Biblical Hebrew Forum

[peter_kirk AT SIL.ORG]

Dear Ian,

Thank you for your interesting comments on DSS, which were however not 
really relevant to my own posting. My own argument would be that the 
Kittim, whether Seleucids or Romans, would not have been the original 
referents of Habakkuk's prophecy. For I am assuming that Habakkuk's 
primary intended reference in 1:6 is to the Babylonians of 
Nebuchadnezzar's time. This would apply even if Habakkuk is dated 
along with other prophetical books in Hasmonean times; these are 
presented as referring to the Babylonian exile. We need to distinguish 
here between the literal referents in the story as presented by the 
prophet, who must surely be the real Babylonians, and any possible 
symbolic reference to the Seleucids. But the DSS commentary on 
Habakkuk takes a different perspective (reference time etc) and so 
uses different tenses.

Peter Kirk