Gilgamesh

Louise M. Pryke

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2019
• ISBN:
  9781317506706
• Edition: 1
• Topic: History
• Subtopic: Ancient History
• Index: History

Gilgamesh focuses on the eponymous hero of the world's oldest epic and his legendary adventures. However, it also goes further and examines the significance of the story's Ancient Near Eastern context, and what it tells us about notions of kingship, animality, and the natures of mortality and immortality.

In this volume, Louise M. Pryke provides a unique perspective to consider many foundational aspects of Mesopotamian life, such as the significance of love and family, the conceptualisation of life and death, and the role of religious observance. The final chapter assesses the powerful influence of Gilgamesh on later works of ancient literature, from the Hebrew Bible, to the Odyssey, to The Tales of the Arabian Nights, and his reception through to the modern era.

Gilgamesh is an invaluable tool for anyone seeking to understand this fascinating figure, and more broadly, the relevance of Near Eastern myth in the classical world and beyond.

Key themes

1

Kingship

Mesopotamian literature holds a remarkable catalogue of heroes and kings who achieved exceptional feats. Gilgamesh, among them, is unique in many ways, but also part of a larger literary tradition of royals and heroes. Some royal characters are historical, with their stories presented in royal inscriptions and epics. Others are legendary figures, battling supernatural enemies and overcoming problems with magical solutions. These varied literary figures may be drawn together by their identification as kings. In this chapter, Gilgamesh’s identity as a king is explored, in light of the political, social, and religious responsibilities of the institution.

In the Introduction to this volume, it was observed that Gilgamesh’s identity, in a variety of sources, is intertwined with the story of his adventures. The Epic of Gilgamesh mirrors the identity of its protagonist in terms of thematic content, and follows the contours of the changes in his character. The role of kingship is fundamental for shaping the arc of Gilgamesh’s characterisation. In this chapter, emphasis is given to the sacred aspects of the king’s position, particularly in terms of the dispensation of justice and the maintenance of cosmic order.

The theme of kingship is foundational to the narrative of the Epic of Gilgamesh, and to the identity of its eponymous protagonist. This theme involves communications between humans and deities, the nature of leadership, and the genre of wisdom (also considered in Chapter 5). Kingship is explored in the Epic of Gilgamesh through the character of Gilgamesh, but also through the depiction of the legendary Flood survivor, Utanapishtim. This chapter considers how the character of Utanapishtim provides a model of ideal kingship, one which leads Gilgamesh to eventual acceptance of his social position, and back to civilisation. It is through his contact with the elder king that Gilgamesh develops his famous wisdom—a crucial quality for successful leadership.

The analysis of Gilgamesh’s characterisation as a king here is based primarily on the Standard Babylonian Version of the Epic of Gilgamesh. Later in the chapter, his role as king in the Sumerian myth of Gilgamesh and Aga is considered, and used as a point of comparison for the hero’s characterisation. In both compositions, Gilgamesh’s identity as king is important for the structure of the narrative, his characterisation, and his interactions with others. The Sumerian story provides a different perspective on Gilgamesh the king, contrasted against his role in the Epic of Gilgamesh.

Gilgamesh’s royal role had a significant cultural impact beyond the world of epic, with his image used in the literature and material culture of historical kings. The role of Mesopotamian king is essential to Gilgamesh’s identity and the shape of his story.

Kingship and religion in Mesopotamia

The depiction of the theme of kingship in Gilgamesh reflects the historical institution of kingship in Mesopotamia. While the portrayal of kingship in Gilgamesh cannot be considered to provide a representation fully reflective of the historical monarchy, Gilgamesh’s royal role is grounded in an ancient political institution which held a central role in the organisation of Mesopotamian society. There is a good deal of “cross-over” in terms of royal ideology and imagery between the historical reality of kingship and its fictional portrayal. To better understand how kingship in Gilgamesh is presented, it is useful to first explore what is known of the historical institution, to give some context to the institution’s depiction in literature.

The emergence of urban civilisations in Egypt and Mesopotamia at the end of the fourth millennium BCE transformed the structure of society. This transformation is most clearly seen in the political sphere with the development and consolidation of the institution of kingship.

Mesopotamian kingship originated in Southern Mesopotamia (Grottanelli and Mander, 2005: 5162), with the first written evidence for divine kingship generally dated to the rule of Naram-Sin of Akkad in the Old Akkadian period. The evidence for Naram-Sin’s divinity is shown through the use of the divine classifier before his name, and also through visual means, with his wearing of a horned crown associated with divine leadership (although Winter has argued that if indeed the horned crown of Naram-Sin indicated a godly status, it would be that of a very minor deity; 2008: 76).

As noted by Michalowski in his chapter on the mortal kings of Ur: “Naram-Sin’s short time as a god on earth was singular and was neither inheritable nor contagious” (2008: 35), and the use of the divine determinative by a king was next assumed by Shulgi of Ur, over a hundred years later. Naram-Sin is the royal protagonist of the Cuthean Legend, a composition sharing several features in common with the Epic of Gilgamesh. These features include an emphasis on the importance of the transmission of expertise through royal succession. The absence of instructions from a previous king leads to trouble for Naram-Sin in his efforts to successfully inhabit his royal role, drawing comparisons with Gilgamesh’s problematic reign in the Standard Babylonian Version of the Epic. Like Gilgamesh, the Cuthean Legend was initially translated by George Smith (Westenholz, 1997: 7).

Despite continued shifts in the ideology of kingship over the millennia that followed (see, for example, Jacobsen, 1970a: 132–156), the theological basis of royal power in Mesopotamia is evident from the time of the earliest royal inscriptions (Westenholz, 2000: 75). The worlds of divine and earthly politics were hierarchically ordered, with the gods emphatically in the dominant position over humans.

In a chapter exploring the intersection of death, divinity, and royal authority in Mesopotamia, Scurlock showed that the monarch’s role was both defined and circumscribed by heavy religious obligation, with his position more ideologically predicated on responsibility than on power (2013: 172). Kingship was perceived as a divine gift; the royal office was thought by the Mesopotamians to have descended from the heavens. The connection between the Mesopotamian king and deities was divinely inspired yet the bond was continuing, dynamic, and reciprocal. The presentation in Gilgamesh of the royal rulership of Uruk being monitored by deities reflects the close historical connection of divinity and kingship in Mesopotamia.

Communication and mediation

Communication is an important theme in Gilgamesh. In the Flood narrative, communication takes on a vital significance (considered in Chapter 7), and the giving of wisdom is generally transmitted orally. This emphasis on communication in Gilgamesh gives a sense of the historical perspective of communication between royals and deities. To give greater context to the presentation of this theme in Gilgamesh, a short summary of the topic is provided here.

Positive communication between historical kings and Mesopotamian divinities was necessary for the king’s success in the role of leader. Deities were thought to constantly guide the ruler in his leadership role, and assist in decision making (Radner, 2009: 221). In a chapter exploring the presence of foreign scholars in Neo-Assyrian courts, Radner observed that divine wishes and guidance were communicated through signs that were “encountered everywhere in the natural world, their creation,” with these signs being monitored and interpreted for the king by various scholarly advisors (Radner, 2009: 221).

To ensure successful communication, scholarly advisors and religious specialists were employed to “monitor and interpret the messages of the gods and to perform the rituals necessary to keep the precious relationship with the divine powers in balance” (Radner, 2009: 221).

The king’s role in keeping cosmic balance was divinely moderated and reliant on clear communication, which was facilitated by the correct interpretation of signs and omens. The failure of a king to heed the warnings of divination, leading to disaster and death, formed a key plot element of the Cuthean Legend. The historical reality of the connection of kingship and divination is also reflected in Gilgamesh, where the interpretation of signs and dreams could prove the difference between failure and success, and Gilgamesh is reliant on the good advice of those around him.

A small number of Mesopotamian kings were themselves worshipped as divine. This practice of deifying living kings was limited to short periods of history (Brisch, 2013), with the kings involved mostly belonging to the Sargonic, Ur III, and Isin dynasties. The question of the divinity or otherwise of Mesopotamian kings is an area of great complexity, and has been the focus of much productive scholarship (see recently Religion and Power: Divine Kingship in the Ancient World and Beyond, 2008, edited by Nicole Brisch).

In the Ur III period, historical kings aligned themselves ideologically and politically with the legendary rulers of Uruk, such as Gilgamesh. The “awkwardly combined” concepts of the king’s divinity and the principle of heavenly election meant a kind of compromise on the issue of divine kingship in this period (Steinkeller, 2017: 38). The problematic combination of divine appointment with individual divinity in this period holds interesting parallels with the complex issue of Gilgamesh’s own quasi-divine yet divinely-elected status as king.

Figure 1.1Uruk in 2008. Image by SAC Andy Holmes (RAF/MoD). Image available for reuse through Open Government Licence (OGL). www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/

In the historical human realm, authority was rooted in the office of the king, with various regional administrative offices branching from this central role. The bureaucracy surrounding the central position of king is represented in the Gilgamesh epic through the elders of the city of Uruk. The role of king was “legitimised by the gods, demonstrated through ritual and reinforced by tradition” (Hill, Jones, and Morales, 2013: 4). In a culture where deities were the source of life and responsible for the maintenance of universal order, concepts of power and religion were tightly interwoven.

Mesopotamian kings could present themselves as having special and unusually close bonds with the divine, and even belonging to the immediate family of the primary deities. Despite their special connection to the immortal world of deities, human kings, like legendary heroes, faced the realities and limitations of mortality.

The mixture of divine and mortal qualities involved in kingship made the Mesopotamian king particularly well qualified for literary explorations of the boundaries of humanity. The special role of Mesopotamian kings has been described as inhabiting the position of the “vertex” of humanity—the point where the horizontal mortal world was connected to the vertical heavens (Grottanelli and Mander, 2005: 5163). Kings were well placed for mediating between humanity and the divine, and the office of kingship was essential in maintaining universal order. The effective maintenance of cosmological order involved the use of royal rituals (Noegel, 2007b).

The primary position of monarch in ancient Mesopotamia was a masculine role; the throne was generally held by a king (for some noteworthy exceptions, see Westenholz, 2000: 89). The nature of kingship in ancient Mesopotamia was not static across all periods, and this variability resulted in changes in the relationship between the monarch and the pantheon.

The relationship of Gilgamesh to various Mesopotamian deities is a significant aspect of his epic, and these relationships also feature prominently in Sumerian myths featuring Gilgamesh. The hero’s success and indeed, his very survival, are contingent on the good will and intercession of primary Mesopotamian deities, yet at times he behaves impiously and displays a lack of proper concern for maintaining his good relations with the divine. The hero’s desire to achieve a type of immortality through lasting fame at times places him at odds with his religious and royal responsibilities, an issue explored in greater detail here.

Royal epics (and epic royals)

It is important to note the significance of the theme of kingship in the development, transmission, and survival of stories of the Gilgamesh’s adventures. The relationship between Mesopotamian epic and historical kingship has very early origins. Noegel has argued that there is no doubt that the “increasingly powerful institution of kingship played a significant role in the creation and promulgation of the earliest epic poems” (2005: 243).

Connections between Mesopotamian kingship and royal propaganda have formed the basis of several scholarly analyses. These scholarly analyses have considered the juxtaposition of kingship and royal propaganda in epic literature and the visual arts. Epics, focused on the exceptional deeds of legendary kings, created a sense of cultural identity and prestige surrounding the role of king—this high stature for the office of kingship was further enhanced by the close bonds between deities and kings seen in epic poetry. The prestige surrounding the legendary rulers of epic—some of whom were worshipped as deities—could be accessed by the historical kings of Mesopotamia through imagery, royal epic, and claims of ancestral t...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Series Information
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• List of figures
• Series foreword
• Acknowledgements
• Why Gilgamesh?
• Key themes
• Gilgamesh afterwards
• Further reading
• Bibliography
• Glossary
• Timeline
• Index