{"id":{"repo_id":"cambridge","oai_identifier":"oai:www.repository.cam.ac.uk:1810/385921"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/cambridge/oai:www.repository.cam.ac.uk:1810/385921","repository":{"repo_id":"cambridge","name":"Cambridge University","base_url":"https://api.repository.cam.ac.uk/server/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"Foreigners in the Priestly Corpus","abstract":"Although there is large consensus on which Pentateuchal texts constitute the ‘Priestly’ corpus, there is also agreement that the corpus itself is not a compositional unity, demonstrating significant variation in theology and anthropology within its strata. This project investigates one important aspect in which this variation is evident: the treatment and attitude towards foreigners. While certain scholarly models concerning this subject have arisen (for example, cultic integration of foreigners in the Holiness Code, “H,” influence of the conquest motif in Numbers, and inclusive monotheism in the Priestly Grundschrift, “P”), they so far pertain to only one particular Priestly layer, without deeper analysis across the layers in the corpus. However, probing the larger issues represented by these models, such as laws binding on foreigners, land and conflict with foreigners over it, and the relationship of foreigners to Israel’s cult, we find no homogenous view on each of these issues over the entire Priestly corpus. Rather, using historical and literary approaches, it can be shown that successive Priestly layers are guided by both the contemporary needs of the Israelite-Judahite community in the Persian to Greek periods as well as ideological influence from other HB texts to which the Priestly corpus is being joined, to revise, reinterpretand even contradictearlier Priestly ideas. As a result, this study not only validates the diachronic approach for Priestly texts, and offers some clarifications towards recent research into Priestly (and Pentateuchal) redactional models, but at a broader level also calls into question the extent to which the Priestly material is theologically centred.","abstract_html":"Although there is large consensus on which Pentateuchal texts constitute the ‘Priestly’ corpus, there is also agreement that the corpus itself is not a compositional unity, demonstrating significant variation in theology and anthropology within its strata. This project investigates one important aspect in which this variation is evident: the treatment and attitude towards foreigners. While certain scholarly models concerning this subject have arisen (for example, cultic integration of foreigners in the Holiness Code, “H,” influence of the conquest motif in Numbers, and inclusive monotheism in the Priestly Grundschrift, “P”), they so far pertain to only one particular Priestly layer, without deeper analysis across the layers in the corpus. However, probing the larger issues represented by these models, such as laws binding on foreigners, land and conflict with foreigners over it, and the relationship of foreigners to Israel’s cult, we find no homogenous view on each of these issues over the entire Priestly corpus. Rather, using historical and literary approaches, it can be shown that successive Priestly layers are guided by both the contemporary needs of the Israelite-Judahite community in the Persian to Greek periods as well as ideological influence from other HB texts to which the Priestly corpus is being joined, to revise, reinterpretand even contradictearlier Priestly ideas. As a result, this study not only validates the diachronic approach for Priestly texts, and offers some clarifications towards recent research into Priestly (and Pentateuchal) redactional models, but at a broader level also calls into question the extent to which the Priestly material is theologically centred.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Lee, Sheng Wei Daniel"],"institution":"University of Cambridge","degree_name":"Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)","degree_level":"Doctoral","degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":["MacDonald, Nathan"],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2025,"date_issued":"2025-04-29","date_published":"2025-04-29","updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:24:11Z","subjects":["Priestly","Foreigners","Literary criticism","Hebrew Bible"],"languages":[],"rights":[],"rights_urls":["https://apollo8-f-pro.lib.cam.ac.uk/bitstreams/d2651069-a2e8-4e58-8c9d-155234591ece/download","http://purl.org/NET/rdflicense/allrightsreserved"],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.119355","outbound_label":"DOI","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.doi"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.advisor","label":"Advisor","values":["MacDonald, Nathan"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Lee, Sheng Wei Daniel"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2025-04-29"]},{"key":"dc:publisher.institution","label":"Dc Publisher Institution","values":["University of Cambridge"]},{"key":"dc:relation.isreferencedby.uri","label":"Dc Relation Isreferencedby URI","values":["https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/385921"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"dc:type.qualificationlevel","label":"Dc Type Qualificationlevel","values":["Doctoral"]},{"key":"dc:type.qualificationname","label":"Dc Type Qualificationname","values":["Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Priestly","Foreigners","Literary criticism","Hebrew Bible"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["https://apollo8-f-pro.lib.cam.ac.uk/bitstreams/d2651069-a2e8-4e58-8c9d-155234591ece/download","http://purl.org/NET/rdflicense/allrightsreserved"]},{"key":"dc:rights.embargodate","label":"Dc Rights Embargodate","values":["2026-06-25"]},{"key":"dc:rights.embargotype","label":"Dc Rights Embargotype","values":["embargo"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.doi","label":"DOI","values":["https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.119355"]},{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["https://apollo8-f-pro.lib.cam.ac.uk/bitstreams/c5771031-794c-4d35-8a0f-3a948b282689/download"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["Although there is large consensus on which Pentateuchal texts constitute the ‘Priestly’ corpus, there is also agreement that the corpus itself is not a compositional unity, demonstrating significant variation in theology and anthropology within its strata. This project investigates one important aspect in which this variation is evident: the treatment and attitude towards foreigners. While certain scholarly models concerning this subject have arisen (for example, cultic integration of foreigners in the Holiness Code, “H,” influence of the conquest motif in Numbers, and inclusive monotheism in the Priestly Grundschrift, “P”), they so far pertain to only one particular Priestly layer, without deeper analysis across the layers in the corpus. However, probing the larger issues represented by these models, such as laws binding on foreigners, land and conflict with foreigners over it, and the relationship of foreigners to Israel’s cult, we find no homogenous view on each of these issues over the entire Priestly corpus. Rather, using historical and literary approaches, it can be shown that successive Priestly layers are guided by both the contemporary needs of the Israelite-Judahite community in the Persian to Greek periods as well as ideological influence from other HB texts to which the Priestly corpus is being joined, to revise, reinterpretand even contradictearlier Priestly ideas. As a result, this study not only validates the diachronic approach for Priestly texts, and offers some clarifications towards recent research into Priestly (and Pentateuchal) redactional models, but at a broader level also calls into question the extent to which the Priestly material is theologically centred."]},{"key":"dc:format.checksum.md5","label":"Dc Format Checksum Md5","values":["b59e6776ac91b09013bd61c8268649ad","87eda9de84448d1f82354d60eee3eb5f"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Foreigners in the Priestly Corpus"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.advisor":["MacDonald, Nathan"],"dc:creator":["Lee, Sheng Wei Daniel"],"dc:date.issued":["2025-04-29"],"dc:description.abstract":["Although there is large consensus on which Pentateuchal texts constitute the ‘Priestly’ corpus, there is also agreement that the corpus itself is not a compositional unity, demonstrating significant variation in theology and anthropology within its strata. This project investigates one important aspect in which this variation is evident: the treatment and attitude towards foreigners. While certain scholarly models concerning this subject have arisen (for example, cultic integration of foreigners in the Holiness Code, “H,” influence of the conquest motif in Numbers, and inclusive monotheism in the Priestly Grundschrift, “P”), they so far pertain to only one particular Priestly layer, without deeper analysis across the layers in the corpus. However, probing the larger issues represented by these models, such as laws binding on foreigners, land and conflict with foreigners over it, and the relationship of foreigners to Israel’s cult, we find no homogenous view on each of these issues over the entire Priestly corpus. Rather, using historical and literary approaches, it can be shown that successive Priestly layers are guided by both the contemporary needs of the Israelite-Judahite community in the Persian to Greek periods as well as ideological influence from other HB texts to which the Priestly corpus is being joined, to revise, reinterpretand even contradictearlier Priestly ideas. As a result, this study not only validates the diachronic approach for Priestly texts, and offers some clarifications towards recent research into Priestly (and Pentateuchal) redactional models, but at a broader level also calls into question the extent to which the Priestly material is theologically centred."],"dc:format.checksum.md5":["b59e6776ac91b09013bd61c8268649ad","87eda9de84448d1f82354d60eee3eb5f"],"dc:identifier.doi":["https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.119355"],"dc:identifier.uri":["https://apollo8-f-pro.lib.cam.ac.uk/bitstreams/c5771031-794c-4d35-8a0f-3a948b282689/download"],"dc:publisher.institution":["University of Cambridge"],"dc:relation.isreferencedby.uri":["https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/385921"],"dc:rights":["https://apollo8-f-pro.lib.cam.ac.uk/bitstreams/d2651069-a2e8-4e58-8c9d-155234591ece/download","http://purl.org/NET/rdflicense/allrightsreserved"],"dc:rights.embargodate":["2026-06-25"],"dc:rights.embargotype":["embargo"],"dc:subject":["Priestly","Foreigners","Literary criticism","Hebrew Bible"],"dc:title":["Foreigners in the Priestly Corpus"],"dc:type":["Thesis"],"dc:type.qualificationlevel":["Doctoral"],"dc:type.qualificationname":["Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:24:11Z"}