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 .
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 20 citations exist upstream.