THE EARTH

AND THE WATERS

IN GENESIS 1 AND 2

A Linguistic Investigation

David Toshio Tsumura

Journal for the Study of the Old Testament

Supplement Series 83
 C opyright© 1989 Sheffield Academic Press

Published by
JSOT Press
JSOT Press is an imprint of
Sheffield Academic Press Ltd
The Univenity of Sheffield
343 Fulwood Road
Sheffield S10 3BP
England

Printed in Great B ritain

by Billing & Sons Ltd
Worcester

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

Tsumura, David Toshio

The earth and the waten in Genesis 1 and 2 : a
linguistic investigation.-Uoumal for the study of
the old testament supplement series, ISSN 0309-0787;
83)
1. Bible. O.T. Genesis-Critical studies
I. Title 11. Series
222'.1106

ISBN 1-85075-208-7
 CONTENTS

Foreword 7
Preface 8
Abbreviations 9

Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION 13

Chapter 2 THE EARTH IN GEN 1 17

A. Etymology of *thw 17
B. Etymology of *bhw 21
C. tohii wabOhU and Ugaritic tu-a-bi{u] 23
1 . Morphological correspondence 24
2. Semantic investigations 26
D. Uses of Hebrew tohii and tohii wabOhii 30
1 . tOhU 30
2. tOhii wabOhii 36
E. tohii wabOhii in the framework of Gen 1 41

Chapter 3 THE WATERS IN GEN 1 45

A. Babylonian background 45
B. Canaanite background 50
C. Etymology of *thm 51
D. Uses of * thm 53
1 . Non-personified use 53
2. Personification 56
E. *tiham- and *yamm- 58

Excursus: A "Canaanite" dragon myth in Gen 1:2? 62

Chapter 4 THE EARTH-WATERS RELATIONSHIP IN GEN I 67

A. A "hyponymous" word pair: 'r� thm(t)

- 67
B. "Heaven" I "earth" I "sea" 72
C. "Heaven" I "earth" 74
D. A flooding of the subterranean waters? 77

Excursus: Structure of Enuma elish I 1-9 81

Chapter 5 THE EARTH IN GEN 2- Earth in a bare state- 85

Chapter 6 THE WATERS IN GEN 2 93

A. Rain and 'ed 93

B . Etymology of 'ed 94
1 . Semitic etymology? 95
2. Sumerian loan word via Akkadian? 97
a. Graphical or graphemic problems 101
b. Phonological problems 104
c. Semantic problems 107
3. Direct Sumerian loan word? 113

Chapter 7 THE EARTH-WATERS RELATIONSHIP IN GEN 2 1 17

A. A flooding of the subterranean waters 1 17

Excursus: Time and place of man's creation 1 19

B. Etymology of Eden 1 23
1 . Sumerian loan word via Akkadian? 1 23
2. Direct Sumerian loan word? 1 25
3. Common West Semitic? 1 27

Excursus: Etymology of Tigris and Euphrates 137

Chapter 8 GOD AND THE WATERS 141

A. God as a rain-giver 141

B. Watery beginning 143
1 . A "creator" god and the water 144
a. Marduk, Ea and El 144
b. Similarity between Ea and El 1 46
2. Watery abode 148
3. Conclusion 153

Chapter 9 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 155

Bibliography 1 69
Indexes 1 85
 FOREWORD

Every year sees new books and studies on questions posed by the opening
chapters of Genesis. The beginning of the B ible attracts l inguists and
philosophers, scientists and theologians, and a variety of other specialists,
yet their studies can only have lasting value if they arise from an accurate
understanding of the Hebrew text. The Council of Tyndale House,
Cambridge, concerned to encourage accurate exegesis of the book of
Genesis in the context of its ancient environment, has promoted research in
these chapters.
We are grateful that Or David Tsumura came from the University of
Tsukuba, Japan, to work at Tyndale House on the Genesis 1-1 1 Project, and
pleased that his initiative and diligence have resulted in this monograph. His
scholarly study examines evidence from Babylonian, Ugaritic and other
ancient Near Eastern texts. He shows that certain long-held views about a
primeval chaos and mythological allusions deserve to be questioned.
Alternative positions are presents with careful explanation and sober
argument. We welcome this inquiry into subjects on which opinions have
been strongly held. We believe that Dr Tsumura's research will help to
clarify the opening pages of the Bible.

K. A. Kitchen
A. R. Millard
D. J. Wiseman
 PREFACE

This monograph is the outcome of my worlc at Tyndale House as a research

fellow of the Genesis 1 - 1 1 Project between July 1 986 and March 1 988. It
provides a linguistic discussion in which Genesis 1 and 2 are set in the
literary and mythological context of the ancient Near East so that
similarities and differences between the biblical tradition and the extra­
biblical ones are elucidated.
I thank both the Tyndale House Council for the invitation to participate
in the Project and the Project directors , Mr A. R . Millard, Profs. K . A .
Kitchen and D. J. Wiseman. Many individuals have assisted m y research. In
particular I wish to thank successive Wardens and the Librarian of Tyndale
House; Profs. W. G. Lambert and R. E. Longacre; and Drs. G. J. Wenham
and R . S. Hess. Friends and family encouraged me throughout, especially in
Cambridge the late Dr. C. J. Hemer, the Rev. and Mrs. David Coffey, the
Rev. Dr. M. Thompson, and in Japan the faculty and students of the Japan
Bible Seminary and the congregation of Hamadayama Church.
I thank the Cambridge University Library and the Oriental Faculty
Library for access to their collections. The University of Tsukuba granted
me almost two years leave of absence. Permission was granted by the
editors of Vetus Testamentum, Biblica and Ugarit Forschungen to reuse
articles published in these journals. I would like to thank Prof. D. J. A.
Clines for accepting this monograph as a volume in the JSOT Supplement
series.
Finally I want to thank Susan, my wife and my colleague, for her
unfailing support and encouragement, for making special "Semitic" fonts
for the Macintosh computer, for her constructive criticisms and suggestions
as a theoretical linguist and for revising my English. To her I dedicate this
book with love.
 Abbreviations 9

ABBREVIATIONS

AB Anchor Bible
ABZ R. Borger, Assyrisch-babylonische Zeichenliste, 1 978.
A EL E. W. Lane, An Arabic-English Lexicon, 1 863, repr.
1 968.
AfO Archiv fur Orientforschung
A Fw H. Zimmem, Akkadische Fremdworter als Beweis fur
Babylonischen Kultureinfluss, 1 9 1 5.
AG K. Tallqvist, Akkadische Gotterepitheta, 1938.
AH Atra-l:Jasis Epic
AH W. G. Lambert & A. R. Millard, Atra-lJasis: The Babylonian
Story of the Flood, 1969.
AHw W. von Soden, Akkadisches Handworterbuch, 1965-8 1 .
AlA S . A . Kaufman, The Akkadian Influences on Aramaic, 1974.
AnBi Analecta Biblica
A nOr Analecta Orientalia
A NE T J. B. Pritchard (ed.), Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to
the Old Testament, 1950, 19693.
AOAT Alter Orient und Altes Testament
ARET Archivi reali di Ebla, testi
AS Assyriological Studies (University of Chicago)
ASN Annali della scuola normale, superiore di Pisa
A USS Andrews University Seminary Studies
BaE L. Cagni (ed.), Il bilinguismo a Ebla, 1984.
BASOR Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research
BBVO Berliner Beitriige zum Vorderen Orient
BDB F. Brown, S. R. Driver & C. A. Briggs, A Hebrew and
English Lexicon of the Old Testament, 1 907.
BG A. Heidel, The Babylonian Genesis, 1 95 1 2 & 19633.
BHS Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia
Bib Biblica
BKAT Biblischer Kommentar Altes Testament
BN Biblische Notizen
BO Bibliotheca Orientalis
BS Bibliotheca Sacra
10 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

BSOAS Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies

B WL W. G. Lambert, Babylonian Wisdom Literature, 1 960.
BZAW Beiheft, ZA W
CAD Chicago Assyrian Dictionary
CBQ Catholic Biblical Quarterly
Gl Code of Hammurabi
CML G. R. Driver, Canaanite Myths and Legends, 1 956.
CMV J. C. L. Gibson, Canaanite Myths and Legends. New ed.,
1 978.
CTA A. Herdner, Corpus des tablettes en cuneiformes
alphabetiques, 1 963.
DOTT D. W. Thomas (ed.), Documents from Old Testament Times,
1 958.
EA El-Amama tablets
Ee Enuma elish
ESP J. J. M. Roberts, The Earliest Semitic Pantheon: A Study of
the Semitic Deities Attested in Mesopotamia before Ur 111,
1 972.
GAG W. von Soden, Grundriss der Akkadischen Grammatik, 1969.
Gilg. Epic of Gilgamesh
HAL W. Baumgartner, Hebriiisches und Aramiiisches Lexikon zum
A/ten Testament, 1 967-.
HAR Hebrew Annual Review
HSM Harvard Semitic Monographs
HSS Harvard Semitic Studies
HTR Harvard Theological Review
ICC International Critical Commentary
/DB interpreter's Dictionary of Bible
lANES Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society of Columbia
University
JAOS Journal of the American Oriental Society
JB Jerusalem Bible
JBL Journal of Biblical Literature
JCS Journal of Cuneiform Studies
JNES Journal of Near Eastern Studies
JPS Jewish Publication Society translation of the Old
Testament
JSOT Journal for the Study of the Old Testament
JSS Journal of Semitic Studies
ITS Journal of Theological Studies
 Abbreviations 11

KA I H. Donner & W. Rollig, Kanaaniiische und Aramiiische

lnschriften 1-1/1, 1 962-68.
KB L. Koehler & W. Baumgartner, Lexicon in Veteris Testamenti
Libros, 1953.
KH Kode d. Hammurabi
KTU M. Dietrich-0. Loretz-J. Sanmartin, Die keilalphabetischen
Texte aus Ugarit, 1976.
LAPO Litteratures anciennes du Proche-Orient
LB Late Babylonian
LdE L. Cagni (ed.), La lingua di Ebla, 198 1 .
LSS Leipziger Semitistische Studien
LXX Septuagint
MA (mA) Middle Assyrian
MAD Materials for the Assyrian Dictionary
MB (mB) Middle Babylonian
MEE Materiali epigrafici di Ebla
M/0 Mitteilungen des Instituts fur Orientforschung
MLC G. del Olmo Lete, Mitos y leyendas de Canaan, 1 98 1 .
MMEW A. Livingstone, Mystical and Mythological Explanatory
Works of Assyrian and Babylonian Scholars, 1 986.
MRS Mission de Ras Shamra
MSL Materialien zum Sumerischen Lexikon
MT Masoretic Text
NA Neo-Assyrian
NAB New American Bible
NA BU Nouvel/es assyriologiques breves et utilitaires
NEB New English Bible
NI COT The New International Commentary on the Old Testament
NIV New International Version
NUS Newsletter for Ugaritic Studies
OA Old Assyrian
OAkk Old Akkadian
OB Old Babylonian
Or Orientalia
OTL Old Testament Library
PEQ Palestine Exploration Quarterly
PLMU C. H . Gordon, "Poetic Legends and Myths from Ugarit,"
Berytus 25 (1 977), 5-1 33.
RA Revue d'assyriologie et d'archeologie orientale
RB Revue biblique
12 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

RGTC Repertoire geographique des textes cuneifonnes

RHA Revue hittite et asianique
RlA Reallexikon der Assyriologie
RS Ras Shamra text
RSP Ras Shamra Parallels
RSV Revised Standard Version
SB Standard Baby1onian
SBH F. I. Andersen, The Sentence in Biblical Hebrew, 1 974.
SEb Studi Eblaiti
SEL Studi epigrafici e linguistici sui vicino Oriente Antico
SLE P. Fronzaroli (ed.), Studies on the Language of Ebla, 1 984.
SLOBA S. J. Liebennan, The Sumerian Loanwords in Old-Babylonian
Akkadian. Vol. 1 , 1 977.
SPUMB J. C. de Moor, The Seasonal Pattern in the Ugaritic Myth of
Ba'Ju, 1 97 1 .
ST Studia Theologica
SVT Supplements to Vetus Testamentum
TB Tyndale Bulletin
TIT T. Jacobsen, Toward the Image of Tammuz and Other
Essays on Mesopotamian History and Culture, 1 970.
TO A. Caquot, M. Sznycer & A. Herdner, Textes ougaritiques I,
1 974.
TOTC Tyndale Old Testament Commentary
TRE Theologische Realenzyklopiidie
TrinJ Trinity Journal
UF Ugarit Forschungen
Ug Ugaritica
UT C. H . Gordon, Ugaritic Textbook, 1 965.
UTS C. H. Gordon, Ugaritic Textbook, Supplement, 1967.
UVST J. Huehnergard, Ugaritic Vocabulary in Syllabic
Transcription, 1 987.
VE "Vocabulary of Ebla" in MEE 4 (1982).
VT Vetus Testamentum
WA S A. Ennan & H. Grapow, Worterbuch der Aegyptischen
Sprache
ZA Zeitschrift fii.r Assyriologie
ZAH Zeitschrift fii.r Althebraistik
ZA W Zeitschrift fii.r die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft
 Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

In modem critical studies of Genesis it is often suggested that the nature of

the "earth-waters" relationship in Chapter 1 is totally different from that in
Chapter 2. For example, G. von Rad in his commentary explains the initial
states of the cosmos as follows:

Whereas in eh. 1 creation moves from the chaos to the cosmos of the entire world, our
account of creation [in Gen 2] sketches the original state as a desert in contrast to the
sown . . . . . [The] cosmological ideas [of J] . . . are thus very unlike those [of P] . . .
Water is here the assisting element of creation. In P and in some psalms it was the
enemy of creation. I

A similar view is expressed by B. S. Childs, who refers to "the

completely different atmosphere prevailing in l . l -2.4a in comparison with
2.4bff."2 B. W. Anderson also holds that "In this [J's] story the contrast is
not between cosmos and chaos but between a well-watered oasis and the
surrounding wildemess . . . "3 W. H. Schmidt similarly recognizes the
contrast between the " Wassercosmogonie" of Gen 1 :2 and the
"vegetationlosen Steppe oder Wiiste in der Trockenzeit vor dem Regenfall"
in 2:5.4 At the same time, some commentators (e.g., Gunkel, Driver,
Zimmerli, Schmidt) have interpreted this dry earth in 2:5 as a dry chaos,

1 G. von Rad, Genesis (OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1 96 1 , 1963, 1 972), 76f. In his
recent article, B. Otzen also contrasts the waters of "malevolence and danger" in Gen I :2
and the "life-conferring" waters in Gen 2:6; see B. Otzen, "The Use of Myth in Genesis,"
in B. Otzen, H. Gottlieb & K. Jeppesen, Myths in the Old Testament (London: SCM,
1980), 40f.
2B. S. Childs, Myth and Reality in the Old Testament (London: SCM, 1960), 3 1 .
3B. W. Anderson, Creation versus Chaos: the Reinterpretation of Mythical Symbolism in
the Bible (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1967, 1987 [reprint with Postscript]), 40.
4W. H. Schmidt, Die SchOpfungsgeschichte der Priesterschrift: Zur Uberlieferungs­
geschichte von Genesis I: 1-2 :4a und 2 :4b-3 :24. 2. iiberarbeitete und erweiterte Auflage
(Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1967), 196.
14 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

"J's equivalent of P's watery chaos in I :2."5

It is basically clear that the general situation described in Gen 2:5-6 is
that of a "not yet productive" earth and an "assisting" water, 'ed, though the
etymology and meaning of 'ed are still hotly debated. As for the situation
in Gen 1:2, there exist some ambiguities about the meanings of the key
expressions such as tOhu wiibohu and t�hom as well as about the nature of
the earth-waters relationship. B . S. Childs, who like many other scholars
accepts a mythological background for these expressions, explains Gen 1:2
as describing "the mystery of a primordial threat against creation,
uncreated without form and void, which God strove to overcome."6 He
expressed this view in more theological terminology a quarter of century
ago: "the Old Testament writer struggles to contrast the creation, not with a
background of empty neutrality, but with an active chaos standing in
opposition to the will of God... . The chaos is a reality rejected by God."7
Recently, Anderson reasserted the same view, saying "God created out
of chaos (not ex nihilo), as shown by the prefatory verse that portrays the
earth as once being a chaotic waste: stygian darkness, turbulent waters,
utter disorder."s B. Otzen also accepts the conventional view, saying "Few
would deny that elements of a description of chaos are present in v. 2."9
However, this view deserves scrutiny. Does Gen 1:2 describe a "watery
chaos" which existed before creation? In other words, do the terms, tOhu
wabOhii and t�hom, in v. 2 really signify a chaotic state of the earth in
waters and hence "a primordial threat against creation"? Does Gen 2:5-6
also describe a similar chaotic state of the earth, though in a "dry chaos"? Is
there any similarity between the "earth-waters" relationship in Gen 1 and in
Gen 2? If so.. in what sense are they similar? What is the function and
meaning of ' the term 'ed in Gen 2:6? How are the waters such as "a rain-

5Cf. G. J. Wenham, Genesis 1·15 (Word Bible Commentary I; Waco: Word Books,
1987), 57.
6B. S. Childs, Old Testament Theology in a Canonical Context (London: SCM, 1 985),
223f. It is well known that K. Barth treats this problem under the .opic of "das Nichtige",
i.e. "Nothingness", in his Church Dogmatics. Vol. Ill: The Doctrine of Creation, Part 3
(Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1 960), 289-368 (§50}, esp. 352, where he says: "in Gen. 1 :2
. . . there is a reference to the chaos which the Creator has already rejected, negated, passed
over and abandoned even before He utters His first creative Word . . . Chaos is the
unwilled and uncreated reality which constitutes as it were the periphery of His creation and
creature."
7Childs, Myth and Reality, 42.
8B. W. Anderson, "Mythopoetic and Theological Dimensions of Biblical Creation Faith,"
in B. W. Anderson (ed.), Creation in the Old Testament (Issues in Religion and Theology
6; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984}, 15.
90tzen, "The Use of Myth in Genesis," 32.
 1 . Introduction 15

water", "an 'ed-water" and "river-waters" related to Eden and i. k garden

of Eden? The purpose of this study is to clarify the initial state of the
"earth" in its relation to the "waters" in Gen 1 and 2 by answering these
questions.
Emphasis is given in this study to the etymological investigation of
various key terms and expressions in the light of cognate languages such as
Ugaritic, Akkadian, Eblaite and Arabic. Though methodologically a
synchronic and structural study should have priority over a diachronic and
comparative one, in the present study more emphasis is given to the
etymological investigations, not because they have the last word in
determining the meaning of disputed terms, but because many of the errors
made in interpreting the Biblical text we are dealing with stem from faulty
etymology.
The present work does _n_Qt_i!_l t�n� !Q__g_i�� � ��Il1!'!_�l:!�I!�!v� !!!�r�ry
_
_
-

�«--f!!_�!��n stori�sin_Q�!lla.n.:J Gen 2; nor does it aia:. �o solve

_&! the theological problems related to the er�. Since it does not
attempt to reconstruct a history of mythico-religious thinking in ancient
Israel, it deals with only the poetical passages which have direct bearings on
our discussions. The so-called Chaoskampf motif ir, Psalms and other
poetical passages is not treated here thoroughly, not because it is irrelevant
for the discussion of the creation faith in Israel, but because it does not
touch directly the exegetical problems of the Genesis passages themselves.
Instead, the present study tries to pr�sent a linguistic analysis of some
key terms related to the initial situation of ilie-eaith and its relationship
with the waters in Gen 1 :2 and Gen 2:5ff. Hence the scope of this study is
limited to the degree that it includes neither discussions of terms such as
f1i5Sek and rfiaf1 �lohim in Gen 1:2 nor a detailed analysis of the Eden story.
However, the etymological studies are supplemented by a literary analysis
and discourse grammatical investigation of the text in which it.�se key
terms appear.
 Chapter 2

THE EARTH IN GEN 1

The initial state of the earth is described in Gen I :2 as tohii wabOhii. This
expression is traditionally translated into English as "without form and
void" (RSV) or "formless and empty" (NIV). It was translated by various
Greek phrases: d:6paTOS' Kat d:KaTaO"KfUaO"TOS "invisible and unformed"
(LXX); K€vw�a Kat oiJetv "an emptiness and a nothing" (Aquila); 9€v
Kat oiJe€v "a nothing and a nothing" (Theodotion); (E-y€v€TO) d:pyov Kat
d:BtciKpLTov "(became) unworked and indistinguishable" (Syrnmachus). l All
but Symmachus rendered it in an abstract sense, though the Hebrew
expression seems to have had a concrete sense originally.2

A. ETYMOLOGY OF *THW

The term tohii probably means "desert" or "waste" in Dt 32: 1 0 where it

appears in parallel with ere$ midbar "a desert land." Until recently its
etymology has been explained in the light of Arabic tih, which Lane defined
"desert or waterless desert in which one loses his way."3 However, the
Arabic term, with a second weak consonant, does not explain the final long
/u/ of Hebrew tohii. The Ugaritic term th w might be a better candidate for
a possible cognate of the Hebrew term.

I J. W. Wevers, Septuaginta: Genesis (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1974), 75.

2See below.
3E. W. Lane, A EL , 326, cf. also 323, where he lists tiih "desert." Cf. W. F. Albright,
"Contributions to Biblical Archaeology and Philology," JBL 43 ( 1 924), 365, who also
cites Aram. twh, "be distracted."
18 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

Ugaritic

The term thw appears in the following Ugaritic text which reads:

14)p np.!J. np!J. Jbim 15)thw.

And my appetite is an appetite of
the lion(s) in/of the desen(s)
hm. brit. angr 16)b ym. or a desire of the dolphin(?) in the sea
(KTU 1 .5 [UT 67]:I : 14--16)4

The same phrase appears also in one of the mythological texts published in
Ug. V ( 1 968), 559-60: lbim thw (Text 4, I. 3-4).
A. Caquot, M. Sznycer & A. Herdner ( 1 97 4) explain th w in the light of
Hebrew toh u and Arabic tfh "desert", s following R. Dussaud, C. H.
Gordon, H. L. Ginsberg and U. Cassuto.6 On the other hand, E. L.
Greenstein ( 1 973), W. Johnstone ( 1 978), J. C. de Moor ( 1 979) and R. J.
Clifford ( 1 987)7 follow W. F. Albright, T. H. Gaster, G. R. Driver, J .
Gray, J. Aistleitner and A. Jirku who connect the term th w with Arabic
ha wiya "to desire" and analyze it as a verbal form.
However, instead of th w in Ug . V, 559-60, Dietrich-Loretz-Sanmartin
( 1 975) read th wt:

l)w y'ny. bn 2)jJm. mt. And the god (lit. son of gods) Mot answered:
np!Jm 3)np!J. Jbim 4)thwt. "Now my appetite is an appetite of
the lion(s) in/of the desert(s),
w np!J 5)angr b ym . an appetite of the dolphin(?) in the sea."
(KTU 1 . 1 33[604]:2-5)

They take both th w and thwt as nouns from *hwy (// Heb *'wh) and trans­
late th wt as "Gier, Verlangen" like Hebrew ta 'iiwiih, "desire, appetite."s

4In this monograph, Ugaritic texts are cited by KTU text number with Gordon's UT text
number in square brackets.
SA. Caquot, M. Sznycer & A. Herdner, TO, 24 1 , n. m.
6AJso J. C. L. Gibson, CML,2 68 & 159: "waste."
7E. L. Greenstein, "Another Attestation of Initial h >:in West Semitic," lANES 5 ( 1 973),
1 57-164; W. Johnstone, "Lexical and Comparative Philological Contributions to Ugaritic
of Mythological Texts of the 24th Campaign at Ras Shamra," Ug VII (1978), 1 17; J. C. de
Moor, "Contributions to the Ugaritic Lexicon," UF 11 ( 1 979), 640; R. J. Clifford, "Mot
Invites Baal to a Feast: Observations on a Difficult Ugaritic Text (CTA 5.i = KTU 1 .5 . 1 ),"
in D. M. Golomb (ed.), "Working with No Data": Semitic and Egyptian Studies Presented
to Thomas 0. Lambdin (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1987), 57, n. 6.
8M. Dietrich-0. Loretz-J. Sanmartfn, "Beitriige zur Ugaritischen Textgeschichte (11):
Textologische Probleme in RS 24. 293 = UG. 5, S. 559, NR. 4 und CTA 5 I 1 1 *-22*,"
 2. The Earth in Gen 1 19

Certainly the form thwt cannot be a verbal form from *hwy. Yet, their
view that hm brit is a gloss to thw and corresponds in KTU 1.133:4 to
wnpS, also a gloss, is not convincing. The particles hm and w should be
taken as indicating the beginning of the second colon and as introducing
terms, brit or npS, which correspond to those in the first colon: npS o r
npS.9
Based on KTU's reading, B. Margalit (1980) and G. del Olmo Lete
(1981, 82) explained thwt (KTU 1.133[UT604]:4) as a variant form of
thw, i.e. a feminine or plural form of thw, and again supported the view
that Ugaritic thw is a cognate of Hebrew tohU.to
Contextually, Ibim thw(t) "the lion(s) in/of the desert(s)" corresponds
well to an!Jr b ym "the dolphin(?) in the sea", since npt; and brit are a well­
known idiomatic pair (e.g. KTU 1. 18:IV:25, 36-37, 1. 19:11:38-39, 43-44).
As for the image of hungry animals, it is interesting to compare it with that
in Jer 5:6, where 'aryeh miyya'ar "a lion from the forest" corresponds to
z:J'eb 'iirabOt "a wolf of the desert" in a parallelism. In the Ugaritic texts,
the land animal, Ibim thw(t), and the sea animal, an!Jr b ym,tt seem to
constitute a merismatic pairt2 and express the comprehensiveness of the
voracious appetite of the god Mot in the Ugaritic mythology.t3
In the light of the above, it is probable that Ugaritic thw is a cognate of
Hebrew tohu and that both have the common meaning of "a desert." If so,
they are most probably <qutl-> pattern nouns (<*/tuhwu!) from the com­
mon (West) Semitic root *thw.t4

UF 7 ( 1 975), 537 follows Greenstein, "Another Attestation of Initial h. >: in West

Semitic," 160, n. 20, who suggested a possible interchange of '!h in Hebrew 'wh and
Ugaritic hwy.
9See Clifford, "Mot Invites Baal to a Feast," 58f. for a recent discussion of the 'p . . . hm
. . .' structure in lL 3-10.
108 . Margalit, A Matter of "Life" and "Death": A Study of the Baal-Mot Epic (CTA 4-5-6)
(Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1980), 97; G. del Olmo Lete, MLC, 635 &
"Notes on Ugaritic Semantics V," UF 14 ( 1 982), 60.
11Cf. Akk. nii!Jiro "whale" as a "sea-horse" (sisii Sa tiimti) in CAD, Nit ( 1 980), 1 37. Also
note that in a certain text, VAT 89 1 7 rev. 1 1-13, ilibu (anSe.a.ab.ba [lit: 'horse of the sea'])
"dromedary" is identified with the ghost of Tiiimat (et�mmu tiiimat) and appears in parallel
with serremu (anSe.eden.na [lit: 'horse of the plain']) "wild ass", the ghost of Enlil; cf. A.
Livingstone, MMEW , 82.
1 2Qlmo Lete, MLC, 635 notes that thw "estepa, desieno" is antonymous to ym.
1 3Cf. Hab 2:5. See A. Cooper, "Divine Names and Epithets in the Ugaritic Texts," RSP Ill
( 19 8 1 ), 395.
14J. Huehnergard, UVST, 287 & 84: "*/tuhwu/ 'wasteland'."
20 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

"Chaos"?

Since the earliest times many translators have felt that the meaning "desert"
is unsatisfactory for the context of Gen 1 :2, as reflected in the various
Greek versions. Hence, English translations such as " formlessness",
"confusion", "unreality", "emptiness" (BOB) or "nothingness" have been
suggested on a contextual basis. And it has been asserted that the term tOhii
"should, according to all analogies, mean something like 'chaos' . " 15
Though Albright's etymological explanation that tohii should be re­
garded as "a blend between bohii and tehom, from which the initial t was
borrowed" is no longer tenable, his conclusion that the phrase tohu wabOhii
signifies a "chaos" and tohii is referring to "chaos as a watery deep, or
tehom, in the Mesopotamian sense"l6 is shared by many modem scholars.
For example, Cassuto thinks that the phrase tohii wabOhii refers to the
" terrestrial state" in which "the whole material was an undifferentiated,
unorganized, confused and lifeless agglomeration." He assumes in Gen 1 :2
existence of a watery chaos, in which "water [was] above and solid matter
beneath, and the whole a chaotic mass, without order or life."l7 Thus, the
expression tohii wabOhii in v. 2 is taken as signifying the primordial
"chaos", which means not simply "emptiness", like Greek xaos "empty
space", IS but also "disorder" or "disorganization", and stands in direct
opposition to the "creation."
Before discussing the biblical usages of the term tOhii, the etymology of
the term bohii and a possible extra-biblical usage of tohii wabOhii will be
discussed in the following sections.

15 AJbright, "Contributions to Biblical Archaeology," 365; also. F. M. Cross, Canaanite

Myth and Hebrew Epic: Essays in the History of the Religion of Israel (Cambridge, Mass.:
Hatvard University Press, 1 973), 323.
1 6AJbright, "Contributions to Biblical Archaeology," 366.
1? U. Cassuto, From Adam to Noah [Part I of A Commentary on the Book of Genesis ]

(Jerusalem: Magness, 196 1 , 1944 [orig.]), 23. B. K. Waltke, "The Creation Account in
Genesis 1 : 1-3. Part Ill: The Initial Chaos Theory and the Precreation Chaos Theory," BS
1 32 (1975), 225-228 interprets the phrase tohu wabOhU as referring to "the chaotic state .
. . before the creation."' Also G. J. Wenham, Genesis 1-15 (Word Bible Commentary 1 ;
Waco: Word Books, 1 987), 16: "the dreadfulness o f the situation before the divine word
brought order out of chaos is underlined."
18 Gk. xaos "empty space", from xaLvnv, "gape, yawn" (cf. the Norse Ginunga Gap).
Cf. AI bright, "Contributions to Biblical Archaeology," 366.
 2. The Earth in Gen 1 21

B.ETYMOLOGY OF *BHW

Arabic

The Hebrew term bOhu occurs only three times in the Bible, always with
toh u. Its etymology has been explained by the Arabic bahiya "to be
empty"(BDB).I9 This Arabic term is used to describe the "empty" or
"vacant" state of a tent or house which contains nothing or little furniture
or goods.zo Thus, it has basically a concrete meaning rather than an abstract
meaning such as "nothingness" or "emptiness."

Akkadian

Albright suggested that the Akkadian term bUbUtu, "emptiness, hunger",

came from * buhbuhtu and is a possible cognate of the Hebrew bohu.zi
However, CAD, B ( 1 965), 301-302 does not list "emptiness" as the mean­
ing of bubiitu A, only giving translations "famine, starvation, want";
"hunger"; "sustenance" for the term. A Hw, 135 suggests simply "Hunger"
for the meaning of bubiitu. For a different term bubu 'tu, the root of which
is *bw' rather than *bhw, CAD, B, 300 gives the meanings, "inflammation,
boil, pustule."22 Neither of these Akkadian terms is cognate of the Hebrew
bOhU.

Plwenician

It has been suggested that the term bOhU is associated with a Phoenician
divine name Baau, the goddess of "night",23 which is mentioned by Philo of
Byblos. According to Albright, the divine name Baau "shows that the
original form of the noun was *bahu, like Arab. bahw; *buhw has changed

19Lane, AEL, 260.

20Lane, AEL, 269f.
21 AIbright, "Contributions to Biblical Archaeology," 366.
22Cf. A. R. Millard, "r"» 'to exult'," JTS 26 ( 1 975), 89 comparing Akkadian bubu'tu
with bii'a', bii'iftii ', "abscess" (< bii a• "to swell, to rejoice").
23As E. Ebeling noted more than half a century ago, this DN and Heb. bOhii have nothing
to do with the Sum. goddess Ba'u; cf. Ebeling, "Ba'u," RLA I ( 1 928), 432. See also
Albright, "Contributions to Biblical Archaeology," 366, n. 7; Cassuto, From Adam to
Noah, 22.
22 The Earth and the Waters in Gen I and 2

a to u under the influence of the labials."24 Cassuto admits this possibility.25

Certainly it is phonologically possible to posit an original "Canaanite" form
*/bahwu/ for both Hebrew bohu26 and Phoenician *lbah(a)wu/, which was
seemingly represented in Greek script as ba-a-u. However, there is no
evidence that the Hebrew term had any connection with the Phoenician
divine name, except for their possible common derivation from the root,
*bhw.

Egyptian

If, as recent studies show,27 the material for Philo's cosmogony originated
in Egypt, the divine name Bciau might have come from an Egyptian word
such as b1 . w.2s However, even if this should be the case, it is not likely that
Hebrew term boh u, with the consonant /h/, is related to these Egyptian
terms.
Recently Gorg suggested that tOhU and bOhil should be explained by
other Egyptian terms, th1 " abweichen", "verfehlen" and bh1 "kopflos
fliehen."29 However, his etymological argument is almost purely specula­
tive. For one thing, there is no evidence for the existence of the nominal
forms t(e/u)h1A w. �t and b(e/u)h1a w. � t. Moreover, their suggested mean­
ings, "Ziellosigkeit", "Vergeblichkeit" and "Fltichtigkeit", "Nichtig-keit",
are pure guesses, especially "Vergeblichkeit" and "Nichtigkeit" . Further­
more, no hendiadic combination of them is attested in Egyptian. So it is
highly speculative to think that the pair, "haltlos und gestaltlos" , refers to
"Negativeigenschaften des hermopolitanischen Chaos."

Hebrew

Westermann recognizes only a stylistic variation between tohil and ti5h u

24Aibright, "Contributions to Biblical Archaeology," 366.

25Cassuto, From Adam to Noah, 21f.
26Cf. */bahwu/ > /buhwu/ > /buhyu/ > /buhii/ > /bohii/. See below p. 24, however, for a
possible original form* /bihwu/ from a Ugaritic example written syllabically.
27R. A. Oden, Jr., "Philo of Byblos and Hellenistic Historiography," PEQ ( 1 978), 1 26.
28J. Ebach's position that Bi:tau comes from the plural form of Egyptian Ba (b1 . w) is
rejected on a phonological basis by Gorg, who suggests that "Bau" should be connected
with Egyptian bj1 "heaven" or bj1. w; cf. M. Gorg, "Toha waboha- ein Deutungs­
vorschlag," ZAW 92 ( 1 980), 43 1 -434. However, bjlis no better than b1 .w.
29Gorg, "Toha waboha - ein Deutungsvorschlag," 433f.
 2. The Earth in Gen 1 23

wiiboha. According to him, "1il::J is added only by way of alliteration" and

"when 1iln and 1il::J occur together there is no real difference in meaning. "3o
However, if bohU were added simply as an "alliteration" to toh{i, it would
be difficult to explain why the conjunction wii is used to connect these two
terms. Moreover, toh{i and bOhU seems to be a traditional word pair, which
can appear as a parallel word pair (AI/B), as in Isa 34: l l , or as a
juxtaposed phrase (A and B), as in Gen 1:2 and Jer 4:23.
Thus, in the light of the above discussion, Hebrew boh{i, though still
lacking definite etymology, seems to be a Semitic term based on the root
*bhw and possibly a cognate of Arabic bahiya, "to be empty."

C. tohU wiibohU AND UGARITIC tu-a-bi-[11]31

The expression tohU wiibOh{i appears twice in the Bible, in Gen 1:2 and Jer
4:23, though toh{i and b0h{1 appear once as a parallel word pair in Isa
34: 1 1. A Ugaritic counterpart of it has been suggested in one of the
"vocabulaires polyglottes", which were published by J. Nougayrol in 1968,
137 [RS20.123]:11:23':32

BAL na-bal-ku-tum tap-Su-bu-[u]m-me33 tu-a-bi-[0(?)]

For this line Nougayrol gives the translation, "renverser, bouleversement"

on the basis of Akkadian na balkutum, and he calls scholars' attention,
though with reservation, to the similarity between Ugaritic tu-a-bi-{ u(? )}

3 0C. Westennann, Genesis. I. Teilband: Genesis 1-1 1 (BKAT Ill; Neukirchen- Vluyn:
Neukirchener Verlag, 1974), 143 [ET 103].
3 1 An earlier version of this section has been published in D. T. Tsumura, "Nabalkutu, tu-a­
bi-[u] and tohD wabOhii," UF 19 (1987), 309-3 15.
32Ug V, 242-243.
.

33Laroche discusses this term under tap!:- "bas" as tap!:utJ- "abaisser, abattre" in his
Hurrian glossary, noting the following two lists in multilingual vocabularies:
137 11 15: Sum. SIG = Hur . tap- !:a- tJal- l:e = Ug. ma!:ka [nu I
"homme de basse classe, pauvre" (cf. Akk. mu!:kenu ?).
137 11 23: Sum. BAL = Akk. nabalkutum = Hur. tap - !:u-I.Ju- urn- me
"renverser, abattre. "
Cf. E. Laroche, Glossaire de la /angue hourrite deuxieme partie (M - Z, Index) (=RHA 35
[1977]), 256. Also cf. Ug. V, 457 & 461. However, his translation of tap !:u!Jumme as
"renverser, abattre" is deeply influenced by the interpretation of Akk. nabalkutu and Ug. tu­
a-bi-[u (?)]. See below p. 30.
24 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

and Hebrew tOhii wabOhii. Recently de Moor also took note of this and said,
"It may well be that the Ugaritians knew the equivalent of the Hebrew 1i1n
1i1:J1 (Gn 1:2)."34

1.Morphological correspondence

tu-a-bi-[u(?)]

The morphological correspondence of the Ugaritic tu-a-bi-[u(?)] and the

Hebrew expression tohii wab6hii, can be explained as follows:

(a) The first half of the syllabic spelling, tu-a, probably stands for /tuba/,
since the grapheme <a> in the syllabic spelling of Ugaritic terms can be
used for a syllable /ha/, as in ta-a-ma-tu4 /tahamatu/,35 whose alphabetic
spelling would be thmt.
(b) The second half of the syllabic spelling, bi-[u], if the second sign is
correctly restored, may stand for /bihu/, since the grapheme <u> of the
syllabic spelling is used for a syllable /hu/ as in tu-u-ru (1 37 :11: I') /tuhuru/
" pure (gem)" and u - wa ( 1 37:11:28') /huwa/ "he", whose alphabetic spellings
are t]Jr and h w.
(c) In the light of Ugaritic th w, /tuhwu/, one might postulate the older
form of tu-a-bi-u /tuba bihu/ as */tuhwu wa-bihwu/, which experienced the
following change:

*/ruhwu wa-bihwu/ > /tuhwu-ya-bihwu/ > /tuhwabihwu/ >

/ruhWabihWuJ > /tuhabihu/: tu-a-bi-u

The Hebrew form tohii wabOhii might be explained as having developed

from the same original form as follows:

*/tuhwu wa-bihwu/ > /tuhwu wa-buhwu/ > /tuhyu wa-buhyu/ >

/tilhii wa-buhii/ > /tohii wab6hii/ : tohU wiibOhu

Thus, it is certainly possible that the Ugaritic tu-a-bi-[u(?)] and the Hebrew
tohii wabohii are two versions of the same idiomatic expression in West
Semitic.

34J. C. de Moor, "El, the Creator," in G. Rendsburg et a/ (eds.), The Bible World: Essays
in Horwr of Cyrus H. Cordon (New York: KTAV, 1980), 183 & n. 58.
35 See below p. 52 on this term.
 2. The Earth in Gen 1 25

tu-a-p f-[ku(?)]

However, according to Prof. W. G. Lambert,36 the Akkadian nabalkutum

"to turn over" rather supports the reading of tu-a-p f-[ku] for the Ugaritic
column in the light of Hebrew *hpk. The same view is taken by J.
Huehnergard.J7 Since the verbal form hpk is identified in the Ugaritic
alphabetical texts,3 8 this suggestion is attractive.
However, there seems to be a morphological difficulty. The form,
which can be normalized as /tuhap(p)iku/, is hard to explain as a Ugaritic
tD infinitive, "to be upset" (Huehnergard), for if it were a tD infinitive, we
would expect in the light of Arabic forms like /tahappaku/ or /tahappiku/,
for active, and /tuhuppiku/, for passive.39 Huehnergard himself accepts this
difficulty, saying "A possible difficulty with our proposal is that the form
tuqattil for the tD infinitive, in view of quttal for the D, is rather un­
expected."4o Moreover, his acceptance ("perhaps") of ta-ga-bi-ra(-yv) as tD
verbal noun /tagabbir-/41 works against his proposal.
On the other hand, the recently published bilingual vocabulary from
Ebla might support this proposal. In this vocabulary M. Krebernik detects
two examples of a tD infinitive /tuPaRRis/ form, i.e. du -za -li-um
/tuZalliHum/ and du-Sa-ne-u4 /tu�anniHu(m)/.42 Therefore, the proposed
reading /tuhap(p)iku/ might be morphologically supported, though this
form is still rare in Eblaite and almost exceptional in Ugaritic.
Thus, both readings, i.e tu-a-bi-[u(?)] and tu-a-p f-[ku(?)] are possible
from phonological and morphological points of view. However, the mean­
ing of the Akkadian counterpart, i.e. nabalkutu, is highly disputed. It is not
certain that the common meaning of nabalkutu is "to turn over" or "to

360raJiy suggested ( 1 5:7: 1 987).

37J. Huehnergard, "Northwest Semitic Vocabulary in Akkadian Texts," JAOS 1 07 ( 1 987),
723; UVST, 84, 1 2 1 , 3 1 5 & 322.
38 Cf. UT 19.788: "to upset."
39Cf. Gordon, UT, 8 1 ; S. Segert, A Basic Grammar of the Ugaritic Language (Berkeley:
University of California Press, 1984), 67.
40UVST, 84; cf. also J. Huehnergard, "A Dt Stem in Ugaritic?" UF 1 7 ( 1 986), 402;
UVST, 27 1 : /tuhappiku/ is against "the existence of a vowel harmony rule around
gutterals."
41 UVST, 322.
4 2M. Krebemik, "Verbalnomina mit Prli- und lnfigiertem t in Ebla," SEb 7 ( 1984), 208.
Cf. K. Hecker, "Doppelt T-erweiterte Formen oder: der Eblaitische Infinitive," BaE, 22 1;
B. Kienast, ·:J'lomina mit T-prafix und T-infix in der Sprache von Ebla und ihre
Sumerischen Aquivalente," BaE, 239, who list the forms /tuptarrisum/ and its variants as
Dt infinitives.
26 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

upset", let alone Huehnergard's "to jump, rebel."43 The Hurrian counter­
part tapSu!Jumme seems to suggest a different meaning for this lexical
entry.

2. Semantic investigations

What, then, is the meaning of this Ugaritic expression? De Moor assumes

that the Ugaritic phrase tu-a-bi-[u(?)] signifies "the state of chaos"44 in the
light of Akkadian nabalkutu as well as Hebrew tohii wiibOhii. However,
while it is possible to render nabalkutu as "renverser, bouleversement" in
certain contexts like Nougayrol, neither CAD nor AHw list this as a
common meaning.45
Since tohii wiibohii, the possible Hebrew counterpart of the Ugaritic tu­
a-bi-[u(?)] is always used for describing the state of the "earth" (Gen I :2,
Jer 4:23) or the "land" of Edom "(Isa 34: 1 1), it might be profitable for a
semantic discussion of this Ugaritic phrase to analyse the Akkadian parallel
term nabalkutu when it appears with a word like er$etu.

a. Atra-tfasis Epic

[l]i- bal-kat eT$etu re-em-� Let the earth's womb be ... ,

�am-mu ia ll-$a-a �u-u ia i-im-ro Let no vegetables shoot up,
no cereals grow.

S iv 58b--5947

ib bal-kat er$etu re-em-�8

- Earth's womb was . . . ,
gam-mu ul ll-$a-a gu-u ul i'-ro No vegetables shot up,
no cereals grew.

43 UVST, 83.
44De Moor, "El, the Creator," 1 83.
45CAD , Nfi, 1 l f. : " 1 ) to cross over . . ; 2) to slip out of place . . . ; 3) to turn over . ";
. . .

AHw, 694f.: "iiberschreiten. "

46W. G . Lambert & A. R. Millard, Atra-lfasis: The Babylonian Story of the Flood
(Oxford: Clarendon, 1 969), 108f.
47Lambert & Millard, AH, 1 10f.
 2. The Earth in Gen 1 27

CAD N/1, 14, following Lambert & Millard who translate nabalkutu in
this context as "to rebel", classifies the text under the meaning "1. c) 'to
rebel against authority.' " However nabalkutu with the meaning "to rebel"
usually appears with "land or country" (miitu), "city" (iilu), "man" (a wilii )
or people as its subject.4 8 Since it is the "womb" (remu) that is the real
"subject" of the (intrans.) verbs libbalkat or ibbalkat in the present text, the
text seems to describe a womb which does not do its ordinary work, i.e.
which is barren or unproductive. Hence the verb might be translated as "to
be out of order. ''49
It should be noted that three lines later the "constriction" of the "womb"
(remu ) of the peoples is mentioned together with its subsequent state of
"no child", i.e. barrenness:

r[em]u (ARtJUS) lu ku-�ur-ma ia u-ge-�r ger-ra

"That the womb may be constricted and give birth to no child" (S iv 51 )5°
remu (ARtJUS) ku-�ur-ma ul u-ge-ger ger-ra
"So that the womb was constricted and gave birth to no child." (S iv 6 1 )5 1

Therefore, "the disfunctioning of the earth's womb" (S iv 49a & 58b) is

mentioned in parallel with the state of "no vegetables, no cereals" (S iv 49b
& 59), i.e. barrenness or unproductiveness, just as the "constriction of the
human womb" (S iv 5 l a & 6 l a) is mentioned alongside the state of "no
child-birth" (S iv 5 l b & 6 l b).
Moreover, this interpretation is confirmed by a parallel text in the Old
Babylonian version of this epic, AH 11 iv 4-6:52

u-ul ul-da er-�e-tum re-e[m-ga]

ga-am-mu u-ul U-$i-a [ . . ] ni-gu u-ul am-ra-[lu.j]
The womb of eanh did not bear,
Vegetation did not sprout [. . ] People were not seen [. . ]

The phrase u-ul ul-da in this older version is replaced in the Assyrian

48Cf. CAD, N/ 1 , 13-14 & 1 9 (4.d : "to cause (someone) to rebel").

49Cf. CAD's meaning "2. a) 'to slip out of place, to become displaced, to turn upside down
(said of pans of the human body, of the exta, and of the moon)'" in CAD, N/ 1 , 1 6. See
also nabalkutu used as describing the anomalous shape of a liver in hepatoscopy; cf. J.-W.
Meyer, Untersuchungen zu den Ton/ebermode//en aus dem A lter Orient (AOAT 39;
Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1987), 1 1 1-1 1 2, 1 35 & 1 79-180.
50Lamben & Millard, AH, 1 08-1 09.
5 1 Lamben & Millard, AH, I 1 0-1 1 1 .
52Lamben & Millard, AH, 78-79.
28 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

version with ib-bal-kat.

This shows that one of the meanings of nabalkutu did correspond to that
of ul iilda. It may be surmised therefore that, diachronically, the neo­
Assyrian phrase remu ibbalkat "the womb is out of order (lit.)" had
experienced its semantic development to become equivalent to and replace
the older phrase remu ul iilda "the womb does not bear." Or, synchroni­
cally, remu ibbalkat "the womb is out of order" became an idiom meaning
"the womb is unproductive." In either case, the term nabalkutu might have
developed the meaning "to be unproductive", first with "the womb" as its
subject and then without it in the process of idiomatization and become able
to refer to the state of unproductiveness of the earth (er$etu ).53 Thus,

(1) remu ibbalkat

"the womb is out of order" > "the womb is unproductive"
-

(2) er$elu [remu ibbalkat ] --> er$etu54 remSa ibbalkat

"the earth's womb is unproductive"
(3) eJ"$elu ibbalkat
"the earth is unproductive"

The passages in the Atra-ijasls Epic should be translated:

Let the earth's womb be out of order,

Let no vegetables shoot up, no cereals be seen.

Earth's womb was out of order,

No vegetables shot up, no cereals were seen.

b. The Ritual of Kalu

This meaning, "to be unproductive", fits in the another text, the Kah'i ritual,
I. 16, though the expression er$etu ibbalkit in this text has been explained as
signifying the rolling "of the tremor of an earthquake." ss

53Compare the earth's womb "producing": nim-S'a[=er$etu] +(w)aliidu and $ilru pal-ku-u
u-Ji-id id-ra-na (AH S iv 58) "The broad plain produced salt" (Lamben & Millard, AH,
1 10-1 1 ) .
S4er$l!tU here i s a casus pendens, i.e. "topicalization."
55CAD, N/1 , 1 8.
 2. The Earth in Gen 1 29

A0.6472: 1 6:56

§umma er�tu imi§ tib nakri §ubat mati ul ikin

§umma �etu ibbalkit (BAL-it ) ina mati kalama la kittu (NU.GI.NA) iba§Ji
ttm mati i§anni

Here, the three parts of the second half basically correspond to the three
of the first half.57

( 1 ) eJ"$etu inii§ = e�tu ibbalkit

"the eanh shakes" "the earth is out of order ( i.e. unproductive)"
(2) tib nakri = ina mati kalama la kittu ibaMi
"attack of the enemy" "there will be falsehood everywhere in the country"58
(3) §ubat mati u1 iklin = rem mati it:anni
"the foundation of the country is not stable" "the status quo of the country changes"59

However, the fact of simple correspondence should not be taken as a

sign of synonymity. Thus it may not be justified to suggest that nabalkutu
means "to roll" or "sich umwenden" on the basis of the iniB ibbalkit =

correspondence as CAD and AHw seem to do6o, since the second is not an
exact translation of the first. Correspondences (2) and (3) rather suggest
that the relationship between the first and second halves is that of cause and
effect. If this is the case, the sentence er$elu ibbalkit refers to some state of
the earth caused by the "unstableness" of the earth.6 I
In the light of the above discussion, the Ugaritic tu-a-bi-[u(?)] would be
better compared with Akkadian nabalkutu "to be out of order", which
acquires an idiomatic meaning of "to be unproductive" when it is in

5 6F. Thureau-Dangin, Rituels Accadiens (Paris : Emest Leroux, 1 92 1 ), 34-35. He

translates line 16 as follows:
Si le sol tremble, surrection de l'ennemi,
I'assiette du pays ne sera pas stable.
Si le sol se d�place, dans tout le pays il y aura instabilit�.
le pays perdra la raison.
57This correspondence is supported also by the presence of "Giossenkeil" (:) between the
two halves. These three pans may correspond to the three prime gods, Anu, Enlil and Ea,
to whom-it is ordered to give sacrifices in the following section, 11. 1 7-9, of this text.
58CAD, K ( 1 97 1), 469.
59Cf. W. G. Lambert, B WL, 1 12-3, I. 6; for this idiom, see AHw, 1 1 66 & 1 386.
60AHw, 695: "sich umwenden" : "v der Erde bei Beben", cites AH S iv 49 & 58 (see above
pp. 26f.) as well as the present text.
61Jn our text the disastrous state of the country (matu) is mentioned in (2) and (3) and the
verbal form nabalkutu in ( 1 ) takes as its subject "the earth (er$etu)", not "the land/country
(matu)."
30 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

collocation with er�etu, rather than with nabalkutu translated as "renverser,

bouleversement" or "to turn over, upset." The meaning, "to be unproduc­
tive", fits in line 23 of 'vocabulaires polyglottes' where its Hurrian coun­
terpart tapSu!Jumme most probably means "to be poor", rather than "to be
low"62, in the light of the other line, 1 37:11: 1 5 : Sum. SIG Hur. tapSa!JalSe
=

= Ug. maSka[nu].63 Hence, this idiomatic meaning of nabalkutu has nothing

to do with "the state of chaos"64 and is close to the meaning of tohii "desert"
and bOhii "emptiness" both of which refer to the unproductiveness of the
earth in the biblical context. For the usages of these Hebrew terms and the
idiomatic phrase tohii wiibOhii, we now turn to the study of the Biblical text
itself.

D. USES OF HEBREW tohii AND tohii wiibOhii

1 . tOhii

The term tOhii occurs twenty times in the Old Testament, eleven of which
are in Isaiah. The uses of the term can be classified into three groups: from
the concrete meaning "desert" to the abstract "emptiness." According to
Westermann, they are:65

( 1 ) "desert" : "the grim desert waste that brings destruction"

- Dt 32: 1 0, Job 6: 18, 1 2:24 Ps 107:40
=

(2) "a desert or devastation that is threatened"

("eine Ode oder Verwiistung, die angerichtet wird")
- Isa 24: 10, 34: 1 1 , 40:23, Jer 4:23;
"the state which is opposed to and precedes creation"

62Cf. Huehnergard, UVST, 84 & 80.

63Note that Sum. SIG is explained in Akk. as engu ga mu�keni ] "the weak, said of the
poor" (Antagal E b 1 8ff.) - cited by CAD, E ( 1 958), 170; M/z ( 1 977), 273 and now
published in A. Cavigneaux, H. G. Giiterbock & M. T. Roth (eds.), The Series Erim-!Jug
= anantu.and An-ta-glll = Saqii (MSL 17; Roma: Pontificium Institutum Biblicum, 1985),
2 1 1- and corresponds to Ug. dl /dallu/ "poor" in the polyglot text S• (cf. Huehnergard,
UVST, 79) and that mugkenu "the poor man" and engu "the weak" appear in parallel to
each other in BWL, 1 1 9, I. 1 1 f. Cf. also AHw, 684 & 1 193. The latter page lists mugkenu
u garO "the poor and the rich" (KAR 26.29).
64Even if the Ugaritic column should be read as /tuhappiku/ "to be upset, to be turned
over", it would not support the view that the initial state in Gen 1 :2 was "the state of
chaos."
65Westermann, Genesis l, 1 42f. [ET 102f.].
 2. The Earth in Gen 1 31

- Gen 1 :2, 1sa 45: 1 8, Job 26:7.

(3) "nothingness"66 - 1Sam 1 2:21 (twice), !sa 29: 2 1 , 40: 17, 41 :29[!],
44:9, 45: 1 9,67 49:4,68 59:4.

"desert"
The first group of the texts (1) certainly describes tohu, which is synony­
mous with "a desert land" (Dt 32:10), as "the wasteland" where caravans
perish (Job 6:18) and as "a trackless waste" where people wander (Job
1 2:24, Ps 1 07:40). Thus, the term refers to the actual desert as "a waste
land."

"emptiness"
As for the third group (3), the term tOh u seems to refer to a situation
which lacks something abstract that should be there, such as worth,
purpose, truth, profit & integrity. The term tOh u is used in an abstract
sense in these passages where it appears in parallel with other abstract
nouns such as 'ayin (or 'iiyin ) in Isa 40:17 & 2369, riq "empty" in 49:4 and
'epes "nothing" in 41 :29. The idols and the idol makers are also con­
demned as tOhu which is in parallel with the phrase 10 '-yo'iJU or bal-yo'ilU
"unprofitable, worthless" in 1Sam 12:21 and lsa 44:9.7 0 In two passages,
the term tOhu refers to words of the unrighteous, i.e. "false testimony"?! in
Isa 29:21 and "empty argument" (NIV) in 59:4.
In this regard, the term in this category would be better understood as
"a lack" or "emptiness" rather than "nothingness." Moreover it should be
noted here that this abstract use of tOhu seems to be typical of Isaiah and
that the only other usage in this sense is in 1 Sam 12:21, referring to idols in

66 "It should be noted that in none of these passages does 'nothing' or 'nothingness'
indicate the existence of a material 'nothing'; it is contrasted rather with meaningful
existence." (Westermann, Genesis I, 143 [ET 1 03])
67Jsa 45: 1 9 should be classified as (2). See below pp. 34ff. for a detailed discussion.
68Not in ET, but in the German original.
69However, Westermann classifies this verse as the second group (2).
7 0E . J. Young translates tohD in !sa 44:9 as "unreality" and explains that the word
"suggests an absence of all life and power," The Book of Isaiah Ill (NICOT; Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972), 172.
7 1 E. J. Young, The Book of Isaiah 11 (NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1 969), 322:
"deceit." He explains that ..,,; prob. signifies 'lies and falsehoods, anything that is vanity
and not based upon truth." (p. 329).
32 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

a similar fashion to lsa 44:9. Furthermore, it is significant to note that the

term in this sense is never used with nouns such as "earth"( 'ere$) and
"city"('ir).

"desert-like state"
In all but onen of the passages classified in Westermann's group (2), the
term tohu is used for describing the situation or condition of places such as
earth, land or city. Let us examine each passage in detail.

a. /sa 24:10
nigb:nah qiryat-whU
suggar kol-bayit mibbO'
The city of chaos is broken down,
every house is shut up so that none can enter. (RSV)
The ruined city lies desolate;
the entrance to every house is barred. (NIV)

The entire chapter of Isa 24 talks about the Lord's devastation of the
earth. The beginning and the end of the opening section, vs. 1 -3a, refer to
the earth which will be "completely laid waste" (YHWH b()qeq ha 'ares. 1/
hibbOq tibbOq hii 'ares) and thus comprise an inclusio. In v. 1 2, "the city is
left in ruins, its gate is battered to pieces" (NIV), the desolation of a city is
mentioned in terms, Sammiih and 'ir, different from those in v. 1 0 where
the term tOhii signifies a "desert-like"(or " desolate") state of a city,
*qiryah. Thus, tOhU here is almost equivalent of Sammiih.73

b. Job 26:7
noreh fitlpon 'al-tohu
toleh 'erefi 'al-b:;�lf-mah
He stretches out the north over the void,
and hangs the earth upon nothing. (RSV)
He spreads out the nonhem 'skies•74 over empty space;
he suspends the earth over nothing. (NIV)

72Isa 40:23 belongs to the third group, as noted above.

73 See below p. 39 on g:;,mtimtih (Jer 4:27).

74
Cf. lsa 40:22: "He stretches out the heavens like a canopy" (NIV).
 2. The Earth in Gen 1 33

Westermann thinks that the term tohii here is "the direct opposite of
creation", though he avoids translating tOhii as "chaos" here. However, the
two verbal forms from *nt.h "to stretch, spread" and *tlh "to hang,
suspend", seem to require concrete objects. The term tohii, which is in
parallel with "a place where there is nothing"(b�Ji-m ah), not with an
abstract concept "nothing" or "nothingness" as in the case of the third
group (above), would have a concrete meaning. Hence, a translation like "a
desert-like place" or "an empty place" might be suggested for tohii in this
context.
If the term $apon (cf. Isa 14: 1 3) should be originally a place name
"Zaphon",75 it may possibly stand, like Ugaritic spn,16 for a high mountain
in this context and the idea that the Lord stretches out the high mountains,
i.e. the high places of the earth,77 over an empty place could correspond to
the Lord's suspending the earth over a place where there is nothing (b�li­
m ah), i.e. an empty place. Thus, the following translation might be
suggested:
He stretches out the high mountains over an empty place,
he suspends the earth over a place where there is nothing.

c. /sa 45:1 8
10'-tohii b:;,ra'ah he did not create it a chaos,
Ja�ebet y:;,$;Ir;Ih he formed it to be inhabited (RSV)78
he did not create it to be empty,
but formed it to be inhabited (NIV)

Taking tOh ii as "chaos", Westermann explains that tohii here is "the

direct opposite of creation. "79 However, tohii here is contrasted with
laSebet in the parallelism and seems to refer rather to a place which has no
habitation, like the term S�mamah "desolation"(cf. Jer 4:27; Isa 24: 1 2),

75M. H. Pope, Job3 (AB 15; New York: Doubleday, 1 973), 1 80; cf. J. J. M. Roberts,
"�apon in Job 26:7," Bib 56 ( 1 975), 554-557.
76Cf. Ug. V ( 1 968), 44 on RS 20.24 where !J�an !Jazi "Mount ijazzi" corresponds to spn
in the alphabetic divine list (KTU 1 . 1 1 8:4; cf. 1 4)
77Cf. N. H. Tur-Sinai, The Book of Job: A New Commentary (Jerusalem: Kiryath Sepher,
1967), 380f.: "the floating land."
78
"He did not create it a waste,
But formed it for habitation." (JPS)
79
Westermann, Genesis. I, 142 [ET 103].
34 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

Q;Ireb "waste, desolate"so and 'aziibiih " deserted."SJ There is nothing in this
passage that would suggest a chaotic state of the earth "which is opposed to
and precedes creation." 82 Thus, the term t6hu here too signifies "a desert­
like place" and refers to "an uninhabited place." The verse might be better
translated as follows:

Not to be a desert-like place he created it;

to be inhabited he formed it.

It should be noted that lo '-tohu here is a resultative object, referring to

the purpose of God's creative action. In other words, this verse explains
that God did not create the earth so that it may stay desert-like, but to be
inhabited. So, this verse does not contradict Gen 1 :2, where God created
the earth to be productive and inhabited though it "was" still tohU wabOhii
in the initial state.83

d. 1sa 45:19
lo' basseter dibbartf
bimqom 'ere!i /loSek
lo' 'iimarti bzcra' ya'lqob
tOhii baqq:JSfini

The term tohu here has been interpreted in basically two ways, in a
concrete (locative) sense and in an abstract sense. For example, "Seek me in
chaos" (RSV); " Look for me in the empty void" (NEB); "in a wasteland"
(JPS); "Look for me in an empty waste" (NAB). On the other hand, NIV
translates tohu as "in vain", thus suggesting an abstract sense. A similar
interpretation has been given by Westermann, who translates tohii as in "im
O den (oder im Nichtigen)" and explains " Tohii, meaning nothingness, that
which is empty, can also have the sense of 'futile' ('das Sinnlose') - the
meaning would then be, 'Seek me in vain' ('Umsonst suchet mich')."8 4

80Note the Akkadian cognate, lJarbu "wasteland" and its verbal use in the following
passage: er�etu gj ilJarrumma ana arkat iime u$$ab "that land will become waste but it will
be (re-)inhabited thereafter" (CT 39, 2 1 : 168, SB Alu - cited by CAD, tJ [ 1 956], 87).
Also Ezek 28:19.
81 See below p. 39 on Jer 4:23ff. for these terms.
82Westermann, Genesis. I, 142 [ET 103].
83See below pp. 41 ff.
8 4C. Westermann, Das Buch Jesaja: Kapite/ 40-66 (Gottingen, 1966) [ET: Isaiah 40-66
(London, 1969)], 140 [ 173]. Cf. also Young, The Book of Isaiah lll, 210: "In vain seek
 2. The Earth in Gen 1 35

All of them understand the syntax in the same way, following MT's
punctuation and taking tohii as an adverbial phrase which modifies the
verbal phrase baqq�Siinf, thus as part of the direct speech. LXX similarly
takes tohii as a part of the direct speech. On the other hand, Symmachus'
translation leaves some ambiguity in its understanding of the syntax of
tOhf1.85
Those who take the term tohii in an abstract sense assume that tohii
corresponds to basseter "in secret" (or "secretly") and hence means "in
vain" or the like. BHS's suggestion to read 1nn� here seems to take this
position. However, the term tohii usually has such an abstract meaning
when it appears in parallel with the abstract nouns with a similar meaning
such as "nothing" or "emptiness" as noted above.
It may be that tOhii is just a part of the sarcastic expression t oh i1
baqq�Siinf "In vain seek me ! " (cf. NIV) and has no grammatical
correspondence with any preceding phrase. However, since the two verbal
phrases dibbartf and 'iimartf correspond to each other, tohii baqq�Siinf " In
vain seek me! " could be taken as a direct object of dibbartf too. Thus, "Not
in secret I spoke . . 'In vain seek me!"' However, such an understanding is
the least suitable to the context.
The most natural explanation structurally would be that tOhii is in
parallel with bimq om86 'ere$ floSek "in a land of darkness." In other
words, tohii without a preposition directly corresponds either to 'ere$
fl oSek or to .Qosek and, in the last colon, an element corresponding to
bimqom or bimqom 'erefi is ellipsized. The former may be supported by
the fact that tohii basically means "desert." On the other hand, the latter
might be supported by a similar expression, though in a reverse order, tohii
wiibohii 11 .Qosek (Gen 1 :2) and tohii wiibohii 11 'en 'or "no light" (Jer 4:23)
as well as tohii 11 floSek (Job 1 2:24-25).87 In this case, the term tOhii,

ye me."; M. Dijkstra, "Zur Deutung von Jesaja 45, 1 5ff.," ZAW 89 ( 1 977), 22 1 : "Suchet
mich vergebens."
85For a detailed discussion, see D. T. Tsumura, " tohii in I sa. xlv 1 9," VJ 38 ( 1 988), 361-
364.
86 bimqom "in (lit. in the place of)" here functions almost as a compound preposition like
b:1tok or ba'ner. Also cf. bimqom A'�er in Hos 2: 1 , 2 Sam 15:2 1 , etc.
'

87Note that vs. 24a-25b constitute the so-called "AXYB Pattern", in which v. 24a and v.
25b are in a distant parallelism, while v. 24b and v. 25a constitute an "inserted" bicolon; cf.
D. T. Tsumura, "'Inserted Bicolon', the AXYB Pattern, in Amos I 5 and Psalm IX 7," VT
38 ( 1988), 234-236. In this structure, it is clear that tahu and /loSek are a parallel word
pair. This has never been noticed by commentators: e.g. Tur-Sinai, The Book of Job,
2 1 8f.; Pope, Job3, 95; S. R. Driver & G. B. Gray, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary
on the Book of Job (ICC; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1 92 1 ), 1 20; E. Dhorme, A
Commentary on the Book of Job (London: Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1 967), 1 80; R.
36 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

corresponding directly to hoSek "darkness", probably means "desolation."

It is thus probably correct that the term tohii is not to be included in the
direct speech, since the verbal phrase dibbarti, like 'iimarti, seems to take
l;,zera' ya'ilqob as an indirect object and baqq;,Suni as a direct object, i .e.
direct speech. If dibbarti should take tohii baqq;,Suni as a direct object, the
term tohu would become a redundant element in a structure such as "I did
not speak ... in a land of darkness, 'In a waste land I in a land of desola­
tion (tohii) seek me!"'
Our new translation would be as follows:

I did not speak in secret,

in a land of darkness,
I did not say to Jacob's descendants
(in a land of) desolation,ss 'Seek me! '

2 . tohii wiibOhii

a.Jer 4:23
23 )ra7ti 'et-ha'ares w�hinneh-tohii waMhu
w�'el-hassamayim w�'en 'onim
24)ra'j'ti heharifn w�hinneh ro'liSfm
w�kol-hagg:Jba'ot hitqalqalii
25)ra 'j'tf w�hinneh 'en hli'adam
w�kol-'op hassamayim nadadu
26) ra'j'tf w�hinneh hakkannel hammidblir
w�kol-'araw nitt�s,ii
mipp:1ne YHWH mipp�ne fJiirOn 'appo

It is often asserted that Jer 4:23-26 pictures a return to the primeval

chaos. For example, Bright says that "the story of Genesis 1 has been
reversed: men, beasts, and growing things are gone, the dry land itself
totters, the heavens cease to give their light, and primeval chaos returns. It
is as if the earth had been 'uncreated."' 89 McKane also expresses a similar

Gordis, The Book of Job (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1 978),
1 41 .
88Qr "(in) a desolate place."
89J. Bright, Jeremiah (AB 2 1 ; New York: Doubleday, 1 965), 33.
 2. The Earth in Gen 1 37

view in his recent commentary. He thinks that this signifies the " return to
the chaos which prevailed before the world was ordered by Yahweh's
creative acts. "9o He even says that "According to v. 23 there has been a
collapse of cosmic order and an invasion by the power of chaos."91
However, this view is greatly influenced by the interpretation of the
phrase tOhii wiibohii as "chaos" in Gen 1 :2 and is not based on the contex­
tual analysis of Jer 4:23ff. itself.
There is certainly no question about the similarity in the terms and
phrases between Jer 4:23ff. and Gen 1 :2ff. However, it is not so certain as
some scholars assume whether the former is patterned after or "modelled
on" the latter.
For example, Fishbane92 finds in Jer 4:23-26 the same order of creation
as in Gen 1 : 1 -2:4a and assumes a "recovered use of the creation pattern" in
this Jeremiah passage. According to him, the order of creation reflected in
Jer 4:23-26 is as follows: tOhii wiibOhii - "light"- "heavens"- " earth"
(:"mountains", "hills") - "bird" - "man"- "his fierce anger. " However, the
actual order of terms and phrases mentioned in Jer 4:23ff. is as follows:
["earth" - tOhii wiibOhii ] // ["heavens" - "light"], "mountains" // "hills",
"man" // "bird", and ["fruitful land" - "desert"] // "towns." Fishbane thinks
that the difference in "the order of creation" in the cases of "earth" ->
"heavens" and "man" -> "bird" in Jer 4:23ff. does not disprove his case,
because "the synthetic parallelism progresses from below to above in all
cases" and "there is no one fixed order to these traditional pairs."
However, it should be noted that not all the terms of the Jeremiah
passage appear in the Genesis passage. Moreover, the order is not the same
in both passages despite Fishbane's explanation. For one thing, the "earth"
in Jer 4:23 should be compared with the "earth" in Gen 1:2, since both are
described by the same phrase tohii wiibohii. If this is the case, his sugges­
tion to reverse the order of "earth" -> "heavens" to "heavens"-> "earth"
so that the order might be the same as that of Gen 1 :3ff. is without support.
Also, "light" in Jer 4:23 refers to the light of the "heavens" and it should
be compared rather with " luminaries" of the sky in Gen 1 : 1 4. Fish bane

90W . McKane, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Jeremiah, Vol. I (ICC;

Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1986), 106. Cf. also B. S. Childs, Myth and Reality in the Old
Testament (London: SCM, 1 960), 42 & 76; H. Wildberger, Jesaja, 2. Teilband: Jesaja 1 3-
27 (BKAT X/2; Neukirchen-VIuyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1 978), 920; R. P. Carron,
Jeremiah (London: SCM, 1986), 1 68.
9 1 McKane, Jeremiah, I, 107.
92M. Fishbane, "Jeremiah IV 23-26 and Job JII 3-1 3: A Recovered Use of the Creation
Pattern," VT 2 1 ( 1 97 1 ), 1 52.
38 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

thinks that 'or "light" in Jer 4:23 should be connected with 'or which was
created on the first day in Genesis account. On the other hand, McKane
explains 'or as referring to the "luminaries" of the sky, like m� 'orot (Gen
I : 14).93 Holladay takes 'or (Jer 4:23) as "light" rather than "the light-giving
sun and moon and stars", but says: "In Genesis 1:3-5 the creation of light is
not associated specifically with the heavens but is thoroughly appropriate
here."94 Thus he notes the difference between Gen 1:3-5 and Jer 4:23.
Recently, Kselman noted that "The chiastic thw wbh w 11 ,flSk [in Gen
1 :2] is echoed in Jer 4:23 (thw wbhw 11 'yn 'wnn), a poem modelled on
Gen 1 . "95 Thus he also takes the similarity in the two parallel pairs as a
result of the direct relationship between the two documents. However, the
similarity between Gen 1:2 and Jer 4:23 exists only in the similar phrases,
"darkness" }JoSek (Gen 1:2) and its negated antonym "no light" 'en 'oram
(Jer 4:23) as well as toh u wab0h f1,96 but not in the subject matter, or
referents. In other words, in the Genesis passage it is "earth" 11 t�hom that
is referred to; in Jeremiah, "earth" /1 "heavens."
Moreover, the nature of relationship between the two referents in Gen
1:2 is different from that in Jer 4:23. In the latter it is merismatic, or
contrastive; in the former it is hyponymous.97 While in Gen 1 :2 only the
"earth", which was totally covered with t�h om-waters, is the subject
matter, in Jer 4:23 the whole universe, "the heavens and the earth", is the
topic of concern. In the light of the above discussion, it is rather difficult to
assume that Jer 4:23-26 is patterned after or "modelled on" the creation
story in Gen 1:1-2:4a.

Let us place the passage Jer 4:23-26 in a wider literary context and view
it in connection with vs. 27-28 where Yahweh's speech is mentioned.9S For
one thing, what Jeremiah saw in vs. 23-26 should be closely related to what
Yahweh said in vs. 27-28.

93Cf. McKane, Jeremiah, I, 1 07.

94 W. L. Holladay, Jeremiah I: A Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Jeremiah
Chapters l-25 (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986), 1 65.
95 J. S. Kselman, "The Recovery of Poetic Fragments from the Pentateuchal Priestly
Source," JBL 97 (1978), 1 64, n. 1 3: "a poem modelled on Gen 1; cf. M. Fishbane, VT 2 1
(197 1), 1 5 1 -67 . "
96See above pp. 35f. o n a word pair, tohii and /IO�ek i n Isa 45: 19 and Job 1 2:24--25.
97See below pp. 67-72 for a detailed discussion of a hyponymous relation between the
"earth" and t;,hom.
98 Wildberger, Jesaja, 2, 920 treats Jer 4:23--28 as closely related to Is 24:4 which mentions
the "earth" which "dries up" ( 'iib;,liih) and the "whole world" which "withers" ( 'um/;,Jiih).
 2. The Earth in Gen 1 39

27)kf-koh 'amar YHWH

g�mamah tihyeh kol-ha'are�
w�kalah Io' 'e'��eh
28) al z6't te'�bal ha'iires
' -

w�ad�rii haggamayim mimma'al

'al ki-dibbarti zammoti
w�Jo' nif!amti w�lo'-'agub mimmennah

Holladay rightly notes that v. 28 corresponds with v. 23 and says, "Here

the expression nicely dovetails with the extinguishing of the light of the
heavens in v. 23. In a way the whole cosmos is in mourning for itself. "99
Thus, he notes the correspondence between 'en 'oram (v. 23) and *qdr "to
be dark" (v. 28). However, he does not discuss the other correspondence,
i.e. tohU wiibOhu and * ' bl "to dry up", with regard to the "earth" in these
verses.
From the structural analysis of vs. 23-28 as a whole, it is noteworthy
that the word pair "the earth" (hii 'iire�) and "the heavens" (ha��iimayim)
appears in this order both in the beginning (v. 23) and at the end (v. 28) of
this section, thus functioning as an inclusio or a "framing" for the section.
In other words, "(The earth is) tohU wiibOhU " 11 "(the heavens) are without
light" in v. 23 corresponds to "(The earth) will dry up" (*' bl ) // "(the
heavens) will be dark" (*qdr) in v. 28. Here, the phrase tohU wiibOhu
corresponds to the verbal phrase "to dry up" IOO and suggests the " aridness
or unproductiveness" of the earth. This is in keeping with v. 27 which
mentions that "the whole earth will become a desolation 1 01 " c��miimiih
tihyeh kol-hii 'iires).
As for the second half of v. 27, w�kiiliih Jo ' 'e 'eseh, various suggestions
have been made. Most recently, it has been translated as "and I will make
its destruction complete" (McKane) I 0 2 or "and none of it shall I
(re)make"(Holladay) I03, by slightly changing the MT reading. On the other

99Holladay, Jeremiah I , 168.

1 00Cf. KB: 11 'b1 "to dry up" Jer 1 2:4, 23: 10, Am 1 :2 and CAD, A/1 ( 1964), 29f. : abiilu B
"to dry up, dry out"; AHw, 3: abalu "(aus)trocknen" which is sometimes used for gadii and
eqlu.
1 01 Cf. Ex 23:29, Isa 1 :7. Note the term g�mamah "desolation" has its synonymous variants
pareb "waste, desolate" (Jer 33: 10, cf. 32:43) and 'ifziibiih "deserted" (Zeph 2:4; I sa 62:4;
Jer 4:29, cf. 4:27). For Zeph 2:4, see L. Zalcman, "Ambiguity and Assonance at Zephaniah
11 4," VT 36 ( 1986), 368.
1 02McKane, Jeremiah, I, 108.
103Holladay, Jeremiah 1 , 166.
40 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

hand Bright has translated the MT as it is: "though I'll make no full
end," 1 04 thus taking kiil;ih as "full end." 1 05 However, kiiliih here as well as
in Nah I :8 1 06 seems to refer to "total destruction", i .e. destruction brought
about by a flood, like gamertu which was brought about by ab ubu " a
flood" in the B abylonian Flood story. 1o1 Thus, the Jeremiah passage
mentions a destruction brought about by the lack of water, not by the flood
water. This is in keeping with our explanation which takes tohU wiibOhU as
signifying "aridness or unproductiveness" of the earth.
Since without v. 23 there would be no reason to compare the Jeremiah
passage with the Genesis creation story,1os we might conclude that the two
single verses, Jer 4:23 and Gen I :2, simply share a common literary
tradition in their use of tOhu wiibOhU, which, according to the Jeremiah
context, refers to a "desert-like" state of the "earth."

b. /sa 34:1 1
wire!:iihii qii'at w:;Jqipp&f
w:�yan!:op w:�'oreb yit:k:�nii-biih
w:�niit;lh 'iil�hii qa w-tohii
w:�'abne-bOhii

The motif of "desolation" or "Verlassenheit" 1 09 can be also found in Isa

34: 1 1 where tohU and bOhii appear in parallel expressions, i.e. "the line of
thw" (qa w-tohU ) /1 "the stones of bhw" ( 'abne-boh u). The text has been
again connected with Gen I :2 and it is often explained, for example, as
"Yahweh had reduced the country for ever to a place just like chaos, to a
real tohfi-wiibOhii (cf. Gen. 1 .2)." 1 10 However, as Wildberger rightly says
"Aber wie die Stelle aus dem Jeremiabuch zeigt, braucht die SchOpfungs-

104
Bright, Jeremiah, 33. Bright adds the following comment: "the land will indeed be a
waste, but it will not be the 'full end' described in vss. 23-26."
1 05
Cf. "complete destruction" (BOB, 478).
106For this verse, see my article "Janus Parallelism in Nah 1 :8," JBL 102 ( 1 983), 109-
1 1 1.
107AH Ill v 42-44, cf. 11 viii 34 & III iii 38. Cf. Lambert & Millard, AH, 158 [a note on 11
viii 34].
108Carroll thinks that "the poem could be a meditation on the creation story . . . ", while
rejecting Fishbane's view. See Carroll, Jeremiah, 1 69.
109H. Wildberger, Jesaja, 3. Teilband: Jesaja 28-39 (BKAT X/3; Neukirchen-Vluyn:
Neukirchener Verlag, 1982), 1 346.
1 1 00. Kaiser, Isaiah /3-39: A Commentary (London : SCM, 1974), 359.
 2. The Earth in Gen 1 41

erziihlung von Gn I nicht vorausgesetzt zu sein," ' ' ' Isa 34:I I simply means
that "the land will become a desolation and waste so that it can no more
receive inhabitants." l l 2 From the context of the Isaiah passage it is rather
difficult to see any direct connection with Genesis creation story. It seems
that Isaiah inherited the same literary tradition as Jer 4:23 and Gen I :2 in
describing the desolateness of the earth or land by tohU and bOhU.

Let us summarize what we have concluded in the above discussion:

the term tohU means ( I ) "desert," (2) "a desert-like place," i.e. "a desolate
or empty place" or "an uninhabited place" or (3) "emptiness"; the phrase
tohu wabohu has a similar meaning and refers to a state of "aridness or
unproductiveness" (Jer 4:23) or "desolation" (Isa 34:I I ).
Having studied the etymology and Biblical usages of the term tohU as
well as the expression tohU wabOhU, it is now time to place this expression
in the Genesis context.

E. tohU wabOhU IN THE FRAMEWORK OF GEN I

The earth in a bare state

In the light of the above, it would be very reasonable to understand the

phrase toh u wii boh u in Gen I :2 as also describing a state of
"unproductiveness and emptiness",m though the context suggests that this
was the initial state of the created earth rather than a state brought about as
a result of God's judgment on the earth or land (cf. Jer 4:23; Isa 34:I l ). In
this regard, the earth which "was"''4 (hay;;,tiih) tohU wabOhU signifies the
earth in a "bare" state, without vegetation and animals as well as without
man.

111
Wildberger, Jesaja, 3, 1 346. Here he changes his previous view on the Jeremiah
passage. Cf. Jesaja, 2, 920.
1 12
Young, Isaiah 11, 438, who, however, holds that the prophet Isaiah took language from
Gen 1 :2.
1 1 3 See also Tur-Sinai, The Book of Job, 38 1 : "in Gen 1 :2 . . . [ tohu] describes the
barrenness of the earth before anything grew on it."
1 1 4Andersen, SBH, 85 thinks that Gen 1 :2a means "the earth had become (or had come to
be) . . . " as a circumstance prior to the first fiat recorded in Gen I :3.
42 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

Day 3 (climax) and Day 6 (grand climax)

This interpretation of tohu wabOhU (lit. "desert-like and empty") as

describing a bare state, i .e. "unproductive & uninhabited" state, of the earth
fits the literary structure of the entire chapter.
As the discourse analysis of this section indicates, the author in v. 2
focuses not on the "heavens" but on the "earth" where the reader/audience
stands, and presents the "earth" as "still" not being the earth which they all
are familiar with. The earth which they are familiar with is "the earth"
with vegetation, animals and man. Therefore, in a few verses, the author
will mention their coming into existence through God's creation: vegetation
on the third day and animals and man on the sixth day. Both the third and
the sixth day are set as climaxes in the framework of this creation story and
the grand climax is the creation of man on the sixth day.m
This literary structure1 16 might be expressed as follows :

Gen 1:2 the earth as unproductive & uninhabited (toha waboha )

[DAY I ] light & darkness [DAY 4] "sun" & "moon"
[DAY 2] two waters [DAY 5] fish & birds
[DAY 3] earth & seas [DAY 6] animals & man
vegetation on the earth

Thus, the "not yet productive" earth becomes productive when God says
tad�e · hii 'are$ de�e · "Let the land produce vegetation" (v. 11) on the third
day; the "empty", i.e. "not yet inhabited", earth becomes inhabited when he
says t6$e ' hii'iire$ nepe� (layyah "Let the land produce living creatures" (v.
24) and na '�seh 'adam b;;>$almen u kidmutenii "Let us make man in our
image, in our likeness" (v . 26). Therefore it is by God's fiats that the
"unproductive and empty/ uninhabited" earth becomes productive with
vegetation and inhabited by animals and man.m The story of creation in

1 1 5 Cf. Wenham, Genesis 1-15, 6; B. W. Anderson, Creation versus Chaos: the

Reinterpretation of Mythical Symbolism in the Bible (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1967, 1987
[reprint with Postscript]), 1 87f. & 1 9 1 . Young notes that the definite anicle is used only
with the ordinal number "6" in this chapter; see E. J. Young, Studies in Genesis One
(Phillipsburg: Presbyterian and Reformed, n.d.), 99.
1 16Wenham, Genesis 1-15, 6f.; I. M. Kikawada & A. Quinn, Before Abraham Was: The
Unity of Genesis 1-1 1 (Nashville: Abingdon, 1985), 78, suggest that the first three days
[regions] correspond to the second three days [corresponding inhabitants].
1 1 7 B. Otzen, "The Use of Myth in Genesis," in B. Otzen, H. Gottlieb & K. Jeppesen,
Myths in the Old Testament (London: SCM, 1980), 39, thinks that "the background of
[Gen 1 : 1 1 f.] is the ancient mythological idea of the 'Earth Mother' who 'gives birth' to the
 2. The Earth in Gen 1 43

Gen I : I -2:3 thus tells us that it is God who created mankind "in his image"
and provided for him an inhabitable and productive earth.

In conclusion, both the biblical context and extra-biblical parallels

suggest that the phrase tOhU wabohu in Gen I :2 has nothing to do with
"chaos" and simply means "emptiness" and refers to the earth which is an
empty place, i.e. "an unproductive and uninhabited place." Thus, the main
reason for the author's mentioning the earth as tOhu waboh u in this setting
is to inform the audience that the earth is "not yet" the earth as it was
known to them. As Westermann notes, "creation and the world are to be
understood always from the viewpoint of or in the context of human
ex istence. " l i S In other words, to communicate the subject of creation to
human beings it is impossible to avoid using the language and literary
\
forms known to them. In order to give the background information, the
author uses experiential language in this verse, to explain the initial
situation of the earth as "not yet."

products of the soil." It should be noted, however, that in Gen I animals are also the
products of the eanh and that the existence of both plant life and animal life on the earth is
the result of the divine fiats. Note also that there is no single myth in the ancient Near East
which treats both plants and animals as the products of the eanh.
1 1 8Westei1Jlann, Genesis. I, 1 45 [ET 104]; also 0. Kaiser, Die myrhische Bedeurung des
Meeres in Agyplen, Ugaril und Israel (BZAW 78; Berlin: Alfred TopelllJ!inn, 1 959), 1 3;
W. H. Schmidt, Die SchOpfungsgeschichre der Priesrerschrifr: Zur Uberlieferungs­
geschichre von Genesis 1 :1-2 :4a und 2 :4b-3 :24. 2., iiberarbeitete und erweiterte Auflage
(Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1967), 86, n. 3.
 Chapter 3

THE WATERS IN GEN 1

A. BABYLONIAN BACKGROUND

H. Gunkel in his famous book Schopfung und Chaos in Urzeit und Endzeit
( 1 895) discussed the Babylonian background of t;)hom in Gen 1:2. 1 He
thought it derived directly from Tiamat, the goddess of the primeval ocean
of Enuma elish. Ever since, many Biblical scholars have assumed some
kind of direct or indirect collllection between the Babylonian Tiamat and
the Hebrew t;)hom.2
For example, B. W. Anderson holds that "As in the Enuma elish myth,
Genesis 1 begins by portraying a precreation condition of watery chaos.
Indeed, the Hebrew word for deep (Gen. 1 :2: Tehom) appears here without
the definite article (elsewhere it is in the feminine gender), as though it
were a distant echo of the mythical battle with Tiamat, the female personi­
fication of the powers of chaos. "3

Lexical borrowing

The earlier scholars who followed Gunkel usually held that the author of

I An abridged English edition of pp. 3-120 is now available as H. Gunkel, "Influence of

Babylonian Mythology Upon the Biblical Creation Story," in B. W. Anderson (ed.),
Creation in the Old Testament (Issues in Religion and Theology 6; Philadelphia: Fortress,
1984), 25-52.
2E.g. B. S. Childs, Myth and Reality in the Old Testament (London: SCM, 1960), 36; B.
W. Anderson, Creation versus Chaos: the Reinterpretation of Mythical Symbolism in the
Bible (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1967, 1987 [reprint with Postscript]), 1 5-40, esp. 39f.; M.
K. Wakeman, God's Battle with the Monster: A Study in Biblical Imagery (Leiden: Brill,
1973), 86ff.
3Anderson, Creation versus Chaos, 39; see Gunkel, "Influence of Babylonian Mythology,"
42 & 45.
46 The Earth and th e Waters in Gen 1 and 2

Genesis had borrowed the B abylonian proper name Tiamat and

demythologized it. However, if the Hebrew t�hom were an Akkadian loan
word,4 there should be a closer phonetic similarity to ti'amat. The expected
Hebrew form would be something like *ti'amat > ti' omat > t�'omat. This
could have been subsequently changed to *t;}'om a (h), with a loss of the
final /t/, but never to t::Jhom, with a loss of the entire feminine morpheme /­
at/.5
Moreover, since the second consonant of Tiamat is /'/, a glottal stop,
which often disappears at the intervocalic position so that the resultant
vowel cluster experiences the so-called vowel sandh i in Akkadian as
ti 'amtum > tiiimtum > t amtum, it is very unlikely that a west Semitic
speaker would represent the second consonant as a fricative [h]. In fact,
there is no example of West Semitic borrowing Akkadian /'/ as /h/, except
Akkadian ilku "duty" as hlk ' (Aram.) with the word initial /h/.6 It is almost
impossible to suppose that Akkadian Tiamat was borrowed by Hebrew as
t::Jhom with an intervocalic /h/, for that also tends to disappear in Hebrew
(e.g. /hi of the definite article /ha-/ in the intervocalic position).7
However, some recent scholars still assume a mythological connection,s
though indirect and remote, between t::Jhom and Tiamat and hold that dia­
chronically the term t::Jhom was originally a Babylonian proper noun. For
example, Wakeman says that "in view of the accepted etymological relation
of the word to Tiamat . . . and given the conservative nature of poetry, we
might expect to find echoes of the myth in the poetic cliches or formulas
associated with t�hom. "9 She thus recognizes the "vestiges of personality"

4Cf. Zimmern, AFw, 44.

5 An Akk. term could be borrowed by West Semitic either with or without the /t/: e.g.
askupp/atu (Akk.), "threshold" > 'sk wpt' (Syr.), maddattu (Akk.) "tribute" > mndh or
mdh (Bib. Aram.) & md't' (Syr.), cf. egirtu (Akk.), "letter" > '(y)grh!t('). See. Kaufman,
AlA, 37, 67 & cf. 48; cf. Zimmem, AFw, 9.
6AHw, 37 1 ; Zimmern, AFw, 10; Kaufman, AlA, 58, cf. 27.
7C�: A. Heidel, BG 3, 90 & 100, n. 58; 0. Kaiser, Die mythische Bedeutung des Meeres
in Agypten, Ugarit und Israel (BZAW 78; Berlin: Alfred Tqpelmann, 1959), 1 1 5; W. H.
Schmidt, Die Schopfungsgeschichte der Priesterschrift: Zur Uberlieferungsgeschichte von
Genesis l :l-2:4a und 2:4b-3:24. 2., iiberarbeitete und erweitene Auflage (Neukirchen­
VIuyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1967), 80, n. 5; C. Westennann, Genesis. I. Teilband:
Genesis 1-1 1 (BKAT Il l ; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1974), 146 [ET: 105];
J. Day, God's Conflict with the Dragon and the Sea: Echoes ofa Canaanite Myth in the Old
Testament (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985), 50.
8E.g. B. Otzen, "The Use of Myth in Genesis," in B. Otzen, H. Gottlieb & K. Jeppesen,
Myths in the Old Testament (London: SCM, 1980), 32 & 40.
9Wakeman, God's Battle with the Monster, 86f.
 3 . The Waters in Gen 1 47

in the idiomatic expression such as t:-Jhom rabbah. I O At the same time, she
thinks that "Though C1ili may be related etymologically to Tiamat, it is
nowhere personified in the Bible. However, . . . the idea was in the process
of being depersonalized." I 1
Here a certain confusion seems to exist in the use of the term
"etymological" by some scholars. When one says that t:-Jhom is etymologi­
cally related to Tiamat, no clear distinction is made between the fact that
t:-Jhom and Tiamat are cognate, sharing a common Semitic root *thm, and
the popular supposition that t:-JhOm is a loan word from the Akkadian
divine name Tiamat, hence mythologically related. Since the latter is
phonologically impossible, the idea that the Akkadian Tiamat was
borrowed and subsequently demythologized is mistaken and should not be
used as an argument in a lexicographical discussion of Hebrew t:-Jhom. It
should be pointed out that the Akkadian term ti'iimtum > tamtum normally
means "sea" or "ocean" in an ordinary sense and is sometimes personified
as a divine being in mythological contexts. 12 Therefore, the fact that t:-Jhom
is etymologically related to Tiamat as a cognate should not be taken as an
evidence for the mythological dependence of the former on the latter.

Western "origin"?

While the majority of Biblical scholars assume the Babylonian background

of t:-JhOm (Gen 1 :2), some Assyriologists have been questioning the alleged
connection between Gen 1 and Enuma elish. 1 3 And in recent years
Assyriologists like Lambert, Jacobsen and Sjoberg are "extremely careful
when dealing with influences from Mesopotamia on the mythological and
religious concepts of the peoples living along the Mediterranean coast, and
see instead a strong influence from that region on Mesopotamia."14
For example, in 1 965 W. G. Lambert said "there is no proof that the
conflict of a deity with the sea is of Mesopotamian origin." And he

IOWakeman, God's Battle with the Monster, 87f.

l l M. K. Wakeman, "Chaos," /DB Suppl. (Nashville: Abingdon, 1976), 1 44; Wakeman,
God's Battle with the Monster, 86ff.
12Cf. AHw, 1 353f. See below pp. 56f. for further discussion on this matter.
i3For example, see J. V. K. Wilson, "The Epic of Creation," in D. W. Thomas (ed.),
DOTT, 1 4: "it seems very probable that the epic has no connections of any kind or at any
point with Genesis."
1 4A. W. Sjoberg, "Eve and the Chameleon," in In the Shelter of Elyon: Essays on Ancient
Palestinian Life and Literature in Honor of G. W. Ahlstrom (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1 984),
2 1 8.
48 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

suggested as a possibility that the Amorites introduced the idea into

Mesopotamia.ts Jacobsen also argues that "the story of the battle between
the god of thunderstorm and the sea originated on the coast of the
Mediterranean and wandered eastward from there to Babylon." I6 Recently,
however, Lambert revised his earlier position and now holds that the motif
of the storm-god's conflict with the sea in Enuma elish came from northern
Mesopotamian traditions. I7 One may certainly have to adjust to the recent
advance in the knowledge of ancient Near East, especially that of northern
Mesopotamia, during past two decades. However, this does not permit
anyone to assume that t;}hom (Gen 1 :2) has a northern Mesopotamian
background.
It should be noted that Enuma elish itself incorporates much older
Mesopotamian traditions. ts For example according to Lambert, "not only
was Eniima Elis consciously based on Anzu, but other items of Ninurta
mythology were deliberately worked in so as to present Marduk as Ninurta
redivivus."I9 As for Tiamat, an Old Akkadian school tablet which predates
Enuma elish by a millennium mentions Tispak, "steward of Tiamat"
(abarak tiamtim)2o and the form tiamtim appears in an Old Assyrian
personal name, Puzur-Tiamtim.2I Thus, the sea had been personified as a

15W. G. Lambert, "A New Look at the Babylonian Background of Genesis," JTS 1 6
( 1 965), 295f. For the relationship between Enuma elish and Gen I , see also W . G .
Lambert, "Babylonien und Israel," TRE V (Berlin: Waiter de Gruyter, 1979}, 7 1 -72.
1 6'f. Jacobsen, "The B attle between Marduk and Tiamat," JAOS 88 (1968), 107.
17Qrai communication of 30.7.88.
1 8There is some disagreement on the dating of Enuma elish among Assyriologists. Lambert
dates Enuma elish around 1 1 00B.C., the second half of the second millennium at the
earliest. Cf. W. G. Lambert, "The Reign of Nebuchadnezzar 1: A Turning Point in the
History of Ancient Mesopotamian Religion," in The Seed of Wisdom: Essays in Honour of
T. J. Meek [ed. by W. S. McCullough] (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1964), 6.
Jacobsen dates it earlier. According to Jacobsen, "Ti'iimat represents the Sealand . . .
Marduk's victory over her its conquest and unification with Babylon and the North under
Ulamburiash [ea. 1400BC]. " (T. Jacobsen, The Treasures of Darkness: A History of
Mesopotamian Religion [New Haven: Yale University Press, 1976], 1 89f.)
l9W. G. Lambert, "Ninurta Mythology in the Babylonian Epic of Creation, " in
Kei/schriftliche Literaturen: ausgewiihlte Vortrilge der XXXII. Rencontre Assyriologique
lnternationale [Eds. by K. Hecker & W. Sommerfeld] (BBVO 6; Berlin: Dietrich Reimer,
1 986), 56. See also W. G. Lambert, "The Theology of Death," in B. Alter (ed.), Death in
Mesopotamia (Mesopotamia 8; Copenhagen: Akademisk, 1 980}, 64f. for the highly
composite nature of Enuma elish.
20Jn Akkadian the god Sea is usually written as tiamtu or tiimtu, and the writing ti-amat
(G�E) appears only once in a gloss. The most common phonetic spellings are ti-a-wa-ti or
ta-a-wa-ti and the spelling ta-ma-[tiJ} also appears in a gloss (from oral communication with
Prof. W. G. Lambert).
2 1 Cf. A. Westenholz, "Old Akkadian School Texts: Some Goals of Sargonic Scribal
 3. The Waters in Gen 1 49

divine being since the earliest period of written history in Mesopotamia.

On the other hand, in some later creation narratives in Mesopotamia the
sea is not personified and has nothing to do with the conflict theme. In
these traditions the creation of the world or cosmos is not connected with
the death of a dragon as in Enuma elish. For example, a bilingual version
of the "Creation of the World by Marduk" from the Neo-Babylonian
period describes the creation of cosmos without a conflict theme. In this
myth, the initial situation of the world is simply described: "All the land
was sea." There the waters alone existed before the creation of the world.22
However, the non-personified use of the sea ( tamtum) in this myth is not a
result of depersonification of the divine name.n
In the light of the above, one needs to revise Westermann's statement
that "the similarity between c,nn and Tiamat would go back to a stage in
the history of the creation narrative when the story of the struggles
between the gods had not yet24 been linked with creation."25 Since some
narratives never associated the creation of cosmos with the conflict theme,
there is no reason to assume that the older stage without the conflict­
creation connection necessarily developed to a stage with this connection.
Clearly more than one creation tradition existed in ancient Mesopotamia
and Enuma elish inherited some of the older Mesopotamian mythological
traditions about the storm god as well as about the conflict of a deity with
the sea.26
It should be noted however that it is the motif of a conflict of a storm­
god with the sea, not a motif of creation, that Lambert and Jacobsen have
suggested as having originated in the west. Hence, Jacobsen's assumption
does not necessarily support a view that the "primordial struggle in
connection with the creation" existed in Ugaritic myth.27 While in Enuma
elish the motif of the conflict of a deity with the sea is integrated in the
story of creation of the cosmos, in Ugaritic the Baal-Yam conflict is not
related to the "primordial struggle in connection with the creation" at all,

Education," AfO 25 ( 1974n7), 102.

22See below pp. 79f.; cf. Heidel, BG 3 , 62; J. Bottero, Mythes et Rites de Baby/one
(Geneve - Paris: Slatkine - Champion, 1 985), 303. Thus, even in a myth related to
Marduk's creative activity, the motif of Chaoskampfis not a prerequisite of creation.
23See below pp. 53-56 on this subject.
24Emphasis by the present author.
25Westermann, Genesis. I. Teilband, 1 46f. [ET: 106].
26While Marduk certainly has storm god attributes in his combat with Tiamat, it is not
correct to treat him as a storm god as such. See below pp. 1 3 3f. on storm gods.
27Cf. J. C. de Moor, SPUMB, 4 1 , n. 3 1 .
50 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

as the following section will explain.

B. CANAANITE BACKGROUND

Since the discovery of Ugaritic myths, a Canaanite background has been

widely accepted for the conflict between Yahweh and the sea-dragons,
Leviathan, Rahab, etc. in poetical passages of the Old Testament.28 And this
"Canaanite" conflict motif in these biblical passages where the conflict is
considered to be related to "creation"29 is held to be "a missing link" for
positing the alleged Chaoskampf in Gen 1 :2. Thus, the theme of
Chaoskampf reflected both in the Babylonian Enuma elish and in the
Ugaritic Baal Myth tends to be taken as the basic prerequisite for any
cosmogonic story in the Ancient Near East.

Creation of Cosmos?

However, scholars have noted that the myth of a Baal-Yam conflict in the
extant Ugaritic texts has nothing to do with the creation of the cosmos as
such30 and the storm-god Baal is not a creator god like Marduk in Enuma
elish. Hence, some Ugaritic scholars have assumed the existence of an
earlier cosmogonic myth in the missing first column KTU 1 . 1 or the
broken section of 1 .2,3 1 which they think gives the "missing account" of the
victories over Yam , Nahar, the "dragon" (tnn)32, the "crooked serpent"
(bPJ 'qltn) etc. claimed by Anat in 1 .3:III:38ff. and the victory of Baal
.

28Cf. A. Cooper, "Divine Names and Epithets in the Ugaritic Texts," in RSP Ill [ed. by S
Rummel] ( 198 1 ), 369-383 [on Ym // Nhr] & 388-391 [on Ltn].
29For the most recent treatments of this topic, see C. Kloos, Yhwh's Combat with the Sea:
A Canaanite Tradition in the Religion of Ancient Israel (Leiden: Brill, 1 986), 70--86; Day,
God's Conflict with the Dragon and the Sea, 18-49.
30 Most recently, see M. S. Smith, "Interpreting the Baal Cycle," UF 1 8 (1986), 3 19f; J.
H. Gr�nbrek, "Baal's Battle with Yam - A Canaanite Creation Fight," JSOT 33 (1985),
27-44 .
31 Day, God's Conflict with the Dragon and the Sea, 13: "a primordial battle associated with
the creation of the world"; cf. also de Moor, SPUMB, 4 1 , n. 3 1 . However, in their review
article of Day's book , Korpel and de Moor doubt Day's assumption that "there existed a
different Canaanite myth in which the victor over Sea became the creator." M. C. A. Korpel
& J. C. de Moor, "A Review of J. Day, God's Conflict with the Dragon and the Sea.
Echoes of a Canaanite Myth in the Old Testament, 1985," JSS 31 ( 1 986), 244.
32Read /tunnanu/ (Ug. V, 1 37:1:8'); cf. Huehnergard, UVST, 185f.
 3 . The Waters in Gen 1 51

over ltn referred to in 1 .5:I: l ff.33 This is, Gibson believes, "what . . .
comprised Ugaritic mythology's primordial battle of the good god with the
powers of chaos so well known to us from the Mesopotamian and Biblical
parallels."34
Recently J. Day suggested that the term t;,hOm can be traced back to the
earlier Canaanite dragon myth which he, like Gibson, thinks is related to
the creation theme. He says, "In so far as t;,hom's mythological background
is concerned this is not Babylonian at all, but rather Canaanite, as the Old
Testament dragon passages show, a point which some scholars still have not
properly grasped. "35 Then he argues tautologically that "The divine
conflict with the dragon and the sea underwent a process of demytholo­
gization and the control of the waters simply became regarded as a job of
work. This is found especially in Gen 1 . . . (Gen 1 's) traditions are ulti­
mately Canaanite. "36 The term t;,hom in Gen 1 :2 is hence understood as a
depersonification of the original mythological divine name in Canaanite,
though he holds that "both t;,hom and Tiamat are derived from a common
Semitic root. "37
However, is there any reason to think that a term used as a common
noun is a depersonification of a divine name when both can go back to their
original common noun? In our case, what is the etymology of the Hebrew
term t;,h om? Is there any direct connection between etymological and
mythological similarity?

C. ETYMOLOGY OF *THM

Morphologically the Hebrew t;,hom corresponds to the Ugaritic thm rather

than to the Akkadian divine name dTiamat with a feminine ending /-at/.

33For a useful summary and discussion on the narrative continuity of the Baal Cycle (KTU
1 . 1-1 .6), see Smith, "Interpreting the Baal Cycle," 324-339. Note also his comment: "The
comparative method has perhaps been abused in the case of the Baal cycle, in attempts to
fill in the cycle's lacunae according to ideas about what "should" be in the cycle. An early
example of this procedure was to fill the gaps with an account of creation. " (p. 328)
34J. C. L. Gibson, "The Theology of the Ugaritic Baal Cycle," Or 53 (I 984), 2 1 1 .
35Day, God's Conflict with the Dragon and the Sea, 50f. & n. 1 4 1 . However, what
Lamben and Jacobsen pointed out is not the Canaanite background of the term t:Jhom, but
the "Canaanite" origin of the storm-sea conflict motif (see above pp. 47f.).
36Day, God's Conflict with the Dragon and the Sea, 6 1 .
37Day, God's Conflict with the Dragon and the Sea, 50.
52 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

However, this fact does not support the claim that the Hebrew t�hom is
specifically Canaanite. Ugaritic also has a feminine form, thmt, which is
spelled syllabically as ta-a-ma-tu4 /tahiimatuf3S (Ug V 1 37 : III:34") for the
name of an ocean-goddess. This reading suggests that the Ugaritic term thm
was probably read as /tahiimu/.
Akkadian tiamtum or tamtum, Arabic tihamat and Eblaite ti 'a-ma-tum -

/tih am(a)tumf39 together with the above cited forms in Ugaritic and
Hebrew indicate that all these forms are the reflections of a common
Semitic term *tiham-. Thus Hebrew t�hom is simply a reflection of the
common Semitic term *tihiim.4o And, as far as the first vowel is concerned,
the Hebrew form t�hom reflects an older stage of development from the
Proto-Semitic *tihiim- than the Ugaritic form thm /tah iimu/ whose first
vowel /a/ is the result of a vowel harmony: *tiham- > *tahiimu.
This etymological investigation shows that the formal similarities are no
proof of direct or indirect "borrowing." In other words, the fact that the
Hebrew term t�hom is related etymologically to the Akkadian divine name
Tiamat and the Ugaritic Tahiimu does not support the theory that the
Hebrew term is a depersonification of an original divine name. The same
can be said for the Hebrew term Semes, "sun" , which is related etymologi­
c ally Jo the Akkadian divine name SamaS4t and the Ugaritic divine name
v
SpS /SapSu/. Just as the Akkadian common noun SamSu is not a depersoni­
fication of DN Samas, so Hebrew SemeS is not a depersonification of an

38A. F. Rainey reads the last sign as tu, instead of turn (Ug. V, 246) and explains that "the
vocalization ta-a-ma-t114 for thmt is due to vowel harmony." Cf. A. F. Rainey, "A New
Grammar of Ugaritic," Or 56 ( 1987), 393; also J. Huehnergard, "Northwest Semitic
Vocabulary in Akkadian Texts," JAOS 107 ( 1987), 725; UVST, 1 84f., 247 & 27 1 . Note
that in this multilingual vocabulary text, Ug. V: l 37, an Akkadian si� n a <a> stands for
either /'a/ or fa/ or /ha/: e.g. ma-a-du-ma /ma'aduma/ ( 1 37:11:36 ), ba-a-lu /ba'alu/
( 1 37:1Vb: l 7?), tu-a-bi-u /tuhabihu/ < /tuhwu wa blhwu/ ( 137:11:23') (see above p. 24), but
not for /at. Since its alphabetic spelling is most likely thmt, the sign a in ta-a-ma-t114 should
be read as /ha/. Hence, Nougayrol's reading tamatum (Ug. V, 58) is not correct.
39The sign 'a (E) is used for etymological /ha/ or /�a/ in the Eblaite syllabary. Cf. M.
Krebernik, "Zu Syllabar und Onhographie der lexikalischen Texte aus Ebla. Teil 1 ," Z4 72
( 1 982), 2 19f.; J. Krecher, "Sumerische und nichtsumerische Schicht in der Schriftkultur
von Eb1a," in BaE, 1 57. Thus, I. J. Gelb's view on the Old Akkadian sign 'a (E) is
supported by the Eblaite evidence; cf. I. J. Gelb, Old Akkadian Writing and Grammar
( M AD 2; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1952), 34. See also E. Sollberger,
Administrative Texts Chiefly Concerning Textiles (L. 2752) (ARET 8; 1986), 3.
40See also Heidel, BG2, 100; Schmidt, Die SchOpfungsgeschichce der Priesterschrift, 80,
n. 5.
41For the early attestation of this DN, see J. J. M. Roberts, The Earliest Semitic Pantheon:
A Study of the Semitic Deities Attested in Mesopotamia before Ur Ill (Baltimore: Johns
Hopkins University Press, 1972), 5 1 f.
 3 . The Waters in Gen I 53

original divine name.42

D. USES OF *THM

I . Non-personified use

a. Ugaritic

The Ugaritic counterpart of the Hebrew tahom appears both with a

feminine ending -t and without it. The shorter form thm appears twice in
the alphabetic texts. Though it appears once as a proper noun, constituting
a part of a compound divine name "Heaven-and-Ocean" Smm-w-thm (KTU
1 . 100 [607] : 1 ), it also appears as a common noun, without any personifica­
tion, in parallel with another common noun ym "sea"43 in 1 .23 [52]:30:

} gp . ym . . . . . . . . . . the shore of the sea

wys.td . gp . thm And roams the shore of the ocean.

The longer form with a feminine singular ending -t can be recognized in

the divine name ta-a-ma-tu4 (=thmt), which corresponds to the Sumerian
ANTU in a multilingual vocabulary list (Ug V 1 37 :III:34"), as well as in
the dual form thmtm /tahiimat-ami/.44
The plural form thmt /tah amatu/ appears in 1 .3 ['nt] :III:25 [22] (cf.
[ 1 30] : 1 9, 1 . 1 7 [2Aqht] : VI: 1 2), where the common nouns, "heavens" ,

42See below p. 60 on the common noun ym "sea" in Ugaritic.

43The term *yamm- is a typically North West Semitic term for "sea" and corresponds to the
Akkadian tiamtum, timtum. The term yamu in an Akkadian plant list, the Uruanna text, is
a West Semitic word; cf. CAD, 1/J ( 1 960), 322. In Amarna Akkadian, the sea is always
referred to in forms of ayabba (EA 74:20, 89:47, 105 : 1 3, 1 14:19, 1 5 1 :42, 288:33, 340:6),
never spelt as ta-am-tu (except in Adapa text [356:50 & 5 1 ] which is written in a standard
Akkadian). I owe this information to Dr. R. S. Hess. See also CAD, Nl ( 1 964), 22 1 (also
in Mari & SB literary texts); W. F. Albright & W. L. Moran, "Rib-Adda of Byblos and the
Affairs of Tyre (EA 89)," JCS 4 ( 1950), 167; cf. J. A. Knudtzon, Die El-Amarna-Tafeln:
mit Einleitung und Erliiuterungen. 11 (Aalen: Otto Zeller, 191 5), 1528 on tamtu. It might be
postulated that the Sumerian loan word ayabba (<= a-ab-ba) in West Semitic experienced
the following phonological change: a-ab-ba => ayabba > (a)yabba > (a)yamba > yamm- >
yiim. For EA 89, see now W. L. Moran, Les Lettres d'El-Amarna: Correspondance
diplomatique du pharaon (LAPO 1 3 ; Paris: Cerf, 1987), 277-278.
44sg. stem + dual ending, cf. Huehnergard, UVST, 1 85.
54 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

"earth", "oceans" and "stars", are all used metaphorically.45 Also in 1 .92
[200 1 ] :5 : wtglJ thmt " she roils46 the oceans", the plural form thmt has an
ordinary sense without any personification.
In 1 .4 [5 l ] :IV:22, 1 .6:1:34 [49:1:6], 1 . 1 7 [2Aqht] :VI:48, 1 .3 ['nt] :V:7
[ 1 5], 1 .2:Ill [ 1 29] :4 (cf. 1 .5 [67]:VI: l ) : e.g.

idle . 1 ttn . pnm Then she surely sets face

'm . il . mbk . nhrm Toward El at the sources of the two rivers
qrb . apq . thmtm In the midst of the streams of the two oceans.
( 1 .4 [5 l ]:IV:20-22)

and also in 1 . 100 [607]:3:

'm . 3)jJ . mbk . nhrm Toward El at the sources of the two rivers
b'dt . thmtm In the assembly of the two oceans.
(cf. Gordon, UTS, 554)

the term thmtm /tahii.matii.mi/ is a dual form and these dual forms as well
as the singular thm ( 1 .23 [52] :30) refer to the waters near El's abode. In
these mythological contexts, the term thm(t) is a common noun "ocean(­
waters)" without any personification. Also in KTU 1 . 1 9 [ 1 Aqht] :l:45, the
term thmtm is a dual in form.47 Here too it is used without personification.
Thus, Ugaritic thm(t) normally appears as a common noun in mytho­
logical texts. There is no reason why we should think that these non­
personified uses of Ugaritic thm(t) are the result of depersonification of an
original proper noun. If we do not think that other terms such as ym, ar�
and Smm are depersonifications of the original divine entities,48 we should
not treat the term thm any differently.

45 See below p. 69 for this text.

46See below pp. 1 32ff. for a detailed discussion of this term. Note the expression, "(the
gods) confused Tiamat" (CAD, E [1958], 379) in Ee I 22.
47See below p. 1 34.
48Jn Ugaritic, ym is often "personified" and refers to a divine entity, the sea-god Yam.
However, the term is used as a common noun without any divine personification even in
mythological contexts, as in the cases of ym (// thm ) in 1 .23 [52]:30, an expression "fish
from the sea" dg bym (1 .23 [52]:62-63) and a divine epithet rbt ayt ym "Lady 'A!irat of the
sea" ( 1 .4 [51 ]:1: 1 3-14 [ 1 4-15], 21 [22], III:25, 28-29,34; 1 .6:1:44, 45, 47, 53 [49:1: 16,
17, 1 9, 25]). Cf. Albright's interpretation of a_trt ym as "She Who Treads on the (dragon)
Sea": W. F. Albright, Yahweh and the Gods of Canaan (London: Athlone Press, 1968),
166. However, cf. the phrase ayt �rm "'A!irat of the Tyrians" (UT 19.428).
 3. The Waters in Gen 1 55

b. Akkadian

The Akkadian tiamtum, tamtum also appears in non-mythological texts

long pre-dating Enuma elish with an ordinary meaning " sea/ocean" from
the earliest times. For example, in an Old Akkadian text the term tiamtim is
used in an ordinary sense:

Lagaski atima tiiimtim in 'ar (SAG.GIS.RA)

kakki (gis TUKUL-gi )-su in tiamtim imassf49
he vanquished LagaS as far as the sea.
He washed his weapons in the sea.

In an Old Babylonian letter which reports "the sea,so the river and the
canal are low" ( tamtum narum u !Jiritum mata), the term tamtum appears
as a common noun.si In the Old Babylonian Flood Story, Atra-t:Jasls epic
I: l 5 , the expression "the bar of the sea" (na!Jbalu tiamtim) appears. It is
repeated six times (AH x rev. i : [6], 10, ii:4, 1 1 , 18, 34.) in the Neo­
Babylonian version, where another phrase "the guards of the sea" (ma��aru
tamt1) (AH x rev . ii:24, 40) appears also without any personification of
tiamtim, tamti "ocean." Also in Atra-tJasls epic III:iv:6, tiamta "sea" is in
parallel with naram "river", both terms with ordinary meanings.s2
Even in a certain mythological context which mentions the creation of
the cosmos the term tamtum appears without personification. For example,
in the bilingual version of the "Creation of the World by Marduk" noted
above.

c. Eblaite

In Eblaite, a language related to Old Akkadian, ti- 'a-ma-tum appears also

49Sargon b I , Vs. col. 2: 49-55 & b 6, Vs. col. 8: 32-38 in H. Hirsch, "Die lnschriften
Sargons," AfO 20 (1963), 35 & 42; also E. Sollberger & J.-R. Kupper, Inscriptions
Royales Sumeriennes et Akkadiennes (LAPO 3; Paris: Cerf, 197 1), 97. This practice of
"washing of weapons in the sea" continued till the Neo-Assyrian period; cf. CAD, K
( 1 97 1 ), 52. See also A. Malamat, "Campaigns to the Mediterranean by lahdunlim and
Other Early Mesopotamian Rulers," Studies in Honor of Benno Landsberger on his
Seventy·fifth Birthday, April 2 1 , 1965 (AS 1 6; Chicago: University of Chicago Press,
1 965), 365-373, esp. 365-367 (on 'Sargon of Akkad').
soar "lake", cf. CAD, (j, 1 98.
5 1 Also AHw, 1 353-54 ( 1 979) lists a number of non-mythological and non-personified
usages of this term in Akkadian texts.
52Lambert & Millard, AH, 96.
56 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

with the ordinary meaning, "sea, ocean": e.g. a-bar-ri-iS ti- 'ii-ma -dim
(ARET 5, 6:VII: l-2 & 3) I 'abariS tihii.m(a)tim/ "jenseits des Meeres;
Obersee."S3 Also it is clear from its context that ti- 'a-ma-tum (ARET 5,
6:X:4) means the ordinary "sea. "S4 In the Sumerian-Eblaite bilingual
vocabulary text (MEE 4, 79:r.III:8'-9'), the Sumerian ab-a is identified
with ti- 'a-ma-tum /tihii.m(a)tum/ "sea. "Ss

d. Hebrew

Thus, U garitic thm(t), Akkadian tiiimtum, tamtum and Eblaite ti- 'a-ma-tum
all appear as a common noun, "sea" or "ocean", from their earliest attesta­
tion. If all these cognate terms can mean "sea" or "ocean" in the ordinary
sense, there is no reason to think that the proto-Semitic *thm was not a
common noun "sea/ocean." In the light of the above, the Hebrew term
tOCiom too should be taken as normally a common noun.

2. Personification

This common noun *tihiim- "ocean" is of course sometimes personified to

become a divine name.

a. Akkadian

It is important to note that scholars have assumed that the divine name
Tiamat was a personification of the common noun ti'iimtu, tamtu "sea or
ocean." For example, H. Zimmem, who took the Hebrew term t;Jhom as an

S3D. 0. Edzard, Hymnen, Beschworungen und Verwandres (ARET 5; 1984), 30. Note the
Akkadian counterpart: ebir tiamti (V AB 4, 134, 45) cited in AHw, 1 353.
S4Another example ri· 'a-ma-du in ARET 5, 4:1:6 may also refer to "sea" /tihiimatum/. Or
"das Durcheinanderwimmeln" [tilpam(a)tum] (Edzard, Hymnen, Beschworungen und
Verwandres, 24f.) ri- 'a-ma-tum (MEE 4, 1 2:V: 10), which Pettinato, Dahood and Zurro
read as /tihiimat-um/, should be read as /til'am(a)-tum/. See M. Kl'ebernik, "Zu Syllabar
und Onhographie der lexikalischen Texte aus Ebla. Teil 2 (Glossar)," ZA 73 ( 1 983), 3;
Kl'echer, "Sumerische und nichtsumerische Schicht," 154. Cf. G. Pettinato, "I Vocabolari
Bilingui di Ebla," in LdE, 270; E. Zurro, "La voz y la palabra," in El Misrerio de la
Palabra. Homenaje de sus alumnos a/ profesor D. Luis A/onso SchOke/ [eds. by V.
Collado & E. Zurro] (Madrid: Ediciones Cristiandad, 1983), 34ff. esp. n. 84.
SS Cf. Kl'ebernik, "Zu Syllabar und Orthographie . . . (Glossar)," 43; P. Fronzaroli, "The
Eb1aic Lexicon: Problems and Appraisal," in SLE, 1 5 1 .
 3. The Waters in Gen 1 57

Akkadian loan word, explained that Tia m a t was a "myth ische

Personifikation" of ti'amtu, tamtu "Meer."56 T. Jacobsen also notes that "In
the case of Tiamat . . . her ultimate identity as a personification of the sea
and its powers cannot be in doubt." Hence he explains the name Tiamat as
an example of "common nouns used as proper names."57 The same position
is taken by AHw, which lists "Meer, See" as the ordinary meaning of this
term.

b. Ugaritic

The same phenomenon of personification of a common noun "sea" is

attested in Ugaritic as a proper noun Yam. Another Ugaritic term for
"ocean", i .e. thrn appears also as a divine name, once with a feminine
ending -t and once without it. Here too, the term thm , which usually
appears as a common noun and is once paired with ym in an ordinary
sense, is personified as proper noun, Thm or Thrnt in Ugaritic. Therefore,
there is no reason why we should take the common noun thm as a result of
depersonification of the divine name Taham(at)u.

c. Hebrew

In Hebrew too, some common nouns are used metaphorically with personi­
fication in poetic texts. Sometimes they constitute a part of idioms as in the
case of the term (;}horn of the phrase t;}hOm rabbiih, which is treated almost
as a definite noun without an article.
It should be noted that several common nouns are used without the
definite article in Gen I : e.g. t;}h om, }JoSek , 'or, yom, layliih, riiqi• ',
Siimayim (v. 8) . . . , while some appear with it - haSSiimayirn, hii 'iire!i
(v. 1 ), hii 'iire!i (v. 2), hamrniiyirn (referring to t;}hom ), hii 'or & ha}JoSek
(v. 4-5), hammiiyirn (v. 6), hiiriiqfa' (vs. 7-8). Thus, the lack of the definite
article with t;}horn is no proof of personification,ss since this form (sg.)
appears either as a part of an idiomatic expression or in the poetic texts.59

56Zimmern, AFw, 44.

57Jacobsen, "The Battle between Marduk: and Tiamat," 105.
58J. Skinner, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Genesis. 2nd edition (ICC;
Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1930), 17: "The invariable absence of the article (except with pi.
in Ps 106:9, Isa 63: 1 3) proves that it is a proper name."
59 See also Kaiser, Die mythische Bedeutung des Meeres, 1 1 5; Schmidt, D i e
Sc/Wpfungsgeschichte der Priesterschrift, 8 1 , n . 5.
58 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

The very existence of its plural fonn, t;Jhomot (or t�homot, t;Jhomot), and
its articular usage in Is. 63 : 1 3 and Ps. 106:9 suggest that the term is a
common noun in Hebrew as in Ugaritic, Akkadian and Eblaite.
Finally, the term t;Jhom is not always a feminine noun as some6o assume
in the light of Akkadian Tiamat. In fact, it appears as a masculine noun
with personification in Hab 3: 10, a chapter where many scholars allege the
existence of the so-called chaos motif.6 1
Thus, the lack of the definite article for t;Jhom in Gen 1 :2 has nothing to
do with personification or depersonification of the original term.

E. *tihiim- AND *yamrn-

While the Common Semitic term *tiham- appears in West Semitic

languages as Ugaritic thm(t) and Hebrew t;JhOm(ot), it is the tenn ym or
yam that regularly denotes the sea in these languages. And *yamm- is
typically a Northwest Semitic term (e.g. Ugaritic, Hebrew, Phoenician,
Aramaic),62 which is borrowed into Akkadian only as in the case of kusa­
yami (AHw, 5 1 4) and into Egyptian as ym.63

1 . Hebrew t�hOm(ot) and yam

In Hebrew, t�hom (ot) never appears as the tenn for the third element of
the "heaven/earth/sea" structure of the universe. In this tripartite frame­
work, expressed in Ex 20: 1 1 , Ps 1 46:6, Hag 2:6, Ps 96: 1 1 , Ps 69:35, Ps
1 35:6 (cf. Ex 20:4, Dt 5:8), it is yam "sea" that constitutes the third part.
Also it should be noted that in the passages where the creatures in three
divisions are mentioned, ( 1 ) "sea"-"heaven"-"earth" (or "field") in Gen

60E.g. Anderson, Creation versus Chaos, 39.

6 1 For a detailed discussion of the relationship between Ugaritic poetry and Hab 3, see my
fonhcoming anicle, "Ugaritic Poetry and Habakkuk 3," TB 40 (1989).
62W. G. Lamben notes that "Yam 'Sea', Baal's enemy at Ras Shamra, does not so far
appear in Eblaite documents under that name," cf. "Old Testament Mythology in its Ancient
Near Eastern Context," Congress Volume: Jerusalem 1 986 (SVT 40; Leiden: E. J. Brill,
1 988), 1 32.
63A. Gardiner, Egyptian Grammar. Second edition (London: Oxford University Press,
1 927, 1950), 422; WAS, I, 78.
 3. The Waters in Gen 1 59

I :26,28, Ezek 38:20; (2) "earth" (or "field")-"heaven"-"sea" in Gen 9:2,

Hos 4:3, (Zeph I :3), Ps 8:8-9, i.e. "birds", "animals" and "fish", the term
for "sea" is always yam, never t;Jhom(ot).
These characteristics of yam correspond to those of the Akkadian apsu,
which constitutes the third part of the "three-decker universe", i.e. heaven­
earth-Apsfi represented by Anu, Enlil and Ea (Enki) in the Atra-tJasis epic
(I i 7-I 8).64
At the same time, yam is used for the "sea" when it is contrasted with
the "land" ( 'ere�) in Gen I : 10, etc. In this regard, the Hebrew yam cor­
responds to Akkadian tiamtum, tamtum "sea" as contrasted with Sadu
"land."65 Thus, yam corresponds to tiamtu as well as to apsu in the
Akkadian language and means "sea" in a general sense.
On the other hand, in the relationship with the term 'ere� "earth", the
Hebrew t;Jhom(ot) is hyponymous (Ps 7I :20, I48:7, Prov 3 : I 9-20, Gen
I : 2) and hence what t;Jhom(ot) refers to is included in what 'ere� refers
to.66 The Hebrew t;Jhom(ot) therefore normally refers to the subterranean
water, corresponding to Apsfi of the Babylonian three earths, upper,
middle, and lower, i.e. "abode of men-Apsu-underworld",67 though it can
also refer to the "flood" caused by an overflow of the underground water
(cf. 'ed in Gen 2:6) as well as to a huge mass of waters like t;JhOm in Gen
I :2.

2. Ugaritic thm(t) and ym

In Ugaritic too, the terms thm and thmt seem to have more specific mean­
ings than ym, for, when paired with other terms, they always appear as the
second element of word pairs. For example, thm appears in the word pair
ym - thm ( 1 .23 [52] :30) which denotes the waters, "sea" // "thm- water",
near the abode of the god El. The same watery abode of El is described
again by nhnn - thmtm ( 1 .4 [5 1 ] : IV:22, 1 .6:1:34 [49:1:6] , 1 . 1 7 [2Aqht]:

64Cf. Lamben & Millard, A H, 1 66; W. G. Lamben, "The Cosmology of Sumer and
Babylon," in Ancient Cosmologies [eds . C. B lacker & M. Loewe] (London: George Alien
& Unwin, 1975), 58. Note that the Akkadian expression, "the fish of the Apsii" (niine
apsi) [CAD, A/2 (1968), 194f.] refers to the fish in lakes & rivers rather than the fish of the
sea.
65Cf. AHw, 1 3 53f.
66See below, Ch 4, for a detailed discussion.
67Lamben & Millard, A H, 166; Lambert, "The Cosmology of Sumer and Babylon," 59;
Livingstone, MMEW, 87.
60 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

VI:48, 1 .3 [ nt] :V:7 [ 1 5], 1 .2:III [ 129] :4; 1 . 1 00 [607]:3): "(two) rivers" //
'

"two thmt-waters." Finally, the term thmt signifies a watery area on or in

the earth in ar� - thmt ( 1 .3 [ nt] :III:25 [22]), in which thm t is in
'

hyponymous relation to ar�.68

On the other hand, Ugaritic ym seems to have a meaning similar to the
Hebrew yam "sea" in a general sense. Its meaning seems to correspond to
Sumerian a-ab-ba, which can stand for "lake" as well as for "sea",69 since
its divine personification, Yam, is identified with dA.AB.BA in the Akkadian
pantheon list (RS 20.24 ) from Ugarit. This also suggests that Ugaritic ym
has a much wider semantic field than thm(t).

3. Akkadian tiiimtum tamtum ,

In Enuma elish the goddess Tiamat represents "sea" in contrast to the

subterranean water god Apsfi and these two waters, male and female, are
described as being "intermingled as one" (line 5).70 In the Atra-l:Jasis epic,
I 1 5 , S v 1 , x i 6, etc., Enki (Ea) the god of sweet-water Apsfi is mentioned
as having "the bolt, the bar of the sea" (�igaru na!Jbalu ti 'iimtim)JI This
"bolt" may have kept Tiam(a)t(um) out, i.e. to stop its waters mixing with
the waters of Apsu, as they did at the beginning of Enuma elish.72 Thus, in
the cosmological traditions of Mesopotamia, there seems to have existed a
distinction between the domain or area of the "sea" and that of the
subterranean ocean.
However, the use of terms for these waters was not always as precise as

68See below pp. 68f.

69Cf. AHw, 1 353.
70For the most recent treatment of the initial section of Enuma elish, see H. L. J.
Vanstiphout, "Enuma eliS, tablet i:3," NABU ( 1987/4), 52-53. He suggests that "in I. 5 the
waters are to be taken as subject of the verb ipiqii . . 'to be intermixed'." (p. 53) It should
.

be noted here that the verb does not even indirectly suggest the initial state of the primordial
oceans as "chaotic." According to Lambert (oral communication), this "intermingling" of
these two waters was orderly in itself, i.e. "as one" (igtenit). See pp. 8 1 f. on Ee I l ff.
7 1 Larnbert & Millard, AH, 1 66.
72Jacobsen thinks that Enki's "connections with the salt water, the sea (a-abba[k)), are at
best peripheral, the sea playing a very small role in the life of Sumerians." Cf. T. Jacobsen,
"Sumerian Mythology: A Review Article," JNES 5 ( 1 946), 145; S. N. Kramer, "(Review
of) H. and H. A. Frankfort, John A. Wilson, Thorkild Jacobsen, William A. Irwin. The
Intellectual Adventure of Ancient Man: An Essay on Speculative Thought in the Ancient
Near East. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1 946, VI, 40 I pp.," JCS 2 (1948),
43, n. 6 & 48, n. 1 6.
 3 . The Waters in Gen 1 61

modem people expect; for example, the tenn tiiimtum, tamtum could refer
to both salt- and sweet-waters, i.e. "sea" and "lake", in Akkadian73 and in
southern Babylonia river water is known to be salty. In Sumerian, it seems,
there is no evidence for distinguishing the sweet and the bitter sea. For
example, at Ebla74 the Sumerian a-ab is identified once with tihiim(a)tum
"sea" and once with bii-la-tum (/bu'ratum/ "well, cistern") in Eblaite.75 In
other words, in Sumerian "the sea [ =a.ab.ba] was conceived as a single
body of water. "76 It may be that the Mesopotamian Tiamat came to be
understood as the representative of only the salt-water sea, particularly as
the enemy of the stonn-god Marduk in Enuma elish in keeping with the
"earlier" Canaanite or "northern" tradition of conflict between the stonn
and the sea (ym).n
As for the earlier meaning of Akkadian tiamtum, tamtum, Albright
suggested that it was '"the subterranean fresh-water sea', Sumerian ab-zu
(Ace. apsii)", "as shown by Hebrew and Ugaritic."78 However, it is more
reasonable to think that the Ugaritic thm(t) and the Hebrew t;;,hom(ot)
experienced a narrowing down of the semantic field of the proto-Semitic
tenn *tiham - , whose meanings and usages are reflected in Eblaite
tiham(a)tum and Akkadian ti 'iimtum and its Sumerian counterpart ab-a or
a-ab-ba, "sea, ocean", which refers both to the salt-water sea and to the

73AHw, 1 353: "Meer, See." Note that both Akkadian tiamtum, tamtum and Sumerian a-ab­
ba could be used for "lake" as well as for "sea." See Jacobsen, "Sumerian Mythology: A
Review Article," 145, n. 28; Albright, Yahweh and the Gods ofCanaan, 8 1 , n. 102.
74VE 1 343' = MEE 4, 79:r.III:8'-9'.
75Note that Akk. bartu can refer to the "source" of a river as well as to "well, cistern"; cf.
CAD, B ( 1965), 335-338, esp. 338. However, Akk. biirtu normally corresponds to Sum.
PU, never to A.AB.BA. Cf. Krebernik, "Zu Syllabar und Orthographie der lexikalischen
Texte aus Ebla. Teil 2 (Giossar)," 43; Fronzaroli, "The Eblaic Lexicon: Problems and
Appraisal," 1 48.
76M. H. Pope, El in the Ugaritic Texts (SVT 2; Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1955), 63; Kramer,
"(Review of) H. and H. A. Frankfort . . . The Intellectual Adventure of Ancient Man . . . ,
1946 . . . ," 43, n. 6. Cf. Jacobsen, "Sumerian Mythology: A Review Article," 1 39f.
77However, McCarter's following comment is not convincing:"In contrast to the
Mesopotamian situation, the distinction between salt and sweet waters is not important in
Northwest Semitic cosmologies. Hence, for example, 'sea' and 'river' may comprise a
poetic pair" (P. K. McCarter, "The River Ordeal in Israelite Literature," HTR 66 [1973],
405, n. 6). For one thing, even in Mesopotamia the distinction between the salt-water and
the sweet-water is not always made clear lexically. Moreover, tamtu and apsii appear as a
word pair also in Akk. literary texts. For example, in W. G. Lambert, B WL, 136f. 1.172
and 1 28f. 11. 37-38. Cf. J. C. de Moor & P. van der Lugt, "The Spectre of Pan­
Ugaritism," 80 31 ( 1 974), 1 5.
78 AJbright, Yahweh and the Gods of Canaan, 8 1 , n. 1 02; also W. F. Albright,
"Contributions to Biblical Archaeology and Philology," JBL 43 (1924), 369.
62 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

sweet-water ocean. In other words, the Akkadian tiamtum, tamtum proba­

bly has a much wider semantic field than its West Semitic cognate terms,
Hebrew t�hOm(ot) and Ugaritic thm(t), which became hyponymous to 'ere�
/ar�. as noted above, semantically corresponding closer to apsii than to
tiamtum though morphologically corresponding to the latter.

Excursus: A "Canaanite" dragon myth in Gen 1 :2?

Is there a Canaanite dragon myth in the background of Gen 1 :2 as Day

assumes?

[ 1 ] t�hOm - not "Canaanite"

According to Day, "both t�hom and Tiamat are derived from a common
Semitic root"79 and the fact that Ugaritic thm (cf. 1 . 1 00: 1 ) is "comparable"
to Hebrew t�hom supports "the view that the OT term is Canaanite." so
However, if the Hebrew term is common Semitic, there is no reason why
the term should be taken particularly as "Canaanite. "
I t should be also noted that Hebrew t�hom is a morphologically older
form8I than the assumed Ugaritic form, *tahiimu. If the Hebrew term were
a loan word from this "Canaanite" divine name and had been depersonified
subsequently, one would expect the Hebrew term to be something like
* tiihom. It may be possible to postulate that a form like t�hom existed in
Southern Canaanite and that the ancient Hebrew borrowed it from this
"Southern" Canaanite language. However, there is no evidence that such a
form was a divine name. Therefore it is very unlikely that Hebrew t�hom
is a borrowing from a Canaanite divine name.

[2] t�hom - not Depersonification

Day explains that t�h om in Gen I :2 is "not a divine personality hostile to

God" and it is used "to denote the impersonal watery mass which covered

79Day, God's Conflict with the Dragon and the Sea, 50.
80Day, God's Conflict with the Dragon and the Sea, 7.
8 1 For other words which follow the sound change, *qital > q:Jtol, see W. R. Garr,
"Pretonic Vowels in Hebrew," Vf 27 (1987), 1 40.
 3 . The Waters in Gen 1 63

the world before God brought about the created order." However, he holds
that the term did denote "a mythical personality" a long time ago and
suggests that the term t:Jhom is a depersonification of the original
Canaanite divine name.
However, as noted above, since the Hebrew term t:Jhom is most proba­
bly a common noun in origin, like the Ugaritic, Akkadian and Eblaite
terms, there is no strong reason why we should take t:Jhom as a depersoni­
fication of the original divine name.

[3] The Canaanite Sea-dragon82 is Yam, not Tahiim

In the attested Ugaritic texts, divine personification of the term thm (t)
"ocean" appears only twice: once in an incantation text, the "Serpent
Charm", as a compound divine name "Heaven-and-Ocean" Smm -w-thm
( 1 . 100 [607) : 1 ) and once in a multilingual vocabulary list as Tahiimatu
(=thmt) (Ug. V 1 37:111:34"), the female counterpart of the god "Heaven"
Samiima (=Smm). Not only is the frequency of the name low, but the types
of literature in which the name appears is limited. In particular, the divine
name Tahiim does not appear at all in the major myth, the Baal Cycle, or in
other mythological texts. Nor is the term Smm ever found personified in
Ugaritic myths.
It is especially noteworthy that the goddess83 Thm(t) never appears in
the conflict scenes, where it is Yam/Nahar that is the sea-dragon, the
antagonist of Baal. There is no evidence in the available Ugaritic mythol­
ogy that Thm (t) was a helper of Yam or that the storm-god Baal ever
fought with the ocean-goddess Thm(t). The term does not appear even as a
common noun in the context where the enemies of Baal and Anat are listed
(KTU 1 .3 ['nt):III:38ff. [35ff.), 1 .5 [67]:I: l ff.). Therefore it is almost

82 Ugaritic scholars are unsettled as to whether the sea god Yam and the serpent/dragon
should be identified. On an iconographical basis, Williams-Fone argues for the god Mot,
rather than Yam, as a serpent in the Ugaritic mythology; cf. E. Williams-Fone, "The Snake
and the Tree in the Iconography and Texts of Syria during the Bronze Age," in Ancient
Seals and the Bible [eds. L. Gorelick & E. Williams-Fone] (Malibu: Undena, 1983), 18-
43. However, note the critical remarks by W. G. Lambert, "Trees, S nakes and Gods in
Ancient Syria and Anatolia," BSOAS 48 ( 1985), 435-45 1 ; D. Collon, "(A Review of) L.
Gorelick & E. Williams-Fone (eds.), Ancient Seals and the Bible. Malibu, Undena, 1983
(= The International Institute for Mesopotamian Area Studies, Monographic Journals of the
Near East: Occasional Papers on the Near East Vol. 2/1.)," AfO 33 ( 1 986), 99f.
83The short form thm, without a feminine ending -1, in the compound name !mm-w-thm is
probably feminine. For a divine couple forming a compound name, cf. Jtpn. w qd! ( 1 . 1 6:1
[ 1 25]: 1 1, 2 1 -22).
64 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

certain that even if there should be an undiscovered myth84 in which a

"creator" god had to fight a Canaanite sea-dragon, the dragon was not
Taham.

[4] Baal is not a creator god

Though Baal is the most active deity in the Ugaritic mythology, he is not a
creator-god. There is "no suggestion in the B aal Cycle that, for instance,
like Marduk . . . he constructed the firmament out of the defeated
monster's carcass." ss As de Moor notes, "Baal is able to repair (bny) the
broken wings of birds in a miraculous way ( 1 . 1 9:III: 1 2ff. [ 1 Aqht: 1 1 8ff] ),
but except for the lightning ( l .3 :III:26, par.) he does not create anything
new."86 Baal is thus simply a "preserver and savior" of the cosmos.s7
In the Ugaritic mythology it is the god El who is a creator god.HH El is
the creator of mankind; he is called "Father of mankind" (ab adm). He is a
progenitor of various gods and goddesses. for example, in 1 .23 [52] :30ff.
El appears as the father of a divine pair, Sl.tr and Slm, as well as of the
y
"Good Gods"(ilm n'mm ).89 Furthermore, if Snm is a divine name, El's
title ab �nm "Father of S nm" suggests that he is also the father of another
god.
Another epithet of El, bny bn wt "creator of creatures" (KTU 1 .6
[49] :III:5, 1 1 ; 1 .4 [51] :11: 1 1 , 111:32; 1 . 1 7 [2Aqht] :I:24 [25] )90 also suggests
that El is the creator-god. De Moor notes similar epithets in Akkadian,
banu nabnft and ban binutu, both meaning "creator of creatures", of the
Babylonian god Ea,9I who is also described as having created "land and

84Canaanite myths are also attested outside of U garitic literature, e.g. an Egyptian version
of "Astarte and the Tribute of the Sea" (translated by J. A. Wilson, in ANET, 17f.) and a
story of El-kunirsha in a Hittite version, "El, Ashertu and the Storm-god" (translated by A.
Goetze in ANET, 1 9 69 3 , 5 19); see also H. A. Hoffner, Jr., "The Elkunirsa Myth
Reconsidered," RHA 23 ( 1965), 5- 1 6.
85J. C. L. Gibson, "The Theology of the Ugaritic Baal Cycle," Or 53 ( 1 984), 2 12, n. 16.
86De Moor, "El, the creator," 1 86.
87Smith, "Interpreting the Baal Cycle," 320.
sssee Smith, "Interpreting the Baal Cycle," 320, n. 43 for bibliography.
89Note that the text carefully distinguishes the birth of S!u and S lm from that of ilm n'mm.
Cf. D. T. Tsumura, Ugaritic Drama of the Good Gods (Ann Arbor: University Microfilms,
1973), 22 & 56.
90Gordon, UT 19.483.
91De Moor, "El, the creator," 1 82f. See below p. 1 46.
 3. The Waters in Gen 1 65

sea" in an Akkadian ritual text (Race. 46, 30).92 Therefore, as de Moor

says, no other U garitic god besides El, the head of the pantheon,93 qualifies
for the role of creator of the cosmos.94
Thus, "in Ugaritic mythology creation and the subduing of the monsters
of chaos are functions divided among different gods, notably El and
Baal. "95 It should be also noted that outside of Ugaritic literature El is
considered as a Canaanite creator god: e.g. El-kunirsha (= El, qn 'r�
"creator of the earth").96

[5] Yam does not appear in Gen 1 :2

Finally, if the Genesis account were the demythologization of a Canaanite

dragon myth, we would expect in the initial portion of the account, the
term yam "sea", the counterpart of the Ugaritic sea-god Yam who corre­
sponds to the god dA .A B .B A ( Ti 'iimat or Aya bbu?91) in the official
=

pantheon list from ancient Ugarit.98 However, the term yiim does not
appear in Gen I until v. 1 0 where its plural form yammim appears as the
antithesis of the " land" ( 'ere�).
In the light of the above discussions, it would be difficult to assume that
there existed in the background of Gen I :2 an earlier Canaanite dragon
myth such as a myth in which a creator-god won victory over the chaos­
dragon, e.g. Yam, Nahar, "dragon" and "serpent." There is no evidence
that the term f;)h om in Gen I :2 is a depersonification of an original
Canaanite deity as Day assumes. This Hebrew term t;)hom is simply a
reflection of the Common Semitic term *tihiim- "ocean" and there is no
relation between the Genesis account and the so-called Chao skampf
mythology.

92AHw, 1 353.
93However, the creator god need not necessarily be head of the pantheon. Enki/Ea was
never that On similarity between El and Ea, see below pp. 146f.
94De Moor, "El, the creator," ! 86.
95Korpel-de Moor, "A Review of J. Day, God's Conflict with the Dragon and the Sea,
1985," 244.
96KAf, II ( 1 968), 42f. Cf. H. Otten, "Ein kanaaniiischer Mythus aus Bo�azkoy," M/0 I
( 1 953), 1 25-1 50; H. A. Hoffner, Jr., "The Elkunirsa Myth Reconsidered," RHA 23
( 1 965), 5-1 6. See also P. D. Miller, Jr., "El, the Creator of Earth," BASOR 239 ( 1980),
43-46, esp. 43f.
97See above, note 43, on ayabba "sea" in Amarna Akk.
98RS 20.24:29 11 KTV 1 .47 [UT 1 7]. Cf. Ug V ( 1 968), 58.
 Chapter 4

THE EARTH-WATERS RELATIONSHIP IN GEN 1

In the previous chapters the etymology and meaning of the terms such as
tOhii wabOhii and t�hom were discussed in order to clarify the initial states
of the earth and the waters described in Gen 1 :2. However, the semantic
investigation of these terms is not completed until the "meaning relation­
ship" between the term 'ere$ and the term t�hom in the present context is
further elucidated.
In the following sections,! we will first discuss some theoretical grounds
for investigating the relationship between the meanings of these two terms.
Then we will examine the nature of relationship between the referents of
these terms, noting other biblical examples, in order to rightly understand
the relationship between the "bare" (tohii wabOhii) earth and the thm­
waters in Gen 1 :2.

A. A "HYPONYMOUS" WORD PAIR: 'R$ - THM(T)

For semantic discussion of any word pair, it is not enough to analyse ety­
mologically the meaning of each word on its own. The meaning relation of
such paired words should be investigated thoroughly and placed adequately
in their context.
Traditionally, the meaning relation of paired words has been treated in
terms either of synonymy or of antonymy. However, for some word pairs
it might be profitable to take note of the meaning relation, "hyponymy,"
which is sometimes explained as "inclusion,"2 i.e. what the term "A" refers

1The original version of this chapter was published as "A 'hyponymous' word pair: 'r� and
thm(t), in Hebrew and Ugaritic," Bib 69 (1988), 258-269.
2C. R. Taber, "Semantics" in /DB. Supplement (Nashville: Abingdon, 1976}, 803-804
lists four types of "conceptual relationships between the sense of different forms": i)
68 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

to includes what the term "B" refers to. But the term "hyponymy" is
preferred to " inclusion," for it is "a relation of sense which holds between
lexical items" rather than a relation of "reference," i.e. "entities which are
named by lexical items."3 The "inclusion" thus entails "hyponymy," but
"hyponymy " can be used also for a relationship between terms that have no
"reference. "4
Our term "hyponym" therefore means that the "sense" [A] of the more
general term "A" (e.g. "fruit") completely includes the "sense" [B] of more
specific term " B " (e.g. "apple"), and hence what "A" refers to includes
what "B" refers to. In other words, when the referent { B ) of the term "B"
is a part of, or belongs to the referent { A ) of the term "A," we can say that
"B" is hyponymous to "A."S Thus, ymn "right hand" is hyponymous to yd
"hand," since what the term ymn refers to is normally a part of what the
term yd refers to.6
This approach can guide the interpretation of debated terms. In the case
of a word pair such as the Hebrew 'ere$ - t:;,hom(ot) and the Ugaritic ar$ ­
thm(t), it is not so easy to determine the meaning relationships, for the
specific meaning of each term is not transparent in some instances and the
referent of 'ere$ or ar$, for example, varies from "earth," "land" and
" ground" to "underworld" depending on context.7 However, by a careful
analysis of the nature of collocation or word associations within a paral­
lelism one should be able to determine the meanings of paired terms.
For example, in the Ugaritic text, KTU 1 .3 ['nt] :III:24-25 [2 1 -22] :

synonymy and similarity, ii) inclusion, iii) antonymy and iv) polar opposition.
3Cf. J. Lyons, Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1968), 453ff.
4The same meaning relation between paired words has been noted by A Berlin, "Parallel
Word Pairs: A Linguistic Explanation," UF 1 5 ( 1983), 1 1 ; The Dynamics of Biblical
Parallelism (Bioomington: University of Indiana Press, 1985), Chap. IV.
5This meaning relation should be also noted for parallelism. Berlin's "particularizing"
parallelism and Clines' "parallelism of greater precision" are, in our terms, "hyponymous"
parallelism. Cf. D. J. A. Clines, "The Para\lelism of Greater Precision: Notes from Isaiah
40 for a Theory of Hebrew Poetry," in E. R. Follis (ed.), Directions in Biblical Hebrew
Poetry (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1987), 77-100, esp. 96, n. 2.
6The analysis of meaning relations in terms of "meaning inclusion" (=hyponym) and
"meaning exclusion" (=antonym) would be extremely profitable for the semantic
discussions of word pairs, for, set in the context of poetic parallelism, the two terms seem
to acquire a closer association to each other than in an ordinary prose context.
7Note also that "earth" (ers.etu) in Akkadian can mean both "earth" in the English sense and
"underworld." In the ancient Babylonian cosmology, there are three "earths", 1 ) the abode
of men, 2) the Apsii and 3) the underworld. Cf. W. G. Lamben, "The Cosmology of
Sumer and Babylon," in C. Blacker & M. Loewe (eds.), Ancient Cosmologies (London:
George Alien & Unwin, 1975), 59; Lamben & Millard, AH, 166.
 4. The Earth-Waters Relationship in Gen 1 69

tant B . Smm . 'm . ar$

thmt . 'mn . kbkbm
"The murmur of the heavens to the earth
Of the deeps to the stars." (Gordon, PLMU, 79)

there are six possible word pairs: ( 1 ) gmm - ar!j, (2) gmm - thmt, (3) Smm
- kbkbm, (4) ar!j - thmt, (5) ar!j - kbkbm and (6) thmt - kbkbm. But only
three combinations of these word pairs are possible from the context.

I. (1 ) gmm - ar!j and (6) thmt - kbkbm

Grammatically the most natural analysis of the paralJel structure would be

as follows:
a-b-e-d
b'-c' -d'
The words gmm (b) and ar!j (d) as weB as thmt (b') and kbkbm (d'), are
connected syntagmaticaUy to each other in terms of the preposition 'm(n)
"to" (c 11 c'). Since Smm "heaven" (b) and aq (d) are a universaUy
acknowledged "antonymous" pair,9 the latter term should mean "earth",
which refers to everything under the heaven, rather than "land" or any­
thing else. The relationship between thmt (b') and kbkbm "stars" (d')IO may

BQn the recent discussions of this term, D. Pardee, "The New Canaanite Myths and
Legends," BO 37 ( 1980), 277.
9Among Semitic languages, Heb. has Siimayim - 'ere$ and 'ere$ - Siimayim; Ug., Smm -
aT$ and aT$-w-Smm (Cf. RSP I, 11 7 1 (p. 1 26f.), 11 208 (p. 190) & 11 554 (p. 356)); Akk.,
Samii - er$etu as well as Phoen. Smm - 'r$ and Aram. Smy' - 'rq ' J 'r". Cf. Y. Avishur,
Stylistic Studies of Word-Pairs in Biblical and Ancient Semitic Literatures (AOA T 2 1 0;
Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1984), 603. In non-Semitic languages, Sum. has
AN - KI; Japanese, following Chinese, ten - chi, etc. See p. 76 on bipartite cosmology.
It is interesting to note that in a NA mythological explanatory text the initial state of
the world described in Ee, 11. 1-2,
"When the heavens above were not (yet) named,
the earth (ammatum) below had not (yet) been given a name,"
(CAD, Nh [ 1 980], 34)
is explained as "When heaven and earth were not created" (ki Same er$eti lii ibbaniim). Cf.
Livingstone, MMEW, 79ff. Note that the term ammatum seems to refer to the "eanh" in
general(cf. CAD, Ah [ 1968], 75; AHw, 44), which is in contrast with the "heaven", rather
than the "underworld" (cf. M. Hutter, "ammatu: Unterwelt in Enuma EliS I 2," RA 79
[ 1 985], 1 87-88.). For the translation "earth", most recently see H. L. J. Vanstiphout,
"Eniima eliS, tablet i:3," NABU (1 987/4}, 53. R. Labat also translates the term as "la Terre"
in R. Labat, et al, Les religions du Proche-Orient asiatique (Fayard/Denoel, 1970), 38.
IONote a similar pair, t:JhOmot "oceans" // S:JQiiqim "clouds", in Prov 3:20.
70 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

also be taken as contrastive like pair ( 1 ) from this parallelistic structure,

though thmt and kbkbm are not a "parallel" word pair in this context. Both
pairs, ( 1 ) and (6), are thus "antonymous" (or "exclusive") and the two
elements of these pairs refer to two opposite directions, i.e. "heaven" <->
"earth" and "oceans" <-> "stars."

2. (2) $mm - thmt and (5) ar� - kbkbm

In a parallelistic structure like this, the "vertical" correspondence rather

than the "horizontal" adjacency t t might be the dominant factor which
"activates word pairs . " Thus, $mm (b) might better be understood as
closely related paradigmatically with thmt (b'), rather than with ar� (d).
This "antonymous" word pair, $mm "heaven" and thmt "ocean(s)", is
certainly a traditional one like $mm "heaven" and ym "sea " 12 in the ancient
Northwest Semitic languages, as is suggested by a divine couple, $amuma
(= $mm) "Heaven-god" and tahamatum (= thmt)l3 "Ocean-god" in Ugarit,
which corresponds to the Sumerian AN and its female counterpart ANTUM
in a multilingual vocabulary text (Ug V, 1 37:III:33"f.). This divine couple
appears also as the compound divine name $mm w thm " Heaven-and­
Ocean" (KTU 1 . 1 00 [607]:1) like the divine name ltpn. w qd$ ( 1 . 1 6: 1 [ 1 25]:
1 1 , 2 1 f.), though the goddess thm here lacks the feminine ending t.l4
He brew t�h om also stands in an "antonymous" relationship to
$iimayim.ts For example, in Gen 7: 1 1 , where the beginning of the great
flood is mentioned, "the springs of the great deep" (ma 'y�not t�hom
rabbah) and "the floodgates of the heavens" (NIV) ( 'ifrubbOt ha$$iimayim)
appear as an "exclusive" pair. The same pair with a slight variation also
appears in Gen 8 :2 where the closing of ma 'y�ni'Jt t�hom and 'ifrubbi'Jt
ha$$iimayim is mentioned. Also in Prov 8 :27, $iimayim is set in contrast to
t�hOm in parallelism. In Gen 49:25 and Dt 33: 1 3 the same antonymous pair
appears in parallelism. Also $iimayim and t�h omot, the plural form of

1 1For a grammatical discussion on the problem of adjacency and dependency in poetic

parallelism, see my "Literary Insertion, AXB Pattern, in Hebrew and Ugaritic: a Problem
of Adjacency and Dependency in Poetic Parallelism," UF 1 8 ( 1986), 351-361 .
12Cf. RSP I, 11 555 (p. 356). For an Akkadian example, see J. C. de Moor & P. van der
Lugt, "The Spectre of Pan-Ugaritism," BO 3 1 ( 1 974), 22.
1 3for a discussion of the vocalization of this term and its etymology, see the previous
chapter, p. 52.
14Heb. t:JhOm, without an ending -t, appears both as a masculine noun (e.g. Hab 3:10) and
as a feminine noun (e.g. Gen 49:25, Dt 33: 1 3).
l5Cf. RSP I, 11 560 (pp. 358f.); Avishur, Stylistic Studies of Word-Pairs, 407.
 4. The Earth-Waters Relationship in Gen 1 71

t�hom, appear as an antonymous pair in Ps 107:26.

The other two words aq (d) and kbkbm "stars" (d') can also be taken
paradigmatically as a word pair like the Ugaritic ar� - 'rpt "cloud" in KTU
1 .4:V:6ff. [5 l :V:68ff] . However, the "earth-and-stars" combination is rather
unusual.

3. (3) Smm - kbkbm and (4) ar� - thmt

Since the referential direction between "heaven" and "earth" in the first
colon and that between "oceans" and "stars" in the second colon are
opposite, i.e.
Smm [above] => acy [below]
thmt [below] <= kbkbm [above],
a chiastic structure has been suggested for this parallelism in spite of the
formal and grammatical pattern given above. I 6
The parallelistic structure based on this referential correspondence
would be as follows:
a-b-e-d
d'-c '-b'
In this structural understanding, Smm "heaven" (b) and kbkbm �'stars" (b')
are taken as closely related to each other as a "parallel" word pair. This
word pair often appears both in Ugaritic and Hebrew,I7 and its meaning
relation is hyponymous, since what the term kbkbm refers to is a part of
what the term Smm refers to. Hence, two terms are juxtaposed in a
construct chain as kok�be haSSiimayim (Gen 22: 1 7 , etc.) and their order
cannot be reversed.
As for the other pair,I8 Dahood thought that the chiastic arrangement
would "favor the meaning 'netherworld"' for ar� which is in parallel with
thmt "depths." I 9 The meaning relation of these two words is seemingly

16M. Dahood, "Ugaritic-Hebrew Syntax and Style," UF 1 ( 1 969), 25; RSP I, 1 27,
followed by W. A. van der Weiden, Le Livre des Proverbs: Notes philologiques (Rome:
Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1970), 37; M. K. Wakeman, God's Battle with the Monster
(Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1973), 1 0 1 ; A. R. Ceresko, "The A:B::B:A Word Pattern in Hebrew
and Nonhwest Semitic with Special Reference to the Book of Job," UF 7 ( 1 975), 74; J. S.
Kselman, "The Recovery of Poetic Fragments from the Pentateuchal Priestly Source," JBL
97 ( 1 978), 1 63; W. G. E. Watson, "Strophic Chiasmus in Ugaritic Poetry," UF 1 5 ( 1 983),
263: "Essentially, the chiasmus here is semantic."
17Cf. RSP I, 11 282 (p. 225f. ) and 11 556 (p. 357); Avishur, Stylistic Studies of Word­
Pairs, 566.
18 See Avishur, Stylistic Studies of Word-Pairs, 353f.
19Cf. M. J. Dahood, "Nonhwest Semitic Philology and Job," in J. L. McKenzie (ed.), The
72 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

understood as synonymous, and the "conditional" meaning, "netherworld",

has been suggested for ar�. However, since the meaning relation of kbkbm
(b') and �mm (b) is hyponymous in this parallelistic structure, it seems that
the meaning relation of ar� (d) and thmt (d') is also hyponymous. In other
words, what the term thmt refers to might be taken as a part of what the
term ar� refers to,20 And the term aq which is contrasted with �mm in the
first · colon most probably refers to everything that is under the heaven.
This hyponymous relationship might be supported by the OT examples.
For example, Ps 7 1 :20 has the construct chain, t;)homot hii 'are�. which
suggests that the term t;)hOmot is hyponymous to the term 'ere� rather than
synonymous to 'ere�.21 In other words, what t;)homot refers to is a part of
what 'ere$ refers to. Kraus takes what 'ere� refers to as the "netherworld"
and suggests that t;)homot hii 'are� here refers to "die unterirdischen
Chaosgewasser, durch die der Tote zur .,,�Ill eingeht. "22 It should be noted
that, unlike Dahood, Kraus takes the two terms as hyponymous. However,
"die unterirdischen Chaosgewasser" would not fit the present context of the
Ugaritic text, since thmt is contrasted with kbkbm "stars. "

B . "HEAVEN"-"EARTH"-"SEA"

Now, it is important to note that in the Old Testament t;)hOm(ot) never

Bible in Current Catholic Thought (New York: Herder & Herder, 1962), 58; Proverbs and
Northwest Semitic Philology (Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1 963), 52; "Ugaritic­
Hebrew Syntax and Style," 25; M. Dahood, Psalms 11 (AB 1 7 ; Garden City, N. Y.:
Doubleday, 1 968), 1 76, followed by van der Weiden, Le Livre des Proverbs, 37; J. J.
Scullion, "Some Difficult Texts in Isaiah cc. 56--66 in the Light of Modern Scholarship,"
UF 4 ( 1972), 122, esp. n. 85; M. H. Pope, Job 3 (AB 15; New York: Doubleday, 1973),
91; Ceresko, "The A:B::B:A Word Pattern in Hebrew and Northwest Semitic", 74. Note
however that not everyone who suggests the chiastic structure interprets M$ as "the nether
world" like Dahood. For example, Wakeman and Watson interpret it as "earth", see above.
20In the immediately following text KTU 1 .3 ['nt]:III:26-28, where the term M$ is again
contrasted with gmm and "men" (ngm) is in parallel with "folk of the land" (hmlt M$), the
term � means "earth/land", not "the netherworld."
2 1 M. K. Wakeman, "The Biblical Earth Monster in the Cosmogonic Combat Myth," JBL
88 ( 1969), 3 1 7 , n. 1 8 holds that because 'ere$ and t;1hom are "synonymous", they "come
to form a hendiadys" in Ps 7 1 :20. However, this construct chain is not a hendiadys, though
a hendiadys may be broken up to constitute a construct chain. Moreover, her argument for
synonymity based on a simple "substitution" in the case of the meaning relation between
ha'are$ and t;1h0mot (Ps 77: 17,19, etc.) or harfm and t;1h0mot (Ex 1 5:8) is not convincing.
22H.-J. Kraus, Psalmen5, 2. Teilband: Psalmen 60-150 (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener
Verlag, 1978), 653.
 4. The Earth-Waters Relationship in Gen 1 73

appears as a term for "sea(s)" in a tripartite description of the world, i.e.

"heaven-earth-sea,"23 though t�hom(ot) is sometimes closely associated
with yiim.24 The best known passage is Ex 20: 1 1 , where "the heaven", "the
earth" and "the sea" as well as "all that is in them" are mentioned. The first
three of these elements seem to be fixed in Hebrew expression, since they
are virtually same in several passages with variants for the fourth, as shown
in the following list:

(Ex 20: 1 1 ) haggamayim hii'are$ : hayyam kol- 'ilger-bam

(Ps 146:6)25 gamayim 'are$ : hayyam kol-'ilger-bam
(Hag 2:6) haggfimayim hii 'are$ hayyam hef!orabah
(Ps 96: 1 1) haggamayim ha'are$ : hayyam : m;,lo'o
(Ps 69:35) gamayim 'are$ yammfm kol-romes barn
(Ps 1 35:6) baggamayim bii'are$ : bayyammfm : kol-t;,hOmot

In Ps 1 46:6 the expression is the same as Ex 20: 1 1 except for the definite
articles. In Hag 2:6 and Ps 96: 1 1 the same pattern, "heaven"-"earth"-"sea",

23L. I. J. Stadelmann, The Hebrew Conception of the World (AnBi 39; Rome: Pontifical
Biblical Institute, 1970), 9f. lists Ps 1 35:6 & 148: 1-7 as examples of the gmym - 'r$ ­
thwmwt scheme and Prov 8:27-32 & Ps 33:6-8 as examples of the gmym - tbl - thwm(wt)
scheme. However, in Ps 1 35:6, t;,hOmot is not the third term (see below) and in 148: 1-7,
t;,hOmot refers to a part of the eanh (see below, pp. 74f.). In Prov 8:27-32, t;,hom
corresponds to gamayim only in v. 27 and the term tebel appears only in v. 3 1 . Note that
the relationship between the earth and the sea is described in terms of 'are$ and yam in v.
29. Ps 33:8 which mentions ha'are$ /1 y(Jg;,IJC tebel should be treated separately from vs. 6-
7. J. M. Vincent, "Recherches exegetiques sur le Psaume XXXIII," VT 28 ( 1 978), 447
recognizes in Ps 33:5-7 a triad, hii'are$ (v. 5), gfimayim (v. 6) and me hayyiim (v. 7),
"terre-<:iel-mer."
24Cf. RSP I, 11 236 (pp. 204f.).
25Compare the following Greek versions:
1 45:6(LXX) TOV TTOLTJOavTa TOV ovpavbv Kat �.
'ri)v edAacrcrav Kat TT!IVTa Ta EV aunis'
1 34:6(LXX) EV T{ji oupav{ji Kat fV Tj) yfl,
€v Ta1s llaMcrcrms Kat E-v micraLs Ta1s �oocrOLs· .
Rev 5: 1 3 Ev Tiji oupaviji Kat E-trt Tiis yijs Kat inrDKchw Tiis yijs
Kat ETTt Tlls !laMcrOT)S Kat TQ fV auT<iS TTclVTa
Rev 5:3 Kat oi&:ts f-8UaTO fV T{ji oupavQ oUB£ £trt Tijs yijs
oUBE UTTOKclTW Tfis yijs
Phi 2: 10 €troupavlwv Kat E-mydwv Kat KaTax8ovlwv
In Rev 5: 1 3 Kat utroKciTw Tfjs yiis , though some mss omit it, is the third element of a
tripartite division in Rev 5:3, which reflects Ex 20:4 and Dt 5:8. The Hebrew 'ere$ seems to
be understood as referring both to the ground ("on the earth") and to the underground
("under the earth").
74 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

is mentioned before the fourth elements, "the dry land" (he�wrabah) and
"all that is in it" (m;;,Jo 'o). Pss 69:35 and 1 35 :6 have a plural form of yam
and their fourth elements, as in 96: 1 1 , are additional items which are
related only to the "sea(s)", i.e. kol-romes barn "all that moves in them"
and koJ-t;;,homot "all oceans" respectively. While in 96: 1 1 and 69:35 the
additional phrases are hyponymous to yam(mim) in 135:6 kol-t;;,hOmot is
either synonymous or hyponymous to the "seas."26
Ex 20:4 and Dt 5:8 describe these three divisions as ba U amayim
mimma'al "in heaven above", bii 'are$ mittapat "on the earth beneath" and
bammayim mittapat la 'are$ "in the waters below (lit. "beneath the earth")."
The creatures in three divisions, i.e. "birds" , "animals" and "fish", are
never mentioned in this order but in the following two different orders: ( 1 )
"sea"-"heaven"-"earth" (or "field") i n Gen 1 :26, 28, Ezek 38:20; (2)
"earth" (or "field")-"heaven"-"sea" in Gen 9:2, Hos 4:3, (Zeph 1 :3), Ps
8 :8-9. However, in none of the passages cited above does the term
t;;,hcJm(ot) appear.
Thus, in the framework of tripartite understanding of the world it is
yam "sea", not t;;,hom "ocean", that constitutes the third part and thus
corresponds, though not exactly, to the Apsfi27 of the Babylonian scheme of
"heaven/earth/Apsfi." On the other hand, the Hebrew t;;,hom(ot), which is
hyponymous to the Hebrew 'ere$ - hence what t;;,hom(ot) refers to - is a
part of the "earth" ( 'ere$), probably corresponds to Apsfi of the Babylonian
scheme of three levels "earth" , i.e. "abode of men/Apsfi/underworld."28

C. "HEA VEN"-"EARTH"

1. Ps 148

The hyponymous relationship between 'ere$ and t;;,hOm(ot) in the Hebrew

language is also supported by Ps 148 :7, which reads:

26Y. Avishur takes (bii) 'are$ and (kol-)�h0mot in Ps 1 35 :6 as a parallel word pair like
those in Ps 1 48:7, Prov 3 : 1 9-20, 8:27-29 and Gen 1 :2 as well as in Ps 7 1 :20 and Ben Sira
16:18. Cf. Avishur, Stylistic Studies of Word-Pairs, 353.
270n Apsu as a place where fish live, see CAD, Ah ( 1 968), I 94f. See also below pp.
1 49f.
28See above p. 68.
 4. The Earth-Waters Relationship in Gen 1 75

haJ:J/(j 'et- YHWH min-ha'iire$

tanninim W:Jkol-t:JhOmot
"Praise the Lord from the earth,
you great sea creatures and all ocean depths" (NIV).

In this context, what t;,homot refers to belongs to what hii'iire� refers to,
and hence the term t;,homot is hyponymous to the term ha 'are�.
In this passage Dahood took the meaning relation of haSSiimayim (v. 1 )
and ha 'are$ (v. 7 ) as polar opposition and suggested that 'ere$ here too
should mean "the netherworld", "the opposite extreme" of heaven.29
However, it should be noted that the following verses, vs. 7bff., never talk
about items in the netherworld. On the other hand, vs. 2-4 mention items
in the heavens. Dahood's own comment points out a problem for his
assumption that the psalmist has a tripartite understanding of the universe:
"What does appear singular is the fact that the psalmist dedicates only one
verse to the subterranean beings, after having given six verses to celestial
bodies, and reserving the next seven for terrestrial creatures. "Jo
As recent studies of the literary structure of Ps 1 48 show, the psalm
should be divided into two sections, vs. 1--6 and vs. 7-1 4.31 While the first
section refers to various items in the heavens, the second mentions those
under the heavens. This literary structure suggests that in the present
context the psalmist seems to use the term 'ere� in the sense which refers to
everything under the heaven, including the sea.32 It is contrasted with
"heaven" in the "exclusive" word pair and both tanninim and t;,homot are
treated as belonging to the earth.J3 Thus, in Ps 1 48, the psalmist's under­
standing of the world is bipartite, rather than tripartite.
The "logic"34 which allows the psalmist to include in the second section

29M. Dahood, Psalms Ill (AB 1 7 A; Garden City: Doubleday, 1 970), 353.
30Dahood, Psalms Ill, 353f.
3 1E.g. D. R. Hillers, "A Study of Psalm 148," CBQ 40 ( 1 978), 328; P. Auffret, La
sagesse a bdti sa maison (Orbis biblicus et orientalis 49; Fribourg 1 982), 3 85--404.
32Cf. Stadelmann, The Hebrew Conception of the World, 3. He includes the sea in the
"second level of the world" in the "three-leveled structure of the world", heaven - earth -
underworld. See pp. l54ff. However, no discussion of the term t:Jhom(ot) is offered in
Section C, which deals with the problem of the sea.
33Note also that in KTU 1.23 [52]:62-63 the "sea" (ym ) in an ordinary sense is
hyponymous to the "earth" (ar$) which is in parallel with �mm, though Dahood suggested
here too the translation of "nether world" for aT$ (cf. RSP I, 11 64 [p. 1 22f]).
34Hillers, "A Study of Psalm 1 48," 328: "We must not demand perfect logic of the
psalmist's cosmology; we must permit him to list dragons and deeps, fire and storm-wind
under the rubric 'earth'." Note also Auffret's explanation: "il s'agit la a la fois de l'abime et
de la terre." (p. 396) as a criticism of Dahood's position.
76 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

several meteorological phenomena, such as "storm-wind"(v. 8), and "flying

birds" (v. 10) as well as tanninim and t�hOmot (v. 7) may look strange at
first glance. But it might be supported by the "logic" of the ancient Semites
as illustrated by Enuma elish which, according to Lambert, combines two
originally separate cosmologies, the one which is bipartite (heaven--earth)35
and is "obtained in this story by the splitting of Tiamat's body" and the
other which is tripartite (heaven--earth-Apsu) and whose three levels are
represented by Anu, Enlil and Ea (Enki) respectively.J6

bipartite
heaven
earth
tripartite
heaven : Anu
earth : Enlil
Apsu : Ea (Enki)

The latter cosmology of "a three-decker universe" can also be identified in

Atra-tJasls epic (I i 7-1 8)_37 This tripartite cosmology seems to have been
transformed to a bipartite one, as the author of Enuma elish seems to locate
Enlil in E!larra (between heavens and the Apsfi), "a lower heaven",38 thus
appointing Anu and Enlil to the heavens, i.e. "the heaven" and "a lower
heaven", and Marduk and Ea to the earth, i.e. "Esagila" and "Apsu."J9

Enuma elish
heaven : Anu
ESarra (= "a lower heaven") : Enlil
Esagila (= "eanh") : Marduk
Apsu : Ea

Therefore, it is not surprising to note that in the psalmist's logic the term
ha'are$ which is in contrast to ha��amayim refers to everything under the

35See above p. 69 on the word pair, "heaven" and "eanh", in various languages.
36Larnbert, "The Cosmology of Sumer and Babylon," 58.
37Cf. Lambert & Millard, AH, 166.
38Larnbert, "The Cosmology of Sumer and Babylon," 58.
39Qn four divisions of the world, see most recently Livingstone, MMEW, 79ff. However,
in a text published by R. Borger (BiOr 30 1 80:72 ii 4), the triad gods, Anu, Enlil and Ea
are understood as controlling "heaven and earth" (AN u Kl), i. e. the entire universe; see
CAD, Mh ( 1 977), 228; I. Bottt�ro, Mythes et Rites de Baby/one (Geneve - Paris: Slatkine
- Champion, 1985), 300f.
 4. The Earth-Waters Relationship in Gen 1 77

heavens, including storm and oceans. In other words, the terms ha 'are�
and ha��amayim are mutually exclusive within the framework of bipartite
cosmology. They are not in a polar opposition like "heaven" < > -

"underworld" which Dahood assumed for this psalm.

For the meaning of t;)hi5mot of Ps 1 48:7, Kraus suggests either "die
Urfluten (akkad. T i amat), die unter der Erde ruhen" or simply "des
Meer. "40 However, the waters under the earth are called Apsu rather than
Tiamat in Mesopotamian cosmology. Since 'ere$ in this verse most
probably means "earth" rather than "underworld", its hyponym t;)homot in
the present context would mean "oceans" in an ordinary sense like Ugaritic
thm, Akkadian tiamtum and Eblaite tiham(a)tum.

2. Prov 3

v. 19 YHWH baPokmah yasad- �

konen g;Imayim bitbiinah
v. 20 bxla'td tahdmot nibqa'ii
u${a)haqfm yir'lpii-t;il

Now in Prov 3 :20, the term t;)homot stands in parallel with �;)paqim
"clouds" antonymously. Similarly, in the preceding verse (v . 1 9) the term
'are$ is put in direct opposition to the term �amayim. Moreover, �amayim
and �;)paqim often appear as a word pair in Hebrew (cf. Dt 33 :26, Is 45:8,
Jer 5 1 :9, Job 35:5, Ps 36:6, 57 : 1 1 , 1 08:5) and such correspondences as
�;)!Jaqim nible �amayim (Job 38:37) and �;)!Jaqim dalte �amayim (Ps
= =

78:23) indicate that �;)!Jaqim ("clouds") is hyponymous to �amayim, like

kbkbm "stars" which is hyponymous to �mm "heaven" in KTU 1 .3 ['nt]:
III:24-25 [21-22] and in biblical passages. Therefore, here also the term
t;)homot should be taken as hyponymous to 'are$.

D. A FLOODING OF THE SUBTERRANEAN WATERS?

The meaning relationship between ha 'are$ and t;)hom in Gen 1 :2 also seems
to be hyponymous. The text reads:

40Kraus, Psalmen5, 1 1 43.

78 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

v. 1 b;,re'gft bara' '�1ohfm 'et ha§§amayim w:�'et hii'ares

v. 2 w:�ha'ares hay:ltah tOhu wabOhU
w:�.{lo§ek 'a1-p:�n8 mhOm
w:�riil$ 't1ohfm m:�ra!Jepet 'a1-p:�n8 hammayim

Here t:>h om "ocean" is a part of ha 'are$ since the term hii 'are$, which
constitutes an antonymous or exclusive word pair together with
hanamayim in Gen 1 : 1 ,4 1 must refer to everything under the heaven.42 In
other words, the cosmology in vs. 1-2 is bipartite as in Ps 1 48 rather than
tripartite, describing the entire world in terms of "heavens and earth."
It should be noted that in v. 2 the term t;)h om rather than yam "sea"
appears. The term yam would constitute the third division of the tripartite
universe, "heaven/earth/sea." On the other hand, the "ocean" (t;)hom) and
its "waters" (hammiiyim) are never treated as the third division of the tri­
partite cosmology in the Old Testament, as noted above.
What this hyponymous word pair, ha 'are$ I/ t;)h om, refers to is
described in this passage by another pair of expressions, tohU wiibOhU /1
p oSek,43 "not yet" normal, i.e. "not yet productive and inhabitable and
without light. "44 However, the water (hamm ayim) of t;)hom s eemingly
covered all the "earth", as vs. 6ff. suggest, though in a normal situation the
ocean is under control and may not pass its limit (i.e. "its edge"45 piw in
Prov 8:29 or "boundary" g:>biil in Ps 1 04:9), as is also suggested by an
Akkadian expression, "the bolt, the bar of the sea" (Sigaru na!Jbalu
ti 'amtim) in the Atra-tJasis epic.46 As Millard notes, there is no hint of a

41Sometimes it is still suggested that Gen 1 : 1 is a later addition (by P) to the older source
which begins with v. 2. However, if this were the case, it would be strange that a Hebrew
creation narrative should begin with the present word order of v. 2, i.e. waw+NP VP,
without any temporal description. For a useful summary of various positions on the
interpretation of the initial verses, see G. J. Wenham, Genesis 1-15 (Word Bible
Commentary 1; Waco: Word Books, 1987), 1 1-13.
42 It is not necessary to posit that ha'are$ has different meanings in v. 1 and v. 2 (cf.
Wenham, Genesis 1-15, 15: "Compounded with 'heaven' it designates the whole cosmos,
whereas in v. 2 it has its usual meaning 'earth'."). J. Sailhammer, "Exegetical Notes:
Genesis 1 : 1 -2:4a," Trin.l 5 ( 1 984), 77, interprets Gen I : l-2:4a as "an introduction to the
author's view of the covenant at Sinai" and understands ·ere� (v. 2) as "land", i.e. the land
to Israel. However, a shift in focus from the totality of universe ("heaven and earth") in v. l
to the "earth" in v.2 does not necessarily result in a change of meaning for the term hii'iire$.
43V.2a and v. 2b constitute a chiastic parallelism; cf. Kselman, "The Recovery of Poetic
Fragments," 164, n. 1 3. See above p. 38.
44See above pp. 4 l ff.
45Dahood, "Proverbs 8, 22-3 1 : Translation and Commentary," 5 1 3.
46AH I i 1 5-16 (also cf. S v I , x rev i 6, 10, ii 4, I I , 1 8, 34). Note that in this context the
term ti'amtim is not personified but has an ordinary sense. Cf. Lambert & Millard, AH,
 4. The Earth-Waters Relationship in Gen 1 79

battle with the sea in this Akkadian expression, though it implies that "the
sea is an unruly element in need of control. "47
A similar but not identical earth-water relation in the context of
creation is also described in a bilingual version of the "Creation of the
World by Marduk" on a tablet of the Neo-Babylonian period, where the
initial state of the world is described both negatively and positively. In ll.
l-9 the state of "not yet" is explained in concrete terms:48

l) A holy house. a house of the gods in a holy place, had not been made;
2) A reed had not come forth, a tree had not been created;
3) A brick had not been laid, a brick mould had not been built;
4) A house had not been made, a city had not been built;
5) A city had not been made, a living creature had not been placed
(therein);
6) Nippur had not been made, Ekur had not been built;
7) Uruk had not been made, Eanna had not been built;
8) The Apsu had not been made, Eridu had not been built;
9) A holy house. a house of the gods, its dwelling, had not been made;

One may note that I. 1 and I. 9 constitute an inclusio, thus grouping this

1 66. See the previous chapter, p. 60.

A similar flooding situation is mentioned in several Akkadian texts. For example, a
Sumerian-Akkadian bilingual hymn to Nergal says:
ta a.ab.ba ki an e.da.ab.uS:
minii 5a tarn tu e�eta umallakum
"Was, womit man das Meer, die Erde fiir dich geflillt hat?"
Cf. I. Bollenriicher, "Gebete und Hymnen an Nergal," LSS 1/6 ( 1 904), 43 & 46; CAD,
M/1 ( 1 977), 176.
4 7A. R. Millard, "A New Babylonian 'Genesis' Story," TB 1 8 ( 1 967), 7. Note also his
comment: "If a parallel is to be sought in the biblical narrative it may be found in Genesis
1 :9." (p. 7)
4 8Translation is by A. Heidel, The Babylonian Genesis. 2nd ed. (Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1 95 1 ), 62. Also cf. L. W. King, The Seven Tablets of Creation. Vol. I:
English Translations, etc. (London: Luzac, 1 902) 1 30-133; R. W. Rogers, Cuneiform
Parallels to the Old Testament 2 (New York: Abingdon, 1 9 1 2, 1 926), 48; Bottero, Mythes
et Rites de Babylone, 303.
80 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

negative "not yet" description49 as a unified entity.so Then in ll. 1 0- 1 1 the

same initial state of the world is described positively as follows:

I 0) All the lands were sea;

1 1 ) The spring which is in the sea was a water pipe; 5 1

After this double description of the original state, the "creation" of the
world is finally mentioned in ll. 1 2ff. :

1 2) Then Eridu was made, Esagila was built . . . .

1 4) Babylon was made, Esagila was completed."

Though "the lands" matatu ( I 0) is not the cognate of Hebrew 'ere$ in

Gen 1 :2, the overall discourse structure between this Neo-Babylonian
"creation" story and Genesis I is similar:
( I ) Setting: a negative description - the earthnand was "bare" (i.e.
unproductive and uninhabited) and "not yet" the same as it exists now;
(2) Setting: a po sitive description - the "ocean-water" (tam tum
1/t;)hom) was covering the whole earth/land (matatu 1/ 'ere$);52
(3) Event: (Then) the earthnand became as it exists now.

However, while there are structural similarities between these two

stories, there is also a clear distinction in theme and purpose between the
two. In the Neo-Babylonian story, the particular cities such as Eridu and
Babylon are treated as the first created things. On the other hand, no

49For another myth which describes the initial situation in "not yet" terms, see the so-called
"Eridu Genesis", UET VI. 6 1 . lines 1'-17', though this myth as now preserved has no
description of a watery beginning like Enuma elish and others. Cf. T. Jacobsen, "The Eridu
Genesis," JBL 100 ( 1 98 1 ), 51 3-529; P. D. Miller, Jr., "Eridu, Dunnu, and Babe!: A
Study in Comparative Mythology," HAR 9 (1985), 233 & 244. See also below pp. 86ff.
on Gen 2:5ff.
50Bottero notes that the order Ekur (of Enlil) - Eanna (of Anu) - Eridu (of Ea) is the
reverse of their antiquity. In other words, the oldest city, Eridu, is mentioned last. See
Bottero, Mythes et Rites de Baby/one, 305. For the antiquity of Eridu, cf. also W. W.
Hallo, "Antediluvian Cities," JCS 23 (1970), 65-66.
5 1nap!Jar miitiitu tiimtumma If inu ga qirib tiimtim rii(umma. Cf. L. W. King, The Seven
Tablets of Creation. Vol. I, 1 32. Note also J. Bottero's translation, "Tous les territoires
ensemble n'etaient que Mer ! Lors (done) que le contenu de (cette) Mer (ne) formait (encore
qu')un fosse (?)", in Bottero, Mythes et Rites de Baby/one, 303.
52
LI. 10 & 1 1 are sometimes interpreted as "le Chaos originel" like Enuma elish; cf.
Bottero, Mythes et Rites de Baby/one, 306f. It is clear from the context that tiimtum "sea" is
not "the enemy of creation" but simply a term for "a mass of water", which is not
personified like Tiamat in Enuma elish. But, even in Enuma elish, the mingling of Apsfi
and liamat was orderly; see p. 60, n. 70.
 4. The Earth-Waters Relationship in Gen 1 81

particular city names appear a s God's creation i n the story o f Gen I , since
in the Genesis stories, unlike the Mesopotamian stories, "the building of the
cities . . . is a purely human enterprise" (cf. Gen 4 : 1 7 , 1 0: 1 0-12, 1 1 : 1 9) .5 3
-

Excursus: Structure of Enuma elish 1 1-9

The discourse structure of the initial section of Enuma elish, Ee I 1 -9 may

be analyzed as follows:54

1 ) When above the heaven was not named;

2) below the earth was not called by (its) name,

3) But as forss Apsfi the primeval, their begetter,

4) (and) the craftsman,56 Ti'amat, she who gave birth to them all,
5 ) their waters57 were being mingled58 together;
6) But no pasture land had been formed; no reed marsh was seen59;

53Miller, "Eridu, Dunnu, and Babel," 239.

54The translation (with emphases by the present author) given here is based on Heidel's
1951 version but is revised in the light of recent developments. Cf. Heidel, The Babylonian
Genesis. 2nd ed., 1 8. For the most recent treatments of these lines, see H. L. J.
Vanstiphout, "Enuma eli�, tablet i:3," NABU ( 1 987/4), 52-53; W. L. Moran, "Eniima eli�
I 1-8," NABU ( 1 9 8 8 /1), 1 5-16.
55Moran, "Eniima eli� I 1-8," 15-1 6 notes that the -ma of Apsu-ma "can only mark the
grammatical predicate. " This "(existential) predicate" -ma may be used here for
topicalization like the Ugaritic existential panicle w ("and"). For a similar understanding of
its syntax, see King, The Seven Tablets of Creation. Vol. I, 3.
56Cf. CAD, Mlz ( 1977), 197. Cf. Heidel, The Babylonian Genesis. 2nd ed., 1 8 who takes
Mummu as a separate entity in this line and translates: Mummu, (and) Ti'amat, she who
gave birth to them all." (cf. Ee 1:30, etc.)
57As Vanstiphout notes, A.MES-�unu "their waters" is to be taken as nominative in the light
of a variant reading mu-u-�u-nu.
58Moran suggests that the Akk. verb i-!Ji-qu-u should be taken as i!Jiqqii with a durative
sense, rather than as i!Jiqii.
59Cf. AHw, 1223. Moran, following Held and Wilcke, suggests the verb �e ·u "to matt,
stuff, lay out" and translates the line as follows: "No solid sward was with thickets
matted." However, taking gipiira and �u�a as resultatives (objects) of the verbs, the line 6
might be better translated literally as follows:
"(But) into a pasture land they (= their waters) had not yet congealed;
nor as a marsh land were they recognizable."
Note that the verb ka$iiru can be used with a liquid like "oil" and "blood" (e.g. Ee VI 5 cf.
CAD, E, 342) in the sense of "to congeal" or "to coagulate"; the same verb is used with
82 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

7) When none of the gods had (yet) appeared;

8) they had ll.Q1 been called by (their) names; (their) destinies had ll.Q1
been fixed,

9) (Then) were the gods created within them (ibbanO-ma ilanii qiriMun).

Here, as Moran notes, in lines 1-8 predication is through nominals,

statives, and the "durative" verb i!Jiqqii, all of which are "an apt description
of event-less flux ." Certainly, seven negatives, which may well mark the
completeness of "absence and negation", in lines 1-2 & 6-8 are used to
describe the initial situation of the universe as "not yet", like other
"creation" myths as noted above. In lines 3-5, the same initial situation is
described positively, as in lines 1 0-1 1 of the Neo-Babylonian version of the
"Creation of the World by Marduk." Then, "only in line 9, with the
creation of the gods, do we meet a punctive, and it is fronted. With ibbanO­
ma we enter time and narrative sequence. "60
To summarize, the overall structure of Enuma elish I I ff. is as follows:
( I ) Setting: a negative description - lines 1 -2 & 6-8 (seven times "not
yet")
(2) Setting: a positive description - lines 3-5 ("waters")
(3) Event - "(Then) were the gods created . . . " (line 9).
Thus, the discourse structure of the initial section of this "creation" epic
is similar to that of the Neo-Babylonian "creation" story and Genesis I .
However, there is a difference in theme and purpose. While the latter two
stories are concerned with the initial state of the earth or land, the initial
section of Enuma elish is concerned with the creation of gods and goddesses
and no reference is made to the earth-water relationship, for the primeval
waters, Apsu and Tiamat, in Enuma elish are understood as having existed
without any relationship with the "earth."
In Gen I the earth in v . 2 is simply a part of the created cosmos

"cloud" in Ee V 49; cf. AHw, 456f.; CAD, K (197 1 ), 260 & 262; B. Landsberger & J. V.
Kinnier Wilson, "The Fifth Tablet of Enuma EIB," JNES 20 (1961), 158f. Cf. also R.
Labat, "Les origins et la formation de la terre dans le poeme Babylonien de la creation,"
Studia Biblica et Orientalia. Vol. Ill: Oriens Antiquus (AnBi 12; Roma: Pontificio Istituto
Biblico, 1959), 2 1 4.
Note that the (marsh) land is understood as a product of the waters in this myth; cf. "Water
came first, and gave binh to Eanh" (W. G. Lamben, "Kosmogonie," RIA 6 [ 1980-83],
2 1 8-222); see below p. 120 on the creation of a marsh land in Gen 2:6f. In an Egyptian
creation myth, Atum-Re is described as having begun his creation "upon a primeval hillock
arising out of the abysmal waters, Nun" (J. A. Wilson, "Another Version of the Creation
by Atum," ANET, 3-4).
60Moran, "Eniima elf� I 1-8," 15.
 4. The Earth-Waters Relationship in Gen 1 83

("heaven and earth" in v. 1 ) and refers to everything under the heaven,

including the subterranean waters. However, the earth was totally covered
by waters and the dry land was "not yet" formed (or seen) until v. 9 where
God said: "Let the waters from under the heaven be gathered to one place
and let the dry land appear." Unlike the cosmology in Enuma elish and
other ancient myths, the land in Gen 1 :9f. was not a product of the
primeval water, hence a part of the water, but a product of the divine fiat
by which God gathered the waters from under the heaven "to one place",
i.e. as "seas", which is a part of the earth.61

6 1 According to F. I. Andersen, "the time information . . . (Genesis 1 : 1 -2; cf. Genesis

2:4b-6) describes the situation before and up to the moment when the story commences."
V. 3 is the beginning of the "story", i.e. the mainline narrative. He says: " When the story
begins (in verse 3), darkness and water already exist. Nothing is said, one way or the
other, about how they came to be there, and no inference whatsoever can be made, from the
text, that the primal substances were not originally produced by God." Cf. F. I. Andersen,
"On Reading Genesis 1-3," in M. P. O'Connor & D. N. Freedman (eds.), Backgrounds
for the Bible (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1987), 1 4 1 .
 Chapter 5

THE EARTH IN GEN 2

It is basically clear that the general situation of the earth described in Gen
2:5-6 is a "not yet productive" earth. Some scholars have interpreted this
non-productive earth as a "dry chaos", J's equivalent of P's "watery chaos
in 1 :2." For example, Schmidt thinks that Gen 2:5 describes "Chaos" before
"Schopfung" in 2:7 . I However, since according to our analysis in the
previous chapters, the initial situation of the earth and its relationship with
the t;)hom-water in Gen I :2 has nothing to do with a " watery chaos" or a
chaotic situation as such, explaining the dry earth in Gen 2:5-6 as a "dry
chaos" seems to be totally misleading. In the following sections, we will
deal with the structure of the Hebrew text of Gen 2:5-6 as a whole and
discuss some etymological problems of such terms as 'ed and 'eden.

THE EARTH IN A BARE STATE

Judging from the discourse analysis of the narrative story in Gen 2:4-4:26,
2:4 as a whole is a temporal description ("when"), while 2 :5-6 is a
SETTING for the first stated EVENT ( wayyi$er YHWH '�Johim "the Lord
God formed") in 2:7, just as 1 : I is a temporal description ("In the
beginning") while 1 :2 is a SETTING for the first stated EVENT ( wayyo 'mer
'�Johim "God said") in 1 :3.2 Like 1 :2, the SETTING in 2:5-6 describes the

1W. H . Schmidt, Die Schopfungsgeschichte der Priesterschrift: Zur Uberlieferungs­

geschichte von Genesis 1 :l-2:4a und 2:4b-3:24. 2., iiberarbeitete und erweitene Auflage
(Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1967), 197.
2For a brief summary of discourse analysis with bibliographies see W. R. Bodine,
"Linguistics and Philology in the Study of Ancient Near Eastern Languages," in D. M.
Golomb (ed.), "Working with No Data": Semitic and Egyptian Studies Presented to
Thomas 0. Lambdin (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1987), 5 1 -54; cf. F. I. Andersen, SBH,
18f. On the Genesis stories, see Andersen, "On Reading Genesis 1-3," in M. O'Connor &
86 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

initial state of the earth, which is in a close relationship with the waters.
Before we proceed to discussion of the earth itself, let us analyze the
structure of these two verses.

1 . Structure of Gen 2 :5-6

W;lkOJ �f"Q ha��iideh (erem yihyeh bii_Mg

W;lkOJ-'e�eb ha��iideh (erem yi$miip
ki 16 ' himpr YHWH '�lohim 'al-hii'iires
W;l'iidiim 'ayin Ja'i1b6d 'et-ha'idiimiih
W;l'ed ya'ileh min-hii'iir�
w;lhigqiih 'et-ko/-p;lne-hii'ldiimiih

"No shrub of the field had yet appeared on the �;

no plant of the field had yet sprung up.
- The Lord God had not sent rain on the earth -
No man was there to till the .!.i\ru:!..
Cd-water was coming up3 from the earth
and watered the whole surface of the .!.i\ru:!.. "

Recent Bible translations are divided between ( 1 ) the position which

takes W;}'adam 'ayin la'i1b0d 'et-ha 'i1damah "No man was there to till the
land" as a part of the ki-clause and (2) that which takes it as outside of the
ki-clause.4 The former position attributes the lack of vegetation not only to
the lack of "rain" but also to the absence of "man"; the latter only to the
lack of "rain."
Sclunidt, for example, takes position ( 1 ) and holds that v. 5b presents
"eine doppelte Begriindung" for the lack of si•p hassadeh " W ii s ten­
striiucher" (Gen 2 1 : 1 5, Job 30:4, 7) and 'eseb hassadeh "Feldkriiuter"

D. N. Freedman (eds.), Backgrounds for the Bible (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1 987),
1 37-150.; R. E. Longacre, "The Discourse Structure of the Flood Narrative," in G.
MacRae (ed.), Society of Biblical Literature 1976 Seminar Papers (Missoula: Scholars
Press, 1 976), 235-262; Joseph: A Story of Divine Providence - A Text Theoretical and
Textlinguistic Analysis of Genesis 37, and 39-48 (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, in press)
3Qr "used to come up", taking ya'ileh as having "frequentative force" (cf. S. R. Driver, A
Treatise on the Use of the Tenses in Hebrew [Oxford: Clarendon, 1 892], 128). However,
this yqtl-form verb may be taken as an old "preterite" and describe a state ("was coming
up") in the past in this SETI'ING.
"while NIV, which avoids translating the particle kf, and NAB take the former position ( 1 ),
NEB and JB take the latter (2).
 5. The Earth in Gen 2 87

(Gen 3 : 1 8 , Ps 1 04: 1 4 , 1 06 : 20, Dt 1 1 : 1 5 ) , i .e . "die Wild- und

Nutzpflanzen." 5 Westermann goes one step further in discussing the rela­
tionship between the lack of vegetation and the double "Begrtindung" and
argues that sfa/1 refers to wild plants which "need only rain for their
growth", while 'eseb refers to "cultivated plants which need man's care. "6
Wenham however distinguishes between "shrub" and "plant" in "whether
they may be eaten or not" and takes the latter as referring to both "wild and
cultivated plants", based on the other occurrences in 1 :29, 30 and 3 : 1 8.7
Thus the vegetation in Gen 2:5 has been classified as <wild - cultivated:> or
as <edible - inedible> by recent scholars.
Cassutos , who also takes position ( 1 ), thinks that sfa/1 refers to some type
of "thorns" in the light of qo$ W:Jdardar ( 3 : 1 8 )9 and interprets 2:5 as
describing the state of "no thorns" because of no rain and "no grain",
because of no man. He thus seems to classify the vegetation as <inedible>
<wild:> "thorns" and <edible> <cultivated> "grain."
However, these explanations based on structural understanding ( 1 ) are
not without difficulties. For one thing, it is hard to understand why the
author described both si•/1 and 'eseb as "of the field" while he described
man's function as tilling the "land." In other words, the primary concern of
man in his relationship with the earth is 'iidamah, not sadeh. If the term
sadeh refers to the wild uncultivated "field", in contrast to the " land"
( 'iidamah), the "shrub" and "plant" of the field should be taken as wild
plants which grow without man's efforts, regardless of edibility. In this
case, the inclusion of "No man was there to till the land" ( w:J 'adam 'ayin
la'abod 'et-ha 'iidamah) in the kf-clause would be unnecessary and even
contradictory.
Structurally position (2) seems to be the better supported: the clause

5Schmidt, Die SchOpfungsgeschichte der Priesterschrift, 196.

6C. Westennann, Genesis. I. Teilband: Genesis 1-1 1 (BKAT V I ; Neukirchen-Vluyn:
Neukirchener Verlag, 1974), 272 [ET 199] . Cf. D. Kidner, "Genesis 2:5, 6: Wet or Dry?"
TB 17 ( 1 966), 109 & n. 1 .
7G. J . Wenham, Genesis 1-15 (Word Bible Commentary 1 ; Waco: Word Books, 1987),
58.
s u . Cassuto, From Adam to Noah [Pan I of A Commentary o n the Book of Genesis]
(Jerusalem: Magnes, 196 1 , 1944 [ ori g .]) , 102.
9Cf. the Akkadian phrase gi!j!iU daddaru (C. J. Gadd, "Inscribed Prisms of Sargon 11 from
Nimrod," Iraq 1 6 [ 1 954], 192, 11. 52-53) in a Neo-Assyrian royal annal, which, Gadd
observed (p. 195), is "the almost verbal equivalent of QO!i w.xlardar (Gen. Ill, 1 8) in God's
curse upon the Garden after the Fall of Man, (also Hosea X,8)." Note that Akk. form gi!j!jU
developed from *qi��u. since Akk. words cannot have two of the phonemes, /q/, /�/ and /1/,
simultaneously (as pointed out to me by Prof. W. G. Lambert).
88 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

w� 'adiim 'ayin la'iibod 'et-ha 'iidamah goes with the sentence w� 'ed
ya'iiJeh min-hii 'are$ w�higqah 'et-kol-p�ne-ha 'iidamah, since both begin
and end with the same or similar sounds. On the other hand, both the
beginning and the end of the clause w�kol si•b hassadeh terem yihyeh
bii 'ares correspond to those of w�kol- 'eseb hassadeh terem yi$miib ki 16 '
himtir YHWH 'elohim 'al-ha 'ares. Moreover, the two subject matters in the
second section, "man" and " 'ed-water", are deeply involved with the land
( 'iidamah); those in the first, "shrubs" and "plants", are "of the field"
( sadeh) and are supposed to be "on the earth" ( ba 'iire$). 10
Thus, structurally vs. 5-6 are better divided into two halves: the first is
concerned with wild uncultivated plants, i.e. "shrub" and "plant", on the
earth ( 'ere$); the second with man who tills the land ( 'iidamah) and the
'ed-water which watered the land ( 'iidamah). In other words, Gen 2 :5-6
presents a twofold description of the earth: the first section [ v. 5a-5c]
speaks broadly about the unproductive and bare "earth" ( 'ere$) in which
even the wild plants were not yet growing because of the lack of rain; and
the second [vs. 5d-6b], more specifically about the "land" ( 'iidamah) which
has "no man to till it" andii is watered throughout by the 'ed-waters. I2 This
structure thus provides a clue to the meaning and purpose of the initial part
of this creation story.

2. "Earth", "Field" and "Land"

In the present context the "land" ( 'iidamah), which was watered throughout
by the 'ed-waters from the "earth" ( ere$). is seemingly contrasted to the
wild uncultivated "field" (sadeh), which requires rain-water for fertiliza­
tion. I 3 Thus Wenham explains: "Gen 2:5 therefore distinguishes two types

l OA similar "grammatical" structure has been suggested by G. Castellino, "Les origines de

la civilisation selon .1es textes bibliques et les textes cuneifonnes," Volume du Congress:
Strasbourg 1956 (SVT 4; Leiden: Brill, 1957), 125-126.
l iThe conjunction w:1 in the beginning of v. 6 is often translated as "but" (e.g. Wenham,
Genesis 1-15, 44 & 46), in keeping with a positive clause after three successive negative
clauses. See Andersen, SBH, 1 83 who lists Gen 2:6 as an example of "Antithesis after
negation."
12Schmidt thinks that v. 6 is in opposition to v. 5 and is set between "Chaos" (v. 5) and
"Creation" (v. 7). Cf. Schmidt, Die Schopfungsgeschichte der Priesterschrift, 197.
However, the shift of focus from the "earth" to the more specific area, the "land", occurs at
v. 5d, not with v. 6a.
1 3This threefold distinction of the earth is possibly in parallel with the Akkadian one, i.e.
"earth" CT$Ctu "field" $eru "land" miitu. Cf. Castellino, "Les origines de la civilisation,"
 5. The Earth in Gen 2 89

of land: open, uncultivated 'plain' or 'field,' the wilderness fit only for
animal grazing, and the dusty 'land' where agriculture is possible with irri­
gation and human effort." 1 4
While these tenns are semantically contrasted in Gen 2:5-6, struc­
turally, in the SETTING of this narrative, vs. 5-6, the subject matter (i.e.
the participant) switches from vegetation (i.e. "shrub" and "plant") to man
and the 'ed-water, and the location or stage of these participants shifts from
the "earth" ( 'ere$) to the "land" ( 'Miimiih) rather than from the wild un­
cultivated "field" (siideh) to the "land" ( '!diimiih) .
The tenn 'ere$ appears here right after the merismatic expression
"earth and heavens" 15 (v. 4b), like hii 'iire$ ( 1 :2) which follows immediately
after the expression "the heavens and the earth" (1 : 1 ). Hence, contextually,
the tenn 'ere$ can refer to everything which is under the heavens as in
1 :2 . 1 6 Thus, in 2:5-6 "earth" ( 'ere$) has a much wider semantic field than
the tenn 'Adiimiih, comprising both the surface of the earth,'7 which "the
LORD God sends rain" (2:5) from above, and the underground, where the
subterranean waters "come up" (2:6).18 In other words, what the tenn 'ere$
refers to includes what the tenn 'lidiimiih refers to 'lidiimiih is thus
-

hyponymous to 'ere$. 19
Therefore, the stage of the narrative setting in Gen 2:5-6 moves from
the wider area 'ere$ to the narrower area 'Adiimiih, from whose "dust"
( 'iipiir) "man" ( 'iidiim) is going to be fonned (cf. v. 7). This focusing (or
narrowing down) of the geographical area as the setting for the Eden
narrative is certainly the primary purpose of Gen 2:5-6. It should be noted
that the four "circumstantial" clauses initiated by W:)-noun phrases are not
mentioned in a chronological or sequential order like the wayqtl construc­
tion but rather in a topical order, i.e. "vegetation"-"man"-" 'ed-water" ,
with an emphasis on the 'ed which watered the whole surface of 'Miimiih.

121.
14Wenham, Genesis 1-15, 58.
15For the Ugaritic expression, ar$ w�mm, which is in the same word order, and other
examples, see above p. 69.
16See above pp. 77f.
17Here, the surface of the earth comprises both the "field" (siideh) and the "land"
( 'ildiimiih).
18See below, the following chapters.
19E. J. Young, Studies in Genesis One (Phillipsburg: Presbyterian and Reformed, n.d.),
63, n. 5 1 , also notes that the 'ildiimiih is "more restricted in reference" than 'ere$. See also
Wenham, Genesis 1-15, 58: "'land' comprises but a part of the earth." Note that the "field"
(siideh) is also a part of the earth.
90 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

And it is in such a well-watered land ( 'l1diimiih),20 specifically in Eden

( 'eden),21 that God planted a garden (gan in 2:8).
In the light of the above, in the initial part of Gen 2 one can identify a
threefold focusing or narrowing down of the geographical area: ( 1 ) from
'ere$ to 'l1diimiih, (2) from 'l1diimah to 'eden and (3) from 'eden to gan.
In other words, the garden, the main stage for this Eden narrative, is a part
of Eden, which is a part of the land, which is a part of the earth.

3. No Vegetation

Now the two terms for vegetation in v. 5 , i.e. "shrub" (sJ'a!l) and "plant"
( 'eseb), may be a merismatic word pair like "plant" ('eseb) and "tree"
( 'e$) in Gen 1 : 1 1 .22 In other words, si•p and 'eseb probably signify the
totality of vegetation which normally grows in the "field."
The totality of vegetation edible by man, i.e. "food", which is produced
by the earth is expressed in Atra-t:Jasis S iv 49,23 which reads:

[li]-bal-kat e�tu re-em-�11 Let the earth's womb be out of order,

�am-mu ia U-$a-a �u-u ia i-im-ro Let no vegetables shoot up,
no cereals grow.

In this text, Sammu "vegetables" and Su 'u "cereals"24 seem to constitute a

20Jt is interesting to note that Sumerian 4-dam, "settlement" (CA D , Nh [ 1980], 233) or
"lieu habit�" (RlA 6h....s [ 1983], 632), which constitutes a merismatic pair with uru "town"
to denote totality of human settlement, refers to a place "which is fructified with water," cf.
W. W. Hallo, "Antediluvian Cities," JCS 23 (1970), 58. The etymology of 4-dam is not
certain but Sji:iberg recently suggested that "a2-dam is a 'Canaanite', West-Semitic
loanword in Sumerian," in A. W. Sjoberg, "Eve and the Chameleon," in In the Shelter of
Elyon: Essays on Ancient Palestinian Life and Literature in Honor of G. W. Ahlstrom
(Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1984), 223. For a recent discussion on 'iidiim as "earth", see R. S.
Hess, " 'ADAM as 'skin' and 'eanh': an Examination of Some Proposed Meanings in
Biblical Hebrew," TB 39 (1988}, 141-149.
21 J n other words, Eden is a part of 'iidiimiih. Cf. Castellino, "Les origines de la
civilisation," 122. For etymology of Eden as a "well-watered" place, see below pp. 1 27ff.
22The Masoretic punctuation suggests that de�e' (Gen 1 : 1 1 , cf. 1 2) is a cognate accusative
of the verb tad�e· and means "vegetation" (cf. NIV). This term is then explained by
concrete terms, i.e. "plants" and "trees."
23Lamben & Millard, AH, 108f., also cf. 1 10f.; see above pp. 26f.
24Note the term �u 'u could be an Akk. cognate of Heb. si"/1, though Akk. �u·u "grain" is
attested only in later times, i.e. LB and NA, and could be an Aram. Lw. Cf. AHw, 1 294:
"eine Getreideart. " Also Ug. �Pt (KTU 1 . 1 00:65) might be related to Heb. si"f!; cf. M. C.
Astour, "Two Ugaritic Serpent Charms," JNES 27 ( 1 968), 25; Huehnergard, UVST, 96,
 5 . The Earth in Gen 2 91

merismatic word pair and signify the totality of edible vegetation, which
the earth (er$etu) produces under a normal situation. Also in Enuma elish
VII:2, where the god Marduk is called "creator of barley and flax, who
causes the green vegetable to shoot up" (ba-nu-u �e-am u qe-e mu-�e­
�u-u ur-qi-t[i]), the totality of vegetation useful to man seems to be
expressed by �e 'u(m), qii and urqitu.2s
Thus, while there is a difference in the nature of vegetation in these
examples, it is possible that "shrub" and "plant" in Gen 2: 5 are also a
merismatic word pair, which signifies the totality of vegetation in the
"field", and hence that the first half of vs. 5-6 describes the unproductive
and "bare" state of the earth without any vegetation. This state of the "bare"
earth is virtually the same as that of the earth which was tohii wabOhii (Gen
1 :2), though in Gen 2:5-6 more concrete terms are used for describing the
initial unproductive state of the earth and the water was covering only a
part of the earth, i.e. the "land" ( 'Mamah) .

4. No Man to "Till" the Land

Now it is very interesting to note that the "unproductiveness" of the earth is

expressed not only in terms of "no vegetation" but also in terms of "no
people" in the Old Babylonian version of the Atra-t:Jasi:s epic:

Atra-Hasi:s Epic 11 iv 4-6: 26

4> u-ul ul-da er-$(!-twn re-e[m-$a]

5) $Q-am-mu (J-ul u-�i-a [ . . ] 6) ni-$u (J-ul am-ra-[tu41

"The womb of earth did not bear,

Vegetation did not sprout [ . . ] People were not seen [ . . ] "27

n. 6 1 .
25Cf. W . G . Lambert & S. B. Parker, Enuma Eli$: The Babylonian Epic of Creation - the
Cuneiform Text (Oxford: Clarendon, 1966), 4 1 ; CAD, Q ( 1 982), 286 (on qu); AHw, 1222
(on $e u[m]) & 1432 (on urqitu).
'

26Lambert & Millard, AH, 78f. See above pp. 27f.

27Though Lambert & Millard analyse I. 6, nHu u ul am-ra-((a)-ma], as a monocolon, it
-

seems that I. 5 and I. 6 constitute the second half of bicolon, which as a whole corresponds
to I. 4, since the column iv (D) is always composed with bicola and a monocolon normally
appears in a transitional point, e.g. II ii 20, in poetry (For monocola in Ps 1 8 :2, 23: 1 ,
1 39: 1 and i n Ug. epics, see D . T. Tsumura, "The Problem of Childlessness in the Royal
Epic of Ugarit: An Analysis of Krt [KTU 1 . 14:1] : 1-25," in T. Mikasa [ed.], Monarchies
and Socio-Religious Traditions in the Ancient Near East [Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz,
92 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

This "unproductiveness" of the earth has been discussed above in rela­

tionship to the term nabalkutu in the Assyrian version. In Gen 1 this situa­
tion is expressed positively ("still") by toh u wiibOhii, which might be
indirectly related to nabalkutu "to become unproductive." In Gen 2, on the
other hand, it is described negatively ("not yet") in more concrete terms,
i.e. "no vegetation" and "no man", as in the Old Babylonian version, though
the term 'iidiim in the Genesis context bears a more specific meaning than
the Akkadian ni�ii.2s

In conclusion, the initial state of the earth in Gen 2:5--6 is described as

unproductive in concrete terms, i.e. "no shrub" and "no plant" as well as
"no man to till the land." In other words, the earth in Gen 2:5--6 was also
the "bare" earth, which had "no vegetation" and "no man", like the earth in
Gen 1 :2 which is described as tOhu wiibOhu, though the earth-water
relationship is different in the two passages.29

1984], 1 1-20). Note the following correspondence: S iv 58b-59: !ibbalkat er!jl!tU rem!Ja! ::
l�u ul U$1i �ii ul i 'rul = 8 : : 9 /1 AH 1 1 iv 4-6: !ul ulda er$f!tum rem!Jal :: I!Jammu u/
�a [ 1 ni� ul amriima/ 8 : : 1 1.
=

28While the Hebrew 'adlim refers only to the male "man" in the Gen 2 creation story (cf. v.
1 5: "to till the garden"), the "man" in the context which describes initial state of the earth
(vs. 5-6) may possibly mean "man" in the generic sense, i.e. "mankind." Cf. R. S. Hess,
"Splitting the Adam: the Usage of 'ADAM in Genesis i-v," VJ [forthcoming].
29See below pp. 1 17ff.
 Chapter 6

THE WATERS IN GEN 2

A. RAIN AND 'ed

It has been noted in the previous chapter that the unproductive state of the
earth in Gen 2:5-6, which is described concretely in terms of "no shrub of
the field" and "no plant of the field" on the earth, is explained as due to the
lack of rain. Rain of course comes from above (i.e. heaven) and is
described as being caused by the Lord God (i.e. "The Lord God had not
sent rain on the earth"). On the other hand, 'ed is described as "coming up"
(ya'illeh) from the earth ( 'ere$), either from the surface of the earth or
from underground . ! Thus, 'ed, the water from below, is clearly distin­
guished from the rain water, the water from above,2 in Gen 2:5-6.
In the situation of Gen 2:5-6, however, the rain-water does not play a
significant role. On the other hand, the 'ed-"water" is actively involved in
the initial state of the earth, which is described negatively in terms of the
"not yet" normal (or productive) earth. But, unlike the earth-water rela­
tionship in Gen I :2, the 'ed-water in 2:6 does not cover the whole earth.
The author carefully distinguishes the "land" ( 'Jldiimiih), which was
watered by the 'ed-water, from the "earth" ( 'ere$), from which the 'ed­
water was coming up.
The etymology of 'ed has been hotly disputed by scholars and is not
settled yet. Let us examine various suggestions for its etymology in detail
and place the term in its proper Biblical context.

I The term 'ere$ can mean one of the following: ( \ ) the surface of the eanh, (2) the
underground, (3) the netherworld. See above pp. 68f.
2Jt is notewonhy that the Genesis account of the garden of Eden (2:4-3:24) does not give to
the rain any role in bringing fenility to the land. In Canaanite religion it is Baal, the god of
rain and storm, who brings fenility to the land. See below p. 128 for rain-gods who bring
abundance to the land.
94 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

B. ETYMOLOGY OF 'ed

The term 'ed has been rendered in various ways since the earliest transla­
tions; e.g. LXX, Vulg., Peshitta & Aquila translated 'ed as "spring" or
"fountain" (LXX: 1Tll"Yfl ). On the other hand Aramaic versions rendered it
as 'aniina' "(rain-)cloud" or "vapour, mist. "3
Modem English versions translate the term as "mist" (KJV; RSV; NEB
note; NIV note), "flood" (RSV note; NEB), "water" (JB ) or "streams"
(NIV). These versions reflect the modem trend in etymological discussions
of 'ed. While the traditional meaning "mist" is still preserved as an option,
the emphasis has shifted from "mist" to "flood" and from "flood" to
"streams."

"vapour, mist"

This has been the traditional rendering of the term 'ed since the earliest
times of B ible translation. For example, the Targumim, both Onqelos and
Jonathan, translate it as 'ilnana ' in Job 36:27 as well as in Gen 2:6. LXX
translates it as VE<P€X.11v "a mass of clouds" in Job 36:27. As Barr points out,
"it is, indeed, precisely this passage that caused traditional sources to
understand the Gen 2:6 passage as 'mist' from the beginning. "4
However, not only does this rendering lack any etymology,5 but it also

3Cf. M. Ellenbogen, Foreign Words in the Old Testament: their Origin and Etymology
(London: Luzac & Co., 1962), 13.
41. Barr, "Limitations of Etymology as a Lexicographical Instrument in Biblical Hebrew,"
Transactions of the Philological Society (1983), 50.
5Recently M. Gorg suggested y1d. t as an Eg. etymology for the term 'eel and interpreted it
as "dew." Cf. M. Gorg, "Eine heterogene Uberlieferung in Gen 2.6," BN 3 1 ( 1 986), 19-
24. However, his view is not convincing either etymologically or contextually. For one
thing, Eg. y1d.t involves two consonants, i.e. /y/ and f/, while Hebrew has only one, and
Ar. 'iyiid "Dunst", as cited by him, would suggest that the second consonant of the
Egyptian term was preserved as /y/ throughout the centuries. On the other hand, if the Heb.
borrowed the Egyptian word earlier (i.e. before New Kingdom), it would not have been
from Eg. y1d.t, for the Eg. term would have corresponded to Heb. *yrd or *yid before
New Kingdom. Cf. A. Erman & H. Grapow, WAS, I, 36. Note also that they suggest the
meanings, "Tau des Himmels" and "Wasser", which should be distinguished from yd.t
"Duft." Moreover, "dew" would not go up from the "earth." Since no rain was yet on the
earth, no dew should be expected on the earth; cf. a Ug. expression, bl . ti . bl rbb "No
dew, no rain" (KTU 1 . 1 9 [ 1 Aqht]:I:44) and a name and an epithet of one of Baal's
 6. The Waters in Gen 2 95

presents some contextual problems. Cassuto for example notes that "it is not
from the earth but from the water that vapour rises" and "vapour waters
the ground only through rain ."6 Hence it is argued that "vapour" is not
suitable for the initial situation of the earth without "rain", the water from
the above. On the other hand, one might suppose that this "vapour, mist"
came up ultimately from the subterranean waters, the water below.7 But,
ha 'ii.re$ does not mean "cosmic reservoir", even though it sometimes refers
to the underworld.
Barr suggests that the vapour might have "damped the surface, but it did
not provide enough water for the plants to grow." "Perhaps the writer dis­
counted the irrigative value of mist: for him only rain was enough to
sustain proper plant life, and especially a garden."s But it is hard to hold
that the author discounted the "irrigative value" of 'ed which he describes
as "watering the whole surface of the land."

Three possible etymologies of this term have been proposed, Semitic,

Sumerian via Akkadian, and Sumerian directly.

I . Semitic Etymology?

No satisfactory Semitic etymology has been suggested for the term 'ed.
BDB simply notes that the derivation is dubious, though it cites an Arabic
'ada "be strong" as a cognate.

Dahood's proposal

Recently Dahood argued for a Semitic etymology for 'ed, which he pro­
posed to translate as "rain cloud" in the light of Eblaite month name 1-du.
He translates the verse as "So he made a rain cloud come up from the

daughters in Ug.: fly bt rb "Dew-girl, daughter of rain" (KTU 1 .4 [5 1 ] :1: 1 8 [ 17], IV:56,
etc., see Gordon, UT, 406 & 482).
6U. Cassuto, From Adam to Noah [Part I of A Commentary on the Book of Genesis]
(Jerusalem: Magnes, 196 1 , 1944 [orig.]), 103.
7Dahood thinks that 'ed refers to the rain clouds, which "ascend from the cosmic reservoir
under the earth," cf. M. Dahood, "Eblaite 1-duand Hebrew 'ed, 'Rain Cloud'," CBQ 43
(198 1 ), 536.
8 Barr, "Limitations of Etymology as a Lexicographical Instrument," 5 1 .
96 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

nether ocean, and it watered all the surface of the ground."9

According to him, since the terms 'ed and 1-du are "associated with
rain", the terms should mean "rain cloud" which, he thinks, "admirably
suits" the texts where the terms appear, i .e. Gen 2:6, Job 36:27 , the
personal name matred (Gen 36:39; 1Chr 1 :50) and the new calendar of
Ebla. And, for etymology, he cites Arabic 'ada ('wd) "to bend, burden,
weigh down" and 'awda "burden, load", which he thinks "can easily be
reconciled with the proposed definition of 'ed as 'rain cloud' or 'mass of
clouds', which give the impression of an overhanging burden." IO
However, his argument is not well-founded. First, he ignores the
Masoretic distinction between two terms, 'ed and 'ed. The latter is always
spelled with yod and very likely belongs to a "different word type" from
the former. And even for 'ed ( -y-d), "calamity", this etymology from
'

Arabic *'wd is nothing but "a conceivable speculation" as Barr notes."

Secondly, his major argument that Eblaite 1-du is "associated with rain"
and hence Hebrew 'ed means "rain cloud" is not certain. For one thing, the
reading of the Eblaite month name itu NI.DU as itu 1-du has not been estab­
lished and a different reading 1-tUm is now suggested by Pettinato in his
new treatment of the calendar of Ebla.l 2 Moreover, the correspondence
between the names of the old calendar and those of the new is not simple.
The fact that itu ga-Sum " Month of Rain" of the old calendar has a
"celestial nature" does not support the contention that 1-du in the new
calendar also has a "celestial nature." l 3
Thirdly, his translation, "So he made a rain cloud come up . . . ", is not
syntactically acceptable for Gen 2:6, even though the verb can be taken as
hiphil.1 4 With this rendering one would expect the Hebrew text to be
something like wayya 'ifleh 'ed. Also the translation "the nether ocean" for
'ere$ is not acceptable; t�hom(ot) would be expected for that meaning. ' s

9Dahood, "Eblaite i-duand Hebrew 'ed, 'Rain Cloud'," 536.

IODahood, "Eblaite i-duand Hebrew 'ed, 'Rain Cloud'," 538.
1 1 Barr, "Limitations of Etymology as a Lexicographical Instrument," 50f.
12G. Pettinato, The Archives of Ebla: an empire Inscribed in Clay (Garden City, N. Y.:
Doubleday, 198 1 ), 1 50: itu i-tum "month of the taxes." See also W. H. Shea, "The
Calendars of Ebla. Part I. the Old Calendar," AUSS 18 (1980), 1 27-1 37 ; "The Calendars
of Ebla. Part 11. the New Calendar," AUSS 19 ( 198 1 ), 59-69; "The Calendar of Ebla. Part
Ill: Conclusion," AUSS 19 (198 1), 1 1 5-1 26; D. Charpin, "Mari et le calendrier d'Ebla,"
RA 76 (1982), 2.
13Dahood, "Eb1aite i-du and Hebrew 'ed, 'Rain Cloud'," 537, n. 1 3.
14Dahood thinks that "Yahweh is preferably understood here as the agent." Cf. Dahood,
"Eblaite 1-duand Hebrew 'ed, 'Rain Cloud'," 536.
ISSee above p. 59 on this term.
 6. The Waters in Gen 2 97

Moreover, his translation of l�'edo (Job 36:27) as "from his rain cloud" is
based on his interpretation of Gen 2:6 and hence cannot be accepted.
Fourthly, if the Masoretic vocalization ma{red were the assimilated
form from ma{ar + 'ed ("Rain from the Rain Cloud"),1 6 one would expect
the form m�tared < m�tar-'ed < matar + 'ed.17 Moreover, the LXX tran­
scription MaTpaEL6 in Gen 36:39 may reflect an older spelling, but that
would have to be spelling matra 'ed, not m�far'ed. 18 This form ma{ra 'ed
might change to ma{rad ( < ma{ra-ed < ma{ra 'ed), as reflected in the LXX
transcription MaTpa8 in 1 Chr 1 :50, but not to matred.
Thus, the revived claim for a Semitic etymology for the term 'ed in the
l ight of Eblaite and Arabic has no solid foundation. The only other
possibility is to seek a non-Semitic etymology for this term. In fact, a
Sumerian connection has been suggested by many scholars since the end of
the last century. Some suggest a Sumerian loan word into West Semitic via
Akkadian and others, a Sumerian loan word directly into West Semitic.

2. Sumerian loan word via Akkadian?

The Akkadian word edu "flood", which is a Sumerian loan word from
A .D E . A , was the first candidate for the origin of the Hebrew term 'ed,
adopted by A. Dillmann (1 892) 1 9 , Friedrich Delitzsch ( 1 896),20 P. Leander
( 1 903),21 H . Zimmem ( 1 9 1 5),22 H . Gunkel ( 1 9 1 7), Gesenius-Buhl.23

16Dahood, "Eblaite i-duand Hebrew 'ed, 'Rain Cloud'," 537.

17There would be loss of /'/ and the subsequent shift of accent.
1 8Baumgartner, HAL, 544, citing Meyer. According to Meyer, ,.,no, LXX MaTpane.
..

Danach ist Wincklers Deutung ,M"1nt.l 'Regen der Wolke' (Gesch. lsr. I 1 93, 1) wohl
richtig." Cf. E. Meyer, Die lsraeliten und ihre Nachbarstiimme (Halle: Max Niemeyer,
1906), 375, n. I .
19Dillmann, Die Genesis (K. Hb. 1 1 ; Leipzig, 1 892), 52 cited by E. A. Speiser, " 'ed in the
Story of Creation," BASOR 140 ( 1 955), 9, n. 2 [=Oriental and Biblical Studies: Collected
Writings of E. A . Speiser, eds. by J. J. Finkelstein & M. Greenberg (Philadelphia:
University .�f Pennsylvania, 1967), 19, n. 2]; 0. Kaiser, Die mythische Bedeutung des
Meeres in Agypten, Ugarit und Israel (BZA W 78; Berlin: Alfred Topelmann, 1959), 1 0 1 ,
n. 7 1 .
20Cited by Speiser, " 'ed i n the Story of Creation," 9 , n . 2.
21 P. Leander, Ober die Sumerischen Lehnworter in Assyrischen (Uppsala Universitets
Arsskrift 1903; Uppsala: Akademiska Bokhandeln, 1903), 19.
22Zimmem, AFw, 44: "akk. edii Flut, Hochwasser: > viell. hebr. 'ed Gen. 2,6; Hi. 36,27
(oder gar < sum. id Fluss?)."
23Cited by Kaiser, Die mythische Bedeutung des Meeres, 1 0 1 , n. 7 1 .
98 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

However soon after, another term id "river" was suggested by scholars such
as P. Dhorme ( 1 907)24 and E. Sachsse ( 1 921 ).25 But this view was not so
popular as the first view until W. F. Albright ( 1 939)26 reinforced it with
new information. He was soon followed by scholars such as U. Cassuto
( 1 944 ).27 However, E. A. Speiser ( 1 955)28 supported the edu connection
once again. Since then, there have been two camps with regard to the
Mesopotamian connection of the Hebrew term 'ed.
While Albright's view ( 'ed = id) is supported by a majority of scholars
such as G. Castellino ( 1 957), P. Reymond ( 1 958), G. Fohrer ( 1 963), E. J.
Young, G. von Rad, W. H. Schmidt ( 1 967), M. Sreb0 ( 1 970), P. K.
McCarter ( 1 973), C. Westermann ( 1 974), P. D. M iller, Jr. ( 1 985), G. J.
Wenham ( 1 987), etc.,29 Speiser's view ( 'ed = edu) is followed by 0. Kaiser
( 1 959), M. Ellenbogen ( 1 962), W. von Soden ( 1 965), W. Baumgartner
( 1 967), etc.3o

A lbright's view (1 939): id ( ID ) => 'ed

According to Albright, the Hebrew term 'ed should be identified with Id,

24P. Dhorme, R B (1907), 274, cited b y Speiser, '"ed in the Story of Creation," 9 , n.
2.
25Ed. S achsse, "Der jahwistische Schopfungsbericht: ein Erkliirungsversuch," ZA W 39
( 1921), 281f. who interprets 'ed as "Kanalwasser. "
26W. F. AIbright, "The BabyIonian Maner in the Predeuteronomic Primeval History (JE) in
Gen 1 -1 1 , " JBL 58 ( 1939), 1 02f.
27Cassuto, From Adam to Noah, 104.
28Speiser, '"ed in the Story of Creation," 9-1 1 .
29G. Castellino, "Les origines d e l a civilisation selon les textes bibliques e t les textes
cun�iformes," Volume du Congress: Strasbourg 1 956 (SVT 4; Leiden: Brill, 1 957), 1 2 l f.;
P. Reymond, L'eau, sa vie, et sa signification dans /'ancien testament (SVT 6; Leiden:
Brill, 1958), 1 69; Young, Studies in Genesis One, 62, n. 50; G. von Rad, Genesis (OTL;
Philadelphia: Westminster, 1 9 6 1 , 1 963 1 972), 74; W. H . Schmidt, D i e
•..

Schopfungsgeschichte der Priesterschrift: Zur Uberlieferungsgeschichte von Genesis 1 :1-

2 :4a und 2:4b-3:24. 2., iiberarbeitete und erweiterte Auflage (Neukirchen-Vluyn:
Neukirchener Verlag, 1967), 197, n. 1; M. ScebJil, "Die hebriiischen Nomina 'ed und 'ed ­
zwei sumerisch-akkadische Fremdworter?" SI 24 (1970) 1 30--141 ; P. K. McCarter, "The
River Ordeal in Israelite Literature," HTR 66 ( 1 973), 403; C. Westermann, Genesis. I.
Teilband: Genesis 1 - 1 1 (BKAT Ill; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1974), 273;
P. D. Miller, Jr., "Eridu, Dunnu, and Babe!: A Study in Comparative Mythology," HAR 9
( 1 985), 239; Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis 1-15 (Word Bible Commentary 1 ; Waco: Word
Books, 1 987), 6, etc.
30Kaiser, Die mythische Bedeutung des Meeres, 102-104; Ellenbogen, Foreign Words in
the Old Testament, 1 3; von Soden, AHw I ( 1965), 1 87; Baumgartner, HAL ( 1 967), 1 1 ,
etc.
 6. The Waters in Gen 2 99

"the subterranean fresh-water stream" in the light of "the name of the chief
god of the Middle Euphrates region, . . . the river-god Id, perhaps also
pronounced Edda by the Semites."JJ He supports his view by citing other
examples of the name of the river god Id in CT, XII, 26, 3 8 1 28, col. IV­
VI, 1 6; CT, XXIV, 1 6, 23; CT, XXIX, 46, 23; Assyrian Law-code, col. Ill,
93, etc., d (A-ENGUR ) l-id as well as the personal name 1-dJ-dJd. While he
admits that it "is probable that the [divine] name was also read as Nfiru in
Accadian," he says that "there is no clear evidence pointing to this alterna­
tive. "32 Thus, he holds that the divine name io was read as Id in Akkadian.
Then he says, "The deity Id appears both as masculine and as feminine;
it represents the fresh-water river in the underworld, whence all terrestrial
rivers flow and whence the fertility of the Mesopotamian plain is derived."
After noting "a hymn to the river of creation" and the "cult of the
masculine Id" in Mari and in the Euphrates region, Albright concluded: "It
is to the Id, the subterranean source of fresh water, that the 'ed of Gen 2:6
must be traced."33 Thus, he sees a close connection between the divine name
Id and the Hebrew 'ed, both as the source of fertility.34
Soon after, Cassuto ( 1 944) followed Albright's view, claiming that the
term 'ed, like the divine name Id, refers to "the waters of the deep
generally and to all the springs issuing therefrom." This view, according to
Cassuto, accords with the statement in Gen 2: I 0 where "the garden was
watered by a river emanating from a spring, and not by rain." And "this
blissful state of affairs prevailing in the garden of Eden and the similar
circumstances obtaining in Egypt served as classic examples of a land
blessed with fertility . . . (xiii 10). "3 5

Speiser's view (1 955 ) : edu (A. DE. A ) => 'ed

In response to Albright's view, Speiser reiterated the view that the Hebrew

3 1 Albright, "The Babylonian Matter," 1 02.

32Albright, "The Babylonian Matter," 1 02f., n. 25.
33Jbid.
34Recently the river goddess ldu in the Harab Myth has been identified with Hebrew '&I by
P. D. Miller, Jr., "Eridu, Dunnu, and Babel," 239. He says: "As in Genesis 2, the: first
thing that is done in the creation is the creation of water, though in Genesis 2 it is >weet
water to water the plants ( '&/) and in Harab it is sea (Tamtu). But in the Harab myth, river,
i.e., Idu ( Heb. '&/), comes in the next generation as daughter of sea (Tamtu)." (p. 238f.)
=

However, Gen 2 has nothing to do with the "creation of water" as such. See below pp.
1 1 3ff. on Sumerian etymologies of the Hebrew term '&/.
35Cassuto, From Adam to Noah, 1 04.
100 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

'ed should be compared with Akkadian edu.

( I ) First, he points out that generally the Sumerian sign fo was read in
Akkadian as niiru, not as id, and "could not, as such, have led to Heb. 'ed. "
And "id, when so pronounced, had a specific cultic bearing, notably so in
the Assyrian Laws."36

(2) Secondly, he notes that "the passage in Genesis suggests subterranean

waters, a meaning that is not automatically implicit in the hitherto known
values of Akk. edu," i.e. "flood, waves, swell." So he tries to show in the
rest of his article that edu also meant the subterranean waters like mllu,
thus supporting the 'ed = edu equation on a semantic basis. In his Genesis
commentary (1 964) he reconfirms his view and says: "The sense would be
that of an underground swell, a common motif in Akkadian literary
compositions. "37 He translates Gen 2:6 as "instead, a flow would well up
from the ground and water the whole surface of the soil."3B

Speiser's view has been supported by two major dictionaries, one

Akkadian and the other Hebrew. AHw I ( 1 965), 1 87 mentions his article
and relates the Hebrew 'ed to the Akkadian edu, which is however defined
as "(bedrohliche) Wasserflut, Wogenschwall." Baumgartner, HAL ( 1 967),
1 1 follows Speiser's view more thoroughly and translates 'ed (Gen 2:6) as
"d. unterirdische Siisswasserstrom, Grundwasser(?)" while he translates
'edo (Job 36:27) as "d. himmlische Strom ."

Sreb�

However, Srebjll39 recently responded to Speiser's view in detail, concluding

that the Hebrew term 'ed should be identified with the Sumero-Akkadian
id, while the term 'ed "Ungliick" should be connected with the Akkadian
edu, which has "ein katastrophenartiger Charakter." Through him,
Albright's equation 'ed = id has been accepted by Westermann ( 1 974) and
other recent commentators.4o Thus, the recent trend seems to favor
Albright's view, but let us examine once more in detail Speiser's argument

36Speiser, '"ed in the S tory of Creation," 9.

37£. A. Speiser, Genesis (AB 1; Garden City: Doubleday, 1964), 16.
38Speiser, Genesis, 14.
39Srebl'), "Die hebrllischen Nomina 'ed und 'ed," 1 30-141 .
40Most recently, Wenham, Genesis 1-15, 58.
 6. The Waters in Gen 2 101

and Sreb�'s response in the light of recent scholarly development.

The issue: id or edu?

The issue here is threefold : graphical or graphemic, phonological and

semantic.

a. Graphical or graphemic problems

Should the Sumerian dfD be read in Akkadian as Id or as Niiru?

Albright vs Speiser

Albright ( 1 939) argued that the Sumerian dfo should be read as Id in

Akkadian and that there is "no clear evidence" pointing to the reading
Naru, though it "is probable that the [divine] name was also read as Naru in
Accadian. "41 On the other hand, Speiser ( 1 955) holds that "id, when so
pronounced, had a specific cultic bearing, notably so in the Assyrian
Laws." While he accepts that there are exceptions to this, he says that "we
can be sure of Akkadian id as distinct from naru only when the term is
spelled out syllabically; and such explicit instances are relatively rare."42 He
goes on to say, "Generally, moreover, the Sumerian logogram in question
was read in Akkadian as naru "river" and could not, as such, have led to
Heb. 'ed." 43

Sreb� thinks that Speiser's explanation that "the Sumerian Logogram in

question was read in Akkadian as naru 'river"' is probably right. However,
he questions Speiser's conclusion that it "could not, as such, have led to
Heb. 'ed', for Sreb� holds that the Sumerian iD was read as id in Akkadian,
citing AHw I, CAD, 1-J (1 960) and AHw 11 uncritically.44

41 A1bright "The Baby1onian Matter," 102f., n. 25.

,

42Speiser, " 'ed in the Story of Creation," 9, n. 7.

43Speiser, " 'ed in the Story of Creation," 9.
44Sreb!<', "Die hebr!iischen Nomina 'ed und 'ed," 1 32, n. 1 8.
102 The Earth and the Waters in Gen I and 2

CAD. I-J 0 960> & AHw 0965-1 972)

According to CA D , I-J ( 1 960), the river god dfD appears as Id in the

following Akkadian texts: ( 1 ) in the contexts referring to the river ordeal ­
Code of Hammurabi (OB) & others; (2) Maqlu-incantation text; (3) Middle
Assyrian laws (written as dfoi-id) as well as in some Sumero-Akkadian
bilingual lexical texts. 45 AHw, Bd I (1965) also cites simi lar texts under "id
auch ittu Ill? (sum. Fw.) 'FluB(gott)."'46 However, AHw, Bd II ( 1 972) on
niiru (m) expresses reservations about the reading of dfD in Code of
Hamrnurabi (OB), citing there once again the same text, "KH V 39", which
was cited under id (A Hw I, 364) before. Three texts (CT 24, 1 6, 23/5;
S urpu S. 52, 23; mA KA V 1 Ill 93) are cited as examples for reading dfD as
the god Id. However, "SchopfungsfluB" (D I NGIR. fD ) which refers to a
,

feminine deity,47 is read as niiru in AHw: attf n. biiniit kaliima (TuL 9 1 , 10

u D). 48 Sreb0 seems to misrepresent this explanation of A Hw by adding his
own comment "(vgL hierzu Gen 2:6 u. 2: 10ff)" after AHw's comment: "im
Ordal u als Gott. a) dfD meist wohl diD zu lesen . . . b) SchopfungsfluB."

Lambert (1965)

In 1 965 , Lambert presented new evidence that the divine name dfD was
read as niiru in Akkadian texts. For example, in a PN na -ru-um-11 ( "The­
river-is-a-god")49 of Old Babylonian period the divine river is spelled as
narum.50 And the god of the river ordeal is referred to as naru, not as Id,
in an Akkadian text from Ugarit: ta -me-e a-na na-ri (B WL , 1 1 6, 3).
Furthermore, according to Lambert, "In a tamftu-text from the libraries of
Ashurbanipal (K 4721 obv. 2, unpublished) there is reference to [annanna
ap]il annanna Sa ina dna-rum a-mat-[ . . . "sJ Therefore, Albright's view
that the Sumerian dfD should be read as Id in Akkadian and that there is "no

45CAD, I-J ( 1 960), 8. Based on the "evidence" in this volume, McCaner also held in I 973
that "this name for the cosmic river was normally pronounced id in Aide. as well as Sum."
Cf. McCaner, "The River Ordeal in Israelite Literature," 403 & n. 4.
46AHw I (1 965), 364.
47Note however that there is a variant text which has a masculine at-ta. Cf. L. W. King,
The Seven Tablets of Creation (London: Luzac & Co., 1 902), 1 28f., n. 2 & 200f.
48AHw II ( 1 972), 748.
49This name may simply mean "The river is divine", as suggested by Dr. R. S. Hess.
5 0Cf. Na-ru-um-DlNGIR (CT 4, 50b:8, also TCL 1 8, 1 03:3) cited by CAD, Nft (I 980),
374.
5 IW. G. Lamben, "Nebuchadnezzar King of Justice," Iraq 27 ( 1 965), 1 1 .
 6. The Waters in Gen 2 1 03

clear evidence" pointing to the reading Niiru is no longer tenable.

Certainly, as Lambert says, "the glosses in the Middle Assyrian laws (i-id)
do not prove that for every occasion dfd is to be read id not niirum. "

Hirsch 0 968/69) & Roberts 0 972)

Hirsch ( 1 968169) also supports the reading niiru for the Sumerian dfo. He
cites an Old Assyrian title, ku-um -ri-im Sa na -ri-im "priest of the god
River" which is replaced by Atj.ME Sa iD in a certain text.52 Although the
DINGIR sign is missing before fo, Hirsch thinks that "FluB-(gott)" is
doubtlessly meant in the context. Thus, the reading n iirum for the
(masculine) divine name fo is confirmed in Old Assyrian. Moreover, while
lexical texts like CT 24, 16 cannot be discounted, the reading Id seems to be
"eine nachaltbabylonische, vielleicht kilnstliche, bewuBte Differenzierung,"
as Hirsch holds.53 Similarly, J. J. M. Roberts included the god Niiru in his
list of the earliest Semitic gods and goddesses. According to him, Niiru, "a
genuine Semitic name for the river god", was sometimes replaced by a
Sumerian loan word, Id, "later than the Old Akkadian period."54

Borger 0 978) & CA D, N 0 980)

In 1 978, Borger mentioned two possibilities: "dfo Flussgott JQ oder Naru

=

(AHw 364a, CAD 1/J 8 [dazu CAD Al1 1 50f.], Lambert Iraq 27 1 1 )."55
After twenty years, CAD lists the dfo in Maqlu Ill 62 & 77, which was
earlier taken as masculine and therefore was discussed under id (CAD, I-J,
8), now under niiru (CA D , Nib 374). Th is means that regardless of its
gender, dfo can be read as niiru, thus invalidating CAD's earlier hypothesis
that the "logogram dfo, because it is constructed as masc., is to be read id
rather than niiru, which is fem."56 Other examples of the river-god Niiru
cited by CA D , Nib besides those by Lambert and Hirsch, are na -ru-um
(RA 44, 43:5 [Old Babylonian extispicy] ) and PN Sa na-ri-im (ICK 1,

52I.e. unpublished tablets from Kiiltepe. See now CAD, Nft , 375.
53H. Hirsch, "Zur Lesung von Jfo," AfO 22 (1 968/69), 38. His suggestion has been
supponed by scholars such as J. Bottero, Myrhes er Rites de Baby/one (Geneve - Paris:
Slatkine - Champion, 1985), 290.
5 4J. J. M. Roberts, ESP, 46.
55 R. Borger, ABZ, 200.
56CAD, 1-J, 8.
104 The Earth and the Waters in Gen I and 2

84:9).57

Bottero 0 981)

In his comprehensive treatment of the river ordeal in ancient Mesopotamia,

Bottero reads the diD of Code of Hammurabi (e.g. §2) and Ur-Nammu
Code (§ 1 3 2) as Niirum.5s On the other hand, he acknowledges the reading
Id as the name of the river god in Middle Assyrian law code (fdJ-id in
§ 17:11:7 1 , etc.) and newly published Mari letters (di-id in p. 1036, I. 23; p.
1037, I. 29).59 As for the spelling i D . D A in the Mari letters, however,
Bottero reads Narum,6o as he does usually in the cases of iD in other Mari
letters.

In the light of the above, the initial question "Should the Sumerian diD be
read in Akkadian as Id or as Niiru?" can be answered as follows. While the
equation diD = id is still possible in special cases such as Middle Assyrian
dfDi-id with "a specific cultic bearing", the Sumerian dfD was probably read
as Niiru under normal situations as in the case of the common noun niiru
(=iD) "river."6 I The fact that the reading of diD was specified as i -id suggests
that that reading was not the normal one for the Sumerian sign. Thus, we
can once more support Speiser's view that "we can be sure of Akkadian id
as distinct from niiru only when the term is spelled out syllabically; and
such explicit instances are relatively rare . Moreover, the Sumerian
logogram in question was read generally in Akkadian as niiru 'river' and
could not, as such, have led to Heb. 'ed."

b. Phonological problems

Does the 'ed - edii equation have a phonological difficulty ?

51CAD, Nh ( 1980), 375.

58J. Bottero, "L'Ordalie en Mesopotamie ancienne," ASN, Serie III, XI, 4 ( 1 98 1 ), 1021-
1 024.
59Bottero, "L'Orda1ie en Mesopotamie ancienne," 1024 & 1 036f.
60Bottero, "L'Ordalie en Mesopotamie ancienne," 1043, I. 33 & 1044, I. 35, 44. See also
n. 53 (above).
61 Note that in Ug V ( 1 968), 238, the sign "i" is used for i7(ID) and is equated with Akk.
na-a-ru (Text 1 35 [RS 21 .62): R: 9'). Also CAD, Nh ( 1980), 368; Huehnergard, UVST,
66.
 6. The Waters in Gen 2 1 05

Speiser

The second problem is whether it was possible for the Akkadian edu to be
borrowed into Hebrew as 'ed. Speiser gave two reasons for defending his
view against the criticism that "edu should have resulted in some such form
as Heb. * 'ede " First, the term 'ed in Hebrew is a rare term, appearing only
.

twice and the Akkadian edu is itself a Sumerian loan word. Second, "even
an established * 'ede could have developed an alloform 'ed." Speiser claims
that "Heb. 'es 'fire' which has a well attested alloform 'isse"62 supports the
possibility of this development.

As a rebuttal to Speiser's explanation, Srebfl), following Hoftijzer,63 points

out that 'isse is not "Feuer'' but a term for offering like the Ug. 'iJt
"Gabe. "64 It is certainly difficult to support Speiser's view that 'ed is an
alloform of * 'ede by the analogy of 'es - 'isse, if the term 'isse h a s
nothing to d o with fire.65 However, Srebfl)'s phonological explanation is not
without problems either. The examples which Srebfl) cited as evidence for
the phonological change edu > 'ed "Ungliick" are not convincing.66

A final long vowel

62Speiser, " 'ed in the Story of Creation," 1 1 .

63J. Hoftijzer, "Das sogenannte Feueropfer," Hebriiische Wortforschung: Festschrift zum
80. Geburtstag von Waiter Baumgartner (SVT 16; Leiden: Brill, 1967), 1 33. Cf. also G.
R. Driver, "Ugaritic and Hebrew Words," Ug VI ( 1 969), 1 8 1-1 84. However, the
identification of Heb. 'i��e with Ug. ilt has been questioned by M. Dietrich, 0. Loretz & J.
Sanmartin, "Ein Brief des Konigs an die Konigin-Mutter (RS 1 1 .872 CTA 50). Zur
=

Frage ug. iF = hebr. ·�h?" UF 6 ( 1974), 460--462.

64Sa:b0, "Die hebrliischen Nomina 'ed und 'ed," 1 34.
65Note that in Ugaritic the term for "fire" i�t is etymologically different from iJt.
66He lists the following examples (see Sa:b!<l, "Die hebrliischen Nomina 'ed und 'ed," 140)
aide. bulu (mA bula 'u) 'Diirrho1z' > hebr. bill,
akk. kutii > hebr. kut (2Kg 17,30) bzw. kuta (2Kg 17,24),
akk. qutii bzw. sutli > hebr. qo'
The first example might suppon the interchange of the noun of Ill weak pattern (cf. mA
bula'u) with that of 11 weak (*bw1) in Semitic languages. However, this does not help
explain the change edu > '&I, since Akkadian edu itself is a loan word from non-Semitic,
i.e. Sumerian. The second example is not valid since it is based on the wrong information
on Kutii in KB, 429, which HAL corrects as Kutii. The /t/ - I 'I correspondence in the third
example is rather hard to explain; we would expect a Hebrew form like qot or qo'.
1 06 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

According to S. A. Kaufman, "Akkadian nouns ending in a final long

vowel usually appear in Aramaic with final -e, which becomes -ya in the
emphatic state, [e.g.] asii, attalii, burii, . . . "67 And, the Akkadian edii was
actually borrowed into the Babylonian Talmud as '(y)dw(w)t ' "foam of the
sea" with the long vowel - ii preserved.68 Two exceptions are, according to
him, Assyrian terms,
baranii "rebel" => Aram brywn '
!inepii "two-thirds" => Aram snb 69
However, whether or not the second example had a final long vowel in the
Neo-Assyrian period is not certain.70 These evidences for Akkadian loan
words in Aramaic would suggest that an Akkadian word with a final long
vowel was normally borrowed into Hebrew, or Canaanite, with the final
long vowel.
In fact, the form without the loss of the final vowel is preserved in
Hebrew in the form 'edo (Job 36:27), as recently suggested by M. H.
Pope.7I Kaufman even suggests that Hebrew 'ed (Gen 2:6) is to be emended
to 'edo in the light of Job 36:27.72

Variant forms

It may be that the Akkadian term edii entered Canaanite with the long form
and subsequently experienced a loss of the final long vowel: /edfi/ => /'ed/
> /'ed/, as in the geographical name Akkad (Heb. 'akkad < Akk. akkadii).13
In this case, the form 'ed is an alloform of 'edo. While Speiser's example,
'es 'fire' 'isse, for explaining the proposed form * ede as an alloform of
- '

'ed should be given up, his basic assumption of the equation 'ed = edu is to
be supported with minor revision.

67Kaufman, AlA , 149.

68Kaufman, AlA, 47, also cf. HAL, 1 1 .
69Kaufman, A lA , 4 1 & 103. Since the last two are loans from Assyrian, Kaufman
conjectures that the Heb. 'ed, which is frequently connected with the Aide edii, might be
considered "a loan from Assyrian as well." (p. 47, n. 80).
70See AH w, 1 242.
71M. H. Pope, Job3 (AB; New York: Doubleday, 1973), 273; cf. F. I. Andersen, Job
(TOTC; Leicester: IVP, 1976), 263. See below p. 1 1 5, for a further discussion of this
passage.
72Kaufman, AlA, 47.
73 B . Groneberg, Die Orts- und Gewiissernamen der altbabylonischen Zeit (RGTC 3;
Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert, 1 980), 7, listing OB spellings a-ka-du-um, ak-ka-du-u,
etc.
 6. The Waters in Gen 2 107

c. Semantic problems

Does Akk edfi really refer to a rare and catastrophic event?

The Akkadian ed u has often been taken as referring to a rare and

catastrophic event, which does not fit the context of Gen 2:5--6. Hence,
many commentators have followed Albright's view. The main issue here is
this: Does Akk edii really refer to a rare and catastrophic event?

In order to support the equation 'ed = edu, Speiser first cites a

Sumerian-Akkadian bilingual vocabulary, VAT 10270 iv 44 ff., which lists
the following entries:74

(Sum) A.Gl6.A = (Akk)e-gu-[u]

A.DE.A e-du-u
A.SI.GA e-si-gu
A.ZI.GA me-lu
A.MAtJ bu-tuq-tum

And he explains that "all these are synonyms for certain bodies of water
(=A) . . . The character of the group as a whole is indicated by . . butuqtum
'break-through' (of the subterranean water); m elu ' flood, (ground)
flow' . "75 Thus Speiser sees here some association of meanings between edii
and milu and butuqtum.
Secondly, he recognizes one of the common usages of milu as "the flow
that rises from underground springs" in the Atra-!:Jasls Epic and adds the
following comment: "Synonymous with it is the term for water that has
broken through to the surface (butuqtum), and also edii." Here too Speiser
use the term "synonymous" in a very loose and rather impressionistic way.
Thirdly, he takes a note of another lexical text where "edii is defined as
5aqii 5a eqli ' watering of the field"' Speiser notes that this equation has long

74Cf. CAD, E (1958), 336.

75Speiser, " 'ed in the S tory of Creation," 10.
108 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

been known76 and that "both with Hebrew 'ed and with Akkadian edil the
same verb (�qy) [is] employed to describe the function of the respective
nouns." Consequently, Speiser sees the three terms 'ed, ya'Je and hi�qa in
Gen 2:6 as corresponding to three Akkadian words, edil, melu and �aqil
and concludes saying, "Plainly, the Biblical verse might have been lifted
verbatim from an Akkadian lexical work."77
Speiser's argument is certainly semantically loose. Especially his use of
"synonymous" and "synonyms" is not precise enough and his examples are
not strong enough as evidence for the meaning "subterranean water" for
edil. Hence he is sharply criticized by Sreb�.

According to Sreb�. Speiser's conunent that "All . . . [are] synonymous for

certain bodies of water (=A )" is only conjecture. Though Speiser takes milu
and edil as being synonymous, this contradicts the meanings of the two
words, since according to CAD the "phenomenon referred to by edu . . . is
a rare and catastrophic event . . . as against milu, the annual high water."7B
Hence, Sreb� concludes that Speiser's attempt to understand edu a s
"unterirdisches, hervorbrechendes (Grund-)Wasser" i s untenable. 'ed in
Gen 2:6 means "ein aufsteigender und bewassemder Wasserstrom" which
has "eine lebenspendende Funktion"; it is probably to be connected with
"dem kultisch bezogenen ID /id."19

Barrs o also follows CA D's comment without reservation. He says: "As

CAD (E, p.35f.) makes clear with numerous examples, edu means some­
thing far more violent and catastrophic than can be related to the Hebrew

76Cf.P. A. Deimel, Sumerisches Lexikon (Roma: Pontificii Instituti Biblici, 1930), 579,
324b; it was cited, e.g., by E. Sachsse, "Der jahwistische Schopfungsbericht: ein
Erkliirungsversuch," ZAW 39 (1 921 ), 28 1 . (Speiser, " 'ed in the Story of Creation," 10, n.
1 0.)
77Speiser, " 'ed in the Story of Creation," 1 1 .
78 CAD , E (1958), 36: "The phenomenon referred to by edu (a.de.a in contrast to [a.si].ga
also in ASKT p. 98:34, Akk. col. broken) is a rare and catastrophic event (cf. the
correspondence mir edu) as against mflu, the annual high water. Albright, RA 16 175."
=

79Scebl!!, "Die hebriiischen Nomina 'ed und 'ed," 1 35.

80Barr, "Limitations of Etymology," 49.
 6. The Waters in Gen 2 1 09

passage. " For this Barr gives the following reasons. First, "CAD gives as
its main gloss onrush of water, high water: it is something like a huge wave
that may sink a ship, or again it is 'the high tide of the sea' which can
overwhelm a camp." Secondly, "used of rivers, edii may be its high flood­
ing, but CAD emphasizes that this is a rare and catastrophic phenomenon."
Thirdly, in "a hymn to Marduk . . . bel kuppi naqbi e-di-e u tamati 'lord of
sources, springs, high waters and seas', it is the kuppu and the naqbu . . .
that might have fitted the Hebrew passage, while the edii is a phenomenon
of the high seas."
Thus, Sreb!11 and Barr depend heavily on CAD's examples and especially
on its final remark: "The phenomenon referred to by edii (a.de.a i n
contrast to [a.si] .ga . . . ) i s a rare and catastrophic event (cf. the cor­
respondence mir edii) as against milu, the annual high water."s t
=

mir = edii

However, a closer look at the evidence shows that the Akkadian term edii
does not necessarily refer to violent water as such. For one thing, CAD's
comment on edii as "a rare and catastrophic event" in connection with the
"correspondence mir edii" is not well founded. In a bilingual lexical text
=

from the Old Babylonian period, lines 1 1-1 282

line 1 1 llli-tr // TUN-gunu 11 me-l]u-li-um "Stmm"

line 12 mi-ir // TUN-gunu 11 e-du-li-um "Wasserflut"

certainly refer to a similar phenomenon, but other correspondences in the

same text show that they are not necessarily synonymous. Note the follow­
ing "correspondences":

line 7 gi-em I/ TUN 11 gj-iq-/um "Scheke1-gewicht"

line 8 gi-em I/ TUN /1 pa-a-!:um "Axt"
SA
• .
line 23 Sa-a I/ 11 li-ib-bu-um "Herzn
line 24 Sa-a I/ sA. 11 ir-ru-um "Eingeweide"

Therefore, there is no reason why we should take edii as synonymous with

me!Jiim "storm", hence referring to a "catastrophic" event.

8 1 CAD, E, 36.
828 . Landsberger, Die Serie Ur-e-a = ndqu (MSL 2; Roma: Pontificii Instituti Biblici,
1951), 149: 1 1-12.
l lO The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

High water

Moreover, edii (e4 -de-a) in contrast to esiguB3 (e4-si ga) "ebb, low water"
-

simply implies that the former means "high water." In fact the term edii
refers to "the annual high water" of spring in the several texts cited by
CAD itself. For example, in the text which reads "the Tigris and the
Euphrates ina mili (A.KAL) kiggati edii pan gatti napaJjg uSetiq I crossed as
if it were dry land at the height of the flooding, the high water of
spring",B4 the term edii appears in apposition to milu without any implica­
tion of it having a destructive power. One other text, which mentions ina
Ajari iimu adanni ede pan gatti "in the month of Ajaru, at the season of the
high waters of spring [the beginning of the year],"B5 suggests that edu
sometimes means "the annual high water" like milu. In another text, irri­
gation (Sqy) "with waters as abundant as the huge waves of the (annual)
inundation" (ki gipM edi me nul]g1)B6 is mentioned.

Destructive water

It is interesting to note that in the last cited example gipig the attributive
of edii is used with milu also in a positive sense, as in milu gapSum illakam
"an abundant [beneficial] flood will come."B7 On the other hand, edu
certainly appears in a negative context as in the following texts:

edii dannu ina tamtim lifabbWna "may a huge wave (in parallelism
with gamru agii) sink them (your ships) in the sea"88

edu tamati gapgrU i�gamma qirib zaratija erumma

"the high tide of the sea rushed on in great mass and entered my tents"89

edii gapgu ga la jggannanu MURUB4-gu

83CAD, E (1958), 336.

84H. Winckler, Die Keilschrifrrexre Sargons, 44 D 36, cited by CAD , E, 36, b & CAD,
Mh, 70.
850IP 2 104 v 70 (Senn.), cited by CAD, E, 36, b.
86Lyon Sar. p. 6:37, cited by CAD, E, 36, b.
87YOS 10 25:58 (OB omen), cited by CAD. Mh, 7 1 . Note also milu ta!Jdum illakam (RA
44 pi. 3 p. 40:22 [OB omen]), cited by CAD. Mh. 7 1 .
88Borger Esarh. 109 i v 12 (treaty), cited by CAD, E , 35
.

890JP 2 74:74 (Senn.), cited by CAD, E, 35.

 6. The Waters in Gen 2 Ill

"the strong tide whose onslaught cannot be rivaled"90

However, it is important to note that the term edii itself has nothing to
do with violence. It is its adjectives like dannu (// Samru) and gapSu (also
ezzu and kaSSu in the following example) that add a "catastrophic " nature
to the term edii. This is true even in the case of mllu, which is followed by
an adjective kaSSu, in the following example:

Araljti mir (iD) lJegalli agii ezzi edii gamro (var. [a]gii gamru edii ezzu)
milu kaggu tamm abiibu ibbablamma ala . . . me ugbj'
"the Arahtu, river of fertility, (now) an angry wave, a raging tide,
a huge flood, a very Deluge, overflowed and inundated the city (of Babylon)."91

It is not just agu and edii that refer to a catastrophic water in this text.
Even the usually "beneficial" flood (mllu) is also used for describing the
destructive nature of the river AralJtu. Therefore, CA D 's comment, the
"phenomenon referred to by edii is a rare and catastrophic event as against
mllu, the annual high water," does not apply to the present text either.92
While Barr argues for the catastrophic nature of edu on the basis of a
hymn to Marduk93 which mentions bel kuppl naqbl ede u tamiiti "lord of
sources, springs, high waters and seas", this title simply describes Marduk
as the "lord of high waters" and it has nothing to do with edu as a negative
entity, though Barr interprets it as "the high seas." This text simply puts
edu "high waters" and tamiitu "seas" in a close contact, without specifying
whether the former is "high waters" of a river or that of the sea.

High tide?

The term edii sometimes refers to a "high tide" of the sea in texts like the
edii dannu ina tamtim cited above and seems to have a closer association
with the sea than mllu (with river).94 However, the ancient Semites

90AKA 223 : 1 5 (Ashurnasirpal), cited by CAD, Q (1982), 13.

9 1 Borger Esarh. 14 Ep. 7:39, cited by CAD , E, 35; NIJ , 372. See also Nabopo1assar &
Nebuchadnezzar, cited by CAD, Mfl, 72.
92Cf. also me mili ragubbat to "water of the high flood, overwhelming power of the river"
(Maqlu VII 179), cited by CAD, NIJ, 372.
93BA 5 393 i 34 (SB hymn to Marduk)
94AHw, 1 87: edii ga tiim ti (Sn 74, 72); AHw, 1 353: tiamtu: j). On the other hand, milu is a
"seasonal flooding of the rivers - association with the rivers, rain, and the depth (nagbu),"
cf. AHw, 652f.;CAD, Mh ( 1977), 70--7 1 .
1 12 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

seemingly understood the edii-water to have come out of Apsu, the subter­
ranean ocean. In Gilgamesh Epic XI: 297f. Gilgamesh bewails his loss of
the plant of life and says to his companion (in von Soden's translation):95

(297) Jetzt steigt zwanzig Doppelstunden weit die Flut

(298) Und ich liess, als den Schacht ich grub, das Werkzeug fallen!
(2 99) Welches konnte ich finden, das an meine Seite ich /egte?
(300) Wiire ich doch zuriickgewichen und hiitte das Schiff am Ufer gelassen!

Albright took this passage as "primarily an aetiological myth explaining the

origin of the tides."96 However, no recent scholars read tamta "sea" in I.
29997 and hence there is no evidence that edu here refers to the tide of the
sea. Since it is understood as having risen as a result of the hero's
forgetting to replace "the cover of ratu which communicated with the
apsiJ,"98 edii here refers to the flooding of the subterranean ocean.

Subterranean water

If Hebrew edu should refer to the "river", there is the question why the
writer of Genesis should borrow the Akkadian "divine" name Id when
there was a common Akkadian noun niiru for river. In fact, the writer uses
niihiir, the cognate of Akkadian niiru, in 2: 1 0, a few verses later. This
makes it more difficult to suppose that 'ed is an Akkadian (< Sumerian)
loan word with a meaning "river."
On the other hand, edu, defined as "water flooding out of the subter­
ranean ocean" seems a better candidate, without philological difficulties.

95A. Schott & W. von Soden, Das Gilgamesch-Epos (Stuttgart: Reclam, 1 958, 1 982),
1 05.
96W. F. Albright, "Notes on Assyrian Lexicography and Etymology," RA 1 6 ( 1 9 1 9), 175.
See also Speiser's translation in ANET (1 950) 96:
And now the tide will bear (it) twenty leagues away!
When I opened the water-pipe and spilled the gear.
Following Albright, he explains that "the opening of the ra(u (normally "pipe, tube"),
apparently took place in connection with Gilgamesh's dive (cf. also I. 27 1 )." Speiser also
notes that the same term is used, "perhaps to a pipe connecting with a source of sweet
waters which would nourish the miraculous plant" in the Eridu Creation Story (n. 232).
97Cf. R. C. Thompson's reading in The Epic of Gilgamish: Text, Transliteration, and
Notes (Oxford: Clarendon, 1 930); A. Heidel, The Gilgamesh Epic and Old Testament
Parallels. Second edition (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1 949), 92; Speiser,
ANET, 97; von Soden's translation; R. Labat et a/, Les religions du Proche-Orient asiatique
(Fayard/Denoel,1970), 22 1 :"le flot."
98Albright, "Notes on Assyrian Lexicography and Etymology," 176.
 6. The Waters in Gen 2 1 13

Moreover, this interpretation is basically supported by the ancient versions

(LXX, Aquila, Vulgate & Peshitta), which translate the term 'ed as "spring,
fountain" (cf. Num 2 1 : 1 7 ),99 and fits the Genesis context we11. 1 oo Before we
discuss the relationship of 'ed-water with the earth in its context, 1o1 let us
review another possibility for the origin of the term.

3. Direct Sumerian loan word?

Already in 1 9 1 5 Zimmem commented, as an alternative to the 'ed :;;: edu

equation, that the term 'ed may be a Sumerian loan word: "oder gar < sum.
id Fluss?" I 02 Some scholars misinterpret Albright's view and imply that the
Hebrew 'ed is a direct loan word from Sumerian. For example, Castellino
says, "Pour le sumerien id s'etait prononce W. F. Albright, mais tout
recemment E[!]. Speiser est intervenu dans le debat en faveur de l'accadien
edu. Mais, peut-etre, les arguments en faveur d'une derivation du sumerien
ne sont-ils pas encore entierement epuises. " 103 Then he suggests that
phonetically 'ed corresponds with the Sumerian 104 id better than the
Akkadian edu.
Recently, Barr suggested as one of the options that " 'ed is indeed
derived from the Mesopotamian culture but represents not the Akkadian
edu . . . but the Sumerian id from which it is said to be derived and which
commonly means 'river', being translated into Akkadian as niiru with this
meaning. The Hebrew would then be derived directly from the Sumerian."
And he admits that this Sumerian derivation is "quite possible purely
linguistically." 105

a. Sumerian id

99According to Cassuto, "it is hard to imagine that Scripture refers to only one spring, since
it says: and watered the WHOLE FACE OF THE GROUND", cf. Cassuto, From Adam to
Noah, 104. However, if the term 'ed refers to an unusually huge "fountain", there should
be no problem in rendering it thus.
100For the usage in Job 36:27 , see below p. 1 1 5.
101 See below pp. 1 2 1 f.
102zi mmem , AFw, 44.
103Castellino, "Les origines de la civilisation," 1 2 1 f.
104 Note that Srebl1), "Die hebrliischen Nomina 'ed und 'ed," 1 35 cites Castellino's "Sum.
id" as the Akk [or "sum.-akk."] id.
105Barr, "Limitations of Etymology," 64, n. lO.
1 14 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

However, it is not so certain that the Sumerian fd (A -ENGU R ) was

borrowed as * 'id > 'ed into Hebrew (or rather Canaanite). For one thing, a
place name such as uruid could refer to the modem l:lit on the Euphratesi06
and it might suggest that the Sumerian id was actually pronounced as /l)id/,
though the place name l:lit possibly means "place where pitch comes" (< It!fi
"pitch"), while in by itself was pronounced as /i/, as orally suggested by W.
G. Lambert. Moreover, the correspondence, idig(i)na (Sum.) /I idigra-um
(Ebla.) // idiqlat (Akk . ) <-> Hebrew !Jiddeqel ( <*l).id + iqlu) "Tigris",
supports two possibilities:

(1) that the Hebrew /!)id-/ reflects the Sumerian fd (or its first element i-) 107
or the first element of Sum. i7-dignal08;
(2) the Hebrew form preserves a pre-Sumerian name.I 09

However, since the name gives a good sense in Sumerian, i.e. "flowing
river" (id+gina),HO the second possibility should be excluded.
The Akkadian form idiqlat on the other hand may derive either from the
loss of the word initial consonant /l)./, which an early Sumerian name of
"Tigris" might have preserved, or simply reflect the first vowel of the later
Sumerian /idigna/. Thus, the Hebrew !Jiddeqel could be a reflection of a
direct (or indirect, i.e. via a non-Akkadian language) borrowing of an
early Sumerian name into Canaanite, and the Sumerian id was possibly
borrowed as /l)id/.

106Cf. S. Parpola, Neo-Assyrian Toponyms (AOAT 6; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener

Verlag, 1 970), 172; J. N. Postgate, "(A Review of) Khaled Nashef, Die Orts- und
Gewassernamen . . . 1 982," AfO 32 ( 1 985), 97; A. Poebel, "Sumerische Untersuchungen
IV," ZA 39 ( 1 930), 1 45. Cf. also I. J. Gelb, Old Akkadian Writing and Grammar. Second
ed. (MAD 2; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961), 26.
107Cf. Leander, Uber die Sumerischen Lehnworter in Assyrischen, 6 1 : "i(d) A.fD naru."
108 Poebel, "Sumerische Untersuchungen IV," 145.
I 09Jf the Heb. term were a Sum. loan word via Akk., a form like *'iddiqliih (Note the
doubling of /d/ for preserving the short /i/ in the initial syllable.) or *'Miqliih, with a fern.
ending /-iih/ (or /-at!), rather than /liddeqel, should be expected. As far as the ending is
concerned, a masculine form in Eblaite 1-dl-gi-ra-um fidigla-um/ (YE 1 423') is closer to the
Hebrew form. However, its initial sign {l) probably stands for the simple vowel /if (see M.
Krebemik, "Zu Syllabar und Orthographie der lexikalischen Texte aus Ebla. Teil I ," ZA 72
[ 1 982], 219; M. Civil, "Bilingualism in Logographically Written Languages: Sumerian in
Ebla," in BaE, 80) and the term is masculine as against the feminine form in Akkadian:
(Sum) /idig(i)na/ - (Ebla) /idigra-um/ - (Akk) /idiqla-t/. Note that the Eblaite form with
an ending /-urn/ is a "semitized" form. See below p. 1 24 on the discussion of the Eblaite
sign list B.
1 10See below pp. 1 37f. on its etymology.
 6. The Waters in Gen 2 115

However, it is also possible that the Hebrew 'ed is a direct loan from
Sumerian e4-de, like Akkad (Heb 'akkad) which corresponds to Sumerian
a-ka-de, which, on the other hand, entered Akkadian as Akkad fl. I I I
Phonologically as well as semantically the term e4 -de "high water" is a
better candidate for the etymology of the Hebrew 'ed than the Sumerian id,
if we should propose a "direct" borrowing of a Sumerian original.
As we noted above, it is possible that 'ed is a shortened form of 'edo as
the result of the loss of the final vowel when or after Akkadian edii was
borrowed into ancient Canaanite. However, since the Sumerian original of
Akkadian edu is e4-de as well as A.D E .A ( e4 -de-a), I I 2 it is also possible
=

that the short Hebrew form 'ed is a "direct" loan from Sumerian e4 -d e,
while the long form 'edo is a Sumerian loan word via Akkadian edu ( <
Sum /edea!).
Therefore, we would like to make the following suggestions:
( 1 ) 'ed (Gen 2:6) is a loan word directly (or via a non-Akkadian language
such as Hurrian) borrowed from Sumerian e4 -de;
(2) 'edo (Job 36:27) is a loan word from Sumerian via Akkadian edii.
Both 'ed and its allomorph 'edo mean "high water" and refer to the water
flooding out of the subterranean ocean.
A final judgment on the meaning and etymology of any term, however,
cannot be made until the term is set in its context adequately. Especially "in
the case of rare words", as Barr rightly notes, "literary questions are
relevant and one cannot proceed purely linguistically." l l 3

As for the term 'edo of Job 36:27, Andersen, who takes 'ed to mean
"upswell (of groundwaters)", recently notes that "the usage in Job 36:27
can be clarified by comparison with other meteorological passages, notably
Proverbs 3 : 1 9-20; 8:22-3 1 , as well as Genesis 6-8 ." 1 14 After noting more
than one "ocean" mentioned in these passages, he suggests that "just as the
'ed (!) comes up from the ground in Genesis 2, so water from God's 'ed ( ! )

l l i See above p . 106.

1 12Cf. Lieberman, SLOBA, 2 1 5f., n. 1 6 1 ; A. R. Millard, "The Etymology of Eden," VT
34 ( 1984), 104. However, CAD, E (1958), 35 and AHw, 187 list only a-de-a for the Sum.
original.
1 13B arr, "Limitations of Etymology," 5 1 .
1 14F. I. Andersen, "On Reading Genesis 1-3," i n M . P . O'Connor & D . N . Freedman
(eds.), Backgrounds for the Bible (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1 987), 1 39.
1 16 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

comes down to the ground in Job 36."1 15 However, it is not certain whether
"his 'ed (!)" refers to "the river of God." For one thing, he has left unde­
cided the etymology of the term 'ed, i.e. whether it is a borrowing from
Sumerian id or Akkadian edu. Moreover, t;)hOrnot in Prov 3:20 is better
taken as referring to the subterranean waters, as noted above. In Job 36:27,
both the "rain" (matar), the water from above, and the 'ed-water, in a
longer form, are mentioned as in Gen 2:5-6. Therefore, it is most likely
that the ed-water in both passages refers to the water from below The two 0

waters in Job 36:27 might be compared with a meteorological phenomenon

described by the Ugaritic expression Sr' thmtm "surging of the two thmt­
waters" (KTU 1 . 1 9 [ 1 Aqht] :l:45). 1 1 6

1 15Andersen, "On Reading Genesis 1-3," 139f., taking -o as 3.m.s. suffix.

1 1 6See below p. 134.
 Chapter 7

THE EARTH-WATERS RELATIONSHIP IN GEN 2

In an earlier chapter we discussed the nature of the relationship between

the earth and the waters described in the initial part of Gen I and con­
cluded that the t;�hom-water in Gen 1 :2 covered the whole earth, though
the t;�h om-water in the B iblical cosmology is a part of the earth ( 'ere$)
under a normal situation. In this chapter we discuss the nature of the rela­
tionship between the earth and the waters described in the initial part of
Gen 2. This involves a further discussion of the term 'ed (2:6) in its proper
context and an etymological treatment of the term 'eden.

A. A FLOODING OF THE SUBTERRANEAN WATERS

In the light of the etymological discussions in the previous chapter, the

term 'ed most probably refers to the subterranean water which comes up to
the surface of the earth, rather than referring to mist or vapour which
comes up from the surface of the earth. However, we should ask how this
water from underground was related to the earth after "coming up" from
the earth in Gen 2. Did it form a stream like the water of the Sumerian Id
(=Akkadian naru) "river", or a flooding water like that referred to by the
Sumerian e4-de(-a) (=Akkadian edii) "high water"?

"River"?

Since niihar in Gen 2: 10, which corresponds to the Akkadian naru, is the
subject of a verbal form of Sqh "to water", Sreb0 thinks that Gen 2:6 and
2 : 10ff. are exegetically closely connected and that the waters in both these
1 18 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

verses are "a river."t However, in Joel 4: 1 8 the subject of this verb is "a
spring" (ma 'yiin) and hence gqh can have any watery entity as its subject.
Therefore the similarity of the verbal fonns in Gen 2:6 and 2: 1 0 does not
necessarily imply that the subjects have identical meanings, and that 'ed
also means "river."
Moreover, if 'ed means "a river", why is the river presented in two
fonns in Gen 2, 'ed and niihiil! To this Castellino, who takes 'ed as "a
river" (sum. id), has answered, "Et qu'on ne dise pas que le niihiir fait
double emploi avec I' 'ed de ii 6. L' 'ed est pour I' '�diimiih, le niihiir est
pour le gan, qui sont deux entites distinctes. "2
However, what is probably more significant than their common verb,
Sqh (Hi.) "to water" , and its objects, '�diimiih and gan, is the difference in
the verbs which describe their origin: ya '�leh (2:6) and yo�e · (2: 1 0). It
seems that the author of Genesis purposely makes a clear distinction
between the 'ed-water which "comes up from the earth" and the "river"
which "comes out of Eden. " The 'ed-water is that which comes up from
underground and waters the whole surface of the land ( '�diimiih). On the
other hand, in v. 1 0 the waters "come out of' one place and "water" a
different place, fanning a stream or streams, like the "spring" (ma'yiin) of
Joel 4 : 1 8.3

Irrigation of the land

Again, if the 'ed-water is a river, why did it not irrigate the soiJ?4 The
initial state in Gen 2:5-6 is described as without rain but with the 'ed-water
having come up from underground to water the whole surface of the land.
Barr thinks that it "is not easy to make good sense of this in the context"
but, instead of assuming plural documentary sources as some critics do, he
wonders whether 'ed isn't "after all a mist?"5 However, as already noted in
the previous chapter, the view which takes the term 'ed as meaning
"vapour, mist" has no etymological support, though etymology does not

1 M.Sa:bfl), "Die hebrltischen Nomina 'ed und 'ed - zwei sumerisch-akkadische

Fremdwoner?" ST 24 (1970), 1 32f.
2G. Castellino, "Les origines de la civilisation selon les textes bibliques et les textes
cuneifonnes," Volume du Congress: Strasbourg 1 956 (SVT 4; Leiden: Brill, 1957), 1 23.
3Jn Joel 4: 1 R a verbal fonn ye$e ' is used with the place that the "spring" originates,
prefixed by the preposition min.
4The question raised by J. Barr, "Limitations of Etymology as a Lexicographical
Instrument in Biblical Hebrew," Transactions of the Philological Society (1983), 64, n. 10.
5Barr, "Limitations of Etymology," 5 1 .
 7. The Earth-Waters Relationship in Gen 2 1 19

determine meaning.
The situation in 2:5-6 as a whole is simply this: because of the lack of
rain there was no plant on the earth, while the 'ed-water was flooding out
of the earth to water, i.e. inundate, the entire surface of the "land"
( 'iidiimiih), which was only a part of the "earth" ( 'ere$). Since this 'ed­
water refers to the water flooding out of the earth, without man's irrigat­
ing and tilling activities the land ( 'iidiimiih) was not suitable for plants to
grow. The problem here was not the lack of water but the lack of adequate
control of water by man for tilling purposes.6 This well-watered situation
is certainly in keeping with Eden, the "well-watered place" where God
planted a garden (2:8).7 To the discussion of the etymology of Eden we
shall turn shortly.

Excursus:Time and place of man's creation

If the 'ed-water refers to the water flooding out of the earth to water the
entire surface of the land ( 'iidiimiih), how could God "form" the man out
of the soil of the land ( 'iipiir min-ha 'iidiimiih)? And when and where did it
happen? Barr, who takes 'ed as "vapour", says, "[The vapour] only damped
the surface, perhaps thus making the earth pliable for God to fashion man
out of the soil."S But if, as we think, 'ed, a "high water", was covering the
entire land ( 'iidiimiih), it would seem to be difficult to understand how the
soil ('iipiir) of the land ( 'iidiimiih) was used for making the man.
According to our discourse analysis of Gen 2,9 vs. 7-8 should be

6for a description of beginning of inigation and agriculture in Sumerian society, see J. van
Dijk, LUGAL UD ME-LAM-bi NIR-GAL: Le recit epique et didactique des Travaux de Ninurta,
du Deluge et de la Nouvelle Creation Tome 1: Introduction, Texte Composite. Traduction
(Leiden: Brill, 1983), 94-97 (11. 344-366); also J. van Dijk, "Lugal-e," RIA 7 ( 1 987),
1 34-1 36.
7For a brief summary of various theories on the location of Eden, see G. J. Wenham,
Genesis /-15 (Word Bible Commentary I ; Waco: Word Books, 1 987), 66-67.
8Barr, "Limitations of Etymology," 5 1 ; cf. H. Gunkel, Genesis (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck
& Ruprecht, 1902), 5, cited by D. Kidner, "Genesis 2:5, 6: Wet or Dry?" TB 17 (1966),
1 1 3.
9To summarize our basic assumptions,
[ 1 ] . a new subparagraph (discourse unit) is begun by every new wayqtl with a stated
subject; waw here is "initial."
[2]. wayqtl without a stated subject indicates that this action or event is in sequence with the
previous action or event; waw here is "sequential."
1 20 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

analysed thus:

[UNIT 1]: wayyi$er (action 1) YHWH '�lohim . . . wayyippa/1 (action 2)

[UNIT 2]: wayyi[fa' (action 3) YHWH '�Johim . . . wayyii�em (action 4)

Here, it is certain that the actual "chronological" order of events is (action

1 ) - (action 2) - (action 4): the LORD God "formed" and "breathed " and
"put." But we do not know when the "planting" (3) of the garden happened.
[UNIT 2] simply explains that (3) happened before the LORD God "put" (4)
and the actual "chronological" order of events can be either ( 1 )-(2)-(3)­
(4) or (1 )-(3}-(2)-(4) or (3}-(1 )-(2)-(4). Of course, it is also possible that
"planting" (3) could happen together with ( 1 ) or (2). 10
However, if the "forming" ( 1 ) of the man happened before the
"planting" (3) of the garden, the man was certainly created from the "soil"
of the land ( 'Mamah) outside of the garden (gan), but not necessarily out­
side of Eden ( 'eden). 1 1
It may be conjectured therefore that when God planted a garden "in
Eden in the east" (b�'eden miqqedem), 1 2 the 'ed-water which had been
covering the whole surface of the land had receded at Eden and the land
there was dry enough for God to make a garden. But, how dry did the land
have to be for God to form a man and make a garden?
A. R. Millard suggested orally that "if 'ed covered the land surface by
issuing from below and produced a situation unsuitable for tilling, it was
presumably creating a marsh of some sort." This situation accords with that
in the initial section of Enuma elish, 1:6, which mentions that the waters
had "not yet" produced the marsh land.13 Therefore, it is reasonable to
think that when God formed the man from the soil of the land before
planting the garden, the 'ed-water had probably created a marshy situation
in Eden and, if it was so, lumps of soil could be scooped up for God to

[3]. wayhi should be treated as one level away from the main line of the narrative
discourse.
See above p. 85, n. 2 for bibliography of Longacre's works.
I DAs E. J. Young, Studies in Genesis One (Phillipsburg, N. J.: Presbyterian and
Reformed, n.d.), 74 notes, "a chronological order is not intended here."
1 1 Note that the spatial relationship among various locations in Gen 2:5ff. would be
suggested in the following scale, from the widest area to the narrowest:
earth ( 'ere$) > land (lldiimiih) > Eden ('&ten) > garden (gan).
12Note a Ug. phrase "the city of the East" ('r. d qdm) in KTU 1 . 100:62; cf. J. C. de Moor,
"East of Eden," ZAW 100 (1988), 105 ff.
1 3See above pp. S l ff.
 7. The Earth-Waters Relationship in Gen 2 121

form the man.J4 Moreover, when God made the garden at Eden, he must
have drained the 'ed-water to make the land dry enough to plant trees. 1 s
The garden in Eden, "the well-watered place,"l6 then was naturally drained
of the water by rivers, so producing arable land. 1 7

'ed as hyponymous to 'ere!j

In Gen 2:6, the relationship between the "earth" (ere!j) and the 'M-water is
described by two verbal forms, ya'llleh and w�hiSqiih.
The first verb suggests the nature of the water in this passage. While the
"river" in v. 1 0 "comes out of Eden", the 'ed in v. 6 "comes up from the
earth"1 s . In other words, the "water" referred to by 'ed in 2:6 is different
from the water which "comes out of' one place and forms a stream or
streams like the "river" (niihar) of Gen 2: 1 0 and the "spring" (ma 'yiin) of
Joel 4 : 1 8 , as noted above. And the phrase min-hii 'iire!j itself indicates the
'ed-water originated underground and hence was a part of the "earth."
Thus in Gen 2:5-6 the term 'ed stands as hyponymous 19 to 'ere!j, the
"earth."
As for the second verb w�hiSqiih, Ellenbogen holds that it refers to "a
thorough soaking or drenching. "zo It certainly suggests that 'ed refers to an
abundant water, since it covered all the surface of the land ( 'adiimiih).
However, the verb *Sqh (Hi.)21 is never used in the sense of "destructive"
flooding like Great Deluge (cf. Akk. abubu) but usually in a positive

1 4Note that when Ea created man, he pinched off a lump of clay (ikru$a tidda) in the apsu,
i.e. in his abode in the subterranean ocean, in a text cited by CAD , Nz ( 1 968), 195. See
below pp. 143ff. on a "creator" god and his relationship with the waters.
!SA bilingual version of the "Creation of the World by Marduk" (Heidel, BG, 63, I. 32)
mentions that Marduk made a swamp into dry land after piling up a dam at the edge of the
sea (cf. I. 3 1 ). See A. R. Millard, "A New Babylonian 'Genesis' Story," TB 1 8 (1967), 8.
1 6For this meaning, see below pp. 1 27f.
17See a similar situation described in Lugal-e, ll. 356v359; cf. van Dijk, LUGAL UD ME·
LAM-bi NIR-GAL, 96.
1 8 Cf. Num 2 1 : 17. Thus, Aquila's E-m(3>..uo-fJ.6S' "gushing forth" -> "gushing water" (or
"overflowing water" < E-m(3Mw "flow over" cf. E-m(3u>..uCw "pour forth"; E-m(3>..u �
"abundantly") and LXX's tTTJYn "fountain, source" (also Vulgate; Peshitta), can be
supported rather than Targums' Aramaic translation "cloud."
1 9For this term, see above pp. 67f.
20M. Ellenbogen, Foreign Words in the Old Testament: their Origin and Etymology
(London: Luzac, 1 962), 13.
2 1 Cf. Gen 2:6, 10, Ezek 17:7, 32:6, Joel 4: 1 8, Ps 104: 1 1 , Ecc 2:6.
1 22 The Earth and the Waters in Gen I and 2

sense.22
Since the 'ed-water flooded out of the subterranean water in Gen 2:6, in
this regard it is related to the t;,hom(ot)-water, the water of the subter­
ranean ocean. However, the verb *Sqh (Hi) never appears with t;,hom(ot)
and in Gen 2:6 has the specific meaning "to inundate (the land)" . Unlike the
situation in Gen I :2 where the t;,hom-water seemingly covered the entire
"earth" ( 'ere$), the 'ed-water was inundating only a part of the "earth", i.e.
the "land" ( 'adamah), in Gen 2:6.23

Two "waters"

It is significant to note that in Gen 2:5-6 both the water from above, rain,
and the water from below, the 'ed-water, are mentioned in the description
of the initial state of the earth, though the former is treated negatively, as
"not yet", and the latter positively, as "already."24 This may suggest that the
separation between the upper water and the lower water, which is de­
scribed in Gen I :6-7 in the biblical context, had already occurred in Gen
2:5-6.
These two waters might be compared with the two thmt-waters in
Ugaritic. For example, as discussed below, the expression Sr' thmtm
"surging of the two thmt-waters" (KTU 1 . 1 9 [ 1 Aqht]:l:45) is mentioned in
a meteorological context and seems to refer to the waters above in heaven
and the waters below the earth as in Gen 7: l l , 8:2. Since this upper thmt­
water is probably the same as the rain-water in the heaven, the lower thmt­
water may correspond to the 'ed-water of the "earth" in the context of Gen
2:5-6.25

22In Ezek 32:6, which NIV translates "I will drench the land ( 'ere$) with your flowing
blood", "blood" adds a negative sense to the text.
23Kidner thinks that "the whole earth was inundated by water," cf. Kidner, "Genesis 2:5,
6: Wet or Dry?" 109-1 14. See the previous chapter on the relationship between "earth"
( 'ere$), "field" (siideh) and "ground" ('Jfdiimiih).
24Note that in the Sumerian myth of "Enki and the World Order", "a rain of prosperity" and
"a high flood" are mentioned in connection with Enki's activities; see S. N. Kramer, The
Swnerians: their History, Culture, and Character (Chicago: University of Chicago Press,
1963), 175.
25See below pp. 1 33f. on the relationship between "rain" and 'dn in the Ugaritic text and
pp. 1 50f. on El's watery abode "in the midst of the streams of the two thmt-waters."
 7. The Earth-Waters Relationship in Gen 2 1 23

B. ETYMOLOGY OF EDEN

We noted in the previous section that, according to the Biblical description,

Eden ( 'eden), where God planted a garden (cf. Gen 2:8), was located in a
part of the land ( 'lldamah) which was once watered by the 'ed-water, the
flooding of the subterranean water. Thus Eden was good land suitable for
planting a garden. What then is the etymology of "Eden"?
Until recently scholars commonly accepted a Mesopotamian origin for
the Hebrew term 'eden as a loan word ultimately from the Sumerian edin
into Hebrew26. For example, Speiser explains that "this word [edinu] is rare
in Akk. but exceedingly common in Sum., thus certifying the ultimate
source as very ancient indeed. The traditions involved must go back, there­
fore, to the oldest cultural stratum of Mesopotamia."27 However, since the
publication of the Aramaic-Akkadian bilingual text from Tell Fekheriyeh
in 1 982, several scholars have revived a Semitic etymology.2s
Theoretically there are three possible explanations for the etymology of
the Hebrew term 'eden, though scholars often do not distinguish between
the first two:29 ( 1 ) the term 'eden is a Sumerian loan word which entered
West Semitic via Akkadian, (2) the term is a Sumerian word borrowed
directly into West Semitic and (3 ) the term is a West Semitic word.

l . Sumerian loan word via Akkadian?

The scholars3o who suggest a Sumerian origin for th is term usually base

26For a brief summary of the Mesopotamian connection, see A. R. Millard, "The

Etymology of Eden," VT 34 ( 1984), I 03f. ; C. Westermann, Genesis. I. Teilband: Genesis
1-1 1 (BKAT l/1; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1 974), 286f. [ET 2 10].
27E. A. Speiser, Genesis (AB 1; Garden City: Doubleday, 1964), 19.
2B A. Abou Assaf, P. Bordreuil & A. R. Millard, La statue de Tell Fekherye et son
inscription bilingue assyro-arameenne (Paris: Recherche sur les civilisations, 1982). See
Miilard, "The Etymology of Eden," 103-106; A. Lemaire, "Le pays d'Eden et le Bit-Adini
aux origines d'un mythe," Syria 58 ( 1 98 1 ), 31 3-330; J. C. Greenfield, "A Touch of
Eden," in Orientalia J. Duchesne-Guil/emin Emerito Oblata (Hommages et Opem Minom 9;
Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1984), 21 9-224. Also, H. N. Wallace, The Eden Narrative (HSM 32;
Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1 985), 84.
29Westermann, Genesis, 286f. [ET 210], for example, does not discuss the possibility of
direct borrowing from the Sumerian edin.
30A shon historical survey is given by Millard, "The Etymology of Eden," 103. For a
bibliogmphy, see also Lemaire, "Le pays d'Eden et le Bit-Adini," 3 1 5, n. 1 .
1 24 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

their argument on the following list in Vocabulary Sb, lines 90-9 1 :J I

90) e-di-in : edin : e-di-nu

91) e-di-in : edin : $e-e-ru "plain, steppe"32

In this list, the "phonetic" reading of the ideographic sign EDIN ("plain,
steppe") is listed in the first column and its Akkadian equivalent in meaning
is listed in the third column. The scholars have taken the line 90 as
evidence for the existence of Akkadian edinu and for the Sumerian connec­
tion of Hebrew 'eden via Akkadian edinu.
However, since the term edinu is a very rare word and is not attested in
Akkadian except in this lexical list, Millard suggests that it is "simply a
learned scribal transcription of the Sumerian word-sign in the Syllabary."33
In fact, the third column of some copies of this Syllabary has e-din, the
same reading as the first column, for line 90.34 Some might ask in this case
where the final -u of the variant form edinu would have come from. For
this, it might be profitable to note that in a recently published text of an
Eblaite sign list Sumerian sign names are seemingly semitized with a
Semitic nominative case ending -um.Js For example, the B-list (TM.75.G.
1 907+ 1 2680) has the following entries:

edin : 1-d1-num /edin-um/

ezen : 1-zi-num /ezen-um/
idigna : 1-di-gi-ra-um /idigra-umtJ6

Hence, the form edinu in Vocabulary Sb might well be a semitized name

(with a nominative case ending /-u/) for the Sumerian sign EDIN rather than
an Akkadian term for "plain, steppe. "37

JIB. Landsberger, MSL 3 (Roma: Pontificium Institutum Biblicum, 1955), 104 [5 copies
preserve I. 90; 3 copies, I. 91].
3Zfhe Sumerian edin is identified in VE, No. 1 247' with the Eblaite term $a-lum, a cognate
of the Aide. $eru(mJ "Steppe."
33Millard, "The Etymology of Eden," 104.
34Landsberger, MSL 3, 104, copies A & St.
35A. Archi, "The 'Sign-list' from Ebla," Eblaitica I (1987), 91.
36Cf. Archi, "The 'Sign-list' from Ebla," l O l f.; also K. B utz, "Bilinguismus als
Katalysator," in L. Cagni (ed.), BaE, 127 on VE 1423': idigna?-muSen = 1-di-gi-ra-um.
37Note that edin(u) and $eru are like Japanese "on-yomi" readings (based on the Chinese
pronunciation) and "kun-yomi" readings (translation of the meaning of the character into
Japanese) respectively. In Japanese most Chinese characters are read as "kun-yomi" only
when they appear as independent words, while the "on-yomi" is most often used in
compound words.
 7. The Earth-Waters Relationship in Gen 2 1 25

Even if edinu should be a nonnal Akkadian word38 which the modem

scholars happen not to know except from Vocabulary Sb, it is still
phonologically difficult to regard the Hebrew tenn 'eden as a loan word
from edinu, since the initial syllable of this Akkadian tenn has no phoneme
I 'I. In other words, if the Hebrew tenn were a Sumerian loan word in
West Semitic via Akkadian edinu, the expected fonn in Hebrew would be
'eden like (Sum.) e-kur => (Akk.) ekurru => (Aram.) 'gwr 39 and (Sum.)
e4 -de-a => (Akk.) edu => (Heb.) 'edo.4o
Therefore we conclude that the Hebrew 'eden cannot be a loan word
from or via Akkadian edinu. However, the possibility remains that it is a
direct (or via non-Akkadian) borrowing from a Sumerian word.

2. Direct Sumerian loan word?

Some might think that the Sumerian edin "plain, steppe" was borrowed
directly into Canaanite as 'eden or the like. However, here too there is a
phonological difficulty. Namely, it is difficult to associate the initial sound
lel of Sumerian edin, written syllabically as <e> (E) in Vocabulary Sb and
as < I > (NI) in the Eblaite "sign-list" B, with the Canaanite syllable I 'el of
Hebrew 'eden, since Sumerian presumably has no phoneme I '/.4 1 In fact

38However, Lieberman, SLOBA does not cite edin in his list of S um. loanwords in OB
Aide.
39Cf. AHw, 196. Note that Heb. hekal, Ug. hkl as well as Ar. haikal is not Sum. loan
words via Aide. (cf.Kaufman, AlA, 27), since Aide. ekallu does not have /h/ as an initial
consonant. In the light of recent developments in Eblaite studies it is probable that these
West Semitic terms came from an earlier Semitic form, /haikal/, of the Sum. ha-gal
(E.GAL). On E ('a) for /ha/, cf. I. J. Gelb, "Ebla and the Kish Civilization," in L. Cagni
(ed.), LdE ( 1 98 1 ), 20; M. Krebernik, "Zu Syllabar und Orthographie der lexikalischen
Texte aus Ebla. Teil 1 ," ZA 72 (1 982), 219f.; Die Personennamen der Ebla-Texte: Eine
Zwischenbilanz (BBVO 7; Berlin: Dietrich Reimer, 1988), 74; also see above pp. 55f. on
Eblaite ti- 'a-ma-tum /ti hiim(a)tum/. This confirms Falkenstein's explanation (cf. A.
Falkenstein, Das Sumerische [Handbuch der Orientalistik I, 11, lh, i; Leiden: E. J. Brill,
1959], 24 [§7 C e]) that a phoneme !h/. is possible for the old Sumerian from the old LW
into Canaanite * haikal < *hai-kal. Cf. E. Lipifiski, "Emprunts sumero-akkadiens en hebreu
biblique," ZAH I ( 1 988), 65. See also Gelb, "Ebla and the Kish Civilization," 23f. for the
recent controversy about whether the diphthong /ai/ was preserved in Eblaite or
monothongized to /ii/. According to Lambert (orally 15.7 .87), a recently discovered Hittite­
Hurrian bilingual text (to be published by E. Neu) has a Hurrian term haikal. Thus, the
West Semitic terms might be a Sum. Lw via Hurrian.
40See above p. 106.
4 ICf. M.-L. Thomsen, The Sumerian Language: an Introduction to its History and
Grammatical Structure (Mesopotamia 10; Copenhagen: Akademisk, 1 984), 4 1 ; Millard,
126 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

Sumerian words such as ezen and idigna, both written syllabically with the
initial sign < l > in the Eblaite "sign-list" B, were borrowed into Akkadian
as isinnu or idiqlat, showing no hint of an initial phoneme I 'I in their
Sumerian originals.42 Therefore it is not likely that the Sumerian edin was
borrowed directly into Canaanite as 'eden or the like.
An objection has been raised against this Sumerian connection also from
a semantic point of view. For example, the meaning "plain, steppe", i.e. the
uncultivated land, for the Hebrew 'eden does not fit the context of Genesis
well, since the term 'eden in its context refers to a place which is part of a
well-watered land ( 'ifdamah) rather than part of a field (sadeh), unculti­
vated land.43
While it is possible that Hebrew 'eden reflects a direct borrowing into
the ancient Canaanite from the Sumerian edin, if Sumerian possessed the
phoneme I 'I in its earlier stage, the evidence for this is very thin.
Meanwhile, a more immediate West Semitic origin should be seriously
sought.

"The Etymology of Eden," 104; Wallace, The Eden Narrative, 84 & 98. In Vocabulary of
Ebla, VE, the Sumerian sign NI ( bu x, i, 'a •· 'u .[?], ni and Jf [?]) stands for fi/ or I 'if in
=

Eblaite (e.g. i-sa-du /'iSiitu/ and i-ri-sa-tum / 'iriStum/). Cf. Krebemik, "Zu Syllabar und
Orthographie der lexikalischen Texte aus Ebla. Teil 1 ," 198f. But there is no evidence that I
'/ was established as an independent phoneme in Sumerian. Hence, the equation 'friid (Gen
4: 1 8) Eridu (e-ri-du), suggested by W. W. Hallo, "Antediluvian Cities," JCS 23 (1970),
=

64 & 67, is not without phonological difficulty.

42Normally in Akkadian the Semitic phoneme */ '/ is realized as /e/ in the initial position.
See below p. 137 (Excursus) for the Hebrew Piddeqel "Tigris."
43Wallace, The Eden Narrative, 84; U. Cassuto, From Adam to Noah [Pan I of A
Commentary on the Book of Genesis] (Jerusalem: Magnes, 196 1 , 1 944 [orig.)), 1 07.
It is interesting to note that in Ebla, in Text Nr. 79 (g): /2/ (MEE 4, 98) the Sumerian term
edin is explained in Eblaite as follows:
ed[in] g [ u ?]- lu [ m] sa - [du]m wa da - bf- turn wa gu - zu: zu: urn wa ga ­
=

za - urn.
The Sum. edin is thus "paraphrased" as, in Butz' highly speculative translation, "die
'Qriinzone der Ebenen', der 'Berg', der 'Wald', die 'abgeernteten Felder' und die
'Odstellen mit kniehohem Gras."' (Butz, "Bilinguismus als Katalysator," 1 30f.) Note
Jacobsen's view that edin is an ancient word for "the sheep country, the broad grassy
steppe," cf. T. Jacobsen, "Formative Tendencies in Sumerian Religion," in G. E. Wright
(ed.), The Bible and the Ancient Near East: Essays in honor of William Foxwell A/bright
(Anchor Books; Garden City: Doubleday, 196 1 ), 360; also G. Castellino, "Les origines de
la civilisation selon les textes bibliques et les textes cuneiformes," Volume du Congress:
Strasbourg 1 956 (SVT 4; Leiden: Brill, 1957), 122, citing Jacobsen's explanation (in
Archaeology 7 [ 1 954], 54). However, this meaning does not fit the Hebrew context ofGen
2.
 7. The Earth-Waters Relationship in Gen 2 1 27

3. Common West Semitic?

While the Sumerian-Akkadian connection remains popular, some scholars

have suggested a Semitic etymology for 'eden in the light of the Ugaritic
'dn as well as the Hebrew plural noun * ';Idanim "delights" (Jer 5 1 :34, 2
Sam 1 :24, Ps 36:8). For example, G. R. Driver connected the Hebrew
'eden "luxury" with the Arabic gadanu "delicacy" and the Ugaritic 'dn
"abundance, delight."44 Cassuto also accepted this correspondence but
explained 'eden in the light of the Ugaritic 'dn which he translated
"moisture" in KTU 1 .4:V:6-7 [5 l :V:68-69] :

wn 'p 'dn mp-h b'l y'dn 'dn

and now also the moisture of his rain
I Baal shall surely make moist.

Thus he interpreted the term 'eden "in connection with the watering of the
ground" and explained that "Eden" in Gen 2:8 is the place "where there
was an exceedingly rich water-supply."45
However, though Cassuto's interpretation is contextually attractive,
there is a difficulty in phonological correspondence between Heb I 'I ,
Arabic lgl and Ugaritic I '1. Hence, most Ugaritic scholars (Gordon46;
Gibson; de Moor; Pope et a/)41 have sought a different etymology and
translated the Ugaritic term 'dn in 1 .4:V:6-7 [5 l :V:68-69] as "time" or
"season" from the root *y'd "to appoint (time)."48 On the other hand, the
question has been left unanswered as to why both the verbal form y'dn and
the nominal form 'dn end in 1nl, though they are possible fom1s from a
purely morphological point of view.

a. Aramaic: the Fekheriyeh Inscription

In 1 982, when the U garitic information for the Semitic etymology of

Hebre w 'eden seemed unpromising, an important Aramaic-Akkadian

44Driver, CML, 1 4 1 & n. 8.

45Cassuto, From Adam to Noah, ! 07. Westerrnann follows Cassuto and holds that
"Ugaritic has a word which corresponds exactly to the Hebrew and has a similar meaning,
'delight."' (Westerrnann, Genesis, 286 [ET 210]).
46UT 1 9. 1 823 'dn I "season": 'dn mtrh ( 1 .4 [5 1 ]: Y:6 [68]) "his season of rain", y'dn .
'dn (:7[69]) "he appoints a season."
47See below pp. 129f. for the bibliography.
48J. C. de Moor, SPUMB, 1 49, following Hoftijzer.
128 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

bilingual inscription from Tell Fekheriyeh was published.49 In this text

Hadad, the god of life-giving water, is called the "water-controller of all
rivers" (gwgl nhr klm) in Aramaic and immediately after is described, both
in Aramaic and in Akkadian, as m'dn mt kin 1/muta!J!Jidu kibriiti. This
bilingual phrase is translated as "who makes all lands abound" (Millard50) ;
"qui fait prosperer tous les pays" (Abou-Assaf, Bordreuil & Millard); "he
who makes all the lands luxuriant" (Kaufman; also Greenfield5 1 ).
Thus, scholars have recognized here '"dn in a verbal form" and, in the
light of the Assyrian verb which means "to enrich, make abundant" ,
suggested a similar sense for the Aramaic parallel "(although the two texts
are not absolutely identical in every phrase)."52 Millard concludes with
caution that "Clearly Old Aramaic gave a sense to 'dn which was very
similar to its value in Biblical Hebrew . . . this new example . . . reinforces
the earlier interpretation" which links Eden with "words with 'dn as their
base and the common idea of 'pleasure, luxury ."'53
However, the Akkadian tal]du "tiberreichlich" and tul]du "uberreichliche
Ftille", whose "denominative" verb in the participial form is mutai].!Jidu,54
often appears for describing the abundance of "rain" & "high water" (milu)
from Old Babylonian onward.ss For example, in the Hymn to Marduk, 1.
27, the god Marduk is called bel tul]-di l]eng[alli? ( . . . ) m] u-.M-az-nin
nui]Si "Herr von Hliufung und Ober[fluss, der da] Ftille regnen llisst. "56 In
another text, the rain god Adad is described as follows: dAdad ii-Sa-az-na­
an eli niSI Samut tul]di "Adad lets it rain copiously for the people."57 As
Lambert notes, "nui]Su, tul]du and .!Jegallu . . . refer to abundance of water

49A. A. Assaf, P. Bordreuil & A. R. Millard, La statue de Tell Fekherye et son inscription
bilingue assyro-aramienne (Paris: Recherche sur les civilisations, 1982).
50Millard, "The Etymology of Eden," 105.
51S. A. Kaufman, " Reflections on the Assyrian-Aramaic Bilingual from Tell Fakhariyeh,"
MAARAV 3 (1 982),137-175 161; Greenfield, "A Touch of Eden," 221 : "who makes the
whole world luxuriant."
52Millard, "The Etymology of Eden," 1 05.
53Millard, "The Etymology of Eden," 104 & 105.
54Note that the Aramaic counterpart m'dn is also the D. stem in a "factitive" sense.
55A Hw, 1 378 & 1 393.
56See W. von Soden, "Zur Wiederherstellung der Marduk-Gebete BMS 1 1 und 1 2," Iraq
31 ( 1 969), 85-86. For nuygu "abundance, plenty, prosperity" which refers to water, "the
flood of fertility", not simply to "abundance in general", see W. F. Albright, "Notes on
Assyrian Lexicography and Etymology," RA 16 (1919), 1 85; CAD, Nh (1 980), 320. For
lJegallu, see CAD, tl (1956), 1 67f.
57SEM 1 17 iii 15, cited by CAD, Z (1961), 43. See also gamu ta!Jittum iznunma "it rained
hard" (ARM 2, 140:9; also cf. KAR 153 r.(!) 10 [SB)), cited by CAD , Z, 42.
 7. The Earth-Waters Relationship in Gen 2 1 29

and profusion of plant life . . . [and] are often found in association with
Adad."5 s
Thus, the Aramaic verbal form m'dn, the counterpart of the Akkadian
muta!J!Jidu in the present context, probably has the literal meaning "to
make abundant in water-supply", though it may mean secondarily "to
enrich, prosper, make luxuriant." The Aramaic phrase m'dn mt kln "one
who makes the whole land abundant in water-supply" as an epithet of the
rain god Hadad certainly fits the context of this bilingual inscription very
well .
This new evidence could be expected to lead scholars to rethink the
possibility of finding a cognate of 'eden. In fact, Greenfield and others
have already reinterpreted the meaning of 'dn in the Ugaritic text KTU
1 .4:V:6-7 [5 l : V:68-69] in the light of the Aramaic evidence.

b. Ugaritic

KTU 1 .4:V:6-7 [5 1 :V:68-691

wn ap . 'dn . mtrh 69 )b*'l y'dn .

.

'dn . !k*t . b glJ

The poetic structure of this text is usually understood as an unbalanced

bicolon (5 :3) and has been translated in various ways: for example,

Now moreover Baal will abundantly give abundance of rain,

abundance of moisture with snow. (Driver, CML, 97)

Lo Baal sets the season of his rain

The season of the ship on the ocean. (Gordon, PLMU, 95)

Moreover, Ba'lu should appoint the time of his rain,

the time of the Jkt-ship with snow. (de Moor, SPUMB, 148)

(Ecoute) encore ceci:

Ba'al va fixer l'heure de sa pluie,
l'heure du jaillissement des !lots. (Caquot & Sznycer, TO, 207)

ssw. G. Lamben, "Trees, Snakes and Gods in Ancient Syria and Anatolia," BSOAS 48
( 1985}, 436.
1 30 The Earth and the Waters in Gen I and 2

Now at last Baal may appoint a time59 for his rain,

a time for (his) barque (to appear) in the snow. (Gibson, CML2, 60)

And moreover Baal will provide his luxuriant rain,

a luxuriant . . . with overflow." (Greenfield60)

And now Baal will fertilize with the luxuriance of his rain,
the luxuriance of watering in turbulence (flow?) (Smith)6 1

De Moor holds that "Regardless whether one connects b'l y'dn with I. 68
or with the rest of 1. 69, the resulting verse is rather long. This is, how­
ever, not without parallels in Ug. poetry."62 In a recent treatment of this
text, de Moor, with Korpel, suggests the 3 :5 structure and takes the first
line as an independent clause, translating:

wn ap . 'dn . m(rh Also it is the prime time for his rains,

b*'l . y'dn . 'dn . lk*t . b glJ Ba'lu should appoint the time of
the barque with snow.63

On the other hand, Olmo Lete divides the lines differently resulting in a
more balanced structure (4:4):

wn ap . 'dn . m(rh b*'l . Ya que asf podni almacenar su lluvia Ba'Ju,

y'dn . 'dn . lk*t . b glJ hacer acopio de abundancia de nieve.(MLC, 202)

Margalit, who holds that "the prevalent stichometric arrangement of this

text [5:3], found or presupposed in (e.g.) A NET, CML , and TO, is mis­
taken" ,64 has a still different analysis for its structure:

wnap . 'dn . m(rh . b'l

y'dn . 'dn . lk(?)t .

59Note that it is the god SamaS in Babylonia who usually appoints a time and provides an
omen; cf. CAD, A/)(1 964), 1 00; A. R. Millard, "The Sign of the Flood," Iraq 49 (1 987),
63, I. 86: adanna d gamag jgkunamma (Gilg. XI:86).
60Greenfield, "A Touch of Eden," 221 .
6 1 M. S. Smith, "Interpreting the Baal Cycle," UF 18 (1 986), 3 14 & n. 5. Cf. M. S. Smith,
"Baal's Cosmic Secret," UF 16 (1984), 297, where he translated 'dn as "season."
62De Moor, SPUMB, 1 48.
63M. C. A. Korpel & J. C. de Moor, "Fundamentals of Ugaritic and Hebrew Poetry," UF
18 ( 1 986), 1 80.
648. Margalit, A Matter of"Life" and "Death": A Study of the Baal-Mot Epic (CTA 4-5-6)
(Neukirchen-VIuyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1980), 214, n. 2.
 7. The Earth-Waters Relationship in Gen 2 131

bglJ . k!t!tn6S . qlh . From the turbulence (?) he lowered his voice
b'rpt . Srh . From the clouds (he lowered) his flash
lar$ . brqm (He lowered his flash) to earth as lightning.66

However, the versification 3 :2:3 with AXB pattem,67 in which an A-line

and a B-line have an organic unity despite their inserted modifier, X-line,
might be suggested for this text:

wn ap68• 'dn . mfrh Now indeed abundance of his rain

b*'l . y'dn . Baal will supply;
'dn . Jr*t . b glJ abundance of (subterranean) waterfrom flooding.

In this structure, mtrh would be interpreted as being in parallel with p-*t or

with the phrase 1r*t . b g/1 as a whole (which stands as a "Ballast Variant"69
to m{rh) rather than with g/1.

1k*t:

Two possible readings have been suggested, since the second sign can be
read either as <k> or as <r> :
( 1 ) 1rt "moisture" (Driver) in the light of Arabic.1arra " gave plentiful
water" or 1ariya "was well-watered ."7o
(2) Jkt "a kind of 'ship' = New Eg. sk. ty" (Gordo n ) ; 7 ' "1kt-ship" (de
Moor);72 "bateaux" (pl.) (Lipinski);73; 1akka "voyager" (Caquot).74
As for the second position, there seems to exist a phonological diffi-

65This should be read as wtn /wutina/ (G. passive). See D. T. Tsumurd, "The verba primae
waw, WLD, in Ugaritic," UF 1 1 ( 1 979), 78 1 , n. 2 1 ; Olmo Lete, MLC, 202.
66Margalit, A Matter of "Life" and "Death", 2 1 6.
67Cf. D. T. Tsumura, "Literary Insertion (AXB Pattern) in Biblical Hebrew," Vf 3 3
( 1 983), 468-482; "Literary Insertion, AXB Pattern, in Hebrew and Ugaritic: a Problem of
Adjacency and Dependency in Poetic Parallelism," UF 1 8 (1986), 351-36 1 .
68Qn the comparison of Eblaite term, AB, with Northwest Semitic ap, se$! G . Pettinato, "II
termine AB in eblaita: congiunzione AP oppure locuzione avverbiale JES?'' Or 53 (1984),
3 1 8-332.
69Cf. Gordon, UT, 1 35-1 37.
70Driver, CML, 1 5 1 , following Gaster, & n. 22.
7' Gordon, UT 19.2680. This is a well attested term for "boat" in the New Kingdom
period; cf. A. Erman & H. Grapow, WAS, IV, 3 1 5.
72De Moor, SPUMB, 149.
73E. Lipinski, "Epiphanie de Baal-Haddu: RS 24.245," UF 3 ( 1 97 1 ), 86f.
74Caquot & Sznycer, TO, 207, n.t.
1 32 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

culty, for Egyptian s probably corresponds to the Hebrew <s> /s/, and not
to the Ugaritic /!/, as Pinel)as does to Egyptian p(1)n!Jsi.15 Also this view
does not fit the context well. Pope and Tigay76 hold that Herdner's copy,
i.e. a shaded k, could be "only the partial remains of r (in fact the follow­
ing single horizontal wedge could be the tail-end of the r, rather than a t). "
And they suggest accepting "the reading Jrt advocated by Driver, or Jr. "
They then conclude that "the word could refer to the subterranean sources
of moisture or to the irrigated earth itself." Pope elsewhere translates the
term Jrt as "watering."77 In the light of the structure of parallelism, 3:2:3
and AXB, we also would like to suggest a reading Jr*t and a meaning such
as "water", either from above or from below.

Many scholars (e.g. Dussaud, Driver, Ginsberg, Gray, Rainey, Herrmann,

Aartun, de Moor, Pope & Tigay, Dietrich-Loretz-Sanmartin, Olmo Lete,
etc.) take glJ as a metathesis of the first and the third consonant of a hypo­
thetical term J.]g in Ugaritic which they think is a cognate of Hebrew geJeg
and Akkadian gaJgu "snow"JB However, the pairing of "rain" and "snow"
does not seem to fit in the context which mentions abundance of water­
supply given by the storm god Baal together with his thunder, lightning
and clouds. In fact, the Mesopotamian rain god Adad is associated with
storm, wind, lightning, clouds and rain, but not with snow, in his
epithets.79
In 1 965 GreenfieldBO discussed the term glJ in the light of MH gig and
translated wtglJ thmt (KTU 1 .92 [200 1 ]:5) as "and the abyss was roiled."

75Pointed out orally by K. A. Kitchen.

76Pope & Tigay, "A Description of Baal," 129.
77Cf. M. H. Pope, Song of Songs (AB 7c; Garden City: Doubleday, 1977), 459; also M.
S. Smith, "Baal's Cosmic Secret," UF 16 (1 984), 297; "Interpreting the Baal Cycle," UF
18 ( 1986), 3 14.
78Cf. Driver, CML, 146; J. C. de Moor, "Studies in the New Alphabetic Texts from Ras
Shamra 1," UF 1 ( 1969) 1 80f.; SPUMB, 149; M. H. Pope & J. H. Tigay, "A Description
of Baal," UF 3 ( 1 97 1 ), 1 29; M. Dietrich 0. Loretz - J. Sanmanfn, "Stichometrische
-

Probleme in RS 24.245 UG. 5, s. 556-559, Nr. 3 vs.," UF 7 (1975), 534; M. Dahood,

=

RSP 11 (1975), 2 1 ; Olmo Lete, MLC, 202. Recently again K. Aanun, "Zur Erkliirung des
Ugaritischen Ausdrucks inr," UF 1 5 ( 1983), 4 discussed similar examples of metathesis.
79Cf. Tallqvist, AG, 246ff.
BOJ. C. Greenfield, "Amurrite, Ugaritic and Canaanite," in Proceedings of the International
Conference on Semitic Studies held in Jerusalem, 19-23 July 1965 (Jerusalem: Israel
Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 1969), 99, n. 36.
 7. The Earth-Waters Relationship in Gen 2 1 33

Gordon has also suggested a similar view: i.e. "move" or "movement," and
translated tgll thmt "she moves the Deep."S l In 1 97 1 , Lipiilski explained
more thoroughly that "le mot gll doit evoquer le rebondissement des flots
dans la tempete. L'image serait alors semblable a celle que l'on trouve au
Ps. 1 07, 25-27" and translated wtgll thmt as "et !'ocean rebondissait" (or
"et elle [Astarte] fait rebondir !'ocean." He also said that "11 apparait ainsi
que gll > glS qualifie un mouvement oscillatoire pareil au soulevement de
l'eau agitee ou effervescente."82 Similarly Caquot83 and Pope hold that the
term gll "manifestly designates a motion applicable to water."84 Recently,
Greenfield confirmed his earlier view and suggested the meaning
"overflow" for the term gll in our text.ss
On the other hand, some scholars have suggested translating the term as
"turbulence(?)"(Margalit; also Smith)S6 or "storm tempest" (Weinfeld)87 in
keeping with the nature of the storm god. However, it seems better to take
the term gll as referring to some kind of water movement caused by the
storm-god, rathe r than to the storm itself, as in a similar context in
Akkadian texts which say amat Marduk asurrakku idallal] "the word of
Marduk roils the subterranean waters" (4R 26 No. 4:5 l f.); ana utazzumiSu
iddallal]u apsii "the depths are stirred up at his (Adad's) groaning" (STC 1
205 :9 [SB lit.]).88 While Pope and Tigay suggest that "in the context gll
probably refers to a meteorological phenomenon like m{r in the parallel
clause,"89 it is more probable that fkt or lrt stands directly in parallel with
m{r, as noted above.
Now, it is important to note that abundant water for agriculture is
provided either by rain, i.e. the celestial water, or by the flooding of the
subterranean waters like Akk. milu, edii, etc. and these two waters , both
celestial and subterranean, are sometimes understood as being brought
about by a rain or storm-god like Adad, Baal or Teshub. For example, as
Lambert notes, "the Anatolian storm god controlled springs and fountains"

81 See UT 1 9.584 & UTS, 55 1 .

82Lipiftski, "Epiphanie de Baal-Haddu: RS 24.245," 86f.
83TO, 208, n. u: "bouillonner."
84Pope, Song of Songs, 459f.
85Greenfield, "A Touch of Eden," 2 2 1 .
86Margalit, A Matter of "Life" and "Death", 216 & 215, n. 1 ; also Smith, "Interpreting the
Baal Cycle," 3 1 4.
87M. Weinfe1d, "'Rider of the Clouds' and 'Gatherer of the Clouds'," lANES 5 [The
Gaster Festschrift] ( 1 973), 426, n. 43.
88Cf. CAD, D ( 1 959), 43 & 45.
89Cf. Pope & Tigay, "A Description of Baal," 1 29.
1 34 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

and also "is concerned with thunder, rain and wind" and in order to main­
tain his northern status "Adad is given 'control of subterranean water
(properly Ea's domain). ' "9 o Thus, "the storm god would have been
involved somehow with terrestrial water."9I This is certainly in keeping
with Hadad's title "water-controller of all rivers" in the Fekheriyeh
inscription, as noted above.
Now, a Ugaritic text, KTU 1 . 1 9 [ 1 Aqht] :I:45 , mentions the storm and
rain god Baal along with meteorological phenomena related to him, "dew"
(t/) 11 "rain" (rbb) and "thunder (lit. Baal's voice)" (ql . b'l) and "surging of
the two thmt-waters" (Sr' thmtm). The text reads:

bl . t1 . bl rbb Let there be no dew I let there be no rain

bl . !:r' thmtm . Let there be no surging of the two oceans
bl fbn . ql . b'l Let there be no goodness of Baal's voice!
(cf. Gordon, PLMU, 22)

Margalit thinks that the shifting to "the subterranean deep (thmt), the
source of uprising spring water" in l. 45, after speaking of "heavenly
precipitation (tl, rbb)" in l. 44, and then returning to "the heavenly arena in
the third and final allusion to aquatic phenomena," ql . b'J, is "poetically . .
. anti-climactic; contextually, it is redundant. "92 However, since thmtm is
dual and these "oceans" seem to refer to both the upper and the lower
ocean as in Gen 7: 1 1 , 8:2, etc., there is actually no "shifting" in description
from heavenly waters to the subterranean water.93
In the light of the above, it might be suggested that the immediate
context (11. 70f.) of our text KTU 1 .4:V:6--7 [5 l :V:68-69], which mentions
"thunder" (ytn qlh) & "lightning" (Srh), supports the combination "rain"
(mtr) & "(subterranean) water" (trt) rather than "rain" & "snow" since the
meteorological phenomena referred to in lines 68ff. are those of the storm
god Baal, who is less likely to be associated with snow. Hence, the term gll

90W. G . Lamben, "Trees, Snakes and Gods in Ancient Syria and Anatolia," BSOAS 48
( 1 985), 437, n. 1 5: cf. bel nag-bi u zu-un-ni "lord of abyss and rain" (BBSr, no. 6 ii
4 1 ).
9 1Lamben, "Trees, Snakes and Gods in Ancient Syria and Anatolia," 449.
92B. Margalit, "Lexicographical Notes on the Aqht Epic (Pan 11: KTU 1 . 1 9)," UF 1 6
( 1 984), 1 3 1 .
93Jt might be conjectured that ancient Canaanites considered the "surging" of two oceans as
taking place at or near El's abode; see below pp. 1 50f. on !!Jmtm "two thmt-waters" at El's
abode. Note that Aanun recently suggested the meaning, "Offnung/Auftun (des Gewassers)
der (beiden) Fluten" for !:r' thmtm and the etymology from Semitic *Sr', instead of the
conventional Sr'; cf. K. Aanun, "Neue Beitrage zum Ugaritischen Lexikon (11)," UF 1 7
( 1 985), 36f.
 7. The Earth-Waters Relationship in Gen 2 1 35

probably refers to Baal's involvement with the subterranean water; hence

"overflow" (Greenfield) or "flooding" could be suggested for the transla­
tion of the term g/1.

'dn:

The Ugaritic verb 'dn can be explained as meaning "to make abundant in
water-supply" in the light of its Aramaic cognate in the Tell Fekheriyeh
inscription as well as from the context. Here in KTU 1 .4:V:6-7 [5 l :V:68-
69], the literal sense seems to fit the context better than the more abstract
sense, since it talks about the meteorological functions of the storm-god
Baal.

c. Old South Arabic

The root *'dn appears in a text MTBNTYN h'dn, as one of the titles of Old
South Arabic god MTBNTYN. Biella suggests the meaning of *'dn as to
"bestow well-being" in the light of Hebrew 'dn to "enjoy luxuries" and
Arabic gadan "dainties. "94 However, there is a phonological difficulty in
connecting the Hebrew I 'I and the Arabic lW with Old South Arabic I '1.
If the divine name MTBNTYN, /motab-natiyanl95 or /mutib-natyiin/, is
related to the Syriac root *nt' "to be humid" (Fell)96 and means "qui assure
la fecondite de la terre grace a l'eau" as Ryckmans suggests,97 its epithet
h'dn should probably be translated as one "who supplies abundant water",
rather than " ([the god] M. who) bestows well-being", in the light of the
Ugaritic 'dn, "to make abundant in water-supply" as well as the Aramaic
m'dn mt kin, "one who makes the whole land abundant in water-supply", a
title of the god Hadad in the Fekheriyeh inscription.

94J. C. Biella, Dictionary of Old South Arabic: Sabaean Dialect (HSS 25; Chico, CA:
Scholars Press, 1982), 354. However, there is no entry for 'dn in A. F. L. Beeston, M. A.
Ghul, W. W. MUlle_r & J. Ryckmans, Sabaic Dictionary (English-French-Arabic)
(Louvain-la-Neuve: Editions Peeters, 1982).
95p_ Hommel, Ethnologie und Geographie des a/ten Orients (MUnchen: C. H. Beck'sche,
1926), 143.
96Cf. A. Jamme, "Le Pantheon Sud-arabe preislamique d'apres les sources epigraphiques,'"
Le Museon 60 ( 1 947), 97, n. 345: "celui qui garantit I'humidite?"
97Q. Ryckmans, Les Noms Propres Sud-semitiques Tome 1: Repertoire Analytique.
(Bibliotheque du Museon 2; Louvain: Bureaux du Museon, 1934), 20.
1 36 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

d. A rabic

The Arabic term gadanu "delicacy" was first suggested as a cognate of the
Ugaritic 'dn but, since Ugaritic has a phoneme /g/ besides I '/, the Arabic
term does not correspond to the Ugaritic one phonologically. It is possible
to take gadanu as a secondary development in the Arabic language from
the root *'dn, like Arabic ngm "to sing" which corresponds to the Ugaritic
n'm. However, one should search in Arabic for a term based on *'dn as a
possible cognate of the Ugaritic 'dn, the Aramaic 'dn, the Hebrew 'dn as
well as the Old South Arabic 'dn.
In fact, there is an Arabic verb 'adana "to dwell, abide"98 from *'dn,
which might be related to the Ugaritic 'dn and other West Semitic cognate
terms. Lane suggests the translation "Gardens of abode, or gardens of
perpetual abode" for the phrase jannatu 'adnin,99 which might preserve an
ancient tradition about Eden. The sense "(perpetual) abode" in Arabic is
perhaps the result of semantic development such as "a well-watered place"
> "oasis" > "perpetual abode", like Akkadian edurii (Lw from Sum. e­
duru 5 , "manor or farm on wet ground" or "moistened ground" 100) which
seems to refer etymologically to "a small rural settlement with a permanent
water supply." 1 o 1

In the light of the above one might suggest the meaning of 'eden as " a
place where there is abundant water-supply" (cf. Gen 1 3 : 10) 102; its verbal
root *'dn means primarily "to make abundant in water-supply" , 1 03 and
secondarily "to enrich, prosper, make luxuriant." The term *'eden (pl.
'lidanim in Ps 36:9) 104 which means "pleasure, luxury" has the same
etymology as "Eden" with this secondary meaning, though MT seems care-

980lmo Lete, MLC, 598 notes van Zij l's suggestion to connect Ugaritic 'dn with Arabic
cognate 'adana, though with a different meaning, "fecundidad."
99Lane, AEL, I, 1976.
wow. W. Hallo, "Antediluvian Cities," JCS 23 ( 1 970), 58 & n. 16.
1 0 1 CA D , E ( 1 958), 39.
1 02This etymology is supported by Gen 1 3 : 10, which reads: "that it was well watered
everywhere like the garden of the Lord." See Cassuto, From Adam to Noah, I 08.
1 03Note, however, that no "rain" had yet been involved with Eden in Gen 2:8 and only "the
'ed-water" was irrigating the whole land.
1 04 Cassuto translates Ps 36:9 as "and Thou givest them to drink from the river of Thy
watering" and suggests rabbinic examples: i.e. B. Kethuboth ! Ob "rain waters, saturates,
fertilizes and refreshes [m:1'adden]; "Just as the showers come down I upon the herbs and
refresh [m:J'add:Jnim] them", etc. (Sifre' Deut. 32:2). Cf. Cassuto, From Adam ro Noah,
107f.
 7. The Earth-Waters Relationship in Gen 2 1 37

fully to distinguish 'eden from *'eden . Ios This root is also possibly
reflected in the personal names, [lmy'dn and m 'dnh, which appear on
ancient Hebrew seals.J06

Excursus: Etymology of Tigris and Euphrates

I . Tigris

The Sumerian name for the Tigris, id ig(i)na, is attested from the pre­
Sargonic period onward. I07 Since it is generally true that geographical
names preserve much older traditions than personal names, the initial
consonant of the Hebrew piddeqel "Tigris" /p/ may preserve a pre­
Sumerian or early Sumerian pronunciation. I os Judging from the
correspondence between idig(i)na (Sum.) /1 idigra -um (Ebla.) // idiqlat
(Aide) <-> Hebrew piddeqel (< *pid + iqlu), the Hebrew form is probably
an early borrowing of the Sumerian original via a non-Akkadian
language.J 09
Delitzsch ( 1 9 1 4) proposed the etymology of Sumerian idigna as from
*idigina meaning "running river," which was accepted by Albright &
L a m b d i n . I I O Lambert similarly explains idigina as "flowing river"

105Recently, Lemaire interpreted both '&fen in Genesis story and 'eden of the geographical
name bet 'eden ( Bit-Adini) in Amos 1 :5 as referring to a specific location, i.e. "les hautes
=

vallees du tJabur, du Balib et de l'Euphrate", which he thinks is the most irrigated and
prosperous region of the ancient Near East and corresponds well to the description of Eden
in the Genesis story; cf. A. Lemaire, "Le pays d'Eden et le Bit-adini aux origines d'un
mythe," Syria 58 (198 1 ), 3 1 3-330, esp. 327f. His interesting hypothesis however needs to
be scrutinized on the basis of other available evidence such as the river names, the stone
name $6ham (2: 1 2) and others. Note also a brief account of the Sumerian 'paradise' myth
and its proposed connection with Genesis story in Kramer, The Sumerians, 147-149.
I 06F. Israel, "Quelques precisions sur l'onomastique h ebrai'que feminine dans
l'epigraphie," SEL 4 (1 987), 80 & n. 15 (p. 86).
1 07See D. 0. Edzard-G. Farber-E. Sollberger, Die Ores- und Gewiissernamen der
priisargonischen und sargonischen Zeit (RGTC 1 ; Wiesbaden: Ludwig Reichert, 1 977),
2 1 6.
108See p. 1 25, n. 39 on the earlier pronunciation of E. as /ha/ or /tla/ in Eblaite Sumerian.
109See above p. 1 14.
I 1 0W. F. Albright & T. 0. Lambdin, "The Evidence of Language," The Cambridge
Ancient History. 3rd ed., I (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970), 148. Cf. M.
C. Astour, "Semites and Hurrians in Northern Transtigris," in D. I. Owen & M. A.
Morrison (eds.), Studies on the Civilization and Culture of Nuzi and the Hurrians. Vol. 2:
1 38 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

(id+gina}, which is a good Sumerian name. Though the Tigris is sometimes

explained as "Swift River", the Sumerian term gina does not mean
"sw ift. " l l l Recently, Heimpel gave an entirely new explanation: i d
"FluB"+igna "Lazuli", 1 1 2 but this is highly speculative. On the other hand,
Baldacci attempts to connect Tigris with the d ivine name dNI.DA.KUL,
which he reads i -ta-qui (= Heb. piddeqel). But the reading of this divine
name is not established and his argument needs more positive support, 1 1 3
since i n Eblaite the river Tigris i s spelt a s 1-di-gi-ra-um. However, a name
for the deified river Tigris appears as dJdiglat or d.fdjdigina.JJ 4

2. Euphrates

The Sumerian name buranun (> Akk purattu or purantu) of the Euphrates
(Heb p;,rat) has been explained as "mighty water source" by Delitzsch 1 1 5 or
"lordly river" (Lambert). l l 6 The Euphrates appears in Eblaite as biJ-Ja-na­
tim /puran(a)tim/ (genitive) in ARET 5, 3:IV:3. 1 1 7 In Mari texts, the name
Euphrates appears both with and without the assimilation of /n/. E.g. pu-ra­
tim (ARM 24 1 1 et al) and pu-ra-an-tim (ARM 2, 22, 21 & 2, 25, 4. 1 3). 1 1 8
The unassimilated forms also appear as pu-ra-na-ta (AH, S i:7) and pu-ra-

General Studies and Excavations at Nuzi 9/1 (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1987), 19, n.
109. Prof. Lambert orally suggested this meaning (1 5.7.87).
I l l Note Edzard's comment in his review article, D. 0. Edzard, "(Review of) A.
Kammenhuber: Die Arier im Vorderen Orient. Heidelberg: Car! Winter Universitiitsverlag,
1 968," ZDMG 1 20 ( 1 970), 3 1 3. Cf. Wolfgang Heimpel, "The Natural History of the
Tigris according to the Sumerian Literary Composition LUGAL," JNES 46 (1987), 3 1 2.
1 12W . Heimpel, "Das Untere Meer," ZA 77 (1987), 5 1 , n. 92.
1 1 3M. Baldacci, "Note semitico-occidentali sulla geografia religiosa ad Ebla," Biblia e
Oriente 24 ( 1 982), 223 & n. 15; P. Xella, "'Le Grand Froid': Le dieu Baradu madu a
Ebla," UF 1 8 ( 1 986), 440, n. 14.
1 1 4See W. G. Lambert, "ldigina/Idiglat," R/A 5h-2 (1976), 31 f. Note also that the Hurrian
name for the Tigris appears in a Ugaritic alphabetic text as argl] (KTU 1 . 100:63 & 64); cf.
J. C. de Moor, "East of Eden," ZA W l OO ( 1 988), 1 10. On Hurrian names for the Tigris,
i.e. A ranza!Ji and A ra Hi!J, see G. F. del Monte & J. Tischler, Die Orts- und
Gewiissernamen der hethitischen Texte (RGTC 6; Wiesbaden: Ludwig Reichert, 1978),
524.
1 1 5Cf. Astour, "Semites and Hurrians in Northern Transtigris," 19, n. 1 10.
1 1 60ral communication ( 1 5.7.87).
1 1 7Cf. D. 0. Edzard, Hymnen, Beschworungen und Verwandtes (ARET 5; Roma, 1 984),
23.
l l 8Cf. B. Groneberg, Die Orts- und Gewiissernamen der altbabylonischen Zeit (RGTC 3;
Wiesbaden: Ludwig Reichert, 1980), 303.
 7. The Earth-Waters Relationship in Gen 2 1 39

na-ti (KAR 360.7). 1 1 9 Its etymology is still unknown.

1 19Cf. Lambert & Millard, AH, 149. For other examples of the unassimilated forms, see
G. F. del Monte & J. Tischler, Die Ores- und Gewiissernamen der hechicischen Texce
(RGTC 6; Wiesbaden: Ludwig Reichert, 1 978), 543f.; I. M. Diakonoff & S. M. Kashkai,
Geographical Names According eo Urarcian Texcs (RGTC 9; Wiesbaden: Ludwig Reichert,
198 1 ), 1 1 1 .
 Chapter 8

GOD AND THE WATERS

In the previous chapters we have noted that in both Gen 1 :2 and Gen 2:5--6
the terms ( t�hom and 'ed) which are normally used for the subterranean
waters appear to describe the initial state of the earth. In Gen 1 the t�hom­
water seems to have covered the whole earth ( 'ere$); in Gen 2 the 'ed­
water is covering only a part of the earth, the "land" ( 'Miimiih). In Gen 1 ,
however, the water from above, from which rain comes down, was not
separated from the water from below, i.e. the subterranean waters, until
the creation of riiqfa', I a division in the water, at vs. 6ff. But, in Gen 2, the
rain is already referred to, though negatively: "The Lord God had not yet
caused it to rain."
In this final chapter we would like to discuss the nature of the relation­
ship between God and the waters in these two chapters of Genesis in
comparison with extra biblical materials.

A. GOD AS A RAIN-GIVER

The rain-giving god, who is one of the most active deities in many parts of
the world, is known not only from written texts such as myths and legends
but also from iconographies, for example, in various cylinder seal
impressions of the ancient Near East.2 He is known as Hadda in Eblaite,3 as

1 For a recent discussion of this term, see P. Collini, "Studi sul lessico della metallurgia
nell'ebraico biblico e nelle lingue Siro-Palestinesi del II e I millennio A. C.," SEL 4 ( 1987),
19-20 & n. 93-98 (pp. 33-34).
2He is represented in Nos. 725-726, 779-780, 782 & 787-792 of D. Collon's list and his
consort is pictured as a nude goddess with rainfall in No. 780, cf. D. Collon, First
Impressions: Cylinder Seals in the A ncient Near East (London : British Museum
Publications, 1 987), 1 70.
3In Eblaite, "one of the most frequently occurring gods is Adda, probably pronounced
142 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

Adad or Addu in Akkadian,4 as Baal, Hadad or Haddu in Ugaritic and as

Teshub in Hurrian and Hittite.
This deity is often called "a giver of abundant water-supply." In the
Akkadian text cited above,s the rain god Adad is described as the god who
"lets it rain copiously for the people" (uSaznan e/i niSI Samiit tu!Jdi). The
Tell Fekheriyeh text also mentions Hadad, the god of life-giving water, as
m'dn mt kin 11 mutal.JlJidu kibnitl'one who makes the whole land abundant
in water-supply." Immediately before that, he is called the " water­
controller of all rivers" (gwg/ nhr klm). Thus, he is sometimes understood
not simply as a rain-giving god but also as a controller of the subterranean
waters like Ea, the god of Apsu, the subterranean ocean.
Similarly, the LORD God of Gen 2 is understood as a rain-giver as well
as the controller of the subterranean waters. While he has not yet sent rain
to the earth (v. 5), he supposedly drained the 'ed-water so that he could
make a garden and plant trees in it (vs. 8-9). Though the narrator simply
describes as background information6 that a river was coming out of Eden
(v. 1 0), the LORD God, the single dramatis personae in this section of the
story, must have controlled the course of the river water from the well­
watered place Eden when he planted the garden. Thus, he is the controller
of both rain and the subterranean water like Hadad.? However, the Lord
God is more than a water-controller, who gives abundant water-supply. He
is the maker of the total universe, i .e. "earth and heaven" ( 'ere fi
w�Samayim)B as expressed in the beginning of this story (2:4).

Hadda, biblical Baal or Hadad, the storm god," cf. W. G. Lambert, "Old Testament
Mythology in its Ancient Near Eastern Context," Congress Volume: Jerusalem 1986 (SVT
40; Leiden: Brill, 1988), 130.
4Cf. Roberts, ESP, 1 3f. for the early attestation of Adad or Addu in the old Semitic PNs.
Also Tallqvist, AG, 246--249.
5See above p. 1 28.
6Gen 2:10-14, in which no single wayqtl appears, is off the main line story-line, thus
constituting an embedded discourse, see above p. 85 for a bibliography.
7This is not a place for a detailed discussion of Yahweh-Baal relationship. Note, however,
the recent treatment of Ps. 29 by C. Kloos, who argues that Yahweh is presented as an
Israelite Baal in this psalm, cf. C. Kloos, Yhwh's Combat with the Sea: A Canaanite
Tradition in the Religion ofAncient Israel (Leiden: Brill, 1986) and J. Day's review of this
book in "(A Review of) Yhwh's Combat with the Sea: A Canaanite Tradition in the
Religion of Ancient Israel. By Carola Kloos. Pp. 243. Leiden: Brill, 1 986," JTS 39
( 1 988), 1 5 1-1 54. For a reappraisal of the alleged connection between God as a warrior
king in Hab 3 and Baal, the victor over Yam, see my forthcoming article, "Ugaritic Poetry
and Habakkuk 3," TB 40 (1 989).
8For this idiomatic pair, see above p. 69, n . 9.
 8. God and the Waters 1 43

B. WATERY BEGINNING

As God is deeply involved with the t:Jhom-water through his rii•ft and his
word in Gen 1 :2, how shall we interpret the nature of the relationship
between God and the t:Jhom-water in comparison with other Near Eastern
mythologies which deal with a watery beginning?
According to Kramer, "the Sumerian thinkers assumed that before the
universe came into being there existed nothing but water, that is, they
postulated the existence of a primeval sea. "9 It is significant however to
note, with Lambert, that the motif of a "watery beginning" ("der
wasseriger Anfang") was by no means only a Mesopotamian notion. "The
ancient Egyptians quite generally acknowledged the god of the primaeval
waters Nu (Nun)t O as the source of all things. In early Greece . . . Ocean is
described as the father (yEvt:ats) of the gods in Homer, and water is the
prime element in the cosmologies of Thales and Anaximander. Thus the
watery beginning of Genesis is in itself no evidence of Mesopotamian
influence. " 1 1
The "watery beginning" of Gen 1 : 2 could well be a reflection of the
universal understanding of water as a basic element of the cosmos.
Certainly the relationship between the earth and the waters is a primary
concern of mankind, since on the one hand water is the source of life in a
normal physical life and, on the other hand, flooding is a major threat to
life on the earth. Therefore, it is no surprise that many ancient traditions
are concerned with the initial state of the earth in relation to the water.
However, while there is a similarity between these ancient traditions and
the Genesis story in terms of a watery beginning, there are also differences

9S. N. Kramer, "(Review of) H. and H. A. Frankfort, John A. Wilson, Thorkild

Jacobsen, William A. lrwin. The Intellectual Adventure of Ancient Man: An Essay on
Speculative Thought in the Ancient Near East. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago,
1946, VI, 40 lpp.," JCS 2 ( 1 948), 43; The Sumerians: their History, Culture, and
Character (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1963), 1 1 3.
I Ofor this term, see A. Erman & H. Grapow, WAS, 11, 2 14: nnw/n w. w?/n wnw? Cf. Gk.
Nouv & Coptic Nun.
I I W. G. Lambert, "A New Look at the Babylonian Background of Genesis," JTS 1 6
( 1 965), 293; also "Babylonien und Israel," TRE 5 ( 1 979), 7 1 ; "Kosmogonie," RIA 6
( 1980-83), 2 1 8-222, esp. 220; "Old Testament Mythology in its Ancient Near Eastern
Context," 1 26. For Egyptian parallels, see J.K. Hoffmeier, "Some Thoughts on Genesis I
& 2 and Egyptian Cosmology," lANES 15 ( 1 983), 39-49.
144 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

in the nature of relationship between the water and the creator god as well
as in the details of description. In the following section, we will deal
specifically with such creator gods as Marduk, El and Ea who correspond
in some way to Elohim of the Genesis story.

i, 1 �, 1 . A "creator" god and the water

,\:
\u\ '
a . Marduk, Ed and El

While scholars have noted similarities between the Marduk of Enuma elish
and the Baal of the Ugaritic myths in that both are "storm" gods, fight with
sea-dragons and become the king of the gods, etc., there is major difference
between these two deities: Marduk "created" or rather formed the cosmos,
but Baal did not.J2 As noted above, as far as the creation of the cosmos is
concerned, in Ugaritic mythology it is the god El, not Baal, that seemingly
corresponds to the "creator" god Marduk. Therefore, it is suggested by
some that El's relationship with thm(t) should be compared to Marduk's
relationship with Tiamat and that both should be compared to Elohim's
relationship with "the water of t;Jhom" in Genesis.
Recently, de Moor interpreted the "two thmt-waters" near El's abode as
" Upper and Lower Flood" since, he thinks, "the Ugaritians were acquainted
with the idea of a celestial and a subterranean thmt." I 3 Then he compares
the two "Floods" with the two parts of Tiamat divided by Marduk and the
upper and lower waters separated by YHWH. And he explains that, like
Marduk (Ee IV. 1 35ff.) and YHWH (Gen 1 :6; Prov 3 : 1 9f., cf. 2 Sam
22: 1 6), "the Ugaritic god El was held responsible for the separation of the
cosmic waters. " 1 4
However, it should be noted that what Marduk created by dividing the
body of Tiamat were "heaven" (Ee IV 1 37-8) and "earth " (Ee V 62),

12See above pp. 64f.

13J. C. de Moor, "Studies in the New Alphabetic Texts from Ras Sharnra 1," UF 1 (1969),
1 82, n. 1 08. Cf. also his explanation of qrb.apq. thmtm "in the bedding of the Two
Floods," i.e. in the stream-bed of the Upper and Lower Flood (J. C. de Moor, "El, the
Creator," in G. Rendsburg er a/ (eds.), The Bible World: Essays in Honor of Cyrus H.
Cordon [New York: KTAV, 1 980], 1 83); b'dt thmtm "at the confluence of two Floods."
See below pp. 1 5 l f.
14"Although these acts of creation ended the state of chaos, the Floods had to be kept under
tight control . . . El dwelt at this remote point of the cosmos . . . to maintain the order." (de
Moor, "El, the creator," 1 83).
 8. God and the Waters 145

which do not include the subterranean water, for Ea had already established
his abode on Apsu (Ee I 73ff.) when Marduk defeated Tiamat (Ee IV 101-
104) 15 Moreover, Marduk's abode is never associated with waters, while
.

the god El in Ugaritic myths is described as dwelling "at the sources of the
two rivers", i.e. "in the midst of the streams of the two thmt-waters. "
In Enuma elish, i t i s the god Ea who resides a t the watery location,
Apsu. On the other hand, Marduk's palace Esagila is located on the earth,
between E �arra (="lower heaven"), Enlil's domain, and Apsu, Ea's
domain.J6 Therefore, Ea has a closer similarity with El than with Marduk
as regards the relationship between the creator gods and their abodes near
or in the waters.
Recently C. H . Gordon summarized a number of common features
which Ea, who is the Sumerian Enki,I7 shares with El in Ugaritic mythol­
ogy. In the following, we will note in detail the similarity between Ea and
El in their being "creator" gods and their living in a watery abode. IS

I5Jn fact, Marduk was born "within the Apsii." Cf. Ee I 8 1 f.

I 6See above p. 76.
17En-ki ("Lord of Earth") is called E-a in Akkadian texts, but since it has supposedly no
Semitic etymology, Kramer suggests that "Ea" may be of "Ubaidian" origin (S. N.
Kramer, In the World of Sumer: An Autobiography [Detroit: Wayne State University
Press, 1986], 202). However, Gordon proposes a Semitic etymology in the light of the
Sumerian-Eblaite bilingual vocabulary:
EN.KI : E-um fl.tay(y)um/ "The Living One"
and compares the god J:lay(y)a with the Ugaritic god Baal whose epithet is also "Prince,
Lord of Earth" (zbl b'l ar$ in KTU 1 .6 [49] :1: 42-43 [ 14-15], etc.) and who is "a dying
and rising god, mourned when dead (mt) and joyously hailed when again alive (by)." E-a =
l:lay(y)a is thus the living "Lord of Earth", cf. C. H. Gordon, "Eblaitica", Eblaitica I
(1987), 20; "(A Review of) S. N. Kramer, In the World of Sumer: An Autobiography.
Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1 986," JCS 39 (1 987), 249. See also Roberts,
ESP, 20, where he suggests *�yy "to live" as a possible etymology of E-a.
I BOther aspects which Gordon discusses are as follows:
( 1 }. wisdom: "Enki's wisdom matches El's sagacity." (Gordon, "[A Review of] S. N.
Kramer, In the World of Sumer, 1986," 249).
(2}. god ofmagic: "The spell of Enki recalls El's exorcism in the Epic of Kret (1 .16 [ 126]:
V:25)." (Gordon, "[A Review of] S. N. Kramer, In the World of Sumer, 1986," 249).
Note that "as god of ablution magic he was usually called En-uru: 'Lord Reed Bundle',
after the reed bundles out of which was constructed the reed hut in which the rites were
performed." (J acobsen, TIT, 22 ).
(3}. drunken god: "The tipsy Enki is to be compared with the drunken El." (Gordon, "(A
Review of] S. N. Kramer, In the World of Sumer, 1986," 249). See Kramer, The
Sumerians, 161.
1 46 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

b. Similarity between Ea and El

(1 ). Creator of creatures

Like El's epithet bny bn wt "creator of creatures",t9 Ea has a similar

title, banu nabnit "creator of creatures" in a text which reads:

Ea . . banii nabnit piitiq kullat mimma �um�u

.

"Ea, who creates creatures, who forms everything."

(Borger Esarh. 79:4)20

This title is used only with the god Ea in Akkadian. Another title of Ea,
ban binutu, which is the exact counterpart of Ugaritic bny bnwt,2t appears
in the expression, [dN1]nGiku mummu biin binutu (PSBA 20 1 58 : 1 4).22 Ea is
also called "creator of everything" (ban kala) with the title m ummu, an
epithet which is usually used with Ea (and Marduk).23 Anu and Enlil, the
other gods of the triad, were also called banu kalama "creator of every­
thing"24 but neither these great gods nor Marduk,25 the "creator" god, were
called ban binutu or banu nabnit.

(2). Creator of the cosmos

Ea is also the creator of the cosmos like El. Ea created "land and sea"
(Gadi u tamat1)26 and is called mummu ban Game u erf?eti "the mummu,
creator of heaven and earth" (LKA 77 i 29f.).27 A similar title, "creatress
of heaven and earth" (banal Game u erf?eli), is used with N a m m u 28 in
whose chamber Ea dwells. Ea is also called piitiq Game u erf?eli "creator of

19See above pp. 64f., for the fact that El, not Baal, is the creator god in Ugaritic myths.
20CAD, Nft( 1980), 28; cf. Tallqvist, AG, 69.
2 1 Cf. de Moor, "El, the creator," 1 82f.
22NinSiku was an epithet of Ea, see Lambert & Millard, AH, 148f., n. to I. 16.
23Jraq 15 1 23 : 1 9; etc, cf. CAD, Mh (1977), 197; CAD, B ( 1965}, 87f.
24Tallqvist, AG, 254 & 300. Note a similar title of a river god, biinat kaliima. See above p.
1 02.
25Tallqvist, AG, 366.
26Racc. 46, 30, cited by AHw, 1 353.
27CAD, Mh, 197. See the Sumerian myth, "Enki and the World Order: the Organization of
the Earth and Its Cultural Processes" (Kramer, The Sumerians, 122, 17 1-183 & 294), for
a detailed account of Enki's creative activities."
28Tallqvist, AG, 7 1 .
 8. God and the Waters 1 47

heaven and earth" and ban kullati "creator of everything,"29 and as a

creator god his name was Nudimmud.JO Ea is called zarii mati "progenitor
(or father) of the land."JI Thus, as the water god,32 Ea was the creator of
cosmos par excellence, though Marduk and S ama S were also called
"creator" (ban[u]) of "heaven and earth" (Same u erfieli).33

(3). Father of the gods

Just as El is the "father" of Baal and other deities (bn ilm), Ea, the father
of Marduk who is "the first born of Enki", is called abu ilani "father of the
gods."34

(4). Father of man

Like El, the "father of man" (ab adm), Ea is called banu nise "creator
of people."35 Ea as a "creator" fashioned man from the blood of Kingu: i.e.
ina damesu ibna ameliitu (Ee VI 3 3),36 Ea also created man in Atra-tJasis,
or at least it was his idea; he was also the creator of man in the Old
Babylonian Agu Saya hymn as well as in the Sumerian myth of Enki and
Ninhurs ag .37 The "Eridu Genesis" mentions that Anu, Enlil, Enki and
Ninhursag fashioned the dark-headed (people),38

When de Moor concluded his discussion on "El, the creator" by saying

29TaJiqvist, AG, 289.

30Ee I 16, cf. Jacobsen, TIT, 22.
3 1 TaJiqvist, AG, 289; cf. Kramer, The Sumerians, 175.
32Tiamat is also described by the title mwnmu in Ee I 4 (see above p. 8 1 ) but she was never
a supreme deity in Mesopotamia. Note that the river goddess appears as a creator in the
Harab Myth (see above p. 99, n. 34) as well as in a myth of "SchopfungsfluB": Niiro biinat
kaliima (see above, n. 24).
33TaJ1qvist, AG, 69.
34Tallqvist, AG, 289; Livingstone, MMEW, 75. Cf. also CAD, A/2 ( 1 968), 195.
35Tallqvist, AG, 69 & 289. Note a different title, biinii $almiit qaqqadi, for Marduk and
Nabu, cf. CAD, N{J, 28; B, 87; Tallqvist, AG, 69.
36Cf. Jacobsen, The Treasures ofDarkness, 1 8 1 .
37See Kramer, The Sumerians, 149f. ;van Dijk, Acta Or. 28 - ARM. For the most recent
treatment of "Enki and Ninhursag", see P. Attinger, "Enki et Ninbursa�a," ZA 74 (1 984),
1-52. For the goddess Nin bursa�a, see T. Jacobsen, "The Eridu Genesis," JBL 100
(198 1 ), 514, n. 5; W. G. Lambert, "Kosmogonie," R/A 6 (1 980-83), 219.
38Jacobsen, "The Eridu Genesis," 515. For these four gods, see Kramer, The Sumerians,
1 18-122.
1 48 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

"Like Sumerian Enlil,39 Babylonian Marduk40 and YHWH, El, the supreme
god of the Canaanites, was thought to be the 'creator of both the cosmos
and man,"'4J he seems to have ignored two other supreme gods in ancient
Mesopotamia, Anu and Ea, who were also recognized as creator-gods and
were both "father of the gods" (abu iliim). In Mesopotamian mythology,
Marduk42 was a late corner and the triad of deities, Anu, Enlil and Ea
(Enki), was already established in the Old Babylonian and Cassite periods43
before Marduk was exalted among the gods.
In a similar way, the Ugaritic senior deity El had already established his
status as the head of pantheon before Baal became a king among the gods.
Baal, however, was never called a "creator" and El remained active as the
creator god and was "not demoted to less than an honorable position. "44

2. Watery abode

Ea and El are similar not only in being the senior creator god and the
father of mankind and gods but also in living near or in the waters. On the
other hand, Enlil and Marduk as well as Baal are never associated with a
watery abode. Gordon notes that "Enki's inhabiting a watery shrine in the
Deep corresponds to El's abode at the sources of the two cosmic Rivers or
Deeps."45 However, the nature and location of El's abode is highly disputed
by Ugaritic scholars. Before we deal with this problem, let us summarize

39Cf. Krarner, The Sumerians, 1 1 8f. Note also Lambert's study on the structure of the
Hurrian pantheon which, according to him, "could well have been modelled on an archaic
Sumerian pantheon from the first half of the Third Millennium with Enlil alone at its head."
See W. G. Lambert, "The Mesopotamian Background of the Hurrian Pantheon," RHA 36
( 1978}, 1 34.
40For a recent study of Marduk, see W. Sommerfeld, Der Aufstieg Marduks: die Stellung
Marduks in der babylonischen Religion des zweiten Jahrtausends v. Chr. (AOAT 213;
Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1982) and Lambert's review article in BSOAS .
41De Moor, "El, the creator," 1 86.
42Note that Marduk is described as holding "the Anuship, the Enlilship, and Eaship" (cf.
Jacobsen, The Treasure of Darkness, 234). Cf. P. D. Miller, Jr., "The Absence of the
Goddess in Israelite Religion," HAR 10 (1 986}, 242.
43Livingstone, MM EW, 76. See above p. 76 on tripartite cosmology. Also cf. A.
Cavigneaux, H. G. Giiterbock & M. T. Roth (eds.), The Series Erim-!JuS anantu and
=

An-ta-g.il =Saqu (MSL 17; Roma: PontifJcium lnstitutum Biblicum, 1985), 9 1 , where Anu,
Enlil and Ea correspond to den-za, dmalJ-za and dki-za-za respectively.
44M. S. Smith, "Interpreting the Baal Cycle," UF 1 8 (1 986}, 338, n. 1 29.
45Gordon, "(A Review of) S. N. Kramer, fn the World ofSumer, 1 986," 249.
 8. God and the Waters 1 49

the nature and location of Ea's abode.

a. Ea's watery abode

Ea (Enki)'s titles which suggest the nature and location of his abode are
Lugal-id(ak) "Owner of the river", Lugal-abzu(ak)46 =�ar apsi "the king of
the Apsfi" and bel naqbi "the lord of the source."47 They present him as the
specific power in rivers or the subterranean waters. In a section in a certain
late text, Ea is associated with water: ul-la-nu: dea (40): mu-u "Primeval :
Ea : water. "48 Here the "water" refers to the primeval Apsfi.
Ea's abode is in Apsfi, the underground sweet waters.49 Ea (Enki) lies in
the "chamber of Nammu" (mayalu �a dNammu), the goddess of the water­
bearing strata; these chambers are down in the earth just above the "surface
of the underworld" (a�ar er$elimma).SO This accords with the description
of his abode in the "middle earth" which is between the abode of men and
the underworld.SJ Ea (Enki)'s watery chamber with two gate posts is
probably depicted in seal No. 760 in the cylinder seal impressions repub­
lished in D. Collon's recent book.52
Ea is usually pictured with two streams,sJ which Jacobsen thinks are the
Euphrates and the Tigris,54 flowing out of his shoulders or from a vase he
holds. However, in Ee V :55, the Euphrates and the Tigris are described as
the two eyes of Tiamat,ss rather than as being related to Ea's abode in

46Jacobsen, The Treasures of Darkness, I l l .

47Livingstone, MMEW, 30-3 1.
48RA 62 52 17 18, cited by Livingstone, MMEW, 74.
-

49See CAD , A/z ( 1 968), 194-197.

50'f. Jacobsen, "Sumerian Mythology: A Review Article," JNES 5 ( 1 946), 145, n. 28. He
also notes that engur is distinguished from a-ab-ba, "sea", in 1 40, n. 2 1 . This is supported
by the Eblaite vocabulary, VE, which lists:
1343': ab-a ti- 'a-ma-tum (79:r.III:8'-9')
1 344': dn ammu (ENGUR) �{-nu !p-mi-um (63-64:v.Ill :20-21 )
5 1 See above p . 74.
52Cf. Collon, First Impressions, 165; also Kramer, The Sumerians, Plate, following p.
1 60.
53Collon, First Impressions, 165 & Nos. 760-762 & 673.
54Jacobsen, The Treasures of Darkness, 1 1 1 .
55Cf. B. Landsberger & J. V. Kinnier Wilson, "The Fifth Tablet of Enuma EM," JNES 20
( 1 961), 160f. Also note: "The Tigris: her right eye. The Euphrates: her left eye." in
Livingstone, MMEW, 82f. ; cf. Landsberger & Kinnier Wilson, "The Fifth Tablet of
Enuma Eli�." 175, and "eyes of Tiamat" in Livingstone, MMEW, 163. On the origin of the
150 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

Apsil. Moreover, in seal impressions such as Collon No. 76 1 , fish are

pictured in these two "waters." These waters are probably subterranean
waters, since fish are usually described as being in the Apsu in Akkadian
texts.56

b. El's watery abode

El's abode57 is near or in the waters (mbk nhnn "at the sources of the twoss
rivers" 1/qrb apq thmtm "in the midst of the streams of the two thmt­
waters" or b'dt thmtm "in the assembly of the two thmt-waters ") and this
watery nature of El's abode is probably pictured on the "Drinking mug
with painted scene."59
There have been two opposing views about the location of El's abode.
M. H. Pope suggests that "the nature of El's abode is . . . similar to that of
the Sumero-Akkadian Enki-Ea who dwells in the apsfi. " 60 And he takes El's
abode to be in the underworld like Ea's abode. The same view has been
taken by 0. Kaiser.61
On the other hand, Clifford62 takes El's abode to be in the mountain
(!Jr�n) on the basis of internal textual evidences.63 He is followed by
Mullen, who compares El's abode at the "sources of the rivers" with "the
garden of God"// "the mountain of God" (Ezek 28: 1 3, 1 6).64 He explains

Tigris river in the Ninurta-Asakku myth, see W. Heimpel, "The Natural History of the
Tigris according to the Sumerian Literary Composition LUGAL," JNES 46 (1987), 309-
3 1 7.
56CAD, Ah. 194f. and see above p. 74.
57For a bibliography on this subject, see Smith, "Interpreting the Baal Cycle," 328, n. 83.
58N. Wyatt, "The Hollow Crown: Ambivalent Elements in West Semitic Royal Ideology,"
UF 1 8 (1986), 426, n. 32 suggests that nhnn perhaps signifies "four rivers" in accordance
with common iconographic and Biblical (Gen 2: 10-14) traditions. However, the dual form
thmtm in the parallel expressions, qrb apq thmtm and b'dt thmtm, rather suggests that the
number of rivers is two.
59AfQ 20 [ 1963], 21 1 : Fig. 30, as discussed by M. H. Pope, "The Scene on the Drinking
Mug from Ugarit," in Near Eastern Studies in Honor of William Foxwell A /bright [ed.
Hans Goedicke] (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 197 1 ), 400.
60M. H. Pope, El in the Ugariric Texts (SVT 2; Leiden: Brill, 1955), 7 1 .
610. Kaiser, Die mythische Bedeutung des Meeres in Agypten, Ugarit und Israel (BZAW
78; Berlin: A. Topelmann, 1959), 54-55.
6 2R. J. Clifford, The Cosmic Mountain in Canaan and the Old Testament (HSM 4;
Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1972), 35-57.
63These two opposing views are summarized by H. N. Wallace, The Eden Narrative (HSM
32; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1 985), 94 & 98, n. 88.
64E. T. Mullen, Jr., The Divine Council in Canaanite and Early Hebrew Literature (HSM
 8. God and the Waters 151

that "the mount of 'El was the !JurSiinu, the place of entrance to both the
Underworld and Heaven . . . at the sources of the life-giving rivers. "65 A.
S. Kapelrud recently also explained in detail that "(El) is still living on his
mountain. "66
El's living at or near the source of rivers can be compared with
Elkuni rSa's abode, i .e. "tent" , at "the source of the Mala-river (i.e. the
Euphrates)" in a Canaanite myth from Bo �azkoy .67 However, in the
Ugaritic texts no specific name is given for these rivers and there are two
rivers and thmt-waters.
These two thmt-waters6s might be compared with various Mesopotamian
traditions in which heaven and apsii are paired and possibly refer to "a
celestial and a subterranean thmt" as de Moor suggests, though his proposal
to compare the two "Floods" with the two parts of Tiamat is not acceptable
as noted above.69 It is interesting to note here that the expressions, "the
upper sea" (a.ab.ba an.ta = tiimtu elitu) and "the lower sea" (a.ab.ba ki.ta =

tiimtu Saplitu), appear in a MA tablet7o of mystical explanatory works:

while "the upper sea" is connected with S amas, "the lower sea of the rising
sun" is described as serving Ea, the god of the subterranean ocean.
It is also interesting to note that the two bodies of water were seemingly
once personified as a divine couple, Samiima "Heaven( -water) '' and
Tahiimatu "Ocean(-water)" or a composite divine being Smm - w-Thm in
Ugaritic religion. This divine pair, "Heaven"-god Samiima (= Smm) and
"Ocean"-goddess Tah iimatu (=thmt), corresponds to Sumerian A N and
ANTU respectively in Ug V l 37:III:33"-34." Therefore it seems that these
preserve an ancient tradition about the separation of heaven-water71 and

24; Chico: Scholars Press, 1980), 153. Note that the mountain waters come out of Apsu,
the subterranean sweet waters. Cf. J. van Dijk, LUGAL UD ME-LAM-bi NIR-GAL: Le recit
epique et didactique des Travaux de Ninurta, du Deluge et de la Nouvelle Creation Tome 1:
Introduction, Texte Composite. Traduction (Leiden: Brill, 1983).
65Mullen, Jr., The Divine Council in Canaanite and Early Hebrew Literature, 162.
66A. S. Kapelrud, "The Relationship between El and Baal in the Ras Shamra Texts," in G.
Rendsburg et a/ (eds.), The Bible World: Essays in Honor of Cyrus H. Gordon (New
York: KTAV, 1980), 82.
67H. A. Hoffner, Jr., "The Elkunirsa Myth Reconsidered," RHA 23 ( 1 965), 8 & 14.
68Cf. ti'iimat tu'amtu, "a deux faces, homme et femme" in van Dijk, LUGAL UD ME-LAM-bi
NIR-GAL, 26. Also cf. n. 1 00: "W. von Soden in AHw s. tu 'am tu [ ! ) = «la double
(Ti'iimat)?>>."
69De Moor, "Studies in the New Alphabetic Texts," 1 82, n. 1 08; de Moor, "El, the
creator," 1 83.
70RA 60 73 8-9, cited by Livingstone, MMEW, 77.
71 Note the anificial etymology of "heaven" (�ame) as "of water" (�a m€) in a BabyIonian
mystical explanatory work; cf. Livingstone, MMEW, 32f., I. 6. Note the same view held
1 52 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

ocean-water which is reflected in the Genesis Creation story, not in 1 :2, but
in I : 6 ff. 72 as well as in the Flood story (Gen 7:1 1 , 8 :2 ) . As de Moor
recently pointed out, in a Ugaritic incantation text, KTU 1 . 1 00, an older
mythological tradition, in which the sun-goddess (�p�) was "the mother of
Heaven (male) and Flood (female)", seems to be presupposed.n In a
mythological explanatory work from the Neo-Assyrian period,74 a similar
cosmological tradition may have influenced preserving two primeval gods,
AnSar ("totality of the upper world")15 and his "Antu" Tiamat,76 who are
equated with ASSur and IStar.
A similar tradition may be recognized in a neo-Babylonian ritual text,
which describes the initial creation of the universe as follows: "Anu created
'heaven' ( game) 11 dNudimmud (=Ea) created Apsfi."77 In Enuma elish IV
1 4 1-2, it is Marduk who shaped the "heavens" to match the Apsu.7 s The
same pair of "heaven" and apsii, "cosmic subterranean water" , appears
quite often79 and can be compared with Hebrew pair of Siim ayim and
t�hOm(ot) in Gen 7 : 1 1 , 8:2, 49:25, Dt 33 : 1 3 , Ps 1 07:26.
In the light of the above, El's abode was probably located at the farthest
horizon where "heaven" and "ocean" meet together. The biggest difference
between El and Ea is this: while El's abode seems to be related to the "two
thmt-waters", possibly "heaven" and "ocean", Ea's abode is related only to
the subterranean ocean. While El is the supreme god in Ugarit, Ea is one of
three traditional supreme deities during the second millennium B.C. in the
southern Mesopotamia and he controls only one of the three areas of
universe, i.e. Apsu . According to Lambert, in the third millennium

by H. Bauer & P. Leander, Historische Grammatik der Hebriiischen Sprache des A/ten
Testaments (Hildesheim: Georg Olmes, 1922 [ 1 962]), 621 . In the Genesis story, however,
God called raqf•"'heaven" (v. 8), not the water above it (as Stieglitz suggests). Cf. R. R.
Stieglitz, "Ugaritic Sky-gods and Biblical Heavens," NUS 35 (April, 1986), 1 3.
7 2See Stieglitz, "Ugaritic Sky-gods and Biblical Heavens," 13. This tradition is therefore
not "a piece of learning which was picked up in Babylon by the Jewish religious
leaders"(C. Kloos, Yhwh's Combat with the Sea, 85).
73J. C. de Moor, "East of Eden," ZA W l OO ( 1 988), 1 06, n. 3.
74Livingstone, MMEW, 233f.
75Cf. Borger, ABZ, 160: sar ki��atu "Gesamtheit, Welt."
=

76In an inscription of Sennacherib, AnSar is depicted "setting out in battle against Tiamat,
followed by a retinue of gods." See Livingstone, MMEW, 232.
77F. Thureau-Dangin, Rituels accadiens (Paris: Ernest Leroux, 192 1 ), 46; also cf. CAD,
Ah, 195.
78Marduk made the heavens (�am€} "a likeness of the Apsu, the abode of Nudimmud (Ea)"
(mi-iy-rit ap-si-i �u-bat dnu-dfm-mud). Cf. Livingstone, MMEW, 80.
79CAD, A/2, 194-196, esp. b, 1 ': "parallel to �amii."
 8. God and the Waters 1 53

Sumerian pantheon as well as in the second millennium Hurrian pantheon,

which reflects the northern Mesopotamian tradition, Enki-Ea was a second­
ranking deity. In this aspect, the Ugaritic god El as a creator is more
similar to Elohim of Genesis.
Thus, both creator gods, Ea and El, who have close associations with the
waters, have similar characteristics and functions. In Ugaritic, the "two
thmt-waters" ( thmtm) and the "Sea" {ym) are distinguished and are con­
nected with two different gods, El and Baal, just like Akkadian Enuma elish
in which Ea's abode is the subterranean ocean Apsfi while Marduk's enemy
is Tiamat, the sea-goddess. However, El's abode "at the sources of the two
rivers", i.e. "in the midst of the streams of the two thmt-waters", seems to
preserve older traditions about the watery abode of a creator god in the
ancient Near Eastern cosmologies.

3. Conclusion

The Biblical Elohim is also deeply involved with the "water of t::JhOm" in
the forms of "Spirit"S O (Gen I :2) and "Word" ( 1 :6ff.) but the author
ascribes to Elohim the creation of the total cosmos, "heavens and earth",
which includes the water of t::Jhom. It is true that in Mesopotamian and
Canaanite pantheons certain deities were called "the lord or creator of
heaven and earth" (e.g. Marduk, Ea and ElB l ), but in the Old Testament
theology, when Yahweh-Elohim is represented as the creator of heaven and
earth (e.g. Gen 1 : 1 , 1 4 :22), it means not only that he is incomparable with
other gods but also that he is the only god who can be treated as god, i.e.
God.82
In conclusion, the Genesis account has more similarities with Ugaritic
mythological traditions than with the BabyIonian in the area of the relation­
ship between a creator deity and the waters. However, this fact does not
prove that Genesis is dependent upon the Ugaritic mythology. The creator
god Elohim of Genesis corresponds not to Baal but to El, who has also
many similarities in characteristics and functions with Ea, the Babylonian

SO'fhe current emphasis on ru•p as "wind" (e.g. R. Luyster, "Wind and Water: Cosmogonic
Symbolism in the Old Testament," ZAW 93 [1981], 1-10; Day, God's Conflict with the
Dragon and the Sea, 39 & 1 07) is seemingly based on the supposition that there is a
Canaanite dragon myth behind Gen I :2.
81Cf. P. D. Miller, Jr., "El, the Creator of Earth," BASOR 239 (1980), 43-46.
82Cf. C. J. Labuschagne, The Incomparability of Yahweh in the Old Testament (Pretoria
Oriental Series 5; Leiden: Brill, 1966).
1 54 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

god of water. As the extant Ugaritic myths seem to presuppose the earlier
(pre-historic?)S3 traditions about the creation of the cosmos, probably by
El, it seems that both Genesis and the Ugaritic myths reflect much earlier
"common" traditions. However, since the linguistic form of Hebrew
/t;)hom/ is older than the Ugaritic /tahamu/ as noted above,s4 it is unlikely
that the Hebrew term is a depersonification of the earlier Canaanite divine
name Taham.

83Cf. Lamben, "Old Testament Mythology in its Ancient Near Eastern Context," 128: "the
creative period of myth lies in prehistory. That was the time of genuine mythic creativity, so
that the basic material was spread everywhere from the Aegean to India before our written
evidence begins. When the earliest myths and allusions known to us were written down,
the basic concern of myth had already lost some of its force." Cf. de Moor's view that
"KTU 1.100 and 1 . 107 . . . presuppose a Canaanite tradition about the Garden of Eden,"
in "East of Eden," 106.
84See above p. 62.
 Chapter 9

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The present study has been concerned with clarifying the nature of the
"earth-waters" relationship in the initial sections of the first two chapters of
Genesis. Some scholars have explained that the nature of this relationship in
chap. I is totally different from that in chap. 2. In Gen I :2 the earth was a
"watery chaos" which existed before creation; in Gen 2:5-6 the original
state of the earth was a desert, i.e. a "dry chaos." The water in the former
was "the enemy of creation"; the water in the latter was "the assisting ele­
ment of creation."
However, do the terms, toh u wabOhu and t;Jhom, in Gen I :2 really
signify a chaotic state of the earth in waters and hence "a primordial threat
against creation"? What is the function and meaning of the term 'ed in Gen
2:6? How are the waters such as "a rain-water", "an 'ed-water" and "river­
waters" related to Eden ( 'eden) and the garden of Eden?

A. ETYMOLOGY

I. tOhU wabohU

The expression tohU wiibOhU, which is traditionally translated into English

as "without form and void" (RSV) or the like, is often taken as signifying
the primordial "chaos" and direct opposition to the "creation." However,
Hebrew tohu is based on a Semitic root *thw and means "desert"; the term
bOhU is also a Semitic term based on the root *bhw, "to be empty."
It is possible that the Ugaritic expression tu-a-bi-[ u(?)], which corre­
sponds to Akkadian nabalkutu "to be out of order" and Hurrian tap-Su-!Ju­
[u]m-me (< tapS- "to be poor") in a multilingual vocabulary, has the
idiomatic meaning "to be unproductive" and is a cognate of Hebrew tOhu
wiibOhu. This idiomatic meaning would have nothing to do with "the state
1 56 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

of chaos." On the other hand, if the expression should be read as tu-a-pi­

[ku(?)] and means "to be upset", it would have no bearing on the meaning
of Hebrew tohU wabOhU, for the Ugaritic term is totally different from the
Hebrew expression.
The Hebrew term tohU means ( 1 ) "desert", (2) "a desert-like place", i.e.
"a desolate or empty place" or "an uninhabited place" or (3 ) "emptiness."
The phrase tOhii wabohii refers to a state of "aridness or unproductiveness"
(Jer 4 :23) or "desolation" (lsa 34: 1 1 ) and to a state of "unproductiveness
and emptiness" in Gen 1 :2, which was the initial state of the created earth
rather than a state brought about as a result of God's judgment on the earth
or land (as in Jer 4:23; Isa 34: 1 1 ). The earth which "was" tOhU wabOhii
signifies the earth in a "bare" state , without vegetation and animals as well
as without man.
In conclusion, both the biblical context and extra-biblical parallels
suggest that the phrase tohU wabOhU in Gen I :2 has nothing to do with
"chaos" and simply means "emptiness" and refers to the earth which is an
empty place, i.e. "an unproductive and uninhabited place."

2. t:JhOm

a. Baby/onian background

Ever since H . Gunkel's famous book Schopfung und Chaos in Urzeit und
Endzeit (1 895), many B iblical scholars have assumed some kind of direct
or indirect connection between the Babylonian goddess of the primeval
ocean Tiamat in the "creation" poem Enuma elish and the Hebrew t:Jhom.
However, it is phonologically impossible to conclude that the Hebrew
t:Jhom was borrowed from the Akkadian divine name Tia m a t. The
Akkadian term ti'amtum > tamtum normally means "sea" or "ocean" in an
ordinary sense. The fact that t;Jhom is etymologically related to Tiamat as a
cognate should not be taken as evidence for the mythological dependence of
the former on the latter.
As some Assyriologists have pointed out, one cannot simply assume that
the theme of conflict between the storm god Marduk and the sea goddess
Tiamat was original to Mesopotamian traditions. At the same time, Enuma
elish itself incorporates much older Mesopotamian traditions.
The sea has been personified as a divine being since the earliest period
of written history in Mesopotamia. On the other hand, in some later
 9. Summary and Conclusions 157

creation narratives in Mesopotamia the sea is not personified and has

nothing to do with the conflict theme. Since some narratives have never
associated the creation of the cosmos with the conflict theme at all, there is
no reason to assume that the older stage without the conflict-creation
connection necessarily developed to a stage with this connection. It should
be also noted that more than one creation tradition existed in ancient
Mesopotamia.

b. Canaanite background

While in Enuma elish the motif of conflict of a storm-god with the sea is
integrated in the story of the creation of the cosmos, in Ugaritic the Baal­
Yam conflict is not related to the "primordial struggle in connection with
the creation" at all. Unfortunately, this theme of Chaoskampf, which is
reflected in both, tends to be taken as the basic prerequisite for any
cosmogonic story in the Ancient Near East. For example, J. Day suggested
that the term t:Jh om in Genesis story can be traced back to an earlier
Canaanite dragon myth which he thinks is related to the creation theme.
The term t:Jhom is then understood as a depersonification of the original
mythological divine name in Canaanite.

However, is there a Canaanite dragon myth in the background of Gen

1 :2? We answered this question negatively for the following reasons:

1 . t:Jhom is not "Canaanite"

If the Hebrew term is common Semitic, there is no reason why the term
should be taken particularly as "Canaanite." It is very unlikely that
Hebrew t:Jhom is a borrowing from a Canaanite divine name, since the
Hebrew form is morphologically older than Ugaritic Tahamu.

2. t:Jhom is not a depersonification

Since the Ugaritic, Akkadian and Eblaite cognates are usually a common
noun, Hebrew t:Jhom is also ordinarily used as a common noun. There is
no strong reason why we should take t:Jhom as a depersonification of the
original divine name.

3. The Canaanite Sea-dragon is Yam, not Taham

Even if there were an undiscovered myth in which a "creator" god had
to fight a Canaanite sea-dragon, the dragon would not be Tahiim, but
Yam.
1 58 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

4. Baal is not a creator god

Though Baal is the most active deity in the Ugaritic mythology, he is
not the creator-god. In Canaanite religion it is the god El who is the
creator god.

5. Yam does not appear in Gen 1 :2

If the Genesis account were the demythologization of a Canaanite
dragon myth, we would expect in the initial portion of the account, the
term yam "sea", which is the counterpart of the Ugaritic sea-god Yam.
However, the term yam does not appear in Gen 1 until v. 10.

Thus, it is difficult to assume that an earlier Canaanite dragon myth

existed in the background of Gen 1 :2. The Hebrew term t;}hom is simply a
reflection of the Common Semitic term *tihlim- "ocean" and there is no
relation between the Genesis account and the so-called Chaoskampf
mythology.

c. Etymology of * thm

Morphologically the Hebrew t;}hom corresponds to the Ugaritic thm rather

than to the Akkadian divine name dTiamat. The Akkadian tiamtu, the
Arabic tihiimat and the Eblaite ti- 'a-ma-tum /tihlim(a)tum/ together with
the Ugaritic thm and the Hebrew t;}hom are the reflections of a common
Semitic term *tiham-. The Hebrew form reflects an older stage of devel­
opment from the Proto-Semitic *tiham- than the Ugaritic form thm
/tahamu/ whose first vowel /a/ is the result of a vowel harmony: *tiham- >
*tahamu.
Ugaritic thm(t) normally appears as a common noun in mythological
texts. Akkadian tiiimtum, tiimtum also appears in non-mythological texts
with an ordinary meaning "sea /ocean" from the earliest times, which
predate Enuma elish. Even in a certain mythological context which
mentions the creation of the cosmos the term tiimtum appears without
personification. In Eblaite, ti- 'a-ma-tum appears also with the ordinary
meaning, "sea, ocean."
Thus, Ugaritic thm(t), Akkadian tiamtum, tiimtum and Eblaite ti- 'a-ma­
tum all appear as a common noun, "sea" or "ocean ", from their earliest
attestation. If all these cognate terms can mean "sea" or "ocean" in the
ordinary sense, there is no reason why we should think that the Hebrew
term t;}hom is a depersonification of an original proper name.
This common noun *tiham- "ocean" is of course sometimes personified
 9. Summary and Conclusions 1 59

as a divine name such as Akkadian Tiamat and Ugaritic Taham(at). Hebrew

t:Jhom is sometimes personified (e.g. Hab 3 : 1 0) but not always as a
feminine noun as some have assumed in the light of the Akkadian feminine
name Tiamat.
While *yamm- is typically a Northwest Semitic term (e.g. Ugaritic,
Hebrew, Phoenician, Aramaic) and corresponds semantically to tiamtu as
well as to apsu in Akkadian and means "sea" in a general sense, the Hebrew
t:Jhom(ot) normally refers to the subterranean water, corresponding to
Apsfi.
The Ugaritic thm(t) and the Hebrew t:JhOm(ot) apparently experienced a
narrowing-down of the semantic field of the Proto-Semitic term *tihiim-,
whose meanings and usages are reflected in Eblaite tiham(a)tum and
Akkadian ti'amtum and its Sumerian counterpart ab-a or a-ab-ba, "sea."
This etymological investigation shows that the formal similarities are no
proof of direct or indirect "borrowing. " In other words, the fact that the
Hebrew term t:Jhom shares a common Proto-Semitic origin with the
Akkadian divine name Tiamat and the Ugaritic Tahamu does not support
the theory that the Hebrew term is a depersonification of an original divine
name.

3. 'ed

The term 'ed has been rendered as "spring" /"fountain" (e.g. LXX: lTTJyil )
or a s 'M1iinii ' "(rain-)cloud" or "vapour, mist" (Targum.). Modem versions
translate it "mist" (KJV; RSV; NEB note; NIV note), "flood" (RSV note;
NEB), "water" (JB) or "streams" (NIV). However, there has been no satis­
factory Semitic etymology and the claim revived by Dahood for a Semitic
etymology in the light of Eblaite and Arabic has no solid foundation.

a. Sumerian Loan-word into West Semitic via Akkadian

Two views for the Akkadian connection have been suggested:

(a) edii "flood", which is a Sumerian loan word from e4-de-a (A.DE.A),
(b) id "river", which is written as iD.
The latter view (e.g. Albright) has been accepted by majority of recent
scholars, but the former view (e.g. Speiser) might be once more accepted
with minor revisions. lo
160 The Earth and the Waters in Gen I and 2

The issue here is threefold: i .e. graphical /graphemical, phonological

and semantic.

( l ) Should the Sumerian dfDbe read in Akkadian as Id or as Naru ?

While the equation dfD = id is possible in some cultic settings, the Sumerian
dfo was probably read as naru under normal conditions as in the case of the
common noun naru ( = fo) "river." The fact that the reading of dfo was
specified in the Middle Assyrian dfoi-id might suggest that that reading was
not the normal one for the Sumerian sign.

(2) Does the edii - 'ed equation have a phonological difficulty?

Because there is no phonological difficulty in equating Akkadian edu and

Hebrew 'edo, the shorter form 'ed may also be treated as a Sumerian loan
word via Akkadian edfi (< Sum /edea/ ). While Speiser's example, 'eS 'fire'
- 'iSSe, for explaining the proposed form * 'ede as an alloform of 'ed should
be given up, his basic assumption of the equation edfi = 'ed is to be
supported.

(3) Does Akk edii really refer to a rare and catastrophic event?

The Akkadian term edfi, which can be defined as "water flooding out of the
subterranean ocean", does not necessarily refer to a violent water as such.
Semantically, "river" is also a possible translation of 'ed in Gen 2:6.
However, there is a question of why the writer of Genesis should borrow
the Akkadian "divine" name Id when there was a common Akkadian noun
naru for river. In fact, the writer uses nahiir, the cognate of Akkadian
niiru, in 2: 1 0. This makes it harder to believe that 'ed is an Akkadian (<
Sumerian) loan word with a meaning "river."

b. Sumerian Loan-word directly into West Semitic

The Hebrew 'ed may be a direct loan word from Sumerian. It is not so
certain however whether the Sumerian id (A-ENGUR) was borrowed as * 'id
> 'ed into Canaanite. On the other hand, it is possible that the Hebrew 'ed is
a direct loan from Sumerian e4-de "high water."
Thus, while it is possible that 'ed is a shortened form of 'edo as a result
of the loss of a final vowel when or after Akkadian edfi was borrowed into
Canaanite, we would like to make the following suggestions:
 9. Summary and Conclusions 161

( 1 ) 'ed (Gen 2:6) i s a loan word directly borrowed from Sumerian e4-de;
(2) 'edo (Job 36:27) is a loan word from Sumerian via Akkadian edii.
Both 'ed and its allomorph 'edo mean "high water" and refer to the water
flooding out of the subterranean ocean.

4. 'eden

Theoretically there are three possible explanations for the etymology of the
Hebrew 'eden.

a. Sumerian /oanword via Akkadian into West Semitic

While this has been a common view for the etymology, Hebrew 'eden
cannot be a loan word from or via Akkadian edinu, since Akkadian has no
phoneme I '1. The term edin u might be simply a semitized name of
Sumerian edin and not used as an actual Akkadian word.

b. Sumerian /oanword directly into West Semitic

Since Sumerian presumably has no phoneme I 'I, it is not likely that the
Sumerian edin was borrowed directly into Canaanite as 'eden or the like.
Also, the meaning "plain, steppe", i.e. the uncultivated land, for the Hebrew
'eden does not fit the context of Genesis well.

c. Common West Semitic

The root *'dn, which appears in the Fekheriyeh Inscription, in a Ugaritic

text, in the divine epithet h'dn in Old South Arabic as well as in the Arabic
verb 'adana, probably has the literal meaning "to make abundant in water­
supply", though it may mean secondarily "to enrich, prosper, make
luxuriant." Hence, Hebrew 'eden probably means "a place where there is
abundant water-supply" (cf. Gen 1 3 : 1 0). The term *'eden (pl. 'cldanim in
Ps 36:9) which means "pleasure, luxury" has the same etymology as
"Eden" , though MT seems to distinguish 'eden from *'eden.
1 62 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

B. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

l . Gen 1

The interpretation of tohu wabohii as describing a "bare" state, i .e.

"unproductive & uninhabited" state, of the earth fits the literary structure
of Gen l . The author in Gen 1 :2 focuses not on the "heavens" but on the
"earth" where the reader or audience stands, and presents the "earth" as
"not yet" being the earth which they all are familiar with. The earth which
they are familiar with is "the earth" with vegetation, animals and man.
Therefore, a few verses later, the author will describe their coming into
existence through God's creation: vegetation on the third day and animals
and man on the sixth day. Both the third and the sixth day are set as
climaxes in the framework of this creation story and the grand climax is
the creation of man on the sixth day.
Thus, the "not yet productive" earth becomes productive when God says
tdg' h 'r$ dg' "Let the land produce vegetation" ( 1 : 1 1 ) on the third day; the
"empty", i.e. "not yet inhabited", earth becomes inhabited when he says
tw$ ' h 'r$ npg l)yh "Let the land produce living creatures" ( 1 : 24) and n'sh
'dm b$lmn w kdm wtn w "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness"
(1 :26). It is by God's fiats that the "unproductive and empty, uninhabited"
(tOhU wiibOhU) earth becomes productive with vegetation and inhabited by
animals and man. The story of creation in Gen 1 : 1-2:3 thus tells us that it is
God who created mankind "in his image" and provided for him an
inhabitable and productive earth.

2. Gen 2

The discourse structure of Gen 2:4ff. is similar to that of Gen 1 : l ff: [ 1 ] a

temporal description ( 1 : 1 , 2:4), [2] a SEITING ( 1 :2, 2:5--6) and [3] the first
stated EVENT ( 1 :3, 2:7). Like 1 :2, 2:5--6 describes the initial state of the
earth as "not yet productive" and as being in close relationship with the
waters.
Structurally Gen 2:5--6 is best divided into two halves. The first section
[v. 5a-v. 5c] speaks broadly about the unproductive and bare "earth"( 'ere$)
in which even the wild plants were not yet growing because of the lack of
rain and the second [v. 5d-v. 6b], more specifically about the "land"
 9. Summary and Conclusions 1 63

( 'lldiimiih) which has "no man to till it" and is watered through by 'ed­
waters.
Here the subject matter (i.e. participant) switches from vegetation (i.e.
"shrub" and "plant") to man and the 'ed-water, and the location or stage of
these participants shifts from the "earth" ( 'ere�) to the narrower place, the
"land" ( 'ildiimiih), from whose "dust" ( 'iipiir) "man" ( 'iidiim) is going to be
formed (cf. v. 7).
A threefold focusing of the geographical area can be identified : ( 1 )
from ere� to 'ildiimiih, (2) from 'ildiimiih to 'eden and (3) from 'eden to
gan. In other words, the garden, the main stage for this Eden narrative, is a
part of Eden, which is a part of the land, which is a part of the earth.
The first half of vs. 5--6 describes the unproductive and "bare" state of
the earth without any vegetation. This state of the "bare" earth is virtually
the same as that of the earth which was tohU wiibOhu (Gen 1 :2}, though in
Gen 2:5-6 more concrete terms are used for describing the initial unpro­
ductive state of the earth.
In conclusion, the initial state of the earth in Gen 2:5-6 is described as
unproductive in concrete terms, "no shrub" and "no plant" as well as "no
man to till the ground. " The earth in Gen 2:5-6 was also the "bare" earth,
which had "no vegetation" and "no man", like the earth in Gen 1 :2 which is
described as tohU wiibOhU, "unproductive and uninhabited."

C. EARTH-WATERS RELATIONSHIP

1 . Gen 1 : a "hyponymous" word pair: 'r!j - thm

In Gen 1 :2, t:Jhom "ocean" is a part of hii 'iire!i since the term hii 'iire!j,
which constitutes an antonymous word pair with haSSiimayim in Gen 1 : I ,
must refer to everything under the heaven. The cosmology in vs. 1 -2 is
bipartite, rather than tripartite, describing the entire world in terms of
"heavens and earth."
What this "hyponymous " word pair, hii 'are� /I t:Jh om , refers to is
described in this passage by another pair of expressions, tohU wabOhU /1
/16Sek, "not yet" normal, i.e. "not yet productive and inhabited and without
light."
Vs. 6ff. suggest that the water of t�hom in Gen 1 :2 covered all the
"earth", as in a Neo-Babylonian bilingual version of the "Creation of the
World by Marduk." While there are structural similarities between these
1 64 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

two stories, there is also a clear distinction in theme and purpose between
the two. The discourse structure of the initial section of Enuma elish is also
similar to that of Gen I . However, there is a difference in theme and
purpose between them also.

2. Gen 2: Rain and 'ed

In Gen 2:5-6, unlike 1 :2, both the water from above, rain, and the water
from below, the 'ed-water, are mentioned in the description of the initial
state of the earth, though the former is treated negatively, as "not yet", and
the latter positively, as "already."
Here, the rain-water does not play a significant role. On the other hand,
the 'ed-"water", which is a flooding water from underground, is actively
involved in the initial state of the earth. But, unlike the t;}hom-water in Gen
1 :2, the 'ed-water in 2:6 was covering the "land" ( 'Adiimah), only a part of
the "earth."
It should be noted that careful distinction is made between the 'ed-water
which "comes up from the earth" and the "river" which "comes out of
Eden." The 'ed-water is that which comes up from underground and waters
the whole surface of the land ( 'iidiimiih). On the other hand, the river­
waters (2: 1 0) "come out of" one place and "water" a different place,
forming a stream or streams.
The situation in 2:5-6 as a whole is simply this. Because of the lack of
rain there was no plant on the earth, while the 'ed-water was flooding out
of the earth to water, i.e. inundate, the entire surface of the land, which
was only a part of the earth. The problem here was not the lack of water
but the lack of adequate control of water by man for the purpose of tilling.
This well-watered situation here is certainly in keeping with Eden, the
"well-watered place" where God planted a garden (2:8).
These two waters in Gen 2:5-6, i.e. "rain" and "flooding water", might
be compared with the two thmt-waters in a Ugaritic expression which
seems to refer to the waters above in heaven and the waters below under
the earth as in Gen 7: 1 1 , 8:2. This upper thmt-water is probably associated
or i dentified with the god "Heaven", while the lower thm t-water may well
correspond to the goddess "Ocean" in Ugaritic religion.
 9. Summary and Conclusions 1 65

D. GOD AND THE WATER

In Gen 1 the t�hom-water seems to have covered the whole earth ( 'ere$); in
Gen 2 the 'ed-water was covering only a part of the earth, i.e. the "land"
( 'Adamah). In Gen 1 , however, the water from above from which rain
comes down was not separated from the water from below, the subter­
ranean waters, until the creation of raqi"'· a division in the water, at vs. 6ff.
But, in Gen 2, the rain has been already mentioned, though negatively:
"The Lord God had not yet caused it to rain."

I . God as a rain-giver

A rain-god such as Adad, Hadad and Baal in various parts of the ancient
Near East is called "a giver of abundant water-supply." In the Fekheriyeh
Inscription, for example, he is described not only as a rain-giver but also as
the "water-controller of all rivers." Similarly, the LORD God of Gen 2 is
presumably understood as a rain-giver and as the controller of the
subterranean waters. When he planted a garden in a well-watered place,
Eden (2:8ff.), he apparently drained the 'ed-water there. Thus, he is also a
controller of both rain and the subterranean water. However, the Lord God
is more than a water-controller. He is the maker of the total universe, i.e.
"earth and heaven"( 'ere$ w�Samayim; 2:4).

2. Watery beginning

The "watery beginning" of Gen 1 :2 could well be a reflection of the

universal understanding of water as a basic element of the cosmos.
However, while there is a similarity between ancient traditions and the
Genesis story in tenns of a watery beginning, there are also differences in
the nature of the relationship between the water and the creator god as well
as in the details of description.
1 66 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

3. A "creator" god and the water

a. Marduk, El and Ea

Marduk and Baal are similar in that both are storm gods. However, there
are differences between these two deities: Marduk "created" the cosmos but
Baal did not. It is suggested by some that El's relationship with thm (t)
should be compared with Marduk's relationship with Tiamat, and both
should be compared with Elohim's relationship with "the water of t�hom "
in Genesis.
However, what Marduk created by dividing the body of Tiamat were
"heaven" and "earth " , which do not include the subterranean water.
Marduk's abode is never associated with waters, while the god El in
Ugaritic myths is described as dwelling "in the midst of the streams of the
two thmt-waters. " In Enuma elish, it is Ea who resides at the watery loca­
tion, Apsu. Thus , Ea has a closer similarity with El than with Marduk as
regards to the relationship between the creator gods and their abodes near
or in the waters.

b. Similarity between El and Ea

Ea, who is the Sumerian Enki, shares a number of features with El in

Ugaritic mythology. For example, they are both:

( 1 ). Creator of creatures
(2). Creator of cosmos
(3). Father of the gods
(4). Father of man.

El and Ea are similar not only in being senior creator gods and fathers
of mankind and gods but also in living near or in the waters.

c. El's watery abode

El's abode is near or in the waters, mbk nhnn "at the sources of the two
rivers " 1/qrb apq thmtm "in the midst of the streams of the two thmt­
waters" or b'dt thmtm "in the assembly of the two thmt-waters." "The two
thmt- waters" might possibly refer to "a celestial and a subterranean thmt."
 9. Summary and Conclusions 1 67

The divine pair, "Heaven"-god Samiima (=Smm) and "Ocean"-goddess

Tahiimatu (=thmt) in Ugarit seems to preserve an ancient tradition about
the separation of heaven-water and ocean-water which is reflected in the
Genesis Creation story, not in 1 :2, but in 1 :6ff. as well as in the Flood story
(Gen 7 : 1 1 , 8:2).

d. Ea's watery abode

Ea's abode is in Apsu, the underground sweet waters. Ea (Enki) lies in the
"chamber of Nammu" (mayiilu Sa dNammu), the goddess of the water­
bearing strata; these chambers are down in the earth just above the "surface
of the underworld" (aSar er�etimma).
While El's abode seems to be related to the "two thmt- waters", possibly
"heaven" and "ocean", Ea's abode is related only to the subterranean ocean.
While El is the supreme god in Ugarit, Ea is one of three traditional
supreme deities in Mesopotamia and he controls only one of the three areas
of universe, Apsu. In this aspect, the U garitic god El as a creator is more
similar to Elohim of the Genesis account.
B oth creator gods, El and Ea, who have close association with the
waters, have similar characteristics and functions. In Ugaritic, the "two
thmt-waters" ( thmtm ) and the "Sea" (ym) are distinguished and are
connected with two different gods, El and Baal, just as in the Akkadian
Enuma elish in which Ea's abode is the sweet water Apsu while Marduk's
enemy is Tiamat, the salt water sea-goddess.
The B iblical Elohim is also deeply involved with the "water of t�hOm"
in the forms of "Spirit"(Gen 1 :2) and "Word" (1 :6ff.) but he is the only
God, the creator of the total cosmos, "heavens and earth." To the author of
Genesis, the entire cosmos was thus the created order; there are no items
that Elohim did not create.

E. CONCLUSIONS

Similarities

The nature of the "earth-waters" relationship in Gen 1 has certain

similarities with that in Gen 2. In both chapters the earth was "not yet"
normal, i .e. unproductive and uninhabited, and was covered by flood-
1 68 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

waters. This "bare" earth became productive and inhabited by God's

creative actions.
Also, both in Gen 1 :2 and in 2:5--6 the waters play a significant role,
positive and potential. The water in Gen 1 was not destructive or threaten­
ing, as some sch olars have assumed. The expressions such as tOhii wabOhii
have nothing to do with the chaotic state of the earth. And the relationship
of the t�h om-water with the earth was not negative. The water then had
remained neutral as a potential power to "form" as a result of God's fiats
and creative actions.

Differences

However, the "earth-waters" relationship in Gen 1 :2 i s certainly

different from that in Gen 2:5--6. In Gen 1 , the t�hom-water, which is
usually under control and comprises only a part of the earth, was then
covering all over the earth and no separation of the water had happened.
On the other hand, in Gen 2, two waters are already separated as the upper
water in heaven and the lower subterranean water in the earth. However,
the difference exists, not in the two different cosmologies, but in the two
different stages of creation based on the same cosmology. Gen 1 :2 concerns
the situation before the separation of the water, while Gen 2:5--6 refers to
the situation after the separation of the water.
In 1 :2 the initial situation of the "world" is described positively in terms
of the "still" unproductive and uninhabited (tohu wabohD) "earth" totally
covered by the "ocean-water", while in 2 :5--6 the initial state of the "earth"
is described negatively in terms of the "not yet" productive "earth" in more
concrete expressions, "no vegetation" and " no man." And the
"underground-water" was flooding out to inundate the whole area of the
" land", but not the entire earth as in Gen 1 :2. At Eden, a well-watered
place, the eastern part of this "land" God planted a garden.

There are both similarities and differences in the nature of the relation­
ship between the earth and the waters in the two passages. It is not adequate
to emphasize only the difference (e.g. "completely different atmosphere")
in the cosmological ideas between the two creation stories in Genesis as von
Rad and other s c h o l ars do. S i nce no motif of
"chaos" exists in Gen 1 :2, it is totally misleading and unacceptable to
assume in that passage "a primordial threat against creation" and hence a
sharp contrast to the cosmology of Gen 2:5--6.
 BffiLIOGRAPHY

Aartun, K. "Zur Erkliirung des ugaritischen Ausdrucks inr," UF 15 (1983), 1 -5.

-- "Neue Beitrlige zum ugaritischen Lexikon (Il)," UF 17 ( 1 985), 1-47.
Abou Assaf, A., Bordreuil, P. & Millard, A. R. La statue de Tell Fekherye et son
inscription bilingue assyro-arameenne. Paris: Recherche sur les civilisations, 1982.
Albright, W. F. "Notes on Assyrian Lexicography and Etymology," RA 16 ( 1919), 173-
194.
-- "Contributions to Biblical Archaeology and Philology," JBL 43 ( 1 924), 363--393.
-- "The B abylonian Matter in the Predeuteronomic Primeval History (JE) in Gen I-
l l ," JBL 58 ( 1939), 9 1 -103.
-- Yahweh and the Gods ofCanaan. London: Athlone, 1968.
-- & Moran, W. L. "Rib-Adda of Byblos and the Affairs of Tyre (EA 89)," JCS 4
( 1 950), 163-168.
-- & Lambdin, T. 0. "The Evidence of Language," The Cambridge Ancient History.
3rd ed., I (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970)
Andersen, F. I. The Sentence in Biblical Hebrew. Janua Linguarum, Series Practica 23 1 .
The Hague: Mouton, 1974.
-- Job. TOTC. Leicester: IVP, 1976.
-- "On Reading Genesis 1-3," in M. P. O'Connor & D. N. Freedman (eds.),
Backgrounds for the Bible. (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1987), 1 37-150.
Anderson, B. W. Creation versus Chaos: the Reinterpretation of Mythical Symbolism in
the Bible. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1967, 1987 [reprint with Postscript].
-- "Mythopoetic and Theological Dimensions of Biblical Creation Faith," in B. W.
Anderson (ed.), Creation in the Old Testament, 1984, 1-24.
-- (ed.). Creation in the Old Testament. Issues in Religion and Theology 6.
Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984.
Archi, A. "The 'Sign-list' from Ebla," Eblaitica I (1987), 91-1 1 3.
Astour, M. C. "Two Ugaritic Serpent Channs," JNES 27 ( 1968), 1 3-36.
-- "Semites and Hurrians in Nonhem Transtigris," in D. I. Owen & M. A. Morrison
(eds.), Studies on the Civilization and Culture of Nuzi and the Hurrians. Vol. 2:
General Studies and Excavations at Nuzi 9/1 (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1987), 3-
68.
170 The Earth and the Waters in Gen I and 2

Attinger, P. "Enki et Ningursa�a," ZA 74 (1984), 1-52.

Auffret, P. La sagesse a biti sa maison. Orbis biblicus et orientalis 49. Fribourg 1982.
Avishur, Y. Stylistic Studies of Word-Pairs in Biblical and A ncient Semitic Literatures.
AOAT 2 10. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1984.
Barr, J. "Limitations of Etymology as a Lexicographical Instrument in Biblical Hebrew,"
Transactions ofthe Philological Society (1983), 41�5.
Barth, K. Church Dogmatics. Vol. lll : The Doctrine of Creation, Pan 3. Edinburgh: T. &
T. Clark, 1960.
Baumganner, W. Hebriiisches und Aramiiisches Lexikon zum A/ten Testament. Leiden:
Brill, 1967f.
-- see also Koehler, L.
Beeston, A. F. L., Ghul, M. A., Miiller, W. W. & Ryckmans, J. Sabaic Dictionary:
English-French-Arabic. Louvain-la-Neuve: Peeters, 1982.
Beld, S. G., Hallo, W. W. & Michalowski, P. (eds.). The Tablets of Ebla: Concordance
and Bibliography. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1984.

Berlin, A. "Grammatical Aspects of Biblical Parallelism," HUCA 50 (1979) 17-43.

-- "Parallel Word Pairs: A Linguistic Explanation," UF 15 ( 1983) 7-16.
-- The Dynamics of Biblical Parallelism. Blooming ton: University of Indiana Press,
1985.
Bodine, W. R. "Linguistics and Philology in the Study of Ancient Near Eastern
Languages," in D. M. Golomb (ed.), "Working with No Data": Semitic and Egyptian
Studies Presented to Thomas 0. Lambdin (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1987), 39-54.
Bollenriicher, J. "Gebete und Hymnen an Nergal," LSS 1/6 ( 1904), 1-52.
Bordreuil, P., see Abou Assaf, A.
Borger, R. Assyrisch-babylonische Zeichenliste AOAT 33. Neukirchen-Vluyn:
Neukirchener Verlag, 1978.
Bottero, J. Mythes et rites de Baby/one. Geneve - Paris: Slatkine - Champion, 1985.
Briggs, C. A., see Brown, F.
Bright, J. Jeremiah. AB 21. New York: Doubteday, 1965.
Brown, F., Driver, S. R. & Briggs, C. A. A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old
Testament. Oxford: Ctarendon, 1907.
Butz, K. "Bilinguismus als Katatysator," in L. Cagni (ed.), Il bilinguismo a Ebla (Napoli:
lstituto Universitario Orientate), 99-138.
Cagni, L. (ed.). La lingua di Ebla: Atti del convegno internazionale: Napoli, 21-23 aprile
1980. Napoli: lstituto Universitario Orientate, 1981.

-- (ed.). Il bilinguisma a Ebla: atti del convegno internazionale: Napoli, 1 9-22 aprile
1982 . Napoli: lstituto Universitario Orientate, 1 984.
 Bibliography 171

Caquot, A., Sznycer, M . & Herdner, A. Textes ougaritiques 1 : Mythes et legendes. LAPO
7. Paris: Cerf, 197 4.
Carroll, R. P. Jeremiah. London: SCM, 1986.

Cassuto, U. From Adam to Noah [Part I of A Commentary on the Book of Genesis.

Jerusalem: Magnes, 196 1 , 1 944 [orig.].

Castellino, G. "Les origines de la civilisation selon les textes bibliques et les textes
cumiiformes," Volume du Congress: Strasbourg 1956 (SVT 4; Leiden: Brill, 1957)
1 1 6-137.
Cavigneaux, A., Giiterbock, H. G. & Roth, M. T. (eds.). The Series Erim-!Jug = anantu
and An-ta-gM Saqil. MSL 17. Roma: Pontificium Institutum Biblicum, 1985.
=

Ceresko, A. R. "The A:B::B:A Word Pattern in Hebrew and Nonhwest Semitic with
Special Reference to the Book of Job," UF 7 (1975), 73-88.

Childs, B. S. Myth and Reality in the Old Testament. London: SCM, 1960.

-- Old Testament Theology in a Canonicai Context. London: SCM, 1985.

Clifford, R. J. "Mot Invites Baal to a Feast: Observations on a Difficult Ugaritic Text
(CTA 5.i = KTU 1 .5.1)," in D. M. Golomb (ed.), "Working with No Data": Semitic
and Egyptian Studies Presented to Thomas 0. Lambdin (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns,
1987), 55--64.
Clines, D. J. A. "The Parallelism of Greater Precision: Notes from Isaiah 40 for a Theory
of Hebrew Poetry," in Elaine R. Follis (ed.), Directions in Biblical Hebrew Poetry
(Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1987), 77-100.

Collini, P. "Studi sui lessico della metallurgia nell'ebraico biblico e nelle lingue Siro­
Palestinesi del II e I millennio A. C.," SEL 4 ( 1987), 9-43.

Collins, T. Line-Forms in Hebrew Poetry. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1978.

Collon, D. "(A Review of) L. Gorelick & E. Williams-Fone (eds.) A ncient Seals and the
,

Bible. Malibu, Undena, 1 983 (= The International Institute for Mesopotamian Area
Studies, Monographic Journals of the Near East: Occasional Papers on the Near East
Vol. 2/1 .)," AfO 33 (1986), 98-10 1 .
-- First Impressions: Cylinder Seals i n the Ancient Near East. London: British
Museum Publications, 1987.

Cooper, A. "Divine Names and Epithets in the Ugaritic Texts," in S Rummel (ed.) RSP III
(198 1), 333-469.
Cross, F. M. Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic: Essays in the History of the Religion of
Israel. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1973.
Dahood, M. J. "Nonhwest Semitic Philology and Job," in J. L. McKenzie (ed.), The
Bible in Current Catholic Thought (New York: Herder & Herder, 1962), 55-74.
-- Proverbs and Northwest Semitic Philology. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute,
1 963.
-- Psalms 11. AB 17. Garden City: Doubleday, 1968.
172 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

-- "Ugaritic-Hebrew Syntax and Style," UF 1 ( 1 969), 1 5-36.

-- Psalms III. A B 17A. Garden City: Doubleday, 1 970.
-- "Eblaite i-du and Hebrew 'ed, 'Rain Cloud'," CBQ 43 ( 198 1 ), 534-538.
Day, J. God's Conflict with the Dragon and the Sea: Echoes of a Canaanite Myth in the
Old Testament. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1 985.

-- "(A Review of) Yhwh's Combat with the Sea: A Canaanite Tradition in the Religion
of Ancient Israel. By Carola Kloos. Pp. 243. Leiden: Brill, 1986. Paperback Gld 84,"
JTS 39 ( 1 988), 1 5 1-154.
De Moor, J. C. "Studies in the New Alphabetic Texts from Ras Shamra I," UF 1 ( 1 969),
1 67-188.
-- The Seasonal Pattern in the Ugaritic Myth of Ba'lu A ccording to the Version of
1/imilku. AOAT 1 6. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 197 1.
-- "Contributions to the Ugaritic Lexicon," UF 11 ( 1 979), 639-653.
-- "El, the Creator," in G. Rendsburg et a/ (eds.), The Bible World: Essays in Honor
of Cyrus H. Gordon (New York: KTAV, 1980), 1 7 1-187.
-- see also Korpel, M. C. A.
-- & van der Lugt, P. "The Spectre of Pan-Ugaritism," BO 31 ( 1974), 3-26.
Deimel, P. A. Sumerisches Lexikon. Roma: Pontificii lnstituti Biblici, 1930.
Del Monte, G. F. & Tischler, J. Die Orts- und Gewiissernamen der hethitischen Texte.
RGTC 6. Wiesbaden: Ludwig Reichert, 1978.
Delekat, L. "Zum ugaritischen Verbum," UF 4 ( 1 972), 1 1-26.
Dhorrne, E. A Commentary on the Book ofJob. London: Thomas Nelson, 1967.
Diakonoff, I. M. & Kashkai, S. M. Geographical Names According to Urartian Texts.
RGTC 9. Wiesbaden: Ludwig Reichert, 198 1 .
Dietrich, M., Loretz, 0. & Sanmartln, J. "Ein Brief des Konigs a n die Konigin-Mutter
(RS 1 1.872 = CTA 50). Zur Frage ug. it.t = hebr. 'gh?" UF 6 (1974), 460-462.
-- "Stichometrische Probleme in RS 24.245 = UG. 5, s. 556--559, Nr. 3 vs.," UF 7
( 1 975), 534-535.
-- "Beitrlige zur ugaritischen Textgeschichte (Il): Textologische Probleme in RS
24.293 UG. 5, S. 559, NR. 4 und CTA 5 I 1 1 *-22*," UF 7 ( 1 975), 536--539.
=

-- Die keilalphabetischen Texte aus Ugarit. AOAT 24h . Neukirchen-VIuyn:

Neukirchener Verlag, 1 976.
Dijkstra, M. "Zur Deutung von Jesaja 45, 1 5ff.," ZAW 89 (1977), 2 15-222.
Donner, H. & Rollig, W. Kanaaniiische und Aramiiische lnschriften 1-111. Wiesbaden:
Otto Harrassowitz, 19662, 19682, 1964.
Driver, S. R. A Treatise on the Use of the Tenses in Hebrew. Oxford: Clarendon, 1 892.
 Bibliography 1 73

-- see also Brown, F.

-- & Gray, G. B. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Job. ICC.
Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 192 1 .

Driver, G. R. Canaanite Myths and Legends, 1956.

-- "Ugaritic and Hebrew Words," Ug. VI ( 1 969), 1 8 1-1 86.

Ebeling, E. "Ba'u," R/A I ( 1928), 432-433.

Edzard, D. 0. "(A Review of) A. Kammenhuber, Die Arier im Vorderen Orient.

Heidelberg: Car! Winter U niversitiitsverlag 1968," ZDMG 1 20 ( 1970), 3 10--3 14.

-- Hymnen, Beschworungen und Verwandtes. ARET 5. Roma: Missione Archeologica

Italiana in Siria, 1984.

-- & Farber, G. Die Orts- und Gewiissernamen der Zeit der 3. Dynastie von Ur.
RGTC 2. Wiesbaden: Ludwig Reichen, 1974.

Ellenbogen, M. Foreign Words in the Old Testament: their Origin and Etymology.
London: Luzac, 1962.
Erman, A. & Grapow, H. Worterbuch der Aegyptischen Sprache. Berlin: Akademie
Verlag, 1961 (repr.).

Farber, G., see Edzard, D. 0.

Finkelstein, J. J. & Greenberg, M. (eds.). Oriental and Biblical Studies: Collected

Writings of E. A. Speiser. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 1967.
Fishbane, M. "Jeremiah IV 23-26 and Job Ill 3-1 3: A Recovered Use of the Creation
Pattern," VT 21 ( 197 1), 1 5 1-167.

Fronzaroli, P. "Per una valutazione della morfologia eblaita," SEb 5 (1982), 93-120.

-- (ed.). Studies on the Language of Ebla. Quademi di Semitistica 1 3. Firenze: Istituto

di Linguistica e di lingue Orientali, Universita di Firenze,
1984.
-- "The Eblaic Lexicon: Problems and Appraisal," in P. Fronzaroli (ed.), Studies on
the Language of Ebla (Firenze: Istituto di Linguistica e di lingue Orientali, Universita di
Firenze, 1 984), 1 17-157.

Gadd, C. J. "Inscribed Prisms of Sargon II from Nimrud," Iraq 16 ( 1954), 173-20 1 .

Gardiner, A. Egyptian Grammar. London: Oxford University Press, 1927, 1950.

Garr, W. R. "Pretonic Vowels in Hebrew," VT 27 ( 1987), 1 29-153.

Gelb, I. J. Old Akkadian Writing and Grammar. Second ed. MAD 2. Chicago: University
of Chicago Press, 196 1 .

Ghul, M . A . , see Beeston, A. F . L.

Gibson, J. C. L. Canaanite Myths and Legends. Second ed.Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark,
1978.
-- "The Theology of the Ugaritic Baal Cycle," Or 53 (1984), 202-2 19.
174 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

Gorg, M. " Tohii wabohii - ein Deutungsvorschlag," ZAW 92 (1980), 43 1-434.

-- "Eine heterogene Uberlieferung in Gen 2.6," BN 31 (1986), 19-24.
Golomb, D. M. (ed.), "Working with No Data": Semitic and Egyptian Studies Presented
to Thomas 0. Lambdin. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1987.
Gordis, R. The Book ofJob. New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1978.
Gordon, C. H. Ugaritic Textbook. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1965.
-- "Poetic Legends and Myths from Ugarit," Berytus 25 (1977), 5-133.
-- "Eblaitica", Eblaitica I (1987), 19-28.
Gorelick, L. & Williams-Fone, E. (eds.). Ancient Seals and the Bible. The International
Institute for Mesopotamian Area Studies, Monographic Journals of the Near East:
Occasional Papers on the Near East Vol. 2/1. Malibu: Undena, 1983.
Grapow, H., see Erman, A.
Gray, G. B., see Driver, S. R.
Greenberg, M., see Finkelstein, J. J.
Greenfield, J. C. "Amurrite, Ugaritic and Canaanite," in Proceedings of the International
Conference on Semitic Studies held in Jerusalem, 19-23 July 1965 (Jerusalem: Israel
Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 1969), 92-10 1 .
-- "A Touch o f Eden," i n Orientalia J . Duchesne-Guillemin Emerito Oblata
(Hommages et Opera Minora 9; Leiden: Brill, 1984), 219-224.
Greenstein, E. L. "Another Attestation of Initial h > : in West Semitic," lANES 5 (1973),
157-1 64.
Groneberg, B. Die Orts- und Gewiissernamen der altbabylonischen Zeit. RGTC 3.
Wiesbaden: Ludwig Reichen, 1980.
Gr�nba:k, J. H. "Baal's Battle with Yam- A Canaanite Creation Fight," JSOT 33 (1 985),
27-44.
Gunkel, H. "Influence of Babylonian Mythology Upon the Biblical Creation Story," in B.
W. Anderson (ed.), Creation in the Old Testament (Issues in Religion and Theology 6;
Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984), 25-52.
Gtiterbock, H. G., see Cavigneaux, A.
Hallo, W. W. "Antediluvian Cities," JCS 23 (1970), 57--67.
-- see also Beld, S. G.
Hecker, K. "Doppelt T-erweitene Formen oder: der eblaitische Infinitive," Ba£, 205-223.
Heidel, A. The Gilgamesh Epic and Old Testament Parallels. Second edition. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1949.
-- The Babylonian Genesis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, I 9512, 19633.
 Bibliography 1 75

Heimpel, W. "The Natural History of the Tigris according to the Sumerian Literary
Composition LUGAL," JNES 46 ( 1 987), 309-3 17.
-- "Das untere Meer," ZA 77 ( 1987), 22-9 1 .
Herdner, A . Corpus des tablettes e n cun�iformes alphabetiques. MRS 1 0 . Paris:
Imprimerie Nationale, 1963.
-- see also Caquot, A.
Hess, R. S. "'ADAM as 'skin' and 'eanh': an Examination of Some Proposed Meanings
in Biblical Hebrew," TB 39 ( 1 988), 141-149.
Hillers, D. R. "A Study of Psalm 148," CBQ 40 ( 1978), 323-334.
Hirsch, H. "Die Inschriften Sargons," AfO 20 ( 1963), 34-52.
-- "Zur Lesung von diD," AfO 22 ( 1968/69), 38.
Hoffmeier, J. K. "Some Thoughts on Genesis I & 2 and Egyptian Cosmology," lANES
15 ( 1983), 39-49.
Hoffner, Jr., H. A. "The Elkunirsa Myth Reconsidered," RHA 23 ( 1 965), 5-16.
Hoftijzer, J. "Das sogenannte Feueropfer," Hebriiische Wortforschung: Festschrift zum
80. Geburtstag von Waiter Baumgartner (SVT 16; Leiden: Brill, 1967), 1 14-1 34.

Holladay, W. L. Jeremiah I : A Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Jeremiah

Chapters 1 -25. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986.

Hommel, F. Ethnologie und Geographie des alten Orients. Miinchen: C. H. Beck'sche,

1926.
Hopper, P. J. "Aspect and Foreground in Discourse", in T. Giv6n (ed.), Discourse and
Syntax (Syntax and Semantics 12; New York: Academic, 1974), 21 3-241.

Huehnergard, J. "A Dt Stem in Ugaritic?" UF 17 ( 1 986), 402.

-- "Northwest Semitic Vocabulary in Akkadian Texts," JAOS 107 ( 1987), 7 1 3--725.
-- Ugaritic Vocabulary in Syllabic Transcription. HSS 32. Atlanta: Scholars Press,
1987.
Hutter, M. "ammatu: Unterwelt in Enuma Elis I 2," RA 79 ( 1 985), 1 87-88.
Jacobsen, T. "Sumerian Mythology: A Review Anicle," JNES 5 (1946),128-152.
-- "Formative Tendencies in Sumerian Religion," in G. Emest Wright (ed.), The Bible
and the Ancient Near East: Essays in honor of William Foxwell A/bright (Anchor
Books; Garden City: Doubleday, 1961 ), 353-368.
-- "The Battle between Marduk and Tiamat," JAOS 88 (1968), 104-108.
-- Toward the Image of Tammuz and Other Essays on Mesopotamian History and
Culture. HSS 2 1 . Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. Press, 1970.
-- The Treasures of Darkness: A History of Mesopotamian Religion. New Haven: Yale
University Press, 1976.
176 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

-- "The Eridu Genesis," JBL 100 (198 1), 5 1 3-529.

Jakobson, R. "Grammatical Parallelism and its Russian Facet," Language 42 (1 966) 399-
429.
Jarnme, A. "Le pantheon Sud-arabe preislamique d'apres les sources epigraphiques," Le
Museon 60 (1 947), 58-147.
Johnstone, W. "Lexical and Comparative Philological Contributions to Ugaritic of
Mythological Texts of the 24th Campaign at Ras Shanrra," Ug VII (1978), 109-1 19.
Kaiser, 0. Die mythische Bedeutung des Meeres in Agypten, Ugarit und Israel. BZAW
78. Berlin: Alfred Ttipelmann, 1 959.
-- Isaiah 13-39: A Commentary. London: SCM, 1974.
Kapelrud, A. S. "The Relationship between El and Baal in the Ras Shamra Texts," in G.
Rendsburg et a/ (eds.), The Bible World: Essays in Honor of Cyrus H. Gordon (New
York: KTAV, l 980), 79-85.
Kashkai, S. M., see Diakonoff, I. M.
Kaufman, S. A. The Akkadian Influences on Aramaic. AS 1 9. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1974.
-- "Reflections on the Assyrian-Aramaic Bilingual from Tell Fakhariyeh," MAARA V 3
( 1982), 1 37-175.
Kessler, K. Untersuchungen zur historischen Topographie Nordmesopotamiens nach
keilschriftlichen Quelien des 1 . Jahnausends v. Chr. Beihefte zum Tiibinger Atlas des
Vorderen Orients 26. Wiesbaden: Ludwig Reichert, 1 980.
Kidner, D. "Genesis 2:5, 6: Wet or Dry?" TB 17 (1966), 109-1 14.
Kienast, B. "Nq!Jlina mit T-prafix und T-infix in der Sprache von Ebla und ihre
sumerischen Aquivalente," BaE, 225-255.
Kikawada, I. M. & Quinn, A. Before Abraham Was: The Unity of Genesis 1-11.
Nashville: Abingdon, 1985.
King, L. W. The Seven Tablets of Creation. Vol. I: English Translations, etc. London:
Luzac, 1902.
Kloos, C. Yhwh's Combat with the Sea: A Canaanite Tradition in the Religion ofA ncient
Israel. Leiden: Brill, 1986.
Knudtron, J. A. Die El-Amarna-Tafeln: mit Einleitung und Erliiuterungen. I & ll. Aalen:
Otto Zeller, 1915.
Koehler, L. & Baumgartner, W. Lexicon i n Veteris Testamenti Libros. Leiden: Brill,
1 953.
Korpel, M. C. A. & de Moor, J. C. "Fundamentals of U garitic and Hebrew Poetry," VF
1 8 ( 1 986), 1 73-2 1 2.
-- "A Review of John Day, God's Conflict with the Dragon and the Sea. Echoes of a
Canaanite Myth in the Old Testament, 1985," JSS 3 1 (1986), 243-245.
 Bibliography 1 77

Kramer, S. N. "(Review of) H. and H. A. Frankfort, John A. Wilson, Thorkild Jacobsen,

William A. lrwin. The Intellectual Adventure of Ancient Man: An Essay on Speculative
Thought in the Ancient Near East. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1946,
VI, 401pp.," JCS 2 ( 1 948), 39-70.
-- The Sumerians: their History, Culture, and Character. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1 963.
-- In the World of Sumer: An Autobiography. Detroit: Wayne State University Press,
1 986.
Kraus, H.-J. Psalmen 5 2. Teilband: Psalmen 60-150. Neukirchen-V1uyn: Neukirchener
Verlag, 1 978.
Krebernik, M. "Zu Syllabar und Orthographie der lexikalischen Texte aus Ebla. Teil 1,"
ZA 72 (1982), 1 78-236.
-- "Zu Syllabar und Orthographie der lexikalischen Texte aus Ebla. Teil 2 (Glossar),"
ZA 73 ( 1983), 1 -47.
-- "Verbalnomina mit Pra- und Infigiertem t in Ebla," SEb 7 (1984), 1 91-21 1 .
-- Die Personennamen der Ebla-Texte: Eine Zwischenbilanz. BBVO 7. Berlin: Dieoich
Reimer, 1988.
Krecher, J. "Sumerische und nichtsumerische Schicht in der Schriftkultur von Ebla," in L.
Cagni (ed.), BaE, 1 39-166.
Kselman, J. S. "The Recovery of Poetic Fragments from the Pentateuchal Priestly
Source," JBL 97 (1978), 1 6 1-173.
Kupper, J.-R., see Sollberger, E.
R. Labat, "Les origins et la formation de la terre dans le poeme Babylonien de la creation,"
Studia Biblica et Orientalia Vol. Ill: Oriens Antiquus (AnBi 1 2; Roma: Pontificio
Istituto Biblico, 1959), 205-215.
-- et al , Le s religions du Proche-Orient asiatique. Fayard/Denoel, 1970.
Labuschagne, C. J. The Incomparability of Yahweh in the Old Testament. Pretoria Oriental
Series 5. Leiden: Brill, 1 966.
Lambdin, T. 0., see Albright, W. F.
Lambert, W. G. Babylonian Wisdom Literature. Oxford: Clarendon, 1 960.
-- "The Reign of Nebuchadnezzar 1: A Turning Point in the History of Ancient
Mesopotamian Religion," in W. S. McCullough (ed.), The Seed of Wisdom: Essays in
Honour ofT. J. Meek (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1964), 3-1 3.
-- "A New Look at the Babylonian Background of Genesis," ITS 1 6 ( 1965), 287-
300.
-- "Nebuchadnezzar King of Justice," Iraq 27 (1965), 1 - 1 1 .
-- "The Cosmology o f Sumer and Babylon," in C . Blacker & M. Loewe (eds.),
Ancient Cosmologies (London: George Alien & Unwin, 1975), 42-65.
178 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

-- "The Mesopotamian Background of the Hurrian Pantheon," RHA 36 (1978), 129-

1 34 .
-- "Babylonien und Israel," TRE 5 ( 1979), 67-79.
-- "The Theology of Death," in B. Alter (ed.), Death in Mesopotamia (Mesopotamia 5;
Copenhagen: Akademisk, 1980), 53-66.
-- "Kosmogonie," RIA 6 ( 1980-83), 2 18-222
-- "Trees, Snakes and Gods in Ancient Syria and Anatolia," BSOAS 48 (1985), 435-
45 1 .
-- "Ninuna Mythology i n the Babylonian Epic of Creation," i n K. Hecker & W.
Sommerfeld (eds.), Keilschriftliche Literaturen: ausgewiihlte Vortriige der XXXII.
Rencontre Assyriologique lnternationale (BBVO 6; Berlin: Dietrich Reimer, 1986),
5�0.
-- "Old Testament Mythology in its Ancient Near Eastern Context," Congress Volume:
Jerusalem 1986 (SVT 40; Leiden: Brill, 1988), 124-143.
-- & Millard, A. R. A tra- lfasis: The Babylonian Story of the Flood. Oxford:
C1arendon, 1969.
-- & Parker, S. B. Enuma EliS: The Babylonian Epic of Creation- the Cuneiform
Text. Oxford: Clarendon, 1966.

Landsberger, B. Die Serie Ur-e-a = niiqu. MSL 2. Roma: Pontificii Instituti Biblici, 195 1.
-- Materialien zum sumerischen Lexikon Ill. Roma: Pontificium 1nstitutum Bib1icum,
1955.
Landsberger, B . & Wilson, J. V. K. "The Fifth Tablet of Enuma EliS," JNES 20 ( 1 96 1 ),
1 54-179.
Lane, E. W. An Arabic-English Lexicon. In Eight Pans. Beirut: Librairie du Liban, 1 863,
1968 [reprint].
Langdon, S. The Babylonian Epic of Creation. Oxford: Clarendon, 1923.
Laroche, E. Glossaire de la langue Hourrite Deuxieme partie (M - Z, Index). (=RHA 35
[ 1 977]).
Leander, P. Uber die sumerischen LehnwlJrter in Assyrischen. Uppsala Universitets
Arsskrift; Uppsala: Akademiska, 1903.
Lemaire, A. "Le pays d'Eden et le Bit-Adini aux origines d'un mythe," Syria 58 ( 1 98 1),
3 1 3-330.
Lieberman, S. J. The Sumerian Loanwords in Old-Babylonian Akkadian. Vol. I . HSS 22.
Missoula: Scholars Press, 1977.
Lipiilski, E. "Emprunts sumero-akkadiens en hebreu biblique," ZAH I (1988), 61-73.
Livingstone, A. Mystical and Mythological Explanatory Works of Assyrian and
Babylonian Scholars. Oxford: Clarendon, 1986.
Longacre, R. E. "The Discourse Structure of the Aood Narrative," in G. MacRae (ed.),
Society ofBiblical Literature 1976 Seminar Papers (Missoula: Scholars Press, 1 976),
 Bibliography 1 79

235-262.
-- The Grammar of Discourse. New York: Plenum, 1983.
-- Joseph: A Story of Divine Providence- A Text Theoretical and Textlinguistic
Analysis of Genesis 37, and 39-48. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, in press.
Loretz, 0., see Dietrich, M.
Luyster, R. "Wind and Water: Cosmogonic Symbolism in the Old Testament," ZAW 93
( 1 98 1 ), 1-10.
Lyons, I. Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1968.
Malamat, A. "Campaigns to the Mediterranean by lahdunlim and Other Early
Mesopotamian Rulers," Studies in Honor of Benno Landsberger on his Seventy-fifth
Birthday, April 21, 1 965 (AS 16; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1 965), 365-
373.
Margalit, B. A Matter of "Life" and "Death": A Study of the Baal-Mot Epic (CTA 4-5---fJ).
Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1 980.
-- "Lexicographical Notes on the Aqht Epic (Part 11: KTU 1 . 19)," UF 1 6 ( 1984), 1 19-
1 79.
McCarter, P. K. "The River Ordeal in Israelite Literature," HTR 66 (1973), 403-412.
McFall, L. The Enigma of the Hebrew Verbal System. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1982.
McKane, W. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Jeremiah, Vol. I. ICC. Edinburgh:
T. & T. Clark, 1 986.
Meyer, E. Die lsraeliten und ihre Nachbarstiimme. Halle: Max Niemeyer, 1906.
Meyer, J.-W. Untersuchungen zu den Tonlebermodellen aus dem Alter Orient. AOAT 39.
Neukirchen-VI uyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1987.
Michalowski, P., see Beld, S. G.
Millard, A. R. "A New Babylonian 'Genesis' Story," TB 1 8 ( 1 967), 3-1 8.
-- "r"ll 'to exult'," ITS 26 (1975), 87-89.
-- "The Etymology of Eden," VT 34 (1984), 1 03-106.
-- "The Sign of the Flood," IRAQ 49 (1987), 63-69.
-- see also Abou Assaf, A.
-- see also Lambert, W. G.
Miller, Jr., P. D. "El, the Creator of Earth," BASOR 239 ( 1 980), 43-46.
-- "Eridu, Dunnu, and Babe): A Study in Comparative Mythology," HAR 9 ( 1 985),
227-25 1 .
-- "The Absence of the Goddess in Israelite Religion," HAR 1 0 ( 1 986), 239-248.
1 80 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

Moran, W. L. Les lettres d'El-Amarna: correspondance diplomatique du pharaon. LAPO

1 3. Paris: Cerf, 1987.
-- "Eniima elin 1-8," NABU (1988 /1), 1 5-16.

-- see also Albright, W. F.

Mullen, Jr., E. T. The Divine Council in Canaanite and Early Hebrew Literature. HSM 24.
Chico: Scholars Press, 1 980.
MUller, W. W., see Beeston, A. F. L.
Nashef, K. Die Orts- und Gewiissernamen der mittelbabylonischen und mittelassyrischen
Zeit. RGTC 5. Wiesbaden: Ludwig Reichert, 1982.
Neiman, D. "The Supercaelian Sea," JNES 28 (1969), 243-249.
O'Connor, M. Hebrew Verse Structure. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1 980.
Oden, Jr., R. A. "Philo of Byb1os and Hellenistic Historiography," PEQ ( 1 978), 1 1 5-
1 26.
Olmo Lete, G. del Mitos y leyendas de Canaan: segun la tradicion de Ugarit. Madrid:
Ediciones Cristiandad, 1 98 1 .
-- "Notes on Ugaritic Semantics V," UF 1 4 ( 1 982), 55-69.
Otten, H. "Ein kanaaniiischer Mythus aus Bo�azkoy," M/0 1 ( 1 953), 1 25-150.
Otzen, B. "The Use of Myth in Genesis," in B. Otzen, H. Gott1ieb & K. Jeppesen, Myths
in the Old Testament (London: SCM, 1980), 22-61 .
Pardee, D. "The New Canaanite Myths and Legends," 80 37 ( 1980), 269-291 .
Parker, S. B., see Lambert, W. G.
Parpo1a, S. Neo-Assyrian Toponyms. AOAT 6. Neukirchen-V1uyn: Neukirchener Verlag,
1 970.
Pettinato, G. The Archives of Ebla: an empire Inscribed in Clay. Garden City: Doubleday,
1 98 1 .
-- "I vocabo1ari bilingui d i Eb1a," in L . Cagni (ed.), LdE, 241-276.
Pope, M. H. El in the Ugaritic Texts. SVT 2. Leiden: Brill, 1955.
-- "The Scene on the Drinking Mug from Ugarit," in Near Eastern Studies in Honor of
William Foxwell A/bright [ed. Hans Goedicke) (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press,
1 97 1), 393-405.
-- Job. 3 AB 15. Garden City: Doub1eday, 1973.
-- Song of Songs. AB 7c. Garden City: Doub1eday, 1977.
-- & Tigay, J. H. "A Description of Baal," UF 3 ( 1 97 1 ), 1 17-130.
Pritchard, J. B. (ed.), Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament.
Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1950.
Rollig, W., see Donner, H.
 Bibliography 181

Quinn, A., see Kikawada, I . M.

Rainey, A. F. "A New Grammar of Ugaritic," Or 56 ( 1 987), 391-402.
Rendsburg, G. et al (eds.). The Bible World: Essays in Honor of Cyrus H. Gordon. New
York: KTAV, 1980.
Reymond, P. L'eau, sa vie, et sa signification dans /'ancien testament. SVT 6. Leiden:
Brill, 1958.
Roberts, J. J. M. The Earliest Semitic Pantheon: A Study of the Semitic Deities Attested in
Mesopotamia before Ur J/1. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1972.
-- "�apon in Job 26:7," Bib 56 ( 1 975), 554--557.
Rogers, R. W. Cuneiform Parallels to the Old Testament.2 New York: Abingdon, 1 9 1 2,
1926.
Roth, M. T., see Cavigneaux, A.
Ryckmans, G. Les noms propres Sud-semitiques Tome 1: Repertoire A nalytique.
Bibliotheque du Museon 2. Louvain: Bureaux du Museon, 1934.
-- see also Beeston, A. F. L.
Sachsse, E. "Der jahwistische Schopfungsbericht: ein Erkliirungsversuch," ZAW 39
( 192 1 }, 276--283.
Srebl'l, M. "Die hebrl!ischen Nomina 'ed und 'ed - zwei sumerisch-akkadische
Fremdworter?" ST 24 ( 1970), 1 30-141.
Sailhammer, J. "Exegetical Notes: Genesis 1 : l -2:4a," Trinl 5 ( 1984), 73-82.
Sanmarrln, J., see Dietrich, M.
Schll).idt, W. H. D ie Schopfungsgeschichte der Priesterschrift: Zur
Uberlieferungsgeschichte von Genesis 1:1-2 :4a und 2 :4b--3 :24. 2., iiberarbeitete und
erweiterte Auflage. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1967.
Scullion, J. J. "Some Difficult Texts in Isaiah cc. 56--66 in the Light of Modern
Scholarship," UF 4 ( 1972), 105-128.
Segert, S. A Basic Grammar of the Ugaritic Language. Berkeley: University of California
Press, 1 984.
Shea, W. H. "The Calendars of Ebla. Part I. the Old Calendar," A USS 18 ( 1 980), 127-
1 37 .
-- "The Calendars o f Ebla. Part 11. the New Calendar," A USS 1 9 ( 19 8 1 ), 59--{)9.
-- "The Calendar of Ebla. Part Ill: Conclusion," AUSS 19 ( 1981}, 1 15-126.
Silverman, M. H. "Syntactic Notes on the Waw Consecutive," in H. A. Hoffner, Jr.
(ed.), Orient and Occident (AOAT 22; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag,
1973), 1 67-175.
Sjoberg, A. W. "Eve and the Chameleon," in In the Shelter of Elyon: Essays on Ancient
Palestinian Life and Literature in Honor of G. W. Ahlstrom (Sheffield: JSOT Press,
1984}, 2 1 7-225.
1 82 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

Skinner, J. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Genesis. 2nd edition. ICC.

Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1 930.
Smick, E. B. "The Jordan of Jericho," in H. A. Hoffner, Jr. (ed.), Orient and Occident:
Essays presented to Cyrus H. Gordon on the Occasion of his Sixty-fifth Birthday
(AOAT 22; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1973), 177-179.
Smith, M. S. "Baal's Cosmic Secret," UF 16 ( 1984), 295-298.
-- "Interpreting the Baal Cycle," UF 1 8 (1986), 3 1 3-339.
Sollberger, E. Administrative Texts Chiefly Concerning Textiles (L. 2752) (ARET 8;
Roma: Missione Archeologica Italiana in Siria,1986)
-- & Kupper, J.-R. Inscriptions Royales Sumeriennes et Akkadiennnes. LAPO. Paris:
Cerf, 197 1 .
Speiser, E . A . " 'ed i n the Story of Creation," BASOR 140 (1 955), 9-1 1 .
-- Genesis. AB I . Garden City: Doubleday, 1964.
Stadelmann, L. I. J. The Hebrew Conception of the World. AnBi 39. Rome: Pontifical
Biblical Institute, 1 970.
Stenning, J. F. The Targum ofIsaiah. Oxford: Clarendon, 1949.
Stieglitz, R. R. "Ugaritic Sky-gods and Biblical Heavens," NUS 35 (April, 1 986), 1 3.
Sznycer, M., see Caquot, A.
Taber, C. R. "Semantics" in /DB. Supplement (Nashville: Abingdon, 1976), 800-807.
Tallqvist, K. Akkadische Gotterepitheta. Studia Orientalia 7. Helsinki: Societas Orientalis
Fennica, 1938.
Thomas, D. W. (ed.), Documents from Old Testament Times. London: Thomas Nelson,
1 958.
Thompson, R. C. The Epic of Gilgamish: Text, Transliteration, and Notes. Oxford :
Clarendon, 1930.
Thomsen, M.-L. The Sumerian Language: an Introduction to its History and Grammatical
Structure. Mesopotamia 10. Copenhagen: Akademisk, 1984.
Thureau-Dangin, F. Rituels accadiens. Paris: Ernest Leroux, 1 921 .
Tigay, J. H., see Pope, M. H.
Tischler, J., see Del Monte, G. F.
Tsumura, D. T. Ugaritic Drama of the Good Gods. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms,
1 973.
-- "Janus Parallelism in Nah 1 :8," JBL 102 ( 1 983), 109-1 1 1.
-- "The Problem of Childlessness in the Royal Epic of Ugarit: An Analysis of Kn
[KTU 1 . 1 4:I] : l -25," in T. Mikasa [ed.], Monarchies and Socio-Religious Traditions
in the Ancient Near East (Wiesbaden: Ono Harrassowitz, 1984), 1 1-20.
 Bibliography 1 83

-- "Literary Insertion, AXB Pattern, in Hebrew and Ugaritic: a Problem of Adjacency

and Dependency in Poetic Parallelism," UF 1 8 ( 1 986), 351-361 .
-- "Nabalkutu, tu-a bi [u] and tohU wabOhii," UF 1 9 ( 1 987), 309-3 1 5.
- -

-- "A 'hyponymous' word pair, 'r� and thm(t), in Hebrew and Ugaritic," Bib 69
( 1 988), 258-269.
-- '"Inserted Bicolon', the AXYB Pattern, in Amos I 5 and Psalm IX 7," VT 38
( 1 988), 234-236.
-- "tohU in Isa. xlv 19," VT 38 ( 1988), 361 -364.
-- . "Ugaritic Poetry and Habakkuk 3," TB 40 ( 1989) [forthcoming).
Tur-Sinai, N. H. The Book of Job: A New Commentary. Jerusalem: Kiryath Sepher,
1 967.
Van der Lugt, P., see de Moor, J. C.
Van der Weiden, W. A. Le /ivre des Proverbs: notes philologiques. Rome: Pontifical
Biblical Institute, 1 970.
Van Dijk, J. LUGAL UD ME-LAM-bi NIR-GAL: Le recit epique et didactique des Travaux de
Ninurta, du Deluge et de la Nouvel/e Creation Tome 1: Introduction, Texte Composite.
Traduction. Leiden: Brill, I 983.
Vanstiphout, H. L. J. "Eniima e/ig, tablet i:3," NABU ( 1987/4), 52-53.
Vincent, J. M. "Recherches ex6g6tiques sur le Psaume XXXIII," VT 28 ( 1 978), 442-454.
Von Rad, G. Genesis. OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1 96 1 , 1963, 1 972.
Von Soden, W. Akkadisches Handworterbuch. Wiesbaden: Otto Harra ssowitz, 1965-8 1 .
-- Grundriss der akkadischen Grammatik. A nOr 33/47. Roma: Pontificium Institutum
Biblicum, 1969.
-- "Zur Wiederherstellung der Marduk-Gebete BMS I 1 und 1 2," Iraq 31 ( 1 969), 82-
89.
Wakeman, M. K. "The Biblical Earth Monster in the Cosmogonic Combat Myth," JBL 88
( 1969), 3 1 3-320.
-- God's Battle with the Monster: A Study in Biblical Imagery. Leiden: Brill, 1973.
-- "Chaos," /DB Supplement (Nashville: Abingdon, 1976), 143-145.
Wallace, H. N. The Eden Narrative. HSM 32. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1985.
Waltke, B. K. "The Creation Account in Genesis I : I -3. Part Ill: The Initial Chaos Theory
and the Precreation Chaos Theory," BS 132 ( 1 975), 2 1 6-228.
Watson, W. G. E. "Strophic Chiasmus in Ugaritic Poetry," UF 15 ( 1 983), 259-270.
-- Classical Hebrew Poetry. Sheffield: JSOT, 1 984, 1986.
Weinfeld, M. "'Rider of the Clouds' and 'Gatherer of the Clouds'," JANES 5 [The Gaster
Festschrift) ( 1 973), 421-426.
1 84 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

Wenham, G. J. Genesis 1-15. Word Bible Commentary 1 . Waco: Word Books, 1987.
Westenho1z, A. "Old Akkadian School Texts: Some Goals of Sargonic Scribal Education,"
AJO 25 ( 1974n7),95-1 10.
Westermann, C. Das Buch Jesaja: Kapitel 40-66. Gottingen, 1966.
-- Genesis. I. Teilband: Genesis 1-1 1 . BKAT 1/1. Neukirchen- Vluyn: Neukirchener
Verlag, 1974.
Wevers, J. W. Septuaginta: Genesis. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1974.
Wildberger, H. Jesaja, 2. Teilband: Jesaja 1 3-27. BKAT X/2. Neukirchen-Vluyn :
Neukirchener Verlag, 1978.
-- Jesaja, 3. Teilband: Jesaja 28-39. BKAT X/3. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener
Verlag, 1982.
Williams-Forte, E. "The Snake and the Tree in the Iconography and Texts of Syria during
the Bronze Age," in L. Gorelick & E. Williams-Fone (eds.), Ancient Seals and the
Bible (Malibu: Undena, 1 983), 1 8-43.
-- see also Gorelick, L.
Wilson, J. V. K. "The Epic of Creation," in D. Winton Thomas (ed.), DOIT, 3-16.
-- see also Landsberger, B.
Young, E. J. The Book of Isaiah 11. NICOT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1969.
-- The Book of Isaiah Ill . NICOT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972.
-- Studies in Genesis One. Phillipsburg: Presbyterian and Reformed, n.d.
Youngb1ood, R. F. The Amarna Correspondence ofRib-Haddi, Prince of Byblos (EA 68-
96). Ph. D. thesis 1961. Philadelphia: Dropsie College for Hebrew & Cognate
Learning, 1 972.
Zalcman, L. "Ambiguity and Assonance at Zephaniah 11 4," VT 36 ( 1 986), 365-37 1 .
Zimmem, H. Akkadische Fremdworter als Beweis jar babylonischen Kultureinfluss.
Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs, 1 9 1 5.
Zurro, E. "La voz y la palabra," in V. Collado & E. Zurro (eds.), El misterio de la palabra.
Homenaje de sus alumnos al profesor D. Luis Alonso Sch6kel (Madrid: Cristiandad,
1 983), 23-39.
 Indexes

AUTHORS

Aartun, K. 1 32, 1 34n Butz, K. 1 24n, 1 26n

Aistleitner, J. 18
Albright, W.F. 18, 20- 1 , 22n, Caquot, A. 1 3 3
54n, 6 l n; 98- 1 0 1 , 1 08n, 1 1 2- Caquot, A. & Sznycer, M. 1 29,
3, 1 28n, 159 131
Albright, W.F. & Lambdin, T.O. Caquot, A . et al 1 8
1 37 Carron, R.P. 37n, 40n
Albright, W.F. & Moran, W.L. Cassuto, U. 20, 21n, 22n, 87 , 95,
53n 98-9, 1 1 2n, 1 26n, 1 27, 1 36n
Andersen, F.I. 4 1 n, 83n, 85n, Castellino, G. 88n, 90n, 98, 1 1 3,
88n, 106n, 1 1 5 1 1 8, 1 26n
Anderson, B.W. 1 3-4, 42n, 45, Cavigneaux, A. et al 30n, 148n
58n Ceresko, A.R. 7 1 n
Archi, A. 1 24n Charpin, D . 96n
Assaf, A.A. et al 1 23n, 1 28 Childs, B.S. 13-4, 37n, 45n
Astour, M.C. 90n, 1 37n, 1 38n Civil, M. 1 1 4n
Attinger, P. 1 47n Clifford, R.J. 18, 1 9n, 150
Auffret, P. 75n Clines, D.J.A. 68n
Avishur, Y. 69n, 70n, 7 l n, 74n Collado, V. & Zurro, E. 56n
Collini, P. 1 4 1 n
Baldacci, M. 1 38 Collon, D . 63n, 1 4 1 n, 1 49-50
Barr, J. 94, 95n, 96, 1 08-9, 1 1 1 , Cooper, A. 1 9n, 50n
1 1 3, 1 1 8n, 1 1 9 Cross, F.M. 20n
Barth, K. 1 4n
Bauer, H. & Leander, P. 152n Dahood, M. 7 1 -2, 75, 77, 78n,
Baumbartner, W. 97n, 98, 100 95, 96n, 97n, 1 32n, 1 59
Beeston, A.F.L. et al 1 35n Day, J. 46n, 50n, 5 1 , 62, 1 42n,
Berlin, A. 68n 1 53n, 1 57
Biella, J.C. 1 35 De Moor, J.C. 1 8, 24, 26, 49n,
Bodine, W.R. 85n 50n, 64, 65n, 1 20n, 1 27, 1 29-
Bollenrucher, J. 79n 30, 1 3 1n, 1 32, 1 38n, 144,
Borger, R. 76n, 1 03, 1 52n 146n, 1 47-8, 1 5 1 -2, 152n,
Bottero, J. 49n, 76n, 79n, 80n, 1 54n
1 03-4, 103n De Moor, J.C. & van der Lugt,
Bright, J. 36, 40 P. 6 l n, 70n
1 86 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

Deimel, P.A. 1 07n Gordis, R. 35-6n

Del Monte, G.F. & Tischler, J. Gordon, C.H. 25n, 54, 64n, 69,
1 38n 95n, 1 27 , 1 29, 1 3 1 -2, 134,
Delitzsch, F. 97, 1 37-8 145, 148
Dhorme, E. 35n Gorelick, L. & Williams-Forte,
Dhorme, P. 98 E. 63n
Diakonoff, I.M. & Kashkai, S.M. Gorg, M. 22, 94n
1 38n Gray, J. 1 8 , 132
Dietrich, M. et al 18, 105n, 132 Greenfield, J.C. 1 23n, 1 28-30,
Dijkstra, M. 35n 132-4
Dillmann, A. 97 Greenstein, E.L. 18, 1 9n
Driver, G.R. 1 8 , 105n, 1 27, 1 29, Gr!llnbrek, J .H. 50n
1 3 1 -2 Groneberg, B. 1 06n, 1 38n
Driver, S.R. 1 3, 86n Gunkel, H. 1 3, 45, 97, 1 19n, 156
Driver, S.R. & Gray, G.B. 35n
Dussaud, R. 1 32 Hallo, W.W. 80n, 90n, 1 26n,
Dussaud, R. et al 1 8 1 36n
Hecker, K. 25n
Ebach, J . 22n Heidel, A. 46n, 49n, 52n, 79n,
Ebeling, E. 2 1 n 8 1 n, 1 1 2n, 1 2 1 n
Edzard, D.O. 56n, 1 38n Heimpel, W. 1 3 8 , 1 50n
Edzard, D.O. et al 1 37n Held, M. 8 1 n
EUenbogen, M. 94n, 98, 1 2 1 Herrmann, S. 1 32
Errnan, A . & Grapow, H. 94n, Hess, R.S. 53n, 90n, 92n, 102n
1 3 1 n, 1 43n Hillers, D.R. 75n
Hirsch, H. 55n, 1 03
Falkenstein, A. 1 25n Hoffmeier, J.K. 1 43n
Fishbane, M. 37, 38n, 40n Hoffner, H.A., Jr. 64n, 65n,
Fohrer, G. 98 1 5 1n
Frankfort, H. & H.A. et al 60n, Hoftijzer, J. 105, 1 27n
6 ln, 143n Holladay, W.L. 38-9
Fronzaroli, P. 56n, 6 1 n Hommel, F. 1 35n
Huehnergard, J. 1 9n, 25-26, 30n,
Gadd, C.J. 87n 50n, 52n, 53n, 90n, 104n
Gardiner, A. 58n Hutter, M. 69n
Garr, W.R. 62n
Gaster, T.H. 1 8, 1 3 l n Israel, F. 1 37n
Gelb, I.J. 52n, 1 1 3n, 1 25n
Gesenius, W. & Buhl, F. 97 Jacobsen, T. 47-9, 5 l n, 57, 60n,
Gibson, J.C.L. 1 8n, 5 1 , 1 27, 1 30 6 1 n, 80n, 1 26n, 147n, 148n,
Ginsberg, H.L. 1 32 149n
Goetze, A. 64n Jamme, A. 1 35n
Golomb, D.M. 85n Jirku, A. 1 8
 Index of Authors 1 87

Johnstone, W. 1 8 Lane, E.W. 17, 2 l n, 1 36

Laroche, E. 23n
Kaiser, 0 . 40n, 43n, 46n, 57n, Leander, P. 97, 1 1 4n
97n, 98, 1 50 Lemaire, A. 1 23n, 1 36n, 1 37n
Kapelrud, A.S. 1 5 1 Lieberman, S. 1 1 5n, 1 25n
Kaufman, S.A. 46n, 105-6, Lipinski, E. 1 25n, 1 3 1 -3
1 25n, 1 28 Livingstone, A. 1 9n , 58n, 69n,
Kidner, D. 87n, 1 1 9n, 1 22n 76n, 148n, 1 49n, 1 5 l n, 1 52n
Kienast, B. 25n Longacre, R.E. 86n, 1 20n
Kikawada, I.M. & Quinn, A. 42n Luyster, R. 153n
King, L.W. 79n, 80n, 8 l n, 102n Lyons, J. 68n
Kitchen, K.A. 1 3 l n
Kloos, C. 50n, 1 42n, 1 52n McCarter, P.K. 6ln, 98, 102n
Knudtzon, J.A. 53n McKane, W. 36-9
Korpel, M.C.A. & de Moor, J.C. Malamat, A. 55n
50n, 65n, 1 30 Margalit, B. 1 9, 1 30, 133-4
Kramer, S.N. 60n, 6 l n, 1 22n, Meyer, E. 97n
1 37n, 143, 145n, 147n, 148n, Meyer, J.-W. 27n
1 49n Millard, A.R. 2 l n, 78-9, 1 1 5n,
Kraus, H.-J. 72, 77 1 20, 1 2ln, 1 23n, 1 24, 1 25-
Krebernik, M. 25, 52n, 56n, 6n, 1 28, 1 30
6 l n, 1 1 4n, 1 25n, 1 26n Miller, P.D., Jr. 65n, 80n, 8 ln,
Krecher, J. 52n, 56n 98, 99n, 1 48n, 1 53n
Kselrnan, J.S . 38n, 7 l n, 78n Moran, W.L. 53n, 8 l n, 82n
Mullen, E.T., Jr. 1 50n, 1 5 l n
Labat, R. 69n, 82n
Labat, R. et al 1 1 2n Nashef, K . 1 1 3n
Labuschagne, C.J. 1 53n Nougayrol, J. 23 , 26, 52n
Lambert, W.G. 25, 29n, 47-9,
5 ln , 58n, 59n, 60n , 6ln, 63n, O'Connor, M.P. & Freedman,
68n, 76, 82n, 87n, 102-3, D.N. 83n, 85n
1 14, 1 25n, 1 28-9, 1 33-4, Oden, R.A., Jr. 22n
1 37-8, 1 42n, 143, 1 47n, Olrno Lete, G. del 1 9, 1 30, 1 32,
1 48n, 152-3, 1 54n 1 36n
Lambert, W.G. & Millard, A.R. Otten, H. 65n
26n, 27 , 28n, 40n, 55n, 59n, Otzen, B. 1 3n, 14, 42n, 46n
68n, 76n, 78n, 90n, 9 l n,
1 38n, 146n Pardee, D. 69n
Lambert, W.G. & Parker, S.B. Parpola, S. 1 1 3n
9ln Pettinato, G. 56n, 96, 1 3 l n
Landsberger, B. 1 09n, 1 24n Pettinato, G . et al 56n
Landsberger, B. & Wilson, Poebel, A. 1 1 3n, 1 14n
J.V.K. 82n, 149n Pope, M.H. 33n, 35n, 6ln, 72n,
1 88 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

1 06, 1 32-3, 150 Tsumura, D.T. 23n, 35n, 40n,

Pope, M.H. & Tigay, J.H. 1 32-3 58n, 64n, 70n, 9 ln, 1 30n,
Pope, M.H. et a/ 1 27 1 3 1n, 142n
Postgate, J.N. 1 1 3n Tur-Sinai, N .H. 33n, 35n, 4 1 n

Rainey, A.F. 52n, 1 32 Van der Weiden, W.A. 7 ln, 72n

Rendsburg, G. et a/ 24n Van Dijk, J. 1 1 9n, 1 2 1 n, 1 5 1 n
Reymond, P. 98 Van Zijl, P.J. 1 36n
Roberts, J.J.M. 33n, 52n, 103, Vanstiphout, H.L.J. 60n, 69n,
1 42n, 1 45n 81n
Rogers, R.W. 79n Vincent, J.M. 73n
Ryckmans, G. 1 35 Von Rad, G. 1 3 , 98, 1 68
Von Soden, W. 98, 1 1 1 , 1 12n,
Sachsse, E. 98, 1 07n 1 28n, 1 5 1n
Sreb0, M. 98, 1 00-2, 1 05, 108-9,
1 13n, 1 17-18 Wakeman, M.K. 45n, 46-7, 7 1 n,
Sailhammer, J. 78n 72n
Schmidt, W.H. 1 3, 43n, 46n, Wallace, H.N. 1 23n, 1 26n, 150n
52n, 57n, 85-6, 87n, 88n, 98 Waltke, B.K. 20n
Schott, A. & von Soden, W. Watson, W.G.E. 7 1n, 72n
l l ln Weinfeld, M. 1 33
Scullion, J.J. 72n Wenham, G.J. 20n, 42, 78n, 87n,
Segert, S. 25n 88-9, 89n, 98, l OOn, 1 1 9n
Shea, W.H. 96n Westenholz, A. 48n
Sjoberg, A.W. 47, 90n Westermann, C. 22-3, 30, 3 1 n,
Skinner, J. 57n 32-4, 43n, 46n, 49, 87, 98,
Smith, M.S. SOn, 5 1n, 64n, 1 30, 100, 1 23n, 1 27n
1 32n, 1 33, 1 48n, 150n Wevers, J.W. 1 7n
Sollberger, E. 52n Wilcke, C. 8 1 n
Sollberger, E. & Kupper, J.-R. Wildberger, H . 37n, 38n, 40-1
55n Williams-Forte, E. 63n
Sommerfeld, W. 1 48n Wilson, J .A. 64n, 82n
Speiser, E.A. 97n, 98- 1 0 1 , 104- Winckler, H. l i On
5, 107-8, 1 1 2n, 1 23 , 159-60 Wyatt, N. 150n
Stadelmann, L.I.J. 73n, 75n
Stieglitz, R.R. 152n Xella, P. 1 38n

Taber, C.R. 67n Young, E.J. 3 1 n, 34n, 41n, 42n,

Tallqvist, K.L. 1 32n, 1 42n, 89n, 98, 1 20n
1 46n, 147n
Thompson, R.C. 1 1 2n Zalcman, L. 39n
Thomsen, M.-L. 1 25n Zimmerli, W. 1 3
Thureau-Dangin, F. 29n, 152n Zimmem, H. 46n, 56-7, 97, 1 1 3
 Index of Texts References 1 89

BIBLICAL TEXTS

Genesis 1 Chronicles 108:5 77

3:8 87 1 :50 96, 97 1 34:6 73n
4: 1 7 81 1 35:6 58, 73-4
6-8 1 15 Job 145:6 73n
7: 1 1 70, 1 22, 6: 1 8 30- 1 146:6 58, 73
1 52, 1 67 1 2:24 30- 1 148 74-8
8:2 70, 1 22, 1 2:24-5 35, 38n 148: 1 -7 73n
1 52, 1 67 26:7 3 1 -3 148:7 59, 74n
9:2 59, 76 30:4, 7 86
10: 1 0- 1 2 8 1 35:5 77 Proverbs
1 1 : 1-9 81 36 1 15 3 77
13:10 1 36, 1 6 1 36:27 94, 96-7, 3 : 1 9f 144
14:22 153 1 00, 106, 3 : 1 9-20 59, 74n,
21:15 86 1 1 2n, 1 15
22: 17 71 1 1 5-6, 3 :20 69n, 1 1 5
36:39 96-7 161 8:22-3 1 1 1 5
49:25 70, 152 38:37 77 8:27 70
8:27-29 74n
Exodus Psalms 8:27-32 73n
1 5 :8 72n 8:8-9 59, 74 8:29 78
20:4 58, 73n, 29 142n
74 33:5-7 73n Ecclesiastes
20: 1 1 58, 73 33 :6-8 73n 2:6 121n
23:29 39n 36:6 77
36:8 1 27 Isaiah
Deuteronomy 36:9 1 36, 1 6 1 1 :7 39n
5:8 58, 73n, 57: 1 1 77 14: 1 3 33
74 69:35 58, 73-4 24 32
1 1 :15 87 7 1 :20 59, 72, 24:4 38n
32:10 17, 30, 74n 24: 1 0 30, 32
32 77: 1 7 , 1 9 72n 24: 1 2 33
33 : 1 3 70, 152 78:23 77 29:21 31
33 :26 77 96: 1 1 58, 73-4 34: 1 1 23, 30,
104:9 78 40- 1 ,
1 Samuel 104: 1 1 121n 156
12:21 31 104: 14 87 40: 17 31
106:9 57n, 58 40:22 32n
2 Samuel 106:20 87 40:23 30- 1 ,
1 :24 1 27 107:25-7 1 33 32n
1 5 :2 1 35n 107:26 7 1 , 1 52 41 :29 31
22: 1 6 1 44 107:40 30- 1 44:9 3 1 -2
1 90 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

45:8 77 5 1 :34 1 27 Habakkuk

45: 1 8 3 1 , 33-4 2:5 1 9n
45 : 1 9 3 1 , 34-6, Ezekiel 3 58n
38n 17:7 12ln 3:10 5 8 , 70n,
49:4 31 28: 1 3 , 1 6 1 50 159
59:4 31 28: 1 9 34n
62:4 39n 32:6 1 2 1n, Zephaniah
63 : 1 3 57n, 58 1 22n 1 :3 59, 74
38:20 59, 74 2:4 39n
Jeremiah
4:23 23, 30, Hosea Haggai
34n, 35 , 2: 1 35n 2:6 58, 73
4 1 , 1 56 4:3 59, 74
4:23-6 36-40 10:8 87n
4:23-8 38-40 Philippians
4:27 32n, 33, Joel 2:10 73n
39n 4: 1 8 l l 8,
4:27-8 38 121n Revelation
4:29 39n 5 :3 73n
5:6 19 A mos 5:13 73n
1 2:4 39n 1 :2 39n
23 :10 39n 1 :5 1 37
32:43 39n
33:10 39n Nahum
5 1 :9 77 1 :8 40

UGARITIC TEXTS

KTU :28-29 54n 6:1:34 54, 59

1 .2:III:4 54, 59 :32 64 :42-43 145n
3 :III:24-25 68 , 77 :34 54n :44 54n
:25 53, 60 :IV:20-22 54 :45 54n
:26 64 :22 54, 59 :47 54n
:26-28 72n :56 95n :53 54n
: 38ff. 50, 63 :V :6-7 7 1 , 1 27, :III:5 64
V:7 54, 59 1 27n, :11 64
4:1:1 3-14 54n 1 29, 1 34- 14:1 : 1 -25 91n
:18 95n 5 1 6:1: 1 1 63, 70
:21 54n 5 :1: 1 ff. 5 1 , 63 :21 -22 63, 70
:11: 1 1 64 : 14- 1 6 1 8 :V:25 145n
:III:25 54n :VI:1 54 17:1:24 64
 Index of Texts References 191

:VI: l 2 53 92:5 54, 132 1 35:R:9 104n

:48 54, 59 100 1 52, 1 54n 1 37:I:8 50n
1 8:IV:25 19 100: 1 53, 63, 70 :11 : 1 24
:36-37 19 :3 54, 59 : 15 23n, 30
19:I:44 94n :62 1 20n :23 23, 23n,
:45 54, 1 1 6, :63 1 38n 30, 52n
1 22, 1 34 :64 1 38n :28 24
:11:38-39 19 :65 90n :36 52n
:43-44 19 107 154n :III:33f. 70, 1 5 1
:Ill: 1 2ff. 64 1 1 8:4 33n :34 52-3 , 63
23:30 53-4, :14 33n :IVb: l 7? 52n
54n, 59 1 33:2-5 18
:30ff. 64 :4 19
:62-63 54n, 75
47 65n Ug. V

AKKADIAN TEXTS

Atra-tJasis Epic ii:4 55, 78n 16 147n

I i 7- 1 8 59, 76 11 55, 78n 22 54n
15 55, 60 18 5 5 , 78n 73ff. 145
1 5-6 78n 24 55 IV 1 0 1 -4 145
11 ii 20 9ln 34 55, 78n 1 35ff. 144
i v 4-6 27, 9 1 , 40 55 1 37-8 144
9 I n, 1 4 1 -2 1 52
92n "Creation of the World V 49 82n
viii 34 40n by Marduk" 55 149
Ill iii 38 40n 1 -9 79 62 144
iv 6 55 10- 1 1 80, SOn VI S Sin
V 42-4 40n 1 2ff. 80 33 147
Si7 1 38 31 12ln VII 2 91
iv 49 26-7 , 90 32 12ln
51 27 Gilgamesh Epic
58 28n Enuma elish XI 86 1 30n
58b-9 26-7 I l ff. 60n XI 297ff. l l l f.
61 27 1 -2 69n XI 27 1 1 1 2n
V I 60, 78n 1 -9 81
x rev. i 6 55, 60, 1 -8 S i n, 82 Hymn to Marduk
78n 4 147n 27 1 28
10 5 5 , 78n 6 1 20
192 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

Hymn to Nergal
LSS 1/6, 43 & 46 Lugal.e 151n Vocabulary Sb
79n 356-9 1 21n 90-91 1 24

Kalu ritual (A0.6472) RS 20.24 33n, 60,

16 28f. 65n

EBLAITE TEXTS

ARET 5 1 2:V: 10 56n VE 1 247 1 24n

3:IV :3 1 38 63-64:v .III:20-21 1 343-4 149n
4:1:6 56n 149n 1423 1 14n,
6:VII: 1 -3 56 79:g:2 126n 1 24n
:X:4 56 :r.III:8-9 56, 61n,
149n Sign list B 1 14n,
MEE 4 (= VE) 1 24
 Index of Selected Terms 1 93

SELECTED TERMS

HEBREW

'ildamiih 86-9 1 , 89n, l)ogek 35-6, 35n, 38, 45-8, 5 1 -3, 5 1n,
90n, 93, 1 1 8-22, 38n, 57, 78, 1 63 56-9, 6 1 -3, 65,
1 20n, 1 22n, 1 23, m'dnh 137 69n, 67-8, 70,
1 26, 1 4 1 , 1 62-5 matar 97, 1 1 5 70n, 72-8, 72n,
'akkad 1 06, 1 1 4 nahar 1 1 2, 1 1 7-8, 73n, 74n, 75n,
'ed 59, 85-6, 88-9, 1 2 1 , 1 60 80, 85, 96, 1 1 5,
93- 1 0 1 , 94n, 'eden 85, 90, 1 17, 1 1 7 ' 1 22, 141 '
95n, 97n, 98n, 1 20, 1 20n, 1 23- 143-4, 1 52-9,
99n, 1 04-7, 7, 1 29, 1 36, 1 63-8
1 06n, 1 1 2-23, 1 36n, 155, 1 6 1 , tohii 1 7-23, 30-6, 3 1 n,
1 1 2n, 1 36n, 1 4 1 - 1 63 35n, 38n, 40- 1 ,
2 , 1 55 , 1 59-65 'irad 1 26n 4 1 n, 1 55-6
'ed 96, 100. 1 05, p�rat 1 38 tohii wabOhii 17 ' 20,
105n q8$ w�dardar 87, 87n 23-4, 23n, 26,
'edo 97, 1 00. 1 06, raqP.' 1 4 1 , 1 52n, 1 65 30, 34-43, 67,
1 1 5, 1 25, 1 60-1 78, 9 1 -2, 1 55-6,
nJ•l) 1 43, 1 53n
bet 'eden 1 37n 1 62-3, 1 68
sP.l) 86-7, 90, 90n
bohii 20-3, 30, 40- 1 , yam 53n, 58-60, 65,
geJeg 1 32
1 55 73-4, 73n, 78,
g{)ham 1 37n 1 58
gJg 1 32 ta 'ilwah 1 8
hekal 1 25n t�hOm rabbah 46, 57,
l)iddeqel 1 14, 1 14n, 70
1 26n, 1 37-8 t�hOm(ot) 20, 38, 38n,
l)my'dn 1 37

ARAMAIC

gwr 1 25 m'dn mt kln 1 28-9,

gwgl nhr klm 1 28, 142 1 35, 1 42
m'dn 1 28n, 1 29 'ilnana ' 94, 1 59

UGARITIC

ab adm 64, 147 artj w gmm 69n, 89n i1t 1 05 , 1 05n

ab gnm 64 ilm n'mm 64, 64n bny bn wt 64, 1 46
1 94 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

b'dt thmtm 144n, 1 50, 1 27n, 1 30n, 1 3 1 , 56-63, 63n, 68-

1 50n, 166 135-6, 1 35n, 72, 77, 1 22,
b[n 'qltn 50 1 36n 1 22n, 1 32-4,
g/1 1 29-33 , 1 35 qrb apq thmtm 144n, 1 34n, 144-5,
hkl 1 25n 150, 1 50n, 1 66 1 50n, 1 5 1 -3,
hpk 25 rb(b) 94n, 95n, 1 34 158-9, 1 64, 1 66-
wtn 1 30n Sl}t 90n 7
zbl b'l ar$ 1 45n Smm 54, 63, 69-72, tnn 50
!JrSn 1 50 69n, 72n, 75n, tu-a-bi-[u] 23, 23n,
ym 1 8 -9, 1 9n, 50n, 77, 1 5 1 24-6, 29, 52n,
Smm w thm 53 , 63, 1 55
53-4, 53n, 54n,
63n, 70, 1 5 1 tu-a-pi-[ku] 25, 156
57-6 1 , 70, 75n,
153, 1 67 SpS 152 ?tuhap(p)iku 25, 25n,
*y'd 1 27 Sr' thmtm 1 1 6, 1 22, 30n
ltn 50n, 5 1 1 34, 1 34n tunnanu 50n
mbk nhnn 1 50, 1 66 ta-a-ma-tu4 24, 52-3, 1kt 1 29-3 1 , 1 33
m{r 1 27, 1 27n, 1 29- 52n 1rt 1 3 1 -4
3 1 , 1 3 3-4 tahamu 62, 1 54, 158 ?1/g 1 32
nhr 150n thw 17-9, 19n, 24,
n 'm 1 36 1 55
'dn 1 22n, 1 27-9, thm(t) 5 1 -4, 52n, 54n,

ARABIC

'ada 95-6 ngm 136 tariya 1 3 1

bahiya 2 1 , 23 'adana 1 36, 1 36n, 1 6 1 1arra 1 3 1
janmitu 'adnin 136 gadan(u) 1 27, 1 35-6
haikal 1 25n tihamat 52, 158
ha wiya 1 8 1akka 1 3 1

OLD SOUTH ARABIC

MTBNTYN 1 35

AKKADIAN

abu iliini 147-8 akkadii 1 06, 106n, ammatum 69n

abiibu 40, I l l , 1 21 1 14 apsii 6 1 -2, 61n, l 1 2,
 Index of Selected Terms 1 95

1 2 1n, 1 33 , 1 50- 1 28n :Jeru 1 24, 1 24n

2, 159 !JurSiinu 1 5 1 Sa me 1 5 1 n
ayabba 53n, 65, 65n idiqlat 1 1 4, 1 1 4n, 1 26, Salgu 1 32
ban binutu 64, 146 1 37 Samas 1 30n
biinu nabnit 64, 146 isinnu 1 26 Sammu 90-1
biirtu 6 1 n ka:jiiru 8 1 n Se 'u 9 1 , 91n
edinu 1 23-5, 1 24n, kiSSatu 152 su 'u 90, 90n
161 milu 100, 107- 1 1 , tiimtu elitu 1 5 1
edu 97- 100, 97n, 104- 108n, 1 1 1 n, 1 28, tiimtu Saplitu 1 5 1
1 3 , 1 05n, 106n, 133 ti 'iim(a)tu, tamtu 46-
108n, 1 1 1n, 1 1 5 , muta!J!Jidu 1 28-9 9, 48n, 52, 53n,
1 1 7, 1 25 , 1 33, muta!Jl.Jidu kibrati. 55-7, 56n, 59-
159-6 1 1 28, 1 42 62, 6 l n,77, 78n,
eduru 1 36 nabalkutu 23, 23n, 25- 80, 80n, 108,
ekallu 1 25n 30, 27n, 29n, 92, 1 1 0- 12, 1 1 1 n,
ekurru 1 25 1 55 146, 147n, 156,
er:jetu 26, 28-30, 28n, na!Jbalu ti 'iimtim 55, 158-9
29n, 34n, 68n, 60, 78 ti 'iimat tu 'amtu 1 5 1 n
69n, 88n, 90- 1 , niiru 5 5 , 100-4, 104n, ta!Jdu 1 1 On, 1 28
9 1n, 146-7, 149, 1 1 2-3, 1 1 7, 1 60 tu!Jdu 1 28, 142
1 67 nu!JSu 1 28, I 28n
esigu 107, 109 puran(a)tu 138
gi:J:JU daddaru 87n purattu 138
!Jegallu I l l , 1 28, ratu 80n, 1 1 2, 1 1 2n

EBLAITE

bU-Ja-na-tim 1 38 idigra-um 1 14, 1 1 4n, 1 58

bU-la-tum 6 1 1 24, 1 37 tihiim (a)tum 6 1 , 77,
1-d1-gi-ra-um 1 1 4n, puran(a)tim 1 38 1 25n, 158-9
1 24, 1 38 :ja-lum 1 24n
1-di-num 1 24 ti- 'a-ma-tum 52, 55-6,
1-du(?) 95-6, 95n 56n, 1 25n, 149n,

SEMITIC

ap 1 3 1 n buhwu 22n 'dn 1 35-6, 1 6 1

bhw 155 J:tay(y)um 145n s r' 1 34n
bfhwu 22n, 24, 52n J:tyy 145n tiham- 52, 56, 58, 6 1 ,
1 96 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

65, 158-9 52n yamm- 53n, 58, 159

tilhwu 19, 1 9n, 24, tuqattil 25

HURRIAN

arS!J 1 3 8n tapSu!Jumme 23 , 23n,

tapS- 23n, 1 55 26, 30, 155

SUMERIAN

A 107-8 gina 1 37-8

A.AB.BA 60, 6 1n, 65 a-ab 6 1 ha-gal 1 25n
A.DE . A 97, 99, 107 , a-ab-ba 60- 1 , 6 1n, hai-kal 1 25n
1 08n, 109, 1 1 5, 149n, 159 id 97n, 98, 1 00-2,
1 1 5n, 159 a-ab-ba an-ta 1 5 1 1 02n, 1 04, 108,
A.ENGUR 99, 1 1 3 , 1 60 a-ab-ba ki-ta 1 5 1 1 1 3-5, 1 1 3n,
A.SI.GA 1 07 , 108n, a-ka-de 1 14 1 1 7-8, 1 37-8,
1 09 a-dam 90n 1 59-60
AB 1 3 1 n ab-a 56, 149n, 159 idig(i)na 1 1 4, 1 14n,
A N 70, 15 1 1 24, 1 26, 1 37-8
ab-zu 61
ANTU 53, 70, 1 5 1
buranun 1 38 itu ga-Sum 96
E.GAL 1 25n
e-duru 1 36 itu i-tum 96n
EDIN 1 24
e-kur 1 25 itu NI.DU 96
EN.KI 145n
e4 -de(-a) 109, 1 1 4-5, Lugal-abzu(ak) 149
ENGUR 149n
d fD 98- 104, 104n, 108, 1 1 7, 1 25, 159-60 Lugal-id(ak) 149
1 1 1n, 1 59-60 e4 -si-ga 1 09 mir 108n, 109
ID.DA 104 edin 1 23-6, 1 23n, nammu 149n
1 24n, 1 26n, 1 6 1 sar 1 5 2
AN u KI 76n En-ki 145n, 147
E-a 145n En-uru 1 45n
E-um 145n ezen 1 24, 1 26

GREEK

VE<f>EAl)V 94 94, 1 21n, 159

1Tll 'Y'l
Novv 1 43n xcios 20, 20n
 Subject Index 1 97

SUBJECT INDEX

Adad 1 28-9, 1 3 2-3, 142, 142n, ASSur 152

1 65 Assyrian 27, 92, 99- 1 0 1 , 1 06,
Adda 1 4 1 n 1 06n, 1 28
Addu 1 42, 1 42n Astarte 64n, 1 33
Agusaya hymn 1 47 A!irat 54n
Akkad 55n, 1 06, 1 1 4 Atra-(:Jasis epic 26-8, 55, 59-60,
Akkadian 21 et passim 76, 78, 90-1 , 1 07, 1 47
alliteration 23 Atum-Re 82n
alloform 105-6, 160 AXB pattern 70n, 1 3 1 -2, 1 3 l n
allomorph 1 1 5 AXYB pattern 35n
Amama 53n, 65n
Amorite 47 Ba'u 2 l n
Anat 50, 63 Baal 49, 50, 58n, 63-5, 93n, 94n,
Anatolia 133 1 27, 1 29-35, 142, 1 42n,
AnSar 1 52, 1 52n 144, 145n, 1 46n, 147-8,
Antu 152 1 53, 1 57-8, 1 65-6
Anu 29n, 59, 76, 76n, 80n, 146- Baal Cycle 5 1 n, 63-4
8, 148n, 152 Baau 21 -2, 22n
Anzu 48 Babylon 48, 48n, 80, I l l , I 52n
Apsfi 59-60, 59n, 68n, 74, 74n, Babylonian 27, 40, 45-7, 50- 1 ,
76-7, 79, 80n, 8 1 -2, 59, 64, 68n, 74, 82n, 105,
8 l n, l l l , 142, 145, 1 45n, 1 29n, 148, 1 5 l n, 1 53 , 1 56
149-50, 1 5 1n, 1 52-3 , 152n, BaliiJ 1 37n
1 59, 1 66-7 ballast variant 1 3 1
Aquila 17, 94, 1 1 2, 1 21n bilingual 79n, 1 07, 109, 1 2l n,
Arabic 17-8, 21 , 23, 25, 52, 94n, 1 23-4, 1 24n, 1 25n, 1 26n,
95-7, 1 25n, 1 27, 1 3 1 , 1 35- 1 28-9, 1 28n, 1 45n, 149n,
6, 1 36n, 1 58-9, 1 6 1 1 63
AraiJtu I l l bipartite 75-8, 1 63
Aramaic 46, 46n, 58, 69n, 90n, Bit-Adini 1 37n
94, 105-6, 1 2 1 n, 1 23, 1 25, Bo�azkoy 1 5 1
1 27-9, 1 28n, 1 35-6, 1 59 borrowing, lexical 45-7, 46n, 52,
AranzaiJi 1 38n 62, 1 04-5, 1 1 2-3, 1 1 5,
AraSSiiJ 1 38n 1 23n, 1 26, 1 37, 1 57, 1 59-
Asakku 1 50n 60
Ashurbanipal I 02
Ashurnasirpal 1 1 On Canaanite 22, 50-2, 5 l n, 6 1 -5,
assimilation 1 38 64n, 90n, 93n, 106, 1 1 3-5 ,
1 98 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

1 25-6, 1 25n, 1 34n, 1 48, 1 26n, 1 3 1n, 1 37-8, 1 37n,

1 5 1 , 1 53-4, 153n, 154n, 1 4 1 , 1 4 1n, 1 45n, 1 49n,
1 57-8, 1 60- 1 1 57-9
Cassite 1 48 Eden 89-90, 90n, 93n, 99, 1 1 8-
casus pendens 28 2 1 , 1 1 9n, 1 20n, 1 23 , 1 27-8,
chaos 13-4, 14n, 20, 20n, 22, 26, 1 36, 1 3 6n, 1 37n, 1 42, 1 54n,
30, 30n, 32-4, 36-7 ' 40, 43, 155, 1 6 1 , 1 63-5, 1 68
45, 5 1 , 58, 60n, 65, 72, Egyptian 22, 22n, 58, 64n, 82n,
80n, 85, 88n, 1 44n, 155-6, 94n, 1 3 1 , 1 43, 1 43n
168 Ekur 79, 80n
Chaoskampf (cf. conflict theme) El 54, 59, 64-5, 65n, 1 22n, 1 34n,
1 5 , 49n, 50, 65 , 1 57-8 1 44-8, 1 44n, 146n, 150-4,
chiasmus 38, 7 1 , 7 1n, 72n, 78n 1 58, 1 66-7
climax 42, 162 El-kunirsa 64n, 65, 1 5 1
cognate accusative 90n ellipsis 35
collocation 30, 68 Elohim 144, 153, 1 66-7
conflict theme 45, 48-5 1 , S i n, emptiness 20- 1 , 30- 1 , 35, 4 1 , 43,
6 1 , 63, 1 56-7 1 56
Coptic 1 43n Enki 59-60, 60n, 65n, 76, 1 22n,
creation ex nihilo 14 1 45, 1 45n, 1 46n, 147-50,
1 47n, 1 53, 1 66-7
darkness 35-6, 38, 42 Enlil 1 9n, 29n, 59, 76, 76n, 80n,
demythologization 46-7, 5 1 , 65 , 1 45-8, 148n
158 Enuma elish 45, 47-9, 48n, 50,
desert 1 7-9, 1 9n, 20, 30-5, 37, 55, 60- 1 , 60n, 76, 80n, 8 1 -
40-2, 1 55-6 3 , 9 1 , 1 20; 1 44-5, 152-3,
dew 94n, 95n, 1 34 1 56-8, 1 64, 1 66-7
discourse analysis 42, 80-2, 83n, Eridu 79-80, 80n, 1 1 2n, 1 26n,
85, 85n, 1 1 9, 1 1 9n, 1 20n, 1 47, 1 47n
142n, 1 62, 1 64 Esagila 76, 80, 145
dragon 49-5 1 , 54n, 62, 63n, 64- Esarhaddon I l l n, 146
5, 75n, 1 53n, 1 57-8 Esarra 76, 1 45
etymology 1 5, 1 7, 20-3, 41 , 46-7,
Ea 29n, 59-60, 64, 65n, 76, 76n, 5 1 -2, 52n, 67 , 70n, 85 , 90n,
80n, 1 2 1n, 1 34, 1 42, 144- 93-4, 94n, 95-7, 99n, 105n,
53, 1 45n, 146n, 1 48n, 1 52n, 1 1 4n, 1 1 5, 1 1 7-9, 1 23, 1 27,
1 66-7 1 34n, 1 36-8, 1 36n, 1 45n,
Eanna 79, 80n 1 5 l n, 155-6, 1 58-9, 1 6 1
Earth Mother 42n Euphrates 99, 1 10, 1 1 3n, 1 37-8,
Ebla 6 1 , 96, 1 26n 1 37n, 1 49, 1 49n, 1 5 1
Eblaite 25, 52, 52n, 55-6, 58,
58n, 6 1 , 63, 77, 95-7, 1 1 4, Fekheriyeh inscription 1 23, 1 27-
1 14n, 1 24-6, 1 24n, 1 25n, 8, 1 34-5, 1 42, 1 6 1 , 1 65
 Subject Index 1 99

Flood 40, 55, 1 52, 1 67 Keret 145n

framing 39 Kingu 147
Kiiltepe 103n
Gilgamesh epic 1 1 1 , 1 1 2n, 1 30n kun-yomi 1 24n
Glossenkeil 29n
grand climax 42, 1 62 Lagas 55
grapheme 24, 1 0 1 , 159 Late Babylonian 90n
Greek 20, 20n, 22, 143, 143n Leviathan 50
literary structure 39, 42, 75, 8 1 -
ijabur 1 37n 2, 86-7, 1 30, 1 62
Hadad 1 28-9, 1 34-5, 142, 142n, literary tradition 40- 1
1 65 loan word 46-7, 53n, 5 7 , 62, 90n,
Hadda 1 4 1 , 1 42n 97, 103, 105-6, 105n, 106n,
Haddu 142 1 1 2-5, 1 14n, 1 23, 1 25,
Hammurabi 102, 104 1 25n, 1 36, 1 59-6 1
Harab myth 99n, 147n logogram 101 , 103-4
l:fay(y)a 1 45n Luga1-e 1 1 9n, 1 2 1n, 1 50n, 1 5 1n
hendiadys 72n LXX 35, 94, 97, 97n, 1 1 2, 1 2 1n,
l:fit 1 1 3-4 159
Hittite 64n, 1 25n, 142
Hurrian 23n, 26, 30, 1 1 5, 1 25n, Mala-river 1 5 1
1 38n, 142, 148n, 153, 1 55 Maq1u 102-3, 1 1 l n
hyponym(ous) 38, 38n, 59-60, Marduk 48-9, 48n, 49n, 55, 6 1 ,
62, 67-8, 68n, 7 1 -2, 74-5, 64, 76, 79, 82, 9 1 , 1 08,
75n, 77-8, 89, 1 2 1 , 1 63 1 1 1 , l l l n , 1 21 n, 1 28, 1 33,
1 44-8, 1 45n, 1 47n, 148n,
Id 98-9, 101-4, 1 1 2, 1 60 152-3, 1 56, 1 63, 1 66
Idiglat 1 38 Mari 53n, 99, 104, 1 38
idiomatization 28 marsh 82n, 1 20
Idu 99n Masoretic 90n, 96-7
inc/usio 32, 39, 79 merismus 1 9, 38, 89-91
inclusion 67-8, 68n metathesis 1 32
inserted bicolon 35n Middle Assyrian 102, 1 04, 105n,
inundation 1 1 0, 1 1 9, 1 22, 1 22n, 1 5 1 , 1 60
1 64 mist 94-5, 1 1 7-8, 1 59
irrigation 95 , 1 1 0, 1 1 8-9, 1 1 9n, monocolon 9 1 n
1 32, 1 36n, 1 37n Mot 63n
IStar 1 52 MT 35, 39-40, 1 36, 1 6 1
Mummu 8 1n, 146, 1 47n
Jonathan (Targum) 94
Nabopolassar 1 1 1 n
Kalfi ritual 28 Nabu 147n
Nahar 50, 50n, 63, 65
200 The Earth and the Waters in Gen 1 and 2

Nammu 146, 1 49, 1 67 Rahab 50

Naru 99, 1 0 1 -4, 1 02n, 1 60 rain 86-9, 93, 93n, 94n, 95-7,
Nebuchadnezzar l l ln 95n, 99, l l l n, 1 1 5, 1 1 8-9,
negated antonym 38 1 22, 1 22n, 1 27-34, 1 28n,
Neo-Assyrian 28, 55n, 69n, 87n, 1 34n, 1 36n, 1 4 1 , 1 4 ln, 1 55,
90n, 1 06, 1 52 1 59, 1 62, 1 64-5
Neo-Babylonian 49, 55, 79-80, rain-god 93n, 1 28, 132, 1 34,
82, 1 52, 1 63 1 4 1 -2, 1 65
Nergal 79n resultative 34, 81n
Ninhursag 1 47, 1 47n river 98-9, 99n, 101, 1 02n, 1 04,
NinSiku 146, 146n 1 1 1 -3 , l l ln, 1 1 5, 1 1 7-8,
Ninurta 48, 1 50n 1 2 1 , 1 34, 1 36n, 1 37-8,
Nippur 79 1 37n, 1 42, 1 48-9, 1 50n,
nothingness 1 4n, 2 1 , 3 1 , 3 ln, 33- 1 5 1 , 1 55, 1 59-60, 1 64-5
4 river-god 99, 102-4, 146n, 147n
Nudimrnud 1 47, 1 52, 152n river ordeal 1 02, 1 04
Nun 82n, 143
SamaS 52, 1 29n, 147, 1 5 1
Old Akkadian 48, 55, 1 03 Samfima 63, 70, 1 5 1 , 1 66
Old Aramaic 1 28 sandhi 46
Old Assyrian 48, 1 03 Sapsu 52
Old Babylonian 27, 55, 9 1 , 92, Sargon 55n
1 02-3, 1 06n, 1 09, l iOn, sea-dragon 50, 63-4, 144, 1 57
1 28, 1 47-8 sea-god 48n, 54n
Old South Arabic 35-6, 1 6 1 Semitic 19, 23-4, 46-7, 5 1 -2, 56,
on-yomi 1 24n 58, 6 1 -2, 6 1n, 65, 69n, 70,
Onqelos 94 95, 97, 103 , 105n, 1 23 ,
1 25n, 1 26n, 1 27, 1 34n,
parallelism 1 9, 33, 35, 37, 40, 142n, 1 45n, 1 55, 1 57-9
40n, 68-72, 68n, 70n, 75n, semitized form 1 1 4n, 1 24, 1 6 1
77, 78n, 1 1 0, 1 30, 1 3 ln, Sennacherib l iOn, 1 52n
1 32-3 sign list 1 24-6
Peshitta 94, 1 1 2n, 12ln sound change 62n
Philo of Byblos 21 -2 storm-god 48-50, 49n, 6 1 , 63,
Phoenician 2 1 -2, 58, 69n, 1 59 64n, 93n, 1 32-5, 1 42n, 144,
PineJ:tas 1 3 1 1 56-7, 1 66
poetic cliche 46 Sumerian 2ln, 23n, 30, 30n, 53,
pre-Sargonic 1 37 53n, 56, 6 1 , 6 1n, 69n, 70,
pre-Sumerian 1 37 79n, 95 , 97, 97n, 99n, 1 00-
preterite 86n 5, 1 02n, 105n, 107, 1 12-5 ,
Puzur-Tiamtim 48 1 1 3n, 1 1 4n, 1 1 5n, 1 17-8,
1 1 9n, 1 22n, 1 23-7, 1 23n,
1 25n, 1 26n, 1 36-8, 1 37n,
 Subject Index 201

143, 1 45, 146n, 1 47-8, waw sequential 1 1 9n

148n, 1 50- 1 , 153, 1 59-6 1 , wayqtl construction 89, 1 1 9n,
1 66 142n
syllable 24 West Semitic 46, 46n, 53n, 58,
Synunachus 17, 35 62, 90n, 97, 1 23, 1 25-7 ,
Syriac 46n, 135 1 25n, 1 3 1n, 1 36, 1 59-6 1
word pair 1 9, 23 , 35n, 37-9, 59,
Taham(at)u 52, 57, 63-4, 70, 6 1 n, 67-7 1 , 68n, 69n, 74n,
15 1 , 1 54, 1 57-9, 1 66 75, 76n, 77-8, 90- 1 , 1 32,
Talmud 105 142n, 152, 1 63 , 1 66
Tamtu 99n
Targum 94, 121n, 159 Yam 49-50, 50n, 54n, 57, 58n,
tD infinitive 25 60, 63, 63n, 65, 142n, 1 57-
Teshub 133, 142 8
Theodotion 1 7
Tiamat 1 9n, 45-9, 48n, 49n, 5 1 -
2, 54n, 56-8, 60-2, 65, 76-
7, SOn, 8 1 -2, 8 1 n, 144-5,
149, 149n, 1 5 1 -3, 1 5 1n,
152n, 1 56, 158-9, 1 66-7
Tigris 1 10, 1 1 4, 1 26n, 1 37-8,
1 38n, 149, 1 49n, 1 50n
Tispak 48
topicalization 28, 8 1 n
tripartite 73-6, 7 8 , 148n, 1 63

Ubaidian 145n
Ugaritic 17 et passim
Ulamburiash 48
unproductive 27-30, 39-43, 80,
88, 9 1 -3, 1 55-6, 1 62-3 ,
1 67-8
Ur-Nanunu 104
Uruk 79

vowe1 harmony 25n, 52, 52n, 158

Vulgate 94, 1 1 2, 1 2 1 n

watery abode 1 22n, 145, 148-50,

1 66-7
watery beginning SOn, 143, 1 65
watery chaos 20, 45, 85, 1 55
waw initial 1 1 9n
 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
Supplement Series
I I, HE, WE AND llfEY:
A LITERARY APPROACH TO ISAIAH 53
D.J.A. Clines
*2 JEWISH EXTIGESIS OF llfE BOOK OF Rtrrn
D.R.G. Beattie
* 3 llfE LITERARY STRUCTIJRE OF PSALM 2
P. Aufliet
4 llfANKSGJVING FOR A LIBERATED PROPHET:
AN INTERPRETATION OF ISAIAH CHAPTER 53
R.N. Whybray
REDATING llfE EXODUS AND CONQUEST
J.J. Bimson
6 llfE STORY OF KING DAVJD:
GENRE AND INTERPRETATION
DM. Gunn
7 llfE SENSE OF BIBLICAL NARRATIVE 1:
STRUCTIJRAL ANALYSES IN llfE HEBREW BIBLE (2nd edition)
D. Jobling
*8 GENESIS 1 - 1 1 : STIJDJES IN STRUCTIJRE AND llfEME
P.D. Miller
*9 YAHWEH AS PROSECUTOR AND JUDGE:
AN INVESTIGATION OF llfE PROPHETIC LAWSUIT (Rm PATTERN)
K. Nielsen
10 llfE llfEME OF llfE PENTATEUCH
D.J.A. Clines
*1 1 STUDJA BIBLICA 1978 1:
PAPERS ON OLD TESTAMENT AND RELATED llfEMES
Edited by E.A. Livingstone
12 llfE JUST KING:
MONARCHICAL JUDICIAL AtrrnORITY IN ANCIENT ISRAEL
K.W. Whitelarn
13 ISAIAH AND llfE DELIVERANCE OF JERUSALEM:
A STIJDY OF llfE INTERPRETATION OF PROPHECY
IN llfE OLD TESTAMENT
R.E. Clemenu
14 llfE FATE OF KING SAUL:
AN INTERPRETATION OF A BIBLICAL STORY
DM. Gunn
IS llfE DElJfERONOMISTIC HISTORY
M. Noth
16 PROPHECY AND EllfiCS:
ISAIAH AND llfE EllfiCAL TRADITIONS OF ISRAEL
E.W. Davies
17 llfE ROLES OF ISRAEL'S PROPHETS
D.L. Petersen
18 llfE DOUBLE REDACTION OF llfE DElJfERONOMISTIC HISTORY
R.D.Nelson
19 ART AND MEANING: RHETORIC IN BIBLICAL LITERATIJRE
Edited by D.J.A. Clines, DM. Gunn, & A.J. Hauser
20 TilE PSALMS OF TilE SONS OF KORAH
M.D. Goulder
21 COLOUR TERMS IN TilE OLD 113STAMENT
A. Brenner
22 AT TilE MOUNTAIN OF GOD:
STORY AND TIIEOLOGY IN EXODUS 32-34
R.W.L. Moberly
23 TilE GLORY OF ISRAEL:
TilE TIIEOLOGY AND PROVENIENCE OF TilE ISAIAH TARGUM
B.D. Cbilton
24 MIDIAN, MOAB AND EDOM:
TilE HISTORY AND ARCHAEOLOGY OF LATE BRONZE AND IRON AGE
JORDAN AND NORTII-WEST ARABIA
Edited by J.F.A. Sawyer & D.J.A Clines
2S TilE DAMASCUS COVENANT:
AN INTERPRETATION OF TilE 'DAMASCUS DOCUMENT'
P.R. Davies
26 CLASSICAL HEBREW POETRY;
A GUIDE TO ITS TECHNIQUES
W.G.E. Watson
1:1 PSALMODY AND PROPHECY
W.H. Bellinger
28 HOSEA: AN ISRAELITE PROPHET IN JUDEAN PERSPECTIVE
G.l. Emmerson
29 EXEGESIS AT QUMRAN:
4QFLORILEGIUM IN ITS JEWISH CONTEXT
G.J. Brooke
30 UIE ESTIIER SCROLL: TilE STORY OF TilE STORY
D.j.A. Clines
31 IN TilE SHELTER OF ELYON:
ESSAYS IN HONOR OF G.W. AHLSTR0M
Edited by W.B. Barrick & J.R. Spencer
32 TilE PROPHETIC PERSONA:
JEREMIAH AND TilE LANGUAGE OF TilE SELF
T. Polk
33 LAW AND TIIEOLOGY IN DEU113RONOMY
J.G. McConville
34 TI-lE TEMPLE SCROLL:
AN INTRODUCTION, TRANSLATION AND COMMENTARY
J. Maier
3S SAGA, LEGEND, TALE, NOVELLA, FABLE:
NARRATIVE FORMS IN OLD TESTAMENT LITERATURE
Edited by G.W. Coats
36 TilE SONG OF FOUR113EN SONGS
M.D. Goulder
37 UNDERSTANDING TilE WORD:
ESSAYS IN HONOR OF BERNHARD W. ANDERSON
Edited by J.T. Butler, E.W. Conrad & B.C. OUenburger
38 SLEEP, DIVINE AND HUMAN, IN TilE OLD TESTAMENT
T.H. McAipine
39 TilE SENSE OF BIBLICAL NARRATIVE 11:
STRUCTURAL ANALYSES IN TilE HEBREW BIBLE
D. Jobling
40 DIRECTIONS IN BffiLICAL HEBREW POETRY
Edited by E.R. Follis
41 ZION, THE CllY OF THE GREAT KING:
A THEOLOGICAL SYMBOL OF THE JERUSALEM CULT
B.C. OUenburger
42 A WORD IN SEASON: ESSAYS IN HONOUR OF WILLIAM McKANE
Edited by J.D. Manin & P.R. Davies
43 THE CULT OF MOLEK:
A REASSESSMENT
G.C. Heider
44 THE IDENTilY OF THE INDIVIDUAL IN THE PSALMS
S.J.L. Croft
45 THE CONFESSIONS OF JEREMIAH IN CONTEXT:
SCENES OF PROPHETIC DRAMA
A.R. Diamond
46 THE BOOK OF THE JUDGES: AN INTEGRATED READING
B.G. Webb
47 THE GREEK TEXT OF JEREMIAH:
A REVISED HYPOTHESIS
S. Soderlund
48. TEXT AND CONTEXT:
OLD TESTAMENT AND SEMITIC STUDIES FOR F.C. FENSHAM
Edited by W. Claassen
49 THEOPHORIC PERSONAL NAMES IN ANCIENT HEBREW
J.D. Fowler
50 THE CHRONICLER'S HISTORY
M. Noth
51 DIVINE INITIATIVE AND HUMAN RESPONSE IN EZEKIEL
P. Joyce
52 THE CONFLICT OF FAITH AND EXPERIENCE IN THE PSALMS:
A FORM-CRITICAL AND THEOLOGICAL STUDY
C.C. Broyles
53 THE MAKING OF THE PENTATEUCH:
A METHODOLOGICAL STUDY
R.N. Whybray
54 FROM REPENTANCE TO REDEMPTION:
JEREMIAH'S THOUGHT IN TRANSmON
J. Untennan
55 THE ORIGIN TRADITION OF ANCIENT ISRAEL:
THE LITERARY FORMATION OF GENESIS AND EXODUS 1-23
T.L. Thompson
56 THE PURIFICATION OFFERING IN THE PRIESTLY LITERATURE:
ITS MEANING AND FUNCTION
N. Kiuchi
57 MOSES: HEROIC MAN, MAN OF GOD
G.W. Coats
58 THE LISTENING HEART: ESSAYS IN WISDOM AND THE PSALMS
IN HONOR OF ROLAND E. MURPHY, 0. CARM.
Edited by K.G. Hoglund
59 CREATIVE BffiLICAL EXEGESIS:
CHRISTIAN AND JEWISH HERMENEUTICS THROUGH THE CENTURIES
B. Uffenheimer & H.G. Reventlow
60 HER PRICE IS BEYOND RUBIES:
TilE JEWISH WOMAN IN GRAECO-ROMAN PALESTINE
L.j. Archer
61 FROM CHAOS TO RESTORATION:
AN INTEGRATIVE READING OF ISAIAH 24-27
D.G. jobnson
62 TilE OLD TESTAMENT AND FOLKLORE STIJDY
P.G. Kirkpauick
63 SHILOH: A BIBUCAL CITY IN TRADillON AND HISTORY
D.G. Scbley
64 TO SEE AND NOT PERCEIVE:
ISAIAH 6.9-10 IN EARLY JEWISH AND CHRISTIAN INTERPRETATION
C.A. Evans
6S TIIERE IS HOPE FOR A TREE:
TilE TREE AS METAPHOR IN ISAIAH
K. Nielsen
66 TilE SECRETS OF TilE TIMES:
RECOVERING BlliUCAL CHRONOLOGIES
j. Hugbes
67 ASCRIBE TO TilE LORD:
BlliUCAL AND OTIIER ESSAYS IN MEMORY OF PETER C. CRAIGIE
Edited by L. Eslinger & G. Taylor
68 TilE TRIUMPH OF IRONY IN TilE BOOK OF JUDGES
L.R. Klein
69 ZEPHANIAH, A PROPHETIC DRAMA
P.R. House
70 NARRATIVE ART IN TilE BlliLE
S. Bar-Efrat
71 QOHELET AND HIS CONTRADICTIONS
M.V. Fox
72 CIRCLE OF SOVEREIGNTY:
A STORY OF STORIES IN DANIEL 1-6
D.N. Fewell
73 DAVID'S SOCIAL DRAMA:
A HOLOGRAM OF TilE EARLY IRON AGE
J.W. Flanagan

• Out of print