Editing Gilgamesh (section)

===Early modern interpretations===
[[File:ISHTAR-EPOS p221 IZDUBAR TAKING LEAVE OF SABITU AND SIDURI IN THE HAPPY HALLS.jpg|thumb|left|upright=1.1|Illustration of Izdubar (Gilgamesh) in a scene from the book-length poem ''Ishtar and Izdubar'' (1884) by Leonidas Le Cenci Hamilton, the first modern literary adaptation of the ''Epic of Gilgamesh''{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|pages=20–21}}]]

The first modern literary adaptation of the ''Epic of Gilgamesh'' was ''Ishtar and Izdubar'' (1884) by Leonidas Le Cenci Hamilton, an American lawyer and businessman.{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|pages=20–21}} Hamilton had rudimentary knowledge of Akkadian, which he had learned from [[Archibald Sayce]]'s 1872 ''Assyrian Grammar for Comparative Purposes''.{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|page=21}} Hamilton's book relied heavily on Smith's translation of the ''Epic of Gilgamesh'',{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|page=21}} but also made major changes.{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|page=21}} For instance, Hamilton omitted the famous flood story entirely{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|page=21}} and instead focused on the romantic relationship between Ishtar and Gilgamesh.{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|page=21}} ''Ishtar and Izdubar'' expanded the original roughly 3,000 lines of the ''Epic of Gilgamesh'' to roughly 6,000 lines of rhyming couplets grouped into forty-eight [[canto]]s.{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|page=21}} Hamilton significantly altered most of the characters and introduced entirely new episodes not found in the original epic.{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|page=21}} Significantly influenced by [[Edward FitzGerald (poet)|Edward FitzGerald]]'s ''[[Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam]]'' and [[Edwin Arnold]]'s ''[[The Light of Asia]]'',{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|page=21}} Hamilton's characters dress more like nineteenth-century Turks than ancient Babylonians.{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|pages=22–23}} Hamilton also changed the tone of the epic from the "grim realism" and "ironic tragedy" of the original to a "cheery optimism" filled with "the sweet strains of love and harmony".{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|page=23}}

In his 1904 book ''Das Alte Testament im Lichte des alten Orients'', the German Assyriologist [[Alfred Jeremias]] equated Gilgamesh with the king [[Nimrod]] from the [[Book of Genesis]]{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|page=26}} and argued Gilgamesh's strength must come from his hair, like the hero [[Samson]] in the [[Book of Judges]],{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|page=26}} and that he must have performed [[Labours of Hercules|Twelve Labors]] like the hero [[Heracles]] in [[Greek mythology]].{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|page=26}} In his 1906 book ''Das Gilgamesch-Epos in der Weltliteratur'', the Orientalist [[Peter Jensen (Orientalist)|Peter Jensen]] declared that the ''Epic of Gilgamesh'' was the source behind nearly all the stories in the Old Testament,{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|page=26}} arguing that [[Moses]] is "the Gilgamesh of Exodus who saves the children of Israel from precisely the same situation faced by the inhabitants of Erech at the beginning of the Babylonian epic."{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|page=26}} He then proceeded to argue that [[Abraham]], [[Isaac]], Samson, [[David]], and various other biblical figures are all nothing more than exact copies of Gilgamesh.{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|page=26}} Finally, he declared that even [[Jesus]] is "nothing but an Israelite Gilgamesh. Nothing but an adjunct to Abraham, Moses, and countless other figures in the saga."{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|page=26}} This ideology became known as [[Panbabylonianism]]{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|pages=26–27}} and was almost immediately rejected by mainstream scholars.{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|pages=26–27}} The most stalwart critics of Panbabylonianism were those associated with the emerging ''[[Religionsgeschichtliche Schule]]''.{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|page=27}} [[Hermann Gunkel]] dismissed most of Jensen's purported parallels between Gilgamesh and biblical figures as mere baseless sensationalism.{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|page=27}} He concluded that Jensen and other Assyriologists like him had failed to understand the complexities of Old Testament scholarship{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|pages=26–27}} and had confused scholars with "conspicuous mistakes and remarkable aberrations".{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|pages=26–27}}

In English-speaking countries, the prevailing scholarly interpretation during the early twentieth century was one originally proposed by [[Sir Henry Rawlinson, 1st Baronet]],{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|page=28}} which held that Gilgamesh is a "solar hero", whose actions represent the movements of the sun,{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|page=28}} and that the twelve tablets of his epic represent the twelve signs of the [[Babylonian zodiac]].{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|page=28}} The Austrian psychoanalyst [[Sigmund Freud]], drawing on the theories of [[James George Frazer]] and Paul Ehrenreich, interpreted Gilgamesh and Eabani (the earlier misreading for ''Enkidu'') as representing "man" and "crude sensuality" respectively.<ref>Freud, Sigmund, William McGuire, Ralph Manheim, R. F. C. Hull, Alan McGlashan, and C. G. Jung. [https://books.google.com/books?id=A_JpNZfZXyYC&q=Gilgamesch+und+Eabani+freudThe&pg=PA199 Freud-Jung Letters: The Correspondence between Sigmund Freud and C.G. Jung]. Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press, 1994, at 199.</ref>{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|page=29}} He compared them to other brother-figures in world mythology,{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|page=29}} remarking, "One is always weaker than the other and dies sooner. In Gilgamesh this ages-old motif of the unequal pair of brothers served to represent the relationship between a man and his [[libido]]."{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|page=29}} He also saw Enkidu as representing the [[placenta]], the "weaker twin" who dies shortly after birth.{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|pages=29–30}} Freud's friend and pupil [[Carl Jung]] frequently discusses Gilgamesh in his early work ''Symbole der Wandlung'' (1911–1912).{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|page=30}} He, for instance, cites Ishtar's sexual attraction to Gilgamesh as an example of the mother's [[incest]]uous desire for her son,{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|page=30}} Humbaba as an example of an oppressive father-figure whom Gilgamesh must overcome,{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|page=30}} and Gilgamesh himself as an example of a man who forgets his dependence on [[Unconscious mind|the unconscious]] and is punished by the "gods", who represent it.{{sfn|Ziolkowski|2012|page=30}}