Legends of Babylon and Egypt in Relation to Hebrew Tradition.pdf

local rain must be sought for the sudden and overwhelming catastrophes of which the rivers are capable.
[1] For detailed lists of the points of agreement presented by the Hebrew Versions J and P to the account in the
Gilgamesh Epic, see Skinner, op. cit., p. 177 f.; Driver, /Genesis/, p. 106 f.; and Gordon, /Early Traditions of Genesis/
(1907), pp. 38 ff.
Thus, viewed from a purely literary standpoint, we are now enabled to trace back to a primitive age the ancestry of the
traditions, which, under a very different aspect, eventually found their way into Hebrew literature. And in the process
we may note the changes they underwent as they passed from one race to another. The result of such literary analysis
and comparison, so far from discrediting the narratives in Genesis, throws into still stronger relief the moral grandeur
of the Hebrew text.
We come then to the question, at what periods and by what process did the Hebrews become acquainted with
Babylonian ideas? The tendency of the purely literary school of critics has been to explain the process by the direct use
of Babylonian documents wholly within exilic times. If the Creation and Deluge narratives stood alone, a case might
perhaps be made out for confining Babylonian influence to this late period. It is true that during the Captivity the Jews
were directly exposed to such influence. They had the life and civilization of their captors immediately before their
eyes, and it would have been only natural for the more learned among the Hebrew scribes and priests to interest
themselves in the ancient literature of their new home. And any previous familiarity with the myths of Babylonia
would undoubtedly have been increased by actual residence in the country. We may perhaps see a result of such
acquaintance with Babylonian literature, after Jehoiachin's deportation,, in an interesting literary parallel that has been
pointed out between Ezek. xiv. 12-20 and a speech in the Babylonian account of the Deluge in the Gilgamesh Epic,
XI, ll. 180- 194.[1] The passage in Ezekiel occurs within chaps. i-xxiv, which correspond to the prophet's first period
and consist in the main of his utterances in exile before the fall of Jerusalem. It forms, in fact, the introduction to the
prophet's announcement of the coming of "four sore judgements upon Jerusalem", from which there "shall be left a
remnant that shall be carried forth".[2] But in consequence, here and there, of traces of a later point of view, it is
generally admitted that many of the chapters in this section may have been considerably amplified and altered by
Ezekiel himself in the course of writing. And if we may regard the literary parallel that has been pointed out as
anything more than fortuitous, it is open to us to assume that chap. xiv may have been worked up by Ezekiel many
years after his prophetic call at Tel-abib.
[1] See Daiches, "Ezekiel and the Babylonian Account of the Deluge", in the /Jewish Quarterly Review/, April 1905. It
has of course long been recognized that Ezekiel, in announcing the punishment of the king of Egypt in xxxii. 2 ff., uses
imagery which strongly recalls the Babylonian Creation myth. For he compares Pharaoh to a sea-monster over whom
Yahweh will throw his net (as Marduk had thrown his over Tiamat); cf. Loisy, /Les mythes babyloniens et les premiers
chaptires de la Genèse/ (1901), p. 87.
[2] Ezek. xiv. 21 f.
In the passage of the Babylonian Epic, Enlil had already sent the Flood and had destroyed the good with the wicked.
Ea thereupon remonstrates with him, and he urges that in future the sinner only should be made to suffer for his sin;
and, instead of again causing a flood, let there be discrimination in the divine punishments sent on men or lands. While
the flood made the escape of the deserving impossible, other forms of punishment would affect the guilty only. In
Ezekiel the subject is the same, but the point of view is different. The land the prophet has in his mind in verse 13 is
evidently Judah, and his desire is to explain why it will suffer although not all its inhabitants deserved to share its fate.
The discrimination, which Ea urges, Ezekiel asserts will be made; but the sinner must bear his own sin, and the
righteous, however eminent, can only save themselves by their righteousness. The general principle propounded in the
Epic is here applied to a special case. But the parallelism between the passages lies not only in the general principle
but also in the literary setting. This will best be brought out by printing the passages in parallel columns.
Gilg. Epic, XI, 180-194 Ezek. xiv. 12-20
Ea opened his mouth and spake, And the word of the Lord came He said to the warrior Enlil; unto me, saying, Thou
director of the gods! O Son of man, when a land sinneth warrior! against me by committing a Why didst thou not take
counsel trespass, and I stretch out but didst cause a flood? mine hand upon it, and break On the transgressor lay his the