Biblical Theology Research Pt. 3

Well, I started delving into some of the liberal methodology of the late 19th and early 20th century. I've reserved my reading for the Wellhausen school, and those who influenced him.
This biographical quote from Wellhausen is interesting. This quote is taken from The Pentateuch in the Twentieth Century: The Legacy of Julius Wellhausen. Oxford University Press. New York, NY. 1998.

“In my early student days I was attracted by the stories of Saul and David, Ahab and Elijah; the discourses of Amos and Isaiah laid strong hold on me, and I read myself well into the prophetic and historical books of the Old Testament. Thanks to such aids as were accessible to me, I even considered that I understood them tolerably, but at the same time was troubled with a bad conscience, as if I were beginning with the roof instead of the foundation; for I had no thorough acquaintance with the Law, of which I was accustomed to be told that it was the basis and postulate of the whole literature. At last I took courage and made my way through Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and even through Knobel's Commentary to these books. But it was in vain that I looked for the light which was to be shed from this source on the historical and prophetical books. On the contrary, my enjoyment of the latter was marred by the Law; it did not bring them any nearer me, but intruded itself uneasily, like a ghost that makes a noise indeed, but is not visible and really effects nothing. Evn where there were points of contact between it and them, differences also made themselves felt, and I found it impossible to give a candid decision in favour of the priority of the Law. Dimly I began to perceive that thorughout there was between them all the difference that separates two wholly distinct worlds. Yet, so far from attaining clear conceptions, I only fell into deeper confusion … At last, in the course of a casual visit in Gottingen in the summer of 1867, I learned through Ritschl that Karl Heinrich Graf placed the Law later than the Prophets, and almost without knowing his reasons for the hypothesis, I was prepared to accept it; I readily acknowledged to myself the possibility of understanding Hebrew antiquity without the book of the Torah.”

Even within this short quote, one is able to see the beginnings of the critical method. Being respected abouve that of Graf, Wellhausen became very influential, particularly for his J, E, P, and D document theory and the hexateuch. What he attempted to do, was apply modern historical and scientific criticism to that of the Scriptures. What I hope to research a bit more, is how this evolutionary process of the critical method's thought was being influenced by airless presuppositions.
Great conservatives did not respond in favor to the critical method for obvious reasons. Green comments with a most verdant quote, "Kuenen and Wellhausen have shown us by what clever tricks of legerdemain they can construct castles in the air and produce histories which have positively no basis whatever but their own exuberant fancy.” Likewise Hodge and Warfield resisted saying, "The writers of this article are sincerely convinced of the perfect soundness of the great Catholic doctrine of Biblical Inspiration, i.e., that the Scriptures not only contain but ARE, THE WORD OF GOD, and hence that all their elements and all their affirmations are absolutely errorless, and binding the faith and obedience of men. Nevertheless we admit that the question between ourselves and the advocates of [modern criticism], is one of fact, to be decided only by an exhaustive and impartial examination of all the sources of evidence, i.e., the claims and the phenomena of the Scriptures themselves."
Both quotes above quoted in: Mark Noll, Between Faith and Criticism, (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1991).

What I hope to find, is the connection between liberal Biblical criticism and Vos' taking Biblical Theology from the heaps of liberal ashes, resurrecting it, and at the same time opposing historical criticism. What I simply mean to say, is that I am wondering why in the times of a great struggle between conservative and liberal views of theology (e.g. inspiration, etc.), did Vos bring Biblical Theology to the fore? Is there a connection, or am I missing something? I believe he was trying to present a Biblical history that responded to the Wellhausen (and future) critics... but was he successful at his attempt?