And he spoke with them, saying, “If you have it in your hearts that I should bury my dead now before me, hear me, entreat for me with Ephron son of Zohar, and let him grant me the cave of Machpelah that belongs to him, which is at the far end of his field. At the full price let him grant it to me in your midst as a burial holding.” And Ephron was sitting in the midst of the Hittites, and Ephron the Hittite answered Abraham in the hearing of the Hittites, all the assembled in the gate of his town, saying: “Pray my lord, hear me. The field I grant you, and the cave that is in it. I grant it to you in full view of my kinfolk. I grant it to you. Bury your dead.” And Abraham bowed before the folk of the land, and he spoke to Ephron in the hearing of the folk of the land saying: “If you would but hear me – I give the price of the field, take it from me, and let me bury my dead there.” And Ephron answered Abraham, saying: “Pray my lord, hear me. Land for four hundred silver shekels between me and you, what does it come to? Go bury your dead.” And Abraham heeded Ephron and Abraham weighed out to Ephron the silver shekels at the merchants’ tried weight (Genesis 23:8-17 from Robert Alter, The Five Books of Moses, A Translation with Commentary).

Generations of commentators have strived to explain the meaning and message of this overly long description of a simple transaction. Let us briefly examine two approaches to two points – the field and the price – mentioned in verse 9.

Prof. Robert Alter provides a modern, scholarly, yet essentially traditional commentary. In regard to “the far end of the field”, Alter explains: “In settling on this particular location for a burial cave, Abraham wants to make it clear that he will not need to pass through or encroach on the rest of the Hittite property.” As for the words “at full price”, Alter explains: “At this point Abraham makes it altogether unambiguous that the ‘grant’ he has been mentioning means a sale.” In regard to the price – four hundred silver shekels – we are told: “A comparison with the prices stipulated for the purchase of property elsewhere in the Bible suggests that this pittance is actually a king’s ransom. Abraham, having twice declared his readiness to pay ‘the full price,’ is in no position to object to the extortionate rate. In fact, his only real bargaining aim has been to make a legitimate purchase, and he is unwilling to haggle over price, just as he refused to accept booty from the king of Salem [should be “Sodom” – A.S.]”.

As Prof. Alter and others note, the language of verses 17-20 “is emphatically legalistic, recapitulating the phraseology that would appear in a contract for the conveyance of property”. Is it possible that this understanding of the concluding section might also shed light on the entire narrative?  The late Prof. Raymond Westbrook (1947-2009) looked at this text – which clearly describes a legal transaction – in light of ancient law.

Abraham expresses his desire to purchase only the cave at the far end of the field, but shows no interest in the field itself. In response, Ephron seems adamant to grant the field to Abraham. Why? Westbrook notes: “According to secs. 46 and 47 of the Hittite Laws, purchase of part of a feudal tenant’s landed property did not subject the buyer to any obligation of feudal service to the king, but purchase of the whole did” (“Purchase of the Cave of Machpelah,” 6 Israel Law Rev. 29 (1971)).

Another possibility that Westbrook raises in that article is that Ephron’s desire to transfer the field by “grant” may reflect the Hittites’ reluctance to sell the land in perpetuity, “as a burial holding”, a term Abraham employs in his request, but which is absent from Ephron’s reply. Westbrook develops this idea further in examining the laws of redemption of land: “If our thesis is correct, payment of the land’s full value was both sufficient and necessary to defeat subsequent redemption of the land.” Moreover, he shows that the words “full price” apparently constituted a legal term that denoted that full value that prevented redemption (“The Price Factor in the Redemption of Land,” 32 Rev. Internationale des Droits de L’antiquité 97 (1985)).

If so, then the dialogue between Abraham and Ephron represents more than customary posturing, and perhaps more than intentional literary parallel and regal honor are reflected in the verses: “But King David said to Ornan, ‘No, but I will buy it for the full price; I will not take for the Lord what is yours, nor offer burnt offerings which cost me nothing.’ So David paid Ornan six hundred shekels of gold by weight for the site” (I Chronicles 21:24-25). And perhaps four-hundred shekels for the Cave of Machpelah was a fair price, after all.

Together with literary analysis, and sociological and historical research, studies like those of the late Prof. Raymond Westbrook add new layers to our understanding of the complexity of the Biblical narrative and to the depth of its theological messages. May his memory be for a blessing.