I found it most interesting that the story of Enheduanna
almost serves as an origin story or folk tale of rhetoric. She evidently
questioned a preexisting theme of rhetoric that was similar to the Greeks, even
though this was happening 2000 years before. She pleaded to her Goddess,
Inanna, in a similar fashion that Greeks use to do.
Another thing that was mentioned that I think is worth discussing,
is the loose translation of her hyms referring a rebellion. I understood it as
a rhetorical situation where she may have spoken out against something that was
perhaps a rhetorical topic.
The largest contrast that I found would be that Sumerian
history and culture is likely to be genderless, since it does not have gender distinctions
in its language (56). This speculation would explain why Enheduanna is
presented as more of a significant player in this story than history has in the
past. It even argues that she claimed to be a high priest, then banished, and
then pleading to Inanna as her aid. On top of that, as I see it, she may have
plotted something of a rebellion, or perhaps acted as a ‘whistleblower’ of some
kind.
In any regard, this backstory illustrates a major similarity
and difference between Sumerian and Athenian rhetoric. Both societies evidently
involved oral rhetorical speaking where Sumerian rhetors would be rhetorical
with each other by giving speeches and dialogs, that would almost certainly
have involved “The Gods”. The difference is that women are as part of the
rhetorical situation and on equal terms for Sumerian rhetoric. We all know that
Athenian rhetoric was in a way gender bias, which was something that transcends
through Western tradition (also noted in 56). This contradiction may have
something to do with the fact that the Sumerian culture is much older than the
Greek culture (more mature perhaps?)
I'd like to address the "Why?" your post is trying to suss out. I'll start with the ending question "more mature perhaps?" which would seem crazy to propose to many people in modern society, and that's exactly why we should explore it more. Since Enheduanna comes from the first known civilization in history, it would seem that said civilization would still be exercising a lot of nomadic society tendencies. Though I'm not even close to an expert on the subject, I think the roles in these settings were much more equal in mutual respect and power roles between the genders; when survival is closer to the top of a peoples' list, they tend to cut the shit, so to speak. So Enhehuanna may have been a product of this transition, having a position that received respect and afforded her a voice. Of course as civilizations grew and survival began dropping down the list, women slowly lost footing in society, and in some cases dropped into subservient roles. We can track this shift from Gilgamesh to the bible. In Gilgamesh women play a much more pivotal role in the epic, but the bible condemns them almost immediately with Eve's actions and weaves a narrative that women must serve men. So yes, I think they were more mature in some sense. Does that make us less mature than Sumerian culture as well?
ReplyDeleteIn your post you point out that the story of Enheduanna serves as an origin story for rhetoric in a way. This reminded me of an excerpt from Binkley's text about mythologies/religions and how their particular brand of rhetoric affects the social structure of the cultures that revere them.
ReplyDelete"[Enheduanna's] gendered ethos and sacred subject matter do not fit the western profile of a singular male subject, a unified agent of discourse, whose themes form the commonplace of a dominant power group." (Binkley, 58)
This lead me to thinking how would life, or social structure rather, be different if the majority of people worshiped say a female deity or or of most cultures still devoted themselves to polytheistic religions. And how would this affect rhetoric? I doubt we would still be viewing Greek Rhetoric as the norm.