Introduction

The ninth place in the order of the books of the minor prophets, both in the Hebrew Masoretic Bible and in the Greek LXX, Latin Vulgate, and other translations, is occupied by the book of the prophet Zephaniah. The Hebrew name of the prophet – Tsephania – transmitted in the LXX as Σοφανίας, from Hebrew means, according to the words composing it: tsaphan (to cover, to protect) and ia(h) – Jehovah, thus meaning “he whom Jehovah protects, to whom Jehovah shows favor.” This name in the Old Testament, besides the prophet, was borne by three other persons mentioned in various biblical places (among them, the high priest of the temple contemporary with the prophet, Jer 21:1; Compare Zech 6:10 and 1 Chr 6:21), and according to the indicated etymology of this name, it generally expressed the theocratic confidence of the faithful people of the Old Testament in the gracious protection continuously exercised by Jehovah’s concern (compare Ps 26:5). Not quite as closely responsive to the direct literal meaning of the first part of the Hebrew name of the prophet is the transmission and explanation of the word Tsephata given by blessed Jerome. “The name Zephaniah,” says he 1, “some translated as ‘a high place for watching’ (specula from the verb ‘tsaphat,’ watched), others as ‘the secret of the Lord’ (from the verb ‘tsaphan’ – to be hidden). However, whether this name is interpreted as ‘a tower of watching for the day’ or as ‘the secret of the Lord,’ both equally suit the prophet. Indeed, it is said to Ezekiel: ‘Son of man, I have made you a watchman (tsopheh) for the house of Israel’ (Ezek 3:17), and in another place: ‘For the Lord God does nothing without revealing His secret to His servants, the prophets’ (Amos 3:7). In accordance with this explanation, blessed Jerome conveys the meaning of the Hebrew name of the prophet Zephaniah by the expression: ‘Speculator et arcanorum Dei cognitor.’ But despite the truth and depth of the thought contained here, there is no exact correspondence to the Hebrew etymology of the prophet’s name in blessed Jerome’s explanation: the verbs ‘tsaphat’ and ‘tsaphan,’ despite their mutual closeness in origin and meaning, nonetheless each has an independent meaning, and the second verb more often has a concrete meaning (to cover, to protect) than an abstract one (secret). In view of this it is better to remain with the first etymology of the name Tsephania-Zephaniah, which we indicated.

No information about the person, life, and activity of the prophet Zephaniah has been preserved in the historical and contemporary prophetic writings of the Old Testament, and the sole direct biblical testimony about the prophet as the author of the prophetic book known by his name, about his origin and the time of his prophetic activity, is the inscription of the book, Zeph 1:1: “The word of the Lord which came to Zephaniah, son of Cushi, son of Gedaliah, son of Amariah, son of Hezekiah, in the days of Josiah, son of Amon, king of Judah.”

What is the meaning of the indication of the prophet’s ancestors named here? “The Hebrews,” says blessed Jerome (cited commentary 237), “hand down that if in the title of a book the name of a father or grandfather of some prophet is indicated, then these also were prophets. Therefore, Amos also, one of the twelve prophets, who says: I am not a prophet, nor am I a son of a prophet; I was a shepherd and I gathered figs of the sycamore tree (Amos 7:14), in the title of the book does not have the name of his father. If this tradition is true, then the prophet Zephaniah was born, so to speak, from a prophetic name and from a glorious line of ancestors...” But this Hebrew-rabbinical tradition has questionable historical validity: the father of the prophet Jeremiah named Hilkiah (Jer 1:1) and Ezekiel’s father, Buzi (Ezek 1:3), were priests, and about their prophetic dignity or service, as well as about other persons named as fathers of prophets (Amoz, father of the prophet Isaiah, Isa 1:1, Beeri, father of Hosea, Hos 1:1, Barachel, father of Joel, Joel 1:1; Amathiah, father of Jonah, Jonah 1:1; Barachiah, father of the prophet Zechariah, Zech 1:1), nothing reliable is known, and this is very improbable, since prophetic service among God’s people generally did not have a hereditary character. Other ancient and modern commentators maintain that such an unusually long genealogy of the prophet even to the fourth generation in the ascending degree indicates that the prophet came from a noble family and had several ancestors distinguished by their deeds. Passing over the unknown to history – the father of the prophet, Cushi, the grandfather, Gedaliah, and the great-grandfather, Amariah – researchers usually concentrate on the fourth and last member of the genealogical table – the great-great-grandfather Hezekiah, by whose name the nobility of the prophet’s origin ought to be determined, and some (in modern times Black, Strauss, Hitzig, Stade and others) identify this great-great-grandfather of the prophet with the contemporary king of Judah named Hezekiah (2 Sam 18:1), thus recognizing the prophet’s belonging to the royal line. This opinion in itself contains nothing impossible. Although the contemporary of the prophet Zephaniah, King Josiah of Judah, was not a great-great-grandson but only a great-grandson of King Hezekiah – separated from him not by three intermediate members, as in the prophet’s genealogy, but only by two (Manasseh – Amon), and although biblical testimony does not mention Amariah, the son of King Hezekiah and brother of King Manasseh, both are quite possible and explicable in light of the long period of time separating Josiah and the prophet Zephaniah from King Hezekiah. However, two circumstances speak against this supposition: 1) the absence in the considered inscription of the title “king of Judah” (Hebrew “melekh Yehudah”) at the name Hezekiah, which the prophet would have directly and positively established the nobility of his lineage; 2) the testimony of the Hebrew tradition, preserved in the work “de vita prophetarum” of Pseudo-Epiphanius, according to which the prophet Zephaniah came from the tribe of Simeon from the region of Saraphat. This tradition is entered into our Menologies under December 3, the day of church commemoration of the memory of the prophet, and although the credibility of this tradition is not above doubt, the very existence of such a tradition about the origin of the prophet Zephaniah from the tribe of Simeon sufficiently strongly speaks against the supposition about the prophet’s belonging to the royal line, consequently to the tribe of Judah, since otherwise it would be incomprehensible how the tradition could have ascribed him to another tribe, while indicating precisely and the place of his birth. Thus, the opinion about the prophet Zephaniah’s belonging to the royal line of David cannot be recognized as certain. It is better to accept the opinion of St. Cyril of Alexandria, that (as can be concluded from the long enumeration of the prophet’s ancestors) the prophet Zephaniah “was by birth not of an ignoble family” (οὐκ ἄσημος ὤν κατὰ σὰρκα γένος) 2. The tradition has not preserved other information about the life and activity of the prophet, just as Scripture has not. The Christian Orthodox Church, celebrating the church glorification of the prophet Zephaniah on December 3, in the church service to the prophet especially notes the solemn Messianic prophecy of the glorification of Zion with the manifestation of Christ, Zeph 3:14-15. “You appeared radiant with the Divine Spirit, prophet Zephaniah, proclaiming the revelation of God: rejoice greatly, daughter of Zion, Jerusalemite, proclaim: behold, your king comes saving you” (kontakion of the prophet. See canon song 6, troparion 2).

The time of the prophetic service and also the utterance of the speeches of the prophet Zephaniah is determined in the very inscription of his book “in the days of Josiah, son of Amon, king of Judah,” who reigned, as is known from 2 Sam 22:1 and 2 Chr 34:1, for thirty-one years – according to the accepted chronology from 641 to 610 BC. But to which exactly period of this reign the beginning of Zephaniah’s prophetic activity belongs – researchers differ in answering this question.

It is known that the reign of the pious Josiah was a time of religious reform directed at eradicating idolatry among God’s people – the unfortunate legacy of Josiah’s father Amon and grandfather Manasseh. Comparing the account of this reform 2 Sam 22-23 and 2 Chr 34-35, in modern times they ordinarily divide the reign of Josiah into three periods, different in character: the first eleven years of his reign form the first, pre-reform period, then from the 12th year to the 18th (when the book of the Law was found in the temple by the high priest Hilkiah, 2 Sam 22:8; 2 Chr 34:15 and following), follows the period of the reform activity of King Josiah directed at destroying all forms of idolatry and restoring the worship and service of Jehovah in complete purity, finally, from the 19th year to the 31st year the post-reform period. To which of these periods should the utterance of Zephaniah’s prophetic speeches be assigned? In the absence of any direct external testimony about the activity of the prophet Zephaniah, in solving this question one must be guided by internal data from the book itself, as well as by certain comparisons and analogies from the book of the prophet Jeremiah, who came to his prophetic service, as is known (Jer 1:2), in the 13th year of the reign of Josiah, consequently, undoubtedly being – for a more or less prolonged time – a contemporary of the prophet Zephaniah. But the indications in the book about the internal state of the Judean people, as well as about its external relations with other peoples, have such a general character that they do not allow establishing precise dates and do not exclude the possibility of different opinions about the time of utterance of Zephaniah’s prophetic speeches. Thus, some researchers and interpreters of the book of the prophet Zephaniah assign the time of the utterance of the speeches contained in it to the first period preceding the reform of worship during the reign of Josiah (Ewald, Gesenius, Stade and others, among Russians – Tyurnin, Narcissus). The grounds for this are the following data about the internal state of the Judean kingdom borrowed from the book itself: 1) in the land prevails – the cult of Baal with special priests, chemarim, worship and service of the heavenly bodies and the cult of Molech (Zeph 1:4-9), 2) the chief significance in the life of the people belongs to the secular and spiritual aristocracy, which, however, abuses its position and only corrupts the people (Zeph 3:2-4); 3) from without, the state enjoys peace, in the hands of the ruling persons and merchants considerable wealth has accumulated (Zeph 1:13), but material comfort created in them a complete indifference to the teaching and threats of the prophets, absolute moral indifference, and the sole means to destroy evil is the complete destruction of the lawless (Zeph 1:3). All these features, they say, indicate that time when on the part of state power, due to Josiah’s minority, measures had not yet been undertaken to eradicate idolatry in the land, and the religious life of the people remained in the state inherited from the two preceding impious reigns. These features, taken from the content of the book itself, were indeed present in the life of the people to whom Zephaniah’s prophetic speeches were addressed, but they were not the exclusive possession of only the first period of the reign, on the contrary, all of them and in their entirety were present both during Josiah’s reform and after it, as becomes especially clear from the comparison of Zephaniah’s prophetic speeches with the threatening speeches of the prophet Jeremiah, Jer 11-17, uttered already after Josiah’s reform, moreover even during his own lifetime. The opinion about the earlier origin of Zephaniah’s prophecy could gain greater force and stability only if it were probable the supposition of many historians of antiquity and learned researchers of the book of the prophet Zephaniah (Duncker, Niebuhr, Schrader, Maspero, Stade and others), that in the latter, specifically in the prophecy about the nearness of the dreadful day of the Lord, a day of wrath and distress, a day of trumpet and battle cry, Zeph 1:14-16, one can see a premonition of the invasion of the Scythians which in the second half of the 7th century BC shook all of Western Asia. The principal and perhaps even sole source of historical information about this event is the account of Herodotus, according to which the Scythians invaded Media at the time when Cyaxares the Mede was besieging Nineveh, forced him to lift this siege, defeated him and dominated in Asia for 28 years; attempted to penetrate Egypt, but Pharaoh Psamtik succeeded in buying them off with a tribute, and on the return journey they plundered the temple of Aphrodite-Astarte in the Philistine city of Ascalon; finally, were expelled by that same Cyaxares (Herod., Histor. I, 103–106; I, 73; IV, 1). But first of all, it must be known that historians do not agree on the precise chronology of the Scythian invasion, and one can only with greater or lesser probability assign it to the time of the Judean king Josiah (i.e., generally after 640 BC). The main point – is that the invasion of the Scythians, so memorable to other peoples of Western Asia, apparently scarcely touched Judea and the Judean people at all (the Scythians perhaps only passed through part of Judea, capturing only booty, as they did in the land of the Philistines), and therefore did not find any significant, or even direct echo in the speeches of the contemporary prophets of God’s people – Zephaniah and Jeremiah. In the depiction by the prophet Jeremiah of the enemies who should appear as executors of God’s judgment over the Judeans (Jer 4:6-7) there is not a single feature which could not be fully attributed to the Babylonians (Jer 25:9-11); clear indications of the Scythians we do not find in him. A similar thing must be said about the prophet Zephaniah and his book. There is no need to see in the depiction Zeph 1:14-16 of the terrible day of Jehovah necessarily the disaster of Scythian invasion (this invasion for Judea, as has been said, apparently had no significant importance). Rather, the invasion of the Scythians and their dominion over various peoples of Asia could only give occasion to the prophet Zephaniah to depict God’s judgment over the Judean people, hardened in its corruption and become blind and deaf to the great signs of the time (Zeph 2:1-2); meanwhile the prophet discerned in the intense enmity and conflict of various peoples with each other only the beginning of a bloody struggle for supremacy in the world, which was to shake almost all the states of that time (Zeph 2:4-11) and lead Judea to complete destruction (Zeph 1:2-3). The Scythian invasion, thus, could only give occasion to the terrible perspective depicted by the prophet, awaiting the Judeans. An indirect allusion to this devastating for many Asian peoples invasion of the Scythians is not without reason discerned in the words of the prophet Zephaniah Zeph 3:6-8, as well as in the first half of the verse Zeph 1:18. In the latter place one can hypothetically see an intense indication of the especially distinctive greed of these plunderers that characterized their conquering campaigns.

According to the opinion of other researchers (Keplna, Hitzig, Strauss), the origin of Zephaniah’s prophecy is contemporary with the very reform activity of King Josiah. But however probable in itself the actual participation of the prophet Zephaniah together with other contemporary prophets (see 2 Sam 23:2) in the renewal of the covenant and the subsequent cleansing of the temple, Jerusalem, and the land from the attributes of idolatry, there is no direct indication in the prophet’s book of the religious worship reforms of King Josiah, and therefore the idea of placing the content of the book in a temporal and causal connection with the event and details of King Josiah’s reform must be abandoned.

It remains, thus, to assign the speeches of the prophet Zephaniah to the third and final period of the life and reign of Josiah, that is, after the 18th year of his rule, which some researchers do (Delitzsch, Kleinert, Philippson and others). The entire situation of the book – the depiction of the people’s sins against faith and morality, as well as the punishments awaiting them – is analogous to the prophetic speeches of Jeremiah, uttered undoubtedly during the time after Josiah’s reform already. To speak of the impending destruction of the “remnants of Baal” (Zeph 1:4) could only be done after Josiah, upon reaching maturity, initiated religious reform, especially after the discovery of the book of the Law (in the 18th year) with new zeal undertook the destruction of the remnants of idolatry in his land. Similarly, about the official use of the Law in the land, although violated by priests (Zeph 3:4), could there be any question until before the discovery of the “book of the Law.” And the prophet Jeremiah speaks of idolatry (Jer 7:17) alongside the official dominion of true worship and legalism (Jer 6:19-30), of false swearing in the name of Jehovah alongside swearing by idols (Jer 5:2; compare Zeph 1:5), of malicious transgression of the Law (Jer 8:8-9), of the corruption of all classes of the people – the royal family, princes, prophets and priests (Jer 2:8; see Zeph 1:4). Therefore both prophets recognize the sole possible outcome for the people of their time – universal destruction, the dreadful wrath of God, the kindling of all-consuming flames of God’s wrath (Zeph 1:18; see Jer 7:20), which is to destroy from the face of Palestine people and all that lives (Zeph 1:2-3; see Jer 4:25), and thus, as it were, repeat and develop the substance of the dreadful prophecy of Huldah concerning the discovery of the book of the Law and its curses (2 Sam 22:16 following 2 Chr 24:24). Finally, the very fact that the prophet Zephaniah, adhering to the well-known prophecy of Nahum (see especially Nah 1:14), foretells the speedy destruction of Nineveh and all of Assyria (Zeph 2:13-15), which according to the now accepted count in science occurred in 606 BC, more favors the relatively later rather than earlier composition of the book.

In accordance with the inscription of the book, in the authenticity of which there is no reason for doubt, earlier researchers recognized it as the work of one sacred writer who lived about 25 years before the Babylonian exile. But from the middle of the nineteenth century, when the so-called higher criticism of biblical writings posed the question of the origin and composition of each of them, objections began to arise against the recognition of the unity and coherence of the book of the prophet Zephaniah. At present, some biblical critics (Stade, Schwally, Budde) assert that only the first chapter unquestionably belongs to the prophet Zephaniah, whose name stands in the inscription, while in the second and third chapters critics point out both individual verses and entire sections allegedly of post-exilic origin. These include all those passages which, in the opinion of critics, in tone and direction do not accord with the content of the first chapter, namely do not have a threatening reproving character with respect to the Judeans, but on the contrary are intended to protect the Judean people from other peoples – such is the section Zeph 2:4-10, containing the foretelling of judgment on the peoples neighboring Judea; or else in their content they contain indication of circumstances of the time of the Babylonian exile or even the post-exilic period, such as: Zeph 3:9-10 (see Zeph 2:11), expressing the idea of the conversion of the heathen to Jehovah, and Zeph 3:14-20, containing the solemn prophecy about the future renewal and glorification of Zion after the times of abasement. But the pre-exilic prophecies also contain not only reproofs and threats against the unfaithful and criminal Judean people, but also comforting prophecies about the salvation and glorification of the faithful remnant (Amos 5:15; Joel 2:32; Isa 37:32; Mic 5:6). Likewise, the conditions favorable for the spread of true knowledge of God among the heathen existed long before the Babylonian exile, and biblical history knows not only many individual cases of the conversion of heathen to faith in Jehovah: Rahab (Josh 2:10-22), Ruth, Naaman the Syrian (2 Sam 5:1), but also whole masses of heathen, such as the Gibeonites (Josh 9). Especially favorable conditions for this conversion of the heathen to faith in Jehovah opened from the time of the fall of the northern ten-tribed kingdom of Israel, when the Assyrians relocated to the place of the Israelites began to acquire the principles of the religion of Jehovah, although at first this worship of theirs could only be very imperfect (2 Sam 17:24). It is still less strange or incomprehensible what is contained in the expression of the prophet that Jehovah “will restore the captivity” of the Judeans (Zeph 2:7), which, according to the opinion of critics, indicates that the Judeans at the time of writing these sections were already in exile. In reality, the thought about the necessity, the inevitability of the captivity of the chosen people in the event they do not fulfill God’s commandments, as well as about their liberation in the event of repentance for correction – this thought is very ancient, expressed even by Moses (Deut 30:3) and repeated more than once by prophets who lived undoubtedly before the exile (for example Hos 6:11). All the more, of course, is this speech understandable in the mouth of a prophet who lived and prophesied some 30 years before the very Babylonian captivity.

In correspondence or relation with the circumstances of the life of the chosen people, and in part also with the neighboring peoples, stand both the content and form of the prophetic preaching, the prophetic speeches of Zephaniah. Namely, in view of the religious-moral state of God’s people at this time, sad to the point of hopelessness, which presented no hopes for correction, and on the other hand in view of the heavy and dreadful events of the contemporary external history, the predominant tone of Zephaniah’s speeches is eschatological, and their chief and central subject is the punitive and purifying judgment over Israel, and then over other peoples and over the whole world generally. But this dreadful judgment of God does not have its purpose in itself; on the contrary, it appears only as a means and path of God’s actions toward the goal of universal, comprehensive salvation. The beginnings of this salvation will appear in “the humble of the earth, who observe His commandments” (Zeph 2:3), not doing injustice, in the “remnants of Israel” (Zeph 3:13), who will comprise the new theocratic community. The religious-moral foundations of the life of this future community will be directly opposite to the life of the Judean community contemporary with the prophet (Zeph 3:11-13), and consequently the relations of Jehovah to the people will be completely changed: instead of a dreadful Judge, as now, He will be for His chosen ones King, Protector, Defender, and His relations to the new community will be as full of love as the relations of a bridegroom to a bride (Zeph 3:14-17), and the final result of this will be honor, peace, and glory to the renewed theocratic community (Zeph 3:18-20). And then still more elevated and broad perspectives appear before the prophet: in the salvation will also participate other peoples, the false gods of whom will be destroyed (Zeph 2:11), and they themselves will turn to a pure, sincere, and unanimous invocation of Jehovah (Zeph 3:9-10). In view of the fact that all the marked main points of the content of Zephaniah’s prophecy have parallels or analogies in more ancient prophets, the question arises of the relation of the book of the prophet Zephaniah to the prophecies of the earlier prophets and, generally, of the position and significance of the former in the series of other prophetic writings. On this question two rather widespread views have been expressed in Western biblical scholarship. First, following one of the ancient researchers of the book – Martin Bucer (Comment. in Tzephanjam. Argentor. 1528), it is often called a brief exposition, a successful epitome of all prophetic speeches (breve compendium, elegans epitome). Secondly, Delitzsch and others divide the prophetic writings into two series – Isaiah and Jeremiah – and place Zephaniah’s prophecy at the head of those which stand under the determining influence of the prophet Jeremiah. But it should be noted that from the Orthodox-church point of view, the thought of the literary dependence of prophets and generally of sacred writers upon one another is not fully acceptable. Besides, more thorough study of the prophetic writings in the light of the data of external history, and especially when illuminated by the history of the successive course of Revelation, shows that the observed sometimes correspondence of thoughts and expressions in different prophets is explained not by direct borrowing, but by the closeness or similarity of the events of the time, and also by the internal connection of the ideas proclaimed by them of the religious and moral order of the world. Finally, in the exposition of their prophetic speeches each prophet to a certain degree manifested also the personal characteristics of his spirit, placed upon his books the stamp of his personality. Taking into account all these indisputable features of prophetic speeches, we cannot fully and without reservations accept both of the adduced judgments of Western scholars about the book of the prophet Zephaniah. In fact, his prophetic speeches cannot be called a generalization of the content of the preceding prophets already because not all features of the future Messianic kingdom found revelation or even mention in Zephaniah: thus, for example, there is absent the teaching about the Personal Establisher of the future kingdom – the Divine Branch of the house of David, which earlier prophets speak of (Hos 3:3; Mic 5:2; Isa 11:1) and later ones (Jer 23:5; Ezek 34:23-25; Zech 3:3) – although in the elevated depiction by the prophet, Zeph 3:14-15, of the coming joy and triumph of Zion one cannot but see a foreshadowing of the future solemn entry of the Lord Jesus Christ into Jerusalem (see Matt 21:5; John 12:15), wherefore the section Zeph 3:14-19, in the Orthodox Church is appointed for reading as a paremia on the feast of the Lord’s Entry into Jerusalem. Similarly, the essential points of the content of the book of the prophet Zephaniah – judgment and salvation are expressed by him with a special character, distinguishing him from other prophets (Nahum, Obadiah, Isaiah, Habakkuk, Joel): the “day of Jehovah” in him is not only a day of wrath and judgment (as in Joel, Nahum), but also the beginning of restoration, and moreover not of the chosen people alone, as in the prophet Joel (chapter III), but of all humanity. This universal idea of judgment and salvation appears in the prophet Zephaniah in such a distinctive revelation that it does not permit speaking of any dependence or lack of independence on the part of the prophet Jeremiah or any other prophet. But of course, contacts of thought and expression of the prophet with the teaching and language of other prophets exist, and one ought not to overlook them in the interpretation of the book.

In its content, the book of the prophet Zephaniah, as is evident from what has been said above, can be subdivided into three parts, in general coinciding with the present division of the book into three chapters. The first chapter depicts the judgment of God awaiting Judea for idolatry and the wickedness of its inhabitants. The second chapter foretells the destruction of other, heathen kingdoms. The third chapter – after a repeated depiction of the punishment of Judea and other peoples (Zeph 3:1-8) – gives a magnificent depiction of the coming new form of life – the salvation of the Judeans and the heathen. For the interpretation, as well as generally for the study of the book of the prophet Zephaniah, the following may serve: 1) translations into Russian – the interpretations of St. Cyril of Alexandria, blessed Theodoret, blessed Jerome; 2) isagogical-exegetical works of Western scholars: P. Kleinert’s in Bibelwerk Lange 1868, L. Philippson’s in his D. Israelitische Bibel. II, 1858, H. Ewald’s, Die Propheten d. Alten Bundes. 1840, I, T. Strauss, Vaticiniaephaniae 1843. Keil, Bibl. Commentar ub. d. 12 Klein. Propheten 1873. K. Marti, Dodekapropheton 1904 and others. 3) in Russian bibliological literature – Irineaus, archbishop of Pskov, interpretation of the twelve prophets. SPB. 1807, vol. V, Palladius, bishop of Sarapul, interpretation of the holy prophets. 1876, vol. V, Historical-exegetical investigation “Book of the prophet Zephaniah” by I. Tyurnin. Sergiev Posad. 1897 and regarding this book – Prof. O. G. Eleonsky, on the question of the book of the prophet Zephaniah. Christ. Readings. 1898, II. The venerable work of Mr. Tyurnin we make considerable use of in compiling the introduction and interpretation of the book of the prophet Zephaniah. See also in D. A. Narcissus. Guide to the study of the prophetic books of the Old Testament. Poltava. 1904, pp. 208–214.

* * *

Notes

Of blessed Jerome, one book of interpretations on the prophet Zephaniah. Works of blessed Jerome, Russian translation, vol. 14. Kiev 1898, pp. 237–238

Of our holy father Cyril of Alexandria, interpretation on the prophet Zephaniah. Russian translation. Theological Bulletin. 1895, I, p. 327.