Dating Biblical Authorship

Many critical biblical scholars and historians of ancient Israel connect the Deuteronomistic History to the book of Deuteronomy, arguing they were composed at roughly the same time. How does that conclusion influence how scholars interpret the content of both biblical sources? How does that interpretation influence the interpretation of the archaeological record, particularly for Israel's early history (pre-monarchy)?

When the Deuteronomistic history is linked in time to the book of Deuteronomy, it establishes an early date for the occurrences within the books. If the authorship occurred at the same time, the historical content will be far greater than if composed at a later date. The internal consistency would be greater since less time has elapsed to allow for human forgetfulness or changes to the text. Finkelstein adhering to a late authorship view of these books believes they reflect the political and religious ideology of their time while containing historical memories of Israel’s past. Thus the message is modified to the current political message and the ancient memories are tailored for that message. The text thus must be viewed with a critical eye to discern between ideology and true historical fact. The range of viewpoints is wide in the field. The extreme would say the, “Bible is a Hellenistic composition with (almost) no historical value, and that the entire "history" of Israel, from the patriarchs, through the exodus, the conquest, the monarchy and the exile and restoration, never happened.” Such a viewpoint dramatically affects the treatment of the text and the consideration of it its validity.

If the text contains true historical value, then archeological finds should corroborate the accounts. Those items found would be viewed through the lens of an earlier chronological dating system. Finds would also work to prove the Biblical stories. Kitchen and Hendel examine items such as the Mari and Nuzi tablets to corroborate the social milieu depicted in the Bible. If these items confirm a similarity between early near Eastern culture and the Biblical text, then there is room to argue for ancient authorship. Finds like the Merenptah Stela are interpreted differently to represent different times and different models of Israel’s history: either as a nomadic group or closer to an organized state just before the Monarchy. Minimalists such as Thomas Thompson who adhere to a late authorship date and Jan Van Seters interpret any data with a critical eye. Thompson casts doubts on the Tel Dan Inscription’s reference to, “the house of David” saying it does not mean David was a historical ancestor. Depending on the presuppositions about the Biblical text, the interpretations for the archeological findings differ.

Footnotes:
Yigael Levin, Hebrew Discussion Board: Brief definition of "minimalism" and "maximalism," http://www.wwuheiser.com/minimalmaximal.pdf.
Israel Finkelstein and Amihai Mazar, The Quest for the Historical Israel, ed. Brian B. Schmidt (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2007).
Yigael Levin, Hebrew Discussion Board: Brief definition of "minimalism" and "maximalism," http://www.wwuheiser.com/minimalmaximal.pdf.
Michael Heiser, Ancient Israel.
Michael Heiser, Ancient Israel.