Chapter 11 Nahum in the Book of the Twelve Daniel C. Timmer Here we survey, in roughly chronological order, recent compositional propos- als focused on the developing book of Nahum in relation to earlier stages of the Twelve before turning to holistic interpretations focused on Nahum in relation to the Twelve, each in essentially its final form. 1 The Development of Nahum and of the Book of the Twelve in Diachronic Perspective Although a few earlier studies postulated the interrelation of various books of the Twelve during their literary development, James Nogalski’s 1993 work broke new ground. His case for the formation of the corpus is based on the catchwords that link (especially adjoining) books. Some catchwords appear to be secondary additions, others may be original, and still others were perhaps part of “a pre-existing block of material specifically incorporated into a writing to further the interests of the Book of the Twelve.”1 On his view, Nahum entered the Twelve as part of the “Joel-related layer,” in which Joel, Obadiah, Nahum, Habakkuk, and Malachi were added to the exilic deuteronomistic corpus (Hosea, Amos, Micah, and Zephaniah) and the early post-exilic Haggai–Zechariah 1–8 corpus.2 Noting similarities between Nahum and Habakkuk involving their citations of Joel and their theophanic hymns, he suggests that “Nahum and Habakkuk entered the corpus of the Book of the Twelve simultaneously.”3 The Micah–Nahum link in the Masoretic order is evident in catchwords and redactions linking Micah 7 with Nahum 1,4 which presupposes the Micah text.5 Nahum 1 is also tied to Joel in various ways6 and to Jonah 4:2 via the reuse of Exod 34:6 in Nah 1:3.7 Finally, Nahum 3 1 Nogalski, Precursors, 13–15, further 21–57. 2 Nogalski, Processes, 274. 3 Nogalski, Processes, 181, 275–276. 4 Nogalski, Precursors, 39–40; idem, Processes, 110–111, 113–115. 5 Nogalski, Precursors, 170. 6 Nogalski, Processes, 116. 7 Nogalski, Processes, 116. © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2020 | doi:10.1163/9789004424326_013 Nahum 187 was influenced by, and influenced, the “Babylonian oracle and commentary” in Hab 1:12a*b, 15–17.8 Contrariwise, Ehud Ben Zvi stresses the historically and literarily discrete nature of the writings that constitute the Twelve. He argues that ancient read- ers would not have perceived the lexical links that Nogalski and others see con- necting the books;9 that the collection’s various orders belie the significance of the perceived links in the Masoretic tradition;10 that many lexical correspon- dences are merely coincidental;11 and that the incipits of the different writings identify them “as separate prophetic books.”12 He proposes that the Twelve is a “repertoire” of books with “a (largely) shared discourse, a common linguistic heritage, implied ‘intertextuality,’ and shared literary/ideological tendencies.”13 Klaas Spronk shares a similar view, recognizing the intertextual relationships between Nahum and other books in the Twelve but interpreting them as the re- sult of “one prophet influencing the other” rather than as “editorial activities.”14 In his 1997 Habilitationsschrift, Burkard M. Zapff identifies 2:4–3:19 as Nahum’s core.15 On his view, Nahum’s hymn (1:2–8) was added when Yhwh- theophany texts were also inserted in Amos (1:2) and Micah (1:3–6), at which point Nahum was integrated into the deuteronomistic Hosea–Amos–Micah– Zephaniah corpus, shifting the focus of Yhwh’s judgment from Israel and Judah to Assyria.16 This likely took place in the fifth or fourth century bce, but before the incorporation of Obadiah and Joel and before the linking of the D-corpus with Haggai–Zechariah 1–8.17 Contra Nogalski, Zapff argues that the catchwords linking Micah 7 to Nah 1:2–8 are evidence that Mic 7:8–20 used Nahum’s hymn (and not vice versa) in the Fortschreibung of Micah (ca. third century bce).18 Aaron Schart develops Nogalski’s argument that earlier forms of Nahum and Habakkuk (Heilsprophetie) entered the D-corpus simultaneously.19 After the subsequent addition of hymns to Nahum and then to Habakkuk as part of the hymn-layer, redactional “cross-linkages” in Nah 1:4b; 1:9b, and in Hab 2:20; 8 Nogalski, Processes, 143, 146–150. 9 Ben Zvi, “Twelve,” 129. 10 Ben Zvi, “Twelve,” 134. 11 Ben Zvi, “Twelve,” 135–37, 139–142. 12 Ben Zvi, “Twelve,” 137. 13 Ben Zvi, “Twelve,” 155. See further Ben Zvi and Nogalski, Two Sides. 14 Spronk, Nahum, 9. 15 Zapff, Studien, 256. 16 Zapff, Studien, 257–258. 17 Zapff, Studien, 258. 18 Zapff, Studien, 268–273, 292. 19 Schart, Entstehung, 234–247..