[b-hebrew] theories and standards

George Athas George.Athas at moore.edu.au
Tue May 19 20:44:54 EDT 2009


This whole discussion seems to be divided into two camps: (1) those who propose that the ancients had the same sense of 'history' as we moderns do; and (2) those who propose that the ancients had a different sense of 'history' to us moderns.

Firstly, our modern sense of history has only really arisen since the printing press made the dissemination and preservation of information commonplace. The rise of the newspaper and journalism also helped considerably in preserving memories of factual events. Prior to that, history was often a creative enterprise, including memories of factual events; pre-scientific hypotheses about the past, such as aetiologies; retrojection, whereby the past was described like the present; propaganda, whereby the past was moulded to a desired shape; dramatic techniques, to make it memorable and entertaining; and many other phenomena.

In terms of Esarhaddon's vassal treaties: I'd say it was a fairly common notion that if an underling failed in their treaty obligations that they would be cursed, and blessed if they met them. The notion is really not that unique. So, the blessing/cursing concept of Deuteronomy could come from just about any time - Bronze Age right through to Hellenistic Era. What is interesting, however, is to compare the specific blessings and curses and see where the closest parallels for Deuteronomy are from. This, of course, doesn't give us a date for Deuteronomy, but it could be one brick in a larger argument to say that Deuteronomy could be from the era of its closest parallel, or even slightly after it.

And no, Gabe has not mistaken the force of the historical task.


Regards,

GEORGE ATHAS
Moore Theological College (Sydney, Australia)
www.moore.edu.au


More information about the b-hebrew mailing list