A History of Ancient Near Eastern Law

   405

tively and other commodities. If they relate to conversion pay-

ments, they may be drawn from such a royal order. If the debtor

has neither grain nor silver, LH “z” allows repayment (before wit-

nesses) in other goods.^141 LH “x” forbids the lender to use different

weights for disbursing the loan and for its repayment.

7.2.3.3 The creditor could claim the whole sum from whichever

joint debtor was able to pay (itti “alme u kìni). The payee could be

the “bearer of his document” (nà“i kanìki“u). It is not clear whether

this referred to an assignee of the loan or to an agent of the creditor.

7.3 Pledge^142

7.3.1 The loan contracts specify pledge of land, slaves, and family

members (including self-pledge by the debtor). There is mention of

the pledge of valuable movables in letters (AbB 8 81: a gold sun-

disk). It was usually given at the time of the loan, but it could also

be given at maturity, presumably in order to gain an extension.

7.3.2 Many of the pledges were antichretic, meaning that the income

from the pledge served as interest. Such a pledge was said to be

interest for the principal (má“.bi.“è) or was designated by a technical

term (mazzazànum). Non-antichretic pledge of land might be hypothe-

cary, meaning that the creditor only took possession on default.

7.3.3 The loan documents do not expressly stipulate forfeiture of

the pledge upon default, but its automatic application is implied by

clauses valuing the pledge at the level of the loan (“the silver is like

the field” kù.babbar a.“à.gi.me.en).^143

7.3.4 LH 49–50 and “a” seek to curb the abusive application as

pledge of a type of lease that amounted to a sale of the standing

crop (esip tabal: “gather and take away!”) attested at Susa (e.g., MDP

(^141) See Petschow, “Die datio in solutum...”
(^142) Skaist, Loan Contract.. ., 202–30; Kienast, Kisurra.. ., 66–103; Eichler, Indenture...,
48–83; Westbrook, Security for Debt.. ., 63–79.
(^143) Kienast, Kisurra.. ., 78–79, 100–102. Kienast’s theory of a development from
automatic forfeiture to non-forfeitable pledge (102–3) has no historical basis; see
Skaist, Loan Contract.. ., 202–8.
WESTBROOK_f10–360-430 8/27/03 12:26 PM Page 405