This challenging collection brings together a number of G.'s previously published papers. The author uses similar passages in mainly Hellenistic Greek texts to try to establish a chronology where the biblical Primary History (Genesis to Deuteronomy) is predated by similar passages in the extra-biblical tradition; the result is a number of chapters where pairings of traditional tales appear, with potential relevance to dating.
Several examples will illustrate the approach: G. compares the tale of David pouring out water heroically obtained by his troops (2 Sam. 23:13–17) to a similar story of Alexander the Great (Anabasis 6.26.1–3). If the latter is earlier (and it cannot be earlier than Alexander), then the Davidic material must be not earlier than Hellenistic.
A second example is perhaps more surprising. Homer's Iliad (19.395–424) includes a story in which the horse of Achilles talks to his master; G. compares this to the story of Balaam's ass (Num. 22), where the animal shows similar powers of perception. The Homeric example predates the earliest biblical version.
Similar examples juxtapose Iphigenia and Jephthah's daughter, Samson and Heracles; an abducted wife tale in Judges 21, and so on. G. is, however, scrupulous in his comparison of biblical and extra-biblical texts. Especially convincing are the treatment of divine messengers (Chapter 5) and the tales of Jews at foreign courts in comparison with Herodotus (Chapter 4).
One issue calls for caution. The materials belong with popular narratives (folktales), where a tale may originally predate all currently known examples. In such instances it will not help merely to date extant examples relative to each other. There may also be problems with the exactness of some parallels (as in the case of Achilles and Balaam).
A striking feature of G.'s treatment is that he sets out to be a doxographer's doxographer. This is done with admirable clarity, but there are times when the complex of opinions and standpoints on offer threaten to be self-defeating. G.'s account of his own changes of mind over decades at the very outset warns of the complications to come, and the reader is wellnigh swamped in the tide of often bitter polemic. The summing-up is unsurprisingly inconclusive, G. edging towards Hellenistic priority while conceding to both sides.
What can we make of it all? A moratorium would seem welcome in a field where scholarship is in danger of collapsing under its own weight; but G. deals patiently with complex issues in dating popular narratives. Readers of ancient folktales and the Greek novel will also find much profitable material along the way.
