1sn In this poetic section, plants and animals provide the imagery for rulers, especially evil ones (cf. respectively Isa 10:33-34; Ezek 31:8; Amos 2:9; Nah 2:12). 2sn The expression those who buy them appears to be a reference to the foreign nations to whom Israel’s own kings “sold” their subjects. Far from being good shepherds, then, they were evil and profiteering. The whole section (vv. 4-14) refers to the past when the Lord, the Good Shepherd, had in vain tried to lead his people to salvation and life. 3sn The first person pronoun refers to Zechariah himself who, however, is a “stand-in” for the Lord as the actions of vv. 8-14 make clear. The prophet, like others before him, probably performed actions dramatizing the account of God’s past dealings with Israel and Judah (cf. Hos 1-3; Isa 20:2-4; Jer 19:1-15; 27:2-11; Ezek 4:1-3). 4tc For the MT reading לָכֵן עֲנִיֵּי (lakhen ’aniyyey, “therefore the [most] afflicted of”) the LXX presupposes לִכְנַעֲנֵיּי (“to the merchants of”). The line would then read “So I began to shepherd the flock destined for slaughter for the sheep merchants” (cf. NAB). This helps to explain the difficult לָכֵן (lakhen) here but otherwise has no attestation or justification, so the MT is followed by most modern English versions. 5sn The two staffs represent the two kingdoms, Israel and Judah. For other examples of staffs representing tribes or nations see Num 17:1-11; Ezek 37:15-23. 6tn The Hebrew term נֹעַם (no’am) is frequently translated “Favor” (so NAB, NASB, NIV, NRSV, NLT); cf. KJV “Beauty”; CEV “Mercy.”sn The name of the first staff, pleasantness, refers to the rest and peace of the covenant between the Lord and his people (cf. v. 10). 7tn The Hebrew term חֹבְלִים (khovlim) is often translated “Union” (so NASB, NIV, NLT); cf. KJV, ASV “Bands”; NAB “Bonds”; NRSV, TEV, CEV “Unity”).sn The name of the second staff, Binders, refers to the relationship between Israel and Judah (cf. v. 14). 8sn Zechariah is only dramatizing what God had done historically (see the note on the word “cedars” in 11:1). The “one month” probably means just any short period of time in which three kings ruled in succession. Likely candidates are Elah, Zimri, Tibni (1 Kgs 16:8-20); Zechariah, Shallum, Menahem (2 Kgs 15:8-16); or Jehoiakim, Jehoiachin, Zedekiah (2 Kgs 24:1–25:7). 9sn The speaker (Zechariah) represents the Lord, who here is asking what his service as faithful shepherd has been worth in the opinion of his people Israel. 10sn If taken at face value, thirty pieces (shekels) of silver was worth about two and a half years’ wages for a common laborer. The Code of Hammurabi prescribes a monthly wage for a laborer of one shekel. If this were the case in Israel, 30 shekels would be the wages for 2 1/2 years (R. de Vaux, Ancient Israel, pp. 76, 204-5). For other examples of “thirty shekels” as a conventional payment, see K. Luke, “The Thirty Pieces of Silver (Zech. 11:12f.), Ind TS 19 (1982): 26-30. Luke, on the basis of Sumerian analogues, suggests that “thirty” came to be a term meaning anything of little or no value (p. 30). In this he follows Erica Reiner, “Thirty Pieces of Silver,” in Essays in Memory of E. A. Speiser, AOS 53, ed. William W. Hallo (New Haven, Conn.: American Oriental Society, 1968), 186-90. Though the 30 shekels elsewhere in the OT may well be taken literally, the context of Zech. 11:12 may indeed support Reiner and Luke in seeing it as a pittance here, not worth considering (cf. Exod 21:32; Lev 27:4; Matt 26:15). 11tn Heb “splendor of splendor” (אֶדֶר הַיְקָר, ’eder hayqar). This expression sarcastically draws attention to the incredibly low value placed upon the Lord’s redemptive grace by his very own people. 12tn The Syriac presupposes הָאוֹצָר (ha’otsar, “treasury”) for the MT הַיּוֹצֵר (hayyotser, “potter”) perhaps because of the lack of evidence for a potter’s shop in the area of the temple. The Syriac reading is followed by NAB, NRSV, TEV. Matthew seems to favor this when he speaks of Judas having thrown the thirty shekels for which he betrayed Jesus into the temple treasury (27:5-6). However, careful reading of the whole gospel pericope makes it clear that the money actually was used to purchase a “potter’s field,” hence Zechariah’s reference to a potter. The MT reading is followed by most other English versions. 13tn Heb “house” (so NASB, NIV, NRSV). 14sn The grammar (e.g., the incipient participle מֵקִים, maqim, “about to raise up,” v. 16) and overall sense of vv. 15-17 give the incident a future orientation. Zechariah once more is role-playing but this time he is a “foolish” shepherd, i.e., one who does not know God and who is opposed to him (cf. Prov 1:7; 15:5; 20:3; 27:22). The individual who best represents this eschatological enemy of God and his people is the Antichrist (cf. Matt 24:5, 24; 2 Thess 2:3-4; 1 John 2:18, 22; 4:3; 2 John 7). 15tn Heb “the broken” (so KJV, NASB; NRSV “the maimed”). 16tn Heb “the fat [ones].” Cf. ASV “the fat sheep”; NIV “the choice sheep.”
1sn In this poetic section, plants and animals provide the imagery for rulers, especially evil ones (cf. respectively Isa 10:33-34; Ezek 31:8; Amos 2:9; Nah 2:12).
2sn The expression those who buy them appears to be a reference to the foreign nations to whom Israel’s own kings “sold” their subjects. Far from being good shepherds, then, they were evil and profiteering. The whole section (vv. 4-14) refers to the past when the Lord, the Good Shepherd, had in vain tried to lead his people to salvation and life.
3sn The first person pronoun refers to Zechariah himself who, however, is a “stand-in” for the Lord as the actions of vv. 8-14 make clear. The prophet, like others before him, probably performed actions dramatizing the account of God’s past dealings with Israel and Judah (cf. Hos 1-3; Isa 20:2-4; Jer 19:1-15; 27:2-11; Ezek 4:1-3).
4tc For the MT reading לָכֵן עֲנִיֵּי (lakhen ’aniyyey, “therefore the [most] afflicted of”) the LXX presupposes לִכְנַעֲנֵיּי (“to the merchants of”). The line would then read “So I began to shepherd the flock destined for slaughter for the sheep merchants” (cf. NAB). This helps to explain the difficult לָכֵן (lakhen) here but otherwise has no attestation or justification, so the MT is followed by most modern English versions.
5sn The two staffs represent the two kingdoms, Israel and Judah. For other examples of staffs representing tribes or nations see Num 17:1-11; Ezek 37:15-23.
6tn The Hebrew term נֹעַם (no’am) is frequently translated “Favor” (so NAB, NASB, NIV, NRSV, NLT); cf. KJV “Beauty”; CEV “Mercy.”
sn The name of the first staff, pleasantness, refers to the rest and peace of the covenant between the Lord and his people (cf. v. 10).
7tn The Hebrew term חֹבְלִים (khovlim) is often translated “Union” (so NASB, NIV, NLT); cf. KJV, ASV “Bands”; NAB “Bonds”; NRSV, TEV, CEV “Unity”).
sn The name of the second staff, Binders, refers to the relationship between Israel and Judah (cf. v. 14).
8sn Zechariah is only dramatizing what God had done historically (see the note on the word “cedars” in 11:1). The “one month” probably means just any short period of time in which three kings ruled in succession. Likely candidates are Elah, Zimri, Tibni (1 Kgs 16:8-20); Zechariah, Shallum, Menahem (2 Kgs 15:8-16); or Jehoiakim, Jehoiachin, Zedekiah (2 Kgs 24:1–25:7).
9sn The speaker (Zechariah) represents the Lord, who here is asking what his service as faithful shepherd has been worth in the opinion of his people Israel.
10sn If taken at face value, thirty pieces (shekels) of silver was worth about two and a half years’ wages for a common laborer. The Code of Hammurabi prescribes a monthly wage for a laborer of one shekel. If this were the case in Israel, 30 shekels would be the wages for 2 1/2 years (R. de Vaux, Ancient Israel, pp. 76, 204-5). For other examples of “thirty shekels” as a conventional payment, see K. Luke, “The Thirty Pieces of Silver (Zech. 11:12f.), Ind TS 19 (1982): 26-30. Luke, on the basis of Sumerian analogues, suggests that “thirty” came to be a term meaning anything of little or no value (p. 30). In this he follows Erica Reiner, “Thirty Pieces of Silver,” in Essays in Memory of E. A. Speiser, AOS 53, ed. William W. Hallo (New Haven, Conn.: American Oriental Society, 1968), 186-90. Though the 30 shekels elsewhere in the OT may well be taken literally, the context of Zech. 11:12 may indeed support Reiner and Luke in seeing it as a pittance here, not worth considering (cf. Exod 21:32; Lev 27:4; Matt 26:15).
11tn Heb “splendor of splendor” (אֶדֶר הַיְקָר, ’eder hayqar). This expression sarcastically draws attention to the incredibly low value placed upon the Lord’s redemptive grace by his very own people.
12tn The Syriac presupposes הָאוֹצָר (ha’otsar, “treasury”) for the MT הַיּוֹצֵר (hayyotser, “potter”) perhaps because of the lack of evidence for a potter’s shop in the area of the temple. The Syriac reading is followed by NAB, NRSV, TEV. Matthew seems to favor this when he speaks of Judas having thrown the thirty shekels for which he betrayed Jesus into the temple treasury (27:5-6). However, careful reading of the whole gospel pericope makes it clear that the money actually was used to purchase a “potter’s field,” hence Zechariah’s reference to a potter. The MT reading is followed by most other English versions.
13tn Heb “house” (so NASB, NIV, NRSV).
14sn The grammar (e.g., the incipient participle מֵקִים, maqim, “about to raise up,” v. 16) and overall sense of vv. 15-17 give the incident a future orientation. Zechariah once more is role-playing but this time he is a “foolish” shepherd, i.e., one who does not know God and who is opposed to him (cf. Prov 1:7; 15:5; 20:3; 27:22). The individual who best represents this eschatological enemy of God and his people is the Antichrist (cf. Matt 24:5, 24; 2 Thess 2:3-4; 1 John 2:18, 22; 4:3; 2 John 7).
15tn Heb “the broken” (so KJV, NASB; NRSV “the maimed”).
16tn Heb “the fat [ones].” Cf. ASV “the fat sheep”; NIV “the choice sheep.”