‘How is the covenant understood in Genesis?’
As a text, Genesis is rather varied, housing a wide range of (often conflicting) narratives, with diverse
historical influences distinguishable in each passage, reflecting the differing intentions and interpretations
of each author. Therefore, the phrase ‘covenant’ cannot be applied to the text generally, since Genesis
contains different forms of covenant, from conditional treaties between leaders and characters, to
everlasting covenants between God and his people, or the patriarchs. Thus, this essay seeks to examine the
historical contexts of Genesis’ authors and editors, determine and define the types of covenants described,
and uncover the true influence of the Babylonian exile on the treaties presented, to ultimately argue that
covenant in Genesis is too varied to be understood as a single form.
To best understand the covenants presented in Genesis, it is productive to first examine the different forms
of treaties, and their uses throughout the history of the Ancient Near East. Treaties, also known in biblical
scholarship as covenants or agreements, were used consistently by kings, civilians, and even whole
communities to maintain peace, delegate responsibilities, or further the power of a civilian family or
kingdom. Sometimes, when treaties were formed between kings, the two parties were equal, however
other times, one member (the suzerain) exercised more influence over the other (the vassal). 1 Indeed, this
is just one example of the way in which covenants, in the context of Genesis and the Ancient Near East, are
incredibly unique from one another, as the (im)balance of power between parties could greatly dictate the
outcome or terms of a treaty. For example, in the case of Genesis 15 and 17, the covenants made between
God and Abraham are by default unequal, with God holding the ultimate authority, and being responsible
for any punishment metered out on the collapse of the agreement. Abraham, the vassal, is obliged to obey
God’s terms due to the expectation his loyalty to God, and place as subservient to God due to being a part
of His creation. This is also the case for the future generations after Abraham, as the “everlasting
covenant”2 is dependent on their sole worshipping of God3 and upkeep of male circumcision.4
The most prevalent examples of ancient Near Eastern covenants stem from the Hittites and the Neo-
Assyrians, who were prominent from the early to mid-second millennium B.C.E., and the early ninth to the
late seventh centuries B.C.E. respectively.5 Treaties from the both of these civilisations invoked a divine
witness to the covenant and the oaths made, and usually required that a physical copy be held in a temple
as an everlasting reminder of the terms of the agreement.6 An example of this can be found in the Sefire
inscriptions, of which Stele 1 cites the gods a witnesses to the treaty.7 However, both groups have distinct
markers in their covenants which determine their origin. For example, Hittite treaties notably contain a
historical introduction and a list of both blessings and curses for obedience and disobedience. 8 In contrast,
Neo-Assyrian covenants lack the historical introduction and usually the blessings, rather housing a large list
1
Lenzi, A. ‘How Does the Hebrew Bible Relate to the Ancient Near Eastern World?’ Bible Odyssey.
Accessed at https://www.bibleodyssey.org/articles/how-does-the-hebrew-bible-relate-to-the-ancient-
near-eastern-world/
2
Genesis 17:7.
3
Genesis 17:7: “be God to you and to your offspring after you”
4
Genesis 17:10-12: “Every male among you shall be circumcised (…) it shall be a sign of the covenant
between me and you”
5
Lenzi. ‘How Does the Hebrew Bible Relate to the Ancient Near Eastern World?’ Bible Odyssey.
6
Ibid.
7
Hallo, W.W. The Context of Scripture. Vol. II: ‘The Sefire Inscriptions.’ Brill: Leiden, 2000. Pg212.
8
Lenzi. ‘How Does the Hebrew Bible Relate to the Ancient Near Eastern World?’ Bible Odyssey.
, of detailed curses for the collapse of the agreement.9 Furthermore, Neo-Assyrian monarchs also created
treaty-like agreements called loyalty oaths, which were placed on entire communities and populations, 10 a
convention which is not found in Hittite records. Indeed, Genesis 17, can be argued to follow this form, by
God’s repeated emphasis that the covenant will be maintained on the basis of the people’s continued
loyalty to Him. This is strengthened by the fact that J’s author, responsible for Genesis 17, would have been
aware of the Neo-Assyrian conventions, writing in the 5th century BCE. Overall, the existence of these vastly
different types and structures of covenant in the ancient near East, and their influence on the authors of
Genesis, demonstrates the way in which ‘covenant’ is varied in Genesis, ranging from treaties between
figures, to oaths imposed on whole communities. Furthermore, the existence of these diverse historical
formulations of treaty demonstrates the way in which covenants were understood differently in each
community, overall promoting varied emphases, which can be seen in the writings of Genesis.
It is also important to note that sacrifice and ritual cutting are integral to many of the biblical covenants,
and indeed those in the ancient near East. In ancient Israel and Judah, treaty formation involved a variety
of rites and signs such as animal slaughter, sacrifices, recitation of curses and the ritual procession between
two halves of an animal11, which is referenced in Genesis 15 (“cut them into two, laying each half over
against the other, but he did not cut the birds in two.”12) Indeed, this relationship between cutting and
creating a covenant is also demonstrated in biblical narratives, as shown by the use of the same verb ‘cut’
in regards to both actions, intrinsically linking the two concepts together. The covenants presented in
Genesis all demonstrate this ritual act of cutting, or at the very least, the exchange of animals, a concept
which can also be seen in extra-biblical texts such as the 8th century BCE vassal treaty between
Asshurnirari V of Assyria and Mati’ilu of Arpad.13
Genesis 15 and 17 contain the clearest examples of ritual cutting as integral to covenant-making. In Genesis
15, Abraham is commanded to bring God “a heifer three years old, a female goat three years old, a ram
three years old, a turtle dove and a young pigeon,”14 all of which bar the birds are cut into two pieces and
lain over each other. Later on, God, symbolised by “a smoking cooking pit and a flaming torch” is “passed
between these pieces,”15 representing the binding of God’s oath to fulfil the promises made to Abraham.
Genesis 15 therefore demonstrates a ratification rite taking place, which aligns with the fact that the
passage is attributed to the J author, and 9th century Judah, in which these conventions were prevalent.
Therefore, the existence of ritual cutting and sacrifice in Genesis 15 may be a result of the intention of the J
author to promote this practice as part of covenant making and highlight its key part in ensuring the oaths
are ratified.
9
Lenzi. ‘How Does the Hebrew Bible Relate to the Ancient Near Eastern World?’ Bible Odyssey.
10
Ibid.
11
Quick, L. Deuteronomy 28 and the Aramaic Curse Tradition. OUP, Oxford, 2017. Pg165.
12
Genesis 15:10
13
Day, J. ‘Why Does God “Establish” rather than “Cut” Covenants in the Priestly Source?’ in Covenant
as Context: Essays in Honour of E.W. Nicholson, ed. A.D.H. Mayes and R.B. Salters. OUP, Oxford, 2003.
Pg96.
14
Genesis 15:9
15
Genesis 15:17
As a text, Genesis is rather varied, housing a wide range of (often conflicting) narratives, with diverse
historical influences distinguishable in each passage, reflecting the differing intentions and interpretations
of each author. Therefore, the phrase ‘covenant’ cannot be applied to the text generally, since Genesis
contains different forms of covenant, from conditional treaties between leaders and characters, to
everlasting covenants between God and his people, or the patriarchs. Thus, this essay seeks to examine the
historical contexts of Genesis’ authors and editors, determine and define the types of covenants described,
and uncover the true influence of the Babylonian exile on the treaties presented, to ultimately argue that
covenant in Genesis is too varied to be understood as a single form.
To best understand the covenants presented in Genesis, it is productive to first examine the different forms
of treaties, and their uses throughout the history of the Ancient Near East. Treaties, also known in biblical
scholarship as covenants or agreements, were used consistently by kings, civilians, and even whole
communities to maintain peace, delegate responsibilities, or further the power of a civilian family or
kingdom. Sometimes, when treaties were formed between kings, the two parties were equal, however
other times, one member (the suzerain) exercised more influence over the other (the vassal). 1 Indeed, this
is just one example of the way in which covenants, in the context of Genesis and the Ancient Near East, are
incredibly unique from one another, as the (im)balance of power between parties could greatly dictate the
outcome or terms of a treaty. For example, in the case of Genesis 15 and 17, the covenants made between
God and Abraham are by default unequal, with God holding the ultimate authority, and being responsible
for any punishment metered out on the collapse of the agreement. Abraham, the vassal, is obliged to obey
God’s terms due to the expectation his loyalty to God, and place as subservient to God due to being a part
of His creation. This is also the case for the future generations after Abraham, as the “everlasting
covenant”2 is dependent on their sole worshipping of God3 and upkeep of male circumcision.4
The most prevalent examples of ancient Near Eastern covenants stem from the Hittites and the Neo-
Assyrians, who were prominent from the early to mid-second millennium B.C.E., and the early ninth to the
late seventh centuries B.C.E. respectively.5 Treaties from the both of these civilisations invoked a divine
witness to the covenant and the oaths made, and usually required that a physical copy be held in a temple
as an everlasting reminder of the terms of the agreement.6 An example of this can be found in the Sefire
inscriptions, of which Stele 1 cites the gods a witnesses to the treaty.7 However, both groups have distinct
markers in their covenants which determine their origin. For example, Hittite treaties notably contain a
historical introduction and a list of both blessings and curses for obedience and disobedience. 8 In contrast,
Neo-Assyrian covenants lack the historical introduction and usually the blessings, rather housing a large list
1
Lenzi, A. ‘How Does the Hebrew Bible Relate to the Ancient Near Eastern World?’ Bible Odyssey.
Accessed at https://www.bibleodyssey.org/articles/how-does-the-hebrew-bible-relate-to-the-ancient-
near-eastern-world/
2
Genesis 17:7.
3
Genesis 17:7: “be God to you and to your offspring after you”
4
Genesis 17:10-12: “Every male among you shall be circumcised (…) it shall be a sign of the covenant
between me and you”
5
Lenzi. ‘How Does the Hebrew Bible Relate to the Ancient Near Eastern World?’ Bible Odyssey.
6
Ibid.
7
Hallo, W.W. The Context of Scripture. Vol. II: ‘The Sefire Inscriptions.’ Brill: Leiden, 2000. Pg212.
8
Lenzi. ‘How Does the Hebrew Bible Relate to the Ancient Near Eastern World?’ Bible Odyssey.
, of detailed curses for the collapse of the agreement.9 Furthermore, Neo-Assyrian monarchs also created
treaty-like agreements called loyalty oaths, which were placed on entire communities and populations, 10 a
convention which is not found in Hittite records. Indeed, Genesis 17, can be argued to follow this form, by
God’s repeated emphasis that the covenant will be maintained on the basis of the people’s continued
loyalty to Him. This is strengthened by the fact that J’s author, responsible for Genesis 17, would have been
aware of the Neo-Assyrian conventions, writing in the 5th century BCE. Overall, the existence of these vastly
different types and structures of covenant in the ancient near East, and their influence on the authors of
Genesis, demonstrates the way in which ‘covenant’ is varied in Genesis, ranging from treaties between
figures, to oaths imposed on whole communities. Furthermore, the existence of these diverse historical
formulations of treaty demonstrates the way in which covenants were understood differently in each
community, overall promoting varied emphases, which can be seen in the writings of Genesis.
It is also important to note that sacrifice and ritual cutting are integral to many of the biblical covenants,
and indeed those in the ancient near East. In ancient Israel and Judah, treaty formation involved a variety
of rites and signs such as animal slaughter, sacrifices, recitation of curses and the ritual procession between
two halves of an animal11, which is referenced in Genesis 15 (“cut them into two, laying each half over
against the other, but he did not cut the birds in two.”12) Indeed, this relationship between cutting and
creating a covenant is also demonstrated in biblical narratives, as shown by the use of the same verb ‘cut’
in regards to both actions, intrinsically linking the two concepts together. The covenants presented in
Genesis all demonstrate this ritual act of cutting, or at the very least, the exchange of animals, a concept
which can also be seen in extra-biblical texts such as the 8th century BCE vassal treaty between
Asshurnirari V of Assyria and Mati’ilu of Arpad.13
Genesis 15 and 17 contain the clearest examples of ritual cutting as integral to covenant-making. In Genesis
15, Abraham is commanded to bring God “a heifer three years old, a female goat three years old, a ram
three years old, a turtle dove and a young pigeon,”14 all of which bar the birds are cut into two pieces and
lain over each other. Later on, God, symbolised by “a smoking cooking pit and a flaming torch” is “passed
between these pieces,”15 representing the binding of God’s oath to fulfil the promises made to Abraham.
Genesis 15 therefore demonstrates a ratification rite taking place, which aligns with the fact that the
passage is attributed to the J author, and 9th century Judah, in which these conventions were prevalent.
Therefore, the existence of ritual cutting and sacrifice in Genesis 15 may be a result of the intention of the J
author to promote this practice as part of covenant making and highlight its key part in ensuring the oaths
are ratified.
9
Lenzi. ‘How Does the Hebrew Bible Relate to the Ancient Near Eastern World?’ Bible Odyssey.
10
Ibid.
11
Quick, L. Deuteronomy 28 and the Aramaic Curse Tradition. OUP, Oxford, 2017. Pg165.
12
Genesis 15:10
13
Day, J. ‘Why Does God “Establish” rather than “Cut” Covenants in the Priestly Source?’ in Covenant
as Context: Essays in Honour of E.W. Nicholson, ed. A.D.H. Mayes and R.B. Salters. OUP, Oxford, 2003.
Pg96.
14
Genesis 15:9
15
Genesis 15:17
