Adam When?

    The absolute chronology of man presented in this volume should be of help and interest to all who are concerned with the history of man and this world. Any thinking person surely wonders, however, how this chronology relates to the evidence produced by secular sources. Much of the secular evidence concerns events in historical time (history since the beginning of writing).

    By comparing written evidence from many early civilizations, scholars have arrived at a chronology of man in historical times that appears accurate from within margins as small as ten years to as great as a few hundred years, depending upon the antiquity and nature of the evidence. If, as we shall see, the early writings made reference to astronomical events, it has been possible to date historical events within a few years or at most a few decades. This kind of evidence is rare indeed; but it has been possible to date many events written in ancient records, such as lists of kings, with reasonable accuracy by relating them to the points in time that were established by astronomical notices. Let us briefly look at the evidence and conclusions offered by secular sources and compare them with the Biblical chronology.


The First Civilization

    Both archaeological and Biblical evidence support the conclusion that the earliest civilizations were located in the present nation of Iraq.

    Albright writes:

Archaeological research has established that there is no focus of civilization in the earth that can begin to compete in antiquity and activity with the basin of the Eastern Mediterranean and the region immediately to the east of it . . . The Obeidan is the earliest clearly defined culture of Babylonia, where we find its remains

underlying nearly all of the oldest cities of the country such as Ur, Erech, Lagash, Eridu, etc. This proves that the occupation of the marshlands of Babylonia by human settlers came rather late in history of the irrigation culture, probably not far from 3700 B.C.1

    Thus, the archaeological evidence shows that the location of the first civilization after the flood was in the Mesopotamia Valley. This information agrees exactly with the Bible which reports that the first cities were Babylon, Erech, Nineveh, etc. (Genesis 10:10-11).

    Conclusions based on archaeological evidence and on Biblical evidence also agree on the date of the earliest civilizations. The date of 3700 B.C. suggested by Albright for the beginning of the earliest city civilization is apparently satisfactory to most archaeologists. M. B. Rowton writes that in Uruk, one of the most ancient Mesopotamia sites, the earliest level of monumental building is that of the level known as Urak V. He concludes “the beginning of Uruk V can plausibly be dated at 3500 B.C.”² The dates 3500 or 3700 B.C. are estimates arrived at by starting at a more clearly defined historical point and allowing a reasonable period of time for each level of prior occupation. Thus, the archaeological evidence appears to indicate that prior to about 3700 B.C., there was no substantial culture in the world. The period prior to the time of writing is known as the Prehistoric Age or the Stone Age. About 3700-3500 B.C., the first great civilization began to be formed in the plains of Sumer in the land of Babylon, Erech, Ur, etc.

    Evidences have been found of ancient nomadic tribes that appear to have existed earlier than 3700 B.C. There is also evidence that a city such as Jericho could be as old as 10,000 years. These evidences, however, do not point to a culture or a civilization that even remotely could have been as important as ancient Babylonia. It might be noted, too, that the dating of archaeological evidence prior to about 3500 B.C. is almost completely dependent upon carbon 14 dating. It can be shown that carbon 14 dating becomes quite undependable when used for dating organisms older than 4000 years. Thus, there is great reason to believe that a carbon 14 date of 10,000 years shows an actual age more on the order of 6000 years.³

    Turning now to the Biblical evidence, we discover that the first notice of building activity after the flood is that of Nimrod, whose kingdom began with Babel, Erech, and Accad, all in the land of Shinar (Genesis 10:10). But when did Nimrod come upon the scene? His

genealogical descent is that of Noah, Ham, Cush, and Nimrod (Genesis 10:1, 6, 8). The Bible offers no timetable for this side of the family tree but it does offer precise information regarding another branch, that of Noah, Shem, Arpachshad, and Shelah. When we study the genealogical statements of the Bible we note that very often two branches of the tree are offered. One is of the descendants who lead eventually to Christ, about which precise timetables are given. The second is the genealogical descent of that side of the family which turned away from God. Thus, between Adam and Noah the Bible records ten generations beginning with Adam and Seth and ending with Lamech and Noah, a period of about 6000 years, as we have seen. However, simultaneously, a genealogy comprised of some eight generations is recorded in Genesis 4. This descent is that which comes through Cain and includes those who were the mighty in the land or the sons of men rather than the sons of God. Each generation on Cain’s side of the family tree appears to be closely parallel to the generations through Seth.

    The parallel character of the sons on God’s side with those on man’s side is emphasized by information concerning later generations. Ishmael, the ancestor of the Arabs became the father of twelve princes (Genesis 2.5:16), but so did his half brother Isaac through his son Jacob. The twin boys, Esau and Jacob, again established the two lines. Jacob lived to be 147 years of age and became the forerunner of a great nation. Esau’s death age is not given but he was 120 when he and Jacob buried father Isaac (Genesis 25:26, 35:29); so he, too, lived to a ripe old age and became the father of an important nation, the nation of Edom.

    Therefore, we may reasonably conclude that Ham and Shem, being brothers, were obviously contemporaries, that Arpachshad and Cush were nearly contemporaries, and that Shelah and Nimrod were probably men of the same period of history. Thus, if we know Shelah’s date, we can surmise that Nimrod’s was close to the same date. We are interested in Nimrod because the Biblical history indicates that he was the foundered of civilization of what is now Iraq or what was then the plains of Shinar or Sumer or Mesopotamia.

    As we saw in Chapter 4, Shelah’s date was 4050 B.C. to 3617 B.C., and Nimrod must have lived about this time. The Bible suggests a date of from to 3617 for the founding of the great cities of the Mesopotamia Valley. Thus, the date suggested by archaeology evidence (3700-3500) accords very well with the Biblical statement.

    It is of more than passing interest in this connection that the name Nimrod has left its mark on the Mesopotamia Valley. The great archaeologist George Rawlinson writes:

The remarkable ruin generally called Ahkerhuf, which lies a little to the south-west of Baghdad, is known to many as the “Tel- Nimrud;” the great dam across the Tigris below Mosul is the “Suhr-el-Nimrud,” one of the chief of the buried cities in the same neighborhood is called “Nimrud” simply; and the name of “Birs-Nimrud” attaches to the grandest mass of ruins in the lower country.4

    We may now begin to see how the secular record helps us to inquire in greater detail regarding the accurate but sometimes sketchy facts offered in the Bible.


The Confusion of Tongues

    The next bit of history that should be interesting to investigate is the Tower of Babel. Is there any secular evidence that relates to the account of this confusion of tongues as set forth in Genesis 11? There is indeed, as we shall see.

    First of all, we might note that the account of Genesis 11 indicates that prior to this time in history, all men spoke one language. Moreover, the leading civilization was located in the plains of Shinar or Sumer. The citizens of these plains desired to be the one great civilization of the world, which prompted the building of the great tower. This in turn brought God’s judgment upon the people so that they were separated into various nations.

    The time of the beginning of the second important civilization of antiquity also would have real significance. We would expect it to be after the Tower of Babel. We know that the event of the Tower of Babel occurred during the generation of Peleg; we read in Genesis 10:25, “And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided.” The Bible does not conclusively identify the phrase “the earth divided” with the Tower of Babel, However, most theologian do make this identification. Actually, it might have reference in addition to the physical division of continental masses.⁵

    We have determined that Peleg’s generation was from 3153 B.C. to 2914 B.C. so this would be the time of Tower of Babel. Therefore,

we would expect no civilizations other than Babylonia to have an antiquity greater than about 3150 B.C.
    All archaeological evidence points to Egypt as the second great civilization to appear. While there was a primitive culture in Egypt prior to the First Dynasty, the uniting of all of Egypt under Pharaoh Menes to form the First Dynasty was the signal for a major burst in the arts of civilization. Albright writes:

It is now certain that the level of Egyptian culture remained considerably below that of Mesopotamia until the First Dynasty, when under strong indirect influence from the Euphrates Valley it forged ahead of the latter in a breath-taking spurt.6

    Interestingly, the new civilization of Egypt beginning with the First Dynasty was patterned after the Babylonian (Mesopotamia) culture. Albright continues:

The close of the Predynastic Age and the beginning of the Thinite (period of first two dynasties)7 period witnessed a sudden burst in the arts of civilization. This seems to have been connected in some way with an increase of cultural influence from Asia, since there are numerous exact parallels between Mesopotamia and Egyptian culture at this time, the former being demonstrably older and more original in nearly every instance.8

    The date of the beginning of the First Dynasty under Menes is calculated to be somewhere between 2800 B.C. and 3100 B.C. Early archaeologists such as Breasted dated his reign at about 3400 B.C. As new archaeological evidence was uncovered, this date was moved forward to about 3000 B.C. Albright believes 2850 B.C. is a good estimate.⁹ William C. Hayes suggests 3100 B.C. is the best date presently available.¹⁰

    When we consider the above information we are stuck by the fact that prior to about 3100 B.C. to 2850 B.C., only one civilization of consequences existed in the world. That was the national Babylonia on the plains of Shinar. At that time in a sudden burst of progress Egypt grew to become a second great civilization, a civilization patterned after the first civilization. These dates are in almost exact agreement with the Biblical date for the Tower of Babel. Surely, the confusion of tongues as recorded in Genesis 11 sent thousands of people, skilled in all the arts and crafts of Mesopotamia, to Egypt and elsewhere. Thus, we see agreement between the sacred and the secular records through this indirect evidence of the timetable of the civilizations of antiquity.

Writing: A Result of Babel

    Another great historical achievement, the beginning of writing was at about the same time in history, and it, too, may be related to the confusion of tongues. The Mesopotamia Valley was the birth place of the first important civilization, and it was also the birth place of writing. Wooley writes:

All the archaeological evidence available seems to prove that true writing was first developed in southern Mesopotamia; and in view of the incalculable importance of the invention for human progress everywhere we are entitled to ask the further question, why was that invention made by the Sumerians rather than any other ancient people?11

    He continues:

It is not possible to trace the development of writing in Egypt with the same detail as in Sumer . . .; the simple but sufficient reason for this is that the Egyptians took over the principle of writing ready-made from the Sumerians.12

    Although it cannot be proven conclusively, the early Sumerian writing probably became the foundation for all other systems of writing. Albright states:

Sumero-Accadian cuneiform was also used to write many other languages, Hittite (nasion or Nasion Horite), (Hurrian) Urartian (in Armenia), Cossean, and Elomite. It was further used occasionally for a number of known languages, such as Indo-Iranian, Canaanite (Hebrew), Egyptian, Aramic.13

    Wooley declares:

The earliest examples of the Indus Valley script that have yet been found date to about the twenty-fourth century B.C. . . . that India owned its art of writing to the Sumerians cannot be proved, but it is highly probable.14

    He states further:

On the whole it is more probable that the Chinese derived from Sumer the principle of writing.15

    The timing of the beginning of writing could be highly significant. Archaeologists vary in their estimates as to when man first began to write. Some choose a date as early as 3500 B.C., although the oldest cuneiform documents that easily can be read must be dated

2800 B.C.¹⁶ In the light of the paucity of tablets dating earlier than 2800 B.C., many archaeologists believe writing began several hundred years later than 3500 B.C. or about 3000 B.C. Gelb writes:

The span of over one thousand years between the beginning of Sumerian writing at the start of the fourth millennium and the establishment of full writing around 2500 B.C., postulated by the high chronologists, has always seemed to me out of proportion with the realities of the Sumerian epigraphy. For that reason I have felt rather in sympathy with the low chronologists who proposed to reduce this span to about 400 to 500 years . . . the date of the earliest Sumerian writing should be set tentatively at about 3100 B.C.17

    Perhaps many archaeologists guess at 3500 B.C. as a beginning point because it is also the approximate time when the Sumerian became a cohesive civilization. Gelb’s conclusion, however, could be the more accurate.

    The confusion of tongues in Sumer sometime between 3150- 2900 B.C. could well have been the catalyst that produced writing. Before this dramatic, civilization-splitting event, all was secure. Only one language was spoken in all the world. Verbal communication was adequate and dependable. But then came a fearful event that shook the very foundations of that great civilization. Men could no longer understand each other. The application of the spoken word to clay tablets would provide insurance that this kind of happening would never destroy a culture again. The clay tablets would always prove to be a reference point. Surely we can see the possibility if not the probability of the connection between writing and the Tower of Babel.


The Ziggurats

    One other bit of evidence seems to support the Biblical account of the Tower of Babel. Abundant evidence is available in the secular record regarding great temple towers, the ruins of which are found in many of the ancient cities of Mesopotamia. These huge structures called “ziggurats” could well be patterned after the original structure called in the Bible "the tower of Babel." One of the largest has been written about extensively. It was located in Babylon but only the bare outline of its foundations can still be seen. James MacQueen writes:

In an isolated position immediately opposite the main gate, but towards the west of the courtyard, stood the ziggurat or temple tower of Babylon. This mighty building, rising to a height of almost 300 feet, must have been a dominant feature of the Babylonian landscape, and certainly accounts for the Biblical narrative of the Tower of Babel. Only the ground plan was recovered by excavation, and there has been a great deal of scholarly argument on the details of the upper portion, but thanks to descriptions given by Herodotus and in contemporary inscriptions, the general shape of the building is clear. The tower was square in plan, and rose, probably in eight stages, to a temple at the summit. The lowest stage was 300 feet square and about 108 feet high, the second 256 feet square and 60 feet high. The third, fourth, and fifth stories were each about 20 feet high, with sides of 197 feet, 167 feet, and 138 feet. The size and shape of the sixth, seventh, and eighth stories are disputed, but it seems most probable that the sixth was 108 feet square and 20 feet high, while the seventh stage, 50 feet high, was no longer square but rectangular, measuring probably 79 feet by 69 feet. On top of this may have been a small “wardroom,” the dimensions of which are not known, forming an eighth story . . . The whole of this structure was apparently faced with baked bricks over a core of unbaked bricks. The core of the first stage was 200 feet square, while the facing on all sides was 50 feet thick, and finished with the usual recesses between flat “towers.” The upper stories may also have been finished in this way, but this is not certain.18

    This great temple tower, also known as Etemenanki, “the House of the Foundation Platform of Heaven and Earth,” could well have been constructed about 3100 B.C., which is the approximate Biblical date of the Tower of Babel.

    In this connection there appears to be two interesting facts. The first is related to an ancient tablet which makes a rather provocative statement. In the book Bible and Spade the author states:

George Smith also quotes a remarkable fragment relating to the collapse of such a ziggurat. “The building of this temple offended the gods. In a night they threw down what had been built They scattered them abroad, and made strange their speech. The progress they impeded.”19

    The Bible makes no reference to the destruction of the city and tower stating only that “they left off building the city” (Genesis 11:8). That a physical disaster accompanied the confusion of tongues is, of course, a distinct possibility since the earth was divided during Peleg’s generation (Genesis 10:25), and, as we shall see in Chapter 14, a physical division of earth-shattering proportions could have accompanied the confusion of tongues.

    The second interesting and perhaps significant fact relative to the Tower of Babel is a curious change in the constructions of bricks. Wooley speaks of this:

The Sumerians, and the Babylonians after them, achieved a mastery of brick-building technique so complete that they had no need to look for any other material. A few early experiments, such as that of moulding bricks in cement, were never followed up. It is true that the size of bricks changed in different periods, but the changes were generally quite small, practically all the varieties coming within the limits of 11 3/4 inches to 13 3/4 inches square. The only serious departure from the norm is one that archaeologists have found difficult to explain. With the beginning of the Early Dynastic period the ordinary flat brick is suddenly and uniformly replaced by the “plano-convex” type- a brick rectangular in plan but rounded on the top like a bun- which continues in use for several centuries. It is a clumsy brick unhandy for laying and requiring much more mortar than does a flat brick, and there is no practical justification for it. It has been suggested that it was introduced by newcomers to Sumer who in their own country had been accustomed to building in stone and so moulded bricks in the form of pebbles; but builders in stone prefer flat flakes to rounded pebbles, and no new people came into Sumer at the beginning of the Early Dynastic period. It is possible that the reason for the change was not technical but sentimental. During the Jamdat Nasr period Sumer had been ruled by foreign interlopers, and their regime seems to come to a violent end brought about by a nationalist revolt. The Jamdat Nasr people had been great builders, and the first act of the new governments was to destroy their buildings and set up new ones; for these ‘plano-convex’ bricks were used, for the first time, and perhaps they symbolized the complete break with the immediate past. Certain it is that long after prodigal considerations had brought the flat brick back into favour with builders a superstitious reverence was still attached to the bun-shape type.20

    The Early Dynastic period spoken of by Dr. Wooley was a period in history that began about 3000 B.C. Could the awe-inspiring events of Genesis 11 have occasioned possible superstitions in regards to the forming of the bricks? The Bible does make reference to making bricks in connection with the Tower of Babel (Genesis 11:3). The archaeologists’ discoveries that there was a significant change in the art of brick making, that it continued for several centuries, and that this change occurred at a time simultaneous with the Biblical chronology of the Tower of Babel surely would seem more than coincidental. The Bible says simply in Genesis 11:8:

So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city.

    The superstitious dread that filled these builders as a result of God’s dramatic intervention in their building project could well have induced such a construction change.

    We have seen that when we reach back in secular history as far as written records will allow, and even further by use of artifact and other data, there is wonderful synchronization with the Biblical chronology. We have seen that a number of archaeological discoveries are in startling agreement with the Bible chronology. Not only were the first great city civilizations discovered in Mesopotamia, as the Bible declares, but many of these ancient ruins bore the name Nimrod, the Biblical builder of these ancient cities. Moreover, the archaeological date 3700-3500 B.C. for the beginnings of these great cities agrees very closely with the Biblical date.

    When we considered the Tower of Babel, we saw that a numbered important archaeological discoveries relate directly to the Tower of Babel and the confusion of tongues that followed it. If concordance of the archaeological record is found with that of Biblical statements to a point 2000 years before Moses, it seems probable that the sacred record must be accurate history all the way back to creation. If the saved record can be read as history back to the days of Nimrod, we surely should be able to read it as history back to the days of Adam.


The Maya Connection

    An interesting time correlation is found in secular records in connection with the Maya civilization that existed hundreds of years ago in Central America. Dr. Howard LaFay wrote in National Geographic Magazine:

. . . the Maya practiced an astronomy so precise that their ancient calendar was as accurate as the one we employ today; they plotted the courses of celestial bodies, and to the awe of the faithful, their priests presided both solar and lunar eclipses. They calculated the path of Venus --an elusive planet that is by turn a morning and evening star - with an error of only 14 seconds a year. The Maya originated a complex system of writing and pioneered the mathematical concept of zero.21

    The Maya produced square or rectangular elements called glyph blocks, which made up separate units of an inscription. These inscriptions were frequently calendars and were found on stelas and monumental building such as temples. Archaeologists have correlated the Maya calendar with our calendar to the extent that precise dates recorded in the Maya writings can be expressed in terms of our calendar. The curious thing is that these calendars frequently included a foundation date. Dr. George E. Stuart writes:

. . . the beginning of the Maya calendar, a date that most Mayanists agree corresponds to our own August 11, 3114 B.C. What, one can only wonder, was the high significance of that day, long before Maya history began?22

    Archaeologists who study the ancient civilization of Maya puzzle about the date 3114 B.C., but the Bible gives the answer.

    Significantly, the Bible indicates Peleg’s period was from 3153 to 2914 B.C., so that Peleg would have been 49 years of age in the year 3114 B.C., the beginning year of the Maya calendar. The Bible records that it was during Peleg’s period that the earth was divided. Genesis 10:25:

And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided; and his brother’s name was Joktan.

    The division of the continents occurred, therefore, during Peleg’s lifetime. Most people of that day would have lived in one part of the huge continent that existed until the time of Peleg; however, some individuals would have lived in that part of the original continent which became Central America.

    This was a gigantic event; the division of the original continent was equivalent to the beginning of time for these nomads. The awful event of part of the continent moving across the ocean floor and the resultant mountain building must have been absolutely astounding

and catastrophic to the progenitors of the Maya people. It is not surprising that in their calendar they placed a foundation date; it is not surprising that the date precisely equates with the Biblical statement that in the days of Peleg the earth was divided.


NOTES:

    ¹William Foxwell Albright. From the Stone Age to Christianity, Doubleday & Co., Inc., 1957, p. 32.

    ²M. B. Rowton, On The Cambridge Ancient History, Cambridge University Press, 1964, pp. 57-58.

    ³See Chapter 12 for an examination of this dating method.

    ⁴George Rawlinson, Egypt and Babylon, New York, John W. Lovell Co., 1885, p. 9.

    ⁵This subject is beyond the scope of this discussion and will be treated in Chapter 14.

    ⁶William Foxwell Albright, From Stone Age to Christianity. Doubleday & Co., Inc., 1957. p. 142.

    ⁷Ibid., p. 157.

    ⁸Ibid., p. 156.

    ⁹Ibid., p. 157.

    ¹⁰William C. Hayes. “Chronology: Egypt, Western Asia, Aegean Bronze Age.” in The Cambridge Ancient History, Cambridge University Press, 1964, p. 4.

    ¹¹Wooley, Sir Leonard. The Beginnings of Civilization; The New York American Library, 1965, p. 364.

    ¹²Ibid., p. 378.

    ¹³Albright, From Stone Are to Christianity, p. 36.

    ¹⁴Wooley, The Beginnings of Civilization, p. 374.

    ¹⁵Ibid., p. 376

    ¹⁶Albright, From Stone Age to Christianity, p. 147.

    ¹⁷Ignace J. Gelb, A Study of Writing, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1952, p. 63.

    ¹⁸James G. MacQueen, Babylon, Frederick A. Praeger Publishers, 1964, p. 174.

    ¹⁹Stephen L. Gaiger, Bible and Spade, Oxford University, University Press, 1936, p. 29.

    ²⁰Wooley, The Beginnings of Civilization, p. 262.

    ²¹Dr. Howard LaFay, “The Maya, Children of Time.” in National Geographic Magazine, December, 1976, p. 729.

    ²²Dr. George E. Stuart, “The Maya Riddle of the Glyphs,” in National Geographic Magazine, December, 1976, p. 779.