The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1898-02-05
NEW STORY OF THE DELuGE.
Newly Discovered Tablets Dating
seven Centuries Before Moses.

Seven Centuries Before Moses.
From the New York Independent.
The announcement by Pere Seheil, the
French Assyriologlst who has given so
much time 20 study of the collections in
the museum at Constant inople, that he had
discovered a Babylonian account of the
deluge much older than Moses was so in
teresting to the Biblical student that we
asked the discoverer for an account of it,
He kindly consented. and his account, the
first thus far published in America, and,
we think, in Europe, viii be of no little in
terest o L.ae
Every Biblical scholar knows that the
Hebrew account of the deluge found in
Genesis has been paralleled by two Baby
lonian accounts, one that of Berosus. a
Babylonlan historian, whose narrative has
been handed down to us by early Greek
Christian writer's. and the other that found
on Assyrian tablets by George Smith
Both resemble. and yet both differ from
the Genesis story, Biblical critics have
differed as to the age of the Biblical story,
the more conservative holding that, being
written by Moses 1t is older than his time,
and was incorporated by him into the
Book of Genesis, while the newer school of
critics were, until the discovery of the
| Tel-el-Amarna tablets, inclined to believe
that the story was borrowed from Nineveh
or Babylon at the time of the captivity, or
not long before IL, atBwhich time the Book
of Genesis was written
The discovery by George Smith of full
poetical account of the deuge, on tablets
in King Assurbanipal's library at Nine
veh, was of immense interest; but 1t cid
not assure us of the age of the deluge
story among the inhabitants of the Eu-
pirates valley; for 1t was on tablets writ
ten in Assurbanlpars reign, that is scarce
six hundred years before Christ. To be
sure, these were said to be copied from
tablets in Babylonian libraries, but we
did not know how old these original tab
| lets were. Besides, the deluSe story was
on the eleventh tablet In long poem,
compiled in twelve books, one for each
month, in a quite artificial way, and might
belong to a comparatively late period of
religious and literary syncretism. The or
iginal Babylonian tablets, from which the
| Assyrian copies were made, were mucn
| desired. vt
Now Pere Schen has made the discov-
| cry To be sure, the record on the tablet
| does not amount to much, it is such a
| frasmentary bit; but it is large enough to
! make sure that the tablet contained the
story of the Deluge, and, most fortunately,
| the most important part of all Is preserV-
ed the colophon, with the date Ii is dat
| ed In the reign Of Ammi-zaduga, King OF
| Babylon, and we know that he relgned
about 2140 B. c. That is, we have here
a precious bit of clay on which was writ
| fen a poetical story of the deluge seven
| centuries before Moses and about the
time of Isaac or Jacob. That Is enough
| to make the discovery memorable. we
learn positively that the story of the &c
| LUCE was familiar to the common people
| of Babylonia, and, therefore, TO all the
East from Syria to Persia.
| Prof. Sayce has lately stated, misappre-
bending Pere Scheils oral announcement
that the new text verbally agrees WIN
that. discovered by George Smith, showing
| the care and accuracy with which the DUO
ument was preserved from generation TO
generation, with mo change even In the
| form OF single word This Is not the
| fact. This is an entirely different redae
ton. and Pere Scheil suggests that diff
ferent cities would have their different
| poetcal editions of the story. rms rag
| ment belongs TO the story current at SIP
para, where the fragment was found, ana
we may suppose that the account glVei'
| by Berosus was also from the Sippara
edition. for Berosus tells us that Xlsuth-
rus (Noah), before the flood, buried In Sip
| para the records of the worlds antedilu-
| Wan history The cuneiform account dis
covered by George Smith seems to have
originated in the city of Surippak; at any
rate the Noah of that story came from the
Surippak. There are in that account no
| such passages as we have in this new
fragment, which shows that we have to DO
| with another version, we do not know
how old for it is itself a copy from a
| partly effaced original.
This text is in poetry. 1t proves that
! the poetic construction was fixed more
than 1000 years before Christ Each line
| Ill ~ 4xrn ofgftA he In 10
| brew poetry.
The fragment is large enough to show
that it is a poem fun of polytheistie and
mythical details, Of which the Genesis
version has been thoroughly purged, CIV
| ing us "a tale purely monotheistlc, abso-
lutely ethical, and fit TO give religious In
| struction to an unscientific people in the
| infancy Of civilization