ABRAHAM AND ARCHÆOLOGY
ABRAHAM HIRED AN OX. ABRAHAM LEASED A FARM. ABRAHAM PAID HIS RENT. WHO
WAS THIS ABRAHAM? TRAVEL BETWEEN BABYLONIA AND PALESTINE. HAMMURAPI,
KING OF THE WESTLAND. KUDUR-MABUG. KINGS SUPPOSED BY SOME TO BE THOSE
OF GENESIS 14.
Archæological investigation has brought to light a number of texts
believed by scholars to illumine the Biblical accounts of Abraham. It is
the purpose of this chapter to translate and discuss these.
The documents which naturally attract us first are some contracts from
Babylonia in which an Abraham was one of the contracting parties. They are
as follows:
=1. Abraham Hired an Ox.=[415]
1. One ox broken to the yoke,
2. an ox from Ibni-Sin, son of Sin-imgurani,
3. from Ibni-Sin
4. through the agency of Kishti-Nabium,
5. son of Eteru,
6. Abarama, son of Awel-Ishtar,
7. for one month has hired.
8. For one month
9. one shekel of silver
10. he will pay.
11. Of it ½ shekel of silver
12. from the hand of
13. Abarama
14. Kishti-Nabium
15. has received.
16. In the presence of Idin-Urash, son of Idin-Labibaal,
17. in the presence of Awêlê, son of Urri-bani,
18. in the presence of Beliyatum, scribe.
19. Month of the mission of Ishtar (_i. e._, Ulul), day 20th,
20. The year Ammizadugga, the king (built)
21. the wall of Ammizadugga, (_i. e._, Ammizadugga’s 11th year).
22. Tablet of Kishti-Nabium.
This tablet shows how Abarama (Abraham), a farmer, hired an ox for a
month. The tablet, as the last line shows, is the copy made for
Kishti-Nabium, the agent. In such business transactions three copies were
often made, one for each of the contracting parties and one for the
scribe. The date of this tablet is 1965 B. C. Ammizadugga was the tenth
king of that first dynasty of Babylon, of which Hammurapi was the sixth.
=2. Abraham Leased a Farm.=[416]
1. To the patrician
2. speak,
3. saying, Gimil-Marduk (wishes that)
4. Shamash and Marduk may give thee health!
5. Mayest thou have peace, mayest thou have health!
6. May the god who protects thee thy head in luck
7. hold!
8. (To enquire) concerning thy health I am sending.
9. May thy welfare before Shamash and Marduk
10. be eternal!
11. Concerning the 400 _shars_ of land, the field of Sin-idinam,
12. which to Abamrama
13. to lease, thou hast sent;
14. the land-steward (?) and scribe
15. appeared and
16. on behalf of Sin-idinam
17. I took that up.
18. The 400 _shars_ of land to Abamrama
19. as thou hast directed
20. I have leased.
21. Concerning thy dispatches I shall not be negligent.
It appears from this document that Abamrama, who is none other than a
Babylonian Abraham, was a small farmer, who leased a small tract of land.
=3. Abraham Paid His Rent.=[417]
1. 1 shekel of silver
2. of the rent (?) of his field,
3. for the year Ammizadugga, the king,
4. a lordly, splendid statue (set up),
5. brought
6. Abamrama,
7. received
8. Sin-idinam
9. and Iddatum.
10. Month Siman, 28th day,
11. The year Ammizadugga, the king,
12. a lordly, splendid statue (set up).
(This was Ammizadugga’s 13th year.)
This document, dated two years after that in which the ox was hired, shows
how Abamrama (Abraham) paid a part of his rent.
The name Abamrama (Abraham) occurs in two other documents published in the
same volume (no. 101, and no. 102), where, in defining the boundaries of
other fields of Sin-idinam, they are said to be bounded on one side by the
field of Abamrama. As these documents mention the name of Abamrama only
incidentally, they are not translated here.
=4. Who Was This Abraham?=
These documents, which relate to the business of a Babylonian Abraham,
come from Dilbat, about eight miles south of Borsippa, which was just
across the Euphrates from Babylon. It is clear that this Abraham was a
small farmer, who hired a tract of land from a larger land-owner. He also
hired an ox wherewith to work his land, and paid the rent of the land and
the hire of the ox as a good citizen should. This Abraham was not the
Biblical patriarch. The patriarch’s father was Terah and his brother
Nahor; the father of this Babylonian Abraham was Awel-Ishtar, and his
brother Iddatum (_ibid._, no. 101, 9). The Abraham of the Bible was a
monotheist according to Genesis; the ancestors of the Babylonian Abraham
worshiped the goddess Ishtar, who corresponded to the Canaanitish
Ashtoreth. The Bible connects the patriarch with Ur and Haran; this
Abraham lived about half-way between these two cities.
Up to the present time this Babylonian Abraham is the only person known to
us other than the Biblical patriarch, who, in that period of history, bore
the name. He is the only one known to us outside the Biblical record.[418]
The only other occurrence of the name outside the Bible is in the name of
a place in Palestine, probably near Hebron, which Sheshonk I, the Biblical
Shishak, calls “The Field of Abram.”[419] As Shishak lived much later
(945-924 B. C.), being a contemporary of Rehoboam the son of Solomon, this
Egyptian place name is not so significant. The Babylonian Abraham
mentioned in the documents just translated is welcome proof that Abraham
was a personal name in Babylonia near the time in which the Bible places
the patriarch. With these documents Gen. 11:27-25:10 should be compared.
Another Babylonian contract is of interest in connection with the
migration of Abraham.
=5. Travel between Babylonia and Palestine.=
1. A wagon[420]
2. from Mannum-balum-Shamash,
3. son of Shelibia,
4. Khabilkinum,
5. son of Appani[bi],
6. on a lease
7. for 1 year
8. has hired.
9. As a yearly rental
10. ⅔ of a shekel of silver
11. he will pay.
12. As the first of the rent
13. ⅙ of a shekel of silver
14. he has received.
15. Unto the land of Kittim
16. he shall not drive it.
17. In the presence of Ibku-Adad,
18. son of Abiatum;
19. in the presence of Ilukasha,
20. son of Arad-ilishu;
21. in the presence of Ilishu ..........
22. Month Ululu, day 25,
23. the year the king Erech from the flood
24. of the river as a friend protected.
The date of the above interesting document has not been identified with
certainty. It is thought by some to belong to the reign of Shamsu-iluna,
the successor of Hammurapi. The writing clearly shows that at any rate it
comes from the period of this dynasty. That is, it comes from the period
to which Gen. 14 assigns the migration of Abraham. _Kittim_ in the
contract is the word used in the Hebrew of Jer. 2:10 and Ezek. 27:6 for
the coast lands of the Mediterranean. It undoubtedly has that meaning
here. This contract was written in Sippar, the Agade of earlier times, a
town on the Euphrates a little to the north of Babylon. It reveals the
fact that at the time the document was written there was so much travel
between Babylonia and the Mediterranean coast that a man could not lease a
wagon for a year without danger that it might be driven over the long
route to Syria or Palestine. Against such wear upon his vehicle the
particular wagon-owner of our document protected himself.
When, therefore, Abraham went out from his land and his kindred, he was
going to no unknown land. The tide of commerce and of emigration had
opened the way. Apparently it was no more remarkable for him to do it
than for an Irishman to come to America half a century ago, or for a south
European to come today.
=6. Hammurapi, King of the Westland.=
It is thought by many scholars that Hammurapi was the Amraphel of Genesis
14. The following inscription[421] relates to this king:
1. To [Shar]ratum,
2. the bride of Anu
3. who has come to lordship,
4. lady of strength and abundance,
5. of the mountain-temple,
6. faithful lady, of exalted counsel,
7. lady who binds the heart,
8. who for her spouse
9. makes favorable her open oracle;
10. to his lady,
11. for the life of Hammurapi,
12. king of the Westland (MAR-TU),
13. Ibirum ..........
14. governor of the river-[district] ..........
15. son of Shuban ...........,
16. a guardian-deity appropriate to her divinity,
17. in the land which she loves,
18. for her service (?)
19. before her beloved temple has set up.
This inscription is quoted here for two reasons: 1. It was erected “for
the life of Hammurapi,” who is supposed by many to be the Amraphel of Gen.
14:1. Amraphel is supposed to be a corruption of Hammurapi, thus Amrapi.
The final _l_ of Amraphel is a difficulty. While many Assyriologists, from
Schrader onward, have recognized the equivalence, it is now seriously
questioned by Jensen and Eduard Meyer, and absolutely rejected by Bezold.
It must be said that, if Amraphel is intended for Hammurapi, the name had
undergone corruption before it was placed in the Biblical record.[422] 2.
In this inscription Hammurapi is called “king of MAR-TU,” or the Westland,
a name by which the Babylonians often designated Syria and Palestine.
MAR-TU simply means “sunset,” but was used like the Arabic _magrib_ as the
designation of a region. There is no reason to doubt that here it
designates Syria and Palestine, so that, if Amraphel is Hammurapi, this
is confirmatory of his connection with the West.
=7. Kudur-Mabug.=
The following inscription[423] has also often been brought into the
discussion of Genesis 14:
1. To Nannar,
2. his king,
3. Kudur-Mabug,
4. “Father” of the Westland (MAR-TU),
5. son of Simti-shilkhak,
6. when Nannar
7. his prayer
8. had heard,
9. Enunmakh,
10. belonging to Nannar,
11. for his life
12. and the life
13. of Arad-Sin, his son,
14. king of Larsa,
15. he built.
This inscription has often been brought into connection with Abraham,
partly because some have seen in Kudur-Mabug the Chedorlaomer of Gen.
14:1, and partly because Kudur-Mabug in it calls himself “Father” or
governor of the Westland. If, however, Kudur-Mabug was intended by the
name Chedorlaomer, the name had been corrupted beyond all recognition in
the Biblical tradition before Gen. 14 was written. In reality there is no
reason to suppose that Kudur-Mabug and Chedorlaomer are the same. As to
the term “Westland,” it probably does not here designate Palestine, but
either the western part of Elam or the southern part of Babylonia.
Babylonia lay to the west of Elam, and Kudur-Mabug placed on the throne of
Larsa, a city of South Babylonia, first his son, Arad-Sin, and then his
son, Rim-Sin, and apparently maintained an over-lordship over both of
them. “Westland” accordingly means in his inscription, not Palestine, but
Babylonia. One of Kudur-Mabug’s sons calls his father “Father” (or
governor) of Emutbal, a region of Elam. It is a mistake, therefore, to
bring Kudur-Mabug into connection with Abraham and Gen. 14.[424]
=8. Kings Supposed by Some to be Those Mentioned in Gen. 14.=
Some fragmentary tablets from the Persian period, not earlier than the
fourth century B. C., contain references which have been brought by some
scholars into connection with Abraham and the fourteenth of Genesis. The
texts read as follows:
I[425]
1. ....................
2. ..............................
3. .................... his work not ..........
4. .................. _su-ḫa-am-mu_ ..........
5. ................ before the gods the creation of ..........
6. ............ day .......... Shamash, who illumines ..........
7. .......... the lord of the gods, Marduk, in the satisfaction of his
heart,
8. .......... his servant, the region, all of it, a counsel not
fulfilled,
9. .......... by force of arms he overthrew. Dursirilani, son of
Arad-Malaku (Eri?-..aku)
10. ............ goods (?) he carried off, took as spoil, waters over
Babylon and Esagil
11. ........ his with the weapon of his hand like a lamb he killed
him,
12. .......... spoke to her, father, and son; with the weapon
13. [Great] and small he cut off, Tudkhula, son of Gazza ..........
14. ...... goods he took as spoil, waters over Babylon and Esagil
15. ...... his son with the weapon of his hands upon him fell.
16. ........ of his dominion before the temple of Annunit ..........
17. ........ Elam, the city Akhkhi to (?) the city Rabbatu he spoiled.
18. ...... like a deluge, he made the cities of Akkad, all of Borsippa
(?)
19. ...... ended.[426] Kukukumal, his son pierced his heart with a
girdle-dagger of iron.
20. ........ the enemy took and the destruction of these kings,
participators in wrong (?),
21. .......... bondage for which the king of the gods, Marduk, was
angry with them
22. .......... with sickness their breast was oppressed ........
23. ........ unto ruins were reduced (?). All of them to the king, our
lord
24. ...... knowing (?) the hearts of the gods, the gracious Marduk,
for the commemoration of his name
25. ........ and named Esagil--to his place may he return.
26. .......... thy ...... may he make. This, O king, my lord we ......
27. .......... his evil his heart the gods, his fathers ..........
28. ............ a participator in sin shall not be (?).
II
1. ..................... gods (?) ..........
2. .......... in the city feared day (?) [and night (?)]
3. .......... Larsa (?), the bond of heaven which unto the four winds
....
4. he decreed them the park (?) which is in Babylon, the city of [his]
majesty (?);
5. he decreed them the possessions of Babylon, small and great.
6. In their faithful counsel unto Kukukumal, King of Elam,
7. they established the fixed advance which to them [seemed] good.
8. In Babylon, the city of Karduniash, kingship he assumed ..........
9. In Babylon, the city of the gods, Marduk set his throne (?),
10. All, even the Sodomites of the plundered temples, obeyed [him].
11. Ravens build nests; birds dwell [therein];
12. The ravens croak (?), shrieking they hatch their young [in it].
13. To the dog crunching the bone the lady .......... is favorable.
14. The snake hisses (?), the evil one who spits [poison].
15. Who is the king of Elam who the great building of Esagil
de[stroyed],
16. which the Babylonians made, and their work was ..........?
17. This is what thou hast written, saying: “I am a king, the son of a
king” ....
18. Who is the son of a daughter of a king, who on the royal throne
will sit? ...
19. He is Dursil-ilâni, son of Arad-Malkua, who the throne ..........
20. on the royal throne he sat and before his warriors [he marched].
21. Now let the king march who from ancient days .........
22. has been proclaimed lord of Babylon; the work of ........ shall
not endure.
23. In the month Siman and the month Tammuz in Babylon there was done
..........
24. the work of the son of the magician. The bull (_i. e._, warrior)
who devastates the land ..........
25. The elders in their faithful counsel ..........
26. [gave] the son of the magician the place instead of his father
27. ................. 1 maid ....................
Two other similar fragmentary texts belonging to the series are published
as noted above, but it is unnecessary to quote them here. The two
fragments which we have translated contain the most important references,
and are sufficient to enable the reader to make up his mind as to the
bearing of these texts upon the fourteenth of Genesis.
Pinches and Sayce read the name of the Elamite king, Kukukumal,
Kudurlakhmal, and identify it with Chedorlaomer. Pinches so reads it,
hesitatingly; Sayce, confidently. There is no reason for so reading it,
except the desire to discover Chedorlaomer. The first three syllables are
represented in the cuneiform by the same sign--a sign the most frequent
value of which is _ku_. It does sometimes have the value _dur_, but never
_lakh_. King reads it Kukukumal, and there is really no reason for reading
it otherwise.
Another name which occurs twice is written in the two places with a slight
difference of spelling. It is according to the most natural reading of the
signs, Arad-Malkua, or Arad-Malaku. Sayce and Pinches read Eri-eaku and
identified him with “Arioch, king of Elassar,” (Gen. 14:1). While this is
a possible reading, it is only secured by giving to the signs their
Sumerian, instead of their Semitic values, and, as the documents are in
Semitic, this is probably wrong. The name is to be read Arad-Malkua.
Another name, Tudkhula, which occurs in the first document, has been
identified by the same scholars with “Tidal, king of the nations” (Gen.
14:1), but in this text there is no evidence that Tudkhula was a king at
all, and the identification is purely fanciful. It should be noted also
that Arad-Malkua, the supposed Eri-eaku, does not himself take any part in
the wars here recorded; it is his son, Dursil-ilâni, who is represented as
a contemporary of Kukukumal, the supposed Chedorlaomer.
It should be further noted that these documents represent a complete
conquest of Babylon by Elam--a conquest in which Babylon itself is laid
desolate. It is not certain just what part Dursil-ilâni played in the
story. He may have been a vassal king under Kukukumal, or the Babylonian
upon whom the hopes of the people centered, to free them from the yoke of
Elam. It is clear, however, that the events mentioned in these documents
are not in harmony with the supposition that these monarchs acted as
allies of Hammurapi in the invasion of Palestine. Hammurapi is excluded
from the account. Kukukumal conquered and desolated the very city in which
Hammurapi had his throne. Kukukumal must, accordingly, have lived at some
other period of the history, and the supposed confirmation of the account
of the fourteenth chapter of Genesis has not yet been found.
As already stated, these tablets are not earlier than the fourth century
B. C. The events which they record were probably much later than the time
of Abraham. Babylon is called by its Cassite name, Kar-duniash, a name
which it did not bear until some hundreds of years after the time of
Hammurapi. Many times in the course of Babylonian history was the country
overrun by Elam, and there is no real reason to suppose that the war here
referred to belongs to the age of Hammurapi.