The Author. 

            There is no prophet of whom less can be affirmed with certainty  than   Habakkuk.    Not   only  do   we   know absolutely nothing about him personally, but dates as far apart as 701 and 330 B.C. have been proposed for him. This late date is based on subjective textual emendation and need not be considered here (See Young, p. 263; Rowley: The Growth of the Old Testament, p. 117.), but the remaining uncertainty springs directly from the book itself.

            The prophet begins (1:2ff) by complaining about the iniquity and oppression around him. Though it is not stated who the oppressor is, the most natural interpretation is that the prophet is complaining about internal troubles, about the social wrongdoing so often condemned by the prophets. God answers (1:5-11) by saying that He is doing something which none could anticipate or believe (ver. 5) in that He is on the point of raising up the Chaldeans (ver. 6; this is the force of the Hebrew), who will be God’s instruments of punishment.

        The prophet then remonstrates with God (1:12-17), asking how He in His purity can use impure instruments, especially when they are as bad as those they are to punish (cf. 1:13 with 1:3f). After some delay (2:1) God answers him, that in due course it will be seen that “the righteous shall live by his faithfulness, but those that are puffed up will perish (2:2-5). The fate of the Chaldeans is then depicted in five woes (2:6-20).

        In Habakkuk’s description of the behaviour of the Chal­deans there is no suggestion that we have to do with prophetic vision; it bears the stamp of being based on what he had heard of them, or even of what he had seen personally. As a result 1:12-17 and 2:6-20 can hardly be earlier than 612 B.C., the year of Nineveh’s fall, and they may be even later than 605 B.C., when Nebuchadnezzar defeated Pharaoh Necho at Carchemish. In contrast 1:5-11 can be given its obvious meaning only if it is dated at the latest shortly after 626 B.C., when Babylon recovered its independence under Nabopolassar the Chaldean.

        If we leave to one side suggestions that have met with little approval, we find that scholars are divided between four different solutions of the difficulty: (See HDB, article Habakkuk; ISBE, article Habakkuk.)

        1. 1:5-11 are not really a prediction, but “the prophet throws himself dramatically into the past” (Lanchester: Nahum, Habakkuk and Zephaniah (C.B). ad loc.).

        2. 1:5-11 should be placed before 1:2; they are the oldest part of the book and are possibly quoted by Habakkuk from an earlier prophet. Then 1:2ff and 1:12-17 form a con­tinuous passage of complaint against the Chaldeans, there being no mention of unrighteous Israelites.

        3. 1:5-11 should be placed after 2:4. Then 1:2ff repre­sents a complaint against the oppression of Judah by the Assyrians, or perhaps the Egyptians; the prophet appeals to Jehovah (1:12-17); Jehovah promises deliverance (2:1-4) through the Chaldeans (1:5-11), then follow five woes against the oppressor, whether Assyrians or Egyptians. (It is on the basis of this view that a date as early as 701 B.C. had been suggested for the prophecy.).

        4. The simplest explanation, though not entirely free of difficulty, is to refuse to see a normal prophecy in Habakkuk. It is a record not of Habakkuk’s messages to the people but of his problems and God’s answers. We are not suggesting that he did not prophesy, but that here we have an account of the inner conflict behind his public utterances. If it is so, we may assume the passage of a considerable period of time between 1:5-11 and 1:12-17. In this case the book may well extend over a period from at least 626 to 605 B.C. This view is the basis of the following notes.