Radau - The Creation-Story of Genesis I, A Sumerian Theogony and Cosmogony

THE HISTORY OF RELIGION ARTICLES RECENTLY PUBLISHED IN

"THE MONIST" AND BABEL AND BIBLE. A

OPEN COURT"

'«THE

Lecture Delivered Before the German Emperor. Pro-

fusely Illustrated from the Best Assyriological Sources. By Dr. Frikdrich Delitzsch, Professor in the University of Berlin. Translated by Thomas J.

Reprinted in Book Form.

McCoRMACK.

50 Cents net

(2s. 6d.).

THE MYSTERIES OF MITHRA.

History of Their Origin. Their DisseminaTheir Doctrines and Liturgy, Their Illustrated. Struggle with Christianity, etc. By Franz Cumont, Professor in the University of Ghent. Belgium. Translated by Thomas J. McCormack. Now Appearing in Serial Form in The Of en Court, Beginning with February, 1902. Price per Number, 10 Cents (6d.). Soon to be published in book-form. tion

and Influence

in the

Roman Empire,

THE FIRST PHILOSOPHER.

Interpretation and Translation of a Fragment

of Egyptian Hieroglyphic Writing of the Sixteenth Century Before Christ, Expounding the System of Thought of a Meraphite Priest that Foreshadows

By James H. Breasted, Professor in the Univerthe Philosophy of Greece. The Montst, April, 1902. Price, 50 Cents (2s. 6d.). sity of Chicago.

EGYPTIAN RELIGIOUS CONCEPTIONS. By of Articles to be Published in

A

Dr. Paul Carus.

Series

The Open Court,

BABYLONIAN AND HEBREW VIEWS OF MANS FATE AFTER DEATH. By Dr. Paul Carus.

The Of en Court, Vol. XV., No.

6.

10 cents (6d.).

THE FAIRY-TALE ELEMENT

IN THE BIBLE. Babylonian Cosmogony. The Cuneiform Tablets of the Marduk Myth. Yahveh's Fight With the Dragon. The Two Hebrew Creation Stories. Deluge Legends. Worship of the Queen of Heaven. Song of the Well. Etc, Etc. By Dr. Paul Carus. Tlu Monist

and July, 1901. Price, 50 Cents (2s. 6d.) Each. These Also Contain Articles on the Resurrection of Christ, by the Rev. William Weber on the Earliest Chapter of History (Babylonia and and on the Authenticity of the Too Teh Assyria), by Prof. James A. Craig for April

Two Numbers

;

;

King, by Dr. Paul Carus.

A STUDY OF JOB AND THE JEWISH THEORY OF SUFFERING.

THE POLYCHROME of Breslau.

BIBLE. By Prof. Carl Heinrich Cornill,

The Monist,

Vol. X., Nos.

THE TWO ACCOUNTS OF HAGAR. sity of Berlin.

The Monist,

i

and

3.

50 cents each

3.

50 cents

4.

University

(2s. 6d.).

By Prof. Hermann Gunkel,

Vol. X., No.

By

The Monist, Vol. IX., No.

Prof. James A. Craig, University of Michigan. 50 cents (2s. 6d.).

Univer-

(2s. 6d.).

THE CROSS AND

ITS SIGNIFICANCE. Also Essays on: (i) The Cross in Central America (2) The Cross Among the North American Indians ; (3) Plato and the Cross (4) The Cross of Golgotha (5) Staurolatry, or The Hi»^ By Dr. Paul Carus. Tlu tory of Cross Worship and (6) The Crucifix. 10 cents (6d.) each. Of>en Court, Vol. XIII., Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, and 11. ;

;

;

;

THE OPEN COURT PUBLISHING COMPANY 324 Dearborn Street, Chicago

LONDON

:

Kbgan Paul, Trench, TrObner &

Co., Ltd.

The

Creation-Story of Genesis

Stimerian Theogony

and Cos77iogony

By

DR,

HUGO RADAV

CHICAGO THE OPEN COURT PUBLISHING COMPANY LONDON Ktgan Paul, Trench, TrUbner *• {>„ U^l.

L

*OAN STAgc

Xz

TKT tiBRARV OF CONGRESS, AUG. 15

1902

CUASS CL XXa Ma

Copyright by

The Open Court Publishing 1902.

firK

Co.

!

PREFACE. npHE •*•

Right Rev. D. S. Tattle, Bishop of Missouri, in delivering a sermon be-

fore a

The more and

cows!

will yield

life,

the people contribute

"You must

more milk they

study

it,

more we draw from

the

—both for the soul and

the brain

also expressed

by Dr. Martin Luther who compared the Bible

and

fruitful tree.

The more and

we pluck

pluck the fruits."

If there are

to milk," nor does

the idea

a beautiful

more

it

will

everybody know "how to

may become

some who thus

fell

was the

dangerous,

from the

— we may

"the plucker"

dare to say that

not,

on the contrary, the plucker's own carelessness, his own fault ? Exactly so

it is

it

with the

'•

and carelessly applied

however,— for

higher critics! it,

A

Criticism.'^

to the Bible, will

remain undaunted,

will

And how many

critic."

UNDERSTAND

it

tree's fault that

Higher

there are

true higher critic's

—Understand

ical

methods as given by

The

Bible

—

fruits

aim

historically.

''history.**

when thus "read

body ever dreamed,

it

from the

fall

tree

who

tree while trying to pluck its fruit,

will

Bible,

true

done carelessly and thoughtlessly, the "milking" as well as

If

the "plucking of the fruit"

a " higher

it,

,

But not everybody knows " how

lessly

to

the

its fruit,

give us.

is

The same

!

was

the oftener

milk the

will give."

The same

the case exactly.

fits

The more we

milk of

:

make

the oftener you milk them, the

of the study of the Bible. it

to

Church," remarked.:

Although somewhat vulgar, yet the simile

more

"How

body of theological students on

liberally towards the support of the

Higher

down?

Was

it

criticism, if thought-

and must be hurtful: not for the

—but

for

who want is

fell

to

him who

aspires to be

be what they cannot be;

not to destroy the Bible, but to

Thus he

will

apply the higher

criti-

In history the divine unll is carried out.

in the light of history" will yield fruits of

which no-

ripened in ages past and saved for our present times to

gather.

tndeed, the Bible

been engrafted on

it

is

a wonderful tree with manifold fruits

from time

other trees raised on foreign

to time

soil.

by

dififerent

gardeners,

These gardeners belonged

:

tiny shoots have

—shoots taken

not surrounded by a "Chinese Wall," nor were they blind, deaf, or dnmb.

had eyes and saw, ears and beard, mouths and spoke.

from

to a people that

And what

was

They

they saw and

PREFACE.

VI

beard and spoke they deposited

in the Bible.

the " higher critic" to trace these

from whence they were taken and by

And

if

we

itic soil,

Thus

whom and

find that this or that little shoot

we

wonderful beauty

to

have traced with the help of

native soil

is

?

Shall

not,

becomes

at once the task of

at

what time they were engrafted.

was taken from North or Sonth

from Egyptian, Babylonian, or Persian

its

it

shoots to their original soil and to inquire

little

soil,

—does

on the contrary, admire

"little clay tablets"

it all

the

more ? And

one of these tiny shoots

The greater

part of the following pages apjjeared in It

was found necessary

The Monist

for July, 1902

in order to explain certain "at-

tributes " of the gods to touch shortly

upon the Sumerian cosmology.

Old Arabian pantheon has been taken

in

by way of "corroboration."

Kosmolog^ie and Jastrow's Religion of Babylonia to the author,

T.

J.

many

to its

the joy of the author.

(Vol. XII., pp. 568-625).

It

Israel-

the tree lose thereby

Also the Jensen's

and Assyria were not accessible

and therefore could not be quoted.

only remains for the author to thank most cordially Dr. Paul

McCormack,

editors of

Cams and

The Open Court and The Monist, not only

valuable suggestions and corrections

but also for the promptness with which

it

when preparing

the

MS.

for the press,

has been printed.

Hugo Radau. Waterloo,

III., June, 1902.

Mr.

for their

THE CREATION-STORY OF GENESIS

I.

A SUMERIAN THEOGONY AND COSMOGONY.

MYTHS

IN

THE BIBLE~is a

subject which has recently re-

ceived the greatest attention from Biblical scholars. fessors

GunkeP and Zimmern* have

various aspects, and Dr. Paul that hardly anything

The

is left

Cams' has discussed

it

is

its

so thoroughly

which has not been adverted

following investigation

Pro-

investigated the subject in

to

by them.

based upon a direct study of the an-

though the results reached b^

my

predecessors and a thorough acquaintance with their method of

in-

cient Babylonian inscriptions,

presupposed here.

vestigation

is

however,

may be

I

For the sake

of completeness,

permitted to recapitulate in a few words the

chief data brought out

here to the myth of the

by first

their investigations, confining myself

chapter of Genesis.

Gen. i. must have contained the soThe called Jahveh-Tehom myth found in other parts of the Old Testament. This myth represents Jahveh as fighting with a dragon, called either Rahab or Leviathan or serpent. Jahveh overcomes original account of

this dragon, divides

it

and forms out

of the

two halves **the waters

that are above the firmament" and **the waters that are below the

firmament."

The

Biblical

dragon has been identified with the

' Schdffung und Chaos in Urzeit und Endzeit. G&ttingen, 1895. Also his new Commentary on Genesis (the Introduction has been published by the Open

Court Publis]yng Co., Chicago).

'"Biblische und Babylonische Urgeschichte " in Heft 3. Leipzig, 190X. *

Z901.

"The FairyTale Element

in the Bible," in

Dtr

alte Orient, Vol II.,

The Monist

for April

and

July,

THE CREATION-STORY OF GENESIS

2

I.

Babylonian Tiamat, a monster which was overcome by the god

Marduk, the god

of light,

and which was likewise divided

in twain.

Further the fight of Marduk with Tiamat was recognised as the original of the fight of

Jahveh with Tehom

:

a fight of the light

The darkness having been overcome by the became possible. The following striking sim-

against the darkness.

the creation

light,

ilarities

were found to

exist

between the Biblical and Babylonian

myths^:

According to both traditions there was

in the

beginning noth-

ing but the chaos under the form of the primeval ocean

was thought that

That

in

it is

Gen.

to be a terrible monster.

Tehom was

this

i.

simply called

Tehom

this

it

The Babylonian name

considered a mythical being

Tehom and

is

treated as a

of

is still

proper name*'

**

In both myths

not ha-Tehom.

represented as a dragon or serpent, either with one

is

or several heads, presumably seven as in Revelation, chapters

and

was

monster was Tiamat, the Biblical Tehom or Leviathan-Rahab.*

evident from the fact that the word

—

—

This ocean, when personified

having been created.

eternal, not

xii.

xiii.

Besides the chief monster there appear in both traditions others: its helpers.

In the Babylonian creation-story there are opposed to

these monsters the

great gods"

among whom Marduk

takes the

Also in the Biblical account there seem

and foremost place-

first

to

**

have been, besides Jahveh, other divine beings, as

is still

evident

**Let us make man." In the Babylonian account i. 26: Marduk who takes up the fight with Tiamat; in the Biblical account the same role is played by Jahveh. Both are armed with Marduk kills with his sword Tiamat, Jahveh Rahaba sword. Leviathan-Tehom. The *' helpers" of Tiamat are treated more kindly by Marduk, precisely as is done with the helpers of Rahab

from Gen. it is

According

by Jahveh.

to

both myths the monster

cording to the Babylonian account the lower waters. *

See

Zimmem,

:

into the

The upper waters

I.e., p. 15.

is

divided

are kept back

Gunkel, Commentary,

p.

85

f.

by a kind Carus, The

ntst, April, 190X, p. 428.

'V

Ixxxix.

9

ff.

V Ixxiv.

13

ff.

Is.

li.

9

ff.

Job

— ac-

upper waters and into

xxvi. 12

ff.;

\x.

13

ff.

of

Mo-

THE CREATION-STORY OF GENESIS by watchmen, who are *'not

barrier and

According

I..

3

to let out the waters."

Jahveh divides the Tehom, the

to the Biblical account

primeval ocean, also into two parts, by putting a firmament be-

Thus the Tehom came

tween them.

restrial ocean, or as

it

said in the Bible,

is

above the firmament" and

Even

ament."

'*

**

ter-

waters which were

waters which were below the firm-

watchmen who

the

and a

to be a heavenly

are to guard the waters of heaven "

are

still

preserved in Job

"Am

I a sea or

By thus to

vii.

12

:

sea-monster that thou settest a watch over

dividing the primeval ocean there

both myths the visible heaven.

Babylonian account

me ? "

created according

is

In the Bible as well as in the

this fight with the

dragon

closely connected

is

with the creation of the world, in such wise that the former pre-

we have Tehom — Fight — Division — Heaven cedes the

In both accounts

latter.

the following sequence:

!

The above investigations,

is

a r^sumi of

and

I

what scholars have arrived

at in their

may be accepted

think their conclusions

as

But, far as they have gone, they have by no means as yet

true.

There are

exhausted the subject.

still

certain difficulties in

left

the Biblical as well as in the Bab\'lonian account which are not yet satisfactorily explained.

And

we

with these unsolved problems

are concerned here.

Before we consider these problems

it

would seem necessary

say a few words about the structure of Gen.

The

first

chapter of Genesis

is

ascribed by

(commonly abbreviated P.)

Priestly school

to

i.

all

— and

scholars to the is

hence

late.

The word cv.bK (Elohim) is used throughout for *'God" and the account is built up according to a certain formula. This formula runs:

"And Elohim that*

it

was good.

said

And

According to

:

let

there be

there

.

.

.

and there was.

.

.

.

And Elobim saw

was evening and there was morning the

this skeleton the creation of the

world

as having taken place within a space of seven days. of seven

count.

days It

is

not original,

was inserted by P.

it is

.

is

.

.

.

.

.day."

described

This system

not found in the Babylonian ac-

This follows from the fact that on

3;

:

THE CREATION-STORY OF GENESIS

4

I.

the third and sixth day two tasks were done, and that on the sev-

enth day, which was intended to be a day of the work of the sixth day:

finish

— and

not yet done on the sixth day is

why

another reason

still

rj'rr "itK TCK7?2 '^r'^Dtn 21*3

he Jinished itf he had to work on

if

But, as

!

Elohim had

rest,

it, it

we

was not

CVOK

at

to

hv'^

an end,

shall shortly see, there

the system of seven daj^s cannot have

belonged originally to the account of the creation. Furthermore,

should like to point out here the

I

which we encounter when trying

used in three different senses in the pression, y-Kn

mos,"

for

**

rW'i c*:;;rn

nx,

In

first

day.

And v.

here therefore

it is

10 yix

is

;

It is

In the ex-

simply the Hebrew term for

it

is

^w'^^1 yn^ri*,

the cosmos as

it

of v. 2, ynx

existed before

explained by Txt^, "the dry ground "

the same as that which

Bearing this in mind,

"earth."

is

the expression,

stands for the chaotic mass the

yixn.

ten verses.

first

difficulty

used to express our idea of ''cos-

it is

heaven and earth"

our word "cosmos."

word

to translate the

w^e

we should understand by

ought to translate verses

i

—

as follows **In the beginning of the Elohim's creating- heaven

—the chaotic

mos)

mass

npon Tehom and the

and earth

existed,' namely,* as a tohu vabohn,

spirit of

(i. e.,

the cos-

and darkness was

— then Elohim said

Elohim nsm?2 upon the waters

** :

etc.

With iio

ex

the

this translation, of course, falls also the theor>^ of a crea-

nihilo.

Not a

chapter of Genesis.

first

theory

Indeed, a creation out of nothing single

word

is

not implied in

indicates such a

—not even the word xt3— for we have instead of XTD

25, 26, the

verb nrr-

It

in verses

was the chaotic mass coeternal with the

Creator out of which everj'^thing was created, made, developed, evolutionised.

After the primeval ocean has been divided into the

waters above and below the firmament, the earth or dry land

made

"appear out

to

*

Gen.

'

Or.

ii.

of the waters under the firmament": nXTCQ

2.

"In the beginning when Elohim was about

»^n^"^

= "existed,' not ^"n or

*Sc. at that time,

i.

e.,

is

•*

became."

"in the beginning."

to create."

"

!

^

:

THE CREATION-STORY OF GENESIS ^tT7\

Even

!

*

I.

5

the birds are developed or take their origin from out

ocean

of this terrestrial

:

r)*.ri

.

ri^n

tt: yii^ c^rn

iirii&^

"Let the waters swarm with swarms of living creatures and with birds."

We one

is

see then, that one thing takes

the parent of the other

there

;

giving birth of one thing to another,

its

origin out of the other,

is,

so to speak, a continual

— a genealogy

Having thus cleared our way, we must now consider the

differ-

between the Biblical and the Babylonian account of the crea-

ences

—differences

tion,

true that Gen.

that are certainly strange

originally

I

Tehom, we must be

made use

of the fight of

able to account not only for

its

If it

be

Jahveh with

omission, but

Babylonian Marduk-Tiamat myth.

also for its differences from the

And

and marked.

just these differences are, for our consideration, of the highest

importance

According to the Babylonian account, the creator Marduk was himself borne

by Tiamat,

—he therefore was not coeternal with Tia-

mat, he was, so to speak, her child the other hand, exists from first act of i.

e.,

The

The Creator

the Babylonian creator

is

the

**

Tohom

of Gen.

herself

division of the

i,

on

The

!

Tiamat/*

the creation of *'the upper waters" and '*the lower waters"! first

act of

Elohim

Now, what *

!

eternity like

all

Gen.

'The

i.

is

of

Gen.

is

i

the creation of the

n*i<

or light.

the significance of this Y,n in Gen. i?

It is

20.

Psalm

writer of

civ. 24

ff.

was, no doubt, later than P., since for

the eternity of Tehom-Leviathan seemed to have been impossible.

could be eternal,

him

Jahveh alone

—hence Leviathan had to become a creature, for we read (R. V.): "

O

Lord,

how manifold are thy works! made them all

In wisdom, thou hast

The

earth

is full

of thy creatures.

Yonder is the sea, great and wide, Wherein are things creeping innumerable. Both small and great beasts. There go the ships. There is Leviathan, whom thou hast formed to take his pastime therein

The

I

original significance of Leviathan is lost here,

creature of Jahveh!

Hence

creatures and the sea with

its

—he

has become a mer«

also the succession: creation of the earth with its

creatures,

among them Leviatbin

I

— THE CREATION-STORY OF GENESIS

6

neither the sun nor the all

created later

:

—

moon nor any of the stars, for they were And yet it is said in v. 4 that

on the fourth day

Elohim by thus creating the

**

darkness"; the former he called

Now

!

light" divided the **light from the **

day," the latter he called

and

this is in direct contradiction to v. 14

**

night.'*

where we are

v. 18,

"two

expressly told that Elohim created the i.

I.

great luminaries,**

the sun arid the moon, "to rule over the day and over the

e.,

night and to divide the light from the darkness'^ daily experience and observation, **the light

it

\

According to our

the sun which conditions

is

and the darkness" or *'the day and the night."

be true, then

it

day

of the first

If this

follows that the statement in v. 4 about the "light" is

And

wrong.

so

it is

We

!

saw above that the

system of seven days does not originally belong to the creation

The

story.

writer of Gen.

nights and days or simply to

however,

i,

in

"days" before

add some such expressions as those found

in v. 4

:

"to divide the

In doing this, he manufactured the

from the darkness."

light

order to fabricate his

the sun was created, had

first

three days,^Mr

Ba-u

Ea

ff.:

KL; And here Ea

*

Italics

Hommel

are built

verwirkt."

upon the sequence

him

that

Ea was

of Bel,

and thus the

Babylonian inscriptions, where

Ea may be found

An-e

is

that of Gudea, Statue

d'°fi"En-lil-li, d'^e'r

Nin-char-sag dingirEN-

or ^^'^R^^EN-KI

of the latter

!

In

all

is

divided from Bel or ^''^^"Bn-VA

the other oldest inscriptions the

'

Given

in

cuneiform signs.

Sudarabisclun Alterthiimer des Wiener Jlofmuseums, == AufsHtze und Abhandlungen, II. p. 140. JDfe

the

was also the son of '"EN-KI

that the

who

is

name

AN

or

above" or by

This idea of

above" and the KI

is

**

it

**lord of that

which

is

it

came

of the case

above."

is

and KI "being that which

is

no doubt

is

above" was consid-

course of time that

in

If this

be translated by **he

being above" and "being below"

the original one, and because "that which

for heaven,

= Ea.*

ist"

would follow from the analogy

EN-AN^ would have to

ered to be the heaven thus

for **that

happened that Jensen explained the

it

by **Herr, dessen was unten

explanation be correct,

= shaplish, the

AN

stood

below" came to mean

"earth." 3. En-lil, we have seen, was in later inscriptions also called E-KUR-dumu-nunna, i. e., E-KUR,* the son of Nunna. If this be true, then AN, the father of Bel (see above: Bel mar reshtii

shame) must also have 4.

But

^^'^B'^^EN-KI or

parent from the wife of

been, or

name

been

Mr. KI was

of his wife

NUN." What

called, a

this