ABSTRACT
In Volume 2 we will present a history of scholarship on the dating of the biblical books focusing on the use of linguistic evidence, a new syn thesis, further detailed case studies of supposed late or LBH features, and a detailed bibliography. The synthesis will draw together the threads of the argument in this volume and argue that seeing EBH and LBH as two successive chronological phases of BH is incompatible with the evi dence. We argue that a better model sees LBH as merely one style of Hebrew in the Second Temple period and quite possibly First Temple period also. ‘Early’ BH and ‘Late’ BH, therefore, do not represent differ ent chronological periods in the history of BH, but instead represent co existing styles of literary Hebrew throughout the biblical period. These two general language types, EBH and LBH, are best taken as represent ing two tendencies among scribes of the biblical period: conservative and non-conservative. The authors and scribes who composed and transmit ted works in EBH exhibit a tendency to ‘conservatism’ in their linguistic choices, in the sense that they only rarely use forms outside a narrow core of what they considered literary forms. At the other extreme, the LBH authors and scribes exhibited a much less conservative attitude, freely adopting a variety of linguistic forms in addition to (not generally instead of) those favoured by the EBH scribes. Between extreme con servatism (e.g. Zechariah 1-8) and extreme openness to variety (e.g. Ezra), there was a continuum into which other writings may be placed (e.g. Ezekiel, the Temple Scroll).
