Babylonian Genesis: The Story of the Creation

by Alexander Heidel

Here is a complete translation of all the published cuneiform tablets of the various Babylonian creation stories, of both the Semitic Babylonian & the Sumerian material. Each creation account is preceded by a brief introduction dealing with the age & provenance of the tablets, the aim & purpose of the story etc. Also included is a translation & discussion of two Babylonian creation versions written in Greek. The final chapter presents a detailed examination of the Babylonian creation accounts in their relation to the Old Testament literature.
Preface
List of Illustrations
Enûma elish
Related Babylonian creation stories
Old Testament parallels
Appendix

Genres: History, Religion, Mythology, Nonfiction, Ancient History, Anthropology, Epic

178 pages, Kindle Edition

First published January 1, 1942

Reviews

[Abeer Al-Gailani · Rating 2 out of 5]

تحتاج الى تدوين الاسماء و ما قامت به ،، ربما يكون للمهتمين بالاساطير او بدراسه الآثار مهم و مفيد لكنه يحتاج ايضا الى جهد لمن لا يمتلك معلومات عن الاساطير البابليه , العهد القديم و الجديد ، العبرانية .

[Daniel Chaikin · Rating 2 out of 5]

ABANDONED
The Babylonian Genesis : The Story of Creation by Alexander Heidel
Published: 1942, 2nd edition 1951
format: 166 page Hardcover
acquired: from my library
read: 115 pages on Aug 5-6
rating: 2 stars

I stumbled into Heidel. He seemed knowledgeable in his intro, notes and translation, but once he started analyzing, he undermined any strengths he might have had. He comes across as manipulative, unreliable, and, ultimately for me, unreadable.

I've wanted to read the Enuma Eliš for a while. This year I have come across several references to Middle Eastern influences on Greek literature, and then read Diane Wolkstein's translation/re-telling of Inanna/Ishtar. So, this was a great time to read this and I was looking forward to it. A quick library catalogue search brought up this book.

The actual translation of the Enuma Eliš takes 43 annotated pages. The translation seemed OK. The story itself was interesting but not really a great read, as it's so painfully political. It tells of creation and the lineage of various Sumerian-regional gods and how Marduk, Babylon's own god, ended up becoming their leader. Creation begins with Apsû, who may represent fresh water, and his wife Tiamat, who represents the ocean, and, perhaps, chaos or the deep unknown. Their children include Anshar and Kishar, who give rise to Anu, who fathers Ea (Sumerian Enki), who fathers Marduk. After many odds and ends, Apsû is killed by Ea, but Tiamat can only be taken by a well-armed Marduk. In return for leadership over all the gods, Marduk slays Tiamat, splits her body into two, and use half to form heaven and the other half to form earth. He then has her general, Kingu, executed. From his blood comes mankind, whose purpose is only to serve the gods.

Heidel follows this up with various other Sumerian-era fragments and a couple old Greek accounts. The history of one goes like this:

The other Greek account if that of Berossus, a priest of Bel Marduk at Babylon. It is taken from his history of Babylonia, which he compiled from native documents and published in Greek about 275 B.C. His writings have perished, but extracts from his history have fortunately been preserved to us. The preservation of the Babylonian creation story we owe to a monk in Constantinople commonly known as Syncellus, or Sunkellos (eighth century A.D.), who derived his material from the lost 'Chronicle' of the church historian Eusebius of Caesarea (ca A.D. 260—ca. 340); and Eusebius, in turn, derived it from the works of Alexander Polyhistor (last century B.C.)

And yet, this account has turned out to be remarkably accurate.

All this seemed mostly OK, although Heidel scattered a few odd comments, proclaiming a sense of certainty where it clearly doesn't belong. When he moved on the the Biblical comparisons he lost me. His use of words like "plainly" and "clearly" and "cannot" in contexts where nothing was plain or clear, and nothing as certain as "cannot" can possible be said, drove me nuts. They are red flags. He plays a lot of other tricks too, confusing the issue to makes his otherwise weaker points. I found that I started to doubt everything he has said. It all started to feel manipulated. I quit with maybe 25 pages of real text to read. I just saw no reason to keep going. Poor Heidel has been slashed from any future reading I might do on these subjects.

[Seval Yılmaz · Rating 4 out of 5]

Kitap; "Enûma Eliş" (tabletlerin bulunuşu, elde edilen malzemenin yayımlanması, öykünün özeti, destanın amacı, destanın kaynakları, yazılış tarihi, şiirin vezni, Enûma Eliş ve yeni yıl festivali ve 7 tabletin çevirisi), "Enûma Eliş ile İlgili Öteki Babil Yaratılış Öyküleri" ve "Eski Ahit'teki Paralel Pasajlar" olmak üzere 3 ana bölümden oluşuyor. Alexander Heidel'in ön sözde belirttiği üzere, "Bu küçük çalışma, asıl olarak meslekten Asur bilimcilere değil, Eski Ahit üzerine çalışanlara ve Hristiyan din adamlarına hitap ediyor." Zaten Heidel'in, birtakım akademisyenler veya uzmanlar tarafından öne sürülen Enûma Eliş ile Eski Ahit arasındaki benzerlik argümanlarını nasıl çürüttüğünü okuduktan sonra Enûma Eliş ile Eski Ahit arasında benzerlik olduğu düşüncesinden kurtuluyorsunuz. Heidel'in de belirttiği gibi Enûma Eliş'te Sümer baştanrısı Enlil yerine Babil/Akkad baştanrısı Marduk'un yerleştirilerek destanın yeniden yazılmasının politik bir amacı var, ki o da Mezopotamya'da mutlak Babil hâkimiyetini resmen ilan etmek. Destan ile ilgili şahsi kanaatlerimden bahsetmem gerekirse, destanın muhtemelen büyük Babil hükümdarı Hammurabi döneminde değiştirilerek Sümer tanrıları yerine Babil tanrılarının koyulduğunu görüyoruz çünkü destanda birçok değiştirilmeden bırakılmış Sümerce kelimeler var. Yani Babilliler, kendi baştanrıları Marduk'un diğer tüm tanrı ve tanrıçaları ezici bir şekilde yenerek baştanrı konumuna gelmesini yeterli görmüşler, değiştirmeye gerek görmedikleri Sümerce kelimeleri önemsiz teferruat olarak kabul etmişler. Yalnız destanda dikkatimi çeken noktalardan biri de Marduk adlı tanrının (erkek) Tiamat adlı tanrıçayı (kadın) öldürmesi ve hatta cesedin üzerine çıkıp ayaklarıyla tepinmesi. Bu önemsiz gibi görünen ayrıntı aslında oldukça önemli çünkü anaerkil düzenin sona erdiğini, yani "ayaklar altında çiğnendiğini" (aynı zamanda ana tanrıça kültünün baltalanması) temsil ediyor. Kutsal kitapların bile insanlar tarafından değiştirildiğini göz önünde bulundurursak bana göre de Enûma Eliş ile Eski Ahit arasında benzerlik bulmaya çalışmak boş bir uğraş olur. Benzerlik aranacaksa Babil destanları (ataerkil) ile Sümer destanları (anaerkil) arasında benzerlik aranabilir. Keza Enûma Eliş ile Hesiodos'un Theogonia'sı arasında büyük benzerlikler bulunabilir, ki Hesiodos'un büyük ölçüde Enûma Eliş'ten beslendiği barizdir. Şahsi kanaatim, Mezopotamya destanlarının herhangi bir kutsal kitabın yüzyıllar boyunca toplumlar tarafından değiştirile değiştirile günümüze ulaşan bir versiyonu olduğu yönündedir. Her halükârda Sümer destanlarının (misal Gılgamış) yanı sıra Enûma Eliş'i de okumak, biz okurların vizyonunu genişletecek ve bizlere farklı perspektifler kazandıracaktır. Bu sebeple bu kitabı herkese tavsiye ediyorum. Keyifli okumalar.

Kitapla ve sevgiyle kalın.

[wasan bahir · Rating 4 out of 5]

يقال كي تفهم شعب اقرأ تاريخة .. لكن العراق اقدم من التاريخ .. فيجب ان نعود مع العراقيين الى قصة الخليقة البابلية
من الملفت للنظر كيف تجد في سفر التكوين البابلي ملامح الاستبداد والتملق منذ فجر التاريخ .. ..في الالواح السبعة لقصة الخليقة الارض والسماء خلقتا من شطر جثة تئامت المهزومة في معركة ..اما الاله الذي كان الباديء في تحريض الالهة على الشر فيذبح عقابا له ويخلق من دمه الانسان ممزوجا بالطين .. خلق الانسان والسماوات لا تتجاوز لوحين من الالواح السبعة .. حيث ان البقية هي بيان نسب الاله المنتصر مردوك و قتاله في المعركة .. مع لوحين كاملين للتمجيد بأسمه والحمد بذكر اسمائه الخمسين !!
كل هذا لانه الاله المعبود المنتصر .. اذن خلق الانسان ليس مهم قدر التمجيد للاله الحاكم ..
ثم ان الانسان خلق فقط لخدمة الالهة .. انه بداية مبدأ الاستغلال الطبقي .. فالناس خدم الطبقة الحاكمة .. التي كثيرا ما نراهم يدعون انهم من نسل او انصاف الهة كما في جلجامش مثلا .. وتستمر الالوهية الى يومنا هذا لكن بمنطق اخر..منطق خدمة الاماكن المقدسة والانتصار للدين ومن نسل النبي !!
الكتاب جميل .. فيه ترجمة النصوص البابلية مع مقارنات لسفر التكوين في الكتب المقدسة .. مع بعض الاساطير البابلية ونقاط تشابهها واختلافها مع قصص توراتية كقصة سقوط الانسان التي نجدها مختلفة في النسخة البابلية ..حيث ان ادبا البابلي اخفق في نيل الخلود ليس لانه عصى ربه او ذنب اقترفة .. وانما لاطاعته العمياء لوصيه اله الحكمة ..

[Ahmed Oraby · Rating 5 out of 5]

لو قيض لي الكتابة عن هذا الكتاب، فسيكون الهدف من ذلك هو الوفاء بالجميل للكاتب، لما صوبه الكاتب لي من أفكار، أو قل لما أناره لي عن موضوعات عدة، اكتنفها الغموض وعدم الفهم الكافي بما يحيط بالموضوع ككل، أو قل لتقديمه رؤية نظر أخرى عن موضوعات كانت قد تشكلت عند قراءتي للسواح مؤخرا.
كتاب جميل، ومبهر، ونقدي، ومبسط وسهل

[Zoe · Rating 1 out of 5]

To say that this is not the most exciting book I've ever read would be a vast understatement; when I was only 30 pages from the end, I put it down for two weeks because I just didn't care enough to go on.

The premise sounds interesting enough: this is a collection of Babylonian creation stories in translation, accompanied by "a detailed examination of the Babylonian creation accounts in their relation to our Old Testament literature". The creation stories themselves were certainly worth reading, if a bit repetitive and dry at times. But the comparison to the Old Testament was not at all what I had expected. I had mistakenly supposed that the focus would be on similarities between the Babylonian and Biblical accounts, and I find that unexpected connections between different cultures are always interesting to read about. Unfortunately, though, the emphasis here was mostly on differences. We would be presented with some details from the Babylonian story, followed by some details from the Biblical story, and told how the two were different. This was repeated several times, and it just didn't make for an engaging narrative.

There was some discussion at the end of structural similarities, but this had too much of a Christian emphasis to really appeal to me. One of the "problems" with the theory that the Bible might have been influenced by the Babylonian Enuma Elish was that this might contradict the doctrine of divine inspiration which "is, of course, indisputably taught in Scripture". So, Heidel explained how the concept divine inspiration could be understood in a way that would allow this influence. I'm just not concerned with reconciling history with the Bible; I wanted to know the historical facts on their own.

I don't mean to say that this is a bad book, just that I don't fit into its intended audience. If I had read the introduction rather than only the back cover before purchasing the book, I would have seen that it was intended for the "Old Testament scholar and the Christian minister". These are the people who might care most about preserving traditional views of the Bible in the light of fairly recently-discovered Near Eastern texts, and I'm just not one of them. Anyone who's interested more in the Near Eastern texts themselves can probably find a more appropriate and more recent book; this one is almost sixty years old. I don't know of any alternatives to recommend, but I can't recommend this one.

[Liam · Rating 3 out of 5]

Written in roughly 1800 BC. Nearly 4,000 years ago.

Summary:
Twin Father & Mother Gods created the heavens and the earth. They then had many children. Notably Marduk was the most powerful of their children. The Father hated all the commotion and noise made by all of his children, so he planned to destroy them. One of his sons was able to stop him, however killed him in the process. Peace reigned and the Gods created humanity out of the blood of the fallen God to be their slaves. Then, after a time, the mother God (Tiamat) grew angry at her son for killing his father. She declared war on all the world of Gods and man. Then Marduk stepped up to stop her on the condition that he would be supreme among all the Gods. He was able to destroy her, and now reigns supreme among the Gods.

I read the Enuma Elish because I had heard it had some remarkable similarities to the Genesis creation account. However I found that it was not very similar at all. The most significant similarity I found was a phrase in it that was almost similar to Genesis 2:5 prior to the creation of humanity:

“And no pasture land had been formed” (Enuma Elish 1:6)

Compare to Genesis 2:5 (ESV): “When no bush of the field was yet in the land and no small plant of the field had yet sprung up for YHWH God had not caused it to rain on the land, and there was no man to work the ground...”

Not a hugely striking similarity... but there is a slight resemblance, and it fits into the same timeframe in this story as the text in Genesis.

All in all I don’t think it was worth my time to read the epic unfortunately. The text was very broken, and the translation in this account in particular, showed all the parenthetical guess work of the textual critics to try and salvage the text of the damaged manuscript. It was nice to be able to see some of the manuscript evidence, but it made the reading experience really choppy and difficult. Each verse (which were often half sentences) was on a new line, which contributed to the choppy experience. I found myself wanting a smoother translation - something more for popular reading. I found myself skimming after a bit. It was interesting to be sure. But probably not worth the time if you’re only reading it for context in Genesis.

[Abdulsattar · Rating 5 out of 5]

قصة خلق العالم عند البابليين

[Samuel Sadler · Rating 3 out of 5]

I taught this book this Fall as part of an Ancient Humane Letters course. Alexander Heidel provides the Enuma Elish, various Babylonian texts from the same period, and his own commentaries specifically geared towards Old Testament scholars and Christian ministers. In this, he has succeeded. I did not read thoroughly through all of Heidel's secondary material, but found his arrangement of sources and comments throughout insightful and useful for teaching. His writing is a bit dry, but the Babylonian stories themselves, foundational to the world with which the Hebrews often contended, are worth our attention.

[Shawn Brace · Rating 5 out of 5]

Not only does this book present the full text of Enuma elish, and parts of other Babylonian creation myths, but Heidel spends the last third of the book disputing the view of much critical scholarship that the creation account in the Hebrew Bible is dependent upon the other ANE myths.

He does a good job of demonstrating how the Bible stands over and against these other myths.

For a writer who was at the Oriental Institute at the University of Chicago, this is a very surprising yet refreshing view.

[Murat · Rating 3 out of 5]

5. " Kan yaratacağım ve kemik olduracağım;
6. sonra lullu'yu çıkaracağım ortaya, 'İnsan' olacak adı!
7. Evet, lullu 'yu: yaratacağım İnsan' ı!
8. (Onun üstüne) yıkılacak tanrıların hizmeti, dinlenebilsinler diye.
9. Sonra akıllıca düzenleyeceğim tanrıların yol ve yöntemlerini de.
10. Eş düzeyde onurlandırılacak, ama iki (gruba) ayrılacaklar."

(VI. Tablet)

[Zach · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is as close as I will likely ever come to a facsimile of the cuneiform tablets of the multiple Babylonian epics. A very clean and well organized version.

[Jena · Rating 1 out of 5]

El autor escribió este estudio de literatura comparada para los estudiosos de la Biblia y pastores evangélicos, entre el libro del Génesis y el Enûma elish o Poema de la Creación en su versión babilónica.
El objetivo principal del autor es hacer patente que los historiadores están equivocados cuando afirman que el Génesis se basa en el poema babilónico; por el contrario, dice el autor, se trata de dos versiones paralelas, o lo que es lo mismo, cada una surge de fuente diferente. Esta teoría puede ser buena para los pastores y estudiosos que desean fortalecer su fe, pero existen estudios de literatura comparada de la Universidad de Princeton, en donde se analizan ambas creaciones verso a verso (a versículo en la Biblia) señalando las coincidencias en el sentido y en el uso de las mismas palabras.
Una de sus ideas para fortalecer la originalidad del Génesis es afirmar que el Dios del Génesis creó el universo ex-nihilo, es decir, de lo inmaterial se obtiene la materia. Creo, y acepto que me corrijan, que no se ha probado la existencia de Dios, el de cualquier religión, ni tampoco hemos visto surgir ente alguno de la nada. Todo lo que afirma es materia de fe y no de conocimiento científico.
Cuando afirma que el Génesis no se fundamenta en el poema babilónico, se saca de la manga al Espíritu Santo quien, dice él, inspiró al "Yavista" (escritor de los primeros libros de la Biblia). La pregunta es: ¿Por qué confundir la gimnasia con la magnesia? Cada religión tiene sus propios mitos ¿por qué revolverlos? Los judíos creen en Yavé y los católicos y demás sectas creen en la Trinidad. Es más, los judíos jamás han estado de acuerdo con las interpretaciones de los católicos y evangélicos hechas para entroncarse con la Biblia.

[William Walker · Rating 3 out of 5]

Finished reading The Babylonian Genesis by Alexander Heidel. It was published in 1967, so a newer addition may have a more complete translation of cuneiform tablets that were missing at that time.

It includes the Enuma Elish, some related Babylonian creation stories, and a very large chapter titled "Old Testament Parallels." This chapter explores the views held in the 1960's about whether the Bible influenced the Babylonians or whether the Babylonians influenced the Bible. This chapter is rather frustrating, as Heidel was a conservative Christian from the 1960's. He does not write with impartiality nor with the indifference of one who considers the first 7-ish chapters of Genesis to be the same kind of myth as those found in the Enuma Elish.

He concludes with the opinion that the question of chicken and egg, should in this case be left open due to the incompleteness of the tablets--one was, at this time, completely missing. He states that regardless of origin, he is confident that the Bible is both true and better. His God is much more powerful than any of the gods told about in the clay tablets and in his story man is given a great task instead of slavery.

Weird how we still ended up with slavery. But that's neither your fault nor mine; and to think otherwise is to fall victim of abuse.

Be free.

[Banbury · Rating 3 out of 5]

This short book provides an English translation of the Enuma Elish, and for that alone it is valuable.

Although I can appreciate that a scholar must provide his sources, and that it may be up to the reader to track those sources down, some of the footnotes were integral to the author's analysis (e.g., when instructing the reader to "c.f." a certain text), yet as a practical matter most readers do not have easy access to the text referred to, especially scholarly periodicals.

He seems to have a bit of bias toward treating the Bible as truth, and the Enuma Elish as myth.

[Wayne]

Fine translation of the Enuma Elish and a number of Babylonian creation story fragments. Then he goes on to address comparisons between the Enuma Elish and the Genesis story. There had already been a lot of conjecture on this by 1963, which he addresses with his own philological arguments. I thought this part of the book would be interesting but unless you're a hardcore scholar it's just not that interesting. I can see why it went out of print.

[E7boehm · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great book, most complete Emuna Elish there is. Not as poetic as King but more complete, and very accurate translation. The essay at the end shows that there are parallels between bible and this poem but that they are mostly accidental a very compelling essay. Good solid scholarship and a pleasure to read. Takes some mental muscle to get through but worth the struggle.

[Wesley Malvini · Rating 3 out of 5]

The Enuma Elish is beautiful. The introduction is biased towards Christianity.

[E Vance Shearin · Rating 3 out of 5]

A good text over all, a little dated in style. It seems to be an excellent translation of the ancient texts and the commentary is the traditional views you would expect from someone writing in the 1930s to 1950s.

[David · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is primarily a comparison between the Enuma Elish and several fragmentary creation myths of the Babylonians with Genesis 1-2 and a few other Old Testament passages.

Chapter 1: Enuma Elish. My primary reason for purchasing this book was to read this myth, and I wasn't disappointed. Heidel precedes it with a helpful summary to orient the reader. The story itself celebrates the ascension of Marduk to the position of king of all the gods, a title awarded to him for his victory over the mother of all the gods Tiamat, who represents the primordial salt water whence everything else came into being. From her carcass, he creates the sky and the earth. He then creates the moon, the stars, and the planets. Finally, from the blood of Kingu (Tiamat's consort/general of her armies), Marduk creates man. The myth concludes with the celebration of Marduk's victory and the recital of his fifty names.

Chapter 2: Related Babylonian Creation Stories. These are framgentary but interesting stories that add details to the Enuma Elish or give alternate accounts.

Chapter 3: Old Testament Parallels. Heidel considers the similarities of the Babylonian stories with Genesis 1-2 primarily, but includes other Old Testament passages. His conclusion is that the similarities are definitely there but that they are overblown, and the differences between the two accounts are more striking.

[Emily · Rating 1 out of 5]

The gist of this is that this is outdated material and the author admits outright is bias toward a specific goal, while also not really being interesting nor quite the book I was looking for.

This book offers a translation of the Enuma Elish and then uses that to try to disprove the idea that the Enuma Elish and the Book of Genesis have anything in common. Heidel outright admits that he wrote this in order so that Christian pastors can use it, and the result is....not persuasive.

I went into hoping to find an exploration of the parallels with the Old Testament and Babylonian mythology. What this was is a overly defensive, pedantic, and rambly argument for why any such parallels cannot actually exist. He makes arguments that actually seem to disprove his point more than anything, and being familiar with more recent scholarship on the subject, this isn't a great take overall. He concludes with pretending that he can't find a conclusion one way or the other, despite the fact that he only really argued against the idea of parallels (and never very effectively in my opinion) and he admitted his goals in the introduction.

Toward the end, I admittedly skimmed to only read the sections I cared about, because he got so caught up with trying to prove his points that he was arguing against parallels that no one thinks exist.

[Ethan]

A translation of the Babylonian creation epic Enuma Elish along with explanatory notes, additional creation stories found in Mesopotamia, and a thoroughgoing analysis of the comparison between the Babylonian stories and the Biblical story of creation.

The author provides a suprisingly robust defense of the Biblical creation narrative as being quite distinct from Enuma elish, more different than alike, in contrast to the standard "scholarly" view of the Biblical story as derivative of and yet polemical against the Babylonian tale.

A good resource for the Babylonian creation story and in terms of the comparison and contrast with the Biblical creation narrative.

[Jerome]

Although a scholarly work, the translation of the Enuma Elish is quite readable, as is the chapter on related creation myths. Anyone who is interested in reading translations of world mythologies will find this book quite accessible. The 3rd chapter on parallels in Genesis is somewhat technical, but also quite readable, however, since the text was first published in 1942, there may be more recent scholarship that takes into account contemporary archeological evidence or more modern methods of comparative analysis.

[Peter J. · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a great read. I have long felt a suspicion that various aspects of the Old Testament were artifacts from when Abraham left Chaldea to monotheize that faith. Examples such as the battle of God with Leviathan, the flood, etc. Though I knew about the Enki flood parallels, I was unaware of the man from clay, prevalence of 7, lack of ex nihilio evidence, etc. I take the author's "scriptural acrobatics" at the end to try to rationalize the issue to still keep the OT as god breathed with a grain of salt. Most of his arguments were quite weak in my opinion.

[Jeffrey Aaron · Rating 5 out of 5]

Like the biblical Genesis, which was written after the Babylonian Genesis, both creation stories are the surface of a much bigger story which goes back further in time before the Hebrews or the Babylonians ever existed. Heidel was a great scholar and we all owe him a great debt of gratitude for bringing Marduk's 11-day Akitu festival back to life. However we also must remember that Marduk was the son of Enki, from Eridu, which the archaeology and the Sumerian literature agree is the oldest city on earth. And that is where the story of the Babylonian and biblical Genesis really begins.

[Suha · Rating 4 out of 5]

يتناول هذا الكتاب قصة الخليقة ملحمة "حينما في الاعالي" او انوما ايلش ، الملحمة السومرية البابلية في الواح في مكتبة اشور بانيبال ..
تهتم انوما إيلش نبذة عن اصل العالم ككل وطريقة تنظيمه، بدأ من الالهة التي تشكل قوى الطبيعة الى مردوك مكون النظام عند البابلين والسومريين..
تنقسم الواح الى شرح المعركة بين الالهة والقسم الاكبر الى تمجيد مردوك واعماله وصفاته ومكانته في حضارة وادي الرافدين ..
وهناك شرح وافي عن النسخة الاشورية لملحمة حينما في الاعالي فبدل من مردوك استبدله الاشوريين بآشور ..
كتاب ممتع بالاجمال لمن يريد ان يعرف عن ملحمة حينما في الاعالي

[Mark Matzeder · Rating 2 out of 5]

As a lifelong reader of mythology I found the translations of the cuneiform texts fascinating. The last third of the book was disappointing as Heidel went through intellectual contortions to support the opinion he began with (to wit: that the Hebrew creation stories recorded in Genesis were not influenced by or drawn from the Babylonian myths).
Also, Heidel seemed really dense about the concept of metaphor in poetry.
I wonder if there have been any cuneiform discoveries since 1951 which might fill out the texts lacunae.

[Khouloud Hkimi · Rating 2 out of 5]

Babylonian Genesis: "the Creation Story", a book by the American Assyriologist and Biblical scholar Alexander Heidel who translated and collected all the cuneiform tablets found to date, telling the Babylonian cosmogony or creation myths, including the most famous "Enuma Elish" (meaning "when above"); a masterpiece recorded on seven clay tablets that were first discovered in the ruins of King Ashurbanipal's great library between 1848 and 1876. Heidel made a comparison later between these inscriptions and the Old Testament, analyzing the similarities between the Babylonian and Hebrew stories.

[Jim · Rating 2 out of 5]

Some of the differences between Genesis and Enuma Elish are that the Babylonians had numerous gods while the Old Testament has one. Babylonian gods were mortal, they ate, they could die. Genesis is all about creating the world for man. The Babylonian gods created man to do the agricultural work so that they wouldn't have to. The Genesis god created the world out of nothing. The Babylonians constructed it out of materials that already existed in the universe.

[Clay · Rating 2 out of 5]

This is a good collection of translations of the Enuma elish and other Babylonian creation myths.
I found the myths themselves terrific and interesting.

The problem is Heidel's commentary. He discusses similarities between the Babylonian and Hebrew creation myths, but it appears that his goal is to write as an apologist for the Hebrew myth instead of writing honestly about the vast and striking parallels that do exist.