Covenantal ways of thinking and the formulation of documents was a critical part of life in the ancient Near East. The Hittite treaties and Deuteronomy are similar in form and structure in many ways. However, there are glaring differences that distinguish the two documents that provide insight into the Hebraic and Hittite culture and values.
First, there are striking similarities between the Hittite treaty presented by ANET and the book of Deuteronomy. Both contain a preamble, introducing the reader to the speakers and/or the parties involved in the forthcoming document. Both Deuteronomy and the ANET Hittite treaty possess a historical prologue, which is helpful in providing a framework to structure the document. The historical prologue …show more content…
Initially, both documents have a preamble which serves the same purpose as stated above, to identify speakers and present the parties involved. The biblical narrative and the Beckman Hittite treaty embrace commonality in regards to a historical prologue as well, framing the context for the other sections of the documents. Both contain a section outlining general stipulations as well as specific stipulations. The Beckman Hittite treaty and Deuteronomy both hold sections that speak of witnesses. This is significant because these sections identify the god(s) that have watched the oath take place, speaking to the binding, legal nature of both biblical covenants and Hittite treaties. Both documents possess segments devoted to curses and blessings. This portion of the deal is significant because it establishes how a particular god was going to respond if a party violated the treaty. If all parties held up their end of the deal, there would be substantial blessing. Yet, if anyone were to fail in their fidelity and violate their end of the bargain, it could insight the wrath of the deity who issued the curse. Finally, both the Beckman Hittite treaty and Deuteronomy hold sections that discuss document clauses, laying out how each document is to be cared for.
Though the sections do not appear in the same order, both the Beckman Hittite treaty and
First, there are striking similarities between the Hittite treaty presented by ANET and the book of Deuteronomy. Both contain a preamble, introducing the reader to the speakers and/or the parties involved in the forthcoming document. Both Deuteronomy and the ANET Hittite treaty possess a historical prologue, which is helpful in providing a framework to structure the document. The historical prologue …show more content…
Initially, both documents have a preamble which serves the same purpose as stated above, to identify speakers and present the parties involved. The biblical narrative and the Beckman Hittite treaty embrace commonality in regards to a historical prologue as well, framing the context for the other sections of the documents. Both contain a section outlining general stipulations as well as specific stipulations. The Beckman Hittite treaty and Deuteronomy both hold sections that speak of witnesses. This is significant because these sections identify the god(s) that have watched the oath take place, speaking to the binding, legal nature of both biblical covenants and Hittite treaties. Both documents possess segments devoted to curses and blessings. This portion of the deal is significant because it establishes how a particular god was going to respond if a party violated the treaty. If all parties held up their end of the deal, there would be substantial blessing. Yet, if anyone were to fail in their fidelity and violate their end of the bargain, it could insight the wrath of the deity who issued the curse. Finally, both the Beckman Hittite treaty and Deuteronomy hold sections that discuss document clauses, laying out how each document is to be cared for.
Though the sections do not appear in the same order, both the Beckman Hittite treaty and