Source of Law in the Biblical and Mesopotamian Law Collections Numerous scholarly studies have compared biblical and cuneiform laws, and noted the many similarities between them. I wish to take a somewhat different approach here, and emphasize what I think is the fundamental difference between the two types of laws. I acknowledge scholarly assumptions that though there were external influences on Israelite law, its uniqueness consists of the changes effected for the purpose of adapting it to its particular theology (1). The pivotal factor in this uniqueness is, in my opinion, the perceived source of the law. Biblical law is perceived to be of divine source. Cuneiform law, in contrast, has its source in the king. This distinction entails several consequences. The source of law affects what is classified as an offence, and how and by whom the offence is to be redressed. In biblical law, some offences disrupt the divine order; in cuneiform law an offence affects public order. Consequently, redress in biblical law is often primarily concerned with punishing the perpetrator; in cuneiform law, it is generally concerned with compensating the injured party. Biblical law admits of no change nor commutation of punishment; cuneiform law not only reflects changes, but allows punishment to be deferred or delegated. 1. Methodology I will not be limiting my biblical examples to the Book of the Covenant. I have frozen my analysis in a different moment of time than most scholars — that is, after the compilation of the assumed later books of the Pentateuch. Questions about the priority of the laws of the different books and their interrelation have been raised by various scholars (2). In general, however, these books represent the further (1) See, e.g. S.M. PAUL, Studies in the Book of the Covenant in the Light of Cuneiform and Biblical Law (VTS 18; Leiden 1970), as well as the works of J.J. Finkelstein and others, particularly with respect to the laws of the goring ox. (2) See, e.g., A. FITZPATRICK-MCKINLEY, The Transformation of Torah from Scribal Advice to Law (Sheffield 1999) 176-177. Cf R.H. PFEIFFER, Introduction to the Old Testament (New York – London 1941) 216; J. VAN SETERS, “Cultic Laws in the Covenant Code and their Relationship to Deuteronomy and the Holi-