The Historiographical Jesus: Memory, Typology, and the Son of David

Written by Anthony Le Donne Reviewed By Joshua W. Jipp

The past decade of research on the so-called “Quest for the Historical Jesus” has witnessed a marked turn from a search for non-interpreted facts about “what actually happened” surrounding the figure of Jesus of Nazareth or “what he actually said” to, rather, an attempt to describe the impact of the earliest memories about Jesus (most notably, here, Le Donne's dissertation director James D. G. Dunn and his Jesus Remembered [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003]). Le Donne situates his research within this conversation but finds lacking “a theory of memory that interacts with recent historiographical discussions of memory theory”—especially social memory (p. 12). Le Donne argues that Jesus can be studied as a historical figure only if “history is thought of in terms of memory refraction” (p. 13), namely, the processes by which all perceptions of Jesus were bent, distorted, and interpreted by his contemporaries. He thereby proposes to examine the manner in which scriptural typology, particularly related to the title “Son of David,” contributed to the continuing evolution of memories of Jesus. In this way, he hopes to chart a path that overcomes the false dichotomy between historical fact and historical interpretation as well as between history and typology.

The book is divided into two sections. Chapters 1-4 lay a theoretical framework for the historiographical study of social memory and typology, while chapters 5-8 function as exegetical test cases that seek to demonstrate his historiographical thesis. Chapter 2 selectively surveys historiographical ideas and argues three theses that work as premises for the rest of his study: (1) all remembered perceptions are inevitably interpreted; (2) all perceptions are continuously interpreted and reinterpreted; and (3) there is no such thing as a non-interpreted memory or event. Chapter 3 introduces a component of social memory theory that is foundational for the work: “memory refraction/distortion.” All memories are refracted in that “[m]atters of emphasis, perspective, and interpretation are the very basis for memory's existence” (p. 51). Memories are refracted for example, through “distanciation” whereby memories become vague, through “instrumentalization,” where they are reinterpreted to better serve present concerns, and through “conventionalization,” where the memories are patterned after certain social and cultural experiences. Most important for his concerns with typology, Le Donne notes that the most important memories are often “measured against, and interpreted by, the climactic moments of great stories and, indeed, history itself” (p. 55, italics his). Individual and corporate events are thereby often remembered and unconsciously interpreted through the lens of sacred texts, national stories, and legends of golden ages. Thus, Le Donne suggests that this “typological narrativization is often a means of remembering and not necessarily a literary device employed in a far-removed context” (p. 59).

The heart of Le Donne's thesis is found in chapter 4 (“Memory and Typology”), which argues, “the analysis of memory refraction provides the Jesus historian a means to locate and chart historical memories that betray typological interpretation” (p. 65). Typological narrativization, then, is a means of memory refraction. Le Donne briefly demonstrates the typological “mnemonic process” with Jesus' saying about John the Baptist in Matt 11:12-15.

  • Jesus activates an OT category by appealing to Elijah the prophet (A. “Hebrew Bible category”).
  • Jesus' appeal to Elijah the prophet activates, however, not only 1-2 Kings but also the memory refraction of Elijah tradition found in Mal 4:5-6 (B. “trajectory of tradition”/”refraction”).
  • In Jesus' claim that John is himself Elijah (Matt 11:14), Jesus paints John as “the new perception” or “the New Testament category” (p. 78; C. “New Testament interpretation or new perception”).
  • Through Matthew's “commemoration of Elijah . . . within perceptions of John,” the audience is now led to remember John through the eschatological category of Mal 4:5-6 (D. “synthesis of tradition”/”localization”).

Le Donne argues that this model, presented in movements A-D, “provides . . . a single trajectory of interpretation that extends from the traditional narrative to the contemporary figure” (p. 79). Foundational to his project here is that these typological memories compose a continuous trajectory of remembrances and that it is the task of the historian to chart these typological memories in the Gospel tradition.

The final four chapters, then, take the title “Son of David” and, through the charting of memory refraction (see movements A-D above), show “how early memories of Jesus were initially shaped by typological interpretation” (p. 94). Chapter 5 charts the typological trajectory and background of the “Son of David” title and functions as the background against which Le Donne charts specific memories of Jesus from the Gospel tradition. Le Donne emphasizes, through examining 2 Sam 7, the Chronicler, Ps 72, Isa 11, and Pss. Sol. 17-18, that the title “Son of David” is both Davidic and Solomonic. Chapter 6 (“The Therapeutic Son of David”) examines the typological trajectory of Solomon, the Son of David, from the archetypal wise king to the powerful exorcist and argues that the mnemonic category of Son of David functioned for Matthew's Gospel as a typological lens for interpreting Jesus' exorcisms. The title “Son of David” ensured that Jesus' exorcisms were not interpreted along the lines of a foreign magician; rather, the title legitimates Jesus' exorcisms by painting him as one like Solomon. Chapter 7 (“Jesus' Temple Procession”) traces the interpretive scriptural trajectories related to a Davidic/Solomonic procession into Jerusalem (e.g., 1 Kgs 1:32-40; Zech 9:9; Ps 118) and argues that if Jesus' procession intentionally evoked these texts, which portray a unity between king and priest/temple establishment, then this typological “act would have been perceived as an invitation to the priesthood to acknowledge his claim as David's successor” (p. 220). The failure of the temple establishment to greet Jesus indicates their rejection of him as Israel's Messiah. Finally, chapter 8 (“The 'Son of David' Question”) examines Mark 12:35-37 and the typological trajectory of Ps 110, specifically traditions that portray an adversarial relationship between Messiah and current temple establishment. He argues that Mark's portrayal of Jesus in Mark 11 and 14, and Jesus' use of Ps110, pitted him “in direct opposition to the Jerusalem temple establishment” and that Jesus'”rank and mission were hinged upon his authority over the Jerusalem temple” (p. 257).

The Historiographical Jesus makes important contributions to the study of the historical Jesus in its demonstration that scriptural typology is a means of remembering and, therefore, is not an anti-historical literary device. Chapters 5-8 richly examine the role of Davidic/Solomonic typology in the Gospels. While his confidence in the ability to trace and chart typological trajectories is convincing in some instances, I question whether this is always possible for the historian (and was less convinced by the test case in ch. 8 on Ps 110 and Mark 12:35-37). While one cannot do everything in a single monograph, of course, I was surprised to find no interaction with two works: (1) Samuel Byrskog, Story as History—History as Story: The Gospel Tradition in the Context of Ancient Oral History (WUNT 123; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000), which works on the “interplay between interpretative and narrativizing procedures” (p. 199), and (2) Richard J. Bauckham's important Jesus and the Eyewitnesses: The Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006). Nevertheless, Le Donne's thesis is a creative argument that will repay valuable dividends to the reader.


Joshua W. Jipp

Joshua W. Jipp
Trinity Evangelical Divinity School
Deerfield, Illinois, USA

Other Articles in this Issue

Evaluating a new English translation of the Bible can be extremely difficult...

Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758) is remembered today as a saint, scholar, preacher, pastor, metaphysician, revival leader, theologian, Calvinist—the list goes on...

Almost two decades ago I wrote an essay titled " When Is Spirituality Spiritual? Reflections on Some Problems of Definition ...

He was the youngest son of elderly parents. His childhood was secluded and unhappy, which might in some measure account for his lifelong melancholy...