The Perspective of Inevitability: Fate and Redemption in the Ancient Flood Epics - Research Paper Example

? The Perspective of Inevitability: Fate and Redemption in the Ancient Flood Epics The flood story as told in the Gilgamesh epic, which is itself the antecedent of an earlier Sumerian text, has been identified by many linguists, historians and archaeologists as strikingly similar to the deluge tradition made famous in the Old Testament Book of Genesis. The great British Orientalist and translator of cuneiform, Sir Henry Rawlinson, identified many parallels between the Mesopotamian poem and various themes in Genesis, ranging from Adam and Eve to Cain and Abel, and the flood. The undeniable consistency between the Mesopotamian and Hebrew traditions reflects not only a common literary thread, but a moral and religious continuum that is still with us. In both versions, the story has to do with divine wrath and punishment, and the singling out of a righteous mortal for preservation - Utnapishtim in Gilgamesh and Noah in Genesis. In Tablet XI, Utnapishtim tells Gilgamesh how he learned of the imminence of the great flood and that he was led to construct a great craft made of reeds and to rid himself of all worldly possessions, to look to the preservation of his life and soul and to likewise preserve the lives of “all living creatures” (Sandars, 1972). Noah likewise receives direct instructions, bearing witness to God’s intention to punish and to the dimensions of the ark that he is to construct. There are, however, different reasons for mankind’s terrible punishment. In Gilgamesh, the gods Name 2 indicate that they are offended by the great uproar caused by human beings, a rather oblique reference to sinfulness, which is clearly stated as the reason for the deluge in Genesis. The two stories act in disparate ways, Utnapishtim’s account of the flood helping Gilgamesh resolve his own quest for immortality, while the story of Noah stands alone in Genesis. Utanapishtim confirms his power and immortality, acknowledging that he has the blessing of heaven and proving himself to indeed be the source of the knowledge that Gilgamesh seeks. Thus, whereas the Old Testament version turns on the morality of man’s sinfulness, the earlier Mesopotamian rendering is part of Gilgamesh’s personal odyssey. As with other mythologies (Ancient Greece, for instance), the flood story in Gilgamesh recounts the arbitrary natures and actions of the immortals, of their power and unpredictability when they embroil themselves in the affairs of mankind, bringing down catastrophic retribution at the slightest provocation. The Genesis version, which has its origins in a monotheistic tradition, is concerned with the covenant between God and Noah, a tale of punishment and of redemption through obedience. It is “clearly and unmistakably a moral judgment, a forceful illustration of divine justice meting out stern punishment” (Heidel, 1963, p. 269). Noah’s salvation is directly attributable to his personal righteousness, as is Utnapishtim’s survival which, however, recalls the more mercurial nature of the gods in “pagan” traditions. There can be little doubt as to the similarity between the two versions, the two key figures concede their inferiority to divine power in the same way, for “not only do Noah and…Utnapishtim…offer sacrifices after the flood, but Noah and Utnapishtim both release the very same birds from the window of the ark/boat when the rains stop” (Middleton, 2005). Also, Name 3 just as the craft built by Utnapishtim came to rest on Mt. Nisir, Noah’s ark “rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat” (Genesis 8:6). There is no rainbow to mark heaven’s promise that such a cataclysm will never again be visited upon the earth in Gilgamesh, however, the gods gather round Utnapishtim’s sacrifice in remorse over the destruction they had unleashed. One thinks often of the ancient flood epics and their consequences for humanity in view of the terrible natural disasters that have struck civilization in recent times. The most recent example would be the tsunami that caused the destruction of a nuclear power plant in northeastern Japan, a tragedy that caused the deaths of thousands and made the area uninhabitable for decades to come. For those of a literary inclination, it is easy to draw parallels between the divine wrath over human sinfulness in the flood epics and the wrath of nature brought down on a human enterprise which has unlocked the secrets of nature; a punishment of Promethean proportions. As well, the specter of global warming and its effects lend the appearance of gathering storm clouds presaging a destructive outburst. In the United States, no flood in recent memory can equal the destructive force of Hurricane Katrina and the damage and loss of life it brought to New Orleans in 2005. The specter of rising seas and the inundation of coastal cities are unsettling reminders of the Mesopotamian and Old Testament Flood stories. “In an eerie way the stories about floods haunt our experience because we keep ignoring the warnings about what changes global warming and climate change will cause” (Kearney, 2008). If Katrina and the Japanese tsunami were signs of things to come, then there is a distinct danger that people will have insufficient time to Name 4 prepare for the worst, especially given the extent to which the world’s governments have ignored the warning signs (Ibid). For Gilgamesh, the flood, or rather Utnapishtim’s account of it, are of paramount importance. The death of Enkidu, Gilgamesh’s great friend and co-combatant, causes him great suffering and an uncharacteristically introspective interlude. Enkidu’s death inspires a horror of death and a desire to seek out the secret of immortality, which he believes Utnapishtim can provide (James, Lawall, et al., 2005). Thus, he seeks out the great creator of the reed boat, the man who has had immorality conferred on him by the gods themselves. Gilgamesh incorporates the story of the Flood, and Utnapishtim’s role in it, in the hopes that what he will learn may convey some idea as to how Gilgamesh may hope to become immortal. Utnapishtim’s concern in relating his story is to indicate how he became immortal. “Utnapishtim may not know the reason for the flood, or he may not record it because it is irrelevant to his purpose, which is to recount how he became immortal” (cite). Utnapishtim concentrates on the gathering of the gods, which takes place after the flood. The story of the flood becomes a cautionary tale for Gilgamesh, who learns from his encounter with Utnapishtim that he cannot hope to achieve immortality. Utnapishtim’s account of the flood and of what happened after gives Gilgamesh a glimpse into the world of the gods, and a forlorn hope that, like Utnapishtim, he too may achieve immortality. But being “godlike,” being a king and mighty warrior is not enough; he does not embody, nor has he earned, the sanctified state that has been bestowed on Utnapishtim. Having failed to remain awake, he is assured that he has come as close to immortality as he can expect to, considering that he has built Name 5 and is king of a great city. He learns from Utnapishtim that though immortality will elude him, the gods have promised that mankind will live forever - Utnapishtim’s immortality is their sign that this is so. As a paragon of human virtue, Utnapishtim is in a position to convince Gilgamesh to be content with his humanity, even though he is part god. He relates how Ea warned him in a dream to turn away from the temporal and worldly, to “tear down (his) house and build a boat, abandon possessions and look for life, despise worldly goods…” (Sandars, 1972). This lesson Utnapishtim passes on to Gilgamesh, whose haughty persona must nevertheless have proof that what he has been told is true, that he is fated not to join the immortals. Utnapishtim challenges Gilgamesh to remain awake for six days; when he fails in this task, Utnapishtim uses wisdom and logic to get his point across: if Gilgamesh cannot master sleep for a few days, how can he hope to conquer death? (Sandars, 1972). When Gilgamesh wakes up, he has proof that mortality is inescapable – the seven loaves of bread prepared by Utnapishtim’s wife prove that he has slept for a week. Thus, the story of Gilgamesh contains important themes of inevitability and of perspective. The hero king learns from Utnapishtim that the gods placed within creation itself the means of man’s demise, and that death is inevitable. From Enkidu he learns the value of brotherly love; from Utnapishtim he learns that the most important things in life are not to be gained through acquiring fame or riches but in the personal riches one stores up by appreciating the value of personal relationships and pursuing a virtuous life. And so Gilgamesh comes full circle. The tyrant king to whom we are introduced in Tablet I completes a heroic quest in Name 6 which he has not learned about immortality or how to be more like the gods, of whom he has been jealous and whose company he craves. Gilgamesh’s quest is one of self discovery, as much an internal journey as it is an epic odyssey through the wilderness. Gilgamesh ultimately returns to Uruk a contrite man and a more enlightened ruler. The overbearing king who claimed the right of sleeping with new brides for his own pleasure simply because he had the power to do so is transformed by personal loss and through firsthand knowledge of his own limitations. In a sense, Gilgamesh and Utnapishtim are alike in that both have had unique experiences: Utnapishtim, the virtuous man, has been granted the gift of immortality while Gilgamesh, the arrogant demigod, has learned the difficult but invaluable lesson that life is its own reward. To struggle against one’s fate is not only a futile effort but a waste of precious time. The flood story in the Epic of Gilgamesh teaches that fate, which takes the guise of the gods’ power, is capricious and feckless. Because it can change on a whim and with no notice there is no point in seeking to control one’s fate. The gods have preordained that destiny is immutable, a law unto itself. In this, Utnapishtim is Gilgamesh’s teacher, as Enkidu taught Gilgamesh about the value of love and the worth of a single life. Because fate can intervene at any moment, because the gods are pre-disposed to vengeance and to be harsh in their retribution, life is tenuous and always hangs in the balance. Gilgamesh learns to accept life on its own terms and to concern himself with what lies before him: to be a just and responsible king and share in the common humanity of his subjects. Name 7 Works Cited Frymer-Kensky, Tikva. “What the Babylonian Flood Stories Can and Cannot Teach us about the Genesis Flood.” BAR, Nov./Dec. 1978. Heidel, Alexander. The Gilgamesh Epic and Old Testament Parallels. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1963, p. 269. James, Heather; Lawall, Sarah; Patterson, Lee; Spacks, Patricia & Thalmann, William. The Norton Anthology of Western Literature, vol. 1, eighth edition. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2005. Kearney, Tony. Who Owns the Future? Bloomington, IN: Author House, 2008, p. 103. Middleton, J. Richard. The Liberating Image: The Imago Deus in Genesis 1. Ada, MI: Brazos Press, 2005, pp. 132-33. The New Jerusalem Bible. Genesis IV, 1-16. New York, NY: Doubleday, 1999. Sandars, Nancy K. The Epic of Gilgamesh. New York, NY: Penguin Books, 1972. Wolff, Hope Nash. “Gilgamesh, Enkidu and the Heroic Life.” Journal of the American Oriental Society. 89(2), April-June, 1969. Read More