Canter Bridge

Largely a rebuttal to claims of ‘pan-deuteronomism’, Person writes at a time when many assumptions about things deuteronom(ist)ic that have seemed settled since Noth are openly questioned in the perhaps unpromising search for a new consensus. An introduction (pp. 1-16) brings the reader up to date on the proliferating meanings assigned terminology of which the definition once appeared to have been agreed, as well as on the tendency to multiply redactional layers in the Deuteronomistic literature beyond the two (Harvard School) and three (Gttingen School) that until recently seemed a sufficient menu from which to choose. Against the perceived expansionistic tendencies of deuteronomistic influence and redactions, some scholars have leveled accusations of ‘pan-Deuteronism’. In the face of this, Person defends a relatively broad definition of Deuteronomic (his preferred term) influence and literatures, as well as proposing ‘a way out of the confusion’ by means of a four-angled approach that considers (a) text-critical controls on redaction criticism, (b) post-exilic Deuteronomic redaction, (c) evidence from ANE scribal schools, and (4) the Deuteronomic school’s social location in an oral culture. (more…)

Read Full Post »