Line 180:
The earliest [[Sumer]]ian Gilgamesh poems date from as early as the [[Third dynasty of Ur]] (2100–2000 BC).{{sfn|George|2003|p=xix}} One of these poems mentions Gilgamesh’s journey to meet the flood hero, as well as a short version of the flood story, although Chen writes that his was included in texts written during the Old Babylonian Period.<ref name="Chen 2013"/><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk/cgi-bin/etcsl.cgi?text=t.1.8.1.3#|title=The Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature|website=etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk}}</ref> The earliest [[Akkadian language|Akkadian]] versions of the unified epic are dated to c. 2000–1700 BC.<ref>{{harvnb|George|2003|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=21xxZ_gUy_wC&pg=PA101 101]}}: "The great list of kings of Sumer and Akkad was, in the form that we know it, compiled early in the second millennium, from sources already current, to legitimize the [[Dynasty of Isin|kings of Isin]] as the successors of the [[Third Dynasty of Ur|Ur III dynasty]]."</ref> Due to the fragmentary nature of these Old Babylonian versions, it is unclear whether they included an expanded account of the flood myth; although one fragment definitely includes the story of Gilgamesh’s journey to meet [[Utnapishtim]]. The "standard" Akkadian version included a long version of the flood story and was edited by [[Sin-liqe-unninni]] sometime between 1300 and 1000 BC.{{sfn|George|2003|pp=xxiv–xxv}}
Yi Samuel Chen, analyzesanalyzing various texts from the [[Early Dynastic Period (Mesopotamia)|Early Dynastic III Period]] through to the Old Babylonian Period, and argues that the flood narrative was only added in texts written during the latter Old Babylonian Period. When it comes to the [[Sumerian King List]], observationsObservations by experts have always indicatedindicate that the portionportions of the [[Sumerian King List]] talkingwhich aboutmention the time before the flood isare stylistically different from the King List Proper. EssentiallyChen writes that Old Babylonian copies tend to representshow a traditionseparate ofpre-flood beforetradition thewhich floodis apart from the actual King List,. whereasFurther, the [[Ur III]] copy of the King List andas thewell duplicate from theas Brockmonsimilar collectiondocuments indicate that the King List Proper once existed independent of mentiona toflood thenarrative floodor anda thepre-flood tradition of before the flood. Essentially, Chen givesprovides evidence to prove that the sectionsections of before the floodSumerian andKing List that mention references to the flood in the Sumerian King List were all later additions added in during the Old Babylonian Period, asthrough the Sumerian King List went throughlater updates and edits. The Flood as a watershed in early Historyhistory of the world was probably a new historiographical concept emerging in the Mesopotamian literary traditions during the Old Babylonian Period, as evident by the fact that the flood motif didn't show up in the Ur III copy and that the earliest chronographical sources related to the flood show up in the Old Babylonian Period. Chen concludes that the name of Ziusudra as a flood hero, andas thewell ideaas ofany thehinted floodreferences hintedof bya that nameflood, in the Old Babylonian Version of "the [[Instructions of Shuruppak]]" arewere onlylater developments during thatthe Old Babylonian Period, whenoriginating alsofrom theupdated didacticinformation textadded wasto updatedthe with informationtext from the burgeoning Antediluvian Tradition.<ref name="Chen 2013"/>
===Ancient Greek===
|
Article Images