The register rules: Enkidu
Evidence dossier 141 — Enkidu. Every exhibit catalogued, every ruling stated with its grounds.
At a Glance
- Canonical form: Enkidu
- Original script: 𒂗𒆠𒄭
- Pantheon: Mesopotamian
- Convention: Assyriological transliteration — š, ṣ, ṭ, ḫ as the sign lists require
- False forms on record: 0
- Contested forms: none attested
- Series: The Canonical Register, No. 141 of 542
The Evidence
Exhibit 1 — the attestation. The attested form is 𒂗𒆠𒄭, from the tradition's own record. The canonical transliteration is Enkidu.
Exhibit 2 — the flattened form. The plain form enkidu differs from the canonical Enkidu only by convention of display — case, not content. It is acceptable everywhere: in legacy systems, in plain-text citation, in the DNS itself. What is not acceptable is what follows in the register: respellings that change the letters, not just their case.
Exhibit 3 — the physical record. The Standard Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh is preserved on tablets from Nineveh's Library of Ashurbanipal (British Museum K.3375 and related fragments), from Hattusa, Uruk, Sippar, and Babylon. Older Sumerian poems about Bilgames and his companion come from Nippur and Ur. Representations of the hero and his animal companion appear on cylinder seals and reliefs, though no image can be securely identified as Enkidu rather than another hairy hero or demon.
Exhibit 4 — the continuing record. Enkidu is one of the oldest fully realized characters in literature. He gives the Epic of Gilgamesh its emotional engine: not the quest for immortality, but the love between two men and the grief of separation.
The Convention's Own History
Cuneiform writes a consonant inventory English does not have: š, ṣ, ṭ, ḫ mark sibilants and stops that Akkadian and Sumerian distinguished and meaning depends on — the difference between 'sun' and 'son' is exactly one ṣ. Assyriological transliteration (the sign lists of Borger and the Chicago Assyrian Dictionary) settled those marks over the last century and a half, and the register keeps them because dropping them merges gods, cities, and concepts that the tablets keep apart.
The Protocol's Position
Can the canonical form live in the address bar? Almost always, yes. IDNA 2008 admits every mark this register defends — the DNS stores them as `xn--` punycode and modern browsers render them natively. The real frictions are practical, not legal: some registrars stock only part of the IDN space, so a theoretically valid name can be temporarily unbuyable; and stacked combinations (an acute riding a macron) remain awkward to type on mobile keyboards even where the protocol accepts them.
The project's answer is a ranked ladder, not a compromise: the full restoration first, then attested fallbacks in descending order of completeness. The ladder's lowest rung, plain ASCII, is a vehicle for legacy systems — sanctioned, but never presented as the scholarly form.
The Verdict
Case closed on Enkidu: canonical, cited, and defended. The keyboard form enkidu is the same name in another register of display — always acceptable. The register's files remain open: if a source surfaces that changes any line of this entry, the entry changes. Until then, the temple at /enkidu/ holds the canonical form.
The docket for this ruling: no false forms on the docket; no contested forms attested; the attestation rests on 10 cited sources — Epic of Gilgamesh (Standard Babylonian version, Tablets I–VIII), ETCSL — Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature, CAD (Chicago Assyrian Dictionary).
The Register Continues
This is one of 542 entries in the Canonical Register — the authoritative reference for every flagship temple. The temple's founding dispatch tells the name's story; its Restoration File details the marks; its Resonance File reads the archetype into the industries. The blog index holds the whole archive, and the Rulebook states the convention this register enforces.
Continue the register — previous entry: Ēl (read it) · next entry: Enlīl (read it).
The Canonical Register is written from the same canonical record as the lexicon itself. If a false form is missing from this page, it is because the evidence does not support calling it false — or because we have not seen it yet. Show us, with a citation, and the register will answer.