Oral Tradition; Style

Jan Vansina’s study of oral traditions in primitive African cultures, demonstrates that fictional legends and historical accounts are clearly distinguished from each other.  Much greater care is taken to preserve historical accounts accurately. Research into oral transmission shows that custodians of oral tradition are able to transmit large blocks of material very accurately over time.  Furthermore, Richard Bauckham has compiled a great deal of research by psychologists on the marks of recollected memory.

Recollected memory is selective—it fixes on unique and consequential events, it retains irrelevant detail, it takes the limited vantage point of a participant rather than that of an omniscient narrator, and it shows signs of frequent rehearsal.  Bauckham then shows these same marks in the gospel narratives.

Vivid and important events can stay with you for decades if frequently rehearsed and/or retold. Factor in that disciples in the ancient world were expected to memorize their masters’ teachings, and that many of Jesus’ statements are presented in a form that was designed for memorization, and you have every reason to trust the accounts. 

Now consider the style of writing. In modern novels, details are added to create the aura of realism, but that was never the case in ancient fiction. Ancient fiction was nothing like modern fiction. Modern fiction is realistic. It contains details and dialogue and reads like an eyewitness account. This genre of fiction, however, only developed within the last three hundred years. In ancient times, romances, epics, or legends were high and remote. Details were spare and only included if they promoted character development or drove the plot.

Next time: C. S. Lewis’ take on the writing style of the New Testament.