Flood Legends (13 page)

As far as the final resting place of the vessel goes, if the water truly covered the top of the highest mountain, then the ship coming to rest on a mountain is quite feasible. However, in the Sanskrit version, we have a mountain that
cannot be located
— in fact, cannot even be identified with
any
existing mountains. In the Hebrew version, we have a mountain range that is still known today. Which seems more accurate? It should be noted that, in the Kariña version, the vessel came to rest in the plains. While this is a perfectly
reasonable
idea, it simply has the weight of every other version against it, for nearly every other flood myth in the world has the vessel landing on a mountain.

So right here, in just a few quick glances, we have seen that, yes, the details are feasible, but more importantly, they are much more likely to have developed from the Genesis version. Have I proven the Genesis version? No, but if we take the idea that civilization started in Mesopotamia (or, more likely, restarted there), and we compare the different Mesopotamian versions to each other, we can,
within reason
, believe the Genesis version is accurate.

Nevertheless, this works best when we can demonstrate that the other versions emanated
from
the Genesis version. If the core of the event is in the present-day Middle East, then we should see the "watering-down" of the story increase as cultures spread outward from the area. The next chapter looks at that.

Endnotes

Chapter 12

The Origin of the Story

You are aware of Shurrupak. It is a city on the banks of the Euphrates. The city is old . . . ancient …and, once upon a time, the very gods lived in it. They reveled in its majesty.

— The Flood according to the Babylonians

Most anthropologists and historians believe that the spread of civilization unfolded as follows: humans, first moving out of Africa, began to develop language, cities, and so forth in Mesopotamia, or the modern-day Middle East. This region is often called the "Cradle of Civilization." The people then began to spread out, some moving north and west into Europe, others spreading into Asia. Once in Asia, it is believed they spread north throughout Russia, and south into Southeast Asia, where they crossed the ocean and inhabited the islands of Indonesia. Eventually, they began to reach Australia. The ones that spread north into Russia eventually made their way across the Bering Strait, migrating south into the Americas.
¹
In this chapter, we're going to follow this basic idea, using the literature to see if, in fact, telephone mythology becomes visibly manifest.

The Early Versions

Coming from Mesopotamia and moving northwest would bring us to the Greek myth of Deucalion and Pyrrah. In the Greek version, the parallels to the Middle Eastern versions are
remarkable
. The hero is told to build a box of wood (similar to the Hebrew version, but much more closely related to the Babylonian version, as most Greek artwork depicts the vessel as being a cube). What we have, then, is this idea of a box (as opposed to a boat) that is rectangular in shape, but, as the story is passed down to other generations, becomes more of a cube.

Where in most versions the vessel is a raft or ship, this very original idea of a box is interesting. However, while that thread remains in
place
, it does not necessarily remain
intact
, for the size of the vessel appears to shrink. We have a rectangular vessel a little more than one million cubic feet in volume, which then changes to a cube-like vessel only 64,000 cubic feet in volume. That vessel then appears to be "watered down" (no pun intended) to a cube that is large enough to accommodate just the hero and his wife, without the added room needed for other crew members.

Secondly, we see the number of crew members on the ship decrease. In the Genesis version, the eight passengers on board are identified for us. In the Gilgamesh Epic, we are merely told that it is Utnapishtim, his wife, and his "family." How many were in his family? The text does not say. All we have is the remaining portion of that particular detail, an obscure and unidentified number. In the Greek version, however, even that portion of the crew is lost, and it is only Deucalion and Pyrrah who board the vessel.

What we have, then, moving from the Torah, through the
Epic of Gilgamesh
, and into Greece, are two points of interest: vessel shape and reduction of crew. These two changes are an immediate, observable evolution and stem, no doubt, from the disapora and this idea of telephone mythology.

From the Middle East, it is generally agreed that civilization spread east, into India. India, of course, is home to the Sanskrit Fish Myth. As we have seen, the parallels are extremely strong: warning from the Creator, building of a ship, stocking of seeds, virtues of the hero, and number of crew members on board. We have already looked at how the differences are indicative of the culture: instead of the hero and his seven family members, it is the hero and the seven Ŗsis. Because Manu and the Ŗsis cannot propagate life, Manu — by his virtue and piety — must therefore re-create life.

The Middle Versions

From India, it is said that people groups split into two movements, some going south into Southeast Asia, eventually crossing the ocean into Indonesia and Australia. The second group, it is agreed, moved northeast, eventually crossing the Bering Strait and entering into North America. We'll follow the southern branch first.

This brings us to the Burmese myth. Here, we still have the strong re-creation thread passed on from the Sanskrit version, but we also find the "bird" and "litmus" threads reappearing. Rather than reappearing, though, what has probably happened is that the threads were never "lost," so to speak, but were passed on through a different culture than the one that created the
Mahābhārata
. In essence, I believe this thread, though not found in the Fish Myth, was still moving and evolving throughout other different cultures.

The other thread still present is the supernatural re-creation thread. In the Burmese version, the different nations spring out of blood, rather than the hero's piety, but the thread is still strong. The main
difference
, of course, is the appearance of the elves, or what I call the first
externally present creatures
. This means that, despite the "worldwide destruction" of the Flood, some animals (or elves, in this case) survived. This is also a thread that will begin to show up more and more.

Continuing south into Timor, we encounter the Rotti version of the Flood. Here we see the idea of various animals being used as a means of bringing about dry land. This is a peculiar version of the "litmus test" thread because, rather than use the animals to "test" for dry land, they are using the animals in an attempt to
create
dry land, or cause the dry land to appear. We also find the osprey — or "bird thread" — here, but it also contains the "external creature" thread, in that the osprey comes from
outside
of the Flood mountain. These ever-present but ever-changing threads could be a
direct result
of the diaspora.

From Timor, our spread of cultures splits again. One branch heads east, toward New Guinea, while the other heads south into Australia. These branches bring us to the New Guinea and Lake Tyers versions.

The New Guinea version is interesting, because we find the idea of a "magical" or "supernatural" fish — like that in the Sanskrit myth — appearing. What I believe this depicts is a
direct connection
between the Valman myth of New Guinea, and the Hindu myth of India. The fact that treating the fish well saves Manu, and treating the fish poorly destroys the village, is too much of a coincidence. This may very well indicate that a thread of people passed down the "Fish Myth," just as the Flood myth in general may have been passed down from the Genesis version.

In the Lake Tyers region of Victoria, Australia, we see, first and foremost, the appearance of a post-diluvian rescue. This is important, because it shows up later. While it may be an evolution of the "external creature" thread, it may also simply be one of those changes that came about on its own, without any direct link. However, as mentioned before, it does show up again, and in an unlikely place.

As you'll recall, the spread of cultures split shortly before reaching Burma. We have followed the southern branches to their extent. Now, we turn to the northern branches. This migration traveled up the eastern coast of Russia, across the Bering Strait, and into North America. At the border of current-day Alaska, the migration splits in two, one branch moving southeast, the other directly south. Following the southern branch, we arrive in British Columbia where we come to the Kaska version of the Flood.

The Later Versions

The Kaska version combines the Flood with the diaspora. I like that. Could a society plausibly invent such a story? Of course. Actually, that makes sense. One culture would be curious about the origin of the other cultures around it and would make up a story to explain it. That, however, is not the right question to ask. What we should be asking is whether or not this society, plus the other dozen or so we've looked at, plus the hundreds of others that we have not considered, could invent this. If one culture in the world told a story of the world being united under one common language, and then splitting into various other cultures, we could, reasonably, claim it to be an invention. If one culture in the world told a story of a global deluge that preceded this split, we could reasonably claim that to be an invention, as well. However, if several hundred cultures from around the world each tell of a global deluge, followed by a scattering of the nations — some of which
combine
the stories into one tale — can we reasonably claim the legend to be an invention? We'll come back to this.

Moving eastward from British Columbia toward the Hudson Bay, we find the Montagnais version of the Flood. The Hudson Bay version also places the family in a vessel, but here we see the "litmus test" for land transform from birds into other wildlife. We also find that, once dry land appears, the hero places a reindeer on the land and has it circle the island until it is complete. This idea is also important.

Continuing south, we would encounter the Hareskin version. The Hareskin version is very similar to the Australian version in that the hero (a human instead of a pelican) collects the drowning animals two by two (still reminiscent of the Genesis version) as he floats past them. If the groups of migrating people split somewhere around Burma, then we would expect some threads of the story to continue south (into Australia), and other threads to spread north (into the United States). Does the presence of this post-diluvian rescue prove that?

No.

Does it
suggest
it?

Yes.

Lastly, of course, we find the Kariña version, which contains the eight crew members and the animals, but
also
contains the divine re-creation. What does that mean for us? It means that — if we view the development of cultures the way we would play the telephone game — stories change as they are passed on. As new threads are added (the idea of a divine re-creation, for example), they would begin appearing in
unlikely
places. We would also see common threads that cannot be explained if each version were
invented
, separately, by different cultures.

Please bear in mind, as well, that many other versions have not even been addressed. It is not as if the story leaves India and does not appear again until we reach Burma; there are other examples of the myth along the way. I have simply chosen several of these stories out of, literally, hundreds. Because of this, I deeply encourage you to study some of these other versions that we have not considered, and see what parallels you can draw.

Do we then still shake our heads, mutter something about the story being "impossible," and go on with our lives? Perhaps we should, instead, actually take a moment to consider the vast array of mythology that is available to us, and wonder if maybe,
just maybe
, our own history is embedded in there.

Endnotes

Chapter 13

Final Thoughts

The man who hears this will dwell in happiness.

—
Mahābhārata,
book III: chapter 185, verse 54

We've taken in a lot of information in these last several pages. Some of it is fairly solid logic, some of it is plausible speculation, and some of it, admittedly, is nothing
but
speculation. But the details should never weigh us down. Rather, we should stay focused on the main issue here: the literature tells us that, at some point in our ancient past, the world was flooded and only a handful survived. But does the literature leave room for us to believe the story?