Holy Writ as Oral Lit: the Bible as Folklore

141 Pages·2000·2.881 MB·English

by  Dundes, Alan

Holy Writ as Oral Lit

Holy Writ as Oral Lit
The Bible as Folklore
Alan Dundes
ROWMAN & LITTLEFIELD PUBLISHERS, INC.
Lanham•Boulder•NewYork•Oxford
ROWMAN&LITTLEFIELDPUBLISHERS,INC.
PublishedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica
byRowman&LittlefieldPublishers,Inc.
4720BostonWay,Lanham,Maryland20706
12Hid’sCopseRoad
CumnorHill,OxfordOX29JJ,England
Copyright!1999byRowman&LittlefieldPublishers,Inc.
Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproduced,
storedinaretrievalsystem,ortransmittedinanyformorbyany
means,electronic,mechanical,photocopying,recording,orotherwise,
withoutthepriorpermissionofthepublisher.
BritishLibraryCataloguinginPublicationInformationAvailable
LibraryofCongressCataloging-in-PublicationData
Dundes,Alan.
Holywritasorallit:theBibleasfolklore/AlanDundes.
p. cm.
Includesbibliographicalreferencesandindex.
ISBN0-8476-9197-7(alk.paper).—ISBN0-8476-9198-5(pbk.:
alk.paper)
1. FolkloreintheBible. 2. Bible—Criticism,Form. I. Title.
BS625.D86 1999
220.6!6—dc21 98-42449
CIP
PrintedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica
""#Thepaperusedinthispublicationmeetstheminimumrequirementsof
AmericanNationalStandardforInformationSciences—PermanenceofPaper
forPrintedLibraryMaterials,ANSIZ39.48-1984.
Contents
Acknowledgments vii
HolyWritasOralLit:TheBibleasFolklore
WhatIsFolklore? 2
WrittenFolklore 5
PreviousStudiesofFolkloreandtheBible 9
VariationinNumber,Name,andSequence 21
VariationinNumber 21
VariationinName 37
VariationinSequence 53
MoreDuplicateTexts 63
TheTenCommandments 96
TheLord’sPrayer 103
StillMoreDuplicateTexts 105
Conclusion 111
Bibliography 119
Index 127
AbouttheAuthor 131
v

Acknowledgments
This book combines a lifelong love of the Bible with a career in the
study of folklore. The numerous citations all come from my family
Bible, which happens to be the King James Version, first set forth in
1611.Iamwellawareoftheexistenceofmanydifferenttranslationsof
the Bible besides the Authorized Version of 1611, such as the Revised
Standard Version of 1952 and the Jerusalem Bible of 1966. I do not
believe that the validity of my argument depends upon using any one
particular translation of the Bible. The argument stands or falls on its
own merit; minor differences in the wording of any passage in either
theOldortheNewTestamentshouldnotaffectthebasicthrustofmy
discussion.
Iwouldliketoexpressmyheartfeltthankstomydearwife,Carolyn,
who has encouraged me in this as in all my scholarly endeavors, and
especially for repeatedly asking, Isn’t all this already pretty much
known by readers of the Bible? Is there anything new or original in
whatyouaresaying?Itismysincerehopethatreadersofthisbookwill
answerthosequestions,respectively,‘‘No’’and‘‘Yes!’’
AlanDundes
vii