The Book of Samuel: Its Composition, Structure and Significance as ...

THE BOOK OF SAMUEL
scholars found in the book of Samuel a scheme of parallel sources
similar to that which was found in the Pentateuch and in the books
of Joshua and Judges. The phenomena that brought them to apply
the method of source analysis in the book of Samuel are rather the
same as in the former books—parallel motifs or stories; discrepancies;
differences in theological and social conceptions; change of
literary genres and styles; awkwardness in the text sequence; and so
on. Julius Wellhausen, the prominent exponent of this method,
posited two main interwoven parallel sources that combined to
make up most of the book of Samuel—the first more natural and
realistic, hence should be the earlier one, and the second containing
theological and schematic components, hence should be regarded
as the later one. 8 Other scholars developed this approach in different
ways. 9 At a later stage, in this view, these hypothetical sources
underwent editorial changes by the Deuteronomistic School. R.H.
Pfeiffer made an attempt to reconstruct the earlier (E and J)
sources of the book of Samuel and to delineate the sparse Deuteronomistic
editorial work that completed the book. 10 This school
of historical literary criticism compares biblical books to a rope that
is made of interwoven strands. To extend the metaphor, the scholar’s
task is to unwind the rope and separate its strands; or if one
puts it in a less figurative way, the scholar’s mission is to analyze
the book’s different sources and the editorial layers, and to establish
their different dates and characters. The basic assumption of
this method is that historiographical and theological elements as
well as ideas and conceptions that were integrated in the sources
and the editorial layers would better reflect the later times of its late
authors and editors rather than the earlier historical times of the
topics of narration.
Regarding the book of Samuel, this approach suffers from
conspicuous shortcomings—the attempts to separate parallel, sequential,
and vital stories (sources) in this book proved to be arbitrary
and unconvincing. Furthermore, the assumption that the
sources and editorial layers reflect later historical periods and
1968), 215–227; J.A. Soggin, Introduction to the Old Testament (London: SCM
Press, 1976), 185–197; W.S. Lasor, D.A. Hubbard and F.W. Bush, Old
Testament Survey: The Message, Form, and Background of the Old Testament
(Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1982), 227–253; R.K. Harrison, Introduction
to the Old Testament (London: Tyndale Press, 1970), 695–718; T.
Longman III and R.B. Dillard, An Introduction to the Old Testament (Grand
Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 2006), 151–166; J. Van Seters, The Biblical Saga
of King David, (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2009), 1–52.
8 J. Wellhausen, Prolegomena zur Geschichte Israels (Berlin: G. Reimer,
1886), 235–307.
9 See, e.g., K. Budde, Die Bücher Samuel (KHC, 8: Tübingen: J.C.B.
Mohr, 1902), passim; O. Eissfeldt, Old Testament: An Introduction, 268–281.
10 R.H. Pfeiffer, Introduction to the Old Testament (New York: Harper,
1948), 242–368.
5