THE chief aim of the present study is to provide a full account of the contents of the recently discovered Babylonian Code of laws promulgated in the twenty-third century before Christ by Hammurabi, the king whose name has been identified with Amraphel, the contemporary of Abraham (Gen. xiv.). The fact that it is the oldest collection of laws in existence, and the advanced state of culture which Babylonia had reached even at that remote period, make the Code one of the most notable discoveries in the history of cuneiform research, and the great interest which it has succeeded in arousing is evinced by the rapidly growing number of monographs, pamphlets, and articles which have already appeared in print.
To jurists and students of comparative law, the Code, by reason of its antiquity, has an importance surpassing that of similar collections from India, Greece, or Rome. A critical estimate of the extent of Babylonia's influence upon the culture of these lands has yet to be made, but the varied traces that have hitherto been adduced would suggest that in the department of law, too, these lands may be 'found to have been not entirely ignorant of Hammurabi's Code. Semitic scholars, too, and especially students of biblical and post biblical literature, will welcome the recovery of a monument which for its bearing upon the laws of the Old Testament exceeds in value even the discoveries of Babylonian creation-legends and deluge-myths.
The Code comes at a time when the biblical world is being flooded with literature, scholarly and otherwise, dealing with the extent of Babylonian civilisation upon Israel. It is, therefore, a particularly opportune discovery, since a careful examination should enable the unprejudiced reader to determine how far if at all Israelite legislation was indebted to Babylonia. If the indebtedness is beyond dispute, then the influence of Babylonia must have been of the most deep-seated character; but if, on the other hand, the dependence of Israel upon the Babylonian Code is not proved, only the strongest arguments will allow us to accept those views in accordance with which Palestine had been saturated with Babylonian culture and civilisation centuries before Hebrew history took its rise.
As a preliminary to our account of the Code a few pages have been devoted in Chapter II. to a general consideration of Babylonia and Israel. The problem of the origin of Hammurabi's dynasty naturally came up for discussion, since, if it was Canaanite, there would be the clearest grounds for the view that the Code reflects Canaanite institutions. If, on the other hand, the dynasty was Arabian, the dependence of Israel, and more particularly of Israelite procedure, upon Northern Arabia might suggest that this land was the common home of the Babylonian and Hebrew systems of legislation. Here it was impossible to ignore the question of the antiquity of the old Arabian civilisation, and so unwillingly enough one found oneself drawn into the field of controversy. The conclusion that was reached in this chapter was not favourable to the view that Babylonia, or even Arabia, would have been likely to influence Israel to such an extent as to impose upon it a code of laws representing a stage of society which the Israelites had scarcely reached before the Exile, and this provisional conclusion was not refuted by the results which, it is believed, have been legitimately obtained from a discussion of the actual contents of the Code.
The scope of the work is indicated by the title. It is primarily restricted to a discussion of the Pentateuchal legislation and the Code of Hammurabi. As regards the " Laws of Moses," the critical standpoint has naturally been adopted, and this procedure appears to be entirely justified by the result. The Code is essentially a collection of civil laws, and on this account the numerous Hebrew regulations which apply solely to cult and ritual do not fall to be considered. The Code has been supplemented by other laws from Babylonian or Assyrian sources, and illustrated from the numerous contract -tablets. The necessity of keeping the book within limits, however, has prevented the writer from dealing at too great a length with this department, otherwise Chapters VII.-IX. would easily have been double their present length.
"1102638706"
To jurists and students of comparative law, the Code, by reason of its antiquity, has an importance surpassing that of similar collections from India, Greece, or Rome. A critical estimate of the extent of Babylonia's influence upon the culture of these lands has yet to be made, but the varied traces that have hitherto been adduced would suggest that in the department of law, too, these lands may be 'found to have been not entirely ignorant of Hammurabi's Code. Semitic scholars, too, and especially students of biblical and post biblical literature, will welcome the recovery of a monument which for its bearing upon the laws of the Old Testament exceeds in value even the discoveries of Babylonian creation-legends and deluge-myths.
The Code comes at a time when the biblical world is being flooded with literature, scholarly and otherwise, dealing with the extent of Babylonian civilisation upon Israel. It is, therefore, a particularly opportune discovery, since a careful examination should enable the unprejudiced reader to determine how far if at all Israelite legislation was indebted to Babylonia. If the indebtedness is beyond dispute, then the influence of Babylonia must have been of the most deep-seated character; but if, on the other hand, the dependence of Israel upon the Babylonian Code is not proved, only the strongest arguments will allow us to accept those views in accordance with which Palestine had been saturated with Babylonian culture and civilisation centuries before Hebrew history took its rise.
As a preliminary to our account of the Code a few pages have been devoted in Chapter II. to a general consideration of Babylonia and Israel. The problem of the origin of Hammurabi's dynasty naturally came up for discussion, since, if it was Canaanite, there would be the clearest grounds for the view that the Code reflects Canaanite institutions. If, on the other hand, the dynasty was Arabian, the dependence of Israel, and more particularly of Israelite procedure, upon Northern Arabia might suggest that this land was the common home of the Babylonian and Hebrew systems of legislation. Here it was impossible to ignore the question of the antiquity of the old Arabian civilisation, and so unwillingly enough one found oneself drawn into the field of controversy. The conclusion that was reached in this chapter was not favourable to the view that Babylonia, or even Arabia, would have been likely to influence Israel to such an extent as to impose upon it a code of laws representing a stage of society which the Israelites had scarcely reached before the Exile, and this provisional conclusion was not refuted by the results which, it is believed, have been legitimately obtained from a discussion of the actual contents of the Code.
The scope of the work is indicated by the title. It is primarily restricted to a discussion of the Pentateuchal legislation and the Code of Hammurabi. As regards the " Laws of Moses," the critical standpoint has naturally been adopted, and this procedure appears to be entirely justified by the result. The Code is essentially a collection of civil laws, and on this account the numerous Hebrew regulations which apply solely to cult and ritual do not fall to be considered. The Code has been supplemented by other laws from Babylonian or Assyrian sources, and illustrated from the numerous contract -tablets. The necessity of keeping the book within limits, however, has prevented the writer from dealing at too great a length with this department, otherwise Chapters VII.-IX. would easily have been double their present length.
The Laws Of Moses And The Code Of Hammurabi
THE chief aim of the present study is to provide a full account of the contents of the recently discovered Babylonian Code of laws promulgated in the twenty-third century before Christ by Hammurabi, the king whose name has been identified with Amraphel, the contemporary of Abraham (Gen. xiv.). The fact that it is the oldest collection of laws in existence, and the advanced state of culture which Babylonia had reached even at that remote period, make the Code one of the most notable discoveries in the history of cuneiform research, and the great interest which it has succeeded in arousing is evinced by the rapidly growing number of monographs, pamphlets, and articles which have already appeared in print.
To jurists and students of comparative law, the Code, by reason of its antiquity, has an importance surpassing that of similar collections from India, Greece, or Rome. A critical estimate of the extent of Babylonia's influence upon the culture of these lands has yet to be made, but the varied traces that have hitherto been adduced would suggest that in the department of law, too, these lands may be 'found to have been not entirely ignorant of Hammurabi's Code. Semitic scholars, too, and especially students of biblical and post biblical literature, will welcome the recovery of a monument which for its bearing upon the laws of the Old Testament exceeds in value even the discoveries of Babylonian creation-legends and deluge-myths.
The Code comes at a time when the biblical world is being flooded with literature, scholarly and otherwise, dealing with the extent of Babylonian civilisation upon Israel. It is, therefore, a particularly opportune discovery, since a careful examination should enable the unprejudiced reader to determine how far if at all Israelite legislation was indebted to Babylonia. If the indebtedness is beyond dispute, then the influence of Babylonia must have been of the most deep-seated character; but if, on the other hand, the dependence of Israel upon the Babylonian Code is not proved, only the strongest arguments will allow us to accept those views in accordance with which Palestine had been saturated with Babylonian culture and civilisation centuries before Hebrew history took its rise.
As a preliminary to our account of the Code a few pages have been devoted in Chapter II. to a general consideration of Babylonia and Israel. The problem of the origin of Hammurabi's dynasty naturally came up for discussion, since, if it was Canaanite, there would be the clearest grounds for the view that the Code reflects Canaanite institutions. If, on the other hand, the dynasty was Arabian, the dependence of Israel, and more particularly of Israelite procedure, upon Northern Arabia might suggest that this land was the common home of the Babylonian and Hebrew systems of legislation. Here it was impossible to ignore the question of the antiquity of the old Arabian civilisation, and so unwillingly enough one found oneself drawn into the field of controversy. The conclusion that was reached in this chapter was not favourable to the view that Babylonia, or even Arabia, would have been likely to influence Israel to such an extent as to impose upon it a code of laws representing a stage of society which the Israelites had scarcely reached before the Exile, and this provisional conclusion was not refuted by the results which, it is believed, have been legitimately obtained from a discussion of the actual contents of the Code.
The scope of the work is indicated by the title. It is primarily restricted to a discussion of the Pentateuchal legislation and the Code of Hammurabi. As regards the " Laws of Moses," the critical standpoint has naturally been adopted, and this procedure appears to be entirely justified by the result. The Code is essentially a collection of civil laws, and on this account the numerous Hebrew regulations which apply solely to cult and ritual do not fall to be considered. The Code has been supplemented by other laws from Babylonian or Assyrian sources, and illustrated from the numerous contract -tablets. The necessity of keeping the book within limits, however, has prevented the writer from dealing at too great a length with this department, otherwise Chapters VII.-IX. would easily have been double their present length.
To jurists and students of comparative law, the Code, by reason of its antiquity, has an importance surpassing that of similar collections from India, Greece, or Rome. A critical estimate of the extent of Babylonia's influence upon the culture of these lands has yet to be made, but the varied traces that have hitherto been adduced would suggest that in the department of law, too, these lands may be 'found to have been not entirely ignorant of Hammurabi's Code. Semitic scholars, too, and especially students of biblical and post biblical literature, will welcome the recovery of a monument which for its bearing upon the laws of the Old Testament exceeds in value even the discoveries of Babylonian creation-legends and deluge-myths.
The Code comes at a time when the biblical world is being flooded with literature, scholarly and otherwise, dealing with the extent of Babylonian civilisation upon Israel. It is, therefore, a particularly opportune discovery, since a careful examination should enable the unprejudiced reader to determine how far if at all Israelite legislation was indebted to Babylonia. If the indebtedness is beyond dispute, then the influence of Babylonia must have been of the most deep-seated character; but if, on the other hand, the dependence of Israel upon the Babylonian Code is not proved, only the strongest arguments will allow us to accept those views in accordance with which Palestine had been saturated with Babylonian culture and civilisation centuries before Hebrew history took its rise.
As a preliminary to our account of the Code a few pages have been devoted in Chapter II. to a general consideration of Babylonia and Israel. The problem of the origin of Hammurabi's dynasty naturally came up for discussion, since, if it was Canaanite, there would be the clearest grounds for the view that the Code reflects Canaanite institutions. If, on the other hand, the dynasty was Arabian, the dependence of Israel, and more particularly of Israelite procedure, upon Northern Arabia might suggest that this land was the common home of the Babylonian and Hebrew systems of legislation. Here it was impossible to ignore the question of the antiquity of the old Arabian civilisation, and so unwillingly enough one found oneself drawn into the field of controversy. The conclusion that was reached in this chapter was not favourable to the view that Babylonia, or even Arabia, would have been likely to influence Israel to such an extent as to impose upon it a code of laws representing a stage of society which the Israelites had scarcely reached before the Exile, and this provisional conclusion was not refuted by the results which, it is believed, have been legitimately obtained from a discussion of the actual contents of the Code.
The scope of the work is indicated by the title. It is primarily restricted to a discussion of the Pentateuchal legislation and the Code of Hammurabi. As regards the " Laws of Moses," the critical standpoint has naturally been adopted, and this procedure appears to be entirely justified by the result. The Code is essentially a collection of civil laws, and on this account the numerous Hebrew regulations which apply solely to cult and ritual do not fall to be considered. The Code has been supplemented by other laws from Babylonian or Assyrian sources, and illustrated from the numerous contract -tablets. The necessity of keeping the book within limits, however, has prevented the writer from dealing at too great a length with this department, otherwise Chapters VII.-IX. would easily have been double their present length.
1.0
In Stock
5
1
The Laws Of Moses And The Code Of Hammurabi
The Laws Of Moses And The Code Of Hammurabi
Related collections and offers
1.0
In Stock
Product Details
| BN ID: | 2940160858043 |
|---|---|
| Publisher: | Kanchan Singh |
| Publication date: | 03/14/2022 |
| Sold by: | Barnes & Noble |
| Format: | eBook |
| File size: | 306 KB |
From the B&N Reads Blog