that the tablet to which it belonged was the second of a series,
and that this series was not that of the Epic of Gilgamish, and from
this we learn that in B.C. 2000 the Legend of the Deluge did not form
the XIth Tablet of the Epic of Gilgamish, as it did in the reign of
Ashur-bani-pal, or earlier. The Sumerian version is equally important,
though from another point of view, for the contents and position of
the portion of it that remains on the half of the tablet mentioned
above make it certain that already at this early period there were
several versions of the Legend of the Deluge current in the Sumerian
language. The fact is that the Legend of the Deluge was then already
so old in Mesopotamia that the scribes added to or abbreviated the
text at will, and treated the incidents recorded in it according to
local or popular taste, tradition and prejudice. There seems to be
no evidence that proves conclusively that the Sumerian version is
older than the Semitic, or that the latter was translated direct
from the former version. It is probable that both the Sumerians
and the Semites, each in their own way, attempted to commemorate an
appalling disaster of unparalleled magnitude, the knowledge of which,
through tradition, was common to both peoples. It is, at all events,
clear that the Sumerians regarded the Deluge as an historic event,
which they were, practically, able to date, for some of their tablets
contain lists of kings who reigned before the Deluge, though it must
be confessed that the lengths assigned to their reigns are incredible.

It is not too much to assume that the original event commemorated
in the Legend of the Deluge was a serious and prolonged inundation
or flood in Lower Babylonia, which was accompanied by great loss of
life and destruction of property. The Babylonian versions state that
this inundation or flood was caused by rain, but passages in some
of them suggest that the effects of the rainstorm were intensified