So /lit, what's the best english translation to the Epic

>>9358160
Why bother? It's not an important work in any way, and there are tons of better epic poems you could read instead. If you're not interested in learning Sumerian to understand the actual poetics of it it's nothing but a historical curiosity.

>>9358164
>ignores question
>creates new question
>answers question
>??????

>>9358160
I've read the Benjamin R. Foster translation from the W. W. Norton & Company which is pretty normie but I kinda enjoyed reading it.

Its a nice epic if you love Mesopotamian culture and history.

>>9358160
I've read the Stephanie Dalley and the Andrew George translations. Beside those two, I found online a prose translation by someone who's name I forgot but it sounded Indian or Persian. The latter was absolute rubbish. The first two are both good:

Both are in verse.

They are honest about what are more or less educated guesses on the part of the translator (words that are unclear/deduced from context are clearly marked, as well as omission/lacunae in the original).

Both translators have made an effort to compile a unitary poem out of several sources while being open and explicit when switching sources.

Both include different versions of the epic itself, as well as other important Mesopotamian works (albeit not the same ones).

Both have extensive notes, introductions, bibliography, and so on.

All in all, I've found Andrew George to have a slight edge. His rendition is more poetic and it feels more cohesive. Obviously, lacking any Sumerian, none of this is a comment on the accuracy. Perhaps George took more liberties with the source material in his quest to make it sound better in English. After giving it some thought I've decided that, at the end of the day, I don't really care if such is the case.

You can get both online as epubs. If there is interest I can upload them somewhere.

>>9359507
What are their respective qualifications? In my experience with religious text translations, the most popular ones often end up being by writers or even journalists rather than linguists or historians (thankfully that's not a problem with the Bible).

>>9359535
Certainly not the case here:

https://www.soas.ac.uk/staff/staff30983.php

http://www.orinst.ox.ac.uk/staff/eanes/sdalley.html