Peterson engages the identities and provenances of the authors of the various “editions” of the Deteronomistic History. Peterson asks where we might locate a figure with both motive and opportunity to draw up a proto-narrative including elements of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and the first part of 1 Kings. Peterson identifies a particular candidate in the time of David qualified to write the first edition. He then identifies the particular circle of custodians of the Deuteronomistic narrative and supplies successive redactions down to the time of Jeremiah.

Peterson engages the identities and provenances of the authors of the various "editions" of the Deteronomistic History. Peterson asks where we might locate a figure with both motive and opportunity to draw up a proto-narrative including elements of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and the first part of 1 Kings. Peterson identifies a particular candidate in the time of David qualified to write the first edition. He then identifies the particular circle of custodians of the Deuteronomistic narrative and supplies successive redactions down to the time of Jeremiah.

This monograph is a comparative, socio-linguistic reassessment of the Deuteronomic idiom, leshakken shemo sham, and its synonymous biblical reflexes in the Deuteronomistic History, lashum shemo sham, and lihyot shemo sham. These particular formulae have long been understood as evidence of the Name Theology - the evolution in Israelite religion toward a more abstracted mode of divine presence in the temple. Utilizing epigraphic material gathered from Mesopotamian and Levantine contexts, this study demonstrates that leshakken shemo sham and lashum shemo sham are loan-adaptations of Akkadian shuma shakanu, an idiom common to the royal monumental tradition of Mesopotamia. The resulting retranslation and reinterpretation of the biblical idiom profoundly impacts the classic formulation of the Name Theology.

Martin Noth argued that in the books of Joshua-Kings could be seen the work of a single, purposeful author or historian-a hypothesis which, although close to becoming one of those rare 'assured results of critical scholarship', has recently encountered criticism. Nelson observes that Noth's historian has a 'disturbing tendency to fall apart in the hands of those who work with him'. In this comprehensive study of the question, he attempts to put on a solid critical foundation the increasingly popular theory that the Deutoronomistic History is a product of a two-stage literary process.

A thorough and detailed analysis of the Deuternomistic History and its influence on the Second Temple period.