[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.