This concept of formation out
of the earth makes man one with the earth. Adam and Enkidu are portrayed as one
with nature, an idea that cannot be original to both accounts. In chapter 1 of
Genesis, the writer gives a little more information on the creation of Adam. It
is stated that God “formed man in His image,” (27). When creating an equal for
Gilgamesh, Aruru “form[s] an image of Anu in her heart,” (Sin-Leqi-Unninni I,
ii, 33). Anu is the god of gods; he is the “highest of the pantheon” as John
Gardner explains in his interpretation of the work (Sin-Leqi-Unninni 71). Enkidu
is made in the image of Anu with one very important detail, he is mortal, which
connects to Adam’s creation. Adam, made in the likeleness of God, is also
mortal, though much like God. With the god-like image, both men are in tune with
nature which could possibly be the ideal way of life for the writers of both
works, explaining why both stories have these significant details. Again,
stressing harmony in nature, Enkidu grows up in the wilderness. He “fed with the
gazelles on the grass/with the wild animals he drank at waterholes” (Sin-Leqi-Unninni
I, ii, 39-40). There seems to be a link here with the creation of Adam; at
first, Adam is given dominance over the animals in the Garden of Eden (Genesis
1:30). It is only later that this is gift is taken away from him, when he gains
knowledge. Enkidu also gains knowledge, in the form of a woman’s love. After a
courtesan lies with him, “the beasts of the wilderness fled from his body,” as
if Enkidu is now too civilized and the animals sense it (Sin-Leqi-Unninni I, iv
25). Adam’s problem, stems from a woman: Eve tempts Adam to eat the forbidden
fruit, which gives him knowledge, and as a punishment, God cast him out of Eden,
separating him from nature (Genesis 3:17-24). While the use of a woman suggests
evil rooting from females, as many myths and religions believe, the harmony with
animals depicts how man came to dominate the earth. A very large question has
always been, why is man so superior to the animals? This is one way to explain
it. Again, the similarities are so close that it is hard to ignore the fact that
one influenced the other.
Most people conclude that the ancient story of
Gilgamesh the hero and king influenced the later writing of the Bible (Kneisler).
Yet, in the words of Frank Lorey of the Institute for Creation Research in
California, “the probability exists that the Biblical account had been preserved
either as an oral tradition, or in written form handed down from Noah… and
eventually to Moses, thereby making it actually older than the Sumerian
accounts… (2). This statement, while referring to just the flood stories, should
be applied to all the similarities between the Old Tesetament and Gilgamesh.
While there is estimation as to when Gilgamesh was written and what period the
story originally comes from (as early as 3000 B.C.), there is no evidence of
when the Bible was written (Loery). Since the Old Testament covers a span of
almost two thousand years, it is very likely that before it was written down
(somewhere around 1000 B.C.) it was passed on orally. Therefore, it is wrong to
assume that concepts in the Bible were influenced from concepts of other works,
such as Gilgamesh, but one should still keep in mind that one did inevitably
influence the other.
Bibliography
The Bible. Casselman, Linda “Gilgamesh and Parallels to the Bible.” 1 October
2000 . Clough, Brenda W. “A Short Discussion of the Influence of the Gilgamesh
Epic on the Bible.” 3 July 1999. 1 October 2000.
http://www.sff.net/people/Brenda/gilgam.htm. Sin-Leqi-Unninni. Gilgamesh. Trans.
John Gardner and John Maier. New York; Vintage Books, 1985. Kneisler, Matthew
“Noah’s Ark: The Story and Gilgamesh Epic.” 1 October 2000.
http://arksearch.com/nastory.htm#Gilgamesh Epic. Lorey, Frank. M.A. “The Flood
of Noah and the Flood of Gilgamesh.” Vital Articles on Science/Creation. (March
1997). 1 October 2000 .
Words: 1356
