It is not possible here to give an account of the detailed argumentation Schmid presents to reconstruct the redactional process he finds behind chapters 30-33 and, by extension, to the redactional stages behind the remainder of the book. Suffice it to say that this passage is the focal point of a number of the successive redactions of the book and reflects the changing worldviews of succeeding generations. This analytic tradition-historical work leads to an interesting synthesis in which he seeks to bring to expression some of the conceptual lines of coherence that give the book its own distinctive kind of unity. This can be seen in the view of history as a continuum that emerges in the course of the redaction of Jeremiah. When the conception of suffering appeared as an interpretable sign, a larger context of meaning could then be conceived that included the past.
Past guilt is presented as the explanation of present suffering.
This permitted the emergence of a historical pattern that explained the present circumstances in terms of the past. Once the judgment had come, a positive view of the future was again conceivable. In summary, Schmid seeks to redeem the tradition-historical method from its excesses and carry it forward into the future in combination with a modified literary method. His effort to see the dialogue between the levels of the tradition, and to bring to light the thematic and conceptual threads that tie the parts of the book together discloses many illuminating insights into the text and the way in which the tradition process may have worked. His nuanced concept of seper, which permits a form of unity that allows considerable redactional diversity, will demand serious consideration by future critics.