On the question of the universality of the Deluge[1] they have, of course, no immediate bearing, though they frequently assert it; for it could never be supposed that the mere occurrence of a legend in a remote part of the globe proved that the Flood had been there. The utmost that could be claimed is that there had been a deluge coextensive with the primitive seat of mankind; and that the memory of the cataclysm was carried with them by the various branches of the race in their dispersion. But even that position, which is still maintained by some competent writers, is attended by difficulties which are almost insuperable. The scientific evidence for the antiquity of man all over the world shows that such an event (if it ever occurred) must have taken place many thousands of years before the date assigned to Noah; and that the tradition should have been preserved for so long a time among savage peoples without the aid of writing is incredible. The most reasonable line of explanation (though it cannot here be followed out in detail) is that the great majority of the legends preserve the recollection of local catastrophes, such as inundations, tidal waves, seismic floods accompanied by cyclones, etc., of which many historical examples are on record; while in a considerable number of cases these local legends have been combined with features due either to the diffusion of Babylonian culture or to the direct influence of the Bible through Christian missionaries.[2] In this note we shall confine our attention to the group of legends most closely affiliated to the Babylonian tradition.
2. Of the Babylonian story the most complete version is contained in the eleventh Tablet of the Gilgameš Epic.[3] Gilgameš has arrived at the Isles of the Blessed to inquire of his ancestor Utnapištim how he had been received into the society of the gods. The answer is the long and exceedingly graphic description of the Flood which occupies the bulk of the Tablet. The hero relates how, while he dwelt at Šurippak on
- ↑ On the overwhelming geological and other difficulties of such a hypothesis, see Dri. 99 f.
- ↑ See Andree, l.c. 143 ff.; Suess, The Face of the Earth, i. 18-72 pass. Cf. the discussion by Woods in DB, ii. 17 ff.; and Dri. Gen. 101 ff.—Lenormant, who once maintained the independence of the legends as witnesses to a primitive tradition, afterwards expressed himself with more reserve, and conceded the possibility that the Mexican and Polynesian myths might be distant echoes of a central legend, emanating ultimately from Babylonia (Orig.2 i. 471 f., 488 ff.).
- ↑ Discovered by G. Smith, in 1872, among the ruins of Asshurbanipal's library; published 1873-4; and often translated since. See KAT2, 55 ff.; Jen. Kosmologie, 368 ff.; Zimmern in Gu.'s Schöpf. u. Chaos, 423 ff.; Jen. KIB, vi. 1, 116 ff. (the translation followed below); Ba. Light from the East, 35 ff.; Je. ATLO2, 228 ff.; and the abridgments in Jast. RBA1, 493 ff.; KAT3, 545 ff.; Texte u. Bilder, i. 50 ff.
tradition in a text of the Book of the Dead, containing the following words: "And further I (the god Tum) am going to deface all I have done; this earth will become water (or an ocean) through an inundation, as it was at the beginning" (l.c. p. 289).
