Comparative Analysis of Gilgamesh and Beowulf

Both Gilgamesh and Beowulf are structurally and temporally in two parts: one at the height of the hero's lives, the second all through their declining years. In Gilgamesh, section one offers Gilgamesh and Humbaba and the Bull of Heaven; in Beowulf, phase one consists of Beowulf`s struggles with Grendel and Grendel`s mother. Part two of Gilgamesh focuses on Gilgamesh and Utnapishtim; section two of Beowulf reveals Beowulf`s struggles with the dragon. Hero is defined via the relationship between the two parts of each of the epics. That definition emphasizes a being who is now not godly, not eternal, but, one who is mortal. It is the dragon that displays to Beowulf that he is human. The dragon may want to be Beowulf`s Enkidu, due to the fact the dragon is his fit and shows Beowulf that he is mortal by means of killing him. Beowulf fights this dragon by giving up as an old man because it is his destiny. He is aware of what he has to do. And when he kills the dragon, he is at peace with himself. The dragon makes Beowulf recognize that he is no longer powerful as he was when he used to be young. It forces him to realize that his youthfulness and power do no longer go on forever and that he will die. The dragon serves as a metaphorical trickster in that it seals Beowulf`s fate, which is indispensable to making him a hero. The dragon makes Beowulf realize that he is mortal at the give up of the story, as Enkidu makes Gilgamesh comprehend that he is mortal. The dying of the dragon leads to the inevitable demise of Beowulf. Even earlier when Beowulf kills the dragon, he realizes that it could very properly be his day to die. The Enkidu of Beowulf is historic age and time. It ultimately brings him face to face-with his mortality. However, as in Gilgamesh, Beowulf`s heroism lives beyond his mortal physique in the form of society and in epic. The Enkidu in Beowulf is now not a character but a process; it comes from Beowulf growing old and realizing that he is no longer as amazing and powerful as he once was. Beowulf is his personal Enkidu. With time and age, he comes to comprehend that first of all he cannot do everything on his own, and second, that he is no longer the supreme being. These are realized in the battles with the mom and the dragon. In Gilgamesh, Enkidu is created by way of the gods as a replica of the unruly Gilgamesh. I have come to exchange the historical order, Enkidu announces, for I am the strongest here (66). Although Gilgamesh defeats Enkidu in their first violent encounter, Enkidu is eventually stronger, for he brings with him the assurance of mortality: he has demise in him. Enkidu is to Gilgamesh what the flood is to the relaxation of the world; the inclusion in the epic of Gilgamesh of a prolonged account of the flood is not an idle appendage. Gilgamesh has a whole lot in common with Beowulf in all varieties of ways. It's a primal quest story. But in Beowulf, we're on the facet of good and we're right, and the monster is God's enemy. Compassion is inconceivable. In Gilgamesh, your coronary heart goes out to Humbaba-he's comic and pathetic and scary as well, but no longer any one of these to the exclusion of the others. Gilgamesh and Beowulf grant a fertile ground to examine the variety of debates on the international and to exhibit that there have long been integral positions pushing a long way beyond the imagination of liberalism and realism. In these texts, the violence of a random nature, touching on to geared-up war, or genuinely to invasion, rape, and pillage, is taken for granted, yet additionally, some perennial subject matters emerge bearing on to tragic heroism and the protection of the homestead, the trouble of mortality and order in the introduction of sustainable institutions, and the existential issues related with normative and vital approaches.

The Sumerian epic Gilgamesh, courting from about 2700 B.C., relates how a semimetal man travels beyond his city-state of Uruk, of which he is king, in what seems to be an existential voyage in search of immortality 60 Gilgamesh is the strongest king on earth, two-thirds god and one-third human, however, also he abuses his own people. He travels with his wild pal Enkidu to the Cedar Forest, leading to hostilities in which they defeat the demon guardian of the trees, all through which Gilgamesh turns afraid for the first time. However, they subsequently fight and kill the 'bull of heaven,' and the gods take revenge for this by killing Enkidu. Bitterly, Gilgamesh then sets out to keep away from Enkidu's fate in a search for his personal lacking immortality. However, in a sequence of adventures involving a search for an herb that is supposed to provide immortality, the herb is stolen through a snake (representing evil). Chastened, Gilgamesh is forced to take delivery of his destiny as a mortal man and return to Uruk.

Save your time!
We can take care of your essay

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Place Order

This was once one of the earliest recorded exploratory journeys. Gilgamesh was once left in the dilemma of a mortal man, confronted with the ultimate voyage into the unknown (death) notwithstanding being partly a god and a king through birth. For Gilgamesh, defeating death was once indispensable for both private and political reasons.61 That Gilgamesh infers a politically state-of-the-art state, and country of being,62 is necessary for illustrating the search for the motives and responses to conflict. From this earliest of texts, it is obvious that city-states exist in a world comparable to that imagined with the aid of Hobbes or Machiavelli; that leaders notion themselves to deserve divinity and therefore to rule through divine right, and that self-interest overruled a desire for cooperation. This tragic epic story reflects the story of the international milieu considered from the viewpoint of leaders who are paternalist, jealous, and fearful. That such wondering still characterizes a whole lot of IR principles is a mystery, given the early lesson discovered through Gilgamesh, that such a route leads to disaster. The political motivation of the orthodox IR concept is tons like Gilgamesh's search for the herb that would make him absolutely immortal, while his [existential] experience and its setbacks reflect the so-called emancipatory strands of theorizing that are looking to set international relations free from the constraints of orthodox assumptions. In Gilgamesh, all of this is wrapped in mythological terms, which have been to be surpassed down to serve as instruction, a warning, and a memorial. The textual content was misplaced for hundreds of years, being rediscovered solely in the twentieth century by using archaeologists on dispersed and buried tablets, which even now are nonetheless being reassembled and translated. The truth that Gilgamesh was lost and solely these days rediscovered serves as a reminder of choice areas of knowledge, but additionally of its fragility and mortality.

Beowulf continues comparable epic themes,63 even though in altogether greater familiar surroundings (it dates from about 700 A.D.). While Gilgamesh could be a parable only from imagination, Beowulf is a section of Anglo-Saxon awareness (inspiring Tolkien, among many others), in which the home, superb hall, and the village are sacred and sovereign and a risk to a kingdom is a danger to domestic and at hazard to a domestic is a chance to a kingdom. Beowulf is referred to as undertaking acts of intense heroism in order to defeat a horrific. the threat in three awesome battles. In the first two battles, he defeats his foes at the very last moment in epic struggles. As a result, he is made king. The political themes dealt with in Beowulf revolve around the ambiguity of precision and evil, the concern of the enemy and an unknown and unpredictable threat, difficulty in physically finding the enemy, and the case with which the enemy can be recognized as the other. The violation of domestic opens up the debate about security and they want to make sacrifices in terms of non-public freedoms in order to protect one's values, home, and person. The fluid nature of the enemy makes the hostilities all the greater stressful and dangerous. The ambiguity of Beowulf's Christian and pagan themes opens up the catch-22 situation of the normative machine upon which Beowulf acts. This is never satisfactorily resolved in the text, even though what is clear is that correct and evil, the inflexible differentiation between them, and the protection of the domestic are paramount. This was once an early structure of territorial sovereignty. Even so, little can be completed to prevent the tragedy of Beowulf's demise in his later, final, defensive, battle, when he kills the dragon that deals him a mortal blow, reflecting the tragedy of conflicting sovereign claims that mark orthodox international relations. Even though he was the most humane of all knights, the mildest, gentlest, and most heroic, the path he took led to death and loss.