"... Archaeological evidence shows that the political status of tenth-century Israel was much more modest than was hitherto assumed, so that the promise of a “great nation” and a “great name” are not nearly as appropriate as had been thought. In addition, Genesis 12:1–3 does not explicitly envision an Israelite state; this fact sets it apart from promises with political substance (Genesis 25:23; 27:28–29, 39–40), which really do date from the early monarchy (tenth or ninth century). Furthermore, as Schmid and Van Seters in particular have pointed out, elements of the promise derive from royal theology, for example, the “great name” (compare 2 Samuel 7:9; 1 Kings 1:47) and the “mediation of blessings” (compare Psalm 21:4; 72:6–7, 16, 17). Such a borrowing is hardly conceivable in a period when the monarchy was just becoming established; more likely it dates from a time when the monarchy had ceased to exist (compare Isaiah 55:5 and in part Psalm 89). Finally, Israel as mediator of God’s blessings in Genesis 12:3b is most reminiscent of the universalism of DeuteroIsaiah; similar formulas date from the late preexilic period (Jeremiah 4:2) or the postexilic period (Zechariah 8:13), where they contrast with the lowly status of Israel among the nations after its political demise (compare Psalm 44:14–15; 79:4; Lamentations 2:15; Deuteronomy 28:37; Jeremiah 24:9; etc.) ..."