Notices of Genesis.—Correspondence of names.—Abram.—Ur of Chaldees.—Ishmael.—Sargon of Agané.—His birth.—Concealed in ark.—Creation.—Garden of Eden.—Oannes.—Berosus.—Izdubar legends.—Babylonian seals.—Egyptian names.—Assyrian sculptures.  
 
CATTERED through various cuneiform inscriptions are other notices, names, or passages, connected with the Book of Genesis. Although the names of the Genesis patriarchs are not in the inscriptions which give the history of the mythical period, nevertheless some of the patriarchal names of Genesis are found here and there in the inscriptions.
 
The name Adam is in the Creation legends, but only in a general sense as man, as in Gen. i. 26, 27, 28.; v. 1, not as a proper name. Several of the other names of antediluvian patriarchs correspond with Babylonian words and roots, such as Methusael (Gen. iv. 18), which is the Assyrian mutu-sa-ili, “man of God,” and has been changed into Methuselah (Gen. v. 21) in order to assimilate it to the genius316 of the Hebrew language, or Noah, the Assyrian nukhu, “rest;” but, besides these, certain names appear as proper names also in Babylonia, among them Cainan, Lamech, and Laban.
 
Cainan is found as the name of a Babylonian town Kan-nan; the inhabitants of which were sometimes called Kanunai, which must not be confounded with the name of the Canaanites or “lowlanders,” originally the inhabitants of the coastland of Ph?nicia and then, by extension, of all Palestine.
 
Lamech has already been pointed out by Palmer (“Egyptian Chronicles,” vol. i.?p. 56), in the name of the deified Ph?nician patriarch Diamich; this name is found in the cuneiform texts as Dumugu and Lamga, two forms of the Accadian name of the moon.
 
The two wives of Lamech, Adah and Zillah, seem to be the Assyrian edhutu or edhatu “darkness,” and tsillatu “the shades of night;” and the names of his two sons Jabal and Jubal are but varying forms of the Assyrian abil “son.” Dr. Oppert long ago pointed out that this Assyrian word was the origin of the name Abel which has been assimilated in spelling to a Hebrew word signifying “mere breath.”
 
Some of the names of the patriarchs after the Flood are found as names of towns in Syria, but not in Babylonia; among these are Reu or Ragu, Serug, and Harran.
 
Laban, on the other hand, as was first noticed by Dr. Delitzsch, is mentioned in a list of gods given in317 a cuneiform tablet (published in the “Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia,” iii. 66, 6.)
 
 
Mugheir, the site of Ur of the Chaldees.
The name of Abramu or Abram is found in the Assyrian inscriptions in the time of Esarhaddon. After the captivity of the ten tribes, some of the Israelites prospered in Assyria, and rose to positions of trust in the empire. Abram was one of these, he was sukulu rabu or “great attendant” of Esarhaddon, and was eponym in Assyria, b.c. 677. Various other Hebrew names are found in Assyria about this time, including Pekah, Hoshea, and several compounded with the two Divine names Elohim and Jehovah, showing that both these names were in use among the Israelites. The presence of proper names founded on the Genesis stories, like Abram, and the use at this time of these forms of the Divine name,318 should be taken into consideration in discussing the evidence of the antiquity of Genesis.
 
Ur, now represented by the mounds of Mugheir, on the western bank of the Euphrates to the south of Babylon, was the capital of the earliest Accadian dynasty with which we are acquainted. It was specially devoted to the worship of the moon-god, the ruins of whose temple have been discovered there. Ur was the birthplace of Abraham, in whom we must see one of those Semitic intruders who settled among the Accadians, and after adopting their culture and civilization finally succeeded in overcoming and supplanting them. It is probable that it is called Ur Casdim, “Ur of the Casdim,” in Genesis only proleptically, since Casdim appears to be the representative of an Assyrian word meaning “conquerors”—a suitable epithet for the Semitic tribes after their conquest of Babylonia. The Greek names Chaldean and Chaldea are of much later date, being derived from the Kaldai, a small tribe settled on the Persian Gulf and first mentioned in the ninth century b.c., who under Merodach-Baladan (b.c. 721-709) possessed themselves of Babylonia and became so integral a portion of its inhabitants as to give their name to the whole of them in classical times.
 
Some of the Genesis names are found at a comparatively early date, the first which appears on a contemporary monument being Ishmael. In the reign of Khammuragas among the witnesses to some319 documents at Larsa in Babylonia, appears a man named “Abuha son of Ishmael.”
 
After the time of Abraham the book of Genesis is concerned with the affairs of Palestine, and of the countries in its immediate vicinity, and it has no connection with Babylonian history and traditions; however, the cuneiform records contain one story which has a striking likeness to that of Moses in the ark, and which, although not within the period covered by Genesis, is of great interest in connection with the early history of the Jews.
 
Sargina or Sargon I. was a Babylonian monarch who reigned in the city of Agané about B.C. 1800. The name of Sargon signifies the right, true, or legitimate king, and may have been assumed on his ascending the throne. Sargon was probably of obscure origin, and hence the myth that attached itself to him in later popular belief. This curious story is found on fragments of tablets from Kouyunjik, and reads as follows:
 
1. Sargina the powerful king the king of Agané am I.
2. My mother was a princess, my father I did not know, a brother of my father chose the mountains.
3. In the city of Azupiranu which by the side of the river Euphrates is situated
4. (my) mother the princess conceived me; in an inaccessible place she brought me forth.
5. She placed me in a basket of rushes, with bitumen my exit she sealed up.
320
6. She launched me on the river which did not drown me.
7. The river carried me, to Akki the irrigator it brought me.
8. Akki the irrigator in tenderness of bowels lifted me up;
9. Akki the irrigator as his child brought me up,
10. Akki the irrigator as his woodman set me,
11. and in my woodmanship Istar loved me.
12. 45? years the kingdom I ruled,
13. the people of the black heads I governed, I ..
14. over rugged countries in many chariots of bronze I rode,
15. I governed the upper countries,
16. I ruled? over the chiefs of the lower countries.
17. To the sea coast three times I advanced, Dilvun (in the Persian Gulf) submitted,
18. Durankigal bowed, &c. &c.
After this follows an address to any king who should at a later time notice the inscription.
 
This myth is but a repetition of the oft-told story, how the hero of noble birth is born in secret, is exposed to death, but is rescued and brought up in a humble sphere of life until the time comes when his true origin and character are revealed, and he becomes a mighty prince and conqueror. The legend was told of Perseus in Greece, of Romulus in Italy, of Cyrus in Persia. But just as Cyrus was a real personage upon whom the legend was fastened, so too Sargon was a real personage, who founded the great321 library of Agané, and extended his conquests as far as the island of Cyprus, which he conquered in the third year of his reign.
 
The most hazardous of the theories put forward in the preceding chapters is the one which identifies Izdubar with Nimrod, and makes him reign in the legendary period of Babylonian history. This theory is founded on several plausible, but probably merely superficial grounds; and if any one accepts Mr. Smith’s view on the point, it will be only for similar reasons to those which caused him to propose it; namely, because, failing this, we have no clue whatever to the age and position of the most famous hero in Oriental tradition.
 
We must never lose sight of the fact that, apart from the more perfect and main parts of these texts, both in the decipherment of the broken fragments and in the various theories projected respecting them, the Assyrian scholar must change his opinions many times, and no doubt any accession of new material would change again our views respecting the parts affected by it. These theories and conclusions, however, although not always correct, have, on their way, assisted the inquiry, and have led to the more accurate knowledge of the texts; for certainly in cuneiform matters we have often had to advance through error to truth.
 
In adopting Mr. Smith’s theory for the position of Nimrod, one thing is certainly clear: he is placed as low in the chronology as it is possible to make him.
 
322
 
The stories and myths given in the foregoing pages have, probably, very different values; some are genuine traditions—some compiled to account for natural phenomena, and some pure romances. At the head of their history and traditions the Babylonians placed an account of the creation of the world; and, although different forms of this story were current, in certain features they all agreed. Beside the account of the present animals, they related the creation of legions of monster forms which disappeared before the human epoch, and they accounted for the great problem of humanity—the presence of evil in the world—by making out that it proceeded from the original chaos, the spirit of confusion and darkness, which was the origin of all things, and which was even older than the gods.
 
The principal story of the Creation, given in Chapter V., substantially agrees, as far as it is preserved, with the Biblical account. According to it, there was a chaos of watery matter before the Creation, and from this all things were generated.
 
We have then a considerable blank, the contents of which we can only conjecture, and after this we come to the creation of the heavenly orbs.
 
The fifth tablet in the series relates how God created the constellations of the stars, the signs of the zodiac, the planets and other stars, the moon and the sun. After another blank we have a fragment which relates to the creation of wild and domestic animals; it is curious here that the original taming of323 domestic animals was even then so far back in the history of the race that all knowledge of it was lost, and the “animals of the city,” or domestic animals, were considered different creations from the “animals of the desert,” or “field,” or wild animals.
 
We next come to the war between the dragon and powers of evil, or chaos, on one side and the gods on the other. The gods have weapons forged for them, and Merodach undertakes to lead the heavenly host against the dragon. The war, which is described with spirit, ends of course in the triumph of the principle of good, and the overthrow of primeval anarchy.
 
In Chapter V. another account of the Creation is given which differs materially from the first. The principal feature in the second account is the description of the eagle-headed men with their family of leaders—this legend clearly showing the origin of the eagle-headed figures represented on the Assyrian sculptures.
 
It is probable that some of these Babylonian legends contained detailed descriptions of the Garden of Eden, which seems to have been the district of Eridu in the south of Babylonia, as Sir Henry Rawlinson believes.
 
There are coincidences in respect to the geography of the region and its name which render the identification very probable; of the four rivers in each case, two, the Euphrates and Tigris, are identical; then, again, the known fertility of the region, its name324 sometimes Gan-duni, so similar to Gan-eden (the Garden of Eden), and other considerations, all tend towards the view that it is the Paradise of Genesis.
 
There are evidences of the belief i............