ANE:Treaties in Tanakh and the Ancient Near East/0

Treaties in Tanakh and the Ancient Near East

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Overview

Archaeological finds have revealed many treaties from the ancient Near East which share much in common with their Biblical counterparts.  As such, these documents can shed light on specific aspects of the Biblical examples which are otherwise obscure or overlooked.  At the same time, the differences between the protocols and content of the treaties serve to highlight some of the unique features of Israelite treaties, and especially of Hashem's covenant with the nation.

Treaties in Tanakh

The term ברית appears 284 times in Tanakh, suggesting that a significant number of relationships in Tanakh are covenantal in nature.  In some cases, the term refers to treaties between individual people or countries, such as the treaties between Avraham and Avimelekh, Shelomo and Chiram, or Achav and Ben Hadad.  At other times it refers to a covenant between Hashem and man, such as Hashem's covenant with Noach, Avraham, or the nation of Israel. 

These covenants/treaties fall into two main categories:

• Promissory treaties – In these, the more powerful party unconditionally promises something or obligates themselves to the less powerful party.  An example would be Hashem's unconditional promises to Avraham or David.¹ 
•  Obligatory treaties – These treaties, in contrast, are conditional on the fulfilling of certain stipulations.  These include both suzerainty treaties between unequal parties, in which a vassal is expected to fulfill the treaty's conditions in obedience to an overlord (who, in turn, might promise protection or the like), and parity agreements where two equal parties agree to obey the same set of conditions. Hashem's covenant with Israel exemplifies the former, while Yaakov and Lavan's treaty illustrates the latter.

Treaties in the Ancient Near East

Second and first millennium (BCE) treaties have been found involving many countries including Egypt, Assyria, Mari, and Babylonia. However, the vast majority of discoveries stem from two eras and locales: the Hittite kingdom of Anatolia (15th-13th c. BCE),² and the Neo-Assyrian Empire (8th-7th c. BCE). Both show significant similarities to Biblical covenants, though it is the Hittite suzerain treaties which will form the focus of this topic.³ These treaties tend to share the same six basic elements:⁴

• Preamble – The opening introduced the person who composed the treaty, giving his title and attributes.⁵
• Historical introduction – The prologue recounted the events leading up to the decision to make the covenant.  These often focused on the benefits bestowed by the suzerain on his vassal, providing the basis for the expectation of obedience.⁶
• Stipulations– These included both general and specific obligations of the vassal to his overlord. Though these vary from treaty to treaty, some common duties included the payment of tribute, provision of military aid, and extradition of fugitives.  The subordinate king was also often prohibited from entering into alliances with kings other than the sovereign.
• Deposition and Public Reading – In several treaties,⁷ provisions for depositing the treaty in the temple (of both the vassal and suzerain) and for periodic public readings thereof were laid forth.⁸ 
• Divine witnesses – Various gods and the natural elements (perhaps also perceived as deities) were called upon to witness the treaty, and sometimes to  punish those who did not keep its terms⁹
• Curses and Blessings – The treaties usually ended with a list of curses and benedictions.

In addition to the above, there was often also an oath of acceptance by the vassal and some sort of ratification ceremony, often involving sacrifices.

Points of Contact

Though Tanakh does not include the texts of most of the treaties mentioned therein, the above elements have clear echoes in Tanakh.  The most striking parallel is Hashem's covenant with the Nation of Israel.  In each of the three covenants, at Sinai (Shemot 19-24), in Moav (Sefer Devarim), and in Shekhem (Yehoshua 24), many of the above components appear:

• Covenant at Sinai

• Preamble –The Decalogue opens with Hashem introducing Himself: "אָנֹכִי י"י אֱלֹהֶיךָ." 
• Historical Prologue – As in the Hittite treaties, Hashem speaks of past events, specifically his taking the nation out of slavery, an act of benevolence which invites obedience.¹⁰
• Stipulations – The rest of the Decalogue lists various stipulations, including the prohibition against other gods,¹¹ the imperative to keep the Sabbath, and interpersonal directives.The latter is unique, as in all ancient near eastern treaties the conditions laid forth are aimed solely at the benefit of the overlord and never deal with the interpersonal behavior of the members of the vassal state. Hashem, though, expects his "vassals" to observe laws not only aimed at Him but also their fellow man.
• Witnesses – No Divine witnesses are called, an expected variation which stems from the monotheistic character of Israelite religion.
• Blessings and Curses – Though there is no distinctive section of blessings and curses, these are embedded into the stipulations. For example, the prohibition against idolatry is followed by: כִּי אָנֹכִי י"י אֱלֹהֶיךָ אֵל קַנָּא פֹּקֵד עֲוֺן אָבֹת עַל בָּנִים עַל שִׁלֵּשִׁים וְעַל רִבֵּעִים לְשֹׂנְאָי וְעֹשֶׂה חֶסֶד לַאֲלָפִים לְאֹהֲבַי 
• Deposition in Temple – The tablets containing the Decalogue were housed in the Ark of the Covenant in the Mishkan. The fact that two tablets were made can be understood in light of Hittite practices as well.  Ancient near eastern treaties were made in duplicate; one belonged to the sovereign and the other to the vassal, each to be placed in the Temple of their respective god. Since in this case, the sovereign and Deity are one and the same, both copies are deposited in the same temple. [According to this theory each tablet contained all ten utterances, and not five as is commonly suggested.]

• Covenant in Moav
• Covenant in Shekhem

¹ Some question whether these are really unconditional. See

² These treaties were found in two main archives, at the ancient capital of the Hittites, Hattusas, and at Ugarit, modern day Ras Shamra.

³ A significant number of these have been discovered and they tend to better preserved than others. Some have survived as almost complete documents, making them a very useful resource. For a collection of Hittite diplomatic texts, including many treaties, see G. Beckman, Hittite Diplomatic Texts, ed. H. A. Hoffner Jr. (Atlanta, 1999).

⁴ Not every treaty contains all the elements listed, nor do they always preserve the order presented below, but as a whole the treaties appear to share this same basic format. [Many of the non-Hittite treaties have a similar form as well.] The basic sections were first noted by Viktor Korosec, in his article, Hethitische Staatsverträge, ein Beitrag zu ihrer juristischen Wertung, Leipziger rechtswissenschaftliche Studien, vol. 60 (1931): 12–14. G. Mendenhall built off his work in his article, "Covenant Forms in Israelite Tradition," Biblical Archaeologist 17 (1954): 50-76, where he highlighted the importance of the Hittite treaties for Biblical study.  Many scholars have since discussed the common form of the treaties, though they differ regarding some of the specifics.

⁵ Thus, for example in a Hittite treaty between Muršilis and Duppi-Tešub, we read, "These are the words of the Sun Muršilis, the great king, the king of the Hatti land, the valiant, the favorite of the Storm-god, the son of Šuppiluliumas, the great king, the king of the Hatti land, the valiant."

⁶ For example, see the prologue in the Treaty Between Mursilis and Duppi-Tessub of Amurru.

⁷ This element is not as widespread as the others.  An example can be found in the Treaty Between Suppiluliumas and Kuriwaza.

⁸ While deposition in a shrine might have served to sanctify the treaty (and invite Divine vengeance on disloyal vassals), the periodic reading probably served the practical function of ensuring that the entire populace was familiar with the treaty's stpiulations.

⁹ See the invocation of the gods in theTreaty Between Mursilis and Duppi-Tessub of Amurru and the Treaty Between Suppiluliumas and Kuriwaza.

¹⁰ Hashem could easily have chosen to introduce Himself as Creator.  The fact that he instead speaks of Himself as redeemer (a fact well known to the nation) might be the intentional desire to model the Decalogue after treaties of the time.

¹¹ J. Berman, "God's Alliance with Man," AzureOnline 25 (2006).