Your question implies that it was necessary for the two
heroes to kill Humbaba, but this is not the case. The Elders of Uruk and Enkidu both try
to persuade Gilgamesh not to fight the monster. His own mother, the Goddess Ninsun, is
unhappy about the expedition. She asks the sun
god Shamash:
Why have you imposed a restless heart on my
son Gilgamesh?
Now you have touched him so that he wants to travel a long way
to where Humbaba is.
He will face fighting such as he has not
known
He will travel on a road that he does not
know
Although there is a suggestion in the text that the
people will rejoice if Humbaba is killed and that he is hated by Shamash, the underlying
message is that this adventure is foolhardy. This is not just because of the dangers
involved, but because Humbaba is the official guardian of the cedar forrest, appointed
by Enlil himself. Gilgamesh and Enkidu know that killing Humbaba will anger the gods.
Enkidu says:
[Kill Humbaba] before the preeminent God Enlil
hears... and the gods... be filled with rage against
us
Consequently, when the council of the gods decide that
either Gilgamesh or Enkidu must die, the reason is
that:
...they killed the Bull of Heaven and have also slain
Humbaba
So the slaughter of Humbaba was by no means
"necessary". In fact, it was a foolish quest that lead directly to Enkidu's death. It
was caused by Gilgamesh's selfish desire to "make a name" for himself. Only at the end
of the story, after all of his attempts at securing immortality prove futile, does
Gilgamesh realise that it is better to preserve life (like the flood hero) than to
destroy it.
No comments:
Post a Comment