L. W. King
Legends of Babylon and Egypt in Relation to Hebrew Tradition
UUID: aaeccee0-3114-11e5-8c56-119a1b5d0361
This ebook was created with StreetLib Write (http://write.streetlib.com)by Simplicissimus Book Farm
Table of contents
PREFACE
LECTURE I—EGYPT, BABYLON, AND PALESTINE, AND SOME TRADITIONAL ORIGINS OF CIVILIZATION
LECTURE II — DELUGE STORIES AND THE NEW SUMERIAN VERSION
I. INTRODUCTION TO THE MYTH, AND ACCOUNT OF CREATION
II. THE ANTEDILUVIAN CITIES
III. THE COUNCIL OF THE GODS, AND ZIUSUDU'S PIETY
IV. THE DREAM-WARNING
V. THE FLOOD, THE ESCAPE OF THE GREAT BOAT, AND THE SACRIFICE TO THE SUN-GOD
VI. THE PROPITIATION OF THE ANGRY GODS, AND ZIUSUDU'S IMMORTALITY
LECTURE III — CREATION AND THE DRAGON MYTH; AND THE PROBLEM OF BABYLONIAN PARALLELS IN HEBREW TRADITION
Appendix
PREFACE
In
these lectures an attempt is made, not so much to restate familiar
facts, as to accommodate them to new and supplementary evidence which
has been published in America since the outbreak of the war. But even
without the excuse of recent discovery, no apology would be needed
for any comparison or contrast of Hebrew tradition with the
mythological and legendary beliefs of Babylon and Egypt. Hebrew
achievements in the sphere of religion and ethics are only thrown
into stronger relief when studied against their contemporary
background.The
bulk of our new material is furnished by some early texts, written
towards the close of the third millennium B.C. They incorporate
traditions which extend in unbroken outline from their own period
into the remote ages of the past, and claim to trace the history of
man back to his creation. They represent the early national
traditions of the Sumerian people, who preceded the Semites as the
ruling race in Babylonia; and incidentally they necessitate a
revision of current views with regard to the cradle of Babylonian
civilization. The most remarkable of the new documents is one which
relates in poetical narrative an account of the Creation, of
Antediluvian history, and of the Deluge. It thus exhibits a close
resemblance in structure to the corresponding Hebrew traditions, a
resemblance that is not shared by the Semitic-Babylonian Versions at
present known. But in matter the Sumerian tradition is more primitive
than any of the Semitic versions. In spite of the fact that the text
appears to have reached us in a magical setting, and to some extent
in epitomized form, this early document enables us to tap the stream
of tradition at a point far above any at which approach has hitherto
been possible.Though
the resemblance of early Sumerian tradition to that of the Hebrews is
striking, it furnishes a still closer parallel to the summaries
preserved from the history of Berossus. The huge figures incorporated
in the latter's chronological scheme are no longer to be treated as a
product of Neo-Babylonian speculation; they reappear in their
original surroundings in another of these early documents, the
Sumerian Dynastic List. The sources of Berossus had inevitably been
semitized by Babylon; but two of his three Antediluvian cities find
their place among the five of primitive Sumerian belief, and two of
his ten Antediluvian kings rejoin their Sumerian prototypes.
Moreover, the recorded ages of Sumerian and Hebrew patriarchs are
strangely alike. It may be added that in Egypt a new fragment of the
Palermo Stele has enabled us to verify, by a very similar comparison,
the accuracy of Manetho's sources for his prehistoric period, while
at the same time it demonstrates the way in which possible
inaccuracies in his system, deduced from independent evidence, may
have arisen in remote antiquity. It is clear that both Hebrew and
Hellenistic traditions were modelled on very early lines.Thus
our new material enables us to check the age, and in some measure the
accuracy, of the traditions concerning the dawn of history which the
Greeks reproduced from native sources, both in Babylonia and Egypt,
after the conquests of Alexander had brought the Near East within the
range of their intimate acquaintance. The third body of tradition,
that of the Hebrews, though unbacked by the prestige of secular
achievement, has, through incorporation in the canons of two great
religious systems, acquired an authority which the others have not
enjoyed. In re-examining the sources of all three accounts, so far as
they are affected by the new discoveries, it will be of interest to
observe how the same problems were solved in antiquity by very
different races, living under widely divergent conditions, but within
easy reach of one another. Their periods of contact, ascertained in
history or suggested by geographical considerations, will prompt the
further question to what extent each body of belief was evolved in
independence of the others. The close correspondence that has long
been recognized and is now confirmed between the Hebrew and the
Semitic-Babylonian systems, as compared with that of Egypt, naturally
falls within the scope of our enquiry.Excavation
has provided an extraordinarily full archaeological commentary to the
legends of Egypt and Babylon; and when I received the invitation to
deliver the Schweich Lectures for 1916, I was reminded of the terms
of the Bequest and was asked to emphasize the archaeological side of
the subject. Such material illustration was also calculated to bring
out, in a more vivid manner than was possible with purely literary
evidence, the contrasts and parallels presented by Hebrew tradition.
Thanks to a special grant for photographs from the British Academy, I
was enabled to illustrate by means of lantern slides many of the
problems discussed in the lectures; and it was originally intended
that the photographs then shown should appear as plates in this
volume. But in view of the continued and increasing shortage of
paper, it was afterwards felt to be only right that all illustrations
should be omitted. This very necessary decision has involved a
recasting of certain sections of the lectures as delivered, which in
its turn has rendered possible a fuller treatment of the new literary
evidence. To the consequent shifting of interest is also due a
transposition of names in the title. On their literary side, and in
virtue of the intimacy of their relation to Hebrew tradition, the
legends of Babylon must be given precedence over those of Egypt.For
the delay in the appearance of the volume I must plead the pressure
of other work, on subjects far removed from archaeological study and
affording little time and few facilities for a continuance of
archaeological and textual research. It is hoped that the insertion
of references throughout, and the more detailed discussion of
problems suggested by our new literary material, may incline the
reader to add his indulgence to that already extended to me by the
British Academy.L.
W. KING.
LECTURE I—EGYPT, BABYLON, AND PALESTINE, AND SOME TRADITIONAL ORIGINS OF CIVILIZATION
At
the present moment most of us have little time or thought to spare
for subjects not connected directly or indirectly with the war. We
have put aside our own interests and studies; and after the war we
shall all have a certain amount of leeway to make up in acquainting
ourselves with what has been going on in countries not yet involved
in the great struggle. Meanwhile the most we can do is to glance for
a moment at any discovery of exceptional interest that may come to
light.The
main object of these lectures will be to examine certain Hebrew
traditions in the light of new evidence which has been published in
America since the outbreak of the war. The evidence is furnished by
some literary texts, inscribed on tablets from Nippur, one of the
oldest and most sacred cities of Babylonia. They are written in
Sumerian, the language spoken by the non-Semitic people whom the
Semitic Babylonians conquered and displaced; and they include a very
primitive version of the Deluge story and Creation myth, and some
texts which throw new light on the age of Babylonian civilization and
on the area within which it had its rise. In them we have recovered
some of the material from which Berossus derived his dynasty of
Antediluvian kings, and we are thus enabled to test the accuracy of
the Greek tradition by that of the Sumerians themselves. So far then
as Babylonia is concerned, these documents will necessitate a
re-examination of more than one problem.The
myths and legends of ancient Egypt are also to some extent involved.
The trend of much recent anthropological research has been in the
direction of seeking a single place of origin for similar beliefs and
practices, at least among races which were bound to one another by
political or commercial ties. And we shall have occasion to test, by
means of our new data, a recent theory of Egyptian influence. The
Nile Valley was, of course, one the great centres from which
civilization radiated throughout the ancient East; and, even when
direct contact is unproved, Egyptian literature may furnish
instructive parallels and contrasts in any study of Western Asiatic
mythology. Moreover, by a strange coincidence, there has also been
published in Egypt since the beginning of the war a record referring
to the reigns of predynastic rulers in the Nile Valley. This, like
some of the Nippur texts, takes us back to that dim period before the
dawn of actual history, and, though the information it affords is not
detailed like theirs, it provides fresh confirmation of the general
accuracy of Manetho's sources, and suggests some interesting points
for comparison.
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
