Mardon, son of Nimrod
Did Nimrod Have a Son?
In the previous section we learned about Nimrod’s conflict with Chedorlaomer that involved his son Mardon: “Making the most of Chedorlaomer's embarrassment, Nimrod led a host of seven thousand warriors against his former general. In the battle fought between Elam and Shinar, Nimrod suffered a disastrous defeat, he lost six hundred of his army, and among the slain was the king's son Mardon.”1 In this civil war of sorts between Shinar and Elam for control of the region, Nimrod’s son Mardon falls in battle.
The source of Legend of the Jews is from the Sefer HaYashar, a much later 16th century text added to the Legend of the Jews compilation of Midrash, which calls into question the origin of this story - and its application to the biblical Nimrod. Midrash often combines facts that were passed down, and at times incorrectly associate them with certain figures making it possible the “death of Marduk” was improperly inserted into the story.
This same Sefer HaYashar is where we get nearly all of the information about Mardon making it ultimately quite an obscure subject: And Mardon, the son of Nimrod, acted more wickedly yet than even his father, and whosoever heard of his actions, would say: From the wicked cometh wickedness. And since then the saying was in the land: From the wicked cometh wickedness; and it hath become an adage in the language of all men from that time up to this very day.2 Juxtaposed with this first reference to Mardon is actually the statement of Terah as one of Nimrod’s chief generals, immediately followed with the birth of Abram. There is the potential that the Sefer HaYashar is implying Abram was a sort of Mardon rival, as Terah was to Nimrod.
Later on in the Sefer HaYashar we get more support for the fact Mardon was evil just like his father: And Mardon, the son of Nimrod, was if possible, more wicked than his father, committing yet worse outrages and abominations than his father, and leading the sons of man unto total depravity. And since that time it has become a saying: From the wicked wickedness will come.3 If this is to be believed - and we view Mardon as a real figure - then Mardon also led the sons of man in some capacity.
This would seemingly be a contradiction if Mardon died during the civil war of Nimrod since Mardon never became king himself. Thus, this would likely show that ‘leading’ was not necessarily full rule over the earth, like Nimrod, but some level of widespread idolatry was led by Mardon as merely a prince and his associated temple cult. In fact, there is the implicit indication that it might not even be a direct ‘leading’ that Mardon performed, but rather the polytheistic practice spread by his cult and its increasing prominence is what ultimately why ‘he’ became so wicked.
A possible connection to Mardon is the Babylonian God known as ‘Marduk’ - actually the patron deity of the city of Babylon. Marduk was the son of Enki/Ea, primary creator god, who was himself one of the Annunaki - the collective pantheon of Mesopotamian gods. In the Sumerian period the planet Mercury was identified with Enki, but in Babylonian times it was none other than Nabu - the son of Marduk - who was associated with Mercury, giving rise to a connection between these two heavenly dynasties.4
More important for this connection is actually the Babylonian Esagila, a temple dedicated to Marduk, but also containing the shrines of Ea and Nabu which later become relevant to the story of Nebuchadnezzar. Associated with this temple complex was the Etemenanki, a towering seven story ziggurat also dedicated to Marduk that we will analyze more intensely in our section on the Tower of Babel. If Mardon was the son of Nimrod, who was Amraphel, who was potentially Hammurabi, then there is a very good likelihood that if Hammurabi had lost a son - whatever his name may be - he could have deified said son as the patron god of Babylon, forever enshrining his immortal legacy over the city.
Since Hammurabi is really the king who founded the city in it’s primary form, mostly remaining an unimportant location subservient to the cities of Elam and Larsa in previous periods, it’s very possible he would have such a massive influence over the cities developing culture. Certifying this cultural shift is Marduk's appearance in personal names from before the era being about 1%, while after the era of Hammurabi rising to 2%. Furthermore it was during the reign of Hammurabi that sanctuaries to Marduk were first built outside the city.5 This would put in context Mardon’s leading the world to wickedness despite never being king; if he became the god Marduk then the claim that Mardon became even more wicked than Nimrod could be taken as a sign of the later rise of prominence for the Marduk cult almost 800 years later in the Neo-Babylonian period.
The very opening of the Code of Hammurabi actually begins by stating Marduk was the son of Ea.6 Given this texts later preeminence it’s very possible the corruption of Ea into a King rather than being actually “God” from a Jewish perspective could have un-diefied both Ea and Marduk, placing Marduk as the son of the king.
An interesting archeological find related to the Code of Hammurabi was the first copy of the extant text discovered in Khuzestan, Iran. This province effectively underpins the modern borders of what was ancient Elam, containing the important Elamite and Persian city of Susa, known to later Jewish writers as Shushan from the Book of Esther. This city's ancient provenance, and knowledge to Jewish writers signals that its symbolic importance as the seat of various kingships was not unknown in the classical world.
Given that the stele containing the Code of a King of Babylon was found in an Elamite city; scholars theorize that the stele, now located at the Louvre, was carried off by Elamite King Shutruk-Nakhunte in the 12th century BCE.7 Quite the prolific stele capturer, Shutruk-Nakhunte helpfully carried off the much earlier ‘Victory Stele of Naram-Sin’ dated to circa 2250 BCE.8
It was actually under Shutruk’s reign that a short lived Elamite empire overthrew the Kassite royal dynasty of Babylon that the Elamites had steadily intermarried with, eventually completely conquering their previous territory. This only lasted roughly forty years, after which the not-famous Nebuchadnezzar I - different from the Nebuchadnezzar II nearly five hundred year's later - conquered Elam for the Babylonians accompanied by the Kassite chieftain Sitti-Marduk returning the Statue of Marduk (depicted in the picture) to the city as patron deity.9 This same statue is even relevant down to the time of Alexander the Great who is said to have restored the ‘crown’ of the statue.
One critical fact obvious from the name of the Kassite chieftain is the patron idol god of the Kassites was ‘Marduk’ and could be related to the root for Nimrod, ‘marad’, but is clearly related to Nimrod’s son Mardon known to us through the Sefer HaYashar.10 The Kassites were, afterall, the ‘sons’ of the earlier Babylonians under Hammurabi’s dynasty. In the Kassite period - helpfully containing that root ‘Cush’ linking them to the other Cushites - theophoric names containing Marduk grew to over 10%, and the local temple to Marduk in Nippur was firmly integrated and well established.11 This is a good mechanism by with “Mardon” could have spread wickedness over the earth and even after the time of Nimrod - in other words post-confusion at Babel - Mardon vis-a-vis the cult of Marduk was still spreading wickedness throughout the lands; potentially more so than his father Ea/Enki/Nimrod.
While not related to the son of Nimrod, there was actually a Marduk, rather than Mardon, known to Jewish writers. From II Kings “At [about] that time, Merodakh Bal’adan son of Bal’adan king of Babylon sent letters and a gift to Hizkiyyahu, for he had heard that Hizkiyyahu was sick.”12 we get a reference to a Merodakh, which was the proper form of the more colloquial ‘Marduk’. A further reference later in Kings is found to a supposed Merodakh - king of Babylon in this period: “Now it was in the thirty-seventh year of the exile of Yehoyakhin king of Judah, in the twelfth month, on the twenty-seventh of the month, that Ehvil-Merodakh, king of Babylon, in the year of his becoming king, lifted up the head of Yehoyakhin king of Judah, from the prison house.”13 His full title even includes the word ‘evil’ leading support for this widespread wickedness from the perspective of the Torah, but it’s strange given that within this story this Evil-Merodach (also called Amel-Marduk) actually freed the King of Judah from prison showing some kind of alliance between these figures.
The events are again mirroring that relationship between Terah-Nimrod, Abram-Mardon, and an overall spiritual rivalry between Judah and Babylon, but goes deeper when one realizes that Evil-Merodakh and his father Nebuchanezzar - himself arguably one of the most important foreign Kings in the entire Torah - came from the ‘Chaldean dynasty’ harkening back to Abram’s origin in the ‘Ur of the Chaldees’ - another name for Babylon. While not important for our relationship to Mardon, son of Nimrod, it is helpful to look at a mysterious conspiracy from the reign of Nebuchadnezzar for cyclical context.
There appears to be a sort of succession crisis, or competition, between Amel-Marduk and his brothers for rule; not exactly an unlikely occurrence in the ancient near east. From one text a sort of conspiracy arises involving both Nebuchadnezzar and Amek-Marduk, implicating one of the two of desecration of the peoples sacred temples: “Concerning [Nebu]chadnezzar they thought [. . .] his life were not treasured [by them . . . the people of] Babylon to Amēl-Marduk spoke, not [. . .] . . . "concerning the treasure of [the Esagila] and Babylon [. . ."] they mentioned the cities of the great gods [. . .] his heart over son and daughter will not let [. . .] family and tribe are [not . . .] in his heart. All that is full [. . .] his thoughts were not about the well-being of [the Esagila and Babylon . . .], with attentive ears he went to the holy gates [. . .] prayed to the Lord of lords [. . .] he cried bitterly to Marduk, the gods [..w]ent his prayer to [. . .].”14 The text is unclear who is being accused here, but the overall subtext is the commoners being upset with the ruler's treatment of their spiritual grounds. Within this text, we get an important clue that the accused “cried bitterly to Marduk” and prayed for potentially some type of forgiveness.
In a separate text from later in Nebuchadnezzar's reign there is another prayer from an imprisoned son named Nabu-shum-ukin who was imprisoned because of a conspiracy against him.15 According to famed Assyriologist Irving Finkel this very same Nabu-shum-ukin is the same person as Amel-Marduk, having changed his anime to “man of Marduk” (in a similar fashion to Jewish renaming) upon his release from prison as a reverence to the God whom he prayed toward. Jewish sources actually help clarify this story where we learn in Leviticus Rabbah that Amel-Marduk was imprisoned by his father alongside the captured King of Judah, Jeconiah, due to Amel-Marduk’s supposedly being declared king by a group of Babylonian officials while Nebuchadnezzar was away.16
What this later Amel-Marduk and earlier usages of Marduk as a patron deity of various dynasties shows is a mechanism by which Marduk, or Mardon, would have implanted himself into the Midrashic memory of the era, but in a way which the vast majority of early and canonical Midrashic stories never record this supposed son. It appears Mardon was less a specific historical figure, even if Nimrod/Amraphel had a son who died during his war with the Elamites.
Legends of the Jews 1:5:112, Louis Ginsberg 1909
Sefer HaYashar Noah 8
Sefer HaYashar Noach 18
Black, Jeremy; Green, Anthony (1992), Gods, Demons and Symbols of Ancient Mesopotamia: An Illustrated Dictionary, The British Museum Press, p. 133
Sommerfield, Walter (1987). "Marduk. A. Philologisch. I. In Mesopotamien". Reallexicon der Assyriologie.
Sommerfield, Walter (1982). Der Aufstieg Marduks: Die Stellung Marduks in der babylonischen Religion des zweiten Jahrtausends v. Chr. Butzon & Bercker. p. 13.
Scheil, Jean-Vincent (1902). Mémoires de la Délégation en Perse. Vol. 4: Textes élamites-sémitiques. Paris, France: Ernest Leroux. p. 12.
Mieroop, Marc Van De (2015). A History of the Ancient Near East, ca. 3000-323 BC. John Wiley & Sons. p. 199.
Kudurru BM 90858, BBSt 6 grant to LAK-ti Marduk.
Sefer HaYashar Noach 18
Sommerfield, Walter (1987). "Marduk. A. Philologisch. I. In Mesopotamien". Reallexicon der Assyriologie. p. 364.
II Kings 20:12
II Kings 25:27
Ayali-Darshan, Noga (2012). "A Redundancy in Nebuchadnezzar 15 and Its Literary Historical Significance". JANES. 32: 21–29.
ibid.
Weiershäuser, Frauke; Novotny, Jamie (2020). The Royal Inscriptions of Amēl-Marduk (561–560 BC), Neriglissar (559–556 BC), and Nabonidus (555–539 BC), Kings of Babylon p. 1.
Hmm, you may have noticed that my reconstruction does not use the writings of the Babylonian Jews at all, so Nimrod could not be contemporary with Chedorlaomer by any means! But I will keep alert for any possibly good information!