• Military Menu                       

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Industry
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• WMD
• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

The Documentary Hypothesis and Higher Criticism

Formerly called “literary criticism” or “higher criticism,” source criticism is the method of biblical study which analyzes texts that are a combination of originally separate documents, rather than the work of a single author. The sources have to be traced to their original form, conceptions are abstracted, the historical course of events displayed,, and the method by which events have worked out of the objective and essential conditions discovered. The dominant method of source-criticism is literary. It deals with documentary indication, traces backward parallel traditions and distinguishes their relationship, genealogy, and dependence; it shows their original or secondary character, seeks the occasions of their deviations; in documents it would discern the seams of joining, the manner and form of the insertions. And then often the question arises whether an oral or a written source lies in the background.

In general modern scholars have reached the conclusion that the Old Testament, in its laws and institutions, its historical narratives, and its prophetical and poetical writings, represents a gradual development. First they found four main documents in the Pentateuch and Joshua, combined by some editor into one work. Then they ascertained that these documents represented not so much individual authors as schools of thought and periods of time, and that in a general way the whole historical literature of the Hebrews was a combination of materials from different sources, handled by different schools of thought at different periods, with differing theories and differing interests. Scholars have distilled five strata of biblical authorship.

1. J [Jahwist] material, of southern origin from Judah, is the interesting material in the first five books. It is characterized by its usage of the term Yaweh. "YHVH", or "Yahweh", is where the Latin "Iehova" came from, from which "Jehovah" was derived. The established J material includes talking animals (the serpent in the garden, Baalam's donkey), spectacular miracles, and many theophanies (God walking in the garden, closing the door of Noah's ark). The original book of J is parsed out in sections starting in Genesis and ending in Kings.Because of its word choice and unique set of concerns, it is traditionally held to have been written sometime after the reign of King David. The Jehovistic narrative, comprising the rest of the history of the Israelitish people down to the occupation of Canaan, was composed for the most part in the time of the Assyrian monarchy, with the help of tradition and some old documents.
2. E [Elohim] material, of northern origin from Israel, is characterized by use of the term Elohim for God. It dates from shortly after J, and does not mention the name of Yaweh for God until after Yaweh's self revelation to Moses on Mt. Sinai/Horeb. The E document was probably composed in the Northern Kingdom around the 9th century BCE.
3. P [Priestly] material is so called because of its uniquely Priestly concerns. Leviticus is one long priestly document. This is traditionally dated to prior to the fall of the Kingdom of Judah, but the most controversial part of Source Criticism is the identification of the writer and date of the Priestly source. The Priestly Code, which comprises the great bulk of what has been commonly known as the Mosaic or Levitical law, with its whole round of sacrifice, priesthood, central sanctuary, one altar, and so on, dates from later still, about BCE 445. It is the work of the Exilic period, and was first put into action by concert between Ezra and Nehemiah. Its whole apparatus of a movable Tabernacle, wandering camp, and other archaic details, with its legislation strictly confined to the situation in the wilderness, were so skilfully contrived to conceal its true date, that it has passed as genuine history till the "Higher Criticism" arose to detect the imposture (Introduction, Wellhausen, p. 9).
4. D [Deuteronomist] material refers to Deutronomy, which uses similar words to both Jeremiah and the Deutronomistic histories (for example Kings until Josiah dies). The Deuteronomist, a person (or group) that collected the material that forms the bulk of the Biblical histories of Joshua, Judges, Samuel and Kings. Dealing with folktale and written court history, these historians attempted to give order and analysis to the diverse sources they had at their disposal, beginning in Josiah's time (d. 609) to post-exilic period, using earlier sources. The Book of Deuteronomy, or the bulk of it, was composed in the reign of Josiah, when Hilkiah, the High Priest, pretended to have found it in the Temple [some seven centuries after the death of Moses]. Various historical Books - Judges, Samuel, and Kings - did not come down to the modern age in their original state. "A revision of them much more thorough than is commonly assumed" took place towards the end of the Babylonian exile (Wellhausen, Introd., p. 8), in other words, the redactors of the Exilic period made the ancient Books tell the story of the sixth or seventh century before Christ, instead of that of the thirteenth, twelfth, or tenth, as the case might be.
5. R [Redactor] material so called because the "Redactor" organised the hotch-potch arrangement into the single volume. It served to finally unite the five books into more or less their current format. R is traditionally dated to around the time of Ezra.

Such are some of the main results reached by this "Higher Criticism". Doublets (duplications and 'retellings'), the main 'difficulty' found in these texts, are found in all types of Semitic literature (even the Greek New Testament). These are now considered by some as simply proper Semitic style, rather than evidence that multiple sources were cut and pasted together.

Martin Noth claimed that Deuteronomy through Kings was written as one document to prop up the reign of King Josiah. Noth, the modern "father" of the Deuteronomistic History, regarded the existence of the "chapters of reflection" in the books of Joshua to Kings as important proof for the unity of this history, which in his view was written by one author. Noth's thesis is that this work is the product of a single author living in Palestine during the exile. For Noth, the purpose of the work was to explain the events of 722 and 587 BC. He saw the fall of both Israelite kingdoms as the result of their religious apostasy and failure to keep the Law.

As is well known, most modern scholars abandoned the idea of a single author for this literary work, but they still accepted the existence of the Deuteronomistic History. Frank Moore Cross's double redaction theory seems to have the most explanatoral power to its advantage, as well as parsimony. The popular two-redaction theory sees the primary edition of the Deuteronomistic History originating from the time of Josiah (Deuteronomy through 2 Kgs 23:25a), and the second edition dating to the exile (which primarily added 2 Kgs 23:25b-25:30). Cross' explanation of the purpose and setting for the two editions is that an upbeat, Jerusalemite first edition was followed by a more somber, exilic second edition.

The account appears to have undergone two separate acts of editorial slanting. The original writers show a strong bias against Saul, and in favour of David and Solomon. Many years later, the Deuteronomists edited the material in a manner that conveyed their religious message, inserting reports and anecdotes that strengthened their monotheistic doctrine. When it comes to Jerusalem, however, the challenge is to set the biblical texts in the context of the archaeological and historical evidence.

The Books of Chronicles belong to the beginning of the Greek domination after BC 330. In them the writer, a Priest, or Levite, has transformed the whole history so as to square with the Priests' Code, and make it appear that the so-called Mosaic legislation had existed all through the times from Saul to the return from the Babylonish Captivity. Among other things he formed fictitious genealogies, to support his views of the Aaronic Priesthood, and the Levitical institutions.

The fundamental issue derived from the division of the Hebrew-speaking peoples into the "dual kingdoms" of Israel and Judah. In the southern kingdom of Judah, the priesthood was descended from Aaron. The result was the compilation of two "histories" with different styles and priorities, and ideas as to what was meaningful - 1st Kings is Yahwist, 2nd Kings is Elohist. The later confusion resulted when this pair of accounts was amalgamated into a single document - Joshua crossing the Jordan River and Moses crossing the Red Sea.

There is an end to all one-sided and narrow-minded particularism. Jehovah is the author and governor of the universe, the Father of the human family, and Israel is "His servant," charged with the mission of redeeming and uniting the human family in the universal Kingdom of Heaven, under the banner of truth, freedom and justice. Therefore, Israel must preserve His integrity among the nations and be holier than others, which can be done only by obedience to the whole Law.