SEARCH
SEARCH
SUBSCRIBE
 | 
RENEW
 | 
DONATE

BIBLE HISTORY DAILY

Joseph and Esarhaddon of Assyria

Brother rivalry in the story of Joseph in the Bible and in the life of King Esarhaddon

beschey-joseph

Brother rivalry in the story of Joseph: Flemish artist Balthasar Beschey depicts the moment when brother rivalry turns vicious in the story of Joseph in the Bible in this 18th-century painting, Joseph Sold by his Brothers.

A father prefers one of his younger sons to his older sons. The younger son is promoted—to the envy of his older brothers—and the older brothers turn against him. When an opportunity presents itself, they manage to depose him. The younger brother ends up in a foreign land—dispossessed of his rights as heir. However, rather than wasting away in this foreign place, he thrives. Eventually, he rises to a high political office, and his original rights as an heir are restored.

Does the above paragraph describe the story of Joseph in the Bible or the life of King Esarhaddon of Assyria? The answer—rather surprisingly—is both.

Eckart Frahm, Professor of Assyriology at Yale University, probes the many similarities between Joseph and Esarhaddon in his article “Surprising Parallels Between Joseph and King Esarhaddon” in the May/June 2016 issue of Biblical Archaeology Review. Not only are there the obvious connections, but there are even more parallels when one delves into the textual evidence.

The story of Joseph appears in the Book of Genesis in the Hebrew Bible, and the account of Esarhaddon’s rise to power is chronicled in the Assyrian text Nineveh A. Both Joseph and Esarhaddon are the younger sons of their fathers, and both deal with brother rivalry because their fathers favor them over their older brothers. In both of these instances, the brother rivalry is so intense and bitter that Joseph and Esarhaddon are forced to leave the land of their birth. While Joseph is sold as a slave by his brothers and taken to Egypt, Esarhaddon flees the Assyrian capital of Nineveh and takes refuge in the West for his own safety. Further, both of their fortunes are eventually restored. Beating incredible odds, they both rise to powerful positions: Joseph becomes second-in-command in Egypt, and Esarhaddon becomes king of Assyria.


In the free eBook Exploring Genesis: The Bible’s Ancient Traditions in Context, discover the cultural contexts for many of Israel’s earliest traditions. Explore Mesopotamian creation myths, Joseph’s relationship with Egyptian temple practices and three different takes on the location of Ur of the Chaldees, the birthplace of Abraham.


 

esarhaddon

Esarhaddon of Assyria: This basalt stele from Sam‘al (modern Zincirli in Turkey) depicts King Esarhaddon of Assyria. Similar to the story of Joseph in the Bible, Esarhaddon dealt with brother rivalry before he became king of Assyria.

While the story of Joseph is familiar to many, the story of Esarhaddon is not as well known. Eckhart Frahm summarizes the Assyrian tale of brother rivalry below:

Esarhaddon reports with unusual candor [in Nineveh A] that he was not the oldest son of his father and predecessor Sennacherib. Esarhaddon had a number of elder brothers. Nonetheless, at some point Sennacherib decided to make Esarhaddon his heir apparent. Liver divination undertaken in the name of the sun-god Šamaš and the weather god Adad confirms the appointment. And both the people of Assyria and Esarhaddon’s brothers swear loyalty to the new crown prince.

The brothers, however, are not happy with this course of events. Jealous and full of resentment, they conspire against Sennacherib’s new succession designation. Sennacherib is affected by their machinations and finally distances himself from his newly minted heir. Secretly, however, Sennacherib continues to wish that Esarhaddon will become king after him. In the meantime, Esarhaddon leaves the capital Nineveh and takes refuge in an unspecified safe location somewhere in the West. Soon after, the brothers “go mad” and commit “deeds that are deeply offensive to the gods and mankind”—a thinly veiled allusion to the fact that, as other sources indicate, they murdered Sennacherib … But the brothers are not to reap any rewards from their actions. Esarhaddon returns to Assyria with a small army, chases the regicides away and, encouraged by prophetic oracles, ascends the Assyrian throne.

What do all of the parallels between the two accounts mean? Are the similarities no more than chance—just two tales of brother rivalry, exile and restoration? Or did one of these stories borrow from the other?

While there are many similarities between the accounts of Joseph and Esarhaddon, there are also some significant differences, such as the resolution. Whereas Joseph forgives his brothers and saves their lives, Esarhaddon does not reconcile with his offending brothers. Although their exact fate is unknown, Esarhaddon’s older brothers flee Nineveh and seek refuge with the king of Urartu. They live as exiles for the rest of their lives—unforgiven by Esarhaddon and unwelcomed in Assyria. This and other parts of departure between the two accounts show that one tale is not an exact copy of the other—despite their many similarities.

For an analysis of the comparisons between the stories of Joseph and Esarhaddon, read the full article “Surprising Parallels Between Joseph and King Esarhaddon” by Eckart Frahm in the May/June 2016 issue of Biblical Archaeology Review.

——————

Subscribers: Read the full article “Surprising Parallels Between Joseph and King Esarhaddon” by Eckart Frahm in the May/June 2016 issue of Biblical Archaeology Review.

Not a subscriber yet? Join today.


In the free eBook Exploring Genesis: The Bible’s Ancient Traditions in Context, discover the cultural contexts for many of Israel’s earliest traditions. Explore Mesopotamian creation myths, Joseph’s relationship with Egyptian temple practices and three different takes on the location of Ur of the Chaldees, the birthplace of Abraham.


 

Learn more about Esarhaddon in the BAS Library:

Erika Bleibtreu, “Grisly Assyrian Record of Torture and Death,” Biblical Archaeology Review, January/February 1991.

Michael B. Dick, “Worshiping Idols,” Bible Review, April 2002.

Victor Hurowitz, “Solomon’s Temple in Context,” Biblical Archaeology Review, March/April 2011.

Lawrence Mykytiuk, “Archaeology Confirms 50 Real People in the Bible,” Biblical Archaeology Review, March/April 2014.


This Bible History Daily feature was originally published on May 16, 2016.


 

Related Posts

People sitting in seats in front of a projection screen in a large room. Courtesy UNESCO
Apr 10
39 Sites in Lebanon Gain UNESCO Protection

By: Lauren K. McCormick

nine spongy masses of iron that have been fired, called blooms. Photo by Marko Runjajić
Apr 6
Understanding Iron in the Iron Age

By: Lauren K. McCormick

who were the babylonians
Mar 17
Who Were the Babylonians?

By: Nathan Steinmeyer


23 Responses:

  1. Eric says:

    Maybe the Joseph story was a way to use this story to show the importance of brotherly forgiveness and how that will help the nation to work together to prevent destruction of the tribe due to hate, division.

  2. David Feltuy says:

    Once again, the intellectual/theological brilliance and moral excellence of the biblical writers (in comparison to other ancient cultures) is clearly shown. Even if it could be proven that the Joseph narrative is a “re-write” of the Esarhaddonn story, the Joseph story conveys that the true and living God is a god that teaches and practices forgiveness and reconciliation (once again, as in other parallel stories such as Gilgamesh/Noah, the biblical telling of the story is theologically and morally superior/advanced to the so-called “originals”). And, once again, those “comparative” mythologists who try to show that there is nothing unique about the Bible and claim that every religion is just a repeat – that every religion is just the same as every other religion every which way – have FAILED.

  3. Kevin says:

    I hope I am reading you comment wrong. As Joseph dates around a thousand years before Esarhaddon.

  4. Paul says:

    Kevin- some scholars (Wellhausen, Documentary Hypothesis e.g.) believe the Torah in it’s current, final form was written as late as 400 BC based on other stories and documents which are now lost to us. I would say that Sauter, in the above, chose her words very carefully (“…did one of these stories borrow from the other?”)
    In Ecclesiastes we read (“..what has been done will be done again;
    there is nothing new under the sun.
    Is there anything of which one can say,
    ‘Look! This is something new’?
    It was here already, long ago;
    it was here before our time.”

  5. Ladislao Errazuriz says:

    All dates from Antiquity are subject to revision, and in some cases, must undergo quite significant corrections. They are currently all based on Egyptian events that were considered contemporary to other Middle Eastern parallel events.
    This is standard procedure, yet leads to extreme reliance on some specific sources whenever no real contemporary events can be brought up.
    The unreliable standard-derivation from Egyptian history uses the assumption that the dynasties 20 and 21 succeeded each other in the same way that the succession of 17th-18th-19th dynasties had taken place.
    However, the Deir Bahari cache of burials used at that time shows that there were some 20th dynasty kings that reigned much later than the apparently later 21st dynasty kings.
    The recent unraveling of the dates for the Apis bull burials has led to a truly sequential corrected chronology, and it shows that in the long run, the dates we assumed for Antiquity are generally about two centuries too old.
    In general terms, the lives of Abraham, Jacob and Joseph may have coincided then with the 18th dynasty Egyptian accounts. The many parallels found that way, could actually imply a historical basis for some of the Biblical personal narrations.
    The parallels between Joseph and the historical Esarhaddon may be coincidental or litterary, but the coincidence of Joseph with the historical Yuya (short for Yussef-Yahveh) goes much further. And his late-Bronze-Age existence would place him toward the end of the Second Millenium B.C.

  6. Dr.Howard says:

    Liberal scholars(never trust their dating it’s always based on their won agendas-i hve done much reserch over the years and seen these speculations go down) would love for the account of Joseph to be a copy of the Assyrian account! It never stops! There are many dissimlarities, to be sure.The mileage on this liberal camel will run out of energy. Nice try no camel! They need to research Homer of some secular subject matter as they always try and undermine scripture.Why waste their time and ours?

  7. Dr.Howard says:

    http://jewsforjesus.org/publications/newsletter/july-1985/08_joseph_jesus
    This is more ediying than infusing doubt with no factual proof

  8. Andrew G Roth says:

    Interesting, but the Bible itself more than answers this question. Most scholars, and me as well, firmly believe that Joseph’s story take place entirely in the Hyksos period, ca. 1678-1570 BCE (High Chronology) are about 20 years later on Low Chronology.

    The fact that the Messiah affirms Moses as the author of the first five books of the Bible should not be cast aside lightly in favor of flawed scholarly convention that Genesis-Deuteronomy is a product of the Babylonian Exile. What then were the books priest Hilkiah found in the plastered walls of the Temple?

    Therefore, I find it very odd that this expert does not even bother to mention that almost a thousand years separate Joseph from Earshaddon, and it is Joseph who was earlier. To not bring that up is, in my view, bad process, as it leaves hanging the assumption as to whether one ascribes historicity of the Torah to Moses or if the liberals are so confident about their Babylonian Exile/Scripture theory that they feel they don’t even need to explain themselves to an audience comprised of large numbers of Biblical believers. I sincerely hope the actual magazine article does a better job than the internet excerpt does!

    Respectfully yours,
    Andrew Gabriel Roth
    Translator, Aramaic English New Testament

  9. Terry says:

    The stories are far more dissimilar than similar. The Assyrian story is simply the battle of sons over who succeeds their kingly father. A common occourence throughout the ancient world. Solomon was a younger son of David, for example. Jacob was a regular guy with a big family, who’s youngest son accomplished more than Jacob could’ve imagined. And in a foreign land. I can’t see a reason why either needed to borrow from the other. And because Israel’s history is based on Israel/Jacob’s 12 sons, it would be absurd to think they would need in any way to borrow from this far later Assyrian story.

  10. Lyone Fein says:

    Actually, the Assyrian story seems to have more in common with the story of Joseph’s father, Jacob.
    Like Esarhaddon, Jacob’s father (Isaiah) makes Jacob the heir in place of his elder brother (Esau). In fear for his life because of his elder brother’s jealousy, Jacob must flee. In Jacob’s absence, the elder brother conducts a life that is displeasing to both his parents and to the biblical God. When Jacob finally returns after decades abroad, it is with a great host that is prepared to battle, if need be. The long estranged brothers meet only once, briefly, (possibly for a wrestling match that Jacob wins) and then separate forever.
    It seems the “similarity” between the Esarhaddon story and that of Joseph stems from both having many older brothers. But structurally, it seems to me that exploring the Jacob story would bear more fruit.

Write a Reply or Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


23 Responses:

  1. Eric says:

    Maybe the Joseph story was a way to use this story to show the importance of brotherly forgiveness and how that will help the nation to work together to prevent destruction of the tribe due to hate, division.

  2. David Feltuy says:

    Once again, the intellectual/theological brilliance and moral excellence of the biblical writers (in comparison to other ancient cultures) is clearly shown. Even if it could be proven that the Joseph narrative is a “re-write” of the Esarhaddonn story, the Joseph story conveys that the true and living God is a god that teaches and practices forgiveness and reconciliation (once again, as in other parallel stories such as Gilgamesh/Noah, the biblical telling of the story is theologically and morally superior/advanced to the so-called “originals”). And, once again, those “comparative” mythologists who try to show that there is nothing unique about the Bible and claim that every religion is just a repeat – that every religion is just the same as every other religion every which way – have FAILED.

  3. Kevin says:

    I hope I am reading you comment wrong. As Joseph dates around a thousand years before Esarhaddon.

  4. Paul says:

    Kevin- some scholars (Wellhausen, Documentary Hypothesis e.g.) believe the Torah in it’s current, final form was written as late as 400 BC based on other stories and documents which are now lost to us. I would say that Sauter, in the above, chose her words very carefully (“…did one of these stories borrow from the other?”)
    In Ecclesiastes we read (“..what has been done will be done again;
    there is nothing new under the sun.
    Is there anything of which one can say,
    ‘Look! This is something new’?
    It was here already, long ago;
    it was here before our time.”

  5. Ladislao Errazuriz says:

    All dates from Antiquity are subject to revision, and in some cases, must undergo quite significant corrections. They are currently all based on Egyptian events that were considered contemporary to other Middle Eastern parallel events.
    This is standard procedure, yet leads to extreme reliance on some specific sources whenever no real contemporary events can be brought up.
    The unreliable standard-derivation from Egyptian history uses the assumption that the dynasties 20 and 21 succeeded each other in the same way that the succession of 17th-18th-19th dynasties had taken place.
    However, the Deir Bahari cache of burials used at that time shows that there were some 20th dynasty kings that reigned much later than the apparently later 21st dynasty kings.
    The recent unraveling of the dates for the Apis bull burials has led to a truly sequential corrected chronology, and it shows that in the long run, the dates we assumed for Antiquity are generally about two centuries too old.
    In general terms, the lives of Abraham, Jacob and Joseph may have coincided then with the 18th dynasty Egyptian accounts. The many parallels found that way, could actually imply a historical basis for some of the Biblical personal narrations.
    The parallels between Joseph and the historical Esarhaddon may be coincidental or litterary, but the coincidence of Joseph with the historical Yuya (short for Yussef-Yahveh) goes much further. And his late-Bronze-Age existence would place him toward the end of the Second Millenium B.C.

  6. Dr.Howard says:

    Liberal scholars(never trust their dating it’s always based on their won agendas-i hve done much reserch over the years and seen these speculations go down) would love for the account of Joseph to be a copy of the Assyrian account! It never stops! There are many dissimlarities, to be sure.The mileage on this liberal camel will run out of energy. Nice try no camel! They need to research Homer of some secular subject matter as they always try and undermine scripture.Why waste their time and ours?

  7. Dr.Howard says:

    http://jewsforjesus.org/publications/newsletter/july-1985/08_joseph_jesus
    This is more ediying than infusing doubt with no factual proof

  8. Andrew G Roth says:

    Interesting, but the Bible itself more than answers this question. Most scholars, and me as well, firmly believe that Joseph’s story take place entirely in the Hyksos period, ca. 1678-1570 BCE (High Chronology) are about 20 years later on Low Chronology.

    The fact that the Messiah affirms Moses as the author of the first five books of the Bible should not be cast aside lightly in favor of flawed scholarly convention that Genesis-Deuteronomy is a product of the Babylonian Exile. What then were the books priest Hilkiah found in the plastered walls of the Temple?

    Therefore, I find it very odd that this expert does not even bother to mention that almost a thousand years separate Joseph from Earshaddon, and it is Joseph who was earlier. To not bring that up is, in my view, bad process, as it leaves hanging the assumption as to whether one ascribes historicity of the Torah to Moses or if the liberals are so confident about their Babylonian Exile/Scripture theory that they feel they don’t even need to explain themselves to an audience comprised of large numbers of Biblical believers. I sincerely hope the actual magazine article does a better job than the internet excerpt does!

    Respectfully yours,
    Andrew Gabriel Roth
    Translator, Aramaic English New Testament

  9. Terry says:

    The stories are far more dissimilar than similar. The Assyrian story is simply the battle of sons over who succeeds their kingly father. A common occourence throughout the ancient world. Solomon was a younger son of David, for example. Jacob was a regular guy with a big family, who’s youngest son accomplished more than Jacob could’ve imagined. And in a foreign land. I can’t see a reason why either needed to borrow from the other. And because Israel’s history is based on Israel/Jacob’s 12 sons, it would be absurd to think they would need in any way to borrow from this far later Assyrian story.

  10. Lyone Fein says:

    Actually, the Assyrian story seems to have more in common with the story of Joseph’s father, Jacob.
    Like Esarhaddon, Jacob’s father (Isaiah) makes Jacob the heir in place of his elder brother (Esau). In fear for his life because of his elder brother’s jealousy, Jacob must flee. In Jacob’s absence, the elder brother conducts a life that is displeasing to both his parents and to the biblical God. When Jacob finally returns after decades abroad, it is with a great host that is prepared to battle, if need be. The long estranged brothers meet only once, briefly, (possibly for a wrestling match that Jacob wins) and then separate forever.
    It seems the “similarity” between the Esarhaddon story and that of Joseph stems from both having many older brothers. But structurally, it seems to me that exploring the Jacob story would bear more fruit.

Write a Reply or Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Send this to a friend