Has Abraham’s

Father, Terah,
Been
Discovered?
Near Eastern tablets that name and describe an individual

closely matching the biblical patriarch Terah

By Christopher Eames • June 21, 20 21

Tell Mozan (Urkesh/Urkish), with protective sheets over the

mudbrick walls of this palace-portion of the city

[ HYRATTIN2019]

he patriarch Abraham is famous as the

T progenitor of the three great monotheistic

religions on Earth: Judaism, Christianity and

Islam. Though his name is common in antiquity

(particularly during the late second millennium b.c.e.,

just following his lifetime), contemporary evidence

directly naming this nomadic individual who lived

nearly 4,000 years ago has remained elusive. Still,

classical evidence abounds, and contemporary

archaeological evidence has corroborated much of the

biblical Abrahamic setting—from the geopolitical scene

of various wars and alliances to local customs and

traditions to certain names, prices and even sayings.

But could the father of Abraham—Terah, patriarch of

the Moabites, Ammonites, Midianites, Ishmaelites,

Israelites, Edomites and more—have been discovered?

Some fascinating contemporary evidence describes a

man that closely fits the biblical account—in name,

location, dating and (rather unusual) story.

Ur … Where?

“And Terah lived seventy years, and begot Abram, Nahor,

and Haran. … And Terah took Abram his son, and Lot

the son of Haran, his son’s son, and Sarai his daughter-

in-law, his son Abram’s wife; and they went forth with

them from Ur of the Chaldees, to go into the land of

Canaan; and they came unto Haran, and dwelt there”

(Genesis 11:26, 31).

Before establishing the identity of the individual, we

must establish where to look—“the land of his nativity,

in Ur of the Chaldees” (verse 28). This most popularly is

related to the famous Sumerian city-state Ur, containing

a massive ziggurat, near the shore of the Persian Gulf in

southwest Mesopotamia.

Ziggurat of Ur

[ Public Domain ]

This site was excavated and named by the famous

archaeologist Sir Leonard Woolley in the 1920s. But it is

far from being the established location of Abraham and

Terah’s “Ur of the Chaldees.” In fact, a long-standing

position (held by influential ancient historians such as

Josephus and Maimonides) has been that the city was

located in northern Mesopotamia, in or around the

modern-day border of Turkey. Proposed locations in

this geographical region include Urartu, Urfa and

Urkesh. The New Testament likewise affirms that Ur of

the Chaldees was in “Mesopotamia” (Acts 7:2-3). The

name Mesopotamia technically refers to the territory

between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, primarily the

northern part of the Fertile Crescent. The Sumerian Ur

sits just outside, and south, of these rivers—not within.

The book of Joshua gives detail for the location

specifically of Terah’s dwelling, in relation to the river

system: “… Your fathers dwelt of old time beyond the

River, even Terah, the father of Abraham, and the father

of Nahor; and they served other gods. And I took your

father Abraham from beyond the River, and led him

throughout all the land of Canaan …” (Joshua 24:2-3).

The context and commentaries make clear that this is

referring to the river, the Euphrates. But the Ur of Sumer

is technically on the same side of the Euphrates as

Canaan is.

Further, the appellation “Ur

of the Chaldees” could

imply that there was

another Ur, a city likely

more significant (the Ur—

the great Ur of Sumer?),

that it was not to be

confused with. And

Haran, Urkesh and Ur of

Abraham is also associated

Sumer located on a map of

in classical literature with
the Middle East
the territory of Assyria,
[ Kmusser/AIBA ]
which was in the north.

Genesis 11:31 states that Terah, Abram, Lot and Sarai

“went forth with them from Ur of the Chaldees, to go

into the land of Canaan; and they came unto Haran, and

dwelt there.” Haran is well out of the way to Canaan,

when travelling from the Sumerian Ur. But it is en route

from the northern “Ur” options.

So which of the northern, “beyond the River”-Ur options

is the best fit? Urartu wasn’t established until a

millennium after Abraham. Urfa is a possibility. But

Urkesh is also a good fit—and even moreso in name. “Ur

of the Chaldees” is not a transliteration of the original

Hebrew. The Hebrew title is Ur Kasdim (“im” is simply a

Hebrew plural ending). Thus, a parallel between Urkesh

š
—more properly titled in inscriptions Urke .Ki, and the

biblical Ur Kasd[im].
Tell Mozan, a city mound of ancient Urkesh

[ Zoeperkoe ]

As for our biblical “Terah”?

Terru, ‘Man of Urkesh’

In the 19th century b.c.e., a prominent official appears

in Urkesh, named Terru. What we know about Terru

comes from a handful of cuneiform tablets sent to

Zimri-Lim, king of Mari—some from Terru himself, and

others referencing him.

Based on the

correspondence, Terru is

generally assumed to be

some sort of kingly figure.

However, he is never

referred to with the typical

title “king” of the time. In

third-party
Example of a Mari tablet

correspondence, he is
belonging to Zimri-Lim

referred to simply as “the [ Public Domain ]

man of Urkesh.” In his own

letters to Zimri-Lim, he

refers to himself as “your servant.” This prominent, yet

not necessarily kingly, position may be hinted at in the

biblical account of Terah (i.e. Genesis 11:26-32; Joshua

24:2). And letters relating to Terru reveal a general

“independence” of the Urkesh public.

More than that, they actually indicate a general public

hatred for him. His letters to Zimri-Lim reveal that the

Hurrian population did not accept him, and the

correspondence speaks of hostility and resentment.

“Because I have cast my lot with my lord, people in my

town hate me. A couple of times I have had to save

myself, escaping death” (arm 28 44bis).

“They do not speak with me,” Terru lamented to Zimri-

Lim in the Mari correspondence. “They speak evil

things.” One of Zimri-Lim’s replies follow: “I did not

know that the sons of your city hate you on my account.

But you are mine, even if the city of Urkesh is not.” The

inference is that Zimri-Lim had set up Terru as a

regional representative in “your [his] city.”

This public scorn for Terru

also parallels the patriarch

Terah. The Bible does not

give any specific details, but

hints at an incredibly tragic

“Terah,” from the Promptuarii series of events. It mentions

Iconum Insigniorum (1553)

Haran mysteriously dying
[ Public Domain ]
“in the presence of his

father” (Genesis 11:28) at Ur

Kasdim, and that Terah subsequently left the city, taking

most of his extended family away with him to a distant

location also called Haran (verse 31).

Later classical accounts suggest that Haran was killed

by the city’s inhabitants, who hated him and his brother

Abraham for their stand against idol worship. Their

father Terah, however, had been an idol-worshiper

himself (Joshua 24:2)—the circa 400 c.e. Midrash

Genesis Rabbah states that he was an astrologer and

seller of idols. The first-century historian Josephus

wrote that, following the death of his son, “Now Terah

hating Chaldea, on account of his mourning for Haran,

they all removed to Haran of Mesopotamia” (Antiquities,

1.6.5). Josephus did not give details of Haran’s death, but

he related that Abraham personally adopted Haran’s son

Lot (hence the close connection between the two in the

Bible). Perhaps there was some feeling of responsibility

in this; after all, Jewish tradition relates that the

primary anger of the pagan city was for Abraham, and

that Haran, in following his brother’s lead, had thus

been killed. Of Abraham’s early preaching, Josephus

wrote that “for which doctrines … the Chaldeans and

other people of Mesopotamia raised a tumult against

him” (Antiquities, 1.7.1). This would certainly explain a

public “hatred” for their father Terah.

Nahor, brother to Abraham and Haran, initially stayed

behind in the land (Genesis 11:31). It seems Nahor’s

family remained partial to idol worship (Genesis 24:15,

29; 31:30), while Terah seems to have repented in

departing “for Canaan” with Abraham. There is a sense

of coming full circle with the Genesis 11 account of

Terah: the tragedy of a son dying young in the presence

of his father—and finally, Terah himself dying in Haran

(the territory). Perhaps there was a degree of guilt felt on

the part of Terah for what had happened to Haran.

The classical historical

accounts of Ur Kasdim’s

idol-worshiping population,

hateful toward Terah’s

family, could fit well

alongside the hated-yet-

prominent leader of Urkesh,

Terru. (And perhaps it is no

coincidence that Terru is

associated with another Lion foundation peg and

tablet discovered at Urkesh

prominent younger leader

(Louvre)
in Urkesh, Haziran—could
[ TKLouvre ]
this be a link to Terah’s son,

Haran?)

And perhaps it is likewise no coincidence that many of

the peculiar biblical Abrahamic customs and laws can

be traced back to this Hurrian region, within which

Urkesh was situated. There was also a known early

Habiru contingent at Urkesh—the Habiru are often

associated with the Hebrews, based on their parallel

14th-century b.c.e. “conquest” of Canaan. Abraham is

named early on in the Bible as “the Hebrew” (Genesis

14:13), a title generally considered to apply to

descendants of the earlier patriarch Eber (Genesis 11:14).

As for the dating: There is some debate about

chronology regarding the early second-millennium

Mesopotamian ruler (with Low, Middle and High

chronologies, varying up to about 120 years on either

end). Certain chronological Bible verses point to Terah

being on the scene in the 20th–19th centuries b.c.e.,

which fits well with the High Chronology placement of

Terru. Further, the period in which Terru lived was just

prior to a remarkable Mesopotamian period that fits

with the early biblical account of Abraham in Canaan—

even fitting with the names of Mesopotamian rulers that

he warred against! This is the infamous period of

Hammurabi, which again parallels the Bible along a

High Chronology timeline. (Read more about this in

detail here.)

So was the “hated” Terru, “man of Urkesh,” one and the

same as the tragic biblical Terah, man of “Ur Kasdim”?

That’s for you to decide. Besides the above limited

inscriptional evidence, very little is known about Terru

and Haziran.

Numerous archaeological discoveries have attested to

the biblical events of the time of Israel’s kings. Typically

though, the earlier the period, the more piecemeal the

evidence. Still, there is a multitude of evidence for the

pre-monarchy period—the time of the judges, the

Israelite sojourn in Egypt, even the period of the

patriarchs: remarkable evidence for customs, practices,

prices and sayings—alongside the individuals

themselves!

Times of Israel blog writer Samuel Griswold wrote about

the Terah-Terru connection in his article “Urkesh:

Abraham’s Ur of the Chaldees?” He concluded: “Other

than for historical accuracy, why is this important? How

can it inspire us as Jews today?” It’s a great question. He

continued: “I feel it gives a context for greater

understanding of the culture that Judaism developed

….”

In relation to the focus of this article specifically,

though: The story of Terah is one of tragedy—but it

ultimately becomes a supremely inspiring one. From

wayward beginnings in an oppressive environment,

Terah’s son Abraham grew up to became one of the most

prominent individuals of the Bible, praised in its pages

like none other; held in more worldwide esteem than

almost any other individual in human history; venerated

by Jew, Christian, Muslim (and even ancient Greek);

equally respected by mortal enemies, by radicals and

moderates, by both sides of sectarian divides; a son

whose name to this day is used as a byword for the

possibility for peace in the Middle East; a man in whom,

according to the Bible, “shall all families of the earth be

blessed”—a man known as the “father of the faithful,”

the “friend of God.”

That would make a father proud.

COPYRIGHT © 20 23 GERALD R. FLURRY, ALL RIGH TS RESERVED.