THE BOOK OF HAGGAI
THE Book of Haggai contains thirty-eight verses,
which have been divided between two chapters. 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. These and the variations in the other
ancient versions will be noted in the translation below.
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, chapter 1, dated the first day of the sixth month, during
our September, reproves the Jews for building their own "ceiled
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 Jeshna, 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, Hag 2:1-9, 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, Hag 2:10-19, 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 naught, and adversity has persisted: small increase
of fruits, blasting, mildew and hail. But from this day God will
bless.
The fourth section, Hag 2:20-23, 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,
till ten years ago W. Bohme, besides pointing out some useless
repetitions of single words and phrases cast suspicion on Hag 1:13,
and questioned the whole of the fourth section, Hag 2:20-23. With
regard to Hag 1:13, 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, Hag 1:14 runs on naturally to Hag 1:12. Bohme’s reasons for
disputing the authenticity Hag 2:20-23 are much less sufficient. He
thinks he sees the hand of an editor in the phrase "for a second
time" in Hag 2:20; notes the omission of the title "prophet," 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 Hag 2:6 b in Hag 2:21; and otherwise
concludes that the section is an insertion from a later hand. But
the formula "the word came to Haggai" occurs also in Hag 2:10 : 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.
Recently M. Tony Andree, privat-docent in the University of Geneva,
has issued a large work on Haggai, in which he has sought to prove
that the third section of the book, Hag 2:10-19, is from the hand of
another writer than the rest. He admits 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
Hag 2:10-19 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 Hag 2:10-19 and the rest of the book; and
that there is a difference of vocabulary. Let us consider each of
these reasons.
The first, that Hag 2:10-19 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, Hag 2:20-23, treats only of a
corollary of the first, Hag 2:1-9, and that corollary may well have
formed the subject of a separate oracle. Besides, as we shall see,
Hag 2:10-19 is a natural development of chapter 1. The
contradictions alleged by M. Andree are two. He points out that
while chapter 1 speaks only of a "drought," Hag 1:10-11, Hag 2:10-19
mentions {Hag 2:17} as the plagues on the crops shiddaphon and
yerakon, generally rendered blasting and mildew in our English
Bible, and barad, or hail; and these he reckons to be plagues due
not to drought but to excessive moisture. But shiddaphon and yerakon,
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. The other contradiction alleged refers to
the ambiguous verse Hag 2:18, 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. Finally, the differences in
language which M. Andree cites are largely imaginary, and it is hard
to understand how a responsible critic has come to cite, far more to
emphasize them, as he has done. We may relegate the discussion of
them to a note, 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"), Hag 2:10-19 styles it "palace," or temple, of Jehovah. {Hag
2:15; Hag 2:18} 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, 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 interest; 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." 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 Hag 1:6.
The only other matter of introduction to the prophet Haggai is his
name. The precise form is not elsewhere found in the Old Testament;
but one of the clans of the tribe of Gad is called Haggai, and the
letters H G I occur as the consonants of a name on a Phoenician
inscription have taken Haggai to be a contraction of Haggiyah, the
name of a Levitical family, but although the final yod of some
proper names stands for Jehovah, we cannot certainly conclude that
it is so in this case. Others see in Haggai a probable contraction
of Hagariah, as Zaccai, the original of Zacchaeus, is a contraction
of Zechariah. A more general opinion takes the termination as
adjectival, and the root to be "hag," feast or festival. 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. Andree, 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. 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. 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. The Christian Fathers
narrate that he was of the tribe of Levi,; that with Zachariah he
prophesied in exile of the Return, and was still young when he
arrived in Jerusalem, 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. With Zechariah Haggai appears on the titles of Psalms
137, 145-148, in the Septuagint; 111, 145, 146, in the Vulgate; and
125, 126, and 145-148, in the Peshitto. "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." All these
testimonies are, of course, devoid of value.
Finally, the modern inference from Hag 2:3, that Haggai in his youth
had seen the former Temple, had gone into exile, and was now
returned a very old man, may be probable, but is not certain. We are
quite ignorant of his age at the time the word of Jehovah came to
him.
|