Imlisanen Jamir
Christopher Nolan's Odyssey opened in theatres this month, retelling a story first assembled by reciters who carried it in memory for generations before anyone thought to write it down. Homer's epic began as sound, repeated at gatherings, reshaped slightly with each telling, held together by rhythm and formula because rhythm and formula are what let a reciter carry thousands of lines without a page in front of him.
That same discipline reaches back further than Homer. A thousand years before Greek reciters were shaping the Odyssey, a Sumerian king named Gilgamesh, thought to have ruled the city of Uruk around 2700 BCE, was already being carried the same way, in memory, by voice, long before anyone pressed his story into the clay tablets that eventually preserved it across Mesopotamia.
The poem follows Gilgamesh through friendship, loss, and a failed search for immortality after the death of his companion Enkidu, built from the same repetition and formula that let a reciter hold it without a page in front of him. Those tablets then sat buried under the ruins of Nineveh for over two thousand years, forgotten so completely that no one alive knew the epic had existed, until a British Museum scholar named George Smith deciphered a fragment describing a flood in 1872 and realised he was reading something older than anything the Bible or Homer had prepared readers to expect.
Gilgamesh, composed over a thousand years earlier in Mesopotamia, worked by the same logic before Assyrian scribes pressed it into clay, and scholars studying both traditions have long noted that their oldest layers share the habits of oral composition rather than the habits of writers working alone at a desk. Neither epic was written first and performed later. Both were performed first, for centuries, and writing arrived afterward to catch what performance had already preserved.
Naga society carried its own histories the same way, and did so for considerably longer than most outside observers assume. Everything before that point, origin narratives, migration accounts, genealogies establishing which clan held which land, the memory of feuds and alliances between villages, survived only because someone spoke it and someone else kept speaking it. This was not folklore in the diminished sense the word often carries now.
Village councils still draw on oral genealogy to settle disputes today, and Article 371A of the Constitution gives that customary practice actual legal standing, which means the recitation Telemachus performs to establish his claim in Homer's world has a living counterpart in Naga customary law rather than a merely literary one.
What Homer's tradition received, and what Naga oral tradition has mostly been denied, is patience. Homeric material had roughly three centuries of oral transmission before it settled into the form we now read, and a further two and a half thousand years of institutions willing to copy, teach, and argue over it.
Naga oral history had a fraction of that runway before missionaries, colonial administrators, and later the state began fixing pieces of it into writing on terms those outsiders set, often extracting what suited their own purposes and leaving the rest to fade with the last elder who remembered it. The compression matters. A tradition given three hundred years to find its own written form and a tradition given perhaps three generations before an external hand starts doing the transcribing are not undergoing the same process, even when both end up called an oral epic in retrospect.
Gilgamesh sat forgotten under Mesopotamian sand for over two thousand years before anyone could read it again. Naga oral history is ageing quietly in the memory of people who are still alive, and unlike Gilgamesh, it does not get to wait to be rediscovered.
Comments can be sent to imlisanenjamir@gmail.com
