Most scholars agree that Haggai 1:15 contains a date formula that is unusual in its placement and form. Many have solved the issue by dividing the verse and attaching the second half (the year) to the following date (2:1, so also BHS). This division, however, may obscure an intentional literary structure. A close look at the textual evidence suggests that Haggai 1:15 likely concludes a chiasm spanning the entire chapter. The transition between 1:15 and the date in 2:1 also employs mirrored symmetry (i.e., chiastic structure) in the arrangement of its components. In these respects, Haggai 1:15 functions as a literary hinge between two larger units (1:1-15 and 2:1-9). By illuminating this literary structure, the difficulties surrounding this verse are explained and the correlation of Haggai’s ideas in 1:1-15 are sharpened, yielding a better reading of Haggai.
The paper will first survey the challenging elements of Haggai 1:15 and various proposed solutions found in both the major Greek uncials (via the use of ekthesis) and modern scholarship (e.g., Rothstein). Building on the suggestions that 1:15 forms an inclusio with 1:1(Verhoef, Meyers and Meyers), and a chiastic structure for 1:4-9 (Whedbee), I offer textual evidence that suggests a chiastic structure was intended to group the entire chapter. Lexical and thematic parallels throughout Haggai 1:1-15 display a set of concentric parallel units which center on the command to build the house (1:7-8). The unusual form and placement of Hag 1:15 was likely designed to serve two functions. As an inverted parallel to 1:1, it forms an inclusio and closes the chapter. Additionally, its components form another envelope structure with the date of 2:1 (resulting in a Day-Month-Year-Month-Day) pattern. In this position, Hag 1:15 functions as a hinge.
Literary structure often supports or conveys meaning. The chiastic structure of Haggai’s first chapter plainly confirms the unit limits and highlights the central command, namely, building YHWH’s house. The center also represents the turning point of action in the chapter as the people move from neglect to work. The structure of 1:15 and 2:1 exemplifies the efficiency and aesthetics of the transition, as the year serves both dates. Appreciating these structures, the reader is able to see that the peculiarities of 1:15 are less a problem than a feature of Haggai’s literary craft.