No More Learning

? The Project Gutenberg EBook of The Epic of Gilgamish, by Stephen Langdon

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or
re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
with this eBook or online at www. gutenberg. org


Title: The Epic of Gilgamish
A Fragment of the Gilgamish Legend in Old-Babylonian Cuneiform

Author: Stephen Langdon

Release Date: July 23, 2006 [EBook #18897]

Language: EN


*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE EPIC OF GILGAMISH ***




Produced by Jeroen Hellingman and the Online Distributed
Proofreading Team at http://www. pgdp. net/









The Epic of Gilgamish


by

Stephen Langdon


University of Pennsylvania
The University Museum
Publications of the Babylonian Section
Vol. X No. 3






INTRODUCTION


In the year 1914 the University Museum secured by purchase a large
six column tablet nearly complete, carrying originally, according to
the scribal note, 240 lines of text. The contents supply the South
Babylonian version of the second book of the epic _sa nagba imuru_,
"He who has seen all things," commonly referred to as the Epic of
Gilgamish. The tablet is said to have been found at Senkere, ancient
Larsa near Warka, modern Arabic name for and vulgar descendant
of the ancient name Uruk, the Biblical Erech mentioned in Genesis
X. 10. This fact makes the new text the more interesting since the
legend of Gilgamish is said to have originated at Erech and the
hero in fact figures as one of the prehistoric Sumerian rulers of
that ancient city. The dynastic list preserved on a Nippur tablet
[1] mentions him as the fifth king of a legendary line of rulers at
Erech, who succeeded the dynasty of Kish, a city in North Babylonia
near the more famous but more recent city Babylon. The list at Erech
contains the names of two well known Sumerian deities, Lugalbanda
[2] and Tammuz.
The contents supply the South
Babylonian version of the second book of the epic _sa nagba imuru_,
"He who has seen all things," commonly referred to as the Epic of
Gilgamish. The tablet is said to have been found at Senkere, ancient
Larsa near Warka, modern Arabic name for and vulgar descendant
of the ancient name Uruk, the Biblical Erech mentioned in Genesis
X. 10. This fact makes the new text the more interesting since the
legend of Gilgamish is said to have originated at Erech and the
hero in fact figures as one of the prehistoric Sumerian rulers of
that ancient city. The dynastic list preserved on a Nippur tablet
[1] mentions him as the fifth king of a legendary line of rulers at
Erech, who succeeded the dynasty of Kish, a city in North Babylonia
near the more famous but more recent city Babylon. The list at Erech
contains the names of two well known Sumerian deities, Lugalbanda
[2] and Tammuz. The reign of the former is given at 1,200 years and
that of Tammuz at 100 years. Gilgamish ruled 126 years. We have to
do here with a confusion of myth and history in which the real facts
are disengaged only by conjecture.

The prehistoric Sumerian dynasties were all transformed into the realm
of myth and legend. Nevertheless these rulers, although appearing
in the pretentious nomenclature as gods, appear to have been real
historic personages. [3] The name Gilgamish was originally written
_d_Gi-bil-aga-mis, and means "The fire god (_Gibil_) is a commander,"
abbreviated to _d_Gi-bil-ga-mis, and _d_Gi(s)-bil-ga-mis, a form
which by full labialization of _b_ to _u_ was finally contracted to
_d_Gi-il-ga-mis. [4] Throughout the new text the name is written with
the abbreviation _d_Gi(s), [5] whereas the standard Assyrian text
has consistently the writing _d_GIS-TU [6]-BAR. The latter method of
writing the name is apparently cryptographic for _d_Gis-bar-aga-(mis);
the fire god _Gibil_ has also the title _Gis-bar_.

A fragment of the South Babylonian version of the tenth book was
published in 1902, a text from the period of Hammurapi, which showed
that the Babylonian epic differed very much from the Assyrian in
diction, but not in content. The new tablet, which belongs to the same
period, also differs radically from the diction of the Ninevite text
in the few lines where they duplicate each other.