Eckart Otto, "Deuteronomy in the Pentateuch and the Hexateuch: Studies of the Literary History of the Pentateuch and the Hexateuch within the Framework of Deuteronomy" (Mohr Siebeck, 2000)

In Deuteronomy in the Pentateuch and the Hexateuch: Studies of the Literary History of the Pentateuch and the Hexateuch within the Framework of Deuteronomy (Mohr Siebeck, 2000; unrevised e-book edition, 2019), Eckart Otto contributes to the study of Deuteronomy, the Pentateuch, the Hexateuch. The book argues that both the Hexateuch and the Pentateuch developed ideas already articulated in the Deuteronomistic form of Deuteronomy. Deuteronomy therefore appears not simply as one component of the Pentateuch, but as a central point of departure for understanding the formation of larger compositions.

Otto places Deuteronomy at the centre of the literary history of ancient Israel. Rather than treating Deuteronomy, the Priestly Writing, Joshua, and Pentateuchal traditions as isolated units, he reconstructs the processes through which these texts were connected, revised, and reinterpreted. The combination of the Priestly Writing with Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomistic Book of Joshua produced a Hexateuchal composition extending from Genesis through Joshua. A later Pentateuchal redaction separated the Torah from Joshua and placed Deuteronomy’s covenant at Horeb at its centre.

The Hexateuch reaches its narrative conclusion with Israel’s arrival in the promised land, while the Pentateuch ends with Moses and Israel still outside the land. This makes Torah and covenant, rather than possession of the land, central to Israel’s identity. Otto also argues that Hexateuchal and Pentateuchal redactors did not merely use a completed Deuteronomy; they reshaped Deuteronomy itself to serve their conceptions of covenant, law, land, and Israel’s relationship with God.

Deuteronomy contributed to the emergence of the Hexateuch and Pentateuch, but the later redactions of these larger works also transformed Deuteronomy. Otto connects these literary developments with conflicts among priestly groups in the Persian period and with debates over priesthood, law, authority, identity, and inherited traditions.

Through this approach, Otto challenges the traditional separation between Pentateuchal and Deuteronomic research. His study also has implications for the hypothesis of a “Deuteronomistic History,” inviting scholars to reconsider the relationship between Deuteronomy, Joshua, the historical books, the Priestly Writing, and the final form of the Torah. It also contributes to discussions of biblical historiography, authoritative scripture, law and narrative, and the Torah’s emergence as