Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Noel O'Riordan" <nor AT iol.ie>]

In identifying the 'tower of Babel story with the Ziggurat of Etemenanki, I offer the following comments

 

Verse 11:9 itself appears to me as being a secondary addition to the 'Babel' pericope, its sole function seems to be an attempt to unambiguously link the etiological story of verses 1-8 to a known place.  The verse repeats what has gone before in verse 7 and 8. taking a leaf from the synchronic school, I would consider the verse to be a literary repetition to enhance the understanding of the text.

 

The tower is certainly identified with Babylon, the traditional association of the noun Babel with the verb balal is merely a convenient word play, we are told that it was already called Babel and then given the 'confuse' explanation, if the Babel was inspired by balal I would expect the sentence to have reversed itself i.e. and so it was called Babel also the verb balal is not used in verse 7. The author is unambiguous about its designation (he even tells us that it is on the plain of Shinar) , the 'confuse' part appears secondary.

 

There is no agreed etiological focus of the story, it could be merely to describe where languages come from, or the development of different races, or a story of the Hubris of mankind or as is obvious an amalgamation of all.

 

The etiological focus of the story can support an identification with Babylon within the pre-post exilic period.  More probably the pre, as the Hubris aspect can be seen as a sneering attack on Babylon with its famed ziggurat. Which in its very name suggests the reason for gods destruction of it (house of the frontier between heaven and earth) and the biblical motivation for its destruction The identification of many different cultures although not as important an aspect, may represent the cosmopolitan nature of Babylon, which would have been at its strongest in the time since Nebuchadnezzer until after the restoration from exile.

 

However, even if verses 1-8 are an originally independent pericope, and I know that even its unity has been open to question , the identification with Babylon stands.  Most probably an identification with its time of greatest wealth and prestige, i.e. from Nebuchadnezzer on.  I can see no reason to rule out the etenemanki ziggurat unless you assume an early dating. for all of verses 1-9.

 

Of note is verse 11:7 'let us go down and confuse their language'   this dovetails with gen. 3:22 'the man has become like one of us' and bears comparison with the story of the Nephilim in 6:1-4.  Interestingly all these sections are linked with the idea of Hubris, and all these sections can be placed within a pre-post exilic context. e.g.. the deuteronomistic like treatment of crime and punishment.

 

As for the notion that for one reason or another the author would not criticize Babylon, consider Isa 46:1-2 which is very derogatory towards Babylon.

 

 

Best regards

 

Noel O Riordan