We may now proceed to the solution of our proper problem. There are no general reasons, either against the figurative, or against the literal interpretation; neither of them has any unfavourable prejudice which can be urged against it. A devastation by real locusts is threatened, in the Pentateuch, against the transgressors of the law, Deut. xxviii. 38, 39; against the Egyptians, the Lord actually made use of this, among other methods of punishment; and a devastation in Israel by locusts is, in Amos iv. 9, represented as an effect of divine anger.--[Pg 308]On the other hand, figurative representations of that kind are of very common occurrence. In Isaiah, _e.g._, the invading Assyrians and Egyptians appear, in a continuous description, as swarms of flies and bees. The comparison of hostile armies with locusts is very common, not only on account of their multitude (from which circumstance the locusts received their name in Hebrew), but also on account of the sudden surprise, and the devastation: compare Judges vi. 5; Jer. xlvi. 23, li. 27; Judith ii. 11. Several times a hostile invasion also is represented under the _image_ and _symbol_ of the plague of the locusts. In Nah. iii. 15-17, the Assyrians appear in the form of locusts,--and that this is not only on account of their numbers, but also on account of the devastations which they make, is shown by the comparison with the ילק in ver. 15;--and just in the same manner are the enemies described who accomplish their overthrow. And,--what is completely analogous,--in Amos vii. 1-3, the prophet beholds the approaching divine judgment under the image of a swarm of locusts, just as, in ver. 4, under that of a fire, and in ver. 7, under that of a plumb-line. All these three images are in substance identical; their meaning is expressed in ver. 9 by the words: "The high places of Isaac shall be desolate, and the sanctuaries of Israel shall be destroyed." The locusts denote destroying hostile armies; the fire denotes war; and the plumb-line, the destruction to be accomplished by the enemies. It was so much the more natural to represent the divine judgment under the image of a devastation by locusts--as is done also in Rev. ix. 3 ff.--because, formerly, it had actually manifested itself in this way in Egypt. The figurative representation had therefore a significant substratum in the history of the past. But it is, throughout, the custom of the prophets to describe the future under the image of the analogous past, which, as it were, is revived in it.--It ought to be still further remarked, that we must, _a priori_, be the less indisposed to admit a detailed symbolical representation in Joel, as the two prophets, betwixt whom he is placed, have likewise such symbolical portions.