Mythogeography and hydromythology in the initial sections of Sumerian and Egyptian king-lists

Ancient pseudo-histories may contain kernels of geographic truth. In the Sumerian King List (SKL) the long and south-focused antediluvian era may reflect a combination of the Ubaid and Uruk periods, while the initial post-Flood period, which was short and ruled from the north, may reflect the Jemdet Nasr phase. The SKL's subsequent return of kingship southward to Uruk and Ur ushers in the Early Dynastic period. For Egypt, the Heliopolitan mythological sequence in which Seth (patron deity of Upper Egypt) is succeeded by Horus (patron deity of Lower Egypt) may reflect the spread of Naqada culture from southern to northern Egypt in the 4th millennium BCE, with the Upper Egyptian origin of both deities reflecting the unification of the Two Lands under the control of Upper Egypt. The actual ages of the cities in the antediluvian portion of the SKL are reflected rather well by their positions in that list. The total time allocated by Berossos to the antediluvian period in Mesopotamia is an order of magnitude higher than the total assigned by Manetho to the mythological/predynastic period in Egypt, perhaps because the Babylonians reckoned time using a sexagesimal numeral system whereas the Egyptians used a decimal one. The Mesopotamian and Egyptian myths that signal the beginning of historical time involve references to a flood – an event whose nature reflects the actual geography and hydrology its source region. The Mesopotamian formula involves a cataclysmic deluge which is nevertheless survived by a man, while the Egyptian one involves a benign inundation which receives the body of a slain god. A late embellishment of the Egyptian myth shares with a late version of the Mesopotamian one the image of a wooden box, with someone important inside it, being tossed aimlessly on the waves. Once again, the outcomes are opposite: the Egyptian vessel is a death-chamber in which a god is murdered, whereas the Babylonian one is a life-boat by which humanity is saved.

Publication Details

Journal
Knowledge Commons (Lakehead University)
Published
2024-11-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.17613/wj4zt-fzs61
Primary Topic
Ancient Near East History
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Mythogeography and hydromythology in the initial sections of Sumerian and Egyptian king-lists

Knowledge Commons (Lakehead University)
Ancient Near East History
article

Mythogeography and hydromythology in the initial sections of Sumerian and Egyptian king-lists

article en

Abstract

Ancient pseudo-histories may contain kernels of geographic truth. In the Sumerian King List (SKL) the long and south-focused antediluvian era may reflect a combination of the Ubaid and Uruk periods, while the initial post-Flood period, which was short and ruled from the north, may reflect the Jemdet Nasr phase. The SKL's subsequent return of kingship southward to Uruk and Ur ushers in the Early Dynastic period. For Egypt, the Heliopolitan mythological sequence in which Seth (patron deity of Upper Egypt) is succeeded by Horus (patron deity of Lower Egypt) may reflect the spread of Naqada culture from southern to northern Egypt in the 4th millennium BCE, with the Upper Egyptian origin of both deities reflecting the unification of the Two Lands under the control of Upper Egypt. The actual ages of the cities in the antediluvian portion of the SKL are reflected rather well by their positions in that list. The total time allocated by Berossos to the antediluvian period in Mesopotamia is an order of magnitude higher than the total assigned by Manetho to the mythological/predynastic period in Egypt, perhaps because the Babylonians reckoned time using a sexagesimal numeral system whereas the Egyptians used a decimal one. The Mesopotamian and Egyptian myths that signal the beginning of historical time involve references to a flood – an event whose nature reflects the actual geography and hydrology its source region. The Mesopotamian formula involves a cataclysmic deluge which is nevertheless survived by a man, while the Egyptian one involves a benign inundation which receives the body of a slain god. A late embellishment of the Egyptian myth shares with a late version of the Mesopotamian one the image of a wooden box, with someone important inside it, being tossed aimlessly on the waves. Once again, the outcomes are opposite: the Egyptian vessel is a death-chamber in which a god is murdered, whereas the Babylonian one is a life-boat by which humanity is saved.

Knowledge Commons (Lakehead University)
Openalex Percentile: Top 44%
Ancient Near East History
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Mythogeography and hydromythology in the initial sections of Sumerian and Egyptian king-lists · Knowledge Commons (Lakehead University) (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS