952
a written record.^166 With a few exceptions (e.g., VAS 5 9 = NRVU
296), the pledge is established in the debt note. A dialogue document
(OECT 9 2, dated 301) contains an interesting case of self-pledge:
a debtor and his family undertake to work for fifty years in the house-
hold of the creditor.^167 There are also many examples of a general
charge on assets, in the form of a hypothecary pledge (“whatever
property (there is) in the city and the country” mimmû “a àli u ßèri).^1687.5.2 In spite of the terminology used (ma“kanu “akànu/ßabàtu, “to
place/seize a pledge”), it cannot be presumed in this period that an
individual pledge was always possessory. This is particularly so in
the case of hypothecary pledge of immoveable property and a gen-
eral charge on assets.^169 In the case of antichretic pledges, on the
other hand, possession was a necessary condition.^1707.5.3 The pledge served as security for the debt, but not as a substi-
tute for the capital loaned, as has been argued for earlier periods.^171
The debtor remained personally liable notwithstanding provision of
a pledge. The so-called “rà“ûclause” found in many documents of
this period (rà“û “anamma ina mu¢¢i objectul i“alla†adi mu¢¢i “a creditor
i“allimu: “another creditor has no right to the pledge until the cred-
itor is satisfied”) has been understood as prohibiting other creditors
of the same debtor from executing their claims against him.^172 Rights
over the pledge passed to heirs in the same way as the debt itself.7.5.4 A pledge in this period did not automatically become the
creditor’s property on default, but express agreements could be made
for that purpose.^173 It is frequently stated in the contract that antichretic
use of the pledge shall be in lieu of interest. The creditor had the
right not only to use the pledge, but to satisfy his claim from it on
default.^174 The details, however, are unclear. The owner of the object(^166) Ibid., 58, n. 169.
(^167) McEwan, “A Babylonian leitourgia”; Oelsner, “Recht im hellenistischen Baby-
lonien.. .,” 130–33. Petschow, Pfandrecht.. ., 66, had no examples at the time.
(^168) Petschow, Pfandrecht.. ., 99–103.
(^169) Petschow, Pfandrecht.. ., 53–57.
(^170) Petschow, Pfandrecht.. ., 103–19.
(^171) Petschow, Pfandrecht.. ., 75–91, 146–47.
(^172) Petschow, Pfandrecht.. ., 98–99.
(^173) Petschow, Pfandrecht.. ., 119–24.
(^174) Petschow, Pfandrecht.. ., 124–32.
westbrook_f26_911-974 8/27/03 1:36 PM Page 952