Episode 17: Grandfathers of History, part 1

Most people left Babel and settled in other places, but they took their memories with them.

All the quotes from the Bible for the main story were were taken from the English Standard Version (see ESV copyright here) or the New King James Version. For the other sources, including commentaries, websites, or articles, you can find links and references in the show notes below in the order they appeared. If you have any questions, there’s a link to contact me at the bottom of the page.

Show notes:

---

1. For an overview of Alexander the Great’s campaigns including victory over Darius in 330 BC and his death in 323 BC, see here. For the rapid fracture of his empire after his death, see here.

2. For more on Cassander, see here.

3. For the historical setting of Euhemerus, see the brief biography on pgs. 886-887 (book pages) here. Euhemerus was a friend of Cassander’s, the ultimate ruler of one of the parts of Alexander the Great’s fractured empire, see here.

4. The story of Euhemerus’ voyage and exploration of Panchaea and the contents of the golden column inside the temple are recorded on pages 1-3 here and with fewer details here. For the distance (given as 60 “stades” in the paper) in miles, see the definition of a “stade” here. For the description of a golden “stele” as a “pillar,” see the definition of “stele” here. For definitions of the Greek gods, see Uranus, Cronus, Zeus.

5. For Euhemerus’ voyage understood as an imaginary trip, and not a literal adventure to the island of Panchaea, see pg. 919 here. For the suggestion that Euhemerus was considered an atheist by his contemporaries, see pg. 246 here. For the suggestion that Euhemerus still listed “real” gods in his imaginary journey even while debunking the “human” ones, see footnote 13 on pg. 3 here undermining the claim that Euhemerus was an atheist. For possible motivations and beliefs Euhemerus was promoting, see here.

6. For the definition of Euhemerism, see here.

7. There is a modern argument that Genesis descended from the myths of Babylon. That claim is investigated and undermined by Bill Cooper in his book “The Authenticity of Genesis,” which makes for interesting reading. Beyond other factors that show the reliability of the Bible, one has to face the fact that ascribing Genesis’ history to Babylonian traditions doesn’t explain the other stories of the Flood and Tower of Babel from all around the world that also corroborate the history Genesis offers, as I mentioned at the end of Episode 1. For a deeper look into evidence that supports the accuracy of Genesis, see Cooper’s books “After the Flood” and “The Authenticity of Genesis” as well as articles that can be found at Creation Ministries International and Answers in Genesis.

8. Besides “The Authenticity of Genesis” I also used Bill Cooper’s “After the Flood” in tracing where people dispersed to after leaving Babel and what history remembers of those people. Cooper’s books provided both information I have referenced in this episode (see later show notes) as well as directions for further research. I have endeavored wherever possible to validate details gleaned from Cooper’s research by finding the original source, but lacking the ability to read languages besides English, I am in some cases indebted to his translations or other sources for those details I could not otherwise verify. I have cited Cooper’s books when I only had his research or conclusions to work from, or the more original sources when I could find those instead. While I do not agree with all of Cooper’s conclusions or connections, his books do make for fascinating reading which is bolstered by his extensive citations.

9. One scholar summarizes the idea that myths contain a grain of truth by referring to a myth as history “in disguise.” See pg. 42, here. For Cooper’s thesis to that effect, see Cooper, Bill. The Authenticity of the Book of Genesis. Introduction to part 2. Kindle Edition.

10. Chronologically, Genesis 10 comes after Genesis 11. Evidence for this comes from the fact that Genesis 10 describes how people dispersed and settled by “languages” even though the division of those languages doesn’t happen until Genesis 11 where people are initially described as all speaking the same language, making it clear that the events of chapter 11 occurred before the settlements of chapter 10. For more, see footnote 306 here and the same idea mentioned in the note on Genesis 11:1, here.

11. There are two things to be aware of regarding all of the history and mythology that comes up in this episode. First, I am not an expert here, so I may have something wrong. Second, I picked and chose examples that offered parallels to the story found in Genesis on the premise that myths might hold a grain of history in them, but this is not true of all myths. People in the past were just as capable of making up stories as we are and they didn’t need a foundation in reality to do it. There are many stories in mythology that don’t show any connection to the history found in Genesis. Those stories could refer to other ancient events that Genesis doesn’t record, events that happened to only one branch of humanity after everyone separated from one another and left Babel behind, or fiction made up so long ago that no one knows its origins. In short, for many myths, there may be no grain of truth or it may be so well buried and forgotten that we can’t figure out what it is. Furthermore, with the breadth of mythology around the world, there is inherent danger of finding false positives and thinking there are parallels between the stories in Genesis and one myth or another when the parallels weak or imaginary. Perhaps the guard against that danger is the fact that so many cultures offer similar stories, so, while we can’t draw concrete conclusions, we can take the general ideas of an original perfect world, the failure of the first humans to follow God, and a Flood, as themes that come up often enough to be worth noticing, and themes that are awfully unusual to simply arise due to coincidence.

12. For the suggestion that people departing Babel took with them stories of the shared history of the world, and that they passed those stories on to their kids, see note on Genesis 11:8 note here and Kidner, D. (1967). Genesis: An Introduction and Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 103–105). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press. One scholar suggests that stories of the confusion of languages aren’t common in lore from around the world (see note on Genesis 11:8, here), but future notes will show that they do exist.

13. In the note on Genesis 10:1, here, it is suggested that the list of names in Genesis 10 is just a list of names the Israelites were familiar with and is arranged “as if” they were a genealogically related family tree, but then it goes on to admit that this is commonly how things were explained in the ancient world, something that goes against their suggestion that this is not a family tree and intimates that more records than just Genesis remember people as somehow related.

14. For the debate about whether Babylon is the site of the tower of Babel, see show notes for last episode here. I assume Babylon and Babel were the same place.

15. The only explicit link between Nimrod and Babel is the reference in Genesis 10:9 that the beginning of Nimrod’s kingdom was “Babel, Erech, Accad, and Calneh.” Assuming this means Nimrod founded Babel, there’s good support for him leading out in building the tower, but it may only refer to Babel being one of the first places he ruled.

16. Regarding Nimrod’s lineage, it only states in Genesis 10:6-8 that Ham had a son named Cush and that Cush was the father of Nimrod. This could mean that Nimrod was either Cush’s direct son, as we’d think of it today, or a more distant descendant (grandson, great-grandson, etc.) as mentioned in the note on Genesis 10:8, here.

17. Some commentaries (see notes on Genesis 10:9, here and here) suggest that Nimrod started out as a literal hunter of wild animals and cleared the world of beasts that were troubling the people and that this work, perhaps, helped him gain favor. While this is speculative, it is entirely possible because, while God did promise Noah that animals would fear humans (see Genesis 9:2, He also mentioned that animals would be responsible for human blood they shed (see Genesis 9:5 suggesting that some animals would still attack humans as some do even today.    Nimrod used this fame, as the theory goes, to gather followers around him and these followers became the nucleus of whatever army he needed to take power and control people more generally. This is all possible, even plausible, but as it is simpler to suggest that the “hunter” reference is a euphemistic reference to tyranny, I left this part of the speculation out of the show. That said, nothing precludes him beginning as a literal hunter and later converting from that into becoming a leader or dictator (For the suggestion that Nimrod turned to targeting other people rather than animals, see note on Genesis 10:9 here).

18. Babylon was the home of Nimrod, a descendant of Ham. That much is clear from Genesis 10:6-8, but the land of Babylon later came to be called after one of Shem’s descendants, Arphaxad, whose children were known as “Chaldeans” according to sources here but more on Shem’s descendants later.

19. Stating that Nimrod was a “mighty man” and a “mighty hunter before the Lord,” would appear to make him more a hero than a villain, but that’s not his general reputation. In the minority, one source (see Zondervan,. NIV, Cultural Backgrounds Study Bible, eBook (Kindle Locations 7857-7883). Zondervan. Kindle Edition.) suggests that “before the Lord” implies God’s approval for Nimrod’s behavior while another reference (Kidner, D. (1967). Genesis: An Introduction and Commentary (Vol. 1, p. 115). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.) expresses something similar while noting the ominous connection to building Babel. Another source (see Andrews Study Bible (2010) Genesis 10:8-12, note. Andrews University Press.) argues that while “before the Lord” often refers to Divine approval, in this case it probably references superior skill in hunting instead. Beyond that, the rest of the commentaries follow a tradition that Nimrod was a bad man and did things against God, not for him. Perhaps the most charitable of these is the note on Genesis 10:8, here which suggests the Bible gives a bad impression of Nimrod, but doesn’t support the extreme legends about him. See also the note on Genesis 10:8 here and note on Genesis 10:9, here as well as other references in the show notes below. One commentary sums it up rather nicely stating that while the words in Genesis aren’t clear about it, Nimrod was probably “a very bad man” (see note on Genesis 10:8, here).

20. For the connection between the word used to describe Nimrod as a “hunter” and terms for “hunter” being used elsewhere to describe tyrants, see list in note on Genesis 10:9, here and note on Genesis 10:8 here. For Nimrod’s possible connection to oppression in general see the note on Genesis 10:8, here. Historical tradition also recalls him as someone who took away liberty and rejected God’s authority (see note on Genesis 10:8, here). A similar connection to the idea of tyranny might be suggested by the phrase “a mighty one” according to Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 261–291). Review and Herald Publishing Association.

21. For the suggestion that the name “Nimrod” was given to him by those living at the same time rather than a birth-name, see note on Genesis 10:8, here.

22. For the meaning of “Nimrod” and its connection to the word “rebel” see notes on Genesis 10:8, here, here, and here as well as Doukhan, J. B. (2016). Seventh-day Adventist International Bible Commentary (pg. 185). Pacific Press Publishing Association.

23. For Nimrod as a mighty man in sin and a murderer of innocent men in Jewish tradition, see note on Genesis 10:8, here.

24. For the idea that Nimrod being mighty “before the Lord” can be interpreted different ways, see note on Genesis 10:9, here.

25. For “Before the Lord” being defiance rather than excellence, see note on Genesis 10:9, here, note on Genesis 10:8 here, and note on Genesis 10:9, here. See also Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 261–291). Review and Herald Publishing Association. For “before the Lord” being similarly translated “in the face of the Lord” see lexicon here.

26. For the suggestion that Nimrod told people to abandon the religion of Shem and follow rules of Nimrod instead, see note on Genesis 10:8, here.

27. For Josephus’ statements about Nimrod, see chapter 4.2, here and other show notes for Episode 16.

28. Opponents of the suggestion that Nimrod was the leader of Babel during the period the tower was built point out that Nimrod being a “son of Cush” (as stated in Genesis 10:6-8) could mean that he was born not as an immediate son but a more distant descendant (according to scholar’s note on Genesis 10:8 here), making him too young to be a leader so early in post-Flood history (based on the timeline that places the events of Genesis 11:1-9 around 100 or so years after the Flood, see show note on Peleg and comments in note on Genesis 11:4, here). Against this idea, I would mention, first, that while Nimrod could have been born several generations later given the ambiguity of the “son of” statement, nothing prevents him being a direct son of Cush, and if Cush was born soon after the Flood, Nimrod could have been born within 30 years of the end of the Flood. Secondly, the reference that Nimrod was a “mighty hunter” is suggested by some scholars to refer to kingship (see other show notes for specifics), and several follow the theory that Nimrod took power by force (see other show notes for specifics). If this is true, seniority would not matter on his becoming the leader of the people headed to Shinar. For an additional claim that the group was led by Nimrod, see Jones, F.N. (2015) Chronology of the Old Testament (pg. 42). Master Books.

29. While Genesis doesn’t explicitly say that Nimrod became a king, Genesis 10:10 describes his empire as a “kingdom.” For the theory that Nimrod started the first monarchy, see notes on Genesis 10:8, here here, and here which suggests he may have succeeded due to persuasion and a potential past reputation for heroism. See also Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 261–291). Review and Herald Publishing Association.

30. The suggestion that authority was patriarchal until Nimrod instigated monarchy can be found in the notes on Genesis 10:8, here, and here. See also note on Genesis 10:10 here. This idea also fits with Nimrod’s “hunting” motif which is connected to royal warfare and invasion according to see Zondervan,. NIV, Cultural Backgrounds Study Bible, eBook (Kindle Locations 7857-7883). Zondervan. Kindle Edition. There’s even an Arabic legend that claims Nimrod saw the shape of a crown in the sky and, inspired by the sight, had someone make a golden crown for him to wear, starting the trend kings have followed ever since. For more, see note on Genesis 10:8 here.

31. References to the cities that formed Nimrod’s kingdom can be found in Genesis 10:10. Other than Babel, these cities don’t play much of a role in the story but, as archeologists have found some of the cities buried in the sands of Mesopotamia, it does give us some insight into the region Nimrod ruled over. For details on each city, see show notes below.

32. As the four cities listed in Genesis 10:10 are only referred to as “the beginning” of Nimrod’s kingdom, it is unclear whether he founded Babel, Erech, Accad, and Calneh, or if they were just the cities that comprised his kingdom either by inheritance or conquest. Supporting the idea that Nimrod did not found the cities, but only ruled them as king, see notes on Genesis 10:10, here and here. The note on Genesis 10:10 here doesn’t say one way or the other while Easton, M. G. (1893). In Easton’s Bible dictionary. New York: Harper & Brothers takes Nimrod as the founder of the first monarchy in the region. The opposite opinion, that Nimrod wasn’t only a ruler but the founder of the cities mentioned can be found in the note on Genesis 10:8, here which equates him with Belus the legendary founder of Babylon as well as Jones, F.N. (2015) Chronology of the Old Testament (pg. 42). Master Books. Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 261–291). Review and Herald Publishing Association states that this can be read to mean that either Nimrod’s first kingdom included Babel or that is where he first became king. If Nimrod was the founder of Babel, that would lend significant support to the belief that he led people to the plain of Shinar and encouraged building the Tower of Babel as it would be odd for him to found a city and not be involved in directing the construction of its most famous monument. In line with the assumption (stated above) that Nimrod was a leader of the people going to Shinar, I followed the assumption that Nimrod also founded the city of Babel in telling the story in this episode since no people group would’ve come before to establish the city for him to inherit.

33. For Erech being what we know of as “Uruk” or “Warka” see notes on Genesis 10:10, here, here, and here as well as Horn, S. H. (1979). In The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Dictionary (p. 338). Review and Herald Publishing Association and Barker, K. L. (2002) NIV Study Bible. Genesis 10:10, note. Zondervan. See also note on Genesis 10:10, here.According to legend, this was the home of Gilgamesh mentioned various places including Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 261–291). Review and Herald Publishing Association and Doukhan, J. B. (2016). Seventh-day Adventist International Bible Commentary (pg. 175). Pacific Press Publishing Association.

34. For Accad being “Agade” in history, and the capitol of Sargon, see note on Genesis 10:10, here. See also Horn, S. H. (1979). In The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Dictionary (p. 13). Review and Herald Publishing Association. See also note on Genesis 10:10, here. This city also provided the name for the language of “Accadian” as mentioned in Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 261–291). Review and Herald Publishing Association.

35. The note on Genesis 10:10, here suggests that we aren’t sure where Calneh is Easton, M. G. (1893). In Easton’s Bible dictionary. New York: Harper & Brothers (entry: Calneh) identifies modern “Niffer” (presumably the same as “Nippur” with a different spelling) that lies about 50 miles south-south-east from Babylon. See also Horn, S. H. (1979). In The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Dictionary (pp. 174–175). Review and Herald Publishing Association and note on Genesis 10:10, here as well as Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 261–291). Review and Herald Publishing Association.

36. As the four cities listed in Genesis 10:10 are only referred to as “the beginning” of Nimrod’s kingdom, it is unclear whether he founded Babel, Erech, Accad, and Calneh, or if they were just the cities that comprised his kingdom either by inheritance or conquest. Supporting the idea that Nimrod did not found the cities, but only ruled them as king, see notes on Genesis 10:10, here and here. The note on Genesis 10:10 here doesn’t say one way or the other while Easton, M. G. (1893). In Easton’s Bible dictionary. New York: Harper & Brothers takes Nimrod as the founder of the first monarchy in the region. The opposite opinion, that Nimrod wasn’t only a ruler but the founder of the cities mentioned can be found in the note on Genesis 10:8, here which equates him with Belus the legendary founder of Babylon as well as Jones, F.N. (2015) Chronology of the Old Testament (pg. 42). Master Books. Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 261–291). Review and Herald Publishing Association states that this can be read to mean that either Nimrod’s first kingdom included Babel or that is where he first became king. If Nimrod was the founder of Babel, that would lend significant support to the belief that he led people to the plain of Shinar and encouraged building the Tower of Babel, as stated by Josephus, as it would be odd for him to found a city and not be involved in directing the construction of its most famous monument.

37. For a brief history of clay tablet use, see the article here.

38. For more on cuneiform, see here.

39. For more on Henry Rawlinson, see here.

40. For the languages Darius used in writing the Behistun inscription, the source here says Susanian (the language of Elam), Old Persian, and Assyrian while the source here calls it Old Persian, Elamite, and Akkadian. It appears Assyrian and Akkadian are being used as synonyms. See also here.

41. For Rawlinson’s method of deciphering cuneiform, as well as references to other people who worked in parallel, see here.

42. An article here for further examples of the “many, many headaches” that were involved in figuring out the languages.

43. I should state that, as with reviving any long-forgotten language, there’s plenty of room for debate about just how well we understand what the language says. Do we understand the grammar? Do we know whether the writing was literal or meant to be taken as a euphepmism? Do we recognize idioms that would’ve been unique to their culture? This is not to say that the work of so many scholars is without value, only that it is prudent to recognize that we are far from understanding these languages the ways the original writer of the tablet would’ve understood it. One author estimates our understanding of Sumerian at about 75% (see here).

44. I am quite far from claiming to be a grammar expert, or perhaps even novice, in modern English. The explanation of current noun cases as three (or four if you include “dative” cases) can be found here and here. For the complexities of Sumerian and other ancient languages, and their simplification over time, see here and an updated article by the same author here where the author points out that Sumerian even today is only about 75% understood. The second article also points out that these languages are both distinct from one another but they all show up in history at about the same time.

45. It also appears that the Sumerians, whose language was unrelated to other languages, borrowed words over time from Semitic languages according to Bauer, Susan Wise. The History of the Ancient World: From the Earliest Accounts to the Fall of Rome (Kindle Locations 531-540). W. W. Norton & Company. Kindle Edition.

46. An article referenced earlier (see here) also noted that some of the words we still use today can be found in these early forgotten languages. Evidently “water” comes from the Hittite language, while the Akkadians gave us “gamalu,’ which became “camel” and “samassammu” which became “sesame.”

47. Both Sumeria and Babylonia, as empires, occupied the area that once held the Tower of Babel. As best we can tell, the Sumerians came first (see here, though recognize that the timeline isn’t Biblical) while the Babylonians followed later (see here, with same timeline caveat). Given their geographic overlap, the earlier Sumerian stories likely influenced all the stories that came later, be it Babylon or Assyrian or other mythologies, though this is my assumption.

48. For other Sumerian legends that bear some semblance to the story in Genesis, see pg. 359-360 (book page numbers 336-337) here.

49. For Adam naming the animals, see Genesis 2:19-20. In Sumerian lore, the god Ea gave Adapa wisdom to name all “concepts” and create the nouns of human speech. See pg 175 here.

50. For the Sumerian story of Adapa who was prevented from becoming immortal by trickery, see pgs. 180-181 here. In this case, as before, the god Ea is involved in preventing Adapa from eating the food of life in order to make Adapa die. It’s interesting to note that in the Sumerian version, the deceiver is one of the “gods.” This version puts humans in the middle being obedient to a “god” who lies to them rather than the way Genesis tells the story of an honorable God and disobedient humans. The author of the reference considers the Genesis version a derivation from the Sumerian myth. I think they are different versions of the same story, with Genesis the accurate account.

51. A Babylonian tablet contains the following, presumably a memory of the world of Eden, “In sin one with another in compact joins. The command was established in the garden of the god. The Asnan-tree they ate, they broke in two, Its stalk they destroyed, The sweet juice which injures the body. Great is their sin. Themselves they exalted. To Merodach their Redeemer he (the god Sar) appointed their fate.” The quote comes from Sayce, A. H. The “Higher Criticism” and the Verdict of the Monuments. (pg. 104) 1894. which itself references “The Babylonian and Oriental Record,” iv. II (1890). The suggestion is that the quote comes from part of the Babylonian story of creation, but Cooper, Bill. The Authenticity of the Book of Genesis. Chapter 7. Kindle Edition adds that the later completely reconstructed Enuma Elish does not contain that section, so this text comes from an other unknown story and adds that both Genesis and this story appear to be independent of each other rather than one copied from the other. For the A.H. Sayce quoted source, see pg. 104 here.

52. The British Museum has a cylinder seal that dates to over 2000 BC and shows male and female figures sitting on either side of what appears to be a tree with two fruit hanging from it. Each person looks as though they are reaching for a piece of fruit while a serpent stands behind the female figure. For an image of the seal see here or search museum number 89326. To explain this away as not a depiction of Adam and Eve is harder than seeing it as a straightforward drawing of the story of the Fall. I also referenced this artifact in Episode 7, but I think its worth repeating.

53. For a previous discussion about the Sumerian king list, see here (with details in the show notes). For the text of the Sumerian king list and a list of the kings that came before “the flood swept over” see here.

54. For multiple versions of the Flood legend in Mesopotamia, see later show notes about Gilgamesh as well as the reference to Ziusudra who was a Flood survivor in another version of the mythology of the region.

55. For the heavily damaged tablet referencing the Flood, see pg. 106 here, as wells as Cooper, Bill. The Authenticity of the Book of Genesis. Chapter 39. Kindle Edition. Though the age of the tablet is unknown, it does appear to reference a single God with “I” rather than many different gods which perhaps suggests it is closer to the original history as recorded by Genesis as mentioned by the article here.

56. You could debate whether the Epic of Gilgamesh fits with Sumerian, Babylonian, or Assyrian legends. The first tablets were found in the library of Ashurbanipal in Nineveh, an Assyrian city, but the setting is Sumerian and the language is Sumerian and other older copies in Babylonian have also been found. The story also developed over time with different adventures being added. For an overview, see here.

57. For a summary of the Epic of Gilgamesh, see here that gives details tablet-by-tablet. For the original translation by George Smith, see pgs. 212-216 here.

58. There are arguments that the Bible record is derived from the Babylonian legend. I don’t think that’s true. If Jews were taking details from Babylonian stories to put in their scriptures, with everything else in the Epic of Gilgamesh, why would they take only the story of a global Flood and change the details of even that story? If Genesis was incorporating parts of this Epic, they didn’t take much if anything besides the concept that there was a global Flood. Instead, it is likely both the story in Genesis and the flood story in the Epic of Gilgamesh remember the same event handed down in different ways. See also Kidner, D. (1967). Genesis: An Introduction and Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 103–105). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press as well as Bauer, Susan Wise. The History of the Ancient World: From the Earliest Accounts to the Fall of Rome (Kindle Locations 14601-14603). W. W. Norton & Company. Kindle Edition.

59. There are a lot of theories about who “Nimrod” might be in the standard history books. As referenced earlier, the name “Nimrod” appears to be a title for “rebel,” more than a name, so we have to work off of the history given in Genesis — the events and geography — to narrow down the options. Among the details Genesis 10:8-10 gives are that Nimrod was a grandson of Ham (possibly more if ancestral meaning of “begat” is intended), that he initially ruled four cities including Babel, that he was later connected with the cities of Assyria including Nineveh, and that he was a “mighty hunter,” who was seemingly against God (assuming “before the Lord” means “in the face of God” and “Nimrod” means “rebel” as suggested in earlier notes). With those details on one side, scholars have suggested both Gilgamesh as one option. Against Gilgamesh as Nimrod (or, alternately, against Nimrod as the founder of Babel since Genesis only says that Babel was part of his original empire, not that he founded it) is the fact that the Epic of Gilgamesh doesn’t reference a tower or the confusion of languages in any way (while including a great many non-biblical details). It’s possible the writer was simply editing out that part of the story, but it lends support to the idea that either Nimrod came after the tower-building and language confusion or that Gilgamesh and Nimrod aren’t the same person. That said, if Nimrod came earlier than Gilgamesh, given the lifespans of Noah and his sons, that doesn’t preclude Gilgamesh still being able to visit a Ham or a Noah to learn about the Flood as both Noah and Shem (see Genesis 9:28 and Genesis 11:11 — and likely Ham and Japheth as well — lived for hundreds of years after the Flood. Beyond Gilgamesh, another option is Marduk, the Babylonian chief god, who is also shown as a hunter and whose name might be translatable into Hebrew as “Nimrod” (see here) and others besides. Beyond these, people suggest Gilgamesh’s earlier predecessor Lugalbanda (see pgs. 304 and 312 here as well as Sargon of Akkad (see articles here and here as well as Barker, K. L. (2002) NIV Study Bible. Genesis 10:8, note. Zondervan), but there were other kings in the record prior to Sargon and Sargon took over cities that other people founded, which points toward a pre-Babel dispersion of people which doesn’t fit with the story in Genesis and makes it tricky to explain how those pre-dispersion people got their different languages. As it stands, overall there’s not a good historical connection, between the Nimrod of Genesis and a well-known historical figure. It could be that Nimrod came too early in history to be well recorded, or that he is well recorded but only in mythology (as in Marduk) so we don’t have a clear idea of who he was. For a list of alternative theories about who Nimrod might be in the historical record, and the conclusion that no option is a close match for the Nimrod of the Bible, see Zondervan,. NIV, Cultural Backgrounds Study Bible, eBook (Kindle Locations 7857-7883). Zondervan. Kindle Edition as well as Doukhan, J. B. (2016). Seventh-day Adventist International Bible Commentary (pg. 174). Pacific Press Publishing Association who notes that the historical identity of Nimrod is debated. The note on Genesis 10:8 here dismisses the idea that either Orion or Gilgamesh refer to Nimrod. For revision of the former translation “Izdubar” now accepted to be “Gilgamesh” see here.

60. Cooper makes the observation that it is odd how quickly paganism sprung up after the Flood. It appears in the very early history of cultures such as the Sumerians. He suggests that there was no idolatry before the Flood or Genesis 6 would mention it, but I’m not convinced. Genesis 6:5 is all-encompassing with respect to the evil things people did before the Flood without going into specific crimes. From my perspective, perhaps the growth of paganism and polytheism is somewhat explained by the shortened lives of people after the Flood (as given by the ages at death recorded in Genesis) compared to those who lived for nearly a thousand years prior to it. Such short-lived people might’ve deified their ancestors remembering them as gods rather than as people like themselves, which also explains many of the the bad behaviors of such ‘gods,’ but this is my speculation (though I do not think it is original to me). For more, see Cooper, Bill. The Authenticity of the Book of Genesis. Chapter 7. Kindle Edition.

61. For the reference to the rainbow in Sumerian literature, see note on Genesis 9:17, here.

62. Genesis refers to “Shinar” while people who lived in the area called the region “Sumer” according to Zondervan,. NIV, Cultural Backgrounds Study Bible, eBook (Kindle Locations 7989-7996). Zondervan. Kindle Edition. There’s dispute, however, over whether the names are etymologically related or not. See Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 261–291). Review and Herald Publishing Association and Doukhan, J. B. (2016). Seventh-day Adventist International Bible Commentary (pg. 175). Pacific Press Publishing Association.

63. One potential example of people remembering a time when the whole world spoke one language is found in the Sumerian story “Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta.” Specifically, there is a line that is translated “To Enlil in one tongue spoke,” referring to the Sumerian god Enlil (see pg. 109 here, including the comment in the right column filling in the word “spoke” that was missing from the earlier translation). Later, on pg. 111 of the same document, the story adds a comment about how the gods changed men’s speech from what had before been a single language. This conclusion, however, of a past happy time is contested by later scholars here and here who translate the passage as referring to a future happy state when everyone will speak in to Enlil in one language and when Enki (another god) will have changed all the languages into the same language.

64. In inscribed cylinders found at the ruins of the tower of Borsippa, about 12 miles from Babylon, Nebuchadnezzar, who lived about 600 BC, writes of restoring an old tower that once stood 60 feet tall but had never been completed. It was very old and broken down and crumbled and lay in ruins. In his day, 600 BC, the tower was very old. For a translation, see pg. 41 here. Page 35 in the source refers the the discovery occurring at “Birs-Nimrud” which is the same as Borsippa according to note here. For the location of Borsippa relative to Babylon, see under “Nebo” in Horn, S. H. (1979). In The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Dictionary (p. 782). Review and Herald Publishing Association.

65. For Nimrod expanding his kingdom into Assyria, see Genesis 10:11 and note on Genesis 10:11, here.

66. There debate about whether Nimrod went and founded Nineveh or whether Assur did it (For conflicting opinions, see notes on Genesis 10:11 note here and here). Given the context, I’d guess that the territory may have been named after Assur, but he or his descendants were displaced and / or conquered when Nimrod invaded so that the country retained the name “Assyria” but the cities were founded and named by Nimrod. A version of this idea is put forward in the note on Genesis 10:11, here, here, and here as well as For more, see Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 261–291). Review and Herald Publishing Association. For the straight-line distance between Babylon and Nineveh, measure between Babylon and Nineveh here.

67. A lot could be said about Nineveh that doesn’t fit into this episode. The city comes up later in the Bible as the target of Jonah’s mission (Jonah 1:1) and as the capitol of the Assyrian empire (see here, but discussions of those topics will have to wait until later. As for the other cities, Nimrod’s city of Rehoboth-Ir might be a title for the city market according to the note on Genesis 10:11 here or “the streets of the city” according to note on Genesis 10:11, here but both sources admit the actual site of the city is unknown. The note on Genesis 10:12, here as well as Doukhan, J. B. (2016). Seventh-day Adventist International Bible Commentary (pg. 175). Pacific Press Publishing Association suggests it may possibly refer to suburbs among other options (see also Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 261–291). Review and Herald Publishing Association.). For Calah, there’s the suggestion in the note on Genesis 10:11 in Kidner, D. (1967). Genesis: An Introduction and Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 108–123). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press that “Calah” is modern “Nimrud,” a name that bears a suspicious similarity to “Nimrod,” an idea echoed in the note on Genesis 10:11, here and here though it admits that there isn’t consensus on that identification (see also Doukhan, J. B. (2016). Seventh-day Adventist International Bible Commentary (pg. 175). Pacific Press Publishing Association.). For Resen, even less is known other than the fact that it is between Calah and Rehoboth-Ir. Altogether there is disagreement about the location of all the cities in this list of four besides Nineveh as stated by Genesis 10:12.

68. For Nineveh as the capitol of the Assyrian empire, see here.

69. For the Assyrians kings Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal ruling over Babylon in addition to Assyria, see comment in Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1977). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 3, p. 305). Review and Herald Publishing Association. This is interesting as 2 Chronicles 33:11 says that the king of “Assyria” took Manasseh, the wicked king of Judah, to *Babylon.” Normally one would expect an Assyrian king to take a captive back to Assyria, but during the time of Manasseh’s reign, the Assyrian emperors were also in control of Babylon. For how the reigns of Manasseh and Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal overlap, see Jones, F.N. (2015) Chronology of the Old Testament (pp. 279-280, 286). Master Books.

70. One of the kings who ruled over Babylon in addition to Assyria was Ashurbanipal. A significant portion of what we know about Babylonian history comes from what was found at Ashurbanipal’s library in Nineveh, as mentioned here. While other tablets have been found, the Flood legend translated by George Smith comes from this library in Nineveh. In addition, according to the article cited above, there were plans underway as recently as 2014 to seek for more artifacts from the library that might be as yet undiscovered.

71. For where Canaan settled, see note on Genesis 10:6 here.

72. Going forward, while I reviewed several sources for where Noah’s descendants went after Babel, one of the more recent and well-sourced is Bill Cooper’s book “After the Flood” which breaks down each descendant in the appendices to the book and references where they are mentioned in ancient records.

73. In Genesis, this list of people is not always the name of the first son himself, but sometimes the people group that eventually descended from that son. For instance in Genesis 10:15-16 it references “Sidon” and “Heth” who would’ve been people, but goes on to talk about the “Jebusite” and “Amorite” which would refer to a tribe. For this principal and its application to the later children of Mizraim, see note on Genesis 10:1, here.

74. Several commentaries suggest that “Heth” refers to the Hittites. See notes on Genesis 10:15 here, here, here, here, and here. Some more recent scholarship doubts the connection between “Heth” and the “Hitties” and suggests that the Hittites came from southeast Europe and might not be related to the Hittites of Canaan or that the two groups are at least not necessarily the same (see Barker, K. L. (2002) NIV Study Bible. Genesis 10:15, note. Zondervan, Andrews Study Bible (2010) Genesis 10:15-19, note. Andrews University Press). Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 261–291). Review and Herald Publishing Association.) suggests that the Hittite empire was a later development and that children of the “Heth” mentioned in Genesis were the precursors to that empire. Of the options, I’m inclined to follow the original opinion that Heth and the Hittites are directly linked. For the remnants of the Hittite capitol of Hattushah, a world heritage site, see here.

75. For the Amorites living in the hill country and a description of them as shown on Egyptian drawings, see Easton, M. G. (1893). In Easton’s Bible dictionary. New York: Harper & Brothers and note on Genesis 10:15-18, here. They weren’t an insignificant tribe, either. Overtime they grew into a power strong enough to conquer Babylon. Hammurabi, an Amorite, was the sixth ruler of that dynasty (see here).

76. For what we know about the Jebusites, see notes on Genesis 10:16 here, here, here, and For more, see Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 261–291). Review and Herald Publishing Association. For Jebus and Jerusalem being the same place, see 1 Chronicles 11:4-5.

77. For details on the Hamathites, see notes on Genesis 10:18 here, here, here. See also Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 261–291). Review and Herald Publishing Association.

78. For the link between the Girgashites and the Phoenicians, see Horn, S. H. (1979). In The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Dictionary (p. 422). Review and Herald Publishing Association.

79. For the possibilty that the Hivites are really the Horites, see For more, see Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 261–291). Review and Herald Publishing Association and Horn, S. H. (1979). In The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Dictionary (pp. 502–503). Review and Herald Publishing Association. For their connection with the four cities of the Gibeonites that tricked Joshua during the conquest of Canaan later on, see note on Genesis 10:17 here.

80. For more on the Arkites, see notes on Genesis 10:17 here, here, here. For the suggested connection between Irqata and the Arkites, see Doukhan, J. B. (2016). Seventh-day Adventist International Bible Commentary (pg. 178). Pacific Press Publishing Association and For more, see Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 261–291). Review and Herald Publishing Association.For the location of the city at the mouth of a river, see Horn, S. H. (1979). In The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Dictionary (p. 75). Review and Herald Publishing Association.

81. For more details about the Sinites, see notes on Genesis 10:17 here, here, and here. The proximity to Tel Arka assumes that that was the home of the Arkites. Another sources suggest that the location is unknown. See Doukhan, J. B. (2016). Seventh-day Adventist International Bible Commentary (pg. 178). Pacific Press Publishing Association and For more, see Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 261–291). Review and Herald Publishing Association.

82. See notes on Genesis 10:18 here and here as well as Doukhan, J. B. (2016). Seventh-day Adventist International Bible Commentary (pg. 178). Pacific Press Publishing Association and For more, see Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 261–291). Review and Herald Publishing Association.

83. See notes on Genesis 10:18 here, here and here. See also Doukhan, J. B. (2016). Seventh-day Adventist International Bible Commentary (pg. 178). Pacific Press Publishing Association and Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 261–291). Review and Herald Publishing Association.

84. For more on Sidon and its connection to Canaan and the Phoenicians, see notes on Genesis 10:15 here, here, here, and note on Genesis 10:15-18 here. Later on in history, the city of Tyre became more important than Sidon, and one scholar notes that the lack of a reference to “Tyre,” in Genesis 10 supports the understanding that the record is older than the point in time when Tyre gained prominence. For more see footnote 393 in Doukhan, J. B. (2016). Seventh-day Adventist International Bible Commentary (pg. 177). Pacific Press Publishing Association. See also    Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 261–291). Review and Herald Publishing Association and Horn, S. H. (1979). In The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Dictionary (pp. 1036–1038). Review and Herald Publishing Association. For locating Sidon between Tyre and Beirut, see map here.

85. For Sidon as an ancient city and one of the home of the Phoenicians, see here and here. For the Phoenicians being known for their sailing abilities, see here.

86. For the history of Tyrian purple, see here and here. For “Phoenician” coming from the Greek for “red-purple” see Horn, S. H. (1979). In The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Dictionary (p. 176). Review and Herald Publishing Association. See also Barker, K. L. (2002) NIV Study Bible. Genesis 10:6, note. Zondervan which suggests that “Canaan” might also mean something like “land of purple.” It’s also possible that someone’s name “Canaan” came to also refer to the color of purple after his descendants became the producers and exporters of the dye, but that’s my speculation.

87. For the Phoenicians founding Carthage, see here. For the meaning of “Carthage” see here. For Carthage being the center of an empire, see here where it is described as “controlling” an empire.

88. For the Carthaginians referring to themselves as “Canaanites” on their coins, see Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 261–291). Review and Herald Publishing Association.

89. For the Canaanite memory of an ancient migration from near the Persian Gulf, see Horn, S. H. (1979). In The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Dictionary (p. 176). Review and Herald Publishing Association.

90. For the background of Philo of Byblos, see here and the introductory paragraphs on pg. 213 here.

91. For a summary of Philo of Byblos’ writings about Phoenicia, see here. In that article, the author mentions that Philo thought of “gods” as humans who’d been deified, giving examples on pgs. 24 and 26. In addition, the author suggests that while the “creation” (cosmogony) part of Philo’s work might’ve been influenced by Greek culture, the section that deals with generations of people who discovered things (technogony) appears to be a genuine recollection of Phoenician legends (see pg. 50). For parallels that are mentioned by the author that come out of the technogony section, see first pg. 23 of the article, where people discovered the use of food on trees aligning with Adam and Eve eating the forbidden fruit Genesis 3 (though in Philo it is the second generation of people who discovered it rather than the first as it is in Genesis). Next, Philo tells of people in the third generation praying to the sun because of droughts (pg. 23) which could be linked to Genesis 4:26 where Enosh, a member of the third generation, is listed as living when “men began to call on the name of the Lord” (in this case, both incidents occurring to members of the 3rd generation). There’s also the mention of giants being born and promiscuous behavior (pg. 24 and Genesis 6:4 as well as the story of a fight between two brothers, one who built shelters from plants and the other who made clothes from animals skins (see pg. 24 vs Genesis 4:1-15) which fits with Cain the gardener who tried to offer a sacrifice of plants fighting Abel the shepherd who offered a sacrifice of animals. Philo goes on to mention a list of discoveries and inventions from the children of the brother who built shelters from plants, including hunting and fishing and metal working, which may align with Jabal and Tubal-Cain who are mentioned as keeping livestock and working with iron and bronze (see pg. 24 and Genesis 4:20-22. These parallels between Philo and Genesis are far from perfect as, for example, in the fight between the brothers, neither is killed and the brother who would be linked to Abel is later described as the first person to turn a tree into a boat, which has no parallel in the story in Genesis. For the author’s list of parallels between Philo and the Old Testament, see pg. 50.

92. For a discussion of the authenticity of Philo’s record, see pgs. 1-9 here which suggests that Philo’s material isn’t very old since it parrots the ideas of Euhemerus in suggesting that the “gods” were once just men. While this is possible, even plausible, the possibility remains that Philo was passing along accurate beliefs independent of Euhemerus. It is also interesting to note that even Philo didn’t know the translation of some names that he recorded (see pg. 9 in above reference) which, in my opinion, lends some support for the idea that at least some of Philo’s material was based on older documents rather than his own inventiveness. See also discussion starting on pg. 19 here. Both of the above authors give some reference to the discovery of tablets at Ugarit in the 1930s improving the opinion of Philo’s authenticity, though to varying degrees. As far as I can tell, though, the details found on the tablets at Ugarit do not overlap significantly with the mythology Philo records with one author stating that Philo offers less specificity (see comments at the end of pg. 55 and start of pg 56 here). Altogether, we don’t have a lot of detail about Canaanite legends. And, even if we did, we’d have to remember that Canaan was a collection of city-states more than an empire, so the religion probably varied from place to place (see pgs. 55 - 56 and article here). Furthermore, with the strip of land along the Mediterranean coast functioning as a crossroads between places like Egypt and Babylon and including trade with Greek people to the north, it would be easy for Canaanite religion to become a mixture of all the surrounding influences.

93. With all these parallels, and the fact that Phoenicia is fairly close to the Jewish homeland, there is speculation about whether the Jewish Scriptures influenced Philo. The author addresses this question on pg. 60 where he suggests that if Philo did borrow from Jewish tradition, then he scrambled it significantly. On the other hand, if Philo was accurately recording and passing along older legends, there’s no way to know whether those legends were influenced by Israelites such as Moses or David or Solomon prior to Philo’s use of them, though, if so, again, the facts and details were well scrambled in the process. For more, see pg.60 here.

94. In addition to dismissing Jewish influence on Philo, it's worth noting that while Philo may have been influenced by Greek culture, his history of the pantheon of gods disagrees with Hesiod, the recorder of the Greek pantheon from around 700 BC (see here), suggesting that Philo wasn’t simply copying Hesiod’s material. For more, see pg. 56, footnote 2, as well as pg. 44 here.

95. For some of the mythology of Canaan, see here for a summary (though I don’t ascribe to the ideas the the author offers of the Bible’s Old Testament incorporating Canaanite ideas into its text). For definition of Yamm, the Canaanite god, see here.

96. The parallel between the Canaanite mythology of Baal and Yamm and the Babylonian story of Marduk and Tiamat is my assumption. Canaan and Babylon weren’t very far apart. For an overview of the Babylonian story, see here.

97. The name “Cush” means “Black” according to Easton, M. G. (1893). In Easton’s Bible dictionary. New York: Harper & Brothers.

98. For Cush settling near modern Ethiopia, see notes on Genesis 10:6, here, here, as well as Easton, M. G. (1893). In Easton’s Bible dictionary. New York: Harper & Brothers, Doukhan, J. B. (2016). Seventh-day Adventist International Bible Commentary (pg. 173). Pacific Press Publishing Association, and Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 261–291). Review and Herald Publishing Association. Curiously, a couple of sources referred to Cush as landing in the Ethiopia of Asia, not the Ethiopia of Africa (see notes on Genesis 10:6, here and here, but as other links (see above) state that Cush was south of Egypt, and as I could find no reference to there ever was an Ethiopia in the Arabian peninsula, I concluded that Cush went into Africa while his children populated the Arabian peninsula, but whether he went to Africa coming from the north, or crossed over the Red Sea to get there (as suggested in note on Genesis 10:6, here) there’s no way to say.    For people still calling Ethiopians Cushites in Josephus’ day, see sentence containing, “Chus; for the Ethiopians,” here.

99. For Cush’s children settling in Arabia, see note on Genesis 10:7, here. In the show notes following, I outline where each tribe likely settled, but there’s much disagreement over the specifics.

100. Broadly speaking, Cush’s son Seba’s descendants are thought to be a tribe in the Arabian peninsula. The notes on Genesis 10:7 here and here put them on the eastern shore of the Red Sea near Massowah in Africa. (see note on Genesis 10:7 here) while the note on Genesis 10:7, here suggests they might’ve lived on both sides of the Red Sea, in Africa as well as Arabia, which would allow for Josephus and other references that put them near the upper reaches of the Nile. Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 261–291). Review and Herald Publishing Association suggests this movement to Africa was only true by the time of Josephus, and that originally Seba had lived in the Arabian peninsula only.

101. For the location of the descendants of Havilah, Cush’s son, in the Arabian peninsula, see note on Genesis 10:7, here and comment placing them on the western part of the peninsula in Doukhan, J. B. (2016). Seventh-day Adventist International Bible Commentary (pg. 174). Pacific Press Publishing Association, though the note on Genesis 10:7, here wants to put them on the coast of Africa while noting that they are an Arabian tribe and Cooper, Bill. After the Flood (p. 184). Kindle Edition has them on the east coast of the peninsula by the Persian Gulf.

102. For the suggestion that Sabtah was part of the “Ethiopians of Arabia” see note on Genesis 10:7 here and Doukhan, J. B. (2016). Seventh-day Adventist International Bible Commentary (pg. 174). Pacific Press Publishing Association who mentions that their name might show up in “Shabwa(t)” the capitol of the kingdom of Hadraumat.

103. For more on Ramah (or Raamah), that can also be pronounced “Rhegma,” see notes on Genesis 10:7 here, here, here, and here which locates it in Oman. For the suggestion that “Ragmatum” might be a memory of “Ramah” in the name of the ancient capitol city of Yemen, see Doukhan, J. B. (2016). Seventh-day Adventist International Bible Commentary (pg. 174). Pacific Press Publishing Association. For Raamah, Dedan, and Sheba dividing up the end of the Arabian peninsula, see note on Genesis 10:7 here. See also For more, see Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 261–291). Review and Herald Publishing Association and Horn, S. H. (1979). In The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Dictionary (p. 921). Review and Herald Publishing Association.

104. Doukhan, J. B. (2016). Seventh-day Adventist International Bible Commentary (pg. 174). Pacific Press Publishing Association suggests that Sabtecah is probably in Arabia, while Cooper, Bill. After the Flood (p. 185). Kindle Edition. suggests southern Arabia, modern Yemen.

105. Sheba and Dedan are probably in southwest Arabia according to Doukhan, J. B. (2016). Seventh-day Adventist International Bible Commentary (pg. 174). Pacific Press Publishing Association. Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 261–291). Review and Herald Publishing Association puts them in Yemen though Cooper, Bill. After the Flood (p. 185). Kindle Edition has Dedan further north. Genesis 25:3 mentions another two boys named Sheba and Dedan who were born later, however and Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 261–291). Review and Herald Publishing Association suggests that the original Sheba and Dedan were in south Arabia while the latter set lived further north.

106. For the Arabian desert as the second largest desert on Earth, behind only the Sahara, see here. For daily high temperatures, see here.

107. For Saudi Arabia covering 80% of the Arabian peninsula, see here. For the note that it is the largest country in the world without a river, see geography note here.

108. For a sandstorm in Arabia from 2011, see the article here.

109. For the remains of a river that used to flow from the west to the east of the Arabian peninsula, see the article here.

110. For details on the Marib dam, see pg. 51 here and pg. 9 here for the dimensions of the dam, pg. 190, here for the amount of land the reservoir irrigated. See pg. 534 here for a diagram of the dam. For the length of the dam compared to the Hoover dam, see pg. 57 here which claims “twice as long” though the statistics from here suggest more like 1.5 times as long. The Hoover dam is, however, around 15 times taller than the Marib dam (see above links for the different heights). The Marib dam failed around the mid-500s AD according to pg. 10 in this source.

111. The Queen of Sheba probably came from southern Arabia near the modern city of Marib rather than from Ethiopia, bringing many spices with her, as mentioned in 1 Kings 10:10. For more, see Horn, S. H. (1979). In The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Dictionary (p. 1015). Review and Herald Publishing Association. For myrrh and frankincense production in souther Arabia, and Marib’s profits from the trade, see here.

112. Southern Arabia was known as “Arabia Felix” or “Happy Arabia” during the Roman era as compared with “Arabia deserta” to the north according to the note on pg. 1 here. See also here.

113. Moses doesn’t say much about Put, the fourth of Ham’s sons. Most scholars think Put settled further west in north Africa, beyond Egypt. There are also mentions of a river in the area named either “Fut” or “Phutes” and that part of the country was known as “Futa.” For “Put” being Libya, see notes on Genesis 10:6 here, here, here, here, and here that mentions the connection comes from Josephus (see sentence containing, “Phut also was the founder,” here who adds that the name Libya came after the region was later renamed for one of Egypt (Mizraim’s) descendants. Cooper, Bill. After the Flood (p. 189). Kindle Edition doesn’t mention Libya, but does place “Put” along the north African coast and mentions that the name frequently shows up in Egyptian records. Cooper also suggests (on pgs. 186-187) that the “Ludim” mentioned in Genesis are the son of Mizraim who later gave their name to Libya, which accords well with Josephus comment. For other references, see also Doukhan, J. B. (2016). Seventh-day Adventist International Bible Commentary (pg. 173). Pacific Press Publishing Association. While Libya is commonly identified as “Put”, there is also the suggestion that “Put” might be south of Egypt in Somalia. For more, see Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 261–291). Review and Herald Publishing Association, Barker, K. L. (2002) NIV Study Bible. Genesis 10:6, note. Zondervan, and Horn, S. H. (1979). In The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Dictionary (p. 918). Review and Herald Publishing Association.

114. For the original Hebrew saying a form of “Mizraim” instead of “Egypt” see note on Genesis 10:6 here. For the Jews still using a form of the word “Mizraim” to refer to Egypt in Josephus’ day, see sentence containing, “The memory also of the Mesraites,” here.

115. For the Assyrians referring to “Egypt” as “Musur,” similar to “Mizraim,” see note on Genesis 10:6, here.

116. For the Canaanite name for Egypt in the 1300s BC as “Misri” see Horn, S. H. (1979). In The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Dictionary (p. 305). Review and Herald Publishing Association.

117. For the Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrews, and other ancient cultures calling Egypt “Mizraim” or something similar while the Egyptians referred to their land as the “black land” see Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 261–291). Review and Herald Publishing Association.

118. For the old Egyptian name for “Egypt” being “Kemi” as a reference to “Ham,” Mizraim’s father, see note on Genesis 10:6, here.

119. The Turks called Egypt “Mitzir” (see note on Genesis 10:6, here) and the Arabs called it “Muzr” or “Mizr” (see Easton, M. G. (1893). In Easton’s Bible dictionary. New York: Harper & Brothers.), but considering that both cultures overlapped with the Jews in the Middle East it is hard to say whether they were influenced by the Jewish name “Mizraim” found in the Bible or independently remember Egypt as something similar to “Mizraim.” For the Egyptians in modern times referring to their country by the name “Misr,” and “Egypt” coming from the name for Memphis, see the article here as well as Horn, S. H. (1979). In The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Dictionary (p. 305). Review and Herald Publishing Association.

120. The “-aim” ending of “Mizraim” suggests that it is referring to two of something, we don’t know why, but there is a theory that it refers to both upper and lower Egypt. See notes on Genesis 10:6, here and here. Easton, M. G. (1893). In Easton’s Bible dictionary. New York: Harper & Brothers suggests it is refers to two “Matzors” referring to the idea of a fortified mound and references upper and lower Egypt.

121. For the Anamim, there are various suggestions including that the lived in the furthest south oasis of Egypt (see note on Genesis 10:13, here), or west of Egypt in north Africa (see Barker, K. L. (2002) NIV Study Bible. Genesis 10:13, note. Zondervan.), or possibly in Cyrene (Doukhan, J. B. (2016). Seventh-day Adventist International Bible Commentary (pg. 176). Pacific Press Publishing Association and Horn, S. H. (1979). In The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Dictionary (p. 44). Review and Herald Publishing Association), though they must refer to the region as Cyrene itself was a colony from Greece (see here.

122. For placing the Ludim in the Nile area, see notes on Genesis 10:13, here. They’re also mentioned as being used as mercenaries by Egypt according to Easton, M. G. (1893). In Easton’s Bible dictionary. New York: Harper & Brothers. Cooper, Bill. After the Flood (p. 186). Kindle Edition suggests that this tribe is where we get the name Libya.

123. The Lehabim are thought to be people living to the west or Egypt (see note on Genesis 10:13 here and note on Genesis 10:13, here) or maybe a desert tribe (see Barker, K. L. (2002) NIV Study Bible. Genesis 10:13, note. Zondervan.). See also Doukhan, J. B. (2016). Seventh-day Adventist International Bible Commentary (pg. 176). Pacific Press Publishing Association and Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 261–291). Review and Herald Publishing Association.

124. For the location of the Naphtuhim, see note on Genesis 10:13 here which places them near Pelusium on Lake Sirbonis or further south toward Sudan, an identification Easton, M. G. (1893). In Easton’s Bible dictionary. New York: Harper & Brothers suggests. The note on Genesis 10:13, here suggests the Nile delta (or some unknown oasis) while Doukhan, J. B. (2016). Seventh-day Adventist International Bible Commentary (pg. 176). Pacific Press Publishing Association agrees with the Nile delta location. While not stating the delta itself, Barker, K. L. (2002) NIV Study Bible. Genesis 10:13, note. Zondervan does place them in lower Egypt. One scholar (see note on Genesis 10:13, here) suggests that these were the “true” Egyptians and links them to the “people of ptah,” an Egyptian god (see here as well as here). The most concrete and plausible link conclusion is offered by Horn, S. H. (1979). In The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Dictionary (p. 778). Review and Herald Publishing Association who notes that Egyptians called the people in the Nile delta “Na-patuh” which could by related to “Naphtuhim.”

125. The Pathrusim are consistently linked to upper (southern) Egypt. See notes on Genesis 10:14 here, here, here, here, and here as well as Barker, K. L. (2002) NIV Study Bible. Genesis 10:14, note. Zondervan. Doukhan, J. B. (2016). Seventh-day Adventist International Bible Commentary (pg. 176). Pacific Press Publishing Association notes that the Assyrians refer to them as the “Paturesi.” Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 261–291). Review and Herald Publishing Association points out that Ezekiel 29:14 calls “Pathros” the original homeland of the Egyptians, which agrees with their own legend regarding the first king, Menes, who united Egypt into one nation, but came from the southern part of the region.

126. For details on Josephus’ description of the Ethiopic war, see chapter 6 for reference to the descendants of Mizraim that were wiped out, chapter 10 for a description of the story of Moses’ actions in the Ethiopic war, and footnote 17 here. It’s unclear how much of the extra-Biblical stories about Moses are rooted in reality versus legend. Moses was trained as an Egyptian prince, and it’s plausible or likely that he led Egyptian troops. As for his tactics in the war, it is hard to know if any of it is more than legend, but if there was a war that destroyed or decimated so many tribes, it would explain why so many of Mizraim’s descendants don’t show up significantly in the historical record, as suggested by Cooper, Bill. After the Flood (p. 187). Kindle Edition.

127. For the Kasluhim, it appears they lived in the northern part of Egypt (see notes on Genesis 10:14 here, and here).

128. For the Casluhim being considered the forbears of the Caphtorim and the Philstim (Philistines) see Genesis 10:14. For the argument that the Caphtorim are descended from Mizraim and only sibling to the Kasluhim, see Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 1, p. 277). Review and Herald Publishing Association.

129. There’s a good bit of debate over the back story of the Philistines. We know from Genesis 10:13-14 that the Philistines were descendants of Mizraim, who founded Egypt. From Judges 3:31, Judges 13:1, and 1 Samuel 4 that the Philistines lived in large numbers in Canaan, where the Israelites had settled. What happened in between those events is debated. There is a group of scholars who place the Philistines as part of the “Sea Peoples” who invaded along the Mediterranean coast around the 1300’s BC (see note on Genesis 10:14, here as well as Horn, S. H. (1979). In The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Dictionary (p. 878). Review and Herald Publishing Association). Part of the argument for this is Amos 9:7 and Jeremiah 47:4 that connects the Philistines to “Caphtor” which scholars suggest is the island of Crete (see Kidner, D. (1967). Genesis: An Introduction and Commentary (Vol. 1, p. 115). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, Horn, S. H. (1979). In The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Dictionary (p. 189). Review and Herald Publishing Association., Doukhan, J. B. (2016). Seventh-day Adventist International Bible Commentary (pg. 177). Pacific Press Publishing Association., and note on Genesis 10:14, here), but this depends on whether “Caphtor” actually refers to “Crete.” In support of this argument, they have found many Aegean artifacts in excavations of Philistine cities (see Doukhan, J. B. (2016). Seventh-day Adventist International Bible Commentary (pg. 176). Pacific Press Publishing Association). On the other hand, Genesis 21:32 and Genesis 26:1 suggest the Philistines were already in Canaan during the days of Abraham and Isaac, placing them there earlier than the Sea Peoples’ invasion of several hundred years later. One suggestion is that the Philistines referenced in the days of Abraham and Isaac were only a small group, later bolstered by settlements after the Sea Peoples’ invasion (see Horn, S. H. (1979). In The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Dictionary (p. 879). Review and Herald Publishing Association and Kidner, D. (1967). Genesis: An Introduction and Commentary (Vol. 1, p. 153). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press) though the above references in Genesis as well as Exodus 13:17-18 make it appear that the Philistines were present in some numbers. Cooper argues confidently that the connection between “Caphtor” and “Crete” is a mistake and references several reasons that suggest “Caphtor” should be associated with a settlement on the mainland of North Africa (see Cooper, Bill. After the Flood (p. 187-189). Kindle Edition). Though Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 261–291). Review and Herald Publishing Association states that the reference to “Keftiu” (also noted by Cooper) as a name for “Caphtor” connects them as the first settlers of Crete in Egyptian inscriptions. In this debate, Cooper’s main important detail is to realize that any identification of the Philistines as coming from Crete with the “Sea Peoples” as a way of dismissing the accuracy of references to the Philistines in the time of Abraham and Isaac isn’t well founded. For a list of places scholars have identified as the home of the Caphtorim, see See notes on Genesis 10:14, here, here, here. note on Genesis 10:13, here with the last suggesting that perhaps the Caphtorim colonized Crete, noting that nothing is said of that island regarding Japheth’s children.

130. For the word “Philistine” possibly coming from an Ethiopian root word meaning “emigrate” see note on Genesis 10:14, here. For the connection between “Philistine” and “Palestine” see comment on Genesis 10:13 here.

131. For the Rosetta stone’s history and its use in deciphering hieroglyphics, see here.

132. For the background on the combination of phonograms, logograms, and determinatives in ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics, see here. The example of combining concrete nouns “ball” and “ants” to make “balance” is my own invention. In the above source, I assume the example of “bee” and “leaf” being combined to make “belief” is a similar invention. For more, see here, a book on the grammar of the Egyptians referenced in the article here.

133. For mention of the earliest hieroglyphics appearing fully formed, see pg. 55 here. It is also suggested in Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 140–141). Review and Herald Publishing Association that Egyptian hieroglyphics appear with out any prototypes script in their earliest examples, suggesting that hieroglyphics began that way and didn’t have stages of development that you would expect of a new language. Depending on your perspective, this doesn’t confirm or deny the story of the tower of Babel. On the one hand, you could argue that a new language wouldn’t have a ready-made writing script so Egyptian couldn’t be a new language fresh from Babel. On the other hand, a language unrelated to the languages of Mesopotamia, but spoken by a cadre of intelligent people, would quickly develop its own writing system for recording information. If Egyptian was related to Sumerian, you’d expect their writing styles to be related too.

134. To be clear, in this list of technologies the ancient Egyptians figured out, I can’t say how many of them appeared early in Egyptian history or how they developed over time. Some of these technologies may have come early, others late, and all of them likely changed over time. Furthermore, any timeline is depend on Egyptian chronology, which is fairly muddled as described here.

135. For the Egyptian counterweight crane used for transferring water, see here.

136. For the use of “nilometers” to measure the water level in the Nile, see here.

137. For Egyptian possession of razor blades in ancient history, see here.

138. For Egyptian hole drilling technology, see reference on pgs. 1-3 here to the age of Egyptian core drilling as well as articles here and here. Neither comments on the methods the Egyptians must have used to make the tubular drills, only the abrasive used to do the drilling.

139. For the list of ancient wonders of the world, see here.

140. For the dimensions and number of blocks used in the great pyramid at Giza, see here.

141. For a primer on ziggurats and a progression from step pyramids to the more famous smooth-sided pyramids in Egyptian history, see here. This is not to say that ziggurats and pyramids are related, only that the stepped shape of the early pyramids is reminiscent of the stepped sides of ziggurats which would make sense if the Tower of Babel was a ziggurat and, as Genesis describes, the settlers of Egypt came there from Mesopotamia after leaving that unfinished tower behind.

142. As a further comment on the link between early Egyptian culture and Mesopotamia, Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 1, p. 140). Review and Herald Publishing Association comments that Egyptian buildings were first built of brick and had similar architecture as those in Mesopotamia as well as a similar patterns and designs on objects.

143. I should mention here that Egyptian mythology has a broad span in terms of material, versions, and timeline of development. Some of the legends mentioned in this episode probably occurred at different points in history, but it is difficult to know whether they are young or old, and even so, connections between these stories and “real” history are speculative at best. For examples of different Egyptian mythology, including examples of it changing over time in Ptah going from craftsman-god to creator-god, see here.

144. For an overview of various Egyptian mythologies here. As an example of the fragmented nature of their mythology, note that Ra, Atum, and Ptah (and potentially others) were all considered the main god of creation (see here, here, and here).   

145. For the creation of the world by Ra rising from the waters that covered the world at the beginning of time, see pg. 207 here. For a description of the Shabaka stone and the story of Ptah creating by using words, see pgs. 81, 83-85 here.

146. For the story of an Egyptian god threatening to destroy the world and return it to a watery flooded condition, see Genesis 8 here as well as pg. 104 here with the full translation found on pg. 174 here.

147. For the story of Ra and the rebellion against his rule, see pg. 2 here. For the reference to the title of the “heavenly cow” meaning “great flood” see here.

148. For a definition of the Egyptian god Thoth, see here. For Ra leaving Thoth as one of the gods in charge of the Earth after he left, see here. For Thoth setting up columns with writing on them after a Flood, see here.

149. For the reference to Plato’s record of Egyptians telling Solon of several extreme floods, see here.

150. For examples of various groupings of gods in Egyptian mythology, see here. Of these, the Ogdoad mentioned below stands out due to its potential similarities with the four pairs of humans who survived the Flood. Whether the other groupings of gods have any significance, I couldn’t say.

151. For a summary of the Ogdoad group of Egyptian gods made up of four pairs of male and female deities, see here.

152. For parallels between the Ogdoad deities and Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth, see the series of articles here, here, here, and here.

153. For Hectaeus of Abdera’s lifetime, see here which puts him between 300 - 400 BC. The reference here puts him at around 290 BC. This would appear to put him contemporary with Euhemerus, but the reference pg. 151 of the article here says Hectaeus was first to suggested that some of the gods were just deified kings of the past. In this case, as in Euhemerus, Hectaeus thought that there were “real” gods who were distinct from legendary kings who’d were simply elevated to the status of gods by people (see pg. 10 of same article here. For Hectaeus of Abdera’s suggestion that the Egyptian gods were forces of nature or deified kings from the past, see pgs. 149-151, here. In addition, on pg. 160 here the author suggests that Hectaeus argued that those deified humans had become immortal by their good actions on mankind’s behalf, making it unclear whether the concept of “deification” is Hectaeus arguing that kings were remembered as gods or that they had become gods in actuality.

154. There are longer and shorter Babylonian and Egyptian timelines, I’m referring only to those that are in surprising agreement with what is mentioned in Genesis. This is cherry-picking, but in my opinion, it is interesting that these timelines offer specific numbers, suggesting, perhaps, that they are based more on reality than legend. If you are making something up, you might not be keen to give specific dates or time periods because that could be shown to be false. If you are telling the truth, there’s no danger in giving specifics.

155. For the Genesis date of the start of the Flood see Ussher, James (2006-11-01). The Annals of the World (Kindle Locations 502-503). Master Books. Kindle Edition who gives 2349 BC. Alternatively, Jones, F.N. (2015) Chronology of the Old Testament (pgs. 278) Master Books gives 2348 BC.

156. For the timing of the events at the tower of Babel, see show notes for Episode 16.

157. For the date of the capture of Babylon by Alexander the Great, see here. For Aristotle as one of Alexander the Great’s tutors before he became king, see here. For Alexander sending the astronomical records back to Aristotle, and the total of 1903 years between the founding of Babylon and its capture by Alexander, see references in Ussher, James (2006-11-01). The Annals of the World (Kindle Locations 581-583). Master Books. Kindle Edition.   

158. For the timeline written in the middle ages by Constantine Manasses that references 1663 years between the founding of Egypt and when it was conquered by the Persians, see Ussher, James (2006-11-01). The Annals of the World (Kindle Location 594). Master Books. Kindle Edition. For 525 BC as the date when Cambyses, the Persian king, conquered Egypt, see here.

159. For the idea that some of the changes in the history people remember was due to accidental mistakes in hand-offs between generations, see comments in Models,    Calling Long Distance, and in the show notes of Episode 10.

160. For the pharaohs being thought of as incarnations of the god Horus, and therefore a god themselves, see here. Elsewhere the pharaohs are defined as a “divine intermediary” between people and the gods, still suggesting a god-like status.

161. For the comment that artisans in Egypt depicted things as they were told to show them, rather than as they were, see pg. 82 here or 1 hr 50 minutes into the audiobook.

162. I talked a lot in the episode about Ham’s kids, but in terms of legends about Ham himself, one commentary (see note on Genesis 9:22, here), references Berosus (see here as saying that Ham was remembered in history as “Zoroast” (presumably Zoroaster). Zoroaster is a confusing character. There’s some suggestion that he lived around 600 BC (see here), much too late to be equated with Ham, but that appears to based on some unreliable Greek history (see here) desiring to describe Pythagoras as a student of Zoroaster. The above article also outlines a number of other spurious attempts to connect Zoroaster to historical figures, but also mentions the belief in Plato’s day (~400BC that Zoroaster lived several thousand years earlier. From all of this we can derive two things. First, if Zoroaster did live in the distant past relative to Plato (though not several thousand years) that could remember a time when Ham lived, but, in digging through the data, legends about Zoroaster appear based on very little and come across speculative and unreliable. As such, any legendary connection between Zoroaster and Ham offers little if any value.

163. For an overview of where Ham’s children settled after Babel, see note on Genesis 10:20 here as well as Horn, S. H. (1979). In The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Dictionary (p. 453). Review and Herald Publishing Association.

164. Bill Cooper, in Cooper, Bill. The Authenticity of the Book of Genesis. Chapter 18. Kindle Edition, notes that where parallels exist between the history in Genesis (creation, Cain and Abel, the Flood, and others) and the stories told by indigenous people, there is room to claim that that those parallels are due to natives reciting versions of stories that they learned from Christian missionaries. On the other hand, presumably, where there are no parallels, the local stories are likely considered genuine and not due to the influence of missionaries. This puts a researcher seeking parallels between the history in the Bible and the stories people remember in their oral traditions in a no-win situation. It is also a bit nonsensical, as Cooper points out. It would be one thing if the local stories included examples recalling Daniel, Hezekiah, Jesus, or other characters from later in Bible history, but you wouldn’t expect the only parallels to come from stories in Genesis 1-11 that people could have learned before their forefathers dispersed from Babel. Quite the opposite. I would expect most stories heard from Christian missionaries to emphasize the stories of Jesus in the Gospels rather than stories of the Flood or Babel. While it is important to check local stories for outside influence before considering them independent memories of history, the existence of parallels is not evidence of contamination, but potentially evidence of people remembering a shared history.

Update: Some show notes modified on 6/16/2023.

Previous: Next:

The Tower Grandfathers of History, part 2