Classics and the Western Canon discussion
This topic is about
Gilgamesh
Gilgamesh
>
Week 6: Tablet XI and the Poem as a Whole
A word about the flood story: We know it was copied into Gilgamesh from an older epic known as Atra-hasis. The first part of Atra-hasis describes how humanity was created; the second part describes how humanity was destroyed by the flood. The second part is incorporated into the Standard Babylonian GilgameshThe similarities between the flood story in Gilgamesh and the Biblical story are striking. Since Gilgamesh preceded the Biblical flood story by around 2,000 years, it’s very likely the older story influenced the latter. However, we don’t know if Atra-hasis is the original source of both stories or if there is a source even older than Atra-hasis that influenced them.
The journey to a place is always much longer and described in greater detail than the return journey. Gilgamesh and Enkidu’s journey to Humbaba takes place over a period of several days and includes rituals and dreams. The journey back is dispensed with in a few lines. Similarly, Gilgamesh’s journey to Utnapishtim is detailed and entails a series of challenges. Other than the encounter with the snake, Gilgamesh’s return journey to Uruk goes by quickly and without incident. The emphasis is always on what happens on the way out, not on the way back. Any ideas why?What does it say about the gods that they unleash a storm which is so out of control, it terrifies even them?
Utnapishtim’s flood story is rich with detail and vivid imagery. It explains how he achieved immortality. But since his story is not going to help Gilgamesh achieve immortality, why is it included? And why in such detail?
Somehow, in the interval between Gilgamesh’s exit from and return to Uruk, he has become wise. Do we know precisely what precipitated his transformation? Is it the journey? The characters he meets? Utnapishtim’s story? All of the above? Or is it something else?
Until he gets back to Uruk where we are told he is finally at peace, Gilgamesh is constantly moving, constantly searching, even though, at times, what he is searching for isn’t always clear. Is that what makes him a hero?
The end of the poem invites us to go back to the beginning with the knowledge of all that has happened in the interim. Why?
Tamara wrote: "The end of the poem invites us to go back to the beginning with the knowledge of all that has happened in the interim. Why?"I did not see an explicit invitation to return to the beginning. I did notice that the city’s description at the end mirrors the opening but didn't quite connect the dots and felt the ending of Tablet XI was unsatisfying. But your question made me reconsider this mirroring of the beginning. Genius touch!
In the Davis and Lombardo translations, there is only a brief passage reflecting the city's structure, rather than a direct prompt to reread Tablet I. Do other translations make this cyclical structure more explicit?
I now see that the opening is not just foreshadowing but also functions as the conclusion, suggesting that Gilgamesh’s journey has resulting in his gaining wisdom and understanding. The repetition of Uruk’s description reframes his return, not as a failure to achieve immortality, but that his journey and experiences eventually brought about his understanding and acceptance of his mortality and place in the world.
He had seen all. He all knowledge possessed. Wise was he beyond measure. Gilgamesh was the possessor of all understanding. He had wisdom of all things. He knew of the Secret and of the Mystery. He knew of the time before the Great Flood.
Davis, Gerald J.. Gilgamesh: The New Translation (Tablet I)
The city, represented here by its walls, and the story we are reading, which he says he narrated and presumably inscribed on a stele, are how he achieves immortality. They are the lasting records of his works.
David wrote: "In the Davis and Lombardo translations, there is only a brief passage reflecting the city's structure, rather than a direct prompt to reread Tablet I. Do other translations make this cyclical structure more explicit?.."The prologue of the Stephen Mitchell translation repeats the same words at the end of the poem:
Climb the stone staircase, more ancient than the mind can imagine,
Approach the Eanna Temple, sacred to Ishtar,
A temple that no king has equaled in size or beauty,
walk on the wall of Uruk, follow its course
Around the city, inspect its mighty foundations
Examine its brickwork, how masterfully it is built,
Observe the land it encloses; the palm trees, the gardens,
the orchards, the glorious palaces and temples, the shops
and marketplaces, the houses, the public squares.
The Helle translation also uses the same language at the beginning and end of the poem to describe the city:
Climb the wall of Uruk, walk its length.
Survey the foundation, study the brickwork.
There--it is not made of oven-baked bricks?
Did the Seven Sages not lay its cornerstone?
Look: Two thousand acres for the city,
Two thousand acres for the orchards,
Two thousand acres for the pits of clay,
And one thousand acres for the temple of Ishtar.
Seven thousand acres is the size of Uruk.
The Helle translation is more specific than the Mitchell translation--maybe because it is later (Mitchell, 2004; Helle, 2021) and more tablets had been translated in the interim.
I don't see a specific prompt to reread Tablet I. But because the same words are used at the beginning and end of the poem, I see it as an invitation to go back to the beginning and reread the poem.
The movement is circular: we are back to the beginning but we have moved upward in the sense that we now know what we didn't know before. I see a similar thing with Gilgamesh: he has made a circular journey from Uruk and back but he has moved upward, i.e. gained knowledge and wisdom.
David wrote: "The repetition of Uruk’s description reframes his return, not as a failure to achieve immortality, but that his journey and experiences eventually brought about his understanding and acceptance of his mortality and place in the world..."I read it the same way and like how you phrased it.
I also think Gilgamesh achieves the immortality he once sought although it is not the flesh and blood type of immortality. Here we are, reading about him and his exploits 4,000 years later. By reading the poem, aren't we granting him a literary immortality and keeping his memory alive? And is that why the poet uses the same words to invite us back to the beginning of the poem? Does he want us to read the poem, again, because our reading breathes life into the words, which, in turn, bring Gilgamesh back to life?
Like you, I think it is a touch of genius.
Tamara wrote: "I also think Gilgamesh achieves the immortality he once sought although it is not the flesh and blood type of immortality."Another good point, his story lives on.
What is the test that Gilgamesh fails, either staying awake for 6 days and 7 nights, or lying about how long he slept, or both? The fact his wife wants to wake him and send him home as soon as he falls asleep makes it seem staying awake was the test.Sleep has swirled over him like a mist.” And his wife said unto Utanapishtim, the Distant One, “Touch Gilgamesh that he may awaken. Let him betake himself homeward in peace upon the road he has traversed.”But he appears to fail another test
Davis, Gerald J.. Gilgamesh: The New Translation (Tablet XI)
Utanapishtim made reply to his wife thus, “All men are duplicitous. Even you will he endeavor to deceive. Gilgamesh will affirm that he has slumbered but a wink. . .
. . .when Utanapishtim touched Gilgamesh, who awoke from his slumbers. Whereupon did Gilgamesh say unto Utanapishtim, the Distant One, “Scarce had I closed mine eyes when you did straightaway touch me and rouse me from slumber.”
Davis, Gerald J.. Gilgamesh: The New Translation (Tablet XI)
Whereupon did Gilgamesh say unto Utanapishtim, the Distant One, “Scarce had I closed mine eyes when you did straightaway touch me and rouse me from slumber.”That happens to me a lot, too. I guess it drives home the fact that you're a limited mortal.
Haha. I wasn't sleeping on the job, just resting my eyes. He did so many other superhuman feats but, in the end, needed to sleep like the rest of us. I also felt the daily bread loaves as a time-keeping devices was clever. Sure, it could be staged if you always have a pantry full of old bread, but the incident and the need to create evidence of passing time is interesting. Digital timestamps are nearly ubiquitous now and such a useful part of our lives. It is entertaining to see how the need could have been addressed earlier.
David wrote: "What is the test that Gilgamesh fails, either staying awake for 6 days and 7 nights, or lying about how long he slept, or both? The fact his wife wants to wake him and send him home as soon as he f..."The test was to stay awake for six days and seven nights. Utnapishtim challenges him to stay awake to prove he can transcend the human need for sleep. If he can overcome sleep, he may be able to overcome death. Gilgamesh fails the test. He says, “sleep seems to have seized me for a moment.” I don’t think he is being deceptive here. He just has no clue how long he has been asleep.
I think that when Utnapishtim tells his wife to bake the bread because “humans are deceitful, he will deceive you, too,” it is not so much a test as a statement that Gilgamesh is no different to other humans in that he is capable of deception.
The test is ironic. In the opening tablet of the poem, we are told Gilgamesh terrorizes the people of Uruk day and night. He doesn’t seem to need sleep. Shamhat even tells Enkidu, “He never sleeps day or night.” We know he sleeps on the way to the Cedar Forest. And now, almost at the end of his journey, he can’t stay awake.
Tamara wrote: "David wrote: "What is the test that Gilgamesh fails, either staying awake for 6 days and 7 nights, or lying about how long he slept, or both? The fact his wife wants to wake him and send him home a..."Nice call back to the comments about not sleeping. I think I even asked at the time how Gilgamesh could dream so much if he never slept. 😊
It also calls back to the end of Tablet X where Utanapishtim says unto Gilgamesh,
The sleeping and the dead, how alike they are.
Davis, Gerald J.. Gilgamesh: The New Translation (Tablet X)
David wrote: "It also calls back to the end of Tablet X where Utanapishtim says unto Gilgamesh,The sleeping and the dead, how alike they are...."
Good catch!
Like Gilgamesh, the Greek heroes sought fame because it was the best way to achieve immortality. It was a pretty crummy way--you ended up a twittering shade in Hades just like everyone else--but it was the best available.
Just a note on two more Greek myth connections * In Hercules' first labor he killed a lion and wore its skin. This could have been an adaptation of Gilgamesh killing lions and wearing their skins.
* The love goddess and the bull. Instead of Ishtar and the Bull of Heaven (actually the constellation Taurus), in Greek myth Hippolytus decides to a celebrate life which offends Afrodite. She does directly punish him with a raging bull but her punish starts a chain of events that ends up with Poseiden sending a great bull from the sea to attack him. The two myths are compared in this article - https://www.jstor.org/stable/40025225?
Michael, your connections between The Epic of Gilgamesh and Greek mythology are well observed. Given how myths evolve through cultural exchange and shared human concerns, it makes sense that we see similar elements across different traditions.When we started reading it, I found Gilgamesh had much in common Hercules. Both had a divine parent, heroic deeds, mixed relationships with gods, companions in some deeds, overcoming the death of a loved one, quest for immortality, etc.
I just wish I could figure out this ancient math. How is Gilgamesh 2/3rds. divine and not 1/2 divine? Does a divine mother count twice, or was Lugalbanda holding out on a little divinity himself, being a king? Do we need to request a paternity or DNA test?
David wrote: "I just wish I could figure out this ancient math. How is Gilgamesh 2/3rds. divine and not 1/2 divine? Does a divine mother count twice, or was Lugalbanda holding out on a little divinity himself, b..."His mother is a goddess and his father is a semi-divine king--a sort of half man, half god.
I think the point is to show Gilgamesh is out of balance.
An observation about the role of women. I’m excluding Ishtar in this because her position is unique among the females as she is a goddess bent on revenge.Ninsun interprets Gilgamesh’s dreams and informs him of the coming of Enkidu. She may possibly know it is Enkidu’s life and death that is the catalyst that sends her son on the path of self-discovery, insight, and wisdom. She adopts Enkidu to cement the bond between them to increase Gilgamesh’s grief when Enkidu dies.
Shamhat acts as the agent that transitions Enkidu from wild man to city man and leads him to Gilgamesh.
The Scorpion wife corrects her husband when he first sees Gilgamesh:
The Scorpion man called to his wife:
“That man over there, in him is the flesh of gods!”
The scorpion woman answered back:
“He is only two-thirds god and one-third human.”
We know the scorpion people were terrifying (“whose visage was dread, whose eyes were death”). Although we don’t know the significance of this exchange because lines are missing, but we can see the scorpion man is incensed when he thinks Gilgamesh is all god. Maybe the gods weren’t allowed there. The scorpion wife’s correction seems to mollify him so he allows Gilgamesh to proceed on his journey.
Siduri sends him on his next step by informing him of Urshanabi who can get him to Utnapishtim.
Utnapishtim’s wife shows compassion for Gilgamesh:
His wife said to him, to the faraway Uta-napishti:
“Touch him, let the man wake up!
By the road that he came, let him go home unharmed,
Let him go back through the gate that he crossed.”
Later she chastises Utnapishtim for his lack of hospitality, urging him to give Gilgamesh a gift before sending him home. This prompts Utnapishtim to tell him about the plant. It’s interesting that she speaks to Utnapishtim only when Gilgamesh cannot hear.
Although they appear to be incidental to a poem by men and about men, each of these women plays a pivotal role in sending Gilgamesh on to the next step in his path to self-knowledge and wisdom. They exert an influence on the outcome beyond—or, maybe, because of—their marginal status.
Women seem to have a firmly established "supporting role". Even Ishtar has to ask her father to use the Bull of Heaven. and don't forget Aya, who Ninsun asks to remind her husband Shamash to protect Gilgamesh on his Quest to kill Humbaba and collect Cedar wood.Each day, as you traverse the arc of the sky, may Aya your Bride not fail to remind you, when day is done, to entrust my son’s care unto the stars, those watchmen of the night.It seems, like Queen Wealhtheow in Beowulf, women like Ninsun, Siduri, and Utnapishtim’s wife serve as guiding voices, nudging the hero toward his destiny.
Davis, Gerald J.. Gilgamesh: The New Translation (Tablet III)
David wrote: "Women seem to have a firmly established "supporting role". Even Ishtar has to ask her father to use the Bull of Heaven. and don't forget Aya, who Ninsun asks to remind her husband Shamash to protec..."I forgot about Aya. Thanks for the reminder.
Tamara wrote: "David wrote: "I just wish I could figure out this ancient math. How is Gilgamesh 2/3rds. divine and not 1/2 divine? Does a divine mother count twice, or was Lugalbanda holding out on a little divin..."What would make him 3/4 god, but you are right. In this epic, the numbers only serves to makes a point, it could be hyperboles of long distances or good amount of something, it should not be taken literally.
In contrast to Utnapishtim’s musing on death as a sudden snap that snatches us away (Tablet X), Gilgamesh feels the presence of death as a constant. It is omnipresent, ubiquitous, always there, lingering, hovering around the corner. He seems to be in the depths of despair:How can I go on, Uta-napishti? Where should I go?
The Thief of Life has a hold on my heart.
Death is sitting in my bedroom,
And wherever I turn, there too is death.
I’m wondering if the two views of death are reconcilable. Can we be, as Utnapishtim suggests in the previous tablet, a fragile mayfly floating down the river of time with no knowledge of death (“But even then it could see nothing”), while simultaneously be aware of the constant presence of death as Gilgamesh is? Does knowing the certainty of our own death without knowing when or how it will happen necessarily lead to despair? Or can it lead to acceptance? Can there be some comfort in knowing we will die while also knowing we have no control of the circumstances and timing of our own deaths?
Sophos Helle wrote and included some every good essays on the epic in the back of his translation. The one I read last night, "The Storm of His Heart," made a good point on this topic. He shows how restless Gilgamesh is, that it is a defining personality trait for him. The gods sent Enkidu to help balance and tame that. All of Gilgamesh's adventures feel wreckless and ill-advised because he has that go-go-go restlessness but once Enkidu died it forced him to confront that he too is mortal and will have to stop. When he asks Uta-napishti "how can I go on" he is expressing that need to always be moving that is in conflict with the stopping that death represents for him.
The essay also points out that he gets in trouble, over and over because of that restlessness. It nearly always backfires on him. Upa-napishti said as much: "why, Gilgamesh, do you always chase grief" (X.267). One example is how hard he pushed himself to get to the island and then being too exhausted to stay awake.
Anyway, I feel like I'm a lot like Gilgamesh in this respect so this analysis hit home.
After reading the essay, it occurred to me that the last scene about the walls of Uruk is a stopping of sorts. He is no longer looking for adventures but instead has come back to the stable and unmoving city walls.
Michael wrote: "Sophos Helle wrote and included some every good essays on the epic in the back of his translation. The one I read last night, "The Storm of His Heart," made a good point on this topic. He shows h..."
Great analysis. Thank you.
I agree with you that he does seem to be at peace when he gets back to Uruk. He is no longer the restless spirit he once was. But what is it that brings about this change in him? He gives the impression he is still restless when he is with Utnapishtim. He retrieves and then loses the plant of everlasting youth on his way home. Something must have happened to him to bring about a transformation. Any ideas?
I think he gradually resigned himself. These three events had real consequences that must have been sobering and forced him to de-escalate his desires.- Enkidu's death => there are real negative consequences to my actions, death is real for me too
- failing the sleep test => I don't have a safety net, I cannot become immortal
- losing the plant that would have de-aged him and given him an extended lifespan => My lifespan will look like everyone else's
I just have to say that the episode of the snake eating the magical plant and slithering away almost made me laugh out loud. I don't think Gilgamesh had quite processed enough to be considered wise or prudent at that point. Who doesn't protect something that has become so valuable to you?
Right, especially with a travel companion. One of them needed to be guarding that thing at all times.And, now we know why snakes shed their skins. :)
Tamara wrote: A word about the flood story: We know it was copied into Gilgamesh from an older epic known as Atra-hasis. The first part of Atra-hasis describes how humanity was created; the second part describes how humanity was destroyed by the flood. The second part is incorporated into the Standard Babylonian Gilgamesh I didn't know about this older epic from which the flood story may be the source. Was that from an Old Babylonian or Sumerian source?
The Atrahasis story is available in Stephanie Dalley's "Myths from Mesopotamia: Creation, The Flood, Gilgamesh, and Others". She says it comes from Old Bablylonian tablets from around 1700 BC but that they've also found passages in Late Assyrian tablets that "appear to follow the Old Babylonian version fairly closely, but with additions and considerable alteration in phrasing and vocabulary."
In one of Helle's back-of-the-book essays, he says the discovery and translation of the Gilgamesh tablets caused quite a bit of excitement in Victorian England. People argued over whether it proved or disproved the Hebrew Bible. Atrahasis was discovered soon after and was considered additional evidence, which further fed the debate.
I'm in the camp that says the additional flood stories can't prove or disprove the historicity of the Hebrew Bible, so any debate using this as a premise, while it might be fun for some, will be fruitless.
Tamara wrote: The journey to a place is always much longer and described in greater detail than the return journey. Gilgamesh and Enkidu’s journey to Humbaba takes place over a period of several days and includes rituals and dreams. The journey back is dispensed with in a few lines. Similarly, Gilgamesh’s journey to Utnapishtim is detailed and entails a series of challenges. Other than the encounter with the snake, Gilgamesh’s return journey to Uruk goes by quickly and without incident. The emphasis is always on what happens on the way out, not on the way back. Any ideas why? Perhaps it is because Gilgamesh has met the challenges and accomplished his goal such as killing Humbaba and felling the trees or getting to the ends of the earth to find out how Utnapishtim achieved mortality, now there is nothing to deter him from a swift journey home. A growing process requires meeting more milestones and challenges than after we reach maturity, generally speaking of course. But, I refer to the episode with the plant & the snake again....he's not quite there yet!
In fact, I'm not sure what really catalyzes his transformation, it seems to occur "off stage" as it were before he & the boatman arrive back at Uruk. He does seem to revel in pointing out the amazing walls of Uruk and encourages Urshanabi to follow it's course to see beauty of the land, gardens and temples.
Tamara wrote: Utnapishtim’s flood story is rich with detail and vivid imagery. It explains how he achieved immortality. But since his story is not going to help Gilgamesh achieve immortality, why is it included? And why in such detail? I felt this long telling built suspense for the listener who wanted the secret to his immortality. The disappointment was all the greater when Gilgamesh realizes that there was no path for him to be immortal.
Mitchell makes the following comment about the flood story: It gives us a harrowing picture of the cost of Utnapishtim's immortality...hovering in the background of this narrative is the unspoken question: If you had to experience all the terror, and death of almost every living thing, in order to be granted immortality, would it seem worth it?
Michael wrote: "The Atrahasis story is available in Stephanie Dalley's "Myths from Mesopotamia: Creation, The Flood, Gilgameth, and Others". She says it comes from Old Bablylonian tablets from around 1700 BC but..."
Thanks Michael!
I have so enjoyed reading this and thanks to Tamara for guiding the discussion & all who participated. It made the reading so much richer. I concurrently read with the Mitchell edition Gilgamesh: The Life of a Poem by Michael Schmidt and was fascinated by the history and discoveries!As I read criticisms of the Mitchell version, I have gotten the 2019 edition by Andrew George coming to dip into. So more Gilgamesh to come for me!
Chris wrote: "In fact, I'm not sure what really catalyzes his transformation, it seems to occur "off stage" as it were before he & the boatman arrive back at Uruk. .."It might occur off stage, as you said. But there is another possibility which may or may not make sense.
I think the clue as to how Gilgamesh gains wisdom may be found in the passage where he dives down to retrieve the plant of everlasting youth. He digs a shaft down to the Apsu and emerges with the plant. If we connect the description of Gilgamesh at the opening of Tablet I with Ninsun’s prayer to Shamash with the passage about his dive, we see a possible connection.
The opening of Tablet I:
There was a man
Who saw the deep, the bedrock of the land,
Who knew the ways and learned all things:
Gilgamesh saw the deep, the bedrock of the land,
He knew the ways and learned all things.
In her prayer to Shamash to protect Gilgamesh, she reminds him:
Will he not grow wise with Ea in the Apsu?
Ea is the god of wisdom and intellect who resides in and/or is associated with Apsu, the freshwater or ground water beneath the earth. Is it possible Gilgamesh acquired wisdom (“saw the deep”) from Ea when he plunged into the Apsu to retrieve the plant?
Tamara wrote: "Chris wrote: "In fact, I'm not sure what really catalyzes his transformation, it seems to occur "off stage" as it were before he & the boatman arrive back at Uruk. .."It might occur off stage, as..."
Love that,thanks!
Tamara wrote: "Chris wrote: "Is it possible Gilgamesh acquired wisdom (“saw the deep”) from Ea when he plunged into the Apsu to retrieve the plant?..."That is good. It is similar to the trip to the underworld, that is a recurring step in the hero's journey.
Chris wrote: "I felt this long telling built suspense for the listener who wanted the secret to his immortality. The disappointment was all the greater when Gilgamesh realizes that there was no path for him to be immortal...."I read it the same way you do, Chris.
Utnapishtim’s flood story is long and replete with detail about the boat building, the flood, and its after-math. He paints a vivid picture of the devastation. And all the while he is talking, we sense Gilgamesh is hanging on his every word to find out how he achieved immortality. The suspense builds up with his drawn-out tale. Gilgamesh’s hopes are completely dashed when he learns there is no path open for him to achieve immortality. He comes down with a crash. If the flood story was short, it wouldn’t have had the same impact on Gilgamesh.
I can feel Gilgamesh’s tense anticipation every time I read the passage. It is every effective.
Speaking of the flood story, I love the use of irony here. When Utnapishtim asks Ea what he should say to the citizens of Shuruppak, Ea tells him to explain the “rewards” they will receive after his departure:On you he [Enlil] will rain
A shower of birds, a windfall of fish,
You will reap a deluge of riches!
At dawn sweets,
At dusk wheat
In downpours he
Will rain on you.
All this talk of rain and deluge and downpours is replete with irony. Utnapishtim gives his palace and treasures to Puzur-Enlil, the man who caulked the hatch from outside, even though he knows the man will not survive the flood. The people have no idea what’s going to hit them. They drink his beer, eat his slaughtered sheep, and build his boat without a care in the world. It's a festive, party atmosphere:
"I butchered oxen for the workmen,
and every day I slaughtered sheep.
I let all my ale, beer, oil, and wine
flow like rivers for the workmen,
they drank like it was New Year's!
I find it interesting Utnapishtim never questions the reason for the flood. He just follows orders.
Chris wrote: "He does seem to revel in pointing out the amazing walls of Uruk and encourages Urshanabi to follow it's course to see beauty of the land, gardens and temples."I think it is precisely that which demonstrates Gilgamesh had turned the corner because he invites the the Ferryman to view the city,
And Gilgamesh said to Urshanabi, the Ferryman, “Behold before you my city of Uruk.I think this demonstrates that has accepted that his true legacy is not eternal life, but the life he shaped for others: his people, his city, his story. That’s where his peace comes from. It’s not that he got the immortality he wanted; it’s that he finally understood what he had.
Davis, Gerald J.. Gilgamesh: The New Translation (Tablet 11)
I just wonder why, after such a long journey he did not ask Utanapishtim if he could take a quick nap before trying to stay awake for 7 more days. I also wonder why he just didn't threaten Utanapishtim for immortality after failing the test. Not asking to rest before his test seems like his old reckless self while accepting the outcome of the test, after the bread evidence of course, and not threatening Utanapishtim after failing the test seems like something new for Gilgamesh. It makes me wonder if, by that point, some part of him already sensed the futility of the quest. Maybe his silence is the beginning of letting go of the illusion he’s been chasing.
I also think the wash and new clothes were another turning point. Recall Siduri's advice,
". . .Fresh and clean should be your raiment. Aye, let your hair be clean washed. Bathe yourself in pure water. . .This, then, is the work of man."Finally we come to losing the 'Old man becomes young man' plant. Maybe Gilgamesh realized, in that moment, that immortality without youth, without vitality, isn’t a gift; it’s a curse. Recall the myth of Tithonus, who was granted immortality but not eternal youth, and ended up aging endlessly, shriveled and miserable.
Davis, Gerald J.. Gilgamesh: The New Translation (Tablet X)
This nugget on puns used in the poem is too good not to share. It's in an essay in the Helle translation (pages 156-157). Helle is summarizing an research from someone name WorthingtonHe is talking about how Ea was prohibited from telling anyone about the flood and needed to talk to Uta-nipishti in code.
...every one of these words can be read in several ways at once. There is a surface positive meaning, promising the citizens of Shuruppak a rich reward for their labor, as well as not one but two hidden meanings, which adumbrate their deaths...
Meaning 1: At dawn there will be cakes, in the evening he will provide you with a shower of wheat
Meaning 2: At dawn there will be darkness; in the evening he will rain on you a shower thick as wheat
Meaning 3: With magical incantations, with wind-demons, he will rain on you death for the 'wheat' (that is, for humanity)
The third meaning is achieved in part because there are no spaces between words in cuneiform writing, so a sequence of signs can be read as forming one or more words, depending on the context...
* ina ser kukki can mean "at dawn, cakes"; but if it is read as two words, ina serkukki, it means with magical incantations
* samut kibati means "a shower of wheat"; but if it is read as three words, sa mut kibati, it means "that which will cause the death of wheat," with stalks of wheat being a commonly used metaphor for the human race
The couplet is repeated a total of three times, so it is possible that a performer might have introduced subtle differences in pronunciation along the way, perhaps to highlight first its positive, then its negative senses, bringing the ominous undertone into still clearer view.
This is just one example of the puns. There are others in the essay that discuss the ironic rewards for the workers that Tamara mentions. Basically, they have the same effect, can be interpreted as good things or death, depending on how they are read or pronounced.
Michael wrote: "This nugget on puns used in the poem is too good not to share. It's in an essay in the Helle translation (pages 156-157). Helle is summarizing an research from someone name WorthingtonHe is talki..."
Thanks for taking the time to type that up, Michael.
Michael wrote: " . . . there are no spaces between words in cuneiform writing, so a sequence of signs can be read as forming one or more words, depending on the context..."
This may help to explain some of the differences in translations. Since there are no spaces between words in cuneiform writing, the meaning may vary somewhat depending on where the translator considers the ending of a words.
It sounds so complicated!
David wrote: "I also wonder why he just didn't threaten Utanapishtim for immortality after failing the test. Not asking to rest before his test seems like his old reckless self while accepting the outcome of the test, after the bread evidence of course, and not threatening Utanapishtim after failing the test seems like something new for Gilgamesh..."I think we are seeing something new in Gilgamesh. He has been pretty aggressive up to this point. He threatens Siduri. He kills the Stone Ones for no apparent reason. But he acts with atypical restraint when he first meets Utnapishtim. His initial reaction is to fight him: “My heart was all set on fighting you.” But instead of reacting with his customary violence, he now seeks knowledge by asking Utnapishtim how he obtained everlasting life. He seems to have mellowed out a bit.
The thing about the plant of everlasting youth is that it doesn't give one everlasting life. People can die when young. The plant simply keeps you young. And since young people are generally unafraid of death because they think they'll live forever, all this plant does is to eliminate the fear of death. It's not a cure. It just relieves the symptoms.It's curious that he wants to "test" it out on an old man before he tries it, himself.
Another thing about the plant:Gilgamesh says to Urshanabi:
If the old man grows young again,
I will eat it too, and return to my youth."
I take that to mean he wants to return to a time when he was unafraid of death, a time when he and Enkidu pranced around doing all sorts of shenanigans that could get them into trouble.
Perhaps his loss of the plant reinforces another lesson he has to learn: there is no going back in time. He has had his hopes dashed. He learned from Utnapishtim he can't be immortal. He is learning from the loss of the plant he can't go back in time.
I was thinking the plant would turn back the clock but that he had a finite quantity of plant and it might spoil. He might only be able to use it once and then grow old again at a normal pace.
Not only does Gilgamesh fail the stay-awake test, but he fails it in spectacular fashion: rather than staying awake for seven straight days, he sleeps for seven straight days. Then he gets a second chance, and he blows that too. I think he's learned humility.
Roger wrote: "I think he has learned humility..."I think so, too.
The action in most epics centers around some noble cause--conquering Troy, founding Rome, regaining the throne of Ithaca, bringing back the Golden Fleece. Gilgamesh and Enkidu set off on a kind of quest to kill Humbaba, but it becomes sordid as Humbaba begs for his life instead of fighting bravely to the end like Hector or Rodomonte. Then our heroes have to wonder if they've really made things better, and it's unclear whether the gods really wanted Humbaba dead. Later Gilgamesh goes on his own quest, but it's narrow and personal--he just doesn't want to die. He brings back only wisdom that he never set out to find. This story is like an anti-epic that precedes all epics.
Gilgamesh reminds Utnapishtim he is made of flesh and blood, so he is living proof all mortals don’t die. He asks Utnapishtim how he achieved immortality, which prompts Utnapishtim to tell his story.
He was king of Shuruppak when the gods decided to unleash the flood. (Although Tablet XI in the Helle translation does not give the cause of the flood, another Babylonian poem says the gods were irritated by the ceaseless noise of humans.) The gods are sworn to secrecy, but Ea craftily warns Utnapishtim and instructs him to build a boat. The people help Utnapishtim build his boat with his specifications. He loads his possessions, gold, silver, family, skilled craftsmen, and animals on board and seals the hatch.
The gods unleash the storms, with each god performing his/her assigned role. Terrified of their handiwork, they fly up to Anu in the heavens and weep, regretting their actions. Belet-ili wails for declaring war on humans. The storm dies after seven days; the water recedes; the boat runs aground on a mountain top. Utnapishtim waits seven days and releases first a dove and then a swallow. Both come back. He releases a crow which finds food and doesn’t come back.
Utnapishtim sacrifices to the gods who smell the scent and “swarmed to the sacrifice like flies.” Belet-ili promises to wear her jeweled necklace as a reminder of the devastation caused by the flood. She invites all the gods to attend the sacrifice except Enlil since he caused the flood without seeking counsel. Enlil is incensed when he sees Utnapishtim has survived. The gods criticize Enlil for his indiscriminate punishment of mankind, with Ea suggesting he could have used less devastating alternative methods. Enlil grants Utnapishtim and his wife immortality and re-houses them far away.
Utnapishtim taunts Gilgamesh and challenges him to stay awake for six days and seven nights. Gilgamesh fails the bread test and bemoans his fate. Utnapishtim chastises Urshanabi for bringing Gilgamesh “whose body is covered with filthy hair.” He orders Urshanabi to bathe Gilgamesh and prepare him for his journey home. Utnapishtim’s wife intervenes and suggests Gilgamesh be sent home with a gift. Utnapishtim tells him how to retrieve a plant that will grant him everlasting youth. Gilgamesh retrieves the plant but loses it on his way home when a snake snatches it away. Gilgamesh and Urshanabi arrive at Uruk and Gilgamesh invites him to climb the walls of Uruk and to survey the beautiful city.
With those words, we have come full circle and back to the beginning of the poem—like a snake biting its own tail.