The War of Gog Against God's People.
The identity of ‘Gog of Magog' is crucial to the interpretation of what follows, for it determines who it will be who will lead these accumulation of nations against Israel. And yet it would appear that Ezekiel has deliberately left the question open (although the solution may have been clearer in his day than it is in ours). If we see Magog as a cypher for Babylon, who it will be noted are not otherwise named, then Gog would be ‘the king of Babylon' which is a title used by both Babylonian and Persian kings (Ezra 5:13). The Persians saw themselves as taking over the mantle of Babylon.
This latter identification may be seen as supported by the fact that the nations listed are, apart from Persia, paralleled in Genesis 10. See Genesis 10:2 where the sons of Japheth include Gomer, Magog, Tubal and Meshech (and also Madai - the Medes, who may have been replaced here by Persia), with Togarmah being a son of Gomer. Cush and Put are mentioned as sons of Ham (Genesis 10:6), but with Cush moving northwards in the person of Nimrod, to become a part of the Mesopotamian nations (Genesis 10:8-12). The inclusion of Persia in the place of the Medes may be especially significant with regard to the identification. This would then indicate an attack led by the Persians.
Others connect Gog with Gyges (Gugu) king of Lydia, presumably in the form of one of his dynasty. This latter is the basis of an attempt to link this invasion with Turkey, but that, like the attempt to link Rosh with Russia, must be seen as very fanciful.
‘And the word of Yahweh came to me saying, “Son of man, set your face towards Gog, of the land of Magog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal, and prophesy against him, and say, ‘Thus says the Lord Yahweh, Behold I am against you, O Gog, chief prince of Meshech and Tubal.' ” '
The word is possibly spoken concerning someone in Ezekiel's day who was gathering forces in an alliance (Ezekiel 38:7), someone who was a legend in his own time, but the thought is not of his direct plans but of a future invasion ‘after many days' and ‘ in the latter years' (Ezekiel 38:8). He would thus be the prototype. As suggested, this could be the king of Persia under his title ‘king of Babylon', or Gyges (‘Gugu') of Lydia (see above), or one of his descendants. But it may well not b either of these who are finally in mind, for the name may then be being used as a symbol of the dark forces of ‘the latter years'.
‘Chief prince' may well have been an official title (nesi' rosh), for there are no real grounds for seeing ‘rosh' (head) as the name of a people, for such a nation is not evidenced anywhere in inscriptions (and Russia was a name which arose well over a thousand years later and therefore has no connection with it).
‘Meshech and Tubal' were mentioned by Ezekiel in Ezekiel 32:26 (where they ere belligerent nations),as well known nations (Assyrian ‘musku' and ‘tabal'), while as we have seen all the names of nations except Persia (but the Medes are mentioned as ‘Madai'), but including Magog which is there connected with Meshech and Tubal, otherwise appear in Genesis 10.
However, there is one argument which is in favour of seeing ‘Rosh' as the name of a people, and that is the Hebrew itself, especially in the light of the possibly parallel phrase ‘Persia, Cush and Put' (Ezekiel 38:5). But if so they were a people unknown to us. And an argument against this is that without Rosh the allies number seven, the perfect number signifying divine completeness (Meshech, Tubal, Persia, Cush, Put, Gomer and Togarmah), which is a regular feature of Scripture. Thus ‘chief prince' is probably after all the correct translation, the one who is over all.
At this time Meshech and Tubal were firmly based in Anatolia, south east of the Black Sea, and traded in slaves (Ezekiel 27:13). Ezekiel probably saw them as a fierce and distant people at the extreme north, along with Togarmah. Meshech and Tubal were close to each other landwise, as was Togarmah.
‘Behold I am against you, O Gog, chief prince of Meshech and Tubal.' Yahweh's current antagonistic attitude towards Gog at that time (whether as a local king or as representing the king of Persia) may have been seen as arising from the raiding and invasion plans of Meshech and Tubal against surrounding peoples (Ezekiel 32:26), but it was magnified by the fact that one day God would bring them against His own people, (although only because their inclinations were that way), only for them to be finally destroyed.