Fifthly, Shuruppak he gave to "the God of Shuruppak",--

After he had called the names of these cities, and they had

been allotted to divine rulers(?),

(1) In Semitic-Babylonian the first component of this city-

name would read "Dûr".

The completion of the sentence, in the last two lines of the column,

cannot be rendered with any certainty, but the passage appears to have

related the creation of small rivers and pools. It will be noted that

the lines which contain the names of the five cities and their patron

gods(1) form a long explanatory parenthesis, the preceding line being

repeated after their enumeration.

(1) The precise meaning of the sign-group here provisionally

rendered "divine ruler" is not yet ascertained.

As the first of the series of five cities of Eridu, the seat of Nudimmud

or Enki, who was the third of the creating deities, it has been urged

that the upper part of the Second Column must have included an account

of the founding of Erech, the city of Anu, and of Nippur, Enlil's

city.(1) But the numbered sequence of the cities would be difficult to

reconcile with the earlier creation of other cities in the text, and

the mention of Eridu as the first city to be created would be quite

in accord with its great age and peculiarly sacred character as a

cult-centre. Moreover the evidence of the Sumerian Dynastic List is

definitely against any claim of Erech to Antediluvian existence. For

when the hegemony passed from the first Post-diluvian "kingdom" to the

second, it went not to Erech but to the shrine Eanna, which gave its

name to the second "kingdom"; and the city itself was apparently not

founded before the reign of Enmerkar, the second occupant of the throne,

who is the first to be given the title "King of Erech". This conclusion

with regard to Erech incidentally disposes of the arguments for Nippur's

Antediluvian rank in primitive Sumerian tradition, which have been

founded on the order of the cities mentioned at the beginning of the

later Sumerian myth of Creation.(2) The evidence we thus obtain that the

early Sumerians themselves regarded Eridu as the first city in the world

to be created, increases the hope that future excavation at Abu Shahrain

may reveal Sumerian remains of periods which, from an archaeological

standpoint, must still be regarded as prehistoric.

(1) Cf. Poebel, op. cit., p. 41.

(2) The city of Nippur does not occur among the first four

"kingdoms" of the Sumerian Dynastic List; but we may

probably assume that it was the seat of at least one early

"kingdom", in consequence of which Enlil, its city-god,

attained his later pre-eminent rank in the Sumerian

pantheon.

It is noteworthy that no human rulers are mentioned in connexion with

Eridu and the other four Antediluvian cities; and Ziusudu, the hero

of the story, is apparently the only mortal whose name occurred in

our text. But its author's principal subject is the Deluge, and the

preceding history of the world is clearly not given in detail, but is

merely summarized. In view of the obviously abbreviated form of the

narrative, of which we have already noted striking evidence in its

account of the Creation, we may conclude that in the fuller form of

the tradition the cities were also assigned human rulers, each one

the representative of his city-god. These would correspond to the

Antediluvian dynasty of Berossus, the last member of which was

Xisuthros, the later counterpart of Ziusudu.

In support of the exclusion of Nippur and Erech from the myth, it will

be noted that the second city in the list is not Adab,(1) which was

probably the principal seat of the goddess Ninkharsagga, the fourth of

the creating deities. The names of both deity and city in that line

are strange to us. Larak, the third city in the series, is of greater

interest, for it is clearly Larankha, which according to Berossus

was the seat of the eighth and ninth of his Antediluvian kings. In

commercial documents of the Persian period, which have been found during

the excavations at Nippur, Larak is described as lying "on the bank of

the old Tigris", a phrase which must be taken as referring to the Shatt

el-Hai, in view of the situation of Lagash and other early cities

upon it or in its immediate neighbourhood. The site of the city should

perhaps be sought on the upper course of the stream, where it tends

to approach Nippur. It would thus have lain in the neighbourhood of

Bismâya, the site of Adab. Like Adab, Lagash, Shuruppak, and other early

Sumerian cities, it was probably destroyed and deserted at a very early

period, though it was reoccupied under its old name in Neo-Babylonian or

Persian times. Its early disappearance from Babylonian history perhaps

in part accounts for our own unfamiliarity with Pabilkharsag, its

city-god, unless we may regard the name as a variant from of Pabilsag;

but it is hardly likely that the two should be identified.

(1) The site of Adab, now marked by the mounds of Bismâya,

was partially excavated by an expedition sent out in 1903 by

the University of Chicago, and has provided valuable

material for the study of the earliest Sumerian period; see

_Reports of the Expedition of the Oriental Exploration Fund_

(Babylonian Section of the University of Chicago), and

Banks, _Bismya_ (1912). On grounds of antiquity alone we

might perhaps have expected its inclusion in the myth.

In Sibbar, the fourth of the Antediluvian cities in our series, we

again have a parallel to Berossus. It has long been recognized that

Pantibiblon, or Pantibiblia, from which the third, fourth, fifth, sixth,

and seventh of his Antediluvian kings all came, was the city of Sippar

in Northern Babylonia. For the seventh of these rulers, {Euedorakhos},

is clearly Enmeduranki, the mythical king of Sippar, who in Babylonian

tradition was regarded as the founder of divination. In a fragmentary

composition that has come down to us he is described, not only as king

of Sippar, but as "beloved of Anu, Enlil, and Enki", the three creating

gods of our text; and it is there recounted how the patron deities of

divination, Shamash and Adad, themselves taught him to practise their

art.(1) Moreover, Berossus directly implies the existence of Sippar

before the Deluge, for in the summary of his version that has been

preserved Xisuthros, under divine instruction, buries the sacred

writings concerning the origin of the world in "Sispara", the city

of the Sun-god, so that after the Deluge they might be dug up and

transmitted to mankind. Ebabbar, the great Sun-temple, was at Sippar,

and it is to the Sun-god that the city is naturally allotted in the new

Sumerian Version.

(1) Cf. Zimmern, _Beiträge zur Kenntniss der Bab. Relig._,

pp. 116 ff.

The last of the five Antediluvian cities in our list is Shuruppak, in

which dwelt Ut-napishtim, the hero of the Babylonian version of the

Deluge. Its site has been identified with the mounds of Fâra, in the

neighbourhood of the Shatt el-Kâr, the former bed of the Euphrates;

and the excavations that were conducted there in 1902 have been most

productive of remains dating from the prehistoric period of Sumerian

culture.(1) Since our text is concerned mainly with the Deluge, it

is natural to assume that the foundation of the city from which the

Deluge-hero came would be recorded last, in order to lead up to the

central episode of the text. The city of Ziusudu, the hero of the

Sumerian story, is unfortunately not given in the Third Column, but, in

view of Shuruppak's place in the list of Antediluvian cities, it is

not improbable that on this point the Sumerian and Babylonian Versions

agreed. In the Gilgamesh Epic Shuruppak is the only Antediluvian city

referred to, while in the Hebrew accounts no city at all is mentioned in

connexion with Noah. The city of Xisuthros, too, is not recorded, but as

his father came from Larankha or Larak, we may regard that city as his

in the Greek Version. Besides Larankha, the only Antediluvian cities

according to Berossus were Babylon and Sippar, and the influence of

Babylonian theology, of which we here have evidence, would be sufficient

to account for a disturbance of the original traditions. At the same

time it is not excluded that Larak was also the scene of the Deluge in

our text, though, as we have noted, the position of Shuruppak at the

close of the Sumerian list points to it as the more probable of the two.

It may be added that we cannot yet read the name of the deity to whom

Shuruppak was allotted, but as it is expressed by the city's name

preceded by the divine determinative, the rendering "the God of

Shuruppak" will meanwhile serve.

(1) See _Hist. of Sum. and Akk._, pp. 24 ff.

The creation of small rivers and pools, which seems to have followed

the foundation of the five sacred cities, is best explained on the

assumption that they were intended for the supply of water to the

cities and to the temples of their five patron gods. The creation of

the Euphrates and the Tigris, if recorded in our text at all, or in its

logical order, must have occurred in the upper portion of the column.

The fact that in the later Sumerian account their creation is related

between that of mankind and the building of Nippur and Erech cannot be

cited in support of this suggestion, in view of the absence of those

cities from our text and of the process of editing to which the later

version has been subjected, with a consequent disarrangement of its

episodes.

Legends of Babylon and Egypt in Relation to Hebrew Tradition · 第 22 / 36 题