Zerubbabel, Joshua, and the Night Visions of Zechariah

PAUL L REDDITT Georgetown College Georgetown, KY 40324

THE SECOND, AND BY FAR THE LONGEST, section of First Zechariah (1:7-6:15) contains the night visions seen ostensibly on the twenty-fourth day of the eleventh month of the second year of the Persian king Darius I. The unity of this material has recently been discussed. A. Petitjean has shown that the oracular material of Zechariah 1-8 (1:1-6,[14],16-17; 2:10-17; 3:8-10; 4:6b-10a; 6:9-15; 7:4-14; and chap. 8) can be interpreted apart from its larger context,1 though scholars have been slow to follow his lead. L. G. Rignell, on the opposite extreme, has argued that all the materials must be interpreted in their present context, though even he conceded that some of the materials (e.g., 1:16; 2:10-11; 3:8-10) seem to have derived from an earlier period in Zechariah's career and that 2:10-11 might have been quoted from some other source.2

Most scholars fall somewhere between these two positions, debating whether this or that passage is original. Much of the discussion has concen­trated on three passages: 4:6b-10a, which is usually held to interrupt its context; 6:9-15, which many scholars see as an addition; and 3:1-10 (in whole or in part), which is sometimes held to exhibit sufficiently different charac­teristics from the other seven visions to deny it to the original sequence or

1 Les oracles du Proto-Zacharie: Un programme de restauration pour la communauté juive après l'exil (EBib; Paris: Gabalda; Louvain: Orientaliste, 1969) viii.

2 Die Nachtgesichte des Sacharja: Eine exegetische Studie (Lund: Gleerup, 1950) 58,81, 135-42.

249

250 THE CATHOLIC BIBLICAL QUARTERLY I 54, 1992

even to Zechariah himself. While other verses might sometimes be consid­ered secondary (e.g., 1:16-17), they are much shorter and a decision about them carries less significance than about the three listed above.

It is important to notice that 4:6b-10a, 6:9-15, and 3:1-10 are the only passages in the night visions (or the whole Book of Zechariah for that matter) that mention Zerubbabel or Joshua. In view of the fact that the originality of all three passages has been questioned, one is justified in examining the passages for the light they might shed on the theology and redaction of Zechariah 1-8. This investigation will argue that all three passages were added to the night visions and that they transformed those visions from a document addressed to Babylonian Jews summoning them to Judah into a politico-theological treatise for Judah and Jerusalem for the year 520 B.C.

I. The originality of 4:6b-10a, 6:9-15, and 3:1-10

The place to begin is 4:6b-10a, which is widely3 recognized as an inter­ruption or secondary expansion of the interpretation of the lampstand and olive trees Zechariah had seen. That interpretation resumes in 4:10b. The insertion includes a series of oracles to or about Zerubbabel (4:6b,7,8-10a), none of which has any obvious connection with the vision of the lampstand and olive trees. Suggestions to move the verses elsewhere4 flounder, of course, on the lack of evidence that the verses ever appeared anywhere else. The better conclusion would seem to be that the verses were composed for their present context for redactional purposes. The place for the insertion was probably suggested by the lampstand in the vision, which at least resembled the menorah in the temple.

The conclusion that 4:6b-10a is a secondary, redactional composition has implications for understanding the rest of the vision. The lampstand would have symbolized God, and the seven lamps were identified as "the eyes of the Lord, which range through the whole earth" (v 10b, NRSV). In ν 11 Zechariah asks about the olive trees standing on either side of the lampstand and is told in ν 14 that they are two "sons of oil." Most scholars interpret the phrase to mean "anointed ones" (NRSV), but the Hebrew word yishär is nowhere else

3 For example, S. R. Driver, The Minor Prophets (Century Bible; Edinburgh: Jack, 1906) 2.203; B. Halpern, "The Ritual Background of Zechariah's Temple Song," CBQ4Q (1978) 169-70; E. Sellin, Das Zwölfprophetenbuch übersetzt und erklärt (ΚΑΤ 12/2; Leipzig: Deichert, 1930 [2d-3d ed.]) 469; L. A. Sinclair, "Redaction of Zechariah 1-8," BR 20 (1975) 40-42.

4 NEB and JB drastically rearrange the text, presumably based on arguments like those of H. Schmidt ("Das vierte Nachtgesicht des Propheten Sacharja," ZAW 54 [1936] 56-59) and Halpern ("Ritual Background," 169), who claim a close connection between 3:1-10 and 4:6b-10a.

THE NIGHT VISIONS OF ZECHARIAH 251

used in connection with anointing. Instead, it is always used in connection with wine, grain, and other agricultural products (e.g., first fruits, Num 18:12; fleece, Deut 18:4; produce in general, Hag 1:11) which signify God's blessing (e.g., Joel 2:19,24) and which should be brought as tithes (Deut 12:17; 14:23; Neh 10:38,40; 13:5,12). It seems highly unlikely, then, that the word means "anointed ones" in Zech 4:14. C. L. and E. M. Meyers5 and A. S. van der Woude6 point to places where constructions with "son" occur (e.g., son[s] of death in 1 Sam 20:31; 26:16; and sons of wickedness in 2 Sam 3:34; 7:10), in which cases the meaning seems to be people sated with or full of something. The closest parallel to Zech 4:14 occurs in Isa 5:1, which designates a hill as "a son of oil" (Samen), i.e., very fertile. Thus, the phrase "sons of oil" in Zech 4:14 seems to indicate that the olive trees are sated with oil.

In connection with ν 12, van der Woude notes that two mountains were depicted at the entrance to heaven in the Gilgamesh Epic, and in Sumerian myth two trees marked the eastern entrance to heaven. Zech 1:8 also speaks of an angel standing among myrtle trees (or mountains), arguably at the entrance to heaven. Van der Woude then proposes that the hapax legomenon santërôt in 4:12 means "mountains."7 Whether that interpretation is correct or not may remain open, but he points to the proper understanding of the olive trees in the vision: they mark access to God and indicate productivity/ fertility.

The second passage to examine is 6:9-15. Contentwise, it is an exhorta­tion commanding Zechariah to take gold and silver from the returned exiles Heldai, Tobijah, and Jedaiah and make crowns. VII continues with no direct object: "and set upon the head of Joshua son of Jehozadak the high priest." Many solutions have been offered for this problem. For example, J. Well-hausen emended the text to read "crown" in the singular and argued that it was intended for Zerubbabel, who was the Branch addressed in w 12-13.8 D. L. Petersen disagreed that only one crown was made and argued that they were for Joshua, but did not signify kingship.9 Further, P. R. Ackroyd10 and

5 Haggai, Zechariah 1-8 (AB 25B; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1987) 258. 6 "Die beiden Söhne des Öls: Messianische Gestalten?,w Travels in the World of the Old

Testament (Μ. Α. Beek Festschrift; Studia Semitica Neerlandica 16; ed. M. S. van Voss et al.; Assen: Van Gorcum, 1974) 265.

7 Ibid., 267. 8 Die kleinen Propheten (Berlin: G. Reimer, 1893 [2d ed.]) 185. And see H. G. Mitchell,

A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi (ICC; Edinburgh: Clark, 1912) 185-86, and K. Marti, Dos Dodekapropheten (KHAT 13; Tübingen: Mohr, 1904) 420.

9 Haggai and Zechariah 1-8 (OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1984) 275. 10 Exile and Restoration (OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1968) 198.

252 THE CATHOLIC BIBLICAL QUARTERLY I 54, 1992

W. A. M. Beuken11 contended that Zechariah addressed Joshua and Zerub­babel alternatively.

Petersen is correct that the crown(s) need not have been royal. The Hebrew word cä\ära is one of three words designating a royal crown and is used with that meaning in 2 Sam 12:30 (cf. 1 Chr 20:2); Jer 13:18; Ezek 21:31 (probably); Ps 21:4; and Lam 5:16. Cant 3:11 offers a special case, since the reference is to a crown placed on the head of King Solomon by his mother on his wedding day. In Isa 28:3 and Esth 8:15 cäfära designates a crown worn by a person or persons other than a king. In the allegory of Israel in Ezek 16:12, God is said to have adorned her with jewelry, including a crown for her head (cf. 23:42). The word is also used symbolically to refer to God himself (Isa 28:5), wisdom (Prov 4:9), gray hair (Prov 16:31), or grand­children (Prov 17:6).

Both ν 11 and ν 14 employ the plural form cä(ärot. To be sure, the verb in ν 14 is singular, but "Plurals of names and animals or things, and of abstracts, whether they be masculine or feminine, are frequently construed with the feminine singular of the verbal predicate... ."12 Further, it is difficult to account for the plural form if it was not original. It would appear, then, that the passage spoke of crowns.

For whom were the crowns to be made? Scholars have debated so long between Joshua, Zerubbabel, or both that they have failed to consider other possibilities. We should notice that 6:9-15 opens with a command to take silver and gold from the three returned exiles to Josiah, the son of Zephaniah, and make the crowns. In ν 14 we read that the crowns would be in the temple as a memorial13 to the same four people.14 Seen from this perspective, the

11 Haggai-Sachar ja 1-8: Studien zur Überlieferungsgeschichte der frühnachexilischen Prophétie (Studia Semitica Neerlandica 10; Assen: Van Gorcum, 1967) 275-82.

12 GKC 464 §k. 13 The term zikkäron means "reminder," "remembrance," "memorial." It often designates

something material: phylacteries (Exod 13:9), stones on the high priest's ephod (Exod 28:12,29; 39:7), atonement money (Exod 30:16), grain for use in a trial by ordeal (Num 5:15,18), burnt offerings and peace offerings (Num 10:10), bronze censers hammered into an altar overlay (Num 17:5 [Eng. 16:40]), gold taken in plunder and given to God (Num 31:54), and twelve stones in the Jordan River (Josh 4:7). In many of these cases, at least one purpose of the zikkäron was to stake a claim to a share in Yahweh's favor (Neh 2:20). In Zech 6:14 the memorials seem to be crowns or wreaths, intended to stake the claims of the four men to a portion in Yahweh's temple.

14 Admittedly, two of the names in ν 10 (Heldai and Josiah) differ in ν 14, but scholars routinely emend Helem to Heldai, and it is clearly a logical assumption that Josiah, son of Zephaniah, and Hen, son of Zephaniah, are the same person (cf. NRSV). D. W. Thomas ("The Book of Zechariah," IB, 6. 1080) notes that the LXX treats all of these names except Josiah as titles. In that case the number of people in the party might well have been greater than four, but that would affect the position being argued here no more than it would any other.

THE NIGHT VISIONS OF ZECHARIAH 253

reference to Joshua and the following address about the Branch ( w 12-13) appear as intrusive as 4:6b-10a and should likewise be treated as an addition. The original admonition would have included the command to make the crowns and to place them in the temple (6:9-1 la, 14) and a summons (v IS) to people far off (presumably in Babylon) to come and help to build the temple. The addition of 6:1 lb-13 would have been suggested by the mention of the temple in w 14 and IS. It is not possible to date this addition with real precision, except to say that it arose before the rebuilding of the temple was finished in S16.

The third passage to examine is 3:1-10, a vision of the cleansing of the high priest Joshua before the angel of the Lord and the iäfän. Here the first question is whether the entire vision belonged originally with the other seven. In the others Zechariah does not understand what he sees and learns their meaning from an interpreting angel. In 3:1-10, by contrast, he is fully cog­nizant of the action of the vision, and there is no introduction to the vision, no interpreting angel, and no explanation. Some scholars15 conclude that these differences indicate the secondary nature of 3:1-10, while others16 deny their significance for the issue.

Two further considerations tilt the decision in the direction of calling the vision secondary. The first consideration is the formulaic language concerned with seeing. The visions beginning with 1:8 and 4:1 both describe the coming of the interpreting angel and employ identical formulae: rä W [ . . .]wëhinnëh. Subsequent visions invariably employ the phrase wtfeiiä* *et cênay wâ^ëre wëhinnëh 2:1,5; 5:1,9; 6:1), except for 3:1-10. Second, in the third vision (2:7) the interpreting angel leaves Zechariah and is told in ν 8 to return and tell the prophet that God "will be a wall of fire around Jerusalem and... the glory within it" (NRSVv 5). That instruction is not carried out in 3:1-10; indeed,

15 E.g., T. Chary, Aggèe-lacharie-Malachie (SB; Paris: Lecoffre, 1969) 73; H. Gese, "An­fang und Ende der Apokalyptik, dargestellt am Sacharjabuch," ZTK 70 (1973) 25; K. Elliger, Das Buch der Zwölf Propheten II (ATD 25; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1967) 103; F. Horst, Die zwölf kleinen Propheten Nahum bis Maleachi (HAT 14; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1964 [3d ed.]) 210; C. Jeremias, Die Nachtgesichte des Sacharja (FRLANT 117; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1975) 201-25, esp. pp. 202-3; Κ. Seybold, Bilder zum Tempelbau (SBS 70; Stuttgart: KBW, 1974) 109; idem, "Die Bildmotiven der Visionen des Propheten Sacharja," Studies in Prophecy (VTSup 26; ed. D. Lys et al.; Leiden: Brill, 1974) 92; A. S. van der Woude, "Zion as Primeval Stone in Zechariah 3 and 4,M Text and Context: Festschrift for E C. Fensham (JSOTSup 48; ed. W. T. Claassen; Sheffield: JSOT, 1988) 237.

16 Scholars retaining 3:1-10 include J. G. Baldwin, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi (Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries 24; London: Tyndale, 1972) 112-18; Halpern, "Ritual Back­ground," 170; W. Harrelson, "The Trial of the High Priest Joshua: Zechariah 3," Er Isr 16 (1982) 118; Petersen, Haggai and Zechariah, 112-15; R. T. Siebeneck, "The Messianism of Aggeus and Proto-Zacharias," CBQ19 (1957) 319-20; R. L. Smith, Micah-Malachi(WBC 32; Waco: Word, 1984) 198-99.

254 THE CATHOLIC BIBLICAL QUARTERLY I 54, 1992

the angel does not even appear in 3:1-10. It is carried out, however, in the subsequent vision; 4:1 specifically notes that the angel came again to Zecha­riah. It would appear, then, that the vision of the lampstand came next in the sequence of visions.

An analysis of 3:1-10 shows that the vision itself is not a unity. Vv 1-5 describe the vision, while w 6-10 are comprised of oracles. Petersen argues that all of the oracles are added, w 6-7,9 interpreting the cleansing of Joshua in a positive manner, w 8 and 10 from a pro-Zerubbabel perspective.17 Since visions can include oracles,18 it hardly seems necessary to call w 6-7,9 an addition in support of Joshua, but w 8 and 10 do seem to be intrusive and messianic. Further, the associates of Joshua are introduced in ν 8 without previous mention, and should not be equated with the celestial beings in attendance ( w 4,7). One may conclude, then, that 3:1-7,9 comprised the vision, formed an addition to the original seven visions, and was itself sec­ondarily expanded by means of w 8,10.

II. The Redaction and Theology of the Night Visions

This investigation has shown good reason for considering secondary all three passages (4:6b-10a; 6:1 lb-13; 3:1-10) in which Joshua or Zerubbabel is found. If that is true, the original series of visions numbered seven, none of which made any reference to Joshua or Zerubbabel. That series also would have included the admonitions in 2:10-17 and 6:9-1 la, 14-15. The first ad­monition appears after the first three visions and before the interpreting angel is said to return and "awaken" Zechariah. It draws out the implications of those visions for its readers. In the first three visions, Zechariah depicts God's compassionate turn toward Jerusalem and the rebuilding of the tem­ple, his punishment of those who had exiled God's people, and the rebuilding of Jerusalem (with God as its protecting wall of fire and glory within). The exhortation in 2:10-17 calls upon the exiles to flee Babylon, return to Zion, and experience the presence of God.

The visions commence again with 4:l-6a,10b-14 (minus ν 12?). In the next four visions, Zechariah depicts the presence of God by means of the image of the lampstand, the banishment of sin and sinners from Judah (5:1-4) to Babylonia (5:5-11), and God's rest in light of all he had done to correct the evil conditions Zechariah complained about in the first vision (6:1-8). This

17 Haggai and Zechariah, 121, 202-14. See earlier Siebeneck, "Aggeus and Proto-Zacharias," 320, on w 8,10.

18 B. O. Long, "Reports of Visions Among the Prophets," JBL 95 (1976) 353-65.

THE NIGHT VISIONS OF ZECHARIAH 255

second sequence also concludes with an exhortation (6:9-1 la,14-15), command­ing Zechariah to make the crowns for people recently returned from exile and predicting that those far off (namely, the exiles) would return to help build the temple. This exhortation seems to fit perfectly well at the end of the visions.

Hence, it seems safe to conclude that the night visions included one exhortation in the middle and one at the end. These exhortations identify both the recipient of the collection and their purpose. The night visions were composed for Jews still in Babylon to urge them to return home and par­ticipate in God's new order. If so, it would seem likely that Zechariah himself was a returned exile, regardless of whether he was the Zechariah mentioned in Neh 12:16.

This initial tract envisioned restoration on a grand scale. God had already moved into the midst of the exiles (called Zion in 2:11) and would resettle them at home around his temple (1:16). Zechariah depicts Judah overflowing with prosperity (1:17) and Jerusalem teeming with people (2:8). Purged of sin (5:1-11) and safe from the punishment coming upon Babylon (1:14-15; 2:1-4), Judah would be the home for Jew and Gentile alike (2:15). To be sure, the nations who had exceeded God's plan to use them to punish the forefathers would not participate. Indeed, Zechariah even predicts (2:13) that the Babylonians would become plunder for the enslaved exiles (as they prepared to leave?), a notion perhaps borrowed from the plundering of the Egyptians at the time of the exodus (Exod 3:21-2; 11:2-3; 12:35-36).

The addition of the Joshua/Zerubbabel materials (4:6b-10a; 6:llb-13; 3:1-10) provided the visions with new contents and directed them to a new audience. The new focus was the events of 520 B.C. and the future those events were inaugurating.

The subject of 4:6b-10a was Zerubbabel and the rebuilding of the temple. V 6b says that the rebuilding of the temple would be accomplished through divine, not human power. Nevertheless, the human agent through whom God would work was Zerubbabel. V 9 insists strongly that Zerubbabel had founded19 the temple and would finish the work.

Reconstruction of the events between 539 and 520 in Palestine is tenuous, given the ambiguity of Ezra 1-6. It is nevertheless possible to suggest that Sheshbazzar had originally begun rebuilding the temple (Ezra 5:16), but that the project had not been finished. Apparently some kind of founding cere­mony was held on the twenty-fourth day of the ninth month of the second

19 Meyers and Meyers, Haggai, Zechariah 1-8, 228, 251.

256 THE CATHOLIC BIBLICAL QUARTERLY I 54, 1992

year of Darius (November/ December, 520; Hag 2:18),20 during which Zerub­babel may have played a role. On that same day Haggai announced that Zerubbabel was God's new signet ring (2:23), reversing the prediction of Jeremiah that no descendant of Jehoiachin would ever rule Judah again (Jer 22:24-30). In 4:9 Zechariah carried Haggai's message one step further, saying that Zerubbabel would finish the task of rebuilding the temple.21

Zechariah 4:7 and 10a are less clear. Both include vague references, ν 7 to a mountain (the difficulties facing Zerubbabel?) which would become level and to a head stone, and ν 10a to a "plummet," literally a stone of alloy or tin. Whatever the precise meaning, these verses appear to declare future roles or accomplishments of Zerubbabel. The thrust of these salvation oracles was to contrast the past time of difficulty with the future time of deliverance, to be gained through the completion of the temple by Zerub­babel (Hag 2:19).

The subject of 6:lib-13 was the future roles of Zerubbabel and (to a lesser extent) Joshua. To be sure, as the text now stands it is Joshua who receives the crowns. However, the passage speaks of the Branch, a messianic title, and predicts (w 12-13) that he would build the temple. In light of 4:6b-10a, that person can only be Zerubbabel. Hence, Wellhausen seems correct that the name Zerubbabel originally stood in 6:11 instead of Joshua.22 Zechariah predicted that Zerubbabel would build the temple, bear majesty, and rule. In addition, there would be a priest beside him, with whom he would dwell harmoniously. The priest's role was delineated further in 3:7.

The subject of 3:1-7,9 was the cleansing and commissioning of the high priest for his future role in the new temple. The setting was apparently the council of Yahweh, where Joshua was on trial. The safan was present to accuse Joshua, and the angel of the Lord was there to preside (though one may question whether the distinction between him and Yahweh should be

2 0 The precise nature of this ceremony is unknown, though many scholars, including Halpern ("Ritual Background,** 171-72), A. Petitjean ("La mission de Zorobabel et la recon­struction du temple, Zach 3:8-10," ETL 42 [1966] 40-71), and D. L. Petersen ("Zerubbabel and Jerusalem Temple Reconstruction," CBQ 36 [1974] 368-71; and Haggai and Zechariah 1-8, 88-90) compare it to the Babylonian kalû ritual.

21 The last half of ν 9 apparently was addressed to Zerubbabel himself: "and you (sing.) shall know" (wëyâdacta). If the Hebrew text is correct, Zerubbabel's completion of the task would be proof to him that Yahweh had sent Zechariah as a prophet to the people. The whole phrase, however, appears twice elsewhere in the night visions (2:13 and 6:15), where the verb is 2d mase. pi. In both cases it is apparently the Jews in exile who will know that Yahweh had sent Zechariah. Since it is quite possible that 4:9 should also be read as a pi. (see BHS, n. b), it would be a mistake to lay too much emphasis on this difference.

22 Die kleinen Propheten, 185.

THE NIGHT VISIONS OF ZECHARIAH 257

emphasized here). The proceedings were cut short by the judge, who an­nounced Yahweh's rebuke of the iäfän and called upon other angels to strip and reclothe (i.e., sanctify) Joshua. The angel commanded the priest to keep the law, placed him in charge of the temple, and granted him access to God's council (v 7). The engraved stone of ν 9 was apparently part of his priestly regalia (see Exod 28:36-38). The cleansing of the priest anticipated God's future forgiveness of the iniquity of the whole land.

The addition of 4:6b-10a, 6:llb-13, and 3:1-7,9 resulted in a "revised, enlarged" edition of the night visions, now aimed at the community in Jerusalem in the flush of the building of the temple under Zerubbabel and promising them a new day. It advocated carrying forward two of the basic institutions of preexilic Judah: the priesthood, under the high priest Joshua, and the Davidic monarchy, under Zerubbabel. Whether the author thought in terms of a diarchy or merely the absence of strife between the two insti­tutions may remain open. The date of the twenty-fourth day of the eleventh month of the second year of Darius (January/ February, 519) given in 1:7 may well have been the date of this edition. It is at least possible that the redactor was none other then Zechariah himself.

The night visions were ultimately surrounded by other material ascribed to Zechariah (1:1-6; chaps. 7 and 8). The redactor23 of those materials wanted to present Zechariah as the authentic successor to the preexilic prophets (1:1-6; 8:9), thus carrying forward the office of prophecy. Subsequent to that redaction, one last touch was added to the night visions, namely the rein-terpretation of the Branch in 6:1 lb-13 and 3:8,10.

The clearer case is 6:1 lb, where the name Joshua was simply substituted for the name Zerubbabel, even though the Branch is told to build the temple, a task emphatically reserved to Zerubbabel in 4:9. It is not difficult to see why the change was made. The success of the building project, coupled with the failure of Judah to reestablish the monarchy, resulted (ironically) in the elevation of the priesthood. The substitution of the name Joshua for Zerub­babel simply reflected that rise in priestly prestige. Scholars sometimes offer a different explanation, namely that Zerubbabel's name was eliminated out of fear of Persian reprisals for the messianic hope surrounding him. That suggestion is not convincing if for no other reason than the name Zerubbabel was retained in 4:6b-10a.

2 3 There is good reason to think that Haggai and Zechariah were ultimately edited by the same person. See P. R. Ackroyd, T h e Books of Haggai and Zechariah I-VIII,w JJS 3 (1952) 152; Beuken, Haggai-Sacharja 1-8, 33-36; R. A. Mason, "The Purpose of the 'Editorial Frame­work' of the Book of Haggai," ΚΓ27 (1977) 413-21; Meyers and Meyers, Haggai and Zechariah, xliv-xlxiii; and Petersen, Haggai and Zechariah 1-8, 38.

258 THE CATHOLIC BIBLICAL QUARTERLY I 54, 1992

The second case of reinterpreting the name Branch appears in 3:8,10. In the original vision Yahweh addresses Joshua directly in 3:7, but in 3:9 speaks of Joshua to the heavenly council. V 8 continues that pattern by addressing Joshua and his companions directly, then switching to the third person to proclaim him the Branch. Here, though, no task is assigned to the Branch, only a promise of messianic bounty in 3:10. It is possible, of course, that the reference is to a future messiah,24 but in the context of the vision about Joshua an identification with the high priest himself seems more likely.

One final question remains to be asked, even though it cannot be an­swered very well. If the second "revised and enlarged" edition of the night visions should be dated in January/ February 519, when was the original tract written? Several scholars25 have suggested dates between 539 and 520. The results of this study require a similar conclusion, but the visions make no clear references to datable events. Nor is it necessary that much time elapsed between the two editions since they were aimed at different audiences.

III. Conclusion

The results of this study can be quickly summarized. The only three passages in the night visions to mention Joshua and Zerubbabel (4:6b-10a; 6:llb-13; 3:1-10) were additions to an original series of seven visions but­tressed by two exhortations. The first edition depicted God turning in grace toward Jerusalem, dwelling in its midst, punishing Babylon, and cleansing Judah. These visions led to a call to the exiles to seize the opportunity to return to Jerusalem and help with the restoration.

The second edition faced a new issue: how would the hope for a restored Judah and Jerusalem come about? The answer was that it would be accom­plished by the combined efforts of the people and their traditional institu­tions, centered around the temple priesthood, represented by Joshua; the monarchy, represented by Zerubbabel; and (implicitly) the office of prophecy, represented by Zechariah. (Zechariah's role was made explicit by the redactor of the third stage.) This second stage envisioned a cleansed priest (3:l-7,9a) leading a cleansed people (3:9b) to the temple rebuilt by a new king (4:6b-10a), with harmony between the two leaders (6:llb-13).

2 4 Siebeneck, "The Messianism of Aggeus and Proto-Zacharias," 324-27; Harrelson, "The Trial of the High Priest Joshua: Zechariah 3," 120.

2 5 G. A. Smith, The Book of the TWehe (2 vols.; New York/ London: Harper and Brothers, 1928 [rev. ed.]) 2. 255-56; Κ. Galling, "Die Exilswende in der Sicht des Propheten Sacharja,M

VT 2 (1952) 33; Sinclair, "Redaction of Zechariah 1-8," 38-40.

THE NIGHT VISIONS OF ZECHARIAH 259

Had Zechariah been content simply to name Zerubbabel as the one to rebuild the temple, his message would have caused subsequent generations less concern, but might have made much less impact than it apparently did. Instead, he spoke of Zerubbabel as ruler and called him by the messianic title "Branch." Nevertheless, the Jerusalem community did not dismiss Zechari­ah's message or the hope that inspired it. Rather, it made two minor altera­tions in the text (at 6:11 and 3:8,10), naming Joshua the Branch to allow that hope to live on and that message to speak.

^ s

Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.

No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling, reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a violation of copyright law.

This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However, for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article. Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available, or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).

About ATLAS:

The ATLA Serials (ATLAS®) collection contains electronic versions of previously published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association (ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.

The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American Theological Library Association.