Scribal Culture and the Making of the Hebrew Bible

by Karel van der Toorn

We think of the Hebrew Bible as the Book—and yet it was produced by a largely nonliterate culture in which writing, editing, copying, interpretation, and public reading were the work of a professional elite. The scribes of ancient Israel are indeed the main figures behind the Hebrew Bible, and in this book Karel van der Toorn tells their story for the first time. His book considers the Bible in very specific historical terms, as the output of the scribal workshop of the Second Temple active in the period 500–200 BCE. Drawing comparisons with the scribal practices of ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia, van der Toorn clearly details the methods, the assumptions, and the material means of production that gave rise to biblical texts; then he brings his observations to bear on two important texts, Deuteronomy and Jeremiah.

Traditionally seen as the copycats of antiquity, the scribes emerge here as the literate elite who held the key to the production as well as the transmission of texts. Van der Toorn’s account of scribal culture opens a new perspective on the origins of the Hebrew Bible, revealing how the individual books of the Bible and the authors associated with them were products of the social and intellectual world of the scribes. By taking us inside that world, this book yields a new and arresting appreciation of the Hebrew Scriptures.

Genres: History, Religion, Judaism, Biblical Studies, Nonfiction, Old Testament, Theology

401 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2007

About the author

Karel van der Toorn is professor of religion and society at the University of Amsterdam. He is the author of the prizewinning Scribal Culture and the Making of the Hebrew Bible, among other publications.

Reviews

[Jonathan · Rating 4 out of 5]

The cultural milieu that produced the Hebrew Bible was almost entirely an oral culture, and yet we owe the transcription, the writing, the copying, the editing and, in the end, the canonization of that work (known as 'Tanakh' in Hebrew) to the scribes of ancient Judea, and Professor Ven Der Toorn details the background, education, and work of these largely unknown anonymous men who created that monumental book. The scribes were part of a tiny educated and literate elite in an overwhelmingly non-literate culture. The masses in that era had the sacred scrolls read to them, and it is not a coincidence that the Hebrew verbs "to read" and "to call out" share the same root (קרא). Scribes fulfilled the tasks of bureaucrats, diplomats, teachers, librarians and (in the non-Israelite cultures) magicians, diviners, healers, and priests. It is likely that the roles in the Temple eras of the scribes were performed by Levites, and we know that the training (which was long and difficult) and the job tended to be passed down through the same families. Van Der Toorn widens our knowledge by describing the roles of the scribes of ancient Mesopotamia and Egypt. The canonization of the Tanakh began in the era of Ezra, when the promulgation of the Torah as the law of the land was decided upon, and two centuries later, when the enunciation of the of the dogma of the end of the prophetic era, thus placing a coda upon divinely-inspired books. One is forced to consider and, perhaps, reconsider one's conceptions of literary production in ancient Israel. So why only four stars? Well, to tell the truth, the book is a bit of a slog; one wouldn't think that a book on ancient scribes and the creation of the Hebrew Bible could be dull, but there you have it. Still, a worthy addition to your library on the Tanakh and ancient Israel. If the writing of the Hebrew Bible has any interest for you, this book simply cannot be ignored.

[Jackson Cyril · Rating 5 out of 5]

Toorn's essential thesis is that neither the Hebrew Bible nor any of its individuals books were written by individuals. He argues-- with the sort of prodigious footnotes and citations typical of German scholarship-- that the Bible was rather compiled, edited and rewritten over the course of many hundreds of years by various scribes. Two books in particular, Jeremiah and Deuteronomy, are closely studied as examples.
Now, all this is pretty interesting, but the fireworks come early in the book when he tries to understand who these scribes were and what their practices were. He produces a wonderful comparative study of class and society in the Ancient Middle East, working from sources in Akkadian, Egyptian and Sumerian to complement the Hebrew sources to trace the development of the scribe class, their function, the power of the literacy in a pre-literate society and even the quarrelsome nature of these intellectuals-- these guys would've given the 19th century Russian intelligentsia a run of their money! Also as anti-cosmopolitan world views gain ascendance in our world today, this remote yet vibrant world of cultural exchange shows that cosmopolitanism was the rule rather than the exception in the ancient world.
His concluding chapter, on the formation of the Biblical canon, is equally rewarding. He posits that the Hebrew canon was in a state of flux throughout antiquity and argues (again, with an army of footnotes to support him) that the Persian Empire's policy of allowing their territories to govern themselves according to their own laws was crucial in forming the canon; Ezra was tasked with giving the Persians an outline of Jewish law, and Toorn argues that it is here that the Pentateuch takes its now familiar form.
A pretty materialistic account; Toorn argues that things like parchment scroll-size and ancient libraries were more important to the formation of the canon than the genius of any individual author.

[Dave Courtney · Rating 3 out of 5]

I have mixed feelings about Scribal Culture. On one hand it has important information regarding a historical discussion of the development of the Old Testament scripture. On the other hand I hesitate to refer to it as necessarily "insightful" information. There is always a leap (of degrees) to be made in moving from information to theory. Karel van der Toorn delivers information designed to move forward a theory. One of the tensions we find in Toorn's overall conclusions (theories) is that it is difficult to dissociate the theory from the information in terms of the determining and influencing factor. So again, on the one hand the information is important for any healthy understanding of the Christian Bible (which can be simply presented as the complex movements, politics, cultures and peoples that lie behind the development of the Old Testament source material, particularly as a finalized and closed canon). On the other hand it remains difficult to see how the facts or truth of this information necessarily affects our ability to see these scriptures as a) connected to an individual prophet/author/teacher or b) an appropriate reflection of the active revelation of God both in the pages of history and in the relationship with the prophets/authors/teachers to whom the canonized books are associated with. What complicates this further is that it remains unclear, outside of the clear passion of Toorn to immerse us and introduce us to the world of the scribes (in particular the Jewish scribal culture) which he asserts carry the sole responsibility of developing, writing and compiling the developed Old Testament scriptures, how he perceives his theories to impact the scriptures themselves, and further (and more importantly) our use of them as a part of a Holy Book.

It should be said outright that little about what Toorn delivers in terms of information is necessarily new. In an academic setting it is commonplace in the study of scripture to acknowledge a multi layered approach that includes cultural influences, politically charged landscapes and motivations, scribes and editors, and the changing perspective of pre-exilic, exilic and post exilic material. This is all par for the course. Conclusions regarding how these elements affect the final product (beneficially/appropriately) is typically where discussion is furthered, particularly when dealing with the active revelation of God. Toorn narrows in on the scribal aspect (obviously according the title), but comes across as a bit too scribal centric in doing so. He sets up the multi dimensional approach but fails to push far enough in exploring exactly where this leaves the particular characters and prophets as individuals associated with the original material.

Toorn's basic premise is as follows. It is to the Jewish Scribal Culture that we owe our acknowledgement for the Old Testament scriptures. He argues that this scribal culture existed as an elite higher class culture, and thus representative of a minority educated people group with personal investment in deciding the final trajectory of the closed canon. His book deals with Deuteronomy and Jeremiah, two books which in his mind provide the best example of scribal influence. At the same time Toorn's more specific conclusions suggest that the written tradition (or book culture) did not emerge until the second temple period, and that it was in this time that the oral tradition shifted and became the product of the book (with all the changes that written revelation could impose o the nature of revelation as the direct activity of God).. Much of Toorn's more suggestive theories emerge in his dealings with the book of Deutronomy, as well as Jeremiah, which are more or less convincing depending on how far his points rely on much larger encompassing ideas. He regards the shifting influence of the Levite Priests who had moved north/south in to the political and religious center with an interest in solidifying their role associated with protecting and communicating the prophetic voice in Israel. The end result are pieces of scripture (for Deuteronomy he argues for four different versions that are apparent) that are edited together and intentionally positioned with recognizable names that would carry the weight of authority (such as Moses) for a Jewish audience, thus endowing themselves with this same authority. His theories then dive further to expose that there is very little about particular individuals that is necessarily applicable to the thematic purposes of the final edited and closed canon, which reflects the limited scope of the educated scribes. He also suggests that the early writers and audience, and the even earlier oral traditions were not concerned with authors in the way we are today given the absence of a book culture. In the case of Deutreronomy it developed from a reform document of oral tradition in to one with particular religious and political intentions in which the exclusivity of the book culture was able to endorse and project as the sole proprieters of temple and religious authority.

As I said, my feeling was that while Toorn speaks to some of the obvious nature of scripture as a multi faceted work, he does little to contend with the motivations of the material itself. One assumes that in every case there must be an original source (which he acknowledges), but for as far he moves from the person connected to this original source, he gives little effort to help us know what to do with them in the end. He also largely fails to consider the more contentious parts of scripture which carry themes and motivations that would largely work against the scribes personal benecit. He also does not contend with the larger story of personal, christological and spirit revelation. He makes the case that revelation changed under the control of the book and scribal culture, but this does nothing to cotend with the ongoing current of the christian movement that moves toward christ and from christ in spirit. He dabbles with the question of motivation and seems to rest on the idea that the scribes did indeed believe they were writing something of genuine revelation, but he doesn't convincingly speak to how this motivation connects, if at all, to any sort of original revelation.

In the end Toorn's information feels like it's a bit too dependent on a very grand and much larger theory of how history progressed. He is right to point out that the Old Testament has been edited, progressed, changed and is filled with differing political and religious agenda. But most scholars understand this as an opportunity to invest further in to the ancient world. Toorn spends time making a comparison with the partnering examples of non biblical material in the ancient world, but this comparison is simply a matter of perception of common understandings being met with unique and definite responses to the nature of revelation. It has long been understood that the Judeo-Christian worldview was very much unique in a world of mirroring philosophies and mythologies. The main contention anyone needs to deal with when approaching this development is in how the idea of Yahweh as the one God followed a very different path, one inconvenient to human purposes certainly. We also must contend with the fact that the trajectory of the faith was forwarded not by a higher class but rather by individuals who were connected with the outcast and minority. The flow of the prophetic voice moves with the mystics who are standing against the elite and for the marginalized. This is the overwhelming testimony of the old and new testaments. The revelation of God is always found being spoken in to the trenches, and this reality seems problematic to at least some of Toorn's theories.

Toorn's book has some very good foundational information regarding the nature of Biblical study for conventional and conservative Christians who have never been exposed to the greater world behind the ancient literature. But it is not as shocking as it seems Toorn wants it to be (or needs it be) on an academic level, and this might be what causes some of his theories to lose some necessary weight.

[Guillaume Bourin · Rating 3 out of 5]

Van der Toorn's reconstruction of the Jewish scribal milieu based on comparative analysis of Mesopotamian and Egyptian data is thought-provoking and certainly useful. Nevertheless, given the scarcity of archeological and literary evidences, some of his claims seem far too speculative. As for me, I disagree on Van der Toorn's main thesis, namely that the canonical OT is the product of centuries of scribal activity, but I acknowledge some of his conclusions, especially when it comes to the role of scribes in the closing of the “canonical era”.

[Jacob Rose · Rating 5 out of 5]

hmm sexy, like peter brown's late antiquity but with more dead sheep skin

[Logan Oviatt · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book graduated my comprehension of redaction criticism into seeing it for myself. The hand of the scribe is light, but finding his words is worthwhile.

[Alan Divack · Rating 4 out of 5]

A mind-blowing book that, in its understated way, challenges not only traditional interpretations but much modern critical scholarship as well as the reading of the bible as literature. It makes textual criticism of a whole different level accessible to the lay reader. While I question van der Toorn's tying of the different stages in the redaction of Deuteronomy and their implicit ideology so closely to specific historical events , I mostly wanted more -- to see how his analysis could be applied to other biblical texts

[Dan · Rating 4 out of 5]

A clearly written, intelligently argued alternative to John Van Seters' "The Edited Bible: The Curious History of the 'Editor' in Biblical Criticism," which piles up evidence, much of it from the Classical era, that editing, in the sense that OT scholars and ordinary readers use it, didn't exist before the Renaissance - but which doesn't offer a solid idea of how, in that case, the books of the Hebrew Bible reached their current form. Van der Toorn, on the other hand, builds on what's known about scribal culture in ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia, and finds Levites associated with the Jerusalem temple acting quite recognizably as editors. He pays most of his attention to Jeremiah and Deuteronomy - in the latter case, with a detailed chronology of how he believes the book was expanded over the course of several "editions," and in the process perhaps explaining why, if it was the product of the royal establishment under Josiah, Deuteronomy says so little about the role of the king.

It would have been nice if he'd devoted similar attention to other books, especially the rest of the Pentateuch, or to explaining how his ideas support or oppose the Documentary Hypothesis; why, if the books of the OT were under strict Levitical control, early Judaism seems to tolerated fairly big textual variations (shown, for example, by Josephus); and, regarding the idea that the Torah was compiled after the Exile at the instigation of the Persian authorities, what we should make of archaeologist Yonatan Adler's view that the general population didn't live under Mosaic law until the Hasmonean era. I guess I'll have to wait for answers to those (especially Adler's theory, which I think is fairly recent).

[Robert Murphy · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was a pretty helpful overview of scribal traits in Israel and Judah and how the scribes authored, shaped, and ultimately created the Hebrew Bible. Van der Toorn draws heavily upon ancient Near Eastern parallels to elucidate points about scribal culture in the ancient Near East. I appreciated this aspect, even if many of the conclusions and parallels were unconvincing.

The most annoying part about this book is the amount of assumptions made throughout the book that go unacknowledged and the hasty conclusions. At the very least, van der Toorn could have acknowledged other theories of scribal composition (this happens occasionally). I understand that this book seeks to cover the whole Bible and explain its formation. But the chapter on Deuteronomy, for instance, was fairly unconvincing because it went from a very simple principle of scribes reframing a narrative to showing how Deuteronomy has 4 frames that were written each around 40 years apart from one another, with various redactions within the older frames. At that point, the parallel with Mesopotamian literature seems to break down.

The other annoying part about this book is that it uses endnotes instead of footnotes.

[Katriel Hubbard · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent look into the scribal manufacture of ancient texts and the application of such models to the biblical text. Van der Toorn surveys comparative evidence from the Ancient Near East to establish the normative practices of scribes in the ancient world and seeks evidence of such practices in the biblical text. The results demonstrate that the transmission of the biblical text is best understood as a "succession" of scrolls produced in the scribal workshop of the Jerusalem temple. This sober approach, grounded in comparative evidence from similar cultures, offers an antidote to the sometimes ungrounded conclusions of other text-critical scholars.

[Brian Tice · Rating 2 out of 5]

This was a disappointing read, built on liberal hypotheses which were long ago disproven. Chief among these is the Documentary Hypothesis of Wellhausen which denies the internal evidence as to the identity of the authors of the books of the Tanakh and which no serious scholar can responsibly espouse or defend. Though there are some pertinent facts woven into the work, the majority of its premises are contrived and highly speculative, built upon a framework of logical fallacies and pseudo-historical fiction.

[Jared · Rating 4 out of 5]

"The Hebrew Bible is the product of the scribal culture of its time; its status of divine revelation is a construct of the Hebrew scribes as well. Though the scribes did not invent the notion of revelation as such, the framing of the books as Holy Writ was their doing."

[Theo · Rating 4 out of 5]

Helder en precies, biedt mij als geïnteresseerde leek heel veel relevante nieuwe inzichten in de achtergronden van dat fascinerende Oude Testament.

[Joel Gn · Rating 5 out of 5]

Always game for a scholarly work that tackles the densely layered history of scripture, and this one certainly did not disappoint.

[Nathan · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is both incredibly compelling on some points, and disappointingly cliche in its commitment to critical perspectives. An example of its compelling material is the hypothesis that the Persian monarchy provided the institutional power needed for a canon to arise (though van der Toorn limits this canon to the Torah). The NT canon, as a social and historical phemenon, is the result of Constantine's adopting Christianity as the religion of the empire. That is not to say he determined the books, but once the list is chosen it is impossible to enforce without sufficient institional reinforcement. Darius and his synchretistic religious project could have provided this for the Old Testament canon.
On the cliche end, van der Toorn is entirely committed to two of the key features of the critical project in biblical studies. First, he remains committed to rewriting the biblical account of Israel's history with a politicized reading of Old Testament texts. In other words, the religious institutions of Israel (e.g. monarchy, temple, scribal school) are seen as competing for power and legitimacy. Thus Deuteronomy is really the result of Josiah enforcing his reform movement. The second cliche element grows from the first. The compositional history of biblical texts are then sought by means of looking for redactional layers resulting from each groups attempting to legitimize their own institution. The book is strongly committed to this project, though offering the occasional critique of this or that rending of the critical project.
That being said the book contains much that is helpful for those who remain committed to the inerrancy project of evangelicalism. Evangelical students of the Old Testament must continue to wrestle with the concepts of "author" and "book/text" as they work out an inerrancy that will account for both the positive statements of the Bible about its nature and what it shows itself to be. As we continue to consider the concept of later inspired redactors, Scribal Culture compiles much of the social and material considerations that must come under consideration. The books erudition makes it well worth the read, and the summary bibliography is worth the price of the book alone.

[Aeisele · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a really interesting historical look at the development of the Hebrew Bible from the perspectives of the people that actually wrote the text - the scribes.
There are three chapters that are really, really good: 1, which discusses the fact that there were no "books" as such in ancient Israel. It was an almost entirely oral culture, and the logistics of what there was - scrolls and tablets. Very interesting material look at the production of texts. Chapter 2 was also really especially good, because it explained the notion of authorship in the ancient near east - the fact that the author was the source of authority, not the source of the actually writing. So, e.g., not one prophet - except perhaps deutero-Isaiah - wrote any of the texts attributed to them. This does not mean ancients didn't think they were "theirs" - they just didn't have modern notions of authorship. Finally, the last chapter was excellent, because it gives a theory of how the Hebrew Bible became conanonized and the canon became closed. His theory is that when the Israelites came back from Persia, Darius ordered Ezra to set out the law of the land - and that's when Ezra and other scribes compiled the Five books of Moses. Later scribes then asserted that the Holy Spirit had left Israel, thus closing the list of books that could make it in to the writings, Torah, and prophets.
Overall, a very interesting book.

[John · Rating 5 out of 5]

I am not expert enough to make a deeply informed judgment about the theories van Der Toorn promotes. My Hebrew is weak and my Akkadian and Sumerian just isn't there. But his narrative is plausible and mostly compelling. The dearth of actual manuscripts that date back to the era of the scribes makes the whole project of describing their work necessarily "theory-laden," of course. There is guess work here, but it's all educated. I really enjoyed reading this as one of several recent books on the history of Israel's God and religion by scholars such as Schmid, Stavrakopoulou, Kugel, and others.

[Charles · Rating 4 out of 5]

Provides an unsettling but highly stimulating theory of how the Hebrew Bible was shaped and identified as revelation. Places the ancient scribes in a role equal in importance to the prophets. Should generate important discussions.

[Mike · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is a mixed bag for me. There are parts that I liked and parts that I disagreed with. I need to reread some of these parts to give it a decent review. It is a solid 3 stars. I may write more later.

[Reinier Markus · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting book in which Van der Toorn explains the origin of many biblical books. Very down to earth.

Read the Dutch version ('Wie schreef de bijbel?')

[Luis Lovell · Rating 3 out of 5]

I've been using this for my OT studies. It's a great reference.