Isaiah 21 - Introduction

Oracles on Babylon, Edom and Arabia

These three short and difficult oracles form together one of the most singular passages in prophecy. Common to all three are (a) the obscure oracular utterance, in striking contrast to the terse lucidity of Isaiah's style, (b) the strongly-marked visionary element in the writer's experience, and (c) a certain readiness of sympathy with the foreign nations concerned in the predictions. These features indicate, if not identity of authorship, at least a peculiar type of prophetic inspiration, to which no complete parallel is found in the acknowledged writings of Isaiah. It is true that expressions characteristic of Isaiah occur in Isaiah 21:1, but they are hardly sufficient to remove the impression that the individuality of the writer is distinct from that of Isaiah. In the rest of the chapter the linguistic evidence is decidedly adverse to Isaiah's authorship.

The oracle on Babel. Isaiah 21:1

Like whirlwinds in the desert, the prophet has seen in a "hard vision" the stormy and impetuous advance of the Persian hosts against Babylon, Isaiah 21:1.

Unnerved and appalled by what he has seen, his mind is filled with gloom and foreboding; the immediate prospect of carnage and destruction obscures for the moment the brighter hopes beyond, of deliverance for Israel, Isaiah 21:3.

Another scene is briefly depicted; a Babylonian carousal within the walls, suddenly interrupted by the call to arms, Isaiah 21:5.

The prophet then describes the mysterious inward process by which the truth had been communicated to him. In spirit he had stationed "the watchman" (his prophetic consciousness) to scan the horizon for some indication of the coming catastrophe. After long waiting "the watchman" descries the appointed sign a train of riders and forthwith proclaims its purport, "Babylon is fallen, is fallen," &c., Isaiah 21:6.

The oracle closes with an apostrophe to the writer's own people announcing that what he has seen is the sure word of Jehovah, Isaiah 21:10.

The question of authorship has to be settled mainly on historical grounds, and we have to consider in the first place, what conquest of Babylon is here referred to? (1) According to an attractive theory propounded by George Smith (the Assyriologist) and elaborated by Kleinert, the reference is to one of the sieges of Babylon which took place in Isaiah's lifetime, most probably that by Sargon in 710. The king of Babylon at that time was Merodach-baladan (see General Introd., p. xvi, and below on ch. 39), whose friendly intercourse with Hezekiah is thought to account for Isaiah's interest in the struggle, as well as for the aversion with which he seems to contemplate the triumph of Assyria (Isaiah 21:3). (2) The majority of critics hold that the prophecy belongs to the last decade of the exile and relates to the capture of Babylon by Cyrus in 538 (see on ch. 13 f.). This is certainly the more obvious theory, and the exegetical difficulties which have been urged against it seem all to be capable of a satisfactory solution. The "tone of depression" manifested in Isaiah 21:3 belongs to the subjectivity of the writer, and merely proves that he is distinct from the author of ch. 13 f.; it has no parallel in Isaiah's descriptions of the fate of Judah's allies. The mention of "Elam" and "Media" (Isaiah 21:2) as the conquering foe is not incompatible with Isaiah's authorship (see Isaiah 22:6), but is most naturally explained of the army of Cyrus. The impression that the author lived at a distance from Babylon is possibly correct (see on Isaiah 21:1); but there may have been inspired seers in Palestine during the time of the Exile. On the other hand, Isaiah 21:10 and the latter part of Isaiah 21:2 seem clearly to imply that Babylon herself, and not her conqueror, is the cruel tyrant under whom the Jews and other nations are languishing.