122-(92) CHALDEAN CREATION- A CCOTJlSnT 



ing been made. The gods there do not make, they ar- 

 range. 



Ami arranged the stars, he caused the moon to beautify 

 the night, and to govern the month, while the sun is 

 represented as already existing, and nothing is said to 

 have been done to it. 



In the myth the year is established by the stars. In 

 Genesis it is the sun and moon that are to be for signs 

 and for seasons, and for days and years ; they are to be 

 the time-measures. In the myth it is the. stars. 



The story as to gates in the centre of the earth, and a 

 stair-case to the upper regions, belongs exclusively to the 

 myth. Nearly all the rest of the tablet has to do with 

 the moon and its office as. the month-maker. This was 

 to the Chaldeans the most important of the time-divi- 

 sions, and accordingly it is given the chief place in the 

 narrative. But in Genesis the month is not even men- 

 tioned. Whatever be the explanation of this omission, 

 it is hard to reconcile it with the theory that the story 

 in Genesis was taken from the Chaldeans.- 



The sixth tablet has not been found. 



The following is thought to be a fragment of the seventh 

 tablet : 



At that time the gods in their assemby created. * * 



They made suitable (Mr. Smith says "pleasing") the 

 strong monsters. 



They caused to come living creatures. * * 



Cattle of the field, beasts of the field, and creeping- 

 things of the field. 



They fixed for the living creatures * * * * * * 

 cattle and creeping things of the city they fixed * * * 

 the assembly of the creeping things, the whole which 

 were created * * * 



* * * which is the assembly of my family * * * 

 and the god Nin-si-ku (the lord of the noble face) joined 

 the two together * * * * to the assembly of the 

 creeping things I gave life * * * 



* * * the seed of Lakhamu I destroyed * * 



In this fragment is to be seen a slight verbal resem- 

 blance to Genesis where it says "cattle, beasts and creep- 

 ing things." But if the authors of these two accounts 

 were to speak of land animals at all, it is difficult to see 

 how they could have avoided that much of resemblance. 



