The Old Testament is a collection of writings which came into being over a period of more than a thousand years in the history of the people of Israel and which reflect the life of the people in this period. Therefore, there is a reciprocal relationship between the writings or "books" of the Old Testament and the life of Israel in its history. The understanding of the texts presupposes insights into the historical context and the development of the life of Israelite society, while at the same time the texts themselves are the most important, indeed for the most part the only, source for it. This "Introduction" attempts to take account of this reciprocal relationship. The first part deals with the history of Israel. However, its approach differs from most accounts of this history. It takes the Old Testament texts themselves as a starting point and first of all outlines the picture of historical developments and associations which the texts present. An attempt is then made, on this basis, to reconstruct historical developments by introducing material from outside the Bible. This method of working leads to close connections between the second and third parts, because it has to take account of the nature and original purpose of the texts and their function within the biblical books as they are now. The second part attempts to present the texts collected in the Old Testament as expressions of the life of Israel. The third part discusses the books of the Old Testament in their present form.

In the mid-3rd century BC, King Ptolemy II Philadelphus of Egypt ordered a translation of the ancient Hebrew scriptures for the Library of Alexandria, which resulted in the creation of the Septuagint, as well as several other books of Jewish and Samaritan scriptures, including the Book of Enoch, Book of Job, Testaments of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and the Dodeka. The Dodeka was not part of the collection of texts the Jews fleeing Egypt carried with them from the Jewish Temple in Elephantine, and is therefore believed to have been translated into Greek later, circa 180 BC. It would eventually be added to the Septuagint as the Book of Dodeka circa 140 BC, and then much later be divided into its twelve constituent books by the early Christians in the 3rd-century AD, subsequently called the twelve minor prophets. The books comprising the Dodeka all date from between 900 and 500 BC, and represent the works of twelve ancient prophets, which in the original Greek translation, represented several different gods. These were not Jewish prophets, but Israelite prophets, mostly living the age before King Josiah banned the old gods, in approximately 625 BC. Most of the books in the Dodeka were written before King Josiah's reforms. The books of Hosea, Amos, and Micah are set during the 8th-century BC, when the kingdom of Samaria fought a series of wars against its more powerful northern neighbor Assyria, ultimately being conquered by the Neo-Assyrian Empire circa 722 BC. The books of Joel, Obadiah, and Jonah follow, although their exact settings are not clear. The books of Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah follow, set in the 7th-century BC, as the Kingdom of Judea struggled for its survival between the powers of the time, Assyria to the north, Egypt to the south, and Babylon to the east, ultimately falling to the Neo-Babylonian Empire circa 586 BC. There is a gap in the prophets during the era when Babylon ruled Judea, and they continue with the books of Haggai, and the first half of Zachariah, set in the late-6th-century, after the Persians have conquered the Babylonian Empire. Combining the various Elohim that are appear to have been the text the Greeks translated, including Shaddai (Shaddayin), On (Aven), Dagon, Tirath (Tirosh), Yitzhar, Reshef (Blight), Mot, Hades (Sheol), and Abaddon (Destruction), Ba'al Hadad, Ba'al Hammon, Qetesh Asherah, Sydyk, and Shemesh, it strongly suggests that the text was heavily edited in the Hasmonean era when Yahweh Sabaoth replaced Lord El. Unfortunately, the existing Dead Sea Scrolls shed little light on the situation as they date to the era the edits would have taken place, but are in the script that should only show the edited version. Nevertheless, they are so damaged almost none of the questions about the differences between the Dodeka and Masoretic Texts could be resolved, even if they were in the Canaanite script.

The oldest surviving physical copy of Esther is found in the Codex Vaticanus, which dates to circa 350 AD. The version of Ether in the Codex Vaticanus is generally accepted as being the original version added to the Septuagint sometime in the 2ⁿᵈ century BC, however, it claims to have not been translated in Alexandria, like the rest of the Septuagint. There are two other early copies of the common version of Esther found in the Codex Vaticanus, the copy in the Codex Sinaiticus from circa 350 AD, Codex Alexandrinus from circa 450 AD. The term ‘king of the gods’ is found in chapter 4 of the Vaticanus version of Esther, however, does not make sense in the theology that developed in later Judaism, in which there was only one God, indicating the early date of the original composition. The title ‘king of the gods’ was used by Esther in the book, who use the title to refer to the god of the Israelite. While Esther was described as being the Queen (or royal consort) in the texts, she was also described as being a devote worshiped of the Israelite god, and ‘King of the gods’ was not a Zoroastrian title of Ahura Mazda either, as Zoroastrianism was also monotheistic, meaning that this title has to be traced back to the Israelite religion.

The Book of Baruch was likely added to the Septuagint sometime before 165 BC, as it does not appear to have been influenced by the Hasmonean redaction found in the Masoretic Texts and the Dead Sea Scrolls. It was ignored entirely by Simon the Zealot, likely because there was no way to get around the fact that Baruch’s God was the Sun. While Baruch agrees with Jeremiah, that child sacrifice was wrong, they do not worship the same god. In his letter to the Moabites, Jeremiah refers to the god Baitylos (Βαιθηλ / בֵּ֥ית אֵ֖ל) as the god that the Israelites had put falsely their faith in, as the Moabites had placed their faith in Chomesh. This letter had to have been written after the destruction of Jerusalem, either in Judah, before the survivors took refuge in Egypt, or in Egypt. Based on the words of Jeremiah, in chapter 31 (Masoretic 48), it appears that Baitylos was the supreme god of the Samaritans before the Assyrians conquered them. However, Baruch, writing five years after the destruction of Jerusalem, praises Baitylos, and describes the Sun, which he then states is their God. This is the old religion that had been banned by Josiah. Baitylos is a variant of the name of the god Bethel, generally used to distinguish him from the town that Jacob named after him. Baitylos was widely worshiped in Canaan during the New Kingdom era, when Egypt ruled the land, and the centuries that followed. Shrines to Baitylos have been found at meteorite impact site across Canaan, Anatolia, and the Aegean, suggesting a widespread cult in the late-Bronze Age. The worship of Baitylos continued throughout the Phoenician territories even after the Romans had conquered them, and was denounced by the Christian theologian Augustine of Hippo in the early-5th century AD.

In the mid 3ʳᵈ century BC, King Ptolemy II Philadelphus of Egypt ordered a translation of the ancient Israelite scriptures for the Library of Alexandria. This translation later became known as the Septuagint, based on the description of the translation by seventy translators in the Letter of Aristeas. The four books of the Kingdoms are generally believed to have been written during the time of Ezra the scribe, compiled from the now-lost books of the Chronicles of the Kingdoms of Samaria and Judah. The authors of the Kingdoms repeatedly refer to the Chronicles as sources for more detailed information, suggesting the books of the Kingdoms were an abridged version and certainly written from a specific theological perspective missing from the Chronicles. There are loanwords in both the Greek and Hebrew translations of 3ʳᵈ Kingdoms that indicate the book, and presumably, all four of the Kingdoms were once written in Cuneiform, from which they were translated into Aramaic. The Aramaic translation appears to have been done in Babylonia, as it uses Mesopotamian terminology instead of Canaanite. This may indicate that the Kingdoms were originally compiled in Babylonia by Judahite captives, presumably from the Phoenician (Paleo-Hebrew) books of the Chronicles. The four books of the Kingdoms are believed to have been translated into Greek from the Aramaic text and added to the Septuagint around 200 BC when a large number of refugees fled from the war in Judea and settled in Egypt. The four books of the Kingdoms would later become two books in the Masoretic Texts, the books of Samuel and Kings. Subsequent Latin and English translations of the Masoretic Text labeled these books as 1ˢᵗ and 2ⁿᵈ Samuel, and 1ˢᵗ and 2ⁿᵈ Kings. The Septuagint’s 3ʳᵈ Kingdoms, is the book called 1ˢᵗ Kings in most Catholic and Protestant bibles, and 3ʳᵈ Kingdoms in Orthodox and Coptic bibles.

The Old Greek translation was the version originally in the Septuagint, however, the authenticity and accuracy of any and all versions of the Book of Daniel have always been in doubt. The Codex Chisianus (also known as the Chigi Manuscript 88) is accepted as being the closest to the Old Greek translation. It claims to be a copy of the Christian scholar Origen of Alexandria's recension from circa 240 AD, and as the Syriac translation of Origen's recension from 616 and 617 AD, the Syro-Hexaplar Codex, is virtually identical, they are both accepted as Origen's work. Origen rejected both the shorter version of Daniel found in the Hebrew and Aramaic translation that the Jews of his day were using, as well as Theodotion's translation, which was largely based on the Hebrew and Aramaic text, and claimed the Old Greek translation was the closest to the original text of Daniel. In 1931, a damaged papyrus from the 3rd-century AD was found, now known as Papyrus 967, which contains a Greek translation of Daniel that is similar to the Codex Chisianus and Syro-Hexaplar Codex's version of Daniel, but does not seem to be Origen's work, supporting his recension as being the 'Old Greek' version. While the content of the Codex Chisianus, Syro-Hexaplar Codex, and Papyrus 967 are essentially the same, Papyrus 967 deviates from the others by having Daniel's visions found in chapters 7 and 8 earlier in the book, before Masoretic chapter 5, likely moved due to confusion over the identities of the two kings named Belshazzar. This translation follows the oldest documented chapter structure of Daniel, starting with the chapter of Susanna, and incorporating the Old Greek versions of Masoretic chapters 7 and 8 earlier in the book, as found in Papyrus 967. Overall, Daniel may be one of the most abused of the ancient authors, as several authors appear to have added to or redacted his work during the Persian Era. The surviving copies of Daniel are such a mess that they are generally dismissed as a work of fiction by most secular historians that research them, as they do not correspond to any version of Babylonian, Median, and Persian history, although being set in the Neo-Babylonian and Early Persian Eras. Ironically, the early sections of the Book of Daniel could only have been written in the Neo-Babylonian and early Persian eras, as the redactions that took place to the earlier sections of text only make sense in the political reality of the Early-Persian Empire.

The origin of the Book of Judith has been debated for thousands of years, and is often assumed to have been written in Greek as anti-Hellenic propaganda during the Maccabean Revolt. It isn’t clear why an anti-Hellenic book would have been written in Greek by an Aramaic-speaking people, however, no ancient copies of it survive in Hebrew, Aramaic, or Phoenician (Samaritan / Judahite). There are Hebrew translations, however, they are dated to the middle ages, 1000 years after the oldest surviving copies of the Judith found in the Septuagint. The Greek translations are remarkably consistent compared to the radically different versions of the Book of Tobit in the surviving copies of the Septuagint. The name of the king in the book of Judith is named Nebuchadnezzar, which was the name of the king of Babylon, between 605 and 562 BC. However, other than the name of the king, no other elements of the story indicate the story originated with the Babylonians. Nebuchadnezzar did not fight the Medes, and could not have killed the king of Media, as the two countries were close allies at the time, and under King Cyaxares the Median Empire reached its peak. Nebuchadnezzar didn’t launch a war against the Elamites, who in fact fell under the control of Cyaxares’s Median Empire. As the name Nebuchadnezzar was used to replace Achiacharos (Αχιαχαρος) in the book of Tobit, when the Sinaiticus version was simplified into the Vaticanus version, it’s likely that the name Nebuchadnezzar was simply used to replaces an older name as well. There are several indicators in the book that point to the original king being Ashurbanipal, the king of Assyria between 668 and 627 BC. Ashurbanipal did fight two wars against Elam, and virtually annihilated the Elamites in the second war. Ashurbanipal also invaded Media, and during the fighting the Median king Phraortes was killed, allowing Ashurbanipal to claim victory, even though he didn’t consolidate his victory and integrate Media back into the Assyrian Empire. When Ashurbanipal had launched the invasion of Media, in his 17ᵗʰ year, he ordered the local kings from across his empire to send troops to the war, but almost all refused, which was a general insurrection. Therefore, while committed to the war against Media, after defeating the Medians, he was eager to return to Assyria, and restore order to his empire.

The Book of Habakkuk is generally considered one of the older surviving books of the Hebrew Scriptures, with most scholars dating it to before the Torah was written, or at least heavily redacted in the time of King Josiah. Most scholars accept that Habakkuk was written by a prophet called Habakkuk around 612 BC, however, virtually nothing is known about him. He was also in the Septuagint's Book of Daniel, however, was cut from the Masoretic version. In the Septuagint's Book of Daniel, Habakkuk was carried by an angel to Babylon to help Daniel, which, although the text was cut from the Masoretic version has influenced the view of Habakkuk's life. His world was very different from the later Kingdom of Judea that emerged in the 2nd-century BC, as the Israelites of his time were still polytheistic, worshiping the Canaanite gods, as well as statues of Iaw (Masoretic Yahweh), the God the Jews and Samaritans would later worship. The Book of Habakkuk is considered unique among the books of the bible, as Habakkuk openly questions his Lord's actions, which in the Masoretic version of the book, means he is questioning God. In the Septuagint's version, his Lord was differentiated from God, and prior to the Hasmonean redaction, appears to have been Qetesh, which was the title of Asherah, the wife of El and mother of Yahweh in the early Israelite religion. Habakkuk describes the rise of the Chaldeans, who, at the time ruled Babylon, and this is accepted as a reference to the rise of the Neo-Babylonian Empire. The Neo-Babylonian empire rose as the Neo-Assyrian empire collapsed, beginning with the revolt of Babylon in 626 BC, and the coronation of Nabopolassar as the king of independent Babylon. In 612 BC, the combined forces of Babylon, the Persians, Medes, and Scythians laid waste to Nineveh, effectively ending the Neo-Assyrian Empire. This is the era that Habakkuk's life is generally dated to, as the Chaldeans (Babylon) was rising, however, this is not the only era suggested. The battles between the Babylonians and the remnants of the Assyrian forces, continued until the Babylonians captured Haran in 609 BC, and their war against the Assyrians ally, Egypt, continued until the Battle of Carchemish in 605 BC when the Babylonians effectively defeated the Egyptians. After 605 BC, the Babylonians dominated Mesopotamia, Syria, and Samaria as far south as the border of Egypt, while the small Kingdom of Judah remained effectively landlocked between Babylonian-occupied Samaria, Amman, Moab, and Edom. In the decades that followed, the Babylonians occupied these smaller kingdoms, destroying the city of Jerusalem in 587 BC, and took the leaders of Judah to Babylonia, where they remained until the Neo-Babylonian empire fell to the Persians decades later.

The story of the Voyage of Wenamen, also called the Report of Wenamen, or the Misadventures of Wenamen, is considered one of the earliest surviving adventure tales. Unlike many of their neighboring cultures, the Egyptians did not write historical narratives, the text must have started as an autobiography of Wenamen circa 1065 BC. The one partially surviving copy appears to have been excerpted from the original autobiography, copied for one of the Meshwesh (Berber) Pharaohs that ruled the late 21ˢᵗ Dynasty after Osorkon the Elder seized the throne in 992 BC. It appears as if only the sections about Canaan were copied, which suggests the Pharaoh in question was looking for information on Canaan, likely as a prelude to an invasion. The surviving text includes the beginning of Wenamen's voyage, but not the beginning of his biography, which would have included his titles and honors and the story of how he became a priest of Amen. The surviving text covers Wenamen's voyage from his departure from Thebes, through his stops in the Egyptian capital of Tanis, and the coastal Canaanite cities of Dor, Tyre, and Byblos, before his ship was blown off course to Cyprus, and the story abruptly ends. The section that covers the stop in Tyre is in the damaged section, in the middle of the story, and only survives in fragments. The abrupt ending of the story is clearly not the end of Wenamen's Biography as it does not include his return to Egypt, which must have taken place or his story would never have been known to the Egyptians.

The differences between the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus versions of Tobit are too extensive to treat the books as the same book, however, their story is essentially the same. The two books must have had a common source, however, the Sinaiticus's version is over 20% longer than the Vaticanus's version, and appears to be an older version of Tobit. One of the reasons that the Book of Tobit is interpreted as fiction, is the existence of historical errors and anachronisms found in the Vaticanus version, which includes the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar and the Persian king Ahasuerus jointly destroying Nineveh, the capital of the Assyrian Empire. Nineveh was sacked by Babylonian King Nabopolassar in 612 BC, along with Median and Persian allies, led by the Median King Cyaxares, who then integrated the city into his Median Empire. Nabopolassar's son Nebuchadnezzar, who assumed the throne in 605 BC, finally conquered the remnants of the Assyrian forces in Syria at the Battle of Carchemish that same year, however, he did not attack or destroy Nineveh. Meanwhile, the name Ahasuerus was the Aramaic name of Xerxes, the Persian king who ruled between 486 and 465 BC. These anachronisms are not found in the Codex Sinaiticus' version, which does not mention either king, but gives credit to King Achiacharos of Media, which is likely an attempt to transliterate the Median name of King Cyaxares into Aramaic. Cyaxares's Median name was Uvaxshtra, however, it was transliterated several ways into the languages and scripts of the day, including the Assyrian and Babylonian Umakishtar, and the Phrygian Ksuwaksaros, and the Greek Cyaxares from which the modern English name is derived. The Sinaiticus version of Tobit describes King Achiacharos as conquering Nineveh and integrating it into his Median Kingdom, which, was done by King Cyaxares according to the Median, Persian, Babylonian, Egyptian, and Greek records from the era, and so, even if the origin of the name is disputed, the person described in King Cyaxares. There are several differences between the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus versions that point to the Sinaiticus version being older, and that point to the Vaticanus version being a later translation created in Alexandria, likely from an Aramaic early-Jewish redaction of the original Aramaic version.