Love, sexuality, and Eroticism in “The Epic of Gilgamesh”
Gilgamesh is the hero of this story, and a ruler of Uruk, a famous old city in South Mesopotamia. Analysis and criticism look into the story’s epic adventure, kingship, nobility, combat, religion, and warrior heroism. Various literatures have gone further to understand the historical, religious, setting, and cultural aspects of the story and its original inscriptions to the Sumerians, Assyrians, and Mesopotamians. In the process, this has led to the making of different versions and interpretations of “The Epic of Gilgamesh” creating a complex and dynamic understanding of sexuality, eroticism, and love. This study carries out an analysis based on the premise that “the various versions and interpretations of the story have created the interplay between the theme of love, sexuality, and eroticism as a masterful blend in the story’s background.”
The debate on eroticism and sexuality in “the Epic of Gilgamesh” concerns itself with the interpretation given to certain scenes. The analysis shall make use of Gilgamesh’s story in the Akkadian Gilgamesh Epic, of the Standard Babylonian version. It will also make use of Benjamin Foster’s 1987 Standard Version, and Cooper Jerrold 1977 Babylonian version.
This analysis finds that there is a masterful embedding of sexuality, eroticism, and love like within the ambiguity of the passage of Shamhat’s passionate sexual encounter with Enkidu (Jackson XVII). To Jackson, the passage represents the passage to humanness, as the author uses less explicit language. This analysis identifies that in many instances the poet was describing the relationship between Enkidu and Gilgamesh, in a manner that gives the impression of homosexual relationship between the two (Jackson XVII). The embedding of this poetic imagery in several passages leaves a lot of room for interpretations. Therefore, this analysis finds that as much as the poet makes impression of sexuality and eroticism between Gilgamesh and Enkidu, it cannot apply modern concepts of homosexuality to an ancient literary Sumerian text. This analysis finds that this is because most of the erotic imagery happens in dream episodes in the poem, rather than the accounts of the adventures between Enkidu and Gilgamesh (Jackson XVII).
It is Benjamin Foster’s 1987 Standard Version, and the Old Babylonian version interpretation by Cooper Jerrold in 1977, which imply sexuality and eroticism between the two in the dream episodes. In the Old Babylonian version of the story, Gilgamesh informs the wise goddess Nansen, his mother, what he dreamt. He tells her he saw the sky and an object like a meteorite fell next to him. Gilgamesh says he tried to lift it up, but failed (Jackson XVII). Gilgamesh then saw the people of Uruk gather around him kissing his feet as if he was a baby, he so loved it that he embraced it as his wife. Gilgamesh then tells his mother, that he set the meteorite before her, and she “made it equal” to him (Jackson XVII). In a Sumerian version cited by Karahashi and Lopez-Ruiz (2006), identifies the making of Endau equal to Gilgamesh, as the way of the gods to calm down Gilgamesh’s heart. “Making it equal” does not imply that Gilgamesh’s mother did recognize that her son was homosexual or would have a homosexual relationship with Enkidu, but it represents the role Enkidu would play in Gilgamesh’s epic. (Karahashi and Lopez-Ruiz (2006, p.98) identifies that the gods brought Enkidu to Gilgamesh and made him “mighty in strength” (I. 92). The relationship between Enkidu and Gilgamesh was a quest by the gods, rather than the sexual relationship implied. This is drawn from the Sumerian version that indicates that the gods, “to [Gilgamesh’s] stormy heart, let [Enid’s] be equal” (I. 97). This is a further support to the thesis that the different versions and interpretations of the story either Babylonian or Sumerian, causing complexity in understanding the difference of existence of love, sexuality, and eroticism in the story.
The complexity of this definition is seen where, Ninsun then interprets for Gilgamesh the dream, saying that “a strong companion will come to him, that he is mighty, strong as a meteorite, that he loved him and embraced him as a wife” (Jackson XVII). Ninsun then ends the interpretation by saying, “Your dream is favorable and precious” (Cooper 39). Benjamin Foster’s Standard version explains the dream in a shorter version. Gilgamesh’s mother making a prediction of the appearance of Enkidu, informs him that a person like him is born on the plains, and he is raised by the mountains. She further says, “You will see him and rejoice. Young men will kiss his feet. You will hug him. You will bring him to me” (Foster 22). At this point, Benjamin Foster’s Standard version is introducing the reader to Enkidu and his relationship with Gilgamesh. In doing so, the versions imply that Gilgamesh’s mother implies that he is homosexual as he has “embraces” Enkidu, who is equal to him. Danny Jackson identifies several erotic and sexual connotations in this second dream in Benjamin Cooper’s standard version. In the dream, Benjamin Cooper identifies that Gilgamesh said that he saw an axe fall next to him and people gathered around it (23) (Jackson XVIII). Gilgamesh then puts it in front of his mother, while commenting “I love it and embraced it as a wife, and then you ‘made it equal’ to me” (Jackson XVIII). His mother then explains the dream, that the axe was a strong companion who would come to Gilgamesh, and would rescue his friend, the strongest in the land, and he is mighty and strong like the meteorite. This analysis finds that in the Standard version, Gilgamesh identifies an ax, but makes the comment that it was an intentional witticism or an ambiguity that played on the fact that ax in Akkidian is “Ahu” also means “brother” and “side”. Therefore, the quotes given by Benjamin Foster and Cooper Jerrold can also imply “I tool it and made it a brother,” or “I took it and placed it at my side” (Jackson XVIII). This analysis finds that versions of the story like those used in this analysis, present the themes of sexuality and eroticism.
This analysis finds that the reason both versions of the story identify sexuality and eroticism in the text is associated with the fact that in old Akkadian, the term “embrace” is an euphemism of sexual intercourse (Jackson XVIII). The ambiguity of the theme arises from the fact that for both the Standard and Old Babylonian versions, explicitly indicate, “Embrace him/it as a wife.” However, in Babylonian terms the traditional rituals and incantations from literature show that the society in dealing with sexual intercourse, the term “wife” is never used, but “woman” is (Jackson XVIII). Therefore, sex and eroticism in “The Epic of Gilgamesh” is masterfully embedded in the story. On the other hand, given the complexity of testing the validity of the versions and interpretations, it also implies that the theme of sexuality and eroticism is a product of centuries of interpretation of old dialect.
The idea of love comes in from the Akkadian version as given by Cavigneaux and Al-Rawi (1993) in Tablet VI, Ishtar is watching Gilgamesh as he is washing himself and putting on clothes. She falls in love with Gilgamesh and proposes marriage, in the following statement, “You shall be my husband, and I your wife” (VI 9; Karahashi and Lopez-Ruiz 98). Karahashi and Lopez-Ruiz (2006) finds that the confusion over the existence of love, sexuality, and eroticism in Gilgamesh is seen in the Akkadian Babylonian version as translated by Cavigneaux and Al-Rawi (1993) and the Sumerian version given by Cooper Foster’s 1993 version (98). The Sumerian version identifies that the goddess Inanna also proposed marriage to Gilgamesh, as stated, “O Gilgamesh, may you be its lord, let me be its lady” (Karahashi and Lopez-Ruiz 99). Despite her expression of love, Gilgamesh who lists rejects Ishtar down all her destructive, un-domestic, and unruly characteristics. It is at this point in the texts does the concept of sexuality and eroticism is introduced as Gilgamesh reminds Ishtar of her unfortunate lovers, like Dumuzi and the gardener Isullanu, whose love ended in tragedy (George 473; Karahashi and Lopez-Ruiz 99). Gilgamesh rebuttal of her exploits is an irony for he was known to take advantage of his kingly rights as he wasted time sporting games and by taking girls and ravishing them away from home (I. 65-73). Benjamin in his standard version identifies that Gilgamesh at the beginning of the story deflowering of young maidens, as he exercises one of his legal and kingly duties of deflowering maidens (Foster 11).
Both Cavigneaux and Al-Rawi (1993) and Benjamin Foster (2001) find that Gilgamesh was sexually perverse and did enjoy in participating in erotic and sexual scenes. As depicted by George that identifies that Gilgamesh, “tyrannized his people with his excessive appetites for sex and play” (George 7). This is gives the ambiguity of the different versions as Benjamin Foster Standard version in (2001) in depicts Gilgamesh’s rejection of Ishtar’s sexual advances as a personification of the unproductive attraction he had to the opposite sex. The standard version tries to imply that Gilgamesh was homosexual, as he rejected the opposite sex, and later asserted and affirmed his unity with Enkidu as a form of self-identity and the beginning of his self-awareness.
In conclusion, this analysis finds that the author of the text “The Epic of Gilgamesh” does not define explicitly theme of sexuality, love, and eroticism, but opts to use these words synonymously in the extracts identified in the scenes. This analysis finds this technique at a masterful way of embedding a theme in a text, and it is associated with the confusion of the different versions and interpretations of the theme. The Sumerian, Akkadian Babylonian, Babylonian Standard version, and the modern Standard version of Benjamin Cooper identify this theme. However, their interpretation of the Babylonian and Sumerian definition of “embrace,” “wife,” “meteorite,” “axe” and “woman” shows the complexity of the theme. The words “embrace” imply sexual intercourse to the Babylonians, and when used in combination with “woman” implies illicit or erotic sexual encounters different from that of “embrace wife” which implies “friendship.” This then introduces the confusion is Gilgamesh was a homosexual, as different versions believe there was a sexual relationship with Enkidu, who was made equal to him. Yet the Sumerian version believes this was a close friendship between the two, whose hearts were equal by the gods. In the end, this analysis finds that there is substantial evidence in literature to support the thesis that “the various versions and interpretations of the story have created the interplay between the theme of love, sexuality, and eroticism as a masterful blend in the story’s background.”
Works Cited
Cavigneaux, Antoine, and Al-Rawi Farouk H. Gilgameš et taureau de ciel (šul-mè-kam) (texts de Tell Haddad IV). RA 1993, 87: 97-126.
Cooper, Jerrold S., “Gilgamesh Dreams of Enkidu: The Revolution and Dilution of Narrative,” in Maria de Jong Ellis, ed., Essay on the Ancient Near East in Memory of Jacob Joel Finkelstein (Hamden, Connecticut, 1977), pp. 39-44.
Foster, Benjamin R. The Epic of Gilgamesh. New York: Norton & Company, 2001. Print.
Foster, Benjamin R., “Gilgamesh: Sex, Love and the Ascent of Knowledge,” in John H. Marks and Robert M. Good, eds., Love and Death in the Ancient Near East: Essays in Honor of Marvin H. Pope (Guilford, Connecticut, 1987), pp. 21-24. Reprinted in John Maier, ed., Gilgamesh: A Reader (Wauconda, IL, 1997).
George, Andrew R. The Babylonians Gilgamesh Epic, Volume I: Introduction, Critical Edition, and Cuneiform Texts. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003. Print.
Jackson, Danny P. The Epic of Gilgamesh. Illinois, USA: Bolchazy-Carducci Publishers, Inc., 1997. Print.
Karahashi, Fumi and Lopez-Ruiz Carolina. Love Rejected: Some Notes on the Mesopotamian Epic of Gilgamesh and the Greek Myth of Hippolytus. Journal of Cuneiform Studies, 58 (2006): 97-107.
