188 Serge Frolov and their immediate successors will pay dearly for their transgressions (as promptly illustrated by the misfortunes of Solomon and especially Rehoboam) does not necessarily contradict the thesis that David’s dynasty as a whole will endure forever (as it does throughout the Former Prophets) (39). As to the heterogeneity of style and vocabulary, it may reflect the basic fluidity of the oral discourse: although the Former Prophets as we know it is a written text, the creator of its Deuteronomistic substrate was doubtlessly influenced by his or her predominantly oral milieu where the utterances that we see today as dissimilar were interchangeable (40). Second, multiple authorship does not necessarily presuppose substantial diachronic depth. Citing the apparent heterogeneity of the Former Prophets, several scholars have recently argued that the corpus as a whole is not an authorial or redactional creation: each book thereof (counting Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings as such) evolved on its own, after which they were brought together and arranged in a chronological order by a canonical or proto-canonical process (41). While rightfully pointing out that there is a large degree of distinctiveness to each of the books in question, the hypothesis founders on the complete absence of textual elements (e.g. superscriptions) identifying them as literary entities in their own right. One way to overcome the difficulty is to interpret the Former Prophets as a group project of sorts whose authors worked on their assignments (which may or may not be coterminous with what we know today as books) individually but with an eye to the overall design. If the (39) Already 2 Sam 7,14 anticipates the possibility of a dynastic scion misbehaving and suffering the consequences. Indeed, a statement that any Davidic descendant will thrive no matter what would border on the bizarre, especially for an author concerned with observance of the divine law and seeing Deut 17,18-20 as an authoritative text. (40) PERSON, School, 85-95, citing S. NIDITCH, Oral Word and Written Word. Ancient Israelite Literature (Library of Ancient Israel; Louisville 1996) and studies of scribes and oral performers of traditional texts in different cultures. Ironically, this consideration deprives Person’s reconstruction of a “Deutero- nomistic school” active over several generations of a major raison d’être. (41) See especially C. WESTERMANN, Die Geschichtsbücher des Alten Testaments. Gab es ein deuteronomistisches Geschichtswerk? (TBü 87; Gütersloh 1994); E.A. KNAUF, “L’‘Historiographie Deutéronomiste’ (DtrG) existe-t-elle?”, Israël construit son histoire. L’historiographie deutéronomiste à la lumière des recherches récentes (eds. A. DE PURY – T. RÖMER – J.-D. MACCHI) (Le monde de la Bible 34; Genève 1996) 409-418.