Abstract

The volume under review is an ambitious undertaking in three parts to edit and analyze the treaties, laws, and covenants of the ancient Near Eastern world, and the authors are to be congratulated for assembling the anthology of texts in part 1. Unfortunately, both the analytic resources provided in part 2 and the historical survey in part 3 are flawed. This article explores the various factors that compromise the comparative approach employed by the authors in these two parts.