The Gilgamesh Epic and Old Testament Parallels

by Alexander Heidel

Cuneiform records made some 3000 years ago are the basis for this essay on the ideas of death & the afterlife & the story of the flood which were current among the ancient peoples of the Tigro-Euphrates Valley. With the same careful scholarship shown in his previous volume, The Babylonian Genesis, Heidel interprets the famous Gilgamesh Epic & other related Babylonian & Assyrian documents. He compares them with corresponding portions of the Old Testament in order to determine the inherent historical relationship of Hebrew & Mesopotamian ideas.
Preface
List of Symbols & Special Characters
The Gilgamesh epic
Related material
Death and the afterlife
The story of the flood

Genres: History, Mythology, Religion, Literature, Archaeology, Biblical Studies, Christianity

280 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1949

Reviews

[Richard · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book sets out to determine what exactly the relationship is between the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) and various Babylonian myths, i.e. various recensions of The Epic of Gilgamesh, the story of Utnapishtim (known under different names) and the descent of the goddess Ishtar to the underworld. There are translations of the Babylonian / Sumerian texts in question. Finally, there are two scholarly chapters comparing and contrasting beliefs and practices concerning the afterlife, and the Biblical and Babylonian accounts of the deluge.

There is some resemblance between the ancient Hebrew concept of Sheol (which designates both the grave and the underworld) and the land of no return. But there are significant differences too. And when the flood stories are examined closely, there are superficial similarities, but the purpose and moral content are different.

The author does not seem to think that the Biblical concepts and stories are slavishly derived from Mesopotamian material. Although there is a family resemblance between them, this does not mean that they are inextricably bound to each other, nor should too much be made of the similarities between them.

[Dave · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is the second translation of the Gilgamesh epic that I have read recently, the other being translated by Benjamin R. Foster. Each of them has their strong points, but overall I prefer the Foster translation. The Foster translation is much more recent(2001), and benefits from additional pieces of the epic being found. The Heidel translation is from 1946 and for that reason has more gaps than the Foster translation. Heidel also translates the racier portions of the epic into Latin rather than English which is troublesome for non-scholars.

That being said, there are some very good things about this book which make it worthwhile. Heidel does an excellent job of informing the reader of what the source is for each part of the translation, as well as for the related material that he presents. His sections on 'Death and the Afterlife', and 'The Story Of The Flood' where he compares the Mesopotamian works with those of the Old Testament are much better than the discussion given with the Foster translation in my opinion. In addition, Rivkah Scharf Kluger uses Heidel's translation for most of her work presented in "The Archetypal Significance of Gilgamesh", which give those interested in a large amount of discussion all based on the same translation.

One last comment on the book itself is that the typeface used is rather small, and not very easy on the eyes.

[Eugenia · Rating 3 out of 5]

An outdated and just not the best translation for Gilgamesh. I recommend Andrew George's translation in Penguin Classic for the Epic.
However, this book includes a number of other myths (very interesting) and a scholarly discussion about parallels and, more precisely, dissimilarities between the Old Testament and the Babylonian stories about the afterlife and the flood.

[E7boehm · Rating 5 out of 5]

A great very scholarly translation of Gilgamesh, less poetic but maybe more readable than Penguin Edition. Also a number of alternate myths are included. A brilliant analysis of Old Testament and Babylonian mythos and the difference in handling of the afterlife and the flood. A hard but worthwhile read.

Few books have been such a pleasure in a trying time.

[Liam Malone · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is fascinating but there is an assumption that one tradition had to influence the other. The Babylonian is older but that doesn't mean the Hebrew story come from it. Many cultures have flood myths.

[Phillip Hardy · Rating 3 out of 5]

I was rather disappointed not only with the severely fragmented translation of the Epic but also with particularly anal conclusions. The detail is definitely there in the analysis though.

[H.C. Jackson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Definitely of its time, but the things it points out about the flood parallels are still of value.

[Daniel Hadley · Rating 3 out of 5]

It is difficult to put stock in the biblical story of the deluge after reading the Gilgamesh Epic (not that it's easy otherwise to believe in a universal flood brought on by wickedness, but Gilgamesh makes it that much more difficult). This is an excellent study in textual syncretism and ancient Near Eastern myth making. The parallels between all of the ancient flood accounts are uncanny, including those between Genesis and Gilgamesh. One word of advice: don't get the Chicago UP version. All of the sex scenes are translated into Latin. What is that about? Apparently top Chicago OT scholars like Heidel felt that laymen weren't ready for the steamy love scenes between Enkidu and the prehistoric prostitute, Shamat.

[Jeffrey Aaron · Rating 4 out of 5]

Alexander Heidel was a great scholar who also translated the Babylonian Genesis (Enuma Elish) in his book by the same name. The origins of that story is linked to the story of Gilgamesh which concludes with the even deeper and older Sumerian flood story, upon which the Hebrew authors based their flood story in Genesis hundreds of years later.

[Jim · Rating 4 out of 5]

Raises a lot of questions about the flood. The Babylonians were talking about Utnapishtim and his ark long before the Hebrews wrote about Noah. Did the Jews copy from the Babylonians or did they both retell an even older story?

[Ian · Rating 4 out of 5]

If you want to read EVERYTHING start here