Tower of Babel (Genesis 11)

The account of the Tower of Babel in Genesis 11 offers numerous points for comparison with the ancient world. The narrative is set in the Land of Shinar, recognized as the region known as Sumer in southern Mesopotamia. The excerpt below looks at the materials and at the nature of the project. Our expectation would be that in order to understand how the project offended deity, we need to have a clearer idea of what the people were actually doing.

Let’s make bricks and bake them (11:3). Stone is not readily available in the alluvial plain of southern Mesopotamia, so a logical economical choice is to use brick—there is plenty of mud. Mudbrick, however, is not durable, so it was a great technological development to discover that baking the brick made it as durable as stone.¹ This was still an expensive process, since the kilns had to be fueled. As a result, mudbrick was used as much as possible, with baked brick used only for outer shells of important buildings or where water-proofing was desirable.²

No baked bricks have been found earlier than the Uruk period (latter part of the fourth millennium).³ In the same general time period, bitumen came to be used as mastic and for additional water-proofing, but it was also expensive because it had to be heated. Consequently, it was used primarily in public projects.⁴ The bitumen was absorbed into the bricks (baked or not), creating a product as durable as stone.⁵

City and a tower (11:4). One single architectural feature dominated the landscape of early Mesopotamian cities: towers known as ziggurats. In the earliest stages of urbanization, the city was not designed for the private sector. People did not live in the city. Instead, it was comprised of the public buildings, such as administrative buildings, and granaries, which were mostly connected with the temple. Consequently, the city was, in effect, a temple complex.

What do we know about ziggurats? (1) Though they may resemble pyramids in appearance, they are nothing like them in function. Ziggurats have no inside. The structure was framed in mudbrick, and then the core was packed with fill dirt. The façade was then completed with kiln-fired brick. (2) Ziggurats were dedicated to particular deities. Any given deity may have several ziggurats dedicated to him or her in different cities. Furthermore, a given city may have several ziggurats, though the main one was associated with the patron deity of the city. (3) Archaeologists have discovered nearly thirty ziggurats in the general region, and texts mention several others. The main architectural feature is the stairway or ramp that leads to the top. There was a small room at the top where a bed was made and a table set for the deity.⁶ Ziggurats range in size from sixty feet per side to almost two hundred feet per side.

Most important is the function of the ziggurat. The ziggurat did not play a role in any of the rituals known to us from Mesopotamia. If known literature were our only guide, we would conclude that common people did not use the ziggurat for anything. It was sacred space and was strictly off-limits to profane use. Though the structure at the top was designed to accommodate the god, it was not a temple where people would go to worship. In fact, the ziggurat was typically accompanied by an adjoining temple near its base, where the worship did take place.

The best indication of the function of the ziggurats comes from the names that are given to them. For instance, the name of the ziggurat at Babylon, Etemenanki, means "temple of the foundation of heaven and earth." One at Larsa means "temple that links heaven and earth." Most significant is the name of the ziggurat at Sippar, "temple of the stairway to pure heaven." The word translated "stairway" in this last example is used in the mythology as the means by which the messenger of the gods moved between heaven, earth, and the netherworld.⁷ As a result of these data, we can conclude that the ziggurat was a structure built to support the stairway. This stairway was a visual representation of that which was believed to be used by the gods to travel from one realm to another. It was solely for the convenience of the gods and was maintained in order to provide the deity with amenities and to make possible his descent into his temple.

At the top of the ziggurat was the gate of the gods, the entrance into their heavenly abode. At the bottom was the temple, where hopefully the god would descend to receive the gifts and worship of his people. A similar mentality can be seen among the people of the American West, who picked up their towns and moved them into proximity with the newly laid railroad tracks, then erected a train station so that the train would stop there and bring economic benefits.

In summary, the project is a temple complex featuring a ziggurat, which was designed to make it convenient for the god to come down to his temple, receive their worship, and bless his people. The key for this passage is to realize that the tower was not built so that people could ascend to heaven, but so that deity could descend to earth.

Reaches to the heavens (11:4). Throughout Mesopotamian literature, almost every occurrence of the expression describing a building "with its head in the heavens" refers to a temple with a ziggurat.⁸ As a sample, here is the description by Warad-Sin, king of Larsa, who built the temple É-eš-ki-te:

He made it as high as a mountain and made its head touch heaven. On account of this deed the gods Nanna and Ningal rejoiced. May they grant to him a destiny of life, a long reign, and a firm foundation.⁹

It is this language, along with the indication that God "came down," that gives textual confirmation that the tower is a ziggurat. This would have been transparent to the ancient reader. (Excerpt from ZIBBCOT, Genesis, by John H.Walton, Forthcoming)

Such background information may help give us alternatives for understanding the offense of the tower, for the building of it assumes certain concepts of God—that he wants to be provided a means for coming down into a temple to be worshiped. Likely the worship would also have had certain pagan elements to it (e.g., worship by providing for the deity’s needs—a common ancient concept). More than anything else, it is an attempt by the people to procure God’s presence in their midst—a benefit that had been lost when Adam and Eve were cast out of Eden.

¹ As the text indicates, this is different from Palestine, where stone is plentiful and where no baked brick is yet attested.

² P. R. S. Moorey, Ancient Mesopotamian Materials and Industries (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1994), 302, 306.

³ Ibid., 307.

⁴ Ibid., 332–33.

⁵ Ibid., 335.

⁶ For more details of ziggurat architecture and use see T. Jacobsen, "Notes on Ekur," EI 21 (1990): 40–47.

⁷ See the Myth of Nergal and Ereshkigal. The Hebrew cognate of this word is also used in the story of Jacob’s "ladder," which serves the same purpose as the stairways of the ziggurat.

⁸ The NIV’s "tower that reaches to the heavens" can be misleading. The Hebrew expression "with its head in the heavens" is idiomatic, just like our English "skyscraper." This is not a siege tower as the early rabbis suggested.

⁹ D. Frayne, Royal Inscriptions of Mesopotamia: Old Babylonian Period (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1990), 208.

Photo credit: Josh McFall

Bible Backgrounds is a series of weekly blog posts leading up to the fall 2009 release of the Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary: Old Testament. Each post is written by John H. Walton, the general editor for the five volumes. ZIBBCOT is the product of thirty international specialists; their work and expertise will also be represented throughout this series.

Comments

[Robert Martin]

Reading the Genesis 11 account sounds without this background makes God sound selfish and peevish. "Hey, they're trying to make themselves better! How dare they! I'm gonna go down and mix them up."

However, with this particular perspective comes a different view. Two things jump out at me.

First, "so we can make a name for ourselves" almost seems like they are doing it for self-worship. The ziggurat is being built, perhaps not for bringing God near, but for allowing the people to become like God's themselves. There's a sense of pride, that humans by themselves can come close to God and even demand God to come to them.

Secondly, related to the first, is that they seem to think that they can control God. "If we build this, God will HAVE to come down and bless us and we'll have a nice place for everyone to come and see God. And people will then know our city for the place where they can meet God." There is hubris here in that they seem that their actions can dictate God's blessing rather than the sovereignty of God being the criteria.

This is all just first impression. Obviously, I have my own lens I'm viewing this through and I welcome critique.

[Luke Isham]

"Reading the Genesis 11 account sounds without this background makes God sound selfish and peevish."

While it's helpful to know how ziggurats were made, that background knowledge isn't necessary to understand why God was upset. However if it has helped clear up your own preconceptions before you read Scripture then that's a good thing.

[Andrew Faris]

Dr. Walton,

You said, "More than anything else, it is an attempt by the people to procure God’s presence in their midst—a benefit that had been lost when Adam and Eve were cast out of Eden."

But the text seems to clearly say otherwise in v. 4, namely that the point is to "make a name for ourselves." It appears that this is the offense, and ch. 12 represents God's plan instead, which is that He will be the one to make Abraham's name great, which will be a blessing to all peoples.

It seems possible that your interpretation dovetails with this if making a name for oneself was tied to unique divine-human interaction, such that a great ziggurat would procure a great name specifically by means of apparently procuring divine presence. But the main issue does seem to be how one will get a great name (the text says so!), and maybe only secondarily how to reconnect with God.

Any thoughts?

Andrew

[John]

Excellent article, thanks!

[kh]

Dr. Walton,

Thanks for the thought provoking article.

You mention "It is this language, along with the indication that God "came down," that gives textual confirmation that the tower is a ziggurat."

I agree with the idea that it was a ziggurat being built, but your statement above seems a little odd to me. You mentioned earlier that the idea of gods coming down in response to a ziggurat was a false pagan concept. If that's true, then I find it difficult to think that the Holy Spirit would associate such false paganism with the Biblical God.

I've tended to think about the phase "came down" more in terms of irony - i.e. even when man tried his best to build a tower with its "top in the heavens," God still needed to "come down" to see it. To me, it speaks of the feebleness of man's efforts in contrast with God's greatness and exaltation.

[John Walton]

Lots of good comments here. There is no problem with the idea of God coming down, but he wants to do it on his own terms at his own time. God begins to reestablish his presence among his people through the covenant, the temple, the incarnation and the Holy Spirit. These are God's initiatives.

Making a name is an interesting aspect here. I do not question that there could be some pride motivating the builders. But, as indicated, that pride could come through their initiative to bring God down. It must also be noted, however, that "making a name" can be more innocent. One makes a name by anything that will bring remembrance once the person has died. The most notable way to do that is by having children.

There is no indication that the people wanted to be like gods or that the ziggurat would help to achieve that. Historically that interpretation came from those who were borrowing a page from Greek mythology where there was an attempt to scale the heavens and overthrow the gods. No hint of that in the bible of the ancient Near East.

[Irving Salzman]

Great post.

The dream which Jacob had at Beth El, was of course, a means/vehicle by which God communicated revelation to the patriarch. Do you think the "sulam" ("stairway") that Jacob saw was an accomodation by God to the ziggurat mentality and theology of the Ancient Near East? Of course, an interesting difference is that the pagan accounts have the deities ascending and descending the stairways. Contrasted with that, Gen 28 has the angels ascending and descending ('olim veyordim bo).

[John Walton]

I believe it is the same principle. It is used as a passage between heaven and earth.

[Pat]

Good post, and I agree with your point://
"There is no problem with the idea of God coming down, but he wants to do it on his own terms at his own time. God begins to reestablish his presence among his people through the covenant, the temple, the incarnation and the Holy Spirit. These are God's initiatives."//
I think the issue was the people wanting to take matters into their own hands and manipulate God as if He were just another god like all the pagan gods. While I am reminded by some at my church that many of the practices in the modern Evangelical church are pagan in origin, the difference is do we sanctify those practices or are they empty rituals for which there is no readily identifiable reason for their existence? Are we on some level trying to achieve the same empty ends as the pagans?

[Jonathan Caldwell]

This discussion helps clarify what was going on. I think that more of the story hinges on the fact that they were trying to make a name for themselves. This article shows HOW they tried to make a name for themselves. Every other major town had their gods within arms reach. To be seen on par with them, Babel had to have the same "setup". They believed that having this structure to which God must come down would equate them with the rest of civilization. How sad that so many of God's people have always been worried about keeping up with the Jones's.

[Latayne C Scott]

I really liked the railroad station analogy.

I'm wondering if the Israelites and their neighbors might not have had some of this "ziggurat thinking" when they went to great lengths to recover the Ark of the Covenant when it was taken in battle. They saw it as their access point or garage-door opener of the presence of God (rather than the opposite: that God's presence was invited, not compelled, to dwell between the cherubim.)

Enjoyed this article very much.

Latayne C Scott
www.latayne.com
representationalresources.com