Pentateuchal source criticism: a preliminary bibliography and exploration of recent research
Figuring out how best to arrange this has been kinda tough. I've chosen, at least for the time-being, to start in reverse chronological order, and see where it goes from here.
I'm going to keep updating this - I know there are crucial areas I've neglected.
These are some of the most recent works that explore general Pentateuchal source criticism:
Joel S. Baden. The Composition of the Pentateuch: Renewing the Documentary Hypothesis. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2012
Thomas B. Dozeman, Thomas Römer, and Konrad Schmid, eds. Pentateuch, Hexateuch, or Enneateuch?: Identifying Literary Works in Genesis through Kings. Ancient Israel and its Literature 8. Atlanta: SBL, 2011.
Thomas B. Dozeman, Konrad Schmid and Baruch J. Schwartz, ed., The Pentateuch: International Perspectives on Current Research, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011.
- No reviews yet; though here is the table of contents.
Tzemah L. Yoreh, The First Book of God (BZAW 402; Berlin/New York: de Gruyter, 2010).
Joel Baden. J, E, and the Redaction of the Pentateuch. Forschungen zum Alten Testament 68. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2009
- A (quite critical) review.
J. C. Gertz et al. (eds.), Abschied vom Jahwisten. Die Komposition des Hexateuch in der jüngsten Diskussion (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2002).
This book later appeared in English as A Farewell to the Yahwist? The Composition of the Pentateuch in Recent European Interpretation (2006), but dropping the articles of Blenkinsopp ("A Post-Exilic Lay Source in Genesis 1–11") and others. Here is a review of the English version.
Speaking of bilingual publications, Konrad Schmid's Erzväter und Exodus: Untersuchungen zur doppelten Begründung der Ursprünge Israels innerhalb der Geschichtsbücher des Alten Testaments (Wissenschaftliche Monographien zum Alten und Neuen Testament 81 Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1999) has been quite influential, and was recently published in English as Genesis and the Moses Story: Israel’s Dual Origins in the Hebrew Bible by Eisenbrauns. Here is a review.
Schmid has been a vocal proponent of the idea of...well - to quote the title of a paper published in Biblica summarizing it - Genesis and Exodus as Two Formerly Independent Traditions of Origins for Ancient Israel.
I guess this might be a nice place to mention David Carr's "The Moses Story: Literary-Historical Reflections," published in the newly-founded journal Hebrew Bible and Ancient Israel. The entire issue containing this article can be found here.
Also, before moving on to other things, I think Van Seters' unique 2006 book, The Edited Bible: The Curious History of the “Editor” in Biblical Criticism should be mentioned. It's stirred up quite a bit of discussion, focusing on more 'methodological' issues (though, really, mainly the semantics of what we mean when we say Biblical "authors" or "editors" or "redactors"). Here is a review. And here is an article Van Seters wrote detailing more of its content, as well as responding to criticisms.
Here are some shorter studies that address a lot of the things covered in the monographs/edited volumes mentioned above.
Baden's "From Joseph to Moses: The Narratives of Exodus 1-2" was [published last year in Vetus Testamentum] (http://www.academia.edu/1546260/From_Joseph_to_Moses_The_Narratives_of_Exodus_1-2). Here, he argues
the canonical text of Exodus 1-2 is a compilation of three originally independent narratives belonging to the pentateuchal sources J, E, and P...Each of these stories contains specific narrative claims that are distinct from that of the canonical text as a whole, and each represents a continuation of the patriarchal narratives into the Exodus account.
In a 2007 JBL article, Christoph Levin argues for "The Yahwist: The Earliest Editor in the Pentateuch."
Rolf Rendtorff also explores the status of the Yahwist in "What Happened to the 'Yahwist'?: Reflections after Thirty Years," SBL Forum. June 2006. Online: http://www.sbl-site.org/Article.aspx?ArticleID=553
There are "retrospectives" of the Priestly source and its delineation in Shectman, Sarah and Baden, Joel S. (eds), The Strata of the Priestly Writings: Contemporary Debate and Future Directions (ATANT, 95; Zurich: Theologischer Verlag, 2009). A review.
Albert De Pury, "Pg as the Absolute Beginning" in Les dernières rédactions du Pentateuque, de l'Hexateuque et de l'Ennéateuque. Here is a description.
I may expand this section at a future point, but for the time-being the only other thing I'll add is Propp's "The Priestly Source Recovered Intact?", VT 46 (1996): 458-478.
As Genesis has been one of the main “laboratories” for source criticism over the past century and a half, it's only fitting that it, too, receives its own section.
Craig A. Evans et al. (ed.) The Book of Genesis: Composition, Reception, and Interpretation, VTSup 152, Leiden: Brill, 2012.
- Konrad Schmid's leading paper in this volume, "Genesis in the Pentateuch," is available here.
Joseph Blenkinsopp, "Abraham as Paradigm in the Priestly History in Genesis," JBL 128 (2009), 225-41.
- Can be found here.
I've always found Samuel Shaviv's "The Polytheistic Origins of the Biblical Flood Narrative" (VT 54 [2004], 527-548) interesting - though I'm not sure of its ultimate validity.
Genesis 1-2 in particular have always received a lot of attention.
Krüger's "Genesis 1:1-2:3 and the Development of the Pentateuch" - from Dozeman et al.'s The Pentateuch mentioned above - is here.
Jeff Morrow, "Creation as Temple-Building and Work as Liturgy in Genesis 1-3"
I haven't had time to read it yet, but the otherwise excellent Mark Smith has published a monograph recently called The Priestly Vision of Genesis 1. A review.
De Pury's "Pg as the Absolute Beginning," mentioned above, focuses particularly on Gen 1 and 2 (vis-a-vis each other).
Finally, there are some good papers in Wénin (ed.), Studies in the Book of Genesis: Literature, Redaction and History (BETL 155, Leuven. 2001) - including Michaela Bauks, “Genesis 1 als Programmschrift der Priesterschrift (Pg),” and Marc Vervenne, “Genesis 1, 1-2, 4: The Compositional Texture of the Priestly Overture to the Pentateuch.”
Miscellaneous/(currently) uncategorized:
Erhard Blum, Textgestalt und Komposition: Exegetische Beitrüge zu Tora und Vordere Propheten (ed. Wolfgang Oswald; FAT, 69; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010).
- A review.
David M.Carr. The Formation of the Hebrew Bible: A New Reconstruction. New York: Oxford University Press, 2011.
Reinhard G. Kratz, The Composition of the Narrative Books of the Old Testament. London: T&T Clark, 2005.
Thomas C. Römer and Marc Z. Brettler, "Deuteronomy 34 and the Case for a Persian Hexateuch," Journal of Biblical Literature 119 (2000), 401–419.
Eckart Otto and Achenbach (eds). Das Deuteronomium zwischen Pentateuch und Deuteronomistischem Geschichtswerk. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2004.
Eckart Otto. Das Deuteronomium im Pentateuch und Hexateuch: Studien zur Literaturgeschichte von Pentateuch und Hexateuch im Lichte des Deuteronomiumrahmens. Mohr Siebeck, 2000.
Christophe Nihan, From Priestly Torah to Pentateuch: A Study in the Composition of the Book of Leviticus. Forschungen zum Alten Testament 2/25. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007.
Thomas Römer (ed.), The Books of Leviticus and Numbers (BETL 215; Leuven: Peeters, 2008).
Jeffrey Stackert, Rewriting the Torah: Literary Revision in Deuteronomy and the Holiness Legislation (FAT 52; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007).
John Van Seters. A Law Book for the Diaspora: Revision in the Study of the Covenant Code. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.
This is pretty incomplete at the moment.
I'm eventually going to get to some of the more radical scholars like Lemche and Guillaume and Gmirken who have analyzed the composition of the Pentateuch as along similar lines of the Greek historiographers (and sometimes proposed very late dates).
Posted Jan 30, 2013, 6:13 AM UTC · edited