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