First Published in 1987. Routledge is an imprint of Taylor & Francis, an informa company.

This first volume in the Harvard Semitic Monographs series challenges many of the standard positions that have long been held concerning the Greek and Hebrew texts of the Books of Kings. The author's personal examination of the Qumran Hebrew manuscripts, published and unpublished, has led to a new understanding of the recensional development of the Greek text. His study contributes significantly to the methodology of modern textual criticism and the evaluation of historical sources in the Old Testament. Examining the parallel development of the Greek text and the Hebrew, the author attributes the chronological discrepancy between the oldest Greek text forms and the Masoretic text to a change from the chronological system found in the Hebrew "Vorlagen" of the Old Greek and proto-Lucian texts to the newer system of the Masoretic text. The greatest difference between the two systems is found in the period from Omri to Jehu, where the pattern of regional formulae is worked into the narratives concerning Elijah and Elisha. The author concludes that the reason for the change to the newer Masoretic system was the desire to be able, from a chronological viewpoint, to identify Jehoshaphat as the King of Judah in the narrative of the Moabite campaign, an identification that was not possible in the older Greek chronology.

The simplest method of transferring data through the inputs or outputs of a silicon chip is to directly connect each bit of the datapath from one chip to the next chip. Once upon a time this was an acceptable approach. However, one aspect (and perhaps the only aspect) of chip design which has not changed during the career of the authors is Moore's Law, which has dictated substantial increases in the number of circuits that can be manufactured on a chip. The pin densities of chip packaging technologies have not increased at the same pace as has silicon density, and this has led to a prevalence of High Speed Serdes (HSS) devices as an inherent part of almost any chip design. HSS devices are the dominant form of input/output for many (if not most) high-integration chips, moving serial data between chips at speeds up to 10 Gbps and beyond. Chip designers with a background in digital logic design tend to view HSS devices as simply complex digital input/output cells. This view ignores the complexity associated with serially moving billions of bits of data per second. At these data rates, the assumptions associated with digital signals break down and analog factors demand consideration. The chip designer who oversimplifies the problem does so at his or her own peril.

The simplest method of transferring data through the inputs or outputs of a silicon chip is to directly connect each bit of the datapath from one chip to the next chip. Once upon a time this was an acceptable approach. However, one aspect (and perhaps the only aspect) of chip design which has not changed during the career of the authors is Moore's Law, which has dictated substantial increases in the number of circuits that can be manufactured on a chip. The pin densities of chip packaging technologies have not increased at the same pace as has silicon density, and this has led to a prevalence of High Speed Serdes (HSS) devices as an inherent part of almost any chip design. HSS devices are the dominant form of input/output for many (if not most) high-integration chips, moving serial data between chips at speeds up to 10 Gbps and beyond. Chip designers with a background in digital logic design tend to view HSS devices as simply complex digital input/output cells. This view ignores the complexity associated with serially moving billions of bits of data per second. At these data rates, the assumptions associated with digital signals break down and analog factors demand consideration. The chip designer who oversimplifies the problem does so at his or her own peril.

Written by a team of veteran scholars and exciting emerging talents, The SAGE Handbook of Film Studies maps the field internationally, drawing out regional differences in the way that systematic intellectual reflection on cinema and film has been translated into an academic discipline. It examines the conversations between Film Studies and its contributory disciplines that not only defined a new field of discourse but also modified existing scholarly traditions. It reflects on the field's dominant paradigms and debates and evaluates their continuing salience. Finally, it looks forward optimistically to the future of the medium of film, the institution of cinema and the discipline of Film Studies at a time when the very existence of film and cinema are being called into question by new technological, industrial and aesthetic developments.