The next passage in Genesis after the one describing Nimrod’s dominion may also refer to Nimrod, if we read with the margin, “Out of that land he went forth to Assyria,” instead of “Out of that land went forth Assur.” These verses will then read (Genesis x. 11, 12): “Out of that land he went forth to Assyria, and builded Nineveh, and the suburbs of the city, and Calah, and Resen, between Nineveh and Calah: the same is a great city.” It must be remembered, however, that Assur was regarded by the Assyrians as their supreme god and eponymous founder, and that in Micah v. 6, “the land of Assur” and “the land of Nimrod” seem to be contrasted with one another. But it is possible to consider the two expressions in the latter passage to be both applied to the same country. After the date of the later books of the Old Testament we know nothing of Nimrod for some time; it is probable that he was fully mentioned by Berosus in his history, but his account of the giant hunter has been lost. The reason of this appears to be, that a belief had grown up among early Christian writers that the Biblical Nimrod was the first king of Babylonia after the Flood, and looking at the list of Berosus they found that after the Flood according to him Evechous first reigned in Babylonia, and at once assumed that the Evechous of Berosus was the Nimrod of the Bible; but as Evechous has given to him the extravagant reign of four ners or 2,400 years, and his son and successor, Chomasbelus, four ners and five sosses, or 2,700 years, this identification gives little hope of our finding an historical Nimrod. It is possible that this identification of Nimrod with Evechous, made by the early chronologists, has caused them to overlook his name and true epoch in the list of Berosus, and has thus lost to us his position in the series of Babylonian sovereigns.