Exodus 21c-22a – Property Damage Laws in the Ancient Near East
Are you up for another round of comparing the biblical laws with those in the Ancient Near East? Here are a few more parallels for us to consider. (All Bible translations are in ESV, and all ANE law codes are from Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament [ANET] by Pritchard, 3rd ed.).
OX FIGHTS
Exodus 21:35 “When one man’s ox butts another’s, so that it dies, then they shall sell the live ox and share its price, and the dead beast also they shall share.
Laws of Eshnunna 53: If an ox gores an(other) ox and causes (its) death, both ox owners shall divide (among themselves) the price of the live ox and also the meat of the dead ox.
We find almost the same exact law about oxen fighting in the Laws of Eshnunna, a law code likely established somewhere around 2000 BC. Apparently, in both Israelite law and elsewhere, if two animals fought and one died, it was common to split the loss down the middle between the two owners.
THIEVERY
I spent some time during the sermon comparing Ancient Near Eastern (ANE) law codes with the Old Testament the subject of thievery, so I won’t repeat it all here. Biblical law required the thief that is caught with the animal in his possession to pay back double (Ex 22:4), and if the animal has already been sold or killed, he pays back 4-5x the amount stolen, depending on the type of beast (Ex 22:1). Other laws were generally stricter, with Hammurabi prescribing death (6-8), the Middle Assyrian Laws prescribing flogging, hair removal, hard labor and a fine (C+G 8, F1), and the Hittite Laws requiring slaves to pay a fine and have their nose and ears chopped off (Hittite Laws 95).
Many other law codes establish a gradation of penalty, depending on the value of that which is stolen. For instance, the Hittite Laws required at one time 30 bulls to be repaid for every one bull stolen, and the prices went down from there (Hittite Laws 57-73, 81-85).
What is significant to note, though, is that most other laws also based their penalties on a gradation of social class. In other words, the slave who stole would be penalized much more than an upper-class citizen, and if you stole from the upper-class, you would be penalized greater than if you stole from a slave. This type of social gradation can be seen reflected in Hammurabi 8. This is not the case with biblical law. The slave and free citizens were penalized in the same way. Biblical morality is not based on social distinction, but on absolutes.
SELF-DEFENSE
Exodus 22:2-3 If a thief is found breaking in and is struck so that he dies, there shall be no bloodguilt for him, 3 but if the sun has risen on him, there shall be bloodguilt for him. He shall surely pay. If he has nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft.
Eshnunna 12-13: A man who is caught in the field of a muskenum [a member of a social class which at Eshnunna seems to be closely connected with the palace or temple] in the crop during daytime, shall pay 10 shekels of silver. He who is caught in the house at night, shall die, he shall not get away alive. (13) A man who is caught in the house of a muskenum, in the house, during daytime, shall pay 10 shekels of silver. He who is caught in the house at night, shall die, he shall not get away alive.
Exodus 22:2-3 makes a distinction between the amount of force that can be legally used to defend yourself against a thief depending on whether it is day or night. It is not considered murder if one kills a thief that breaks in during nighttime, but it is considered murder if the thief is killed during the day.
The Laws of Eshnunna 12-13 have a parallel. Though the situation isn’t exactly the same – namely, we are not talking about self-defense, but about a thief being caught – there is still the daytime/nighttime distinction, with similar consequences. A thief caught in the day is fined, but the thief caught at night is assumed to have more mischievous motives and is put to death. The slight difference between these two law codes is that Exodus is not mandating the death of the criminal; it is merely saying that self-defense to the point of killing the thief is acceptable. Eshnunna, on the other hand, seems to be saying that the penalty for the nighttime thief is indeed death.
GRAZING AND BLAZING A FIELD
Exodus 22:5-6 juxtaposes penalties for an animal caught grazing in another’s field and an out-of-control fire burning another’s field. These are sandwiched between laws about theft and stolen/damaged property. Commentator Nahum Sarna notes that the Hittite Laws also juxtaposes the same two types of law and these are also in between laws on theft (Exodus 131). This may indicate that the law code we see in Exodus is following a sort of well-known or established pattern for dealing with situations. At the very least, it is quite curious that there is such a strong similarity between the law codes.
There are several similar laws in other civilizations that deal with these issues. Hammurabi stipulates that if an animal pastures without consent on another man’s field, the negligent shepherd owes an addition of 20 kur of grain per 18 iku to the owner (57-58). This, as far as I can figure out, is about a 6% addition to the damaged property (see footnote 95 on ANE -171). The Hittite Laws have more to say on the subject. If cattle are caught grazing, the negligent shepherd pays 10 shekels of silver for each acre of cultivated land destroyed, and 3 shekels of silver for uncultivated field (107).
Hittite Laws also discuss out of control fires. If a man accidentally burns down another man’s house, he has to rebuild the house and replace anything lost (98). If the fire burns a field, he gives 6 shekels of silver per tree that was damaged and he must do the replanting himself (105).
So again, we see some strong similarities with Israelite law. There is a stronger penalty outside Scripture, possibly due to biblical law taking into consideration the motive of the fire starter and negligent shepherd.
PROPERTY DAMAGE OR LOSS
Exodus 22:10-11 “If a man gives to his neighbor a donkey or an ox or a sheep or any beast to keep safe, and it dies or is injured or is driven away, without anyone seeing it, 11 an oath by the LORD shall be between them both to see whether or not he has put his hand to his neighbor’s property. The owner shall accept the oath, and he shall not make restitution.
Hammurabi 266-7: If a visitation of god has occurred in a sheepfold or a lion has made a kill, the shepherd shall prove himself innocent in the presence of god, but the owner of the sheepfold shall receive from him the animal stricken in the fold. (267) If the shepherd was careless and has let lameness develop in the fold, the shepherd shall make good in cattle and sheep the loss through the lameness which he let develop in the fold and give (them) to their owner.
Hittite 75: If anyone yokes an ox, a horse, a mule (or) an ass and it dies, or a wolf devours it or it gets lost, he shall give (the value of) the respective animal. But if he contends: “It died by the hand of god,” he shall take an oath.
Exodus 22:13 If it is torn by beasts, let him bring it as evidence. He shall not make restitution for what has been torn.
Hammurabi 244: If a seignior hired an ox or an ass and a lion has killed it in the open, (the loss) shall be its owner’s.
Sumerian Laws 9: If a lion has devoured a straying ox, he (i.e., the herdsman or the person who hired it) must deliver the… in full, to its owner. (10) If an ox caused the loss of a straying ox, ox for ox… (remainder lost).
Let’s compare a series of laws from Exodus and ANE law codes concerning property damage. In Exodus 22:10-11, we see that if property is entrusted to a bailee and is lost or dies due to unseen causes, an oath is made before the Lord by the bailee professing the bailee’s innocence, and no restitution is needed (cf. 22:9). This is not unlike the laws in Hammurabi or the Hittite Laws. Hammurabi 266-267 states that if a “visitation of god” occurs (meaning, the animal dies of natural causes or is killed by another beast), the person who was watching over the animal must prove in an oath before a god that he is innocent. Restitution is not made, but the original owner simply gets the dead animal back. The Hittite Laws also mention an oath and a god’s sovereign cause.
Hammurabi 244 and the Sumerian Laws 9 also mention the animal that is devoured (cf. Ex 22:13). If the animal is torn by wild beasts, no restitution is made (just like in Exodus) so long as evidence can be presented. The original owner gets to keep the dead meat.
What is most interesting to me is that all of these laws assume the innocence of the bailee. If you entrust your goods to another person – be it a sheep or ox or bicycle or boat – you are implying that they are trustworthy enough to keep it well protected. If it is destroyed not by negligence but by an “act of God” – be it a wolf or lion or storm or lightning strike – we chalk it up to God’s sovereignty and the bailee isn’t faulted.
So overall, we are seeing some strong similarities between Israel’s law code and other cultures’. This could simply be evidence of a cultural norm geographically and temporally located. It could also be evidence of God’s general grace upon all mankind. We have also noted several areas where the Israelite law had an elevated morality from the others (i.e. they valued the life of a slave and of a thief above property). This, of course, is a good reflection of the divine benevolent Deity behind the laws in Exodus.
The post Exodus 21c-22a – Property Damage Laws in the Ancient Near East appeared first on Bethany Bible Church.