There now remain to be treated of Chedorlaomer and Tidal, the remaining two of the four allies who fought in that memorable conflict by the Dead Sea to bring into subjection their revolted vassals.
From the time of their first discovery it has been felt that the occurrence of names containing the element Kudur--Kudur-mabuk, Kudur-Nanhundi, Kudur-Nahhunte, etc.--was, in itself, excellent testimony to the correctness of the narrative in the 14th chapter of Genesis, where an Elamite king having _Chedor_ as the first element of his name, attacks and conquers, in alliance with certain kings of Babylonia, five petty rulers of a district on the shores of the Dead Sea. It was, however, naturally a matter of disappointment that the name of Chedorlaomer himself did not occur, for it was soon recognized that the identification, made by Sir Henry Rawlinson, of Kudur-mabuk (read Kudur-mapula) with Chedorlaomer could not be sustained. What was wanted, was some such name as Kudur-Lagamar or Kudur-Lagamal, the second element having been recognized in other texts as the name of the Elamite deity Lagamaru. It was to all appearance thought to be probable that the name of Tidal would be found.
Accordingly, when two tablets were referred to at the Congress of Orientalists held at Geneva in 1894 as containing the names Tudhula, Êri-Eaku (Êri-Ekua), and another name read doubtfully as Kudur-lah(gu)mal, no publicly-expressed objection to their possible identification with Tidal, Arioch, and Chedorlaomer was made. The names were placed before the Semitic section of the Congress of Orientalists referred to, as recent discoveries, which were certain as far as they went, their identification being a matter of opinion.
None of these documents are in a state of completeness, though one of them, a kind of poem, contains no less than 76 lines, more or less well preserved. The other two are of the nature, apparently, of historical legends, though they may be true historical documents, and, though imperfect, are of great importance. Concerning the names which are contained in these texts there is but little or no doubt, though there may be doubt as to the way in which they ought to be read in consequence of the fanciful way in which they are written.