Historicity of the Patriarchal stories in the Bible

The life of Abraham has been variously interpreted. Some like Philo of Alexandria call it an allegory, some as an exaggeration of a historical figure, some say it is a fiction, but others affirm it is historical and trust worthy. The biblical description of the background and setting of the patriarchs fits exactly with the culture of the second millennium B.C. Archeology has cast interesting light upon the background of this section.


The Mari age was one of considerable political and cultural importance for Assyria. Parrot, the French Archaeologist, discovered a highly developed civilization there.

“Even more important was the discovery of over twenty thousand clay tablets in various rooms of the palace. They included correspondence between Hammurabi and Zimri-Lim, the last king of Mari, as well as a huge collection of business documents.”

 This period of Amorite history is very important as it throws light on the lives and practices of the Patriarchs. Some tablets contain reference to the “Habiru”, Some of the place names that survived in the area of Haran corresponds with the Patriarchal names: The names of cities like Serug, Terah, and Nahor were all located in the vicinity of Haran, The names like Abraham, Isaac, Laban, Jacob and Joseph seemed to have been in common use at this time: A-ba-am-ra-ma, A-ba-am-ra-am, and Ya-”qub”-e and Ya-ah-qu-ub-i. The Mari tablets also have a reference to a warlike nomadic tribe known as Banu-Yamina. Some scholars see the similarity with Benjaminites of the Biblical narratives.


The texts of Nuzu (a Horite city in northern Mesopotamia) also have some bearing on the patriarchal time. The adoption of Eliezer by Abraham (Gen.15:2f) bears similarity to the adoption law found here which states the responsibilities of the adopted son to the childless parents and forfeiting of these rights in case of the birth of a legal son after adoption. These tablets also talk about the barren wife obliged to give her handmaid for raising children to her husband. Because procreation was understood to be the chief purpose of marriage (cf.Gen.16: 2; 30:3; 21: 11). According to Nuzu tablets the “birthright” of first born is negotiable (cf. Esau’s forfeiting birthright). Even Rachel’s stealing of “teraphim” could be understood in these customs. The Nuzu law recognized as the leader of the family (associated with the right of inheritance) the one who possessed the household idols.


These and many more could be said about the historicity of the Patriarchal stories in the Bible. They also confirm the historical accuracy of the Biblical narratives.