_THE BOOK OF HAGGAI_
The Book of Haggai contains thirty-eight verses, which have been
divided between two chapters.[615] The text is, for the prophets,
a comparatively sound one. The Greek version affords a number of
corrections, but has also the usual amount of misunderstandings,
and, as in the case of other prophets, a few additions to the Hebrew
text.[616] These and the variations in the other ancient versions will
be noted in the translation below.[617]
The book consists of four sections, each recounting a message from
Jehovah to the Jews in Jerusalem in 520 B.C., _the second year of
Darius_ (Hystaspis), _by the hand of the prophet Haggai_.
The _first_, chap. i., dated the first day of the sixth month, during
our September, reproves the Jews for building their own _cieled
houses_, while they say that _the time for building Jehovah’s house has
not yet come_; affirms that this is the reason of their poverty and of
a great drought which has afflicted them. A piece of narrative is added
recounting how Zerubbabel and Jeshua, the heads of the community, were
stirred by this word to lead the people to begin work on the Temple, on
the twenty-fourth day of the same month.
The _second_ section, chap. ii. 1-9, contains a message, dated the
twenty-first day of the seventh month, during our October, in which the
builders are encouraged for their work. Jehovah is about to shake all
nations, these shall contribute of their wealth, and the latter glory
of the Temple be greater than the former.
The _third_ section, chap. ii. 10-19, contains a word of Jehovah which
came to Haggai on the twenty-fourth day of the ninth month, during our
December. It is in the form of a parable based on certain ceremonial
laws, according to which the touch of a holy thing does not sanctify so
much as the touch of an unholy pollutes. Thus is the people polluted,
and thus every work of their hands. Their sacrifices avail nought, and
adversity has persisted: small increase of fruits, blasting, mildew and
hail. But from this day God will bless.
The _fourth_ section, chap. ii. 20-23, is a second word from the
Lord to Haggai on the twenty-fourth day of the ninth month. It is
for Zerubbabel, and declares that God will overthrow the thrones of
kingdoms and destroy the forces of many of the Gentiles by war. In that
day Zerubbabel, the Lord’s elect servant, shall be as a signet to the
Lord.
The authenticity of all these four sections was doubted by no one,[618]
till ten years ago W. Böhme, besides pointing out some useless
repetitions of single words and phrases, cast suspicion on chap. i. 13,
and questioned the whole of the _fourth_ section, chap. ii. 20-23.[619]
With regard to chap. i. 13, it is indeed curious that Haggai should be
described as _the messenger of Jehovah_; while the message itself, _I
am with you_, seems superfluous here, and if the verse be omitted, ver.
14 runs on naturally to ver. 12.[620] Böhme’s reasons for disputing the
authenticity of chap. ii. 20-23 are much less sufficient. He thinks he
sees the hand of an editor in the phrase _for a second time_ in ver.
20; notes the omission of the title “prophet”[621] after Haggai’s name,
and the difference of the formula _the word came to Haggai_ from that
employed in the previous sections, _by the hand of Haggai_, and the
repetition of ver. 6_b_ in ver. 21; and otherwise concludes that the
section is an insertion from a later hand. But the formula _the word
came to Haggai_ occurs also in ii. 10:[622] the other points are
trivial, and while it was most natural for Haggai the contemporary of
Zerubbabel to entertain of the latter such hopes as the passage
expresses, it is inconceivable that a later writer, who knew how they
had not been fulfilled in Zerubbabel, should have invented them.[623]
Recently M. Tony Andrée, _privat-docent_ in the University of Geneva,
has issued a large work on Haggai,[624] in which he has sought to prove
that the _third_ section of the book, chap. ii. (10) 11-19, is from the
hand of another writer than the rest. He admits[625] that in neither
form, nor style, nor language is there anything to prove this
distinction, and that the ideas of all the sections suit perfectly the
condition of the Jews in the time soon after the Return. But he
considers that chap. ii. (10) 11-19 interrupts the connection between
the sections upon either side of it; that the author is a legalist or
casuist, while the author of the other sections is a man whose only
ecclesiastical interest is the rebuilding of the Temple; that there are
obvious contradictions between chap. ii. (10) 11-19 and the rest of the
book; and that there is a difference of vocabulary. Let us consider
each of these reasons.
The first, that chap. ii. (10) 11-19 interrupts the connection between
the sections on either side of it, is true only in so far as it has a
different subject from that which the latter have more or less in
common. But the second of the latter, chap. ii. 20-23, treats only of a
corollary of the first, chap. ii. 1-9, and that corollary may well have
formed the subject of a separate oracle. Besides, as we shall see,
chap. ii. 10-19 is a natural development of chap. i.[626] The
contradictions alleged by M. Andrée are two. He points out that while
chap. i. speaks only of a _drought_,[627] chap. ii. (10) 11-19
mentions[628] as the plagues on the crops shiddāphôn and yērākôn,
generally rendered _blasting_ and _mildew_ in our English Bible, and
bārād, or _hail_; and these he reckons to be plagues due not to drought
but to excessive moisture. But shiddāphôn and yērākôn, which are always
connected in the Old Testament and are words of doubtful meaning, are
not referred to damp in any of the passages in which they occur, but,
on the contrary, appear to be the consequences of drought.[629] The
other contradiction alleged refers to the ambiguous verse ii. 18, on
which we have already seen it difficult to base any conclusion, and
which will be treated when we come to it in the course of
translation.[630] Finally, the differences in language which M. Andrée
cites are largely imaginary, and it is hard to understand how a
responsible critic has come to cite, far more to emphasise them, as he
has done. We may relegate the discussion of them to a note,[631] and
need here only remark that there is among them but one of any
significance: while the rest of the book calls the Temple _the House_
or _the House of Jehovah_ (or _of Jehovah of Hosts_), chap. ii. (10)
11-19 styles it _palace_, or temple, of Jehovah.[632] On such a
difference between two comparatively brief passages it would be
unreasonable to decide for a distinction of authorship.
There is, therefore, no reason to disagree with the consensus of all
other critics in the integrity of the Book of Haggai. The four sections
are either from himself or from a contemporary of his. They probably
represent,[633] not the full addresses given by him on the occasions
stated, but abstracts or summaries of these. “It is never an easy task
to persuade a whole population to make pecuniary sacrifices, or to
postpone private to public interests; and the probability is, that in
these brief remains of the prophet Haggai we have but one or two
specimens of a ceaseless diligence and persistent determination,
which upheld and animated the whole people till the work was
accomplished.”[634] At the same time it must be noticed that the style
of the book is not wholly of the bare, jejune prose which it is
sometimes described to be. The passages of Haggai’s own exhortation are
in the well-known parallel rhythm of prophetic discourse: see
especially chap. i., ver. 6.
The only other matter of Introduction to the prophet Haggai is his
name. The precise form[635] is not elsewhere found in the Old
Testament; but one of the clans of the tribe of Gad is called
Haggi,[636] and the letters H G I occur as the consonants of a name on
a Phœnician inscription.[637] Some[638] have taken Haggai to be a
contraction of Haggiyah, the name of a Levitical family,[639] but
although the final _yod_ of some proper names stands for Jehovah, we
cannot certainly conclude that it is so in this case. Others[640] see
in Haggai a probable contraction for Hagariah,[641] as Zaccai, the
original of Zacchæus, is a contraction of Zechariah.[642] A more
general opinion[643] takes the termination as adjectival,[644] and the
root to be “hag,” _feast_ or _festival_.[645] In that case Haggai would
mean _festal_, and it has been supposed that the name would be given to
him from his birth on the day of some feast. It is impossible to decide
with certainty among these alternatives. M. Andrée,[646] who accepts
the meaning _festal_, ventures the hypothesis that, like “Malachi,”
Haggai is a symbolic title given by a later hand to the anonymous
writer of the book, because of the coincidence of his various
prophecies with solemn festivals.[647] But the name is too often and
too naturally introduced into the book to present any analogy to that
of “Malachi”; and the hypothesis may be dismissed as improbable and
unnatural.
Nothing more is known of Haggai than his name and the facts given in
his book. But as with the other prophets whom we have treated, so with
this one, Jewish and Christian legends have been very busy. Other
functions have been ascribed to him; a sketch of his biography has been
invented. According to the Rabbis he was one of the men of the Great
Synagogue, and with Zechariah and “Malachi” transmitted to that
mythical body the tradition of the older prophets.[648] He was the
author of several ceremonial regulations, and with Zechariah and
“Malachi” introduced into the alphabet the terminal forms of the five
elongated letters.[649] The Christian Fathers narrate that he was of
the tribe of Levi,[650] that with Zechariah he prophesied in exile of
the Return,[651] and was still young when he arrived in Jerusalem,[652]
where he died and was buried. A strange legend, founded on the doubtful
verse which styles him _the messenger of Jehovah_, gave out that
Haggai, as well as for similar reasons “Malachi” and John the Baptist,
were not men, but angels in human shape.[653] With Zechariah Haggai
appears on the titles of Psalms cxxxvii., cxlv.-cxlviii. in the
Septuagint; cxi., cxlv., cxlvi. in the Vulgate; and cxxv., cxxvi. and
cxlv.-cxlviii. in the Peshitto.[654] “In the Temple at Jerusalem he was
the first who chanted the Hallelujah, ... wherefore we say: Hallelujah,
which is the hymn of Haggai and Zechariah.”[655] All these testimonies
are, of course, devoid of value.
Finally, the modern inference from chap. ii. 3, that Haggai in his
youth had seen the former Temple, had gone into exile, and was now
returned a very old man,[656] may be probable, but is not certain. We
are quite ignorant of his age at the time the word of Jehovah came to
him.
FOOTNOTES:
[615] In the English Bible the division corresponds to that of the
Hebrew, which gives fifteen verses to chap. i. The LXX. takes the
fifteenth verse along with ver. 1 of chap. ii.
[616] ii. 9, 14: see on these passages, pp. 243, n. 685, 246, n. 700.
[617] Besides the general works on the text of the Twelve Prophets,
already cited, M. Tony Andrée has published _État Critique du Texte
d’Aggée: Quatre Tableaux Comparatifs_ (Paris, 1893), which is also
included in his general introduction and commentary on the prophet,
quoted below.
[618] Robertson Smith (_Encyc. Brit._, art. “Haggai,” 1880) does
not even mention authenticity. “Without doubt from Haggai himself”
(Kuenen). “The Book of Haggai is without doubt to be dated, according
to its whole extant contents, from the prophet Haggai, whose work fell
in the year 520” (König). So Driver, Kirkpatrick, Cornill, etc.
[619] _Z.A.T.W._, 1887, 215 f.
[620] So also Wellhausen.
[621] Which occurs only in the LXX.
[622] See note on that verse, n. 694
[623] Cf. Wildeboer, _Litter. des A. T._, 294.
[624] _Le Prophète Aggée, Introduction Critique et Commentaire._ Paris,
Fischbacher, 1893.
[625] Page 151.
[626] Below, p. 249.
[627] i. 10, 11.
[628] ii. 17.
[629] They follow drought in Amos iv. 9; and in the other passages
where they occur—Deut. xxviii. 22; 1 Kings viii. 37; 2 Chron. vi.
28—they are mentioned in a list of possible plagues after famine, or
pestilence, or fevers, all of which, with the doubtful exception of
fevers, followed drought.
[630] Above, p. 216; below, p. 248, n. 708.
[631] Some of M. Andrée’s alleged differences need not be discussed at
all, _e.g._ that between מפני and לפני. But here are the others. He
asserts that while chap. i. calls _oil and wine_ “yiṣhar and tîrôsh,”
chap. ii. (10) 11-19 calls them “yayin and shemen.” But he overlooks
the fact that the former pair of names, meaning the newly pressed oil
and wine, suit their connection, in which the fruits of the earth are
being catalogued, i. 11, while the latter pair, meaning the finished
wine and oil, equally suit their connection, in which articles of food
are being catalogued, ii. 12. Equally futile is the distinction drawn
between i. 9, which speaks of bringing the crops _to the house_, or as
we should say _home_, and ii. 19, which speaks of seed being _in the
barn_. Again, what is to be said of a critic who adduces in evidence of
distinction of authorship the fact that i. 6 employs the verb labhash,
_to clothe_, while ii. 12 uses beged for _garment_, and who actually
puts in brackets the root bagad, as if it anywhere in the Old Testament
meant _to clothe_! Again, Andrée remarks that while ii. (10) 11-19 does
not employ the epithet _Jehovah of Hosts_, but only _Jehovah_, the rest
of the book frequently uses the former; but he omits to observe that
the rest of the book, besides using _Jehovah of Hosts_, often uses
the name Jehovah alone [the phrase in ii. (10) 11-19 is נאם יהוה, and
occurs twice ii. 14, 17; but the rest of the book has also נאם יהוה,
ii. 4; and besides דבר יהוה, i. 1, ii. 1, ii. 20; אמר יהוה, i. 8; and
יהוה אלהים and מפני יהוה, i. 12]. Again, Andrée observes that while the
rest of the book designates Israel always by עם and the heathen by גוי,
chap. ii. (10) 11-19, in ver. 14, uses both terms of Israel. Yet in
this latter case גוי is used only in parallel to עם, as frequently in
other parts of the Old Testament. Again, that while in the rest of the
book Haggai is called the prophet (the doubtful i. 13 may be omitted),
he is simply named in ii. (10) 11-19, means nothing, for the name here
occurs only in introducing his contribution to a conversation, in
recording which it was natural to omit titles. Similarly insignificant
is the fact that while the rest of the book mentions only _the High
Priest_, chap. ii. (10) 11-19 talks only of _the priests_: because here
again each is suitable to the connection.—Two or three of Andrée’s
alleged grounds (such as that from the names for wine and oil and that
from labhash and beged) are enough to discredit his whole case.
[632] ii. 15, 18.
[633] In this opinion, stated first by Eichhorn, most critics agree.
[634] Marcus Dods, _Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi_, 1879, in Handbooks
for Bible Classes: Edin., T. & T. Clark.
[635] חַגַּי Greek Ἀγγαῖος.
[636] חַגִּי, Gen. xlvi. 16, Num. xxvi. 15; Greek Ἁγγει, Ἁγγεις. The
feminine חַגִּית, Haggith, was the name of one of David’s wives: 2 Sam.
iii. 4.
[637] No. 67 of the Phœnician inscriptions in _C. I. S._
[638] Hiller, _Onom. Sacrum_, Tüb., 1706 (quoted by Andrée), and Pusey.
[639] חַגִּיָּה, see 1 Chron. vi. 15; Greek Ἁγγια, Lu. Ἀναια.
[640] Köhler, _Nachexil. Proph._, I. 2; Wellhausen in fourth edition of
Bleek’s _Einleitung_; Robertson Smith, _Encyc. Brit._, art. “Haggai.”
[641] חגריה = _Jehovah hath girded_.
[642] Derenbourg, _Hist. de la Palestine_, pp. 95, 150.
[643] Jerome, Gesenius, and most moderns.
[644] As in the names קַלַּי ,כְּלוּבַי ,בַּרְזִלַּי, etc.
[645] The radical double _g_ of which appears in composition.
[646] _Op. cit._, p. 8.
[647] i. 1, the new moon; ii. 1, the seventh day of the Feast of
Tabernacles; ii. 18, the foundation of the Temple (?).
[648] Baba-bathra, 15_a_, etc.
[649] Megilla, 2_b_.
[650] Hesychius: see above, p. 80, n.
[651] Augustine, _Enarratio in Psalm cxlvii._
[652] Pseud-Epiphanius, _De Vitis Prophetarum_.
[653] Jerome on Hag. i. 13.
[654] Eusebius did not find these titles in the Hexaplar Septuagint.
See Field’s _Hexaplar_ on Psalm cxlv. 1. The titles are of course
wholly without authority.
[655] Pseud-Epiphanius, as above.
[656] So Ewald, Wildeboer (p. 295) and others.