Archæology and the Bible

George Adam Smith[535] pointed out several years ago that, when this passage is compared with 2 Kings 19:36, it points clearly to the conclusion that Sennacherib’s army was attacked by bubonic plague. In modern times this plague first attacks rats and mice, which in their suffering swarm the dwellings of men and spread the disease. The Hebrews regarded the attack of such a plague as a smiting by the angel of God. This is shown by 2 Sam. 24:16, 17; Acts 12:23; 2 Kings 19:36. Such a pestilence would render the Assyrian army helpless, and would be regarded by the Hebrews as a divine intervention on their behalf. As it is supported by both the book of Kings and Herodotus, it probably affords us a clue to what really happened to Sennacherib’s army.

We hold, then, that the last of the three views concerning the campaigns of Sennacherib to Palestine is probably correct.

The Elteke mentioned in the inscription of Sennacherib is the city referred to in Josh. 19:44 and 21:23. The Merodachbaladan referred to is mentioned in Isa. 39:1, where it is said that he sent to congratulate Hezekiah upon his recovery from sickness. It is clear from what the Assyrian accounts tell us that his real motive in sending to Hezekiah was to induce him to rebel against Assyria.

12. The Siloam Inscription.

The following inscription was discovered in 1880 on the right wall of the tunnel which connects the Virgin’s Well (Ain Sitti Maryam) at Jerusalem with the Pool of Siloam (Birket Silwân).

This inscription, though not dated, is believed to come from the time of Hezekiah. Hezekiah is said in 2 Kings 20:20 to have built a conduit and to have brought the water into the city. This inscription was found in a remarkable conduit which still runs under the hill at Jerusalem, cut through the solid rock. It is about 1,700 feet long. It was cleared of silt by the Parker expedition of 1909-1911, and the tunnel is about 6 feet in height throughout its entire length. When it was cut the wall of Jerusalem crossed the Tyropœon Valley just below it, so that, while the Virgin’s Spring (the Biblical Gihon) lay outside the walls, this aqueduct brought the water to a pool within the walls, so that the inhabitants of the city could, in case of siege, fill their water-jars without exposing themselves to the enemy.

The inscription is now in the Imperial Ottoman Museum at Constantinople.

13. Esarhaddon, 681-668 B. C.

Esarhaddon, the author of the inscription from which this extract is taken, is mentioned in 2 Kings 19:37 and Isa. 37:38 as Sennacherib’s successor, a statement which the inscriptions abundantly confirm. The above quotation from his inscription shows that Manasseh, King of Judah, 2 Kings 20:21 and chapter 21, was a vassal of Esarhaddon. Esarhaddon is also alluded to in Ezra 4:2.

14. Ashurbanipal of Assyria, 668-626 B. C.

These extracts from the inscriptions of Ashurbanipal show that during the reign of Manasseh he was active in reducing the rebellions of Phœnician cities, some of which, as Tyre and Accho, were at the doors of Palestine. No doubt Manasseh continued to pay him tribute and so was not molested. The name of Ashurbanipal is preserved in Ezra 4:10 in the corrupt form of Osnappar.

15. Necho of Egypt, 609-593 B. C.

(An account of the interment of an Apis bull then follows.)

The above is the beginning of an inscription of Pharaoh Necho, whose defeat of King Josiah, of Judah, is recorded in 2 Kings 23:29, f. He became over-lord of Judah for four years and placed Jehoiakim on the Judæan throne (2 Kings 23:34). Necho was himself defeated at Carchemish on the Euphrates by Nebuchadrezzar, of Babylon, in 604 B. C., and as he retreated to Egypt Nebuchadrezzar pursued him through Palestine. The book of Jeremiah speaks of this defeat and vividly describes the pursuit which followed. (Cf. Jer. 46:2, f.)

16. Nebuchadrezzar II, 604-562 B. C.

Many inscriptions of Nebuchadrezzar are known, but most of them relate to buildings. The following extracts are those which best illustrate the Bible.

Reference to the Lebanon

A Building Inscription

Nebuchadrezzar was the king who destroyed Jerusalem and carried the more prominent of the people of Judah captive. (See 2 Kings 24 and 25.) His inscriptions give no account of these events. In the first of the quotations made above he covers all his conquests by one general reference. In the second quotation he gives a more detailed account of his conquest of the Lebanon, because that inscription was carved on the rocks at the side of one of the deep valleys of the Lebanon. The third inscription, relating to the building of Babylon, has been strikingly confirmed by Koldewey’s excavation of Babylon, by which the massive walls and extensive temples were uncovered.[544] It also gives us a background for Daniel 4:29, where Nebuchadrezzar is said to have walked upon[545] the royal palace and said: “Is not this great Babylon which I have built?”

17. Evil-Merodach, 562-560 B. C.

Nebuchadrezzar was succeeded by his son, Amil-Marduk, whom the Bible (2 Kings 25:27) calls Evil-Merodach. The only inscription of his that has been found is the following, inscribed on an alabaster vase found at Susa, whither the Elamites had at some time carried it as booty:[546]

This is the king who released Jehoiachin, King of Judah, from prison after his thirty-six years in confinement and treated him kindly.

Note on the Land of the Queen of Sheba.—This region, which lay in South Arabia, was explored during the nineteenth century by a number of travelers. Three of these, Thomas J. Arnaud in 1843, Joseph Halévy in 1869, and Eduard Glaser who made four expeditions between 1882 and 1894, brought back from South Arabia many inscriptions, several of which were made by rulers of Saba, the Biblical Sheba, whose queen is said to have visited Solomon (1 Kings 10:1-13). As none of these relate to that queen, it has not seemed fitting to include one of them. The inscriptions, however, show that two important kingdoms existed there, Saba and Main. Main is thought by some to be related to the Biblical Midianites. The Greek version of Job makes Job’s friend, Zophar, king of Main. The kingdom of Saba lasted until 115 B. C. It established strong colonies in Africa. In 115 B. C. one colony overthrew the mother-country and established the kingdom of Saba and Raidhan, which lasted till about 300 A. D. After that Saba became apparently unimportant, but various Semitic kingdoms succeeded one another in Africa, including the present-day Abyssinian kingdom. The Abyssinian king claims descent from Solomon and the Queen of Sheba.

CHAPTER XVIII

Belshazzar is here said to be the son of Nabuna’id, whereas in Dan. 5:11, 18 Nebuchadrezzar is called his father. Nabuna’id, as the Babylonian documents show, was not a descendant of Nebuchadrezzar, but a usurper of another family. Some scholars hold that this shows the book of Daniel to be in error, while others hold that “father” in Dan. 5:11, 18 is equivalent to “ancestor,” and think Belshazzar may have been descended from Nebuchadrezzar on his mother’s side.

The Nabuna’id-Cyrus Chronicle

This chronicle is known only from a tablet which is somewhat broken. The following extract will show the nature of its contents:

2. Bearing on Biblical Statements Regarding Belshazzar.

Similar chronicles are given by the tablet for other years. It is stated each time what Nabuna’id was doing; where the king’s son (Belshazzar) was, and what Cyrus was doing. Cyrus, who overthrew the Median king in 553 B. C., was occupied for several years in subjugating other lands before he attacked Babylon. He overthrew Crœsus, King of Lydia, in 546. It would seem that it was well known in Babylonia what he was doing each year. Those scholars who believe that Isaiah 40-55 is the work of a prophet who lived during the Babylonian Exile, claim that this chronicle explains how that prophet could refer in Isa. 44:28; 45:1 to Cyrus as a well-known figure. They see the exercise of the prophetic gift of the prophet in the faith which he had that Cyrus would release Israel from captivity. Those who believe that the whole of the book of Isaiah is the work of the son of Amoz, see in these verses pure prediction of the rise of Cyrus as well as of the release of the Jews.

3. Account of the Capture of Babylon.

From the chronicle just quoted we have the following statement for the 17th year of the reign of Nabuna’id:

4. Bearing of This Account on the Book of Daniel.

This interesting text here becomes too broken for connected translation. It is clear that the document means to state that Nabuna’id was king of Babylon when it was captured, and not Belshazzar, as stated in Daniel 5:30. It states, also, that Cyrus captured Babylon and not Darius the Mede, as in Dan. 5:31. It is true that Gobryas took Babylon first, and occupied it about two weeks before Cyrus arrived. He was, however, Cyrus’s officer and was acting in his name. Critical scholars, who believe that Daniel was written 168-165 B. C., find in these statements a confirmation of their views. They think its author lived so far from the events that he confused their exact order. Those who defend the traditional date of Daniel think that Gobryas is meant by Darius the Mede, and see in the exalted position which Belshazzar held, as crown prince and commander of the army, sufficient ground for the Biblical statement that he was king. By such interpretations they harmonize this chronicle with the Bible.

Dr. Theophilus G. Pinches has recently published[550] some extracts from two tablets from Erech which are in the possession of an Englishman, Mr. Harding Smith, which throw some additional light on these points. It was customary for Babylonians in confirming a contract to swear by the name of the reigning king, and one of these tablets contains a contract, dated in the 12th year of Nabuna’id, in which a man bound himself by the oath of Nabuna’id, King of Babylon, and of Belshazzar, the king’s son. As Belshazzar is here associated with the king, he must have been but slightly lower in rank and power than the king himself.

This is confirmed by a tablet at Yale, recently published by Prof. Clay.[551] The text contains the interpretation of a dream for the King Nabuna’id and for his son Belshazzar. It is dated in the seventh year of the reign of Nabuna’id.

The other tablet quoted by Pinches shows that in the fourth year of Cambyses (i. e., 524 B. C.), Gobryas was still governor of Babylon. If he is the man who in Daniel is called Darius the Mede, he exercised the powers of governor in Babylon for a considerable number of years.

5. Inscription of Cyrus.

The following is an inscription of Cyrus. The lines are much broken at the beginning, but it reads as follows:[552]

6. Bearing on the Capture of Babylon and the Return of the Jews.

This inscription confirms the statement of the chronicle already quoted that Cyrus conquered the city of Babylon without a blow. The most important feature of it for the student of the Bible is, however, its revelation of the reversal of the Assyrian policy of transportation. That policy had been inaugurated by Tiglathpileser IV more than two hundred years before. In accordance with it the kingdom of Israel had first been stripped of its more prominent inhabitants who had been carried captive to distant lands, and then the kingdom of Judah. Cyrus determined to attach his subjects to himself by gratitude instead of terror, so he permitted, as he says here, those who had been transported to return to their several countries and rebuild their temples. It was in consequence of this general policy that the Jews were permitted to return from Babylonia and rebuild the temple at Jerusalem. This is referred to in Ezra, chapter 1. It is there implied that Cyrus made a special proclamation concerning the temple at Jerusalem. Some scholars infer from the above inscription of Cyrus, that the book of Ezra (chapter 1) has freely interpreted the general policy of Cyrus as a special permission granted to the Jews. It may be, however, as others have held, that a special edict was issued in favor of each individual nation in order that this general policy might be carried out without opposition.

In any event, the inscription confirms the statement of Ezra that Cyrus permitted the Jews to return.

CHAPTER XIX

Numerous papyri found since 1895 at Elephantine, an island at the First Cataract of the Nile, reveal the existence of a Jewish community there. The documents are dated from the year 494 B. C. to the year 400 B. C. They show that this Jewish community had at Elephantine a temple to Jehovah, that they were soldiers, and that some of them were engaged in trade. One document declares that when Cambyses conquered Egypt (525 B. C.) he then found the temple of Jehovah in existence there, and that it had been built under native Egyptian kings. How came such a community of Jews to be established there? It is thought that they were a garrison placed there by Psammetik II, King of Egypt, 593-588 B. C. This Psammetik endeavored to conquer Nubia,[553] and according to a confused statement in Josephus (Contra Apion, I, 26, 27) Rhampses (perhaps a corruption of Psammetik), employed some Jews in an expedition to that country.[554] However, these Jews came to dwell at this point, and whensoever the settlement was made, the documents[555] are most interesting, and open to us a hitherto wholly unknown vista in the history of the Jews.

1. Temple Papyrus from Elephantine.

To this letter Bagohi (Bagoas) sent the following reply:

The first of these documents is dated in the 17th year of Darius II, i. e., the year 407 B. C. It states that the temple at Elephantine (Yeb) had been destroyed by Waidrang and had lain in ruins for three years. The community which worshiped in the temple had previously written to Jehohanan, high priest at Jerusalem, probably to ask that he intercede with the Persian governor Bagohi (Bagoses), but had written in vain. They now write to Bagohi himself, and also to the two sons of Sanballat, governor of Samaria (cf. Neh. 2:10, 19, etc.), with the result that the request is granted, and authority is given to rebuild the temple.

The fact that there was a temple at Elephantine at all is new and startling. Its significance is differently interpreted by different scholars. More conservative scholars claim that it is opposed to the date which the critical school assign to the date of Deuteronomy, viz.: 621 B. C., because, if the law against more altars than one had been introduced then, Jews would not have so soon violated it by building this shrine. Critics, on the other hand, hold that it fits well with their views, since they believe that Deuteronomy was accepted by Jews as a whole only gradually, and after considerable struggle.

One thing is clear: at the time the temple at Elephantine was overthrown, the Jews at Jerusalem looked upon it with disfavor.[556] They took no steps to lay the matter before the Persian governor. It was not till the aggrieved Egyptian Jews wrote to the heretical Samaritans, Dalajah and Shelemjah, sons of Sanballat, who would naturally be glad to encourage another rival to the temple at Jerusalem, that the matter was pushed and permission given to rebuild the temple.

This appeal to Sanballat’s family throws interesting light on the progress of the schism between the Jews and the Samaritans.[557] (Compare Nehemiah 4:1, ff; 6:1, ff.; and 13:28.)

The existence of this temple has an interesting bearing upon the date of Isa. 19. Some scholars have held that that prophecy, which refers to a temple of Jehovah in the land of Egypt, is late and must refer to the temple built by Onias III, about 170 B. C. (Cf. Josephus, Antiquities, xiii, 3:1, 6.) It is now possible to suppose that the reference may well have been to this hitherto unsuspected temple at Elephantine.

2. Hananiah’s Passover Letter.

This letter is from some Hananiah who seems to have stood high in authority among Jewish communities. Several Hananiahs are mentioned in the post-exilic literature. One of them was a military commander in Jerusalem in the time of Nehemiah (Neh. 7:2), but as that was at least twenty-five years before the date of our letter, it would be precarious to assert that that Hananiah was the writer of this letter, though it is possible that he was.

From the letter it is clear that the writer is informing the Jewish garrison at Elephantine concerning the details of the provisions for the observance of the Jewish Passover, as they are laid down in Exod. 12 and Lev. 23. It seems strange that these Jews at Elephantine who were faithful enough to Jehovah to have a temple in his honor, should have needed to be informed of such details, if they had copies of the Pentateuch. Adherents of the modern school of criticism see in this fact a confirmation of their view, that the Levitical law had been introduced into the Jewish community at Jerusalem only in the time of Ezra and Nehemiah, for, they urge, this letter shows that it was unknown to the garrison at Elephantine until the reign of Darius II. To this, conservative scholars reply that it was customary among the Jews to make yearly proclamation of the approach of the festival, and that this may be simply such a proclamation. They also urge that ignorance of the law on the part of some Jews is no proof that it did not exist.

3. Letter Showing that the Jews of Egypt were Unpopular.

This is a letter sent by a member of the Jewish colony of Elephantine to his Jewish brethren there, highly recommending to them two men. He was especially anxious to make a good impression upon these because they were acquaintances of a certain Anani. This Anani apparently was a man of influence at the Persian court. His name may be the same as Hanani, Nehemiah’s brother (Neh. 7:2). It has been pointed out that the existence of two men of the same name who could have influence at the Persian court would be improbable. This letter shows that since Hananiah came to Egypt, the Jews have been in affliction, and the writer of this letter is anxious to make a good impression upon the friends of Anani, so that this affliction may be removed.

Scholars of the critical school see in this letter a confirmation of their view that the Levitical law had but just been introduced into the Egyptian community. The reference to the “chastisement” or “affliction” which had rested on the community is thought by them to be, probably, the friction between Jews and Egyptians caused by the less friendly relations toward foreigners, which the Levitical law imposed on its devotees. It is, of course, possible that the “chastisement” may have been due to something quite different. It should be said, too, that the papyrus is torn somewhat just where the word rendered chastisement occurs, so that the word itself is not certain.

CHAPTER XX

The following Babylonian poem treats of a mysterious affliction which overtook a righteous man of Babylonia, and has been compared with the book of Job.[558]

1. I advanced in life, I attained to the allotted span;
Wherever I turned there was evil, evil—
Oppression is increased, uprightness I see not.
I cried unto god, but he showed not his face.
5. I prayed to my goddess, but she raised not her head.
The seer by his oracle did not discern the future;
Nor did the enchanter with a libation illuminate my case;
I consulted the necromancer, but he opened not my understanding.
The conjurer with his charms did not remove my ban.
10. How deeds are reversed in the world!
I look behind, oppression encloses me
Like one who the sacrifice to god did not bring,
And at meal-time did not invoke the goddess,
Did not bow down his face, his offering was not seen;
15. (Like one) in whose mouth prayers and supplications were locked,
(For whom) god’s day had ceased, a feast day become rare,
(One who) has thrown down his fire-pan, gone away from their images,
God’s fear and veneration has not taught his people,
Who invoked not his god, when he ate god’s food;
20. (Who) abandoned his goddess, and brought not what is prescribed,
(Who) oppresses the weak, forgets his god,
Who takes in vain the mighty name of his god; he says, I am like him.
But I myself thought of prayers and supplications;
Prayer was my wisdom, sacrifice, my dignity;
25. The day of honoring the gods was the joy of my heart,
The day of following the goddess was my acquisition of wealth;
The prayer of the king,—that was my delight,
And his music,—for my pleasure was its sound.
I gave directions to my land to revere the names of god,
30. To honor the name of the goddess I taught my people.
Reverence for the king I greatly exalted,
And respect for the palace I taught the people;
For I knew that with god these things are in favor.
What is innocent of itself, to god is evil!
35. What in one’s heart is contemptible, to one’s god is good!
Who can understand the thoughts of the gods in heaven?
The counsel of god is full of destruction; who can understand?
Where may human beings learn the ways of god?
He who lives at evening is dead in the morning;
40. Quickly he is troubled; all at once he is oppressed;
At one moment he sings and plays;
In the twinkling of an eye he howls like a funeral-mourner.
Like sunshine and cloud[559] their thoughts change;
They are hungry and like a corpse;
45. They are filled and rival their god!
In prosperity they speak of climbing to Heaven;
Trouble overtakes them and they speak of going down to Sheol.

(At this point the tablet is broken. We do not know how many lines are wanting before the narrative is resumed on the back of the tablet.)

Reverse

Into my prison my house is turned.
Into the bonds of my flesh are my hands thrown;
Into the fetters of myself my feet have stumbled.
....................................
5. With a whip he has beaten me; there is no protection;
With a staff he has transfixed me; the stench was terrible!
All day long the pursuer pursues me,
In the night watches he lets me breathe not a moment;
Through torture my joints are torn asunder;
10. My limbs are destroyed, loathing covers me;
On my couch I welter like an ox,
I am covered, like a sheep, with my excrement.
My sickness baffled the conjurers,
And the seer left dark my omens.
15. The diviner has not improved the condition of my sickness;
The duration of my illness the seer could not state;
The god helped me not, my hand he took not;
The goddess pitied me not, she came not to my side;
The coffin yawned; they [the heirs] took my possessions;
20. While I was not yet dead, the death wail was ready.
My whole land cried out: “How is he destroyed!”
My enemy heard; his face gladdened;
They brought as good news the glad tidings, his heart rejoiced.
But I knew the time of all my family,
25. When among the protecting spirits their divinity is exalted.

The above is from a tablet called the “Second” of the series Ludlul bêl nimeqi, i. e., “I will serve the lord of wisdom.” The “Third” tablet of the series has been published by R. Campbell Thompson in the Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archæology, XXXII, p. 18, f. It is considerably broken, but the parts which are legible are as follows:

............................................
............................................
Let thy hand grasp the javelin
Tabu-utul-Bêl, who lives at Nippur,
5. Has sent me to consult thee,
Has laid his .......... upon me.
In life .......... has cast, he has found. [He says]:
“[I lay down] and a dream I beheld;
This is the dream which I saw by night:—
10. [He who made woman] and created man,
Marduk, has ordained (?) that he be encompassed with sickness (?).”
15. And .......... in whatever ..........
He said: “How long will he be in such great affliction and distress?
What is it that he saw in his vision of the night?”
“In the dream Ur-Bau ap[peared],
A mighty hero wearing his crown,
20. A conjurer, too, clad in strength,
Marduk indeed sent me;
Unto Shubshi-meshri-Nergal he brought abu[ndance];
In his pure hands he brought abu[ndance].
By my guardian-spirit (?) he st[opped] (?),”
25. [By] the seer he sent a message:
“A favorable omen I show to my people.”
..........................................
...... he quickly finished; the ...... was broken
........ of my lord, his heart [was satisfied];
30. .......... his spirit was appeased
............ my lamentation .................
................ good .... ..........

Reverse

..........................................
..........................................
................ like ................
He approached (?) and the spell which he had pronounced (?),
5. He sent a storm wind to the horizon;
To the breast of the earth it bore [a blast],
Into the depth of his ocean the disembodied spirit vanished (?);
Unnumbered spirits he sent back to the under-world.
The ...... of the hag-demons he sent straight to the mountain.
10. The sea-flood he spread with ice;
The roots of the disease he tore out like a plant.
The horrible slumber that settled on my rest
Like smoke filled the sky ..........
With the woe he had brought, unrepulsed and bitter, he filled the earth like a storm.
15. The unrelieved headache which had overwhelmed the heavens
He took away and sent down on me the evening dew.
My eyelids, which he had veiled with the veil of night.
He blew upon with a rushing wind and made clear their sight.
My ears, which were stopped, were deaf as a deaf man’s—
20. He removed their deafness and restored their hearing.
My nose, whose nostril had been stopped from my mother’s womb—
He eased its deformity so that I could breathe.
My lips, which were closed—he had taken their strength—
He removed their trembling and loosed their bond.
25. My mouth, which was closed so that I could not be understood—
He cleansed it like a dish, he healed its disease.
My eyes, which had been attacked so that they rolled together—
He loosed their bond and their balls were set right.
The tongue, which had stiffened so that it could not be raised—
30. [He relieved] its thickness, so its words could be understood.
The gullet which was compressed, stopped as with a plug—
He healed its contraction, it worked like a flute.
My spittle which was stopped so that it was not secreted—
He removed its fetter, he opened its lock.
............................................
............................................

2. Comparison with the Book of Job.

A commentary on this text, which has been preserved on a tablet, informs us that Tabu-utul-Bêl was an official of Nippur in Babylonia.[560] This story has some striking similarities to the book of Job. It presents also some striking dissimilarities.

Tabu-utul-Bêl, like Job, had been a just man. He had been also a religious man. (See lines 23, ff., p. 392.) The virtues which he claims are similar to those of Job (see Job 29 and 31); there is, however, this difference: Job’s virtues are social; those of Tabu-utul-Bêl consist of acts of worship and loyalty. Tabu-utul-Bêl is smitten, like Job, with a sore disease. To him, as to Job, the providence is inexplicable. He, like Job, charges his god with inscrutable injustice. The chasm which often yawns between experience and moral deserts was as keenly felt by the Babylonian as by the Hebrew.

Here the parallelism with the book of Job ends. The two works belong to widely different religious worlds. Job gains relief by a vision of God—an experience which made him able to believe that, though he could not understand the reason for the pain of life or its contradictions and tragedy, God could, and Job now knew God. (See Job 42:4-6.) Tabu-utul-Bêl, on the other hand, is said to have gained his relief through a magician. We are apparently told by the fragmentary text that at last he found a conjurer who brought a messenger from the god Marduk, who drove away the evil spirits which caused the disease, and so Tabu-utul-Bêl was relieved. This difference sets vividly before us the greater religious value and inspiration of the book of Job. It treats the same problem that the Babylonian poet took for his theme, but between the outlook of the poet who composed Job and that of the Babylonian poet there is all the difference between a real experience of God and faith in the black art.

3. Another Similar Lament.

Another fragment of a lament of a somewhat similar character, written in the Sumerian language, comes to us on a tablet from Nippur, the very city with which Tabu-utul-Bêl is said to have been connected. It reads as follows:[561]

Column I

1. ..............................
2. ..................................
3. .................... he carried away,
4. .................... he destroyed,
5. .................. spoke to ..........
6. .................. was destroyed,
7. .......... completely from on high was destroyed.
8. I, even I, am a man of destruction.
9. With might from below he destroyed,
10. I, even I, am a man of destruction.
11. Nippur (?)—its temple verily is destroyed,
12. My city verily is destroyed.
13. O Enlil, from the height descend,
14. May Ububul destroy them!

Column II

1. ..............................
2. ..............................
3. .............. my food (?) is not,
4. The ground grain is removed, with the hand he seized it;
5. My eyes fail.
6. The shrine of the mother which the silver-smith cast,
7. To earth he has ground,
8. Its contents on the earth verily he flung—
9. I am a man of destruction!—
10. Its contents on the earth verily he destroyed;
11. I am a man of destruction!
12. The man from above is wise;
13. On earth he dwells.
14. The man who went before,
15. Hides in the rear.
16. Namtar my maiden (he snatched away);
17. Who shall bring the maiden back?

Column III

1. Namtar verily is smitten, yea verily,
2. Who shall bring back strength?
3. The smiter has smitten,
4. Who shall strike him down?
5. The hero bearing the dagger
6. He has cast down,
7. Who shall drag him off?
8. At the gate of my palace no protector stands,
9. A man of desolation am I!
10. The land is completely overthrown, I have no defender,
11. A man of desolation am I!
12. The flood fills not the marsh land;
13. My eye thereon I lift not.
14. To man’s plantations water reaches not,
15. My hand stretches not out to it.
16. To the marsh land which the flood filled
17. Truly the foot walks upon it!

From this point on the tablet is too broken for connected translation. Dr. Langdon calls this the lament of a Sumerian Job, but his woes, in so far as this fragment recounts them, are due to the conquest of his land by an enemy, and to famine due to a failure of the rivers to overflow. The parallelism to Tabu-utul-Bêl and to Job might be closer, if we had the whole tablet. As this tablet is in the script of the first dynasty of Babylon, it is evident that this kind of lamentation was as early as 2000 B. C.