The Antiquity of Civilization
THE Biblical History tells us that a highly developed civilization was already achieved a thousand years before the Flood. And recent investigations, pushing their way back towards the time of the Flood, and now even back beyond that time, find always proofs of the existence of a civilization already achieved.
For example, R. E. NEWBERRY, in the address from which we quoted in our first chapter, says: “... the discoveries at Naqada, Hierakonpolis, and Abydos had shown us that all the essential features of the Egyptian system of writing were fully developed at the beginning of the First Dynasty. Hieroglyphic signs were already in full use as simple phonograms, and their employment as phonetic complements was well established. Determinative signs are found beginning to appear in these early writings.... At the very beginning of the First Dynasty the numerical system was complete up to millions, and the Egyptian had already worked out a solar year of 365 days.” Of the hieroglyphic system of writing, the Professor thinks that it “must have been the growth of many antecedent ages;” but he adds, “yet no trace of the early stages of its evolution has been found on Upper Egyptian soil”—nor in Lower Egypt either, where he thinks it must have been evolved.
Another archaeologist, VON OPPENHEIM, as the result of his recent excavations at and near Tell Halaf, close to the source of the Khabur River in Upper Mesopotamia, is convinced that the most ancient Hittite civilization was simply one taken over by the Hittites from the “Subaraic” people whom they conquered and dispossessed somewhere about 2000 B. C. And the evidence he has gathered shows clearly a deterioration and not an advance in the standard of civilization as the centuries rolled on, thus again confirming the accuracy of the Scripture statements and at the same time demonstrating that the evolutionary theory will not do even as a working hypothesis.
From Lower Mesopotamia comes similar evidence. Dr. JuLius JORDAN, in speaking of excavations at the site of the city of Erech, in 1930, said: “It has been proved that before the Dynastic period in Sumer—earlier than 3000 B. C. —the country was colonized by a people highly talented in art.” Still more recent discoveries at Erech and at Ur in the winter of 1933-4 have convinced the excavators that at a period several centuries older than the time of Sargon the Great—that is, about 700 years before Abram—the post-Flood civilization had already begun to deteriorate.
There also is clear evidence, referred to by WEIGALL in his “History of the Pharaohs,” that at least one great astronomical cycle, namely, the 1460 years period of Sothis, had been discovered before the rise of the First Egyptian Dynasty; and it will not be out of place to give here some further extracts from the address by Prof. BREASTED in 1924. He remarked that “The Edwin Smith Medical Papyrus, acquired in 1906 by the New York Historical Society,” and written in the 17th century B. C. , contains the record of medical observations which “show that its author had already observed that control of the members and limbs of the body was localized in different sides of the brain.” He points out that this fact has been rediscovered by the work of modern surgeons only within the last two generations. In the course of the same address he said: “I hold in my hand part of an original transit instrument, made as stated by the inscription upon it, by no less a king than Tutankhamen... for the tomb of his (or his wife’s) great-grandfather, Thutmose IV.... It was used for determining meridian time, especially at night, in order that the observer might then set his water clock, with its 24-hour divisions.” All this reminds one of what Solomon said about the ancient completeness of civilization (see Eccl. 1:9, 109The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun. 10Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us. (Ecclesiastes 1:9‑10); and 3:15).
The Origin of Alphabetic Writing
Recent discoveries have made matter of common knowledge the fact of the vast antiquity of writing and the fact of its widespread use in very early times. These facts are implied in many parts of the Biblical History. For instance, when Joshua led Israel into Canaan, one of the cities captured bore the names of “The Library City” (Kirjath-sepher) and “The City of Learning” (Kirjath-sannah); and 400 years earlier still, a legal land-transfer was drawn up between Abraham and Ephron the Hittite (see Gen. 23:17, 1817And the field of Ephron, which was in Machpelah, which was before Mamre, the field, and the cave which was therein, and all the trees that were in the field, that were in all the borders round about, were made sure 18Unto Abraham for a possession in the presence of the children of Heth, before all that went in at the gate of his city. (Genesis 23:17‑18); and 49:32).
As far back as archaeology has gone, proof has been always found of the popular use of writing; and it should not be forgotten that the 19th century unbelief in the Bible, as represented by the various “Higher Critical” theories, was largely based upon the assumption that the art of writing was a comparatively late invention.
It is not yet, however, generally known that alphabetic writing is of very great antiquity. This matter has a distinct bearing upon our present subject; for, if Moses could not have written except in syllabic signs, most of which had several sound-values, various questions at once arise as to the accuracy and reliability of the present Hebrew text of that very important part of the Biblical History. What, then, are the facts?
On the coast of Syria, directly opposite the most eastern point of Cyprus, is a promontory. On its northern side is a bay, where in ancient times was a fine harbor, called by the Greek merchants, “White Haven,” because of the glaring whiteness of the rocks that guard the entrance. (The modern Arabic name, Minet-el-Beida, means “White Bay.”) The old harbor has long ago become silted up by sediment: carried down into it by a small river. Close to the bay is a hill, about half a mile back from the present coastline. It is 65 feet high, 3000 feet long, and nearly 2000 feet wide. To quote from an article by the arch6eologist in charge of the excavations, M. F. A. SCHAEFFER: “In the spring of 1928 an Alouite (i.e., a native of that region) plowed up... a flagstone which covered the entrance to a subterraneous passage. This led to a burial chamber, which the native rifled. It probably contained gold objects, which got into the hands of antique dealers and were lost. But the Governor of the Alouites, H. SCHOEFFLER, learned of the discovery, and after an inspection of the place, advised the Government Bureau of Antiquities in Beyrouth to send an archaeologist at once.” Thus it came about that a French Expedition, led by M. SCHAEFFER, commenced excavations at Ras Shamra, the 65-foot hill, in 1929.
During that first season of the operations a number of tablets were found which were written in cuneiform (wedge-shaped characters). In date these go back as far as the beginning of the period of the Judges of Israel. The amazing thing about these tablets is that they are written not in syllabic signs, but in an alphabet containing 28 letters. M. SCHAEFFER says: “This alphabetic script is so well established that it must have been in use for a long time” before that period. He describes it as “a very finished alphabet,” and says that the language “is closely related to Phoenician,” which, again, was a language closely related to Hebrew.
Similarly, MACALISTER in his 1925 book on “A Century of Excavation in Palestine,” says (pp. 247-9): “Until recently the old Hebrew script was not known to have existed before about the year 1000 B. C.... But we now know that the old Hebrew script was much earlier than had been supposed. Among the discoveries of M. PIERRE MONTET, in the excavations of Byblos, was a tomb containing a sarcophagus inscribed in this old Semitic character.... This carries the history of the script back at least two hundred years, to the time of Ramessu II. Moreover, it shows us the alphabet not only fully developed, but actually deteriorating; for certain of the characters.. are undoubtedly of a form that has been developed by penmanship.”
Sir FLINDERS PETRIE’S discoveries at the Temple of Serabit in 1905, take us a step further. From them we learn that in the Peninsula of Sinai, in which region Moses spent forty years, there was in his days in common use a fully developed Semitic alphabet still simpler than the one used at Ras Shamra.
In 1935, excavations at the site of Lachish, in S.W. Palestine, furnished inscriptions which both in date and in the forms of the alphabetic letters are intermediate between the Serabit inscriptions on the one hand and those of Byblos and Ras Shamra on the other. It can now no longer be questioned that in the time of Moses there was a fully developed Semitic alphabet ready for him to use; and the 1935 discoveries at Lachish show that “ordinary people,” and not only professional scribes and priests, “were reading and writing alphabetically.”
But L. A. WADDELL, in his 1927 volume on “The Aryan Origin of the Alphabet,” proves that an alphabet was in use in times much further back than the days of Moses. On p. 61 he thus summarizes his conclusions: “The Sumerians from the earliest-known periods, as we have found, employed in their ‘syllabic’ writings these particular signs with their ‘alphabetic’ values generally, which are now disclosed to be the parents of our alphabetic letters....
But they did not often spell out words by such simple ‘alphabetic’ signs, but mixed these up with a greatly preponderating number of syllabic signs, often containing two or more consonants. Yet, sometimes the Early Sumerians appear to have spelled out a few of their words alphabetically even in the earliest period.”
Early Degradation in the Realm of Religion
The theory of evolution, largely because of its subtle flattery, is still strongly entrenched in popular belief, in spite of the destruction of every one of its foundations by recent scientific researches. The notion is still being propagated that in religion there has been a gradual enlightenment—a progress through the ages away from debased and wrong ideas about God, and onward to ideas noble and right. The Bible, on the contrary, declares that ever since the Fall mankind has been departing from the pure primal revelation of God, and has been going ever more deeply into religious darkness and corruption of the truth, and that only fresh Divine revelations have been able to arrest and to reverse this evil tendency.
Here, then, we have a clear issue which can be decided by the recent researches and discoveries; and these bear testimony, in accents strong and distinct, to the truthfulness of the Scriptural account and to the falsity of the evolutionary hypothesis.
Professor WOOLLEY shows this, in his volume on “Ur of the Chaldees;” and so does L. A. WADDELL, with considerable detail, in his 1929 volume on “The Makers of Civilization.” It is proved that in the course of the first three dynasties of Ur there was a very perceptible process of degradation in the religious ideas and observances. Abundant evidence to the same effect is coming in from other regions in Mesopotamia. In an article written in 1933, Dr. FRANKFORT describes recent “finds” at Eshnunna, belonging to the period of Sargon the Great, that is, 400 or 500 years before the time of Abram. The “exquisitely carved” cylinder-seals and other objects show that while sun-worship was the chief idolatry, a number of lesser deities were already acknowledged there, and even serpent-worship was flourishing. The recently excavated sacred buildings at Sakkara, built by Egyptian kings of the Third Dynasty, about 200 years before Abram, tell the same story; for the comparatively simple and grand religious ideas, enshrined in those early temples, put to shame those of the later priest-ridden Egyptians. Similar evidence is rapidly accumulating in regard to Asia Minor, Syria, and other regions of the ancient world.
Dr. LANGDON, Professor of Assyriology at Oxford in the preface of his book on “Semitic Mythology,” expresses his conviction that “both in Sumerian and Semitic religions Monotheism preceded Polytheism.” In Field-Museum Leaflet 28, he says: “In my opinion, the history of the oldest religion of man is a rapid decline from monotheism to extreme polytheism and widespread belief in evil spirits. It is in a very true sense the history of the fall of man.” (The expression “belief in evil spirits” should be, more accurately, “worship of evil spirits.”) Professor SCHMIDT, of Vienna, another outstanding authority on this matter, in his 1931 volume on “The Origin and Growth of Religion—Facts and Theories,” speaks to the same effect and in equally decisive tones.
The first step in the downward path was the supplanting of the adoration of the true God by the worship of the sun. Then came the introduction of female deities, of moon-worship, of human sacrifices, and of many other abominations. It becomes increasingly clear that, just as the Sacred Record relates, it was only by a succession of Divine revelations that Abram and his descendants could be delivered from these corrupt and corrupting ideas and practices, and be led onwards in the path of true godliness.
The Original Home of Civilization
The Bible declares that the radiating center of the earliest civilization after the Flood was “the Land of Shinar,” that is, Lower Mesopotamia. This portion of the Biblical History, however, was held up to ridicule by the critics of the 19th century. Concerning the account given in chapters 10 and 11 of Genesis, they used such epithets as “strange,” “laughable,” “marvelously grotesque,” “a childish theory.” In some respects they were most learned men, and some of them were extremely brilliant; but they allowed prejudice to obscure their judgment, and of course they were quite unaware that by marvelous discoveries in Biblical lands their own theories were about to be tried and found wanting. The Scriptural declaration as to the original home of civilization is now becoming the assured verdict of archeology.
It is now admitted that Assyria was colonized from Babylonia, as is stated in Gen. 10:1111Out of that land went forth Asshur, and builded Nineveh, and the city Rehoboth, and Calah, (Genesis 10:11). The Bible mentions Babel, Erech, Accad, and Calneh, as four of the very oldest post-diluvian cities; and the archeological proofs of the accuracy of this, especially as to Erech and Calneh (or Nippur), are rapidly accumulating. King Eri-aku, the Arioch of Gen. 1411And they took all the goods of Sodom and Gomorrah, and all their victuals, and went their way. (Genesis 14:11), in an inscription of about 2000 B. C., refers to Erech as “the ancient city of Erech.” As to Calneh, the mound of ruins there contains the remains of no less than twenty-one successive cities; and in connection with the ancient temple was a college or university for the training of priests and scribes, with a vast library and a three-years’ course of study.
There is increasing evidence that the first Egyptian civilization was imported from Lower Mesopotamia. One of the most recent and important contributions to the establishment of this fact is WADDELL’s 1930 volume on “Egyptian Civilization.” In the past, determined efforts have been put forth to show that the Egyptian civilization was either older than that of Mesopotamia or at any rate was originated independently; but it is now being shown that those who accepted the Biblical account were in the pathway of truth.
Until comparatively recently it used to be boldly asserted that the Bible was wrong in attributing a code of legislation to Moses: the critics said that mankind in Moses’ days was not sufficiently advanced for such a thing as that. At the beginning of the present century, however, came the discovery in Persia of the copy of the code of laws published throughout his wide empire by Khamu-Rabi of Babylon—the Amraphel of Gen. 14—four centuries before the time of Moses. And now this turns out to have been largely a revision of the legal code published by Urukagina, king of Lagash, who reigned some little time before Sargon the Great, that is, nearly nine hundred years before the Laws of Moses were given. Thus we now know that codified legislation, that potent factor in civilization, also came from the land of Shinar.
It appears to have been this Sargon who spread the Southern Mesopotamian culture, by wide and consolidated conquests, from the Mediterranean to Persia, and indeed from Crete to the Valley of the Indus.
The land of Shinar was also the radiating center of religious ideas and practices. GARSTANG, in his 1910 volume on “The Land of the Hittites,” says that the main source of the religion of the Hittites was Babylon; and this means that the “Subaraic” religion, which was borrowed by the Hittites, originated as to its main features at Babylon. Dr. FRANKFORT’S recent “finds” at Eshnunna, of objects belonging to the times before Sargon the Great, show that the classical worship of “Hercules” was derived from Southern Mesopotamia, where the “fertility god” was represented with lion-skin, bow, and club, and as slaying a seven-headed hydra. This same deity proves to be the original also of “Tammuz” or “Adonis.” It will be remembered that the Biblical History clearly indicates that the land of Shinar, and Babylon in particular, was the center from which spread the corrupting flood of idolatry.
Nimrod and His Times
It is significant that the tenth chapter of Genesis, so contemptuously treated by the learned critical ignorance of last century, is constantly receiving confirmation from modern discoveries. For example, the Bible was said to be in error in listing Elam as a Semitic people. But, as MACY, in a recent volume, says: “When the French exploration party made their investigations at Susa, the capital of Elam, they there found on the oldest bricks of the place, traces of a cuneiform writing, ages older than any that had been previously discovered there. And that writing was in the Semitic language. The critics tried, indeed, to explain this away by suggesting that at that time the ruling powers were Semitic, but the people of Elam were not. This explanation, however, collapsed when it was shown that the Elamites were then under Sumerian domination; and those non-Semitic overlords had to use the Semitic language in their dealings with the Elamites.
The particulars given about Nimrod were declared to be quite unhistorical; but confirmatory facts on this matter also are now coming to light in “the land of Shinar.” For some little time now tablets have been deciphered containing the name of a certain god that from most ancient times was worshipped especially at the temple of the city Lagash. Assyriologists gave “Nin-gir-su” as the pronunciation of the signs used for that name. WADDELL, however, in his recent volume on “Makers of Civilization,” remarks: “This title, Nimirrud... has hitherto been conjecturally restored by Assyriologists from the polyphonous Sumerian signs, without any key whatsoever to its traditional form, as ‘Nin-gir-su.’” He then shows that the signs used may (according to BRUNNOW’S standard “Classified List of Sumerian Ideographs”) be read also as “Ni-mir-rud.” One inscription tells us that Mesilim, king of Kish, near the end of the Second Dynasty of Ur (that is, some 300 years before Abram), built a temple at Lagash for Nimirrud the god of Lagash; and on that occasion he dedicated to Nimirrud a fine limestone mace-head, 8 inches high and 51 ins, in diameter. The suggestion which was made towards the end of last century, that Nimrod was the historical personage deified as “Marduk” or “Marud” by the Babylonians, is supported by various recent discoveries. The hunting fame of Nimrod is reflected in the fact that “Marduk” was pictured as attended by four hunting dogs, sculptured effigies of which used to be offered in his temple. Further, the old Babylonian tradition said that Marduk built the city of Erech (see Gen. 10:1010And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar. (Genesis 10:10)). From a very early period, Nimirrud was worshipped as the supernatural patron of Lagash, a city not far from Ur.
Another fact which is revealed in the tenth chapter of Genesis, namely that the high civilization which arose after the Flood was one developed by the Hamitic peoples, used to be strongly contested and still is, in some quarters; but the latest investigations and discoveries in this matter also testify to the accuracy of the Bible. The first masters of civilization were the Sumerians. Later on, the Akkadians obtained supremacy. The same sign were used in the writing of both these peoples. Now TOYNBEE, a leading authority, in his work entitled “A Study of History” (1934), says: “When, however we examine the cuneiform script in which both the Sumerian and the Akkadian language was conveyed, we find, by conclusive internal evidence, that this script was originally evolved in order to convey Sumerian and was adapted to convey Akkadian subsequently” (p. 110). “The Akkadians spoke a language of the Semitic family, the Sumerians a language with an utterly different structure and vocabulary which has no known affinities” (p. 109). The Sumerian language was “agglutinative” in structure (p. 110); and that stamps it as one belonging to the Hamitic portion of the human race. Nimrod, the founder of the first empire after the Flood, was a Hamite.
Babylon: The City and the Tower
It is well to notice that the Biblical History distinguishes between the city and the tower, in Gen. 11. It speaks, not of “a city with a tower,” but of “a city and a tower.” At present the River Euphrates rolls between the ruins of Babylon and “Sirs Nimroud” or “Borsippa;” but recent discoveries have revealed the fact that in ancient times the course of that river lay to the east of Babylon, and close to the walls of Kish.
As to the Tower, the Bible, by saying that “they left off to build the city,” implies that the Tower was completed. Birs Nimroud (Arabic for “The Tower of Nimrod”) is still majestic in its ruined condition, being almost 300 feet high. It is constructed of exceedingly well baked bricks, united by bitumen: “they had brick for stone, and bitumen had they for mortar.” Eight hundred years ago, Benjamin of Tudela found it 700 feet high and two miles around the base. The Greek traveler, Herodotus, who saw it in the middle of the fifth century B. C., describes it as consisting of a series of eight towers, each successive one being smaller than the one below. The towers were square; and the lowest measured 1200 feet on each side. The ascent was by a spiral roadway, provided with resting-places. On the top was a spacious temple. The descendants of its ambitious builders carried the memory of the great achievement with them around the world, and everywhere “ziggurats” (“memorials”) were built. Every important Mesopotamian city had its ziggurat. Though smaller in dimensions, and varying somewhat in shape, the original step-pyramid form was maintained. The earliest pyramid in Egypt was the one at Sakkara; and it is a step-pyramid; the oldest temples of China were step-pyramid in form; so were the ancient temples in Mexico.
As to the City. From the most primitive times, Babylon was especially reverenced throughout Mesopotamia. For example, when Sargon the Great (B. C. 2460) built his new city Agade, he modeled it on Babel, which was then held to be “a city of special sanctity.”
In view of such facts as these, it occasions no surprise that archaeologists, who in their earlier days were taught the baseless fables of the 19th century “higher critics,” are coming out into the light of a reverent belief in the accuracy of the Bible. It is not so very long ago that the great archaeologist, Prof. A. H. SAYCE, published a book entitled “Monument Facts and Higher Critical Fancies.”