OP BABYLONIAN CONCEPTIONS ON JEWISH THOUGHT. 313 



a cuneiform text dating from the time of the Khammurabi 

 dynasty, as at that period alone do we find the variants 

 Ammurabi and Ammirabi side by side with Khammurabi. 

 Also that the confusion into which the whole text has fallen, 

 from verse 17 onwards, taken in conjunction witli the 

 presence of so many obscure and archaic expressions, is the 

 best possible proof of the antiquity of the whole chapter. 

 " Probably," he says, " the original, which seems to have been 

 written in Babylonian, was rescued from the archives of the 

 pre-Israelitish kings of Salem, and preserved in the Temple at 

 Jerusalem." This theory, however, does not conflict with the 

 higher criticism, as expounded by Canon Driver, which does not 

 deny the antiquity of any of the sources of the Old Testament, 

 but asserts that " the Hebrew historiographer is essentially a 

 compiler of pre-existing documents, and not an original author." 

 This chapter (Genesis xiv) is put apart by Driver as coming 

 from a special source ; he also points out that, although the 

 four names in verse 1 correspond more or less exactly with 

 those of kings discovered in the inscriptions, at present (up to 

 June, 1909) there is no monumental corroboration of any part 

 of the narrative which follows. Some poetic fragments 

 discovered by Dr. Pinches narrate inroads of Kudur-dugmal or 

 Kudur-luggamal into North Babylonia, Khammurabi being his 

 opponent. (In Genesis they are described as coming together 

 against the King of Sodom and his allies.) Also a mention is 

 made of a certain Tudkhula identified by Hommel with the 

 Tidal of Genesis. Another inscription mentions Iri-Aku, the King 

 of Larsa (corresponding to Arioch of Ellasar in Genesis) ; and also 

 Kudur-Mabug his father is called the Prince of Martu (the West). 



Professor Hommel is also of opinion that the dynasty to 

 which Khammurabi belonged was South Arabian ; and that it 

 had introduced into Babylon a doctrine of monotheism which 

 was of great antiquity, and superseded the polytheism of 

 Babylonia ; and that consequently Abraham carried with him 

 to Canaan this higher conception ; and he explains the fact that 

 Khammurabi's father bore the Babylonian name of Sinmuballit, 

 and his grandfather that of Apil-sin, by the fact that it was 

 customary to adopt the personal names of the country ruled 

 over. But I am not aware that Hommel is supported in this 

 theory by any distinguished archaeologist. And to my mind 

 his arguments appear forced and unreal. 



As regards Deuteronomy, the completion of this book is put 

 by Canon Driver as before 621 B.C., and possibly at about 

 630 B.C. But he adds that " the bulk of the laws contained in 



