Whether you thank Yahweh, Ishtar, or Osiris for your daily bread a few literary comparisons may prove to be insightful when looking at the written laws for your particular flavor of faith. For example, The Negative Confessions, The Code of Hammurabi, and The Ten Commandments and Covenant Code all offer insightful similarities. The Mesopotamian and Hebrew texts are remarkably similar. That being said, while the Egyptians, Mesopotamians, and Hebrews subscribed to remarkably similar laws, their concept of God differed in distinct ways. While the outcomes of these documents were likely similar, their individual intents differed slightly. These documents provide uniquely prime insight into the inter-influenced moral traditions and legal codes of the ancients as well as our current western legal traditions and historical roots.
It would seem that enacting a law prohibiting theft or murder could go without mention, but common sense may not be so common after all. All of these documents, whether bluntly or in a roundabout way, specifically admonish theft or murder as one might expect. The Book of the Dead, incantation twenty nine (“not carrying away milk from the mouths of children”) and incantation ten (“…defrauding the oppressed one of his property”) jibe well with the very succinct “thou shalt not steal” from Yahweh, as well as the implicitly clear code twenty two from Hammurabi stating “If a man practice robbery and is captured, that man shall be put to death.” None of these civilizations had to wonder whether murder was à propos in their respective cultures. Incantation sixteen from Egypt says “I have done no murder” from the good book we have “thou shalt not kill” and from Mesopotamia, code one tells us that you can be put to death for the mere accusation of murder without proof. While those rules may sound like natural law, it might behoove a youth of ancient times to be well versed on the rules concerning parental relationships. Oppressing members of ones family would surely not please Osiris as negative confession two states. Striking your father in Mesopotamia meant forfeiture of your hand, as code one hundred ninety five tells us, while to not “honor your father and your mother” may result in a potential abbreviation to your potentially “long life” in The Ten Commandments. The Covenant Code clearly explains a probable cause for your early demise. Quite simply, “anyone who strikes his father or mother must die.” Adultery and fornication, as well, are ubiquitous transgressions. The Osiris worshipper would hopefully be able to state incantation twenty two (“I have not committed fornication”) with a straight face, while fooling around with someone else’s spouse in Mesopotamia would result in being bound and thrown into the water as per code one twenty nine. Yahweh is quite succinct in his command that “Thou shalt not commit adultery.”
A close comparison of the Hebrew laws with the Code of Hammurabi reveals not only common laws against theft, adultery, and being nice to the parental units, but they also share a common spirit in law. For example, compare the phraseology in codes three and four of Hammurabi to commandment nine of the Bible. The phraseology admonishing us to not “…bear false witness….” is common to both documents. As well, the penalties, while not always implicitly stated, have a common spirit better known as the “eye for an eye” system of fairness. In Hammurabi’s time, false accusations of murder meant death (codes one and three); destroying your neighbor’s grain field means you simply pay him back the amount of grain he lost (codes Fifty three through fifty five). Code one ninety six specifically offers an eye for an eye. Codes one ninety seven and two twenty nine offer a broken bone for a broken bone and knocked out teeth for the same respectively. Consider some excerpts from The Covenant Code. Paragraph one, among others, offers death for death. Paragraph three suggests the Hebrew should prepare to have a guest for a while after incapacitating someone, as one was required to nurture the person back to health and otherwise compensate them for their misfortune. Lastly, this equitable fairness is restated in the timeless phrase of paragraph five “…life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stroke for stroke….” Comparisons of the spirits of these laws indeed show remarkable similarity.
That being said, while the Egyptians, Mesopotamians, and Hebrews subscribed to remarkably similar laws, their concepts of God differed in some ways. From what we have just discussed, it can be safely concluded that these three civilizations had a keen sense of fair play as they included in their laws most of that which might be considered generally decent today. They differ however in their discussion of fair play regarding God or gods. Hammurabi felt safe not mentioning what might ensue in the event you disrespect Ishtar, while failing to utter incantation thirty eight regarding “obstructing gods” might not bode well for your Egyptian afterlife. The Ten Commandments, on the other hand, offer some truly unique insights right from the beginning regarding one’s relationship with God. To wit, you are to have only Yahweh as your God and no others, you should not worship so much as a statue, and under no circumstances should you “misuse” the name of God. Swift punishment will come to those who do not adhere to these commandments regarding the one true God, and, by all means, “remember the Sabbath day….”
While the outcomes of these documents were likely similar, their individual intents differed to some degree. The general outcomes of these documents in their respective civilizations were likely the same; they all resulted in a general trend towards that which is considered decent behavior. While that was surely a mutual intent in all three civilizations, there may indeed have been some variety in the initial spirit of the projects. The Negative Confessions, as they are so aptly called, while giving the living something to strive for, seem to have their major importance in one’s ability to recite them to Osiris with a straight face in the afterlife. The implied penalty was singular in that you may not be able to continue on your post mortem journey failing one of these affirmations. The Code of Hammurabi appears to more closely resemble a set of secular rules with less consideration given to how one should actually conduct or not conduct a relationship with your god of choice. Inversely, the Hebrew laws seem to be rooted in a close concrete relationship with Yahweh as the one true God, and a sentence rarely passes without a requisite reference to God.
The impact of these laws and codes were likely mutual from the aforementioned spirit of equity in the “eye for eye” rules, to their common phraseology such as “…bear false witness….” Additionally, they have certainly had an impact on current western legal tradition. Consider the not so obvious death for the thief. While it may seem archaic, it is indeed current martial law under emergency situations in our country today with measure meted on the spot. Modern civil courts offer financial recompense from a transgressor. Hammurabi and Yahweh, as well, offered equitable compensation in the form of grain or assistance in some way. The twenty third and twenty fourth laws of Hammurabi have a ring of welfare to their spirits. As adultery and fornication were prohibited in the ancient world, so to this day do we make laws concerning with whom you may be permitted to have sex. Many states offer legal recourse for adulterous behavior. The list of modern parallels is abundant.
As a result, these three cultures and their requisite laws do have similarities. The spirit of Mesopotamian and Hebrew law are, in many ways, identical. That being said, their respective concepts of God indeed differ in some ways. While the outcomes of these documents were likely similar, their individual intents differed slightly. A study of these texts is indeed a study in the heritage of what we know today to be our modern western legal tradition. ~Joel Perry