Peterson engages the identities and provenances of the authors of the various “editions” of the Deteronomistic History. Peterson asks where we might locate a figure with both motive and opportunity to draw up a proto-narrative including elements of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and the first part of 1 Kings. Peterson identifies a particular candidate in the time of David qualified to write the first edition. He then identifies the particular circle of custodians of the Deuteronomistic narrative and supplies successive redactions down to the time of Jeremiah.

This monograph is a comparative, socio-linguistic reassessment of the Deuteronomic idiom, leshakken shemo sham, and its synonymous biblical reflexes in the Deuteronomistic History, lashum shemo sham, and lihyot shemo sham. These particular formulae have long been understood as evidence of the Name Theology - the evolution in Israelite religion toward a more abstracted mode of divine presence in the temple. Utilizing epigraphic material gathered from Mesopotamian and Levantine contexts, this study demonstrates that leshakken shemo sham and lashum shemo sham are loan-adaptations of Akkadian shuma shakanu, an idiom common to the royal monumental tradition of Mesopotamia. The resulting retranslation and reinterpretation of the biblical idiom profoundly impacts the classic formulation of the Name Theology.

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.

This collection of essays examines the relationship of prophecy to the Deuteronomistic History (Deuteronomy–2 Kings), including the historical reality of prophecy that stands behind the text and the portrayal of prophecy within the literature itself. The contributors use a number of perspectives to explore the varieties of intermediation and the cultic setting of prophecy in the ancient Near East; the portrayal of prophecy in pentateuchal traditions, pre-Deuteronomistic sources, and other Near Eastern literature; the diverse perspectives reflected within the Deuteronomistic History; and the possible Persian period setting for the final form of the Deuteronomistic History. Together the collection represents the current state of an important, ongoing discussion. The contributors are Ehud Ben Zvi, Diana Edelman, Mignon R. Jacobs, Mark Leuchter, Martti Nissinen, Mark O’Brien, Raymond F. Person Jr., Thomas C. Römer, Marvin A. Sweeney, and Rannfrid Thelle.

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

In The Deuteronomist’s History, Hans Ausloos provides for the first time a detailed status quaestionis concerning the relationship between the books Genesis–Numbers and the so-called Deuteronom(ist)ic literature. After a presentation of the origins of the 18th and 19th century hypothesis of a Deuteronom(ist)ic redaction, specific attention is paid to the argumentation used during the last century. Particular interest also is paid to the concept of the proto-Deuteronomist and the mostly tentative approaches of the Deuteronom(ist)ic ‘redaction’ of the Pentateuch during the last decades. The book concludes with a critical review and preview of the Deuteronom(ist)ic problem. Each phase in the Deuteronomist’s history is illustrated on the basis of the epilogue of the Book of the Covenant (Exod. 23:20-33).

A thorough and detailed analysis of the Deuternomistic History and its influence on the Second Temple period.

A third redactor, also inspired by Deuteronomy, completed the history up to the exile. Unlike the preceding authors he reworked the whole of the deuteronomistic history.