Chapter One

1. Title of the book. 2–7. The Lord’s judgment on Samaria. 8–9. The prophet’s sorrow. 10–16. Calamity befalling Judah.

Micah 1:1. The word of the Lord that came to Micah the Morasthite in the days of Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah, which he saw concerning Samaria and Jerusalem. Verse 1 is the title of the book. See the introduction. In the title commentators call attention to the fact that the prophet names Samaria before Jerusalem; this is explained by the fact that the prophet speaks of judgment upon God’s people, and this judgment first fell upon Samaria. – “Which he saw” (ascher chazah); in the Septuagint ὑπὲρ ῶν εῖδε – an abbreviated form instead of ὑπὲρ τοὺτων, ἅ εῖδε, in Slavonic: “concerning those whom he saw.”

Micah 1:2. Hear, all peoples; let the earth and all it contains listen! Let God be witness against you, the Lord from His holy temple! The prophet addresses his speech to all peoples and to the earth. From what follows it becomes clear that the prophet is speaking of the peoples and the earth against which God comes as a witness, that is, not of pagan nations (Nowack), but of the people and land of Israel. – “The Lord from His holy temple”: biblical writers often call heaven the temple of God (Ps 11:4; Hab 2:20); as may be seen from verse 4, Micah understands by the temple of the Lord the heavenly dwelling of God. In the Septuagint, instead of the Hebrew “hear all peoples” in verse 2, ἀχούσατε λαὸι λόγους; in Slavonic “hear all people (πάντες, only in some editions in the Septuagint manuscripts) words”; the latter probably arose from the Hebrew kullam (all peoples), read as millim (words). The expression “all it contains” is transmitted by the Septuagint periphrастically and understood of people; hence in Slavonic “earth and all who are upon it.” Instead of the word “witness” (cd) the Septuagint has abstractly εῖς μαρτυριον, in Slavonic “for a testimony,” as a testimony.

Micah 1:3. For behold, the Lord goes forth from His place, and He will descend and tread upon the high places of the earth. In verses 3–4 the prophet depicts the descent of the Lord to judgment upon Samaria. The conjunction “for” indicates that verse 3 serves as an explanation of the preceding, namely the words of verse 2 “let God be witness against you.” The adverb “behold” indicates the nearness of God’s judgment. – “From His place” – that is, from heaven.

Micah 1:4. And the mountains will melt under Him, and the valleys will split apart, like wax before fire, like waters flowing down a slope. The features of the image of the Lord’s descent are borrowed by the prophet from physical phenomena characteristic of Palestine, but probably not from the melting of snow on the peaks of Palestinian mountains (Yungerov), rather from a thunderstorm cloud bursting with abundant rain. In the Slavonic text, instead of the expression “the valleys will split apart” we read “the dales will melt”: the Septuagint transmitted the text of the original freely. Instead of the words “flowing down a slope” in Slavonic “coming down with impetus”; the Greek ἐν καταβάσει could be transmitted as “along a mountain slope.”

Micah 1:5. All this is for the transgression of Jacob, for the sin of the house of Israel. From whom is the transgression of Jacob? Is it not from Samaria? Who has set up the high places in Judah? Is it not Jerusalem? The prophet indicates the cause of the impending punishment upon Samaria and Jerusalem in the people’s impiety. “From whom (mi) is the transgression of Jacob? Is it not from Samaria?” From the Hebrew the above sentence should be more exactly rendered: “Who is the transgression of Jacob? Is it not Samaria?” The prophet, presenting Samaria as the embodiment of sin, expresses the thought that the life of the Israelite kingdom is nothing but impiety or sin. “Who (has set up) the high places (bamoth) in Judah”: in the Septuagint the Hebrew bamoth corresponds to the word ἁμαρτίας (in Slavonic “what sin (is there) to the house of Judah”). In view of the reading of the Septuagint, as well as the Syriac and Targum, some commentators (Nowack) suppose that in the Hebrew text instead of bamoth (high places) there originally stood chathoth (sins) beth jehndah, where chathoth was lost and beth was changed into bamoth. But the correction of bamoth to chatchoth is motivated mainly by the debatable reasoning defended by representatives of negative criticism that Micah, a prophet of the eighth century, could not in such strong form condemn the worship at high places. The parallelism of the clauses will be maintained even with the present reading of the Hebrew text (transgression of Jacob – high places of Judah); moreover, it is easier for bamoth to produce chathoth, which was in copies of the Septuagint, than the reverse.

Micah 1:6. Therefore I will make Samaria a heap of ruins in the field, a place for planting vineyards; I will roll her stones into the valley and bare her foundations. The prophet announces judgment upon Samaria and threatens it with complete destruction; according to the prophet’s word, of the city nothing will remain but a heap of stones thrown down into the valley from the hill on which Samaria stood, the foundations of the houses will be exposed, and the place of the city will be occupied by vineyards. The Septuagint translated the Hebrew lei hassadeh (“into a heap of ruins in the field”) as εἰς ὀπωροφυλάκιον ἀγ po ῦ, in Slavonic “into a vegetable storehouse in the field.” A vegetable storehouse – a hut set up in the field to preserve fruit. Samaria was destroyed more than once: namely in 722 BC by Sargon, king of Assyria (2 Sam 17:1), then around 107 BC by John Hyrcanus, who tore down the city’s fortifications and leveled it to the ground (Josephus Antiquities 13; 10:2–3). Restored after Hyrcanus by the Roman proconsul Gabinius (57–55 BC), Samaria was rebuilt and enlarged by Herod the Great, who renamed the city in honor of Augustus as Sebaste. But even under the new name the city did not long enjoy prosperity; gradually it declined and turned into ruins. Now on the site of ancient Samaria stands a small village Sebaste, and much of the territory of the once renowned city is occupied by fields and vineyards (cf. Keith. Evidences of the Truth of the Christian Religion, 1870. P. 244–253).

Micah 1:7. All her carved idols will be broken to pieces and all her payment for prostitution will be burned with fire, and all her idols I will destroy; for from the payment of prostitution she gathered them, and to the payment of prostitution they will return. Along with the destruction of Samaria will perish the Samaritan idols, Resileicha – stone carvings, Russian “idols,” and ozabecha – statues, thus proving their powerlessness. – “Her payment for prostitution,” that is, various offerings to pagan gods, (the service of whom, from the prophet’s perspective, is prostitution, or perhaps outright payments collected as payment for the prostitutes who existed at pagan temples (in Slavonic “because from the payment of prostitution she gathered”). – “For from the payment of prostitution she gathered them, and to the payment of prostitution they will return”: that is, the idols, which Samaria set up from the payment of prostitution, will pass to another prostitute – Nineveh, will be turned into offerings to Assyrian gods. The prophet calls the worship of the heathen to their gods prostitution, proceeding from the thought that they, like the Judeans, have departed from the covenant which the Lord made with all humanity in the person of Adam and Noah (cf. Hos 6:7; Ezek 16:1 and Ezek 23:1). The verbs jukkththu (will be broken) and issarphu (will be burned) were either read by the Septuagint in active voice forms (jakothu isrphu) or they simply replaced the passive form with the active; hence in Slavonic: “all her carved things will be shattered and all her payments (μίσθωμα, payment to the harlot. Hos 2:12; Deut 23:19; Ezek 16:50) will be burned with fire.”

Micah 1:8. On account of this I will mourn and wail, I will go stripped and barefoot; I will make a lamentation like the jackals, and mourning like the ostriches. The prophet expresses his sorrow over the destruction of Samaria, since this destruction serves as an indication of the impending calamities for the Jewish people, upon which from verse 8 the prophet concentrates his attention. – “I will go stripped and barefoot”: the prophet intends to put on mourning – to dress, like captives robbed by enemies (Isa 3:23), in sackcloth and even to strip himself, that is, either to tear his clothing, as was done as a sign of mourning (Gen 37:34; 2 Sam 14:2), or to strip himself entirely as was done with captives (Isa 20:1-6). The prophet’s clothing was to express not only his sorrow but also to prefigure the coming captivity of the people. – “Like the jackals, and mourning like the ostriches”: the cry of jackals, according to the testimony of travelers, resembles the weeping of a man; likewise, ostriches at night emit a sound reminiscent of human weeping. The Septuagint referred the words of verse 8 not to the prophet but to Samaria; therefore in Slavonic: “on account of this Jerusalem will weep and lament, will go barefoot and naked, will make a lamentation like serpents (ὡς δρακὸντων) and mourning like daughters of the Sirens.” In the Greek text, thus, the lamentation is compared to the lamentation of dragons (Hebrew thanim) – mythical beings which supposedly could emit unusual hissing or whistling (Jerome, in his commentary) and with the wailing of Sirens. By Sirens (σειρήν) or Sirens the Septuagint understood either those mythical beings which, according to the tale of Odysseus, were distinguished by an extraordinarily pleasant voice (Jerome, Theodoret), or night birds emitting a sorrowful moan (Yungerov), the female ostriches.

Micah 1:9. For her wound is grievous; it has reached Judah, it touches the gate of my people, to Jerusalem. The cause of the prophet’s sorrow over the destruction of Samaria is that a similar calamity threatens Judah and Jerusalem. The prophet, at this point, calls Jerusalem the “gates of the people,” because Jerusalem had the same significance for the country as gates have for a city – it was the place of the supreme court, the residence of kings, the place of the assembly of the people (Deut 21:19; Jer 17:19). The taking of Jerusalem was the key to the conquest of the country, as the taking of city gates gave into the hands of enemies the city itself. Instead of the words of the Russian text “her wound is grievous (anuschah)” in Slavonic we read: “because the plague (κατεκρατησεν) conquered her,” that is, “the plague has prevailed over her”; instead of ея (αὐτῆς, genitive from κατεκρ.) in Slavonic there should be it – (dependent on the verb “conquered”).

Micah 1:10. Do not announce it in Gath; do not weep at all in Beth-leaphra; roll yourself in the dust. In verses 10–16 the prophet in a series of images speaks of the impending calamity. Making use of wordplay, the prophet names at this point the cities which will suffer from the calamity. The text of Mic 1:10-16 appears not to have been preserved in its original purity and is read differently in the original and translations. Therefore the meaning of verses 10–16 is very unclear and is usually established by commentators only provisionally. In verse 10 the prophet forbids Judah to announce the disaster that has befallen them and even to weep loudly in the Philistine city of Gath, so as not to provoke the malice of the sworn enemies and thus worsen the calamity. Instead of this the prophet invites the people to devote themselves to sorrow and dress themselves in mourning at Ophrah. “Ophrah” – is ordinarily identified with the city of Shamír mentioned in Josh 18:23; 1 Sam 13:17), which according to the testimony of Jerome and Eusebius was located on the plain between Eleutheropolis and Ascalon. The prophet names, in depicting the calamity coming upon Judah, precisely the listed places, in view of the philological significance of their names: the prophet desires to make use of wordplay. To the inhabitants of Ophrah (the name Shamír means: beauty, ornament) it is predicted that they will be shamefully naked, to the inhabitants of Tzaan (tzaan – from jaza to depart), that they will not escape the calamity, and of the village of Etzal (side, direction, support) it is said that it will not provide help to the fugitives. The translation of the Septuagint and our Slavonic text in verse 10 conveys a thought different from that of the original and obscure. The verb Ibri lachem (depart) the Septuagint referred to the end of verse 9. Instead of “the inhabitants of Ophrah, shamefully naked” in Slavonic, according to the translation from Greek, we read – “dwelling well in their cities”: the word “well” (Greek καλῶς) the Septuagint translated the Hebrew name Ophrah, the words “in their cities” (τὰς πόλεις αύτῆς) the Septuagint translated, evidently, the Hebrew erjah (nakedness, Russian “naked”), deriving it from ir (city), while the Hebrew boscheth shame (Russian “shamefully”) was left without translation. Instead of the name Tzaan in the Greek text we read Σενναὰρ, as well as Σεnnὰν (Jerome, Complutensian, Aldine and manuscripts) and ἡnnaὰρ (Theodoret, Chrysostom). The Anakites, Greek οι ῾Ενακείμ – descendants of Anak (Num 13:34; Deut 9:2; Josh 14:15), which once occupied the southern part of Palestine, and then the Philistine cities of Gaza, Gath, Ashdod (Josh 11:22; Judg 1:20; 1 Sam 17:1 and others). The appearance of the name Anakites is explained by an error in the Greek text: (middle bacho (from bachah to weep) was translated by the Septuagint with the word ῾Εν῾Ακείμ (as in the Alexandria list and lists 23, 95, 145, 187), which by subsequent scribes was corrected to ῾Εν Βακεὶμ (Judg 2:1-5), as reads blessed Jerome (in Bachim), Syriac-hexapla and XII code., and then to ῾Ενακείμ, which reading, found in many manuscripts, was adopted and by the Elizabethan editors of the Slavonic Bible. On the basis of the original Greek reading ῾Εn ῾Ακείμ or ῾Εn ῾Ακεί modern commentators (Hoonacker) suggest in the present Hebrew text the word bacho to be considered a proper name of the Phoenician city Accho (Judg 1:31): bacho al thibehu – do not weep loudly, do not weep in Accho. The expression of the Slavonic text: “do not build from a house for mockery” means – do not make from the house (of Judah) an object of mockery.

Micah 1:11. The inhabitant of Shaphir will pass by in shame; she will not come out; the inhabitant of Beth-ezel will take away its standing place from you. In view of the impending invasion of enemies, the prophet calls the inhabitants of Shaphir to depart into an enemy country as captives, from whom clothes have been torn off (“shamefully naked”); those living in Tzaan will not escape the calamity and will not find themselves a refuge – everywhere, as, for example, in Etzal, they will meet lamentation and wailing. “Shaphir” – is usually identified with the city of Shamír mentioned in Josh 15:48, which according to the testimony of Jerome and Eusebius was located on the plain between Eleutheropolis and Ascalon. “Tzaan” or Tzeanan – a hamlet mentioned in the book Josh 15:37, now Kirbeth-es-Senat near Beit-Jibrin. Etzal – a hamlet mentioned also in the prophet Zech 14:5 and was supposedly located near Jerusalem. The prophet names, in depicting the calamity coming upon Judah, precisely the enumerated places, in view of the philological significance of their names: the prophet desires to make use of wordplay. To the inhabitants of Shaphir (the name Shamír means: beauty, ornament) it is predicted that they will be shamefully naked, to the inhabitants of Tzaan (tzaan – from jaza to depart), that they will not depart from the calamity, and about the village of Etzal (side, direction, support) it is said that it will not provide help to fugitives. The translation of the Septuagint and our Slavonic text in verse 11 gives a thought different from that of the original and obscure. The verb Ibri lachem (depart) the Septuagint referred to the end of verse 10. Instead of “the inhabitants of Shaphir, shamefully naked” in Slavonic, according to the translation from Greek, we read – “dwelling well in their cities”: the word “well” (Greek καλῶς) the Septuagint translated the Hebrew name Shaphir, the words “in their cities” (τὰς πόλεις αύτῆς) the Septuagint translated, evidently, the Hebrew erjah (nakedness, Russian “naked”), deriving it from ir (city), while the Hebrew boscheth shame (Russian “shamefully”) was left without translation. Instead of the name Tzaan in the Greek text we read Σενναὰρ, as well as Σεnnὰν (Jerome, Complutensian, Aldine and manuscripts) and ἡnnaὰρ (Theodoret, Chrysostom). Church Fathers (blessed Theodoret, Cyril of Alexandria) think that the name Sennaar the Septuagint used to allegorically name Jerusalem. The name Etzal (beth-azel) is transmitted by the Septuagint in a common sense: “mourn for the house near her” (ἐχόμενον αὐτης). Instead of the words “will not provide help to you” the Septuagint read another expression, which in Slavonic is transmitted: “will take from you the plague of ailments.”

Micah 1:12. The inhabitant of Maroth writhes in pain; for good has departed from the Lord to the gates of Jerusalem. By the words “inhabitant of Maroth” the prophet designates the inhabitants of Maroth in general. The location of Maroth is unknown. Provisionally they identify Maroth with Mooraph mentioned in Josh 15:59, which was located not far from Jerusalem in the territory of the tribe of Judah. But some commentators think that Maroth is a Phoenician settlement (Hoonacker). The prophet in describing the picture of the impending calamity to Judah makes use of the name Maroth in view of the meaning of the name (bitterness, sorrow). The very expression of the prophet about Maroth is understood differently: in our text the Hebrew chalah tetov is rendered by the words “writhes in pain about... good”, where tov is understood in the sense of property; modern commentators (Nowack, Hoonacker), in view of the abstract meaning of the word tov, render the given expression: “hopes for good.” If Maroth is understood not as a Judean, but as a hostile to Judeans settlement, then the meaning will be that Maroth (bitter) expects good for itself from the impending calamity to Judah. The prophet notes about the calamity that it has come to the gates of Jerusalem: this means that the calamity has drawn near, but has not yet arrived. – The first half of verse 12 in Greek and Slavonic text gives a thought different from that of the original. Instead of ki chalah (for grieves) the Septuagint, evidently, read mi chalal, which they translated τίς ἤρξατο (in Slavonic “who began”). The word maroth (Maroth) is understood by the Septuagint as a common noun and rendered by the word ὀδυνη, pain. All the expression in the Slavonic text received the form: “who began in good things dwelling in pains,” or, as it should be: who began to send pains living in good things, that is, “who began to send pains to one dwelling in well-being.” The speech is about Jerusalem, which in verse 11 is called Sennaar.

Micah 1:13. Harness the horses to the chariot, inhabitant of Lachish; she was the beginning of sin for the daughter of Zion; for in you are found the transgressions of Israel. The city called in verse 12 Lachish, now Um-Lachish on the way from Beth-Jibrin to Gaza, was located on the Judean plain, in the territory of the tribe of Judah (Josh 10:3). The city was well fortified (2 Chr 11:9) and could therefore withstand a prolonged siege by Sennacherib (2 Sam 18:14) and serve as the last refuge for the Judeans at the conquest by Nebuchadnezzar (Jer 30:7). It is supposed that Lachish was one of the “chariot cities” of King Solomon (1 Sam 10:26) and that horses were stationed to the sun in it (2 Sam 23:11), although for the latter there is no basis. The meaning of the prophet’s address to Lachish is not clear, since the Hebrew rethom hammerkabah larechesch is translated differently. According to the meaning of the Russian text, the prophet calls upon the inhabitants of Lachish to save themselves with fast horses – evidently, in view of the impending calamity. In the Slavonic text, in accordance with the translation of the Septuagint, the prophet’s address to Lachish is rendered by the words: “the sound of chariots and horsemen,” which words are referred to the end of the previous verse and understood as about Jerusalem. – “You (Hebrew hi – he) – are the beginning of sin for the daughter of Zion, for in you are found the transgressions of Israel”: it is not known why Lachish could be called the beginning of sin for Jerusalem. Calmet, Shegg, and other commentators suggest rephrasing the second half of verse 13 as follows: “the beginning of sin for the daughter of Zion was that in you are found the transgressions of Israel” (Knabenbauer).

Micah 1:14. Therefore you will give gifts in Moreshah-Gath; the houses of Achzib will be a deception for the kings of Israel. “Therefore you will give”: the speech is addressed not to Lachish (Yungerov), but to the daughter of Zion. “Gifts” – Hebrew schiluchim means gifts given to a bride as a dowry (1 Sam 9:16). “Moreshah-Gath” – apparently a hamlet which had some relations with Gath, – either being near it or even lying within its territory. The name of the hamlet morescheth is consonant with meorasah bride (Deut 22:23-27); therefore in the expression “you will give dowry to Moreshah” there is wordplay. The meaning of the expression probably is that the daughter of Zion must send dowry to Moreshah because of the transition of his possession to a new master. Moreshah is named by the prophet as the representative of the whole country. – “But the houses (beth) of Achzib (Achziv) will be a deception (leachzav) for the kings of Israel”: in the prophet’s expression there is wordplay, obtained not only from the consonance of the name Achzib with the word achzav (deception), but also from the fact that in the sense of a common noun achziv means a stream drying up in summer and thus deceiving the traveler hoping to quench his thirst; like a stream, the city of Achzib will deceive the hopes of the kings of Israel. By the latter the prophet understands the kings of Judah. Achzib will be a deception for them in the sense that it, together with other cities, will pass into the hands of the enemy. Achzib is a city in the tribe of Judah, to the west of Jerusalem (Gen 38:5; Josh 15:44). – The Septuagint translated the proper names Moreshah and Achzib, as in other cases, with common nouns; hence in the Slavonic text we read: “for this reason will give those given even to the inheritance (variant Moreshah) of Gath, houses of vanity (from Hebrew houses of Achzib): in vain they were to the kings of Israel.”

Micah 1:15. Still I will bring the heir to you, inhabitant of Mareshah; the glory of Israel will go to Adullam. “Mareshah” (“inheritance”) is a city in the tribe of Judah (Josh 15:44), now the ruins of Marah to the southwest of Beit-Jibrin. According to the prophet’s word, to Mareshah an heir (hajoresch) will be brought, that is, Mareshah will pass into the possession of the enemies of Judah. Mareshah is named by the prophet as an example, as one of the cities of Judea. – “He will go to Adullam, the glory of Israel.” Adullam – an ancient city (Gen 38:1) in the tribe of Judah (Josh 15:36), surrounded by rocks and caves, which once served as a refuge for David and his companions (1 Sam 22:1; 1 Chr 11:15). Its location is identified with the present-day village of Koreytun. According to the Russian translation, the second half of verse 15 has the meaning that the heir, that is, the enemy, will reach the southern border of Judea, to Adullam. “The glory of Israel” Adullam, as is supposed (Yungerov), could have been named because the surrounding caves and rocks made it a good defensive point for the Judeans (2 Macc 12:35). But the Hebrew text of the expression under consideration can be translated differently: “to Adullam will come the glory of Israel.” “The glory of Israel,” in such a case, the prophet calls Judean nobility and desires to express the thought that with the coming of calamity the nobles of Judah, like David once, will hide in the Adullam caves. The Septuagint referred the first half of verse 15 to Lachish (Slavonic “until the heirs I will bring to you dwelling in Lachish”), and in the second instead of the name of Israel they put daughter of Zion (the inheritance will even come to Adullam, the glory of the daughter of Zion). The name of Lachish is in no translation except the Greek.

Micah 1:16. Make yourself bald, cut your hair in mourning over the children you cherish; enlarge your baldness like the molting eagle, for they will go into captivity from you. The prophet addresses Judah, representing Judah as a mother grieving over her children. The prophet calls upon Judah to mourn because of the impending captivity of the people. – “Enlarge your baldness”: during mourning the Hebrews cut and even shaved the hair on their head and beard (Isa 15:2; Jer 7:29); to do this the prophet calls upon Judah. – “Like the molting eagle”: that is, like an eagle, which every year in spring loses feathers and is covered with new ones. Instead of the expression “make yourself bald” in Slavonic we read: “be covered with sores.” Instead of the words “enlarge your baldness” in Slavonic “enlarge your mangy covering.”