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

THE BOOK OF SAMUEL
A Weiser, who unlike Rost, preferred to define the latter large cycle
as the court history of David’s rule. 18
The studies of the development of the story cycles created the
impression that the book of Samuel is a product of the combination
of sequential story cycles, and that it is a worthwhile endeavor
to trace back the development of the early traditions that eventually
became the main components of the final book. This endeavor was
dubbed traditio-historical analysis. In Scandinavian scholarship the
main effort was placed on the study of oral traditions that had been
handed down from one generation to the next. R.A. Carlson applied
such a method in his study of 2 Samuel. 19 Other scholars
suggested two more story cycles—the stories concerning Samuel
which were preserved in the holy compound at Gilgal, and the
“Appendix” at the end of the book (2 Samuel 21–24). 20
ARGUMENTS CONCERNING THE BOOK’S LATENESS AND
ITS HISTORICAL UNRELIABILITY
The problem of dating the composition of the book of Samuel and
determining the type and number of its authors and editors has
become a major issue for historians who are interested in the period
of the rise of the Israelite monarchy. The basic assumption
shared by many scholars was and still is, as I have said, that late
materials tend to reflect the opinions and knowledge of their late
authors or editors rather than those of the historical period of the
narrative. This assumption, however, is simplistic and overgeneralized.
After all, it is often the case that historical information
written by late but meticulous historiographers proves reliable;
while in other instances writers who recorded events of their times
are patently biased. Court scribes everywhere over-glorified kings
and their achievements and excused their failures. The writer’s date,
then, is hardly a perfect touchstone for determining historical reliability.
21 Yet, the question of dating the time of writing or editorial
work is still very important, since often later authors or editors
lacked access to early sources that perished during the passage of
time or were simply not available to them.
In the last two decades serious doubts were raised among archaeologists
and historians regarding the historicity of the rise of the
Israelite monarchy as depicted in the book of Samuel. The common
argument is that most of the book’s materials came from late
sources and that part of it was composed by the Deuteronomistic
18 For a summary of the different cycles and other editions compare
Weiser, Introduction, 162–170.
19 R.A. Carlson, David, the Chosen King: A Traditio-Historical Approach to
the Second Book of Samuel (Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1964).
20 See, e.g., Longman III and Dillard, Introduction, 155–156.
21 I. Provan, V.P. Long and T. Longman III, A Biblical History of Israel
(Louisville, Ky.: Westminster John Knox Press, 2003), 56–62.
7