In this passage, Gilgamesh dreams of a figure who will be his equal, and interpreters tell him that “heroes kiss his feet” and that he will lead Gilgamesh. This prophetic dream frames Enkidu as Gilgamesh’s destined counterpart: not only a rival but also a partner who will shape his heroic identity. The imagery of “an axe in the street” and “heroes kiss his feet” reflects how masculinity is tied to symbols of power and violence, yet also reverence. The text suggests that Gilgamesh’s greatness requires balance. Gender politics emerge through the absence of women in this dream: the hero’s destiny is mediated entirely through male bonds. The translation describe Enkidu as Gilgamesh’s “likeness,” collapsing rivalry into mirror-image intimacy. Gilgamesh’s heroic identity is forged in masculine struggle and mutual recognition.

Camron Newcomb

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

This moment in the Old Babylonian version underscores how gendered power is central to the hero making process in early Mesopotamian culture. Shamhat, the unnamed "harlot," initiates Enkidu's transformation from wild beast to man, and then from man to hero, not through brute force, but by teaching him to conform to gendered norms of civilization.

Importantly, civilization here is gendered male: Enkidu must learn to eat bread, drink milk, wear clothes, and accept hierarchy, including the authority of the male king, Gilgamesh. This socialization is mediated by a woman, but it ultimately renders women peripheral once male heroism is established. Even when Enkidu and Gilgamesh bond, it is through violent competition and mutual respect, culminating in a moment where Enkidu prevents Gilgamesh from pursuing the goddess Išhara, framing love or femininity as a threat to masculine heroic purpose.

Clay and Jastrow’s 1920 translation reflects early 20th century ideas about gender and morality. Their diction treats the "harlot" with subtle moral judgment, while placing more noble framing around the “mighty hunter” Enkidu. The translation also shows a preference for structured, formalized syntax, which reinforces the patriarchal lens through which the epic was interpreted at the time.

By crafting Enkidu to match Gilgamesh’s “stormy heart,” the gods frame male power as something wild, aggressive, and potentially dangerous unless checked by another man of equal force. The word “stormy” conveys emotional turbulence, suggesting that admired manhood in Mesopotamian culture was intense, unpredictable. Peace in Uruk is imagined not as communal cooperation but as the result of two men clashing until balance is achieved. This emphasis on physical struggle reflects a patriarchal worldview where masculinity is proven by combat and domination.

© 2025 Melinessa Louis Douze. Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)

The harlot’s invitation is an important turning point because it shows a woman actively guiding the male hero’s path rather than existing only as a passive figure. Shamhat uses sexuality as a form of persuasion, but the translation’s choice of the word “harlot” colors her power with moral suspicion, echoing patriarchal anxieties about female influence. Instead of being merely an object of desire, she functions as a bridge between wilderness and civilization, embodying beauty, culture, and religious order. This suggests that female sexuality is not only potent but also necessary for shaping male strength into socialized heroism. Enkidu’s willingness to follow her into Uruk and challenge Gilgamesh shows that the epic constructs heroism as relational male power defined in response to both female influence and urban culture. Unlike the Ramayana, where Sita embodies loyalty and sacrifice, Shamhat’s role is active and influential, showing how Mesopotamian traditions allowed women to act as agents of transformation, even if through sexuality framed as “dangerous.” The language of translation here is crucial: by choosing “harlot,” the text imposes judgment on Shamhat, reinforcing a patriarchal reading that might not fully capture her cultural role as a temple courtesan.

© 2025 Melinessa Louis Douze. Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).

In Phaedra, gender roles are central to the tragedy, especially through the contrast between Phaedra's forbidden desire and Hippolytus's proud purity. Phaedra is portrayed as emotionally and sexually unstable, her desire treated as both dangerous and shameful. Her downfall reinforces patriarchal views where female sexuality must be hidden or punished. Meanwhile, Hippolytus's heroism lies in his control and rejection of passion, fitting the Greek ideal of masculine virtue. rational, proud, and emotionally restrained. Compared to Sita Sings the Blues, Phaedra is a woman destroyed by her feelings, while Sita is a woman silenced by social duty but both are trapped in male-dominated systems that define a hero through emotional suppression or moral superiority. Sita, especially in Paley's version, is allowed to speak back, while Phaedra's voice leads to her ruin.

© 2025 Melinessa Louis Douze. Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).

Camron Newcomb

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

The figure of Phineus, a blind prophet saved by male heroes (the Boreades) and rewarded with the masculine coded power of foresight reveals the way heroism is constructed through patriarchal intervention. In both Apollonius and the dramatized version by Aeschylus, Phineus is repositioned from a victim to a hero via male deliverance. Notably, the Harpies female monsters, represent chaos and disruption that must be tamed by male force, reinforcing traditional gender binaries where femininity is aligned with disorder, and masculine action with order and divine favor.

In this context, The Persians uses Phineus as a mythic prologue to set up Xerxes's downfall as a failure to embody the virtues of Hellenic masculinity: discipline, moderation, and obedience to divine will. Aeschylus contrasts the heroic male ideal of prophecy (Phineus, Darius) with the failed heroism of Xerxes, whose excessive ambition marks a deviation from the masculine ideal and leads to ruin.

Comparing this version of The Persians (as interpreted through 19th century scholarship like Plumptre’s) with Robert Auletta’s modern adaptation (1993) shows how gender is reframed over time. While Plumptre’s translation emphasizes stoic, hierarchical masculinity in line with Victorian values, Auletta’s contemporary version inserts more emotional vulnerability into Xerxes, complicating the classical heroic ideal. This shows how gender expectations shift with culture and time, revealing translation as an act of ideological transmission, not just linguistic rendering.

Camron Newcomb CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

This lyrical passage from The Persians offers a striking contrast between heroic masculinity and feminine suffering, deeply encoded in the gender politics of ancient Greek tragedy. The women are defined not by their own actions but by the absence of their men, reinforcing a binary where male heroism exists on the battlefield while female identity is rooted in passive emotional endurance.

The imagery “widow’d couch,” “pensive breast,” and “love lorn woe” frames these women as emotional vessels, symbolically tethered to the physical and martial exertions of men. Their suffering is romanticized and gendered, grief is feminized, domestic, and private, while heroism is masculinized, public, and glorified. This pattern reveals how female subjectivity is subordinated to the narrative arc of the male hero, echoing patriarchal ideologies.

From a linguistic standpoint, the poetic diction emphasizes emotional melodrama and uses bodily metaphors ("throb," "streaming tear") to anchor femininity in physical vulnerability. In contrast, men are described earlier in the text through martial ornamentation: “blazing with gold,” “proud steeds,” “massy spears,” etc. The translation here (Robert Potter’s 1777 version) clearly reflects the 18th century lens, romanticizing grief in highly gendered Victorian prose, potentially amplifying the patriarchal dimensions more than Aeschylus himself might have done in the original Greek.

Comparatively, this portrayal of women mirrors Sita’s position in The Ramayana and Soudabeh’s emotional manipulation in Shahnameh. In both cases, women are symbols of honor, temptation, or mourning, rather than autonomous actors. Meanwhile, male heroes like Rama, Siavash, and Beowulf embody courage through sacrifice and public duty, reaffirming a cultural pattern that links masculinity to action and femininity to reaction.

This annotation demonstrates how epic and dramatic literature across cultures constructs gendered heroism by emotionally loading female grief and idealizing male war-making. The juxtaposition deepens our understanding of how literary canon preserves, and sometimes critiques patriarchal hero myths.

Camron Newcomb

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

In this scene, the Danish coast guard stops Beowulf’s ship and immediately identifies one of the Geats (Beowulf himself) as an extraordinary figure: “Never a greater one / Of earls o’er the earth have I had a sight of.” This response not only reflects the cultural idealization of the hero’s physical appearance, but also reinforces how masculinity is visually constructed and recognized in warrior societies. The coast guard reads Beowulf’s armor, stature, and composure as clear signs of high status and heroic capability, connecting external form with internal worth, a hallmark of the gendered construction of the hero in epic literature.

The linguistic emphasis on “hero in armor,” “low ranking fellow,” and “striking appearance” shows that visual markers of masculinity, armor, weapons, height, posture are treated as symbolic credentials, establishing heroic identity before action even begins. This reveals a form of performative masculinity, where being seen as a man and a hero is almost as important as actually acting like one. The narrative rewards the ability to appear heroic even before deeds confirm it.

From a gender politics standpoint, this reinforces a patriarchal worldview where male bodies are not only expected to perform heroism but also to embody it visually a privilege and pressure that aligns with martial and aristocratic ideals of masculinity. Female figures, by contrast, are often rendered invisible or are not physically described unless tied to beauty or emotional traits, emphasizing how gender roles are linguistically and culturally encoded in unequal ways.

Comparatively, this construction mirrors figures like Rama in the Ramayana, whose beauty and bearing identify him as dharmic, or Siavash in Shahnameh, whose dignity and divine aura precede his moral trials. Each reinforces how masculinity and the heroic ideal are visually coded across traditions, reflecting the shared patriarchal values of ancient epic literature.

Camron Newcomb CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

This early commentary on Beowulf draws attention to the composite nature of its protagonist, a "mixed Nature" figure blending myth and historical legend. Importantly, it hints at the constructed ideal of the heroic masculine figure, shaped by cultural memory, mythic exaggeration, and evolving political ideologies. Beowulf is positioned here as a man whose identity is not only historical or literary, but mythological, molded to meet the gender expectations of the societies that retold his story.

From a gendered lens, this portrayal reinforces a masculine heroic archetype rooted in supernatural achievement. By emphasizing “supernatural Character” over mortal vulnerability, Beowulf is gendered as more than man, he is mythologized masculinity, capable of performing feats that symbolize the ultimate virtues of patriarchal societies: strength, courage, conquest, and leadership.

Linguistically, the passage’s formal register (“futile Speculation,” “mixed Personage”) reflects the Victorian scholarly tone, but also subtly upholds patriarchal values by assuming the centrality of male heroism as the proper subject of epic literature. The gender invisibility of women in both the narrative and its analysis further underlines the male-dominated interpretive tradition in early philology and mythology.

Comparatively, Beowulf as a mythologized male hero aligns with Feridoun in Shahnameh, Rama in Ramayana, and Siavash in Persian mythology. All are men elevated to semi-divine status, reinforcing a cultural preference for men as saviors, kings, and spiritual ideals. This canonization of male figures obscures feminine agency and often reinterprets communal or spiritual archetypes through a gendered lens of masculine dominance.

Camron Newcomb CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

This passage highlights Siavash’s mythological role as a “vegetation god” figure, symbolizing death and rebirth, a motif deeply tied to cycles of nature and agricultural fertility. In terms of gender politics, Siavash embodies a masculine hero archetype, whose sacrificial martyrdom and regeneration reflect culturally constructed ideals of male heroism, where strength is paired with self sacrifice for communal renewal.

Linguistically, the text frames Siavash as a divine masculine figure “drawn to earth to carry out their duty,” emphasizing active male agency and responsibility. The repeated focus on “martyrdom and regeneration” underscores a cultural valorization of male suffering as necessary for social and cosmic balance. This resonates with the patriarchal worldview of ancient Iranian and surrounding societies, where heroic masculinity is defined by endurance, sacrifice, and regeneration.

Moreover, the narrative subtly contrasts Siavash’s enduring symbolic vitality with the loss of “sanctity and old nature” following Aryan immigration, which may reflect the cultural and linguistic layers imposed by successive translators and editors, each influencing the gendered portrayal according to their historical context. For example, earlier texts may emphasize Siavash’s divine qualities, while later versions humanize him, aligning heroism with mortal virtues.

Comparatively, this construction of Siavash parallels other vegetation gods like Tammuz and Osiris, where masculine death and rebirth cycles serve as metaphors for heroic masculinity, blending divine and human traits. Unlike many epic female figures who embody passivity or relational roles, Siavash’s heroism is active and sacrificial, a key marker of masculine ideals across cultures.

Camron Newcomb CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

In this pivotal moment, Kaweh asserts his heroic masculinity through fearless defiance against the Shah’s corrupt authority. His refusal to “lend [his] hand unto this lie” marks a bold moral stance, positioning him as a masculine ideal rooted in honor, integrity, and resistance to tyranny. The physical act of tearing the declaration symbolizes the rejection of false authority and the destructive power of oppressive patriarchy embodied by Zohak’s regime.

Linguistically, the choice of words, “wicked,” “ignoble,” and “ally of Deevs”, reflects a clear moral binary tied to gendered power, Kaweh embodies righteous masculinity, while the Shah and his associates are cast as corrupt and weak. The narrative empowers Kaweh’s masculine agency, highlighting his ability to act alone and command respect (“none dared uplift a finger to restrain him”), underscoring patriarchal values that prioritize male leadership and courage.

Comparatively, other versions of this story and adaptations may soften or amplify Kaweh’s defiance depending on the translator’s cultural context and gender politics. For instance, a more modern feminist influenced version might explore Kaweh’s role in a communal or collaborative context, but this traditional version centers on individual male heroism as the driver of social justice. This focus parallels other epic heroes like Gilgamesh or Beowulf, where masculinity is inseparable from heroic authority and moral righteousness.

Camron Newcomb

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

This passage presents Gilgamesh not just as a mythical hero, but as part of a historically rooted dynastic tradition, with his lineage traced through a priestly father. This connection between priesthood and kingship reflects how masculine authority in ancient Mesopotamian heroism is both divine and hereditary. Heroism is gendered male from its very origin, the right to rule and to be remembered is passed from man to man, sanctified by both blood and religion.

Interestingly, while Langdon's translation was significant in making this version accessible, later scholars (like Clay and Jastrow) criticized it for errors and misreadings, many of which reinforce patriarchal norms through selective emphasis. Langdon frequently positions Gilgamesh’s actions in a romanticized light, elevating masculine conquest and omitting or downplaying the influence of female characters like Shamhat or Ninsun.

Linguistically, this version contributes to the gendered image of the hero through epithets like “builder of walls” or “conqueror,” aligning Gilgamesh with male coded acts of power and civilization. The omission of female influence in Langdon’s translation suggests not only a flaw in scholarship but a reflection of early 20th century gender norms, where masculinity was seen as synonymous with leadership, and femininity as peripheral or subversive.

• The virtues highlighted—self-control, generosity and other higher principles of life.
• Hospitality emphasized through the Persian understanding of giving gifts—communicating the ideas of returning honor.
• Patriarchal ideas of male lineage formulate cultural alliances while women are seen as diplomatic instruments.

• the ethical virtues of pietas are displayed in Siawosh’s devotion. Ritual respect understood from the perfumed letters to show adherence to the cultural order.
• Yet again, loyalty and honesty are highlighted, along with diplomacy
• “Tender green of spring”—refers to a metaphor for the joyand prospering of righteousness. This is a shift into the emotionaspects of the character.

• There is divine disfavor here—kingship is seen with Iran’s moral victory. Zoroastrian ideals are embedded in the religious perspective—truth and what it means to be righteous over ideas of evil. Courage and discipline are placed over Garsivaz’s loyalty to Afrasiyab because it supports the wrongdoing.
• There are geographical and symbolic Persians rhymthmic prose utilized in words like— balkh and Zabolestan.
• In regards to the patriarchal status, kings are the center of all power. There are emphasis on authority and succession.

• This reinforces the central tragic theme of the entire play—It is a cosmic casualty. All disaster is referred to the divine hand of the gods bringing about judgement upon the pride of the people. The belief are purely Greek in their expressions, especially in how they understood pride to be dealt with the most shameful judgement.

• The scale of the slaughter conveyed. This is seen as an act of divine judgement for the Persians.

• The hyperbolic opening to set the scene of the destress and mood.

Xerxes’ Hubris, Emotional Collapse, and Religious Politics In this passage, Xerxes' self-pity and overwhelming despair highlight the destructive power of hubris, a fatal flaw that marks him as an anti-hero. His words “Alas the day, that I should fall Into this grimmest fate of all” are drenched in emotional exaggeration, which contrasts sharply with the stoic resilience expected of a leader. This emotional outburst reveals the excessive pride that defines his downfall. Xerxes’ failure to take responsibility for his actions is compounded by his invocation of divine forces: “What power of Fate Descends, what louring gloom of hate?” He attempts to externalize his downfall, seeking to explain the catastrophic loss not as the result of his own hubris or poor leadership, but rather as the manifestation of divine wrath.

This appeal to the gods is significant in the context of religious politics in Greek tragedies. Xerxes' plea to the gods underscores how divine intervention is often invoked in times of defeat to justify a loss. This religious framing places the divine will at the center of the narrative, portraying Xerxes’ downfall as something beyond human control. However, this is not just a religious explanation, it also serves a political function. By blaming the gods, Xerxes attempts to shield his leadership from scrutiny, redirecting attention away from his own decisions and onto the will of the divine. This invocation of divine punishment mirrors the political context of the time, where rulers would often claim divine favor or wrath to legitimize their actions or explain their misfortunes.

Xerxes’ emotional breakdown and reliance on divine blame also exemplify the patriarchal mentality of his leadership. In his mind, the gods are punishing him, not because of his failings as a ruler, but because fate is turning against him. This reflection of religious politics reveals how rulers in antiquity often manipulated religious narratives to reinforce their authority. The gods, in this context, are invoked not simply as a spiritual force but as a political tool to justify Xerxes' actions and protect his reputation as king. By invoking divine wrath, he also seeks a sense of absolution, shifting blame away from his own choices and hubris.

This religious rhetoric, however, only deepens his tragic fall. Instead of demonstrating civic responsibility or personal reflection, Xerxes remains emotionally detached from the consequences of his actions, appealing to higher powers rather than confronting his own leadership flaws. The gods may be invoked, but the lack of accountability on Xerxes’ part only reinforces his status as an anti-hero, a leader undone by his pride and emotional instability, rather than a rational hero capable of taking responsibility for his choices.

This passage dramatizes the religious consequences of Xerxes’ arrogance, he dares to “bind the holy Hellespont,” essentially engaging in sacrilegious overreach. The language frames his actions as both politically and theologically misguided. It underscores the religious politics at play. Greek cultural values pit mortal ambition against divine order. Translators emphasize this hubris differently some heighten the moral tone, others soften it. Annotation links divine justice to narrative tragedy.

• Grendel is seen as the divine wrath upon the people, a curse thing. The Christian ideas of punishment and the permission of human trials by God. Grendel’s evils are condemned for killing innocent warriors. This is also emphasized by the Gummere rendition (https://studylib.net/doc/9435792/file?utm_source=chatgpt.com). Both capture the theological imagery and how the medieval scribes would have understood or edited the story to fit their culture.

• “undarkly” an old English diction meaning—clear. This provides and archaic hue by the author.

Draupadi's emergence from fire, marked by the blue lotus fragrance, symbolizes both divine intervention and a prophetic destiny tied to the destruction of the Kauravas. Her divine origin connects her to sacred forces, framing her actions as part of a cosmic order. In Hindu religious politics, her role in the Mahabharata reflects the gods' will, justifying violent conflict as a means of enforcing divine justice.

However, Draupadi's quest for vengeance complicates her status as a heroine. While her actions are divinely sanctioned, they blur the line between justice and vengeance, marking her as an anti-hero. Her willingness to destroy in the name of retribution challenges traditional moral boundaries, making her a divine figure acting through violence, not peace.

This passage is central to understanding Rama’s heroic and divine qualities, as it is the moment where the text sets the ethical and spiritual standards by which the hero is measured. The list of virtues "virtuous, heroic, true, firm in his vows, good and kind" positions Rama as the epitome of moral perfection. The inclusion of his ability to control his rage highlights the stoic ideal that was highly valued in ancient texts and religious teachings, particularly in Hinduism, where control over one’s emotions and desires is seen as a sign of a higher spiritual state.

The text also includes a spiritual dimension by noting that when Rama's "warrior wrath is high," even the gods "fear and fly." This establishes Rama not only as an exceptional human hero but also as someone divinely chosen and imbued with supernatural strength. His wrath, while fierce, is framed as a divine weapon, further cementing his role as the divinely appointed ruler and reinforcing the religious nature of his heroism.

In this sense, Rama’s actions and virtues transcend human limitations, making him both a moral and divine figure, an ideal hero who serves as a model for good governance and spiritual authority. His portrayal here connects him with the gods, suggesting that his heroic qualities are not just earthly but heavenly in their significance.

This section ties together the religious, political, and heroic dimensions of Rama’s character, and it sets the tone for his divine journey. It also emphasizes the patriarchal ideals that shape his duty as he is not just a man of action but one whose actions are guided by divine will and moral clarity.

Enkidu’s creation by Aruru in response to Gilgamesh’s unchecked tyranny embodies religious intervention in hero making. The phrase “a goddess made him” communicates divine redress, introducing Enkidu as a corrective force, or anti-heroic counterpart, governed by spiritual logic. Unlike Gilgamesh’s sanctified rule, Enkidu’s origin underscores the gods’ active role in maintaining cosmic balance. Together, these two figures reflect religious politics in action, heroism is defined not by solitary glory, but through divine checks and relational harmony.

The Assyrian and Babylonian/Akkadian versions of Gilgamesh present religious values that are central to their narratives but with notable differences shaped by the translators' cultural and historical contexts. The Assyrian version places a strong emphasis on the king’s semi-divine status and the divine mandate, reflecting a more centralized religious-political ideology. The Babylonian/Akkadian translations, by contrast, highlight the hero's struggle with mortality and divine justice, emphasizing human limits before the gods. Linguistically, the Assyrian translation occasionally uses exalted language to reinforce Gilgamesh’s divine authority, possibly to support the ruler’s legitimacy in Assyrian culture. Meanwhile, the Akkadian versions often reflect a more somber and reflective tone, revealing a nuanced view of human-divine relationships. These differences underscore how religion informs notions of heroism and morality differently in each culture and how translation choices embed the political-religious values of the time.

The fact that the terms "mistress," "harlot," and "wanton" were being used to describe Shamhat shows how they truly view women. Although they are aware of the “positive” impact she has had on Enkidu, it is almost as if she is minimized to just a promiscuous woman. Those terms in and of itself have negative connotations.

I find it interesting that Enkidu is not considered "fully man" until he experiences loss of virginity from a woman. What dictates whether or not a man or civilized? Also, what does this say about how men view women? Was this act necessary to became a civilized man? This shows how women are seen as beings who are not only domesticated but that they can domesticate others.

There is some regret and imprecatory tone in his demise here. Kind of brings sense of self-alienation because it doesn't seem like he is someone who now belongs to either world (city or wild). Becoming party of civilization has brought it total cost, which is not always enlightening.

part of his transformation into society. Nothing like the primitive creature he was before. He is becoming accustomed to the things of the world of man.

This is an example of Us vs Them boundary, because Enkidu's appearance symbolizes an uncivilized man of wild nature and unconditioned by strong societal norms. He has feminized hair an is in need of strengthening in the culture.

Gilgamesh is clearly being linked to the civilization itself. He is central to the identity of it. His knowledge is central to the nation itself. Without him, the nation would not be so great is something that con reasonably be implied since he core to its meaning.

Seven is a sacred number but I do wonder why it is always seven? I also wonder why the young men had to pray to their medicine. I saw a source that seven represents the highest spiritual power and I wonder if that is true.

Why and how did Coyote die after having intercourse with the woman? I guess I'm confused on why it took so much out of him. Did anything happen to the woman after he died? I understand this is about reproduction but I wonder if he could have gone about it a different way.

These stories are about the Salinian and Cherokee tribes. They are stories about how human and animals were created. The Salinan story was written by John Alden Mason in 1912. The Cherokee story was written by W.Powell, Nineteenth Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution in 1897-1898. Both are these stories were created in what is now California.

Gälûñ’lätï is defined as the sky world or realm.

The language of this suggests that the identity of the creator is unknown. It almost seems like this was supposed to remain a mystery to prevent people questioning the presence of the creator. This is significant because it will not disrupt the harmony created. It was expected to understand the activities of the creator. Without balance the creator and people would not be able to keep each other in check.

The four cords seem to represent a compass. This is significant because it shows Earth was created with stability and balance that should be maintained. Although no one remembers who did it, it can be indicated that God created it. This differentiates the Earth. The audience are the people who came to be after and were told this story of how life on Earth was created, even if there are questions with how it came to be. This also shows that Earth was created from the efforts of the water-beetle.

The Cherokee made this story to describe the beginning of life. This is important because it shows there is a genuine concern for Native's to be extinct. This shows significance in taking care of Earth because life is precious. This also shows how Earth came to be and how fast it can disappear. This is significant because harmony is important to live.

This almost indicates that the animals create the earth and determine how it is shaped. This seems to take place before humans were created. Before them, there was no Earth and the animals lived on a land in the sky. They would also need to make sure every animal could survive and thrive in the new room. The animals had to get Earth ready to prepare for human creation so they could live.

The Native Eagle Symbol is known as “The master of skies” and is believed to be the creature with the closest relationship with the creator.

Etruscans submitted in 338 BC and were completely taken over in 211 (Second Punic wars)

Explaining the pace with "30 seconds later" makes me feel like I was there

This is a weird sentence structure

Exciting--feels like I"m there

This is especially engaging to Hockey enthusiasts themselves but if that is they're target market then the descriptor is clear and exciting.

This sentence does a really good job at engaging the reader.

All of these things play into story telling

Importance of this statement as it pertains to the conversation

Very interesting way to describe it

Good use of mixed media

Alliteration at the beginning of the sentence brings power to the ending piece “still forever proud” also a great way to end the essay.

Third party perspective — interesting take on story telling

because they played each other a lot, the fight and tension was building.

this may have been a little excessive.

really cool to hear how this riot affected the whole country of Canada and their future.

very cool line here, using two opposites to describe each other.

great line here about sport and how important it is for people .

they sacrificed for the team as you do in religion, which a weird comparison but

course work of the class.

Interesting how they decided to make a course on religion based hockey and compare it to the religion they all practice. Just shows how important it is to them.

this event caused Montreal to never be the same in regards to hockey.

after reading this, a fight of this magnitude could have happened on any given night.

puts a perspective on how important hockey is in Canada.

I love how in hockey the whole benches clear and fight no matter what happens.

I wonder why they did not like each other, playing 14 times per season.

he is causing a lot of backlash with his actions, even though he is the best hockey player at the time.

should have been a longer suspension, at least it would have today.

even though so much occurred because of this, they are still proud of what happened.

that is a lot of arrests made in a short amount of time.

they lived very from the churches, but they still were very religious. they feel bad for living that far away

On their travels they come across so many different areas, little areas of land with 2-3 houses.

Good insight of how they live and the layout.

They are always looking forward to better weather and happier living.

Interesting to see their work and the pay to go along with it.

He’s try to describe the way hope makes us do things differently while still letting the reader come to that conclusion on their own. Interesting writing tactic

Great story telling

The speaker is not just a speaker if he’s injecting his own laugh he is a part of the conversation

Interesting way to describe the excitement of exploration by underplaying it

hi , sita's story CCBYND ndri

Persian (by Edmund Dodge Anderson Moshead). The queen did not speak for a period of time because of excessive grief and was so sad that she was tired. This passage of Moshead version Stood, sank, and died and left us leaderless? Let me understand that Persia has lost its leadership and has entered a state of total despair. The queen can feel tired because she was hurt too deeply. She lost her son and husband and left her speechless for a long time. This paragraph is not described in Aeschylus. From this passage, Moshead can tell that she is very pitiful. Both versions told me that it was very difficult for her to live as a woman, and she became a widow without her husband and children. Especially under this kind of shock, she must bless the last drop of hope. The hope is that the last Persian fleet defeats Greece. But she was still defeated, so her last hope was destroyed. It is not easy for her to be a woman, but this passage shows the love and mentality of being a mother or an expressive mother for her children.

SHANGBIN WU CC BY-SA

The Persian (By Edmund Doidge Anderson Morshead). The queen dreamed that her son was lost in the war. She especially said in the last paragraph, my son was thrown away. I can see that she is surprised and terrified, but also very worried. At the same time, like the Aeschylus version, it also describes her worry and fear of losing her child. But Aeschylus did not describe in detail how her child was lost. The Morshead version described in detail that her son's head was pierced in by auto parts and then lost his life. This version can be more graphic, and I can feel from the text that the queen is very nervous and scared.

SHANGBIN WU CC BY-SA

The Persian (By Edmund Doidge Anderson Morshead) The queen appeared in the same noble posture. Whether from Morshead or Aeschylus version, we can see that the authors of both versions gave the queen a very high evaluation. She is the old mother of Xerxes and the old wife of Darius! His Majesty, the son of God. So we see that she is still highly praised by the author, and she even has a certain relationship with God with her "god-like luster". This can more powerfully prove that as a woman, she is a very high-powered person, and is the person who influences the whole story.

SHANGBIN WU CC BY-SA

The queen is a very tragic person. Because of war, she lost her husband and her son. Her happiness and pride have left her, she not only has to live in sorrow but also in hatred. As a woman, she still has to live with strength. She is now a widow, and I can realize that she has to live for this grief every day. And it is not easy for her to live as a woman, and she has the last gleam of hope that her country’s Persian fleet was defeated and shattered. So this woman is very miserable, and I can see from this text that the author described the queen's unwillingness and helplessness.

SHANGBIN WU CC BY-SA

She could not accept Persia's failure and the loss of her son. She did not believe that her Persian army would fail. So she started screaming for relief and wanted to know the process. This proves that the queen is very anxious. From this simple passage, we can see that the queen has lost her sanity, and she has a vengeful heart anyway.

SHANGBIN WU CC BY-SA

In this paragraph. The queen was too worried about her son and played the role of maternal love for her son. She dreamed of the death of her son. And worry about his son. So she did everything for her son, and the whole tragedy is all around her.

SHANGBIN WU CC BY-SA

Queen, in the tragedy of the Persians. She is playing a very important political role. She controlled the progress of the whole tragedy for her son. She played a lofty position among women. And the author gave her a high evaluation. Her evaluation is that "she even has a certain relationship with God with her "god-like luster"." From this point, it can explain how noble and important her status is.

SHANGBIN WU CC BY-SA

The Babylonian version of GILGAMESH. A hunter was angry when he saw Enkidu. And tell his father. The father suggested that his son take a woman to deal with Enkidu when he sets out. After letting the woman take off her clothes in front of him and having intercourse with him, let him abandon the animals in it. Compared with the regular version, the Babylonian version does not describe Enkidu as the strongest person in the world. My father didn't use the word "Harlot" to describe this woman. And he didn't ask his son to go to Gilgamesh, he just asked him to take this woman to Enkidu. However, from the text of the Babylonian version, we can see that the Babylonian version respects women very much compared to the original epic. But these two versions of the epic have one thing in common, that is, women play a very important role in the epic. They can do things that boys can't. Women are used to doing some negative things. Both versions of men are very cowards and incompetent. However, the Babylonian version does not call Enkidu a savage, so this one is more civilized.

SHANGBIN WU CC BY-SA

The Babylonian version of GILGAMESH. Enkidu threw an entity on the face of the goddess and added an insulting remark. Although there are not many texts in this passage, judging from this reaction, it can be seen whether it is the Babylonian version or the ordinary version. Men always play a bullying, barbaric, and violent role. Women are always the objects of seldom being respected and humiliated too much. What's interesting is that in the normal version, only ordinary women are humiliated, and the goddess is always a respected existence. Although the Babylonian version does not have negative words about women, it can be seen from some text of behavior that it is also an excessive disrespect for women. At the same time, the goddess was emotionally unstable because of Enkidu's behavior. This completely broke the perfect and noble image of the goddess in this epic.

SHANGBIN WU CC BY-SA

The Babylonian version of GILGAMESH. Gilgamesh's mother told him directly, don't believe, your power will be warned. And let Enkidu go ahead of him. Because he is good at fighting and has seen fights. This passage is more like making Gilgamesh use Enkidu as his bodyguard. But in the normal version of Gilgamesh, his mother was imparting wisdom to Gilgamesh and told someone that would change Gilgamesh. And Gilgamesh will like this person very much and will change because of this person. This person is Enkidu, so Enkidu will be valued and respected very much in the regular version. In the Babylonian version of this text, the mother did not impart wisdom to Gilgamesh. The mother did not show to be the goddess of wisdom, nor did she mention the characteristics of women who lived in this epic. There were no negative images and excessively positive images. On the contrary, I saw more intrigue, because she let her son walk in front of him with Enkidu. This means that Enkidu is just a tool similar to his bodyguard.

SHANGBIN WU CC BY-SA

The Babylonian version of GILGAMESH. The people were forced to submit because of conquest. The authoritarian rule caused Erec's people to pray to the goddess. So Aruru created an opponent for him that could resist him. Compared with the usual version of the epic Gilgamesh. The usual version is telling people are ruled by Gilgames. But this Babylon version is telling that people are conquest and live in an authoritarian, so they ask Goddess to help. Babylon did not talk too much about the goddess Aruru. But we can still see from this version that Aruru, as a woman, comes from a lofty position and a powerful force. Whether it is the Babylonian version of the epic, or the ordinary version of the epic, it is a great existence. Therefore, women play an irreplaceable and great role in both two versions of the epic of Gilgamesh. But this Babylonian version does not describe women too much, so compared to the normal version, this version is more likely to rarely see negative stories about women. More to describe the positive image of women.

SHANGBIN WU CC BY-SA

Gilgamesh had a dream. He dreamed of his wise mother, Ninsun. One of the gods of wisdom. His mother told him Gilgamesh's dream. When the mother explained his dream, Gilgamesh was attracted by a woman, and Gilgamesh would be drawn like a woman when she saw him. So Gilgamesh's mother appears as a female character; she represents wisdom and hope. Because her mother taught Gilgamesh a per of wisdom he never had before; this also shows that women are an excellent and intelligent existence in this epic. His mother also told him that one person would change Gilgamesh. She is instructing him. This person will save Gilgamesh, and Gilgamesh will change because of this person. So this also proves that his mother's role as a female can also change and guide others.

SHANGBIN WU CC BY-SA

The son ran to his father and told him that he had met someone stronger than himself. He was afraid. Not only did he dare not face this powerful enemy, but he also ran to ask his father for help. The father used a woman to deal with the strongest man and used the word “harlot” to address a woman. From this, we can see that this epic discriminates against women, and most women play miserable roles. You can also see men's cowards. Including that Enkidu is a savage, another meaning of this sentence is to say that he is a civilization. But because the epic has such a passage, you can see the characteristics of this epic. This is a feature of prejudice against women, and men are noble.

SHANGBIN WU CC BY-SA

She taught him the art of women and made Enkidu fall in love with her. She made Enkidu, a man known as the strongest man in the world, weak, and she made the strongest man listen to her. This tells us that women are very powerful. They can do things that men, including heroes, can't do.

SHANGBIN WU CC BY-SA

Men show the arrogance and prejudice of men. To deal with the strongest person, a vulnerable group such as a woman and a child was used to deal with this strongest person. But on the contrary, this can also show that women are also very powerful; without women, men like them can't deal with the strongest person. It can also prove that women played an essential role in this story. In a sense, women are heroes in this epic.

SHANGBIN WU CC BY-SA

When Joseph was presented to the king, he did not claim to be innocent but took on the punishment that he was given. This is how we know that he knows that he played a part in the incident with the king's wife. He says himself that the soul wants to do evil but god is the one stops the evil from happening. And so he was forgiven by the king to work along side him. (Itani, T. (n.d.). Quran in English - Clear and Easy to Read. Quran in English. https://www.clearquran.com/012.html) CC BY-NC

Maybe Satan caused the inmate to forget about Joseph because Joseph had mentioned that only his true God was the one worth believing in. Whether it's religion or our own arguments we are all like Joseph. We all want someone to believe our story or be on our side or just be understanding. When we add religion to the mix, it's a different kind of understanding that people want to receive. It's not so simple as saying "believe in my god." (Itani, T. (n.d.). Quran in English - Clear and Easy to Read. Quran in English. https://www.clearquran.com/012.html) CC BY-NC

Although they both lusted after one another, the woman got blamed for it. Unfortunately this is not a surprise because whenever a man does something to a woman, it was the women's fault. 'What was she wearing, what was she doing, she must have said something or done something to provoke the man to make a move.' That is what people will say. Maybe the woman acted this way because she didn't want to lose her husband or her way of living but it was unfair for Joseph to only get punished for what they both did. (Itani, T. (n.d.). Quran in English - Clear and Easy to Read. Quran in English. https://www.clearquran.com/012.html) CC BY NC

This right here is interesting. In the bible version or the Torah version, the woman was the one who was drawn to Joseph. In this version, they were both drawn to one another and it was the god who kept Joseph from the woman. He wasn't a loyal servant because of his character, he was a loyal servant because that's who god made him to be. Very interesting compared to Gilgamesh where Gilgamesh was created by the gods but he had complete control of his actions. Because of his strong personality, the gods actually had to make an equal to stop him. (Itani, T. (n.d.). Quran in English - Clear and Easy to Read. Quran in English. https://www.clearquran.com/012.html) CC BY-NC

The god allowed for Joseph to get captured because he was going to make sure that Joseph rose to a high place and prove his brothers wrong. (Itani, T. (n.d.). Quran in English - Clear and Easy to Read. Quran in English. https://www.clearquran.com/012.html) CC BY-NC

In this version, we see that Joseph tells his father about the dream that he had of his brothers bowing down to him and Jacob is wise enough to inform him not to say anything to his brothers because he knows that it will make them jealous. However, it's not the dream that makes them jealous, it's the fact that Joseph is clearly the favorite brother. Here, Jacob instructs him to keep listening to God because at the end of the day he is the one that is going to make everything okay. (Itani, T. (n.d.). Quran in English - Clear and Easy to Read. Quran in English. https://www.clearquran.com/012.html) CC BY-NC

Their father Jacob knew about Joseph being alive through his god. The sons tried to keep it a secret like they did when they got rid of him but this time god make sure that he knew Joseph was safe. What happened once was not going to happen again because Joseph had risen up to a good position and made a living for himself. Now his brothers needed him to provide for them. Among brothers, it must have felt like they wanted their father's attention and tried to prove that they were being raised to be good men. Instead they proved they were bad men by leaving their brother behind for dead. Joseph didn't owe anything to his brothers. But instead he chose to be the bigger person and provide for them in a time of famine. (Itani, T. (n.d.). Quran in English - Clear and Easy to Read. Quran in English. https://www.clearquran.com/012.html) CC BY-NC

In the other version of Joseph, the vision or dream made Joseph seem like the bad guy who wanted to rule over his brothers. Instead the fulfillment of his dream showed that one day there would be reconciliation between the brothers after they tried to kill him. (Itani, T. (n.d.). Quran in English - Clear and Easy to Read. Quran in English. https://www.clearquran.com/012.html)

I feel like in this paragraph all the names that the chorus is saying are men who went to fight in the battle of Salamis and they're trying to say some kind of protection over them. They are also setting the scene for what is taking place so far in the play which is a battle.

By far the best part. A lot of plays rely on bringing people back from the dead to get their point of view of cross. In this case, since Darius is known as the 'king of kings' maybe the author wanted to know how he would react to a terrible defeat. As the reader, we get read the perspective of a person who has already passed away in the time of writing this.

As a Greek writing about the most powerful empire in the world, Aeschylus must have had a lot of fun imagining how the palace in Susa was in shambles due to the Greek warriors defeating the Persian warriors. So much so that the queen is panicking, the elders are panicking and the messenger is is retelling in detail how horrible the battle is going. It's a mischievous undertone when you read it from that perspective.

This made me think of the female naval officer and the Greeks. One born in Hellas would be someone betraying Xerxes in Greece and the one born in an eastern land, the female naval officer (forgive me, I forgot her name) was the queen of a land called Libya in Turkey. She was the one who helped Xerxes and gave him advice although he never took the advice because of his huberus.

Joseph’s brothers were filled with jealousy and hatred. Their father loved Joseph more than any of them, which is unfair. They teased Joseph as a dreamer; This happened after he said he saw a dream. The brothers decided to sell him to merchants from Midianite, and those merchants turn to sell him to Ishmaelite merchants. The brother told their father Joseph was dead. There was just too much jealousy in their heart that led them to sell their brother. CC BY-NC-ND

In this story we see an adaptation of the Hindu Ramayana tale which details the rocky marriage between Rama and Sita. This story is focused on Sita and how heartbroken she is because of the way things are with her and Rama. That is the reason why she sings the blues. CC- BY-NC

We see a lot of different narratives in this play. One of the narratives is Dave with his girlfriend and the cat. Another one is the shadow puppets who are talking about Sita and Rama and basically are arguing about who knows the story and who's story is the correct one. And lastly we see the narrative of the songs. All the different songs explain parts of the story and make the reader more interested. CC- BY-NC

She is a woman, not a harlot. This shows that sex was considered to be less taboo for this translation, and she is treated like a woman and not an object, as well as not being treated like a prostitute, as that is the definition of Harlot.

Dimas Villanueva CC BY-NC-ND

In this version of The EOG, It shows that Langdon, the man who discovered these cuneiform tablets, believes that "These dreams are recounted to Enkidu by a woman who with whom Enkidu cohabits for six days and seven nights" In the N.K Sanders translation of EOG, it seems that this would be where the "Harlot" comes in. However, This is different. The woman is described to be almost like a priestess, someone who interprets dreams and just so happens to have sex with Enkidu. This was not a weird or taboo subject, (Probably because of the fact that this is the Babylonian version and more older.) and she is not treated like a Harlot. She is treated with respect, as a priestess. She is simply helping Enkidu become a better hero and helping him get into society, and this is acknowledged instead of being treated badly.

Dimas Villanueva CC BY-NC-ND

This shows a double standards in regards to gender and sex. A woman who has a lot of sex is referred to as a "Harlot". Meanwhile, Gilgamesh has sex with every virgin on their first night of marriage, and while people don't like it, they don't do anything about it, and they don't say anything about it as well. They don't give him a name either. This shows the female gender has a taboo towards sexual activity and men's sexual activities are more accepted. This is most likely because man is seen as dominant and brutal but women are seen as civil and fragile and the best example of class.

Dimas Villanueva CC BY-NC-ND

The manner in which the "Harlot" controls Enkidu, is through sex. This shows that the woman has the power to control man and make him civil. Woman is seen as the most civil thing at the time, and sex with a woman gets rid of any ancient animal like tendencies and makes a man civil. Which is what happened here with Enkidu and the Harlot. Yet, no one calls the harlot a hero for making Enkidu civil.

Dimas Villanueva CC BY-NC-ND

This statement shows the power that gender has. Enkidu is a wild man who's ideals are going against the mainstream ideals of society, he is seen as the other, the person on the outside, and the only thing that can calm him down and make him civil is woman. This means that at the time, in society, women were seen as the epitome of civility and etiquette, to the point where if someone who doesn't have the same ideals as society gains a women they will become civilized. And the ancient, uncivilized origins of man shall be forgotten.

Dimas Villanueva CC BY-NC-ND

The language used here is "Harlot". This is the language that was describes the woman, because this is meant to be a translation of the Sumerian version, where sex was seen as a more taboo thing. It also could have been that when this translation was made, the idea of sex was a lot more taboo, and a woman who was known to have a lot of sex was considered to be a harlot. This shows that the female gender and sex were negatively associated and it was a taboo subject.

Dimas Villanueva CC BY-NC-ND

If we look at this altogether, we can begin to see an interesting form of "self" of the identity of this people. They see themselves as civilized. They see Enkidu as "other". They see this wild man and think he should be tamed by a "harlot" who will strip naked and lay with Enkidu so that he may too be civilized. It's interesting as well the language used her to describe this woman. This implies that without women, men would still be uncivilized, that they would be wild and roam the lands as wild beasts do. However, the author still translates to harlot. So, it is not merely the act of a woman, but the physical act that somehow tames the wildness within men, yet she does not gain any respect for keeping men civil.

Zach Long CC BY-NC-ND

We can see from this section that Joseph still remains close to his roots and his religion, to his nation, as it were, even in death. He wishes to be carried to Israel, the promised land, so that he may be buried with his people. This is why Joseph is still regarded so highly, despite some of his childish nature. He embodies that of the perfect man of faith, never faltering in the skills that God gave him in interpreting dreams, and maintaining his connection to God.

Zach Long CC BY-NC-ND

In this section of the text, while not directly from the story of Joseph, it does show to us that most people see Joseph as being in the right because he sticks with his Jewish heritage, that he follows the faith of his people, despite how his brothers sold him o slavery and that he grew up mostly in Egypt where it was not the predominant religion of that area.

Zach Long CC BY-NC-ND

This further shows that those that follow God under this religion are not following what is "right" that all other religions are false and wrong. You either believe in this God, or you believe wrongly and therefore are seen as being "other" of being incorrect.

Zach Long CC BY-NC-ND

In this text we can see what it means to be of this faith. We can see that the beauty of Joseph draws evil and brings a lady to want him. If he were to listen to these desires than he would be "ignorant" which shows that promiscuity, or coveting someone else's wife, is seen as "less than" in the identity of this culture.

Zach Long CC BY-NC-ND

Here we have a different spin on the idea of "us" vs "them". Instead of the idea of nations being different because they are a different people, we have Soudabeh convincing Kay-Kavous that Siawosh is unworthy and that he tricked them with magic. All to get revenge because Siawosh would not sleep with her. It's certainly a different view of "them" vs "us" that we've seen in other works.

Zach Long CC BY-NC-ND

The wording here and in the Helen Zimmern translation, are nearly identical. This shows just how important to the tellers of this story, that Siawosh be strong and beautiful. Without this element, Siawosh would not be chosen by fate nor the king to be raised well.

Zach Long CC BY-NC-ND

In looking at this moment, the "them" vs "us" is even used with ones own blood. Sudaveh manipulates Kai Kawous in order to get back on Saiawosh for denying her. This reminds me a bit of Lord of the Rings, where the king of Gondor is made ill and is under Sauromon's control and doesn't care that his son was killed. In this sense, Saiawosh is being made into a "them" despite truly being an "us" as he is from his father.

Zach Long CC BY-NC-ND

We see here that the identity of this nation is in military strength and physical beauty. He is given up to be raised by a king because he is so beautiful and strong. This sense of identity is familiar in other moments in literature, where you only belong in the predominant race if you are strong and handsome.

Zach Long CC BY-NC-ND

In this translation of the story, we can see that the word used here is hierodule and almost immediately after, courtesan. Hierodule is another word for priestess, and courtesan implies a sexual nature. So here we can see this used to both show that she should have some status and yet is also shown to have little regard. However, she is still shown to be used to make Enkidu civilized, and thus he is no longer "other" to the people of Uruk, but one of them as he becomes Gilgamesh's companion.

Zach Long CC CC BY-NC-ND

This is the closest part I could find to that of Cookson /The_Persians)when he first looked at Xerxes. In that version, he translates Xerxes as a warmongering unwise king. Here, we see something similar, though again a bit more subtly displayed. Morshead does blame Xerxes here, but he doesn't outright call him a fool or say he only seeks war, which depletes the manly youth of Persia.

Zach Long CC BY-NC-ND

This section shows the first taste of how the Persians view the Athenians. They see them as nothing more than murderers, as common thugs who slew husbands and fathers. Despite the fact that the Persians were the attackers and the Athenians were the defenders of this war. Again, in the language comparison between this version and the version translated by Cookson/The_Persians), we can see that both shows Athens as an evildoer, however, in this case Morshead is actually more brutal about it than Cookson is. Here Athens is portrayed as simply murderous, whereas in Cookson's version it only states them as being hateful. I would say that murder is worse than hatred, though I suppose the latter could lead to the former.

Zach Long CC BY-NC-ND

Here, we can see that the Athenians are shown as bowing to no one man, they have no king, nor are they subject to any other nation. The idea of a democracy, as the Athenians are known to have some form of in this time, is foreign to the Persians. This is also interesting because the use of the word slave. With Persians being the first known Empire in the world, they cast aside slavery and let all people be free. While Athens was not the worst in terms of slavery, as say the Spartans, they were still slavers in totality. They did have slaves. So using the word "slave" here is an interesting use of the word. We can see this same thing come through in looking at the Cookson/The_Persians) version as well.

Zach Long CC BY-NC-ND

Again, in looking at the Cookson/The_Persians) version here, we can see that he has a grander flair in his talking of the queen. He references her as the wife of a god. Here, in Morshead's version, we see that she is still highly regarded by the author, and she even has some relationship to a god with her "godlike sheen". However, again with the word choices here, we can see that Morshead appears to be a bit more modest in how he chooses to portray the Persians versus the way Cookson talks about them.

Zach Long CC BY-NC-ND

If we look at this section in comparisson to the version translated by G. M. Cookson/The_Persians), we can see that the translators went in slightly different ways. In Cookson's version it shows the bravado of the Persians. It showcases how mighty they are. With Morshead, he translated it in a more modest light. He does say that no barrier nor phalanx, a reference to the style in which the Hellenistic people fought, can be so brave. Essentially they say the same thing, that Persia cannot be defeated by such a style of fighting, but Cookson seems to have the Persians boasting be more outright and less hidden in the meaning of the words.

Zach Long CC BY-NC-ND

We see the Persians as a whole, along with Darius and the Queen, spoken of in such high regards that this switch to showing Xerxes as an unwise king is a change of pace. It places him as "other" it shows that they had to fight him as he is a terrible king. It is a negative way of looking at him, though Aeschylus clearly had some respect for his father and mother and of the people as a while, he dis not show the same respect for Xerxes throughout this play, giving both the Athenians and the Persians a "common enemy" as it were within the context of this play. For the Athenians, he is a bafoonish ruler whom was handily defeated at Salamis. For the Persians, he wasted time and the lives of their men on his on interests of getting revenge for their loss at Marathon, and losing almost all of the men of Persia, casting away an entire generation of strong men.

Zach Long CC BY-NC-ND

While Aeschylus is Athenian, this play is from the Persian perspective,and while he does not wish to besmirch the name of Athens, he has to see from the Persian's eyes what it may look like to see their mighty army defeated. In this instance, he is saying that Athens really knows how to hold a grudge. That, if you come for its people, you will falter, and you will fail as they harness no compassion for its enemies.

Zach Long CC BY-NC-ND

It;s curious the use of language here. While this is saying that the Athenians are slave to none, that they do not have one ruler above them as they are a democratic power, the use of "slave" not sorting with Athenian is an interesting choice of words because they do house slaves. So while what the author is saying is true, the use of the word slave here is an interesting choice as the word slave does correlate to Athens, but not in the same way. It's almost to indicate, as the original author was Athenian, that they are superior to Persia because they bow to no one man, no king rules Athens. They are not subjugated to another people, like most of Persia's territory, which are satraps and subjugates of Persia, and not all technically Persians.

Zach Long CC BY-NC-ND

When speaking of the Queen of Persia, the author speaks of her as the "spouse of a god". The use of language here is to show that Persians, especially the rulers of Persia, are powerful enough to be, and be with, the gods. They think themselves as gods, and therefore, how could they not come out of this war victorious.

Zach Long CC BY-NC-ND

This section here shows how highly the Persians think of themselves. It equates them to being incomparable, as having no equal in military might. This is quite interesting considering they have been defeated by the same foe only a few years prior at the battle of Marathon, thus the Persians clearly have equals, or perhaps even superiors in these terms. They do have more numbers than they had on their previous march to fight the Athenians, Spartans, etc. than when they lost at Marathon. It's similar in irony to the Titanic being an "unsinkable" ship, only to sink on its maiden voyage. Here the Persians are saying the same thing, that they are incomparable in strength, and yet we find out later that they are in fact not incomparable.

Zach Long CC BY-NC-ND

Relieving the Burden of Navigating Health and Social Services for Older Adults and Caregivers

Rama's hard words on his real reasons on why he save Sita and his feelings about her broke her heart. With this details about what Sita feels and how she is reacting, the reader is able to create an image of the character int heir mind.

CC BY-NC-ND

This following lines express Rama's feelings and thoughts after saving Sita. He basically told her that he fight for his honor and justice not because of his love for her, a love that does not exist in him any more. Here we can see the true colors of Rama, where he only thinks about himself as a superior male and the unbalance toxic relationship that he has with Sita.

CC BY-NC-ND

In the whole story of Ramayana, we are facing the extreme loyalty, respect and love that is given to the husband, but not equally to the wife. This quote reflect exactly how enormous this devotion is frm the women side is, as the author is claiming that "each princess gave her soul to love". Refering the husband as "to love", and in Ramayana's case Sita been a devoted wife to Rama no matter what.

CC BY-NC-ND

Bhishma's action reflect the core of Hinduism, getting rid of our vanities and connecting more with the spiritual world. Bhishma teaches us about the abounding flaws of humanity and the ways we can rise above them. Bhishma shows us that we can live a fulfilling life if we abandon our mundane habits. It also teaches us that love can blind us and that good deed are always rewarded. CC BY-NC-ND .

Because of his many virtues and sacrifices, Bhishma was and continues to be a role model in Indian culture. The story of Bhishma narrated in the epic of Mahabharata , the most influential book in hinduism; reflects an idealized version of the male. He is Kind, cares about others and kept his word until his final breath even after the sons of Satyavati were born which is more amazing.

Bhishma's weakness is his love for his father. He gave up all carnal desires and right to the throne for the lust of Shantanu, which place into perspective this noble action. As a result of his vow he puts at risk the future of his beloved empire, goes against his beliefs and is forced to do things that he knew were wrong. CC BY-NC-ND

Devavrata become Bhishma because of his promise of celibacy. Bhishma was such a good son that he did not only gave up his rightful throne but also the right to have family and carnal pleasure. This in what makes Bhishma a hero. CC BY-NC-ND

Beowulf is following the same lead as Gilgamesh as the epic hero, as he is going out of his way to preform an epic dead such as killing Grendel with his bare hand in order to show to the danes that he is worthy of praise and to be their king. This is similar to both Siowash and Gilgamesh as the both preform epic deeds though each with there own different reasons.

NC-BY-CC-ND

Here is an image of Siyavash cover in flames. Siyavash was accuse wrongly but he always believed in himself, that is why he was more than willing and putted himself in that position. He was true to himself and always tried to do the right thing, that along with his noble status, kindness and intelligence is what makes him such a beloved figure. CC BY-NC-ND .

Xerxes is not playing the traditional gender role as man as he now grieves with the chorus about the loss of his men at the hands of the Ionians.

NC-BY-CC-ND

Xerxes, trying to play the male gender role, trying to expand his dynasty so that he may follow in the footsteps of his father and his grandfather actually ended up being the means to the downfall of his army. As his hubris lead him to the conclusion that it was neccesary to attack greece and build a bridge in order to do so.

NC-BY-CC-ND

Contrary to Hyppolytus and Siyavash, Joseph had a long lasting life and had a family something that the Greek and Persian version did not have. We can argue that the reason why Joseph lived longer was because of his faith in God. A God who always helped him get through the toughest of circumstances. The gods in the Greek version did not help Hippolytus on the contrary it was the reason why he died, while in Siyavash there is no divine powers involved. CC BY-NC-ND .

In here like in the Persian version, Hyppolitus has a tragic end. In this image we see the position in how he died. His ankles are tied and while his horse is running. Is indeed a terrible ending for someone who was not to blame for anything, all thanks to the god Poseidon. Interestingly, the Persian version has not such things as divine beings, there is not even mention of them. This once proves that in order for some things to appeal to other cultures things such as religion, politics and lifestyle need to take part. CC BY-NC-ND

This is very unlike what we typically expect of those in playing the male gender role as well as the hero. Normally we would expect one that is in this role to prepare for a battle and go down swinging, however siowash doesnt do this and in fact accepts his fate as being killed by the hands of Afrasiyab. The fact that one is going to die is not accepted by Gilgamesh until the end of the epic.

NC-BY-CC-ND

Siawosh is the representation of a good Persian ruler, like Cyrus The Great. He had confident on himself because of the way his father raise him. He always thought before taking any decisions and always try to both maintain piece and strengthen his connections with other countries. His integrity and diplomacy was both his virtue and tragic flaw. Still, he is the representation of hope and good of the Persian culture. CC BY-NC-ND (http://www.cais-soas.com/CAIS/Literature/Shahnameh/siyawash.htm)

Siawosh plays the male gender role and role of a hero differently. Siawosh does not use his ability to have relations with the wife of his father because of the teachings that he had received from Rostam. This highlights the differences between the male gender role at the time of the writing of the Epic of Gilgamesh and in the Epic of siawosh. NC-BY-CC-ND

The mother of Gilgamesh being asked what the meaning of her dream is by her son is a representation of one of the female gender roles that exist within the epic. As the mother to Gilgamesh, she imparts to him the wisdom that he lacks in order for him to make sense of his dream so that he may act accordingly. NC-BY-CC-ND

Gilgamesh pillages his own kingdom in this translation of the epic. as he is too strong to be stopped from doing so. This is typical of those that are playing the masculine gender role. In the modern day world we want our male figures to be strong and wise, exactly what Gilgamesh is portraying during this point of the story. However, the way that he does this is drastically different than how Siyawash does so, as he acts noblely rather than as a pillager of his own kingdom. NC-BY-CC-ND

To me the real hero of the story is not Gilgamesh but Inkidu. Gilgamesh full of human vices despite being a demigod. But Inkidu was the reason why Gilgamesh started to live. Gilgamesh would have being nothing without his partner, he would not have suffer in like without Inkidu's death, and would have not turn his life around either. This is why Inkidu is the hero. CC BY-NC-ND

In this older version , the translation is clear and more explicit. While in other versions these actions are cover under a bunch of metaphors and wordiness. So it looks like when we, ourselves, became more civilize the amount of censorship we created for ourselves also grew. Just think about that Inkidu and Gilgamesh were lovers, and this was not something new, other cultures also practice this. But later became taboo with the help of Christianity. It is just now that we are starting to accept that everyone does not have the same sexual preference, everyone should be free of choosing a partner regardless of sex. Uncivilized does not mean close minded. CC BY-NC-ND

The story of Gilgamesh dates back to thousands of years but it was first written between 2150 - 1400 BCE. Gilgamesh is narrating his dream to his mother so that she could later interpreted. He says that something like a meteor fell him. This dream would become his reality when he encounter his complement , Inkidu.However, when we see the translation by Stephen Langdon, the thing become a person. Why is this? CC BY-NC-ND

In the modern version of Gilgamesh the women who civilizes by having intimacy with Inkidu is now a prostitute (harlot) not a priestess. What does this says about our current relation with sexuality? CC BY-NC-ND

In the old Babylonian version what fell from the sky was something not a person. But yet, in this 18th century translation by Langdon says "He". We later know that, that he was Inkidu but Langdon takes all of the excitement and mystery out of it. Maybe is because during that era people were not as imaginative and patient. CC BY-NC-ND

At the end of the day, the only hero in the story was Nina herself. Rama was a complete self absorbed jerk and Sita was completely submissive and did not think of her even once. While Nina went through modern similar faces of rejection and self worth, she came to terms with herself, and accepted the fact that her ex boyfriend was not worth her pain and that she had to move on in life. CC BY-NC-ND

When Rama finds his sons by coincidence he wants to take the boy with him, but not Sita. So he suggest another trial to confirm her purity. The only reason why he seems to "Care" about his songs is because they are boy, I am sure that if they were girls Rama would not have care. But he wants a successor and now he has it. Thought out the story Sita needs to prove herself but no Rama. Sita's Value depends on how valuable Rama think she is. And right now she is garbage to him. Now that he has his songs there is no more use for her. CC BY-NC-ND

In the modern intake of Nina Paley. She is dump by her ex. His reasons: he was bored of her already. Yet, despite of being treated so badly by her boyfriend Nina insist and begs him to go back with her, just like Sita when Rama wants to take his sons with him back to the palace. CC BY-NC-ND

This song is sings by Sita and Rama's sons and it say a lot about the sexist culture in Hindu society. To everyone Rama is perfect, therefore he is never wrong. When he kicks Sita out of his kingdom because people were talking about Sita even though Rama knew she was pure and innocent. Yet, he does it "for the good of the people". When in reality his fragile and huge ego was the one to blame. Also "Duty first, Sita last" once more demonstrates the gender inequality. CC BY-NC-ND

In this image we can observe the difference between man and women in Sita Sings the Blues. While Rama is being taking care of to make sure he is dry, Sita is under the rain with no protection while admiring Rama from afar. However, Rama seems to only care about himself and looks proudly forward without even looking at his wife. CC BY-NC-ND

I am completely lost in this passage, what is supposed to be happening?

I am not following what is happening in these lines, i know lines are missing but i feel as if they could have done something here.

I believe Gilgamesh has this dialogue with Enkidu, but i am not too sure as to why this is happening.

I realize here is saying what is happening to him but the translation isn't as clear as it should be.

This passage here just further shows how much power the woman did have for that brief period of time of teaching Enkidu. Once Enkidu knew how to survive, he knew his role already. His abilities were extremely important to his role against all of his challenges.

Here the woman is teaching him the ways of the land where if it had not been for her, Enkidu would have been lost and might not have fulfilled his fate. The role of the woman here is extremely important, she was almost like a catalyst in starting this motion of events.

In this passage, the woman actually has power over the man having the ability to change him from the inside out. He has lost his connection with the animals which is extremely visible to them.

You can see here that the woman did not have a choice but to follow Enkidu when Enkidu had the opportunity to do what he pleases with her. The male viewing her as an object to change.

You can see here that the woman acts extremely volatile when she gets rejected by Enkidu. The roles here play a part because i feel as if she lusts for him for his manly attributes and extreme exaggeration of his power. Enkidu's role was not to be Ishtar's for he had another fate to fulfill.

You can see here that the woman acts extremely volatile when she gets rejected by Enkidu. The roles here play a part because i feel as if she lusts for him for his manly attributes and extreme exaggeration of his power. Enkidu's role was not to be Ishtar's for he had another fate to fulfill.

grgtrgyugyef

highest god, creator of all gods and beings

Enkidu is a superlative being, notion of gods as being human-like and vice versa

hierodule - being a priestess, her having sex with Enkidu is not seen as a shameful thing. opposite of most religions that demand chastity for their priestesses

Goddess being omniscient in Assyrian religion

Dharma for Nordic peoples? definitely Pagan concept, seems like an oversight from Christian translators

everything in God's hands, Beowulf merely a vessel

notion of the Christian afterlife, purifying of soul

judgement of God - declaring the throne and hall of Heorot holy, cannot be usurped by enemies of God

mixture of Christianity (Cain and Abel) and Paganism (elves, giants, etc)

some translations name God specifically here, same sentiment though

all of Beowulf's victories due to God in Beowulf's eyes. even his death is not a sad event to him as he sees it as God's will

even in a boast, Beowulf equates the result of his actions as being the will of God. almost negates the concept of personal responsibility

again, origin being of Cain - evil begetting evil

one of the few times where fate is mentioned without being linked to God's will

repeated again, continuously reaffirming the evil of Grendel by siding him against God

"truth is established" - God is the declarer of what is and isn't true. reality itself is bent to God's will. Whoever is on the side of God is on the side of truth, therefore Beowulf = the truth

idols = paganism. first mention of the devil. "God they knew not" declaring them to be heathens.

insinuation that they deserve punishment because of their paganism

Cain, direct reference to Bible. awkward insertion of Christian narrative/origin. Evil begotten from one of the first sins. No mention of the devil, evil as something unfavorable to God

God-Father: God as creator, maybe taking place of Odin as father/creator of all beings.

"sent to solace the people" - god-sent, chosen, given divine status

Enkidu realizes after cursing the harlot that he was wrong in doing so. After all, she was the woman who civilized him and found his perfect match and companion. He praises her and promises her good fortune in her future. Although he did curse her at the beginning, men do have respect for women (after they realize they are wrong) sort of like Gilgamesh when Siduri give him life advice and he rejects it. Later on he realizes that he was wrong and began to appreciate his life.

The epic challenges the idea of gender and sexuality. There is no specific classification of gender and sexuality in the text. Women and men are treated differently, but there is no specification on what women and men do differently.

Women represent not only temptation and ruin but also power. Enkidu only thought with his heart whereas she was able to lead him in the right direction. Women are the greatest aid to the hero since they provide the men with the information they require to change themselves and the world.

One of the prominent women in the Epic of Gilgamesh is Siduri. She gives advice to Gilgamesh who was blinded by the death of Enkidu. She encourages him to put away his grief and actually enjoy the life he is living instead of seeking immortality. He was busy trying to run away from death that he forgot to enjoy the things he had. As usual he ignored her advice and suffers greatly as his search for immortality was a failure.