Journal: Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society
Volume: JETS 22:1 (Mar 1979)
Article: The Historical Background Of Genesis 11:1-9: Babel Or Ur?
Author: Dale S. DeWitt

JETS 22:1 (March 1979) p. 15

The Historical Background Of
Genesis 11:1-9: Babel Or Ur?

Dale S. DeWitt*

The purpose of this article is to propose a historical event behind Gen 11:1–9 that answers to the two specifically stated results of the “tower of Babel”: the breakup of linguistic unity and the scattering of the tower builders. It is common knowledge now that the tower is the ziggurat of the lower Tigris-Euphrates basin, that Shinar is the Biblical equivalent of Sumer, and that burnt brick and bitumen mortar were widely used in the third millennium B.C. in Sumer. No effort will be made, therefore, to detail these points for their own sake but only as they relate to the central suggestion of this article.

Two attitudes toward Genesis 1–11 seem to hinder any attempt to tie the “tower of Babel” to a specific historical event: (1) that historical co-ordinates with the book of Genesis do not become clear or even plausible until Genesis 12, and (2) that Genesis 11 reflects a later Mesopotamian situation but not one predating Abraham and his migration. The first attitude may be illustrated from Robert Davidson in his recent commentary on the NEB text of Genesis 1–11. Davidson observes, “It is only when we come to the story of Abraham in chapter 12 that we can claim with any certainty to be in touch with traditions which reflect something of the historical memory of the Hebrew people.”1 Similarly N.M. Sarna asks, “Does this then mean that the patriarchal narratives are merely symbolic and not to be regarded as factual? Are they in the same categories as the stories related in the first eleven chapters of Genesis?”2

This much at least may be agreed on: It is more difficult to tie down historical co-ordinates for Genesis 1–11 than for Genesis 12–50. It is also true, as Davidson says, that the twelfth chapter of Genesis marks the point where the historical memory of the Hebrew people takes its actual point of OT departure. Indeed it is true that Genesis is the point where we can now confidently parallel cultural references with a definite period of ancient Near Eastern history. This is not, however, Davidson’s meaning. He means rather that Genesis 1–11 is mythological, while anything concretely historical does not begin until You must have a subscription and be logged in to read the entire article.
Click here to subscribe