The Old Testament in the Light of the Historical Records and Legends of Assyria and BabyloniaPinches, Theophilus G. (Theophilus Goldridge)
Religion
The Old Testament in the Light of the Historical Records and Legends of Assyria and Babylonia
Pinches, Theophilus G. (Theophilus Goldridge)
Bible. Old Testament -- Criticism, interpretation, etc.
As has been already noticed, the Assyrians spoke the same language, and
had practically the same religion and literature (including the ancient
Akkadian classics) as the Babylonians, whom they resembled in manners,
customs, and outward appearance. The old translation of the verse
referring to Assyria, “Out of that land (Babylonia) went forth Assur,” is,
in all probability, perfectly correct, whatever may be the arguments in
favour of the rendering, “He (Nimrod) went out into Assyria,” for it is
exceedingly likely that the Babylonian civilization of Assyria is wholly
due to emigration of settlers from Babylonia. Moreover, as will be seen
later on, the enigmatical Nimrod is none other than the well-known head of
the Babylonian Pantheon, Merodach, who is actually stated to have built
Babel (= the city Babylon), Erech, and Niffer (identified in Rabbinical
tradition, which in this case is probably correct, with Calneh). The
Babylonian tradition as to the foundation of the city of Akkad is still
wanting, but that its origin was attributed to Merodach is more than
probable. If, however, there had been any grounds for honouring Calah,
Nineveh, and Resen with the same divine origin, the Assyrians would
certainly not have allowed the tradition to go unrecorded. Properly
speaking the “land of Nimrod” (Micah v. 6) is Babylon, notwithstanding all
arguments to the contrary, for that was the land which he loved, the land
whose great cities he was regarded as having founded and as still
favouring, and the land where, if we may trust the language of his name
(in Akkadian it means “the brightness of day”), he ruled when he was king
upon earth—the land, in fact, which gave him birth.
At first governed by _patesis_, or viceroys (many Assyriologists call them
priest-kings or pontiffs), this title was abandoned for that of _šarru_,
“king,” between 1600 and 1800 B.C. The use of the title _patesi_ (in
Assyrian _iššaku_, “chief”) implies that the earlier rulers of Assur
acknowledged some overlord, and in all probability this overlord was the
paramount king of Babylonia at the time. If we regard Nimrod (Merodach) as
the first king of Babylonia (or the first really great ruler of the
country), then it is certain that it was not he who founded the great
cities of Assyria, for they can have no pretensions to the same antiquity
as the great cities of Babylonia, any more than Assyrian civilization can
be of the same period. Of course it is probable that the cities of Assyria
were founded at an exceedingly early date, perhaps many of them are as old
as any Babylonian foundation, but their importance was nothing like so
great as those of Babylonia until the latter had already been renowned
many hundreds—perhaps many thousands—of years, and to attribute the origin
of these unimportant places to Nimrod would bring him no honour, even if
it were probable that he had founded them.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account