angelology in the epic of gilgamesh

ANGELOLOGY IN THE EPIC OF GILGAMESH* MEHMET-ALI ATA Abstract

The Epic of Gilgamesh has been interpreted by Th. Jacobsen and his followers primarily as the story of a hero who struggles beyond his capacity to find immortality, gets disappointed, and finally faces the truth, maturing and turning to normality on the premise that it is his achievements and not himself that will last. The present paper challenges a literal reading of the plot of the Epic along these lines, and through select comparison with the ancient Egyptian, heterodox Hebrew, Iranian, and Gnostic traditions, argues that the meaning system embedded in the Epic can be thought to point to notions of mysticism and soteriology, expressed in a distinctively Mesopotamian idiom that suppresses an explicit display of such concepts.

There have been many attempts toward interpreting aspects of The Epic of Gilgamesh.1 Admittedly, the poem is a rather enigmatic piece of literature, compounded by the fact that in its latest and most comprehensive format, the Standard Babylonian Version, it is a conglomeration of independent Gilgamesh tales that go back to remoter antiquity.2 In this respect, the twelve-tablet Standard Version, even
* My sincere thanks to Irene J. Winter for reading an earlier version of the manuscript and sending me critical comments and detailed edit suggestions, as well as to an anonymous JANER referee for alerting me regarding a number of philological matters that would have otherwise escaped my attention. 1 Some examples are Jacobsen 1930, idem., 1976: esp. 218-9; Foster 1984, Abusch 1986, idem., 1993; Cooper 2002. 2 Tigay 1997: 46. The older poems of Gilgamesh (known as Bilgames in these poems) in Sumerian are not the same as the later Standard Babylonian Version, but separate and individual tales without common themes. They were probably part of a long-standing oral tradition and first committed to writing under the Third Dynasty of Ur (George 1999: xix). To some extent, these poems were the source of the later Standard Babylonian Version, which is the classical Epic of Gilgamesh, so to speak (ibid., xv, xx). This Akkadian epic acquired its original shape in the Old Babylonian Period (Tigay 1997: 41). Its final version restructured the episodes, reworded the text extensively, and added supplementary material, but it is closely related to its Old and Middle Babylonian forerunners and tells the same story (ibid., 45). This version became so widely accepted in the first millennium

Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2004 Also available online www.brill.nl

JANER 4

mehmet-ali ata

without the controversial appending of the twelfth tablet,3 may not be taken as a unified story that presents a coherent narrative structure in the sense that one might expect to find in a work of western literature. I believe that the greatest drawback of contemporary approaches to the meaning, or threads of meaning, in the poem is in trying to see in it normal human emotions and concerns, such as love, sex, friendship, and transition from immaturity to adulthood. Especially, one particular line of interpretation initiated by Thorkild Jacobsen and taken up by his followers favors the idea that the main theme of the Epic is Gilgameshs growing out of an eccentric and in some ways childish lifestyle, and turning to normality.4 Further, speculations on the nature of the relationship between the two heroes of the epic, Gilgamesh and Enkidu, have often suffered from literalisms such as a friendship that takes the place of a normal heterosexual relationship, and even homosexual inclinations proper.5
that scribes were no longer able or willing to modify it in any substantial way (ibid.). On the Akkadian authors separating some of the themes of the Sumerian poems from their original contexts and using them in the Akkadian epic in constructing a sequence of events, see ibid., 42. 3 Tablet XII of the Standard Babylonian series of Gilgamesh is in fact a close paraphrase in Akkadian of the latter half of one of the Bilgames poems in Sumerian. Even though some have argued that Tablet XII had an indispensable place in the Epic, most scholars would agree that the tablet was appended to the series because it was plainly related material (George 1999: xxviii). According to Tigay, the appendage of this tablet to the epic might be connected with the interest of incantation priests, like Sn-leqi-unnnn, in Gilgamesh as ruler of the Netherworld (Tigay 1997: 44). 4 In stating in a nutshell the main subject matter of the epic, Abusch writes: It is about nature, culture, the value of human achievements and their limitations, friendship and love, separation and sorrow, life and death. (Abusch 1986: 143-4). Abusch further indicates that in the Epic, man is addressed both as an individual and as a social being (ibid., 144). See also Jacobsen 1976: 218-9, Foster 1984: e.g. 21-22, and Abusch 1993: e.g. 7 and 14. In his 1993 work Abusch particularly sees the carpe diem advice of Siduri to Gilgamesh, contained in the Old Babylonian Version of the Epic, as a suggestion that the hero should take up the normal life of a mortal man who experiences the pleasures and bears the responsibilities of human family and society (ibid., 14). More recently Cooper has written: The Akkadian Gilgamesh epic is about growing up, as Jacobsen came to believe, but Gilgameshs friendship with Enkidu and his rejection of Ishtar were not part of a refusal to grow up, as Jacobsen thought, but were important stages in the maturation process (2002): 81-82. 5 See again Jacobsen 1976: 219 where the author writes: The appearance of Enkidu provides Gilgamesh with a chum and allows him to remain in preadolescence rather than moving on to a heterosexual relationship. Along similar lines, Abusch interprets Gilgameshs encounter with the barmaid Siduri in the Old Babylonian Version as Gilgameshs seeking in the barmaid a woman with whom

angelology in the epic of gilgamesh

My essential premise in this paper is a totally representational understanding of the episodes in the poem. I would submit that all the events presented within the framework of the Epic are actually models or representations of cosmic sagas that take place in a mythical time frame, an anthropological proto-history that does not involve man in the ordinary sense of the word, as we know him today, but one that focuses on the primordial versions of the anthropos. These sagas, however, have direct consequences in the current human condition. Even the most seemingly human element in the poem, death and its inevitability, can also be understood in terms of the divines relation and concession to death, since Gilgamesh is partly man and partly god.6 In the discussion that follows, I do not venture a thorough and definitive interpretation of the poem. Rather, I would like to point out preliminary alternative lines of approach, focusing on select aspects of the Epic rather than treating it as a whole. To this end, in addition to aspects of ancient Egyptian and Iranian religion, I shall draw on comparable themes found in the later heterodox, or esoteric, religious traditions of the Near East, such as the biblical apocrypha, hidden books, works which Jewish tradition characterizes as the Outside Books, that is, books left out of the Scriptural canon;7 and the Gnostic tradition, the first and most dangerous heresy among the early Christians, with a probable birth date after 70 AD.8
he can live and through whom he can attain immortality, to replace the dead friend whom he grieved (Abusch 1993: 4). One can quote other opinions regarding the relationship between the two heroes: The tragedy of Enkidu begins with his attraction to the opposite sex, is joined by jealousy and revulsion for another of his own sex, and is now sealed by his friendship with Gilgamesh, which has no sexual basis at all (Foster 1984: 22); The meaning of the dream, however, is clear from its content. Gilgamesh sees an axe, with which he cohabits as with a woman; as the axe is equivalent to Engidu, the dream cannot mean anything but that homosexual intercourse is going to take place between Gilgamesh and the newcomer (Jacobsen 1930: 70). On an assessment of the suggested homoerotic connotations in the epic, as well as the evolution of Jacobsens ideas on the meaning of the Epic, see Cooper 2002. 6 SV I 48 and IX 51. 7 Bamberger 1952: 15. Most of these books were composed in Hebrew or Aramaic, and a few in Greek. Some of these books were included in Greek manuscripts of the Bible, and thence were taken over by the Catholic Church as sacred scripture (ibid., 15-16). 8 Filoramao 1990: 2; Couliano 1990: 29. The origins of Gnosticism are practically unknown. However, it clearly has ancient precedents of a similar nature such as Orphism, Pythagoreanism, and the ancient Egyptian Books of the Afterlife. On the controversial question of the origins of Gnosticism, see Couliano 1990:

mehmet-ali ata

In one sense, we are irremediably removed from the essence or kernel of a very ancient civilization, while in another sense it is highly likely that elements of that essence or kernel, manifest in different guises, made their way to later philosophical and religious developments that occurred in the same broad geographical area, perhaps as a result of the continuum of an intellectual tradition. The fact that these traditions were considered esoteric and hence left out of mainstream scriptures, coupled by the resemblance of many of their themes to those in ancient literature, may be taken as further indication that what we are dealing with in ancient texts like The Epic of Gilgamesh are primarily the earlier, and perhaps more authentic, versions of the same esoteric material. It is hence only natural that later religious traditions that were meant to appeal to masses chose to suppress or exclude these notions. My domain of inquiry in this paper primarily comprises Gilgameshs acts prior to the coming of Enkidu,9 the prefiguration of the coming of Enkidu in Gilgameshs dreams interpreted by his mother,10 and the nature of the relationship between the two heroes in the Epic. In relation to the dreams that prefigure the coming of Enkidu in terms of objects falling from the sky as well as the co-mingling of the divine with a realm of opposite character as the central theological problem in the Epic, I will also be referring to the myth of Ishtars Descent to the Netherworld 11 in order to place matters further in an ancient Mesopotamian context. Finally, insofar as the somewhat antagonistic but in essence mystical camaraderie between Gilgamesh and Enkidu is concerned, I will be making use of the ancient Egyptian myth of the Contendings of Horus and Seth12 for comparisons which I hope will further shed light on the nature of both the struggle and the friendship between the two heroes. I would like to start with Gilgameshs initial state presented in the epic before the coming of Enkidu. He is depicted as an uncontrolled man of extreme emotions, oppressing the people of Uruk over whom
28ff; Filoramo 1990: 7ff. Part of the evidence for Gnosticisms ancient origins should come from disentangling the codes of ancient sources themselves, especially those of Mesopotamia and Egypt, which scholars of Gnosticism so far have not dealt with deeply. 9 SV I 65-93. 10 SV I 245-293. 11 For an analysis especially of the Sumerian text, see Sladek 1974. 12 On this myth, see Griffiths 1960; te Velde 1977; Parkinson 1995: esp. 70ff; te Velde 2001.

angelology in the epic of gilgamesh

he rules as king.13 Even though the precise nature of this oppression is not entirely clear, from what the poem itself spells out, it is certain that Gilgameshs acts are socially disruptive, since he lets no son go free to his father, lets no [daughter go free to her] mother, and lets [no] girl go free to [her bridegroom].14 Theories as to how Gilgamesh was oppressing the citizens of Uruk include his forcing them to some form of corve duty, his abusing both men and women sexually, and his again forcefully engaging them in a physically challenging and tiring game of hockey.15 I will not here discuss any of these theories, and will simply postulate that whatever Gilgamesh was doing in Uruk, his super-human strength and passion were above what the standard human capacity in this particular mythical context could bear, leading the citizens of Uruk to complain to the gods in order to find relief from their intense agitation.16 One may immediately compare this situation to one found in the Epic of Atrahasis, in which the first generation of humanity created by the gods is also characterized by an analogous kind of excessive and annoying behavior, depicted in the poem as noisiness, which results in the gods decision to wipe this bothersome humanity from the earth by means of certain catastrophes that culminate in the Flood.17 One can talk about two further comparisons along the same lines, one from within and the other outside the ancient Mesopotamian tradition. First, within the Mesopotamian tradition, the antediluvian sages, apkallus, are also said to have committed an act or acts of hubris that offended the ruling gods, resulting in their punishment and relegation from the mainstream cosmos to the Aps as well.18 Even
13 Supra 10. Gilgamesh is further referred to in SV I 234 as adi- a-am lu , translated by Foster as the joy-woe man, which characterizes his state of being a man of intense but agonizing emotions (Foster 1984: 29). The words are also translated as joy-woe-man i.e. of fickle mood in Black et al. 1999. 14 SV I 68, 72, 76 (George 1999: 3-4). 15 For a synoptic assessment of these theories with special emphasis on the hockey game and the nature of Gilgameshs sexual association with the male and female citizens of Uruk, see again Cooper 2002: 77ff. 16 SV I 92-93. 17 OB I vii; OB II i, vii; SV II iii, iv. 18 In the fragmentary texts preserved, it is not entirely clear how the apkallus angered the gods. Erica Reiner writes: It certainly seems as if the scribes deliberately suppressed a cycle dealing with those human beings who, at one time or other of history, and no doubt with the connivance of Ea, revolted against the gods and brought down Itar from heaven into Eanna, or aroused Adads anger by some forgotten or perhaps unmentionable act, or angered Ea through some form of challenge which is still obscure to us, in spite of the three duplicates we now have

mehmet-ali ata

though texts do not specify what the hubris of the sages was, one can think of how Gilgamesh is also a semi-divine figure who has superior wisdom, and posit that the apkallus also angered the gods on account of an excessive manifestation of their super-human capacity. As for the comparison outside the Mesopotamian tradition, it is the apocryphal Book of Enoch where another group of semi-divine beings, the Giants, who are the offsprings of fallen heavenly angels, the Watchers, and mortal women, are said to have brought widespread slaughter, destruction, and moral corruption to the world.19 As is the case in both The Epic of Gilgamesh and that of Atrahasis, in the Book of Enoch as well mankind complains to the Most High for release from their troubles, bringing about the destruction of the Giants by means of the Flood.20 The story of these Giants presence on earth is also alluded to in the Hebrew Bible, in the Book of Genesis (6: 1-4) in which the beney haelohim, sons of God, descend from heaven and conjugally unite with the benot haadam, daughters of men.21 Even

of this allusion (1961: 11; for a transliteration and translation of the reverse of the relevant bilingual text/tablet LKA No. 76, see ibid., 2ff). It is clear from the Poem of Erra, however, that these antediluvian sages were relegated to the Aps by Marduk: I dispatched those (renowned) ummnu(-sages) down into the Aps: I did not ordain their coming up again (v. 147, Marduk speaking to Erra, Cagni [trans.] 1977: 32). It is noteworthy that in both the apkallu tradition and the Epic of Atrahasis, it is Enki/Ea as the god of gnosis who encourages the initial generation of humanity to be rebellious, as is especially clear in the latter work: Enki made his voice heard / And spoke to his servant: / Call the elders, the senior men! / Start [an uprising] in your own house, / Let heralds proclaim / Let them make a loud noise in the land: / Do not revere your gods, / Do not pray to your goddesses, / But search out the door of Namtara (OB I vii, Dalley [trans.] 2000: 19). 19 I Enoch 7-9, Black (trans.) 1985: 28-30; Reeves 1992: 67. Then the giants began to devour the flesh of men, and mankind began to become few upon the earth; and as men perished from the earth, their voice went up to heaven: Bring our cause before the Most High, and our destruction before the glory of the Great One (I Enoch 8.4, Black [trans.] 1985: 29). One can compare one of the relevant passages in the Epic of Atrahasis: 600 years, less than 600, passed, / And the country became too wide, the people too numerous. / The country was as noisy as a bellowing bull. / The God grew restless at their racket, / Ellil had to listen to their noise. / He addressed the great gods, / The noise of mankind has become too much, / I am losing sleep over their racket. / Give the order that urupp-disease shall break out (OB I vii, Dalley [trans.] 2000: 18). 20 I Enoch 8-9, ibid., 29. 21 Reeves 1992: 68. These (leaders) and all the rest (of the two hundred watchers) took for themselves wives from all whom they chose; and they began to cohabit with them and to defile themselves with them, and they taught them sorcery and spells and showed them the cutting of roots and herbs (I Enoch 7.1, Black [trans.]: 28); When men began to multiply on the face of the ground, and daughters were

angelology in the epic of gilgamesh

though neither Gilgameshs nor the other Mesopotamian super-human generations offenses are presented as abominable as those of the Giants, the paradox here is that the Hebrew tradition may be using a different tone of presentation in relating a mythical incident analogous to the Mesopotamian ones we are looking at. For instance, the mingling of the human and the divine in breeding super-human beings is how heroes are generated in Greek myths. The suggested mixture of the two separate realms of the divine and the human, tolerated and even prized in Greek mythology, was abhorred by Jewish tradition as an illicit disruption of the created demarcation between the spheres of the sacred and the profane.22 Furthermore, just as Gilgamesh, prior to the arrival of Enkidu, is engaged in the practice of the jus primae noctis, or the droit de seigneur,23 so are the ancestors of the Giants, the sons of God of Genesis, said by some commentators of the Bible to have had sexual intercourse with mortal women in the same manner.24 Most revealing, however, is that Gilgameshs name, along with a version of Humbabas name, is found twice in certain fragments of the Book of Giants from Qumran which may originally have been part of the Book of Enoch.25 The versions of these fragments found in the oasis of Turfan in Central Asia had a formative influence on Mani, the founder of the heretical Manichaean sect who was brought up in Babylonia.26 In fact, the Book of Giants became a part of the canon of Manis faith, and perhaps for this reason it was eventually excluded from the Jewish Book of Enoch.27 Why Gilgamesh and Humbaba should feature as giants in the Qumran fragments may be suggested partly from the (again) fragmentary Anatolian version of the Gilgamesh Epic as unearthed in Hittite cuneiform at Boazky. This version dates from the midsecond millennium BC. In it, Gilgamesh is specifically described as a giant, 11 cubits (about 5 m) tall.28
born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were fair; and they took to wife such of them as they chose (Genesis 6.1-2, Holy Bible. Revised Standard Version). 22 Reeves 1992: 68. 23 He will couple with the wife-to-be, / he first of all, the bridegroom after. / By divine consent it is so ordained: / when his navel-cord was cut, for him she was destined (OB II P 159-162, George [trans.] 1999: 15). 24 Jung 1974: 116. 25 Dalley 1997: 228. 26 Ibid. 27 Ibid. 28 Ibid.

10

mehmet-ali ata

Finally, in comparison to Gilgameshs excessive vigor, I would mention the equally complex and enigmatic Egyptian god Seth who also has a similar uncontrolled and exuberant male sexuality.29 Seth is the opponent of both Osiris and Horus in Egyptian mythology.30 However, this opposition is a mystical one. The Two Lords, Horus and Seth, were the perennial antagonists.31 The Egyptian king was identified with both of these latter gods but not in the sense that he was considered the incarnation of one or the other; he embodied them as a pair, as opposites in equilibrium.32 In Egyptian mythology, these two gods were at first separated, but ultimately reunited and reconciled.33 Like most of the divine or semi-divine beings such as the Giants and the apkallus who are known to have committed acts of hubris, in Egyptian mythology Seth also undergoes a significant degree of relegation, losing his equal share over the rule of Egypt with Horus, and becoming subject to the latters superiority.34 According the Memphite Theology, even though at the beginning the two gods contending for the rulership of Egypt are separated and assigned equal shares of the country, Geb, the earth-god who acts as arbiter between them later regrets his decision and rescinds it, giving the whole land to Horus. The two crowns of Upper and Lower Egypt are now said to grow from the head of Horus,35 as he is also shown in art. In this regard, notwithstanding his negative associations, Seth is also a god who has become the victim of an act of usurpation that perhaps adds to his behind-the-scenes venerability. He is thus a paradoxical divinity, on the one hand the separated god, an anti-social god, cut off from the community of the gods,36 but on the other hand, a god that has his own complex sanctity. From this standpoint, one can also remember Georges Dumzils emphasis on the sexual
29 te Velde 2001: 269; on the sexuality of Seth, see also idem. 1977: 39ff and Parkinson 1995: 65 ff. On the animosity between Horus and Seth, as well as that between Osiris and Seth, see also Griffiths 1960. 30 On the complexity created by the co-extensiveness of Horus and Osiris as the opponents of Seth, see Tobin 1993: 100. 31 Frankfort 1948: 21. 32 Ibid. 33 te Velde 2001: 269. 34 Frankfort 1948: 25. On the original royal equality between Horus and Seth, see also Tobin 1993: 100. On Seths benevolent qualities notwithstanding his overall negative reputation, see Griffiths 1980: 11. 35 Ibid. 36 te Velde 1977: 31.

angelology in the epic of gilgamesh

11

excesses and offenses of Indo-European heroes as acts that are hallmarks of these beings ontologies in addition to their positive qualities of valor.37 Through his initial sexual violations and later fear of death, Gilgamesh too is essentially cut off from mainstream society, and throughout the Standard Version of the poem, he is never assimilated to it. Rather than a lack of normality, however, this aspect of Gilgamesh too is part of what the complex hero is all about, on the one hand alien and unwanted, on the other venerable and indispensable. I now would like to address the arrival of Enkidu to the scene. The primary intention of the gods in creating and sending out Enkidu is for him to be a match to Gilgameshs restlessness,38 and the similarity, equality, and complementarity of the two heroes are time and again signaled throughout the poem.39 Most noteworthy, however, is the imagery in Gilgameshs dreams that prefigure the coming of Enkidu. Gilgamesh has two dreams which he relates to his mother who in turn interprets them for him.40 Both dreams include supernatural objects that mysteriously appear in the midst of the city of Uruk, and both are revered by the people of Uruk who surround and admire them. The first dream is of greater interest for my purpose. In it, a heavenly rock, a supernatural meteor has fallen from the sky. Gilgamesh tries
37 Dumzil 1969: 68ff. One could especially compare Seth with the Greek hero Oedipus who on account of a sexual fault of a cosmic character is relegated, and even banished, from Thebes where he was king (Oedipus Tyrannos), but is also ultimately desired by his native city for the sake of its safety on account of the venerability of his bodily presence as declared by prophecies (Oedipus at Colonus). 38 They summoned Aruru, the great one: / You, Aruru, created [mankind:] / now fashion what Anu has thought of! / Let him be a match for the storm of his heart, / let them vie with each other, so Uruk may be rested! (SV I 94-98, George 1999: 4-5). 39 The band of shepherds was gathered around him, / talking about him among themselves: / This fellow how like in build he is to Gilgamesh, / tall in stature, proud as a battlement (SV II 38-41, George 1999: 13); He entered the city of Uruk-the-Town-Square, / and a crowd gathered around. / He came to a halt in the street of Uruk-the-Town-Square, / all gathered about, the people discussed him: / In build he is the image of Gilgamesh, / but shorter in stature, and bigger of bone (OB II P 178-185, George 1999: 15). Overall, this similarity and cosmic complementarity between the two heroes is directly reminiscent of the Gnostic Anthropos, or Urmensch myth: This relationship is understood as a relationship of copy to original, i.e., the (earthly) man is a copy of the divine pattern, which likewise often bears the name man (Rudolph 1983: 92). 40 SV I 245-272 (first dream), 273-293 (second dream).

12

mehmet-ali ata

to lift it, but it is too heavy for him to handle. In relating this dream to his mother, Gilgamesh says: The stars of the heavens appeared above me, / like a rock from the sky one fell down before me. / I lifted it up, but it weighed too much for me, / I tried to roll it, but I could not dislodge it.41 As for the second object mentioned in the second dream, it is an axe, and this time Gilgamesh is able to lift it, and set it out at his mothers feet: [In a street] of Uruk-the-TownSquare, / an axe was lying with a crowd gathered round. / The land [of Uruk] was standing around it, / [the country was] gathered about it. / A crowd was milling about before it, / [the menfolk were] thronging around it. / I lifted it up and set it down at your feet.42 Gilgameshs mother interprets these objects as manifestations of a mighty comrade whom Gilgamesh will love as a wife.43 This image of a wife has been understood in an early article by Jacobsen as an indication of a homoerotic connection between Gilgamesh and Enkidu.44 In fact, these prefigurations of Enkidu introduces at the outset the paradoxical complementarity of the two heroes. If Gilgamesh is superior to Enkidu, as most would agree, why is then Gilgamesh the hyperactive oppressor of Uruk unable to lift the heavenly rock?45 Was not Enkidu, however, a primitive man, a lull, made of clay?46 Clearly, in these dreams, especially in the first one, Gilgamesh encounters a special manifestation of Enkidu, a superior ineffable being of a heavenly nature which he cannot fully master. Once again, we may turn to the ancient Egyptian myth of the Contendings of Horus and Seth in relation to this particular episode in The Epic of Gilgamesh. The Egyptian myth is preserved on a late twelfthSV I 247-250, George 1999: 10. SV I 277-283, ibid., 11. 43 Like a wife you loved it, caressed and embraced it: / a mighty comrade will come to you, and be his friends saviour (SV I 267-268, George 1999: 10). See also SV I 288ff. 44 Jacobsen 1930: 70. The change in Jacobsens interpretation of the relationship between Gilgamesh and Enkidu in the authors later years is noted by Cooper 2002: 74. 45 In fact, as noted by Foster, in the Old Babylonian Version Gilgamesh is able to move the heavenly rock with the help of the young men of Uruk: I tried to bear it but it was too heavy for me, / I strained but I could not move it. / While the land of Uruk was gathered around it, / The young men did it homage, / I even bent my brow/ They loaded me. / At last I could raise it and brought it off to you (OB I P 8-14, Foster 1984: 26) 46 The goddess Aruru, she washed her hands, / took a pinch of clay, threw it down in the wild. / In the wild she created Enkidu, the hero, / offspring of silence, knit strong by Ninurta (SV I 101-104, George 1999: 5).
42 41

angelology in the epic of gilgamesh

13

dynasty fragment and comprises a sexual incident in which Seth tries to induce Horus to take part in homosexual acts.47 Horus response suggests that the act is a disreputable one that Seth would wish to keep secret: And the Person of Horus said: Watch out; I shall tell this! 48 Horus describes the act to his mother Isis as: [] Seth [sought] to have carnal knowledge of me.49 And she says to him: Beware! Do not approach him about it! When he mentions it to you another time, then you shall say to him: It is too painful for me entirely, as you are heavier than me. My strength shall not match/support your strength, so you shall say to him.50 Disregarding the sexual details of this episode, which one should see as completely irrelevant to any social or literal understanding of sexuality, what we have here is a very similar configuration to the initial Gilgamesh-Enkidu dialectics, with one side too heavy, superior, or unbearable for the other. Even though the heavier side in the initial prefiguration of Enkidu is Enkidu himself, it is later Gilgamesh who ultimately choreographs Enkidus participation in sexual activities with the harlot Shamhat, just as Seth tries to engage Horus in pederastic acts.51 Hence, if we set aside Enkidus prefigurations in Gilgameshs dreams, it is Gilgamesh with his exuberant sexual vigor who makes arrangements with the hunter to lead the harlot to Enkidu, and in this respect he is comparable to Seth who initiates the sexual transactions between himself and the innocent Horus.52 In both stories, in a way, a series or chain of catastrophic events are instigated by the plots of a divine or semidivine being characterized by an exuberant male sexuality. In Gnosticism, the instigator of such a chain of troubles is Sophia, the female trickster, just as Seth is the male version in Egypt.53 I would argue
47 The homosexual episode is related in a Kahun Papyrus and in The Contendings of Horus and Seth (P. Chester Beatty I) (Griffiths 1960: 41; Parkinson 1995: 70). And then the Person of Seth said / to the Person of Horus: How lovely is your backside! / Broad (ws ?) are [your] thighs [] (Parkinson 1995: 70). 48 Ibid. 49 Ibid. 50 Ibid. 51 Said Gilgamesh to him, to the hunter: / Go, hunter, take with you Shamhat the harlot! / When the herd comes down to the water-hole, / she should strip off her raiment to reveal her charms. / He will see her, and will approach her, / his herd will spurn him, though he grew up amongst it (SV I 162-166, George 1999: 7). 52 At the same time, however, research has also shown that a text from the pyramid of Pepy I presents the homosexual advances as reciprocal and names Horus as the initiator (Griffiths 1980: 15). 53 In relation to the trickster character of the Egyptian god Seth, te Velde quotes

14

mehmet-ali ata

that in Gilgamesh as well we have such a figure, bit of a Seth, bit of a Sophia, characterized by an excessive sexual involvement, manifest in his practice of the jus primae noctis, his arranging for Enkidus sexual union with Shamhat, and perhaps his methods of oppressing the people of Uruk.54 A fragmentary passage in the Egyptian New Kingdom Dream Book describes the signs of people for whom the diagnosis is the god in him is Seth.55 Symptoms include the fact that such a man is beloved of women through the greatness [] of his loving them, aggression, anti-social behavior, and that he will not distinguish the married woman from [an unmarried one(?)].56 In Gnosticism, Sophia claims to be whore and holy at the same time.57 In its contemporary context the designation whore indicates an excess of eroticism, not necessarily the practice of rapid profit from quick sex.58 Sophia, as
Kernyi: Disorder belongs to the totality of life, and the spirit of this disorder is the trickster. His function in an archaic society, or rather the function of his mythology, of the tales told about him, is to add disorder to order and so make a whole, to render possible, within the fixed bounds of what is permitted, an experience of what is not permitted (Radin with commentaries by K. Kernyi and C. G. Jung 1956: 185 cited in te Velde 1977: 56). Kernyi further called the trickster: the spirit of disorder, the enemy of boundaries (ibid.). On Sophia as the female trickster in Gnosticism, see Couliano 1992: 86. 54 The abnormal erotic phenomena that characterized Greek heroes was associated by Aristotle with the melancholic syndrome. The name of the syndrome is amor hereos or, Latinized, heroycus, as its etymology is still in doubt: it might be derived from the Greek eros, corrupted heros (love), or directly from heros (hero), for heroes represented, according to ancient tradition, evil aerial influences, similar to devils (Couliano 1987: 19). The medieval perception of this very phenomenon finds expression in a passage from St Hildegarde of Bingens Causae et curae also quoted by Couliano: Melancholics have big bones that contain little marrow, like vipers . They are excessively libidinous and, like donkeys, overdo it with women. If they desisted from this depravity, madness would result . Their love is hateful, twisted and death-carrying, like the love of voracious wolves . They have intercourse with women but they hate them (ibid.). One can again remember from this standpoint Gilgameshs characterization as a ad-a-amlu, joy-woe man in the Epic of Gilgamesh (SV I 234). Perhaps, what this rather obscure designation referes to is also an analogous understanding of melancholy that is both exuberant and destructive. Finally, one can note how the Sumerian King List also refers to Gilgamesh as the son of a lill-demon: divine Gilgames/ his father (was) a lill demon / a high priest of Kullab / reigned 126 years (Critical Edition of the Text, col. iii 17-20, Jacobsen 1973: 89). 55 Parkinson 1995: 67. 56 Ibid. 57 In one of the Nag Hammadi documents (NHC VI 2, 13, 16-22) she declares: I am the honored / and the despised. / I am the prostitute / and the respectable woman (Rudolph 1983: 81). 58 Couliano 1992: 87. According to the cosmology of Gnosticism, which is a

angelology in the epic of gilgamesh

15

the last or outermost layer, or aeon, of the hierarchy of the Pleroma (the fullness), the realm of the unknown God, is characterized by an uncontrolled passion which violates the unity of this heavenly configuration.59 As a result of inexperience or because of the machinations of an evil character who rapes her, she looks down to the lower world, which she is not supposed to do. This action is illegal within the constituted order of the Pleroma.60 In the early scholarship on Gnosticism Sophia was often compared to certain ancient Near Eastern goddess figures such as Ishtar.61 Even though this idea may have other bases and be considered outdated today, Sophias affinity to Ishtar is unmistakable given how the latter also looks down from Heaven and covets a lower world.62 Further affinity between Gilgamesh and Ishtar in the poem can be gleaned through Gilgameshs own connection with the harlots of Uruk who are presumably cult-followers of Ishtar herself. His sending for a harlot to initiate Enkidu is a clear indication that he has some power over these women. In addition, a passage in Tablet III seems to depict Gilgameshs mother Ninsun initiating Enkidu to a cult characterized by these women, referred to as the votaries of Gilgamesh: O mighty Enkidu, you are not sprung from my womb, / but henceforth your brood will belong to the votaries of Gilgamesh, / the priestesses, the hierodules and the women of the temple. / She put the symbols on Enkidus neck.63 In this respect, Gilgameshs confrontation with the goddess in Tablet VI of the Standard Version in

modified version of the late antique cosmic system, the earth is at the center of the cosmos, and is surrounded by the air and the eight heavenly spheres. These eight spheres consist of those of the seven planets and the fixed stars which close them off. Beyond them is the the realm of the unknown God, the Pleroma, with its own graduated worlds, aeons (Rudolph 1983: 67). 59 Rudolph 1983: 80. 60 Couliano 1992: 87. Ultimately, Sophia is saved and reintegrated into the Pleroma (ibid., 71). Thus, she has a dual nature, on the one hand exclusively spiritual, as she also takes part in the creation of man through the implanting of the divine spark, and on the other lower and fallen. 61 Ibid., 83. 62 The opening verses of the Sumerian poem Inannas Descent read: From the great heaven she has set her mind on the great below / From the great heaven the goddess has [set] her mind on the great below / [From] the great heaven Inanna has [set] her mind [on the great below] / My mistress has abandoned heaven, abandoned earth, and is descending to the netherworld / Inanna has abandoned heaven, abandoned earth, and is descending to the netherworld (vv. 1-5, Sladek [trans.] 1974: 153). 63 SV III 121-124, George 1999: 27.

16

mehmet-ali ata

which the hero rejects Ishtars proposal of marriage is in a way a confrontation with his own exuberant libido which he now also rejects.64 Finally, just as in ancient Egyptian mythology the relationship between Horus and Seth is one of antagonism followed by reconciliation, Gilgamesh and Enkidu initially contend, perhaps over possessing the right of the first night at the threshold of the bridal chamber,65 but are later reconciled through Enkidus acceptance of Gilgameshs superiority.66 The importance of such a reconciliation manifests itself in ancient Egyptian kingship, with the king embodying both Horus and Seth at the same time, and hence ruling over both Upper and Lower Egypt.67 In Gnosticism, the reconciliation comes with Sophia regretting her act of ignorance, and being restored to the Pleroma on the one hand, and actively participating in the salvation mechanism in the lower world on the other.68
I submit this idea notwithstanding the masterful interpretation of the episode by Abusch as Ishtars proposing Gilgamesh to make him a denizen of the Netherworld (Abusch 1986: esp. 149). A comparison in Gnosticism would be the archontic progenitor who is not only responsible for the creation of man as a copy of the heavenly man, just as Gilgamesh is indirectly responsible for the creation and sexualization of Enkidu, but also brings concupiscence to himself right from the beginning: this is to be identified with his female dimension, of demonic origin. Accordingly, his salvation is possible only through rejection of this female source (Filoramo 1990: 90). 65 For the goddess of weddings was ready the bed, / for Gilgamesh, like a god, was set up a substitute. / Enkidu with his foot blocked the door of the wedding house, / not allowing Gilgamesh to enter. / They seized each other at the door of the wedding house, / in the street they joined combat, in the Square of the Land (SV II 109-114, George 1999: 16). 66 After he broke off from the fight, / said Enkidu to him, to Gilgamesh: / As one unique your mother bore you, / the wild cow of the fold, the goddess Ninsun! / High over warriors you are exalted, / to be king of the people Enlil made it your destiny! (OB II P 231-240, George 1999: 16). 67 te Velde 2001: 269; Frankfort 1948: 21. A comparable instance of the merging or reconciliation of contending opposites of a cosmic character can be found in Aeschylus Seven Against Thebes , between the two sons of Oedipus, Eteocles and Polyneices. The latter is the outlawed brother who is now leading an army against Thebes, whereas the former is the ruling king of Thebes. The analogy to Horus and Seth respectively could not be clearer. At the end of this conflict, the two brothers kill one another, which the poet expresses in a way so as to suggest the merging of one to the other: Shall I send forth a joyous cry, hail to the lord of good fortune renewed? Or weep the misbegotten pair, born to a fatal destiny, each numbered now among the slain, each dying in ill fortitude, both truly named [eteokls], both men of many quarrels [polu-neiks]? (825-830, E.D.A. Morshead [trans.], revised by Gregory Nagy). 68 Rudolph 1983: 81; Couliano 1992: 71.
64

angelology in the epic of gilgamesh

17

I now come back to Gilgameshs dream images prefiguring the coming of Enkidu. One unmistakable comparison to these images, surprisingly never mentioned in scholarly literature, is the phenomenon of the fallen angels in the Hebrew tradition, implicitly referred to by the Book of Genesis, and more extensively found in the Book of Enoch.69 According to this tradition, sons of God, angels, fall down from Heavens to the lower world, and there, upon illicit sexual intercourse with mortal women, not only lose their heavenly purity, but also breed the generation of Giants already addressed above. In this tradition, the acts committed by these angels on earth clearly constitute an abomination. This defilement of their angelic nature makes it impossible for the angels, or Watchers, as they are also called, to return to their heavenly place of origin.70 Matters are a bit more implicit with Enkidu. First of all, as already indicated, there is the paradoxical situation of Enkidus being both heavenly and earthly at the same time. Nevertheless, the name Enkidu is always preceded by the divine determinative dingir in the Standard Babylonian Version, d+EN.KI.D, whereas the harlot Shamhat has the ordinary human determinative, marimtu mamat, used before female human names. Hence, with Enkidu and Shamhat, we do encounter the exact same paradigm as that found in the Jewish fallen angel tradition, a divine man having sexual relations with a mortal woman. Furthermore, just as in the Jewish tradition the fallen angels once defiled cannot resume their former heavenly state, so Enkidu can no longer run with the wild animals and slowly moves toward death and the Netherworld after his initiation into human intercourse. In fact, in Tablet I of the Standard Version, after his sexual intercourse with Shamhat, Enkidu is characterized as follows: Enkidu had defiled his body so pure.71 Further, in Tablet VII Enkidu curses Shamhat with the verses: Because [you made] me [weak, who was undefiled!] / Yes, in the wild [you weakened] me, who was undefiled!72 Clearly, the notion of miasma attached to this act is as severe a concern in the Mesopotamian epic as it is in the Jewish Apocryphal context. One can now ask the question: what then exactly is the role and nature of Enkidu in the Standard Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh? First
69 Supra 19, 20, 21. It has been suggested that the myth of the fallen angels was inspired by the phenomenon of shooting stars (Bamberger 1952: 23). 70 Reeves 1992: 68. 71 SV I 99, George 1999: 8. 72 SV VII 130-131, ibid., 58.

18

mehmet-ali ata

of all, let us reiterate that he is likely of divine origin, and possibly comparable to a fallen angel. There are further clues in the poem that point to Enkidus sacred formation. His name in Sumerian means Enki created him.73 An association with the Mesopotamian god of wisdom may hence be thought to reveal the gnostic role played by Enkidu in the epic. Also noteworthy is the monster Humbabas overbearing address to Enkidu in Tablet V of the Standard Version: Come, Enkidu, you spawn of a fish, who knew no father, / hatchling of terrapin and turtle, who sucked no mothers milk!74 These bizarre attributes pronounced by Humbaba in addressing Enkidu may just be insults, but the selection of specific creatures may again be thought to point to a connection with Enki, inasmuch as both the fish and turtle are animals that are part of this gods iconography and symbolism.75 The poem itself provides additional glosses on the role of Enkidu in the Epic on two occasions, the first when Gilgameshs mother interprets the dreams in Tablet I, and the second when the officers give instructions to Gilgamesh on his journey to the Cedar Forest with Enkidu in Tablet III. In the first episode, Gilgameshs mother prognosticates: a mighty comrade will come to you, and be his friends savior (muzib ibri),76 and a bit later: he will be mighty, and often will save you.77 As for the second episode, the officers entrust Gilgamesh to Enkidus care on the journey to the Cedar Forest: Who goes in front will save his comrade, / who knows the road shall [guard] his friend,78 and again a bit later: In our assembly [we place the King in your care:] / you bring him back and replace [him in ours!].79 What one sees in both of these instances is a clear sense of soteriology established between Gilgamesh and Enkidu. In fact, Simo Parpola has suggested that the Akkadian word axe, ainnu, used in reference to the coming of Enkidu in Gilgameshs second dream may be related to the word assinnu, the savior of Ishtar on her descent to the
EN.KI+D (to make, to build), Parpola 1998: 318. SV V 89-90, George 1999: 41. 75 Enki is the supervisor of the apkallus some of whom wear fish-skins. The turtle is also a symbol of Enki (Black and Green 1997, s.v. turtle). Moreover, another symbol of Enki is a Mischwesen, the suhurmau, which is partly goat and partly fish (ibid., s.v. goat-fish). 76 SV I 268, George 1999: 10. 77 SV I 272, ibid. 78 SV III 218-219, ibid., 28. 79 SV III 226-227, ibid., 29. On Enkidus salvificatory role in the Epic, and his designation as muzib ibri, savior of the friend, see Parpola 1998: 319, n. 14.
74 73

angelology in the epic of gilgamesh

19

Netherworld who is also created as a zikru by Enki/Ea,80 just as Enkidu is created as the zikru of Man.81 If, as Parpola argues, the words assinnu and ainnu are cognate as an instance of intertextuality, we may have here further support to the idea that Enkidu is a fallen angel. Just as in Ishtars Descent an agent of the upper world has to enter the Netherworld for the salvation of the goddess, the assinnu, a savior is also necessary to counteract the co-mingling of the human with the divine in Gilgameshs ontology. In a way, Gilgameshs position as two-thirds divine and one-third human in the mortal sphere can also be understood as the descent of a portion of divinity into the mortal human realm.82 Just as an entire mechanism of substitution and extraction follows Ishtars captivity in the Netherworld, a series of events and connections that culminate in Gilgameshs encounter with Utnapishtim also accompany Gilgameshs crisis of sexual hyperactivity and fear of death. In contemplating the salvific function of Enkidu, Stephanie Dalley draws a parallel between the latter and Enoch:
What has happened to Babylonian Enkidu, the wild man who was created by the gods to become the counsellor and equal of Gilgamesh? His part is taken in the Arabian Nights by Affan, wise man of Jerusalem, who bears no trace of wild origins, but whose role parallels that of Enkidu in that he travels with Buluqiya to the main heroic episode, draws the magic circle, and dies as a result of brave endeavor. Enoch himself shares certain aspects of character with Enkidu as well as a superficial similarity in name (Hebrew Hanoch, Arabic Ukhnukh): both come to save mankind from lustful abuse, and Enkidus dream vision of entering the Underworld is comparable to Enochs vision.83

One final comparison with another ancient religious tradition might further help shed light on the obscurity of this angelological relationship between Gilgamesh and Enkidu. According to one view, in Zoroastrian angelology as well, each being has his fravarti in the heavenly world which assumes the role of his guardian angel.84 In the prelude to the millennia of the period of the mixture of light and darkness, the Zoroastrian supreme deity Ohrmazd offers these an80 dEa ina emqi libbiu ibtni zikru / ibnima Auunamr lassinnu (Ea conceived a plan in his wise heart / He created Auunamr, the assinnu) (Sladek 1974: 258). 81 Parpola 1998: 29. SV I 95-96 can be literally translated as: You Aruru created Man, / Now create his zikru (atti dArru tabni L / eninna bini zikiru). 82 I shall die, and shall I not then be as Enkidu? / Sorrow has entered my heart! (SV IX 3-4). 83 Dalley 1997: 229. 84 Corbin 1978: 29. On other expert theories on the controversial and still not well-understood nature and role of the fravarti, see Boyce 1975: 117ff.

20

mehmet-ali ata

gels the choice from which their entire destiny originates: they could either live in the celestial world sheltered from the ravages of the evil god Ahriman, or else descend to the earth in order to be incarnated in material bodies and struggle against the counterpowers of Ahriman in the material world.85 They choose the latter track, and this, according to the aforementioned view, gives the etymology of their name, fravarti: those who have chosen.86 In the guise of a human being, the angel, on leaving the high ramparts of heaven, is the terrestrial person himself.87 In pondering these matters, the Islamicist Henry Corbin asks: Does he not in his turn need some guardian angel, a celestial reduplication of his being?88 Corbin notes that Mazdean philosophy has in fact entertained this question: One solution might be in some way to conceive of the earthly union of Fravarti and soul as one in which the former remains immune from all Ahrimanian contamination.89 In the case of Gilgamesh and Enkidu, I believe that the analogy to this view is clear in terms of these two heroes being one anothers saviors and guardian angels. Less clear, however, is which one of them corresponds to the being of purity, the man of light, who has the ultimate immunity. Even though one need not establish a one-toone correspondence between the Epic of Gilgamesh and Mazdean angelology, one nevertheless cannot overlook the fact that it is Gilgamesh who is immune to all the ordeals that he goes through, whereas Enkidu, perhaps as a result of his initial contamination with the material world, is not able to do so. In this regard, the paradox is that even though Enkidu is potentially an angelic being who is in charge of saving Gilgamesh from the latters descent to the material
Ibid. Ibid. 87 Ibid. 88 Ibid. 89 Ibid. Corbin concludes that the question is much too complex for a solution to be found in a mere philological inventory of existing texts (ibid., 30). This paradox is precisely that of the Redeemed Redeemer of Gnosticism where the redeemer (salvator) and the one to be redeemed (salvandus) belong closely together and are sometimes hard to keep apart, since the point of view may swiftly change, from savior to saved (salvandus) and vice versa. Behind this stands the conception, fundamental to gnostic soteriology, that both partners, Salvator and Salvandus, are of one nature, i.e. from parts of the world of light. In the process redemption they represent two poles which must indeed be kept apart, but through their consubstantiality they have from the beginning removed or unyoked the distinction between the two which otherwise is usual in the history of religion (Rudolph 1983: 122, 131).
86 85

angelology in the epic of gilgamesh

21

world, he is not in turn saved by any particular angelic agent. In a way, Enkidu acts as a unilateral sacrifice for the spiritual well-being of Gilgamesh, as in Tablet VII of the Standard Version the gods in assembly decide that Enkidu should die rather than Gilgamesh.90 In Sethian Gnosticism, one group of tractates conceptualizes the means of attaining enlightenment as a horizontal, temporally successive sequence of descents into this world by a heavenly savior who reveals the upper world, while another group conceptualizes the means of attaining enlightenment as vertical ascent through a succession of mental states in which the Gnostic is assimilated to ever higher levels of being.91 I would suggest that in The Epic of Gilgamesh we see parallels of both of these mystical phenomena. The descent of Enkidu, conveyed especially by the two dreams of Gilgamesh, instigates a soteriological mechanism through descent, just as Inanna/Ishtars captivity in the Netherworld instigates first the descent of a savior figure, the assinnu, and later that of a substitute, Dumuzi/Tammuz, to that realm as ransom for the goddess escape.92 As for the second mode, the ascent, it is the adept who by means of his own spiritual faculties elevates himself to higher levels of consciousness. This Gilgamesh achieves through the alchemical potential of his typhonic nature, the lewd Seth or Sophia within him so to speak, as well as the companionship he forms with Enkidu which the gods have intended solely for this transformation. In other words, Enkidu perhaps acts as a ladder in helping Gilgamesh attain his higher stages of spiritual development.93 Other agents located on the way-stations of this proposed path of the ascent of Gilgamesh are the Scorpion Beings that appear in Tablet IX, and the tavern-keeper Siduri in Tablet X. Tzvi Abusch notes how in the Old Babylonian Version of this episode the speech
90 This episode is in fact missing from the Standard Babylonian Version, and is known from a fragmentary prose paraphrase in Hittite which was based on an older version of the epic: Enkidu began to speak to Gilgamesh: My brother, this night what a dream [I dreamed!] The gods Anu, Enlil, Ea and celestial Shamash [held assembly], and Anu spoke unto Enlil: These, because they slew the Bull of Heaven, and slew Humbaba that [guarded] the mountains dense-[wooded] with cedar, so said Anu, between these two [let one of them die!] And Enlil said: Let Enkidu die, but let not Gilgamesh die! (George 1999: 55). 91 Turner 2001: 80. 92 Inannas Descent (Sumerian text), l. 288 ff; Ishtars Descent (Akkadian text), l. 126 ff. 93 In the Pyramid Texts, the ladders of both Horus and Seth are used by Osiris in ascending to heaven (917d-e, Griffiths 1980: 11).

22

mehmet-ali ata

of Siduri, which consists of a number of advices given to Gilgamesh regarding the carefree manner in which he should live his life, is characterized by inversion and chiasmos.94 The section especially highlighted by Abusch is as follows: Let your clothes be clean, / Let your head be washed, in water may you bathe. / Look down at the child who holds your hand, / Let a wife ever delight in your lap.95 What Abusch notes as problematic in this series of advices is their order:
In spite of its apparently straightforward meaning, the passage poses some difficulty. The quatrain is made up of two couplets, but their arrangement is odd. Precisely because of the common everyday meaning of the text, we are struck by the peculiar order of its elements: in the first couplet, wearing of clean clothes is enjoined prior to washing of head and body; in the second couplet, relationship with a child is mentioned prior to sexual relations with a woman. This ordering of elements contradicts the logical or, at least, a more usual causal or temporal sequence.96

I will not continue rehearsing Abuschs brilliant observations on these peculiarities in the text. Suffice it to indicate that Abusch regards the inversion and chiasmos in this particular episode of the Old Babylonian Version as purposeful literary devices, designed to enhance and give particular meaning to this climactic encounter in which Gilgamesh is urged by the tavern-keeper to re-enter a normal state of living.97 I somehow cannot help thinking, however, that the tavern-keeper here rather speaks in riddles and equivocations, perhaps not unlike the three witches in Shakespeares Macbeth or the Delphic Oracle. What Siduri is in fact trying to mean here may be the opposite of what she says, and hence the inversion and chiasmos; namely that Gilgamesh should not be caught up with the cares and concerns of an ordinary man, and should rather keep at his path of ascent.98 This idea, if true, would also further invert the whole rhetoAbusch 1993: 2. Ibid. 96 Ibid. 97 Ibid., 7. 98 Comparable is Bilgames interrogating his servant Enkidu about the conditions of the Netherworld in the Sumerian poem Bilgames and the Netherworld (vv. 255ff). Bilgames repeatedly asks his servant whom he has summoned from the dead how the man with n sons fare in the Netherworld, the number ranging from one through seven. The more sons a man has, the better his condition is in the Netherworld. For instance, while the man with one son bitterly laments, the one with seven is seated on a throne among the minor gods, not unlike what Bilgames himself is destined to attain after his own death (The Death of Bilgames M 120 ff). The Sumerian mind cannot have been so nave to think that the more children
95 94

angelology in the epic of gilgamesh

23

ric of normality created by Jacobsen and his followers in the interpretation of the epic. Indeed, the nature of the advice Gilgamesh receives at these way stations may be further clarified by what Utnapishtim tells the hero very explicitly at their initial encounter in Tablet X of the Standard Version: Why, Gilgamesh, do you ever [chase] sorrow? / You, who are [built] from gods flesh and human, / whom the [gods did fashion] like your father and mother! In a way, what the survivor of the Flood here underlines is the fact that Gilgamesh is already prepared, or even pre-destined, for a successful, if post-mortem, ascent. Thus, as Coomaraswamy puts it in relation to Vedic sources, one who is forearmed by initiation and sacrifice may be called undying (amrta) even though he has no hope of never dying at all, a hope that he could not have, beacause no one becomes immortal in the flesh.99 What The Epic of Gilgamesh may hence be doing is suppressing within a native Mesopotamian idiom all overt clues that point to notions of immortality and ascent in the visible plot of the poem, and instead conveying these notions through codes for the initiated reader to follow. This is somewhat in contrast to the ancient Egyptian tradition in which, even though codes still exist, the kings ascent to immortality is explicitly outlined by the Pyramid Texts. This differone has generated in this life, the better ones destiny will be in the afterlife. After all, we know that Bilgames himself has not fathered any sons, and yet he is destined to be among the junior deities. One should rather conceive of this questionand-answer passage in the poem as a literary riddle which perhaps inverts its own literal meaning. Words of advice with the message dont worry be happy or carpe diem uttered by both Siduri and Utnapishtim to Gilgamesh can also be compared to maxims of a similar tone in classical Persian poetry as can be encountered in the works of poets such as Omar Khayyam, Rumi, and Hafiz. What is more, within the Hermetic milieu of the Renaissance, such maxims also found their way into the works of Marsilio Ficino: All things are directed from goodness to goodness. Rejoice in the present; set no value on property, seek no honors. Avoid excess; avoid activity. Rejoice in the present (Ficino, Letters, vol. I, p. 32 [n.1]). Similarly, in the same episode quoted above from the Old Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh, Siduri also says: But you, Gilgamesh, let your belly be full, / enjoy yourself always by day and by night! / Make merry each day, / dance and play day and night! (Si iii 69, George 1999: 124). Again along similar lines is the advice of Enki/Ea to Utnapishtim before the Flood hits the world in the Standard Babylonian Version: O man of Shuruppak, son of Ubar-Tutu, / demolish the house, and build a boat! / Abandon wealth, and seek survival! / Spurn property, save life! (SV XI 23-26, George 1999: 89). 99 Coomaraswamy 1942: 48, n. 35.

24

mehmet-ali ata

ence has often been understood as one reflecting the difference in religious mentality between ancient Mesopotamia and Egypt: whereas the former is pessimistic about promises of afterlife, the latter is characterized by an assurance thereof.100 This perspective is misleading, as the difference may be one in modes of presentation rather than in elite religious consciousness. I believe that Gilgameshs ability to reach the immortal Utnapishtim in Tablets X and XI of the Standard Babylonian Version is already an indication of a promise of successful ascent, even though this ascent is presented more as a descent to the Netherworld. Indeed, the beginning of the Standard Babylonian Version of the Epic is already clear about Gilgameshs mystical capacity: He saw what was secret, discovered what was hidden, / he brought a tale of before the Deluge. / He came a far road, was weary, found peace, / and set all his labours on a tablet of stone.101 We see a clear parallel in ancient Egypt as well. The ultimate destiny of the Egyptian king is to go forth to the sky among the Imperishable Ones and to go around the sky like the sun.102 The Pyramid Texts mention the sun, the sky-goddess Nut, Osiris, Horus and even Geb, the earth god, as being in that region of the sky.103 The Imperishable Ones are the circumpolar stars, the kings brethren, about 26 to 30 degrees above the northern horizon in the Giza pyramid area. These stars revolve around the celestial north pole and neither rise nor set.104 Utnapishtim, the forefather of Gilgamesh, who found eternal life, and who now leads an unchanging and steadfast life far away from the earth is comparable to these stars. Gilgamesh is able to reach and speak face to face with this immortal man. His return to Uruk at the end of Tablet XI after his failure to find immortality in the flesh may be thought of as analogous to this circular movement that characterizes the Imperishable Ones, rather than an anti-climax to the Epic. Moreover, there are significant clues as to the solar nature of Gilgameshs journey, since he enters the Netherworld whence the sun comes out everyday,105 guarded by the Scorpion Beings, them100 101 102 103 104 105

See for instance, Frankfort 1948: 5. SV I 7-10, George 1999: 1. Lehner 1997: 28. Ibid. Ibid. SV IX 38-9.

angelology in the epic of gilgamesh

25

selves solar creatures;106 follows the path of the Sun in the Netherworld for twelve double hours until he reaches light;107 and finally crosses a cosmic body of water that culminates in a blessed land of immortality.108 One need only to hearken to one of the spells from the Pyramid Texts to see the parallel:
My father ascends to the sky among the gods who are in the sky; he stands at the Great Polar Region and learns the speech of the sun-folk. Re finds you on the banks of the sky as a waterway-traveller who is in the sky: Welcome, O you who have arrived, say the gods. He sets his hand on you at the zenith(?) of the sky; Welcome, O you who know your place, say the Ennead. Be pure; occupy your seat in the Bark of Re, row over the sky and mount up to the distant ones; row with the Imperishable Stars, navigate with the Unwearying Stars, receive the freight of the Night-bark. May you become a spirit which is in the Netherworld, may you live of that pleasant life whereof the Lord of the Horizon lives, (even) the Great Flood which is in the sky. Who has done this for you? Say the gods who serve Atum. It is one greater than I who has done this for me, (even) he who is north of the waterway, the end of the sky. He has heard my appeal, he has done what I said, and I have removed myself from the Tribunal of the Magistrates of the Abyss at the head of the Great Ennead.109

In conclusion, I would like to stress that there is much more to The Epic of Gilgamesh than a literal reading of the plot in terms of human relationships, sexuality as a social construct, psychological queries ranging from transition to a mature adult life to homoeroticism, and even the fear and inevitability of death. Underlying the plot and the individual episodes of the poem is a complex representational structure that reveals a system of soteriology, in essence very similar to that found in ancient Egypt, one that is centered on the king and the stages of his safe ascent to the circumpolar stars. Part of what both the Old and the Standard Babylonian Versions may have done is construct this configuration of soteriology and ascent by deploying and combining in an erudite manner the independent Gilgamesh stories that go back to remoter antiquity. Similar structures also characterize in various forms and guises the later esoteric traditions of the Near East, systems such as Gnosticism or the biblical Apocrypha that have not made their way to mainstream religious texts. The utilization of aspects of these systems in understanding the
106 107 108 109

Wiggermann 1992: 148. SV IX 138-170. SV X 169 ff. Pyramid Texts, Utterance 513 (= Faulkner 1969: 189).

26

mehmet-ali ata

codes of ancient literary works such as The Epic of Gilgamesh would then not be a forced endeavor, since similarities are too obvious to disregard. Comparative analyses of the ancient and these later sources reveal not only the continuum of secret doctrines that pertain to the spiritual development and ascent of the adept, often visualized in the ancient world under the guise of kingship, but also the earliest traceable origin of these ideas. References
Abusch, Tzvi. 1986. Ishtars Proposal and Gilgameshs Refusal: An Interpretation of The Gilgamesh Epic, Tablet 6, Lines 1-79. History of Religions 26, Number 2: 143-187. , 1993. Gilgameshs Request and Siduris Denial. In Mark E. Cohen et al. (eds.), The Tablet and the Scroll. Near Eastern Studies in Honor of William W. Hallo. Bethesda, MD: CDL Press: 1-14. Black, Jeremy and Anthony Green. 1997. Gods, Demons and Symbols of Mesopotamia. An Illustrated Dictionary. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press. Black, Jeremy, Andrew George, and Nicholas Postgate, eds. 1999. A Concise Dictionary of Akkadian. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz. Black, Matthew, trans.. 1985 The Book of Enoch or I Enoch. A New English Edition. Leiden: E. J. Brill. Boyce, Mary. 1975. A History of Zoroastrianism. Leiden/Kln: E.J. Brill. Cagni, Luigi. 1977. The Poem of Erra. Sources and Monographs from the Ancient Near East. Volume 1. Fascicle 3. Malibu, CA: Undena Publications. Coomaraswamy, Ananda K. 1942. Spiritual Authority and Temporal Power in the Indian Theory of Government. New Haven, CT: American Oriental Society. Cooper, Jerrold S. 2002. Buddies in Babylonia: Gilgamesh, Enkidu, and Mesopotamian Homosexuality. In Tzvi Abusch (ed.), Riches Hidden in Secret Places. Ancient Near Eastern Studies in Memory of Thorkild Jacobsen . Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns: 73-85. Corbin, Henry. 1978. The Man of Light in Iranian Sufism. Translated by Nancy Pearson. Boulder, CO: Shambala. Couliano, Ioan P. 1987. Eros and Magic in the Renaissance. Translated by Margaret Cook. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press. 1992. The Tree of Gnosis. Gnostic Mythology from Early Christianity to Modern Nihilism. Translated into English by H. S. Wiesner and the author. San Francisco, CA: Harper Collins. Dalley, Stephanie. 1997. from Gilgamesh in the Arabian Nights (1991). In John Maier (ed.), Gilgamesh. A Reader. Wauconda, IN: Bolchazy-Carducci Publishers: 214-235. , 2000. Myths from Mesopotamia. Creation, the Flood, Gilgamesh, and Others. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dumzil, Georges. 1969. The Destiny of the Warrior. Translated by Alf Hiltebeitel. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press. Faulkner, R. O., trans. 1969. The Ancient Egyptian Pyramid Texts. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Ficino, Marsilio. 1975-1995. The Selected Letters of Marsilio Ficino. In 5 Volumes. Trans-

angelology in the epic of gilgamesh

27

lated from Latin by members of the Language Department of the School of Economic Science. London: Shepheard-Walwyn. Filoramo, Giovanni. 1990. A History of Gnosticism. Translated by Anthony Alcock. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Foster, Benjamin. 1984. Gilgamesh: Sex, Love and the Ascent of Knowledge. In John H. Marks and Robert M. Good, Love and Death in the Ancient Near East. Essays in Honour of Marvin H. Pope. Guilford, CT: Four Quarters Publishing Company: 21-42. Frankfort, Henri. 1948. Kingship and the Gods. A Study of Ancient Near Eastern Religion as the Integration of Society and Nature. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press. George, Andrew, trans. 1999. The Epic of Gilgamesh. The Babylonian Epic Poem and Other Texts in Akkadian and Sumerian. London: Penguin Books. Griffiths, J. Gwyn. 1960. The Conflict of Horus and Seth. From Egyptian and Classical Sources. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. , 1980. The Origins of Osiris and His Cult. Leiden: E.J. Brill. Jacobsen, Thorkild. 1930. How did Gilgame Oppress Uruk? Acta Orientalia 8: 62-80. , 1973. The Sumerian King List. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. , 1976. The Treasures of Darkness. A History of Mesopotamian Religion. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Jung, Rabbi Leo. 1974. Fallen Angels in Jewish, Christian and Mohammedan Literature. New York: Ktav Publishing House. Lehner, Mark. 1997 The Complete Pyramids. London and New York: Thames & Hudson. Parkinson, R. B. 1995. Homosexual Desire and Middle Kingdom Literature. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 81: 57-76. Reeves, John C. 1992. Jewish Lore in Manichaean Cosmogony. Studies in the Book of Giants Traditions. Cincinnati, OH: Hebrew Union College Press. Reiner, Erica. 1961. The Etiological Myth of the Seven Sages. Orientalia 30: 111. Rudolph, Kurt. 1983. Gnosis. The Nature and History of Gnosticism. San Francisco, CA: Harper & Row, Publishers. Sladek, William R. 1974. Inannas Descent to the Netherworld. Ann Arbor, MI: University Microfilms. te Velde, H. 1977. Seth, God of Confusion. A Study of his Role in Egyptian Mythology and Religion. Leiden: E. J. Brill. , 2001. Seth in the Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Tigay, Jeffrey H. 1997. Summary: The Evolution of The Gilgamesh Epic. In John Maier (ed.), Gilgamesh. A Reader. Wauconda, IL: Bolchazy-Carducci Publishers: 40-49. Tobin, Vincent Arieh. 1993. Divine Conflict in the Pyramid Texts. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 30: 93-110. Turner, John D. 2001. Sethian Gnosticism and the Platonic Tradition. Bibliothque Copte de Nag Hammadi. Section tudes 6. Qubec: Les Presses de luniversit Laval; Louvain-Paris: ditions Peeters.