Myths from Mesopotamia: Creation, the Flood, Gilgamesh, and Others (Oxford… (edition 2009)

I just picked this up to get unembelished accounts of Gilgamesh and Inanan's decent. Had a flip through the other myths, but ultimately I don't have a high enough interest to persevere with them.

This is an invaluable text for those looking for what's on the tablets and nothing else, but for the same reason may be rather tedious for the the casual reader.

Atrahasis, the wise man who built an ark and saved mankind from destruction by a Flood, becoming a quasi-immortal progenitor. His story is delicately (speaking of cannibalism [27a] and slavery [26b]) compiled by Enheduana, daughter of Sargon, 2390-2335 BC, and holder of the most prestigious temple office at Ur, the author of the Temple Hymns [3].
Gilgamesh. Standard and Old Babylonian Version.
Nergal and Ereshkigal, two very different versions. Judge of the Underworld, and consort "Queen of the Great Earth", sister of Istar. In the earlier version, Nergal seizes the throne of the Underworld by force from the Queen. No Sumerian version is known. I like the part where Nergal enters the house, past the curious doors, seals Ereshkigal off, and then seizes her by the hair. But she cries out to him "Don't kill me! let me tell you something." And he listens, and weeps. Then she says, "come, you can be my husband, I will put the Tablet of Wisdom in your hand." Then she weeps. He kisses her and wipes away her tears [180]. Oh my brother, my sister, by this time we are all in tears.
Adapa. The first of the antediluvian sages, sent by Ea to bring civilization to mankind. See? Man's folly is reduced to a simple misunderstanding over table manners. Of course Ea then punishes Adapa, tricking him out of immortality.
Etana. A Quasi-historical king of Kush. We are still piecing this together, but the motif of a man's ascent to heaven on an eagle's back has entered Iranian and Islamic legend. Great curse sample: "May the prowling weapon make straight for him".
Anzu, the lion-headed eagle. Two versions, again very different. (!) The hero is Ninurta, whose title is "Bel", "The Lord", equivalent to Biblical Semitic "Ba'al". The epic of cosmic warfare among powerful gods centers around possession of the Tablet of Destinies, with which Anzu has flown off to inaccessible mountains. After a preface, "Pay attention to reliable words!" Deliverance for the despondent Igigi [210], the assembled gods, begins after Ea, the Lord of Intelligence, suggests to the sister of all Gods, Belet-ili, that she offer Ninurta, her powerful son, to capture the soaring Anzu. When this sister says "Yes", "The gods of the land were glad at her utterance" [211]. She instructs her son in a battle plan to conquer Anzu, "and the warrior listened to his mother's words" [212]. Colophon is missing.
Epic of Creation. So named, but a different sort than Gilgamesh. Here, no struggle against fate, no heroes. Marduk overcomes the forces of evil -- with no suspense built up. Mankind created to serve the gods, the males of whom elect their leaders. Goddesses play no part in creating the civilized world [228], and waters are the primeval forces. Mankind's king, surrounded by priests performing the proper rites, receives his mandate from the gods. The subjects kiss the feet of the King. Loyal support is absolute and brooks no rivalry. Only utter chaos is the alternative. Reeks of propaganda but probably not stultifying to the peerage.
Theogony of Dunnu. This was probably a town of importance, and clearly had its own local tradition about "creation". Here the primeval forces are the Plough and Earth, as the parents of the Sea. Clearly Mesopotamians did not have a single specific tradition for creation. Recurrent themes of incest, and murder of parents, contrast with the dignified courtesies in the Creation Epic.
Erra and Ishum. 8th Century BC, the poet speaks in the first person, of his theme. The poetry is filled with blood-lust and war glorification.

The translator reminds us that "all the great temples would have had their own libraries" [xviiia].

A very scholarly edition, however I found the fragmentary nature of the texts very hard to deal with. This is, of course, not the fault of the author but a failing in the archaeological record. Nonetheless, I found it difficult to get a proper handle on the stories and their implications. ( )