§ 162. It a man takes a wife and she bears him children and that woman dies, her father may not lay claim to her dowry. Her dowry belongs to her children.
§ 163. If a man takes a wife and she does not present him with children and that woman dies; if his father-in-law returns unto him the marriage-settlement, which that man brought to the house of the father-in-law, unto the dowry of that woman her husband may not lay claim. Her dowry belongs to the house of her father.
§ 164. But if his father-in-law does not return the marriage-settlement unto him, he shall deduct from her dowry the amount of the marriage-settlement, and then return the dowry to the house of her father.
§ 165. If a man has presented to his son, the first in his eyes, field, garden, or house, and written for him a sealed deed, and afterward the father dies; when the brothers divide, he shall take the present which his father gave him, and over and above they shall divide the goods of the father’s house equally.
§ 166. If a man takes wives for the sons which he possesses, but has not taken a wife for his youngest son, and afterward the father dies; when the brothers divide, for their younger brother who does not have a wife they shall present over and above his portion money for a marriage-settlement, and shall enable him to take a wife.
§ 167. If a man takes a wife and she bears him children and that woman dies, and after her he takes a second and she bears him children, after the father dies, the children shall not share according to their mothers. They shall receive the dowries of their respective mothers, and the goods of their father’s house they shall share equally.
§ 168. If a man has set his face to cut off his son, and says to the judges: “I will cut off my son,” the judges shall make investigation concerning him; if the son has not committed a grave crime which cuts off from sonship, the father may not cut off his son from sonship.
§ 169. If he has committed against his father a grave crime which cuts off from sonship, he shall pardon him for the first offense. If he commits a grave crime the second time, the father may cut off his son from sonship.
§ 170. If a man’s wife bears him children and a slave-girl bears him children, and the father during his lifetime says to the children which the slave-girl bore him: “My children,” and counts them with the children of the wife, after the father dies the children of the wife and the children of the slave-girl shall divide equally the goods of their father’s house. The sons that are sons of the wife shall at the sharing divide and take.
§ 171. But if the father during his lifetime has not said unto the children which the slave-girl bore him: “My children,” after the father dies the children of the slave-girl shall not share with the children of the wife. The slave-girl and her children shall be given their freedom; the children of the wife may not put a claim upon the children of the slave-girl for service. The wife shall receive her dowry and a gift which her husband gave her and wrote upon a tablet and may dwell in the dwelling of her husband as long as she lives and eat. She may not sell it. After her it belongs to her children.
§ 172. If her husband has not given her a gift, they shall restore to her her dowry and she shall receive from the goods of the house of her husband the portion of one son. If the children abuse her in order to drive her from the house, the judges shall investigate concerning her and if they find the children in the wrong, that woman shall not go from the house of her husband. If that woman sets her face to go out, she shall leave with her children the gift which her husband gave her; the dowry from the house of her father she shall receive and the husband of her choice may take her.
§ 173. If that woman, where she has entered, bears children to her later husband, after that woman dies the children of her first and her later husband shall share her dowry.
§ 174. If she did not bear children to her later husband, the children of her first husband shall receive her dowry.
§ 175. If a slave of the palace or the slave of a workingman takes the daughter of a patrician and she bears children, the owner of the slave shall have no claim for service on the children of the daughter of a patrician.
§ 176. But if a slave of the palace or the slave of a workingman takes the daughter of a patrician, and when he takes her she enters together with the dowry from her father’s house into the house of the slave of the palace or the slave of the workingman; if after they are united they build a house and acquire property and afterward the slave of the palace or the slave of the workingman dies, the daughter of the patrician shall receive her dowry and they shall divide into two parts whatever her husband and herself had acquired after their union. Half the owner of the slave shall take, and the daughter of the patrician shall receive half for her children. If the daughter of the patrician had no dowry, whatever her husband and herself had acquired after their union they shall divide into two parts. The owner of the slave shall take half and the daughter of the patrician shall receive half for her children.
§ 177. If a widow whose children are minors sets her face to enter the house of a second husband, she shall not do it without the consent of the judges. When she enters the house of a second husband, the judges shall inquire into the estate of her former husband, and the estate of the former husband they shall entrust to the second husband and to that woman, and shall cause them to leave a tablet (receipt). The estate they shall guard and rear the minors. The household goods they may not sell. The purchaser of household goods belonging to the children of a widow shall forfeit his money. The goods shall revert to their owners.
§ 178. If there is a wife of a god, priestess, or sacred harlot, whose father has given her a dowry and written her a record of gift, and in the record of gift he has not written, “after her she may give it to whomsoever she pleases,” and has not given her full discretion; after her father dies her brothers shall take her field and garden, and according to the value of her share they shall give her grain, oil, and wool, and shall content her heart. If her brothers shall not give her grain, oil, and wool, according to the value of her share, and shall not content her heart, she may let her field and garden unto any tenant she pleases and her tenant shall maintain her. Her field, garden, or whatever her father gave her she may enjoy as long as she lives. She may not sell it for money or transfer it to another. Her heritage belongs to her brothers.
§ 179. If there is a wife of a god, priestess, or sacred harlot, whose father has given her a dowry and written a record of gift; and in the record of gift he has written, “after her she may give it to whomsoever she pleases,” and has granted her full discretion; after her father dies she may give it after her to whomsoever she pleases. Her brothers have no claim upon her.
§ 180. If a father does not give a dowry to his daughter, a priestess living in the appointed house, or a sacred harlot, after the father dies she shall receive from the goods of her father’s house the same share as one son, and as long as she lives she shall enjoy it. After her it belongs to her brothers.
§ 181. If the father of a priestess, sacred harlot, or temple maiden gives her to a god and does not give her a dowry, after the father dies she shall receive from the goods of her father’s house a third of the portion of a son and shall enjoy it as long as she lives. After her it belongs to her brothers.
§ 182. If a father does not give a dowry to his daughter, a priestess of Marduk of Babylon, and does not write a record of gift for her; after her father dies she shall receive from the goods of her father’s house one-third of the portion of a son, and shall pay no tax. A priestess of Marduk after her death may leave it to whomsoever she pleases.
§ 183. If a father presents a dowry to his daughter who is a concubine, and gives her to a husband and writes a record of gift; after the father dies she shall not share in the goods of her father’s house.
§ 184. If a father does not present a dowry to his daughter who is a concubine and does not give her to a husband; after her father’s death her brothers shall give her a dowry according to the value of the father’s estate and shall give her to a husband.
In comparison with these Babylonian laws of inheritance those in the Old Testament are comparatively simple. We learn from Deut. 21:15-17, that a man’s firstborn son received a “double portion” of his father’s estate, i. e., twice as much as any other son. The inference is that the other sons shared equally. This law also provides that, when a man has two wives, the sons of the favorite wife shall have no advantage as to inheritance over the sons of the less loved wife. In Num. 27:8-11 it is provided that if a man has no son, his estate (i. e., real estate) may go to his daughter; if he has no daughter, it may go to his brothers; if no brothers, it goes to his father’s brothers. If his father has no brothers, the estate is to go to the next of kin. In Num. 36:2-12 the law that a daughter may inherit her father’s estate is supplemented by the provision that such a daughter must marry within the tribe, so that the landed property may not in the next generation pass out of the tribe.
Such were the Hebrew laws of inheritance. They apply to a much less complexly organized society than the Babylonian.
§§ 168, 169 of Hammurapi’s code deal with the cutting off of a son. This is paralleled in Deut. 21:18-21, though punishment inflicted by the law in Deuteronomy is quite different from the Babylonian, since the Hebrew boy, whose parents have proved him before the elders to be unworthy of sonship, was not cast out and sent away, but stoned to death. Another form of this law appears in Exod. 21:17.
Adoption
§ 185. If a man takes a young child in his name unto sonship and brings him up, one may not bring a claim for that adopted son.
§ 186. If a man takes a young child unto sonship, and when he has taken him he rebels against his [adopted] father and mother, that foster-child shall return to his father’s house.
§ 187. One may not bring claim for the son of a temple-servant, a palace guard, or of a sacred harlot.
§ 188. If an artisan takes a son to sonship and teaches him his handicraft, one may not bring claim for him.
§ 189. If he does not teach him his handicraft, that foster-son may return to the house of his father.
§ 190. If a man does not count among his sons a young child whom he has taken to sonship and reared, that foster-child may return to his father’s house.
§ 191. If a man who takes a young child to sonship and rears him and establishes a house and acquires children, afterward sets his face to cut off that foster-son, that son shall not go his way. The father who reared him shall give him from his goods one-third the share of a son and he shall go. From field, garden, or house, he shall not give him.
In the codes of the Old Testament there are no laws of adoption. The story of the adoption of Ephraim and Manasseh by Jacob in Gen. 48 shows that the idea was not unknown to the Hebrews, among whom the ceremony of adoption would seem to have consisted of the act of acknowledging the children as one’s own by placing one’s hands on their heads and giving them a paternal blessing.
Renunciation of Sonship
§ 192. If the son of a temple-servant or the son of a sacred harlot says to the father that brought him up or to the mother that brought him up, “Thou art not my father,” or, “Thou art not my mother,” they shall cut out his tongue.
§ 193. If the son of a temple-servant or the son of a sacred harlot has identified his father’s house and hated the father who brought him up or the mother who brought him up and goes back to his father’s house, they shall pluck out his eye.
The Old Testament has no laws with which to compare these. The two classes of persons whose children are mentioned were banished from Israel by Deut. 23:17, 18.
Wet-nurses or Foster-mothers
§ 194. If a man gives his son unto a nurse and his son dies in the hands of the nurse and the nurse substitutes another child without the consent of the father or the mother, they shall prosecute her; because she substituted another child without the consent of his father or his mother they shall cut off her breast.
This law also is without Biblical parallel.
Assault and Battery
§ 195. If a son strikes his father, they shall cut off his hand.
§ 196. If a man destroys the eye of the son of a patrician, they shall destroy his eye.
§ 197. If he breaks a man’s bone, they shall break his bone.
§ 198. If one destroys the eye of a workingman or breaks the bone of a workingman, he shall pay 1 mana of silver.
§ 199. If one destroys the eye of a man’s slave or breaks the bone of a man’s slave, he shall pay half his value.
§ 200. If a man knocks out the tooth of a man of his own rank, they shall knock his tooth out.
§ 201. If one knocks out the tooth of a workingman, he shall pay ⅓ of a mana of silver.
§ 202. If a man shall strike the private-parts of a man who is of higher rank than he, he shall receive sixty blows with an ox-hide scourge in the assembly.
§ 203. If a patrician strikes the private-parts of a patrician of his own rank, he shall pay 1 mana of silver.
§ 204. If a workingman strikes the private-parts of a workingman, he shall pay 10 shekels of silver.
§ 205. If the slave of a patrician strikes the private-parts of the son of a patrician, they shall cut off his ear.
§ 206. If a man strikes a man in a quarrel and wounds him, he shall swear, “I did not strike with intent,” and shall pay for the physician.
§ 207. If from the stroke he dies, he shall swear [as above], and if it was a patrician, he shall pay ½ mana of silver.
§ 208. If it was a workingman, he shall pay ⅓ of a mana of silver.
§ 209. If a man strikes a man’s daughter and causes a miscarriage, he shall pay 10 shekels of silver for her miscarriage.
§ 210. If that woman dies, they shall put his daughter to death.
§ 211. If through a stroke one causes a miscarriage of the daughter of a workingman, he shall pay 5 shekels of silver.
§ 212. If that woman dies, he shall pay ½ mana of silver.
§ 213. If one strikes the slave-girl of a man and causes a miscarriage, he shall pay 2 shekels of silver.
§ 214. If that slave-girl dies, he shall pay ⅓ of a mana of silver.
These laws are strikingly parallel to Exod. 21:18-27, to which Exod. 21:12-14 should be prefixed. The Babylonian code, like the Hebrew, imposes the death penalty for wilful murder. Both codes provide that one who is an accidental homicide shall escape the penalty, but they do it in different ways. Hammurapi provides that the killer may take an oath that he did it without intent to kill. Exod. 21:13, 14 provides that the homicide may find sanctuary at the altar of God. In place of this Deut. 19:4, ff., provides that he may flee to a city of refuge.
If a man injures another in a fight, the Bible (Exod. 21:18, 19) provides that he shall pay for the lost time and, as does Hammurapi, the cost of healing the injured man. Exod. 21:22 provides, as does Hammurapi, for the payment of a fine for causing a woman to miscarry, but Exodus does not, like the Babylonian code, fix the amount of the damage; that is left to the judges. In the laws concerning the injury of slaves the two codes differ. Exodus provides (21:20, 21, 26, 27) for cases in which owners injure or kill their own slaves; Hammurapi, for cases in which the injury is done by others. A mere reading of the penalties imposed by the parts of the Babylonian code translated above impresses vividly upon the mind the fact that underlying many of them is the principle so forcibly expressed in Exod. 21:21-25: “life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.” The details of application are different, but the principle is the same. Many of the differences were caused by the more complex nature of Babylonian society, in which three classes, patricians, workingmen (or semi-serfs), and slaves, existed. Hebrew law recognizes but two classes—freemen and slaves.
Physicians
§ 215. If a physician operates upon a man for a severe wound with a bronze lancet and saves the man’s life, or if he operates for cataract with a bronze lancet and saves the man’s eye, he shall receive 10 shekels of silver.
§ 216. If it is a workingman, he shall receive 5 shekels of silver.
§ 217. If it is a man’s slave, the owner of the slave shall give the physician 2 shekels of silver.
§ 218. If a physician operates upon a man with a bronze lancet for a severe wound, and the man dies; or operates upon a man with a bronze lancet for cataract and the man’s eye is destroyed, they shall cut off his hand.
§ 219. If a physician operates with a bronze lancet upon the slave of a workingman and causes his death, he shall restore a slave of equal value.
§ 220. If he operates for cataract with a bronze lancet and destroys his eye, he shall pay ½ his price.
§ 221. If a physician sets a broken bone for a man or has cured of sickness inflamed flesh, the patient shall pay 5 shekels of silver to the physician.
§ 222. If he is a workingman, he shall give 3 shekels of silver.
§ 223. If he is the slave of a patrician, the owner of the slave shall give 3 shekels of silver to the physician.
§ 224. If an ox-doctor or an ass-doctor treats an ox or an ass for a severe wound and saves its life, the owner of the ox or the ass shall pay to the physician ⅙ of a shekel of silver as his fee.
§ 225. If he operates upon an ox or an ass for a severe wound and it dies, he shall give unto the owner of the ox or the ass ¼ of its value.
These laws about physicians have no parallel in the Old Testament, the laws of which did not take account of the existence of doctors. They are of interest, since they show the antiquity of physicians in Babylonia, not only for men, but for animals. They also reveal the fact that the practice of medicine in Babylonia was attended by some risks!
Herodotus (I, 197) declares that the Babylonians had no physicians, but brought their sick out into the streets and asked of each passer-by whether he had had a like sickness and what he had done for it. Possibly, as among ourselves, there were many who did not wish to incur the expense of a doctor, and who did as Herodotus reports, but these laws, and the existence of physicians at Nineveh at the time of the later Assyrian kings, make it probable that Herodotus was wrong as to their non-existence at Babylon in his day.
Laws of Branding
§ 226. If a brander without the consent of the owner of a slave cuts a mark on a slave, making him unsalable, they shall cut off the hands of that brander.
§ 227. If a man deceives a brander and he brands a slave with a mark, making him unsalable, they shall put that man to death and cause him to perish in the gate of his house. The brander shall swear: “I did not brand him knowingly” and shall go free.
These laws have no parallel in the Old Testament. Evidently the simpler organization of Hebrew society made them unnecessary.
Responsibility of House-builders
§ 228. If a builder builds a house for a man and completes it, he shall give him as his wages 2 shekels of silver for each Shar of house.
§ 229. If a builder builds a house for a man and does not make its work strong and the house which he made falls and causes the death of the owner of the house, that builder shall be put to death.
§ 230. If it causes the death of the son of the owner, the son of that builder shall be put to death.
§ 231. If it causes the death of a slave of the owner of the house, a slave like the slave he shall give to the owner of the house.
§ 232. If it destroys property, he shall restore whatever was destroyed, and because he did not build the house strong and it fell, he shall rebuild the house that fell from his own property.
§ 233. If a builder builds a house for a man and does not make his work strong and a wall falls, that builder shall strengthen that wall at his own expense.
These laws have no parallel in the Bible. Among the agricultural population of Palestine builders were not a separate class. The penalties inflicted by the Babylonian code were severe, and yet, if modern legislators would put upon the house-builders of our time a similar responsibility for good work, fewer lives would be sacrificed by falling buildings.
Responsibility of Boatmen
§ 234. If a boatman builds a boat of 60 Gur for a man, he shall give him 2 shekels of silver as his wages.
§ 235. If a boatman builds a boat for a man and does not make his work sound and in that year the boat is sent on a voyage and meets with disaster, that boatman shall repair that boat and from his own goods shall make it strong and shall give the boat in sound condition to the owner of the boat.
§ 236. If a man gives his boat to a boatman for hire and the boatman is careless and sinks or wrecks the boat, the boatman shall restore a boat to the owner of the boat.
§ 237. If a man hires a boatman and a boat and loads it with grain, wool, oil, dates, or any other kind of freight, and that boatman is careless and sinks the boat or destroys its freight, the boatman shall replace the boat and whatever there was in it which he destroyed.
§ 238. If a boatman sinks a man’s boat and re-floats it, he shall give money for ½ its value.
§ 239. If a man hires a boatman, he shall give him 6 Gur of grain a year.
The Hebrews were not a maritime people, and had no such laws as these or the following.
The Collision of Ships
§ 240. If a boat that is floating downstream strikes a boat that is being towed and sinks it, the owner of the boat that was sunk shall declare in the presence of a god everything that was in that boat and [the owner] of the boat floating downstream, which sunk the boat that was being towed, shall replace the boat and whatever was lost.
There is, naturally, nothing similar to this in the Old Testament.
Laws Concerning Cattle
§ 241. If a man levies a distraint upon an ox as security for debt, he shall pay ⅓ of a mana of silver.
§ 242. If a man hires for a year, the wages of a working ox is 4 Gur of grain.
§ 243. The hire of a milch cow, 3 Gur of grain for a year he shall give.
§ 244. If a man hires an ox or an ass and a lion kills it in the field, the loss falls on the owner.
§ 245. If a man hires an ox and causes its death through neglect or blows, he shall restore to the owner an ox of equal value.
§ 246. If a man hires an ox and crushes its foot or cuts the cord of its neck, he shall restore to the owner an ox of like value.
§ 247. If a man hires an ox and destroys its eye, he shall pay to the owner of the ox money to ½ its value.
§ 248. If a man hires an ox and breaks off its horn, or cuts off its tail or injures the flesh which holds the ring, money to ¼ of its value he shall pay.
§ 249. If a man hires an ox and a god strikes it and it dies, the man who hires the ox shall take an oath in the presence of a god and shall go free.
§ 250. If an ox when passing along the street gores a man and causes his death, there is no penalty in that case.
§ 251. If the ox of a man has the habit of goring and they have informed him of his fault and his horns he has not protected nor kept his ox in, and that ox gores a man and causes his death, the owner of the ox shall pay ½ mana of money.
§ 252. If it is the slave of a man, he shall pay ⅓ of a mana of money.
§ 253. If a man hires a man and puts him over his field and furnishes him with seed-grain and intrusts him with oxen and contracts with him to cultivate the field, if that man steals the seed-grain or the crop and it is found in his possession, they shall cut off his hands.
§ 254. If he takes the seed-grain, but enfeebles the cattle, from the grain which he has cultivated he shall make restoration.
§ 255. If he shall let the cattle to a man for hire, or steal the seed-grain so that there is no crop, they shall prosecute that man, and he shall pay 60 Gur of grain for each Gan.
§ 256. If he is not able to meet his obligation, they shall tear him in pieces in that field by means of the oxen.
The Biblical legislation corresponding to this is found in Exod. 21:28-35, but it covers only a portion of the cases of which the Babylonian law treats. It provides that, if an ox gores a man or a woman to death, the ox shall be stoned. If the ox was wont to gore and the owner had not kept it in, but it had been permitted to kill a man or a woman, the owner as well as the ox should be stoned. At the discretion of the tribunal a fine or ransom might be laid on the owner. In case the ox gored a slave, the owner of the ox was to pay 30 shekels of silver and the ox was to be stoned. If a man opened a pit and a neighbor’s ox or ass fell into it, the digger of the pit must make good the loss to the owner of the animal, and the dead beast became the property of the digger of the pit. If one man’s ox killed the ox of another man, the two men were to sell the live ox and divide the price. If it were known that the ox was wont to gore in the past, and its owner had not kept it in, he was to pay ox for ox, and the dead animal should be his.
It thus appears that the exigencies of Hebrew agricultural life were different from those of Babylonia, and were naturally met in different ways.
Wages of Laborers
§ 257. If a man hires a field-laborer, he shall pay him 8 Gur of grain per year.
§ 258. If a man hires a herdsman, he shall pay him 6 Gur of grain per year.
Hebrew law did not regulate wages.
On Stealing Farming-tools
§ 259. If a man steals a watering-machine from a field, he shall pay to the owner of the watering-machine 5 shekels of silver.
§ 260. If a man steals a watering-bucket or a plow, he shall pay 3 shekels of silver.
As the Hebrews did not systematically irrigate their land, the Old Testament contains no similar laws.
Laws Concerning Shepherds
§ 261. If a man hires a herdsman to tend cattle or sheep, he shall pay him 8 Gur of grain per year.
§ 262. If a man, oxen, or sheep ..............
(The rest is broken away.)
§ 263. If he loses an ox or a sheep that is intrusted to him, he shall restore ox for ox and sheep for sheep.
§ 264. If a herdsman who has had cattle or sheep intrusted to him receives his full pay and is satisfied, and he causes the cattle or the sheep to diminish in number or lessens the birth-rate, he shall give increase and produce according to his contracts.
§ 265. If a shepherd to whom cattle or sheep have been given to tend is dishonest and alters the price or sells them, they shall prosecute him, and he shall restore to their owner 10 times the oxen or sheep which he stole.
§ 266. If in a fold there is a pestilence of a god, or a lion has slain, the shepherd shall before a god declare himself innocent, and the owner of the fold shall bear the loss of the fold.
§ 267. If the shepherd is careless and causes a loss in the fold, the shepherd shall make good in cattle or sheep the loss which he caused in the fold and shall give them to the owner.
The nearest approach in the Old Testament to laws of this character is in Exod. 22:10-13, which provides that, if a man deliver to his neighbor an ox, or ass, or sheep, or any beast to keep, and it dies, or is injured or is carried off when no one sees the deed, the oath of Jehovah shall be between them that the keeper has not put his hand to his neighbor’s goods. The owner was to accept this, and no restitution was necessary. If the animals were stolen from the keeper, he must make restitution. If they were torn in pieces by beasts of prey, he must bring the pieces for witness, and need not make restitution.
The same general principles of the limits of responsibility underlay the two codes in these cases, though they differ in details. In Israel the shepherding of the flocks and herds of other people was not, as in Babylonia, a distinct occupation.
On Wages of Animals and Men
§ 268. If a man hires an ox for threshing, 20 Qa of grain is its hire.
§ 269. If he hires an ass for threshing, 10 Qa of grain is its hire.
§ 270. If he hires a kid for threshing, 1 Qa of grain is its hire.
§ 271. If he hires cattle, a wagon and a driver, he shall pay 180 Qa of grain per day.
§ 272. If a man hires a wagon only, he shall pay 40 Qa of grain per day.
§ 273. If a man hires a field-laborer from the beginning of the year until the fifth month, he shall pay him 6 She of silver per day; from the sixth month to the end of the year, 5 She of silver per day he shall pay.
§ 274. If a man hires an artisan, he shall give per day as the wages of a ..... 5 She; as the wages of a brick-maker, 5 She of money; as the wages of a tailor, 5 She of silver; as the wages of a stone-cutter, ...... She of silver; ............ She of silver; ............ She of silver; ............ of a carpenter, 4 She of silver; as the wages of a ...... 4 She of silver; as the wages of a ...... She of silver; the wages of a builder, ...... She of silver.
§ 275. If a man hires a boat (?) to go upstream (?), its hire is 3 She of silver per day.
§ 276. If he hires a boat to float downstream, he shall pay as its hire 2½ She of silver per day.
§ 277. If a man hires a boat of 60 Gur burden, he shall pay ⅙ of a shekel of money per day.
There are no parallels to these laws in the Bible, as the Old Testament does not attempt to regulate prices. When one considers the customs of trade all over the Orient, and the time fruitlessly consumed in making bargains, one does not wonder that the practical sovereign of a great commercial people, such as the Babylonians were, should regulate prices by law. As a rule, to this day, a purchaser begins by offering only a fraction of what he is willing to give, and the seller by asking at least twice as much as he is willing to take. A long psychological battle follows, during which there are many victories and capitulations on each side. This law was designed to put an end to this time-consuming custom.
When the Sales of Slaves are Void
§ 278. If a man buys a male or a female slave and before a month is past he has an attack of rheumatism (?), he shall return to the seller, and the purchaser shall receive back the money that was paid.
§ 279. If a man buys a male or a female slave, and another has a legal claim upon him, the seller shall be responsible for that claim.
§ 280. If a man, while in a foreign country, purchases a male or a female slave of a man, and, when he returns home, the former owner of the male or the female slave recognizes his slave, if that male or female slave is a native of the land, he shall give it its freedom without recompense.
§ 281. If they are natives of another country, the purchaser shall declare in the presence of a god the price that he paid, and the former owner of the male or female slave shall pay the price to the merchant, and shall receive back his slave.
No laws similar to these are found in the Old Testament.
The Penalty for Renouncing a Master
§ 282. If a slave shall say to his owner: “Thou art not my owner,” they shall make him submit as his slave, and shall cut off his ear.
This penalty reminds one of the boring of a slave’s ear (Exod. 21:6; Deut. 15:17) in token of perpetual slavery.
2. The Mosaic Code not Borrowed from the Babylonian; Different Underlying Conceptions.
A comparison of the code of Hammurapi as a whole with the Pentateuchal laws as a whole, while it reveals certain similarities, convinces the student that the laws of the Old Testament are in no essential way dependent upon the Babylonian laws. Such resemblances as there are arose, it seems clear, from a similarity of antecedents and of general intellectual outlook; the striking differences show that there was no direct borrowing. The primitive Semitic custom of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth (Exod. 21:24; Lev. 24:20; Deut. 19:21) is made the basis of many penalties in the Babylonian code. (See §§ 196, 197, 200, 229, 230, etc.) The principle underlying it is found also in many other sections. These similarities only show that Babylonia had a large Semitic element in its population. Again, Hammurapi pictured himself at the top of the pillar on which these laws are written as receiving them from the sun-god (Fig. 292). The Bible tells us that Moses received the laws of the Pentateuch from Jehovah. The whole attitude of the two documents is, however, different. Hammurapi, in spite of the picture, takes credit, both in the prologue and in the epilogue of his code, for the laws. He, not Shamash, established justice in the land. Moses, on the other hand, was only the instrument; the legislation stands as that of Jehovah himself.
This difference appears also in the contents of the two codes. The Pentateuch contains many ritual regulations and purely religious laws, while the code of Hammurapi is purely civil. As has been already pointed out, the code of Hammurapi is adapted to the land of the rivers, and to a highly civilized commercial people, while the Biblical laws are intended for a dry land like Palestine, and for an agricultural community that was at a far less advanced stage of commercial and social development.
Religion is, however, not a matter of social advancement only. In all that pertains to religious insight the Pentateuch is far in advance of Hammurapi’s laws.
CHAPTER XIV
AN ALLEGED PARALLEL TO LEVITICUS—A CARTHAGINIAN LAW CONCERNING SACRIFICES[469]
The Text of the Carthaginian Law. Comparison with the Levitical Law.
1. The Text of the Carthaginian Law.
Temple of Baal[zephon], Tar[iff of d]ues, which [the superintendents of d]ues fixed in the time [of our rulers, Khalas]baal, the judge, son of Bodtanith, son of Bod[eshmun, and of Khalasbaal], the judge, son of Bodeshmun, son of Khalasbaal, and their colleagues.
For an ox as a whole burnt-offering[470] or a prayer-offering, or a whole peace-offering,[471] the priests shall have 10 (shekels) of silver for each; and in case of a whole burnt-offering, they shall have in addition to this fee [300 shekels of fle]sh; and, in case of a prayer-offering, the trimmings, the joints; but the skin and the fit of the inwards[472] and the feet and the rest of the flesh the owner of the sacrifice shall have.
For a calf whose horns are wanting, in case of one not castrated (?), or in case of a ram as a whole burnt-offering, the priests shall have 5 shekels of silver [for each; and in case of a whole burnt-offering they shall have in addit]ion to this fee 150 shekels of flesh; and, in case of a prayer-offering, the trimmings and the joints; but the skin and the fat of the inwards and the fe[et and the rest of the flesh the owner of the sacrifice shall have].
In case of a ram or a goat as a whole burnt-offering, or a prayer-offering, or a whole peace-offering, the priests shall have 1 shekel of silver and 2 zars for each; and, in case of a prayer-offering, they shall [have in addition to this fee the trimmings] and the joints; but the skin and the fat of the inwards and the feet and the rest of the flesh the owner of the sacrifice shall have.
For a lamb, or a kid, or the young (?) of a hart, as a whole burnt-offering, or a prayer-offering, or a whole peace-offering, the priests shall have ¾ (of a shekel) and ...... zars of silver [for each; and, in case of a prayer-offering, they shall have in addition] to this fee the trimmings and the joints; but the skin and the fat of the inwards and the feet and the rest of the flesh the own[er of the sacrifice] shall have.
For a bird, domestic or wild, as a whole peace-offering, or a sacrifice-to-avert-calamity (?) or an oracular (?) sacrifice, the priests shall have ¾ (of a shekel) of silver and 2 zars for each; but the f[lesh shall belong to the owner of the sacrifice].
For a bird, or sacred first-fruits, or a sacrifice of game, or a sacrifice of oil, the priests shall have 10 g[erahs] for each; but ......................
In case of every prayer-offering that is presented before the gods, the priests shall have the trimmings and the joints; and in the case of a prayer-offering ....
For a cake, and for milk, and for every sacrifice which a man may offer, for a meal-offering[473] ..........
For every sacrifice which a man may offer who is poor in cattle, or poor in birds, the priests shall not have anything ..........
Every freeman and every slave and every dependent[474] of the gods and all men who may sacrifice .........., these men [shall give] for the sacrifice at the rate prescribed in the regulations ..........
Every payment which is not prescribed in this table shall be made according to the regulations which [the superintendents of the dues fixed in the time of Khalasbaal, son of Bodtani]th, and Khalasbaal, son of Bodeshmun, and their colleagues.
Every priest who shall accept payment beyond what is prescribed in this table shall be fi[ned] ............
Every person who sacrifices, who shall not give ............ for the fee which ..............
2. Comparison with the Levitical Law.
This document is not earlier than the fourth or fifth century B. C. The Carthaginians, from whom it comes, were an offshoot of the Phœnicians, who were, in turn, descended from the Canaanites. They were accordingly of kindred race to the Hebrews. One can, therefore, see from this document something of how the Levitical institutions of Israel resembled and how they differed from those of their kinsmen. It will be seen that the main sacrifices bore the same names among both peoples. We find the “whole burnt-offering,” the “peace-offering,” and the “meal-offering.” The Carthaginians had no “sin-offering,” while among the Hebrews we find no “prayer-offering.” The ways of rewarding the priests also differed with the two peoples. The Hebrews had no such regular tariff of priests’ dues as the Carthaginians, but parts of certain offerings and all of others belonged to them. Leviticus assigns from the peace-offering the “heave-thigh” and the “wave-breast” to the priests (Lev. 7:14, 34; Num. 5:9, 10; 31:29, 41). Meal- or flour-offerings belonged to the priests (Lev. 5:13; 7:9, 10), as did the sin- and trespass-offerings (Lev. 6:18, 29; 7:9, 10). Of the burnt-offerings the priests had the skin (Lev. 7:8).
The interesting thing is that in the ritual, as in the social laws, we find that the heathen Semites had a considerable number of regulations similar to those of the Hebrews.
CHAPTER XV
SOME LETTERS FROM PALESTINE
Letters of Rib-Adda of Gebal. Of Ebed-Hepa of Jerusalem. Their Light on Conditions in the Period of the Egyptian Domination of Palestine.
Many of the El-Amarna[475] Letters were written from Palestine and Phœnicia. Some scholars think these letters come from the Patriarchal period; others hold that they are contemporary with the Hebrew conquest, and give us additional information concerning it. Some of those who hold this last view believe that the conquest of Palestine by the Hebrews was not made all at once. They think that the tribes descended from Leah entered the land before those descended from Rachel. Such scholars hold that these letters give us contemporary evidence of the wars of the Leah tribes. Whichever view one takes, the letters are most interesting, as they open to us a previously unknown chapter in the history of Jerusalem.
1. Some Letters of Rib-Adda of Gebal.[476]
To the king, my lord, the king of the countries, speak, saying, Rib-Adda, thy servant, the footstool of thy feet; at the feet of the sun, my lord, eight times and seven times I prostrate myself. Again, there is clear to the king, my lord, the deed of Ebed-Ashera, the dog, when all the lands of the king, my lord, are made over unto him and are subservient to his land. And now behold the city of Sumur has been won over—a fold of my lord and a temple of his shrine—to him, and he has encamped in the temple of my shrine and has opened the place of the curse of my lord and won it. What is he, a man ......... and dog that he should judge? Again, when men say in the presence of the king, my lord: “Learn that Gebal is ..........,” then know that he has not taken Gebal ............... and it is difficult for the lands of the king, my lord. Again, let the king, my lord, send his inspector who may judge ................ and may protect the city of the king, my lord. And I ........ and will serve my lord, the king of the lands. And may my lord send people and let them bring whatever belongs to my .............. into the presence of the king, my lord, and let not that dog take anything that belongs to thy gods. And is it clear now that he would take Gebal? See, Gebal is like Memphis, loyal to the king. A second time, see Ebed-Ninib, the man whom I sent with Buhiya, is a .......... So send unto thy servant. Again see, Ummahnu is a maid-servant of the Baal-goddess of Gebal; her husband is Ishkur .......... send! ..........
(The tablet is broken off at this point.)
II[478]