[416] Vorderasiatische Schriftdenkmäler der königlichen Museen zu Berlin, VII, No. 198.
[417] Ibid., VII, No. 97.
[418] Since this manuscript was sent to the printer, another Abraham has been found in some tablets in the Yale University Collection.
[419] Breasted, Ancient Records, Egypt, IV, pp. 352, 353. (See [p. 360].)
[420] See Beiträge zur Assyriologie, V, p. 498, no. 23; cf. p. 429, ff.
[421] King, Letters and Inscriptions of Hammurabi, Vol. I, No. 66.
[422] Some scholars suppose that the writer of the account in Genesis had before him a source in the cuneiform writing in which the “pi” at the end of Hammurapi’s name was spelled with a sign that could be read either “pi” or “pil” (see Barton, Origin and Development of Babylonian Writing, Leipzig, 1913, No. 185), and that the l was attached in consequence of a misreading of this sign. That, however, admits corruption, though it attempts to explain its cause.
[423] Cuneiform Texts, &c., in the British Museum, XXI, 33.
[424] It was until recently not known that Arad-Sin and Rim-Sin were different persons, and some thought the king might be called either Rim-Sin or Eri-aku (Arioch, Gen. 14:1). It is possible that Arad-Sin may have been called Ari-aku in Sumerian, but it is improbable. It is now known that Arad-Sin died 30 years before Hammurapi came to the throne. With our present knowledge it is difficult to see how Arioch could be the name of Rim-Sin unless Rim-Sin be read partly as Semitic and partly as Sumerian and then considerably corrupted.
[425] The text was published by Pinches in the Journal of Transactions of the Victoria Institute, Vol. XXIX, 82, 83; cf. emendations by L. W. King, Letters and Inscriptions of Hammurabi, Vol. I, p. li, ff. Sayce has also translated them, filling out the lacunæ by freely exercising the imagination, in the Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archæology, XXVIII, 203-218, 241-251, and XXIX, 7-17.