[Avodah] Was Lavan daft, dense or what?

[Daniel Eidensohn]

>
> I wrote:
>
> There is a more direct answer to your question from archeology and
> anthropology. The household gods were not just objects of worship but
> their possession was also critical for authority and inheritance rights.
>
> It was equivalent to identity theft - losing the deed to the farm,
> stocks as well citizenship papers etc. Lavan's concern was not
> theological. That is perhaps why they were stolen in the first place.
>
>   
This is found in the new edition of Encyclopedia Judaica vol 19 page 646

TERAPHIM...The tablets from Nuzi proved to have direct bearing on 
knowledge of teraphim since the Akkadian term ilani, "gods:' was used in 
Nuzi legal texts in ways that closely paralleled some of the occurrences 
of the word 'elohim or its interchangeable partner teraphim (Gen. 31:30; 
cf. 31:19, 34,35). In an adoption contract from Nuzi it is stated that 
on the death of the adoptive father the adopted son shall be heir. If, 
however, a natural son is born, he shall be the primary heir and receive 
his father's /ilani/ ("gods"); otherwise, the/ ilani /go to the adopted 
son. In cases where a normal heir was lacking, the possessor of the 
/ilani/ was entitled to a large share of the inheritance. , Rachel's 
theft of her father's teraphim may be viewed as an attempt to secure her 
own right to her father's inheritance. Then again, since Laban had 
begotten sons, Jacob, who may have been adopted by Laban, would have had 
no right to the gods, and thus Rachel might have stolen them in order to 
secure the right of paterfamilias for her husband. The idea that 
possession of the household gods was in some way connected with rights 
to property inheritance has found widespread acceptance. M. Greenberg, 
however, has cast serious doubts on the validity of this interpretation, 
and maintains that since both the adopted son and the legitimate heir 
divide the inheritance equally, the possession of these household gods 
does not determine a title to inheritance but rather leadership of the 
family, and a claim to paterfamilias.