gnizing that two
fundamentally different accounts of a deluge have been worked
up into a single story in the Bible."[171:1]

The importance of the Babylonian Deluge story does not rest in anything
intrinsic to itself, for there are many deluge stories preserved by
other nations quite as interesting and as well told. It derives its
importance from its points of resemblance to the Genesis story, and from
the deduction that some have drawn from these that it was the original
of that story--or rather of the two stories--that we find imperfectly
recombined in Genesis.

The suggestion of Jean Astruc that "two fundamentally different
accounts of a deluge have been worked up into a single story in the
Bible" has been generally accepted by those who have followed him in the
minute analysis of the literary structure of Holy Scripture; and the
names of the "Priestly Narrative" and of the "Jehovistic Narrative"
have, for the sake of distinctness, been applied to them. The former is
so called because the chapters in Exodus and the two following books,
which treat with particular minuteness of the various ceremonial
institutions of Israel, are considered to be by the same writer. The
latter has received its name from the preference shown by the writer for
the use, as the Divine name, of the word _Jehovah_,--so spelt when given
in our English versions, but generally translated "the LORD."

There is a very close accord between different authorities as to the way
in which Genesis, chapters vi.-ix., should be allotted to these two
sources. The following is Dr. Driver's arrangement:--

PRIESTLY NARRATIVE. | JEHOVISTIC NARRATIVE.
|
Chap. Verse. | Chap. Verse.
Genesis vi. 9-22. |Genesis vii. 1-5.
vii. 6. | 7-10.
11. | 12.
13-16a. | 16b.
17a. | 17b.
18-21. | 22-23.
24. | viii. 2b-3a.
viii. 1-2a. | 6-12.
3b-5. | 13b.
13a. | 20-22.
14-19. |
ix. 1-17. |

The Priestly narrative therefore tells us the cause of the Flood--that
is to say, the co