Old Babylonian Creation Texts (Creation in Ancient Mesopotamia, Part 2)

This is the second post in the series “Ideas of Origins and Creation in Ancient Mesopotamia.” The first post in the series, which detailed some methodological issues highlighted some bibliographical resources, may be found here. The third post will survey Neo-Bablylonian creation texts, while the fourth post will synthesize the findings and relate them to our understanding of the biblical creation texts.

My first post was discussed by a couple other bloggers. Duane over at Abnormal Interests agreed with my plan to present the texts in roughly chronological order using the date of the tablets rather than the various proposed dates of composition. Charles Halton at Awilum, however, noted (correctly) that the fact that the current extant texts of Sumerian mythology date to the Old Babylonian period does not mean that they were not written until this time. I just took the easiest way to present the material. 🙂

Old Babylonian Texts (ca. 2000 – 1600 BCE)

There are a number of creation texts from the Old Babylonian period. Most of these are Sumerian texts. The compositions are presented in random order. It should be noted that this section is by no means exhaustive. For quotations, the most recent scholarly translation of the texts is customarily utilised.

1. Creation of the Hoe
[Translations: Context of Scripture, 1.157; Kramer, Sumerian Mythology, 40, 51-53; Jacobsen, Treasures, 103.]

This brief Sumerian text (109 lines) is a didactic poem about how the hoe (i.e., pickaxe), which was important in both making bricks and agriculture, came into being through a divine act. It includes a long introduction that “is of prime significance for the Sumerian conception of the creation and organisation of the universe� (Kramer, Sumerian Mythology, 51). Unfortunately, nothing of any consequence is known about its background or authorship, which somewhat obscures the meaning of the text at a few points. More recently this composition has been interpreted as a satirical school text.

The story goes as follows: After Enlil had separated the heaven and the earth, he “bound up� the slash in the earth’s crust which resulted from the separation. Then Enlil fashions the hoe and uses it to break the hard top crust of the earth. The hard topsoil had thus far prevented the first humans, made below, from “breaking up through the ground� — much in the same way that hard topsoil will prevent germinating plants from sprouting. The passage concludes with a glowing eulogy in honour of the newly created hoe.

Here is an excerpt that refers to the creation of the world:

Not only did the lord who never changes his promises for the future make the world appear in its correct form,
— Enlil who will make the seed of mankind rise from the earth —
not only did he hasten to separate heaven from earth,
( …. ) and earth from heaven,
but, in order to make it possible for humans to grow “where the flesh sprouts,�
he first affixed the axis of the world in Duranki (Context of Scripture, 1.511).

2. Gilgamesh, Enkidu, and the Netherworld
[Translations: Kramer, Sumerian Mythology, 30-41; Dalley, Myths, 120-25]

A partial translation of this Sumerian tale, also known as “Gilgamesh and the Halub-tree,� is found appended to the end of the Gilgamesh Epic (Tablet 12). The original Sumerian composition describes primordial times when a single halub-tree grew beside the Euphrates. Inanna uprooted the tree and planted it in her garden. Later, when she wants to remove the tree, she could not because a snake had taken up residence in its trunk. The Sumerian hero, Gilgamesh, came and cut it down and made a chair and bed for Inanna, and in return she made a pukku and mekku for him. The pukku and the mekku eventually end up in the Underworld, and the story follows Gilgamesh’s attempts to regain them.

As with the last text, for the purposes of this study the prologue is especially important. It reads:

After heaven had been moved away from earth,
After earth had been separated from heaven,
After the name of man had been fixed;
After An had carried off heaven,
After Enlil had carried off earth, . . .

Again, as with the passage above, heaven and earth are first separated, humankind is created, and then An is given heaven while Enlil is given earth.

3. Emesh and Enten / Dispute Between Summer and Winter
[Translations: Context of Scripture, 1.183; Kramer, Sumerian Mythology, 49-51; Jacobsen, Treasures, 103.]

This piece of literature, fully entitled “Emesh and Enten: Enlil Chooses the Farmer-god,� has been reconstructed from fourteen separate tablets (only seven of which have been published), and is about 308 lines long. The text itself deals more with the organisation of the heaven and the earth, rather than cosmology. Gordon actually classifies it as an “Unilingual Sumerian Wisdom Disputation� (E. I. Gordon, “A New Look at the Wisdom of Sumer and Akkad,� Bibliotheca Orientalis 42 [1960]: 145). The composition begins with Enlil cohabiting with the hursag, the mountain range, and subsequently engendering Emesh, the god of summer, and Enten, the god of winter. The two gods get into a dispute concerning their relative value and roles, after which Enlil puts the animal world under the authority of Enten and vegetation under the authority of Emesh.

4. Enki and Sumer / Enki and the World Order
[Translations: Kramer, Journal of the American Oriental Society 54 (1934): 413; Jacobsen, Treasures, 85.]

This myth, pieced together from various tablets and fragments, deals exclusively with the ordering of the world and the establishment of “law� (me) on it by Enki. After an introductory hymn in praise of Enki and various temple rites are described, the composition goes on to tell of how Enki orders all things in Sumer, after which he orders things in other lands and assigns each of them their natural resources and characteristics. He then fills the Tigris and Euphrates with fish and water, institutes “rules� or “decrees� (mes) for the sea, appoints the winds to Ishkur’s command, and then causes the fields and animal life to flourish, as well as other acts of organisation. A god is made responsible for each phenomenon. Underlying this myth — and others — is the belief that each object of nature and feature of culture has its own me, “law,� intrinsic to it, as well as its own specific purpose in the working of the universe — both of which is a result of divine assignments.

5. Cattle and Grain
[Translations: Chiera, Sumerian Epics, 26; Kramer, Sumerian Mythology, 53, 72-73.]

The beginning of this poem tells the purpose for which humanity was created: to provide food for the gods. The actual myth concerns Lahar, the cattle-god, and his sister Ashnan, the grain-goddess. This brother and sister pair were created by the gods to provide food for the “Anunnaki,� the followers of An. This arrangement did not work out though, as the followers of An were not sated. In order to remedy this situation and provide food for the gods humankind “was given breath.�

Kramer also attempts to derive from the first line of this composition an idea of what the Sumerians pictured as the actual shape of heaven and earth. The first line reads: “After on the mountain of heaven and earth.â€? From this line Kramer concludes that “it is not unreasonable to assume . . . that heaven and earth united were conceived as a mountain whose base was the bottom of the earth and whose peak was the top of heaven.â€? Against this interpretation Jacobsen cogently argues that in the phrase “on the mountain of heaven and earthâ€? (hur-sag an-ki-bi-da-ke4) the genitive cannot be taken as an appositive genitive (with mountain = heaven and earth). It should rather be taken as a possessive genitive, expressing the notion that from a phenomenological perspective the mountain appears to touch both heaven and the earth (Jacobsen, “Sumerian Mythology: A Review Article,â€? in Toward the Image of Tammuz and Other Essays on Mesopotamian History and Culture [Harvard Semitic Series 21; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1970], 117-118).

6. Eridu Genesis
[Translations: Context of Scripture, 1.158; ANET 42-44; Jacobsen, “The Eridu Genesis,� JBL 100 (1981): 513-29; The Harps that Once, 145-50.]

This myth of beginnings is pieced together from three sources: two Sumerian texts dated ca. 1600 BCE, and a bilingual document (Sumerian with Akkadian translation) from the Neo-Babylonian era. The story-line of the reconstructed text includes the creation of humankind and animals, the founding of kingship, the building of the first great cities, and the Deluge. Unfortunately, due to lacuna the earlier fragments do not contain the account of creation of humankind. Nevertheless, in the older texts the creation of humankind is assumed, and as the creators An, Enlil, Enki, and Ninhursaga are mentioned:

When An, Enlil, Enki, and Ninḫursaga
fashioned the dark–headed (people),
they had made the small animals (that come up) from (out of) the earth
come from the earth in abundance
and had let there be, as befits (it), gazelles,
(wild) donkeys, and four–footed beasts in the desert (Context of Scripture, 514).

From numerous parallels in other myths, though, it seems very likely that only Enki and Ninhursaga actually took part in the creative process (Jacobsen, “Eridu Genesis,� 516).

7. Enki and Ninmah / The Creation of Humankind
[Translations: Context of Scripture, 1.159; Kramer, Sumerian Mythology, 69-72; Jacobsen, Treasures, 113-114; Harps, 151-66.]

This Sumerian tale is a prime anthropological text. It narrates the creation of humankind as well as including the motivation and the methods for doing so. It is not clear, however, whether the text as we have it was originally one or two separate and independent stories. Jacobsen thinks the latter because of what he considers major differences in setting and outlook between the two stories. The major differences that he mentions are: (1) Ninmah plays significantly different roles in the two sections. In the first she is a secondary figure, while in the second she has a much more prominent role; (2) in the first text humankind is engendered without the help of male semen, while in the second male semen is part of the process (Jacobsen, Harps, 151-153). Another way of looking at the text is offered by Kikawada. He construes the two parts of the myth as representing an archetypal ancient Near Eastern literary convention in which the creation of humankind is told in two parts. From his perspective any differences would be attributed to the typical movement from the general to the particular that is characteristic of the convention. The two explanations do not need to be considered mutually exclusive, in that even if the two parts of the myth were at one time totally distinct, an editor/redactor evidently put them together according to the convention (Isaac M. Kikawada, “The Double Creation of Mankind in Enki and Ninmah, Atrahasis I 1–351, and Genesis 1–2,� Iraq 45 [1983]: 43).

The first part of the story begins with how at the beginning of time the lower gods had to toil for their livelihood. The work proved to be too much for them and they actively rebelled and blamed Enki for their toil. Enki’s mother, Namma, informed her son about the turmoil and suggested that he create a substitute for them. Enki then remembered “Apsu’s [“the deeps�] fathering clay� and had his mother get a couple of womb-goddesses pinch off this clay for her, and then Namma gave birth to humankind—“[without] the sperm of a ma[le]� (Jacobsen, Harps, 156-157). The poem goes on to describe how Ninmah, “the exalted lady� (= Ninhursaga), and Enki got into a contest during a celebration in honour of the newly created humanity. The contest entailed Ninmah trying to create deformed humans that Enki could not find a place for in society. Enki prevails and the composition ends with a hymn praising Enki.

8. Enki and Ninsikila/Ninhursaga
[Translations: ANET 37-41; Jacobsen, Harps, 181-83.]

This composition is a good example of a text that deals with theogony — the engendering of the gods. Jacobsen contends, as with the above myth, that it is made up of two originally separate and independent stories. The first story consists primarily of an eulogy to the pristine land of Dilum. The second story basically narrates Enki’s sexual adventures. Enki’s first target is Nintur, whom he courts and eventually has to marry her to get his way with her and this produces Ninnisiga. Enki then proceeds to have intercourse with his daughter Ninnisiga, and then with his granddaughter, and then great-granddaughter, etc. Finally Enki’s real wife, Ninhursaga, has enough of his fooling around and warns Uttu — the next in line — about him. Enki eventually takes Uttu by force, but unbeknownst to Enki, Ninhursaga removes the semen from Uttu’s womb and plants it. Enki comes across the plants and eats then — making him pregnant. As he cannot give birth, Ninhursaga places him in her vulva and gives birth to eight deities — four gods and four goddesses.


Love Poetry from the Song of Songs

Happy Valentine’s Day!

Here’s some biblical love poetry for any young men who may be out there. Whisper these words into the ears of your Valentine’s Day date and you will be guaranteed a second date! … Really!

(Image from an old Wittenburg Door)

How beautiful you are, my love,
how very beautiful!
Your eyes are doves
behind your veil.
Your hair is like a flock of goats,
moving down the slopes of Gilead.
Your teeth are like a flock of shorn ewes
that have come up from the washing,
all of which bear twins,
and not one among them is bereaved.
Your lips are like a crimson thread,
and your mouth is lovely.
Your cheeks are like halves of a pomegranate
behind your veil.
Your neck is like the tower of David,
built in courses;
on it hang a thousand bucklers,
all of them shields of warriors.
Your two breasts are like two fawns,
twins of a gazelle,
that feed among the lilies….
Your lips distill nectar, my bride;
honey and milk are under your tongue;
the scent of your garments is like the scent of Lebanon
Your belly is a heap of wheat…
Your nose is like a tower of Lebanon,
overlooking Damascus (Song 4:1-5, 11; 7:2, 4)

For a more serious look at the imagery of the Song of Songs, you can check out my post from last Valentine’s day: “The Most Excellent of Songs (The Challenge of Translating Metaphors).


Ultimate Bible Quiz

Gee… I’m so smart! I took the “Ultimate Bible Quiz” and got 100%! (Of course, as a professor of biblical studies, if I took the test and didn’t get 100% I probably wouldn’t advertise it on my blog!!)

You know the Bible 100%!

 

Wow! You are awesome! You are a true Biblical scholar, not just a hearer but a personal reader! The books, the characters, the events, the verses – you know it all! You are fantastic!

Ultimate Bible Quiz

(HT to my student who just started a blog: Scotteriology)


“Lord” in the NT and in Modern Translations

David Ker over at Lingamish has a series of posts on the Greek word kurios, “Lord” (κύÏ?ιος) in the New Testament. The first post introduces the series, while the second examines the relationship between the kurios and the slave. The third entry in the series provides some different definitions and English glosses of the term, while the fourth looks at the word’s cultural context.

That brings me to David’s fifth post where he is asking for our input. Specifically he is asking for readers to share examples of how kurios is translated in Bible translations around the world. So, if you know some other languages, I encourage you to head on over and share your knowledge!


Goldingay on Psalms and Other Commentary Updates

goldingay_psalms.jpgI’ve added a few new commentaries in the Wisdom & Psalms section of my OT Commentary Survey.

One commentary that I want to single out among the updates is John Goldingay’s superb volume on Psalms 1-41:

I have always liked John Goldingay’s scholarship and this volume on the Psalter is no exception. Goldingay interacts with the best scholarship on the Psalms and presents it in a warm and engaging style that is both academically sound and theologically relevant. As such his commentary is ideal for pastors and Christian scholars and laypeople will also find it extremely accessible. I highly recommend it!

Another new commentary on the Psalms is in the popular Believers Church Bible Commentary:

There is also a new commentary on Proverbs by biblical studies doyen Tremper Longman:

Hot off the press is a new commentary on Ecclesiastes that looks at the reception history of the book:

For more listings and evaluations of commentaries on other biblical books, see my Old Testament Commentary Survey.


Forthcoming Commentaries on Genesis

In a comment on my previous post on commentaries on the book of Genesis, John Hobbins of Ancient Hebrew Poetry fame noted the value of Skinner’s ICC volume on Genesis (and he’s right, I should have at least listed it!). He also mentioned Ronald Hendel’s forthcoming commentary on Genesis for the Anchor Bible series (replacing Speiser). If Hendel’s work The Text of Genesis 1-11 (Oxford University Press, 1998; Buy from Amazon.ca or Amazon.com) is any indication, his Anchor Bible commentary will be the top critical commentary available on Genesis for years to come (or at least until Clifford’s Hermeneia volume is published!).

Here is a listing of other forthcoming commentaries on the book of Genesis:

  • Bill Arnold. New Cambridge Bible Commentary (Cambridge University Press). A popular series based on the NRSV aimed at Pastors and laypeople. This volume is still in progress and won’t be published for a few years.
  • David Baker. Apollos Old Testament Commentary (Apollos/InterVarsity Press). A semi-popular series based on the author’s own translation of the Hebrew text. This volume is several years down the road.
  • Erhard Blum. Historical Commentary on the Old Testament (Peeters). The title of this series is a bit misleading if you are expecting a history of interpretation. The series is more of a historical-critical commentary aimed at scholars and ministers.
  • Richard Clifford. Hermeneia (Fortress). This is one of the premier critical commentaries available in English (and it’s beautifully typeset). If Clifford’s volume on The Creation Accounts in the Ancient Near East and in the Bible (Catholic Biblical Association, 1994; Buy from Amazon.ca or Amazon.com) is any indication, this should be a very good critical commentary. It is at least three years from publication.
  • Blackwell Bible Commentaries (Blackwell). This series looks more at the reception history of the book under study. As such it is of primary interest to scholars and teachers. This one was assigned to Danna Fewell and Gary Phillips, but they have since dropped out and I don’t think the commentary has been reassigned yet (at least there is no indication on the Blackwell site)
  • Duane Garrett. Kregel Expository Commentary on the Old Testament (Kregel; note the title of the series is still tentative). This is a conservative evangelical series geared for pastors and laypeople. Garrett is author of Rethinking Genesis, The Sources and Authorship of the First Book of the Pentateuch (Baker Book, 1991; Buy from Amazon.ca or Amazon.com), which I reviewed a number of years back. The commentary is at least two years from completion.
  • Ronald S. Hendel. Anchor Bible (2 volumes, Doubleday). The new volumes in this series are excellent critical commentaries. The first volume on Genesis 1-11 should be available in 2008 if everything goes according to schedule.
  • Theodore Hiebert. Abingdon Old Testament Commentary (Abingdon). A popular series aimed at pastors and laypeople.
  • Kathleen M. O’Connor. Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary (Smyth & Helwys). This is a unique series aimed at pastors and laypeople that includes insightful sidebars, fine art visuals, and a CD-Rom containing all the text and images of the volume in a searchable format. This volume will be a while since she is just getting underway with it.
  • Russell R. Reno. Brazos Theological Commentary on the Bible (Brazos/Baker). A series designed to serve the church; appropriate for pastors, teachers, and laypeople. This volume may be available in late 2008.
  • John H. Sailhamer. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary Rev. (Zondervan). This volume is scheduled to be released in June 2008.

Most of these commentaries are a number of years off. The only ones which I am not sure of any potential publication date are the Hiebert and Blum volumes. So it looks like we’ll have to make due with what we already have!
Is anyone aware of any other forthcoming commentaries on Genesis?


The Slavonic Pseudepigrapha Project

I received notice today of an interesting online project dedicated to the Second Temple Jewish literature preserved in the Slavic milieux. The Slavonic Pseudepigrapha Project is developed by scholars from the Theology Department at Marquette University (Milwaukee, USA).

The resource provides original manuscripts, translations, and extensive bibliographies to the following pseudepigraphical materials preserved in Slavonic language, including:

  • Slavonic Life of Adam and Eve
  • Adam Octipartite
  • 2 Enoch
  • Sataniel Text
  • Apocalypse of Abraham
  • Testament of Abraham
  • The Ladder of Jacob
  • Joseph and Aseneth
  • Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs
  • Testament of Job
  • Life of Moses
  • Apocryphal Fragments about David, Solomon, and Elijah
  • Ascension of Isaiah
  • 3 Baruch
  • 4 Baruch
  • Pseudo-Danielic Fragments
  • Apocalypse of Zosimus
  • Ahiqar
  • The Word of the Blessed Zerubabel
  • The Josippon
  • Palaea Historica
  • Interpretive Palaea
  • Palaea Chronographica

This looks to be a great resource for those interested in the pseudepigrapha.

While I am on the topic of the pseudepigrapha, another excellent resource is the SBL sponsored, Online Critical Pseudepigrapha.


Commentaries on Genesis

westermann_genesis.jpgI am teaching an undergraduate course on the book of Genesis this semester, so I thought I would put together a post on what I consider some of the better commentaries on this foundational book of the Bible. I have focused on commentaries in English and have made recommendations for scholars, teachers and preachers, as well as students and lay people.

There are many good commentaries on the book of Genesis, though with Genesis — perhaps more so than other books — the critical commentaries can focus extensively on matters of historical-criticism. While this may be valuable for questions of authorship and the development of a book like Genesis, it doesn’t help with the interpretation of the final canonical form of the text. That being said, Claus Westermann‘s three-volume commentary is excellent, both for its engagement with the critical questions and matters of interpretation (and Speiser to a lesser degree). I also find Nahum Sarna‘s commentary to not only be beautifully typeset, but also rich in its dealing with the Hebrew text and Jewish interpretation. wenham_genesis.jpgFrom a more evangelical perspective, Gordon Wenham‘s masterful volumes are second to none. While Wenham is more concerned with literary and theological issues, he also engages most critical issues with scholarly responsibility. As such, Wenham is my choice for best overall commentary on Genesis.

sarna_genesis.jpgOther good critical commentaries include Coats (somewhat limited by the nature of the FOTL series) and von Rad (a classic tradition-history commentary albeit somewhat sparse), while Brodie‘s literary analysis is interesting to say the least. For a conservative Jewish perspective on the opening chapters of Genesis check out Cassuto. In addition, for those interested in the history of the interpretation of this book, the volumes in the Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture by Louth and Sheridan are worthy of careful perusal. Finally, Hermann Gunkel‘s ground breaking commentary on Genesis has been recently translated into English by Mark Biddle and is full of many insights for the assiduous reader.

hamilton_genesis.jpgFor pastors and teachers, there are ample commentaries to choose from. Brueggemann, Cotter, Fretheim, Gangel, Hamilton, Mahthews, Ross, and Waltke are all good, though I would probably go with Hamilton if you are looking for one solid commentary written from an evangelical perspective. If you want a broader perspective, then both Brueggemann and Fretheim are excellent. While not a full commentary, Alter‘s translation is refreshing and his comments are also quite insightful.

walton_genesis.jpgMore popular-level commentaries include Gowan, Hartley, Janzen, Kidner, Roop and Walton. I have used Roop as a textbook in the past and have quite liked its style and theological substance. I also find the ITCs by Gowan and Janzen quite insightful. And Kidner, of course, always provides solid exposition from an evangelical point of view. I have to say, however, that I have been nothing but impressed with John Walton‘s commentary in the NIV Application Commentary Series. While he may be a bit more on the conservative side of the spectrum, his knowledge and engagement of the ancient Near Eastern literary, cultural, and historical background to the book are evident on every page. I highly recommend his commentary for pastors, students, and laypeople alike.

Here is an (almost) exhaustive listing of commentaries on the book of Genesis in English:

For more listings and evaluations of commentaries on other biblical books, see my Old Testament Commentary Survey.


I’ve been Blurbed!

Sorry for the self-indulgence, but this is way too cool. I just noticed from Kevin Wilson’s Blue Cord blog that I have been “blurbed” on the back cover of a new edition of Mary Douglas‘s In the Wilderness: The Doctrine of Defilement in the Book of Numbers (Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series, 158; Oxford University Press, 2001; Buy from Amazon.ca or Amazon.com).

As far as I am aware, this is my first blurb.

in_the_wilderness_sm.jpg

Here is a close-up of the quote:

wilderness_blurb.jpg

The blurb is from a review I did of the first edition of the book in the Toronto Journal of Theology back in 1994. I imagine it would be fine to reprint the review here, but I should check with the journal first.


And God said, “Let there be Limericks” (Genesis as a Limerick)

I’m teaching an undergraduate course on the book of Genesis this semester. One of the first assignments I require students to complete is to read through the book of Genesis (preferably in one sitting) and write one or two brief yet descriptive sentences for each chapter of the book. I have a number of different reasons behind getting students to do this assignment, perhaps my biggest reason is to get students into the biblical text right at the beginning of the semester. This exercise also provides students with an outline of the book which they can use as a study aid throughout the semester.

While I always encourage creativity, most of the assignments are well done, but pretty straightforward. That being said, a number of years ago when I was teaching a course at Wycliffe College in Toronto, one of my students, Joseph Walker, went far beyond any expectations and wrote his chapter summaries as an extended limerick. Joseph is now the rector at St Timothy’s Anglican Church here in Edmonton (he kindly gave me permission to share the limrick with you). Enjoy.

1 The God who created the world,
2 on this planet humanity hurled,
3 with a snake in the grass,
4 to tempt family en masse,
5 Adam’s generations unfurled.

6 They were wicked (no need to convince!),
7 God said “Get in the ark, I’ll evince
8 with a great Holy Wash,
9 my covenant, gosh
10 and three sons will come out in the rinse.

11 They could not reach heaven by skill
12 so God thought “Someday I’ll fulfill
13 a promise of lands
14 where Melchizedek stands
15 if Abe keeps my covenant still.�

16 So Ishmael resulted from quibbling
17 but the promise of “heir� kept on nibbling.
18 After Sodom’s destruction,
19 and old Lot’s instruction,
20 tell us, is she or ain’t she your sibling?

21 Finally Sarah and Abe had a son,
22 (by sacrifice almost undone!)
23 and then Sarah died
24 and young Isaac applied
25 to the birthing of two, not just one!

26 Now Isaac, his father did imitate,
27 and a strange way of blessing initiate,
28 on Jake’s dreamy head,
29 who then thought instead,
30 of marriage (and family) to consummate.

31 At Laban’s striped flock he did point,
32 his new name put him all out of joint,
33 his bro’ burst his bubble,
34 his kids got in trouble,
35 and all their 12 names we have loint.*

36 Esau’s descendants were listed by name,
37 Joe’s brothers did wrong, to their shame,
38 what with Judah’s romances,
39 and Pot’s wife’s advances,
40 some hard luck to Joseph soon came.

41 Yet Joseph was favored with power,
42 and his brothers before him did cower,
43 though he tricked like a thief,
44 to his brothers’ relief,
45 his father with presents he’d shower.

46 So Israel left his vicinity,
47 in Egypt they were blessed by Divinity
48 and the Patriarchs passed
49 on their blessings, at last
50 and the Covenant went on to infinity

*With apologies to the Brooklyn / east side N.Y. accent

If you liked this sample of his writing, you should check out Joseph’s blog, Felix Hominum.