Page 276 - Foundations

George Smith provides the following evidence to support his belief that the Chaldean
Izdubar/Gilgamesh was based upon the historic person the Bible names as Nimrod.

The centre of the empire of Izdubar appears to have lain in the region of Shinar, at Babylon, Akkad,
Erech, and Nipur, and agrees with the site of the kingdom of Nimrod, according to Genesis X. 8, 9,
10, where we read : "And Cush begat Nimrod: he began to be a mighty one in the earth. He was a
mighty hunter before the Lord: wherefore it is said, even as Nimrod the mighty hunter before the
Lord. And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land
of Shinar." All these cities were ultimately within the dominion of Izdubar, whose character as
hunter, leader, and king corresponds with that of Nimrod, and the name of Shamas, or Samas the
sungod, who is most probably represented as his father, may read Kusu (Cush), the same name as
that of the father of Nimrod...

The two passages already quoted from Genesis afford the only reliable information with respect to
Nimrod outside the cuneiform inscriptions. According to Genesis Nimrod was a " son of Cush," that
is a Cushite, or Ethiopian, and he distinguished himself as a mighty hunter, his prowess being so
great that his name passed into a proverb. He afterwards became king, commencing his reign in
Shinar or Babylonia, and still later extended his empire into Assyria, where he laid the foundations
of that state by the foundation of the four leading cities, Nineveh, Calah, Rehobothair, and Resen. The
fame of Nimrod is again alluded to in the Bible, where Assyria is called the land of Nimrod...

I was entirely in the dark until I discovered the Deluge tablet in 1872, I then conjectured that the hero
whose name I provisionally called Izdubar was the Nimrod of the Bible, a conjecture which I have
strengthened by fresh evidence from time to time...

My own opinion that he was the hero I have hitherto called Izdubar was first founded on the
discovery that he formed the centre of the national historical poetry, and was the hero of Babylonian
cuneiform history, just as Nimrod is stated to have been in the later traditions.

I subsequently found that he agreed exactly in character with Nimrod; he was a giant hunter,
according to the cuneiform legends, who contended with and destroyed the lion, tiger, leopard, and
wild bull or buffalo, animals the most formidable in the chase in any country. He ruled first in
Babylonia over the region which from other sources we know to have been the centre of Nimrod's
kingdom. He extended his dominion to the Armenian mountains, the boundary of his late conquests
according to tradition, and one principal scene of his exploits and triumphs was the city of Erech,
which, according to Genesis, was the second capital of Nimrod.
[Source: The Chaldean Account of Genesis, George Smith]

The reader at this point may remark that there is a great difference between the words “mighty hunter”
and “mighty despot.” What is the proper rendering of the Genesis account of Nimrod? In Hebrew the
words are “gibbor tsayid.” The Hebrew word gibbor indicates that which is mighty in a wide range
of applications. The word is used to describe the giant offspring of angels and women, as well as
descendants of Adam who were mighty in battle or strength. The word is even applied to God, for He
too is mighty. The Hebrew word tsayid is understood to relate to the process of catching or killing a
wild animal (or figuratively man). It expresses the idea of lying in wait as a huntsman would in