The Double Redaction of the Deuteronomistic History: The Case is

This article argues that the Deuteronomistic History (DH) was first com-posed during the reign of Josiah and then revised by the addition of limited amounts of more pessimistic material in the early exile. The argument of intense thematic dissonance is supported by a number of confirmatory observations. The interests of DH are pre-exilic and culminate in the reforms of Josiah. Many signals indicate a change of authorship near the end of 2 Kings. Recognizing the fact of double redaction leads to a proper understanding of the purpose and theology of DH. 1. The Problem Many of us who still practice historical criticism and source analysis have become less and less comfortable with what we are doing. It is increas-ingly apparent that the critical tools we have inherited from our scholarly forebears are entirely too blunt and crude for the delicate operations we have sought to perform with them. Anything approaching certainty or even scholarly consensus appears to be virtually impossible for nearly any asser-tion one might make about the redactional history of biblical materials. Nonetheless, the balance of probability still indicates that the Deu-teronomistic History (DH) was first composed during the reign of Josiah and then revised by the addition of limited amounts of more pessimistic material in the early exile. The powerful argument of thematic dissonanc