EARLY HISTORY in 



Let us inquire a little more in detail into the 

 general features of these early historic notices. 



For the purposes of this inquiry we may content 

 ourselves with the consideration of the ancient 

 Hebrew documents incorporated in the Book of 

 Genesis, and the remains which have been preserved 

 of the old Chaldean literature. Both of these re- 

 present an antediluvian period of long duration. 1 

 Both refer the primitive seats of population to the 

 Euphratean region of Western Asia. Both terminate 

 the antediluvian age with a great diluvial catastrophe. 

 These are sufficient points of general agreement to 

 make it probable that both originated in one funda- 

 mental history, or at least were based on attempts to 

 describe the same events. Otherwise there are great 

 differences. The Chaldean accounts have a prolix 

 iteration, which makes it probable that they were 

 prepared for popular and liturgic use, and may not 

 fairly represent the original documents in possession 

 of the priestly class. They also naturally introduce 

 all the personnel of the Chaldean pantheon, and as 

 this must have been a thing of gradual growth it 

 gives them an air of recency, though we know that 

 they are very old. The Hebrew version, on the 

 other hand, is monotheistic, and has an aspect of severe 

 simplicity in striking contrast to the florid and popu- 

 lar Chaldean version. 



1 Hommel has proved (Journal of the Society of Biblical Archao- 

 logy, 1893), what has always been suspected, that the ten patriarchs of 

 Berosus are the same with those of the Sethite line in Genesis. 



