Religion and Humanity in Mesopotamian Myth and Epic

Humans and deities
The frequent observation in modern scholarship of the creation of humans to serve divine 
overlords—often contrasted negatively against biblical creation accounts—gives a sense of a 
one-sided and fairly exploitative relationship between humans and Mesopotamian deities.
14
 Yet 
the topic is a complicated one, with literary sources providing an intricate picture that reflects a 
number of different types of relationships between gods and humans. Even within the narrative 
10
11
12
13
14

---

Religion and Humanity in Mesopotamian Myth and Epic
Page 
5
of 
23
Printed from Oxford Research Encyclopedias, Religion. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a 
single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).
date: 22 December 2022
of Atrahasis, individual deities interact with humans in different ways: there is no “one size fits 
all” divine connection in Mesopotamian literature. Despite a rigid hierarchy in favor of the divine, 
these relationships are frequently close, involving strong emotional bonds. The human/divine 
connection is not solely beneficial to either party, with a great deal at stake on both sides of the 
relationship. Perhaps because of the crucial nature of the divine/human connection, relations 
between deities and humans involve risk. Relations between the divine and human worlds can be 
dangerous and destructive, and capable of jeopardizing the survival of humankind, animals, and 
the natural world.
While there are limits to the permeability of the conceptual boundaries separating the human and 
divine worlds, in literature there are numerous ways for humans and deities to interact. 
Communication takes many forms, including sacrifice, attendance of festivals, dedicatory 
offerings and building works, prayer, song, direct and indirect dialogue, omens, prophecy, and 
divinely inspired dreams.
Animals in Mesopotamian literature provide an important mortal yet nonhuman “other” to 
contrast with the activities and qualities of divine and human actors. Animal imagery used in 
figurative language is found throughout Mesopotamian literature, and humans and deities can be 
ascribed positive or negative traits associated with particular animals.
15
Animals can function as 
sacrificial offerings, companions, warriors, and dangerous opponents—indeed, the Bull of 
Heaven in the Epic of Gilgamesh is employed in all of these roles. In myth and epic, animals are 
recognized for their commercial and intrinsic values; they provide a source of food, transport, 
and material goods,
16
but are often presented in a sensitive manner that acknowledges their 
capacities as sentient creatures, holding several qualities in common with humans (such as 
mortality and dependence on the natural environment for survival).
Like animals, hybrid creatures and monsters in literary sources also provide insight into cultural 
perceptions of humanity, and the complexity of human and divine relations. Figures such as the 
Scorpion People can be seen to span the divide between the natural and supernatural spheres in 
terms of both their form and function. Scorpion People are the best-attested animal/human 
hybrids in Babylonian literature,
17
appearing most notably in Tablet IX of the Epic of Gilgamesh. 
These hybrid creatures, with human heads and scorpion tails, are presented as being created 
alongside other animal/human hybrids to function as warriors for Tiamat in Tablet I of Enuma 
Elish, with the differing roles of the Scorpion People in the two epics likely to be a result of 
different literary traditions.
18
 In the Epic of Gilgamesh, Scorpion People are liminal creatures. As 
well as inhabiting a space between human and animal, their role in the narrative is to guard the 
tunnel linking the sun, earth, and sky.
The liminality of the forest guardian Humbaba, from the Epic of Gilgamesh, allows for the 
consideration of the humanity of the heroes, Gilgamesh and Enkidu. The importance of family in 
the experience of humanity is explored through Humbaba’s speech following his capture in 
Tablet V. Humbaba uses animal imagery (significantly, a terrapin and a turtle) to contrast 
Enkidu’s status as an orphan with Gilgamesh’s divine parentage, and his own genesis as one 
created by a god but with no “parent” to provide nurturing. Humbaba adds the comment that 
Enkidu, like the spawn of a fish, did not know his father, and like the two reptiles, he did not 
suckle his mother’s milk. These comments reflect the biological reality of reptiles as egg-laying 
15
16
17
18

---