by
Damien F. Mackey
“The identification of Nimrod with either Sargon or Naram-Sin has been brought up
in the past, generally only in passing. …. The present writer believes that
a conclusive case now can be made for equating Nimrod with Sargon”.
Dr. Douglas Petrovich
Sargon of Akkad, whom I have tentatively, intra-dynastically multi-identified thus:
Sargon and Naram-Sin
and
especially, though, seems to invite comparison with the biblical Nimrod.
Caleb Chow, for instance, in
The Legacies of Sargon and Joshua: An Archaeological and Historiographical Comparison
begins his “Nimrod” section on p. 78 with this statement: “The person of Nimrod is a curious case in that his characteristics bear a striking resemblance to Sargon of Akkad”.
But Caleb Chow will conclude this section (p. 79), with: “In summary, Nimrod was not any particular historical individual, but rather the "figure" of Sargon--that is, the first great king after the flood”.
And previously I have followed Dr. Douglas Petrovich’s view that Sargon was Nimrod: “Identifying Nimrod of Genesis 10 with Sargon of Akkad by Exegetical and Archaeological Means” http://www.academia.edu/2184113/_2013_Identify
Beginning on p. 93 of this article, Dr. Petrovich will commence his section V:
V. THE PREFERABLE OPTION FOR NIMROD’S IDENTITY:
SARGON OF AKKAD
Having completed a detailed study of Gen 10:7–12 and an evaluation of the views for the identification of Nimrod that are most prevalent in the scholarly literature, the final task at hand is to identify correctly who Nimrod is, and to demonstrate why this identification is secure. Nimrod is none other than Sargon the Great, the King of Sumer and Akkad, who is history’s first empire-builder. The identification of Nimrod with either Sargon or Naram-Sin has been brought up in the past, generally only in passing. …. The present writer believes that a conclusive case now can be made for equating Nimrod with Sargon. The following arguments will serve to support the veracity of this claim. ….
It is interesting to note, in light of my “Sargon and Naram-Sin”, that Dr Petrovich will here entertain (but dismiss) the possibility that Naram-Sin may have been Nimrod:
Before concluding this task, reasons will be given as to why Sargon is to be preferred over his grandson, Naram-Sin, for the dubious distinction of being identified with Nimrod.
Dr. Petrovich’s thesis suffers, though, as I have pointed out previously, from a geographical misplacement, by his identifying the biblical “Shinar” - and hence the region of Nimrod (9:10): “The first centers of his kingdom were Babylon, Uruk, Akkad and Kalneh, in Shinar” - with Sumer in southern Mesopotamia.
“Shinar” is better identified with Sinjar, NE Syria. I wrote of this as follows:
Dr. Douglas Petrovich’s “Identifying Nimrod of Genesis 10 with Sargon of Akkad … appears to fit in well, at least chronologically, with my placement of the Akkadian dynasty. But I would now consider - thanks to [Anne] Habermehl’s research - that Petrovich’s geography of Genesis 10:10’s “Erech, Babel and Akkad”, all still presumed to be located in ancient Sumer, stands in need of a geographical shift.
This refers to Anne Habermehl’s article at: https://answersingenesis.org/tower-of-babel/where-in-the-world-is-the-tower-of-babel/
I had previously favoured David Rohl’s view (in The Lost Testament) that the Uruk I dynasty after the Mesopotamian flood (identified by Sir Leonard Woolley) was the dynasty of Cush and Nimrod, with the latter being the historical Enmerkar (‘Enmer the Hunter’).
And this may still apply as well, since the Akkadian dynasty was far reaching.
It needs to be said, though, that even the whole concept or “Uruk” may need to be reconsidered (and Habermehl has done just that), since, as according to Genesis 10:10, Uruk was “in Shinar”:
“The first centers of [Nimrod’s] kingdom were Babylon, Uruk, Akkad and Kalneh, in Shinar”.
And only after that (vv. 11-12): “From that land he went to Assyria, where he built Nineveh, Rehoboth Ir, Calah and Resen, which is between Nineveh and Calah—which is the great city”.
Whilst Sargon was a real person, I would suggest that the Mesopotamians had borrowed this story of his infancy (dating much later than the similar Moses story) from the Book of Exodus (http://ancienthistory.about.com/od/nemonarchs/g/Sargon.htm):
“A story about Sargon’s youth sounds like the Moses infancy story. The baby Sargon, nestled in a reed basket sealed with bitumen, was placed in the Euphrates River. The basket floated until it was rescued by a gardener or date grower. In this capacity he worked for the king of Kish, Ur-Zababa until he rose in the ranks to become the king’s cupbearer. …”.
Moses seems to have had in mind the arrogance of the Babel-ians (Genesis 11:3-4):
“They said to each other, ‘Come, let’s make bricks and bake them thoroughly’. They used brick instead of stone, and tar for mortar. Then they said, ‘Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves; otherwise we will be scattered over the face of the whole earth’,”
when he recorded of the “new king [Pharaoh] … in Egypt” (Exodus 1:8-11):
“‘Look’, he said to his people, ‘the Israelites have become far too numerous for us. Come, we must deal shrewdly with them or they will become even more numerous and, if war breaks out, will join our enemies, fight against us and leave the country’. So they put slave masters over them to oppress them with forced labor, and they built Pithom and Rameses as store cities for Pharaoh.”
Who may have been the equivalent of the Israelite slaves in the construction of Babel?
The Akkadian kings and the later potentates of Mesopotamia, such as Hammurabi of Babylon, were wont to speak condescendingly of the, presumably indigenous, “black-headed people” whom they governed.
The Catholic mystic, Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich, has written this of Nimrod and Babel (Life of Jesus Christ):
“One of the chief leaders in the Tower building was Nemrod [Nimrod]. He was afterward honored as a deity under the name of Belus. He was the founder of the race that honored Derketo and Semiramis as goddesses. He built Babylon out of the stones of the Tower, and Semiramis greatly embellished it. He also laid the foundation of Ninive [Nineveh], and built substructures of stones for tent dwellings. He was a great hunter and tyrant. At that period savage animals were very numerous, and they committed fearful ravages. The hunting expeditions fitted out against them were as grand as military expeditions. They who slew these wild animals, were honored as gods. Nemrod also drove men together and subdued them. He practiced idolatry, he was full of cruelty and witchcraft, and he had many descendants.
He lived to be about two hundred and seventy years old. He was of sallow complexion, and from early youth he had led a wild life. He was an instrument of Satan and very much given to star worship. Of the numerous figures and pictures that he traced in the planets and constellations, and according to which he prophesied concerning the different nations and countries, he sought to reproduce representations, which he set up as gods. The Egyptians owe their Sphinx to him, as also their many-armed and many-headed idols. For seventy years, Nemrod busied himself with the histories of these idols, with ceremonial details relative to their worship and the sacrifices to be offered them, also with the forming of the pagan priesthood. By his diabolical wisdom and power, he had subjected the races that he led to the building of the Tower. When the confusion of tongues arose, many of those tribes broke away from him, and the wildest of them followed Mesraim into Egypt. Nemrod built Babylon, subjected the country around, and laid the foundation of the Babylonian Empire. Among his numerous children were Ninus and Derketo. The last-mentioned was honored as a goddess”.
Dr. D. Livingston has, for his part, considered that Nimrod was the basis for the semi-legendary hero, Gilgamesh, historically also the fifth king of Uruk (“Who Was Nimrod?”).
It needs to be noted that the famous Epic of Gilgamesh, considered by documentists to have been the inspiration for some of the early Book of Genesis, exhibits late traces. For instance, Dr. Nili Samet has, in her article, “The Gilgamesh Epic and the Book of Qohelet: A New Look” (https://www.academia.edu/19814432/The_Gilgamesh_), drawn some very solid parallels between Gilgamesh and king Solomon’s Ecclesiastes (or Qoheleth). Though she, also, regards the Epic of Gilgamesh as being the influence upon the Hebrew book.
Dr. D. Livingston has written more realistically in favour of Hebrew influence upon the pagans – though he also follows a southern Mesopotamian geography (op. cit.):
“Besides the stories of the Creation and Flood in the Bible, there ought to be similar stories on clay tablets found in the cultures near and around the true believers. These tablets may have a reaction, or twisted version, in their accounts of the Creation and Flood. In the post-Flood genealogical records of Genesis 10, we note that the sons of Ham were: Cush, Mizraim, Put and Canaan. Mizraim became the Egyptians. No one is sure where Put went to live. And it is obvious who the Canaanites were. Cush lived in the "land of Shinar," which most scholars consider to be Sumer. …. The sons of Shem -- the Semites -- were also mixed, to some extent, with the Sumerians.
We suggest that Sumerian Kish, the first city established in Mesopotamia after the Flood, took its name from the man known in the Bible as Cush. The first kingdom established after the Flood was Kish, and the name "Kish" appears often on clay tablets. The early post-Flood Sumerian king lists (not found in the Bible) say that "kingship descended from heaven to Kish" after the Flood. (The Hebrew name "Cush" was much later moved to present-day Ethiopia as migrations took place from Mesopotamia to other places.)
….
In Genesis 10:8-11 we learn that "Nimrod" established a kingdom. Therefore, one would expect to find also, in the literature of the ancient Near East, a person who was a type, or example, for other people to follow. And there was. It is a well-known tale, common in Sumerian literature, of a man who fits the description. In addition to the Sumerians, the Babylonians wrote about this person; the Assyrians likewise; and the Hittites. Even in Palestine, tablets have been found with this man's name on them. He was obviously the most popular hero in the Ancient Near East.
No comments:
Post a Comment