TH E B RITIS H A C A D EMY

L eg en d s of B a b y lon an d E gyp t

in r e la t i o n t o H eb r e w

Tr a d i t i o n

BY

L e o n ar d W Ki ng .

MA . .
,
LITT D . .
,
PS A. . .

A ss i s t nt K
a ee
p e r o f t
E gyp i a n a nd r t t
A s sy i a n A n i q u i i e s

i n the Bri t i sh M u s e um
r
Pro fes s o i n t h e U ni ve r i ty
s o f Lo ndon
King s ’
Coll e ge

The S chw ei ch L ectu r es

19l 6

2 2 001 6

L ondon
P ubli she d fo r the B riti sh A caderix
y
By H umphrey M il ford, Oxfo rd U ni vers ity Pre ss
A me n C orner E , C .

1918
 P R E FA C E

IN the s e l e ctures an atte mpt i s made not so much to restate

,

familiar facts as to accommodat e th e m to new and s upplementary

,

evid e nc e which has been publi s hed in America s inc e the out
bre ak of the war . But even without the excus e of r ecent
di s covery no apology wo ul d be needed for any co mpariso n or
,

contra s t of Hebrew tradition with the myt hological and legendary

b e lie fs of Ba bylon and Egypt Hebr e w ac hievements in the
.

s ph e re of religion and ethi cs are only thrown into stronger relief

when s tudied again s t th e ir contemporary bac kground .

The bulk of our new material is furn i shed by s om e early texts ,

written towards the close of the third millennium They

incorporate tradition s which extend in unbrok e n outline from
their own period into the remote ages of the pas t and claim to ,

trace the his tory of man back to his crea tion Th e y represent the
.

early national tradition s of the S umerian people who preceded the

,

S emite s as the ru lin g race in Babylonia ; an d incidentally they

necessita te a revision of c u rrent views wit h regar d to t h e cradle
of Babylonian civiliz ation The mo s t remarkable of the new
.

documents is one which relates in poetical narrative an ac c oun t

of the C re ation of Antediluvian history and of the D eluge It
, ,
.

thu s e xhi bits a clo s e res emblance in s tructure to the corre s pond
ing Hebrew traditions a resemblance that is not shared by t he
,

S emitic -Babylonian V e r s ions at pre s e nt known But in mat t er

.

th e S u m e ri an tradition is more primitive than any of t h e S e mi tic

versions In s pite of the fact that the te xt appears to have r ea ched
.

u s in a magical se tting and t o some ext e nt in epitomized form

, ,

thi s early docum e nt enables us to ta p the stream of tradition at

a point far above any at which approac h has hi therto been
p os s ible
.
iv PR EFAC E
Though the resemblance of early S umerian tradition to that of
t he Hebrews is s triking it furni s h e s a s till closer paral lel to the
,

s ummari e s pres e rved from the history of B e r os s u s Th e huge .

figures incorporated in the latter s chronological s cheme are no

’

longe r to be treated a s a product of Neo -Babylonian s peculation ;

t h ey reappear i ntheir original s urroundings in another of thes e
early documents the S umerian Dynas tic List The sources of
, .

B e ros s u s had inevitably been semitized by Babylon ; but two of

his three Antediluvian citie s find th e ir place among the five of
primitive S umerian belief and two of hi s ten Antediluvian kings
,

rej oin their S umerian prototypes Moreover the recorded ages .

,

of S umerian and Hebrew patriarchs are strangely alike It may .

be added that i n Egypt a new fragment of the Palermo S te le has

enabled us to verify by a very s imilar comparison the accuracy of
, ,

Manetho s sources for hi s prehi s toric period while at the s ame

’

t ime it demonstrate s the way in which possible inaccuracie s in his

system deduced from independent evidence may have arisen in
, ,

remote antiquity It i s clear that both Hebrew and Hellenisti c

.

traditions were modelled on very early lines .

Thu s our new material enables u s to check the age and in ,

s ome measure the accuracy of the tradition s concerning the

,

dawn of hi s tory which the Greeks repro duced from native

s ources , both in Babylon and Egypt after t he conquests of ,

Al exander had brought t h e Near East within the range of their

intimate acquaintance The third body of tradition that of the
.
,

Hebrews though unbacked by the prestige of s e cular achieve

,

ment has through incorporation in the canons of two great

, ,

religious sys tems acquired an authority which the others have

,

not enj oyed In r e -examining the s ources of all three accounts

.
,

s o far as they are affected by the new discoveries it will be of ,

interest to observe how the s ame problem s were s olved in

antiquity by very different races living under widely divergent
,

conditions but within ea sy reach of one another Their periods

, .

of contact ascertained in hi s tory or s ugge s ted by geographical

,

consideration s will prompt the further ques tion to what e xtent

,

each body of belief was evolved in independence of the others .

The close correspondence that h a s long been recognized and is

now confirmed between the Hebrew and the S emitic -Babylonian
 P R EFAC E
sy s tems as compared with that of Egypt nat urally fa lls within
, ,

the s cope of our inquiry .

Excavation has provided an extraordinari ly full archaeological

commentary to the legends of Egypt and Babylon ; and when I
re ceived the invitation to deliver t h e S chweich Lectures for 1 9 16 ,

I w as reminded of the te rms of the Bequest and was asked to

empha s ize the archaeological side of th e subj ect S uch material .

illustration w as also calculate d to bring out in a more vivid ,

manner than was possible with purely literar y evidenc e the ,

contras ts and parallels pres ented by H e brew tradition Thanks .

to a special grant for photographs fr om the British Acad emy I ,

was enabled to illustrate by means of lante rn s lides many of the

problems discuss ed in the l e cture s ; and it was originally inte nd e d
that the photographs then s hown should appear as plates in t hi s
volume But in view of the continu e d and increas ing shortag e
.

of paper it was a ft erwards felt to be only right that all i ll u st ra

,

tions should be omitted Th i s very neces sary decision h as i n

.

volved a recasting of certain s ections of the lecture s as delive red ,

which i n its turn has rendered possible a fuller tr e atm e nt of

t h e new lite rary evidence To the conse quent s hift i ng of inte rest
.

is als o due a tr anspo s ition of names in th e title On their literary

.

side and in virtue of the intimacy of their relation to H e brew

,

tradition the legen ds of Babylon must be given preceden c e over

,

those of Egypt .

For the delay in the appearance of the volume I must plead

th e pressure of other work on s ubj ects far removed fr om a r c hae o
,

logical s tudy and affording li ttle time and few facilitie s for a
continuan c e of archaeological and textual research It i s hope d .

that the in s ertion of refe rences throughout and t h e more d e taile d

,

discuss ion of problems s uggested by our new literary material ,

may inclin e th e r eader to add his indulgence to that already

extended to me by the British Academy .

L W KING
. . .
 C O N TEN TS

PA G E
LE CTU R E I
E GY PT B A BYL O N A ND PA LE S TINE
, , ,
A ND S O ME TR A DITIO NA L
O RIG INS O F CIVIL IZ A TIO N
Ob j t ec of th e lec t re
r w tr di ti n onc rn i ng t h
u s to ex a min e Heb e a o s c e e

ea rly g f
a m nki n d
es O i n t h O f i
a mp rt n t vi d n p b li h d in
, e li gh t o a e e ce u s e

A m e ri i n e th
ca s tb re k f th w ; n ew m t ri l f rni hed by
c e ou a o e ar a e a u s

S m eri n li t r ry t e t
u a f n e arly pe ri d i nv lvi ng l x mp ri n of
s o a ea o , o a s o a co a so

Egypt i n n d B b y l ni n my t h l gy 1 3 ; ha r ct er f H b r w tr di ti n
a a a o a o o ,
- c a O e e a o

a nd j ti fi ti n f h oi f bj t 3 4 ; Egypt n d B b y l n i n H b re w
us ca o or c ce o su ec ,
- a a o e

t adi ti n nd i n hi t ory 4 ; g gr phi l f t r i n prob lem 4 6 ; li n f

r o a s , eo a ca ac o s ,
—
es o

early n ta t 7 8 ;
co om m r i lc , n d p li t i
— l r el t i n c f Sy i t v ll y e c a a o ca a o s o r a o a e s

o f Nil nd E p h r t e
e a 8 1 0 ; tend en i e i n Heb r w hi t ry fte r
u a s, ttle -
c s e s o a se

m nt i n C n n 1 0 ; nti n i ty f h m n lt r nd mp r ti v
e a aa , co u O u a cu u e, a co a a e

m th d f t dy 10 1 1 th t t h e v hi l Of r eligi i de m y b f m
e o o s u ,
-
a e c e ou s as a e o co

p i t e ri g in ill tr t d i n n th r m e di m 1 1 fi E gyp ti n nd t h r
‘

os o , us a e a o e u , . a a o e

for i gn le m en t i n S e m i t i
e e t e mp li fi ed i n P h oeni i n nd A m an
s c ar x e c a a ra ae

pr d t 1 1 1 4 ; tri ki ng m t ri l ffe t f A y ri an i nfl en i n Sy ri
o uc s , —
s a e a e c s o ss u ce a,

15 16 ; t h S m i t d p t b i li ty 1 7 ; h ri h d tr di ti n of t h p t
’
—
e e e s a a a , c e s e a o s e as

a pp li bl b y n l gy t mp i t i f H b r w li t r t r 17 1 8 B by
ca e, a a o , o co os on O e e e a u e, -
a

l n i n fl en i n n t i q i ty 1 8 ; t h it f Ni pp r 1 8 2 0 ; T l b i b nd
’
o s u ce a u ,
e s e o u ,
—
e -a a

th ri v r Ch eb r 2 0 ;
e e n w m at e ri l 2 1 2 ; t h e m er gi n g
a ,
f h i to ry
ou r e a ,
-
o s

i n t l ge nd nd my t h 22
o e a , .

Unb r k en lt r l e q ence i n Egypt fr om n eoli t h i c tage b t

o cu u a s ntr tu s u co as

o fh wri tt n hi t ri l r e ord t o th e of Me pot m i 22 th Palerm

er e s o ca c s os so a a, e o

St l e e n d th a wly r e ov er d fr g m nt 23 4 ; th W r hi pp r of
e ne c e a e s, -
e
‘
o s e s

H r o us 24 ; n w pr dyna t i r l r
’

, e f Uppe r Egy pt 25 ; e ral tr di ti on s c u e s o ,

o a

b f r e i n v n t i n f wri ti ng 2 6 ; h i t r i c l
e o e o o cy f M n et h n , s o a a c c ura o a o co

fi rm d 2 6 7 M n etho nd B e
e ,
—
27 ;
a pp r li mi t f r h e l gi l a r os su s , u e o a c a o o ca

e vi d n e i n E p h r t
e c , V ll y t b r nz ge lt r 28 ; r e rd f
u a es a e , o o e-a cu u e, co s o a

m r rem te p t r l ti ng t r dl f B by loni an i v ili z ti on 2 8 9

o e o as , e a o c a e o a c a ,
-

l gend ry lem t i n t h
e a e rly t t nd th g e Of the g od n rt h 2 9
en s e ea ex s, a e a s o ea ,

c orr p nd n f S m ri n nd Gr e k tradi ti n 3 0 ; th e A n t dil vi n

es o e ce o u e a a e o s, e u a

ki g f B o
n s o nd erm e n w S m r i n pr t ty p 3 1 3 ; S m ri n
ss u s a so e u e a o o es , -
u e a

p tri r h f t h e Dy n ti Li t 34 6 ; th b ook f t h g n r ti n f
a a c s O as c s ,
- ‘
e o e e e a o s o

A d m 3 7 ; Heb r w
a h e fr m S m r th r gh B b y l n 3 8 th e N p h ili m
e ec o s o u e ou a o , e

a nd t h i r tr t m Of t di ti on 3 9 ; new li gh t on t r diti n l rigin of

e s a u ra , a o a o s

ci vi li a t ion 3 9 40
z ,
—
.
 C ONTENTS

P A GE

LECTU R E II
DEL U GE S TO RIES A ND TH E NE W S U M ERIA N VE R S IO N

Heb rw e Ver i n f the t ry 41 2 ; g f the

a nd Bab yloni an s o s o s o ,
—
a e o

S m ri n V r i n 43 ; w i d pr d
u e a e s o , rr n f i m i l r t ri e es 44 ; ea oc c u e ce o s a s o s,

form e r tr l gi l i nt rpret ti n 44 5 ; rec nt ynth t i t nd n i e i n

as o o ca e a o s, - e s e c e e c s

r r h 45 6 ; l r i nt erpr t ti n f Del g myt h i n i dent lly r v i v d

es e a c ,
—
so a e a o o u e c a e e ,

47 Egypti n L g end of th e De tr t i n o f M nk i n d 48 ; th e S m e ri n
a
‘
e s uc o a u a

Ver i n nd i t li te r ry nne i n wi th Cre ti n my th 49 50 ; magi cal

s o a s a co x o a o ,
-

sett i g f th n rr t i v
n o 5 0 1 e t n t p o rt i on of th e t e t 5 1 2
e a a e, - x a s x ,
—
.

i
() I tr d t inon t moy t h ucn d o n t f oCr e ti n 5 2 8 ; (ii ) th e An t e
a a cc u O a o ,
-

di l v iu i ti f S m r nd of Be
an c es o 5 8 6 2 (ii i ) th e Co n i l Of th e god
u e a ros su s , -
u c s

a nd Z i d p i ty 6 2 9 ; (i ) th e Dre m -wa r ni ng nd S m ri n dre m

us u
’
u s e ,
-
v a , a u e a a

di v i n t i n 6 9 7 6 ; ( v ) t h F l d th e e
a o ,
-
p f th G r e t B t n d th
e oo , s ca e o e a oa , a e

S cri fi
a t t h e S n g d 7 6 85 ; ( i ) t he Pr p i t i t i on f t h
ce o u - o
, ng ry god
-
v o a o e a s,

i mm rt li ty 85 91 n mi ta k b le v i den e f m g ic l
’
a nd Z i d us u u s o a ,
-
e u s a e c o a a us ,

85 9 ; l- f th v e r i n 89 9 1
c os e o e s o s, -
.

C m l t i v e ff t f v i d n e th t th e new t e t cont a i n
u u a e ec o e p i m i ti v e
e c a x s a r

S m ri n V r i on f th S m i t i D l g
u e a e s tory 9 1 2 ; g ner l re lt f
O e e c e u e s ,
- e a su o

co mp ri n w i th H b rew V r i n 92 3 ; gr pi ng n rt i n p i nt f
a so e e s o s, —
ou , o ce a o s, o

S m ri n nd Heb re w Ver i n
u e a a g i t th f B b y lon 9 3 ; m r
s o om
s a a ns os e o a , o e c

p l t
e e r pr d t i
e n f S m
o e ri n
uc tr di t i
o n i n
o H l l n i t i
u p r i d 9 4 a
; l l a o e e s c e o , o ca

su rv i v l f S m ri m yth l gi l t t nd N B by l ni n i nt r t i n
a o u e an o o ca ex s, a e O- a o a e es

t h m r e n i nt v e r i
e o a 94 5 ; b n e f
c e tr l gi l l ri ng i n th
s on s , -
a se c o as o o ca co ou e

S m r i n n rr t i v
u e a 95 ; n tr
a t pr ented by Nil t Tigri nd
a e, co as es e o s a

E ph r t
u 95 6 h r t r f fl d i n M op t m i
a es , —
c a ac e n d tt e t d di
o tr oo s es o a a, a a s e sas e s

d ri n g l t r h i t r i l p e ri d 9 6 9 ; t h l al S m ri n F l d fi tt d t
u a e s o ca o ,
-
e oc u e a oo e o

l t r p li t i l h ri z n
a e o 9 9 ; fl od tr di t i n i n
ca o o r s, f E t er n M di o a o s a ea o as e

t err n n 9 9 1 00 ; B byl ni Heb rew nd Greek D l g t ori tr ed

a ea ,
-
a o an , , a e u e s es ac

t b i
o f h i t ri l f ct i n E p h r t e V lley nd th pr b b l
as s o s o ca a ri gi n f
u a s a , a e o a e o s o

o th r D l g t ri 1 00 ; b rv ti n my th
e e u e s o es , ppli ed to th fl ood of
o se a o s as a e s

D ali on and Da rd nu
e uc 100 1 oncl i on 1 01 a s, -
c us , .

LE C TU R E III
CR E A TIO N A ND TH E DR A G O N MYTH ; A ND TH E PR OB L E M OF

BA BYL ONIA N PA R A L L EL S IN H E B R E W T RA DITIO N

Le gend my th 1 02 ; re f
a nd k n wl dg f Egy pti n myt h
, s ou c s o ou r o e e o a o

l gy 1 02 3 ; m y th l gi l
o ,
-n pti n f t h ni v r 1 03 4 ; p etry
o o ca co ce o s o e u e se, -
o

an d m yt h 104 ; p hil phi l nd m t ri li t i i nt pr t t i

, f my t h
os o ca a a e a s c er e a ons o ,

1 04 5 H t h p t C r t i d th P tt r t w rk 1 05 6 th S
’

g d un - o
-
a s e su s ea on , a n e o e a o - e
,

a n d t h pri m v l w t r 1 07 ; Egy pti n r li gi y r t i m 1 07 b

e ae a a e , a e ou s s nc e s ,
a s en ce

o f Egy pt i n p r ll l i n H b r w tr di ti
a 1 07 8 d
a a tr t f Cr t i
e s e e a on , —
c on as o ea on

myth i n Egy pt nd B byloni d ri g th l tt r Semi ti p ri d 108 t h

s a a a u n e a e
’
s c e o , e
 C ONTENT S ix
PA GE

Su m eri n Cre t r nd th i r l te r c mi ti vi ti 1 09 10 ; th L dy f th
a a o s a e a os c ac es , -
e
‘
a O e

M nt i n
ou n d m t h r f m n ki nd 1 11 1 2 ; w h t w
a s a o e o t h e S m ri n
a ,
-
a as u e a c on

ce p ti n of
o t h e i v r n d i t ri un
g i n 1 13 1
e se a 4 ; mp i t e h rs t r o f - co os c a ac e o

th e S e mi t i p em f C r e ti n c o n d d ed ti n fr m th S m eri n ri gi n l
o a o ,
a uc o s o e u a o a

f t h S v n th T b le t 1 14 ; t h e S mi t i nt ti n l mbin ti n Of e i t ’
o e e e a , e es en o a co a o x s

i g m y th 1 14-1 5 ; tr
n s, f i n n gr l m nt i n t h p e m 1 1 5 1 6 ;
a c es O co uou s e e e s e o ,
-

i nd p n d t
e e i t n en f th Dr g ex s e mb t 1 16 1 7 n w S emi ti v er i
ce O e a on c o a ,
-
a e c s on

o f th e Dr g n myt h 1 1 7 1 8 ; t h S m e ri n Dr g n m tif 1 1 8 1 9 ; th Bi rt h
a o ,
—
e u a a o o ,
-
e

o f th g d e n d t
o h v i ds a f D m i e1 2 0 1
e ; g n r
enc e ti n fr om o a a sc u s, -
e e a o

pri m v l w t r 12 1 3 ; th l ter S m ri n V r i on nd r S mi ti -

m thod f r ti g d y l nd 1 24-
ae a a e , e a u e a e s u e e c - re

d ti n 1 2 3 4 ; Gi li mm 5 i rri g ti on
’
ac o ,
—
a s e o c ea n r a , a

myt h f E ki o d Ni n ll 1 2 5- 6 ; mp l y m n t
n an d i g ni fi n
e a, f my th e o e an s ca ce o

i n m gi 12 6 7 ; O
a c, nd - S m ri n pr t ty p a nn es a 12 7 ; th E ph t a u e a o o e, e u ra es

r t r 1 27 8 ; my th gg t d b y th t w p t f th e M p t mi n
a s c ea o ,
—
s su es e e o as ec s O e so o a a

ri v r 1 28 ; th i r omb i n ti n fl ti f p li t i l d v l pm t 128 9 ;
e s, e c a o a re ec on o o ca e e o en ,
-

co mp r i n w i th H b r w V r i n 1 2 9 3 0 ; vi vi d S mi ti B b yl ni n
a so e e e s o s, -
e c- a o a

l ri n g of H b r w n rr t i v e
c o ou 1 3 0 1 ; pri mi ti v
e e a n try Of th l te r
a s, -
e a c es e a

tr di ti n 13 1
a o s, .

P ri d nd pr e b y w hi h Heb r w b e m e ac q i nte d wi th B by
e o s a oc s s c e s ca ua a

l ni n i de
o a 131 2 ; p a s,i b ili ti of p -
i li i nfl os s 1 3 2 ; E z ek i l n d
es r e-e x c u e n c e, e a

t h e Ep i f Gi lg m h 1 3 2 5 ; B b y l n i n e h oe
c o a es , gg t i v f
-
rl a o a c s su es e o o a

tr di ti 1 3 5 6 th r e deb t b l p ri d Of p e-e i li nt t 1 3 6 7 ; the

a on , -
e a a e e o s r x c co ac ,
-

p tri r h l ge nd t h tr di ti n l th r h i p f th P nt t h 1 37 8 ;
a a c a a a e a o a au o s O e e a eu c ,
-

th ttl m nt i n C n n n d vi d nce fr m T ll l-A m rn 1 3 8 ; t h l te r

e se e e a aa a e e o e e a a, e a

J d n m n r ch y n d th e n t ri
u a ea o a d pt i a f A y ri n c t om o o nd ou s a o on o ss a us s a

b li f 13 8 9 J wi h
e e s, il
- d B b yl ni n my t h logy n d t h e es p t i v
e s ex es a n a o a o , a r ec e

i fl n e f B b yl n n d Egy pt p on Heb r e w tr d i t i n 1 3 9 ; l k
n ue c o a o a f u a o , ac O

H b r e w re p n e t Egy pt
e s o c pt i n m t e r i l i d
s o l 139 ; th A r b i n
ex e a a ea s , e a a

no m d d t he Ham i ti prob lem 1 39 40 ; effe t of r i l di vi i on nd

a an c ,
— c s ac a s a

a ffi i ty 140
n ,
.

APPEN DI X E S
I . C O M PA R A T IV E TA BLE OF THE S U M E R IA N, S E MITIC -B A BY
L O NIA N, H E L L E NIS TIC , A ND H E BR E W VE RS IO NS O F C RE A
TIO N , A NTE D IL U VIA N H IS T O R Y A ND THE D EL U G E ,

II . THE A NTE D IL UVIA N K ING S OF B ER OS S US A ND TH E S UM E

R IA N D Y NA S TIO L IS T

IN DE X
 L E G EN D S O F B A BY L O N A ND E GY P T

IN R E L A TIO N TO H E BR E W

TR A D ITIO N

L ECTURE I

EGYPT B A BYLON
, ,
A ND PALE S TINE ,
A ND S OME
TR AD ITION AL O R I G IN S OF C IVILI Z ATION

AT the present moment most Of u s have little time or thought

t o s pare for s ubj ect s not connected directly or indirectly with th e
war We have put a s ide our own intere s ts and s tudies ; and
.

aft e r the war we shall all have a certain amount of l e eway to

make up in acquainting ourselves with what has been going on
in countrie s not yet involved in the gre at s truggle M e anwhile .

the most we can do is t o glance for a moment at any discov e ry

O f exceptional intere s t that may com e to light .

The main O bj ect of the s e lecture s will be to examine certain

Hebrew tra dition s in the light of new evid e nce w hich h a s been
p u blished in America since the o u tbreak of the war The .

evidence is furnished by some early literary texts inscribed on ,

tablets from Nippur one Of the O ldest and most s acred citie s of
,

Babylonia They are written in S u m e rian the language spoken by

.
,

the non -S e mitic people whom the S emitic Babyloni ans conquered
and displaced ; and they include a very primitive version of the
D eluge s tory and C reation myth and some text s which throw
,

n e w light on the age of Babylonian civilization and on the area

within which it had its rise In them w e have r e covered some

.

of the material from which B er os s u s derive d hi s dynasty of Ante

d iluvian kings and we are thu s e nabl e d to te s t the accuracy of
,

the Greek tradition by that of the S umerian s themselves S O fa r .

then as Babylonia is concerned these document s will necessitate

,

a e examination of more than one problem

r - .

The myth s and l e gends of ancient Egypt are al s o to some

extent involved The trend of much r e cent anthropological
.

res earch has been in the direction of seeking a single place of

K . B
2 EGYPT BABYLON
, ,
A ND PALE S TINE
origin for s imilar beli e fs and practice s at least among races ,

which were bound to one another by political or commercial ties .

And w e s hall hav e occasion to te s t by m e ans of our new data , ,

a recent theory of Egyptian influ e nce The Nile Vall e y was O f .

,

cours e one of t h e gre at centre s from which ci v ilization radiated

,

throughout the ancient East ; a n d even when direct contact i s ,

unproved Egy ptian literature may furni s h instructive parallel s

,

and contrast s in any s tudy of We s tern A s iatic mythology .

Moreover by a s trange coincid e nce ther e h a s al s o been publi shed

, ,

in Egypt since the beginning O f t h e war a r e cord refe rring to t h e

reigns of pr e dyna s tic rulers in t h e Nile Valley Thi s like some .
,

of the Nippur texts take s u s back to that dim period before the
,

dawn of actual hi s to ry and though t h e information it afford s i s

, ,

not detailed like t heirs it provides fr e s h confirmation of th e

,

general accuracy of M a n e t ho s sources and Suggests s ome inter ’

esting points for comparison .

But the people with who s e traditions we a r e ultimat e ly con

cerned are the Hebr e ws In the firs t series of S ch w eich L e ctures
.
,

delivered in the year 1 9 0 8 t h e lat e C anon Driver showed how ,

t h e literature of A s s yria and Babylon had thrown light upon

H ebrew traditions concerning the origin and early hi s tory of th e
world The maj ority of t h e cuneiform documents on which he
.
,

based his compari s on date from a p e riod no earlier than the

,

seventh century R d and yet it w a s clear that t h e t e xts them

,

s elve s i n some form or other mu s t have descended from a remote

, ,

antiquity He concluded hi s bri e f refe rence to the C reation and

.

D eluge Tabl e t s with these words : The Babylonian n arrative s ‘

are both polytheistic whil e the corresponding biblical narrativ e s

,

( Gen i
. and vi ix ) are made— the vehicle of a pure and exalted
monothei s m but in spite O f thi s fundam e ntal di ffe rence and al s o ,

variations in detail t h e re s emblance s are s u ch a s to leave no

,

doubt that th e Hebrew co s mogon y and t h e H ebrew s tory of t he

D eluge are both d e rived ultimately from the same original a s the
Babylonian narrative s only transformed by the magic touch of
,

I s rael s religion and infus e d by it with a n e w s pirit

’

,
1
Among .
’

the recently publi sh e d documents from Nippur we have at last

recovered one at least of tho s e primi tive originals from which
the Babylonian account s were derived whil e others prove the ,

exi s t ence of variant s torie s O f the world s origin and early his tory ’

which have not s urvived in the later cuneiform texts In s ome .

1
Dri v er M , odern Resea r ch as i llu s tra ti ng the B i ble ( Th e S c h w ei ch Lec t re
u s,

p 23 . .
 S UBJE CT OF THE LE CTU RES 3

of these early S u me rIan record s we may trac e a faint but remark

able parallel with the Hebrew tradition s O f man s hi s tory between ’

his Creation and the Flood It will be our tas k then to examine .
, ,

the relation s which the Hebrew narratives b e ar both t o the early

S umerian and to the later Babylonian Ver s ion s and to ascerta in ,

how far t h e n e w discoveries s upport or modify current views

w ith r e gard to the content s of those early chapters O f Gene s is .

I need not remind you that Genesi s is the book of Hebrew

o r i gin s and that i t s contents mark it off to some ext ent from the
,

other b ook s of the Hebrew Bibl e The Obj e ct O f the Pentateuch .

and the Book O f Jo s hua i s to describ e in their origin the funda

mental in s titutions Of the national faith and to trace from the
earlie s t times the course O f e vent s which led to the Hebrew
s e ttlement in Palestine Of this national history the Book of .

Genesis forms the introductory s ection Four centuries of com .

p l e t e silence lie between i t s clos e and the beginning of Exodus ,

where we enter on the h istory of a nation a s contras ted with that

1
of a family While Exod u s and the s ucceedin g books contain
.

national traditions Genesis i s large ly mad e up of individual ,

biography C hapters xii l are concern e d with the immediate

.
—

anc e stors of the Hebre w race beginning with Abram s migration ,

’

into C anaan and clo s ing with Joseph s death in Egypt But the ’
.

aim Of the book is not con fi ned to recounting the ancestry of

Israel It s eeks also to s how her relation to other peoples in the
.

world and probing still d e e per into the past it describes how the
,
’
earth itself was prepared for man s habitation Thus the patri .

archal biographies are preceded in chapters i xi by an account

-
, ,

of the origin of the world the beginnings of civi lization and , ,

the distribution of the various races of mankind It i s of cours e .

, ,

with certain parts of this first group of chapters that s uch

striking parallels have long been recognized in the cuneiform
texts .

In approaching this particular bod y Of Hebrew traditions the ,

neces s ity for som e caution will be apparent It is not as though .

we were dealing with the r e ported beliefs O f a Malayan or C e ntral

Australian t ribe In such a case there would be no di fficulty in
.

applying a purely Objective criticism without regard to ulterior ,

con s equ e nc e s B u t here our own fe e lings are involved having

.
,

their roots deep in early a s s ociations The ground too is wel l .

1
Cf , e g . . .
, S k i nn e r ,
A C r i ti ca l a nd E x egeti ca l Commenta ry on Genesi s
p . n f . D i r v er ,
The B ook f Genes i s,
o 1 0th e d . pp
Ry le, T he B ook
.
f
o

G enes i s pp . x ff .
4 EGY PT BABYLON , , AN D PALE S TIN E
trodden and had there been no new material to discus s I think
, ,

I should have preferred a le s s contentious theme The n e w .

material is my ju stification for the choice of s ubject and als o the ,

fact that whatever views we may hold it will be necess ary for
, ,

u s to as s imilate it to them I S hall have no hesitation in giving

.

you my own reading of the evidence ; but at the s am e time it

will be po s sible to indicate solutions which will probably appeal
to those who view the s ubject from more conservative stand
points That side of the di s cus s ion may well be postponed until
.

after the examination O f the new evidence in detail And fi rs t .

of all it will be advi s abl e to cl e ar up s ome general aspects of th e

problem and to define the limits within which our criticism may
,

be applied .

It must be admitted that both Egypt and Babylon bear a bad

name in Hebrew tradition Both are synonymou s with captivity .
,

the symbol s O f s uffering endure d at the b e ginning and at the

clo s e of the national life And during the s tru ggle again s t .

As syrian aggres s ion the disappointment at t h e failure of expected

,

help is reflected in prophecie s of the p e riod These great crises .

in Hebr e w history have tended to Obscure in t he national memory

the part which both Babylon and Egypt may have played in
moulding the civiliz ation of the s mall e r natio ns with whom they
came in contact TO s uch influenc e t he rac e s of S yria w e re by
.
,

ge ographical po s ition peculiarly s ubj ect Th e country h as often

,
.

been compared to a bridge between the two great continents of

Asia and Africa flank e d by t h e sea on one side and the desert on
,

the other a narrow cau s eway of highland and coastal plain con
,

ne cti ng the valleys of the Nile and the Euphrate s For except
1
.
,

on the frontier O f Egypt desert and sea do not m e et Farther , .

north the Arabian plateau i s s eparate d from the Mediterranean

by a double mountain chain which runs s outh from the Taurus ,

at varying elevations and encloses in its lower cours e the remark

,

able depression Of the Jordan Vall e y the D ead S e a and the , ,

‘
Arabah The Ju da e an hills and the mountain s of Moab are
.

merely the southward prolongation of Lebanon and Anti -Lebanon ,

and their neighbourhood to the sea endows this narrow tract Of

habitable country with i t s moisture and fertility It thu s form e d .

the natural cha nnel of intercourse between t h e two earliest

1
. . mt
S ee G A S i h , H is tor i ca l G eogr ap hy of the H oly L a nd, 5 ii , 45 pp . a nd

r
My es , D a wn of H i s tor y, 1 3 7 if pp
a n d c f Hoga h , The Nea rer E a s t,
. . . rt pp . 65
a n d Reclu s, Nou relle Geograp hi e u n i ver s elle,
’
IX , 685 fl t . pp .
'

.
 GEOG R A PHICAL FACTO R S IN P R OBLE M 5

centres of civilization and was later the battle ground of their

,
-

opposing empires .

The great trunk -road s of through commu n ication ru n no rth

and s outh across the eas tern plate aus O f the Hauran and Moab
, ,

and along t h e co astal plains The O ld highway from Egypt .

,

which le ft t h e D elta at P e lus i u m at first follows the coast then , ,

tr e nd s eastward acro ss the plain of E s dra elon which breaks the ,

coa s tal range and pas s ing under Hermon run s northward through
,

D ama s cu s and reach e s the Euphrate s at i t s mo s t w e s terly point .

O t h e r through tracks in Palestine ran then as t h ey do to d ay ,

‘
by Beersheba and Hebron or along the Arabah and west of t he
,

D ead S e a or through Edom and e ast of Jordan by the present

,

Hajj rout e to D amas cu s But the great highway from Egypt

.
,

the most west e rly O f the trunk road s through Palestin e , was that
-

mainly followe d with s om e variant s ections by both caravans

, ,

and armie s and w a s known by the Hebrews in its s outhern

,
’
course as the Way of the Philistines and farther north as the
Way of the East
The plain O f E s draelon where the road first tr end s eastward
, ,

h a s been the battl ground for most invaders O f Palesti n e from

e -

t h e north and t hough Egyptian armies o ft en fought in the

,

southern coastal plain they too have battled there when they
,

held the southern country Megiddo which com mands the main .
,

pass into the plain through the low S amaritan hill s to the south
east O f C armel was the s ite of Th ot h mes III S famous battle
,
’

again s t a S yrian con federation and it inspired the wri ter of the ,

Apocalyp s e with hi s vision of an Armageddon O f the future But .

invadi n g armie s always followed th e be ate n track of caravans ,

and movements represented by the great campaigns were reflected

in the daily pa s s age of international commerce .

With s o much throu gh traffic continually pas s ing within her

borders i t may be matt e r for s u rpri s e that far more striking
,

evidence of its cultural effect should not have been revealed by

archaeological re s e arch in Pal e stine Here again the explanation .

i s mai n ly of a geographical character For though t h e plains and .

plat e au s cou ld be crossed by the trunk -road s the r e st of the ,

country is s o broken up by mountain and valley that it presented

fe w facilities eith e r to forei gn penetration or to external contro l;
The physical barri e rs to l ocal inte rcourse rei nforced by striki ng ,

d i ffe rence s in soil altitude and climate wh i le they precluded

, , ,

S yria herself from attaining national unity always tended to ,

’
protect her separate provinces or kingdoms from the full , ,
6 EGYPT BABYLON
, , A ND PALE S TINE
e ffects of foreign aggres s ion One city-s tate could be traversed
.
,

devastated or annexed without in the lea s t degree affecting

, ,

neighbo uring areas It is true that the population of S yria has

.

alway s been predominantly S emitic for s h e was on the fringe O f ,

the great breeding -ground of the S emitic race and her landward
boundary was Open to the Arabian nomad Indeed in the whole .
,

course Of her histo ry the only race that bade fair at one time to
oust the S emite i n S yria was the Greek But the Greeks .

remained within the citi e s which they founded or re built and , ,

a s R obert son S mith pointed out the death -rate in Eastern cities ,

habitually exceeds the b irth -rate the urban population mu s t be

reinforced from the country if it is to be maintain e d so that the ,

type of population is ultimately determined by the blood of the

peasantry 1
Hence aft er the Arab conque s t the Gre e k elements
.

in S yria and Palestine tended rapidly to di s appear The Moslem .

invasion was only the las t of a serie s of s imilar great inroads ,

which have followed one another since the dawn of hi story and ,

during all that time ab s orption was continually taking place from
de s ert tribes that ranged the S yrian border As we have seen .
,

the country Of his adoption was such as to encourage the S e mitic

nomad s particularism which was inheren t in his tribal organiza
’

tion Thus the predominance of a S ingle racial element in the

.

population of Palestine and S yria did little to break down or

overs tep the natural barriers and lines of clea vage .

These fact s suffice to show why the influence O f both Egypt

and Ba bylon upon the va ri ou s p e ople s and kingdom s of Palestine
was only intensified at cert ain period s when ambition for ,

extended empire dictated the reduction O f her province s in detail .

But in the long intervals during which there w a s no attempt to

,

enforce political control regular relation s were maintained along

,

the lines of trade and barter And in any estimate of the po s sible
.

effect of foreign influence upon Hebrew thought it i s important ,

to realize that some O f the channels through which in later

periods it may have acted had been flowing since the dawn of
history and even perhaps in prehi s toric times It i s probable
,
.

that S yria formed one of the links by which we may explain

the Babylonian elements that are attested in prehistoric Egyptian
cultu re But another po s sible line of advance may have been by
2
.

way of Arabia and across the R e d S ea into Upper Egypt .

rt mt
S ee Rob e s on S i h , Reli gi on of the S emi tes ,
1 p
12 f ; a nd c f S i h , H i s t;
. . . mt
Geogr , 10 f
. p . .

2
Cf S u mer a nd A kk a d ,
. 3 22 ff pp
a n d for a full di s c u ss i on of t he
. . oi n s of p t
8 EGYPT BABYLO N , , A ND PALE S TINE

with Mesopotamian or S u san traditions His beard too is qu ite .

, ,

different from that of the Libyan desert tribes which the early
E gyptian kings adopted Though the treatment of the lions is .

s uggestive of proto -Elamite rather th a n of early Babylonian

model s the design itself is unmistakably of Me s opotamian origin

, .

Thi s di scovery intens ifie s the s ignificance of other early parallels

that have been noted b e tween the civilizations of the Euphrates
and the Nile but its evidence s o far as it goe s does not point to
, , ,

S yria as the medium of prehi s toric intercourse Yet then a s .

,

lat e r there can have been no phys ical barri e r to the use of the
,

river-route from Mesopotamia into S yria and of the tracks thence

southward along the land -bridge to the Nile s delta ’
.

In the early historic perio ds we have d e finite evidence that

the eastern coast of the Levant e xercis e d a s trong fascination
upon the rulers of both Egypt and Babylonia It may be .

admitted that S yria had little to give in compari s on to what s h e

could borrow but her local trade in wine and oil mu s t have
,

benefited by an i nc re a s e in th e t hrough tra ffi c which followed

‘

the working of copper in Cyprus and S inai and of S ilver in the

Taurus Moreover in the cedar forests of Lebanon and the north
.
,

she po sse s sed a product which was highly valued both in Egypt
and the treeless plain s of Babylonia The cedars procured by .

S n efe ru from Lebanon at the close of the IIIr d Dyna s ty were

doubtless floated as rafts down the coast and we may s e e in them ,

evidence of a regular tr afli c in timber It has long been known .

that the early Babylonian ki ng S harru -kin or S argon of Akkad , ,

had press ed up the Euphrates to the Mediterranean and w e now ,

have information that he too w a s fired by a des ire for precious

wood and metal One of the recently published Nippur i nsc ri p
.

tions contains copies of a number of hi s texts collected by an ,

ancient scribe from h i s statues at Nippur and from these we ,

gather additional details of h i s campaign s We learn that aft er .

his complete s ubjugation of S outhern Babylonia h e turned h i s

attention to the west and that Enlil gave him the land s fro m
,
‘

t h e Upper S e a to the Lower S e a i e from the Mediterran e an to . .

the Persian Gulf Fortunately thi s rather vague phras e which

.
,

survived in la ter tradition is re s tated in greater d e tail in one of

,

the contemporary versions which record s that Enlil gave him ,

‘

the upper land Mari Ia rmu ti and Ibla as far as the C edar Forest
, , , ,

and the S ilver Mountai ns

1
See Poeb el, H is tori ca l Tex ts ( Uni v . of Pc nns . Mus . P ub l .
,
Bab Sec . t .
, Vol IV,
.

No . 1, p p 1 7 7 f , 2 22 ff
. . .
 C E DA R FO R E S T A ND S ILVE R MOUNTAIN S 9

Mari was a city on the middle Euphrate s but the name may ,

here s ignify the district of Mari which lay in the upper cours e of
S argon s ma rch Now we know that the la t er S u merian monarch
’
.

Gudea obtained his cedar beams from the Am anus range which ,

he names A ma n u m and des cribes a s the cedar mountains

Doubtless he felled his tree s on the eas tern slopes of the moun
tain But we may infe r from his texts that S argon actually
.

reached the coast and hi s C edar Fore s t may have lain farth e r
,
’

to the south perhaps a s far s outh a s the Lebanon The S ilver

,
.
‘

Mountains can only be identified with the Tauru s where silver

’

mines were worked in antiqui ty The refer enc e to Ia rmu ti i s .

interesting for it i s clearly the s ame place a s Ia r i mu t a or

,

Iari m mu t a of which we find mention in the Tell e l-Amarna

,

letters From the refe rence s to thi s district in the l e tters of

.

R i b -Adda governor of Byblo s w e may infer that it was a l e vel

, ,

district on the coast capabl e of producing a considerable quantity ,

of grain for export and that it w as un der Egyptian control at ,

the time of Amenophi s IV Hitherto i t s po s ition has been con .

j ll placed in the Nile D elta but from S argon s reference we ’

e c tu ra y ,

mu s t probably seek it on the Nort h S yrian or pos s ibly the C ilician

coa s t Perhaps as D r P oeb el s ugge s ts it was the plain of
.
, .
,

Antioch along the lower cou rse and at the mouth of the Orontes
, .

But hi s further su gges t i on t h a t the term is us ed by S argon for

th e whole str e tch of country between the s e a and the Euphrate s
is hardly probable For the geograp hi cal references need not .

be treated a s exhaustive but a s confined to the more important ,

districts through which th e expedition pass ed The district of Ibla .

which is al s o mentioned by Naram -S i n and Gudea lay probably ,

to the north of Iar mu t i perhaps on the s outhern s lopes of Taurus , .

It too w e may regard as a di strict of re s tricted extent rather than

, ,

as a general geographical term for the extreme north of S yria .

It i s significant that S argon doe s not allude to any battle wh e n

describing this expedition nor doe s he claim to have devasta t e d ,

the we s tern coun tries 2

Inde e d mos t of thes e early expeditions .
,

to the west appear to have b e en in spired by motive s of com

mer c i al enterpri s e rather than of conquest But increase of .

1
Th Da ng i n , L es i ns cr ip ti ons d e S umer et d A kk a d,
u r e a u-
’
p . 1 08 f , S ta
. t ue B,
c ol . v
, 1 2 8 ; Ge. rm cd , p68 f . . . .

2
m vr r r r t t t t
In s o e e s i ons o f hi s ne w e c o ds S a g on s a es ha men d i ly a

ea t b r e d b e f r h i m ( e P eb el p i t p t h gh th e fi g r m y h
’
a o e s e o , 0 . c .
, . ou u e a e
i nt ended t on v y n id
o c f th iz
e f S rg n
a rt w e m y p rh p se e
ea o e s e o a o
’
s cou , a e a s
i n i t n t i na
a ot e e t i mat e f th t ot l trengt h f h i rm d force
c c ur a s o e a s o s a e s.
10 E G YPT, BABYLON , A ND PALE S TINE
wealth nat u rally followed by political exp ansion and Egyp t s
w as ,
’

dream O I an A s iatic empire was realized by Pharaohs of the

X VIIIt h Dy n a s ty The fac t that Babylonian should then hav e

.

been adopt e d a s the medium of official int e rcours e in S yria points

to t h e clo s e ne s s of t he commercial tie s w hich had already unite d
the Euphrate s Valley with the west Egyptian control had .

passed from C anaan at the time of t he H e brew s ettlement which ,

was indeed a comparatively late epi s od e in the early hi s tory of

S yria Wh e ther or not w e id e ntify the Khabiri with the Hebrews
.
,

t h e ch a racter of the latter s incurs ion i s strikingly illustrated by

’

some of the T e ll e l-Amarna l e tters We see a nomad folk pre ssin g .

in upon s e ttled peoples and gaini ng a foothold h e re an d ther e 1

.

Th e great change from d es ert life consist s in the adoption of

agriculture and when onc e tha t w as made by t he Hebre ws any
,

further advance in economic deve lopm e nt was dictated by their

new s urroundings The s ame proces s had been going on a s we
.
,

have s een in S yria s ince t h e dawn of hi s tory the S emitic nomad

, ,

pa s sing gradually through the s tages of agricultural and village

life into that of the city The country favoured the retention of .

tribal exclusiveness but ultimate survival could only be purchased

,

a t the co s t of some amalgamation with their new neighbours .

Below the s urface of H e brew hi s tory these two tendencies may be

t raced in varying action and reaction S ome s ections of th e rac e .

engaged readily in the social and commercial life of Canaanit e

civilization wi t h its rich inheritanc e from the past O thers .
,

esp e cially in the highland s of Judah and the south at fi rs t ,

succeed e d in keeping them s e lves remote from for e ign influence .

During the later period s of the national life the country w a s

again subj ected and in an intens i fi ed degree to tho s e force s of
, ,

political aggression from Mesopotamia and Egypt which we have

already not e d as operating in C anaan B u t throughout the s ettled .

Hebrew community as a whole the s park of de s ert fi re was n ot

extingui s hed and by ki n dli n g the zeal of the Pr ophets it even
,

tu a lly affected n e arly all the white races of mankind .

In his Pre s idential Address before the Briti s h A s sociation

at Newca s tl e S i r Arthur Evans emphasized the part which
2
,

r ecent archaeology has played in proving the continu ity of

h uman culture from the mo s t remote periods He s how e d how .

S ee es pe Pr fe or B ey f rt h m i ng comm ent y n J dge

c i a lly o ss u rn
’
s o co ar o u s

( pa ss i m ) , a n d h i f rt h
s m i ng S hwei h L ct r ( n w deli v r d i n
o co c c e u es o e e ,

Ar h l g i l Li ght on th Or i g i f Ci v i li z t i n i n E r p e
’
‘
New c a eo o ca s e ns o a o u o ,

rt
B i i s h As s oc i t i n N w
a o ,
tle o Ty ne 1 9 16
-
e ca s - u
, .
 C OMPA R ATIVE M ETHO D OF S TU D Y 11

gaps in our knowledge had been bridged and he traced the ,

part which each gr eat race had taken in increa s ing i t s i nhe ri
‘

t ance We have in fact ampl e ground s for a s s uming an int e r

.
, ,

chan ge not only of commercial products but in a minor d e gree

,
'
, , ,

of idea s within areas ge ogra ph i c a lly c onn e c te d and it i s s urely

not derogatory to any H ebrew writ e r to s uggest that he may
have adopted and u s ed for h i s own purposes conceptions current
, ,

among hi s contemporarie s In other word s the v e hicle of r e li .

,

g i ou s ideas may well b e of compo s ite origin ; and in the course ,

of our study of early Hebre w tradition I s uggest that we hold ,

ourselves j ustified in applying the comparative method to s ome

at any rate of the ingredients which went to form t h e fini s hed
product The proce s s is purely literary but it finds an analogy
.
,

in the study of S emitic art e s pecially in t h e later period s An d , .

I think it will make my meaning clearer if we con s ider for a

moment a few example s of sculpture produced by races of S emitic
origin I do n ot s uggest that we s hould regard the one proces s
.

a s in any way proving t h e exi s tence of the other We s ho ul d .

rather treat the compari s on as illustrating in another m e dium

the effect of forces which it is clear were operative at various , ,

periods up on race s of the same s tock from w hich t h e Hebrews

t hemselve s were descended In s uch material products t he eye .

at once detects the S emite s readi n e s s to avail himself of foreign ’

models In some cases direct borrowing is Obvio u s ; in others to

.
,
.

adapt a metaphor from music it i s pos s ible to trace extraneou s ,

motifs in t h e de s ign 1
.

S ome of the mo s t famous monuments of S emitic art date from

t h e Persian and Hellenistic period s and if we glance at them in ,

th i s connexion it is in order to illu s trate durin g its mo s t obvious .

phas e a tendency of which the earlier effects are less pronounced .

In the sarcophagus of the S idoni an king E sh mu n-azar II whi c h ‘

i s pr e s erved in the Louvre 2

we have indeed a monument to ,

which no S emitic sculptor can lay claim Workmanship and .

material are Egyptian and th e re i s no doubt that it w a s s culp ,

t u r e d in Egypt and transported to S idon by sea But the .

king s own engravers added th e long Phoenician ins cription i n

’

,
.

1
The ry om i i on f pl t e r pr e ent i g th li d h own i n the
n e c es s a ss o a s, e s n e s es s

l ct e h
e ur i nv olv ed r e
s, ti ng f m t p sage i n whi h p i nt of ch eo
as a ca s o os as s c o s ar a

l gi l d t il w r di
o ca ed
e a e Pr f p v B t th f llowi g p r gr p h
e e s c u ss se e a ce, . . u e o n a a a s

h v b e n r e ta i ned
a e t h m j ri ty f t h
e m on m ent r ef rred t e w ell
as e a o o e u s e o ar

k n wn
o .

2
Corp Ins or S emi t . . .
,
I i , t ab II
. . .
12 EGYPT BABYLON , , A ND PALE S TINE

which he adjures princes and men not to open his resting-pl ace
since ther e are no j ewels therein concluding with s ome potent ,

curs es agai n s t any violation of h i s tomb On e of the latter .

implore s the holy god s to d e liver such violators up to a mighty

pri nc e who s hall rule over them and w as probably s ugges ted
’
by Alexander s recent occupation of S idon in 3 3 2 R e after his .

reduction and drastic puni s hment of Tyre King Es hm a n - azar .

‘

was n ot unique in hi s choice of burial in an Egyptian co ffin ,

for he mer e ly followed t h e e xample of h i s royal fath e r Tab n i th ,

'

prie s t of As ht a rt and king of t he S idonian s who s e s arcophagu s

‘

pre s e rved at C ons tantinopl e still bears in addition to h i s own ,

e pitaph that of i t s former occupant a certa in Egyptian gene r al ,

P e np ta h But more in s tructive than thes e borrowed memorials

.

i s a ge nuin e e xample of Pho e nician work the s tele set up by ,

Ye b aw-milk king of Byblo s and dating from the fourth or fifth

, ,

century B In t he s culptured panel at the head of the ste l e

.

the king i s represented in the Persian dres s of the period s tand

ing in the pres e nce of A sht a rt or Astarte his Lady Mistre s s of ‘

, ,

Byblos Ther e is no doubt that the stele i s of native work

man s hip but the influence of Egypt may be s een in the technique
,

of the c a r ving in the winged di s k above the figure s and s till

, ,

mor e in the representation of the goddess in her character as

the E gyptian Hathor with disk and horn s vulture head -dress , ,

and papyru s -s ceptre Th e in s cription r e cord s the dedication of an

.

altar and s hrine to the godde s s and these too we may conj ecture ,

were fas hioned on Egyptian line s .

The repre s e n tation of S emitic deities under Egyptian forms and

with Egyptian attribute s w a s e ncourage d by the introd u ction of
their cults into Egypt itself In addition to A s tarte of Byblos . ,

Ba al Anath and R e s hef were all borrowe d from S yria in com

’

, ,

p a rativel
y early time s and given Egyptian characters The .

conical S yrian helm e t of R e s h e f a god of war and thunder , ,

gradually gave plac e to t h e white Egyptian crown s o that as ,

R e s hpu he w as represented as a royal warrior ; and Qa d e s h ,

another form of Astarte becoming popular with Egyptian women ,

as a patrones s of lo ve and fecundity was also s ometim e s mod e lled ,

2
on Hathor .

S emitic coloni s ts on the Egyptian border were ever ready to

a dopt Egyptian s ymbolism in delineating the native gods to

1
C I S
. . .
, I i , t ab I
. . .

2
S ee W Ma x Mulle r
.
, E gyp tologi ca l Resea r ches , I, p . 32 f , p l 4 1,
. . a nd S A
. .

C ook , R eligi on o f A nc i ent P a les t i ne, pp . 83 ff .

 E GYPTIAN ELEMENT S IN S E MITI C A R T 13

whom they owed allegiance and a partic u larly striking example ,

of this may be se e n on a stele of the P e rsian period preserved in

the C airo Museu m 1
It was found at Te ll D e fenne h on the right . ,

bank of t h e P e lus i ac branch of the Nile clo s e to the old Egyptian ,

highway into S yria a s ite which may b e identified with that of ,

the biblical Tahpanhes and t h e D aph n ae of the Greeks Here i t .

was that the Jewish fu gitive s fl e e ing with Jeremiah afte r the ,

fall of Jeru s al e m founded a Jewi s h colony beside a flouri s hing ,

Phoenician and Aramaean s ettlement One of the local god s of .

Tahpanhes i s represented on t h e C airo monument an Egy ptian ,

s tele in the form of a naos with t h e W inged s olar di s k upon its

frieze He s tand s on the back of a lion and i s cloth e d in A s iatic

.

co s tume with the high S yrian tiara crowning his abundant hair .

Th e S yrian workmanship i s obviou s and the S yrian character of ,

the cult may be recognized in s uch d e ta ils as the small brazen

fir e -altar b e fore the god and the sacred pillar which i s being ,

anointed by the o fficiating prie s t But the god ho ld s in hi s .

left hand a pur e ly Egyptian s ceptre and in h i s right an emblem

a s purely Babylonian t h e w e apon of Marduk and Gilgame s h ,

which was al s o wielded by e arly S umerian kings .

Th e Elephantine papyri have shown that the e arly J e ws of the

D ias pora though untrammeled by the ort hodoxy of J e rusalem
, ,

maintained the purity of their loc al cult in the face of cons ider
able di fii c u lt i es Hence t he gravesto nes of their Aramaean con
.

temporarie s which have been found in Egypt can only be cited

, ,

to ill u s trate the temptations to which they were expo s ed ?

S uch
w a s the m e morial ere ct e d by A b s e li to t h e memory of h i s parents ,

Abb a and A hatb fi in the fourth ye ar of X erxes 4 81 B They

, ,
.

1
Mu ller , op . m m t i evi den
ci t , . p .hi b i t
3 0 f , pl 40 Nu i m ila r
. . . is a c ce ex s a s

r eadi n e on th p ss t t d p t th enee f H lleni ti

e a rt of loc al Syr i a n c ul s o a e e v r o e s c

c i vi li za ti n while r t i i ng i n g r ea t m
o r th i r wn i ndi vi d li ty
e a n Hi ll ea s u e e o ua s ee ,
‘
S om P le t i ni n C lt i n t h e G r c o Rom n A ge
e a s a i n P o di g
u s f th a c - a
'

,
r cee n s o e

B i ti h A d my V L V
r s ca e ,
O

It m y b dm i tt d t h t t h Gr e k pl t oni z ed lt of I i a nd O i r i h d
2
a e a e a e e a cu s s s s a

it s O ri gi n n th f i n f Gr ek nd Egypti n whi h t k p l e n Pt ol m i c
i e us o o e s a a s c oo ac I e a

t im ( f S tt M n ri ff P g i m d Ch i ti i ty i Egyp t p 33
es o . co - o c e ,
B t a an s an r s an n , . u

w m y
e a m th t lr dy in th P r i n p ri d th O i ri lt had b eg n
ass u e a a ea e e s a e o e s s cu u

t o ac q i r e t i nge f m y ti i m w hi h t h gh i t di d n t ff t th e m e h ni l
u a o s c s , c ,
ou o a ec c a ca

r pr d ti n f th
e o uc ti v t t
o o pp l d t th Ori t l m i nd
e na e ex s, a ea e o e en a as

w ell t as rt i l m nt in Gr k r li gi n P r i n i fl nc pr b ab ly
o ce a n e e e s ee e o . e s a n ue e o

pr p d th e w y f t h Pl t ni
e ar e g i a f t h O i ri
or n d I i lee g nd w hi ch
a o c ex e es s o e s s a s s e s

w e fi d i n Pl t r h
n nd t h e l tt er m y h v b e n i n g r
u a c t m r d vel p
a a a a e e ea eas u e a e o

m en t nd n t i ft n
,
a m ed
o , mplete m i nd r t di ng f the l ter
as s o e as s u , a co su e s an o a

Egy pt i n lt a cu . C I S II i t b X I N 1 22 3
. . .
,
.
, a .
, o . .
14 E GYPT BABYLON , ,
A ND PALE S TINE
had evidently adopted the r e ligion of Osiri s and were :
buried at
,

S aqqarah in accordance with Egyptian rites The upper s cene .

engraved upon the s tele repr e sents Abb a and hi s wife in the
pre s e nce of O s iri s who i s atte nd e d by I s i s and Nephthys ; and ,

in t h e lower panel i s the funeral scen e in which all the mourners ,

with on e exc e ption a r e A s iatic s C ertain details of the rite s that .

are re pre s ented and mi s takes in t he hi e roglyphic version of the,

text prove that the work is Aramaean througho u t

,
1
.

If our examples of S emitic art were con fined to the Pers ian
and later period s they could only be e mployed to throw light ,

o n their own epoch when through communication had b e en ,

organized and there w a s con s e quently a certain pooling of com

,

me rc i a l and arti s tic product s throughout the empir e It i s true

?

that under the Great King the variou s p e tty s tate s and provinces
wer e encourage d to manage their own affairs so long as they paid
t h e required tribute but their horizon naturally expanded with ,

increas e of commerce and the necessity for s e rvice in the king s ’

armie s At this time A ramaic was t h e s peech of S yria and the

.
,

population esp e cially in the citie s was still largely Arama e an

, , .

A s early a s t h e thirteenth century s e ction s of thi s inter e s ting

S emitic race had begun to pre ss into Northern S yria from t h e
middle Euphrates and they absorbed not only the old C anaanite ,

population but al s o Hittite immigrants from C appadocia The .

latte r indeed may for a time have furni s hed rulers to the vigorous
North S yrian principalitie s which re s ulted from thi s racial com
bination but the Aramaean element thank s to continual reinforce
, ,

1
v ery i m i l r m on m e nt i th e C rp ntr S t le ( C I S 11 i t b X III
A s a u s a e as e . . .
, .
,
a .
,

N o . omm m r t i ng T b c d gh t r f T b p i
e o a n Ar m n l dy w h o a a, au e o a e , a a a ea a

w l
a s a so a nv rt t O i ri coIt i r t h r l t r t h n th t f A b b a nd hi
e o s s . s a e a e a a o a s

wif in th A m i
e, s h r t r
ce e tr n i t i n l fr m th r h i t o t h e
ra a c c a ac e s a re a s o a o e a c a c

s q r lph b t ;
ua e a Dr i v r N t a n th H b w T
e t f th B k
s ee f S m l e , o es o e e re ex o e oo s o a ue ,

pp . d C k N th S mi ti In i p ti n p 2 05 f Th V t i n S t le
an oo e, or e c s cr o s, . . e
‘
a ca e

( p o i t .t b X I
c V .N , a w hi
. h d t e fr m t h
, e f rt
o h . e nt ry r pr en t c a s o ou c u , e es s

i nf i r w rk
er o o .

Cf B v n H
2
.
f S l e a V l I pp 5 2 6 0 f Th e rti t i i nfl en e
, ou se o c eucus , o .
, .
, . a s c u c

of M p t m i w v n m w i d ly pr d th t h t f Egy pt d ri ng th
eso o a a as e e or e e s ea an a o u e

P r i n p eri d Thi i gg t d f e mpl by the f m li n w i gh t

e s a o . s s su es e , or x a e, a ou s o - e

di v red t A by do i n My i th t w n on t he H lle p nt f m ed f t he l v es
s co e a s s a, e o e s o a or o

o f H d L nd r
ere a n Th l tt r f i t Ar m i i
ea ri pt i n ( C I S 11 i
e . e e e s o s a a c ns c o . . .
, .
,

t b VII N 1 08) pr v by t h i r f rm t h t i t d t e fr m t h P r i n p e ri od
a .
,
o . o e e o a a s o e e s a ,

a nd i t pr v nc i
s ffi i n t ly tt t d It w i gh t m r v r
o e na e s su gg t t h
c e t it a es e . s e o eo e su es s a

w a s no t m r ly B b yl i e e Per i i mp rt t i n b t t f l l
a a y et
on a n o r s an o a o , u cas or oca u se ,

i n d ign d t h iq
es it i
an r ly di ti g i h bl from the b e t A yri n
ec n ue s s ca ce s n u s a e s ss a

w r k f th
o v th t ry
O e s e en c en u .
16 EGYPT BABYLON , , A ND PALE S T INE
support In the word s of his son Bar-r ek u b he laid hold of the
.
,

skirt of h i s lord the king of A s syria who w a s graciou s to him ,

and it w a s probably at this time and as a reward for h i s loyalty , ,

that Ya di was united with the neighbouring di s trict of S am al

’ ’

But P a n a mmu s devotion to his foreign mas ter led to h i s d e ath ’

for he died at the s iege of Damascu s in 7 3 3 or 7 3 2 B c in the ,

. .
,

camp while following h i s lord Ti gla t h-pi les e r king of As syria

, , ,
’
.

Hi s kinsfolk and the whole camp bewailed him and h i s bo dy ,

w a s s ent back to Ya di where it w a s int e rred by h i s son who set

’

, ,

up an inscribed tatue to h s memory Bar rekuh followed in

s i - .

h i s father s foot s tep s a s he leads u s to infer in h i s palace -i ns c r i p

’

tion found at Z e nj i rli I ran at the wh e el of my lord the king ,

of A s syria in t h e mi ds t of mighty kings po s se s s ors of s ilver and

, ,

poss e s s ors of gold It i s not s trange therefore that hi s art .

’

s hould r e fl e ct A s syrian influence far more s trikingly than that of

P a n a mmu I The fi gu r e of himself which he cau s e d to be carved

.

in re li e f on the left s ide of the palac e -inscription is in the Assy

rian s tyle and so too is another of his reliefs from Z enj i rli On
1
,
.

the latter Bar-rekuh is represented seated upon his throne with

eunuch and scri be in atte ndance while in the field is the emblem ,
‘
of full moon and crescent here as cribed to Ba al of Harran ,
’

the fa mou s c e ntre of moon wors hip in Northern Me s opotamia

- 2
.

The d e tailed history and ar ti s tic development of S am al and ’

’
Ya di conve y a very vivid impre s s ion of the social and material

1
S ends chi fl z, IV vi i A tti t d nd tr tm t f rob e
’

b th p l lx . . u e a ea en o are o

A yri n
ss nd a i th e rr ng e m en t f di v i n
,
a so y m b sl i n t h p p r fi e ld a a o e s o s e u e ,

th gh ome of th e l tt r
ou s
g i v n n de r f m i li r f rm T
a h k i g
e l are e u un a a o s. e n
’
s c os e

fi tt ing p e k ed p w vid t ly th r y l h ddr

a ca f S m l as e th r y l en e o a ea e ss o a
’
a see e o a

fig r n
u e o m ll r t l f i nf ri r de ig p i t pl l vi
a s a e s e e o e o s n, o . c .
,
. x .

2
0p i t pp 2 5 7 3 46 ff
. c . nd p l l
,
Th g . r l tyl f th,
lpt r nd .
,
a . x . e e ne a s e o e s cu u e a

m h f t h d t il
uc o b vi ly A y r i
e e a A yri n i fl n a re o i p rt i l r ly ou s ss an . ss a n ue ce s a cu a

n ti bl i th r n ; th d t i l f i t d r ti pr i ly
’
o cea B - k b e n a r re u s o e e e a s o s e co a on a re ec s e

si mi l r t th a f n A y ri n b r n z t h r n i t h B ri t i h M
o os e o a m The f ll
ss a o e o e n e s us eu . u

m d r
oo n a n ent t f th f m i li r f rm b t
c esc m n t d n t d rd
a re n o o e a a o ,
u a re ou e o a s an a

w i th t l P rh p th m o t i t r e ti ng fi g r i n t h mp i ti n i th
a ss e s . e a s e s n e s u e e co os o s e

sc ri b w i th h v h e d wh t d b f r th k i ng H i pr b b ly n
e s a en a ,
o s an s e o e e . e s o a a

Egy pt i n f i n hi l ft h d h rri n Egy pti rib e wri t i g p l tt ’

n - a e e,
a ,
or s e an e ca es a an s c s

w i th p l f i k d ac e f br hor Th wr i ti ng t b l t nd r hi
n an m
c as e or us es . e -a e u e s ar ,

w h i h l k li k e
c oob nd v l m s m y p ib ly b a d b l t b l t w i th h i g
ou o u e, a os s e a ou e a e n e,

o i gl t b l t w i th
r a s n r gi t e r r l d r dy f
e a e tri d w a id On e s u e ea or e n es o n on e s e . e

w o ld lik t k n w i n wh t h r t r h t k d w B k b
u e o o t ti n a c a ac e s e oo o n a r -r e u
’
s 1 ns r u c o s .

Th tw i e phi n e of Z nj i li S kj -G nz i d C r h mi h w r lti m t ly
n s x s e r , a e e , an a c e s e e u a e

d r i v d fr m Egy pt b t i n v i ew f t h
e e o b f th r tr ,
f Egypt i n
u o e a s en ce o o e a c es o a

i fl n i n th Z nj i li lpt r th e ri b pr t th roy l rt i ’
n ue ce e e e r scu u e s, sc e s es en c a e a c ou s

q i t ne p e t d
u e u x c e .
 S EMITE S A DAPTAB ILITY 17
’
THE

e ffects upon the native population of S yria whi ch followed the ,

westward advance of Ass yria in the eighth century We realize .

not only t h e readin e ss of one party in the sta te to defeat i ts rival

with the help of As syrian su pport but also the manner in which ,

the li fe a n d activities of t h e nation as a wh ol e were unavoidably

affected by their ac tion Other Hittite A ramaean and Phoenician
- .

monum ent s a s yet undocumented with lite rary records exhib it

, ,

a strange but not unplea s ing mixture of foreign mo tifs su ch as ,

w e s e e on the stel e from A mr i th in the inl and dist rict of Arvad

1
.

But perhaps the most remarkabl e example of S yrian art we

2
po s s e s s is the King s Gate rece ntly discovered at Ca rchemish
’
.

The presen c e of the hi eroglyphi c inscriptions po ints t o the

survival of Hittite tra dition but the figures repres ente d i n th e ,

reliefs are of Aramaean not Hittite typ e Here the kin g is se en , ,

.

leading hi s eldest s on by the hand in some sta tely c eremonial ,

and ranged in register s behind them are the younger membe rs

3
of the royal fam i ly whose age s are indica te d by their occ upations
,
.

The e mployment of basalt in place of limestone does not disguise

the sculptor s debt to Assyria But the design i s enti r e ly h i s
’
.

own and the combin ed di gnity and homeline s s of the composition

,

are refreshingly s uperior to the arrogant s pirit and hard execution

which mar so much A s syrian wo rk Thi s example is particul ar ly .

instr uctive as it shows how a borrowed art may be develop ed in

,

skilled hand s and made to s erv e a purpose in complete harmony

with i ts new environment .

S uch monuments s urely illustra te the a daptabili t y of the

S emitic craft s man among men of Phoenician and Arama e an
strain Excavation in Pale s tine has fail e d to furni s h examples
.

of Hebrew work But Hebrew trad ition its e lf j ustifies us in

.

regarding this tr a i t as of more general application or at any ,

rate as not repugnan t to Hebrew thought when it relate s that ,

S olomon employed Tyrian cra ft smen for work upon the Temple

1
C ollecti on d e Cler cq, II, p l x x x i t
Th e s ele i s scul u e d i n eli ef
. . v . t pt r r
wt rt r
i h t h e fi gur e of a No h Sy i an g od r pt
He e t h e i n g ed d is k i s Egy ia n , as
. w
w m twt r
e ll a s t h e g od s h el e
’
t tt t
i h u ae u s, a nd hi s loin -c lo h ; hi s a i u de a nd h is
su pp rt tt t z m t w
o in g li on ar e Hi i e ; a nd t h e lo en g e - ou n a i n s, on h i ch t h e li on
t t q rv
s a n d s , and th e e ch n i u e of t h e c a r pt
i n g ar e As sy i an Bu t i n s i e of i t s com .
o

r tr q t t r
p os it e cha a c e th e de s ign i s ui e s u c c e ss fu l an d n ot i n th e leas i n c o ng u ou s .

2
rt Pt
Hoga h , Ca rche mi s h, I pl B 7 f . . . .

3
r p t r w p p tp
Tw o of t h e olde boy s lay a t k n u ck le-b one s , o h e s hi s i n ni n - o s, and
g
ali ttle n k d gi l r n b eh i d
a e pp rti ng her lf w i t h t i k n th h d f
r u s n su o se a s c ,
o e ea o

whi h i rv d b i rd Th pr
c s ca e i n i b r o gh t p b y th e q een m t h e r
a . e oc e ss o s u u u - o ,

wh o a rri cth y nge t b by n d l ad a p et l m b

es e ou s a a e s a .

K . C
18 EGYPT BABYLON , , A ND PALE S TINE
and its furniture ; for Phoenician art was essentially Egyptian
in its origin and general character Even Es h mu n - azar s d e s ire .
‘ ’

for burial in an Egyptian sarcophagus may be paralleled in

Hebrew tradition of a much e arlier period when in the las t , ,

v e rs e of Gene s is it i s recorded that Joseph died and they

1
, ,
‘

embalmed him and he w a s put in a coffi n in Egypt

, S ince it
’
.

form ed the su bj ect of prophetic denunciation I refrain for the ,

moment from citing the notoriou s adoption of Ass yrian cus tom s
at certain period s of the late r Ju da ean monarchy The two .

record s I have refe rred to will s u fli c e for we have in them ,

cheri shed traditions of which t h e H e brews themselve s were

,

proud concerning the most famous example of Hebrew religious

,

archit e cture and the burial of one of the patriarchs of the race .

A s imilar re adiness to make u s e of the be s t available resource s ,

even of foreign origin may on analogy be regarded a s at least

,

pos s ible in th e composition of Hebrew literature .

W e s hall s ee that t h e problems we have to face concern the

pos s ible influ ence of Babylon rath e r than of Egypt upon H e brew, ,

tradition And one last example draw n from th e lat e r period

.
, ,

will serve to demon s trate how Babylonian influence penetrated

the ancient world and has e ven left some trace upon mod e rn
civilization It is a fact though one perhaps not generally
.
,

realized that the twelve divi s ion s on the dial s of our clock s and
,

watche s have a Babylonian and ultimately a S umerian ance s try

, ,
.

For why is it we divid e the day into twenty -four hours ? W e

have a decimal sys tem of r e ckoning w e count by tens ; why ,

then s hould we divid e the day and night into t w elve hours e ach ,

instead of into t en or s ome multiple of ten Th e r e a s on i s that

the Babylonians divi ded the day into twelve double hours and -

the Greeks took over their ancient s ys tem of time -divi s ion along
with their knowledge of a s tronomy and pa s sed it on to us S o .

if we ours elve s after more than two thou s and years are making
, ,

use of an old cu s tom from Babylon it wo u ld n o t be s u rpri s ing if ,

the Hebrews a contemporary race s hould have fallen und e r her

, ,

influ e nce even before they w e re carried away as captives and

s e ttled forcibly upon h e r river -banks .

W e may pass on then to t he site from which our new material

, ,

h a s been obtained the ancient city of N i pp u r in central Baby

—
,

lonia Though the place has be e n de s erted for at least nine

.

hundred years i ts ancient name still lingers on in local tradition

, ,

and to this day Nif er or Naf a r is the na me the Arabs g ive the
f

1
G en 1 2 6 ,
. . a s s i g ned by c ri ti cs to E .
 S ITE OF NIPPUR NEAR TH E S WAMP S 19

mound s which cover its extensive ruins No modern town or .

village has been built upon them or in their immediate neigh

b ourh ood The neare s t con s iderable town is Diwani yah on the
.
,

l e ft bank of the Hillah branch of the Euphrates twenty miles to ,

the s outh -west ; but some four mile s to the s outh of the ruins is
the village of S uq e l- Afej on the eastern edge of the Afej
‘

,
‘

marsh e s which begin to the s outh of Nippur and s tr e tc h away

,

westward Protecte d by i ts s wamp s the region contains a

.
,
‘
few primitive s ettlem e nt s of the wild Afej tribesmen each
a group of reed huts clu s tering around the mud fort of i ts
-

ruling sheikh Their chief enemies are the S hamm ar who

.
,

dispute with them pos s e s s ion of the pasture s In summer the .

marshes near the mound s are m e rely pool s of water connecte d

by channels through the r e ed -bed s but in spring the flood ,

water conv e rts them into a vas t lagoon and all that m e ets the ,

eye are a few s mall hamlets built on rising knolls above the
water -l e vel Thus Nippur may be almost isolated during the
.

flood s but the mound s are protected from t h e waters e ncroach

,
’

m e nt by an o u ter ring of former habitation which h a s s lightly

raised the level of the encircling area Th e ruins of the city .

stand from thirty to seve nty fe e t above the plain and in the ,

north -easte rn corner ther e rose before the excava t ions a conical , ,

mound known by th e Arabs as B i n t cal-E mi r or The Princ e ss

,
‘ ’
.

This prominent landmark repre s e nt s the temple -tower of Enlil s ’

famou s s anctuary and e ven after excavation it is s t i ll the fi rs t

,

obj ect that t h e approaching travell e r s e es on the horiz on Wh e n .

he ha s climbed its summit h e enj oys an u n inte rrupted view over

de s ert and swamp .

The cause of Ni pp u r s pre s ent de s olation i s to be traced to the

’

chang e in the bed of the Euphrat e s which now lie s far to ,

the w e s t But in antiquity the s tr e am fiow e d thro u gh the centre

.

o f t h e ci t y along the dry bed of the S hatt e n Nil which divide s

‘

—
, ,

t h e mound s into an eas tern and a western group The latter covers .

t h e r e main s of the city proper and w a s occupi e d in part by the

gr e at business -hou s es and baza ars Here more than thirt y .

thou s and contracts and accounts dating from the fourth mil ,

le nn i u m to t h e fi fth century B C wer e found in hou s es along the

. .
,

former river-bank In the ea s te rn half of the city was E nl il s ’

.

t
great templ e Ek a r with its mple tower Imk harsag rising in
e -
,

successive s tages be ide it The huge temple enclosure contained

s - .

not only the s acred s hrines but also the prie sts apartments ,
’

s tore -chambers and temple -magaz i nes O utside its enclo s ing
,
.

c 2
20 EGYPT BABYLON , , A ND PALE S TINE
wall to the s outh -west a large triangular mound christened
, , ,

‘
Tabl e t H ill by the excavators yi e lded a further s upply of
’

records In addition to business -documents of the Firs t Dynas ty

.

of Babylon and of the later A s syrian Neo -Babylonian and P e rs ian , ,

periods b etween two and three thou s and literary texts and
,

fragments were discovered her e many of them dating from the ,

S umerian period And it is po s s ible that some of the early

.

literary texts t ha t h ave been published were obtained in other

p arts of the city .

No les s than twenty -one different strata representing separat e ,

periods of occupatio n have be e n noted by the American ex ca

,

vat ors at variou s level s within the Nippur mound s l the earliest ,

de s cending to virgin s oil some twenty feet below the pres ent
level of the s urroundi n g plain Th e remot e date of Ni ppu r s .
’

foundation s a city and cult c e ntre i s attested by the fact that

a -

the pavement laid by Naram -S i n in th e s outh -ea s tern temple

court lies thirty feet above virgin soil while only thirty-six feet ,

of superimposed debr i s represent the s ucceeding millennia of

occupation down to S a s sanian and early Arab times In the .

period of the Hebrew captivity the city s till ranked a s a grea t

commercial market and as one of the mo s t sacred repositori es of
Babylonian religious tradition We kno w that not far off was .

Te l-abib the seat of one of t h e colonies of J e wish exil e s for that

, ,

lay by the river of C hebar which we may id e ntify with the

‘

Kabaru Canal in Ni ppu r s immediate neighbourhood It was ’

.

among th e captives by the river C hebar that Ez e kiel lived and

prophesied and it w a s on C h e b a r s banks that he saw hi s firs t
,
‘ ’

vi s ion of the C herubim H e and other of the Jewi s h exile s may

3
.

perhaps have mingled with the motl e y crowd that onc e thronged
the s tre e ts of Nippur and they may often have gaz e d on the
,

hu ge temple -tower which rose above the city s flat roo fs We

’
.

know that the late r population of Nippur its elf incl u ded a con
s i de r a b le J e wish element for the upper s trata of t he mounds ,

have yielded numerous clay bowl s with Hebrew Mandaean and , ,

S yriac magical inscriptions ; 4

and not the least interesting of
the obj ects recovere d was the w ooden box of a Jewish scribe ,

S ee Hi lp recht, E x p lora ti ons i n B i ble L a nd s , 2 89 ff , 5 40 ff a nd ish e pp . . . F r

,

E x ca va ti ons a t Nipp ur, I Pt

II . Pt .

2
z
E ek i i i 1 5
. . .

3
z
E ek i l , 3 i ii 2 3 ; and of x 15 , 2 0, 2 2, a nd x lii i 3
. . . . . . .

Se e J . . t mr
A Mon go e y , A r a ma i c Inca nta ti on Tex ts f r om Nipp u r, 1 9 13 .
 TEL-ABI B A ND THE R IVE R C HEBA R 21

contai n ing his pen and ink -ves s el and a little scrap of crumbling
1
parchm e nt in s crib e d with a few Hebrew charac ters .

Of the many thou s and s of inscribed clay tabl e ts which were

found in the course of the expeditions s ome were kept at ,

C on s ta n tinople while others wer e presented by the S ultan Abdul

,

Hamid to t h e excavators who had them convey e d to Am e rica ,

.

S ince that time a large number have been publi s h e d The work .

wa s n e ce s s arily s low for many of the texts were found to b e in

,

an extrem e ly bad s tate o f preservation S o it happened t hat .

a great number of the boxes conta inin g tablet s remained until

recently still packed up in the store rooms of the Penns ylvani a
-

Museum . But under the present energetic Director of the

Museum D r G B Gordon the process of arranging and pub
, . . .
,
’
li shi ng the mass of literary material has been s peeded up
‘
.

A s taff of skilled workmen has been employed on the laborious

task of cleaning the broken tablets and fitting the fragments
together At the s ame time the help of several Assyriologi sts
.

w a s welcomed in the fu rther task or run ning over and sortin g

the collections as they were prepared for study Profes s or Clay .
,

Professor Bar ton Dr Langdon Dr Edward C hiera and Dr Arno

,
.
,
.
,
.

’
P oe b e l have all participated in the work But the lion s share .

has fallen to the last-named scholar who was given l eave of ,

absence by Johns Hopkin s University in order to take up a

temporary appointment at the Penns ylva ni a Museum The .

res ult of his labours was publish ed by the Museum at the end of
Th e texts thus ma de available for study are of very
vari e d interest A great body of them are grammatical and
.

repre s ent compilations m ad e by S emitic scribes of the period of

Ha mmu ra b i s dyna s ty for th e ir s tudy of the old S umerian tongue
’
.

C ontaining as mo s t of them do S emitic renderings of the

, ,

S umerian words an d expre s s ions collected they are a s great ,

a help to us in our study of the S umerian language as they were

to their compil e rs ; in particular they have thrown much n ew
light on the paradigm s of the demonstrative and personal
pronouns and on S umerian verbal forms But lite rary texts are .

al s o includ e d in the recent publications .

When the Pennsylvania Museum s ent out i ts first expedi tion ,

lively hopes were entertain e d that the s ite selected would yield
material of intere s t from the biblical standpoint The city of .

1
Hilp re ch t E x p lor a ti ons ,
,
p . 5 55 f .

2
Poeb el, H i st or i ca l Tex ts a nd H i s tor i ca l a nd Gr a mma ti ca l Tex ts ( Un i of v .

P enn s. Mu s . P ub l .
,
B ab S e c
. t .
, Vol IV No 1 , a nd Vol V) , hi lad el hi a , 1 9 14
. . . . P p .
22 EGYPT BA B
,
YLON , A ND PALE S TINE
Nippur a s we have s e en w a s one of the mo s t sacred and mo st
,
,

ancient religious centre s in t h e country and Enlil i

,
t s -
city god , ,

w as t h e h e ad of the Babylo n ian pantheon On s uch a .s it e it

e
s e med li k e ly that w e might fi nd ver s ions of the Babylonian

l egen ds which w e re curr e nt at the dawn of history b e fore the

ci ty of Babylo n and i t s S emiti c inhabitant s came upon the s cene .

Thi s expe ctation h a s proved to be not u n founded for the lite rary ,

t exts incl u d e the S umerian Deluge Ve rs ion and C reation myth

to which I r e ferred at the beginni n g of th e lectu re Other texts .

of almo s t e qual int e re s t con s i s t of early though fragmentary lists

of hi s torical and s emi -mythical ru lers They prove that B e ros su s
.

and the lat e r Babylo nian s d e p ended on mat e rial of quit e early
origin in compiling th e ir dyna stie of mi mythical kings In
s s e - .

th e m w e obtain a glimp s e of age s more remote than any on

w hich e xcavation in Babylonia h as yet thrown light and for the ,

first tim e we have recovered genu in e nativ e tradition of e arly

date with re gard to the cradle of Babylonian culture B e fore .

w e approach t h e S u merian leg e nd s t hemselve s it will be a s well ,

to day to trac e bac k in thi s tradition the gradual m e rging of

-
i

hi s tory into lege nd and myth comparing at t h e s am e time the

,

ancient Egypti an s picture of h i s own r e mote past We will al s o

’
.

a s c ertain wh e th e r any n e w light i s thrown by our inquiry upon

Hebre w traditions concerning the earlie s t history of the human
race and t he origins of civilization .

In the s tu dy of both Egyptian and Babylonian chr onology

ther e h as b e e n a tend e ncy of l a t e year s to r e d u c e the v e ry e arly
date s that were formerly in fashion But i n Egypt while the .
,

dyna s ti e s of Man e tho hav e been t e l e s coped in places excavation ,

has thrown light on predynastic period s and we can now trace ,

th e hi s tory of cultu r e in t h e Nil e Vall ey back through an u n ,

brok e n s equ e nc e to i ts n e olithic s tage Qu ite recently too a s

, .
, ,

I mention e d ju s t now a fre sh literary record of these early

,

pr e dyn as tic p e rio ds h a s b e e n r e covere d on a fragment of the ,

famous Pal e rmo S tel e our most valuabl e monument for early
,

Egyptian history and chronology Egypt pre s ents a s tri k i n g

.

contras t to Babylonia in the comparatively s mall number of

wr itten record s which have s urvived for th e r e con s truction of her
hi story We might well s pare much of h er religio u s literature
.
,

e n s hrin e d in endl e s s t e mpl e -in s cription s and papyri if w e could

,

but exchan ge it for s om e of the royal an nal s of Egyptian

Pharaoh s That hi s torical r e cord s of thi s character were com
.

piled by th e Egyptian s cribe s and that they were as detailed and

,
24 EGYPT BABYLON , ,
A ND PALE S TINE

( Memphi s) ; the oth e r three which were purchas e d from a dealer

, ,

are s aid to have come from Minieh while the fi ft h fragment at , ,

University C ollege i s al s o s aid to have come from Upp e r Egypt l

, ,

tho u gh it w a s purchas ed by Profe ss or Petrie while at M e mphi s .

Th e s e r p ugge t that a number of duplicate copie were

'

e o r t s s s s

e ngraved and s e t up in di f
f er e nt Egyptian to w n s and it is ,

p o s s ibl e that t h e whol e of the t e xt may ev e ntually be recover e d .

The choic e of bas alt for the record s was obviou sly dictated by a
d es ire for th e ir pre s ervation but it h a s had the contrary effe ct ; ,

for th e block s of thi s hard and precious stone have been cut up
and re used in la ter time s The largest and mo s t intere s ting of .

th e new fragments has evid e ntly been employed as a door sill -

,

with the re s ult that i ts sur face i s much rubbed and parts of its
te xt are unfortunat e ly almost undecipherable We s hall s ee that .

the earlie s t s ection of i t s record h as an important bearing on our

k nowl e dg e of Egyptian predynastic hi story and on the traditions
of that re mot e period which have come down to us from the
hi story of Manetho .

From the fragm e nt of the s tele preserved at Palermo we

'

already knew that its record went back beyond the Is t Dynasty
into predynastic times For part of the top band of the i nsc ri p .

tion which i s th ere pres erved contain s nine names borne by

, ,

ki ngs of Lower E gypt or the Delta which it had been conje e , ,

turod mus t follow the god s of Manetho and precede the Wor
,

s hippe rs of Horus t h e immediate pre decessors of the Egyptian

dyn a s tie s ?
But of contemporary rul e rs of Upper Egypt we had
hi the rto no knowledge s ince the s uppo s ed royal names di s covered ,

at Abydos and as s igned to the time of the Worshippers of

Horus are probably not royal names at all 3
With the poss ible .

exception of two very archaic s late palettes the fi rst historical ,

m emorial s recovered from t he south do not date from an earlier

p e riod than the beginning of the Is t Dynas ty The large s t of .

the Cairo fragment s now h elp s us to fi ll in this gap in our

knowle dge .

On the top of t he new fragment we meet the same band of 4

Fo uc a rt
B u lleti n de l Ins ti tu t Fra nga i s d A i c he ologi e Or i enta le X II i i
,
'

,
’ ’

pp r r
,

. 16 1 a nd c f Ga d i n e , Jou r n
. of E gyp t A r ch , 1 1 1, 1 43 ff , .
. . pp . a nd
tri Pt pp
.

Pe e, A nci ent Egyp t, 1 9 1 6 , III, 1 14 112 . .

. P tr
C f e i e , op ci t , 1 1 5 , 12 0
. . pp . .

7
S e e B re as ted, A nc R ec , 1 , 5 2, 5 7
. . pp . .

3
C f Ha ll , A nc i ent H is tory of the Nea r E a st ,
.
p
99 f. .

Ca i ro N o. 1 s ee Ga u i e t r , M us Egyp t ,
. III, p l x x i . vf .
 NEW R E CO RD OF THE P R E DYNA S TI C AGE 25

rectangle s as at Palermo but here their upper portions are 1

,

broken away and there only remain s at the bas e of each of

,

them the outlined figure of a royal personage s eate d in the ,

s ame attitud e as those on the Palermo s tone The remarkabl e .

fact about the s e figu res i s that with t h e appar e nt exception of ,

t h e third fi gure from the right each wea rs n ot t h e C rown of the

2
, ,

Nort h as at Pal e rmo but t h e C rown of t h e S o u t h We h ave

, ,

then to do with ki n gs of Upper Egypt not the D e lta an d it i s , ,

no longer possible to su ppose that the p redynast ic r ul e rs of t h e

Palermo S te le were confined to those of Lower Egypt as reflecting ,

northern tradition R ulers of both halve s of the country a r e .

repre s ented and Monsieur Gautier h as shown fr om data on the

,
3
,

reve r s e of the in scri ption that the kings of the D e lta w e r e ,

arranged on the original stone be fore the rul ers of the s outh
who are outlin ed upon our n e w fragm ent Moreover we have .
,

now recovered defini te proof that this band of the insc ription
is concerned with pr e dynast ic E gy ptian princes ; for the ca r
touche of the ki ng whose years are enumerated in the s econd ,

han d imme di ately be low the kings of the south reads A t h e t a , ,

name we may with ce rtainty identify with A t hot h e s the s e c ond ,

succe s sor of Menes foun der of t he Ist Dynast y which i s alrea dy , ,

given un der the form A te t h in the Abydos Li st of Ki ngs 4

It i s .

thus quite certa in that the first ban d of the in s cription relates to
the earlier periods before the two halves of the coun try were
brought to gether under a single rul er .

Though the tra di tion of these remote times is here recorded on

a monument of the Vth Dynasty there is no reas on to doubt its ,

general ac curacy or to s uppo s e that we a r e dealing with pur e ly

,

mythological pers onages It i s pe rhaps po ss ible as Mons i e ur .

,

Foucart suggests that mi s s ing po rtions of the te xt may have ,

1
In t hi ppe r
ban d t h e s ac es a re
s u ue ec a n gles , b ei ng se a a ed b y p tr r t p rt
v rt
e i cal li n es , n ot by th e hi e ogly h for y ea
‘ ’
r p
a s i n t h e lo e b a nds ; a n d ea c h r wr
r t prt
ec a ngle i s assi gn e d to a s e a a e k i n g , an d n ot , as i n t h e o h e b a n ds, t o a t r
y e r
a o f a k i ng s e i gn
’
r .

2
r w w r r t r
Th e di ffe en c e i n th e c o n o n b y h i s fi gu e i s pr pp r t
ob ab ly o nly a a en

t t
a n d n ot i n en i onal F rt r r m t r m t
M ou ca , a fte a c a efu l ex a i n a i on o f th e f ag en ,
.

co n cl d ut h t i t i d t b q nt d m
es a st n ri gi n l d f ct i n
ue o su se ue a a g e or o a o a e e

t h e to e
s f B ll t i n X II ii p 1 6 2
n c . u e , , , . .

3
Op it p 3 2 f
. c .
, . .

In M n th li t h e corr p nd t K m th e nd r f M ne
’ '

a e o s s es o s o evx e s, s e co s u c c esso o e s

a cordi ng t
c b th A fri n ond E bio wh i gn t h n m A t h thi t
ca us a us e u s, o a ss e a e o s o

th e ond r le r of th e dyn
e s c ty only th T t f th Ab y do Li t Th f rm
u as , e e a o e s s . e o

i pr e e rv ed b y E r to t h ene fo b ot h of Mene i mm edi t or

’
A th oth es s s ce a s s r s a e suc ss s .
26 EGYPT BABYLON , ,
A ND PALE S TINE
ca rri e d r ec ord bac k thro u gh purely mythical period s to Ptah
the
a n d t he C re a tio n In that ca s e w e sho u ld have as we s hall s e e
.
, ,

a s tri k ing para ll e l to e arly S umerian tradition But in t h e fi rs t .

e x ta n t por t io n s of t he Pal e rmo t e xt w e a r e already in t h e r e alm

o f g e nu in e tradition Th e name s pr e served appear to be those

.

of individ u al s not of mythological creation s and w e may

, ,

as sum e that th e ir owners really e xi s ted For though th e i n v e n .

t ion of writi n g had not at that time been achieved i t s place ,

w a s probably ta ke n by ora l tradition W e know that with .

c e rtain trib e s of Africa a t the pre s ent day who po s s e s s no ,

k nowl e dg e of writing th e re are fu nctionari e s charged with t he ,

d u t y of pr e s e rvi n g tribal tradition s who tran s mit orally to their ,

s u cc e ss or s a r e membranc e of pa s t chie fs and s om e details of

e v e nt s that occurre d centuries b e for e l The predyna s tic .

Egyptians m a y we ll have adopted s imilar means for pre s e rving

a r e m e mbranc e of t h e ir pa s t hi s tory .

More ove r t h e n e w t ext fu rn i sh e s fre s h proof of the general

,

a c c u racy of Man e tho e ven wh e n d e aling with tradition s of thi s

,

p re hi s tori c a g e On th e s te le th e re i s no d e fi nite indication that

.

t h e s e two s e ts of pr e dynas tic kings were contemporaneous rul er s

of Lowe r and Upp er Egypt re spective ly ; and s ince els ewhere t h e
li s t s as sign a s ingle s overeign to e ach e poch it h as been s ugg es t e d ,

that w e s hou ld r egard them a s s ucce s s iv e repres entative s of the

l e gitimat e k ingdom ?
No w Man e tho after h i s dynasti e s of god s ,

a n d d e mi -god s s tat e s that thirty M e mphite kings r e ign e d for

,

years and w e re followe d by ten Thi n i t e kings whos e r e igns

,

cove re d a p e riod of 3 5 0 y e a rs Neglecting the figure s a s obvious ly .

e rron e o u s we may well admit that th e Gre e k hi s torian here

,

all u d es t o our two pre Me n i te dyn as tie s But t he fact tha t h e

-
.

s ho uld r e gard th e m a s ruling con s e c u tiv e ly do es n ot preclud e

t h e oth e r alte rnativ e The modern conve ntion of arranging .

li n es of cont e mporan e ou s ru l e rs in parallel columns had not

b e e n e volved in antiquity a n d without s ome s uch method of ,

di s ti n ction contemporan e ou s rul e r s when enum e rate d in a list , ,

a ssum e that b efore the uni fi cation of Egypt by th e found e r of

,

t he Is t Dyna s ty t h e rul e rs of North and S outh were inde

,

F rt i ll tr t t h i p
31 . ou ca us a es s oi n t by ci ti ng th e c a s e of th e B u s h ong o s , w h o
h v
a thi w y pr rv d li t
e 1 11 s a es e e a s of n o le s s th an a h u nd r ed a n d tw ntye - n
o e of
t h i r p t k i g ; p it p 182
e as n s o . c .
, .
, a nd c f. Tordey a nd J oy c e , Le s B u sh ongos
’

,
i n A n na les d a M us ’
e
s d a C ongo B elge, s er . 111, t 11, fa s c i (B r
u s s els ,
F rt
. .

2
o u ca ,
loc . c i t.
 MANETHO A ND B E R OS S U S 27

pendent prince s po s s essing no traditions of a united throne ,

on which any claim to hegemony could be based On the .

a ss umption that thi s was so th e ir arrangement in a con ,

s ec u t i v e s e ries would n ot have dec e iv e d their immediat e s uc

c e s s or s But it would undoubtedly tend in cours e of tim e to

.

obliterate the tradition of th e ir t rue ord e r which eve n at the ,

period of the Vt h Dyna s ty may hav e b e en compl e tely forgotte n .

Manetho would thu s have introdu ced no s tra n ge or novel con

fus ion ; and thi s explanation would of course apply to other
s ections of h i s s y s tem wher e the dyn a stie s he enumerat e s app e ar

to be too many for t heir perio d But h i s r e production of two .

line s of pr e dyn a s tic rulers s upporte d a s it now i s by t h e e arly ,

evid e nce of the Palermo t ext only s erve s to incr e a s e ou r c on fi ,

dence in the general accuracy of his s ource s whil e at t h e s a me ,

time it illustrate s very e ffe ctiv ely the way in which po ss ible
inaccuracie s deduced from independent data may have aris e n in
, ,

quit e early time s .

In contra s t to the dyn a s ties of Manetho tho s e of B e r os s u s are ,

so i mperfectly pre s erved that they have n e ver formed t h e bas is

of Babylonian chronology ?
But here too in t h e chronological ,

s cheme a s imi lar proc e s s of reduction h a s t ak e n plac e

, Certain .

dynastie s recovered fr om native s ource s and at on e time regard e d

,

as co n secutiv e were proved to have been contemporan eo us an d

,

archaeological e v id ence su ggested that s om e of th e great gaps s o ,

freely assumed in the royal se quence had no righ t to b e there ,

.

A s a res ult the su cc e s s ion of known r u l e rs w a s thrown i n to

,

truer p e r s pective and such gap s as remain e d w e r e b e ing parti a lly

,

fi ll e d by later discoverie s Among the latt e r t h e most important .

find was that of an early list of kin g s recently p u bli s h e d by ,

P ere S c h eil and s ub s e qu e ntly purcha s ed by the Briti s h Mu s eum

2

s hortly before the war This had h e lped u s to fill in the gap .

b e twe e n the famou s S argon of Akkad a n d the lat e r dynas tie s ,

but it did not ca rry u s far beyond S argon s own time Our ’

1
vi d
W hile t he fH r d t e i tr rdi ri ly v l b le f th d t i l
en c e o e o o us s ex ao na a ua or e e a s

h e gi v f th
es o i v i li z t i n f b t h Egy pt
e c d B b y l ni
a o d i
s o p i lly f ll
o an a o a, an s es ec a u

i th
n f th f rm r i t i
e ca se o f li tt l pr t i l
e o fe th
, h r n l gy
s oIn e ac ca u se or e c o o o .

Egy pt h i r p rt f t h s erly hi t ry i
o o f d d h h r dly tt mpt
e ea n
s o s c on u s e , an e a a e s o e

f B by l i
or a It i pr b b l t h t
on a . h s bj t h m ti m mi d r t ood
o a e a on su c su ec s e so e es su n e s

h i i nf rm nt t h e pri t wh
s o a s, tr d i t i wr mr es s , r t ly r pr d ed
os e a on s e e o e a cc u a e e o uc

b y th e l t r n t i v wri t r M
a e th
a d B
e F e s d t il dane mp r i n o an e r o s su s . or a e a e co a so

o f l i l th ri ti i n r l t i n t b th ntri
c as s c a au o es e G i fli th i n H g
e a th
o o o c ou es , s e r o ar
’
s

A th i ty
u or d A h an l gy pp rc a eo o , .

S e C mp t
2
e nd o 191 1 pp 6 06 if d R d A g IX
es r e us, p 69 .
,
an ec .
’
ss r .
, . .
 28 EGYPT BABYLON , ,
A ND PALE S TINE
archa e ological evidence als o comes s uddenly to an end Thus .

t he e a rli es t pictur e w e have hith e rto obtained of the S um e rians

h as eb e n that of a rac e e mployi n g an advanced s y s t e m of writing
and po s s ess ed of a knowledge of metal We have found in s hort . , ,

abundant re mains of a bronze -age culture but no traces of p r e ,

c e ding age s of d e velopm e nt s uch as m e e t u s on early Egyptian

s ite s It w as a natural infe rence that the adve nt of the S umerians
.

i n the E u phrate s Vall ey w a s s udden and that th e y had brough t ,

their highly developed culture with them from some region of

C entral or S outh e rn A s ia .

Th e n ewly publis hed Nippur documents will cause us to modify

that vi e w The lists of early kings wer e them s elves drawn up
.

und e r the Dynas ty of Ni s in in the twenty -second century B c '

. .
,

and th ey give us trac e s of po s sibly ten and at lea s t e i gh t othe r

?
kingdom s before the earlies t dynasty of the known li s ts One
of their novel features i s that they include s ummarie s at the
e nd in which it i s stated h o w often a city or di s trict e nj oyed
,

the privil e ge of being the s eat of s upreme authority in Babylonia .

Th e e arli e s t of th e ir s ections li e within the legendary period and ,

though in the third dyna s ty preserved we begin to note sign s of

a firmer historical tradition the great break that then occurs in ,

the text is at present only bridged by title s of various king

dom s which t he s ummaries give ; a few even of these are
’

mi ss ing and the relative order of the rest i s not assured But in .

S pite of their imperfect state of preservation the s e documents ,

are of great hi s torical value and will furnish a framework for

future chronological s ch e mes Meanwhile we may attribute to .

som e of the late r dynasties titles in complete agreement with

S um e rian tradition The dynasty of Ur -E ngu r for example.
, ,

w hich preceded that of N i s in becomes if we like the Third , , ,

Dynas ty of Ur Anoth e r important fact which strikes us aft er

.

a s crutiny of t he e arly royal name s recovered is that while ,

two or thre e are S emitic the great maj ority of thos e born e
2
,

S e e Po eb el, H i s tor i ca l Tex ts, pp

7 3 ff a nd H i s tor i ca l a nd Gra mma t ica l Tex ts ,
. .

p l ii.
—
i v ,
No s 2 —
5 The b e s es e
. .
t pr rv
e d o f t h e li s s i s No 2 ; Nos 3 a n d 4 a re t . .

co mpa ra i e ly s tv m
a ll f a
g e n r m t
s ; a nd o f No 5 th e ob e s e onl i s h e e
y u b li sh ed
. vr r p
fo r t he fi s rttm t t
i e, the c on en s of t h e e e s e ha i n b een
g rvr a d e k no n s o e v m w m
r
y ea s a go by Hi lpr e c ht ( of M a thema ti ca l, Metrologi ca l, a nd Ch ronolo i ca l Ta blets
.

g
p m t p rt p
,
. 4 6 f , p l 3 0, No
. .
Th e fra g e n s b elong to s e a a e c o i e s of th e
.

mr t r r pp t t
S u e i a n dy nas i c e co d, a nd i t h a e ns ha t h e e x a n o i on s of h e i t t p rt t r
t m p v r m pr
te x i n s o e la c es c o e t he s a e e i od a nd a re du li ca
es of o ne a no h e p t t r
r t
.
2
C f , e g , t w o o f th e ea li es k i n s of Ki sh Galumu m n
a d Z ug a i b
g (
. . .

, g s ee
b elo , w p rm r pr
The fo .
mt
e is ob a b ly th e S e i i c-Baby loni a n o d lca lumu m, w r
 THE GO DS ON EAR TH 29

by the earliest rulers of Kish Erech and Ur are as obviously , ,

S um e rian .

It i s clear that in native tradition current among the S ume ,

rians themselve s before the close of the third millennium their ,

race was regard e d a s in po s s e s sion of Babyl onia s ince the dawn

of hi s tory This at any rate prove s that th e ir advent was not
.

sudden nor comparatively rec e nt and it fu rther suggest s that ,

Babylonia itself was th e cradle of their civilization ?

It will be
t h e province of future archaeological re s earch to fi ll out the
mi s sing dynastie s and to determine at what point s i n the li s t
their s trictly hi s torical basi s di s appears S ome which a r e .
,

fortunately preserved near t h e beginning bear on their fac e ,

their legendary character But for our purpose they are none .

the worse for that .

In the firs t two dynasties which had th e ir s eats at the cities ,

o f Ki s h and Erech we s ee god s mingling w ith men upon the ,

earth Tammuz the god of vegetation for whose annual death

.
, ,

E ze kiel saw women weeping bes ide the Temple at Jerusalem is ,

here an earthly monarch He app e ars to b e de s cribed a s a .

h u nter a phrase which recalls the death of Adoni s i n Greek

’
,

mythology According to our S umerian text he reigned in Erech

.

for a hundred years .

Another attractive Babylonian legend i s that of Etana the ,

prototype of Icaru s and hero of the earliest dream of human

flight C linging to the pinions of his friend the Eagle he beheld
?

t h e world and its encircling s tream recede beneath h i m ; and he

flew through the gate of heaven only to fall headlong back to ,

earth He is here duly entered in the li s t where we read that

.
,

Etana the shepherd who as cended to heaven who s ubdued all

, ,

lands ruled in the city of Kish for 6 3 5 y e ars .

The god Lu ga l-banda is anoth e r hero of legend Wh e n the .

‘
y ou n g a n i m al, Z la mb th
rp i n,
f
’
P e b el H i
e la
t T t tter z c a ci bu m ,
sco o c . o ,
s . ex s,

p 1 11 Th
. . e n m
occu rren
p i t t Sem i t i i nfiltr ti n i t
ce o f th es e a es o n s o c a o n o

N rth ern B b yloni

o in t h e d w n f hi t ry
a a s t t f th i g w h ld
ce a o s o , a s a e o n s e s ou

n t r lly
a u a p e t It i i mpr b bl th t n th i p i nt S m ri n tradi ti n ho ld
ex c . s o a e a o s o u e a o s u

h v m r ly r e fl t ed the
a e e e n di t i on of a l t r p ri d
ec co s a e e o .

S e f rt h r p 1 1 9
1
e u 1 e , .
,
n. .

Th e Egy pti n c n pt i
2
f th de ca ed P h r oh
o n di ng t h ea v en a
ce on o e eas a a a s ce o s

a f l on n d b e om i ng m erg d i nt t h
a c a c n wh i h fi r t r in th Py r m i d e o e su , c s occ u s e a

t t ( e G rdi ner i n C m nt Et d Sy i nn pp
ex s se a b elon g t a
u o
’
s u es r e es , . s o

di ff r en t r ge f i de
e B t i t m y w ell h v b en
an o mb i ned wi th th Et n
as . u a a e e co e a a

tr di ti n t prod e th f n r ry gl mploy d
a o o uc omm ly i n R m n
e u e a ea e e e so c on o a

Sy ri i n r pr e ent ti on f t h e mp er or p otheosi ( f C m nt p it ’
a e s a s o e s a s c . u o , o . c .
,

pp 3 7 .
30 EGYPT B ABYLON , ,
A ND PALE S TINE
h e arts of t he oth er god s failed them he alon e recov ered the ,
’

Tabl e t s of Fat e s tolen by th e bird god Z fi from E n lil s palace

,
- .

He i s e h re record e d to hav e reigned in Er e ch for y e ar s .

T ra dition already told u s that Erech w a s t h e native city of

Gi lga m e s h t he hero of t h e nation a l e pic to whom h i s ance s tor
, ,

U t n ap
- i s h t i m r e lated t h e s tory of the Flood Gilgam e s h too i s .

in our li s t a s king of Erech for 1 26 y e ar s

,
.
)

W e h av e here in fact recove r e d tradition of Post diluvian s -

k ings U n fortunate ly our li s t goes no farther back than that

. ,

bu t it i s probabl e that in i ts original form it pre s ented a general

c o r r e s po n d e nc e to t h e s ys t e m pre s e rved from B e r os s u s which ,

e n u me ra t es t e n A nt e dil u via n king s the last of th e m X i s u t h r os , ,

t h e h e ro of t he D elug e I nd e e d for the dyna s tic period the

.
, ,

agr e e m ent of th es e old S u m e rian li s ts with the chronological

s ys t e m of B e r os s u s i s s tri k i n g Th e latter according to S yn .
,

c e llu s give s ,
or years a s t h e total duration of the
hi s torica l p e riod apart from h i s pr e c e ding mythical age s while
, ,

t h e fi gu re a s pre s erv e d by Eu s ebiu s i s Th e com

?
years
pil e r of o n e of our n ew li s ts writi n g s ome
2
years earlier , ,

r e ckon s that t h e dyna s tic p e riod in h i s day had las ted for
y e ars Of co u rs e all the s e fi g u r e s a r e mythical and even at the
.
,

time of the S u merian Dyna sty of N i s in variant tradition s were

c u rr e n t with r e gard to t h e numb e r of hi s toric a l and s emi
mythi c al k i ngs of Babylo n ia and t h e d u ration of th e ir r u l e For .

t h e e arli e r writ er of anoth e r of our li s ts s eparat e d from t h e one

3
,

alre ad y qu ote d by an int e rval of only s ixty-s eve n y e ar s gives ,

4
y e ars a s t he total du r ation of the dyna s ti e s at h i s time .

B u t i n s pit e of th e s e di s cr e panci es t h e gen e ral re s emblance ,

pres ent e d by t h e hug e total s in the variant copie s of t h e li s t to

t he a lt e rn ative fi gure s of B e r oss u s if w e ignore h i s mythical ,

p eriod i s remarkable They indicat e a far clo s e r correspondence

, .

of t he Gre e k t radition w ith th a t of the early S umerians them

s e l ve s than w a s form e rly s u s p e cted .

F u rth e r proof of thi s corres pondence may b e s een in the fact

1
Th e fi gu re t t v
i s ha gi e n b y Syn cellus (ed Di nd or f, 147 ) b ut i t i s . p .

i n t h e e u i a le n q v
hi ch i s a dded i n sa s tw &c The di s c e a n cy i s r . rp
e x pla i ne d b m t t
y s o e a s d u e t o a n i n e n i o na l o i s si on o f t h e u ni s i n t h e s e cond m t
r e c k o n i ng ; o he rs ou ld ega dt w a s th e c or r
e c fi g u e ( c f H i s t of B a b , rr t r . . .

p .
r
The ea di ng of n i ne y a ga i ns e i h
g y i s su o ed by t h et of t t pp rt
‘

i -
Eus eb us ( Ch i on li b p r i , e d S choene , c ol
. . . . .

2
No 4 . .
2
No 2 . .

Th e fi g ur e s a re b r k en
o , b u t th e r
e a d i ng gi v en m y b e a a c ce pt ed wi th ome s
c on fi de nc e s ee Poeb el, H i s t Ins or . .
,
p . 1 03 .
32 EGYPT BABYLON , , A ND P A LE S TINE

that the early n ame s pre s erved by it may have b e en the original
s ourc e of B e r os s u s An t e diluvian rul e r s
1
may y e t be acc epte d in
’

a mo di fi e d form In coming to h i s conclu s ion he may have be e n

.

i nfl u e nc e d by what s ee m s to me an u n do u bted corr es pondence

b etwe e n one of t h e rul e rs in our li s t and t h e s ixth Antediluvian
k i ng of B e r ossu s I think fe w will be di spo s e d to dispute the
.

e q u ation

A cicc vos n o zp fiv Etana a shepherd ,

.

Each li s t preserve s t h e h e ro s s heph e rd origin and the c orr es p on ’

d en c e of t h e nam e s i s very close Da on os merely tran s posing the ,

i nitial vowe l of Etana ?

That B e ros s u s s hould have tran s lated
a Po s t -diluvian r ul e r into h i s A ntediluvian dynas ty would not
be at all s u rpri s i ng in vi e w of the ab s e nce of detailed corre
s on de nc e b e tw e e n h i s later dynastie s and tho s e we k now actually
p
occu pi e d t he Babylo n ian throne Mor e ove r t h e inclu s ion of .
,

B a bylon in h i s li s t of A nt e diluvian citi e s 3

s hould mak e us

h es itate to re gard all the rul e rs he as s igns to h i s earliest dynas ty

as n e c es sarily r e taining in his list their original order in
S um e rian tradi t io n Thu s we may with a clear con s cien ce s eek
.

e quatio n s b e twe e n t h e name s of B e r os s us Ant e diluvian rulers ’

and tho s e pre s e rve d in t h e early part of our Dynastic List ,

a lthough w e may r e gard the latter a s actually Po s t -diluvian in

S u m e rian b e li e f
Thi s r efl e ction and t h e result already obtained encourage us , ,

t o a c c e pt t h e followi n g further e uation which i s yielded by a

q ,

r e newe d scr utiny of t h e li s ts

E nme n u nna
’ '
A nneuw v .

H e re A m m en on , th e
fo u rth of B e r os su s Antediluvian kings ’

pre s ents a wond e rfu lly clo s e tran s cription of the S umerian nam e .

The n of th e firs t sylla bl e has b e e n a ss imilat e d to the following

r ttm t
S ee th e b i e f s a e en h e a k es i n t h e c ou s e of a e i e of Dr Poeb el s m r rv w ’

v m
.

o lu e s i n t h e A mer i ca n Jo u r na l o
f S emi tic L a ngu a ges a nd L i tera tu res , XXX I,
r p
A p i l 1 9 15 , 22 5 mp r
He does not c o
.
m
a e a ny o f t he n a
.
pr m
es , b u t h e o i s es a
t t
s u dy o f h os epr rv ese mp r
e d a nd a c o twt
a i s o n o f t h e li s wt
i h Be r oss us a nd i h
Ge n i v a nd
.
v p t t r r rt r
It i s os s i ble ha P o fes s o Ba on h a s a l ea d fulfi lle d h i s
.

y
rm r r pr p
p o is e o f fu the di s c us s i on , e h a s i n hi s A rcha eology a nd the B i ble, t o t h e
p i t
ub l c a i on o f W t v r r t r
.

h I h a e s e en a e fe e nc e i n a no he c on nex i on c f Jou r n
( . .

A mer Or S oc , Vol XXX I

. .
V p , v .
t
b u t I ha e not y et b een a b le t o ob a i n
.

i t
s gh of a c o p y .

2
Th ri t f rm A i vi d t ly m er ntr ti
e va an o d ny l i m i t
'

awc s e en a e co ac on , a n a c a

m ay h v h d t r pr
a e

di r g rd d i vi w f
s e a
t
e
m r
a

w q
l
n
ly
ti n
t h o
e o r
e
i gi nel f rm f
o
th e n m
e s en
e i t be
ou r n e
o e c ose

e ua o
a o o a s o

f rth
.

3
S ee
p 62u e r, . .
 A NTE DIL U VIAN KING S 33

cons onant in accordan ce with a recognized law of euphony and ,

the resultant doubling of the m is faithfully preserved in th e

Greek Precisely t h e same initial component E n me occurs in
.
, ,

the name E nme du r a nk i borne by a mythical king of S ippar , , ,

who h as long been recognized as the original of B eros su s s eventh ’

Antediluvian king Et et épa x o s? There too the original n h as ,

been a s s imilated b ut the Greek form retains no d oubli ng of the

,

m and points to its fu rther weakening .

I do not propose to deta in you with a detailed discussion of

S umerian royal names and their pos s ible Greek equivalent s I will .

merely point out that the two s uggested equations whi ch I ven ,

ture to think we may regard as e stablished throw the study of ,

B e r os s u s mythological personages upon a new plane No equi

’
.

’
valent has hitherto been suggested for A dwvos ; but A p p évco v has
be en co n fidently explained as the equivalent of a conj ectured
Babylonian original U mman u lit Workman The fact that , ,
.
‘

w e s hould now have recovered the S umerian original of the

name which prove s to have no connexi on in form or meaning
,

with the previously suggested Se mitic equivalent tend s to ca s t ,

’
doubt on other S emitic equations propo s e d Perhaps Ap fi)\ o v or .

may after all not prove to be the equi valent of Am elu ,

‘
Man nor ’

, that of A mél-S i n Bo th may find their .

true equivalent s in some of the missing royal names at the head

of the S umerian Dynas tic List There too we may provisionally .

”
seek A Awpo g the firs t ki n g whose equation with Aru ru the
,
‘ ’

, ,

Babylonian mother -godde ss never ap peared a very happy su g ,

ge s tion 3
The ingeni ous proposal on the other hand that h i s
.
4
, ,

successor repre s e nts a mi s copied A 6dn a po s a Gre e k

,
’
,

rendering of the name of Adapa may s till hold good in view of ,

Etana s pr e sence in the S umerian dyna s tic record U t-n ap i sh t i m s

’ ’
.

1
Va r E be Bé pea-.
x o s ; t h e s e con d h a lf of th e o i i na l n a
g e ,
E n m e dur a nki , i s r m
m ro e c los ely ese pr rv
e d i n E d or a nch u s , t h e fo g i e n b y t h e A e n i an a ns rm v rm tr
t r
la o of Eu se b i u s S ee fu h e , 3 8 and 6 1
. rt r pp 2 Cf 3 8, n 1 . . . p . . .

3
Dr Poeb el (H i s t Ins or ,
. . ptr t . t t t
42 , n 1 ) ma k e s t h e i n e es i ng s ugge s i on h a. .

”
A k wp o c may e r pr e e
s n a n a b b e ia e d a n d t
rr pt rm
co r v t
u fo o fm t h e na e L a l -ur

a li m ma , w t t m w r
h i ch h a s co e do n t o u s a s h a of a n ea ly a n d m t y h i c a l ki n g o f
pp r w
Ni u ; s ee Ra li nson , W A I , IV, 60 V ,
4 7 a n d 44 , a n
. d c f S .ev T.a bl o f . . .

Gr ea t , Vol I, p . . . t t
2 17 , No 3 2 574, Re v , 1 2 f It may b e adde d h a th e su ffe i ngs r . . .

wt w tt r t
i h hi ch t h e la e i s a ss oci a ed i n t h e tr t pr p
a d i i on a r e m t
e h a s s u ch as i gh
h av tt h d t h m lv t t h fi r t h m n r l r f th w rld ; b t th
e a ac e e se es o e s u a u e o e o u e

su gg t d q
es e
e t i n t h o g h t e
uampt i n b
g yo r aso
,
n f t h r e
u m t p ra lle l i t w ld e o e o e a ou

t h f rni h t A d m f t e n t pr e ent h rdly b

us u s o a
’
s e pt d in v i ew of th
a , ca a s a e a cc e e

p o ib ili ty t h t l r q ti n t A ) wp m y b e f rth m i g
ss a a c os e e ua o o
”
\ og a o co n .

Homm el P
4
S o B ibl A h V l XV
, r oc. c p 243
. . rc
,
o . . .

K . D
34 EGYPT BABYLON , , A ND PALE S TINE
’
title Khas i s a tra or A tra kh as i s the Very Wise s till of course
,
,
‘
,

remains the e s tabli s hed e qu ivalent of S ic ovepos ; but for Q n dpms

’

na p i s h t i m s father may
’
a rival to Ubar Tutu - U t -
, ,

perhap s appear The new identifications do not of cours e dis pose

.

of the old ones except in the cas e of U mmanu ; but they open
,
1
up a n e w line of approach and provide a fre s h field for conj ecture .

S emitic and po s s i bly contracte d original s are s till pos s ible for
, ,

unidentifi e d mythical kings of Be r os s us ; but such equations will

in spire greater confidence , s hould we be able to e stablish S umerian
original s for the S e mitic r e nd e rings from new materi al already ,

in hand or to be obtai n ed in the fu ture .

But it i s time I read you extracts from the earlier extant

portion s of the S umerian Dyna s tic Li s t in order to illu s trate ,

the clas s of doc ument with which we a r e d e aling From th e m .

it wil l b e s e en that t he record i s not a tabu lar lis t of nam e s

like t he we ll k no w n Kings Lis ts of the Ne o -Babylonian period
-
’
.

It i s cast in t he form of an epitomized chronicle and give s under

’
s e t formulae th e l e ngth of each king s reign and h i s father s name
’

in ca s e s of direct s ucce ss ion to father or brother S hort phra s e s .

are al s o s ometime s add e d or in s e rted in t h e sent e nce re ferring to

,

a king in order to indicat e hi s humbl e origi n or t h e achievement

,

which made his nam e famou s in tradition The head of the Firs t .

C olumn of the text i s wanting and the fi rst royal name that i s ,

compl et ely pres erved i s that of G alu mu m the ninth or tenth ,

’
r ul e r of the earlie s t kingdom or dyna s ty of Kish The text
‘
.
, ,

then ru n s on conn e ct e dly for seve ral line s

G a lu mu m rul e d for nin e h u ndred ye ars .

Z u ga g i b rul e d for eight hu n dr e d and forty year s .

Arp 1 , s on of a man of the people , rul ed for s eve n hundred and

twe n ty ye ar s .

tana t he s h epherd who a s c ended to h e aven who s u bdued

, ,

all land s r u l e d for s i x h u ndre d and thirty fiv e years

,
- ?

Pili s on of Etana rul e d for four hundr e d and t e n years

, .

E n me nu nn a rul e d for s i x hundr e d and e l e ven y e ars .

M e la mk i s h son of E n me nu n na rul e d for nin e hundred y e ars

, , .

B a rs a ln u nna s on of E n me nu n n a r u led for t w elve hundred

, ,

y e ars .

Mesz a [ s o n of B a r s a lnu n n a ruled for years , .

s on of Bar s a ln u nn a rul e d for years, .

A s mall gap then occurs in th e text but we kno w that the last
,

1
rt r p
S ee fu h e A p e n di x II, pp 144 ff . .

2
Pos s i bly 6 2 5 y e a s r .
 S UME RIAN PAT R IAR C H S 35

two representativ es of this dynasty of twenty three kings are -

relate d to have rul e d for nine hundred yea rs and six hundred
and twenty -five years respectively In th e S econd C olumn of .

the text the lines are also for tunately pre s e rved which re c ord
the pas sing of the first hegemony of Ki s h to the Ki ngdom of ‘

E a nn a the latter taking i t s nam e from the famou s temple of

’

Anu and Is htar in the old city of Erech The text continue s .

The kingdo m of Kish pas s ed to E a n na .

In E a nn a M e s ki ngas h er son of the S u n -god ruled as high

, , ,

pri e st and king for thre e hundred and twenty-fiv e y e ars .

M e sk i ng as h e r ent e r e d into 1
and asc e nd e d to
E nme r k a r s on of M e s k i n ga s h e r t h e king of Erech who b
, t ,

with the peopl e of Erec h ruled as king for four

2
,

hundred and twenty years .

L u ga lb an da the sheph e rd rul ed for twelve hund red years , ,

.

D umuz i t h e hunter
3
who s e city w as
, ruled for a
hundred years .

Gri sh b ilga m e s who s e father was A th e high priest of Kullab

' 4 5
, , ,

ruled for one hundre d and twenty six years - 6

.

1
v rb m y l i mp ly d n t i nt
Th e e a a so es c e o .

2
ph r
Th e pp r t h v b en i mp erf t ly p i d b y th ri b A i t
as e a ea s o a e e ec 00 e e sc e . s

t nd t he b rdi n t nt n r d t h k i ng f E r h w h b ilt wi th th
s a s su o a e se e ce ea s e o ec o u e

p eop le f Er h Eit h r th bj t g v r ed by th v rb h b
o ec mi tte d i n
e e o ec o e n e e as een o ,

w hi h w e m i gh t r t r
c ca s e om e h ph r th i ty p rh p by
es o e s s uc a se a s
‘
e c or e a s, a

s li gh t tr n p i t i n w h ld r e d th k i ng w h o b ilt E r h wi t h th p e p l
a s os o , e s ou a
‘
e u ec e o e

o f Er h In ny ec e th fi r t b i ldi ng f t h i ty f Er h
a c as di t i n g i h d e s u o e c o ec , as s u s e

fr om i t n ie t lts a n tre E nn c pp r t b r rd d h r i n th e tr di t i n
n cu -c e a a, a ea s o e e co e e e a o .

Th i i t h e fi r t r f r n t Er h i n t h t t ; d E n me k f th r w
’
s s s e e e ce o ec e ex an r ar s a e as

h i gh pri t w ll k i ng S f rt h r pp 3 6 nd 5 9
es as e as . ee u e ,
. a .

i3
T mm z . e . a i uGi lg m h
.
4
. e . a es .

5
Th m f th f th r f Gilg m h i r th r tr g ly pr e d b y th
e na e o e a e o a es s a e s an e ex ss e e

s i ngl i gn f th v w l
e s d m t pp r nt ly b r d
or e A o A th er i
e a an us a a e e ea as . s e s a

s m ll b r k i t h t t t th n d f th i li n D P b l n t n t r lly
a ea n e ex a e e o s e, r. oe e o u na u a

a s su m d t h t A w m r ly th fi r t yll b l f th e n m f wh i h t h d
e a as e e e s s a e o a e, o c e en

w as w nti g B t i t ha w b
n n h w . th t th mp l t n m e w A ; e
u as n o ee s o n a e co e e a as se

Fo t h O i t L i t Z i t V l X V III N 12 ( D
r sc ,
r en . . l 3 67 ff Th r d
- e .
, o .
, o . ec .
,
co . . e ea

i g i d d
n s d fr m t h f ll w i g ntry i
e u ce A y ri o p l n t ry lie t f g d o o n e n an ss a n ex a a o s o o s

(C T t i th B i t M
un . ex P t XX IV p l 2 5 11 29
s n e Th g d A w h i l
r . us , .
,
.
,
. e o , o s a so

e q t d t th g d D b b i g i ( i
ua e o S ri b
e fU o i th pr i e t f K ll b ; h i
u sa ur . e . c eo r s e s o u a s

wi f i t h g dd Ni g i k ( i
e s e oL dy f t h dg
es s f t h t r e et n A th
u es r a . e . a o e e eo e s , e

pri t f K ll b nd th h b nd f g dd i l rly t b i d nt i fi d wi th A
es o u a a e us a o a o es s , s c ea o e e e ,

t h pr i t f K ll b n d f t h r f Gi lg m h f
e es o u w e k n w fr m t h Gilg m h
a a a e o a es , or o o e a es

Ep i th t t h h r m th r w t h g dd Ni n ( b l w p 3 9 ’
c a e e o s o e as e o ess ns u se e e o , .
,
n .

W h t her Ni g i k w
e t i t l f Ni n
n u es rr pre t v ri nt tr di ti
a as a e o s u n , or e s en s a a a a on

w i th r g rd t t h p r nt g f Gi lg m h
e a o th m t h r e id w h v in
a e a e o a es on e o e
’
s s e, e a e

an y fi rm t i
ca s e c on n f h i d n t fr m pri t nad g d d o I t w o n t r l s es c e o es a o e ss . as a u a

th t A h ld b b q t ly d i fi d Th i w n t th
a s ou e su se t th t i mu en e e . s as o e cas e a e e ou r

t t w i n rib d th n m i wri tt n w i th t t h e di v i ne det rmi n t i v

ex as sc e ,
as e a e s e ou e a e .

P i bly 1 86 y r
6
os s ea s .
36 EGYPT BABYLON , , A ND PALE S TINE

.
] luga l, s on of G i s hb i lga mes ruled for , years .

Thi s group of e arly ki ngs of Erech i s of e xceptional intere s t .

Apart from its inclus ion of Gilgamesh and the god s Tammuz and
Lu galb a n da its record of Me s k i nga s h e r s reign pos s ibly refer s to
’

one of the lo s t l e gends of Erech Like him Melchizedek who .

,

comes to u s in a chapter of G e nesis reflecting the troubled time s

2
of Babylon s Fi rs t Dynas ty w as priest a s w e ll as king Tradition
1 ’

,
.

appears to have credited M e s ki n gas h er s son and succe ss or ’

Enme r k a r with the building of Erech a s a city around the firs t

,

s ettlement E ann a which had already given i t s name to the ,

kingdom If s o S um e rian tradition con fi rm s the a s s umption

,

of mod e rn research that the great cities of Babylonia aro s e around

ti
th e s l l more ancient c u lt -c e ntre s of t h e land W e s hall have .

occa sion to rev ert to t h e tradition s here recorded concerning the

parentage of Me s k i ngash er t h e founder of thi s line of kings and , ,

that of i ts mo s t famou s member Gilgame sh Meanwhile we ,

.

may note that the clo s ing rulers of the Kingdom of E ann a are
wanting Whe n the t e xt i s again pr e s erved we r e ad of the
.
,

heg emony pa s s ing from Erech to Ur and thence to Awan

The k [ ingdom of Erech pas s e d to ] Ur 3

.

In Ur Mes ann i pada became king and r u led for eighty ye ars .

M e skia gn unna s on of Me s a n ni pa da ruled for thirty years

, , .

E lu [ j ru le d for twenty -fiv e y e ar s

. .

Bal u [ ruled for thirty -s i x years

. .

Four k in gs (thus ) r u l e d for a hundre d a n d seventy-one years .

The k i n gdom of Ur pas sed to Awan .

In Awan

With t h e Kingdom of Ur we appear to be approaching a

‘ ’

firmer hi s torical tradition for the reigns of its rulers are recorded ,

in d e cad es not hu n dred s of years But we fi nd in the summary

, .
,

which conclud e s t he main copy of our Dynas tic List that the ,

i
k ngdom of Awan though it consi s ted of but three rulers is ,
,

C f H is t
. . o f Ba b .
, p . 15 9 f
Gen x i v 1 8
.
2
. . .

3
r t rt
Th e es o a i on of E e ch h e e i n
, r r p
la ce o f Ea nna , i s b a s ed on th e a b s enc e
of th l tt r
e m a e na e i n th e s u af e mm r tr r
a y th e b ui ldi ng of E ech by Enme rk a r
th k ngd m pr r t t r
,
e i o w as ob a b ly e ck oned a s ha o f E e ch .
 THE GENE R ATION S OF A DAM 37

from Nippur to have been an importa nt city of Elam at the time

of the Dynas ty of Akkad we gather that the Kingdom of
1
,
‘

A w an represented in S umerian tradition the fi rst o c casion on

which the country passed for a time under Elamite ru le At .
.

t hi s point a great gap occur s in the text and when the detailed ,

dynastic succession in Babylonia is again ass ured we have passed ,

de fi nitely from the realm of myth and legend into that of

2
history .

What new light then do these old S umerian records throw

, ,

on Hebrew tradition s concerning the early age s of mankind ?

I think it will be admitted that t here is s ome thmg s trangely
familiar about some of those S umerian extracts I read ju s t now .

We s eem to hear in them the faint echo of another narrative ,

like them but not quite the same .

And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and
thirty year s and h e died .

And S eth lived an hundred and five years and begat ,

Eno s h : and S eth lived aft er he begat Enosh eight hundred

and s even years and begat s ons and daughters : and all ,

the days of S eth were nine hundred and twelve years :

and he died .

and all the day s of Enosh were nine hundred and five
years : and he died .

and all the days of Kenan were nine h undred and ten
years : and h e died .

and all the days of Ma h alalel were eight hundred ninety

and five years : and he died .

and all the days of Jared w ere nine hundred sixty and
two years : and he died .

and all the day s of Enoch were three hundred sixty and
five y e ars : and Enoch walked with God : and he w as not ;
for God took him .

and all the days of Methuselah were nine hundred sixty

and nine years : and he di e d .

and all the days of Lamech were seven hundred seventy

and s even years : and he died .

An d Noah was fi ve hundred years old : and Noah begat S hem ,

Ham and Ja ph eth , .

Throughout the s e extracts from the book of the genera ‘

tions of Adam G alu mu m s nine hundred years seem to run

“ ’

1
P os hel Hi t In n p 12 8
,
s . sa S e f rt he r A pp endi II p 146
, . .
2
e u , x , . .

3
Gen v 1 ff ( P)
. . . .

The m e lengt h of r ei gn i redi t d to M lamki h a nd to one a nd p erhap s

sa s c e e s

tw o oth r r le r of t h t fi r t S m e ri n ki ng d om
‘
e u s a s u a
 38 EGYPT BABYLON , ,
A ND PALE S TINE
almo st lik e a refrain ; and Methuselah s great age t he recognized
’

s ymbol for longevity is even exceeded by two of the S umerian ,

patriar chs The name s in the two li s ts are n ot t h e s ame but in

.
1
,

both w e a re moving in the s ame atmospher e and along similar

lin es of thought Though e ach list adhere s to i ts own set .

formulae it e s timat e s the length of human li fe in the early ages

,

of th e world on much the sam e gigantic s cale as t he other Our .

S umerian record s are not quit e s o formal in their s tructure a s the

H e bre w narrative but the s hort note s which here and there ,

relieve their s ti ff monotony may be parallel e d in the Cainite

?
genealogy of the preceding chapter in Genesis There C ain s ’

city-building for example may pair with that of E n me rk ar ; , ,

and though our new record s may a fford no preci s e e quivalents to

Jab al s patronage of nomad life or to the invention of music and
’

m e tal working a s cribed to Jubal and Tubal cain these too are
- -
,

quite in the s pirit of S umerian and Babylonian tradition in their ,

at tempt to picture t he beginnings of civilization Thus Enme .

dura n ki the prototype of the seventh Antediluvian patriarch of

,

B er os sus w a s traditionally revered as the firs t exponent of

3
,

4
divination It i s in the chronological and general s etting
.
,

Th e p oss i b i li ty of th e Ba b yloni a n o rig i n of s o m e of th e Heb rw e na m es in

t hi s gen ealogy t p r ll l h l g b n nv d nd n i der
a nd i t s Ca i ni e a a e as on ee ca as se a co s

ab l i ng n i ty h
e b een e p d d i n b t i ni g q t i b tw en th e Heb rew
u as ex en e o a n e ua on s e e

n m a d th
es a n f t h A nt edi l v i n k i g f B
os e o by tr i ng c mm on
e u a n s o e r os su s ac a o

m ni g fea h n gg t d p i r It i f rt t t h t new i d nt i fi ti n of
or ea c su es e a . s un o u na e a our e ca o
’
A pp wi th the S m eri n E m n h ld di p os f n f th b e t p ar ll l
'

e vw v u a n en u na s ou s e o o eo
‘
e s a e s

obt i n d a i “w a e B b
, v z mmdn . w rk m n C i n ( t ) K n n s ” a . u u,
‘
o a a , e a

m i th A n th r ti f tory p i r gg ted i
s o e B b mél
sa s ac a su es s a .
.
a
‘

u,

m n E h W m r m rm r
'

( ) m
‘
a 135 n b
nos t t h bl n f t h f e t él a u e e se a ce o e o o a u

m y pr v t b f rt i t
a o e i n v i w f th p
o i b i li ty f d e
e o n t fr m
u q i te
ou s , e o e os s o sce o a u

d iff r t S m r i n r i gi
e en l ( e b vu p e Th a lt r t i v m y p rh p
o na se a o e, . e a e na e a e a s
h v a e t b f d t h t th
o H b r w p r ll l t S m ri
e a ce n d B b yl ni n
a e e e a a e s o u e an a a o a

tr di t i n
a h r onfi n d t h r onol gi l tr t r
s a re e e co nd g r l nt nt nd e o c o ca s uc u e a en e a co e s, a
d n t
o t nd t H b r w r e d ri g f B b y l i n n m
o ex e o e It m y b e dded n e n s o a on a a es . a e a

th t h rr p d
a su c in m co i ng b tw n p e r
es on l m i n d iff r nt
e n ce ea n e ee s on a na es e e
l ng g i
a ua t v ry i gn i fi nt b y i t lf Th n m
es s no e f Z g g ib of Ki h (
s ca se . e a e o u a s see
ab v p 28 f n
o e, f . mpl i p r ll l d b y th t i tl b rn by n f th e
.
, . or e x a e, s a a e e e e o e o e o
ea rli t k i g f th I t Dy n ty f Egy pt N m w h
es n s o e rv d l t e p lette
s as o , ar er, os e c a e s a a s
h ve b n f
a d t Hi ee k p li ; h t ou n w kn w n a t h S rp i n era on o s e oo as o as e co o
G n i 1 7 ff ( J )
2
e . v. . .

S 3
b v p 33
ee a o e, . .

S b l w p 61
ee It m y b n t ed t h t n
e o , .
nt f th . ri gi f di vi na a e o a a a ccou o e o n o
t n s l d d i hi d r i pti f t h d n d t f N h b y th wr i t r f
i o i
o

i nc u e n s esc on o e es c e an s o oa e e o
th Bi b li l A nti q i t i
e f Philo
ca pr d t f th m h l t h F o r th
u es o , a o uc o e sa e sc oo as e u
B k f E dr
oo o d th A p ly p
s f B r h ; e J m
as an Th B i bli l A nti
e oc a se o a uc s e a es , e ca

qmti f Ph i l p 86
’

es o o, . .
40 EGYPT BABYLO N , ,
A ND PALE S TINE
nin et e en hundre d years Thi s i nf erence our new material.

s upport s ;
but w h e n d u e a llowa n ce has been made for a re s ulting
di s turbanc e of vi s ion the S umerian origi n of the remaind e r of
,

hi s e vid e nce is not a bly co n firmed Two of h i s ten Antediluvian

.

king s r ej oin th e ir S umerian prototype s and we s hall s e e that ,

two of hi s three An tediluvian citie s find their place among

t h e fiv e of primitive S umerian b e lie f It i s clear that in B aby .

lonia as i n Egypt th e local tradition s of th e dawn of hi s tory

, ,
,

c urrent in th e H e ll e nistic period we re mod e ll e d on very early lines

,
.

Both countrie s were t h e s eats of ancient civilization s and it is ,

natural that e ach s hould s tage i t s pictur e of beginnings upon i t s

own s oil and e mbelli s h it with local colouring .

It i s a tribut e to the hi s torical accuracy of Hebrew tradition

to r e cogniz e that it n e ver re pres e nted Pale s tin e as th e cradl e of
the human rac e It looked to t h e Ea s t rather than to th e S outh
.

for evid ence of man s e arli e s t hi s tory and fi rst progr e s s in the
’

a rts of life And it i s in t he East in t he soil of Babylonia that

. , ,

w e may legitimat e ly se e k material in which to verify the s ources

of that traditional b e lief .

The new parall e l s I have t o-day attempted to trace between

some of t he Hebrew traditions preserved in Gen iv- vi and ,
.
,

tho s e of th e e arly S umerians a s pr e sented by their great Dynasti c

,

Li s t ar e e ss entially general in character and do not apply to

,

d e tail s of narrative or to proper nam es If they stood alon e we .

,

s hould s till have to con s ider whether they a r e s uch a s to s ugge s t

cultural influence or ind ependent origin But fortunately they .

.

do not exhau s t t he evidenc e we have lately recovered from the

s ite of Nippur a n d w e wil l postpone formulating our conclusions
,

with regard to them until t h e whole fi e ld h a s be e n s urveyed .

Fr om the biblical s tandpoint by far the mo s t valuabl e of our new

docum ents i s one that incorporate s a S umerian ve rs ion of the
D eluge s tory We s hall s e e that it pre s e nt s a variant and more
.

primitive pictur e of that gr e at cata s trophe than tho s e of the

B abylonian and H ebre w v e rs ion s And what i s of e ve n greater .

interes t it connects the narrative of the Flood with that of

,

C reation and s upplies a brief but int e rmediate account of the

,

Antediluvian period H ow th e n are w e to e xplain this s triking

.

li tera ry re s e mblance to the structure of the narrative in Gen e s i s ,

a r e s e mblanc e that i s completely wanting in the Babylo nian

v e rs ions ? But that is a probl e m we must reserve for the next
lecture .
 LEC TURE II

D ELU GE S TO R IE S A ND TH E NE W

.
S UME R IAN VE R S ION

IN the first lecture we s aw how both in Babylonia and Egypt

, ,

rec e nt discoverie s had thrown light upon periods regarded a s

prehi s toric and h o w we had lately recovered traditions conc e rn
,

ing very early rulers both in the Nile Valley and along the
lower Euphrate s On the stren gth of the latter di s covery we
.

noted the pos s ibi lity that future excavation in Babylonia would
lay bare sta ges of primitive culture s imi lar to those we have
already recovered in Egyptian soil Meanwhile the documents .

from Nippur had s hown u s what the early S umerian s themselves

believed about their own origin and we traced in their tradition
,

the gradual blending of hi s tory with legend and myth We saw .

that the new Dynastic List took us back in the legendary

sequence at least to the beginning of the Post-diluvian period .

Now one of the newly pub lished literary texts fills in the gap
beyond for it gives us a S umerian account of the history of
,

the world from the C reation to the D eluge at about which ,

point as we saw the extant portion s of the Dyna s tic List take
, ,

up the story I propose to devote my lecture to -day to t hi s

.

early vers ion of the Flood and to the e ffect of its discovery
upon some current theories .

The Babylonian account of the D eluge which was discovered ,

by George S mith in 1 8 72 on tablet s from the R oyal Library at

Nineveh i s as you know embedded i n a long epic of twe lve
, , ,

Books recounting the adventures of the Old Ba bylonian hero

G ilgam e s h Toward s the end of this compo s ite tale Gilgamesh
.
, ,

desiring immortality crosses the Waters of D eath in order to

,

beg the secr e t from h i s ancestor U t-n ap i sh ti m who in the past ,

had escaped the D eluge and had been granted immortality by

the god s The Eleventh Tablet or Book of the epic contains
.
, ,

the acco unt of the D elug e which U t -n api s ht i m related to h i s

kinsman Gilgamesh The close corre s pondence of this Baby
.

lonian story with that contained in Genesis i s recognized by

42 DELUGE S TO R IE S A ND THE S UME R IAN VE R S ION

e very one and n ee d not detain u s You will r e member that in .

s om e pa s s age s t h e acco u nt s tally ev e n in minute d etail s such , ,

for e xample a s th e device of s ending out bird s to te s t the abate

,

m ent of the wat e rs It is tru e that in the Babylonian vers ion .

a d ov e a s wallow and a raven a r e s ent forth in that or der

, , ,
r

in st e ad of a raven and the dove thre e times But s uch s light .

dis cre pancie s only emphasiz e the general resemblance of the

narra tive s .

In any compari s on i t i s u sually admitted that two accounts

have been combin e d in the H e brew narrative I s hould lik e to .

point out that thi s a ssumption may be made by any one what ,

e v e r h i s view s may be with r e gard to the textual problems of

the H ebre w Bibl e and t he traditional authors hip of the Penta

t e u ch And for our purpose at t he moment it i s immaterial
.

wh e ther we identify the compiler of these Hebrew narratives

with Mo se s him s e lf or with some later Jewish historian who s e , .

name ha s not come down to u s Whoever he was he ha s .

,

s crupulou s ly preserv e d h i s two texts and e ven when they di ffe r , , ,

he h as given each as h e found it Thanks to thi s fact any one .

,

by a careful exami n ation of the narrative can disentangle the

two ve rs ion s for him s elf He will find each give s a consi s tent .

s tory One of them appears to be s impler and more primitive

.

than the oth e r and I will refer to them as the earlier and the
,

late r Hebrew Ve rs ion s 1

The Babylonian text in the Epic of .

Gilgame s h contain s s everal peculiarities of each of the Hebrew

vers ions though t h e points of resemblance are more detailed in
,

the e arli e r of the two .

Now the tablet s from the R oyal Library at Nineveh inscribed

with the Gilgam e s h Epic do not date from an e arli e r period
than th e s eventh century But archaeological evid e nce has
mb i ed
In th e t in Gco i 5 i 1 7 i f th f ll w i g p
n a cco u n
g b e en . v .
—
x .
, e o o n a s sa es

m rk d i th m rgi n
a e n nd r li d n d th n r d on e ti v ly i t w i ll b
e a or u e ne , a e ea c s cu e , e
n th t t h y g iv e
s ee a n i t nt nd e lm t ompl t t
a co
n of t h D l ge
s s e a a os c e e a c ou
c e e u
G n e i 9 2 2 ; i i 6 1 1 1 3-1 6 (d w t
. v .
—
vG d mm nd d
.
, 1 7 (t
, o n o
‘
as o co a e o
up th rth 18 2 1 24 ; v i ii 1 2 ( t w r t pp ed 3 ( fr m nd ft r
on e ea —
, .
, o e e s o o
‘
a a e
-5 13 (t fr m ff t h o
‘
14 1 9 ; nd i
o 1 17
o Th m rk d p e —
a x —
e a e ass a es
,
g . .

r p r t th l t r H b r w V r i n If th r m i ni ng p g b e th n r d
e e s en e
‘
a e e e e s o e e a as sa es e ea
t iv ly th y w i ll b
c o ns ec u en t g v
i , diff r ent v r i
e of t h m v nt e s ee o e a e e s on e sa e e e s,

th gh n t om pl t ly pr rv ed th ther ; t h e p g
ou o so c e e b t nt i llyes e as e o es a s sa e s su s a a

r pr nt th
e es e rli r H b r w Ver i n In c mm nt ri n th H b r w t t
e ea e e e s o o e a es o e e e ex
th y e f r
a re , o lly r f rr d t nd r t h onv
c ou s e , u s u a i t y m b l J nd P e e e o u e e c en en s o s a ,

r pr t i g r p t i v ly th r li r nd th l t r v i n F f rthe r det il
e es e n n es ec e e ea e a e a e ers o . or u a s,

y f th m d r n
s ee a n o mm t r i e e G i e g D i v er B k f G n i
o e co en a s on e n es s , . . r , oo o e es s ,
pp 85 {f ; Sk i n r G i pp 147 iii ; Ry l G i p 9 6 f
. . n e , enes s , . e, enes s , . .
 THE S EMITI C VE R S ION S 43

long shown that th e traditions themselve s were current duri n g

all period s of Babylonian hi s tory ; for Gilgame s h and h i s hal f
human friend Enkidu were favourite s ubj ects for the seal e n
g raver wheth ,
e r he liv ed in S umerian time s or und er the
Achaemenian kings of Persia We have al s o for s ome years .
,

now po s s e s s e d two early fragments of the Del u ge narrative

, ,

proving that the s tory w a s known to the S e mitic inhabitants

of the country at the tim e of Ha mmu rab i s dynasty ? Our ’

newly dis covered text from Nippur was al s o written at about

that period probably before 2 1 0 0 ,
But the composition
its elf apart from the tablet on wh ich it i s inscribed m u s t go
, ,

b ack very much earlier than that For instead of being com .

posed in S emitic Babylonian the text is in S umerian the lan , ,

guage of the earlies t known inhabitant s of Babylonia wh o m ,

the S emites eventually displaced Thi s people it is now recog .

,

n i z e d were the originators of the Babylonian civilization and

, ,

we saw in the first lecture that according to their own tradition s , ,

they had occupied that co untry s ince the dawn of history .

The S emite s a s a ruling race came late r though the occurrence ,

of S emitic names in the S umerian Dynastic List sugges t s very

early infiltration fro m Arabia ?
After a long s truggl e the
immigrants succeeded in dominating the settled race ; a n d in
the proce s s they in turn became civilized Th e y learnt and .

adopted the cuneiform writing they took over the S umerian ,

literature Towards the close of the third millennium when

.
,

our tablet w as written the S umerians a s a race had almost ,

c eased to exi s t They had been absorbed in the S emitic p Op u la

.

tion and their language w a s no longer the general language of

the country But th e ir ancient lite rature and sacred texts were
.

1
Th e rli r
ea e of th e t w o f r gm ent
a s i s da t ed i n t h e ele en h y ea of A mmi zav t r
d u ga , th e t ent h
k i n g of Ha mmu ra b i s dy na s ’
t y , i e i n 1 9 6 7 B C ; i t w as p u b
. . . .

li sh ed by S ch ei l, R ecu ei l de tra va u x , Vol X, . X pp . 5 5 if He e th e Delug e s o y

. r t r
d oe s n ot form p rt a m
of t h e Gilg a r
e sh E i c , b u t i st e c o u n e d i n th e s ec ond p
t t
ab le r t w r
of a di ffe en r r m
o k ; i t s h e o a lso b e a s th e n a e A t ra k h as i s , a s i n

v r tv r
th e a i a n r m
e s i on of t h e Delu e f o
g tvh e N i nr r
e e h l ib at r
y T h e o h e a n d .

sm r r m t w
alle f a g en , m t hi ch ust r t p
b e da e d b y i ts sc i p , w a s u b li sh e d b y Hi l
pr t r V F
ech ( B a bylon i a n E x p edi ti on, s e i es D, Vol ,
pp a sc 1, 33 as s i gn e d . . .

it t b
o at t h m e p ri d ; b t i t i pr b bly f
ou e sa e oi d r b ly l t r d te
u s o a o a c on s e a a e a .

The m t onv eni n t tr n l t i n

os c f t h e leg n d th t w r k w n b e f r t h e
e a s a o s o e s a e e no o e

p b li t i on of the Ni pp r t e t
u ca th g i v e n b yu R o g e r Cxn i f
s m a re os e s, u e or

P a rall l t th Old T t m nt ( O f r d
e s o e n d Dh rm e
es a e Ch i d t t x o , a o , o ce e ex es
religi A y -B bylo i
eu x (
ss P r i
ro a n ens a s,

S e ab ov p 2 8 f n 2
2
e e, . .
, . .
44 D ELUGE S TO R IE S A ND THE S UME R IAN VE R S ION
carefully pres e rved a n d continued to be studied by the S emitic
prie s ts and s crib es S o the fact that the tablet is written in the
.

old S um e ri an to ngue prove s that the story it tell s had come

down from a v e ry much earlier period Th i s i nfer e nce is not .

a ffe cted by c e rtain small di fference s in idiom which i t s la n

guage pre s ents when compared with that of S umerian building

ins cription s ? S uch would naturally occur in the cours e of
transmi ss ion e sp ecially in a text which a s we s hall s e e h ad
, , ,

be e n employed for a practical purpo s e after being subj ected to

a proces s of redaction to s u it it to i ts new setting .

Wh en we turn to the t e xt its elf it will be obvious that the ,

story als o i s very primitive But before doing s o we will

.

inquire whether thi s very early vers ion i s likely to ca s t any

light on the origin of D e luge stories such as are often met
with in other parts of th e world Our inquiry will have an .

interes t apart from the que s tion it s elf a s it will illustrate the ,

views of two dive rgent schools among students of primitive

religiou s literature and tradition According to one of the s e.

vi ews in i t s mo s t extreme form the tale s which early or

, ,

primitive man t e ll s about his gods and the origin of the world
he s ee s around him are never to be regarded as s imple stories ,

but are to be consi s tently interpreted as symbolizing natural

phenom e na It is of cours e quite cer tain that both in Egypt
.
, , ,

and Babylonia mythology in the lat e r p e riod s rec e ived a s trong

,

a s trological colouring ; and it i s equally clear that some legend s

derive their origin from nature myths But the theory in the .

hand s of i ts more enthus ia s tic adhere nt s goes farther than that .

For them a compl e te abs ence of as trological colouring i s no

d e te rre n t from an a strological interpretation ; and where s uch ,

colouring does occur the pos sibility of later embellishment is

,

di s counted and it is treated without furth e r proof as the base

,

on which the original s tory re s t s One s uch interpre tation of .

the D e l u g e narrative in Babylonia particularly favoured by ,

recent G e rman writers would regard i t as refl e cting the pas s age
,

of t h e S u n through a portion of the ecliptic It is a s sumed tha t .

the primitive Babylonians were aware that in the cours e of

age s the s pring e quinox must travers e the southern or watery
r e gion of the zodiac Thi s on their sys te m s ignified a s u b
.
, ,

m ergence o i the whole universe in wat e r and the D e luge myth ,

would symbolize the s afe pa s sage of the vernal S u n -god through

that part of the ecliptic But we need not spend time over that
.

S e e fu h e rt r p , . 49 .
 A S TR O LOGI C AL THEO R IE S 45

view as its underlyi ng conception i s undoubtedly qui te a late

,

development of Babylonian astrology .

More attractive is the s impler a strological theory that the

voyage of any D eluge hero in h i s boa t or ark repre s ents the
daily j ourney of t h e S u n -god ac ross the h e avenly ocean a con ,

c ep t i on which is s o often repre s ented in Egyptian s c u lpture and

painting It use d to be assumed by holders of the theory that

.

this idea of the S un as th e god in the boat w a s common among

primitive races and that that wo ul d ac count for t h e widespread
,

occurrence of D eluge storie s among sca tte r e d rac e s of the world

- .

But thi s vie w h as recently undergone s ome modification in

accordance with the general trend of other lines of res e arch .

In rece nt years there has been an increas ed re a di n e s s among

archaeologists to recognize eviden c e of contact between the
gr eat civilizations of antiquity This has been particular ly the .

case in the area of the E aste rn M editerranean ; but the po s s ibility

has also been mooted of the e arly use of land -route s runn ing
from the Nea r Ea s t to Ce ntral and S outhern Asia The di s .

c ov e ry in Chine s e Turke s ta n to the eas t of t he C aspian of , ,

a prehistoric cul ture resembling that of Elam h a s now be en

followed by the finding of similar remains by S i r Aurel S te in
?
in the course of the j ourney from whi ch he h as lat e ly returned
They were discovered in an old bas in of t h e He lmand Ri ver in
e S
P rsian ei tan where they had been lai d bare by wind erosion
s ,
- .

But more interes ting still and an incentive to fur t her explora ,
"

tion in that region is another of his di sc overies last year also

, ,

made near the Afghan border At two sites in the Helmand .

Delta well above the level of inundation he ca me acro ss frag

, ,

ments of pottery insc ribed in early Ar amaic characters ? thoug h ,

for obvious reason s he h as left the m with all his other collections
,

in India This un expected fin d by the way sugg est s for our

.
, ,

problem po s sibilities of wide trans miss ion in comparatively early

times .

The s ynthetic te nde ncy among archaeologi s ts has been refl ecte d
in anthropologica l research which has be gun t o quest ion th e ,

s eparate and inde pendent origin not o nly of the more useful arts ,

and crafts but also of many primitive cus toms an d beliefs It is

, .

s uggested that too much stress h a s been laid on environment ;

and though it is readily ad mitte d that similar needs and

,

1 ‘
p
S e e h i s Ex edi i on i n C en a l Asi a t tr ’

, i n The Geogi ap hi ca l Jou r na l, Vol .

X V
L II (Jan —
u n e, . J
3 58 if pp . .

2
0p . cit , p 36 3
. .
46 DELUGE S TO R IE S A ND TH E S UME R IAN VE R S ION
experi ence s may in s ome case s have given ri s e to s imilarexpedients
and explanations it i s urged that man i s an imitative animal and
,

that i n ve ntive geniu s i s far from common ?

C onsequently the
wid e di s p e rs ion of many beli e fs and practice s which used ,

gen erally to be e xplained a s due to the s imilar and indepen dent

working of the human mind under like condition s i s now often ,

provi s ionally regi st e re d as evidence of migratory movement or

of cultural drift Much good work ha s recently been done in
.

ta bulating t he occurrenc e of many cu s tom s and beliefs in order ,

to a s c e r tain their line s of di s tribution Worker s a re a s y e t in .

t h e coll e cting s tag e and it i s hardly neces s ary to say tha t ,

e xplanatory theorie s are s till to be regarded a s pur e ly tentative

and provi s ional At the m e e tings of the Briti s h As s ociation

.

duri n g t he las t few y e ars th e mo s t bre e zy discus s ion s in the ,

Anthropological S ection have undoubtedly c e ntred around this

s ubj e ct There ar e s e veral work e rs in the fi e ld but the most
.
,

compr e h ens ive theory a s y e t put for w ard is one that concern s u s ,

a s it h a s given a n e w lease of life to the old s olar interpretati on

of th e D eluge s tory .

In a land s u ch a s Egypt wh e re th e re i s littl e rain and t h e sky ,

i s always cl e ar t h e s u n in i ts s pl e ndour t e nded from the e arli e s t

,

p eriod to dominate t h e national con s ciou sn e ss A s inte rcours e .

increa s e d along the Nil e Vall e y centres of S u n -wors hip cea s ed to ,

b e m e r e ly local and t h e political ri s e of a city d e termin e d the

,

fort n of
u e s i ts cult From t h e proto dynastic period onward the
- .
,
‘
King of the two Lan ds had born e t he t i tle of Horus a s t h e ’ ’

li n ea l d es c e n dant of the grea t S u n -god of Edfu and t h e ri s e of ,

R a in t h e Vt h Dyna s ty through the prie s thood of H e liopoli s , ,

was con fi rm e d in t he s olar theology of the Middl e Kingdom .

Thu s it w a s that oth e r d e iti e s a s s u m e d a s olar character a s form s

of R a A me n th e local god of Thebe s b e come s Am e n -R a wi th
.
, ,

t h e p oliti c a l ri s e of h i s c ity and e v e n t h e old C rocodile -god , ,

S e b c k s oars into t h e s k y a s S e b e k -R a
, The only oth e r move .

m ent in t he r eligio n of anci e n t Egypt comparabl e in importance ,

to thi s s olar d e v e lopm e n t w a s t h e pop u lar c u lt of O s iri s a s God of

,

t he D e ad and with it t h e o fficial religion had to com e to term s

, .

H oru s i s re born a s the po sth u mo u s s on of O s iri s and R a gladd e ns ,

h i s abo d e d u r in g h i s nightly j ourney thro u gh t he Und e rworld .

1
S e e, e .
g .
, Ma r ett A nthr op ology ( 2 md
, ed .
, Ch a p . i
v,Envi r nm nt
‘
o e
’

rli r t p rt i rly i r f m y t h l gi l
,

pp a nd fo r en d e n c i e s , c u la
.
ea e a n t he s p h e e o o o ca
i
e x eg e s s , s e e 8 Re i na ch , C u ltes , My thes et R eli i ons
.

g ,
t IV
.
pp . 1 if .
48 D ELUGE S TO R IE S A ND THE S UME R IAN VE R S ION
fecu ndity The neare s t Egyptian p a rallel to the D eluge story
.

i s th e L g
e e nd ‘
of the D e s truction of Mankind which is e u

grav e d on t he wall s of a chamber in the tomb of S eti I ?

Th e
’

lat e S i r Ga ston Maspero i nde e d called it a dry deluge myth ,

b u t h i s paradox w a s intended to e mpha s ize the d ifference as much

as the parall e li s m pr e s ent e d It i s tru e that in the Egypti an .

myth t h e S u n -god cau s e s manki n d to be s lain because of the i r

impi e ty and he eventually pardon s the s urvivors The narra
,
.

tive thu s betrays undoubt e d parall e li s m to th e Babylonian and

H ebrew stori e s s o far as concern s t he atte mpted annihilation of
,

mank ind by th e o ffe nded god but there the re s emblance ends ,
.

For wat e r ha s no par t in man s d e s truction and the es s ential ’

element of a Deluge s tory i s thu s ab s ent ?

Our new S um e rian

1 r p
It w as fi s t ub li sh e d b y Mons i eu Na vi lle, Tra ns S oc B i bl A r ch , IV r . . .

p p 1 if. T h .e y h m a y b m t
e os c on e n i e n ly s u di e d i n D r B u d gm t
e s e d i i o n i n v t t .
’

t
Egyp t i a n L i te ra t u r e, V o l I ,
L eg e n d s o f t h e G o d s .
1 4 ff , h e e t h e pp . .
w r
i r p
h e og y l h i c e x a n d a nt t
sla i o n a pr t
r e i n e d o n O tr
os i e a g e s ; t c f t h e pp t p .

su mma ry , op ci t , pp x x iii {f , . h e e th e
. pr p . . t
i n ci a l li e a u e i s a ls o c i ed w r S ee trt r .

l h i G d f th E gyp ti n V l I h p
a so s o s o e ii pp 3 88 ff a s, o .
,
c a . x ,
. .

1
Th nd e ubt d p i t fr
ou mb l e w ll th q lly tri ki g p i t
o n s o e se a n ce , a s e as e e ua s n o n s

o f di v r g n e pr t d b y th Egypti m yth wh n mp r d w i th th e
e c e, es e n e e an e co a e

B b y l ni n
a o d H b r w t ri
a an f D l g m y b b ri fl y i ndi t d
e e s o Th es o a e u e a e e ca e . e

i m p i ty f m
e i o mp l i i g f th g f R fi d p r ll l i th wi k ed
en n co a n n o e a e o a n s a a a e n e c

n es s of m n p n th a rth ( J ) nd th rr pt i f ll fl h (P) f th H b r w
u o e ea a e co u on o a es o e e e

Vri n (
e s o b v
s p 4 2
s ee a n Th o e, mm n i n g yb . R f t h
,
e g r t
.
H li e su o a o ea e o

p lit
o an mi g d i c os n il i
c l di g h i p r
o s i fi ed Ey t h pr i m ev l
n c ou c ,
nc u n s e s on e, e a a

p i r S h nd T fn t Keb th e g d f th rth nd h i
a u a e u ,
rt N t th ky o o e ea a s c on s o u e s

g dd
o d N t
es s , a n h pr i m v l w t
u r g d n d e r i g i n lly N t m
ae a l t rp rt a e - o a o a u
’
s a e cou n e a ,

i p r ll l d b y t h p h
s a a e e i ld i mb ly f th e g d i th B b yl ni n
e u ar n , or a sse o o s n e a o a

V r i ( Gi lg Ep i X I 1 1 20 f nd f 11
e s on s ee . c,nd t h y m , t i n th e
. .
, a c . . a e ee
‘

Gr t H ea S n -t mp l
ou s e t H li p li
or u t h B b y l i n g d d li b r t
e e a e o o s, as e a on a o s e e a e

i Sh
n u ru
pp k E gy pt i a B b.
y l n i n d H b r e w n rr t
an , i v ll g r a i t h o a n, a e a a es a a ee n e

di v i d t rm i t i n t d tr y m nk i nd d i n m n lt i m t rv i v l B t '
ne e e na o o es o a an a s u a e su a . u

th l
e c os e o f t h Egypt i n t y di v rg e i nt th r ph ere Th l ghter f
a s or e es o ano e s . e s au o

m b y th Ey
en f R i th f rm f t h g dd
e e o a H t h r w h d ri g th ni gh t
n e o o e o es s a o , o u n e

w d i n th i r b l d i gg ti v f Afri ; n d t i he dri k i g f m n
a es e oo , s su es e o ca a so oo s r n n o e
’
s

b l d m i d w i t h th n r t i m
oo x e dr k n d w i th
e v n th nd v l f b e r
a co c an a ea se e ous a es s e s o e ,

w ith th r lt th t thr gh dr nk n
e es u ah ed fr m lou gh t e r Th e l tt u r e nes s s e c ea s o s au . a e

p rt f th rr t i v i di r tly
a o e na a t d wi t h t h e lt ri t l nd b r dri k i g
e s ec c onn e c e cu - ua a ee - n n

a t th F t i v l
e f H t h r nd R ; b t t h d tr t i n f men b y l gh t r i n
es a s o a o a a u e es uc o o s au e

pl a ce o f d r w ni g pp r t b l ng t th
o n a ri gi n l my th Ind d th ly
ea s o e o o e o a . ee , e on

su gg t i es f D l g t ry i
on o a ppli d by th pr
e u e s o f N t h pr i m v l s su e e es e n c e o u, e ae a

w t rg d t R
a e - o ,
n il a nd t h t i a s
’
pli b l n th r gr d In ny
c ou c , a a s ex ca e o o e ou n s . a

c as e th p i t e fr mbl
o n s o pr nt d by th rli r p rt f t h Egy p t i n
es e a nc e es e e e ea e a o e a

m y th t S m i t i D l g t ri
o e g n r l n t d t il d ;
c e u n d t h o gh t h y
e s o es a r e e e a , o e a e a u e

m y pa ib ly b d
os s t r fl t i n fr m A ie ue t h y e n t h t gge t n
o e ec o o s a, e ar o suc as o su s a

Egy pt i n ri gi f D l g m yt h
a o n or e u e s .
 R A A ND THE DE S TR U CTION OF M A NKIN D 49

d ocument , on the other hand contains what is by far the earliest ,

example yet recovered of a genuine Deluge tale ; and we may

thus use it incidentally to test this theory of Egyptian influence ,

and also to ascertain whether it furni s hes any positive evidenc e

on the origin of D eluge stories in general .

The tablet on which our new version of the D eluge is inscribe d

w a s excavated at Nippur during the third Babylonian expeditio n
sent out by the Univers ity of Pennsylvania ; but it was not unti l
the s ummer of 19 1 2 that its contents were identified when the ,

several fragments of which it is composed were as s embled and

put together It is a large document containing six columns of
.
,

writing three on each side ; but unfortunately only the lower

,

half has been recovered so that con s iderable gaps occur in the ,

text ?
The sharp edges of the broken surface however suggest , ,

t hat it was damaged after removal from the soil and the ,

pos s ibility remains that some of the mi s sing fragments may yet
be recovered either at Pennsylvania or in the Museum at Con
s t a n t i n o le A s it is not dated its age must be determined
p .
,

mainly by the characte r of its s cript A close examination of .

the writing suggests that it can hardly have been inscribed as

late as the Kas s ite Dynasty s ince two or three signs exhibit ,

more archaic forms than occur on any tablet s of that period ; 1

and such linguistic c orruptions as have been noted in its text

may well be accounted for by the process of decay whi ch must have
already affected the S umerian language at the time of the later
kings of N i sin Moreover th e ta blet bears a close resemblance
.
,

t o one of the newly published 0 0 pies of the S umerian Dyn astic

List from Nippur ; for both are of the same shape and com
3

posed of the same reddish -brown clay and both show the same ,

peculiarities of writing The two tablets in fact appear to have .

been written by the same hand and as that copy of the Dynastic ,

Li s t was probably drawn up before the latter half of the First

Dynasty of Babylon we may a s sign the same approximate date ,

for the writing of our text 1

This of cours e only fixes a lower .
‘

limit for the age of the myth which it ens hrines .

Th at the composition is in the form of a poem may be seen at .

1
r t
Th e b ea d h of th e ab le i s 5 3 in t t .
, a nd it ri gi n lly m e
o a r
a su ed ab ou t 7 in .

t r
i n le ng h f om t op to b o o ; b u t only tt m a b ou t on e -t hi rd of i t s i nsc ri b ed su r
fac e
ispr rv
ese ed .

1
Cf P oeb el, H i s t Tex ts ,
. 6 6 if . pp . .

1
No 5 s ee ab o e,
. 2 8, n 1 v p . . .

4
S ee ab o e , v p . 43 .

K .
50 DELUGE S TO RIE S A ND THE S UME R IAN VE R S ION
a glance from the e xternal appearance of the tablet the division ,

of many of the li n e s and the blank space s frequently left b e tween

the s ign-groups b e ing due to the rhythmical charact e r of the
text T h e s tyl e of t he po e try may be simple and abrupt but
. ,

it exhi b its a familiar feature of both S emitic Babylonian and

-

Hebre w poetry in i t s con s tant e mployment of partial repetition

,

or paraphras e in parallel line s The story it tells is very .

primitive and in many re s pects unlik e the Babylonian Versions of

the D eluge which we already poss e s s P e rhap s i ts m ost s triking .

pecul iarity i s the s etting of the s tory which opens with a record ,

of the creation of man and animal s goes on to tell how the first ,

citie s wer e built and end s with a version of th e Deluge which i s

, ,

thus recounted in i ts relation to the S umerian hi s tory of the

world This literary connexion be tween the C reation and D eluge
.

narrative s i s of unusual int e r es t in vi e w of the age of our text , .

In the Babylonian Vers ions hitherto known they are included

in s eparate epic s with qui te di ffe rent contexts Here they are .

recounted together in a s ingle document much a s they probably ,

were in t he history of B er os sus and a s we find them in the

pres ent form of the Book of Genesis Thi s fact will open up .

s ome interesting problems when we attempt to trace the literary

de s cent of th e tradition .

But one important point about the text should b e emphas i zed
at once s inc e it will affect our unders tanding of s ome very
,

obscur e pas sage s of which no satisfactory e xplanation ha s yet

,

been given The as s umption has hitherto be e n made that the

.

text i s an epic pure and simple It is quite tru e that the greater .

part of it i s a myth recounted a s a narrative in poetical form

, .

But there app e ar t o me to b e clear indication s that the myth

‘

was really embedded in an incantation If this w a s so the .

,

mythologica l portion w a s recited for a magical purpo s e with the ,

obj e ct of invoking the aid of the chief deities who s e actions in

t h e past are th e r e d e s crib e d and of increa s i n g by that means
,

t h e potency of t h e s pell ? In the third lecture I propose to tre at

,

i n more detail t he employment and significance of myth in

magic and w e s hall have occasion to refer to other in s tanc e s
,
,
S um e rian Babylonian and Egyptian in which a myth h as
, , ,

r eached u s in a magical s e tting .

In the pre s ent ca s e the infe renc e of magical use is drawn from
1
It wi ll b e s e en t t ha th e sub ec - a j t m tt r e of a ny myth tr t d i n thi w y h
ea e s a as
a c lose c onne x i on wt i h th e obj e c for t whi ch t he i n nt t i n w
ca a p e rf rm ed ;
o as o
s ee fu hert r p , . 12 6 f .
 MYTH IN M A GI C AL EMPLOYME NT 1

certain passag es in the te xt it s elf which appear to be explicable ,

only on that hy pothesi s In magical compo s itions of the later .

period intend e d for recitation the sign for Incantation is ,

‘ ’

usually prefixed Unfortunate ly t h e b egi nni ng Of our text is

.

wanting ; but its Opening word s w e re given in the Oolophon or ,

title which is engraved on the left hand edge of the tablet and
,
-
,

it i s possible that the traces of the fir s t s ign there are to be read

as E N Incantati on ? S hould a e examination of the tablet
,
‘
r -
’

establish thi s reading of the word we should have definite proof ,

of the s u ggested magical setting of the narrative But even if .

we as sume its absence that would not invalidate the argum e nts
,

that can be adduced in favour of recognizing the existe nce of a

magical element for they are based on internal evidence and
,

enable us to explain cert ain features which are inexplicable on

Dr P o eb el s hypothesis Moreover we shall later on ex amine
’
. .
,

another of the newly published S umerian compositions from

Nippur which is not o nly semi -epical in character but is of
, ,

precisely t h e same s hape script and period as our text and is , , ,

very probably a ta blet of the sa me seri es There also the Ope n ing .

sign s O f the text are wanting but far more of its contents are ,

?
pres erved and they pre s ent unmistakable traces of magical use
Its evidence as that of a parallel text may therefore be cited in
, ,

support of the pre sent contention It may be added that in .

S umerian magical compositions of this early period of whi ch we ,

have not yet recovered many quite obvious examples it is ,

po s sible that the prefix Incantation was not so invariable as in ‘

the later magical literature .

It h a s already been remarked that only the lower half of our

tablet ha s been recovered and that co ns equently a number of ,

g ap s occur in the text On the obverse the upper portion

. Of each
of the first three columns is missing while of the remaining ,

thre e columns which are inscribed upon the reverse the upper
, ,

portions only are pre s erved This diffe rence in the relative .

p ositions of the textual fragments recovered is due to the fac t

1
Cf Poeb el, H i st Tex ts ,
. . p
6 3 , and H i s t a n d Gr a m Tex ts , p l i
. In th e. . . .

p h o to g ra hi c p e o dr pr
u c i o n O f t h e e dt
g e s o f t h e a b le g i en i n t h e la t v
e o lu e, t tt r v m
p l. lx x x i x , th e tr
a c e s of th e s i gn s u gges t h e ead i ng E N t rS e m sip ta , .

‘
i nc a n a i on tt But the s ig n m ay e y o s s i b ly b e ea d A N v r p r
In th e la e . tt r
r
c a s e w e ma y ea d , i n t h e tr r p
a c e s of t h e t w o s i gn -g o u s a t t h e b egi n ni ng of th e

t t
ex , t h e na m t
es of b o h A n u an d Enlil, w h o a ea pp r r
s o f e qu en ly a s th e tw o t
p r e idi
s ng d ei ti e i n t h e m y tsh ; s ee f t h er p 5 3
ur , . .

1
S ee b elow p 12 5 f , . .
52 DELUGE S TO R IE S A ND THE S UME R IA N VE R S ION

t hat S um e rian s cribes like their later Babylonian and Assyrian

,

imitators wh en they had fi ni s hed writing the obverse of a tablet

, ,

turned it ove r from bottom to top — not as we should turn a sheet ,

of pap e r from right to left But in s pite O f t h e lacunae the

,
.
,

s equ enc e of events related in the mythological narrativ e may be

follow ed without di fficulty since the main Outline of the s tory ,

i s already familiar enough from the vers ion s of the S emitic

Babylonian s cribes and of B e r os su s S ome uncertainties natu rally .

remain a s to what exactly was included in the mi s s ing por tion s

of t h e tablet ; but the more important epis odes a r e fortunat e ly
recount e d in the extant fragments and these s u ffi ce for a definition ,

of th e di s tinctive character of th e S umerian Vers ion In view of .

i t s literary importance it may be advi s able to attempt a s om e what

detailed di s cu ss ion of i ts contents column by column 1
and the ,

analys i s may be mo s t conve niently divided into numbered

s ectio ns e ach of which refer s to one of the six column s of the
,

tablet The description of the Firs t C olumn will serve to e s tab

.

lish the general character Of the text Throughout the analys is .

of th e tablet parallel s and contrasts will be noted w ith the

Babylonian and H e brew Versions It will then be po ss ible to .

s ummarize on a s urer foundation , the literary hi s tory of the ,

traditions and finally to e s timat e the e ffect of our new evidence

,

upon current theorie s as to the origin and wide di s pers ion of

D eluge s tories .

The following headings under which the six numbered s ections

,

may be arranged indicate the contents of each column and s how

,

at a glance the main features of the S umerian Version :

I . Introduction to t h e Myth and account of Creation , .

II . The Antediluvian Citie s .

III . The Council of the Gods an d Z i u su du s piety ,

’
.

IV . The Dream -Warning .

V . The D eluge the Escape ofthe Great Boat and the S acrifice
, ,

to the S un -god .

VI . The Propitiation of the Angry Gods and Z i us udu s Immor ,

’

I I NTR O DU CTION To TH E MYTH A ND ACC O U NT or CR E A TION — The

.
,

beginning Of the text is wanting and the ear liest lines pre s erved ,

of the Firs t C olumn Open with the clo s ing sentences of a s peech ,

1
t r vr
In the lec u e as deli e ed t he c on en t t f ea h l m n w e re
s o c co u nec essa ri ly
su
m
m r z r t
Pr
en dence ; s ee
r r
a i ed a h e b i efl

p v
e face,
y , and c onclus i on s
. .
w r e gi ven wi thout di
e scuss i on Of th e
 INT R O DU CTION TO THE S UME R IAN TE X T 53

probably by the chi ef of the four Creating deities who are later ,

o n referred to by name In it there is a reference to a fu ture .

d e s tr uction of mankind but the context is broken ; the lines in ,

que s tion begin

As for my human race from (or in) its destruction will I cause ,

i t to b e
For Nintu my cr e ature s will I
Fr om the refere nce to my human race it i s clear that the
spea k e r i s a creating deity ; and since the expres s ion i s exac tly
parallel to the term my p e ople us ed by Ishta r or B elit -ili the , ,

La dy of the gods in the Babylonian Version of the D eluge s tory

when sh e bewail s the destruction of mankind D r P o eb el a s signs
1
,
.

t h e speech to Ni n k h a rs a gga or Nintu the goddess who later in

1
, ,
’
the column is associated with A nn En lil and Enki in man s , ,

creation But the mention of Nintu in her own speech is har dly
.

con s iste nt with that s upposition if we assume with Dr P oebe l

3
,
.
,

as we are probably j us tified in doing that the title Nintu is ,

employed here and elsewhere in the narrative merely as a syn onym

of Ni n k ha rs a gga 1
It appears to me far more probable that one .
‘

of the two s upreme gods Anu or Enlil i s the sp eaker and addi
5
‘

, , ,

t i ona l grounds wi ll be cited later in support of this view It is

‘

indeed possible in spite of the verbs and suffixes in the s ingular , ,

that the speech i s to be as s igned to both Anu and En lil for i n ,

the last column as we shall s e e we find verbs in the s ingular , ,

following references to both these d eities 6

In any case one of .

the two chief god s may be regarded as speaking and acting on

1
w p
See b elo , 63 f . .

1
0p ci t , p. J . . . p
2 1 f ; a n d c f a str ow , H ebrew a nd B a byloni a n Tr a di ti on s , . 3 36 . .

3
t t t tv tv
It n e c es s i a e s t h e a k i ng o f ( di ngi r ) Ni n-tn -r a as a g eni i e, n ot a da i e ,
an d t h e vr w w r r
e y a r ‘
r t
k a d e nde i ng my , Ni ntu s , c ea i on s ’

4
t r r t p
A n o h e o f t h e ec en ly m r m t
ub li s h e d S u e i an y mp t
h olo g i c a l c o os i i on s

r m pp r
f o Ni u ( s v p
ee a b o e ,
5 1 ) i n c lm r m t
u des a n u b e O w
f y h s i n h i ch.E nki i s

t rtwt
a s s oc i a e d fi s r rr t t
i h Ni n ella , e fe ed t o a ls o as Ni n u , th e G odd ess of Bi r h
‘

t h en wt r wt
i h Ni nsh a r , e fe rr ed t o a ls o a s Ni n k u rra , a n d fi nally i h Ni nkh ar
sa gg a f rth r p 1 2 5
s ee Th i t e t
u hi b i t th pr
e ,
b y wh i h .
p r te s x ex s e oc es s c se a a

tr di t i wi th r g rd t g dd
a on s o ri gi n lly di t i n t w r
e mb i n d t g t h e r
a o o es s e s a s c e e co e o e ,

w i th th r lt th t th i h r i n w r b q tly ft i d nt i fi ed wi t h n
e es u a e r e o es e e su se u en O en e o e

a n th ro Th r th m y t h h v n t b e n
e . e ebj e t ed t v ry v re pr
e of s a e o e su c o a e se e oc ess

e di t i n g nd i n ,n q n t h w ldi n g i n t
a compl t a i n th S m eri n
se ue ce e e s o so c o e e s e u a

V er i n f th e D l g
s o o e u e .

5
If E li l n m e h ld pr v t o b t h fi r t w r d f t h ompo i ti on ( e e
’
n s a s ou o e e e s o o e c s s

ab ov p 5 1 n w h ld n t r lly r g rd h i m th e p k er h er nd as
e, .
, . e s ou a u a e a as s ea e a

t h pr t g n i t f th e g d t h r gh o t th t e t
e o a o s i l h e l o pl y i n th e
o o s ou u e x , a r e a s a s

S m i ti -B b y l i n V e r i on
e c a on a s .

1
S e b l w p 86
e e o , . .
54 DELUGE S TO R IE S A ND THE S UME R IAN VE R S ION
be ha lf of both though it may be that the inclusion of the second
,

name in t he narrativ e was not origin al but s imply due to a com

bination of variant tradition s S uch a c onfl a t e .
-
use of Anu Enlil
would pr es e nt a s triking parallel to t h e H e brew combination
Yahwe h -Elohim though of course in the ca s e Of the former pair
,

t h e s ubs e quent s tage of identification w a s never attain e d But .

th e e vid e nc e furni s hed by the text i s not conclu s ive and it is ,

preferabl e here and el s ewhere in t h e narrative to regard either

Anu or Enlil as s peaking and acting both on h i s own behalf and
’

as the oth e r s representative .

Thi s refe rence to the De luge which occurs so early in the text , ,

s u gge s t s the probability that the account of the C reation and of

the foundin g of Antediluvian cities included in the fi rs t two ,

columns i s to b e ta k en m e rely as s u mmarizing the ev e nts that

,

led up to the D eluge And an almo s t certain proof of thi s may

.

be s e en in th e Opening words of the compo s ition whi ch are pre ,

s e rv e d i n i ts colophon or title on the left hand edge of the tabl e t

- .

We have already noted that the firs t two word s are there to be
read either as the prefix In cantation followed by the name
,

‘
Enlil or a s the two divine name s Anu (and) Enlil
’

,
Now ‘

the s ign s which follow th e trace s of Enlil s name a r e quite ’

c ertain ; they repre s ent Z i u su du which as we shall see in the ,

Third Column is the name O f the Deluge hero in our S umerian

,

Version H e i s thus mentioned in the opening word s of the text

.
,

in some relation to one or both of the two C hief gods of the sub
sequent narrative But the natural place for hi s firs t introduction
.

into the story is in the Third C olumn where it i s related that at ,

that time Z i usu du the king did s o-and -s o The prominence

, .

given him at the beginning of th e text at nearly a column s ,

’

interval before the lines which record the creation Of man is ,

sufficient proof that the D e luge s tory is the writer s main interest
’

and that preceding episodes are mere ly introductory to it .

What s ubj ec t then may we conj ecture was treat e d in the

missing line s Of thi s column which precede t he account of Crea ,

tion and close with the s peech Of the chief creating deity ? Now
the Deluge narrative practically end s with the last line s of the
tablet that are preserved and the lower half of the S ixth C olumn
,

i s entirely wanting We shall see reason to believe that the

.

miss ing e nd of the tabl e t was not left blank and unins cribed but ,

conta in e d an incantation t he magical efficacy of which was,

ensur ed by the preceding recitation of the D eluge myth If that .

1
S ee a b o e, v p . 5 1, n . l .
56 D ELUGE S TO R IE S A ND THE S UME R IAN VE R S ION

W e shall
’
later from the remainder of Marduk s s peech
s ee
1
, ,

that t he S emitic Ve rsion h as been elaborate d at thi s point in

order to recon cil e it with oth e r ingredient s in i t s narrative ,

w hi c h w e r e e ntirely absent from the simpler S umerian tradi tion

r
.

It will s uffic e here to note that in both th e rea s on given for , ,

man s e xi s tenc e i s the same nam ely that the god s th e m s e lve s
’

, ,

may have wors hippers ?

The conception is in full agreem e nt
with early S umerian thought and reflects the theocratic con ,

s t i tu t i on of the earliest S umerian communities Th e idea was .

naturally not re pugnant to the S emites and it need not s urprise ,

u s to find the very word s of the principal S umerian C reator put

into the mouth of Marduk the city-god of Babylon , .

The deity s s peech perhaps comes to an end with the declara

’

tion O f his purpose in creating mankind or in sanctioning their

s urvival of t h e D eluge ; and the following three line s appear

to relate his es tablis hment of the divine laws in accordance with

which his intention w a s ca rried out The passage includes .

a refrain which i s repeated in the S econd Column

,

The s ublime decrees he made perfect for it .

It may probably be as sumed that the refrain i s employed in

relation to the s ame deity in both pa s sage s In the S ec ond .

Column it precedes t h e foundation of th e Babylo nian kingdom

and the building of the Antediluvian cities In that pass age .

there can be little doubt that the subj ect of the verb is the chief
S u m e rian deity and w e are therefore the more inclined to
,

a ss ign to him al s o t h e opening speech of the Firs t Column ,

rather than to regard it as s poken by the S um e rian goddess

who s e share in creation would justify her in claiming mankind
as her ow n In the last four lines O f t h e col u mn we have a brief
.

record of the Creation itself It w a s carri e d out by the three .

greates t god s of the S um e rian pantheon Anu Enlil and Enki , , ,

with the help of the goddess Ni nk ha rs a gga ; the pa s sage reads

When Anu E nlil Enki and Ni nk hars agga
, ,

Created the blackh e ad e d ( i e mankind

) . .
,

Th e nzggzl(ma ) of t he e arth they caused the earth to produce P

( ) ,

The animals the four l e gge d creature s of the fi eld they

- ,
,
artfully called into existe nce .

1
. t r
C f Lec u e III, 1 15 f p . .

1
t tt
It may b e a dded ha h is i s als o th e eas on
g i en for
’
r
an s c e a i on i n t he v m r t
in tr t
o du c i on t o a e x
t tw rt
h i ch celeb a e s t h e fou ndi n or eb ui ldi n of a e
g g le ; r t mp
s ee b elo , w p
1 10 . .
 C R EATION OF MAN A ND ANIMAL S 57

interpreta tion of the thir d li ne i s O bs c ure but there is no

Th e ,

d oubt tha t it record s the cre a tion of s omet hi ng which i s r e p r e

s ented a s having t ak e n pla c e b e tw e en the cr e ation of manki n d

and that of animals Thi s obj ect whi ch i s writte n as ni g-gi l o r .

,

n ig-gi l-ma i s referred to again in th e S ixth Co l u mn wh e re t h e

, ,

S umeria n h e ro of the D elug e ass igns to it t h e h onorific titl e ,

‘
Pre s erv e r of the S e e d O f Mankind It must t h e re fore h av e ’
.

p layed an imp rt nt par t in man s pr e s ervation from t h e Flood ;

’
o a

and t h e su b s equent be sto wal of the title may b e pa ralle led in t h e

early S emitic D eluge fragment from Nippur wh e re t h e bo at in ,

which U ta n ap is h ti m e s ca pes is ass ign e d the v e ry s i milar t itl e

~

Pr eserver of Life But n iggi lma is not the word use d in th e

S umerian Version o i usu du s boa t and I am inclin e d to s ugge s t
’
1
,

a m ea ni ng for it i n co nnexi on wi th t h e magica l element in t he

text of the e xistence of which there is other e v idence On that
, .

ass umption the prominence giv e n to i ts cre ation may be para l

,

leled in the introd uction to a la ter magical t e xt which des cri be d , ,

probably in connexion with an incantation t h e creation of t w o ,

small creatures one whi te an d one bla ck by N in -i gi -aza g The

, , ,
‘

Lo rd of Cl ear Vision one of the title s borne by Enk i or Ea ’

, .

The time of their creation is indi ca ted as after t hat of ca tt le ‘

,

beast s of t h e field and b r eatur e s of the city and the compos ition
O pens in a way which is very like the O pening of the present

passa ge in our t e xt 3
In neither t ext i s there any idea of givi n g
.

a complete account of the crea tion of the world o nl y so m u ch ,

of the origi nal myt h be i ng included in each ca se a s s uffice s for

the writer s purpos e Here we may assume that th e creation
’
.

O f man kind and of anim al s i s recorded beca us e t hey were to be

saved from the Flood and t hat of the niggi lma bec ause of the ,

part it played in ens uring th e ir s urvi val .

The disc ussi on of t he mean ing of niggi lma may bes t be po st

poned till the S ixth C olumn wh e re we find oth er r e fer e nces to ,

S ee Hi lp r ec h t , Ba bylon i a n E x p edi ti on, S e i es D Vol

1
,
as c 1 , la e Re v , r , . V F . p t ,
.

p t r p r pr
1 8 t h e h o og a hi c e odu c i on clea ly sh o s as Dr
. t r
os he l s ug g es t s ( H i s t w , . P .

Tex ts , 6 1, n p. t t
h a t h e li n e h ould ea d :
.s gi i h t ( su )
i m a -
g r
m ~ v

gu r nn a su m -ha In na si r a t n a p i s t i m, Tha sh i
- - - - ‘
s hall b e a ma g m g u r m ( gi a n t p t
t , m
b oa ) an d i t s na e s ha ll b e P e s e e o f Li fe ( li t Sh e ha
” “
r es e rv r
es . t t pr rv
1
S e eb e lo , 79 w p . .

3
S e e S er en Ta blets of Crea ti on, Vol I, t p wt
1 22 ff Th e e x t O e n s .i h th e pp . .

w r t r m
o d s Wh en t h e g od s i n h ei as se m w r r t
b ly ha d a d e [ t h e o ld] a n d had c ea e d ,

th h v e a n d h d f rm d t h
ea en s , rt h nd h d b r gh t li vi ng re t re i nt o
a o e e ea , a a ou c a u s

b i g e n th li f rmi n g n i n tr d ti on t t h
e p i l t f r ea ti n
n es o a o uc o e s ec a ac o c o

wi th w hi h t h omp it i n w on rn d
c e c os o as c ce e .
58 DELUGE S TO R IE S A ND THE S UME R IAN VE R S ION

the word M eanwhile it may be noted that in the present

.

p a s s ag e t h e creation of man prec e d e s that of animal s as it did ,

in t he e arli e r H e br e w Ve rs ion of Cre ation and probably als o in ,

the Babylonian Vers ion though not in the later Hebrew Version
,
.

It may be add e d that in another S umerian account of the

C r e ation the s ame order O f man b e fore animals i s followed
1
, ,
.

II TH E A NTE DILU VIA N C i r rus — A s we s aw was the ca s e with

.

the Firs t C olumn of t h e text the earliest part preserved of the ,

S econd C olumn contain s t h e close of a speech by a deity in ,

which he proclaim s an act he i s about to perform Here W e .

may as sume with some con fi dence that the speaker is Anu or
E n lil pr e fe rably the latter s ince it would be natural to ascribe
, ,

t h e political con s titu t ion of Babylonia the foundatio n of which ,

i s for e shadow e d to the head of the S umerian pantheon

,
It .

wo u ld appear that a beginning had already been ma de in the

e s ta bli s hment of the kingdom and before proceeding to his
‘ ’

, ,

furth e r work of foundi n g the Antediluvian citie s he follows the ,

e xample of t h e s peaker in the Firs t C olumn of the text and lays

down t h e divine enactm e nts by which h i s purpose was a c c om

p li s h e d Th e. sam e refrain i s repeated
The s ub [ lim e decrees ] he made perfect for it .

The t e xt th e n r e lates the founding by the god of five cities ,

p robably in cl e an‘
place s that i s to s ay on hallowed ground
’

, .

He call s e ach by i t s name and as s igns it to i t s own divine patron

or C ity -god

In cl e an plac e] s he foun ded [ fi ve ] cit [ ies] .

d afte r he h a d call e d their nam es and they had been

allott e d to divi n e rul e rs
of th e s e cities Eri du he gav e to the leader Nu, , ,

d i mmu d,
S e condly to Nngira ( 3) he ave Bad
,

Thirdly Larak he gave to a bi lk harsa g

, ,

Fourthly S ip par h e gave to the hero t h e S u n-god

, , ,

Fi fthly S h u r uppa k h e gave to th e God of S h u ru p p a k

,

Af te r h e h a d call e d t he name s of the s e cities and th e y had

,

been allotted to divin e rulers (P) ,

The compl etion of the sentence in the last two lines of the ,

column cannot be rendered with any ce rtaint y but the pa s sage

,
,

1
C f Sev Ta bl Vol I,
. .
13 4 f . p t t
b u t th e e x h a s b e en s ub ec ed t o e di i ng ,
. . j t t
m
a nd s o e of i t s e i s odes a r e ob i ou s l d i s l
p y v
a c ed p
S ee fu h e Lec u e III 12 3 . rt r t r ,
p . .

1
mt
1n S e i i c -Ba b loni an th e fi s co
y o n e n o f -rt mp
hi s c i y na e ould ea d t t t m w r
‘
D0 r ’
.
 CR EATION OF THE S UME RIAN KING D OM 59

appears to have r e lated the creation of s mall rivers and poo ls .

It will be noted that the line s which contain t h e names of the

five cities and their patron gods form a lo n g explanatory
1

parenthe s i s th e precedi n g line being repeated aft er their

,

enumeration .

As the fi rst of the se rie s of five cities i s Eridu the seat of ,

Nu d i mmu d or Enki who was the third of the creating deities , ,

it has be en urged that the upper part of the S econd C olumn

mus t have included an account of the founding of Erech the ,

city Of Anu and of Nippur Enlil s city ?

, But the numbered ,
’

sequence of the cities would be difficult to reconcile with the

earlier creation of other citie s in the text and the mention of ,

Erid u as the first city to be created would be quite in accord

with i ts great age and peculiarly s acred characte r as a c u lt
C entre Moreover the evidence of the S umerian Dynastic Li s t
.

i s definit e ly against a ny claim of Erech to Antediluvian ex i s

tence For when the h e gemony passed from the first Post
.

diluvian ki n gdom to the second it went not to Erech but to

‘
,

the shrine E a nn a which gave its nam e to t h e second kingdom , .

‘

and the city itself w as apparently not founded before the reign
of Enmerk ar the second occupant Of the throne who i s the first
, ,

to be given the title King of Erech 3

This conclusion with ‘ ’
.

regard to Erech incidentally disp ose s of the argu ments for

Ni p pu r s Ant e diluvian ra nk in primitive S umerian tradition
’

which have been founded on the order of the cities mentioned

4
at the beginning of the later S umeri an myth of C reation The .

evidence we thus obtain that the early S umerians thems e lve s

regarded Eridu as the fi rs t city in the world to b e cre ated ,

increases the h Op e that future excavation at Abu S h ahr a i n may

reveal S umerian remains of period s which fr om an archaeological ,

sta ndpoint must still be regarded as prehi s toric

, .

1
Th e pr eci s e m ea n i ng of th e s ig n -
g r pou he r pr ovi
e s i onally r end r ed e v
di ine
r u le r is
y et a s c en ot rt a i n ed .

1
Cf Poeb e l, op c i t
. . .
,
p . 41 .

1
S ee ab o e , v p
t r ecord by th w y i ll tr t e t h m i g f th e
. 35 . Th a , e a ,
us a s e ea n n o

p h r e in l n p l
as wh n pp li d t t h A t dil vi
c ea a c es iti e F Er h e a e o e n e u an c s . or ec ,

th ou
gh f P t dil v iO n r i gios - w l f un d e d i a l n p ot O n m ly n, as a so ou
‘
n a c ea s
’
, a e

ar o n d th e n i nt
u lt at f E nn
c e cu c en r e o a a .

S e Le t r III p 1 2 3 f Th
4
e c u e i ty f Ni pp r d e n t oc r m
, .
g th e fi r t
. e c O u o s o cu a on s

f r ki gdom
ou
‘
of t h n S m eri n Dyn t i Li t ( ee b v pp 34 iii ) ; b t w e
s e u a as c s s a o e, . u

m y pr b b ly
a m e th t i t w as th e se t f t l t n e ea rly ki ngd m i n
o a a ssu a a O a e as o
‘
o

c on q sen
e c of w hiu h Enliel i t i t -
y g o d tt i nc d h i l t e r p re e m i n e nt r n ,k s c , a a e s a a

i n th S m eri a n p anth e n
e u o .
60 D ELUGE S TO R IE S A ND TH E S UME R IAN VE R S ION
It not e worthy that no human rulers are mentioned in con
is
ne x i on with Eridu and t h e oth e r four Ant e diluvian citi e s ; and

Z i u su du t h e h e ro of the story i s apparently t he only m orta l

, ,
’

wh o s e n a m e occurre d in our text But i ts author s principal

'

s ubj e ct i s t h e D e lug e and the preceding hi s tory of the world i s,

cl e arly not giv e n in de tail but i s merely s ummarized In vie w ,

.

of the obviou s ly abbre viat e d form of the narrative of which we ,

hav e a lre ady noted s triking evid ence in i ts account of the C rea
tion we may conclu de that in the fuller form of the tradition
1
,

t h e cities wer e al s o a s s igned human ruler s e ach one t h e r e pre ,

s e nt a t i v e of i
h s city -god These would corr e spond to t h e Ante .

diluvian dyna s ty of B eros su s the last member of which was ,

X i s u t h ros t he later co u nte rpart of Z i u su du

,
.

In s upport of t h e e xclusion of Nippur and Erech from the myth ,

it will b e not e d that t h e s econd city in the li s t i s not A dab 2

,

which w as probably the principal seat of the godd e s s Ni nkh a r

s agga t h e fourth of the creating deities
,
The names of bot h .

deity and city in that line a re strange to us Larak the third .

,

city in t he s eries i s of gr e ater intere s t for it is clearly L ar an k h a

, , ,

which according to B e r os su s was the seat of the eighth and

ninth of h i s An t e dil uvian kings In commercial documents .

of th e P e rs ian p e riod which have been found during the excava ,

tions at Nippur Larak i s de s cribed as lying on the bank of the

,
’
Old Tigri s a phra s e which must be taken a s referring to the
,

S hatt e l- Hai in view of the situation of Laga sh and oth e r early

,

cities upon it or in i ts immediate neighbourhood The site of .

t h e city s hould perhap s b s ought on the upper cours e of the

e
str e am where it tend s to approach Nippur It would thu s have
, .

lain in the n e ighbou rhood of B i s may a the s it e of Adab Like , .

Adab Laga s h S hu ru pp ak and other early S umerian citie s it was

, , , ,

probab ly de s troyed and deserted at a very early period though ,

it w a s reoccupi e d und e r its old name in Ne o-Babylonian or

P e rs ian times Its e arly di s app e aranc e from Babylonian history
.

p e rhap s in part accounts for our own un familiarity with P ab i l

k ha rs a g i ts city -god unles s we may regard the name as a varian t
, ,

1
S ee a b o e , 57 v p . .

9
t
Th e s i e o f A d a h, n ow a k ed b y t h e m r
ounds o f B i s may a , w a s a i a lly m p rt
vt
e x ca a ed b y a n e x p t
e d i i on s e n ou t i n 1 9 03 by t h e Uni e s i
y t
o f C h i c a g o , a n d vr t
rv v m tr
h a s p o i ded a lu ab le a e i a l for t he s ud of t h e e a li e s S u e i a n e i od
y t r t mr
,
p r
R ep or ts f the E x p edi ti on of the Or i enta l E x p lor a ti on Fu nd
s ee o
( Bab ylon ia n
t
S e c i on of the Un i v r i t y f C hi g
e s o ca o ) , a nd Ba nk s , B is mya O n g ou nds r
of an t i q ity u a lone w m i gh t p r h p
e e a s ha v e ex p t
e c ed i ts i nc lu s i on i n th e y h m t .
 CITIE S
“

THE FIVE ANTE DI LUVIAN 61

form of P a b i ls ag ; but it is hardly likely that the two should be

identified .

In S ippar the fourth of the Antediluvian citie s in our series

, ,

we ag ain have a parallel to B e ros s u s It has long been recog

n i z e d that P a n t i b i b lon or P a nt i b i b li a from which the third
, , ,

fourth fifth s ixth and s eventh of h i s Antediluvian kings all

, , ,

came was the city of S ippar in Northern Babylonia For th e

, .

seventh of these rulers Eéebé pa x o s is clearly E n me du ra nk i the

,
1
, ,

mythical king of S ippar who in Babylonian tradition was ,

regarded as the founder of divination In a fragmentary com .

po s ition that has come down to us he i s described not only as ,

king of S ippar b u t as b e loved of A nn E nl il and Enki the

, , ,

three creating gods of our text ; and it is there recounted how

the patron deitie s of divination S ham ash and Adad them s elves , ,

2
taught him to practise their art Moreover B er os su s directly .
,

M pli e s the existence of S ippar before the Deluge fo r in the ,

summary of his version has have been pre s erved X i su t hros ,

under divine instruction buri e s the s acr e d writings concerning ,

t h e origin of the wor ld in S i sp ara the city of the S un -god so ,

that aft er the D eluge they might be dug up and tran s mi tted to
mankind E b ab b a r t h e great S un -te mple w as at S ippar and it
.
, , ,

is to the S un god that the city is naturally allotted in the new

-

S umerian Vers ion .

The la s t of t h e five Antediluvian citi e s in our li s t i s S hu ru p

pak in which dwelt U t-napi s hti m the hero of the Babylo ni an
, ,

vers ion of the D eluge Its site has been identified with the
.

mounds of Fara in the neighbourhood of the S hatt e l-Kar the

, ,

former bed of the Euphrates ; and the excavations that were

conducted there in 1 9 0 2 have been most productive of remains
dating from the prehistoric period of S umerian culture 3
S ince .

our text is con cerned mainly with the D eluge it is natura l to ,

as s ume that the foundation of the city from which the D eluge

hero cam e would be recorded last in order to lead up to the ,

central episode of the text The city of Z i u su du the hero of .

,

the S um erian s tory is unfortunate ly not given in the T hi rd

,

C olumn but in view of S huru ppa k s place in the list of An te

’

, ,

diluvian cities it i s not improbable that on this point the S u me

,

rian and Babylonian Versions agreed In the Gilgame s h Epi c .

Shu ru pp a k is the only Antediluvian city referred to while in ,

1
S e e ab o ve p , . 33 .

Cf Zi . mm er n , B ei trage zu r Kenn tn iss d er B ab Relay , . pp . 1 1 6 ff.

3
S ee H i s t .
f Sum
o . a nd A ide ,
pp . 24 ff .
G2 D ELUGE S TO R IE S A ND THE S UME R IAN VE RS ION

th e H e br e w acco u nt s no city at all i s m e ntioned in connexion

with Noah Th e city of X i su th ros too i s not recorded but as
. , , ,

hi s fa th e r cam e from L ara n kh a or Larak we may regard that ,

city a s h i s in t he Gre e k Vers ion Be s ides La r ank h a the only . ,

An e t diluvian citie s according to B e r oss u s were Babylon and

S ippar and t h e influ e nce of Babylonian theology of which we

, ,

h ere have evidence would be su fficient to account for a dis

,

t ur b a n c e of t h e original traditions At the s ame time it is not

.

excluded that Larak was al s o t h e s cene of the Deluge in our text ,

though as we have not e d the po s ition of S hu rupp ak at the close

, ,

of t h e S umerian li s t points to it a s the more probabl e of the two .

It may b e added that we cannot yet read the name of the deity
to whom S hu ru ppak w a s allotted but a s it is expressed by the ,

city s nam e prec e ded by the divine determinative the rendering

’

the God of S hu r uppa k will meanwhile s erve .

The creation of small rive rs and pools which seem s to have ,

followed the foundation of the five sacred cities is best explained ,

on t h e as sumption that they were intended for the s upply of

water to th e citie s and to the templ e s of their five patron gods .

The cr eation of t h e Euphrate s and the Tigris if recorded in our ,

t ext at all or in its logical order mu s t have occurred in the

, ,

upper portion of the column The fact that in the later S umerian.

acco u nt their cre ation i s related between that of mankind and

t h e b u ilding of Nippur and Erech cannot be cited in s upport of
thi s s u gge s tion in v iew of the abse nce of those cities from our
,

t e xt and of the process of editing to which the later v e rs ion has

been s ubj e cted with a consequent di s arrangement of its epi s odes
, .

III TH E C O UNCIL on TH E Go ns A ND Z IU S UDU s PIETY — Fr0 m

.
,
’
.

the lowe r part of the Third C olumn wh e re i t s text i s firs t pre ,

s erv e d i t i s clear that the gods had already deci d ed to s e nd

,

a D e l u g e for the godde s s Nintu or Ni nkh ar s agga h e re re fe rred

, ,

to al s o a s t h e holy In n anna wail s aloud for the intended

‘ ’
,

d e s truction of her people That t h i s de c i s i on had been decreed

‘

by th e gods in council i s cl e ar from a pa s s age in the Fourth

C olumn where it i s s tated that the s endi n g of a flood to
,

d e s troy man k ind w a s the word of the as s embly [ of the god s ]

Th e fi rs t line s pre s erv e d in t he pr e sent column d e s crib e the
e ffe ct of t h e deci s ion on the various god s concerned and their

action a t th e clo s e of the council .

In the lines which de s cribed t h e C ounci l of the Gods broken ,

1
S e e b elo w p , . 70
.
64 DELUGE S TO R IE S A ND THE S UME R IAN VE RS IO N
repres e nted a s lamenting Nintu or and Inn a n n a or ,
e -
B lit ili
I s hta r For Inna nna a s a separate g oddes s had no s hare in the
.

S u merian Cr e ation and the r e fe renc e to her people is there

,

only applicabl e to Nintu Dr P oeb e l has to assume that the . .

S um e rian name s s hould be reversed in order to r e s tore them to

th e ir original ord e r which he su ggests the Babylonian Version,

h a s pre s erved But no s uch textual emendation is necessary

.
.

In the S emitic Vers ion Is htar definitely di s places Nintu as the

mother of men as is proved by a lat e r pass age in her speech
,
1
where she refe r s to her own bearing of mankind The necessity .

for t he s ubs titu tion of her name in the later version i s thus
obv i ou s a n d w e have already noted how s imply thi s was e ffe cted
,
.

Anoth e r feature in which the two vers ions di ffe r i s that in

t h e S um e ria n t e xt the lamentation of th e godde ss precedes the
s ending of t h e Deluge while in the Gilgam e s h Epic it i s occa ,

s i on e d by the actual advent of t h e s torm S ince our text is n ot .

completely pr e s e rve d it i s just po s s ible that the couplet was,

’
r ep e at e d at the end of the Fourth C olumn after mankind s
d e struction had tak e n place But a furth e r apparent di fference .

has b een not e d While in the S umerian Vers ion the goddess at
.

once d e plore s the divin e d e ci s ion it i s clear from I s htar s word s ,

’

in the Gilgamesh Epic that in the assembly of the gods s he had

at any rate concurr e d in it ?
On the other hand in B elit -ili s ,
’

lat e r speech in th e Epic after U t -n a pi sht i m s s acrifice upon the ,

’

mountain she appears to ascribe the deci s ion to Enlil alone

,
3
.

Th e pa s s age s in the Gilgame s h Epic are not really contradictory ,

for they can be interpreted as implying that while Enlil forced ,

hi s will upon t h e other god s agains t B elit-ili s protest the goddess

’

at fi rs t reproached hers elf with her concurrence and later s tig ,

mat i ze d Enlil as the real author of the cata s trophe The S emiti c .

narrative thus does not appear as has been s u gge s ted to betray , ,

trace s of two variant tradition s which have been s kilfully com

b i n e d though it may perhaps exhibit an expan s ion of the S ume
,

rian s to ry On t h e other hand mo s t of the apparent discrepancies

.
,

b etwe en the S umerian and Babylonian Versions disappear on ,

1
. p
Gi lg E i c , X I, 1 123 . .

1
C f l 1 2 1 f , S i nc e I c o
. .
‘
. mm
a n ded e i l i n t h e a ss e b ly o f th e g ods , ( and) v m
comm a nde d b a tt
le fo r th e de s u c i on of my eo le tr t p p
1
Cf
.
t t
{f , Y e gods h a ar e h e e " S o long a s I fo ge not t h e (j e els of)
. r r t w
z p
la p i s la uli u on my n e ck , I i ll k ee p h es e da s i n m
y w y e o y , ne e t
i ll I mm r vrw
r tt m
fo ge h e m
1 Let th e g od s c o e to t he offe i ng, b u t let not Enlil co e t o t h e r m
o ffe ri n g , s i nbe h e t
ook not cou ns el b u t s e n t he deluge a nd su ende e d my t rr r
p p
e o le to de s u c i on tr t
’
.
 LAMENTATION OF THE G O D DE S S E S 65

t he recognition that our text give s in many pa ssage s only an

epitome of the original S umerian Version .

The lament of t he godde ss i s followed by a brief account of

the action taken by the other chi e f fi gu re s i n the drama Enki .

holds couns e l with his own heart evidently d e vi s ing th e proj ect , ,

w hich he afte r ward s carri e d into e ffect of pre s e r ving t h e s ee d ,

of mankind from destruction S inc e the verb in the following .

line i s wanting we do not know what action i s th e re recorded

,

of the four creating deities but the fact that the god s of heave n
and e arth invoked the name of Anu and Enlil s ugge s ts that it
w a s their will which had been forced upon the other god s We .

s hall s e e that throughout the text Anu and En lil are t h e ulti

mate rulers of both god s and men .

Th e narrative t hen int roduces the human hero of the D elu ge

story

At that time Z i u s u du the king priest of the god

, ,

Made a v e ry great .

In humility h e prostra te s him s elf in reverence ,

D aily h e s ta n d s 1 n attendance
1 2
A dream s u ch a s had not be e n before com e s fort h
, ,
.

By the Name of Heaven and Earth he conjures

The name of th e hero Z i u s u du i s the fuller S umerian e qu i va

, ,

lent of U t n ap i s h ti m ( or Uta-na p i s ht i m ) the abbreviated S emitic

-
,

form which we find in the Gilgame s h Epic For not only are .

the fir s t two elem e nts of the S umerian name id e ntical with tho s e
of the S emitic U t n ap i s ht i m but t h e name s thems elv e s are
-
,

equated in a later Babylonian s yllabary or explanatory list of

3
word s We th e re find U t -n a p i s h t e gi ve n a s th e equivalent of
.

the S umerian Z i su da evid e ntly an abbreviate d form of the

‘ ’

name Z i u su d u ; and it is significant that the names occur in the

4

1
The w rd m y l
o b e e nd e e d d ea s
a a so r r r m
2
For s e e n t h i r nd r i g
of t h e e b e—d e , for vr
h i c h Dr Poeb el d oes not h a a d a w . zr
tr t
a n s la i on , s e e Ra w h n s o n , W A I , IV, p l 24. n u -e-d e
. S em la . . .

a s -s n- u ( Pr
es ) ; a n d c f B rfin n o w Clas s ified I/ i st ,
. 3 27 A n a l e na i e r e n
,
p . . t r tv
r ‘
r t
d e i ng i s c e a e d i s a ls o p o s sib le a n d
’
o uld g i e e u a lly g oo d s ens e ; c f w v q .

n u-e-d e S em la su-p u -u ,
. W . A I . .
,
IV, p l 2 , l 5 . .
( )
a ,
a nd B rii nn o w , op . ci t .
,

p . 328 .

C f Gu n Tex ts i n the B r i t M us , P t X III, p l 3 0, l 9 ( a )

3
. . . . V . . .

1
m m r Vr
The n a e i n th e S u e i a n e si on i s ea d b y Dr Poe b el a s Z i u gi ddu , b ut r .

t r m
he e i s u ch i n fa ou of v r Pr
o f Zi mm er n s s u gg e s i on , b a se d on th e fo
.
’
t rm
t t
Zi su da t r
h a t h e h i d syllab le of t h e n a e sh o uld b e ea d as s u O n a
, m r .

r m t
f a g en of a n o h e Ni u t r pp r t t
ex , No 4 6 1 1 , Dr La ngdon e ad s t h e na e as . . r m
K . F
66 D ELUGE S TO R IE S A ND THE S UME R IAN VE R S ION

s yllabary bet w ee n tho s e of Gilgame s h a n d En k idu evid e ntly in ,

con s equenc e of th e as s ociation of the D e lug e story by the Baby

lon i a n s with their national epic of Gilgame s h The name .

Z i u su du may be r e nd e r e d H e who l e ngthened the day of life

or H e who mad e life long of days which in the S emitic for m

abbr viated by the omi sion of the verb The ref renc e is
is e s e .

probably to t he immortality be s towed upon Z i us u du at the clo s e

’

of the s tory and not to the prolongation of mankind s existence

,

in which h e w a s in s trumental It i s s carcely nece s sary t o a dd .

that t h e name h a s no lingui s tic connexion with the H e brew

name Noah to which it al s o pre s ents no parallel in m e aning
,
.

It i s an int ere sting fact that Z i u su du s hould be d e s cribed

s imply as the king without any indication of the city or area
‘

he ruled ; and in three of th e fiv e oth e r pa s s ages in t h e text in

which h i s nam e i s mentioned it is follo w ed by the s ame title
without quali fi cation In mo s t cas e s B e ross u s tell s u s t h e citie s .

from which h i s Ant e diluvian rulers came ; and if the end of the
lin e had be e n pr e s erve d it might have been po ss ible to d e termine
d efinitely Z i u su du s city and incidentally the scene of the Delug e ’

in the S umerian Vers ion by the nam e of the deity in who s e ,

service h e acted a s pries t We have already noted s om e ground s .

for believing that hi s city may have been S hu ru ppa k as in the ,

Babylonian Version 2
and if that were s o the divine nam e read ,

t h e God of S hu r uppa k s hould probably be restored at the

‘ ’
as

end of the line 3

.

Z i -u -s u d—d a ( c f. Uni v . of P e nn s . Mu s . P ub l Ba b . S ec .
,
Vol . X , No 1, . p . 90 ,
P L i v a ) ; t h e pr t mp m t
e s en ce o f t h e p h on e i c c o t v r
le en da m a y b e c i ed i n fa ou
t r
of h i s pp r
e a d i ng , b u t i t d oes n ot a ea pp rt
t o b e su p t rp
o ed b y t h e h o og a hi c
r pr
e t m
od u c i o n s o f t he na m r
e i n th e S u Vr
e i a n Delug e v
e s i on g i en by Dr Po eb el .

v
( H i s t a nd G r a m Tex ts , pl lx x x i i i
. . t t t r
It may b e a dded ha , on e i h e .

t r tv
a l e na i e, t h e m m
e a n i n g o f t h e na me i s t h e sa e .

1
Th m i g f t h S m ri n l m t
e ea n n i n th n m r nd r d
o e t in
u e a e e en a e a e, e e e as u u

th S m i t i f rm i r th r b
e e c or n d D P b l l ft i t n pl i ed It i
, s a e o s cu e, a r . oe e e u ex a n . s

v ry pr b bl
e o gg t d b y D L gd n ( f P
a e, a s s u S B i bl A h XX X VI
es e r . an o c . r oc. oc . . rc , ,

1 9 14 p , th t w h ld
. t i t wi th th S m i t i dd i n th t
a e s ou in co nn e c e e c u u a c as e ,

pl ace of b r t h t h r nd r i g h
ea gg t I h ld b ei n lie d t r e nd r i t
e n e su es s , s ou e c ne o e

h er d y f
e as dd h a th m ni g d w n
or u nd t h i gn U D i
u asmpl y ed e ea n a a e s s e o

b oth f d y ligh t
o r u rr u, nd i m
‘
d y a - ’
,
a i u,
‘
a
3
S b v p 61 f
ee a o e, . .

3
Th r m i n t h t
e e pre rv d f th e det rm i t i v e w h i h i n t m
a s a a re se e o e na , c s o co

b i n d w i th th ig N pr v th t E ki n m i n t t b r t r d H n ‘
e e s n E , o es a n s a e s o o e es o e . e ce

Zi usud w n t pri
u t f Enk i nd h i i ty w pr b b ly n t Erid th e t
as o es o , a s c as o a o u, e s a

o f h i di vi n fri
s d nd en ell r nd t hen fi r t of th A t dil v i
a i ti e
cou s o ,
a e s e n e u an c s .

S ffi i t r n f E k i i nt rv nt i n n Z i b h lf i f r i h d b y th e
’
d
’
u c en ea so or n s e e o o u su u s e a s u n s e

fact th t G d f th D p h e w
a ,
as o on rned i n th pr op d m ethod f
o e ee , as c ce e os e o
 A R OYAL A ND P R IE S TLY D ELUGE - HE R O 67

Th e
employment of the royal ti tl e by its e lf accord s with the
tradition from B er os s u s that before the D el u ge a s in lat e r ,

period s the land w as gove rned by a s ucce ss ion of s upreme rulers

, ,

and that th e hero of the D e lug e w a s t h e last of them In th e ,

.

Gilgame s h Epic on the oth e r hand U t-n api shti m i s given no , ,

royal nor any other titl e H e is mere ly re fe rred to a s a man of .

’
S h u r u pp ak s o n of Ubar -Tutu and he appears in the gui se of
, ,

an anci e nt hero or patriarch not invested with royal power On .

thi s point B e r ossu s evidently pre s e rve s the origi nal S umerian
tradition whil e the Hebrew Vers ions resemble the S emitic
,

Babylonian narrative Th e S umerian conc eption of a series of .

s uprem e Antediluvian rulers i s of course merely a reflection

from the hi s torical period wh e n the hegemony in Babylo nia ,

w as contested among the city -sta tes The growth of the .

tradition may have been encouraged by the early u s e of lnga l ,

‘
king which though always a term of s ecular character was
’

, , ,

not very sharply distinguished from that of p a tes i and other

religiou s titles until in a ccordance with politica l develop ment
, , ,

it w a s required to connote a wider dominion In S u m e r at the .

,

time of the composition of our text Z i u su du was still o nly one in ,

a long line of Babylonian ruler s mainly historical but gradually ,

rec e ding into the realms of legend and myt h At the time of .

the later S emites there had be e n more than one complete break
in the tradition and the hi s torical setting of the old s to ry had
become dim The fact that H e brew tra dition should range itself
.

in thi s matter with Babylon rather than with S umer i s important

a s a clue in tracing the literary history of our text s .

Th e rest of t h e colum n may be taken a s de s criptive of Z i u s u du s

’

activitie s On e line records hi s making of s ome very gr e at obj ect

.

or the erection of a huge building ; and s inc e the following line s

1

a r e concerned s olely with religious activities the refe rence i s ,

po ss ibly to a temple or some other st ructure of a s acred character .

Its foundat ion may have been recorded as striking evid e nce of

m an s tr t i on Hi ri v lry of Enli l th e G d of th E rt h i i mp li d i n t h
’
des uc . s a , o e a ,
s e e

B b yl i n V r i n ( f G i lg Ep i
a on a X I 11 3 9
e s o d i n t h e S m eri
o . V ri n . c, , . an u an e s o

t hi w ld n t r lly
s out n d t An th G d f H v n
a u a ex e o n, e o o ea e .

Th e l m n t g
1
g v r
e e
y l r g eh g w h i h r
a r- a r , i t h e n m e o f e a e or
‘
u e c oc c u s n a

t h i gr ea t bj t
s b ildi ng o
gg g ec i e mporl y d l t r
u i n t h e t e rm f , a n-s a - u r — ur
,
s o e a e or

th h g b t (g i h ) m g g
‘
i n wh i h Z i d r od t th t rm ( se
’
e u e oa ,
s a - u r— u r , c u su u e ou e s o e

b low p 7 9 n
e Th r w
, . f o r ,
v n t th i rly p ri d na t r l
. e e a s, o c u s e, e e a s ea e o a u a

t n d en cy t o p i t r n
e p rh m n l t h li v c u e d de do f re m te
a su e u a s ca e e es a n e s o o

pr ed e or t en d n y whi h i n r d i n l t r t i m nd l d as w e hall
ec ss s, a e c c c ea s e a e es a e , s se e,

t o t h el b r t i on f e t v g n t d t i l
e a o a e f t h er p 8 1 f n 2
o x ra a a e a se ur , . .
, . .

F 2
68 DELUGE S TO R IE S A ND THE S UME R I A N VE R S ION

hi s devotio n to h i s god ; or sinc e t h e verb in thi s s ent e nce ,

depend s on t h e word s at that time in the preceding line we ‘ ’

may p e rhap s regard h i s action a s directly connect e d with the

,

r eve lation to b e mad e to him His p e r s onal piety i s then .

d e scribed : daily he occu pi e d him s elf in h i s god s s ervice pro

’

s t ra t i ng him s e lf in humility and con s tant in h i s attendance at the

s hri n e A dream (or po s s ibly dr e am s ) s uch as had not been ‘

. ,

before appears to him and he s e e m s to b e furth e r described as

,

conjuri ng by the Name of H e aven and Earth but as t he e nds

of all th e s e line s are bro k en the e xact connexion of the phrases ,

is not quit e c ertain .

It i s difficult not to a s s ociate the refe rence to a dream or ,

po s s ibly to dre am -divi n ation with t h e warning in which Enki ,

reveal s t h e p u rpos e of the god s For the later v e r s ion s pr e pare .

u s for a r e fe r e nce to a d ream

1
If w e take t h e line a s describing.

Z i u su du s practic e of dr eam -divi n ation in g e n e ral such as had

’

not b e e n befor e he may have been represented a s the fi rs t

’

diviner of dreams as E n me du r ank i w a s h e ld to be t he firs t

,

practition er of divination in g en e ral ?

But it s e em s to me more
probabl e that the refe r e nc e i s to a particular dr e am by mean s of ,

which h e obtain e d knowledge of t he god s int e ntion s On the ’

.

r end e ring of this passag e d e pend s our int e rpretation of the whole
of t he Fourth C olumn where the point will be further di s cussed
, .

M e anwhile it may b e not e d that t h e conj u ring by the Nam e of

H e ave n and Earth which we may a s s um e i s ascribed to Z i u su du ,

gain s in s igni fi canc e if w e may regard the s etti n g of t h e myth as

a magical incantation an infe r enc e in s u pport of which we s hall
3
,

not e fu rth e r evide n ce For we are furni s hed at onc e with the
.

grou nd s for i t s magical employm ent If Z i u su du t hrough con .

,

juri n g by the Nam e of H eav e n and Earth could pro fi t by ,

th e warning s ent him and s o e s cap e the impending fat e of

mank ind the application of s u ch a myth to the special n eed s
,

of a S u m e rian i n p e ril or di stress will b e obviou s For should .

he too conj u re by the Nam e of Heaven and Earth he might

, , ,

look for a s imilar deliverance ; and h i s re ci t al of t h e myth

itse lf would t e nd to clinch the magical effe ct of h i s own
'

incantation ?

Th e d e s cription of Z i u s ud u has also gr e at interest in furni s hing

u s with a clo s e parall e l to the pie ty of Noah in the Hebrew

1
w p
S ee b elo , . 71 f .
2
S ee a b o e ,v p 61 . .

1
v p
S e e ab o e , . 50 f .
1
S ee fu h e rt r p 86 f
,
. .
 THE PIETY OF Z IUS U D U 69

Ve rs ions For in the Gilgame s h Epic and in B e r os su s thi s

.

fe atur e of t he s tory i s compl e t e ly abs e nt We a r e th e re given .

no r e a s on why U t -n a p i s h ti m w as s elected by Ea nor X i s u th ros ,

by Kro n o s For a ll that tho s e vers ion s te ll us the favour of

.
,

each d e ity might have b e e n confe rr ed arbitrarily and not in ,

recogn ition of or in r e s pon s e to any particu lar q u ality or action

, ,

on t h e part of i ts recipi e nt Th e S um e rian Version now re s tor e s .

t h e original s etting of t h e s tory and incidentally prov e s that in ,

thi s particular t h e Hebrew V e rs ion s have not embroid e r e d a

,

s impl e r narrative for the p u rpo s e of e di fic at i on but have ,

faithfu lly reproduced an original s trand of the tradi tio n .

IV THE
. D R E A M-
WA R NING The top of the Fourth Column of .
—

the text follows imm e diately on the clo s e of the Third C olumn ,

so that at this one point we have no great gap be tween the

column s But u nfortu nat e ly t h e end s of all the line s i n both
.

column s are wanting and the exact context of s ome of the ,

phr as es pre s e rv e d and their relation to each other a r e c ons e

quently doubtful Thi s materia lly affects t h e interpr e tation of
.

the pa s sag e as a whole but the main thread of the narrative ,

may be readily followed Z i u su du is h e re warned that a flood .

is to be sent to destroy th e s e e d of mankind ; the doubt

‘ ’

that e xi s ts concerns the mann e r in which the warning i s con

v ey e d In the first line of the column aft er a reference to the
.
,

god s a buil di ng seems to be mentioned and Z i us u du standing , ,

beside it apparently hears a voice which bid s him take hi s

, ,

stand beside a wall and then conveys to him the warning of

the coming flood The d es truction of mankind had bee n
.

decreed in t he a s sembly [ of th e gods] and would be carried out

by the commands of A nn and Enlil Before the text break s off .

we again have a referenc e to the kingdom and its r ule ‘ ’ ‘ ’

a fu rt her trace of the close as s ociation of the D e luge with the

dyna s tic succe ss ion in the early traditions of S umer 1
.

In th e Ope ni ng words of the warning to Z i us u du with i ts ,

promin e nt re p e tition of the w ord wall we must e v idently ‘ ’

trace s ome conn e xion with t h e puzzlin g word s of Ea in the

Gilgame s h Epic when he begin s h i s warning to U t na p i sht i m
,
- .

The warnings a s given in t h e two vers io ns are printed be low

, ,

i n parallel column s for compari s on ?

The Gilgame s h Epic a fter ,

1
S ee ab o e , 31v p . .

2
0 0 1 IV, 11 1 6 a r e h e
. . . t r e co mp ra ed wi th Gi lg Ep i . c, XI, 11 1 9 -31 . .
70 DELUGE S TO R IE S A ND THE S UME R IAN VE R S ION

relatin g how the gr e at god s in S hu ru p p ak had decid e d to send

-
a deluge continue s as follows,
in the right hand col u mn :

S U M E RIA N V E RS IO N .
VE R S IO N
S E M ITIC .

For he god s a Nin -igi azag t h e god Ea

- 1

I
, ,

.
sa t with them ,

Z i u s u du s tan di n at i ts s ide ( )
2 0 And he r e peated th e ir word

h e ard to the house of reed s

At th e wall on my left
‘
R eed hut
- ‘
reed hut "
-
,

s id e ta k e thy s tand Wall wall " ,

i I
and
At the vall will speak
‘
‘
0 reed -hut hear " O w all; ,

a word to thee u ndersta n d "

( )
5 O my ‘
devout one ‘
Thou man of S hu r u pp ak ,

s on of U b ar -Tut u ,

‘
By our ha n d a fl ood 2 ‘
Pull down thy house ,

will be build a s hip ,

[ t s en
‘
To d e s troy the s e e d of ( )
25 Leave thy po s s e s sions ,

man k i n d take h e e d for thy life ,

Is t h e deci s io n the word Abandon thy property

‘
,
,
of the a s s embly [ of
3
and save thy life ,

the gods ] .

1
Ni n-i gi -a z ag , Th e Lo d r of Clea r Vi s i on a t i tl e bo r ne b y Enk i , or Ea , as

God of Wi s do of 57 m .p . .

1
Th e S u e i a n e mr t rm
a ma r u , h e e u s e d fo r t h e ood a n d end e e d a s ai nr fl r r r
t rm
s o . tr t
by Dr Poeb el, i s e x pla i n e d i n a la e sy lla b a y a s th e e u i a len o f t he r q v
mt wr
S e i i c-Ba b ylo ni an o d a batbu (c f M e i s s n e , r No t rm th e e em . .

p fl t r mt v r
loy ed for th e ood b o h i n th e ea ly S e i i c e si on of th e Atr akh a si s s o y t r
t r
da e d i n A mmi za duga s ei gn ( s ee a b o e , v p m
43 , n 1 ) a n d i n th e Gi lga esh
’
. .

p
E ic Th e
. wr t v t r r
o d ab i tbu i s o f en c on en i o na lly en de ed
‘
d elu g e , b u t s h ou ld
’

m r r t tr
b e o e a c cu a ely a ns la ed t fl o od tr t t t mp t
It i s ue h a th e e m
e s s of th e S u e

ri V r
an e s i on prob a b ly i m rl
p y a i n ; a n d i n t hme Gi lg a p
e s h E v r
i c h e a y a i n i n

v fl w w t
t he e eni ng b egi n s th e ood a n d i s follo e d a t da n b y a h u n d e s o r t rm and

rr
h u i c an e t
B u t i n i s elf th e e
. t rm mp fl
a bd bu i w t p
li e s ood, hi c h c ou ld a k e la ce
t r r rv r
h ou gh a i s e of t h e i e s u na c co mp v r
ani e d b y h e a y loca l a i n Th e a nnu a l .

r f ll i n B b yl i t d y i n n v er g nly b t 8 i n nd th r h v
ai n a a on a o- a s o a a a e o a ou .
,
a e e a e

b ny r i
ee ea s i n wh th t t l r i f ll h
n s u cce s s o t eed d 4 ien ; nd e o a a n a as no ex c e n . a

y t
e t h b ib i e a t thi ng f th p t ( e b l w p 97
i u s no a o e as s e e o , .

Th3
w rd h r r d r d
e o mbly i th S m i t i l n-w rd b h m i n
e e en e e
‘
a s se
’
s e e c oa o a ra ,

B b yl ni p g m t h t rm mp l y d f th mb ly f th g Od b th ‘
a o an a ra e e e o e or e a ss e o e s o
,

in th B b l
ye i aC r t i n S rion a n d i t h Gi lg m h Ep i
ea o It emp l y m t
e es a n n e a es c . s o en
n th S m ri V r i in pl f i t S m ri q i v len t kk i i
i e u e an e s on , n ace o s u e an e u a u n, s a

i t r
n e est i g mp l n f S m i t i i nfl n e
ex a It
e o rr e d n t ne
e r i ly
c ue c . s o cc u nce oe s o ces s a

im ply th i t e ex f r g i z d S m i ti V r i n t t h p r i d
s en c e o a ec o t t n e e c e s o a e e o ou r ex
w asi ri b d Th b t i t ti f b lg m f kk i i t h t t m y w ll d ta
ns c e . e su s u on o a ru or a n n e ex a e a
fr m t h p ri d of H mm r b i w h
o e e o w m y m t h t th i n r d i m
a u a , en e a a ss u e a e c ea s e

p rto f th
a nc e o i ty il w r fl t d i n th g r l d pt i n f th Se m it i
e c -c
ou n c as e ec e e ene a a o o o e c
t rm ( f P sh l Hi t T t p
e c . o e , s . ex s, .
72 DELUGE S TO R IE S A ND THE S UME R IAN VE R S ION

Ut —n a i h t i m ov e rh e ar s him T h e v e r s ion of B er os s u s that ?

p s ,

Krono s him s e lf app e ars to X i s u t hr os in a dr e am and warns him ,

‘
r
is e e e j ct d by D r P o e b e l who r e mark
.
s that h e re the original
,

s ig n i fi ca c
n e of th e dr e am h as alr e ady been obliterated C on s e
’
.

q u ently th e re s e e m s to him to b e no logical conn e xion b e t w een

the d e r am s or dr e am me n tion e d at t h e clo s e of the Third C ol u mn
and th e communication of the plan of t h e gods at the b e ginni n g
?
of t h e Fourth C ol u mn of our t e xt
S o far from B e r oss u s havi n g mi ss e d t he original s igni fi cance
of the narrativ e h e r e l a t e s I thin k it can b e s hown that h e ,

r eproduc e s v e ry acc u rat e ly t he s en s e of ou r S umerian text ; and

that the appar e nt di s cr e pan ci e s in t h e S emitic Ve rs ion and the ,

puzzling r e fere nce s to a wall in both it and the S u m e rian Ve r

s io n a r e capabl e of a s imple e xplanation
,
Th e re a ppears to me .

no ju s ti fi cation for s plitting t he S emitic narrative into the

s e v e ral v e rs ion s s ugg es ted s inc e t h e a s s umption that t h e dir e ct ,

warning and t h e dr e am -warn ing mu s t b e di s tinguish e d i s r e ally

ba s e d on a mi su nd e rs ta ndi n g of the character of S um e rian
dream s by which impor tant d e cisio n s of the god s in council
w er e communicated to mankind W e fortunat e ly pos s e s s an .

in s tructiv e S um erian parallel to our pa s s ag e In it t h e will of .

the god s i s r e veal e d in a dream which i s n ot only des cribed in ,

full but i s furni shed with a detailed interpretation ; an d a s it

s e e m s to cl e ar up our di fficulti e s it may be w e ll to s ummarize ,

i t s main fe ature s .

Th e occa s ion of the dream in thi s case w a s not a coming

d eluge but a great dearth of water in the rivers in cons s ,

qu e nc o of which t h e crop s had s uffered and the country w a s

thr e aten e d with famin e Thi s occurred in t h e r e ign of Gudea .
,

pate s i of Laga sh who live d s ome centuri e s b e for e our S um e rian

,

document w a s inscribed In h i s own in s cription h e tells u s .

3

that h e w a s at a lo ss to know by what mean s h e might restore

pro s pe rity to h i s country wh e n on e night he had a dream ; and ,

1
.
p
C f Po eb el, H i s t Tex ts , t 51 f . pp r t t r
Wi h t he g od s a a e n sub e fu ge i n th e
. .
’

t r t pp
h i d o f h es e s u vr o s ed J m Fr z r
e s i on s S i r a es a e ( A nci en t S tor i es of a G r ea t
Flood ,p pt mp r
1 5 ) n ot i na ly c o
.
w w t r
a es th e e ll- rv t
k no n s o y of Ki ng Mi da s s s e a n , ’

p rt rm t
w h o, u nab le to k e e the s ec e of th e k i n s d efo
g m w pr
i y t o h i s elf, h i s e e d i t
’

i t r
n o a h ole i n t h e wt r tt t r w rw t r
g ou nd, i h th e e s ul ha th e ee ds hi ch g e u p h e e b y
t rr t
h ei w pr
u s li ng i n t h e mi nd w r
o c la i v
ed i t t o th e o ld ( O i d , M eta morp hos es , x i ,
1 74 rt r
s e e fu he , p 7 6 , n 1 . . .

it p 5 1 J tr w H b d B b T d p 3 46
1
0p . cf l .
, . c . a so as o e an a ra
, . . .
, . .

t d A kk d Cy l A pp 134 ff
3
S Th
ee -D ngi n L i ip t i n d S m
u reau a , es ns cr o s e u er e
’
a .
, , . .
,
G rm d p p 88 ff ; n d f K i
e c d H ll B n d W taA i pp o1 9 6 ff n an
g y a a es
.

s a,
.
, . . .
, . . . .
 INTE R P R ETATION OF S UME R IAN D R EAM S 73

it was in cons e quence of t h e dream that h e event u a lly e rect e d

on e of t h e mo s t s umptuou s ly appoint e d of S um e r i an temple s

and thereby restor e d h i s land t o pro s p e rity B e for e r e co u n t ing .

h i s dream he d e scrib e s h o w t h e god s th e m s e l v e s took co u n s el .

On th e day in which de s tini e s w e re fi x e d in h e av e n and earth ,

Enlil the chief of the god s and Ningirs u t he city-god of

, , ,

Laga s h h e ld convers e and Enlil t u rnin g to Ningirs u de s crib e d

, , ,

t h e sad cond i tion of S outhern B a bylonia and r e mark e d that ,

‘
the decr e e s of the temple E n i nn fi s hould b e made gloriou s in
heav e n and upon earth or in other words that Ni n gi rs u s
’ ’

, , ,

city -t e mple m u s t be rebuilt Ther e upon Ningirsu did not .

communicate h i s orders directly to Gud e a but conv ey e d the ,

will of the god s to him by mean s of a dr e am .

It will be noticed that we here hav e a very similar s ituation

to that in the D eluge s tory A confer e nc e of t h e god s h a s been
.

held ; a deci s ion h a s b e en tak e n by t h e great e s t god E n lil ; and , ,

in con s equence another deity i s anxiou s to inform a S um e rian

,

rul e r of that deci s ion The only diffe rence i s that her e Enlil
.

d e s ire s the commun ication to be made whil e in the D eluge ,

story it i s made without his knowledg e and obvious ly against ,

h i s wishe s S o the fact that Ningirsu doe s not commu ni cate

.

directly with the pate s i but conveys hi s mes s age by means of

,

a dream is particularly in s tructive For here there can be no

,
.

question of any subterfuge in the method employed S inc e E nl il ,

w a s a con s enting party .

The s tory goe s on to relate that while the pate s i s lept a vision
, ,

of the night came to him a n d he beheld a man who s e s tature

,

was s o great that it equall e d t h e h e aven s and the e arth By the .

diadem he wore upon h i s head Gud e a knew that the fi gure

mu s t be a god Be s id e the god w as t h e divin e e agle t h e
.
,

emb lem of Laga s h ; h i s feet r e s ted upon t h e whirlwind and ,

a lion crouched upon h i s right hand and upon his l e ft The .

figure s pok e to the pate s i but he did not understand the meaning
,

of the words Then it s e e med to Gudea that the S un rose from

.

the earth ; and h e b e held a woman holding in her hand a pure

re e d and she carri e d al s o a tablet on which w a s a star of
,

t h e heav e n s and S h e seemed to ta k e counsel with hers e lf

, .

While Gudea w a s gazing h e s e em e d to s ee a second man who

, ,

w a s like a warrior ; and he carried a S lab of lapi s laz u li on ,

which he drew out t h e plan of a temple B e fore the patesi .

him s elf it seemed that a fair cushion w as placed and upon the ,

cu s hion w a s set a mould and within the mould was a brick

, .
74 D ELUGE S TO R IE S A ND THE S UME R IAN VE R S ION
And on the right hand t he patesi b e h e ld an a ss that lay upon
the ground S uch w as t h e dre am of Gudea and he was troubled
. ,

becaus e h e could n ot interpret it ?

To cut the long s tory s hort Gudea decided to s e ek the h e lp of ,

Nina the child of Eridu who a s daughter of Enki t h e God of

,
‘ ’
, , ,

Wi s dom could divin e all the mys terie s of the god s But fir s t
,
.

of all by sacri fi ces and libation s h e s e cured t he mediation of his

own city -god and godde s s Ningirs u and G a t umdu g ; and then , ,

repairing to Nin a s templ e he recounte d to h e r th e d e tail s of his

’

vi s ion When the patesi had fini s hed the goddes s addressed
.
,

him and s aid S h e wou ld explain to him th e meaning of his

d r e am H e re no doubt we are to und e rs tand that s h e s poke
.
, ,

through t he mouth of her chief priest And thi s w a s the inter .

p r e t a t i on of the dr e am The man who s e s tature w a s so

. great ,

and who s e h e ad w a s that of a god w a s the god Ningirs u and the , ,

word s which h e uttered we re an order to the patesi to rebuild

the templ e E n i nn fi Th e S u n which rose from the earth was .

the god Ningishzida for like the S u n he goes forth from the ,

e arth . The maiden who held the pu r e reed and carried the
t ablet with the star w a s the godde s s Ni sa b a ; the s t ar w a s the
pure s tar of t h e te mple s con s truction which S h e proclaimed ’
.

The s econd man who w a s lik e a warrior w a s th e god Ni du b ;

, ,

and the plan of the t e mple which he drew w as the plan of

E n i nn u Th e brick which rested in i ts mould upon the cushion
.

w a s the s acr e d brick of E ni nn fi ; and the as s that lay upon the

ground w a s the pat e s i him s el f ?

Th e e s s ential feature of the vision i s that the god him s elf

app e are d to t h e s le e p e r and d e liv e red his m e s sag e in word s That .

i s pr e ci s ely t h e mann e r in which Kronos warned X i s u t hr os of

t h e coming Delug e in the vers ion of B e r oss u s while in the
;
G ilgam e s h Epic t h e appar e nt contradicti on b e tween t h e direct
w rnin g and t he dr e am -warning at once disappears It i s tr u e
a .

that Gud e a s ta t e s that he did not und e rstand th e meaning of the

’

god s m e s s age and so required an interpretation ; but h e w a s

,

e q u ally at a lo s s a s to the identity of the god who gave it

,

although Ni ngirs u w as hi s own city-god and

w a s accomp ani e d

{ d r
The m bl i t i m g ry b r t t h t f p
es e a nc e ls
y pt i v i
a i e o f l t e r ea s o a o a oc a c s on s a a
p rie o i t r ti g
18 vid
n e es f t h l tt r
n rm t
, as e try nd of th e
e nc e o e a e
’
s e o e a nc es , a
d v l pm t i
e e o th en f pr i m i t i v m t r i l t
n e u se o it mpl t ly h g d e a e a o su a c an
co e e e
p liti l
o
t l k B t th
ca ou oo p i t wh i h d t
. u er n pr b l m
os e a r e o n s c o no c on c ou r o e .

y m b li m f th t f b d n w ppli b le t th p t i
2
Th e s o b s o e a ss , a s a ea s o e
ur , as a ca o e a es
t k f rry i g t t h b ildi g f th t mpl
0

in h is as o ca n ou e u n o e e e.
 MEANING OF ME S S AGE A ND VI S ION 75

by hi s own familiar city-emblem We may thu s a ss ume that the .

god s word s as words w e r e equally i n t e lligibl e to Gudea But

’

, ,
.

as they were utter e d in a dream it w as nece s s ary that t h e pat e si , ,

in view of h i s country s peril s houl d h ave divine as surance that ’

they implied no oth e r meaning A n d in h i s ca s e s uch a ss urance .

w a s the more es s ential in view of t h e s ymboli s m attac hing to ,

the other feature s of h i s vi s ion That thi s i s sound rea s oning is .

prov e d by a s econd vision vouchsafed to Gudea by Ni n girsu .

For the pate s i though h e began to prepar e for t h e bu i lding of

,

the temple was not content even with Nin a s a ss urance He

,
’
.

o ffe red a prayer to Ningirs u him s elf sayi n g that he wi shed to ,

build the t e mple but had received no s ign that thi s w a s the will
,

of the god ; and he prayed for a S ign Then as t h e pat e s i lay .

,

s tretched upon the ground the god again appeared to hi m and ,

gav e him detailed in s tr u ction s adding that he would grant the ,

S ign for which he a s ked Th e S ign was that h e shoul d fe el his .

S ide touched as by a fl a m e and thereby he should know that he

1
,

w a s t h e man cho s en by Ni n gir s u to carry out h i s command s .

Her e it is the S i gn w hich con fi rms the apparent meaning of the

’
god s words And Gudea was at last cont ent and built the
.

temple ?

We may conclude then that in t h e new S umerian V e r s ion of , ,

the De lug e we have traced a logical co n nexion between t h e direct

warning to Z i u s u du in t h e Fourth C olumn of the text and the
refe rence to a dream in the broken li n e s at the clo s e of the Third
C olumn A s in the Gilgame s h Epic and in B e r ossu s here too
.
,

the god s warning i s conveyed in a dr e am and the accompany

’

ing r eference to conjuring by the Name of Heav e n and Earth

probably repr e s ents the m e ans by which Z i u su du w a s enabl e d to
1
Cyl A
, ii. l 1 0 f.
; c f c ol x
Th u r ea u.Da ngi n , op c i t ,
-
, . 1 5 0 f , Ge
. e d , p 1 02 f
. . . p . . rm . . . .

w r tr t r r
Th e o d a nsla e d s i d e m a y a ls o b e e n de e d a s h a nd b u t s i de i s t h e
m r pr
o e ob ab le r r
e n de i n g o f t h e t w o t
Th e o u c hi n g of Gu dea s s i de ( or h a n d)
’
.

pr t t r t r m
es en s a n i n e e s i ng es e t J t
b la n c e t o t h e ou ch i n g of ac ob s h i gh by t h e
’

di v i n wr t l r t P i l i
e es Gen
e ii 2 4 ff ( J
a J E) Gi v
en e b li f i t h
n . x x x . . or . en a e e n e

co n t n t pr
s a f th n en nd i t fr q
es en ce o t m i f t tie u h t ry
se a s e u en an es a on, su c a s o as

t h t f P i l m i gh t w ll ri fr m
a o en e pl i ed i j ry t th i t i
e a se o an u n ex a n n u o e sc a c

m l w h il m r th n n i lm n t f th h rt li v r m ig h t p rh p
u sc e, e o e a o e a e o e ea or e e a s

su gg t t h tes h f b ek i
ou c
g g d T h r i of ra ec n i n b tw
on n o . e e s o c o u s e n o c on ex o e een

t h S m ri
e u nd H b r w t ri
e an a b y d th i r mm b k gr d It m y
e e s o es e on e co on ac o un . a

b e dd ed t h t t h ri t i w h w ld r v r th l f J ob d th wr tler ‘

a a os e c cs o ou e e se e r o es o ac an e es

mi t h p i nt f th H b r w t ry
ss e o o e e e s o .

2
Ev e b f r t ti ng n th w rk h t k t h f rth r pr
n s o, e o e s ar ti n f o e o , e oo e u e ec a u o s o

a sce rt i i ng t h t th om en w er f v o r b l nd f p ri fy i g h i i ty fr m ll
a n a e s e a u a e a o u n s c o a

m li gn i nfl
a e u en c s.
76 D ELUGE S TO R IE S A ND THE S UME R IAN VE R S ION
verify ppar e nt meaning The assurance which Gudea oh
i ts a .

ta i n e d through t h e pri e st of N i n a and the S ign t h e prie t king

s -
,

Z i u su du s ecur e d by h i s own act in virtu e of h i s pi e ty and pra o

'
,

tic e o f d i vi n a t i on A n d h i s e mploym e nt of t h e particu lar clas s

.

of i n cantation r e fe rred to that which conjur e s by the Name of ,

H eaven and Earth i s s ingularly appropriate to the cont e xt For

,
.

’
by i ts u s e h e w a s e nabled to te s t t h e mea n ing of Enki s word s ,

which re lat e d to t h e int entio n s of Anu and Enlil the god s ,

r e s p e ctive ly of H e ave n and of Earth The s ymbolical s e tting of .

Gudea s vi s ion al s o fi nd s a parall e l in the reed -house and wall of

’

t h e D e l u g e s tory though in t h e latter case we have not the

,

be n efi t of interpr e tation by a godd e ss In the S umerian Version .

t h e wall i s merely part of the vision and doe s not receive a direct
addr e s s from t h e god That app e ars as a later deve lopment in
.

t h e S emitic Ve rs ion and it may perhap s have sugge s t e d the

,

excu s e pu t in that vers ion into the mouth of Ea that he had

, ,

not directly reve aled t h e d e ci s ion of the god s ?

Th e omi s s ion of any re ference to a dr e am befor e the warning

in t h e Gilgam e s h Epic may be accounted for on the assumption
that r e aders of the poem would naturally suppose that the usual
method of divine warning w a s implied ; a n d the text does indi
cate that the warning took place at night for Gilgame s h proc e ed s ,

to ca r ry out the divine in s tructions at the br e ak of day Th e .

direct warn ing of the H e br e w Version s on the other hand does , ,

not carry thi s implication S ince accordi ng to H e brew ideas ,

direct s pe e ch a s well a s vi s ion w as included among the methods

, ,

by which the divine will could be conveyed to man .

V . TH E FL O O D , TH E E S CA PE
G R E A T B O A T A ND TH E OF TH E ,

S A CR IFICE TO TH E S U N-G O D The mi s s ing portion of t h e Fourth .

—

C olumn mu s t have d e s crib e d Z i u su du s building of h i s gr e at

’

boat in ord e r to e sc a p e the De luge for at t he beginning of the ,

Fifth Column we a r e in th e mid dl e of t h e D eluge itsel f The .

column b egins
All t h e mighty wind -s torm s together blew,
Th e flood rage d .

Wh e n for s e v en days , for s e ve n nights ,

Th e flood had ov e rwh e lm e d the land ,

t t
1
g y r
In ha c a se th e p a a llel s u ge s e d b Si r a es a e ( s e e a bto e , 7 2 ,
J m Fr z r v p .

tw
n 1 ) be
. ee n t h e ee d- r w
h ou s e a nd a ll of t h e Gi lga es h E i c , n ow ega d ed a s m p r r
a m m e di u of c o mm
u ni c a i o n, a n d t he t
h i s e i ng eeds of th e Mi das s o y w p r r t r
w t
o uld s ill h old
good .
 THE C OMIN G OF THE FLO O D 77

( )
5 When the wind -s torm had driv e n the great boat ov e r the

mighty wat e rs ,

Th e S u n -god came forth s hedding light over heaven and ,

earth .

Z i u s u du op e ned the O pen ing of th e great boat ;

-
The light of t h e hero the S u n god (h e ) causes to enter into , ,

t h e interior of the great boat .

Z i us u du the king , ,

1
( )0 Bows him s elf down before t h e S u n -god
The king s acri fi ce s an ox a s heep he s laughters ,

The connected text of the column then breaks off only a sign ,

or two remaining of the following half dozen line s It wi ll

- .

be s een that in t he eleven line s that are pre s erved we have

s everal clo s e parall e l s to the Babylonian V e rsion and s ome

e qually s triking di ffer en c e s Whil e att e mpting to de fi ne the .

latter it will be well to point out how close the resemblances

,

are and at the same time to draw a comparison between the

,

S umerian an d Babylonian Vers ion s of thi s par t of the s tory and

the correspondin g H e brew account s .

H e re a s in t h e Babylonian Ve rs ion the Flood is accompanied

, ,

by hurricanes of w ind though in the latter the description is ,

worked up in con s iderable deta il We t here read that at the

1
.

appointed time the r uler of th e darknes s at eve ntide sent a heavy

rain U t -n ap i s ht im s aw i t s beginning but fe arin g to watch the
.
,

storm he entered the interior of the S hip by Ea s instructions

,
’

clo s ed the door and handed over the direction of the ve s s el to

,

the pilot P uzu r -Amurri Lat e r a thunder-storm and hurrican e .

add e d their terrors to the d e luge For at early dawn a black .

clo u d came up from th e horizon Adad t h e S torm -god thundering ,

in its mid st and h i s herald s Nab fi and Sh arru flyi n g ov e r moun

, , ,

tain and plain Nergal tor e away the s hip s anchor while Ninib
.
’

directed the storm ; the Anunnaki carried th e ir lightning -torches

and lit up the land with their brightnes s ; the whirlwind of the
S torm -god reached the heavens and all light was turned into ,

darkn e s s Th e sto rm raged the whole day coveri n g mountain

.
,

and people with water ?

No man beheld hi s fellow ; the g ods
them s elve s were afraid s o that th e y re tr e ated into t h e highest ,

h e aven where they crouched down cowering like dogs Then

, ,
.

1
Gilg E i c X I, 11
. p . .

2
In t h e A tr a k h a s i s v er i on d t d i n th r i g n f A mmi d g ( ee
s , a e e e o za u a s v
ab o e,

p . 43 , n . C ol . I 1 5
,
. t i n r fe r nce t o the c y f m n when A d
, co n a s a e e r o e ad th e
S t orm god -
,
S la y s t h m w i th h i fl d
e s oo .
78 D ELUGE S TO R IE S A ND THE S UME R IAN VE R S IO N
follows t h e lam ent a tio n of I shtar to which r e fe rence h a s alre ady ,

b e en mad e 1 t h e godd e s s r eproaching hers elf for the par t s h e had

,

ta k e n in t h e d e s tr u ction of h e r people Thi s s ection of th e S e mitic .

n a rrative clo s es with t h e picture of the god s weeping with her ,

s itti n g bow e d down with their lip s pre s s ed together .

It i s probabl e that t h e S um e rian Vers ion in t h e mi ss ing portion ,

of i ts Fourth C olumn contained s ome account of Z i u su du s

’

e ntry into h i s boat ; and thi s may h ave b e e n preced e d a s in the ,

Gilgame s h Epic by a refe re nce to the living seed of e very

,
‘

kind or at any rate to the four-l e gge d creatures of the fi e ld

’

and to h i s p e rs onal po s ses sion s with which w e may a s s ume he ,

had pr e viou s ly load e d it But in the Fifth C olumn we have no .

m ention of the pilot or of a ny oth e r companion s who may have

accompani e d the king ; and we s hall see that the S ixth C olumn
contain s no refe rence to Z i u su du s wife Th e description of the ’
.

s torm m ay have b e gun with the clo s ing line s of the Fourth

C olu mn though it i s al s o quite possibl e that t h e fi rs t lin e of the

,

Fifth C ol u mn actually begins the account H oweve r that may .

b e a n d in s pite of the po e tic imagery of the S emitic Babylonian

,

narrativ e t h e gen e ral character of the catastrophe is the s ame in

,

both ve rsion s .

We fi nd an equally close parallel between the S umerian and ,

Babylonian accounts in the duration of the s torm which a c c om

,

p a n i e d the Flood a s will be seen by printing the two versions

,

together : 3

S U M E RIA N
VE R S ION . S E MITIC
VE R S ION .

When for seven days for ,

For six days and nights
s ev e n nights ,

The flood had overwh e lmed The wind blew the flood , ,

t h e land , the t e mpe s t over

wh e lmed the land .

Wh e n th e wind -s torm had When t he seve nth day

drive n th e great boat dr e w near t h e tem ,

ove r the mighty wat e rs ,

p e s t t h e flood cea s ed
, ,

from the battl e

In which it had fought
like a host .

Th e S un
god came forth
-
Then the s ea rested and
s hedding light over w a s still and the ,

h e aven and e arth . wind s torm the flood

-
, ,

c e as e d .

1
S ee ab o e, v p . 63 f .
1
S ee v p
a b o e, . 56 f .

1
C ol . V , ll 3 — 6
. a re he r e co mp ra ed wi th Gi lg Ep i . c, X I, 11 1 28-3 2
. .
80 D ELUGE S TO R IE S A ND THE S UME R IAN VE R S ION

as furni s hing additio n al proof if it w e re n e e d e d of the depen , ,

de e nc of t h e S e mitic -Babylonian and A s syrian Versions upon

S u m e rian originals .

It m a
y b e worth while to pau s e for a moment i n our s tudy of

t h e t e xt i n ord e r to inquire what kind of boat it w a s in which

,

Z i u s u du e s cap e d the Flood It i s only called a gr e at boat or .

‘ ’

‘
a great s hip in the text and thi s term a s w e have noted w a s ’

, , ,

ta k en ove r s e mitiz e d and lit e rally tran s lated in an early S emitic

, ,

B a bylonian Ve rs io n ?
B u t th e Gilgam e s h Epic repre s enting t h e ,

t
la e S er mitic -Babylo n ian Ve rs ion s upplie s fuller d e tail s which , ,

h ave not how e ve r b e en s ati s factorily e xplain e d

,
Either the , .

obvio u s meaning of the d e s criptio n and fi gu r e s th e r e given h a s

be e n i gn or e d or the mea su re men t s have b e e n appli e d to a c e ntral
,

s tr u ctu r e placed u pon a h u ll m u ch on the li n e s of a modern ,

‘
ho u s e boat or t he convent ional Noah s ar k
- ?
For th e latter
’ ’

int e rpretation the text it s elf a fford s no j u s ti fi cati on The stat e .

m ent i s d e finite ly made that the length and breadth of t h e ve s s e l

it s e lf ar e to be the s ame and a lat e r pas s age give s ten ga r for
3

t h e h e ight of t s s id e s and ten ga r for t h e breadth of i ts dec k

i 1
.
‘

Thi s d es cription ha s be en taken to imply a s qu a r e box -like

s t ructu r e which in ord e r to b e s e a w orthy mu s t b e placed on
, , ,

a conj ectured h u ll .

I do not think it h a s been noted in thi s connexion that a ves s el ,

a pproxim a t e ly with t h e r e lativ e proportion s ofthat d e s crib e d in the

Gilga m es h Epic i s in cons tant u s e to -day on th e lowe r Tigr is and ,

E u phrate s A k ufia h t h e familiar pitched coracl e of Baghdad

5
.
, ,

wo u ld provide an a dmirable mod e l for the gigantic vessel in which

U na p i s h ti m rod e out t h e D e lug e
t -
Without eith e r stem or s t ern .
,

quit e round li k e a S hi e ld s o H erodotus d e s crib e d th e Zcuj fa h ’

—

of h i s day ; s o too i s it repres ented on A s syrian s l a b s from

6
, ,

a flood ( Cu n . Tex ts , Pt . X II, p l 5 0, Ob v . .

,
l 23 )
. c f. P oeb el, H i s t Tex ts ,
. p . 5 4,
n . 1 .

1
Se e ab o e , v p 79 n 3 f .
, . .

g J tr w H b p
2
Cf .
, e . .
, as o , e r . a nd B a b Tra d
. .
, . 32 9 .

Gi lg Ep i c , X I, 11 2 8— 3 0 ; s ee a b o e ,
1’
.
71 . v p . .

L 5 8 f The ga r con a i ne d w el e c u b i s , s o ha th e e ss el
. .
ould h a e t t v t t t v w v
r t
mea su e d 1 20 c u b i s ea ch w a y ; ak i ng th e Ba b yloni a n cu b i , o n t h e b a s i s o f t t
G u dea s s cale , a t 49 5
’

( of Th u r e a u -D n
a g i n , Jou r na l A s i a ti u e, Di x
q mm
S er , . .
. .

t X III, 1 909 ,
. 7 9 iii , his ou ld
g i e a l e pp
n g h , b ead h , a nd h e igh of
. t w v t r t t
nea ly 19 5 ft r Fo r t h e ea s u e e n s i n th e la e.
Heb e e s i o n a nd i n m rm t tr rw Vr
B e ross us, s e e b e lo , p 8 1 f , n 2 w . . . .

5
A rab .
l fiah
eu
’

, pl .
Z f
f aru ; in a ddi ti on t o i ts comm on u se fo r t h e B a gh da d
c o a c le, r t he w rd i o s a ls o e mp l yed f o or a la ge b a s r k t e
r t
.

6
He odo u s , I, 194 .
 THE PR OTOTYPE OF NOAH S AR K 81
’

Nineveh wh e r e we see it employed for t h e trans port of h eavy

,

b u ilding mate rial 1

i ts form and s truc t u r e ind e e d s ugg e st a pre
hi storic origin Th e Zru fia h i s one of tho se e xamples of pe rfect
'

adj us tment to conditions of use which ca n not be improv e d .

Any one who ha s travelled in one of t h e s e cra ft wi ll agr e e t hat

their storage capacity is immense for t h e ir circular form and ,

s teeply curved s ide allow every inch of s pa ce to be utilized .

It is almos t impo ss ible to up s e t them and their o nly disa dvantag e ,

is lack of s pe e d For th e ir guidan ce all that i s required i s a s t e ers

.

man with a paddle a s indicated in the Epic It is true that t h e ,

.

larger kufia h of t o-day tend s to increas e in diameter a s compar e d

to height but that d e tai l might well be ignored in pict uring t h e
,

mons te r ves sel of U t napishtim Its s even horizontal stage s and .

their nine lateral divisions would have been structurally soun d in

’
s upporting the vess el s s id e s and the se l e ction of the latt e r u n
e ven numb e r though prompte d doubtle s s by i t s s acred chara ct e r
, ,

is only suita bl e to a circular craft in which the interior wa ll s

would radiate from th e centre Th e use of pitch an d bitume n .

for s meari ng the v es s el inside and out tho u gh unu sual even in ,

Mesopotamian s hipbuilding i s pr ec isely the method e mployed ,

in t h e Zrufia h s con s truction

’
.

We have no detai led description of Z i us u du s grea t boat ’ ’

‘
,

be yond t h e fact that it w a s covered in and ha d an O pe ning or ,

light hole which could be clo ed But the form of U n ap i s h ti m s

- s ,
t — .
’

vess el w a s no doubt tra di tional and we may pic t ur e that of ,

Z i us u du as also of the ku fia h type th oug h s maller and without i t s ,

succe ssor s e laborate inte rnal st ructure Th e gra du al d e v e lo pment

’
.

of the hug e coracle into a s hip would hav e been encouraged by

the S emitic us e of t h e te rm s hip to desc rib e it ; and the att e mpt
to reta in som e thin g of its original proportions re s ulte d in pro
?
d u c i n g t h e unwiel dy ark of lat e r tradition
1
Th e
Zj en
'

ab w
i s fo i t h rm
b i t m
ed of
en S m wif t hck er w or k
-
coa e d t u . o e o os e

r pr n t d n t h Ni v h lpt r pp r t b v r d wi t h k i n ; d
e ese e o e ne e sc u u es a ea o e co e e s s an

H rodot
e ( I 194 ) t
us t t h t t h ,
b t w hi h m
s a d w n
es t h r i v r t
a e oa s c co e o e e o

B b yl n
a i r l r nd m d
o are c f ki n B t hi f rt h r d
cu a a ri p ti a h w e o s s . u s u e es c on s o s

th t h e i h r r f rri g t t h k l k
a s e e ki n r ft w i t h wh i h h h
e e n o mb in d
e e e or S -a
, c e as co e

a d e ri pti n f th l fl k
sc o Th l t S i H ry R wli
o e ei / h da vr n
. e a e r en a n s on a ne e se e or

h e rd of
a k in v r d Z fi h
a s i th r th T g i
-
co e e E ph r t ac d t h re
a n
on e e e l r s or u a es, a n e ca

b e li ttl d b t th t b i t m n w
e ou mp l y d f th i r n tr ti in nt i q i ty
a u e as e o e or e co s uc on a u ,

as i t i to d y s Th r ft
- a ft n l rg
.
n gh t es e rry fi c a i h or
a re o e a e e ou o ca ve or s x se s

a nd d oz am en en .

1
The d ri pt i n f th e k i n t pr rv d fr m th
es c o o rli r H b r war s o es e e o e ea e e e

V er i on (J) b t t h l tt r H b r ew V r i n ( P ) whi l i n r i g th l gt h f
s , u e a e e e s o , e c eas n e en o

t h e v sel h es n i de r b ly r ed
,
d i t h i gh t nd b r dt h
as co s a It m r m nt uce s e a ea . s e a su e e s

K .
G
82 D ELUGE S TO R IE S A ND THE S UME R IAN VE R S ION
We will re turn now to the text and r es u m e t h e compari s on w e
w e re ma k i n g b e tw e e n it a n d t h e Gilgam e s h Epic In t he latt e r .

no dir e ct r f r
e e e nc e is m ad e to t h e ap p e aranc e of the S u n -god
afte r t h e s torm nor is U t n ap i s h ti m r epre s e nt e d a s prayi n g to
-
,

him B u t t h e s equence of e vent s i n t h e S umerian Ve rs ion i s

.

ve ry natural and on that account alon e apart from oth e r re as on s

, , ,

it may b e held to re pre s ent the original form of t h e s tory For .

t h e S u n -god would naturally re appear after th e darkn e s s of the

s torm had pas s e d and it wo u ld be e qual ly natural that Z i u su du
,

s hould addr ess him s elf to t h e great lig h t -god More ove r t h e .
,

Gilgam e s h Epic s till re ta i n s trac e s of the S umerian Ve rs ion as ,

will be s een from a compari s on of their narrati v es the S e mitic 1

,

Ve rs ion b e ing quot e d from th e point wh e re th e hurri c an e c e ased

and th e s ea becam e s till .

S UME RIA N VE R S IO N S E M ITIC VE R S IO N . .

Wh e n I looke d at t he
s torm t h e uproar had ,

c e as e d ,

And all mankind w as

turne d into cl a y ;
In plac e of fi e ld s th e re
w a s a s w amp .

Z i u su du open e d t h e O p e n I op en e d t he op e ni n g ( lit .

ing of th e gr e at boat ; hol e and daylight ‘

fe ll upon my c ou n t e
n anc e .

The light of th e h e ro the ,

S u n -god ( h e) cau s e s ,

to e nte r into th e i n
t e ri or of t he gr e at
boat .

Z i u s u du t h e king , ,

( ) Bows him s e lf down befor e ( 1 3 7 ) I bowed my s e lf down and

10
t he S u n -god ; s a t do w n w e e ping
;
The king s acri fi c e s an ox O ve r my count e nance ,

a s h e e p h e s laugh flowe d my tears .

t e rs
I gazed upon th e quarters
( of the world ) all —

w as s ea .

a re
t r
he e gi v en t i n le g th 5 0 b i t i n b r dth d
( Ge n . vi . 15 ) as 3 00 cubi s n , cu s ea an
b it
i n h i gh t ; t k i ry H b r w b i t t b t 1 8 i t h i
,
30 cu
g th
s e di a n e or na e e cu a a ou n . s
,

w ld g i
ou
v l gt h
e a f b t 450 ft b r dt h f b t 7 5 ft d h i ght f
en o a ou .
, a ea o a ou . an a e o
b t 45 ft Th i t ri r t r i ri ly r d d t thr Th v
,
a ou en n e o s o e s a re
l
.
e c e ssa e uc e o ee . e es se
i B m
n e ro s s u s
r fi t d i b y t w nd t h h d l g t h f v r t h r
ea s u es ve s a a o, a us a a en o o e ee
t h nd f t
ou s a d ee b r dt h f m r t h
an a tw lv h dr d ea o o e an e e un e
C l V ll 7 1 1
.

h r m p r d w ith Gilg Ep i X I 11 1 3 3 9
1
o —
a re e e co a e
.
, .
. c, .
- .
,
 TH E S AC R IFI C E TO THE S U N-G OD 83

It will be s een that in the S emitic Version t he beams of th e

S u n god have b ee n r e duced to daylight and Z i u su du s act of‘ ’ ’
—
,

wors hip has b e com e m e r e ly prostration in token of grief .

Both in t h e Gilgame s h Epic a n d in B e r oss u s the sacrifice

o ffere d by the D e luge h e ro to the god s follows th e e pi s ode of the
bird s a n d it ta k e s place on the top of t h e mountain afte r the
,

landing from t h e ve s s e l It is hardly prob a ble that two sac r ifice s

.

w e r e recounted in the S umerian Ve rsion one to t h e S un -god in ,

the boat and another on the mountain after landing ; and if we

a r e ri ght in identifying Z i u su du s recorded sacrifice with that of
’

U n api s ht i m and X i su t hr os it would seem that accordin g to

t -
, ,

the S um e rian Version no birds were sent out to tes t the abat e
,

m e nt of t h e wat e rs Thi s conclusion cannot be regarded as quite

.

certain ina s much as the greater part of the Fifth C olumn i s

,

wanting We have moreover already s e en reason to believe that

.
, ,

the acco u nt on our tablet is epitomized and that con s e quently ,

t h e omi s s ion of any e pi s od e from our te xt doe s not necess arily

imply its ab s ence from the original S umerian V e rs ion which it
follows B u t here -a t lea s t it i s clear that nothing can have been
.

omitted betwe e n the O pening of the light -hol e and the s acrifice ,

for the one act i s the natural s equence of the other On the .

whol e it s eem s pr e fe rabl e to as s ume that we have recovered

a s impler fo rm of t h e s tory .

A S the s torm itself i s described in a few phrases s o the ce s sa ,

tion of t h e flood may have been di s missed with equal brevity ;

2
the gradual abat e ment of the wat e rs as atteste d by t h e dove the , ,

swallow and the raven may well be due to later elaboration or

, , _

to combination with s ome variant account Under its amended .

form t h e narrativ e lead s naturally up to th e landing on the

mountain and t h e s acri fi ce of thank s giving to the god s In the .

S u m e rian Ve rs io n on t h e other hand Z i u s u du regard s him s elf as

, ,

s aved wh e n he s e e s t h e S u n s hining ; he ne e ds no further tests

to a s sure him s elf that the dang e r i s ov e r and his sacrifice too is ,

o n e of gratit u de for hi s e s cape Th e di s appearance of the S u n

.

god from t he S e mitic Vers ion was thus a nece s s ity to avoid an ,

anti -climax ; and t h e hero s attitud e of wors hip had obviously to

’

be tran s lated into one of gri e f An indication that the s acrifice

.

was originally r e pres e nt e d a s havi n g tak e n place on board the

boat may be s e en in t h e line s of t h e Gilgame s h Epic whi ch
r ec ount how Enlil after acqui cing in U n api s ht i m s s u rvival
’

,
e s t -

of the Flood wen t up into the ship and le d h i m forth by the

,

hand although in the preceding lines he had already landed

, , ,

G 2
84 D ELUGE S TO R IE S A ND T HE S UME R IAN VE R S ION
and had sacri fi c e d upon t he mountain The two pa s sag e s are .

hardly cons i s t en t a s th e y s tand but they find a s impl e e xplana

,

tion if w e r e ga rd t h e s e co n d of them a s an unaltered s urvival

from an e a r h e r form of t h e s tory .

oning be sound it follows that whil e , ,

the earlier H e brew Vers ion clo s e ly re s embl e s t h e Gilgam e sh Epic ,

t h e later H e br e w Ve r s ion by i t s omi s s io n of t h e birds would

, ,

o ffer a parall e l to the S um eria n Vers ion B u t wheth e r we may .

draw any co n cl u s ion from thi s apparent grouping of our au th ori

ti e s will be be s t d e alt with when we have concluded our surv e y
of the new e vid e nce .

A s we hav e s ee n the text of the Fifth C olumn breaks off with

,

Z i us u du s s acri
’
fi c e to t h e S u n -god afte r h e had opened a light
,
’
hol e in the boat and had s e e n by the god s beam s that the s torm
w a s over Th e mi s s ing portion of the Fifth C olumn must hav e
.

included at l e a s t s ome account of the abatement of the waters ,

t he s trandi n g of the boat and the manner in which Anu and

,

Enlil becam e appri s ed of Z i u s u du s e s cap e and cons equently of ’

t h e failur e of their intention t o annihilat e mankind For in the .

S ixth C olumn of the text we fi nd th e s e two d e ities reconciled to

Z i usu du and be s towing immo rtality upon him as Enlil bestows ,

immortality upon U t-n api s hti m at t h e clo s e of the S emitic

Ve rsion In the latter account after the ve ss el had grounded on
.
,

Mount Ni s i r and U t-n ap i s ht i m had t e s ted t h e abatement of t he

waters by mean s of the bird s he brings all out from the s hip and
,

offe rs hi s libation and sacrifice upon t he mountain heaping up ,

reed cedar-wood and myrtl e beneath h i s s e ven s acrificial ve s s els

, , .

And it w a s by thi s act on h i s part that the god s fi rst had know
ledge of his e s cape For th e y s melt the s we et s avour of the
.

s acrifice and gathered like flie s over the s a c r i fic er

‘
,

It i s poss ibl e in our text that Z i u s u du s s acrifice in th e boat was ’

al s o t he mean s by which the god s became acqu ainted with his

s urvival and it s eem s obvious that the S u n-god to whom it w a s ,

o ffe red s hould have continued to play s om e part in the narrati ve

, ,

p erhap s by ass i s ting Z i u su du in propitiating Anu and Enlil In .

t he S e mitic -Babylonian Ver s ion the firs t d e ity to approach the ,

sacri fi c e i s B elit -ili or I s htar who i s indignant with Enlil for

,

what h e h a s don e When Enlil him s elf approaches and s e e s t he

.

s hip he i s fi lled with anger agains t t h e god s and a s king who , ,

h a s e s cap e d exclaim s that no man must live in the de s truction

, .

Thereupon Ninib accu s e s Ea who by h i s pleading s ucceeds i n ,

1
Gi lg Ep i c, x 1, 1 1 6 2
. . .
 ETHI CAL C O NT R A S T O F VE R S ION S 85

turning E nl il s purpo s e H e bid s Enlil vi s it th e sinner with his

’
.

s i n and lay h i s tra ns gres s ion on the transgre s s or ; Enli l s houl d

not again s end a delug e to des troy t h e whole of mankind but ,

s ho u ld be conte n t with le s s w h ole s ale de s truction s uch a s that ,

wrought by wild b e a s ts famin e and plagu e Finally he con , , .

fe s s e s that it w a s h e who warned Z i u s u du of the god s deci s ion by ’

s ending him a dr e am Enlil thereupon chang e s h i s int e ntion and

.
,

going up into t h e s hip l e ads U t -n ap i sh t i m fort h Though E a s , .

’

inte rvention find s of cours e no p arall e l in either Hebrew version

, , ,

t h e s ubj e ct -matter of his s peech i s reflected in both In the .

earlier H e bre w V e rs ion Yahweh smell s t h e s weet savour of Noah s ’

burnt o ffe ring and s ay s in h i s heart he will no more des troy

e very li v ing creature as he had done while in the later Hebrew
Ver s ion Elohim after remembering Noah and c aus i n g the waters
,

to abate e s tabli s he s h i s covenant to the s ame e ffe ct and as a

, , ,

S ign of the covenant s et s h i s bow in the cloud s ,

.

In its treatment of t h e climax of the s tory w e s hall see that

the S um e rian Vers ion at any ra te in the form it h a s re ach e d us , ,

i s on a lower ethical lev e l than t h e Babylonian and H eb rew

Vers ions E a s argument that the s inner s hould he a r h i s own
.
’

S i n and t h e tran s gr e s s or his own tran s gr e s s ion in s om e m e asure

fore s talls that of Ez e k i e l ; and both t h e Hebr e w Vers ions r ep re

1

s ent t h e s avi n g o f Noah a s part of the divine intention fr om the

b e ginning But th e S um e rian Version introduc e s the e lement of

.

magic a s the m e an s by which man can b e nd the will of the god s

t o h i s own end s How far the deta il s of the S umeri an myth at
.

thi s point re s e mbl e d that of the Gilgam e s h Epic it is impossible

to s ay but the gen e ral course of the s tory mus t have been the
,
’

s ame . In the latter Enlil s anger i s app e a s e d in the former that ,

of Anu and Enlil and it i s legitimate to s uppo s e that En k i like ,

Ea was Z i u s u du s principal support e r in view of the part he

,
’

had alr e ady tak e n in ensuring his e s cap e .

VI THE P R O PITIA TIO N O F TH E A N G R Y G OD S A ND Z IU S UD U S

’

.
,

I M M O RTA L ITY — The pre s ence of t h e puzz ling lines with which
.
,

the S ixth C olumn of our text op e n s w a s not explained by ,

D r P oeb e l ; in d eed they would b e d ifficult to reconcile with hi s

.
,

a s s u mption that ou r text i s an e pic pure and s impl e But if as .

,

i s sugge s ted above we are dealing with a my th in magical em ,

ployment they are quit e capable of explanation The problem

,
.

th e se line s present will bes t be s tated by giving a translation of

1
Cf E . z k vi i i p
e . x , a si
s
m , es p . x vi ii . 20 ; a nd for a co mp ri a s on of Ezek . x iv .

1 2 20
—
. wi th Gi lg Ep i . c, X I, 11 1 80 9 4,.
—
s ee b elo w pp
, . 1 3 2 ff .
86 D ELUGE S TO R IE S A ND THE S U M E R IAN VE R S ION
the e xtant portion of the column wh e r e th e y will b e s e e n with ,

th e ir immediat e conte xt in relation to what follows the m

By the S o ul of H eaven by the S o u l of Earth S hall ye , ,

conj u re him ,
1
That with you he may
An u and Enlil by t h e S oul of H e ave n by t h e S o u l of
‘
,

Earth s hall y e conjure , ,

And with y ou will h e

( )
5 T h e n i ggi l
‘
m a of the ground s pring s forth in abun
da n c e
Z i u su du t h e k i n g , ,

Befor e A n n and E n lil bows him s elf down .

Life lik e (that of) a god h e give s to him 1

,

An e t e rnal s oul lik e ( that of ) a god h e cre at e s for him .

( )
1 0 At that tim e Z i us u d u t h e ki n g , ,

Th e nam e of t h e ni ggi lma (nam e d ) Pre s e rve r of t h e S e e d

of Mankind
land t he land of Di lmu n
2 2
they cau s e d h i m
,

to dwe ll .

The firs t two lin e s of t he column are probably par t of t h e

s peech of s ome deity who urge s t h e neces s ity of invoking o r ,

conjuri n g Anu and Enlil by the S oul of Heav e n by t he S oul of ,

’
Earth in ord e r to s ecure their support or approval Now A n u
, .

and Enlil a r e the two gre at god s who had det e rmin e d on man
k ind s de s truction and who s e wrath at h i s own e s cape fro m
’

d e ath Z i u s u du mu s t placat e It i s an obvious infere nc e that .

conjuring by t he S o u l of Heave n and by th e S oul of Earth

i s eith e r the method by which Z i u s u du h as alre ady s u cceed e d in
appeasing their anger or the means by which h e i s h e r e e nj oined ,

to attain that end Again s t t h e latt e r alternative it i s to b e .

note d that th e god is addr ess ing more than on e pers on ; and ,

further that Z i u s u du is evidently already pardone d for s o far

, , ,

from following t h e d e ity s advice h e imm e diately pros trat es him ’

s elf b e for e A nn and E n lil and r e ceive s immortality We may .

conj e cture that at t he clos e of th e Fifth C olumn Z i u s u du had

alre ady performed t h e invocation and thereby had appeas ed the
1
pr pl ti th v rb r v
5?
t he ob a ble e x a na on o f es e e s i n th e s i ng u la s ee ab o e ,
p
,

. 5
2
Pos s i b ly t o b e tr n l ta s a ed
‘
m nt i n Th r nd ri g f th pr p r n m
ou a
’
. e e e n o e o e a e
ast t h a o f Di lmu n i s
o

v ry e u nc e rt i F th pr b b l i d ti fi ti n f Di lm n
a n . or e o a e en ca o o u
W th th f B hr i t h P r i n G lf f R wli n n J m R y A
.
.

i e Is la nd o a e n in e e s a u o a
, . so , ou . o . s.

p p 2 0 if
. . a n d s ee f rt h r M i n r O i nt L i t Z i t XX N 7
u e , e ss e , r e . .
- e , o. ,
fi
’

co .

1
Th e tr a ces o f th e s i g ns
p r rv
e se ed i n l 13 . a re n ot c lea r .
88 DELUGE S TO R IE S A ND THE S UME R IAN VE RS ION
anger that mu st b e appeased If once combi n ed the further s tep . ,

of mak ing the incantation the actual means by which Z i u su du

achi ev e d h i s own rescue and immortality wo u ld be a natural
developm ent It may be added that t h e word s would h ave been
.

an e qually appropriate addition if the incantation had not existed

ind ep end e nt ly but had been s uggested by and developed from
, , ,

t h e myth .

In t he third and e leventh lines of t he column we have further

re fe rences to the my st e riou s obj ect the creation ofwhich appears to ,

have b e en recorded in the Firs t C olumn of t h e text betwe e n man s ’

cre ation and that animal s The second s ign of t h e group com .

posing i ts name w as not recognized by Dr P oe b el b u t i t i s quite .

,

clearly writte n in two of th e pass age s and has been correct ly ,

identified by Profe s sor Barton ?

The S umerian word i s in fact , ,

to b e re ad niglgi l-ma ? which wh e n preceded by th e determina

tive for pot jar or bo w l i s given in a lat e r s yllabary as the
‘ ‘

e quival e nt of the S emitic word ma s hkha lu Eviden ce that t h e .

word ma s hkha lu w a s actually employ e d to d e not e a j ar or vess e l

of s om e s ort i s fu rni shed by on e of th e T e l e l -Amarna letters
which r efe rs to one s il v e r ma s hkha lu and on e (or two ) stone
‘ ’ ‘
b
ma s hkha lu In our text the determinative i s ab s ent and it is
3 ’
.
,

po s s ibl e that the wo rd i s u s ed in another s en s e Pro fes s or Barton .

,

in both p as s age s in the S ixth C olumn give s it the meaning ,

‘
curs e he int e rprets th e lin e s as refe rring to the r e moval of a
’

curse from the earth after t he Flood and he compar e s G e n viii 2 1 , . .

,

wh e re Yahweh d e clare s he will not again curs e th e ground for

man s s ake ’
But thi s tran s lation ignores the occurrence of th e
word in the Firs t Column wh e re t h e cre ation of the n iggi lma i s ,

appare ntly recorded ; and h i s rend e ri ng the s e ed that w a s

cursed in 1 1 1 i s not s u pported by t h e photographic r epr odu c
’
.

tion of the text which s uggests that the fi rs t S ign in the line is
,
’
not that for s eed but i s t he S ign for name a s correctly read by ,
’

Dr P o eb el In that pa s s ag e the niggi lma app e ars to be given by

. .

Z i u su du the nam e Pr e s e rv e r of t h e S e ed of Mankind which w e ‘

hav e already compared to the title bestow e d on Uta -n ap i s hti m s ’

ship Pres erver of Life

, Like the s hip it mu s t have played an ,
’
impo rtant part in man s pre s ervation which would account not ,

S ee A mer i ca n Jou r n a l of S emi ti c L a ngu ages , Vol

1
I, A i l 1 9 15 , 22 6 . XX X pr p .

wr tt Frt m v
.

2
It i s i e n n ig-g i l i n th e i s C olu n ; s ee a b o e 5 6 f
, .

S ee Wi n ck le , E l-A ma rna , p l 3 5 f , NO 2 8, Ob v C ol 1 1 l 45 Re v C ol 1
r . . . .
, , , ,
. . .

pp v w r pr t r m
.
,
l 63, a nd Knu d tzon , E l-A m Taf
.
1 12 , 122 ; th e es s els e e
.
es e n s f o
. .
,

m p
A eno h i s IV t o B u r n ab u ri a sh S ee a b o e , 57.
v p . .
 ‘
P R E S E RVE R OF THE S EE D OF MANKIN D ’
89

only for the h on ori fic titl e b u t for the s pecial record of i t s

cr e ation .

If we may conn e ct t h e word with t h e magical colouring of th e

myth w e might perhap s retain i t s k n o w n meaning jar or
,
“

,
‘ ’

bowl and regard it as e mployed in the magic a l ceremony which

’

mu s t have form e d part of the invocation by the S oul of Heav e n ,

by the S oul of Earth ’ But the accomp an ying refe rence s to t he .

ground to i t s producti o n from the ground and to i t s s pri n ging

, ,

up if the phra s e s may b e so rendered s ugge s t rath e r s ome kind

, ,

of plant ; and thi s fr om i t s e mploym ent in magical rit e s may

1
, ,

al s o have given i t s name to a bowl or ve s s el which held it A .

very similar plant w a s that f ound and lo s t by G i lgame s h after hi s ,

soj ourn with U t -n ap i s h t i m ; it too had potent magical pow e r and

bore a title d e s criptiv e of i t s p e culiar virtue of trans forming old
age to youth S hould thi s s u gge stion prove to be correct t h e
.
,

three pa ss ages mentioning t h e n iggi lma mu s t be cla s sed with

those in which the invocatio n i s refe rr e d to a s en s uring t h e ,

s anction of the myth to furth e r elem e nt s in the magic In ac cord .

ance with thi s vi e w the fifth line in the S ixth C olu mn is probably ,

to be inclu ded in the divine s p e ech wh e re a r e fe rence to the ,

obj ect employ e d in t h e ritual would not be out of plac e But it .

is to be hoped that light will be thrown on this puzzling word

by furth e r s tudy and perhap s by new fr agm e nts of the text ;,

m e anwhile it would b e hazardou s to sugge s t a more de finit e

rendering .

With the sixth lin e of the column it is clear that the origin al
narrative of the myth i s re su m e d Z i u su du the k ing pro s trat e s
?
, ,

himself befor e Anu and Enlil who bestow immor ality upon hi m ,
t

and cause him to dwell in a land or mountain the name of , ,

which may perhap s b e read as D i lmu n The clo s e paralleli s m .

between thi s portion of the text and the end of the myth in t h e
Gilgam e sh Epic will b e s e e n from th e followi n g extract s t h e 3
,

magical portions bei n g omitted from the S um e rian Version

1
r r th g r
Th e e fe en c es t o d th rth l t d to ‘
e n t it
ou n
’
, or
‘
e ea
’

, a so en c on ec

p r wt
e c u li a ly i h E nli lE nlil l i t i n w i th th . rt h wh i h i f ’
s c os e a s soc a o e ea , c s, o

c r i nd p dently tt t d i
ou s e , e p li i tly r f rr d t i n th B byl i n
en a es e ,
s ex c e e e o e a on a

V r i ( f Gi lg Ep i X I 11 3 9
e s on c . S gg t d r fl t i
. c, f t hi i d
,
. h v u es e e ec on s o s ea a e

l g b n tr
on d i th H b r w V r i
ee ace ; f G nv i ii 2 1 ( J ) wh r Y h w eh
e e e e s on s c . en . .
, e e a

say h s w i llet g i r t h g r d
no d Ga i
a n 1 3 ( P ) w
c u se h e r e E l h i m e ou n , an en . x .
, o

sp k f hi v
ea s o t b tw m nd t h rth
s co en a n
‘
e ee n e a e ea

It w i ll l
2
b n t d t h t wi th t h i li
a so th t
e t g i n f ll n t r lly i nt
o e a s ne e ex a a a s a u a o

co p l t s
u e .

3
C l VI 11 6 9
o . d 12 th r m p r d wi th Gi lg Ep i X I 11 1 9 8 205
, .
—
an ar e e e co a e . c, ,
.
—
.
90 D ELUGE S TO R IE S A ND THE S UME R IAN VE R S ION

S U M E R IA N VE R S IO N . V E R S IO N
S E M ITIC .

Then Enlil went u p into

the S hip ;
Z i u s u du , t he k ing, H e took me by t h e h a n d
and le d m e forth .

B efore Anu and Enlil bows He brought out my wife

him s e lf down .
and cau s e d h e r to
bow down at my s id e ;
He touched ou r brows ,

s tandi n g b e twe e n us

a nd bl e s s ing u s

Life li k e (that of) a god he ‘

Form e rly w a s U t -n ap i s h
giv e s to him . tim of mankind ,

An e te rnal s o u l li k e (that B u t n ow le t U t -n ap i s ht i m
of) a god h e creates for be lik e t he god s , eve n
him . us "
‘
And le t U t-n a p i s ht i m
d w e ll afar off at th e
’
mou th of th e rive rs "
In a land ,
the land Then th ey took m e and
of
1
th e y a far off at t h e mo u th ,

caused him to d w ell . of t h e rive rs th ey ,

caus e d me to dwe ll .

Th e S um erian Ve rs ion thus apparently conclud e s with t he

familiar e ndi n g of t h e legend which w e find in t h e Gilgam e s h
Epic a n d in B e r os s u s though it h e r e occu rs in an abbreviat e d form
,

and with s om e variation s in d e tail In all thr e e ve rs ions t h e .

pro s tra tion of t h e D e l u ge h e ro b e for e t h e god i s followed by t he

b es towal of immortality u pon him a fat e which accordi n g to , ,

B e r os su s h e s har e d with hi s wife h i s dau ght e r and t h e s te e rs

, , ,

man The Gilgam es h Epic p e rhap s implie s that U t -napi s h t i m s

.
’

wife s hared in h i s immortality but t he S umerian Ve rs ion ,

mentions Z su du alon e In t he Gilgam e s h Epic U t na p i s ht i m

i u .
-

i s s e ttle d by t h e god s at t h e mouth of t h e riv e rs that i s to s a y ,

at t h e h e ad of t h e Pe rs ian Gulf whil e according to a po s s ibl e

,

r e nd e ri ng ofth e S umerian V e rs ion h e i s mad e to d w e ll on D i lmu n ,

an i s land in t h e G u lf its elf Th e fact that Gilgam e s h in t h e

.

Epic has to cros s th e s e a to reach U t -n ap i s ht i m may b e cited i n

fa vour of the readi n g Di lmu n and t he d e scr i p tion of t h e s e a as
‘ ’

t h e Wat ers O f De ath if it impli e s mor e than t h e great da ng e r

o f th e ir p as s ag e w as probably a lat e r d e ve lopm e n t a s s ociat e d
,

with Ut -nap i s h t i m s immortality It may b e add e d that in

’
.

n e ith e r H e bre w v e rs ion do w e find any parall e l to t he concluding

1
O r, On a m t
o un a i n , the m t
ou n a i n o f
’
, &c .
 92 D ELUGE S TO R IE S A ND T HE S UME R IAN VE R S ION
The cu mulative e fl e c t of s uc h g e neral and detailed evidence is
'

over w h elmi n g a n d w e may di s mi ss all doubts as to the

,

validity of D r P oe b el s claim We have ind e ed re cover e d a very

.
’
.

e arly and in s om e of i t s fe ature s a very primitiv e form of the

, ,

D e l u ge narrat ive which till now h a s r e ached u s only in S emitic

and Gree k rend e rings ; and t h e s tre am of tradition has been
tapp e d at a point far abov e any at which w e have hitherto
a pproach e d it What e vid e nce we may a s k does thi s early
.
, ,

S um e rian V e rs ion o ffe r with r egard to the origin and literary

hi story of the H e br e w Ve rs ion s ?
Th e g e n e ral d epe n denc e of t h e biblical Ver s ions upon the
Babylonian l e ge n d a s a whole h as long b e en re co gnized and 1
,

need s no fu rther d e mon s tration and it h as alr e ady b e e n ob s erv e d

that t he parall e li s m s with t h e v ers ion in the Gilgame s h Epic are
on t h e whol e mor e d e tail e d and s triking in t h e earli e r than in t h e
"
l at e r H e bre w Ve rs ion ?
In the cours e of our analys i s of the
S um e rian t e xt i t s mor e s tri k ing points of agreem e nt or diver
genc e in r e lation to t h e H e brew Vers ion s were noted under
, ,

t h e di ffe r e nt s e ction s of i t s n a rrativ e It w as al s o obvious that .

,

in many fe atu r es in whi ch t h e H e bre w Vers ions di ffe r from t h e

Gilgam es h Epic t h e latt e r fi nd s S u m e rian s u pport
,
The s e facts .

co nfirm the con cl u s ion whi c h we s hould naturally bas e on ground s

,

of hi s torical probability that while the S emitic -Babyloni an,

V e r s ions we re d e ri v e d from S u m e r the Hebre w account s were ,

equally clearly d e rive d fro m Babylon But there a r e one or two .

piec e s of e vid e nce which are apparently at varia n ce with this

con c lus ion and th e s e c all for s ome explanation
, .

Not too m u ch s ig n i fi canc e s hould b e attached to the appare nt

omi s s ion of th e e pi s ode of t h e bird s from the S umerian narrative ,

i n which it would agre e with the later a s again s t the earlier

H e br ew Ve rs ion for apart from i ts epitomized characte r there i s
, ,

s o much mi ss ing from the t e xt that the ab s e nce of thi s epi s ode

cannot be r e garded as es tabli s h e d with certainty And in any .

case it could b e balanced by the S umerian order of C re ation

of men before animal s which agre e s with t he earlier H e br e w
,

Ve rs ion agai ns t t h e later B ut there i s one very s tri k ing poin t

.

in which our new S u m e rian t e xt agree s with both the H e brew

V e rs ions a s aga i n s t t h e Gilgam e sh Epic and B e ros s u s and that
i s in t h e char a ct e r of Z i u s u du which presents s o clo s e a parall e l
,

to the pi e ty of Noah A s w e have already s e en the latter is due

.
,

1
S ee ab o e, v p 2f
. .

2
Fo r de t a i ls s ee e s p e c i ally S k i nne r ,
G en es is p p 1 7 7 ff
. . .
 G R OUPING OF AUTHO R ITIE S 93

to no Hebrew idealization of the s tory but r e pre s ents a genuine ,

s trand of the ori ginal tradition which i s completely a bsent fro m

,

the Babylonian Version s But the B abylo ni an Vers ions are t he

.

media through which it h as generally b e en a s sum e d that t h e

tradition of th e D e l u ge reached the Hebrews Wha t explanation .

have we of thi s fact ?

This grouping of S umerian and H e bre w authoriti e s a ga in s t ,

the e xtant s our c e s from Babylon i s empha s iz e d by the general

,

framework of the S umerian s tory For the lit e rary connexion .

whi ch w e have in Gene s is betwe e n the C reation and the D eluge

narrative s h a s hithert o found no parallel in the c uneiform t e xts In .

Babylon and As s yria the myth of C reat io n and the D eluge legend
have been divorced From the on e a compl et e e pic h as b e e n
.

evolved in accordance with t h e ten e t s of Babylonian t h e ology t h e ,

C reation myth being combined in t h e proce s s with other myths

of a som e what analogou s character ?
Th e D elug e legend h as s u r
v i v e d a s an i s olated s tory in more than one s e tting the principal ,

S emitic V e rsion being recounted to th e n ational h e ro Gilgamesh ,

towards the clos e of the compo s it e epic of h i s adve n ture s which

grew up aroun d the nucleu s of hi s nam e It i s .

s urprise s of the newly recovered S umerian

H e bre w connexion of the narratives i s s e en to
very primitive tradition Noah s reputation .
’

stand alon e His li ne of descent from Adam ,

.

narrative connecting the creation of the world wi th its part i a l

destruction by the D e lug e alr e ady appear in S umerian form at
,

a time wh e n the city of Babylon itself had not s ecured i t s l at e r

-

power How then are we to account for th is corr e s pondenc e of

.

S umerian an d Hebrew traditiou s on point s complet e ly wanting ,

in our intermediate authoritie s from whi ch how e ve r oth e r, , ,

evidence s uggests that the Hebr e w narrative s were derived ?

At th e risk of anticipati n g some of t h e conclus ions t o be drawn
in the next lecture it may be w e ll to d efin e an answer now
, .

It i s possible that those who still accept the traditional author

ship of the Pentateuch may be inclin e d to s e e in this c or r esp on
dence of Hebre w and S umerian id e a s a confirmation of their ow n
hypothesis But it should be pointed out at once that this is not
.

an in evitable deduction from t he evidence Indeed it is directly .

,

c ontradicted by the rest of the evidenc e we have s u mmarized ,

while it would leave completely unexplained some s igni ficant

features of the problem It is true that certain important details
.

1
S ee fu rth er , Lec t r
u e 111, pp . 114 ff.
94 D EL UGE S TO R IE S A ND TH E S UME R IAN VE R S ION
of t h e S u m erian tradition whil e not affecting Babylon and
,

As syri a h av e l e ft th e ir s tamp upon t h e H e brew narrative s ; but

,

th a t i s not a n e xhau s tive s tatem e nt of th e cas e For w e have .

a ls o s e e n that a mor e complet e s u rvival of S u m e rian traditio n

h a s ta k e n place in t h e hi s tory of B er os s u s Th e re we trac e d the

.

s a m e g e n e ral fram e wor k of t h e narrative s with a far closer ,

c or r e s ponden c e i n detail The k in gly rank of Z i u su du i s in

.

c ompl e t e harmo ny with t h e B e r os s i a n conception of a s e rie s

o r s up r e m e A nt e diluvian r u l e rs and the name s of two of t he

, ,

An tediluvian citie s ar e amo n g tho s e of their n e wly r e covere d

S u m e rian prototyp e s There can thu s b e no s ugge s tion that t h e
.

G r e e k reprod u c tio n s of t h e S u merian tradition w e re in their turn

d u e to H e bre w infl u enc e On t h e contrary we have in them a
.

p ara ll e l c as e of survival in a far more compl e te form .

Th e i n fe r e nc e w e may obviou sly draw i s that t h e S umerian

n a rr a t iv e co n tinu e d in exi s t e n ce in a literary form that clo s e ly
,

r e s e mbl e d t h e original v e r s io n into the later hi s torical perio d s

, .

In t hi s th e r e wo u ld be nothi n g to s urpri s e u s when w e recall the

,

c a r e fu l p r es e rvation and s tu dy of ancient S umerian r e ligious

t exts by t h e lat er S emiti c pri e s thood of th e country Each .

a n cient c u lt c e ntr e in Babylonia continu e d to cling to i t s own

-

local tradi t io n s and th e S u merian de s ir e for th e ir pre s e rvation

, ,

whi c h w a s i nh e rit e d by th e ir S e mitic gu ardian s w a s in great ,

m e a su re u naffe ct e d by political occu rre nce s e l s e where H e nc e it .

w a s that As h u r-ban i -pal when formi n g h i s library at Nin e veh

, ,

w a s able to draw upon s o rich a s tor e of t h e mor e anci e nt lit e rary

t ext s of Babylon ia Th e S u m e ri an Vers ion of the D eluge and
.

of Ante dilu vian hi s tory may w e ll hav e s urvived in a le s s

e pitomi z ed form than that in which w e hav e recovered it and
; ,

li k e oth e r anci e nt t exts it w a s probably provided with a S emitic

,

tran slation In d e e d i t s lit e ra ry s tu dy a n d reproduction may

.

have c o n tinu e d without int e rru ption in Babylon its elf B u t .

e v e n if S u m e r ian tradition di e d out in the capital und e r the

i nfl u e n c e of t h e Babylonian p r i e s thood its r e introduction may

,
-

w ll hav t k n plac in Ne o Babylonian tim e s P e rhap s the

e e a e e -
.

antiq u arian r e s earch e s of Nabonid u s w e r e charact e ri s tic of his

p e ri od a n d i n any cas e t h e collection of his country s god s into ’

t h e c apital mu s t hav e b e e n a c compani e d by a r e newed intere s t

i n the mor e ancient v e rs ion s of the pas t with which t h e ir cult s wer e
p e c u li arly a ss ociate d In t h e e xtant s ummary from B e r os s u s we
.

may po s sibly se e evidenc e of a sub s equent attempt to combin e

96 DELU GE S TO R IE S A ND TH E S UME R IAN VE R S ION
month s ; and not o n ly mus t t he flood-wate r b e controlled but ,

s om e portio n of it mu s t b e d e tain e d arti fi cially if it i s to be ,

of u s e d u ring t h e b u rn ing month s of July Au gus t and , ,

S ept e mb e r wh e n t h e rivers a re at th e ir lowe s t

,
Moreove r .
,

h e avy rain in April and a warm s o u th wind melting the s now

i n t he hill s may bri n g d own s uch flood s that t h e channel s cannot
cont a i n them ; the dam s are then br e ached and the country
i s laid wa ste H ere th e r e i s fi r s t too much water and th e n too
.

li t tl e .

Th e great dang e r from flood in B abylonia both in i t s range ,

of a ction and in i ts de s tr u ctive effe ct i s du e to t h e strangely ,

flat charact e r of t h e Tigri s and E u phra t es del ta ?

H ence after
a s e ve re br e ach in the Tigri s or Euphrat e s t h e rive r after ,

inundating t h e c o u ntry may ma k e it s e lf a new chan nel mil e s

away from t h e old one To mitigate the dang e r t h e floods may .
,

b e dealt with in two way s by a multiplic a tion of canal s to —

s pre ad t he water and by providing e s cape s for it into depressions ,

in t h e surrounding desert which in th e ir turn become centre s of ,

fe r t i lty Both m e thod s w e re e mploye d i n an tiquity ; and it may

.

b e a dded that i n any s chem e for t h e fu t u r e pro s p e rity of the

country th ey mu s t b e employe d again of co u rs e with the increa s e d ,

e fli c i e n c y of modern apparat u s But whil e th e Babylonian s s u c

?

c e e d e d in co n trolli n g t h e E u phrat e s t h e Tigri s w a s n e v e r really ,

tam e d and wh en e ve r i t burs t i t s right bank th e s outhern plains

3
,

1
B agh da d, th o ug h 3 00 m il es by c or w-fly fr m o th e s ea a nd 5 00 by ri v r e , is
o nly 12 0 ft a o e s ea -le el . b v v .

2
Th e Ba byloni ans c o n olled th e Eu h a es , a n d a t t h e sa e i e o i d ed tr p rt m t m pr v
t
a a i ns
g i ts tm t
i e o f low s up ly , b y e s ca p es i n o t w o de e s s i ons i n t he
‘ ’
p pr
w tr
es e n d es ert w t
t o th e NW o f B ab y lon , k n o n od ay a s th e Habb ani a h
y .

a nd A b u Di s d e pr
es si ons , w
hi ch li e S of t h e m r tw
od e n o n of Ra adi a nd m .

N . f K rb l
o Th t t h e depr
e e a i
. wr t lly da r rv i r
es e ss on s e e a c ua use as es e o s
in t i q i ty i pr v d by th pr n l g th i r dg f t h i k b d f
an u s o e e es e ce a on e e es o c e s o
E p hr t
u h ll
a es s I ddi t i n t e l d s .p th B b y l i n y t m
n a o o ca n a s a n e sc a es , e a on a s s e
i n l d d w ll
c u e n tr t d d ik pr t t d by b r hw d By tt i g n
e -c o s uc e es o ec e us oo . cu n a
e i ght m il - h n l th r
e c g h l w h i ll b tw
an t h H bb a i y h n d A b Di
e ou a o e e en e a n a a u s
d pre i d b y b ildi g
es s on s a n h rt d m 5 0 ft hi gh r t h l tt r
u n rr w a s o a . a c os s e a e
’
s na o
ou tl t S i Willi m Wi ll k ti m t t h t r rv i r
e , r a ld b bt i d
c oc s es a es a a e se o cou e o a ne
h ldi g i g ht n m i lli r d ft n f w t r hi w k Th I ig t i n f
.

o n e ee S a s o o s o a e . ee s or e rr a o s o
M p t mi ( E
es o o a d F N Sp n
a G g p hi l J
. an n l V l XL N
. .
2 o ,
eo r a ca ou r a , o .
, o .

(A g u , p p 1 29 ff d th rt i l i Th N E t i t d o p 9 7 n 1
, .
, an e a c es n e ea r as c e n .
, .
,

nd p 9 8 2 S i W i lli m Wi ll k v l m d b q t p p f rm ’
a n r a c oe s s o u e an su se u en
.
, . .
a e rs o
th b t i tr d t i n t
e es n th t dy f B byl ni n Del g tr di ti n n i t
o uc o o e s u o a o a u e a o o s
m t er i l i d
a a s e .

Th i r w rk
1
e rri d t n th Ti gri w r ff t i v f i rrig ti b t the
o s ca e ou o e s e e e ec e or a on u
B by l n n n v r
a o ia d d in ntr lli g i t fl d t h y di d t h
s e e s u c cee f th e co o n s oo s as e os e o e
 FLOO DS IN ME S OPOTAMIA A ND EGYPT 97

were devastated We could n ot have more s uitable soil for th e .

growth of a D eluge s tory .

It w as o nl y by constant and unremitting atte ntion that disast e r

from flood could be averted ; and the diffic ulties of the proble m
’

were and are increa s ed by the fact that the fl ood-water of t h e

Mesopotami an rivers conta ins five time s a s much sediment as
the Nile In fact one of the most pre ss in g of the prob le ms the
.
,

S umerian and early Babylonian engineers had to s olve w a s the

keeping of the canal s free from silt ?
Wha t t h e floods if left ,

uncheck e d may do in Mesopotamia is well illustrated by the

, ,

d ecay of the ancient canal s y s tem which has been the immedi ate
-
,

cause of t h e country s present state of sordid desolation That ’

.

t h e d ecay w a s gradual w as not the fault of the rivers but was ,

due to the soun d principles on which the old syste m of control

had been evolved through many centuries of labour At the .

time of the Moslem conquest the sy ste m had already begun to

fail In the fift h century there had been bad floods ; but worse
.

came in A D 6 2 9 when both rivers bur s t their banks and played

. .
,

havoc with the dik e s and emb a n k ments It i s related that the .

S assanian king Parwi z the contempor a ry of Mohamm ed cruc i fied , ,

Eu h p rt A m iv
a es rth en d m th r em i n f whi h e till k n own
. a ss e ea a , e a s o c ar s as

Ni mr d D m w th r wn ro th Ti gri b v th e p oi n t wh re i t ent red

’
o s a as o ac ss e s a o e e e

i t delt ; t hi
s rv d t t rn th ri ver ov r h d ongl m er t e r k nd k ept
a s se e o u e e ar c o a oc a

i t t a h i gh l v l
a th t i t ld i rri g t e the e o n try son b ot h b nk a A bo v c ou a e c u o a s . e

t h e d m w r th h da f th l t r N h rw an C n l
e e e g r t tr
ea m 4 0 0 ft wi de
s o e a e a a a , a ea s ea .

a n d 1 7 ft d e p w hi h pp li d th e ntry t f th e ri v er Th Na Sharri
. e , c su e c ou e as o . e r or

Ki g C n l t h e N h r M lk h of t h Gr k n d t h N h r l M li k of t h e
’ ’
n s a a , a a a a e ee s a e a e - a

A r b pr ot e t ed th ri gh t b nk f t h Ti gri b y i t
a s, c w n hi gh rt i fi i l b nk
e a o e s s o a c a a s,

w hi h n till b tr ed f h ndred f mi le ; b t i t t ok i t pp ly fr m
c ca s e ac or u s o s u o s su o

t h e E ph r t e ut Si pp r wh r e t h e gr o n d i
a s m 2 5 ft h i gh r th n n the
a a , e u s so e . e a o

Ti g ri Th Ti gri
s . lly fl d ed i t l ft b n k i t w
e th ri g h t b nk wh i h
s u sua oo s e a as e a c

w pr t t d nd b r e h h er m e nt di t er Cf Will k p i t nd
as o ec e , a a ac e a s as . . c oc s, 0 . c .
, a

Th N e E t S ept 2 9 1 9 1 6 (V l X I No
ea r as , p 5 22 ; nd ee bel w
.
,
o .
,
. . a s o ,

p 98 n 2
.
, . .

1
Cf L t t f H . m m b i V
e l 1 1 1 pp
er s o v i ff i t w tah d t y f v ery
ura , o .
,
. x x x . as e u o e

v i ll g t own p n th b nk f th m i
a e or n l i n B b y loni
u o t k p ite a s o e a n ca a s a a o ee s

o w n e ti o Sl r f i lt c nd f r e i t w l re p o i b l f i t wn
n c ea o s , a o c ou s as a so s ns e or s o

s m ll r i rri g t i n- h n l Whi l th i nv nt i n f t h y t m f b i n
a e a o c a ne s . e e e o o e s s e o as

i rri g ti n w a pra ti lly f r d n Egy pt th

o as tr rdi n ry f rt ili ty of
c ca o ce o , e ex ao a e

B by l n i w
a w n i
o th t th a f n t r b y th
as y te m f p r n i l i rr i g
o n e ee o a u e e s s o e e n a a

ti no i rri g ti n ll t h y r r n d
, or I B b y l i th w t r w
a o a l d in t
e ea ou . n a on a e a e as e o

s m ll fi ld f tw
a th r
e r wh i l th Nil V ll y w i rri g t d i n g eat
s o o or ee a c e s , e e e a e as a e r

b in e h
as s t i ni ng m e t h i rty t f rty th
ac c on a d r Th B by l ni nso o o ou s a n ac e s . e a o a

m et h d gi ve f m r pr fi t b l r e lt nd Si Wi lli m Wi ll k p i nt o t
o s ar o e o a e su s, a r a coc s o s u

t h t Egypt t d y i gr d lly b n d ni ng i t w n y t m nd d pti ng t h t of

a o a s a ua a a o s o s s e a a o a

it s n ci ent r i v l ;
a e Th N E t S ept 29 1 9 1 6 p 5 2 1
a se e ea r as ,
.
, , . .

K . H
98 DELUGE S TO R IE S A ND THE S UME R IAN VE R S ION
in one day forty canal -worker s at a certain breach and yet ,

?
was unable to ma s ter t h e flood All repairs were suspended
during t he anarchy of the Mo s lem invasion As a cons equ e nce .

t he Tigri s left i ts old b e d for t h e S hatt e Hai at K ut and

l-
,

pouri n g i ts own and i ts tributarie s wa t e rs into t h e Euphrates ’

formed the Great Euphrate s S wa mp two hundr e d mil es long ,

and fi fty broad But e v e n then what w a s left of the old s ystem .

w as su fli c i e nt to support the s plendour of t h e Eastern C aliphate .

Th e s e cond gre at blow to the s ys t e m followed the Mongol

conqu e s t w hen the Nahrwan Canal to the eas t of the Tigris
, , ,

had i ts head swept away by flood and t he area i t had irrigated

became des ert Then in abo u t t h e fi fteenth c entury the Tigris
.
, ,

returned to i ts old cours e ; the S hatt e l-Hai shrank and much ,

?
of the Gr e at S wamp dried u p into t he desert it i s to day -

Thin gs b e cam e wors e d u ring t h e centuri e s of Turkish misrul e .

But th e s ilting up of the Hillah or main bra nc h of th e Euphrates , ,

about 1 86 5 and the tran s ference of a gr e at part of its s tream

,

into the H i ndi yah Canal caused even the Turk s to take action ,
.

They con s tructed t he old H indi yah Barrage in 1 89 0 bu t it gave ,

way in 1 9 0 3 and the s t a te of things w a s e ven wors e than before ;

for the Hillah branch th e n dried entirely ?

From thi s brief S ketch of progressive disaster during the later

1
S ee Le S tr ge T an p 27 , he L a nds f the E a s ter n Ca lip ha te
o , . .

2
Th i s i llus tr t th
d m g t h Ti g ri by i t lf ia es p b l f i fl i t i ng n
e a a e e s se s ca a e o n c o

th e c ountry It m y b e dd d t h t S i Willi m Wi ll
. k pr pa t n tr la e a r a c oc s o os e s o co o

th Ti g r i fl d by n
e s p i t th Th rthar d pr i n g r t lt p n
oo s a es c a e n o e a e ess o , a ea sa a

a t t h t i l f W adi Th rt har wh i h li
e a O 1 4 ft b el w l v l d i 2 00 fta , c es . o s ea -
e e an s .

l w r t h n t h fl d-l v l f t h Ti g r i
o e a m th i rty t w m i l w y Th
e oo e e o e s so e - o es a a . e

e s ca p w ld l v th Ti gri t th S f Sam rr th pr p d B l d B r ge
e ou ea e e s o e . o a a, e o os e e e ar a

b i g b i lt b l w i t d p tr m f Ni mr d D m Th Th rt h ar p ’
e n u e o an u -
s ea o o s a e a es ca e

w ld dr i n i t th E p hr t
ou a d th l tt r
n o H b b ani y h e p ( e u a es, an e a e
’
s a a e s ca e se

a b v o e,p 96 n 2 ) w ld r i v ny rp l w t r fr m th Ti gri
.
, . ou nd ec e e a su us a e o e s, a s ec o

b rr g b i g th r w n
a a e r th E p hr t p tr m f F lluj h w h r t he r
e n o a c os s e u a es u -
s ea o a a , e e e

is n a t p f li m t
ou C I O n r t h h d f t h S khl w i y h C l Th
o es o n e ea e ea o e a a a a na . e

Th rt har d pr
a i n b id d i p i g f th Ti gri flo d w t r w
e es s o , ld th
es es s os n o e s o - a e , ou us

pr b bly f d th E ph r t ; nd
o a ee d b rr g o e th Ti g r i
u t b a es a a s ec o n a a e n e s, o e

b i lt t Kut w ld
u a pply w t r t th S h ft l H i Wh th
, ou su ntry i s a e o e a e - a . en e c ou
fr d fr m d g r f fl d th B ghd d R i lw y
ee o an ld b
e n th r
o gh t h
oo , e a a a a co u e ru ou e

cu lt i v t d l d i n t d f t h r gh t h
a e an t rn d rt Wi ll k Th N
s ea o ou e eas e es e s ee c oc s, e ea r

E t O t 6 19 16 ( V l X I N
as , c .
,p 5 45 f o .
,
o . . .

2
It w th t h t S i Wi lli m Will k d ign d th e w Hi di y h
as en a r a c oc s es e e n n a

B rr g wh i h w
a a e, mpl ted i n 1 9 13 Th Hi di y h b r n h t -d y th
c as co e . e n a a c , o a e

m i tr m f th E p hr t i the ld l w ly ing P ll p C l
a n s ea o e u a es , s o o - a a co as a na ,

wh i h b r h d w tw rd b v B byl nd di h rg d i t w t r i nt th e
c a nc e es a a o e a on a sc a e s a e s o

w t rn m r h
es e I t iq ity th h d f t hi b r n h had t b p d i n
a s es . n an u e ea o s a c o e o en e
h i gh fl d d th n l
oo s a n d g i n i mm di t ly ft r th fl d to k e p th m i
e c os e a a e a e a e e oo e e a n
100 DELUGE S TO R IE S A ND THE S UME R IAN VE R S ION
and in all good faith and by a purely logical process th e
mountai n -top s are represented as s ubmerge d and the s hip or , ,

ark or che s t i s mad e to come to ground on th e highest peak

, ,

known to the s tory-teller and h i s hearers But in i ts early .

S um e ria n form it i s ju s t a simple tradition of some great inunda

tion which overwhelmed the plain of S outhern Babylonia and
,

was p e culiarly di s as trou s in its e ffe cts And s o its memory .

’
survived in the picture of Z i u su du s s olitary coracle upon the
face of the waters which s e en through the mist s of the D eluge , ,

tradition h a s given u s the Noah s ark of our nursery days

,
’
.

Thu s the Babylonian Hebrew and Gree k D elug e s torie s r e , ,

solve the ms elves not into a nat ure myth but into an early legend
, , ,

which h as a basi s of hi s torical fact in t h e E u phrate s Valley .

And it i s probable that we may explai n aft e r a s imilar fashion the

occurrenc e of tal es of a like character at l e as t in s om e oth e r parts
of the world Among rac e s dwelling in low lying or well watered
.
- -

d i stricts it would be s urpri s ing if we did not find independ ent

s torie s of past flood s from which few inhabi tants of the land

e s caped It i s only in hilly countrie s s uch a s Palestine where

.
,

for the gr eat part of the year water i s scarce and preciou s that ,

we are forc e d to deduce borrowing ; and there is no doubt that

both the Babylonian and the biblical stories have been re s ponsible
for s om e at any rat e of the s cattered tales But th e re i s no need .

to adopt the theory of a single s ource for all of them whether ,

in Babylonia or still le s s in Egypt l , , .

I s hould like to add with regard to this reading of our new ,

evidence that I am very glad to know S i r James Frazer hold s

,

a very s imilar Opinion For as you are doubtles s all aware .

, ,

S i r Jame s is at pre s ent collecting Flood s torie s from all over the
world and is supplementing from a wid e r range the collections
,

already made by en orman t Andree V i nt ern i tz and G er lan d

L V
, , , f .

When his work is complete it will be po ss ible to conj ecture with

far greater con fi dence how particular tradition s or groups of
tradition arose and to what extent transmis s ion has taken place
, .

Meanwhil e in his recent Huxley Memorial Le cture he has

,
2
,

su gge s te d a thi rd po s sibility as to the way Deluge stories may

have arisen .

Thi s a rg m nt i t
u e s a k en rom
f an a rti le I p bli h ed i n Pr f
c u s o es s o r He a dla m
’
s
Ch ur ch Qua r ter ly R evi ew, Ja n .
,
1 9 16 pp 2 80 ff
, nt i n i ng
. . . co a an a c c ou n t of
Dr Poeb e l s di sco
.
’
v ry e .

2 S ir
G Ja . . Fr z r A n i nt e , c e S tor i es o f a Gr ea t Flood ( t h e Hu x ley Mem or i al
Lec t r
u e, R y A nt h r p o . o . Ins t 1 9 16 .
 T R AN S MI S S ION OR INDEPEN D EN C E 01

S tated briefly it is that a Deluge s tory may ari s e a s a popular

,

explanation of some s triking natural feature in a country ,

although to the s cienti fi c ey e t he feature in question i s du e to

cau s e s other than cat as trophic flood And he worked out the .

s uggestion in the ca s e of t h e Greek tradition s of a great d e luge ,

as s ociated with the nam e s of D eucalion and Dardanus De u c ali on s .

’

d eluge in its lat e r forms at any rate i s obviously coloured by

, ,

S emitic tradition ; but both Greek stories in their origin S i r , ,

Jame s Fr azer would trace to local condition s the one suggested —

by the Gorge of Tempe in Thes s aly the other explaining the ,

exi s t e nce of the Bo s phoru s and D ardanelle s As he pointed .

out th e y would be instance s not of genuine hi storical traditions

, , ,

b u t of what S i r James Tylor called observation myth s A ’

.

third s tory of a great flood regarded in Greek tradition as the

,

earliest of the three he would expla in by an extraordinary

,

inundation of the C op ai c Lake in Boeotia which to this day is ,

liable to great fluctuation s of level His new theory applies .

o nl y to t h e other two traditio ns For in them no his torical.

kernel i s presuppo s ed though gradual erosion by water is not

,

e xcluded as a cau s e of the surface features which may have

suggested the myt hs .

This valuable theory thus opens up a third possibility for our

analysis It may also of cou rse be used in combination if in
.
, , ,

any particular instance we have reason to believe that tran s

mission in some vague form may already have taken place
, ,
.

And I would with all deference suggest the pos s ibility that in ,

view of other evidence thi s may have occurred in the cas e of

,

the Greek traditions With regard to the theory itself we may

'

con fi dently expect that fu rther examples will be fo u nd i n its

i llu s tration and suppor t Meanwh i le in the new S umerian
.

V e rs ion I think we may conclude that we h ave recovered beyond

any doubt the origin of the Babylonian and Hebrew traditions
and of th e large group of stories to which they in their turn
h ave given rise .
 LECTU RE III

CR EATION A ND THE D R AGON MYTH ; A ND THE

PR OBLEM OF BABYLONIAN PAR ALLEL S IN
HEB R EW T R ADITION

IN our di s cu ssion of the new S umerian Version of the D elug e

story we came to t h e conclu s ion that it gave no support to any
theory which would trace all such tales to a single origin ,

whether in Egypt or in Babylonia In spite of s trong a stro

.

logical element s in both the Egyptian and Babylonian religious

sys tems we s aw ground s for regarding the astrological tinge of
,

much ancient mythology as a later embelli s hment and not as

primitive material And so far as our n e w version of the D eluge
.

s tory was co n cerned it resolved itself into a legend which had

, ,

a ba s is of hi s torical fact in the Euphrate s Valley It will be .

obviou s that th e same cla ss of explanation cannot be applied to

narratives of the C reation of the World For th e re we are .

dealing not with l e gend s but with myth s that is stories exclu
, , , ,

s i v el
y about the god s .But where an e xamination of their earlier

forms i s possible it would seem to s how that many of these tales

,

al s o in their origin are not to be interpreted a s nature myths

, , ,

and that none arose as mere reflections of the solar system In .

their mor e primitive and s impler aspects they s eem in many

ca s es to have been s ugge s ted by very human and terre s trial
experi ence To -day w e will examine the Egyptian S umerian
.
, ,

and Babylonian myth s of C reation and after we have noted the

, ,

more s triking features of our new material we will consider ,

the problem of foreign influence upon H e bre w traditions concern

ing the origin and early hi s tory of th e world .

In Egypt as until recently in Babylonia we have to depend

, ,

for our knowle dge of Creation myths on documents of a com

p a r a t i v e ly late period Moreover Egyptian religious literature
.
,

as a whol e is textually corrupt and in consequence it is often

,

di fficult to determine the original s ignificance of its allusions .

Thank s to the funerary in scription s and that great body of

 CR EATION A ND TH E D RAGON MYTH

s peckled with s tars alone visi ble from the earth beneath,
R e fer .

ence has alre ady be e n made to the dominant i nfluence of the S u n

in Egyptian re ligion and it i s not surprising that he should so
1
,

often appear as the firs t of created beings H i s orb its elf or .

,

later t h e god in youthfu l human form might be pictured as ,

emerging from a lotus on the primaeval waters or from a marsh ,

bird s egg a conception which influenced the later Phoenician

’

-
co s mogony The S caraba e us or great dung fe eding beetle of
. ,

Egypt rolling the ball before it in which it lays i ts eggs is an

, ,

obvio u s theme for the early my th maker A n d it w a s natural

- .

that the B e e tle of Khepera s hould have been identified with the
S u n at h i s ri s ing as the Hawk of R a represented his noonday
,

flight and the age d form of Atum hi s s etting in the west

,
.

But in all the s e vari e d conceptions and explanation s of the

universe it i s di fficult to det e rmin e how far the poetical imagery
of later period s h as transformed the original myths which may
lie behind them .

As the Egyptian Creator the claims of R a the S u god of

n -
,

Heliopolis e arly s uperseded tho s e of other deities On the other

,
.

hand Ptah of Memphi s who for lo n g ages had been merely the
, ,

god of architects and craftsmen became under the Empire the ,

architect of the univers e and is pictured as a potter moulding

the world -egg A s hor t po e m by a priest of Ptah which has
.
,

come down to u s from that period exhibits an attempt to develop ,

2
thi s idea on philosophical lines Its author represents all gods .

and living creatures as proce e ding directly from the mind and
thought of Ptah But thi s movement which was more notably
.
,
’
r eflected in Akhenaten s religiou s revolution died out in political ,

d i s a s ter and the original materialistic interpretation of the

,

myths was restored with the cult of Amen How materialistic .

thi s co ul d be is well illustrated by two earli e r members of the

X VIIIt h Dyna s ty who hav e left us vivid repr e s e ntations of
,
’

the pott e r s wheel employed i n the proce s s of man s creation ’

.

When the famou s queen Hats h ep s ut after the return of her ,

exp e dition to P unt in the ninth year of her young cons ort
Thoth me s III decided to build her temple at D eir e l-Bahari in
,

the n e cropoli s of Western Thebe s she sought to emphasize her ,

claim to t he throne of Egypt by recording her own divine origin

upon i ts wall s We have already noted the Egyptians beli e f in
.
’

1
S ee Le c u t r e II, p . 46 f .

2
S ee B eas r t e d, Z ei ts chr ifl f ar A egyp tzsche Sp r ache,
’

XXX IX pp , . 3 9 if , a nd
H i s tory of E gyp t, pp . 3 5 6 if .
 MATE RIALI S TI C INTE RP R ETATION S 1 05

the solar parentage of their legitimate ruler s a myth that goe ,

back at least to the Old Kingdom a n d may have had its origin in
prehistoric time s 1
With the ri s e of Th e bes Amen inherited the
.
,

prerogative s of Ra ; a n d s o H at s hep s u t s e ek s to s how on t h e north ,

s ide of the retaining wall of h e r temple s Upp e r Platform that

’

she w a s the daughter of Amen him s e lf the great God Lord of ,

‘
,

the sky Lord of the Thrones of the Tw o Land s who re s ide s a t

, ,

Th ebes Th e myth w a s no invention of her own for obviously

’
.
,

it mu s t have followed traditional line s and though it is onl y ,

employed to exhibit the divine crea t ion of a single per s onage it ,

a s obviou s ly reflects the procedure and method s of a g e neral

C reation myth .

Thi s series of sculptures shar e d the delib e rate mutilation that

all her record s s u ffer e d at the hand s of Th othme s III after h e r
death but enough of the s cene s and their accompanying t e xt has
,

survived to render t h e detail e d interpretation of t h e myth quite

certain 2
Here a s in a general C reation myth Ame n s firs t act
.
, ,
’

i s to s ummon the gr e at gods in council in order to announce to ,

them the f uture birth of the great prince s s Of the twelve gods .

who attend the fi rst is M e n thu a form of the S u n -god and

, ,

closely a s sociated with Amen 3

But the second deity i s Atum .
,

the great god of Heliopolis and he is followed by his cycle of ,

deities S hu the son of R a

—
Te fn u t the Lady of the s k y ;
,
‘
,
‘ ’

Keb the Father of the God s

, Nut the Mother of the Gods ,
‘

O s iri s Isis Nephthys S et Horus and Hathor We are here in

, , ; , , .

the presence of co s mic deitie s as befits a proj ected a c t of creat ion ,

.

The subsequent scene s exhibit the Egyptian s literal interpreta ’

tion of the myth which neces s itate s the god s bodily pr e sence ,
’

and personal participation Thoth mention s to Amen the name .

of queen A ahmes a s the future mother of Hat s h e ps u t and we ,

later s e e Amen himself in the form of her hu s band A a -kheper , ,

k a -R a (Th oth m e s I ) sitting with A ah mes and giving her the ,

Ankh or s ign of Life which she receive s in her hand and inhale s
, ,

4
through her nostril s God and queen are seated on throne s .

above a couch and are supp orted by two godde s ses After,
.

leaving the qu e e n Amen call s on Khnum or K hn e mu the fl at , ,

1
S ee ab o e , v p .3 9, n . 2 .

N S ee Na vi lle , D ei r l
e B a ha r z,
-
’

Pt . II, pp . 12 pl t a es x l i if v .

3
S ee B u dg e , Gods of the E gyp ti a ns , Vol II, 2 3 if Hi s ch i ef c ul -c en e w a s . pp . . t tr
rm t r
He on hi s , b u t h e e a s els e h e e h e i s gi en hi s us ual i le Lo d of Th ebe s w r v tt r
4
v r
Pl x l ii S i mi la s c en es a r e e es en ed i n th e b i rt h t e mples a t Dende ah ,
. . r pr t ~
r
P
Edfu , hila e, Es neh , a nd Lu x o ; s ee Na vi lle , op ci t , 14 r . . p . .
106 C R EATION A ND T H E DR AG ON MYTH
horned ram -head e d god who in texts of all period s is referred to ,

a s t h e b u ild e r of god s and men ; and he i n s tructs him to create

1 ’

t h e body of h i s fu ture daught e r and that of her Ka or double ,

whi c h w ould b e unite d to her from birth .

Th e s c e n e in t he s erie s which i s of greatest interest i n the ,

pr e s ent connexion i s that repre senting Khnum at h i s work of

,

creation H e i s s eated before a potter s wh eel which he works

'

with h i s foot and on t h e re volving table he i s fas hioning two

2
,

children with h i s hand s th e baby princess and her double It ,

w a s always Ha ts h ep su t s desire to be represented a s a man and

’

s o both t h e c h ildren are boy s As y e t they a r e li feless but the

3
.
,

s ymbol of Life will be held to their nostril s by H e e t the divine

q ,

Potter s wife who s e frog-head typifie s birth and fe rtility When

’

,
.

Amenophi s III copied Ha t s h ep s u t s s culptures for his own serie s ’

at Luxor he as s ign e d thi s duty to the greater goddes s Hathor

, ,

perhap s t he mo s t powerful of the co s mic godd e sse s and t h e

mother of the world The s ubsequent scenes at D eir e l-Bahari .

include t h e l e ading of queen A a h mes by Khnum and He qet to

the birth chamber ; t h e great bir th s c e ne where the queen is
-

attended by the godde s s e s N e phthy s and I s is a number of divine ,

nu rses and midwiv e s holdi n g s e veral of the doubles of t h e ‘ ’

baby and favourable genii in human form or with the head s of

, ,

crocodile s jackal s and hawks repr e s enting the four cardinal

, , ,

points and all bearing the gift of li fe ; the pre sentation of the
young child by the god des s Hathor to Amen who i s well pleased ,

at th e s ight of h i s daughte r ; and the divin e suc kling of Ha t s h ep

s u t and her doubles But these epi s ode s do not concern us a s ,

of cours e they m e rely reflect the procedure following a royal

’
birth But Kh num s part in the prince ss s origin stand s on a
.
’

different plane for it illustrate s the Egyptian myth of C reation

,

by t he divin e Potter who may take th e form of either Khnum ,

or Pta h Mon sieur Nav i lle points out the extraordin ary re s em
.

blance in detail which H ats h ep su t s myth of divine paternity ’

b ears to the Gr e ek legend of Z eu s and Alkmene where the god ,

1
. p
Cf Budge , op ci t , Vol II, . 50 . . . .

2
t r pr rv
Th i s de a i l i s not clea ly es e e d a t Dei el-Bah a i b u t i t i s q u i e clea r r t r
w tw
i n t h e s c e n e o n th e es a ll o f t h e Bi rt h- oo
’
i n t he Te le a t Lux o , r m mp r
m p v t p r t
w h i ch A eno h i s III e i den l co i ed f om h a of Ha sh e su
y t t p t .

3
In th i m il r cene t L
e s r wh r th
a s a ux o , e e e f t r A m enop h i III i
u u e ep e s s r r

t d th C t r wh e l th
s en e on e lpt r h
rea o
’
s e e scu o as di t i g i h ed th h m n ch i ld
s n u s e u a
fr m i t
,

o p i ri t l d b l by th q i nt d
s s ua ou e
’
e ua e v i f p tti ng i t fi ng r i n i ts
ce o u s e
m th
ou
 1 08 C R EATION AN D THE D R A GON MYTH
'

a ccount with h
t e principal S e mitic -Babylonian C reation narra
tive 1
. Th e application of the Ankh the Egyptian sign for Li fe , ,

to the no s tril s of a newly-created being i s no tr u e parallel to

t h e breathing into man s no s tril s of the breath of life in the
’

earli er H ebr e w Version ? e xcept in the s ense that each proce s s

w as s u gge s t e d by our common human anatomy We should .

naturally expect to fi nd s ome Hebr e w parallel to the Egyptian

id e a of C re ation a s the work of a potter with his clay for ,

that fi gure appears in mo s t ancient mythologies The Hebrews .

inde e d u s ed the conception a s a m e taphor or parable and it 3

,

also und e rlie s th e ir earlier pictur e of man s creation I have ’

.

not to u ch e d on the gro ss e r Egyptian co n ception s concerning

t h e origin of t h e unive r s e which we may probably connect ,

with A frican ideal s ; but tho s e I have refe rred to will s erve to
demon s trat e t h e compl e t e a b s e nce of any feature that pres ents
a d e tail e d re s emblanc e to H e br e w tradition t/ .

W h e n we turn to Babylonia we find there also evidence of ,

conflicting idea s the product of different and to some extent,

competing religiou s centre s But in contrast to the rather .

confu s e d condition of Egyptian mythology the S emitic C reation ,

myth of t h e city of Babylon thanks to the latter s continued ,

’

political ascendency s ucce e ded in winning a dominant place in ,

the national lit e rature Thi s i s the vers ion in which s o many .

points of r es emb lance to the fi rs t chapter of G e ne s i s have long been

recogn iz e d e specially in t h e s ucce s sion of cr e ative act s and their
,

relative order In the S e mitic -Babylonian Vers ion t h e creation

.

of the world i s r e presented a s the re s ult of confl ict the e mergence ,

of order out of chaos a result t hat i s only attained by t h e pers onal ,

triumph of the C reator But thi s underlying duali s m does not .

appear in t he more primitive S um e rian V e rs ion we hav e n ow

recover e d It will b e remembere d that in the s econd lecture
.

I gave s ome account of the myth which occurs in an e p i to ,

mi ze d form a s an introduction to the S umerian Ve rs ion of the

D elug e t h e two narrative s being recorded in the same document
,

and conn e cte d with one another by a description of the Ante

1
diluvian cities We there s a w that C re ation i s ascrib e d to the
‘

1
S ee b elo w p 130 F
, . . or t he w i de d i ff i n i n t h myth of rem ote p ple
us o , e s eo s,
of a v ag u e t h ry th t w
eo a ou ld tr e ll cre t ed t hi ng t w t e ry orig i n ee
ac a a s o a a , s
F rn
a ell, G r eece a nd B a bylon, p . 1 80 .

1
Gen i i 7 ( )
. . J .

3
C f , e g , Is a i a h x x i x
. . .
. 1 6, x lv 9 . a nd J r mi
e e ah x vi i i . 2f.

S ee a b o e , v pp
52 ft . .
 EGYPTIAN A ND HEB R E W C ON C EPTION S 1 09

three greate s t gods of the S u merian pantheon A nn E nl il and , , ,

Enki assi s ted by the goddess Ni nk ha rs a gga

, .

It is signi fi can t that in the S um e rian Ve rs ion no less than

four deities are r epre s ented as taking p art in the C r e ation For .

in thi s we may see some indi c ation of the period to which i ts

composition m u st be as s igned Their a s s ociation in the text
.

s ugge s ts that the claims of local god s had already b e gun to

compete with one another as a result of political combination
between t he cities of th eir cults To the s am e general period .

we mu st al s o a s s ign the compilation of th e S umerian Dynas tic

record for that presuppo s e s the existence of a s upreme ruler
,

among the S umerian city-states Thi s form of political consti .

t u t i on mu s t obviously have been the result of a long process

of development and the fact that its exi s tence sho ul d be re garde d
,

as dat i ng from the C reation of the world indica tes a comparatively

dev e loped s tage of the tradition But behind the combination .

of citie s and their god s we may conj ecturally trace anterior

s t ages of d e velopment when each local deity and his human
,

representative s e e me d to th e ir own adherent s t h e s ole objects for

worship and allegiance An d even a fte r the demand s of other
.

centres had been conceded no deity ever quite gave up hi s loca l

,

claim s .

Enlil the second of the four S umerian creating deities even

, ,

t u ally ou s ted h i s rivals It has indeed long been rec ogni zed that
.

the r ote played by Marduk in the Babylonian Version of C reation

had be e n borrowed from Enlil of Nipp u r and in the A tr a k h a s i s
legend E nl il him s elf app e ars a s the ul timate ruler of the world
and t h e other god s figur e a s h i s son s Anu who heads the
‘ ’
.
,

li s t and play s with Enlil the l e adi ng part in the S umerian narra
tive w a s clearly his chief rival
, And though w e pos s es s no .

d e t a i le d a cc ou n t of Anu s creative work the pers istent ascription

’

to him of the creation of heaven and hi s familiar titl e the , ,

‘

Father of the Gods suggest that he once po s se s s ed a correspond

’

ing body of myth in E a nn a hi s temple at Erech En ki the thi rd

,
.
,

of the creating god s w a s naturally credite d as God of Wi s dom

, , ,

with special creative activiti e s and fort unat ely in his c ase we ,

have s om e independent e vidence of t h e vari ed form s these could

assum e .

According to one tradition that ha s come down t o u s aft er 1

,

A nu had made the heavens En k i creat e d Aps u or the D eep , ,

1
S ee Weis sb a ch , B a bylonis che Mi s ce
llen, pp . 3 2 ff
.
 C R EATION A ND T H E DR AGON MYTH
‘

11 0

1
hi s own dw e lli n g -place Then taking from it a piece of clay he .

proc e e d e d to creat e the Brick-god and reeds and fore s ts for t he ,

s upply of b u ilding material From the s ame clay he continued .

C
to form othe r deitie s and material s including the arp nter god ;
e -
,

t he S mith -god
; A ra zu a patron -deity of building
; and mo u n
,

tain s a n d s e a s for all that they produced ; the Gold mith god
s -
,

the S ton e -cutter-god and kindred deitie s together with their , ,

rich products for o ffe rings ; the Grain-deitie s Ashnan and ,

Lakhar ; S iri s a Win e -god ; Ningi s hzida and Ni n s ar a Garden

, ,

god for th e sake of t h e rich offe rings they could make ; and
,

a deity de s crib e d as the High prie s t of the great god s to lay ‘ ’

down nec e s sary ordi nanc e s and command s Then h e created the .

King for the equipment probably of a particular temple and

’

, ,

finally men that they might practi s e the cult in the temple so
,

elaborat e ly prepare d .

’
It will be s een from this s ummary of Enki s creative activitie s ,

that t he text from which it i s taken i s not a general C reation

myth bu t in a ll probability the introductory paragraph of
,

a compo s ition which celebrated the building or restoration of

a particular t e mple ; and the latter s foundation i s represented on ’

henotheis tic line s a s the main obj ect of creation C ompo s ed

, .

with that s pecial purpose its narrative is not to be regarded as ,

an exhaustive account of the creation of the world The inci .

d e nts ar e ec lec ti ve and only s uch god s and material s are men
,

t i one d a s would have b e en required for the building and adorn

ment of the temple and for the provi s ion of its o fferings and
cult But even so i ts mythological background is instructive
. .

’
For whil e Anu s creation of heaven i s po s tulated a s the neces s ary
preced e nt of Enki s activitie s the latter creates t he De e p
’

, ,

v e getation mountain s s ea s and mankind

,
?
Moreove r in his, , ,

charact e r as God of Wi s dom h e i s not only the teacher but t h e ,

cre ator of those d e iti e s who were patrons of man s own con ’

structive work From s uch evidence we may infer that in his

.

temple at Eridu now cove red by the mounds of Abu S ha hra i n

,

in the extr e me s outh of Babylonia and regard e d in early ,

S um e rian tradition a s the firs t city in t h e world Enki himself

3
,

w as onc e celebrat e d as t h e s ole creator of the univers e .

1
O ne of th e i lestt
Enk i was t he o eof P tt r
of C a n Tex ts i n the B r i t M u s , . . .

Pt . XX I , V pl.4 1, 43 .

1
For the de elo v pm t
en o f ha w as ob ab ly a la ew t c onc e pr
i on , h a Enk i s
’
tr pt t t
cr tv tvt t
e a i e ac i i i es , li k e h os e o f Ma d uk e e r w r pr
ec e de d b y c on i c , s e e b e low , fl t
p
,

. 1 16 f .
3
S ee a b o e , 59 v p . .
1 12 CR EATION A ND THE DR AGON MYTH
In t h e myth w e are not told her m e thod of creation but from ,

t h e above title s it i s clear that in her own cycle of tradition

Ni nkhars agga w a s co n ceived as fa s hioning men not only from
clay but al s o from wood and perhaps a s employing metal for ,

t h e manufacture of her other work s of creatio n Moreover in .

,

t h e great God List where she i s referred to und e r her title

,

Mak h Ni n kh ar s agga is a s s ociated with Anu Enlil and Enki ;

, , ,

s h e there appear s with her depend e nt deities after E nl il and

, ,

be fore Enki . We thus have definite proof that her association

with the three chi e f S umerian god s was widely recognized
in the e arly S umerian period and dictated her po s ition in the
cla s s i fi ed pantheon of Babylonia Apart from this evidence .
,

th e important ran k ass igned her in t h e hi s torical and legal

record s and in votive in s cription s e specially in t h e early period
1
,

and in S outhern Babylonia accord s fu lly with the part she here ,

plays in t he S umerian Creation myth E an n a tu m and Gude a .

of Lagas h both place her imm e diately after A nn and Enlil ,

givi n g her pr e cedence over Enki ; and even in the Kassite

Ku du r ru in s cription s of t h e thirteenth and twelfth centu ri e s ,

wher e she i s referr e d to s h e tak e s rank after Enki and before

,

the other god s In S u mer s h e w a s known a s the Mother of the

.
‘

God s and s h e w a s credited with t h e power of trans fe rring the

’

kingdom and royal in s ignia from one king to his s ucc e s s or .

H er su pre me po s ition as a goddes s i s atte s t e d by the relative

i n si gn i fic a n ce of h e r husband Du np a e whom s he completely over ,

s hadow s in which re s p e ct s h e pre s ents a contra s t to the goddes s

,

N i n lil E n lil s femal e counterpart The early clay figurine s found

’

.
,

at Nippur and on oth e r sit e s repre s enting a goddess suckling ,

a child and cla sping one of h e r breasts may well be regarded a s ,

r epre s enting Ni n k h a r s agga and not Ninlil Her sanctuaries .

w er e at K e s h a nd Adab both in the s outh and thi s fact s u ffi

2
, ,

c i e ntly explai ns her comparative want of infl u e nce in Akkad ,

wher e the S e mitic I s htar took her place S h e doe s indeed .

appear i n t he north during the S argon i c p eriod und e r her own

nam e though later sh e s urviv e s in her synonym s of Ni nma k h
, ,
‘
the S ublim e Lady and Nintu t h e Lady of C hi ld -bearing
’

, ,
‘ ’
.

It i s under the latter title that Hammurabi refe r s to her in his

C od e of Laws wher e s h e i s tenth in a s e rie s of eleven d e iti e s
, .

But as Godd e ss of Birth she retained only a pale reflection of

1
S ee es p e c i ally , P os h el, op . ci t .
,
pp . 24 if .

1
S ee ab o v p
e, . 60 .
 R E C ON C ILIATION OF R IVAL C LAI MS 113

her original cosmic character and her functions were gradually ,

1
specialized .

From a consideration of their cha racters as revealed by inde ,

pendent source s of evidence we thus obtain the re as on for t he ,

c c -O peration of four deitie s in the S um e rian Cr eation In fac t “

the new text illustrat e s a well -known principl e in the develo p

ment of myth the r econciliation of the rival claims of deities
, ,

whose cults once isolated had been brought from political caus es
, ,

into contact with e ac h oth e r In this aspect myth is the me di um .

through which a working pan theon i s e volved Naturally all .

the deiti e s concerned cannot continue to play their original part s

in detail In the Babylonian Epic of Cr eation where a s ingle
.
,

deity and not a very prominent one was to be rais ed to pre

, ,

eminent rank t h e problem was simple enough He could ret a in

,
.

his own qualiti e s and achieve ments while borrowi n g tho s e of

any former rival In the S um e rian text we hav e the res ul t of
.

a far more d elicate process of adjustment and it is poss ible ,

that the brevity of the text is here not entirely due to com
pression of a longer narrative but may in part be re garded as ,

evidence of early combination As a re s ult of the as s ociation .

of s everal competing d e ities in the work of creation a tendency ,

may be traced to avoid di scrimination be twee n rival claims .

Thus it is that the as sembled go ds the pantheon as a whole are , ,

regarded as collectively respon s ible for the creation of the uni

ver se It may be added that thi s use of i ld ni the gods forms
.
,
’

an interesting linguistic parallel to the plural of t h e Hebrew

divine title Elohi m .

It will be remembered that in the S umerian Version the

account of C rea tion i s not given in full only such episodes being
.
,

included as were directly related to t h e D elug e s tory ?

No
doubt the selection of men and animals was sugges ted by their
sub s equent re s cue from the Flood ; and emph asis was purposely
laid on the cre ation of the n i ggi lma becaus e of the part it playe d
3
in securing mankind s survival Eve n so we note d one st ri king ’
.
,

parallel between the S umerian Vers ion and that of the S e mitic
Babylonian s in the reason both give for man s crea tion
,
?
But ’

in the former there is no attempt to explain how the universe itself

1
PCf . o s hel, op . p 33 It
c i t. , . . isp o ib l t h t n der n f h e l te r
ss e a , u o e o r a

yn
s ym on s, w e sh ou ld i den t i fy h e r, as D P os hel
r.
gge t w i t
suh t h My li tt f
s s,
a o e
H r d t
e o o us .

1
S e e a b o e, v p 56 f . .
3
S ee ab o e, v p . 57 .

1
S ee fu h e rt r p 1 1 5 f , . .

K.
1 14 C R EATION A ND THE D R AGON MYTH
had come into b e i n g and the exi s tence of the earth i s presupposed
,

at th e moment when Anu Enlil Enki and Ni n kh ars a gga und e r , , ,

take t he creation of man Th e S emitic Babylonian Vers ion on the

- . ,

other hand is mainly occu pi e d with e vents that led up to the

,

acts of creation and it conc e rn s our problem to inquire how far

,

thos e e pi s odes were of S emitic and how far of S umerian origin .

A fu rther que s tion ari s e s as to whether s ome strand s of the

narrative may not at one time have e xisted in S umerian form
independently of the C reation myth .

The s t ate ment is sometime s mad e that there i s no reason to

as sume a S umerian original for the S emitic Babylonian Vers ion
-
,

as recorded on the S even Tablets of C reation ; and this remark

1
,

though true of that vers ion as a whol e need s s ome qualification ,

.

The compos ite nature of the poem ha s long be e n recognized and ,

an analys is of the text h a s s hown that no l e ss than five principal

s trand s hav e be e n combin e d for i t s formation T h e s e consist of .

( i ) The Birth of the God s ( ii ) The Lege nd of Ea and Apsu; ( iii )

The principal Dragon Myth ( iv) The actual account of C reation
and (v) The Hymn to Marduk under his fifty titles ?
The
As syrian commentaries to the Hymn from which considerable ,

portions of its text are restored quote throughout a S umerian ,

ori ginal and explain it word for word by the phrases of the
,

S e mitic Ver s ion ; s o that for one out of the S even Tablets a
3

S emitic origin i s at onc e di s proved Moreover t h e maj ority of .

,

t h e fifty title s even in the forms in which th e y have reach e d us

,

in t h e S emitic text are demon s trably S umerian and s ince many, ,

of them c e lebrate detail s of their owner s creativ e work a S u me ’

rian original for other parts of the vers ion is implied Enlil and .

Ea a r e both re pr e s ented as be s towing their own names upon

1 ‘
Marduk and w e may a s sum e that many of the fifty title s were
,

originally born e by Enlil as a S umerian C re ator 5

Thus some .

portio ns of the actual account of C reation were probably derived

from a S ume rian original in which Father Enlil figured a s the
hero .

For what then were the S emitic Babylonians themselves

r e s ponsible ? It seem s to me that in the S even Tablets we ’
, ,

1
. . . J
Cf , e g , a s t row , Jou rn of the A mer Or S oc , Vol XX I.
279 . . . XV p . .

1
S ee The Seven Ta blets of C rea ti on, Vol I, lx i {f ; a nd of S ki nne , Genes i s , . pp . v r
pp
. .

. 4 3 if .

1
C f S ev Ta bl , Vol I,
. . 1 5 7 ff
. . pp . .

Cf Tab l VII, 11 1 1 6 ff
. . . .

m r t
The nu b e fi f y w a s s ugg es ed b y a n i de o a
g e t
p loy ed for Enli l s n a e rm m ’
m .
 C R E A TION A ND THE DR AGON MYTH
‘

116

S U M E R IA N VE R S IO N . S E MITIC
VE R S ION .

‘
Th e peopl e will I cau s e to ( )
6
‘
I will make man that ,

i n their settlements
. ,
man may
C itie s s hall ( man ) build I will cr e ate man who
‘ ‘
. ,

i n their protection will

.

shall
1 cause him to r e s t ,
‘
That he may lay the brick That the s ervic e O f the
‘

of our house s in a clean ods may be

s pot ,
gi s h e d and that ,

s hrine s [may be
‘
That in a clean spot he may But I will alter the ways
e s ta blish our l of the god s and I will ,

change [ th e ir p ath s ] ;
( )
1 0 Togeth e r s hall they b e

oppressed and unto

evil s hall [ they .

The we ldi ng O f incongruou s elements i s very apparent in the

S emitic Ve r s ion For the s tat e m e nt that man will b e created in
.

ord e r that the god s may have wors hippers i s at once followed by the
announc e ment that the gods them s elve s must b e punished and
their ways changed In the S umerian Version the god s are
‘ ’
.

united and all are naturally regard e d a s worthy of man s worship ’

.

The S umerian C reator makes no di s tinctions ; h e refers to our

house s or templ e s that s hall be e stabli s h e d But in the later
’

, ,
.

vers ion divine conflict h as been int roduc e d and t he future head ,

of th e pantheon h as conqu e red and humiliated the r e volting

deities Th e ir ways mu s t therefore be altered before they are
.
‘

fit to receive the wor ship which w a s accorded them by right in

the s impler S u merian tradition In s pite of the epitomized .

character of t h e S u m e rian Vers ion a compari s on of thes e passages ,

s ugge s ts very forcibly that the S e mitic -Babylonian myth of

C reation i s ba s ed upon a s impler S umerian s tory which h a s been ,

e laborat e d to reconcile it with the D ragon myth .

Th e S emitic poem itself al s o supplie s e vidence of the i n d ep en

d ent e xi s tence of t h e Dragon myth apart from the proces s of
C r e ation for th e s tory of Ea and Aps u which it incorporate s i s
,
1
, ,

merely th e local D ragon myth O f Eridu Its inclusion in the story .

i s again s imply a tribute to Marduk for though Ea now become ,

Mardu k s fath e r could conquer Ap s u he w a s afraid of Tiamat and

’
‘
, ,
’
?
turned b ack The original Eridu myth no doubt r e presented
pr li m i ry t m n r t i o
e na o a
’
s c ea n , o r as a r rti on
ea ss e of h i s du y t af etr h is re cs ue
fr m d tr t i b y th F l d ;
o es uc on e oo s ee a b ov p 5 5
e, .

b v p 1 14
.

1
S ee a o e, . .

1
Ta b l III, I 5 4, & c
. . . In th e t ry
s o of Bel a nd the D r agon, th e th i rd of th e
 IN C ONG R UOU S ELEMENTS IN S EMITI C POEM 117

Enki a s conquering the watery Abys s which became h i s hom e ; ,

but th e re i s nothing to connect thi s tr adition with his e a rly

cr e ativ e activitie s We hav e lon g p oss e s s e d part O f another
.

local vers ion of the D ragon myth which de s cribe s the conquest ,

of a dragon by s ome d e ity other than Marduk ; and the fight is

there described a s taki ng place not before C re ation but at a time , ,

wh e n me n exi s ted and citie s had be e n bu i lt ?

M e n and god s
were equally t e rrified at the mo n s ter s app e aranc e and it was to ’

d e live r the land from h i s clutches that on e of the god s went out
’
and s l e w him Tradition delighted to dwell on the dragon s
.

enormou s siz e and te rrible appearance In this vers ion h e i s .

de s cribed a s fi fty bérn in length and one i n height ; his mouth

’

1 -

mea sured six cubit s and the circuit O f his ears twelve ; he
dragged him s elf along in the water which he la s hed with his ,

tail ; and when slain h i s blood flowed for three years three
, , ,

month s a day and a night From thi s description we can se e

, .

he w a s given the body of an enormous serpent 3

.

A further v e rsion of the Dragon m yt h has now be en identified

on one of the tablet s rec overed during the recent excavation at s

Ashur ? and in it the dragon i s not entirely of s erpent form , but

i s a true dragon with l e gs Like the one j ust described h e is a .
,

male monster The description occurs as part of a my t h of which

.
,

the text is so badly pre s erved that only the content s of one
column can be made out with any certainty In it a god whose
“

.
,

name i s wanting announces the presence of the dragon : In ,

the water he lie s and I ] l Thereupon a second god cries .

successively to A rur u the mother -goddes s and to P a llil another , , ,

a p cryph l ddi ti on t D ni l w e h ve di r e t vi den of th e l t e r i v l f

o a a s o a e , a c e ce a su v a o

t h Dr g n m tif p rt f m ny tr e of th Cr e t i n m y t h i n t h i c on n e i on
e a o o a a ro a ac e a o s x

e C h rle
s e Apa yp h n
s, d P d i
ocr
p g p h V l I a a p 6 5 3 f seu e ra a, o . . .

S 1
S ee T bl t V l I pp 1 1 6 11 l i i i f
even a e s,Th t e t i pr es rv ed on an
o .
, .
, x v . e x s e

A y r i n t b l t m d f th li b r ry f A h r b ni p l
ss a a e a e or e a o s u — a - a .

1
Th bé n w eth p th t ld b e v er d i n t w h o r tr v elling
r as e s a ce a c ou co e o u s
’
a .

Th e B b yl ni n Dr g n h d pr g ny i n t h e l t e r p
3
a o a a ly pt i li t e r t r e
o a o e a a o ca c a u ,

w h r w e fi d v ry i m il r d ri pti n f th re t r e i z A m ng th em w e
e e n e s a es c o s o e c a u s
’
s e . o

m y p r h p i l d t h dr g n i n t h A p
a e a s nc u ly p e of B r h w h
e e aor d i n g
o e o ca s a uc , o, a c c

t t h S l v ni V r i pp r ntly v ry d y d ri nk b i t d pt h fr m t h e
’
o e a o c e s on , a a e e e a s a cu s e o

e
s a, a n d y et t h d n t i k b e s ea f th e t h r h n dr d n d i t y
oe s o s n ec a u s e o ee u e a s x

r i v r t h t fl w i nt i t ( f J m
e s a o A p ry p h A n d ot
o S o d S ri e i n
. a es ,
‘
oc a ec a
’
, ec on e s,

A rm i t g R bi n n V NO 1 pp li ff ) B t Egypt
’
T t
’
a e o d S t di so s ex s an u es , ,
.
, . x . u s

Dr g n m tif w
a o ev n m r
o pr li fi nd th Fi li S p hi nd b t edly
as e o e o c, a e s s o a u ou

su gg t d d e
es e ri pt i f t h S e
sc rp en t e p i ll i
on s o
y n n e i n w i t h H de , s ec a n co x o a es .

F t h t t ee Eb eli n g A n t t I NO 6 ; i t i tr n l t e d by hi m i n
4
or e ex ,
s , ss r ex e , . s a s a

O i nt Li t Z i t Vol X IX N : 4 ( A pr i l
r e . .
- e .
, .
, o ,
 1 18 C R EATION A ND THE D R AGON MYTH
deity for h e lp in h i s predicament
,
. And then follows the
de s cription of the dragon :
In the s ea w a s the S e rpent cre [at e d ] .

S ixty bérn i s hi s lengt h

Thirty be r n high i s hi s he [ ad ]
‘
?

For half (a béru ) e ach s tretche s the surface of his ey [ e s ]

For twenty bér n go [ h i s fe et] 3
.

He devou rs fis h t h e creature s [ of the s ea ] , ,

H e devours bird s th e creatu res [ of the h e av e n ] , ,

He devours wild a s s e s the cr e atur e s [ of the fi e ld] , ,

He devours me n to the peoples [ h e

1 ‘

The text here break s O ff at t he moment when P a lli l W hose , ,

h e lp against the dragon had b e e n invoked begins to s p e ak Let , .

u s hop e w e s hall recover the continuation of the narrative and

learn what became of thi s omnivorou s mon ster .

Th e r e a r e ample ground s then , for as s u m i ng the independent ,

exi s t e nce of th e Babylonian Dragon -myth and though both the ,

ve rs ion s recovere d hav e com e to u s in S emitic form ther e i s no ,

doubt that t he myth it se lf exi s ted among the S um e rian s The .

dragon motif i s constantly recurring in de s criptions of Sumerian

t e mple -decoration and the twin dragons of Ningishzida on ,
’

Gudea s libation va s e carved in green steatite and inlaid with

-
,

she ll are a notabl e product O f S umerian art

,
5
The ve ry names .

’
bo rne by Ti amat s brood of mon s ters in the S even Tablet s are
stamped in mo s t ca s e s with their S umerian d e s cent and Kingu , ,

whom s h e appointed as her champion in place of Apsu is equally ,

1
Th e li n e
3 0 ber n S ar e a ds :
[ D r
‘

Eb eli n g
'
a-e n d e s r i s
- -a
a -a a s- ‘ -
r i Sa a . r r
h ea ds ( Ko fe ) , i p mp
ly i ng ha t h e d a g on h a d t t
o e h a n on e h ea d r
It may b e m r t .

p t t t
oi n ed o u t h a , i f w e c ou ld a c c e h i s a ns la i on , w e s h ou ld h a e a n i n e espt t tr t v
tr t
p r
i ng a a llel t o t h e d e s c i i on of s o e of t h e r pt
i ae al ons e s , es e m ed pr m v m t r pr rv
rm
f o B er oss us, as G am a
p e v fx o vr a s « ( ba hds Os 860
’

Bu t th e c o on
‘
o d for
‘

. mm w r
‘
h ea d i s ha hhad n , and h e e c a n b e li le d ou b
’
t r h a l ess i s h e e u s e d i n i t s tt tt t r
r r
o di na y s ens e o f h ea d , s u i , t op h en a mm t
li ed to a h i gh b u i ldi ng w pp .

1
r
Th e li ne ea ds : a -na g m-a m la -bn-n a li -bi t én d
[
u

a u f j e ei n e Halfte i st ei n Z i e el i h e
g [
u s ed h e e , not r
i h i t s o di n a y wt
r r
en de i ng , b u t i n i t s s e c i a l s ens e
,
t i on , floor-s a c e , a ea p
i e s u fa ce
D r E b eli n g a n sla es , . tr t
] A u ge [n ] g eleg r r
B ut li bi ttn i s cle a ly t r
e a ni ng O f
‘
b i ck r r m
h i ch y i elds a s a n ge r w tr
h en a p w pp
li e d t o la ge b u i ldi ngs , o f fou nda r
r r
Dr Eb eli ng ea d s end-si t a t th e end of
. . r .

t h e li ne , b u t t h e s i gn i s b ok e n e h a s th e a ces may r o e to b e p r p tr
hos e of pr v t
a z na i n ,
‘
r
hi s e a s , i n h i c h c a s e li -bi t nz[ nd-§n
’
w ] i gh b e end e e d e i h e as m t r r t r
‘
r
s u fac e o f h i s ea s or a s r
b a s e ( li t fo unda i on) of hi s e a s t . r
1
i e th e leng h of h i s a c e w a s
. . t e n y ber n p tw t ’
.

Li t th e b la ck h ea ded
‘
.
- ’
.

5
S ee E de S a rzec , D ecou vertes en C ha ldee l x li
.

, p
'

, Fg
i 2 , a nd Heu zey , Ca ta
'

. v
p
.

log ue d es a nt iqu i tés cha ldeennes 2 81

'

.
, .
1 20 C R EATION A ND THE D R AG ON MYTH

We hav e thus traced four out of five s trands which form t he

the S emitic -B abylon i an po e m of Creation to a S umerian ance s try .

And we now come back to the fi rs t of th e s trand s the Birth of ,

th e God s from which our di s cus s ion starte d

,
For if this too .

s hould prove to be S umerian it wo uld help to fill in the gap in ,

our S u merian C reation myth and might furni s h u s with s ome ,

idea of t he S um e rian vi e w of beginnings which pre ceded t h e

acts of creation by t h e great god s It will be rememb e red that .

t he poem O pens with the description of a time when heaven and

e arth did not e xi s t no fi eld or mar s h even had b e en created and
, ,

the unive rs e con s i s ted only O f the primaeval water-god s Aps u , ,

Mumm a and Tiamat who s e waters were mingled together

, , .

Then follows t he s ucce ss ive generation of two pairs of deiti e s ,

L a k h mu and L a k ha mu and An s har and Ki s har long age s sepa , ,

rating the two generations from each other and from the birth O f
the gr e at gods which sub s equently tak es place In the summary .

of the myth which is given by D a ma s ci u s the names of the

1

variou s deities ac curately corre spond to those in the O pening

lines of the poem ; but he make s some notable additions as will ,

be seen from the following table :

Da ma s ci us S E vnN TA B LE r s I
‘ ’
. .

A n a a a v--T a vflé
’ i
Apsu— Tiama t
v
Ii s Mu mmu
u
2—
A a x rj 2
L ak hmu — L ak h a mu
’

A a x os
Kt o a a pfi
’
Anshar Kishar
’
A o o wpo s — —

Nu di mmu d ( = Ea)
”
A vo s , IAM vos , A o s
' ’ ’ ’

Anu ,

In the passage of the poem which describes t he birth of the

great god s afte r the last pair O f primaeval deities mention is ,

duly made of A nn and Nu di mmu d (the latter a title of Ea) ,

corr e sponding to the A v6s and A o s of D a mas c i u s ; but there ’ ’ '

appears to be no refe renc e to Enlil the original of IM w os It is ,

”
.

jus t pos s ible that his nam e occurred at the e nd of one Of the
broken line s and if s o we s hould have a complete parallel t o
, , ,

Damas c i u s But the traces are not in favour of the re s toration ; 3

.

1
Qu a es ti onesd e p r i mi s p r i nc ip n s , cap . 1 25 ; ed . pp p 3 84
Ko , .
.

2
E m en ded f o rm
th e ea d i ng A a x r j
rv Ka i A a x dv O f th t te ex .

1
Anu a nd Nudi mmu d a re e a c h m ent i on ed for th e fi r t t i m e t th
s a e b eg i nn i ng
 THE GO DS A ND DA MA S CIUS 121

and the om1 s s i on of Enlil s name from thi s part Of the poem may ’

be readily explained a s a furth e r tribute to Marduk who definitely ,

us urps his place throughout the s ub s equ ent narrative A n n a n d .

Ea had both to be m e ntioned beca u se O f t he parts they play in

the Epic but Enlil s only record e d appearance i s in the final
,
’

a ssembly of the god s wh e re he be s tows hi s own name th e Lor d ,

of t h e World 1
upon Mardu k Th e evid e nc e of Da masc i u s .

sugge s t s that Enlil s name w a s her e re tained betwe e n tho s e O f

’

Anu and Ea in other version s of th e po e m But t he O ccurrenc e

, .

of the name in any vers ion is in it s e lf evidence O f t h e an tiquity

Of thi s s trand of the narrative It i s a legitimate infe rence that .

the myth of the Birth of t h e God s goe s back to a tim e at lea s t

before the rise of Babylon and i s presu mably of S umerian origin ,
.

Further evidence of this may be s een in the fact that Anu ,

Enlil and Ea (i e Enki ) who are here created together are the
, . .
, ,

three great gods of the S umerian Ve rs ion of C reation ; it i s they

who create mankind with t h e help of the godd e s s Ni nk harsa gga ,

and in th e fuller vers ion of that myth we s hould naturally expect

to fin d som e account of their own origin The refer e nc e in .

Da mas ci us to Marduk ( Bijao s) as the son of Ea and D amkin a

( A ats y
) i s also of in t erest in thi s connexion a s it exhibit s a ,

goddess in close connexion with one of the three grea t gods ,

much as we find Ni nkh ars a gga associated with them in the

S umerian Version ?
Before leaving the name s it may be added ,

that of the primaeval deities A nshar and Kishar are Obvio us ly

, ,

S umerian in form .

It may be noted that the character of Aps u and Tiamat in thi s

portion of the poem i s quite at variance with th e ir lat e r actions
3
.

Their revolt at the ordered way of the gods was a nec essary ‘ ’

pr e liminary to the in corporation of the D ragon myths in whi ch ,

Ea and Marduk are the heroes Here they app e ar as entirely .

b e n efic e n t gods of the primaeval wate r undisturbed by storm s , ,

in whose quiet depths the e qually b en efic ent deitie s L akhmu and

of a li n e , t r e li ne f ll wi ng th e r ef ren e t o N di mm d ent i r ely

and the h e s o o e c u u are

oc c u p i d wi th de ri pt i n f h i w i d m nd p w r It i l pr b b l th t
e sc o s o s s o a o e . s a so o a e a

th t h r
e pr ce di g li n (11 14
ee e ll f w h i h r f r t A nn b y n m e w e r
n es . a o c e e o a , e

ent i r ly
e p i ed wi th hi d ri pti
occu B t it i nly i n 11 1 3 1 6 t h t
s es c ny on . u s o .
—
a a

r ef r t E nli l
e en c e n h ve o
o rr d d t h tr
ca pr e e rv d of thei r e nd
a cc u e , an e a c es s e s co

h lv
a es d t g g e t th e r t r t i n
o no su s es o a o .

1
C f Ta b l VII, l 1 1 6
. . . .

1
Da mki n a w a s th e la e t r wi f of E Enk i ; d Ni nkh gg i
e a or an a r sa a s a ss oc i a ed t
w i th Enki , as hi s c ons o rt i n th er S m ri n m yt h (
, an o b ov p 53 u e a s ee a e, .
,
n
.

3
Tabl I 11 1 — 2 1
. , . .
 C R EATION A ND THE DR AG ON MYTH

L a k h a mu , An sh ar and Ki s har were generated This i nt erpre ,

?

t a t i on by t h e way s u gg e s ts a mor e satisfactory restoration for

, ,

t h e clo s e of the ninth lin e of t h e poem than any that has yet
b e e n propo s e d That line i s u sually taken to imply that the gods
.

w e r e creat e d in t h e mid s t O f [ heaven ] but I think the follow

‘

i ng r e nd e ring in connexion with 11 1 5 give s better s ense, .

-
,

Wh en in the height heaven w a s not n am e d ,

And t h e e arth b e n e a t h did not bear a name ,

And t h e prima e val Ap s u who begat them 2

,

And Ma mmu and Tiamat who bore them all 2

, ,

( )
5 Their wat e r s w e r e m ingl e d together ,

9
( ) Th e n w er e cre a te d t h e god s in the mid s t of [their waters] ,
3

L a k h mu and L a k ha mu were call e d into b e i n g

It t h e
ninth line of the poem be restore d as suggested its ,

accou n t of t h e Birth of the God s will be found to corre s pond

accurat e ly with the s ummary from B erossu s who in explain i ng , ,

the myth refe rs to the Babylonian b e lief that t he universe

,

con s i st e d at fi rs t of moi sture in which living creatures such as ,

h e had already de s cribed were generated ? The primaeval ,

waters are originally the s ource of life not of de s truction and it , ,

i s in th e m that the god s a r e born as in Egyptian mythology ; ,

1
We ma y p rh p e e rvi v l f Ti m t ori gi n l h r t r i n h e c tr l
a s s e a su a o a a
’
s a c a ac e r on o
of t h e Ta bl t e sf F t Th p m d
o t r pr
a e. th i z i ng t h m
e oe oe s n o e esen er as se e
1 n a ny su cc e s s u f l fi gh t ; th y pp r t b e lr d h r t b t w on Ki g
e a ea o a ea e s o es o n u,
y
th ou g h in t h l t r my t h l gy t h y
e a e n t h i b y ri h t
o o
g ( f T b l I 11 1 3 7 f
ef a re o s c . a .
, . .
,

an d Ta b l IV, I . .

1
i e t h e g ods
. . .

3
Th e li ne i s ni n es e th pr rv
e d only on a Neo-Ba by lon i a n du li c a e ( S even p t
Ta blets ,Vol 1 1, p l t
I s u gg es e d th e e s o a i on lei -r i b §[ a -ma -mi ] , i n t h e i ds
. . r t rt m t
o f h ea e n v
as oss i ble , s i n c e t h e p
a c e s o f t h e fi s s i n i n t h e la s
g o d O f t h e tr rt tw r
m
li ne s e e e d t o b e h os e of th e Neo-Bab lon i a n fo ty rm Of eat Th e es o a i on . r trt
p r
a p e a ed a t th e i t t r t tr
e n ot a l o e h e
g tm v
s a i s fa c o y i n i e w of t h e fi s li n e of th e rt
p m
oe , a n d i t c ou ld o nl t pp
y e j u s i fi ed b y s u
b t t
os i ng h a sa mama , or h e a en was v
r
a l e ad v v t
y a g u e ly c on c ei ed a s i n e x i s enc e o ci t , Vol I
( p p 3, n But th e . . .
, . .

tra c es of th ig I h v g i v e t h m ( p i t Vol II l
e s n, a s
p m y l
a p e i b ly n e o . c .
, .
, . a a so os s
b t h e f th N -B b l i n f rm f t h
e os o e i g n m ; nd I w ld n w r t r
eo a on a
y o o e s e a ou o es o e
the en d f th li i n th N B b y l ni
o e t b l t l i ib m[ §n
ne e i n th eO - a o an a e as e -r e-e- e
mi d t f [ th i r w t r rr p rm f thi
s o
] e
n d i ng t t h fa e s m ns
- - n in l 5
co es o o e o a -
n n . o s
d p li t In t h A y r i n V r i n me l §n-
u ca e .
(p ) nn w ld b r d i n b t h li n
e ss a e s o -
ou e ea o es .
It wi ll b p ib l t v ri fy t h n w r di n
e os s b - m t tr
g y
e o i n e i n f t h e e ea , a r e ex a a o o e a ces
on t h t b l t wh
e t h Br i t i h M
a e m ll ti n g i n b m
en
, e il bl f s u s eu co ec o s a a eco e a va a e or
t dy ft r th w
s u a e e a r.
37 11 0 5 y d fir -
1
7 n a vr ds Ka i { é w v g u a zrr i e evvn ér w v r o zchr de Kr )
’

H
1 ’

] I
'

p ro e 7 0 1
[
‘

q y y n S .

r t r
c ea u e s o f th e i a e al a e pr m v w t r w r
e e k i lle d by t h e li h ; a nd
g e es i al t t rr tr
an
im w r t
a ls e e h e n c e a ed r t w
hi c h c ould b e a (i e b ea h e a nd ex i s i n) th e a i r r . . r t t .
1 24 C R EATION A ND TH E DR AGON MYTH

NO city had b e e n cr e at e d no cr e atu re had been made , ,

Nipp u r had not be e n cre a t e d E k u r had not be e n bu i lt , ,

Ere ch had n ot b e e n cre at e d E a n n a had not b e en built , ,

Ap s u h a d n ot be e n creat e d Eridu had not be e n built , ,

O f t h e holy hou s e the hou s e of t h e gods the habitation had

, ,

n ot b e en cr e a t e d .
. 1

All land s were s e a

1
.

At th e time when a channel (w a s formed) in the m i dst of the

sea .
Then w as Eridu created ,
E s a gi la w a s b u ilt etc ,
.

H e re w e hav e the d e fi n it e s tatem e nt that before C r e ation all the

world w a s s e a And it i s important to note that th e primaeval
.

water i s not p e rsoni fi ed ; t he ordinary S u merian word for s e a

i s e mployed which t h e S emitic tran s lator h a s faithfu lly rend e red
,

in h i s v e rs ion of t h e text ?
Th e r e ference to a channel in the
s ea as t h e cau s e of C reation s eem s at fir s t s ight a littl e O bscure ;
, ,

bu t t h e word implies a drain or water -channel not a current

’

of t h e s ea its e lf and the refe re nce may be explained as s ugge s ted

,

by the drainag e of a fl ood -area NO doubt the phrase was .

elaborated in th e original myth and it i s po s sible that what ,

appears to b e a s e cond version Of C reation later on in the text

i s r e ally part O f the more detailed narrative of the first myth .

There th e C reator him s elf i s nam e d He i s the S umerian god .

G i li mma and in t h e S emitic tran s lation Marduk s name is s ub

’

s titut e d To the following couplet which describes G i li mma s

.
,
’

m e thod of creation i s appended a further e xtract from a later ,

portion of the text there evidently di s placed giving additional

, ,

detail s of t h e Creator s work : ’

( 7 ) G i li mma bound re e d s in the face

1 of the waters ,

( ) He form e d s oil and pour ed it out

1 8 beside the reeds 3
.

1
S um . n i gi n k n r -k u r-r a -ge, S em . n ap b
- ar m a -ta -a -tn ,
li t .
‘
a ll la nds
’
,
i . e.
Su mr e ian a nd Bab y loni a n ex pr i e s s on s for ‘
th e w rld
o

Sum h r r r pr
1
a -a b- en d e e d b y tamta m, not b y i t s
’
.
,
ba
s ea , i s e e
‘
e s o ni fie d
equ i a le n Ti av a t m t .

1
Th e s u gge s ion h as b e en t a de h a a mn, th e m
o d i n th e S e i i c e s i ont t w r mt v r
r t
h e e ra n sla ed e e ds t r
s h ou ld b e co nn ec ed i h a mma tn, t h e o d us ed for t wt w r
e a rt h o r dry la nd i n t h e B a b loni a n C ea i o n S e i e s Ta b l I l 2 a nd
y , , , g i en r t r . . v
so m
e su ch ean i n m
g a s e x a ns e p
Th e c ou le i s h u s e x la i ned t o ea n ha p t t p m t t
t h e god m
a de a n ex
p a n s e on t h e face of th e a e s , a nd h e n ou ed ou t d u s wtr t p r t
‘
ou t h e e x a ns e p mt v r
Bu t th e S e i i c e si on i n l 1 8 ea ds i tti a mi ‘ b es i de t h e . r ,
a .
’
, no t ma a mi , ‘
on th r d n t
th e a nd in a ny ca s e e e oe s o s ee mm uc h
si
g n ifi i th
c a nce t fpn ri g t p i lly r t d d t n
e ac o ou n ou s ec a c ea e us o or b e s i de la nd
a lre a dy f rm d o Th S m i
e w r d tr n l t d by mn i wri tt n
e u er a n o a s a e a i -di r w i th
.
s e g ,
 A ME S OPOTAMIAN METHO D OF C R EATION 1 25

( )
3 1
3
( )2
( )
3 3
( )
3 4

Here the S u merian C re ator i s pictur e d as forming dry land

from the primaeval water in much t h e sa me way as the ea rly
cu ltivator in the Euphrate s Valley proc ured the rich fi e l ds for
hi s crops Th e exi s te nce of th e earth is here not r ea lly pre
.

s uppo s ed A ll the world was sea until the god crea ted lan d out
.

of the waters by the onl y practica l method that was po s sibl e in

Me s opotamia .

In anoth e r S umerian myth which has been reco v e r e d on one of ,

the early ta bl e ts from Nippur w e have a rather di ffe rent picture ,

O f beginnings For there though water is the s ource of li fe the .

, ,

exi s tence of the land i s pre suppo s e d But it i s bare and deso .

late as i n the M e sopotamian sea s on O f low water

, The under ‘ ’
.

lying idea is s ugge s tive O f a period when s ome progress i n

s y s tematic irrigation had already been made and the filling Of ,

t h e dry can al s and s ub s e qu e nt irriga t ion of the parched ground

by t h e ri s ing flood of Enki was not dr e aded but eagerly de s ired .

The myth i s o nly one Of s everal that have been c ombined to

form the introductory s ections of an incantation ; but in all of
them Enki the god O f the deep water plays the lea din g part
, , ,

though a s soc iated with di fferent consort s ?

The in ca nta tion is
the m ent gi r d i n l 1 7 d t h gh i n th e f ll w i ng li n i t i wri tt en
e le ,
‘
ee .
, an ou o o e s

un d r i t v ri n t f rm
e sd i wi t h a t gi th q ti n gi -d i
a o mn i l wh r
a- r ou , e e ua o -
a r a s e se e e

a tt t ed ( f D li tz h H nd w b t b h p
es c . e I f v r of r g r di g m
sc , a r er u c , . n a ou e a n a n as

so m rt f r d h r
e so d o ll t i v ly i t m y b
ee p i nt d t t h t th e
, e e u se co ec e ,
a e o e ou a

S m eri
u v erb i n L 1 7 i k sd t b in d
an r t ly r end r d b y ka i th e s e a,
‘
o
’
, ac cu a e e e ra sa n

S mi ti v r i n A
e c m i g t h t l 34 b l g t th me
e s o . nt t h
ss u r ti n n a . e on s o e sa ac c ou , e c ea o

o f r d i n g en r l b i d tr e
ee s ft r d y l n d i f rm ed w ld n t of
e a es re e es , a e r a s o , ou o c ou s

b t v ri
e a w i th t h g d
a a n ce f m rt f r d i n hi fi r t act f r ea t i n
e o
’
s use O so e so o ee s s o c o .

H re t t h r ed-b ndl
e c a es h r t th il b th f whi h g t f rm
e e u es , a s e c ea e s e so , o o c o o o

t h fi r t di k ; t h r ed-b ed li k th e th r v g t t i on pri n
e s e e ep fr m t h e s, e o e e e a , S g u o

g r d
ou n w h i t pp r en a ea s .

Th S m i ti v r i
1
e h r r d th l r d M d k t h e rr e p di ng
e c e s on e e ea s e o ar u co s on

n m e i n th e S m ri n t
a t i t pr r d u e a ex s no e se v e .

Th e li n i r t r ed fr m 1 2 f t h
1
e b v r e f th e t t
s es o o . o e o e s o ex .

f P nn M P b l B b S t Vol
1
Cf np p 53 n 4 S
. s L gd n Uni
ra , .
, . . ee an o ,
v. O e s . us . u .
, a . ec .
, .

X N , o .
p l 1 f pp 6 9 {f ; J A m O S V. l XXXV I.
, pp . . ou r n . er . r. oc .
, o . .

1 40 f Pri n J o Am . O S V l X XXV I pp 9 0 ff
ce , J t wJ n
ou r n . er . r . oc .
, o .
, . . as r o , ou r .

Am O Ser . V l XXXVI pp 1 22 111

r . oc .
, d i n p rt i lo hi det iled t dy of
.
, .
, an a cu ar s a s u

th t t i n A m
e ex J n S mi t L g V l XXX er II I.pp 9 1 1
1 D
ou r L gd n . e . an , o .
,
. . r . an o
’
s

fi r t desc ri pt i n f th e te t i n P
s S
o B i bl A h V l XXXVI
o x , r oc . oc . . rc , o .

pp 1 88 w b d n comp r t i v ly m ll fr gm nt nly ; nd on hi
. as as e o a a a e s a a e o a s
1 26 C R EATION A ND THE D R AGON MYTH
directed again s t variou s di s ea s e s and the recitation of the ,

clo s ing mythical s e ction w a s evidently intended to enli st the aid

of s p e cial god s in combating them The creation of thes e .

d e iti e s i s recite d u nd e r s e t formulae in a sort of refrain and the ,

d ivin e nam e a ss ign e d to each bears a magical conne x ion with

the s ickn e ss h e or s h e is int e n d e d to di sp e l ?

W e have alr e a dy not e d exampl e s of a s imilar u se of myth in

magic which w as common in both Egypt and Babylonia ; and
,
1

to ill u strat e its employm e nt again s t di s ea s e a s in the Nippur ,

document it will s u ffi ce to cit e a we ll -known magical cur e for

,

t h e toothache which w a s adopted in Babylon ?

There toothache
w a s b e lieve d to be ca u s ed by t h e gnawing of a worm in the gum ,

and a myth w a s u s e d in th e incan tation int ended to relieve it .

Th e worm s origin i s traced from Anu t he god of heaven through

’

, ,

a de s c en ding s cal e of creation ; Anu the heaven s the earth , , ,

rive rs can al s and mars he s a r e repr e sented a s each giving ri s e to

,

t h e next in order u n til finally the marshes produce the worm , .

The myth th e n r e lat e s how the worm on being O ffered tempti n g ,

food by Ea in an s wer to her prayer a s ked to be allowed to drink ,

t h e blood of the te e th and t h e incantation close s by invo k ing ,

t h e c u rs e of Ea b e cau s e O f the worm s mi s guided choice It i s ’

.

clear that powe r over t h e w orm w a s O btained by a recital O f her

co mpl ti f th t t fr m ther fr g m nt i n P n ylv ni P r f r S y e

e on o e ex o o a e s en s a a, o e s so a c

a t O n ce r li z d th t th p r li m i ry di g i f D l g my th ld n t b
ea e a e e na a nos s o a e u e c ou o e

t i d ( f E p Ti m N 1 9 1 5 pp 88
s u s a ne c . x H Pr f
os . r Pri n es , nd ov .
, , . e, o ess o c e, a

Pr f r J t w i d p d t ly h w d t h t t h ti f E k i i n th my th i n
o e ss o a s ro n e en en s o e a e ac on o n e

s en di g w t r n t h l nd w
n a e n t p i ti v b t b n fi
o t e n d th pr a di g as o un e u e e c en a e ec e n

s ec t i i whi h i m l
on , n d ri b d c ot p rf rm i g t h ei r
an l t i vi t i
a s ar e esc e as n e o n u sua ac es ,

w as h w i d p d nt ly b y P f
s o n n r Pr i e d Pr f
en r J tr w t h ve
e r o e ss o nc e a n o es s o as o o a

r frn
e e e t t th i r di ff r
ce , n o t t r i n id l i to e i n P r di b te en na u e n a ea ex s e nc e a a s e, u ,

o n f m i li r li
a t th i r n n
a i t nes , in d l t l d
o It m y be dd d o - x
e s en c e a es o a e an . a e a e

t h t Pr f r B rt n d D P t er g r g r lly w i th Pr f r Pr i
a o e ss o a o an d r . e s a ee en e a o esso nce a n

P f r J tr w i n th i r i t rpr t t i
r o e ss o as o f th t t whi h l d the e n e e a on o e ex , c ex c u es

su g g t d b i b li l p r ll l
es e nd I nd r t ca d fr m D L ng d n t h t h v ry
a a e s a u e s an o r . a o a e e

r ightly r g i z th t t h t t i t D l g my th It i
ec o n es a bj t f e ex s no a e u e . s a su ec or c on

gr t l t i
a u a th t t h di on i h m t i lly i n r d
a e k wledge f th i
s cu ss on as a er a c ea s e o ur no o s

d i ffi ltcu mp it i co os on .

1
C f C l VI 11 2 4 ff
. o th A b w r t d f th i k
.
, . f th . w ( b) us -u a s c ea e or e s c n es s o e co a

Ni t l f t h t f t h fl k ( t l) ; Ni k
n- u or a ot n d Ni n k i f
e th t f th oc u- n n- a -u - u a - a-s or a o e
m th ( l ) ; N - i f t h t f t h
ou ea i ( m ni g n rt i n ) D
a z or i m f th t
a o e n a -s ea n u ce a a z - a or a
o f th d ei ( m ni g a -z rt i ) Ni n ti l f th t f ti l (li f ) th e n m f t he
ea n u nc e a n - or a o e a e o
ei ght h n d l t d i ty i i mp er f t l pr
a as rv d e s ec es e e
y .

b v pp 5 0 f 5 7 1 07 ; d f pp 6 8 86 f 1 19
1
S ee a o e, .
2 .
, , an O . .
, .
, ,
n . .

1
S Th mp
ee D il o d E i l Sp i i t f B byl n i
s on , V l II pp 16 0 ff
ev f
s an v r s o a o a, o .
, . . or
a n m b r f th er
u e mp l O oJ tr w J A O S V l XX XV I p 2 79 n 7
ex a es , s ee as o . . o .
, . .
, .
, .
, .
1 28 C R EATION A ND THE DR AGON MYT H

du c tory lin e s of a S e mitic inca n tation of which we posses s ,

1
Neo -Babylonian copie s
O thou R iver who did s t create all things
, ,

Wh en t he gr e at god s dug thee out ,

Th ey s e t prosp e rity upon thy banks .

Within thee Ea King of the De e p created h l S dw e ll i ng

0

.
, ,

The Flood they s ent not befor e thou wert "

H e re the river cr e ator i s s harply distinguished from the
as

Flood ; a n d w e may conclud e that the water of the Euphrate s

Vall ey impre ssed the e arly S u m e rians a s lat e r th e S emit e s with , ,

i ts creative a s well a s with i t s d e structive power The reappear .

anc e of t h e fe rtile s oil after the receding inundatio n doubtless

, ,

s u gge s t e d t h e id e a of cr e ation ou t of water and the stream s ’

sl ow but automatic fall would furni s h a mod e l for the age -long

e vol u tio n of primaeval deiti e s Wh e n a god s active and arti ’

.

fic i a l cr e atio n of t h e earth mu s t be portray e d it would h ave been ,

natu ral for the primitiv e S umerian to picture the Creator working
a s he him s e lf would work whe n h e reclaimed a field from flood .

We ar e thu s s hown t h e old S um e rian god G i li mma piling reed

bundl e s in the wat e r and heaping up s oil bes ide them till the ,

ground within hi s di k e dri e s off and produc e s luxuriant ve ge

t a t i on B u t here th e re i s a hint of stru ggle in the process and
.
,

w e p erc e iv e i n it t h e myth -re dactor s opportunity to weave in

’

t h e Dragon m otif No s uch e xcu s e i s afforded by the other

.

S um e rian myth which pictur e s t h e life -producing inundation as

,

t h e gift of t h e two d e iti e s of the D eep and the product of their

un i on .

B u t in their oth e r a spect the rivers of Me s opotamia could be

t errible ; and the Dragon motif its elf on the Tigris and Euphrate s , ,

dr e w its image ry a s much from flood as from storm When .

th e refore a s ingl e d e ity must be made to appear not only as ,

C r e ator but al s o as t he champion of h i s divine alli e s and the

,

conqu e ror of other gods i t was inevitable that the myths attaching
,

to the wat e rs und e r their two aspects should be combined Thi s .

may alre ady have taken place at Nippur when Enlil became the ,

h e ad of t h e panth e on ; but the exi s tence of his myth is c onj ec

2
tural .
In a later age we can trace the proces s in the light of

1
Cf Se ven Ta blet s
.
f Cr ea ti on Vol I
o , .
, p . 12 8 f . For tri ki ng ev i d n f t h e
s e ce o
su rv vi al of t h e c ul t of th e Eu h p r te
a s in to th e Ro m n p r i d e C m nt
a e o ,
s e u o ,

E t u des S yr i ennes , p p 247 ff. .

2
t
The a sp e c of Enli l a s t h e C r t or
ea of V eg t t i e a on is
emp h a i z ed i n T b let VII
s a
 MYTHOLOGY A ND POLITI CAL DEVELOPMENT 1 29

hi s tory and of existing texts Th e re Marduk identified wholly .

,

as the S u n -god conquers the once fe atureles s primaeval wate r

, ,

which in the proce s s of redaction h as now become the Drago n

of flood and s torm .

Thu s t h e duali s m whi ch i s s o characteristic a feat u re of the

,

S emitic -Babylonian sy s t e m though absent from the earlie s t ,

S um e rian ideas of Cr e ation was inherent i n the nature of the ,

local rive r s whos e varied as pects gave rise to or coloured separate

,

myths It s pre s ence in t h e later mythology may be trac e d as

.

a reflection of political development at firs t probably among the ,

warring cities of S umer but certainly later in the S emitic ,

triumph at Babylon It was but to be expected that th e con .

q u e r or whether S umerian or S emite

, should repre s ent hi s own ,

god s victo ry as the e s tablishment of ord e r out of chaos But

’
.

thi s would be particularly in harmony with the character of the

S e mitic Babylo n ian s of the First D yna s ty whose g e nius for ,

m e thod and organization produced alik e H ammu r ab i s C ode of ’

Laws and the s traight s treets of the capital .

W e have thu s been able to trace the variou s strands of the

S emitic -Babylonian poem of C reation to S um e rian origin s ; and
in the s e cond lectur e we arrived at a very s imilar conclusion with
regard to the S emitic -Babylonian Vers ion of the D eluge pre
s erved i n the Epic of Gilgamesh We ther e s a w that the literary .

s tr u cture of th e S umerian Ver s ion in which C reation and D eluge ,

are combined must have s urviv e d u nder s ome form into the Neo
,

Babylonian period s ince it was reproduc e d by B er os su s A n d,

.

we noted the fact that the s ame arrangement in Ge n e s is did

not th e refor e prove that t h e H e br e w accounts go back dir e ctly t o
early S u merian original s In fact t h e s tructural re s e mblance .
,

pr e s ented by Gene s i s can only be regard e d as an additional proof

that the S u merian originals conti n u e d to be studied and tran s
lated by the S emitic priesthood although they had long b e en ,

s up e r s e d e d o fficially by th e ir later d e scendant s the S emitic epics , .

A detailed compari s on of the C reation and D eluge narrative s

in the various v e rsions at once discloses the fact that the con

of th e Bab y lon i a n re t i n ( p m
b ov e p
oe It i
of Ci g ni fi n t t h t
a o s ee a , . s s ca a

rttt
h is fi s r h ld b i nt rpret d B t w er f p l n t i ng F nd r
i le , A s a i , s ou e e e as es o o a
’
, ou e

of sowi ng Cr e t or f g r i n nd pl nt H w h
’
, a o d th gr en h rb t
a a a s e o cau s e e e e o

s pri n g p ( f Su T bl t V l I p 9 2
c . even Th e a
p n ie s,
g p h r e
o b y w
. hi h , . se O e n as s, c

t h g d i h il d tr i k t h k y n t
e o s a e f th wh l
, s mp i ti on It i tr e th t
e e e - o e o e o e co os . s u a ,

as S kh k
u he i
- ur
,
D tr y er f t h e fo s b t th g r t m j ri ty f t he t i t l
es o o e u e ea a o o es

a n d t he i r Sem i ti c gl r ef r t r t i v e t i vi ti e not t t h e Dr g n myt h

os s es e o c ea ac s, o a o .

K . K
130 C R EATION A ND THE D R AGON MYTH

n e x i on eb tw ee n tho s e of t h e S e mitic Babylonian s and the Hebrew s

is far clo s e r a n d mor e s triking than that w hich can be traced

wh e n t h e l a t te r a r e plac e d b e s id e t h e S u m e ri an origin a ls l We .

m ay th r
e e for e r e g a rd it a s c e rtain th a t t h e H e br e w s d e riv e d th e ir
knowl edge of S u m e rian tradition not dire ctly from th e S umerians ,

th e m s e lv e s b u t throu gh S emitic chann e l s from B a bylon

,
.

It will b e unn e ce s s ary h e re to go in d etail through the points

of r e s emblance that a r e ad mitt e d to exi s t b e twe e n the H e br e w
acco u nt of C reation in t he fi rs t chapt e r of G e ne s i s and that
pre s erved in t h e S even Ta bl e ts It will su ffi c e to e mphas ize
‘

two of them which gain in s ign i fi cance thro u gh our n ewly

,

acquired knowledg e of early S um e rian b eli efs It mu s t b e .

admitted that on fi rs t reading t h e poem o n e i s s truck mor e by

, ,

the di ffer e nces tha n by th e parall e l s ; but that i s du e to the

polythei s tic ba s i s of the poem which attract s att e ntion when ,

compare d with th e s e ve r e and dig n ifi e d mo noth e i s m of the

H e bre w writ e r And if allowance b e m ade for the cha n ge
.

in theological s tan dpoint the mat e rial points of re s emblanc e ,

are s een to be very marked The outline o r gen eral cours e .

_
N

of e v e nt s i g t h e s ame In
/ w N ‘ « e x t
an abys s of water s
w ‘
M
.

at t h e beginning de not e d by almost t h e s ame S e mitic word ,

t h e H ebre w tekom t ran s lat e d t h e d e ep in G e n i 2 be ing ’

‘
. .
, ,

th e e quival e nt of t h e S emitic -Babylonian Ti a ma t t h e mon ,

ster of s torm a n d flood who pre s ent s s o s triking a contra s t

to the S umerian primaeval wa te r 3
Th e s e cond a c t of C r e atio n .
‘

in t h e H e bre w narrative i s that of a fir ma me n t which divid e d ‘

t h e wat e rs un der it from tho s e abov e 4

But this a s w e hav e .
,

s e e n h a s no para llel in t he e arly S um e rian conc e ption until i t

,

w a s combin e d with the D ragon combat in th e form in which

we fin d it in the Babylonian po e m Th e r e the body of Tiamat .

i s divided by Mard u k and from one half of her h e con s truct s a ,

cove ring or dom e for h e aven that i s to say a firmame n t to ,

‘ ’

k e e p h er upp e r waters in place The s e will s uffice a s te s t .

passage s s ince th e y s erve to poin t out quite clearly the S emitic

,

S ee th e c o mp r t v t
a a i e a b le of pp ndi I p 1 42 f Vri e s ons gi v en a s A e x , . .

2
S ee S even Ta blets , Vol I, pp nd S k i nn r G i pp 45 ff . . a e , enes s , . .

3
v r
Th e i n a i ab le u s e o f t h e Hebr w w rd t kom wi th t th rti l pt i e o e ou e a c e, e x c e n
t wo p a s sa g i th p l r l pr v
es n t h t i t i pr p r m ( f Sk i ner p i t
e u a , o es a s a o e na e c . n , 0 . c .
,

p . an d it rr p d s wi t h Ti m t m k t h r m b l
co es f th
on e nc e a a a es e es e a n ce o e

v ri
e s on s f m r
ar ig ifi t t h n i f th i r p r ll li m w r nfi d l ly t
o e s n ca n a e a a e s e e co ne so e o
id ea s ( s ee b v p 1 08 n l )
a o e, .
, . .

Ge n i 6 -8
. . .
132 C R EATION A ND THE D R AGON MYTH
docum ent s wholly within exilic times If the C reation and .

Deluge narrative s s tood alone a ca s e might perhap s be made ,

ou t for con fi ni ng Babylonian influence to thi s late p e riod It .

i s tru e that duri ng the Captivity the Jew s were directly e xposed
to such influence They had the life and civilization of their .

captors immediately before their eyes and it would have been ,

only natural for the more learned among the Hebr e w scribes
and priests to interest them s e lve s in the ancient literature of
their n e w home And any previous familiarity with the myths
.

of Babylonia would undoubtedly have been increas ed by actual

re s idence in th e country W e may p e rhap s s e e a re sult of such .

acquaintanc e with Babylonian lit e rature after J eh oi ac hi n s de ,

’

ort a t i on in an interesting literary parallel that h a s be e n pointed

p ,

out between Ez e k xiv 1 2 20 and a s peech in th e Babylonian . .

—

account of the D elu ge in the Gilgame s h Epic X I ll , ,

.

Th e pa ss age in Ezekiel occurs within chap s i xxiv which corre .

—
,

s on d to the proph e t s firs t period and con s ist in the main of his
’

p
utterance s in exile before the fall of Jeru s alem It form s in fact .
, ,
’
the i n troduction to the prophet s announc e ment of the coming
of four s ore ju dge ments upon Jeru s al e m from which there
‘ ’

s hall be l e ft a rem n ant that s hall be carried forth But in ’

‘ 2
.

con s e qu e nce here and ther e of trace s of a lat e r point of view it is

, , ,

gen e rally admitted that many of t h e chapt e r s in thi s s ection may

have b e e n con s iderably ampli fi e d and alter e d by Ez e ki e l him s elf
in t h e cours e of writing And if we may r e gard t h e literary .

parallel that ha s be e n pointe d out a s anything more than for

t u i t ou s it i s open to us to a s s ume that chap x i v m a y hav e been
, .

worked up by Ezeki e l many year s after his p rOp he ti c call at

Tel -abib .

In t he pas sage of the Babylonian Epic Enlil had already sent the ,

F lood and had destroyed t h e good with t h e wicked Ea thereupon .

r e mon s trates with him and he urge s that in future the sinn e r ,

only s ho u ld be mad e to s u ffer for h i s sin ; and ins tead of again ,

cau s ing a flood let there be di s crimination in the divine punish

,

ments s ent on men or land s While the flood made the escape of .

S e e Dai ch es , E z ek i el a n d t h e Ba b y lon i a n A c c ou n of t h e Delu ge i n th e t

Jew is h Qu a r ter ly R cmew , A
’

pr i l 1 9 05 It h a s of c ou s e long b een e c ogni ed

. r r z
th t Ez k i l i
a e n e , n a nn ou c i ng th e p u n i sh m nt e of the k i ng of Egy pt in x x x ii .

i m g ry wh i h tr
u s es a e c s ongly re ll t h B b y loni n Cr ti n my th F
ca s e a a ea o . or he
comp r P h r h t
a es a ao o a s ea m n t r v r w h m Y h w h w i ll th r w hi n
- o s e o e o a e o s et (as
M r d k h d t hr w n h i
a u a o s v r Ti m t) ; f Loi y L myth b byl n i n
o e a a c . s , es es a o e s et les
p r emie r s chap i tr es d e la G nee se p 87 . .

E z k
e . x iv 21 f . .
 E Z EKIEL A ND THE GILGAM ES H EPIC 133

the deserving impo s sibl e other form s of punishment would a ffe ct

,

the gu i lty only In Ezekiel the s ubj e ct is t h e s ame but the

.
,

point of view i s di ffer e nt The land the prophet h a s in h i s .

mind in verse 1 3 i s evidently Judah and hi s d e sir e is to explain ,

why it will s u ffer although not all its inhabitants deserved to

s hare its fate Th e di scrimination which Ea u rg es Ezekiel
.
, ,

a s s erts will be made but the s inner mu s t bear h i s own s i n and ,

the righteou s howeve r eminent can only s ave them s elve s by

, ,

their righteousne s s The gen e ral principle propounded in the

.

Epic is here applied to a special case But the paralleli s m .

between the pas sage s li e s not o nly in the g e n er al p ri nc i p le but '

also in the literary setting This will best be brought out by .

printing the pa s s age s in parallel columns .

Epic XI 1 80 1 94
G i lg .
, ,
—
. Ezek xiv 1 2 20 . .
—
.

( 1 8 0 ) Ea opened his mouth and 12 An d the w ord of the Lord

s pak e ,
came unto me sayin g , ,

H e s aid to the warrior 13 S on of man when a land ,

Enlil : sinneth again s t me by

Tho u direc tor of the co mmitt ing a tr e spas s and ,

god s " O warrior " I s tretch out m i ne hand

Why did s t thou not ta ke upon it and br e ak the ,

coun s el but didst cause s ta ff of the bread thereo f ,

a flood ? and s end fa mi n e upon it ,

On t h e sinn er lay his sin ,

and cu t off from it man
( 1 8 5 ) On the tran s g ressor lay and beast ; 1 4 though
hi s tran s gr e s sion " these thr e e men Noah , ,

Be merciful so that (all ) , ,

D a n i e l and Job were in, ,

be not de s troyed " it they sho ul d d e liver

,

Have patience so that ,

but their own s o uls by
(all ) be not [ cut off] .
. the i r righteous ne ss s aith ,

In s tead of caus ing a the Lord God .

flood , 15 If I c a u s e n oi so me bea sts to

1
Let li on s come and pass through the land and ,

diminish mankind " they spoil it so that it be ,

Ins t e ad of causin g a d esolate that no man ,

flood , may p as s through be ca u se

~

1 90 ) Let leoz oa r ols

1
come andf
of the beasts ; 1 6 t hou gh
diminish mankind " these three men were i n
In s tead of causing a it as I live s aith the
, ,

flood , Lord God they shall -de ,

Le t fa mi ne be ca u s ed and liver neither sons nor

le t it [ smite] the land . d aughters th e y only
Instead of causing a s ha ll b e delivered but the ,

flood , land shall be de s olate .

1
t
B o h Bab yloni an w ord e i n th e ing l r b t prob bly
s ar s u a , u a us ed c olle c tiv ely ,

as w t t r H b rew q i v l nt i n Ez ek i 1 5
i s t h e c ase i h h ei e e u a e . x v
. .
 134 CR EATION A ND THE DR AGON MYTH

L et the P la g come u e-
god Or if I bring a s w or d upon
and [slay ] man kind " that land a n d s ay S word , , ,

go through the land ; so

that I cut off from it man
and bea s t 1 8 thou gh
th e s e thr e e men we re in
it as I liv e s aith th e Lord
, ,

God th ey s hall deliver

,

neither s on s nor d au gh
ters but th e y only s hall
,

be delive red th e m s e lve s .

Or if I s end a p es ti len ce into

that land and pour ou t ,

my fury u pon it in bloo d ,

to cut off from it man a n d

b e a s t ; 2 0 thou gh Noah ,

D ani e l a n d Job wer e in

, ,

it a s I live s aith the Lord

, ,

God th ey s hall d e liver

,

n e ither s on nor daught e r ;

th ey s hall bu t d elive r
th e ir own s oul s by their
righteou s nes s .

It will be seen that of the four kind s of divine puni s hment

mentioned thre e accurately corre s pond in both compo s itions
,
.

Famine and pe s tilence occur in both while the lion s and leopard s ,

of the Epic fi nd an equivalent in n oi s ome b e a s ts The s word ‘ ’

.

i s not referred to in the Epic but a s thi s had already threatened ,

Jeru sa lem at the time of the prophecy s utterance i ts inclu s ion ’

by Ezeki el w as inevitable Moreover the fact that Noah should .

,

be named in t he refrain as the firs t of the three proverbial ,

example s of righteousne s s s hows that Ez e kiel h a d t he D eluge in ,

hi s mind and increa s e s t h e s igni fi cance of the underlying parallel

,

betwe e n hi s argument and that of t h e Ba bylonian poet It may

1
.

1
Thi s s u gge s ti on is in so m m
e r
e a su e con fi rm ed by th e B i bli ca l A nti qu i ti es o f
Ph i lo, as c rib
J m t th l i g ye r f t h fi r t nt ry A D f
ed b y Dr . a es o e c os n a s o e s ce u . . or
i t wri t r i
s hi e , t f th F l d h
n s t lly d Ez k i 12 if i n
a cc ou n o e oo , as a c ua use e . x v. .

o r d r t l b r t th di v i p h i G n v i i i 2 1 f Th i w i ll b e n fr m
e o e a o a e e ne s ee c n e . . . s s ee o

th f ll wi g
e o tr t i whi h th p g i t rp l t d b tw n v r 2 1 nd
o n ex ac , n c e a ssa e n e o a e e ee e se s a
22 f G n v i i i i
o e l. d w i thi n b r k ts A d G d
en c o s e i d I w i ll n t g i n ac e s : n o sa : o a a

r th rth f m n k f th g i f m
cu s e e ea or h e rt h t h l ft ff ( i )
a
’
s sa e, or e u se o an s
’

a a e o s c
fr m hi y th
o sA d t h r f r I w i ll n t
ou i n
n d tr t t h
e e o er ll li v i o a a n as
.

g y g e g es o o e a
l h v d na e [ t i t h ll b wh n t h dw ll r p n e rth h v i ed
B o e. u s a e, e e e e s u o a a e s nn ,
Iwi ll j dg th m b y f mi
u e by t h w d
e by fi e a b y p ti l n ( li t d t h )
ne o r es or or r or es e ce ea
.
,
an d th r h ll be e s rt h q k a d t h y h ll b
e ea tt er d i t p l
ua n t
es , a n e s a e sca e n o a c es o
i nh b i t d (
a th pl
e f t h i r h b i t t i n h ll b
or , e a ces o tt r d) B t I w i ll n t
e a a o s a e s ca e e . u o
 13 6 C R EATION A ND TH E DR AGON MYTH
many feature s i n the story of Paradis e l though no e quivalent of ,

t h e s tory its e lf h as b ee n recover e d In the l e g e nd of Adapa for .

,

e xample wi s dom and immortality a r e the prerogative of the

,

god s an d the winning of immortality by man i s bound up with

,

e ating the Food of Life and drinking the Water of Life ; here

too man i s le ft with t he gift of wi s dom but immortality i s with ,

held And the as s ociation of winge d guardian s with the S acred

.

Tre e in Babylonian art i s at l e ast s ugge s tive of the C herubim and

the Tre e of Life The very site of Eden has now been identified
.

in S outh ern Babylonia by means of an old boundary -s tone

acquired by the Briti s h Mu s e u m a year or t w o ago 2
.

But I need not now d e tain you by going over th i s familiar

ground S uch po ss ibl e echoe s from Babylon seem to s ugge s t
.

r e -e xilic influence rather than late borrowing and they surely

p ,

ju s tify us in inquiring to what periods of dir e ct or indirect

contact earlier than the Captivity the res emblances between
, ,

, Hebrew and Babylonian id e as may be traced One point which .

,

we may re gard as definitely s e ttl e d by our new mat e rial i s that ,

the s e s torie s of the C reation and of the early hi s tory of the world
were not of S emitic origin It is no longe r possible to regard .

the Hebrew and Babylonian Vers ions a s de s cended from common

S emi tic originals For we have now recovered s ome of tho s e
.

original s and they are not S emitic but S umerian Th e question

,
.

thus re s olve s itself into an inquiry as to period s d u ring which

the H e brews may have come into direct or indirect contact wi th
Babylonia .

There are three pre exilic periods at which it has been sug
-

ge s ted the H ebrews or the ancestors of the race may have

, ,

acquired a knowledge of Babylonian traditions The earliest of .

the s e i s the age of the patriarchs the traditional ancestors of the ,

H ebre w nation The s econd period i s that of the settlement in

.

C anaan which we may put from 1 20 0 B c to the e s tablishment

, . .

of D avid s kingdom at about 1 00 0 B c The third period i s that

’

. .

of the later Ju da ean monarchy from 7 3 4 to 5 86 B c the date of , . .

,

the fall of Jerus alem ; and in this last period there are t w o
Cf . es p Ski nne , G enes i s ,
ec i a lly r 9 0 it pp
Fo r th e la e s di sc us si on o f t he
. . t t
Se rp nt
e r
a n d t h e T ee o f Li fe
,
s u ge s ed b y Dr
g S k i t
n ne s su a y o f the . r ’
mm r
e v1 d Fr z r
a e i n E ssa s a nd S t u d i es
p esented to Wi lli a m Ri dgewa y
z
p§
<

g
s ee
y r

PP
2
S ee B a byloni a n B ou nda r S tones i n the B r iti s h M u s eu m
y 7 6 if , a nd pp .

c f G eogr a h i ca l Jou r na l Vol X L N

.
p , , o 2 ( A ug , . . 1 47 For th e la es
. p . . t t
rv w
e ie o f t h e e i den c ev r t t
e la i ng t o th e s i e o f a a di s e s e e B oi ss i e r
,
Pr
, La s i u a i o n t t
p r t rr tr
d u a a di s e es e i n L e Globe
,
t
LV Mé oi es G ene a .
,
m r ( v ,
 P R OBLEM OF B A BYLON IAN PAR ALLEL S 13 7

reigns of special importance in thi s connexion th os e of Ah a ,

( 7 3 4 7 2
—
0 B c ) and Man as s.eh (
. 6 9 3 6 3 8 B —
.

With r e gard to the earlie s t of the s e period s tho s e who s upport ,

the Mosaic authorship of t h e Penta teuch may quite consi s tently

as s ume that Abraham heard the legends in Ur of the Chaldees .

An d a simple retention of the trad itional vi e w s eem s t o me a far

prefe rable attitu de to any elaborate att e mpt at rationalizing it .

It i s admitted th at Ar abia w a s the cradle of th e S emitic rac e ;

and the mo s t nat ural line of advance from Arabia to Ar am and
thence to Palestine would be up the Euphrate s Valley S ome .

writers ther e fore a s sume tha t nomad tribes pers onified in the ,

traditional figure of Abraham may have campe d for a time in ,

the neighbourhood of Ur and Babylon and that they may have

carried the Babylonian stories with them in their wanderin gs a n d ,

continued to preserv e them during their long s ub s equen t hi s tory .

But even granting that s uch nomads would have taken any
,

intere s t in traditions of settled folk this view har dly c omm e nd s ,

itself For stories received from foreign s ources b e come more

.

and more trans for m ed in the course of centuri e s 1

The vivid .

Babylonian colouring of t h e Gene s i s narratives ca nnot be re con

ciled w ith thi s explanation of their so urce .

A far greater number of writers hold that it was after their

‘

arrival in Palestine that the Hebrew patriarchs came into conta ct

with Babylonian cul ture It i s true that from an early period .

S yria w as the scene of Babylonian invasions and in the firs t ,

lecture we noted s ome newly recovered e vidence upon this point .

Moreover the dyna s ty to which Hammurabi belonged cam e

,

originally from the north-eas t ern border of C anaan and Hammu

rabi himself exercised authority i n the we s t Thus a pla u sible .

cas e could be made out by e xponents of this theory es pe cially as ,

many parallel s were noted between the Mo saic legi s lation and
that contained in H a mmurab i s C ode But it i s now generally ’

recognized that t he featur e s common to both the Hebrew and

the Babylonian legal system s may be paralleled to -day in the
S emitic Ea st and elsewhere and cannot therefore be cited as
2
,

1
Thi s j t i n w ld n ot f c o r pply t o M N i ll
ob ec o ou gge te dol t i n u se a . av
’
e s su s so u o ,

th t
a i f rm t b l t f rm d t h m di m f tr n m i i n
cu n e o a e s o B t it e th r e e u o a s ss o . u s au o

h i m lf d d t h t h d o
se a s n ot d ny i t
a j t r l h r te r ;
e es Th T t f e s c on e c u a c a ac se e e ex o

th Old T t m
e t (S h w i h L t r e
es a en p 32
c e c ec u s, . .

2
S e Cook Th L w f M
e , nd th C d
e a f H mm bi p 2 8l i ; Driv r
s o os es a e o e o a u ra ,
. . e ,

G n i p
e es s , vi f ; n d f J h n Th L w f B byl ni nd th L w f th
. x x x . a o . o s, e a s o a o a a e a s o e

H b w P p l ( S hw ich L ct r e
e re eo es cpp 5 0 if
e e u s, . .
138 C R EATION A ND THE DR AGON MYTH

e vi denc e of c ultu ra l co n ta c t Thu s the hypothe s i s that t h e .

H ebre w pa triarch s w e re s u bj e c ts of Babylon in Pal e s tine i s not

r e q u ire d a s an explanation of t he facts ; and our firs t p e riod
s till s tand s or fa ll s by th e qu e s tion of t h e Mo s aic authors hip of

t he P e ntat eu ch which mu s t b e decided on quite oth e r ground s

,
.

Tho s e who do not accept t h e traditio na l V iew wi ll probably be

co n te nt to rul e this firs t p e riod out .

D u ri n g the s econd period that of the s e ttlement in C anaan , ,

the H e bre ws came into contact with a p e opl e who had u s e d the
Babylo n ian language as the common m e dium of communication
throughout the N e a r Eas t It i s an interesting fact that among .

t h e num e rou s letter s found at T e ll e l-Amarna w e re two texts of

quite a di ffe re nt character The s e were legend s both in the form .
,

of s chool exe rci s e s which had been written out for practice in
,

the B abylon ian to ngue One of them w a s the legend of Adapa

.
,

in which we note d ju s t n ow a di s tant res e mblance to the H e brew

s tory of Paradi s e It s e ems to me we a re her e s tanding on
.

rather fi rm e r ground and provi s iona lly we might p la c e the

beginning of our proce ss after the tim e of H e br e w contact with
the Canaan ite s .

Und e r the e arlier Hebrew monarchy there w a s no fresh influx

of Babyloni a n c u ltur e into Pa l e s tin e That do es not occur till .

our la s t main period the lat e r Ju da ea n monarchy when in con

, , ,

s e qu e nce o f the we s tward advance of As s yria t h e civilization of ,

B a bylo n w a s onc e more carri e d among t h e p etty S yrian s tates .

I s ra e l w a s fi rs t drawn into th e circl e of A s syrian influenc e when ,

Ahab fought a s the ally of Be n hadad of D amascu s at t h e battle

of Kark ar in 8 5 4 B c ; and from that date onward the nation
. .

w a s m en ac e d by t h e invading pow e r In 7 3 4 B c at the invita . . .

,

tion of Ahaz of J u dah Ti gla th-p i les e r IV d e fi nit e ly interve ned

,

in t he a ffairs of I s ra e l For Ahaz purch as ed hi s help against the

.

alli d armie of I rael and S yria n the S yro Ephraimiti s h war

e s s i -
.

Ti gla t h-p i le s e r thr e w h i s forc e s agai n s t D ama s cu s a n d Is rael and ,

Ahaz becam e hi s vas s al l To thi s period wh e n Ahaz lik e .

, ,

Pa na mmu II ran at the wh e el of h i s lord t h e k i n g of A ssyria

, ,

we may a scribe the fi rs t marked i nva s ion of A s syrian influenc e

over Ju dah Trac e s of it may be seen in the altar which Ahaz
.

cau sed to b e e re ct e d in Jer us al e m afte r the patt e rn of the A ss y

r ian altar at D ama s cus 2
We s a w in t h e fi rs t l e cture in t h e
.
,

monum e nts w e have re cover e d of Pa n a mmu I and of Bar-re kuh ,

how th e li fe of another small S yrian state w a s in e vitably changed

2 Ki n gs x vi . 7 if .
2
2 Ki n gs x vi . 10 fl
'

.
 1 40 C R EATION A ND THE D R AGON MYTH
h ave previou s ly b e en felt But I think there is a wider and in
.

that s e n s e a bett e r an s wer than tha t

.

I do not propo s e to embark at this late hour on wha t e thnolo

gi s ts kn ow a s the Hamitic problem But it is a fac t that many
’
.

s triking parall e l s to Egyptian religiou s b e lief and practice ha ve

been traced among rac e s of the S udan a n d Eas t Africa These .

are p e rhap s in part to be e xplained a s the re sult of contact and

cultural inh e ritance But at the s ame time they are evidence
.

of an African but non -Negroid s u bs tratum in the religion of

, ,

ancient Egypt In spit e of h i s proto S emitic s train the anci ent

.
-
,

Egyptian him s e lf never b e came a S emite Th e Nile Valley

.
,

at any rat e until the Mo s l e m conque s t w as s tronger than i ts

,

inva d e rs it r e ceived and moulded th e m to its own ideal Thi s .

quality w as s hare d in som e degre e by the Euphrates Valley .

But Babylonia w a s not endowe d with Egypt s isolati on ; she

’

w a s alway s O pen on t h e s outh and we s t to the Arabian nomad ,

who at a far e arli e r period s ealed her S emitic type .

To s uch racial divi s ion and a ffinity I think w e may confidently

trace the influence e x e rted by Egypt and Babylon respectively
upon Hebrew tradition .
 A P P EN D IX E S

I . C OMPA R ATI VETABLE OF T H E S UME R IAN S EMITI C

,

BABYLONIAN HELLENI S TI C A ND HEB R EW V E R

, ,

S ION S OF C R EATION ANTE D IL UVIAN HI S TO R Y

, ,

A ND THE D ELUGE

II THE ANTE DILUVIAN KING S OF

. B E ROS S US A ND
THE S UME R IAN DYNA S TI C LI S T
 1 42
A P P E NDIX I

C OMP A RA TI E V TA B LE OF TIIE S U MER IA N, S E MITIC

B A B Y LO NIA N, H EL LE NIS T IC , A ND H E B RE W VE RS IO NS
O F C R E A TION, A NTE DILU VIA N H IS TORY ,
A ND TH E
D E LU G E

NB . .
— P a ra lle ls w it h th e n ew Su m ri e an Vri e s on a r e pri nt ed i n h ea y y v t pe .

S U M E R IA N V E R S IO N S E V E N TA B L E TS GIL G A M E S H E P IC , X I

{ NO h e a v e n rt h N h v
o r ea rth o ea en or e a
F i r t Cr t i
s fr m Pri m v l w t r g d
ea on o ae a a e - o s

p r i m v l
ae a w t r W it h A u
a e
p T i m t M mm s —
a a , u u

ou t fl i t ; f L t r G r ti f
c on c c . a e e ne a on o
S m ri
u e V i ]an L k h m L kh m
e rs on a u- a a u
A h r Ki h r ns a —
s a
Th e g r t g d ea o Bi rth f g r t g d
s o ea o s
A nu E l i l E nk i
, n nd ,An N di mm d ( = E ), a u, u u a
Ni k hn gars a
g r t i ng A p u n d
a , c eaT i m t r v lt s a a a e o
d i ti
e es C q t f A p u by E on ues O s a
C q t f Ti m t b y on u es O a a
M rd k S n g d a u as u - o

Cr t i n f v ri g f ea o O co e n or
h v n fr m h lf f ea e o a O
Ti m t b dy t k e p
’
a a s o o e
h e w t r i pl
,

r a e s n a ce
C r ti n f l mi ri ea o o u na es

[ Cr t i on f v g t t i ] ea O e e a on
R easo n f m n or r R a n f
’
m n
s c r ea ea s o or a
’
s c ea
t i n w r h ip f g d
o o s t i n w r hi p f g d
o o s o o s O o s
C r ti
ea fm n
on o Cr t i n
a f m n fr m ea o O a o
Cr t r bl d
’
nd ea o s oo a
fr m b o on e
Cr t i
ea f nim l
on o a [ Cr ti f ni m l ]
a s ea on O a a s
Hy m n on S v nt h T bl t e e a e
Cr ti
ea f k ing d m
on O o
5 A t dil n e i n i ti uv a c es An t e dil v iu an c i ty
Er i d B d
u, L r ka a a S h u ru p p ak
S i pp r S h
,

a , pp k u ru a
G d d r m nk i n d r fl
’
o s ec e e a s Gods d e c ee ood, th e
d tr
es ti
uc by fl on O
g od d e s s t pr t t
Is h ar o es
N i n t p r t ti g
u o es n
Zi us u d h u, fD l er o o e u U t -n a p i s htim h r f e o O
d p ri t
,
ki ng an es
Zi d p i ty
’

us u u s e
W a rn ing f Zi do usu u W a rn i n g Of Ut-n ap i sh
by E ki i n d r
n m ea t i m b y Ea i n d r e a m
Ziu su d v l h g
’
u s ess e a u e S h i p : l 2 0 x 12 0 x 1 2 0 c u
ship t tr v
b i s ; 7 s o i e s ; 9 d i i s i ons
m
All k i nds O f a ni a ls
Fl o o d a nd s torm for r m
Fl o o d f o
‘
v h ea y ra i n
7 day s t r
a n d s o m for 6 da s
y
p
S h i o n Mt Ni s i r .

tm t
A b a e en wt r
Of a e s
t t r
e s e d b y b i ds
r
S a c ifi c e t o S un- od i n
g wt
S a c ri fi c e i ht s w ee
s hi
p v r m t
s a ou on ou n a i n
A nn a nd E nlil a p ea sed p Ea s
’
pr t to es t o E nl i l
t t
Imm o r a li y of U t-na
Im m rt o ali ty O f Z i us udu w
pi sh ti m a nd hi s i fe
 A PP ENDIX II

THE A NTE DILU VIA N K INGS OF B E RO S S U S A ND THE

S U ME R IA N DY NA S TIC LIS T

1 1 ma y b e
1
O f as s s a n c e t i n tab ul ar fo r m the
it to th e r e a de r to r epea

e q u i v a l e n ts t o th e m yt hi ca l ki n gs O f B e r o ss us w h i ch a r e b r ie fly d i s

c u s s e d i n L e ctu r e I In th e follo w i ng t a b l e th e t w o n ew e q u ati ons

.
,

O b ta i n e d fr om t h e ea r li es t s e cti o n O f t h e S u me r i an D y nas tic L i s t a r e ,

pri nte d i n he avy t yp e The e s tab lis h e d e q u ations to oth e r n a me s a r e .

1

pri nte d i n or dina ry typ e with ou t b ra cke ts wh il e th os e for whic h w e ,

s h o u l d p o ss i b l y s ee k o t h e r e qu iv al en ts a r e e n cl o s e d with i n b ra c k e ts
2
.

Aru r u h as n ot b e en i nc lu de d a s a p oss ib l e e q u ivale nt for A hwpos ”

.
3

A h wpo s

] A la
i
A Oa n a po s
’ ’
A }\ Oi7ra pos ,

p or us , A lap au r us
A lni elon

M eydh a po s, M eydha vo s, A me
ga la r u s

A den/ e s , A dw s E tana
E bebcbpea x E n m e du r an k i
'
E beboi pa x os , os ,

E dora nchus
A memp hs inu s [ A m el S
- i n]

Q n dp ‘

m
s [ U b a r -
T u tu ]

Eic ov dpos , Ei s ov dpo s, 2 [ m flpos Kh a s i s a tra , A trak h as i s

1
S ee ab o e ,
3 1 if v pp
For t h e oyal na e s of Be r oss u s , sec E us eb chr on
. . r m . .

lib p r i , e d S ch oen e , c O ls 7 f , 3 1 if
. . . Th e la i ni ed a i a n s c o es ond t o fo . s t z v r t rr p rm
rm
.

i n th e A e n i a n t ra n sla t l on o f Eu s eb i u s
r q v t mm
.

1
For t h e p i nc i p al di s cu ss i on s O f e u i a len s , s ee H o el, P r oc S oc B i bl . .

XV
.

A r ch , Vo l . .
p p 2 43 if , a nd D i e a ltor i enta li s che n D enlcmd ler u nd da s
mm r
.

A lte Tes ta me nt pp 2 3 ill ; Z i e n D i e K e i li n s ch r f

i t en u n d d as A l te
pp
.
,

Tes ta ment , 3 rd e d 5 3 1 if. a nd c f Le n o rma n t , L es or igi nes de

rv r p
. . .

’
l h is toi r e, I p p 2 1 4 ff S e e a ls o D i e . G e n es i s l 0 t h e.d 80 f . .

r p r
.
, ,

S k i nn e , Genes is , p 1 3 7 f Ba ll, G enes i s , . 5 0 ; a nd G o don, E a r ly Tr a d i ti ons

. .

of G enes i s 4 6 ff
p p , . .

1
1 ‘
q t
1 O r 11 9 s u gg es ed e u a i on O f Lal-u r-a li mm a t i h A k mpos , s ee a b o e ,
”
wt v
p . 33 n3 ‘
.

r tw t
The h u n d e d a ndr en y sa s or y ea rs a s s i g n e d b y B e r o s su s for

rt t v t v
t he d u a i on O f t he A n e d i lu i a n d na s
y y ( s e e a b o e 3 1 n a r e di s i b u ed p tr t
w m m r v w rt r
. .
, ,

a s follo s a ong t h e t e n k i n s ; t h e nu b l fi i ‘
g b e s a r e g i e n e o s n sa s

w
follo ed bt r q v t
y h ei r wt r
e u i a le n s i n y ea s i h i n b a c k e s : 1 Ten sa s ’
t r
r rt w v t
.

2 Th ee
.
3 Th i e e n 4 T el e
. 5 Ei g h e e n .

t t
.

6 Ten 7 Ei gh e e n 64 800 8 Te n 9 Ei gh
t
. . .

10 Ei gh e en .
 APPEN DIX II 1 45

For co mparison with B er oss u s it may b e us e fu l to b r t fr om

a s t ac th e
S ume rian Dyn as ti c Li s t th e mes occ u r r i ng i n the e ar li es t
r oy a l na

e xtan t dyn as ti e s Th ey ar e .
giv e n
b e l ow w i th v a ri an t forms from
d up lica te copie s O f the lis t an d agai n s t eac h i s a dde d th e n umbe r O f
,
-

e ars i ts o w n e r i s re co rded to hav e r ule d T h e figu res giv in g th e tota l

y .

d ur ati on O f e ach dy nas ty e ith er i n th e s umm ar i e s O r u n de r th e se p ar ate

,

r e igns a r e s o m et i m e s n ot c omp l e te l y p re se rv ed ; i n s u ch cases an a:

,
i s a dde d t o th e t ota l O f th e fi gur e s s till l e gib l e Ex cep t i n th os e case s .

re fe rr e d t o i n th e foot-note s all th e n am e s are writte n i n t he S umerian

,

lis ts wi thou t the determina tiv e fo r go d

KING D OM OF R IS K .

( 2 3 ki ngs 1 8, 000 + x y e ar s , 3 m o nths, 3 days )

y e ars
G alum um, Kalumu m 9 00
Z u gagi b , Z ugak ib 840
A rp i , A r p in , A r b u m 720
Et an a 1
63 5 (or 6 2 5 ) years
P ili 41 0 y ears
E nme n u nna, E n mennu nna ‘
611
Me lamkis h 9 00
B ar salnu nna

KINGD OM OF EA NNA ( Emacs ) .

6

(Ab ou t 10 1 2
— ki ngs ; + 56 y ears )
1 . Me s k i ngas h e r 3 25 y ea rs
2 . E nmerk ar 42 0
3 . Lu galb a n da "

1
v p
Ga p of s e e n, O r oss i bly ei gh , na es t m .

1
m
Th n a e E a na i s t wr tt
i e n i n t h e li s s i h and i h ou th e de e t wti nati ve wt t t rm
for g o i e
1
r t
Th e ead i ng O f t h e la s s i gn i n th e n a e i s u n k n o n A a ri a n fom Of w v t rm
m p wt
.

t h e n a e os si b ly b e gi n s i h B a li .

1
rm
Th i s fo i s g i en on a f v ent O f a la e A ssy i an c o y of t h e li s ; c f t r p t
p v p
.

S tu di es i n E as t er n H i s tor y, Vol I I, 1 43 , a n d s ee a b o e,
. 3 1, n 4
r p t r m
. . . .

5
Ga p O f fou , or os si b ly h ee , n a es .

6
Ea nna w as t h e g e a e r t t mp
le Of E ech r
In th e S ec ond C olu n Of th e . m
t
li s ‘
t h e ki ngdo
’
m r r v p
i s e c o de d t o h a e as s e d f o Ki sh to Ea n n a , b ut th e r m
t r m
la t e na e d oe s n ot occ u i n t h e s u r mm r
a y ; for t h e ob able c h an g e i n the i le pr tt
O f t h e k i ngdo m
s ee a b o e , p 3 6 , n 3
, v . . .

1
m
Th e n a e Lu ga lb a nda i s wr tt
i en i n th e li st s wi h an d i hou the d e er
'

t wt t t
mi nat i ve for g od
K .
1 46 APPEN D IX II
4 . D umu zi 1
(i . e . Tammu z) 1 00 y ears
5 . Gi s h b ilga me s 1
(i . e . G i lgames h) 1 2 6 ( o r 1 8 6 ) y ea r s
6 . .
] lu gal y e ars

K NG DO M O F U R
I .

( 4 ki n gs ; 1 7 1 y e ar ) s

1 Mes anni pa da
. 80 years
2 Me s k iag nu n na
. 30
3 . Elu [ . 25
4 B al u [
. . 36

K INGDOM OF A WA N .

( 3 k i ngs 3 5 6 y e ar s )

A t this p oint a great gap o ccu rs i n ou r princ ip a l lis t Th e n ame s O f .

som e O f th e mi s s ing
‘
k
i ngdo ms may be infe rre d fr om the s u mm ar ie s ,
b u t th e i r re lative o r de r is t h em w e k n o w t h e
u nc e rtai n . Of t w o Of

du r ati on a s e con d Ki n gdom O f U r c o nta i ni ng fo u r k i ngs a nd las ti ng

,

for a h u ndr e d an d eigh t y e a rs a n d a noth e r k i ngdo m the n a me o f , ,

wh ich i s not p re s e rv e d c ons is ti n g O f on ly on e ki ng w h o r u led for

,

s e v e n y e ars Th e dy nas tic s u c c e s s io n o nl y again b e c om es as s u r e d with

.

th e o p enin g O f th e Dy na s tic ch ro nic le p u blis he d b y P er e S ch e i l a n d

rece ntl y ac qu ire d b y the B ritis h Mus e u m It will b e n ote d that with .
5

t h e K i ngdom O f U r th e s e p a r ate re ign s l as t fo r de ca de s and n ot

h u ndr e ds O f y e ars e a ch s o t h at w e h ere s e e m t o a p p roa c h ge n u ine
,

t r a dition th ou gh t he Ki ngdo m O f A wa n m ak e s a p a rtia l re v e rs ion t o

,

myt h s o far as i ts du ration i s conc e rne d Th e tw o s uggeste d e q u a tio ns .

with A nte dilu via n kings O f B er o s s u s b oth occ u r in th e earliest King

dom o f Kis h a n d li e we ll with in th e S u m eria n my th ica l p erio d Th e .

s e con d O f t he r u l e r s c on c e rn e d E nme n u n n a A mm e n o n ) i s p la ce d i n
( , ,

S u me ri a n traditi on s e ve r al th ou san d y e ars b e fore the re p u te d s u cces s ion

O f th e g o ds Lu galb a n da a n d Ta mm u z a n d O f t h e n ati o nal h e r o G ilga

me s h to the th rone O f E re ch In the firs t l e ctu re s ome re markab l e .

6

po i nts of gene ral r e se mblanc e hav e al rea dy b e e n p ointe d ou t b etw ee n

He b re w an d S u me ri an t r aditions O f th e s e e arl y ages O f the wo rld .

1
m
Th e na e Du u i i s m z
i en i n t h e li s wr tt
i h t he d e e i na i e for god twt t rm tv
1
m
Th e na e G1s h bi lga mes i s i en i n th e li s i h th e d e e wr tt
i na i e for t wt t rm tv
g od 0

1
t r
Ga p O f ab ou fou , five , Or si x k i ngs
t
.

Wa n i ng .

0 S
v pp
ee a b o e , 2 7, 3 6 f .
6 See ab o e
.
,
v pp .
1 48 IN D EX
A h r
s u -b an i - al
p , 1 39 ; lib r ry a of, 3 1 , 9 4, B i rt h f th g d 1 14 1 20 3 ; r y l
, o
e o s, ,
- a o a ,

117 1 06 ; g d d f 53 1 12 o e ss o

B i r th -
t mpl 1 05
,
.
,

r r
.

A h s - u n asi -pa l, k i ng, 15 e e s, .

tr t r
.

A s i a , 4, 2 8, 4 7 f Cen an d S ou h e n , al B i may
s 60 a,
B it m 81
.
.

45 u en ,

B l d d r i k i g f 48
.

tm m r t
.

As i a t i c c os u e , 1 3 ; e p i e of Egy p , oo n n o

B t r p r t ti n
, , .

10 oa s , of th S
e 1 03 u n, e es e n a o s

m m t 7
.

A s s , s y b oli s of, 7 4 f i
o anc e n ,
B ti 1 0 1
.

r w t r v
.

A ss y i a , es w a d a d a n c e of, 1 7 , 1 3 8 oe o a, .

r r
.

As ys i a n i n fl u e n c e i n S y i a 1 5 -1 7 ; B i i
o ss er, A 136
B ph r 1 0 1
.
.
,

tr
,
s c u lp u e , 1 7 os o us,
B w di vi
.

r
.

A s ta t e , 1 2 o 85 1 43 n e,
r t d P r f J H 23 f 104
.
, ,

r t r
.

A s t ologi c a l h eo i es , 44 f ea s e o

Bri k -g d 1 1 0
. .
, . . .
, ,

r B
.

A s t ology , ab y lo n i a n , 45 c o
Bri t i h A i ti 10 46
.
,

tr m r
.

A s on o y , B a b y lon i a n a n d G ee k , 1 8 s s s oc a on ,

Bri ti h M m 2 7 3 1 107 122 1 3 6

,
.
.

A te t h , 2 5 ; se e A t h e t . s u se u , , , , , ,

A th e t , k i n g, 2 5 146
t Br z g lt r 2 8
. .

A th ot h e s , 2 5 se e A t h e t , Te a on e -a e cu u e, .

t
.

A t h ot h i s , 2 5 se e Te a B ii
r w R E 65
nn o
B dg D E A W lli 48 1 05 7 1 1 9
, ,
. . .
.

A t rakh as i s , 3 4, 43 , 7 1 , 1 44 le ge n d, 109 ; u e, r . . a s, — .

r
.
, ,

v e s i on of D e lu ge , 43 , 7 0, 7 7 B u rna b i h k i g 88 u r as n
B r y Pr f C F 1 0
.
, ,

t
.

A u m , g od , 1 0 4 f u ne o

m B h g 26
. . .
, ,
. .

k i n gdo of, 3 6 f , 146

‘
A w a n, 3 6 us on os ,

B y b l 9 12 ; Mi tr f 12
. . .

’
os , s ess o

l g d 1 2 ; f H rr
.
, ,
B
'
a a , o 16 o a an ,
B b y l i H b r w tr di ti n 4 ; i
.
,

a on , n e e a o n C a i n , 3 8, 1 43
3 2 6 2 1 43 ; S m i t i tri m p h
,
.

B e r os su s , e c u C a i n i t e gen e a logy , 3 8
t 1 29 ; b i ld i g f 1 2 3 ; F i r t Dy r m
.
, ,

a u n o s Cai o, 2 3 f Mu s e u , 1 3
ty f 2 0 3 6 49 1 29 t tr
. .
, ,

n as o , C a li p h a e , Ea s e n , 9 8
g r fr m fl d i
, , , . .

B b yl i
a d on a , 96 ; an e o oo n, C a n aa n , 3 , 1 0 , 1 3 6 —8
th r t v zt t
.

S ou 8 e n, C an aa ni e c i i li a i on , 1 0 ; p op u la i on,
hr i v il i z
.

B byl i
a l gy 2 2 2 7
on a n c on o o c a 14
ti r d l f 2 2 29 1 1 9 ; i fl t
.
, ,

on, c a e o , , ,
n u e nc e , C an aa n i e s , 1 3 8 .

18 131 9 ; l g g 10 - an u a e, C a pp a d oc i a , 1 4
A t di l v i r m
. .
,
B d
a i ty 5 8 1 42 n e u an c C a ch e i sh , 1 6 f
B gh d d 80 9 6 ; R i lw y 9 8 rm
. .
, ,
a a a a Ca e l, 5

B hr i r tr
. .
, , ,
a 86 e n, C a p e n e -go d , 1 1 0
B li r tr t
. .

a k i g 1 45 n , . C a p e n a s S e le , 1 4 .

B ll 0 J 1 44
a C as p i a n , 4 5
Bl[ rF r t m t
. .
,
. .
,

a u k i g 3 6 1 46 n C e da o es , 8 f ou n a i ns , 9
B k E J 60
.
,
. .
, .

an s, C e d a rs o f Leb a n on , 8
tr m F rt
. .
,
. .

B a r -r e k u b , k i n g , 15 f , 1 3 8 ‘
C h ap e s of C o i n g o h b y Da y 103
r
. . .

B a rsa lnu n n a , k i n g, 3 4, 1 45 C h a le s , C a n on R H , 1 1 7
r
. . . .

-
B a r s u r , of Y a d i , 15
’
C h e b a , 2 0 f , 13 5
B r r r m
. .

a ton , P of G A , 2 1 , 3 1 f 88, 126 C h e u b i , 20 , 1 3 6

B r U vr t
. . . . .

a u c h , A p o ca ly p se of, 3 8 1 1 7 C h i ca go, n i e s i y o f, 6 0
B r t r wr
. .
,
a s i n -i r i ga i on 9 7 C h i e a , Dr Ed a d , 2 1
B r r
.
,
. .

e e s h e b a, 5 C h i ld -b e a i ng , La dy o f, 1 1 2
B t r mt
. .

ee le o f h e pe a , 1 0 4 K C h i ne s e y h o lo 1
gy , 1 9
r r t
. .

B e l a n d t h e D a gon , 1 1 6 C h i n ese Tu k e s a n , 45
B t r
. .

eli -i li , g od d e s s , 5 3 , 6 3 f , 84 C h on i c le s , S e c on d B ook of, 1 3 9

B r
. .

en ed i te , G , 7 C h on ology , 2 2 , 2 7
B t
. . .

e n h a d a d II, 1 3 8 C i li c i a n c o as , 9
t v
. .

B e ros s u s , 22 , 5 2 , 1 29 ; A n ed i lu i a n C i rc u mc i s i o n , 47
t v t mt
.

c i t i e s of, 40, 60 f , 6 6 , 1 43 A n e d i lu i a n C i y c ou n c i l, S e i i c , 70
v z t tr r
. .

k i n gs o f, 3 1-4, 3 8, 40 , 60 f , 1 44, 1 46 ; C i i li a i on , a d i ti on a l o i g i ns of, 3 9 f

r tm r r
. .

c h o n ologi ca l s y s e o f, 3 0 -2 ; C e a C la y , P of A T , 2 1
m t r mm r m r
. . . .

t i on y h o f, 1 2 2 ; De lu ge v e s i on of, C o d e of H a u a b i ; s ee H a m u ab i
t t t
.

7 2 , 74 f , 7 9 , 82 f , 9 0 ; d y n a s i e s of, C o n s a n i n op le , 1 2 , 2 1 , 4 9
m r
. . .

2 7 ; h i s to ry of, 5 0 , 9 4 ; o n s te s of, C o ok , S A , 1 2 , 1 3 7
mr r r
. . .

1 1 8 ; s ou r c e s o f, 3 9 ; S u e i a n
pa al C ook e , P o f G A , 14 f . . . .

le ls t o, 60 f , 6 6 f , 90 , 1 2 7 , 1 42 f C o pa i c L ak e , 10 1
Bv
.

r
. . .

e an , E R 14 C op p e , 8
B mr m
.
, .

r
.

i n t e l- E i , ou nd , 1 9 C os mi c y e a , 3 1
Br
.

m r t
.

i ds i n De lu g0 et c r
y , 83 fw 9 2 1 3 1 C os ogony ; se e C e a i on
v
.

1 42 f .
C ou a d e , 4 7
 INDEX 1 49

r t
C ea i on , Ba b y loni a n poe m of, 1 1 4-23 ; Ea , god, 1 20 f , 1 42 ; d w e lli ng o f, 1 27 f ;
m t m
. .

s pe e c h o f,
L E gy p t i a n y h of, 1 02 f , 1 1 9 Su e 1 32 f ; t i tle o f, 5 7 ; i n
ri l t r S m rtv
. .

an acc ou nt f o , a e u e De lu ge na r a i e , 69 7 6 f , 84 f ;
myth f 1 23 5 ; H br w r
. .

i r an l
o , - see a so e e an d Ma d u k , 55 ; an d A s u
p ,
V r i e s on s . an d th e W o rm
, 1 26 f
Cr mb l m 1 6 r
.

t
e sc e n , as e e Ea g le, f i e n d o f E tan a , 29 ; fu n era ry ,
Cr
,
t m m
.

d i l -g d 46
oc o e o , 29 ; as c i y -e b le , 7 3
Cr w E gyp ti m
. .

o ns , 1 2 25 an, Ea nn a, 35 , 1 09 , 1 24 , ki n gd o
‘ ’
of, 35 f ,
°

l d ri ft
. .
,
C lt
u ur a
C m t Fr z 29 1 2 8
,
u on , an , Ea nn a t u m , pa t e s i , 1 1 2
C r r
. .
,

u fE
se o 1 26
a, Ear -p i e c i n g, 4 7
C r rt m
. .

u se s, Ph ni i oe 12 c an , Ea h , Na e of, 65 , 6 8, 75 f , 8 7 ; S oul
C yp r v
. .

of, 86 i n D e lu ge
8
u s, .
, 89 ; e rs i ons , 89 ,
1 42 f
rt
.

D ai ch es , Dr S , 1 3 2 , 1 35 Ea h
r
. . .

D ama s c i u s , 1 20 f . Eas t , Far , 4 7 ; Nea , 45 ; W a y o f t h e , 5 ’

.

D amas c u s , 5 , 1 6 , 1 38 E ba b b ar , 6 1
m
. .

D a k i n a , god d e ss , 1 2 1 Eb e li ng, E , 1 1 7 f
t
. . .

D an i e l, 1 33 f Boo k of, 1 1 7 E c li p i c , 44
t
. . .

D a on o s , ki n g, 3 2 see E a na . Ed e n , s i te of, 1 3 6 .

Da p hn ae , 1 3 Edfu , 46 , 1 05
m
. .

D a rd an e lle s , 1 0 1 . Edo , 5 .

D ar d a n u s , 1 0 1 Ed or a n c h us , 33 , 1 44 see En me d ur ank i
r t rm
. .

Da vi d , 1 3 6 E gg, c e a i on f o , 1 04
t t U r
. .

D az i m a , d e i y , 1 26 Egyp , 1 , 6 , f , 47 ; p pe , 6
t r tt wr r
. .

De a d , fu u e s a e o f, 103 god L 2 ; i n H eb e w t ra
f 46 o e 4—7
o ;
t r
,
.
,

De a d S e a , 4 f di i on, 4 ; D agon motzf of, 1 1 7 i so la °

o

tr w
.

De a t h , W a e s of, 40 , 9 0 t i on of, 1 40 ; S un - ors h i p i n, 46 f ;

t t m rr
. .

D ee p , foun ai n s of the , 13 1 ;
‘
l
’
s ee a so S y ri a n c ul s i n, 1 2 ; s y s t e of i i ga
t i on i n, 9 7 ; Eze k i e l an d , 1 3 2
D i r l-B h r i 1 04 106 v
.

e e a a E gyp t ian c hr on ology , 22 ; c i i liz at i o n,

D li t z h Fr i d r i h 1 25
, ,
.

e sc e c 6 -8 ; i nfl u e n ce , 2 , 1 2 E , 1 6 , 49 , 1 3 9 f
t ri f 4 1 1 00 f ; S m r tr
.
, , . .

D l g
e u e, s o es o , u e k i n gs , ea ly , 8, 24 -7 li e a tu re , 2 ,
ri V r i gr w t h f t m t
.

f 49 fl 102 ; y h ology , 48, 1 0 3 f , 1 22 ; p r e

‘

an e s on o , o o ra
di ti Fl d tr
. .

f 99 f ;
on o , l see a s o oo hi s o i c a rt , 7
D d r h 1 05 t
. . .

en e a , . Egy p i a n s, 1 3 .

De rk e t o , god d es s , 99 Ek ur , 1 9 , 1 1 9 , 1 2 4
r
. .

D e u ca li on , 9 9 , 1 0 1 El, S y i an god , 1 5
rm
. .

Dho e , P er e P a u l, 4 3 E lam , 3 7, 45
r
. .

D i as po a , 1 3
t r
.

D ilm u n, 86 , 89 f E le p h an i ne , 1 03 ; p a py i , 1 3
m tr tm t m
. .

D i se as e , yt h i n ea e n of, 1 26 f E lohi , 85 , 89 , 1 1 3
t w
. .

Di s k, Egyp i an i nged , 1 2 f , 1 7 ; of E lu [ k i n g, 3 6 , 1 46
t r
. . .

Ha h o , 12 E ni nnu , 7 3 f
v r r
. .

D i i n a t i on, o i gi n of, 3 8 ; foun d e of, 6 1 E n ki , god , 7 4,

w
.

Di an i y ah , 1 9 1 42 ;
r m t rr t
.

D agon , 1 1 7 f , 1 29 ; c o b a , 1 1 9 , 1 30 ; 1 1 7 ; i n pa n th e on , 1 1 2 ; i i ga i o n
m m m r
.

motif, -1 9 1 2 8
; y t h s 1 1 4-1 9
y th o f 1 25 -8
; e ss e nge o f, 1 2 7 ;
t tt
, , , ,
1 2 1 , 1 23 , 1 29 s ea of, 5 9 ; i le of, 5 7, 7 0 ; W a y
‘ ’

r m v t w
.

D ea di i n a i on, a rni n g, of 68 o f, 1 1 1 .

D e lu ge , 6 9 fl
t tt mr
.

Dr e a ri i s , i n e rp re a i on of S u e i a n , En li l, god , 5 1 , 58 f , 64 f , 6 7 , 6 9 , 7 1 , . .

7 2 if 7 3 , 83 -7 , 89 f , 1 09 , 1 1 1 f , 1 20 f ,
rv r t t
. . .

D i e , th e la e C a n on S R , 2 f , 1 4, 42 , 1 3 2 f , 1 42 ; ass oc i a i on of, w i th A n n ,
r r t
. . . .

1 3 1 , 1 3 7 , 1 44 53 f , 65 ; as c re ato , 5 6 ; C ea i on
tm
. .

D u b b i sa gur i , god , 35 my th of, 1 2 8 f ; pa la ce o f, 30 ; e p le~

m twr
. .

D u uzi , god a n d k i n g, 35 , 1 46 s ee o e o f, 1 9 ;
‘
W a y of, 1 1 1
’

mm z
.

Ta u . E n m ed u r an ki , k i n g, 33 , 38 , 6 1 , 68 , 1 44 .

Du n pae , go d , 1 1 2 En m e n n unn a , 3 1 s ee E nm e n u nn a
t t m
.
.

Dy n as i c L i s , S u e ri a n, 3 1 , 34-6 , 40, En me n u n n a, ki n g, -6 .

43 , 49 , 5 9 En me r k a r , ki n g, 35
t t
.

Dy n as i es , E gyp i an , 24 Is t, 24-6 , 3 8 ; En n ea d , o f H e li opo li s , 10 7 .

IIIr d , 8 ; V t h , 23 , 2 5 f 46 X VIIIt h Eno h, 3 7

c
.

1 0 , 1 04 ; XXIs t , 4 7 ; Ba b y lo n i an , 2 7 E n os h , 3 7 f
mr vr m
, .

S u e i an , 2 8 ii i ; se e a ls o B e ros s u s , En i on e n t , 45 f
th rt
.

M a ne o. E a os th e n es , 2 5 .
150 IN DEX
Er e ch , 3 0 , 5 9 f , 6 2 , 1 09 , 1 2 3 f , 1 45 f G od s , r f t h 120 3 M th r f th
B i th o e, — o e o e,
rth 29 3 9
.

r
.
.

b u i ldin g o f, 35 f ; e a ly k i ngs of, 29 , 1 12 o n ea

G ld m i th g d 1 10
.
, ,

m
.

- o
o f, 29 , 3 6
’
35 f k i n gd o o s
G rd
,
.

r
.
.

E i d u , 6 0 , 6 6 , 7 4, 1 1 0 , 1 2 3 fou n o D A R 1 3 1 1 44
on , r . . .
, ,
.

d a t i on of, 5 8 f D agon y h of 1 1 6 r m t G d
or D G B 21
on , r.

Gr i - d i ti
. . .
,
. ,

rt r
.

E y h a ea n S e a , 1 2 7 a n 1 10 e e s,

Gr v t Ar m
.
.

E sa gi la , 1 2 3 f a e s on e s , 13 f a aea n ,

G r k m y t h l gy tr d i ti
.

r
.

E sd a e lon , p la i n of, 5 ee 29 f o o ,
a on s o

r F r
.

E sd as , o u t h Book o f, 3 8 fl d 9 9 10 1
oo s, —

Gr k i Egyp t 1 3 i n S yri
.

zr
.

Es h mu n -a a II, 1 1 f , 1 8
‘
ee s, n 6; d a, an
B byl i
. . ,

E sn e h , 1 0 5 a 18 on a n s ,

G i fii t h F L l 2 7
.
.

2 9 3 2 — 4 1 44 f
Et ana , god a n d k i n g, r

p t i 9 7 2 f 75 f 1 1 2 ; d r m
, . .
, .

r t t tr
.
, ,

E u p h ra e s , c ea i on of, 6 2 ; a s c re a o , G d
u ea, a es , ea
f 7 5 ; li b t i
,
.
,
.
,

127 f G ra c c o -Ro a n c u l o f, 1 2 8 m t f 73 f
o , 76 ; ig .
, s n o , a on

tr t w
.

c on as e d i th Ni le , 4 7 , 9 9 c h a n ge s v a s e o f, 1 18 .

i n b e d o f, 1 9 , 6 1 , 9 8 ; i s e o f, 9 5 f ; r
tr
.

fl o od s o f, 9 5 — 8 ; c o n ol of, 9 6 f . H a b bani yah d e pre s s i on 9 6 , e s cap e , 98 .

s wma p s o f,
1 9 ,
9 8 ; a lle y ,
i n fl u e n ce V H a d a d go d , ,
15 .

o f, 1 40 Ha d s 1 1 7
e

r t r
.
. ,

E u s e b i us , 25 , 1 44 H aj j ou e , S y i an , 5 .

v r r r t r
.

E a n s , S i r A th u , P e s i d e n i a l A d d e s s H all H ,
. R , 2 4, 72 . .

of, a t Br t
i i s h A s s oci a i on , 1 0 t H a m, 3 7
mt r m
.

B
.

Ex od u s , oo k o f, 3 H a i i c p ob le , 1 40
m r
.
.

E y e o f Ra , 4 8 H a mu a b i , 1 3 7 C od e o f, 1 1 2 , 1 2 9,
z m t r
.

E e ki e l, 2 0 , 29 ; an d t h e G i lga e sh E pi c , 1 3 7 ; d y n as y of, 2 1 , p e i o d
85 , 1 3 2 —5 o o k o f ,
20 , 8 5 ,
1 3 2 -5 B . of, 7 0 .

H a pi , god , 47
rr
.

H a an , 1 6
Fl d
a con , d Ph r h 29 e c e as e a ao as ,
t r
H a h o , god d es s , 1 2 , 48, 1 05 f ;
.

es i F t
F lluj h 9 8
.
.

a a
v a ls of Ra a n d , 48
Far 6 1
.
,

t q
.

a,
H a ts h e ps u , u e e n , 1 04-6
F w ll D L R 9 9 1 08
.

a e r.
H au rfin , 5
F t T b l t f 3 0 1 22
.
,
. .
, ,

w
.

a e, a e s o ,
H a k of R a , 1 04
Fi - lt r 1 3
.
,

rm t
.

re a a ,
H ea d -d e fo a i on , 4 7
F i rm m t 1 3 0
.

m r
.

a en ,
H e a d la P f A C 1 00
Fi h r 0 S 2 0
.
o

v m
. .
,
.
, .

s e ,
H ea e n , ga te of 2 9 ; Na e of,
Fli t k i f 7 f
.
. .
,
,
n n e,
75 f , 87 ; S o u l of, 8 6 , 89
Fl d S m ri d ri pti f 7 6
.

rwVr
. .

oo u e an o ,es c on
H eb e e s i on s , o f D e lu ge , 42 , 4 8 , 6 9 ,
S mi ti B b y l i t f 77 f
,

e c- a on a n a ccou n s o
76 , 79, f , 89 E , 9 2 E , 1 3 1 ; o f
H br w f 1 3 1 ; w rd f
, .

r t r t
. . .

e t e a cc ou n s o o s or ,
,
C ea i on , 5 8, 1 08 , 1 3 0 o f C ea i on
70 ; l
F d f Lif 1 3 6
D l g s ee a s o e u e.
and D e lu ge , 136 ; se le e n t in tt m
oo

F t h W 35
o e, .
C an aa n , 1 0 ; agi ca l i n sc i p t i o n s , 20 m r
r
.

or s c
H e b on , 5
F rt G 2 4 6
, .
, .

r t
.

ou ca -
H e li op o li s , 46 , 48, 10 4 f ; G e a E n n ea d
Fr z r S i J m G 7 2 76 100 f 12 7
.
, .
,
.

a e r a es ,
of, 1 0 7
.
,
.
, , , ,

t v zt r
.

4 36 .
H e lle ni s i c c i i li a i on, 1 3 ; p e i od , 1 1 ,
40
t
.

G a lu mu m, k i n g , 2 8, 3 4, 3 7 , 1 45 H e lles po n , 1 4

r vr
. .

G a d e n -god , 1 1 0 H e lman d R i e , 45

r r
. .

G a d i n e , D r A lan H , 24, 29 H e q e t, god d es s , 1 06

rm
. . . .

G a t um d u g, godd e s s , 7 4 H e on , 5

t r rm t
. .

G a u i e , H , 2 3— 5 H e on h i s , 1 05

r r
. . .

G eb e l e l-A ak , 7
‘
H e o, 14
B r t
. .

G e nes i s , oo k of, 2 f , 1 8, 3 6 — 41 , 5 0 , 7 5 , . H e od o u s , 2 7 , 8 0 f
,
1 0 3 ,
1 0 7 ,
1 1 3 . .

82 , 88 f , 9 3 , 10 7 f , 1 27 , 1 2 9 f , 1 35
. . . . H es i od , 9 9 .

G e rj i n , 1 5 H e u ze y , Léon , 1 1 8
r z
. .

G e lan d , G , 1 00 H e e k i ah 1 39
m
.
,
. .

G i lga e s h , 1 3 , 3 0 , 35 f , 3 9 , 4 1 , 6 8, 9 3 , H i e r a k on po li s , 38
wt r
. .

1 46 ; i h li on s , 7 on s e a ls , 43 H i e a p oli s , 9 9
m t
.

a g i ca l p la n of, 89 i ll, G F , 1 3
m q r rt
. . . .

G i lga es h E p i c , 3 9 , 4 1 -3 u ot e d , 63 f , . H i llah b a n c h o f Eu ph a e s , 1 9 , 9 8 .

7 0 f , 7 8, 1 33 f H i lp r e c h t , H
V 2 0 f , 28 , 43 , 5 7 , 7 9
rr
. . . . .

G ili mma , god , 1 24 , 1 2 8 H i n d i y ah B a a ge , 9 8 C a n a l, 9 8

tt t mm t t r
. .

G i shb i lga me s , god a n d k i n g, 3 5 f , 1 46 ; H i i e i i g ra n s i n o S y i a , 1 4 ; i n

m
.

see als o G i lga e sh s c r i p t i on s , 1 7

t tt t m m m t
. .

G od Lis , 1 1 2 . H i i e -A r a ae a n on u en s, 1 7 .
 152 IN DE X
Ma , ri 8f Ne b -s r-ch e , 1 07t r
zz r
.

r
.

Ma s p e o , t h e la te S i r G as ton , 48 Ne b u c h a d n e a II, 1 3 9 .

rr r
.

Me d i te a ne a n , 4 , 8 ; Eas te n , 4 5 , 9 9 Ne c h o , 1 3 9
t r
. .

Me ga li t h i c b u i ld i n g, 4 7 Ne oli t h i c c u l u e , 22
m
.
.

M e gi d d o 5 Ne p h i li ,
r t
.
,

M e i ss n e , B , 7 0, 8 7 Ne p h h y s , god d e s s , 1 4, 1 05 7
r
. . .

Me la mk i s h , 3 4, 3 7 , 1 45 Ne ga l, god , 7 7
z
.

M e lc h i e de k , 3 6 Ni d u b , god , 7 4
m r
. .

Me p hi s , 2 4 , 1 04 Ni fl er , 1 8 ; s e e a ls o Ni pp u
'

m t t r t
. .

Me p h i e k i ng s , 2 6 Ni le , i nu n d a i on of, 47 , 9 5 ; c o nt a s e d
w i th Ti gri d E p h t
.

M e n e s , k i n g, 2 5 s an u ra e s , 9 9 1 23 i n
v 1 03 ; V ll y 46 1 40 ; i rri g
.
,

Me n t h u , god , 1 05 h ea e n, a e a
ti f 9 7
.
, ,
M e s a n n i p a d a , k i ng, 3 6 , 1 46 . on o , .

M e s k i agn u n n a , k i ng, 3 6 , 1 46 Ni l -g d 4 7
e o
Ni mr d D m 9 7 f
.
.
,
Me s k i n ga s h e r , k i ng, 3 5 f , 3 9 , 1 45 '
o s a
m rv r r
. .
, .

Me s op o t a i a n i e s , c ha ac te r of, 9 5 -9 i na, go dd e ss , 74- 6

m yth fr m 1 2 8 f
.

s o i n e lla , god d e s s , 5 3 , 1 2 7
v
.
, .

M L
e s za k i g 34 n 1 45 Ni n e eh , 3 1 , 4 1 - 3 , 8 1 , 9 4
M t l w rk i g p t r t
. . .
, ,
e a - o n a on d e i y of, 119 Ni ngi rs u , god , 7 3 -5
z r
. .
,

M e t h u se la h , 3 7 f . Ni n gi sh i d a , god , 7 4, 1 1 0 ; d agons of,

M i d as , 72 , 7 6 . 1 18 .

M i ni e h , 2 4 . i ng u es i rk a , god d e ss , 3 5 .

M i t ra h i ne h , 2 3 i n i b , god , 7 7 , 84
z
. .

M oab , 4 f Ni n -i gi -a ag, 5 7 , 7 0
t t
. .

Moa bi te S on e , 1 5 Ni nk a s i , d e i y , 1 2 6
mm
. .

Mo h a ed , 9 7 Ni nk au tu , d e i ty , 1 2 6
q t
. .

M o n gol c on u es 9 8 Ni nk h a rs agga , godd e s s , 5 3 , 6 0 , 6 2 f , 1 2 1 ,

m tr r tr
, . .

Mo nt go e ry , J A 2 0 1 42 as c rea es s , 5 6 ch a ac e o f,
r t mb l m
. . .

/ M oo n , c ea i on o f, as e e 16 111
wr
, .

Moon- o s h i p , 1 6 . Ni n k u r r a , god d e ss , 5 3 .

Mo s e s , 42 . i nli l, god d e ss , 1 1 2 .

Mosa i c le gi s la t i o n , 13 7 i n m ak h , god d e s s , 1 1 2
m q t r
. .

Mos le c on u e s t , of E gy p , 1 40 ; of Ni ns a , god , 1 1 0
m r r
.

Mesop ota i a , 9 7 f of S y i a , 6 Ni n s h a , god d e ss , 53

t rr
. . .

Mo h e - i gh t , 3 9 . Ni ns u n , god de s s , 35 , 3 9 .

M ii lle r , W M , 1 2 f Ni nt i l, d e i ty , 1 2 6
t
. . . .

M u mmi fic a t i on , 47 i n u , god de s s , 5 3 ,
m v wtr t
.

M u mmu , p ri ae a l a e -god , 1 2 0, 1 2 2 , Ni n u ] , d e i ty , 1 2 6 .

1 42 i p pu r , 2 2 , 3 3 , 49 , 5 9 f
t t w m
. .

My li t a , 1 1 3 s i e o f, 1 8-2 0 ; e i s h e le e n t i n J
r t r m
. .

M y nes , P of L , 4 J p op u la i on of, 2 0 f C ea ti on y t h of,

tr r t rm
. . . . .

My s i a , 1 4 1 1 5 , 1 2 8 h i s o i ca l i n s c i p i o n s f o ,
r mr m t
.

My s t e i e s of O s i ri s , 103 8, 3 6 f S u e i an y t h ologi ca l t e x s
t rm m tr
. .

My th , a n d lege nd , 1 0 2 ; a n d po e i ca l f o , 5 1 , 6 5 , 1 2 5 ; S e i ti c D e luge s o y
m r
i a ge y , 1 0 4 as e fl e c ti on of p oli ti ca l r rm
f o , 79
v t v
.

d e e lop me n , 1 29 ; i n e o lu t i on o f Ni sa b a , god d e ss , 7 4
t m m t tr
.

p a n h e on , 1 1 3 ; i n agi ca l e p loy Ni s i n , Dy n as y of, la e k i ngs of,

m t
e n , 5 0 f , 85 — 9 , 1 2 6 f i n i tua l, r °
49
v m t
. . .

1 03 p h i los op h i c a l d e e lop e n
°
o f, Ni s i r, M t , 8 4, 9 9 , 142
m r rtt
. .

1 04 ; a te i a li s t i c i n te r
p e a i on of, Noa h , 6 6 , 6 8, 85 , 9 1 , 1 3 1 , 13 3 -5 ,
l o4 f 1 43 t
d e sc e nd a n s o f, 38 S u e i an mr
tr
.

M y th r e d a c o s , 1 1 5 , 1 2 8 p ’a a llr
e l t o tp i e y o f 68 f 9 2 f
tr m t r rm
.
,
. .
,
My th ology , as ologi c al e le e n s i n , 44 . Noa h s a rk , 1 0 0 o i gi n a l fo of, 80 f
; .

s ee a lso A r k
rm v w t r
.

Nab oni d u s , 9 4 . Nu , p i ae a l a e -god , 48, 107 , 1 23 .

Na b fl , g od , 7 7 Nu d i mmu d , 5 8, 1 20 f , 1 42
m
.

r
. .

Na ga H a adi , 7
‘

Nufl a r , 1 8 ; se e a ls o Ni pp u
'

r
. . .

Na h a Ma lk h a , 9 7 Nugi ra d e i ty , 5 8
r
.

m r
.

Na h e l Ma li k , 9 7 .
Nu b e i ngs , fis c a l, 2 3
m mt v r
.

Nah m an C a n a l, 9 7 f Nu i s a i c e i d e nc e o n S y i a n cu lts , 1 3
rr
.
.

Nar S h a i , 9 7 . Nu t , god d e ss , 48, 1 03 , 1 05 , 1 0 7 .

Na ram S i n , k i ng, 9 , 2 0 .

Na r me r , k i n g, 3 8 O a nn e s , 1 2 7
r
.

v m t
.

Na t u e m y t h s , Ob se r a t i on y h s , 1 01
Na v i lle , P o f Ed oua d , r r v
O ce a n , h e a e nly ,
.

z
.

Na i , d e i ty , 1 2 6 .
r r
O i l, S y i a n t a d e i n , 8 .
 IN DE X 153

Om 75 e ns , Po t t r i n r ti m y th 1 04 1 06 1 08
e c ea on - s

r l tr d i ti 1 35 ; b f r i v ti f d i vi t i tl 1 1 0 f
.
, , , ,
O a a on, e o e n en on o as ne e,
wri ti g 2 6 P tt w h l 1 04 1 0 6
.

'
n o er s ee ,

Or t 9 P t t ry wi th rly A m i h r t r
.
, .
,
on e s , o e ea ra a c c a ac e s,
O v i d 72
.
,
45
O i ri P r dy ti k i g f Egy pt 25 7
.
, .

s s, lt f 46 1 0 7 i cu o
°
n e n as c n s o -

P r i r t r p ri d 2 2
.
, ,
e s an
p i d 1 3 M y i f 1 03 ; e o
°
s e es o , e o s,

Ar m v rt t 1 4 pl t i z d P r i t-k i g 3 5 f 6 5 7 6
.
, ,

a e a n c on a on es n s,
°
a e s o, e

lt f 1 3 P ri m v l w t r 1 0 7 f 1 2 1 f 1 2 4 ;
.
, , .

cu o , ae a a e c on
v rt d t S t rm d g 1 29
.
,
. .
, ,

e e o o - ra on ,
P ri P r f J Dy
.

P ab i lk h a rsa g, go d , 5 8, 6 0 nce , l y 1 25 f o ne e
Pr p h t H b r w 10
. . . .
,
P a b i lsag, god , 6 1 o e s, e e
rm r t P r t E l mi t
. .
,
P a le o S te le , 2 2 -6 , 3 9 n e w f a gme n s o o- a t 8 e ar ,
t t P r t S m ri
.

of e x o f, 22 —7 o o- u 119 e a ns ,

r
. .

Pa les t i n e , 3 , 40 , 10 0 , 1 3 7— 9 oa d s P s e u d o-Lu c i a n , 99
r t
.

t h ou gh , 5 p op u la i on o f, 6 P ta h , god , 2 6 , 1 04, 1 0 6
t r t t m r
. .

P a le t es , a ch a i c s la e , 2 4 P ole a i c p e i od , 1 3
t
. .

P alla c op a s Ca n a l, 9 8 f P u n , 1 04
m rr
. .

P allil, d e i ty , 1 1 7 f P uzu r-A u i , 7 7

rm t t
. .

P a nam m u I, 15 f , 13 8 . . Py a i d e x s , 2 9 .

P a n a m mu II, 1 5 f , 1 3 8
t
. .

P a n h e on , 1 1 3 .
Qad es h god d e s s , 1 2
, .

P a n t i b i b li a , 6 1 Qa ra l, of Y a d i 1 5
’

Qu e e n, c r e a t i on of a ,
. .
,

P a n t i b i b lo n , 6 1 1 04— 6
m mm
. .

P a p u an u i e s , 47
r
.

P a a di s e , 1 3 6 , 1 3 8 Ra , g od , 48, 9 5 , 1 0 3 -5 , 1 0 7 , 1 1 9 , 1 2 3 ; as
r r tr F tv
.

P a n as s u s , 9 9 c e a o , 1 04 ; es i a ls o f, 48 ; H a w k
r z
.

Pa w i , k i ng 9 7 of, 1 04

t r t
, .

P a e s i , as e li gi ou s i tle , 6 7 Ra i n fa ll l n B a b y lon i a , 7 0
tr r r m
. .

P a i a c hs , H e b e w , 3 7 f , 1 3 6 -8 ; S u Ra ad i , 96
mr w t
. .

e i an , 3 4 f , 3 7 f Ra li n s on , t h e la e S i r H C 3 3 , 6 5 , 7 9 ,
r
. .

P e lu s i a c b a n c h of Ni le , 13 . 81 , 86 .

P e lu s i u m , 5 . R e c lu s , E , 4 . .

P e n i e l, 7 5 Re d S e a , 6 f
tr m
. .

P e np ta h , 1 2 R e d a c o s , S e i t i c , 1 1 5 , 12 8
t t
. .

P e n t a e u ch , 3 , 9 3 , 1 3 7 f Re e d -h u s , 1 9 , 7 0
v U vr t
. .

P e n n s y l a n i a , 1 26 ; n i e s i y of, 49 ; Re i n a c h , S , 46 , 1 3 5
m
. .

Mu s eu , 2 1 , 49 R e k u b -e l, god , 1 5
r
. .

P e s i a , 43 R e s h ef, god , 1 2 , 1 5
r rr
. .

P e s i a n d es s , 1 2 ; pe i od , 1 1 , 1 3 -1 5 , 2 0 , Re s h pu , god , 1 2 ; s ee Re s h ef
B
.

60 R i b -A dd a , of y b los, 9
P r i vr v
. .

e s an G lf 8 86 9 0 99 u Ri e , i n h e a e n , 1 0 3
S i t rm t
, , , , . .

P i
e rs a n 45 e s a n, R o b i n s on , D r J A i a ge , 1 1 7
P t r D J P I2 6 r r
. . . .

e e s, r. R oge s , P o f R W , 43
P t ri P r f W M F li d r m r
. .
,
. . . . .

e e, 24
o n e s, Ro an S y i a , 2 9
P tr i f t i m y th f 4 7 m r
. . . . .

e ac on
, s o , . Ry le , Dr H E , D ea n of W e s t i n s te ,
. . .

Ph i l 1 05
a e, 3 , 42
P h i li t i
. .

s W y f th
ne s , 5 ‘
a o e
P h i l B i b li l A t i q i ti r r
.

‘ ’
o, f 38 ca n u es o 13 4 f S ac e d T ee, 1 3 6
mg y r rF
, .
,
.

Ph i i
oe n c a n t 18 ar , c os o on 10 4 ; S a c i fice a fte loo d , 7 7, 83 f
r i p ti 11 f ; m m t
.
,
i n sc on s , on u en s, 17 S a k h law i y a h C a n al, 9 8
ttl m t 1 3
. .

se en , e S a kj e -G eu zi , 1 6
m
. .

Ph oe n i c i a n s , 4 7 Sa
’
a l, 1 5 f
m rt
. .

P i li ki n g, S a a i a n h i lls, 5
r r m rr
.

P i lla , sac e d , 13 S a a a, 98
qq r
. .

P i nc h e s , T G , 1 2 3 Sa a ah , 1 4
r
. . . .

’
P i s t i s S op h i a , 1 1 7 . S a gon , o f A kk a d , 8 f , 2 7 . .

P lagu e - g od , 1 3 4 S a r ze c , E d e , 1 18
t v tr t r
. . .

P la n s , d i i n e i n s u c i on s i n u s e of, S a s sa n i an p e i od , 2 0
r
.

12 7 S a y c e , P o f A H , 7 , 1 26
tr
. . . . .

P lu a ch , 13 S ca ra b a e u s , 1 04
r
. .

P oe b e l, D r A , 8 f , 2 1 , 2 8— 3 3 , 3 5 , 3 7 , 3 9 ,
. . . S c h e i l, P e e V , 2 7 , 43 , 146 . .

49 , 5 1 , 5 3 , 5 7 , 5 9 , 6 3 -6 , 7 0-2 , 80 , 85 , S c h oe n e , A , 3 0 , 1 44
w t r
. .

f , 1 00 , 1 1 1 - 1 3 S c h e i c h Le c u e s , 2 , 10, 1 3 7
tr mr r r r
. . .

P oe y , S u e i a n , 50 S c o p i on as p op e n a m e , 3 8
t v r tt
. .

P os -d i lu i a n k i n gs , 3 0 pe i od, 3 1 S c o -Mon c r i e fi, P D , 1 3
’
°
. . . .
154 IN DE X
r
S c i b e, S yri a n e p e s e n ta i on of E gy p r r t 8 7 , 9 5 , 142 E gy p i a n , 48, 10 4, 1 23 t
ti a n, 1 6 o f Ed fu , 4 6 c i y o f, 6 1 G a e of, 1 1 1 t t
r r m m
. .

S c u lpt u e , A s s y i a n , 1 7 S e i t i c , 1 1 S u n -te p le s , 48, 6 1

w
. .

S e a ls , 7 . S u n - ors h i p , 46 f .

S e b e k ,god , 46 S uq e l A fej , 1 9
-‘
. .

S e be k -Ra , god , 46 S us a , 7
m r m
. .

S e i s t a n , 45 S y b o li s m i n d e a s , 7 4 f
mt B
. .

S e i es i n a b y lo n i a, 2 9 , 43 S y nce llu s , 3 0
r r
. .

S e mi t i c a r t, 1 1 , 1 3 9 ; de i t i es , 1 2 ; a ce , 6 S y i a , 4— 6 , 1 4 f , 47 , 13 7 a s lan d b ri dge o

mm t r
. .

S e rpe n t, 1 1 7 f 4 , 8 ; co u n i c a i on s t h ou gh , 4 f
r t r
. .

S e pe n t -c u lt s , 47 p op u la i on of, 6 , 1 4 ; A s s y i a n i n fl u
tr t
.

S e t, god , 10 5 , 1 0 7 e n c e i n , 1 5 -1 7 fl oo d - a d i i o n i n , 9 9
t r m r t
. .

Se h , 3 7 S y i ac agi c a l i ns c i p i o n s , 2 0
t r t tt
. .

S e i I, 48 S y i a n c oa s t , 9 c u l s , 1 3 s a es , 1 38

v t t m t r r mt
. .

‘
S e n Ta b le s o f C re a i on , c o p os i e
e
’
S y o-Eph a i i i s h w a r , 1 3 8
r tr q t m r t
.

c h a ac e of, 1 1 4 if u o ed, 5 5 , 1 1 6 , . S w a p , t h e G ea , 9 8 .

1 22
m
.

S h al a ne se r III, 1 5 Ta b s , 1 4
m B tH r
. .

S h a a s h , go d , i n a b y lo n i a , 6 1 in Ta b le i ll, a t Ni pp u , 2 0
r
.

S y ia, 15 s e e a ls o S u n -god Ta b ni t h , k i n g, 1 2
m
. .

S h a mar, 1 9 . Ta h a p i , 1 4 .

S h a r r u , go d , 7 7 Tah p a n h e s , 1 3
r mm z
. .

S h a rr u -k i n , k i n g, 8 s e e a ls o S a gon Ta u , 2 9 , 3 5 f , 3 9 , 1 46 ; s e e a ls oDu mu zi
tt tt
. . .

S h a e l-H a i , 6 0 9 8 Ta ooi n g, 4 7
t r
.
, .

S h a t e l-Kar , 6 1 Ta u u s , 4 , 8 f , 95
tt
. . .

S ha e n-Ni l, 1 9 Te fn u t , god d e s s , 4 8, 1 05 , 10 7
m
. .

S he , 3 7 . Te l-ab i b , 2 0 f , 1 3 2
mr tr
. .

S h u , god , 48, 1 05 , 1 0 7 . Te ll e l-A a n a , le t e s , 9 f , 88 ; legen ds , .

S h u ru pp a k , 48, 6 0 — 2 , 66 f , 7 0 , 1 42 . 13 8 .

fou n d a ti on o f, 5 8 G od of , 5 8, 6 2 , 6 6
’
. Te ll De fe n n e h , 1 3 .

S i d on , 1 1 f Te lloh , 7
m r
. .

S i d on i a n s , 1 2 Te p e , G o ge o f, 10 1
vr J r m
. .

S i l e Mou n ta i ns , 8 f Te mp le a t e us a le , 1 7 f , 2 9
t
. . .

S i na i , 8 Te a , k i n g, 2 5
r t
.
.

S i p p a , 3 3 , 6 1 f , 9 7 , 1 42 f fou n d a i on Th a m t e , 1 43
rt r r
. . .

o f, 5 8 Th a h a d e p e ss i on , 98
r tr
. .

S i s pa r a , 6 1 s ee S ip p a Th e b e s , 46 , 1 05 W e s e n , 1 04
r
. .

S i i s , go d, 1 1 0 Th e s s a ly , 1 01
r
.
.

S k i n n e , D r J , 3 , 42 , 1 1 4, 1 3 0 f , 13 6 ,
. . Th i n i te k i ngs , 2 6
m
. .

1 44 Th o p s on , R C , 1 2 6
r
.

t
. . .

S mi th , G e o ge , 4 1 Th o h , god, 1 05
m r m
. .

S i t h , S i r G e o ge A d a , 4, 6 Th ot h me s I, 1 0 5
m r
. .

S i t h , P of G Elli o t , 4 7 Th ot h me s III, 5 , 2 3 , 1 0 4 f
m r
. .

r r
. .

S i th , W R ob e ts on , 6 Th u n d e , S y i a n god of, 1 2
m
. . .

S i th -god , 1 1 0 .
Th u re au -Da n gi n , F , 9 , 7 2 , 7 5 , 80
m t rm v t
. .

S ne fe ru , k i ng , 8 Ti a a , p i a e a l d e i y , 1 1 5 f , 1 1 9 f ,
r t r t
.

r r tr
. .

S o la h e ology , 46 f ; pa e n age of 1 2 2 , 1 24 , 13 2 , 1 42 ; o i gi n a l c h a ac e
t
.

E gy p i a n k i n gs , 3 9 , 1 04 o f, 1 2 1 f
m
. .

S olo o n, 1 7 Ti gla t h -p i le s e r IV, 1 5 f , 1 3 8 f

t rm
.

r r t
. .

S ph i nx e s , H i t i te -A a a ea n, 1 6 Ti g i s , c e a i o n of, 6 2 ; c h a n ge s i n b e d
t
.

S p i nn i n g- op s , 1 7 o f, 9 8 ; r
i s e o f, 9 5 f ; fl ood s o f, 95 — 8 ;
r
.

tr tr t w t
.

S te i n , S i r A u e l, 45 c on ol o f, 9 6 f c on as e d i h Ni le ,
t t r
.
.

S on e -c u te -god , 1 1 0 99 ‘
t h e O ld , 6 0
’

m
.

r tr
.

S to r -god , 7 7 .
Ti mb e , affic i n , 8
m v v r
.

Ti e -d i i s i o n s , d i i ne fou nde s of, 1 1 1

tm
sy s e s of, 1 8
m r tm
.

Ti e - e c k oni ng, s y s e s of, 2 3

m ri t r
.

Su e t 1 18 ; l g
an ar 43 ; Dy an ua e, To o h a c h e , mag i ca l c u e for , 126 f
g
t i L i t 28 fl V i f C r t i
, .
’
n as c s , e rs on o ea on Tor d e y , E , 2 6
l t r V r i
.

r r
. .

an d D l g 49 e u e, f a e e s on T a d e , S y i a n, 8
ti
o
i r i g ti n m y t h r
.

C re a 1 23 5 ;
on , - r a o T ee of L i fe , 1 3 6
1 2 5 7 ; tr d i ti
, .

-
94 f a on s , Tu b a l-c a i n, 3 8
m i 43 ; ri gi l h m f 1 19
.

r t
.

S u e r a ns , o na o
e o , Tu k e s a n , 45
ri v r f th 1 03 r
.
.

S u n, e f th ‘
o 39 e, so n o e Tu k s , 9 8
g d 1 19 ; B byl r
. .

S u n- o , i 44 1 1 1 1 29 a on a n, Ty e , 1 2
1 42 ; S m r i
, ,

r r
, ,

35 3 9 58 7 7 f 82 4
u e a n, , , , .
,
—
, Ty i a n c a ft s me n, 1 7 .