6. She launched me in the river, which did not drown me.
7. The river carried me, to Akki, the water-carrier, it brought me.
8. Akki, the water-carrier, in tenderness of bowels, lifted me.[469]
And now let us compare the Bible narrative in Exodus:
And when she [Moses' mother] could not longer hide him, she took for him an ark of bulrushes, and daubed it with slime and with pitch, and put the child therein, and she laid it in the flags by the river's brink.[470]
Mr. G. Smith then continues:
The story is supposed to have happened about 1600 b.c., rather earlier than the supposed age of Moses; and, as we know that the fame of Sargon reached Egypt, it is quite likely that this account had a connection with the events related in ExodusII, for every action, when once performed, has a tendency to be repeated.
But now that Professor Sayce has had the courage to push back the dates of the Chaldean and Assyrian Kings by two thousand years more, Sargon must have preceded Moses by 2,000 years at the least. The confession is suggestive, but the figures lack a cypher or two.
Now, what is the logical inference? Most assuredly, that which gives us the right to say that the story told of Moses by Ezra had been learned by him while at Babylon, and that he applied the allegory told of Sargon to the Jewish lawgiver. In short, that Exodus was never written by Moses, but was re-fabricated from old materials by Ezra.
And if so, then why should not other symbols and glyphs far more crude in their phallic element have been added by this adept in the later Chaldean and Sabæan phallic worship? We are taught that the primeval faith of the Israelites was quite different from that which was developed centuries later by the Talmudists, and before them by David and Hezekiah.