72 Lena-Sofia Tiemeyer From a structural point of view, the general structure of the section Hag 2.10-14 as a whole suggests that verse 14 is the culmination of the preceding inquiry. First, the occurrence of the root amf in both the inquiry (v. 13) and in the following prophetic oracle (v. 14) binds the two together. Second, the word ˆk (“thus”, v. 14) indicates a comparison with the previous material. Thus, Hag 2,14 is most likely the conclusion of the preceding inquiry (vv. 12- 13), and thus dependent on its content (18). This in turn renders the latter scenario the more plausible one: what we have here is a carefully crafted text where the prophet used the form of inquiry as a platform upon which to build his oracle (19). Hence, it is unlikely that Haggai approached the priests in search of knowledge. Instead, by asking rhetorical questions, he sought to bring a particular issue to light. Given this conclusion, it is further possible to detect a critical disposition towards the priests in Hag 2,10-14 as a whole. We know from other texts that the priests were responsible for teaching the laws of purity to the people as well as for ensuring that they were maintained (cf. Lev 22,15-16). Thus, I suggest that the involvement of the religious authorities in his argumentation was one way in which Haggai emphasized the clergy’s involvement and thus also their responsibility for the people’s current impurity (v. 14). 2. Priests in Ezek 44,15-31 Similarly to Hag 2,12-13, the earlier text of Ezek 44,15-31 focuses on the priests but without the critical tone of the former. On the contrary, the passage begins by lauding the Zadokite priests for serving faithfully in the sanctuary when the rest of the people of Israel fell away from God. Accordingly, the focal point of the oracle is the priests and their privileges and obligations. At the same time, there is, as in Hag 2,10-14, a concern for the people: the priests should take care lest they transfer their ritual status to anyone else (v. 19), and they are required to teach the people about things holy and profane, about impurity and purity (v. 23). On this basis, I propose seeing Ezek 44,15-31 as pre-emptive of the situation in Hag 2,10-14: the priests should endeavour both to teach the people about ritual issues to ensure that the people remain pure, and to make certain that they themselves do not convey their own ritual status to the people. 3. Priests in Lam 4,13-16 Lastly, the earliest text of the three — Lam 4,13-16 — is again critical of the priests. The lamenters identify the priests, alongside the prophets, as those —————— concerning the participation of the Samarians in the temple building), however, cannot be accepted. (18) Cf. KESSLER, Haggai, 201, 204. Yet not all scholars agree with this. BEUKEN, Haggai, 70, for example, opposes the idea that the prophet is interested in ritual issues. Instead, he argues that the torah given by the priests (vv. 12-13) functions merely as a link to the actual issue, being God’s authority. Beuken’s assumption concerning Haggai’s indifference towards ritual matters is, however, purely conjectural. Furthermore, his claim that the questions and answers in Hag 2,12-13 are merely a matter of determining God’s authority, without any significance for the following oracle in verse 14, is not convincing. (19) Cf. K. KOCH, “Haggais unreines Volk”, ZAW 79 (1967) 61.