Tanakh & the Ancient Near East Index – Parashat Lekh Lekha

•  Dr. Yoshi Fargeon, in his lecture סיפורי האבות בהשוואה לחוקי המזרח הקדום, attempts to demonstrate that the Patriarchs and Matriarchs might have often acted in accordance with the norms of their time rather than the later laws of Torah. Thus he notes that Sarai's treatment of Hagar follows the laws set forth in the Code of Hammurabi of how to deal with a slave wife who views herself as equal to her mistress. In such a case, one returns the slave-wife to slave status, as Avraham tells Sarai, " הִנֵּה שִׁפְחָתֵךְ בְּיָדֵךְ".  See also the similar discussion in Tanakh and Archaeology (4), by R. Amnon Bazak.

•  In Tanakh and Archaeology (4), R. Amnon Bazak notes that there is evidence from the laws of Nuzi and Babylon that in the ancient near east there was a custom that when one is childless, the steward of the house might inherit. This might explain Avraham's fear that Eliezer might inherit him.

• See R. Alter, The Hebrew Bible: Translation and Commentary (New York, 2019), who sheds light on Hashem's command to Avraham "קוּם הִתְהַלֵּךְ בָּאָרֶץ לְאׇרְכָּהּ וּלְרׇחְבָּהּ כִּי לְךָ אֶתְּנֶנָּה" from what is known about possession of property in the ancient near east. He writes, “walking around the perimeter of a piece of property was a common legal ritual in the ancient Near East for taking final possession, and the formula ‘I have given it to So-and-so and to his sons forever’ is a well-attested formula in the region for the conveyance of property going back as far as the Ugaritic texts, composed in the fourteen and thirteenth centuries B.C.E.”

• Listen to The String and the Shoe-Strap, by R. Yitzchak Etshalom, for analysis of the meaning of Avraham’s oath not to take spoils in light of ancient Near Eastern evidence. He notes Egyptian texts which similarly speak of taking oaths before battle that one will not plunder, and not take either a "sandal" or spool of "thread".

• See “Between Bethel and Ai”--Identifying Ai, by Prof. Yoel Elitzur, for the fascinating story of scholarly attempts to identify these cities based on archaeological discoveries, and how to reconcile these findings with the Torah’s account (especially given that they initially appear at odds with one another).

• There has been much scholarship over the past couple of centuries relating to the location of Sedom and Amorah. For example, see The Site of Sodom and Gomorrah: Diversity of Views by Frederick G. Clapp and Geography in the Parsha: Sedom and Gomorrah, by Prof. Yoel Elitzur.

As the area near Damascus described in Bereshit 14 only becomes known as Dan in the days of the Judges, people question its mention in the chapter.

• See  אנשים ונחלות במנשה ובשבטי ישראל by Prof. Y. Elitzur¹ who suggests that the later inheritances of the tribes were indeed known already from the Patriarchal period, bringing evidence, among other things, from the blessings of Yaakov and Moshe and the correlation between names of the tribe's descendants and cities in their inheritances..
• See also Verses Added to the Torah at a Later Date: The Phenomenon and Its Ramifications (4), by R. Amnon Bazak, who surveys various approaches to the question regarding Dan's mention in Bereshit 14, highlighting and elaborating upon Prof. Elitzur's suggestion above.

• For an image from archaeological finds in Egypt relating to circumcision in the Ancient Near East, see Olam Hamikra.

• Olam HaMikra includes this photograph of an altar from antiquity, which may be similar to the altars built by the Patriarchs.