What historical context influenced the harshness of Deuteronomy 28:55? Text Under Consideration “...refusing to share with any of them the flesh of his children that he is eating, because nothing else is left to him in the siege and hardship your enemy will impose on all your cities.” (Deuteronomy 28:55) Literary Setting: Covenant Curses at Moab Deuteronomy 27–30 records Moses’ covenant renewal on the Plains of Moab. Following the Ancient Near Eastern suzerain-vassal treaty format, chapter 28 alternates blessing (vv. 1-14) and curse sections (vv. 15-68). Verse 55 belongs to the most acute “siege-famine” subsection (vv. 52-57). The harsh language is not arbitrary; it belongs to the formal legal warnings designed to deter national apostasy. Ancient Near Eastern Treaty Parallels 1. Esarhaddon’s Succession Treaty (7th c. BC) threatens violators: “May they eat the flesh of their sons and daughters.” 2. Hittite treaties (14th-13th c. BC) list famine, pestilence, and cannibalism among curses. Israel, literate in this diplomatic milieu, would have recognized the form and gravity of such stipulations. Moses adopts the conventional pattern yet roots it in Yahweh’s moral authority, not imperial caprice. Sociopolitical Reality of Siege Warfare Late Bronze/Early Iron Age city-states fell by siege, not pitched battle. Walled towns (tell sites such as Lachish, Hazor, and Jericho) reveal charred layers, siege ramps, and arrowheads that validate biblical descriptions (cf. 2 Kings 25:1-4; Jeremiah 52:4-6). Starvation, disease, and cannibalism were tragically attested tactics and consequences. Israel’s Later Historical Fulfilments • 2 Kings 6:28-29—Samaria besieged by Arameans, resulting in maternal cannibalism. • Jeremiah 19:9; Lamentations 2:20; 4:10—Jerusalem’s Babylonian siege (588-586 BC) fulfills Deuteronomy’s warning. Babylonian Chronicles (BM 21946) confirm the length and severity of the siege. • Josephus, War VI.201-213—The AD 70 Roman siege repeats the horror; Josephus explicitly cites Mosaic curses as precedent. Archaeological Corroboration 1. Lachish Reliefs (Sennacherib’s palace, Nineveh) depict Judean captives and famine emaciation. 2. Lachish Ostraca (ca. 588 BC) plead for food aid, echoing siege desperation. 3. Masada food-remnant strata and cookware ratios illustrate how supplies diminish under isolation. Anthropological and Behavioral Insight Modern famine studies (e.g., 1941 Leningrad siege, 1930s Ukrainian Holodomor) document identical behaviors: food theft from kin, psychological disintegration, and rare but real cannibalism. Moses’ description aligns with observable human responses under caloric collapse, underscoring that the text is not hyperbole but sober realism. Theological Rationale: Holiness and Covenant Gravity Yahweh’s covenant is relational and moral; violation invites proportionate covenant lawsuit (Isaiah 1). The extremity of the curse spotlights the seriousness of idolatry and injustice (Deuteronomy 28:15). Yet Deuteronomy immediate context moves to hope: “He will restore you” (30:3). The harshness magnifies the later mercy found ultimately in Christ, who bears the curse (Galatians 3:13). |
    |