. I. 403, who identifies 
it with Eltekeh of Jos. ig 44 , making Amos a Danite; Oort, ThT. XXV. 121-6, who 
makes him belong to the ten tribes. H GAS. HG. 315. 

** Its ruins, " extensive, but uninteresting," still remain, bearing the name ol 

Teku a (cJL>). PEF. 1874, p. 27. 

ttSee also Ba.; Rob. BR? I. 486 f . ; Stickel, Das Buck Hiob, 269-77; K.ue. 
HCO? II. 355 f. H Hi. Gal., Us. |||| Che. EB. 


divine communication as by vision. The vision may have been 
merely a dream, a vision of the night, or a half-sleeping, half- 
waking condition, as with the Syrian monks of the present day ; 
or the ecstasy or trance. It is impossible, in the majority of 
cases, to distinguish between these forms. Such visions came to 
non-prophets (i K. 3* i S. 28 8ff -) as well as to prophets (i K. ig 6 
i S. a 1 14 )- 

An earlier and a later usage may be noticed: (i) In the earlier period 
nm (as well as nxt of which it is often the poetic equiv.) marks the 
reception of the message, which is seen as well as heard (cf. ^rpfco Am. 9 1 
Is. 6 1 ; JNin Am. j l 4 - 7 8 1 2 Ki. 8 10 - 13 ; this is in accordance with the Arab. 
i<\Uif used of clairvoyants, soothsayers, those who can foretell the future 
(cf. Hoffm. ZA W. III. 92 f.). At this time *o:n had reference to the speaking 
or impartatiou of the communication to others. N*OJ is not (a) a passive 

formation from a root toj = J73J to bubble forth; Arab. *AJ to well forth 

(Redslob, Der Begriff des Nabi (1839); and Ho. J^ 10 , p. 30; Ke. on Gn. 2O 7 ; 
Kue. Proph. 42; Maybaum, Die Entwickelung des isr. Prophetenthunis, 113; 
Baud. EinL 314); nor (b} a noun, designating an ordinary speaker from NOJ, 

cf. Arab. LxJ utter a low sound, Assyr. Nm nabu, name, call (Or. Proph. II f.; 
K6. II. i, pp. 133, 407; BDB.; cf. WRS. Proph. 390 f.); but (c} as is seen 
from the use of the Niph al to prophesy, an involuntary speaker, one who 
speaks under compulsion that which has been communicated to him 
(Hoffm.; Arab. Lo raise up, speak softly, hence s Lo soft wine). Per 
haps it is an active transitive (cf. Son; j^DN; S>*?fl; Tpc; ^rv) its object 
being DSJ, which he apprehends quietly but imparts vehemently with deep 
breaths, cf. Bewer, AJSL. XVIII. 120. (2) In the later period, the distinc 
tion between rim (also n&o) and toaj is broken down, the former, as well 
as the latter, meaning to utter or announce prophecy (Is. 2 1 Mi. i 1 (rim), 
Is. 29 11 2 1 2 ). In this verse, n?n has its later usage; and since the distinc 
tion between revelations "heard" and "seen" is made by the compiler of 
the book (cf. chaps. 1-6 with 7-9), the date of the expression would seem to 
be still later than the compilation. (Ba., Hoffm. ZA W. III. 95.) 

1 b. Concerning Israel^ The words of Amos were intended for 
the North, viz. Israel, not the South. The Northern Kingdom, there 
fore, seems to have been regarded by him as Israel proper, of which 
Judah was a fragment (i K. n 29 - 39 2 K. i7 18 ).* His utterances 

* See Seesemann, Israel und Juda bei Amos und Hosea (1898), pp. 1-17, in 
which it is shown that Amos always means Ephraim when he uses the name Israel, 
thus following the usage of the old sources of the historical books, e.g. K in 

concerning foreign nations, Syria, Moab, etc., like the similar 
utterances of Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, were intended for the 
ear of Israel. There is no reason to suppose that the outside 
nations ever heard them. In a true sense, however, even these 
utterances were concerning Israel, since the attitude of God 
therein depicted was the same as that assumed by him toward 
Israel and Judah ; and the affairs of Israel were so closely woven 
with those of the nations named as to make everything concerning 
them related in some way also to Israel. The fact that so much 
of the prophetic material has to do with the outside nations, 
coupled with the probability that no part of this material was 
given to them, points indisputably to the opinion here expressed, 
and justifies and explains the use of the phrase concerning Israel. 
In the days of Uzziah . . . and . . . Jeroboam~\ In corrobora- 
tion of this statement may be cited (i) the plain historical narra 
tive (7 9ff ) in which Jeroboam plays an important part; (2) the 
consistency between the representation made in 2 K. i4 25 as to 
the extent of Israel s kingdom and the allusions in Am. 6 14 (the 
borders of Ephraim) and 6 2 (the destruction of Hamath) ; (3) the 
consistency between the situation which forms the background of 
the discourses of Amos and that which, as gathered from other 
sources, existed in the days of Jeroboam. The work of Amos 
would fall between 765 and 7503.0.* (see Introduction, 12,2). 
Uzziah~\ The long reign of Uzziah,f during which there was 
co-regency with Amaziah at the beginning and with Jotham at the 
end, was, in general, a period of comparative peace, and of great 
political prosperity. Judah was probably in a certain kind of sub 
ordination to Israel ; J the Philistines were severely defeated and 

I K. I2 18ff -. Though certainly familiar with the broader significance of the name 
Israel, he probably refrained from thus using it because of Ephraim s unwillingness 
to allow Judah to share it, and because after the division of the kingdom, ordinary 
usage limited the use of the name Israel to the North, the South being called 

* For a presentation of the view that the Book of Amos is really post-exilic, see 
AJSL. Jan. 1902, an article by Edward Day and Walter H. Chapin. 

f According to the old chronology B.C. 810-758 ; but 791-740, Schra. ; 783(7)- 
737, Kit. Hist. 1 1. 239 f. ; 767-716, Sta. GVI. I. 559; 79o(?)~74O, Marti, EB. 1.795; 
790-739, KAT*. I. 320; 783-738, HPM. III. 435. 

t Kit Hist. II. 331; Gu. EB. II. 2242; Paton, Hist. 205, 225 ff.; cf. KA T*. I. 
262 f. 


their fortifications at Gath, Jabneh, and Ashdod destroyed ; in the 
south the Arabs and Maonites were defeated ; the walls of Jerusa 
lem were strengthened. Uzziah probably accompanied Jeroboam 
in his campaigns against Syria and after Jeroboam s death made 
an independent expedition there.* He appears about 738 B.C. 
as head of a coalition of Syrian states against Tiglathpileser IH.f 
His name in the Book of Kings and in the Tiglathpileser inscrip 
tions is Azariah. Religiously Judah, while zealous for the temple 
ceremonial, was to a large extent under the influence of Israel 
and the outside nations. The power of the priests was increas 
ing, and it is probable that Uzziah was brought into conflict with 
them and that the mysterious incident (2 Ch. 26 16 ~ 25 ) really means 
that Uzziah was deposed and isolated by the priestly faction. \ 
Jeroboam~\ The reign of Jeroboam lasted about forty years and 
was marked by great political prosperity. While many wars were 
waged, peace existed during a large part of his reign. In the 
wars with Syria much northern territory (the district east of the 
Jordan) was recovered. This was accomplished the more easily 
because the Syrians were weakened by wars with Assyria. The 
limits of the kingdom assumed the widest extent (2 K. i4 25ff ), 
though the statement that his dominion extended to Hamath is 
thought to be an exaggeration. || The calf- worship was zealously 
observed at Bethel and Dan^f and a similar worship at other 
places. While this worship was conducted in the name of Yahweh, 
it was largely corrupt, including Teraphim, Masseboth, the Ephod, 
and the Asherah.** The prophets of the period tell us tt that this 

Kit. Hist. II. 335 f. 

fill R. pi. 9, II, Is. 3, 4, and III, Is. 23, 31. But this identification of Azriya u of 
Ya udi with Uzziah of Judah is called in question by an increasing number of schol 
ars who maintain that the Ya udi of Tiglathpileser s narrative is a district in Northern 
Syria mentioned in the inscriptions recently discovered at Sinjirli. So, e.g. Wkl. 
Forsch. I. 1-23 ; Id. KA T*. I. 262 ; W. E. Barnes, DB. II. 512 ; Paton, Hist. 233 f. ; 
Gu. Gesch. 188 f. ; Horn. Trad. 319; Kit. Konige, 263; Benz. Konige, 166; G. S. 
Goodspeed, History of Babylonians and Assyrians (1902), 230 f. ; Smith, O. T. Hist. 
(1903) , 226 f. ; but v. McCurdy, HPM. I. 413 f. J Kit. Hist. II. 331. 

According to the old chronology 825-784; but 790-749, Schra. ; 781-741, Sta. 
GVI. I. 559; 781-740, Kit. Hist. 11.240; 783-743, HPM. 262; 785-745, 
I. 262; 784-744, Paton, Hist. 223, 231. || Sta. GVI. I. 570. 

U Ho. 8-5. 6 i 5 Am. 814. ** Kit. Hist. II. 305 f. ; Ho. a** 17 3* 10*. 

ft Am. 26 ff- 316 41 57. 10 ff 63 ff 84 ff. Ho. 4! f- n ff- 6 f- la? *. 

LI 7 

reign was characterized by gross immorality, inordinate luxury of 
the rich, and by oppression and injustice toward the poor. Two 
years before the earthquake^ This phrase, contrary to Keil, is 
intended to mark a date. Since earthquakes (the view which 
makes it a civil commotion is untenable) are not infrequent in 
Palestine,* as may be gathered from their frequent mention in 
poetic descriptions, this must have been an especially severe one. 
Reference is made to it certainly in Zc. 14*, possibly also in Am. 
8 8 - 9 (an interpolation) and Mi. i 2 ~ 4 .f Tradition, according to 
Josephus, I connects it with Uzziah s attempt to act as priest 
(2 Ch. 26 16 ) and with a shattering of the temple in the year of 
Uzziah s death (Is. 6 4 ). On closer examination, however, we 
may ask, Does the editor mean to imply that this earthquake was 
a beginning of the fulfilment of the prediction of Amos ? Had 
there, in other words, been an interval of two years, a period of 
repentance, between the last words of warning and this the first 
flash of the lightning which consumed them? || Does this chrono 
logical statement carry with it the implication that his work was of 
short duration, limited, perhaps, to the one year, " two years before 
the earthquake, "1" or may it be inferred with Pusey from 7* 2 11 - 12 
that he had a long ministry, and that the discourses were written 
out only after a period of at least two years? The answers to these 
questions depend partly on one s conception of prophecy, but more 
largely upon data which are not at hand. Jerusalem itself seems 
seldom to have been affected by earthquakes, and this may account 
for the lack of reference to specific earthquakes by O. T. writers, 
this being the only case mentioned in O. T. literature.** 

Dicy] Only in this book, i 1 7 8 - 10 - 14 8 2 . <& A/ic6s which stands also for 
VIDN; proper names of the same form are piD>?, Ne. i2 7 - 20 ; fcx, 2 K. 2i 18ff -; 
fiDN, Is. I 1 ; pi"*, 2 K. I5 33 ; rnjr, Jos. I5 3 *; -IIDJ?, Jos. 7 24 ; the original vowels 
are not a u (Lag. BN. 28 f.), but a d (Earth. NB. 41, cf. 59; Lag. BN. 
69 f.). This form is found in adjectives (cf. Si-u, great}> abstract substantives 
(cf. tfhw, peace} ; with active significance (cf. piry, oppressor ; fin = jp) ; per 
haps never as passive. The etymologies suggested may be classified : (i) ov and 

* V. Pu. I. 286; Dr. 172; Che. EB. II. 1150 f.; E. Hull, DB. I.6 34 f. 

f Cf. also Jo. 2!. + Ant. IX. 10*. $ Cal. || Pu. If Bl. EM. 363. 

** Hoffm. (ZA W. III. 123) regards this case as an exegetical inference from y 3 6 
(cf. 78 8 2 ), the thought being that Israel s punishment is twice postponed, for a year 
each time; so Che. EB. I. 149; and Marti, EB. I. 776. 


ir-io a people put away, populus avulsus (Jer.; cf. Ba.), (2) connection with 
the Egyptian Amasis or Amosis (Ges. Thes. 1044), (3) for DID?, carried (in 
the bosom} or for Dpi?, carrying, burden-bearer, related to VDJ? (MV.; cf. 
Jer. in introd. to Jo.), (4) a hard or heavy people (Jer. in introd. to Is.), or 
heavy -tongued, lisping (Jer. on Am.), used of Am., who according to the 
Rabbins used D^3 (y 14 ) for is^a, cf. Ju. I2 6 . Of these (i) and (2) are 

absurd, (3) and (4) uncertain. The root (cf. jj*4-ft, to be oppressed ; Phoen. 
Day, to burden, v. Levy, Phon. Wort. 38), means (a} to lift and carry, Is. 46*, 
() to load an animal, Gn. 44 13 . It is probable, therefore, that the word is a 
simple adjective meaning heavy (Ba.). onpju run] = np_j rvn, cf. SINC ; DJH 
DW3, Is Saul also among (one of) the prophets ? (i S. lo 11 ), also 2 S. 15 31 
Ps. n8 7 ; cf. the tv of A. and S. v.s. The word onpj is of interest from 
every point of view: (i) ipiu of 7 1 * is probably a corruption of it; (2) the 
Hebrew forms from the same stem, viz. TV*, punctured, rnpj, point, c^^, 
bread-crumbs, indicate a root (not occurring as such in Hebrew) meaning 
puncture; (3) the cognate forms, Ass. n&kidu (Dl. Pr. 47 and HWB. 479; 

Muss-Arnolt, Z?eV/. 719; Evans, Essay on Assyriology, 74) and Arab. 

mean shepherd, the latter (Lane, 2837) being used of a particular kind of 

sheep, viz., tX&3, a kind having short legs and ugly faces, but furnishing 

P 7 

the best kind of wool; (4) Syr. |,~aJ, shepherd, and Moabitish -ipj (Mesha 
stone, 1. 30 [reading doubtful] ; v. Dr. Heb. Text of Sam. LXXXV. ff . and in 
Authority and Archaeology, 90; Smend and Socin, Die Inschrift des Konigs 
Mesa von Moab ; Lidzbarski, Handbuch zur Nord-Semitischen Epigraphik, 
I. 415 ff.; \V. H. Bennett, DB. III. 404 ff.), cf. 2 K. 3 4 ; (5) suggestions have 
been made : (a) from a root meaning pierce (cf. Jui3, used of a bird s boring, 
and of the bite of a serpent) from which is developed the idea distinguish, 


used particularly of separating good money from bad; hence JJ&, applied 

to a kind of sheep distinguished for choice wool (v.s. ); hence t>Uu 
" l i?. !| J (v.s.} ; () from a root meaning ta puncture explained by " stimulo 
hastae utuntur, pungentes calcem et pedes bovum posteriores" (Har.); 
(c) shepherd, so called because many of his sheep are "npj (Ki.). The 

idea of tfjn], as of its cognates \ji+\ (also j*C.\), Aram. yy^ t is to 

shake, tremble. It is used, therefore, only of noises which are connected with 
a trembling or shaking movement, e.g. of the quivering spear, Jb. 4i 21 ; of 
the thundering rattle of horses hoofs, Jb. 39 24 ; of the roll of wagon wheels, 
Na. 3 2 Je. 47 3 . Very appropriately, therefore, is it used of an earthquake, 
i K. I9 llf - Is. 29 6 Zc. I4 5 . Interestingly enough the root is not used of 
earthquakes in the other Semitic dialects, which, however, employ words of 

t> V 

similar significance (Aram. rr, Syr. p*ol (from JMT, move one s self}, Arab. 


from Js-K> move, shake}. 

1.2 9 

2. The text or motto of the book. i 2 . When Yahweh mani 
fests his power and majesty, all nature feels the terrible influence 
of the manifestation. The essence of the teaching of Amos seems 
to be presented in this verse, which serves as an introduction, pre 
pared either by himself or the editor. In any case it is a separate 
section and not to be immediately connected with what follows.* 
The verse is a stanza of four lines, in trimeter movement.f The 
parallelism is exact, lines i and 2 being synonymous, 3 and 4 
synonymous ; lines i and 2 synthetic with 3 and 4. The rhythm 
of the verse is inimitable : 

jvata m,T 


For an interesting theory as to its relation to the following 
stanzas, in which it is suggested that Amos went to the head 
quarters of the Northern King, accompanied by a chorus, and 
that the entire passage (Chs. 1,2) was presented in strophe and 
antistrophe, v. Miiller. \ Against the authenticity of the verse may 
be urged : (i) the phraseology is similar to that found in Joel and 
later authors (v. p. 12) ; (2) the words suit the context better in 
Joel than here ; (3) the tone of lamentation seems inconsistent with 
the severe announcements which follow; (4) the extremely fin 
ished and artistic character of the verse (zu.), in contrast with the 
spoken addresses which follow ; || (5) the lack of point in making 
Jerusalem so prominent in an address delivered to the citizens of 
Northern Israel;^ (6) the hostility, implied toward the high- 
places of the North, did not exist until after Amos s time. It is 

* So Dat., Ba., Reu., Gun., We., Now., GAS., Dr., et al. 

f See my articles in AJT. I. (1897), 140-5, and BW. XII. (1898), 86-9, 179-82, 
251-6, 333-8- 

J Die Propheten in ihrer ursprunglichen Form (1896) ; cf. Lohr, Untersuchungen 
zum Buck Amos (1901), p. 3 ; K6. Stilistik, Rhetorik, Poetik (1900), 348 ff. ; Zenner, 
Die Chorgesange im Buche der Psalmen, I. (1896), 5-8 ; Sievers, Metrische Studies, 
I. (1901), 134-41, 472-9; Baumann, Der Aufbau der Amosreden (1903) ; and on 
Hebrew Poetry in general, Briggs, General Introduction to the Study of Holy Scrip 
fure(iSgg}, 355-426. 

Che. in Introd. to WRS. Proph. XV. f., and art. "Amos," Efi. 

|| Seesemann, p. 5. U Volz, 19 f. ; Bu. art. " Amos," Jew. Enc. 

10 AMOS 

not enough to claim that Amos uses this utterance earlier, because 
in Joel the effect of Yahweh s indignation is very much exaggerated 
as compared with the effect described by Amos ; * or that the 
passage is not hostile to the high-places but implies merely that 
Jerusalem is the most prominent of the places at which Yahweh is 
worshipped.! The verse introduces the entire book and not the 
first chapters. 

2. JNB] Greek versions variously: 6 tyBtytaTo; A. S. 
6. ipct&Tai; while 2TE& translate as future. O jnn niNj] habitations of 
Kings; U speciosa pastorum ; & oasis inhabited by shepherds. ^Dian B>NI] 
T& fortification of their strongholds. 

2. And he said] This phrase is used after "words" of i 1 in 
stead of the more common " saying," because of the number of 
subordinate sentences intervening; cf. Ho. i 2 . Yahweh roars 
from Zion, and utters his voice from Jerusalem] This is found 
in Jo. 3 16 , but in a different connection. The verse is neither 
original with Amos and, with what follows, a reflection of his shep 
herd-life ; borrowed therefore by Joel who, in this case, lived later ; J 
nor is it original with Joel and repeated, somewhat later, by Amos, 
because though still unfulfilled he wishes to give assurance of 
fulfilment ; but by the hand of a post-exilic editor who inserts 
it here from Joel|| (v.s.). The " roaring " is that of the lion,f not 
that of thunder (as perhaps in Joel and Je. 25 30 ) nor of waves, 
though this is found elsewhere, cf. Is. 5 30 ; the phrase " utters his 
voice " is the Hebraistic expression for " thundering " (Ps. 46 
Jb- 37 4 ) ; the idea of both phrases is the manifestation of majesty 
and power. Zion] originally applied (a) to the hill Ophel, 
(b) to the ridge on which the temple stood, and later (c) to the 
entire city** (so here and in 6 1 and Is. 2 s ), and Jerusalem] of the 

* Mit. f Now. 

J Cocceius, quoted by Ba. ; We. ; Mit. ; Dr. 75 ; Id. art " Joel," EB. ; Now. ; 
GAS. ; Elh. 137. 

Ba. ; Reu.; Kirk. Doct. 63 ff. ; G. G. Cameron, DB. II. 675. 

|| Volz, 19 f.; Taylor, DB. I. 86; Che. EB. I. 151; Day and Chapin, AJSL. 
XVIII. 72 f.; Houtsma, ThT. 1900, p. 432; cf. Bu. Jew. Enc. I. 532. 

IT Ju. I4 5 Am. 3 4 - 8 Ps. I04 21 ; so Dr. ; et al. 

** Klaiber, ZDPV. III. 189 ff., IV. 18 ff. ; Riehm, HBA. II. 1839 ff. ; Starck, Pal. 
u. Syrien, 86 f. ; Smith s DB*. II. 1650 f. ; Miihlau, art. " Zion " in Riehm s HBA. ; 
BSZ. s.v. }vx. 

I. 2 II 

synonymous parallelism, are too local to be understood as mean 
ing the mass of the faithful children of God.* To the pure and 
devout worshippers of Yahweh, at the time of this utterance (/.<?. 
after the exile), the place represented by these names was the centre 
of the national life, as well as of the theocracy. The pastures of 
the shepherds mourn] The shepherd life of the author (whoever 
he was) shows itself in these words, which stand in relation of 
consequence to the first half. The Targumic " habitations " in 
stead of " pastures " has no basis ; nor is the translation " perish " 
instead of " mourn " on the ground of the parallel " wither " f well 
taken. The present tensej presents the descriptive idea better 
than the future "shall" or "will." The top of Carmcl~\% does 
not refer to the Carmel of i S. 25* in Southern Palestine, || the 
home of Nabal which, according to Eusebius and Theodoret, was 
a village south of Jerusalem, not a mountain ; nor may it be taken 
in a general way, " the best of cornfields," * but designates the 
mountain ordinarily so called (cf. 9 3 ) on the coast of Palestine, 
west of the plain of Esdraelon. The word, being originally an 
appellative meaning the garden, like certain other geographical 
terms,^[ has the article. No part of Palestine was more beautiful 
or fertile than the ridge of Carmel (S.E. to N.E. 12 miles, 1800 ft. 
high at the S.E., 500 ft. high at the N.W.) .** The greatest calam 
ity imaginable would be the withering of Carmel, Is. 33 9 Na. i 4 . 
The prophet speaks of a general characteristic of Yahweh with 
special reference to an impending judgment. In semi-proverbial 
form we have the essence of the prophetic thought ; the verse 
serves also, from the point of view of the editor, as a motto 
or text. The chapters which follow are merely the expansion 
of this thought, and the explanation of it. There will be locusts 
and drought (7 1-6 ) ; but the end will come about through Assyria 
(f 7"). 

* Geb. f Calv. 

t So We. ; Or. ; Gun. ; GAS. ; Now. ; Elh. ; but cf. Dr. 

Ba. 191-5; WRS. Sem. 156; Badeker, Pal* 259; ZDPV. VIII. no; Mit. 
55 f. ; Starck, Pal. u. Syrien, 103 ; GAS. HG. 150, 152-note, 337-41 ; Buhl, Geog. 23, 
163; Jastrow, JBL. XI. 115. For the city Carmel in Judah, cf. BSZ. 387; Rob. 
BR? I. 495-8. 

|| Jer.; Mich.; Justi ; BSZ. 387. f E.g. lySjn, v. 2 ; Jtton, 4!. 

** F. R. Conder and C. R. Conder, Handbook, 209. 

12 AMOS 

2. nin>] the position of this word makes the first half of the v. subordinate 
to the second, the force being, "When Yahweh out of Zion roars, and 
from Jerusalem utters his voice, the pastures of the shepherds mourn," etc.; 
GK. 142 c\ Dr. 165; H. 45, 3, b. The other alternative, to treat m,-p as 
emphatic, is scarcely possible. The emphasis rests on ?vx and oS^iT> which 
stand out of the usual order. A rhetorical climax is seen in both members, 
the roar of the lion passing into that of thunder; the waste of Carmel s top 
following the desolation of the pasture-land. If we omit ICNM the first word, 
and pronounce >JIN for nirp and nS for DT., we find that 21 of the 28 vowels 
in the verse are long (o (7), a (6), e (3), ^ (3), (2)), in other words the 
very vowel sounds with the frequently recurring sibilants (5) and liquids (13) 
suggest the thunder in its rollings, jxiy, jm] @ uses aorist or pf. (v.s.~), 
WESb, the impf., the former adopting the gnomic, the latter the prophetic 
interpretation; for variation in other Grk. versions v.s. Likewise in the case 
of V?3Ni and co 11 ! the same variation occurs. The use of the present expresses 
the thought as generic. H. 21, 3; Dr. 35; GK. 107^-. JNtt", niNj, iSa*n, 
COM] The usage of these words is of a late character; SJN is used figuratively 
as in Jo. I 10 Is. 24 4 - 7 33 9 ; but cf. Ho. 4 3 ; row as in Jo. I 19f - 2 22 ; vy as in 
Jo. i 12 ; JSP is used of "> only in Jb. 37* Je. 25 30 Ho. n 10 Jo. 4 16 , all post- 
exilic passages. Note further the similarity of v. 26 to Je. 9 9 23 25 37 Is. 33* 
Na. i 4 , all post-exilic except the first (v. Che. EB. I. 151, n. 2). 

3. Approaching judgments upon the surrounding nations.* 

i 3 -2 5 . The real work of Amos is to preach to Israel ; he begins his 
work, however, by announcing the judgment which is to fall upon 
the neighboring nations. In this he has a threefold purpose : 
i) To gain the good- will of those in whose welfare he is inter 
ested, and to whom his words are addressed. In this is seen the 
art of the prophetic method. 2) To show that a judgment is 
coming, which is to include all nations ; shall Israel be omitted ? 
3) To raise the question, whether, if these nations, without the 
truth as given by Yahweh s prophets, must suffer, Israel shall not 
suffer most of all. The literary work of Amos (though belonging 
to the earliest period of written prophecy) exhibits evidence of 
the highest poetical skill. A study of the utterances of Amos, with 
reference to their original form, discloses some interesting facts. 
Since the connection of thought and, in many cases, the very 
wording of the text, are largely dependent upon the results of such 
study, it will be necessary in each section, or closely allied group 

*Ba. 65-110; Ew. I. 151-5; WRS. Proph. 127 ff.; We. 67-71? Or. 109-12: 
Mit. 56-84 ; DHM. Die Propheten, 1. 62-66 ; McC. HPM. 1. 337-46 ; GAS. 1. 121 ff. 

I- 3-5 13 

of sections, to present a reconstruction of the text, including 
divisions into strophes, arrangement in lines, transposition, at 
times, of clauses or lines, and changes in the reading of words. 

Chaps, i 3 - 2 s constitute a literary unit and present the char 
acteristics of Amos as clearly as any other portion of the 

Its divisions are : 

against Damascus and Gaza, Strophes of 5, 3, and 4 lines. 
!&-io. 11-12 a g a inst Tyre and Edom, Strophes of 5 and 2 lines. 
I 12 - 15 2 1 " 3 against Ammon and Moab, Strophes of 5, 3, and 3 lines. 
2 4 ~ 5 against Judah, Strophes of 5 and 2 lines. 

The symmetry of the arrangement is not only striking, but sig 
nificant The significance of the variation in form in divisions II. 
and IV. will be considered in their detailed treatment. The 
arrangement of Miiller t does not bring out all the facts, and his 
theory of the poetical form of Amos requires an adjustment of 
the material so artificial as to throw the greatest doubt upon the 
whole scheme. 

I. 3-5. Judgment upon Syria. In his forecast of impending 
national catastrophes, the prophet begins with Syria, and charges 
the nation with sins, as a punishment for which Yahweh will send 
desolation and captivity. 

The strophic arrangement, if the opening and closing words, " thus has 
Yahweh said " and " said Yahweh " are included, is 5, 3, and 4 ; the clause 
"and I will break," etc. goes with strophe 2, because it completes the thought 
of the strophe, forming its culmination ; while the structure of the following 
sentence excludes it from strophe 3, including reference as it does to " com 
mon people," " ruler," " whole people." It will be noted that the arrange 
ment of i 6 - 8 is precisely that of I 3 " 5 . Miiller s arrangement, 5, 2, and 5, 
ignores the logical connection of the members, and the parallelism of i 3 - 5 . 
Line 5 of strophe i, and line 4 of strophe 3 are shorter than the rule ; and it 
is possible to treat them as parts of the preceding lines. Cf. Lohr, 3. 

3. U3 B>N] E here and in v. 13 has fern. suf. earn; so also 6 L . Hoffm. 
=U3^N(?) (ZA W. III. 97, v.i.y, Elh. -us eta. "m DB>n] & eirpifrv ( = 

* For the view that this entire section is exilic, see Houtsma, Th T. 1900, p. 432. 
t Die Propheten I. 63, 64; II. nj, ij. 

14 AMOS 

irploffiv ffiSrjpois ras tv yaffrpl exoi/aas ru>v Iv Ta\adS (l Ch. 2O 8 , T^i, 
@ Si^Trpio-ev) ; the additional words here (and in 3L) are perhaps an inser 
tion from i 13 (Vol.), unsupported by the other versions. 4. rojonx] < rd 
tfe/xAia ; A., 2., /Sdpeis ; 0., ras auXcis ; H domes. "nrrp] @ uiou A5fy, 
reading n for final i. 5. Tn^i] goes with strophe 2 (v.s.}. ps] @, 0., 
*ftj>; S ,0], so F z ^/z; but A. dvwfaXovs; S., E., d5t/cfas. -|Dim] @ om. 
pV rio] @ dvdpuv (cf. Ho. I 7 ) Xappdv (=pn); U </<3/w^ voluptatis. 
N-np (cf. Nu. I 15 i6 2 ); A., Kup^i T;; 3J Cyrenen. 

3 a. 7%j /^^^ Yahweh said~\ Usual formula for the introduction 
of each utterance, cf. i 6 - 9 - 11 - 13 2 1 - 4 - 6 . The tense (pf. not impf.) 
implies no particular time in the past at which the revelation has 
been given. The imperfect would have suggested a repeated 
statement on the part of Yahweh. Amos, like the other proph 
ets, is represented as Yahweh s spokesman. For three trans 
gressions, yea for four} Compare similar expressions in Je. 36 s3 
Pr. 3O 15 - m 21 - a Ecclus. 26 5 . The numbers were taken literally 
by the Rabbins, who understood that three transgressions had 
actually been committed which were to be forgiven, while the 
fourth was of such a nature as to make forgiveness impossible.* 
A symbolical interpretation, however, has been generally adopted : 
(i) Four and three added together = seven, a complete num 
ber ; t ( 2 ) three, the complete number, four, more than enough ; | 
(3) three, representing many, four the thing which calls for 
punishment ; or, as seems most probable, the two numbers 
together representing the idea of indefiniteness or lack of limita 
tion. || The word rendered transgression really means rebellion 
against authority (cf. i K. i2 19 2 K. i 1 ). Damascus } The coun 
try (cf. v. 5 , in which the city is thus designated) of Syria, or that 
portion of it of which Damascus was capital. From the days 
of Baasha and Ben-hadad I. (i K. i5 18ff ) there had been con 
stant struggle between Israel and Syria, in which Israel had 
suffered grievously (2 K. io 32 i3 22 ). At this time, however, the 
southern territory of Syria must have been in Israel s hands 
(2 K. if , 4 ). 

* So essentially Ew. Dat. 

t Cal., Os. U Gun., We., Mit., Val., Now., Marti. 

I Pu., Dr. 

1-3 15 

The country of Aram (o^x, Homer and Hesiod, * Apt/iot ; later "Svpla ind 

Stfpos, shortened from Affffovpta ; Ar. <*LwwJ!, i.e. North-land, as Yemen 


meant South-land ; the root (*j-* w , be unlucky, 3d form go to the left, hence > 

north) included the territory between the Taurus Mountains and the Arabian 
desert, the Tigris and the Mediterranean, except the coast land occupied by 
the Phoenicians and Philistines, and the possessions of Israel, Edom, Moab, 
and Ammon. The Aramaeans, or Syrians, were closely related to the Hebrews, 
and in the earliest times they seem to have lived in close relationship with each 
other. The early traditions, as presented in the Old Testament, connect the 
two families in the migration from Ur of the Chaldees (Gn. ii 31 24 10 - ^ 2y 43 ) ; 
represent the Hebrews as coming to Canaan, while the Aramaeans remained 
in Mesopotamia ; describe the residence of Nahor in Mesopotamia ; intro 
duce Balaam of Pethor on the Euphrates (Nu. 22 5 23 7 ; Pethor is identified 
by Schr., KAT 2 . pp. 155 ff.; KB. I. 133, with the Assyrian Pitru located on 
the river Sagur, near Hierapolis ; this, if correct, involves a slight inaccuracy 
in the Biblical statement that Pethor is on the Euphrates; cf. Che. on Pethor 
in EB.}\ and mention Cushan-rishathaim, King of Aram (Ju. 3 8 10 ). The 
Priest-writer of the Hexateuch uses the geographical term D"\N pa (BSZ. 655; 
cf. No. EB. I. 278), the field of Aram. Other references of interest are 
Gn. 22 20ff - 25! 28 2 (cf. io 22ff -) 3 1 47 Is. 36" Ezra 4 7ff.i7f. 52 ff. In the time of 
Saul, Zobah had become the centre of Aramaean power (i S. I4 47 cf. 2 S. io 6 ); 
and in David s time the King of Zobah, Hadadezer, was Israel s most dan 
gerous enemy (2 S. 8 3ff - io 16ff -). The different branches of Aram, viz. 
(i) ,wm o-w (2 S. 8 5ff -), (2) aim n>a DIN (2 S. io 6 cf. Nu. i3 21 ), (3) DIN 
rojro (I Ch. IQ 6 cf. 2 S. io 6 Jos. i3 n ), (4) aio (2 S. io 6 cf. Ju. u 3 ), (s)-vitfj 
occurring chiefly in connection with nape (Dt. 3 14 Jos. I2 5 I3 13 2 S. I5 8 ), were 
united under Hadadezer, and with the exception of TlEb, all took part in the 
war against David. At this time the dominion of the King of Zobah extended 
to Damascus and Hamath (2 S. 8 5 - 9 10 ) and beyond the Euphrates (2 S. io 16 ). 
The capital of Zobah was between the Euphrates and the Orontes (the Saba 
mentioned by Ptolemaus; Ew., cf. Ba.; also BSZ. 696). David defeated 
Hadadezer twice (2 S. io 13 - 18 ) and gained control of the country. A little 
later, a kingdom was established in Damascus under Rezon, one of Hadad- 
ezer s captains (i K. ii 23 " 25 ). In Solomon s reign this new kingdom was con 
tinually at war with Israel (i K. n 25 ). Henceforward Damascus was the 
capital city and seat of the kingdom of Aram, the word Aram itself, when not 
otherwise defined, being used for this kingdom (i K. I5 18 2 K. 5 1 6 8 - ^ Am. i 5 ). 
Only during the reign of Hezion, Rezon s successor, was there peace (i K. 22 1 ). 
For the view that Hezion and Rezon are identical, v. Ew. Hist. IV. 24, n. 5; 
GAS. EB. I. 990; Thenius and Klo. on i K. n 23 I5 18 ; and KAT*. 134; but 
cf. Che. art. " Hezion," EB. L; Kit. on i K. I5 18 . Wkl. Untersuch. 60 ff. reads 
Hazael on basis of (5 AL . Tabrimmon, son of Hezion, seems to have made a 
covenant with Judah against Israel (i K. I5 18 - 19 ). With Ben-hadad I., the son 

16 AMOS 

of Tabrimmon, the relations became still more delicate. A treaty was made 
with Baasha, King of Israel, but afterwards at the request of Asa, King of Judah, 
it was broken, and certain cities in the north of Israel were captured (i K. 
S 20 ^) Ben-hadad II. was frequently repulsed by Ahab, King of Israel, with 
whom Jehoshaphat of Judah was allied (i K. 2O lff - 22 3ff - 2 K. 6 8 - 24 ; for the 
view that the opponent of Ahab was Ben-hadad I. v. Wkl. Untersuch. 60 ff.; 
Che. art. " Ben-hadad," EB. ; but cf. Gu. GVI. 154). Ahab, fearing Shalma- 
neser II. (860-825) of Assyria, dealt very leniently with Ben-hadad, though 
victorious over him, because it was deemed expedient to keep Syria as a 
power between Assyria and Israel (F. Brown, Assyriology, 60 f.; Kit. Hist. 
II. 272). When Shalmaneser attacked Ben-hadad, Ahab and other neigh 
boring princes came to the assistance of Syria, but all were defeated in the 
battle of Karkar (854 B.C.; see Shalmaneser-Monolith, col. II. 91 f.; Schr. 
KGF. 359-64; KB. I. 172; COT. I. 182-90; We. SV. I. 31 ff.; Sta. GVL I. 
528 f.; McC. HPM. I. 272-80; R. F. Harper, ABL. 43). In the year follow 
ing (853 B.C.) Ahab took advantage of a respite from Assyria to make his 
fatal campaign against Ben-hadad (i K. 22 1 " 40 ). Hazael, the usurper, successor 
of Ben-hadad II. , captured the land east of the Jordan (2 K. lo 32 *"- 
from Jehu and Jehoahaz, and made a campaign against the Philistines (2 K. 
I2 17f -), in which Jehoash of Judah secured the safety of Jerusalem by giving 
him presents. But Hazael s son, Ben-hadad III., was defeated by Joash of 
Israel three times, and Jeroboam II. took away from him Hamath and 
Damascus, or, at least, part of the territory belonging to Damascus (2 K. I3 25 
1426-28). Moreover, Adad-nirari III. (812-783 B.C.) of Assyria besieged Da 
mascus and compelled its king, Mari, to pay heavy tribute. In the time of 
Amos, therefore, Syria was greatly weakened, but was probably giving signs 
of renewed hostility. 

3 b, c. I will not revoke it~\ Cf. Is. 55". The pronoun " it " is 
ambiguous here as in Nu. 23 Is. 43 13 48 16 ; it probably refers to 
the anger of Yahweh, i.e. the threatening which is involved in the 
preceding verse, and in this case the idea is that Yahweh will not 
avert the punishment which he has already threatened.* Others 
refer it to the specific threatening which is to be uttered in verses 
ind5 .f A different turn is given to the verb by translating it 
" repay," " pay back," J and making the sentence interrogative, 
although without the sign of interrogation. Hesselberg, however, 
giving the verb the same force but taking the connection differently, 
arrives at this interpretation, " I will not repay Syria for the inde- 

* Jus., Hi., Ew. ( Pu., Or., We., Now., Dr. f Marck, Mau. 

t The other meaning of a^n, revoke, turn, regularly requiring |*nn or *)N. 
So Va. 

1-3 IJ 

finable number of lesser crimes of which she has been guilty, but 
on account of her threshing Gilead," etc. Some refer the pro 
noun to Syria, the verb being translated " convert." * Others refer 
" it " to some earlier prophecy, the fulfilment of which has been 
delayed, but according to Amos will not be revoked.f The 
translation " I will not bring them back,"J requires a late date for 
the prophecy. By a change of pointing (v.s.) Hoffmann trans 
lates, "I will not let them dwell in peace." Because they have 
threshed Gilead ] The country, not the mountain, of Gilead is 
intended. The word is derived, according to Gn. 3i 47ff , from 
the Aramaic words meaning hill (b|) and witness ("II?) , || and 
accordingly was used at first as the name of the mountainous 
region forming the boundary between Israel and her Aramaean 
neighbors. For a good example of this narrower usage, see 
Ct. 4 1 . At an early period, however, it took on a larger meaning 
and designated, in contrast with Canaan, west of the Jordan, all 
the territory east of the Jordan except Bashan (cf. Dt. 3 13 Jos. 
i3 m L31f ). In Dt. 34 1 Bashan seems to be included.^ It stands 
specifically for the territory of the two and a half tribes (e.g. 
Nu. 32 26 - 39 Jos. i2 2 5 ). In i S. i3 7 Gad and Gilead are joined. 
That Amos used the word in the latter sense appears from 
2 K. io 32f -, although even here it is used in two senses in the 
same passage. ** With threshing instruments of iron} The read 
ing of & (v.s.) is without basis. References in the O. T. to 
threshing machines or instruments are easily classified according 
as they speak (i) of the ordinary work of such machines 
(2 S. 24^ i Ch. 2I 23 Is. 2 8 27 - 28 ) ; (2) of their use as instruments 
of torture (here, and 2 S. i2 31 i Ch. 2O 3 ), or (3) in a figurative 
sense (Jb. 4I 30 of the crocodile; Is. 4i 15 of Israel). To under 
stand their use as instruments of torture we must note the three 
forms which are described as still found in Oriental countries, 

* Jer. f Mit. J Day and Chapin, AJSL. XVIII. 73 f. 

Cf. the similar phraseology used by Tiglathpileser III.: "the land Bft-Amuk- 
kani I threshed as with a threshing instrument ; all its people, and its possessions 
I brought to Assyria" (KB. II. 4f. ; cf. ABL. 54). 

Cf. suggestion of Ba. ny_ Sj hill of eternity, Hb. 38 (ig nnn) and Gn. 49 2 


ifCf. GAS. HG. 548 f., 575-90; S. Merrill, art. "Gilead," DB.\ Che. art 
Gilead," EB. ** Ba. 


1 8 AMOS 

viz. (i) that seen by Niebuhr at Yemen,* a great stone, in 
the shape of a wooden drag, drawn over the grain by two oxen ; 

(2) that seen by Niebuhr in Syria, f a sledge, made of planks 
underneath which are fixed sharp flints, or pieces of sharp iron ; 

(3) that described by Girard, % a threshing wagon, consisting of 
a square frame of wood across which, parallel with two of the 
sides, run two axletrees, on one of which are three, and on 
the other four flat iron wheels. Only prisoners of war were 
thus tortured ; the custom was not uncommon of placing them 
on the ground like grain, and driving the machine over them. 
Other cruelties (cf. 2 S. i2 31 ) were practised at the same time. 
The cruelties here represented, whether literally or figuratively, 
were probably those practised by Hazael (842-802 B.C), in the 
incursions during the reigns of Jehu and Jehoahaz (cf. 2 K. 8 12 
I0 82f. j^r^ 4. Send a fire] For fire as a symbol of war, see 
Ju. p 20 ; of divine wrath, which frequently finds expression in war, 
Dt. 4 24 32 22 . The same words are used in Ho. 8 14 and Je. if 
2 1 14 4Q 27 5O 32 . It is hardly to be taken either as literal fire, or as 
lightning; || cf. Ju. 2O 48 and 2 K. 8 12 . In the house of Hazael^\ 
Hazael,^" the founder of the dynasty which sat upon the throne 
of Syria in the times of Amos, was a contemporary of Joram 
(2 K. 8 29 ), Jehu (2 K. io 32 ), and Jehoahaz (2 K. is 22 ). His occu 
pation of the throne was foretold by Elisha (2 K. 8 7 - 13 ). The 
allusion here may be to Damascus, or to a royal palace in 
Damascus, as favored by the parallelism, or to the dynasty of 
Hazael. In any case the thought is essentially the same. 
The palaces of Ben-hadad^\ A phrase practically parallel with 
" house of Hazael." The name scarcely refers to Ben-hadad I. 
(about 900), or Ben-hadad II. (about 874), both of whom pre 
ceded Hazael, but rather to Ben-hadad III. (2 K. io 3 i3 25 ),** 
the son and successor of Hazael. The suggestion ft that this 

* Reisebeschreibung -von Arabien, 158. f Ibid. 158. Post, PEF., 1891, p. 114. 

J Memoir e sur I agriculture, r Industrie et le commerce de I Egypte, II. 504 f. 
(cf. Ba.). 

Cf. Dr. 227 f. ; Now. Arch. 1. 232 ff. : Benz. Arch. 209 f. || Schro. ; GFM. Ju. 21. 

U Ri. HBA. I. 572; COT. I. 196 ff., 202 ff.; Sta. GVL I. 540-6, 562-6; Che. 
art. " Hazael," EB. ; C. F. Burney, art. " Hazael," DB. 

** Or., Dr.; v. GAS. art. " Damascus," EB.\ and KAT*. 134, on the question 
of two or three Ben-hadads. ft Cf. Mit. ; KA T*. 134. 

I. 4-5 *9 

may be the same as Mari whom Adad-nirari III. (803 B.C.) 
conquered is hardly tenable. By some the name is thought 
to be a title of Syrian kings as Pharaoh was of the Egyptian 
kings ; * others think Hazael and Ben-hadad are used as typical, 
representative names of the kings of Damascus.! 5. The 
bars of Damascus} The bars employed in ancient cities to 
fasten the gates are frequently used by synecdoche for the de 
fences of a city (Ju. i6 3 i K. 4 13 Je. 5i 30 Lam. 2 9 ). The power 
of Yahweh will break in pieces the defences of the city. An 
inhabitant^ i.e. the common people ; either so, or with equal 
appropriateness, the one sitting on a throne ; the former is favored 
by the context which has another term for ruler (v.i.) ; for 
the latter, cf. Ps. 2 4 22 3 . The valley of Aven\ If the He 
brew text be read with (^ JiK, \ instead of fiK, and it be remem 
bered that On was the Egyptian name for Heliopolis, a name 
given also to Baalbek, because it was a centre of the sun-worship, 
the prophet must have had in mind " the valley of the Lebanon" 
(Jos. ii 17 i2 7 ), the Coele-Syria of the Greeks, the modern El- 
buka a. With this may be compared Ezekiel s similar treatment of 
the Egyptian On (so 17 ). If the Hebrew text is retained, the pun 
is introduced to bring out more distinctly the idolatry. The inter 
pretation, valley of idolatry, || presents no satisfactory explanation. 
The sceptre holder} This phrase in Ju. 5 14 means governor, in 
Am. 2 3 judge.^ It evidently denotes the supreme officer, whether 
king or judge, and is either synonymous with inhabitant of the 
preceding member, or in contrast with it. From Beth-Eden\ The 
localities suggested for this designation are (i) old Jusieh, near 
Riblah, thirty miles N.E. from Baalbek ;** (2) the modern Jubb- 
Adin, twenty-five miles N.E. from Damascus, perhaps a country 
seat of the Syrian kings ;ft (3) Ehden or Bet Jenn, near the foot 
of Hermon, eastward ; J J (4) Ehden, on the N.W. slope of Leba 
non, near the great cedars ; (5) the Eden of Ez. 27^, || || (cf. 

* Jer., Bauer, Schro. ; cf. Je. 492^. f We., Now., Marti. 

X See against this view EB. I. 390. 

So Dahl, Hi., Ba., GAS. ; but v. We., Now., Dr. || y. Os., Gun., Or. 
II So Hi. ** Hi., Ke. ft St. ; Hoffm. ZA W. III. 97. 

}J Ros., cf. Ba. Bauer. 

III! Ri. HBA. I. 176; COT. II. n f.; Wkl. Forsch. I. 104; Now.; but v. Che. 
EB. I. 551 f. ; Dr. 228 f. 


2 K. iQ 12 Is. 37 12 ), which is the Bit-Adini of the Assyrian inscrip 
tions (often mentioned by Ashurnacirpal and Shalmaneser II.), an 
Aramaic kingdom, on both banks of the Middle Euphrates. The 
people of Aram] v.s. under Damascus. Shall go into captivity ] 
The word rh\ meaning to be or make naked is here for the 
first time used in the sense of go into captivity. The earlier 
word rotf to carry captive is used of captives as individuals, al 
though individuals are, of course, included in a general captivity 
(cf. y 17 ). nbj, on the other hand, stands for a national captivity or 
exile, when a whole nation is deported. Since the Assyrians (under 
Tiglathpileser III.) were the first to introduce this policy, the idea 
had not existed among the Hebrews before the time of Amos.* 
The policy, as history shows, was one which contributed to the 
fall of the Assyrian empire. To Kir] The following suggestions 
have been made: (i) The original home of the Aramaeans 
(cf. 9 7 ) ;t ( 2 ) tne place to which they were afterwards carried 
(2 K. i6 9 );J (3) to be pointed Tip and taken as the name 
of the river which rises in the Caucasus and empties into the 
Caspian Sea ; (4) Cyropolis ; || (5) the Syrian province, Cyrr- 
hestica;^" (6) Cyrene ; ** (7) Kurenia in Media, cf. Is. 2i 2 
22 6 ;|f (8) Kuris, north of Aleppo; JJ but nothing certain has 
yet been discovered. The latest suggestions are to emend *rp 
to pip, the name of a nation mentioned in Ez. 23^, corresponding 
to the Kutu or Kue of the Assyrian inscriptions; to emend to 
nip and identify it with the Karians whom Arrian (III. 8 5 ) men 
tions in connection with the Sittakenians. || || In the mind of 
the prophet the world power by which this judgment was to be 
executed was Assyria. This is evident from the historical situa 
tion of the times, in which Assyria, of all the nations, was the 
only one capable of accomplishing such a thing ; from the 

* McC. HPM. I. 327 f. But cf. GSG. History, 170, 239, who claims that this was 
introduced as early as Tig. Pil. I. (noo B.C.), and developed by Tig. Pil. III. 

t Ki., Ba. J Jus. 

Mich. ; Bauer, cf. Jus. ; but the name of this river begins with K not Q, and 
the river lies outside of the territory that was dominated by Assyria. 

|| Struensee, 214. H Har.; Furrer, BL. III. 534. ** 8T, A, U. 

ft Bochart, Reise., cf. Ba. J+ Socin. 

W. Max Miiller, art. "Kir," DB.; Wkl. Untersuch. 177; cf. Klo., Co., and 
Bredenkamp on Is. z&t- |||j So. Wkl. Forscfi. II. 254 ff. ; cf. EB. art. " Kir." 

I. 5 21 

"deportation" policy referred to in !"fai (v. 5 ), a policy peculiar to 
Assyria; and from the direct naming of Assyria by Hosea (io 6 ) 
the younger contemporary of Amos. The historical statement of 
the overthrow of Syria by the Assyrians is given in the Annals 
of Tiglathpileser III.* 

3. IDN] Indefinite pf. v. H. 17, 3; Dr. 9 ; cf. K6. Stil. 112 f. 
"Ui] So also vs. 6 9 - 1L 13 2 1 - 4 - 6 ; for this use of numbers to express the idea of 
indefiniteness v. GK. 134 s ; K6. Stil. 163 f.; for a similar use of one and two, 
Dt. 32 80 Je. 3 14 Jb. 33 14 40* Ps. 62 12 Ecclus. 38 17 ; two and three, Jb. 33* 
Is. i; 6 2 K. 9 32 Ho. 6 2 Am. 4 8 Ecclus. I3 7 23 1G 26 28 32 7 5O 25 ; /*r and five, 
Is. I7 6 ; _/fo<? and six, 2 K. I3 19 ; > and seven, Jb. 5 19 Pr. 6 16 ; seven and ^z^/, 
Mi. 5 4 EC. ii 2 ; nine and ten, Ecclus. 25 7 ; the same usage exists in Arab. 
(cf. Spitta, 132 ), in Syriac (cf. No. Syr. Gram. 240.5), in the Tel- 
el- Amarna Letters (87, 1. 44; 1 20, 1. 32), in Greek {Odys. V. 306) and 
Latin (Horace, Carm. I. 21, 13; Virgil, Aen. I. 94). -7^3] a stronger 
word than "O>, always containing the idea of wilful opposition, whereas the 
latter is the etymological equivalent of transgress, i.e. overstep the limit; 
cf. Nton to miss (the mark). IJ:T>N] It has been urged against the usual 
interpretation of this (i) that the suffix cannot refer to T, since this has 
not been mentioned and is not readily supplied from the preceding con 
text, (2) that it cannot refer to the threat in v. 2 , since v. 2 contains nothing 
touching foreign nations and, moreover, to represent "> as uttering a threat 
and at once declaring his purpose not to withdraw it is to compromise him, 
(3) that the suffix is not sufficient to designate an unspoken oracle, (4) that 
punishments are always revoked on account of repentance, not " on account of 
three or four transgressions" as here (so Hoffm. ZAW. III. 97; Elh. 139). 
But the emendations proposed (v.s.) are certainly no less objectionable, e.g. 
if it referred to the people the pi. suffix would be more natural, especially in 
view of the immediately following as>n; furthermore -ua^N N 1 ? is a very weak 
expression of the thought of exile. nixnna] The more ordinary word is jnio 
with which }M"in is used as a descriptive term in Is. 4i 15 ; the primary meaning 
of pn = cut, cf. Assy, harasu = dig; the ynn is mentioned again in Is. 28 27 
Jb. 4i 30 ; and possibly in 2 S. I2 31 where it is vocalized ]>nn. The modern 
name for the jniD in Palestine is nauraj, and among the common people 
mauraj ; it is still called mbrdg in the Kalamun mountains around Ma lula" 

* The passage relating to the conquest of Damascus is badly mutilated ; in part 
it reads as follows : " In order to save his life, he fled alone ... I entered the 
chief gate of his city ; his chief officer I captured alive . . . impaled him and sub 
dued his land ... I captured his city and shut him up like a bird in a cage . . . 
his groves which were innumerable I cut down and left not a tree standing . . . the 
house of the father of Rezin of Damascus, impassable mountains. . . ." See 
Layard, Inscriptions in the Cuneiform Character, pi. 72, 15.3-16; COT. I. 252-7; 
Rost, Die Keilschrifttexte Tiglat-Pilesers III., I. 34-7. 

22 AMOS 

(PER, 1891, p. 114; Dr. 227 f.). The njj ftfN and irtafc SaSa of Is. 28 27 f. 
point to the third form of threshing instrument mentioned above (v. p. 18). 

4. HIJDIN] A poetic word which does not occur in the Hexateuch, Ju., or 
S., and is used chiefly in the prophets. It is sometimes considered a for 
mation from onx (BSZ.; BDB.; K6. II. I, pp. 154, 203). It is probably a 
loan word of uncertain origin (E\v. 8 , 496). Its usual meaning is clearly 
palace, but it has also the meaning fortress, citadel. Cf. Assyr. ulminu, 
palace, and almattu, <:#.?// (Muss- Arnolt, Diet?). "nrrp] In view of <S vlov 
A5tp, Assy. Dad- idri, or better Bir- idri (=(7)IM- idri; Shalmaneser- 
Obelisk, 59, 88; KB. I. 134; Wkl. Untersuch. 68 ff.; Hilprecht, Assyriaca, 
76 ff.; Sayce, art. " Ben-hadad," DB.; Che. art. " Ben-hadad," EB.}, and 
the reading ITJ? -nn, (i Ch. i8 3 , for ~\r; -nn) the proper form is -nn p or 
better mn ns. The divine name Bir seems to have been confused by the 
Hebrew scribes with the Aramaic bar = son, and was thus rendered ben. The 
meaning of the name is " Bir is my glory." The name Adores used by Justin 
(36, 2) is identified by Noldeke (BL. I. 392) with our Ben-hadad. On the use 
of the name of this god in Syrian proper names v. Sayce, Hibbert Lectures 
(1887), 55 f. 5. px] Macrobius (Sat. I. 23) and Lucian (de Dea Syria, 5) 
state that the worship of the sun at Heliopolis in Syria was derived from Heli- 
opolis in Egypt (quoted by Rob. BR 2 . III. 518). On the supposition that this 
is correct, the name On is explained as having been carried over from Egypt 
also; cf. Egyptian Aunu. But the statements of Macrobius and Lucian are 
without further support and, as Dr. suggests, may be "nothing more than 
inferences from the fact of two celebrated temples being dedicated to a similar 
cult " ; if so, the name On together with the Egyptian theory of its origin, 
must go. In any case On was the secular, not the religious, name of the 
Egyptian Heliopolis. We. suggests the possibility that px is a corruption of 
the name of some god, and doubts whether Heliopolis was an Aramaic city in 
the time of Amos (so also EB. I. 390; cf. Wkl. Untersuch. 183 n.; Hirscht, 
ZwTh. XLIV. 46 f.; K6. Stil. 297). oats? -pirn] The Hadad inscription of 
Zinjirli, 11. 15, 20, and 25, contains the Aramaic equivalent of this phrase, viz. 
-an ?nx (DHM. Die altsemit. Inschriften von Sendschirli (1893), 20 f.; quoted 
by Dr.). Cf. the (TKTTTOVXOS jSacriXeris of Homer (//. II. 26; Od. II. 231). 

py nos] The Assyrian Btt-Adini was the occasion of more than one cam 
paign on the part of Ashurna?irpal and Shalmaneser II. The latter gives a full 
account (Monolith Inscription, col. I. 12-29, H- I- 35) of the capture of Ahuni, 
the son of Adini, the ruler of Blt-Adini; the inhabitants of Btt-Adini seem to 
have been called p> ja; the Assyrian inscriptions likewise speak of Bit- Am 
man, e.g. Bu-du-il sar Blt-Am-ma-na (KB. II. 149, ABL. 86.) while the O.T. 
mentions the pep ^a. The objection that Bit-Adini had long been subject to 
Assyria, hence cannot be the place referred to here, seems fatal (Che. EB. I. 
552; cf. Wkl. Untersuch. 183; Rogers, History of Babylonia and Assyria, 
II. 74; GSG. Hist. 191, 198, 213); Xappdv in @ is due to confusion of n 

and ~\. iSji] Cf. Arab. ^^. uncover, emigrate, and y^- make bare, go into 

1.6 23 

exile ; so Aram, and Syriac. It is applied but rarely to the exiling of indi 
viduals, e.g. 2 S. I5 19 , and is sometimes used figuratively of lifeless things, e.g. 
Pr. 27 26 I S. 4 21f - Is. 24 11 Ho. io 5 . naa> seems to have been the earlier word 

(cf. Arab. ^**H> ^ captured ; Syr. | Q^, take ; Assyr. sabu, to overpower, 
attack). nSj does not appear in this sense prior to the coming of the Assyrian 
forces westward. DIN] cf. Assyr. Aramu, which is never applied to people 
west of the Euphrates, who are always called Haiti. rrvp] W. Max Miiller, 
art. "Kir," DB., suggests that m>p DIN ay iS;n is an interpolation based upon 
9 7 ; urging that if Kir was the original home of the Aramaeans (9 7 ) the 
Assyrians would certainly never have deported them thither, but rather to 
some strange region. 

6-8. Judgment upon Philistia. Next in order Philistia is 
upbraided for the sins of which her cities have been guilty, in 
punishment for which the entire country shall perish. 

The strophic arrangement of vs. 6 - 8 is like that of vs. 3 - 5 , viz. 5 + 3 + 4. 
The parallelism is exact, if the line, " and I will turn my hand against Ekron," 
be transposed from the middle of v. 8 to be the last line of v. 7 . Even a hasty 
comparison of the two pieces shows that by this change, the lines of each 
piece beginning with " and I will cut off " are brought into the same position; 
likewise, in the case of the lines beginning with " and the one holding, etc.," 
while the climactic arrangement of strophe 3 is thus preserved. 

6. ua- tt N] renders suf. aurotfs. Vy] ^^e/cev; cf. dvd &v in v. 3 . 
(= nb>B>, or an error of a copyist for the transcribed 
Wkl. treats as a gloss based on v. 9 (Untersuch. 183; so 
Lohr.); but onsS cannot well follow en-tan (Now., Oct.) 7. nmn] <&%& 
pi. ; but cf. nna, ae>v, nsir. 8. atrv] (5 pi. lev] <& e^ap^o-erat. D^nc Ss] 
TUV d\\o<t>v\(t}i>, the regular rendering outside of the Hex. ^ma^tpni] to be 
transposed (z/.j-.). mn> IJTN] ( Ktfptos. 

6 a. Gaza~\ As Damascus (v. 3 ) represented Syria, so Gaza, as 
the largest city of the Philistines, and perhaps as the centre of the 
slave traffic here rebuked, is used for Philistia (v.i.). On this city 
v. George Adam Smith.* 

The name of the Philistines is similar in all the languages of their neigh 
bors. In Egyptian it is Purasati, and in Assyrian Palastu, Pilistu, and 
PiliStu. The Philistines were immigrants into Palestine from Caphtor (Am. 9 7 
Dt. 2 23 ), an island (Je. 47*), doubtless in the Mediterranean. This place has 
been variously identified, e.g. with Cyprus, Kdpirados, and Crete. The last 

* HG. 181 ff. 

24 AMOS 

seems most probable both from its size and from notices in which the Phi 
listines are called D^rna (<5 Kpyruv ) and similar expressions (i S. 3<D 14 - 16 
Ez. 25 15 - 16 Zp. 2 6 ; Ba., GAS. HG. 171). The view which places Caphtor in 
Egypt (Ebers, Aegypten u. Bucher Mose s, 127 ff.) is untenable, although pos 
sibly the Philistines dwelt there for a time before their final location (Gn. IO 14 ). 
A Semitic origin has been claimed for them by many (Ew., Sta. GVL I. 142; 
cf. W. J. Beecher, art. "Philistines," >.), chiefly on the ground of the 
proper names. But from part of the names and from their general un- 
Semitic characteristics, a non-Semitic origin is more probable (Ba., Wkl. 
GI. I. 216; McC. HPM. 192). The available evidence indicates that 
they were probably Aryan pirates whose first settlement in Palestine was 
made about the age of Ramses III. (Ew., GFM. Ju. 80 ; Brugsch, Egypt 
under the Pharaohs, 329 ff.; Ed. Meyer, GA. I. 319 f.). Probably in the 
patriarchal time they occupied a small territory between Egypt and Gaza (Ba., 
Beecher, Wkl., et a/.), since the early references to them are too numerous to 
be explained as later additions. They were so formidable at the time of the 
Exodus that the Hebrews were not willing to take the direct road to Palestine 
(Ex. I3 17 ). They were either partially conquered under Joshua and some of 
their cities taken (Ju. I 18 ), the view of many; or else they had not yet occu 
pied those cities, but toward the close of the period of the Judges were 
greatly strengthened by numerous immigrants directly from their original home, 
summoned because of their fear of the growing power of the Hebrews (Ba.). 
Near the close of the period of the Judges they became so strong that they 
invaded the territory of the Hebrews and subdued them (Ju. 14* I5 11 ). We 
have records of their defeating Israel (i S. 4ff.), and only in the time of 
Samuel were they defeated (i S. 7 3 ff - especially v. 14 ). Saul had frequent con 
tests with them (i S. I7 lff - i8 6 I9 8 23* ff - 29! 31*). After this time, they 
appear to have been so far conquered that they are seldom mentioned. 
Cf. the view of W. Max Miiller, AuE. 389 f, that the last Egyptian king of the 
2 ist dynasty conquered them. This explains why David and Solomon had 
little trouble with them (2 S. 8 1 ). 

6/b. Because they carried into complete captivity] Cf. Js. 24 5 28* 
Ob. 20 . This has been taken to mean: (i) a peaceful captivity, 
i.e. " captivity of those who lived peacefully with them, and had 
not injured them,"* (2) a holy or pious captivity,y (3) captivity 
of Solomon as in (&, which (although a copyist s error) is de 
fended by Theodoret, J while (4) Jerome understands it to mean 
a perfect captivity, i.e. the hardest service ; liut the phrase here 
and in v. 9 refers rather to a complete captivity, i.e. one of the 
whole people, neither age nor sex being spared (cf. Je. i3 19 ).|| Cf. 

* Geb., Grotius. f Jus. % Cf. Ba. Va. || Cal., We., Now., et aL 

I. 6-7 25 

the translations of Driver, they carried into exile entire popula 
tions ; Ewald, whole villages, and Winckler (v.s.) . To deliver 
them up to Edom] Either to deliver up as a fugitive slave to his 
master* (cf. Dt. 23 15 ), or to deliver over to Edom to be resold. 
From this reference, and from v. 9 , Edom, in these early days, must 
have been engaged in the slave trade between different nations.! 
There seems to be allusion to an historical incident, for the 
definite recovery of which the data are insufficient. According 
to Hitzig, the Phoenicians (see v. 9 ) sold the slaves to the Philis 
tines, who again sold them to the Edomites, the greater activity 
of the Philistines being reflected in the use of rfbsn rather than 
VJDPi, and in the order of the names in vs. 6 " 10 , Philistines, Phoeni 
cians, since Jo. 3* gives them in the reverse order. According to 
Baur | the Philistines sold them to the Phoenicians, and they again 
to the Edomites, Tyre being the chief slave market. For this it is 
urged that mbjn, used of the Philistines, means their actual removal 
from the land, while TJDH of the Phoenicians refers only to their 
dealing in them. Slavery was an essential element in ancient 
civilization, and the supply of slaves was in large part recruited 
from captives taken in war. The large demand for them under 
the ancient regime is evidenced by the gigantic pyramids of 
Egypt, by representations on Assyrian bas-reliefs, and by the 
legislation concerning them in the Hammurabi code; cf. e.g. 
15-20, 118, 119, 175, 176, 226, 227. Does Jo. 3 s - 6 refer to 
the same event? and is the event that which is described as 
occurring under Jehoram (2 Ch. 2i 16 ) or Ahaz (2 Ch. 28 18 ) || ? 
It seems best either to understand that reference is made to 
both of them and to any other similar event,^ or that there 
is no specific reference intended.** Indeed, it is not certain 
that mbo refers at all to the Israelites.ff The sons of Javan (Jo. f) 
may refer to an Arabian tribe (cf. Ez. 27 19 , v.s.) rather than to the 
Greeks. |t 7. Gaza~] Gaza, was the most southern (2 K. i8 8 ) 
and important of the five Philistine cities (i S. 6 17 ). Being the 

* Kusznitzki. 

f Cf. also Ez. 27 16 (reading DIN (Edom) for mN (Aram), as do <E, &, A., Da. 
Toy, Co., Hi., Kraetzschmar, et a/.). % p. 96; so also Ew. 

Mit. || Ros., Schro. U Jus. ** Os. ft We. 

JJ Ba. ; cf. Che. art. "Javan," EB.; Sta. Dos Volk Javan (1880). 

26 AMOS 

last town on the road to Egypt, it was always closely connected 
with Egypt.* 

Its situation on the edge of the desert made it important to caravans. It 
was located on a hill about a hundred feet high, three miles from the Mediter 
ranean, and fifty miles S.W. of Jerusalem. In ancient times it was the centre 
of great caravan routes north to Jerusalem, Damascus, Tyre, etc., and south 
to Egypt, South Arabia, Petra, and Palmyra. In the Tel-el-Amarna period it 
was held by Egypt. Early Israel probably never captured Gaza (Ju. i 19 3 3 
Jos. 1 3 s ). To the contrary effect are Jos. I5 47 Ju. I 18 (cf. ), which are prob 
ably later additions. Gaza (= Assyr. ffa-az-za-tu or Ha-zi-ti} suffered severely 
at the hands of the Assyrians in the times of Tiglathpileser III. (734 B.C.). 
In the Nimrud Inscription, 1. 62, Hanno of Gaza is mentioned as paying 
tribute; see ABL. 57; KB. II. 21. In the annals of Tiglathpileser (III. 
R 10, 2, Is. 19 ff.) in connection with the attack upon Israel, we read, "As for 
Hanno of Gaza [who] had fled [before] my [weapons] and escaped to 
Mutsri Gaza [I captured], its possessions, [its] gods [I carried away] 
. . . and my royal image [I set up]." See KB. II. 32 f.; COT. I. 247. 

8 c. And I will turn my hand~\ Strike with repeated blows, f 
rather than extend in a new movement. J Cf. also Ju. 6 9 Is. i 25 
Zc. i3 7 Ps. 8i 14 . This has been transposed (v.s). Ekron\ The 
northernmost of the four cities named, was of importance because 
it possessed an oracle of Baalzebub (2 K. i 2 ), and was on a 
good trade route, being on the northern frontier of Philistia, nine 
miles from the sea, in the vale of Sorek, where a pass breaks 
through the low hills to Ramleh. It was on a branch of the line 
of traffic. Hence, possibly, it is mentioned only once in the 
Egyptian lists, viz. by Thutmosis III. It was thus the nearest 
of the Philistine cities to Judah. 8 a, b. Ashdod~\ Was a well- 
fortified city, south of Ekron, 21 miles N.E. of Gaza and three 
miles from the seacoast; cf. Jos. i3 3 i S. 6 17f -. It was anciently 
of importance as the halfway station on the road from Gaza to 
Joppa. It was well watered, and situated at the mouth of the 
most broad and fertile valley of Palestine. The cult of Dagon 
was especially associated with Ashdod (cf. i S. 5 f. i Mace. lo 83 
1 1 4 ) . From 3 9 it may be supposed to have been in the times of 
Amos a place of some repute. Askelori\ mentioned as early as 

* Cf. the lists of Ramses II. and III. which are treated in A*/" 2 . VI. 24 ff., 31 ff.; 
W. M. Miiller, A. und E., 159, 164 ff., 227 ff., 393 ; Sayce, Patriarchal Palestine, 235- 
40; cf. Paton, Hist. 78 (map). f Ros., Ba. J Mit. 

I. 7-8 27 

on Meneptah s Israel-stele, was situated in a rocky amphitheatre 
immediately on the coast. It was isolated from the other Philis 
tine cities by its location. 

Letters from its governor form a part of the Amarna correspondence 
(Am. Tab. 207, 21 if.; see transl. of No. 207 in Paton, Hist. 101; Wkl. 
Amarna Letters}. It is mentioned as a part of the Philistine territory in the 
days of Samson (Ju. H 19 ), Samuel (i S. 6 17 ), David (2 S. I 20 ), Zephaniah (2 4 - 7 ), 
Jeremiah (252 47 5 - 7 ), and the later Zechariah (9 5 ). Metinti of Askelon is 
mentioned among the tributaries of Tiglathpileser III. (Nimrud Inscription, 
1. 61, v. ABL. 57). 

8 d. The remnant of the Philistines shall perish~\ Not the in 
habitants of the cities and villages (including Gath) unmentioned 
before* (cf. Je. 39 3 Ne. f 2 ), nor the last man of the Philistines t 
(cf. mnK, 4 2 p 1 ), but the remnant of the Philistines wherever 
they may be, i.e. all the Philistines. Cf. Ez. 36 3 - 4 . Other pre 
dictions against Philistia will be found in Is. n 14 i^- 32 Je. 25 20 47 
Zp. 2 4 7 Ez. 25 15 - 17 Zc. <f-~ . The Lord Yahweh} The most com 
mon designation for the deity in Amos, occurring fifteen times. 

6. nnSty mSj oniSjn V] The pron. suf. used as subj. GK. 115 /*; K6. 229 d; 
H. 29, 23(i); the cogn. ace. GK. 117^, q\ H. 32, 2 ; prep, and inf. expressing 
causal clause, GK. 158*:; K6. 403 f ; lit. because they carried into exile an entire 
exile, i.e. exiled company; cf. Is. 45 13 , the fem. being used collectively, GK. 
122 s; K6. 255 d\ so also the other deriv. n^ ij (cf. Je. 29 1 ). oiN 1 ? yjonV] 
-PJDH is followed by Sx (Dt. 23 16 ), TO (i S. 23 11 - 12 - 20 ), and as here S (Ps. 
yg48. so. 62) . this W ould seem to be a poetic usage. The Hiph. like the Pi. 
= shut one up to, deliver over to ; the ace. of the person is omitted here as in 
I S. 23 12 . The inf. with *? = purpose ; GK. i i^f,g; H. 29, 3^ ; K6. 407 a. 

9, 10. Judgment upon Tyre. The world-catastrophe which 
the prophet sees includes also Phoenicia. The relationship be 
tween Phoenicia and Israel had been very close (v.i.) ; but the 
threats of destruction here uttered continued to be made to 
the very end (cf. Is. 23 Je. 25 Ez. 26-28 Zc. 9 26 ). 

The structure of this oracle (and of the following one), viz. 5 and 2, is 
very different from that of the preceding. Strophe i is the same including (i) 
line i, the divine authority; (2) lines 2, 3, the use of the symbolical numbers, 
marking the transgression in a general way, as one often repeated; (3) lines 3, 
4, 5, the more specific charge; while strophe 2 is a reproduction of the first 

* Jer. f Ew., Now. 

28 AMOS 

two lines of strophe 2 of the preceding oracles. There is nothing to corre- 
spond to strophe 2, line 3, and all of strophe 3, including the closing rnrp ICN. 
This striking variation of form in the utterances against Tyre (vs. 9 - 10 ), Edom 
(vs. 11 - 12 ), and Judah (2 4 - 5 ) is to be explained, not upon the ground of a 
desire to condense, in order to avoid too much monotony and repetition, 
for it would be impossible in that case to understand why the condensation 
is made in one case rather than in another; but upon the supposition, for 
which there is other support, that these particular utterances, viz. concerning 
Tyre, Edom, and Judah, are not from Amos, but are interpolations from a later 
time. The considerations to be noted here are: (i) If the geographical 
order prevailed as elsewhere, from N. to S., vs. 9 * 11 would have preceded 
vs. 6 " 8 ; (2) the charge made here is the same as that made against the 
Philistines; (3) the "> IDN is lacking here as in the section on Edom (vs. 11 - 12 ). 
Cf. We., Now., Lohr; Che. EB. I. 151; Baumann. 9. ] Wkl. (KAT? I. 
147; so Che. Crit. Bib.} IXD referring to the N. Arabian Mucri. nn 1 ?:^] @ 
(as in v. 6 ) nbW. OTIX] ,& |Za^j>. nnxS] not DINS for Amos would have 
said Damascus; Wkl. (6*7. I. 199 note) omits, since it really comes from v. 6 ; 
but this is not certain. 

9 a. Tyre\ i.e. Phoenicia. According to the usual view, the 
Phoenicians were a Semitic people, who, like the Aramaeans anj 
Hebrews, formed a part of the great Semitic westward immi 

That they were originally related to the Hebrews may be concluded from 
their Semitic speech, which can hardly have been borrowed by either nation. 
They are named with the Hamites in Gn. io 6 for good reasons, as that table 
does not contemplate actual relationship but geographical distribution. The 
oldest settlement of the Phoenicians was Sidon. The Assyrian inscriptions 
mention a great and a small Sidon (Sennacherib, Taylor Cyl. II. 38; COT. I. 
87; RFH. ABL. 71). From that point they spread, first to the north on 
the coast (cf. Gn. io 15 ), and later to the south, where Tyre was founded as a 
colony of Sidon (cf. Is. 23 12 , where it is called fi-px-na). Tyre, the prominence 
of which dates from about 1197 B.C., was first built on the mainland, thirty 
furlongs south of the later island-city, called by the old writers HaXaLrvpos (Jos. 
Ant. 9, 14, 2; Strabo, 16, 2, 24; Diodorus, 17,4; Curtius, 4, 2, 18; Ba. 239). 
Old Tyre is probably meant by -is nxpD (Jos. ig 29 2 S. 24 7 ). It existed at the 
time of the Exodus, but seems to have been of little importance, in view of 
the above passage in Joshua, which contains the only mention before David s 
time, and represents it to have been conquered by the tribe of Asher, although 
other Phoenician cities, as Acco, Sidon, were not so treated (Ju. I 31 ). Homer 
often mentions Sidon, but never Tyre (//. VI. 289; XXIII. 743 ; Odys. XIV. 
84; XIII. 285 ; XV. 425), but both are mentioned in the Tel-el- Amarna letters 
(e.g. Nos. 17 and 18). By reason of their increase, the Tyrians founded the 
new city on an island four furlongs from the mainland, and being thus pro- 

1.9 29 

tected from enemies they soon rose to importance. In David s time they had 
their own powerful king (2 S. 5 11 ), and from that time on are frequently men 
tioned. By the year 900 B.C. they had taken the supremacy of the Phoenicians 
away from Sidon, as shown by the fact that in I K. i6 31 Ethbaal is King of 
the Sidonians, while according to Josephus (Ant. VIII. 13, 2) he was King 
of Tyre. On Tyrian coins of Antiochus Epiphanes, we read " metropolis of 
the Sidonians," the Phoenicians generally being called Sidonians. Tyre is 
often mentioned in the Assyrian inscriptions (z/.z.). Both Sidon and Tyre 
are written with the determinatives for city or for country, but with Tyre the 
latter is more common. At the time of Amos, Tyre, the chief city, naturally 
vpresented the whole country. By its geographical position it was more 
intimately connected with Israel than was any of the other cities. The 
settlement of the Hebrews in Canaan did not bring them into much trouble 
with Phoenicia. In the times of David and Solomon Phoenician influence 
was great (28. 5 11 I K. 5 lff -), being seen especially in everything that relates 
to art, architecture, and, indeed, the common affairs of life (Perrot and Chi- 
piez, Phenicie-Cypre). After the division, the intimacy became even greater, 
Jezebel, the daughter of Ethbaal, king of Phoenicia (i K. i6 31 ), being queen 
of Israel, and her daughter Athaliah, the wife and successor of Ahaziah, being 
queen of Judah (2 K. 1 1 1 ). In the times of the prophets, perhaps as early 
as those of Amos, there came a reaction against Phoenicia, due, in part, 
perhaps, to the character of the two women just mentioned, and in part to 
the work of Elijah and Elisha. 

9 b. The brotherly covenant} From i K. 9 13 , in which Hiram 
calls Solomon brother, and from 2 S. 5 11 i K. 5 lff - i6 31 we may 
conclude that friendly relations existed between Israel and Tyre 
before, during, and after the time of Solomon. A covenant is 
mentioned between Solomon and Hiram (i K. 5 12 ), which pos 
sibly contained a provision against selling the Hebrews as slaves.* 
This was a spiritual covenant as well as a worldly one, i K. 5 7 .f 
It may be an objection to this that the covenant was one of 
individuals (Solomon and Hiram) and not of the two nations ; \ 
since it seems quite clear that vs. 9 - 10 are a late interpolation 
(v.s.). The reference is not to a supposed covenant between 
Edom and Israel which Phoenicia had forgotten, although Israel 
and Edom are called brothers in v. 11 , because (i) the relation 
ship with Edom was that of blood, not of covenant ; (2) this 
relationship had long ago been changed to one of deadly 
enmity ; || (3) Phoenicia would not be responsible, but Edom ; 

* Pu. t Geb. J Dusterdieck. Cal., Ew., Dusterdieck. || Ba. 

30 AMOS 

at all events Philistia would be equally responsible. It has been 
suggested * that the slaves turned over to Edom were taken by 
Tyre, not from Israel, but from various cities of the Phoenicians 
or of the Canaanites. This would constitute the breach of the 
covenant. Cf. Winckler s view (v.s.). 10. And it shall devour 
her (Tyre s) palaces ] Cf. Is. 23 Je. 25^ Ez. 2 6 15ff - Zc. 9 2f -. This 
prediction was fulfilled in the relationship which Tyre sustained to 
Assyria and the empires that followed. 

Up to the time of Amos the city had paid tribute to Ashurnacirpal 
(Annals, col. III. 86) and Adadnirari III. who says, "... from above the 
Euphrates, Hatti, Aharri, to its whole extent, Tyre, Sidon, the country of 
Omri, Edom, Palastu as far as the great sea of the setting of the sun, I 
brought to submission, and taxes and tribute I placed on them" (i R. 35, 12; 
v. RFH. ABL. 52), and a little later to Tiglathpileser III. v. Nimrud Inscrip 
tion : " I sent my military governor, the chief officer, to Tyre ; from Mitenna, 
of Tyre, (I received) one hundred and fifty talents of gold . . ." (ABL. 57; 
cf. COT. I. 242). 

9. TOT xSi . . . DTUDn Vy] Inf. continued by pf., GK. 114 r, 158 c; K6. 
413 d. o>nx nna] an attributive gen., v. Ko. 335 c; GK. I28/. Primary 
meaning of nna appears in Assyr. biritu (bar A = bind), fetter, also treaty, 
covenant (Zimmern, Busspsalmen, 59, 82 ; Dl. Die Sprache der Kossaer, 7, 
and HWB., s.v.}. nna might be made either (a) between men, or (6) be 
tween God and man. Of the former there were at least two kinds, those 
between individuals, e.g. I S. i8 3 2O 8 23 18 2 S. 3 12ff ; and those between 
tribes or nations, e.g. 1 K. 5 26 I5 19 Ho. I2 2 Gn. 26 26ff - 3i 44ff -. A divine cove 
nant is said to be at the basis of the great institutions of the O. T., viz. 
Israel s claim to the land of Canaan (Gn. 15), the perpetual monarchy of 
the Davidic house (2 S. 7 23 5 Ps. 89 3 ), and the perpetual priesthood of the 
Levites (Ex. 32 29 Dt. 33 9 Je. 33 21 Ma. 2 4ff -). The usual expression for making 
a covenant is nna ma, the significance of which is illustrated by Gn. 15. The 
idea of communion of life secured by eating together seems to have been the 
original conception lying at the root of the custom of covenant -making (cf. 
Jos. 9 14f -); this fellowship might be established by drinking each other s 
blood, or by partaking together of the blood of a sacrificial animal, or by eating 
salt together, or by eating any food in common. It is probable that the cove 
nant was usually ratified by some distinctly religious rite. The full ceremony 
of making a covenant was as follows : (a) a statement of the terms agreed to; 
(i>) an oath on the part of each party to the agreement to observe the terms 
agreed to ; (<:) a curse invoked upon himself by each one in case of failure 
to keep his agreement ; {d} a solemn ratification of the curse made by pass- 

* We., Dr. 

1. 9-n 31 

ing between the parts of a sacrificed animal (probably a later development 
of the custom of eating the sacrifice together). The expression OTIS nna 
occurs only here, and the covenant alluded to is wholly unknown. On cove 
nants v. Kraetzschmar, Die Bundesvorstellung im A.T. (1896); N. Schmidt, 
art. " Covenant," EB.; Da. art. " Covenant," DB. ; WRS. Sem. 312 ff., 479 ff.; 
Val. ZAW. XII. 1-22, 224-60, XIII. 245-79; art. "Bund," PRE? ; Giese- 
brecht, Die Geschichtlichkeit d. Sinaibundes (1900); H. C. Trumbull, The 
Blood Covenant; Id., The Covenant of Salt ; Id., The Threshold Covenant. 

11, 12. Judgment upon Edom. After Syria and Philistia, and 
in connection with Tyre, the prophet, according to the present 
text, foretells the doom of Edom. This oracle, like those against 
Tyre and Judah, is evidently an interpolation from the exilic or 
post-exilic period. The specific arguments* are: (i) the simi 
larity of structure with i 9 - 10 and 2 4 5 and the difference of structure 
from that of the other fuller utterances; (2) Petra, the most im 
portant city of Edom in the time of Amos, is not mentioned,! 
while the names Teman and Bozrah occur elsewhere chiefly in 
late writings \ ; (3) the vagueness of the description of Edom s 
offence ; (4) Edom in early times was subject to Israel, and suf 
fered more from Israel than Israel from Edom. For two centuries 
before Amos Edom had been under Israel (i K. n 16 2 K. i4 7 ). 
The cruelty which furnished the basis for the ill feeling on the part 
of Israel came with the exile. It was not unnatural, therefore, 
that a later writer, devoid of historical perspective, and thinking 
that Edom deserved denunciation, should frame a section which 
in due time secured a place in the text of Amos. The clause 
" and his wrath, etc." (v. 11 ) from the point of view of the inter 
polation, is a gloss, merely repeating the thought of the preceding 
phrase in synonymous words. 

11. VDm nniin] probably a gloss; (55 Av/uiyparo /x^r^pa ^?rl 7775; other 
versions follow JH3L Some codd. of read fj-^rpav for fjLijTtpa. Hirscht 
accounts for the text of @ on the supposition that DIN crept in after vcrn 
by mistake from the previous line and was then read with the preceding 
V as DINS which then went over easily into nmN3. Gr., rotih or risen for 

* V. We. ; Che. EB. I. 151 f. ; Bu. Jew. Enc. I. 532 ; Now., Lohr, Baumann, 
Marti ; cf. GAS., Dr. 

fThe Sela, captured by Amaziah (2 K. 14^), is probably not to be identified 
with Petra, but with some unknown rocky fortress ; so Kit. on 2 K. I4 7 ; Che. EB. 
IV. 4344. 1 But cf. Gn. 3688 f. (J) ; and Che. EB. I. 602. 

32 AMOS 

S /cai ijpirao-ev ets paprtpiov <f>plicr)v atrov. *A. *al 

tfypev<rei> els TOI)S a^cD^as ^ <5/37?7 atfroD ; similarly S., 6. JT ^/ tenuerit ultra 

^ 7 a > 7 

furorem suum. % ai \^ ^ >o-^L_i* |^L!O. SS. retain |$IC, but connect 
)flN with following clause rendering ~\y_ booty. Ols. (on Ps. IO3 9 ; so also 
Gr., We., Gu., Dr., Elh., Oct., Oort Em., Hirscht), w, which is appar 
ently supported by % and U and favored by the parallelism. nxj mcc] 
@ t(pti\aev els VIKOS ; other versions follow |$12T. Cf. < ^^^hSS. Marck 
and Va., rnDtf; so also J. A. Bewer (AJSL. XVII. 168), but with a different 
meaning (v.i.). Ols., nxjS IDB> (so We., Gu., Now., GAS., Oort Em., Elh., 
Oct., Hirscht) but this is unnecessary. 12. pin] A., S. f 6., Arab., &, 
south. (Jic&U follow H@T. niX3 mjD"iN] <J0 0e^\ia rei^wv atiTys; other 
versions treat mx:i as a proper noun. A., S., render PUDIN by fidpeis ; 0., 

11 a. Edom\ The traditions recognize the Edomites as older, 
so far as concerns national existence, than the Israelites. 

Mt. Seir, extending from the southeast shore of the Dead Sea to the Gulf 
of Akabah, a mountainous region, seems to have been their first home after 
the migration from Mesopotamia. Some think it is the country mentioned in 
Egyptian records as Adma or Atuma, near Egypt, the inhabitants of which 
were called Shasu, nomads (Chabas, Voyage, 307 ; Brugsch, Hist. I. 146, 
216; DB? I. 855). This region, full of caves, gave them as freebooters 
(Gn. 27 40 ) great protection, and was, likewise, favorable for caravan trade 
between Egypt and Arabia, and Phoenicia and Philistia (cf. Ez. 27 16 , read 
ing DIN for DIN; so >, and some Hebrew Mss.). From the table in 
Gn. 36, it has been supposed (Ba.) that the Edomites conquered and incor 
porated the Horites (Dt. 2 22 ), also the Canaanites and Ishmaelites. Their 
form of government was tribal (Gn. 36 15 - 19 - 29f -) ; but for all the tribes there 
was one king (Gn. 36 31f -) probably elective (Buhl, Gesch. d. Edomiter, 47; 
cf. Sayce, DB. I. 645). The cities, in order of importance, were Petra, 
where two caravan routes crossed; Bozrah (Is. 346 63 1 ) ; the ports Elath 
and Ezion-geber (i K. 9 26 ). Some suppose them to have been sun-worship 
pers in view of the occurrence of the word "njn (the name of the sun-god) 
in their proper names (i K. II 17 I Ch. I 50 Gn. 36 39 ; Ba. 100; cf. No. EB. 
II. 1187), but nothing really definite is known of their religion. Edom and 
Israel were not always so bitter towards each other as in the later days (cf. 

1 K. i i lf -). While this hostility had some basis in Edom s treatment of Israel 
at the Exodus (Nu. 2O 14 - 21 Dt. 2 1 " 8 the two accounts leave this matter quite 
uncertain) and in events of the times of Saul and David (i S. I4 47 2 S. 8 14 ), 
the ground for complaint was rather on the side of Edom. Edom remained 
subordinate to Israel under Solomon (i K. Q 26 ), although Hadad sought to 
throw off the yoke (i K. ii 14 - 22 ), and to Judah under Jehoshaphat (i K. 22^ f - 

2 K. 3 8ff -)- Under Joram, Edom revolted and then followed a period of 

i. n-12 33 

independence, during which it had a king of its own (2 K. S 2 *- 22 ) ; but soon 
Sela was captured by Amaziah (2 K. H 7 ), and Elath was restored to Judah 
by Uzziah (2 Ch. 26 2 ). For an interpretation of the Blessing of Esau 
(Gn. 27 39f -, which had its origin about this time) as revealing the feeling of 
Israel toward Edom, see No. EB. II. 1185. 

11 b. Because he pursued his brother with the sword~\ Cf. Ob. 10 . 
If this contains a definite allusion, it must be understood, not of 
Nu. 20 17ff -;* nor of Jehoram (2 Ch. 21^ 2 K. S 2 ^ 22 ) ; f but 
rather of some incursion of Edom against Israel shortly before 
the utterance. J It is perhaps better taken of the general attitude 
of Edom towards Israel, shown in the cases cited above and in 
many others of which there is no record. The title "brother" 
was frequently thus applied, e.g., Dt. 2 4 2$ Ob. 10 " 12 cf. Gn. 27 40 - 41 . 
Israel and Edom were more closely related than was Israel with 
any other nation. And destroyed his compassion^ The rendering 
of Cyril "did violence to the womb," referring to Esau s trading 
his birthright, is fanciful ; likewise that which makes Vttrn " his 
brother." || The choice must lie between "his compassions," i.e., 
the Edomites have destroyed their natural sense of compassion or 
regard for a brother,^" or " his wombs," i.e., pregnant women.** 
Cf. Vater s opinion, which makes Vttrn foetus. This line seems to 
be a comment in explanation of the preceding phrase, and its 
omission greatly relieves the passage. And he cherished his 
anger perpetually^ If fH@E is accepted, "anger" may be the sub 
ject = And his anger did tear perpetually (cf. Jb. i6 9 ) ; or an 
accusative of manner = And in his anger he did tear. In either 
case the meaning is the same, viz. that of a lasting hatred of 
Edom for Israel (cf. Gn. 27"). ft The emendation of Olshausen 
(v.s.) here followed, which is based upon the parallelism and 
implied in & and U, and retained his anger (cf. Ps. I03 9 Lv. iQ 18 
Na. i 2 Je. 3 s ), makes a much easier rendering, but one which is 
redundant, unless the following clause is treated as a gloss. And 
he kept his anger forever] (v.i.). 12. Tertian] Used synony 
mously with Edom in Je. 4Q 7 Ob. 9 Hb. 3 3 and in parallelism with 

*Ra., Cyril. \ Ew. || Cf. Ba. 

t Schlier. Gal., Jus., Ros., Dr. f Cal., Schra, Ba., Pu., Ke., Dr. 

** (E, Doederlein, Dat., Jus. ; but v. Marti. 

ft So Cal., Jus., Ros., Ba., Pu., Ke., and in the second form A., 2., Geb. 

34 AMOS 

it in Je. 49 20 . There being no mention of walls, we may, with 
most commentators, understand that no "city" is intended. 
BozraJi\ Probably the chief city of Edom. Referred to in Gn. 
36 s3 Je. 49 13 , and with Edom in Is. 34 6 6s 1 Je. 4 9 22 cf. Je. 4 9 7ff -. 
So called from its strength ; Is. 34 6 . Note the rendering of @ 

Teman was celebrated for its wisdom (cf. Je. 49 7 ff> ) ; Eliphaz, one of Job s 
friends, came from it (Jb. 2 11 4 1 ). It was probably named from Teman, 
grandson of Esau; cf. Gn. 36 n - ^ 34 . Its location is not certain, but Ez. 25 13 
mentions " Teman even unto Dedan " as including the whole country, hence, 
as Dedan was in the southeast, Teman was probably in the northwest or north 
(Buhl, Edomiter, 30). 

Bozrah is probably to be identified with the small modern village Buseire 
or Busera, meaning, little Bosra, although it has also been identified with the 
later Petra (Wetzstein, in De. Jesaja? 704). Under Joram of Judah, Edom 
probably gained its independence (2 K. 8 20ff -). The text is doubtful, but cf. 
Sta. GVL I. 537; Buhl, Edomiter, 64; Kit. in loc. References of doubtful 
date to Edom are found in Ps. 6O 8 11 (= Ps. loS 8 11 ) Je. 49 s - 22 (cf. also Is. II 14 
Je. 9 25 25 21 ), with which are to be contrasted the kindly references in Dt. 2 5 ~ 8 
23 7f -. The kings of Edom before the time of Amos had paid tribute to 
Adadnirari III. and soon after to Tiglathpileser III. 

11. io-n Sy] prep, with inf. expressing cause (w.j.). nntt>i] Pf. with i cons. 
fol. inf., to express freq. action; Dr. 118; GK. 1122, 114^; H. 25, I a; K6. 
413 </. vnm]; GK. 124,?; K6. 262 e. ipo i] the impf. with i cons. 
fol. a pf. with i cons.; cf. Dr. 118. IDN] either subj. or obj. or adv. ace. 
according to interpretation. nxj mots imajfi] This, for reasons given above, 
is probably a gloss. The usual rendering has been "And his wrath he kept 
forever," the n_ referring to .ay, Mapptq dropped because of recession of 
accent, GK. 58^-; or n_ paragogic (Ros.), cf. Zc. 5 n Nu. 32 42 Ru. 2 1 *. Ew. s 
rendering of mots? " lieth in wait " (cf. Jb. 24 15 Ps. 56 7 ) is hardly tenable. 
J. A. Bewer suggests a new rendering for this and the preceding clause, viz. 
"His anger tore perpetually, while his fury raged forever; " cf. Je. 3 6 . This 
involves a change of vocalization in one word (v.s.~), and the giving to nEtt> of 
the meaning rage, not elsewhere found in Hebrew, though quite common in 
Assyrian (cf. Dl. HWB. s.v.} imajn] casus pendens and chiasm for em 
phasis; GK. i42/n. i.; K6. 34i</. nxj] adv. ace. of time; GK. ii8/; 
H. 33,3- 

13-15. Judgment upon Amman. The list of Israel s ene 
mies, the announcement of whose destruction would be gladly 
received, included, besides Syria and Philistia (Phoenicia and 
Tyre), also Ammon and Moab. These two are the next pair to 

I. 12-13 35 

serve as the target of the prophet s indignant arrow. Ammon, 
because of her wickedness, shall, with the others, perish. 

The arrangement of the strophes is 5, 3, and 3, and the general plan is 
that of the first two oracles. The clause no ID ova ipoa (v. 14) is but a weak 
repetition of the preceding clause and there is nothing to correspond to it in 
the parallel section on Moab (2 1 3 ), although in every other respect the paral 
lelism is perfect. For these reasons we may regard it as a gloss. While the 
first two utterances (those concerning Syria and Philistia) are parallel, con 
sisting each of three strophes with three lines in each, and the third and 
fourth utterances are parallel, consisting each of two strophes, one having 
four, the other two lines, the fifth arid sixth utterances are also parallel, con 
sisting each of three strophes, one of four, one of two, and one of three lines. 

13. nnn] Val. rYnxa(?). oSiaj] 5J = iSiaj. 14. nDinj] < pi. as in 
v. 7 ; j = nxina. "lyoaj (H Kal o-eio-fl^creTcu (= *V7Di). noiD a 
pais <rvvTe\eias O.VTTJS (= no^D ^p>a). Gr. DVO. 15. OsSc] ol 
A., 2., SF = D3 l ?D (so also Gr., Dr., Oort Em., Now.). Nin] read (with 
Gr. and Now.) vjna, foil. , ol lepels CLVTWV; so A., S., 0.j cf. 

13 a. The children of Ammon] It was entirely proper to unite 
Ammon and Moab in treatment, because they were closely related 
to each other and to the Hebrews. 

However untrustworthy the story of Lot s incest with his daughters maybe, 
ihe fact which lies at the basis of the story may be credited, viz. that Ammon 
and Moab, as well as the Hebrews, belonged to the stock of the Terahites, 
who emigrated with Abraham (Kit. Hist. I. 24; Sta. GVL I. 113). Just as 
tradition assigns to these nations a common origin, the law in later times 
(Dt. 23 4 Ezr. 9 1 Ne. I3 1 ) refuses them admittance to the congregation of 
Israel. Moloch of Ammon, as well as Chemosh of Moab, was a man-eating 
fire-god, and to the worship of this god Israel frequently showed an incli 
nation (Ju. io 6 i K. Ii 6f - 2 K. 23 13 ). These nations, according to the tradi 
tions handed down, dwelt together, east of the Jordan, between the rivers 
Arnon and Jabbok, whence the original inhabitants, called Zamzummim by 
the Ammonites, and Emim by the Moabites (Dt. 2 9f - 18 ~ 21 ), had been driven 
out. But they were subsequently separated by the Amorites, who, coming in 
between them, drove Moab south over the Arnon and Ammon to the east and 
north over the Jabbok, and established a kingdom in their original territory 
(Nu. 2i 26ff ). At the time of the Exodus the Hebrews did not disturb 
Ammon, although they conquered the Amorites (Nu. 2i 24f ). Ammon, now 
with Moab ( Ju. 3 13 ), and now alone ( Ju. io rf -), laid claim to the land taken 
from the Amorites by Israel ( Ju. n 13 ; cf. Jos. I3 25 ). The contest was con 
ducted on both sides of the Jordan. How much of all this is historically 
accurate we cannot affirm. Defeated by Jephthah fju. U 4f ), they appear 

36 AMOS 

next in Saul s time, under Nahash their king, at the siege of Jabesh-Gilead, 
where they were routed (i S. ii; cf. I4 47 ). While at first on good terms 
with David (2 S. io 2 ; cf. 23 37 ), they later became hostile (2 S. io 3f -) and 
were defeated by him and treated with terrible cruelty (2 S. 8 12 io. i2 26 " 31 ) at 
the capture of Kabbah. They do not occupy a very prominent place after this, 
but are mentioned as having been defeated by Jehoshaphat (2 Ch. 20) and 
as tributary to Uzziah (2 Ch. 26 8 ) and Jotham (2 Ch. 2j 5 ). Allusion is made 
to them in Is. n 1 *. At the time of Amos they were probably independent. 

136. Because they have ripped up the women with child of Gilead ] 
This act of cruelty was not uncommon among the Hebrews (2 K. 
8 12 Ho. io 14 i 3 16 2 K. is 16 Is. i 3 16 Na. 3 10 Ps. i 3 7 9 ; cf. Iliad, VI. 
57 f., XXII. i6 3 f.).* The reference is in every way so specific as 
to suggest a particular event. This event may have been in con 
nection with the attack of Nahash, the Ammonite, upon Jabesh 
Gilead ( i S. 1 1 ) , or a league of the Ammonites with the Syrians 
under Hazael (2 K. 8 12 io 32 ) ; cf. the league mentioned in 2 S. 
io 6ff< ; v. also 2 K. i 3 3 - 7 .f To this interpretation, in general, Jewish 
commentators have objected because of the cruelty involved, 
and have suggested that ninrt be taken as = onn mountains. 
This gives (i) they broke through the mountains of Gilead, i.e. 
violated the law of boundaries (Dt. 27 17 ), or (2) the castles which 
were strong like mountains. J For rrhn it is also suggested to 
change the text (v.s.) and read fortified places as being more in 
harmony with the last clause of the verse. That they might enlarge 
their border] This was the purpose of the war in which such 
cruelties were practised. The Ammonites had originally laid claim 
to this district (Ju. n 13 ) and were always presenting themselves as 
claimants for additional territory (Ju. io 8 i S. n 11 ). 14 a. But I 
will kindle~\ Cf. / will send, v. 10 and previously. This expression 
has been thought to mean that the fire is not only sent by Yahweh, 
but is also directed by him, or that it is a conflagration from 
within. || Rabbah~\ This is abbreviated for " Kabbah of the sons 
of Ammon " (Dt. 3 n 2 S. 1 2 26 1 7 27 Je. 49 Ez. 2 1 20 ) . The town was 

* Cf. Schultens, Monumcnta antiquissimae Historiae Arabum, 135, cited in 
Michaelis, Comm. on the Laws of Moses, I. 327 ; Ba. ; for Arabic usage We.i cites 
BAthir, IV. 256, i ; 258,6; 260,20; 262, n ff. ; Kitab al- Agh. XIX. 129, 12 f. ; XX. 
128, 13; Tabard, II. 755, 19. 

t Hi,, Ba., Pu. t So Ki., Val. Geb. || Pu. 

I. 13-14 37 

situated at the head of the Jabbok, about twenty-five miles N.E. 
of the Dead Sea, and is to be distinguished from the post-biblical 
Rabbah of Moab, the biblical Ar. 

This is the only city of Ammon of any importance mentioned in the Bible, 
though Jephthah is said to have captured twenty cities the names of which 
are not mentioned, probably because they were small, all of which is a testi 
mony to the essentially roving character of the people. Rabbah was besieged 
and captured by David, but afterward regained its importance. 

14 b. With shouting in the day of battle~\ The verb here rend 
ered " shout," in Is. 15* Mi. 4 9 and Ho. 5 8 is used of the cry of those 
in distress ; cf. also Nu. lo 1 " 10 Jo. 2 1 . The substantive, contrary to 
Marck, is used only of the joyful cry of victory or attack * (Jos. 6 5 
Jb. 39 s * Je. 4 19 4 9 2 Am. 2 2 Zp. i 16 Nu. io 5 - 6 ). With a storm in the 
day of tempest~\ This scarcely refers to an actual storm,f but 
describes figuratively the assaulting of a city. \ Cf. Is. 27 28 2 . 
And their king shall go into exile~\ Upon the basis of 5> and U, 
some would read Milchom, the name of the Ammonitish idol, for 
their king (v.s.). Upon the basis of Je. 49 3 , where the same 
phraseology is used, and Je. 48 7 (cf. also Zp. i 5 ), where Chemosh 
is spoken of in the same connection, others suggest Molkam, the 
name of an idol. As opposed to these, and in favor of the ordinary 
translation, their king, may be urged the use of " his princes " ; 
the absence of any reference to idolatry in preceding passages, ref 
erence being made rather to cruelty ; and the similarity of i 5 - 8 and 
2 3 (cf. "judge," a substitute for "king" of this passage). || His 
princes^ The meaning will be determined by the interpretation 
of the preceding D3b&, either royal princes, or the princes of 
Milchom, i.e. the priests. 

The fulfilment of this prophecy against the Ammonites is proba 
bly to be found in their subjugation by the Assyrians. Of this we 
know simply that after the invasion of Tiglathpileser they always 
appear as tributary to Assyria.^" In the time of Nehemiah they 

* Ba. f Marck. J Ke., Dr., Marti. Hi. 

|| Hi., Gu., Val., Mit., GAS., Elh., Lohr, Hirscht, Get., Hal. 

11 Sanipu, King of Ammon, is mentioned by Tiglathpileser III. in a list of tribu 
taries, including, among others, Salamanu of Moab, Metinti of Askelon, Ahaz of 
Judah, Qaushmalaka of Edom, and Hanno of Gaza (ABL. 57; KB. II. 21). 
Sennacherib (Taylor Cyl. II. 47-57) speaks of Buduilu of Ammon, along with 

38 AMOS 

were still hostile to Israel. They are mentioned in the apocryphal 
books (Judith 5. 6. 7 i Mace. 5 30 " 43 ) as appearing in alliance with 
the Arabs (i Mace. 5 s9 ), and manifesting the same characteristics 
and attitude toward Israel as in the earlier history. They are de 
scribed as numerous by Justin Martyr,* but Origen f states that in 
his time they had become merged in the Arabs. 

14. nynra] Note the rhythm in the two lines thus beginning, and the 
alliteration in the repetition of 3, and in HDID . . . i; D. "I>*D] Cf. mpir Na. i 3 ; 
it is to be compared with Assyrian, storm, and, to be tempestuous. The 
verbal root is used in Hebrew of any violent movement, e.g. Jo. i 11 - 13 , of a 
raging sea. Hence comes for the noun the meaning, storm. noiD] Cf. 
Ho. 8" Na. I 3 ; used of the storm-wind, especially of the hot wind from the 
south (Ba). Its derivation may be considered doubtful. It is ordinarily 
taken from rpD, to cease, bring to an end, which is not entirely satisfactory. 
15. nSu] Another formation = rvrSj (v. 9 ) ; Ko. 244 . nrv] Used to 
strengthen the ) ; Ko. 375 h. 

II. 1-3. Judgment upon Moab. Ruin will come upon Moab 
for her sins ; and the overthrow of the nation will be complete. 
Cf. Is. 15, 16, 25 10 - 12 Zp. 2 8 - 11 Je. 48 Ez. 2^ Dn. n 41 . 

In the text, as reconstructed, the line iDvSiD psso no with the -i changed to 
n, has been transferred to follow line 3 of strophe I, and the last word of this 
line, TfrS (to lime (?)), restored to "ntP 1 ? (cf. Je. 47 4 ), is joined as first word 
to the line transferred. This reading, in order to do indignity to the dead 
because of violence suffered by Moab, or in order to do indignity to the dead in 
Shaon of Moab (v. Hoffm.), makes the number of lines in this and the preced 
ing oracle the same; the gloss in i 14 , DSID ova 1>D2, having been omitted, 
allows the lines beginning n^jNi and nj?nna to stand together here just as in 
the previous oracle, provides a parallel line for the purpose-clause, "m ]ych; 
and removes the inexplicable Ti^S from a line to which it does not belong, if 
the measure of the v. is to be considered. For a fuller discussion of the line, 
v.i. If this is accepted, the strophes have respectively 5, 3, and 3 lines. 

1. ID-it! ] (5 Kar^Kavffav ; so & "F& 3 sg. -p^S] <g els Kovlav. Ttf usque 
adcinerem. & nn^aa N-y>jp TW^DV Gr. ISN\ Hirscht, -vipS i^bS OHM mnxj? 
(cf. Ps. io6 37 ; the reading D^X was proposed by Zenner, Die Chorgesange 

Menahem of Samaria, Ethobal of Sidon, Metinti of Ashdod, Kammusunadbi of 
Moab, Malikrammu of Edom, and others, as bringing him rich presents and kissing 
his feet (ABL. 71 ; KB. II. 91). The same king is included by Esarhaddon in his 
list of the twenty-two tributary kings of the Hittites (ABL. 86; KB. II. 149). 
Amminadbi, king of Ammon, is included in a similar list occurring in Ashurbani- 
pal s Annals (ABL. 97 ; KB. II. 240 f.). * Dial. Tryph. f On Jb. i. 

I. 14-11. i 39 

im Buche der Psalmen 1896, I. 8). 2. rnnpn] <J| TU>V ir6\wv 
E Np3. U.S proper name. fWB>a] iv d8vva/j.lq.. & ^^ao^,_o. TS in 
sonitu, for this and fol. word. S" 52 ] <& 3 codd. of Kenn. and 2 of de 
R. = Sipai (so Hirscht). 3. nanpc] We. ninpo, since Moab is masc.; 
so also vw (so Now., Elh., Lohr, Oct.). 

1 a. Moab~\ The account of the origin of Moab given in Gene 
sis simply indicates * that the nation was closely related with 
Israel, and also with the weaker nation of the Ammonites. Their 
language was a dialect closely allied to the Hebrew. Their land 
(called "Titt^n, the level, or pntp, i Ch. 5 16 ) was a plateau, fruitful 
and well adapted to agriculture (Is. i6 8ff- Ru. i 1 2 K. 3 4 ), which 
was their chief occupation. Its length was about fifty miles and 
its breadth thirty, and it was capable of supporting about 500,000 
inhabitants. At the time of the Exodus, the Moabites had an 
organized kingdom (Nu. 22 7 - 14 - 15 ).f Their religion was henothe- 
istic, their only god mentioned in the Old Testament being Che- 
mosh (Nu. 2 1 29 Je. 48 46 ). The form Ashtar-Chemosh also meets 
us on the Moabite stone, \ perhaps indicating the androgynous 
nature of the deity. Their Baal-Peor, whom the Israelites were 
led to worship with unchaste rites (Nu. 25 1 " 5 ), was probably the 
same divinity, known as the Lord of Peor. || It is improbable 
that there ever existed any ethical or spiritual movement in Moab 
similar to that found among the Hebrews. 

Moab s boundaries to the west and south were constant, viz. the Dead Sea 
and the brook of the willows, Wady-el-Hasy (Is. I5 7 ); but to the east and 
north they varied, although usually the boundary was near the river Arnon 
(Nu. 2 1 13 ). The country seems to have had many cities. Whether Reuben 
and Gad occupied territory belonging to Moab (Nu. 32 s4 - 38 ) is doubtful 
(Sta. GVI. I. ii6ff.). No mention is made of Moab in the Amarna letters 
thus far published; but it was probably included as a part of the Egyptian 
province of Canaan. In a list of the conquests of Ramses II the name Muab 
occurs (Sayce, Pat. Pal 21, 153). The aggressive character of the Moab 
ites is alluded to in Is. i6 6 Zp. 2 10 Je. 4S 29 - 42 . The Baal-Peor and Balaam 
incidents are of special interest. There were wars with Israel in the time 
of the Judges, resulting finally in the defeat of Moab (cf. Nu. 2i 21 31 (E), 
Ju. 3 12 - 30 ii 12 - 28 ). There was little hostility, with the exception of a war in 
Saul s reign (i S. I4 47 ), till late in the reign of David, when, for some un- 

* Cf. Ba. ; Sta. G VI. I. 27 ff. f But v. Wkl. GI. I. 203 f. t Line 17. 

$ Sta. GVI.l. 114. I! Sta. GVLl.u* f. ; Dr. Dt. 63 f. 


known reason, he subdued them with cruel tortures (2 S. 8 2 - 12 I Ch. i8 2 lv ). 
They probably remained tributary till the division of the kingdom (i K. II 1 ). 
For a time they are not expressly mentioned. Then Omri of Israel subdued 
them (Mesha stone, Is. 4ff.), and they continued tributary to the Northern 
kingdom (2 K. 3 4 ). After the death of Ahab or during his reign (2 K. I 1 
3 s ), the Moabites under Mesha revolted and secured their independence 
(Mesha stone, cf. Sta. G VL I. 532-6; English translations of this inscription 
may be found in Dr. Sam. pp. Ixxxv-xciv; Bennett, art. " Moab," DB. III. 
407 f.; Dr. art. "Mesha," EB. III.; Ball, Light from the East, 240), which, 
apparently, they never again lost to Israel. For the view that the Salman 
mentioned in Ho. io 14 as having destroyed Beth-Arbel was a king of Moab, 
see the discussion in loc. 

1 b. Because they burned the bones of the King of Edom~\ The 
nature of the act is uncertain. According to ftHiZr the words to lime 
follow Edom. This has been taken to mean the burning alive of 
the king mentioned,* or the burning of one who had been killed or 
buried. f The words to lime are supposed to describe the man 
ner of the burning, as lime is burned ; \ or the result, to dust, i.e. 
completely ; or, as many Rabbis, to make lime used as plaster 
ing. || For the reading of Hirscht, v.s. Still more uncertain is 
the personal allusion which is intended. Is the reference to 2 K. 
3 s7 , the son there being rather that of the King of Edom who is 
captured by the King of Moab before the battle begins?^ But 
(a) a king, not a king s son, is mentioned ; (fr) no objection 
could be presented to the right of a conqueror to do as he 
pleased with a captive taken in war ; (c) according to Josephus, 
the Moabite king offered his own son to Moloch.** Or is it to 
some incident in connection with 2 K. 3, e.g. the capture of the 
King of Edom himself immediately after the event related in 
2 K. 3^, of which the records do not speak? -ft And did the 
crime consist chiefly in disturbing the peace of the dead in the 
grave (cf. 2 K. 23 18 ), by burning the body, perhaps, on the grave 
itself, ft and scattering the ashes upon water or in the air? Cf. 
Jos. y 25 . The Jews, like other nations of antiquity, considered 
offences against the dead as most impious acts. JJ They identified, 

* Os., Geb., Mau. Ki., and most modern comm. ** Schro. 

t Jer., Gal., Hi., Ke. || So also Geb. ft Hi. 

J Ros. H Ki., Cyril, Abar., Geb., Mich. 

ft See e.g. Frey, Tod, Seelenglaube und Seelenkult in alt. Israel; Schwally, Das 

n. i 41 

to a certain extent, the grave with the world of spirits, so that 
only those buried together could associate with each other, while 
the unburied, as with the Greeks and Romans, were considered to 
wander as restless spirits with no fixed abode. Hence, cremation 
was condemned, while embalming was a common practice. These 
ideas may be gathered from various passages (Dt. 2I 23 Jos. lo 27 
2 K. 2 3 16 - 18 Ps. 7 9 2 - 3 Is. i4 19 66 24 Je. 36 30 ).* Or was the crime con 
nected with some incident of which no record is anywhere made, 
the date of which cannot therefore be fixed, though probably 
taking place shortly before this prophecy ? f Or is this merely a 
different form of the tradition given in 2 K. 3^, J and was the 
King of Moab Mesha, whose character as presented in the 
Moabite stone seems to be entirely consistent with the representa 
tions here made ? It has been noted that the sin is against 
Edom, and not against Israel. The entire passage, although it 
is the key-note of the piece, is evidently obscure. It is there 
fore suggested that the text be modified as indicated above : In 
order to desecrate the dead because of violence done to (or suf 
fered by) Moab~\ This purpose-clause now corresponds to a 
similar clause in i 13 . In one case an act of vandalism was com 
mitted, viz. the ripping up of women with child, the purpose 
being, remotely, to increase their territory ; here is another act 
of vandalism, the burning of the bones of a royal personage, 
and the purpose is to take vengeance, by this desecration of the 
dead, for violence done to Moab. Not only is Tvh without sig 
nificance, but also the clause, And Moab shall die in a tumult^\ 
ordinarily interpreted as a description of the nation s death. 
The Palaces of Keryyoth~\ Either a name for Kir-Moab, || a city in 
the southern part of Judah captured by the Moabites (Jos. I5 25 ) ; 
or (since where Ar is mentioned, Keryyoth is not found) another 
name for Ar-Moab,^[ mentioned Nu. 2i 15 Is. I5 1 , not appearing in 

Leben nach dent Tode ; Matthes, " De doodenvereering bij Israel," TAT. July, 
1901; Sta. Die Alttest. Vorstellungen vom Zustand nach dem Tode; Jeremias, Die 
Babyl.-Assyr. Vorstellungen vom Zustand nach dem Tode ; Now. Arch. I. 188 f., 329 ; 
Benz. Arch. 165 ff.; WRS. Proph, 398; Jos. Ant. XVI. 7; Griineisen, Der Ahnen- 
kultus und die Urreligion Israels ; and the references to Arabic customs cited by 
We.i, viz. Kitab-al-Aghani XII. 21, n ; BAthir V. 178, 12; 203, 23; Mac. V. 47, I. 

* Cf. Schro., Hi., Or. ; WRS. Proph. 397 ; Sta. G VI. I. 421 f. ~ t Ew. 

J Ba. $ We. || Jus. II Ew., Mit. 

42 AMOS 

Je. 48 ; or a place different from both of these,* of which men 
tion is made in Je. 48 2441 . Cf. (, which treats it as a common 
name. The city probably stands for Moab, as Damascus repre 
sents Syria, from which it may be inferred that the city was an 
important one. The reference in the Moabite stone (1. 13) favors 
Ewald s view that it is another name for Ar.f With shouting 
and with the sound of the trumpef\ Cf. i 14 with shouting in the 
day of battle ; the trumpet is introduced as inciting them on to 
conflict (cf. Je. 4 19 Zp. i 16 Jb. ^). 3. The Judge . . . her princes } 
In the narrowest sense the judge would be the head of the judicial 
system ; \ but it is rather a word of general significance, applicable 
to the king (cf. Mi. 5*), one of whose functions was to judge 
(2 S. 8 15 i5 2 i K. f Je. 2i 12 ), and is thus used intentionally for 
king ; || perhaps, better still, a name for the highest officer (cf. the 
Carthaginian Sofefes) t * or regent** (cf. 2 K. i5 5 ) ; or, in the 
absence of a proper king, vassal, or prince appointed by the king 
of Israel. ft The feminine pronoun must refer to the land, H 
although Wellhausen would change it to the masculine as refer 
ring to the judge, to which word also with him refers. The close 
resemblance in thought between 2 3 and i 15 should be noted. 

Frequent mention of Moab is made in the Assyrian inscriptions, 
e.g. that Salamanu paid tribute to Tiglathpileser !!!., Chemosh- 
nadab to Sennacherib, || || Mucuri to Esarhaddon and Ashurbani- 
pal.Hl" The policy of Moab seems for the most part to have been 

* Ba. f Ri- HBA. ; Dr. J Ros. Jus., Dr. || Ba., Ke., Now. 

U Pu. ** We. ft Ew., Hi., GAS. JJ Hi., Ba., GAS., Mit. 

\\ Moab was subdued in the course of the western campaign which resulted in 
the establishment of Assyrian supremacy over Ammon, Askelon, Judah, Edom, 
Gaza, and some Syrian states. See ABL. 57 ; CO T. I. 249 ; KB. II. 21. 

(HI The tribute of Chemoshnadab was received in connection with Sennacherib s 
third campaign, which included the overthrow of Sidon and other Phoenician 
cities; the subjection of Samaria, Arvad, Byblos, Ashdod, Ammon, Edom, Askelon, 
and Ekron ; the battle of Eltekeh, and the siege of Jerusalem. See ABL. 71 ff. ; 
COT. I. 284 ff.; KB. II. 91 ff. 

UU Mucuri of Moab is included among the " twenty-two kings of the land of 
Haiti, of the sea-coast and the middle of the sea" named as tributary to Esarhad 
don and to Ashurbanipal. See ABL. 86, 96 f. ; CO T. II. 40 f. ; KB. II. 149, 239 f. 
A successor of Mucuri, whose name is quite uncertain, is mentioned by Ashurbani 
pal as having defeated Ammuladin, an Arabian chief: " Chemosh-Astarte (?), 
King of Moab, a vassal submissive to me, brought about his defeat in the field of 
battle." See G. Smith, History of Ashurbanipal, 288 ; Wkl. GI. I. 209. 

II. i-3 43 

one of peaceful acceptance of the Assyrian lordship ; at least no 
record of any struggle between Assyria and Moab is preserved 
other than one in the time of Sargon.* 

1. ints>] Inf. cstr. with suf. after hy is a favorite construction in Amos; 
cf. Dtt>n *?y (I 8 ), oniSjn ty (16), D-vjon-S? (i 9 ), unV?p (i 11 ), Djfpa-S? (i 18 ), 
DDND Sy (2*), o-OD Sy (2 6 ). The m. sg. pron. is used in two cases with collec 
tive force : GK. 135 /; Ew. 317, i), 2). -ni^] v.s. Inf. cstr. with h express- 
,ng purpose, cf. -iMDnS (i 6 ) and a^rnn jyoS (i 13 ); but of the other five instances 
where the similar construction might have been expected, one (i 3 ) has noth 
ing, while four (i 9 i 11 2 4 2 8 ) have synonymous clauses, all of which (except 
2 8 ) indicate the state of mind which led to the act of sin, e.g. forgetfulness of 
the brotherly covenant (i 9 ), the stifling of compassion (i 11 ), non-observance 
of Yahweh s statutes (2 4 ). The root -ntf with its derivative ntf, has the primary 
meaning of committing an act of violence, despoil, cf. Is. 16* Je. 48* 8 Ho. 
I0 i*._2. On the art. in nmpn] cf. W?jn and |Tvn; H. 4, 3 e (4); GK. 
126 e; Ew. 8 277 c. On identification with -\y v. Dietrich in Merx, Archiv I. 
320 ff.; also ZDPV. II. 10. noi] fOT for non, although i might remain in 
the sense of even (cf. GK. 154, note i ()). nstfa] J51E in a tumult (i.e. 
the nation is pictured as dying in the midst of the din of battle, cf. Ho. io 14 
Ps. 74 23 ) ; so Pu., Dr., Mit., et al. ; cf. emendation suggested above, pNtfa 
in return for violence done to, with a of price (cf. Gn. 2Q 18 Dt. I9 21 ), and a 
cstr. in objective relationship with a following genitive; H. 8, I 3; GK. 128/5. 
The objective genitive is common with words of this class, denoting injury, etc.; 
cf. Ob. 10 Hb. 2 17 . For riNff in the meaning, violence, destruction, cf. Ps. 4O 8 Je. 
46 17 . Or. reads fiNja = in, or because of, MoaUs pride, cf. Is. i6 6 , in which ref 
erence is made to the well-known pride of Moab. Some treat }INB> as an old 
proper name, perhaps of the acropolis of 3N1D ~\y, corresponding to 3Nin as 
jv* to o Sttnv; cf. Je. 48 45 Nu. 24 17 (na> = nN2>). So Hoffm. ZAW. III. 97; 
but v. Now. Perhaps pNty is for \~r\v, a word which, like "OB^D, seems to 
designate the land of Moab in i Ch. 5 16 . nynra] Now modifies nSax of 
oreceding line, just as in i 1 *. Sip^] Note asyndeton as in ova (i. 14 ); the 
intended parallelism is evident. ^DV^] This instrument was a horn; it is 

specifically called " ram s horn " in Jos. 6 4 ff ; cf. Arab. yi!^w, ram s horns, 
and Assyr. sapparu, mountain goat. In early times, according to the Tal 
mud, they were, naturally, crooked; but the modern shofar (used in the 
synagogue) is usually straightened and flattened by heat. It is the oldest 
form of wind instrument in the world still in use, having been employed in 
the Mosaic ritual from the beginning until the present day. The shofar was 
probably the earliest kind of trumpet, and was used in war (Ju. 3 27 ) and to 
raise the alarm at the approach of danger (Am. 3 6 ). Later in Israel s history 

See KB. II. 645. ; Wkl. Keilinschnftliches Textbuch zum A. T? (1903), 

44 AMOS 

the trumpets were appropriated by the priests for use in worship, in some re 
spects serving the purpose of the modern church bell. 

4, 5. Judgment upon Judah. As the text now stands, the 
climax of Amos s outburst against the neighboring nations, before 
Israel herself is denounced, appears in words uttered against 
Judah, whose punishment is predicted on the ground of abandon 
ment of Yahweh s instruction. 

The form of the piece, if the clause onnnx cn^as < o l ?mt?N oniars o-ij?n> 
is omitted as a gloss (v.i.}, is identical with that of the oracles relating 
to Tyre and Edom, i.e. 5 + 2. Against the genuineness of the entire utterance 
it may be urged that the similarity in form just mentioned puts the section in 
the same category with I 9 - 10 and i 11 - 12 , and any doubt which attaches to these 
oracles must attach also to this; furthermore, that the introduction of this 
oracle removes entirely the force of the surprise which the Israelites would 
have felt; that it is impossible to suppose that Amos would have treated 
Judah so cursorily, and in a manner so like that in which he treated the out 
side nations; that the terms of Judah s sin are of a Deuteronomic character 
and of later origin (cf. riDi? N^ rpn, Dt. 4 6 6 24 i6 12 i; 19 , as well as the fre 
quently recurring phrases to observe to do, to observe and do, 4 6 5 1 , etc.) ; that 
the style is tame, vague, and weak; that the term Israel in 2 6 - 16 includes 
Judah (cf. 2 10 ); that the concluding formula "> "\CN is lacking, and that the 
sin described, transgression of the " instruction " and the " statutes " of 
Yahweh, was too indefinite, not so flagrant as to call for its introduction in 
this place, in fact, unlike any charges made elsewhere by Amos, and out 
of harmony with the formula, for their transgressions, etc., since it could not 
be specified as one of the three or four. So Duhm, Theol. der Proph. 119; 
We.; Sta. GVL I. 571; Val.; Che. in WRS., Proph. XVI. and EB. I. 153; 
Oort, TAT. XIV. (1880), 116; GAS.; Volz 19; Now., Lohr ; Taylor, DB. 
I. 86 ; Baumann. But note the considerations offered on the other hand : 
that Judah is not included under Israel in 2 6ff and it is inconceivable that 
Amos should have omitted Judah in his written statement, even if, perhaps, 
he failed for certain reasons to mention it in his oral statement; that the 
phraseology termed Deuteronomic is to be found in Is. 5 24 Ex. i8 16 ; that 
though the charges brought against Judah are general they are corroborated 
by Is. 2 s - 8 18 2 5 7 24 ; and Amos may have wished to reserve the more specific 
accusations for use against Israel. So WRS. Proph. 399 f.; Kue. Einl. II. 347; 
Gun., Mit., Dr. If the passage is genuine, its introduction by the prophet is 
due to his desire to prevent the charge of favoritism toward his own people 
(Cal.) The reasons for regarding the clause in v. 4 beginning "m oiyrm as a 
gloss are : (i) the comparatively late date of the idea contained in it, cf. 
Ex. 32 1 Dt. 9 12 ; (2) the use of DOTS to designate idols, a use which is parallel 
to that of D^San which appeared after Jeremiah s time (Now.); (3) the 

n. 4 45 

awkwardness of the syntax as it is here introduced (z/.*.) ; (4) the fact that 
the symmetry of the strophic arrangement is entirely destroyed. 

4. mw] @ vlCjv lovda. nDB> . . . DONE] U renders both by 3 p. sg. 
on-ao] j& om. suff. < adds a ^wolTfjffav. 3J idola sua. onnnN . . . IC>N] 
@ fol. Heb. idiom, ofs . . . oirlffu avr&v. ui mpriM] a gloss (z .J.). 

4. JudaK\ Outside of this oracle the only specific references to 
Judah are found in i 2 6 1 y 12 9".* Judah represents the southern 
kingdom, including Benjamin, in distinction from northern Israel 
(i K. i2 206 ).f The relationship of the two nations was very close 
in spite of the disruption, for however they may have differed 
from each other in dialect, in religious ideas or in governmental 
sympathy they were one nation in distinction from their Canaan- 
itish neighbors. The impossibility of uniting all the interests ol 
the various tribes showed itself in the earliest times, and it was 
only under David and Solomon that a union, even when effected, 
could endure. The rivalry between the two kingdoms after the 
division was intense and bitter (cf. i K. i2 18 21f 26ff 15^*.* 2 K< 
i4 8ff ) . At this time there seems to have been no special cause for 
bitter feeling between them. The law of Yahweh~\ Four stages 
in the history of this word may be traced : J (i) direction or in 
struction from Yahweh, in general, without any technical meaning ; 
cf. advice from elders, Pr. i 8 , utterances of prophets, Is. i 10 8 16 ; 
(2) technical direction given by the priest on specific matters of 
ceremonial observance and conduct, Mi. 3 11 Je. 2 8 i8 18 Lv. n 46 
T 5 32 ; (3) direction as to the general duty of an Israelite as found 
in Dt. i 5 i K. 2 3 2 K. io 31 i 4 6 iy 13 2i 8 22 8 Je. 16"; (4) the direc 
tion formulated and contained in the Pentateuch, Ne. 8 lf 13f io 34 **. 
The exact meaning intended here will depend upon the date 
assigned to the passage. The use in the next member of the 
parallelism of the word statutes } in a measure marks the idea as 

* Cf. the query whether the story of the encounter of the prophet of Judah with 
Jeroboam I (i K. 13), may not have been worked up upon the basis of the en 
counter of Amos with Jeroboam II.; Kue. Einl. II. 342. 

f Cf. especially Seesemann, Israel und Juda bei Am. u. Ho. 

JDr. Dt. 208, 209, 401 f.; WRS. OTJC? 299 ff., 372 if., 382 f., 425 f.; Kue. 
Hex. 10.4 ; Sm. Rel. (v. Index) ; We. Pro!., 394 ff. ; McC. HPM., $ 457, 488, 610; 
Benz. Arch., 321, 324, 412; Now. Arch. II, 97 f. ; Dr. 230 f.; Kent and Sanders, 
"The Growth of Israelitish Law," in Bibl. and Sent. Studies, critical and histor. 
essays by the members of the Sem. and Bibl. Faculty of Yale Univ. (1902), 41-90. 

46 AMOS 

consistent with the third or Deuteronomic stage described above, 
2 K. i y 19 . This word (sometimes with judgments, also with testi 
monies and commandments, prefixed), is especially frequent in Dt. 
and in books dependent on Dt. (cf. 4 5 - 8 14 5 1 31 6 1 - 20 etc.), and de 
signates enactments or institutions whether moral, ceremonial, or 
civil (e.g. Dt. y 1 3 12. 14. 16. 17).* This "direction " of Yahweh 
and these " statutes," they had rejected, had not observed^, a charge 
which accords well with the feeling of the prophets (Is. 5 24 ), who 
narrated the stories of the kings of David s line (2 K. i; 15 - 19 ), 
although the charge is of sin against God, rather than against 
man. Cf. the frequent formulas, " evil in the sight of Yahweh," 
"provoked him to jealousy with their sins which they committed, 
above all that their fathers had done." Judah s rulers might be 
classified as (i) the good kings, Asa (i K. 15" 2 Ch. i4 2 ), Je- 
hoshaphat (i K. 22 43 2 Ch. ly 3 ), Joash (2 K. i2 2f - 2 Ch. 2 4 2 - 18 ), 
Amaziah (2 K. i4 3 2 Ch. 25 2 ), who, nevertheless, fell far short of 
reaching the standard in the mind of the historian, a standard 
(fixed by Dt.) in accordance with which all worship on high- 
places was interdicted; (2) the bad kings, Abijah (i K. i5 3 , cf. 
2 Ch. i 3 10 ), Joram (2 K. 8 18 2 Ch. 2i 6 ), Ahaziah (2 K. 8 27 2 Ch. 
22 3 ), who openly opposed the true Yahweh worship, while Atha- 
liah (2 K. ii 3 2 Ch. 22 12 ) actually deserted the Yahweh religion.f 
If this representation of apostasy comes from Amos, allowance 
must be made for the fact that the general prohibition of worship 
on high-places was still a thing of the future (Josiah s reign) ; if 
from a later date, the charge may have been made from the point 
of view of Deuteronomy. That the accusation in general was true 
against the Judah of Amos s time cannot be doubted. The gloss, 
And their lies have caused them to err] (resembling Je. 23 13 - 32 ), is 
a still later interpolation in the original charge, J whenever made. 
These lies, in the mind of the interpolator, may have been the 
plausible but false excuses which they offered for their trans 
gressions, or the false prophets whose activity in later times 
was very great, || or, better still, their idols, i.e. something which 
has no actual existence, and actually deceives;^ for a similar 

* Gun.; Lag. BN, 40; Earth. NB. 112, 119; Baentsch, Das Bundesbuch, 32; 
Dr. Dt. 62. f See Mit., 81 f. + So Marti. Cal., Geb. || Ki., Abar. 
If Jer., Drus., Dat., Schro., Ros., Hi., Ba., Mit., Dr., Now., eta/. 

II. 4-5 47 

idea in connection with other Hebrew words v.i. After which 
their fathers walked] An expression used of Yahweh worship (Dt. 
i3 4 ), and also of idolatry (Dt. 4 3 8 19 n 28 i3 2 ). The whole course 
of Judah s history was an illustration of this fact. Judgment, 
therefore, shall come upon Judah, and shall show itself particu 
larly against the palaces of Jerusalem}, a threat which would 
strike terror to the hearts of Israelites, for Jerusalem, even to the 
Northern Israelites, represented in a peculiar manner the Yahweh, 
in whose worship the two nations united. 

According to tradition Jerusalem was in existence before Abraham (Gn. 
I4 18 Ps. 76 2 ). At the conquest of Canaan, Jerusalem (on the Amarna in 
scriptions, dr. 1400 B.C., Urusalim; hence the original name, Jebus being 
used to designate the non-Israelite population, Ju. ip 11 , GFM. Ju. 20, 
413) was not taken from the Jebusites (Jos. I5 68 , cf. the substitution of 
" Benjamites " for " Judahites " in Ju. I 21 , and note also the spurious char 
acter of i 8 ), but remained a Canaanitish city until captured by David (2 S. 
5 s - 9 ), who fortified it and made it the capital of the kingdom. Under 
Solomon the city was magnificently adorned with buildings, most important 
of which was the temple. Between the time of Solomon and that of Amos, 
Jerusalem had been captured and plundered three times: (i) by Shishak in 
Rehoboam s reign (i K. I4 25f - 2 Ch. I2 lf -); (2) by Arabians and Philistines 
in Joram s reign (2 Ch. 2i 16f -); (3) by Israel under Jehoash in Amaziah s 
reign (2 K. I4 13f - 2 Ch. 25 23f -). 4. DND] used of rejection of people by 
Yahweh (Je. 6 30 I4 19 ), as well as of rejection of Yahweh by his people, as 
here; cf. also i S. I5 23 2 K. i; 15 ; cf. in the same sense rur, VJ, 3TJ?, B>BJ, -|Sir. 
mm] from Hiph. of m> = direction, used with o>pn (nipn), O^BBD, and 
niWD (Baentsch, Das Bundesbuch, 29-34; Dr. Dt. 62). Note the chiastic 
arrangement of mm and vpn. The change of subject from DDND in the clause 
beginning oiymi is very awkward and throws suspicion on the connection of 
the two clauses. ornara] their images, d. JIN (Is. 66 3 ), DTI^N . . . S (Je. 5 7 ), 
Vsn (Je. 8 19 ), and SSs (Lv. I9 4 ). I^N] A good example of a full relative 
sentence H. 46, i; GK. 138 a; Ew. 8 33i, c (2). 5. aSaTv] Q e riforDSttTp; 
cf. Urusalim (Amarna), Ursalimma (Assyr.) (Dl. Par. 288; COT. I. 148 f.; 
RP? V. 60 f.; DB* I. 1582; BSZ. s.v.; BDB. s.v.; Grill, ZAW. IV. 134 ff.; 
Zimmern, ZA. 1891, pp. 252, 254, 263; Sayce, HCM. 176; Jastrow, JBL. 
XI. 105). @ le/oouo-aX^/x, class. Grk. Iepoff6\v/j.a, Aram. oWn\ Other 
proper names with the ending D^. are : oynn, DjnSaT, Djnnp, o^ap, o;nn j, 

4. Judgment against the nation Israel. 2 6 - 16 . If other 
nations are to be punished for their sins, surely Israel must suffer. 
(i) Her transgressions are many, and, above all, injustice and 

48 AMOS 

oppression prevail; (2) notwithstanding the divine purpose to do 
for her everything possible, every effort has been rendered futile ; 
(3) therefore, now, a destruction shall come from which there 
shall be no escape. These three ideas are expressed in three dis 
tinct pieces, each of three strophes, and each strophe, originally, 
of four lines. The writer adjusts the form of his language to the 
character of the thought, and the logical movement is thus ren 
dered wonderfully impressive. 

6-8. The injustice and oppression in Israel. The nation is 
guilty of a treatment of the poor and needy so cruel as to be a 
profanation of God s holy name. 

The three strophes of this piece have the trimeter movement. Each con 
tains a single verse; but vs. 7and8 have been transposed. V. 7 is to be placed 
as the third strophe after v. 8 because (i) the ptcp. D>flSn is less abrupt, connect 
ing itself with the subject of the preceding imperfects; Torrey s statement 
concerning Amos s use of the ptcp. (JBL. XV. 152) is entirely in accord with 
this; (2) the order of thought thus becomes more regular; (3) the piece 
closes with the climax "profane my holy name"; and (4) the closing line, 
just quoted, sustains a striking relation to the first line of the succeeding 
piece " and yet I," etc. Cf. my presentation of this point in the Biblical 
World, September, 1898, p. 179, and Lohr (1901), who places v. 8 between 
7a and 76 , and then brings together 7/ and 10 (v. 9 following); on the other 
hand Get. 66, regards the first of these changes as unnecessary, the second as 

6. pnx] Gr. o^?, cf. 8 6 . poxi] { connects with pnx. D^S 
& ]UDnn S -ia. Che. (Crit. Bib.},v>hy. 7. D^CKCTI] read oiD[N]t?n, from 
*iw (so jer., Ba., We., Gr., Now., forrey JBL. XV. 151, GAS., Lohr; 
cf. Hal.), supported by @, which connects O DNttTi with D^Spj, rendering it 
TO. irarovvra (some codd., T&V TTOLTOTLIVTUV), by S, and "F, qui conterunt. 
& perhaps = avflNtf (cf. Ez. i6 57 ; so Hal). Oct. PN-I hy ps "^ O fr n 
o^Si. hy~] Elh. SN. (?) ps nop *?j?] Om. as a gloss, since it is unnecessary, in 
itself is very awkward, and altogether spoils the rhythm (so We., Now., Torrey 
JBL. XV. 151 ff., Lohr, Marti ; cf. Dr., Elh., and Oct., who are unable to see 
how these words could have gotten in the text if they were not genuine; but 
v. Torrey s explanation of the origin of the gloss). Oort (Em.} om. the entire 
clause, beginning with D>DNB>H. &rl rbv xvv rf)s 7775 seems to be a later addi 
tion to <t (so We., Now.). tt>N-n] J5 om. U pi. U seems to om. 2 (so also 
Lohr). Hirscht, Bfona. yrn] Gr. jn\ Oort (Em,}, Marti, TV. BNI] 
@ Kal vibs. mpjn] TV ai/TV iraiSlffKrjv. Read with Hoffm. rngan (y.i.). 
Another reading suggested is n-^jn, the accursed thing. 8. hy\] Oort, fol. , 

n. e 49 

om. hy (so Now., Elh., Lohr); perhaps @ read ns\ D San] (5 
= D San (Vol.) or o^San (Va., Seb., Gr.); so & Gr., fol. @, adds rVijn;% 
rj>] Ew. w. Sta. W (cf. Je. 2 20 ). HaL9\ Sa] <S om. owup] <S <?* 
vvKo<j>avTtG)v = according to Hirscht, D ppy, a corrupt text. & Np^ny, 0/W, 
probably reading a form of JB (Seb.). Gr. a^J Dj? (?). <S s rendering of 8a , 
KO.I rd Ifjutria avruv deffpeiJOVTes ffxotvloiS TrapaTrerdcr/AaTa tirolovv ^x6/Aej/a 
TOO evffiaffriiplov, according to Ba. = rapS D^x W]? T D^ah onnja ngi; but 
according to Gr. myv 1 ? o^ana on^p DHJ3. 

6. Though starting the indictment of Israel with the stereo 
typed formula, for three transgressions, etc.] this is abandoned 
after the first sentence. Because they sell the righteous for money, 
and the needy for a pair of shoes ] The reference is not to the 
righteous and poor in spirit who, because of opposition to a royal 
edict, are seized and sold into slavery ; * nor to the corrupt acts 
of judges in the oppression of the poor, at first for money, and 
later, as they become more corrupt, even for a pair of shoes ; | but 
to the unjust and outrageous seizure (sell here being used figur 
atively) of innocent men by the powerful for debt, and to the 
habit of selling the poor into slavery when the debt was only as 
much as a pair of shoes ; J cf. 2 K. 4 1 Mat. iS 25 . The sin of Israel 
repeated in different forms is that of injustice, oppression ; cf. the 
legislation which touches this, Ex. 23^ Dt. I6 18 " 20 Lv. ig 15 ; and 
the attitude of the later prophets, Is. i 23 3 14f< s 23 io lf - Je. 5 28 22 3 
Ez. 22^ Mi. 3 9 " 11 7 3 Mai. 3 5 . The phrase for a pair of shoes (cf. 
Am. 8 6a ) seems to be a proverbial expression designating some 
thing of the lowest value ; cf. Ez. i3 19 . A very plausible in 
terpretation || is based on the custom of using the shoe as a 
" conventional symbol in legal transactions " (cf. Ru. 4 7 Ps. 6o 8 ). 
One of the commonest crimes of Amos s day was that of land 
grabbing (cf. Is. 5 8 ) on the part of the rich, and it is this that 
Amos is here denouncing. The judges are charged with receiv 
ing money for the betrayal of the innocent, and not only so, 
but also with cheating the needy out of his land. This interpre 
tation is supported by @ s reading of i S. 1 2 3 , viz. e/< x et ps Ttvos 
e^tXao-/xa /cat V7ro8r//xa (from whose hand have I taken a 

* Geb. I Os., Va., Hi., Ew., Ba., Dr. 

t AE M Theodoret, Crocius, Ros. Dathe, Bauer, Jus., Schro., Ros., Marti. 

|| G. H. Box, Exp. Times, XII. (1901), 377 f. ; cf. Hoffm. ZA W. III. 97 ff. 

50 AMOS 

bribe and a sandal?)* 8. And because garments taken in pledge 
they spread out\ These were especially the outer garments, or 
mantle (Gn. 39 ia i K. 22 l ),f rather than bedclothing (i S. i9 13 ),J 
held in pledge contrary to the command in Ex. 22 26 , which pro 
vides for the return of the garment over night, or taken in pay 
ment for unjust fines. || Garments thus illegally and mercilessly 
held, the upper classes spread out, in order to recline upon them, as 
upon couches for sleeping,^" or as at banquets in their feasting.** 
Cf. Ewald s interpretation, cast lots (i S. I4 42 ). Beside every 
altar] Referring to the sacrificial meals (cf. i S. 3 3 9 12 - 13 Dt. i4 26f- , 
also Ho. 8 11 lo 1 - 2 - 8 i2 n ). And the wine of such as have been 
fined they drink~\ That is, wine purchased by money received 
through unjust judgment.ft In the houses of their gods~\ Not 
in the house of their gods,JJ i.e. the calves worshipped as gods 
in Bethel and Dan ; nor in the house of their God, i.e. Yahvveh, 
for this was at Jerusalem ; but in the houses of their gods || || (v.i.). 
The whole is a protest of the simple ancient Jewish religion against 
the metropolitan civilization,^ carrying with it, as it does, corrup 
tion and greed. 7. Who tread \_to the dust of the earth] the 
head of the poor] Cf. 8 4 Gn. 3 15 ; that is, trample the poor into 
the dust,*** or, omitting fHK "iBl? btt, who tread upon, or crush, the 
head of the poor, a reading based upon a slight change of ifK2E 
(v.s.). Others have understood the phrase as meaning, "who 
desire to destroy the heads of the poor who already are cast into 
the dust,"tff or, "who long for the dust of the earth, i.e. earthly 
things, gold, silver, which may be possessed only at the risk of the 
heads of the poor," \\\ or, "who long for the person of the poor 
in addition to his landed property," or, "who long to see dust 
scattered upon the heads of the poor, i.e. to see their misery as 
thus indicated," |||| || or, "who long for even the dust sprinkled by 

* The correctness of <5 s reading is established by Ecclus. 46 19 where the 
original text (ed. of Cowley and Neubauer, p. 32) reads: >n[npS ^D]D D^Syjl ~\D3 
= from whom have I taken a bribe or a pair of sandals ? 

t Jus., Schro., Ba. J Ros. ft Cal., Os. ( Ros. 1HT We. 

Ra., Ki., Cal., Os., Jus., Va., Ros. JJ Or. *** Ba., GAS. 

|| Geb. H Cal., Os., Jus., Va. Crocius. ftt Cal., Jus. 

** Ra., Ki., Luth., Geb., Ros. |||| Oort (TAT. XIV. 141), Mit. 

Jit Geb., who cites for similar use of 3 28. 231^ an itfflia; i Ch. ia 19 
also Straensee, Mich. $ Hoffm. ZA W. III. 99 f. 

IHIII Dat., and with slight variation, Ros., Ke., Or., Gun., Elh. 

II. 8, 7 5^ 

the mourner (cf. 2 S. i~ 15^ La. 2 10 ) upon his head, as indicative 
of his grief." * The general thought is the same in every case. 
And the way of the humble they turn aside~\ Cf. $ Is. io 2 
Ex. 23 6 Je. 5 4 . The word way is difficult to define, meaning 
"the judgment"! or "the cause, business";} better, however, 
is " the path in life, the walk by which they are characterized " 
(Ps. i 6 ). The rich and powerful push the humble out of the 
path in which they would naturally walk, in other words, deprive 
them of the privileges to which they are entitled (Jb. 24* Mat. 
i8 6 ). A man and his judge deal according to agreement^ 
So Hoffmann, changing "i to "I. || This is in better harmony with 
the context, which is entirely occupied with the idea of cor 
ruption and oppression. The other reading, a man and his 
father go unto the same maid, makes the sin an exaggerated form 
of adultery, a father and son going to the same harlot,^" or the 
same young wife,** or a girl (the article being generic), i.e. one 
of the temple prostitutes || wno were in the service of Baal and 
Astarte, and plied their business near the altars and temples 
(cf. Gn. 38 21>22 Dt. 23 17 i K. I4 24 ) ; or a servant taken as a concu 
bine (Ex. 2 1 8 - 9 , cf. Ez. 22 11 Lv. i8 8<15 ) ; \\ according to Reuss, it 
does not mean the same woman, but simply that the father sets 
an example to the son ; while Hitzig explains that the expression 
nrtK !ni?3 is avoided, because it might have implied that intercourse 
with different maids would not be blameworthy. And so profane 
my holy name } Any act inconsistent with God s character would 
be a profanation of his name a phrase common in the Holiness 
Code (Lv. 1 7-26) and in Ezekiel. This would apply equally well 
to (i) impurity of life, || || (2) idol worship involving impurity (cf. 
Lv. i8 21 2o 3 ),^H[ (3) corruption in the administration of justice.*** 
The thought is that this is the real result fff of all such action. 
This phrase does not, as Nowack contends, settle beyond ques 
tion that the preceding clause refers to the practices of the temple 

* Va., Schra, Hi., Pu., Hd.. Duhm (Theol.), Dr. 

t Ros., Ba., C*un. Mit. IT Cal., Os., Hi., GAS. 

t Jus. || ZA W. III. 99 f. ** Rabbi Salomo, Geb. 

ft Mich., Mau., Ew., Hd., Ba., St., Now., Dr., Elh. Iffl St. *** Hoffm. 
\\ Ros. Cal., Os., Ros. 1||| Most commentators. fff Ros. 

52 AMOS 

6. DIM] with i atten. from a, instead of with 6, as if the Qal Impf. had a; 
so also Ne. i3 15 ; but rnas, Ex. 2i 8 . Cf. ^JDJ, 2 S. I 10 with V?^, i S. 29 3 . 
F. Earth, /V#. 77 <r; GK. 61 b. qoaa] a denotes price, cf. 8 6 ; GK. H9/; 
K6. 3320. pnx] Cf. Earth, /V#. 133 <:; Lag. .&M no; Ols. 18501; 
Kautzsch, Ueber die Derivate des St. pTf in a.t. Sprachgebrauch (1881); 
WRS. Proph. 72 ; always used of persons except Dt. 4 8 . For the sense 
innocent (cf. ip j ) v. Ex. 23 7 Pr. i8 17 . ~oapa] May denote price, BSZ., s.v.; 
Ew. 8 315 f, note 3; but for the sake of (i S. I2 22 ) here and in 8 6 gives better 
sense. Cf. Ba., who maintains the latter as the only meaning; Hoffm. {ZA W. 
III. 99) makes -nay here, 7 8 and 8 6 = pun iiay (Jos. 5 11 ), i.e. produce, 
secured to the judge by the token of a pair of shoes; cf. Ru. 4 7 . D^Syj] 
= something of the slightest value (cf. 8 6 Ez. I3 19 ; so Dathe, Ba., Jus., Ros., 
Schro., et a/.), but cf. Ba., 264; ZA. VII. 296; Hoffm. ZA W. III. 98 f. 
8. hy~\ not a prep, governing onja, but a continuation of Sj: with DT3D = 
because, as in Gn. 3I 2) Ps. H9 136 ; cf. full form, Dt. 29 25 . Lohr shows clearly 
that S>i as a prep, is out of place, for Amos uses aaa> and mo for lie and 
recline ; <g om. it; and it is superfluous in the metre of the line. l^] by 
the transposition of vs. 7 and 8 now continues the inf. Q-OD (H. 29, 5 b; GK. 
114?-; Dr. 118), having in itself and giving to the inf. the freq. force, 
H. 21, 2; GK. 107 ; Dr. 33 a ; Ew. s use of n& = S eri, cast lots, is un 
necessary and without basis; cf. Is. 3i 3 Je. 6 12 , in which nan is used of 
stretching out the hand, a sense more easy to harmonize here with its use in 
v. 7 inti"] is coordinate with is\ On the sacrificial meals of the Hebrews, 
see Di. on Lv. 3 ; WRS. OTJC? 239, 448-51, and Proph. 98 f.; and other 
literature cited in my Constructive Studies in the Priestly Element in the 
O.T. (1902), 90 ff. DninSx ma] = in the houses of their gods, the second 
noun pluralizing also the first, H. 3,4; GK. 124?-; cf. orvaxy ma, i S. 3i 9 . 
7. D^BBTI] or, DijDS t^n (GK. 23^); the article, as in Gn. 49 21 Ps. 49", adds a 
new statement, here in a tone of impatience and indignation; (GK. 126^; 
K6. 41 1 e\ Mit. ; Torrey, /2?Z. XV. 151 f.; cf. the frequent use of the ptcp. in 
this way, 3 10 4 1 5 7 6 3 - 4ff - 13 , etc.). Against the reading here adopted, Elh. 
(cf. Hirscht) urges (i) that in Gn. 3 15 , where *pe> occurs with p*o, the prep, 
a is absent; (2) that in Gn. 3 15 *pB> cannot possibly mean tread upon, when 
used of the serpent at least ; (3) that it involves the rejection of jnN IDJ? S;*, 
the presence of which words cannot be accounted for on the supposition that 
they are a gloss (but z/.j.); (4) that fft^T makes satisfactory sense. u>jna] 
On use of a after verbs of touching and taking hold of, GK. ngk; Ew. 8 217, 
3, 2), a} ; but note that in 8 4 the a is omitted after D^DBTI. ui a^oNtrn] rd 
TrarovvTO. ^TTI rbv xovv rrjs 7775 /cat ticovdijXi^ov et s Ke0a\as TTTW^CIV (cf. $& for 
the sake of sandals which tread upon the dust of the earth and who strike the 
poor with their fists) is explained as due to a double interpretation of o^QNirn, 
one rightly connecting it with the subject of the preceding inf., the other 
wrongly connecting it with D^Sp; it is as an explanatory gloss to the latter 
that the xn -\oy hy originated (so e.g. Torrey, /Z?Z. XV. 152). The result is 
that the two interpretations appear side by side in @ and 5, QiflNB>n being 

ii. 9-12 53 

represented in each, while El@T presents a mixture of the two interpretations, 
NH icy iy belonging to the secondary one. Hirscht objects to this that @ 
renders ^NtP in 8 4 by tKTpijBw ; cf. 2 K. IQ 26 where 4 confuses nrnp with rpjp 
and translates it TraTT^uara, and Is. 25 10 where t^n is rendered by irareiv. 
Moreover, in Gn. 3 15 , *ptt> is used of an action of the foot, not of the hand 
(i<ov5v\tfa). Hence only TTOLTOVVTO. can here be referred to D^flNip, and 
since this rendering of D^Nt^ made the Hebrew unintelligible, KCU iKovdti\iov 
was freely added by the translators after tiri rbv x^ v T ^s 7??s in order to 
secure sense for the passage. Hirscht, therefore, would retain ffflfi, with one 
change, viz., U JO3 instead of tf&na, and, by considering t^foa as the direct 
object of o^flNipn and regarding y^sn nay as an ironical expression for money 
(cf. Assyr. " gold, the dust of his land " and " the dust of the earth of Susa 
... I took to Assyria," KB. II. 14, 209), would secure the following inter 
pretation : "the wicked already possess much, and yet it is nothing (dust), 
and they ever covet more of this nothing from those who have nothing more." 
This is scarcely an improvement upon H2T and, to say the least, makes very 
awkward syntax. y^] A more usual meaning of nan than the above; here 
a continuation of the ptcp., as the other, of an inf.; H. 27, 5^; GK. n6x; 
Ko. 4i3/, 368/5 Dr. 117. mjun SN la 1 ? vaNi WK\] In support of this 
reading note (i) that H3T is entirely outside of the scope of the author s 
thought ; cf. Mi. 2 9 in which the casting out of the women is a part of the 
picture of oppression; (2) the parallel picture in Mi. 7 3 ; (3) the use of 3N 
- priestly judge, 2 K. 6 21 13" Je. 17! (cf. Gn. 458; GFM. Ju. 385 f.), and a 
similar usage in Egyptian (ZD M G. XXXI. 726) ; (4) the similar combination 
of njro and y?n in 3 3 . jyD 1 ?] H. 29, 3 a (a); GK. 107 q\ Ko. 4077"; Ew. 8 
337, 2; expresses a necessary logical consequence but never simply result; 
" in rhetorical passages, the issue of a line of action, though really unde 
signed, is represented by it ironically as if it were designed" (BDB. 775), 
eg. Ho. 8 4 ; cf. Ko. 396^. This is the only occurrence of f>oS in Amos. 

9-12. The efforts made by Yahweh to build up Israel. The 
present condition of Israel is not due to neglect on the part 
of Yahweh, for he (i) had taken Israel out of Egypt, led her 
through the wilderness and brought her to Canaan, (2) had 
driven out the Canaanites from before her, and (3) had raised 
up teachers through whom his will might be made known, but 
all to no effect. 

This piece stands in closest connection with the preceding (cf. the contrast 
they had profaned his holy name, when it had been he, who was, etc.), and 
falls into three strophes each of three pentameters, or six alternating trimeters 
and dimeters ; preferably the former, since the long drawn out lines picture 
the historical details given, and form a contrast with the quick trimeter move 
ment of vs. 13 " 15 which follow. It seems right to transfer v. 10 to precede v. 9 

54 AMOS 

and make it form the first strophe, because (i) this is a simple historical 
statement and the chronological order is self-evident, while (2) nothing is 
gained by the explanation that v. 9 , although later in time, is put before v. 10 to 
emphasize the greatness of the victory over the tall and mighty aborigines, 
which was so remarkable in contrast with the weakness of Israel at the time 
of the prophet (Evv.), or to tell first what God did for the nation, and then 
what he did to the nation ; (3) the confusion grew out of the fact that both 
strophes began with OJN1 ; while (4) the whole of strophe 2 (v. 9 ) grows out of 
the mention of noNPi in line 3 of strophe I (v. 10 ). Cf. Lohr, Oct., Baumann, 
and Marti who makes both 10 and 12 interpolations. 

10. TiiSyn ^JNI] U correctly renders, ego sum qui ascenders . . . fed. 
Before HBnS the insertion of DDNONI found in j&, and I brought you to this 
place, completes the rhythm and furnishes a basis for nan*?. 9. >mDtt>n] 
<5 <?%>a; <S A t&yeipa. ams;:] Some codd. oa^BB. D^iVx . . . DM-\N] 
G sg. -PDir Ni] <& Q-tipava. ; (some codd. ^pa) ; A. nal (rvvtrpi^a in second, 
but 29 like (f; cf. Ba. s suggestion that ^pava. is an early (because followed by 
Jer. and Arab.) modification of t^pa to fit the picture of a tree. 11. D>pNi] 
( Kal e\a/3oj = npN) (cf. Dt. iS 18 ). onuS] ayiao~/j.6v = in. The line p|Nn 
"Ui HNT ps] the concluding home-thrust of the piece should stand at the 
end of v. 12 , where it belongs logically and poetically (sec Biblical World, 
September, 1898; so also Lohr, 6; on the contrary, Oet 66). ^ND] Gr. nbxr. 
rw] Riedel, rnx nr. 12. onn] <& 7)yia<r/j.tvov$; other Greek versions 
robs Nafipa/ous. -iN^n N^ "^nx 1 ;] & has the third person; these words might 
well be omitted as a gloss and the line thus restored to its proper length. 

10. And yet it was I who~\ Emphasizing, cf. U, the contrast 
between the ingratitude and wickedness of the people (v. 8 ) and the 
readiness of Yahweh to pour out blessings upon them. For simi 
lar use of the conjunction, which is especially frequent with the 
personal pronouns, see Ju. i6 15 Is. 53 7 Gn. 26^. Brought you up 
out of Egypt] The usual form of expression, cf. Gn. i2 10 26 2 44" 
4S 25 46 3 , not because Palestine was toward the north,* but rather 
because of the local elevation, the mountainous character of Pales 
tine in contrast with Egypt. f The general thought here expressed 
is found elsewhere, Ex. 19* Dt. 32 Ps. y8 53 Je. 2 2 . For the various 
explanations of the present order of vs. 9 10 , and for the reasons 
which suggest a reversal of the order, v.s. Forty years ] Cf. 5* 
Dt. 2 7 8 2 especially 2Q 5 ; a reminder not only of the disobedience 
for which the wandering was a punishment, and in spite of which 
Yahweh was good enough to bring them into the land, but also of 

* Ros. t Hd. ; cf. GAS. HG. 45-59. 

ii. io, 9 55 

the power of Yahweh exhibited in his gracious act of feeding and 
caring for them during all this time. * On the duration of the wan 
dering there is difference of opinion. -f For the use of the number 
forty in Scripture, { see Gn. y 4 252 so 3 Ex. I6 35 24 18 Nu. I3 25 Dt. 
25 3 Ju. 3 11 5 31 S 28 is 1 i K. i 9 8 Ez. 2 9 llff - Jon. . To possess the 
land] Cf. Dt. 6 12 Ho. i3 4 (RV. marg.). This phrase has been 
joined (i) to the preceding clause with the idea that this long 
wandering was intended to prepare them for driving out their 
opponents, (2) to the whole verse, explaining thus the purpose 
of the Exodus as a whole ; || but it is better with %> (z/.j.) to suppose 
that the words and brought you hither] were a part of the original 
text. The Amorite} By whom Amos meant not a particular 
people dwelling from the Jabbok to the Arnon on both sides of 
the Jordan (cf. Nu. 2I 21 - 32 ), nor one (cf. Gn. io 15f -) of many Canaan- 
itish peoples, used here to represent allf (cf. Gn. i5 16 Jos. 24 15 ), 
but the whole Canaanitish constituency, described by E (of the 
Hexateuch) and by Amos as the Amorite (#.*.). 9. And it was 
I who destroyed from before them} An emphatic expression as in 
v. 10 , and the usual word for the overthrow of the Canaanite race 
(see in E, Jos. 24 8 , the same phrase), especially frequent in Dt. 
(cf. 2 21f ) and in the later historical books. The Amorite . . . 
whose height was like the cedars} An hyperbolical description, based 
upon the common opinion of the existence of giant nations, in 
tended to magnify the goodness and the power of Yahweh, who 
was able to overcome enemies of such stature.** Specific mention 
of the gigantic autochthones of the land is made elsewhere, viz. 
of the sons of Anak (Nu. i3 22ff Dt. i 28 ); the Emim (Dt. 2 10 ) ; the 
Zamzummim (Dt. 2 20 ) ; the Rephaim (Dt. 3"); cf. also Nu. I3 33 . 
The cedar in the Hebrew mind was the ideal representation of gran 
deur, 2 K. i4 9 Is. 2 13 Ps. 8o 10 9 2 13 Ez. i7 22f - 3 i 3 Je. 22 7 . Andhe was 
strong as the oaks} Cf. Is. 2 13 Zc. n 2 Ez. 2f. But I destroyed 
his fruit . . . his roots } That is, root and branch (cf. Ez. i; 9 Ho. 
9 16 Jb. i8 16 Is. 5 24 ),tt a picture of complete destruction, \\ and not a 

* Cal., Ros., Ba., Pu. f Cf. Sta. G VI. 1. 132 f. ; Dr. Dt. 32 f. J Cf. K6. Stil, 54. 

AE., Ki. || Ros. U Jus., Schro., Ros., Ba., Hd., Pu., Or., et al. ** Pu. 

ft Cf. Eshmunazar Inscription (Corp. Insc. Sent, ii p. 19, Is. n, 12) : " May he 
have no root underneath, or fruit above, or any beauty among the living under the 
sun." ++ Cal., Tus., Ba. 

56 AMOS 

reference to different classes, e.g. the fruit being the children, and 
the root the stock of the population as that which propagates the 
species.* The destruction, here poetically exaggerated, was not 
at first represented as so complete, cf. Ex. 23 32f - 34 12 ; but in later 
times, and especially in Dt. (cf. y lf 2O 15f Jos. n 20 ) it is treated as 
something practically finished even in the early days. Perhaps the 
gradual disappearance of the Canaanites furnished the occasion 
for this difference in representation. 11. Yahweh had shown his 
presence and his favor in the Exodus and in the Conquest ; but 
when Moses, the great prophet, had died, who, in the divine plan, 
should serve as mediator between himself and Israel? Moreover 
I raised up some of your sons for prophets } (cf. Je. 6 17 ), and, 
through these, the connection of Yahweh with Israel had been 
maintained. All this was in strict accord with Dt. i8 15 , the earliest 
announcement of which formed the constitution of the prophetic 
order. Up to this time Israel s prophets, not reckoning Moses, 
Samuel, and those sent also to Judah, included Ahijah (i K. I4 2 ), 
Jehu (i K. I6 1 ), Elijah (i K. ly 1 ), Elisha (i K. i 9 16 ), Micaiah (i K. 
22 s ), Jonah (2 K. I4 25 ), and the many prophets whose names 
are not given (i S. 28 13 Ho. 4* i K. I3 1 20 35 ). Hitzig s inter 
pretation, aroused . . . so that they became, is not so good as the 
ordinary raised up, or ordained. The phrase your sons limits the 
writer s thought to Israelites,! but " lays no stress upon the fact 
that youth is the time of inspiration and enthusiasm " ; J cf. Jo. 3 1 . 
Nor does the blessing consist in the fact that their own sons have 
been taken as Yahweh s representatives, when angels might have 
been chosen. The usual particle (jtt) is here used to express the 
partitive idea, some of. And some of your youths for nazirites~\ 
Mitchell rightly distinguishes Nazaritc from nazirite. The nazi- 
rite, as the word "IT3 signifies, was separated (from men, || or from 
wine If), consecrated to God; cf. the Rechabites, 2 K. io 15 Je. 35 6 . 
Ordinarily the vow of the nazirite was made for a definite period ; 
but in two cases, those, perhaps, in the mind of Amos, the 
obligation seems to have been assumed for life, viz. Samson (Ju. 
I3 s.T.i4 16 i7) and s amue l ( x S. i 11 ). This has been thought to be 
the original form of the vow.** The custom had its origin in an 

* Hi., Ke. t Cf. GAS. I. 11-30, 44-58. || Ba. IT Jus. 

t Ba. Cal. ** WRS. Proph. 84 ; Gun. 45. 

ii. 9, "-is 57 

effort to counteract the self-indulgent habits introduced into Israel 
by the Canaanites. The law (Nu. 6 2 " 21 ) provided only for the 
temporary obligation, at the termination of which the hair, which 
meanwhile had been sacred, should be sacrificed (Nu. 6 18 ). It 
was also understood that the nazirite should abstain from pollution 
by contact with death, as well as from every product of the vine 
(cf. Ju. i3 14 Nu. 6 3f ). The nazirite (cf. also the cases of John the 
Baptist, Lu. i 15 , and, according to Eusebius,* James, the brother 
of Jesus) was introduced not as a reminder of Yahweh s goodness 
in establishing the institution as a set way for securing holiness,f 
nor because of the similarity of the nazirite s work to that of the 
prophet, the former teaching by example, the latter by precept ; \ 
but because it enabled the speaker to deal a severe blow against 
one of the great evils of his day. 12. But~\ Instead of observ 
ing the example and obeying the precepts of these divinely 
appointed agents, ye made the nazirites drink wine~\ and so 
debauched them, a fact which, in view of the nation s degen 
eracy, is easily credible, although no historical allusion to it is 
found. The influences used may have been either persuasion 
(Gn. i g 32 - 34 ) or compulsion (Nu. 5 2426f )||. And the prophets 
ye commanded, "ye shall not prophesy"^ Cf. 7 16 . The example 
of one class is made null and void, and the utterances of the 
other class are prevented, and so Yahweh himself, who had 
raised up these messengers, is insulted and rejected. Note the 
chiastic arrangement of the thought. Actual examples of the 
prohibition placed upon prophecy were not infrequent, e.g. Jero 
boam I. (i K. is 4 ), Jezebel (i K. i8 4 i 9 2 ), Ahab (i K. 22* * f ), 
Ahaziah (2 K, i 9ff> ), Jehoram (2 K. 6 31 ) ; cf. later the case of Amos 
(y 13 ), also Is. 3O 10 - 11 and the persecution of Jeremiah. Is not this 
indeed so .?] Will any one deny these accusations ? Is Israel then 
not deserving of the punishment which is threatened? This ques 
tion is in a better position here than at the end of v. 11 , and con 
cludes the entire accusation. // is the oracle of Yahweh~\ The 
phrase used here and ordinarily translated saith Yahweh (also in 
2 ie 3 io.i3.i^ etc< ^ is not the phrase used in i 15 2 3 5 16 - 17 - 27 , etc., but 
one of much stronger significance (v.i.). 

* Hist. ii. 23. f Cal. J Os., Geb., St. Ki. || Jus., Ba. 

$8 AMOS 

10. -OJNI] Emphatic by position and expression, GK. 135 a; Ko. 362^. 
"1*71x1] Always without > in i p. sg. with i cons.; GK. 69 x. -airs] V. Baentsch, 
Die Wuste in d. a. Schriften. nj;p D^OIX] Sg. of noun with pi. of numeral, 
H. 15, 4. ntinV] The inf. with S expressing purpose, GK. 114 /, and notes. 
ncxn] According to We. (Die Composition des Hexateuchs, 341 f.), Steinthal 
(Zeitschrift fur Volkerpsychologie, XII. 267), Meyer (ZA W. I. 121-7, ! 39 ff -) 
WRS. (Proph. 26, 379), Sta. (GVI. I. no; cf. also Budde, Bibl. Urge- 
schichte, 344-8; De. on Gn. 48 22 ), Di. (Gen. I. 365), Kit. (Hist. I. 22), Dr. 
(Dt. p. 11), GAS., Buhl (art. "Amoriter," PRE?}, and Now., this is a name 
current as early as the sixteenth century B.C., and applied to the primitive popu 
lation of Palestine in E and D of the Hexateuch (J using " Canaanite "), and in 
Amos, synonymous with Canaanite. Cf. Gn. 48 22 Dt. I 7 - i 9 - 20 , also Ju. I 34f - 6 10 
2 S. 2i 2 . McC. (HPM. I. 406 ff.) maintains that " in the Old Testament the 
two names answer to two distinct peoples, though it is impossible as yet to say 
with certainty how far the one was removed from the other in point of origin, 
and date of settlement "; similarly Wkl. (GL I. 52 ff.). The terms land of 
Amar, which occurs with land of Kandna (Canaan) in the Egyptian inscriptions 
(Brugsch, Hist, of Eg? II. 14 f., 154; Bu., Bibl Urgeschichte, 346 f.; Dr., Dt. 
12; GFM.y. 81 ff.), and Amurri of the Tel-el-Amarna tablets (Sayce, Races 
ofthe O. T. 55f., 101 f., 110-17; Dr.Z?/. 12; GFM./. 83) are probably the same 
name. The word occurs frequently in the Assyrian inscriptions, if the name for 
Syria, matu Aharri, is to be read matu Amurri ; so Delattre, PSBA. 1891, 
pp. 215-34; ZA. VII. 2; RP? V. 95 rm. 4, 98 rm. 2; Muss-Arnolt, Diet. 30, 
61; Sayce, art. " Amorites," DB. ; W. M. Miiller, art. "Amorites," Jew. 
Enc.; Paton, Hist. 16; Wkl., KAT? I. 178. 9. rnocn] The usual word 
for the destruction of the Canaanites, especially frequent in Dt. e.g. I 27 2 12 - 21 - 22 - a 
etc. onvisp] is a sudden change from the second person to the third, K6., 
Stil. 241. ^naj . . . ^C x] whose height, the full form of the relative sen 
tence (H. 13, i; 46, i; GK. 1380; Ew. 8 331 <:, 3). xin }bn] The unusual 
order makes jon (occurring only here and Is. I 31 ) very emphatic. 0\rSxr] 
On the generic art. in comparisons, H. 4, 3 d (2); GK. 126 o. On the 
Hebrew idea of giant nations much has been written (cf. especially DB? I. 
1173-6; Schwally, Das Leben nach dem Tode, 64 f,; Id. ZAW. XVIII. 135; 
Dr. Dt. 40; GFM. Ju. 39), but the subject is not yet entirely clear. The 
words S- N (of which the sg. occurs only in proper names), n^x, (noun of unity 
corresponding to W), pS^x, and the differently pronounced nSx and f^x, 
though carefully distinguished infHE, are hopelessly confused in the versions. 
In Aramaic this is one word fS- X, meaning great tree. The traditional idea 
(Celsus, Hierobotanicon, I. 34 ff. ; J. D. Michaelis, Supplementa, p. 72 ff.; Ros. 
Bibl. Alterthumsk. IV. 229 ff.; Ges. Thes. 50 f. ; but on the other side Lowth 
on Is. i*>; GFM. Ju. 121 f.; ZDPV. XIII. 220 ff. ; We. Prol. 248), that cer 
tain two or three of the words were used consistently for terebinth, and others 
for oak, is not borne out by the versions, and the distinction could not have 
been indicated in the unpointed text. The words signify " in Hebrew usually, 
if not exclusively, holy tree, as the place, and, primitively, the object of wor- 

II. i3-i6 59 

ship, without regard to species " (GFM./. 121). -VCBM] Yea, I destroyed, 
a repetition of ^rncm, for the purpose of adding the phrase which would 
characterize the destruction as complete ; on tt-ripava, v.s. Note i in Hiph. 
after waw cons., as frequently in I sg., GK. 53 n. vantr] For the same 
expression, Is. 5 24 I4 30 Mai. 3 19 . 11. crvjiJD] The prep, used partitively, 
GK. 11974;; K6. 81; Ew. 8 2i7, i, i),). -ajS] On the use of S, GK. 119/5 
K6. 3277^ /3 2). 12. >pprn] With a double ace., H. 31, i ; GK.ii;^. In 
fH the waw cons, construction is continued, notwithstanding the break 
caused by the insertion of "m rjxn, K6. 368 b. nwajn S>n] The chiastic order 
again, for emphasis and variety; instead of nix with ace. of person (e.g. 
Gn. 26 n ),the rarer construction of Vj; (still more rare are Sx and S) is used 
(cf. also Gn. 2 16 i K. 2 43 Is. 5 6 Na. i 14 ) ; the thing forbidden is here (according 
to the present text) introduced by nnxS (sometimes with h and the inf. e.g. 
Je. I3 6 ). 1X3 jn X s ] In the direct form of one of the "ten words," the negative 
separated from the verb by the disjunctive accent, hence dag. lene in r, GK. 
21 b; not an entreaty, in which case ^x would have been used, but an absolute 
command, as if from heaven itself, H. 41, I a, b ; GK. 107 o. 11 b. ^xn] 
The interrogative is for rhetorical effect, K6. 371^; H N (= really) giving 
special stress to the following fx, cf. Gn. i8 13 . DXJ] This word occurs about 
370 times in the O. T., being especially frequent in Je. (171 times), in Ez. (86 
times), and in Am. (21 times). It is distinctively a prophetic word, appear 
ing in all the prophets except Hb., Jon., and Dn., and occurring outside of 
prophetic literature only three times, viz. Ps. 36 2 no 1 Pr. 3O 1 . It is followed 
by the divine name everywhere except in Nu. 24, where it is used of Balaam; 
in 2 S. 23 1 , of David; in Pr. 3O 1 , of Agur (a doubtful text); in Ps. 36 2 , of 
transgression personified; and in Je. 23 31 , where it is used as a cognate 
accusative. DXJ usually comes at the close of a prophetic statement or occurs 
parenthetically in the midst of one; it introduces the utterance only in Nu. 24 
2 S. 23! Is. i 24 56 8 Zc. I2 1 Ps. 36 2 no 1 Pr. 3O 1 . It is a noun of the form 
qu(ul\\\iQ Siaa, irim, etc. (so Earth NB. 82 e\ K6. II. I p. 501); rather than 
a pass. ptcp. (Dr., and most of the older authorities). The root does not 
occur in Hebrew in any other form (except Je. 23 31 , where it is a denomina 
tive vb.), but cf. Arab, ncfama groan, sigh, murmur, whisper, etc. Hence 
ex: probably denoted the divine communication as imparted secretly and mys 
teriously; cf. the phenomena indicated as accompanying the communication 
of Yahweh s word to Balaam (Nu. 24 3f - 15f ); the phrase "uncover the ear" 
used of God speaking to man (i S. 9 15 Jb. 33 16 , etc.); and Eliphaz s descrip 
tion of the revelation given to him (Jb. 4 12 ). DXJ is the strongest word 
denoting prophetic utterance and especially marks its divine character; it is 
best rendered oracle. Cf. BDB., BSZ. 

13-16. The impending calamity. The charge of wickedness 
has been made (vs. 8 " 10 ) ; the futile efforts of Yahvveh to save the 
nation have been narrated (vs. 11 12 ) ; the end has now come ; Israel, 

60 AMOS 

for her sins, must suffer : (i) Yahweh will bring a great calamity ; 
(2) the strongest will not be able to escape ; (3) the swiftest and 
most courageous will fall. 

This piece, forming the last of the dreadful trilogy, goes back to the trim 
eter movement. The movement then becomes short and quick, as if by its 
very form to foretell the coming doom. In view of (i) the difficulties sug 
gested by v. 13 (.z.); (2) the serious interruption of thought between TDJ? 
and -ONI (v. 14 ); and (3) the irregularity of the first strophe as compared 
with the peculiar symmetry which elsewhere characterizes the form of these 
chapters, there seems to be good reason for assuming the loss of a part of the 
text, perhaps one or two lines, of the first strophe. On the other hand a com 
plete strophe of four trimeters may be obtained by dividing as follows : 

OJN run [pS] 

This arrangement would be fatal to Gun. s interpretation (ZM.). 

13. njn] (g logically reads pV, 5td TOUTO, before this, pS having dropped 
out, because of the frequency with which njn is employed as an introductory 
particle, cf. run pSi, Is. 8 7 . P^E] <& Kv\lw; < A /cwXtfw; A. Tptf^<rw; U 
strideboj j / will press (same root as in Hebrew). Hi. p">CD (so also St., 
Or. (?), We., Gr., Val., Dr. (?), Now., BOB., Elh., Lohr, Oct.). p>;n] < 
KiA/erat; A. rpffei; % Cresses; F stridet. Hi. pion (so St., We., Dr., 
Now., BDB., Oct., et al.}. Gr. p^on (so e.g. Elh., Lohr). nSjpn] Some suggest 
nSjyn. nS] Gun. om. as dittograph. 15 a. icy . . . E>orn] Belongs with 
v. 14 , in strophe 2; this arrangement is demanded by the meaning, as well as 
by the versification. 14. Spc] < <?>c Spo^ws; A. and 6. KovQov; 1& S^piD. 
Gr. D^pc. V. 15 is om. in some Mss. of Kenn. and deR., and in the Arabic, 
probably because of the similar endings of v. 14 and v. 15 as now separated. 

* y A* 

15 b. taSn^] read aSo", as in (5 5ia<ra>0?7, & J^sAJ, 3T 3?r??^ TS salvabitur 
(so Hi., Gr., Seb., Now., Dr., Elh., Oort (/.), Oct., Hirscht). Zeydner 
(7%5/., IV. 201 ff.; so also Now.) regards the words from Spi (v. 15 ) to omaw 
(v. 16 ) as a later addition (^..), while Lohr om. v. 15 entirely as late; so 
Hirscht (with some hesitation) ; but cf. Je. 46 9 . Oct. is inclined to om. Spi 
IPDJ . . . (v. 15 ); v. Baumann, 31. 16. "m ^DNI] @ /cat 6 /cparaids o) ^ 
cvpr)<rei rrjv KapSiav af>rov iv 5vva<rTeiais, for which Wkl. (Untersuch. 184 f.), 
proposes this original text : rvn-iaaD i^S nyv ^S ^-CNI = " the stouthearted 
his heart will forget heroic deeds." <, according to Wkl., read sV as N^ and 
gave rw its Aramaic sense, find. Dmaja] & = maw. A Kal cu/o^crei T^V 
Kapdlav (omitting 6 Kparcubs ov /*r?), similarly @Qr and Syr -Hex., Kal 

II. 13-16 6l 

ij KapSla ffov; and @ Bab om. ofl yicrj. In view of these facts Hirscht regards 
the original text as being NXDI which was corrected to pCNi; transl. both 
and since the result was in conflict with the preceding vs. added the negative 
of his own accord. Similarly Vol., but v. Stek. 

13. I will make you groan in your places just as the threshing 
wagon makes the (floor) filled with sheaves to groan] This is Hoff 
mann s rendering,* and is the best of the many (v.i.) that have 
been proposed. There is nothing in the words themselves, or in 
the context, to suggest an earthquake.! The writer s mind is filled 
with war, the coming of which (cf. 5 27 6 7 - 14 7 9 - 17 8 9f - 14 ) shall make 
men cry out in their misery. The appropriate manifestation for 
such grief would be uttering of groans, which not improperly might 
be compared by the farmer-prophet to the creaking and groaning 
of the threshing-floor under the weight of the threshing-sledge and 
its full supply of sheaves. This does not differ essentially in thought 
from the more common interpretation, / will press your place, as 
the wagon that is full of sheaves presses \ what is under // or on 
the earth ; \\ or, I will press that which is among you as a wagon 
which is loaded (with stones} presses the sheaves ; ^[ or, I will press 
down upon you as a wagon presses that is full of sheaves ; ** or, / 
will make it totter (p^Bfc) beneath you as a cart tottereth that is 
full of sheaves (v.s.} . The lack of clearness here is probably to be 
explained by the loss of a part of the strophe. 14, 15 a. Then 
shall refuge fail the swift"] Cf. 9 16 . The strophe beginning with 
these words presents, in four sharp utterances, the utter lack of hope 
of any deliverance. Neither the swift (Je. 25^ 46 6 Jb. 1 1 20 ), nor the 
strong (Pr. 24 5 ), nor the hero, experienced in war, nor the armed 
man, skilled in handling the bow (Je. 46 9 ), shall find refuge, or be 
able to assert his strength, or rescue himself, or stand (Ps. I02 26 
Dn. ii 6 - 8 ; also Je. 46 21 Na. 2 8 ), when the great calamity shall come. 
Everything in which men at such times trust shall fail, viz. swiftness, 
strength, experience, and skill in the use of weapons of war. 
15, b, c, 16. And the swift of foot shall not rescue himself] Cf. 
2 S. i 2 - 3 2 18 i Ch. i2 8 . This strophe, omitted in some Mss. (v.s.), 
repeats the same idea in largely the same words, though differently 

* ZAW. III. 100 f. J Crocius, Schro.,Ges. || Schlier, Ke. ** Ew., GAS. 
t Cf. Mit. 96 f. } So Hd. H Geb. 

62 AMOS 

arranged. This is not a later insertion (v.s.) ; the poet would 
picture again, with monotonous vividness, the impossibility of 
escape. Does the phrase shall flee away naked] (i.e. having aban 
doned his weapons, armor, or dress which might embarrass him) 
contradict what has been said concerning the impracticability of 
any effort to escape ? No, for flight here means rout, not escape. 
But upon the whole strophe and its correspondence to the pre 
ceding, v.t. In that day\ The day which was always uppermost 
in the mind of the prophet, the day of Yahweh, described more 
fully in 5 18 . 

13. run] For other cases of nin used to introduce a solemn utterance, 
cf. Gn. 6 17 Is. 7 14 . <l ? ^] Emphatic and in contrast with the suffix in D.^nnru 
otherwise the more common jn would be used; cf. Gn. 24 13 Ex. 4 23 . 
jvpn . . . p^p] The ptcp. used here of the immediate future, H. 27, 2c y 
GK. 116 d; Dr. 135, 3. This a. X. has given rise to many and widely differ 
ent interpretations, the chief of which may be classified: (i) Those in which 
P-IJ? is given the meaning of the Aramaic p-ix press, cf. the derivative npp 
Ps. 55 4 , nppis Ps. 66 11 : (a} both verbs taken transitively: / will press 
you down (for this use of rm cf. Jb. 36 16 ) as a wagon (or, a cow} presses, 
etc. (Doderlein, Ew., GAS. v.s.}; or, I will make narrow the place for you, etc. 

(Riickert) ; or (= Arab. (J^fr), I will cut in pieces, as a threshing roller, etc. 
(BSZ. s.v. pip) ; (b} the first verb trans., the second intrans. : I will press you 
doivn as a wagon is pressed down, i.e. gives way (Va., De Wette, Ros., 
Mau.) ; (c} both verbs intrans. : / am pressed under you as a wagon is 
pressed, etc. (Cal., Ba., Pu.). (2) Those in which pip is translated creak, 
groan (cf. Arab. ^^Xfc), then tremble, totter : (a) I groan under you as 
the wagon groans (Os., cf. A. and T , v.s.} ; (b} I will make you cry out, 
etc. (Jus., Hoffm. v.s.}. Against which Now. urges the unsuitableness of 
the thought as preparatory to v. 14 ; the uncertainty of the readings in Ps. 66 11 
and 55* cited in comparison; the difficulty of making njODn an ace., and of 
omitting pjn. (3) Those involving change of text : (a} I will make it 
tremble under you as the wagon trembles (v.s.}, by changing pip to pio (cf. 
I S. 2, >:oS for ^cpS; 2 S. 246, fs* for ]-;<}; (b) I will make it tremble under 
you as the full wagon makes the sheaves tremble, with -PDp as object, and rh 
omitted (Gun.). (4) pip = Arab. * *> withdraw, flee away ; I will cause 

your place to yield as the wagon breaks down that is full, etc. (Hi. s later view), 
the reference being to the earthquake of I 1 , though the words were probably not 
spoken, but written afterward. The great majority of these interpretations are 
based upon the conception of an earthquake (v.s.}. (5) pip = Arab. ^J).fc, 
hinder, I will cause a stoppage under you as the threshing sledge (Is. 28 27f ) stops 
(i.e. no longer turns) which is choked with straw; cf. <S A (v.s.} (Wetzstein, ZAW. 

II. 16 63 

III. 278). Hal. renders nm] as " body," citing lib. 3 16 Zc. 6 12 . -tt S?] The 
prep, governing the antecedent of the relative, not the relative; cf. H-46, 3<r); 
K6. 63; GK. 138^. p^n] Impf. of indef. freq. action, II. 21,3; Dr. 33^; 
GK. 107 g. "iN^cn] The art. with ptcp. equiv. to a rel. clause, H. 4, 3/5 Dr. 
135, 7; on the Qal. ptcp. of stative verbs, GK. 50 , d. n^] For another case 
of ethical dative with ptcp. cf. -h 1^3 Ho. 8 9 ; H. n, 2<r; GK. 1195; K6. 36; 
Ew. 8 217, 2, 2) ) 3); Dr. Dt. 10 f, 1 6. Note Gun. s suggestion that nS is a 
dittograph of the last syllable of the preceding word (cf. K6. 402 /). -ppy] 
Either ace. after nxSon, i.e. ace. of spec. (cf. K6. 3277), or ace. after p>j?n 
(Gun.). 14. p . . . n3Ni] The i is consequential, following the ptcp. H. 25, 5; 
Dr. 113 (i); GK. n6x. p with -ON, cf. Je. 25 35 Jb. n 20 Ps. I42 5 . SpJ 
Standing alone, even without the article, used as a superlative (so Va.; 
GK. 133^). Dijp] So far as form is concerned, either flight (so Ke., Val.), 
the noun with D having the force of the verb, or place of flight, refuge (Pu., 
Gun.), the a denoting place; GK. 8$e; Earth, NB. 160 c. 15 a. npn iron 
iby N^] i.e. shall perish, or shall be put to flight. 15, 6, c. A comparison 
of the second and third strophes, 14 - 15a - and 156 c > shows a general purpose on 
the part of the writer to repeat the thought with the same words arranged in 
a somewhat striking manner. If ony might be pointed D-nj? (skilled} rather 
than on^, and two or three transpositions made, the similarities of the 
strophes would become still more striking, the parallelism more perfect, and 
^ better sense gained. The following is suggested as a plausible conjecture : 

*?ps DUS -asi B{?D? N 1 ? 

IPD VDN-" N^ prm om3J3 

>3 DU> Dion 33^ 

Note that after the first clause, those that remain are circumstantial, adding, 
in a subordinate way, details to the main picture. This may in part be repro 
duced by the use of the conjunction while; H. 45, I c ; GK. 156^; Dr. 

Zeydner (T/iS/., 1886, pp. 201 f.) supposes that 2 14 - 16 contains several 
glosses, and that, these being rejected, the original text was : 

n oi3 D-ir on 

16. nS v^xi] The stoutest of heart, an epexegetical genitive, really super 
lative; GK. 128*; cf. K6. 336 /&. any] According to iftfl& an ace. of state, 
H - 33,45 GK. nSn; K6. 332^. 

64 AMOS 

Summary. A judgment on Israel : (i) The nation has sinned 
grievously, treating the poor and needy unjustly, and oppressing 
them beyond all measure ; until her behavior has become in the 
eyes of the world a profanation of Yahweh s holy name. (2) This 
moral condition is due to no lack of effort on Yahweh s part; since 
he had led Israel out of Egypt into Canaan, had driven out the 
Canaanites before her, and had given teachers who should declare 
righteousness to her; but all his care had been without result. 
(3) For her sins Israel must suffer, the nation shall perish; none, 
not even the swiftest and strongest, shall escape. 

5. The roar of the lion ; destruction is coming. 3 1 " 8 . The 
prophet s first message concerning Israel s future has been de 
livered. The people, very naturally, refuse to credit his state 
ments. Yahweh is not likely, in their opinion, to desert his own 
nation. Everything, politically considered, seems to be prosperous. 
Disaster of any kind is far removed from their thoughts. The 
leaders are blind to the actual situation. To meet this condition 
of things, the prophet delivers what may be regarded as the most 
striking of all his utterances, viz. 3 1-8 . The ordinary view * which 
makes this passage an explanation of the prophet s mission, upon 
the ground that he was compelled by Yahweh s power to speak, 
although against his will, does not bear close examination. 

The strophic arrangement of 3 1 ~ 8 is 2, 4, 4, 4, and 2 lines, each line a pentame 
ter, a movement better adapted to the thought than the trimeter. Strophe 2 
seems to have lost one of its four lines, the restoration of which (something 
like, But you have forsaken and rejected Yahweh your God} greatly aids in se 
curing an intelligible interpretation. The effort of D. H. Miiller f to connect 
these vs. C 1 " 8 ), as two strophes, with a third strophe (vs. 9 " 12 ), in each of which 
there is an allusion to the " lion " in the last line but one, seems arbitrary when 
one measures the last line of the proposed third strophe, and observes that, 
in order to meet the exigencies of the theory, in other words, to get in " the 
lion," he makes it twice the length of any other line. Cf. the arrangement by 
Lohr which makes vs. 1 ~ IQ consist of three strophes of 10, 6, and 6 lines re 
spectively, involves the omission of V s. 16 - 4b - 56and 7 and the transposition of 6 " 
to follow 6b , and disregards the irregularity of the length of the lines thereby 
secured. See also Baumann, 35 ff. Marti treats v. 3 as a gloss. 

* This is held by nearly all the commentators; v. the partial list of opinions 
given. t Die Propheten, I. 70 f. 

III. I 65 

III. 1-3. A message against the nation which Yahweh brought up 
out of Egypt : You were chosen for a special work ; but you have 
forsaken Yahweh, therefore you shall be punished for your iniqui 
ties , for there must be agreement between a nation and its God. 

1. Strophe I (v. 1 ) is made up of two pentameters, and forms the introduc 
tion. i"> jj] is really superfluous after D^y and before crr^D S>, and, since 
it lengthens the line unduly, may well be regarded as a gloss. >ja] Some 
Mss. have no, so <5 of/cos, and Syr.-Hex. (so also Get.) ; cf. 2 11 3 12 4 5 9 7 with 
5 1 - 2 6 U 7 10 9 9 . on So *?>] connects with foregoing by /ecu. Lohr and Marti 
omit lb as an interpolation due to a desire to make the following speech refer to 
Judah as well as to Israel. In favor of this might be urged (see Seesemann, 
Lohr; cf. Baumann) : (i) that the sentence is complete with la ; (2) 16 
drags a little; (3) the change of person, from Yahweh to I, is a little awk 
ward; (4) this expresses briefly Amos s theory of divine justice, but this 
theory in the vs. that follow is developed and applied only to Israel, not to 
Judah; (5) Amos never uses noxV to introduce a divine oracle. But this con 
clusion is not necessary. Amos develops his thesis only against Ephraim. 
but it is not impossible that in the theme he has Judah in mind also; by 
means of an addition to an address to Ephraim he briefly indicates that what 
he is about to say in v. 2 applies to Judah as well as Israel. It is not his 
function, however, to apply it especially to Judah (so Seesemann). Since v. 3 
is synonymous with v. 26 , this interpretation (#./.) solving what has already 
become a difficult problem (Oort, 7/&7 . XIV., 121 f., 138, failing to find any 
connection between v. 2 and v. 3 , and considering the "particularism" of v. 2 
inconsistent with the catholic spirit of Amos, regards vs. 1 - 2 as an interpola 
tion ; while Now. treats 3 s - 8 as having no logical relation to 3 1 - 2 ), in order to 
secure a logical antecedent for v. 26 and, at the same time, make the structure 
of strophe 2 complete, I would suggest that such a line as, But you have for 
saken Yahweh, your God, once formed a part of the text. 2. ,-n] < TrXrjv; 
S. fjibvovi. Tiy-r] Gr. ^J^- iro Soc] & precedes this with the phrase 
" from all the peoples," which is probably a marginal note, explaining nnoiPD, 
that has crept into the text (so Seb.). DD\~nji>] @ rds d/iaprias (some codd. 

* 7 7 
/ca/a as) ; A. d^o/Aias; S. dSiKtas; 0. aaepelas; J5 ^a^^Guu; { fo^n; 

U iniquitates, 3. nrv] ( ewl rd aurd Ka66\ov. nyu DN] @ ta.v fjt.rj yvupl- 
roys (= ijnu), so Marti; but A. ffwrd^bJivai; G. (rvi>\0u<rt.i>. 

1. The form of statement is intended to arouse the attention 
of the people, cf. 3 13 4 1 5 1 8 4 ; the prophet, according to fH2T, ad 
dresses himself to the sons of Israel~\ by whom he ordinarily means 
Northern Israel ; * but here he adds, as if by an afterthought, the 

* So here Cal., Bauer, Schro., Hi., Ew. 

66 AMOS 

whole family that I brought up, etc.], thus giving to the common 
phrase a larger meaning.* A better sense is gained by treating 
ISP as as a gloss, v.s. Cf. for this use of family, v. 2 , Je. 8 3 Mi. 2 3 . 
This phrase " reminded Israel proper that any preeminence among 
the nations of which they might boast was the inheritance of all 
the sons of Jacob, and it reminded Judah that any danger that 
threatened Israel threatened them also, so far as they had been 
guilty of similar transgressions."! The word uttered is against^ 
not simply in reference to the nation Israel; and here, as fre 
quently among the prophets, there is the fond allusion to the 
time when Yahweh brought her up out of the land of Egypt~\ i.e. 
the time when Israel really became a nation. So intense has the 
thought of the prophet become that he identifies himself with 
Yahweh. 2. You only have I known] Not, acknowledge J as of the 
elect, nor take notice of= love (cf. Ho. i3 5 Ps. i 6 Jb. 24") ; with 
the following preposition from, the idea is to distinguish from, to 
choose, as in Gn. i8 19 Je. i 5 Is. 58 3 . This thought is found also in 
Dt. f i4 2 28 1 - 8 - 13 - 14 Ps. i47 19 - 20 . The doctrine that Israel has 
been chosen by Yahweh for a particular service to the world lies 
at the basis of every expression of Hebrew thought. Nor is it 
paralleled by a similar doctrine among other nations ; in any case, 
the teaching took a stronger hold of Israel. This thought, car 
ried too far, furnished the basis for a superstition almost as deadly 
as any of those which the Israelitish religion was to displace. 
Against this superstition the prophets contend. The choice of 
Israel by Yahweh, they maintain, is not unconditional. Israel must 
cherish the right mind toward Yahweh, or punishment will come ; 
and when it comes, it will be all the more severe because of the 
special privileges which she has enjoyed. Was this idea true? or 
was it a fancy of the Hebrew people? To answer this question is 
to place an estimate upon the whole prophetic work. The thought 
of v. 2a suggests the idea of failure on the part of Israel to fulfil 
the divine purpose (cf. Ho. 4 10 Je. 5 19 Dt. 3 i 16 i S. i5 23 2 K. i; 15 ) 
because she has rejected Yahweh ; and now I will visit upon you all 
your iniquities ] (cf. Ex. 2o 5 Je. 5 9>29 n 22 23 2 , etc.), because, Israel, 

* Os., Geb., Ros., Ba., Hd., Pu., Ke., We. J Ke. 

f Mit. $ Now., Dr., Elh. 

III. i-3 67 

you have rejected the unique privileges offered you ; because, 
although specially chosen, and given a knowledge of Yahweh s 
will which others did not have, you have shown yourselves un 
worthy. Calamity is here, as everywhere, pictured as a visitation 
of God. Too much stress must not be placed upon all, which 
does not imply that, while all of Israel s sins shall be punished, 
some of those of less favored nations might be overlooked.* Israel s 
punishment, declares the prophet, will be the more severe because 
her sins have been more heinous ; the " all " refers to the sins of 
the nation many times repeated. If, now, Yahweh and Israel 
have no longer anything in common, can there be harmony and 
cooperation as in the past? 3. Can (they} two walk together, if 
they be not agreed?^ If, on the one hand, Israel has left Yahweh, 
and if, on the other, he is planning for Israel terrible punishment, 
what will be the issue? The prophet sees, what other men of his 
times do not see, viz. the dissolution of the covenant relationship 
which has hitherto existed between Israel and Yahweh. In the 
remaining strophes he proceeds to develop this thought. The 
interpretations which connect v. 3 with what follows, and make it 
to be the thought of the whole, that everything has a definite 
cause and works out an ordained result (e.g. that two persons, 
seen walking together in the wild moorlands of Tekoa, must have 
arranged their meeting beforehand, i.e. have agreed to be to 
gether, cf. Jos. ii 5 Jb. 2 n ),t and that the presence of the prophet 
against his will indicates a plan of action formed against them 
by Yahweh himself, | proceed from a wrong point of view. No 
tice should be taken of that other class of interpretations in 
which a special allusion is found in sniro to the agreement be 
tween Yahweh and the prophet, conveying authority to the latter, 
or the agreement between Joel and Amos, || or the agreement 
among all the prophets, an agreement which indicated the truth 
of their message as coming from the Holy Spirit,!" this assertion 
of their authority being rendered necessary because the proph 
ets had been forbidden (2 12 ) to prophesy.** That the verse 

* So Ke. || Munster. 

f Va., Schro., Hi., Ew., Mit., Now., GAS., et al. IT Os. 

t St. ** Ros., Pu. 
Cal,, Dathe, Bauer, Ros., Mau., Ke., Or. 

68 AMOS 

refers to the relation between Yahweh and his people was rightly 
taught by Grotius, Gebhard, Marck, Harenberg, Justi, Schroder, 
Henderson, Pusey. 

! i" 1 !? "^in rs WCB ] does not mark a formal division of the matter (cf. 
4 1 5 1 ; contra Mit.) ; the prophet both at the beginning and in the middle of 
his utterances frequently uses this, or a similar phrase, to arouse attention. 
-i;p] Pf. of indef. past, H. 17, 3; Dr. 9. DD^>;] The prep, is not used 
simply as a dat. (Va. ; cf. Gn. 2 16 ), nor does it mean in reference to (suggested 
by Va.); the common force against is more appropriate (Ros. and most 
comm.). nn-sippn-*?-] On SD totality oj \ H. 5, I a, (i). On form of pen, Earth 
NB. 161 a ; used in this strophe in both its narrower and wider sense, fa mily 
and nation ; on its derivation from not? pour out, v. BSZ. 868. vnSyn] On the 
sudden change of person, see K6. Stil. 249. onxn px] Appos. annexion, 
H. 8, 3<r; GK. 128 /. 2. D^PN] Emphatic, (i) in standing before its vb. 
rather than as a suffix in connection with it, thus furnishing one of the neces 
sary usages of PN, H. u, 2b, (i), GK. II7<?; (2) in being preceded by \>~\. 
VI5H ] Not a stat. pf. do I know, but a pres. pf. have I chosen; H. 17, 2 ; Dr. 
8 ; GK. io6g, an act of the past the consequences of which, at least in 
part, continue down to and include the present. I~~ L >] Implying a statement 
of Israel s abandonment of Yahweh. ipD] A future impf. H. 22, i; GK. 107 i; 
Dr. 29. mr>J Strictly error, cf. the vb. in 2 S. y 14 24 17 , etc., and Dr. on 
I S. 20 30 . 3. inn:] Fuller vnir (Je. 46 12 - 21 49 3 ) ; lit., in his unities, ace. 
of manner (Earth" ZDMG. XLII. 356), GK. 1 18 q, Ols. 135 c\ cf. Gn. 22 6 - 8 . 
ON <i n i ^3] From n^s cstr. with archaic ending t, H. 41 rm. e\ GK. 90 m\ Sta. 
343 ; found in Phoen. (Tabnith inscr. 5) as conj. ; without DX, Is. 10* 
Gn. 43 8 ; cf. K6. 392 a. nyu] lit. they have made an appointment (cf. 
lyiD appointed time}. 

4, 5. The roar of the enemy may even now be heard ; Israel, 
unconscious of the fact, is already within the toils. 

In a double figure, that of a lion and his prey, and that of 
a bird and its hunter, the situation of Israel, in the prophet s 
times, is portrayed. This situation is the result of the separation 
of Israel from Yahweh. The difficulty lies in the fact that Israel 
as a nation has long been deaf to the roaring of the lion, and 
blind to the hunter and his snare. Only the prophet hears and 

The structure of strophe 3 is clear. 

4. n>"a] K TOV SpvfMov abrov. injyDD] Baumann om. 13 1 ?] <& adds rl. 
Lohr om. 46.56 as being superfluous both in form and thought. 5. na hy 
pxn] (g M TT]V yr)v t which suggests either the omission of no (so Oort 

HI. 3-5 69 

ThT. XIV. 134 and Em., Gun, Mit., Val., Now., Elh., Hirscht, Lohr, Oct., 
Baumann), as having crept in by mistake from the last clause of v. 5 , or, 
better, the corruption into ns of an original \J3 (Perles). tppic] (gf I&VTOV 
(= i^pic, or efanp Vol.) ; so <&&; Mit. E^)", but cf. Gun. nS> s ] o-xao-^ererai, 
F auferetur (= n^ri, so also Gr.). xn-jc] < ^TTI r^s 7775. ToS^ xS] <& 
adds ri. J5 om. and renders ID 1 ?), P ^*|o, but this was not, as Seb., basing his 
idea upon a certain conception of the passage, suggests, the correct text ; for 
it carries with it lack of rhythm and of good meaning. 

4. The prophet is a countryman and deals with phenomena 
which are familiar to him. For a long time lions have not fre 
quented Palestine, but the testimony is unquestioned that they 
were common down to the Christian era, and even later.* Does 
a lion roar in the forest when there is no prey for him ] i.e. Does 
he go hunting without securing something? or in declarative form, 
When a lion roars, his prey is near at hand ; let it beware. The 
second member is only a variation in form of the first : The young 
lion does not utter his voice unless he has caught something. In 
the prophet s mind the people, destined to suffer for their sins, are 
the prey, which is already, in vision, in the possession of the lion, 
whose roar, though uttered, the prey has not understood. The 
prophet s voice is one of warning ; and, now, with change of 
figure we hear it again ; and this time, likewise, it is a figure which 
appeals to a countryman. 5. Does a bird fall upon the ground, 
if there is no hunter? or does a snare fly up without catching 
anything? } Here, as Mitchell observes, " the order of thought is 
reversed." The prophet, with his keen insight, perceives that 
already the bird has fallen, the snare has sprung up. It follows, 
therefore, that there is a hunter near at hand, invisible perhaps, 
but none the less real. Cannot the people see that they are 
entrapped, that they are already within the toils ? 

The first couplet (v. 4 ) has been interpreted (i) as one of several illustra 
tions of the principle of cause and effect ; nothing happens by chance ; there 
is always a cause (Reu., Val., Now., GAS., Dr., et al,~} ; (2) as describing 
Yahweh under the figure of a lion (cf. v. 8 , also i 2 , Je. 25 80 Ho. II 10 ; and, 
on the roaring of the lion, cf. Ps. IO4 21 Is. 5 29 31* Je. 2 15 Ez. 22 26 ), i.e. 
Yahweh s roar compels me to prophesy (Schro., Hi.), or Yahweh s roar indi- 

* Cf. Ju. 145 i S. 17^ 2 K. 1728 ; Reland, Palaestina, I. 274; Van Lennep, Bible 
Lands, 247 ; G. E. Post, art. " Lion," DB. 

70 AMOS 

cates imminent danger (Cal., Os., Pu.)i or Yahweh s roar should lead to 
repentance (Geb.), or Yahweh does not threaten, and fail to send punish 
ment (Dathe, Jus., Ros.). It is suggested by some (Ba., Hi.) that in the 
first clause the roaring precedes and is the cause of capture ; while in the 
second, it is a different roar, viz. that which accompanies the eating and so 
follows as the result of the capture. According to Geb. the young lion is the 
prophet who joins with Yahweh in threatening punishment ; Hd. suggests that 
the subject of ^ must be nnx, not "por, since the young lion in the den 
roars only when the old lion brings home the prey ; but the second clause is 
generally understood to present the same thought as the first (Ros., Ke., 
et a/.). Even greater difficulty has attended the interpretation of the second 
couplet : (i) a bird does not fall upon the ground, unless there be to it, i.e. 
the bird (Hi., Mau., Ba.), or the ground (Hes.), a snare (Cal., Os., Dat., 
Ros.), or a fowler (Luther, Ba. ); in other words, people do not suffer except 
because of sin ; or calamity never comes except by a net which God stretches 
(Cal., Os., Dat.), or calamity comes through the snare of Jeroboam s false 
worship (Geb.). The ns of v. 5 6 is " the large net of the bird-catcher which he 
has to draw up and which takes a number of birds at once" (Ew.). Hence, 
will the net go up, i.e. be taken away (Ew., Hes., Mau.), or treating n^J?l 
as Hiph., will the fowler remove the net before, etc. (Cal., Geb., Jus., Schro. ; 
cf. U) ; while many understand it as meaning, the net does not spring up 
unless a bird has entered it (Os., Hi., Hd., Ke., Now., GAS., Dr., et #/.). From 
one or another of these renderings, the thought is inferred to be : Yahweh 
will surely not desist until his threatenings have been fulfilled (Cal., Os., Ros., 
et /.), or Israel is to be captured by the fowler Satan (Geb.). You cannot 
escape a punishment which God has announced through the prophets (Dat.). 
Just as none of these things happen without a cause, so the prophet s preach 
ing is not without cause Yahweh has revealed to him the coming calamity 
(so GAS., Now., Dr., Marti, et /.). 

4. nnx, -PC?] nnx and nx, which are but different forms of the same 
word (Ols. 216 d, Earth, NB. 237), are the usual words for lion. The original 
meaning is probably to be seen in the Ethiopic ACT, wild beast. The Arabic 


l< \ I , wild goat, is a different specialization of the same idea. Aram, nnx, 

O 7 

Syr. |^|, Assyr. aru, all mean lion. It is the usual word in Hebrew ; N>aS 

*1 f 

(Arab. &~y &OJ, Assyr. labbu) is the poetic word and does not mean dis 
tinctly lioness (the old view, cf. Ges. Thes. 738) although in some cases it is 
feminine. -Pfl2 is the young lion, but old enough to seek prey, thus distin 
guished from -vu the cub, usually of a lion. ^S px HT?. 1 .] Circ. clause, cf. v. 5 , 
"7 px irpirM, H. 45, i d; Dr. 159; GK. 141 e. px] Cstr. before n GK. 
1520; Ew. 8 321 b; Sta. 371 a. ^p frr] Cf. Vip Ntw. DX viSa] Cf. v. 3 ; 
GK. 163*-. 5. -nov] Here fern., but masc. in Ps. IO2 8 Pr. 7 23 ; cf. K6. 
252 a. ntyn] On the various constructions, v.s. tPpvs] The whole bird- 

III. 6 71 

net or trap is probably expressed by no (cf. Pr. 7 23 EC. 9 12 ), consisting of 
two frames covered with nets, which fly together, perhaps the lower one 
flying up, when the trap is sprung, irpio is either the mechanism by striking 
which the bird springs the trap (cf. Wilkinson, Manners and Customs of the 
Ancient Egyptians, I. ser. iii. 37 f., 46; Hoffm. ZAW. iii. 101 ; BSZ.) or, 
better still, the bait (BDB., Dr.); in any case not a synonym of r\s (contra 
Mit. and Hirscht). "HD S ] Inf. abs. prec. the finite vb., intensifying it ; H. 28, 
30; GK. 113 , q. On the position of the negative, v. K6. 352 /. 

6, 7. The calamity comes from Yahweh ; but Yahweh always 
warns ; why, then, do not the people tremble ? 

Having announced that Yahweh and Israel must now separate 
and that the latter is to be punished (strophe 2), that a nation, 
even at this time, is ready to pounce down upon Israel as her prey 
(strophe 3), the prophet, in strophe 4, asks : Why, when the alarm 
has been given, do the people not tremble? This calamity, so soon 
to burst upon them, like every such calamity, is from Yahweh. Do 
they not understand that Yahweh sends no disaster without having 
previously made announcement through his prophets ? 

6. The structure of strophe 4 is chiastic, members i and 4 relating to the 
alarm, members 2 and 3, to the agency of Yahweh. Nothing can be more 
certain than the close relationship of these two couplets. The versions 
almost unanimously treat CN as a particle of condition. "pps n;n] Hoffm., 
ijn n>n (w.z.). ntr;?] Elh. nr:. Lohr and Baumann transpose v. 6a and 66 . 
7. Variations exist as to the tense rendering of nS> . . . w;*, ( TTOIT^T; 
. . . clTro/cXtfi/ T? ; U facit . . . revelaverit ; % |-i^ U-*- <I " 1 " D ] iraideiav 
(reading a formation from ~\D\ Vol.); the suffix avrov is present in (g A Q; 
A. &Tr6ppr)Tov ; 2. 6fJiL\iov ; Q. TTJV Pov\r/v ; & oVjjj. Oort s suggestion 
of rib (Th.T. XIV. 135; adopted by Gun.) or \^ (Em.; so also Hal.) for 
>3 (v. 7 ) is superfluous. Oct. would place v. 7 after v. 8 on the ground that 
>3 of v. 7 finds no basis in v. 6 ; while Lohr, Baumann, Marti, om. v. 7 as a gloss. 

6. Shall a trumpet be sounded in a city] as a summons to bat 
tle, or in order to give alarm against destructive animals (Jo. 2 1 ), 
or against an approaching enemy (Ho. 5 8 Je. 6 1 Ez. 33), and 
the people not tremble ?1 (cf. Ho. n 10 - 11 i S. i6 4 ). Why, then, 
should not the warnings of the prophet be heard and heeded ? 
Can evil~\ i.e. not moral evil, but misfortune, calamity, disaster 
(cf. i S. 6 9 Je. i 14 i8 8 Is. 45 7 Gn. i 9 19 44"* Ex. 3 2 14 Ez. f), 

72 AMOS 

happen in a city and Yahweh not have caused it?~\ He is over 
all and in all, the author of all fortune, good or ill. 7. But 
(rather than for) he does nothing} in the way of sending calamity 
upon men,* except he reveal his {secret) purpose to his servants, 
the prophets } To the prophets, who are Yahweh s servants (cf. 
the frequent use of this expression in Jeremiah s times, e.g. 
2 K. I7 13 - 23 2i 10 24 2 Je. y 25 25* 26* 29 35 15 ), and as such 
represent him in his dealings with men (Gn. i8 17 Dt. i8 18 ), he 
reveals the significance of the calamity, and the purpose which it 
was intended to subserve. They are given the knowledge and 
are expected to sound the alarm by forewarning and exhortation. 
Since, then, every calamity comes from Yahweh to serve a purpose, 
and since the prophets, who are the interpreters of the divine will, 
have given the alarm, how strange that the people who are in such 
danger do not hear and tremble ! 

6. ox] better understood as an interrogative (= HUM; so many, e.g. 
Har., Jus., Ros., Ew., Hd., Pu., Reu., Or., We.) than as a conditional part. 
(Schro. apparently, Mit.); rarely (cf. Gn. 38 17 1 K. i 27 Ju. $* Is. 29 16 ) at the 
beginning of an interrog. and still more rarely, as here, repeated (cf. Je. 48 27 
Jb. 6 12 ); cf. H. 42, 4 a, b; GK. 150 A; Ew. 8 324 c, (<)). mm xS D>I] Circ. 
clause ; note use of xS (not ps, see vs. 4 - 5 ; cf. ntry N 1 ? mm), because the vb. 
is finite; GK. 152 a, b\ Dr. 162. m;n n;n] Hoffm. s reading, (i) ,-^n 
(fern, of jn = n,ym; cf. Ex. 32 17 ), and (2) iva, through a watcher, i.e. a 
prophet, is, as Gun. (pp. 59-61) has said, open to the following objections : 
i) The word rv;n cannot be shown to exist; in Ex. 32 17 it is either to be read 
ijn with Q e r!, or njn, with a fern, suffix, with Di. 2) jr\ is not identical with 
nv-nn, but means, in accordance with the original meaning of the root, 
a tumultuous noise rather than a warning cry (Ex. 32 17 Mi. 4 9 Jb. 36 s3 ). 
3) The reading -\"3 for m> 3 is very questionable. No text is known in which 
TV has the meaning proposed, synonymous with prophet. 4) The inference 
which Hoffm. draws, that " false prophets do not warn," i.e. false prophets 
sleep while the true are wakeful, is not warranted by the facts. 5) The 
connection with nfc V xV mm) would be difficult, and Hoffm. does not ex 
plain it. ntrp] The 3rd pers. is resumed here; cf. v. 26 ; K6. StiL 256. 
7. v?] Does not mean here for (to be joined with v. 8 ; Schm., Or, Dr.), 
nor namely (Hi.), nor surely (Geb., Hd., BDB., Now.; cf. GAS.), nor is 
Oort s suggestion of a change to ,13 or fp necessary; the preceding sentence 
is virtually a negative sentence, and ^ = w/(Mit.), H. 44 rm. (</); GK. 163 b\ 
Ew. 8 3540. rnrir] Indef. freq., H. 21, 3; Dr. 33 (); GK. 

* Cal., Geb., Ros. 

III. 6-8 73 

^j . . .] A usual form of expressing nothing (cf. Ex. 9 4 I K. 5 7 io 3 Is. 392) ; 
cf. also *?j . . . N L , <? 0<?/ H. 14, 2</; GK. 152 . DN ^] except = 
unless previously, H. 48, I/; GK. 163 c; K6. 372 /&. n^j] Fut. pf., H. 19, 3; 
Dr. 17. ITD] The old derivation was from ^D", to establish, hence a de 
cree, counsel (Jus.; Ges. 77ies. 602 ; Hd.). It is now usually assigned to the 
root "no of uncertain meaning (BDB.; K6. II 1 . p. 49; cf. Horn. ZDMG. 

o o *. 

XLVI. 529). Similar is Syr. 9010 jooifl, secret conversation, f D has the 
meanings, (i) confidential discourse, (2) counsel, (3) secret, (4) assembly, here 
probably secret, secret counsel, cf. Je. 23 18 - 22 . Lohr (v.s., following Duhm, 
and Che. EB. I. 154) urges against the authenticity of v. 7 (i) the difficulty of 
explaining -o; (2) the phrase D NOjn may belongs to Je., Dt., and later litera 
ture; (3) mo occurs nowhere prior to Je.; (4) the poetic structure differs 
from that of the context, hence it is to be regarded as an interpolated expla 
nation of v. 86 . But an argument from language is at best unconvincing; the 
ID can be satisfactorily disposed of as above; and the v. fits well in the strophic 
structure here presented. 

8. The enemy having manifested his presence, let every one fear ; 
Yahweh having spoken, let every one recognize the coming calamity. 

The utterance is the last of the rapidly rising climax, and sus 
tains a close logical connection with what has been said; both 
members are thus connected with strophe 2, the first, also, espe 
cially with strophe 3, and the second with strophe 4 In view of 
the decision to punish Israel for his sins (strophe 2), a movement 
has been inaugurated which makes Israel, though seemingly un 
conscious of the fact, the prey of a mighty nation (strophe 3) ; 
the lion has roared, let every one fear (strophe 5 a) ; Yahweh is 
the author of this situation, and has through his prophets an 
nounced it, though without effect (strophe 4) ; the Lord God hath 
spoken, let every one hear and see beforehand the coming disaster 
(strophe 5 <). 

8. The parallelism is complete and synonymous, although " the lion " and 
"the Lord God" do not have the same reference. jsr] @ and U render 
by futures, fyerffercu, rugiet, & and & by pfs., >ooiJ, Dnj. For 15-1] all 
have pfs. 2] @ KCU n s in both cases. N3r] We. mm (so also Now.) ; and 
Che. {EB. I. 154) 3N^; but no change is necessary. 

8. The prophet, as has been seen, recognizes in the tramp of 
the Assyrian army, which his ear has been quick to catch, the fact 
that the lion has roared^, and, himself hearing it so distinctly, he 

74 AMOS 

does not understand why others should be deaf to it. Who is 
there that does not fear ?~\ The purpose of the roaring was to occa 
sion fear ; why is it that every citizen of the kingdom is not terror- 
stricken and penitent before the approach of this terrible army 
from the north ? The Lord Yahweh hath spoken~\ and the words 
have no uncertain sound. The message given, as always, through 
his servant, the prophet, and given for the purpose of carrying con 
viction to the hearts of those who would not see, has been uttered ; 
who is it that cannot prophesy ? *~\ Who is there so blind as not to 
see this coming misfortune and proclaim beforehand its terrible 
significance ; in order that, if perchance Israel should hear and 
repent, Yahweh might order otherwise ? This was the purpose of 
all prophecy. 

8. JNttf nns] Circ. cl. with vb. in pf. (the lions having roared} preced 
ing the principal sentence, H. 45, 3^; Dr. 165; GK. 156^. N-\" N*? ^D] 
i.e. who should not fear ? or who is there that does not fear ? or let every one 
fear. On the force of the tenses here and the conditional nature of the sen 
tence z>. GK. 159/^5 Dr. 154. N^".] It is not necessary to suppose (Schro.) 
that there is here a reference to the event described in 7 12 , and that conse 
quently that event took place before the utterance of this passage. The sub 
stitution of mrp for Nsr (v.s^ is too prosaic, but harmonizes with the general 
interpretation adopted above. 

6. The doom of Samaria. 3 9 -4 3 . In still another form the 
prophet delivers the message given him to proclaim, (i) So great 
is the wickedness of the capital city, Samaria, that even Egypt 
and Philistia, called upon to look within Samaria s walls, are 
astonished at what they see. (2) But an enemy is coming who 
will quickly lay waste this beautiful and luxurious city. What 
remains will be as nothing. Even the altars of Bethel will be in 
cluded in the dreadful destruction. (3) The women of Samaria, 
because of their debaucheries, must share the punishment. They 
shall be carried away captives through breaches in the wall. 

This piece, which is entirely separate from the preceding and following, 
originally consisted of six strophes, each containing four pentameters. To 
restore this, certain minor changes in the text are necessary as well as 
the transfer of v. 15 to follow v. 11 (see BW., Sept. 1898, pp. 179-82; so 

* Geb., Ros. ; cf. GAS. " who can but prophesy? 

in. 8 75 

also Elh.; cf. Lohr who places v. 12 after vs. 13 - 14 - and15 ; and Baumann who 
places v. 13 between v. 10 and v. 11 ). Here again Miiller s arrangement of 
strophes {Die Propheten, I. 71) fails, because he has not observed that 
4 1 - 3 belongs with 3 9 " 15 and, indeed, forms the climax of the piece (so We., 
GAS.) The first line of each strophe, as rearranged, contains a statement of 
proclamation or assertion on the part of Yahweh, thus giving great intensity 
to the whole passage. Still further, the six strophes logically divide them 
selves into three groups, each of two, and in the first strophe of each group 
reference is made to Samaria. Strophes I and 2 (vs. 9 - 10 , vs. 11 - 15 ) present a 
judgment scene. Samaria is accused of tumult and oppression. Outside 
nations are summoned to witness her wickedness and to testify against her 
The decision is rendered punishment, viz. destruction by a foreign foe 
who will lay waste the whole city. Three clauses are probably interpola 
tions: (i) HCNi (v. 9 ) merely repeats the idea contained in -i^D^n and, 
although in the form iDN^. it would be common, may be thrown out; (2) 
ro-i,->3 n^iirjn (v. 9 ) is very awkward, meaning, not oppression, but the op 
pressed; does not join well with mo-inc; is superfluous in view of T# (v. 10 ); 
and entirely spoils the measure of the line (see BW., Sept. 1898, p. 182; so 
Lohr). (3) nvp CNJ (v. 15 ) does violence to the measure and is tautological 
after the same phrase in v. 11 , which constitutes the first member of the strophe. 
The transfer of v. 15 to follow v. 11 is justified by the demands of the strophic 
arrangement, for otherwise all would be confusion; by the closeness of 
thought in vs. 11 and 15 , everything having to do with houses (palaces, winter 
houses, summer houses); and by the fact that in its present position it makes 
an anti-climax, while by its removal v. 14 furnishes, in the destruction even 
of Bethel s altars, the highest point yet reached in the description. 

9. nuDix] (5 xwpcus (= nicnx; so also Elh.), or m?nx (Vol.), so in 
vs. 10 - ll . nm N2] tv A<r<7vpiois (= -tttt>Na, so also Gr., Wkl. Untersuch. 185, 
Val., Oort Em., Oct., Marti) ; Elh., -IWND. S;n] Elh., -91, omitting a rusiN. 
cnxn P-\N] T77S Aiyt-n-Tov, probably an error for 7775 Aiy , which appears 
in 22 Mss. (so Hirscht). ncNi] Baumann om. nn] Read in sg. with J5 
and Syr.-Hex.; cf. 4 1 6 1 (so Oort, TAT. XIV. 129; We., Now., GAS., Lohr, 
Elh., Oct., Baumann) ; Gr. ny. nDinc] & sg., < dav^affrd, reading incorrectly, 
ninicn, pass. ptcp. of nnn (Drusius, Ba.), S. axoprcw/as. nanpa . . . naina] 
Oort (ThT. XIV. 129) naipa . . . rbina. naipa 0^11:71] om. as a gloss upon 
nninr, which unduly lengthens the line (v.s.}. 10. ijrv] sg. nn:u nwp] 

0^.0 7 

(55 a <rrat tvavrlov aur^s (= nnsp . . . irx, Va.). nroj] J5 IZn llQOSp, 
(connecting with ru , Seb.), fa NP-n^x. "> DNJ] Lohr removes to the end of 
the v.; Baumann om. 11. piNn 2001 is] ( Typos KVK\66ev TJ yrj <rov ^prj^d-^- 
o-fTtti, vocalizing ii , taking <rov from fol. line, dropping \ and adding the vb. 
TS tribulabitur et circuietur terra. Read 23D 11 with & (adopted by St., Gun., 
Seb., We., Gr., Val., Now., Dr., Lohr, Elh., Hirscht, Oct.) ; this is better than 
an; (Ba.), or s ocr (Bauer); cf. Hoffm. and Gu., 2001; Jus. a>ao ns (but v. 
Gun.); Oort (Em.) 22101; Rahmer DOD (cited by Hirscht), a dialect form 

76 AMOS 

for 3 or = flame ; Va. 3"3D nx; Gr. "oxr, for is, on basis of 0; Hal. "n;x? "i*. 

-mm] 5 = Tvm, with fol. suffixes in 3 sg. fem. @ /cardet. We., TVIHI (so 
also Gr., Now., Lohr, Elh., Oct., Hal.). "pc] Hal. nee. iraji] Oct., I taj). 
15. TTom] @ <rvyx & Ka ^ ira-rd-fa, explained by Vol. as a double 
rendering based on a reading, Ten or vncn; cf. (Jl s rendering of Darn 
in i S. 7 10 . ISDI] @ irpo<TTedri<rovTa.i = 1DD 11 or IBDU (Va., Oct.) or ISDN (Vol.). 

D m DTO] @ ZrepoL oT/cot TTO\\O[ ; @ A Q oT/cot trepoi iro\\ol. There is no need 
to suppose, with Oort (TAT. XIV. 128), that JftE is corrupt; cf. Baumann, 
ja>n TO. nin^ DNJ] Lohr om. as a later addition (^.j.). 

9-11. Samaria 1 s wickedness astonishes the neighboring nations. 

9. The opening words accord with the oriental usage of sum 
moning assemblies by proclamation. Proclaim} i.e. let it be 
proclaimed, the word being used indefinitely,* and not addressed 
specifically, either to the prophets | (for Amos seems everywhere 
to be standing alone in his work), the hostile nations, J or any 
general messenger. Over the palaces } Because either the 
upper classes are addressed, as corresponding to the upper 
classes of Samaria, upon whom judgment was coming, [| or the 
palace is the natural place from which proclamation is dissemi 
nated.^" Ashdod . . . Egypt} The prophets not infrequently 
represent pagan peoples as morally superior to the rebellious 
people of Yahweh, because the former sin in ignorance, but the 
latter with full knowledge.** These two names are representative, 
Ashdod standing for Philistia. In explanation of the selection of 
these, it has been suggested that they, of all nations, rejoiced 
most over Israel s humiliation ; -ft that these two in contrast with 
Edom, Ammon, Moab, Syria, and Phoenicia, stood apart from 
Israel ; J that they were the nations whose unrighteousness Israel 
had experienced ; \\ that " even the chief cities of the Philistines 
and Egyptians, who indeed are not weak and can tolerate much, 
would be amazed, if they saw the mad extravagance and the 
injustice in Samaria "; that Ashdod especially was chosen be 
cause of its similarity to 112?, the word used in v. 10 to denote the 
violence of which Amos accuses the people. || || Gather ye upon 
the mountain of Samaria} If the plural is read, the reference 

* Ros., Mau., Mit., Dr. Hd. ** Cf. Hal. $ We. 

t Hi., Ke. || Hi., Mau., Ke., Mit. fr Ew. |||| GAS. 

J Ba. H Mercer, Ros., Ba. JJ Ke. 

m. 9-ii 77 

is to the mountains of Ebal and Gerizim, from which may be 
seen the mountain or hill on which Samaria is built and on 
which the witnesses might stand and look down into Samaria (cf. 
i K. 1 6 24 ) ; * but the better reading is in, i.e. the mountain or 
hill of Samaria (cf. 4 1 6 1 ). Samaria } is declared to have been 
founded by Omri (i K. i6 24 ). It is on a hill about three hun 
dred feet high, surrounded on three sides by mountains, but 
open toward the west. Later it was fortified, especially by 
Ahab, so that it was strongly defended. It took a siege of three 
years for Assyria to capture it. From that time on it was of 
little importance. And see the manifold tumults therein} In 
other words, the turbulent and voluptuous life of the nobles 
(Pr. i5 16 ),t including oppression,! confusion and overturning of 
justice, arbitrary deeds of might, || strife of poor and rich,^[ 
terrores** 10. And (how} they know not to do good~\ The igno 
rance carries with it indifference and hostility (cf. Je. 4 s2 ). The 
emphasis is on know, all ideas of right having been lost.ft The 
reference is, of course, to the wealthy Samaritans. These who 
treasure violence and oppression} That is either (i) store up 
money and goods which are the fruit of violence (cf. 2 6<7 ), \\ or 
(2) heap up oppression as one heaps up treasure. 11. There 
fore } Because of the iniquities which have been mentioned, for 
the existence of which there is ample evidence, an adversary shall 
surround the land~} An enemy, || || rather than affliction*^ in view 
of the following phrase ; in any case, the invasion is one which 
shall include the whole country. And he shall strip from thee thy 
strength^ The subject is the adversary of the preceding clause ; 
this is better than to treat the verb as impersonal, one shall strip*** 
or to make it passive, thy strength shall be stripped from thee,^ 
or to understand the subject to be Yahweh. fft And thy palaces 
shall be plunder ed~} The beginning of the more detailed description 
of the results of the invasion, the principal effect of which is seen 
in the destruction of the more prominent and splendid buildings 

* So Cal., Jus., Schro., Ba., Mit., Dr. f Hes. + Cal. 

Jus., Schro. || Va. IT Ros. ** Mich. ft We. 

J+ Dat., Va., Schro., Ros., Ba., Hd., Gun., Now., Dr. $$ Jus., Pu., We. 

Jill Cal., Geb., Mich., Mau., Hd., Ke., Gun., We., Now., Elh. 
UH Jer., Hi., Hes., Ba., Dr. *** Hi. fft Ba. 

78 AMOS 

of the city. This is continued directly (according to the re 
arrangement suggested above) in v. 15 . And I will smite the 
winter house together with the summer house~\ The older opinion, 
that the winter and summer houses were distinct, being built and 
arranged differently, although close together,* seems to have little 
support. They were rather different parts of the same house, f the 
upper story, if there were two, or the exterior, if there was but one 
story, being used for summer. Cf. Ju. 3 20 Je. 36 22 . An inscrip 
tion recently discovered at Zinjirli, dating but shortly after Amos s 
time, furnishes an interesting parallel to this expression. Bar- 
rekub, King of Sham al, a vassal of Tiglathpileser III., relates his 
activities in decorating his father s house in honor of his ancestors, 
the kings of Sham al, and says, " and it is for them a summer house 
and a winter house." J The houses of ivory ] That is, houses 
adorned with ivory (cf. Ps. 45* and Ahab s house, i K. 22 39 ), an 
evidence of great luxury, for ivory was costly (cf. i K. io 18 ). All 
these were houses of nobles rather than of kings. Many houses 
shall perish~] According to some D sn may be translated great, cf. 
Is. 5 9 ; || but the more natural idea is that many houses (cf. 6 11 Is. 5 9 
2 K. i7 5 fi ), even those of the common people, shall be destroyed.^" 
The writer sees a great catastrophe, the destruction of every struc 
ture in the city. 

9. hy~\ According to Massora Magna (cf. Mercer, Ba.), here and in twelve 
other cases, yw with Sj; instead of Ss. "inB>&a] On prep. 3 after noun in 
cstr. state to define more closely the force of annexion, H. 9, 2,b\ GK. 130 a; 
Ew. s 289 ; K6. 336 u; cf. also }nN;j. Against ffl^T and in support of his own 
reading (Z/..T.) Elh. urges (i) that the coupling of a Philistine town with the 
great land of Egypt is unlikely ; (2) that one would not expect only two people 
to be summoned to witness Samaria s corruption, but rather the whole world; 
(3) that the reference to "palaces " is strange; it is not uncommon to speak 
of the land when the inhabitants of it are really referred to, but " palaces " is 
never used for the people of the land ; (4) @ s reading roniN ; consequently the 
reading, " Proclaim to the lands, from Assyria to the land of Egypt," etc., was 

* Bauer, Ros., Dr. 

f Van Lennep, Bible Lands, 115; Thomson, LB. I. 478; Ri. HBA. I. 574-80; 
Reu.; GFM. Judges, 96 flf; DB? I. 1403-8; Benz. Arch. 111-24. 

J Quoted by Dr. from an article by Sachau in Sitzungsberichte d. Akademie d, 
Wissenschaft, Berlin, Oct. 22, 1896, p. 1052. 

Gun., We., Now. || Ki., Cal., Geb., Bauer, Mau., Hd. 

H Hi., Ros., Ba., Ke., Or., Gun., We., Gu., Mit., Dr., Now., GAS. 

in. ii 79 

probably the original one. But (i) the plural rnDiN occurs only once, Ps. 49 12 , 
and there not in the sense of lands, countries, but as denoting the landed 
possessions of individuals ; (2) Ashdod, a representative town of Philistia, 
and Egypt are summoned as two of the lands most closely concerned with 
Israel s affairs ; (3) " palaces," a favorite word with Amos, are mentioned as 
representative of the ruling classes. isDsn] Niph., with its original reflexive 
meaning, GK. 51 c. nn"?j?] The difference between the sg. in and the pi. nn 
is important ; if in is read, the outside nations are invited into Samaria 
itself (cf. 4 1 6 1 , v.s.}. *v] here and 2 S. i; 11 2 K. 22 20 , instead of *?N after 
f|DN, according to Massora Magna (cf. Mercer). pintr] The name of the 

1 V 

city is in Aram, fpj?^, in Syr. ^v* ^ T Assyr. Samerina. It probably means 
watch-tower, from iptt ; . Cf. however, Sta. ZA W. V. 165-75 ; GAS. HG. 
346-9. nnmn] Cf. Pr. y 11 2O 1 . The pi. may intensify the idea (GK. 124^) or 
represent a condition finding frequent expression (GK. I24/) ; according to 
Hi. made pi. by the proximity of the pi. o^pw;?; elsewhere (i S. 5 9 - 11 14 -* Zc. 
I4 18 ) in sg. o^pityy] Taken (i) as a pass, ptcp., those oppressed, calumniam 
patientes ( Jer., Va., Ros.) ; (2) as connected with rcinc as a case of hendiadys 
= the great cry of the oppressed (Geb.) ; (3) as a ptcp. used as a noun (Jb. 
35 9 EC. 4 1 ), cf. SiaT, noiSo (Hd., Ba.); (4) as a noun, oppression (Jus., Schro., 
Mau., and most modern comm.), used collectively and then abstractly, GK. 
I24<r; K6. 261 d\ but evidently here it is a gloss (v.s.~). 10. I>;"P N^I] 
Grammatically dependent on INI (v. 9 ), see . . . and how they do not know (cf. 
Ho. 7 10 Je. 2 19 EC. 6 10 ). Cf. GK. 157; Ew. 8 351 b ; K6. 413/4, and Stil. 259. 
pitry] The inf. as obj. of verb (cf. i K. 3 7 ; Is. i 14 , etc.) ; cf. H. 29, i d, 
GK. 114 c; K6. 3992. nnsj] Fern, for neut., cf. n;i, Gn. 5o 20 ; nSpj, Je. 6 U ; 
rwaj, Ps. 5 10 ; cf. H. 2, 2 b (2) ; GK. 122 q. onmi] Cf. construction cf 
flNB>n (2 7 ); K6. 411/5 GK. 126 b. 11. a>3Di is] Besides the textual 
changes above, the following constructions have been suggested: (i) the 
supplying of Nb; (Ros.); (2) aoo = na^ao used as a prep., Ps. 5O 3 (Hi.); 
(3) supply ix rnrp after i (Ros.), the i = and indeed, cf. Je. I5 13 Ez. 137.22 
(GK. 154*); (4) aoD = -s ? a; C f. 2 K. 176 (Hd.); (5) aoo = S a^ao; cf. 
Ex. i6 13 40 33 Nu. i 53 , ^ here omitted on account of the sententious brevity 
of the message (Ba.,), cf. Ko. 319 q, 375 </. "n^] 1 written defectively; 
for subj. have been suggested, i* (Mau.), Yahweh (Ba.), in; on (Hi.), H. 37, 
2c\ GK. 144 ^/, e\ Ew. 8 294/5 (2); cf. v. 8 Is. 636; We. s reading ii-ini is 
suggestive, but not really necessary. -j^ r^op] A change in the suffix from 
the 3d m. pi. to the 2d f. sg., i.e. to the city of Samaria or the Israelitish 
nation, GK. I22h ; Ew. 8 317 ; i> = might, with the idea of glory (Ke.), 
not fortresses (Ew.), which would require a more specific word (Ba.); cf. 
liaa, niNon, Ps. 29* 96 I32 8 . voj] On form, GK. 67 /. 15. T^rrn] The 
use of the 1st p. is no more striking after -via 3 (v. 11 ) than, according to fH, 
after . . . iSan I>HJ^ ( v - 14 ) > n "- instead of >_, GK. 75^ H?."? n\a] On 
annexion as a substitute for the adjectival construction, H. 8, 3 d\ GK. 128 q ; 
here used collectively. Sy] together with = and, cf. Gn. 32 12 28 9 (Ros., 

80 AMOS 

Mau., Or., We., Mit., Now.), not upon, i.e. the stones of one falling upon 
those of the other (Ba., Ke., GAS.)- ?n v?3] On via = bat-te, GK. 96; 
Sta. 187 a ; BSZ. and BOB. s.v. ]&? (also I K. io 18 ; cf. Ez. 2; 15 ) is for the 
fuller o^njt , tooth of elephants (cf. I K. io 22 2 Ch. Q 21 ). For further allu 
sion to houses of this kind, see I K. 22 39 Ps. 45 9 . ISDI] Pf. 3 pi. of *]-io, cf. 
Is. 66 17 (BDB.), or of nao, cf. Je. I2 4 (suggested by Ros., cf. BSZ. where it is 
assigned to both roots !). D>31 DTia] Singularly like the Assyr. bitu rabu, 
the ideographic equivalent of the word ekallu, Sa/n, which has gone over into 
Heb., Aram., and Syr. The Assyr. ekallu is itself a loan-word, being the 
Assyrian form of the Sumerian e-gal = great house. The phrase here may 
then be equivalent to DiSa < >n = palaces. 

12-14. Nothing will be left to Samaria s luxurious nobles ; and 
even the altars of Bethel will be destroyed. 

These strophes furnish pictures in detail of the coming destruc 
tion, the first, of its effect upon those who have been living lives 
of luxurious ease ; the second, of its effect upon the religious 
institutions of the period. 

12. Sia] Hoffm. (ZAW. III. 101 f.) -aS. tar] & ^o^s&J = shall be 
carried away, which makes better sense, unless with We. we understand the 
last part of the line to have been lost, e.g. from the invading enemy. jnntPa] 
Oort (ThT. XIV. 128; so Baumann) om. as a later insertion. ntan nNca] @ 
KiTtvavri TTJS <t>v\i)s (explained by Hirscht as = n^n nxnpS; by Oort, loc. cit. 
as = D ^03 j cf. Stek. 102) ; cf. 6. Kartvavri /cX^aros; j& ^ * * ,_^o9 Jj^al^rj 
(= nt?p oxnoa, x and n having been transposed, D being a dittograph; Seb.); 
jaSw f|ipna = in the strength of power. Oort, ntoa >ri^pa (so also Val.); 
Hal. D rppa; Marti, n^cx cushion. cn> ] iepets; against the explanation 
of Jer., adopted by most critics, that did not understand the meaning of the 
word and so merely transliterated it, fyes, and that it was afterward modified, 
Hirscht rightly urges the fact that in 6 4 <& renders eny correctly; Q m s, 2., 9., 
and Syr.-Hex. have K\(VT\, and some codd. K\lvei, following Aa/xa<r/c<. & has 

\ 7 

^SffiS (= V nx% ) which may be a part of the translation of pt ^nai, as it was 

vocalized (Seb.), cn> being wholly omitted. ( rr 1 ?"! = trust, which points 
to a different reading from fttd, since in 6 4 v~\y is rendered correctly. On the 
basis of O s rendering, and the supposition that (JIJ53E all point to a word 
ending with D, while 9T seems to have read a word beginning with a, Hirscht 
proposes D^DS (= their confidence}. U has Damasci. Hoffm. s proposal to 
read Damascus, and to connect 12& , beginning D>3B"n, with v. 13 , does not 
commend itself. We. suggests that pts>m is a corruption of some word corre 
sponding to PNC. Lohr om. "m ooti in as a gloss combined from 3 9 4 1 6 4 . Elh. 
proposes v-\y pferpn -a 31, the construction being like that of mm no men ^Sa 
in 2 Ch. 36 10 . Oct. fcnp na-jnai, cf. Pr. 7 16 . Gr, ip na>p^ai, cf. Ju. 4 18 . 

III. 12 8 1 

Margolis (AJSL. XVII., 1901, 170 f.), en? p n&ta-i, translating: "So shall the 
children of Israel that dwell in Samaria rescue the corner of a couch and the 
leg of a bed," regarding i as dittog. of a, and s as dittog. of B , and treating 3 
as 3 of accompaniment, 3 S*j, meaning " escape with, rescue." Che. {EB. I. 
149) substitutes aajpn for ppoi; Duhm and Marti, ntfa^. 13. >nS nin> ijnx 
niNaxn] ( Ki5/)ios 6 6ebs 6 iravTOKpdrwp, omitting ^JIN; so also U. & "the 
Lord of Hosts, the Mighty One, the God of Israel," reading apparently "UIN 
SaoiS" TI^N niN3X mm; probably the Sxitt" TI^N is a gloss explaining mm 
nisoxn (Seb.). Lohr om. the whole of v. 135 , "ui m DNJ, as a later addition 
having no place in the original strophic structure. 14. mro?D] Oort ro-XD 
(TAT. XIV. 142; so also Val., Elh.; cf. Stade and Marti). We. om. v. 146 
as a later addition which is wholly foreign to the context (so also Now., Lohr; 
Che. EB. I. 154; Bu., art. "Amos," Jew. Enc.}, but v.i. 

12. As the shepherd rescues from the mouth of the lion]. The 
mind of the prophet reverts to his own experiences,* and not sim 
ply to a popular saying | (cf. i S. i; 34 ^ Is. 31*). The shepherd 
(cf. Ex. 22 13 ) was accustomed to produce the remains of a beast 
as evidence. Amos s references to lions are not infrequent ; cf. 
3 4>8 5 19 . The force of the comparison lies in the insignificant 
character of what is rescued, viz. two legs or a piece of an ear~\, 
the merest remnant, something, indeed, not worthy of mention. 
Some \ think of an allusion to a variety of goat with exceedingly 
large ears, which would be of sufficient value to account for the 
shepherd s rescuing them at such danger to himself; but this is 
unnecessary. So the children of Israel shall be rescued^ There 
is to be added, perhaps, from the enemy (v.s.) ; cf. the rendering 
rescue themselves ; in other words, practically none of the Is- 
raelitish voluptuaries described shall be saved, there being no 
possible reference to the remnant referred to in 9 9 , an idea so 
cherished by Isaiah (6 13 ).|| They who sit in Samaria on the 
corner of a couch, on the damask of a divan\ One may put aside 
without much consideration most of the interpretations proposed 
for this passage, e.g. (i) the inhabitants dwelling in two particular 
streets in Samaria, viz. Peath Mittah and Demesek Eres ; ^[ (2) by 
hypallage, for in a bed of extremity,** i.e. brought from afar, 
and in a couch of Damascus,ft ** covered with Damascene 

* Ros., Schro., Hd. f Hi. J Jus., Hd. Ew M Ke. || Contra Ba. 
U Based upon the use of DOB 11 rather than DODir (Drusius, cited by Geb.). 

** HNS ntDD3. ft ptf m tsnpa. 


82 AMOS 

stuff; * (3) those few should be saved who had crept into 
beds for safety, into couches covered with Damascene stuff ;f 

(4) in Samaria, that is, in the corner of a bed, etc., the city 
being thus compared to a bed from its geographical position ; | 

(5) there shall be saved only the sick lying on couches ; (6) shall 
secure themselves with the corner of a couch, etc., connecting 
Ul HKSH with te2 . || We have a picture of Samaria s nobles lying 
free from care on soft couches (6 1 ).^[ Perhaps there is contained 
a thrust at the new court method of sitting on the corners of sofas 
instead of lying on them.** 13. Hear ye] Addressed, not to the 
Egyptian and Philistine nobles who are thus commissioned by 
Yahweh to make to his people the announcement of their doom,t| 
nor to Israel herself, \\ nor to the few faithful, nor to the proph 
ets (v.s.) ; || || but for rhetorical purpose, to individuals among 
the people, or to any who might hear.^F And testify against] 
Meaning more than declare unto, cf. Gn. 43 3 Dt. 4 26 30. The 
house of Jacob] i.e. the house of Israel (cf. p 8 with 9 9 ) ; but the 
writer means not all Israel (3 1 ), who would have an interest in and 
be witnesses of the sin and punishment;*** but rather the ten 
tribes (7 10 ),ttt as is indicated by the mention of Bethel. The 
declaration of the Lord Yahweh, the God of Hosts ] Cf. similar ex 
pressions in 5 14 6 14 Ho. i2 5 Is. i 9 - 24 , here either wholly or in part a 
gloss ; v.s. for the great variations of the versions. 14. Thai] 
What follows is an object clause after testify against (v. 13 ) ; cf. the 
renderings, for, ||| surely. In the day that I visit the trans 
gressions of Israel upon him ] i.e. when the threatened disaster 
comes. / will inflict punishment upon the altars of Bethel~\ 
Peculiar sacredness attached to the altars (cf. 2 8 ) at Bethel, for 
here Abraham and Jacob had erected altars (Gn. i2 8 35 7 ), and 
here sacrifice had been offered in all later times (i S. io 3 ). Allu 
sions to the worship at Bethel are found in i K. I2 2831 13* 2 
Am. 9 1 Ho. 4 15 io 1>2 8 . The destruction of these altars meant in 
reality the entire abolition of Israel s worship, and was the great 
est blow which could be struck. Wellhausen argues that v. 14b 

* Geb. || Gun. tt Cal - Ba - *** Ba - Ke - 

t Jus., Hes. H Schro., Hi., Ew. Geb. ttt Mit., Seesemann. 

t Ros., Pu. ** Hoffm. ||i| Ros.,Gun. ttt Ros - 

Hd. ft Hi., Mau., Ke., Reu. HH Mit. 

III. 12-14 83 

is an interpolation, because (i) not the altars but Samaria s aris 
tocracy are the sinners, (2) the sins of Samaria s aristocracy 
could not be visited upon Bethel s altars, and (3) in the preceding 
verses and in v. 15 Amos speaks of Samaria s excesses ; but this is 
not convincing, for (i) just as the punishment threatened, takes, in 
one case, the form of destruction of dwelling houses, so it takes 
here the form of destruction of religious structures ; (2) Bethel is 
described by Amaziah as a sanctuary of the king and a royal resi 
dence (7 13 ), and its destruction would mark the humiliation of the 
royal house, as well as the disappearance of the last refuge of the 
people (i K. i 50 2 28 ) ;* (3) as has been shown above, v. 15 is to be 
taken with vs. 11 12 , and this utterance is the highest yet reached in 
the prophetic climax. Horns of the altar\ An important part of 
the altar, since they were needed for the performance of a certain 
part of the ceremony (Lv. 4 30 ).! 

12. S>x\] Impf. of clef, freq., H. 21, 2; Dr. 33 (a) ; GK. 107 -. ... njnn 
nNn] On the use of the article, GK. I26r. TS ] On form, GK. 97 a, note; 
Sta 361 b. On use of the numeral with the dual to express a certain emphasis, 
GK. 88/~; K6. 257^. IN] Used especially in legal expressions. S-o] Only 
here; cstr. of V^3, a piece, from S?:i, in Hiph. divide ; = yun, lobe of the ear, 
Ex. 192; but note the suggestion of -oV (z/.j.) ; cf. Is. 26 13 (cf. Gun. per contra). 
DO -J^n] Hoffm. s conjecture that with this word v. 13 begins, O yc who dwell, 
etc., etc., hear, has nothing for its support; it goes better with what precedes. 
The ptcp. with the art. rel. clause, GK. 126^. The usual objections to 
the fH2T of this clause are: (i) on the basis of the rendering Damascus, 
(a) that the presence of Israelites in D. is inexplicable, (b) that some word 
corresponding to HNOJ is necessary before any; (<:) that it requires a change 
of pointing, viz. pir^n; (2) on the basis of the rendering damask, (a) that in 
the time of Amos Damascus was not renowned for the manufacture of 
the material now named after it, () the old versions are all against it, 
(r) in Arabic the name of the material (dimaks) differs from that of the city 
(Dimaksh), so that it is doubtful whether there really is any connection 
between the two. Cf. Frankel, Aramaische Fremdworter im Arabischen, 40, 
288; Ko. Stil. 26 f.; BDB. For the various attempts to emend the text v.s. 
13. niNaxn >nS mm >.PN] This is the only occurrence in the O. T. of this 
full title. Other combinations with PIJOX in Amos are nifoxn \iS nin i >, 6 14 ; 

* Mit. 

t On an Aramaic inscription from Teima, to the S.E. of Edom, an altar is 
represented with horns, curved like those of an ox, rising from the corner. Perrot 
and Chipiez, History of Art in Sardinia, Judaea, etc., I. 304. 

84 AMOS 

nisax >nSs mm, 4 13 5 14f - 27 6 8 ; rn&osn mm ^is, g 5 ; ^IN rnsax TI^N mm, 5**. 
1 has ni*ox also in 9 6 - 15 . Other divine titles used in Amos are : mm, 54 times; 
mm >jnN, 19 times; ^JTN, 3 times; and OTI^N, once, viz. 4 11 . Lohr (p. 58) 
maintains (i) that of the titles in which mxax appears, the oldest one is 
niNax mm, a form not appearing in Amos, but especially frequent in Is., Je., 
Hg., and Zc.; (2) that nisax was not used at all by Amos, but is to be 
ascribed to later editors wherever it appears in the book; (3) that the earliest 
passage in which niNax appears is 2 S. 5 10 , which belongs to the 9th century, 
and shows that the name has been long familiar to the people; (4) that the 
earliest use of nisas that has come down to us was that which denoted 
Yahvveh s warlike might, and (5) that later it came to denote Yahweh as the 
ruler of the powers of nature. The title is distinctly of a prophetic character, 
occurring only in the prophets, the prophetic histories, and in six Psalms of a 
prophetic tone. For other discussions of the meaning and use of the name 
see De. ZLTh., 1874, pp. 217 ff.; Schra. JPTh., 1875, pp. 316 ff.; Sm. AW. 
185; Kautzsch, ZAW. VI. 17 ff., 260; Dr.; BOB. 14. o^a] in cstr. rela 
tion with the following inf., which serves as protasis, H. 29, i,b; GK. 114^. 

rn^Di] The i marks the apodosis, H. 25,2^/5 GK. 112 mm; K6. 3672; 
ace. to Ew. the protasis includes all of v. 14 , the apodosis beginning with v. 16 . 

niji|5 . . . ninarn] PI. fern., referring to inanimate objects, H. 2, 2b (i); 
GK. 122 m, n. 

IV. 1-3. The women of Samaria who by their debaucheries 
have oppressed the poor wUl be carried away captive through 
breaches in the walls of the city. The fifth and sixth strophes 
close the piece and present in form and thought an almost 
perfect climax. 

At first sight the pentameter seems to have been abandoned; but a study 
of the double strophe, as a whole, shows a purpose in this on the part of 
the artist. One serious difficulty remains, however, upon any hypothesis of 
construction, viz. the evident shortness of strophe 5, line 2, fnptf nna n# (4 1 ). 
It is probable that a word like las" has dropped out after lt?N. The tetram 
eter of lines 3 and 4 is explained by the evident desire for double phrases 
ending in rn and D 11 -, by the length and full sound of two of these phrases thus 
brought into juxtaposition, and by the preparation of the poet for the climactic 
effort which is to be made in strophe 6. This last point will perhaps also explain 
the shortness of strophe 6. Having now used every art at his disposal with which 
to prepare for the final scathing words of taunt and rebuke, line 3 is drawn out 
with words long and strong sounding, while line 4 is still longer and stronger, 
a fitting expression of the terrible thought which has been accumulating. 
Isaiah, in later times, adopted not only the idea of reaching a climax, in the 
description of a coming calamity, by charging the women with responsibility 
because of their debaucheries, but also the use of words ending in rn and o> 

iv. i-3 8s 

for the effect of the sound. Cf. Is. 3 la ~ 23 , in which this method is developed at 
great length and most skilfully. 

1. f>an] U pingues ; 2C N^DDJ; S. al /36f$ e(;r/)o0oi; other versions treat 
as proper name. D.-pjiN 1 ?] We. pinnS; so also p->Sj? and pnx (v. 2 ) (so 
Now., Elh., Oet., Lohr). rwan] 6<8 pi., and add to us (=1^); this, if 
original, would make five words in this line. 2. mm >JIN] @ om. one 
of these titles, having merely jct/ptos. wnpa] @ Kurd, TUV aylwv. Gr. itrcja, 
cf. 6 8 Je. 5 1 14 . 13] Baumann om. N ^JI] icai Xij/^oirat; similarly &F. 
We. wfew (so Gr., Now., Elh., Oort Em., Oct., Hirscht). JTIJM] <g <?j/ 
dfTrXots; A. ^v dupeots; 6. ^v 86pa<n; <& p^S; U in contis ; 2T pmonn Sy. 

pnnrwi] rat roi)s /*e0 y/icov; { panm run nwoa] @ ets X^ras 
UTTOKato/A^ovs ^/SaXoGtrtv e/j,irvpoi \oi/j.ot, of which, according to Vol., e/s 
\4prjras is the translation of nn^Da, vTroKaio^vovs an explanatory addition, 
i[\ov<riv a vb. supplied from the context, and e/Airvpoi Xoi/uo ( = burning 
plagues} an erroneous translation of run. @ A Q om. viroKatontvovs t/j,j3a\ov(riv , 
7 codd. om. ffjLirvpoi Xoipot; hence Hirscht regards @ as containing a double 
rendering of run, which was either unknown to the translators or else illegible. 

r py 

nwo] & M&r-O. njn] Gr. run, on basis of A. ix6v5lwi>, and % li- 1 ??- 
3. nnjj n^x njxxn D^nai] @ icai ^evcx^orecr^e (= njxxini) yvfj.val Kartvavri 
dXXiJXwi , of which Kartvavn is probably a corruption of 7uva?Kes evavn 
(so Va., Ba., Hirscht), or perhaps yvftval = n^ns, cf. Lv. I3 45 Nu. 5 8 
(so Vol.). Gr. D^ifl IN. Hal. ni^i x njxxn fli. njnaWn] < 

o-eo-^e; so U, reading njnaStsn; cf. S , ?iufcJo. njionnn] @ eis r6 
r6 Po/j.fjidi> (= njinnn nn); 0. c/s rd tyr)\bv 6pos; U inArmon; A. 

< 7 P ^ 

S. eJs Apueviav; & >JBVI; 5 ^l^i?]? l ^-^- Many emendations have 
been suggested for these last two words, e.g.: Hi. HJID inn fruWrn (ruin 
being a contraotion of njiyc) = and ye shall be cast out on the mountains 
as a refuge. Ew. rmnn nnn = and ye shall cast Rimmonah to the moun 
tains. Ba. PD-) Tin ^pWrn. New. njoinn nj>nDS^ni = and I will cast it 
forth utterly destroying it. Doderlein and Dahl, pDin, the former trans 
lating " Schlachtbank," the latter " Verweisungsort." Meier (SK., 1842, 
pp. 1028 f.) HMD nnn nj^jaWnj = and ye shall cast (each one of you) on the 
mountain her false godj ruin being derived from pn = divide, decide (cf. 
Arab. /7jLx> to lie), and meaning an image, an idol ; cf. nj-inn (Jb. 4 16 Dt. 4 16 
Ex. 2o 3 ). Gr. njiD-m mn njnDS^ni. K6. (II. i. p. 459, N. 5), njimn mnn. 
Hi. (ist ed.), nro-) nnn inaSi^ni (so also St., Gun.). Elh. njicnnn ^aSni (so 
also Gun. ThSt. XVIII. 218). Oet. nyiovi PN njrjoWni (cf. Or. njnaSiprn 
nro-^n). Lohr, pnoir mja-\N n -jn^ni. Oort, njiDinn. Mit. pm n->ri 
= toward the highlands of Ramman, i.e. Syria. Che. (7?. II. 1966), 
rfltshipa njS^ni. Hal. njpipn (cf. Is. 2O 10 Je. 22 19 ). Marti, rhiar\y_. The orig 
inal text seems to be beyond recovery (so We., GAS., Now., Dr., et a/.). 

86 AMOS 

1. Ye kine of Bashan~\ The attention of the prophets is not 
infrequently turned to women (cf. Is. 3 16 4 1 ). The women of the 
times are here designated by a figure strikingly appropriate. 
Bashan * was the northernmost of the three great divisions of the 
mountainous range east of the Jordan, reaching to the Yarmuk, 
south of which were Mt. Gilead and Ha-Mishor, and was known 
for its oaks (Is. 2 13 Ez. 2f Zc. u 2 ), ^pastures (Mi. 7 14 Na. i 4 Je. 
50 19 ), and especially its cattle (Dt. 32" Ps. 22 12 Ez. 39 18 ), which are 
represented as being both fat and ferocious. The allusion is not to 
the men,t especially judges and counsellors, called cows by way of 
contempt, which supposition would explain the masculine form of 
watf ; but, in view of one, Je. 5o 27 Ps. 22 12 , where men are intended, 
and the feminine forms occurring so frequently in the passage, to the 
noble women and princesses \ who are now rebuked because of their 
s j ns . Who . . . in the mountain of Samaria] Cf. above and on 
3 9 . Injure the poor and crush the needy] Not difectly, to be sure, 
but through their husbands ] (cf. 2 7 S 6 ), not the rich, of whom 
the rulers ask bribes, for oppressing the poor ; nor the kings and 
princes || urged to intemperance by their counsellors ; nor the king, 
the plural being a plural of excellence (cf. Gn. 4O 1 2 S. io 3 ), 
but the lords, or husbands of the debauchees ^[ (cf. Gn. i8 12 
i K. i 17ff - Ps. 45 11 ), the masculine suffix being due to careless 
ness, to whom they say bring that we may feasf\ i.e. the 
husbands are induced to deal oppressively with the poor in 
order that they may procure the viands needed for their wives 
debaucheries (cf. Is. 28 lff> ), which, from the general character of 
the language, may be understood to have included drinking, 
feasting, and wanton luxury of every kind. 2. The Lord Yahweh 
hath sworn] Cf. similar expressions (6 8 S 7 ). By his holiness"] 
Not by his sanctuary, the temple at Jerusalem by which, 
as the symbol of his holiness, he may swear; nor by his holy 
name** (Je. 44 26 ) ; but rather by his majesty,! t " nis sacred awe- 

* Wetzstein, Hauran, 39-42, 83-6; Gu. ZDPV., 1890, 230 ff . ; GAS. HG. 53, 
549 ff. 575 f., and art. " Bashan," DD. ; Dr. art. " Bashan," EB. 
t Jer. (fol. 2T), Cal., Os., Mercer, Har., Dat., Hd. 

J Geb., Jus, Va., Hi., Ba., Ke., Gun., We., Now., GAS., Dr. Cal. 

|| Ros., Mau., Hd. 
11 Geb., Jus., Va., Ba., Hi., Ke., We., Dr. ** Va. tt Jus., Schro., Ros., Now. 

IV. i-3 8; 

inspiring personality/ * with the implication that he will vindicate 
his holiness by inflicting punishment for sin.| Days are coming 
upon you~\ The sad and serious forecast of gloom and wretched 
ness so common in prophecy (cf. 8 11 9" of the bright future, i S. 
2 31 2 K. 2O 17 Is. 39, and fifteen times in Je., e.g. y 32 i6 14 ). 
And ye shall be taken with hooks ] The translation shields j gives 
no sense here ; the same is true of thorns ; the figure is that of 
fish (no longer cows) caught by hooks. || This is better than to 
understand the representation of animals led by rings in their 
noses. IT Even the last of you~\ That Amos does not mean here 
their posterity ** (cf. Je. 3i 17 Ps. lop 13 Dn. n 4 ) is clear from y 17 , in 
which he looks forward to an immediate destruction. In the 
synonymous member, for the sake of emphasis, he adds that even 
of those, if there are any, who may be left, the last without excep 
tion shall suffer in like manner, viz. be carried away with fish 
hooks^ thus interpreting the expression already given. |t The 
older interpretation pots was strange enough in connection with 
the word fifiT, fish. Calvin s idea, that though they thought them 
selves so large they should be carried away by a very small instru 
ment (fish-hooks), and Gebhard s, that the instruments were poles 
sharp like thorns, which were to be used for rescuing the women 
from fish-ponds into which they had fallen, are equally absurd ; cf. 
the view of G. A. Smith that, the hooks ordinarily used for such 
purposes having all been used on account of the great number of 
captives, fish-hooks will be used for the last of them. The correct 
idea is the same as in Hb. i 145 , i.e. that of women as helpless as 
the fish in the hands of the angler (Mitchell) ; cf. also the usage of 
the Assyrians in leading captives by ropes fastened to rings in the 
under lip. \\ 3. And through breaches ] Emphatic by its posi 
tion; these could hardly have been prepared beforehand for secret 
escape, nor were they made by the people themselves in their 
hurry to escape ; || || but were those made by the enemy, and, 
according to the picture, are so many as to furnish the easiest 
exit from the city ; cf. 2 K. i f-*, also Gn. 3S 29 . Ye shall go forth] 

Mit. f Os., Hd., Ke. J A. ; QS& weapons. Doderlein. 

|| Cal., Ros., Schro., Mau., Pu., Gun., Mit., Now., Dr. 

1 Jus., Hi., GAS. ; cf. Duhm and Marti. ** Geb., Hi., Ba., Gun., Elh. 

ft Ros., Hi., Ke. JJ Rawlinson, Anc. Man. 1. 243. Hi. U[| So apparently Cal 

88 AMOS 

Direct address ; not escaping as fugitives,* but carried away as 
captives, f Each woman straight before her] i.e. not one after 
another ; \ nor each caring only for herself (cf. Jos. 6 5 - M Is. 47 15 ), 
nor each one alone, unaccompanied by a man, || nor each one 
in a captive state, not permitted to turn to the right hand or 
the left ; ^[ but each one straight forward " from the place where 
she is captured,"! i.e. through the breach which is directly before 
her ** (cf. here also Is. 47 15 Jos. 6 5 - *>) . And ye shall be casf} The 
passive is easier than the active with the object supplied, "ye shall 
cast yourselves."- Toward Harmon\ In favor of understanding 
this word as the name of a place, however uncertain may be its 
exact significance (v.i.), may be urged (i) the general testimony 
of the versions, (2) the weight of interpretation, (3) the demands 
of the passage, and (4) that this piece, like other pieces of Amos, 
might be expected to close with a statement of the place to which 
Israel is to be sent captive ; cf. $* 6 14 .ft 

1. -ly^r] Masc., though women are addressed, because standing first (cf. 
Is. 32 11 ) GK. 1440, K6. 205 c. t^an rn-r?] rna for rn?, hence _ unchange 
able, even in cstr., GK. 25 e ; the art. used in jc an regularly in historical 
statements (e.g. Nu. 2i 33 Dt. I* Jos. ly 1 but not in I Ch. 5 23 ), and fre 
quently, though not in the majority of cases, in poetry; it is present, e.g., in 
Is. 2 13 Je. 22 20 , but lacking in Ps. 22 13 68 16 - 23 Is. 33 9 Ez. 276 39 1S Mi. 7 14 
Na. I 4 Zc. ii 2 ; cf. Dr. Dt. 47 ; GAS. HG. 549 ; it is the distinctive art., as 
in n~^!?> GK. 126 e. rnpB?;H] Art. with ptcp. = rel. clause; ptry is very 
general, including the doing of an injury whether open or secret ; while 
> Xi refers rather to open attack and assault (Ho. 5 11 Ju. io 8 ) ; both words 
are found together, as here, in Dt. 28 33 I S. I2 3 - 4 . ia;r indicates a more 
entire destruction. rnxsrn] Note asyndeton in case of the ptcps. with 
the art. on^nxS] nn is either an error in grammatical usage (Ba.), or the 
masc. because the cows (fern.) are used to represent men (Ros., Mau.), 
or a copyist s mistake (v.s.~), or the masc. used, as including the fern. (Schro.), 
cf. DD^ S ;, oanN (v. 2 ) with the use elsewhere of the fern.; see GK. 1350; 
K6. 14. ^a?] Sg., although addressed to cn>rN; to be urged perhaps 
in favor of interpreting DH^TN king (Ros., Mau., Hd.); on He cohort., 
GK. 48 i ; Sta. 595 b. nri^i] The simplest expression for purpose, H. 
26, 2 a, Dr. 60, GK. io8</. 2. yarj] Pf. of indef. past; H. 17, 3; Dr. 
9; GK. io6. -pa] This a falls under the general head of means or in 
strument, cf. its use in nca (Dt. 6 13 , etc.) ; as here in Jos. 2 12 and fre- 

* Hi., Or. f Mit. t Jus. \ Ew. || Geb. 

II Hd., Dr. ** Ros. ft Hoffm., ZA W. III. 102 ; but cf. Marti. 

IV. 3 89 

quently, Is. 62 8 ; cf. Arab. sj which must be used in swearing rather than 

or Ui>, before a pron. suf., and when, as here, the vb. is expressed (Wright, 
Arab. Gram. II. 62). ^] Either a part, of asseveration, surely, or equiva 
lent to quotation marks (Hd.), GK. 157 . NiJO]] Shall it be taken (i) as 
a Niph. pf. used impers. (Hi.), cf. Gn. u 9 Ex. I3 7 Is. 23!, H. 25, 2 </, 
or (2) as Qal. impf. I pi. (sugg. by Va.), or (3) as Pi el pf. (GK. 7500) 
with 3 Vi Nn understood as subj. (Ke.), or used impersonally, cf. i K. 9 11 
(Schro., Ba., Ke.), or (4) with the text changed to wcj (z/.j.) ? Preferable 
is (3) or (4). On pf. with i cons, here, GK. 112 x ; K6. 361 c. . . . rv*:x3 
rn-vD3]. This is the only case where TD has the meaning hook, its usual 
sense being thorn, and the only occurrence of the fern, form of the plural. 
rm also is found only here, the usual form being a^v, pi. of jv. The 
primary force of both words, as also of ryn, is brier, thorn (cf. Pr. 22 5 Jb. 5 5 
Is. 34 13 Ho. 2 s 9 6 ), and the meaning hook is of later origin ; cf. Assyr. hahin, 
hihinu, thorn. Hal. urges that usage of the kind here described was 
never accorded to women, but only to dangerous prisoners, and that njNsn 
of v. 3 shows that women go forth voluntarily, hence that the statement 
is made not of living women but of the carcasses of women that are 
dragged out and cast upon the dung heap. ?3~ < nnN] Stronger than n iNtf 
(Ew). 3. a^ioi] Ancient interpreters (so Dat., Jus.) seem to have read with 
3 = through; but it may be the ace. as obj. of NP (Va., Schro., Ba.); cf. 
Gn. 44 4 GK. u8</; K6. 211 d\ on position, Ew. 8 309 a, i. mrs] As dis 
tributive pron. GK. 139 b. ^^pb f ?]] Read by and other versions (v.s^) as 
a Hoph. ; otherwise with an obj. supplied (Geb.), the n_ is either due 
to the influence of the last syllable of njxxn (Ke., Mit.); or to be taken as 
n paragogic, though rare in pf. (Va., Ros.), cf. Is. 7 2 2 S. I 26 ; or, better, 
as a case of dittography, GK. 44 / (^.j.). rwcnnn] In addition to the 
explanations of this term involving emendation of the text (^.^.), the fol 
lowing renderings may also be cited: (i) pcin has been regarded as a 
stronger pronunciation of pens and interpreted (a) of the king s palace, 
(b} of the fortresses or palaces of the enemy (so Jus., Schro., et al.} ; 
(2) it has been identified with Armenia (so <?& ., Jer., et al.} ; (3) high 
lands which had to be crossed on the way to Assyria (so Hes., Mau.); 
(4) the name of the mountain on which Samaria stood, or some portion of it 

(AE.); (5) Mt. Amanus (Luther); (6) pride (Rashi); (7) it has been 

connected with Arab. *J& and referred to the harem of a hostile king. It 

is regarded as inexplicable by many (so We., Val., Dr., Now., GAS., et a!.}. 
It is to be taken, in any case, as a place-name, and We. s objection to this, 
that such a name would be suitable if the people as a whole were spoken of, 
while it does not suit where the women in particular are mentioned, does not 
hold in view of the preceding njxxn O^IDI. All efforts to discover such a 
place as Harmon have thus far failed. 

90 AMOS 

7. Israel s failure to understand the divine judgments. 4 4 13 . 

The occasion is perhaps a festival.* The prophet in an ironical 
vein exhorts Israel to continue in the formal ceremonial worship 
the cultus at Bethel and Gilgal but it is all an illusion, and 
displeasing to the very God whose favor they thus seek to gain. 
Again and again Yahweh has indicated his displeasure with their 
conduct in drought, in famine, in blight of crops, in pestilence 
and war, and in earthquake ; but alas ! they have not turned back. 
It remains, therefore, to inflict upon them, what? In any 
event, " Prepare, O Israel, to meet thy God ! " Who is he that 
speaks thus ? The God of creation and history. 

This piece, though very different in movement and structure from any that 
has preceded, is none the less artistic. The arrangement presented here appeared 
in BW., October, 1898, pp. 251 f. In its original form the piece consisted of 
nine strophes, each containing four trimeters. Of these, I and 2, which form 
the introduction, are closely connected, likewise 8 and 9, which form the con 
clusion. Strophes 3-7, each of which is introduced by a vb. in the first per 
son ( 76 and 8a are a gloss), and characterized by the refrain But you did not 
return to me, saith Yahweh, make the body of the poem (cf. below on strophes 
4, 5). Miiller s arrangement {Die Propheten, I. 68 f.) of this section, in 
cluding 4 1 " 3 , is arbitrary and artificial. His attempt to secure strophes of 
5+4+3 + 2 + i an d refrain, i.e. 16 lines, with an introduction of 8 lines 
and a closing strophe of 8 lines, is an utter failure. One need only examine the 
lines to see that they have been arranged to meet the demands of the theory. 
It is important to note the more serious changes of text involved in the 
reconstruction here adopted. These will be discussed in detail in their 
proper places : 

(i) the rejection in v. 7a of the gloss o^enn npStP iipa; (2) the rejection 
of v. 76 and all of v. 8 , except the refrain, as a gloss; (3) the rejection of 
the gloss DD DiD oi? DJ?; (4) the treatment of v. 13 as a later addition, although, 
if the line ist? niN3X -riSs mn> might be fitted into strophe 8, the place of a 
lost line would be supplied in that strophe and an extra line avoided in 
strophe 9. 

The arrangement proposed by Lohr (in 1901) has much in common with 
the present reconstruction, viz. (i) the rejection of vs. 7 - 8 as a later addition 
(so also Baumann); 7 8 &, however, are regarded here as genuine; (2) the 
treatment of vs. 126 - 13 as an interpolation; (3) Lohr finds in vs. 4 - 6 and 9 ^ u six 
strophes identical with strophes 1-3 and 5-7 of the present arrangement (ex 
cept that he makes two lines out of the refrain instead of one, as here, and 
retains DIPDID ot? Dy). But Lohr differs also in connecting 3 14ft 9 1 (as far 

* We. 

IV. 4 91 

as trsDn) and g 7 with the present piece, which he regards as only a frag 
ment of the address against the sanctuaries at Bethel and Gilgal, the begin 
ning and end of 4 4 12a being lacking. 

4, 5. Continue, O Israel, your efforts by sacrifices to secure 
YahweWs favor, but it is useless. 

The strophe consists of three couplets, each containing an ironical command 
relating to the cultus, with a fourth couplet explaining Israel s strange conduct, 
viz. their love for all this empty show. The structure is perfect, every line 
being regular in length. 

4. S-iVjn] and H precede by 3. imn] Oort, wnm (ThT. XIV. 143; 
so also Gun., Elh.,Oet.). 5. mm pnriD ntopi] <5/ccu dvtyvaxravefa v&(jjov=w\p) 
rrvin yinc; & = DDDD (so also Hirscht); Ew., niopi (so also Gun., Oort Em., 
Elh. and Oct., who omits conj.) ; cf. Margolis (A/SL. XVII. 171), who suggests 
mm firn laqi^, Call out in the streets, Thanksgiving! niaij -ix-)|-n] <& en 

P ^ 

6caX6rai>To = w^; 5 jJyJ cjcjJo (= M -ITUI). ipDn] @ joins to fol. cl., 
while & translates nSiSo = 

4. <?<? /# Bethel and transgress. ~\ It is only necessary to read 
the whole phrase to see that the prophet is not serious ; " going 
to Bethel " carries with it transgression, the two are synonymous. 
The tone of voice, doubtless, indicated the irony of the expression. 
The transgression was not (i) the worshipping on high places, 
a violation of the law of the central sanctuary at Jerusalem 
(Dt. i2 4 " 7 ),* for that law had not yet been promulgated; nor 
(2) the changing of the details of the ceremonial by adapting 
them to the heathen worship outside of Israel ; f nor (3) the calf- 
worship which was in vogue at Bethel (cf. Ho. 4 15 8 5f -) ; | nor 
(4) the failure to give Yahweh a proper place in the worship ; 
nor (5) the fact of engaging in worship though morally unfit, || 
but the fact of engaging in any kind of ceremonial worship for 
the purpose of finding Yahweh, when, indeed, the more zealously 
they observe the cultus, the farther do they remove themselves 
from Yahweh.f In Gilgal ] For situation and description,** cf. 
Jos. 4 19 i5 7 ; for the place which it had occupied in Israelitish his- 

* Cal. f Geb., Os. + Jus., Hd. So apparently Pu. || Dr. 
IT We.; WRS., Proph. 94-99; Now., Mit. 

** Conder, Tent Work, II. 7 ff.; Rob. BR*. I. 557; GAS. HG 494; Bliss, art. 
" Gilgal," DB. ; GAS. art. " Gilgal," EB. ; Marti. 

92 AMOS 

tory, cf. Jos. 4 19 - 5 3 - 10 i S. 7 16 io 8 n 14 i5 loff 2 S. ig 15 Ho. 4 1S 9 U 
i2 n . The site has only recently (1865) been identified * as Jiljul, 
4^ miles from the Jordan, i^ miles from Jericho. And bring 
every morning your sacrifices] The ironical vein still continues ; 
the sacrifices were those which were offered annually (i S. i 3 - 7 - 21 ) ; 
the worshipper is invited to offer them daily instead of annu 
ally ; f the exaggeration does not consist in offering instead of a 
usual morning offering an earlier one ; J nor is the sense satisfied 
by understanding the invitation to be merely the description of a 
custom, viz. that of making an offering on the next morning after 
arrival at the sanctuary. Every third day your tithes } The tithe || 
was differently administered at different periods. According to the 
regulations of Dt. (i4 28 26 12 ), which seem earlier than those of P 
(Nu. i8 21 28 ), the third year was the tithing year /car eoxqv,li be 
cause only in this year was the whole tithe given away, the offerer 
himself and his family eating it in the other years. In strict 
parallelism with the preceding line, the prophet urges the wor 
shippers to offer their tithes every third day instead of every third 
year.** Note, however, should be made of the renderings, every 
three years, a tf = year ft (as in Lv. 25^ Ju. ly 10 2 Ch. 2i 19 ), on 
three days ( = at the times of the three great feasts, which, it is 
claimed, lasted originally each a single day), \\ every three days, i.e. 
frequently, and especially, on the third day (after arrival), ||fl on 
the ground that Amos is exaggerating nothing, but as above, describ 
ing the custom of the visiting worshipper at Bethel, who offered 
his sacrifice on the morning after arrival and his tithe on the 
third day, a supposition for which no one offers a good reason. 
5. And burn of leavened bread a thank-offering] The prophet 
exhorts the people still further to increase their zeal by burning 

* By Zschokke ; but Schlater (Zur Topogr. u. Gesch. Palastinas, 246 ff.) ; Buhl 
(Geogr. des alt. Pal., 1896, pp. 202 f.) and BSZ. identify this Gilgal with Julgjll, 
opposite Ebal and Gerizim, east of the plain. 

t Mit. J Ba. $ Os., We., Now., Dr. 

|| Hermann, Gottesdicnstl. Alterth. d. Griechen, 20, 4; Ri. HBA. II. 1792-7; 
Di. on Lv. 2788; Ryssel, PRE2 XVII. 442 f.; We., Die Composition des Hexa- 
teuchs ; WRS. ,&?#*. 244-54; Sayce, Patriarchal Palestine , 175. 

II Dr. Dt. 173. ++ Oort, Th T. XIV. 143 f. 

** Ros., Ke. Schro. 

ft Cal., Va., Hd., Pu. || || Os., We., Now., Dr., Marti. 

IV. 4-5 93 

(i.e. turning into sweet smoke) what ordinarily was not burned, 
viz. the leavened bread which formed a part of the thank-offer 
ing. Amos does not here refer to the transgression of any law in 
existence (e.g. Lv. 2 11 7 12 ) ; but to a new custom, just now 
being developed, the thought being that a thank-offering prepared 
with yeast or grape-honey (Ho. 3 1 ) would be more acceptable. 
This use of leaven (cf. the raisin-cakes of Ho. 3 1 ) was probably 
regarded as pleasing to the Canaanitish deities,* hence in later 
times it came to be forbidden (Lv. y 12 Ex. 23 18 ). The transla 
tion of 2T, from violence = that which is gained by violence (v.s.) 
seems to relieve a serious difficulty, but like the rendering without 
leaven~\ is quite far-fetched; cf. ( (v.s.}. And proclaim free 
will offerings, make them known\ The freewill-offering (cf. 
the later regulations Dt. i2 6 - 7 Ex. 35^ Lv. 22 18 - 21 ) was intended 
to be given as the freest possible expression of the heart s feeling. 
The irony, which still continues, lies in the prophet s urging the 
people, not the priests, J to publish far and wide their voluntary 
gifts, an action which was directly contrary to the spirit of such 
gifts. The language does not convey the idea, ordinarily assigned 
to it, of a command to the priests to make freewill offerings 
compulsory.|| For so ye love to do~\ Cf. Je. 5 31 . The prophet 
has described a tendency, indeed the fundamental error, of the 
Northern religion. This fault, which has now become an organic 
part of the national system, is not that the offerings, correct in 
themselves, were made at the wrong place,^" but that Israel is 
laboring under a delusive idea ; for outward forms of any kind, 
however zealously executed, will not take the place of the essentials 
of religion. 

4. "m SMDO 1x2] The parallelism rules out the rendering, "Go to Bethel, 
and transgress at Gilgal," etc. (Hi.). SN JTO] Ace. of direction after 1x2, GK. 
ii8</. SjVjn] This might be taken (i) with lain = place in which, GK. 
118^; cf. the 2 of the versions (GAS., Dr.); (2) with 1N3 of prec. member, 
or with a verb of motion supplied = ace. of direction (Jer., St., Or., Gun., We., 
Mit., Now. , Elh.) 5(3)= ace. of specification, " as far as concerns Gilgal " (Ba.) 
GK. 118^; (2) is preferable. The name is a reduplicated formation from SSj 

* Cf. WRS. OTJC1 434 and Sem. 220 f. Ba. 

t Oort, TAT. XIV. 144; but cf. Gun. || Schro., Hi., Pu., Ke. 

t Os. IF Cal., Os. 

94 AMOS 

and means the circle, the reference being probably to a circle of sacred stones 
(cf. Jos. 4 S 29 * 1 -); for a similar formation, cf. 133 from 113; the art., which 
is always retained, except Jos. 5 I2 23 , is an indication that the appellative 
force of the word was long felt; cf. Ko. 295^. y&gh lain] Lit., multiply in 
transgressing, inf. with V having the force of the gerund, H. 29, 3 e; GK. 1 14 o\ 
Ko. 399 m. ~ipaS] Distributive, cf. Je. 2i 12 (but here npa 1 ? may = in the 
morning, early), Ex. 29 38 - 39 I Ch. i6 40 ; Ko. 331/5 cf., however, Now., who 
maintains that for the expression of the idea, every morning, every third day, 
there would be used either the pi. (cf. Ps. 73 14 Jb. 7 18 ), or a repetition of 
the word (cf. I Ch. 9 27 ) ; GK. 123^. On the force of the art., v. Ko. 300 . 
Giesebrecht {Die hebr. Praeposition Lamed, p. 23) makes ipaS = early every 
where except Ps.49 15 . nianj, mm, ysn.nBpi Da>mis>i7B, aznnar] This vocabulary 
of religious worship is noteworthy for its size and scope, its definiteness, and 
the peculiar connection in which it is introduced. If this passage is genuine, 
and no one doubts this, it must be conceded (i) that a fully developed cultus 
was in existence at this time; (2) that it was showing a pronounced tendency 
towards a still fuller expansion; (3) that the priest-power was very consider 
able, and one with which the prophet was coming into antagonism; (4) that 
the prophet, at all events, represented an idea in religion which did not have 
much, if any, prevalence at this time. 5. TJp] Inf. abs. for imv., II. 28, 5 c; 
GK. 1132; Ew. 8 328^; Ko. 218 b. The original meaning of the word is 

-C i 

to give out vapor or smoke, like Arab. -5 to give forth vapor, >Lo smoke, 
steam, Assyr. kutru, smoke. Pi el and Hiph. are commonly used, meaning to 
burn on the altar. It cannot be said that the Pi el is the proper word to be 
used for burning incense, and the Hiph. of sacrifices (Gun.). The Massorites 
attempted to make the distinction that the Pi el designates either irregular or 
idolatrous sacrifice, the Hiph., lawful. But this is arbitrary (cf. 2 Ch. 34 25 ). 
Rather, the Pi el is the older expression, and the Hiph. the younger, used 
chiefly in P; cf. Ko. 96 (We. Prol 64; ZA W. VI. 298 f.; Kit. Theol. 
Studien aus Wiirtemberg, II. 53; SS. 660; Now. Arch. II. 246 f.). p] Is 
not partitive, some leaven for a thank-offering, but local, a thank-offering 
made up of leaven. * r cn] The usual term for leavened bread. In general, 
all leavened bread was forbidden to be offered on the altar (Ex. 23 18 Lv. 2 11 ). 
Traces of greater freedom appear in Lv. 7 13 23 17 . This passage shows the custom 
in Israel to have been different from that in Judah. Amos does not necessarily 
regard it as unlawful (We.). Indeed, the custom may be regarded as in har 
mony with the original ideas of sacrifice (WRS. Sem. 220 f., 242; OT/C. 2 345). 
n-nr] The thank-offering is a particular kind of the D^nStf (Lv. 7 12 ). It is 
also called rninn naj, Lv. 7 12 22 29 , and fully D>oV^ rnm nar Lv. 7 13 - 15 (Now. 
Arch. II. 238; Benz. Arch. 446). manj] The freewill-offering, a spon 
taneous offering, not one prescribed, often united with TU vow, both being 
extraordinary offerings (Now. Arch. II. 238 f. ; Benz. Arch. 446, 451). 
They might take the form of burnt-offerings (Dr. Dt. 143; Lv. 22 18 - 21 ), 
but more usually of o^vhv (Lv. 7 16 ). The nmj were often made the 

IV. 6-8 95 

occasion for free-handed hospitality, with perhaps a general invitation to 
all to come and partake (We.; WRS. Sem. 254). Dnans] Stative pf., 
H. 18, i; Dr. ii; GK. iobg. D3var] The root nar means to slaughter 
for sacrifice, as originally all slaughtering was connected with sacrifice, 
n?; is therefore the generic word for sacrifice, usually designating the sacri 
ficial meal, for which in later times D>DSe> was commonly substituted as a 
more specific term (WRS. Sem. 222, 237; Dr. Dt. 141 f., 145; BDB. s.v. ; 
Now. Arch. II. 210, 215; Benz. Arch. 435; We. Prol. 73). DDTHB^D] The 
tithe was a widespread institution in antiquity. On tithes in general, see 
Spencer, De Legibus Hebraeorurn, III. IO, I ; Ew. Antiquities, p. 300; 
Ryssel, s.v. "Zehnten," PRE?; WRS. Sem., Lecture VIL, and Proph. 383 f., 
and art. "Tithes," Enc. Br. ; We. Prol. I56f.; Dr. Dt. 166-73; Now. Arch. 
II. 257 f. Among non-Semites may be cited the Greeks, who tithed the 
spoils of war, the annual crops, and other sources of revenue (Xenophon 
and his followers, e.g., reserved a tithe of the proceeds of the sale of captives 
for a thank-offering to the gods, Xenophon himself using his own share to 
erect a small temple in Scillus, near Olympia; v. Anabasis, V. 3; cf. Her 
mann, Gottesdienstl. Alterth. d. Griechen (2d ed.), 20, 4) ; the Romans, 
who paid tithes to Hercules (Diodorus, IV. 21 ; Plutarch, Moralia, II. 267 E), 
and the Lydians, who tithed their cattle (Nic. Damasc. in Miiller s Fragm. 
Hist. Gr. III. 371). Among the Semites the custom was general; the Car 
thaginians sent an annual tithe of their increase to Tyre to the temple of Mel- 
karth (Diodorus, XX. 14) ; there are many references to tithes and monthly 
tributes in the records of the Babylonian temples (Jastrow, Rel. 668). A 
common vow among the Arabs was, " If God gives rne a hundred sheep, I will 
sacrifice one in every ten" (Arnold, Septem Moallakat, p. 186). The only 
pre-Deuteronomic references to the tithe in the O. T. are Gn. 28 22 and this 
passage. It is to be noted that both connect the payment of tithes with 
Bethel. It is probable that in early times the religious tithe of each district 
was given for the support of the sanctuary of the district. This tithe was 
probably not compulsory, but was spontaneously given; it is classed by Amos 
with freewill-offerings, thank-offerings, and vows, and may have been used to 
furnish a sacrificial banquet. The absence of any regulation concerning tithes 
in the earliest legislation seems to point to the voluntary character of the gift. 
It is not unlikely that in the earliest times the tithe and the " firstfruits " and 
" firstborn " were identical. 

6-8. Famine and drought have failed to draw you unto me. 
These two strophes, with the later insertion, have never been made 
entirely clear, either in structure or meaning. 

6. >nnj] <j| 5c60-u>. ?vpj] yofj-^iaa-^v, toothache; 
all reading jvnp = bluntness, from nnp, to be dumb (Ba., Seb.; Lag. BN. 
200 f.; BSZ., BDB.); cf. Je. 3i 29 Ez. i8 2 ; S stupor em , A., TrX^i/; 2., 0, 

96 AMOS 

Ka6api<Tn6v. 7 a. "vsp 1 ? owin ntrV.y -nj?3] though in all the versions (cf. 6 rpv 
y-rjTov but Q m s 0e/na>oO), is a gloss, added as a meteorological calculation, and 
disturbing not only the strophic arrangement, but also the poetic generaliza 
tion. "viocx N^J Closes the third member of the strophe, after which the refrain 
from v. 8 , " DNJ i-\y oratr N 1 ?!, belongs. 7 &. npSn] This word, with what follows 
in v. 7 and v. 8 as far as the refrain, is evidently an interpolation, repeating the 
idea of the famine already described. In favor of this are (i) the awkward 
ness of the two circumstantial clauses in their present position at the end of 
v. 7 , although necessarily dependent on iy:i of v. 8 ; (2) the redundancy in the 
repetition of "vy with the numerals; (3) the utter extravagance and lack of 
poetical force in the whole expression; (4) the impossibility of securing a 
symmetrical structure for the poem if this section is to be included; (5) the 
lack of reason for dwelling at such length on the drought, when other calami 
ties are, in some cases, treated in a single line. T>t3Dn] Gr. "ODri ; Oort 
(Em.}, fol. @, fiptfa, -VBBN (so Gun., Now., Elh.) ; but ffl&, though unex 
pected, may be intended for the sake of alliteration (Oct.). 8. lyji] Should, 
in any case, stand closely connected with what precedes; @ Kal ffwaffffpoiffdj- 
ffovTdi, reading possibly ii^ui; cf. Nu. i6 n (Vol.), so J5. 

Lohr om. all of vs. 7 - 8 as a later insertion coming from two hands, the first 
of which contributed a strophe consisting of V s. 7att - 76 and86 (the refrain), 
while the second furnished a variation of this strophe, consisting of vs. 7a - 8 
(including the refrain), which crept into the text from the margin. These two 
strophes, according to Lohr, differ from the original strophes in having one 
more line each, and they interrupt the progress of the thought, while they 
also closely resemble 8 llf - (endorsed by Now. ThLZ. XXVI. 164). 

6. I also it was who gave to you~\ The pronoun is emphatic, 
and, with the particle DJ, marks the contrast between Yahweh s 
attitude of punishment and their conduct described in vs. 4 - 5 . 
Cleanness of teeth~\ Nothing to eat, interpreted in the following 
member as "lack of bread," i.e. famine ; on the frequency of 
famine in Palestine, cf. Gn. i2 10 26* 4I 54 Ru. i 1 2 S. 2I 1 i K. ly 1 .* 
The meaning stupidity, favored by some of the versions (v.s.), does 
not accord with the etymology of the word, the parallelism, or the 
context. The idea of " innocency of eating what was forbidden,"! 
or that of "emptiness," | is not to be found in the word. In all 
your cities~\ The calamity referred to affected the whole country. 
Such famines are recorded as having taken place under Ahab 
(i K. ly 12 ), and under Jehoram (2 K. 4 s8 8 1 ), but the reference 
here is probably to a later famine of which no record has been 

* See C. Warren, art. " Famine," DB. f Geb. J Va. 

IV. 6-8 97 

preserved. But ye did not return to me~\ Yahweh expected the 
calamity to bring the people to their senses, but it failed to do so.* 
This expression is common and important (cf. Ho. 6 1 i4 L 2 Is. io 21 

yS 34 Mai. 3 7 ), since it with the N. T. Greek cirurrptyav (e.g. Acts 3 19 
9 s5 ii 21 i Thes. i 9 ) prepared the way for the later idea contained 
in the word " conversion." | 7.7 also it was who withheld from 
you the rain~\ Lack of rain was, of course, the occasion of the 
famine described in v. 6 . Perhaps this strophe originally preceded 
that in v. 6 . In any case the famine and the drought are treated 
distinctly. While yet there remained three months to the harvest^ 
This clause, which is to be treated as a gloss, \ contains an expla 
nation by some later hand as to the details of the withholding of 
the rain. The interpolator may have had in mind either (i) the 
so-called latter rains of the last of February or first of March, the 
harvest beginning, in some sections of the country, April i and con 
tinuing into June ; this rain fell when the grain was beginning to 
grow, and without it the crops would be ruined (but see Nowack, 
J 35)j or ( 2 ) a drought for the entire three months preceding 
harvest ; || or (3) the rain which fell in the latter part of April, that 
is, three months before the fruit harvest, ^[ or within three months 
of the last of the grain harvest in June ; ** or (4) the heavy rain 
due six months before harvest, i.e. in November and December, 
which in this case Yahweh had withheld until three months 
before the harvest time, that is, until sometime in 
Rain upon one city~\ Not at intervals, upon various occasions, \\ 
but in the particular case which the prophet has in mind, the 
tense denoting vivid representation. Yahweh is represented 
as withholding rain, although he gave evidence of his power to 
bestow it on certain cities, which stood in striking contrast with 
those from which it was withheld. This phenomenon is not an 
uncommon one in Palestine ; || || cf. Ju. 6 s6 ff> 7 b, 8. One field 

* On the ancient belief that natural calamities were an indication of displeasure 
on the part of the deity, and consequently of sin on the part of the people, v. GAS. 
I. 169 f. ; HG. 73-76. t Dr. J So also Marti. 

Jus., Va. f Schro., Hi., Ke., Or., Mit. || Ros. f Jer. ** Ba. 

ft We., Now., GAS., Dr. # Mit., Dr. $ Va., Ew. 

|||j Thomson, LB. II. 66. 

98 AMOS 

being rained upon and another field, which was not rained upon, 
drying up, tiuo or three cities staggering unto one city to drink water 
without being satisfied^ An insertion, which really adds nothing to 
the picture already presented, made by some one who felt perhaps 
that a description of a drought was imperfect if it did not include 
the country as well as the city ; the interpolator, however, forgets 
himself and in a very tautological way goes back to the cities, two 
or three of which he represents as exhausted because of the 
drought, and as staggering in their weakened condition to a more 
favored city, where, after all, they are doomed to disappointment. 
How remarkably this picture resembles that given in 6 9 10 , which 
must also be treated as an interpolation ! * But ye did not return 
unto ?ne~\ The refrain, which contains, as Mitchell has said, " a 
world of pathetic tenderness." 

6. DJ] Correlation, expressing correspondence, here of a retributory char 
acter, not simply emphasizing JN (Pu.), nor \nnj (Mau.), but the whole 
thought (Ba., Reu., We.); cf. Gn. 2O 6 Jos. 24 18 2 S. I2 13 Mi. 6 13 (see BDB. 
s.v., CJ! (4) p. 169; Ko. 394 </). D>JB> fvpj] Versions (v.s.} seem to have read 
prr, the root of which is used with ftp in Je. 3129-80 z> ,g-2. tn i s reading was 
favored without good reason in BSZ. 12 ; cf. Lag. BN. 201 ; the phrase is pecul 
iarly significant as a figurative designation of famine; cf. iflO fvpj Gn. 2O 5 
Ps. 26 73 13 , cleanness of my hands. n> % ] Stronger than ^x (cf. La. 3 40 ) ; Ss 
represents only the direction, iy the attainment of the purpose (Fleischer, Kl. 
Schriften, I. 402 f.). 7. D" J] Really a shower, or biirst of rain, used (i) of 
abundant rain (e.g. I K. i; 14 i8 41 - 44 ) ; (2) in poetry for IBC, the generic word 
for rain; but also (3) of heavy winter rains (e.g. Ct. 2 11 ; cf.Lv.26 4 ); cf. also 
n-V", Ho. 6 3 Dt. ii 14 Je. 5 24 ; rn;2 Jo. 2 23 Ps. 84 7 , early rain; PipSe Je. 3 3 
Pr. i6 15 Zc. lo 1 , latter rain. On these words, see Rob., BR? I. 429 f.; Chap 
lin, PEF. 1883, pp. 8ff.; Klein, ZDPV. IV. 72 f. nya] K6. 401 x. rwW] 
H. 15, 2b; GK. 134^. ^manni] Not freq., Dr. 114 (a), but equiv. to a 
vivid impf., GK. II2/&, note; so also -VBSN (v. 8 ). nnx . . . PHN] one . . . 
another, GK. 139 e, note 3. npSn] Introducing the first of the two circ. 
clauses, H. 45, 3^; Dr. 165. -vann] Not 2d p. addressed to Yahweh, 
nor 2d p. addressed to the water (Va.), nor 3d p. used impersonally, nor 
with T; understood as subject (Ros., Schro.), but 3d p. fern. (= neut.) impf. 
(Mau., Hi., Hd.), or to be read -P3BN with and U (w.J.)> GK - I 44 <: ; Ko - 
323 k. 8. i>ui] Freq.; lit. to move with unsteady gait, and so, of a drunkard 

* On the method of water supply in Eastern cities, viz. by cisterns, cf. the 
Mesha inscription, Is. 9, 24 f.; Je. 2^ 2 K. i8 3 i Dt. 6" Is. 36" Pr. 5" EC. 126 
2 Ch. 2610 Xe. 925. See S. A. Cook, art. " Conduits and Reservoirs," EB. ; Benz. 
Arch. 51 ff., 230 f. ; 7.DPV.I. (1878) 132-76. 

iv. 8-s 99 

(Is. 24 20 ), of a blind man (La. 4 14 ), of one exhausted (Ps. 59 16 )- vh* ointe>] 
Used to express an indefinite number, GK. 134 s; Ko., Stil. 163, 212. N 1 ?)] = 

9-11. Blight of crops, pestilence and war, and earthquakes 
have failed to draw you to me. These three strophes conclude the 
five which have the refrain. 

t> 7 

9. pp-pai] fol. in J$ by jjj_aoo = -naai, an insertion from Hg. 2 17 ; cf. 
Dt. 28 22 I K. 8 37 (Seb.). rnann] @ iv\iietva.Tc = ornayi; so also Syr.-Hex. 
(so also Oct.); but read ""na^rn, -to which Oct. objects (i) that ain else 
where has only the sea and rivers as objects, tra 11 always being used of vegeta 
tion, and (2) that this emendation destroys the contrast intended by the 
author, viz. "You increased your gardens and your vineyards, but your fig 
trees and olive trees the locust devoured." But the contrast exists only after 
the text has been emended by Oct. in order to produce it; the change to the 
2d p. involved in Oet. s reading is too abrupt; and mn is used of other 
things than rivers and seas, e.g. Je. 2 12 (the heavens) ; Ju. 16" f - (green withes); 
Ez. I9 7 (palaces); Zp. 3 6 (streets); 2 K. ip 17 (land, though Din should per 
haps be read here). oa^nuj] is joined by @ with what precedes, while U 
makes the division after oa^Diai. *6] <& oi)5 &s, so also in vs. 10 - 11 . 10. ia^l 

f> P 9; F mortem; & jJZolc; { N^ID. anna] Zeydner ( ThSt. 1888, 
pp. 249 f.; so also Val.) anna. >ati>] There is no ground for the readings: 
>ax (Gr., so also Elh., Oct.); oar (Hoffm. ZA W. III. 103); (oamna =) Danpa 
(ox =) ofc* D^ (Hal.); or nfer (Zeydner, loc. cit., so also Val.). ttNa] @ ^ 

iri/pf , reading C sa ; so also 6 Hebr. Mss. (so also Zeydner, /0<r. cit., Val., Elh.) . 

>. v 
Da^nn] @ in some Mss. om. suf. while S renders . osZo^jJfl {your stench }, 

connecting it with ,_** (Seb.). onaNai] Omit -i with (@<SH, A., S. (so We., 
Gr., Now., Lohr, Hirscht, Oct., Hal., Baumann). Ethiopic = D^OJXI; Zeydner, 
DDiflii (loc. cit., so also Val.) ; Elh. cxa, following A Q. Marti om. 

9. I smote you] Each of the five strophes begins with a verb in 
the perfect ist singular ; cf. (i) / it was who gave you (famine}, 
(2) /* / was who withheld from you rain, (3) I smote you, (4) / 
sent upon you pestilence, (5) I overturned you. With blight and 
decay~\ Both words are used of human diseases in Dt. 28 22 . The 
first is the scorching of the east wind, cf. i K. 8 37 2 K. ig 26 2 Ch. 
6 <28 Is. 27 8 Ez. i7 10 ; the second, mildew caused by dampness 
and heat, having a yellow appearance, cf. Je. 3O 6 . / laid waste 
your gardens and vineyards ] This reading, on the basis of Well- 
hausen s emendation, satisfies every demand of the context. The 
difficulties of the old text are seen in the efforts to translate it, 


e.g. many of your gardens,* the multiplying of your gardens,f 
your many gardens, J or much mildew (taking mmn with what 
precedes), or as an adverb, most, often. || Your fig trees and olive 
trees the locust devoured^ With this rendering it is no longer neces 
sary to discuss whether of the four nouns, gardens, vineyards, fig 
trees, olive trees, only the first depended on " I smote," f or the 
first two,** or none,ft all being taken as the object of " devoured." 
The word for locust is a general word meaning the one that gnaws ; 
cf. Jo. i 4 2^. This visitation was not infrequent, and was always 
attended with the greatest possible destruction. \\ 10. The 
pestilence after the manner of Egypf\ The many possibilities of 
this ambiguous phrase have been seized upon ; the sending of 
the pestilence was (i) sudden as was the destruction of Egypt s 
firstborn ; (2) a visitation upon the wicked, not the righteous, 
as was the case of the Egyptians, as compared with the Hebrews ; || || 
(3) as if Israel were God s enemy as Egypt had been ;ff (4) sent 
while they were on their way to Egypt ;^[ (5) sent from Egypt, 
lit. on the way on which one comes from or goes to Egypt ; *** 
(6) in the same way as that in which it was sent against Egypt, 
cf. Is. io 26 ; ftt (7) J ust as m Egypt, the home of the pestilence, \\\ 
"a thoroughly Egyptian plague," "with the same severity and 
malignity " with which it visits Egypt, || || || after the manner of 
Egypt.^FlHI Does the prophet have in mind a particular historical 
event? No. For the estimation in which the Hebrews regarded 
pestilence as a punishment for sin, cf. Lv. 26^ 2 S. 24 15 . I slew with 
the sword } Reference is made not to any particular battle, e.g. the 
slaughter by Hazael and Benhadad of Syria, when Jehoahaz was king 
(2 K. 8 12 I f)**** but rather to the long Syrian conflict, which 
lasted many years.tttt Together with the captivity of your horse s~\ 
An interpolation, \\\\ meaning that horses were captured and 
slain, or that, while the men were slain, the horses were cap 
tured. || || || || The word < otp is, however, here used in an uncommon 

* GAS. + Ros., Mau., Mit., cf. Pu. || Ba M Ew., Or. ** Ros. ( Schro. 

t Geb. $ Hd. H Jus. ft Bauer. 

Jt Thomson, LB. II. 102 ff. ; Van Lennep, Bible Lands, 313. Os. 
HI Geb., Ros. UH Cal. *** Va. ttt Hd., Pu. J+J Hi., Ke. 

$ Ew., GAS. IHIII Dr. UHU Ba., We. **** Ros., Schro., Hi., Ba. 

tttt We., Now. tttt So also Baumann. $$ Va., Schro ., Hi., Hd., Ke 

|| || || || Os., Geb., Ros., Ba. 

IV. 9-1 1 IOI 

sense, viz., the act of taking captive (Ezra g 7 Dn. n 33 ), but ordi 
narily it denotes either the condition of captivity or the sum of the 
captives. In Ex. 22 9 , the verb is used as here of animals, though 
elsewhere of men. The preposition Dp here = besides and is used 
in a late or Arabic sense. The peculiar usage of the more important 
words, the anti- climax, the fact that the line interferes with the stro 
phe, and the evident afterthought implied in it show its character as 
a later insertion. And I caused the stench of your camps to rise in 
your nostrils ] The slaughter was so great, the unburied bodies and 
carcasses so many (cf. Is. 34 3 ) , that pestilence arose, the result of 
war. As above, drought followed famine, though the occasion of it, 
so here war follows pestilence, though the occasion of it. Justi s 
reading, " I caused your camps to burn in mine anger " (cf. 2 K. 
5 1 i3 3 ), although supported by (@, cannot stand. 11. I over 
threw among you~\ That is, some of your cities; the overthrow was 
evidently that of an earthquake, perhaps that mentioned in i 1 * 
(which, it will be remembered, is from a later hand), or some 
earthquake unspecified; f others understand an overthrow by a 
hostile attack ; J and still others, a general summing up of all the 
preceding judgments. The word TOSH is always used of the 
destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, cf. Gn. iQ 25 Dt. 29 22 Is. i 7 1| 
i3 19 Je. 49 18 5o 40 . The shortness of this line may be due to the 
omission of some phrase.^" As God overthrew Sodom and Go 
morrah} The point of comparison is not the manner of the over 
throw, but its thoroughness.** The form of expression is so 
similar to that in Gn. 19 as to lead some|t to suppose that Amos 
had that text before him. The use of the word Elohim, in con 
trast with the subject of TOfin, strangely enough has been thought 
to prove the existence of more than one person in the Godhead. \\ 
The reading " the great overthrow," using Elohim as a superla 
tive, is grammatically possible, but out of harmony with the con 
text. And ye were as a brand snatched from the blaze~\ i.e. ye 
were barely rescued, saved as by a miracle, cf. Zc. 3 2 , || || not, the 
destruction was only partial.^ But ye did not turn unto me~] 

* Schro., Hi., We. f Mau., Schlier, Pu., Mit. J Ke., St. Ba. 

|| Where a^D is probably to be read for D^"V. 

U See B W., October i8q8, p. 252; so also Lohr and Baumann. ** Mit. 

ft E.g., Va. JJ Geb., lies. $$ New. |||| Jus., Va., Mit. HI Hi. 

102 AMOS 

Every effort was futile which Providence put forth to rescue Israel 
from total destruction. 

9. ps-iso] On the art., GK. I26w; K6. 297^. vannn] Instead of main, 
which is grammatically impossible (cf. K6. 402^-); cf. We. (v.s.*). DD- js p] 
On the masc. pi. ending, cf. Na. 3 12 , K6. 253^ ?JN-] Impf. of vivid repre 
sentation of past event, Dr. 27 (i) (/z) ; GK. 107 d ; H. 20, I a. an] Cf. 
other names for locust, all of which are likewise descriptive terms: ro^N (Jo. 
i* 2 25 ), ,V?> (Na. 3 16 ), yon (Jo. i* Is. 33*), :nn (2 Ch. 7 13 ), SsSx (Dt. 
28 42 ), 3J (Is. 33 4 ). 10. DDU] a = against ; for other cases cf. Gn. i6 12 2 S. 
24 17 . c;] For other cases of Djp in this sense, cf. Is. 25 11 34 7 Je. 6 11 Na. 
3 12 Ps. 66 15 . 11. DDD] 3 partitive, among you, some of you; cf. Nu. n 17 
Zc. 6 15 . rocncD] An old inf. form in the cstr. relation with N, GK. 115^; 
Earth, NB. 171 c, a; Ko. 233 c ; as an inf. it governs mDTN as a direct 
object, GK. II5</. We. regards this old inf. followed by the general title 
DTI^N as an indication of an old and not distinctively Israelitish idiom. 
S*::] A Hoph. ptcp., u appearing in the sharpened syllable. 

12,13. Therefore you shall suffer. What? Prepare for the 
worst. It is Yahweh who speaks. 

The remaining strophes of the poem have suffered greatly in their text. 
It may be accepted, in general, that a part of v. 12 and all of v. 13 are from the 
hand of a later writer (so Duhm, Theol. 109; Oort, ThT. XIV. 117/5 
We., Sta. GVI. I. 571; Taylor, DB. ; Lohr, Che. in WRS. Proph. XV. 
and EB. I. 153; Bu. Jew. Enc.; Now., Co. Einl. 176; Baud. Einl. 509; 
Marti; but on the contrary see WRS. Proph. 400; Kue. Einl. II. 347; 
Mit., Hoffm. ZAW. III. 103; cf. GAS. I. 201 ff.; Dr. 118 f.). It may be 
supposed that the original poem contained a conclusion, predicting a punish 
ment more severe than any of those \\hich had been described; that this 
prediction was in form consistent with the strophes which preceded, though, 
of course, without the refrain; that the later editor, for one or more of several 
reasons which might be given, substituted the present concluding lines, which 
are general in character, for the more specific statement in the original; that 
this later editor, here as everywhere, ignored, consciously or unconsciously, 
the poetic form of the production which he thus modified. It is not strange 
(contra We.) that the conclusion here, as perhaps in Is. 9, should thus be 
broken off. We may well understand that in a multitude of cases the closing 
words of earlier sermons, having lost in later times the direct and specific 
reference which they were intended to convey, have given place to utter 
ances presenting more modern thought and form. In view of this we need 
not be surprised to find that while vs. 12 - 13 as thus modified contain eight 
lines (the number for two strophes), they are so constructed that, except by 
a transposition which is more or less violent, the division is 3 -f 5 instead of 
4 + 4- 

iv. 12 iO3 

12. m] U haec; & no. Oort (7^71 XIV. 117) regards the phrase 
Ssi-^ . . . nj as due to dittography. "O ap> ] TrXryi Sri; "$ postquam autem 
& 9 \^e ]^i ^^; A. varepov; 6. <TXO-TOV, & NT NnniN 1 ? nan tfSi ^n 
r -Qj7N; Elh. drops the clause -|S nojjN rw o ap; as a gloss on the preceding 
clause. Oct. regards the first two clauses as doublets, but suggests also that 
the original text may have read ^NTJ" n>t^ nxr ^ ap> , with second clause p 1 ? 
T? nfc y x ro. Oort (Em.} inserts i before ap>. nanpS] < rov ^Tri/caXeurflcu = 
<& Ij-o^? (=(5, perhaps PN Nip 4 ?, Seb.); E fjSiN N^i? 1 ? 
A. KartvavTi; S. = ut adverseris ; Q. els aTravTijaLv. 13. "ixv 
ann] arepeuv ppovrriv, reading -\D,I (Va.), or as" (cf. asj, a^o ; cf. Na. 

2 8 La. 2 4 , Vol.) and n>"n (Va. Vol.); 5 1|-S for ^F as wel1 as N ^- 
^ni^-.-i,;] <g rbv xprT6t> aiirov = ^nc o or vvtro; so also Syr.-Hex. A. ris 17 
6fj.L\ia avrov; S. r6 ^wi/^a ai)roG; 9. rd? \67oi a^rou; U eloquium suum ; 
^ *i^ ~<^*. ^01 |i^ ( = ina*^ no, Seb.); E ninaty nn (= infc-yo). Get. 
regards no S jo as a marginal gloss and reads ^BSB O for in^ n?:. Hoffm., 
ZAW. III. 103, -VHP (P" 1 !?) ncisS l>JC-i, seeking thereby to bring the clause 
into harmony with the context. Hal. infe D }n x ^^in Di. no>> nnj ] @ A 
inserts Kal; so some Hebrew MSS.; so also Oort, ThT. XIV. 117; A. 
renders nj^ by xv/ J - a > flood; S. eairepav, evening; U faciens matulinam 

OP 7 

nebulam; S) 

12. Therefore} In view of the failure of Yahweh s previous 
judgments to bring Israel to terms. Thus will I do to thee\ The 
threat is addressed to each individual of the nation, and thus 
becomes more vivid. But what is the threat implied in the word 
thus? It does not refer specifically to the punishments proposed 
in the preceding statements, e.g. 4 2 " 3 ,* nor to punishments of such 
a character in general. f nor to a complete destruction like that 
just cited in the case of Sodom and Gomorrah. \ But as always 
in the case of thus in Amos, and as evident from the tense of the 
following verb, || the reference is to the future.^" The prophet 
thus theatrically ** predicts the final punishment, a punishment all 
the more severe because it is left thus indeterminate. Whether of 
purpose or not, the form is that of the Hebrew oath, God do so to 
me and more also if, etc. (i K. 2 23 ), which is most terrible in its 
significance because of its indefiniteness. Because I will do this~] 
The words " this " and " thus " refer to the same thing ; i.e. 
because this punishment, so terrible in its nature, is to come upon 

* Contra Ros., Schro., Mau., Hd. f Os. J Geb. 

Ba. || Ke. H So Now., Mit., GAS., Dr. ** Ew. 

104 AMOS 

you. Prepare to meet thy God~\ This can scarcely refer to a rising 
up in preparation like that of an accused person when the judge 
approaches * or when sentence is about to be pronounced.t Nor 
does the injunction have reference simply to the hard fate which 
is before them, J the inevitable doom (cf. Je. 46" Ez. 22 14 ) which 
the nation could not escape, whatever might be true of the indi 
vidual. It is not a challenge, || calling upon Israel to endure 
Yahweh s anger. It is, in accordance with the whole spirit and 
purpose of prophecy, a call to repentance (cf. (, to call upon thy 
God), in other words the spiritual application of the threat ; for 
every prediction of disaster was in itself an exhortation to repent 
ance, in order that, if possible, the disaster might be averted. 
Whatever befell the nation, there was an opportunity for the 
repentant individual to receive divine favor.^[ 13. The logical 
connection between v. 12 and v. 13 is somewhat uncertain. To make 
v. 126 a challenge and translate 13a , But (remember), who 
formeth mountains, etc., || is un- Hebraic. The strophic arrange 
ment would be satisfied, and a good thought obtained by combin 
ing 12c and 1M thus, ( 12c ) Prepare to meet thy God, O Israel, 
( 13d ) Yahweh, God of Hosts is his name; ( 13a ) for behold, etc.] 
In any case, an ellipsis in thought must be supplied, e.g., Prepare 
to meet thy God, O Israel ! (and do not doubt his power to bring 
the threatened punishment). For, lo ! he forms the mountains^ 
" By his power the visible world, with all its grandeur, exists " 
(Ps. I04 8 ).** And he creates the wind ~\ The invisible world,ff 
not the spirit of man. {f And he tells man what is his thought^ 
This seems out of place in the midst of an utterance, all the other 
members of which refer to nature. Its uncertainty of meaning is 
attested by the variety of interpretations accorded to it, e.g. (& his 
Messiah ; & how great is his glory ; 01 what are his works ; U his 
declaration ; his (God s) thought to man, his (man s) thought to 
him ; || || and the attempts to emend the text (?>.s.). Hirscht pro 
poses to take mK as a proper name and interpret it in view of 
Gn. 3 11 . He makes dawn darkness~\ Not dawn and darkness ; ^ffl 

* Ew. f Reu. t Suggested by Jus. Hd. || Mit. 

II So Cal., Os., Geb., Jus., Ros., Ba. ( Pu., Ke., Dr. ** Bauer, Jus., Ros., Schro. 
ft Ros., Ew., Hd., Pu., and most comm. ++ Cal., Geb., Or. Geb., Ew. 
Jill Cal., Jus., Schro., Hd., Ke., Dr. IN <G., fol. by Cal., Geb., Jus., Ke., et al 

IV. 12-13 105 

nor spiritual light and darkness,* but either he changes dawn into 
darkness, i.e. the change from day to night,t or from night to 
day, \ or better, the change of day at the approach of a storm 
(Ps. i8 9 ). He treads on the heights of the earth\ i.e. goes forth 
in storm and thunder (cf. Mi. i 3 Jb. 9 8 Matt. 5 s4 ). 

12. pS] Very similar in meaning to p hy. In usage, however, they vary, 
pS being often used as in this case where the inference is important and of 
a threatening character, and also having sometimes the meaning, nevertheless 
(Je. 5 2 ); cf. Ew. 8 -^53 b (2). no] Regularly refers to something that follows 
(BSZ., BDB., and SS., s.v.\ Ko. 332 , and Stil. 112); rarely of something 
present, Is. 2O 6 . >a 3p>] Cf. the same expression in 2 S. I2 10 , and the similar 
IPS 3|i> in Gn. 22 18 26 5 2 S. I2 6 ; cf. Ko. 389 n, and Stil. 171. rw] Neut., 
H. 2, 3; GK. 122 q. onn] Art. om., H. 5,4; GK. 126 /$; Ko. 277 . 
DIN] Here collective, H. I, 2. n^] On the ptcp. in cstr. with the object and 
governing product in ace., see GK. 116^, N. 2; Ko. 241 f. nov in" ] 
Double obj. H. 31, 6, rm. c ; Ko. 327 w. T?] ^- i s the archaic ending of 
fern, cstr.; cf. GK. 87 s\ Ew. 8 211 d. The form is ba-m-the, perhaps a mis 
taken vocalization for ba -mo-the, the 6 written defectively, Ols. 164 ; 
GK. 95 o. 

8. A dirge announcing Israel s coming destruction. 

A lamentation is pronounced : " Israel shall fall, her forces shall 
be reduced to a tenth ; for she has disobeyed Yahweh s direct 
command, Seek me ; not Bethel, nor Gilgal, nor Beersheba ! " 
and now again it is commanded, Seek Yahweh, lest ye perish. 
[Who speaks? The creator of the luminaries, the controller of 
the seas, the destroyer of the strong.] 

The original poem consisted of six strophes (vs. 1 " 6 ). The second and 
third strophes are elegiac in their movement, a short line (dimeter) follow 
ing a longer line (trimeter). Bu., ZAW. II. 30, considers only the second 
strophe to be elegiac; so Mit., 125; Dr. 175. The nrp (dirge) was a formal 
composition, somewhat artistically constructed, the second or shorter line 
being intended to echo the first, " producing a plaintive, melancholy cadence." 
To the six original strophes were added, by a later hand, two strophes, each 
having four trimeters. V. 7 belongs to the section which follows, and should 
precede v. 10 . The addition is after the analogy of the insertion already 
noticed in 4 13 . There is, notwithstanding the statements of Oort (z/.z.) and 
Volz, entirely satisfactory connection between vs. 4 " 6 and vs. 1 3 . 

* Grotius, Geb., Dathe. f Gun. \ Or $ Mit., Dr. 

106 AMOS 

V. 1-3. Israel shall fall, never again to rise; only a tenth shall 

1. nn -o-n] (g adds Kvplov, perhaps substituting mm for n?n(Va.). n>a 
SNT.T-] (SU join with following v. and make suhj. of nScj. 2. Dip] 2T adds N.IU? 
jon = in one year. Ssia" n"?ira] U join with n^aj; 1& assembly. nnoiN] 
& om. suf.; @ has his. 3. mm >j-ux ICN .13 ^] To be transferred to v. 1 to 
follow SN-V.?, thus relieving (i) a serious interruption in the thought of vs. 2 - 3 , 
(2) the lack of a line in one strophe and superfluity of a line in another. 
Baumann om. mj?n] <JIF<2>& add from which, thus making f^x subj. of nNXTi. 
TN^r] @U have passive (= iN ; n) with HND as subj. (Vol., so also Gr.); 
J62T have Hithpa el, while JSUC insert in it ; so also in v. 36 . SJOB noS] 
To be transferred to fol. ns 1 ^, thus conforming to the nrp measure (so Now.; 
Lohr places it after mm, v. 3 ; Gun. and Oct. regard it as a repetition from v. 4 ). 

1. Hear this word. ] The beginning of a new discourse, intended, 
if possible, to strike terror to the hearts of the people and thus 
lead them to repentance. Such a message, uttered in the pros 
perous days of Jeroboam II., would certainly seem to be in con 
trast with the time in which it was uttered. Which I fake up 
against you, even a dirge ] This rendering is to be preferred to 
(i) as I uplift a dirge, making iffK = as ; * or (2) because I uplift, 
etc., t since it is the more simple and at the same time accords 
better with the versification. The word " take up " (Ktw) i.e. 
on the lips, is found in the technical term K&a, so often used by 
the prophets ; it means " to pronounce," " to denounce," and is 
used regularly of a dirge (Je. y 29 Ez. iQ 1 , etc.). Just as in the case 
of an individual s death there was uttered a lamentation (cf. 
2 S. i 17 Ez. 28 12 32 2 2 Ch. 35 25 ) so here, the death of the nation 
being assumed, the mourner utters the dirge-song. This dirge is 
not restricted to v. 2 , \ nor does it include the entire chapter, but 
is contained in vs. 2and3 . O house of Israel^ The fH(E connects 
these words with the preceding, as against (gF (v.s.), thus greatly 
increasing the pathos of the appeal. For thus says the Lord Yah- 
weh~\ Transferred from v. 3 , introducing in the most solemn way the 
sad and severe announcement which is to follow. 2. Shall fall~\ 
The certainty of the event being indicated by the use of the per 
fect. Very unreasonable is the interpretation which renders the 

*Ba., We. tOs.,Hi. 

t Dahl, Ros., Hd., Hi., Ew., Bu., Ba., Pu., GAS., Dr. Ki., Schro. 

v. 1-2 io7 

perfect literally, and has fallen, and upon this basis rejects vs. 1 " 3 ,* 
because, as a matter of fact, Israel did not fall until after the reign 
of Jeroboam II. The expression is used of violent death (e.g. 
2 S. i 19 - 25 - 27 ), especially of death in battle, and of loss of honor or 
possessions (e.g. 28. i 10 Ps. io 10 Pr. n 28 ). For its use of nations 
cf. Is. 2 1 9 Je. 5 1 8 . Not to rise again~\ i.e. as a people; the 
prophet always held out hope of pardon and mercy to indi 
viduals. Virgin Israel^ In personifications the word " virgin " 
is used alone with no other name besides Israel (Israel never 
occurs with " daughter " in this sense) ; aside from this passage, 
this expression is found only three times,| viz. Je. i8 13 3i 4 21 . The 
explanations of the phrase, used here for the first time, may be 
classified according as the principal thought is found in (i) the 
figure of chastity, whether political chastity, i.e. as being free, 
unconquered, independent of other powers \ (cf. the use of 
" daughter " in the same sense, and sometimes in combination 
with " virgin," in connection with Idumea, La. 4 22 ; Judah, La. i 15 
2 1 - 5 ; Egypt, Je. 4 6 n - 19 - 24 ; Babylon, Is. 47 1 - 5 Zc. 2 7 ; Jerusalem, 
Is. 37 22 ; in La. 2 13 and Je. i8 13 the reference is to Jerusalem before 
her capture), or religious chastity, i.e. freedom from contaminating 
contact with other gods ; or (2) the idea of the delicacy and 
self-indulgence of the people ; || or (3) the idea of collectivity, 
the feminine being used to convey this thought, in this sense it 
has been taken (a) as a designation of the people in general ; ^f 
(fi) as a poetic term for state (cf. Is. 37 22 Je. i4 17 2 K. i9 21 ) ; (t) as 
the designation of a city, and usually the chief or capital city of 
the kingdom, Samaria, or Jerusalem.** It here refers to northern 
Israel ft ( m Isaiah, Jerusalem), and is employed to mark the con 
trast between Israel s past and future condition. She shall be 
hurled down upon her own sotl~\ A stronger figure than that con 
tained \T\fallen ; the description is expanded in Ez. 2Q 5 (leave thee 
(thrown) into the wilderness), 32 4 (leave thee forsaken upon the 
land) ; there is no thought of an uprooted and prostrate tree, \\ 
nor of a depraved woman in difficult child-birth. She will be 
left to die where she has fallen. With none to raise her up] An 

* Oort, Th.T. t XIV. 118. t Mit. ll Va., Ros. JJ Geb. 

t Geb., Har., Hi., Hd., Ke., Now., Dr. ** Schro., Ew. $ Har. 

$ Os. || Gal., Pu. ft Mit., Now., GAS. 

108 AMOS 

advance upon what has preceded, for not only will she not be 
able to raise herself, but no one else will be able to render her 
assistance. The Jewish interpreters in general follow &, and 
regard the calamity as of temporary character. 3. The city that 
goeth forth a thousand having (but} a hundred left~\ The two 
circumstantial clauses of this verse add to the picture portrayed in 
v. 2 an additional feature, viz. the ninefold decimation of the forces 
sent out to war, a terrible slaughter. The statement is general, 
the city being any city in the kingdom. The thousand refers not 
simply to the levy or census,* but to the warriors who marched 
out for war.t While it is evident that in Amos s time the basis 
of military enrolment was the towns and villages, in earlier days 
it was tribes and families. \ For allusions to similar companies, 
cf. i S. 8 12 2 S. i8 L4 2 K. ii 4 - 19 Ex. i8 21 etc. Of the house of 
Israel~\ Transferred (v.s.). 

1. T^N] Depends for its construction upon n^p; if as a pronoun it 
refers to i:nn, nrp is either in apposition with it, or an ace. of purpose, 
GK. 131 ; K6. 327^, 384 c (Now.); but if -i^N="as" (Ew. 8 334 a, Ba., 
We.), r^p is the ace. after Ntt>j; the former is preferable. xr:] Ptcp. of 
immediate future, GK. u6/; since the lifting up of a word, or of the voice, 
is but an Oriental phrase for utterance or speech, perhaps the word speak would 
fairly represent srj ; cf. s ip xrj (= ^?ip onn, *?ip pj), Ju. 9 7 ; also NS-J alone, 
Is. 3 7 42-- n (see, however, Paton, JBL. XXII. 201-7). nyp] The verb frp 
is doubtless a denominative from nrp. A plausible derivation ( Thes.\ for 

nrp is the Arabic root ULJJ, to forge, devise, hence a skilfully wrought 
production, so named either from its poetic form, or from its contents as 
glorifying the dead (Wetzstein, Zeitsch. f. Ethnologic, 1873, pp. 270 ff.). Bu. 
prefers the former reason (ZAW. II. 28). This derivation from the Arabic 
is doubted by some (e.g. Ba.). The closest parallel is found in the Syriac 
]A 1 n, which means both song and elegy. We may also compare Eth. 
Vi * song, and *i\ to sing. The nj>p is an elegy, a poem of lamenta 
tion, thus distinguished from Tip, which means sometimes a song of lament, 
but sometimes simply the cry of mourning (Je. 3i 15 ); cf. the vb. in I S. 7 2 . 
nrp is used commonly, as here, with N:-] (Je. 7 29 9 9 Ez. 19* 26 17 27 2 - 32 
28 12 32 2 ); with rvp (2 S. i 17 Ez. 32), and with -^% With HB>J, hy gen 
erally precedes the person or thing which is the object of lamentation, but 
sometimes S N (Ez. 19* 27 32 ) ; V" is sometimes used of the place (Je. 7 29 ). 
For the importance of elegies among Oriental nations, cf. Wetzstein (TAJ.) 
and the Arabic work, Hamasa, 365-497. The principal rhythm of the nrp 

Ew. f Hd., Ba., Schegg. J We., Now. $ Cf. Benz. Arch. 359. 

V. 3 

is a long line followed by a shorter one, the favorite measures being 3 and 2 
words, 4 and 2, and 4 and 3. However, a nj>p may be written in another 
measure, and the Qinah measure may be used for other poems, as a later 
usage. On Qtnah rhythm, see Bu. ZAW. II. 6 ff., 38-45; III. 299 f.; XL 
234 ff.; XII. 261 ff.; and in Preuss. Jahrbucher, 1893, PP- 460 ff.; Ley, SK., 
1896, p. 637; DHM. Prop/i. I. 209; Ko. Stil. 315 ff.; BDB. s.v. The 
principal examples of the nj<p in the O.T. are the following: the Book of 
Lamentations; Is. I4 4 - 21 Ez. ig 1 14 26 15 ~ 17 2y 2 - 36 28 12 ~ 19 (doubtful) 32 2 - 16 Je. 9 9 , 
and several separated vs. following, Is. 45 14 " 25 Ps. 137 2 S. i 19 - 27 3 S3f - (the 
last two not in the technical measure) 2 K. 1921-28 (=Is. 37 22ff -) Is. I 21 23 
Ho. 6 7tf - Am. 8 10 . SN-IS" no] Vocative; not subj. of rV?cj (v. 2 ). 2. nSsj] 
Proph. pf., H. 19, 2; GK. 106 w; Dr. 14. voin xS] Impf. in contrast 
with preceding pf., used to intensify the idea that the destruction will be 
permanent, H. 20, 2, rm. b; Dr. 36; on the inf. with rpoir, H. 36, 3 (2); 
GK. 1 20 a; Ko. 399 b. nSina] On the cstr. state, GK. i28/; Ko. 337^. 
nDipD PN] Circ. cl., H. 45, 2 e; on force of p>N, Ko. 361 d, 402 /. 
3. "PJ?n] Stands first, not because emphatic, but in a circ. cl., H. 45, 3, 
rm. d. nxpn] On art. with ptcp., H. 4, 3/5 here joined poetically to "Pj?n, 
the city being thus represented as going out to war. nSs] Ace. of limitation, 
or specification, H. 33, 3; GK. 1172; Ko. 332 >; so also nsp; for a similar 
construction, cf. 2 K. 5 2 , DIITU, and 2 K. 9 25 , ones. The same idea is ex 
pressed by V with the numeral; cf. I S. 29 2 . noS] Not a case of h used 
when the preceding governing word is absent, but like nnS in Je. I3 13 (Hi.); 
cf. Ko. 281 n. 

4-6. Israel shall fall (vs. 1 " 3 ) because she has disobeyed the 
divine command given in ike past to seek Yahweh alone. [But 
even now the entreaty comes again] Seek Yahweh, lest ye perish. 

These verses contain the second half of the dirge (strophes 4, 5) and the 
concluding strophe of the original poem, somewhat mutilated. The second 
half gives the explanation of the destruction announced in the first half; 
while in the concluding strophe, the prophet, as so many times before, turns 
in exhortation to the people to do the thing, the neglect of doing which in the 
past has cost them so dearly. The logical connection of vs. 4 " 6 becomes plain 
when -CN (v. 4 ) is taken as historical pf., or plup. (v.i.}; and, therefore, the 
proposal to throw out vs. 1 - 3 (Oort), or to treat v. 4 as introducing a new section 
(Now., Marti), may be rejected. 

5. najjn N<? yap iN3>] To be transferred to the beginning of v. 5 ; it is 
entirely rejected by Baumann, since (i) it spoils the strophic arrangement, 
(2) has nothing to correspond to it as in the case of Bethel and Gilgal; cf. 4 4 , 
where only the two cities are mentioned; also 8 14 . yiv iN3i] @ has eirl 
rb <f>ptap rov VpKov; cf. same in Gn. 26 81 2i 31 , but in Am. 8 14 it has proper 
name. psS rrm] @ ea-rcu ws oi>x virdpxov<ra, similarly & and {, all seeming 


l.o take fiS in the sense of ps 1 ? (Seb., so Hal.); U erit inutilis. 6. It 
seems probable that an entire member has been lost, perhaps ^ioa" no nnjn. 
- n L >i" 1 ] ( dva\dfj.^r} with ^DT> no as subj. = 3ix or p*n (Va.) or ncx, cf. 
Is. 4 2 (Vol.) ; U comburatur, similarly &. Read " nos tfs rktf\ (so We., 
Elh., Lohr, Gun. Th. St. XVIII. 221; cf. Baumann); cf. Gun. tt>NO nSe" (in 
his comm., but abandoned later in favor of We. s reading; so also Gr.). 
Now. !i N3 nvr; Oct. oto r : v; Elh. trs -pV^(?); Hal. nSr(?); Duhm (.#. 
3799) and Marti, i^N snS nSx\ n^x] < adds avrbv. Now. om. as gloss. 
Vx no s ] (& r ofrcy I<rpa.7]\ (cf. Ho. io 15 ); one cod. has r$ lo-pa^X; so 
also one cod. of Kenn. SsiS i 1 , and one of de R. SNTJH noS (so also Dathe, 
Gr., Now., Elh., Hal., Lohr, Oort Em.). A. and S. r Bcu0i)X; 6. ry r/c V 
Bai^X. Hirscht explains the reading I ?NI^> as due to a marginal note by a 
reader contrasting fix no and V-" no, which resulted in the blending of no 
w and ^x no into SN-IB" no. We. and Now. om. SN noS as a gloss; Marti 
transposes it to v. 7 . Oct. transposes thus: D f&o SNI^-" no H^DNI. Lohr 
rejects v. 66 as an interpolation based on I 4 , and introducing a thought entirely 
foreign to Amos. 

4. For thus said Yahweh to the house of Israel^ The prophet 
has just described the coming desolation. This description sug 
gests at once the question, Are we not zealously engaged in the 
worship of Yahweh ? Why are we then to suffer ? The answer is 
furnished : Yahweh in times past spoke thus and thus, com 
mands which ye have disobeyed. The verb is not to be rendered 
saith, but said, referring to the injunctions of the past. The dirge 
may well describe the occasion of the impending calamity. The 
ordinary interpretation which makes this an exhortation uttered 
by the prophet, after announcing the calamity,* takes away the 
force of the most impressive portion of the piece, and compels 
the prophet to give two exhortations in practically the same lan 
guage (see v. 6 ). Seek me~\ A common phrase for the expression 
of religious desire implying worship and obedience, and used alike 
of God and idols. t And live\ i.e. that you may live, implying that 
ihe danger ahead may not be averted otherwise ; cf. Is. i 19 Am. 5 15 . 
The life of course includes national life and prosperity (Baur). For 
other examples of two imperatives used in this way, either condi 
tionally, if you seek me you will certainly live, the conclusion being 

* Nearly all comm. 

f Besides ;r-n, the word here, typj is also used in the same sense; cf. Ps. 246 
Is. 8 19 556. The exact meaning here as gathered from the context is to make e/ort 
to obey his will and to practise a righteous life. 

V. 4-5 III 

thus rendered more certain, or as an action with a purpose, seek me 
in order that you may live, the request being thus emphasized, cf. 
Gn. 42 18 i K. 22 12 2 K. 5" Je. 2y 17 Am. 5 14 . There is no reference 
to the future life, nor, perhaps, even to spiritual life.* 5. And 
to Beer-sheba do not (ye shall not) cross over] (v.s.). This line, 
probably corrupt, must be transferred to precede the line and do 
not seek Beth-el, which is required by the chiastic arrangement of 
the next strophe. Several explanations have been given of the 
lack of a corresponding line, as in the case of Gilgal and Beth-el, 
e.g. a pun is evident in the very word intP "IKS = "S& 1K3 = fount 
of captivity ; f or, Beer-sheba is omitted because, being in Judah, 
it was not destroyed when Samaria fell ; J or because Amos is 
prophesying only to the ten tribes ; or because no suitable paro 
nomasia could be found for Beer-sheba. || If the present text is 
accepted, we must understand that the Israelites of Amos s day 
were not satisfied with visiting the sanctuaries of the North, but 
were so zealous in their worship as to cross over the border-land 
of their own territory f and penetrate as far south as the ancient 
sanctuary of Beer-sheba, thirty miles southwest of Hebron on the 
road to Egypt. Beer-sheba played an important part in the sto 
ries of the patriarchs, cf. Gn. 2I 14 - 31 - 33 26 23>33 28 46*; there is no 
authority for Driver s statement, "in Amos s time it was a popular 
resort for pilgrims from N. Israel," unless it is found in 8 14 (a 
doubtful text). After the captivity it was again occupied (Ne. 1 1 27 ). 
This worship was strikingly inconsistent with the assumption of 
Jeroboam I. that Jerusalem was too far away from the Northern 
tribes to be the place of central worship. The most extreme 
form of corrupt worship, viz. that at Beer-sheba, is thus placed in 
contrast with the true attitude commended. Ye shall not seek 
Beth-el~\ i.e. visit for the purpose of exercising rites and ceremo 
nies. And Gilgal ye shall not enter] Reference has already been 
made to these places as the seats of sanctuaries. For Gilgal shall 
surely go into exile~\ The Gilgal, in which they now take such de 
light, will be laid waste.** And Beth-el shall become (Beth)aven~] 

* Contra Pu., Ke. + Jer., Hi. || Ros. 

t Har. Ba., Ke. H Jer., Har., Ros., Hi., Ba. 

** The alliteration of the original nSj> nSj SjSjn cannot well be indicated in a 
translation. Cf. Ew., Gilgal wird Galle weinen ; Ba., Gilgal giltig entgilt es ; Or., 

112 AMOS 

The word pK has been variously taken as meaning nought* idol 
atry^ iniquity \ (cf. Ho. 4 15 5 8 io 5 ) ; trouble ; in a recent transla 
tion it is rendered des Teufels. || It is better to understand it as 
an abbreviation ^[ of pK ITS, the px in either sense being the oppo 
site of bx (Beth-el). Cf. Hoffmann s suggestion ** that the wor 
ship of the Northern kingdom had many Egyptian elements, such 
as the calf, that Yahweh was identified with Ra , and Beth-el with 
On, the sacred city. Hence the use of pK by Hosea and Amos 
has a double sense; here " your On-Beth-el will become Aven, delu 
sion." It is of importance to note that not far from Beth-el, close 
to the edge of the desert, there was a village (the site of which is 
now uncertain) named Beth-aven (cf. Jos. f i8 12 i S. i3 5 i4 23 ).-j"j- 
6. The dirge being now completed, it is the natural thing for 
the prophet to utter an exhortation. This, found in v. 6 , completes 
the piece. But, unfortunately, one line seems to have been lost ; 
perhaps it read, And now, O house of Israel, seek Yahweh and 
live ] i.e. do as he long ago bade you. Lest he cast fire on Joseph s 
house~\ \\ The wrath of God is represented by fire (Dt. 32 22 Ez. 
22 21 ). Joseph, as well as Ephraim, is often used for Northern as 
distinguished from Southern Israel (cf. 2 S. iQ 20 Ob. 18 Zc. io 6 ; 
Joseph, without house, occurs in Am. 5 15 6 6 Ez. 37 16 Ps. 78 67 ). 
For 13eth-el~\ (&, some Mss., and the demands of the parallelism 
incline some (v.s.) to read for Israel; but the reading of fHC is 
satisfactory, Beth-el being the centre of the religious cultus ; cf. 
2 K. 22 17 Is. i 31 Je. 4 4 . 

4. The Hebrew could not distinguish has said (indef.), has just said (pf. 
of immediate past), from the historical said; the latter is intended here, H. 
1 6, i; Dr. 7; GK. 106 d. vm ^wn] H. 48, 8; Dr. 152, I; GK. 

Die Rollstadt rollt von dannen ; Mit., Gilgal shall go into galling captivity ; We., 
Gilgal wird zum Galgen geken ; GAS., Gilgal shall taste the gall of exile. Cf. 
Ho. i2 12 for a similar alliteration of the same letters; and for other cases Is. io 29 
158 Je. 61 Mi. iio. 11. 14. 15 Zp. 24. 

* Mich., Jus., Ros., Ba., Or. % Ew. || We. ; cf. GAS. 

t Hd. f GAS. Dr. IT Hi., Mit. 

** ZA W. III. 105 f. ft GAS., art. " Beth-aven," EB. 

%% fHC nSs- has been translated advance (Cal.) ,pass through consuming all (Har., 
Jus., Hd.), destroy (Dahl), kindle (CF and F, v.s.}. The translation adopted, which 
seems better, rests upon the suggestion that n and 3 are easily confused in sound, 
while the 3 of !?jo is inserted after the analogy of dittography. 

V. 5-6 II3 

no/; K6. 364 k. em and isfjpa are practically synonymous (cf. Ez. 34 6 ) ; and 
are used alike of seeking Yahweh and of seeking idols (e.g. Lv. IQ 31 Is. IQ 3 Dt. 
i8 u Je. 8 2 2 1 2 Gn. 25 22 , etc.). For original force of both see BSZ. and BDB. 
An early meaning, resort to, seems to appear in Am. 5 5 Dt. I2 5 2 Ch. I 5 . 
Both words were used commonly of consulting the deity, through an oracle 
or through a prophet, in reference to matters of all kinds, religious and secu 
lar (Ex. i8 15 i S. 9 9 2 K. 3 11 8 8 Ez. 2O 1 - 3 , etc.). From this usage came the 
broader meaning of seeking in prayer and worship and, in general, striving to 
act in accord with the divine will (Dt. 4 29 Ho. 5 6 Zp. 2 3 Ps. 4O 17 69? IO5 3 , 
etc.). In prophetic speech tsm is much the more common word of the two 
when used of religious affairs. 5. iemn SN] Deprecation, H. 41, i b\ Dr. 
50 (a) Obs.\ GK. 152/5 K6. 352^., but cf. vh (with isan) prohibition. 
VjSjni Vsnia] marks the chiasm; perhaps tfS after SjSjn is due to a desire 
not to repeat the sound aL nSjp n^j] H. 28, 3 a; GK. 113*; K6. 329;-. 
SjSjn >D] Note masc. form of the vb., though the feminine is more usual 
with names of towns ; K6. 248 c. The subj. first because emphatic, so SKDO; 
note the chiastic order of the proper names in 56 , as compared with that in 
5a_ e. n ij x ,-] VfSt Th e difficulty is twofold (i) the use of nSx with ace. of 
the person, when it is regularly followed by ^? or SN (cf. Ju. I4 19 I5 14 i S. 
IO 6 ), being used with the ace. in the sense of to reach, 2 S. I9 18 ; and (2) the 
fern. vb. n^x which points to IPN ; hence the many emendations proposed 
(z .j.). Margolis (AJSL. XVII. 171), however, defends nSx> (but reads t^sa) 
on the basis of the usage of nSx in Ecclus. 8 10 , where it is followed by nSnja 
(a mistake for nSrua; cf. @) and rendered kindle by @. f|DV r^a] Subj., 
not obj. nSax] Fem. as ref. to JPN. V^ma 1 ?] Correct, notwithstanding 
We. et aL, v.s.; not ace. (h sign of ace.) after naaD (cf. Hd.), nor to be 
connected with nSax (Mau.); but dat. of adv. or disadv.j cf. Ez. 37 11 ; 
GK. 119 s. 

8, 9. Who is it that you are asked to seek ? Yahweh is his 
name, the creator of the luminaries, the controller of the seas, the 
destroyer of the strong. 

This addition from a later hand, "to relieve the gloom of the prophetic 
picture," falls into two strophes, each of four trimeters. It bears the general 
character of the additions found in 4 13 9 5 - 6 , and resembles in style the 
Deutero-Isaiah (cf. Is. 4O 22f -). Note (i) the use of participles, and (2) the 
peculiar words; cf. Stickel, Hiob 276; Che. EB. I. 153 n. 3. Vs. 8 and 9 
are placed by Elh. after 2 7f -. Their lack of connection with v. 7 is generally 
acknowledged (so Ew., followed by GAS., who places them before v. 7 ; Gr., 
who would place v. 8 after 4 13 ; Oct., who suggests the alternative of the end 
of the chap.; Che. EB. I. 153, who places them after 4 13 ; Now., who re 
gards them as a misplaced gloss on v. 6 ; Dr., Marti, and others, who treat 
them as an interpolation; cf. Baumann). 

114 AMOS 

8. IDP nvr] To be transferred to the beginning of v. 8 , some preceding 
word being lost ; or perhaps the line may be filled from & = Let there be fear 
in the presence of him who, etc. Two codd. of Kenn. add niso* and two codd. 
of read, Yahweh, God of hosts. StD31 HDO] iravra Kal fJLTa<TKvdfav = 
apt-i Vn (Vol.); A. ApKTovpov Kal fipluva ; 2. IlXeidSas Kal a<rrpa; 5J Arctu- 
rum et Orionem ; 0. IlXetdSa Kal Zo-irepov ; & N^DDI nD>:>; % l^a-^o )%n*n. 

ninSx] Read nin^ (cf. Ps. 23 4 ) foil. @ cmd? (Va.), not SS* (Vol.) ; U &*- 

bras; but & jialo * v v I (see BDB.). rM] Read rMS, with ten codd. 
Kenn. and seven de R. (so Dathe, Mit., Oort ThT. XIV. 118, Elh.). Nipn 
OTT^D 1 ?] @T = who commands to gather great armies like the waters of the sea. 

9. .rSacn] (H 6 diaipuv = .r^oon (Now.); (Q 6 diopifav ; A. 6 ^eiSicD? ; 
S. rd? TTotoDj Ta KarayeXdcrai ; U ^z arridet (subridet, cod. Am.); & "UJDi; 
S - ^V^^- Gr. D>J^Snn ; Get. SaSwn ; Oort -\3JD ; Elh., Sv, JS n ; Oort 
(/.) and Marti, N^Sflnn. nif] Read -air, fol. (5 a\)VTpiy.\).Qv (so Ew., Hi., 
Oort, Gr., GAS., Now., Oct.). & ] A\. and & va^n = tsn (Seb.) ; J$ vastita- 
tem ; S. d0awo-/i6v. Hoffm., nfer here and in fol. clause. Elh., n:: . ry] (5 
/<rxJi = V (so also Oort) ; U robustwn ; Q a^pr 1 ; S> jl * v >; Hoffm., TV(?). 
1^1 J /cat raXaurupiav; Tff depopulationem ; Ss IntiVo; E ]mi3i; Hal. 
-inch. St. would read (so also Dr. and Oort Em.} -airi on basis of <& and 
Is. 59 7 6o 18 Je. 48 3 ; but it is better to read ~\iy for the previous it^ (v.s.) 
and retain H2T here, since (^ employs (rvvTpi/j./jLt>s and aiJi to represent 
naitf twenty-three times, but ii only four times, including this passage, while 
the vb. ~a a> is regularly rendered by crwrpipw. raXanrwpta, on the other 
hand, represents ir ten times and "O- only thrice, while mty is regularly ren 
dered by raXcuTTupita. However, the occurrence of the phrase -a 1 .:*! ia> in 
Is. and Je., where renders by crvvrp. /cat ra\., makes the matter somewhat 
uncertain. nxoc] Hoffm., "PxacC?). Nn^J Read N^:J, with all the versions 
(so Va., Oort ThT. XIV. 118 and Em., Hoffm., GAS., Now., Elh., Oct., 
Hal.); 2. eTrdyw, U affert ; & \L^o; & whtfv. These vs. are evidently 
not genuine. V. 7 must be transferred to precede v. :0 , see p. 105. So Bauer, 
Ew., Or., GAS.; cf. Mit., who strains himself in the effort to connect vs. 7 and 8 
(p. 129); Gun., who rejects v. 7 ; WRS. Proph. (p. 400), who maintains that, 
though not closely connected with the immediate context, these vs. are in 
complete harmony with the general purport of the thought of Amos, and that 
the ejaculatory form is "not surprising under the general conditions of pro 
phetic oratory, while the appeal comes in to relieve the strain of the intense 
feeling at a critical point in the argument." The suggestion has been made 
to transfer imjn from v. 7 , with > (New. v.i. p. 118), or to supply iam (Mich., 
Jus.), or seek Yahiueh (Geb.), or He is the one who (Ba.); but it seems best 
to supply part of a line which shall include the words taken from the end of 
the v., viz. i2tt> mrr, since this phrase could not originally have stood in the 
midst of the description. In 4 13 it comes at the close of the sentence. 

V. 8 115 

8. Whose name is Yahweh] The God who is Israel s national 
God, and who desires Israel s strongest allegiance. The creator of 
the Pleiades and Orion~\ In two or three strokes the poet depicts 
the omnipotence of the God for whom he pleads. He seizes upon 
two of the heavenly constellations which are most conspicuous to 
represent, by synecdoche, the universe that is visible. They are 
referred to in Jb. 9 38 31f - (cf. Is. i3 10 ) in the same way as a proof 
of God s creative power. The Hebrew name for Orion, which 
also =fool, may perhaps contain a trace of some old mythological 
notion, which held this constellation to have been " originally 
some foolhardy, heaven-daring rebel who was chained to the sky 
for his impiety." * The thought is not different from that of the 
Psalmist (8 3 ). This seems to be the meaning rather than (i) the 
interpretation of na 3 as "genial heat" and b DD as " cold," f on 
the ground that it harmonizes better with the context to speak 
of present acts than of a far-distant creation (but cf. the custom 
of the Deutero-Isaiah) ; or (2) that which finds the principal 
force of the utterance in the star-worship, which was not uncom 
mon in Israel (cf. Je. y 18 44 17 - 18 2 K. i; 16 2i 3 - 5 , cf. 23"), the 
thought being " do not worship the stars, but the creator of the 
stars " ; } or (3) that of nia 3 as " fortune," " destiny " ; or (4) that 
which supposes the stars to have been mentioned because of their 
influence upon the weather, and because the writer wished to show 
the supremacy of Yahweh over all such forces. || Who turneth 
deep gloom into morning] The " darkness " thus turned is not 
the darkness of death,^[ an interpretation based upon an incorrect 
pointing of rvabst (#*) nor the original creation of light, \ but 
the change from night to day, a most wonderful, although most 
common, phenomenon. And day into night darkeneth] This 

* Dr. ; so Di. (on Jb. 98), Che., BDB. For reference to these constellations in 
early Greek literature, cf. Horn. //. XVIII. 486-9: 

ITAr/iaSa? &" Ya5a? re TO re aOevos Hpuovo? 
Ap/CToy 6 r\v Kal a/aa^av ejri/cATjo ii (caAeoucrty 
*H T auTof) <TTpe (/>eTcu *ai r Hpuova 5o*ev*t, 
OITJ 6" a/a/uopd; eari \Ofrpiai> flxeavoio. 

Cf. also XXII. 26-31, and Od. V. 272-75. 

f Parkhurst, cited by Owen in his translation of Cal. t Geb. $ Schlier. 
|| Hoffm. Z AW. III. 109. 11 Pu., Ke. 


supplements and explains the preceding phrase ; the idea is that 
of the regular order of nature, night succeeding day, under a great 
Director, not that of an extraordinary event like the darkness of 
the land of Egypt,* nor the shortening of the days in winter. 

Who calleth the waters of the sea and poureth them on the face 
of the earth] Cf. Is. 48 13 Jb. 3S 34 . Are these waters the rains 
drawn from the sea and descending upon the earth (cf. Jb. 36^) ; t 
or the fountains and streams by which the earth is watered \ (cf. 
EC. i 7 Jb. i2 15 ) ; or an inundation, the Noachian deluge, the 
most terrible punishment in history ? In favor of the last are 
the use of the expressions call and face of the earth, the thought 
of the following, and the typical character of the illustrations of 
Yahweh s power, as thus interpreted, viz., "Jehovah, by whom 
the world was made, of whose will the order and harmony in 
nature are an expression, and at whose command the forces in 
nature may become as destructive as they have been beneficent." || 

9. Causeth violence to burst upon the strong] For the word 
rbs&n (found elsewhere only in Jb. 9^ lo 20 Ps. 39 14 and rrrbaa in 
Je. 8 18 ) there have been suggested the following : (i) He that 
strengthens (the spoiled against the strong, so that the spoiled, or 
a waster, shall ascend upon the very fortresses;! or destruction 
(= the destroyed) against strength ( the strong) so that (through 
him) destruction comes upon the fortress) ; * (2) He that mani 
fests; ** (3) He that causes to flash forth (figure taken from the 
dawn),ft cf. Is. 47" Jo. 2 2 ; also nfci in Is. 42 9 58**; (4) He that 
laughs at ; \\ the third satisfies the context in all the passages in 
which the word occurs and accords with its derivation (#./.). On 
Hoffmann s interpretation v.i. And causeth devastation to come 
upon the fortress] This rendering is based upon the reading K 2; 
(v.s.) instead of xia , although the Qal of Kin (like aw) sometimes 
has a transitive meaning. 

8. nay] has been treated as obj. of ram to be supplied (Mich., Jus.), as 
subject of V22> mrp (Schegg), as predicate of a sentence of which Nin, to be 
supplied, is subject (Ba.). If regarded as an interpolation, its connection 
may be very loose, perhaps the answer to some implied question; cf. K6. Stil. 

* Geb. $ Pu., Ke. ( Reu., Mit. ** Va. 

f Jer., Cal., Os., Geb., Dahl, Ros., Or. || Mit. ft Ros., Ba., Hi. 

t Hi. H CaL JJ A., Jer., Schegg, Pu. 

V. 8-9 II7 

214- HD^] occurs elsewhere only in Jb. 9 9 38 31 ; usually taken to mean the 
Pleiades (so A., 2., 6., and < on Jb. 38 31 ), from the idea that it is similar to 

Sx >^ 

Arab. &0 15 , a heap (Ba. ; BDB.; Taylor, DB. III. 896). Other meanings 

given are Sirius (Stern, in Jud. Zeitschrift fur Wissen. u. Leben, III. 258 ff.; 
No. in BL. ; Hoffm. ZA W. III. 107 ff.) and the Scorpion (ZA. I. 264). 
^ Dj] The derivation from VDD = A? &? strong, is very questionable. The word 
ordinarily means a fool. As used of a star it occurs only here and in Jb. 9 9 38 31 
Is. I3 10 . A. and T3 and <g on Is. I3 10 and Jb. 38 31 translate by Orion, which 
is the usual meaning given; Saadia, Abulwalid, and others identify with 
Canopus. Cf., for further discussion, Wetzstein in De. Job, 2 501 f.; Taylor, 
DB. III. 632; R. Brown, Jr., Trans, of Ninth Congr. of Orientalists, II. 
457 f. nin^x] The old derivation is as a compound of DID *?y = shadow of 
death; so (5, A., 2., 0. (in places); &2TF; Ges. Thes. ; Schwally, Das Leben 
nach dem Tode, 194; No. ZA W. XVII. 183 ff.; BDB. The vocalization 
no*?* from oSs, be dark (cf. Assyr. salmu) is also ancient, and has been 
accepted by many; Ew. 8 270 c; De. and Hupfeld (on Ps. 23*); BSZ., Gun., 
Bu. (on Jb. 3 5 ) ; K6. Lehrgebdude, II. i. p. 415. Barth, NB. 259 c, would 
make the form r^* (cf. Marti), while We. 3 proposes nioSx after analogy 
of Arab, tzulamdt. The passages in which the word is found are, besides 
this, Jb. 3 5 io 21f - I2 22 i6 16 24" 28 3 34 22 38" Is. 9 1 Je. & I3 16 Ps. 23* 4420 
loyio. u t nSi 1 ?] For syntax according to fH^T, cf. GK. 117 ii; K6. 327 z>. 
-p^nn] A pf. of experience fol. preceding ptcp., in chiastic order with IDH-, 
H. 18, 3; GK. 106 -. Niipn] The art. here; in preceding ptcps. it has been 
omitted, the first being in cstr.; cf. GK. 126/5; K6. 411 h. D3BB"i] Impf. with 
waw cons. fol. a ptcp. H. 24, 5; GK. in u. 9. jpSacn] Commonly derived 

from a Heb. root akin to Arab. s*~**2, to be bright, ,&J*2, to be bright, joyous. 

w Vl^ 

In all the other passages in Heb. the meaning be glad, cheerful, is usually 

assigned; cf. Schultens, Origines Hebrcza (1761); Lane, Arab. Lex. 245; 
BDB., BSZ. It is here in chiastic order with N->:T; here the impf. (indef. 
freq.) follows the ptcp. with the article, H. 21, 3; GK. in u. ia>] Hoffm., 
on the basis of an emended text, translates, he carises Taurus to rise after 
Capella and causes Taurus to set after Vindemiator. This is explained by 
the fact that Capella rises at the end of April before Taurus in May, and 
Taurus sets in November after the setting of Vindemiator in September. To 
this it is objected (We.) that this is too ordinary a matter to stand in so 
important a connection, and that if this had been the idea, the stars were so 
well known that so different a reading could not have grown up. 

9. Transgressors shall come to grief, s 7 1(M7 . (i) A per- 
verter of judgment and an oppressor of the poor, Israel shall not 
enjoy the gains which she has unjustly made (vs. 7 lof ). (2) Guilty 
of every sin, receiver of bribes, she must change her life, if she 


would live and have Yahweh s presence ; vs. 12 " 14 . (3) Only right 
eousness will furnish ground for mercy, in the great calamity which 
is to bring lamentation to every heart (vs. 15 " 17 ). 

This poem consists of three double strophes, each double strophe including 
one strophe of four and one of six lines. The first part of each double strophe 
contains a characterization of the times; the second part, introduced by joS 
describes the calamity which is coming upon Israel as punishment. 

7, 10, 11. Those who exercise injustice and shun him who 
reproves them for it, shall forfeit all the privileges which otherwise 
would accrue to them. The reasons for placing v. 7 in this con 
nection are : (i) its utter lack of connection with v. 6 and v. 8 ; its 
natural connection with v. 10 ; and the fact that when joined to v. 10 
it permits a strophic arrangement of the whole section at once 
simple and natural. This transposition has been adopted without 
reference to the arrangement, upon the basis of the logical con 
nection.* Unsatisfactory must be regarded the attempt to connect 
it with the preceding verse as a contrast, yet ye change, etc. ; f or 
with the following verse, supplying consider at the beginning of 
v. ; \ or to supply, Seek him, I say, ye who, etc. ; or to make it 
a gloss belonging to 6 12 , || a suggestion growing out of the endeavor 
to treat vs. 8 - 9 as original with Amos (cf. Nowack in 

7. D Donn] (g 6 TTOL&V = Sj?on (Vol.), rendering by same word as for 
(v. 8 ) ; cf. the different rendering of "jcnn (v. 8 ). Oort, on basis of <&, 
(ThT. XXV. 121 f.; so Val.). nj^s] els fyos = rbyzh (Va.), or perhaps 
which Oort substituted in 1880, but later (TkT., 1891) abandoned for 
. JJ absinthium; cf. in 6 1 2 , irixplav. V^N 1 ?] New. trxV?. in>jn] 
sg. (so Oort and Val.); S> n n *-; joined to fol. v.; Gr. -lyjn. 10. ixjtt] 

Elh. MJ .J . njwa] pi. rvaiC] g|-1MV>\rnrrPpfrpHhySph tn]lM.-iV) \. 

cf. Syr.-Hex. and Ez. 3 26 . nan] , 0., \6yov = na-y, S. prj/j.a. o^nn] , 0., 
offiov; S. afj.wfj.ov. Hoffm. 0>Dn (but v. Gun.). 11. DrD^ia] suf. 3 p. pi.; 
3J diripiebatis ; *& paraca; & ^oL^^SJS, perhaps = orDDia (Seb.; so Hal.). 
Read o?pia (so Oct., Marti) or oaoia (We., Now., Elh., Che. EB. I. 155, Lohr). 
Gr. Spc oaDD ^ir; Oort, DDDDia. Some MSS. read t for u ; ; others oanteha, 
o^DDria, arD ii o (v. de R.). ia DNSP::] 5wpa ^/cXe/crd, perhaps reading 
some form of nna for -a (Va.); so also ?B. Gr. PN^-I (cf. Dt. 24 10 ). 

* Ew., Reu., Gu., GAS., Now. ; K6. 411 f. ; Marti ; Gun. would drop v. 7 as an 
interpolation. f Jus. J Schro. i Stru. || Kue. 

V. 7 119 

orpjs] ,5 makes this and Dpyoj rel. clauses, omitting in each case the follow 
ing \ ir.n] Some MSS. of Kenn. and de R. icn; cf. Mi. 6 13 ~ 15 Zp. I 13 . 

7. 7$<?y z//w /!?//- judgment to wormwood~\ The leaders are 
especially meant, but the people are also not without guilt. The 
arraignment begun thus with the participle, a favorite form of 
expression with Amos, in impassioned speech, is continued by the 
finite verb (cf. 2 7 4 13 ). The figure is drawn from a bitter herb, 
reckoned poisonous (cf. 6 12 Je. 9 15 2^ 15 La. 3 15 - 19 Dt. 2Q 18 Pr. 5 4 
Rev. 8 11 ) by the ancients. Instead of the sweetness of justice, 
the bitterness of injustice is accorded. The very institutions 
which were intended to secure justice produce injustice (cf. La. 3 19 
Am. 6 12 ) . And cast righteousness to the ground } Righteousness, 
here meaning civil justice, is personified, and represented as an 
individual thrown down, and treated with violence and contempt, 
" trampled under foot." This is stronger than the ordinary "turn 
aside justice" (Baur) ; cf. 2 S. 8 15 Is. 59" Je. 22 3 . 10. They 
hate~\ Referring, as before, to the upper classes, who have the 
administration of justice. Him that reproveth in the gate\ i.e. 
the gateway, the place where justice was administered (cf. Dt. 22 15 
Ru. 4 lff - Ps. 12 f Pr. 3 1 23 i K. 22 10 La. 5 14 ) ; the phrase is de 
pendent upon the word translated the one who reproves, i.e. the 
prophet, or the judge, who rebuked injustice (cf. Jb. i3 15 i9 5 
Is. 29 21 ) perhaps Amos himself. The one who speaks uprightly] 
Not one who advocates an unblamable manner of life,* nor one 
who brings witnesses to prove his own integrity. f The word a &n 
is not an object accusative = one who speaks the truth (cf. Is. 
33 1 5 ) jt but an adverbial accusative (cf. Ps. i5 2 Pr. 28 18 ) and 
means sincerely, blamelessly. They abhor] A synonym of they 
hate, but stronger. || Therefore"] The mark of the second part 
of the strophe; cf. vs. 13 - 16 (also 3" 4 12 ). Because ye trample 
upon the weak] A more direct statement of the charge already 
made in vs. 7 - 10 . And take from him exactions of grain } The 
specific kind of oppression is here indicated ; the translations 
load of grain, as much as a poor man could carry on his back ;f 
great load;** tax placed on every one over twenty years of age* 

* Geb. + Now. || Hi., Ke. ** Lu. 

t Har. Ros., Hd., Dr. U Cal. 

120 AMOS 

(cf. Ex. 3o 12 16 ) ; his share* are far-fetched. (Cf. Gratz s emen 
dation; v.s.). The word has come to be a general designation 
for gift;| it was sometimes voluntary (cf. Gn. 43 34 2 S. n 8 
Je. 4O 5 ), but also sometimes involuntary (cf. 2 Ch. 24 6 " 9 Ez. 2O 40 ). 
In the latter case, as here, it was really a tax forced from the 
poor by the rich ; J something more than a euphemism for inter 
est, and called such to evade the law (Lv. 25 Dt. 23 19 ). Cf. 
Hitzig s rendering which introduces the apodosis with this clause : 
Ye shall have to take from him a present of corn, i.e. as alms. 
Houses of hewn stone ] Cf. Zp. i 13 Mi. 6 15 ; houses of exceptional 
character, for the rich. But ye shall not dwell in them} Cf. 
Dt. 28 30 Is. 65 22 Am. g u ; there will be no opportunity to dwell in 
them, because Israel is to go into exile. Vineyards of delight^ 
Cf. Ez. 23 6 - 12 - 23 ; Is. 32 12 ; the poet pictures in the most tantalizing 
manner the dire character of the doom which confronts them. 

7. DOflnn] Cf. above; the art. is used almost as a vocative, but the fol. vb. 
in the 3d pers. points rather to the relative usage, H. 4, 3/; GK. 126 b\ on 
tense force cf. Ko. 237 a. njy 1 ?] Commonly derived from fj?S = Arab. \3&, 
to revile, abominate, hence the detested herb, cf. Ges. Thes. 758. The word 
is used only figuratively in the O. T., i.e. either in comparisons (Pr. 5*, 
where it is contrasted with honey), or as a figure of apostasy (Dt. 29 17 ), or 
injustice (here and in Am. 6 12 ), or bitter grief (Je. 9 15 23 15 La. 3 15 - 19 ). 
The plant belongs to the genus Artemisium and is common in Palestine, 
many varieties of it existing there. Cf. J. Low, Aramdische Pflanzennamen, 
80 f., 401,421; Tristram, Nat. Hist, of Bible, 493. irvjn] Pf. fol. ptcp., H. 27, 
53; GK. 116^:; Dr. 117; an Aramaicized pf., GK. 72 ee. 10. iNjtt>] Stat. 
pf., H. 18. 2; cf. GK. 106^-. ij?a>a] According to the accent, the subj. of isjtr, 
i.e. those who are in the gate hate him who reproves ; but it is better to connect 
with PP31D. 13- ] Cf. = i3"r, and note the chiastic order. DTP] Adv. ace., 
H- 33, 5 ; GK. Ii8. nyrp] Impf. of frequentative action. 11. orotpn] 
Has been taken from 013, oppress, the v being introduced to give the resem 
blance of ; i3, be ashamed (Geb.) ; from DID. the tt> being a mistake of original 
copy (Jus.), or a scribal error (Va.), or a dissimilation from D13 (Gun., Oort, 
BDB. p. 143); from ^3 (>ww, behave proudly, abuse (Har., Hi.) ; from tfia 
= be ashamed (Tuch, on Gen. p. 213, cited by Ba.); from T?3, being read D3tna 
(2TU). It is ordinarily explained as a Po el inf.; but it should be read DDD13 
(v.s.~), Qal. inf. cstr., the v being a correction placed side by side with the 
letter corrected; cf. D8>cj,% Ne. u 13 , and D D:J>DJ, Ne. 7 52 ; cf. GK. 61 e. St] 

* Oort, Th T. XIV. 154. + We., Dr., BDB. 

f Har., Stru., Jus., Schro., Ros., Hi., Gun., GAS. Pu. 

V. 10 121 

^j from which this is derived, means to be low, weak. It is uncertain whether 

it is the same as the root SSt, to hang. It is probably the same as Arab. u, to 
be lozu, -vile, and perhaps Assyr. dalalu, to be humble, obedient. Hence Si means 
(i) weak, (2) lowly, humble, poor. r.NSc] Cf. Phcen. nNPD = tax, penalty; 

BOB. 673. "OJ Means grain. Is perhaps similar to Arab. -J, wheat. Usually 
derived from 112 = to purify. It is written 13 here and in Am. 8 6 Ps. y2 16 ; else 
where 13. mpp] Continuing the inf. DDDO; cf. K6. 413 d. via] GK. 96; Sta. 
187 . n>n] An abstract noun = hewing; vj3N is to be understood as pre 
ceding it; cf. Is. 9 9 i K. 6 36 ; K6. 243 b. icn] Cf. reading icn; on the noun 
used as here for adj., GK. 128^; for men in same construction, Je. 3 19 I2 10 
Ez. 26 12 Ps. io6 24 . 

12, 13, 14. In view of Israel s many sins of persecution and 
bribery, prudence would suggest silence, in order that life and 
Yahweh may still be hers. This double strophe has in the first 
part, as before, a description of Israel s wickedness, and in the 
second part a threat of punishment, viz. the death of the nation 
and abandonment by Yahweh. The first part has a reference to 
the " gate " as the forum of justice, and the second is introduced 
by "therefore." 

The authenticity of vs. 13 - 14 - and 15 has been questioned by Oort (ThT. 
XIV. 122, who suspects only v. 15 and regards 13 and 14 as belonging to 
Amos, but as originally having followed v. 20 ), Val., Now., Volz, GAS., Lohr, 
Che. (EB. I. 154), et al. Oet. grants the late origin of v. 13 , but claims 
vs. 14 * for Amos, placing them, however, after v. 24 . We. also regards v. 13 as 
interrupting the connection between v. 12 and v. 14 , being only a parenthetic 
note. Elh. inserts v. 12 between 5 11 and 2 13ff -, and vs. 13 15 between 2 16 and 
3 lf -. Marti places vs. 14f - after v. 6 , and drops v. 13 as late. The reasons for 
suspecting the passage are: (i) lack of relation to v. 12 , since a threat 
(perhaps v. 16 ) would be naturally expected to follow; (2) lack of con 
nection with v. 16 , the p 1 ? of 1G having no meaning after v. 15 ; (3) lack of 
unity within these vs. themselves, 15 " being a repetition of 14 a , 14 and 15 
being an imitation of 5 4 - 6 ; (4) the use of Sv^ cn in a technical sense as 
in Pr. io 19 Ecclus. 2O 7 ; (5) the lack of consistency between the thought 
of v. 13 and the general spirit and teaching of Amos, whose tone was bold and 
fearless, rather than of the kind to encourage silence under difficult circum 
stances ; (6) the nation, although treated as responsible, is only a remnant, 
but there is no time preceding 734 B.C. when this historical situation exists. 
It is to be conceded that the logical consecution of the passage is not as clear 
as might be expected from Amos ; but it is possible (v.i.~) to answer most, if 
not all, of these objections. If, however, these arguments are conclusive, the 

122 AMOS 

original piece is one strophe shorter, the second part of strophe 2 and the 
first part of strophe 3 being late, the original strophe 2 consisting of what is 
now strophe 2 a and strophe 3 h . 

12. DD>nNion] Read a^NEn, on account of the masc. o^cx> (We., Now., Lohr, 
Oct., Marti; cf. Elh., p. 148). 103 >npS pnx nix] <S seems to have read 
3 inpS X nix (Seb.) ; U hostes justi accipientes munus ; & .INST"? nS PP^ 
ip.ien pDD uSagS Vn^. ion lyeo D^IONI] Gr. -issn 3 UN p-n. 13. DT 1 ] 2C 
adds Njjpen Dip p. njn] <S Trovrjpwv, perhaps = o>jn (Vol., Hirscht), n arid 
D being similar in Aramaic script. 14. IDN I^ND] connects with v. 15 . 

12. Surely I know} A new strophe ; Yahweh is now repre 
sented as speaking ; however ignorant men may be, he knows (cf. 
P S - 73 11 Jb. 22 13 ). Many are your transgressions} i.e. in multi 
tudes are they commitied. And great are your sins} The repeti 
tion is, of course, poetical, yet the two words mark different kinds 
of iniquity, the first, deliberate rebellion; the second, habitual 
variation from the right. The position of the adjective in each is 
very emphatic. After making the general charges, the speaker 
introduces more specific arraignment. Persecutors of the right 
eous } Cf. 2 7 3 9 - 10 ; all the more strong because of the singular, and 
the lack of the article ; the impassioned feeling is so marked that 
the speaker passes in what follows from the second to the third 
person. Takers of bribes} Ordinarily *IED means ransom, the 
price paid for life by wealthy criminals (Ex. 2i 30 Nu. 35 31 ) ; the 
sin, if this be the meaning, consists in threatening the unprotected 
with death in order to extort from them a new ransom ; * but 
here, as in i S. i2 3 , the word means bribe given to the judge f 
(cf. inu?) . Yea the needy in the gate they thrust aside~\ Cf. 2 7 Ex. 
23 6 Dt. i6 19 24 ir . In passing to the third person, there is not 
simply a "relaxing of the tension of direct invective " (Mitchell) ; 
the speaker, as if with gesture of the hand, indicates his con 
tempt. \ The offence mentioned was not (i) making the feeble 
fickle-minded by means of legal decisions, nor (2) giving un 
just decision against the poor, and thus depriving them of their 
just rights (cf. Is. io 2 2 9 21 Mai. 3 5 Pr. i8 5 ),|| but (3) the repell 
ing of those who wished to defend their cause (cf. Is. io 2 ).^" 
13. Therefore} The mark of the second part of the double stro- 

* So here, Ew. J Ke. || Ros. 

t Ros., Hi., Ba., Or., Mit., Now., Dr, Geb. U Mit., Dr. 

V. 12-14 123 

phe. Since the prudent man at such a time is keeping silence~\ 
This general meaning for b Sltftt is to be preferred* to (i) the 
teacher, i.e. the prophet, whose function it was to rebuke evil at 
any cost| (cf. 5 lff- 7 9ff " Dn. i2 3 i K. i8 13 ), perhaps Amos him 
self; \ or (2) the official whose duty it was to restrain and punish 
crime. It includes all who might, under ordinary circumstances, 
be expected to rebuke the public iniquity. The fact is stated, 
that, at such a time, i.e. under the present circumstances, injus 
tice so prevails that speech will accomplish nothing. || There 
is no indication of reproach uttered against the prudent. The 
translation, therefore shall he who understands this time keep 
silence, for it shall be an evil time^ connecting " in that time " 
with the preceding word, erroneously refers the utterance to a 
future time rather than to the present. The whole clause is cir 
cumstantial, and as such subordinate, a construction well ex 
pressed by the conjunction since. It is surely an evil time"] A time 
which promises disaster. 14. Seek good and not evil~\ The ad 
vice has already been given to seek Yahweh (v. 4 ; cf. v. 15 Mi. 6 s ). 
The force of the imperative is not really hortatory, but conditional, 
and it implies a threat, that unless good rather than evil is sought, 
national death awaits them. That ye may live~] In other words, 
unless you seek good, a thing which you are not now doing, you 
will die politically. That so] i.e. in case ye do so ; j not, in like 
manner as,** nor "so," corresponding to Yahweh . . . 
may be with you] In the special sense of extending help and giving 
prosperity. God of Hosts ] i.e. the God who rules heaven and 
earth is able to render any and every kind of help. As ye have 
said] Israel, of course, always maintained that she was loyal to 
Yahweh. She had always regarded herself as, in a peculiar sense, 
the people of God (Je. y 10 Mi. 3"). Has her life justified the 
idea ? Unless her whole attitude changes, unless good and not 
evil is made the end of her national life, that life shall cease, and 
the much talked of fellowship of God will be lost. 

12. ":>] Not causal, but asseverative ; cf. also v. 13 . Tyv] Stat. pf. H. 18, 2; 
GK. io6g; Dr. II. Don] Position and indeterminateness indicate a de- 

* With Dat., Jus., Hd., Gun., Dr. + Ba. || Ke., We., Mit. ** Hi. 

t Dahl, Ros. Har. H Gun. ft Ke. 

124 AMOS 

pendent clause (Now., Ko. 384^), or pred. ace., and by position emphatic, Ko. 
334.*; so also wony. mx] With Tip 1 ? in appos. with subj. of lan. P" 1 "**] 
Collective. ^npS] Ptcp. in cstr., GK. 116 g. IDS] The bribe given to a 
criminal officer, as distinguished from inz , the bribe given to a civil officer in 
order to escape the punishment decreed (Hi., Now.). ^Ni] Epexegetical 
i = even. ion] Pf. of indef. past, H. 17, 3; Dr. 9; continuing a ptcp., 
H. 27, 5 3; Dr. 117; GK. 116*. 13. Sv^nn] Circ. cl., H. 45, 3^; Dr. 
165. DJ Asseverative. N>n] Copula. 14. Sx] Deprecatory, H. 23, 
rm. ; GK. 152^ g\ with jussive understood, Ko. 355 n. fPC 1 ?] On ex 
pression of purpose, Mit. Final Constructions of Biblical Hebrew ; H. 47, 
4^ (3)j GK. 165 b, c; Ko. 396 b. TPI] On use of jussive here, cf. GK. 
109 ; H. 44, 2b-, Dr. 62; Ko. 355 n. DITIDN] Pf. of indef. past, as ye 
have all along said. 

15-17. Only righteousness will avail against the calamity which 
is coming. The third and last of the double strophes does not 
at first sight seem so compact and logical as those which have 
preceded. Indeed, v. 15 (v.s.) is thought by most commentators to 
be the desired continuance of v. 14 and to have no connection with 
what follows.* In the preceding sub-sections, the prophet has 
pictured Israel s iniquity and ruin. In the first, all was dark ; in 
the second, a slight suggestion of hope was given, provided her 
method of life was changed ; in the third, the case is presented 
more strongly in the form of an exhortation, followed by the distinct 
assertion that perhaps Yahweh will be gracious, etc. There is 
seen, therefore, a gradually increasing representation of pardon, a 
thought which filled every prophet s heart, no matter how dark 
the picture which he painted. In this sub-section, as in the other, 
there occur the reference to the " gate," and the introduction of 
the conclusion by " therefore," although the logic of it here, it 
must be confessed, is not so clear as in the other case. (For 
another alternative, v.s.) 

15. 12HN . . . isjip] I p. pi. aiB . . . jn] 5> pi.; & infinitives = to do 
evil and to do good. "hw"] <& SITUS. 16. pS] Gr. J3N. ^"<N] Because of 
its anomalous position and on the authority of <&S> and seven Mss. is omitted 
by some (New., Lohr; Baumann omits the phrase ^IN . . . p 1 " 1 ) ; it is, how 
ever, probably a corruption of pns ; cf. the suggestion of GAS. to read 
^iN mrp, dropping nwax TI^N as an intrusion; but the title IJIN nirr does not 
otherwise appear in Amos. SON] Baumann, ^3S. TU " jnv SN ncDOi] con- 

* Cf. Baumann, who drops s 14 - 15 as late. 

v. i S 125 

nects 1DD21 with prec. and inserts KO! after it, thus: xal Koirerbv icai ets ei56ra5 
epTJvov. Read with U (so also Oort Em., We., Now., Or., Oct., Elh.), which 
transposes ^vS before ISDC thus : ^/ ad planctum eos qui sciunt plangere ; cf. &, 
which inserts *?x before ICDD and retains it also before >jnv. S. gives /x,Aos for 
vi j. Hal. ^a^ni(?) for ICDDI (cf. 2 13 "PC;*). This whole clause is a gloss (cf. 
Lohr, who omits ISDDI SJN SN and is followed by Now. 7Y.Z., 1901, p. 164), 
as is indicated by the awkwardness of the construction after the prec. clause, 
and the impossibility of arranging it in harmony with the structure of the 
strophe. 17. D>D-o] odois = D^-n; cf. the reading D cnb (Hoffm. ZA W. 
III. 112). -ays >:)] & = / zaz // reveal myself to perform vengeance of judg 
ment. 176 is taken by Lohr as an addition; while Baumann rejects 17a . 

15. Hate evil and love good\ Already in the preceding strophe 
a hint has been given of the possibility of pardon. The sugges 
tion made, " Seek good and not evil," is now repeated in even 
stronger form, as the condition on which pardon may be secured. 
The abstract " evil " and " good " is better than the concrete " evil 
man," "good man."* The positive command is needed to sup 
plement the negative, for to hate evil is not sufficient unless one 
seeks good.f The speaker s purpose to impress his thought by 
repetition is seen in comparing " hate " of v. 14 with " hate " of v. 10 . 
The standard of good and evil, in his mind, is conformity with 
Yahweh s will. And establish justice in the gate] In other words 
reverse the present condition of things ; \ the reference is not to 
the restoration of true worship instead of calf-worship, nor to the 
improvement of private morality, but to the execution of public 
justice. || Perhaps} Cf. Gn. i6 2 Jo. 2 14 . Even if Israel should re 
pent, the question of relief is not absolutely certain, for there are 
many contingencies ; the suffering which has been predicted may 
be necessary for the working out of great plans. A remnant of 
Joseph} Does the prophet here anticipate the doctrine of the 
remnant, " the repentant and purified few," so strongly emphasized 
by Isaiah (cf. n 11 ) and Micah (cf. 4 7 ),^[ or does he refer to the fact 
that Israel is now only a remnant (cf. f- 5 ) on account of the calami 
ties (cf. 2 K. io 32 Am. 4 - 11 ) which she has already suffered?** The 
objection ft to the latter view, that the kingdom had been restored 

* AE. t ROS. 

J Cal., Ros., Mit. (cf. vs. 5 7. 10 12 w jth u>xn; cf. the opposite irvjn, v.7). 
Geb. || We. If Cal., Ew., Mau., Ba., Pu., Ke., Mit., Dr. 

** Jus., Schro., Ros., Hi., Hd., Or., We. ft Ke. 

126 AMOS 

l,y Joash and Jeroboam II. (2 K. i3 23ff i 4 2ft - 28 ), has little weight 
from the point of view of the prophet. This difference between 
the real fact and the appearance (for, after all, the prosperity 
under Jeroboam II. was only the last upward flash of the dying 
flame) makes it unnecessary to consider this verse as a gloss added 
after the fall of Samaria.* 16. Therefore^ Refers not to a par 
ticular class, the hypocrites, of whom the prophet now speaks 
exclusively ; t nor to the whole preceding paragraph, vs. 7 - 10 ~ 12 , in 
which their sins were enumerated ; J nor to v. 13 . (The Masso- 
retic space rests upon a misconception.) After a momentary pause, 
in which opportunity is given for an indication of assent, the poet, 
following the form of utterance already adopted in the preceding 
strophes, begins for the third time the announcement of doom. 
Therefore, i.e. " because they do not do what they have just been 
exhorted to do," || because, indeed, they give no sign of doing it. 
/ will cause shouting] This is the translation of piK, suggested 
as an emendation of *:"ix (v.i.). /// all squares ] The open places 
near the gates, the market-places (cf. Je. 48 ^ Is. 3 2G i4 sl ) in which 
injustice had been substituted for justice ; there is no restriction in 
the context to the squares of Samaria. For mourning^ The shout 
will not be for joy, but rather a lamentation for the dead, accom 
panied by beating on the breast. They shall say, Woe ! Woe /] i.e. 
the mourners, who form the funeral procession, which marches 
through the streets, shall utter these words (cf. i K. 13 Je. 22 18 
34 5 Ez. 2 10 3O 2 ). The mourning company would include also 
mourning-women and flute-players (cf. Je. 9 17f 48 ^ Mat. 9 23 ).H 
And tJie husbandmen shall summon to mourning*] Cf. Je. 9 17 . This 
rendering** is to be adopted, describing the effect of the judgment 
upon the country, as distinguished from the cities and towns. 
The ordinary interpretation, viz. they (people in general) shall 
summon the husbandmen to mourning, because their rustic voices 
would be loud enough, ft or because no inhabitants of the city 
would be left from the slaughter, \\ or because the occupation of 
the husbandmen would henceforth be useless, does not so well 
accord with the context. The word " husbandmen " includes the 

* So Oort ( Th T. XIV. 122). f Cal. + Ros., Hd. Stru., Ke. || We. 
H Ha., Ke., Or., Thomson (LB. I. 145 f.) ; Van Lennep (Bible Lands, 586) ; Mit. 
** Ew., Gun. ft Hd. JJ Ros., Hd. Pu. 

V. 15-17 127 

cultivators of the soil and, as well, those who had care of cattle.* 
Ami unto wailing (cf. US) those skilled in lamentation] This 
has been added by a later hand to indicate, what the passage does 
not elsewhere specifically express, the employment of professional 
mourners ; y skilled and unskilled raise the mourning cry. J These 
were generally women (Je. 9 17f- ) ; but cf. 2 Ch. 35^ EC. i2 5 , where 
men are spoken of. 17. Yea in all vineyards ] Where, ordi 
narily, the joy is greatest (cf. Is. i6 10 Jb. 24 18 ), there will be 
mourning because of the failure of crops. The writer has now 
described the mourning of the three great divisions of the nation, 
people of the city, husbandmen, and vinedressers, the last two be 
ing distinguished from each other, and both from the first. || The 
transposition of this clause so as to follow Woe f Woe ! which G. A. 
Smith proposes, is unnecessary. When I pass through the midst of 
thee~] Laying waste the country ; an allusion to the passing through 
Egypt (Ex. ii 4 i2 12 ).^I It is universally conceded that the idea 
here is that of a punishment** which is to come upon Israel, either 
pestilence or war (cf. v. 27 6 14 ) . 

15. vr-i-n . . . lanxi . . . iNr: ] Successive imperatives, H. 23, rm. (z); 
GK. nort; Dr. 112. 1> 2] The adverbial modifier precedes the object, 
GK. 142^: ^ix] = ; N and ^ (= N <LI ) means if not, whether not, with jnv ^ 
supplied; cf. Assyr. tilai, Jo. 2 14 ; Ko. 186. prv] GK. 67 cc\ Ko. 210 d; 
here trans, taking dir. obj. (cf. Ex. 33 19 ) ; cf. Ki. (v. Ros.) who makes it 
intrans. and supplies ^ before nnx- 1 . f \w nns^ ] Indefinite = a remnant 
(GK. 127*?); cf. Dt. 22 19 i S. 4 12 . 16. TJ" |N ] Emend, for \nx; ]^, cf. 
.v = to twnng as of a bow, used of inarticulate sound, e.g. shout; while 

generally expressing the shout of joy, it is used once (in Qal) of mournful 
cries, La. 2 19 , the IHph. cause to shout is seen in Ps. 65 9 Jb. 2Q 13 , in both cases 
with the idea of rejoicing. Here the verbal idea of shouting, intentionally 
left indefinite for a moment, is later defined by the ace. ncoc. ncN] Impers., 
GK. 144^ Tr n] Only here in this form ; elsewhere ^n = vae ! of; cf. Is. I 4 
Je. 48 , etc., in the sense of threat; Is. iS 1 , of exhortation ; I K. I3 30 Is. I7 12 
Je. 22 18 , in the sense of affliction, grief, as here. In the modern Syriac 
dialect of Urmia the mourner s cry is u hu, u hu ; cf. Socin, Die neuarania- 
ischen Dialecte am Urmia- See (1882), p. 102. !N~V] Not impers. as ncx<, 

* So also in Amm., Syr., and Arab. ; cf. Assyr. ikkaru. 

t Cf. Wetzstcin in /.eitschrift /. Ethnologic, 1873, pp. 295-301. Bu. in ZAW. 
II. 26 f. and ZDPl 7 ., 1883, pp. 184 ff. ; Dr. 232 ff. 

t We., GAS. $ V. Gun. and Marti in loc. U Ew. 

H Cal., Ba., Ke., et al. ** Va., Ros., Schro., Hi., Ew., Ba., et al. 

128 AMOS 

but with -UN taken collectively for subject ; GK. 145 b ; K6. 346 m ; with S, 
cf. Gn. 3 9 Jon. 3 2 . -irs] From -UN = ^5l, dig; on form, GK. 84, No. 22 ; 

cf. Assyr. ikkaru, and \o! ; in Je. 3i 24 "nj?3 1>DJ is joined to the word ; 
in 2 Ch. 26 10 it is used with o- C-o as here. Sax] Cf. iflDC, TIJ, oa Vip. 
>nj -jjnv] On construction, GK. n6g; it is interesting to note that TIJ outside 
of this place, and Mi. 2 4 , occurs only in late literature, viz. Je. ^\&- t 
cf. r^jjipcn and niDDnn, Je. 9 16 . No sharp distinction can be made between 
MJ and nj>p ; the former was perhaps a more general term than the latter 
(Dr.). u] = when, as in Ho. n 1 Gn. 4 12 Dt. 4 25 , etc. 

10. The doom of captivity. 5 18 -6 14 . (i) A woe against 
those who pray for Yahweh s day : it is a day of judgment ; be 
cause of formal feasts and noisy songs, without justice and right 
eousness, the nation shall go into captivity, saith Yahweh (5 18 " 27 ). 
(2) A woe upon those who are careless and indifferent : because 
of the luxury, the licentiousness and the apathy of the people, 
the nation shall go into captivity, saith Yahweh (6 1 " 7 ). (3) An 
oath against the proud and self-confident Israel : because of 
this pride and bold audacity, this self-dependence and disre 
gard of justice, Israel shall be supplanted by a foreign nation, 
saith Yahweh (6 8 - 14 ). 

This poem consists of three triple strophes, each strophe of the nine con 
tains six lines. In each triple strophe, the first presents a woe (in the third, 
this woe becomes an oath) ; the second presents a phase of the wickedness 
of the situation (e.g. (i) the utter formality of worship, (2) the luxury of 
life and apathy of feeling, (3) the pride and self-confidence) ; the third 
pictures the coming captivity (e.g. (i) a captivity beyond Damascus, (2) a 
captivity at the head of the captives, (3) the complete surrender of the 
country to a foreign enemy). The symmetry of the three divisions is almost 
perfect, each beginning with a woe (or oath), each ending with saith 
Yahweh in one form or another. The logic and symmetry of this section 
are completely destroyed by Elh., who places 5 18 - 20 between 3 8 and 3 9 ; 5 21 ~ 25 
between 3 14 and 4 1 ; 5 26f - between 4 3 and 4 4 ; 6 1 - 6 between 4 11 and 4 12 ; 6 7 
between 4 12 and 4 13 ; 6 8 between 4 13 and 5 1 ; 6 9 11 between 5 3 and 5*; 6 12f - be 
tween 5 8 and 5 6 ; 6 14 between 5 6 and y 1 . Lohr does not recognize the unity 
and independence of this section, but treats it in connection with 5 1 17 . He 
arranges 5 18 -6 14 in eight strophes, consisting of 4, 10, 4, 4, 10, 10, 4, and 4 lines 
respectively. This involves the omission of 5 19 - 26 and 6 2 - 9 - 10 , the transposition 
of 6 5 to follow 6 6a and the addition of an extra line after rn 1 ?}? in ^ as well 
as before v^ini in 5 27 , and disregards the logic of the passage at some 
points. Baumann s reconstruction is still more radical. 

V. 18-27 129 

18-27. A woe upon ignorant zeal for a corrupt worship, in 
which no place is found for justice or righteousness ! A cap 
tivity beyond Damascus awaits you. The unity of this section 
(consisting of three six-line strophes) appears in (i) the outer 
form, as compared with the other sections, and (2) the thought 
which centres about the cultus. This cultus includes the great 
doctrine of "Yahweh s day" as well as a regular set of feasts, 
and offerings ; it is not wholly detached from images all of 
which are wrongly understood, and wrongly practised, and for 
this reason lead to ruin. 

It is best to regard as interpolations (i) mrp ov 03 1 ? nrnn 1 ?, v. 18 ; 
(2) BOS s 1 ? 03 sno D^J", v. 22 (y.i.}. It will be noted that in the third 
and fourth lines of each strophe the poet allows himself to prolong the 
measure, a pentameter being substituted for a trimeter evidently in order 
to lay emphasis upon the thought by increasing the details given. The fact 
that this occurs so uniformly in each strophe shows that it is intentional. 
It would be possible, of course, to make two trimeters in each case (or a 
trimeter and dimeter), the strophes having eight instead of six lines. 

18. nin^ ar] & twice in this v. : Dip p >n^nS TTiin NDV. m nnS] and 
U translate nr as a pron. : iva ri avrrj, ad quid earn vobis. nin> DV] 3J connects 
with the following, dies domini ista tenebrae, et non lux. The entire clause 
beginning with nnS bears the marks of an interpolation, for the sake of 
making clear the relation between the first and last clauses of the verse ; 
cf. Lohr, who would treat ~ns s^i y^n sin as a gloss derived from v. 200 , having 
its origin in the later insertion of v. 19 . Sin] (J| adds before it i = KO\ aim). 
19. S3 ] < etV 77775770-77 suggests rroi (Oct.). IT] (& ras x c P as O-VTOV. Lohr 
makes the v. a proverb which has crept into the text from the margin; but for 

O V V 

this there is no basis. 20. sSn] j jj_oi, making the sentence affirmative. 
nvr cr] Lohrom. ^si] Gr. Sjjsi (so Lohr, Elh.). 21. o^mjpa rvns sSi] 
(S inserts dv<ria.t, Gr. on basis of ( inserts o^nnjo here and drops it from 
v. 22 as a dittograph. 22. as o] Elh. transposes o to the beg. of v. 21 . mSiy] 

** 7 

& ]^"*^ v-; omitted as a gloss to explain nns in BDB. p. 585. DrnnjD)] 
J5 om. i, connecting the word with n*-\s. Baumann om. We. thinks that 
after mSj the apodosis to the preceding clause has fallen out (so Now., 
Lohr; but cf. Baumann; also Duhm and Marti, who treat m^>? . . . o as a 
gloss). BOS sS DD-snn aSri] May be rejected as an interpolation added 
to give an apparently greater completeness to the catalogue of offerings ; 
(5 has Kal a<j)T-r)piov(s} tirt<j>ai>elas vpuv, reading arsnc (Va., Vol.). Hirscht 
calls attention to the fact that in the nine other cases where (85 renders 
C C^ by the pi. it employs the neuter form, and suggests that <S read 
here crr^tr. & has ^omVifliV) |^ojt>o, instead of the more usual ren 

130 AMOS 

dering of D oStf, viz. | Vi\ A> | **"?. U et vota pinguium vestrorum; 
r^T? ?- Gr., on basis of (S, ^BM (so Hal.). Oct. suggests the transposition 
of this clause to follow nity. 23. pon] Gr. njipn (cf. Is. I4 11 ). T^J] <S 
dpydvwv <rou; A. vafiX&v <rov, 1& inaccurately, I^J?, so % ; 18 fyrae tuae. 
po^x xS] Probably a gloss. 24. SJPI] & jL^Jo, deriving the word from 
nSj = to uncover ; so 5J </ revelabitur, and { ^JP^. 9. dTroi/cta-^o-erat 
= nSj, /<? az/rj/ captive. 25. nnjc] j&E pi. The order of words in v. 25 
varies greatly in the Mss. of @, e.g. in <* ^XT^" no follows 131D3; @ B agrees 
with |H2C ; Tischendorf s text places ^jna" no after % and -\3iD3 after nja> 
(so &). Cf. Acts 7 42 . 26. ni3D] Read nrp (so Dozy, Die hr. zu Mekka, p. 33; 
Schmidt, /Z?Z. XIII. 8), with <g and S. ryv <nn\rt\v\ similarly > ouLsufclo 
and U tabernaculum. A. roi)s o-uo-Kiao-^oiys ; 0. r^v tipaaiv, confusing with 
nyjr (Schmidt) ; rwp (cf. Lag. Proph. Chald. 452). Cod. 196 of de R. niro 
(so also Ba.). The reading n:p is adopted by many (Schrader, SK. 1874, 
pp. 324-35, and COT. II. 142; Oort, 77; 7 1 . XIV. 142, 147 f. ; Gun., Baethgen 
.&#*. ,AW. 239; Mit., Now., Dr., Oct., BDB.), but v.i. DuoSc] @ TOU MoX6x = 
^b; A. Mo\xV; 5 >cnnSV; F Moloch deo vestro ; all taking it as name of 
an idol ; so also two codd. of de R. & psncwnD. S. 0. /3a<riX&os ITXWI . 
Ba. D Vs ?; but see Diisterdieck, SK., 1849, pp. 908-12. p-o] @ Pa.i<j>dv, a 
copyist s error of i for r. Jus., Ba., and Schmidt cite : (i) J. D. Mich. Supple 
mental, pp. 1225 ff., who adopts Kircher s explanation (Lingua Aegyptiaca resti- 
tuta, p. 49) of PH$AN = Arab. Vjn = ^nr = Saturn ; and (2) P. E. Jablonski, 
Opuscula (1806), pp. 41 ff. ( = Remphah Aegyptiorum deus, 1731), who reads 
Po^0a (cf. Complutensian, Origen), and explains it as Ro-mphah = king of 
heaven = sun. T, A. S. read p^, taking it as a proper name. 0. d/j.aijpti)<nv, 
and 5J imaginem, both deriving from fi3 (^. Muss-Arnolt, Exp^ II. 425). 
5> ^c|_^ = fix; (so also Jus., Ba., Dozy, Die Isr. zu Mekka, 33; Kue., Rel. of 
Isr. I. p. 245; Schrader, SK. 1874, pp. 324 f.; Gun., Mit., We., Gu., Now., 
BDB., Oort, Em.-, Dr., Elh., Oct.). D3>o ?x] Dozy, DDC^S (so Muss-Arnolt, 
Exp. & II. 425). Gr. suggests that UDIS may be the name of a god and that 
we should read nSx nx\ Schrader transposes X to follow DjinSx (COT. II. 
141 f.; Gun., Mit., Oort (Em.), Dr.(?), Elh., Oct.). We. om. as a gloss on 
DD^nVx. 3313] We. om. as a gloss on p^3 (so independently G. F. Moore in 
BDB., Gu., Schmidt, JBL. XIII. 10; Zeydner, Stemmen voor Waarheid en 
Vrede, 1893, PP- 613 ff.; cf. Dr.). Cf. Now., who takes D3>nbN 3313 as a gloss 
belonging before pT. ns^nSx] @T psniva. < and 5 have a different order 
from jjH& in the latter part of this v., (I = and the star of your god, Raiphan 
their images which ye made for yourselves; 5 = the star which you made 
for yourselves a god (cf. U). We. takes v. 26 as a later addition which has 
crowded out an original threat that connected closely with v. 27 (so also Now., 
Che. (EB., but see Crit. Bib.}, Lohr, Marti). 27. IDB>] We. om. (so Lohr). 

18 a. Alas /~\ Not so strong as woe, implying "commiseration, 
rather than denunciation" (Driver). For those who long for] 

V. i8 131 

Not the hypocritical Hithpolel = pretend that they desire ;* nor 
the simple Pfel = desire, with the reflexive sense, desire for them 
selves ; t but earnestly desire and expect. \ The day of Yahweh\ 
Cf. Jo. 2 2 3 14f -. The prophet does not speak to (i) those who in 
their misery and distress think that the coming of Yahweh, even 
if it brought death, would be better than their present situation ; 
nor to (2) the credulous and superstitious Israelites, who, trusting 
in their Israelitish descent, and mindful of promises made to their 
ancestors, but forgetful of the obedience on which the promises 
were based, and of their own conduct which was the occasion 
of the evil situation, blindly imagine that Yahweh s day can bring 
only good ; || nor to (3) the bold and reckless sceptics who did 
not believe that the day would ever come, and thus mocked the 
suggestions by the prophet to this effect (cf. Is. 5 19 Je. i7 15 Ez. 
i2 22 ).^[ He has in mind, rather, (4) the great multitude, who 
think that without reference to their conduct, or the attitude of 
their mind, this "coming day" will be a "cure-all" for every 
woe.** It does not, however, follow from this, as Wellhausen 
contends, that Amos would have " protested against the Messianic 
belief, if he had known of it." 

Amos found a well-established doctrine of the day of Yahweh cherished 
among the people. They looked forward to it as a day when Yahweh would 
give them triumphant victory over all their enemies and thereby establish 
himself as supreme among the gods. This hope grew out of their monolatrous 
conception of Yahweh and their belief in their own nation as destined to 
become the great and powerful representative of Yahweh among the nations, 
and was fostered by the long-continued hostilities between Israel and her 
neighbors, in which Israel was not always victorious. The day must come, 
therefore, in which Yahweh would gloriously vindicate himself and his people 
by overthrowing all his foes and making Israel supreme. But the idea as 
expressed by Amos was, in one essential point at least, directly contrary to 
the prevailing thought ; instead of Israel triumphing over her enemies on that 
day, she is herself to be humiliated, and that by Yahweh himself. This new 
conception of the day was the direct outcome of Amos s new conception of 
Yahweh as an ethical God, whose chief requirement of his people was right 
eousness. Amos felt that in view of the moral corruption of Israel it was 
inevitable that Yahweh would punish her and thus vindicate his own righteous- 

* Har., citing I VBP, Jos. 9 4 ; n^nrn, i K. I4 2 ; rsnn% i K. 20 38 . 
t Pu. f Mit. ! + GAS. Os., cf. Cal. || Geb., Ba. 

U Har., Dathe, Jus,, Ros., New., Ew. ** We. 

132 AMOS 

ness in the sight of the world. Other nations, too, were to be punished, not, 
however, as enemies of Israel, but as transgressors of the moral law. The 
new way thus marked out by Amos was trodden by all his successors. 
The development of the idea kept pace with the growth of the conception 
of Yahweh, and further modifications through successive periods were caused 
by the ever changing historical and social environment. For a systematic 
historical treatment of this subject see J. M. P. Smith, "The Day of Yahweh," 
AJTh. V. (1901), 505-33. Other material will be found in R. H. Charles, 
A Critical History of the Doctrine of a Future Life, etc. (1899), 80-137; and 
the article, " Eschatology of the Apocryphal and Apocalyptic Literature," 
DB.; A. B. Davidson, art. " Eschatology of the O. T.," DB.; Marti, Gesch. 
der Isr. Religion, 180-6; WRS. Proph. 131 ff. 397 ff. 

18 b. What have ye to do with it ?~\ This is plainly an interpola 
tion, explaining the m of the preceding line, what concern is it 
of yours ? What good will it do you ? (cf. Gn. 2 y 46 ) . Yahweh s 
day is a day of darkness and not light } It is better thus to 
connect " DV with what follows.* The darkness is figurative, 
i.e. ruin, calamity, but it is also physical or literal, as appears 
from the following comparisons. It remained for Joel, in later 
days, to emphasize still more strongly the literal side (cf. Jo. i 15 
2 1 3 4 - 14 ) , and represent nature itself as sharing in the gloom ; f 
cf. also Is. s 30 S- 2 9 2 58* 5 9 9 Je. i 3 16 . 19. As when one flees 
from a lion and a bear meets him~\ The comparison is singularly 
appropriate in view of the occupation of Amos, for it was an 
everyday experience ; cf. Is. 24 18 . The lion] Cf. i S. 1 7 34 La. 3. 

The bear~\ Once common and dangerous, although at present 
found only in the northern districts (cf. i S. i y 34 2 K. 2 24 La. 3) . 

r S oes i n t the house . . . and a serpent bites him] The coming 
home has no connection with the lion and bear episodes, as, for 
example, because of the terror and exhaustion which would follow 
such an encounter ; J it is rather the sudden coming of misfortune 
when and where it would be least expected. The serpent^ 
Probably an adder hidden in a crevice. Strange enough is the 
tendency of ancient commentators to refer the animals in these 
comparisons to particular individuals, e.g. the lion to Nebuchad 
nezzar, || Pul ;1[ the bear to the Persians,** Tiglathpileser,^[ Ahasu- 
erus ; || the serpent to Shalmaneser,^" Alexander the Great, or 

* So Ros., Schro.; on the contrary, Mit., GAS., Marti. f Schro., Ba. 

I Hi., Mit. Ros., Dr., eta/. || Jer. H Geb., Har. ** Abar. 

v. i8-2i 133 

Antiochus Epiphanes.* The thought is not climactic, a grada 
tion being intended,! but is general, and pictures a situation from 
which there is no escape ; cf. " incidit in Scyllam, qui vult vitare 
Charybdim." $ 20. Deep darkness without any brightness in it~\ 
After repeating the very words of v. 18 , changed for greater forceful- 
ness into the form of a question (perhaps Marti is right in treating 
v. 20 " as a gloss on v. 18 , and joining v. 205 to 18 ), the prophet employs 
another phrase in which still stronger words are used for darkness 
and light, viz. deep darkness, gloom, a darkness which grows greater 
and greater, without even a ray of light (cf. Is. 50, and for the 
opposite, Is. 9 1 ). 21. I hate, I despise~} Cf. Is. i 14 Dt. i6 22 Ps. n 5 , 
and likewise Je. 6 30 y 29 . The prophet represents Yahweh as entirely 
out of sympathy with the religious worship, and, indeed, hostile to 
it. It is the cultus which seems to the prophet to be the occa 
sion of all trouble, since to this may be charged " the illusion and 
the obstinacy "of the people. Your fea sts~\ Such festal gather 
ings as the passover (i K. i2 32 ) and the feast of tents (i K. 8 2 ), 
not sacrifices ; religious, not profane. Under this name were 
included the three annual festivals (Ex. 23" 34 23 ; cf. Dt. i6 16 ). 
The name has its origin not in the dancing (JJn) which was a 
feature of the feasts, but in the pilgrimage which was involved. || 
These festivals are hated by Yahweh (cf. Is. i 10 " 15 ), not because 
they failed to comply with certain prescribed rules or regulations 
as to place ; ^[ nor because of calf-worship ; ** nor because they 
were external, not including worship of the heart,ft for, up to 
this time, emphasis had not been placed on heart-worship ; but 
because they constituted a cultus which did not truly represent 
Yahweh, and must be abandoned, if true ideas of Yahweh were to 
prevail. $$ / will not smell~\ A relic of the old superstition that 
the god actually smelled the savor of the offering (Gn. 8 21 Ex. 2Q 41 
30 38 ) . The term is used as one of several to express delight in, 
or acceptance of, a sacrifice (Lv. 26 31 Is. n 3 ) ; cf. nantf (5 22 ). 

* Jer. f Mil. J Jus., Ros., Schro. Hi. 

|| No. ZDMG. XLT. 719; We. SV. III. 106, 165; WRS. Proph. Lect. II. 
note 6 ; Dr. Sam. 173 ; SS. 184-5 \ BDB. On Hebrew feasts in general see 
the literature cited in my Constructive Studies in the Priestly Element in the Old 
Testament (1902), pp. 104-6. 

H Cal., Va. * Pu.. ft Jus., Ros., Schro., Hd., Ke., Ba. ++ We. 

134 AMOS 

While the old realistic idea has doubtless largely disappeared, the 
thought was originally like that which appears in the Babylonian 
story of the Deluge : * 

" A peace-offering I made upon the height of the mountain; 
Each time I placed seven censers, 

Poured into them calmus, cedarvvood and sweet-smelling . . . 
The gods inhaled the savor ; 
Yea, the goch inhaled the sweet savor ; 
The gods gathered like flies around the sacrificer." 

Your festivals } Nowhere else does the plural of this wordf occur. 
The singular means an assembly, especially of a religious character, 
is used as a synonym of Jin, and designates especially the festival 
of the seventh day of the passover (Dt. i6 8 ) and the eighth day of 
the Feast of Tabernacles (Lv. 23^ Nu. 29^2 Ch.; 9 ). j It contains 
the idea of holiday, \ not that of solemn assembly \\ cf. 2 K. lo 20 
i S. i 13 Jo. i 14 . The usage here, as in Is. i 13 , is general. 22. For, 
although ye offer] This is better than yea, if, ^ or simply although ; ** 
cf. the suggestion that the first line of v. 22 is to be taken as apod- 
osis of IfHK, v. 21 .tf Your burnt- offerings and meal-offerings"\ 
These words are not to be separated, {J but, taken together, are 
the object, not of nrix, but of ^i?n. || || The use of the suffix 
with mnafc and not with rfho does not depend upon the fact 
that the former was offered regularly morning and evening, while 
the latter had no fixed rule ;^|^f nor is it an inconsistency in the 
use of the suffix ; *** the two words form one idea, and the suffix, 
attached to the second, modifies the whole expression (?>.* .). The 
connective, and, is not even* on the ground that the nrua was 
more important than the nbiB. Cf. Wellhausen and Nowack, who 
understand that after mbtf there originally stood an apodosis which 
has fallen out. Perhaps with BDB. (s.v. HTOfc) Jtbu might be 
taken as a gloss explaining itHK. Meal- offerings ] Originally a 
gift, or offering of any kind (Gn. 32 13 43" i S. io 27 ), but as other 

* V. KA T* p. 550 ; BW.IU. 117. f rnxj?. 

J Cf. its use in later times of the Feast of Weeks ; Jos. Ant. III. 10, 6 (= Ao-apfla), 
and in the Mishnah. 

Mit. 11 Ew. ft Elh. p. 155. $ Hes. 

|| Cf. Ke. ** New., GAS. }} Ros. |||| So most comm 

flit So Hi. *** We., Now. ; Hal. om. the suffix with ninjo. 

v. 21-24 i35 

sacrifices became more definitely indicated, in later usage, and 
especially in P, applied only to unbloody or vegetable offerings. 
The peace-offerings of your failings I will not regard^ This 
may be regarded as an interpolation, dating from the time when 
specific detail must be given regardless of monotony. It is 
distinctly superfluous and anti-climactic. The translation peace- 
offerings * (only here in the singular) is preferable to thank- 
offering,^ or votive offering^ or meal-offering. The fuller form is 
B obP PQT (Lv. 3 1 6 , etc.). 23. Take away from me the noise of 
thy songs ] The verb is singular, showing the elevation and austerity 
of the language in keeping with the thought. || Noise, or clashing, 
is kindred to tumult^ and preferable ** to multitude, ff The ob 
jection is not to the musical drawl in worship, \\ but to the entire 
worship, of which the music was a part. The parallelism shows 
that more was meant than merely the noise of the people s throng 
flowing like great waters (Is. i7 12 ). We know little or nothing 
of the music of Amos s period. And the melody of thy lyres ] 
Only here is mai used of instrumental rather than vocal music 
(Ps. 8i 2 98 5 Is. 5 1 3 ). The lyre or harp (also called psaltery) with 
as many as ten strings (Ps. 33*) was used in profane music (Is. 5 12 
I4 11 Am. 6 5 ; cf. Gratz, Psalmen, I. 66), but likewise in sacred 
music (2 S. 6 5 Ps. 33 2 i44 9 ). || || This passage testifies to the early 
use of songs and music at the sacrifice f f (cf. 8 10 Is. 3o 32 ) ; but it is 
not so clear that this description evidences close connection of 
the ritual in Samaria with that in Jerusalem.*** I will not hear] 
These words, taken separately by Calvin, are evidently an addition 
prompted by the desire to complete the parallelism. ttt w i tn 
these omitted the line would read, Remove from me the noise of thy 
songs and the melody of thy lyres, a strong pentameter. 24. Let 
justice roll as waters~\ Cf. Is. i 10 " 17 . Yahweh wishes not the swelling 
sound of pilgrimages, nor that of liturgy, but rather that of judg 
ment. We have here not a threat, \\\ that Yahweh in his wrath 

* ffi; Ros., SS. (s.v.). f Jos., Ew., Ke., GAS., et a!. t Mich. 

Di. on Lv. 3, Now. Arch. II. 211. || Ew. U Jer. ** Geb., Ros., Mit. 
ttCal. it Or. Hoffm. ZAW. III. 112. 

(HI Cf. the excellent essay, " Music of the Ancient Hebrews," in The Book of 
Psalms (SBONT.}, 217-34. 1HI So We. *** Ke. 

ftt On the other hand, Or., Gu. JJJ Os., New., Hi., Ke. 

1 36 AMOS 

will send judgment like a swiftly rolling, impetuous stream ; nor 
a prediction * of the righteousness of the Messiah, nor an answer 
to certain hypocrites that Yahweh will give free course to (i.e. 
bless) their righteousness, if it be sincere ;f nor an assertion that 
by their own efforts alone this ideal state can be secured ; J but 
an exhortation to give up the old idea of religion, viz. a cultus, 
and adopt the new, viz. justice and righteous living. Justice . . . 
righteousness^ That is as practised among men in life ; it is not 
the divine justice executed against men as in Is. IO 22 ; cf. Is. 51* 
59 17 63*. || As waters . . . as an ever-flowing stream~\ The on 
ward, unobstructed flow of a mighty mass of waters is, indeed, an 
admirable figure with which to describe the ideal progress of justice 
and righteousness. The " stream " was at the rainy season a tor 
rent, at other times a small brook or even merely the dry bed of a 
stream. But the stream, to fit the figure, must be never-failing, 
ever-flowing. 25. Was it (only} sacrifices and offerings that ye 
brought me in the wilderness during forty years~\ Interpretations 
have greatly varied ; according as they have represented Israel 
during this period, offering (i) idolatrous sacrifice to Yahweh ; f 
(2) sacrifice acceptable in form, but not continuous because of 
lack of animals ;^[ (3) required sacrifices, but no freewill-offer 
ings ; ** (4) sacrifices to idols, but not to Yahweh ; ft (5) sacrifice 
accompanied (v. 26 ) by idol-worship ; \\ (6) few sacrifices compared 
with their many rebellions ; (7) no sacrifices at all ; || || (8) sacri 
fices to be sure, but also something else, viz. " true worship of the 
heart and righteousness, public and private." f f This rendering 
places the emphasis in its proper place and does not compel Amos 
to say that there were no sacrifices or offerings in the wilderness. 
The n of DTon has been taken as the article,*** as n interrogative 
expecting an affirmative answer ; fff as n interrogative expecting a 
negative answer. \\\ The real meaning is this : In the period of 
the wandering, " the golden age," ye brought me something more 

* Schegg. f Cal. 1 Ew. 

Har., Mau., Hd., Pu., Or., Gun., We., Mit., GAS., Dr. || Ke. H Geb. 

** Jus. -rt Jer., Os., Pu., Or. JJ Va., Ros., Mau. $$ Schro. 

Jill Hi., Ew., Ba., We., Mit., GAS., Dr., Marti. ftt Hd. 

UH Macdonald, JDL. XVII I. 214 f. JJJ So most recent comm. 

*** Dahl, Stru., Mau. 

V. 24-26 137 

than sacrifices (cf. Je. y 22 ) ; and the logical connection is with the 
following verse and not with the preceding, as appears from the 
strophic structure, and from the evident connection between 
Dntwn (v. 25 ), and DnKtWi (v. 26 ; v.i.). Forty years] The same tradi 
tion concerning the sojourn in the wilderness as that furnished by 
the Hexateuch. 26. But now ye lift up] This has been taken 
as (i) a charge of idolatry against the time of the wandering in 
the wilderness* (= and ye lifted up) ; but what has the prophet s 
thought here to do with idolatry in the time of the wilderness ? 
(2) as a question coordinate with and parallel to the preceding, 
Did ye carry about the tabernacle of your king, etc. ; f (3) as a 
charge of idolatry for the entire period from the wandering to the 
days of Amos, J and indeed such a charge would have been true ; 
cf. Jos. 2 4 14 Ex. 32 4 " 8 - 19 Ju. iy 4f - i S. i9 13 i K. I2 25 - 33 ; (4) as an 
accusation against the contemporaries of Amos (and ye lift up) ; 
(5) as a prediction (and ye shall lift up) of a time when they 
shall carry their idols on their backs into captivity ; || and (6) as 
a command (the waw consecutive and perfect being treated as 
an imperative) to take up their idols and go into captivity ; ^[ cf. 
Is. chap. 2. The 1 would be conjunctive in (i) and (2), adversative 
in (3) and (4), consecutive in (5) and (6). The shrine of your 
king and the image of your God which ye have made for yourselves"] 
This translation (i) is based upon a text which treats (a) 2212 as 
a gloss explaining fl 3, and having its origin at a time when the 
latter had come to be pronounced |V3 and treated as the name of 
a deity (z>.j.) ; (b) DS ttbi as a gloss explaining DSVl^K, occa 
sioned by the phrase Drb DlTtfy irx (v.s.) ; and restores map to 
n?D (v.s.) ; (2) accepts the proposition that according to the 
context Amos has in mind an impure and corrupt worship, in 
other words, a worship which included not only a wealth of sacri 
ficial offerings in number and variety, together with extravagant 
and debauching sacrificial banquets, but also pretentious proces 
sions in which the sacred symbols of Yahweh were carried about 
with a view to gaining his favor ; (3) rejects the proposition that 

* Os., Dathe, Jus., Hes., Ba., Hi., Ke., Pu. r Bu. (AW. of 7sr., 68). 

t Schmidt, JDL. XIII. 1-15. Geb., Har. 

Tiele (Gesch. d. Relig. im Altertum, I. 336). 

II Ew., Or., Val., GAS., Dr. ; Peters, Ilebr. I. 242 f. 11 Mit. 

138 AMOS 

idolatry was intended, whether this was the worship of Assyrian 
gods,* viz. Sakkut (=Adar) and Kewan (= Saturn), including 
the view which would make "jbia and chx proper names, viz. 
Moloch (or Milcom) and Selem ; | or Phoenician gods, viz. Koun 
and Keiwan;\ (4) avoids the conjecture, occasioned by the 
difficulty of ascribing the worship of Assyrian gods to Amos s time, 
that the whole is either very late, i.e. after 722 B.C., or a late re 
daction of an earlier text which had become unintelligible (v.s.) ; 
(5) involves the treatment of DnKlMi suggested in (4), p. 137. 
The prophet has in mind the times of the wandering in the wilder 
ness, times when Israel was treated with special favor by Yahweh, 
a favor which was evidently secured in some other way than by 
sacrifices and processions. These were the times which antedated 
the introduction of Canaanitish impurity into the Yahweh worship. 
His face is set severely against recognizing this sort of thing as 
pleasing to Yahweh. This kind of worship will not merely fail to 
turn away his anger; it is, in itself, an occasion of displeasure. 
The condition of heart and mind which it represents is sufficient 
evidence that only punishment of the severest character will meet 
the exigencies of the situation. 27. Beyond Damascus ] This 
phrase in earlier days represented the climax of judgment, as did 
Babylon in later days. Cf. Acts 7 43 in which Stephen actually 
substitutes Babylon for Damascus. 

18. MH] Used at times as a particle of denunciation and threatening; cf. 
Is. I 24 ^8. 11. 18. 20. 21. 22 } e t c> . b u t a l so as expressing commiseration and grief; 
cf. I K. i3 30 Is. 3- n 6 5 24 16 . s lsrsn] Art. with ptcp. = rel. cl. with its 
antecedent; H. 4, 3/; K6. 411 a. Hithp. = an intensified Pi el (cf. BDB.) 
= to long after presumptuously; v. Je. I7 16 . n : T n^] On d. f. firm., cf. GK. 
20 k and on d. f. conj., GK. 20 c ; on force of n-, K6. 42/3 = adverb, giving 
"directness and force" to the question (BDB.); contra Ros., who regards it 
as either obj. of vb. desire understood, or as subj. of some phrase such as 
come into your mind. nix X s ] x^ with noun; cf. GK. 152^/5 more emphatic 
than r*; cf. Ex. 4 10 Am. 6 13 7 14 Je. 2 11 , etc. 19. Dir] Freq.; fol. by 
four pfs. with waw cons., GK. 112 /, K6. 367 ;. - run . . . jjnn . . . >-\xn] 
Art. denoting an individual not definitely known, GK. 126^, r\ K6. 3^- 
man] Art. = his ; K6. 299 <?. 20. njj X K ] x% rather than px, as in v. 18 . 

* So Schra. COT. II. 141 f.; We., Mit., Dr., Che., Now., Torrey, BDB., Muss- 
Arnolt, Marti, et al. 

t Baethgen (Sem. Rel. 239). J Tiele, Rev. de r Hist. d. Rel. III. 211. 

V. 26-27 139 

21. \-,wt?] Slat, pf., GK. 106^-. Note asyndeton, GK. 154 a, N. ; K6. 370 , h. 

2 nns] Cf. Ex. 3O 38 Lv. 26 31 Is. 1 1 8 , only other cases where this vb. is fol 
lowed by a of interest (cf. K6. 212 <r). wmsv] D. f. dirimens, GK. 20 h. 

22. CN -o] = For even */ (K6. 372^); Dr., 143, treats it as an imaginary 
condition introduced by CN taking imperf. in both protasis and apodosis. 
CJ_] With the second of two nouns which, together, form one idea, cf. 2 S. 23 5 . 
Muss-Arnolt (Exp.^ II. 414, N. 3) calls attention to the frequency of this con 
struction in Assyrian; e.g. Tig. Pil. I., Prism Inscr. col. I. 71, narkabati u um- 
ma-ni-te-ia (my chariots and my warriors), II. 6, III. 44, etc. For the opposite 
construction in which the suffix is used with the first of a series of nouns and 
omitted with succeeding ones, v. Ex. I5 2 ; cf. Assurbanipal, Annals,V. 59 ff.; 
cf. GK. 135 m. 2 s i] On the nature of this offering, cf. Now., Arch. II. 21 1 f. 
Elsewhere n^a is always pi. ; it is used sometimes with mi preceding it (eg. 
Ex. 24 i S. ii 15 ), and sometimes without rat as here (e.g. Nu. I5 8 I S. 13). It 
is not unlikely that the pi. cstr. should be read here; the "> might easily be lost 
sight of between two ~ s. 3DWT. ] Cf. Is. I 11 . Assyr. niaru = fat; Ar. c yX* 

= be digestible. The word is used generally, as here, of sacrificial animals, 
e.g. Ez. 39 18 . 24. Ti] For advers. % cf. K6. 360 c. Perles, Analekten, 
p. 75, following We., proposes to connect with S J = spring and to translate 
spring up, or bubble forth. Bare] Cf. Batten, JBL. XI. 206-10, on usage of 
this word; here evidently in the sense of justice. 26. D.-iNtr;i] GK. 112.* 
takes the pf. with waw cons, as fut. (yea, ye shall take it up} and H2rr as 
frequentative (cf. Ew., Oct., p. 71); Dr. 119 a treats it as pf. with waw cons, 
not attached to a preceding impf. but still retaining future force; K6. 368 , 
emphatic copula going back to v. 24 , and resuming the thought after the inter 
ruption of the parenthetical question in v. 26 ; cf. Am. 2 12a ; Che. (EB.}, the 
waw is simply waw-explic. so often prefixed to glosses; cf. Is. 452. ... r;p] 
That this was the original pointing is supported by (@> and 2., although the 
next word Mw\6x makes (, as a whole, interpret the passage of idolatry 
rather than impure worship; in its favor are also JSU (v.s.}. Under the 
influence of the anti-idolatrous feeling, and at an early time, although after 
the coming in of Assyrian ideas (Is. 2 6 ~ 8 ), the striking resemblance of the 
Assyrian SAG-KUD, i.e. Ninib, the Assyrian god of war (cf. nj2 rrD, 2 K. I7 30 , 
the name of a god; Dl. Pa. 215 f.), which name with the determinative kak- 
>kz = star (II. R. 32, 25; COT. II. 141 f.; Tiele, Bab.-Ass. Gesch. 528 f.; 
Sayce, Hib. Lectures, pp. 7, 151-154), as suggested by Jules Oppert, means the 
planet Saturn, led to a modification of the original n?D to r-rp, the change 
from a to I being perhaps suggested by the form of VP ^S abomination (words 
denoting idolatry and idols frequently take the ground-form qittul, e.g. 
D^ITJ, i^VO?; so Ba. ; Baudissin, Sem. Rel. I. 95 f.; No. Gott. Gelehrt. Anzeigen 
(1884) II. 1022; Torrey, JBL. XIII. 61 f.; Che. Exp? V. 43; Muss- 
Arnolt, Exp^ II. 421 f.), or due to a natural attenuation (v.i.~). p>?] Espe 
cially interesting are IT which makes it a common noun, viz. imaginem (as 
adopted above), and 5> jvr, the pronunciation which expressed the later in- 

140 AMOS 

terpretation involved in the reference to Assyrian gods. For reference to the 
use of this word in Babyl. texts, cf. Jensen, JCosmologie, in f. For formation 
as a common noun, cf. j-vx (Ez. 39 15 ); Sta. 228. In connection with this 
interpretation may be noted (i) the suggestion of Muss-Arnolt (Expf> II. 
414-28), who transposes v. 25 , placing it between vs. 23 and 24 , omits v. 26 as 
a marginal gloss, emending it as follows: x ui DDnSx 3313 p>3~rNi ODviSs , 
translating: And now ye worship Ninib as your decider (or king), and even 
as your elohim ; and the star Saturn, as your idol which, etc. He takes Ntfj 
here in the sense of the Assyr. nasu gatd = lift up the hands = pray to, wor 
ship; and T?D as equivalent to the Assyr. mal(i)ku which is applied to 
Ninib and other gods; and accounts for the selection of these names from 
the many Assyrian gods by the fact that the star Kaimanu, the star of the god 
Ninib, is spoken of as the star of justice and righteousness (kakkab kettu u 
me-sar, II. R. 49, No. 3, 41), hence was chosen with reference to the thought 
of v. 24 . (2) The opinion of Che. that the "proof of the Assyriological ex 
planation is so nearly complete that we ought not to hesitate to accept it " 
(ExpJ* V. 42-44; abandoned, however, in Crit. Bib. in favor of a Jerahme- 
elite explanation) ; but the cultus here designated (that of Sakkuth and 
Kaiwan) was not known in Israel until after 722 B.C. (cf. 2 K. ly 30 ). An 
insertion of this kind is seen perhaps in Is. io 4 . (3) The suggestion of 
Baethgen {Sent. Rel. 239) that there are four proper names of deities, viz. Sak- 
kut, Kaiwan, Moloch, Selem. (4) The suggestion of G. A. Barton {Oriental 
Studies, Philadelphia, 1894) that Amos refers to a cultus that was at least 
probably present in his own day; since in one of the El-Amarna letters from 
Jerusalem mention is made of a city Beth-Ninib, an evidence of the worship 
of Ninib, or Saturn, in Palestine. (5) The suggestion of Tiele (Rev. d. Fhist. 
d. rel. III. 211), who makes these divinities purely Phoenician. (6) The 
objection to the interpretation which makes the prophet refer to the carrying 
into exile, by Israel, of Assyrian gods, that, as a matter of fact, the victors 
would carry off the idols of the vanquished nations (We.; cf. Hi.). (7) The 
reading of Haupt, ZA. II. 266, 281 f., j? (for frxr>), the Hebrew form of the 
Babyl. name Ka am&nu. (8) The opinion that Sakkuth and Kaiwan are per 
haps two names for the same god; since Sakkuth is an ideographic writing 
for the god Ninib, and Ninib seems to be the god of the planet Saturn 
( = Kaiwanu), and Sak-kut and Kaiwanu are associated, as here, in the 
Shurpu tablets; cf. IV. R. 52, col. 4, 1. 9; and Zimmern, Beitr. zur Kenntnis 
der Bab. Rel. (1896), p. io, 1. 179 (so R. W. Rogers, EB. I. 749; Muss- 
Arnolt, Exp? II. 414-28). (9) The carrying of images in procession among 
the Hebrews is not at all improbable in view of {d} the references to the 
carrying of the ark in the wilderness, around Jericho (Jos. 6), and into battle 
(as at Gilboa) ; (3) the same custom among the Assyrians, as at the New 
Year s procession (cf. Jastrow, Rel. of Bab. and Assyr. 679; C. J. Ball, Light 
from the East, 173); and (f) among the Egyptians (cf. Herodotus: "The 
image being in a small temple of gilt wood, they carry out on the previous day 
to another sacred habitation"; quoted by Hd. p. 159). (io) The designa- 

VI. 1-7 141 

tion of Yahweh as Y?n occurs also in Je. 48 15 5 1 57 Dt. 33 5 Ps. 5 8 lo 16 29 iu ; 
and, as Elh. suggests, Israelites do not apply the term to the gods of for 
eigners, (u) The sugg. of K6. II. i. 151, that the pointing p>r is intended to 
suggest PD, as something established, firm. (12) The explanation of Schmidt, 
who regards r~p and p3 as the original readings, but accounts for fJl^T by 
supposing that at a later time nssSo came to be read ai^r, that this suggested 
the reading \v~, and that this in turn gave rise to the pointing rro, the Pal 
estinian equivalent for P-irp, a being attenuated as in Rimmon (= Ramma n) 
and Tiglathpileser (= Tukulti-apal-e-sarra). (13) The suggestion of Hal. 
that three idols of Aramaean origin are mentioned, viz. nuD, the Aramaean 
name of Nabu, which was something like n^p, the Zex^s of Hesychius; 
po = Saturn; and 3313 = Venus (Aram. Nnaaw) ; the translation being "And 
you shall carry Sakwe, your king, and Kaiwan and Kokab, your gods, the 
images which, etc." 27. S ns^nn] Is a circumlocution for the st. cstr.; K6. 
28i/; BDB.; cf. Je. 22 19 Gn. 35 21 . 

VI. 1-7. A woe upon reckless and indifferent Samaria, who 
devotes herself to enervating luxury of every kind, in food and 
drink, home-life and banquets, but forgets the danger which 
threatens the country ! She shall herself lead the captives who are 
soon to be dragged away. 

The unity of this section (the second section of three six-line strophes) is 
seen in (i) the outer form, and (2) the single thought which it presents, viz. 
the sinful luxury of the nation (v. 2 , pass over to Calneh, etc., is a later inser 
tion, ??.*.). The structure of the section is characterized by the constant re 
currence of the ptcp. with the article, followed by a finite vb. in cases in 
which it is desirous to prolong the thought. Each of the couplets (except 
the ninth) presents a single characteristic of the nation, viz. (i) recklessness, 
(2) conceit, (3) procrastination, (4) luxury, (5) gluttony, (6) enervation, 
(7) drunkenness, (8) hardness; therefore (9) captivity. 

1. irjjNS>n] <J| rots eov0evovcriv = D^s^n, with Aramaic force (Bauer) or 
D Nr&n; cf. Zc. I 15 , where the same word was unknown to @ translators 
(Vol.); j \ * " ^i == <l P^^ n (Seb.) ; 3J qui opulenti estis; A. /caratrTra- 
TaXcDires ; 6. evOrjvovvTes. Gr. D^JjNStP. P xa] Che. nnnrj (JQR. X. 573); 
Co. {Einl?) suspects genuineness (cf. Now., Volz, Lohr, Marti). n^N-i ->3f>j 
DMjn] (JjJ direr pvyrjcrav (= lopJ Vol.; Schleus. fol. Dru. corrects to aireTpvirt)- 
<rav; cf. Arabic) dpxfa tQvuv. & ^^p = 3i?j (Seb.) or arij (Hal.); F 
optimates ; 2. oi d)vo/j.acr/j.{voi tiri rots apxTYOis TU>I> tdvuv ; 6. ot firfK\-r)0T)<Tav 
dpxa- iOL TUV tdv&v; hence Gr. and Che. suggest D io,ij.-i, but this is unneces 
sary since apj in Ni. means practically the same thing; cf. Nu. i 17 i Ch. i6 41 
2 Ch. 28 15 , etc.; in this case >3pj should be read oopjn = they who are desig- 

142 AMOS 

nated, or designate themselves, as the first, etc. This is supported by (i) 0., S.; 
(2) the grammatical consistency which it furnishes with the use of the ptcp. 
fol. by a finite vb. throughout the entire passage; (3) the fact that, as Lagarde 
has shown, the final a of the pi. was not written in original Mss. Torrey s read 
ing (JBL. XIII. 62 f.) iflpj (based on (5, though uses it in another sense), 
an imv. (to be translated, "make the round of the foremost nations and come 
to them, house of Israel ! Pass over to Calneh, etc.") to be connected logi 
cally with v. 2 , is suggestive but fails to relieve the difficulty, since it looks to 
the preservation of v. 2 as a part of the original text. Hal. op; = Pronounce 
(the names of). SNT^ nu an 1 ? ixoi] /cat el<rr)\6oi> avroi, connecting okos 
Tov Io-parjX with the following v.; Jo *.. ^ V Q = -nn (Seb.(?)); U ingredientes 

pompatice do mum Israel; 3T pasnpn pn Szn. Che., cnS 1312 {JQR. X. 573), 
but this means nothing. The reading i?n (fol. Jo" ) is in close sympathy with 
the context, and is supported (i) on the side of the construction by Jos. 8 2 - 1>7 
ii 14 Dt. 2 35 3"; (2) as a charge against the rulers by Is. 312.14.15 IO 2. c f t 
Ez. 34 10 - 22 Am. 2 6ff - 4 1 5 12ff - (6 3 ). The reading Ssis" nos nSiro (Grimme, 
ZDMG., 1897, p. 696), while ingenious, contributes nothing; much more 
plausible is the reading c^-ixrn (cf. 2 K. 24 15 ) " und zu deren Vorderesten 
das Haus Israel gehort " (Hirscht). Oct. suggests either Sxia ma <|L >>a\ or 
tt" rnaa C"iQD) Q^Naj; Gr. suggests -i:?\ Hal. -is-a-i. 2. njS^] Trdi/res ; 
S ^I^a. nan non] @ E/xa^ f Paj8j8(. -nil] <5 adds iKeWev. rj] Hal. ai. 
Dents 1 ?!)] @ d\Xo0!y\a>j , as usual. a^avjn] S5J have superlative, taking rt 
as the article. The whole v. is a later insertion (so Schra., Bickell in COT., 
We., Now., Lohr, Oct., Marti; cf. GAS., and Peters, Hebr. II. 175, who 
suggests that Amos may have been still alive in 711 B.C.), as appears (i) from 
the different form of the v. as compared with those which precede and 
follow, i.e. the different rhythm (Bickell in COT. II. 144); (2) from the 
marked interruption which it makes in the transition of thought from v. 1 to v. 3 
(the connection between * and 3 being very close) and the grammatical dis 
turbance involved; (3) from the utter lack of meaning which it furnishes; 
(4) from the historical fact (z>.z.) that in the days of Amos these cities had not 
yet been destroyed. The text is to be emended (so Geiger, Oort, Em.; We., 
Val., Now., Get., Marti, et #/.) () by inserting the subj. of D"air, viz. D.~N, 
dropped perhaps because of similarity of sound, (b) by transferring the p 
connected with o^Siaj to stand with D^iri). Cf. Elh., DDVsjo oSim jn ox, and 
Gr., 1JM ai DJ. 3. onjcn] oi tpxd/jLevot, but A Q and Syr.-Hex. (in mar- 

m V 7 

gin) ol edx^jueivi = D <1 i-ni; & ^tnm *^? = o^ancn (Seb.), or DMXPDH (Gr.); 
5J qui separati estis ; & ri?nip fiis. Baumann inserts M.I. Che. D^aijron 
nixy a ^^; Riedel, o 1 1 ?. pspjni] oi ^77^0^x6$ /cat ^0a7rT6^.efot, a double 
rendering; Hoffm. i-ifc Jni; Riedel, it-jni. natr] <S ffafiparuv nar ; (so 
also Hoffm., Hirscht); cf. 5 ]& n^S. Che., nar ; Gr. na ; Riedel, na^S? 
Marti, i lir. 

VI. I 143 

VI. 1. Alas !~\ Addressed to the ruling classes; they that are 
careless in Zion} Judah as well as Israel is now rebuked, for (i) 
there is no good reason to omit pratt (v.s.) ; cf. Nowack, who would 
give a later date (the time of writing down the prophecy) to v. ] , if 
the reference to Judah is original ; and Cheyne, who would make 
v. 1 a late insertion or change jvat to nann (v.s.), the people being 
at ease because (2 K. i5 16 ) the general resided there; (2) the 
rendering of ( and & who despise Zion * may not be sustained ; 
(3) there is no support for the translation " make a tumult in " ;f 
the usual interpretation, at ease, secure, careless, is supported by 
Is. 32 9 . Reckless in the mount of Samaria } i.e. those in Samaria 
who are confident and therefore reckless, | not, those who trust in 
the strength of Samaria. Who specify themselves the chief of the 
nations } According to fH2T, "3p3, the rulers are here designated 
as noted, marked by name (cf. the later usage in Nu. i 17 i Ch. i6 41 
2 Ch. 28 15 3 1 19 ), there being no reference in these words to the 
cities of Jerusalem and Samaria. || Justi s " the princes of the first 
people of the earth " (cf. Nu. i 16 ) well expresses the idea, a com 
mon one from the earliest times, that Israel was the most exalted 
nation of the entire world. It is better (v.s.} to make a slight 
change in the text and thus secure the rendering indicated. The 
expression is not ironical.^ Cf. same phrase (without article) used 
of Amalek in Nu. 24 20 , of spoil in i S. i5 21 , and of Ammon in 
Dn. 1 1 41 . Unto whom Israelis house comes~\ Cf. Ex. i8 16 2 S. 15*. 
The pronoun whom does not refer to the nations whom Israel dis 
possessed,** nor to the mountains of Zion and Samaria, the land 
which Israel occupied, ft nor to these mountains as places where 
the Israelites assemble for worship and for judgment ; J J but rather 
to the princes, to whom as leaders and judges Israel comes for 
justice (cf. 2 S. 15*), or to render service ; cf. Gn. iQ 9 i K. io 14 
Is. 49 18 . It is not necessary to omit on 1 ? 1X21, || || nor to under 
stand ^[ that the phrase refers to the coming of the people to their 
leaders to learn foreign customs ; but it must be conceded (with 

* Adopted by Dathe ; Geb. so translates f3T. Os., Geb., Pu. ** Ki. 
t Har. || Cf. Cal. ft Ros. 

t Cal., Ros., Mau., Ba. U We., GAS., Dr. JJ Hes. 

4 Schro., Mau., Umb., Hi., Hd., Ba., Schegg, Pu., Or., Dr. HIT With Hoffm. 
II II So We. 

144 AMOS 

Nowack) that the phrase is an awkward one, and that some such 
word as "tastf might well have been expected. Much may be said 
for the reading of & (v.s.), "and spoil for themselves the house 
of Israel." Cf. Marti, who reads "and in the gods of the house 
of Israel," and calls it a gloss on "in the mount of Samaria." 
2. Pass over to Calneh . . . Hamath and . . . Gath} With this 
verse must be compared Na. 3 8 Ju. n 25 2 K. ig 13 . The determina 
tion of the localities depends somewhat upon the age of the 
verse. Is the verse as a whole encouraging, and intended (whether 
by Amos or a later editor) to strengthen Israel s claim that she is 
the first of the nations ? In this case these cities are cited as ex 
amples of prosperity, and the argument is : " No city of your 
acquaintance is more flourishing than yours ; yet ye treat Yahvveh, 
who has given you this prosperity, with neglect ; the punishment 
for this conduct is exile."* But (see Nowack) (i) contemporaries 
of Amos needed no such encouragement in their faith ; (2) the 
mention of Gath would have no meaning in such a comparison 
while Assyria and Egypt were in existence ; (3) " these king 
doms" must mean Calneh, etc., not Israel and Judah. Or, is the 
verse threatening, and intended to warn Israel that she, however 
" first " she may be, shall perish ? In this case these cities are 
cited as examples of "fallen greatness" (Driver), and the argument 
is : " If cities that have been great are now in ruins, Israel, like 
wise, may perish. "f The latter view is to be accepted (v.s.). 
Calneh ] (cf. n>3, Gn. io 10 ; 10^3, Is. io 9 ; n??, Ez. 27^) is not 
Ctesiphon, on the Tigris ; \ nor Niffer ; nor Kullani, mentioned 
in the Eponym Canon || as conquered by Tiglathpileser III., B.C. 
738 (= modern Kullanhou, six miles from Arpad ; cf. Calno and 
Arpad, Is. io 9 ) ;^[ nor Kunulua (Kinalia), about seventy-five miles 
north of Hamath, southeast of Antioch, capital of Patin ; ** but, 
perhaps, the Kuluniift conquered by Sargon, 711 B.C. Hamath 
the great~\ The modern Hamah (with 30,000 inhabitants), on the 

* So Ew., Hi., Ke., Or., WRS. (Proph. 138), Dr. 

t Ba., Pu., Schra., We., Now. J Ba., Or. \ G. Rawlinson (Smith s DB1). 
|| G. Smith, The Assyr. Eponym Canon, 50; Wkl. Gesch. Bab. u. Ass. 225; 
Tiele, Bab.-Ass. Gesch. 230. U H. G. Tomkins, PSBA. V. 61. 

** Gu. Das tukunflsbild des Jesaia, 43 ; Di. on Is. 10^. 
ft Dl. Pa. 225; COT. II. 143. 

vi. ,- 2 

Orontes, 150 miles north of Damascus, the northernmost limit of 
the territory promised to Israel (Nu. 34 8 ). At times it was a part 
of the Israelitish kingdom (as under David and Solomon, its king 
being Toi, 2 S. 8 9 , and perhaps under Jeroboam II., 2 K. I4 25 - 28 
Am. 6 14 ) ; at other times, it was independent and allied with neigh 
boring nations against Assyria, as when it joined with Syria and 
Israel against Shalmaneser II. and was defeated, 854 B.C. ; or with 
Judah, against Tiglathpileser III., 741 ; or against Sargon, 720, 
when at last its subjection was complete. After this date it is re 
ferred to as furnishing colonists for Samaria, 2 K. i7 24 , and con 
taining Israelitish exiles, Is. n 11 .* Gath of the Philistines^ That 
one of Philistia s five cities nearest (cf. i S. iy 52 ) Judah s border 
(whether it is to be taken as Tell es Safieh,-\ or Dikriu, % or to be 
regarded as unknown ). It was destroyed by Uzziah (2 Ch. 26 6 ) 
about 760 B.C. Here resided Rephaim (Jos. u 22 2 S. 2I 18 - 22 ). Cf. 
Gimtu Asdudim, COT. II. 89, gi.\\ Are they better than these 
kingdoms ? Or is their border greater than your border ?~\ With 
this rendering the sense is, Are the cities just mentioned fairer 
than the kingdoms of Israel and Judah ? No ; for God has so 
punished them that they are reduced in size.^f How ungrateful, 
therefore, you are, in view of all that God has done for you above 
your fellows.** The question is answered affirmatively by some tt : 
Yes ; therefore how foolish it is of you to remain careless, having 
seen the downfall of people more powerful than yourselves. Some 
take the n as article, instead of interrogative (cf. (g and &), and 
translate as a clause in apposition with the names just given, "the 
best of those kingdoms." \\ The words have been put in the 
mouth of the leaders, saying: (Go to} those which are better 
than these kingdoms (just mentioned}, and see if any is as great 
as yours, this is the boasting of the leaders. The rendering, || || 
Are there fairer kingdoms than these (i.e. Kalneh, etc.) ? And yet 
they are not so large as the land of Israel, does not add much 
to a better understanding of the text ; but Pusey was approach- 

* Cf. COT. II. 7 f., 143 ; GAS. 177 ; Buhl, Pal. 66, no; Dl. Pa. 275-8. 
t Porter in Smith s DB\ Che. EB. % Guerin, Jvdee, II. io8f. 

GAS. HG. 194 ff. ; Dr. || V. C. J. Ball, Light from the East, 93, 186, 

It Va., Mau. ** So Ros., Hi., Hd., Reuss, Mit. 

ft Schro., Kno. J+ Dathe, Mich. $ Schegg, Gun. |||| Sugg, by Mit. 

146 AMOS 

ing the thought when he made it mean, " Are they, Israel and 
Judah, better than these (i.e. Calneh, etc.)?" This leads us to 
emend the text (v.s.) by supplying Di/ix and changing the position 
of the pronominal suffixes : Are ye better than these kingdoms ? 
Is your border greater than was their border ?~\ They have per 
ished, are you not afraid that you, too, will perish ? This inter 
pretation is in strict accord with Na. 3 8 . With this interpretation 
it becomes clear that the verse is an interpolation from the end of 
the eighth century (v.s.). 3. Who postpone the day of calamity^ 
The connection of this with v. 1 is very close both logically and 
grammatically. These leaders, like those described in Is. 5 19 , put 
far away the day of disaster, i.e. declare that it is far off, or act 
as if it were far away (cf. 9 Is. 22 13 66 5 ). And cause the seat of 
violence to come near} This may refer to tribunals or thrones in 
which violence is in authority instead of justice, the word rot? 
being a technical word for throne or judicial seat; cf. Ps. I22 5 
74 20 , or, perhaps better, to the sitting of injustice.* According to 
some | the seat of violence has reference to Assyria, but the refer 
ence is rather to the encouragement of oppression in the midst 
of Israel. J 

1. MH] v.s. on 5 18 . Followed by ace., K6. 321 b; characteristic of Isaiah s 
style, rarely met with elsewhere; Am. 5 18 Mi. 2 1 Hb. 2 6ff -; cf. Ew. 8 327 . 
o^jjon] An intransitive adj. from vb. fN = to be quiet, a root occurring 
also in Syriac and Ethiopic with same meaning as in Hebrew. For formation, 
cf. p;n; Earth, AT?. 143 a; and Sta. 230. CNI] Equivalent to a superla 
tive; cf. K6. 309 . 2. rai] Article omitted before "\ for sake of euphony, 
GK. 1262; cf. K6. 334 m and 337 u. 3 r i :r u D~r:] For proper names with 
fol. gen., cf. GK. 125,6; Ew. 8 286 <-. Article omitted as in Gn. io 14 , etc.; cf. 
K6. 295/ DOTjn] Subj. omitted in fftST; cf. Ew. 8 303^,1. 3. D^tjr] 
Cf. Is. 66 5 for onir, Hiph. ptcp. of IT, v. Oct. ::r s ] S introduces 
ace., cf. Ho. io 12 , a common Aramaic construction; Ew. 8 282 t, Da. 100, 
rm. 5, K6. 289-4. peom] Finite vb. cont. ptcp., cf. 2 7 5 7 . pas ] Earth, 
ZDMG. XLI, 619, connects this with the Arab. Lo = to gather; cf. 
K6. 2io/ 

* Cf. GAS. I. 174. t Pu. 

% So nearly all comm. There is neither occasion nor basis for the violent 
emendation of Hoffm. (v.s.), furnishing the translation: Ye who daily demand 
unjust [tribute}, and every Sabbath require unrighteous [gain} ; cf. <5. 

VI. 3-4 147 

4. DTTD] <& KaTaffiraTaX&vTes = DTPD, with Aramaic force (Vol.) ; so 
U lascivitis. pane] @ adds ya\a6rivd = o^iy or vbhy, which resemble 
D- Sj;? (Va.). 5. Dnanfln] @ twiKpOTovvTes ; (JI B tiriKpaTovvres; Gr. O^flD/in, 
or D^flflBn. >>] Gr. ^2. *?aj~i] ( TO)? 6/370^0;^; 5 {j "> < ; U psalterii ; 
Q N^aj. -pro] 6 cbs eo-T^ra, which Cappellus explained as due to 
confusion with TIT, and Vol. as a reading of DID from on, while Hirscht 
sugg. that there may have been a corruption of 02AATIA into ESTOTA. 
Gr. nnp. In any case the phrase is probably a gloss, since it has no 
place in the metrical structure of either the preceding or following line ; 
cf. ui iSn-nN, Is. 8 7 ; so Peters (ffebr. II. 175), Che. (EB.), Lohr, et at. 
DnS latt n] F pttiaverunt se habere ; <& t\oyt(ravTo. BSZ., s.v. non, sugg. 
that in onS lies a derivative from nr^, cf. n^?pn. ") <i c>~ 1 Sa] @ KCU oux ws 
06^70^0, according to Vol. =: i^ >Sa, but according to Hirscht, due to a 
reading from -vvf = -no. Gr. i C ! ^Saa. Now. TIT s%; so Oort (Em.}. Elh. 
i^ ^r, since tradition does not ascribe to David the making of musical 
instruments. Che. (Exp. T., 1898, p. 334), restores the entire v. thus: 

Who play on timbrel and harp, 
And rejoice at the sound of song. 

(Cf. Jb. 2i 126 .) Marti reads v. 56 , Tira S^irnS -la^ni n^na. 6. | 

<S T^V 5iv\uriJ.tvov oivov p p,?T?a; cf. Is. 25 6 Ps. I2 7 (Vol.); so 

j 1 ^7 ^ ; 1? vinum in phialis ; & adds ]ppi = ^pj.. Oort, j ^|5^-iD? (so Val.), 

or pn-isa (cf. Je. 48). Gr. D"p-Tsa (so Elh., Hal.). iSnjj Gr. iSn(?), 

from s^n ; cf. Je. 5 3 . Lohr places 6a before 5 , while Marti transposes 66 to 

follow 13 . 7. crSj] (5 SuyaerTwv = D^SiJ (Va., Vol.). o^nno nr-i^] 6 x^e- 

/j.eTiff/j.b s ITTTTUV t E0pdt/i, perhaps reading DD:D (so Oct.; but cf. Vol.). 

.7 .. 7 "* PP 

S. eTaipela TpvQ-rjTuv ; & ^cgi.a.1^ \ 4- ^Jbtf j-jc?, perhaps reading anno 
= ? > ?V (Seb.). 1J factio lascivientium ; 1& r?^ 

4. ^7w //> ^ &0ry couches] Cf. 3 12 . These were couches 
inlaid with ivory, such as those which Sennacherib took from 
Hezekiah.* The use of such couches indicated the luxury and 
self-indulgence of the times. And stretch themselves out upon their 
divans ] Reference is intended to lying at the table ; it does not 
include the specific idea of " romping," f nor that of abundant 
tapestry with which the divan was draped, \ nor the thought of 

* CO T.I. p. 286. f Schro. J Ki. 

148 AMOS 

drunkenness,* but, in general, all of these, emphasis being placed 
on the wantonness and extravagance of their conduct ; cf. Is. 22 13 
Ez. 23 15 . Lambs out of the flock~\ i.e. those carefully selected 
from the flock on account of special fatness or daintiness, 
cf. Dt. 32" i S. i5 9 ,| rather than a general reference to the 
wealth of those persons who are rich enough to have flocks. \ 
Calves from the midst of the stall ] i.e. calves reared artificially 
in a stall, a place in which they are shut up in order to be easily 
fattened. Cf. i S. 28 24 Je. 46 21 Mai. 4 2 . 5. Who twitter~] Used 
sarcastically of the music rendered at feasts. The idea is not 
that of ordinary singing, nor dancing, || nor cooing,^" nor wanton 
silly talk or song,** nor parting the lips,|t nor bungling, doing 
something prematurely, \\ nor leading in the music without waiting 
for the professional musicians, nor improvising idly || || ; but of 
derision, to indicate the prophet s contempt " for the perhaps 
really not unmusical songs with which feasts were enlivened " ^[ ; 
cf. Is. 5 12 24 9 . To the sound of the harp\ Another rendering is, 
in accordance with ; cf. ""B bl? in Gn. 43 7 Ex. 34 27 Lv. 2y 18 . Like 
David~\ If this word is genuine, the leaders of Israel, whom the 
prophet would rebuke, are now brought into comparison with 
David. They are like him in that they devise for themselves 
instruments of song] It is not a contrast, viz. between their use of 
instruments for amusement, and that of David for worship.*** Nor 
is it correct to render fff "they think, fondly imagine make 
the mistake of supposing that the instruments are for them as for 
David." 5trn = devise, invent, with reference to the popular idea 
that David was an inventor of instruments. No other passage of 
earlier times speaks of David as a poet or musician. \\\ But this 
reference does not imply that his reputation had only to do with 
secular music. The evidence is very strong, however, that the 
word is a gloss (v.s.). Instruments of song] Musical instruments 

* Ba. We. renders " ausgelassen sein," which is approved by Now., and cites 
its application in Arabic to animals pasturing freely, at liberty, and in Syriac to 
wild and rapacious beasts. 

t Ba. et al. || Stru. ft Schegg. Hd. 

JMau. HSchro. }+ Ew. |||| Dr. 

Ros. ** Hi., Ke., Now. UH Mit.; cf. Hoffm. ZA W. III. 114. 

*** Jer., Cal., Jus., Ros., Schro. ++t Reuss. 

ftt So Ew., Mit. We., Dr. 

VI. 4-7 149 

used to accompany the voice ; but the context is not favorable to 
the allusion to instruments, hence (v.s.) Cheyne s suggestion, 
voice of song, Elhorst s words of song, Nowack s all kinds of 
song, and Marti s consider themselves like David in the under 
standing of song. 6. Who drink (from) bowls of wine~\ Another 
token of self-indulgence. Instead of the ordinary drinking-vessel, 
the word is employed which is later used of the vessel from 
which blood was poured or thrown (dashed) for sacrificial pur 
poses (Ex. s8 3 Nu. 4 14 7 13ff - Zc. 9 15 I4 20 ), the large size thus being 
emphasized. With the first of oils they anoint themselves^ Anoint 
ing in ancient times signified not only consecration, but joyousness 
(cf. Ps. 23 5 92 10 Is. 6i 3 EC. Q 8 with io 19 ). It was a hygienic cus 
tom, since the oil refreshed the skin and served as a protection 
against heat. In this case the first of oils, i.e. the choicest 
oils, are employed. To omit anointing was a sign of mourning 
(2 S. I2 20 i4 2 ). And do not grieve for the breach of Joseph~\ 
Their minds are so occupied with the mirth and joy that they 
fail to see, and hence to appreciate, the terrible breach or wound 
which, in the near future, will be inflicted upon Israel. Such 
a sight as that which the prophet has gained would make them 
sick in body and in mind (cf. i S. 22 8 ); for a great affliction 
or overthrow (cf. Je. 8 1L21 ) is near at hand. This word breach 
does not refer to any specific political intrigue,* nor to the 
present evil condition of Israel, f but to the future calamity 
which even now threatens the nation. J 7. Therefore, now~\ 
The now is logical, rather than temporal, Ho. 2 10 5 7 . At the 
head of the captives ] These, who were described as the JTtPKi 
D U-i, D npJ, shall go forth at the head, in the very forefront ; cf. 
i S. p 22 Mi. 2 13 . And the shout of the banqueters shall cease~\ 
The rendering, " the mourning of those who stretch themselves 
out shall come," is based upon an impossible meaning of no. 
Some use here the Aramaic meaning of rma, viz. feasting. j| The 
rendering " shout " (either of joy or sorrow) is required here as 
in Je. i6 5 and is justified by the Arabic ^Sv1T The allitera 
tion in the Hebrew words DTtno rmfc no is noticeable. 

Mich. f Schegg. J Hi., Mit. Cal. 

Har., Mich. U Jus., Va., Ros., Ba., Pu., Ke. 

1 50 AMOS 

8 b. Saith Yahweh God of Hosts } This phrase, if retained at 
all, must follow this piece as a whole. 

4. O nnD] On force of pass, ptcp., cf. Ko. 235 d. 5. o^oifln] a.X.; if text 
is correct, probably to be connected with lo ^3, to precede, fourth stem = to 
hasten, exceed due bounds, be immoderate, talk excessively (Lane, p. 2376) ; 
hence Dr., following Abul-Walid (Neubauer, Abul- WalicTs Lexicon, col. 
586), suggests "to extemporize poetry over-rapidly, without premeditation, 
in a hurried flow of unmeaning, unconsidered words" (v. Dr. p. 236 ; Now.). 
Observe, likewise, Hoffm. s rendering, " those who strike the strings across 
the opening of the harp," which is based on the usage of ttifl (Lv. I9 10 ), 
to tear (cf. Buxtorf, Lex. 1811 f.; Payne Smith, Thesaurus Syriacus, p. 3311), 
and makes the ^ s ; entirely superfluous. ^oj] The kinds of instru 
ments denoted by the two names *?aj and ~nj3 are nut certainly known. 
The two are the only stringed instruments mentioned in the O. T., and are 
frequently named together (Is. 5 12 i Ch. I5 16 2 S. 6 5 , etc.). Both seem to 
have been made of wood (i K. io 12 ) and to have been portable (i S. io 5 
2 S. 6 5 ). A full discussion of these and other instruments, with excellent 
illustrations of Assyrian, Babylonian, and Egyptian harps, etc., is given in 
Bk. of Ps. (SBONT.}, 222 ff.; cf. Dr. 234 ff.; Benz. Arch. 273 ff.; Now. Arch. 
I. 273 ff. 6. a nrtr] to drink from, cf. Gn. 44 5 ; same force in Arabic 
and Aramaic (Dn. 5 2 ). For the same phrase to drink of, cf. Pr. 9 5 ; GK. 
ngm, N. ^ITE] Used only here of wine; elsewhere, bowl or basin for 
throwing or casting a liquid, esp. blood ; e.g. at altar, Ex. 27 3 Nu. 4 14 ; in 
temple, i K. 7 50 2 K. I2 14 ; in second temple, Neh. 7 70 . This meaning is 
borne out in the signification of the root, which in the cognates means scatter, 

disperse; cf. Aram, py, Assyr. zaraku, Arab. O^, cast at. D^ir] On force 
of the pi., cf. K6. 259 a. inir C ] For construction, etc., cf. Ko. 327 o and 
319 m. On impf. continuing ptcp., cf. Dr. 1170. The original meaning 
seems to be shown by Arab. ^.j^jO = stroke with the hand. It is used of 

painting d. house (Je. 22 14 ) and oiling a shield (Is. 2i 5 2 S. I 21 ). Anointing 
as a part of the toilet is always expressed by another verb, y.D. nrc, as 
used of persons, is limited to anointing as a religious rite, aside from this 
passage ; and this seems to be no exception, since the feast here was a 
sacrijicial feast. The primitive significance of anointing was probably re 
ligious ; animal fat was the first unguent, and, being regarded as the special 
seat of life, was considered the best medium for the transmission of the vitality 
of the being from which it was taken ; hence " unction was primarily an 
application of sacrificial fat with its living virtues to the persons of the wor 
shippers" (WRS. Sem. 383 f.). This accounts for the anointing of kings, 
priests, etc., and for the use of unguents in connection with religious rites. 
Olive oil was used later when agriculture was taken up (Ps. 92 n Dt. 28* 

VI. 8 151 

Nu. 6 15 ). f| Dr ] This designation of N. Israel occurs twice elsewhere in Amos 
(5 6-15 )> other names are: Jacob (6 8 7 2 - 5 8 7 ); house of Jacob (9 8 ) ; house of 
Isaac (7 16 ) ; and regularly Israel (2 6 - n , etc.). Joseph is named as the ancestor 
of Ephraim, the largest tribe (cf. Ho. 6 4 I3 1 ). The use of the title occurs 
each time in a connection implying a bond of sympathy between Israel and 
Yahweh, or at least a shade of tenderness in the feelings of Amos. 

8-14. Yahweh makes oath : I abhor Israel, and she shall 
be given over to her enemies for destruction; she has turned 
justice to poison, imagining herself strong ; surely I will bring 
upon her a nation which shall overcome her entire territory. 

The striking difference between the grammatical expression in this piece 
(the third of three six-line strophes) and that in the preceding is evidence 
of distinctness; but when there is considered in connection with this (i) the 
opening oath (v. 8 ), which is climactic to the woes introducing the other 
pieces, (2) the concluding words, which are parallel to those of the other 
pieces, we have sufficient basis for the assumption that this is one of three 
pieces making up a larger whole. Vs. 9 - 10 are so peculiar in their thought and 
form as at once to raise suspicion of their genuineness ; this suspicion be 
comes a certainty upon closer investigation (v.i.}. The intensity of expression, 
as well as the definiteness of this section, is greater than in either of the two 
preceding. It thus furnishes a fitting climax for the entire piece, containing, 
in essence, the threefold thought of the whole, viz. (i) Yahweh s anger, 
because of (2) Israel s sin, and consequently, (3) Israel s destruction. 

8. -a* ^nSx mrp DNJ] (5 om. (so Now., Elh., Lohr, Baumann); it should fol 
low .-n~, v. 7 (cf. We., Oct., Marti). axrc] Read apns (so Geiger, p. 349; We., 
Mit, Elh., Lohr, Get., et al.}. jixms] @ inserts ira<rav; & nrr>:n xripn rvj 
(so in Lon Ion Polyglot, but in Paris Polyglot, nriai). rrucis] (5 rcW x<ipas 
avrov; IT donws cjus. \-niDii] Gr. fol. /ecu eap<S, rnani. ni<Ssi] (g avv 
Tracn rots KaroiKovcriv ai/T^v; U cum habitatoribtts suis. Hoffm. n^Sc-i = and 
her citadel; so Matthes and Elh. 9, 10. These verses are a later insertion (so 
Now. and Lohr ; We. and Che. consider them, at least, misplaced ; but cf. 
GAS. and Marti), made in order to illustrate the last phrase of v. 8 . This is 
evident because of (i) the marked interruption of the continuity of thought 
between v. 8 and v. 11 ; (2) the utterly strange and incongruous conception thus 
introduced ; (3) the impossibility of arranging the material of these vs. (viz. 9 - in ) 
in any poetical form, much less the form which characterizes the remainder of 
the piece. The acceptance of GAS. s suggestion to supply at the close of v. 8 
the words to the pestilence only furnishes a still better basis for the addition 
of the gloss. Get. sugg. the order 7.n.&9.w__ ax n , ni ] y Q UO( J si . C. 
inm] adds vat VTro\eKpdtf(roi>Tai ot KardXonroi. n*n IN^JI] (S Kai X^/i^oi/Tat 
01 oiKeioi 01 O.VTUV. Hal. nn -iNin\ Riedel, TH -iNfc :i. ISIDCI] Many Mss. 

152 AMOS 

read ir. <& Kal wapapiuvrai = iiso--) (Va., Vol.), as in Gn. ig 9 2 K. 2 17 5 16 , 
or unoM (Vol.), as in i S. 2S 23 . & ou^, w^j-x? ^ ^ c| = lanpoi (Seb.); 
U et comburet eum; v Nmj2D. Now. ncDD)(?); Riedel, no^jn-i = besom. 
After o sxy] @ adds avruv. -\rxS] pi. ^nama] < and & om. DON] 
Riedel adds mm >n, to explain what follows. \n on] { pSo nci JICD 
;i XDipa j wo iin xS |>Df? nn na nx. ^cov^ osa? \4^s &*^, reading 
D?x for on (so Seb. ; cf. Gr. Monatsschrift, 1886, p. 376). TorrV?] 
J5 cooi ^i i** t Si = "V2n (Seb.) ; 3J recorderis. The following attempts at 
reconstruction of the text may be noted : Oort, understanding that on -\Xi 
is a dittog. of D-JX "IDXI (cf. Baumann, who om. Dax ncxi), that the material 
has been largely transposed, and that the horrors of an earthquake are here 
described, reads : > run -o (H) riDBO lain xS n^ ( 10 d ) HNSci m^ ^nnjom ( 8 <*) 
. . . INITJI ( 10 ) inn nnN noa DI^JN mtrp ON n^m ( 9 ) o^pa . . . non nani nn 
DSN I^NI iny myn n>an \iDma ieNS IDNI n^an-}D. That is: ( 8d ) And 
I will deliver up a city and its contents, ( 10d ) so that it shall no longer 
be called by its name; ( n ) for, behold, Yahweh commands and will smite, 
etc., ( 9 ) and it shall come to pass that, whenever ten men shall have 
died in one house, ( 10 ) their relatives will clear away the ruins in order 
to carry the bones from the house, and they will say to whoever is in 
tiie rear of the house, " Is there still another ? " and he will answer, 
"No!" Zeydner reads ( ThSt. IV. 196 ff.; so Val.) : NwnS -npD INIWI ( 10 ) 
VN iS-oon ^DNI DOS -\DNI "JDJ; iipn rnan ^nama na N 1 ? nDNi n^an-p D^DXJ? 
mn^ oBtt nsrn. That is : ( 10 ) And an escaped one will remain to bring 
forth the bones from the house and he will say to whoever is within 
the house, " Is there still any one with thee ? " And he will say " No." And 
he will say, "These have done foolishly. Remember the nam^ of Yahweh." 
Ru. reads : iN>ji ( 10 ) onnxn -nn-vi niD insi n>aa D^JN ni2p -vn> ON n>m ( 9 ) 
in D-^Ni -ps 103; mpn . . . 12x1 man-p vnxy nS si . That is : ( 9 ) And 
it shall come to pass that if there be ten men in a house and one die 
and the others be left, etc., ... to bring forth his bones ... "Is He 
still with you who creates (= ICN) and annihilates?" . . . Gr. reads: 
IDT^I cm-ay oiNirji ( 10 ), substitutes no*o for the sg., drops on ICNI as dittog. 
from DDN ncio, and adds 12 x after N 1 ?. Hoffm. reads vo^Dn n-n WBJI ( 10 ) 
= and his burners erect a funeral pyre for him. Oct. sugg. ^s in Ntrji ( 10 ) 
pj- s, treats POD O^DX? N -xinS as a gloss on the corrupt iciDD) and de 
clares the remainder of the v., beginning with the first naKi, to be " un- 
versehrt." Elh. reads HSDO nn strji, and om. ICNI following fD>. Box and 
Oesterley (Exp. T. XII. (1901) 235 f.) read D>CXJ? N^inS 1x101 nNB iNtt j) 
D3X -\DXI "iDj? -nyn n^an >nama n^xS nnxi non-p, treating on -\DXI as a 
dittog., and the last clause, vn o, as a gloss on on -icxi. Marti -^on mn itrj>, 
or i^p 1 ? nn ixc \ 11. nixn mm run ^] Is an insertion (so also Baumann) 
made to connect vs. 9 - 10 with the interrupted thought in "ui nam] which is to 
be read n--n or rm (so Oct.). Gr. reads xx^ for mxD. n>an] & -isSp. Hi. 

om. n as due to homoioteleuton (so Gr.). Svun] g \^\ D 

VI. 8-9 153 

^010*55^0. Gr. D>XIX-\. mam] Gr. mai. 12. en-trv ON 
onpaa] @ et 7rapa0-iw7r?7<roj Tai ^v 6rj\eiais = DOftj or rviaftj (Va., Ba.), prob 
ably an error of vision. U aut arari potest in bubalis ; A. el dpoTpiaQrjaeTai; 
S. Trefrpa 5id /3ou>>. Read a< ipaa (so Mich., Hi.; Oort, ThT. XIV. 120, and 
*./ Gr., We., Gu., Val., Mit., GAS., Now., Dr., Lohr, Elh., Oct., Marti); 
cf. Hirscht, 37,73? (Jb. 39 lu ); Hal. on -ij^?. J?NT>] 6 ets 8vfd>v t as in 
Dt. 32 33 Jb. 20 16 ; & rB"3 I T M ^ n ? 13. NV?] Gr. N7 *?y_. 14. ui "> DNJ] 
Omitted in some Mss. of @. Transpose to end of v. (so Lohr). <& 
insert MJ before CNJ. Nia^c] (& TOU ^ eiffe\6eiv. ny] @ /cat ws = n>i 
(Hirscht); @ A and other codd., ^ws. nanpn] @ TWJ/ 5v<r/j.uv, a frequent 
rendering of an^n and naty; cf. Is. I5 7 . S |-|-^? O rt su gg- lll e trans 
position of v. 14 to precede 5 26 . 

8. The Lord Yahweh hath sworn by himself^ Elsewhere 
only in Je. 5i 14 , in 4 2 the oath was by his holiness. For ex 
pressions similar to this, Gn. 22 16 Nu. I4 28 Heb. 6 13 . / abhor\* 
Cf. Dt. 2S 63 Ho. 5 121 * i3 7f -; also Am. <f. The glory of Jacob~} 
Not something that belonged to Israel as a special treasure, which 
distinguished them from other nations, cf. Is. 2 10 - 19 - 21 Ps. 47 4 ,| in 
other words, the true glory, which shall now be taken away ; nor 
the temple at Jerusalem, cf. 2E ; % but rather that of which Jacob 
boasted as their glory, viz. palaces and cities (cf. Na. 2 2 Zc. 9 6 ), 
the pride which has brought downfall (Is. 9 9 Ho. 5 5 ). || / will 
deliver the city and its contents ] i.e. men, cattle, goods, shall be 
given to the enemy (i 69 ). Perhaps the thought refers more 
specifically to the siege and capture of the city ; f cf. 2 14 - 16 3 llf - 
4 2 3 5 16 8 3 . The city is Samaria, the article being omitted in the 
terse, poetical expression. 9. This verse and the following 
introduce a new element into the description of the future pun 
ishment, and at the same time a new form and a new style. 
After these verses (i.e. in vs. 116 12 " 14 ) the old idea, style, and form 
recur. The new element is the plague ; the new form, an indi 
vidual experience ; the new style, conversational prose, the poetic 

* The root 3K.n may better be read 3j?n (v.s.} t whether the use of N in this text 
is to be understood as an intentional change (Geiger, p. 349), a Samaritanism 
(Eich, Einl. I. 185 ; Jus.), a provincialism (Ba.), or a copyist s error (Dahl., Now.). 
The renderings "I find wanting" (cf. rnxr), Storr (see Va.), "I will paralyze," 

from L^jL-S, to be numb (Va.), hardly deserve consideration. 

t Cal., Hd. \ Ki. and Jewish interpreters generally. 

Ros., Ke., Mit. || Ba. IT Hi., Ba., Pu. 

154 AMOS 

form being abandoned. There is nothing in v. 8 , or in vs. 12ff which 
corresponds, or lends aid in interpretation. And if shall come 
to pass~\ Cf. the series of pictures of devastation in Is. 8 15> a - 22 . 
If there be left ten men in one house that they shall die] 
The picture is that of a slaughter in war. If of the survivors 
there are as many as ten, all of them shall perish in a plague. 
According to some,* ten represents a large number, a numerous 
family, all of whom, however, shall die. According to others,! 
it means a very few, because the prophet has in mind especially 
the palaces which would contain hundreds. 10. And one s 
uncle, even his burner, shall take him up to bring out the body 
from the house } The relative, J perhaps uncle, father and brothers 
being dead, comes to care for the dead body. The relative is 
either himself the burner, or is accompanied by a burner. Inas 
much as burning of the dead was entirely exceptional among 
the Hebrews (cf. 2 1 ; the cases of criminals, Lv. 2o 14 2i 9 Jos. y 15 - 25 
Gn. 38 24 , and that of Saul and his sons), this has been taken 
as another exception, the prophet supposing it to be impossible 
to adopt the usual form of burial, and the burner represented 
as acting either within |j or without ^[ the home, on account of 
the peculiar situation ; or the burning, like the plague itself, has 
been considered a mark of divine anger.** The reference is 
not, however, to the burning of the body, but to the burning 
of spices in honor of the dead ; tt f- J e - 34 5 > an d especially 
2 Ch. i6 14 2 1 196 . The suggestion has also been madej| that 
the lack of timber in Palestine would make cremation of any 
considerable number of bodies almost impossible. The pronoun 
his seems to suggest some common custom. And shall say] 
It is the relative who speaks. To him who is in the innermost 
parts of the house~\ i.e. to some one who is still alive, || || and, in 
his terror, has withdrawn to the inmost recesses of the house ; ^[ 
not to a neighbor in an adjoining house,*** nor to a servant,ftt nor 

* Os., Geb., Hi., Torrey, Marti. f Jus., Ros., Schro. 

t Jus., Ros., Schro., Ba., Hd., Ke. A. V. 

|| Cal., Hi. U Ke. ** W. R. Smith, Sem. 372, N. 3. 

ft Har. ; Thomson, LB. II. 493 ; Mit., Dr. ++ Mit. 

$$ Hi., Dr. III! Jus.,Va., Hi., Ba. 
1H1 Cf. Ps. 1288; \-o-\i is also used of a cave in i S. 2^, of Sheol in Is. 14*^ 
of a ship in Jon. 16. *** Cal. ftf Schlier. 

VI. 9-12 I $ 5 

to a relative who remains weeping.* Is there yet any one with 
thee} Are you altogether alone ? And he shall say} Inserted to 
separate the two parts of the statement, cf. 2 K. 6 27f> Gn. i6 8 n 2i 7 . 

None} The last survivor answers, and in his answer gives 
utterance to the deepest feelings of despair. And he shall 
say: Hush! one may not mention the name of Yahweh~\ Cf. 8 3 
Hb. 2 20 Zp. i 7 Zc. 2 13 . This is not the utterance of the survivor, 
and thus to be taken as a word of repentance (being rendered, 
Ought we not to remember Yahweh s name?),t nor an explana 
tory statement by Amos of what was in the sick man s mind ; { 
but the utterance of the relative to the survivor, which partakes 
of the despair common to the situation : " No prayer will avail, 
all is lost," or " recourse to Yahweh is of no use " ; || " do not 
tempt Yahweh to farther outburst of anger" ;f "do not mention his 
name and thus make him aware of your presence " ; ** cf. Is. i9 17 .ft 

11. For behold Yahweh will command^ A part of the gloss, 
intended to regain the connection which has been lost. What 
follows should, however, be joined directly to the last words of v 8 , 
viz. / will give over the city and its contents, and one shall smite 
the great house and the small house~\ Utter destruction is coming. 
The great house in connection with the small house, means either 
all houses, alike of rich and poor, JJ for God is no respecter of 
persons ; cf. 3 15 Is. 9 17 ; or, as seems better, the nation Israel and 
the nation Judah, the former of which suffered under Shalmaneser, 
the latter under Sennacherib. Into fragments . . . into fissures } 
The distinction suggested that the destruction of the great house 
(whether taken of the rich, or of Israel) is to be more complete 
than that of the small house (i.e. the poor, or Judah), is not 
found in the text. The second word is as strong a word for de 
struction as the first. 12. Do horses run upon crags?} It is 
just as unnatural and absurd for you to pervert justice, as for men 

* Os. + Hi. || Jus., Schro. ** Ba., Reuss. 

t Har. Dathe, Va., Ros. IT Ew., Dr. 

ft The collection of materials on conceptions of divine names among primitive 
peoples given by F. J. Coffin, in his dissertation on the Third Commandment, is 
of interest as illustrating the last clause of v. ; see JBL. XIX. 166 ff. Cf. also 
Baumann s sugg. that mrv has displaced an original DTI^N = spirit (i S. 28 18 ). 

It Cal., Har., Ros., Schro., Hi., Mit., Dr., Marti. 

ZT, Jer., Dahl, Dathe, Jus., Hd., Or., We. 

1 56 AMOS 

to make horses run upon crags.* We are not to understand that 
the rock represents the hard and stubborn people. t Does one 
plough the sea with oxen ?~\ This reading (v.s.) avoids the necessity 
of supplying an important word in thought and, at the same time, 
the very irregular plural form, D Hpa. That~\ *3 can scarcely be 
rendered but, \ or surely, Ye have turned justice into poison] 
Only a general word may be used, since the exact meaning of tf&O 
is uncertain (v.i.). " A moral order exists which it is as impossible 
to break without disaster as it would be to break the natural order 
by driving horses upon a precipice." || The fruit of righteousness 
into wormwood^ i.e. what would be good and helpful, into that 
which is bitter and injurious. 13. Who rejoice in that which is 
not~\ A strong effect is produced by using vh to negate a noun 
(cf. 01? vh, bsrxb, Dt. 32 17 21 ; trx vb, Is. 3i 8 ). The people, whom 
the prophet rebukes, flatter themselves with self-deception, that 
which is imaginary, not real ^[ ; but v.i. Who say, Have we not 
taken for ourselves horns by our own strength ?~\ The nation is rep 
resented as boasting of the new power ** which they had acquired 
under Jeroboam II. ; ft tne horn represents power, Je. 48^ Dt. 33" 
Ps. 75 5 - 10 89 17 . An utterance of pride, similar to this, is placed in 
Ephraim s mouth, Is. 9. Against Graetz s suggestion \\ that xb 
m is a city, viz. Lo-debar, 2 S. 9 4f - ly 27 , and Q-np another city 
(i Mace. 5 26 ; cf. Ashteroth-Karnaim, Gn. i4 5 (), both on the 
east of Jordan, and that the boast has to do with their recent 
subjection by Jeroboam, the names of these towns being selected 
because of their peculiar significance, may be said : || || (i) the 
Hebrew prophets are not accustomed to speak thus of victories, 
(2) Pipb is not the proper word for capturing a town, but rather 
izb, (3) b npb is a common idiom for the idea, to provide oneself 
with (cf. Is. 8 1 Je. 3 6 2 - 28 Ez. 4 1 5* Zc. n 15 , etc.) ; (4) these towns 
were not sufficiently strong to warrant such a reference to them,1ft[ 
(5) f- 5 15 ; ( 6 ) tne unanimous testimony of the versions. 
14. Yea~\ or surely, goes back again to v. 11 after the digression 

* Dathe, Schro., Ba., Hd., Pu., Ke., Reuss, Mil., Dr. f Cal., Os. 

t Mit. Hes. || GAS. U Cal., Os., Geb., Ros. 

** Geb., Har., Jus., Schro., Dr. ft Jus., Schro., Ba., Ke., Dr. 

It So We., GAS., Now., Elh., BDB., p. 520, Marti. GAS. |||| Dr> 

HU Cf. however GAS. 1. 176 ft 

vi. 12-14 i$7 

in vs. 12 - 13 ; not but* nor for as "justifying the low estimate of 
their power, expressed in v. 13 ," f nor " as a means of destroying 
you in spite of your imagined strength " ; J nor therefore, because 
of your self-confidence. Behold] Here, as so often, in the 
announcement of the climax. / am raising up] Cf. f Hb. i fl 
Is. io 5 ; in the sense of giving to them a commission; it is some 
thing which is even now in progress. Against you, O house of 
Israel, a nation] By the removal of the clause beginning with 
DK3 the object nation is brought nearer the verb. This nation 
was of course Assyria; cf. s 27 Is. $ ff - And they shall crush 
you] Cf. Ex. 3 Ju. 4 3 6 9 Nu. 22 25 . From the entrance to Hamath] 
Cf. 2 K. i4~ 5 , which describes the restoration of Jeroboam II. in 
almost the same words ; also Nu. 34, which indicates this as 
the territory promised. This was the pass between the Lebanons, 
the northern limit of Israel s territory. Dan was at its mouth. 
Unto the stream of the Arabah] This could not have been 
the Nile, || nor the Dead Sea^f which in Nu. 34 3 12 is the southern 
border, nor the river Arnon;** cf. 2 K. I4 25 ; nor the Kidron.ft 
We must decide between (i) the stream of Egypt, i.e. the Wady- 
el-Arish, Nu. 34 5 ; j J (2) the sea of the Arabah, i.e. Wady-el-Hasy, 
the old boundary between Moab and Edom, which flows into 
the southern end of the Dead Sea; or (3) a stream flowing 
into the north end of the Dead Sea ; || || in this case 2 K. I4 25 
would mean that Jeroboam II. had extended his kingdom as 
far as the Dead Sea (cf. Dt. 3 l6f ).f1F 

In many forms and under many figures the poet has thus pro 
nounced the doom of captivity. With each new effort, he has 
become more clear and definite ; and with this direct statement 
the first part of the book closes. 

* AV. J Mit. || Dathe. ** Jus. ; cf. Hoffm. 

f Dr. $ Cf. Geb. U Dahl. ft Ros., Schro., Mau., Hd. 

jj Cf. We., who suggests that originally the reading was probably onXD Sru, 
and that the present text is the work of a later writer who desired to exclude Judah 
from the threatened territory. 

$$ Hi., Gun., Now., Dr. |||| Mit., GAS. 

ill! The name mijjn Sm occurs only here ; as We. notes, the southern border 
is onxo Sru when Judah is included and nmpn o^ when it is excluded. A 
D^anjn Sru is mentioned in Is. 15" as the boundary between Moab and Edom 
which is probably not referred to here. 

158 AMOS 

8. r^-iDjD] This is the 3 of swearing; cf. Gn. 2i 23 22 16 Am. 8 14 ; Ko. 391 a\ 
BDB. 89 f.; his soul = himself ; cf. Ps. 25 13 Gn. 496, etc.; H. 8, 2r, rm. (</). 
3NPD] = 3> nD. Cf. the constant interchange of *?> and VN ; ^> j and 
VNJ; z/. BSZ. 577. The weakening of y to x is characteristic of the later 
development of the Semitic languages ; it is especially frequent in Assyrian, 
Mandaic, Samaritan, Phoenician, and the later stages of Ethiopic and Aramaic; 
cf. Lindberg, Vergleich. Gram. d. sem. Sprachen, I. 21 f. pNJJ V. note of Dr., 
pp. 238 f. 9. irci] The i marks apod., H. 44, 2c. 10. vm] Most com 
mon force in Heb. as in other Semitic dialects (cf. Assyr. dddzf) is "loved one"; 
so Is. 5 1 and Ct. I 13f - et passim ; but the meaning "uncle" is well attested; 
cf. Lv. io 4 i S. H 59 ; so also in Syriac. A broader term, e.g. kinsman, would 
seem better here (Hi., Ba., Ke., Or., RV. m., BDB.). wo::] Cf. I K. i8 27 , 
jppforro; La. 2 6 , ]& for -p La. 4 4 , ens for DID; 28. 1 2 2 , JVM for JIDJ; for similar 
interchange in Aramaic, cf. Dalman, Gram. d. jild.-pal. Aram., p. 74. This 
use of the pron. suf. without reference to an) thing already mentioned is 
awkward, but not unknown; cf. Is. 17 (where the text should probably be 
emended to read ip). For the use of sg. suffix referring to pi. antecedent, 
cf. K6. 3480. D3.x] Used absolutely, GK. 152*, cf. Ew. 8 322 . on] 
Ordinarily as here (Ju. 3 19 Am. 8 3 Hb. 2 20 Zp. i 7 Zc. 2 17 ) an interjection; 
cf. Ne. 8 11 Nu. I3 30 where it is treated as a vb. -v:nn s ] On construction, 
cf. Ew. 8 295^; Ko. 399/3. sira] D of interest, K6. 212*;. 11. D-D-DI] 

a.X.; cf. Ar. . u^ = "a fountain choked up by ruins"; and the related root 

in Assyr., resu (DSI) to shatter, kill, etc.; cf. p:n and Din, and trimi 
(Je. 5 17 ). In Ct. 5 2 the same word has the sense drops (of dew), but this 
must come from another DDT (cf. Ez. 46 14 ). Cf. Hoffm. ZAIV. III. 115. 
On use of ace., cf. Ew. 8 284 a, (c)\ Ko. 327^. 12. onpaa] It is urged 
against the reading 31 ipas (i) that the pi. anpa appears in 2 Ch. 4 3 ; 
cf. Ne. io 37 ; (2) that the mention of oxen in connection with sea-ploughing 
is superfluous; (3) that the absence of the article with D" 1 would be excep 
tional; and (4) that the figure would be too bold for a Semite; cf. Gun.; 
Ko. 254^. trsi] Written tr^, Dt. 32 32 . Ho. io 4 and Dt. 29 17 show that 
the word denotes some plant, and its frequent association with nj;-^ indicates 
that it was of a bitter (Ps. 69 22 ) and probably poisonous nature. Poison is 
clearly meant in Dt. 32 33 Je. 8 14 Jb. 2O 1G , etc. Some have thought that the 
poppy was the plant in question (T/ies. ; G. E. Post, DB. II. 104). 
13. NSS] GK. 1520, N.; Ew. 8 286^; H. 8, 2 d, rm. (/) ; Ko. 3807 (TN 
being dropped from consciousness). 14. nisoxn] The article in this title 
is exceptional. The full title niN2x[n] inSx mrp occurs 26 times in O. T., 
but the article appears with msox only four times, viz. Ho. I2 6 Am. 3 13 6 14 9 5 . 
It occurs six times in Amos without the article (4 13 514.15.16.2758^ Q^ 
Ko. 295 i and 285 a. >u>] "Indeterminate for the sake of amplification" 
(as in Arabic) =a terrible (?) nation; GK. 125 c. NiuSn] On construc 
tion, Ko. 406 c. 

vii. 1-9 i59 

11. Three visions of destruction, y 1 9 . These three visions 
were probably announced at Bethel : * (i) a vision of devouring 
locusts, the destruction stayed by the interposition of Yahweh s 
hand (7 1 " 3 ) ; (2) a vision of devouring fire, the destruction stayed 
again by the interposition of Yahweh s hand (y 4 " 6 ) ; (3) a vision 
of a plumb-line, the destruction this time permitted to become 
complete (7 7 9 ).f 

Contrary to the usual interpretation, this section, like those which have pre 
ceded, is a poem. I reached this conclusion in March, 1897 ; see BW* Nov. 
1898, pp. 333 ff. ; cf. Elh. De profetie van Amos (1899); Lohr (1901); 
Baumann (1903). The form and style are in many respects similar to 
those found in the first pieces (chaps. I and 2). The poem consists of three 
stanzas of nine trimeters each. These stanzas present in common a remark 
able symmetry, each falling logically into three subdivisions; the first and 
second are strictly parallel throughout : 

mm -U-IN -ox-in na mm >j-m jx-in na 

jj nxv [mm] njni anS Nip rum 

c>pSn niS? nSnna mm >;-ux ??sa 

xn >mi nai oinn nx ^nxni 

N SoxS pSnn nx nSiixi 

xj~nSo mm ijix icxi xj S-in mm -unx insi 

xin |iop ^ apjp oip^ ID Nin pop 13 apj?^ Dip 1 * ^D 

mm onj nsr Sy mn^ onj 

n^nri xS mm ^DN ninn x 1 ? x^n DJ 

Of the nine lines five in each are practically the same; in the remaining 
four there is a similarity of plan; cf. rum, line 2, the forms of Sjx in lines 
4 and 5; and the same logical division comes at the end of each triplet. Con 
cerning the corrections of the text, viz. (i) omission of -] s cn vj inx trp*? njni 
(v. 1 ) and (2) the reading of nSan xn >mi (v. 2 ), v.i. The third stanza is from 
its nature essentially different, and yet the difference is one of thought rather 
than of form. With the omission of v. 8 (v.i.} the arrangement is as follows : 

iS maj? my rpoix N 1 ? ijson no 

ax: >jnx njm 

anna oyam no y TDp) ^jx nt^ ^jjn ijix IDXM 

Sxitj" >DJ? anpa 

* Note the suggestion of H. P. Smith, Old Testament History (1903), p. 211, that 
these visions belong to the opening of Amos s ministry. 

f (i) On the relationship of chs. 7-9 to those which have preceded, see Intro 
duction, p. cxxviii; (2) on the nature of the vision and its use in prophecy, see 
references on p. 388. 

l6o AMOS 

VII. 1-3. A vision of destroying locusts, whose destructive work 
is stayed by Yahweh upon the prophet s urgent intervention. 

1. ixv] <& tTriyovrj = -Vi (so also Ba., Hoffm., Gu., We. 3 , Marti); so & and & 
Pl?3. Insert mm as subject of ixv (so Oort, Now., Elh.). nVnn] Baumann 
om. T?cn n:> ins trp 1 ? rum] Read p^. for a>ps (so Hoffm., We., Lohr; 
Che., Crit. Bib.; Marti). /SpoCxos efs Fw7 6 jSacrtXetfs; A. 8\j/i(j.o$ OTT/CTW 
rrjs ydfys TOV /SacrtX^ws ; S. /ecu ws elire iv &\f/t/j.os /wera TT);> Kovpiiv TOV 
/SacaX^tos; G. /cat /Sot) 5i/a/.xos yuerd TT^V Kovpav TOV ^SacrtX^ws. Gr. *:) PN E p S. 
Oort, p^ for tfpS (so Val.). Elh. p^n oj nns njni. Volz (7^2z. XXV. 
1900, p. 292) BMpSon n " "^L 1 -* ^il^l ; cf. Marti. Schmidt (EB. 4332), ju Y?D 
or i^sn ju. Che. {Crit. Bib.} Voni oni na^Ni p 1 " njn\ This phrase is an 
explanatory insertion not belonging to the original text, as appears from 
the form, the thought, and the strophic structure (so Now., Baumann). 
2. ns : DN rrm] Read n-^p NH -TIM (so Torrey, JBL. XIII. 63; We. 3 , 
Dr., Oort, Em.; Lohr; cf. GK. H2uu; but cf. Baumann). We. 1 ona THI. 
Now. T.PN3 \IM or o .IM (so Elh.). Val. ox TIM. Oet. -in:n = ijn (cf. Je. i8 3 ). 
Volz, L) ^N[ S ] nS ^CNM. Baumann and Marti om. n 1 ?} ON. Nj~rV?D] @ 
?Xews YevoG; U propitius esto, obsecro ; <S ^-Hl^*. Gr. xj~Sin, as in v. 6 . 
= Hiph il (so also Os., Dathe, Gr., Seb., Oct.). S. T^ &v 
Ia/cc6^3. Cf. the frequently occurring phrase a^pD px (e.g. 5 2 ). 
Oort, aip;*? for oip^ ns (so Val., Now. (?), Elh., Oct.); but the text 
may well stand. 3. am] (j.eTa.v6r)<roi> cnj (Vol.) or arnn (Va.); so 

^7 "T 

misertus est ; A. Trape/cX^r;; 2. 

1. 7%//j- ^^ Z^r^/ Yahweh showed me~\ This is the uniform 
introduction to all the visions except the fifth (9*). There is 
no evidence to show whether the vision came in a dream, or in 
ecstasy. Indeed, it is not necessary to suppose that either of 
these methods was employed. They are, nevertheless, real 
visions, since the writer clearly distinguishes between them (to 
gether with the fourth vision in 8 1 4 ) and the historical episode in 
7 10 " 17 . Yahweh was forming] Cf. Gn. 2 7 . To supply Yahweh as 
the subject brings the form of expression into harmony with the 
corresponding line of the second stanza, and makes unnecessary 
the reading of iy. (formation, breed) instead of the participle, 
although this is favored by (&& and many scholars (v.s.). The 
participle shows that the action was not yet finished. Locusts~\ 
Perhaps, here, locusts in the larval stage.* Reference was made 

* See Dr., pp. 82-91 (= Excursus on Locusts) , and, in addition to the literature 
there cited, art. " Locusts," in DB. and EB. 

vrr. 1-2 161 

in 4 9 to the sending of locusts for the purpose of bringing Israel 
to see the error of her ways. This was, of course, an act of mercy 
on the part of Yahweh. But here the mercy " appears not in 
sending the locusts, but in withdrawing them before they had 
utterly destroyed the vegetation of the country. It is the same 
plague viewed from two slightly different standpoints, from the 
first of which appears the active, from the second the passive side 
of the divine mercy." * In the beginning of the coming up of the 
aftergrowth^ The aftergrowth was either ( i ) the second growth, 
the first being cut off, as here, for taxes, or for royal use,f or 
(2) a later grass which started up in March and April under the 
influence of the late spring rains. J Ordinarily grass was not 
cut and made into hay, but was eaten, as it grew, by the 
cattle. Perhaps, however, in this case, it had been allowed to 
grow for the king s levy for the support of the cavalry. || 
And behold there were full-grown locusts after the king s mow 
ings^ This is undoubtedly a gloss (v.s.) intended to fix more 
definitely the exact time of the invasion of locusts. Does this 
mean the king s mowings, which, as suggested above, were levied 
for the army, the people making no use of the grass until 
this levy had been taken away?^[ This seems satisfactory, yet 
some take *$ in the sense of shearings, the time designated being 
the time of the king s sheeps hearing** The translation locusts 
involves a change of text based upon <& (v.s.). fftM, has after 
growth. The appearance of the larvae of the locust in the 
beginning of the coming up of the aftergrowth, and of fully 
developed locusts after the king s mowings, is intended to rep 
resent a destruction of herbage which threatened to be complete, 
since the latter appeared at a time when the rains were all past 
and the summer heat was just beginning. 2. And when they 
were making an end of devouring~\ Mitchell contends (i) that 
,Tm should be retained instead of the proposed vn ; (2) that it 

* Mit. f Jus., New., Or., et al. \ Mit., GAS., Now. 

Burckhardt, Travels in Syria, 246 ; so Mit., Now., and others ; but see 
Gun. ( ThSt. XVIII. 222 f.), who questions the statement that hay was unknown in 
Palestine, and that ^ p s cannot mean aftergrowth, and cites Ps. yj - 726 go 6 to show 
that two growths of grass were customary. || WRS. Sem. 246. 

IT Ros., Ew., Ba., Now., Dr. ** Hoffm., Mit. 

f62 AMOS 

has the inchoative force (cf. Is. 4 4 ) ; (3) that to suppose that 
the locusts would first devour the herbage and then proceed 
to the grass is to make a distinction between atw? and ttfpb* 
(viz. vegetables and grass) * which does not exist, and also 
to ignore the habits of locusts, who devour everything as they 
go. n*m = and it was coming to pass, i.e. an act not yet com 
pleted. This is better than the suggestion t to substitute DIB for 
DX ; but the reading n^aa Kn vn (v.s.) is adopted here as being 
still more plausible. Forgive] i.e., Israel has sinned; the locusts 
have been sent to punish ; the punishment having been inflicted 
in part, forgive now the sins on account of which it was sent. 
How can Jacob stand] The interrogative ""a is used here as in 
Is. 5 1 19 as who, i.e. in what condition is Jacob that he should 
stand?| The reading D p 1 (v.s.) = who shall raise up Jacob ? is 
not necessary ; nor is "ft used in apposition with the subject. 
Cf. the reading cip fc (v.s.). For he is small] Notwithstanding 
his boasts he is insignificant in the sight, not only of God, but also 
of men. 3. Yahweh repented him concerning this] The usual 
anthropomorphic expression ; cf. v. 6 i S. 1 5 s5 Jon. 3 9 Gn. 6 7 Jo. 2 14 . 
It shall not be] The utter destruction proposed will not take 
place. Perhaps sufficient infliction has now been given to bring 
Israel to a realization of his sins. Cf. the similar description of 
Yahvveh s method of work with Israel in chap. 4. 

The first vision describes graphically a visitation of locusts sent 
upon Israel as a punishment, which, however, because of the 
intervention of the prophet was stayed before it had completely 
devoured the land. The prophet had in mind, according to 
some, an attack of locusts ; || according to others, an Assyrian 
invasion, viz. that of Pul or Tiglathpileser III.,^[ or past punish 
ment, of whatever kind, which had been only partial.** 

1. "m rum] The equivalent of an obj. clause. K6. 361 . >ai] From the 
root rnj (not found as such) meaning gather ; cf. UJ>> = N3J (whence N3>, 
Is. 3O 14 , pool, cistern} ; Aram. N33. Three nominal forms occur: (i) 33 (in 
pi.), Is. 33*; also (2) 3 v>, Na. 3 17 ; (3) ou orig. vowels a, a; cf. GK. 86 z; 
Ols. 216 d\ Sta. 190 and 301 a. >n] Hoffm. and Mit. render shearings, main- 

* Hi., Ke. + Geb., Ros., Hd. ; K6. 332*. II Pu., Mit., Dr. ** We. 

t We. Hi., Dr. H Har., Dathe, Ros., Hd. 

VII. 2-4 163 

taining (i) that mowing and haymaking are and always have been unknown 
in Palestine, (2) that TJ = fleece in Dt. i8 4 Jb. ji 20 , and in Ps. 72 fleece 
suits better than meadow. But as We. suggests, (i) the king s shearing 
would take place at the same time as that of other people, and the added 
genitive would be superfluous, (2) the rendering mowing is made probable 
by its occurrence in Arabic. However, Assyrian gizzu is always = shearing, 
wool. 2. mm] If correct, freq. Dr. 120; H. 25, i a; but better as above. 

^axS rtao] On the use of the infinitive, GK. 1 14 #z; Ew. 8 285 <r; H. 29, 4 a. 

3. cnj] Niph. pf.; cf. Ar. A-<V> = to sigh deeply, groan ; with L 7 as in 
v. 6 Je. 8 6 Ex. 32 12 , etc., sometimes with SN Je. 26 3 , and with a clause intro 
duced by v, Gn. 6 6f . .-NT] This thing; fern. = neut. GK. 122 q.\ H. 2, 3; 
not because it refers to a plague. mnr>] Fern.; cf. TNT. 

4-6. A vision of destroying fire, whose destructive work is stayed 
by Yahweh upon the prophet s urgent intervention. 


4. ti to anS Nip run-] <g for anS has r^ StKTjf ; J5 vl Vi\; & j-icS; 
0. KCU 6 /caXwi XT/P BiKrjv; 3J ^ ^^ vocabat judicium ad ignem. Ew. inter 
prets (so Hi., We., Now.) Nip as = rnp (Is. 34 14 ). Krenkel (ZwTh. IX. 
271) C S ia 31 1 ?; cf. Dt. 32 2 ; so Oort (TAT. XIV. 121, and Em.}, Val. ; but 
as Oct. says, 301 is not so used, the usage being as in Gn. I9 24 , S>N -PBCD. 
Gr. B>Na igaS. Hoffm. N3 a^J or e>x aanS; cf. Ps. i8 14 . Elh. and Hal., 
B>N nan^, flame of fire. Oct. an^. Riedel, a>N aoc S (Jb. i8 5 ). IJIN] Gr. om. 
as dittog. ^N m] Elh. Vaxn ICNM. pSnn] adds icvplov, cf. Dt. 32 9 . 
F inserts ww/. Krenkel, San TNI (ZwTA. IX. 271; so Oort, /w.; Val., 
Oct.). Hoffm. r^rn. 5. NrSnn] >& render in same way as srnSo v. 2 . 
6. mnn N s ] in v. 3 , OVK etrrat, here ou /AT) ytvrjTai. nt N ICN] & om. as 
in v. 3 . 

4. 77^ Z^r^/ Yahweh was calling to contend by fir e~\ Cf. Is. 66 16 . 
Yahweh is now in open controversy with his people. This repre 
sentation is not infrequent ; cf. Is. 3 13 Je. 2 9 Ho. 4 1 Mi. 6 12 . Call 
ing, as in 5 8 9", = giving command. Cf. also Is. 48 13 Jb. 38. 
It is Yahweh who is calling, not an angel,* and the command is 
that punishment shall be inflicted by fire ; in other words, " fire 
is called into the quarrel." f Other suggestions are as follows : 
calling (Israel) to strife with fire ; J one called that the Lord 
Yahweh would punish with fire. The reference in any case is 
not to war, || but, as the context plainly shows, to summer heat^" 
which results in drought. If K"p is taken as = rrp (v.s.), the 

* Ew. f GAS. J Ba. Ew. |j Hd. II We., Mit. 

1 64 AMOS 

meaning is (cf. Dt. 25 Is. 34") Yahweh meets (i.e. comes near) 
to strive ; but in favor of the ordinary interpretation is (i) the 
phrase in Am. 5 8 , (2) the parallel in Is. 48 13 ; cf. Jb. 38 34 ; it is 
true, however, that these are all late passages. And it devoured 
the deep} So intense is the drought that the great subterranean 
depths which supply the springs and streams with water are dried 
up.* Cf. On. 7 11 Dt. 33 13 Ps. 24*. For similar droughts, cf. 
Jo. i 19 - 20 Ps. 83 14 Is. 9 18 .f There is no reference to large bodies 
of water like the Jordan. J Elh. supplies "and he said," and then 
reads : " it shall devour the great deep and it shall devour the 
land." And had begun to devour the land"] This has been under 
stood as meaning the land of Israel, i.e. the portion assigned by 
Yahweh to his people (cf. Mi. 2 4 and npbn in Am. 4 7 ) ; by others, 
as the cultivated land (cf. Mi. 2 4 2 K. 9* 36f -) ; || but if we under 
stand the framework of the land in distinction from sea, i.e. that 
which is apportioned to man for cultivation,^]" we obtain the climax 
which Wellhausen fails to see.** 

The first and second visions are parallel with the list of inflic 
tions in 4 6 " 11 ; others might have been added, but these two were 
typical of all the efforts which had been made to turn Israel from 
her evil way. The fire may have been intended to represent a 
more severe punishment than that which the locusts repre 
sented, tf While there is no reference to an Assyrian inva 
sion,! 4 : the two represent every past judgment which has befallen 
Israel. These visions are not premonitions of coming disaster, 
but rather interpretations of actual afflictions. || || 

4. anS] Davidson translates, calling fire into the quarrel ; but see GAS., 
p. no; H. 47, 3^/; Ew. 8 3380. irx^] On force of art., cf. K6. 299^. 
nn-> "JIN] On peculiar position, cf. Ew. 8 306 </. Dinn nx] On use of nx and 
absence of art., K6. 293 c; cf. K6. 249 z, on feminine gender. nSoxi] in con- 
tin, of Sjxni is peculiar; cf. GK. ii2#; Dr. 120 n\ K6. 370^ = it had just 
begun to eat, i.e. incipient impf. with pluperfect idea. Cf. Gun. ( ThStt 
XVIII. 223 f.), who regards this as indefensible (either a slip of the pen 01 
an incorrect phrase) and would read ^usm. 6. XTTOJ] Emph. 

* Hoffm., We., Mit., GAS., Now. $ Geb., Ros., Hi., GAS., Dr. 

t Thomson, The Land and the Book, II. 228. || Now. 

J Geb., Ba. U Cal., GAS. 

** Krenkel s suggestion of Li rn, the world, is unnecessary. \\ Or. 

ft Cal., Dr. JJ Geb., and many others. l||| GAS. 

VII. 4-7 l6$ 

7-9. A vision of the plumb -line t whose destruction is permitted 
to become complete. 

7. jxin] Add ^JIN with U (so Oort, Em.; Lohr, Oct.). -JJN nmn] 
Read nn ^n, and om. "px (so Oort, Gr., Now., Elh., Lohr, Get.). Val. nan;. 
Hal. fix TI. Riedel sugg. that "px is an abbreviation of ninx, a pun being 
intended here as in 8 1 . "px] dda/j-avrtvov, dSd^as; so j$; A..ydi>(jj<ris; 
Q. TT]K6fji.evov ; U litum, and trulla caementarii. 3SJ Jix] ( om. JIN 
(so Lohr); <g A Q m s and Syr.-Hex., di/Tjp ear^Kcus. Hirscht explains (g s 
treatment of j-ix as due to the influence of the similar form in vs. 1 - 4 and 
8 1 , and perhaps also to a desire to avoid the anthropomorphism of ffttZT. 

8a. is a gloss. JIN icx 11 !] Oort (Em.*) adds ^x. "iu>] Hal. sugg. -1^7. 

9. pnr 11 ] (H TOU 7Awros,- so >. S. roO IaKu>/3 (cf. a similar change by ( 
in v. 16 ). iKnpc] @ ai reXerai. Lohr adds nini DNJ at close of v. 

7. The Lord stationed beside a wall~\ fE2T reads plumb-wall, 
but this is very difficult.* According to this interpretation the 
picture represents the Lord as a builder, and describes his char 
acter. The wall beside which he stands is a token of his work, 
i.e. it is built by a plumb-line ; it is an ideal wall. It is only this 
kind of work which he will countenance. His work must be 
exact. t But all this is exactly contrary to facts, since the wall is 
condemned. The rendering of "^K by " adamant," J referring to 
the unchangeableness of God s decrees, or by " sling " as more 
striking and as representing (v. 8 ) the beginning of war, or by 
" plaster " || may not be accepted. The " wall " can hardly be 
taken allegorically as representing the people of Israel ; nor is the 
plumb-line intended to signify the law or revelation.^" It is 
equally impossible to render the phrase "wall together with a 
plumb-line " or a " wall built to the plummet." ** We may there 
fore suppose that the word " plummet," which occurs legitimately 
in the next phrase, has crept in here by mistake. With a plumb- 
line in his hand~\ i.e. the purpose of the builder is to test the 
character of the wall, in order to determine whether it has been 
built thoroughly and exactly (cf. Is. 28 17 ). There is here an antici 
pation of the work of destruction which is to be spoken of later, 
for walls were destroyed by plumb-line, i.e. thoroughly ft (La. 2 8 
Is. 34 n 2 K. 2 1 13 ). It is not enough to understand that the plumb- 

* Cf. We. t ffi*. Stru. || Schegg. ** Ke., GAS., Dr. 

t Cf. Sm. SK. } 1876, pp. 622 f. n. Staudlin. H Geb. ff Hi., Pu. 

166 AMOS 

line indicates the measurement of that part of the wall which is 
to be destroyed.* 8. I am setting a plumb-line in the midst of 
my people Israel^ The builder will test the structure, and that 
which does not stand the test shall be destroyed (cf. texts cited 
above). And I will not again pass by them any more] In the 
former visions Yahweh had permitted the intercession of the 
prophet, but now any request to this effect is anticipated and shut 
off. To pass by or over is to pardon (Mi. y 18 Pr. i9 n ). Hoffmann s 
translation of TD17 by " harvest " has nothing in its favor. 9. The 
high places^ Down to the days of Josiah the nation worshipped 
Yahweh regularly and legitimately upon the so-called high places. f 
These were natural or artificial eminences chosen as being nearer 
the abode of the gods. Other nations had followed this same 
custom (Dt. i2 2 ; cf. also Is. i5 2 i6 12 , and the Mesha-stone, 1. 3). 
On these high places, an altar was raised, which was attended by 
priests (i K. i2 31ff - i3 32f ) When, in and after Josiah s time, the 
centralization of the worship had been effected, in connection with 
the publication and acceptance of Deuteronomy, a ban was placed 
upon worship at the high places. But in the days of Amos this 
centralization had not taken place. When, therefore, he speaks 
reprovingly of the worship conducted at these places, it is not 
because of the many places as distinguished from one place, but 
because of the unsatisfactory (i.e. unspiritual, perfunctory) char 
acter of the worship. Of Isaac~\ A synonym used by Amos alone 
for Israel. It may include Judah, but not Edom. J Many sugges 
tions have been made touching the use here of this word, e.g. 
(i) because Isaac s example was often quoted in support of this 
idolatrous practice ; (2) with reference to the meaning of the 
word " mockery" as descriptive of the worship here conducted || ((, 
followed by Jerome and Theodoret, treats the word as an appella 
tive, "mockery") ; (3) for the altar at Beersheba, built by Isaac 
(Gn. 26 25 ), greater antiquity and authority were claimed than for 
the worship at Jerusalem ; f (4) to contrast " their deeds with the 
blameless, gentle piety of Isaac." ** The spelling pnt^ for prar, 


f See my Constr. Studies in the Priestly Element in the O. T., pp. 74 ff., and 
literature cited on pp. 78 ff. Now. Heb. Arch. II. 12-14. 

J So We. Cal., Os. || Geb. 1 Har. * Pu. 

VII. 8-9 1 67 

found in v. 16 and in Ps. io5 9 Je. 33 26 , has been thought to be pro 
vincial,* and to cast ridicule on the idol-worship.t And the 
sanctuaries of Israel shall be laid waste } The exactness of the 
parallelism is to be noted;! but the order is chiastic. And 
I will rise up against the house of Jeroboam with the sword~\ 
Cf. Ho. i 4 . Drought was the punishment pictured in the first 
vision, locusts in the second, and now the sword in the third ; cf. 
the parallel in 4 6 " 11 . The prediction is plainly one against Jero 
boam s dynasty ; the great destruction is coming in Jeroboam s 
time ; and, in the prophet s mind, the destruction of the dynasty 
and that of Israel are synonymous. The ruin of Jeroboam s house 
is not an incident in the general destruction, but the climax. The 
sword stands for the Assyrian army; cf. 6 U . The application in 
the third vision is made directly to Israel. One application serves 
for all three visions. 

7. 2Xj] Indicates something more formal and fixed than IE? (Dr.). 
px vrai] Characteristic Hebrew idiom, cf. Is. 6 Ga 2 S. I6 1 Zc. 2 5 2 Ch. 26 19 . 
For order of words in circ. cl. cf. H. 45 rm. (</); K6. 362 c ; GK. 156^. On 
meaning of IJN, cf. Lag. BN., p. 175, 1. 5 ; Jensen, Hitliter u. Armenier, 
p. 209; Dl. HWB. p. 101 ; Riedel, p. 31. 8. DIP >JJ-i] Ptcp. refers to 
present, not to future time. -nj? rpDiN ^] Usual idiom to express the idea 
of doing (or not doing) a thing once more, e.g. 5 2 7 13 Dt. 5 19 Gn. 8 1 2 Is. 23 12 , 
etc. V -or] Pass by, forgive, cf. :np2 -ay (5 17 ), pass through, destroy. 
9. ictt j] Other words expressing the idea of waste, desolation are a in, 3Ni, 
3 of instrument. 

12. An Accusation and a Reply, y 10 " 17 . 

(1) The priest of Bethel, to whose ears have come the words 
of Amos s utterances, charges him to the king as a conspirator; 
and, acting doubtless for the king, orders him to leave Bethel, 
the king s headquarters, and return to Judah. 

(2) The prophet Amos, in reply to the charges of the priest, 
asserts that he is not one of the prophetic guild, but a herdsman 
sent by Yahvveh directly to speak to Israel ; and, acting as 
Yahweh s spokesman, declares the fate of the priest, his family, 
and his country. 

* Va., SchrS. t Ros. 

J D^anpn = nina ; 

1 68 AMOS 

This passage has always until recently (see my strophic arrangement in 
BW., Nov. 1898, pp. 333-8) been taken as a piece of historical prose thrown 
in between the first and second groups of visions. It is clear that it is an 
episode growing out of former utterances of Amos (cf. Riedel s suggestion 
that 7 10 - 17 was placed after 7 because the name Jeroboam occurs nowhere else 
in the book). At first sight it would seem to be prose ; and yet mere prose 
would scarcely be expected even in an episode if we remember (i) the 
very early date of the work of Amos, and the tendency, at this early date, 
to describe all events in poetry; cf. Ju. chap. 5, Ex. I5 1 18 ; (2) the fact that 
Amos in his introductory address, which was prosaic enough from one point 
of view, and very monotonous, nevertheless adopted the poetic form and 
worked out the various statements in so careful a manner as to make them 
seem almost artificial. If, now, we note still further (3) the many parallelisms 
which the passage contains ; (4) the logical division into two parts (vs. 1(M3 
and vs. 14 " 17 ); (5) the triple division of the first part, viz. v. 10 six lines, v. 11 
three lines, vs. 12 - 13 six lines ; (6) the similar triple division of the second 
part, viz. vs. 14 - 15 six lines, v. 16 three lines, v. 17 six lines ; and (7) the measure 
of the first part, regular trimeter, and that of the second, regular tetrameter, we 
have sufficient data for supposing that this was originally intended to be poetry. 
The artistic skill which put the accusation in a trimeter movement, and the 
strong and terrible reply in the heavier and statelier tetrameter is charac 
teristic of Amos. The symmetry is throughout extraordinary. Lohr (1901) 
also maintains the poetical character of this narrative and arranges it in five 
strophes of four lines each, the introductory statements in vs. 10 - 12 - 14 - 17 being 
regarded as prose : str. I = vs. 10 n ; str. 2 = vs. 12 - 13 ; str. 3 vs. 14 - 15 ; str. 4 
= v. 16 j str. 5 = v. 17 . But this arrangement involves (i) the omission of 
mm I*?K 10*01 from v. 15 ; (2) the omission of inmx SJ?D nSj-> nSj SN-WI from 
v - 17 ; (3) considerable irregularity in the length of lines; (4) the treat 
ment of "\ON nnx as a line, although the corresponding line, mm ION HD pS, 
in v. 17 is not counted. Elhorst (1900) treats the passage as poetry and 
arranges it in three strophes : (i) vs. 10 ~ 15 = 18 lines ; (2) vs. 16 - 17a = 6 lines ; 
(3) v. 176 = 3 lines. This arrangement exhibits neither symmetry nor logic. 
See also Baumann s strophic arrangement. For a discussion of the authen 
ticity and date of this portion of the book of Amos v. pp. cxxiv, cxxix. 

10. p:i] { N3n as usual. "^P] S. Avt-jrco-ev dvarapao-cro, a corruption of 
iirolr)ffev tivrapffiv (v. Field, Hex.\ 11. niD\j Gr. adds n^3. 12. nrn] 
(& 6 opu>v ; U qui vides. onS . . . SON] d Karaftiov. 13. Nin] Lohr and 
Baumann om. the second time. 14. -OJN] <5J5 om. the second (so also 
Lohr and Baumann). ipis] Lit. cow-herd, is inconsistent with JNX in 
v. 15 , and must therefore either be changed to ipu, cf. i 1 v so Hi., Gr., 
We., Gun., Mit., Dr., Now., Oort, Em.; Elh., Lohr, Oct., Baumann), or be 
taken in a general sense, the larger including the lesser. D DptP oSiai] 
2. xwi> <TVKOfji.6pov3. QL NnS^cb >S fpptri, and adds " because of the sins of 
the people Israel, I afflict my soul." 15. nnND] <& IK; "$ cum seguerer. 

VII. lo-n 169 

= hy (so also Elh., Oort, Em.\ Oct.). 16. |V3n K 1 ?] otf ^ 
s, perhaps = rfc^n (Vol.), cf. <&&, i^Sn (v. Seb. j /<?<:.). U non 
stillabis; S. ov/c ^Trtrt/i^ets ; A. ou <TTaAdets = fEE. pns"] @ lairri/S; 
U& = v. 9 . 17 a. nj?n -vya] Hoffm. s reading, rwn 1^2, is unnecessary, and 
is rightly objected to by Gun. because : (i) ~\y = ix only in Aramaic (Dn. 4 16 ) ; 
(2) nj? with 3 is not used to express such an action; (3) other words, e.g. 
Mir, are regularly used to denote violation of this sort ; (4) i!HC is per 
fectly clear. Hal. njyn. 17 b. Lohr and Baumann om. last clause. (OF adds, 
from beginning of chap. 8, the words : oi/rws e5ei^ /xoi Ki/ptos. 

10. And Amaziah the priest of Bethel^ This outbreak led by 
the priest, perhaps a high priest (certainly not the only priest), 
was provoked by the scathing words which now for some time 
Amos had been preaching. It is not impossible to suppose that 
the interruption was due immediately to the utterance of v. 9 .* 
But from the beginning the prophet had antagonized the priestly 
order. The interests of the priest were identical with those 
of the king. Amos has conspired against thee~\ The prophet is 
not charged with having entered into actual conspiracy ; but 
rather with conduct of a deceitful and seditious character which 
would produce conspiracy. The land is not able to contain all 
his words~\ Either the land is too small, | the prophet s words 
being too many and too atrocious ; or, the people cannot endure 
the prophet s work, because it is so hostile, the priest thus pro 
claiming in hyperbolical fashion his own thought as that of the 
people. 11. Jeroboam shall die by the sword~\ The words of 
Amos here quoted by the priest contain only the subject of his 
preaching, and this, indeed, is given in a form which would be 
most likely to incite the king, for it will be noted that (i) the 
actual statement of Amos was not personal ; he said the house 
of Jeroboam (7 9 ), | although, while Jeroboam was still alive he was 
the principal member of the house ; (2} the reasons for Amos s 
words are not given, viz. Israel s sins and the prophet s inter 
cession. Perhaps, on the other hand, no concise statement of 
this kind could be more accurate, and it may therefore be an 
injustice to charge the priest with distorting or perverting the 
prophet s words. || Israel shall surely go away into captivity"] 

* Ke., We. f Va., Ros., Hd., Dr. Hi., Ke., We. 

I Os. ( Geb., Har., Jus., Schro., Pu. || So Now. ; per contra GAS., Dr. 


These words had been uttered by the prophet many times; 
cf. 5 6 - 27 6 7 . 12. And Amaziah spoke unto Amos ] This message 
was sent by the priest to Amos, either (i) because his words 
to the king produced no effect, and he was compelled there 
fore to act upon his own authority;* or (2) after the message 
had been sent to the king and before the answer had been 
returned ; in this case they were prompted by a friendly desire 
to have the prophet avoid the king s wrath, f or, as seems most 
plausible, (3) on the authority of the king, the statement to that 
effect being omitted ; J such ellipses in conversation are very 
common; cf. Is. y 10 " 13 . There is no evidence (4) that an un 
satisfactory answer had been received from the king, and is 
left unmentioned because it was unsatisfactory. O thou Seer /] 
Cf. the rendering, visionary. \\ The history of nrn is brief :f in 
pre-exilic literature it is used only of Gad (28. 24 11 , cf. i Ch. 2i 9 ) ; 
in later literature it occurs 2 Ch. 29^ (Gad), i Ch. 2$ 5 (Heman), 
2 Ch. <f i2 15 (Iddo), i 9 2 (Jehu, son of Hanani), 29 (Asaph), 
35 15 (Jeduthun),and (in the plural) Is. 29 30 Mi. 3 7 2 Ch.33 18 - 19 . 
The other word translated seer, Hfcjh, is said (i S. 9) to be the 
oldest designation for prophet, and is used as a title only of 
Samuel (i S. 9 -"-- i Ch. 9 22 2 6 28 29*), of Hanani (2 Ch. i6 7 - 10 ), 
and in plural, Is. 30. Amos had just announced three visions ; 
it was appropriate to apply to him this title ; ** but it is also 
probable that mockery was intended, much as if we should say, 
" O thou gazer ! " |t Go, flee thee to the land of Judah] This 
is not the advice of a friend ; but the command of one in au 
thority. In Judah, the prophet s own land, he might say con 
cerning Israel what he pleased. Eat bread there and prophesy 
there~\ To understand this it must be noted (i) that in the ear 
lier days there were soothsayers, rather than prophets, % | whom 
the people consulted about the affairs of life, making a gift for 
the privilege of the consultation (cf. i S. 9 7 8 ) ; (2) that these 
soothsayers constituted local guilds (i.e. the schools of the proph 
ets), and, for the most part, restricted their work to a particular 
locality, securing their livelihood by means of the gifts received, 

* Dr. f Ros. J Ew. Cal. || GAS. f See Dr., p. 206. 

** Dahl, Mit., Dr., Da. (DB. IV. 109). ft Merc., Jus., Ros., Hd., Dr. 

JJ Cf. Da., art. " Prophecy and Prophets," DB. 

VII. 12-14 I7 1 

i.e. from charity; (3) that in later times the great mass of 
the so-called prophets were only soothsayers of this character, 
receiving rewards from the people for speaking according to 
their wishes (cf. Is. 3 o 10 Mi. 3 5 Ez. i 3 19 i K. 22 13 Je. 2 3 16 - 17 28" 
29 8f ) ; (4) that, in every case, those whom time has shown to 
be true prophets were, like Amos, bold in their utterance, and 
regardless of public opinion. The priest is anxious to dismiss 
Amos, for he supposes him to be a soothsayer, and therefore 
one who is in sympathetic touch with the masses of the people, 
and these, as always, are ready to rise against those who are 
in authority. He orders him to go to Judah, where he will have 
no difficulty in making a livelihood by uttering invectives against 
Israel, for the people of Judah will be pleased to hear of any 
calamity which threatens Jeroboam II. 13. But at Bethel thou 
shaft no longer prophesy} Cf. 2 12 . Then follow two reasons for 
this banishment: (i) Bethel is the place of the king s sanctuary, 
i.e. the principal headquarters in the kingdom for the national 
religion; and (2) it is the royal residence; these, of course, 
were the very reasons why Amos desired to preach in this place. 
14. And Amos answered and said~\ With these words the move 
ment leaves the lighter trimeter, and becomes a heavier, more 
sonorous tetrameter. The opening words are strong : / am no 
prophet, nor a prophefs son, etc.~\ " Amos was the founder and 
the purest type of a new phase of prophecy."* The use of the 
past tense, / was no prophet, etc. (i.e. when I was called), to 
avoid a contradiction! with v. 15 , is based upon a misconception 
of the meaning of the prophet s words, which is, " I am not a 
prophet by profession, nor am I a member of a prophetic guild." J 
The literal use of the phrase, prophet s son, has been defended 
on the ground that among false prophets the office was trans 
mitted from father to son ; but for this no evidence exists. The 
other interpretation depends upon (i) the general use of the 
word " son " in Semitic in the sense of belonging to, (2) the name 
applied to the companies of prophets at Bethel, Gilgal, etc. 
(cf. i K. 20 35 2 K. 2 3 - 5 - 7 - 15 , etc.). A shepherd am /] See on i 1 . 

* We. Pro!. 472. t So (PS, Ros., Schro., AV., RV., Dr. 

I ye:, Cal., Mau., Hd., Ke., We., Mit., Dr., GAS. Har. 

1 72 AMOS 

And a dresser of sycamores ] This occupation was of the 
lowest in rank, and, joined with that of herdsman, it indicates the 
humble origin of the prophet, obn has been thought * to refer 
to the " piercing " of the fruit in order that it might ripen ; but 
the verb is better understood as signifying " to tend or dress 
the fruit of the sycamores " (v.i.). This fruit resembles a small 
fig, although it is very insipid in taste. The tree " grew abun 
dantly in the mild climate of the Shephelah, or Maritime Plain 
(i K. lo 27 i Ch. 2y 28 ), as it does still in that of the deep Jordan 
valley; in Egypt, where it also grew (Ps. y8 47 ), and where it is 
found still, its wood was used for doors, boxes, coffins, and articles 
of furniture (Wilkinson-Birch, Anc. Eg. II. 416). It attains the 
size of a walnut tree, has wide-spreading branches, and, on account 
of its shade, is often planted by the wayside (Lk. ip 4 ). The fruit 
grows, not on the branches, but on little sprigs rising directly 
out of the stem, and in clusters like the grape it is something 
like a small fig in shape and size, but insipid and woody in 
taste" (Driver, p. 207).! 15. Go, prophesy against my people, 
Israel^ It was while he was following his occupation that the mes 
sage of Yahweh came to him, a message which he could not refuse 
to obey, a command, indeed, to go north to Israel, and to preach 
against her. The prep. b$ is euphemistic for btt (cf. v. 16 ). This 
usage in a bad sense (cf. Je. 26" ff - 28 8 Ez. 6 2 ) is clearly indicated 
by the context, j " There is a note of yearning " in the suffix 
<_ of "tel? (cf. " thy " in 9 15 ). 16. Now, therefore } All that has 
been said thus far is preliminary, the real word is yet to be 
spoken. Thou sayesf] A marked antithesis is made between the 
thou sayest of Amaziah and the Yahweh hath said (v. 17 ). Thou 
shalt not preach} tpj in Hiph. is here first used of prophecy 
(cf. Mi. 2 tt11 Ez. 2i 2 - 7 Jb. 2 9 22 also Ct. 4 16 Dt. 3 2 2 ). The transfer 
of drop to preach may rest upon the idea that the word of 
prophecy drops refreshingly like dew upon the obedient, weari 
somely upon the disobedient ; || or, better, may have been suggested 
by the flow of prophetic speech when in the ecstasy.^" The 
verb is here essentially synonymous with KS3 of the parallel clause, 

* F, Ba. ; cf. Lagarde, Mit, I. 68 f. ; Che. in WRS. Proph. 396 ; Mit., Dr. 
t Cf. G. E. Post, art. " Sycamore," DB. || Pu. 

t Mau., We. Mit. H Dr. 

VII. H-I7 173 

and does not carry with it any contemptuous idea. 17. Thy 
wife shall be a harlot in the city~\ This does not imply that she 
is already one of the Wtfip of Baal ; * or that she shall enter 
voluntarily into whoredom, in order to obtain her accustomed 
luxuries;! or that she will be seduced by the conquerors;! but 
that she shall be forcibly ravished, and that in the city, i.e. in 
public (cf. i 13 Is. i3 16 La. 5" Zc. i4 2 ), the disgrace being all the 
greater. || Thy sons and thy daughters shall fall by the sword~\ 
i.e. thy children. The daughters were generally taken as wives for 
the soldiers, but the punishment is here extraordinary. Thy land 
shall be divided by line~] This distribution of land to colonists was 
in accordance with the Assyrian policy after the time of Tiglath- 
pileser III. (cf. 2 K. iy 24 Mi. 2 4 Je. 6 12 ). The line was, of course, 
the measuring-line. Thou shalt die in an unclean soil ] This 
is characteristic of the early Israelitish thought. Any land in 
which Yahweh was not present was unclean (i S. 26 19 ). More 
over, Yahweh could not be present, unless he could be properly 
worshipped (cf. Ho. g 3 -* Ez. 4 13 ).^T The reference is probably 
to Assyria. It was for this reason, in part, that no place of wor 
ship was established in Babylon during the exile. Israel shall 
surely go into captivity away from his land~\ The very words 
(v. 11 ) with which Amaziah had charged him are now repeated. 
This shows his daring. These words were, after all, the sum and 
substance of his preaching. Perhaps he expected the captivity 
immediately. In any case, about twenty-five years passes before 
Tiglathpileser III. attacks Israel, and thirty-five before Samaria 
is destroyed by Sargon. 

10. Sain] From *?ai; cf. Arabic <5 . The -i of the preformative has 
arisen through a depression of the vowel from h^ (ground-form yaukhal 
- yawkhal} ; GK. 69 r\ so Ko. I. i, 36, 2; Bottcher, 475 f., Bickell, 33, 
Stade, 486. On the basis of the proper name Srnrv (Je. 37"; cf. 38 1 ), Ew. 8 
127^, explains it as a Hoph. always used instead of the Qal. VonS] 
From another root, but similar in sound to Sain. 11. 3nra] Emph. position; 
chiastic order; and the emph. inf. n^j; cf. 5 5 7 17 ; GK. 113 ; Ew. 8 312*7. 
12. n-a] Imv. fol. by another imv., and this by an impf., a rare combi- 

* Jus. ; cf. Har. f Ew. J Geb. 

$ Cal., Ros., Mau., Hi., Hd., Pu., We., GAS., Now., Dr. || See RP. III. 51. 

IT Now. Arch. II. 275 f.; WRS. OTJC. 249 f. 

1 74 AMOS 

nation. N2jn]; H. 23,rm.(i). iS] Eth. dat.; H. 39,7; Ew. 8 , 
315 ; K6. 35. 13. *?NTP3] Emph. pos.; ace. of place. Xin] Showing 
that fc ?N~no is masc., as are all names of towns in which no appears; K6. 
248 c. -ny ]imn S] Cf. 5 2 7 8 8 2 . Y?D anpn] Note omission of art. with 
jSo in this common phrase, cf. Da. 22, rm. 3. 14. fyi] Here used in 
the technical sense of retort, or reply to an accusation; cf. Jb. ^ 
etc. 0*713] The vb. seems to be a loan-word, being a denominative from 

the Arabic (jIxXj, a fig, or Ethiopic balasa fig, or sycamore (Di. Lex. 
Aeth. col. 487; Lag. BN. 108), and evidently = to care for, or dress, figs, 
or sycamores. @ renders xvlfav = scraping ; 0. similarly (xapdcrcrcui ) ; this, 
perhaps, points to some process of nipping the fruit to aid it in maturing. 
(Cf. Lag. Mit. I. 68 f.; Tristram, Nat. Hist. Bib. 399.) 15. \)n,-"i] The 
waw cons. = but. IEN nnx] In contrast with mrv IDN no. 

13. A fourth vision of destruction, with an explanatory 
discourse. 8 1 " 14 . 

(i) A vision of summer fruit, the ripeness of which indicates 
that its end has come; 8 1 - 2 . (2) An address: O ye who are 
corrupt, who practise every manner of wrong-doing, against 
whom the earth quaked, but in vain the day is coming when 
the sun shall be darkened, when slaughter shall prevail, when 
mourning shall be universal, when a famine for the presence of 
Yahweh shall fill the land, for he may not be found ; when the 
strongest shall faint, when men shall swear by their gods, and 
when they shall fall, never to rise. S 4 " 6 - 7f 9 and 3 - 10 - llf - 13f -. 

This section is a logical unit. It is composed of seven strophes of trimeter 
movement, each of six lines. Each strophe represents a step in the progress 
of the thought : str. i (vs. 1 - 2 ), the vision that the end has come; str. 2 (vs. 4 6 ), 
a pointed arraignment of those who stand accused; str. 3 (vs. 7 - 8 ), the threat of 
earthquake; str. 4 (vs. 9 - 3 ), the darkening of the sun, the slaughter of multi 
tudes; str. 5 (v. 10 ), deep and universal mourning; str. 6 (vs. 11 - 12 ), the aban 
donment of his people by Yahweh ; str. 7 (vs. 13 - 14 ), despair, confusion, 

The most important modifications of the text are the following: (i) The 
omission of v. 2a , the question and answer, a gloss, after the style of Zecha- 
riah, which has crept in and supplanted the original third line of the strophe. 
This third line contained, perhaps, a further description of the V>p aiSo, cf. 
a similar expanded form in 4 7 7 1 ; (2) the transposition of v. 3 , describing the 
wailing because of slaughter, to follow v. 9 , thus making with v. 9 a complete 
strophe. In its present place v. 3 has no meaning, while, after v. 9 , it not only 
continues the thought of terrible punishment, but prepares the way for the 

vni. i-2 175 

following strophe, which is wholly given up to the thought of mourning; 
(3) the omission of v. 6 , which consists of the repetition, with slight changes, 
of 2 66 , and the gloss TOtW *U Sani; (4) the omission of the stereotyped 
phrases in v. lla : mm ... run. Hal. s transposition of vs. llaud12 to precede 
9 11 is at least unnecessary. 

VIII. 1, 2. The fourth vision of destruction the basket of 
summer fruit. 

1. vp aiSa] 6 tiyyos i&vrov, perhaps = tfgii iS? (Schro.) ; A., 

S., Kd\afws (}7rc6/>as; 6., #7705 dirwpas dcpivys; 
or V(5 nSs (Seb.); d N^i? fl-vo >So JND; U uncinus pomorum. 

2. IDN^I] & adds ^N mm. fpn] Hoffm. n^ (so Gu.). 

1. Thus the Lord Yahweh showed me~\ Each of the first four 
visions begins with the same words. A basket of summer fruit~\ 
The word iibs occurs only once outside of this passage, viz. in 

Je. 5", where it is "cage" (cf. Assyr. kilubi, bird-net). The 


word was doubtless a general term for receptacle (cf. ^Jij , 
stitch, braid), used alike for cage or basket. The use of pp, 
summer fruit (cf. Je. 24 lff- ) is to be connected with the pp (end) 
of v. 2 . The picture in the vision is suggested by the thought 
concerning Israel. 2. The end has come unto my people Israel~\ 
The advance in thought between this and the former visions will 
be noted. The end is now close. Paronomasia, or punning, is 
not infrequent among the prophets.* It is not to be supposed 
that the words pp and pp are at all connected etymologically.f 

I will not again pass them by\ Cf. 7 8 . For v. 3 , v.i., p. 181. 
This vision is really a reassertion of the thought contained in 

the third vision, which had been interrupted. Three interpreta 
tions are suggested: (i) As summer fruit, when ripe, may not 
last long, so Israel, ripe in her sins, shall now come to an end. J 
(2) As summer fruit is plucked when ripe, so that it may not rot, 
so shall Israel be removed from home and carried into captivity. 
But it is better to adopt another, viz. (3) the summer fruit is late 

* See Je. if- 5020- 34 5120 EZ. 2516 Mi. ii4f- Ho. i^ ; cf. Casanowicz, Paronomasia 
in the O. T. 

t Cf. Hoffm., who substitutes pp for yp, and treats -nsy as in y 8 . 
J So Cal., Mau., Now., Elh. Merc., Ros., Hes., Schlier. 

176 AMOS 

and poor, the best being gathered earlier ; a receptacle containing 
summer fruit shows the last of the crop, the end of the year, and, 
by analogy, the approaching end of Israel s kingdom.* 

4-6, 7f., 9 and 3, 10, 11 f., 13 f. An address, growing out 
of the vision, directed to the corrupt and wicked Israelites, an 
nouncing the certain and immediate destruction of the nation. 
V. 4 has no connection with v. 3 , which for this and other reasons 
is transferred to follow v. 9 . 

4. o- DXtt n] Read O BNtfn = who tread upon (so We., Now., Oct.). @ ol 
ets rb irpul, the last three words being, perhaps, a dittog. of 


(so Hirscht). * "* ? ~ ""^y-" 1 (Seb.), cf. & r^"% 
pox] , om. nott Si] 5 om. ; ( Karadwaareijovres , 0. Xi/ovrej; U deficcre 
facitis. Gr. nx piyyS. Hoffm. ratfSi. Now. D^pu^rn (so Oort, Em.; Marti). 
Oct. r" i a^>, omitting i (so Bewer, AJSL. XIX. Ii6f., who considers it an 
adverbial expression meaning altogether}. Elh. mntf 1 ?, which he transposes 
between o^as^n and fvaN. pix] ( airb rrjs 7975. Bewer adds v:n\ 
5. Bnnn] Gr. Bhnn. "12^] "F merces ; 6 om. (so Marti). natfm] Sb adds 
a predicate, viz. jOS/o. Gr. | in. -a] 6r)<ra.vpbv = IXIN; so ,S (so also 
Oort, 77; T. XIV. 155, and Em.; Gr., Elh.). F frumentum. ptopn 1 ?] SS^, 
I p. pi., as also for the remaining infinitives. n> s ] Oort (Em.) ma^ ?. 
We. nu:S.i (so Marti, Now. 2 ). 6. SDC] 6 dTri Trai/r^s (= i ?3p); 5 ^L. 
"^] 76^/xaros; (Q n , Trpdaews; perhaps = x^3 (Va., Stek.), or nau; (Vol.). 
Gr. -U3 or ias. -i>airj] Hoffm. -i3^ ; j. Oort rejects the last three words 
of v. 6 ; while Lohr and Oct. consider the first six a repetition from 2 6 , and 
doubt whether the last three words should be connected with v. 5 , or be 
looked upon as the conclusion of a missing sentence. We., Now., Bau- 
mann, and Marti reject the entire verse. 7. app psja] & om. a and 
renders as an appos. to rnrv. Gr. fixjS. natPN] < ^TriXTya-^creTai; so {. 
, misunderstanding, renders e/s vt/cos (cf. I 11 ). an^ty^c] = 
(so Marti). 8. n-in] Hal. adds jnnrn (cf. 9 5 ). nnSj:] A., S. o-/ce- 
= nsoy (Hirscht). nx^] Read -nxo (so Oort, W T e., Gr., Gu., 
Now., Oct., Marti). All versions render river, Riedel, nxa (cf. Baumann). 
n*?a] @ <rvj>Tt\eia = nS? (Vol., Seb.; adopted by Hirscht); so & <n ^ D > 
TS universus; other Greek versions ira<ra. nptt j) ntt-\jj-i] @ uses one vb., 
Kara/S^o-erat, the first being probably a gloss (so Now., Elh., Oort, Em., Oct.; 
Gr. regards it as a dittog.; but cf. Hirscht). Hoffm. nisnjr, for nty-uji (so 
We. 3 ). Read with Q e rt and several codd. nypsrj (cf. 9 5 ) (so Gr., Hoffm., Gu., 
Now., Oct., et at.). Elh. om. 86 as a repetition from 9 5 . We. om. entire 
v. (so Now., Lohr. Marti). 

VIII. 4-5 177 

4. Hear this} The beginning of a new strophe ; the actual 
threat will be given later in v. 7 ; cf. 3 1 4 1 . Oh ye that tread upon} 
This rendering, based upon the text O BKtpn (v.s.),is preferable; 
cf. 2 7 . And are for making the poor to cease} The idiom is a 
peculiar one but well established.* To translate " even to make," 
etc.,t or, connecting it with D BKBH, " panting after the needy and 
to destroy," \ is unsatisfactory. Nor is it advisable to read "and 
on the Sabbath after the poor of the land " (v.s.), which spoils the 
parallelism, and fails to furnish a consistent thought ; or, " ye who 
oppress the poor " (v.s.), on the basis of 4 1 and (d. The poor of 
the earth} K thibh "nap ; in Q ri., n yy ; the latter = poor, wretched 
(of the physical state), the former = humble, meek (of the spirit 
ual). || The emphasis here is on the low and miserable social state 
of the poor (cf. 2 7 Jb. 24* Is. 3 14f< ), for which either form would be a 
correct expression.^" 5. When will the new moon pass} The day 
of the new moon was celebrated as a religious festival (cf. i S. 

20 alsQ 2 R ^3 ^ jM figffl z 451.6 j Ch> ^ wkh 

TOtt; Ho. 2 11 Nu. 28 11 - 15 Ne. io 32f -). On this observance cf. Di. 
Lev. 578 f. ; Benz. Arch. 464 f. ; also Muss- Arnolt, JBL. XI. 72 ff., 
i6off. The reference here is to such observance; it is to be in 
ferred that, like the Sabbath, it included suspension of trade.** The 
view that BHrn means month, the desire being that some disaster 
would come which would increase the price of grain, ff or that the 
month is the harvest month during which the poor might gather 
what they needed, \ \ scarcely deserves mention. Note also the 
suggestion of Graetz (v.s.} to read "how long till the new (corn) 
will pass away . . . and the old (corn) " etc. That we may sell 
grain] The eager desire to resume a business in which profit 
might be gained, with utter disregard of all conventional and legal 
restraints, is rebuked. One can see no occasion for the suggestion 
of Wellhausen that this reproach is strange, because ordinarily the 
corn-merchant is no loser by delay in disposing of his wares. And 
the Sabbath that we may offer corn} This is better than "open 
(our) storehouses," " grain " by metonymy for " storehouse " || || (cf. 

* Dr. Tenses, 206; Da. Syn. \ 96, rm. 4; GK. 114^. || Geb., Har., Mit. 

f AV. J Mit. Ros. U Hi. 

** Va., Schro., Ros., Hi., Man., Ke., Mit. +J Ki. 

ft Merc. . $$ So generally. |||| Ros. 


1/8 AMOS 

Gn. 4 1 56 ). This is the earliest allusion to the Sabbath in prophetic 
literature. Diminishing the ephah and enlarging the shekel^ The 
size of the ephah is not definitely known, being estimated at from 
21.26 quarts (Thenius) to 40.62 quarts (Josephus).* The shekel 
given in gold or silver has been variously estimated, perhaps in 
gold 16.37 grains (= $10.80) ; in silver 14.55 grains (=$.6o).f 
Perverting balances of deceit^ i.e. providing false balances. A 
third kind of deceit is here mentioned. The attitude of the right- 
minded toward these practices is seen in Ho. i2 7 Jb. 22 6 Pr. n 1 
20 23 . The legal attitude is given in Lv. ip 35 - 36 Dt. 25 13 " 15 ; cf. also 
Ez. 45 9-1 . 6. This verse consists of two elements, both of which 
are glosses or interpolations : ( i ) To buy the poor for silver and 
the needy for a pair of shoes^ A double phrase, of which the 
first part is a modification and the second a repetition of 2 6 . J 
These lines stand in no close relationship with those which pre 
cede (vs. 4and5 refer to dealers in grain; 6a has nothing to do with 
this) ; are entirely out of grammatical harmony with those which 
follow ; are a mere repetition (but in a different context) of 2 6 ; 
and may not be adjusted to any satisfactory construction of the 
strophic system. (2) And we sell the refuse of the corn\ This 
phrase is interpreted, " and buy (the needy) for a share by lot in the 
wheat for sale " ; is declared unintelligible by one, || and at least 
out of place by another.^" It is impossible to connect it gram 
matically or logically with what precedes, although it is sometimes 
called the climax** of the indictment, or the final proof of their ava 
rice. |t The whole is therefore to be taken as two later explanatory 
glosses, coming from different hands. Nowack suggests that per 
haps in 66 we have a fragment of an old saying by Amos, which, with 
the addition of the material in 2 6 (suggested by D BKtrn in 8 4 and 

* Benz. Arch. 183 f. ; cf. Novr.ArcA. I. 203; and art. "Weights and Measures," 

f Benz. Arch. 194; cf. Dr. p. 211 ; WRS. PEF., 1894, p. 229 ; A. R. S. Kennedy, 
art. " Money," DB ; Madden, Coins of the Jews. 

% njp is used for IDS, and D^Sl for pnx, without any serious modification 
of the sense. The infinitive nupS has been taken as indicating the purpose of 
the fraud described in v. 5 , the inf. there indicating the method (Geb.) ; as indi 
cating result rather than purpose (Hi.), and as (like ni^S) parallel with 
and ^-nnS Hoffm., changing text, v.s. || Oort. 

U We. (who calls the entire v. suspicious). ** Mit. ff Dr. 

VIII. 5-8 179 

2 7 ), makes up the verse.* 7. Here begins a new strophe (vs. 7 - 8 ), 
marked by the solemn introduction : Yahweh hath sworn by the 
glory of Jacob~\ The oath is an evidence of indignation, and here, 
as in 4 2 6 8 , " is provoked by the spectacle of some crying moral 
wrong, "f ( has \ against the pride of Jacob, but ? after l?2tttt 
= by. The glory of Jacob is not Palestine, the possession of 
Jacob (although citation may be made of Je. i3 9 Ne. 2 3 Ps. 47* 
Dn. 8 9 ) ; nor, the greatness which he has given Israel ; nor by 
myself (cf. 6 8 ), || for although Yahweh himself is Israel s glory 
(i S. i5 29 ), the author of 6 8 could hardly have described Yahweh 
as " the glory of Jacob " : it is rather the vainglorious boasting of 
Israel (cf. 6 8 Ho. 5 5 y 10 ), by which, as an unchangeable fact, Yah 
weh swears scornfully .^[ I will never forget all their dceds~\ i.e. the 
multitude of their wicked deeds. The elliptical form of the oath 
is here employed ; for the full form see 2 S. 3 9 ip 13 , etc. 8. Con 
trary to the arrangement usually adopted,** v. 8 is to be closely con 
nected with v. 7 , forming with it a strophe. The indignant feeling 
of Yahweh is shared by nature, and in proof of this the earth will 
quake. On this account shall not the earth tremble ?~\ Not on 
account of the oath just sworn, ff but on account of the wicked 
ness and corruption of Israel, Yahweh (cf. 9 5 ) will bring a convul 
sion of the land itself. Tri describes the movement up and down, 
the restlessness which characterizes the earthquake. Some \% 
have thought this refers to the earthquake in Uzziah s time (Am. i 1 
Zc. i4 5 ). And every inhabitant in her shall mourn\ Its univer 
sality and its grievous character are thus vividly depicted. And 
shall not the whole of it rise like the Nile ?~\ n3 has been read like 
light, but is almost universally taken for IK S, like the Nile (cf. 9 5 ). 

* Elh. rearranges the text of vs.*. . 5. and 6& ( an d translates as follows : 

(4) Hear this, ye who long to plunge the poor and the miserable in ruin, 

(6 a) To buy the poor for money and the miserable for a pair of shoes, 
(5 6 ) Who say, when will the new moon be over that we may sell grain 

And the Sabbath, that we may open the granary, and sell the chaff of the 

Who diminish the measure 

And advance the price 

And falsify the deceitful balance. 

t Dr. J So also Jer., Os., Jus., Schro. $ Bauer. || Hes., Ke., Marti. 
H We., Now., Dr. ** Dr. ft Schegg, Ke. ++ Or. $ Rashi. 

l8o AMO2 

The reference is to the annual inundation. The rendering, " the 
whole land shall be inundated as by the Nile," * makes the subject 
of nbl? not the thing which goes up, but that unto which some 
thing goes (cf. Is. 34 13 Pr. 24 31 ). The interrogation continues as 
indicated in the translation given. And heave\ A gloss ; omitted 
by O, lacking in 9 5 and superfluous ; probably due to inability 
to understand nptwi.f Cf. Hoffmann s suggestion (v.s.). } And 
sink like the Nile of Egypi\ Cf. Is. 24 19 - 20 . This phenomenon was 
known throughout the world. The usual translation makes 
= as by the Nile. 

9. Lohr and Marti reject the first six words as a later addition. 
< 3 p. with c>Eiy as subj., Sutrercu. Similarly 2., 6.; IS occidet ; 1& ^DDN. 

Tocrin] @ 3 p.; but U tenebrescere faciam. nix ova] Gr. ava nix; Che. 

? * 

(Crit. Bib?) DP m> a. 3. i^im] & _l^sJc. nin^] Read n nr, singing- 
women, since on>2> would be expected for songs, and the present text yields 
no sense (so Hoffm., Oort, We., Gu., Now., Elh., Lohr, Oct., Baumann, 
Marti). (51 TO, (parvdnara, variously explained, e.g. as = nnvtf (Dahl), rm^ 
(Va.), D>J1DD (Vol.), rVnV (Riedel). A. arpd^iyyes; 6. rd tirdvudev; S. y5a; 
U cardines = n n^x (Dahl). S:pn] (g^ have article (so Gr.). Ninn era] 
Superfluous (so Lohr, Marti); cf. 8 9 . Sb has this phrase twice, connecting 
it the first time with the preceding, and the second time with the following 
context. The presence of ots between the two occurrences renders dittog. 
improbable (Seb.). ni.-p IJTN DSJ] Lohr transposes to the end of the v. 
Baumann, Marti, and Now. 2 om. "Ufln 21] @ TTO\I>S 6 ITCTTTW/CWS; U multi 

^ y p *, 

morientur; % ],\4/ ^ t ^m 1. on ^n] Read TjWn, and om. on as a 
dittog. (so Oort, Gun.). (5 tTripptyu ffiw-jr-fiv = on jiSlPNj U projicietur 
silentium; & M^P ^L^AJo- Zeydner (-ii^ay =) D3p; n^n (ThSt., 1886, 
pp. 205 ff.; so Val.). Elh. Dj?a ^Wn. Get. and Hal. on ^Srn. Lohr suggests 
that n of DI was originally the article, while D, or c, is the initial letter of a 
lost word, perhaps nimTD. 10. ITP] <H Aya-n-rjTov. nnnns] @ robs /J.CT 
avTov ; 2., 6. r6 iff\o.rov rrjs 7175. Gr. mrnDj?n\ 11. The first six words 
are a gloss (so also Baumann). p-wa 3j;i] Gr. inserts NDXI. Before poie 1 ?] 
@ inserts Xi/idi/ = ay^. nan] Read sg. with @&U& and many Mss. (so 
Dr., Marti). 12. iyji] & ^a-*blsJo. D^D] @ uSara T^S ^aXdo-o-^s, a double 
rendering. IBBW* nn?D] Gr. IBBW^I nnn-" p^n (?). 13. njeSynn] @ exXef- 
iffovcriv. NDxa] Om. as superfluous to sense and metre (so Lohr). 14. Lohr 
om. 14 a as a later addition. DDi^Na] <& /cord TOV JXaoviou, with BB>N in 

* Dathe, Jus., Ros. f Now. 

J There is no good reason for treating (with We.) the whole v. as a gloss. 

VIII. 9, 3 I8l 

mind; > l^siuajs. Oort metea (so Gr., Elh.). pnSNj Baumann >rv?N. 
pi] <S 6 0e6$ <rou. Oort, rpa = T}N3 (so We., Elh.). Hoffm. rpn (so von 
Gall, Altisr. Kultstdtten, 49; Oct.; Marti; Now. 2 ; cf. Wkl. A OF. II. 194*".). 
Dozy, TI^N (Jsr. zu Mekka, 31 f.; so Now.). Gr. T>nSN (so Gu.). Gun. ^ 
Houtsma, -priD {ThT. X. 91). Hal. T 

9. The next strophe is made up of vs. 9and3 . / will cause the 
sun to set at noon} The writer has in mind the day of Yahweh, 
which is characterized by great natural changes. These are sug 
gested by those with which the prophet is familiar. An eclipse 
had occurred June 15, B.C. 763,* the centre of which passed 
through Asia Minor at about 38-39 N. At Jerusalem (31 
46 N.) it would be visible "as a fairly large partial eclipse."! 
Reference to an eclipse of the sun has been found by some, 
also, in Mi. 3 6 Zc. i4 6 Jo. 2 10 - 31 3 15 Je. is 9 2 K. 2O 11 Is. 38 8 
(689 B.C.) ; | Ez. 30 18 32 7 - 8 (556 B.C.) ; but it is to be noted that 
nowhere in the Old Testament is there direct mention of an 
eclipse, and that in all the cases cited greater or less doubt 
exists whether there was really any thought of an eclipse. This 
leaves our passage as the only clear case of an indirect char 
acter. 3. The result of such an eclipse is the terror and dismay 
which first appear in connection with the palace life : the singing 
women of the palace shall wail } For text v.s. The word ba-n, 
Assyrian ekallu, means large house, used ordinarily of temple in 
Hebrew, although just as regularly of palace in Assyrian. An 
other rendering is " walls " (rrnitf). || Some urge against the trans 
lation palace the representation in 6 4 " 9 , and the use by Amos of 
nua-ix to express the idea of palace (6 8 i 4 - 7 - 10 - 12 etc.) f ; but this 
is not conclusive. Wailing was the ordinary sign of grief for the 
dead (Is. i5 2 - 3 i6 7 etc.). A multitude of carcasses } The eclipse 
foretells and accompanies the direst of all disasters an indis 
criminate slaughter. In every place they are cast} The imper 
sonal one casts is used for the passive,** or better (v.s.) vocalize as 

* According to Michaelis, Feb. 9, 784 B.C. ; but cf. Dr. who cites von Oppolzer, 
Canon der Finsternisse vol. 52 (1887) of the Denkschriften of the Vienna Acad 
emy; G. Smith, Eponym Canon, 46 f., 83. f Dr. 

J V. Bosanquet, TSBA. III. 31 fit, V. 261 ; Pinches, DB. I. 193. 

\ Cf. Boutflower, AJSL. XVII. 244-9. II , Dahl. H Schro. 

** Geb., Va., Mau., Ba, 

1 82 AMOS 

passive. So great is the slaughter that the burial is thus promis 
cuous. Some prefer to take the verb as imperative, " throw them 
anywhere." * If the text is allowed to stand, en is translated 
Hush /] So deep is the despair, and so great the danger, that 
silence is enjoined by those who are removing their dead (cf. 
the gloss in 6 9 - 10 ). But this is quite doubtful. The principal 
treatments of en have been: (i) as an adverb, in silence ;\ 
(2) as an imperative, be silent ; \ (3) as an interjection ; 
(4) as connected with the following sentence ; || (5) as a mar 
ginal note added to express the feeling of some reader ;f 
(6) omitted as unintelligible ; ** (7) rendered, with a change of 
text (v.s.) f " casts bitterness " ; ff (8) it is, most probably, a corrup 
tion of Ttfn, an abbreviation for ^btt H (v.s.). The strophe is the 
most picturesque of this series. It is strictly logical the eclipse 
the slaughter the confusion and despair of the burial. The 
dramatic effect is probably not so definite nor so strong as is sug 
gested by G. A. Smith. 10. And I will turn your pilgrimages 
into mourning } The pilgrimages or festivals were the types of 
rejoicing (Is. 3O 29 Ho. 2 11 La. 5 15 ). And all your songs into 
dirges } Cf. v. 3 and 5 1 . Sackcloth } i.e. a coarse cloth made of 
goats hair or camels hair. It was the garb of prophets (Is. 2O 2 
Zc. i3 4 2 K. i 8 Mk. i 6 ) and mourners (Is. 15* 22 12 ), and was worn 
next to the skin (i K. 2I 27 2 K. 6 30 Jb. i6 15 Is. 32"), being bound 
about the loins (Ez. y 18 ), sometimes as the only garment (i K. 2O 31 
2 1 27 ), and sometimes under an outer cloak (2 K. 6 ?>0 ). It is prob 
able that a loin cloth of sackcloth was the earliest dress of the 
Hebrews (cf. Erman, Life in Ancient Egypt, 200 ff.), and the use of 
it in mourning is an illustration of the general custom of retaining 
ancient forms and usages in religious ceremonies. JJ Baldness] 
This was another sign of mourning ; it was artificially produced, 
the hair on the forehead being shaved off (Dt. I4 1 ). It was a 
custom common to Hebrews, Moabites (Is. i5 2 ), Phoenicians 
(Ez. 27 31 ), Philistines (Je. 4y 5 ), Arabs (Agh. xv. 12), and many 
others. It seems to be a relic of ancestor- worship, the object of 

* JT, Merc., Hd. + Merc., Har. || SS. ** We. 

f Cal., Os., Va., Schro., Mau., Ba., St. $ Drusius. f Gun. ft Elh. 

Jt Cf. Schwally, Das Leben nach dem Tode, 12 ft". ; Kennedy, art. " Sackcloth," 
DB. \ Now. Arch. I. 193. 

viii. io-i2 1 83 

it being to establish an inviolable covenant between the living and 
the dead, whereby the aid and protection of the latter are assured 
to the former. In Arabia the hair was deposited on the tomb. 
Hair, on account of its rapid growth, was thought to be a special 
seat of life and strength (cf. the story of Samson) ; hence, like 
blood, it was considered especially efficacious as a bond of union. 
For the later Hebrew use of the custom, cf. Is. 3 24 22 12 Mi. i 16 
Ez. y 18 etc.* And I will make if\ Not the land and its people, f 
but the lamentation and sorrow of Israel on this terrible day. J 
Like the mourning for an only son~\ An expression of the most 
intense sorrow, cf. Je. 6 26 Zc. i2 10 . There is no reference to Tarn- 
muz, the Assyrian Adonis. And the end of if\ That is, of the 
mourning ; not of the Messianic times, || nor of the land.^f As 
a bitter day~\ Theirs will be a hopeless sorrow, the end of which is 
worse than the beginning.** 11. And I will send a famine^ In 
such misery the people will naturally turn to Yahweh, but there 
will be a famine and thirst, not for bread nor for water, but for 
hearing the word of Yahweh ] The singular, as in versions (v.s.). 
12. And they shall wander from sea to sea~\ i.e. from the Dead 
Sea to the Mediterranean ft (cf. Ps. 72 ioy 3 Zc. 9 Jo. 2 20 ) ; or, 
perhaps, the term is a more general one, meaning the ends of 
the earth, j J And from the North even to the rising of the sun 
they shall run to andfro~\ A brief expression designating the earth 
with reference to its quarters. They shall not find / /] Cf. i S. 28 6 
Ez. y 26 Je. 37 17 . This is the climax of distress. 

The arguments for treating this strophe (vs. 11 - 12 ) as an interpolation 
(Oort, We., K6. (Einl. 304^), Now., Che. in EB., Lohr, et al.) have little 
force. It is urged: (i) that literal and figurative thirst cannot properly 
be so closely joined; (2) that the formula in v. 13 points back to v. 9 , and not 
to " Lo, the days are coming" (v. 11 ). But in answer it is to be said that 
(i) the word KEU- (v. 13 ) is a gloss; (2) likewise the words, " Behold, the 
days are coming; it is the oracle of the Lord Yahweh" (v. 11 ); (3) these 
verses make a complete strophe, the essential thought of which, abandonment 

* Cf. WRS. Sent. 323 ff. ; arts, on " Baldness," by Macalister, DB. t and W. Max 
Miiller, Jew. Enc. ; art. " Cuttings " ( 3), by C. J. Ball, EB. 

t Cal., Merc., Ros., Hd., Or., Mit. $ We., Dr., Elh. H Or. 

J Geb., Hi., Ke., We., Dr., Elh. || Schegg. 

** Oort and Gun. are unwarranted in pronouncing v. 10& unintelligible, 
ft Va., Jus., Ros., Or., Mit., Marti. J+ Ke., Now. 

1 84 AMOS 

of the people by Yahweh, is most appropriate after the description of the 
bitter mourning (in the preceding strophe). Marti om. 116 - 126 as glosses. 

13. A new strophe now begins, the last, which describes the 
pitiable plight of the nation. The fairest maidens and the youths~\ 
The flower of the people, and its strength, shall faint"] This is no 
anticlimax ; nor is there real force in the argument for omitting 
this verse instead of vs. 11 - 12 .* The moment one recognizes the 
division into strophes, it is perfectly clear that no difficulty arises 
in going from v. 12 to v. 13 . 14. The flower of the people have 
been they who swear by Samaria s guilt } The calf at Bethel ; 
cf. 1^ nK iOPi, Ho. io 8 ; but since Amos nowhere else attacks any 
special feature of the cult, and since Samaria is not used else 
where by him for Israel, Wellhausen supposes that originally there 
stood here the name of the god of Bethel, f Notice should be 
taken of the emendation adopted by W. R. Smith, Oort, Graetz, 
and Elhorst of mtPK, Asherah, for nt?K ; but cf. Stade, ZA W. 
III. 13, and Hoffmann, ibid. 123. And say : as liveth thy God, 
O Dan\ The calf at Dan, in northern Israel, near the base of 
Mt. Hermon (i K. I2 20 ). \ Swearing was a part of the routine 
of worship, cf. Dt. 6 13 io 20 Is. 48 1 Je. i2 1G . Under the Canaanitish 
influence, there had come to be different Yahwehs at different 
places, with different names; cf. Gn. i6 13 2I 33 33 20 35 7 . And 
by the way of Beersheba~\ On account of the difficulty of ^"V^i, 
there have been suggested (v.s.) : (i) thy darling, (2) thy well, 
(3) thy lord, (4) thy god. It is possible to understand "way" 
of the method of worship at Beersheba (cf. Ju. 2 22 Je. io 2 ) ; but, 
on the whole, it seems preferable to take it of the pilgrimages 
to Beersheba, with which may be compared those to Mecca. || 
And they shall fall and not rise again~\ The conception of 
God is so far from the true one, and the worship based upon 
it is so far from that which Yahweh desires, that utter ruin awaits 
the people.^" 

1. a] A noun of the same form as tf-ia, waa, from the ground-form aii> 
(z -*i) as is shown by the Assyrian equivalent kiltibi, bird-net (cf. Winckler, 
ZA. VI. 145; Zimmern, ibid., 157), which occurs as a Canaanitish gloss in the 

* GAS. 185. f So Now., Che. (#.). Marti. J Stanley, Sin. and Pal. 461. 
$ Now. Arch. II. 8 f. || GAS., Dr. H Paton, JBL. XIII. 88 ff. 

VIII. I 3 -I4 185 

Tell-el Amarna letters. Cf. GK. 84 a, /. 2. S iujr] Cf. 7 8 ; these are the 
only two cases of this phrase; the more common expression for forgive 
is ty -ay (Mi. 7 18 ). 4. nor 1 ?] With syncopation of n, GK. 53^. Inf. cstr. 
continuing a ptcp., H. 29, 50; Ko. 413^; Dr. 206. >):>?] For which Qr. 
^jy. MJJ? in Kt. and Qr. is found in one Ms. which is followed by the second 
and the third editions of the Hebrew Bible (Naples, about 1491-1493, and 
Brescia, 1494) ; while another Ms., followed by the fourth edition of the Bible 
(Pesaro, 1511-1517) and by the Complutensian Polyglot, has "jy in both Kt. 
and Qr. (see Ginsburg). For explanations of forms cf. Earth, NB. 113; 
Lag. BN. pp. 48, 1 88, 190, and Mit. I. 81 ; BDB. uj? and >jy differ in meaning 
(v.s., and cf. Lag. Mit. I. 81), but the line between them cannot be very strictly 
drawn, for they are frequently interchanged, a confusion no doubt partly due 
to the Massoretes. 5. ~a# moirji] Impf. with i to denote purpose; cogn. 
ace. popnS] This infinitive and the following are parallel with iCN 1 ? at the 
beginning of the verse, the construction being that of concomitant circum 
stance, equivalent to the gerundive; cf. Dr. 206; GK. 1140; H. 29, 3^. 
IJTNO] Cf. Pr. n 1 2O 23 Ho. i2 8 Mi. 6 11 (yen TND); and the opposite (pis TNI:) 
Lv. I9 36 Ez. 45 10 Pr. i6 n Jb. 3i 6 . Other words are 0^=3 and n;,-j (Is. 46 6 ). 
7. rm N DN] Ellipt. form of oath; Ew. 8 356 a; GK. 149 b; H. 48, 9 a; 
Ko. 391 . nxj^] Other phrases denoting the same idea are nn> "vn 1 ?; 
-ni -n nj?; cSiy nj? (Je. f Ps. IO3 17 ); cSiy 1 ? (Gn. 3 22 ); -ij (Am. i 11 Ps. I9 10 ); 
"V ?% ( Ps - 83 18 ). 8 - ?... ?.] The two particles separated. nj?peji] 
Kt. nppji. In some Mss. n^pjyji is found in Kt. and Qr., and so also in the 
Complutensian Polyglot. Cf. POJ = jnx 9. nnnx] According to Lag. BN. 

129, 1 6, this is connected with Arab, "-llb ( = /<? step for tti), and, like the 

s ft T. ^ 

Arab. /"^> literally = ^ar/^ (cf. Assyr. Xtru), and denotes the midday as the 

highest point in the sun s course. Ko. II. i. p. 93 derives it from inx = -I--IT (to 
shine}. It occurs (ainx) in Mesha-Stone, 1. 15. It appears to be a dual 
form; cf. aoiy (Ex. i6 12 ). P^V] ^ introducing the obj., a common Ara 
maic usage; Ko. 289 d. 3. S;pn] Probably a loan-word from Sumerian e-gal 
( great house], which has passed over, directly or indirectly, into Assyr., Arab., 
Aram., Syr., Ethiop., and Heb. (Oppert; Schra. Hollenfahrt der Istar, p. 148; 
COT. II. 39; Haupt, E-vowel, u f.; Lehmann, SamaYsumukin, 126). Aram. 
and Syr. N^IPP, and Assyr. ekallu palace or temple, but the latter meaning is 
rare in Assyr. (Dl. HWB.}, while in Ethiop. and Heb. it is the prevailing 
one. It is used of palaces, as here, in i K. 2I 1 2 K. 2O 18 Is. I3 22 39 7 
2 Ch. 36^ Na. 2 7 Ps. 459- 16 Ho. 8 14 Jo. 4 5 Pr. 3O 28 . The word is much more 
frequent in post-exilic literature than in early writings, which may be due to 
Assyrian influence or to the greater prominence of the temple in Hebrew 
thought, or to the combined influence of both causes (cf. BDB. 228). 
V?>S>n] Other words used in mourning are : nrp N^J, pp, "too, mj, SJN, 
"np, .-IJN, n^ , ncn, nnj. 10. nrp] Cf. 5 1 . The elegiac measure appears in 
this verse with the introduction of the word nj <i p; the evenly balanced mem 
bers of the preceding verses are dropped, and their place is taken by mem- 

1 86 AMOS 

bers consisting of long and short lines, with the long line each time containing 
the predicate of the short line. It is limited to this verse (cf. Bu. ZAW. II. 30 f.). 
n-] Neut., GK. I35/; H. 2, 3. -PIT] Obj. gen.; GK. 128/1; K6. 336 </. 
11. ox "o] Here adversative; not, as frequently, exceptive; cf. GK. 163 . 
Note K6. 372 h. TO^TII] Pf. with Waw cons, in apodosis following a 
ptcp., H. 25, 2d\ K6. 361 c. yw*] On use of ? cf. K6. 281 p. 12. pcv, 
mr;_] In Heb. the points of the compass are denoted in three ways: (i) with 
reference to one s position facing the east they are Dip or anp (east}, ^v or 
p>n (south ], nnrux (west), >NDZ> (north); (2) with reference to the sun they 
are mro or tfoty mra (east), om (south), t^cir NOD or :n>D (west), jicx 
(north) , (3) geographically, SJj (south), & (west). itrjv.r 1 ] Denotes an 
uncertain roaming up and down in order to find something (2 Ch. i6 9 Je. 5 1 
Zc. 4 10 Dn. I2 4 = to search through a writing). 13. njatynn] On form cf. 
GK. 54 k, 146 . 14. jnii j] The custom of attesting the truth of a matter 
by oath was exceedingly common among the Hebrews. Most commonplace 
affairs were ratified by oath (Gn. 2i 25ff -); in certain cases a man s oath was 
sufficient to establish his own innocence (Ex. 22 6f - 9f - 12 ); treaties were made 
binding by oath (Gn. 2i 23f -), likewise promises (Gn. 24 37 SO 5 *"-). This fre 
quent usage caused it to become little more than an emphatic form of state 
ment, as is seen by the fact that Yahweh himself is spoken of as swearing to 
do or not do certain things (e.g. 6 8 Je. 49 13 ). Since oath was usually taken 
in the name of the god worshipped by the one swearing, it came about that 
swearing by a god was considered synonymous with worshipping a god (Dt. 
6 13 io 20 Je. I2 1S Is. 48 1 ). *n] Not the st. cstr. of the substantive vi (Ew. 8 
329 ; K6. II. i. p. 42), but a contracted form of the adj. ^n (whose st. cstr. 
appears only in Dn. 12"), the two forms of the adj. having been differentiated 
by the Massoretes who reserved *n for oaths sworn by Yahweh, and used *n 
in oaths sworn by false gods and other non-enduring persons and things 
(Hoffm. ZA W. III. 124; GK. 93, aa, note; BSZ., BDB.). 

14. A fifth vision of destruction, with a passionate de 
scription of the ruin. 9 1 " 86 . (i) A vision of the downfall of the 
altar at Bethel, the chief seat of the Northern religion, and of 
the utter ruin of the votaries ; 9 1 . (2) A vivid expression of the 
thought that escape is impossible, whether they flee to the under 
world, or to the heavens, to the top of Carmel or to the bottom 
of the sea ; or even if they are captives in a foreign land ; 
p 2 " 4 . (3) An assurance that, after all, Israel, because of sin, 
will be treated like other nations, whose migrations, as well as 
that of Israel, Yahweh has conducted ; and that complete de 
struction awaits the nation, in spite of her feeling of false 
security; 9 7 " 86 . 

IX. i-8 1 87 

This section is clearly composed of four strophes of six lines each. The 
movement is for the most part tetrameter, although occasionally for the sake 
of more vivid description it falls into the trimeter. Strophe I (v. 1 ) presents 
the vision of the catastrophe; strophes 2, 3 (vs. 2 - 4 ) describe the utter impossi 
bility of escape; strophe 4 (vs. 7 * 85 ) silences the objection, which, of course, an 
Israelite would urge, that Yahweh, as Israel s God, could not thus humiliate 

The more important modifications of the text are: (i) the treatment of 
vs. 5 - 6 as a later interpolation, on the same grounds as assigned for 4 13 5 8 - 9 ; 
(2) the omission of v. 8c , "except that I will not utterly destroy the house of 
Jacob ; it is the oracle of Yahweh," as a gloss inserted by a later hand to 
modify the absolute assertion of destruction made by Amos, and as a connect 
ing link to the section of promise which was added, perhaps by the same hand. 

-p] Gr. n-N(?); Volz (ThLZ. 1900, p. 291) and Marti, -]<<. mnojn] 
@ titi rb i\a<rTripi.ov(= r^jr-i); U cardinem ; A. (TO) oi/co^/^/xa; 2., 9. ^TTI 
rb Kifiupiov, 5 fop] M\. Gr. 3mDn(?). Lohr calls attention to the possi 
bility of dittog. in iinflzn "p. D^DDH] < ra irpbtrv\a.; U superliminaria ; 

t> 9 ^ > . ^ 

> ]waiic| 3"33] Imv., so (5 dtaKO\l/ov; 17 avaritia ; 5> ^cgiN^il. Seb. 3i*X3i. 
Lag. (Anmerk. z. gr. Uebers. der Prov. V./i) Bj?p = D % ;O, in wrath, cf. Hb. 3 12 . 
Oort, 3 ITS or srox. Elh. S^D- N ^30 J7X3 ^xai. Gr. D; % XDS"I = n;xDM(?). 
Oct. I-IVTII. Volz (op. cit.} and Marti, trna oyx3 T:N M \ D^D] @ iravruv; 
so 3J. 2. nrn ] (5 KaTaKpvpSxriv. Oort, nnrs < _ (so Gr.). Gun. m-, with 
fol. 3 omitted. Lohr and Baumann om. v. 2 as late and as out of harmony 
with the strophic arrangement. 3. DNI] @ tai>. TV IJJE] Baumann and 
Now. 2 om. as gloss. "p^P] 5 pi. 3"- ] Oort om. r. 4. TV] ( pi. 
Lohr and Now. 2 om. 46 as Jeremianic. 5. & inserts -ON at beginning (so 
Gr.). Before ruNSsn] 65 inserts 6 debs = \~iSx (so Elh., Oct.); cf. the 

remark of We., " Am. does not say mssxn mn\ but sn ^n^N - \" jirml 

p p J 

@ /cai craXei;a;j avrriv ; 5 j^- |c. H^D] (*f <Tvi>Tf\eia avTrjs (= n^a), the 

pron. being absent in 8 8 ; so > ; U omnis, but in 8 nniversus. nj pu i] 
Gr. n> p^ji. nj O ^i SD 1^2x1] Elh. om. as repetition from 8 8 . Oct. om. 56 
as repetition from 8 8 . ix"?] Riedel, "\N3. 6. ir s ;;;] ^ is a dittog.; read 
vn ^r or \-^v; cf. Ps. IO4 3 (so Oort, Gun., Gr., We., Mit., Now., Elh., Oct., 
Marti). ( sg. ir.iisi] /cat TT^V eTrayyeXlav avrov; & dJ^Xaitfo; both 
possibly deriving it from njj; cf. Jb. 2i 31 Is. 44 7 (Va., Seb., Vol., et al.}. 
Other Greek versions, dfo Lyv. Gr. innjxi. mrr] (Q% add riN3x (so Gr.). 
Vs. 5 6 are to be associated with 4 13 5 &9 , and treated as an insertion; for 
the argument in full v.t. 7. N^I] S> = njn. IIDDD] (@ 2. KaTTTraSo/cfas; 
so T^S U. *vp] (@i /36(9pou, deriving it from nip; 6. rot xoy ; A., E . Kti p ; 
S i--c; ^- KupTyi-Tjj ; U Cyrene; & ^-"r 1 . 8. 
IJIN ^ ] Oort, 3s % : ry. "ui ^ DSN] A gloss. 

1 88 AMOS 

IX. 1-4. The vision of destruction ; the impossibility of escape. 

1. 1 saw~\ This vision has an entirely different introduction from 
those of the preceding visions. Here Yahweh himself appears, the 
symbol being no longer used.* By the altar] The translation 
on t is too specific (but cf. f) ; the idea is that of leaning, or 
hovering, over; cf. Nu. 2 3 3 - 6 i K. I3 1 i S. 2^ Is. 6 2 . % The altar 
in the prophet s vision was not the altar in general as a place of 
refuge, nor the altar at Jerusalem, including the temple and all 
that the temple represented, || nor in particular the altar of burnt 
offering at Jerusalem ; ^[ but, rather, the altar at Bethel,** reference 
being made to the form of religion practised at the northern sanc 
tuaries (cf. 8 14 ), concerning which already much has been said. 
The chief temple of Northern Israel was located in Bethel. And 
he said~] The person commissioned to do the work of destruc 
tion is not mentioned. It was not the prophet,ft but rather 
one of the angels \\ in Yahweh s court (cf. 2 S. 24 16 i Ch. 2i 15 ). 
Smite the capitals] Originally ninpa was, perhaps, the ornament 
or knop (cf. Ex. 25 3L33ff -) at the top of the column (Zp. 2 14 ) ; 
later, the capital itself, here used collectively. These capitals 
at the top of the columns, on which rests the roof of the altar- 
building, shall be smitten with a violent blow. That the thresh 
olds may shake~\ The posts, or thresholds, || || or sills which 
really formed the foundation. Some of the old interpreters 5F1F 
understood these phrases to be intended figuratively of the kings, 
princes, and high priests. According to Ewald both terms apply 
to the altar; nines to the knop, i.e. the horns; D BD to the 
bottom of the altar ; so that the whole altar is shivered, and 
the pieces fly u^ . the assembled people. Yea break them 
off (/)] DMDl is so difficult that Wellhausen and Nowack give 
it up. It is perhaps an imperative.*** The suffix evidently refers 
to the parts of the temple, i.e. the capitals, or the sills, or both. 

* Cf. Hi., Ba. J Ew., Ba., Dr. || , Cal., Ros., Ke. 

t Dusterdieck, SK., 1849, p. 914. Dahl, Mit. II Os., Merc. 

** Bar., Mi., Ew., Hi., Ba., Schlier, Pu., Or., Gun., We., Now., GAS., Dr., Elh., 
Maiti. ft Jus., Ba. 

+t Jer.,Theod., Os., Merc. = Ros., Hi., Ew., Ke., Pu., Now., Dr. Cal., Geb. 
III! Jus., Hd., We., Mit., GAS., Now., Dr., Marti. Ull E.g. Mere., Geb. 

*** So , Merc., Va., Ros., Schro., Ew., Hd., Or., Gun., Mit., BDB., GAS., Dr. 

ix. 1-3 1 89 

Elhorst by emendation of this and the two following words (v.s.) 
gets this sense : " Those who seek unjust gain from corn, I will 
deprive of children." And the residue of them} Cf. i 8 4 2 . This 
is not the beginning of a new verse, but a continuation of the 
vision,* for the picture includes the falling altar, those crushed 
beneath it, and also those who escape and flee to meet a death 
even more terrible, death by the sword. There is no reference 
to the common people. f The phrase means the last one of 
them, \ i.e. the one left from the destruction of the temple. 
There shall not escape a fugitive } There can be no escape from 
Yahweh. It is this thought which is expanded in the strophe 
that follows. 2. Dig through to Sheol~\ The under-world, the 
abode of the dead (Is. I4 9 - 11 Jb. n 8 26 5f- ), located in the very 
centre of the earth (Eph. 4 9 ), and therefore a most appropriate 
and significant, though hyperbolical, example of inaccessibility. 
Climb up to heaven] The utmost height (Je. 5I 53 ). The two 
terms biKtf and D &EJ are often thus employed as points of 
extreme opposition; cf. Jb. n 8 Ps. i39 7 8 Is. y 11 Mat. n 23 . 
3. At the top of Carmel~\ Carmel was another example of in 
accessibility, not only for its height (1800 ft. above the sea), 
but more especially for its limestone caves (said to exceed 2000 
in number, and to be so close together and so serpentine as to 
make the discovery of a fugitive entirely impossible), and its 
forests, which in the days of Strabo, || were the retreat of robbers. 
Cf. Ju. 6 2 i S. 13 i K. i8 42 .f Bottom of the sea } The only 
place remaining for a fugitive compelled to leave the land, of 
which Carmel, projecting into the sea, was the last portion.** 
The sea was of course the Mediterranean, and hence the ser 
pent} could not have been the crocodile,ft nor tne venomous 
marine serpents found in tropical regions; jj the reference must 
be to the imaginary sea-monster supposed by the ancients to 
have its abode in the depths of the sea; Gn. i 21 Is. 27*. 

* On the contrary We., Now. J EXv., We., Mit., GAS., Now., Dr. 

t Gal., Os., Geb., Ros. 

Cf. Stark, SK. LXXVI. 1576., who uses this clause to prove that Yahweh 
was thought of as dwelling, not in the heavens, but in the temple at Jerusalem. 
II XVI. 2, 28. ** Dr. ffKi. Jt Pu. 

H Cf. Fu., Ke., Dr. $$ Or., Mit., Now., Dr., Marti. 

1 90 AMOS 

-4. If they go (about} in captivity ] Cf. s 27 . The prophet has 
no definite place in mind either in Egypt or Assyria. It is 
perhaps an allusion to another Israelitish conception, viz. that 
outside of Palestine Yahweh had no power over them ; since in 
a strange and foreign land they would be under the power of 
the god or gods of that land; cf. Jon. i 1 . From this point 
of view, the remark, " Elsewhere exile is the worst threat ; here 
that is surpassed," * has no place. The sword and it will slay 
them~\ The serpent, upon Yahvveh s command, would bite them ; 
the sword, spoken of as a thing of life (cf. Ez. 32 11 Ho. n 
Is. 34 5 6 ), at the same command, will slay them. / will put my 
eye on them for evil} This phrase, used elsewhere, "to keep 
watch over" (Gn. 44- Je. 24 39 12 ), i.e. in a good sense, is here 
defined in the bad sense. With it may be compared "set the 
face against" (Je. 2i 10 Ps. 34 Lv. 2o 5 Ez. i5 7 ). The purpose 
which was ordinarily good is now hostile. 5. The Lord Yah 
weh SabaotJi} The proposed logical connection of this verse 
with the preceding, " God is able to bring such punishments, 
because he is the almighty one " | is unnatural and far-fetched. 
We have here a dignified and heartfelt utterance introduced by 
one who has been reading the words of Amos in the light of the 
history of the centuries which have followed. It is better to treat 
the phrase as practically independent, \ rather than to make it the 
subject of what follows or an oath, " by the Lord," etc. || Else 
where, as has been noted,f Amos always says " God of Hosts." ** 
With these verses may be compared 4 13 5 8f- . He that touches 
the earth and it melts} Cf. Ps. 46 gf IO4 32 I44 5 Na. i 5 . The 
manifestation of Yahweh s power in lightning, storm, or earth 
quake brings terror. Cf. also Mi. i 4 Ju. 5 4 Ps. 75 3 . And it 
rises up, etc.] A repetition, almost verbatim, of 8 86 . 6. He that 
builds his chambers in the heaven} This is the Hebrew picture 
of Yahweh s dwelling-place. " The Hebrews pictured the sky 
as a solid vault (firmamentum) } resting at its extremities on the 
earth (Jb. 26") ; in this vault the heavenly bodies were imag- 

* We. f Merc., Ros., Jus., Mit., Dr. J Hi., Ke., Or., GAS., Now. 

Mit., Dr. || Ew. f We., Mit., Now. 

** See GAS., p. 205 f., for statement on Amos s use of divine names. Cf. Lohr, 
pp. 38-67. 

IX. 4-7 I9 1 

ined to revolve : in front of it (i.e. in the open air below its 
lower surface) the birds flew (Gn. i 20 ) : above it were reservoirs 
in which rain was stored (as also snow and hail) ; and above 
these waters above the firmament Jehovah sat enthroned."* 
The slight change of text (cf. Je. 22 14 Ps. IO4 3 ) here adopted 
(v.s.) does away with the interpretations, (i) ascents, i.e. air, 
fire, and spheres which successively approach nearer to heaven ; f 
(2) heaven of heavens, or third heaven (cf. Dt. io 14 i K. S 27 
Ps. i48 4 ) ; I (3) clouds, as formed by the ascent of moisture ; 
(4) heavenly orbs, supposed to be in steps one above another 
leading to Yahweh s throne. || His vault upon the earth he has 
established^ rPW&t, used in Ex. i2 22 Is. 58 6 2 S. 2* of something 
held firmly together,^, a bundle, has been explained as (i) prom 
ise (from -TM) ; ^[ (2) arch = p pn, firmament, something beaten 
out, the vault which overhangs the earth.** He that calleth 
for the waters, etc.] Repeated from 5 86 . The arguments which 
have been urged against the genuineness of these two verses 
are : tt (0 tne abruptness of their connection with the context ; 
(2) the fact that they repeat much from 8 8 and 5 8 ; (3) their 
similarity to 4 13 and 5 8-9 , which are interpolated passages; (4) the 
use of the title OX mrP "HK as compared with Amos s use of 
WK-3C "nbx m,T ; (5) the style resembles that of Deutero-Isaiah 
and other late writers ; (6) their metre and strophic form differ 
from the structure of the original material. 7. Are ye not 
as the sons of the Cushites unto me .?] The Cushites or Ethio 
pians, \ \ in Amos s times, occupied Nubia, with Napata as capi 
tal. About this time upper Egypt with Thebes became a part 
of the Ethiopian territory. The king of Ethiopia, Piankhi, after 
overcoming most resolute resistance and capturing Memphis, es 
tablished his authority over the petty princes of Egypt, receiving 
homage and tribute from them and preventing all attempts on their 

* Dr., p. 218. + Pu. || Merc., Ros. ; cf. Hes. 

t Cal. Geb. 11 So <&S> and Stru. 

** Mich., Ros., Jus., Hi., Ba., Hd., Mit., Now. 

ft So e.g. Duhm ( Theol. 119), Oort (TAT. XIV.), Sta. (GVI. I. 571), Gieseb. 
(BeitrSge, 190 f.), Co. (/ /.), Che. (in WRS. Proph. xv f. and EB.}, Taylor (DB.\ 
We., Now., Lohr, Marti; but cf. WRS. (Proph. 400), Kue. (Einl. 71,6), K6. 
(Einl. 303 f.). 

tt Brugsch, Egypt under the Pharaohs, 387 ff. 

I 92 AMOS 

part to unite in opposition to him. However, Shabako, probably 
the grandson of Piankhi, was the first Ethiopian ruler to seat him 
self upon the throne of Egypt and actually administer its affairs. 
Israel, says the prophet, is no more to me than the far-distant, 
uncivilized, and despised black race of the Ethiopians ; cf. Je. i$ 2s . 
No reference is made to their Hamitic origin,* or their black 
skin ; f an d yet their color and the fact that slaves were so often 
drawn from them added to the grounds for despising them. J 
Did / not bring up Israel out of the land of Egypt ?~\ This is 
not to be read separately from what follows. The sense and 
syntax will be seen either by treating this clause as a protasis, 
viz. " If I brought Israel up from the land of Egypt (as you 
assert), did I not also bring the Philistines from Caphtor ? " 
etc. ; or, more literally, by reading the three clauses in close 
connection. Did I not bring up Israel out of the land of Egypt, 
and the Philistines from Caphtor and Aram from Kir?~\ Yahweh 
from his point of view was equally concerned in many, or indeed 
all, historical movements, of which three are cited as examples 
and placed side by side with that of the Israelites. This thought 
was probably not new with Amos ; it was involved in the general 
idea of the day of Yahweh, and must therefore have existed be 
fore Amos s day. All this is in answer to the objection made 
by certain narrow Israelites that Yahweh could not, if he would, 
desert Israel at this stage of his connection with them. Caphtor] 
Not a part of the Nile Delta, || but Crete ;1" cf. Dt. 2 23 Je. 47* 
Gn. io 14 (in which, " from whom the Philistines came forth " 
should be transposed to follow " the Caphtorim "). Cf. also 
Cherethites, Ez. 25 16 Zp. 2 5 i S. 30". Syrians from Kir\ See 
under i 5 . Some groundless inferences have been drawn from this 
verse, e.g. that the Philistines and Arameans had also been deliv- 

* Ba. t Ke. 

% Gush (Gn. io c - 7 Is. n 11 iS 1 2O 3 - 5 37 43 3 ), often mentioned = Soudan (Arabic, 
asw&d black). In Egyptian inscriptions, Kesh (cf. Dr.). Che. (EB. 968) inter 
prets Gush here as designating the N. Arabian district of that name, which adjoined 
the land of Musri. See Wkl. Musri, 2 (1898), and Hibbert Journal, II. (1904), 
571-590. Sellin, Beitrage, I. 95 f, 

|| Ebers, sEgypten u. d. Blicher Moses, 130 f. ; Brugsch, Egypt under the Pharaohs; 
see, however, Sayce, Academy, April 14, 1894, p. 314. 

H De Goeje, Th T. IV. 257 f. 

IX. 7-8 193 

ered from slavery ; * that according to Amos the Philistines and 
Syrians were Cushites.f 8. The eyes of the Lord Yahweh are 
upon} Cf. 9 4 . The use of n marks the unfavorable look; cf. 
Ps. 34 15 16 . In v. 4 it was declared that Yahweh would look with 
disfavor upon Israel ; v. 7 asserts that, in reality, no greater reason 
exists for the exercise of favor toward Israel than for its exercise 
toward other nations ; v. 8 goes back again and reasserts the un 
favorable attitude of Yahweh to Israel and its consequent ruin. 
This is a clear logical sequence. The sinful kingdom} This is not 
every sinful kingdom, J nor Judah, nor both Israel and Judah, || 
but Israel alone, f With the article it might well be rendered this 
sinful kingdom.** / will destroy it from off the face of the earth} 
This is the statement of absolute destruction which has been 
made so frequently and which, made now for the last time, is 
expanded, vs. 9 - 10 . Save that I will not utterly destroy the house 
of Jacob } A later Jew, who saw that the words of Amos had 
not been literally fulfilled, adds this saving clause. The line is 
an extra one from the point of view of the strophic arrange 
ment ; it is flatly contradictory to the thought which precedes 
and follows ; it has the tone of the later environment. The 
entire verse is late in the opinion of some.ft The efforts made 
to explain the clause as a part of the text show at a glance the 
futility of the effort, e.g. " the favor here granted to Israel is a 
special one because of the covenant with their fathers." \ \ It is 
true that in later days (cf. Je. 5, 30, Ez. 14) this argument was 
urged by prophets and others ; but at this time the prophet had 
just announced an exactly opposite position. The hotise of Jacob} 
is, of course, the northern kingdom (s 1 - 4 - 6 6 8 - 14 7 2 - 5 - 10 - 16 8 7 ), for the 
prophet has had nothing else in mind from 7 1 . The context 
directly opposes the view which would refer these words to 
Judah ; nor is there any reason to suppose that Israel in 
general is meant. || || 

1. vtfjrvi] i of purpose; H. 26, 2 a. ojrxai] For form of suffix, cf. GK. 
6ig; but see Margolis, AJSL. XIX. 45-48, for a better explanation. orr?] 

* Geb. J Gal., Merc., Pu. || Ke. ** Va. 

t Cf. Hi. Jus. H Dahl, Ros., et al. 

ft E.g. We., Che. in WRS. Propk. p. xv, and in Exp. 5th ser. V. 46 ; Volz, 
Jah-weproph. 23 f. ; Now., Marti. JJ Merc. \\ We. |||| Ew., Ke. 

194 AMOS 

dat., K6. 286 d, DJ . . . Dir] A somewhat uncommon expression for the 
impers. idea; cf. Is. i6 10 Nu. 6 9 Dt. if; GK. 144 *; K6. 324 /.B^B ... *?!:] 
Same as prec. except that the cognate root ti^o is used as subj., with D instead 
of o on account of preceding D of on 1 ?. 2. DN] Here with impf. in a cond. 
sent, assuming an imaginary case = " though they were to dig . . . my hand 
wo uld fetch them"; GK. 159/5 H. 48, 4; K6. 390^; Dr. 143. 3. Nan, 

VD] an = to withdraw, hide (BDB.). iro, as Arabic Jiu* shows, means 
to cover, veil, protect, etc. They are practically synonymous in Hebrew, and 
neither of them is used in the Qal. Nan, however, is, with one exception 
where it is used figuratively (Jb. 38 30 ), always used with reference to man; 
while IPD is used indiscriminately of men and things (cf. Ps. I9 7 Ho. I3 14 
Gn. 3 1 49 ). Hence tro is of more frequent occurrence than Nan. ^D"on] 
On art., cf. H. 5, i. >T"ip] Root perhaps -np, "to dig out " (so K6. II. i. 

G <. 
p. 91); cognates, Assyr. qaqqaru and Arabic Js *JJ = ground. On form 

(pilpel} GK. 840; Sta. 243, i) ; change of i to y is for sake of euphony; cf., 
for other cases of dissimilation in reduplicated stems, aaia = aaaa ; D3ia 
= 03SD (K6. II. i. p. 465). The word occurs in five other passages (Nu. 5 17 
i K. 6 15 - 16 - 30 7 7 )> each time denoting the floor of a building. Here it is 
the floor of the sea. 4. or\nm] On suf., GK. 59^-; on ending n_, GK. 59 a; 
on vowel-change, GK. ^c,g. 5. ^INI] There is much force in Ew. s treat 
ment of this i as the i of the oath ; other possible examples of this usage 
are Ho. I2 6 Jo. 4 20 Je. 29 23 Is. 5i 15 Dt. 32 31 Ps. yi 19 Sg 38 ; cf. Ew. 8 340^; 
H. 44, it/, rm. (i). >uun] The ptcp. here is followed by Jinrn, i.e. impf. 
with i cons., and this by iSaxi (also nn*?> i and nyppi). GK. \\2tt regards 
this case (i.e. the pf. with i cons, following an impf. with i cons.) as one 
of a few instances due to error in the text, or to incorrect modes of 
expression ; cf. K6. 366 i who treats the ptcp. as referring to past time ; 
Ew. 8 343 #. In Am. 7* what seems to be a similar case proves on exami 
nation to be different, since nSaNl is equivalent to an incipient impf. (v.s. }. 
The proper explanation is this : the ptcp. together with Jicm expresses not a 
descriptive action, but a fact of general experience, a construction ordinarily 
denoted by the pf.; GK. io6/; Dr. 12; H. 18, 3. The whole expression 
= " he causes the earth to melt." This was the principal statement, which is 
followed by three clauses each giving a detail of the concurrent phenomena. 
These clauses are not subordinated as circumstantial clauses would be by 
placing the subject before the predicate; they are concurrent and coordinate, 
yet descriptive, and hence the pf. with i consec. (= impf.) is employed. It 
is possible that this peculiar const, points to a late and unclassical date for 
vs. 5 - 6 . 6. imjs] His vault; from the root idea of binding (Talm. and 
Aram. "UN) come four different ideas, each of which occurs but once, viz. 
b^^nch (of hyssop), Ex. I2 22 , company (of men), 2 S. 2 25 , bands (of ox-bow), 
Is. 58 8 , and here the heavens, as bound or Jitted together into a vault. Cf. 

AT. 4>Lil. 7. D"Eo] On o_, GK. 87 a. wSn] Given concessive force in 

ix. 8-is 195 

GK. 150 . SxiK"~nx] The force of the position may be expressed by placing 
emphasis on the word Israel. 8. ^ DDN] An adv. of limitation, = save that; 
the other cases of this are Nu. I3 28 Dt. 15* Ju. 4 9 ; also (according to We., Sta. 
GVI. I. 199, Dr., Kit., and BDB.), I S. I 5 . N 1 ?] For unusual position (else 
where only in Gn. 3* Ps. 49 8 ) cf. GK. 113 v\ H. 28, 3 rm. f ; K6. 352 /. 
vceri] Intens. inf. abs., here written fully; cf. Dt. 15" Is. 59* Je. 3 15 ; etc. 
(GK. 53*). 

15. A later voice of promise. 9 8c - 15 . (i) A modification of 
the prophetic utterance concerning the exile, which shall not be 
doom, but a source of discipline, destruction coming upon the 
wicked only; p 80 - 9 - 10 . (2) There will be a lifting up and repair 
ing of David s hut, now fallen, and the acquisition of all the terri 
tory originally intended for Israel; 9"- 12 . (3) There will be a 
return of numerous and plenteous harvests, a rebuilding of cities, 
and a replanting of vineyards; and Israel shall be permanently 
reestablished ; 9 13 " 15 . 

This section is composed of three strophes of six lines each. Strophe I, 
introduced by the transition clause, save that I will not utterly destroy, etc., 
furnishes the ground for what follows, viz. only the wicked of Israel shall 
perish ; strophe 2 describes the political reestablishment of Israel, including 
Judah; strophe 3 pictures the prosperity and permanency of restored Israel. 

The chief reasons for denying this section to Amos are: (i) the many 
linguistic affinities between it and the works of exilic and post-exilic times 
(see especially Che. Exp. 5th ser. VIII. 44 f.; Volz, 23; Dr. 119; Day and 
Chapin, AJSL. XVIII. 81; Grimm, Liturgical Appendices, 91); e.g. -P^TI 
(v. 86 ), SID-* (v. 9 ), TH (v. 11 ), ttnin and ixip (v. 13 ) scriptio plena; the late 
formula eriO a^D 1 run (v. 13 ); the phrase aSiy D o; cf. Mai. 3* Mi. 7 14 Is. 5i 9 
Je. 46 26 , which are late passages; the phrase n)3B> av.r, which is post-exilic; 
T nt % cf I s - 4 jl 5 2? 54 6 66 9 Ps. I47 12 Jo. 4 17 ; D- Dj? is later than E>WP, occur 
ring only in Jo. i 5 4 18 Is. 49 26 Ct. 8 2 ; ro-nn, cf. ronn, Is. 49 19 ; JID in Hithpa. 
only in Na. I 5 Ps. IO7 26 ; (2) the fact that this picture of restoration is incon 
sistent with Amos s repeated announcements of entire destruction (cf. 5 1 2 
9 1 " 4 7 ) 5 (3) a favorable attitude towards Judah, as distinct from Israel, is not 
characteristic of Amos; (4) the emphasis laid upon material blessings, ex 
tension of territory, etc., to the exclusion of every moral characteristic, is in 
consistent with the attitude of Amos, whose whole message is ethical; (5) the 
fact that the passage contains echoes of later writings, e.g. cf. v. 11 and Is. 1 1 1 , 
v. 13 a and Lv. 26 5 , v. 136 and Jo. 4 18 , v. 14 and 2 K. I9 29 Je. I4 9 29 s i s . 54 3 6521 
Dt. 28 30t 39 Zp. I 13 ; (6) the abruptness of transition from the announce 
ment of destruction to the promise of restoration in v. 86 ; (7) the use of the 
title "\>rh is in opposition to the usage and thought of Amos (4 12 being a 

196 AMOS 

questionable passage) ; (8) Amos always represents the whole people as the 
object of punishment, but here a distinction is made between the righteous 
and the sinner which is characteristic of later thought; (9) the passage 
seems to look back upon a ruined nation (vs. 11 - 141 -); (10) Amos always con 
templates an exile in Assyria, not a scattering among the nations as here. 
(So e.g. Sta., We., Oort, Marti (Gesch. 191 and Dodekaprophetoti), Sm. (Rel. 
183); Houtsma (TAT. XXXIV. 433), Co. (Einl. ed. 3, p. 184), Che. (WRS. 
Proph. XV. and Exp. Jan. 1897, pp. 44-47, and EB.}, Preuschen (ZAW. 
XV. 24-27), Now., GAS., Volz, Lohr, Taylor (DB.\ Bu. (Jew. Enc.}, Bau- 
dissin (Einl. ), Grimm (Liturgical Appendices, 88 ff.); but cf. Val., Dr., Mit., 
Get. (pp. 24 f.), Co. (Einl. ist ed.).) 

Some interpreters make the interpolation begin with v. 11 ; so e.g. Torrey 
(JBL. XV. 153 f.; cf. Schwally, ZA W. X. 227; Seesemann, p. 15), who 
saves vs. 8 * 10 for Amos by pruning them of later additions, viz. v. 86 , and the 
last clause of v. 9 , which were added in order to prepare the way for vs. llff -. 

9. inx] @ avvTpiwa. = natf (so also Elh.), j .001 n n?. Get. -u-u (?), 

* >. 
cf. Is. I7 6 . 10. iniD 11 ] 4 T\evT^ffovffi ; U morientur ; Sb ^nN !,! njnn] 

TO, Kcucci. B"jr] Read inn (so We., GAS., Now., Torrey, Dr., Oort 
Em., Elh., Oct., Marti). Cf. Hi. who reads jpirn as in i Ch. 2i 12 Jb. 4i 18 , 
and cites the substitution of B ^S for jpfc s in i S. I4 26 . onpn] Read nipn, 
since Hiph. occurs only in Jb. 4i 3 (so We., Torrey, GAS., Now., Oort Em., 
Elh., Oct., Marti). unya] (S e0 ^/xas. Read unj? (so Hoffm., We., Gr., 
Oort Em., Torrey, Now., Elh., Oct., Marti). Riedel, -irnya. 11. nao] 
& n>an Nr-irSE. Hoffm. n ^D and rnSoJn (so Preuschen, ZAW. XV. 25; 
Schwally, ibid. X. 226; Gu.). At end of v. 11 & adds, ~n-n nn PIJITD; cf. 
Dt. 32 7 . vnD-tm pix-ifl] J5 3 m. pi. suffixes; U, for -\e, aperturas murorum 
ejus. We. n^b-jni n^-is (so Gr., Val., Now., Elh., O^t., Marti). 12. ran"] 
v = ityn\ onx nnNtf~PN] @, omitting PN, ot /cardXotTroi TWJ/ 
(= D^N), and inserting as obj. of isnT in some Mss. /ie, in others, 
e.g. A , r^y ntpiov, cf. Acts I5 17 . on^S^ . . . nti N] Gr. ityxa. <?0 ok ... 
^TT airoiys; F *o ^^ . . . super eos. nm] FS> pi. 13. tt Jji] & ^,J 
= J^n (Seb.). ixipa i^~nn] @ 6 d/i7;rds rdj/ rpvyr]T6v. Vol. sug. as basis 
of < n^xpa trnn, but tynn = seedtime, while awrbs = harvest. 3T NTixna N^^; 

p * 

! ?|. Oct. BnTin. Gun. ^ina nxip. rn oa o^ajj; T^i] (51 *al 
ij <TTa<f>v\i] tv ry <rirbp<$, perhaps reading 133 for "pi; cf. Ez. 47 12 

(Vol.). s> \i\^ l-ai^? 1 s^ c ; cf - ^"}i ">i P?M r?^ ^v D D >] 

5T, freely, nnn IDH. njjjinnn] CT^^UTOI eaovrai, perhaps reading 
cf. Ho. II 8 (Vol.); U <rw//z ^rw^/ ^ inSon>; <S ^Vim^aj. 14. 
, freely, ^0avt(r/A^as. 15. itt>ru>] 5J evellam eos. DDDIN] <&>* B om. suff. 
6 0e6$ 6 TravTOKpdrup; hence Gr. msax inSw. 

9. /^?r behold I command^ The later writer preserves the 
continuity of expression, by placing the words in the mouth of 

ix. 9-io 197 

Yahweh. The importance of the utterance is indicated by the 
use of Behold. The participle represents the action as on the 
point of occurrence. / will shake the house of Israel among all 
the nations } Every Israelite, good or bad, shall be subjected to 
the discipline (no longer doom) which is coming. Instead of a 
particular people, among whom Israel is to go captive, as else 
where, the phrase " all the nations " occurs, as in later prophets ; 
cf. Je. 43 5 Ez. 36 21 . Just as one shakes with a sieve} The sieve 
is ordinarily constructed in such a way as that the good grain is 
retained, while the light grain, the dust, and chaff fall through to 
the ground when the sieve is shaken. So the captivity is to be a 
means of sifting out of Israel all the wicked and worthless who 
are a disgrace and offence to the true people of Yahweh. And 
not a kernel shall fall~] The good shall remain in the sieve, i.e. 
in exile, but the bad shall fall, i.e. perish. THE = kernel or 
pebble; cf. the following views : (i) that the nation is entirely 
chaff;* (2) that 11126 = small stones which remain with the 
wheat, not one of them shall fall ; t (3) that it means firm and 
solid grain, i.e. something pressed together ; \ (4) that pebble 
= wicked, who shall remain in the sieve, i.e. captivity, while the 
righteous fall out or escape ; (5) that "iliac = pious, who are 
bound in a bundle that they may not be lost. || In favor of the 
interpretation of TTtt as grain are : (i) the fact that what remains 
in the sieve is the good element according to the description here, 
while the bad falls through; (2) the idea of destruction could 
not be expressed by the figure of preservation in the sieve, nor 
deliverance by falling through the sieve.^f 10. All the sinners 
of my people } This is the point of differentiation. It cannot 
mean, " all my sinful people," ** a thought more naturally ex 
pressed through an adjective. These sinners must be removed 
through the process of sifting; a violent death awaits them. 
Disaster shall not touch or befall us} For change of text, v.s. 

* Cal. f Merc., Ros. t Ba. 

Hoffm., Preuschen (ZAW. XV. 24). This interpretation supposes the sieve 
referred to here to be the Kirbal described by Wetzstein, 7.DPV. XIV. i ff., as a 
sieve with large meshes into which the grain was first thrown in order to screen out 
of it small stones, clods, straws, and imperfectly threshed ears, which could not be 
blown out by throwing the grain against the wind. Cf. Ecclus. 27*. 

|] Hes. U So Now. ** Torrey, JBL. XV. 154 f. 

198 AMOS 

For a similar attitude of mind on the part of the wicked, cf. 
Am. 6 3 . Looking forward to Yahweh s day as a time of joy and 
blessing (cf. 5 18 ), they scornfully refuse to heed the prophet s 
warnings of calamity. With this picture of Yahweh s day as a 
time of discipline and purification resulting in the preservation 
and strengthening of the righteous, that of Amos is in striking 
contrast; cf. s^S 9 - 10 - 1 -- 13 . 11. In that day] Cf. the introduc 
tory phrase in v. 13 , and the occurrence of both together in 8 11 . / 
will raise up the hut of David~\ This expression presupposes the 
exile, for the Davidic house is here reduced to a hut ; cf. Hoff 
mann (z ; ..f.) who reads huts, and interprets the phrase, not as 
having reference to the union of the two kingdoms, but as a 
picture of the coming restoration of the simplicity of Davidic 
days which Amos loved, the huts of David being contrasted with 
the palaces and forts of the age of Jeroboam. Build it as in 
the days of old } This would hardly be appropriate in Amos s 
days, but entirely so in later times. 12. That they may possess 
the remnant of Edom and all the nations ] Cf. Ps. 60. This 
hostility towards Edom in particular seems to reflect the feelings 
of the exilic age ; cf. Ob., Is. 63 1 " 6 , etc. This political exaltation 
of Israel at the expense of the nations in general is strangely 
discordant with the teachings of Amos ; cf. v. 7 . Which are called 
by my name ] This does not mean " those to whom he shall have 
revealed his divine nature, and manifested himself as a God and 
Saviour";* nor " those who have been solemnly proclaimed by 
him as his property or subject-lands, which was done in his 
promises to Israel and David s house " ; f DUt refers rather to the 
thought (cf. Je. 7 10 Dt. 28 2 S. i2 28 ) that an owner s name will 
adhere to what he owns, and to the fact that David had actually 
subdued extensive territory and made it submissive to Yahweh. J 
13. The ploughman shall overtake the reaper, etc.] Cf. Lv. 26 s . 
Ploughing and reaping will press close upon one another, the time 
of ripening will be so short ; before the farmer has his crops all 
sown, it will be time for him to begin reaping those first sown. 
And the treader of grapes him who soweth seed~\ i.e. the vintage 
will be so abundant that seedtime will arrive before the vintage is 

* Ke. f Or. t Now. 

IX. 10-15 1 99 

finished. Vintage begins in September, while seedtime begins as 
soon as the October rains have made ploughing possible. And 
the mountains shall drop sweet wine~\ Cf. Jo. 3 18 . The vineyards 
were commonly planted on the mountain slopes. And all the 
hills shall melt~\ It will appear as though the hills themselves were 
being dissolved in the copious streams of wine flowing from the 
vineyards on their sides. 14. / will lead back the captivity of 
my people~\ In Ho. 6 11 , and everywhere in later writings (i.e. eleven 
times in Je., three times in Ez., Dt. 3O 3 Ps. i26 L4 La. 2 14 Ps. 14* 
53 6 Zp. 2 7 3 20 ), except in Jb. 42, the phrase niai? SltP may be 
given this meaning (v.i.). The other interpretation turn the for 
tune (turning) of my people, based on the derivation of iTDtt from 
511P rather than n-tP, is favored by some scholars (v.i.). The latter 
meaning is more general. In either case, the post-exilic origin of 
this utterance is clear in view of the detailed description which fol 
lows, and seems to have been written in the light of experience. 
They shall rebuild waste cities and inhabit the ni\ Cf. Je. 33 Is. 54 3 
6s 21 . The opposite is seen in Zp. i 13 Dt. 28 30 . And they shall 
plant vineyards and drink their wine, and they shall make gardens 
(i.e. orchards), and eat their fruit~\ For similar ideals of the 
future see Is. 65 21 Ez. 28 26 ; and note the contrast between this 
and Amos s outlook, 4 9 5"; cf. Dt. 2 8 ao - 89 Zp. i 13 . 15. I will 
plant them upon their land~\ Cf. Ho. 2 23 Je. 24 6 32 41 42 45* 
2 S. y 10 Is. 6o 21 Jo. 3 20 . The nation is here represented as a tree 
(cf. Ps. i 3 ). And they shall not again be plucked up from their 
land which I have given them~\ A promise of permanent posses 
sion, qualified by no conditions ; but the nation is thought of here 
as righteous, and therefore enjoying the favor of Yahweh. Saith 
Yahweh thy 6W] Cf. 4 12 Is. 4i 10 52 54 6 66. This is a phrase 
expressive of the close relationship now existing. It is not used 
by Amos. 

9. JW 1 ] Indef. freq.; literally, is shaken, the subj. grain being under 
stood. n-on] a.X. Apparently from ~o : = intertwine, weave. There seems 
to be no sufficient reason on either lexicographical or exegetical grounds to con 

nect it with the modern JU*^, described by Wetzstein, ZDPV. XIV. 1-7. 

~n-ri] Etymol. uncertain; perhaps from -nx = to press together. The meaning 
pebble is assured for 2 S. ly 13 , the only other occurrence. Grain of corn suits 
the present context better. 10. >D>? ^NBn] Partitive genitive, GK. 128?; 


not "my sinful people" (so Torrey), cf. Da. 240;. tyjn] Hiph. never 
occurs elsewhere meaning " draw near," but rather with causative force, " bring 
near." Hence the original consonants trjn should probably be pointed as Qal. 
Likewise onpn] must be pointed as Pi.; Hi. occurs only in Jb. 4i 3 , where 
also Pi. was probably original (so Duhm). "unjn] If f$U be retained, ^ is 
to be explained as scriptio plena, since ipa is regularly used in sg. before 
suff. But (i) this unusual pointing, (2) the inappropriateness of this prep, 
after the vbs. used here, and (3) the rendering of (& (v.s.) support the change 
to unjr adopted here. The objection of Gun. that ny does not elsewhere 
occur with suffix of I p. pi. is of little force. 11. roo] Used here fig. of the 
fallen Davidic dynasty; cf. its use in 2 S. 22 12 of the clouds as the dwelling- 
place of Yahweh. This is preferable to pointing it as pi., with Hoff m. (v.s.), and 
requires less change in the following suffixes, involving merely the reading of 
masc. sg. suff. instead of f. pi. in firsts, whereas the reading rnrD necessitates 
reading jrpnDtn, and T 1 " 1 ^ 3 * an d rflS^J. Perhaps, however, it is better to 
read all three suff. as fcm. sg., with We., and refer them to roD. Tn] The 
scriplio plena is a distinctively late characteristic, not becoming customary 
until the close of the fourth century B.C. In 6 5 it occurs again, but there it is 
certainly a later addition. See Eckardt, ZA W. XIII. 89 f. ; cf. BDB. s.v. ; 
for the statistics of the two forms of writing the name, see Bonk, ZA W. XI. 
127 ff. vrD"\n] a.X. ; a passive ptcp. formation (Barth, NB. 126^), from 
D-n = "to tear down." If the masc. suffix be retained it must be explained 
as influenced by, or referring to, -pn. ^3] For this use of o cf. Ho. 2 5 . 
12. DmSy >DE> *opj TJ>N] This phraseology regularly denotes the fact of 
possession; cf. Is. 4 1 63 Dt. 28 10 Je. y 10 I5 16 2 S. I2 28 . PNT nrp] This use 
of the ptcp. to express an attribute of Yahweh is found also in 4 13 5 8f - 9 5f -, and 
is common in late literature. 13. D^Dj?] Pass. ptcp. formation (Barth, NB. 
I26r), from DDJ? = crush by treacling; cf. Mai. 3 21 ; Syr. <_tt^ = to explore; 
Arab. IMX = to prowl about. This was probably a sweet wine made by not 
allowing fermentation to continue the usual length o