3. Comparison with Genesis 4. : But our examination of the matter cannot stop here. In Gen. 4 16-23 there is a list of the descendants of Cain strikingly similar to the list of the descendants of Seth in Genesis 5. If the names of Adam and Abel be supplied from Gen. 4:1, 2, the two lists appear as follows: The close parallelism of these two lists of names is really greater than it appears to the English reader to be. Cain, which means "artificer," is in Hebrew the same word as Kenan, lacking only one formative letter at the end. Irad and Jared differ in Hebrew only by the wearing away of one consonant. Mehujael is as much like Mahalalel, and Methushael as much like Methuselah as the Assyrian name, of Tiglath-pileser, Tukultu-apal-esharra, is like Tiglathpileser, while Enoch and Lamech are the same. The importance of this likeness arises from the fact that the socalled critical scholars claim that these two lists of names are in reality the same original list as it came through two lines of tradition and was worked up differently by two writers. This view has been vigorously opposed by some conservative scholars, notably by the late Professor Green, of Princeton.1 Between rival critical hypotheses. it is not the function of archæology to decide. It must be admitted, however, that the names of the descendants of Genesis 4 can be equated with those of our Babylonian kings, as well as those of Gen. 5. Adam, Seth, Enosh, Cain, Enoch, Mehujael, and Methushael would be derived exactly as it has been explained that the corresponding names of Genesis 5 could be derived. It only remains to explain the names Abel and Irad. It will be noticed that Abel occupies in the list a position next to 1 See his Unity of the Book of Genesis, New York, 1895, Chapter II. Adam and Cain; Abel is also said to have been a shepherd. In the list of Babylonian kings Etana the shepherd comes in between Adimê (Aripi) and Pilikam, the equivalent of Cain. It is probable, therefore, that Etana is the king that corresponds to Abel. Etana is described in the Sumerian as "the shepherd who went to heaven,' SIBA LÙ AN-ŠU NI-IB-E-DA. If the two words SIBA LÙ became detached and misunderstood as a proper name, the s at the beginning, according to a well known phonetic law, could become h and give us the Hebrew Abel. Irad may also be ir-tu, a corruption of ZI-IR-TU, a name of the mother of Dumuzi, who may at times have been referred to as the son of ZI-IR-TU. These possibilities are not proof that the names arose as suggested, but are not without weight. If Abel arose from the traditions of Etana and Enoch did also, and if the names of Genesis 4 are derived from the list of Babylonian kings, then Etana figures twice in the fourth chapter of Genesis. If Enoch is a fragment of the name Enmeduranki, a possibility already recognized, it is not difficult to understand how Etana came into the tradition twice. 4. Comparison with the List of Berossos. Another list of names awaits comparison. Berossos, a Babylonian priest who died about 260 B. C., compiled a list of kings who lived before the flood, and attributed to them incredibly long reigns. His work has not survived, but his list is quoted by two early Christian writers, Eusebius and Syncellus, and Hommel' and Sayce3 have claimed that his names are, many of them, identical with the patriarchs of Genesis 5. 1 See Rawlinson's Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia, II, 59, rev. 9, and Zimmern's Babylonischer Gott Tamus, p. 13. 2 Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archæology, XV, 243–246. Expository Times, X, 253. 28,800 432,000 years. It has long been recognized that Amelon is the Semitic Babylonian word amelu, "man." It is a Babylonian synonym of Mutu-elu, the equivalent of Enosh, and is also a translation of Enmenunna. Ammenon has also been recognized as the Semitic Babylonian ummanu, "artisan." It is a translation in one word of the Sumerian Pilikam. Daonos or Daos has, too, been seen to be the phonetic transliteration into Greek letters of the Sumerian Dumu, the first part of the name Dumuzi. Euedorachos has also been thought to be the Sumerian Enmeduranki, whom we have recognized as another name for Etana. Four of the names of Berossos are thus easily connected with names in the new list of kings. The fifth one, Megalaros, might be a corruption either of Mutushalal or of Mutu-ša-elu, and so go back ultimately either to Enmeirgan or to Meskingashir. Xisouthros is clearly the same person as Ziugiddu. He had no connection with this list of kings, but is, like Noah in Genesis 5, attached to it on account of the flood. Hommel long ago saw that Otiartes is the same as Ubara-tutu, who is said in the account of the deluge which was found at Nineveh to have been the father of Utnapishtim, the hero of the deluge.1 Berossos has, accordingly, not only added the hero of the deluge, but has displaced one of the names from the king list in order to find a place for the father of Xisouthros. The other names are puzzling. Poebel has suggested that Alorus may be a Greek corruption of the Sumerian name Laluralim, who is said to have been a king of Nippur. An old text which contains this name3 is accompanied by a gloss zugagib, "scorpion," and the first king in the list translated above is Zugagib. If, therefore, this suggestion is true, the name may go back to the same source as the others, after all. Amempsinos has been thought by some to be a corruption of the well known Babylonian name Amil-Sin. There was an Amil-Sin in the first dynasty of Babylon, but why the name should be inserted here cannot at present be explained; nor has a satisfactory explanation been suggested for Alaparos. 1 See Chapter VI, p. 273. 2 Historical Texts, p. 42. * Rawlinson's Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia, V, 44, 17b. The Semitic name of this king is also said to have been Tabu-utul-bel. He is the one whose fortunes correspond so closely to those of Job. (See Chapter XX.) See Meissner, Seltene assyrische Ideogramme, No. 6945. The above discussion may be summed up in a few words. The Babylonian list of kings with which this chapter begins makes no reference to the flood, neither does the fourth chapter of Genesis. All the names in Genesis 4 may be found in the Babylonian list, though Etana seems to have been inserted twice under different names. As Genesis 5 omits Abel, it has Etana only once. All the other names of Genesis 5, except Noah, are found in the Babylonian list. Noah has been added to connect the list with the flood. The ages of the patriarchs in Genesis 5 correspond approximately to the general lengths of the reigns assigned to the kings in the tablet. Berossos seems to have exercised much greater freedom, inserting several names, the origin of some of which cannot now be made out. He also greatly exaggerated the lengths of the kings' reigns. These correspondences are simply noted. It is but a few months since the writer discovered them, and he was the first to do so. It is too early to correctly estimate their ultimate significance. It should, however, be observed that the Biblical numbers (Gen. 5) lack the gross exaggerations of Berossos, and that, if the correspondences here pointed out are real, the tradition embodied in Genesis is carried back to a time from 800 to 1000 years earlier than Moses. CHAPTER VI A BABYLONIAN ACCOUNT OF THE FLOOD, FROM A TABLET WRITTEN AT NINEVEH IN THE SEVENTH CENTURY B. C.1 TRANSLATION OF THE TEXT. COMPARISON WITH GENESIS 6-9. ANOTHER BABYLONIAN VERSION. 1. Translation of the Text. 1. Gilgamesh said to him, to Utnapishtim, the far-away: 2. "I look upon thee, O Utnapishtim, 3. Thy appearance is unchanged; thou are like me; 4. Thou art not at all different, thou art like me. 5. Thy courage is unbroken, to make combat, 6. On thy side thou liest down-on thy back. 7. [Tell me] how hast thou advanced and in the assembly of the gods hast found life?" 8. Utnapishtim spoke to him, to Gilgamesh: 9. I will reveal to thee, O Gilgamesh, the secret story, 10. And the decision of the gods to thee will I relate. 11. Shurippak, a city which thou knowest, 12. Is situated on the bank of the Euphrates. 13. That city was old and the gods in it— 14. Their hearts prompted them-the great gods-to make a deluge. 15. [There drew near] their father Anu, 16. Their councillor, the warrior Ellil, 17. Their herald, Enmashtu, 18. Their hero, Ennugi. 19. The lord of wisdom, Ea, counselled with them; 20. Their words he repeated to the reed-hut: 21. "O reed-hut, reed-hut, O wall, wall, 22. O reed-hut, hearken; O wall, give heed! 23. O man of Shurippak, son of Ubaratutu, 24. Pull down thy house, build a ship, 25. Leave thy possessions, take thought for thy life, 26. Leave thy gods, thy life save! 27. Embark seed of life of all kinds on a ship! 28. The ship which thou shalt build, 29. Measure well its dimensions, 30. Make to correspond its breadth and its length; 31. Upon the ocean thou shalt launch it." 32. I understood and spoke to Ea, my lord: 33. "I understand], my lord; what thou hast thus commanded 34. I will honor and will do. 35. [But] what shall I say to the city, the people, and the elders?" 36. Ea opened his mouth and spake, 1 Translated from Haupt's Das Babylonische Nimrodepos, p. 134, f. |