My claim is that several archaeological finds demonstrate an intersection between the biblical narrative and the “secular” ancient history that everybody learns in high school and college. Depending on the details, most of these can be taken to demonstrate a reliability or historicity in the biblical account. I’d like to go through several of these, in roughly chronological order. (I say “roughly” because many of the objects cannot be dated precisely.)
Nuzi
Because the Middle East is largely desert, the Euphrates River dominates it. As it meanders its way southeast from the mountains of southeastern Turkey to the Persian Gulf, its water provides life to a crescent-shaped region from northern Syria through modern Iraq, paralleling its sister river the Tigris, and then through Kuwait, where it empties into the Persian Gulf. Not surprisingly, the kingdoms, cultures, and their cities snuggle up close to this “Fertile Cresent.”
Nuzi was a city near modern Kirkuk, Iraq, about 100 miles north of Baghdad, east of the Tigris. It was at its geopolitical height around 2000 BC, the time of Abraham.
Archaeologists found tablets that recorded the legal and social customs of that culture.
One tablet contains the following regulation:
- “The tablet of adoption belonging to Nashwi … : he adopted Wullu …. As long as Nashwi is alive, Wullu shall provide food and clothing; when Nashwi dies, Wullu shall become the heir.”
Thus an aging, childless couple could adopt an adult son to care for them when they could no longer care for themselves, and when they died he would inherit their wealth. This appears to be the arrangement between Abram and Eliezer of Damascus (Gen 15.2). God, of course, had another plan for Abram’s wealth, and a lot more.
Side note: I’ve wondered about the inherent conflict of interest in these arrangements; when the adoptive parents die, the adoptee’s work ends, and he gets their money. I wonder how many adoptees hastened the death of their adoptive parents, whether by action or just neglect.
Another tablet reads as follows:
- “Kelim-ninu has been given in marriage to Shennima. If Kelim-ninu bears, Shennima shall not take another wife; but if Kelim-ninu does not bear, Kelim-ninu shall acquire a woman of the land of Lullu as a wife for Shennima, and Kelim-ninu may not send the offspring away.”
Another side note: I’m not sure the land of Lullu would be the best place to find a good wife.
The infertile wife—and in those days the wife was always assumed to be the infertile one—bore the responsibility of finding a fertile wife for her husband. This too sounds familiar; Sarai, beyond the age of child-bearing, insists that Abram take her servant as a wife so that she (Hagar) can bear him a son (Gen 16.2). It was her responsibility.
This also helps explain why Abram was troubled when Sarai later demanded Hagar’s expulsion from the house (Gen 21.9-12). Given the relationship, that just wasn’t done.
Now, I’m not suggesting that Abram and Sarai lived under the laws of Nuzi; the Bible never places them in that city. But the city was in effect the capital of a large region in eastern Mesopotamia, and its laws would certainly influence the laws of the surrounding area, from Ur to Haran, across the eastern Fertile Crescent. It’s no surprise that the patriarch would have followed those cultural practices.
A connection, verified in historical records, between the practices of the ancient patriarch Abram and the culture in which he lived.
We’ll turn next time to Israel’s time in Egypt.
Photo by Annie Spratt on Unsplash
Leave a reply. Keep it clean.