The So-Called Deuteronomistic History: A Sociological, Historical and Literary Introduction

by Thomas Römer

In contrast to the Torah/Pentateuch, the Deuteronomistic History is not recognised by Jewish or Christian tradition as a separate collection and the term itself is an invention of modern biblical scholarship. In this detailed investigation of the Deuteronomistic History, Thomas Romer provides students and scholars of the Old Testament with a complete guide to this important subject. Romer briefly outlines the content of biblical books relevant to the study of Deuteronomistic History - Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges and Samuel-Kings. He then defines the concept of Deuteronomistic History, surveying the evolution and history of the debate with particular emphasis on the work of Martin Noth. Romer then provides a sociological, historical and literary approach to the books from Deuteronomy to Kings. He examines questions such as: Why and how did Deuteronomism rise as a 'school' under Assyrian hegemony? What role did propaganda play in the composition of these books? What happened on an ideological and sociological level during the Exile and Persian period? Is the so-called Deuteronomistic literature properly understood as crisis literature? And what influence did the Deuteronomistic History have on the identity of the Second Temple period.

Genres: Biblical Studies, Religion

224 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2006

About the author

Thomas Römer is Professor of the Hebrew Bible at the Collège de France and Professor at the University of Lausanne.

Librarian note:
There is more than one author in the GoodReads database with this name

Reviews

[Janet · Rating 4 out of 5]

I am not a professional or even knowledgeable in this field, so keep that in mind when reading this review. When I first started the book, I was disappointed because I thought I would get a more definitive overview of the history and times covered in the old testament books, Joshua through Kings. Instead the author purported to show that these books along with Deuteronomy itself were written and rewritten at three distinct periods of Jewish history. Romer used close textual review and elucidated themes that the “redactors” (in other words, scribes who edited and expanded the text over the years) used to interpret past history in terms of intervening events, especially the idea that if the Jewish people did not worship their God alone and persisted calling upon other gods, they would lose the land that Moses brought them to. Romer also highlighted word choice and syntax such as the use of the singular or plural you. (On an unrelated note, have you folks noted how we really do need a plural you in contemporary English?)

At any rate, as I came to understand what Romer was doing, at first, I was skeptical and unconvinced by his examples. However, as I went through the book and first read the revisions that Romer attributed to the era when Josiah was king of Judah, and then read about the revisions during the Babylonian exile, and then the revisions after many of the exiles returned, I found his thesis compelling.

Also, I’m sure this is Old Testament 101 to Biblical scholars, but I also became more impressed with the literary device of the book of Deuteronomy as a report of a speech by Moses, and at the same time, I could be convinced that within the “speech” there were warnings and rules which reflected issues which were crucial at different times in Jewish history up till around 500 BC.

Now, I have to say that I am a very compulsive reader, and I did go back and check the chapters and verses which he gives as references. In my experience as a non-religious layperson reading these books of the Bible two years ago, I found the repetition of speeches and interpolation of peculiar incidents aggravating and frustrating. I’m not eager to reread this whole corpus now, but I’m more appreciative of how the confusing text of the books that we read today reflects an urgent desire by the scribes of ancient times to explain those centuries of wars and tragedies and to inspire their fellow Jews to adhere to their religious practices.

[Jack Naylor · Rating 3 out of 5]

Romer is a deft narrator, and as such, this book wins quite a few points with me. I found the overview of the scholarship to be quite helpful, and all of his arguments for the parsings of the DtrH to be easily traceable. I'm just not sure I appreciate his confidence in his own narrative. Josiah is the hero, and the earliest layers are all identifiable as such because of some demonstrable connection to his cultic and political centralization. But too much boils down to - this verse clearly comes from the original Josianic DtrH because it's concerned with an agenda he would be concerned with - why do we know he would be concerned with that agenda - because it's in DtrH. He talks himself in a circle. Its not exactly clear to me why Hezekiah couldn't be the originator of the text and was later downplayed by some exilic Josiah fanboys.

In any case, I don't think a lot of his suggestions are unreasonable (there certainly is a Deuteronomist concerned with the narrative of exile as it relates to the worship of other gods), and I would actually recommend this book, but it's way too presumptuous.

*Also, citing Finkelstein's The Bible Unearthed a bunch is not a reason to say that the United Monarchy "definitely" didn't exist at all.

[Greg · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is an impressive synthesis of 60 years or so of scholarship on the Deuteronomistic History, the books of Deuteronomy through 2 Kings. His, is a middle-of-the-road analysis of the development of the books based on a triple redaction of the Deuteronomistic History. First, there was the book of Deuteronomy that was not part of the DH that was produced either in the reign of Hezekiah or Josiah. The DH was a product of scribes producing court propaganda in the reign of Josiah (Samuel and Kings). After the fall of Jerusalem and the deportation of the elite of Judah in 587, a second redaction was done, updating Deuteronomy for the Exile, gluing Joshua and Judges, and updating the DH for exile. Finally, there was an early Persian period final redaction of the DH that harmonized it with the Priestly material (Exod., Lev., Num.) and substantially reworked Joshua (his hypothesis is that the earliest Torah in the late Persian Period was a Hexateuch (Gen-Josh) not the Pentateuch (Gen-Deut). The book is very well organized and presents an excellent history of scholarship as far as the European scholarly tradition is concerned. The author is Swiss and there is a bias towards Continental and British scholarship on the DH and not enough attention is paid to the Frank Moore Cross and his disciples, particularly as it contrasts greatly with his hypothesis of a substantial Persian Period redaction. Obviously there was a Persian Period and Hellenistic editing that took place to produce the document that we have now, based on differences between the Samaritan Pentateuch, Masoretic Text, and Septuagint (and variations between Greek A and Greek B of that) and surprisingly Romer doesn't really address it from this perspective as Emmanuel Tov has done. Cross and his disciples would not have considered the post-exilic editing as drastic as Romer, and would dispute the dating of certain chapters and verses that Romer puts in the post-exilic period.

[Dan · Rating 5 out of 5]

A remarkably clear, coherent explanation of why Romer believes the DH is a three-layer creation (Josianic, exilic and post-exilic). If only all the dissections of the Hebrew Bible were this accessible. But now I have to go back to Idan Dershowitz's The Valediction of Moses to see how the proto-Deuteronomy supposedly preserved in the Shapira fragments (in Dershowitz's ingenious but wildly contrarian view) could have fit into Romer's scheme.

[Jeremy Garber · Rating 3 out of 5]

Römer provides a sophisticated yet readable outline of the story of the Deuteronomistic History and the political tensions beneath its creation. In brief, the author makes the argument that the books of the Hebrew Bible that make up the “so-called Deuteronomistic History” (Judges, Chronicles, and Kings) were created in three separate stages, before, during, and after the exile to Babylon. Römer does an especially good job of comparing the various strands of the text to Ancient Near Eastern texts, suggesting a political movement that wanted to centralize religion and politics in the city of Jerusalem and created a history to justify that concentration. This history traces the movement of a people from scattered outsiders to a minor nation that looked longingly outward to become a militarized superpower – and the tension of desire and oppression that caused them repetitive waves of grief. As a theologian, this book from the discipline of biblical studies was far more informative and readable than many of its kind. Suitable for general graduate students in divinity, theology,

[Clayton Tune · Rating 3 out of 5]

You know, Romer is WAY above my education level but his ideas are fascinating. The DT History fascinates me and he is (apparently) one of the leading scholars in the field. The introduction to Babylonian and Assyrian literature was new for me and very interesting. Though it may not help in the class I'm teaching, it helps to know. This would most definitely not be a light, bathroom read... or if Bathroom is too negative of a place, a Sunday afternoon read.