I’m going to continue my doubling up of the minor prophets for a bit, and see how that goes, especially as the pace is going to slacken when I hit the New Testament and get to go through the Gospels.
So the Book of Micah identifies itself as being the collection of the sayings of Micah, a Prophet living under the reign of Yehotam, Ahaz, and Heziak, kings of Judah is the period of 700-750 BCE. This was a period of Assyrian ascendancy and aggression against the Semitic kingdoms and during the middle part of this period, Judah had been reduced to series of vassalized city-states. Israel eventually rebelled and its capital of Samaria was destroyed as a result.
Micah has a potentially interesting compositional history. Without further evidence, most accept that the first several chapters are either written by the prophet or transcription of generally accepted sayings and prophecies. It is also held by scholars that the later portions are additions; reworkings of a prior set of prophecies in the post-exilic period. The prophet foretells of the destruction of the temple, though the wording of the prophecies seems to indicate soon, rather than in the centuries to come, as one example.
Thematically the book has similarities to other prophets; disobey God bad, Samaria was destroyed for its sins and failures to honour god, etc. Foretelling the rise of Israel and a return to glory once the people return to God. While hardly unique with regards the prophets, it does show us how the act of taking historical works and repurposing them to later function has an ancient pedigree. Just as Christians would later take various elements of the Hebrew bible and see in them evidence for their saviour, post-exilic priests could look to past prophecies for evidence both of divine power(i.e. Look, the prophet foretold this would happen! God is great!) and as apparatus for political control or motivation(i.e. Don’t turn away from God and the Priesthood! If you stay with us the Prophets say we will return to Glory!).
The book of Nahum has a less certain providence and authorship. From the text, we can date it to after the destruction of Themes in 663 BCE. It mentions the event and it seems unlikely the work could be written either. It draws on the destruction of Themes to talk of a more present act; the destruction of Nineveh, Capital of the Assyrian empire by the Babylonians. These place it at the end of the 7th century BCE.
Nahum is poetic about the coming destruction of the city and has a sort of schadenfreude with regards the Israelites enemies and conquerors impending destruction. The comparison with Themes is at once historical; so fall all tyrants and all great cities not beholden to God it seems to say. Those that brought us low are now brought low. Otherwise, there isn’t much to say about it. It’s poetic and draws strange metaphors and symbols. The author is at one point a seeming participant in a battle to defend the city for example.
Only five more minor prophets to go; Next up are Habakkuk and Zephaniah.