/ay"breuh ham', -heuhm/, n.1. the first of the great Biblical patriarchs, father of Isaac, and traditional founder of the ancient Hebrew nation: considered by Muslims an ancestor of the Arab peoples through his son Ishmael.2. a male given name: from a Hebrew word meaning "father of many."
* * *Iflourished early 2nd millennium BCGenesis tells how Abraham, at 75, left Ur with his barren wife, Sarai (later Sarah), and others to found a new nation in Canaan. There God made a covenant with him, promising that his descendants would inherit the land and become a great nation. Abraham fathered Ishmael by Sarah's maidservant Hagar; Sarah herself bore Isaac, who inherited the covenant. Abraham's faith was tested when God ordered him to sacrifice Isaac; he was prepared to obey but God relented. In Judaism he is a model of virtue, in Christianity he is the father of all believers, and in Islam he is an ancestor of Muhammad and a model (in Sufism) of generosity.II(as used in expressions)Abraham KarlAbraham Plains ofNelson Ahlgren AbrahamCowley AbrahamDarby AbrahamDukas Paul AbrahamFlexner AbrahamGallatin Abraham Alfonse AlbertGeiger AbrahamGrierson Sir George AbrahamHeschel Abraham JoshuaIdelsohn Abraham ZeviKuyper AbrahamLincoln AbrahamMaslow Abraham HaroldMichelson Albert AbrahamPissarro Jacob Abraham CamilleQuisling Vidkun Abraham Lauritz JonssonRoentgen AbrahamAbraham StokerWaksman Selman AbrahamWerner Abraham Gottlob
* * *▪ Hebrew patriarchIntroductionflourished early 2nd millennium BCfirst of the Hebrew patriarchs and a figure revered by the three great monotheistic religions: Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. According to the biblical book of Genesis, Abraham left Ur, in Mesopotamia, because God called him to found a new nation in an undesignated land that he later learned was Canaan. He obeyed unquestioningly the commands of God, from whom he received repeated promises and a covenant that his “seed” would inherit the land.The critical problem of a “biography” of AbrahamThere can be no biography of Abraham in the ordinary sense. The most that can be done is to apply the interpretation of modern historical finds to biblical materials so as to arrive at a probable judgment as to the background and patterns of events in his life. This involves a reconstruction of the patriarchal age (of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph; early 2nd millennium BC), which until the end of the 19th century was unknown and considered virtually unknowable. It was assumed, based on a presumed dating of hypothetical biblical sources, that the patriarchal narratives in the Bible were only a projection of the situation and concerns of a much later period (9th–5th century BC) and of dubious historical value.Several theses were advanced to explain the narratives—e.g., that the patriarchs were mythical beings or the personifications of tribes or folkloric or etiological (explanatory) figures created to account for various social, juridical, or cultic patterns. However, after World War I, archaeological research made enormous strides with the discovery of monuments and documents, many of which date back to the period assigned to the patriarchs in the traditional account. The excavation of a royal palace at Mari, an ancient city on the Euphrates, for example, brought to light thousands of cuneiform tablets (official archives and correspondence and religious and juridical texts) and thereby offered exegesis a new basis, which specialists utilized to show that, in the biblical book of Genesis, narratives fit perfectly with what, from other sources, is known today of the early 2nd millennium BC but imperfectly with a later period. A biblical scholar in the 1940s aptly termed this result “the rediscovery of the Old Testament.”Thus, there are two main sources for reconstructing the figure of father Abraham: the book of Genesis, from the genealogy of Terah, Abraham's father, and his departure from Ur to Harran in chapter 11 to the death of Abraham in chapter 25; and recent archaeological discoveries and interpretations concerning the area and era in which the biblical narrative takes place.The biblical accountAccording to the biblical account, Abram (“The Father [or God] Is Exalted”), who is later named Abraham (“The Father of Many Nations”), a native of Ur in Mesopotamia, is called by God (Yahweh) to leave his own country and people and journey to an undesignated land, where he will become the founder of a new nation. He obeys the call unquestioningly and (at 75 years of age) proceeds with his barren wife, Sarai, later named Sarah (“Princess”), his nephew Lot, and other companions to the land of Canaan (Syrian and Palestinian religion) (between Syria and Egypt).There the childless septuagenarian receives repeated promises and a covenant from God that his “seed” will inherit the land and become a numerous nation. He not only has a son, Ishmael, by his wife's maidservant Hagar but has, at 100 years of age, by Sarah, a legitimate son, Isaac, who is to be the heir of the promise. Yet Abraham is ready to obey God's command to sacrifice Isaac, a test of his faith, which he is not required to consummate in the end because God substitutes a ram. At Sarah's death, he purchases the cave of Machpelah near Hebron, together with the adjoining ground, as a family burying place. It is the first clear ownership of a piece of the promised land by Abraham and his posterity. Toward the end of his life, he sees to it that his son Isaac marries a girl from his own people back in Mesopotamia rather than a Canaanite woman. Abraham dies at the age of 175 and is buried next to Sarah in the cave of Machpelah.Abraham is pictured with various characteristics: a righteous man, with wholehearted commitment to God; a man of peace (in settling a boundary dispute with his nephew Lot), compassionate (he argues and bargains with God to spare the people of Sodom and Gomorrah), and hospitable (he welcomes three visiting angels); a quick-acting warrior (he rescues Lot and his family from a raiding party); and an unscrupulous liar to save his own skin (he passes off Sarah as his sister and lets her be picked by the Egyptian pharaoh for his harem). He appears as both a man of great spiritual depth and strength and a person with common human weaknesses and needs.The Genesis narrative in the light of recent scholarshipThe saga of Abraham unfolds between two landmarks, the exodus from “Ur of the Chaldeans” (Ur Kasdim) of the family, or clan, of Terah and “the purchase of” (or “the burials in”) the cave of Machpelah. Tradition seems particularly firm on this point. The Hebrew text, in fact, locates the departure specifically at Ur Kasdim, the Kasdim being none other than the Kaldu of the cuneiform texts at Mari. It is manifestly a migration of which one tribe is the centre. The leader of the movement is designated by name: Terah, who “takes them out” from Ur, Abram his son, Lot the son of Haran, another son of Terah, and their wives, the best known being Sarai, the wife of Abram. The existence of another son of Terah, Nahor, who appears later, is noted.Most scholars agree that Ur Kasdim was the Sumerian city of Ur, today Tall al-Muqayyar (or Mughair), about 200 miles (300 km) southeast of Baghdad in lower Mesopotamia, which was excavated from 1922 to 1934. It is certain that the cradle of the ancestors was the seat of a vigorous polytheism whose memory had not been lost and whose uncontested master in Ur was Nanna (or Sin), the Sumero-Akkadian moon god. “They served other gods,” Joshua, Moses' successor, recalled, speaking to their descendants at Shechem (Nāblus).After the migration from Ur (c. 2000 BC), the reasons for which are unknown, the first important stopping place was Harran, where the caravan remained for some time. The city has been definitely located in upper Mesopotamia, between the Tigris and the Euphrates rivers, in the Balikh valley and can be found on the site of the modern Harran in Turkey. It has been shown that Harran was a pilgrimage city, for it was a centre of the Sin cult and consequently closely related to the moon-god cult of Ur. The Mari tablets have shed new light on the patriarchal period, specifically in terms of the city of Harran.There have been many surprising items in the thousands of tablets found in the palace at Mari. Not only are the Ḫapiru (“Hebrews”) mentioned but so also remarkably are the Banu Yamina (“Benjaminites”). It is not that the latter are identical with the family of Benjamin, a son of Jacob, but rather that a name with such a biblical ring appears in these extrabiblical sources in the 18th century BC. What seems beyond doubt is that these Benjaminites (or Yaminites, meaning “Sons of the Right,” or “Sons of the South,” according to their habits of orientation) are always indicated as being north of Mari and in Harran, in the Temple of Sin.The Bible provides no information on the itinerary followed between Ur and Harran. Scholars think that the caravan went up the Euphrates, then up the Balikh. After indicating a stay of indeterminate length in Harran, the Bible says only that Terah died there, at the age of 205, and that Abraham was 75 when he took up the journey again with his family and his goods. This time the migration went from east to west, first as far as the Euphrates River, which they may have crossed at Carchemish, since it can be forded during low-water periods.Here again, the Mari texts supply a reference, for they indicate that there were Benjaminites on the right bank of the river, in the lands of Yamhad (Aleppo), Qatanum (Qatna), and Amurru. Since the ancient trails seem to have been marked with sanctuaries, it is noteworthy that Nayrab, near Aleppo, was, like Harran and Ur, a centre of the Sin cult and that south of Aleppo, on the road to Ḥamāh, there is still a village that bears the name of Benjamin. The route is in the direction of the “land of Canaan,” the goal of the journey.If a stop in Damascus is assumed, the caravan must next have crossed the land of Bashan (the Ḥawrān of today), first crossing the Jabboq, then the Jordan River at the ford of Dāmiyā, and arriving in the heart of the Samaritan country, to reach at last the plain of Shechem, today Balāṭah, at the foot of the Gerizim and Ebal mountains. Shechem was at the time a political and religious centre, the importance of which has been perceived more clearly as a result of recent archaeological excavations. From the mid-13th to the mid-11th century BC, Shechem was the site of the cult of the Canaanite god Baʿal-Berit (Lord of the Covenant). The architecture uncovered on the site by archaeologists would date to the 18th century BC, in which the presence of the patriarchs in Shechem is placed.The next stopping place was in Bethel, identified with present-day Baytīn, north of Jerusalem. Bethel was also a holy city, whose cult was centred on El, the Canaanite god par excellence. Its name does not lend itself to confusion, for it proclaims that the city is the bet, “house,” or temple, of El (God). The Canaanite sanctuary was taken over without hesitation by Abraham, who built an altar there and consecrated it to Yahweh, at least if the Yahwistic tradition in Genesis is to be believed.Abraham had not yet come to the end of his journey. Between Shechem and Bethel he had gone about 31 miles. It was about as far again from Bethel to Hebron, or more precisely to the oaks of Mamre, “which are at Hebron” (according to the Genesis account). The location of Mamre has been the subject of some indecision. At the present time, there is general agreement in setting it 1.5 miles (3 km) northwest of Hebron at Rāmat al-Khalīl, an Arabic name which means the “Heights of the Friend,” the friend (of God) being Abraham.Mamre marked the site of Abraham's encampment, but this did not at all exclude episodic travels in the direction of the Negeb, to Gerar and Beersheba. Life was a function of the economic conditions of the moment, of pastures to follow and to find, and thus the patriarchs moved back and forth between the land of Canaan and the Nile River delta. They remained shepherds and never became cultivators.It was in Mamre that Abraham received the revelation that his race would be perpetuated, and it was there that he learned that his nephew Lot had been taken captive. The latter is an enigmatic episode, an “erratic block” in a story in which nothing prepared the way for it. Suddenly, the life of the patriarch was inserted into a slice of history in which several important persons (“kings”) intervene: Amraphel of Shinar, Arioch of Ellasar, Ched-or-laomer of Elam, and Tidal of Goiim. Scholars of previous generations tried to identify these names with important historical figures—e.g., Amraphel with Hammurabi of Babylon—but little remains today of these suppositions. The whole of chapter 14 of Genesis, in which this event is narrated, differs completely from what has preceded and what follows. It may be an extract from some historical annals, belonging to an unknown secular source, for the meeting of Melchizedek, king of Salem and priest of God Most High (El ʿElyon), and Abraham is impressive. The king-priest greets him with bread and wine on his victorious return and blesses him in the name of God Most High.In this scene, the figure of the patriarch takes on a singular aspect. How is his religious behaviour to be characterized? He swears by “the Lord God Most High”—i.e., by both Yahweh and El ʿElyon. It is known that, on the matter of the revelation of Yahweh to man, the biblical traditions differ. According to what scholars call the Yahwistic source (J) in the Pentateuch (Priestly code) (the first five books of the Bible), Yahweh had been known and worshiped since Adam's time. According to the so-called Priestly source (P), the name of Yahweh was revealed only to Moses. It may be concluded that it was probably El whom the patriarchs, including Abraham, knew.As noted before, in Mesopotamia the patriarchs worshiped “other gods.” On Canaanite soil, they met the Canaanite supreme god, El, and adopted him, but only partially and nominally, bestowing upon him qualities destined to distinguish him and to assure his preeminence over all other gods. He was thus to become El ʿOlam (God the Everlasting One), El ʿElyon (God Most High), El Shaddai (God, the One of the Mountains), and El Roʾi (God of Vision). In short, the god of Abraham possessed duration, transcendence, power, and knowledge. This was not monotheism but monolatry (the worship of one among many gods), with the bases laid for a true universalism. He was a personal god too, with direct relations with the individual, but also a family god and certainly still a tribal god. Here truly was the “God of our fathers,” who in the course of time was to become the “God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.”It is not surprising that this bond of the flesh should still manifest itself when it came to gathering together the great ancestors into the family burial chamber, the cave of Machpelah. This place is venerated today in Hebron, at the Ḥaram al-Khalīl (Holy Place of the Friend), under the mosque. Abraham, “the friend of God,” was forevermore the depositary of the promise, the beneficiary of the Covenant, sealed not by the death of Isaac but by the sacrifice of the ram that was offered up in place of the child on Mount Moriah.André ParrotAdditional ReadingA study of the patriarch Abraham is based on scriptural documentation and particularly on Genesis. One should therefore first consult a critical translation of the first book of the Old Testament such as E.A. Speiser (ed. and trans.), Genesis, 3rd ed. (1979, reissued 1985); Gerhard von Rad, Genesis, rev. ed. (1972, reprinted 1985); and Claus Westermann, Genesis 12–36 (1985). The world of the patriarchs has inspired numerous works; those which take into account recent archaeological discoveries include William F. Albright, The Biblical Period from Abraham to Ezra (1963); and Roland de Vaux, Ancient Israel: Its Life and Institutions, 2nd ed. (1965, reissued 1973). Centred on the city of Ur and the discoveries that were made there is Leonard Woolley, Abraham: Recent Discoveries and Hebrew Origins (1936), but some of his analogies must be rejected. André Parrot, Abraham and His Times (1968), presents a synthesis of the double archaeological and epigraphical documentation. Critical reappraisals of Abraham as a historical figure include Thomas L. Thompson, The Historicity of the Patriarchal Narratives: The Quest for the Historical Abraham (1974); and John Van Seters, Abraham in History and Tradition (1975, reissued 1987), which includes a discussion of literary tradition.
* * *