Evaluating Noth’s Deuteronomistic History Hypothesis as a Popperian Thought Experiment
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21407929 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Cynthia Edenburg (0000-0002-7714-7049, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2023 |
| Volume | 53 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 155-172 |
| Publication date | 2023-02-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Die Welt des Orients (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0043-2547 • E-ISSN: 2196-9019 |
| Publisher | Walter de Gruyter GmbH (PUBLISHER • DE) |
| DOI | 10.13109/wdor.2023.53.2.155 |
| OpenAlex | W4394968464 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 16 |
Is Noth’s conception of a Deuteronomistic History misguided, and does it lead scholarship to a dead-end? These seem to be the conclusions of those who characterize Noth’s hypothesis as an “Irrweg der Forschung”. This paper examines whether the severe criticism and fundamental rejection of the DtrH hypothesis is justified, and considers the merit of Noth’s contribution to the understanding of Biblical historiography in the light of Popper’s approach to conjectures and refutations. A key point of dispute is whether the Book of Joshua was composed as the natural conclusion to the Pentateuchal narrative, or whether it is the first main chapter of the history of Israel and Judah following from the programmatic introduction in Deuteronomy, or alternatively, just one part of the vast narrative comprising the Pentateuch and Former Prophets. The different arguments are reconsidered in order to better appreciate the main innovations in Noth’s way of thought
Deuteronomist · Epistemology · Theology · Classical Philosophy and Thought · Historical Astronomy and Related Studies · Medieval and Classical Philosophy · Philosophy · Psychology
| Highly cited | No |
|---|