The Formation and Intention of the Haggai-Zechariah Corpus
Jakob Wöhrle
University of Münster
woehrle@uni-muenster.de

Abstract

Because of the similar dating system in the books of Haggai and Zechariah, since the end of the 19th century it has been proposed that these two books once formed an independent collection: the Haggai-Zechariah corpus. But neither the formation nor the intention of this corpus has been adequately explained. This article shows that only the book of Zechariah underwent redaction in the course of the composition of this “Book of the Two.” This position stands in contrast with the common assumption that both books underwent redaction in the process. Then the article shows that the Haggai-Zechariah corpus can be understood as a reaction to the decreasing hope for divine salvation in the fifth century. In the light of, and despite the negative experiences that characterize this period, the Haggai-Zechariah corpus adheres to the promises of the early pre-exilic prophecy. But in order to adhere to these promises, the conditions for their fulfillment had to be (re)defined.

1. Introduction

It is an old thesis that the books of Haggai and Zechariah once formed a common corpus. Already in 1896 August Klostermann assumed that these two books were combined to a book of the two, before they were taken up in the book of the Twelve.1 This thesis is, above all, supported by the dating system found in both books:

Hag 1:1

In the second year of King Darius, in the sixth month, on the first day of the month, the word of Yhwh came through (ביד‎) the prophet Haggai to Zerubbabel, son of Shealtiel, the governor of Judah, and to Joshua, son of Jehozadak, the high priest.

Hag 1:15

On the twenty-fourth day of the sixth month, in the second year of King Darius.

Hag 2:1

In the seventh, on the twenty-first of the month, the word of Yhwh came through (ביד‎) the prophet Haggai.

Hag 2:10

On the twenty-fourth day of the ninth, in the second year of Darius, the word of Yhwh came to (אל‎) the prophet Haggai.

Hag 2:20

Then the Word of Yhwh came a second time to (אל‎) Haggai on the twenty-fourth of the month.

Zech 1:1

In the eighth month, in the second year of Darius, the word of Yhwh came to (אל‎) the prophet Zechariah, son of Berechiah, son of Iddo.

Zech 1:7

On the twenty-fourth day of the eleventh month, the month of Shebat, in the second year of Darius, the word of Yhwh came to (אל‎) the prophet Zechariah, son of Berechiah, son of Iddo.

Zech 7:1

Then in the fourth year of King Darius, the word came to (אל‎) Zechariah, on the fourth of the ninth month, in Kislev.

The words of Haggai and Zechariah are at several places linked to specific points of time in the early reign of the Persian King Darius. Thus, both books are set in a chronological framework and can be read successively as one well structured and coherent work. This led Klostermann to the conclusion that a common redactor was responsible for this chronological framework in both books. The redactor—according to Klostermann the prophet Zechariah himself—took up the prophetic words, implemented the dates and with this he formed a small collection of two interrelated prophetic books.

Meanwhile, many scholars have accepted the thesis of Klostermann;2 but from time to time it has also been criticized. Because, in a closer reading, some notable differences can be found between the verses, containing the dates in the book of Haggai and those in the book of Zechariah. For example, only in the book of Haggai the addressees of the following message are mentioned in these verses and only there the name of the prophet is given with the preposition ביד‎ (Hag 1:1; 2:1; cf. 1:3). On the other hand, only in the book of Zechariah, the Babylonian names of the months are mentioned (1:7; 7:1).

Therefore, Wilhelm Rudolph has presumed that at first only the book of Zechariah was set in a chronological framework and that the pupils of the prophet Haggai copied this type of framework, when they edited the words of the prophet.3 Following Rudolph, they wanted to emphasize the priority of Haggai and therefore they inserted in his message earlier dates than those given in the book of Zechariah. Thus, according to Rudolph, not one common redactor was responsible for the dating system in both books, but one book was redacted according to the other.

The opposite view was held by Rex Mason.4 Without any further explanations, Mason once supposed that the chronological framework in the book of Zechariah was redacted according to the book of Haggai.

More complicated models were presented by Albertz and Lux. Both assume that the books of Haggai and Zechariah were combined in a two-step redaction. Following Albertz, at first the dating system in the book of Haggai was inserted together with Zech 8:9–13. In a second step, the chronological framework was added to the book of Zechariah together with Hag 2:5a.5 Lux also presumes that the same redactors are responsible for both, the dating system in the book of Haggai and for Zech 8:9–13.6 But in his view, the same hand also implemented the dates in Zech 1:7; 7:1, whereas a second redaction is responsible for Zech 1:1–6 and 7:7–14.

In contrast to all the other positions, John Kessler totally denies the existence of a Haggai-Zechariah corpus.7 In his opinion, the similarities between the chronological framework in the book of Haggai and in the book of Zechariah go back to literary conventions of the early post-exilic time.

This short survey of the scholarly work in the last century shows that the literary connection between the books of Haggai and Zechariah is not without controversy. Even the existence of a Haggai-Zechariah corpus has been denied. And among those scholars taking such a corpus for granted, there is no definite position to whether one and the same redactor is responsible for the common features in both books or if one book has been redacted according to the other. Additionally, the intention of the Haggai-Zechariah corpus has up to now only been defined inadequately.

There is only one way to move beyond the results of the previous scholarly work, the formation of each book has to be examined separately. Against this background, it is possible to ask on which redactional level the chronological framework was inserted into the particular book. Afterwards, the redaction responsible for the dates in one book can be compared with the redaction responsible for the dates in the other. And furthermore it can be asked, whether both redactions originate from the same author or, if one book has been redacted according to the other.

2. The formation of the Books of Haggai and Zechariah

A new redaction critical analysis of the books of Haggai and Zechariah, which can not be presented in detail,8 leads to the conclusion that both, the chronological framework in the book of Haggai and the chronological framework in the book of Zechariah were inserted in the particular book in the course of a redaction.

According to the proposed formation of the book of Haggai, the primary layer of this book consists of the verses Hag 1:2, 4–11, 12b, 13; 2:3, 4*(without יהושע …הכהן הגדול וחזק‎ in the verse), 5aβb, 9, 15–16, 18aβb, 19, 23. In these words the people, and in Hag 2:4, 23 also Zerubbabel, are summoned to build the temple in order to avert the bad economic circumstances of their time. Only if the people react to the demands of the prophet, will Yhwh give new blessing and the land will prosper again.

This primary layer underwent a redaction, which, according to Hans-Walter Wolff, can be called Haggai-Chronicle.9 In the course of this redaction, the verses Hag 1:1, 3, 12a, 14–15; 2:1–2, 4*, 10, 20, 21a have been added. Thus, on the level of the Haggai-Chronicle, the chronological framework has also been implemented into the book.

The verses added by the Haggai-Chronicle differ from the primary layer of the book in several aspects.10 In the primary layer, besides Zerubbabel in 2:4, 23, the people are the only addressee. However, in the Haggai-Chronicle, the words are addressed to the people and to Zerubbabel, the governor, and to Joshua, the High Priest. Haggai 1 is especially remarkable. Whereas the prophetic words in this chapter are addressed to the people as a whole, in the introductory verse Hag 1:1 only Zerubbabel and Joshua are mentioned. Furthermore, it is notable that Zerubbabel is called “governor” (פחה‎) within the Haggai-Chronicle (1:1, 14; 2:2, 21). But in the only two passages where Zerubbabel is mentioned within the prophetic words of the book, the title “governor” is missing (2:4, 23). Additionally, the words of the prophet are introduced in the Haggai-Chronicle with the messenger formula כה אמר יהוה‎, but in the primary parts of the book of Haggai with the formula היה דבר יהוה‎. Finally, the people are called שארית העם‎ in the Haggai-Chronicle (Hag 1:12a, 14; 2:2), but העם הזה‎ (1:2) and כל־עם הארץ‎ (2:4) in the primary layer.

The Haggai-Chronicle rearranges the words of the primary layer, in which the refusal of the people to build the temple is accused, to a narrative report, which describes how the people—despite their initial reservations—obeyed the prophet and built the temple. The text in Hag 1:12–14 mentions that the people listen to the prophet and start the work following the first words of the prophet in Hag 1:1–11. The words of Haggai 2 can now be understood in a way that the first delays of work on the temple were prevented by the prophet:

      1:1, 3 1st day of the 6th month
         
1:2-13* Initial Refusal  
         
    1:12a, 14 Start of the Works
    1:15 24th day of the 6th month
         
    2:1-2, 4* 21st day of the 7th month
         
2:3-9* Delays  
         
    2:10 24th day of the 9th month
         
2:15-19* Foundation of the Temple  
         
    2:20, 21a 24th day of the 9th month
         
2:23 Promise to Zerubbabel  

Furthermore, a kind of antimonarchic tendency can be detected within the Haggai-Chronicle.11 The primary-layer states in Hag 2:23 that Zerubbabel, the grandson of King Jojachin, will be the “signet ring” of Yhwh. That means, the condemnation of the Davidic monarchy, predicted in Jer 22:24, will be annulled.12 However, within the framework of the Haggai-Chronicle Zerubbabel is just characterised as “governor” (פחה‎; 1:1, 14; 2:2, 21), while the Persian King Darius is with ostentation called “the king” (המלך‎; 1:1, 15).

According to the proposed formation of the book of Zechariah, the primary parts of this book include on the one hand the seven night visions in 1:8–14aα, 17aβb; 2:1–9; 4:1–6aα, 10a*(from שבעה־אלה‎)b, 11, 13–14; 5:1–11; 6:1–8, and on the other hand the three—originally connected—narrative reports in 4:6aβ–9a, 10a*(until זרבבל‎ just before “these seven”); 6:9–13*; 7:2–6; 8:18–19a. Thereby, the night visions are all unconditioned words of salvation, in which judgment on the nations is announced (1:8–17*; 2:1–9; 6:1–8), a new leadership for the people is awaited (4:1–14*) and the removal of cultic and social misdeeds is predicted (5:1–11).

In the redactional process of the book of Zechariah, on a first level a redactor has put the night visions and the narrative reports together. On a second redactional level, words concerning the high priest Joshua in Zech 3:1–8; 6:9–14*13 have been implemented into the book. And on the next level, the dating system has been added in 1:1, 7; 7:1, together with the words in 1:2–6, 14aβ–17aα; 2:10–14; 4:9b; 6:15; 7:1, 7, 9–14; 8:1–5, 7–8, 14–17, 19b. According to the fact that these redactions added several prophetic words to the book of Zechariah, it can be called Word-Redaction.

The intention of the Word-Redaction can best be seen in Zech 1:1–7, 14–17:

1. In the eighth month, in the second year of Darius, the word of Yhwh came to the prophet Zechariah, son of Berechiah, son of Iddo:

2. Yhwh was very angry with your ancestors.

3. Therefore speak to them: Thus says Yhwh of hosts: Return to me (שובו‎), oracle of Yhwh of hosts, and I will return to you (ואשוב‎), says Yhwh of hosts.

4. Do not be like your ancestors, to whom the earlier prophets proclaimed: Thus says Yhwh of hosts: Return from your evil ways and from your evil deeds. But they did not listen or heed me, oracle of Yhwh.

5. Your ancestors, where are they? And the prophets, do they live forever?

6. But my words and my statutes, which I commanded my servants the prophets, did they not overtake your ancestors? So they returned (וישובו‎) and said: Yhwh of hosts has dealt with us according to our ways and deeds, just as he planned to do.

7. On the twenty-fourth day of the eleventh month, the month of Shebat, in the second year of Darius, the word of Yhwh came to the prophet Zechariah, son of Berechiah, son of Iddo, and Zechariah said:

[First night vision]

14. … Thus says Yhwh of hosts: I am jealous for Jerusalem and for Zion with great jealousy.

15. And I am very angry against the nations who are at ease: for while I was only a little angry, they furthered the disaster.

16. Therefore thus says Yhwh: I have returned (שבתי‎) to Jerusalem with compassion: my house shall be built in it, oracle of Yhwh of hosts, and a line shall be stretched out over Jerusalem.

17. Cry again: Thus says Yhwh of hosts: My cities shall again overflow with prosperity …

In Zech 1:1–7, and that means even before the first night vision in Zech 1:8ff., divine support is linked to human repentance. According to Zech 1:3, only if the people are willing to return to Yhwh, will Yhwh return to the people. Consequently, after the notice in Zech 1:6 that the people returned to Yhwh, it is mentioned in Zech 1:15–16 that Yhwh returned to the people, and that the temple is now built in Jerusalem and the wrath of Yhwh is directed against the nations.14 This means that due to the new introduction in Zech 1:1–6 and the subsequent words of the Word-Redaction, the formerly unconditioned night visions of the book of Zechariah are made dependent on the repentance of the people.

This is similar to the redactional parts implemented by the Word-Redaction in the Question about Fasting in Zech 7–8. In Zech 7:7–14, the people are once more forced to remember the former generation and summoned to repent. Thereby, repentance is specified as committing social justice. Based on this advice, divine support is promised again in Zech 8:1–8, and the Word-Redaction ends with a further retrospect in Zech 8:14–15 and one more advice in Zech 8:16–19*. Considering the date in Zech 7:1, where the Question about Fasting is set in the fourth year of Darius, i.e. two years after the night visions, the intention of the Word-Redaction in Zech 7–8 becomes obvious, repentance was not only required in the year work began on the temple, but also in the time after.

The Word-Redaction thus adds a new frame around the existing book of Zechariah and thereby sets the previously unconditioned promises of the night visions under the condition of ongoing repentance:15

1:1 Dating   7:1 Dating
 
1:2-6 Retrospection + Demands   7:7-14* Retrospection + Demands
 
1:14- 2:14* New Support   8:1-8* New Support
 
    8:14-15 Retrospection
 
    8:16-17, 19b Demands
 
  1. NV   2. NV   4.-8. NV   Fasting   Fasting  

It follows from the above that the dating system in the book of Haggai goes back to a redaction called Haggai-Chronicle, the dating system in the book of Zechariah to a redaction called Word-Redaction. These redactions can be summed up as follows:

The Haggai-Chronicle 1:1, 3, 12a, 14-15
2:1-2, 4*, 10, 20, 21
The Word-Redaction 1:1-7, 14aβ-17aα
2:10-14
4:9b
6:15
7:1, 7, 9-14
8:1-5, 7-8, 14-17, 19b

3. The Formation of the Haggai-Zechariah Corpus

On the basis of the redaction critical analysis of the book of Haggai and the book of Zechariah, it can now be asked, if the dating system in both books was implemented by the same or by different redactors.16 The Haggai-Chronicle, responsible for the datings in Haggai, and the Word-Redaction, responsible for the datings in Zechariah, are quite different in form and content. On the formal level, the additions of the Haggai-Chronicle are mainly restricted to the narrative framework. The Word-Redaction, however, also implemented prophetic words in the book of Zechariah. In Zech 1–2 and 7–8 several small sermons were added, in which the people are summoned to repent and in which promises, concerning the future of the people, are cited.17

More significant are the differences concerning the content of the Haggai-Chronicle and the Word-Redaction of the book of Zechariah. In the narrative framework of the book of Haggai, Zerubbabel and Joshua are addressed. Thereby, the description of Zerubbabel as governor could be understood as a degradation of this member of the Davidic family. However, neither is Zerubbabel mentioned in the additions of the Word-Redaction, nor can a kind of antimonarchic tendency be found in these additions.

Still one more difference is important, according to Hag 1:12a, 14, added by the redactors of the Haggai-Chronicle, the repentance of the people consists in the rebuilding of the second temple. The rebuilding of the temple is the essential deed, with which the people show their willingness to return to Yhwh and to which Yhwh will react and give new blessing. According to the Word-Redaction of the book of Zechariah, however, the repentance of the people has to precede the rebuilding of the temple. Thus, in Zech 1:6 the repentance of the people is stated and on this background it is told in 1:16 that Yhwh returned to the people and that the temple is built in Jerusalem. What repentance means according to the Word-Redaction, is shown in the additions to the Question about Fasting. Real repentance consists in committing social justice. The people have to stand up for the widow, the fatherless, the poor, and the stranger, and they shall not plan evil against their brothers (Zech 7:10). Therefore, according to the Word-Redaction, the rebuilding of the temple has no value for its own sake. The rebuilding of the temple does not lead to the new support of Yhwh, as in the Haggai-Chronicle. On the contrary, the new support of Yhwh enables the rebuilding of the temple. And this support is the result of the—ethical—repentance of the people.

Thus, against Klostermann and all the others, who followed his thesis,18 the dating system in the book of Haggai and the dating system in the book of Zechariah can not be traced back to one and the same redactor. However, as there is no other book in the Hebrew Bible with a comparable dating system, the similarities between the frameworks of these two books make it very unlikely that they were, as John Kessler presumes, formulated completely independent from each other. Therefore, the most probable assumption is that one book was redacted according to the other.

In all probability, the Word-Redaction of the book of Zechariah is responsible for the combination of the books of Haggai and Zechariah.19 For the dates given by this redaction in the chronological framework of the book of Zechariah can well be understood as a secondary reference to the book of Haggai:

Hag 1:1–11

1st day of the 6th month, 2nd year

Initial Refusal

Hag 1:12–15

24th day of the 6th month, 2nd year

Start of the Works

Hag 2:1–9*

21st day of the 7th month, 2nd year

Delays

Hag 2:10–19*

24th day of the 9th month, 2nd year

Foundation of the Temple

Hag 2:20–23*

24th day of the 9th month, 2nd year

Promise to Zerubbabel

Zech 1:1–6

8th month, 2nd year

Call to repentance

Zech 1:7–6:15*

24th day of the 11th month, 2nd year

The Night Visions

Zech 7:1–8:19*

4th day of the 9th month, 4th year

The Question about Fasting

The call to repentance in Zech 1:1–6 is dated in the eighth month of the second year of Darius. This means that this message is set in the time of Haggai, and exactly in the time before the foundation of the second temple in the ninth month (Hag 2:10). Thus, the dating in Zech 1:1 can indeed be understood as a secondary reference to the dating system of the book of Haggai.20 The Word-Redaction wanted to set the first word of the book of Zechariah in 1:1–6 in the time before the foundation of the temple, as it is mentioned in Hag 2:10. The opposite view that the words of Haggai were arranged around the time of the call to repentance in Zech 1:1–6, can hardly be explained. Rudolph, who presupposed that the framework of the book of Haggai was formulated according to the framework of the book of Zechariah in order to pronounce the priority of the prophet Haggai,21 has overlooked one important fact; not all the dates in the book of Haggai are prior to those of the book of Zechariah. In the time directly before the rebuilding of the second temple, the date of Zech 1:1 is prior to that of Hag 2:10.

4. The Intention of the Haggai-Zechariah Corpus

According to Zech 1:1–6, the subsequent message of the book of Zechariah is conditioned by the willingness of the people to repent. But if the above mentioned reflections about the existence of a Haggai-Zechariah corpus are correct, the call to repentance in Zech 1:1–6 does not only refer to the subsequent message of the book of Zechariah, but also to the book of Haggai. For this call to repentance is set in the time before the foundation of the temple, mentioned in Hag 2:10. That means that the foundation of the temple was provided not only and mainly by the summons to start the work of the prophet Haggai but by the call to repentance of the prophet Zechariah.

With this concept, the Word-Redaction corrects the theology of repentance of the book of Haggai. According to the message of the book of Haggai, the rebuilding of the temple was sufficient to affect Yhwh so that he would return to the people and give new blessing. For the redactors of the Word-Redaction, such a reduction of repentance solely to the rebuilding of the temple was apparently not enough. They emphasized that the foundation of the sanctuary in the ninth month was only possible because the people had listened to the words of the prophet Zechariah in the month before.22

Thus, the Word-Redaction determines the relationship between human repentance and divine support in a new way. In the line of the dtr. tradition—like in the speech in the temple in Jer 723—the temple has no value for its own sake. The temple does not guarantee the support of Yhwh. At the most, it symbolises the support of Yhwh. But this support is set under the condition of human repentance.

This theology of repentance is once more illustrated by the Word-Redaction in the additions to the Question about Fasting in Zech 7–8. As mentioned before, the Word-Redaction now demonstrates that repentance consists in committing social justice. And according to the dating of Zech 7:1 in the fourth year of Darius, the Word-Redaction shows that repentance is not a single act. Also two years after the beginning of the work on the temple, repentance was necessary. This can be taken as another correction of the theology of repentance in the book of Haggai. For once again, the one-sided view on the rebuilding of the temple is corrected. The demand for social justice persists and will continue to be the condition of divine support.24

The question remains, why the redactors of the Word-Redaction developed their theology of repentance by taking up the books of Haggai and Zechariah. A summons to repent could have been formulated much easier in a separate work. Therefore, one observation is important which has been overlooked so far. Within the words of salvation in Zech 8:1–5, 7–8 a change from past tense to future tense forms can be detected. While in Zech 8:1–3 present salvation is mentioned, in Zech 8:4–5, 7–8 outstanding hopes are described:

1. The word of Yhwh of hosts came as follows:

2. Thus says Yhwh of hosts: I have been jealous (קנאתי‎) for Zion with great jealousy, with great fury, I have been jealous (קנאתי‎) for her.

3. Thus says Yhwh: I have returned (שבתי‎) to Zion and I live (ושכנתי‎)25 in the midst of Jerusalem. And Jerusalem is called (ונקראה‎) the Faithful City and the mountain of Yhwh of hosts, the Holy Mountain.

4. Thus says Yhwh: Old men and old women will again sit (ישבו‎) in the places of Jerusalem, each with a stick in his hand because of great age.

5. And the places of the city will be full (ימלאו‎) of boys and girls playing in its places.

7. Thus says Yhwh of hosts: Look, I rescue (הנני מושיע‎) my people from the countries of the east and from the countries of the west.

8. I will bring them back (והבאתי‎) and they will live (ושכנו‎) in the midst of Jerusalem. They will be (והיו‎) my people and I will be (אהיה‎) their God, in truth and in righteousness.

Following these words, the expectations concerning the Zion have come true. Yhwh has returned to Zion and the mount of the temple is a holy mountain again. The hope for a new presence of Yhwh in Jerusalem, which led to the rebuilding of the temple, seems to be fulfilled. But according to Zech 8:4–5, 7–8, the people are still suffering from low population, parts of the people still live in the diaspora and need to be saved.

Thus, in Zech 8:1–5, 7–8, the promises of the books of Haggai and Zechariah are divided in those that have been fulfilled, and those that have not been fulfilled. Thereby, the presence of Yhwh in Jerusalem, expected in Hag 1:8; 2:5 and Zech 2:9, has come true. However the growth of population, predicted in Zech 2:8, the return of the exiles, promised in Zech 2:10–14, and in this context rescue from the hands of the nations, expected in Zech 1:8–14; 2:1–4; 6:1–8, have not been realised.

Against this background, the further demands at the end of the Haggai-Zechariah corpus in Zech 8:14–19 can be understood in a way that they define the conditions that have to be met for the fulfillment of not yet realised hopes. The fulfillment of these hopes is set under the condition of repentance.26

The Word-Redaction thus reacts to the question of why only parts of the promises of the early post-exilic prophecy have been realised.27 It is emphasized in Zech 1:1–7, 14–17* that already the current salvation—the rebuilding of the temple and the presence of Yhwh in Jerusalem—was only possible, because the people had returned to Yhwh. And it is declared that any further salvation will depend on the ongoing willingness of the people to repent and to keep social justice. This means that the Word-Redaction wants to adhere to the promises of the early post-exilic time. But in order to adhere to theses promises, the conditions for their fulfillment have to be defined.

The formation of the Haggai-Zechariah corpus can be understood as a reaction to the disappointed hopes in the later post-exilic time, probably in the fifth century, when numerous revolts occurred in the Persian empire, when the economic conditions of the people were bad, and when the population was alarmingly low.28 Against the background of this time, the Haggai-Zechariah corpus can be read—on a synchronic level—as a reflection upon the conditions of divine salvation. Read as a whole, the Haggai-Zechariah corpus gives the promises of this time and states the importance of human repentance for their fulfillment. Thus, the Haggai-Zechariah corpus demonstrates the relationship of human repentance and divine support.

[1] A. Klostermann, Geschichte des Volkes Israel. Bis zur Restauration unter Esra und Nehemia (München: Beck, 1896), 213.

[2] Cf. for example P. R. Ackroyd, “The Book of Haggai and Zechariah I–VIII,” JJS 3 (1952), 152; W. A. M. Beuken, Haggai-Sacharja 1–8. Studien zur Überlieferungsgeschichte der frühnachexilischen Prophetie (SSN 10; Assen: van Gorcum, 1967), 331–336; R. J. Coggins, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi (OTG; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1987), 26–27; C. L. Meyers and E. M. Meyers, Haggai, Zechariah 1–8. A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 25B; New York: Doubleday, 1987), xliv–xlviii; J. Nogalski, Literary Precursors to the Book of the Twelve (BZAW 217; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1993), 256; J. E. Tollington, Tradition and Innovation in Haggai and Zechariah 1–8 (JSOTSup 150; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993), 11–47; P. L. Redditt, Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi (NCBC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995), 12.42–43; T. Pola, Das Priestertum bei Sacharja. Historische und traditionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen zur frühnachexilischen Herrschererwartung (FAT 35; Tübingen: Mohr, 2003), 40–42.

[3] W. Rudolph, Haggai – Sacharja 1–8 – Sacharja 9–14 – Maleachi (KAT 13,4; Gütersloh: Gütersloher, 1976), 46–47.

[4] R. Mason, “The Purpose of the ‘Editorial Framework’ of the Book of Haggai,” VT 27 (1977), 421. However, the statements of Mason are inconsistent. For in The Books of Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi (CNEB; Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1977), 29, he mentions that the redaction of the book of Haggai and the redaction of the book of Zechariah are comparable, and idem, 34, he seems to presuppose that both books underwent the same redaction.

[5] R. Albertz, Religionsgeschichte Israels in alttestamentlicher Zeit (2 vols.; GAT 8/1–2; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 21997), 484.

[6] R. Lux, “Das Zweiprophetenbuch. Beobachtungen zu Aufbau und Struktur von Haggai und Sacharja 1–8,” in “Wort JHWHs, das geschah ...” (Hos 1,1). Studien zum Zwölfprophetenbuch, ed. E. Zenger (HBS 35; Freiburg: Herder, 2002), 191–213.

[7] J. Kessler, The Book of Haggai. Prophecy and Society in Early Persian Yehud (VTSup. 91; Leiden: Brill, 2002), 56–57.

[8] Cf. J. Wöhrle, Die frühen Sammlungen des Zwölfprophetenbuches. Entstehung und Komposition (BZAW 360; Berlin: de Gruyter, 2006), 288–366.

[9] H. W. Wolff, Dodekapropheton 6. Haggai (BKAT 14,6; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 1986), 4.

[10] For the following cf. P. R. Ackroyd, “Studies in the Book of Haggai,” JJS 2 (1950–51), 169–170; Wolff, Haggai, 3–6; Tollington, Tradition, 19–23; H. Graf Reventlow, Die Propheten Haggai, Sacharja und Maleachi (ATD 25,2; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1993), 6. These differences have been overlooked by M. H. Floyd, “The Nature of the Narrative and the Evidence of Redaction in Haggai,” VT 45 (1995), 481–482; Kessler, Haggai , 53; Pola, Priestertum , 41–42, who mentioned that it would not be possible to differentiate between two different redactional layers—the words of the prophet and the narrative framework—in the book of Haggai.

[11] Cf. Mason, “Purpose,” 417; Albertz, Religionsgeschichte , 484; J. E. Tollington, “Readings in Haggai: From the Prophet to the Completed Book, a Changing Message in Changing Times,” in The Crisis of Israelite Religion. Transformation of Religious Tradition in Exilic and Post Exilic Times , ed. B. Becking and M. C. A. Korpel (OtSt 42; Leiden: Brill, 1999), 194–208.

[12] Cf. e.g. G. Sauer, “Serubbabel in der Sicht Haggais und Sacharjas,” in Das ferne und das nahe Wort, ed. F. Maass (FS L. Rost; BZAW 105; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1967), 204; K. Seybold, “Die Königserwartung bei den Propheten Haggai und Sacharja,” in Studien zum Messiasbild im Alten Testament, ed. U. Struppe (SBAB 6; Stuttgart: Kath. Bibelwerk, 1989), 245; Reventlow, Propheten , 30–31.

[13] For a detailed analysis on Zech 6:9–15 cf. Wöhrle, Sammlungen , 342–346.

[14] Cf. Meyers and Meyers, Haggai , 123.

[15] Already R. Mason, “Some Echoes of the Preaching in the Second Temple? Tradition Elements in Zechariah 1–8,” ZAW 96 (1984), 231, has mentioned regarding the addition in Zech 7:7–14: “As so often in preaching, the indicative has given way to the imperative or, rather, the cohortative.”

[16] Cf. for the following Wöhrle, Sammlungen , 367–374.

[17] Astonishingly enough, this has never been recognized. Although the previous work on the formation of the books of Haggai and Zechariah led to slightly different results as the above mentioned, it could have been noticed that the redaction responsible for the datings in the book of Zechariah also implemented some prophetic words, whereas the redaction in the book of Zechariah is mainly restricted to the framework of this book; cf. for example Beuken, Haggai-Sacharja , 331–336; Tollington, Tradition , 23.47; Redditt, Haggai, 42–43.

[18] See above note 2.

[19] Up to now, only Mason presumed that the book of Zechariah was redacted according to the book of Haggai, see above note 4. However, Mason did not give any reasons for his thesis, and in another publication he mentioned that the dating system of the book of Haggai and the dating system of the book of Zechariah were implemented by the same redaction.

[20] Also R. G. Kratz, Das Judentum im Zeitalter des Zweiten Tempels (FAT 42; Tübingen: Mohr, 2004), 68, recognized that the date in Zech 1:1 is set in the time before the date given in Hag 2:10. However, Kratz did not presume that Zech 1:1 can be taken as a secondary reference to the book of Haggai. He rather held the thesis that the book of Haggai originally ended in Hag 2:9 and that Zech 1:1 followed directly upon Hag 2:9. But as there is no reason to suppose that the whole range of Hag 2:10–23 is secondary, the thesis presented in this article seems to be more likely.

[21] See above note 3.

[22] Cf. Lux, “Zweiprophetenbuch,” 212, with regard to Zech 1:1–6: “Für den spätdeuteronomistischen Redaktor war es demnach nicht allein und noch nicht einmal vorrangig die Tatsache der Grundsteinlegung zum Tempel, die die Wende von der Unheilsgeschichte zur Heilsgeschichte herbeiführte, sondern die erfolgreiche prophetische Umkehrpredigt Sacharjas.”

[23] Cf. W. Thiel, Die deuteronomistische Redaktion von Jeremia 1–25 (WMANT 41; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 1973), 103–134; R. Albertz, Die Exilszeit. 6. Jahrhundert v. Chr. (Biblische Enzyklopädie 7; Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2001), 159–161.

[24] Cf. Lux, “Zweiprophetenbuch,” 213.

[25] For the durative meaning of w-qatal forms after a qatal form expressing a single act, cf. P. Joüon and T. Muraoka, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew (2 vols.; SubBi 14; Rome: Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 1991), §199v.

[26] Cf. Albertz, Religionsgeschichte , 484; Kratz, Judentum , 84.

[27] That the Word-Redaction reacts to unrealized promises can also be seen in Zech 2:13; 4:9; 6:15, where it is stated that the fulfillment of the promises mentioned there will confirm the prophet. That means, the credibility of the prophet was disputed and an answer was needed, why not all of his words had come true. For this interpretation of Zech 2:13; 4:9; 6:15 cf. Reventlow, Propheten , 49.

[28] Cf. H. Donner, Geschichte des Volkes Israel und seiner Nachbarn in Grundzügen (2 vols.; GAT 4/1–2; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 21995), 432; Albertz, Religionsgeschichte, 468–478.536–541.