OF THE BABYLONIAN CREATION AND FLOOD STORIES. 321 



As a parallel to these, Professor Langdon quotes " the J. version 

 of the Hebrew," which " describes how, after the expulsion from 

 Eden there arose patrons of culture." These were Abel the 

 shepherd, Cain the agriculturist, Enoch the founder of cities, 

 Laniech, " whose name is identical with Luniha,* the Sumerian 

 title of Ea, as god of psalmody " ; his three sons, Jabal, patron 

 of Bedouin-life; Jubal, patron of music; and Tubal, patron of 

 metal workers. 



We must all admit the likeness there is here, but the differ- 

 ences are noteworthy. In Genesis, everything happens in a 

 natural way — these pioneers of civilization — by the way, does 

 Bedouin-life come under that heading ? — being the descendants 

 of Adam and Eve in the ordinary course of descent from their 

 ancestors, whilst all the " patrons of civilization " in this new 

 tablet are divine personages created or produced, apparently simul- 

 taneously, by the mother-goddess. It has long been my opinion 

 that in any two accounts of the Creation — sensible accounts, 

 worthy of being taken into consideration, — there are bound 

 to be likenesses, even though composed quite independently, by 

 people having no communication with each other. Every 

 account of the Creation must speak of the formation of the 

 heavens and the earth ; the sun, the moon, and the stars ; 

 recognize the existence of land and water ; treat of the creation 

 of plants and trees ; birds, beasts, and fishes ; preceded or 

 followed, as the case may be, by the formation of man — first in 

 order if his importance be considered, last in order if the 

 provision for his needs be the prominent thing in the composer's 

 eyes. In like manner the arts and sciences must be referred to, 

 and the chances are that polytheists will attribute their 

 introduction in some way to their gods, as the Babylonians did, 

 whilst monotheists will attribute them to famous and celebrated 

 men. as in the case of the Hebrews. 



In Professor Langdon's second paper, an account of the 

 pre- Semitic version of the fall of man {Proceedings of the Society 

 of Biblical Archceology, November, 1914), he seems to regard the 

 new tablet which he is publishing as a story of the Creation 

 rather than of the Flood. It is true that a personage corre- 

 sponding with Noah — the divinity whose name is read Tagtug — 

 is referred to, and seems to go on board a ship or boat (gis ma), 

 but it is doubtful whether this personage can be regarded as the 

 same as the Ut-napisti" 1 or Athra-hasis of the Flood-story of the 



This is doubtful, the last radical being "J, in Hebrew not n, h. 



Y 



