5 Ashkelon will see it, and fear; Gaza also, and will writhe in agony; as will Ekron, for her expectation will be disappointed; and the king will perish from Gaza, and Ashkelon will not be inhabited.
*Minor differences ignored. Grouped by changes, with first version listed as example.
In this verse also is described the devastation of those cities which the Prophet names; as though he had said, that all those cities which had risen up against God's people were devoted to extreme vengeance. Zechariah says that none would be exempt from punishment, since the hand of God would be stretched forth, and extend everywhere, so that it might be easily concluded, that all those who had unjustly harassed the Church would be thus rewarded for their cruelty. This is the import of what is here said. He says that Ascalon would see and fear; for at that time the Ascalonites were hostile to the Jews. He speaks the same of Aza, which the Greeks called Gaza; but they were deceived in thinking it was a name given to it by Cambyses, for the reason that Gaza means a treasure in the Persian language. This is childish. It is indeed certain that it has been owing to a change in the pronunciation of one letter; for , oin, is guttural among the Hebrews, and was formerly so pronounced, like our g: as they called Amorrah, Gomorrah, so Aza is Gaza. We have spoken of this elsewhere. Now it appears from geography that these cities were near the sea, or not far from the sea, and having this advantage they gathered much wealth. But as wealth commonly generates pride and cruelty, all these nations were very troublesome to the Jews. This is the reason why the Prophet says that grief would come on Gaza, and then on Ekron and on other cities. He adds, Because ashamed shall be her expectation. There is no doubt but they had placed their trust in Tyrus, which was thought to be impregnable; for though enemies might have subdued the whole land, there a secure station remained. Since they all looked to Tyrus, the Prophet says that their hope would be confounded, when Tyrus was overthrown and destroyed. The sum of the whole is, that the beginning of the vengeance would be at Tyrus, which was situated as it were beyond the world, so as not to be exposed to any evils. He says then that the beginning of the calamity would be in that city, to which no misfortunes, as it was thought, could find an access. And then he mentions that other cities, on seeing Tyrus visited with ruin, would be terrified, as their confidence would be thus subverted. He afterwards adds, Perish shall the king from Gaza, and Ascalon shall not be inhabited; that is, such a change will take place as will almost obliterate the appearance of these cities. It follows --
Ashkelon shall see and fear - The words express that to see and fear shall be as one. The mightiest and wealthiest, Tyre, having fallen, the neighbor cities of Philistia who had hoped that her might should be their stay, shall stand in fear and shame. Tyre, being a merchant-city, the mother-city of the cities of the African coast and in Spain, its desolation caused the more terror Isaiah 23:5-11.
And the - (a) king shall perish from Gaza - that is it shall have no more kings. It had been the policy of the world-empires to have tributary kings in the petty kingdoms which they conquered, thus providing lot their continued tranquil submission to themselves . The internal government remained as before: the people felt no difference, except as to the payment of the tribute. The policy is expressed by the title "king of kings," which they successively bore. Sennacherib speaks of the kings of Ascalon, Ekron and Gaza .
A contemperary of Alexander mentions, that the king of Gaza was brought alive to Alexander on its capture. Alexander's policy was essentially different from that of the world-monarchs before him. They desired only to hold an empire as wide as possible, leaving the native kings, if they could; and only, if these were intractable, placing their own lieutenants. Alexander's policy was to blend East and West into one. . These petty sovereignties, so many insulated centers of mutual repulsion, were essentially at variance with this plan, and so this remnant of sovereignty of 1,500 years was taken away by him, when, after a siege in which he himself was twice wounded, he took it. Alexander wholly depopulated it, and repeopled the city with strangers.
And Ashkelon shall not be inhabited - Ashkelon yielded at once to Jonathan, when he "camped against it" (1 Macc. 10:86), after he had taken and "burned Ashdod and the cities round about it." In another expedition of Jonathan its inhabitants "met him honorably," while "they of Gaza shut him out" at first (1 Macc. 11:60, 61). "Simon - passed through the country unto Ascalon, and the holds there adjoining," without resistance, whereas "he turned aside to Joppe, and won it" (1 Macc. 12:33). He placed Jews in Gaza, but of Ascalon nothing is said. The ruins of a Christian city, built on its site, "khirbet-Ascalon," have been lately discovered in the hills near Tell Zakariyeh, , and so, a little south of Timnath, a Philistine city in the days of Samson, whence Samson went to it, to gain the 30 changes of raiment Judges 14:19. Commentators have assigned reasons, why Samson might have gone so far as the maritime Ascalon, whereas, in fact, he went to a city close by.
That city, in 536 a.d., had its Bishop . : "The site shows the remains of an early Christian Church or convent:" as a great lintel of stone , resembling somewhat the Maltese Cross, lies on the ground." It was probably destroyed by the inundation of Muslim conquest. In 1163 a.d. it was a ruin. The distance of the ruins from the Ascalon Maiumas corresponds to that assigned by Benjamin of Tudela, being twice the distance of that city from Ashdod ; but since he was at Beth Jibrin, he must have been not far from the spot where it has been recently discovered . The Ashkelon, which was Herod's birth-place and which he beautified, must have been the well-known city by the sea; since the distance from Jerusalem assigned by Josephus is too great for the old Ashkelon, and he speaks of it as on the sea .
Ashkelon shall see it, and fear - All these prophecies seem to have been fulfilled before the days of Zechariah; another evidence that these last chapters were not written by him.
Her expectation shalt be ashamed - The expectation of being succoured by Tyre.
Ashkelon shall see it, and fear,.... That is, as Kimchi explains it, when Ashkelon shall see that Tyre humbles herself and submits, she shall humble herself and submit also: and the sense may be, that the inhabitants of Ashkelon, seeing that Tyre, with all her wisdom and strong reasoning, could not stand before the power of the Gospel, but submitted and embraced the Christian religion, were induced, through the efficacy of divine grace, to do the same; and certain it is that this place became Christian; we read (h) of a bishop of Ashkelon, in the synod of Nice, and of other bishops of this place in later councils: it belonged to Palestine, and was one of the five lordships of the Philistines, Joshua 13:3.
Gaza also shall see it, and be very sorrowful; this was a city of Palestine, near to Ashkelon; they are mentioned together, Judges 1:18 the Gentile inhabitants of this place, when they saw the progress the Gospel made in Tyre, Zidon, and Ashkelon, were grieved at it, but many among them submitted to it: very likely Philip the evangelist first preached the Gospel here; see Acts 8:26 there was a Christian bishop of this place in the Nicene council, and others in after ones (i).
And Ekron; for her expectation shall be ashamed; this was also one of the five lordships of the Philistines, Joshua 13:3 which, being near to Tyre, had its dependence on that, expecting it could never be taken; but when they saw that it was taken by Alexander, it was ashamed of its vain expectation, hope, and confidence: and so the inhabitants of this place, when the Gospel came to it, were "ashamed of the house of their confidence", as the Targum paraphrases the words; the confidence they had in their idols, and in the works of their own hands; and were also "ashamed because of their iniquities", as the Arabic version renders them; being convinced of them, and humbled for them, and betaking themselves to Christ for salvation from them. It is probable, that Philip preached the Gospel here, seeing it was not far from Azotus or Ashdod, next mentioned, where Philip is heard of after the baptism of the eunuch: and if Ekron is the same with Caesarea, that was called Strato's tower, as say the Jews (k); and which also Jerom (l) observes, some say are the same it is certain that Philip was there, Acts 8:40 there were several Christian bishops of this place in later times (m).
And the king shall perish from Gaza; some understand this of Batis, who was governor of Gaza, when it was taken by Alexander; who was fastened to a chariot, and dragged about the city, as Curtius (n) relates; but this man was not a king, but governor of the city under one: I rather think the idol Marnes, which signifies "the lord of man", and was worshipped in this place, is here meant; which when it became Christian was destroyed, and a Christian church built in the room of it, as is reported by Jerom (o).
And Ashkelon shall not be inhabited; by Heathens, but by Christians.
(h) Reland. Palestina Illustrata, l. 3. p. 594. (i) Ib. p. 795. (k) T. Bab. Megilla, fol. 6. 1. (l) De locis Hebraicis, fol. 88. D. (m) Reland. ib. p. 676, &c. (n) Hist. l. 4. c. 6. (o) Comment in Isaiah. xvii. tom. 5. fol. 39. H. Epist. ad Laetam, tom. 1. fol. 19. E.
Ashkelon, &c.--Gath alone is omitted, perhaps as being somewhat inland, and so out of the route of the advancing conqueror.
Ekron . . . expectation . . . ashamed--Ekron, the farthest north of the Philistine cities, had expected Tyre would withstand Alexander, and so check his progress southward through Philistia to Egypt. This hope being confounded ("put to shame"), Ekron shall "fear."
king shall perish from Gaza--Its government shall be overthrown. In literal fulfilment of this prophecy, after a two month's siege, Gaza was taken by Alexander, ten thousand of its inhabitants slain, and the rest sold as slaves. Betis the satrap, or petty "king," was bound to a chariot by thongs thrust through the soles of his feet, and dragged round the city.
Zac 9:5. "Ashkelon shall see it, and fear; Gaza, and tremble greatly; and Ekron, for her hope has been put to shame; and the king will perish out of Gaza, and Ashkelon will not dwell. Zac 9:6. The bastard will dwell in Ashdod; and I shall destroy the pride of the Philistines. Zac 9:7. And I shall take away his blood out of his mouth, and his abominations from between his teeth; and he will also remain to our God, and will be as a tribe-prince in Judah, and Ekron like the Jebusite." From the Phoenicians the threat turns against the Philistines. The fall of the mighty Tyre shall fill the Philistian cities with fear and trembling, because all hope of deliverance from the threatening destruction is thereby taken away (cf. Isaiah 23:5). תּרא is jussive. The effect, which the fall of Tyre will produce upon the Philistian cities, is thus set forth as intended by God. The description is an individualizing one in this instance also. The several features in this effect are so distributed among the different cities, that what is said of each applies to all. They will not only tremble with fear, but will also lose their kingship, and be laid waste. Only four of the Philistian capitals are mentioned, Gath being passed over, as in Amos 1:6, Amos 1:8; Zephaniah 2:4, and Jeremiah 25:20; and they occur in the same order as in Jeremiah, whose prophecy Zechariah had before his mind. To ועזּה we must supply תּרא from the parallel clause; and to עקרון not only תּרא, but also ותירא. The reason for the fear is first mentioned in connection with Ekron, - namely, the fact that the hope is put to shame. הובישׁ is the hiphil of בּושׁ (Ewald, 122, e), in the ordinary sense of this hiphil, to be put to shame. מבּט with seghol stands for מבּט (Ewald, 88, d, and 160, d), the object of hope or confidence. Gaza loses its king. Melekh without the article is the king as such, not the particular king reigning at the time of the judgment; and the meaning is, "Gaza will henceforth have no king," i.e., will utterly perish, answering to the assertion concerning Ashkelon: לא תשׁב, she will not dwell, i.e., will not come to dwell, a poetical expression for be inhabited (see at Joel 3:20). The reference to a king of Gaza does not point to times before the captivity. The Babylonian and Persian emperors were accustomed to leave to the subjugated nations their princes or kings, if they would only submit as vassals to their superior control. They therefore bore the title of "kings of kings" (Ezekiel 26:7; cf. Herod. iii. 15; Stark, Gaza, pp. 229, 230; and Koehler, ad h. l.). In Ashdod will mamzēr dwell. This word, the etymology of which is obscure (see at Deuteronomy 23:3, the only other passage in which it occurs), denotes in any case one whose birth has some blemish connected with it; so that he is not an equal by birth with the citizens of a city or the inhabitants of a land. Hengstenberg therefore renders it freely, though not inappropriately, by Gesindel (rabble). The dwelling of the bastard in Ashdod is not at variance with the fact that Ashkelon "does not dwell," notwithstanding the individualizing character of the description, according to which what is affirmed of one city also applies to the other. For the latter simply states that the city will lose its native citizens, and thus forfeit the character of a city. The dwelling of bastards or rabble in Ashdod expresses the deep degradation of Philistia, which is announced in literal terms in the second hemistich. The pride of the Philistines shall be rooted out, i.e., everything shall be taken from them on which as Philistines they based their pride, viz., their power, their fortified cities, and their nationality. "These words embrace the entire contents of the prophecy against the Philistines, affirming of the whole people what had previously been affirmed of the several cities" (Hengstenberg).
A new and important feature is added to this in Zac 9:7. Their religious peculiarity - namely, their idolatry - shall also be taken from them, and their incorporation into the nation of God brought about through this judgment. The description in Zac 9:7 is founded upon a personification of the Philistian nation. the suffixes of the third pers. sing. and the pronoun הוּא in Zac 9:7 do not refer to the mamzēr (Hitzig), but to pelishtı̄m (the Philistines), the nation being comprehended in the unity of a single person. This person appears as an idolater, who, when keeping a sacrificial feast, has the blood and flesh of the sacrificial animals in his mouth and between his teeth. Dâmı̄m is not human blood, but the blood of sacrifices; and shiqqutsı̄m, abominations, are not the idols, but the idolatrous sacrifices, and indeed their flesh. Taking away the food of the idolatrous sacrifices out of their mouth denotes not merely the interruption of the idolatrous sacrificial meals, but the abolition of idolatry generally. He also (the nation of the Philistines regarded as a person) will be left to our God. The gam refers not to the Phoenicians and Syrians mentioned before, of whose being left nothing was said in Zac 9:1-4, but to the idea of "Israel" implied in לאלהינוּ, our God. Just as in the case of Israel a "remnant" of true confessors of Jehovah is left when the judgment falls upon it, so also will a remnant of the Philistines be left for the God of Israel. The attitude of this remnant towards the people of God is shown in the clauses which follow. He will be like an 'alluph in Judah. This word, which is applied in the earlier books only to the tribe-princes of the Edomites and Horites (Genesis 36:15-16; Exodus 15:15; 1-Chronicles 1:51.), is transferred by Zechariah to the tribe-princes of Judah. It signifies literally not a phylarch, the head of an entire tribe (matteh, φυλή), but a chiliarch, the head of an 'eleph, one of the families into which the tribes were divided. The meaning "friend," which Kliefoth prefers (cf. Micah 7:5), is unsuitable here; and the objection, that "all the individuals embraced in the collective הוּא cannot receive the position of tribe-princes in Judah" (Kliefoth), does not apply, because הוּא is not an ordinary collective, but the remnant of the Philistines personified as a man. Such a remnant might very well assume the position of a chiliarch of Judah. This statement is completed by the addition "and Ekron," i.e., the Ekronite "will be like the Jebusite." The Ekronite is mentioned fore the purpose of individualizing in the place of all the Philistines. "Jebusite" is not an epithet applied to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, but stands for the former inhabitants of the citadel of Zion, who adopted the religion of Israel after the conquest of this citadel by David, and were incorporated into the nation of the Lord. This is evident from the example of the Jebusite Araunah, who lived in the midst of the covenant nation, according to 2-Samuel 24:16., 1-Chronicles 21:15., as a distinguished man of property, and not only sold his threshing-floor to king David as a site for the future temple, but also offered to present the oxen with which he had been ploughing, as well as the plough itself, for a burnt-offering. On the other hand, Koehler infers, from the conventional mode of expression employed by the subject when speaking to his king, "thy God," and the corresponding words of David, "my God" instead of our God, that Araunah stood in the attitude of a foreigner towards the God of Israel; but he is wrong in doing so. And there is quite as little ground for the further inference drawn by this scholar from the fact that the servants of Solomon and the Nethinim are reckoned together in Ezra 2:58 and Nehemiah 7:60, in connection with the statement that Solomon had levied bond-slaves for his buildings from the remnants of the Canaanitish population (1-Kings 9:20), viz., that the Jebusites reappeared in the Nethinim of the later historical books, and that the Nethinim "given by David and the princes" were chiefly Jebusites, according to which "Ekron's being like a Jebusite is equivalent to Ekron's not only meeting with reception into the national fellowship of Israel through circumcision, but being appointed, like the Jebusites, to service in the sanctuary of Jehovah." On the contrary, the thought is simply this: The Ekronites will be melted up with the people of God, like the Jebusites with the Judaeans. Kliefoth also observes quite correctly, that "there is no doubt that what is specially affirmed of the Philistians is also intended to apply to the land of Chadrach, to Damascus, etc., as indeed an absolute generalization follows expressly in Zac 9:10.... Just as in what precedes, the catastrophe intended for all these lands and nations is specially described in the case of Tyre alone; so here conversion is specially predicted of the Philistines alone."
If we inquire now into the historical allusion or fulfilment of this prophecy, it seems most natural to think of the divine judgment, which fell upon Syria, Phoenicia, and Philistia through the march of Alexander the Great from Asia Minor to Egypt. After the battle at Issus in Cilicia, Alexander sent one division of his army under Parmenio to Damascus, to conquer this capital of Coele-Syria. On this expedition Hamath must also have been touched and taken. Alexander himself marched from Cilicia direct to Phoenicia, where Sidon and the other Phoenician cities voluntarily surrendered to him; and only Tyre offered so serious a resistance in its confidence in its own security, that it was not till after a seven months' siege and very great exertions that he succeeded in taking this fortified city by storm. On his further march the fortified city of Gaza also offered a prolonged resistance, but it too was eventually taken by storm (cf. Arrian, ii. 15ff.; Curtius, iv. 12, 13, and 2-4; and Stark, Gaza, p. 237ff.). On the basis of these facts, Hengstenberg observes (Christol. iii. p. 369), as others have done before him, that "there can be no doubt that in Zac 9:1-8 we have before us a description of the expedition of Alexander as clear as it was possible for one to be given, making allowance for the difference between prophecy and history." But Koehler has already replied to this, that the prophecy in Zac 9:7 was not fulfilled by the deeds of Alexander, since neither the remnant of the Phoenicians nor the other heathen dwelling in the midst of Israel were converted to Jehovah through the calamities connected with Alexander's expedition; and on this ground he merely regards the conquests of Alexander as the commencement of the fulfilment, which was then continued throughout the calamities caused by the wars of succession, the conflicts between the Egyptians, Syrians, and Romans, until it was completed by the fact that the heathen tribes within the boundaries of Israel gradually disappeared as separate tribes, and their remnants were received into the community of those who confessed Israel's God and His anointed. But we must go a step further, and say that the fulfilment has not yet reached its end, but is still going on, and will until the kingdom of Christ shall attain that complete victory over the heathen world which is foretold in Zac 9:8.
Her expectation - Her hope that Tyre would break Alexander's power, or hold out against it. Ashamed - Turned into shame and confusion. The king - The government shall be overthrown. Shall not be inhabited - For many years.
*More commentary available at chapter level.