Commentary on the book of the prophet Zechariah

Chapter 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Information about the life and work of the prophet Zechariah. The name of the prophet Zechariah was given various meanings; According to most of the newest researchers, the name Zekharjah means: “(the one whom) Jehovah remembers” (Keif, F.B. Meyer, Bredeukamp, ​​Smith Farrar, etc.). – Zechariah twice calls his ancestors by name: the word of the Lord came to Zechariah, the son of Barachiah, the son of Addov (Zechariah 1:1, 7). According to other genealogical indications found in the books of St. Scripture, we can assume that the prophet’s father was called Varakhia, and his grandfather was called Addo. But due to the fact that the Heb. ben is used to designate not only a son, but also a descendant in general; it cannot be decisively asserted that the prophet Zechariah gives the names of his closest ancestors. That is why we do not meet St. The fathers who interpreted the book of Zechariah agreed in their understanding of the given indication of the prophet’s descent. According to the interpretation of St. Cyril of Alexandria, Zechariah was born “from his father Barachia in the flesh,” but at the same time he is also the son of Addo, a prophet in spirit, and “was brought up, as one must think, in the morals of this latter and became an imitator of the same feats of virtue” (Creations of St. Cyril Alex., Part XI. Sergiev Posad, 1893. P. 2). Rev. Palladius, having mentioned this opinion of St. Father, noted that “it is not known for certain whether Addo raised Zechariah” (Palladius, Bishop of Sarapul, Interpretation of the books of the holy prophets Zechariah and Malachi. Vyatka, 1876. P. 1, pr. 2). To the opinion of St. Cyril comes close to the explanation of one of the later researchers, who points to the possibility of levirate, according to which the mother of the prophet, after the death of her husband Barachia, gave birth to Zechariah from his brother Addo (Iddo): only with this understanding, Addo is the father of Zechariah in the flesh, and Barachiah by law (Dr. L Bertholdt, Historischkritische Einleitung... Schriften des alien und neuen Testamente. 4 – ter Theil, Erlangen, 1814. S. 1698). Blazh. Jerome identifies the Addo of Zechariah as mentioned in 2 Chronicles 12:15 and 2 Chronicles 13:22; and he considers this latter to be the man of God about whom he speaks in 1 Kings 13:1–6 (Works of Blessed Jerome of Stridon, Part XV. Kyiv, 1900. P. 4 – Migne, patrol, ser. lat., t. XXV, col. 1419); Therefore, according to Jerome, Addo could not be the grandfather of our prophet, but a more distant ancestor. According to Blessed Theodoret, “the prophet informs about the name of the father who gave birth to him, and about the name of the one by whom the father was born” (Creations of Blessed Theodorit, Bishop of Cyrrhus, part V. Sergiev Posad, 1907, p. 68). However, parallel indications from other holy books (Ezra and Nehemiah) not only do not confirm this most probable opinion, but, on the contrary, raise doubts about its validity. In 1 Ezra 5:1 and 1 Ezra 6:14 Zechariah is simply called the son of Adda, without mention of Barachiah. But in any case, this does not give the right to discern between the testimony of the prince. Ezra and the book. the prophet Zechariah is an irreconcilable contradiction and does not serve as a sufficient basis for considering benberekhja in the latter as interpolation (a similar opinion was expressed by Knobel and Ortenberg), because, firstly, ben and the later bar, in biblical usage, can mean not only a son, but also a descendant in general; secondly, there are many examples in the Bible of some persons being called by the name of their more famous grandfather, with the name of their father omitted. Therefore, most interpreters explain the omission of the name Barachiah in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah (Neh. 12:16) by the fact that Barachiah was not only unremarkable, but also died at a young age. In fact, by the time of the return of the captives under Zerubbabel and Jesus, Iddo (Addo) was the head of his priestly family (Neh. 12:1, 4, 7), and under the successor of the high priest Jesus, his son Joachim (Neh. 12:10), the head of the family was not Barachiah, but Zechariah (Neh. 12:12, 16); There is nothing incredible in the assumption that the prophet is more often called by the name of his grandfather, who perhaps outlived his son and passed on his dignity as a representative of the clan to his grandson. About the time and place of birth of Zechariah, in the absence of precise indications in the books of St. Scripture, we have to be content with only more or less probable assumptions. The most accepted opinion among researchers is this: if during the high priesthood of Jesus the grandfather of the prophet Addo was still a representative of his priestly family, then Zechariah, when the captives returned to Jerusalem during the reign of Cyrus, was a relatively young man; and from the fact that eighteen years later, in the second year of Darius Hystaspes (519 BC), he calls himself naar - a young man (Zech. 2:4; v. 8 Masor. Vol.), this assumption becomes even more probable. Hence the following conclusion is drawn: the prophet was born in Babylon shortly before the publication of the decree of Cyrus and arrived in Jerusalem as a child (A. Kohler, Der Weissagungen Sacharjas erste Hallte, Cap. 1–8. Saugen 186f. Ss. 9–10). Like Jeremiah (Jer.1:1) and Ezekiel (Ezekiel 1:3), the prophet Zechariah belonged to the priestly family. St. Cyril Alex. directly calls Zechariah “descended from priestly blood, that is, from the tribe of Levi” (p. 2). Most of the newest interpreters (Kell, Cornill, Pusey, Marti) believe that in Nehemiah 12:4, 16 Iddo and Zechariah refer to the same persons as 1Ezra 5:1 and 1Ezra 6:14. Hence the conclusion: the prophet Zechariah belonged to a priestly family, and therefore he himself was a priest. In addition, Zechariah was the head of his priestly family, a title he inherited from his grandfather Iddo under the high priest Joachim, the son of Jesus (Neh. 12:10, 12, 16). Zechariah began to send out his prophetic ministry a little later than Haggai (in the second year of the reign of Darius Hystaspes, only two months later), when Jesus was the high priest; under Jesus, Iddo, the grandfather of the prophet, was still the head of his clan (Neh. 12:4, 7, 12, 16), therefore, Zechariah began his prophetic ministry earlier than his priestly ministry (i.e., as the head of the clan). There is some reason to assume that prophetic dignity was, as it were, hereditary in the family of Zechariah. St. Basil the Great, in his interpretation of Is. 1:1, notes; “Why did the prophet add the father’s name? To show that his prophetic talent is a paternal heritage” (Works like our holy father Basil the Great, Archbishop of Caesarea Cappadocia Part II. Holy Trinity Lavra of St. Sergius, 1900. P. 16). And St. Cyril of Alexandria, reading in Zech. 1:1, 7 instead of τὸν προφήτην - τὄυ προφήτου, directly calls the prophet Addo, who was, according to the generally accepted opinion, the grandfather of Zechariah. According to Baumgartess and Köhler, who follows him, the prophetic activity of Zechariah relates mainly to the first period of his life, and the priestly activity to the later (cit. S. 9); although this does not deny, of course, the possibility of combining duties of both kinds, as we see in the example of Jeremiah. The first recorded prophecy of Zechariah dates back to the second year of Darius Hystaspes. But based on 1 Ezra 5:1–2, it can be assumed that he entered the prophetic ministry earlier than this time; since the immigrants from Babylon, precisely as a result of the prophetic admonitions of Haggai and Zechariah, began to resume the church construction. But this is the testimony of Prince. Ezra is actually confirmed only in relation to Haggai - the first chapter of his book; Zechariah's prophetic admonitions of the corresponding content remained, therefore, not written down. The last of the prophecies of Zechariah, which have a specific indication of time, refers to the ninth month of the fourth year of Darius (Zechariah 7:1). The prophecies of chapters IX-XIV, therefore, must be attributed to a later time; It is not possible to accurately determine the entire period of Zechariah’s prophetic ministry due to the lack of reliable data. One can only say that this ministry of Zechariah coincides with the time of the initial dispensation of the Jewish community, upon the return from Babylon, and the time of the reconstruction of the church, or, as Western scientists put it (de-Wette, Sellin, Klostermann, etc.), the time of restoration. Compared to the prophetic activity of Haggai, the ministry of the prophet Zechariah was longer, judging by the instructions of the books of both prophets. Besides the books of Ezra and Nehemiah and the book bearing the name of our prophet, there are several psalms in the inscriptions of which the name of Zechariah, along with the name of Haggai or separately, appears (according to the LXX, Ital, Vulgate and Pescito). According to glory. the translation contains in the inscriptions of the following psalms the names of the named prophets: 137, 145, 147 and 148 (Haggai and Zechariah); Ps.139:1 is inscribed like this: At the end of David, a psalm to Zechariah in the dispersion. That the psalms that have the names of St. Haggai and Zechariah in the inscription were not composed by them can be concluded from the fact that in some inscriptions David is also listed as the author. And the very use of the names of two prophets in the inscription raises doubts about their authorship. Köhler recognizes the following assumption as the most probable: Haggai and Zechariah gave the psalms bearing their names in the inscriptions the form in which they were sung by the community and came down to us (Die Weissagungen Haggai. S. Erlaugen. 1860. S 33). In Book I Ezra reads: When the builders laid the foundation of the church of the Lord, then they appointed priests in their vestments with trumpets and the Levites, the sons of Asaph, with cymbals, to praise the Lord according to the statute of David the king of Israel. And they began to sing alternately: “praise” and “glorify the Lord,” “for He is good, for His mercy endures forever” (1 Ezra 3:10–11). Here you can see an indication of the use of psalms 145–148 and 105–106 during the described celebration of the founding of the church, the initial words of which, indicating their content, are given in the book. Ezra. Hence, perhaps, the corresponding psalms received in the inscription the addition of the names of Haggai and Zechariah the prophets, who were the initiators of the restoration of the church and, probably, the organizers of the liturgical ritual upon the return of the Babylonian captives to their homeland, as if imparting even greater authority to these psalms. In the books of Holy Scripture we do not find accurate and detailed information about the circumstances of the life and work of the prophet Zechariah. From the book of his name, as well as from the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, we can determine with sufficient clarity only the identity of the prophet and the time of his life and activity. We can affirm that Zechariah was a contemporary of the prophet Haggai, Zerubbabel, and the high priest Jesus; Having survived the latter, he was under his son Joachim the head of his priestly family. The beginning of Zechariah's prophetic activity, according to Scripture, is determined quite accurately; about the end of it, as well as about the time of the prophet’s death and the place of his burial, we have absolutely no indications in Scripture. General content and division of the book of the prophet Zechariah. The book of the prophet Zechariah is almost unanimously divided into two parts by all interpreters and researchers, ancient and modern, traditionalists and deniers: the first contains the initial eight chapters, the second the last six. The first part, which contains revelations to the prophet in the second and fourth years of the reign of Darius Hystaspes (Zech. 1:17; Zech. 7:1), in turn, can be divided into three sections. The first section (Zech. 1:6) concludes with an introductory exhortation to turn from evil ways to God, indicating the disasters to which the ancestors of the prophet’s contemporaries were subjected for their impenitence, and the immutability of divine definitions. The second section (Zech.1 – Zech.6:15) consists of a description of eight prophetic visions and the symbolic action that concludes them. In the third section, which contains two chapters (VII and VIII), the prophet offers, on behalf of God, a resolution of the issue regarding the observance of fasts established in memory of the destruction of Jerusalem and the church, with the addition of admonitions and promises offered to the people at the command of God. The second part of the book of the prophet Zechariah contains an image of the future destinies of the world in general and the Kingdom of God in particular; this second half of the book can be divided into two prophecies, beginning with the same words: massa debhar lehova; There are no indications of the time of receiving revelations and the name of the prophet in the second part of the book. The first prophecy spoken to the land of Hadrach depicts the struggle between the pagan world and Israel and the destruction of the power of the pagans; and the second prophecy (about Israel) paints pictures of the future glorious state of the chosen people, when they, purified by disasters, bitterly mourning their crimes and freed from unworthy members, will achieve a high degree of holiness and glory. Each of the two prophecies can, in turn, be divided into two halves and the division of the entire second part will be as follows: section one of the first prophecy - ch. Zech.9 and Zech.10, second section - Zech.11 chapter; section one of the second prophecy - ch. Zechariah 12:1 – Zechariah 13:6, section two – from Zechariah 13:7 to the end. The purpose of writing the book. Turning to the question of the purpose of writing the book of the prophet Zechariah, it is necessary first of all to note the author’s intention to encourage the builders of the church and all the people during the difficult time for them of rebuilding the community after captivity; at the same time, the prophet is trying to dispel the false opinion about the righteousness and godliness of the sons of a criminal people freed from captivity and about the immediate proximity of messianic times. To achieve these goals, the prophet depicts the future Kingdom of the Messiah and, in general, the glorious destiny of the people of God, as likely to be realized after a long struggle with paganism, after the repeated falls of the chosen people themselves; the actions of Providence leading the chosen people to their intended goal will be expressed in miraculous help to the sons of Israel in the fight against paganism, on the one hand, and in severe punishments for their own sins, on the other; Moreover, the pagans serve as an instrument in the hands of God to punish the sons of God’s people, as in times past. Particular reasons for writing can be indicated only for two sections: Zechariah 6:9–15 and VII-VIII. The external reason for writing Zechariah 6:9–15 was the arrival in Jerusalem of Heldai with his companions from Babylon, with gifts for the church. Chapters VII and VIII were written on the occasion of a question raised by some of the Jews about the appropriateness of observing the fasts established in memory of the destruction of Jerusalem and the church, under changed circumstances. The question of the authenticity of the second part of the book of the prophet Zechariah. The book of the prophet Zechariah is included in canon I of the Old Testament holy books in fourteen chapters; The New Testament quotes the second part as inspired; the fathers and teachers of the Church did not express doubts about the attribution of all fourteen chapters to the prophet Zechariah, a contemporary of the construction of the second church. Orthodox exegetes have always held (with the exception, it seems, of Archpriest Pavsky), and to this day they hold the view that the named book in its entirety belongs to the prophet Zechariah. Western scientists were of the same opinion until the half of the 17th century; and then voices against the authenticity of the last six chapters of the book began to be heard more and more sharply. Zechariah; so in our time, for most Western scientists this is a generally accepted truth (K. Marti. Dodekapropheton. Tubiugen 1904. S. 391), and the book. They divide Zechariah into two: the first concludes the prophecies of Zechariah, a contemporary of Zerubbabel; and the second belongs to an unknown author, who is usually called Deuterosachariah. (However, some researchers attributed the compilation of Zechariah 9–14:) to certain individuals). The basis for dividing the book of Zechariah for scholars of the negative direction was the difference in the content of one and the other part, in language, methods of presentation, etc.; and the external reason for separating the last six chapters was the fact that the Evangelist Matthew in Matthew 27:9–10 quotes from Zechariah 11:12–13 not with the name of Zechariah, but of Jeremiah, although Jeremiah 32:9 (and some verses from chapters XVIII, XIX and XXXII) represent only a distant resemblance to the Gospel text, and the passage from Zechariah corresponds to it quite accurately. Taking the path of denial, researchers in this direction are trying to comprehensively clarify the points of difference between the first and second parts and prove the impossibility of their origin from the same author. First of all, they come to the conclusion about the difference between the authors by comparing the content of both parts. In the first part, consisting mainly of visions, the prophet's thought is focused on the building of the church and on the main figures of that time, Zerubbabel and the high priest Jesus. In the last six chapters there are no visions, they do not mention Jesus and Zerubbabel at all, and nothing is said about the church building. Here we are talking about the overthrow of a world power hostile to the chosen people, the good and the wicked shepherd, the great crime of the people and their repentance, the abolition of the Levitical ministry and universal sanctification. In the second part, the Angels and the evil spirit, whom we meet in the visions of the first part, do not appear active. It is not noticed, they say, that there is such a close similarity in the religious views held in both parts that one can assume the unity of origin of both parts. As for the language and methods of presentation of the second part, then, in this respect, its difference from the first appears, apparently, even more clearly. The first part is written in prose, the second in poetic language; in the first part, each more or less independent passage begins with a brief introductory formula, which in chapters IX-XIV. completely absent. In the second part, the name of the prophet is not mentioned, and the time of revelation to the prophet is never indicated. Comparing the language of both parts, they find seemingly irrefutable evidence of the difference between their authors: in the book. Zechariah has some words and expressions that are characteristic only of one particular part; in IX-XIV ch. there is a comparatively larger number of Aramaisms indicating the later origin of these chapters; and in particular, the decisive factor here is the fact that both parts use the same words in more or less different senses or, conversely, give different names to the same object. Rejecting the authenticity of Chapters IX-XIV. book Prophet Zechariah, researchers-deniers in the further development of this position diverge in different directions, presenting an extraordinary variety of views on the time of origin of the controversial chapters and on the identity of their author. Some researchers attribute the composition of the second part of Zechariah or some chapters to the time before the fall of the kingdom of Israel. Others - to the Maccabean era; that is, the controversial chapters, according to some, belong to the 8th century, according to others - to the half of the 2nd century. BC; and within these limits - over, therefore, six centuries - a wide variety of dates are indicated. Recognizing, in most cases, the anonymity of Deuterosachariah, representatives of the negative view attribute the saying and writing of the prophecies contained here to certain individuals: the prophet Jeremiah, Zechariah, mentioned in 2 Chronicles 26:5 and in Isaiah 8.2, and Uriah, mentioned in Jeremiah 26:20-23. This alone may indicate to some extent the instability of the foundations on which opponents of the traditional view that Zechariah, a contemporary of Zerubbabel, belonged to all fourteen chapters of the book inscribed with this name are trying to establish their negative judgments. And upon closer examination, the arguments of opponents of the authenticity of the second part of the book. Zechariahs in general are plagued by bias, exaggeration and false generalizations and, as such, are far from possessing the degree of persuasiveness that they attribute to them. Against the fact that the two parts of the book of Zechariah represent too sharp a difference in content, it can be objected that this difference, however, is not so great that on this basis one can exclude on this basis any possibility of the origin of both parts from the same author. The second part contains no visions; but in the first part there is a rather significant section, in addition to the introduction to the entire book, i.e. Ch. VII-VIII, represents narrative and ordinary prophetic speech; symbolic action described in the first part, in ch. IX-XIV correspond to the symbolic actions in Zech.11:4–17. Good and evil spirits are not active and are not mentioned in the second part, but they are not discussed in ch. VI-VIII; on the other hand, the Angel of Jehovah is mentioned in Zechariah 12:8 and by “saints” in Zechariah 14:5, according to most interpreters, only Angels can be understood. The inconsistency of the content of the second part of Zechariah with historical circumstances also cannot be proven with full thoroughness. For example, the mention of the house of Judah and the house of Israel does not at all mean that ch. IX-XI were written earlier than 722: in this case, it would be necessary to reject the affiliation of Zechariah and ch. VIII, in which (Zechariah 8:13) these names are used; however, critics do not. The mention in Zechariah 9:5 of the king of Gaza does not at all indicate the pre-captivity origin of this chapter, since the Babylonian and Persian rulers used to leave the conquered peoples with their kings: if only they recognized their dependence on them and gave them the opportunity to be titled kings of kings. The methods of presentation are related to the content and therefore it is quite natural that when describing visions the prophet uses prosaic language, and expounds sublime prophecies about the future fate of the chosen people and the whole world in rhythmic speech. In contrast to the researchers of the negative direction, who defend the traditional view, with sufficient consistency and clarity, prove the correspondence of the content of both parts of the book. Zechariah. Without denying external differences, Pusey, for example, sees a remarkable unity of purpose throughout the book. The starting point in all sections of the book is the time following the captivity, but they all lead to the distant future: the first two have as their subject the time before the coming of the Savior, the third, from the campaigns of Alexander and the victorious Maccabean troops, leads to the fact of the rejection of the Good Shepherd; the latter, connected with a third identical title, beginning with the image of the future repentance of the people at the death of Christ, reaches the final conversion of Jews and pagans. The same researcher draws attention to the fact that in both parts of the book there is no mention of a king or any earthly ruler: the coming Ruler is the Messiah. According to the content of the entire book, the division between the two Jewish kingdoms has passed; The house of Israel and the house of Judah are presented, in the image of the prophet, as united by a community of interests - not as an independent whole, but as constituting one society of the remnant of God's chosen people (op. cit. pp. 503–504). Keil finds a very close means between the prophetic visions of the first part and the predictions of the second, so that ch. IX-XIV, in his opinion, contain a prophetic image of what the prophet contemplated in his night visions, that is, the future fate of the Kingdom of God, in its struggle with the pagan world. Ch. VII-VIII represent, according to Keil, the connecting link between the first and second parts. In both parts of the book, Zechariah connects his prophecies with the writings of previous prophets. Parallels in thought and expression can be seen when comparing Zech. 2:9 with Zech. 9:8; Zech.3:2 with Zech.12:8; Zechariah 8:20ff. from Zechariah 14:16 et seq.; Zechariah 8:23 with Zechariah 9:7 and others. One can point to the comparison between Judah and Jerusalem in Zech. 1:12; > Zechariah 2:2 ; Zechariah 8:15; Zechariah 12:2ff.; Zechariah 14:14; on the use of symbolic numbers in both parts (Zech.3:9; Zech.11:8) on the use of rare expressions not found in other books of scripture, but found in both parts of the book. Zechariah. Subjecting to a thorough analysis the arguments of opponents of the authenticity of the second part of the book. Zechariah, we have the right to draw the following conclusion: negative criticism does not indicate a single reason that would give the right to the conclusion that the controversial chapters cannot belong to the prophet Zechariah; all negative arguments are only conjectural and in the conclusion the deniers give more than in the reasons given. It is necessary to keep in mind one more very important circumstance, which gives a significant preponderance to the positive data in favor of the unity of the book. Prophet Zechariah. The twelve prophets soon after Malachi compiled a separate collection; The book of Zechariah occupies not the last place in this collection: it is unlikely that a forged or anonymous work will be inserted into the middle of the collection, which, in comparison with the individual books of the minor prophets, has a rather significant volume. In any case, such an insertion could only have been made before the writing of the book of Malachi, which is incredible, since Malachi is separated from Zechariah by a period of time of no more than half a century: Zechariah’s younger contemporaries could have lived to see the writing of the book. Malachi and until the conclusion of the collection of the “twelve” and, at the same time, the entire department of the prophetic books of the Old Testament. In conclusion, we can also add that the original reason for denying the authenticity of the controversial chapters has now lost all significance for negative criticism; since Zechariah 9 - Zechariah 14 was attributed to the prophet Jeremiah (according to the quotation from the Evangelist Matthew, as noted above) only in the first time after this question arose, and subsequently the second part of Zechariah is attributed by the vast majority of researchers to the post-exilic period. Literature. From the patristic interpretations of the prophet Zechariah, they have reached our time: the interpretations of St. Ephraim the Syrian (on Zech. 3–14), St. Cyril of Alexandria, Blessed. Theodorit and Blessed Jerome - all are available in Russian translation. From the patristic period we have a commentary by Theodore of Mopsuet. Interpretations of Western scientists on the book. the Prophet Zechariah, published before the beginning of the 18th century, are indicated in Karptsov (Carpzovius) a Introductia ad libros propheticos Bibliorum Veteris Testamenti, Lipsiae, MDCCXXXI. pp. 451-452, - under three headings: Lutheran, Catholic and Reformed. The latest isagogical and exegetical aids until the end of the 19th century. are listed in Reinke (Ss. 32–34), de Wette (W. M. L de Wette, Lehrbuch der historisch – kritischen Einleitung in die kanonischen und apokryphischen Bucher des Alien Testaments... Berlin, 1869. S. 475), Bachman (Dr. loh. Bachmanú's Preparation und Commentate zu den geleseusten Buchem des alien Testaments. Kleine Propheten. Heft 11: Sacharja. Berlin 1896. Ss. 79–80) and Nowak (Die Kleinen Propheten ubersetzt und erklert Von D. W. Nowack. Gettingen 1897. S. 316). In the present century, many interpretive works on the prophet Zechariah have already appeared in the West. These are: A. von. Hoonacker, Les chapitres IX-XIV du livre de Zacharie (Revue biblique internationale. 1902. Pp. 161–183 et 347–378) F. S. Eiselen, Commentary on The Old Tesiament. Vol. IХ – the Minor Prophets. New York, 1907. Pp. 571–686; Perowne, The Books of Haggai and Zehhariah. Cambridge, 1908 (First Edition 1886); K. A. Leimbach. Die Weissagungen der Propheten Joel, Abdias, lonas, Nahum, Habakuk, Sophonias, Aggäus, Zacharias und Malachias. Fulda, 1908 Ss. 125–179; E. F. Stroter, Die Nachtgesichte des Propheten Sacharja. Bremen, 1908; A. Maclaren, The Books of Ezekiel, Daniel and the minor Prophets. London. MCMVIII. pp. 264–322. In Russian it should be attributed: Commentary on the book of Zechariah Irenaeus (Klementyevsky), Archbishop. Pskovsky; Palladia, ep. Sarapulsky (Interpretation of the books of the holy prophets Zechariah and Malachi); I. Samborsky (Read in General. Loves. Spiritual. Enlightenment. 1872, Xl-XII, pp. 205–283: “On the book of the prophet Zechariah”). A small study by D. Bogorodsky (Vilna, 1886) is devoted to the question of the authenticity of the second part (chapters IX-XIV). - In addition, in Russian there is “A Brief Explanation of the Twelve Last Prophetic Books of the Old Testament” by Friedrich Rougemont, translated from French (St. Petersburg, 1880). You might be interested in: