Biblical Foundation of Greco-Roman Myth. Part Three: Including more ancient myths

 

“Bryant tells us of Sesostris building a ship 280 cubits long, dedicated to Osiris at Thebes. This is the most remote inland part of Egypt, where it made no sense to build a ship; thus it was not a ship, but a temple, built in the shape or symbol of a ship. Bryant says it was sacred to Osiris at Theba, or actually was itself called Theba, and the city (Theba) also got its name from the ark. Theba is the Hebrew word for ark used in Genesis”.

Joe Spears

  

Joe Spears appears to have identified successfully, in his 2008 article:

 

Noah and Family: Myth, Legends,

Ancient History and the Bible

 

some further intriguing appropriations by the ancient pagan nations of biblical antediluvian and early post-diluvian stories: http://www.tasc-creationscience.org/content/noah-and-family-myth-legends-ancient-history-and-bible

 

…. In mythology, gods ruled over the realm of men. It thus seems likely that rulers would the ones to be portrayed as gods. This is confirmed in the well-known case of the Egyptian Pharaohs, who were considered at least semidivine.

 

One interesting psychological observation: a person who gained a position of power in the ancient world through war(s) of aggression is a person who may have a desire for power. Indeed, some would say this is blatantly obvious. If this is the case, it is within the realm of possibility that this desire for power might manifest itself in the ruler himself claiming his deity. As an example, some Roman emperors (Caligula, etc.) claimed divinity.

 

Ancestors have been worshiped in different cultures, including cultures in India, Africa, China, Egypt, and others.

 

Powerful and mighty men such as Heracles (Hercules) could be thought to be gods, or accounts of their deeds may have become exaggerated with time to the point that those deeds became superhuman in nature, and thus, the performer of the deeds also became superhuman. In fact, Zeus is described by ancient writer Euhemerus as a mighty warrior, but a man.

 

What about long-lived people? What would someone living in the ancient world think if there was a 500 year old king ruling their country? This king would easily seem immortal. The ancients did believe such people existed—at least, they claimed that they did. Josephus mentions this in Antiquities of the Jews, Book 1, Chapter 3, section 9. He also says that other ancient writers also claimed great longevity for some of the ancients – Manetho, Berosus, Mochus, Hestieus, Hieronymus, etc. The Bible also gives accounts of people in ancient times who lived hundreds of years. Some ancient accounts even claim that some kings lived thousands of years.

 

Regardless of how long such people actually lived, the written accounts do mention very long lives in ancient times. Some might say we are gullible for believing these accounts, but whether people really lived that long is not so much the point, as it is that others who lived long ago believed the accounts. We should bear in mind that it is their attitude toward real people that would cause them to deify such people, not the actual age.

 

The people who live a long time might be considered immortal—possessing a god-like quality. One question: wouldn’t everyone at that time also live to the about same age? To understand this question, let’s examine the lifespans of people as found in Genesis.

Before the flood, people—at least the people that Genesis tells us about—lived 800 or 900 plus years. After the flood, there is a gradual decrease in the lifespans of individuals. A plot of this shows an exponential decay in the lifespans. Why would ancient writers make up numbers in such a way as to fit a pattern that would not be described until centuries afterward? Many processes and phenomena in nature exhibit exponential patterns in their behavior. This gradual decrease in lifespan is is seen from one generation to the next. But remember, that the original older ancestors would still be around for many generations. 

 

So, we see a gradual decrease in the lifespan of men after the flood. It seems to level off somewhere near 100 years. It seems that some might think of Noah and others who were extremely long-lived as apparently immortal, and therefore gods. Some might question, why would ancient people say some are gods, since all people had approximately the same lifespan? To explain this, we must realize there would be a mix of people of various lifespans all living at the same time. The long-lived would still be around while their multiple-great-grandchildren would be alive. And the long-lived would be few in number, while the short-lived would be much larger in number. It appears that each succeeding generation had shorter average lifespans than the previous (check the ages given in the Old Testament to see this). So, by the time the ancient ones were really old, there could easily exist a large number of relatively short-lived descendants. This is because the number of people in each succeeding generation would typically get larger, while the lifespan would get smaller.

 

So, there can be many generations during the lifetime of one long-lived ancient member of Noah's family, each succeeding generation making up a proportionately larger part of the population than the preceding generation. Thus, the population could be very large and consist mostly of short-lived people, while a long-lived ancestor still existed. The vast majority could easily view such a one as immortal, or as a god. Thus, within a few hundred years after the flood, assuming the ages given in Genesis to be accurate, there could easily have existed a handful (or a few dozen) extremely long-lived individuals, a minority, among a much larger population of much shorter-lived individuals. To the multitudes, these few long-lived leaders would have seemed immortal and as gods, for not only were these ancients long-lived, but they were the fathers and grandfathers of their societies—recall ancestor worship—but they also were the founders, leaders and rulers of their nations according to ancient documents (recalll the divinity of kings).

 

So, we see a situation with a minority of powerful, longlived rulers. They would have all of the above-listed characteristics that would make people see them as gods. Thus, that Noah and his immediate descendants would be transformed into deities seems reasonable and fits the above reasons for doing it. And we also have the evidence of the myths themselves and ancient writers such as Euhemerus, indicating that Noah and family actually were deified and incorporated into ancient mythology.

 

Noah and the Deluge

 

Bryant wrote: “Among the people of the east the true name of the Patriarch was preserved…Noas, Naus, …Nous…Anaxagoras spoke of him by the name of Noas or Nous. …The disciples of Anaxagoras esteem Nous the same as Prometheus … .”

 

Suidas and Stephanus tell us Annacus or Nannacus lived 300 years, and then the Deluge came which destroyed mankind—he prayed for man and was a king. Annacus, Innachus and Nannacus relate to Noachus and Noah.

 

According to Eusebius, who lived around 300 BC and is known as the father of church history, Inachus would have lived long before the existence of the place he was supposed to have ruled.

 

Greeks combined Dios (god) with Nusus (Noah) as Dio-nusus or Dionysis. The god Dionysis also is connected with Noah. Dionysis is associated with vineyards and taught man to plant the vine; Noah planted a vineyard after the flood (Gen. 9:20).

 

Evidence of Noah in the ancient world is found in place names. Hesychius, who compiled the largest dictionary of ancient Greek words and lived about 500 BC in Alexandria, claimed cities and mountains throughout the world were called Nusean. These places included Arabia, Ethiopia, Egypt, India, Libya, and more.

 

Philo says Deucalion was actually Noah: “The Grecians call the person Deucalion, but the Chaldeans style him Noe; in whose time there happened the great eruption of waters.”

 

Seisithrus was a king, according to Median and Babylonian archives, as described by Adydenus and Eusebius. Quoting from Bryant’s New System,

…the flood began…during the prevalence of the waters Seisithrus sent out birds, that he might judge if the flood had subsided: but that the birds, not finding any resting place, returned to him again. This was repeated three times;…he quitted the ark…¹

According to Bryant, Lucian said,

…those of the antediluvian world were all destroyed. The present world is peopled from the sons of Deucalion…from one person…the former brood…were men of violence… lawless…. On this account they were doomed to destruction: and for this purpose there was a mighty eruption of waters from the earth, attended with heavy showers form above…till the whole earth was covered with a flood and all flesh drowned…Deucalion alone was preserved, to re-people the world. This mercy was shown to him on account of his justice and piety. …He put all his family, both his sons and their wives, into a vast ark…animals of every species, boars, horses, lions, serpents, whatever lived upon the face of the earth, followed him by pairs…¹

 

Lucian also says Deucalion raised an altar to God after exiting the ark. Note these points in agreement between Lucian’s account and the Genesis account:

 

·         water coming from the earth, not just as rain

·         all today are descendants of the sole survivor

·         the survivor built an altar

·         the survivor was pious and just

·         the world destroyed was evil

·         their evil was the reason for the flood

·         animals were on the ark

·         animals appeared in pairs

 

The Ark

 

Berosus mentions something else in agreement with the Biblical description of the ark. He said the ancient people used scrapings from the ark’s asphalt as charms. The Bible says the ark was sealed or coated inside and out.

 

Theophilus said the ark was visible in his day on the mountains of Armenia. Interestingly, the Bible says the ark landed in the mountains of Ararat. Theophilus’ locations matches the one in Genesis. Chrysostom said the remains of the ark were preserved in the mountains of Armenia in his time.

 

In Egypt the Ship of Isis was called Baris. According to Nicolaus Damascenus, Baris is the name of the mountain on which the ark rested in Armenia. Here we see a connection with Egyptian religion, the mythological personage Isis, and the Ark of Noah.

Bryant tells us of Sesostris building a ship 280 cubits long, dedicated to Osiris at Thebes. This is the most remote inland part of Egypt, where it made no sense to build a ship; thus it was not a ship, but a temple, built in the shape or symbol of a ship. Bryant says it was sacred to Osiris at Theba, or actually was itself called Theba, and the city (Theba) also got its name from the ark. Theba is the Hebrew word for ark used in Genesis. Also, the length, 280 cubits, is almost exactly the length of the ark given in Genesis. In Genesis it is 300 cubits, but different nations had different measures of the cubit, which could account for the discrepancy; and the difference is less than 10 %.

 

Bryant says:

Sesostris was Osiris; the same as Dionusus, Menes, and Noah. He is called Seisithrus by Abydenus, Xixouthrous by Berosus and Apollodorus; and is represented by them as a prince, in whose time the Deluge happened. He was called Zuth, Xuth, and Zeus: and had certainly divine honors paid to him.

The word Zeus, according to Bryant, is associated with making of wine, and Noah is known as the one who taught man to plant vineyards.

 

In several religious mysteries and festivals, an ark or ship is involved. Pausanias tells of an ancient temple in Ionia; the God was on a float, and came that way from Phenicia. Aristides tell us that a ship was carried in a procession at the feast called Dionusia in Smyrna. The name Dionusia is associated with Noah, as we have seen above.

 

Plutarch said, “The vessel in the celestial sphere, which the Greeks call the Argo, is a representation of the Ship of Osiris, which out of reverence has been placed in the heavens.” Therefore, this Greek constellation has its origins in Egypt. There is a star in this constellation, Canopus, which can not be easily seen in Greece (again consistent with the origin of this constellation’s name as somewhere other than Greece). This star is bright, is located on the rudder of the ship in the constellation, and indicates the guiding force. Ptolemy was member of the temple Ca Noubi, and Noubi refers to Noah. Thus it seems that the guiding star of the ship, on the rudder, is named after Noah. In this case, the ship represented by the constellation would obviously be symbolic of the Ark.

 

History Before the Flood

 

The information below is worthwhile and interesting in its own right, but will also be used later in explaining the relationship of the god Dagon to Noah. Berosus wrote of a list of ten kings who lived before the flood. This list is over 2,000 years old, and on that list the tenth king lived both before and after the flood, having survived it. Another list obtained from the Weld Dynastic Prism is about 4,000 years old. These lists, as well as one from Genesis, are summarized in Table 1.

 

Table 1

Bible	Berosus	Weld Dynastic Prism
Adam	Alorus	Alulim
Seth	Alaporus	Alalmar
Enos	Amelon	Enmeniunna
Cainan	Ammenon	Kichunna
Mahalaleel	Megalarous	Emmengalanna
Jared	Daonos	Dumuzi
Enoch	Edoranchus	Sibzianna
Methuselah	Amenpsinos	Emenduranna
Lamech	Otiartes	Uburratum
Noah	Xisouthros	Zinsuddu

 

There are some interesting similarities in these lists.

 

The third king on the Berosus list, Amelon, is the Babylonian Amilu, meaning “man.” This corresponds to the Hebrew, Enos, which also means “man.”

Fourth on the Berosus list, Ammenon, is the Babylonian, Ummanu, meaning “artificer” and is the equivalent of Kenan (Cainan) which means “smith.”

Eighth on the Berosus list is Amenpsinos, which is taken to be a corruption of Amilsinus, i.e., Amil-sin, “the man of Sin” (the Moon God). Methuselah, also number 8 on the Biblical list, may be a variation of Mutu-sha-Irkhu, “man of the Moon God,” or if the more original form of the name is Methuselah, “the man of God.”

Seventh on the Berosus list probably refers to Emmeduranki, a legendary king of Sippar, to whom God gave the “table of the gods” and taught the secrets of heaven and earth. Enoch, also number seven on the Biblical list, was supposed to have been close to God and to have become the recipient of superhuman knowledge and revelations of the nature of heaven and earth.

Of course, number 10 on the Berosus list is the one who survived the flood. Here are points of similarity between Xisouthros and Noah:³ 

 

 

·         God told them both to build a boat

·         the reason for the boat was a coming flood

·         when water began to subside, both sent out birds

·         the boat landed on/in (a) mountain(s) 

 

Dagon - Oannes

 

There is a god named Dagon. He is often drawn as a merman, or part fish, part man. According to Berosus, he appeared during the reign of the third of the ten kings listed above. Also, Noah was born during the time of the third from Adam, who was alive and possibly reigning as king at the time.

 

Though a god, Dagon learned from this third king, i.e., from a man. This seems strange, for a god to be taught by a man. Yet, it makes perfect sense that Noah would learn, as a child, from one of his ancestors who was still living. This could explain why this account was included, in spite of the fact that it didn’t make sense, simply because the myth of Dagon was based on events that really happened.

 

Both Noah and Dagon lived before and after the flood. Also, both are associated with water—Noah obviously as having built the ship and been on it during the flood, and Dagon as being part fish, part man.

Lastly, Dagon taught man useful information for building a civilization. Noah is not mentioned specifically as doing this, but it makes a lot of sense to assume that he did. After all, he would have been the leader of the entire population of the world. He brought animals with him – wouldn’t he also have brought anything else that might be useful after the flood, such as knowledge? Wouldn’t his children learn from him? These seem reasonable assumptions. That Dagon is supposed to have done these things lends support to the idea that he is based on real events, involving Noah.

 

Conclusion

 

We have seen indications that ancient myths were based on real people. We also have seen evidence that some of these myths are based on characters named in the Bible, such as Noah and his family, but also referred to in many documents. The similarities between Dagon and Noah, between the ten pre-flood kings and the ten generations from Adam to Noah, are just a few of the clues we have examined. These clues indicate the existence of a man named Noah, of a real flood (the stories of Deucalion and others), and other events described in the Bible, all of which support the truth of the Genesis narrative.

Land of Nod and City of “Enoch”

 

by

Damien F. Mackey

 

Part One:

Grappling with the Problem  

 

 

“So Cain went out from the Lord’s presence and lived in the land of Nod, east of Eden.

Cain made love to his wife, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Enoch. Cain was then building a city, and he named it after his son Enoch”.

 

Genesis 4:16-17

 

 

 

 

Introduction

 

Pin-pointing a geography for the antediluvian patriarch, Cain - the “Land of Nod” and the City that he is said to have built in honour of his son, Enoch (Genesis 4:16-17) - has turned out to be quite a challenge.

 

Firstly, I was drawn to the idea that the ancient cities of Sumer (southern Iraq) were Cain-ite cities. David Rohl seemed to have a point when proposing, in his book The Lost Testament, that ancient Eridu was called after Cain’s grandson, Irad; Uruk (Sumerian Unuki) and Ur (Sumerian Unuki) after Cain’s son, Enoch; Badtibira (“City of the Metal Worker”) after Tubal-Cain.

Moreover, the Babylonian ‘Noah’, Ziusudra, is associated with Shuruppak.

All ancient cities of Sumer with possible biblical connections.

“The Land of Nod” could then be the region “beyond the Euphrates”, which tended to have sinister connotations in the Bible (e.g. Jeremiah 2:18; Revelation 9:14).

 

My interest in Sumer waned somewhat, however, when I came to realise that – thanks to an article by Creationist, Anne Habermehl – Sumer was not the biblical “land of Shinar”.

See my subsequent:  

 

Tightening the Geography and Archaeology for Early Genesis

 

https://www.academia.edu/34936691/Tightening_the_Geography_and_Archaeology_for_Early_Genesis

 

Second attempt. I, now thinking that ancient Jericho - one of the oldest cities in the world - must rank as a prime candidate for Cain’s city, found that Roy Schulz had indeed argued for Jericho’s “Pre-Pottery Neolithic” (PPN) phase to have been what he called “Cain’s Famous Walled City” (http://www.churchofgoddiaspora.com/pre-flood_world.htm).

But I later rejected PPN Jericho as being stratigraphically far too recent for the era of Cain.

 

Thirdly, the view of Dr. Ernest L. Martin about the Land of Nod is the one that I now accept and intend to build upon in this series. Dr. Martin embraced - as do I - the traditional view that the Garden of Eden was located at the site of Jerusalem. For him, the Land of Nod was the region beyond the eastern perimeter of the Garden. He wrote about it, e.g., in “The Temple Symbolism in Genesis”: http://askelm.com/temple/t040301.htm

 

Further Temple Teaching

 

Cain was sent into the land of Nod, East of Eden, away from the presence of God. He became cut off from the Eternal. God then gave him a “mark” to show that Cain was not completely forgotten and that a measure of protection would be afforded him and his descendants. Cain became a representative of all Gentiles. They were reckoned as being in Nod (wandering — without a fixed spiritual home). And while they could approach the East entrance to Eden, they could not go in. A barrier was placed around Eden. The altar which Cain and Abel constructed in the area of Eden near the East gate (door) of the Garden was out of bounds to those who lived in Nod.

This condition existed throughout the antediluvian period. But with the great flood of Noah, everything was destroyed — the Garden, the altar, the barriers, etc. When Noah and his children began to repopulate the earth, none of these former things were retained — except in the memory of man, and only in symbol. In the time of Moses, however, God selected the Israelites to be His nation — in favored status to Him. Moses was ordered to build a tabernacle which resembled the condition that existed in the pre-flood age. Outside the tabernacle was represented the land of Nod. The court on the inside of the tabernacle (the court of Israel) was Eden. The Holy Place was the Garden. The Holy of Holies was the center of the Garden. The tabernacle not only represented Eden and the Garden, but it was also a physical type of God’s heavenly abode.

The Israelites were reckoned as being in Eden like Adam and Eve were. However, even the privileged nation could only go to the East entrance to the Holy Place — which represented the Garden. Into the Holy Place (the Garden) only the Aaronic priests could go at the time of the morning and evening (the cool of the day) sacrifices. And even the priests were barred from entering “the midst of the Garden” — the Holy of Holies. They were only able to get close to the curtain that separated the outer Garden from its midst.

Only once in the year was anyone allowed to enter the Holy of Holies. On the Day of Atonement the High Priest, after many ceremonies of purification, and after he clouded the entire inner chamber with incense so that the mercy seat would be hidden from view, was able to push the curtain aside and briefly step into the inner sanctum. After he did his required duties, the curtain came down once again, and the Holy of Holies (the midst of the Garden) became closed for another year. This showed that while the tabernacle stood, God still reckoned barriers between Himself and mankind. ¹²

While Adam and Eve before they sinned were able to witness God’s presence, their sins caused them to be sent from the Garden (the Holy Place). Cain and his descendants were sent further East — they were expelled from Eden and went to Nod. But when the Flood came the Garden, the altar, Eden, etc. all disappeared from earth. Mankind now found itself without any physical area on earth in which God dwelt. That’s why the early descendants of Noah wanted to build a tower “to reach to heaven” (Genesis 11:1–9). They wanted to reach God, to have access to His heavenly presence. But God would not allow it. He had been angry with man for his ways, so He changed their languages and scattered them into all the earth. He sent all mankind into a condition of “Nod.”

Finally, God selected Abraham to be the father of a nation which would be responsible for leading man (in a step-by-step way) back to God. By the time of Moses, the Abrahamic family had now reached nationhood. Moses built the tabernacle, and Israel was brought back into Eden once again. A middle wall of partition was erected, however, that kept all Gentiles out. God even put restrictions on Israel. Even they were told to stay out of the Holy Place (representing the Garden). The Aaronic priests were allowed to go in. But no one was permitted in the Holy of Holies except the High Priest on the Day of Atonement — and even then he (the holiest man on earth, symbolically) was not allowed to see the mercy seat. All of this shows that God still had several barriers which kept many sections of mankind away from an intimate association with Him.

 

This estimation greatly limits the geographical boundaries so that any search for Cain’s city of Enoch in far away Sumer, or even in much closer Jericho, is doomed to failure.

Our attention must now turn rather to the region directly to the east of the Temple of Yahweh in Jerusalem itself.

Part Two: First Rudimentary ‘City’

 

“Cain dwelt thereafter in the Land of Nod. It was "on the east of Eden," an expression which seems to mean adjoining it. Therefore, it was not far away. Here in due time Cain's son Enoch was born. As Adam's family increased in Eden, and Cain lived in fear that "everyone" there sought his life for slaying Abel, he hit upon an idea. He enclosed and "fortified" his residence, for self protection. This is the primary meaning of the word, "city" in Hebrew”.

David J. Gibson

 

Scholars have suggested various regions for the biblical “Land of Nod” (Genesis 4:16): “Then Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and settled in the land of Nod, east of Eden”.

I earlier referred to both Mesopotamia and the region of Jericho, for instance.  

David Rohl, who has located the Garden of Eden as far east as the fertile Adji Chay valley in East Azerbaijan, Iran, has identified the Land of Nod with Noqdi, to the east of that valley.

http://davidrohl.blogspot.com.au/2012/02/road-to-paradise.html

We well-travelled moderns tend to think in global terms and vast distances, and for us, mention of a “city”, such as the entity that Cain built, conjures up the notion of something sizeable. However, the reality appears to have been different.

Not only had Cain not moved far away at all from the original home, the Land of Eden - which I have accepted to have been at the site of Jerusalem - but Cain’s “city” may have been a very small affair. I think that David J. Gibson may be right on track with the following observations of his (http://nabataea.net/eden8.html):

 

EDEN

Originally titled "The Land of Eden Located" 1964
by David J. Gibson

 

Chapter Eight Cain's City of Enoch   Now that we have arrived at what seems to be a reasonable opinion as to the location of the Land of Eden, the identification of the four river-heads and the approximate site of the Garden of Eden, it should be possible from this to know where to look for the next-door region, that is, the Land of Nod to which Cain went after he was revealed as the murderer of his brother Abel. The Scripture account states:   "And Cain went out from the presence of the Lord, and dwelt in the Land of Nod, on the east of Eden." --Genesis 4:16.   It is to be noted that "the presence of the Lord" was in Eden. Here, in the infancy of the human race the Lord's presence is connected with a place. Many think the place was the entry to the Garden, where the Cherubim stood with a Flaming sword. It is generally assumed that to this sacred spot the people brought their sacrifices, as we read of the offerings of Cain and Abel. At this place God spoke directly to the worshippers and the worshippers spoke to Him. From this place Cain was driven and cut off for life.   Cain dwelt thereafter in the Land of Nod. It was "on the east of Eden," an expression which seems to mean adjoining it. Therefore, it was not far away. Here in due time Cain's son Enoch was born. As Adam's family increased in Eden, and Cain lived in fear that "everyone" there sought his life for slaying Abel, he hit upon an idea. He enclosed and "fortified" his residence, for self protection. This is the primary meaning of the word, "city" in Hebrew. It did not at first denote size, but an enclosed, fortified place. Cain may merely have erected a wooden palisade about a few huts, but this was new, it was novel, it deserved a name. He named it after his son, "Enoch." The record runs:   "And he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch." --Genesis 4:17. [End of quote]   With this in mind, it may be futile to look for any archaeological remains of such a basic enclosure, given the ravages afterwards of the Noachic Flood. And Gibson has made this very point: “Now obviously the city which Cain builded and named after his son Enoch must have been destroyed by the Flood so that the physical entity itself probably disappeared, though it was subsequently re-founded”. In the same article, Gibson quotes Dr. Arthur C. Custance, who thought that the name of Cain’s city, “Enoch”, became a standard for subsequent cities:   The subsequent history of this city we do not know: but of the name of the city we know a very great deal. Without entering into too much detail regarding changes in pronunciation which occur in the course of the development of a language, it seems necessary to point out here that the sound represented by the letter N is often reproduced (strange as it may seem) as an R. The CH sound which terminates the name Enoch may be replaced by a K or G, or a GH. These changes are very common. When cuneiform was being deciphered for the first time, it soon became apparent that some of the cities mentioned in Biblical antiquity were still in existence as mounds and very often the natives in the area had preserved the original name in a modified form. A very important city in antiquity appeared under the name Uruk and a study of cuneiform soon revealed that this could equally well be pronounced Unuk, which was recognized at once by Sayce, and many others, as identical with the Biblical word, Enoch. One of the features of cuneiform writing was the use of what are called determinatives, signs which are placed before or after certain words to enable the reader to distinguish between names of cities and names of people, or names of deities and names of mortals, and so forth. Thus if a city happened to have a name which was also the name of a famous man, it was customary to use a determinative to let the reader know whether one was referring to the man or to the place. In the case of a man's name, the determinative was put in front of the word; in the case of a ... The interesting thing about the city Unuk, or Uruk, was that the determinative was omitted. It is the only instance in which this is so. The reason for this sole exception to the rule was not apparent at first until it was realized after considerable study of cuneiform texts that the word had come to mean the City par excellence, a special city, special for historical reasons. And as such, it was not considered to stand in need of any distinguishing~ determinative. The 'specialness' lay in the fact that it was the name of the first City ever to have been built, and as such it was the prototype of all others and came to be referred to, to all intents and purposes, as The City - in somewhat the same way that people tend in England to refer to London as 'The city'.  [End of quote]

 

John the Evangelist (I John 3:12) seems to suggest that Cain may have slain his brother Abel in a sacrificial type of fashion, by cutting his throat.

For, according to: http://biblehub.com/commentaries/1_john/3-12.htm

 

….

This was evidence of [Cain’s] devilish nature. The word for ‘slay’ (σφάζειν) is a link between this Epistle and Revelation (Revelation 6:4, &c. …), occurring nowhere else in N. T. Its original meaning was ‘to cut the throat’ (σφαγή), especially of a victim for sacrifice. In later Greek it means simply to slay, especially with violence.