Charles Ellicott Commentary Isaiah 5

Now will I sing to my wellbeloved. —Literally, Now let me sing. The chapter bears every mark of being a distinct composition, perhaps the most elaborately finished in the whole of Isaiah. The parable with which it opens has for us the interest of having obviously supplied a starting-point for a later prophet (Jeremiah 2:21), and for our Lord’s teaching in the similar parable of Matthew 21:33-41. Here, however, there is the distinctive touch of the irony of the opening verse. The prophet presents himself, as it were, in the character of a minstrel, ready to sing to his hearers one of the love songs in which their culture delighted (Amos 6:5). In its language and rhythm, it reminds us of the Song of Solomon.

The very word “beloved” recalls Song of Solomon 5:1–2; the description of the vineyards, that of Song of Solomon 8:11–13. The probability that the parallelism was intentional is increased by the coincidence of Isaiah 7:23 and Song of Solomon 8:11, which we will encounter later. On this assumption, Isaiah’s words have a special interest as showing how early that poem lent itself to a mystical interpretation.

One might almost conjecture that the prophet allured the people to listen with music as well as words and appeared, as Elisha and other prophets had done, with harp or pipe in hand (2 Kings 3:15; 1 Samuel 10:5; 1 Samuel 16:23; Isaiah 30:29). The frequency of such hymns (Isaiah 12; Isaiah 25; Isaiah 26:1–4) shows, at any rate, that the prophet had received the training of a psalmist (See Introduction.).

A song of my beloved. —A slightly different reading adopted by some critics gives A song of love. The “beloved” is purposely not named, but appears afterwards as none other than Jehovah. The word, closely connected with the ideal name Jedediah (the beloved of Jehovah; 2 Samuel 12:25), occurs in twenty-six passages of Song of Solomon and not elsewhere.

A very fruitful hill. —Literally, a horn, the son of oil. The combination “horn of oil” in 1 Samuel 16:1, 1 Samuel 16:13, and 1 Kings 1:39 suggests the thought that the phrase is equivalent to “the horn of the anointed” (Kay). The term “horn” was a natural synonym for a hill. Thus, we have Matterhorn, Aarhorn, etc., in the Alps. Oil was naturally symbolic of fertility. In Psalm 80:8-16, we have a striking parallel. The “fruitful hill” was Canaan as a whole, with a special reference to Judah and Jerusalem.

The “choicest vine”—literally, vine of Sorek (Genesis 49:11; Jeremiah 2:21), bearing a small dark purple grape—pointed back to the fathers of the nation, who, idealized in retrospect, were as the heroes of faith compared with the then-present generation.

The picture that forms the parable might almost take its place among the Georgics of Palestine. The vineyard on the hillside could not be plowed, and therefore the stones had to be taken out by hand. It was fenced against the beasts of the field. There was a tower for a watchman to guard it against the attacks of robbers (Compare to Virgil, Georgics ii. 399-419). Each part has its own interpretation.

And he fenced it.—In the “fence” we may recognise the law and institutions of Israel which kept it as a separate people (Ephesians 2:14); in the “stones” that were gathered out, the removal of the old idolatries that would have hindered the development of the nation’s life; in the “tower” of the vineyard (compare in a different context Isaiah 1:8), the monarchy and throne of David, or the watch-tower from which the prophets looked forth (Habakkuk 2:1; Isaiah 21:5–8); in the “winepress,” the temple in which the fruits of righteousness were to issue in the wine of joy and adoration (Zechariah 9:17; Ephesians 5:18).

It was, we may note, one of the maxims of the Rabbis that the duty of a scribe was “to set a fence around the law” (Pirke Aboth, i. 1). In the last clause of the verse the pleasant song suddenly changes its tone, and the “wild grapes” (sour and hard, and not larger than bilberries) are types of deeds of harsh and cruel injustice on which the prophet proceeds to dwell.

And now, O inhabitants of Jerusalem.—“The song of the vineyard” comes to an end and becomes the text of a discourse in which Jehovah, as the “Beloved” of the song, speaks through the prophet. Those to whom the parable applies are invited, as David was by Nathan, to pass an unconscious judgment on themselves. (Compare to Matthew 21:40-41, as an instance of the same method.)

What could have been done more ... — The prophet cuts off from the people the excuse that they had been unfairly treated, that their Lord was as a hard master, reaping where he had not sown (Matthew 25:24). They had had all the external advantages that were necessary for their growth in holiness, yet they had not used them rightly. (Compare the striking parallelism of Hebrews 6:4-8.)

I will take away the hedge ... —This involved the throwing open of the vineyard to be grazing land which all the wild bulls of Bashan—i.e., all the enemies of Zion—might trample on (Ezekiel 34:18). The interpretation of the parable implies that there was to be the obliteration, at least for some time and in some measure, of the distinctness and independence of the nation’s life. (Compare to Hosea 3:4, for a similar sentence in another form.)