CREATION (Lat. ereatio, from ereare, to create: connected with erescere, to grow. Gk. s6pos, koros, youth. Goth. hairdo, Ger. Herde, Eng. herd, 01r. earn, heap, Arm. ser, species.•Skt. §ardha, Ar. sanda, species), THE. The act of the Supreme Being in bringing the universe into exist ence, and specifically the account of the divine ac tivity contained in the Book of Genesis. According to this account God created the 'heavens and the earth' by successive acts throughout a period of six days. On the first day light was produced and day and night divided; on the second day the firmament (q.v.) was created and the waters separated; on the third day the dry land ap peared and plant life began; on the fourth day the heavenly luminaries were made; on the fifth day aquatic life and birds appeared ; on the sixth day land animals and man were created; and on the seventh day God rested from His work and instituted the Sabbath. This narrative has been regarded as veritable history, as a primi tive and crude attempt to construct a scientific theory, as poetry, and as pure myth. It is sig nificant that at the present time attempts to harmonize the narrative with the teachings of science are not in favor even with the more con servative, while the most radical critics recog nize its value as a medium for teaching moral and religious truth. According to the compila tory hypothesis of the origin of the Ilexateueh, Genesis contains two creation narratives. The first, beginning with chap. i. and extending through the first clause of chap. ii. 4, belongs to the Priestly Writer and was written by him to emphasize the importance of the Sabbath. The other, chap. ii. 41)-7, is from JE (see ELOH1ST AND YAIIWIST) , is given only partially, and is not in all its details consistent with the account of the Priestly Writer. Nevertheless, the narra
tives may have a common source, and the dis erepaneies be due to different workings-over which they have undergone before reaching their present form. In 1S75 portions of a Babylonian creation myth, previously known only in frag mentary quotations from Berosus (q.v.), were found in cuneiform character among the material brought from the palace of .Asshurbanipal, and were deciphered by George Smith. Since that time other fragments have been discovered and the myth is now quite well known. It has strik ing points of resemblance with the narrative of Genesis, which have been explained by two hy potheses: (1) that both accounts are indepen dent developments of an original Semitic myth ; and (2) that the Hebrew account is borrowed from the Babylonian. If the latter hypothesis is correct, the borrowing may have taken place at any one of several periods when relations between the Babylonians and Israel were specially close. It may be that the Hebrews first learned the story on their entrance into Palestine, since the Tell-el-Amarna tablets have proven that Baby lonian influence prevailed there as early as B.C. 1500. Traces of Phoenician, Egyptian, and Per sian influence have also been found by some scholars, and there are undeniable resemblances to cosmogonies of other peoples, even the more primitive, for it should be noted that the differ ences are marked, even where comparison is made with the Babylonian account. Consult the commentaries on Genesis (see GENESIS, BOOK OF) Jensen, Die Kosmologie der Babylonier ( St rassburg, 1890) ; Gunkel, Schopfung mid Chaos in Urzeit and Endzeit (Gottingen, 1S95) ; Smith, The Chaldean Account of Genesis (New York, 187(3).