Biblica_1:Layout 1 21-11-2011 12:59 Pagina 325 325 EISODUS AS EXODUS: THE SONG OF THE SEA between the late 8th century BCE and the Persian period find support in situating the biblical authors within a cultural continuum that did not characterize earlier eras. To be sure, Jamieson-Drake’s study correctly identifies features that contributed to the rise of Judah as a multi-tiered state in the late 8th century. There can be little doubt that this accounts for a rise in literature emerging from its scribal establishment from that time down to the end of the monarchic period 18. And there also can be little doubt that the Persian period sees the orchestration of most of the materials that would be standardized and canonized as Scripture by the shapers of the Hebrew Bible. However, this historical back- ground for the redaction or orchestration of literary traditions is by no means the only setting for the generation of written sources. Moreover, while the formation of a state is indeed the best socio-po- litical context for the emergence of written works, the question of what constituted a “state” in antiquity must be revisited. In the two decades since Jamieson-Drake’s study, advances in scholarship point to the viability of different positions on both the issues of state formation and scribal resources in ancient Israel. Within the last decade, D.M. Master and L.E. Stager have both argued for a model of state formation that derives from patrimonial power structures rather than the strict socio-economic urbanization/centralization model advocated by Jamieson-Drake 19. From this alternative per- work of both collections of oracles that history is measured according to a Persian imperial calendar, and that the restoration of the Jerusalem Temple is a step toward integration into the imperial superstructure (Temple Restora- tion, 293-294). See also A.C. HAGEDORN, “Local Law in an Imperial Context: The Role of Torah in the (Imagined) Persian Period”, The Torah as Penta- teuch. New Models for Understanding Its Promulgation and Acceptance (eds. G.N. KNOPPERS – B.M. LEVINSON) (Winona Lake, IN 2007) 69-76, for the imperial influence upon the redaction of the Pentateuch. 18 SILBERMAN – FINKELSTEIN, “Temple and Dynasty”; B. HALPERN, “Jerusalem and the Lineages in the Seventh Century B.C.E.: Kinship and the Rise of Individ- ual Moral Liability”, Law and Ideology in Monarchic Israel (eds. B. HALPERN – D.W. HOBSON) (JSOTS 124; Sheffield 1991) 80-86; W.M. SCHNIEDEWIND, How the Bible Became a Book. The Textualization of Ancient Israel (New York – Cam- bridge 2004) 93-106 (who considers evidence from the 8th-7th centuries). 19 D.M. MASTER, “State Formation Theory and the Kingdom of Ancient Is- rael”, JNES 60 (2001) 117-131; L.E. STAGER, “The Patrimonial Kingdom of Solomon”, Symbiosis, Symbolism and the Power of the Past. Canaan, Ancient Is- rael, and their Neighbors from the Late Bronze Age through Roman Palaestina. Proceedings of the Centennial Symposium, W.F. Albright Institute of Archaeo-