UNIVERSAL JEWISH HISTORY

BY
Rabbi Philip Biberfeld, LL.D.

VOL. I.
ANCIENT JEWISH HISTORY

Published by
THE SPERO FOUNDATION
NEWYORK, 1948
All rights reserved, including the right to reproduce
this book, or any portion thereof, in any form.

PUBLISHED BY
THE SPERO FOUNDATION

dedicated to the advancement of traditional

Judaism through the publication and distribu-
tion of Jewish c h s i c s , educational literature,
and allied purposeful philanthropic activities.

-
PRINTED IN THE UNITED
BY
STATES

A. LAMBERCLCB, NEW YOBK

13:
OF AMERICA
 LWr CGrm! XULL! CXUL LZk9'
rCUC AaL! CQGL LCLr EracO A6 bO b w
ACGGL! CrLr L'aLIILLrO'
XAU L!UI LI ClrCXG UIE L!Wi LrG
ULU LNIN C ~ C L I I I W QXUC
raau W L U ~~ L C L :
GICL
 PREFACE

The history of m h d is the history of its spiritual

and moral evolution. The Jewish people was intended to be
and actually has been the bearer of this evolution. Thus,
the hist.ory of the Jews is inseperably linked to the history
of all mankind.
Whether or not one agrees with the above assessment
of the meaning of history, the facts of history compel the
realization that Jewish history has been and is universal
in its scope. Because of its unique historical career, the
Jewish people has been connected with the history of nearly
every nation on earth. This universal aspect of Jewish
history is further heightened by the recognition that from
the very beginning all Jewish historical sources were based
on the idea of 'One World,' which only in our days has
regained its strength among the nations of the earth. The
more we progress the more it wiII exert its influence on a11
aspects of intellectua1 life. The study of history especially
will require the development of a point of view which re-
lates the history of every country to the whole world.
(Stephen Spender "The Intellectuals and Europe's Future,"
in Commentary, January 1947, p. 11) The conviction
grows that the only history which makes any sense is uni-
versal history (Nouy, p. 9 9 1 ) ; and there can be no doubt
that this insight is one of the fundamentals of Jewish
history.
The Jewish people, furthermore, has become central in
the development of human culture. Even with full recog-
nition of the contributions of Greece and Rome, it may
well be questioned whether any other nation has so pro-
foundly influenced the course of human life or has con-
tributed comparable stimuli to the thought and action of
our day. (William A. Irwin, in The Intellectual Adventure
of Ancient Man, Chicago, 1947) On the religious tradi-
tions of the Jew are based the beliefs of hundreds of mil-
lions of human beings. The Bible has become the "Book
of Mankind." "One World-One Book" has become a
slogan of our days. Rather impressive is the following ap-
praisal of the Jews by Mark Twain: "If the statistics are
right, the Jews constitute one per cent of the human race.
It suggests a nebulous dim puff of star dust lost in the
blaze of the Milky way. Properly the Jew ought hardly to
be heard of; but he is heard of, has always been heard of.
His contributions to the world's list of great names in
literature, science, art, music. finance, medicine, abstruse
learning. are also way out of proportion to the smallness
of his bulk." (From "The hlan that Corrupted Hadley-
burg") Thus, at least to a certain degree, has come true
the blessing bestowed on Abraham: "And in thee shall
all the families of the earth be blessed" (Gen 1433) which
in the prophecy of Isaiah (4236) took the form: "I . . .
will give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of
the nations."
Finally, as Isaiah had also predicted (44: 7) , the Jewish
people, in spite of all the unparalleled persecutions it has
suffered throughout the centuries, has become the eternal
pople. Again we may quote Mark Twain who depicts this
phenomenon in the following poignant way: "The
Egyptian, the Babylonian, and the Persian rose, filled the
planet with sound and splendour, then faded to dream-
stuff and passed away; the Greek and the Roman followed,
and made a vast noise, and they are gone; other peoples
have sprung up and held their torch high for a time, but
it burned out, and they sit in the twilight now, or have
vanished. The Jew saw them all, beat them all, and is
now what he always was, exhibiting no decadence, no
infirmities of age ,no weakening of his parts, no slowing
of his energies, no dulling of his alert and aggressive
mind." (Z.C.)
No starting point seems more adequate for Jewish
history than that chosen by the Bible: The Creation.
Modern excavations have vastly enriched our knowledge
and have shown us that that which, as recently as fifty
years ago, was believed to be a beginning actually had been
preceded by a long cultural development. Under the impact
of these discoveries, the Patriarchal Age has become an
essential epoch of Jewish history. (See Kittel, II, P. IX)
But even the Patriarchal Age was not the begimmg. Its
roots go back to the preceding epoch which is also brought
back to new life by the archaeological discoveries of our
time.
Thus, the following division of Jewish history seems
appropriate:
First Period: The Primitive Times, from the Creation
to the time of Abraham.
Second Period: The Patriurchul Age, From Abraham
to the Death of Joseph.
Third Period: Becoming a Nation, From the Exodus to
the Conquest of Canaan.
Fourth Period: The First Commonwealth, From the
Conquest of Canaan to the Destruction of the First
Temple.
Rfth Period: The Second Commonwealth, to the De-
struction of the Second Temple.
Sixth Period: D-nance of the East. (70-1000 C.E.)
Seventh Period: Dominance of the West.
Eighth Period: Dominance of Eastern Europe.
Ninth Period: Dominance of the New World and Pal-
&.
The present volume contains the First Period. It has
become rather extensive because, for lack of predecessors
in this field, many details had to be worked out h m the
elements.
Special thanks are due the Spero Foundation, which
has made possible the publication of this volume.
Rabbi Leo Jung has sponsored the edition and read the
book in manuscript form. It has benefited much from his
erudite criticism and sup:gestions. Mr. Allen Mandelbaum,
English Lecturer at Yeshiva University, has been of much
assistance in the editorial superivsion.
New York, Nisan 5708 PH.BIBERFELD
 CONTENTS
PAGE
PREFACE.......................................................................................... 4
FUNDAMENTALQUESTIONS ........................................................ 7
CHRONOLOGY................................................................................ 29

SECTION I , PRIMITIVE TIMES

CHAPTERI. PREHISTORY AND CREATION .................................... 41
1. Jewish Tradition about Prehistory and C m t i ~ ~
2. Biblical Tradition and Modern Science
3. Creation in the Tradition of Mankind

CHAPTER11. THE FIRST HUMAN BEINGS .................................. 49

1. The Cradle of Civilization
2. The Intelligence of the First Human Beings
3. The Religious Belief of the First Human Beings
4. Origin of Laws. Basic Laws
5. Paradise Lost

1. Beginning of Civilization
2. Rise of Urban Civilization
3. The Results of Modern Excavations
4. The Ten Generations before the Flood

CHAPTERIV. THE FLOODAND ITS CONSEQUENCES ................ 73

1. The Flood
2. The Tradition of Mankind about the Flood
3. Conditions after the Flood

CHAPTERV. THE SONS OF NOAH AND THEIRDESCENDANTS 83

1. The Sons of Noah
2. The Descendants of Japhet
3. The Descendants of Ham
4. The Descendants of Shem
5. The Dispersion of the Nations
 PAGE
CHAPTERVI. T H E BUILDING OF THE TOWER.
CONFUSIONOF THE LANGUAGE .......................... 95
1. The Building of the Tower
2. The Tradition of Mankind
3 . Confusion of the Language

CHAPTERVII. POST-DILUVIAL CIVILIZATION ............................ 107

1. The Rise of Post-Diluvial Civilization
2. Unification of the Land. Naram-Sin, Nimrod
3. The Babylonian Empire

CHAPTERVIII. T H E POSTDILUWAN PATRIARCHS ................... I 15

1. The Settlements of the Postdiluvian Patriarchs
2 . Terah at Ur. His Migration to Haran
3. The Traditions of the Postdiluvian Patriarchs
4. The Alphabet

APPENDIX:T H E BIBLEAND THE ANCIENTLAW CODES ............ 129

1. Current Opinions about the Parallels between the Bible
and the Ancient Law Codes
2. Jewish Tradition about the Laws of Antiquity
3. The Code of Hammurabi
4. The Hittite Code of Laws
-a

5. The Book of the Covenant

6. Assyrian Laws
7. The Structure of the Various Groups
8. Final Conclusions
 FUNDAMENTAL QUESTIOKS.

I. The archaeological discoveries of the last decades have

forced modern, scientific scholars of the Bible to reverse
! completely their attitude towards the Old Testament, At1
the end of the last century, they stood ready to deny the
i historical foundation of practically everything related in
the earlier books of the 0. T.I Today, their entire position
\
i has undergone radical changes, and inscriptional data have :
\established the historicity of innumerable passages and i
istatements of the O.T. and confirmed its reliability as a
'historical ~ o u r c e .This
~ revolution was heralded by the
famous pronouncement of Rudolf Kittel with regard to
the solidity of the critical construction of Hebrew history.
In 1921 he declared that he felt very doubtful about the
conclusions of the Wellhausen school, because of the weak-
ness of their foundation and the steadily widening dis-
crepancy between them and the data from the ancient
Orient. ('Es fehlte dem Gebaeude das Fundament, und es
jehlten den Baumeistem die Masstaebe.) The present
position of modern Biblical scholarship is defined by the
following statement: 'The picture of Israel's history from
the Patriarchal Age to the Restoration is curiously like
the traditional one in essentials. Details may be altered
but the broad outlines remain the same ~ubstantially.'~
This complete reversal is, in itself, a fact of first rate
importance. The so-called scientific approach, with all its
arrogant, contemptuous treatment of the Bible, has, in
almost all instances, been proved a complete failure by the
facts themselves. There were, obviously, a number of
misconceptions and methodological errors which rendered
impossible the recognition of the truth. As many of them
still prevail, a clarification is yet necessary.
/ 11. "Scientific" thinking was and is based on certain
implicit suppositions which, made explicit, can be seen as
essentially incorrect.
The first and most important one is that only those
I facts can be verified which are in accord with our experi-
ence. As Jewish history is fundamentally based on phenom-
ena such as revelation, prophecy, and miracle which are
beyond common experience, the veridical nature of that
history must be denied. This, of course, has extraordrnsry
implications.

1
The second pre-supposition in such "scient%cn thinking
is the description of the growths of cultures in purely i
evolutionary terms. The simple archetype for such develop-
ment may be described as follows: Modern nations have
developed from a state of illiteracy and primitive civiliza-
tion. They accepted culture gradually from older nations
and learned the art of writing. Their first literary efforts
were communal epics and songs celebrating the deeds of
their tribal heroes. Historical chronologies followed. Then,
as culture reached a higher level, individual poets of repute
arose, science and research expanded.
This experience, true within certain limits, was looked
upon as a scheme of universal validity. When the unani-
mous voice of the sources of Jewish history was against
it, showing an overwhelming height of culture at its very
begmning, that voice must needs be untrue; its complete
lack of reliability was a foregone conclusion. The axiom
of evolution postulated that Jewish history, too, had to
start with illiterate, semi-savage tribes with a crude religion,
receiving their culture from their more highly civilized
neighbors, the Babylonians, the Egyptians, and the in-
habitants of Canaan.
This way of thinking is impressively illustrated by the
following statement made in the hey-day of evolutionary d
thought: "The history of a people begins with its written
documents. Therefore, the question of where we have to
start the reliable history of Israel depends, in the first place,
on the problem of when we may assume written documents
to have been made. Their value will then be judged
by experience . . . According to common experience, mem-
ories beyond the time of grandparents cannot be relied
upon as historical sources. Written records in Israel were
possible only from the time the Jews settled down and
developed into a real nation. A recording of events is
possible only when such a state of social organization
is reached which provides the means and the necessity for
them . . . Far more important is the second cause: the
necessities of administration, which, however, belong to the
time of a developed State. Thus it follows that a historical
tradition could begin in Israel only at the time of the
kings. Only then could a Mazkir (officer of the records)
be appointed to write down the deeds of his master."6 On
this rather shaky foundation, full of numerous arbitrary
assumptions, Wellhausen and his school constructed a his-
tory of the Jews which had nearly nothing in common with
the traditional picture.
In spite of the complete reversal enforced by the arch-
aeological discoveries, many of the old suppositions are
still maintained. They have merely been modified for
purposes of adjustment to the new situation.
f the earlier tradition of Israel is now i /
"?
genera y admitted. It is furthermore conceded that writing :1
was widely known and in common use in Palestine and
Syria throughout the Patriarchal Age and that the Hebrew ,
alphabet was used for everyday purposes in the 14th and
13th century B.CX6 From this, a reasonable observer !
I
/

might well conclude that the reliable early history o f . j

Israel was written down at a very early time. Instead, we i
now are taught that the literary sources might be placed i
even hter than Wellhausen had assumed, as the Israelites, j ,I
though they were a u i e d rather o n o r a l '
tPaditiarrrThe accuracy of oral tradition for many centuriesl j
h-~s-Uaaenlybecome a well established fact? With its help,
the Israelites performed a miracle of meticulous transmis-
sion of the finest details of their early history.
Modern scientists thus reveal themselves as unwilling to
accept the consequences of their own ideas when these
consequences happen to confirm-the truth of the Bible.
The reliabilitv of the Bible as a historical source is based
solely upon the fact that it was written down at a very
 early time. Oral tradition, therefore, was always controlled
and not able to influence the sacred text.
, References to the Iliad and other epics as parallels for
; a long oral traditions are beside the point. The Greeks
; 1 otw- wn.e and had tosrae
rely, on
--- oral..---.--.-
transmiss~on
i for at least six centuries
' -v7-Tn 1 wri ing was In use
ffGGXG-earliest times and was surely used to preserve
the most precious traditions.
Underlying this strange turnabout of scientific argument
' is the intent to maintain the fundamental supposition that
only those facts can be recognized that are in accord with
common ex~erigace. Supra-natural facts are denied a
priori. To achieve this purpose tFe -stiangesE-e-anations
=l1ingly accepted. This is apparent also in the attitude
towards the prophets. As general experience endorses only
vaticinatio ex eventu, their predictions are usually dated
subsequent to the events to which they obviously point.
The book of Isaiah, for instance, has to be torn arbitrarily
into two or more parts lest its predictions fail to conform
to common experience. The book of Daniel has t o be
ascribed to the time of the Maccabees, as-retold events
which took shape at this time. Again the Biblical accounts
of the l o n m i t y of the first human beings and the
PatriarcGMarenot in accord with our present experience.
Thus, though their reliability in general and in detail has
t o be admitted, they are rejected; and, in their place, forced
and awkward solutions are suggested, e.g. that the 175
years of Abraham may be divided among three gener-
,ations.l0
An examination of the basic assumption that only those
phenomena that are confirmed by common experience can
be recognized as valid, reveals its total fallacy. First of
all, there are many facts which. until a given time, were
not kn- they finally became known they widened
thX3iGmmanexperience which, until then, had been willing
to deny them. The existence of the continent of America,
was not in accord with common experience and, therefore,
was denied until it was discovered. Archaeological discoveries,
in particular, should have taught us prudence and careful-
ness in this respect. Recent excavations, again and again,
 have proved contrary t o all expectations, overthrowing
many assumptions which had been deemed ~nquestionable?~
Moreover, human experience and understanding, because
of their own inherent limits, are not reliable criteria for
determining the existence or non-existence of certain pheno-
mena. There are, without any doubt, thugs beyond human
understanding. The space which surrounds the earth does
exist. Nevertheless, we are unable to comprehend its naturi.
\Ye cannot imagine it without any limits, nor can we
think that it has limits. Thus, the limits of our own '
imagination and understanding must be accepted. VC7e
must face the fact, that they, together with the common
experience which is based upon them, are no sufficient cri-
teria for determining the existence of a certain phenomenon.
There are still other suppositions which lead modern ".-("
-
scientists to misinterpret the facts of Jewish history. The /'
IVellhausen theory, based on the a&m.- -of le_v_olution, -
assumed that Israelitic
- monotheism did not go b a- -x to
Moses but was the rgsult e E Y o T u t i o n a n a that
Jew= religious institutions passed through the three
Hegelian stages of evolution, pre-prophetic, prophetic, and
legal.12 Both assumptions have been disproved. Archaeology
has clearly demonstrated the artificiality of the Hegelian
formulas.13 Nevertheless, the axiom of evolution in general
is still upheld and especially used to interpret the earlier
times and the Patriarchal Age?4 The very early dates
claimed for the beginning of human culture in the various
areas were merely the consequences of such an assumption.
Now, however, the general trend is directed toward a con-
siderable reduction of all these early datesT5 Moreover, it
becomes increasingly evident that a high cultural level
was present in many civilizations at a very early time?6
Thus, the basic idea of a prolonged and slow progress of
mltural development is no longer in accord with the facts.
-4 growing conviction that the theory of religious evolution,
too, is contrary to the f a d s can be found among competent
scholars. Supported by an immense body of data, W.
Schmidt, in his monumental work, Der Ursprung der
Gtt.esidee (1919-36) , has demonstrated that all indications
point to a primitive monotheism which padually degen-
 erated, thus disproving the simple evolutionary progres-
sion.'? Its use as a means of interpretation is, therefore,
an unwarranted supposition, distorting the entire picture
of the early history.18 The theory of legal evolution has
been deemed. the greatest achievement of Wellhausen and
the one most fit to resist the impact of new evidenceJS
For the insufEciency of the evolutionary approach even
here, we refer the reader to the appendix on "The Bible
and the Ancient Law Codes."
Another assumption which has exerted a wide influence
, I
!, - on the whole area of Jewish history has its origin in modern
anti-Se*tic ~reiu-s. It is an interesting fact that the
foundations of modern Biblical Criticism were laid by a
'brilliant succession of trained German Hebraists and
Orientalists', all 'A an' Christiap, despite repeated *ti-
Semitic statements --+%IT-
o e ~ontrary.8~ One can, with reason,
assert that people who, blinded by prejudice, cannot under-
stand a living Jew, are disqualified from giving us a true
picture of the Jewish past.M
/,
There is, finally, among Christian authors, a tendency
( to depict Jewish history as a mere preparatory 0y1.1
>,' -4 Christianit . Judaism is represente~ a t 1
prop e IC teachings which had to be restored and climaxed,
0 of n
and the New Testament is held up as the extension and
fulfilment of the Old T e ~ t a m e n t . ~
Every one of these pre-suppositions implicit in the
thinking of those scholars who pretend to be scientific and
unprejudiced is sufficient to distort completely the true
picture of Jewish history. It is not hard to realize the
effect they produce when combined. They are t h d t i o n a l
elements upon which nearly every single statement or
.-t -------..
Some examples may illustrate this point.
The Biblical view that Elam is a son of Shem was
questioned by the 19th century Bible scholars as the Elam
of history is Aryan. Recent discoveries, however, have
shown that early Elam was peopled by Semites. Forced
to admit the accuracy of the Biblical statement, one
of these prejudiced "scientists" adds: "The fact (that this
statement is correct) is not one which the writer of the
 verse-is likely to have k n o ~ n . "This
~ remark exposes very
clearly the negative dogmatism of Bible critics. In their
hands, the Bible experiences that treakment to which the
Jews have become so accustomed, which has been so
poigantly characterized by Lasing's famous words: 'Tut
nichts. Dm Jlrde &d ~ e r b r a n n t ' . ~(It does not matter.
The Jew wilI be burnt.)
J o s e p h u ~reproduced
~~ the records of Tyre which mention
I the relations between king Solomon and Hiram, king of
Tyre, in conformity with the Biblical accounts. The
interesting comment of Schradef16 was that these records
may be trusted so far as Hiram is concerned, but with
respect to Solomon they cannot be relied upon, as they
must have originated at a much later time when post-exilic
Judaism made its influence felt in Tyre. ('als das nach-
edische Judentum sich in T y w breit machtel')
.
The Byzantine historian, .Prompius, secretary of Belisar,
I reports a Phoeni ' ' ' ' 'I was engraved on
two stone pillars in Numidia and read: 'We are, that fled
before the robber Joshua son of Na~e.'~'This inscription
codrms the tradition28 that part of the population of
Palestine fled to Africa when Joshua invaded the country.
Modern Biblical scholars, however, do not like it, because
it implies the recognition of Joshua as a historical person-
ality. They cannot deny that Procopius, an unbiassed and
erudite witness, read the inscription. They assume, there-
fore, that it was forged by guides led by the desire to
make their region more attractive to foreigners.= They
forget to add that these guides had very carefully studied
the Jewish tradition.
Sapienti sat. Obviously there are no limits to the argu-
ments of modern scholars when the goal - to be reached
is the r e j e c t l h a L B U d traditions.
III. The effects of the fallacious basic suppositions which
have been characterized so far are furthermore aggravated
by the methodological errors which in part emanate from
them.
The linguistic or philo methods used to examine
and j u d k t i e text of the ave been proved unreliable
time- and again?O In connection with tbis, the following
 statement of Sellin31 regarding the campaign of Amrafel,
(Gen. XIV) is very instructive: "On the other hand, the
antiquity of the kernel of the report may be deduced from
several linguistic and material details. Though they had
been declared late or fictitious because of their uniqueness
1 within the O.T., their reliability and antiquity has been
;
'
proved by recent discoveries. A special problem is repre-
sented by the names of the kings of the East. Whereas
i previoudy thex - - w ~ d e k a a - - m e r emventlons, a g d
! part-Gf thehi has been proven toaxX6jEX-e:-t __.._-_-
h i s t o r i c a l l y _ v e . r ~ o ~ eTFIs
' 7 remark demonstrates the
i total inadequacy of these philological and linguistic methods
: as a basis for reliable judgment.
Nor are the chronological methods any more reliable.
' All modern historians still depend upon the EgyGtian priest
and writer, Manetho, who lived about 250 R.C.E. He was a
'; contemporary of Berossus, a Babylonian priest, and the
/ two priests became rivals in the procl:mation of the
; antiquity and greatness of their respective Tl~e
extremely early dates for the beginning of the dynasties
st,ill current in many chronological systems are derived
from Manetho's E m t i a n H i s t o n which has exerted a
wide i n i n c e on the whole area of Ancient History far
beyond the limits.--of-&at of E m t . I t is now certain that
BEZFiio was a-careless and uncritical compiler, that his
dynastic totals are so absurdly high that they are not
worthy of a moment's and that all the systems
based on his lists are much too high.34 Nevertheless, his
influence is still pervasive. The usual division of Egyptian
history into thirty dynasties is based directlv upon his
work: and in the arrangement of all available material
within a framework of consecutive dynasties, all modern
historians still rely on him?5
One of the bases of early Rabvlonian chronology was
a reference on a cylinder of Nabonidtis (about 550 R.C.E.)
to the effect that he had discovered in the foundation of a
temple at Agade an inscription of Naram-Sin which no
one had seen for 31200 years. This notice was generally
deemed sufficient to p l a c e m m - S i n a t a m R f' Fb
the time of Adam. I t goes without saying that arguments
e
 against it derived from Biblical chronology were utterly
unfit to shatter this firm b ~ i s . 3Now. ~ however. it is
admitted that this early date is i n ~ r ~ K ! - a n , d - ~ - ~ ~ a % F m -
Sin has to be placed at least 1100 years Z ~ t e r . 3M ~ ocrn
t ! b m & @ T € ~ ~ - ~ elater.a> a r s
The same surprising irreliability had to be conceded for
the time of the end of the third millennium and the
beginning of the second millenium. Quite recently a revolu-
tion in the whole chronology of Western Asia has brought
80wn the time of Hammurabi who originally had been
placed at about 2350 B.C.E. to 1738-1676, a trifling time
of about 620 years.39 This development is not, by any
means, completed. The obvious trend is ..directed towards
a reduction of the whole chronology to the limits set by
that very Biblical tradition which- h a d . - k - d i d e d . -
\$'hatever the final result of this trend may be, it is evident
that the chronological principles and methods hare been
proved insufficient and unreliable.
Not much more can be said for the reliability of the
results of modern archaeology. On the one hand. it is
based on the chronology of Manetho. Around his state-
ments the discoveries of the excavators and explorers are
grouped;40 and from what has been said before. the
inaccuracy of this method is apparent. On the other hand.
the rather shaky findings of the Bible critics are taken
over by archaeologists without reservation or e~amination.'~
Linguistic and philological insufficiencies are thus combined
with all the chronological
always the
u+~ichmag . b-z~ificiiii~ +
shortcomings. -Besides
. .. of genuine -. -2 there
archaeolo iealblunders
e o owmg example may
illu-strate this. Before 1930, a number of structures at vari-
ous sites in Palestine were, in accordance with the unani-
- - - - - is ,

mous opinion of archaeologists, taken for d e n t temples

with characteristic Semitic ' p i l l a r ~ e ynow turn out to
have been commodious houses. What were supposed to be
religious 'pillars,' are but the remains of stone posts which
once supported the roofs.'2 Under these circumstances there
can be no doubt that the results of modern archaeology :
must be treated with some skepticism.
TTnfortunately,many Jewish historians have not refrained
from accepting the results of this kind of "science" in spite
of its underlying suppositions and methodological blunders.
Where -seek_tarestare the splendour of their
f o ~ ~ m t i together n g small pieces o m
pmefy, -~theseTewGTi.1hGtofianscompete to destroy our
past, the glory of which is accessible to everyone who is but
willing to see the evident.
N.Modern scholars have thus been unable to reach
an unbiased approach to Jewish history. Such an approach,
however, is possible. We have only to be willing to accept
even those phenomena that are not in accord with our
common experience, provided that their truth can be
demonstrated. This is a platform for scientific thinking as
postulated by the laws of common sense. Any opposition
against it can easily be traced to the wrong supposition
that only those facts can be recognized which are in accord

- -

sources of Jewish
will, by their inner
;veracity, bear witness that these phenomena are not only
possibilities but actual truth.
1. One of the prime sources for the study of the history
of any nation must be the psycholo&aI character o m t
nation. gurprisingly little attention, howeve-& been
that factor of first-rate importance in the history
of the Jewish people. Because of its relative stability
throughout the centuries, this character structure is a
valuable source for an understanding of the past. The
outstanding character trait of the Jewish people is its
stubbornness. In the Bible it is repeatedly called the
'stiff-necked' people par excellencea and admonished for
its obstinacy.44 This stubbornness was mixed with keen
intelligence and irony, revealing itself, for instance, in the
following exclamation: 'Because there were no graves in
Egypt, hast thou taken us away to die in the wilderness'.'"
 With death a t their heels on the approach of the awesome
Egyptian army, the Jews call out with sharp irony that
surely Egypt, the land of huge cemeteries had no scarcity
of graves.46And that early stubborness of the Jewish people
can well be traced thr.?ttghout the centuries. In the
Talmud4? it is pointed out that the Jewish people is the
most inflexible of all the nations. Tacitus4"remarks that
when siege was laid to Jerusalem men and women were
equally obstinate, that they feared more to live, when
compelled to icave the country, than to die. Only this
stubbornness can explain the fact that the Jewish people,
alone among the nations of the Orient, was able to
withstand the overwhelming impact of Hellenism. It alone
can explain the fact that throughout $2000 years of exile, in
spite of the most cruel and unceasing persecutions in nearly
every country on earth, the Jewish people has remained
faithful to its heritage. Even today stubbornness is a
prominent feature of the Jewish people. Unbending are its
idealists; unyielding its materialists. At both poles an in-
comparable devotion to chosen purposes is manifest; and
despite centuries of suffering, Jewish irony and sarcasm,
too, are still alive. That a-nation SO obstinate finally ac-.
cepted phenomena iio6eeasliox>en to attack by ironic sar-
casm, is m ' r a - 9 G o n g proof of the truth of these
y, the whole literature of such a people
e- than an array of fraudulent or obscure
documents continuously produced and reproduced by
prophets and priests. The assumption is nothing less than
ridiculous that because of such documents the Jewish
people accepted not only a belief, but a legal code govern-
ing every detail of human life from dawn to dusk and
remained faithful to it for thousands of years. The dis-
crepancy between the national character as derived from
historical experience and such a course of action would be

The course as dzpicted h..

.. .
far more miraculous than the tradition with an its miracles.
v i n scad
6ii&-the&;;;i;;;h character;- late&-.by. it.
We3?i6iFmy from--experience that real miracles are ;
necessary to urge the Jewish people to adhere to the laws '
of Torah. On the other hand, we know from the same '
. . ,,
a
 ,experience that no power on earth could compel the
Jewish people, even today, t o accept even the slightest
change in any word in the Bible.49
2. Moreover, one must realize that the Jewish people
/- throughout the whole course of its history has been
b outstanding personalities whose moral dignity and

7
2 n a t i c a l h . e - s t . t r u h r e _r~~ea_.e_.
left.-.behind. Those who fought, very o f=kE
lze, against everything that was evil or disgusting, against
th%o

lies and deceptions, would never have represented their

words or the Torah as revelation if this were not the full
truth. They leveled the most acrimonious accusations
against the false prophets who dared t o misrepresent their
words as r e ~ e l a t i o n ;and ~ ~ if modern scholars are correct,
me should have t o assume that the true prophets did the
very same thing themselves. Again, the psychological
miracle involved in such an assumption is far greater than
the miracles of prophecy and revelation which it tries t o ex-
plain in this 'natural' way.51 The idea that pious fraud
and pseudoepigraphy were common in Israel was central
t o Bible criticism. Nearly every book and passage of the
O.T. has, a t one time or another, been stigmatized as a
literary forgery.52 Under the impact of the results of
archaeology, this assumption had to be given up as without
parallel in the pre-Hellenistic Orient which, we now know,
had an almost superstitious veneration both for the written
word and for oral tradition. Only in Hellenistic times did
this situation change radically.53
,3. Finally, the miraculous fate of the Bible among the
nations of the world demands our careful consideration.
\ In spite of the hate and persecution which the Jewish
'people has encountered everywhere, the Jewish Bible has
,i
become the Book of all mankind. As the fundamental reli-
;gious book o f % u n d r e d ~ o n s ,it has inspired nearly
'
every great man on earth and helped immensely t o build up
and shape the culture of every nation. The psalms of David
have conquered the heart of people everywhere, and the
emotional and spiritual experiences of the prophets have
proved normative for two-and-a-half millennia of Christian
religious life.54The Ten Commandments are progressively
 recognized as the basic laws inherent in human nature.66
Today the Bible points the way to the future of mankind.
These facts, indeed, require an explanation. Other books
written only some hundred years ago, however great they
may have been, fade away and vanish from the memory
of mankind. Books and codes of Biblical times are long
forgotten and, even when excavated, become objects of
scientific research alone, but never exert a wide influence
on the mass of mankind. But the Bible still dominates
mankind and has become the world's meatest book.u

There is only one adequate expkn-ation ,for .all-these

overwhelming facts: ThP l e 2 n a t .duman_b&y-if
i ~ ~ e ~ v e l a t&kesi o n i t ~ . t , e r q a l .I~t ~is impos-
shle to beheve that a number of nebulous scribes and vriests
who skillfully sifted and pieced together a collection of
obscure documents should have succeeded in creating the
greatest cultural monument on earth.
The verdict on the Bible already has been passed by
mankind. This fundamental fact should always be kept
in mind when there is any argument about minor details.
The whole concept on which Bible criticism is based is
irrelevant when we merely take into consideration the
fate of the Bible unto the present time.
V. The national character of the Jewish people as we still
experience it today, the moral integrity of its great leaders
as engraved in every word they left to posterity, and the
miraculous triumph of the Bible among mankind force us
to recognize revelation, prophecy, and miracles as historical
truth. Even common experience, however, if properly
evaluated, leads us to the very same results. !
I. Unparalleled in the history of mankind is the course i
of Jewish history eJren during the last 2000 years.=
hv e x a m i n a t i o n in all its details. The fact ,

of Jewish survival amidst a world of hate and contempt

in spite of unceasing oppressions and persecutions is a
historical miracle of first-rate importance. That during
\
!

this time of hardship greater than that sustained by any

nation, the Jewish people kept alive its moral and spiritual
strength and that today, nearly 1900 years after its State
was destroyed, it is reviving its dead language and starting
 to return to its native country-would seem inconceivable
', were we not experiencing this in our very day. If this
", ',:development, which is unique in the history of all e d ,
'pas predicted with all its details thousands of years sgo,
h e n , there is no honest explanation other than divine
.re~elation.~?

i d e r p 3 its ho-
'And the Lord shall
sca ter thee among all people, om the one end of the
earth even unto the other; . . . And among these nations
shall thou find no ease, neither shall the sole of thy feet
have rest; but the Lord shall give thee a trembling heart,
and failing of eyes, and sorrow of mind: And thy life shall
hang in doubt before thee; and thou shalt fear night and
day, and shalt have no assurance of thy life: In the
morning thou shalt say, Would G'd it were even! and at
even thou shalt say, Would G'd it were morning! for the
fear of thine heart wherewith thou shalt fear, and for
the sight of thine eyes which thou shalt see'.bs 9000 years
of exile have passed by now. But the fate of the Jewish
people during this time, seen retrospectively, cannot be
depicted more strikingly than in these concise words
written long before it even started.
The extraordinary devastation which the Holy Land has
undergone throughout the centuries up to the present time
was also predicted in the Bible. "So that the generation to
come of your children that shall rise up after you, and the
stranger that shall come from a far land, shall say, when
they see the plagues of that land, and the sickness which
the Lord has laid upon it; and that the whole land thereof
is brimstone, and salt, and burning, that it is not sown,
nor beareth, nor any herbs groweth therein, like the
overthrow of Sodorn and Gomorrah, Adma, and 'Zeboim,
which the Lord overthrew in his anger, and in his wrath.w
The significance of this prediction is fully comprehensible
only when we realize that it referred to the land of 'mi&
and honey'.
Furthermore, there is a rather amazing presage of the
destruction of the Jewish State by the Romans with all its
details which we know today as historical events. The
Bible tells us that a Jewish king would be led into
ca~tivity.6~ This actually happened to Aristobulus, the
son of Alexander Jannai. He was carried away by Pompey,
with his two daughters, his sons Alexander and Antigonus,
and a great number of Jewish captives, to Rome where he
was led before the triumphal chariot of the general. (61
B.C.E.) A t the same time the next prediction came true:
'The stranger that is within thee shall get up above thee
very high; and thou shalt come very After the
conquest of Jerusalem by Pompey Antipater, the Idumean
became the real ruler and appointed his sons as prefects,
Herod in Galilee and Pezahel in Jerusalem. Later Herod
became king, killed all the remaining members of the
Hasmonean dynasty, and went so far in his oppression and
mistreatment of the Jewish people that Jews became the
pariahs as their own ruler led the way in discriminating ,
against
This is followed by the prediction of the iron rule of the 1
Romans. 'Therefore shalt thou serve thine enemies which ,i
the Lord shall send against thee, in hunger, and in thirst, 1
and in nakedness and in want of all things: and he shall !
put a yoke of iron upon thy neck, until he have destroyed
thee. The Lord shall bring a nation against thee from far,
from the end of the earth, as swift as the eagle flieth; a
nation whose tongue you shall not understand; a nation
of fierce countenance, which shall not regard the person
of the old, nor show favour of the young.'64 These terse
words contain a vivid description of the merciless Roman
legions that came to Palestine from the end of the earth
and spoke a language unkown to the Jews. They were the
only ones among the nations of antiquity that fought under
the symbol of the eagle. The Romans governed the land
by their infamous procurators who so rapaciously plundered
and exploited it as to bring the population to utter despair
and revolt. This was foretold with the following words:
'And he shall eat the fruit of thy cattle, and the fruit of
thy land, until thou be destroyed: which also shall not
leave thee either corn, wine or oil, the increase of thy
kine, or the multiplication of thy sheep, until he have
destroyed theesB6
 Finally, the war of the Romans against the Jews is
depicted, including the siege of Jerusalem and the other
fortresses throughout the country, which led to the complete
disaster in 70 C.E.66 The terrible famine that killed off
the population during the siege of Jerusalem is described
in all its appalling details.'j7 The conclusion of the "chapter
of warning" forms the prediction that the Jewish people
would be led back to Egypt to be sold there into slavery.
This came true when Titus brought the Jewish captives to
Egypt where most of them were sold and only 700 selected
for the triumphal march in Rome.68
Faced with these overwhelming instances of actual
prophecy, the thesis cannot be maintained that this is not
in accord with our human experience. One cannot hold
that these predictions were written down after the events
had taken place, as it is impossible to contend that Deuter-
ononly was written after the destruction of the second
Temple. There is general agreement among the Bible critics
that it, was found in the temple at the time of king Joshiah
(621 B.C.E.), nearly 700 years before the predicted events
even started.
2. The cultural develogment of all mankind, too, has
-. -
d thousands o ~ a ~ v k c~ e u. i t s
=and -He shaTZGeTl"in the tents of Shem: and
let ~ a i a a nbe their servant .'6"ellenism and ~udaism,
Japhet and Shem, have become the teachers of all mankind.
Whereas in art and science modern civilization is built
upon the heritage of Greece, its religious ideas are based
upon that which went forth from the tents of Shem. With-
out being aware of this prediction, Albright70 states: 'Man
will never outgrow the empirical logic of Israel or the
ilristotelian logic of Greece. Future progress must conserve
all the essential elements of both.' Nor have the final
words come less true: "And let Canaan be their servant".
Until very recently people descended from the Hamitic
branch of mankind were the slaves of the other nations
who had left them behind in their cultural development.
Even to the New World they were brought as slaves.
The future of all mankind as it is taking shape in our
days was presaged by the prophets Tsaiah and Micah more
 than 2500 years ago.71 The United Nations and the ideals
of peace and justice have become the hope of all mankind.
They are the realizations of the predictions of these pro-
phets made at a time when mankind at large was utterly
unable to grasp their very essence. Now they are the
foundation of modern international law. This is well
recognized by modern authorities. "Of the greatest import-
ance, however, for the international law of the future,"
professes O~penheim,7~ "are the Messianic ideals and hopes
of the Jews, as these Messianic ideals and hopes are not
national only, but fully international. Thus we see the
Jews, a t least a t the time of Isaiah, had a foreboding and
a presentment of a future when all the nations of the world
would be united in peace. And the Jews have given this
ideal to the Christian world. It is the same ideal which
has in bygone times inspired all these eminent men who
have labored to build up an international law. And it is
again the same ideal which nowadays inspires all lovers
of international peace."
Thus we experience today the actual truth of a proph-
ecy which foresaw future developments thousands of
years before mankind was able to comprehend them. In
view of this experience of ours, it seems ridiculous to tear
to pieces the words of the prophet Isaiah in order to avoid
the recognition of his prophecies about the time of C ~ r e . ' ~
3. There is another prediction of this prophet about
the city of Babylon which should also open the eyes of all
those who, like Balaam, are unable to see the miracle in
front of them. The city of Babylon was the capital of the
old Babylonian empire from about a000 B.C.E. It was the
metropolis of antiquity, the center of Oriental civilization.
Nebuchadnezzar restored it in the middle of the sixth
century. Of this city the prophet said: "And Babylon, the
glory of kingdoms, the beauty of the Chaldeans' excellency,
shall be as G'd's overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah. It
shall never be inhabited, neither shall it be dwelt in from
generation to generation; neither shall the Arabian pitch
tent there; neither shall the shepherds make their folds
there. But wild beasts of the desert shall live there; snd
their houses shall be full of owls; and ostriches shall dwell
 there, and satyrs shall dance there. And jackals shall cry
in their desolate castles, and dragons in their pleasant
palaces: and her time is near to come, and her days shall
not be pr~longed."'~
After the reign of Cyrus, Babylon still continued to
be an important city, remaining one of the capitals of the
Persian Empire. But gradually the city became more and
more deserted. Alexander the Great intended to make it
the center of his world empire, but his early death pre-
vented this. And Babylon eventually passed from the scene.
It was reduced to rubble and remained in this condition
until our time as a constant witness to the truth of the
predictions of the Hebrew prophet^?^
The fate of Egypt was foretold by the prophet Ezekiel.
He predicted that it would be conquered by the Babyloni-
ans and become an inferior kingdom. "It shall be the basest
of the kingdoms; neither shall it exalt itself any more above
the nations."16 Now, 2500 years &er this prediction was
made, we know that it has come true. Egypt, one of the
world powers of antiquity, has never risen again to domi-
nate other nations. It has become a secondary kingdom
under the rule of other powers.
Thus, the future of mankind and the fate of nations
and cities have been predicted thousands of years ago in
unmistakable words. A denial of real prophecy can, there-
: fore, not be based upon the lack of human experien~e.7~
t ~

i i Our own knowledge compels us to admit the miraculous

i t truth of prophecies that are beyond the limits of rational
' i thought. Consequently, not the slightest argument can be
1
! derived from the common experience available to us now
j against the recognition of those phenomena and predictions
which belong to earlier times not open to our direct
investigation.
VI. These basic convictions are further strengthened
by the astonishing reliability of the Biblical sources which,
because of the results of modern excavations, is now
beyond doubt ."
Generally, it may be said that the Biblical sources
ssess an objectivity and impartiality never -matched by
-human
Nowhere on earth do we find the mis-
t - .
takes and blunders of kings so clearly described and con-
demned as those of the kings of Israel. No other nation
has given such unbiased reports of its defeats and of the
tributes paid to foreign conquerors. The Egyptian historio-
graphers avoided carefully the report of any humiliating
fact. The same was true with the otherwise more reliable
Assyrian annalsY8 A few examples will illustrate the re-
markable degree of accuracy that prevails in the Bible.
1. The fall of Samaria is recorded in the Book of
Kings79 with the following words: 'And it came to pass
in the fourth year of king Hezekiah, which was the seventh
year of Hoshea, son of Ela, king of Israel, that Shalmaneser,
king of Assyria, came up against Samaria and besieged it.
And they c o n q w e d it at the end of three years.' Only
by the change of the regular use of vowels did the Masorah
hint that not Shalmaneser but they, the Assyrians, took
the city. Modern excavations brought the explanation of
this, as it seemed, whimsical irregularity. Shalmaneser be-
sieged Samaria for three years; but he died before the end
of the siege, and the city was taken during the first months
of his successor, Sarg~n.~O This detail was rather unimpor-
tant for the course of Jewish history. Nevertheless, it was
retained to avoid an error.8l
After the conquest of Samaria, the Assyrians, as was
their custom, transplanted the population. The details
are reported in the Bible. The Israelites were settled ,in
Halah and Habor, by the river Gozan, and in the cities
of the MedesF2 On the other hand, men from Babylon,
Cutha, Awa, Hammath, and Sepharvaim were brought
into the cities of Samaria to replace the transplanted
I~raelites.~ In complete conformity therewith are the
records of king Sargon. 'At the beginning of my reign
in my &st year Samaria I besieged, I captured 37390
people from its midst I carried captive. 50 chariots I took
there as an addition to my royal force. . . I returned and
made more than formerly to dwell. People from lands which
my hands had captured I settled in the midst. My officers
over them as governors I appointed. Tributes and taxes
I imposed upon them after the Assyrian manner.'84
The name of Ssrgon occurs only once in the Bible,=
 and the critics asserted that it was a synonym for Shal-
maneser. Recent discoveries, however, have proved that
Sargon was the successor of Shalmaneser and one of the
greatest Assyrian rulers. Until the discovery of his palace
in 1845, the Biblical passage was the only text which had
preserved his name.86
2. Still more light is shed on the unprecedented reli-
ability of the Biblical records by the inscriptions of Senna-
herib. According t o the Bible, he came up against all the
fortified cities of Judah and took them. And Hezkiah, king
of Judah, sent to the king of Assyria at Lachish, saying:
" 'I have offended; return from me; that which thou puttwt

on me will I bear.' And the king of Assyria appointed unto

Hezekiah king of Judah three hundred talents of silver
and thirty talents of gold. . ."!j7 Sennaherib's account of
this campaign reads as follows: "And as to Hezekiah, the
Judean, who had submitted to my yoke, 46 of his strong-
holds, fortified cities, and smaller cities of their environs
without number, with the onset of battering rams and the
attach of engines mines, breaches, and axes I besieged,
I captured! . . ."88
The agreement between these separate sources is rather
astonishing. Nowhere in the annals of mankind do we find
a defeat with all its humiliating details described by the
vanquished nation with such impartiality as in this Biblical
record.
The campaign ended in a disaster that forced the
-4ssyrians to retreat from J e r u ~ a l e m .As
~ ~ the Assyrians,
in complete contrast to Biblical reports, never recorded
their own defeats or setbacks, they do not mention this
retreat either, though their annals show that they did not
conquer Jerusalem. The disaster they met with, however,
was so overwhelming that the Greek historian Herodotus
could but confirm it. He ascribed the retreat t o an emer-
gency created by a plague of field mice, which devoured
the quivers, bow-strings, and the thongs of the Assyrian
shields?O
The Bible report concluded with the assassination of
Sennaherib. 'So Sennaherib king of Assyria departed, and
went and returned, and dwelt a t Nineveh. And it came to
pass, as he was worshipping in the home of Nisroh his
god, that Adrammeleh and Sharezer his sons smote him
with the sword: and they escaped into the land of Ararat.
And Esar-haddon his son reigned in his stead.'91
I n contradiction to this report, the Babylonian chronicle
ststed that on the 90th of Tebet, Sennaherib, king of
b y r i a , was killed by his son in a rev0lt.9~Thus, he was
assassinated by only one of his sons. The same account was
given by Berossus and Nab0nid.9~With respect to this event
of first rate significance for Babylonian-Assyrian history all
indications seemed to be that the Babylonian records were
more reliable than the Biblical ones. However, the fact is
that the opposite is true. I n a more recently discovered
fragment of the prism of Esarhaddon, he reports himself
that his brothers revolted and slew Sennaherib, their father,
to gain the kingship. Before he could reach them in Nine-
veh, they fled from there to unknown ~ a r t s . 9 ~
The Babylonian Chronicle, Nabonid, and Rerossus were
mistaken;92 only the Biblical account proved to be correct.
I t was confirmed in all the minor details by the inscription
of Esarhaddon and proved to be more accurate regarding
this event of Babylonian-Assyrian history than the Baby-
lonian sources themselves. This is a fact of utmost impor-
tance for the evaluation of even contemporary sources not
in accord with Biblical tradition.
3. There is no need to quote more instances to demon-
strate the general reliability of the Bible as an historical
source, as discovery after discovery has established the
accuracy of innumerable details.94 However, this fact in
itself is highly significant. I t is a postulate of unbiased
scientific method to depend on a source of proven relia-
bility also for such details as otherwise have not beell
proven or are beyond the realm of common experience.
Scientific method should make it impossible to repudiate
such a source wherever its testimonies are opposed only
by unfounded suppositions.
VII. The reversal of the scientific attitude towards
Biblical tradition that has developed during the last decades
had particular bearing on the Patriarchal Age. Wellhausen
once pronounced the following view: 'From the patriarchal
 narratives it is impossible to obtain any historical informa-
tion with regard to the Patriarchs; we can learn something
about the time in which the stories about them were first
told by the Israelite people. This later period, with all its
essential and superficial characteristics, was unintentionally
projected back into hoary antiquity and is reflected there
like a transfigured mirage.'95 This entire fantasia, which
was the credo of practically all of the Old Testament schol-
ars of standing in Europe and America, has been swept
aside; and the extraordinary accuracy of the narrative of
the Patriarchs, tested by rapidly accumulating material,
, is now well e~tablished.9~
The attitude of Wellhausen and his followers, how-
ever, still survives with regard to the time preceding the
Patriarchal Age. Where the Biblical account of the Patri-
archal Age was once rejected, the preceding time is now
called mythological or legendary. But trends are already
visible that reveal the truth of the Bible for this early
period also.
To upset the clear testimony of the Bible that Meso-
potamia was the cradle of mankind, every effort had been
made to claim an earlier age for Egyptian culture. This
had to be given up under the impact of steadily-increasing
material showing that the culture of Egypt was later than
that of Babylonia and was influenced by or even derived
from itP7
The extremely early dates for the beginning of human
culture which, in contradiction to the Bible, were claimed
both for Egypt and Mesopotamia are gradually being re-
d u ~ e d . 9As
~ has alreadv been pointed out, the obvious
trend is directed towards a reduction of the whole chron-
ology to the limits set by Biblical traditionP9 This de-
velopment should be kept in mind. Errors of 1500 or 1600
years which are now admitted should shatter the com-
pletely unwarrant$ presumptuousness of modern Bible
scholars. The Patnarchal Age vas terra inmgnita for mod-
ern scholars at the time of Wellhausen. They refused to
rely on the Bible and pursued theories which proved to be
completely false, while the historicity of the Bible came
fully to light. At present, the preceding epoch is terra
incognita for them. Would it not be foolish to reject again
the help of the Bible only to fall victim to new fallacies?
Should not this experience be utilized by scientists who
always want to rely on human experience? The famous
pronouncement of Kittel should serve as a serious warning
to these scholars that their present concepts may be proven
wrong because both the theoretical and methodological
bases of these concepts have been found wanting before.
The teachings -of Wellhausen and his school have failed.
The remnants are crumbling under the impact of new dis-
coveries. The present position is well characterized by Al-
bright in his statement: 'The picture of Israel's history
from the Patriarchal Age to the Restoration is curiously
like the traditional one in essentials. Details may be altered,
but the broad outlines remain substantially the same."00

CHRONOWGY
A reliable chronology ~sa prerequisite for the study of
Jewish history. Without it, proper historical relations to !
the civilizations of other peoples cannot be established and i
cladied. Let us, therefore, as a preliminary task recon- j
struct the chronology of the early times as derived from
the Bible and other sources. The data derived from such
a chronology will accord completely with the rnmt recent \
i
findings of archaeological science. i
1. The Bible provides continuous chronological dates 1
up to the death of Joseph.' On the basis of the traditional i
era of creation ( m a m u d ) they lead to the following '
dates of the common era. x\

The Flood-9104. The Chinese tradition is very close, \

placing the Flood in the year 9900? According to Indian
tradition, a new age, the Silver Age, started in 9904.'
Birth of Abraham-1819. This date is corroborated
by recent excavation in the area of the Dead Sea, suggest-
ing very strongly that the time of Abraham cannot be
placed earlier than the 19th century B.CJL5
Birth of Isaac--1'719.
Lifetime of Jmb1659-1505.
Death of Joseph-1451.
 The Sojourn in Egypt lasted from 1533 (130th year
of Jacob, Gen. 47:9) to 1313, altogether 310 years.
The Biblical account that it lasted 400 or 430 years6 in-
cludes the preceding time leading to the Egyptian bondage
either from the birth of Isaac (400) or from the time of
the Covenant with Abraham (430) .7 The sojourn in Egypt
cannot have lasted for 400 years. Such an assumption is
ruled out when we consider the lifetime of all the genera-
tions who lived there.
There is a possibility that the 430 years are dated
from the time of the Hyksos who ruled over Egypt and,
apparently, also over Palestine. When they were driven
out of Egypt, Palestine remained under Egyptian rule.
Thus, from about 1'730 onwards, Abraham and his de-
scendants were really under Egyptian rule. This may well
be the meaning of the words of the Bible:8 'Now the
sojourning of the children of Israel that they stayed in
Egypt was four hundred and thirty years.' I t is noteworthy
that in the following sentence referring to the actual
Exodus not Egypt is mentioned, but 'the land of Egypt:'
indicating that after having stayed under Egyptian domi-
nation for 430 years (partly in Palestine) the Jews finally
went out of the land of Egypt.
The Hyksos are known to have established their own
era, named after Tanis, their capital city? The Ramesside
House, tracing its ancestry back to one of the Hyksos
kings, erected the '400 pear stela' of Tanis to commemorate
his time. It may well be that the 400 and 430 years of the
Bible are in direct connection with this era.1°
The date of the Exodus thus is 1313. The general
Jewish tradition is followed here.ll Some Jewish authorities
place it 30 years later a t l383?'
Among modern scholars there is an 'early Exodus
theory' assigning the Exodus t o the middle of the 15th
century. (see sub II) The results of recent excavations,
however, tend to discredit this. The year 1390 or a few
years earlier is gradually being accepted as the date of
the Exodus.lz
The next date is provided by the 480 years which,
according to I Kings 6:1, elapsed between the Exodus and
the beginning of the buildmg of the temple in the fourth
year of King Solomon. The traditional chronology of the
S e t h Ohm follows the literal meaning of this statement.
As a result, only 903 years remain for the entire time from
the building of the temple to its second destruction.
(1313-480 plus 70) After a further subtraction of 70 years
for the Babylonian exile, only 833 years are left for the
time of the first and the second temple. According to the
Seder Ohm they sre divided into 410 and 430 yesrs re-
spectively. The very short time thus available for the
period of the second temple led to the reduction of the
time of the Persian kings to only % years. It was assumed
that the kings Koresh, Darjavush, and Artachshacta were
identical and that Ezra already came to Palestine one
year after the building of the second temple.
These consequences were rejected by R. Serachja of
Lunel13 as incompatible with the words of the Bible.14
To solve these diEiculties, the suggestion has been made
that the 480 years of the Book of the Kings be considered
a mere symbolical number such as those that frequently
occur in Egyptian chronologies. Then the time necessary
for the later period could easily be subtracted from it.15
Such an assumption, however, would be unparalleled in
the whole Bible and seems unjustified for a book written
in the prophetic spirit.16 It is, moreover, unnecessary; for
the Bible itself points the way to an adequate solution.
The genealogy of King David shows only four genera-
tions for the time from the conquest of the land to his
own time (Salmo-Boas-OwedJesse)?' If we assume a
period of 480 pears from the Exodus to the fourth year
of king Solomon, these four generations together must have
lived 366 years,. as we have to allow 40 years for the
wandering in the desert, 70 years for K i i David, and 4
years for Solomon. This would be possible only if we
assume that Salmo, the first of the line, was one year old
at the time of the conquest and that each of the following
generations was born when their respective fathers were
91 years old.18 This seems very improbable. The six pre-
ceding generations of the same genealogy, from Judah to
Nahshon, cover only 290 years, which means that, on the
average, one generation was separated from the next by
about 40 years.
The genealogy of King David thus demonstrates that
the 480 years must have a meaning similar to the 400 or
430 years for the sojourn in Egypt. There, too, the life-
time of the generations living in Egypt was proof of the
shorter duration of the whole period. The sums of 400 or
430 years were to include the preceding time preparing for
the historical climax in Egypt. I n the very same way, the
time of the Exodus, as referred to in the Book of Kings,
may have been counted from those preceding events which
started the entire historical development that led finally
to the Exodus. There is, indeed, one event of outstanding
significance which fulfills these requirements: the death
of Joseph. A turning point in the early history of the Jews,
it marked the end of the Patriarchal Age and the begin-
ning of a new epoch, that of the oppression, which finally
led to the Exodus. It is, therefore, the beginning of the
Book of the Exodus. Counting 480 years from this event,
which took place in 1451, we arrive a t the year 971, which
according to dates derived from completely independent
Assyrian inscription was, indeed, the fourth year of king
Solomon. The meaning of the 480 years would then be that
that much time had elapsed from the beginning of the
era of the Exodus starting with the second book of the
Torah and the death of Joseph until the building of the
first temple.
Thus, the main problems of the later chronology are
solved. There now remain 1041 years for the time of the
first temple, the Babylonian exile, and the second temple,
instead of the 903 years of the S~&TO h . The difference
of 139 yean is made up by the time that elapsed between
1451 and 1313.
This chronology is in full accord with the traditional
era of creation ( a e ~ amundi) which is based on the tradi-
tion of the Sanhedrin. Its reliability is clearly illustrated
by the fact that its dates for the second millenium B.C.E.
have been widely confirmed by the most recent archae-
ological discoveries.lg The beginning of the Seleucid era, a
basic date for the chronology of the first millenium B.C.E.,
 has been handed down as the year 3448 in complete agree-
ment with the general chronology putting it at 313
B.C.E.20. The difficulties arose solely from the inaccurate
apportionment of the correct space of time. The 1389
years from the Exodus to the second destruction were di-
vided into 480 years until the building of the first temple,
410 years for the first temple, 70 yeaxs for the Babylonian
exile, and 430 years for the second temple. Instead, the
division must be 941, 385, 70, 586 years, respectively. The
total, however, of 1389 years remains unchanged.
We thus get the following dates for the time after the
Exodus:
The Conquest of the Land started in 1979. This, again,
is corroborated by recent excavations in Palestine. The
destruction and burning of several sites by the Israelites
must have taken place in the middle of the 13th century?'
The Period of the Elders and Judges lasted from about
1345 to about 1030, for only 215 years. This is in accord
with the fact that only four generations of ancestors of
King David lived during this time. No contradiction can
be found in the account that Jephta based the claims of
the Israelites to the country east of the Jordan on a
possession of 300 years.22 This was an approximate num-
ber intending to show that the Israelites possessed the
country from times immemorial. Besides, the time of
occupancy of their predecessor, King Sihon, may have been
included.23
Deborah-about 1195."
Destruction of Shiloh-about 1050?5
King Saul-1036-1015.26
King David-1015-975.
King Solomon-975-935.
Partition of the Kingdom-934.
-om of Isrclel-934-799.
Kingdom of Judah-934-586.
Babylonian ExilH86-516.
Persian Rule--536-339.
Greek Rule-439-140.
Beginning of the Seleucid Era, according to tradition
1000 years after the exodus,27- 313.
 Jewish Rulers-140-B.C.E.4 C.E.
Roman War Against the Jews-86-70 C.E.
11. As has been mentioned previously, there is an early
Exodus theory prevalent, &ping the Exodus to the
middle of the 16th century. It is, however, incompatible
with a number of basic data, some of which are provided
by recent excavations.
1. It is not in accord with the traditional era of crea-
tion. There are 2448 years from the creation to the Exodus,
to which must be added 1450 years, the number of years
B.C.E, and 1947 years, the number of years C.E, making
a total of 5845 years against the traditional 5707 of the era.
2. According to this theory, Abraham's birth would
have to be dated at 1950. Recent excavations, however,
have revealed that he cannot be placed earlier than the
19th century.es
3. One of the strongest supports of this theory has
been the fact that the Tell-el-Amama letters (about
1400) enumerate the Habirus among the tribes invading
Canaan. But there is increasing agreement to the effect
that the information of Tell-el-Amarna about the Habiru
invasion with regard to its form and scope could never
be harmonized with the Biblical story of Joshua's cam-
paig~~.~~
4. The Bible connects the bondage in Egypt with the
name of Ramses. This can refer only to Ramses II (dated
about 1300), who is well known for his numerous build-
ings. The storage cities of Pithom and Ramses, mentioned
in the were erected by him. There is no evidence
that there had been any town before hi time. The Biblical
account cannot refer to Ramses I as he ruled only two
years over EgyptP1
5. It is argued that the 'early Exodus theory' is attested
by an inscription of Pharaoh Mernephtah, the successor
of Ramses 11. In his victory inscription on the famous
'Pillar of Mernephtah' of the fifth year of his reign he
bow:
'The kings are overthrown saying 'Maam'
Not one holds up his head among the nine bows.
Wasted is Tehenu (Lybia)
 Kheta is pacified (Hittites)
Plundered is the Canaan with every evil.
carried off is Askelon,
seized upon is Gezer,
Yenoam is made a thing not existing,
Israel is desolate, his seed is not;
Palestine has become a widow for Egypt
All lands are united, they are pac%ed;
Every one that is turbulent is bound
by King Mernephtah, who gives life like
Ra every dayPZ
The proponents of the "early Exodus" theory claim
that this inscription presupposes the presence of Israelites
in Palestine in the fifth year of Mernephtah, the Pharaoh
of the Exodus according to their opponents. This inter-
pretation, however, is not accurate. The Egyptians used
a certain 'determinative' in connection with the names of
settled peoples. That sign is used in the inscription with
Tehenu, Kheta, Askelon, Gezer and Yenoam, but not with
I ~ r a e l ?indicating
~ that at this time Israel was still a
nomadic people that perhaps had just escaped from
Egypt?' This interpretation is further strengthened when
we follow, for the last lines, the translation given by
Ranke: 36
'All lands are united in peace.
Every one roaming around is bound.'
The boasting of Pharaoh would then tally with that
which is hinted a t repeatedly in the Bible? For Pharaoh
will say of the children of Israel, 'They are entangled in
the land, the wilderness has shut them in.'36
There is, on the other hand, proof that the Palestinian
campaign of Mernephtah preceded the conquest of Joshua.
On this campaign several places were named after Mern-
ephtah. Egyptian troops are reported to have been at the
Well of Mernephtah, in the mountains', at the 'fortress
of Mernephtah on the way to Upper Tyre', in the 'city
of Mernephtah in the region of A m ~ r This . ~ ~ 'well of
Mernephtah' is mentioned in the book of Joshuas8 as a
point on the borderline at the partition of the land. There
can, consequently, be no doubt that the conquest took
 place after the time of Mernephtah and did not precede
it by about 150 years.
6. I have already pointed out that there is increasing
archaeological evidence to the effect that the conquest
with its burning of cities took place in the middle of the
13th century.39 Furthermore, in the Biblical account of
the conquest, 'chariots of iron' are mentioned repeatedly.'O
As iron was not in use in Canaan before the 13th cen-
tury:' these chariots again point to a mid-13th century
date.
111. The chronology, as outlined above (sub I), is in
, accord with the dates provided by contemporary Assyrian
inscriptions and by that of the Ptolemaic Can~n.'~Assyrian
chronology is based upon a number of lists of eponyms,
officials who held office for a period of one year, and whose
names were used to date all the documents executed dur-
ing their office. As these lists sometimes refer to astro-
nomical events, such as eclipses of the sun, it is possible
with their help to attain some real accuracy. They cover
the period from about 900 to 650 B.C.E.43 Similarly re-
liable is the so-called Ptolemaic Canon, a list of the kings
of Egypt, Persia and Babylon as far back as the year
747 B.C.E. It is based on astronomical dates and is rather
accurate. These reliable sources are in accord with the
Biblical records.
Nothing comparable to their trustworthiness can be
found in the chronological dates of the Babylonian sources
for the earlier times. It is not until we arrive at about
$2000 B.C.E that the dates given may be accepted as
approximately corned. The foundation of the chronology
is frail. The kings are described as kings and rulers of
Kish, Lagash, Sumer, Agade, Ur, Isin, Larsa and Erech,
as well as of Babylon and Assyria. There is at present no
doubt that many of these dynasties were contemporary
and overlapping." I n the case of the individual cities there
existed, moreover, a tendency to start out with reigns of
legendary duration and work down to- reigns of actual
historical length.'5 As indicated previ~usly,'~many scholars
once tended to trust these Babylonian sources, and to
assume extremely early dates for the beginning of Babp-
 lonian history; but this practice has been completely re-
versed by recent discoveries. The present trend is clear.
After all the exaggerations of the past decades, it becomes
increasingly apparent that the Biblical accounts, which
had been ridiculed, contain the scientific truth regarding
these earliest times.
A synchronization, however, is possible in spite of the
complete lack of reliability on the part of the Babylonian
sources. The Flood, as a very decisive event, has left
its deep mark in Babylonian tradition. The Babylonians
had a list of ten kings ruling before the Flood, and they ,'
arranged their later dynasties in the order they ruled after
the Flood." Recent excavations at Ur, Shuruppack, and
Kish have, furthermore, given archaeological evidence of
the Fl~od.'~We are thus enabled to coordinate the history
of the city kingdoms after the Flood with those events
and developments which, according to the Bible, followed
the Flood.
ate of the Flood as given by Biblical tradition.I
.K, is- c a rather astonishing way i
b m i n e s e and Indian traditions. The Chinese place it 1
at 2200; the Indians started a new age, the Silver Age.
with the year 2204.'9 Indian culture reached its height
in the first half of the third millenium and disappeared
well before the end of the same millenniumFOIn Assyria.
the names of rulers can first be traced shortly before t.he
year 2200 B.C.EF1 These surprising agreements fully justify
I
the use of the date of the Flood as a basis for our chro-
nology.
Important for the synchronization of the Egyptian
chronology is the fact that the Babylonian king Burna-
buriash lived at the time of Amenhotep IV. Assyrian king
lists show that he was also a contemporary of the Assyrian
king Puzur Ashur, who lived at about 1450 B.C.E. Thus,
Amenhotep W , too, must be placed at this timeF2
IV. Still less dependable than the Babylonian is the
Egyptian chronology of the early time. Breasted63 points
out that the extremely early dates for the beginning of
the dynasties current in some histories are based upon
the chronology of Manetho, a late, careless, and uncritical
 compilation. Its dynastic totals are, as he puts it, "so
absurdly high throughout that they are not worthy of
a moment's credence."54 Because contemporary sources
for the early time are missing, early Egyptian history is
reconstructed by hazardous inferences from later literary
sources, rather than by reading off the concrete record
of archaeological remains.s6 Even the time of the end of
the third millenium and the beginning of the second mil-
lenium is clouded in darkness. Some authorities place the
lath dynasty as far back as 2500 B.C.E; others bring it
down to 1900-1800~6
Nevertheless, a synchronization is also possible for early
Egyptian history, as it seems certain that the first Egyp-
tian dynasties started at about the same time as the early
Babylonian ones.s7 As these arose after the Flood, the same
time must be assumed for the beginning of the Egyptian
dynasties.58 This is confirmed by the fact that at this time
a sudden burst of progress in the arts of civilization is
noticeable in Egypt, obviously initiated by a cultural i d u x
from AsiaFg
The early Egyptian dynasties ruled over city states.
They were contemporaneous and overlapping just as those
of Babylonia were. This form of political organization can
be observed at this stage of historical development wherever
details are at hand.GOThe long period alloted to them by
arranging them successively has, therefore, to be reduced
.
considerably, as was done with the Babylonian dynasties.
.l?rom about 1700 to 1580, Egypt was ruled by the
Hyksos.G1 They were nomads and their dynasty is referred
to as 'Shepherd-Kings.' There is a wide-spread belief that
under their rule the Hebrews came to Egypt. I t has to
: be admitted that Semites must have been there, but there
j is no evidence available that the Patriarchs were among
i
1
them.G2 The theory does not seem to be in accord with
the Biblical account. When the brothers of Joseph came
to Egypt they were advised to introduce themselves at
/ the court as keepers of cattle. In doing so they hoped to
avoid to be taken into the service of the king, as every
i shepherd was 'an abomination to the E g y p t i a n ~ . 'Under
~~
the 'Shepherd-Kings' this does not make much sense. It
 ANCIENTJEWISH HISTORY SO

is, however, fully understandable under the kings of the I,

7,
following dynasty, who drove the invading Hyskos out of
Egypt and became the founders of the -New Kingdom.
During their reign, surely, every shepherd must have been
,I
'
an 'abomination' to the Egyptians, reminding them of the
hated Hyskos.
It is, consequently, under the rule of this dynasty, the
eighteenth, that we must place the arrival in Egypt of
Joseph (1544) and Jacob (1599). The Pharaoh at this
time was either Thutmes III or Amenhotep III. The last
king of this dynasty, the heretic, Amenhotep IV (Ikhna-
ton), tried to introduce monotheistic ideas into Egypt.
As we have noted, he was a contemporary of the Baby-
lonian Burnabwriash who lived at about 1450 B.C.E. After
his death and the short reign of his successors, the once-
powerful 18th dynasty was overthrown. A sharp reaction
against the religious reforms of Ikhnaton set in under the
19th dynasty. Ramses 11, its most famous king, beame
the oppressor of the Israelites. The Exodus 'then took place
under his successor, Mernephtah.
V. We may conclude-that from the beginnin~.oft_he
second kJGiiurn B.C.E, chrono~*-z here de-
Y&peCis- substantially in cpnformity with the results of
moaern-,e'Sccations.
, . .-+- As to the third millenium, there are
still some discrepincies. The present tendency, however,
is directed towards a reduction of previously assumed
early dates to the level set by Biblical chronol~gy."~
 SECTION
I
PRIMITIVE TIMES

1. Jewish Tradition about Pre-history and Creation

Of late, pre-history, dealing with the period before the
earliest written documents begin in Mesopotamia and
Egypt, has become familiar as an introductory chapter
of human history. Its inclusion has extended our pre-view
of history to a period of over 500,000 years?
Jewish history, even in its wider aspects, need not be
traced back beyond the time of Creation? However,
as the pre-historic facts discovered by modern science are
commonly held to be contradictory to the Bible, an out-
line of the views of Jewish tradition on pre-history must
be given in order to make clear from the very beginning
that there is no inconsistency between the Bible and well-
established facts. On the contrary, it is rather astonishing
that facts only available for about a century and undreamt
of during Ancient and the Middle Ages, confirm
Jewish traditions well-known far thousands of years.
I. The ancient Jewish tradition about the creation was
kept secret? From several references to it in Talmudical
sources, the following main principles can be d e r i ~ e d . ~
1. The world was created out of nothing. ()?Ha
The creation proceeded by degrees, moving towards per-
fection. G'd, the Creator, built different worlds and de-
stroyed them again until, findy, a state of sufbcient fitness
had been reached? The repeated destructions may have
been caused in Werent ways. A lunar catastrophe which
may have brought about one of them is mentioned in the
t r a d i t i ~ n .When
~
i
the present world finally came into ex-
 istence, it was built upon the ruins of the prior ones like
a palace upon debrk7 The time preceding the creation
of the present world was ruled by a time system dif-
ferent from the present one?
2. In these successive creations, original imperfections
and disharmonies were gradually eliminated. Unfit and
unharmonious creatures were left behind as the creation
progressed and were replaced by creatures more harmoni-
ous and better able to survive?
3. According to this tradition, human beings, too, were
already in existence before the present world. Repeated
reference is made to 974 generations of pre-Adamitic man?O
Some hints as to their bodily structure may perhaps be
derived from the characteristics mentioned in connection
with the &st man. He is described as of exorbitant size,"
originally an andr~gynus,'~ and in the possession of a tail."
11. It is not within the scope of this book to interpret
the text of the Bible in the light of this tradition?' It
may be stressed, however, that the meaning of the first
word is 'at the very beginning.'16 In the fist two verses
the Bible states clearly and formally that the world in
which we live was constructed on the foundation of the
Tohu and Bohu, that is to say, on the ruins of pre-existing
worlds. Ages untold may have elapsed between the calling
of matter into being and its rea at ion?^ Allusions to this
concept of the creation occur also in other parts of the
Bible. The psalms contain the following passages. "Before
the mountains came into existence and the world was in a
state of birth."ls "Of old you have laid the foundation of
the earth: and the heavens are the works of your hands.
They shall perish, but you shall endure; all of them shall
wear out as garment. You change them like a man does
his attire."18 These verses give us a very impressive de-
piction of the successive creation of worlds which were de-
stroved and superseded by new ones.
2. Biblical Tradition and Modern Science.
Modern discoveries and science have elucidated and clarqed
the ancient Jewish tradition outlined so far.
1. During antiquity there was general belief*in the
eternity of matter. It was the backbone of Aristotelk
philosophy which rejected the Jewish tradition of a crea-
tion out of nothing.l9 Matter and energy, up to the present
time, were held to be quite different things. Only recently
has there been a break with what is called the 'classical'
theory of matter. With the theories of Einstein, the identity
of matter and energy has been firmly established. H is
famous equation (e=mc2) has based the relation be-
tween them on the velocity of light. It is rather amazing
that the Biblical account starts the creation with the
famous words, "let there be light", which brought forth a
light not identical with that of the sun and the stars.
Still more emphasis is laid on this point in the words
initiating the creation in the Psalms.20 "Thou hast robed
thee in splendor and majesty. He covereth himself with
light as with a garment; he stretches out the heavens like
a curtain: he layeth the beams of his upper chambers in
the waters."
2. Among modern theories trying to explain the geo-
logical discoveries there is much that seems close to the
Jewish tradition. Georges Cuvier, for example, assumed
that sudden catastrophes have repeatedly taken place on
earth, destroying innumerable living beingsF1 The inhabi-
tants of the dry land were engulfed by deluges; and the
tenants of the water, deserted by their element, were left
to perish from drought. He furthermore points out that
even ancient rocks, formed or deposited before the appear-
ance of life on earth, show signs of terrific violenceF2 In
the same way, LyelF stresses that we learn from geological
investigations that throughout an indefinite span of ages
the whole animate creation has been decimated again and
again. Agassiz, father and son, stated that all the fossil
formations have embryonic character. This, too, is a re-
markable confirmation of ideas contained in the traditional
~osrnogony.~~
3. Geological findings, furthermore, have shed light
upon the order of the creation as reported in the Bible.
It is surprisingly in accord with that in which living beings
appeared on earth during the diflerent geological forma-
tions. There, in both plant and animal life, the law of pro-
 gression prevailed. In the lower strata the entire want of
higher plants is striking. Palms and some other mono-
cotyledons appeared in secondary times. Only later did the
higher forms come into existence. The invertebrate animals
flourished before the vertebrate. In the latter class, fish,
reptiles, birds and mammalia made their appearance in
a chronological order analogous to that in which they
would be arranged zoologically, that is, according to an
advancing scale of perfection in their organi~ation."~ We
have only to open the Bible to realize that these modern
geological discoveries merely illustrate its order of the
creation. There is the same gradual ascent from inorganic
to organic, from lifeless matter to vegetable, animal and
man." In plant life appear at first monocotyledons (grass)
which are followed by dycotyledons and trees. Animal life
is arranged from the invertebrates to the fish, the am-
phibians or reptiles to the birds. Then follow the mammals
and, finally, man. The evolutionary scheme is, thus, well
j attested by the Bible. Each stage, however, was no pro-

i duct of chance but an act of Divine will realizing the

Divine purpose.27
The parallelism, indeed, is so strilung that a modern
author, Will Ley, was inspired by it to write his book,
The Days of Creation, in which he demonstrates that the
terse report of the Bible contains in an amazing way a full
outline of the story of Creation as unfolded by modern
discoveries. Rather interesting is his remark28 that earlier
attempts to draw this parallel sufFered from the fact that
science was still at a fairly early stage of development and
most of the things which make the parallel striking were
simply not known.
The genetic relations are noticeable still in the laws
of the Torah, where birds are linked t o fish with regard
to the laws of slaughtering.= It is pointed out that the
scales covering the feet of birds still reveal this c o n n e d i ~ n ? ~
Indeed, in geological formations fish were followed by
amphibians and reptiles. A vast reptile population then
spread over the earth, t o be followed by the birds. Geo-
logy also furnishes the link between bird and reptile in
the archaeopteryx, a bird with teeth, claws on its wings,
and a reptilian tail.JO
The link between human beings and animals is hinted
at in the words of the Bible: "and man became a living
creature"31, which were interpreted to mean that originally
he had a tail.JZ This connection is well realized today.
Modern scientists were misled by it to believe that either
man descended from the ape or, as it is assumed today,
that ape and man have descended from a common an-
cestor. They were unable to grasp the idea of a progres-
sive creation bringing forth, in over-abundance and in
gradual ascent, higher and higher forms, exhausting all
the preparatory stages, until a state of relative perf~ction
finally had been reached. I t is, however, more and more
being realized that evolution is conceivable only as the
activity of a supreme, directing Intelligence that has
planned out, far back in the recesses of time, the ultimate
goal of creation.33
This forms the essence of the extraordinary book,
Human Destiny, by the famous French biologist, Lecomte
du N o ~ y Using. ~ ~ strictly
~ scientific reasoning based on
the modem findings in mathematics, physics, chemistry,
biology, and philosophy, he shows that the very fa& of
evolution postulate the recognition of a Creator who from
the beginning directed the ascending development towards
a certain goal: the free This author, too, repeatedly
points out the astonishing parallels between the early
chapters of Genesis and the known fads of evoluti~n?'~
He ventures the opinion that the writer of the Bible in-
tuitively knew the grand program of life prepared for
the world by its Creator. To this we may add that reve-
lation offers a far better explanation than such unheard of
intuition.
The exorbitant size ascribed by Jewish tradition to the
first mad1 has been illustrated by most recent findings.
Fragm-ents discovered in Java and China indicate that man
has shrunk to his present size from a race of giants twice
the size of the modern gorilla?'
4. Another fact revealed by modem scientific research
is rather surprising. Although it is generally agreed that
 men have been using tools for perhaps a million years, it
is also admitted that they have come an almost un-
imaginable distance in the last few thousand years, com-
pressing in that relatively trifling space nearly the whole
! sum of what mankind has a c h i e ~ e d ?T~here is, further-
more, sufficient evidence that there is a gap between the
( men of the paleolithic age and the historic or prehistoric
I civilization, the first falling exclusively within the province
'
of the geologist and anthr~pologist?~ These f a d s in them-
i selves lead to the assumption that something startling
; must have happened then to bring about such astonishing

i development. The facts postulate a c~-eationsome thousand

I years ago!
? We are now able to comprehend the tradition that the
worlds preceding the present one had not yet reached a
state of sufficient perfection, that the present world was
created at the right time and that the time before was
not propitious?" The words of the Bible: "And G'd saw
every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very
good'aS are interpreted to mean that the prior worlds were
not fit to satisfy the Creator. In this world, however, the
inadequacies of the past had been overcome. A state of
fitness had been reachedF7 Fitness, according to modern
science means success in living. If the total numbers indi-
cate constant increase, the species may be regarded as
successf~l.~~ Thus we understand the deep significance of
the blessings which were bestowed upon the creatures:
"Be fruitful and multiply."40
5 . Science today increasingly confirms the truth of the
Biblical revelation that G'd is the Creator of the universe.
As Cressy Morrison, the former president of the New York
Academy of Sciences, has pointed out recently'l, every
increase of light reveals more brightly the handiwork of
an intelligent Creator; it is scientifically, as well as imagina-
tively, true that, as the Psalmist said,
"The heavens declare the glory of G'd, i
And the firmament showeth His handiwork."
In the same way, the other great religious teaching of
the Bible, the brotherhood of man, is b e i i verified by
modern science. The fact that the differences between races
are superficially imposed upon a skeleton which is identical
for mankind everywhere, that in all the important physical
traits man is everywhere exactly the same is being recog-
nized more and more. There is no doubt any more that
all Inen are members of one family and of one blood, as
is laid down in the revelation of the Bible.'z The close
affinity of all the races of mankind requires us to believe
that the species was essentially what it now is and thut,
Man w e a d cweT all the continents front a single starting
poiat .'"
3. Creation in the Tradition of Mankind
The tradition of the creation was the heritage of all
mankind. Only in the Bible, however, has its original truth
and beauty been preserved. The traditions of the other
nations are evidently mere distortions of the original ac-
count. In the Bible, for instance, the second day's work
is recorded in these words: "And G'd said, Let there be
a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide
the waters from the waters. And G'd made the firmament
and divided the waters which were under the firmament
from the waters which were above the firmament^.'^' These
majestic words assumed the following perverted and ugly
form in the Babylonian version: "He (Marduk in his
iight against Tiamat) spread out his net to catch her, he
drove the winds, which he had gathered together, down
her throat, and he seized the spear and pierced through
her carcase. He drove the weapon into her heart, he sev-
ered her inward parts, he vanquished her, he cut off her life.
He split her like a flat fish, into two halves. From one of
these halves he made the covering for the heavens, i.e.,
firmament, and from the other he seems to have formed
the earth."46 Despite these abominable distortions, we still
are able to recognize their origin. Divine words have been
corrupted and intermixed with ab~urdities.'~
I< should be impossible for any unprejudiced reader to
contend that such corrupted traditions could in any way
have been the source of the Biblical record. But this is
just what many moderns feign to believe, assuming that,
by eliminating innumerable barbaric and mythological ele-
ments, the miracle was performed of fashioning out of such
monstrous and gruesome stupidities the majestic words
of the Bible in all their sublime ~implicity.'~Even a
thorough-going Bible critic like Driver must admit: "It
is incredible that the monotheistic author of Genesis I
could have borrowed any detail, however slight, from the
polytheistic epic of the conflict of Marduk and Tiamat."48
There is, certainly, some connection between the Babyloni-
an epic and the account of the Bible. This is proved by
many similarities and analogies which otherwise could not
be e~plained.'~ The right explanation, however, is that the
Babylonian version goes back to the same source which
was the common inheritance of all mankind and has been
preserved in the Bible in its original beauty and purity.
In the Babylonian version it was corrupted by polytheistic
and mythological absur~lities.'~
We shall make the same observation on other occasions
where the Bible record is confronted with ancient tradi-
tions showing unquestionable similarities. In every in-
stance, the Bible contains the original tradition in its pure
simplicity; and the other versions, though older in years,
are more developed in detail, adapted to later cultural
conditions, and corrupted in their ethical content. They
are based on the same original traditions which were in-
herited by all the descendants of the first human beings.
Their deformations indicate the degeneration that befell
mankind in very early timesFO
Most of the cosmogonies of the ancient peoples are
distorted and full of bestiality and cruelties in the same
way as the Babylonian version!' But a relatively well-
preserved one was taught by the Etruscan priests. They
believed that the creation took 6000 years for its comple-
tion. In the first period G'd created heaven and earth; in
the second, the firmament; in the third, the waters; in the
fourth, the sun and the moon; in the fifth the souls of
animals; and in the sixth, man. Man was formed from clay
and fell from a better state.62
 THE FIRST HUMAN BEINGS

1. The Cradle of Civilization

I. At the time of the creation the surface of the earth
did not yet have its present shape. The tradition mentions
two floods besides that of Noah's time which changed the
topography of at least the Mediterranean area consider-
ably. These floods occurred at the time of Enosh and at
the time of the Tower of Babel. The first one reached to
Calabria (Spain) or to the land of the Berbers (North
Africa), the second one to the present east coast of the
Mediterranean? There is no doubt today that there were
once land bridges, which later sank beneath the water,
through Italy and Sicily as well as Gibraltar connecting
Europe and A f r i ~ a According
.~ to modern scientific findings
men's prehistoric life centered around the Mediterranean
for several hundred thousand years. Yet it is also held that
human civilization was not built up over this area but
in the Near East: where, in conformity with Biblical tra-
dition, we must place the beginning of the Historic Age.
The topographical changes caused bycthe different
floods make impossible an exact location of the Paradise
where, according to the Bible, the first human beings lived.
The Bible, however, does identify two of the four rivers
that flowed out from Paradise as the Euphrates and the
Tigris.' Thus, we may assume that it was situated near
the Persian Gulf a t the coduence of these two rivers and
two other ones, the Pishon and Gichon, which can no
longer be
The assertion that this region was the place where
human history started had been long contested. Priority
was vigorously claimed for the valley of the Nile.6 But with
every year of accumulating research, it becomes more prob-
able that it was the rich delta of Mesopotamia's rivers that
saw the earliest scenes in the historic drama of civilization?
The topography of this territory has since undergone many
changes. The rivers have filled up to the Persian Gulf for
150 to 160 miles, and the gulf is so much shorter at the
present day.8
11. The first human beings in Paradise lived on fruits.
Technically speaking, they were food gatherers, not food
producers. This, according to modern scientific concepts,
is what men in prehistoric times were. They were content
to take what they could get. The dawn of civilization came
when man started to control his own food supply? He
began then to cultivate two cereals, wheat and barley. I t
is rather interesting to note that the tree of knowledge,
the fruits of which caused the expulsion from Paradise and
the beginning of food production, was identified by the
tradition with wheat. I t was pointed out that the intd-
lectual development of the child depends on its grain
no~rishment?~
III. The tradition of a Paradise appears in the folk-
lore of almost all l a n d s - i i Egypt, India, Tibet, Baby-
lonia, Persia, Greece, Polynesia, Mexico etc. The Greek
poet, Hesiod (ca. 750 BCE), in 'Works and Days', records
that Inen once lived like gods, without vices or passions,
vexations or toil. In happy companionship with divine be-
ings, they passed their days in tranquility and joy. The
earth was more beautiful then than now and spontaneously
yielded an abundant variety of fruits. Men were but mere
boys at the age of one hundred years." Most of these
Edens had forbidden trees and serpents or dragons that
stole immortality from men.
a. The Intelligence of the First Human Beings
I. The first human beings were, both physically and
mentally, at a very high level. Tradition ascribed singular
beauty to Adam.12 He had the ability to create words, and
animals were brought to him that he might name them."
Language, accordingly, was not developed from the in-
articulate sounds of savages, as many s ~ p p o s e ?It ~ was
the achievement of a being endowed with a high spiritual
capacity, able to use his nervous system in a superior way,
as one uses the keys of a piano, to give expression to every
slight nuance of his thought.15 There are in the tradition
different opinions regarding the original language. Some
authorities believe that it was Aramaean, others assume
that it was Hebrew.16 Throughout the thousands of years
that have passed, the Hebrew language has retained its
crystal-clear structure. I t is, therefore, especially instructive
if we wish to trace the ways and means which were used
by the human mind to create words and laquage.16"
The letter g, ;, for instance, which is produced by
the highest part of the mouth, the palate, serves to char-
acterize high or big objeds.17 The greatest amount of mo-
tion is necessary to produce the letter ' 1. .' Consequently,
it was used in the language to depict movement.18
Words were formed in Hebrew by two letters defining
the basic meaning. By adding a third letter this stem is
adapted to any shadow of thought.lsa Thus, for instance,
the stem l n is combined with nearly every other letter
of the a l ~ h a b e t ? ~
An amazing depth of knowledge and understanding
reveals itself in the methods used to name certain objects.
TIN -light. The word is mainly characterized by the
letter of motion, 1. Today we know that velocity is the
most outstanding feature of light.
Y ~ N--earth is derived from the word y;, run." I t
means the running, rotating one. To realize the significance
of this name we have to bear in mind that until some
centuries ago it was categorically denied that the earth
moved. The word is to be found in nearly every language.
(earth, Erde, jord, aarde; terra, terre etc.)
The sun which was worshipped as a god by so many
nations of antiquity was named a D w meaning servant, or
non, the hot one, or ~ l n ,the earthen one. Only the re-
sults of spectrum analysis have disclosed in recent times
the earthen consistence of the body of the sun. The moon,
which was equally idolized, received the names 3337, the
white one (luna in Latin) or my, the wanderer, or lrfD,
the round plate.21
The names of the metals were derived from their
qualities.
337 -gold, means that which glitters. 137, 1 r f Y .
:c> -silver, the pale one;
nmn3 --copper, was derived from snake, as copper
found on the ground has the green color of a snake.22
;-ra~-wheat, was named so because its ear is split
through. (Dan).
x ~ y w -means barley, which is recognized by its
long hairs. (lytr).
;yq -the name for wine, is derived from my deceive.23
The prophet Habakuk2' exclaims; 'Yea also the wine deals
treacherously with the haughty man.'
qia -fruit, which is the same in English, Latin, French,
German, etc. (fruit, fructus, fruit, Frucht), means that
which is severed (tia) or to be divided for reproduc-
t i ~ n (1%)
.~~
Of special interest are the names of the animals,26
q ? ~-means the docile ox. (To be used to, to prac-
tice aram. q ? ~ )
TIW -the glaring, straight-walking ox.
nia, Ta -the fruitful cattle.
3 W 3 -the sheep, covered with wool. ( 7 ~ 2 )
~ 2 -the
3 sheep which is w a ~ h e d . (323)
~
5t;l -the sheep which is being washed. (ym).
ty . -goat, meaning the bold one.
nw, n?a -lamb, derived from N ~ J ?a3 , carry, and
carry away. The lamb is gently carried by the shepherdsza
N937 -The name of the lion, is derived from 35, the
heart. (We are reminded of 'lionheart' or Richard Coeur
de Lion.)
The names of the fox and perhaps too, that of the
jackal, ? ~ I w5nw, suggest that they are walking on
their hollow feet ?yw.
wm -The word for snake contains the stem mn indi-
cating the swift movement. The synonym q l t refers to
the burning effect of the poison.
This small selection may suffice to convey a slight idea
 of the understanding which the first human beings must
have possessed. According to the tradition, Adam had the
ingenuity to produce fire by rubbing two stones.29 He be-
came experienced in all kinds of handicraftsS0 and had
knowledge of the calendar based on a combination of the
solar and the lunar year?l
II. This over-all picture of the spiritual level of the
fist human beings is retained in the common tradition of
mankind. They are everywhere depicted as god-like, of
overwhelming mental abilities. In the Babylonian version
of the Fall of Man, the first man is described in the
following way:
'He possessed intelligence
Wide intelligence he (Ea) made perfect for him, the
destiny of the country to reveal
Unto him wisdom he gave; eternal life he did not
grant him
The prudent, the most wise among the Annunaki
was he,
Blameless, clean of hands, anointed.
The observer of divine commands.'32
Recent excavations have codinned this ancient tradi-
tion. The beauty and delicacy of the pottery as well of the
architectural remains of an early stratum of Tepe Gawra
dating hundreds of years before the discovery of metal
tools, no longer permit us to regard the men of the Stone
Age as uncivili~ed.~~
Looking back to the first millennia of human history
we can state that they witnessed discoveries in applied
science that directly or indirectly have affected the pros-
perity of millions of men. Epoch-making inventions seem
to have followed one another with breathless speed. I n no
period of history until the days of Galileo was progress in
knowledge so rapid or far-reaching discovery so freq~ent.~'
The common tradition of mankind thus joins with the
results of modern excavations and the testimony of his-
tory in bearing witness to the fact that human culture did
not arise by a gradual slow evolution from a state of semi-
savagery but was created by human beings of overwhelming
spiritual abilities.s5
 3. The Religious Belief of the First Human Beings
I. The central purpose of the life of the first human
beings in Paradise was to live in the presence of G'd.J6
They not only believed in G'd but had a clear knowledge
of him. Mankind has well preserved this fundamental fact.
Babylonian tradition shows how the first human beings
were in close contact with the gods and served thema7
The Greeks depict them in happy companionship with
divine beings.ll
The actuality of this original state alone can explain
one of the outstanding facts of history and psychology:
the universality of religion throughout mankind.'8 Philoso-
phers are fascinated by the problem of the antiquity and
persistence of yet are unable to find an adequate
soiu tion for the indestructible piety of mankind.
Recent studies of primitive religion have led to a grow-
ing conviction that there was originally a general worship
of a Highest G'd. Primitive peoples still have preserved,
behind the beliefs in gods and idols, the idea of a Great
Spirit or G'd.3g He is thought to be a cosmic G'd residing
in heaven, all-powerful and credited with the creation of
the world.40 This belief is found among savage peoples in
all parts of the earth, including Africa, Australia and South
America. In Der Ursprung der Gttesidee (1913-36), W.
Schmidt has shown that all indications point to a primitive
monotheism, which has gradually degenerated. He has
successfully disproved the far-spread evolutionary scheme
of fetishism-polytheism-monotheism, or animism-polytheism-
monotheism." The original religious state of mankind is,
thus, well in accord with the general spiritual and cultural
level outlined before.
This original monotheism is of special importance as it
illustrates again the true relation of ancient sources to the
traditions of the Bible. Their thoroughly polytheistic ver-
sions are, without doubt, the degenerated forms of the
original source, which in the Bible was well preserved. The
assumption that the Biblical traditions merely purified
Babylonian polytheistic versions is incompatible with the
historical fact that polytheism was a degeneration of the
original monotheistic belief. Its practical impossibilities
already have been shown."
11. Human piety found its expression from the very
b e i i of history in hymns full of utmost devotion to
the Creator. According to the tradition, Adam was the first
to conceive a psalm. Other men of similar religious genius
followed his example. Mention is made of Abraham and
Moses--until, finally, all these hymns, prayers and songs
were united in the Books of the Psalrn~.'~Psalms XCII*
and CXXXJX," in particular, are ascribed to Adam.
This tradition about the early origin of the Psalms has
been fully codbmed by the fact that such psalms were
discovered in Babylonia, Eypt, India and Palestine. They
are obviously derived from a common root dating from
the dawn of human history. In one Babylonian fragment
men are admonished in a highly impressive way 'to live in
the fear of G'd,' 'to offer daily sacrifice and prayer,' and
to be 'holy in the fear of G'd.'46 As no particular Baby-
lonian god is mentioned, it seems to belong to the oldest
monotheistic traditi~n.'~ The penitential Babylonian hymns
contain the following beautiful passage: 'Thou renderest
judgment, and thy decision is righteous. Unto thee are
subject the lams of the earth and the laws of hea~en."~
Most of them, however, abound in polytheistic perver-
sions!'
Close to the original source is also the following Indian
prayer, taken from the Bagavad-Ghita, one of the oldest
of the Brahmanic treatises: 'Eternal and Omnipotent Be-
ing: Creator of all things, G'd of gods, Preserver of the
world: Thy nature is incorruptible, and distinct from that
of all perishable things. Thou, the ancient indivisible One,
the Supporter of the Universe, mert before all the gods.
Thou knowest all things, and art worthy of being known
by all things. Thou art the Supreme Source, and through
Thee the world came out of nothingness. Before and behind
Thee everything bows. Mayest Thou be venerated every-
where, Thou who art everywhere, Thy glory and Thy
power are infinite.'48
Especially well known for its close similarities with
Psalm CnT is the famous ode to the sun of Ikhnaton, the
 Egyptian heretic king.49It was not the first one of its
kind in Egypt. His father, Amenophis III., had already
composed a beautiful hymn to the sun g0d.5~
At Ras Sham-Ugarit in Palestine, a Psalter was
found written in the language of the ancient Arnorites,
which some authorities believe to have been used for a
spring festival at ancient Jerusalem!'
IKI. Another form of worship which, according to tradi-
tion, also goes back to the time of Adam was sacrifi~es.5~
Cain and Abel brought sacrifices to show their thankful-
ness to the Giver of al!3 When Noah left the ark he, too,
felt moved to express his gratitude to G'd. He built an
altar and offered burnt offerings!' Sacrifices became a
universal heritage of mankind. With idolatry, however, the
rites became full of depravities and absurdities, of which
human sacrifice was one of the worstF5 Amid these per-
versions, the original idea in all its purity was upheld in
the family of the patriarchs until it was incorporated in
the laws of the Bible. The common origin explains the
fact that some parallels in the rituals of sacrifice can still
be traced. One of the rites, for instance, which was general
throughout Western Asia, consisted of eating the right
front leg of sacrificed animalsF6
N. The particular psalm ascribed by the tradition to
Adam is Psalm XCII, which is devoted to the Sabbath,s7
the day blessed and hallowed by the Creator?* It was
kept holy by the patriarchs59 and observed by their de-
scendants in Egypt.GOThe fact that the Babylonians, too,
assigned special importance t o their ~labbattuis well in
line with this tradition. Considering the distortions which
the other traditions experienced at their hands, we need
not be surprised at finding that they looked on the day
of rest as a day of misfortune unfit for undertaking sig-
nificant things.61
4. Origin of Law. Basic Laws.
I. The essence of human culture is clearly defined in
the Bible in two profound words. Man was put into the
Garden of Eden 'to serve it and to guard it.'6Voday, after
several thousand years of human history, no better defini-
tion could be given. Only those endeavors of human beings
deserve the name of culture which are intended and fit
to uphold and serve the creation.
The outstanding place of the human beings in the
Creation is indicated by the first command not to eat of
the tree of knowledge. I t implies the birth of moral free-
dom. The therefore, connects with this law the
basic laws which from the beginning were imposed on all
msnkind. They include the crimes against G'd and hu-
manity, the violation of which means the forfeiture of the
right to live on earth. The first of the seven groups re-
vealed the fundamental significance of right and justice.
Then follow in natural order all the basic relations of
human beings in their submission to the rule of law. The
first of these, the relation to G'd, the creator, is regulated
by establishing the crimes of blasphemy and idolatry, for
the recognition of G'd is the very foundation of law. The
next group covers the crimes against family life: incest
and adultery. The integrity of life and property is pro-
tected by the following two groups. Later on, after the
Flood, another group was added to protect animals against
cruelty.
This law ruled over the life of mankind from the be-
ginning of history. In the Bible it can be traced from the
time of CaiqG4and it was the basis for all the cod8cations
of antiquity.==
In our days its significance has become obvious as the
fundamental law on which alone the nations will be able to
build up a world of justice and peace.66
11. The tradition dating back the origin of law to the
very beginning of human history is confirmed by the facts
of evolution. There. is noticeable a sudden reversal in the
tendency. Man is required to combat and to dominate
those animal instincts which heretofore had ~revailed.As
if the voice of some Final Power spoke to him, he is
ordered not to kill, not to steal, not to covet.66aFrom now
on h i task is to overcome his ancestral animal instincts
and mem~ries.~GbThis is contrary to the belief of the
Church that the effort of man is motivated by the redemp-
tion of the original sin.66cIt is, however, in complete har-
mony with the Jewish tradition to the effect that all the
 laws of the Bible tend to lead man to overcome the remains
of his ancestral heritage.66d
A universal survey shows that the history of criminal
punishment starts at the outset of human social life. Crim-
ind punishment was an original historical fact and crim-
i d law preceded the development of other parts of law.B7
Furthermore, there was the general conviction among
the peoples of antiquity that law was of divine origin and
crime a sin against the deity.68The authority of Law was
divine.69 This concept was not the result of philosophical
reflection. The whole dynamics of law were based on it.70
5. Paradise Lost
I. Paradise, the place where the first human beings
lived, implied the blessing of the earth with abundance
and peace and the nearness of G'd. When this was lost by
the sin of man, his thorny way through history began. Two
guardians, however, were set up to guard the way of the
Tree of Life: The Cherubim and the flame of the ever-
turning sword.?' They are symbols for the course of human
history. There are two ways to lead mankind back to the
Paradise it lost. By accepting the rule of G'd, the Creator,
peace based on justice can be established throughout the
world. Abundance of all material wealth, as we realize
today, would be the natural consequence. But it means that
men must consider themselves Cherubim, bearers of the
majesty of G'd on earth. This is the essence of the laws
of the Bible as symbolized in the holy tent which con-
tained the arc with the Cherubim 'keeping the way of
the Tree of Life.' The other way is that course in the his-
tory of mrrnlrind which is marked by incessant social revo-
lutions and wars. It is the flame of the ever-turning sword.
Mankind in refusing to accept the sway of G'd has been un-
able to find the way to social and international peace. But
the catastrophes which mark the course of human history
with ever-increasing devastations are terrible reminders that
the goal must be reached to save humanity from final
destruction.
Everlasting peace based on justice and freedom from
want has become the fervently desired aim of all mankind.
 The nations have united themselves to attain this goal.
But, so far, there has not been enough realization that it
will be achieved only when mankind is willing to follow
the other guardian, the Cherubim, and accept the reign
of G'd as the basis of social and international life.72
11. The Babylonians had a tradition about the punish-
ment of the first man showing striking similarities with
the account of the Bible. It contains the same general idea
of the connection of increasing knowledge with the at-
tributes of divinity on the one hand and with suffering and
clothing on the otherJ3 The whole level, however, is char-
acterized by the following details. The god Ea was afraid
that Adapa might gain immortality, which could be ob-
tained by eating a certain kind of food. Therefore, when
Adapa was about to go into the presence of the supreme
god Anu, Ea told him a falsehood in order to prevent him
from eating the food that would make him immortal.74 I t
.is obvious that this tradition, too, is a degenerated form
of the Biblical narrative, which was a common heritage of
all mankindY6
It is noteworthy in this connection that the excava-
tions at Tepe Gawra, northwest of Nineveh, have brought
to light in s stone age stratum a remarkable seal depicting
a man and woman and a serpent. It strongly suggests that
the tradition of the story of the temptation as told in the
Bible was well known at a very early time.76
The memory of the Tree of Life was so vivid in the
tradition of mankind that it dominated their highest desires
and longings. They all told how their most famous heroes
ventured their life for it. The people of Sumer and Akkad
described the wonderful adventures of the shepherd Etana
who went in search of the herb in which was the source
of life?' They also told how the gigantic hero Gilgamesh,
after many mighty deeds, failed to gain immortal life?8
He was prevented from entering the holy wood where the
trees of the gods were standing covered with precious stones
and great fruits."
The k of Life was the oldest symbol of Assyria.
Assyrian artists developed it into a decorative palm tree
in which form it was later used by the Greeks.80 The ex-
cavations at Taanak in Palestine have shown that it was
already in use there at a very early time as an ornament
' Cherubim, too, survived in the memory
for p ~ t t e r y . ~The
of the nations. They were called Karibu by the Baby-
lonians. In their reminiscences of Paradise they mention
scorpion-men guarding the entrance to the holy gardemS2
In Assyria, the Cherubim were represented as monstrous
beings, half-man, half-bull, protecting the gates of the
royal palaces.8s
 DEVELOPMENT OF CIVILIZATION

1. Beginning of Civilization
The beginning of human civilization is connected in
the Bible with the names of the two sons of Adam: Cain
and Abel. While the first name is interpreted as mean-
ing obviously a saphg,l no explanation is offered for the
name Abel. After many fruitless hypotheses, the solution
has been found by modern discoveries which show that
the word means simply 'son.'2
As they became food producers, men began to control
nature by two steps, by cattle breeding and agri~ulture.~
Both are closely related. Many authorities believe that
cultivation is older than stock breeding. Others believe that
while some human groups were beginmng to cultivate
plants other groups were domesticating animals." Light
is shed on this question by the Bible, which reveals that
Abel and Cain became "keeper of sheep and tiller of the
ground!" Though Abel was the second son, his occupa-
tion, keeping the sheep, is specified first. This seems to
indicate that the domestication of animals preceded agri-
culture and that afterwards two different groups engaged
in these two occupations. I t has already been mentioned
that wheat and barley were the first plants cultivated by
men and that a hint to this effect may be found in the
tradition identifying the tree of knowledge with wheat.6
Social life is introduced with the sad report of the
fratricide.? The punishment meted out upon the murderer
was that he should be a fugitive and a vagabond on earth.8
This was the original consequence of any transgression of
 one of the basic human laws? The criminal became an out-
law. He lost any claim to protection by law. Everybody,
thus, was entitled to kill him.1° This kind of punishment
was the foundation of ancient criminal law all over the
world?l In Greece the evildoer was in permanent flight
before the pursuing Erinyes; in Germanic law he became
anguished and restless.12
After his crime C a b had to hide from the face of G'd.
He was marked by a sign protecting him from being slain.
A reminiscence of this is retained in the Babylonian myth
where Gilgamesh is described as bearing 'shame upon his
face and the sign of the gods.'15
2. Rise of Urban Civilization
I. The development of human civilization was brought
about by two difFerent races, the descendants of Cain and
those of Seth?4 The Cainides were the founders of urban
civilization and the inventors of many fundamental tech-
nical devices. The Sethides, on the other hand, preserved
the great cultural inheritance of mankind and handed it
down to later generations.
11. It is highly significant that Cain, the first killer,
who 'went out from the presence of G'd' and lost the near-
ness of nature, became the first city builder?= His new goal,
of necessity, was to defend himself against a hostile world.
The cleavage broadened between man and nature. Human
culture received a new direction. Its primary aim was no
longer to serve and guard creation but to protect and serve
man.
He settled in 'the land of Nod, on the East of Eden.'16
This points to Elam, which is to the east of the probable
site of the first human settlements near the Persian Gulf."
The choice of this country is easily understood as its moun-
tain ranges provided a good defense against hostile assaults.
Its deposits of ores, especially copper and lead, indicate,
furthermore, that metallurgy was initiated there.
We learn from the Bible1* that Cain called the name
of the first city he built Chanokh after the name of
his son Enoch. This name contains the Hebrew stem
illn meaning rest which suggests that it was intended to
 express the fervent hope of the fugitive Cain that in this
place he and his descendants would find rest.lS This city
was not the only one which Cain built. We are told that
he founded many cities and that this activity became
the essence of his lifeOz0
Among his descendants, urban civilization experienced
a tremendous expansion. The first step was the industriali-
zation of cattle breeding. Jabal obviously widened the class
of a n i d which could be domesticated and developed it
on a broader ~cale.2~ His brother Jubal became the inventor
of the first musical instruments, the harp and the pipe.
The climax came with the rise of metallurgy, which is
connected with the name of Tubal-cain, the fist smith of
copper and iron. This new art was soon misused to pro-
duce the weapons of war.22 It is possible that t h e posses-
sion of such weapons inspired Lamech, the father of Tubal-
cain, in his triumphal song which marks the appalling
growth of the spirit of Cab.% His boastful words throw
some light on his name, which is probably connected with
the Babylonian-Assyrian word linu meaning 'rule' with
an added The descendants of Cain who had been on
the defensive were now able to take the offensive and try
to extend their rule. As will be shown, this is what actually
seems to have happened.
III. No similar technical inventions are mentioned
with regard to the descendants of Seth. I t seems that they
mainly preserved the original simple way of life and that
urban civilization played only a secondary part among
them. Their cultural achievements will be dealt with
later. (see 4)
IV. It has already been mentioned that during this
epoch a great flood occurred which must have had a
catastrophic character. According to the tradition it took
place in the generation of Enosh. The Flood of Noah's
time was the second one. A third one took place a t the
time of the Tower of Babel?=
V. There are some indications in the tradition that
human culture before the Flood of Noah's time already es-
tended far beyond the borders of Mesopotamia. Reference
is made to the Nephilim, the giants, who were in existence
 before the Flood, as living also in later times where they
are mentioned in Palestine at the time of Moses.26It would
thus seem that they survived in Palestine which, according
to one opinion, was not destroyed by the Flood. It is as-
sumed that other people, too, may have survived there."
This may equally apply to the prehistoric population of
eastern Palestine (Transjordan) , the Rephaim, Zuzim,
Emim, and Chori who were later annihilated when the
Babylonian kings invaded the country."
3. The Results of Modern Excavations
. I. Modern excavations have vastly broadened our
knowledge of these early times of human civilization.
The earliest village settlements so far discovered are
those at Tell Hassuna, south of modern Mosul, which have
been excavated quite recently, and at Tepe Gawra, north-
west of Nineveh. Then follow Tell Halaf, northwest of
the Khabur tributary, which belongs already to the so-
called Chalcolithic or 'copper stone' period. People were
then moving out of the age of stone into the age of the
use of metaLB
The first settlement in Babylonia proper was Tell El
Obeid, 4% miles northwest of Ur, where early buildings
were erected with bricks made of mud and dried in the
sun.30 This Obeidian culture is the first clearly-defined one
in Babylonia. It is thought to prove that the occupation
of the marsh lands of Babylonia by human settlers took
place circa 4000 B.C.E. The remains of this culture underly
nearly all the oldest cities of the country such as Ur, Erech,
Lagash, Eridua1; the culture itself is associated with that of
Susa (Elam), one of the most ancient centers of civiliea-
t i ~ n In ~ lowest stratum a t Sum a stone age necropolis
. ~the
was found containing a type of pottery of extraordinary
beauty. This civilization was, apparently, exterminated by
the conditions which prevailed during a flood, and was
followed, at a long interval, by another, which produced
a different type of potteryP Among the tools and weapons
buried with the dead were stone-headed clubs and copper-
headed tomahawks. Copper mirrors have also been found."
The influence of this Elamite civilization is clearly discerni-
 ble in the oldest cities of Babylon such as Eridu?= L a g ~ h , " ~
and El Obeid.'? This influence was apparent, furthermore,
in the remains found at the bottom of Tepe GawraJ8 and
Yorgan Tepe near N i n e ~ e hand ~ ~ may have reached even
to Egypt.'O
The story of Mesopotamia is continued at Warka, the
site of ancient Erech or Uruk, some 35 miles up the
Euphrates from Tell El Obeid." To a later period belongs
the settlement at Jemdet Nasr, not far from the site where
Babylon later was to stand.4gDuring this period the cities
of Shurippak (Fara), Eshnunna or Ashnunak (Tell As-
mar), and ICish were founded."
11. The excavations have, in a rather spectacular way,
confirmed the tradition of three successive floods. The
first one, known from the excavations at Ur by Woolley,
must have taken place sometimes in the middle of the
Obeid Period." It is very probable that it was that one
which also destroyed the most ancient civilization of
S u ~ a Evidences
.~~ of a second large flood at the end of
the Jemdet Nasr Period appear at Shurippak which, ac-
cording to Babylonian tradition, was the city of Noah and
the last ruling city before the Flo~d.'~An even later flood
occurred which left at Kish a layer of sediment one-and-a-
half feet thick some distance above the Jemdet Nasr
~tratifkation.'~These findings would indicate that the
Jemdet Nasr Period was the last one before the Flood.
III. The settlements at Hassuna which, as has been
pointed out, belong to the very earliest time, show clearly
that religious life then was free from idolatrous infl~ences.'~
The inhabitants were a peaceful community of farmers,
builders and craftsmen. They led a simple life with no
evidence of opulence and riches, of kings, queens, gods,
goddesses, high priests and priestesses, as was found in the
city civilizations of later times.'? At Tepe Gawra, at a
level belonging to the end of the Obeid Period, an acropolis
has been discovered with an imposing place of wor~hip.'~
It has already been mentioned that the beauty and deli-
cacy of the pottery and these architedural remains render
impossible the view that the men of the Stone Age were
un~ivilized.'~I n a later stratum of the same site a re-
markable Stone Age city was found. The houses had win-
dows and niches. There were streets and a market place.
In this stratum was found the seal depicting a man and
woman and a serpent which has already been referred to
as strongly indicating the general tradition of the story of
the temptation at this early time.6O
The earliest writing was found at the Uruk perid in a
crude pictographic script which was the ancestor of the
later cuneiform. At Jemdet Nasr writing was found in a
somewhat more advanced form.61 Metal was employed
there more freely than before, and bronzes2 also makes
its first appearance.
b y scholars now have reached the conclusion that
the use of copper was not discovered until about 3000
B.C.E.63 This corroborates fully the Biblical account of the
rise of metallurgy. It allows a dating of the pure stone age
civilizations before 3000 B.C.E. and of those with fre-
quent use of metal after this time.
The Stone Age civilization as a whole made an im-
pressive series of contributions to man's progress. It wit-
nessed the following discoveries: artificial irrigation, the
plough, the use of animal power, sailing boat, wheeled
vehicles, spinning potter's wheel, orchard husbandry, fer-
mentation, production and use of copper, bricks, cylinder
seal, writing, and br0nze.6~ Iron ores were occasionally
smelted in Mesopotamia at a very early time. This dis-
covery, however, was not foIlowed up. On an industrial
scale, iron was not smelted or worked anywhere before
1400 B.C.EF6 I n view of these facts, the Biblical tradition
that Tubal-cain already smelted iron seems especially
significant.
The traditional view that the discovery of the metals
was no blessing for mankind because they were misused for
war purposes, has been fuIly confirmed. The early cities
of Babylon were the fortified residences of Merent tribes,
which were frequently a t war with each other. One city
would subjugate its neighbor for a time and establish a
small empireP6
IV. With respect to the race of the inhabitants of
Mesopotamia who originated its first prehistoric culture,
 there is convincing proof that they were different from
the Semites and Sumerians who lived there in later times.s7
The survey given before has shown two distinct infiuences,
one from Halafia in the north and one from Elam in the
east.68 Further clarification can be derived from the names
of the cities. Many of them have the ending 'ak', Shurippak,
Larak, Akshak, Ashnunak, which again points to Elam,
where the Elamite name of Susa was ShushinakF9 These
names thus suggest a race corning from the east, obvi-
ously spreading from Elam to the north (Tepe Gawra,
Yorgan Tepe, Ashnunak) and to the west (Larak, Akshak,
Shurippak) . On the other hand there was the city of Erech
of extreme antiquity which seems to have a Semitic name.60
All this elucidates the brief hints of the Bible in dis-
closing two strains of population who gave rise to the
culture of this epoch. The Elamite civilization was founded
by Cain and his descendants. After the discovery of metal-
lurgy, this civilization spread to the west and north, where
new cities were founded which dominated the country.
The oldest settlements at Hassuna and Halaf show the in-
fluence of the other part of the population. Of special im-
portance are the religious conditions which can be observed
at Hassuna. It is very interesting to note that pictures of
these early men have been preserved. At Umk a bas-relief
was found representing two bearded men fighting three
lions?
V. Before the Flood this early civilization had already
spread far beyond Mesopotamia. To the west it is traceable
in Egypt where the first strata of pre-dynastic civilization
(Tasian, Badarian, Amratians, and Gerzean) belong to
it. They either preceded Jemdet Nasr or were contem-
poraneous, with it. I n Palestine, the earliest occupation of
Jericho, of Gezer, and Jerusalem, of settlements in Trans-
jordan and at Teleilat Ghassul (Ghassulian) north of the
Dead Sea not fax from Jericho, originated at this period!'
To the east, Obeidan culture extended to the Iranian
Highland and across Iran to Baluchistan.B4
M. Memories of these early times have been pre-
served in the traditions of mankind, especially in that of
the Babylonians. Of particular interest is an account of the
 origin of a It looks longingly back to a place of
heavenly peace where:
'the deadly lion destroyed not;
the wolf a lamb seized not'
(see Isaiah 11:6) Hope is uttered that the newly founded
city
'may be a resting ,an abode of the people.'
It is very possible that it reflects the desire of Cain
and his descendants to regain paradisiac peace by building
a city. Enki, the builder, may even be identical with
Chanokh, the son of Cain, whose name became that of
the first city.
Another city obviously connected with the descendants
of C a b is mentioned in the earliest Babylonian king-li~t.8~
Its name, Badgurgurru, means 'fortress of workers in
bronze'; and it seems very probable that it was one
of those founded by Tubal-cain, the originator of metal-
l ~ r g y .According
~~ to this list, the sovereignty or su-
premacy was, at the beginning, at Eridu. Its rule was
overthrown by the kings of Badgurgumu. From there
it seems to have passed by conquest to Larak, Sippar, and
finally to Shurippak, which was wiped out at the time of
the Flood.68 This would indicate that the descendants of
Cain, after the discovery of metallurgy, conquered the land
with their superior weapons and founded new cities (Larak,
Sippar, Shurippak) 69 among which a constant fight for
supremacy raged until they were destroyed by the Flood.
Tubal-cain, the inventor of metallurgy, became the
Vulcan of the Greeks and Romans, the god of the smiths.'O
In Canaan his name was Kauthar,-Koshar,-Kushar, the
wise craftsman, the inventor of tools and weapons, as well
of the arts. He was the discoverer and the patron of
music?l This tradition is very interesting as it combines
the two closely related personalities who were the origi-
nators of metallurgy and music. The Greek tradition has
also preserved the memory of the sister of Tubal-cain,
Naamah, who became their A~hrodite.'~ This accords
perfectly with the tradition that Naamah was playing
timbrels before idols.7a The Greeks have, furthermore, in
their words 'kinaros' and '.nablos,' retained the old Biblical
 names of the first musical instruments which were invented
then.?' In Babylonia harps and lyres were fashioned by
carpenters at a very early time. There were professional
musicians to play upon themY5
4. The Ten Generations Before the Flood
I. The Bible enumerates ten generations from Adam
to the Hood. They were the bearers of the great traditions
of mankind which they handed down to Noah who saved
them for the generations after the Flood. When we realize
that he lived six full centuries together with Methusaleh,
who in turn had lived 243 years with Adam, we can com-
prehend how all the original traditions were transmitted
through the ages.?6These traditions consisted of the belief
in G'd, the story of the creation, the Paradise and its loss,
and the basic laws that had been revealed; and they were
enhanced by all the wisdom and the discoveries that these
generations with their outstanding abilities had acquired.
Especially noteworthy are their astronomical knowledge
and their calendar, a combination of the lunar and the
solar year, which b e the common heritage of man-
Irind." According to tradition, a perversion of the original
belief in G'd took place in the third generation, that of
E n o ~ h . ?People
~ then started to believe that some super-
natural power had been bestowed by the Creator on the
planets and the stars. Thus, they began to worship them
and finally became idolators. Since cuneiform script is
called C b e t h Emsh by I~aiah,?~ it may be assumed that
it waa invented at the time of En~sh.~O This would tally
with the fact that some time later the first pictographic
writing made its appearance at Warka.bl Mention has been
made repeatedly of the flood that occurred during this
generation. It enables us to identify its time with the
early Obeidan period.
A further spiritual decline obviously took place in the
p e r a t i o n of Enoch (Chanokh) who led a life of in-
timate companionship with G'd in a morally-disintegrat-
ing age and yet, according to tradition, was removed when,
finally, he himself was endangered.81 It was surely no acci-
dent that, beginning with him, the names of the Cainites
 were used among the descendants of Seth. By this time, the
former had fought their way into Babylonia and with the
help of their metal weapons brought it under their control.
We thus find from then on the names: Chanokh, Methu-
selah, and Lemech, corresponding to the names of the
Cainites: Chanokh, Methushael, and Lemech. The name
Methuselah means 'hero' or 'man of the weapon'82, and
is especially characteristic of the whole trend. There are
also indications that from this time on intermarriage took
place between the two races, leading to the complete cor-
ruption of mankind before the Fl00d.8~ Fitting into this
picture would be the tradition that Naamah, the sister of
Tubal-cain, became the wife of Noah.84
Some light is shed on the structure of the original
language by the explanation given for the name of Noah?=
It shows that the stem of the word Nocham (comfort),
consisting of three letters, were the two letters N a ~ h . ~ ~
11. The most striking feature of the whole list is the
long duration of the lifetime of the antediluvial patriarchs,
for most of them reached an age of more than 900 years.
This rather astonishing f a d is ,however, the common tra-
dition of mankind (see sub m).It must be realized that
since these early times human beings have lost much of
their originsl vitality. Obviously, moreover, there was an
intended gradual reduction of the human life-span to the
present level. Even before the Flood it was generally re-
stricted to 120 yearss7 and was further shortened to an
average of only 70-80 years at the time of M0ses.8~The
extraordinarily long life-span may, furthermore, even at
this early time, have been confined to some distinguished
leading individuals, whereas most human beings reached
only a more-or-less usual age at There are still
in our days families whose members possess special
longevity.
In spite of the extraordinary lifetimes of the single
generations, the reliability of the list cannot be questioned.
The dead reckoning of the major figures in the genealogies
is the whole basis of Hebrew chronology. If this chronology
is judged correct, the figures must be approximately true.
As has been shown previously, the traditional chronology
 for the second millennium B.C.E. harmonizes perfectly with
the dates furnished by secular records.s0 Thus, there can
be no doubt that its foundation is accurate?l
III. The genealogy of the antediluvial patriarchs was
handed down by nearly all the post-deluge peoples in a
very similar way. They usually claimed descent from a
race of 'gods' who often lived and reigned for a thousand
years. They were nearly always represented as ten in
n~rnbers.9~ This conformity among so many Merent na-
tions is a convincing proof for the accuracy of the com-
mon idea concerning the patriarchal longe~ity?~
Close harmony exists with the Sumerian king-lists. Ac-
cording to Berossus' version, Uta-Napishtim (Noah) was
the tenth of the kings who reigned before the F l ~ o d ? ~
It seems doubtful whether a direct connection between the
names can conclusively be proven?' Very striking, how-
ever, is a passage of the Babylonian list concerning Etana
the shepherd. He ascended to heaven, subdued all lands
and ruled 635 years.96 This suggests Enoch who 'was not;
for G'd took him.'96 His lifetime of 365 years would tally
somewhat with the Babylonian 635 years. In an old poem,
fragments of which have been found on some broken tablets
from Nineveh, the fortunes of Etana were given in detail.
He is said to have been carried to heaven on the back of
an eagle?6 This strongly resembles the traditional view
of the fate of Enoch based on the Biblical phrase 'G'd
took him .*?
With respect to the relation between the two lists as !
a whole, we must arrive at the same conclusion arrived
at in previous instances: no direct interdependence can
be demonstrated, but both go back to the same common
source which in the Bible has preserved its original purity
and simplicity.98
Of special interest is a tablet dealing with the founda-
tion of the early Babylonian ~ i t i e s ?After
~ enumerating
Eridu and Larak, it continues: 'Fourthly, Sippar as the
dwelling of Shamash he gave. Fifthly, Shuri~pak unto
Lamkurru he gave.'
As Shurippak was the city of Noah which was founded
not long before the Flood, it seems highly ~robabIethat
 the L a m k m mentioned in this inscription as its builder
is identical with Lemech, the father of Noah. Accord-
ing to Jewish tradition, Chanokh, the seventh patri-
arch, was king of Sippar,. the city of the sun-god,
Shamash.'* This would also agree with the Babylonian
tablet where Sippar precedes Shurippak, which was given
to Lamkurru (Lemech), the grandson of Chanokh.
Surprisingly close to the Biblical account is the Chinese
tradition. From Hoang-Ti, the 'great' monarch of that
people, down to Yao, who lived at the time of the Flood,
there were nine generations. No mention is made of the
posterity of Tay-Hao, the second son of Hoang-Ti, who
would correspond to Abel. Tchouen-Hiu, son of Tchang-
Hi, the Chinese Seth, instituted public worship; and so
did Enosh, the son of Seth in the Bible. The Chinese Cain
built a city, and dwelt in it?O1
JosephusloZquotes many other ancient sources which
retained the tradition that the ancients lived a thousand
years and points out that astronomical observations made
a t that time required a lifetime of at least 600 years.lo3
Mankind also remembered the mighty giants who ap-
peared on earth towards the end of this period. The Hindus
told in their distorted tradition that a long time after the
first man, Adima, had been created there came upon the
earth tyrannous Azoours or Giants. Brahma then 'regretted
that he had made Adima,' and the deluge destroyed
mankind.lO'
 CHAPTERIV.
THE FLOOD AND ITS CONSEQUENCES

1. The Flood
I. The terrible conditions that prevailed before the
Flood are described in the Bible with the words: "And
the earth was corrupt before G'd, and the earth was filled
with violence. And G'd saw the earth, and, behold, it was
corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the
earth."l
It has already been pointed out that the descendants
of Cain, obviously with the help of their superior metal
weapons, had conquered the land. Their way of life domi-
nated the earth, and for them life meant unscrupulous
selhhness and the deification of power and pleas~re.~ End-
less warfare between the merent tribes, with all its de-
moralizing effects, was the natural consequence. One city
after the other had to yield its sovereignity after being
'overthro~n.'~Thus, finally, not much was left of the
original spiritual and moral level of the first human beings;
and the last remnants of this ethos were endangered by
the intemmmbge which, toward the end of this period,
had taken place between the two branches of mankind.
To save humanity, no other way was open but to anni-
hilate that which had decayed beyond repair.
II. There is a tradition about the Hood in all branches
of the human family, with the sole exception of the black
A universal tradition everywhere so exact and so
concordant must necessarily be a reminiscence of an actual
and terrible event that could not be effaced from the mem-
ory of mankind.' It has already been pointed out that
 archaeological discoveries of recent years have brought
striking evidence for the story of the Flood." Of the three
floods indicated by the pertinent layers a t Ur, Shurippak,
and Kish, the flood indicated at Shurippak belongs obvi-
ously in Noah's time.6 According to Babylonian tradition,
Shurippak was the seat of Noah which was wiped out by
the Flood.?
m. The Flood occurred in 1656 aera mundi (era of
the creation), which is the year 2104 B.C.E. This date is
corroborated by several traditions and recent findmgs.
A Greek tradition places the deluge a t 9376 B.CJ3.s
The Chinese put it a t about 9900 B.C.E.9 I n the Indian
tradition a Golden Age began in 3164 and a Silver Age in
2204:O from which time they began to date their ter-
restial sovereigns.ll Similarly, the names of the Assyrian
rulers can first be traced to shortly before the year 9200.12
It is impossible to believe that mere chance caused the
traditional origin of the Assyrian, Indian, and Chinese
monarchies to be dated at about 2200 B.C.E?3
The reliable Babylonian king-lists for the time after
the Flood also point to this same date1'; and there is still
further confirmation of this date by some archaeological
findings. Several very old sites have been found to have
been abandoned at about this time. Eridu, the oldest city
of Babylonia, was deserted a t about 2000 B.CX.'5; and the
site of Tepe Gawra, which had been occupied from earliest
times, ceased to be inhabited before 2000 B.C.E.16 Dis-
coveries in Palestine point to the very same time. (see
sub IV.)
IV. As to the place where the Flood started, there is
no doubt that it was in Babylonia?? The ark finally landed
at the mountains of Ararat in Armenia, which is north
of Mesopotamia.18 Though the Bible mentions that all the
high mountains under the sky were covered by the Flood,
a controversy exists about its extent. R. Johanan, the
leading Amora of Palestine, interpreted the Biblical
passage restrictively and contended that Palestine was not
inundated by the Flood.lg Consequently, human beings
and other creatures could have survived in Palestine.20
This opinion i s opposed to that of Resh Lakish who 8s-
sumes that Palestine, too, was flooded; though Mesopo-
tamia was the center where, afterwards, the bodies of the
dead were carried by the waters.
I t is interesting to note in this connection that about
the QQndcentury B.CX. or even a little earlier, a break in
the continuity of population occurred in Palestine. The
progressive de-population of the country reached its ex-
treme point about 9000 B.C.E., after which date the curve
of occupation rose even more rapidly than it fellP1 Fur-
thermore a report of the excavations upon the site of Beth
Yerach (Khirbet-Kerach) indicates that this city was de-
stroyed around the twenty-fourth century B.C.E., possibly
as a result of a flood, and was not settled again until about
two centuries At Gezer, hally, a tradition per-
sisted to the effect that the Flood had started and ended
there at the tannur, the subterranean tunneLS
In the Babylonian tradition, the Flood had only local
chara~ter.~' The original Greek tradition, however, was ob-
viously a universal Flood. Aristotle, then, was the first to
consider the deluge as only a partial inundation?= A simi-
lar controversy exists today among modern scientists.
Some of them assume that the Flood was confined to the
area of Mesopotamia. Other authorities point out that
the universal tradition of the story of the Flood can be
explained only by the assumption of a global scope for
the catastrophe.
a. The Tradition of Mankind about the Flood
I. The most famous account of the Flood outside the
Bible is the Babylonian version which has come down as
part of the Gilgamesh poem dealing with the adventures
of a mythical hero, Gilgamesh. In it, the story of the Flood
is reputed to be told to Gilgamesh by the Babylonian
Noah, who is called Utna-pishtim (Day of Life) or Ziu-
giddu (Life Day prolonged) .28 The name, 'Noah', does
not occur in the Babylonian tradition. I t was found, how-
ever, in a Harrian fragment of the Flood where the hero
is named Nahmolel or Na-ah-m~-Ii-el.~.This form is of
special interest as the Bible explains the name of Noah as
meaning 'comfort,' which in Hebrew is 'noham.'
 The Babylonian story runs as follows: The gods decide
to send a flood upon the earth. One of the gods, Ea, re-
solves to save his favourite Utna-pishtim and commands
him to build a ship. He also furnishes him with a mislead-
ing pretext to offer his contemporaries when questioned as
to the reason for his building the ship. In obedience to
Ea, Utna-pishtim collects wood and materials and makes
a barge 120 cubits wide, covering it, within and without,
with pitch. When the ship is built he fills it with his
possessions, his family and his dependents, including arti-
sans, together with domestic and wild animals. He then
enters it himself and closes the door behind him. That
same night a mighty storm arises, with terrible thunder
and lightning and torrents of rain which continue for six
days and six nights, until all mankind is destroyed, and
the very gods 'cower in terror like dogs.' The ship Gnally
is grounded on the top of a high mountain. Seven days
later Utna-pishtim sends out a dove, but she finds no
resting-place and returns to the ship; after a further inter-
val, he sends forth a swallow, which also returns to the
ship; but when, some time after, he sends a raven, the
bird flies away, and though it approaches and croaks, it
does not re-enter the ship. Utna-pishtim then releases all
the animals; and leaving the ship, offers a sacrifice to the
gods upon the mountain. 'The gods gathered like flies over
the sacrifice.' They begin then to quarrel; but eventually,
Utna-pishtim is blessed and immortality conferred upon
him.ao
The resemblances between this Babylonian story and
the Biblical account are obvious.'l The agreement does
not extend only to the incidents of the tale but even to
its actual ~hrasing.'~There are, however, most significant
difIerences. The Babylonian conception of the deities is in
strong contrast with the dignity of Biblical monotheism.
The Babylonian gods disagree, are false to one another
and false to men; they crouch with fear like dogs and
come swarming about the sacrifice like hungry flies. The
Babylonian Noah was saved through celestial favoritism,
not because he was righteous and blameless.'Vuch in-
stances strongly indicate that the Bible supplies the original
record, whereas the Babylonian version was distorted by
mythical and polytheistic perversions.34 As in previous
cases, we arrive at the conclusion that it is ridiculous to
assume that by a process of purification these absurdities
could have been transformed into the terse and majestic
narrative of the Bible.3-e only adequate solution is
that a simple and true original report, as retained in the
Bible, was handed down by all the descendants of Noah
and later on, in their hands, distorted by polytheistic and
mythical absurdities. The similar phrasing and verbal
identity of some passages of the two versions would indicate
that they were part of the original account.s6
This explanation is natural and self-evident, but in
this instance external evidence is available. Besides the
version of the Gilgamesh poem, which was written down
in the 7th century B.C.E., fragments have been discovered
of a much older Babylonian version written at Nippur at
about 9000 B.C..E.s7 It represents Noah (Ziugiddu) as a
very pious man, who was apparently saved from destruc-
tion on account of his piety. After the Flood he prayed
that the curse that had come upon the land might be
raised.38 This old version thus motivates the Flood and the
rescue of Noah as acts of justice and not as celestial
caprices. There can not be the slightest doubt, then, that
the older form was much purer in its moral content.
Consequently, the perversions of the later form mean that
the original higher level had been lost. This shows, in
pn'nnple, that the fact that the Biblical accounts are
everywhere higher than their parallels is not due to a
process of progressive pur8cation but to the retention of
originally high forms in their simplicity and purity. This
is also the reason why, in this case, the less corrupt, old
account from Nippur agrees more nearly with the Biblical
amount in the fundamental concept of the Flood than the
much later one of the 7th c e n t ~ r y . ~
The Babylonian version is of h t rate signifi-ce in
yet another respect. Critical theory, with the help of its
ins&&nt philologid criteria, had contended that the
Biblical account was based on separate sources which
were later combined. Now, the Babylonian version of the
Flood has shown very clearly that all those parts which
had been artificially separated formed a unity there, too.
We may add that they were already an undivided whole
in the original source to which the Babylonian version goes
back, the same source which was retained in the Bible.''
II. The numerous traditions of other nations show
marks of corruption similar to those in the Babylonian
tradition.'& The priests of India taught how, a t a time when
all men had become immoral, the great god Brahma
appeared to the holy prince, Satyavrata, ordering him
construct a ship wherein he, together with seven Wise
Men, would be saved from an imminent deluge. The num-
ber of eight individuals thus exempted from the great
punishment embodies the original tradition.'l This same
detail is noticeable in the old Chinese writings, where the
picture of water and the figure representing eight always
indicate the 'great i n ~ n d a t i o n . ' Yao,
~ ~ the Chinese Noah,
constructed a large boat in which he escaped from a uni-
versal del~ge.'~The most ancient book of the Chinese
begins history with this Yao, who is occupied in mak-
ing the waters pass away. These waters had been raised
as high as heaven, and are still a t the feet of the loftiest
mountains, covering the hills that were less elevated and
rendering the plains impassible."
The ancient Mexicans portrayed their Noah, whom they
designated as Coxcox, lying in a boat near a mountain.
Their traditions recorded how this survivor of a universal
deluge freed a bird, that he might learn whether he could
safely di~embark.'~ Hieroglyphic inscriptions of Tizapan
in Tlaxcala, Mexico, describe a world which was inundated
by a huge flood overflowing the highest mountains. Nearly
all human beings were killed or transformed into fishes.
Only in the land of Anaguac were some giants saved.
These giants, the most powerful of whom was Xilua, be-
came the new founders of mankind.'6
The tradition of the Flood was especially vivid in
Armenia. There is still in existence, a t the foot of Mount
Ararat, a place which is called Nachidchevan, meaning 'The
first place of Descent,' a lasting monument to the preserva-
tion of Noah in the ark, upon the top of that mountain.
I t was mentioned already by Jo~ephus'~and by Moses
Chorenensis, the Armenian historian. Josephus, further-
more, quotes the following remark of Nicolaus of Damas-
cus: 48 "There is a great mountain in Armenia, over Minyas,
called Baris, upon which it is reported that many who fled
at the time of the Deluge were saved; and that one who
was carried in an ark came on shore upon the top of it;
and that the remains of the timber were a great while
preserved. This might be the man about whom Moses,
the legislator of the Jews, wrote."
The ancient Greeks thought that after a general sub-
mersion, the earth had been repopulated by Deukalion and
P ~ r r h.4g
a Every Greek colony began its history with its
own particular deluge story. Each of them had some re-
coUection of the Flood which, obviously, had been their
common tradition.sO
3. Conditions after the Flood.
I. After the Flood the relation between G'd and man-
kind was confirmed and re-established. A new covenant
gave reassurance to all mankind that in the future it would
be spared similar catastrophic destr~dion.5~
It is noticeable that in the days immediately after the
Flood religion consisted of pure monotheism. There are
indications that such a religion existed in Babylonia, though
its adherents were few and it soon died The name of
the city Bab-ilu contained the name of the god n. He
was shadowy in nature, with indistinct attributes; but the
similarity between his name and the Hebrew word for G'd
suggests that in I1 we have a relic of the original religion
in which only one G'd was worshipped by all the descend-
ants of Noah. The worship of Il remained a dim and vague
memory in Babylon. No temples were erected to him, and
his name was rarely incorporated into the names of people.63
The same name Il was also used by the Assyrians, Phoeni-
cians, and Sabaens as their oldest designation for G'd."
The Egyptians originally shared the belief in a G'd of
Heaven who created the world,6' and the idea of the unity
of Gad was the foundation of their primitive religious
~ystern.5~ In Palestine the belief in a Highest G'd was
still alive at the time of Abraham.56 Recent excavations
indicate that the oldest Semitic religion in Palestine did
not know any pictorial representation of G'd.S7 Dyeus-
Pater, 'father sky,' was the Highest G'd of the Indo-
Europeans, the G'd of Heaven, the Creator and -the ethical
G'd from whom the daughter peoples derived their Jupiter,
their Zeus pater, and the Dyans pita.68
11. After the Flood the basic law of mankind which
had been revealed to the first human b W 9 was modified.
Until then, the consequence of any transgression had been
that the criminal became an outlaw like Cain. Now this
was changed. A duty was imposed on human society to
eliminate offenders by human justice.60 The death penalty
referred to every crime against these laws, which, now, were
further extended to protect animals. Previously, human
beings had not been permitted to eat the flesh of animaIs.
Fruits and vegetables had been their f0od.6~When per-
mission to eat animal fl,esh was granted, it was done with
one restriction: life must have departed completely from
the animal before man could partake of its flesh. The
Biblical account of the Flood shows that Noah was well
acquainted with the distinction between clean and unclean
animalss2 that later became part of the laws of the Torah.
111. According to the tradition, the Flood brought about
significant changes in general geographic and climatic con-
d i t i o n ~ ? Considerable
~ alterations of the surface of the
earth took place; the continents were separated from each
other, and communication became much more difEcult.
Before the Flood, the climate had been especially favor-
able. Spring was ever-present, and fertility was extra-
ordinary. Now the earth again acquired ~easonsas it had
already repeatedly done during the various geological
epochs?"ese fundamental changes surely must have
exerted an essential influence on the life of human beings.
The loss in vitality and the duration of life which started
then66 may well have been produced by them. The new
conditions required harder work. This explains why the
Bible stresses the fact that Noah became a husbandman.86
He is credited by the tradition with the invention of the
pl0ugh,6~which, perhaps, may mean that he improved on
earlier forms. He was the first one to produce wine in
quantities, though wine was already known before the
Flood.68
It is very interesting that this detail has been retained
in Chinese tradition. The Chinese Noah, Yao, invented
fermented liquor.'j9 According to the sacred legend, rice
wine was discovered in his reign and presented to the
Emperor. He then banished the discoverer and prohibited
the new
THE SONS OF NOAH AND THEIR DESCENDANTS

1. The Sons of Noah

I. The three sons of Noah became the fathers of man-
kind after the Flood. Their descendants have in very dis-
similar ways, influenced the course of history to our present
days. If now, after thousands of years, we should try to
sum up what each of them has brought forth, no more
perspicuous utterances could be offered than those con-
tained in the blessing of N0ah.l "The sense of beauty,"
he pronounced, "may G'd grant to Japhet, but He may
dwell in the tents of Shem, and Canaan will become their
servant." Restrospe~tively~ we can state that the descend-
ants of Japhet have, indeed, developed the culture of
beauty and, with it, influenced all mankind; but that, on
the other hand, the dominating religious ideas that spread
over the earth originated from the tents of Shem. It is
equally true that the third branch became the slaves of
the white races until our very time.
The tradition of three sons of Noah was especially well
kept by the Indians. Their Satyavrata (Xisustros, Noah)
had three sons, Shema, Charma, and Yapati.' Japhet sur-
vived in the Greek tradition as a Giant who appears in
Home9 and as the founder of the human race in Hesiod.
Chem or Kam, derived from Ham, was the most ancient
name for Egypt.'
II. From these three sons of Noah developed the three
human races: The Japhetides with their main branch, the
Indo-Europeans or Aryans, the Semites, and the Hamites.
We learn from the Bible that remnants of races that had
lived before the Flood also survived, especially in Pal-
estine;= but they were gradually destroyed!
As the Book of Mankind, the Bible furnishes us with
a survey of all the nations which then arose to play their
part in human history. Its trustworthiness has been strik-
in& vindicated by new light from ancient monuments?
With its help. the origins of many peoples which have been
 cloudened ethnographically and linguistically by steady in-
termixture can be clarified and half-forgotten traditions elu-
cidated. I t is not based on artificial human schemes but on
historical truth.
In general, the Hamites occupied the southernmost
countries; the Japhetides, the northernmost; and the Sem-
ites, the central region. However one branch of the
Hamitic Cushites remained in Babyl~nia.~
2. The Descendants of Japhet
The main part of the posterity of Japhet is formed by
the Indo-Europeans. But the Mongolian race also belongs
to them. The following branches of the Japhetides are
named:
1) Gomer ( 7 o :j which, according t o the tradition,
is identical with the germ an^.^ As Tacitus reports,1° the
Germans were unable to give a satisfactory etymology for
their name. The connection with Gomer seems evident. The
Germans told that from their founder, Manio, descended the
Ingaevones, Istaevones, and Herrnionesl1 who may be
identical with the three sons of Gomer: Ashkenaz, Riphath,
and Togarmah. l2 Ashkenaz is mentioned by Jeremiah as
attacking Babylonia,13 but in the tradition is especially
identified with Germany?' In the Mishna, reference is made
to the 'German? as of extraordinarily bright colour.16
2) Magog was the forefather of the Mongols. The
designations, 'Mandshu' and 'Mongol', are derived from
their original name, 'Magog.'16
3) Madai, the Medes. No mention is made of the
Persians, who did not appear before the time of Cyrus.
4) Javan, the Ionians or the Javones of the inscrip
tions.17
a) The first son of Javan, Elisha, is the Greek Hellt13ts.l~~
b) Various identifications have been proposed for the
second son, Tarshish. He was the father of the Etruscans,
which is evidenced by the following facts.17"
Ramses m ' s records call the Etruscans TRS. The same
TRS is contained in their Greek name Tyrsennians. In the
name 'Etruscan' the removal of the vowels and the ending
 (can) again leaves TRS. Tyrrhenian, meaning the Etruscan
Sea, was the name of the triangular basin enclosed by
Italy and the islands of Corsica, Sardinia, and Sicily.18 I n
the Bible, Tarshish is frequently mentioned as a flourishing
seaport which is generally identified with Tartessus in
ancient Spain.lS The discovery in 1926 of an Etruscan ceme-
tery on the Greek island of LemnosZ0suggested the eastern
origin of this people. It had, furthermore, been connected
with Tarsos of Asia MinorF1 The resemblance between the
Etruscan and Lydian alphabets also points to that regiom2'
Thus, we may conclude that the men of Tarshish were the
Etruscans, who migrated from Asia Minor via the Aegean
islands to Italy and to Spain.
c) The Kittim were a race inhabiting the island of
They founded there the city Ktion on the site
of modern Lanarka, which, in Phoenician inscriptions, was
called Keti. 24 The name Kittim was used also for other
islands and the coast lands of the MediterraneanF5
d) The name of the last tribe, Dodanim, is given in
Targum Jonathan as Dardanim referring to Dardania in
the region of Troy.26 The Dardenas are mentioned as the
allies of the Hittites in their fight against Ramses 11."
It seems, however, that part of this tribe in early times
migrated to Greece, for there was in Epirus an ancient
place called Dodona.
5) The remaining three branches, Tubal, Mesheh, and
Tiras, represent the Slavic peoples. Tubal may be con-
nected with a mountsin, Tibar, of Assyrian inscriptions,
and the people, Tibareni, of classical geography. In the
Assyrian period this land lay considerably south of its
later site on the shores of the Black Sea, where the Tubal
of Ezekiel has to be placed.27a Mesheh is perhaps
identical with the Muski, who, together with other peoples,
had raided from Syria to Egypt by 1 2 0 B.C.E. Still
migrating, bv 1170 B.C.E they were threatening the Assy-
rian border, and remained dangerous till Tiglath-Pileser T
drove them back 'as far as the Upper Sea,' which may
mean the Black SeaF8 The prophet Ezekiel, in referring
to these peoples, calls them Rosh, Meshech, and T ~ b a l . ~ ~
These names were used in the famous letter of Chasdai
 ibn Shaprut to the king of the Chazars who is addressed
as king of Rosh, Meshech, and T~bal.~O The Chazars lived
in the region of the Black Sea. We may assume that the
people of Meshech were the ancient Massagetes and that
their name still survives in the names Muscovites and
Moscow.31 Tiras or Rosh may designate the ancestors of
the Russians.
9. The Descendants of Ham
The descendants of Ham were Cush, Mizraim, Put, and
Canaan.
1) Cush is Ethiopia. Most of the Ethiopian tribes
mentioned in the Bible32 migrated to Africa and to the
African coast of the Red Sea. One tribe, however, remained
in Mesopotamia. Its famous ruler was Nimrod (see Chapter
VII, 9). The name of one of the African tribes, Sheba, was
retained in the Ethiopian Shoa.SS This name and that of
another Cushite tribe, Havilah, occur also among the Se-
mitic tribes descending from Joktan?' There were, indeed,
two divisions of tribes on both sides of the Red Sea, one
African and Hamitic, and the other one Asiatic and
Semitic.35
a) Mizraim, Egypt. The most ancient name for Egypt,
as already mentioned, was Chem or Kam refemng to the
ancestor, Ham. This name has survived to our days in the
word, 'Chemistry', meaning the Egyptian art. The dual
form of the word Mimaim is explained by the division of
the land into Upper and Lower Egypt. To the end of
Egyptian history the kings bore the title 'king of Upper
Egypt and Lower Egypt.'36 Among the descendants the
following can be identified:
a) The Lehabim were the Lybians who lived in North
Africa.s7 There is no doubt that they were related to the
Egyptians .88
b) The Naphtuhim were the dwellers of the Nile
Delta."9
c) The Pathrusim were the inhabitants of Upper
Egypt, which bears the proper name, Pathros.'O
d) m e Philistines played an especially important part
in Jewish History. From their name was derived the name
'Palestine.' They arrived in Palestine in two different waves.
 As w l y as the time of the Patriarchs, they had settled
there.'l At the time of the Judges, they were driven from
Crete by the invasion of the Dorians and widened their
foothold in Palestine, threatening to crush the Israelites.
Their pottery, as found at Lachish and Gezer in southern
Palestine, is Cretan, codrming the tradition that the Phili-
stines came from Crete.'z
e) The Caphtorim became closely connected with the
Philistines. They were the inhabitants of Crete, the Biblical
Caphtor, Egyptian Kptr, and Accadian Ka~tara.'~The
Egyptian name, Keftjew, is applied to the Philistines, the
Phoenicians, the inhabitants of Crete and to other peoples."
It is possible that it refers to Asia Min~r.'~This would
c o b the tradition of the Targum and the Septuaginta
identifying Caphtorim with Cappadocia. They thus seem
to have extended from eastern Asia Minor as far west as
Crete. The fact that a Cappadocian style is discernible in
Philistine art suggests the possibility that some of them
migrated by land from Asia Minor through Syria to Pales-
tine.46The Caphtorim settled also in Egypt and are known
there as the Copts, who gave to this land the name,
'Egypt.'47
It is very significant to note that in numerous places
the Bible depicts Caphtor-Crete as a cultural center from
which the peoples ~pread.'~Only recent discoveries have
shown that Crete was ,indeed, the birthplace of an im-
portant culture called 'Minoan' which extended to Syria
and Palestine, to the west coast of Asia Minor, and to
central and northern Gree~e.'~This culture begins at about
the same period as Egyptian culture6O with which it was
connected from a time at least as far back as the Fifth
Dynasty.61 This again illustrates the relationship between
these two peoples as stated in the Bible.
f) The Casluhim belonged to the same group as the
philistine^.^^^ It seems that they were the people who
founded Chalkis on Euboea, the largest island of Greece.
Originally the island itself was called C h a l k i ~ . ~
The
l ~ name
is obviously a transposition of Casluch (CHLks-KSLch)
in a way similar to that in which Crete is transposed from
CpTR. Chalkis was also the name of a small island be-
 tween Lesbos and Asia Minor and of a place on the Ionian
coast of Asia Minor."lb The early connection with Asia
&or, moreover, is evidenced by the fact that the first
Greek alphabet was the Chalcidic which was bornwed
from Aramaic people6'" and brought not only to the main
part of continental Greece but also to Italy.61b
In Asia, on the cost of the Black Sea, lived the people
of Colchis which in the Greek myth was the goal of the
famous expedition of the Argonauts who raided there after
the Golden Fleece. Colchis, again, seems to be identical
with Kasluch KICHS-KSICH) .
3) Put are the Puntites, the peoples of eastern Africa,
now known as the Somali people. Their representations on
the Egyptian monuments show striking resemblances to
the Egyptians themselves.62 The Hebrew Put seems to
stand for Punt, Egyptian Pwnt, Punet." Josephusb4 locates
Put in Lybia, in northern Africa, which gets some support
from a passage of the prophet Nahum.66It seems possible,
therefore, that this tribe had branched out, one part settling
on the northern coast and the other one on the coast of
the Red Sea.
4) The descendants of Canaan, the fourth son, are
given in particular detail, for they occupied Palestine.
Their territory is defined as stretching at the coast from
Zidon to Gaza in the south, Sodom and Gomorrah in the
east and from there to Lssha in the north east.
a) The fmt-born son was Zidon. His name became
that of the first capital of the Phoenicians,S6who were the
discoverers of westernmost Mediterranean and the Atlantic
Ocean and exerted a decisive influence on the development
of Greek culture. They brought to the Greeks and to
Europe the Semitic alphabet. Greek tradition ascribes this
to Kadmos, which means 'the man from the east.' Accord-
ing to their belief, Phoenix, Killjx, and Kadmos were sons
of Agenor, a son of the water-god, Poseidon. It is probable
that A-genor is the Greek form for Canaan." Kadmos was
sent by Agenor to seek his lost sister Europa, which name
is derived from n y meaning 'west.' This tradition may
go back to the fact that part of the Greeks descended
 from Canaan and became separated from their brother
tribes when they migrated to the west.
b) Heth, the second son, was the father of the Hittites,
a powerful and warlike nation. Recent discoveries have
revealed that they were neither Indo-Europeans nor Se-
m i t e ~ Their
. ~ ~ religion was closely related to that of the
C a n a a n i t e ~ Pictures
.~~ in Egyptian reliefs show two distinct
types, one resembling the early Greeks and the other the
peoples of Mongolia.60They were called men of the country
Khattu in Cappado~ia,~' the capital of which was Boghaz-
koi, ancient Hattusas, situated over a hundred miles east
of Angora. " They captured Babylon, overthrew the dyn-
asty of Hammurabi, and held sway in Syria and Asia Minor
from 1800-900.63Some smaller settlements were established
in PalestineG4which, though unimportant outlying fringes
of the great Wttite people, had the good fortune to have
had their memory kept alive in the Bible, while the empire
itself was utterly forgotten until its remains were excavated
in our days.6S This empire extended from the Aegean Sea
to the Euphrates at Charchemish and to Hamath in
Syria.66 The Bible locates the Hittite land between the
Lebanon and the E u p h r a t e ~ ,and ~ ~ it is mentioned on a
parity with In Boghazkoi was found a copy of
the great treaty between Hattusil, the Hittite king, and
Ramses II of Egypt69 that ended the prolonged struggle
between these two powers.
c) The tribe of the Jebusites dwelt in and around
Jerusalem, which at the time of the judges was called
'Jebus.'7O However, the ancient name, Jerusalem, mentioned
already in the Amsrna tablets, survived?'
d) The Amorites who settled in Palestine at a very
early time were one particular warlike tribe amongst the
Canaanites. They over-ran Babylonia and ruled there fore
centuries.72Another branch was ~owerfulin Egypt, Syria,
and Canaan until about 1500. Afterwards, the main group
was obliteratedY3 Their language shows their relationship
to the Hittites and, on the other hand, to the Abyssinians,
who were also of Hamitic stock.74
e) The Girgashite, according to the tradition, fled to
Africa when Joshua conquered the c0untry.7~This has
 been confirmed by an inscription76and a legend found in
the writings of the church father^?^ It is possible that the
otherwise unexplained name, 'Greek' (Grsecos, Graecia),
which originated in Italy, is connected with G i r g ~ h i . 7 ~
f) The Hivite pin) is probably identical with a
powerful kingdom on the southern coast of Asia Minor
called Ach-chi-ya-wa. This name seems to be the same
which the Greeks applied to a region in Greece called
A~haea.7~ The prefix A- in the Greek language is very
often added to names of persons, as in A-pollo, A-chilles,
A-garnenn0n.8~Thus A-chaea may be identical with Chiwi.
There are indications that the Achaeans migrated by sea
and settled in southern Greece where they mingled with
other settlers and gave their name to this part of the
land.81 A second group of Achaeans (Akaiwasa, Achaioi-
Achivi) that had remained in Asia Minor, invaded Egypt
in later All this sheds light on the fact that the
Achaeans who settled in the eastern Aegean area borrowed
their alphabet from people in western and southern Asia
Minor with whom they were in close contact from a very
early time!3
Like the Hittites, the Hivites, too, had some settlements
in Palestine. Their main stronghold was under the Lebanon
and from Mount Hermon to b a t h ! ' To the south they
occupied Shehema5 and Gibe0n.8~As Hivites, the Gibeon-
ites could deceive Joshua into believing that they came
from far away, for the main part of their people lived in
Asia Minor. It is possible that the Awim who were driven
from the coast by the Philistines also belonged to the
Hi~ites.8~
g) The Sinites. A passage of the prophet Isaiah88 shows
that they are obviously the Chinese. Their land is referred
to as far away from Palestine, neither to the north nor
to the west. It is highly significant in this connection that
the Egyptian reliefs picture one type of Hittites with high
cheek bones, oblique eyes, wearing pigtah like the people
of Mongolia and China.- Comparative archaeological in-
vestigations, moreover, have demonstrated with increasing
clearness that nearly all basic elements of Chinese civiliza-
tion have penetrated from the westPo Some elements of
their early art and industry appear to have come from
Mesopotamia and Turkestan?' The Biblical name Sin
obviously is identical with that of the ancient Chinese
province of Chin or Tsin, which conquered all the other
provinces, established a unified empire, and gave to China
the name by which it is known to nearly all the world
except itself?18
h) The BRradites were the founders of the Phoenician
city of Arad0s.9~
i) The Hsmathites founded Hamath in Syria, at one
time the capital of a strong kingdomg3 which formed the
northern frontier of the Israelite kingdom at the time of
its greatest extent?'
4. The Descendants of Shem.
Shem, the father of the last group of nations, is called
the father of d the Bne E b e ~ ? ~This
" may refer to Eber,
who was one of his outstanding de~cendants?~ It may,
however, also point to the fact that his descendants lived
at the bank of the river Euphrates. Thus Joshua addressed
the Israelites: 'Your fathers dwelt on the other side of the
river in old time.'g6 The name Ibrim became a designation
for the Israelites and other related tribes.97 Abraham was
called Haibriss and the land of the settlements of the
Patriarchs was r e f d to as 'the land of the Ibri~n.*~ In
Egypt the Israelites were called Ibrim?Oo
It is increasingly acknowledged that the Habiru or
Khabii mentioned in Babyloniau inscriptions of the days
of Rim Sin, in the tablets of Mari, Nuzu, and Tell el
Amarna were identical with the Ibrim?O1
1) The oldest son of Shem was Elam. The people of
Elam lived beyond Babylonia and the Persian Gulf. AS
the Elam of history was Aryan, its Semitic origin was
questioned. The h n c h exploration at Susa, however, has
shown that the oldest Elamite inscriptions are written in
Babylonian, which proves that early Elam was peopled
by Semites.lba
9 ) Ashur, Assyria, became the most pwerful of the
Semitic peoples, a military state. The Assyrians occupied
the narrow river valley of the upper Tigris and spoke a
 Semitic language closely related to that spoken at Akkad,
Babylonia.lo3 The Biblical tradition of the Semitic origin
of this people enabled modern scholars to decipher their
cuneiform inscriptions?"'
9) The name of the third son, Arpachshad, is explained
as 'the territory of the Chasd', the last part of the name
forming the origin of the name Kasdim (Ur of the Cas-
dim) ?05 ArpachShad was the ancestor of Eber who, together
with Shem, became the bearer of the old traditions of
mankind throughout the centuries until the Patriarchal
Age. This line, therefore, will later be dealt with in
detail.lo6From one of the sons of Eber, Joktan, came the
pure Arabs, an older people than the posterity of Ishmael.lo7
4) Lud, the fourth son, became the forefather of the
Lydians, famous in the history of Asia Minor.lo8
5) F'rom Anun, the last of the sons of Shem, descended
the Aramaeans or Syrians, whose territory included Meso-
potamia, 'Aram of the two Rivers.' By 1900 B.C.E. they
had established a group of flourishing kingdoms, particularly
in Syria. They controlled the commerce of Western Asia
and carried the Semitic alphabet to the frontiers of India.
Aramaic finally became the general language, also displacing
the Hebrew of Palestine?M
5. The Dispersion of the Nations.
It is an overwhelming panorama which the table of nations
unfolds before our eyes, rea&ming again the fundamental
truth of the unity of all mankind, the prime foundation
for the brotherhood of man. It shows clearly how all early
civilizations were derived from one cultural center, a fact
which archaeological research has established beyond any
doubt.'1° Throughout the centuries, the migrations of
numerous nations have followed and amlerated each other
from the center in Mesopotamia. To the West, the pen-
insua of Asia Minor l i e d the Mediterranean world to
that of the Two Rivers?ll Civilization, spreading from the
Near East, thus first reached the easternmost of the three
European peninsulas, Greece. From there it moved weat-
ward to Italy. Spain, the westernmost peninsula, was the
last to be reached by ci~ilization?~~
 Along the Mediterranean coast, via the isthmus at
Suez, trade and culture passed from Asia to the Nile. The
cultural unity of all these territories is shown by aston-
ishing similarities between SumemAkkadian, Anatolian,
Canaanite and Egyptian mythology?13 Many Mesopota-
mian elements are found in the primitive culture of Egypt.
The farther back we trace the Egyptian language, the
more afEnities it reveals with the Semitic tongues of the
Near East. The pictographic writing of the early Egyp-
tians seems to have come in from Sumeria. Unquestionable
is the Mesopotamian origin of the cylindrical seal which
was in use a t the time of the first dynasties. Early Egyp-
tian architecture resembles that of Mesopotamia.ll' This
influx of Mesopotamian culture into Egypt took place in
the Jemdet Nasr period, the late Pre-dynastic and early
Proto-dynastic Periods of Egypt.l15 It was the time after
the Flood?16
The Indo-European tribes, the Mongols, and the Chin-
ese left Mesopotamia to the north and east, spreading to
Europe, the Far East, Polynesia, and probably America.l17
The tradition of the ancient peoples has well preserved
the memory of the origin of their civilization. The Chinese
and the Hindus point to the West as the cradle of their
ancestors; the Europeans indicate the East as their original
home?"
 CHAPTER VI. THE BUILDING OF THE TOWER.
CONFUSION OF THE LANGUAGE.

1. The Building of the Tower

I. The scattering of the different branches of mankind over
the earth was speeded by an event which took place a
comparatively short time after the Flood: the Building
of the Tower?
The first human settlements after the Flood were
located in the mountainous ranges stretching east of Meso-
potamia down to the Persian Gulf. For a considerable
time, the plain-land was not habitable because of the
thorough devastation caused by the inundation. When
settlers finally ventured down again from these eastern
mountains into the plains, they reached the southern
region, which they called Shinar.2 The fear of new cata-
strophes still lingered and may, at least partially,3 have
given rise to the plan they conceived of building a city and
the Tower. Archaeology has proved that the Sumerians,
as the founders of the first post-diluvian civilization are
called,' came from the east. Their connection with the
mountains is shown by the fact that they worshipped
mountain gods: which perhaps originated in their memory
of the rescue at the top of the mountains after the Flood.
This may have induced them, in part, to build a 'Moun-
tain House,' as the oldest Babylonian temple in Nippur
was also ~ a l l e d . ~
Huge towers, which rose high above the temple build-
ings, became a common feature in Babylonia. The ruins
of many of these tower-temples, called ziggurat, are still
preserved. Some of them were several hundred feet high,
rising in rows upon rows of terraces. The Tower of Babel
has been reconstructed by Koldewey, the excavator of
Babylon. At Babylon he found the square base of the tem-
ple and the bottom-most ends of the three stairways? I t
consisted of an artificial mound, high enough to over-top the
severest inundation, with a platform large enough to con-
tain the house of the gods. Below clustered the stores,
workshops, and dwellings of the temple servants as well
as the quarters of the lay population. Other important
buildings occupied similar p l a t f ~ r m s At
. ~ the time of Nebu-
chadnezzar, the immense ziggurat rose to a height of 650
feet, surpassing in height the pyramids and all but the
latest of modern b~ildings.~ In the days of Hammurabi
it was already known as Etemenanki (The House of the
Terrace-platform of Heaven and Earth) ;lo its foundation,
however, goes back to still earlier times."
This undertaking is even more astonishing when we
recognize the fact that no stones were available in Shinar,
the later Babylonia. Not even a pebble could be found
there. Clay bricks were the usual material for building,
and ordinary houses were the merest hovels of mud bricks
which were dried in the sun. Baked bricks were in use for
palaces and temples.12 Now the settlers of Shinar decided
to use baked bricks not only for the Tower but also for
the whole city.13
11. When the gigantic project was frustrated by divine
interference, the city survived, though for a considerable
time it remained of only minor importance. As the Bible
explains,14 it received the name Babel 'because G'd con-
founded there the language of all earth.' This does not
mean, as it is generally assumed, that the word 'BBL' is
derived from the Hebrew word for confound 'BLL.' The
emphasis of the explanation lies rather in the word G'd
and is well in harmony with the Assyrian name 'Bab-ilu'
meaning the 'Gate of G'd.' The city was so named because
"G'd confounded there the language of all earth and G'd
scattered from there the nations over the earth."ls I t has
already been pointed out that the name n u as a desig-
nation of G'd points to the time when only one G'd was
worshipped by all the descendants of Noah.le
Some insight into the significance of the prevention of
the building of the Tower for the cultural development of
mankind may be derived from our recent experiences. These
experiences have led a former German architect, Dr.Walter
Gropius, to urge that Berlin not be rebuilt into one of
Europe's great cities. Instead, he suggests the rebuilding
of Germany in smaller communities in order to change the
German outlook upon life. He is convinced that the super-
buildings of the Nazis so dwarfed the individual that he
lost his self-respect and became overawed by his surround-
i n g ~ . ~ ~ ~
9. The Traditions of Mankind.
An event of such overwhelming magnitude as the con-
fusion of the language must have left a deep imprint on
the memory of mankind. Mythological traditions and
architectural remains have kept it alive.
The Babylonian story is closely interwoven with the
creation myth in which a supreme part is ascribed to the
Babylonian god; Marduk. In it we learn how the service
of the gods was laid upon mankind and how the gods
molded bricks for a year and labored to construct Esa-
gilla, the large temple tower of Marduk at Babylon.17 A
so-called account of the creation starts with the words:
"A holy house, a house of the gods.
in a holy place had not been made"
and contains then the following passages:
"3 No brick had been made, no foundation had been
built
9 The holy house, the house of the gods, the dwelling
had not been made
14 Babylon was made, Esagila was completed
15 The gods and the Anunaki he made at one time
16 the holy city, the dwellings of their hearts desire,
they named as firsi
93 He formed the Tigris and Euphrates and set them
in their places
36 Bricks he laid, a foundation he constructed
37 A city he built, a throne he established."18
It seems obvious from these excerpts that the myth
refers to the construction of the city of Babylon and the
Tower, the holy house.
 A finding of remarkable interest in this connection was
made at the site of Tepe Gawra, which had been occupied
from earliest times.lg On top of the three oldest civiliza-
tions, the latest of which was contemporaneous with El
Obeid and probably antediluvian, remains were found of
a new civilization created by people who, apparently, had
migrated from southern Babylonia; for they built whith
clay bricks in a country where stone was abundant. Those
who preceded them and came after them constructed build-
ings of stone; and thus the use of bricks must have been
due to their having lived previously in a country like
Babylonia, where no other building material was known.
The tools of this period, being wholly those of the late
Stone Age, indicate that they left Babylonia before the
rise of the Sumerian civilizati~n.~~ I t seems warranted to
assume that this migration was part of the great migration
brought about by the catastrophic events following the
building of the Tower.
In the west, too, we find some indications pointing to
the building of the Tower. The oldest city of the Phoeni-
cians was Byblos, which they believed their god El to have
founded at the beginning of time. To the end of its history,
Byblos remained the holy city and the religious center of
Phoenicia. The old Phoenician name probably was Gibe1
(Hebrew Gebal) meaning 'mountain,'21 a name which re-
quires explanation, as the city was built in the plain.22
I t becomes comprehensible when we assume that this city
was founded under the impact of the events at the 'moun-
tain house' a t Babel and thus received its deep-rooted
recognition as a religious center. There are, moreover, some
close parallels in the cult of Ishtar at Babylon and that
of Astarte at Byb10s.~~
It has already been mentioned2' that shortly after the
Flood an influx of Mesopotamian civilization is discernible
in Egypt. At this time, too, there suddenly appeared an
advanced technique and style in the erection of recessed
brick buildings which was evidently based upon the know-
ledge of architectural achievements in M e s o ~ o t a m i a . ~ ~
Shortly afterwards, the so-called Pyramidic Age started
in Egypt. Pyramids were built not for architectural but
 for religious purp0ses.2~Furthermore, since the word, 'pyra-
mid', is derived from the Egyptian word pi-~e-rnua,2~ mean-
ing altitude, it would be rather surprising if no close
connection existed between the ziggurats of Mesopotamia
and the pyramids of Egypt. Obviously, both were repre-
sentations of the Mountain House.
In the very same way as it had spread into Egypt,
the pyramid was carried all the way across Asia. The
square polaric peak survives in Buddhist literature as
Mount Meru. In China it was perpetuated as the central
object of worship at the shrines of the cosmic sky god.
The Chinese pyramids were not of stone, as in Egypt,
but of earth. The most important was "five cubits square,
green on the east, red on the south, white on the west,
black on the north, and all covered with yellow earth."2fis
These colours point clearly to Mesopotamia where the
seven levels of the ziggurat at Borsippa, too, had symbolic
colours black, white, purple, blue, scarlet, silver, and gold.26b
Quite recently a pyramid has been discovered near Sian,
Shensi Province, ChinaF6~I t is the same region where fine
painted pottery of West Asiatic derivation has been found
in great quantities, datable from about 2500 to 2000 B.C.E.
The pyramid may well be from this time."6a
The connecting link between pyramid and Tower is,
furthermore, clearly shown in the Mexican tradition which
located the construction of the Tower on the site of their
great pyramid of Ch0lula.2~
Highly significant are inscriptions which were found at
Tizatlan, Tlaxcala in Mexico.28 They give a report of
the Flood saying that once the world was inundated by a
flood, the waters passing over the highest mountains.
Nearly all man were destroyed or changed into fish. Only
in the land of Anaguac did some giants save themselves
in a cave and become the founders of a new mankind.
After the waters had ebbed away, the most powerful of
them, Xilua (Xisustros?), resolved to build an artificial
mountain in remembrance of the salvation. For years and
years he ordered bricks to be made and, supported by his
numerous sons, put them skillfully together. The building
grew higher and higher, reaching into the clouds. Full
of pride, they started to mock a t the gods. Then came
down the anger of the 'Pure Spirit' as a devastating fire.
Many of the people were killed. The rest were shocked and
lost their language. Confused and helpless, they wandered
in the ruins of the buildings, hungry and lonesome until
the 'Spirit' took pity on them. A pigeon gave the language
back to fifteen families. Then the people were scattered
over the world. This tradition is of special interest as it
bears a very close resemblance to the Biblical account and
links the story of the Tower with that of the Flood, re-
taining even the punishing by the confusion of language.
As to the fifteen families to whom language was restored,
is seems rather surprising that in the Biblical list of the
nations Japhet and all his descendants are exactly fifteen.29
In spite of mythical and polytheistic traits the monotheistic
origin can still be recognized, for G'd is referred to as the
'Spirit' or the 'Pure Spirit.'
Another tradition of the tower and the confusion of the
language, that of the Sybil, is quoted by Josephus30 in
the following way: 'When all men were of one language,
some of them built a high tower, as if they would thereby
ascend up to heaven but the gods sent storms of wind
and overthrew the tower, and gave everyone his peculiar
language; and for this reason it was that the city was
called Babylon.' There was, furthermore, handed down by
one of the Church-fathers a fragment of a History of
Assyria written many centuries before the Christian era,
which speaks of the tower and of the consequent disper-
~ion.~~
Finally, we may mention that in modern China a tower
is still a sign of separation.31
3. Confusion of the Language.
The account of the confusion of the language is introduced
in the Bible with the statement that before that event
the whole earth was of one language and of few words.J2
We are able to grasp the deep meaning of these words
when we consider the structure of the Hebrew language.
I t has alrady been pointed outs3 that Hebrew words are
formed by two letters containing the basic meaning which.
 by an additional third letter, is adapted to numerous
nuances of thought. Special reference has been made t o
the stem c h - r which is combined with nearly every other
letter of the alphabet to produce a considerable number
of w0rds.3~About 65 different ideas are thus expressed by
a mutational use of two letters of the alphabet. We under-
stand that a language of such structure has only 'few
words.' People, however, had t o possess the mental ability
to combine them by mere flexion in a way similar to that
in which, today, words are changed by conjugation or
declension. This ability was based on a highly developed
uniformity of thought and clear knowledge of the basic
meaning of every letter?" It is, obviously, this ability
which was disturbed and disrupted at the time of the
building of the Tower.
The consequences of this mental disruption can be
clearly observed in the structure of the Chinese language.
Every word in it may be a noun, a verb, an adjective or
an adverb, according to its context and its tone. Since
the spoken dialects have only from four to eight hundred
monosyllabic word-sounds or vocables ('few words'), and
these must be used to express the 40,000 characters of
the written language, each vocable has from four to nine
'tones,' so that its meaning is made to differ according
to the manner in which it is sung. Gestures and context
support these tones and make each sound serve many
purposes. The vocable 'I' may mean one of 69 things,
'ski' may mean fifty nine, 'ku' twenty nine?5 In conse-
quence of this structure of language its dialects difer to
the point of mutual unintelligibilityP6
This illustrates the confusion of language as the de-
rangement of the mental ability to use the different letters
according to their inherent basic meaning for the forma-
tion of words in conformity with other human beings. The
original human ingenuity has been preserved in the Hebrew
language, giving it its crystal clear structure that dominates
the formation of its w0rds.3~Hebrew is connected with
nearly every branch of the Semitic languages; but even
compared with ancient Babylonian, it has preserved the
more original ~ t r u d u r e . 5 ~
 The confusion of languages exerted an equally disrup-
tive influence on the use of writing, as the words indicated
in the pictographs were pronounced differently in accord-
ance with the name of the thing or the action in the
various tongues. Thus was produced that puzzling poly-
phony of sou^ in the Sumerian syllabary, the explanation
of which has been the despair of scholars. For instance,
Kud can be pronounced Has, Tar, Sil, Sila, and Kurum,
Du can be pronounced GUT, Gin, Ra, and It is
highly interesting to note that the Sumerian language re-
sembles rather markedly that of the Turkish and other
Mongol peoples of Central Asia.'O
4. Common Origin of Languages.
I. Though human languages since the time of the confusion
have developed in different directions, their common origin
can still be traced today. Linguistic evidence has clearly
established a kinship between the Hamitic and Semitic
peoples;" and in spite of complex difficulties, it is also
possible to link Semitic and Indo-European languages
dire~tly.'~Their kinship can be established on the basis
of similarity or identity of vocabulary. Naturally much
precaution is necessary; and certain principles have to be
followed to avoid fallacious conclusions. We may only com-
pare those words which we may assume to have existed
at an early stage of human civilization.
The following groups are, therefore, taken into con-
sideration:
1) Names of planets and stars, the earth and parts of
its surface; 2) names of minerals; 3) names of plants; 4)
names of animals; 5) designations of human beings, age,
sex, parts of the human body, family, relationship; 6) des-
ignations for space and time, numbers and measures; 7)
designations of primary acts and occupations, war and
weapons.
We must, furthermore, keep in mind the fact that,
generally, Oriental peoples have remained more stable than
the Indo-European nations and may have preserved the
original forms in a purer state.43
11. The following survey gives a small selection of
words belonging to the seven groups. The kinship existing
between the various tongues seems obvious.
1) Y l N - earth - aarde - jord - terra - terre -
tierre44
3313 - luna - lune
52 - hill - Huegel - collis - colline
2 ) 3n3 - coal - Kohle - kul - uhel - ugolq5
l v B D - sapphire - Saphir
n 3 1 1 - emerald - s m a r a g d ~ s ~ ~
3) 913 - fruit - frudus - Frucht -
jl7y - leaf - Blatt, Laub - folium - feuille
y l ; - seed - semen - Saat
9 - wine - vinum - vin47
p y l ~,pin - grain, kernel, corn - Kern, Korn -
grain, graine, granum
333 - cane - canna - cane48
U W ~- balm - Balsam - b a ~ m e ' ~
4 ) 11E - ster - Stier - taurus - taureau - tyr -
tjur50
Y E - farro - Farre5'
IW> - sheep - Schaf - schaap - szkop -
~kopec~~
E1> - ovis
;y - goat - Gaiss - geit - kosa - k ~ z a ~ ~
53y - calf - Kalb
;1nv - ass - asinus - ane - Esel
~ ' 1 3- lion - leo - Loewe - lew -
7nw - jackal - chaqal - shagal - S ~ h a k a l ~ ~
31nn - cat - catulus - Katze - chat - kot -
koshka - katta - gatto - gat0
y~ -nisuss6
DU - KauzS7
my - raven - Rabe - raaf - corvus - corbeaujS
qiw - serpent - serpenss9
; i p - horn, corner - cornu - Horn - corne60
13n - milk - lac - lait - Milchs1
5) l y t r - hair - Haar
7-y - eye - Auge - oculus - oil, yeuxs2
 ;TN - ear - Ohr - auris - ~ r e i l l e ~ ~
nq - riak - riechen, G e r u ~ h ~ ~ ~
7W7 -tongue - language - lingua - langue
;a - tooth - dens - Zahn - dantaP3
~ j ! 3- foot - padam - pes - fotus -
> H - father - pater - pitar - Vater - pere6'
E N - mother - mater - matar - Mutter -
mere6*
1-7 - child
in-w - wise - white - weise - savant - sapiens
- 3 ~, 9 3 3 ~ ,-7 ,-n- I , my - je - ich - ego66
nnN ,n-Thou - tu - DU - t d 6
nNr ,nr - that, this - ce - cis, citra
6) t r - side - Seite
- after
T ~ N - apara - achteP
Tna - morrow - morgen
q3n - harvest - Herbst - herbisP8
t n - ~ one - ekaS9
w5w - three - tres - threis - drei70
ww - sex - six - sas - sechs71
n p -~ seven - sapta - septem - sept - ~ i e b e n ~ ~
i n l W t 3 ,7773 - measure, mete - mensura, metiri -
mesure - mesurer - messen, Mass7%
y-12 ,q3 cup - cupa - coupe, gobelet - B e ~ h e r ? ~ ~
25w , Y ~ W - snow - Schnee - nix - neige73
p~ - green, crude - gruen - crudus
31-w - wise, white - weise, weiss
25n - Albion - album - Alps - Elbe (meaning
white as milk) 74
y ~ r- saw - serere - saen - semeP
3x3 -curt - short - kuerzen - scara - secafe -
schee~en?~
tm - thresh - dreschen - AS threscan, therscan7?
333 ,33n - graven - grave, engrave - graben -
gravure
33w - break - brechen - briser
q 3 ~- tear - rip - rive
337 - dagger - Dolch - dague
593 - fall - fallen - labi
 733 - walk - aller
DSB - flee - fliehen
p ~ 3 - kiss -kues~en~~
fib - separar - separate
1 x 1 - hurry - hurtig
~ 3 5- legere, colliegere - collect - lesen
12;? - Bury
nns - path-ana - p a t - e ~-~open
~ - ouvrir -
oeff nen .
This list seems sufficient to show that there is a com-
mon origin for many basic words of the Semitic and Indo-
European languages. We may thus conclude that, in the
same way as Semitic and Hamitic peoples, Semites and
Indo-Europeans, too, must have been closely connected at
the dawn of human history.
 CHAPTE~VII.

POST-DILUVIAL CIVILIZATION

1. The Rise of Post-diluvial Civilization

I. After the Flood, new civilizations which were built
up by the three races of mankind arose on top of the de-
stroyed one. Archaeological discoveries have shown that
new cities were built above the strata of silt that had been
deposited by the Flood? Three diiFerent races are discerni-
ble: the so-called Sumerians in the South, the Semites to
the North? and a third race or melange of peoples, different
from both Semites and Sumerian~.~
An earlier belief that the Sumerians had preceded the
Semites has been given up.' Both populations lived side-by-
side from earliest times. I t seems probable that the city
culture of the South was created by the Sumerians while
the Semites were in a semi-nomadic state!
Despite much research, nothing definite has been found
so far about the race of the Sumerian~.~ However, the facts
already known point convincingly to their Hamitic origin.7
Skulls found a t Kish in pre-historic tombs show a similarity
with pre-dynastic Egyptians, indicating a common an-
cestry! They were short and stocky people with high,
straight, non-Semitic noses, slightly receding foreheads
and downward sloping eyess which remind us of the Hamitic
origin of the Chinese?O Elements of their language resemble
Mongol speech." Their writing seems to be somewhat con-
nected with Hittite, early Chinese, and Egyptian hiero-
glyphs, the products of peoples of Hamitic stock?2 Very
interesting are the following details concerning Sumerian
clothing. Their dress consisted of a skirt which left their
 F y nude from the waist up. On solemn religious occa-
sions, when Sumerians were officiating before the gods,
they discarded all clothmg, and were entirely nude.13 These
facts tally surprisingly well with the character of Ham as
depicted in the Bible. I t was a pertinent incident that
caused Noah to curse him and his descendants.14 Light is
also shed on the tradition that the generations before the
Flood exhibited their shamelessness and their immoral life
by appearing naked in public.15 The Noahidic laws refer-
ring to incest and unchastity consequently were called
Gilui Arojoth which literally means 'uncovering of the
nakedness.'16
11. The settlements of these new civilizations centered
around the cities of Eridu, Ur (now Mukkajar), Uruk
(Biblical Erech, now Warka) , LarsaI7 (Biblical Ellasar,
now Senkereh), Lagash, Nippur (Biblical Calneh, now
Niffef18), and Nisin. To the northeast was Babylon and
due east, Kkh, the site of the oldest culture known in that
region; some sixty miles farther up the Euphrates lay
Agade (Biblical AccadlS). The Sumerians were predomi-
nant in the South. Originally, they may have had control
of Kish but lost it very early to the Semites," who also
ruled over Erech, Agade, and B a b y l ~ n . ~Larsa
l and Nippur
passed from them into Sumerian hands.22 The mingling of
the three races is especially perceptible at Lagash where
they settled side by side in different districts of the city.z3
111. Politically, the cities were organized as small city
kingdoms under the rule of petty kings.24 From documents
of the time of Hammurabi it becomes evident that these
kings had under their rule many local kings.25 Things de-
veloped apparently in a way similar to the development
of ancient Egypt or China, where feudal states grew out
of the agricultural communities of primitive days through
the absorption of the weaker by the stronger.26
The petty kings were called Pate& or priest-king,
indicating that government was bound up with religionz7;
and religious beliefs in distorted forms dominated social
life. Each city centered around the temple. The antiquity
of this system of sqciety is illustrated in the overwhelming
power of the temple a u t h o r i t i e ~ The
. ~ ~ gods worshipped in
them became innumerable. Part of them were common to
the whole land and not only local deities, showing again
that this theologico-political system goes back in its founda-
tion to the preceding stage of ~ulture.~S
To most of the temples were attached schools, in which
the clergy instructed boys and girls in writing and arith-
metic and prepared them for the high profession of scribe.30
The development of cuneiform script was the outstanding
contribution of Sumeria to the civilization of mankind.
Sumerian writing reads from right to left which was the
original way of writing. The Babylonians were the first
people to write from left to right.31 Sumerians and Baby-
lonians, however, never advanced from the representation
of syllables to letters. The calendar, of uncertain age and
divided the year into lunar months, adding a
month every 3 or 4 years to reconcile the calendar with
the seasons and the sun.S3
An extensive code of laws was proclaimed by Ur-engur
and Dungi, kings of Ur, which probably became the foun-
tainhead of Hammurabi's famous code.S4 Quite recently,
sections of another legal code, preceding that of Ham-
murabi by 150 years, have been discovered. This code has
been ascribed to the Babylonian king L i p i t - I ~ h t a r . ~ ~
TV. Fragments of king lists exist for some of the city
kingdoms. As historical sources, however, they are not very
reliable. There was a tendency in them to start out with
reigns of legendary length and work down to reigns of
actual historical length.36 Besides, the dynasties were very
often contemporaneous and overlapping. .Thus, a reliable
chronology cannot be obtained by adding numbers of these
dynasties together as has been attempted previously?7
Relatively reliable lists of Ur, Larsa, and Babylon lead
back only to the time of the According to the
lists, the first dominant city kingdom after the Flood was
K i ~ h ?which
~ name obviously was derived from Kush,
whose descendants remained, in part, in this region.'O Then
follow Uruk (Erech) and Ur. The name of the most ancient
king of Kish was Mes-ilim. On the king list of Ur we find
the name Mes-anni-padda.'l The syllable Mes- seems to
be identical with the Hebrew Mesu- in the names Mesu-
shael" and Mesu-shelach, which means the hero, the man>3
Unceasing struggle for supremacy was going on among
the dynasties of the numerous city kingdoms. A Sumerian
poem recently published" reveals details of this warfare.
It relates how Enmerkar, the ruler of Erech, thirsted
for the wealth of Aratta, a city-state near Erech, which
was rich in metal and stone and finally succeeded in add-
ing it to the lands he already possessed.
This continuous strife was temporarily brought to an
end by the first unification of the whole region into one
empire which was accomplished by the dynasty of Sargon.

8. Unification of the Land. Naram-Sin. Nimrod.

I. According to the Babylonian sources, the Sumerian

city-kingdoms were defeated by Sargon, a Semitic king,
who succeeded in building up a powerful dynasty. Not
many details about his life are preserved, and even these
few have a mythical ~harader.'~His city of origin seems
to have been Kish, as he was attached to the priesthood
of that city and probably organized his rebellion there.'6
His career began with the conquest of Erech. He then
founded Agade, choosing it as his capital. On this occasion,
the sacredness of Babylon was revealed by the fact that
he took soil from the outer walls of Babylon and conse-
crated the boundaries of his new capital with the earth
of the holy city and modelled Agade after Babylon.47 He
invaded Ur, E-Ninna and Lagash and possessed Nipp~r,'~
the Biblical C a l ~ ~ e hThen -
. ~ ~ he occupied and rebuilt the
city of K i ~ h . " ~
A serious revolt ended his reign. His conquests were
resumed by his grandson or son,"8 Naram-Sin, who as-
sumed the title 'king of the four region^."^ His full title
was 'The divine Naram-Sin, the mighty, god of Agade,
king of the Four quarter^.'^^ He extended the conquests
 to the upper T i p - s where he left his monuments5' and
founded a temple at Nineveh in Assyria. The earliest tem-
ples in what were to be the historical cities of Assyria
were founded by Accadians (emites) or S~merians.5~
Sargonic art left its remains at the conquered places as
evidenced by the triumphal stela of Naram-Sin from Susa
and the bronze helmet from Nineveh. Babylonian script
and other devices were introduced fully-formed into As-
syria. Sargon and his successors could, therefore, claim to
have been 'founders of ~ities.'"~ Long after the end of this
dynasty its glories were remembered in saga both by the
Accadians themselves and by the Hurrians and Hittites
of the north.
11. This historical background elucidates the terse
Biblical account about Nimrod and his deeds.54 'Nimrod,'
it reads, 'was a descendant of Cush and began to be a
mighty one on earth. The beginning of his kingdom was
Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh in the land of
Shinar. Out of that land he went forth to Ashur (or into
Assyria) and built Nineveh, and Rehoboth-Ir, and Calah,
and Resen between Nineveh and Calah,-the same is the
great city.'
I t seems quite obvious that Nimrod is identical with
Naram-Sin. Accadian Sin is the moon-god which was
worshipped at Ur and Haran. Naram-Sin means 'the
beloved of the m ~ o n - ~ o d . ' ~ Tremaining
he part of the
name, Naram or Nrm, is very close to the Biblical
Nmrd where the additional D contains perhaps a hint
at the omitted name of the god." The four cities which,
according to the Biblical account, formed the beginning of
his empire are those which were already under the rule of
Sargon. They are Babel, the sacred city, Erech, the first
conquest, Accad, the newly founded capital, and Calneh
which, according to TaImudicaI tradition. is identical with
Nippur." These four original cities furnish the explanation
for the official title 'king of the four regions' which Naram-
Sin a~sumed.6~ The full title: The divine Naram-Sin, the
mighty, god of Agade, king of four Quarters5' bears very
close resemblance to the Biblical description: 'he began
 to be a mighty one in the earth. . . . And the beginning
of his kingdom was Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and
Calneh, in the land of Shinar.' His descent from K w h
agrees especially well with the link between Sargon and
the priesthood of Kish.GOT'he Bible further clarifies the
part he played in the foundation of the Assyrian cities. It
is reported that he built there the four cities, Nineveh,
Rehoboth Ir, Calah and &sen. These cities were inter-
connected by huge walls and thus, taken together, formed
the 'Big City' (in fact, a whole province) which later on
was occupied by hundreds of thousands of people with
their cattle and f l ~ k s . 6 ~
Reference may be made to our previous discussions
about the time of Naram-Sin.G2 As has been pointed out,
he lived at about 2000 BCE. This, then, would be the
approximate time of Nimrod. T'he Bible mentions that
Nimrod was a mighty hunter and became proverbial as
such. This may refer to the famous Babylonian epic glorify-
ing Gilgamesh, a descendant of Ut-Napishtim (Noah). In
pictures, he is represented as a great hunter. His Ethiopian-
like features remind us of the fact that Nimrod was de-
scended from C ~ s h . 6Like
~ Nimrod, Gilgamesh ruled over
Babylon, Erech, and Nippur (Calneh) .64 The epic, thus,
may be a legendary version of the powerful deeds of Nim-
rod or Naram-Sin. The memory of Nimrod as a mighty
hunter has survived to our very days among the inhab-
itants of Northern Mesopotamia (Ass~ria)and Armenia.""
3. The Babylonian Empire.
I. After the decline of the dynasty of Sargon, the
Sumerian cities of the south were able to regain control
of the country under the leadership of Ur. The kings of
Ur combined the title lring of Ur' with that of 'king of
Sumir and Accad' showing that they ruled over the North
(Agade) and the South alike.G6 However, this kingdom of
'Sumir and Accad' collapsed after a relatively short time
under the impact of foreign invasions. In the East, the
Elamites seized the Sumerian cities and led into captivity
the last king of Ur. From the West, so-called Amorites
 invaded Accad and assumed control of the northern re-
g i ~ n These
. ~ ~ invaders are of particular interest as at least
part of them were distinctly Semites. Their language was
very close to that of the Hebrews but differed clearly
from that of the Babylonian Semites (Accadians) . A11 in-
dications are that they came from the West, especially
from P a l e ~ t i n e .They
~ ~ became so powerful that the kings
of Ur took their leaders with their armies into their ser-
vice.69 They gradually took over the rule of Sumer and
A ~ c a d . In
~ ~ the Northwest, their leader, S~mu-Abu,'~
became the founder of the first dynasty of Babel.
Babylon, which had been politically insignificant in
previous centuries, suddenly rose to become the admin-
istrative and commercial center of a rich empire.T1I t gave
its name to the old plain of Sumir (Shinar), which from
this time on may be called Babyl0nia.7~
For a long time a struggle went on between the
'Amorites' and the Elamites. Finally, Hammurabi, the
sixth king of the dynasty of Babel, after thirty years of
his reign, defeated the Elamites decisively and united the
whole land under his rule. I t has already been mentioned
that, because of recent excavations, the dates of Hammu-
rabi have been reduced considerably to about 1728-1676.
Thus Hammurabi was contemporaneous with Abraham
and may well be identified with Amrafel, the king of
Shinar, who took part in the campaign to the West as
recorded in the The residence of Terah at Ur
thus coincides with the decline of this city and the ascend-
ancy of Babylon.
Hammurabi, a descendant of those Western Semites
closely related with the early Hebrews,74 was one of the
greatest rulers of history. The administration of his vast
empire still receives the admiration of modern expert^.^'
His greatest accomplishment was the famous Law Code
bearing his name which was found at Susa in 1901. I t is a
compilation and codification of laws which was partly
based on old Sumerian 0riginals.7~For its relations to the
Bible, reference may be made to the Appendix on 'the
Bible and the Ancient Law Codes.' The general cultural
level of this time is indicated by the fact that a consider-
able part of the population was literate. The thousands of
letters from this period that have been found are evidences
of this wide-spread literacy.77
The Babylonian empire lasted only until about 1600
when it was destroyed by Hittite raiders from Asia Minor.:"
 CHAPTERVIII.

T H E POGTDILUVIAN PATRIARCHS

1. The Settlements of the Postdiluvian Patriarchs

I. While the continuous struggle between the rival
cities and states went on in the south, the descendants of
Shem settled in the northern part of the country where
they probably lived in a semi-nomadic state? Of special
importance among them is the central group, the descend-
ants of Arpachshad, the forefathers of Abraham. Their
original seat is located, according to Joshua, on the banks
of the river E u p h r a t e ~ Some
.~ hints as to the fate of these
generations are contained in the names of the Postdiluvial
Patriarchs as recorded in the Bible: and recent excavations
have vastly increased our knowledge. They have shown
that several of these names became the names of cities
and places indicating the significance of these personalities.
Of special interest is the discovery of many striking social
and legal parallels between the stories of the Patriarchs
and the Horite documents from Nuzu in eastern Mesopo-
tamia dating from the 15th century B.C.E. Sensational
were the discoveries of nearly 30000 cuneiform tablets at
Mari on the middle Euphrates, since the inhabitants were
closely related to the early Hebrews, a fact which is evi-
denced by their personal names.'
I n view of the overwhelming evidenec that has piled
up during the last decades, it is rather interesting to note
that among modern Biblical ~cholarshardly one had ac-
cepted the traditional Hebrew account of Abraham's Meso-
pota,mian origin from Ur and H a r a a 6
 11. Arpachshad, the third son of Shem, was born two
years after the Flood"?210?2-1664). Documents found at
Nuzu show that the region near Nineveh was called Ar-
r a ~ k a I. t~ is the Arrapachitis of Ptolemy and possibly the
Arpachshad of the Bible.8 The meaning of the name may
be 'the territory of the Chasd3 which would indicate that
Semites gained a foothold on the western bank of the
Euphrates where Ur Casdim, the Mugheir of today, per-
haps became their seat.1° In early inscriptions, settlements
of cattle-breeding Semites are mentioned in Southern Meso-
potamia. Later inscriptions refer to Semitic nomads called
Habiru.ll At the time of Rim-Sin of Larsa they are said
to have enrolled in the Sumerian army.12 To these early
Hebrews may be ascribed an altar found at Ur which was
constructed of unhewn stones for which is no parallel in
Sumerian custom^?^
The name of Shelah (2067-l634), the son of Arpachshad,
means weapon, referring probably to these early fights for
settlement.13 This name also forms part of that of the
prediluvian patriarch, Methu-selah, meaning the man or
the hero of the weapon. As has been pointed out," the
syllable Methu- or Mes- was still in use in the names of
kings after the Flood. I t seems, however, that beginning
with Shelah a strict observance of the rule was initiated
which limited the structure of Hebrew words to three let-
ters. Thus this time may be considered a turning point in
development of the Hebrew language.13
The most outstanding of these Patriarchs was Eber
(9037-1573) who became closely connected with Shem as
the bearer of the old traditions. He survived to the time of
Jacob who, according to tradition, studied the spiritual
inheritance of ancient times in the 'tents of Shem and
Eber.'16
Tt has already been mentioned that the designations
firim and Habiru are possiblv derived from his name.16 .
In cuneiform documents they are also called Khapiru
or Khabiru.17 which would establish a link to the name
of the river Khabur or Chabores, an eastern tributary
of the Euphrates south of the Haran district where the
 Ibrim settled. I n the later parts of the Bible this river
is mentioned as Kebar or Chabor.ls Its name thus seems
to be only another version of that of the patriarch Eber.
Some confirmation for this assumption may be found
in the fact that the name of the next patriarch, Peleg
(1994-1755), is traceable in the name of the town Phalija,
which was situated on the Euphrates just above the mouth
of the K h a b ~ r ?At
~ the time of Peleg, a 'division of the
land' took place which, according to the tradition, alludes
to the scattering of the peoples after the Building of the
Tower.20
The name of Reu, the son of Peleg, means shepherd
and indicates the occupation of these generation^.^^ A cer-
tain degree of assimilation evidenced in the structure of
this name may reveal the idolatrous influences that played
their part a t this time.22 The name of this patriarch, too,
seems to correspond to the name of a town in the middle
Euphrates valley.23
Serug, Nahor, and Terah, the names of the following
patriarchs, occur as places in the region of Haran?* The
place reflecting the name of &rug was called SarugiF5
Nakhur, the city of Nahor, to which Abraham sent his
servant26 is frequently mentioned in the Mari tablets and
Middle Assyrian documents?' Terah is presumably to
be found in the place name Til-sa-turahi, belonging to a
town on the Balikh.28
The following ~ i c t u r eof the early Hebrews or Habiru
evolves from both the Bible and inscriptional sources.29
They were a nomadic people occupying the steppes of
Mesopotamia during the general period corresponding to
the end of the third and the early part of the second mil-
lenium B . C E and played such an important part that
their gods were mentioned in the oath formulae of the
treaties between Hatte and Mitanni, as well as in the
treaties between Hatte and Nuhassi. The list of the Patri-
archs combined with the names of the places which were
derived from their names show that their first home was
in the valleys of the Euphrates and its tributaries, espe-
cially the Khabur, in the west and northwest of Mesopo-
tamia, where they obviously were a dominant element of
. ~ ~this clarifies the words of Joshua: 'On
the p o p u l a t i ~ n All
the banks of the River (Euphrates) dwelt your fathers
from olden times.'
I t is of interest to note that modern scholars have to
admit that the patriarchal stories fit with thorough con-
gruity and often with surprising relevance of detail into
the historical setting of life in Mesopotamia during the
early second millenniumPo

4. Terah at Ur. His Migration to Haran

I. From the ancient seat in Northern Mesopotamia,
Terah migrated to the city of Ur in the South.31 His two
older sons, Abraham and Nahor, had already been born.
The third one, Haran, was born at Ur and died there.e.J2
Relations between the Hebrews and the city of Ur had
probably existed from the earliest times.33Terah is depicted
by the tradition as a leading military official of the king
of Ur. This tallies especially well with the fact that Habirus
were serving as soldiers in the Sumerian armie~.~'The
tradition has furthermore preserved with surprising tenacity
the name of the wife of Terah, Amatlah bath Carnabu?'"
Most of the hundreds of names of priestesses found in in-
scriptions are combinations of the word A m t h , meaning
servant, and the name of a god. Personal names formed
with the syllable 'car' (mountain) occur frequently and the
name Car-neb0 is also well attested.34b The names of the
wives of Abraham and Nahor, Sarai and Mil~ah,3'~ point
distinctly to CTr, where the ruling goddess Ningal was called
Sarath and her daughter, Istar, was called Ma1~atah.e.J'~
The city of Ur has been excavated recently and we now
have a rather complete picture of the conditions prevailing
there at this time.35Ur was one of the most ancient cities.
The name means 'the city' (Hebrew 'Ir'). I t was a sacred
city dedicated to Nannar, the Moon-god. Countless other
gods were worshipped, but the moon-god was supreme. For
his worship a quarter of the city was set aside.J6 A mighty
ziggurat went up in three stages, the lowest about 35 feet
 high, with the effect of a stepped pyramid.3i Three brick
stairways led to the top of the first stage; from there more
stairs led to the uppermost stage. I t was a mountain of
brickwork into which millions of bricks had gone and was
called the 'Hill of Heaven' or 'the Mountain of G'd.' At the
time of Abraham it was already very old.38 Hundreds of
little public chapels, which must have played a great part
in the daily life of the people, were spread over the city.39
Besides, nearly every house had a chapel for the worship
of the household gods, containing an altar with clay cups
and platters for the offerings and little terra-cotta reliefs
of the gods.40 The religion of Ur was a polytheism of the
grossest type. Written texts have preserved the names of
about 5000 separate Sumerian gods or 5000 variant names
of an indefinite number of Sumerian gods. Above those
multiple petty gods was the city's lord and king, the Moon-
god, the patron who did not care about the small needs
of people.'l With these historical facts, tallies very well
the tradition that Terah was a manufacturer of idols, which
must have been a flourishing business at this time, when
every one worshipped his own idols in his own home.'2
I t has already been mentioned that at Ur was found
an altar of hewn stones, pointing to the presence of Ibrim
at an early time.46
General education was wide-spread. Though it cannot
be supposed that every one was able to read and write, a
surprisingly large number could. Elementary schools were
common throughout the town. The curriculum contained
writing exercises, dictation, the reading of hymns, and
arithmetic. The more advanced pupils worked at square
and cube roots and did exercises in practical geometry.46
In one of these schoolhouses, the clay tablets with the ex-
ercises of the boys and girls of 4000 years ago have been
uncovered. One of them shows how- highly the Babylonians
valued the art of writing. I t reads: 'He who shall excel in
table writing- shall shine like the sun.'47
In view of all these facts, it seems rather ridiculous
for modern scholars to cling to the belief that the Hebrews
were illiterate still at the time of the kings.48 There can
 not be the slightest doubt that Terah and Abraham and
their descendants were able to read and write.
Ur was a great city with an estimated population of
about a quarter-of-a-million. Its wealth was based on com-
merce and manufacture. The trade reached far beyond
the borders of Mesopotamia. The medium and standard
of exchange was barley. Later gold and silver were added.
But silver was not coined money; it bore no stamp or gov-
ernment guarantee. The actual amount of metal had to
be determined by the scales, as was done by Abraham
when he weighed the silver to buy the cave of Mah~ela.'~
Because of the political events of the time, the favor-
able economic conditions of the city changed funda-
mentally. Ur, the old capital, came under the rule of Larsa
and, finally, under that of Hammurabi of Babylon. The
trade routes to the north were blocked by the continuous
strife for supremacy. This may explain the decision of
Terah to leave Ur. It was not an isolated case but part of
a general northward migration of the Habiru tribes.50
11. Terah planned to proceed to Palestine, but when
he reached Haran he stayed there.51 The town of Haran is
still in existence on the Balikh river 60 miles west of Tell
Halaf. The name is Bssyrian and means 'road'; for it is
on the highway from Mesopotamia to the West, the con-
verging point of the commercial routes from Babylon in
the south, Nineveh in the east, and Damascus in the west.62
The place, therefore, was especially fit for the commercial
talents and aspirations of Terah. Moreover, Haran was the
only other important town of Mesopotamia that had the
Moon-god for its special patron in the same way as Ur.
Presumably, Terah was addicted to the worship of the
Moon-god and must have been attracted by the associa-
tions with his customary worship surrounding him a t
Harar~.~~
III. There is, however, a possibility that Terah eventu-
ally carried out his original plan to go to Palestine. The
Bible reports6' that he died a t Haran at the age of 205
years, which implies that his death occurred only sixty
years after Abraham left for Pslestine. The emphasis laid
on the place of his death-'at Haran'-needs an explana-
tion since no like mention occurs in the case of any of
the other patriarchs.55 I t may indicate that he, too, pro-
ceded to Palestine according to his plan but finally returned
to Haran where he died. This assumption finds some sup-
port in the results of recent excavations. At Ras Shamra,
the former Ugarit, at the northern border of Palestine, a
mythological poem was found with allusions to a Terah
who is represented as the moon-god. The names of his
wives, Shin and Nikar, are also those of the moon-god.
All this points to Ur and Haran. The poem gives the ac-
count of a fight between this Terah and Keret, the king of
Sidon. The decisive battle took place in the Negeb, the
South of Palestine, and ended with the victory of Terah.
The whole story would tally especially well with the tradi-
tion already referred to depicting Terah as a leading sol-
dier. But it must be noted that the interpretation of the
poem is still very much in doubt and, so far, can be ac-
cepted only with great cauti0n.5~

3. The Traditions of the Postdiluvial Patriarchs

I. We have pointed out that the postdiluvial Patri-
archs handed down the ancient traditions which they had
received from Noah and Shem and that Shem and Eber
became great links between these generations and the
Patriarchal Age, which started with Abraham.
The 'tents of Shem'ji were the places where these tradi-
tions were taught and guidance given to those who sought
it.58 Jacob became a man 'dwelling in the tents' which,
according to tradition, refers to his years of learning in
the tents of Shem and Eber.59 There can, therefore, be
no doubt that Abraham, too, was in close contact with the
old, genuine traditions which, though obscured by idola-
trous fallacies, were still alive even in his father's house.
These traditions comprised the stories of the Creation
and the Paradise, the genealogies of the generations before
the Flood, the stories of the Flood and the Tower, and
the Noahidic Laws.60 Ail these traditions were the common
inheritance of all the descendants of Noah. But, as has
 been pointed out repeatedly, they had become corrupted
and mixed with mythical and polytheistic elements. The
Hebrew traditions retained the simple, original purity
which fixes them as closer to the source than the versions
of the other peoples. A similar relation exists with regard
to the Noahidic Laws which became the backbone of the
various codifications of ancient times. Here, too, Hebrew
traditions, as incorporated in the Torah, have preserved the
simplicity of the source to which the older codifications can
be traced back.61
Modern archaeology has confirmed that the ancient
traditions of mankind were handed down by the postdilu-
vim patriarchs and finally brought to Palestine by Abra-
ham. This refers especially to the stories of the Creation,
the Flood, and the ancient Laws.62
One of these spiritual treasures was the Hebrew lan-
guage which, as has been demon~trated?~ had retained its
crystal-clear structure through a deep understanding of the
inherent meaning of the lette~-s.~' There is every reason
to believe that the postdiluvian patriarchs, with their out-
standing personalities, not only left their mark in the
names of the towns and cities but also exerted a deep influ-
ence on the spiritual life of their surroundings. The Baby-
lonian psalms, especially, with their genuine religious feel-
ings and ideas, may well be connected with them.65

4. The Alphabet
I. One of the most precious inheritances which the
western world received from the Near East is the alphabet.
About its Semitic origin no doubt seems possible; for of
its twenty-two letters, seventeen have definitely Semitic
names.6s The Egyptians and the Babylonians never used
the highly abstrad method of representing ideas by com-
bining twentg-odd letters. Instead, they used hundreds or
thousands of individual character^.^^ The oldest alpha-
betical inscriptions so far discovered are those of Serabit
El Khadem, on the Sinaitic Peninsula 50 miles within
Mount Sinai, which are dated between 1989 and 1776
B.C.E.%*A number of the characters found there are mid-
 way between certain Egyptian hieroglyphs and the letters
of the Semitic alphabet.69 This gave rise to the theory
that the alphabet was invented by some Semitic mine fore-
men who discovered something of the methods of Egyptian
scribes and applied them to their own lang~age.?~ Against
this theory it is argued that the invention of the alphabet
'was the deliberate achievement of some man of genius'
and not that of an ignorant mine boss?' Certainly, there
is much truth in this remark.
So far, no results have been obtained by modern scholars
in their search for the origin of the alphabet. It seems that
this is partly due to their neglect of the most important
part of linguistic research: a careful scrutiny of the alpha-
bet itself. It may well be expected to yield some hints re-
garding the occupation of its inventors, their way of life,
and the language they used. Such inquiry, therefore, has
to be undertaken as the first step toward a reliable solu-
tion of this pr0blem.7~
11 H - The first letter, aleph, means the docile cat-
tleT3 and is depicted in the old Hebrew alphabet as the
head of an ox. The word aliph. means to teach, to s t ~ d y . 7 ~ ~
Thus, this letter forms an eloquent invitation to learning.
3 - Beth, the second letter, means house. In Hebrew
it characterizes the inner part of a thing: as prefix it means
s.
In, into.' Thus, the picture, house, explains the use in the
language.
3 - Gimet - camel. As has already been pointed
this letter is formed with the ~ a l a t e the
, highest of
the sound-producing organs, and used for high objeds.
In conformity with this use it is represented by the camel,
the highest animal known to the child.
7 - D&h means door. It had the form of a triangle,
the capital Greek delta, and represented the door of a tent.
As a moving part, it was especially fit to symbolize a let-
ter indicating sharp motion. This is its basic meaning in
Hebrew;" and it is produced with the tongue, the moving
part of the mouth.
n - The meaning of the next letter, He, is uncertain.
It is depictea as a pointing hand and may mean: there.
 1 - The letter mu means hook. It is, indeed, used
in Hebrew as a hook to connect the words. This letter is
not otherwise used as a consonant in the formation of
words. I t seems, therefore, that the word vau was especially
formed to illustrate its use in the language to the learning
~hild.7~
i - Zayin means the point of a thing. This letter is
produced with the tip of the tongue and the teeth, which
matches its use in the language??
The order of the alphabet so far follows the development
of the child. The first letters which the child is able to
pronounce are ab-ba. Then come the sounds g (gaga), d
(dada) and the soft he. The first sound produced with
the teeth is the zayin (th)
B ,n - The letters cheth and teth are unexplained.
9 - Yoodh means the closed hand and is used as the

symbol for ownership. Bethi: my house, the house which I

enclose with my hand.
3 - C q h , the open hand, the cup, the spoon used as
symbol for the ownership conceded to the other person.
Bethcho, your house, the house which I give with my open
hand to the other person.
i - Lamedh means a whip to drive animals, perhaps
a warning for the pupil who now has passed half of his
way (11 out of 22 symbols) to go ahead with his work.
In the language the lamedh means motion 79 and is thus
well depicted by the symbol. As a preposition (1, el) it in-
dicates the direction of a movement.
r- Mem means water (mayim). It is the dual of ma
-what. The man trying to grasp the water with his hand
may have exclaimed astonishedly: what is it? The very
same structure is noticeable in other languages. "water"
is derived from "what," the German Wmser from was,
Latin aqua from quaqua. As a preposition this letter indi-
cates a 'moving away' from an object (from) which is a
characteristic of ~ a t e r . 7 ~ ~
With this symbol, a new group starts: the water, the
fish and fishing.
 f - Nun - the fish. It was the word for fish used by
the original race before the Flood.80
D - Samekh - its backbone.
y- 'ayin--its eye.
B - Pe - its mouth. The letter is formed by opening
the mouth abruptly and used t o express all the nuances
derived from the basic meaning, "open, opening."81
Y - Sadhe - the hunter, the fisherman.
3 - Koph - the back of the head.82
7 - Resh - the head.83
w - Shin - the tooth.
n - Tau - the wild ox, or the symbol for the end.84
111. The preceding survey leads to the following con-
clusions:
1) In view of the fact that 17 of the 22 letters have
definitely Semitic names, the Semitic origin of the alphabet
cannot be contested.
2) The symbols used for the letters show that the in-
ventors were semi-nomadic, living in houses and tents,
occupied with cattle breeding, hunting, and fishing and in
possession of camels.86
3) The alphabet is closely connected with the structure
of the Hebrew language and the formation of its words.
The recognition of this f a d reveals the surprisingly deep
meaning of its symbols. No such relation is traceable in
any other language and only completely insufficient ex-
planations of the names of the letters can be offered.86
4) The whole structure of the alphabet shows that it
was indeed the 'deliberate achievement of some man of
genius.'?l
These results suggest convincingly that the alphabet
originated with the Hebrew semi-nomads, the ancestors
of Abraham, who lived at the bank of the river and pre-
sumably were engaged in cattle breeding, fishing, and hunt-
ing. Without doubt, they possessed the spiritual ability to
produce such a cultural treasure of first-rate importance.87
The time of its invention may be deduced from the excep
tional ancient forms of the words gimel, yoodh, and shin
which have been preserved in the Hebrew alphabet but
 obviously go back to the time before Abraham.**A further
clue is furnished by the traditional name, k'tab 'ibn', which
links the alphabet to the period of the 'Ibrirn or even t o
'Eber who was the spiritual leader down to the Patriarchal
Age.89
This assumption is well in keeping with the enormous
influence the descendants of these early Hebrews have ex-
erted on the spiritual development of mankind up to our
present days.
IV. It is rather interesting to note that the alphabet
made its appearance in Palestine and Syria in the period
between 1700 and 1100 BCE,SO just a t the time of Abra-
ham's immigration. Obviously, it was then newly intro-
duced; for, as evidenced by the Amarna tablets and other
documents, the cuneiform of the Mesopotamian lands re-
mained in use a long time thereafter?l The knowledge of
the Semitic alphabet mag have been brought to the Sinai
peninsula by Semitic workers, which could have led to the
mixture with hieroglyphic symbols as discovered a t Serabi
el Khadem.68
Before 1100 B.C.E. the alphabet reached Asia Minor.
F'rom there it was brought to Greece and, by the Etrus-
cans, to Italy?3 The Aramaeans carried it from the Medi-
terranean eastward through Asia to India. The theory that
the Indian alphabet was developed independently cannot
be maintained as its kinship with the Semitic alphabet is
beyond doubkg4
Indeed, every alphabet of the civilized world from India
westward was derived from the Semitic (Hebrew) alpha-
bet. Tt was a priceless gift, one of the most important
contributions t o modern ci~ilization?~ Finally, one may
point out that the so-called Arabian numerals are, as a
comparison between them and the Semitic alphabet shows,
nothing other than the letters of the ancient Semitic
alphabet. Arabian reports of their Indian origin are with-
out foundation. The numeral system of India was intro-
duced there from B a b y l ~ n i a ? ~
V. The supposition that the ancient Hebrews were
illiterate and did not acquire the knowledge of writing
until they had settled in Palestine for centuries was one
of the backbones of Bible criti~ism?~ The results of mod-
em archaeology have completely shattered this belief.
They show that at Ur, where Abraham was raised, writing
and reading was a matter of elementary that
alphabetic Hebrew writing was employed in Canaan and
neighboring districts from the Patriarchal Age on, and
that it was in use for every-day purposes in the 14th and
13th centuries B.CJl?9
 APPENDIX: THE BIBLE AND THE ANCIENT
LAW CODES

1. Current Opinions about the Parallels between

the Bible and the Ancient Law Codes.
I. There is no doubt that close similarities exist be-
tween the laws of the Bible, especially the Book of the
Covenant, and the ancient law codes of Hammurabi and
the Hittites? These relations are widely explained by the
assumption that somehow the laws of the Bible were de-
rived from these older law codes? However, as easy as this
sounds in theory so great are the difficulties when attempts
are made to trace the way this acceptance of law actually
may have taken place.
If it is assumed that Moses first propounded the Rook
of the Covenant before the entry into Palestine, there is
no explanation whatsoever for his basing it on the ideas
and the phraseology of the Babylonian Code of Hamrnu-
rabi. If, on the other hand, it is to be dated from the
years of the settlement, it is quite impossible that the
Hebrews took over, as the groundwork of their future, the
laws of the nations whom they had extirpated as depraved?
On their conquest of Palestine they destroyed thoroughly
the cities of the land, built up new ones on their ruins,'
and uprooted the previous religion with such vigor that
only the scantiest traces s u r ~ i v e d .This
~ explains the re-
markable fact that in spite of the geographic situation and
the close similarity in language, parallels and points of
contact are negligible.' Under these circumstances, it
would be absurd to suppose the acceptance by the Hebrews
of the laws of the Canaanites, which clearly reflected the
moral depravity of the population?
129
 Nevertheless, such inconsistencies are the very basis
of a newly advanced theory, the essence of which is that
the old Mesopotamian laws, adapted to the special con-
ditions in Canaan, passed into Israel's hands probably
during the period of the judge^.^ This rather puzzling theory
is backed by American scholars in the belief that it is
fit to uphold the last pillar of the crumbled Wellhausen
hypothesis: his demonstration of the evolution of legal
theory in the Bible.g
The only remaining possibility is to trace back the
connection between the Code of Hammurabi and the Bib-
lical Laws to an earlier date, at least to the time of the
Patriarchs. It is indeed assumed that the Book of the
Covenant gave authoritative sanction to what was already
traditional as the sanctified ancient usage of the patriarchal
family.1° As the analogies between the Torah and the Code
of Hammurabi are not confined to the Book of the Coven-
ant," the supposedly later additions are ascribed to later
influences of the Code when the more complex conditions
of urban life called for new legislation to supplement that
which had sufficed for the wandering tribes.12
II. The main fault with all these theories is that they
are not based on intensive comparative study of the vari-
ous codes, their systematic order, groups and single laws.
Mere generalities are not sufficient to clarify the relations
that undoubtedly exist.

2. Jewish Tradition about the Laws of Antiquity.

I. There is a Jewish tradition regarding the laws which
ruled the nations from earliest times. As will be demon-
strated, it is this tradition that furnishes the key to the
understanding of the ancient law codes, their relation to
the Bible and especially to the Book of the Covenant.'"
According to this tradition, seven basic law groups were
revealed to the first human beings." Their order is 1)
Dinim; 2) the prohibition of blasphemy; 3) prohibition
of idolatry; 4) prohibition of incest; 5) prohibition of blood-
shed; 6) prohibition of robbery; ?) prohibition of eating
of flesh cut from living animals. Controversial are laws
forbidding castration, witchcraft, and mixture of seed
( k h i m ).I5
II. A dispute exists about the meaning of the first
group, Dinim. According to one opinion, it merely states
the duty to establish courts of justice.16 Other authorities
assume that it refers to a vast complex of material (i.e.,
non-procedural) law similar to that contained in the Bible,
particularly in the Book of C ~ v e n a n t . ' ~According to a
third view, it refers to crimes against the integrity of
justice, the crimes of witnesses and judges.18 This opinion
is supported by the tradition of the Talmud Jerushalmi
to the effect that judicial corruption or the acceptance of
briberies is punishable by death under tliese laws?9 There
is general agreement that the seven groups were not simple
commandments but the categories for whole groups of
laws adding up to a comprehensive codifi~ation.~~
III. The queer order of the groups2' becomes intellig-
ible when we remember that, according to the tradition,
they were the system of law revealed to the first human
beings. To them, indeed, first had to be disclosed the
principle of law and justice as the guiding-principle in
human life. Then follow in a natural and harmonious order
all the basic relations of human beings ruled by law.
The first relation, as defined by the laws against blasphemy
and idolatry, is that between G'd and man; next is the
relation to the nearest unit of human beings, the family,
with the crimes against the integrity of family life (incest).
The relation to human beings in general is then determined
by the laws protecting life and property. Protection is even
extended to animals and, eventually, to plants (Maim).
The law as a whole may be called the Law of Creation,
teaching human beings the way to build up their individual
and social life on the foundations of justice and peace. This
law, as will be demonstrated, was the common inheritance
of mankind and thus became the backbone of the earliest
human codifications of law.
 3. The Code of Hammurabi.
'I. The Code of Hammurabi was unearthed at Suss in
1909, engraved upon a diorite cylinder which had been
carried from Babylon as a trophy of war. The legislation
in the prologue represented as a gift from ia a
compilation of earlier law with additions.= It resembles
that of Urengur and Dungi, the kings of Ur, who had
proclaimed for all Sumeria the first extensive code of laws
in history.24It is, however, not yet clear whether it evolved
from these older codifications or goes back to some pre-
decessor, prior to them both."= Recently, fragments have
been uncovered of a code written by the Babylonian king,
Lipit-Ishtar, which apparently served as a prototype for
the Code of Hammurabi and is believed to precede it by
150 years.26 The Code surely contains very old traditions
leading back to the dawn of human history.27 Its system
has, so far, not been explained."* Civil and criminal law
seem to be mixed up indis~riminately.~
11. The laws are arranged in the following order?O
The dividing lines are used to clarify the system which
will be explained later on.
1-2 False accusations.
H Laws concerning false witnesses.
5 Reversing a judicial decision.
-

Theft of goods of a god or a temple (put to

death).
Purchasing or receiving stolen goods (put to
death) .
Theft of ox, sheep, ass or pig or boat from
a god or temple.
Receiving of stolen goods.
Stealing of children and slaves (put to death).
Housebreaking and brigandage.
If a man breaks into a house, before that break
he shall be put to death).
Stealing a t a fire.
The duties and privileges of soldiers, constables
and tax-collectors.
Renting of fields.
 4d3-52 Pledgmg a field.
53-58 Damages caused by water; neglect of the dyke.
57-48 Damage caused by a shepherd having his sheep
eat the vegetation of fields.
5-6 Horticultural laws, renting of a garden, pledg-
ing of the fruits.
(Five columns with about 55 sections erased
probably dealing with the rights of tenants)
100-107 Agents and merchants.
100 Agent receiving money from a merchant.
103 Agent traveling with money being robbed by
an enemy.
108-1 11 Wine Merchants.
108 A woman keeping a wineshop.
114-126 Deposits.
112 Transported goods not delivered.
113 Embezzlement of deposits.
114-119 Persons pledged for debts.
120-121 Storage of grain.
129-126 Deposits and losses.
126 If a man has not lost anything, but says he
has lost something, he shall double the
amount.
127 Against slandering woman.
128-182 Adultery.
153-136 Adultery of women of captives or deserted
women.
137-145 Divorce.
1 4 6 1 4 7 wife gives a slave t o the husband.
148-149 sick wife.
150 presents to the wife.
151-152 premarital debts.
155 wife causes death of husband for the sake of
another man (adultery).
154 Incest (father daughter) .
155-156 Incest (bride of son) .
167-168 Incest (son mother, wife of father).
159-161 eng-ment, bride prices.
162-184 Laws of inheritance.
185-198 Adoption.
195-214 Assault and Battery.
195 Son strikes father; hand cut off.
196 Man destroys the eye; destroy eye.
197 Man breaks a man's bone: break his bone.
198 Man destroys eye of a workingman or breaks
his bone; pays one mana of silver.
199 ,Man destroys eye of a slave.
200 Man knocks out the tooth of another man; his
tooth is knocked out.
201 Knocks out tooth of a workingman.
202 A man strikes the private parts of a man.
203-205 A patrician, a workingman, a slave striking the
private parts.
206 If a man strikes another man in a qm.me1 and
wounds him.
207 He dies in consequence of the wounds.
208 If a workingman is concerned.
209 If a man strikes a man's daughter and causes
a miscarriage.
210 If a woman dies in this case, his daughter is
put to death.
211-214 Same case if a workingman or a slave girl is
concerned.
215-225 Laws about physicians.
226--227 Laws of Branding.
228-233 Responsibility of House Builders.
234-239 Responsibility of Boatmen.
240 Collision of ships.
241--449 Laws concerning cattle; hiring of cattle.
250-252 Goring ox; habit of goring.
253-260 Overseer of a field.
261-267 Laws concerning shepherds.
96-77 Wages.
278-282 Laws about slaves.
m. At first glance this comprehensive codification
seems, indeed, to be without system and order. However,
with the help of the Jewish tradition about the Noahidic
Laws, as outlined before, the whole system becomes im-
mediately perceptible. The compilation can be reduced to
 ANCIENTJEWISHHISTORY 135

the following main groups which are marked by the divid-

ing lines.
1 - 4 Procedure; crimes against jurisdiction.
6-146 Laws about theft; property; deposits.
147-193 Laws concerning family life; crimes of adult-
ery and incest.
195-984 Injuries; endangering of life, health, and
property. Labor.
The first group is completely homogeneous referring
exclusively to the crimes of witnesses and judges. The
second group is distinctly marked by the crime of theft.
Laws concerning personal property, real estate, trade and
business are woven in. But the group as a whole is domin-
ated by the laws about theft to which it always returns
after every interruption. The last laws of this group, those
about deposits, are in their structure still dependent on
the basic law about theft.31 The next group refers t o
family life and centers around crimes against the family,
such as a d u l t e v and incest. The other sides of family law
are inserted; but again, the group as a whole is clearly
dominated by the criminal laws to which it always returns.
The last group may be headed: Endangering of Life. I t
comprises Assault and Battery with the lex talionis (law
of equivalent retaliation), laws concerning physicians, re-
sponsibility for neglect in house building, responsibility of
boatmen and laws about the goring ox. I n connection
with the latter, the overseer of fields, shepherds, wages
and slaves are dealt with.
This survey reveals the amazing fact that the whole
system of the Code is clearly based on the groups of the
Noa.hidic Laws. I t contains the following groups:
1) 1-5 ............................... LPinim
4) 6-146. ...................Theft and Robbey
3) 147-193. ..................Adultery and Incest
4) 19.3-489.. ......................... Bloodshed
The agreement, indeed, is surprising. The whole struc-
ture of the Code suddenly becomes intelligible, especially
the continuous mixture of criminal and civil law. The
criminal laws form the skeleton and backbone to which
 the civil laws, which are somewhat connected with them,
are attached. Thus it is easily explained why the laws
concerning deposits are followed by those referring to
adultery, which so far has puzzled modern sch0lars.3~
Deposits form the last item of the Theft and Robbery
group. Then starts the next group, Adultery and Incest,
with the first crime adultery.
IV. With one exception the order of the groups in the
Code follows closely that of the tradition. The traditional
order would be: Dinirn, (Blasphemy and Idolatry, omitted
in the Code) Adultery and Incest, Bloodshed, Theft and
Robbery. The order of the Code is Dinirn, Theft and
Robbery, Adultery and Incest, Bloodshed. Undoubtedly,
we need an explanation of why Theft and Robbery
are placed before Adultery and Incest as, ordinarily, rights
of property would have to follow capital crimes.J3 It be-
comes intelhgible when we assume that the Noahidic
laws in their traditional order were the pattern and
basis of the Code. There the first group, Dinirn, was
followed by the religious crimes (Blasphemy and Idolatry)
which are omitted in the c0de.3~The only religious crime
which remained in the Code was the theft of goods of a
god or a temple. Consequently, they are used to introduce
the next laws and, belonging to the p u p Theft and
Robbery, this group is given precedence over the other
ones. After it is finished, the order of the original law is
resumed with the groups of Adultery and Incest and
Bloodshed.
V. The agreement between the Code and the Noahidic
Laws is not codned to the system and the order of the
groups. The groups themselves follow the structure of the
Noahidic Laws which forms the skeleton of every one of
them. This will be shown when, through comparison, the
framework of the various groups will be tracedP5

4. The Hittite Code of Laws.

I. A Hittite Code of Laws, probably dating from about
1350 B.C.E.,3has found at Boghazkoi (Hittite City).
The laws are arranged there in the following order:
1-1 8 Assault and Battery.
1-2 A man or a slave is killed intentionally.
3-6 A man is killed without intention.
7-4 A person is blinded, teeth are knocked out.
9 A person is struck on the head.
10 Someone strikes a person that he becomes ill,
unfit for work. He has to provide a man for
work and to pay the doctor's bill.
The hand of a man or slave is broken.
The nose of a man or slave is injured.
The ear of a man or slave is injured.
Someone causes a pregnant free woman to mis-
carriage.
Same in the case of a slave.
Stealing a person.
Stealing a slave.
Slave running away.
Using cooking utensils of other persons.
Laws concerning Bride price.
Laws concerning bandits.
abducting a woman)
Laws concerning leased land and feudal holding;
Using of fields belonging to other people
especially to soldiers.
Laws concerning losses and damages.
Performance of military duties in connection
with the possession of land; right of irrigators.
If an irrigator steals there is no compensation)
Classes exempt from military service.
Laws concerning stealing and injuring of do-
mesticated animals.
If anyone hitches up an ox, horse mule or ass
and it dies or a wolf devours or destroys it,
and afterwards gives it up entirely, if he
shdl say: By the act of a god it died then
he shall swear.
If anyone hires an ox, horse, large mule, or ass
and it dies under him, he shall bury it and
and pay the hire.
If cattle breaks into a field and the owner of
the field fmds them he may hitch them up
for one day.
If anyone steals two hives, if three hives for-
merly he was caused to be stung to death by
bees, but now he shall give 6 shekels of
silver.
Theft in a house, storehouse.
Laws relating to fires.
Theft of fruits, wood, standing crop, cutting
of trees. If anyone lights a fire and in a vine-
yard it catches the vines, if vines, apple,
trees, pomegranate fruit trees are burned for
the tree he shall give 6 shekels and replant
the orchard.
If anyone lights a fire in a field and it catches
the standing crop and burns the field.
If a person allows his sheep to enter the vine-
yard of a neighbor and they lay it waste, he
shall give.
Stealing apple trees.
Stealing from an orchard of fruit trees.
Stealing from a liquid a butt.
Taken by witchcraft.
cutting of vine.
(broken)
Stealing of different objects.
(birds, free peasant, contents of a chariot,
large jar, ornaments from the gates of the
palace, door, bricks, reins of a horse, from
an orchard, leather helmet, lance, bronze
knife, bronze razor from a barber)
Rentals and wages.
Responsibility of a shepherd if a motherless
animal wanders away.
Ritual Laws.
Offerings to gods.
'If anyone sows seed upon seed, they shall put
him by the side of the plough and harness a
pair of oxen, and place this one over against
those and them over against him, and the
man shall die, and he who had first sown the
field shall take it.' Formerly they did thus.
Now one sheep shall be substituted for the
man 9 sheep shall be substituted for the oxen,
Establishing boundaries of a field.
A Witch Law: A free man kills a serpent and
speaks the name of another, he shall pay;
a slave shall die.
Mother throwing out a drunken son.
Reward to be asked for keeping alive a person
for a year.
Resisting the justice of the king: house shall
become a ruin.
If men are in fight and one dies, one person
he shall give.
Concerning children of slaves.
Prices for work, cattle, fields, vineyards, flesh,
garment.
Unnatural sins. If a man lies with a cow, the
punishment death. (the king may let him
live)
Incest with mother (forcibly) punishment death.
Incest with daughter (forcibly) punishment
death.
Incest with son (forcibly) punishment death.
If willingly not punishable. Stepmother (forc-
ibly) not punishable. If father alive punish-
able.
Adultery. Free man with wife of neighbor out
of doors not punishable: Second time punish-
able.
Killing a man's wife.
A Levirate Law. If a man takes a wife and
the man dies his brother takes his wife; then
 his father take her; if also the father dies,
the woman which he married his brother take,
it is not a crime.
194 Free man with a slave woman no penalty.
195 Wife of brother while alive punishable with
death. Mother and daughter-death.
196 Slave causing disturbances.
197 If a man seizes a woman in the mountain and
commits the hllmrrn crime he shall die. If he
seizes her in a house, the woman is at fault,
she shall die. If the husband finds them and
they are killed, there is no penalty.
198 He may free them before the king or the king
can free them.
199 Man lies with a hog, dog, he shall die, the
king may let him live; bull rear upon a man;
bull shall die.
200 Man lies with a horse or a mule, no penalty;
M8n with male.
11. For these hws, too, no plausible explanation of the
system and structure has so far been offered. Again, the
tradition about the Noahidic laws provides the necessary
help. Four groups are clearly discernible.
1) 1-18 Assault and Battery.
2) 19-163 Laws of Theft.
3) 164-186 Ritual laws and some other laws.
4) 1 8 7 4 0 0 Unnatural sins, Incest, Adultery.
The first and the last group are completely homo-
geneous. In the second group the whole law of property is
inserted. However, the survey shows that Theft is the
dominating topic to which the legislation always returns
when the additions have been concluded. Three of these
p u p s ' are identical with those of the Noahidic Laws.
Assault and Battery corresponds to Bloodshed; Theft to
Theft and ftobbery; Unnatural sins, Incest, Adultery to
Adultery and Incest.
The t h i i group seems to contain the remnants of the
two first groups of the Noahidic Laws referring to the
relation to G'd and the Crimes against Jurisdiction. Thus
we find Ritual Laws (164-167) and laws about Resist-
ance against Justice of the King (173). In connection
with these, two other kws are dealth with which may have
belonged to the Noahidic Laws: The law about sowing
seed upon seed (166-167) 37 and the Witch Law (170) . . ?8
Though this group seems to be a conglomerate, the
other three follow in their whole structure the correspond-
ing groups of the Noahidic Laws which form their skeleton.
This will be demonstrated later on.
111. One interesting feature of this code is that it fre-
quently modifies earlier customs and regulations, especially
by replacing original death penalties. This is particularly
evident in the last group concerning unnatural sins etc.,
where the original, rigid concept obviously gave way to
moral corruptionFs This may also explain why this group
was pfaced at the end of the code though it preceded the
other groups in the Noahidic Laws.'O
5. The Book of the Covenant.
I. In the Bible the laws are arranged in the following:
order4*:
1) Laws about slaves 91: 1-11
9) Bloodshed, Assault and Battery 31: 19-36
3) Theft ai:s7-99
4) Incest, law against witches 23: 15-18
5) Idolatry 99: 19
6) Blasphemy aa: 27
7) Crimes against Jurisdiction
Crimes of witnesses 93: 1-3
Crimes of judges 93:6-8
There can be no doubt that these laws, too, are based
on the groups of the Noahidic Laws. Some of them (4-6)
have fragmentary ~haracter,'~which of course needs an
explanation. The order of the groups is nearly reversed.
The obvious reason is that Exodus, ch. XXI. seq. is prim-
arily concerned with law in the narrower sense, as evidenced
by the term Mishpatim used there.'2a
The survey confirms the opinion that the group Dinim
of the Noahidic Laws refers to the crimes against jurisdic-
tion.
I . . The fact that the Book of the Covenant is also
based on the Noahidic Laws is of great importance. I t
furnishes us with the key for the understanding of all
the parallels and similarities which have been found in the
other codes and, so far, have been completely misinter-
pret ed.
6. Assyrian Laws.
I. During the excavation of the site of ancient Ashur,
fragments of a code of Assyrian law were found which
appear to come from the period between 1450 and 1350
B.C.E.'3 These laws are arranged in the following order:
1 Woman steals in a temple.
2 Woman speaks blasphemy or utters sedition.
3 Woman steals in the house of the sick or dead
husband.
4 Receiving goods from a wife (probably stolen) .
5 Woman stealing from the house of another man.
6 Making deposits in a pawn shop.
7 A woman stretches out her hands against a man.
8 Woman in a fight crushes a man's testicle.
9 Rape.
10 Murder.
11 Rape on a highway (kill the man).
13 Adultery (kill both) .
13 Adultery.
14 Man finds his wife in adultery.
15 Wife has deceived the other man about her mari-
tal status.
16 False accusation of the wife.
17 False accusation.
18 Slander.
19 Man has intercourse with companion; make him
eunoch .
a0 A Man strikes daughter of a man and causes a
miscarriage.
31 Stranger seizes wife on a road.
99 Adultery when sheltering a wife.
93-94 Adultery.
26-99 Inheritance of the widow.
30 Engagement.
40 Whether wifes of men or women on the street
shall veil their heads.
41 Veiling a woman.
49 Engagement form.
45 Husband a captive.
46 Rights of widow.
47 Practicing magic: killed.
48 Daughter given for debts.
50 Man strikes woman causing miscarriage: kill the
man if woman dies or husband has no son.
53 Woman causes miscarriage.
55 Taking away a virgin.
II. Obviously this law is a special collection of laws
concerning women. Nevertheless, the groups of the Noa-
hidic laws are still discernible. They seem to have served
as the basic material for this special codification.
The first group (1-6) is derived from the Theft Group,
the second group (7-55) comprises the various aspects of
family life with regard to women. Its chief topic is the
crime of Adultery. In these two main groups are incorpor-
ated the following fragments of other groups of the Noa-
hidic Laws:
1) Blasphemy (9). This crime is mentioned in connec-
tion with that of stealing in a temple. This confirms what
has been pointed out with regard to the Hammurabi Code
where the order of the groups indicates that in the basic
legislation religious crimes (blasphemy and idolatry) must
have followed the first group."
9) False accusation (16-17), obviously a remnant of
the group Dinim.
3) Causing a miscarriage (90. 50-85), a remnant of
the group Battery and Assault (Bloodshed), where this
delict has its proper place in the other codes.
4) Practicing of magic (47) ."j
 7. The structure of the various groups.
We have thus far demonstrated that the codifications sur-
veyed are based on a legal system which is identical with
the traditional order of the Noahidic Laws. The exact
nature of this relation will be disclosed by a comparative
study of the various groups. It will furthermore shed light
on their original structure and the interrelation between
the codifications. In the following survey, the traditional
order of the Noahidic Laws is observed.
1) Dinim. The comparison leads to the conclusion that
this group comprises the crimes against the integrity of
Jurisdiction, crimes of witnesses and judges. These crimes
form the beginning of the Code of Hammurabi (1-5) and
are contained in the Bible.'6 It is very interesting to note
that the Sumerian Law Code, which preceded the Code of
Hammurabi and in some respects was ob&ously its
~ource,'~the crime is formulated in an abstract way which
is very close to that of the Bible.'* The wording is in-
definitely written to cover all degrees of accusations with
their corresponding penalties. The formulation of the
Code of Hammurabi, on the contrary, already connects
the basic crime with facts and develops it into ca~es.'~
This is of fundamental importance as it evidently shows
that the Bible has preserved the original formulation that
antedates the Code of Hammurabi.
The original abstract form was also retained in the
Roman XII tablets where-this group comprising the crimes
of false witnesses and judges is clearly discernible.60In the
Assyrian Laws this crime is still traceable as that of false
accusation (16-18) .
9 ) Blasphemy. This crime is contained in the Book of
the Covenant5' and in the Assyrian Laws where it is
connected with that of stealing in a temple.s2
3) Idolatry. For obvious reasons this crime has been
preserved only in the Bible. 53 Its omission in the other
codification indicates the religious depravity of mankind.64
It has been pointed out that the otherwise unexplained
order of the groups in the Hamrnurabi Code suggests that.
originally, religious crimes had followed the first group,
Dinirn.=
4) Adultery and Incest. The group of the Book of the
Covenant referring to this has a completely frag-
mentary character containing only incoherent laws about
seduction, witches, and unnatural sins. No legislator would
have composed such law omitting the main legislative
principles and mentioning only certain remnants. The fol-
lowing comparison shows beyond any doubt that these
laws originally formed a legislative unity with other laws
which are contairgd in other parts of the Bible, especially
in the Book of Le~iticus.~' It becomes furthermore evident
that these combined laws were the backbone of the cor-
responding groups of both the Code of Hammurabi and
the Hittite Laws.

Against slander-
ing woman.
Adultery. Lev 20: 10 Adultery.
A d u l t e r y of
women of cap-
tives or desert-
ed women.
Divorce.
Wife gives a
slave.
Sick wife.
Presents to the
wife .
Premartial debts.
Wife causes
death of hus-
band for the
sake of another
m a n (adult-
ery) - Lev 20: 10 Adultery.
I n c e s t (father Lev 20: 11 Wife of father.
daughter).
155-156 Incest (bride of Lev 20:12 Wife of son.
son).
Lev. 20:13 Unnatural sins
with males.
157-158 Incest (son
mother, wife of
father).
Lev. 20:14 Daughter and
mother.
Lev 20:15 Unnatural s i n s
with animals (Ex 22:18) .
159-161 Engagement,
bride prices.
162-184 Laws of inherit-
ance.
185-193 Adoption.
The comparison shows that the laws 137-152 of the
Hammurabi Code are only inserted. The group starts with
the crime of adultery in agreement with the Bible and
returns to this crime with law 153. Then follow the incest
cases to which other laws concerning family life are at-
tached. The laws contained in the Bible seem to have been
the skeleton of the group.
Still closer is the agreement between the Bible and the
Hittite Laws.

187-188 Unnatural s i n s Lev 20:10 Adultery.

with animals.
189 I n c e s t w i t h Lev 40:lO Wife of father.
mother.
I n c e s t with
daughter.
Incest with son.
190 Incest with Step- Lev 90:11 Wife of father.
mother.
191 Adultery.
192 Killing a man's
wife.
 A levirate law. Lev f0:13 Wife of son.
Father marries
wife of his son.
Free man with a
slave woman.
Lev 20: 13 Unnatural sin be-
t ween males.
Wife of brother. Lev f0:14 M o t h e r a n d
m o t h e r and daughter.
daughter.
daughter, mo-
ther or sister.
Slave causing dis-
turbances.
A man seizes a Deut 32:&3js A man finds a
woman in the betrothed virgin in the
mountain. city. He seizes her in the
He seizes her field.
in a house.
R i g h t of t h e
king's court.
Unnatural s i n s Lev 30: 15,16 Unnatural sins
with animals.
Unnatural s i n s with animals.
with animals.
Unnatural sins Ex 33: 18 Unnatural s i n s
between males.
with animals.
The agreement of these groups is obvious. Again the
relation seems to be that the Biblical laws form the skele-
ton which is used in the Hittite laws. Both surveys show
that the Hammurabi Code and the Hittite Laws have in
common only those laws which are contained in the Bible.
The inserted laws do not agree. This means that the three
codes are independent of each other but go back to a
common source which is best preserved in the Bible. The
legislative changes mentioned in the Hittite laws59 show
a progressive deterioration from an original high moral
standard with rigid punishments to an extremely lax code.
Thus, it becomes manifest that the high standard of the
Biblical laws was not the result of a higher development
but of the retention of the original level.
5) Bloodshed. The comparison of the laws belonging
to this group lead to very similar conclusions.
BIBLE
Ex 31: 13-14 Murder a n d
manslaughter.
195 Son strikes father. Ex 31: 15 Son strikes par-
ents.
Ex 31: 16 Theft of a person.
Ex 31: 17 Son curses par-
ents.
196-305 Laws of talion.
306 A man strikes another Ex 31: 18 A man strikes
man in a quarrel and another man in a quarrel
wounds him. and wounds him.
Ex 31: go Striking a slave.
309 A man strikes a man's Ex 31: a3 Men striking a
daughter and causes a wife and cause a miscar-
miscarriage (309-314) . riage.
Ex 31 :23-35 Laws of talion.
als--aaLi Laws about Phy- Ex 31: 36-27 Destroying the
sicians. eye or the tooth of slaves.
336-337 Laws of Branding.
338-933 Responsibility of
House builders.
334-339 Responsibility of
boatman.
340-Collision of ships.
341-349 Laws concerning
cattle; hiring of cattle.
350-353 Goring ox; habit Ex 31 :38-83; 35-36 Goring
goring. ox; Habit of goring.
Ex 31:83-54! Responsibility
for digging or opening a
pit.
a534260 Overseer of a field.
901-967 Concerning shep
herds.
378-282 Laws about slaves.
HITTITE
LAWS BIBLE
1-2 Man or slave killed Ex 21:12 Murder.
intentionally.
3-6 Man is killed without Ex 21:13 Man is killed
intention. without intention.
7-9 Cases of law of talion.
Ex 21:15 Son strikes par-
ents.
Ex 21 :16 Theft of a person.
Ex 21:17 Son curses par-
ents.
10 Someone strikes a per- Ex 21:18 A man strikes
son that he becomes another man in a quarrel
ill, unfit for work. He and wounds him. Has to
has to provide a man pay the loss of time and
for work and to pay the cost of healing.
the doctor's bill.
Ex 21:26 Killing a slave.
Ex 21:2% Men striking a
wife and causing a mis-
carriage.
Ex 21:23-25 Laws of talion.
11-16 Injuring the hand, Ex 21:26-27 Destroying the
the nose, the ear of a eye or the tooth of slaves.
man or a slave.
17-18 Causing a pregnant
free woman or a slave
to miscarriage.
Ex 21:28-32; 35-36 Goring
ox; Habit of Goring.
Ex 21 :33-34 Responsibility
for digging or opening a
pit.
 These comparative surveys show again that the three
pieces of legislation are independent of each other but
go back to a common source. A closer study reveals that
this source is best preserved in the Bible, which has re-
tained the original law in its primitive form and verbal
simplicity?" In the other codes the simple and terse formu-
lations have been dissolved for application to special cases.
This is perspicuous with regard to the law of talion which
only in the Bible has retained its natural form and order.
The Code of Hammurabi, moreover, has already adapted
the primitive laws to a fully developed civilization as is
shown by the insertions concerning Physicians, branders,
house builders, and boatmen. Finally, the comparison
shows that only the Bible has preserved the whole group.
In the Code of Hammurabi the beginning (murder and
manslaughter) is missing and in the Hittite Laws the
end, (goring ox)
6) The conclusions drawn so far are further strength-
ened by the comparative study of the next group concern-
ing Theft and Robbery.

6 Theft of goods of a god Ex 21: 16 Theft of a per-

or a temple. son ,O
7 Purchasing or receiving
stolen goods.
8 Theft of ox, sheep etc. Ex 21: 37 Theft of ox or
from a god or a tem- sheep.
ple.
9-13 Receiving of stolen
goods.
14-90 Stealing of children
and slaves.
91 A man breaks into a Ex 22: 1-3 Man breaks into
house. a house.
21-24 Housebreaking and
Brigandage.
9s Stealing a t a fire. Ex 94: 5 Damage by fire.
9 6 - 4 1 Duties and priv-
ileges of soldiers, con-
stables and tax collec-
tors.
49-47 Renting of fields.
4 8 - 5 9 Pledging of fields.
53-56 Damages caused by Ex 92: 5 Damage by fire.
water neglect; of the
dyke.
57-58 Damage caused by Ex 4934 Damage caused by
a shepherd having his sheep in fields or vine-
sheep eat the vegeta- yards of other people.
tion of fields.
5 9 - 6 6 Horticultural laws,
renting of g a r d e n s ,
pledging of fields.
100-107 Agents and mer- Ex 24: 6-14 Deposits.
chants. Responsibility of shep-
108-1 11 Wine merchants. herd, Borrowing and hir-
112-146 Deposits. ing a thing.
BIBLE
19 Stealing a person. Ex 41: 16 Stealing a person.
4-1 Stealing a slave.
99-94 Slave running away.
45 Using cooking utensils.
9 6 - 3 6 L a w s concerning
bride price.
37-48 L a w s concerning
bandits.
3 9 - 4 1 Concerning leased
land and feudal hold-
ing.
4 9 4 5 Concerning losses
and damages.
46-49 Performance of mil-
itary duties.
50--46 C 1a s s e s exempt
from military service.
57-99 L a w s concerning Ex 21:37 Theft of ox or
stealing and injuring sheep.
of domesticated ani-
mals.
93-97 Theft in a house, Ex aa: 1-3 Man breaks into
storehouse. a house.
98-100 Laws relating to Ex aa:5 Damage by fire.
fires.
101-104 Theft of fruits
etc.
105 If anyone lights a fire Ex %:5 If a fire breaks out
and in a vineyard it and catch in thorns, so
catches the vines, if that the stacks of corn,
vines, apple, trees po- or the standing corn, or
megranate fruit trees the field, be consumed
are burned for the therewith; he that kindled
tree he shall give 6 the fire shall surely make
shekels and replant the restitution.
orchard.
106 If anyone lights a fire
in a field and it catch-
es the standing crop
and burns the field.
107 If a person allows his Ex 22:4 If a m a n s h a l l
sheep to enter the cause a field or vineyard
vineyard of a neighbor to be eaten and shall put
and they lay it waste. in his beast and shall feed
in another msn's field.
108 Stealing apple trees.
109 Stealing from an orch-
ard.
110 Stealing from a liquid.
111 Taken by witchcraft.
113 Cutting of vine.
114-1 18 broken.
119-149 Stealing of dif-
ferent objects.
145-169 Rentals and
wages-
163 R e s p o n s i b i l i t y of Ex 33:6-14 Deposits,
a shepherd. Itesponsibility of s h e p
herd, Borrowing and hir-
ing a thing.
The comparison of the laws of this group is especially
instructive. It clearly demonstrates that the laws contained
in the Bible form the skeleton of both the Code of Ham-
murabi and the Hittite Laws. Both follow its order closely
but interrupt it by laws referring to a more highly de-
veloped civilization. These insertions in both laws are,
however, not identical, which proves that they were not
part of the common source. This means that this common
source contained only the laws which are preserved in the
Bible. The terse and simple formulations of the Biblical
laws are widely, spread out in the other codes to apply
them to numerous specialized cases. (see eg. 57-93 of the
Hittite Laws). I n the Bible laws concerning deposits have
preserved a form which in historical development goes back
far beyond that of the Code of Hammurabi.G1 All these
facts lead to the conclusion that i t is not a t all possible to
assume that the Biblical Law was derived from either the
Code of Hammurabi or the Hittite Laws. Despite the fact
that the Code of Hammurabi is much older the Bible has
actually preserved the common source of all these legisla-
tions in their purity and simplicity without additions
adapted to higher civilization. It is because of this that
the Bible seems to form the backbone of the other legisla-
tion~!~
8. Final Conclusions.

Summing up the preceding discussion we arrive a t the

following conclusions.
I. The Code of Hammurabi, the Hittite Laws, and the
Biblical Laws contained in the Book of the Covenant and
other parts of the Bible go back to a common source which
is best preserved in the Bible where it has retained its
original simplicity. I n the other codes it has been trans-
formed in order to adapt it to the conditions of a more
 developed civilization. For this purpose, its original se-
quence was repeatedly interrupted by additional laws
somewhat connected with the basic ones of the source.
11. The common source that can be traced in all these
codes is identical with the Noahidic Laws which, according
to the tradition, were the inheritance of all mankind. In
the Book of the Covenant this original divine law was
promulgated again with the modifications of Biblical legis-
lati0n.6~Where fundamental changes took place, parts of
the old law were omitted to be dealt with in extenso in
other parts of the Bible.64
III. The comparative study discloses that the original
common source was simple and terse in its wording and
that the Code of Hammurabi and the Hittite Laws
adapted it to more complicated conditions. This result has
been confirmed by examining the relation of the Code of
Hammurabi to its Sumerian predece~sor.6~ This examination
has revealed that the original abstract formulation, which
was very close to that of the Bible, became complex. All
this establishes beyond any doubt the conviction that
the simple and lucid formulations of the Bible were not
the product of an artificial process of elimination but those
of the original version in all their purity and simplicity.
This conclusion has implications which extend far beyond
the realm of these ancient legislations. I t has a decisive
bearing on all those instances where the pure and beautiful
Biblical traditions are confronted by mythological parallels
with all their ugly distortion^.^^ For all these instances,
the comparative study of ancient legal codes yielding in-
sight into the successive phases of historical development,
makes it clear that no progressive elimination has taken
place but that the Bible has preserved the original version
that had been the common inheritance of mankind.
N.The process of moral deterioration also is clarified
by a close study of these ancient legislations. The Hittite
Laws, especially, reveal that originally there were in exist-
ence rigid laws threatening with capital punishment all
kinds of sexual crimes67 and that increasing degeneration
led to a relinquishment of this high moral standard.68 This
 sheds light on the cultural level of early mankind in general
and confirms from another angle the f a d that the pure
traditions of the Bible contain the original versions and
that the ugly distoritions of other nations are merely the
expression of their moral degeneration. The belief that the
relation was the converse of that which we have demon-
is, therefore, incompatible with these facts, too.
The depraved moral conditions shown in the Hittite
Laws are the very same as those described in the Bible
with respect to the inhabitants of Palestine. Their sexual
crimes especially are utterly abhorred and referred to
as the reason for the extermination70 that had to be
executed by the Israelites. These circumstances completely
rule out the assumption71 that the Israelites could have
accepted in any form the very laws which were the legal
expression of a degenerated culture that they were bound
to destroy.
V. he comparative study furthermore discloses that
the Biblical Laws as contained in the various parts of
the Bible, especially the Book of the Covenant, Deuter-
onomy and Leviticus, formed a legislative unit from earliest
times. They are a unit in the Code of Hammurabi and in
the Hittite Laws.72Their separation in the Bible leaves the
remnants of the group in the Book of the C ~ v e n a n t ?as~
an unintelligible fragment which no legislator would have
conceived. The only reasonable explanation is that in the
Bible, too, it formed from the very beginning a legislative
unit with the other laws of the group which, for the sake
of modification and amplification, were dealt with in other
parts of the Bible. This leads to the conclusion that the
Book of the Covenant which Bible Criticism deems to be
the oldest part in the 'legal evolution'" belonged, from the
very beginning, inseparably together with the laws con-
tained in Deuteronomy and Leviticus,'~upposedly of
much later origin.
M.The key for the understanding of the structure of
the ancient Law Codes as outlined in this appendix was
furnished by the Talmudical tradition about the order
of the Noahidic L a ~ s . 7It~ has been shown that this order
actually was the system of these codes of antiquity which
were long forgotten in Talmudical times. This makes clear
that Talmudical traditions, far from being the product
of this late time, reach brrck even beyond the time of
Moses, preserving throughout the centuries precious tra-
ditions about the earliest times of human history.
 NOTES
Footnotes here have used a brief entry form. For longer entry the reader
is referred to the Bibliography. Where only the author's name appears,
the reader will find the only work of that author which is cited in this
book in the Bibliography. If two or more works of the same author
have been used, the footnotes list the name of the author and the
abbreviated title of the specific book cited.
1. Woolley, Abrabam, p. 22; 7. Albright, Journal of Bibl.
Albright, As*chaeol. of Palest. p. Literat. 1936 p. 165; From the
129. Stone Age, p. 35 ff; Arch. of
2. Albright, Arch, confronts, Palestine, p. 144.
p. 181; Arch. and the Religion, 8. Albright, From the Stone
p. 176. Age, p. 40 ff; The A,rch. of Pal.,
3. Albright, Arch. confronts, p. 144.
p. 184; Journ. of Bibl. Literat. 9. Albright, From the Stone
1936, p. 165; Already as far back Age, p. 41.
as 1897, Fritz Hornmel (The An- lo. Woolley, Abrabam, p. 266.
cient Hebrew Trrldition p. VIII) 11. Woolley, Abrabam, p. 215;
had predicted this development Barton, p. 425, states that recent
with the following words: "But findings showed that the horse was
truth must in the end prevail. The well known in Mesopotamia soon
monuments speak with no faltering after the year 3000 B.C.E., a
tongue, and already I seem to see thousand years earlier than was
signs of the approach of a new hitherto thought. Especially note-
era in which men will be able to worthy for its candidness is the
brush aside the cobweb theories of following statement of Barton in
the so-called 'higher critics' of h e the preface to the second edition
Pentateuch, and, leaving such old- of his book Semitic and Hamifir
fashioned errors behind them, at- Origins (p VII) : "32 years ago
tain to a dearer perception of the he (the author) published a sketch
red facts" of Semitic Origins. In the preface
4. Albright, Arch, confronb, to that work which represented a
p. 188; see also Durant, p. 300. dozen years of research, he said,
5. Schrader, KAT, p. 204 ff. 'I would no longer doubt that
6. Albright, Arch. confronts, these studies had led me to the
p. 186; From the Stone Age, p. discovery of the path trodden by
192 ff. the Semites in the journey from
 savagery to civilization, in the
course of which the most charac-
teristic features of their social and
religious life were created.' After
30 years he finds that he has
abandoned most of the important
theories which he advocated 30
years ago. In science opinions and
theories are never final; they are
always subject to change as facts
previously unkown come to light";
See also Isaacs, p. 49.
12. Albright, Arch. confronts,
p. 178.
13. 1.c.p. 182, 187.
14. See Woolley, Abraham, pp.
244, 290; Albright, From the Stone
Age, p. 187.
15. Albright. From Stone Age.
p. 113, 107; Barton, p. 60; Fine-
gan, pp. 31, 38, 34, 47.
16. Barton, p. 47; in general
see Barsilai, I1 p. 3ff.
l7. Albright, From the Stone
Age, p. 125.
See e'g. wmlley. Abraham'
pp. 31, 171, 178.
19. Albright, Arch. confronts,
p. 187.
20. Albright, 1.c.p. 177.
21. See e.g. Sellin, 1 p. 181.
22. Albright, Arch. and the Re-
ligion, p. 5, see also From the
Stone Age to Christianity.
23. Driver, see Hertz, Genesis
10:22.
24. Nathan the Sage, IV, 2.
25. Against Apion, 1, 17, 18.
26. KAT., p. 235ff.
27. de bello Vandal., 11, 10,
22 see Kittel, I p. 423 note 6.
28. Talmud Jerushalmi, Shebiit,
VI, 1; Rambam, Hilk Mloiim,
VI, 5.
29. Kittel, 1.c.
30. See e.g. Albright, Fromz
Stone Age, p. 45: "Nearly every
book and passage of the O.T. has
been stigmatized as a literary forg-
ery by at least one sd~olarthough
the whole assumption of pious
fraud was found to be without any
koundation." See also pp. 190,
192, 244; Hertz, Genesis p. 106 ff.
31. Geschichte d . isruelit, jued.
V o l i e ~ I, p. 38; see also Hommel,
Ancient - f , . ' , & j op.
n , 159.
32. Barton, p. 11; Breasted,
History of Egypt, p. 23; Barsilai,
p. 95; Marcus, Chronol., p. 4;
Finegan, p. 65ff.
33. Breasted, l.c.; See C b n o -
logy, note 54.
34. Albright, From the Stone
Age, p. 113; Waddell, Egyptian
apil., pp. 140, 175.
35. Finegan, 1.c.
36. Boulton, p. 50; see Barsilai,
p. 177.
37- p. 61.
38. Albright, From the Stone
Age, p. 107; Finegan, p. 38.
39. Finegan, p. 47; &or 77,
p. 25; Basor 88 p. 28-36; A survey
 of the various opinion on this sub- referring to E. v. Dobschuetz, The
ject held by the first authorities Influence of the Bible on Civiliza-
50 years ago is given by Hommel, tion.
Ancient Tradition, p. 120. 55. See Solomon Goldrnan, The
40. Barton, p. 11; Finegan, p. Book of Book.
65. 56. see Isaiah 40:8, 55:ll;
41. See Woolley, Abraham, p. Carlebach, The Hebrew Bible, p.
13 ff. 349 ff. The linguistic arguments
42. Barton, p. 208. of Bible Critics will be dealt with
43. Exod. 32:9; 33:3,5; 34:9 in extenso in the following vol-
Deut. 9:6, 13 umes. Reference is made to the
44. Deut. 9:26, 10:16; 31:27; following books and papers of
I1 Kings 17:14; Jeremiah 7:26; Oskar Goldberg which are of fun-
16:23; 19:15; Nehemiah 9:17, damental importance: Die fuenf
29; 11 Chronic. 30:s. Buecher Morer, ein Zahlenge-
45. Exod. 14:ll. blreude, Berlin 1908; "Das Zahl-
46. See S. R. Hi& Exod. engebaeude des Pentateuch," Re-
14:ll. zwe Jwive de Geneve, 1947; See
47. Babli, Beaa, 25b. also Hertz, Genesis pp. 106, 109.
48. Historiae V, 13, p. 296; 57. See Ramban, Lev. 26:16;
see also V, 5 and V, 10, pp. 289, S. R. Hirsch, Deut. 28:20; Isaac
294. Breuer, Der newe Kusmi, p. 66 ff; /'1'
/' 49. Doroth Harishonim, VI p. Doroth Hmishonim, VI pp. 108-
127; see also S. R. H i d , Exod 116.
32:1 1 ; 34.9; Hornrnel, Ancient 58. Deut. 28:64 ff; see also
Tradition, p. 18. Deut. 4:27.
50. Jeremiah 239; Hezekiah 59. Deut. 29:21 ff.
13. 60. Deut. 28:36.
51. See Carlebach, Propheten, 61. Doroth Harishonim, p. 111. J
p. 70 ff. 62. Deut. 28:43.
52. Albright, From the Stone 63. Doroth Hm'shonim, Ic. p. ,
Age, p. 45. 36.
53. Albright, From the Stone 64. Deut. 28:48-50.
Age, p. 45; Arch, confronts, p. 65. k t . 28:51.
183. 66. Deut. 28:52.
54. Albright, Arch. and Reli- 67. h t . 28:53-57; Doroth ;

gion, p. 23 ff; Sce Jacobs, p. 65 ff Harishonim, VI p. 111.

 68. Josephus, Iewish War, VII, 85. Isaiah 20:l.
'
5, 3; Doroth Harishonim, VI p. 86. See Barsilai, p. 90.
112. 87. 11 Kings 18:13 %.
69. Genes. 9:27. 88. Barton, p. 472.
70. Albright, Arch. and Reli- 89. 11 Kings 19:35.
gion, p. 35. 90. Barton, p. 475; Marcus,
71. Isaiah 2:4; 11:6 ff; Micah Chronol, p. 74.
4:3 %. 91. I1 Kings 19:36 f.
92. Jeremias, p. 596; see also
72. Oppenheim, International
Chapter VII Note 17.
Law, p. 51; author's "Judaism and
93. Jeremias, 1.c.; KAT, p. 84.
International Law," pp. 195, 202.
94. Albright, Arch. confronts,
73. Carlebach, Propheten, pp. p. 181;Arch. of Palestine, p. 128.
16, 44, 119 %. 95. Prolegomena, 3rd ed. p.
74. Isaiah 13:19-22;see also 33 1 see Albright, Arch. of Pales-
Jeremiah 50:12%; 51 :26%. tine, p. 129.
75. See Boulton, p. 178; Bar- 96. Albright, 1.c.; Arch. con-
silk, p. 335; Carlebach, p. 127; fronts, p. 185; Hertz, Genesis p.
Woolley, Abrabarn, p. 67; Fine- 11 1; Woolley, Abraham, p. 22,
gan, p. 10. p. 259.
76. Ezekiel 30:15. 97. See Chapter I1 Note 7;
76a. Of special significance in Albright, From Stone Age, p. 100.
this respect are the experiments 98. See note 32 %; Finegan, p.
on prophesy described by J.B. 13.
Rhine, Reach of the Mind, the 99. BASOR 67 p. 26;69 p. 18;
results of which certainly sug- 77 p. 26.
gested precognition as a part of 100. Arch. confronts. p. 188.
the human mind.
77. Albright, Arch. confront, CHRONOLOGY
p. 181 ; Arch. of Palestine, p. 128. 1. Gen. 5; 11:lO; 21:5; 25:
78. Jeremias p. 392. 26; 28:9;41:46, 47:9.
79. II Kings 18:9. 2. See Nacblath Zwi 1935 p.
80. Kittel, I1 p. 366. 314; 1936 p. 79 I -
81. See Bmsilai, p. 90. 3. Parsons, p. 45; B~siIai, p.
82. TI Kings 18:ll. 176; Marcus, Chronol. p. 5.
.83. 11 Kings.17:24. 4. Patsons, p. 31; see for fur-
84. Barton, p. 466. ther details Chapter IV, l, 111.
 5. Albright, Arch. of Pal. p.
137.
6. Gen. 15:13; Ex. 1240.
7. See Rashi, Ex. 12:40.
8. Ex. 12:40.
9. See also Num. 13:22.
10. Albright, From the Stone
Age, pp. 169, 195; Archaeol. of
Pal., p. 144 BASOR N. 58 p. 16;
Boehl, p. 25.
11. Zemach David, year 2448.
12. Albright, BASOR N. 58
p. 16; 68 p. 24; From the Stone
Age, p. 195; Finegan, p. 106;
Kittel, p. 368.
13. Bad Hanroaur, Rosh Ha-
shana 2.
14. See Marcus, Chronol., p.
13; BarsiIai, I p. 317, 11 p. 22;
Jahrb, Jued. Literar, Gesellsch.
1906.
15. Marcus I.c.
16. See Nachlath Zwi 1935,
pp. 276, 313; 1936 p. 79.
17. Ruth, 4:18; I Chron. 2.
18. See ibn Ezra, Ruth 4:17;
but see also Nahmanides, Genesis,
46:15.
19. See Fundamental Ques-
tions notes 36 ff, 98 ff; Woolley, 215 places Saul from 1027-1012.
Abraham, p. 287.
20. See Rambum, XI Hikh.
Kid& Hachodesh, X Hilkh. 137.
Sbmittah ; Zemach David, year
348 arguing against de Rossi in
Meor Enajim, who without sufh-
cient reason rejected the era of
creation; see Marcus, Chronol. p.
13.
21. Albright, BASOR N. 58
pp. 14, 24; N. 68 p. 24; Arch.
of Pd., p. 101; Arch. and the
Religion, pp. 69, 102; Finegan,
p. 136; Barton, p. 119. The ar-
chaeological findings in Trans-
jordan indicate clearly that the
events described in Numbers 20:
14-17 cannot be placed before the
13th century. (Finegan, p. 132)
There is, furthermore, evidence
that the cities Bethel, Lachis and
Debir were destroyed within the
13th century (Finegan, pp. 136,
'
140) and that Jericho was burned
apparently about 1300-1200. (Bar-
ton, p. 112).
22. Judges 1 1 :26.
23. Nachlath Zwr 1935 p.
80; Marcus, Chronol., p. 39.
24. Albright, BASOR N. 68
p. 25.
25. Albright, Arch. of Pal.,
p. 57.
26. Marcus, Chronol., p. 40
mentions an old tradition that king
Saul ruled 11 years; Kittel, I1 p.
27. Marcus, Chronol., p. 13.
28. Albright, Arch of Pal., p.
29. Woolley, Abraham, p. 49;
Boehl, pp. 30, 45; Sellin, p. 19.
30. Ex. 1:ll.
31. Barton, pp. 20, 26;Breast-
ed, Hist. of Egypt, p. 446; Al-
bright, From the Stone Age, p.
194;Kittel, I pp. 366, 367 note 2.
32. Barton p. 376.
33. Barton, 1.c.; Albright,
From the Stone Age. p. 194.
34. Barton, pp. 155.
35. Kittel, I. p. 361.
36. Ex. 14:3; see also Ex. 32:
12; Num. 14:16; Marcus, Chronol.,
p. 10; It is argued that Mernephta
cannot have been the Pharaoh of
the Exodus as his mummy has
been found and is now in the
museum at Cairo whereas the Pha-
raoh of the Exodus perished in
the Red Sea. (See Barton, p. 27)
There is, however, the surprising
tradition that the Pharaoh alone
escaped when his whole army
drowned and the still more amaz-
ing fact that according to re-
searches of a distinguished English
anatomist, Sir Grafton Elliot-Smith,
the mummy contained an incrusta-
tion of crystals of common salt
which may be the consequence of
an immersion in the Sea. (See
Golding, pp. 114, 115).
37. Kittel, I. p. 362.
38. Joshua 1 5 9 , 18:15.
39. See note 21.
40. Joshua 17:16;Judges 1:19.
41. Duncan, p. 62; See Plso
Finegan, p. 133 with reference to
the bedstead of iron mentioned
Deut. 3:11.
42. See Kittel, I1 p. 210 ff;
Boulton, p. 52; Marcus, Chronol.,
p. 14; Bursilai, I1 p. 8.
43. Boulton, p. 52; Barton,
p. 57.
44. Boulton, p. 51; Barsilai,
I1 p. 3.
45. Finegan, p. 31.
46. Fundamental Questions
notes 36 ff, 98 ff.
47. Barton, p. 317 ff; Fin:-
gan, p. 24.
48. Finegan, 1 . . ; Woolley.
Abrahm, p. 170; Barton, p. 41;
for further details see Chapter 111,
2, IV, Chapter IV, 1, I1
49. See note 4.
50. Albright, From the Stoue
Age, p. 4.
51. Barton, p. 66.
52. Barsilai, I. p. 174, I1 p.
2; Marcus, Chronol., p. 8.
53. History of Egypt, p. 23.
54. Breasted, 1 ; Albright,
From the Stone Age, p. 113; Mar-
cus, Chronol., p. 4; Barsilai, p.
96; See Fundamental Questions
notes 33 ff; Waddell, Egypt. Civil-
izat., pp. 140, 175.
55. Childe, p. 177.
56. Myres, p. 116.
57. C,hilde, preface and chron-
ological survey; Albrigfit, From
the Stone Age, pp. 105, 114;
Waddell, Egypt. Civilizat., p. 139.
58. Barsi~ai,I1 p. 3.
59. Albright, From the Stone
 ),
Age, pp. 101, 114; The picto- Chachma; Israel Lipschitz, appeu- /

graphic writing of the predynastic

---_
dix of vol. 4. --
Egyptians (Badarians) seems to lo. M e d r a b Raba I, 28; Bab-
have come from Sumeria. The cyl- 11. Subbat, 78b; Chagrga, 14a;
indric seal, which is of unques- Sebachinz, 116a; Lipschitz l.c.;
tionably Mesopotamian (Sumerian) Marcus, Chronol., p. 23.
origin, appears in the earliest per- 11. Babli, Chugiga, 12a; San-
iod of Iuiown Egyptian history. hedrin 38b; Baba Bathra 75a.
(Durant, pp 135, 146) ; Waddell, 12. Babli, Berachot, 61a; Med-
1.c. p. 173. sdsh Raba I, 8.
60. Sumerians, Hittites, Phoe- 13. Medrash Raba I, 14; Bab-
nicians, Palestine, Aramaeans, li, Berachoth, 61a.
Breasted, Coizq., pp. 132, 207, 14. See Ahron Marcus, Ker-
157, 258. set Sofer, Krakau 1912 ; Dibre
61. Kittel, I p. 74 ff; Barton, J'aar: Talrrtaoth Chochtna p. 4 ff.
p. 24. 15. See the Targunzirn.
62. Barton, p. 24 ff. 16. Hertz, Genes. I, 1; Dibre
63. Gen. 46:34; see also Gen. J'aar p. 17. Very significant in this
43:32. respect is the fact that according
64. See Finegan, p. 13; Al- to the tradition the era of the
bright, BASOR 88 p. 32. Creation does not start with the
first day of the Creation but with
CHAPTER I. PREHISTORY the sixth day, with the creation of
AND CREATION man. The preceding time is of in-
1. Childe, p. 5. commensurable size. (See Marcus,
2. Talmud Babli, Chagiga, Chronologie, p. 1 ff; Maimonides,
1lb. Hilkh, Krddush Hahaude~hVI, 8 ) .
3. Chagzga, l l b . 17. Psalm 90, 2.
4. See Barsilk, p. 69ff. 18. Psalm 102, 26ff.
5. Me&& Ma, I, 3; I, 9 ; 19. Juda H a - h i , H A - K ~ s a r i ,
I, 12. Part I 67; Hertz, Genes. p. 54;
6. Medrash Raba, 1,6; Babli, Jacobs, PP. 172, 176.
Hulin, 60a. 20. Psalm 104, 2ff. The role
7. Talmud Babli, Chagiga, 16a. which the speed of light plays
8. Medrash Raba, I, 3. in the Einstein cosmogony thus
9. atrsilai, p. 71 ff; Mose finds its explanation. Otherwise
Hayim Luzzato, Klach Pithche not the slightest reason can be
given for the fact that the equiva-
lence formula for energy and mass
is connected with the speed of
light.
21. The Surface of the Globe,
p. 8 ff.
22. 1.c. p. 8 ff, p. 11.
23. Principles of Geology,
Vol. I1 p. 466.
24. Barsilai, p. 75.
25. Lyell, Vol. I p. 143 ff.
26. Hertz, Genes., p. 54.
27. Hertz, Genesis, p. 54.
28. Will Ley, Days of Crea-
tion, p. 7. He tries to explain the
amazing parallelism by referring
to the inherent logic of the se-
quence of the Creation. (p. 8 )
This, however, is incompatible
with his own statement (p. 112)
that the 'astronomical interlude' of
the fourth day does not follow a
logical pattern and has baf3ed
theologians and scientists alike.
There is, indeed, no other honest
explanation than divine revelation.
29. Babli, Hulin, 27b.
30. Haeckel, Evolution of
Man, Vol. I1 p. 481 ; Nouy, p. 67.
31. Genesis 2:7.
32. Medrash Rak I, 14.
33. Hertz, Genesis, p. 55.
33a. The Nobel Prize Win-
ner Robert A. Millikan described
the book Human Destiny as one
of such fundamental grasp and
insight that one cannot expect
such a book to appear more than
once or twice in a century. (See
Readers Digest, March 1947 p. 39
ff) -
33b. See pp. 84, 97, 134, 148,
225.
33c. pp. 112 ff, 134, 148.
34. The bones of the Java
Giant Man (Meganthropus) , sup-
posed to have lived 500,000 years
ago, were discovered by V. Koen-
igswald, a Netherlands paleontolo-
gist. New I'ork Times Oct. 13,
1946.
35. Childe, pp. 49, 95.
36. Breasted, History of Egypt,
p. 25; Myres, p. 52; Childe, p.
119. See also Barton, Origins. pp.
15, 90 stating that there is a great
hiatus between the pdaeolithic and
neolithic remains in Egypt.
37. Medrash Raba 1, 9; 1, 12.
38. Genesis 1:31.
39. Childe, p. 11.
40. Genesis 1:22, 28.
41. Man does not Stand Alone;
Readers Digest 1946, Dec., p. 11;
see also Hertz, Genesis, p. 55.
42. Alpenfels, "Our Racial Su-
periority," Readers Digest Sep.
1946, p. 79.
43. Lyell, vol. 11, p. 417.
44. Genesis 1 :6,7.
45. Boulton, p. 56; Durmt, p.
237; Finegan, p. 52; Barton, p.
27%; Hertz, Genesis, p. 52.
46. Sillem, p. 21.
 47. Hertz, Genesis, p. 52 ; Du-
rant, p. 329; Albright, Arch. and
Religion, p. 15; Woolley, Abra-
ham, p. 168; Gressmann, The
Tower, p. 30 seq, p. 38.
48. See Hertz, Genesis, p. 52.
49. See Finegan, p. 53; Barton,
p. 297; Hommel, Ancient Tradi-
tion, p. 308 already stated: "I
now no longer hesitate to say
that the Monotheistic concept of
the Biblical text, and especially of
the 'Priestly Code' must compared
with the Babylonian polytheistic
version, be regarded as the origi-
nal."
50. Sillem, p. 22; See Appen-
dix, note 66.
51. Hertz, Genesis, p. 52.
52. Parsons, p. 219.
THE FIRST HUMAN BEINGS
1. Talmud Jerurhalmi, Shekal-
im, VI, 2; Medrash Raba, I , 23;
Juchasin, year 1235; about ar-
chaeological evidence see Chapter
IV, 1, I1
2. Breasted, Ancient Timer,
pp. 35, 45.
3. Breasted, 1.c. p. 47.
4. Genesis 2:14; The state-
ment that the Tigris went to the
east of Assur was true only uatil
the.time of Mosis, not later. Kit-
tel, 1 p. 256.
5. Delitzsd.1, W o lag das Par-
adies; Albright, The Location of
the Garden of Eden, p. 16 ff;
Eridu, the oldest city according
to Babylonian inscriptions, was
situated on the shore of the Per-
sian Gulf (Barton, p. 39). It is
at this site that traces of perhaps
the world's earliest adhatian
have been discovered quite re-
cently. (New Y m k Times, Febr.
19, 1948) The region of Eridu
and Ur originally was called Gu-
edinna or Semitic Kisad-edini,
which means the river region of
Eden (Hommel, Ethnologie, pp.
244, 245).
6 . Barsilai 11, 3 .
7. Durant, p. 109; Breasted.
Cotzq, p. 120;Hommel, Der baby-
lotzirche Ursprung der aegyptirchen
Rtlltur; Waddell, Egyptian Civili-
zatjotz, Its Sumerian Origin.
8. Breasted, 1.c. p. 121.
9. Childe, p. 75ff.
10. Talmud Babli, Brochaarr,
40a; Sanhedrin, 70b ; Medrurh
Raba, I. 15.
11. Durant, p. 329.
12. Talmud Bubli, Baba Bath-
ra, 58.
13. Genesis 2:19.
14. Durant, p. 73; Wilhelm
Wundt, Gwndzuege der physio-
logischen Prychologie p. 621 ff;
see Barrilai, 2.
15. Barrilai, p. 1.
 16. Babli, Sanhedrin, 38b;
Medrash Raba, I 18, 31.
16a. The modern theories fail
to explain the central parts of
language and its whole complex
structure. Some scholars, therefore,
fall back on the religious belief
that the first language was directly
given to the first men by G'd
though miracle. (See Encyclopedia
Britannica, sv. Language p. 702
fi).
17. gdrsilk p. 16; see:
,3: ,333 , n y m ,333 , X I , n w
-73 ,7173
In english we find: big, great,
grand, large, high.
18. Barsilai pp. 17, 26;
,w:1 ,1:1 ,D31 ,731 ,731 ,3'21
,t';~ , q i ~ ,y11 , n i l , ~ m,qm
, m y ,331 , l ' l ,3'1 ,BDl , w n 1
,Dyl , 7 y l , 7 y l , a 1 , B B l ,DDl
r y 7 ,7?1 r y y l rwyy , E l ,T;l
.nny
In English we find: race, rage,
raid, rain, ramble, roam, rap, rap-
id, rash, raving, mv& ride, rift,
ring the bell, riot, rise, roar, roil,
roll, rotate, rub, run, rush.
l8a. Very instructive for the
recognition of the original ability
of creating words is the way Leah
formed the name i73t pro-
ceeding from the stem ~ > vla t 39. Kittel, I pp. 209, 288, 128,
537 to 7 7 3 ~ . (Gen. 30:20)
19. Barsilai p. 14
,m ,am , n n , n n , n n
, m n ,h'ln ,T'ln , a m ,'ln'ln
.mn , w n , m n , m n ,pin
20. Medrash Raba, 1, 5; Bar-
silai, p. 45.
21. Barsilai, p. 43.
22. Bar~ilai,p. 41.
23. Barsilk, p. 46.
24. 2:5.
25. Barsilai, p. 48.
26. 1.r.
27. See Song of Songs VI, 6
"Thy teeth are like a flock of sheep
which go up from the washing."
28. See the wonderful para-
phrases of Isaias 40:11 "He shall
gather the lambs with his arms
and carry them in his bosom"
(NB") Bar~iIai, p. 49; see a h
Isaias 63:9
29. Babli, Persachim, 54a.
30. Medrash Raba I, 24.
31. Iurhasin sub Adam; see also
Babli, Aboda SMU, 8a; Genesis
1:14.
32. Barton, p. 312.
33. Barton, p. 47, Finegan, p.
17.
34. Childe, pp. 257, 118, 119.
35. see Bar~ilai,I1 p. 4.
36. Genesis 3:s; see Ramban.
37. Barton, p. 312.
38. Durant, p. 57.
171 ; Sillem, pp. 17, 21; Ahright,
From the Stone Age, p. 124 8.
40. ~ l b r i g h t , 1.r.
 41. Chapter I, note 47 ff ; Ap-
pendix, note 66.
42. Babli, Baba Batbra, 14b;
Medrar Raba, Kobelet Raba, 7: 19;
Barsilai, 283. The fact that He-
brew and Babylonian psalms go
back to the same common root
explains that the same metrical
form and the well known par-
allelism can be traced in both of
them. I t is of special interest that
examples for this common use are
found in just those chapters of
the psalms which by the Jewish
tradition are ascribed to Abraham
and Moses. Psalm LXXXIX
(ascribed to Abraham, see Baba
Buthra 15a) contains the verse:
"Righteousness and judgment are
the foundation of Thy Throne
Mercy and truth
go before Thy Face."
Psalm XCI (by the tradition
ascribed to Moses, see Rashi Baba
Batbra 14b) contains the verse:
"He that dwelleth in the ward of
the Highest
And abides in the shade of the
Mightiest"
These verses may be compared
with the following lines from the
Babylonian Creation Epos:
"Naught shall be reformed
what ever I furnish,
Ne'er be taken b a d
the word of my mouth"
(See Hommel, Ancient Trditiotz
p. 340.)
43. Medrasb &a, I, 22.
44. m i , Ba& Batbra, 14b.
45. Siliem, p. 17; Smith, Gene-
sis, p. 78.
46. Durant, p. 236.
47. Bahr, die babylott. B w -
psalmen, p. 18ff; Barsilai, p. 264ff.
48. Parsons, p. 33.
49. The nature of this relation
will be clarified in the following
volume.
50. Albright, Stotte Age, p.
165.
51. Barton, p. 138; It is very
interesting in this connection that,
according to the tradition, Ma&-
zedek, the king of Jerusalem, was
one of the authors of the Psalms
(see Baba Batbra, 14b).
52. See Babli, Aboda Sara, 8a;
Sabbat, 28b; Cbulin, 60a.
53. Hertz, Genesis 4:3.
54. Genesis 8:20.
55. Durant, p. 66.
56. Albright, Stone Age, p.
179; Nurn. 6:19; Deut. 18:3;
The distinction between clean and
unclean animals, unfit for sacri-
fices, belonged to the common
heritage of all mankind. (See
Babli, Sebabim, 115a; S. R. Hirsch
Gen. 7:2).
5 7 . Medrasb Raba, I, 22.
58. Genesis, 2:2,
59. See Rashi Gen. 26:5.
16:23.
 60. Medrab Raba, I1 1,5; S. R.
H i d , Genesis, 2:1; Exodus
16:23
61. Their 'day of cessation' was
observed on the 7th, 14th, Wth,
21st and 28th days of the months
Ellul and Marcheshvan. They
were considered unlucky days, and
on them the king was not to offer
sacrifices, nor consult an oracle,
nor invoke curses on his enemies.
See Herk, Gm. p. 57; Barton,
p. 309 f f ; The Babylonian prohi-
bitions for bhese days apply to cer-
tain classes of people only not to
the whole population. There was
a day cdled Shabatum on the fif-
teenth day of each month (Barton,
p. 310) All this shows that the
tradition of the Sabbath of the
Creation was still alive in Baby-
lonia.
62. Genesis 2:15.
63. Babli, Sanhedrin, 56; Ram-
bum, Hilkh. Mlokhim, =,I; See
a h Nouy, p. 114.
64. See author's "Das Noach-
idische Urrecht."
65. See Appendix.
66. See author's "Judaism and
International Law."
66a. pp. l m , 195.
66b. pp. log, ii8ff.
66c. p. 118.
6613. Barsilai p. 70; Magid Me-
shorim, Seder Ahatei.
67. Lisst, Lehrbuch d . deutscb-
en Strafechts, p. 27; Nouy, p.
129.
68. Lisst, 1.c. p. 28.
69. Leist, Graeco - italische
Rechtsgeschichte, pp. 550, 599,
761.
70. Author's, Dar Nouchid.
Urrecht, p. 38.
71. Cknesis 3:24.
72. See S. R. Hirsch Gen. 3:24;
author's Judaism and International
Law p. 209ff; Nouy, p. 136.
73. Barton, p. 312; There exists
a Babylonian Story of Ijnpulsion
from a Garden which obviously is
the Babylonian version of the ex-
pulsion from the Paradise, reading
as follows:
"He did not obey him . . .
Thy humanity thy body has not
been taken away
For humanity the words of under-
standing are not
End thy weeping
From my midst go forth to the
steppe
To me forever, having taken of
the clothing-establishing tree,
as an outcast thou shalt not re-
turn
The death emancipating reed the
enlightened children who are
wretched
shall not take" (Barton, p. 315).
74. Barton, p. 312.
75. Barton, 1.c.
76. Barton, p. 46; Fig. 293;
Barton, Origins, p. 142.
77. Breasted, Conqfiest, p. 141.
78. Breasted, Conq., p. 142.
79. Sillem, p. 34; Gressman,
The Tower, p. 36.
80. Breasted, Conq., p. 163ff;
Delitzsch, P ~ a d i e j , p. 91.
81. Kittel, I p. 96.
82. Sillem, p. 34.
83. Barsilai p. 162; Dutant p.
280; Gressman, AOT., I1 pp. 86,
106-17 and plates CXLVIII-CLXI ;
the Cherubim appear on ancient
Assyrian, Babylonian, Egyptian
Canaanite and Hittite monuments.
Delibsch, Paradies, p. 93; As
Gressmann (The Tower, p. 37)
points out, the flaming sword, too, Hirsch.
with which the Paradise was guard-
ed, corresponds to tbe Assyrian Gen. 4:23,24; Barton, p. 46.
custom of erecting a bronze imi-
tation of a flash of lightning as
guardian on the ruins of a de-
stroyed city in order to ordain it
for ever to destruction.
1. Gen. 4:l; Sillem, p. 10;
The verb krna received only in
later times the meaning 'acquire'
when a cane was used to sym-
bolize such act.
2. Sillem, p. 10; BarjilrU', pp. the world's earliest civilization
138, 139.
3. Breasted, Conq., p. 5
4. Childe, p. 75.
5. Gen. 4:2.
6. See chapter 11, note 10.
7. Gen. 4:4.
8. Gen. 4:12.
9. Chapter 11 4.
lo. Gen. 4:14.
1 1. Lisst p. 28.
12. Noachid. Uwecbt, pp. 23,
24.
13. Sillem, pp. 34, 35.
14. Gen. 4:18-24;Gen. 5.
15. Gen. 4:17.
16. Gen. 4:16.
17. See chapter 11, note 5.
18. Gen. 4:17.
19. Ramban, Hertz, Gen. 4:17.
20. See K'fi JaQar.
21. Hertz, Gen. 4:20; S. R.
22. Medrash Rabr I, 23 ; Hertz,
23. Gen. 4:23,24.
24. Barsilai, p. 153.
25. See chapter 11, note 1.
26. Gen. 6:4; Num. 13:33.
27. See Marcus, Chronof., p.
25; B d l i , Sebacbim, 113; Bctbli,
Nida, 61a.
28. Marcus, pp. 22, 23.
29. Finegan, p. 14.
30. Finegan, p. 17.
31. Albright, Stone Age, p. 99;
Quite recently traces of perhaps
have been discovered at Eridu, the
oldest city according to Babylonian
inscriptions, which was situated on
the shore of the Persian Gulf.
 (See Chapter 11, note 5). TSle dis- 56. Barton, p. 61.
coveries gave rise to the belief 57. Barton, p. 39, Origins, p.
that the civilization of Eridu p ~ -59.
ceded that of El Obeid. (NN 58. Finegan, p. 17.
)'or& Tirnes, Febr. 19, 1948.) 60. Barton, Origins, p. 65.
32. Finegan, p. 17; Barton, 59. Barton, Origins, p. 60.
Origins, p. 33. 61. Finegan, p. 23.
33. Barton, 1.c. 62. Finegan, p. 68ff; Barton,
34. Finegan, p. 18. p. 8 ff; Origins, p. 90; Albright,
35. Barton, p. 39; Origins, p. Stotze Age, p. 101.
34. 63. Finegan, p. 122ff; Barton,
36. Barton, p. 36. pp. 132, 149; Albright, Stone Age,
37. Finegan, p. 17; Barton, p P 96, 101.
Origins, p. 34. 64. Finegan, p. 17.
38. Barton, p. 44. 65. Barton, p. 357 ff.
39. Barton, p. 43. 66. Barton, p. 317.
40. Barton, Origins, p. 34. 67. Barton, p. 322.
41. E'inegan, p. 19. 68. Barton, p. 317.
42. Finegan, p. 23. 69. See Barton, p. 333.
43. Finegan, p. 23; Barton, p. 70. Marcus, Chronol., p. 28;
49 ff. Parsons, p. 5 .
44. Finegan, p. 24. 71. Albright, Arch. and the Re-
45. Finegan, p. 24. ligion, p. 41.
46. Finegan, p. 24. 72. Marcus, Chronol., p. 28.
47. New York Times, Nov. 1, 73. Medrush Raba, I, 23.
1945; Krarner, p. 20. 74. Marcus, 1.c.
48. Finegan, p. 17. 75. Childe, 166.
49. Barton, p. 47. 76. Parsons, p. 3.
50. Barton, p. 46; see chapter 7 7 See Breasted, Conq., pp.
11, note 76. 55, 126; Childe, p. 243.
51. Finegan, p. 22ff; Barton, 7 8 Medrarh Raba, I, 23; Ram-
p. 43. barn, Hilkh Aboda Zara, I, 1.
52. Finegan, p. 23. 79. 8:l.
53. Barton, p. 60. SO. Barsifai, p. 39.
54. Finegan, pp. 15, 19, 20, 81. Hertz, Gen. 5:24; Sefer
22; Childe, p. 257. Juchasin; Ben Sirach 44:16; Eno&
55. Ulilde, pp. 135, 166. was esteemed as the inventor of
writing, arithmetic and astronomy Biblical genealogy. (see Barton, p.
and as the kacher of laws which 325).
had been revealed to him by G'd, a) The Babylonian list contains
(See Seder Hadoroth). many names which are not
82. Barsilk, p. 138, 165; Sec mentioned in the Bible (Bar-
Seder Hadoroth, year 687, quoting ton, p. 324).
from other sources that his name b) Not a single figure of the
was Methuselah because he used Biblical list is identical with
a sword on which the name of any of the Babylonian list.
G'd was engraved. See also Seder This should be the case if
Hadoroth, year 987, referring to the Bible account had been
the warfare between Enoch and the derived from it, as is dear-
descendants of Cain. ly shown by the Berossus
version which uses the fig-
83. Gen 6:2; see Hertz ibid.
ures of the Babylonian list
quoting Ibn Ezra, Mendelssohn,
repeatedly (3 times 36000,
S. R. Hirsch, W. H. Green.
3 times 64800, once 28800,
84. Medrarh Rub., I, 23.
once 43200).
85. Gen. 5:29.
c) The Biblical account is a
86. Bursilai, p. 165.
simple genealogy, whereas
87. Gen. 6:3.
the Babylonian list enumer-
88. Psalm 90:lO.
ates kings, their conquests
89. Hertz, Gen. 5:5.
and their cities. It is a more
90. See Chronology, note 64.
developed political form. In
91. See Woolley, Ahlaham, p.
the Bible the original gene-
287; see Isaacs, p. 48.
alogical scheme has been re-
92. Parsons, p. 4.
tained. (See Zimmern, p.
93. Parsons, p. 4; Woolley,
28).
Abraham, p. 263; Barton, p. 320.
Barton contends that the Biblical
94. Finegan, p. 25; Woolley, antediluvial list corresponds close-
F. 263; Barton, p. 322. ly to the Babylonian list of kings
95. Barton, p. 322. who are said to have reigned after
96. Gen. 5:24; Barton, p. 322.
the Flood (p. 322, see Col. I1 of
97. See Seder Hadoroth, year the list p. 318). This, however,
974. does not seem to be correct. The
98. The Babylonian lists can- second column of the list (p. 318)
not have been the source of the is not a continuation of column I
(p. 317), as Barton asamcs, but
rather parallel to it, referring like-
wise to the time before the Flood.
There are, consequentiy, two ante-
diluvial Babylonian lists (Col. I
and 11) corresponding to the two
Biblical lists. The first list refer-
ring to the *time after the Flood
is Col. I11 which starts with the
sovereignity of Kish, where CO~.
I ended. We may also note that
the figures of Col. I are not so in-
discutable as they seem to be. Ob-
viously two zeroes have been added
to the real figures to make them
more impressive. Thus, instead of
the figures 28800, 36000, 64800,
43200, etc., we have the figures
288, 360, 648, 432 which, as years
of rulership, tally well with the
years of lifetimes given in the sec-
ond list (Col. I1 900, 840, 720,
635, etc.).
100. Zimmern, p. 29; see Book
of Enoch.
101. Parsons, p. 5.
102. Ant. I, 3, 9.
10.3. See Medrarh Raba, I, 26
104. Parsons, p. 30.
CHAPTERIV.
THE FXOOD AND ITS
CONSEQ-ES
1. Gen. 6:ll-12.
2. Hertz, Gtn., p. 61.
3. Barton, p. 317.
3a. See Riem, Die Sintflut in
Sage und Wissenscbaft.
4. Lenormant, Les orzgines de
J'bistoire d'apes la Bible; see
Boulton, p. 60; Parsons, p. 6 ; Al-
bright, Stone Age, p. 128.
5. See Chronology, note 48.
6. Finegan, p. 24; Barton, p.
40ff; Woolley, Abrahm, p. 170;
Durant, p. 119.
7. Barton, p. 317.
8. Cuvier, p. 108 quoting
Varro and Censorinus, de Die
Natalis chap. 21.
9. Barsiiai, p. 176; Marcus,
Chronol., p. 5; Cuvier, p. 134.
10. Parsons, p. 31.
11. Cuvier, p. 117.
12. Barton, p. 66.
13. Cuvier, p. 135.
14. Barsilai, 11, p. 3; See Bar-
ton, pp. 61, 58.
15. Barton, p. 39.
16. Barton, p. 44.
17. Babli Sebahim, 113b.
18. Gen. 8:4.
19. Medrarh Raba, I, 32, V, 3;
Babli Sebahim, 113a; Ramban,
Gen. 8 : l l .
20. Babli, Nida, 61a.
21. Albflgfit, Stone Age, p.
119.
22. New York Times, June 5,
1945.
23. Kittel, I p. 116.
24. Barton, p. 331.
25. Cuvier, p. 110.
 28. Barton, p. 335.
29. Woolley, Abrabam, p. 175.
30. Barton, p. 327; Bodton, p.
62; see Hertz, p. 104.
31. Barton, p. 331; Hertz, p.
104; Woolley, p. 169ff.
32. Woolley, p. 169.
33. Barton, p. 331; Hertz, p.
105.
34. Boulton, p. 65; Barton, p.
331.
35. See Woolley, Abraham, p.
178; Gunkel, see Hertz, p. 105.
36. See Appendix note 66.
37. Barton, p. 335.
38. Barton, pp. 335, 336; see
Gen. 8:21.
39. Barton, p. 336.
40. See Hertz, p. 108 ff.
40a. A comprehensive survey is
given by Riehm, Die Sintfl~t in
Sage rrnd Wi~senscbaft.
41. Parsons, pp. 6, 30; Cuvier,
p. 117.
42. Parsons, p. 7.
43. Parsons, p. 45.
44. Cuvier, p. 134.
45. Parsons, p. 6.
46. H. L. Meyer, "Die Bw#ckr
hTach Asien."
47. Ant., I, 3, 5 ; see also Cu-
vier, p. 132.
48. Ant., I, 3, 6.
49. Parsons, p. 6.
50. Cuvier, p. 110 ff.
51. Gm. 9 : l l ; This trait was
preserved in the Babylonian tra-
dition; see Barton, pp. 331, 335.
52. Bodton, p. 39.
53. Bodton, p. 41.
54. Kittel, I, p. 288; Albright,
Archaeology and Religion, p. 72.
55. Parsons, p. 67; Finegan,
p. 92.
56. Gen. 14:18.
57. Kittel, I p. 128.
58. Kittel, I p. 210; Albright,
Stone Age, p. 130; Breasted,
Cony., p. 280.
59. See Chapter 11, 4.
60. Gen. 9:6; Hertz, p. 80.
61. Gen. 1:29.
62. Gen. 7:2; 8:20; S. R.
Hirsch, Gen. 7:2.
63. Medrah Raba, I, 34; S. R.
Hirsch, Gen. 8:22.
64. Ley, p. 113 ff.
65. See Chapter 111, 4, 11.
66. Gen. 9:20.
67. Rashi, Gen. 5:29; Medrajh
&bu, I, 25.
68. Medrarh Raba, I, 36.
69. Parsons, p. 45.
70. Durant, p. 644.
THE SONS O F NOAH AND
THEIR DESCENDANTS
1 . Gen. 9:26ff.
2. Parsons, p. 30.
3. Iliad, 8:479.
4. Hertz, Gen. 10:6, The
name of the capital of the second
nome of Lower Egypt originally 21. Josephus, Ant. IX, 10.
was Hm. (Barton, Origins, p. 22. Encyclop. Britannica, S.V.
184). Alphabet p. 683.
5 . Gen. 6:4; Bar~ilai, 182; 23. Hertz, Gen. 10:4.
Marcus, Chronol., p. 25. 24. Pauly Wissowa, S.V. Kition;
6. Gen. 14:5ff; W t . 2:lO ff. Josephus, Ant. I, 6, 1.
7. Hertz, Gen. 10. 25. Jeremiah 2:lO; Ezekiel
8. Gen. 10:8; see a i j a Raba, 27:6; Josephus, 1.c.; Pauly Wis-
A'egaim, II, 1. sowa, 1.c.; Barton, p. 293; Hom-
9. Babli, Megilla, 6b; Joma, mel, Ethnologie, p. 56.
10a; Many identify Gomer with 26. Hertz, Gen. 10:4.
the Cirnmerians but even then 27. Kittel, I p. 358; Breasted,
there may be a connection with History of Egypt, p. 424; Myres,
people who lived in Germany (See 208; Nolte, p. 36.
Pauly Wissowa, S.V. Kimmerier, 27a. CAH p. 418.
pp. 398, 431).
28. Myres, p. 158.
10. Germania, Chapter I, p.
29. Ezekiel 38:l; The custom-
313.
11. Germania, Chapter I, 2, p.
ary translation: "the chief prince
312.
of Meschech and Tubal" is incom-
1 2 . Gen. 10:3.
patible with the Neginoth (Barsi-
13. 51:27. 14 p. 92) which show clearly
14. Rashi, Deut. 3:9; Rashi.
that "Rosh" is a proper name. The
Baba M e z h , 73b (Reitwagen). correct translation, therefore, is:
1 5 . Negaim, 11, 1 ; see Elija "prince of Rosh, Meschech and
Rdba. Tubal."
16. Bdrsilai, 92. The fact that "Rosh" probably
17. Hertz, Gen. 10:4; Nolte, means the Russians is of utmost
p. 36. importance for our time. It implies
17a. Nolte, 12ff. that the campaign depicted in the
17b. See Hornrnel, Etbnologie, prophecy of Ezekiel (Chapter 38)
p. 63 ff. which Gog will undertake against
18. Breasted, Conquest, p. 462; Palestine supported by armies from
History of Egypt, p. 467; Myres, Persia, Ethiopia, Lybia, and Ger-
p. 206. many (Gomer) would refer to
19. Hertz, Gen. 10:4. the rulers of the Russians.
20. Breasted, Conquest, p. 460. 30. See Barsilai, p. '92.
 31. Parsons, p. 10; airsilk, p. 338; Parsons, p. 9; Bur~ilk,
p. 92. pp. 133, 189, 254.
32. Gen. 10:7. 48. Deut 2:23; Jerem 47.4;
3 3 . Barsilk, 166. Amos 9:7.
34. Gen. 10:28 ff. 49. Myres, 170f.
35. Albright, the Location, p. 50. Myres, p. 204.
19; Barton, origin^, p. 1. 51. Myres, p. 169.
36. Barton, p. 24; Hertz, Gen. 51a. Gen., 10:14.
10:6. 51b. Pauly-Wissowa, S.V. Chal-
37. See Nahum 3 9 . kis.
39. Hertz, Gen. 10:12; The 51c. Encyclop, Britannica, S.V.
first nome of Lower Egypt was Alphabet p. 681.
Men-nofer, later called Memphis 52. Breasted, Hist. of Egypt,
(Hebrew qlf) Its god was p. 26; see Nahum 3:9.
Ptah (nn~)(Barton, origin^, 53. Albright, The Location, p.
p. 183). There is a possibility that 20; Barton, Origins, p. 1.
the name of Pharaoh Merneptah 54. Josephus, Ant. 1, 6, 2.
goes back to the word naphtuhim 55. 3:9.
(See Joshua 15:9; 18:15). 56. The tradition of the Phoe-
40. Isaiah 11:11. nicians was that they came from
the region of the Persian Gulf.
41. See Gen. 10:19 in connec-
tion with Gen 21:22; 26; Deut (Durant, p. 294; Herodotus 11,
44) Their main city representing
2:23.
the whole land throughout Biblical
42. Breasted, Hi~toryof Egypt,
times was Tyre which superseded
p. 512; The prophet Zephaniah the older capital Sidon at about
calls them people of Crete (2:5) ; 1100 B.C.E. It is highly significant
See also Jerem. 47:4; Amos 9:7
that in the Torah onIy Sidon is
where Crete is called Caphtor.
mentioned but never Tyre (Bm-
4 3 Albright, Stone Age, p. silai, p. 248; Jampel, p. 29; Du-
163. rant, p. 294).
44. Kittel, I, 152; Nolte, p. 24; 57. Nolte, p. 32; They used
Breasted, Hist. of Egypt, pp. 261, Sumerian (Hamitic) cuneiform
319; See Ramban, Deut 2:23. script with its Sumerian meanings
45. Barton, p. 156. and phonetic values, (Waddell,
46. Kittel, I, 153. Tower, p. 5).
47. Breasted, Hist. of Egypt, 58. Barton, p. 83.
 59. Albright, Universal Jewish Annual Vol. I 1924 p. 115-19.
Encydop, s.v. Hittites. 80. Nolte, p. 32.
60. Barton, p. 80. 81. Breasted, Conq., p. 258.
61. Barton, p. 84. 82. Breasted, p. 260; Kittel, I,
63. Hertz, Gen. 10:15. 262; Nolte, p. 36.
Barton, p. 92. 83. Enqdop. Britannia, S.V.
64. Gen. 23:j; 23:lO; 26:34; Alphabet p. 681.
Barton, p. 92 84. Joshua 11:3; Judges 3:3.
65. Barton, p. 92. 85. Gen. 34:2.
66. Barton, p. 77. 86. Joshua 9:7; 11:19.
67. Joshua 1 :4; see also Gen. 87. See Rumban, Deut 2:23;
15:18. Joshua 13:3; Babli, Hulin, 60b.
68. 1 Kings 10:29; 2 Kings 88. 49:12.
7:6; Albright, 1.c. 89. Barton, p. 80.
69. Barton, p. 75 90. Albright, Stone Age, p. 5.
69. Barton, p. 75. 91. Duraat, p. 642.
70. Judges 9:10, 11. 91a. Durant, p. 645.
71. Barsilai, p. 185. 92. Parsons, p. 87; Nolte, pp.
72. Breasted, Conq., pp. 120, 6, 28.
143. 93. Isaiah 37:13; Hertz, Gen.
73. See Amos 2:9; Univers. 10:18.
Jewish Encyclop., s.v. Amorites. 94. Num. 13:21; Judges 3:3;
74. Caspar Levias, Freidus Me- 2 Kings 14:28, 25:21.
morial volume, 1929 pp. 404-30; 94a. Gen. 10:21.
A. Sayce, Ancierzt Egypt, Sept. 95. Hertz, Gen. 10:22-24.
1924; see Univers. Jewish En- 96. Joshua 24:2.
cyclop s . ~ .Amorites. 97. Kittel, I, 293.
75. Talmud Bablj, Sanhedrin, 98. Gen. 14:13.
91a; Jerushalnri, Shebi~t, VI, 1 ; 99. Gen. 4 : 1 5 .
Ramkm, Hilkh, Mlokhim, VI, 5. 100. Gen. 39:14ff; Exod. 1:6;
76. See Fundamental Questions, 5:3; 10:3.
note 27. 101. Jirku, p. 13ff; BASOR 67
77. &rdai, p. 248; Univers. p. 28; Woolley, Abraham, p. 45
Jewish Encyclop., s.v. Girgoshi. ff; Kittel, I, 286 note 4, p. 292ff;
78. Barsilai, 107. Finegan, p. 56ff.
79. Breasted, Conq., p. 258; 102. Hertz, Gen. 10:22; Bm-
Taeubler, Hebrew Union College .rilai, 165.
 103. Breasted, Conq#est, p. CHAPTERVI.
153.
THE BUILDING O F THE
104. Sillem, pp. 3, 9. TOWER, CONFUSION
105. Hertz, Gen. 10:22; Bar- O F THE LANGUAGE
silk, 168; Josephus, I, 6, 4; See 1. See Barsilai, 168; Marcus,
Albright, Archueol. of Pd. p. 139, Chronology, 30ff. With reference
note 27. to Gen 10:25 the tradition assumes
106. See Chapter VIII. that the went took place at the
death of Peleg 340 years after the
107. Barsilai, pp. 166, 168;
Flood. There are, however, several
Parsons, p. 9; Hommel, Ancient
other explanations of this passage
Tradition, p. 96.
(Ibn Ezra: at the birth of Peleg,
108. Hertz, Gen. 10:22; Par- Heidenheim reduction of human
sons, p. 9; Durant, p. 289. age; Marcus: division of the
109. Breasted, Conq., p. 158 ff. Semites, Barsilai 168; Sayce quoted
1 lo. Albright, Stone Age, p. 6.
by Hertz: introduction of a sys-
tem of canals).
1 1 1. Breasted, Conq., p. 456. 2. Gen. lO:lO, 11:2, 14:l;
112. Breasted, 1.c. Only the Bible had preserved the
113. Albright, Stone Age, p.
memory of Sumerian culture. In
the tradition of mankind it was
145.
completely forgotten until the re-
114. Durant, p. 135 ff; Barsi- mains were brought to light in
lai, 186; Myres, pp. 55, 62; Fine- our time. (Durant, p. 118; Jam-
gan pp. 21, 75; Barton, p. 8; pel, p. 110). Waddell (The
Hommel, Der Babylonische Ur- Tower of Babel, p. 9) points out
sprung; Ethnologie, p. 110; Wad- that the ancient Sumerian name
dell, Egyptian Civilization, p. 173. for Babylon was Ti-Shenir or
115. Finegan, p. 75. Shenir (p. 2 ff, p. 9). He, fur-
thermore, quotes a bilingual text
116. see Chap. 111, 3, 11; Al-
in which the title of Babylon is
bright, Stone Age, pp. 101, 114,
'Shinir-Gal.' Shi-nir, obviously
120.
identical with the Biblical Shinar,
117. Parsons, p. 9; Waddell, means the 'Tower of Life' (p.
Mahers of Civilizat., p. XVI. 10). The name refers to Babylon
118. Parsons, p. 8 and to the land of Babylon (p. 9)
and, as Waddell puts it, was
uniquely preserved in Hebrew tra-
dition.
3 . Josephus, Ant. I, 4, 1.
4. Jampel, p. 110; Durant, p.
119.
5. Jampel, p. 112; The deity
contributed by the Sumerians was
the goddess NZNKHURSAG 'Lady
of the Mountain'; Enlil was the
'king of the mountains' (Barton,
Origins, 228ff).
6. Jampel, 112; Gressrnann,
Tower, p. 7.
8. Myres, p. 100.
9. Durant, p. 224.
10. Finegan, p. 43.
ll. a similar way as the
ziggurat of Ur. (Finegan, p. 43)
Babylon was the old sacred city
already at the time of Sargon when
he built Accad, his new capital
(Jampel, p. 114; see Chap. VII,
2, I ) .
12. Finegan, p. 17; Myres, p.
100; Hertz, 11:3.
13. Gen. 11:3 ff.
14. Gen. 1 1 9 .
15. The of this m-
tence is further elucidated by the
parallel in Gen 28:16, 17: "And
Jacob awakened out of his sleep,
and he said, Surely the Lord is in
this place; and I knew it not.
And he was afraid, and said, How
dreadful is this place, this is none sowa, 1.r.; Gressrnann, Tower, p.
other but the house of G'd, and 17.
this is the gate of heaven." There,
too, the manifestation of the pres-
ence of G'd induced Jacob to call
the place 'Gate of Heaven.' It is
very interesting that the Biblical
explanation of the name Babel
which was supposed to be 'con-
fusion' has been long discredited
by modem scholars (CAH. p. 505;
Gressman, Tower, p. 5; Waddell,
Tower, p. 7; Delitsch, Prtladies,
p. 213; &rant, p. 225). Not the
slightest attention was paid to the
second part of the Biblical ex-
planation which, by repetition, puts
the emphasis on the name of G'd.
Thus 533, indeed, is nothing
else than Bab-ilu 5-33, the
'Gate of Heaven.' (See also B ~ u l -
ton, p. 3; Barsilai, p. 144) Un-
fortunately, Hertz, Gen. 1 1 :9 calls
the Biblical explanation an in-
stance of popular etymology.
16. See Chap. IV, 3, I.
16a. New YorR Times, Jan. 5 ,
1948.
17. Finegan, p. 53; see Gress-
mann, Tower, p. 6; CAH, p. 505.
18. Barton, p. 303.
19. k chap. 111, 3, note 38.
20. Barton, p. 44.
21. See Pauly W' ~ssowa, S.V.
Byb1os.
22 Nolte, p. 29.
23. Durant, p. 295; Pauly Wis-
 24. See Chap. V, 5, note 114 ff.
25. Finegan, 75; Durant, 136.
26. Durant, p. 148;Gressmann,
Tower, p. 15 ff.
26a. Arthur Upham Pope, N e w
York Times, April 8, 1947.
26b. Durant, p. 255.
26c. N e w York Times, March
28, 1947.
27. Parsons, p. 8.
28. Ham burger Fremdenblatt,
May 9, 1927 (H. L. Meyer, Dfe
Bruecke nach Asien) .
29. Gen 10:2-4.There are in-
dications that the account is of
Tartar Mongolian origin. (See
Hamburger Fremdenbl. I.c.) This
would confirm the assumption that
the Mongols descended from
Japhet: see Chap. V, 2, 2.
30. Ant., I, 4.
31. Parsons, p. 8.
32. Gen. 11:l.
33. See Chap. 11, 2, note 19.
34. See chapter 11, note 19;
Barsilai, p. 15.
34a. See Ibn Ezra.
35. Durant, p. 771; Barsilai,
p. 38.
36. Durant, p. 773.
37. Barsilai, p. 39; on this fun-
damental idea is based the Com-
mentary of S. R. Hirsch.
38. Enzyclop. Judaica 5.v. 'He-
braiscbe Sprache' p. 1035.
39. Bartons, Origins, p. 66 ff;
Barsilai, p. 39.
40. Bnrlrilai, p. 39; Myres, p.
92
41. Barton, Origzus, p. 25.
42. See the fundamental treatise
of Friedrich Delitzsch, (Stzrdzeu
zreber Indogermanisch - Semitische
Wurzelverwandtsch.zf,) . After a
very instructive survey of the works
of earlier authors, sharing his
opinion that a connection exists
between the Semitic and Indo
European languages (Ewald, Ohls-
hausen, Lassen, Lepsius, Schwartze,
Benfey, Bunsen, Max MueUer,
Steinthal, Rudolf v. Raumer), he
develops the foundation for a
really scientific approach to the
whole question. See also Grote-
meyer and Uppenkamp. On the
other hand. see Barton, O,rigi?z~,p.
25 who categorically denies the
existence of such connection or
the possibility of proving it.
43. Groterneyer, p. 4.
44. Barsilai, 46; Delitzsch, p. 5.
45. Barsilai, 41.
46. I.c.
47. Kittel, I, p. 43.
48. Barsilai, 50.
50. Kittel, I, p. 43;Barsilui, 48.
51. Kittel, I. p. 43.
52. Barsilai, 48.
53. 1.c.
54. Barsilai, 4 9 .
55. 1.c.
56. Barsilai, 56.
57. 1.c.
 58. 1.c. 4. Jampel, p. 115.
59. Bcirrilai, 50. 5. Stone Age, p. 107.
60. Barsilai, 48; Uppenkamp, 6. Durant, p. 118; Barton.
4 , 5. Origins, p. 35 A.
61. See Barsilai, 42. 7. Jampel, p. 11.
62. Grotemeyer, 11. 8. Barton, Origins, p. 39.
63. 1.c. 9. Durant, p. 119.
63a. Delitzsch, p. 5. 10. See Chap. V note 88 seq.
( 5 . Uppenkamp, 5. The most important of the earliest
65. Grotemeyer, 6. Chinese provinces was Chin or
66 Barsilai, 30. Tsin which established a unified
67. Uppenkamp, 9. empire and gave to China its name
68. Uppenkarnp, 5, 8. (Durant p. 645).
69. Grotemeyer, 6. 11. ~ u r a n t ,p. 119; Myres, 91
70. 1.c. ff.
71 . Barsilai, 162; Uppenkamp, 12. Barton, Origins, p. 37.
4. 13. Barton, Origins, p. 36ff.
72. Uppenkamp, 4; Delitzsch, 14. Gen. 9:22 ff.
p. 5. 15. Ginzberg, Vol. v note 17
72a. Delitzsch, p. 47. (Noah 15-17).
73. See Rashi, Deut. 3:9. 16. Ginzberg, 1.c. Noah, 67-70
74. Barsilai, 42. note 67.
75. Uppenkamp, 9. 17. As Langdon, p. 515, points
76. Uppenkamp, 4. out, the Biblical rendering Ellasar
77. Delitzsch, p. 5. has proved to be the correct one
78. Delitzsch, p. 54. being directly based on the Su-
79. Delitzsch, p. 55. rnerian original. The Babylonian
Larsa is a distortion. Of course the
CHAPTERVII Babylonian form was generally ac-
cepted. Now it has to be admitted
POSTDILWIAL "that something was wrong about
CIVILIZATION our knowledge concerning the his-
1. Barton, p. 41, p. 50; Bar- tory of the word."
ton, Origins, p. 66; Woolley, Abr., 18. Talmud Babli, Joma, 1Oa.
p. 170. 19. Durant, p. 118.
2. Barton, p. 61 ff. 20. Barton, Origins, p. 36.
3. Barton, Origins, pp. 59, 69. 21. Barton, Origins, pp. 36, 67.
 22. Barton, Origins, pp. 64, 68. the time of the dynasty of Lana
23. Barton, Origins, p. 63.
171.
24. Durant, p. 120; Childe, p.
171
25. Baor, 67 p. 26.
26. Durant, pp. 146, 645.
27. Durant, p. 126; See Nu-
meri 24:17 where Bileam, the
Mesopotamian, uses the word
PAATE (Patesi) for the petty
kings of M d .
28. Myres, p. 98.
29. Durant, p. 127; Childe, p.
202.
30. Durant, p. 129.
31. Durant, p. 131.
32. See Chap. I11 note 77.
33. Durant, p. 125.
34. Durant, pp. 123, 127; See
Langdon, "the Sumerian Law
Code."
35. World Telegram, April 14,
1947; See Appendix.
36. Finegan, p. 31.
37. Barton, pp. 58, 60.
38. See Barton, pp. 59, 61;
Barsikli, 11, p. 3; The totd of the
dynasty of Lana backwards from
the 12th year of the successor of
Hammurabi (1664) is only 289
(Barton, p. 59). Its beginning
falls, therefore, in the year I953
B.C.E. A chronological list of the
kings of +Ur and Nisin has 117
years for the first and 225 years for
the latter, which were parallel to
(Barton, p. 59) As the dynasty of
Nisin rose upon the ruins of the
kingdom of Ur, the Iatter started
at about 2070 B.C.E. (1953
plus 117). A mathematical cal-
culation has lowered the beginning
of the dynasty of Babylon, previ-
ously assumed to be 2400, to the
year 2151 (Barton, p. 58). The
first and second dynasties must
have overlapped, one ruling in the
north, the other in the south.
(Barton, p. 58).
39. Barton, p. 317; Finegan.
p. 25; Jampel, p. 112.
40. Gen. 10:8; Jampel, pp.
112, 119; Albright, "the Location
of the Garden of Eden" p. 19.
41. Kittel, I p. 46; Finegan,
p. 33.
42. Gen. 5:22; 4:18.
43. Barsilai, 168.
44. New Yor& Times, March
2, 1947.
45. CAH. 403; Durant, p.
121 %.
46. CAH, p. 404.
47. CAH, p. 407.
48. See note 18; Jampel, 114;
Barton, Origins, p. 64.
49. CAH, p. 414.
50. Finegan, p. 39.
51. Breasted, Conq., p. 137;
Kittel, I p. 51.
52. Childe, p. 197; Barton, p.
66; Stone Age, p. 107 %.
 53. Barton, LC. 62. See Fundamental Questions,
54. &.I 10:8-12. note 36 ff.
55. CAH, p. 412. 63. Smith, Genesis, p. 194; Sil-
56. In a similar way the He- lem, p. 28; Delitzsch, Puradies, p.
brew rendering of the name of 53 ff; Hommel, Ancient Tradition,
Hammurabi, Amrpl, has an addi- p. 39.
tional L which probably means 'el' 64. Sillem, p. 26; Durant, p.
the name of G'd (Boulton, p. 72; 230.
see however note 68) ; Bbl mean- 65. Sillem, p. 29.
ing Bab-L, Gate of G'd see Chap. 66. Barton, p. 64; Durant, 123.
VI note 15. 67. Finegan, pp. 43, 45.
57. See note 48. 68. Kittel, I, p. 48; Jarnpel,
58. CAH, p. 414; Bur~ikzi, p. p. 26; Homrnel, Ethnologic p.
166. 90; Hommel, Atrcienr Tradition,
59. Finegan, p. 39. pp. 41, 56, 68. The original form
60. See Jampel, p. 112; Bar~i- of the name Hammurabi was
la;, p. 166; Albright, "Location 'Ammi-rabi.' The variants were
of the Garden of Eden" p. 19. merely the results of attempts to
61. Hertz, Gen 10:12; Jonah give a Babylonian aspect to the
3:3; Heidenheim Gen 3:3; Micah name of the greatest of the Baby-
5:5 calls Assyria "the land of lonian kings (1.c. p. 105). The
Nimrod." In the Assyrian city element 'rabi' was replaced by the
Calah, one of those founded by Babylonian 'rapashtu' or 'rapaltu'
Nimrod, Ninurta or Nimurta (1.c. p. 106). This explains the
whose name'is identical with Nim- Biblical form of the name 'Am-
rod was especially honoured as raphel,' which could only occur in
the god of battle and hunt. This a cuneiform text dating from the
god became the national hero of time of the Harnmurabi dynasty
Assyria though originally he was itself. (1.c. p. 192).
a Sumerian god. (Gressmann, 69. Kittel, I, p. 61.
Tower, p. 26) This reflects the 70. Kittel, I, pp. 48, 62; Jam-
historical events reported in the pel, p. 27.
Bible in the usual mythological 71. Stone Age, pp. 109, 113.
manner. Naram-Sin was already 72. Myres, p. 114.
given the rank of deity by the in- 73. Stone Age, p. 110; Fine-
scriptions of his own time (CAH. gan, pp. 46, 47; Kittel, I, pp. 63,
p. 413). 65.
 74. Kittel, I, p. 66. (Woolley, Abraham, p. 638) is
75. Kittel, I, p. 67. completely unfounded. Hommel,
76. Finegan, p. 47. Ancient Tradition, p. 210 points
77. Finegan, p. 50. out that the region of the lower
78. Stone Age, p. 112. Euphrates was known as the land
of Kaldu. Originally the name
CHAPTERVIII was Kashdu, then (as early as the
second millennium B.C.E.) Kasdu,
THE POSTDILWIAN and, finally (from the ninth cen-
PATRIARCHS tury onwards), Kaldu. The He-
1. Stone Age, p. 107. brew Kashdim thus has preserved
2. Joshua 24:2. the original form. (See also Hom-
3. Gen. 11:lO-32. ~nel, Ethnologic, p. 244 ff; De-
4. Albright, Arch. confronts, litzsch, Paradies, p. 55; on the
p. 185; Arch. of Pal., p. 1378; other hand see Waddell, Tower,
Finegan, p. 47. P 8).
5. Albright, Arch. of Pal., p. 11. Albright, Postdiluvian Patr.,
139; Stone Age, p. 179. p. 392; Woolley, Abraham, p. 48
6. Gen. 11:lO. ff, Boehl, p. 28.
7. Albright, Postdiluvian Patr., 12. Kittel, I pp. 292, 286; It
p. 388. is very interesting that the tradi-
8. Barton, p. 44; Albright, tion (Sefer Hajahm) depicts Ter-
Arch. of Pal., p. 139; See how- ah as a leading general; See Heid-
ever Hommel, Ancient Tradition, enheim, Gen. 11:27.
p. 295. 12a. Woolley, Abraham, pp.
9. Cf. Ur of the Casdim; See 45, 47.
Hertz, Gen. 10:22 quoting Sayce; 13. Albright, Postdiluvian Patr.,
The name of one of the descend- p. 389; Barsilai, 168.
ants of Nahor was Chesed, Gen. 14. See Chapter VII 1, note 42.
22:22; See Heidenheim, Gen. 15. Rashi, Gen. 25:27.
11:28. 16. See Chapter V, note 101.
lo. Albright, Arch. of Pal., 17. Stone Age, p. 182; BASOR
page, 139 note 27; Josephus Ant. 67 p. 28.
I, 6, 4; Barsilai, 152, 168; See 18. Ezekiel, 1:3; 3:15, 23;
also Chapter V note 105; The 10:15, 22; 2 Kings 17:6; 18:ll;
contention that the n&me 'Ur of I Chron 5:26; See, however, De-
the Casdim' is an anachronism litzsch, Paradies, p. 184 pointing
 out that Chabor and Kebar are
not identical.
19. Albright, Arch. of Pal., p.
139 note 29; Postdiluuian Patri-
archs, p. 387.
20. Gen. 10:25; see Hertz,
ibid; see chapter VI note 1; Deut.
3223.
21. Barsilai, 138, 160.
22. Bursilai, 168.
23. Stone Age, p. 179; Postdi-
luuia~z Patriarchs. p. 388 (RAI-
LU) .
24. Albright, Arch of Pal., p.
139;BASOR 67 p. 27; Stone Age,
p. 179.
25. BASOR 67 p. 27; Albright,
Post&lt/uian Patriarchs, p. 385.
26. Gen. 24:lO.
27. Stone Age, p. 179.
28. Albright, Postdiluuian Pa-
triarchs, p. 386.
29. 1.c. p. 392 ff.
30. Finegan, p. 61; see also
Woolley, Abraham, pp. 47, 48 ff.
31. Ramban, Gen. 11:28, 12:l;
Gen. 24:4, 10.
32. Gen. 11:28. .
33. See note 9.
34. See note 12.
34a. Babli, Baba Batbra, 91.
34b. Jampel, p. 34 8.
34c. Gen. 11 :29; 22:20.
34d. Jampel, p. 35.
35, See: The Ercavations of Ur
and the Hebrew Records, by C .
Leonard Woolley, 1929.
36. Woolley, Abraham, p. 79;
Boulton, p. 68.
37. cf Chapter VI note 26 ff.
38. Wooliey, Abraham, p. 80
ff; see chapter VI note 6.
39. Woolley, ibid. p. 108.
40. These were the teraphim
mentioned at the time of Laban
Gen. 31:53;Woolley, pp. 211 ff,
231, 237.
41. Woolley, ibid. p. 192 ff.
42. The oldest source of these
tales which have been preserved
in the Jewish tradition is the
apocryphical Book of Jubilees
Woolley ibid, p. 109.
45. See note 12.
46. Woolley, ibid. p. 102 ff.
47. Breasted, Conq., p. 150.
48. Breasted, Conq., p. 192;
see note 97 ff; Fundamental Ques-
tions, note 5.
49. Gen. 23:16; cf Woolley,
Abr., p. 123 ff.
50. Woolley, Abr., p. 135 ff.
51. Gen. 11:31.
52. Hertz, Gen. 11:31.
53. Woolley, A h . , p. 1%;
Boulton, p. 69.
54. Gen. 11:32.
5 5. See Ramban.
56. Albright, Arch. and the
Religion, p. 59; Woolley, A h . ,
p. 196; See now Iewixh Quarterly
Reuiew, 1947 p. 285.
57. Gen. 9:27.
58. Gm. 25:22; see Hertz.
Leonard Woolley, 1929.
59. Gen. 25:27; see Rashi.
60. See Gen. 26:5.
61. See appendix on 'the Bible
and the Ancient Law Codes'; Hom-
mel, Ancient Tradition, p. 290,
points out that the Semites--and
more particularly the Western
Semites-had from the beginning
a much purer conception of the
deity than was possessed by any
of the other races of antiquity,
such as Sumerians or Aryans, for
instance.
62. Stone Age, p. 180 ff;
Woolley, Abr., pp. 165 ff, 177,
183.
63. See chapter VI note 37.
64. About the alphabet see the
next paragraph.
65. See Hommel, Ancient Tru-
dition, p. 312; Delitzsch, Puru-
dies, p, 86; see Chapter I1 notes
42-51; Bursilk, p. 265.
66. Encyclopedia Britannia, s.v.
Alphabet p. 680.
67. Ladder of Progress, p. 104;
Nevertheless many modern schol-
ars look in either one of these di-
rections for the source of the al-
phabet; See Encgclop. Britannia,
I.c.
68. Ladder of Progress, p. 107;
Finegan, p. 127; According to
most recent reports (New York
Times, Jan. 22, 1948) these in-
scriptions have been deciphered by
W . Albright, who dates them 300
years later. He found that the
cuneiform inscriptions are of
Canaanite origin and contain twen-
ty-eight characters, all consonants.
It thus would seem that this scrip-
ture is a similar mixture of cunei-
form and alphabetic writing as
that of Ras Shamra, Ugarit. See
Univers. Jewish Enqclop. s.v. 'Ras
Shamra Inscription' Vol. 9 p. 77.
69. Barton, p. 129 ff.
70. Prof. Spengling, see Ludder
of Progress, p. 112; Finegan, 127.
71. Gardiner, see Ladder, p.
112.
72. See Bursilai, p. 116; Gas-
ter, p. 8 ff; Universal Jewish En-
cydop., s . ~ .alphabet, p. 198.
73. Proverbs, 14:4.
73a. Proverbs, 22 :25; Job,
1523; 33:33; 3 5 : l l .
74. See chapter 11 note 17
75.
,im ,n>t ,m , m t ,337 ,nHt
,qnt , n z t , m t ,317 ,TI? ,my
,p'n ,q57 ,351 ,n>t ,HX ,3n7
.HWt ,717 .137 ,337 ,3D7
76. Bursib 25, 116.
77. IlH the ear, the point of
the head, 331 the tail, this,
the outstanding thing, lil! the
bright, optically outstanding, 1-1
shine, brilliance, the glit-
tering metal, gold, 3131 the
stinging fly, n>r kill, slaughter,
f'f the piercing weapon, l b l
to cut, pyr the piercing cry,
nir to shine, to beam.
 78. Barsilai, 18, 105. 88. B~rsilai,p. 103.
79. 89. Barsilai, pp. 93ff, 103, 135,
,y4 ,113 ,an'/ , m y ,:nS ,nu? 168; Marcus, Chronologie, p. 30;
, w ~ i,y'i ,an;! ,7nj ,mi ,yij Recently other scholars came to
.w33 ,333 ,op3 ,np3 ,by7 ,mj the same belief that the Hebrew
79a. Cf. the German song: alphabet is the oldest known. See
"Das Wandern ist des Muellers Durant, p. 303; About the mean-
Lust, Vom Wasser haben wir's ing of the tradition that the shape
gelemt etc." of the written characters and the
80. Barton, Origins, p. 62; writing were created on the eve of
Barsilai, p. 117. Sabbath in the twilight (Aboth
81. V, 8 ) see Barsilai, p. I quoting
,laD ,nnD ,nD ,ylD ,:rD ,;itD R. Juda Hanassi ben Barsilai of
, m ~,: ~ S ,EZ ~ D,a% ,njc ,ljb Barcelona.
,mP, 8 1 D , f l C ,n3D , Y X D ,Dub 90. Ladder of Progress, p. 102.
, a m ,?WD , i i ~ , 3 1 ~, y i ~, y i ~ 91. Zbid. p. 103.
.inD ,;-:ED 93. Encyclopedia Britannia, s.v.
82. Barsilk, p. 27; cf caput, Alphabet, p. 683; atrsilai, p.
capital, chief, Kopf. l03ff.
83. For its use as letter of mo- 94. Encyclopedia Britannica, p.
tion see chapter I1 note 18. 683.
84. Barsilk, p. 117. 95. Breasted, Conq., p. 274.
85. Bavsilai, p. 99; These facts 96. Barsilai, p. 134.
render impossible the assumption 97. See Fundamental Questions,
that the alphabet was deviced by note 6.
mine workers or, as Gaster (p. 9) 98. See notes 46, 47.
suggests, by the Israelites during 99. Stone Age, p. -192; Kittel,
their sojourn in the desert. I p. 156, 11 p. 54; Barton, pp.
86. The following is suggested. 109, 134.
It is as if the nursery rhymes by
APPENDIX: THE BIBLE AND
which children were taught the
THE ANCIENT LAW CODES
alphabet had been standardized so
that 'a' were called 'apple', 'b' 1. Finegan, p. 48ff; Woolley,
'bat' and 'c' 'cat' and a pichue of Abraham, p. 179.
each formed the respective letter. 2. Woolley, Abr. p. 179; Kit-
(Lzdder of Progress, p. 111). tel, 11 p. 51.
87. See Barsilai, 100, 135, 168. 3. Woolley, p. 181 ff.
 4. Albright, Arch. and the Re-
ligion, p. 102.
5. Albright, 1.c. p. 94.
6. Stone Age, p. 179; Al-
bright, Arch. and the Religion, p.
68 ff.
7. See this Appendix 8, IV.
8. Kittel, I1 p. 50ff; Albrecht
Alt, p. 26 who confesses however
that the way this acceptance of
law may have taken place is ut-
terly obscure.
9. Albright, Stone Age, p.
204; "Archaeol. confronts" p.
187ff; Arch. and the Religion, p.
3 1 ; Albright, Journal of Biblical
Id.,1936 pp. 164 ff. It is inter-
esting to note that Albright (Arch.
of Pal. p. 140) considers it most
unlikely that the Hebrews would
have borrowed such stories as that
of the Flood from their neigh-
bors after their settlement in Pal-
estine. It is hard to understand
why then this should have hap-
pened with their laws. See also
Stone Age, pp. 181 and 204.
lo. Woolley, Abr., p. 183.
11. Finegan, p. 49 ff; Alt, p.
13.
12. Woolley, Abr., p. 186.
13. Modem scholars neglected
this tradition completely in conse-
quence of their wrong and preju-
diced attitude towards Talmudical
sources. (see Appendix 8, IV).
14. See author's Noachidisches
U r ~ e r b t ; Talmud Babli, Sanhedrin
56b; Ramhanz, Hilkhaus Mlokhim,
IX, X.
15. Babli, Sanhedrin, 56a; Ram-
barn, 1.c. X, 6; Hilkhaus Kilaim,
I, 6; Hertz, Gen. 9:7
16. Rambam, Hilkhaus Mlok-
him, IX, 14
17. Nahmanides, Gen. 34:13
18. Rashi, Sanhedrin, 59a
19. See Nahmanides, Gen.
34:13
20. See Sefer Hahinukh, 416
21. The group order seems
rather perplexing as the natural
one would be as the R m b a m has
it (Hilkhaus Mlokhim, 9) Idola-
try, Blasphemy, Bloodshed, Incest
and Adultery, Robbery, Eating of
flesh of a living creature, DINIM
22. Durant, p. 220
23. Koschaker, p. 2
24. Durant, pp. 123, 127;
CAH. I pp. 435, 461
25. Durant, p. 135
26. N. Y. World Telegram,
April 15, 1947; June 19, 1947
27. Mueller, p. 242
28. Koshaker, p. 6. The as-
sumption of Durant (p. 220) that
the Code is arranged 'almost sci-
entifically' under the headings of
Personal Property, Real Estate,
Trade and Business, the Family,
Injuries and Labor is not in accord
with the facts.
29. Mueller, p. 189
 30. Barton, p. 378 ff
31. Koshaker, pp. 61-66
32. Mueller, p. 197
33. Mueller, p. 200
34. This explanation is sup-
ported by the fact that in the
Assyrian laws (see G of this Ap-
pendix first group) the crime of
Blasphemy has been retained and
IS dealt with in connection with
that of stealing in a temple. See
note 44
35. See 7 of this Appendix
36. Barton, p. 407 ff
37. KILAIM, see note 15
38. See note 15 ; Babli, San-
hedrin, 56b, 59. The Hittite law:
A free man kills a serpent and
speaks the name of another is a
very interesting example for the
Hober Haber of the Bible. See
Deut. 18:lO-12; S. R. Hirsch,
;bid; Babli, Sanhedrin, 65a
39. 187, 188, 189, 200
40. Of special interest is the
Levirate law as contained in 193
It is obviously very close to that
presupposed in the Bible in the
story of Juda and Tamar. (Gen.
38)
41. h o d u s 21-23
42. See also Alt, pp. 12, 13
42a. See Das Noachid. Lrr-
recht, p. 46
43. Barton, p. 427 ff
44. See note 34
45. see nok 15
46. Exod. 23:l-3, 6-8; Deut.
19:16
47. Langdon, "The Sumerian
Law Code," p. 490 ff
48. Langdon, pp. 495, 502
49. See Hamrnurabi 1-4, Bar-
ton, p. 378 ff; See also Langdon,
p. 509
50. Mueller, p. 176; "Noachid,
Urrechf" p. 9
51. b o d . 22:27
52. See note 44
53. Exod. 22:19.
54. Tdrnud Babli, Baba &ma,
35.
55. See note 34.
56. Ex 22:15-18;See note 42
57. Levit, 20:10 ff; Deut.
22 :13; See Finegan, p. 49 ff; Alt,
p. 13; The separation of these
laws is easily explained by the fact
that this group of the Noahidic
Laws was fundamentally changed
by the Torah. The Book of the
Covenant repeats the ancient laws
as far as only minor alterations of
the formulation were necessary. As
the group of sexual crimes was
changed in its whole structure its
main body is omitted to be dealt
with in the proper places, espe-
cially Lev. 20:10 ff. Even there,
however, the differentiation of pun-
ishment reveals the connection
with the Noghidic Laws. Obvi-
ously those ctiws which are pun-
ished by the death penalty had
 already belonged to the Noahidic
Laws (See S. R. Hirsch Lev.
209).
58. The same distinction is
contained in the Assyrian Laws 1 1
"If a man's wife is going along
the highway and a man seizes her
. . , she does not consent, she
defends herself, he is strong, he
rapes her . . . he shall kill the
man; the woman was not to
blame" and 12 "If the wife of a
man goes from her house unto a
man and goes to a place where a
man lives and he has intercourse
with her, and knows she is the
wife of a man they shall kill both
the man and the woman" This in-
dicates that this legal distinction
was already part of the Noahidic
Laws (see Noarhid. Ulvecht pp.
28ff, 58; Mueller, p. 117 stating
the same with regard to the Ham-
murabi Code) In the Bible it
found its place in Deut. in con-
nection with the other family dis-
putes which prior to the Sinaitic
Laws were handled by the puter
familiar, the husband or the fam-
ily and now turned over to the
courts (See Noachid. Uwecht, 1.c.).
59. See note 39; See 4. Hit-
tite Laws, 187-188, 191, 198, 200.
5921. The laws concerning in-
jury to pregnant women are also
contained in the Sumerian Law
preceding the Code of Hammurabi
(18, 1 9 ) . Again the Code is much
more explicit and comprehensive.
(Langdon pp. 496, 508, 509). See
also the Assyrian Laws, 20, 50,
23).
60. The law concerning theft
of a penon (Ex 21 :16) does of
course not belong to the group
Bloodshed but headed originally
the group Theft. In the original
Law punishment for all kinds of
theft was death. This was changed
in the Bible, and theft of a person
was the only case for which it was
retained. Therefore it was trans-
ferred to the Bloodshed group
where capital punishment still pre-
vailed. (See Noachid. Urrecht, p.
48).
61. Mueller, pp. 113, 181;
Koschaker, pp. 5 5 , 58, 59. The
laws concerning the responsibility
of shepherds are in their right
place in this group where they
are placed in the Bible and in the
Hittite laws. In the Code of Ham-
murabi they were transferred to
the Bloodshed group to be linked
with the laws about the goring
ox. They are already contained in
the Sumerian Law Code. (Lang-
don, pp. 497, 514).
62. N o trace of the seventh
group of the Noahidic Laws (Pro-
hibition of eating flesh cut from
living animals) is to be found in
the various codifications. However,
 the controversial laws regarding
witchcraft and mixture of seed
(note 15) have been retained. (See
regarding witchcraft: Code of
Hammurabi, 2, Hittite Laws 170,
Assyrian Laws 47; regarding mix-
ture of Seed: Hittite Laws 166
which is of special interest as it
refers to an ancient abrogated law
that had provided death penalty.)
63. See note 60.
64. See notes 57, 58.
65. See notes 47-49;59a.
66. Chapter I Note 47ff; Chap-
ter I1 note 41; chapter 111 note
98; Chapter IV notes 34 ff.
67.,68. See notes 39, 59.
69. Note 66.
70. Leviticus 18:24, 20:23.
71. See note 3 ff.
72. See note 56 ff.
73. EX. 22:15-18.
74. Albright, Arch. of Pal. p.
151 ff; "Arch. confronts," p. 187.
75. Lev. 20:lO ff; Deut. 19:16
ff; Deut. 22:23-27; Woolley,
(Abraham, p. 186) wants to ex-
plain the legal parallels contained
in the supposedly later parts of the
Bible as later additions influenced
by Babylonian colonies, which be-
came necessary because "under the
monarchy the more complex con-
ditions of urban life called for
new legislation to supplement that
which had sufKced for the wander-
ing tribes." It is, indeed, hard to
understand how such an explana-
tion may be offered for the laws
of Lev. 20 or Deut. 19 and 22
quoted in this note.
76. Babli, Sanhedrin, 56,
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Albright, W. F., The Archaeology of Palestine and the Bible, New

York, Chicago, 1932.
, Archaeology and the Religion of Israel, Baltimore,
1932.
, From the Stone Age to Christianity, Baltimore, 1940.
(quoted : Stone Age or From the Stone Age).
, "Archaeology confronts Biblical Criticism," in The
Amerrcan Scholar, vol. 7, Spring 1938.
, "Western Asia in the Twentieth Century B.C.," in
Basor 67, p. 26.
, "A Revolution in the Chronology of Ancient West-
ern Asia," in Baror 69, p. 18.
, The Location of the Garden of Eden," in The
Anlevican Iournal of Semitic language^ and Literature, Vol. 39,
Nov.-Oct. 1922.
, "Archaeology and the Date of the Hebrew Conquest
of Palestine," in Baror 1935, vol. 58, p. 10.
, "The Role of the Postdiluvian Patriarchs in Hebrew
History," in Iournal of Biblical Literature, 1924 p. 385f.
Alpenfels, "Our Racial Superiority" in Readers Digest, Sept. 1946
p. 79.
Alt, Albrecht, "Die Urspruenge des israelitischen Rechts," in Bericht
ueber die Verhandlungen der saechischen Akademie der Wis-
senschaften, vol. 86, Leipzig, 1934.
Ba'al Hamoaur, Commentary on the work of Alfasi by R. Serahja
Halevi.
Bahr, Johannes, "Die babylonischen Busspsalmen und das Alte Testa-
ment Wisren.rcbaftliche Beilage zum Iabresbericht der Hum-
boldt-Gymnasiunls zu Berlin, Bedin 1903.
Barsilai see Marcus.
Barton, George A, Semitic and Hamitic Origins, Philadelphia, 1934.
, Archaeology and the Bible, 7 ed, Philadelphia,
1937. (quoted: Barton).
BASOR, Bulletin of the American School of Oriental Research,
Jerusalem.
Biberfeld, Philipp, Das Noachidische Urrecht, Francfort, 1937. Also
Nahalath Zewi, vols. VI, VII.
 , "Judaism and International Law" in lrrael of TO-
rnorrou,, ed by Rabbi Leo Jung, New York, 1946.
Boehl, Franz M. Th., "Das Zeitalter Abrahams,' 'in Der alte Orient,
Vol. 29, Leipzig, 1930.
Boulton, W . H., Babylon, Assyria and Israel, London, Sampson Low,
Marston & Co. Ltd., 1924.
Breasted, J. H., The Conquest of Civilization, New York, 1938.
(Conquest).
, Ancient Times; a History of the Early World, Bos-
ton, 1935.
, A History of Egypt, New York, 1923.
Breuer, Isaac, Der neue Kusari, Francfort, 1934.
The Cambridge Ancient History, (CAH), New York, 1928.
Carlebach, Joseph, Die drei grossen Propheten, Francfort, 1932.
, "The Hebrew Bible," in The Jewirh Library, ed by
Rabbi Leo Jung, First Series, Second ed, New York, 1943.
Caro, Joseph, Magid Merharim, Venice, 1654.
Chiide, V. Gordon, Man Makes Himself, Library of Science and
Culture, London, 1937.
Cuvier, G. A., Discourse on the Revolution of the Surface of the
Globe, Philadelphia, 1837.
Delittsch, Friedrich, W o Lag das Paradies, Leipzig, 1881.
, Studien ueber Indogermanisch-Semitische Wurzel-
verwandtschaft, Leipzig, 1873.
Dibre Jdar, by Isak Roller, Berlin 5661 (1901).
Doroth Harirhonim see Halevi.
Duncan, J. G., New Light on Hebrew Origins, London, 1936.
Durant, Will, The Story of Civilization, I. Our Oriental Heritage,
New York, 1942.
Elija Raba, Notes to the Mishna by the Gaon of Vilna.
Encyclopedia Britannica, ed 1946.
Encyclopaedia Judaica, vols I-X, Berlin, 1928-34.
Finegan, Jack, Light from the Ancient Past, Princeton, University
Press, 1946.
Gans, David, Zemach David, Aufbach, 1768.
Gaster, Moses, "The Romance of the Hebrew Alphabet," in The
Jewirh Library, ed. by Rabbi Leo Jung, 2nd Series, 1930.
Ginzberg, Louis, The Legends of the Jews, Philadelphia, 1913-1938.
Golding, Louis, In the Steps of Moses, Philadelphia, 1944.
<;oldman, Solomon, The Book of Books, Philadelphia, 1948.
Gressrnann, Hugo, Altorientalische Texte zurn Alten Testament,
(AOT) , Berlin, 1926-27.
, The Tower of Babel, New York, 1928.
Groterneyer, Herrnann, "Ueber die Verwandtschaft der indoger-
rnanischen und sernitischen Sprachen," Kernpen 1871, in Juhrer-
bericht des Gytntlasiun~szu Kevzperz.
Haeckel, Ernst, The Evolution of Man, London, 1905.
Halevi, Isaac, Doroth Hurirhotziit~. Ic F~ancfort, 1906, Ie Frankfort,
1918, VI Jerusalem, 5699.
Heidenheirn, Wolf, Commentary on Genesis, 1797.
Heilprin, Jehiel, Seder Hadoroth, Warsaw, 1876.
Hertz, J. H., The Pentateuch and Haftorahs: Genesis, New York,
1929.
Hirsch, S. R., Der Pentateuch, Francfort, 1893.
Homer, Iliad.
Hornmel, Fritz, Der babylonische Ursprung der aegyptischen Kultur,
Muenchen, 1892.
, Die Altorientalischen Denkmaeler und das alte
Testament, Berlin, 1903.
, The Ancient Hebrew Traditions as illustrated by the
Monuments, New York, 1897.
, Ethnologie und Geographie des alten Orients. Muen-
chen, 1926, Handbuch der Alterturnswissenschaft 111.1.1.
Ibn Ezra, Commentary on the Bible.
Isaacs, Moses Legis, "Faith and Science.'' JezclisL Library, ed. by
Rabbi Leo Jung, Second Series, New York, 1930.
Jacobs, Joseph, Jewish Contributions to Civilization, Philadelphia,
1945.
Jahrbuch der Juedisch Literarischen Gesellschaft, Francfort.
Jarnpel, Siegmund, Vorgeschichte des israelitischen Volkes und seiner
Religion, vol. I, sec. ed., Francfort, 1928.
Jeremias, Alfred, Das Alte Testament irn Lichte des alten Orients,
Leipzig, 1930.
Jirku, Anton, "Der Karnpf urn Syrien Palaestina irn orientalischen
Altettum," Der alte Orient, Vol. 25.
Josephus, Antiquities; The Wars of the Jews; Against Apion.
Judah ha-Levi, The Kuzari.
Juhasin see Zacuto.
Kittel, Rudolf, Geschichte des Volkes Israel, 7. ed., Stuttgart,
1925, 1932.
Kli Jaqar, Commentary on the Tora.
Koschaker, Paul, Rechtsvergleichende Studien zur Gesehgebung Ham-
murapis, Leipzig, 1917.
Kramer, Samuel Noah, "The Iraqui Cradle of our Civilization."
New York Times Magazine, Febr. 1, 1948.
Ladder of Progress see McCown.
Langdon, S., "The Sumerian Law Code compared with the Code
of Hammurabi," in Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 1920,
p. 489fF.
Leist, B. W., Graeco-italische Rechtsgeschichte, Jena, 1884.
Lenormant, Francois, Les origines de I'histoire d'apres la Bible, Paris,
1880-84.
Ley, Will, The Days of Creation, New York, 1941.
Lipshih, Israel, Tiferetb Israel, Commentary on the Mishna, Vilna.,
1911.
Lisst, Franz v., Lehrbuch des deutschen Strafrechts, Berlin and
Leipzig, 1922.
Luzzatto, Moses Hayyim, Klab Pitbe Habnza, Konec, 1785.
Lyell, Sir Charles, Principles of Geology, New York, 1889.
Magid Mesbarim see Caro.
Mairnotzides, Misbneb Torab.
Marcus, Ahron, Barsilai Sprache als Schrift der Psyche, I. Berlin.
1905; 11. 1. Krakau, 1908.
, Juedische Chronologie, Francfort, 1935.
, Kessetb Hasofn; Krakau, 1912.
McCown, Chester Charlton, The Ladder of Progress in Palestine,
New York, London, 1943.
Medrasb Rabba.
Meyer, H. L., "Die Bmecke nach Asien," in Hamburger Fremden-
blatt, May 9, 1927.
Morrison, A. Cmsy, Man Does Not Stand Alone, New York, 1944.
Mueller, D. H., Die Gesehe Hammurabis und ihr Verhaeltnis zur
mosaischen Gextzgebung sowie zu den XI1 Tafeln, Vienna,
1903.
Myres, J. L., The Dawn of History, London, 1937.
Nabalat Zwi, a monthly, Francfort, 1932-1938.
Nahmanides, Commentary on the Torah.
Nolte, Hans, Die Ureinwohner des Heiligen Landes, Papenburg,
1914, Beilage w m Ostcrprogramm 1914 des Realgymnasiums za
Pqenburg.
Nouy, L e m t e du, Human Destiny, New York, London, 1947.
Oppenheim, Lassa, International Law. A Treatise, 4th ed., London,
New York, 1928.
Parsons, Reubm, Universal History, Vol. I. Sec. ed., New York,
Cincinnati, 1904.
Pauly-Wissowa, Realencyclopadie der Klassischen Altertumswissen-
schaft, Stuttgart, 1894-1939.
& m h see Maimonides.
Rmnban see Nahmanides.
Rarhi, Commentary on the Bible and Talmud.
Rhine, J. B., The Reach of Mind, New York, 1947.
Riem, Johannes, Die Sintflut in Sage und Wissenschaft, Hamburg,
1925, Agenhu des Rauhen Hanses.
Seder Hadmoth, see Heilprin.
Seder Olam, Lemberg, 1850.
Sefer Hahinuch, Aaron ha-Levi of Barcelona, Bruenn, 1799.
Schmidt, Wilhelm, der Ursprung der Gttesidee, AschendorfT, 1912-36.
Schrader, S. Eberhard, Die Keilinschriften und das alte Testament,
Berlin, 1903 (KAT).
Sellin, Ernst, Geschichte des Israelitisch Juedischen Volkes, Leipzig,
192432.
Sillem, C. H. W., "Das alte Testament im Lichte der assyrischen
Forschungen und ihrer Ergebnisse I. Die Genesis," Hamburg,
1877, Programm der Hoeheren Buergerschule.
Smith, George, The Chaldaean Genesis, London 1876.
Sprengling, Martin, The Alphabet, Chicago, 1931.
Stone Age see Albright.
Tacitus, Historical Works, vol. 11, The History, Germania, Agricola;
Translated by Arthur Murphy, London, 1907.
TdrJumoth Hubma, Commentary on the Torah by M. Rosenbaum,
Berlin, 1882.
Talmud Babli.
Talmud \erushalmi.
Universal Jewish Enzyclopedia, ed by Isaac Landman, New York,
1941.
Uppenkamp, August, "Beitraege tur Semitisch-indogermanischen
Sprachvergleichung," Duesseldorf, 1895, Beilage t u den Schul-
nachrichten des Kgi. Gymnasiums t u Duesseidorf.
Waddell, L. A., Historical Origin and Economic Purpose of the
Tower of Babel, London, 1922.
, The Makers of civilization in Race and History,
London, 1929.
, Egyptian Civilization Its Sumerian Origin and Real
Chronology, London, 1930.
Woollcy, L., Abraham, Recent Discoveries and Hebrew Origins,
London, 1936.
, The Excavations of Ur and the Hebrew Records,
London, 1929.
Wundt, Wilhelm, Grundtuege der physiologischen Psychologie,
Leipzig, 1908-11.
Zacuto, Abraham, Sefer Yuhrrrin.
Zemach David see Ganz.
Zimmern, H., "Biblische und Babylonische Urgeschichte" in Der
Alte Orient, Leipzig, 1901.
 INDEX
A b l , 56, 61, 72 Amatlah, 118
Abtaham, 10, 29, 30, 34, 55,80, 91, Amenhotep 111, 39, 56
113, 115, 117, 118, 119, 120, Amenhotep N,37, 39
121, 122, 125, 126, 127, 167 Amenophis; see h e n h o t e p
Abyssinians, 89;see dso Ethopia America, 10, 28, 93
Accad, 59, 92, 108, 111, 112, 113, American, 130
178; see also Agade Ammirabi, 182
Accadian, 87, 11 1 Amrafel Amraphel, 14, 113, 182
Accadians, 111, 113 Amorites, 56. 89, 112, 113
Achaea, 90 Amratians, 67
Achaeans, 90 Amur, 35
Achaioi, 90 Anaguac, 78. 99
Ach-chi-ya-wa, 90 Anatolian. 93
Achilles, 90 Angora, 89
Achivi, 30 Antigonus. 21
Adam, 14, 50, 53, 55, 569 61, 69; Antipater, 21
pre- Adamitic, 42 Anu, 59
Adapa, 59 Annunaki. 51. 97
Adima, 72 Aphrodite. 68
Adma, 20 Ap~ollo,90
Adrammeleh, 27 Arabian. 23. 126
Aegean, 85, 89, 90 Arabs 92
Aera mundi, 29, 32, 34, 74, 163 Arad,&, 91
Africa, 13, 49, 54,86, 88, 89 Aram, 92
African, 86 Aramaean, 51
Agade, 14, 36, 108, 110, 111, 112; A~~~~ 92. 126, 163
see alro Accad Aramaic. 88. 92
Agamemnon, 90 Ararat. 27. 74, 78
Agassiz, 43 Aratta, 110
Agenor, 88 archaeopterix. 45
Akaiwasa, 30 Argonauts, 88
Akkad; see Accad Aristobulus. 21
Akkadians; .ree Accadians Aristotle, 75
Akshak, 67 Aristotelian. 22, 43
Albright, 22 29 Armenia, 74, 78, 79, 112
Alexander, 2 1 Armenian, 79
Alexander Janai, 2 1 Arpachshad, 92, 115, 116
Alexander the Great, 24 Arrapachitis, 116
Alphabet, 85, 88, 90, 122, 123, 124, Arrapka, 116
125, 126, 185, 186 Artachshacta, 3 1
Amarna; see Tell-el-Amarna Arvadites, 91
Amath, 118 Aryan, 12, 91
Aryans, 83, 185 Babylonians, 8, 24, 37, 56, 59, 60,
Ashkenaz, 84 67, 109, 119, 122
Ashnunak, 65, 67 Badarian, 67, 163
Ashur, 91, 111, 142: see also Assur B a d g v w r u , 68
Assyria Bagavad-Ghita, 55
Asia, 38, 88, 93, 99, 126 Balaam, 23, 181
Asia Minor, 85, 87, 88, 89, 90, 92, Balikh, 117, 120
114, 126 Baluchistan, 67
Asiatic, 86 Baris, 79
Askelon, 35 Belisar, 13
Assur, 165 Berbers, 49
Assyria, 25, 26, 27, 36, 37, 59; 40, Berlin, 97
91, 100, 111, 112, 182 Berossus, 14, 27, 71, 171
Assyrian, 25, 26, 32, 36, 37, 59, 74, Bethel, 161
85, 96, 112, 117, 120, 142, 144, Beth-Yerach, 7 5
169, 182, 188, 189 Bileam; see Balaam
Assyrians, 25, 26, 79, 91 Black Sea, 85, 86, 88
Astarte, 98 Boas, 31
Atlantic Ocean, 88 Boghazkoi, 89, 136
Australia, 54 Book of the Covenant, 129, 130,
Awa, 25 131, 141, 145, 153, 154, 155.
Awirn, 90 188
Azoours, 72 Book of the Kings, 31, 32
Babel, 49, 63, 95, %, 98, 11I, 112, Borsippa, 99
113, 178, Brahma, 72, 78
Bab-ilu, 79, %, 178 Brahmanic. 55
Babylon, 23, 24, 25, 36, 65, 66, 79, Breasted, 37
89, 96, 97, 100, 108, 109, 110, Buddhist, 99
112,113, 120,132,177, 178,181 Burnaburiash, 37, 39
Babylonia, 28, 38, 50, 55,64,69,70, Byblos, 98
71, 74, 79, 84, 89, 91, 95, 96, 98, Byzantine, 13
113, 126 168
Babylonian, 14, 23, 27, 36, 37, 38, , - -
48. 55, 62, 64, 68, 71, 72, 74, 75, Cainides, 62, 69
76, 91, 95,97, 101, 109, 110, 111, Cairo, 162
112, 113, 114, 122, 129, 132, Calabria, 49
165, 167, 168, 169, 171, 172, Calah, 111, 112, 182
180, 182, 190 Calendar, 53, 69, 109
Babylinian-Assyrian, 27, 63 Calneh, 108, 110, 111, 112
Babylonian Exile, 31, 32, 33 Canaan, 8, 22, 34, 35, 36, 68, 83,
Babylonian tradition, 65, 75, 78. 86, 88, 89, 127, 130
173 Canaanite, 93, 169, 185
Babylonian version, 47, 48, 53, 54, Canaanites 89, 129
75, 77, 78, 165 Caphtor, 87, 175
Caphtor-Crete, 87, 175 Cushites, 84
Caphtorim, 87 Cutha, 25
Cappadm4 87,89 Cuvier, 43
Cappadmian, 87 Cyprus, 85
Carnabu, 118 Cyre, Cyrus, 23, 24, 31, 84
Car-neb, 118
Casdim; see Ur Casdim; K a d k , Damascus, 79, 120
Kashdim Daniel, 10
Casluch, 87, 88 Dardania, 85
Casluhim, 87 Dardanim, 85
Central Asia, 102 Dardenas, 85
Chabor, 117, 184 Darjavush, 31
Chabores, 1 16 David, 18,31, 32,33
Chalcidic, 88 Dead Sea, 29, 67
Chalcolithic, 64 Debir, 161
Chaldean, 23 Deborah, 33
Chalkis, 87 Deukaliin, 79
Chanokh, 62,68,69,70,72 Deuteronomy, 22, 155
Charchemish, 89 Dodanim, 85
Charma, 83 Dodona, 85
Chad, 92, 116 Dorians, 87
Chasdai ibn Shapmt, 85 Driver, 48
Chazars, 86 Dungi, 109, 132
Chem, 83, 86 Dyeus-Pater, 80
Chemistry, 86 Dyans-pitar, 80
Cherubim, 58,60,169 Ea, 53, 59,76
Chesed, 183 Eber, 91,92, 116, 117, 121
Chin, 91, 180 Egypt, 14,17,22,24,28,30,32, 34,
459 30g 919 loo, log,
97
35,36,38,39,41,50, 55, 56,65,
Chinese, 29, 37, 72, 74,78,81,30, 67,83,85,86,87,89,30,91,93,
93, 99, 101,107,180 98,99,108,164, 174, 175
Chiwi, 90 Egyptian, 14, 17, 25, 28, 30, 31,
Cholula, 99 35, 37,38, 56,86,87,88,89,90
Chori, 64 93,99,107,123, 163, 169
Cimmrians, 174 Egyptians, 8, 35, 38, 39,79,86,88,
Colchis, 88 93, 107, 122, 163
Copts, 87 Einstein, 43, 163
Corsica, 84 El, 98;see I1
Coxcox, 78 Ela, 25
Cptr; see Kaptara Elam, 12,62,64, 67,91
Crete, 87, 175 Elamites, 112, 113
Cretan, 87 Elisha, 84
Cush, 86, 109, 111, 112 Ellasar, 108, 180
Cushite. 86 Elliot-Smith, 162
El Obeid; see Tell-el-Obeid Germani, 84
Ellul, 168 Germanic, 62
Emirn, 64 Germans, 84
E-ninna, 110 Germany, 84, 97, 174
Enki, 68 Gerzean, 67
Enlil, 178 Gezer, 35, 67, 75, 87
Enmerkar, 110 Ghassulian, 67
Enoch, 62, 69, 71, 170, 171 Gibel, 98
Enosh, 49, 63, 69, 72 Gibeon, 90
Epirus, 85 Gibeonites, 90
Erech, 36, 64, 65, 67, 108. 103, 110, Gibraltar, 49
111, 112; see also Unk;Warka Gichon, 49
Eridu, 64, 65, 68, 71, 74, 108, 165, Gilgamesh, 59, 62, 75, 77, 112
169 Girgashite, 89, 90
Erinyes, 62 Gog, 84, 174
Esagua, 97 Gomer, 84, 174
Esarhaddon, 27 Gomorrha, 20, 23, 88
Eshnunna, 65 Gozan, 25
Etana, 59, 71 Greece, 22. 50, 62, 85, 87, 88, 90,
Etemenanki, 96 92, 126
Etruscan, 48, 84, 85 Greek, 26, 33, 50, 68, 74, 75, 79,
Etruscans, 84, 126 83, 84, 85, 88, 90, 123
Ethiopia, 86, 174 Greeks, 10, 53, 59, 68, 79, 88, 89,
Ethiopian, 86, 112 90
Euboea, 87 Gropius, 97
Euphrates, 49, 65, 89, 91, 97, 108, Gu-edinna, 165
115, 116, 117, 118, 183 Habakuk 52
Europa, 88 Habiru, 91, 116, 117, 120
Europe, 28, 49, 88, 93, 97 Habirus, 34, 118
Euopean, 92 Habor, 25
Europeans, 93 Haibri, 91
Exodus, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 39, Halaf, Halafia; see Tell Halaf
162 Halah, 25
Ezekiel. 24, 85. 174 Harn, 83, 86, 108
Ezra, 31 Harnath, 89, 90, 91
Fara. 65 Hamathites, 9 1
Far East. 93 Hamites, 83, 84
French, 91 Hamitic, 22, 84, 86, 89, 102, 105,
Galilee, 21 107, 175
Galileo, 53 Hamrnath, 25
Gzza, 88 Hammurabi, 15, 89, 96, 108, 109,
Gebal, 98 113, 120, 129, 130, 131 132, 144
Genesis, 45, 48 145, 146, 148, 150, 153, 154,
German, 97, 186 155, 181, 182, 189
Haran, 111, 115, 116, 117, 118, Ibrim, 91, 116, 117, 119, 126; see
120, 121 also Habiru; Khabiru; Khapiru
Harrian, 75 11, 79; see also El; Ilu
Hasmonean, 2 1 Iliad, 10
Hassuna; see Tell Hassuna 11% %
Hatte, 117 India, 50, 55, 78, 92, 126
Hattusas, 89 Indian, 29, 37, 55, 74, 83, 126
Hattusil, 89 Indians, 37
Havilah, 86 Indo-European, 102, 105, 179
Hebrew, 9, 24, 51, 62, 70, 79, 88, Indo-Europeans, 80, 83, 84, 89, 93,
92,96, 98, 100,101, 115, 116, 105
122, 123, 124, 125,126, 127, 167 Ingaevones, 84
177, 182, 183, 186 Ionian, 88
Hebrews, 38, 113, 115, 116, 117, Ionians, 84
118, 119, 126, 129, 187 Iran, 67
Hegelian, 11 Iranian, 67
Hellas, 84 Isaac, 29, 30
Hellenism, 17, 22 Isaiah, 10, 22, 23, 68, 69, 90
Hellenistic, 18 Ishmael, 92
Hermiones, 84 Ishtar, 98
Hermon, 90 Isin, 36
Herod, 21 Israel, 7, 8, 9, 10, 18, 22, 25, 29,
Herodotus, 26 30, 33, 35, 130
Hesiod, 50, 83 Israelite, 28, 91
Heth, 89 Israelites, 9, 25, 33. 35, 39, 87, 91,
Hezekiah, 25, 26 155, 185
Hindus, 72,92 Israelitic, 11
Hiram, 13 Istaevones, 84
Hittite, 89, 107, 114, 136, 145, 146, Istar, 118
Italy, 49, 84, 88, 30,92, 126
149, 150, 151, 153, 154, 155,
169, 188, 189 J a b 4 63
Hittites, 35, 85, 89, 30, 111, 129, Jacob, 29, 30, 39, 116, 121, 178,
163, Japhet, 22, 83, 84, 100
Hivite, 90 Paphetides, 83, 84
Hivites, 90 Java, 45
Hm, 174 lavan, 84
Hoang-Ti, 72 ~avones,84
Holy Land, 20 Jebus, 89
Homer, 83 Jebusites, 89
Horite, 115 Jemet Nasr, 65, 66, 67, 93
Hoshea, 25 Jephta, 33
Hurrians, 111 Jeremiah, 84
Hyksos, 30, 38, 39 Jericho, 67, 161
J e d e m , 17, 21, 22, 26, 56, 67, Kdix, 88
89, 167 Kisad-edini, 165
Jesse, 31 Kish, 36, 37, 65, 74, 107, 108, 109,
Jew, 12, 13 110, 112, 172
Jewish, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16, 17, 18, Kittei, 7, 29
19, 20, 21, 22, 25, 29, 30, 34, 43 Kinirn, 85
45, 57, 72, 130, 134, 184 Koenigswald, 164
Jews, 9, 13, 17, 21, 22, 23, 30, 34 Koldewey, 96
Johanan, Rabbi, 74 Koresh; see Cyrus
Joktan, 86, 92 Koshar, 68
Jordan, 33 Kptr, 87
Joseph, 29, 32, 38, 39 Ktion, 85
Josephus, 13, 72, 79, 88, 100 Kush; see Cush
Joshia, 22 Kushar, 68
Joshua, 13, 34, 35, 89, 90,91, 115. Laban, 184
118 Lachish, 26, 87, 161
Jubal, 63 Lagash, 36, 64, 65, 108, 110
Jubilees, Book of, 184 Lamech, 63, 70, 72
Judah, 26, 31, 33, 188 Lamkurm, 7 1, 72
Judaism, 12, 13, 22 Lanarka, 85
Judean, 26 Larak, 67, 68, 71
Judges, 33, 87, 130 Larsa, 36, 108, 109, 116, 120, 180,
Jupiter, 80 181: see also Ellasar

-
Kadrnos, 88 as ha,-88
Kaldu, 183 Leah, 166
Kam, 83, 86 Lebanon, 89, 90
Kaptara, 87 Lehabim, 86
Karibu, 60 Lemech; see Lamech
Kasdim, 92 Lemnos, 85
Kasdu, 183 88
Kashdim, 183 Lessing, .13
Kashdu, 183 Levitious, 145, 155
Kasiuch; see Casluch Ley, 44
Kauthar, 68 Lipit-Ishtar, 109, 132
Kebar, 117, 184 Lud, 92
Keftjew, 87 Lybia, 34, 88
Keret, 121 Lybians, 86
Keti, 85 Lydian, 85
Khabiru, 91, 116; .ree Ibrim Lydians, 92
Khabur, 64, 116, 117 Lyeil 43
Khapiru, 116; see Ibrim Maccabees, 10
Khanu, 89 Madai, 84
Kheta, 35 Magog, 84
Khirbet-Kerach, 7 5 Mahpela, 120
Malcatah, 118 Mongols, 84, 93, 179
Malkizedek, 167 Morrison, 46
Mandshu, 84 Moscow. 86
Manetho, 14, 15, 37 Moses, 11, 55,64,70, 79, 129, 156,
Manio, 84 165.
- , 167
- -
Marduk, 47,48, 97 Moses Chorenensis, 79
Marcheshvan, 168 Mosd, 64
Mari, 91, 115, 117 Mountain House, 95, 98, 99
Massagetes, 86 Mountain of God, 119
Medes, 25, 84 Mount Mem, 99
Mediterranean, 49, 85, 88, 92, 93, Mugeir, Mukkajar, 108, 116
126 Muscovites, 86
Meganthropus, 164 Muski, 85
Memphis, 175 Na-ah-mu-li-el 7 5
Men-nofer, 175 Naamah, 68, 70
Mernephtah, 34, 35, 36, 39, 162, Nabonid, -us, 14, 27
175 Nachidchwan, 78
~es-&mi-padda,110 Nahmolel 75
Meshech, 85, 86, 174 Nahor, 117, 118, 183
Mes-ilim, 109 Nahshon, 31
Messianic, 23 Nahum, 88
Mesopotamia, 28, 41, 50, 63, 65, Nakhur, 117
66, 67, 74, 75, 86, 91, 92, 93, Nannar, 118
95, 98, 99, 112, 115, 116, 117, Naphtuhim, 86, 175
118, 120, 157 Naram-Sin, 14, 15, 110, 111, 112,
Mesopotamian, 93, 98, 115, 126, 182
130, 163, 181 Naue, 13
Methusaleh, Methuselah, 69, 70, Nazis, 97
110, 116, 171 Near East, 49, 92, 93, 122
Methushael 70, 110 Nebuchadneuar, 23, 95
Mexican, 99 Negeb, 121
Mexicans, 78 Nephilim, 63
Mexico, 50, 78, 99 New Kingdom, 39
Micah, 22 New World, 22
Milcah, 118 Nicolaus of Damascus, 79
Minoan, 87 Niffer, 108
Minyas, 79 Nikar, 121
Mishna, 84 Nile, 50, 86, 93
Mitami, 117 Nimrod, 86, 110, 111, 112, 182,
Miuaim, 86 Nimurta, 182
Moab, 181 Nineveh, 26, 27, 59, 64, 65, 71,
Mongol, 84, 102, 107 111, 112, 116, 120
Mongolia, 89, 90 Ningal, 118
Mongolian, 84, 179 Ninkhursag, 178
Ninunq 182 Phoenician, 13, 85,91,98
Nippur, 77,95, 108,110, 11 1, 112 Phoenicians, 79, 87, 88, 98, 163,
Nisin, 108, 181 175
Nisrob, 27 Phoenix, 88
Noah, 49,56,63,65,69,70,71,72. piremus, 99
74,75,76,77,78,79,80,81,83, Pishon, 49
96, 108, 112, 121 Pithorn, 34
Noahidic, 108, 121, 122, 134, 135, Polynesia, 50, 93
136, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, Pornpey, 21
154, 155, 188, 189 Poseidon, 88
Nouy, 45 Procopius, 13
N'uhassi, 1 17 Psalms, 18,43. 55, 56, 167
Numidia. 13 Psalmist, 46
Psalter, 56
Ptah, 175
Obeidian, 64, 67 Ptolernaic Canon,
Obeid Period, 65,69;see also Tell- Ptolerny, 116
el-Obeid Punet, 88
Oppenheirn, 23 Punt, 88
Owed. 31 Puntites, 88
Paate, 181 Put, 86,88
Palestine, 9, 13, 15, 21, 30, 31, 33, Puzur Ashur, 37
35, 55, 56, 60, 64, 67, 74, 75, Pwnt, 88
79,80,83,86,87,88,89,90,92, Pyramid, 99, 119
113, 120, 121, 122, 126, 127, Pyramidic, 98
129, 155, 163, 174, 187 Pyramids, 96, 98. 99
Palestinian, 35 Pyrrha, 79
Paradise, 49,50,54,58,60,69. 121, Ra, 35
168,169 Ramesside, 30
Patesi, 108, 181 Rarnses, 34
Pathros, 86 Rarnses I, 34
Pathrusim, 86 Rarnses 11, 34, 39,85,89
Patriarchal Age 7,9, 11, 27,28, 29, Rarnses 111, 84
32,92, 121, 126, 127 Ranke, 35
Peleg, 117, 177 Rash Sharnra, 56, 121, 185
Persia, 36, 50, 174 Red Sea, 86,88
Persian, 24, 31, 33 Rehoboth-Ir, 1 1 1, 112
Persian Gulf, 49, 50, 62, 91, 95, Rephaim, 64
165, 169 Resen, 111, 112
Persians, 84 Resh Lakish, 75
Pezahel 21 Reu, 117
Phalija, 117 Rim-Sin, 91, 116
Philistines, 86, 87, 90 Riphath, 84
Phoenicia, 98 Roman, 21, 34, 144
 Romans, 20, 21, 22, 68 Shalmaneser, 25,26
Rome, 2 1, 22 Shem, 12, 22, 83, 91, 92, 115, 116,
Rosh, 85, 86, 174 121
Russians, 86, 174 Shema, 83
Sabattu, 56 Shenir, 177
Sabaeans, 79 Shensi, 33
Sabbath, 56, 168, 186 Shepherd-kings, 38
Salmo, 31 Shiloh, 33
Samaria, 25 Shin, 121
Sarai, 118 Shinar, 95, 96, 111, 112, 113, 177
Sarath, 118 Shinir-Gal, 177
Sardinia, 85 Shoa, 86
Sargon, 25, 26, 110, 111, 112, 178 S h u r i ~ ~ aSk h, u r u ~ ~ a 377
k . 65, 68-
Sargonic, 111 71, 72, 74
Sarugi, 117 Shushinak. 67
Satyavrata, 78, 83 Sian, 99
Saul, 33, 161 Sicily, 49. 85
Schmidt, W., 11, 54 Sidon, 88. 121. 175
Schrader, 13 Sihon, 33
Seder O h , 31, 32 Sin, 91
Seleucid, 32 33 Sinai, 122, 126
Sellin, 14 Sinaitic, 122, 189
Semites, 12, 38, 67, 83, 84, 91, 105, Sinitesj 90
107, 108, 111, 113, 116, 157, Sippar, 7
" 717 72
185 Slavic, 85
Semitic, 15, 67, 80, 86, 88, 89, 91, Sodom, 20, 239 88
92, 93, 101, 102, 105, 107, 110, '3. Z1. 327 3 i
116, 122, 12?, 125, 126, 157,
165, 179 South America, 54
Senkereh, 108 Spain, 49, 85, 92
Sennaherib, 26, 27 Suez, 93
Sephamaim, 25 Sumer, 36, 59, 113
Septuaginta, 87 Sumeria, 93, 109, 132,. 163
Serabit el Khadem. 122, 126 Sumerian. 71, 98. 102, 108. 199.
Serachja of Lunel, 31 110. 112, 113, 116. 118. 119.
Serug, 117 144, 154,163, 175, 177,180, 189
Seth, 62. 63. 70, 72 Sumerians, 67. 95. 107. 108, 109.
Sethides, 63 111, 163, 178, 185
Shabatum, 168 Sumero-Akkadians. 93
Shamash, 71. 72 Sumir, 112, 113
Sharezer, 27 Sumu-abu, 113
Sheba, 86 Surippak; see Shurippak
Shelah, 116 Susa,64,65,67,91, 111, 113, 1Z1
Shehem, 90 Sybil, 100
Syria, 9, 85, 87, 89, 92, 126, Tizapan, TiEatlan, 78, 99
Syrians, 92 T h c a k 78. 99
Taanak, 60 ~ o ~ a r m a 84
h,
Tacitus, 17, 84 Torah, 17, 18, 32, 44, 122,
Talmud, 17, 131 175, 188
Talmudical, 155, 156 Transjordan, 64, 67, 161
Tamar, 188 Tree of Life, 58, 59
Tanis, 30 Troy, 85
Targum, 87 Tsin, 91, 180
Targum Jonathan, 85 Tubal, 85, 86, 174
Tarshish, 84, 85 Tubal Cain, 63, 66, 68, 70
Tarsos, 85 Turkestan, 91
Tartar, 179 Turkish, 102
Tartessus, 85 Tyre, 13, 35, 175
Tasian, 67 Tyrhenian, 85
Tay-Hao, 72 Tyrsennians, 84
Tchang-hi, 72 Tyrus; see T y ~ e
Tchouen-Hin, 72 Ugarit, 56, 121, 185
Tehenu, 34, 35 United Nations, 23
Teleilat Ghassul, 67 Ur, 36, 37, 64, 65, 74, 108,
Tell Asmar, 65 110, 111, 112, 113, 115,
Tell-el-Amara, 34, 89, 91, 126 118, 119, 120, 127, 132,
Teli-el-Obeid, 64, 65, 98, 170; see 178, 181
aho Obeidian; Obeid Period Ur Casdim, 92, 116, 183
Teli Halaf, 64, 67, 120 Ur-engur, 109, 132
Teli Hassuna,64, 65, 67 Uta-Napishtim, 71, 75, 76, 11
Ten Commandments, 18 Umk, 65, 66, 67, 108, 109
Tepe Gawra, 53, 59,64, 65, 67,74, Vulcan, 68
98 Warka, 65, 69, 108
Terah, 113, 117, 118, 119, 120, Wellhausen, 7, 9, 11, 12, 27
121, 183 29, 130
teraphim, 184 West Asiatic, 99
Thutmes 111, 39 Western Asia, 15, 56, 92
Thuunes IV, 39 Wooliey, 65
Tiamat, 47, 48 Xilua, 78, 99
Tibar. 85 Xisustros, 83,99
~ibarkni,85 Yao, 72, 78, 81
Tibet, 50 Y a p t i 83
Tiglath- Pileset, 85 Zeboirn, 20
Tigris, 49, 91, 97, 111, 165 Zeus-pater, 80
Til-sa-turahi, 117 Zidon, see Sidon
Tiras, 85, 86 Zigg~rat,95, %, 99, 118, 178
Ti-Shenu; see Shenu Ziu-giddu, 75, 77
Titus, 22 Zuzim, 64