When we read any pre-historical materials, gods or the divines must be inevitable characters. In some cultures, polytheism is more popular; therefore, we may expect that there are multiple gods appear with different purposes in the writings of polytheistic cultures. Some of these divines are willing to assist the human in achieving their goals and some of them are completely opposite due to different reasons. These “devastating” gods are characterized as the antagonists in the writings for countering the protagonists, who are humans. However, if we analyze and understand their purposes, we may change our minds that the nature of these antagonistic divines reveals weakness in the nature of human authority. Due to the long period of years and …show more content…
In Gilgamesh, Ishtar is an antagonist; and more essentially, her existence in the epic somehow directs the plot and changes Gilgamesh’s mind. In the glossary of The Epic of Gilgamesh, Ishtar is described that “sometimes she is a mature woman, sometimes an impetuous young virgin.” When she first appears in tablet VI, she acts like the “impetuous virgin” by asking Gilgamesh to marry her, which she is attracted “(by) the beauty of Gilgamesh” after Gilgamesh successfully kills Humbaba. Gilgamesh refuses and satirizes Ishtar for her promiscuous relationships with Dumuzi by using several metaphors such as “a shoe that bite the foot of its owner” and “a waterskin that [cuts the hands] of its bearer” on Ishtar. In Mesopotamian mythology, Dumuzi is the ex-husband of Ishtar who is picked as a scapegoat of dying in the underworld for Ishtar because only the dead may enter the underworld. From Gilgamesh’s metaphor, we may realize that Ishtar is not someone who can be trusted as a life partner. In here, we may see a parallelism with Clytemnestra in Odyssey who betrays and murders her husband, Agamemnon. Both of these two women betrayed their husband by setting them up and alluring other men. Their action of setting their husband up, in fact, are not considered as infamous as the modern society’s belief. …show more content…
A country (or a clan at pre-historic period) is always considered as the development and union of families. At the beginning of Gilgamesh, we can regard Gilgamesh as a tyrant according to the report from the gods of heaven, describing Gilgamesh that “he has no equal when his weapon are brandished… He harries without warrant. Gilgamesh lets no son go free to his father.” Therefore, we can determine that Uruk, Gilgamesh’s city doesn’t have obvious rules for authority and Gilgamesh is the only one who gives the rules. Under such pressure, citizens in Uruk are absolutely not satisfied with Gilgamesh’s control. In the later tablet where Gilgamesh refuses to marry Ishtar, Uruk is punished and turned into complete chaos. The satire is originated from Gilgamesh, but the ones who suffer are the citizens. We may consider Ishtar’s anger as a challenge to Gilgamesh’s authority because Gilgamesh is the king of Uruk and if he doesn't take any responses to the bull and catastrophe, Gilgamesh will be overthrown for not caring his people. Considering the previous experience that Gilgamesh is infamous among citizens, this event is the last chance for Gilgamesh to maintain his authority. At the end, Gilgamesh succeeds in killing the bull and save his kingdom, which the whole society returns to normal. This part of the epic indirectly explains the fact that unrestrained authority has
The Epic of Gilgamesh served the purpose to shed some light on the culture of Sumeria. The story has helped give factual information even though the epic many not be true in whole, it may have some truth in parts. It has given us more knowledge on the architectural craftsmanship of Sumerian people, and also shows us the belief of many gods in Sumer's polytheistic society.
Gilgamesh is the king of Uruk, one who is macho, irresponsible, and simply not fit to be in the position that his blood status has put him in. His decisions are constantly making the people of Uruk
In many literary works throughout history, there is a deity mentioned that has some form of involvement in the life of humans whether it be monotheistic or polytheistic. In Augustine’s Confessions, the main point driving his entire work is how he strayed from God and found his way back to him. It’s an autobiography of an imperfect life. In contrast, the Epic of Gilgamesh is a story of monstrosity and self-discovery contributed to by many authors over the course of history pertaining to an arrogant King who was the puppet of many gods. However, both explore how a supreme deity is a central part of life.
The main character in the book The Epic of Gilgamesh, is Gilgamesh himself. In the beginning of the book one realizes that Gilgamesh is an arrogant person. Gilgamesh is full of himself and abuses his rights as king. He has sexual intercourse with the virgins of his town and acts as though he is a god. Throughout the story, many things cause Gilgamesh to change. He gains a friend, he makes a name for himself by killing Humbaba, and he tries to become immortal because of the death of Enkidu. Through these main actions his personality changes and he becomes a better person.
Gilgamesh was a very self confident and at times that self confidence led to him to have little compassion for the people of Uruk at he beginning of the story. He was their king, but not their protector; he kills their sons and rapes their daughters. He felt like he was superior to others due to the fact that he was two-thirds god, his mother was a goddess Ninsun and one third human. This fact is the key to all of his actions. This is also what sets him apart from the hero Odysseus.
Gilgamesh can be viewed as a writing that describes the social scene of the times it was written in. The characters of Enkidu and Gilgamesh are strong males. The roles of women in Gilgamesh are submissive and subtle. Women in this ancient Sumerian tale tend to be passive, but capable of influencing the outcome of events. Enkidu is a mighty force to confront. He is so strong that he is seen as a wild animal in his first appearances in the book. Gilgamesh is as strong or even stronger than Enkidu. He is the king of Uruk and is part god and part man. These dominant male characters command the most attention of the reader.
The myths which prove the contradictory behavior of the gods, acting as both benefactors and tormentors of man, can readily be explained when viewed in light of the prime directive for man, to worship the gods and not “overstep,” and the ensuing “Deus ex Mahina” which served to coerce man to fulfill his destiny as evidenced by the myths: “Pandora,” “Arachne, and “Odysseus.” Humankind and it’s range of vision over the gods beauty and power portrayed them to be benefactors but unseemingly it depicted their affliction towards humans.
The Epic of Gilgamesh is a historic story of the king of Uruk, Gilgamesh. The story depicts the short lived friendship of Gilgamesh and Enkidu. The story begins as Shamat the harlot seduces Enkidu and convinces him to go to the city of Uruk and meet Gilgamesh. From that moment on, the two were very close. They planned a trip to the forest of cedars to defeat the monster known as Humbaba so that Gilgamesh could show his power to the citizens of Uruk. However, Enkidu tried “vainly to dissuade” (18) Gilgamesh in going to the forest. Despite Enkidu’s plead, the two continued on their voyage to the forest where Humbaba lives. Once they arrived, they found the monster and killed him.
In many literary works we see significant transitions in the hero's character as the story is developed. This is also true in the Epic of Gilgamesh with its hero, Gilgamesh. In this narrative poem, we get glimpses of who Gilgamesh is and what his purposes and goals are. We see Gilgamesh act in many different ways -- as an overbearing ruler resented by his people, a courageous and strong fighter, a deflated, depressed man, and finally as a man who seems content with what he's accomplished. Through all of these transitions, we see Gilgamesh's attitude toward life change. The goals he has for his own life alter dramatically, and it is in these goals that we see Gilgamesh's transition from being a shallow, ruthless ruler to being an introspective, content man.
Mortal and immortal women inspire many of the events that take place in The Odyssey and The Epic of Gilgamesh. For example, without the harlot, who “tames” Enkidu, the story of Gilgamesh would not be, as we know it. A chapter entitled, “Women in Ancient Epic” from A Companion to Ancient Epic by Helene Foley compares Ishtar in Gilgamesh to Calypso and Circe in The Odyssey. By comparing the role of immortal and mortal women in both The Odyssey and The Epic of Gilgamesh, one will be able to discern how the feminine figures have played a pivotal role in shaping the destiny of the epic heroes, as well as, understanding the interrelation amongst the female figures of both ancient epics.
He takes on the aspects of outward uncivility that matches his inside. Since Gilgamesh is not civilized, he doesn’t function as well in or outside of society. When he’s looking for immortality, he relies on his strength and his uncivilized nature rather than allowing civilization to lead him to immortality. If he had allowed himself to listen to the gods who were trying to help him, the perhaps he would have achieved immortality rather than “hindering his own progress by smashing the Stone Ones” (George, 75) who were planning on helping him. Some would argue that Gilgamesh’s civility does, however, grow immensely through the epic. Since he starts off as a king and is able to do anything he wishes due to not having anyone trying to usurp him. Even when Enkidu comes into the story to stop Gilgamesh, he never succeeds. Instead they join forces, yet Gilgamesh does not gain civility and instead stays incredibly savage and fights together with Enkidu, battling demons like Humbaba and killing him for glory. It’s not till Enkidu dies and Gilgamesh realizes that he can in fact be affected by death and the gods despite being two thirds god himself. There’s no real evidence that Gilgamesh truly change. While the epic ends with Gilgamesh wearing his royal robes “fitting his dignity” (George, 97) and eventually accepting that not only will he not be granted
The story of Gilgamesh seems to be a collection of trials and tribulation. Throughout the book, you watch characters battle demons with each other, as well as within themselves. The tantalizing temptations that fill each character, ultimately leads to destruction and death. One example was the relationship between Ishtar and Gilgamesh. Both characters display a type of arrogant, 'ego-consciousness' (Neumann 63) that inevitably leads to subversive fate.
Gilgamesh is an epic of great love, followed by lingering grief that causes a significant change in character. It is the story of a person who is feared and honored, a person who loves and hates, a person who wins and loses and a person who lives life. Gilgamesh's journey is larger than life, yet ends so commonly with death. Through Gilgamesh, the fate of mankind is revealed, and the inevitable factor of change is expressed.
In Gilgamesh, he fights Humbaba with Enkidu, his best friend. Humbaba is the guardian of the Cedar Forest who was assigned by the god Enlil. Gilgamesh doesn't fight for the world, but he has his own reasons. In the text, it states, “Even if I fail I will have made a lasting name for myself’’ (181). In other words, Gilgamesh's motivation to slaughter Humbaba is not just to get rid of evil but to let his people remember him. Gilgamesh is being selfish because if he's dead, Uruk won't have a ruler, which means Uruk will be out of control. The choice Gilgamesh makes causes him not to care about Uruk but only himself. However, the encounter of Enkidu's death has turned Gilgamesh into another person. He couldn't confront the truth that Enkidu has died. Enkidu was more than a best friend to him, he was a brother whom he loved. Because of his love for Enkidu, Gilgamesh builds a statue so everyone in Uruk will remember him. This demonstrates Gilgamesh changing from selfish to selfless. This change is part of Gilgamesh's transformations towards becoming a hero. Gilgamesh changes as a result of Enkidu's death. According to the text, it states, “Gilgamesh interferes in the lives of his subjects beyond his right as king”(175). This proves that Gilgamesh was bothering and annoying the people of Uruk. Gilgamesh is going to become king soon and he shouldn’t disregard or interfere with his subject’s private life.
The story itself reflects an image of the cultural situation in which it was conceived. One major difference between this ancient society and our own is the way in which we sustain our leaders. Gilgamesh's character, whether based on an actual person or not, is portrayed as a very powerful and proud person. He was created to be better and stronger than common man and he is favored by the gods. This portrayal of a super-human king indicates a deep respect for leadership by those who told this story. Likely, these people lived under the rule of a monarchy in which the King was the all powerful leader and lawmaker. In today's society though, it is not common for one person to have unlimited power. Our governments are designed to divide ruling power between numerous parties; in order to keep any one person from becoming all powerful. Today's society would not tolerate a king who could do as he pleases, even if he were a noble and just man. In the story, Gilgamesh's super-human strength and power are not always convenient to his subjects. "His arrogance has no bounds", and "his lust leaves no virgin to her lover," yet the people respect his authority. The supremacy of Gilgamesh in the story reflects the feelings toward leadership held by that society which created the story. The respect they had for an all powerful monarch is hard for us to understand today. Our society looks down on those who rule as dictators and labels them tyrants and enemies. It is odd to imagine living in a society where a king is to be respected.