2. nephilim.pdf

8/10/2019 2. Nephilim.pdf

1/15

JBL 106/1 (1987)13-26

OF DEMIGODS AND THE DELUGE:TOWARD AN INTERPRETATION OF GENESIS 6:1-4

RONALD S. HENDELSouthern Methodist University, Dallas, TX 75275

The interpretation of ancient mythology poses a number of thorny

methodological problems. We are given only a text, or sometimes portionsof a text, often heavily edited by scribal or editorial tradition. The contextof a myth in the oral tradition may have been totally displaced by theliterary composer, and various changes might have completely transformedelements of the oral tale. Ancient writers tended to conserve more thaninnovate, but exceptions are readily called to mind. The Old Babylonianauthor of the Gilgamesh epic must be credited with a good deal of literarycreativity, as Jeffrey Tigay has recently emphasized.1 The Yahwist, authorof the oldest stratum of biblical narrative, is also to be credited with

literary creativity and artistry.2 The fact that the Yahwistic myths ofGenesis 2-11 come down to us in a self-conscious literary form has led someto despair of their interpretation as myths.3The stories have been overlaidwith literary intention.

The difference between myth in its oral form, as discussed by contemporary anthropologists and folklorists, and myth that has been shaped and

1 J. Tigay, The Evolution of the Gilgamesh Epic (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1982).

2

I presume here the Yahwistic authorship of the narrative sections of Genesis 2-11, minusthe Priestly sections of the Flood story. For recent controversies in source criticism, seeespecially the contributions by R. Rendtorff, R. N. Whybray, J. Van Seters, N. E. Wagner,G. E. Coats, H. H. Schmid, R. E. Clements, and G. J. Wenham inJSOT 3 (1977) 2-60; seealso W. H. Schmidt, "A Plea for the Yahwist," in Studies in the Period of David and Solomon,ed. T. Ishida (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1982) 55-73; and F. M. Cross, Th e EpicTraditions of Early Israel," in The Poet and the Historian: Essays in Literary and HistoricalBiblical Criticism, d. R. E. Friedman (Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1983) 13-39. On theartistic aspects of the Yahwistic work, see especially R. Alter, The Art of Biblical Narrative(New York: Basic Books, 1981); J. P. Fokkelman, Narrative Art in Genesis(Amsterdam: VanGorcum, 1975); and M. Fishbane, Text and Texture (New York: Schocken Books, 1979)

17-62.3 See the remarks of P. Ricoeur, "Structure et hermneutique," and C. Lvi-Strauss,"Rponses quelques questions " in Esprit (Nov 1963) 596 653 esp 611 17 and 631 32


2/15

14 Journal of Biblical Literature

transformed by ancient authors is a central problem that must be dealtwith in any attempt at interpretation.4 The written versus the oral, theYahwistic work versus traditional mythologythese are the antinomieswithin which my discussion of Gen 6:1-4 will progress.

Julius Wellhausen characterized Gen 6:1-4 as a "cracked erraticboulder" in its context in the early stories of Genesis.5 Hermann Gunkelpreferred to call it "a torso" or "a fragment."6 All are agreed that the storyis strange and incomplete. Most scholars have supposed that the Yahwistis suppressing material that is even more mythological than the materialretained.7 I find this last point hard to conceive: what could be moremythological than the sexual mingling of gods and mortals and the birthof semidivine offspring? Surely if the Yahwist were averse to myth as such

he would simply have omitted Gen 6:1-4. That the Yahwist included it inthe Primeval Cycle of Genesis 2-118indicates that he did not find it objectionable and that it is indeed an authentic Israelite myth. The story is,however, somewhat disjointed in its Genesis context. The Yahwist retainedthe story in his composition, yet declined to present it in a full narrativeform. Why the Yahwist composed the story as he did, where the story camefrom, and what happened between the oral and written stages will be theleading questions of my discussion.

First, the text:(1) When mankind began to multiply on the face of the earth,

and daughters were born to them,

4 For recent work on the relationship between the biblical text and oral tradition seeespecially R. C. Culley, "Oral Tradition and the OT: Some Recent Discussion," Semeia 5(1976) 1-33, and references; idem, Studies in the Structure of Hebrew Narrative(Philadelphia: Fortress, 1976) 1-68; Cross, "Epic Traditions," 13-39; and H. N. Wallace,The Eden Narrative (Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press, 1985), esp. chap. 2: "The Yahwistic Source

and Its Oral Antecedents."5 J. Wellhausen, Prolegomena to the History of Ancient Israel (trans. J. S. Black and A.Menzies; Edinburgh: Adam & Charles Black, 1885) 317.

6 H. Gunkel, Genesis bersetzt und erklrt (HKAT; Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht,1901) 59.

7 For example, . S.Childs describes the story as "a foreign particle of pagan mythology"which the Israelite tradition has radically altered. "Even in the final stage the mutilated and

halfdigested particle struggles with independent life against the role to which it has been

assigned within the Hebrew tradition" (Myth and Reality in the Old Testament [London:

SCM, 1960] 54, 57).8 In this essay I will use the designation "Primeval Cycle" rather than the conventional

terms "Primeval History" or Urgeschichte to refer to the narratives in the early part ofGenesis. The stories of the Garden of Eden, Cain and Abel, etc., cannot be called history

i l iti t f th d Th t i l th " d ti [ ]


3/15

Hendel: Of Demigods and the Deluge 15

(2) then the Sons of God saw that the daughters of men werebeautiful, and they took wives of them, from any whomthey chose.9

(3) And Yah weh said: "My spirit will not be strong10 in manforever, for indeed he is but flesh. His lifetime will be 120years."

(4) The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and alsoafterwards, when the Sons of God mated with the daughters of men and they bore children for them: these werethe warriors of old, the men of renown.

The first issue that I will pursue is in many ways the most difficult:Where did the story come from? Scholars are divided in their responses.

Some take the story to be an etiology of the Nephilim,11 who are to be

9 Note the syntax of the introductory sentence: temporal clause (wayh kt. ..) followedby a parenthetical statement (bnt. . .) leading to the initial narrative sequence(wayyir'u...). This syntactic structure is typical of the introductions to cosmological storiesin Israelite and in Mesopotamian literature; see W. F. Albright, "Contributions to BiblicalArchaeology and Philology,"JBL 43 (1924) 364-65; G. Castellino, "Les Origines de lacivilisation selon les textes bibliques et les textes cuneiformes," in Volume du Congrs:

Strasbourg, 1956 (VTSup 4; Leiden: Brill, 1957) 125-28; E. A. Speiser, Genesis(AB; GardenCity, NY: Doubleday, 1964) 12, 19.

10 Ipropose reading the unique verbal formyadnas astative qal imperfect from the geminaterooty/dnn ("to be strong"). K. Vllers first suggested this reading based on the Akkadian verb

dannu("Zur Erklrung des JIT Gen 6,3,"ZA14 [1889] 349-56). The case is now clearer thanit was in Vollers's day. The root\ldnn appears twice in the Ugaritic texts, though, as with allUgaritic etymologies, caution is warranted(CTA12.2.59; 16.1.30). More important, and thus faroverlooked, is the occurrence of the root\ldnn in the Israelite placename Dannh. Dannh ismentioned in Josh 15:49 as a town in the neighborhood of Debir in the Judean hill country.Although the site of Dannh has not been identified, it is clear from recent archaeological surveysthat the Judean hill country was largely unpopulated in the Canaanite period (B. Mazar, "TheEarly Israelite Settlement in the Hill Country,"BASOR241 [1981] 75-85.) The likelihood is,therefore, that Dannh was originally an Israelite settlement and that the name Dannh was agood Hebrew name. The meaning of the word is "stronghold" or "fortress," cognate with theAkkadiandannatu.The root*Jdnnoccurs in Hebrew in a place-name and, I propose, in the verbydnin Gen 6:3.1 might add that there is no difficultyinreading the formyadnas stative, sinceother similar geminate forms are attested in Hebrew with stative meanings, e.g.t'z(Ps 89:14),also meaning "to be strong."

11 E. G. Kraeling, "The Significance and Origin of Gen 6:1-4," JNES 6 (1947) 193-208;B. S. Childs, Myth and Reality, 49-57; O. Loretz, Schpfimg und Mythos (Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1968) 31-48; G. von Rad, Genesis: A Commentary (trans. J. H. Marks;

Philadelphia: Westminster 1968) 113-16; U. Cassuto, "The Episode of the Sons of God andthe Daughters of Men," in Biblical and Oriental Studies I (trans. I. Abrahams; Jerusalem:Magnes Press, 1973) 17-28; H. Gese, "Der bewachte Lebensbaum und die Heroen," in Wort
http://ldnn/http://ldnn/http://ldnn/http://ldnn/http://ldnn/http://ldnn/


4/15

16 JournalofBiblicalLiterature

identifiedwith the epithets "warriors ofold"and "men ofrenown."12 I findthisresponse to be lacking, primarily because it explains so little. To be

sure,the story does account for the origin of the semidivine heroes of old,butto stop there is to be left with a tautology: the myth exists because it

explainswhat itexplains.The context and theconnectionsofthemyth withother elements of tradition areleftto the side in the etiologicalinterpretation.

Another response is to follow the lead of the pseudepigraphical

writingsof the second centuryB.C.E. (I Enoch 6-11;Jubilees4-5) and toderiveGen 6:1-4 from the "rebellion inheaven"pattern.13The discoveryof the HumanKumarbicycle has spurred this interpretation.14The Sons

of Godare seen as rebels fromheaven,and the sexualminglingwith earthlywomenis seen as their sin. The problem with this view is twofold. First,

theSons of God are not depicted as rebels in Gen 6:1-4, neither are they

punished. Second, the sexual mingling with mortal women is not explicitlycondemned.The punishment that occurs in the story is directed at mankind,problematic as that might seem. The connection with the "rebellioninheaven" myths is thus purely conjectural, and, I would argue, the con

jecture is unconvincing.15

Where,then, did Gen 6:1-4 come from? I submit that the story of theminglingof gods and mortals16and the procreation of the demigods was

originallyconnected to the flood narrative and functioned as its motiva

tion.The Yahwist detached the story of the demigods from the myth of2 The Greek identifies the nplm with the gibbrtm 'er m'lam by translating both

as.13

Speiser, Genesis,4546; P. D. Hanson,"Rebellion in Heaven, Azazel and Euhemeristic

Heroes in I Enoch 611,"/BL 96 (1977) 197212.14

On the Human Kumarbi cycle, see H. G. Gterbock, Kumarbi: Mythen vom hurri-

tischen Kronos (Zurich: Europaverlag, 1946); idem, "The Hittite Version of the Hurrian

Kumarbi Myths: Oriental Forerunners of Hesiod," AJA52 (1948) 123-34; see also H. A.

Hoffner, Jr., "Hittite Mythological Texts: A Survey," in Unity and Diversity (d. H. Goedicke

and J. J. M. Roberts; Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1975) 138-39.15 See also the critical remarks of D. L. Petersen, "Genesis 6:1-4, Yahweh and the Organi

zation of the Cosmos,"/SOT 13 (1979) 52-54.16 The identity of the bn-halohm is clear from their frequent occurrence in biblical

and other West Semitic lore. They are the lesser gods who meet in Yahweh's assembly (Job

1:6; 2:1; Ps 29:1; Ps 89:7 with the older form bn 'lm [compare the Ugaritic bn Urn]). They

were present with Yahweh at the dawn of creation (Job 38:7), and they were shortly

thereafter apportioned among the nations (Deut 32:8, Q: bny 'Ihym).The bn il or bn Urn

occur dozens of times in Ugaritic mythology, with a similar range of functions as their

Israelite counterparts. The chief god of the pantheon, El, is called 'ab bn il, "father of the

sons of El," which indicates that the term bn il originally included the notion of the patri

mony of El. The bn 'lm are also mentioned in the Phoenician inscriptions of Arslan Tash(KAI 27.11) and Karatepe (KAI 26.A.III.19) and in the Ammonite inscription from the

Amman Citadel, line 6 (S. H. Horn, "The Amman Citadel Inscription," BASOR 193 [1969]


5/15


the deluge in order to preface the flood with a more purely ethical motive:Yahweh's anger at the evil behavior of humanity. This would explain whyGen 6:1-4 directly precedes the flood narrative, and, simultaneously, whyit is unconnected from its context. In order to support my surmise I will

range from the Babylonian motive for the flood story in the myth ofAtrahasis to the mythological motives for the Trojan War in the Greektradition. Somewhere between Babylon and Greece, in a peculiar twist oftradition, the connection between demigods and the deluge was generated,only to survive in fragments.

The Mesopotamian motive for the deluge is an imbalance in thecosmos, namely, the overpopulation of humanity on the earth.17The noiseof mankind disturbs EnliFs sleep, so he decrees destruction for humanity,first in the form of several plagues and drought and finally in the form ofthe flood. The crucial passage in theAtrahasis myth reads:

The land grew extensive, the people multiplied,The land was bellowing like a bull.At their uproar the god became angry;Enlil heard their noise.He addressed the great gods,"The noise of mankind has become oppressive to me.Because of their uproar I am deprived of sleep."18

Like the action in the later Babylonian creation myth, Enuma Elish, thechief god is disturbed by the noise of overabundant activity; he decreesdestruction and is finally thwarted by the actions of the wily god Enki/Ea(Enuma ElishTab. I.1-77).19 In theAtrahasis myth, Enki saves Atrahasisand family, so that life may be preserved. To prevent future overpopulation, the gods take several measures: they create several categories of

Philo of Byblos's Phoenician History referring to the sexual adventures of the mothers ofHypsouranios and Ousos (PE 1.10.9) can be construed as referring to sexual encounters

between gods and mortal women (pace U. Gassuto, "The Sons of God," 23, inter alia). Theclosest one comes to this notion in the Semitic sphere is the description of Gilgamesh in theMesopotamian tradition as two-thirds god and one-third human, though his mother, Ninsun,was a goddess. See Tigay, Gilgamesh Epic, 153-56. Ishtar's advances to Gilgamesh in tab.VI are perhaps relevant to this theme.

17 See especially W. L. Moran, "Atrahasis: The Babylonian Story of the Flood," Bib 52(1971) 51-61; and A. D. Kilmer, "The Mesopotamian Concept of Overpopulation and ItsSolution as Reflected in the Mythology,"Or 41 (1972) 160-77. For a rsum of other views,see R. A. Oden, Jr., "Divine Aspirations in Atrahasis and in Genesis 1-11,"ZAW 93 (1981)197-216, and references (esp. 197 n.4).

18

mtum irtapis nis imttd I mtum ktma l iSabbu (isappu) I ina hubrtsina ilu ittadar IdEnlil ttemerigimSinI issaqar ana iti rabutim I iktabta rigjimawluti I ina hubrSina uzamma

Sitta (Atrahasis Tab. 1.353-359; Tab. II.i.2-8; cited from W. G. Lambert and A. R. Millard,


6/15


women who do not bear children; they create demons who snatch away

babies; and, as W. G. Lambert has recently argued on the basis ofGilgamesh

Tab. X.vi.2832, they institute a fixed mortality for mankind. The restored

text reads: "Enki opened his mouth / and addressed Nintu, the birth

goddess,/'[You,]birthgoddess,creatressofdestinies,/[Createdeath]for thepeoples/"

20 Death, barren women, celibate women, and infant mortality

are the solutions for the problem of imbalance that precipitated the flood.

In Greek tradition a different kind of imbalance appears in several of

the mythological motives for the Trojan War. In order to make my com-

parison precise, I should emphasize that although the Trojan War is a

military encounter rather than a flood, it functions in a way similar to the

Babylonian deluge: it serves as the great destruction which divides the prior

age from the present age,21

just as does the flood in theAtrahasis myth and

in other Mesopotamian traditions.22

One of the mythological motives for the Trojan War, found in the

Hesiodic tradition, rather than the Homeric, sounds remarkably like Gen

6:14, as has been noted in recent studies by Ruth Scodel and David

Neiman.23

The text is from Hesiod'sCatalogue of Women, fr. 204 MW.24

2 0 W. G. Lambert, "The Theology of Death,'* in Death in Mesopotamia (ed. . Alster;

Mesopotamia 8; Copenhagen: Akademisk, 1980)5458. Lambert restores: [attisa-a]s-s-ru

ba-ni-a-at Si-ma-tiI[mu-taSu-uk-ni] a-nani-Si (AtrahasisTab. III.vi.47-48).21 See R. Scodel, "TheAchaean Wall and the Myth ofDestruction," Harvard Studies in

Classical Phifology86 (1982) 33-50.22 According to Gilgamesh tab. X.27, humans before the flood were "luU-men"that is,

primeval man(Lambert, "Theology ofDeath," 54-55). On the Mesopotamian tradition that

all knowledge washanded downby the antediluvian sages, theapkallu,see W. G.Lambert,

"Ancestors, Authors, andCanonicity,"JCS 11 (1957) 8-9; see also W. Hallo, "Antediluvian

Cities,"/CS 23 (1971) 60-66.R. A.Oden,Jr., haspointedout to me anadditional similarity:

in later eras, justas theTrojan War becomesthefirst datable eventinGreek history,theflood

becomes the first datable event in much ancient Near Eastern tradition (e.g., Berossos's

Babyloniaca).

23 Scodel, "Achaean Wall,"42; D.Neiman, "SonsofGods andDaughters ofMen," paperreadat the SBL New England Regional Conference, 5April 1982;seealsoM. L.West, Early

Greek Philosophyand theOrient (Oxford: Clarendon, 1971) 43 n. 3.24

, '

,

,[]

[ Jowrt

[...].[..][] ,

'[][][ ]

'[][ ] '

Hesiod fr. 204.95103MW, cited from R. Merkelbach andM.L. West, eds., Fragmenta


7/15


All the gods were divided in spirit through strife, for at that time high-thundering Zeus was planning wondrous deeds, to mingle disorder onthe boundless earth, for he already was hastening to annihilate the raceofmortalmen, as a pretext to destroy the lives ofthedemigods, [so that]the children of the gods [would not mate with wretched] mortals, seeing[fate] with their own eyes, but that the blessed gods [henceforth], asbefore, should have their way of life and their accustomed places apartfrom mortal men.

The point of this fragment is to motivate Zeus's decision to bring onthe Trojan War by reference to the unseemly mingling of gods and mortalsand the resulting procreation of the heroic demigods. Zeus decides to senda war "to destroy the lives of the demigods," so that the gods would desist

from mating with mortals and so that gods and mortals might live separately.25 The imbalance in this case is not a general overpopulation butrather the procreation ofaspecific mixed category of beings, the demigods.Zeus brings on the Trojan War to destroy the heroic demigods, so that theproper division of realms between gods and humans might be secured.

The theme of the separation of gods and mortals is prominent inanother Hesiodic myth, the story of Prometheus's sacrifice and the subsequent creation of Pandora,26so it appears that the Greek pedigree of thistheme is secure. The Hesiodic myth of the five ages pursues similar themes

and reflects a common formulaic diction in the description of the separation of the heroic demigods from mortal men.27 The word used of thedemigods, hmitheoi, rare in Hesiod, occurs both in fr. 204 M-W and inthe myth of the five ages. The same word, hmitheoi, occurs only once inHomer, in a passage that describes the destruction by flood of the Achaeanwall (Iliad 12.17-33, esp. 23).28 It is interesting that the destruction is to

[ ] and [] [],proposed by U. von WilamowitzMoellendorff in Grie-

chischeDichterfragmente I. Epische und elegische Fragmente(Berlin: Weidmann, 1907) 34;

and line 102, [ ],proposed by A. Rzach,ed., Hesiodi Carmina(Stuttgart: Teubner,1958) 165.

For more on Hesiod fr. 204 MW, see K. Stiewe, "Die Entstehungszeit der hesiodischen

Frauenkataloge," Philologue 107 (1963) 19; J. Schwartz, PseudoHesiodeia(Leiden: Brill,

1960) 41819; and G. Nagy, The Best of the Achaeans: Concepts of the Hero in Archaic

Greek Poetry (Baltimore, MD:Johns Hopkins University Press, 1979) 6, 21920.2 5

See Wilamowitz (Dichterfragmente, 43): "Am liebsten wrde man die eigentlicheAbsicht des Zeus darin sehen, da er durch den troischen Krieg dem Verkehre der Gttermit den Menschen, insbesondere der Erzeugung von , ein Endemachte.. . ." For theunderstanding of (line 101) and (line 102) as"gods,"see Schwartz,Pseudo

Hesiodeia, 418 n. 4; and Stiewe, "Frauenkataloge," 6 n. 2 (pace M. L. West, Hesiod:Works

and Days [Oxford: Clarendon, 1978] 19394).2 6

Works and Days 53105; Theogony 570616. See J.P. Vernant, Myth and Thougfit


8/15


i ccur after the fall of Troy. Scodel has argued that this small destructionmay be a vestige of an older flood tradition which the Trojan War haslargely displaced.29 In support of Scodel's argument, I would note thatPoseidon, the god partly responsible for the flood of the Achaean wall, iselsewhere in the epic decidedly pro-Achaean (e.g., Iliad 13-14). The contradiction in Poseidon's role in bringing on the destruction by flood of theAchaean wall when elsewhere in the epic he is pro-Achaean points up theanomaly of the episode and supports its likely status as a vestige ofavariantpre-Homeric flood tradition.30

In sum, I suggest that the Trojan War functions in a manner similarto the Semitic flood tradition and may indeed be related by way of oraltradition to the older Semitic myths.31 One of the mythic motives of theTrojan War sounds very similar to Gen 6:1-4, although it retains morecontext. In the Greek text, the mixing of gods and mortals and the existenceof the mixed-breed demigods are the direct motive for the Trojan War.Zeus wished to separate gods from mortals and to destroy the demigods,so he decrees the Trojan War. There are other mythical motives in theGreek Trojan War tradition, including the abduction of Helen, found inboth the Homeric and Hesiodic traditions32and in an interesting fragmentof the Cypria which describes Zeus's decision to bring about the TrojanWar as a result of human overpopulation.33 The similarity between thisfragment and theAtrahasismyth has been often noted,34though its similarity with an Indian myth in theMahbhrata raises the possibility of Indo-European origins.35 In any case, complexity of themes is what we shouldexpect in a tradition of oral mythology.

29 Scodel, "Achaean Wall."30 For another example in the Iliad of a pro-Trojan stance by Poseidon signaling a variant

epic tradition, see Iliad 20.288-339; and Nagy,Achaeans,268-69.31 In addition to Scodel's discussion, see T. B. L. Webster, From Mycenae to Homer

(London: Methuen, 1958) 86, 180-81, 291; and G. S. Kirk, Myth: Its Meaning and Functionsin Ancient and Other Cultures (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press,1970) 116-17.

32 See M. L. West, Immortal Helen (London: University of London, 1975).33 Cypria fr. 1; T. W. Allen, ed., Homeri Opera V (Oxford: Clarendon, 1912) 118; see

the translation of Evelyn-White, Hesiod, 497. For more on Cypria fr. 1, see esp. F. Jouan,Euripide et les lgendes des chants cypriens: Des origines de L guerre de Troie l'Iliade

(Paris: Socit d'dition, 1966) 14-54. The tradition contained in Cypria fr. 1 is alluded toseveral times by Euripides:Electra 1282-83;Helen36-41; Orestes 1639-42.

34 Webster, From Mycenae, 86; Kilmer, "Overpopulation," 175-76; G. S. Kirk, "GreekMythology: Some New Perspectives,"JHS 92 (1972) 79; M. Nagler, Spontaneity and Tradi

tion: A Study in the Oral Art of Homer (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of CaliforniaPress, 1974) 155; and Scodel, "Achaean Wall," 40-41.35 Mahbhrata 1.58.35-50; trans, by J. A. B. van Buitenen, The Mahbhrata: 1. The


9/15

Hendel:Of Demigods and the Deluge 21

Gen6:14 contains no overt references to the destruction of the demi-

godsnor to the separation of gods and mortals. In fact, a tradition in Num

13:33 records that the Nephilim were living in the land of Canaan at the

time of the entry of the Israelites. The advance scouts report toMoses:

All the people whom we saw in its midst were peopleof greatsize;therewe saw the NephilimtheAnaqim are part of the Nephilimand weseemedin our own eyes like grasshoppers, and so we must have seemedin theireyes.

Elsewhere it appears that the Nephilim and the Anaqim are called by a

more general term, the Rephaim (Deut 2:11). The Rephaim and the

Anaqimare said to have beenwipedout by Joshua(Josh 11:2122),Moses

(Josh 12:46; 13:12), and Caleb (Josh 15:14; Judg 1:20), though some

stragglers remained to be slain by David and his men (2 Sam21:1822=1 Chr 20:48).

3eAccording to one tradition, the huge bedstead of the last

of the Rephaim, King Og of Bashan, could still be seen on display in

Rabbah ofAmmon (Deut3:11).37

Thereexistsa contradiction in the traditions of the Nephilim. Accord-

ing to Gen 6:4 the Nephilim "were on the earth in those days,"priorto the

flood, and thus ought to have been destroyed by the flood. Yet according

to other traditions they are found in the land of Canaan by the early

Israelites38

and arewipedoutunderthe leadership ofagreat hero ofIsrael,

either Moses, Joshua, Caleb, or David. The battle between David and

Goliath (1 Samuel 17) appears to be related to the encounters between

David's men and the last of the Rephaim.39

The function of the Nephilim

Rephaim in all of these traditions is constantthey exist in order to be

wipedout: by the flood, by Moses,by David, and others.40

The function of the Nephilim in Israelite tradition, I submit, is to die.41

3 6 SeeJosh11:22:"NoAnaqimremained in the land ofIsrael,but some remained in Gaza,

Cath,and Ashdod."3 7 For more on Og, seeJ.R. Bartlett, "Sihon andOg,Kings of the Amontes," VT 20(1970)

26571.3 8

The Yahwist acknowledges this inconsistency in Gen 6:4, "The Nephilim were on the

earth in those days and also afterwards" I see no reason to deny 4 to the hand of the

Yahwist. For another acknowledgment of the inconsistency of tradition (or, perhaps better,

multiformity of tradition) by the Yahwist, see Gen 26:1.3 9

Note that two versions of the tradition of David and Goliath are preserved in the MT;

seeP. Kyle McCarter,1Samuel(AB;Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1980)284309.In 2 Sam

21:19 a certain Elhanan, one of David's men, kills Goliath of Gath, one of the remaining

rpa. In 1Samuel 17, thestoryhasbecome attached toDavid, thegreaterhero. This type

of fluidity in an oral narrative tradition isprecisely whatwe should expect.40 Note that the giant aboriginal inhabitants of Seir, Ammon, andGaza are also utterly

annihilated, generallybyYahweh (Deut 2:12,20-23); seealso Deut 9:1-3; Amos2:9.


10/15


The same can be said of the function of the Greek heroes. 42An interestingdescription of the Nephilim as dead warriors of old is preserved in Ezek32:27:

They lie43

with the warriors,The Nephilim of old,44

who descended to Sheolwith their weapons of war.They placed their swordsbeneath their headsand their shields45

upon their bones,for the terror of the warriorswas upon the land of the living.

Nephilim literally means "the fallen ones/'46 indicating, apparently, theones fallen in death. Similar usages of the verbnpaland its derivatives arefound elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible, as in David's lament over the deathof Saul and Jonathan, 'k napl gibbrm ("how the warriors are fallen,"2 Sam 1:19, 25, 27), or Jeremiah's warning to the false prophets and priests:"they will fall among the fallen," lakn yippl bannplm (Jer 6:15;8:12). It appears relevant to a discussion of the Nephilim that the genericterm Rephaim has a double meaning: (1) the giant aboriginal inhabitantsof Canaan and (2) the shades of the dead.47The connection between death

and the Nephilim appears to be basic to the several forms of the tradition.I submit that the Nephilim, the warriors of old in Gen 6:1-4, are

intended to be destroyed by the flood and that the destruction of thesedemigods was an authentic motive for the flood in early Israelite oral

42 See W. Burkert, Homo Necans: The Anthropology of Ancient Greek Saaificial Ritualand Myth (trans. P. Bing; Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California, 1983) 35 -48,esp. 39; Nagy, Achaeans, 9-10, 174-209.

43 Omit l' with the Greek and the Syriac.

44 The Greek reads ("the fallen giants of old"),which obviouslyrefersto o' ("the giants of old") of Gen 6:4. The Hebrewtext is best read: yiSkb 'et-gibbrim I nplm m'lam. The MT m'arlm is an obviousmistake, triggered by a confusion between resh and waw. For the reading nplm ratherthan MT nplm, see W. Zimmerli, Ezekiel 2 (trans. J. D. Martin; Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983) 168, 176.

45 Read sinntm instead of MT 'wntm. The mistake of MT was likely triggered bythe cluster of 'ayins and sades in the following two words.

48 It is a qatU passive adjectival formation of the root\lnpl ("to fall").47 On the difficult problem of the rptim in Ugaritic literature, see M. H. Pope, "The Cult

of the Dead at Ugarit," in Ugarit in Retrospect (d. G. D. Young; Winona Lake, IN: Eisen-brauns, 1981) 159-79; C. E. L'Heureux, Rank Among the Canaanite Gods: El, Baal and the

Rephaim (HSM; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1979); idem, "The Ugaritic and Biblical
http://lnpl/http://lnpl/http://lnpl/


11/15


tradition. The parallel Greek tradition for the motive of the Trojan Warmay or may not be cognate with Gen 6:1-4.1 suspect that it is, and I wouldpoint to the international era of the Late Bronze Age for the most likely

period of oral diffusion,

48

but a historical linkage of the two traditions isnot necessary for my point. Gen 6:1-4 presents a mixing of categoriesofgods and mortals and the procreation of a hybrid category of demigodswhich it is in the nature of the myth to suppress. Mary Douglas has pointedout the preoccupation of ancient Israelite thought with the suppression ofanomaly in dietary laws and in the laws of kinship.49These "purity laws,"as she calls them, serve to keep "distinct the categories of creation."50Thesame tendency is at work in Gen 6:1-4. The sexual mingling of the Sonsof God and the daughters of men creates an imbalance and a confusion in

the cosmic order. The birth of the demigods threatens the fabric of thecosmos. The natural response in myth, as exemplified by the Babylonianflood tradition and the Greek Trojan War tradition, is to suppress theimbalance by destroying the cause of the imbalance. In theAtrahasis myth,humanity is destroyed so that its noise might be eliminated; in the TrojanWar tradition, humanity is to be destroyed so that the demigods might beeliminated. The natural conclusion of Gen 6:1-4, according to the logic ofthe myth, is the delugethe destruction of humanity and the concomitantannihilation of the disorder. The cosmic imbalance is resolved by a great

destruction, out of which a new order arises.

In Gen 6:1-4 the Yahwist has transformed the old myth according tohis plan for the Genesis Primeval Cycle. The myth has been detached fromthe flood narrative, though it still precedes it, and a new motive for the floodhas been supplied. The motive for the flood in Gen 6:5-8 is the increase ofmankind's evil on the earth, not the increase of population, nor the mixingof gods and mortals. That the Yahwist is conscious of these older traditionsis evident in the parallel wording of Gen 6:1, "When mankind began to

multiply on the face of the earth," and Gen 6:5, "for the evil of mankindmultiplied on the earth."51 The parallel wording creates a thematic

48 On the extensive contacts between the Aegean and the Near East in the Late BronzeAge, see C. W. Blegan, "The Expansion of the Mycenaean Civilization," CAH II/2A,181-87. For connections in myth and cult, see Webster, From Mycenae to Homer, 64-90;Kirk, Myth, 205-26; P. Walcot, "The Comparative Study of Ugaritic and Greek Literatures," UF 1 (1969) 111-18; M. L. West, Hesiod: Works and Days and Hesiod: Theogony(Oxford: Clarendon, 1966) passim; and W. Burkert, Structure and History in Greek Mythol

ogy and Ritual (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California, 1979).49 M. Douglas, Purity and Danger: An Analysis of the Concepts of Pollution and Taboo

(London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1966) 41-57; idem,Implicit Meanings: Essays in Anthrol (L d R l d & K P l 1975) 261 73 283 318


12/15


counterpoint between the myth of Gen 6:1-4 and the motive for the flood.

The effect of the counterpoint, I suggest, is to highlight the new motive for

the floodthe evil of mankindand to relegate the tradition preserved in

Gen 6:1-4 to the status of an exemplar of the "evil imagination" of human

ity, similar to the other stories of the Primeval Cycle. The fact that the

humans are not the initiators of the corrupt activity points up a disparity

between Gen 6:1-4 and the other stories of the Primeval Cycle, but this

seems not to have bothered the Yahwist. Though the story no longer serves

the purpose it once did, it fits well enough into its new context as one of

several illustrations of mankind's evil activity prior to the flood.

The punishment of mankind in Gen 6:3 seems to have been supplied

by the Yahwist in order to orient the story toward human culpability. The

odd intervention of Yahweh to limit the human life-span may, in fact, be

a remnant of an old flood tradition. At the end of the Atrahasis myth,

according to Lambert's restoration, death is decreed as the fate of human

ity. Although the limitation of life-span in Gen 6:3 may not carry quite the

same nuance, theAtrahasis myth and the Sumerian King List both suggest

that a lessening of life-span is more appropriate after the flood than before

it.52 The lessening of life-span before the flood may be a reordering of an

older detail. As has often been noticed, the limitation of life-span in Gen

6:3 complements the decree of mortality at the end of the Garden of Eden

story, which creates a linkage of theme within the Primeval Cycle.The composition of the Primeval Cycle is patterned with a number of

other themes which are carried on in Gen 6:1-4. The mixing of gods and

mortals in Gen 6:1-4 is mirrored by the mixing of divine and human in the

Garden of Eden story, in the desire of the humans to "be as gods, knowing

good and evil" (Gen 3:5, 22), and in the Tower of Babel story, where the

humans desire to build "a tower with its top in heaven" (Gen 11:4).53

The

hint of incest between Eve and Adam may also mirror the sexual mingling

of gods and humans in Gen 6:1-4. In the one case, the sexual partners are

Gilgamesh Epic and Old Testament Parallels (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1949)225-26; A. R. Millard, "A New Babylonian 'Genesis' Story," TynBul 18 (1967) 11-12; C.Westermann, Genesis III (BKAT; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 1974) 500-501; see alsoH. Schwarzbaum, "The Overcrowded Earth,"Numen 4 (1957) 59-74. The connection seemsrather forced, however, since an increase of population is to be expected in myths of primevalhumanity. The distinctive features of the Atrahasis myth excess of population and itsaccompanying noiseare both absent in the Israelite tradition. For a nuanced view of thecontrast between the Israelite and Mesopotamian traditions, see Moran, "Atrahasis," 61.

52

See Lambert, "Theology of Death," 54-58; T. Jacobsen, The Sumerian King List(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1939) 70-77;ANET, 265-66; see also J. J. Finkelstein,"The Antediluvian Kings: A University of California Tablet,"/CS 17 (1963) 44-51.


13/15


too closely related; they are of one flesh and bone (Gen 2:23). In the other,the partners are too distandy related, across the bounds of human anddivine.

The confusion of the roles of the siblings in the Cain and Abel story,that is, the fratricide, may also be seen as a variation on the themes of theconfusion of categories and the overstepping of bounds.54 In some waysCain's murder ofhisbrother is a structural variation on the Garden of Edenand the Tower of Babel stories. In all three instances, the overstepping ofproper bounds results in curses and in exile.55 Noah's cursing of Canaanfollows a similar structure. The son had seen the nakedness of the father,thus transgressing their proper relationship, and Canaan as a result iscursed.56In Gen 6:1-4 the bounds between divine and human are breached,and the result is the decree of the limit of life-span. The basic patternpersists.

I suggest that the Primeval Cycle is characterized by a series of mythological transgressions of boundaries that result in a range of divine responseswhich slowly build up the present order of the cosmos.57To borrow fromthe terminology of Claude Lvi-Strauss, the stories proceed in a dialecticalfashion, generating oppositions and resolving them, all the while sketchinga transition from a mythical "nature" to human "culture," from the timewhen humans were naked and immortal to the era of clothing, mortality,hard labor, and nations: the era of the present world. Gen 6:1-4 fits snuglyinto this contextthe repetition of mythological transgressions of boundaries and the slow building up of the limitations of the human world.

To conclude, I submit that Gen 6:1-4 is not the "cracked erraticboulder" of Wellhausen's interpretation, nor is it "isolated in every respect,"as Martin Noth remarked.59The story is ofapiece with the other narrativesof the Primeval Cycle. It is a mythological fragment, displaced from its

54 See C. Lvi-Strauss's remarks on the function of "overstepping of bounds" in traditionalmythology in Structural Anthropohgy (trans. C. Jacobson; New York: Basic Books, 1963)223-30. For treatments of this theme in Genesis 2-11, see recently P. D. Miller, Genesis 1-11:Studies in Structure and Theme(JSOTSup 8; Sheffield: University of Sheffield, 1978) 20 -26;Fishbane, Text and Texture, 32-33; and esp. R. A. Oden, Jr., "Transformations in NearEastern Myths: Genesis 1-11 and the Old Babylonian Epic of Atrahasis," Religion 11 (1981)30-34.

55 For an interesting interpretation of the theme of exile in Genesis 2- 11 , see P. Ricoeur,The Symbolism of Evil (trans. E. Buchanan; Boston: Beacon, 1967) 242.

56 On the problem of the interchange between Ham and Ganaan in Gen 9:18-26, seeWestermann, Genesis, 646-48.

57 Compare D. L. Petersen's astute remarks on Gen 6:1-4 as a "myth of organization"


14/15

26 Journal ofBiblical Literature

original traditional context andintegratedby theYahwist into thestructural and thematic framework of the Primeval Cycle. Thework of theYahwist,Isuggest, was conscious and complex; the myths thatheused hadresonances alltheir own.59

5 9 Versions of this paper were delivered at a biblical colloquium at York University,

Toronto, November 1982, a seminar at Harvard University, October 1983, and the annual

meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature, December 1984. Of the many people who

helped in the growth of the paper, I would like to single out J. Hackett and G. Nagy for

special thanks.


15/15

^,

Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles forindividualuse

according to fair use as defined by U.S.and international copyright law and as

otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.

Nocontent may be copied or emailed to multiple sitesor publicly posted without the

copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling,

reproduction, or distribution ofthisjournalinexcessof fair use provisions may be a

violation of copyright law.

This journalismade available to you through theATLAScollection with permission

fromthe copyrightholder(s).The copyright holderforan entireissueofajournal

typically isthejournal owner, who also may own the copyrightineach article. However,

for certain articles, the author ofthearticle maymaintainthe copyright in the article.

Pleasecontactthe copyright holder(s) to request permission tousean articleorspecific

work foranyuse not coveredbythe fair use provisionsofthecopyrightlaws orcovered

by your respectiveATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the

copyrightholder(s),please refer to the copyright information inthejournal,ifavailable,

orcontact ATLA to request contact informationforthe copyright holder(s).

About ATLAS:

TheATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions of previously

published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. TheATLAS

collectionisowned and managedbythe American Theological Library Association

(ATLA) and received initial funding fromLillyEndowmentInc.

Thedesign and final form ofthiselectronic documentisthe propertyoftheAmerican

Theological Library Association.

2. nephilim.pdf

Documents