(He built the city), the community exercised power, (He built the city Niffer), he built Ê-kura, the temple, (He built the city Erech, he built Ê-a)na, the temple,” ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Here the obverse breaks off, and the end of the bilingual story of the Creation-story is lost. How many more lines were devoted to it we do not know, nor do we know how the incantation proper, which followed it, and to which it formed the introduction, began. Where the text (about half-way down on the reverse) again becomes legible, it reads as follows— ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ “Thy supreme messenger, Pap-sukal, the wise one, counsellor of the gods. Nin-aḫa-kudu, daughter of Aa, May she make thee glorious with a glorious lustration (?), May she make thee pure with pure fire, With the glorious pure fountain of the abyss purify thou thy pathway, By the incantation of Merodach, king of the universe of heaven and earth, May the abundance of the land enter into thy midst, May thy command be fulfilled for ever. O Ê-zida, seat supreme, the beloved of Anu and Ištar art thou, Mayest thou shine like heaven; mayest thou be glorious like the earth; mayest thou shine like the midst of heaven; May the malevolent curse dwell outside of thee. Incantation making (the purification of the temple). Incantation: The star ... the long chariot of the heavens.” The last line but one is apparently the title, and is followed by the first line of the next tablet. From this we see that this text belonged to a series of at least two tablets, and that the tablet following the above had an introduction of an astronomical or astrological nature. It will be noticed that this text not only contains an account of the creation of gods and men, and flora and fauna, but also of the great and renowned sites and shrines of the country where it originated. It is in this respect that it bears a likeness to the fragmentary portions of the intermediate tablets of the Semitic Babylonian story of the Creation, or Bêl and the Dragon, and this slight agreement may be held to justify, in some measure, its introduction here. The bilingual version, however, differs very much in style from that in Semitic only, and seems to lack the poetical form which characterizes the latter. This, indeed, was to be expected, for poetical form in a translation which follows the original closely is an impossibility, though the poetry of words and ideas which it contains naturally remains. It is not unlikely that the original Sumerian text is in poetical form, as is suggested by the cesura, and the recurring words.