Nimrod the Mighty, King of Kish, King of Sumer and Akkad

Author(s): Yigal Levin

Source: Vetus Testamentum, Vol. 52, Fasc. 3 (Jul., 2002), pp. 350-366
Published by: Brill
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1585058
Accessed: 31-01-2016 06:51 UTC

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1585058?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents

You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Brill is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Vetus Testamentum.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 147.8.31.43 on Sun, 31 Jan 2016 06:51:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 NIMROD THE MIGHTY, KING OF KISH,
KING OF SUMER AND AKKAD

by

YIGAL LEVIN
Chattanooga, United States

One of the most intriguing parts of the biblical "primeval history",

to the student of the Bible's historical and geographic background, is
the "Table of Nations" recorded in Genesis x. Unlike the preceding
Creation, Eden, Fall and Flood narratives, the "Table of Nations" is
clearly based on a tangible view of the history and geography of the
world, which the scholar can attempt to understand using his knowl-
edge of the ancient Near East and his understanding of the workings
of biblical literature in general and of biblical genealogies in particu-
lar.' The intent of this contribution is to focus on what is arguably
the most fascinating passage in the Table-the Nimrod story recounted
in verses 8-12. We will offer fresh insight on both the historical back-
ground of the Nimrod tradition itself and on the literary development
of the passage.

The author wishes to express his thanks to the many people who read the manuscript
of this paper and made innumerable helpful comments and suggestions, especially
Professors A. Demsky, V. Hurowitz, J. Klein, A. F. Rainey, A. Skaist and D. Weisberg.
'For such discourses the reader is referred to any of the standard commentaries
on Genesis, as well as F. Crusemann, "Human Solidarity and Ethnic Identity: Israel's
Self-Definition in the Genealogical System of Genesis", in Ethniciy and theBible (Biblical
Interpretation Series 19; ed. M. G. Brett; Leiden, 1996), pp. 57-76; B. Oded, "The
Table of Nations (Genesis 10)-A Socio-Cultural Approach", ZAW 98 (1986), pp. 14-31;
J. Simons, "The 'Table of Nations' (Genesis 10): Its General Structure and Meaning",
OudtestamentischeStudien 10 (1954), pp. 155-184; D. J. Wiseman, "Genesis 10: Some
Archaeological Considerations", Faith and Thought87 (1955), pp. 14-24. For general dis-
cussions of the genealogies in Genesis, see M. D. Johnson, The Purposeof the Biblical
GenealogiesWith SpecialReferenceto the Genealogiesof Jesus (Society for New Testament
Studies Monograph Series 8; Cambridge, 1969), pp. 3-36; R. R. Wilson, Genealogy and
Historyin the Biblical World(New Haven/London, 1977), pp. 137-183; R. B. Robinson,
"Literary Functions of the Genealogies of Genesis", CBQ48 (1986), pp. 595-608; R. S.
Hess, "The Genealogies of Genesis 1-11 and Comparative Literature",Biblica70 (1989),
pp. 241-254; Yu. B. Tsirkin, "Japheth'sProgeny and the Phoenicians", in E. Lipinski (ed.),
Phoeniciaand theBible (Studia Phoenicia XI; Leuven, 1991), pp. 117-134; Y. Levin, "Un-
derstanding Biblical Genealogies", Currentsin Research:
BiblicalStudies9 (2001), pp. 11-46.

? Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2002 LII, 3

VetusTestamentum
Also available online - www.brill.nl

This content downloaded from 147.8.31.43 on Sun, 31 Jan 2016 06:51:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 NIMROD THE MIGHTY, KING OF KISH 351

1. The Nimrodstoryin Genesis

In the extant received text of Genesis, the Nimrod narrative is at-
tached to the genealogy of the sons of Ham listed in verses 6-7, "The
sons of Ham: Cush, Egypt, Put and Canaan. The sons of Cush: Seba,
Havilah, Sabtah, Raamah and Sabteca. The sons of Raamah: Sheba
and Dedan." Verses 8-12 narrate: "And Cush begot Nimrod; he began
to be a mighty man on earth. He was a mighty hunter before the
Lord; therefore it is said: 'Like Nimrod a mighty hunter before the
Lord.' The beginning of his kingdom was Babylon and Erech and
Accad and Calneh in the land of Shin'ar. From that land [he] went
forth [to] Assyria and built Nineveh and Rehoboth-Ir and Calah and
Resen between Nineveh and Calah; that is the great city." The text
then goes on to enumerate the progeny of Egypt and of Canaan.
As they stand, verses 8-12 present us with several problems. The
first problem is in the understanding of the vocabulary and the syn-
tax of the MT itself, without which we would not be able to create
a comprehensible translation. For example verse 8 tells us that Nimrod,
prt: 73 nrl'Fi 5,nn. The word flnnliterally means "began", but "he
began to be mighty" makes little sense in this context. The RSV trans-
lates "he was the first on earth to be a mighty man," suggesting per-
haps a role similar to that of Jabal, Jubal and Tubal-cain, "fathers"
of all herders, musicians and metalworkers in Genesis iv 20-22.2 The
noun ~11Qcould mean anything from "giant"3 to "hero" to "mighty
man"4 to "champion"5 to "man of power"6 to "potentate",7 each trans-
lation calling forth its own set of associations. r:": could be translated
"on earth", giving Nimrod's might universal significance, or "in the
land", making him a local hero.8 The subject of the (masculine) verb

2
So P. P. Saydon, "The Inceptive Imperfect in Hebrew and the Verb 5nnl 'to
Begin"', Biblica35 (1954), p. 47. J. Van Seters, The Pentateuch-A SocialScienceCommentary
(Trajectories 1; Sheffield, 1999), p. 118, also sees "the hero Nimrod as the founder of
Empires". Cf. idem, Prologueto History--The rahwist as Historianin Genesis(Louisville,
1992), p. 178. See also C. Westermann, Genesis1-11-A Commentary (trans. by John
J. Scullion; London, 1984), p. 516.
3 So LXX:
yiyo;.
4
RSV; V. P. Hamilton, The Book of GenesisChapters1-17 (NICOT; Grand Rapids,
1990), p. 335, uses "mighty" in verse 8 and "hero" in verse 9.
5 G.
J. Wenham, Genesis1-15 (Word Biblical Commentary; Waco, 1987), p. 223.
6
JPS.
7 E. A. Speiser, Genesis(The Anchor Bible; Garden City, 1964), p. 64.
8 RSV and JPS translate "on earth", while Hamilton (Genesis,p. 335) prefers "in
the land".

This content downloaded from 147.8.31.43 on Sun, 31 Jan 2016 06:51:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
352 YIGAL LEVIN

R2' (literally "went out") in verse 11 could be Nimrod himself (last

mentioned by name in verse 9), but it couldalso be Ashur("Assyria"),
assuming that the reference is to the (masculine)eponym of the Assyrians
(cf. verse 22) rather than either the land or the city known by the
same name (and both feminine in Hebrew).9 Finally, which is "the
great city" at the end of verse 12? The syntax would indicate that
Resen is meant.'? This city, however, is totally unknown (see below);
Nineveh, capital of the Assyrian empire at the height of its power, was
truly "the great city" in her time (cf. Jonah i 2; iii 2-3; iv 11).
The second problem presentedby the Nimrod story is the identification
of some of the toponyms mentioned in the text. Proper identification
is important to any attempt to understand the text's original geo-
graphical and historical context. Babylon and Nineveh are, of course,
well known throughout the Bible, being the capitals of the empires
which would eventually devastate Judah and Israel. Ashur,paralleled
to "the land of Shin'ar" in the preceding verse, seems to refer to the
land, rather than to the ancient city (which is not clearly attested any-
where else in the Hebrew Bible). The land of Shin'ar is mentioned
seven times in the Hebrew Bible: besides our passage, the tower of
Babel was built in "a valley in the land of Shin'ar" (Gen. xi 2); Shin'ar
is the home of King Amraphel in Gen. xiv 1, 9. According to Isa.
xi 11, the Lord God will gather the remnant of his people from Assyria,
Egypt, Pathros, Cush, Elam, Shin'ar, Hamath and the Islands of the
Sea. Zech. v 11 envisions an angel building a temple for the Ephah"
in the land of Shin'ar and Daniel i 2 mentions Nebuchanezzar bring-
ing the vessels of the Temple "to the land of Shin'ar to his god's
house." The general consensus is that Shin'ar refers to southern Meso-
potamia, perhaps a dialectic form of "Sumer".'2 Zadok has pointed
out that the form and its western cognates are attested only from the
mid-second millennium and has suggested that it was actually derived
from the Kassite toponym Sanhar.13This may be true, but the biblical

9 So
AV; JPS; Hamilton, Genesis,p. 335, but cf. Edward Lipinski, "Nimrod et
Asiur", RB 73 (1966), p. 84.
10 So AV.
See, however, Westermann, Genesis,p. 518.
" For the meaning of the term Ephah, see Carol L. Meyers and E. M. Meyers,
Haggai, Zechariah1-8 (The Anchor Bible; New-York, 1987), pp. 295-309.
12 P.A. Deimel, "Sumer = ~WL", Biblica2 (1921), pp. 71-74. Also see Speiser, Genesis,

p. 67, Westermann, Genesis,p. 517, who sees Shinar as reffering to "Sumer and Akkad
together".
13 R. Zadok, "The Origin of the Name Shinar", ZA 74 (1984), pp. 240-244.

This content downloaded from 147.8.31.43 on Sun, 31 Jan 2016 06:51:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 NIMROD THE MIGHTY, KING OF KISH 353

term, whatever its etymology, clearly stands for the southern Mesopo-
tamian plain. The Bible mentions Accad and Calah only in this pas-
sage, but both are well-attested in cuneiform literature, the former
being the capital of the Sargonid empire that ruled Mesopotamia in
the 23rd century BCE, the latter being the capital of the Assyrian
empire from the ninth century BCE untill the founding of Dur-Sarru-
kin (Khorsabad) by Sargon II in 707.14 Erech is mentioned as such
only in our passage. The "Erchevites", that is to say, "men of Erech"
(so JPS), together with the Babylonians, Susanites and Elamites, are
mentioned in an Aramaic letter quoted in Ezra iv 9. Presumably the
reference is to the well-known Sumerian city of Uruk.'5
The remaining three cities mentioned are totally unknown. A city
named Calneh is mentioned in Amos vi 2; in Isa. x 9 it is spelled
"Calno". The reference, however, is clearly to a place in northern Syria
rather than in southern Mesopotamia. A tradition preserved in the
BabylonianTalmud Yoma lOa identifiesCalneh with "Nopher Ninphi"-
perhaps referring to Nippur.16 However, Albright's suggested emenda-
tion of the vocalization of DLlI- weCalnehto wekullana-"andall of them
in the land of Shin'ar" is so attractive that it has practically become
the standard translation.17Rehob and Rehoboth are fairly common
biblical and western Semitic toponyms.'8 However, no place by the
name of Rehoboth-Ir is known in Mesopotamia. The name literally
means "town square(s)",and various attempts have been made to iden-
tify the city.19Resen is also unknown, however *Res-ini ("spring-source")

14
In this paper we have retained the spelling "Accad", prevalent in English trans-
lations of the Bible, when referring to the biblical citation. The spelling "Akkad" (or
"Agade" in Sumerian) is the accepted transcription of the Cuneiform.
15 U. Cassuto, A Commentary on theBookof GenesisChapterI, Verse1-ChapterXIII, Verse5
(5th ed. Jerusalem [Hebrew]), p. 139.
16
Cassuto, GenesisI-XIII, p. 138. Cassuto cited and then rejected a suggestion that
"Calneh" was a corruption of the Sumerian KI-ENLIL ("city of Enlil", perhaps from
ENLILKI).
17 W. F.
Albright, "The End of 'Calneh in Shinar"', JNES 3 (1944), pp. 254-255.
Cf. RSV; as Speiser, "In Search of Nimrod", Eretz-Israel5 (1958), p. 33* n. 12, put
it: "There is scarcely room for a freak such a *Calneh in such company as Babylon,
Uruk and Akkad". But also see A. S. Yahuda, "Calneh in Shinar", JBL 65 (1946), pp.
325-327; Westermann, Genesis,p. 517, who disages with Albright's hypothesis on var-
ious grounds.
18 Such as in
Joshua xix 28 and 30 (two separate towns!); 2 Sam. x 8; Gen. xxvi
22; xxxvi 37; not to mention the Rehob south of Beth-shean attested in Egyptian
sources.
19 Cassuto, GenesisI-XIII, p. 139.

This content downloaded from 147.8.31.43 on Sun, 31 Jan 2016 06:51:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
354 YIGAL LEVIN

is a fairly common name.20 Speiser's comment about Calneh, though,

would be just as appropriate for Rehoboth-Ir and *Res-mni:the two
unknown towns seem out of place alongside the great Nineveh and
Calah. G. Dossin's suggestion that both are actually translated forms
of the name Ashur ("the city")21is as ingenious as it is unfounded: the
problem remains unsolved.
The geographical context of the Nimrod story is undoubtedly Meso-
potamian and seems to refer to someone moving from Shin'ar into
Assyria.22The next issue is that of textual context. As we have noted,
the Nimrod narrative is at the moment affixed to the genealogy of
Ham. According to verses 6-7, Ham's descendants inhabited the lands
from Canaan southwards through Egypt, Cush (ancient Nubia) and
Put (either Pu[n]t/Somalia or Libya), spilling over into south-western
Arabia as well.23 Why, then, is the Mesopotamian Nimrod reckoned
a "son of Cush"? Is he, or is he not, an integral part of the Hamite
genealogy?
The most common answer to this question usually found in the
scholarly literature is based on documentary hypotheses. Critical schol-
arship is almost unanimous in the assessment that verses 8-12 were
taken from a different documentary source than the preceding verses.
There are two reasons for this: style and redundancy. Stylistically,
verses 1-7 are purely genealogical in form, listing the descendants of
Japheth and Ham as the eponyms of the various nations. Verses 8-12
are actually not a genealogy at all, but rather a narrative, connected
to the preceding verses by the verb 75', "begot". As for redundancy,
having already listed the sons of Cush and gone on to his grandsons,
why return now to tell of an additional son? The obvious answer is

20
Cf. the modern Ras el-'ein/Rosh Ha-'Ayin near the site of ancient Aphek in the
Sharon plain.
21 Cited
by Wiseman, "Genesis 10", pp. 20-21.
22
The story's "Babylonian" origin was recognized as early as 1901 by H. Gunkel,
The Legendsof Genesis-Biblical Saga and History (trans. from 1901 original by W. H.
Carruth. New York, 1964), p. 90.
23 The reason that Canaan, inhabited
by Semitic-speaking peoples at least from the
beginning of the second millennium BCE (see R. Zadok, "A Prosopography and Ethno
Linguistic Characterization of Southern Canaan in the Second Millennium BCE",
Michmanim9 [1996], pp. 97-145), is considered a "son of Ham", has been dealt with
extensively and is usually considered to reflect the political and cultural ties between
the two nations, including the three hundred years of Egyptian rule over Canaan. See,
besides the sources mentioned in note 1 above, Speiser, Genesis,p. 67. For Put, see
Simons, "Table of Nations", pp. 179-181.

This content downloaded from 147.8.31.43 on Sun, 31 Jan 2016 06:51:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 NIMROD THE MIGHTY, KING OF KISH 355

that the Nimrod verses were taken from a separate source. Simons
considered the very insertion of the Nimrod narrative into the Table
of Nations to be "an error", while admitting that this is not a solu-
tion to "the Nimrod problem".24 The usual consensus is that while
most of the "Table of Nations" in its present form is to be attributed
to the Priestly school, the Nimrod tale was taken from the J source.25
The advantage of the "separate document" theory is that it allows us
to deal with the Nimrod narrative on its own, without regard for the
rest of the Table of Nations. But that does not solve the problem:
even assuming that the phrase "and Cush begot Nimrod" was part of
the J original, where did the tradition linking Nimrod to Cush come
from in the first place?
There are three possible answers to this question. The first is that
the whole connection is a scribal error and Nimrod and Cush have
nothing to do with each other. One could postulate that Nimrod (and
perhaps Canaan as well) was part ofJ's Shem genealogy, coming after
his now-lost Japheth and Ham lists. At some point in time the words
"and Cush begot", originally from J's Hamite list, were somehow
attached to what was left. This reconstruction would solve several prob-
lems (including that of the inclusion of Canaan in the Ham genealogy),
but unfortunately has no textual basis.26
The second possibility is that the Nimrod tradition really does have
a Cushite/Ethiopian background. Proponents of this theory would then
have to explain the story's Mesopotamian geography. Meyer consid-
ered the Nimrod story to be Cushite in origin and its transferal to
Mesopotamia simply to be in error.27Wiseman considered Nimrod's
"Hamitic" origin to represent the "non-Semitic"origins of the Sumerians
and other early inhabitants of Mesopotamia.28 Kraeling solved the

24 See Simons, "Table of Nations", pp. 164-165.

25
See Cassuto, The "Questio"of theBookof Genesis(Hebrew translation of 1934 Italian
original by M. E. Artom; Jerusalem, 1990), p. 87; Speiser, "In Search of Nimrod",
p. 33*; G. Von Rad, Genesis-A Commentary (Trans. by J. H. Marks; Old Testament
Library; Philadelphia, 1961), pp. 141-143. In his opinion the "fragments of the Yahwistic
Table of Nations" go all the way to the end of the Canaan list in verse 19. Westermann,
Genesis,p. 514 also considers the Nimrod story to be a J addition to the P Table of
Nations.
26 This idea is hinted at by Westermann, Genesis,p. 515, who sees Nimrod's Cush

as a person, rather than "the name of a land or a people". Westermann does not,
however, attempt to deal with the "Hamite" origin of this Cush.
27
E. Meyer, Die Israelitenund ihreNachbarstamme (Halle, 1906), p. 448.
28
Wiseman, "Genesis 10", pp. 19-21.

This content downloaded from 147.8.31.43 on Sun, 31 Jan 2016 06:51:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
356 YIGAL LEVIN

problem by claiming that biblical Cush "often includes Arabia as well

as Ethiopia and the region of Chaldea can without difficultybe described
as belonging to Cush".29 The best attempt so far was that of Kurt
Sethe, who suggested identifying Nimrod with the 18th dynasty Egyptian
Pharaoh Amenhotep III (c. 1411-1375 BCE). This king was known as
Neb-Ma-Re,30 was known for his great hunts and boasted of extend-
ing his rule to the Euphrates.31The problem with this line of thought,
however, is that it ignores the so totally Mesopotamian geography of
the passage. General statements connecting Cush with Arabia or with
the Euphrates do not explain the extraordinary detail and apparent
antiquity of the Nimrod city-list.
The third option, embraced by most scholars, is to interpret Nimrod's
Cush as something or someplace other than Ethiopia (and hopefully
in the general neighborhood of Mesopotamia) and then to assume that
whoever inserted the tradition into its present place mistakenly identi-
fied the two. Speiser, for instance, identified Nimrod's Cush with the
Iranian people that the Akkadian documents call the kasui, the peo-
ple known to us as the Kassites, who ruled Babylonia from the 16th
to the 12th centuries BCE.32

2. The historicalprototype
for Nimrod:previoussuggestions
Having agreed on a Mesopotamian setting, our next question should
be: human or superhuman? In other words, should we search for a
real historical character, probably a king, who served as the prototype
for Nimrod? Or is he based on a god or demigod which the biblical
version "humanized"?
Several divine figures have been offered as the prototypes for the
Nimrod legend, especially those of Nergal, the Babylonian Marduk and
the Sumerian Ninurta-all of whom were renowned as great hunters.33

29 E. G. H.
Kraeling, "The Origin and Real Name of Nimrod", AJSL 38 (1922),
pp. 217-218.
30 So Sethe.
Actually the king's name was written in several different ways. See
C. Kuhne, Die Chronologie der internationalen von El-Amama(Kevelaer, 1973),
Korrespondenz
p. 129 n. 642.
31
Cited by Von Rad, Genesis,p. 142, who found the suggestion "attractive" but
admitted that other interpretations are possible.
32
Speiser, "In Search of Nimrod", p. 32*. This was picked up by Van Seters,
Prologue,p. 178, who suggested that the Kassite Cush and the Ethiopean Cush were
identified "merely upon the similarity of names".
33 Lutz,
quoted by Wiseman, "Genesis I0", p. 21; Lipinski, "Nimrod et Assur";

This content downloaded from 147.8.31.43 on Sun, 31 Jan 2016 06:51:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 NIMROD THE MIGHTY, KING OF KISH 357

Others have equated Nimrod with legendary Mesopotamian heroes

such as Gilgamesh.34Gunkel called him "the giant Nimrod", presum-
ably following the Septuagint.35Speiser, however, seems to have been
correct in rejecting an identification of Nimrod as a god or demigod:
despite the "epic" aspects of the story, there is no textual evidence of
Nimrod's being anything other than mortal.36
Our next point should, by all accounts, be chronological:is it possible
to use the geographicaldata in order to date the tradition?Unfortunately,
the answer is no. Both Simons and Speiser tried to do so over forty
years ago-with totally different conclusions. Simons considered the
narrative to belong "to a fully historical and relevantly recent period...
w. 8-12 are a posthumous addition to the Table of Nations."37Speiser
first assumed that the source of the passage must be J, which he
assumed to have been composed in the tenth century BCE, and took
that as the lowest possible date for our passage. As the upper end he
took the foundation of Calah, the "youngest"city in the section. Under-
standing a statement by Ashurnasirpal II to mean that Calah was
founded by Shalmaneser I (ca. 1272-1243 BCE), Speiser claimed that
"Nimrod" must have ruled in Mesopotamia between the mid-thirteenth
and the late eleventh centuries. His conclusion was that Nimrod is
none other than Tukulti-Ninurta I, King of Assyria (ca. 1246-1206
BCE), who conquered Babylonia during its period of "Kassite" rule.38
However, Speiser, once having chosen his favorite candidate, then
went on to explain away all facts that did not fit the theory. Verses
10-11, "the beginningof his kingdom was Babylon and Erech and Accad
and Calneh (or: "they are all") in the land of Shin'ar. From that land
he went forth to Assyria..." specifically state that Nimrod was a ruler

D. Collon, "Nimrod, the Mighty Hunter, and his Descendants: Contest Scenes on
Cylinder Seals", in Sealsand Sealingin theAncientNearEast, ed. byJ. Goodnick Westenholz
(Jerusalem, 1995), p. 23. See also the various commentaries and dictionaries and more
recently K. van der Toorn and P. W. van der Horst, "Nimrod Before and After the
Bible", HTR 83 (1990), pp. 1-29, and A. Pinker, "Nimrod Found?", JBQ 26 (1998),
pp. 237-245.
34
See W. H. Gispen, "Who Was Nimrod?", in The Law and theProphets,Old Testament
StudiesPreparedin Honor of Oswald ThompsonAllis, ed. by J. H. Skilton (Nutley, N. J.,
1974), pp. 207-214 and references there. Westermann, Genesis,p. 516, likewise sees
Nimrod as a legendary figure such as Gilgamesh and like the later Ninos.
35 Gunkel, The
Legendsof Genesis,p. 101.
36
Speiser, "In Search of Nimrod", p. 33*.
37 Simons, "Table of Nations",
p. 165.
38
Speiser, "In Search of Nimrod", pp. 33*-34*.

This content downloaded from 147.8.31.43 on Sun, 31 Jan 2016 06:51:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
358 YIGAL LEVIN

of Shin'ar who reached Assyria, not an Assyrian who conquered Baby-

lonia. Speiser's answer to this is to translate TlnZrDnnl'fWl as "the
mainstays of his kingdom",39perhaps linguistically possible but cer-
tainly not the simplest translation. He ignored the bit about Nimrod
"going out" from Shin'ar "to Assyria"-exactly the opposite of what
the "real-life" Tukulti-Ninurta did. Speiser understood the statement
that Nimrod "built" cities as referring to construction works of Tukulti-
Ninurta in Ashur (sic) and Nineveh and then immediately mentioned
that Calah (which verse 11 also credits Nimrod with building) was
founded by Tukulti-Ninurta's father, Shalmaneser I. Speiser explained
away the reference to the ancient cities of Accad, Erech and the land
of Shin'ar/Sumer as meaning that Tukulti-Ninurta/Nimrod bore the
title "King of Sumer and Akkad".
The main fault with Speiser's theory is that he got embroiled with
trying to explain the details, rather than looking at the larger picture.
Speiser was right in insisting on a Mesopotamian origin for Nimrod:
anything else contradicts the very explicit geographical setting. Speiser
was also correct in rejecting a divine Nimrod. However, the very chron-
ological limits he devised in order to help identify the "historical"
Nimrod blinded him to what should have been obvious: that the Nim-
rod tradition goes back to a much older, much less "historical", era.
After expounding on the identificationof Nimrod with Tukulti-Ninurta
I, Speiser noted "in passing" that "the Nimrod fragment in Genesis
has been described independently as a survival of what had once been
a full-bodied epic tale."40The "legendary" aspects of the Nimrod story
were also emphasized by Cassuto. He suggested that verses 9-12 were
remnants of the opening lines of an epic poem, which then went on
to tell of Nimrod's prowess as a hunter of beasts and monsters, of his
conquests in the lands of Babylonia and Assyria and of the cities he
built. In Cassuto's opinion, the epic originated in the "Amoriteconquest"
of Mesopotamia in the early second millennium.41Cassuto was prob-
ably correct in his understanding of the legendary aspects of the story.
We suggest, however, that he, like Speiser, dated the origin of the tra-
dition wrongly.
Another attempt at dating the Nimrod tradition was that of Wiseman.
He proposed to date the Nimrod narrative by citing the archaeological

39 Speiser, "In Search of Nimrod", p. 34*.

40
Speiser, "In Search of Nimrod", p. 35*.
1 Cassuto, Genesis,p. 137.

This content downloaded from 147.8.31.43 on Sun, 31 Jan 2016 06:51:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 NIMROD THE MIGHTY, KING OF KISH 359

evidence from the sites mentioned: Babylon, Uruk, Ashur, Calah and
Nineveh; the date of "Agade" (Akkad) is known only through literary
evidence.42Although the archaeological data he cited is by now almost
half a century old, Wiseman's main point is still correct: Gen. x 8-12
preserves traditions that go back a long time-at least to the twenty-
third century BCE.

3. Sargonand Naram-Sin,Kingsof Akkad

The mid-third millennium BCE was a time of great change in Meso-
potamia. After several centuries of rivalry between the various Sumerian
city-states such as Ur, Uruk, Lagash and Umma, the rulers of the city
of Kish managed to establish a sort of priority over much of southern
Mesopotamia. The primacy of one Sumerian city over the others was
an innovation. In successive generations the title "King of Kish" would
come to mean a divinely authorized ruler over all of Sumer and would
be claimed at different times by the rulers of the various cities. Use
of the title "King of Kish" implied such qualities as being victorious
at war, a righteous judge and a builder of cities.43At about 2300 BCE
the cities of Uruk, Ur, Umma and Lagash were all under the suzerainty
of a certain Lugal-zagesi. This king, though he apparently did not use
the title "King of Kish", claimed to rule all of Sumer.44
Into this world appeared Sargon of Akkad. Legend has it that he
was born in the town of Azipiranu on the Euphrates. At birth, his
priestess mother hid him in a basket of rushes, which she then set
afloat on the river. The basket floated to Kish, where Sargon was
adopted by Aqqi the gardener.45According to the various (and not at

42
Wiseman, "Genesis 10", pp. 20-21.
43 Th. Jacobsen, "Early Political Developments in Mesopotamia", ZA 52 (N. F. 18)
(1957), p. 129; T. Maeda, "'King of Kish' in Pre-Sargonic Sumer", Orient17 (1981),
pp. 1-17; P. Steinkeller, "Mesopotamia in the Third Millennium BC", ABD IV, 1992,
p. 276.
44
Jacobsen, "Early Political Developments", pp. 134-136. For the development of
the idea of kingship in Sumer, see W. G. Lambert, "Kingship in Ancient Mesopotamia",
in Kingand Messiah in Israel and the AncientNear East (ed. John Day; JSOT Supplement
Series 270; Sheffield, 1998), pp. 55-57.
45 Our main source for the early events of Sargon's career is a Neo-Assyrian text
now known as "The Sargon legend", found in Nineveh and now in the British Museum.
The text was first published by L. W. King, CuneiformTextsfrom BabylonianTabletsin
the BritishMuseumXIII (London, 1901), pl. 42-43. See also B. Lewis, The SargonLegend:
A Study of the AkkadianText and the Tale of the Hero Who was Exposedat Birth (ASOR

This content downloaded from 147.8.31.43 on Sun, 31 Jan 2016 06:51:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
360 YIGAL LEVIN

all numerous) sources, Sargon began his career as cup-bearer to Ur-

zababa, king of (the city of) Kish. A Sumerian-language version of the
story tells that Sargon escaped assassination.46He somehow became
king himself and expanded his rule over all of southern Mesopotamia,
pushing north to conquer Mari, Ebla, Ashur and Nineveh and even
reaching Anatolia and the Mediterranean.47 At some point Sargon
moved his capital to the previously unknown city of Akkad, adding
the title "King of Sumer and Akkad" to his previous designation "King
of Kish".48According to one of the sources, he built the city of Baby-
lon "opposite Accad".49 Sargon was the first known Semitic-speaking
Mesopotamian ruler to adapt the Sumerian cuneiform script to his
own language, today known as "Akkadian". He reigned for 56 years
and was succeeded by his sons Rimush and Manishtushu and then by
Manishtushu's son Naram-Sin.50Naram-Sin ruled for 36 years. He sur-
vived a rebellion led by Kish itself and then restored the empire,
including the reconquest of Ebla.51Naram-Sin, besides appointing him-
self the new deity of the city of Akkad, restructured the bureaucracy,
economy and defenses of the kingdom and was known as a patron of
the arts. He was also the first to adopt the title sarrukibrdtimarba'im,
"King of the four corers of the Earth".52Naram-Sin was succeeded
by his son Shar-kali-shari, during whose time the empire fell apart.53

Dissertation Series 4. Cambridge, MA, 1980); J. Goodnick Westenholz, The Legendsof

the Kingsof Akkade--he Texts (Winona Lake, 1994), pp. 49-55; ANET 119.
46
J. S. Cooper and W. Heimpel, "The British Museum Sumerian Sargon Legend",
JAOS 103 (1983), pp. 67-82.
47 W. F.
Albright, "The Epic of the King of Battle: Sargon of Akkad in Capadocia",
JSOR 7 (1923), p. 16; C. J. Gadd, "The Dynasty of Agade and the Gutian Invasion",
in The Cambridge AncientHistoy3 Vol. I part 2 (ed. I. E. S. Edwards et al.; Cambridge,
1971), p. 341.
48 Th.
Jacobsen, The SumerianKingList (Chicago, 1939), p. 111.
49 W. F.
Albright, YahwehandtheGodsof Canaan(London, 1969), pp. 86-87. Unfortunately
Albright did not cite his sources for the tradition, promising to do so at a later date.
50 Jacobsen, loc. cit.;W. S. Lasor, "Sargon", in TheInternational
Standard
BibleEncyclopedia
vol. IV (general ed. G. W. Bromiley; Grand Rapids, 1988), p. 338.
51
Gadd, "The Dynasty of Agade", p. 426. For a collection of texts on Naram-Sin,
see Goodnick Westenholz, The Legends,pp. 173-368.
52
J. Lewy, "The Late Assyro-Babylonian Cult of the Moon and its Culmination in
the Time of Nabonidus", HUCA 19 (1945), p. 489 n. 421. Lambert ("Kingship", pp.
58-59) emphasizes the uniqueness of Naram-Sin's claim of divinity in the history of
Mesopotamian kingship. The idea of a divine king was followed by the kings of Ur
III. See J. Klein, Three Sulgi Hymns: SumerianRoyal Hymns GlorifyingKing Sulgi of Ur
(Ramat-Gan, 1981), pp. 29-36.
53 For an
analysis of the chronologies of the various accounts, see D. A. Glatt,

This content downloaded from 147.8.31.43 on Sun, 31 Jan 2016 06:51:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 NIMROD THE MIGHTY, KING OF KISH 361

A few additional Akkadian rulers are known, but by this time Uruk
had regained independence and the Gutian invasion was under way.54
The city of Akkad was eventually abandoned and lost.
The identification of Nimrod with either Sargon or Naram-Sin has
been brought up in the past, generally only in passing; van Gelderen's
1914 suggestion of Naram-Sin has been discussed only by Gispen, who
dismissed the idea practically out of hand.55The analogy, however, is
quite striking. Both Nimrod and Sargon began their reigns in Sumer/
Shin'ar, "building"Akkad and Babylon and continuing north to Assyria.
Both were credited with extraordinary prowess. Both were considered
to be the first postdiluvians to wield royal power in a whole new way.
The decisive factor, however, is the identification of biblical Cush,
which "begot" Nimrod, with Kish, where Sargon first took power. We
have already mentioned that Speiser identified Nimrod's Cush with
the Mesopotamian Kassites. The connection with the city was noted
by both van Gelderen and Simons.56 But the similarity in name, of
course, is not enough. The rest is in the tradition.

4. The "Kingof Kish" in Mesopotamian

and Westerntradition
We have already noted the importance of the title "King of Kish"
(Sumerian lugal ki-sar-ra, Akkadian sarrukissatmdti or sar-kisati) to the
Sumerian kings of the pre-Sargonic period and fact that the title was
taken over by Sargon, who added it to his title "King of Akkad".57
The title's significance, however, went beyond politics. According to
the Sumerian King List, which is the very document that supplies us
with most of the "hard" information about the Sargonic period (such

Displacementin Biblical and RelatedLiteratures(SBL Dissertation Series 139;

Chronological
Atlanta, 1993), pp. 43-52.
54
Steinkeller, "Mesopotamia", pp. 727-728; Gadd, "The Dynasty of Agade", pp.
454-457.
55 C. van
Gelderen, 'Who Was Nimrod?', The Expositor8 (1914), pp. 274-282; Gispen,
"Who Was Nimrod?", p. 209; D. J. Wiseman, "Nimrod", in New Bible Dictiona?y3 (ed.
J. D. Douglas et al.; Leicester/Dunner's Grove, 1996), p. 875.
56
J. Simons, The Geographical and TopographicalTexts of the Old TestamentX (Leiden,
1959), p. 58.
57 For discussion of its importance, see Jacobsen, The Sumerian KingList, pp. 181-183;
Lewy, "The Late Assyro-Babylonian Cult", pp. 475-489. For the development of the
term's usage, see W. W. Hallo, Early Mesopotamian Royal Titles:A Philologicand Historical
Analysis(American Oriental Series 4; New Haven, 1957), pp. 21-28. Hallo emphasizes
the connection between the ancient royal title of Kish and its later derivative sar-kissati.

This content downloaded from 147.8.31.43 on Sun, 31 Jan 2016 06:51:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
362 YIGAL LEVIN

as names and reigns of kings), it was to the city of Kish that kingship
itself was lowered from heaven after the flood.58 Like the biblical
Nimrod, the ancient kings of Kish were the very embodiment of human
kingship in the postdiluvian era. Over a thousand years later, the Neo-
Assyrian kings would use Sargon's royal title of sar-kissati,taking it to
mean, quite literally, "King of the Universe".59Most strikingly,Sargon's
Neo-Assyrian namesake, Sargon II, had his full title, "the Great King,
the Mighty King, King of the Universe (sar-kissati),King of Assyria,
King of Babylon, King of Sumer and Akkad" inscribed on numerous
inscriptions all over his royal palaces.60
We know very little about Sargon of Akkad himself. We do not
know where his birthplace of Azupiranu is.6' His real name is unknown:
Sarru-kin,meaning "the true King" in Akkadian, is obviously a throne
name.62Even the exact site of his royal city of Akkad has not yet been
identified.63The events of Naram-Sin's long reign are likewise known
more from legend than from history.64
But to the Mesopotamian of the Late Babylonian and Neo-Assyrian
periods, the age of Sargon and Naram-Sin was one of the important
stages in human history. Most of what was known about the era was
what modern scholars would term "legend"; to people of the second
and first millennia BCE, the tales of the Flood, of Etana the shep-
herd, the struggle between Agga of Kish and Gilgamesh of Uruk and
the ascension of Sargon and Naram-Sin were history.65
The same was obviously true for the Canaanite and the Israelite
living in the second and first millennia BCE at the other end of the
Fertile Crescent. Although our knowledge of the Western Semitic

58
Jacobsen, The SumerianKingList, p. 77.
59 Cf. the inscriptions of Tiglath-Pileser I (ANET, 274), Shalmaneser III (ANET, 276)
and Adad-Nirari III (ANET, 281).
60 See D. D. Luckenbill, AncientRecords
of Assyia and Babylon(New York, 1927) II:
pp. 25, 39, 45, 48.
61 Azupiranuis in fact the name of a medicinal or spice plant. See the discussion in

Lewis, The SargonLegend,pp. 44-45.

62 The "biblical" form
"Sargon" commonly used in Western literature apparently
reflects the Neo-Assyrian pronunciation of the name. It appears only once in the Bible,
in Isaiah xx 1, and refers to the Neo-Assyrian king who subjugated Samaria in 720
BCE.
63 On the
possible location of Akkad, see H. Weiss, "Kish, Akkad and Agade", JAOS
95 (1975), pp. 434-453.
64
See J. S. Cooper, The Curseof Agade(Baltimore/London, 1983).
65
E. A. Speiser, "Ancient Mesopotamia", in The Idea of History in the AncientNear
East (ed. R. C. Denton; New Haven, 1955 [second reissue 1983]), pp. 49-50.

This content downloaded from 147.8.31.43 on Sun, 31 Jan 2016 06:51:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 NIMROD THE MIGHTY, KING OF KISH 363

versions of the primeval history are extremely limited, it is clear from

the few sources we do have (the Bible included) that the two histories
were parallel to a large extent.66 It may be assumed that the similar-
ity was due, initially, to the common origin of all Semitic peoples.
During later periods, the different versions would be occasionally
"updated" through continuous contact between Mesopotamia and the
Levant, which Demsky, following A. L. Oppenheim, referred to as a
"stream of scribal tradition" connecting Canaan and Mesopotamia dur-
ing the second millennium.67The Gilgamesh fragment found at Megiddo
and especially the Sargon epic from El-Amarna are just two examples
of such cultural contact.68 Hittite versions of the Sargon and Naram-
Sin accounts have been found in Anatolia.69 Increasing Assyrian and
Babylonian influence and eventually domination of Syria and Israel
during the ninth through sixth centuries would obviously have had its
impact on the written biblical version of the story. The motif of the
king as a mighty hunter, especially of lions, seems to be a particularly
western theme. It is known from a late fourth millennium stele from
Uruk, but then disappears from Mesopotamia for over two thousand
years.70 The theme is well-known in Egypt, mentioned in 18th cen-

66 For an overview of
comparative studies of the primeval history, see R. S. Hess,
"One Hundred Fifty Years of Comparative Studies on Genesis 1-11: An Overview",
in 'I StudiedInscriptions
fiom Beforethe Flood'-Ancient Near Eastern,Literary,and Linguistic
Approachesto Genesis1-11 (Sources for Biblical and Theological Study 4; ed. by R. S.
Hess and D. T. Tsumura. Winona Lake, 1994), pp. 3-26 and references there.
67 A. Demsky, "The Education of Canaanite Scribes in the
Mesopotamian Cuneiform
Tradition", in Bar-Ilan Studiesin Assyriology(ed. J. Klein and A. Skaist; Ramat-Gan,
1990), p. 158. The similarity and common origin of Mesopotamian and western scribal
traditions and myths, especially that of the flood, have also been commented on by
D. J. Wiseman, "Israel's Literary Neigbours in the 13th Century BC", JNSL 5 (1977),
pp. 77-91, and by W. W. Hallo, "Information From Before the Flood: Antediluvian
Notes From Babylonia and Israel", Maarav 7 (1991), pp. 173-181.
68 A. Goetze and S. Levy, "Fragment of the Gilgamesh Epic from Megiddo", Atiqot

2 (1959), pp. 121-128; Albright, "The Epic of the King of Battle", pp. 1-20; Goodnick
Westenholz, The Legends,pp. 102-139. Interestingly enough, one of Sargon's generals
in this version was known by the name of Kissi. The similarity between the story of
Sargon's ascension and that of Moses in Exodus ii is also quite striking and may well
be taken as further evidence of a common scribal tradition. For a study of "the Infant-
Exposure Motif", see Lewis, The SargonLegend,pp. 149-195.
69 See H. A.
HoffnerJr., 'Remarks on the Hittite Version of the Naram-Sin Legend',
JCS 23 (1970), pp. 17-22 and references there.
70 The closest thing to royal hunting in the late third and early second millennia is
from several Akkadian period cylinder seals showing the king battling lions, but even
these are not true hunting scenes. In later periods the lions were replaced by griffins,
bull-men and other mythical creatures. See Collon, "Nimrod", pp. 28-32.

This content downloaded from 147.8.31.43 on Sun, 31 Jan 2016 06:51:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
364 YIGAL LEVIN

tury Mari and appears in sculpture and painting at Mycenae and

Tiryns and in Homeric and Classical Greek literature.71The first Meso-
potamian ruler to boast of prowess in hunting was Tiglath-pileser I of
Assyria (1115-1077 BCE), who titled himself, "valiant man, armed with
the unrivaled bow, expert in the hunt." He reports slaying wild bulls,
elephants and 920 lions.72 The theme was renewed almost four cen-
turies later by Ashurbanipal.73The Hebrew version of the legend, then,
included this western motif of royal courage.74
Speiser himself compared the Nimrod tradition with that of Sargon
and Naram-Sin, as ancient kings about whom legend tells us more
than does history.75The ancient Hebrews, like their Mesopotamian
counterparts, probably had their own version of the "bringing down"
of kingship after the Flood.76At some early age, stories of the Great
King, Sargon of Kish, who ruled Shin'ar and Accad and even con-
quered Assyria and her cities, reached the Levant, as proven by the
version found at El-Amarna. Apparently, time and distance blended
the names and deeds of Sargon and his almost as legendary grand-
son Naram-Sin, a corrupt form of who's name was the one remem-
bered.77 The author of J may very well have had a full-length epic
poem at his disposal. Israelite tradition made the hero "a mighty hunter
before Yahweh", but retained his role as the original human monarch.
The Hebrew Nimrod tradition may have indeed been "updated" yet
again, by addition of cities ruled by the more recent Sargon, the second

71
See P. Bienkowski, "Hunting", in Dictionaryof theAncientNearEast (eds. P. Bienkowski
and A. Millard; London, 2000), pp. 149-150; J. K. Anderson, Hunting in the Ancient
World(Berkeley, 1985), pp. 1-16. As Westermann, Genesis,p. 516, ponted out, the king's
prowess at hunting was not originally considered to be a sport. He considered the
hunting of "wild animals threatening the community" to be "one of the functions of
the king from the early days of the sacral kingship".
72 A. K. Grayson, AssyrianRulersof theEarlyFirstMillenniumBC (1114-859 BC) (RIMA
2; Toronto, 1991), pp. 25-26.
73 See R. D. Barnett, SculpturesfromtheNorthPalaceof Ashurbanipal at Nineveh(668-627
BC) (London, 1976), pp. 13, 53-54.
74 Although Lewis (The SargonLegend,p. 196) suggested that the almost unreadable
column II of the Neo-Assyrian version, which seems to include lists of non-mythical wild
animals, is "the prelude to an adventure story or a hunting motif." However, the rela-
tionship of this column to the Sargon text is far from certain, as noted by Goodnick
Westenholz, The Legends,p. 36.
75
Speiser, "In Search of Nimrod", p. 35*.
76 Hallo
("AntediluvianNotes", p. 176) noted that Genesis rejected the idea of human
kingship in favor of a divine kingship.
77 Although, once again, the fact that we don't know Sargon's birth name doesn't
mean that the ancients didn't.

This content downloaded from 147.8.31.43 on Sun, 31 Jan 2016 06:51:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 NIMROD THE MIGHTY, KING OF KISH 365

Assyrian king to take the name.78 The Assyrian monarch might have
even used the comparison for propaganda purposes.79 This would
explain the anachronistic inclusion of Calah. Indeed, the mysterious
Resen could even be a corruption of Dur-Sarru-kin,the new capital
built by Sargon II.80The eighth century Judahite prophet Micah used
the designation "Land of Nimrod" when predicting the future destruc-
tion of Assyria.81 As Vargon has pointed out, the name "Land of
Nimrod" is not used in any Assyrian inscription.82Micah was famil-
iar, as were his audience, with the Israelite Nimrod tradition and used
it for emphasis.83The full version of the story was, however, unfortu-
nately lost when the compilers of the Book of Genesis decided that
mere mention of Nimrod's name would have the desired effect.
To later generations, the effect was lost. The compilers of the "Table
of Nations" included Nimrod as one of the typological seventy descen-
dants of Noah. LaterJewish tradition perceived Nimrod as the arche-
typal evil king. His name was understood to mean "we shall rebel

78
An almost unknown Sargon I ruled Assyria c. 1850 BCE. He is known only from
the Assyrian King List and from a collection of seal impressions found at Kanish. See
Grayson, AssyrianRulers of the Third and SecondMillennia BC (to 1115 BC) (RIMA 1;
Toronto, 1987), pp. 45-46. Extraordinary, this first Assyrian Sargon consistently spelled
his name preceded by the divine determinative: dLUGAL.GIN, "Divine Sargon". See
J. Lewy, "On Some Institutions of the Old Assyrian Empire", HUCA 27 (1956), p. 78
n. 332.
79 We have
already noted that the extant text of the "Sargon Legend" is of Neo-
Assyrian origin. Lewis (The SargonLegend,pp. 97-107), after listing the arguments for
an early and for a late date for the original composition, suggests that the final ver-
sion was commissioned by Sargon II, "to glorify Sargon II by showing that he was a
worthy successor to Sargon of Akkad." Lewis does admit, however, that the evidence
is inconclusive.
80 We would
suggest an original 71D '1T* becoming 10'l* by assimilation of the
graphically similar 'I and 1 and 3 and 3, the second 1 later being dropped either
through haplography or by phonetic assimilation with the final 1. The LXX version
Aacnj could be taken either as evidence of an original form '10n7*or as a simple scribal
error.
81 Micah v 5 (Eng.v 6). For a discussion of the historical background of Micah
iv 9-v 14 see Ch. S. Shaw, The Speechesof Micah-A Rhetorical-Historical Analysis(JSOT
Supplement Series 145; Sheffield, 1993), pp. 156-160. Shaw connects the passage with
the Syro-Ephraimite invasion of Judah in 733 BCE: Judah's enemy in the passage is
"Israel" (cf. iv 14), while Assyria seems to be looming on the horizon.
82 Sh. Vargon, The Book of Micah-A Studyand Commentary (Ramat-Gan [Hebrew]),
p. 151.
83 We should, however, note that local northern
Mesopotamian tradition preserved
the name Nimrudfor the site of the Assyrian Calah. This could be a remnant of an
ancient local tradition; it could also be a late tradition influenced by the biblical text.

This content downloaded from 147.8.31.43 on Sun, 31 Jan 2016 06:51:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
366 YIGAL LEVIN

(against God)", he was the builder of the Tower of Babel and the
enemy of Abraham.84
The biblical Nimrod, then, is not a total counterpart of any one
historical character. He is rather the composite Hebrew equivalent of
the Sargonid dynasty: the first, mighty king to rule after the flood.
Later influence modified the legend in the Mesopotamian tradition,
adding such details as the hero's name, his territory and some of his
deeds, and most important his title, "King of Kish". The later editors
of the Book of Genesis dropped much of the story and mistakenly
identified the Mesopotamian Kish with the Hamitic Cush. The Nimrod
tradition was thus lost to later generations, save five remaining verses
in the tenth chapter of Genesis.

Abstract

The intent of this paper is to examine the story of Nimrod in Genesis x 8-12,
offering fresh insight on both the historical background and the literary development
of the passage. The article deals first with the passage's literal meaning, syntax and
the extant text. The geographic context of the passage is shown to be distinctly
Mesopotamian-Nimrod being the "builder"of Babylon, Erech, Accad and other south-
ern Mesopotamian cities and then moving north to Assyria. After surveying previous
attempts to identify an "historical" Nimrod, the author then suggests that the biblical
figure is modeled after the combined traditions about Sargon of Akkad and his grand-
son, Naram-Sin. Nimrod is the son of "Cush"; Sargon began his royal career at Kish
right after the flood. The Sargon-Naram-Sin traditions reached the Levant during the
second millennium BCE, being combined by time and distance into a composite per-
sonality. The tradition reached its final form during the reign of Sargon II of Assyria,
who added such themes as hunting to the story. The later editors of the Book of
Genesis dropped much of the story and the Nimrod tradition was thus lost to later
generations, save five remaining verses in the tenth chapter of Genesis.

84 L.
Ginzberg, The Legendsof the Jews (translated from the German by H. Szold;
Philadelphia, 1942) I: pp. 177-181.

This content downloaded from 147.8.31.43 on Sun, 31 Jan 2016 06:51:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions