A New Interpretation of Bilgames' Death
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
REVIEW ARTICLE THE SOLUTION OF THE DREAM: A NEW INTERPRETATION OF BILGAMES’ DEATH Niek Veldhuis University of Groningen The excavations in Tell Haddad (ancient demonstrate that my reading is plausible from a Meturan) have added significantly to our knowl- philological point of view and produces a coher- edge of the Sumerian Bilgames narratives.1 The ent story line. I will begin with my conclusions: fragments of Bilgames’ Death from Tell Hada the plot (§1). This new reconstruction of the nar- (Meturan) were recently published and edited by rative is justified through the discussion of some and Cavigneaux and Al-Rawi (2000).2 Since key passages in §2. Finally, the new translation Kramer’s publication of some Nippur fragments (§3) is meant as a general orientation aid for the (1944), little progress had been made on this com- reader, and as a means to demonstrate my under- position for more than half a century. Although standing of the narrative. The Appendix presents the Meturan version differs in many details from a previously unrecognized fragment that could be the Nippur fragments, Cavigneaux and Al-Rawi joined to the main Nippur source. succeeded in establishing the correct order of all In many ways this article takes the edition of scenes and in presenting some version of the text Bilgames’ Death by Cavigneaux and Al-Rawi for nearly all passages. (2000) as its point of departure, or as the giant’s Notwithstanding the dramatic progress in tex- shoulder on which to stand. The editors have pro- tual reconstruction, the basic story line remains vided a solid textual basis from which every fu- largely unclear. Given our imperfect knowledge ture discussion has to start. Moreover, they have of the grammar and lexicon, the reconstruction of collected and edited the most important texts and a Sumerian literary text is always fraught with passages that elucidate one or another aspect of uncertainties. In the present case, however, the the composition. If in the following pages one en- fragmentary nature of some of the pivotal passages counters more criticism than praise, this does not and the unusual orthography of the Meturan texts adequately represent my appreciation of the book. render all interpretations provisional. I hope to 1. The Plot of Bilgames’ Death My understanding of the narrative differs in one 1. See Cavigneaux and Al-Rawi (1993a; 1993b). 2. A translation of Bilgames’ Death appeared in George central point from previous ones. Bilgames has a (1999: 195–208). George’s translation largely follows the un- dream in which he is told that he will die. This derstanding of the text by Cavigneaux and Al-Rawi. The dream is then repeated word for word. We then ETCSL translation of Bilgames’ Death (Black et al. 1998), appeared in October 2000, after the present article was fin- learn that the “solution” of the dream was revealed ished. to Urlugal. This “solution” was interpreted by pre- 133 JCS 53 (2001) 134 NIEK VELDHUIS vious scholars as referring to an explanation of the The second part (M[92]–125 // M182–[216]) re- dream. The “second dream,” according to this read- fers to the future. It is a speech directed to Bilgames ing of the text, is in the voice of Bilgames, who about the burying and mourning rituals that will recounts his dream in order to obtain an exegesis. be performed on his behalf. The identity of the The building of the hero’s tomb follows the dream speaker is unfortunately unclear. In the Nippur interpretation. version it appears to be Enlil (N v 12). In the There are several problems with this reconstruc- Meturan version it may be the ghost Sisig (see tion of the narrative. First, Bilgames’ dream does below), but that remains uncertain. A few lines in not seem to require an interpretation, as it is clear the first part of the dream are repeated almost ver- enough by itself. Furthermore, the narrative func- batim in the second part. These lines are crucial tion of the dream and its interpretation, and their for the understanding of what the dream is all relation to the tomb building remain unclear. It will about. be argued instead that the repetition of the dream Enki answers An and Enlil, who apparently pro- is the dream come true. Furthermore, the “solu- posed to save Bilgames from death. In his answer tion” of the dream and the building of Bilgames’ Enki reminds his peers about the flood story, and tomb is equivalent. The tomb will guarantee that he concludes that whatever his credentials, the name of Bilgames will not be forgotten. The Bilgames has to die. However, he will be made an hero’s anguish in the face of imminent death, a important person in the underworld (80–86): recurring element in the dream, is thus resolved. In the closing passage, when he enters the under- 80 (Enki:) “Bilgames, among the spirits, dead world, we learn that Bilgames has accepted his fate in the underworld let him be the governor of and is in peace. the underworld, let him be the foremost of This interpretation produces a much more co- its spirits!” He (= Enki) rendered the ver- herent story line, which may be summarized as dict, he made the decision: “When you speak follows: it will be as important as the word of Ningiåzida~ and Dumuzid.” Then the young 1. Introduction: Bilgames on his deathbed lord, lord Bilgames 2. Bilgames’ dream: he learns that he will die 85 (like?) all of humanity, all that has life, was 3. The dream comes true heart-stricken! He was in despair, he was heart-stricken. 4. Urlugal builds Bilgames’ tomb 5. Bilgames enters the underworld in peace Previous translations took the subject of 82 to be Bilgames (“He [= Bilgames] will pass judge- My reading is based on the analysis and inter- ment, he will render verdicts”). Though this makes pretation of several passages. They will be dis- good sense in translation, there are two problems. cussed in detail in §2. First, the verbal forms in 82 are indicatives with mu- and ba-, not precatives as in 81. Second, line 2. Commentary on Some Key Passages 83 suddenly changes to the second person. This was explained as a lapsus by Cavigneaux and Al- M80–86 and 120–125: Bilgames’ Despair Rawi (2000: 43), but it may as well be understood Bilgames’ dream has two clearly distinct parts. as the ipsissima dicta by Enki in his verdict con- The first part (M49–87 // M140–177) refers to the cerning Bilgames. past: Bilgames’ accomplishments and the story of The structure of line 85 is uncertain and remains the Deluge. It takes place in the heavenly council. so in my rendering. Line 86, however, is crucial. REVIEW ARTICLE 135 The Meturan version has urfi nam-ba-ugfi-ga åag› literature, often in a context where death or the nam-ba-sag‹-ga. In the Nippur version the line ap- dead plays a prominent role. To bolster our argu- pears as urfi nam-ba-e-ug‡-e åag› nam-ba-e-sag‹- ment, therefore, we will study those attestations ge (N v16).3 In both versions the expression is to see whether a positive interpretation is possible interpreted by the editors as a second person nega- in those contexts, too. tive modal form: “Ne te meurtris pas le sein, ne The Incantation to Utu was recently re-edited t’afflige pas le coeur!” Or, in George’s version: by Alster (1991).4 The structure and interpreta- “Be not in despair, be not heart-stricken.” In none tion of the text was elucidated by Geller (1995: of the attestations of this expression, however, is 107): “The central theme of this incantation is quite the second person expressed. It seems more natu- clear: the man is falsely accused by ghosts before ral, therefore, to translate a third person, and to Utu, although he is innocent, and as a result the understand /na/ as the positive modal prefix. dead have caused him problems. The incantation A very similar passage appears at the end of the is a plea to Utu to make a correct judgement re- second part of the dream. Bilgames is told that all garding the human victim.” I follow Geller in his his relatives will come to his funeral, but this fails general interpretation of the text, although in de- to ease his mind (lines M120–125 //M211–216): tail my understanding occasionally differs from his. 120 He was in despair, he was heart-stricken! The structure of the incantion is as follows: Now the Anuna counted him in their midst. 1) praise to Utu; 2) description of different types They counted him only second to the great of ghosts; and 3) plea to benevolent gods to act in gods! He (Enki) made him governor of the favor of the patient. The middle part, the list of underworld. He rendered the verdict, he made ghosts, begins with two rather lengthy sections, the decision: both introduced with tukum-bi: if it is a ghost of 125 “When you speak it will be as important as such-and-such a type. The first of these sections the word of Ningiåzida~ and Dumuzid.” begins (127): “if it is a hostile ghost who has not been released from the pit” (see Geller 1995: 105). This is the end of the dream after which This ghost receives a most negative treatment: as Bilgames wakes up. The significance of the he- long as he does not leave the victim’s body, he roes’ anguish in the lines translated above becomes will be cut off all supplies, and the Anuna are asked clear in the final passage of the story (see below to erase his name (128–33).