Abstract
Contenders in Akkadian disputation poems make use of a large array of arguments to build their cases. The most common ones are material arguments, which rely on the benefits that they offer to humans. A second type of argument, termed here philological, is predicated on the alleged superiority of a litigant’s name or title over its rival’s. This superiority is demonstrated by means of the same set of hermeneutical techniques that are found in Mesopotamian exegesis and Mesopotamian literature at large. The present paper collects the philological arguments that can be found in debate poetry, discusses their discursive role and studies their parallels in Sumerian and Akkadian literature. Particular attention is given to the phrase mu-ni|bi-gin₇ || kīma šumīšū-ma, “like its name,” which is argued to be a technical term for introducing such philological discussions. Akkadian debate poems are lighthearted texts, but elucubrations of this type are common in serious texts as well. This fact suggests we should take these arguments seriously, however unpalatable from a modern etymological point of view they might be, just like the fanciful etymologies of Plato’s Cratylus.
References
Assman, J. 2003. Etymographie: Zeichen im Jenseits der Sprache. Pp. 37–63 in Hieroglyphen: Stationen einer anderen abendländischen Grammatologie, ed. A. Assman, and J. Assman. Munich: Fink.Search in Google Scholar
Black, J. A. 1992. Some Structural Features of Sumerian Narrative Poetry. Pp. 71–101 in Mesopotamian Epic Literature. Oral or Aural?, eds. M. E. Vogelzang, and H. L. J. Vanstiphout. Lewiston, Queenston, Lampeter: Edwin Mellen.Search in Google Scholar
Borger, R. 1973. Die Weihe eines Enlil-Priesters. Bibliotheca Orientalis 30: 163–176.Search in Google Scholar
Bottéro, J. 1977. Les noms de Marduk, l’écriture et la ‘logique’ en Mésopotamie ancienne. Pp. 5–28 in Essays on the Ancient near East in Memory of Jacob Joel Finkelstein, ed. M. De Jong Ellis. Hamden: Archon.Search in Google Scholar
Civil, M. 1965, Le debat sumérien entre la houe et l’araire. Édition critique, traduction et commentaire. Unpublished PhD dissertation: Paris.Search in Google Scholar
———. 2007. Early Semitic Loanwords in Sumerian. Pp. 11–33 in Studies Presented to Robert D.Biggs, 4 June 2004, ed. M. Roth, W. Farber, M. Stolper, and P. von Bechtolsheim. Assyriological Studies vol. 27. Chicago: The Oriental Institute.Search in Google Scholar
Edzard, D. O. 1968/1969. Die Inschriften der altakkadischen Rollsiegel. Archiv für Orientforschung 22: 12–20.Search in Google Scholar
———. 1982. Aufbau des Syllabars “Proto-Ea”. Pp. 42–61 in Societies and Languages of the Ancient near East. Studies in Honor of I.M. Diakonoff, ed. M. A. Dandamayev. Warminster: Aris & Phillips.Search in Google Scholar
Falkenstein, A. 1960. Eine Inschrift Waradsîns aus Babylon. Baghdader Mitteilungen 1: 25–40.Search in Google Scholar
Finkel, I. L. 2005. Explanatory Commentary on a List of Materia Medica. Pp. 279–283 in Literary and Scholastic Texts of the First Millennium BC, ed. I. Spar, and W. G. Lambert. Cuneiform Texts in the Metropolitan Museum of Art vol. 2. New York: Metropolitan Museum.Search in Google Scholar
Frahm, E. 2010. Reading the Tablet, the Exta, and the Body: The Hermeneutics of Cuneiform Signs in Babylonian and Assyrian Text Commentaries and Divinatory Texts. Pp. 91–141 in Divination and Interpretation of Signs in the Ancient World, ed. A. Annus. Oriental Institute Seminars vol. 6. Chicago: The University of Chicago.Search in Google Scholar
———. 2011. Babylonian and Assyrian Text Commentaries. Origins of Interpretation. Guides to the Mesopotamian Textual Record no. 5. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag.Search in Google Scholar
Frayne, D. R. 1990. Old Babylonian Period (2003–1595 BC). The Royal Inscriptions of Mesopotamia. Early Periods vol. 4. Toronto, Buffalo, London: University of Toronto.10.3138/9781442678033Search in Google Scholar
Gabbay, U. 2014. Pacifying the Hearts of the Gods. Sumerian Emesal Prayers of the First Millennium BC. Heidelberger Emesal-Studien vol. 1. Harrassowitz: Wiesbaden.Search in Google Scholar
Gabbay, U., I. Finkel, and E. Jiménez 2015. Commentary on Ritual Text (CCP 7.2.u103). Cuneiform Commentaries Project. (https://ccp.yale.edu/P469985).Search in Google Scholar
Gabriel, G. 2014. enūma eliš – Weg zu einer globalen Weltordnung: Pragmatik, Struktur und Semantik des babylonischen “Lieds auf Marduk”. Orientalische Religionen in der Antike vol. 12. Mohr Siebeck: Tübingen.Search in Google Scholar
———. 2018. Decreeing Fate and Name-Giving in Enūma Eliš. Approaching a Fundamental Mesopotamian Concept with Special Consideration of the Underlying Assumptions and of the Condition of Possibility of Human Knowledge. Pp. 163–178 in Text and Image. Proceedings of the 61e Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, ed. P. Attinger, A. Cavigneaux, C. Mittermayer, and M. Novák. Leuven, Paris, Bristol: Leuven.10.2307/j.ctv1q26x24.21Search in Google Scholar
George, A. R. 1992. Babylonian Topographical Texts. Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta vol. 40. Peeters: Leuven.Search in Google Scholar
Hruška, B. 1969. Das spätbabylonische Lehrgedicht “Inannas Erhöhung”. Archív Orientální 37: 473–522.Search in Google Scholar
Jacobsen, T. 1987. The Harps that Once… Sumerian Poetry in Translation. New Haven, London: Yale University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Jiménez, E. 2014. Commentary on Therapeutic (CCP 4.2.W). Cuneiform Commentaries Project. (https://ccp.yale.edu/P412240).Search in Google Scholar
——— 2016. Commentary on Divine Names (CCP 7.1.6.A.b). Cuneiform Commentaries Project. (https://ccp.yale.edu/P461230).Search in Google Scholar
———. 2017. The Babylonian Disputation Poems. With Editions of the Series of the Poplar, Palm and Vine, the Series of the Spider, and the Story of the Poor, Forlorn Wren. Cultures and History of the Ancient Near East vol. 87. Leiden: Brill.Search in Google Scholar
———. 2018. New Fragments and Extracts of Akkadian Disputation and Fables Chiefly from Babylonian Schools. Orientalia 87: 157–168.Search in Google Scholar
Klein, J. 1976. Šulgi and Gilgameš: Two Brother-Peers (Šulgi O). Pp. 271–292 in Kramer Aniversary Volume. Cuneiform Studies in Honor of Samuel Noah Kramer, ed. B. L. Eichler. Alter Orient und Altes Testament vol. 25. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Butzon & Bercker Kevelaer.Search in Google Scholar
Lambert, W. G. 1967. The Gula Hymn of Bulluṭsa-Rabi. Orientalia 36: 105–132.Search in Google Scholar
———. 1974. The Seed of Kingship. Pp. 427–444 in Le Palais et la Royauté (Archéologie et Civilisation), ed. P. Garelli. Paris: Paul Geuthner.Search in Google Scholar
———. 1982. The Hymn to the Queen of Nippur. Pp. 173–218 in Zikir Šumim: Assyriological Studies Presented to F. R. Kraus on the Occasion of His Seventieth Birthday, ed. G. van Driel, T. J. H. Krispijn, M. Stol, and K. R. Veenhof. Leiden: Brill.Search in Google Scholar
———. 1987/1990. Lugalsisa. Reallexikon der Assyriologie 7: 151–152.Search in Google Scholar
———. 1990. Etymology. Pp. 214–216 in A Dictionary of Biblical Interpretation, ed. R. J. Coggin, and J. L. Houlden. London: Philadelphia.Search in Google Scholar
———. 2000. Babylonian Linguistics. Pp. 217–231 in Languages and Cultures in Contact. At the Crossroads of Civilizations in the Syro-Mesopotamian Realm. Proceedings of the 42th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, ed. K. Van Lerberghe, and G. Voet. Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta vol. 96. Leuven: Peeter.Search in Google Scholar
———. 2013. Babylonian Creation Myths. Mesopotamian Civilizations vol. 16. Eisenbrauns: Winona Lake.Search in Google Scholar
Landsberger, B. 1969. The Series Lú=Ša and Related Texts. Materialien zum sumerischen Lexikon Vol. 12. Roma: Pontificium Institutum Biblicum.Search in Google Scholar
Limet, H. 1968. L’anthroponymie sumérienne dans les documents de la 3e dynastie d’Ur. Les Belles Lettres: Paris.Search in Google Scholar
Litke, R. L. 1998. A Reconstruction of the Assyro-Babylonian God-Lists. An : da-nu-um and An : Anu šá amēli. Texts from the Babylonian Collection Vol. 3. Yale Babylonian Collection: New Haven.Search in Google Scholar
Massé, H. 1973. Ibn al-Faqih al-Hamadani. Abrégé du Livre des pays. Damas: Institut Français de Damas.10.4000/books.ifpo.6217Search in Google Scholar
Mattock, J. N. 1991. The Arabic Tradition: Origin and Developments. Pp. 153–163 in Dispute Poems and Dialogues in the Ancient and Medieval near East, eds. G. J. Reinink, and H. L. J. Vanstiphout. Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta Vol. 42. Louvain: Peeters.Search in Google Scholar
Maul, S. M. 1999. Das Wort im Worte, Orthographie und Etymologie als hermeneutische Verfahren babylonischer Gelehrter. 1–18 in Commentaries/Kommentare, ed. G. W. Most. Aporemata Vol. 4. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Search in Google Scholar
———. 2005. Nos. 2–18. Bilingual (Sumerian-Akkadian) Hymns from the Seleucid-Arsacid Period. Pp. 11–116 in Cuneiform Texts in the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Volume II: Literary and Scholastic Texts of the First Millennium BC, ed. I. Spar, and W. G. Lambert. Cuneiform Texts in the Metropolitan Museum of Art vol. 2. New York: Metropolitan Museum.Search in Google Scholar
Michalowski, P. 1990. Presence at the Creation. Pp. 381–396 in Lingering over Words: Studies in Ancient Near Eastern Literature in Honor of William L. Moran, eds. T. Abusch, J. Huehnergard, and P. Steinkeller. Atlanta: Scholars Press.10.1163/9789004369559_024Search in Google Scholar
Perniss, P., R. L. Thompson, and G. Vigliocco. 2010. Iconicity as a General Property of Language: Evidence from Spoken and Signed Languages. Frontiers in Psychology 1: 1–15.10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00227Search in Google Scholar
Poebel, A. 1929. Sumerische Untersuchungen IV. Zeitschrift für Assyriologie 39: 129–164.10.1515/zava.1929.39.1-3.129Search in Google Scholar
Pomponio, F. 1978. Nabû. Il culto e la figura di un dio del Pantheon babilonese ed assiro. Studi Semitici Vol. 51. Istituto di Studi del Vicino Oriente: Roma.Search in Google Scholar
Reinink, G. J., and H. L. J. Vanstiphout. 1991. Dispute Poems and Dialogues in the Ancient and Mediaeval Near East. Forms and Types of Literary Debates in Semitic and Related Literatures. Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta Vol. 42. Peeters: Leuven.Search in Google Scholar
Schuster, H. S., and B. Landsberger. 1955. Das Vokabular Sb. 89–153 in Materialien zum sumerischen Lexikon 3, ed. B. Landsberger. Roma: Pontificium Institutum Biblicum.Search in Google Scholar
Sedley, D. 1998. The Etymologies in Plato’s Cratylus. Journal of Hellenic Studies 118: 140–154.10.2307/632235Search in Google Scholar
———. 2003. Plato’s Cratylus. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Selz, G. J. 2002. ‘Babilismus’ Und Die Gottheit dNindagar. Pp. 647–684 in Ex Mesopotamia et Syria Lux. Festscrift für Manfried Dietrich zu seinem 65. Geburtstag, ed. O. Loretz, K. A. Metzler, and H. Schaudig. Alter Orient und Altes Testament vol. 281. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag.Search in Google Scholar
Sjöberg, Å. W. 1960. Der Mondgott Nanna-Suen in den sumerischen Überlieferung. I. Teil: Texte. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Search in Google Scholar
Streck, M. P. 2004. Dattelpalme und Tamariske in Mesopotamien nach dem akkadischen Streitgespräch. Zeitschrift für Assyriologie 94: 250–290.10.1515/zava.2004.94.2.250Search in Google Scholar
van de Mieroop, M. 2015. Philosophy before the Greeks. The Pursuit of Truth in Ancient Babylonia. Princeton: Princeton University Press.10.23943/princeton/9780691157184.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
van Dijk, J. J. A. 1983. Lugal ud me-lám-bi nir-ĝál. Le récit épique et didactique des Travaux de Ninurta, du Déluge et de la Nouvelle Création. Texte, traduction et introduction. Leiden: Brill.Search in Google Scholar
Zgoll, A. 1997. Der Rechtsfall der En-ḫedu-Ana im Lied nin-me-šara. Alter Orient und Altes Testament vol. 246. Ugarit-Verlag: Münster.Search in Google Scholar
© 2018 Walter de Gruyter Inc., Boston/Berlin
