1 E. Otto, Deuteronomium 1–11, 2 Teilbände, HThKAT, Freiburg/Basel/Wien 2012; idem, Deuteronomium 12–34, 2 Teilbände, HThKAT, Freiburg/Basel/Wien 2016–2017.

2 Some of the papers held in Helsinki are published in this volume of the ZAR.

3 R. Müller, Eckart Otto's models of Urdeuteronomium and Deuteronomistic Deuteronomy, ZAR 25 (2019), S. (1).

4 J. Gerhard, Commentarius Super Deuteronomium, In quo Textus Declaratur, Quaestiones dubiae evolvuntur, Observationes eruuntur, & loca in speciem pugnantia conciliantur, Jena 1657. Cf. on this commentary L. Perlitt, Hoc libro maxime fides docetur. Deuteronomium 1, 19–46 bei Martin Luther und Johann Gerhard, NZSTh 32 (1990) repr. in Deuteronomium-Studien, FAT 8, Tübingen 1994, 184– 191.

5 Otto's thesis on the formation of the Book of Deuteronomy as part of the Tora is summarized in Otto, Deuteronomium 1–11, 231–257.

6 Cf. Otto, Das Deuteronomium. Politische Theologie und Rechtsform in Juda und Assyrien, BZAW 284, Berlin/New York 1999, 15–90; idem: Deuteronomium 12–34, 1222–1226, 1241–1253, 1984–1990 and passim; C. Koch, Vertrag, Treueid und Bund. Studien zur Rezeption des altorientalischen Vertragrechts im Deuteronomium und zur Ausbildung der Bundestheologie im Alten Testament, BZAW 383, Berlin/New York 2008; C. L. Crouch, Israel and the Assyrians. Deuteronomy, the Succession Treaty of Esarhaddon, and the Nature of Subversion, Ancient Near East Monographs 8, Atlanta, Ga 2014.

7 Cf. O. Eißfeldt, Einleitung in das Alte Testament, 3. Auflage, Tübingen 1964, 292–297, for the older consensus of research. This consensus has been revoked for a time. Instead, the relationship between the Covenant Code and the Deuteronomic Law was explained by the assumption that parallel local oral traditions had been scripted independently of each other. Only since the mid 80s of the 20th century has the literary dependence of the Deuteronomic Law on Covenant Code been perceived more strongly again. Cf. C. Levin, Die Verheißung des neuen Bundes in ihrem theologiegeschichtlichen Zusammenhang ausgelegt, FRLANT 137, Göttingen 1985), 85–88; N. Lohfink, Zur deuteronomistischen Zentralisationsformel (1989), repr. in Studien zum Deuteronomium und zur deuteronomistischen Literatur II, Stuttgart 1991, 147–177; E. Otto, Vom Bundesbuch zum Deuteronomium, in Biblische Theologie und gesellschaftlicher Wandel, ed. G. Braulik et al., Freiburg/Basel/Wien 1993, 260–278; idem, Das Deuteronomium, 217–364; J. C. Gertz, Die Gerichtsorganisation Israels im deuteronomischen Gesetz, FRLANT 165, Göttingen 1994, 117–157; B. M. Levinson, Deuteronomy and the Hermeneutics of Innovation, Oxford/New York 1998. J. Van Seters, A Law Book for the Diaspora. Revision in the Study of the Covenant Code, Oxford/New York 2003, argues that the Book of the Covenant is depends on Deuteronomic Law. Cf. the critical comments at B. M. Levinson, Is the Covenant Code an Exilic Composition? A Response to John Van Seters (2004), repr. in “The Right Chorale”. Studies in Biblical Law and Interpretation, FAT 45, Tübingen 2008, 276–330; E. Otto, A Law Book for the Diaspora. Revision in the Study of the Covenant Code (by John VanSeters), Bib. 85 (2004) 273–277.

8 Otto, Deuteronomium 12–34, 1100.

9 Levinson, Deuteronomy; J. Stackert, Rewriting the Torah. Literary Revision in Deuteronomy and the Holiness Legislation, FAT 52, Tübingen 2007.

10 Cf. Otto, Bundesbuch; idem, Das Deuteronomium, 217–364; idem, Deuteronomium 12–34, 1100–1107 and passim.

11 Cf. Otto, Deuteronomium 12–34, 1093–1099.

12 Cf. Levinson, Hermeneutics, 23–53.

13 For the analysis of Deut 19,1–13, the inner biblical reception of the Deuteronomic law of asylum see Gertz, Gerichtsorganisation, 117–157. The literature published since then is noted and discussed by Otto, Deuteronomium 12–34, 1521–1537.

14 Cf. A. Jepsen, Untersuchungen zum Bundesbuch, BWANT 41, Stuttgart 1927, 30.

15 Cf. Otto, Deuteronomium 12–34, 1528.

16 J. Wellhausen, Die Composition des Hexateuchs und der historischen Bücher des Alten Testaments, unveränd. Nachdr. der 3. Auflage 1899, Berlin 1964, 204f; idem, Prolegomena zur Geschichte Israels, 6. Ausgabe, Berlin 1905, 156.

17 Cf. Otto, Deuteronomium 12–34, 1537, on the one hand and Gertz, Gerichtsorganisation, 137, on the other hand.