An Old Babylonian Version of the Gilgamesh Epic · Chapter 6Introduction. (5)
This chapter is not translated yet. You are reading the original.
It is only proper to add that Professor Jastrow assumes the responsibility for the explanation of the form and etymology of the name Gilgamesh proposed in this volume. The question is one in regard to which legitimate differences of opinion will prevail among scholars until through some chance a definite decision, one way or the other, can be reached.
66 me-iḫ-rù (line 191).
67 Tablet I, 5, 23. Cf. I, 3, 2 and 29.
68 Tablet IV, 4, 7 and I, 5, 3.
69 Assyrian version, Tablet II, 3b 34, in an address of Shamash to Enkidu.
70 So Assyrian version, Tablet VIII, 3, 11. Also supplied VIII, 5, 20 and 21; and X, 1, 46–47 and 5, 6–7.
71 Tablet XII, 3, 25.
72 Ward, Seal Cylinders of Western Asia, Chap. X, and the same author’s Cylinders and other Ancient Oriental Seals—Morgan collection Nos. 19–50.
73 E.g., Ward No. 192, Enkidu has human legs like Gilgamesh; also No. 189, where it is difficult to say which is Gilgamesh, and which is Enkidu. The clothed one is probably Gilgamesh, though not infrequently Gilgamesh is also represented as nude, or merely with a girdle around his waist.
74 E.g., Ward, Nos. 173, 174, 190, 191, 195 as well as 189 and 192.
75 On the other hand, in Ward Nos. 459 and 461, the conflict between the two heroes is depicted with the heroes distinguished in more conventional fashion, Enkidu having the hoofs of an animal, and also with a varying arrangement of beard and hair.
76 See Jastrow, Religion of Babylonia and Assyria (Boston, 1898), p. 468 seq.
77 Ungnad-Gressmann, Das Gilgamesch-Epos, p. 90 seq.
78 Pennsylvania tablet, l. 198 = Assyrian version, Tablet IV, 2, 37.
79 “Enkidu blocked the gate” (Pennsylvania tablet, line 215) = Assyrian version Tablet IV, 2, 46: “Enkidu interposed his foot at the gate of the family house.”
80 Pennsylvania tablet, lines 218 and 224.
81 Yale tablet, line 198; also to be supplied lines 13–14.
82 Yale tablet, lines 190 and 191.
83 PSBA 1914, 65 seq. = Jensen III, 1a, 4–11, which can now be completed and supplemented by the new fragment.
84 I.e., Enkidu will save Gilgamesh.
85 These two lines impress one as popular sayings—here applied to Enkidu.
86 King’s fragment, col. I, 13–27, which now enables us to complete Jensen III, 1a, 12–21.
87 Yale tablet, lines 252–253.
88 Yale tablet, lines 143–148 = Assyrian version, Tablet IV, 6, 26 seq.
89 Assyrian version, Tablet III, 2a, 13–14.
90 Lines 215–222.
91 Assyrian version, Tablet V, Columns 3–4. We have to assume that in line 13 of column 4 (Jensen, p. 164), Enkidu takes up the thread of conversation, as is shown by line 22: “Enkidu brought his dream to him and spoke to Gilgamesh.”
92 Assyrian version, Tablet VI, lines 146–147.
93 Lines 178–183.
94 Lines 176–177.
95 Tablet VII, Column 6.
96 Assyrian version, Tablet VI, 200–203. These words are put into the mouth of Gilgamesh (lines 198–199). It is, therefore, unlikely that he would sing his own praise. Both Jensen and Ungnad admit that Enkidu is to be supplied in at least one of the lines.
97 Lines 109 and 112.
98 Assyrian version, Tablet IX, 1, 8–9.
99 Tablet VIII, 5, 2–6.
100 So also Gressmann in Ungnad-Gressmann, Das Gilgamesch-Epos, p. 97, regards Enkidu as the older figure.
101 See Jastrow, Adam and Eve in Babylonian Literature, AJSL, Vol. 15, pp. 193–214.
102 Assyrian version, Tablet I, 2, 31–36.
103 It will be recalled that Enkidu is always spoken of as “born in the field.”
104 Note the repetition ibtani “created” in line 33 of the “man of Anu” and in line 35 of the offspring of Ninib. The creation of the former is by the “heart,” i.e., by the will of Aruru, the creation of the latter is an act of moulding out of clay.
105 Tablet I, Column 3.
106 Following as usual the enumeration of lines in Jensen’s edition.
107 An analogy does not involve a dependence of one tale upon the other, but merely that both rest on similar traditions, which may have arisen independently.
108 Note that the name of Eve is not mentioned till after the fall (Genesis 3, 20). Before that she is merely ishsha, i.e., “woman,” just as in the Babylonian tale the woman who guides Enkidu is ḫarimtu, “woman.”
109 “And he drank and became drunk” (Genesis 9, 21).
110 “His heart became glad and his face shone” (Pennsylvania Tablet, lines 100–101).
111 That in the combination of this Enkidu with tales of primitive man, inconsistent features should have been introduced, such as the union of Enkidu with the woman as the beginning of a higher life, whereas the presence of a hunter and his father shows that human society was already in existence, is characteristic of folk-tales, which are indifferent to details that may be contradictory to the general setting of the story.
112 Pennsylvania tablet, lines 102–104.
113 Line 105.
114 Tablet I, 1, 9. See also the reference to the wall of Erech as an “old construction” of Gilgamesh, in the inscription of An-Am in the days of Sin-gamil (Hilprecht, Old Babylonian Inscriptions, I, No. 26.) Cf IV R² 52, 3, 53.
115 The invariable designation in the Assyrian version as against Uruk ribîtim, “Erech of the plazas,” in the old Babylonian version.
116 In Ungnad-Gressmann, Das Gilgamesch-Epos, p. 123 seq.
117 See Jensen, p. 266. Gilgamesh is addressed as “judge,” as the one who inspects the divisions of the earth, precisely as Shamash is celebrated. In line 8 of the hymn in question, Gilgamesh is in fact addressed as Shamash.
118 The darkness is emphasized with each advance in the hero’s wanderings (Tablet IX, col. 5).
119 This tale is again a nature myth, marking the change from the dry to the rainy season. The Deluge is an annual occurrence in the Euphrates Valley through the overflow of the two rivers. Only the canal system, directing the overflow into the fields, changed the curse into a blessing. In contrast to the Deluge, we have in the Assyrian creation story the drying up of the primeval waters so that the earth makes its appearance with the change from the rainy to the dry season. The world is created in the spring, according to the Akkadian view which is reflected in the Biblical creation story, as related in the P. document. See Jastrow, Sumerian and Akkadian Views of Beginnings (JAOS, Vol 36, p. 295 seq.).
120 Aš-am in Sumerian corresponding to the Akkadian Šabaṭu, which conveys the idea of destruction.
121 The month is known as the “Mission of Ishtar” in Sumerian, in allusion to another nature myth which describes Ishtar’s disappearance from earth and her mission to the lower world.
122 Historical Texts No. 1. The Sumerian name of the survivor is Zi-ū-gíd-du or perhaps Zi-ū-sū-du (cf. King, Legends of Babylon and Egypt, p. 65, note 4), signifying “He who lengthened the day of life,” i.e., the one of long life, of which Ut-napishtim (“Day of Life”) in the Assyrian version seems to be an abbreviated Akkadian rendering, with the omission of the verb. So King’s view, which is here followed. See also CT XVIII, 30, 9, and Langdon, Sumerian Epic of Paradise, p. 90, who, however, enters upon further speculations that are fanciful.
123 See the translation in Ungnad-Gressmann, Das Gilgamesch-Epos, pp. 69, seq. and 73.
124 According to Professor Clay, quite certainly Amurru, just as in the case of Enkidu.
125 Gressmann in Ungnad-Gressmann, Das Gilgamesch-Epos, p. 100 seq. touches upon this motif, but fails to see the main point that the companions are also twins or at least brothers. Hence such examples as Abraham and Lot, David and Jonathan, Achilles and Patroclus, Eteokles and Polyneikes, are not parallels to Gilgamesh-Enkidu, but belong to the enlargement of the motif so as to include companions who are not regarded as brothers.
126 Or Romus. See Rendell Harris, l. c., p. 59, note 2.
127 One might also include the primeval pair Yama-Yami with their equivalents in Iranian mythology (Carnoy, Iranian Mythology, p. 294 seq.).
128 Becoming, however, a triad and later increased to seven. Cf. Rendell Harris, l. c., p. 32.
129 I am indebted to my friend, Professor A. J. Carnoy, of the University of Louvain, for having kindly gathered and placed at my disposal material on the “twin-brother” motif from Indo-European sources, supplemental to Rendell Harris’ work.
130 On the other hand, Uruk mâtum for the district of Erech, i.e., the territory over which the city holds sway, appears in both versions (Pennsylvania tablet, 1. 10 = Assyrian version I, 5, 36).
131 “My likeness” (line 27). It should be noted, however, that lines 32–44 of I, 5, in Jensen’s edition are part of a fragment K 9245 (not published, but merely copied by Bezold and Johns, and placed at Jensen’s disposal), which may represent a duplicate to I, 6, 23–34, with which it agrees entirely except for one line, viz., line 34 of K 9245 which is not found in column 6, 23–34. If this be correct, then there is lacking after line 31 of column 5, the interpretation of the dream given in the Pennsylvania tablet in lines 17–23.
132 ina šap-li-ki, literally, “below thee,” whereas in the old Babylonian version we have ana ṣi-ri-ka, “towards thee.”
133 Repeated I, 6, 28.
134 ul-tap-rid ki-is-su-šú-ma. The verb is from parâdu, “violent.” For kissu, “strong,” see CT XVI, 25, 48–49. Langdon (Gilgamesh Epic, p. 211, note 5) renders the phrase: “he shook his murderous weapon!!”—another illustration of his haphazard way of translating texts.
135 Shown by the colophon (Jeremias, Izdubar-Nimrod, Plate IV.)
136 Lines 42–43 must be taken as part of the narrative of the compiler, who tells us that after the woman had informed Enkidu that Gilgamesh already knew of Enkidu’s coming through dreams interpreted by Ninsun, Gilgamesh actually set out and encountered Enkidu.
137 Tablet I, col. 4. See also above, p. 19.
138 IV, 2, 44–50. The word ullanum, (l.43) “once” or “since,” points to the following being a reference to a former recital, and not an original recital.
139 Only the lower half (Haupt’s edition, p. 82) is preserved.
140 “The eyes of Enkidu were filled with tears,” corresponding to IV, 4, 10.
141 Unless indeed the number “seven” is a slip for the sign ša. See the commentary to the line.