Incest in the ancient Near East: The priestly law and the polarization of Israel against her neighbors

The main concern of this dissertation is the reasons for the condemnation of the nations in Lev. 18. The research is based on the hypothesis that the origin of incestuous practices in this text is erroneously attributed to the Canaanites and Egyptians.; We did an exegetical study of the family laws and forbidden unions in this text in light of the patriarchal narratives in Genesis. We then examined incest in Egypt, Canaan, and in the HL, and HC. We also looked at the Gattungen of the Priestly laws in Lev. 18 in light of other legal texts, both biblical and non-biblical. Finally we considered the stream of tradition, and the concept of polarization of Israel against her neighbors.; We found that the narratives in Genesis did not provide the composition framework for these laws. Incest in Egypt was practiced in the royal families during the pharaonic times, but not among the common people. It was widespread during the Ptolemaic and Roman times. The lifestyle of the Canaanites reflected the lifestyle of the Semitic people in general, and they were not notoriously licentious.; Concerning the stream of tradition, we found that the first cuneiform texts were written with the cultural continuum which was effectively maintained by the scribal tradition. A process of step-by-step textual growth and improvement might have affected some texts. We also found that the author of Lev. 18 has deviated from the tradition preserved in the other texts by including laws on incest that are not found in the other codes.; The author of Lev. 18 depended partly on the Covenant Code, but more on the Deuterononomic sources. The notion of sin of idolatry and punishment of nations in Lev. 18 is also found in DtrH. In the background of H there stands HL in terms of both structure and content. Consequently, the family laws and forbidden unions in Lev. 18 are theological. They are applied as points of departure of the commandments for dispossession. These laws do not therefore reflect the sins of the Canaanites and Egyptians. The laws also do not reflect a desert setting. They are postexilic and a product of ancient Near Eastern legal tradition which provided their framework.