ZACCHARIA, PROPHET. — The penultimate of the minor prophets. His name (Zekharjah, “Jahweh remembers”) well corresponds to the content of his prophecy. Son of Berechiah and grandson of Iddo, he was of priestly stock (Zach. 1:1; Ezra 5:1; 6:14; Neh. 12:16). He was a contemporary of Haggai; he delivered his first oracle recorded in his book in the 8th month of the second year of Darius I, i.e., in October–November 520 BC, two months after Haggai’s first discourse (Zach. 1:1; 7); chapter 7:1 dates to the 4th year of Darius (518 BC). He is not to be confused with the Z. of Matt. 23:35 (cf. 2 Chron. 24:20 ff.).
Haggai and Z. infused new ardor into the hearts of the returnees, who had grown disheartened by the difficulties encountered in rebuilding the Temple. The first contingent of exiles, in 537 BC, was led by Zerubbabel (v.) and the high priest Joshua; they numbered about 40,000 from the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, mostly priests and Levites, who settled in Jerusalem and its environs. Seven months after their return, they erected the altar and began rebuilding the Temple (Ezra 1–3). But the fierce hostility of the neighboring peoples, led by the Samaritans, induced the suspicious Persian court to order a halt to the work.
As they set out on the long desert journey back to their homeland, the exiles, considering themselves “the true people of Jahweh,” the “holy remnant” that Jahweh had reserved for Himself (Ezra 2:2; 9:8; Hag. 1:12), thought that the promises of prosperity filling the second part of Isaiah and Ezek. 34:25–31; 35; 36; 47 would be fulfilled in them. These are the chapters to which Z. 9–14 especially refers. Instead, as Ezra 3–4 and Nehemiah show, they found none of the dreamed-of happiness, but rather the usual hard life, burdened by heavier labor and threatened by every kind of danger. They had fallen from the dream of the fairest hopes into the harshest experience of reality; cf. Ps. 126 (125) and 85 (84).
The prophecies described the role Jahweh would take in the rebirth of the theocracy and linked to it the Messianic kingdom that was its end and perfection; yet the two stages of the rebirth had to be distinguished: the preparatory and the definitive; only to the latter, i.e., the kingdom of the Messiah, did many of the fairest prophetic promises refer. Haggai and Z. intervened to revive the faithful, urging them to resume and complete the rebuilding of the Temple, with the consequent resumption of worship: the first step in the national rebirth. The work, resumed in the second year of Darius, was completed in the 6th year, 515 BC (Ezra 5–6).
The book of Z., already called by St. Jerome “most obscure” and the longest of the twelve minor prophets (PL 25, 1417), consists of two clearly distinct parts (linked by chs. 7–8): the eight “night” visions (chs. 1–6) and the prophecies (chs. 9–14). In both visions and discourses, the theme is the same: the certain fulfillment of the rebirth promised by Jahweh, the punishment of the nations foretold in Ezek. 35–36; its perpetuity, with triumph over the violent attacks of the peoples (Ezek. 38–39 = Z. 9:14; cf. Dan. 7–12); the new theocracy is in fact in service, the immediate preparation for the kingdom of the Messiah, by which it will be “absorbed.” The returnees are therefore the object of Jahweh’s care; they are called “the daughter of Zion” (1:14), “the people of Jahweh” (8:8, 12), “the remnant of Israel” (8:6, 11), the object of divine blessings; Jahweh dwells in their midst, places His abode once more in Jerusalem (2:9, 14; Vulg. 2:5, 10).
In the first vision (horsemen or instruments of divine justice: 1:7–17), formal assurance is given of the nation’s rebirth and the punishment of the nations. Where was the fulfillment of the prophecies about the prosperous rebirth of the new Israel on the hills of Palestine and the punishment of Edom and the other peoples who, rejoicing in Judah’s ruin, had despised Jahweh? (cf. Ezek. 35; 36:1–5, 33–36; etc.). Jahweh answers: “I am exceedingly jealous for Jerusalem and for Zion; and I am exceedingly angry with the nations that are at ease; for when I was angry a little, they furthered the disaster of my people.” The hour has come, the Lord assures, of My favor toward Judah: the new Israel is rising. “Jahweh will again comfort Zion and will again choose Jerusalem” (2:1–4; Vulg. 1:18–21). Israel will have Jahweh as its defender and will embrace a vast multitude (cf. Ezek. 36:10 ff.; 37). Therefore Z. urges the exiles still in Babylon to return home, to share in the extraordinary glory of the new community, which “will embrace many nations” and have the Lord at its center (2:5–17; Vulg. 2:1–13). The mention of the vast multitude, of the conversion of the nations (cf. Isa. 2:3 ff.; Mic. 4:2), points to the kingdom of the Messiah, the ultimate and definitive goal of the resurrected Israel, guided by the priesthood and the Davidic line. The priesthood, now purified (ch. 3), will attend to all that pertains to worship (v. 7); Joshua and his priests are a sign and pledge of the rebuilding of the Temple and the restoration of worship (v. 8), an essential part of the resurrected Israel. To Joshua is joined Zerubbabel (v. 8b); together they will complete the work begun, to which the Lord reserves the final touch (v. 9). Zerubbabel (ch. 4) is charged with the material construction of the Temple, Joshua with worship; the former must rely solely on God’s action: Jahweh will overcome all difficulties that appear insurmountable to human strength. A key element of the reborn Israel, now purified, is holiness (ch. 5). As iniquity was carried off to Babylon, so it is to be banished forever from the young Jewish community. Alongside material rebuilding, Jahweh proceeds gradually toward spiritual perfection, working through the prophets and other representatives to bring about the progressive sanctification of Israel. Chapter 6 follows with the exaltation of Joshua (vv. 9–11) and that of Zerubbabel (vv. 12–15). The latter realizes the Messianic hope inasmuch as he is the root from which the Messiah will spring. The link between the new Israel, now rising, and the Messianic kingdom that will succeed it is again highlighted; the former is temporary and preparatory. Moreover, the purpose of the Sinai covenant, now restricted to the single tribe of Judah, is emphasized; the covenant is concretized in the promise made by Jahweh to David. This rebirth of the covenant, this marvelous work (the new theocracy), is the exclusive fruit of God’s love (8:2) and His omnipotence (8:6 ff.); in it the essence of the covenant is realized: “Behold, I will save My people; I will bring them back from the east... that they may dwell in Jerusalem; they shall be My people, and I will be their God in faithfulness and in justice” (8:8). Therefore the returnees are revived; they are the object of Jahweh’s choicest blessings (8:14 ff.): “As I purposed to do evil to you when your fathers provoked Me to anger... and I did not relent, so again I have purposed in these days to do good to Jerusalem and to the house of Judah; fear not!” In return, Jahweh demands, in addition to worship (3:1–8), the practice of justice (8:16 ff.).
In chs. 7–8, in response to a question from the most faithful of Bethel about whether the fasts in the 4th, 5th, 7th, and 10th months, voluntarily undertaken by the exiles to commemorate the fall and plundering of Jerusalem and the Temple (588 BC), Z. replies that it is far more important to observe the precept given to the fathers: “Render true judgments, show kindness and compassion to one another” (7:9); thus the days of fasting are turned into days of joy, and the peoples will come to Jerusalem to worship the Lord (ch. 8).
The second part presents the same themes as chs. 1–6, with a predominance and development of messianic prophecies. Punishment of neighboring nations (9:1–7 = 2:1–4), and protection of the restored Israel (9:8) with the realization of the Messiah’s kingdom, a peaceful king over all nations (cf. Ps 72:8); an invitation to other exiles to return and join the reborn theocracy (9:9–12 = 2:5–17). Yahweh’s protection is manifested when the nations (here specified: the Hellenists, 9:13) attack Israel (9:13–17 = Ezek 38–39). In ch. 10, Z. resumes the idea developed by Ezekiel especially in chs. 34 and 38–39. The national disaster was punished for Judah’s infidelity and not for any defect in Yahweh’s power; this power, together with his mercy, is demonstrated in the return of the exiles, preceded by their conversion, and is shown in the future triumph against the overwhelming attack of the nations. This theme continues in chs. 12–13 and is concluded in ch. 14 with the image of Jerusalem as a source of salvation for all (Zech 14:8–11 = Ezek 47:1–11).
There is no doubt about the authenticity of the first part; whereas non-Catholic criticism is almost unanimous in denying Z. the second part, even though it is then at a loss to provide a positive explanation for the origin and exegesis of these chapters. It suffices to consider the principal solutions proposed. 1) H. L. Strack, E. Koenig, Orelli place chs. 9–11 before 722 BC, and chs. 12–14 before 587 BC (they would have been composed after the death of Josiah at the battle of Megiddo); 2) B. Stade, B. Duhm, K. Marti, E. Sellin relegate 9–14 to after the exile (3rd or 2nd century BC); 3) some recent scholars attribute chs. 9–11 to a contemporary of Hosea or Isaiah, chs. 12–13 to a contemporary of Jeremiah, and ch. 14 to an unknown writer after the exile (E. Sellin). Among the literary arguments, the well-known one is drawn from 9:13 where “the sons of Javan” (i.e., the Greeks) are mentioned, an expression that those who uphold a more recent origin of this second part consider decisive. The expression is regarded as a gloss by van Hoonacker, Nowack, and Mitchell; and this solution should not be dismissed, although it is not necessary for those who recognize the supernatural character of prophetic inspiration (cf. Isa 45:1). The principal argument, as A. Clamer aptly summarizes, lies in the difference of “eschatological conceptions” between the first and second parts; in the latter there is the attack of all nations against Jerusalem (14:2), the source that flows from the capital (13:1), the “apocalyptic” character of the description in Zech 14, elements that are absent from the first part. Before speaking of opposition, however, it is wiser to study objectively whether a relationship is impossible: whether there might not rather be a harmonious development between the two parts (H. Junker, cited in bibliography, p. 113). This harmony does exist; it suffices to refer to the prophecies of Ezekiel (chs. 34–39, 47). It is pointless to speak of a genre or “apocalyptic” character when one recognizes the prophetic complex employed by Ezekiel. Recently, using only internal criteria, the unity of the second part has been affirmed (cf. Delcor), a view already upheld by van Hoonacker, Junker, and others.
The Hebrew text, taken as a whole, is well preserved. L. G. Rignell concludes, after a careful analysis of the first six chapters, that the Masoretic text should not be arbitrarily corrected; the readings of the other versions have less value than the Hebrew text, and thus many passages ordinarily considered glosses should instead be retained (e.g., 1:9b; 2:4, 10, 12, 13, etc.); verses regarded as corrupt or out of place instead offer an intelligible and coherent text (e.g., 1:8; 3:4, 9; 4:2, 6, etc.): cf. Revue biblique, 58 (1951), pp. 467–68.