The Big Book of Mysteries. Lionel and Patricia Fanthorpe
creation, as Genesis records, and as several other ancient sacred texts partially reinforce? Were they the work of extraterrestrial genetic engineers, and, if so, why? Are they likely to come back to see how their experiment is getting along? Or are we under constant observation already? The Eden narrative leaves vast questions unanswered — especially the problems of who God was talking to when He said, “Let us make man in our own image” (Genesis, chapter 1, verse 26); the identity of the “sons of God,” and the origin of the people of Nod, among whom Cain wandered, and from among whom he presumably took his wife, the girl who became Enoch’s mother. It is perfectly possible that the Supreme God of the Universe may have chosen to use his genetic engineers from another planet to create intelligent life on this one, just as it is perfectly possible that he used Darwinian evolution — or a modification of it — as one of his instruments. Neither concept raises the slightest theological difficulty nor does it present any challenge to faith: if anything, it makes God even more awesome and powerful than the authors, editors, and translators of Genesis realized.
Genesis, chapter 11, verses 1–9 give the biblical account of the Tower of Babel. At the heart of the story is one of the many quaint and colourful, aetiological or explanatory myths which purport to give reasons for various natural phenomena: thunder is the laughter of the gods — or their game of celestial skittles; the rainbow appeared after the flood as God’s promise that the Earth would never again be destroyed by water; the robin has red feathers on its breast because it attempted to take out the crucifixion nails to end Christ’s suffering.
The story of the Tower of Babel begins with the assertion that there was only one universal language in the beginning. In the course of their wanderings from the east “they” (an intriguing use of the plural pronoun, which the author of this section of Genesis may well have intended to include all of Adam and Eve’s descendants, via Noah and the survivors of the flood), arrived at the Plain of Shinar. It was a pleasant enough spot, and they elected to stay for a while. It was then decided that it would be a good idea to build a permanent city there, and accordingly they set to work.
The Genesis account says that they used brick for stone and “slime” for mortar. There is general agreement among scholars specializing in the period that the word translated “slime” here probably refers to pitch or bitumen.
The Tower of Babel does not provide an explanation for the origins of language but for the differentiation of language. The origins of language do not seem to have concerned the authors, compilers, and redactors of Genesis. It seems probable that the writer’s natural assumption was that language had been built into Adam and Eve along with their basic understanding of themselves and their environment.
Paleolinguistic studies seem to suggest that language and thought patterns evolved in mutually reinforcing roles — like acrobats who raise themselves on piles of wooden blocks by adding a block at a time to each pile on which their hands balance alternately.
Hunting, especially with primitive flint weapons, was likely to prove most successful when groups of hunters co-operated. Co-operation — unless we consider the theory that our earliest ancestors were telepathic — was almost certainly improved by language. The earliest aural signals may have conveyed basic, but vital, hunting messages such as “Go forward. Go back. Move toward me. Move away from me. Keep still and silent. It’s coming toward you.”
The technique of a skilled shepherd controlling his dogs with simple sounds, elementary proto-words, or whistle signals could be similar to the proto-words with which paleolithic hunting parties coordinated their movements.
The authors and editors of Genesis probably felt that they had to try to provide an explanation for the apparent anomaly: if all persons were descended from Adam and Eve, why did Babylonians, Israelites, and Canaanites speak different languages?
Map of Eden and its location.
There is an interesting and mysterious connection between the Babel story and the Apostles speaking in tongues. On the day of Pentecost, all those to whom the Apostles preached heard the words in their own language — yet the Apostles were Galileans. Some analysts of this “speaking-with-tongues” phenomenon have wondered whether the Apostles were using Koine Greek — a simplified version that resembles classical Greek in much the same way that Pidgin resembles standard English, and which was widely used and understood throughout the Roman Empire.
GLOSSOLALIA
Psycho-linguistics experts have investigated numerous cases of glossolalia, a state in which a subject with no apparent conscious knowledge or recollection of another language can apparently speak it fluently. In the most interesting reports of glossolalia, some subjects have been able to speak their mysterious unknown language but have not known the meaning of the words they were saying. At other times subjects appear to have been able to understand the meaning, but have not been able to reply in the strange language.
The precise nature of the neurological and physiological processes involved in speaking and understanding a given set of audible signals (or visual symbols in the case of a written language) is complex and controversial. Most linguistic scientists would probably agree that the process is basically an associative one: a distinct, discrete sound, or sound pattern, becomes associated with an object (noun) or an activity (verb). If different human groups evolved at different sites at different times, their chosen sound patterns for denoting different actions and different objects would in all probability be totally arbitrary, with the exception of certain onomatopoeia.
If, however, the Eden origins of Homo sapiens are to be taken literally and historically, then a single “language of Eden” would be the logical sequel.
Investigation seems to suggest, rather tantalizingly, however, that the oldest roots of modern languages do tend to converge in the remote past. DNA investigations have also indicated the possibility of a common ancestor — maybe from the vicinity of the Olduvai Gorge.
The word Babel seems to have been derived from an ancient Hebrew root meaning “to confound” or “to confuse” and would seem to refer to the story of the tower that was never completed because its builders lost the power to understand one another’s languages.
It has been suggested that slaves taken by the Babylonians to carry out their grandiose building projects were dependent upon interpreters among the Babylonian overseers. If a slaves’ rebellion — or an outbreak of plague — led to the deaths of these interpreters, almost total confusion would have ensued, leading to probable abandonment of the site.
The Babylonians referred to their city as Bab-ili, Babila, or Babilam, meaning “the gate of God.” It was also known as Babilani — “the gate of the gods.” The ancient Akkadians called it Ka-dingira, which also meant “the gate of god,” as well as Tin-tir —“the seat of life.” Its other titles included E or E-ki, meaning “house” or “hollow place.” Yet another ancient title was Su-anna, meaning the city with the high defence.
The mysterious “they” of Genesis 2, verses 2–9, may refer solely to the Cushites, followers of Nimrod, the much acclaimed “mighty hunter” of Chapter 10, listed in the ancient genealogies as the great-grandson of Noah through Ham’s line. They seem to have referred to themselves as the people of Kingi-Ura, and are known in some scholarly circles as the Sumero-Akkadians. It is likely that they migrated to Shinar from some original location in the northeast of Mesopotamia.
Their building materials were mainly bricks and bitumen, and their earliest city layout seems to have been a relatively basic collection of dwellings scattered around a central temple-tower which they called the Zikkuratu.
Part of the mystery of the city of Babel and its vast tower is its great age. It is mentioned before Erech, Akkad, and Calneh in the account in Genesis 10, and almost certainly predates them by many centuries. The Greek historians of Alexander’s time questioned the Babylonians about it, and were given