Folktale in Ancient Mesopotamia

Literature is a collection of genres and Folklore is considered a major component of literature that reflects the culture and traditions shared by a particular group of people. Folklore has its subgenres too, like tales, proverbs and jokes. At the beginning, folktales were kept alive in the popular collective memory throughout history by oral recitation. It was not until the last two centuries when people, almost universally, started to write this rich cultural heritage. Herskovits believes that ‘substantial body of folktales is more than literary expression of people. It is, in a very real sense, their ethnography which, if systematised by the student, gives a penetrating picture of their way of life’ (Bascom, 1954). Thus, a folktale acts like a mirror reflecting the culture where it has originated from. In order to capture the essence of the folktale, it is paramount to understand the local traditions and customs of that specific culture, as described by Malinowski, that ‘the folklore of people can be fully understood only through a thorough knowledge of the culture’ (Malinowski, 1926).

Iraq, like other countries, owns a rich heritage of folktales dating back to more than a thousand year ago. The Arabian Nights, a masterpiece of folklore literature, is widely believed to have its origin in the streets and palaces of Baghdad during the Abbasid Caliphate (750 – 1258 AD). However; it was never expected that folktales were written and orally narrated in ancient Mesopotamia. In this vast alluvial plain of southern Iraq, myths, hymns and incantations were in abundance. Hundreds and possibly thousands of clay tablets discovered in Iraq contained stories of gods and kings, priests and temples and monsters and mythic creatures. In 1952, a group of archaeologists discovered a small library of cuneiform tablets in Sultantepe (Assyrian city Huzirina) in Turkey. One tablet caught them by surprise. The text, which was written in Akkadian and dated to approximately 1500 BCE, was a unique tale of a poor man who once lived in the Sumerian city of Nippur. This story was distinctive because its style belongs to folklore genre, a form of literature that we have never found before in Ancient Mesopotamia.

The Poor Man of Nippur was documented by Nabu-rihtu-usur, a scribe from ancient Huzirina, and tells the story of Gimil-Ninurta, a wretched individual who lived in his city Nippur in abject misery. Gimil-Ninurta decided to buy a goat from the market and take it as a gift to the mayor’s house, hoping that he will be offered a decent meal and drink in return. On the contrary, the mayor gives Gimil-Ninurta only ‘some bone and gristle and third-rate beer’ and forces him to leave. Gimil-Ninurta, feeling angry and humiliated, shouts to the doorkeeper that the mayor will repay him threefold. The story, according to Gurney, belongs to folktale type 1538 of the Uther Index, used for the classification of folktales (Gurney, 1972). The Poor Man of Nippur involves an ‘initial swindle perpetuated by a trickster on a simpleton’. This is followed by series of pranks in which the hero (Gimil-Ninurta in this story) avenges himself by giving his enemy a beating. The tale was written in 160 lines and can be divided into 5 episodes (Cooper, 1975): an introduction, then the first contact of Gimil-Ninurta with the mayor. This is followed by three successive contacts when Gimil-Ninurta carries out his revenge on the mayor.

Introduction encompasses the lines 1-22 and provides an overview of the protagonist, a poor and dejected individual who lives in Nippur:

1 There was a man, a citizen of Nippur, destitute and poor

2 Gimil-Ninurta was his name, an unhappy man.

3 In his city, Nippur, he lived, working hard, but

4 Had not the silver befitting his class,

5 Nor had he the gold befitting people (of his stature).

6 His storage bins lacked pure grain,

7 His insides burned, craving food, and

8 his face was unhappy, craving meat and first-class beer,

9 having no food, he lay hungry every day, and

10 was dressed in garments that had no change.

11 In his unhappy mood, he thought to himself:

12 ‘I’ll strip off my garments which have no change, and

13 In my city Nippur’s market I’ll buy a sheep!’

14 So he stripped off his garments that had no change, and

15 In his city Nippur’s market he bought a three-year old goat.

16 In his unhappy mood, he thought to himself:

17 ‘Suppose I slaughter the goat in my yard-

18 ‘There could be no feast, for where is the beer?

19 ‘my friends in the neighbourhood would not find out and be furious,

20 ‘And my family and relatives would be angry with me,

21 ‘(instead,) I’ll take the goat and bring it to the mayor’s house’

22 ‘Attempting (thereby) to favourably influence him!’.

The above introduction highlights Gimil-Ninurta’s extreme poverty and how it plays a crucial role throughout the story. At the beginning, it made him vulnerable to exploitation by the more powerful and wealthy mayor. However; later in the story, Gimil-Ninurta’s poverty proved to be the driving force that galvanised his revenge. His poverty as depicted in the story is not mere starvation and hunger, but the inability to satisfy his other physiological and social needs (owning gold and silver for example). His wishes, if were met, will have a beneficial impact by achieving a respectable social status within Nippur community. Kinkaid defines poverty as ‘not only deprivation of resources but an inability to control the circumstances of one’s life in the face of more powerful groups in society’ (Kinkaid, 1973). Gimil-Ninurta was portrayed as a naïve individual who lives in misery. However; he is a complex character. In lines 19 & 20, we became aware that Gimil-Ninurta has a family and lives in a neighbourhood, but the text revealed his resentment of the idea that his family and his neighbours sharing a feast with him.

The first contact with the mayor is described in lines 23-71. Gimil-Ninurta took the goat and heads to the gate of the Mayor’s house and presents himself to the gate keeper Tukulti-Enlil, asking to meet the mayor. After being admitted and introduced to the mayor who accepted the goat as a gift, Gimil-Ninurta was treated disrespectfully by him and was thrown out of the house:

58 ‘Give the citizen of Nippur a bone and a sinew, and

59 ‘Give him a drink of third-rate (beer) from your flask, then

60 ‘send him away and throw him out of the gate!’

After the humiliation he has suffered, Gimil-Ninurta declares to the gatekeeper that he will take a threefold vengeance:

66 ‘announce to your master abundance from the gods, as follows:

67 ‘For the one load you have imposed on me,

68 ‘for that one, I will repay you three times!’

To fulfil his revenge, Gimil Ninurta decides to go to the king and borrows a new chariot, pledging he will pay one mina of gold, and also asked for clothes fit for a nobleman. He then catches two doves and put them in a box, which he seals with a seal. Presenting to the mayor like a lord, he was well received and admitted into the mayor’s house. He tells the mayor that there are two minas of gold in the box. Gimil-Ninurta spends the night talking to the mayor who then falls asleep. At that moment, Gimil-Ninurta releases the two birds from the box. In the morning, the mayor notices the box empty. Gimil-Ninurta, pretending to be very angry at the loss of gold, accuses the mayor of negligence and beats him. Moreover, the mayor refunds the two minas of gold assumed to be in the box (lines 72 – 114). This section gives a picture of a corrupt local government, represented by the mayor, whose interests are distant from those of the local population. It is interesting to notice that king, unlike the mayor, was portrayed as a decent character who wishes to help his citizens. This motif is widely attested in later folktales from Iraq and the Arab world and deemed important by the author(s) in order to emphacise one of the main functions of folktale is to ‘maintain social conformity by accepting certain traditional patterns of behaviour ‘(Bascom. 1954). However, if we closely examine the text, we can notice that the King, in some way, was also corrupt. The king was not interested in finding out the reason why a poor and destitute individual like Gimil-Ninurta would ask to borrow chariot and new clothes. The king’s main focus was the profit that he is going to make by lending his chariot for one mina of gold.

In the third contact with the mayor (lines 115-139), Gimil-Ninurta disguises himself as a doctor from the city of Isin. He was admitted to the palace with expectation that he is going to cure the mayor from the injuries inflicted from beating the night before. Gimil-Ninurta asks the mayor’s entourage to be alone with the mayor in a dark private room in order to treat him. He then gives the mayor the second beating. It was apparent that in the first meeting with the mayor, Gimil-Ninurta’s poverty and guilelessness made him vulnerable to exploitation by the mayor. On the contrary, we find that in the second and third meeting, the mayor was a victim of a trickster, Gimil-Ninurta. As we approach the fourth and the last meeting (Line 140-160) between the two, it is important to notice that the mayor at this stage became more vigilant and more shielded by his guards as he was anticipating the third revenge from Gimil-Ninurta. Similarly, Gimil-Ninurta was aware that a more intelligent and astute idea is needed to carry out his third revenge:

140 (But) Gimil-Ninurta was worried, like a dog . . . did not . . . him.,

141 ‘He observed the number of folk and noticed all the people (around the mayor).

Gimil-Ninurta decides to hire a man and asks him to go the mayor’s gate. He asked him to shout that he was the man who brought the goat to the mayor. The guards and staff at the mayor’s house chase the man. Under the bridge, Gimil-Ninurta was waiting for the mayor to come out. Once all the mayor’s attendants left to chase the man, and when the mayor passes, Gimil-Ninurta suddenly appears from under the bridge and gives him a third beating. Here the story ends with the mayor returns limping and humiliated to the city and Gimil-Ninurta leaves Nippur and for the country.

Careful examination of the closing end of this tale, we notice that Gimil-Ninurta not only succeeded in fulfilling his revenge, but in addition he was rewarded with a prestigious feast at the mayor’s house, one mina of gold and clothes for a nobleman. These were the needs and luxuries that preoccupied his mind prior to meeting with the mayor. Unlike the widely popular tales of the Arabian nights where the protagonist falls in love with the king’s daughter, there are no women in The Poor Man of Nippur. Interestingly, the primary motif in the Poor Man of Nippur was Gimil-Ninurta’s revenge from the mayor.

It is essential to examine the text within the context of place and time. Nippur was the stage for the story’s events. Nippur from the abundant archaeological evidence and literary texts was a religious and great learning centre in ancient Mesopotamia. The story brings to light concepts of Class and social stratification within Nippur and the notion of wealth (the mayor) versus poverty (Gimil-Ninurta). Scholars observed how The Poor Man of Nippur provides us ‘great freshness and gives us much precious information about everyday speech, the mores of citizens of Nippur, and a number of facts about workday life not to be found in the usual types of documentation’. However; Nippur in this tale was a city where you can exchange an old garment for a goat, and a poor individual like Gimil-Ninurta can easily gain access to meet the king. The other city mentioned in the tale was the city of Isin. Isin was famous for being the city of best healers and ‘doctors’ in ancient Iraq. Both were key cities in the third and second millennium BCE.

The Poor Man of Nippur represent a unique and an early example of a folk tale from ancient Mesopotamia that significantly contributed to our knowledge about the social traditions and culture in a Sumerian city, possibly in the third or second millennium BCE. Unlike other literary texts from ancient Iraq, the protagonist in The Poor Man of Nippur is a simple individual who became a victim of abuse because of his poverty. Themes and motifs in this story are replicated in later folktales from Iraq and the Near east. The Poor Man of Nippur so far is considered the first attested folktale in the world.

References:

Four Functions of Folklore (Bascom, 1954)

Crime and Custom in Savage Society (Malinowski,1926)

The Poor Man of Nippur and its Folktale Parallels (Gurney, 1972)

Structure, Humour, and Satire in the Poor Man of Nippur (Cooper,1975)

Poverty and Equality in Britain (Kinkaid,1973)