Friday, September 1, 2023

Carol L. Meyers and Eric M. Meyers on Zechariah 9:9

  

O Daughter Zion. In Hebrew poetry, “daughter” (bat) plus a toponym is commonly used. It is thought to designate the inhabitants of a particular place (Haag 1975: 334) or to indicate the place itself and thus, collectively, its population. However, close attention to the grammar of the expression indicates population. However, close attention to the grammar of the expression indicates a more specific usage. Although “daughter” (bat) plus a place name is frequently translated “daughter of [place].” Thereby implying that the place has a daughter, it is clear that such a translation is erroneous. The idiom refers to the place itself, personified as a daughter. . . . The specific daughter-Zion combination appears twenty-six times in the Hebrew Bible.

 

The frequent use of “daughter” or “daughters” in Scripture to personify a place and to enhance its role in a poetic text is imperfectly understood. Perhaps because place names are normally feminine, this female kinship term came to designate various locales and their inhabitants. The suitability of “daughter” here is probably related to the dependent status of daughters. Just as unmarried daughters cannot act independently of their parents, so Yahweh’s people must rely on God and on the king who is coming for their future to be arranged. . . . “Daughter Zion” in this verse is parallel to “Daughter Jerusalem,” the two expressions together signifying the holy city. Although these exhortations at the beginning of verse 9 apparently draw upon Zeph 3:14 . . .they do not include “Israel,” which accompanies “Zion” and “Jerusalem” in Zephaniah. Zechariah 9, in contrast, focuses especially on Jerusalem. This attention to Zion/Jerusalem in verse 8 that God will be in the Temple in Jerusalem . . . Just as this verse echoes the language of the oracular expansion of Zechariah 2 (especially 2:14 [NRSV 2:10]), so too the previous verse uses images associated with that chapter of First Zechariah, again 2:14 (NRSV 2:10) in particular. The fact that both verses 8 and 9 connect with First Zechariah, along with their common concern for Jerusalem, provides continuity between the first and second subunits of chapter 9. The theme of Jerusalem as a sacred city where the future king will rule (v 10) is thus a natural sequel to the theme of reestablishing God’s presence in the Temple. Thus, although the second subunit (9:9-10) of this chapter in many ways stands apart from verses 1-8 and 11-17, it nonetheless is thematically connected to its context . . . The call to Zion as witness and celebrant of a new world order, characterized by stability (worldwide peace), is part of Zion’s traditional role in the expectation for Yahweh to overcome Israel’s enemies and establish Israelite/Davidic/divine sovereignty in Jerusalem. This role for Zion is part of the “Zion tradition”, in which a number of motifs accrue to the depiction of Zion, especially in Psalms . . . These motifs are part of a general Near Eastern typology of royal accession . . . It should be noted that “Daughter” appears twice here, thus prefiguring the double use of “sons” in verse 13 . . . This is another of the ways in which the subunits of Zechariah 9 are interconnected. (Carol L. Meyers and Ric M. Meyers, Zechariah 9-14: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary [AB 25C; New York: Doubleday, 1993], 121, 122)

 

Although a lowly beast (Gen 49;14ff.), it also could signify royalty. The story of Saul retrieving asses may be an allusion to his future office, and the succession story of Solomon has him on a mule rather than a horse (although the word there is pered rather than ḥămōr [1 Kgs 1:33, 38]). The range of images attached to ḥămōr is striking, and they all may contribute to the message of this passage—that the king represents peace, that his humble beast is suitable for his role in submitting to divine power while exerting his own royal dominion, and that he is a legitimate monarch. The use of a lowly animal is one of the ways in which a royal figure partakes of the life-style of the people he dominates. In this way he bridges the structural gap between those in power and those subjugated and thereby helps to win the cooperation of people dominated by a royal elite . . . (Carol L. Meyers and Eric M. Meyers, Zechariah 9-14: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary [AB 25C; New York: Doubleday, 1993], 130)