« Bill Moyers at the National Conference for Media Reform
Main
Tool Making, Brains and Speech »
June 10, 2008
An Ambiguous Post on the Gilgamesh Letter
The other day I mentioned a supposed letter from Gilgamesh to some king. In that post I focused on the expression kīma nēši, "like a lion" in line 13. Today I'd want to discuss a couple of abnormally interesting things about the "opening" of the "letter." As before, the text is Gruney's, 128; the translation is mine with more than a little help from both Gurney, 129 and Foster, 368.
1) a-na TI [ ]x-u šàr Aš(?)-ra-nun-maki qi-bi-ma
2) um-ma dG[IŠ.GÍN.MAŠ šà]r Uriki mār KUL.UNUki-ma
3) bi-nu-ut dA-n[u dEnlil u dÉ-a mi-gir dŠá-maš na-ram dMarduk
4) šá ki-ma qí-e [ u]l-tú išid šamê(AN.ÚR) a-di elât šamê(AN-PA) mātāti(KUR.KUR) napḫar(NIGIN)-ši-na i-be-lu
5) ù šarranimeš [a-ši-ib] parakkē meš ú-na-áš-šá-qu šēpē-šú
6) šarru šá ul-tú [ṣi-it dŠamši a-d]i dŠamšiši mātāti(KUR.KUR) napḫar(NIGIN)-ši-na kīma qí-e uš-ta-ti!-en-kám-ma
1) To Ti[ . . . .. . . . . .]?u king of Ashramnumma(?), speak
2) thus (says) G[ilgamesh kin]g of Ur, son (citizen) of Kullab,
3) creation of Anu, Enlil and Ea, favorite of Shamash, beloved of Marduk,
4) who, as (with) a cord, rules all the lands from the base of heaven (the horizon) to the top of heaven (the zenith),
5) and the kings occupying daises kiss his feet,
6) the king who has, as (with) a cord, gathered from all the countries from [the rising of the sun (Shamash ) to the set]ting of the sun (Shamash).
I'd like to focus first on the expression kīma qí-e, "like a cord." qû, "cord," of which qí-e (qî?) is the genitive, has a range of meanings from "flax" to "string" to "net." And what scholars often take as a different root, qû (II), means measuring vessel but also a measurement of area (the area required to grow a qû of grain) and of thickness (CAD, Q, 288). I think there being two different Sumerian equivalences in the classical vocabulary texts (GU = qû I ["flax" etc.] and SILA = qû II ["measuring vessel" etc]) and, on the surface, substantial differences in meaning justifies Astrologists seeing two different roots here. Note also the "thread of Šamaš" given to a nadītu (CAD, Q, 286). Šamaš again. The Hebrew cognate of one or both (or neither?) of these roots is קו. Hebrew קו generally means "measuring cord," but it can stand as a metaphor for "precept" or "oracle" or the like. See Isaiah 28:100 for example. Now I don't want to join the one root or two root argument, nor do I want to commit myself too firmly on the exact cognitive relationship between or differing semantic ranges of Hebrew קו and Akkadian qû (I or II or both). I do want to point out the possible ambiguity between the meanings of the Akkadian word(s) even if they are from two differing roots.
So when we look at line 4 of the Gilgamesh Letter, kīma qí-e could well relate to some kind of measure in a figurative sense. He rules by percept (to rely perhaps too heavily on the possible Hebrew cognate). But in line 6, we have little choice but to see qí-e as a net that gathered the nations together. And when we turn to lines 39 and 40 of the first column of the Hymn of Shamash (another text where kīma qí-e appears), there is little choice but to see the expression as indicating a cord or net. Here is Lambert's, 128, text and my translation of Hymn of Shamash I:39-40,
39) [dŠamaš] ki-ma qí-e ka-sa-ta ki-ma im-ba-ri [ká]t-ma-ta
40) [rap]-šu an-dùl-la-ka sa-ḫi-ip mātāti
39) [Shamash], like a cord you bind together, like a dense fog covers,
40) your protection extends over the lands.
With the verb kasû, there is little room for ambiguity here. The "cord" that binds and the "dense fog" are metaphors for Shamash' universal protection. But that doesn't necessarily convince me that the opening of the Gilgamesh Letter is free of quite intentional ambiguity that results in a kind of tension between kīma qí-e in line 4 and kīma qí-e in line 6.
There's another possible ambiguity is the opening of the Gilgamesh Letter. It's not so clear, at least to me, where (or if) the tutelary of Gilgamesh ends and a description of Shamash begins and ends or if it is just that single divine name. Note the use of qí-e in both the "letter" and the Hymn. In fact, I wonder if we are supposed to see a relationship between Gilgamesh and Shamash that goes well beyond protected and protector. Does the letter partially merge the two?
On another related subject, it is also noteworthy that lines 4 and 6 of the Gilgamesh Letter strongly support an active (Lambert, 128, and others like me) as opposed to a passive ("when thou art bound with a cord," Stevens, 388) understanding of ki-ma qí-e ka-sa-ta in the Hymn of Shamash I:39. See Gruney, 132, for further references.
I think the most accessible English translation of the whole of the Gilgamesh Letter is Foster, 368-369. Also, George, 117 -119 has a good discussion of the "letter" with special focus on the opening. Note that James Getz just posted a short discussion of Divine Kingship and Gilgamesh and Piotr Michalowski’s paper “The Mortal Kings of Ur: A Short Century of Divine Rule in Ancient Mesopotamia” today. While not related to the letter itself this is interesting stuff, check it out.
References:
George, A.R. ed., The Babylonian Gilgamesh Epic: introduction, critical edition and cuneiform texts, Oxford:: Oxford University Press, 2003.
Gurney, O. R., "The Sultantepe Tablets (continued)," Anatolian Studies, 7 (1957), 127-136.
Lambert, Wilfred G., Babylonian Wisdom Literature, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1960
Stevens, Ferris J., trans, "Sumero-Akkadian Hymns and Prayers," in James Pritchard, Ancient Near Eastern Texts relating to the Old Testament, Third Edition with Supplement, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969, 383-392
Posted by Duane Smith at June 10, 2008 4:01 PM | Read more on Akkadian |
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.telecomtally.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/2529
Comments
What function did this letter have? It's obviously not authentic. Why do you think it was written?
Posted by: Jim Getz at June 11, 2008 7:18 AM
Jim,
Why it was originally written is anyone's guess. Most think it served as part of the scribal curriculum at Sultantepe. All three copies are from there and they were found in the general context of clearly school texts. If I had to guess, it even originated as a scribal exercise where some master dictated it, making it up as he when along, to his students. I'm not so sure that it originated at Sultantepe but then it may well have. It's literary function is even less clear to me.
Posted by: Duane at June 11, 2008 8:46 AM
Sorry, comments are closed for this post.
Send me an email if it is important.