Martin Noth argued that in the books of Joshua-Kings could be seen the work of a single, purposeful author or historian-a hypothesis which, although close to becoming one of those rare 'assured results of critical scholarship', has recently encountered criticism. Nelson observes that Noth's historian has a 'disturbing tendency to fall apart in the hands of those who work with him'. In this comprehensive study of the question, he attempts to put on a solid critical foundation the increasingly popular theory that the Deutoronomistic History is a product of a two-stage literary process.

The thesis that the books of Deuteronomy to 2 Kings have undergone a redaction that made them into a 'Deuteronomistic History' has become since Martin Noth (1943) a widely accepted idea in Old Testament scholarship. But there is no consensus when this history was edited: under Josiah (622 BCE), during the exile (c. 560 BCE) or even later? And what was the intention of its redactors? Can we rely on the so-called Deuteronomistic History for the reconstruction of Israelite history? Or should we give up the thesis of a Deuteronomic redaction of the Former Prophets? This volume explores these and many other questions about this key topic in Old Testament scholarship. It results from a research seminar organized by the Swiss universities of Fribourg, Geneva, NeuchGtel and Lausanne. It contains contributions by the following scholars: R. Albertz, J. Briend, M. Detienne, W. Dietrich, J.J. Glassner, S. Japhet, E.A. Knauf, A.D.H. Mayes, S.L. McKenzie, S. Pisano, M. Rose, A. Schenker, F. Smyth, A. de Pury and T. R÷mer. Articles in French were translared by J. Edward Crowley

This volume reexamines and reconstructs the relationship between the Deuteronomistic History and the book of Chronicles, building on recent developments such as the Persian -period dating of the Deuteronomistic History, the contribution of oral traditional studies to understanding the production of biblical texts, and the reassessment of Standard Biblical Hebrew and Late Biblical Hebrew. These new perspectives challenge widely held understandings of the relationship between the two scribal works and strongly suggest that they were competing historiographies during the Persian period that nevertheless descended from a common source. This new reconstruction leads to new readings of the literature.

Revision of author's doctoral thesis submitted to the Melbourne College of Divinity in 1987.

The Creation of History in Ancient Israel demonstrates how the historian can start to piece together the history of ancient Israel using the Hebrew Bible as a source.

This study analyzes several passages in the Former Prophets (2 Sam 19:12-44; 2 Kgs 2:1-18; Judg 8:4-28) from a literary perspective, and argues that the text presents Transjordan as liminal in Israel's history, a place from which Israel's leaders return with inaugurated or renewed authority. It then traces the redactional development of Samuel-Kings that led to this literary symbolism, and proposes a hypothesis of continual updating and combination of texts, beginning early in Israel's monarchy and continuing until the final formation of the Deuteronomistic History. Several source documents may be isolated, including three narratives of Saul's rise, two distinct histories of David's rise, and a court history that was subsequently revised with pro-Solomonic additions. These texts had been combined already in a Prophetic Record during the 9th c. B.C.E. (with A. F. Campbell), which was received as an integrated unit by the Deuteronomistic Historian. The symbolic geography of the Jordan River and Transjordan, which even extends into the New Testament, was therefore not the product of a deliberate theological formulation, but rather the accidental by-product of the contingency of textual redaction that had as its main goal the historical presentation of Israel's life in the land.

In The “God of Israel” in History and Tradition, Michael Stahl examines the historical and ideological significances of the formulaic title “god of Israel” (’elohe yisra’el) in the Hebrew Bible using critical theory on social power and identity.