Many Qur’an scholars contend that due to the process of canonizing the Qur’an several of its chapters (suras, sgl. sura) do not reflect deliberate composition. Such suras are viewed as an incoherent mosaic of juxtaposed text units that lack any logical or thematic interconnectedness. In a surface reading, Chapter Eleven of the Qur’an (surat Hud) would seem to belong to this category of suras. Nevertheless, by employing both textual and intertextual perspectives within a framework of structural analysis, the suggested study will argue that surat Hud is a coherent text with a unified thesis. Particular attention will be paid to “intra-Qur’anic referentiality” and in unison my analysis will be situated within the text’s initial literary tradition. However, in order to situate the analysis of surat Hud within the Qur’an’s initial literary tradition I shall, contrary to Andrew Rippin, consider the Qur’an as more than a unique reading of Biblical traditions. I propose, through examining surat Hud, that the Qur’an was not only responding to earlier Biblical and Apocryphal lore, but also thickened its own earlier texts, particularly narrative texts, as it expanded. Ultimately, the study will suggest that the several passages of surat Hud contribute to refuting the accusations of fabricating the revelations levelled against the prophet, chiefly, by means of asserting the authority of Qur’anic narratives over older Biblical and Apocryphal traditions.