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. $269. On Wages of Animals and Men § 268. If a man hires an ox for threshing, 20 Qa of grain is its hire. § 270. § 271. per day. If he hires cattle, a wagon and a driver, he shall pay 180 Qa of grain § 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 .She of silver;. ..of a carpenter, 4 She of silver; .4 She of silver; as the wages of a.... .She of silver; of silver;. as the wages of a. 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 2 She of silver per day. § 277. If a man hires a boat of 60 Gur burden, he shall pay 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 will ing 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. 216; 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 SACRIFICES1 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. 3 For an ox as a whole burnt-offering? or a prayer-offering, or a whole peaceoffering, 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 flesh; and, in case of a prayer-offering, the trimmings, 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 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 addition 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 (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-avertcalamity (?) or an oracular (?) sacrifice, the priests shall have (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.... 1 From the Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum, I, No. 165. It is the word so translated in Deut. 33: 10. So rendered in Lev. 7: 13; 10: 14. Many scholars would render it "thank-offering." For a cake, and for milk, and for every sacrifice which a man may offer, for a meal-offering1. 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 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...... which.. 2. Comparison with the Levitical Law. ..for the fee This document is not earlier than the fourth or fifth century B. C. The Carthaginians, from whom it comes, were an offshoot of the Phoenicians, 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 burntoffering," 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). Mealor 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. 1 This is the rendering of the Revised Version for this word. The Authorized Version rendered it less accurately "meat-offering." * Each temple had a number of officials connected with it besides the priests, such as carpenters, gate-keepers, slaughterers, barbers, Sodomites, and female slaves. Another Phoenician inscription mentions these. |