In or about 1985 the landscape of contemporary biblical scholarship changed (I doubly parody V. Cunningham's opening line in the final chapter and his allusion to Virginia Woolf at p. 649). 1985 was the year that U. Luz published the first volume of his landmark commentary on the Gospel of Matthew, which entwined exegetical comment on the text with aspects of the text's reception history (described by Luz as ‘Wirkungsgeschichte’). Twenty-five years later, this Oxford Handbook attempts to showcase and to reflect upon the labours of (predominantly Anglophonic) biblical scholars who have followed in Luz's steps. A central purpose of this volume is to display ‘a highly diverse set of responses to the Bible’ (p. 6). Unlike Luz's work, the binding tradition here is that of the Academy, not the Church.

The book itself boasts forty-four chapters, divided into two parts, with an introduction by J. Roberts. Part i comprises twelve chapters on Genesis, Judges, Job, Psalms, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, John's Gospel, Romans, First Corinthians, Galatians and the book of Revelation. The decision to select these texts is anchored in the insight that they have had colourful histories of subsequent interpretation (p. 6). The majority of the authors of these chapters are biblical scholars, many of whom have published reception historical works in the already-established Blackwell commentary series, for example D. Gunn, J. Kovacs, J. Riches, C. Rowland and J. Sawyer. These chapters ‘provide an overview of scholarly post-Enlightenment readings of the form and content of each book’ (p. 7).

Yet whilst these chapters are certainly informative both for the novice and the general student of biblical studies, and whilst they cumulatively create a visible biblical ‘anchor’ for the second part of the book, their place and function within a volume on reception history is unclear. Although they sometimes discuss issues which later become storm centres of interpretative creativity and/or controversy (for example. pp.121–7), most chapters in part i simply do not explore the reception history of the text. The obvious exception is D. Gunn's chapter on Judges, three paragraphs of which outline briefly the form and content of the book: the remainder are devoted to interesting and various uses of Judges, for example the use of Judges 19–21 by John Milton, commissioned by Parliamentarians to rationalise the regicide of Charles i (pp. 96–8 at p. 91). J. Riches's chapter on Galatians mainly explores the theological history of interpretation, although there are glimpses of the text's wider reception history, for example its use in Zen Buddhism (p. 151). Yet these are the exceptions rather than the rule. To be sure, scholarly readings and theological interpretations are themselves ultimately included within the reception history of the text. However, that sort of technical point sits uneasily with the spirit of the experimental work being undertaken in the study of reception history. Nor, for that matter, does it explain the relation between the parts (part i is presented as a launch pad for part ii). Though one cannot fault the writers' analyses, one wonders whether it is a missed opportunity in such a prominent volume on reception history.

Part ii comprises an extensive assortment of case studies in reception history. The assemblage of these pieces is thoughtful. Chapters xiii–xv deal with the reception of the Bible in different types of interpretative media: iconography (understood as any type of artistic representation, p.175); textual translations; and memory and imagination. Chapters xvi–xviii consider the reception of ideas, specifically millenarianism, pacifism and violence and antisemitism. Chapters xix–xxiv follow the general convention of taking a specific historical character, community or context and exploring the use of the Bible therein. Conversely, chapters xxv–xliii take a biblical text as a supreme point of reference and consider its reception in a given historical context. Part ii thus sits at the juncture of a range of scholarly interests (from Bob Dylan and Dan Brown to G. F. Handel and John Ruskin) and academic expertise (contributors include scholars of the Bible, art history, literature and music). Thus the Handbook truly exemplifies the interdisciplinary nature of biblical reception history. It is also gratifying to see case studies which move beyond mere European reception history, with chapters by A. Asano on Kanzo Uchimura (pp. 323–39) and by J. Holtom on Gandhi (pp. 542–56). The final chapter, by V. Cunningham, is a dense account of recent developments in literary theory vis-à-vis the Bible. As such, it is less of a plenary discussion about reception history than another instance of it: it essentially explores the reception of the Bible in contemporary literary criticism.

As the introduction plainly states, this Handbook is not engineered to prescribe a scholarly consensus about reception history, but rather designed to embody a descriptive demonstration of its ‘richness and value’ through ‘multiplicity and diversity’ (p. 8). None the less, one cannot shy away from theoretical matters, such as whether or not the ‘premise’ of reception history – namely that ‘foundationalist hermeneutic’ is relativised by ‘variety of meanings’ – is a legitimate one (p. 4). Doubtless Roberts believes that it is; he briefly appeals to the philosophical hermeneutics of H.-G. Gadamer as justification. But there are other searching matters concerning reception history which this volume raises, such as the purpose of and hermeneutical pedigree of reception history. Furthermore, whilst this Handbook successfully parades many learned and interesting examples, one wonders if the eclectic mixture of studies in part ii (marketed as an intentional act to show the fascinating possibilities of this type of research) actually reveals something of the disarray which lies at the heart of reception history. What is the ‘value’ of viewing together the way Bob Dylan, Dante and Gandhi interpret the Bible? If its value lies in elucidating the social, historical and cultural worlds of these individuals, then reception history has served a purpose. Yet I would suspect that such an answer would not satisfy those whose focus is the text and whose primary interest is saying something about that text. This volume is most certainly timely and highly pertinent to recent developments within biblical studies. It is a welcome addition to the field for the reasons I have given, but also because it stimulates profound questions about reception history that have yet to be answered.