E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Israeli archaeologists say they have found two 3,700-year-old clay tablets that appear to contain legal pronouncements similar to the Code of Hammurabi and the biblical "tooth for a tooth" rule.
The clay fragments, bearing Akkadian cuneiform script, were unearthed this summer during the Hebrew University of Jerusalem's excavations at Hazor National Park in northern Israel. They date to roughly the same time frame as the Babylonian Hammurabi Code, which is considered the world's oldest surviving written collection of laws. And the fact that the tablets were found in Israel suggests they might have had an influence on Old Testament writers.
Wayne Horowitz, a professor at Hebrew University's Institute of Archaeology, told the Jerusalem Post that a team of experts is preparing the Hazor code for publication as part of a book. He said the discovery could open up interesting new connections between the Hammurabi Code and biblical law.
Horowitz said it wasn't yet clear whether the document was written at Hazor, where a school for scribes existed in ancient times, or was brought in from elsewhere.
The tablets and stone monument that first brought the Hammurabi Code to light were discovered in present-day Iran in 1901. The latest find marks the first time an ancient legal document resembling the code has been found in Israel.
So far, the team has translated only parts of the Hazor text, but those parts are enough to suggest that the tablets address the same sorts of topics covered by the Hammurabi Code. Horowitz told the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz that the first word he deciphered was a legalistic Akkadian term meaning "if and when." There are references to "master" and "slave," as well as a word referring to a body part, most likely a tooth.
The Babylonian legal code laid out a range of punishments that were graduated according to the status of the offended party: Injuries done to slaves, for example, were judged to be less serious offenses than injuries to their masters. Hammurabi's idea of reciprocity in offense and punishment has parallels in the biblical law of "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth," which appears in Leviticus, Exodus and Deuteronomy (and which gets an different twist in the Gospel of Matthew).
The Hazor archaeological team is continuing its work, under the direction of Hebrew University's Amnon Ben-Tor and Sharon Zuckerman - and it sounds as if there's much more to come. Device Magazine reports that the archaeologists are about to uncover a monumental Bronze Age building where they expect to recover additional tablets. An honest-to-goodness "Bible Code" may be lying right under their feet.
More ancient mysteries:
- Shard bears oldest script found in Jerusalem
- Biblical fragments reunited after centuries
- In ancient wall, scholar sees proof for Bible
- Artifact suggests Bible written centuries earlier
- Noah's Ark found? Not so fast
Join the Cosmic Log corps by signing up as my Facebook friend or hooking up on Twitter. And if you really want to be friendly, ask me about "The Case for Pluto."
Leave a Comment:
Hey Alan, glad to see you're back.
The two clay tablets are an amazing and priceless find. Hopefully they'll find more tablets very soon. It looks as if they're off to a good start in deciphering them. The Archaeologists may be looking at the first recordings of the "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth" terminology. Maybe I misunderstood it though. Do they think the tablets came first, then the Hammurabi code of law? According to the various web sites, the earliest parts of the Bible date back to 3,300yrs. It will be interesting to see if there are any major discrepancies in the tablets and the Old Testament.
Another interesting article came up on Newsvine in the last week. It was determined that the area the Dead Seas scrolls were found is the place where the parchment itself was made. They're wanting to authenticate the ink, but it will probably show that the scrolls were written in the same area too.
Thanks for the article. Look forward to something on evolution, anthropology, etc.
It is encouraging to see something other than Egyptian artifacts make the news. We have so little of the Sumerians to discuss or view. Iraq was a great opportunity for both the Iraqis and archeologists worldwide to play catch-up regarding Sumerian culture. Sadly, that time may not come again. Still, it is time for further investigation of Sumerian texts...
As you well know, Enki was fascinated with the rapid turnover of gestating embryos. No, not gleaned from the pages of Sitchin, rather from the Sumerian dictionary. Certainly, a man with that kind of scientific curiosity is worth study.
University of Pennsylvania Sumerian Dictionary On-Line: http://psd.museum.upenn.edu/epsd/index.html
An interesting read, for sure.
This was the failed law code, the first line reads, "an eye for a tooth".
Congratulation and God blessing you.
For the sake of the people living back then, I hope this does not mean they had to deal with lawyers.....
I'm still waiting for them to find the biblical scrolls or tablets that have the footnote "I made it all up suckers!" LOL
You would have to find a lot of Biblical scrolls with that text. You should do some research on the Bible before you diss it. I mean real good research not just people who are biased towards the bible or against it but both.
You know that's the truth! I'm an atheist, but I can see the find being significant for Christians and the Jewish people as well. It is a real historical document (although misinterpreted to a degree, IMO) But we're talking about the Old Testament and its Hebrew laws.
So there's no need to diss the Bible.
In the beginning man made god......
Here we go again. I believe that evolution "made" man. Mankind evolved ( and not from apes.) Life evolved in the ocean. We're descendants from uh... little fishies, if you will. I tell my cat that all the time. She likes that bedtime story. Maybe that's why she bites me at night...
But I'm not mocking what you say or believe in, in no way. I respect your beliefs and where you found them. I can appreciate the findings of the clay tablets. But I'm going to stay on topic. So I'm not going to get into a religious debate with you or anyone else. I have a right to my personal beliefs. I don't feel the need to convince or "save" anyone.
Please re-read my post...carefully....
Sorry, I have dyslexia. :-)
TristanAvedon "I'm still waiting for them to find the biblical scrolls or tablets that have the footnote "I made it all up suckers!""
I'm still wating for you to learn how to read. God says he made it up right there. Who is the sucker now?
I'm waiting for that too Sac-Mike.
Looks like my bathroom tile.........which they will unearth a few hundred years from now in a landfill somewhere.
This headline is hilarious. "The 'eye-for-an-eye' rule". They probably couldn't call it "Hammurabi's Code" because no one would know what that was.... it's a sad day for public intelligence.
This headline on MSNBC's home page makes me laugh... They call it the "'eye-for-an-eye' rule". They probably couldn't call it the "Hammurabi's Code" because no one would know what that was and no one would click the story to learn more.... it's a sad day for public intelligence. I remember Hammurabi's code being on a tests in history class starting in 6th grade.
Sadly I am suspect of any and all claims of authenticity of these so called historical finds. As the James Ossuary, Joushua Stone (?) and the Temple Pomegranate proved to be faked and suspicions surrounded the same dealer as having had connections with two of the items in question, the veracity of the claim is called into question automatically. This one dealer in particular ( his name escapes me now) , has done more to undermine the field of archeology than any other. It is amazing that a single individual can wreak such havoc. And for him to do it for money is disgraceful. The very core of Judaism has been slandered and one has to wonder will the damage ever be repaired ?
"The clay fragments, bearing Akkadian cuneiform script, were unearthed this summer during the Hebrew University of Jerusalem's excavations at Hazor National Park in northern Israel."
These fragments didn't come from an antiquities dealer..
Many misunderstand the purpose of the eye for an eye command. It was to limit retribution to that of the offense, not to command retaliation. God is full of grace and mercy, and we are allowed to show grace and mercy as well. We are not to demand more from someone that wronged us than the actual damages.
Sounds like indemnification to me..its an insurance term.
Indeed Tiredofthecrap. I find it amazing the number of people who call themselves religious who so effortlessly pick and choose, or even embellish particular teachings in order to meet their current needs. For instance, how many Christians cast aside or downright ignore "Turn the other cheek", a direct quote from Jesus, in favor of an "Eye for an eye" from the older Hebrew Bible.
Jimbo -- I find it amazing the intellectual hoops the religious will jump through in order to make a 2,000 year set of mythologies, myths and stories (some of which is based on historical facts, but most of which was plagiarized from early myths and stories) relevant to the rest of us who have long ago let go of such fairytales.
Jimbo -- I find it amazing the intellectual hoops the religious will jump through in order to make a 2,000 year set of mythologies, myths and stories (some of which is based on historical facts, but most of which was plagiarized from early myths and stories) relevant to the rest of us who have long ago let go of such fairytales.
Indeed, from Jimbo we find the true purpose of religion to all of humanity: to "...pick and choose or even embellish particular teachings in order to meet their current needs".
I agree with the poster who said it was to limit punishment to the gravity of the offence. Basically if someone knocks out your tooth you aren't supposed to kill them. Of coarse now days it would self defense. The NT is the new covenent and it says you should forgive your enemies. Much harder to do than knock out a tooth. When someone does me wrong, my first thot is revenge. I'm a Christian, but I still think revenge - tho I know it's wrong and I don't do it. I still think about it.
Learn to spell.
Coarse is course, thot is thought, and tho is though.
Prime example of the failure of modern day schools.
You would have to find a lot of Biblical scrolls with that text. You should do some research on the Bible before you diss it. I mean real good research not just people who are biased towards the bible or against it but both.
Wow, *sigh* research - please. eye for an eye is more well known then tooth for a tooth!
My biggest issue is why no biblical referance? would be nice to know that some effort was put into this. I know that being a 'news' org that you can't quote the BIBLE...(although u've (msnbc and other news orgs not the author) been known to quote the books of other known religions)...is your editor anti-christian? or are you? is there a memo that went out saying " no bibical quotes! but you can qoute everything else" ?
No don't reply your an Atheist, that doesn't count, atheists/buddist/christians or any other religion for that matter - its not your personal religion i'm questioning, I'm trying to find out if your lazy, ignorant or just plain didn't care about what people read on the web. why did u not perfrom research on this most basic of comparisons?
and Yes it IS a personal question. and i want you to answer it.
What does any of this have to do with a "God" . Nothing...just nothing. These are ideas written
by people and for some bizarre reason , linked to a ficticious God.
Cool your jets Aaron.
Why do you even demand that this be related to the bible in the first place? Why can this not be an interesting historical find in its own right?
I feel that a good amount of effort was put into this article; it is informative and straight forward. Web articles need to be written concisely. Few people spend long hours on their computers checking the news. Alan has done a remarkable job of providing educational glimpses into the more fascinating work being done in numerous scientific fields.
Insofar as scientific journalism goes, there is no need to correlate with sacred texts. Only if the discovery is directly biblical, or refutes biblical references would such as notation be necessary. You are upset over something which has no reason to be included, other than to satisfy your own personal desires. You say atheists don't count? Atheists also read these articles, no? Why should one belief or non-belief trump others? Better to leave the article neutral with respect to religious fables and stick to the facts.
You speak of bias, and I believe your own bias is showing quite evidently here.
The rule I like is not an eye for and eye, but two wrongs do not make a right.
Your assumption that equitable compensation is a wrong, is misguided. Equity does in fact demand that a wrongdoer compensate the victim in an amount equal to that he dispossessed the victim.
If the wrongdoer cannot compensate the victim for the loss of his sight, the victim must have the right to demand the wrongdoer suffer an equal loss.
What is being missed here, is this is not an absolute rule to be applied in all circumstances, this is a limiting rule. In other words the victim cannot demand two eyes to compensate for the loss of one eye. That would be inequitable and a wrong.
This rule has been lost in countless cases, where the victim uses the system to extort far more than equity provides.
I knew it! American was founded on Babylonian Values, this just proves it.
Babylonian values, you mean Iraqi Sharia.
Hmmm... makes the 'What would Jesus do?'query more of a rhetorical question, eh? And, given the vehement belief in such things as the death penalty, why is it so many identify themselves as 'Christians' when Jesus wasn't around for some 1700 years?
Someone let Larry King know his pet rock has been found...and to fix the hole in his pocket.
FASCINATING!
Aaron-493369 said:
"My biggest issue is why no biblical referance?"
Maybe you missed this part of the article: "Hammurabi's idea of reciprocity in offense and punishment has parallels in the biblical law of "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth," which appears in Leviticus, Exodus and Deuteronomy (and which gets an different twist in the Gospel of Matthew)" ?
If you click the words 'Leviticus, Exodus and Deuteronomy' or the words 'Gospel of Matthew', you will find that they are linked to the biblical citation at biblegateway.com .