Search results

The Aramaic marriage contracts from the Jewish military colony in Elephantine, written in the course of the fifth century B.C., provide much needed information about the legal position of the wife in the first millennium B.C., especially in the Persian period. They reflect the practice of middle class families, in which the wife's rights and the basically monogamous character of marriage, as stipulated by the contracts, parallel an old Near Eastern legal tradition, quite different from the rabbinic one, based in part on a misread, misinterpreted, and widely discussed text of Deut 24:1-4. The article examines the successive steps of marriage agreement, as presented in the contracts, which have some basic features in common and record the bridegroom's request, his solemn marriage declaration, the payment of the bride-price, the drawing up of a written contract with a description of the dowry, and the stipulations referring to the dissolution of marriage by divorce or death of one of the parties. Their equal rights in case of divorce are not due to the Egyptian environment, but to an old Semitic tradition, going back at least to the early second millennium B.C. The monogamous principle of the marriage contracts in question is also examined and their social context is briefly characterized. ; The Aramaic marriage contracts from the Jewish military colony in Elephantine, written in the course of the fifth century B.C., provide much needed information about the legal position of the wife in the first millennium B.C., especially in the Persian period. They reflect the practice of middle class families, in which the wife's rights and the basically monogamous character of marriage, as stipulated by the contracts, parallel an old Near Eastern legal tradition, quite different from the rabbinic one, based in part on a misread, misinterpreted, and widely discussed text of Deut 24:1-4. The article examines the successive steps of marriage agreement, as presented in the contracts, which have some basic features in common and record the bridegroom's request, his solemn marriage declaration, the payment of the bride-price, the drawing up of a written contract with a description of the dowry, and the stipulations referring to the dissolution of marriage by divorce or death of one of the parties. Their equal rights in case of divorce are not due to the Egyptian environment, but to an old Semitic tradition, going back at least to the early second millennium B.C. The monogamous principle of the marriage contracts in question is also examined and their social context is briefly characterized. ; The Aramaic marriage contracts from the Jewish military colony in Elephantine, written in the course of the fifth century B.C., provide much needed information about the legal position of the wife in the first millennium B.C., especially in the Persian period. They reflect the practice of middle class families, in which the wife's rights and the basically monogamous character of marriage, as stipulated by the contracts, parallel an old Near Eastern legal tradition, quite different from the rabbinic one, based in part on a misread, misinterpreted, and widely discussed text of Deut 24:1-4. The article examines the successive steps of marriage agreement, as presented in the contracts, which have some basic features in common and record the bridegroom's request, his solemn marriage declaration, the payment of the bride-price, the drawing up of a written contract with a description of the dowry, and the stipulations referring to the dissolution of marriage by divorce or death of one of the parties. Their equal rights in case of divorce are not due to the Egyptian environment, but to an old Semitic tradition, going back at least to the early second millennium B.C. The monogamous principle of the marriage contracts in question is also examined and their social context is briefly characterized.

Hittites appear quite often in the Bible, as usually translated, and they happen to be related, even nowadays, to the Hittite Empire of the Bronze Age. This understanding of the biblical texts does not take historical data into account. While some passages may allude to Neo-Hittite states of Syria or be inspired by the cuneiform use of Hatti in Iron Age II, other mentions must have referred originally to the North-Arabian tribe Hatti, living in southern Canaan or the Negev and known from the toponymic list of Shoshenq I (10th century B.C.) and certainly from the inscriptions of Tiglath-pileser (8th century B.C.). The case of "Uriah the Hittite" is somewhat different, because the man in question was ewri Hutiya, bearing the Hurrian title "lord" or "king" and a Hurrian personal name. He was apparently continuing the lineage of Hurrian princes of Jerusalem known from some Amarna letters of the 14th century B.C. Hurrian political and military influence in Canaan is well attested, but the Nuzi analogies with patriarchal narratives hardly prove a characteristic Hurrian impact on Israelite customs and the early Hebrew literature. The role of Hurrians, called Horites in the Bible, could no longer be understood properly by the redactors of biblical books, but the realm of Urartu in Iron Age II Anatolia seems to have been known quite well in scribal circles. ; Hittites appear quite often in the Bible, as usually translated, and they happen to be related, even nowadays, to the Hittite Empire of the Bronze Age. This understanding of the biblical texts does not take historical data into account. While some passages may allude to Neo-Hittite states of Syria or be inspired by the cuneiform use of Hatti in Iron Age II, other mentions must have referred originally to the North-Arabian tribe Hatti, living in southern Canaan or the Negev and known from the toponymic list of Shoshenq I (10th century B.C.) and certainly from the inscriptions of Tiglath-pileser (8th century B.C.). The case of "Uriah the Hittite" is somewhat different, because the man in question was ewri Hutiya, bearing the Hurrian title "lord" or "king" and a Hurrian personal name. He was apparently continuing the lineage of Hurrian princes of Jerusalem known from some Amarna letters of the 14th century B.C. Hurrian political and military influence in Canaan is well attested, but the Nuzi analogies with patriarchal narratives hardly prove a characteristic Hurrian impact on Israelite customs and the early Hebrew literature. The role of Hurrians, called Horites in the Bible, could no longer be understood properly by the redactors of biblical books, but the realm of Urartu in Iron Age II Anatolia seems to have been known quite well in scribal circles. ; Hittites appear quite often in the Bible, as usually translated, and they happen to be related, even nowadays, to the Hittite Empire of the Bronze Age. This understanding of the biblical texts does not take historical data into account. While some passages may allude to Neo-Hittite states of Syria or be inspired by the cuneiform use of Hatti in Iron Age II, other mentions must have referred originally to the North-Arabian tribe Hatti, living in southern Canaan or the Negev and known from the toponymic list of Shoshenq I (10th century B.C.) and certainly from the inscriptions of Tiglath-pileser (8th century B.C.). The case of "Uriah the Hittite" is somewhat different, because the man in question was ewri Hutiya, bearing the Hurrian title "lord" or "king" and a Hurrian personal name. He was apparently continuing the lineage of Hurrian princes of Jerusalem known from some Amarna letters of the 14th century B.C. Hurrian political and military influence in Canaan is well attested, but the Nuzi analogies with patriarchal narratives hardly prove a characteristic Hurrian impact on Israelite customs and the early Hebrew literature. The role of Hurrians, called Horites in the Bible, could no longer be understood properly by the redactors of biblical books, but the realm of Urartu in Iron Age II Anatolia seems to have been known quite well in scribal circles.