Nimrod (Hastings' Dictionary)

A son of Cush, who ‘began to be a mighty one in the earth,’ and a great hunter, and who is described as having had, as the beginning of his kingdom, the cities Babel, Erech, Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar or Babylonia (Gn 10°), There have been many speculations as to the identity of this ancient hero and the meaning of his name.

To all appearance, his greatness rested as much upon his prowess as a hunter as upon his success as a ruler of men; but it is to be noted that the ex- pression ‘a mighty hunter before the Lord’ is, to all appearance, merely another way of saying ‘a very great hunter indeed,’ and may perhaps be ironically intended. That violence on insolence are associated with the character of the hero (see Josephus, Ant. 1. iv.

2) on account of the expres- sion 153 gibbér, in no way affects the question of his career and identity. With regard to this, it may be noted that the derivation of Nimrod from the root > mdrad, ‘to rebel,’ rests on a false eer and there is also no real ground to connect him with the building of the tower of Babel, to which his name is attached by tradition (see Mirkhond*), though we shall see further on what connexion, if any, he may have had with that erection.

Among the later attempts at identification, the most important is that which made him to be one with Izdubar or Gistubar, as the name was then read, and it was confidently expected that the true reading of this name when found would turn out to be very similar to the Hebrew form Nimrod —an expectation which seemed to be confirmed by the reading of Namrasit as the Semitic form of Gisdubarra, pointed out by Hommel.

There is hardly any Assyriologist who would not have liked to welcome this explanation, for it had in it much inherent probability. When, however, the Babylonian pronunciation of the name read as Izdubar or Gistubar appeared, it turned out to be Gilgames, the Gilgamos of Aelian, as pointed out by Oppert. The supposition that Nimrod was the * Rauzat-us-Safa, translated by E. Rehatsek (Oriental Trans- ation Fund, vol. i. pt. i. p. 140).

It appears to have been in the neighbourhood of one of the few passes leading down to the Dead Sea. In the ss and herbage NIMROD same as the hero Gilgame& therefore fell to the ground. There was then no alternative but to fall back upon the suggestion, made by Josef Grivel (TSBA iil. 136 ff.) in 1874, that Nimrod is none other than the god Merodach.

Little need exists to through all Grivel’s reasons for supposing that the two were identical, many of these being untenable ; but it may be noted that his view was based prima- rily upon the likeness he had noticed between the shorter form of the name of Merodach in Accadian and the biblical Nimrod. Notwithstanding the difference that appears to exist between these two names, it is certain that they are very closely related.

The name Merodach is, as is well known, of Accadian origin, the full form being Amar- utuk or Amar-uduk, and the meaning apparently ‘the brightness of day.’ From this it will be seen that he was a solar hero, and that his name is compounded with that of the Sungod, one of whose names, in Accadian, was Utuki—the same word as the final element, utuk or uduk.

As the syllable -uk was, to all intents and purposes, a termination or lengthening, we have in Amaruduk a word containing all the consonants of Nimrod except the initial nm. The addition of this con- sonant is apparently due to the same cause as the initial m in Nisroch and Nibhaz (see these articles), namely, the desire to disfigure the name of 8 heathen deity. The vowels of this newly formed word have also been brought more or less into conformity with that of Nisroch and of Nibhaz (cf.

JRAS, 1899, p. 459). In Gn 108 the expression ‘Cush begat Nimrod’ apparently means only that he was of Cushite nationality (he is not mentioned among the sons of Cush in ν. 7), and not a Semite. This would agree with the evidence furnished by the name, for Amaruduk is not Semitic, but Accadian, which is regarded by many as a Cushite language. Amar- uduk or Merodach was son of Ea or Aa, whose name is also Accadian.

The question whether Merodach ever was really king of Babylon need not detain us here, as it is of no importance. Suffice it to say that ‘the king’ (Accad. lugala, Bab. Sarru) par excellence was one of his titles. This he apparently bore as ‘king of the gods’; but there is no reason to suppose, on that account, that he was not king of men durin his life on earth.

The second point in this parall refers to the cities over which He had dominion, and in this connexion it is to be noted that, whilst Gilgame&’ (Gistubar) seems to have been king of Erech only, Merodach was, first of all, king of Baby lous and remained patron god of the city practically to the last.

Besides this, he seems to be mentioned, in the bilin story of the Creation, as the builder of Niffer (identified by the bbins with Calneh), together with its temple -kura, and of Erech, with its temple E-ana (cf. ll. 39 and 40 with 6 and 7, JRAS, 1891, pp. 394, 395). The building of Babylon is referred to in 1. 14 (/.c.), and it may be supposed that he was also regarded by the writer as its constructor.

If the statement of the Rabbins be correct, which makes Niffer to be the same as Calneh, then we have here Merodach mentioned in close connexion with three of the four cities referred to in Gn 10" as the beginning of the kingdom of Nimrod, and it is not by any means improbable that future discoveries may reveal to us in the same connexion Accad, which would make the fourth.

In addition to this, however, Merodach was regarded by the Babylonians (though they did not look, to all appearance, upon that side of his char- acter as the most important) as a mighty hunter, for it was he who, when all the other gods held | back, attacked, and caught with his net, the great NIMSHI dragon of Chaos, as detailed in the Babylonian story of the Creation :— ‘The lord * spread wide his net to enclose her, The evil wind following behind, he sent on before.

Tiamtu opened her mouth as wide as she could— He caused the evil wind to enter before she closed her lips. The evil winds filled out her body, Her consciousness was taken away, wide opened she her mouth, He seized the weapon, 4 Sundered her nero a hs aot He enclosed her, put an end to her life, Threw her body prone and stood thereon.

’t Merodach was indeed ‘a hero in hunting’ (gibbér gayid), which, as we know from the Assyrian magn dees was often accomplished with a net,} as in the legend here quoted ; and this circumstance seems to complete the list of parallels needed.

A large portion of the Semitic- Babylonian legend of the Creation is devoted to this exploit of the head of the Babylonian pantheon, testifying to the importance with which the early Babylonians regarded it, and it is mentioned in the eulogies pronounced upon him by his father Ea or Aa at the end of the story.

The legends that have been preserved cencerning Nimrod would seem to show that his fame in the country of his exploits rests more upon what was known of him there than upon the somewhat meagre account in Genesis, and it is probably for the same reason that so many places there are named after him.

§ Thus we have the Birs Nimroud, the ancient Borsippa, near the ruins of Babylon, Tel Nimroud, near Baghdad, the dam Suhr el- Nimroud, across the Tigris near Mosul, and the mound of Nimroud, the ancient Calah. To all appearance, he was regarded in later times in his native country as a great builder also.

As has been pointed out above, he seems to have been looked upon by the Babylonians as the builder of Babylon, and the bilin Creation story appar- ently attributes to him the completion of E-sagila, the great temple-tower in that city, which was certainly of the type of the Tower of Babel, even if it were not that erection itself.

This may account for the connexion of Nimrod with the catastrophe of the confusion of tongues, ascribed to him in the East both in comparatively ancient and in more recent times. T. G, PINCHEs.