In order to understand the position to which we must assign the legends of early Chaldea, it is necessary to give some account of the literature of the Ancient Babylonians and their copyists, the Assyrians. As has been already stated, the fragments of burnt brick on which these legends are inscribed were found in the dÉbris which covers the palaces called the South West Palace and the North Palace at Kouyunjik; the former building being of the age of Sennacherib, the latter belonging to the time of Assur-bani-pal. The tablets, which are of all sizes, from one inch long to over a foot square, are generally in fragments, and in consequence of the changes which have taken place in the ruins the fragments of the same tablet are sometimes scattered widely apart. They were originally deposited, it would seem, in one of the upper chambers of the palace, from which they fell on the destruction of the building. In some of the lower chambers the whole floor has been found covered with them, in other cases they lay in groups or patches on the pavement, and there are occasional clusters of fragments at various heights in the earth which covers the ruins. Other fragments are scattered singly through all the upper earth which covers the floors and walls of the palace. Different fragments of the same tablet or cylinder are found in separate chambers which have no immediate connection with each other, showing that their present distribution has nothing to do with the original position of the tablets of which they formed part.

The inscriptions show that the tablets were arranged according to their subjects. Stories or subjects were continued on other tablets of the same size and form as those on which they were commenced, in some cases the number of tablets in a series and on a single subject amounting to over one hundred.

Each subject or series of tablets had a title, the title consisting of the first phrase or part of a phrase in it. Thus, the series of Astrological tablets, numbering over seventy tablets, bore the title “When the gods Anu (and) Bel,” this being the commencement of the first tablet. At the end of every tablet in each series was written its number in the work, thus: “the first tablet of When the gods Anu, Bel,” “the second tablet of When the gods Anu, Bel,” &c. &c.; and, further to preserve the proper position of each tablet, every one except the last in a series had at the end a catch phrase, consisting of the first line of the following tablet. There were besides, catalogues of these documents written like them on clay tablets, and other small oval tablets with titles upon them, apparently labels for the various series of works. All these arrangements show the care taken with respect to literary matters. There were regular libraries or chambers, probably on the upper floors of the palaces, appointed for the reception of the tablets, and custodians or librarians to take charge of them. These regulations were all of great antiquity, and like the tablets had a Babylonian origin.

Judging from the fragments discovered, it appears probable that there were in the Royal Library at Nineveh over 10,000 inscribed tablets, treating of almost every branch of knowledge existing at the time.

In considering a subject like the present one it is a point of the utmost importance to define as closely as possible the date of our present copies of the legends, and the most probable period at which the original copies may have been inscribed. By far the greatest number of the tablets brought from Nineveh belong to the age of Assur-bani-pal, who reigned over Assyria from B.C. 670, and every copy of what we will term the Genesis legends yet found was inscribed with one exception during his reign. The statements made on the tablets themselves are conclusive on this point, and have not been called in question, but it is equally stated and acknowledged on all hands that most of these tablets are not the originals, but are only copies from earlier texts. It is unfortunate that the date of the original copies is never preserved, and thus a wide door is thrown open for difference of opinion on the point. The Assyrians acknowledged that this class of literature was borrowed from Babylonian sources, and of course it is to Babylonia that we have to look to ascertain the approximate dates of the original documents. But here we are met by the following difficulty. It appears that at an early period in Babylonian history a great literary development took place, and numerous works were produced which embodied the prevailing myths, religion, and science of the day. Written many of them in a noble style of poetry, and appealing to the strongest feelings of the people on one side, or registering the highest efforts of their science on the other, these texts became the standards of Babylonian literature, and later generations were content to copy them instead of composing new works for themselves. Clay, the material on which they were written, was everywhere abundant, copies were multiplied, and the veneration in which the texts were held fixed and stereotyped their style. Even the language in which they were written remained the language of literature up to the period of the Persian conquest. Thus it happens that texts of Rim-agu, Sargon, and Khammuragas, who lived at least a thousand years before Nebuchadnezzar and Nabonidus, are composed in the same language as the texts of these later kings, there being no sensible difference in style to match the long interval between them.

We have, however, clear proof that, although the language of devotion and literature remained fixed, the speech of the bulk of the people was gradually modified; and in the time of Assur-bani-pal, when the texts of the Genesis legends which we possess were copied by Assyrian scribes, the common speech of the day was widely different from that of literature. The private letters and despatches of this age which have been discovered differ considerably in language from the contemporary public documents and religious writings, showing the change the language had undergone since the style of the latter had been fixed. So, too, in our own country the language of devotion and the style of the Bible differ in several respects from those of the English of to-day.

These considerations show the difficulty of fixing the age of a cuneiform document from its style, and the difficulty is further increased by the uncertainty which hangs over all Babylonian chronology—an uncertainty that can be cleared away only when the ruined cities of Babylonia are excavated.

Chronology is always a thorny subject, and dry and unsatisfactory to most persons besides; some notice must, however, be taken of it here, in order to fix something like an approximate date or epoch for the original composition of the Genesis legends.

The so-called Assyrian Canon affords us an exact chronology up to the year B.C. 909, and a series of contemporaneous monuments, together with one or two chronological allusions in later inscriptions, enables us to work back from this date to a period falling between B.C. 1450 and 1400 when Assyria was brought into close relation with the southern kingdom of Babylonia. Babylonia was at the time under the sway of a foreign dynasty of KossÆan princes from the mountains of Elam, which was overthrown, as we learn from the Assyrian records, about B.C. 1270. It had been in possession of the country for a considerable time, since a fragmentary list which gives the names of the first nine sovereigns composing it does not come down to the time when the first of the princes who came into close contact with Assyria was reigning. Indeed, a considerable interval must be allowed between the latter period and the last of the nine kings mentioned in the list, in which to insert the isolated names of more than one monarch of the dynasty incidentally mentioned on later monuments. Supposing that not more than fifteen kings preceded Cara-indas in B.C. 1450, and that the average length of their reigns was twenty years, we should have B.C. 1750 as the approximate date of the leader of the dynasty. He could not have been later than this, and there are many reasons which would lead us to suppose that he was earlier.

Khammuragas was the leader of the dynasty in question. He had conquered the rulers of the two kingdoms into which Babylonia was at this time divided. One of these was a queen, with whom ended a dynasty, famous in the annals of early Babylonia, whose seat was at AganÉ or AgadÉ, near Sepharvaim. She had been the successor of Naram-Sin, the son of Sargon, who, like his father, had extended his power far and wide, and had even penetrated as far as the shores of the Mediterranean. Sargon had been a great patron of learning as well as a conqueror; he had established a famous library at AganÉ, and had caused a work on astronomy and astrology to be compiled, which remained the standard authority on the subject up to the end of the Assyrian Empire. It was entitled, “The Illumination of Bel,” and was in seventy-two books. Berosus, the historian, seems to have translated it into Greek.

Like the Babylonians and Assyrians of a later day, Sargon and his subjects belonged to the Semitic stock, and were therefore related to the Hebrews and the Arabians. But they were really intruders in Chaldea. The primitive inhabitants of the country, the builders of its cities, the inventors of the cuneiform system of writing, and the founders of the culture and civilization which was afterwards borrowed by the Semites, were of a wholly different race. They spoke an agglutinative language of the same character as that of the modern Turks or Finns, and were originally divided into two sections—the inhabitants of Sumir or Shinar, the plain country, and the Accadians or “Highlanders,” who had descended from the mountains of Elam subsequently to the first settlement of their kinsfolk in Shinar. At some date between B.C. 3000 and 2000, the Semitic population which bordered upon Babylonia on the west, and had long been settled in some of its western cities, such as Ur (now Mugheir), conquered Shinar or Sumir. The Accadians, however, maintained their independence for a considerable time after this conquest, until, finally, Accad also was reduced under the sway of the Semitic kings. The old population of the country was gradually absorbed, and its language became extinct. The extinction of the Accadian or Sumerian language had already taken place—at all events among the educated classes—at the time that Sargon founded his library at AganÉ, and one of the chief reasons which led to the compilation of the great work on astronomy, was the necessity of preserving the astronomical and astrological observations recorded in a language which was beginning to be forgotten. At the same time Semitic translations of other portions of the old Accadian literature were made. The library at AganÉ, however, was not the only place where the work of translation went on; many other libraries existed, and their scribes and readers had alike become Semites, who required works written in their own tongue. The Semitic translations of Accadian works which were made for the library of Erech, one of the earliest seats of Semitic power, must have been considerably older than those made for the library of Sargon.

The extinction of the Accadian language and the translation of Accadian works into Semitic Babylonian are important facts for settling the chronology of a document or inscription. Wherever we can show that a Babylonian or Assyrian text is translated from an Accadian original, or wherever we have a copy of that original itself, we may feel pretty sure that we are dealing with something older than the eighteenth century before the Christian era.

Mr. Smith believed that the “Exploits of the God Dibbara” was one of the oldest of the mythological texts which have come down to us, though he admitted that the mention of Assyria in it was in favour of a somewhat later date.

It notices a large number of peoples or states, the principal being the people of the coast, Subartu or Syria, Assyria, Elam, the Kassi, the Sutu, Goim, Lullubu, and Accad.

The Izdubar legends, containing the story of the Flood, and possibly also the history of Nimrod, were probably written in the south of the country, and at least as early as B.C. 2000. These legends were, however, traditions before they were committed to writing, and were common in some form to the whole of Chaldea.

The account of the Creation in days, though probably of late Assyrian origin in its present form, may nevertheless rest on older traditions. At present, however, it is not possible to assign to it any great antiquity.

It should, of course, be remembered, that the texts we possess at present are written in Semitic Babylonian or Assyrian—Babylonian and Assyrian being but slightly varying dialects of the same language. They are, however, mostly translations of earlier Accadian documents, and belong to the same period as that which witnessed the foundation of the library of AganÉ. We shall not be far wrong, therefore, in dating them in their present form about B.C. 2000. The translations then made were copied by successive generations of librarians and scribes, the latest copies of which we know being those that have been brought from the library of Kouyunjik.

To the same early period belonged various other literary compositions, among which we may particularize a long work on terrestrial omens, compiled for Sargon of AganÉ, as well as the syllabaries, grammars, phrase-books and vocabularies, and other bilingual tablets by means of which a knowledge of the old language of Accad was conveyed to the Babylonian or Assyrian scholar.

On the other hand, a series of tablets on evil spirits, which contained a totally different tradition of the Creation from that in days, goes back to the Accadian epoch; and there is a third account from the City of Cutha, closely agreeing in some respects with the account handed down by Berosus, which must be placed about the same date.

In spite of the indications as to peculiarities of worship, names of states and capitals, historical allusions and other evidence, it may seem hazardous to many persons to fix the dates of original documents so high, when our only copies in many cases are Assyrian transcripts made in the reign of Assur-bani-pal, in the seventh century B.C.; but one or two considerations may show that this is a perfectly reasonable view, and no other likely period can be found for the original composition of the documents unless we ascend to a greater antiquity. In the first place, it must be noticed that the Assyrians themselves state that the documents were copied from ancient Babylonian copies, and in some cases state that the old copies were partly illegible even in their day. Again, in more than one case there is actual proof of the antiquity of a text. We may refer, for example, to a text an Assyrian copy of part of which is published in “Cuneiform Inscriptions,” vol. ii. plate 54, Nos. 3 & 4. In a collection of tablets discovered by Mr. Loftus at Senkereh, belonging, according to the kings mentioned in it, to about B.C. 1600, is part of an ancient Babylonian copy of this very text, the Babylonian copy being about one thousand years older than the Assyrian one.

Similarly a fragment of a Babylonian transcript of the Deluge tablet has recently been brought from Babylonia, and serves not only to fill up some of the breaks in our Assyrian copies, but also to verify the text of the latter.

It is unfortunate that so many of the documents embodying the Genesis traditions are in such a sadly mutilated condition, but there can be no doubt that future explorations will reveal more perfect copies, and numerous companion and explanatory texts, which will one day clear up the difficulties which now meet us at every step of our examination of them.

So far as known contemporary inscriptions are concerned, we cannot consider our present researches and discoveries as anything like sufficient to give a fair view of the literature of Assyria and Babylonia; and however numerous and important the Genesis legends may be, they form but a small portion of the whole literature of the country.

It is generally considered that the earliest inscriptions of any importance which we now possess belong to the time of Lig-Bagas, king of Ur, who first united under his sway the petty kingdoms into which Chaldea was previously split up, and whose age is generally assigned to about three thousand years before the Christian era.

The principal inscriptions of this period consist of texts on bricks and on signet cylinders, and some of the latter may be of much greater antiquity. Passing down to a time when the country was again divided into the kingdoms of Karrak, Larsa, and AganÉ, we find a great accession of literary material, almost every class of writing being represented by contemporary specimens. Each of the principal cities had its library, and education seems to have been widely diffused. From Senkereh, the ancient Larsa, and its neighbourhood have come our oldest specimens of these literary tablets, the following being some of the contents of this earliest known library:—

1. Mythological tablets, including lists of the gods, and their manifestations and titles.

2. Grammatical works, lists of words, and explanations.

3. Mathematical works, calculations, tables of cube and square roots, and tables of measures.

4. Works on astronomy, astrology, and omens.

5. Legends and short historical inscriptions.

6. Historical cylinders, one of Kudur-mabuk, B.C. 1800 (?) (the earliest known cylinder), being in the British Museum.

7. Geographical tablets, and lists of towns and countries.

8. Tablets containing laws and law cases, records of sale and barter, wills and loans.

Such are the inscriptions a single library of Babylonia has produced, and beside these there are numerous texts, only known to us through later copies, but which certainly had their origin as early as this period.

Passing down from this period, for some centuries we find only detached inscriptions, accompanied by evidence of the gradual shifting of both political power and literary activity from Babylonia to Assyria.

In Assyria the first centre of literature and seat of a library was the city of Assur (Kileh Shergat), and the earliest known tablets date about B.C. 1500.

Beyond the scanty records of a few monarchs nothing of value remains of this library, and the literary works contained in it are only known from later copies.

A revival of the Assyrian empire began under Assur-natsir-pal, king of Assyria, who ascended the throne B.C. 885. He rebuilt the city of Calah (Nimroud), and this city became the seat of an Assyrian library. Tablets were procured from Babylonia by Shalmaneser, son of Assur-natsir-pal, B.C. 860, during the reign of Nabu-bal-idina, king of Babylon, and these were copied by the Assyrian scribes, and placed in the royal library. Rimmon-nirari, grandson of Shalmaneser, B.C. 812, added to the Calah library, and had tablets written at Nineveh. Assur-nirari, B.C. 755, continued the literary work, some mythological tablets being dated in his reign.

Tiglath Pileser, B.C. 745, enlarged the library, and placed in it various copies of historical inscriptions. It was, however, reserved for Sargon, who founded the last Assyrian dynasty, B.C. 721, to make the Assyrian royal library worthy of the empire. Early in his reign he appointed Nabu-zuqub-cinu principal librarian, and this officer set to work to make new copies of all the standard works of the day. During the whole of his term of office copies of the great literary works were produced, the majority of the texts preserved belonging to the early period previous to Khammuragas.

With the accession of Sargon came a revival of literature in Assyria; education became more general, ancient texts were brought from Babylonia to be copied, and the antiquarian study of early literature became fashionable.

Sennacherib, son of Sargon, B.C. 704, continued to add to his father’s library at Calah, but late in his reign he removed the collection from that city to Nineveh (Kouyunjik), where from this time forth the national library remained until the fall of the empire.

Esarhaddon, son of Sennacherib, B.C. 681, further increased the national collection, most of the works he added being of a religious character.

Assur-bani-pal, son of Esarhaddon, the Sardanapalus of the Greeks, B.C. 670, was the greatest of the Assyrian sovereigns, and he is far more memorable on account of his magnificent patronage of learning than on account of the greatness of his empire or the extent of his wars.

Assur-bani-pal added more to the Assyrian royal library than all the kings who had gone before him, and it is to tablets written in his reign that we owe almost all our knowledge of the Babylonian myths and early history, beside many other important matters.

The agents of Assur-bani-pal sought everywhere for inscribed tablets, brought them to Nineveh, and copied them there; thus the literary treasures of Babylon, Borsippa, Cutha, AganÉ, Ur, Erech, Larsa, Nipur, and various other cities were transferred to the Assyrian capital to enrich the great collection there.

The fragments brought over to Europe give us a good idea of this library and show the range of the subjects embraced by its collection of works. Among the different classes of texts, the Genesis stories and similar legends occupied a prominent place; these, as they will be further described in the present volume, need only be mentioned here. Accompanying them we have a series of mythological tablets of various sorts, varying from legends of the gods, psalms, songs, prayers, and hymns, down to mere allusions and lists of names. Many of these texts take the form of charms to be used in sickness and for the expulsion of evil spirits; some of them are of great antiquity, being older than the Izdubar legends. One fine series deals with remedies against witchcraft and the assaults of evil spirits. Izdubar is mentioned in one of these tablets as lord of the oaths or pledges of the world.

Some of the prayers were for use on special occasions, such as on starting on a campaign, on the occurrence of an eclipse, &c. Astronomy and astrology were represented by various detached inscriptions and reports, but principally by the great work of which mention has already been made, and many copies of which were in the Library of Assur-bani-pal.

Among the Astrological tablets is a fragment which professes to be copied from an original of the time of Izdubar.

Historical texts formed another section of the library, and these included numerous copies of inscriptions of early Babylonian kings; there were besides, chronological tablets with lists of kings and annual officers, inscriptions of various Assyrian monarchs, histories of the relations between Assyria and Babylonia, Elam, and Arabia, treaties, despatches, proclamations, and reports on the state of the empire and military affairs.

Natural history was represented by bilingual lists of mammals, birds, reptiles, fishes, insects, and plants, trees, grasses, reeds, and grains, earths, stones, &c. These lists are classified according to the supposed nature and affinities of the various species, and show considerable advance in the sciences. Mathematics had a place in the library, there being tables of problems, figures, and calculations; but this branch of learning was not studied so fully as in Babylonia.

Grammar and Lexicography were better represented, since there were many works on these subjects, including lists of the characters, the declension of the noun, the conjugation of the verb, examples of syntactical construction, reading-books, interlinear translations of Accadian texts, and the like. All these tablets were copied from Babylonian originals. In legal and civil literature the library was also rich, and the tablets serve to show that the same laws and customs prevailed in Assyria as in Babylonia. There are codes of laws, law cases, records of sale, barter, and loans, lists of property, lists of titles and trades, of tribute and taxes, &c.

In Geography the Assyrians were not very advanced; but there are lists of countries and their productions, of cities, rivers, mountains, and peoples.

Such are some of the principal contents of the great library from which we have obtained our copies of the Creation and Flood legends. Most of the tablets were copied from early Babylonian ones which have in most cases disappeared; but the copies are sufficient to show the wonderful progress in culture and civilization already made by the people of Chaldea long before the age of Moses or even Abraham. Babylonian literature, which had been the parent of Assyrian writing, revived after the fall of Nineveh, and Nebuchadnezzar and his successors made Babylon the seat of a library rivalling that of Assur-bani-pal at Nineveh. Of this later development of Babylonian literature we know very little, explorations being still required to bring to light its texts. A few fragments only, discovered by wandering Arabs or recovered by chance travellers, have as yet turned up, but there is in them evidence enough to promise a rich reward to future excavators.