Humor as Pedagogy: Cases from Mesopotamia in the First Millennium bce

Aug 21, 2026

Humor in cuneiform texts faces a central problem: identifying which writings were intended to be humorous, since no clear genre equivalent to “comedy” exists in Sumerian or Akkadian corpora. Applying established humor theories enables modern scholars to recognize potentially humorous content and shared humor mechanisms that cross cultural distance. The study also shows that many humorous compositions originate in scribal educational settings, especially school texts used within curricula, and categorizes humorous forms found in the corpus.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages27

Reading Time1 h 8 min

AccessFree to download

Introduction

Challenges in identifying humorous cuneiform texts

Humor theories and recognition of humorous content

Types of humorous material in the cuneiform corpus

Humorous content in scribal education and school texts

Journal of Near Eastern Studies Forum Humor as Pedagogy: Cases from Mesopotamia in the First Millennium bce Shana Zaia, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam* Introduction ** Any discussion of humor in cuneiform texts has to acknowledge the primary challenge that has consistently plagued studies of humor in ancient Mesopotamia: identifying the texts that were intended to be humorous in the ﬁrst place. There is no clear, discrete genre of“comedy” in the Sumerian or Akkadian textual corpora. Moreover, most humor is culturally determined, and the distance between the sensibilities of ancient Mesopotamians and modern readers means that it is * I gladly dedicate this study to the wonderful students of my Akkadian Seminar “Humor in Mesopotamia,” which took place atthe University of Vienna in Winter Semester 2021: Robert Allabauer, Margareta Divjak-Mirwald, Craig Harris, Nicole Lundeen, Sanja Masic-Irlbek, Nicolaas Verhelst, and Agnes Woitzuck. Thankyou for an enjoyable semester of learning, discussing, and (most importantly) laughing together. Moreover, I wish to recognize and thank one of my former professors, Benjamin R. Foster, who pioneered humor studies in Assyriology and whom I credit with inspiring my interest in this topic. I also owe immense gratitude to Niek Veldhuis for his careful reading of an earlier version of this work and his insightful comments, which have greatly improved this study, and to the anonymous JNES reviewers for their feedback. Any remaining faults are my own. ** Abbreviations used in this article follow those of The Assyrian Dictionary of the University of Chicago (Chicago, 1956–2020) . not always apparent what ancient scribes considered funny or not.1 However, while the designation of a text or components thereof as “humorous” will always remain subjective to some extent, the application of established humor theories has assisted modern scholars in identifying potentially humorous content and humor universals that transcend cultural differences.2 In particular, scholars have utilized incongruity, superiority, and relief/release theories which explain what makes something funny, to persuasively identify several Sumerian and Akkadian compositions that were likely to be humorous in nature.3 Moreover, humorous content found in the cuneiform corpus can be subdivided Other abbreviations include DCCLT = “Digital Corpus of Cuneiform Lexical Texts,” [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/dcclt/index](http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/dcclt/index) [.html](.html), accessed December 2024; SAA 6 = Kwasman and Parpola, Legal Transactions (1991) . 1 Milstein,“Teaching with a Dose of Humor”(2022), 263–64, with further bibliography. 2 On this concept, see Guidi,“Humor Universals”(2017) . 3 These theories are not mutually exclusive. Incongruity theory locates humor in a disconnect between expectations and what occurs; superiority theory (also known as hostility theory) relies upon deriding or demeaning an “other”/out-group, and relief or release theory is the use of humor to release excess energy or negative emotions. There are many sources for discussions of humor theory, e.g., Attardo,“Linguistics of Humor”(2008), Raskin,“Practice of Journal of Near Eastern Studies, volume 84, number 1, April 2025. © 2025 The University of Chicago. All rights reserved. Published by The University of Chicago Press. [https://doi.org/10.1086/735029](https://doi.org/10.1086/735029) 132 ✦ Journal of Near Eastern Studies into different but recognizable types: parodic, anecdotal/narrative, referential/allusive, ironic, based in word play, absurd, hyperbolic, caused by ambiguity/ misunderstanding, bawdy or sexual, insulting,“cringe,”dark or gallows, physical or slapstick, visual, repetitious, surprising, based on punchlines/“one-liners,” sarcastic, and “gross out,” among other forms. Since Benjamin Foster’s groundbreaking 1974 article, several studies have expanded the corpus of what can be recognized as humorous cuneiform compo

FAQs

Why is it difficult to identify humor in ancient Mesopotamian cuneiform texts?

There is no discrete “comedy” genre in the Sumerian or Akkadian corpora, and what ancient scribes considered funny is not always apparent to modern readers.

How do scholars use humor theories in cuneiform studies?

They apply theories such as incongruity, superiority, and relief/release to identify potentially humorous elements and humor universals beyond cultural differences.

Where does much of the humorous cuneiform material come from?

Many humorous compositions are connected to educational contexts, particularly “school texts” preserved from ancient classroom practice.

Aug 21, 2026

Upload by Felix Montgomery