Uta-napishtim obeys his god; he loads the boat with all of his gold and silver and takes on board the beasts of the field and the creatures of the wild together with artisans and all of his family and kin. Soon the storm begins; for six days and seven nights, the wind blows and the deluge flattens the land, but on the seventh day the ocean grows calm and the boat runs aground on a mountain.
Seven days later, Uta-napishtim lets loose a dove to find land, but the dove returns. Next he dispatches a swallow, but it too comes back. Finally, a raven is set free and never returns. Disembarking from the boat, Uta-napishtim makes an offering to the gods, but when the god Enlil smells the smoke and sees the boat, he is seized with fury.
However, reprimanded by Ea for his lack of foresight and reason, Enlil relents and declares that Uta-napishtim and his wife shall become immortal and dwell far away at the source of the rivers.
Two other ancient Near Eastern flood stories from beyond the borders of Mesopotamia are known, the most famous being the version found in the book of Genesis. Another short but very fragmentary version describing only Atra-hasis, the flood itself, and the conclusion that the hero gains immortality was found at ancient Ugarit and dates to the fourteenth century B. A much later version of the flood story was written in Greek by Berossos, a Babylonian priest of the god Bel.
This tale, part of a larger work on Babylonian history, is lost, but sections of the flood story are quoted by the later Greek writers Eusebius and Polyhistor. According to this version of the tale, the hero Xisuthros Ziusudra has a dream in which the god Kronos warns him about the onslaught of an impending flood. Xisuthros digs a hole and buries all the written material from his city. After the flood subsides, Xisuthros lets loose birds who return to the ship empty-handed.
A few days later, he again frees birds and they return with their feet covered in mud. When he releases birds for a third time, they fail to return. Let its dimensions be well measured. The eleventh tablet, line reads, "Lay upon the sinner his sin; lay upon the transgressor his transgression.
The meanings of the names of the heroes, however, have absolutely no common root or connection. Noah means "rest," while Utnapishtim means "finder of life. Utnapishtim also took a pilot for the boat, and some craftsmen, not just his family in the ark. It is also interesting that both accounts trace the landing spot to the same general region of the Middle East; however, Mt.
Ararat and Mt. Nisir are about miles apart. The blessing that each hero received after the flood was also quite different. Utnapishtim was granted eternal life while Noah was to multiply and fill the earth and have dominion over the animals.
From the early days of the comparative study of these two flood accounts, it has been generally agreed that there is an obvious relationship. A popular theory, proposed by liberal "scholars," said that the Hebrews "borrowed" from the Babylonians, but no conclusive proof has ever been offered. This still does not stop these liberal and secular scholars from advocating such a theory.
The most accepted theory among evangelicals is that both have one common source, predating all the Sumerian forms. Indeed the Hebrews were known for handing down their records and tradition. You may want to address that. Also, do you have a source for the "was seemingly adapted" claim?
With that authorship date for Genesis, there's no question to answer, Gilgamesh is clearly earlier by a few centuries. That said, some scholars may stick to the widely disputed BCE date. My intent was to show that even then, the flood story in Gilgamesh is older by virtue of originating in Atra-Hasis , even if the earliest known copy of it might be around the same age or slightly younger than Genesis.
Riker Have you ever read Gilgamesh? Yannis yes, I did before posting my answer. My point still stands though, you should probably provide a source even if it is just "from showing many similarities". Both written texts refer to the flood, but the flood is thought to have happened much earlier in human history, long before humans were writing anything.
Very early ancient texts are notoriously inaccurate in regards to timing; for example, the Sumerian king lists tell us that the first Sumerian kings ruled for tens of thousands of years. There is a strong possibility that both texts refer to the same flood, as both regard the same region of the world and would have been affected similarly by the floods created by melt at the end of the last glacial period, ending roughly around BCE. Show 1 more comment. So it's possible either way, but it's most likely they were written somewhat concurrently.
There's a lot of disagreement on Mosaic authorship. See WP. I will add that to the post. Just pointing out that modern scholarship doesn't give much credibility to the traditional view that Augustine was working from. Nathaniel ah, okay. My most recent biblical study was on Augustine and his time, thanks for letting me know though.
Note that the internal dating of the Bible places Moses hundreds of years after the flood story. Sign up or log in Sign up using Google. Sign up using Facebook. Sign up using Email and Password. Post as a guest Name. The translation of ancient cuneiform tablets in the 19th century confirmed the Mesopotamian flood myth as an antecedent of the Noah story in the Bible.
There must have been a heritage memory of the destructive power of flood water, based on various terrible floods. And the people who survived would have been people in boats. Yet tales of the Flood spring from many sources. Myriad ancient cultures have their own legends of watery cataclysm and salvation.
According to Vedic lore, a fish tells the mythic Indian king Manu of a flood that will wipe out humanity; Manu then builds a ship to withstand the epic rains and is later led to a mountaintop by the same fish.
0コメント