gender symmetry in disparagement in Sumerian texts

Men have long been subject to more disparagement, including dehumanizing invective, than have women. Men historically have been figured as dogs and treated like pigs. Invective against men has even supported castration culture. Harsh disparagement of men can be found in Sumerian texts from Mesopotamia about four thousand years ago. Sumerian texts, however, include some similar forms disparaging women. To advance gender equality, modern societies must strive to imitate and expand the ancient Sumerian practice of gender symmetry in disparagement.

Consider, for example, a Sumerian text that harshly disparages and dehumanizes an unnamed man. Stringing together a wide variety of insults, the text begins:

He is good seed of a dog, offspring of a wolf!
He is stench of a mongoose, an unruly hyena cub, a fox with a crab’s covering,
a monkey not pleasing to its homeland, its judgment confused.
His face is disfigured, his judgment is muddled, his intelligence is (X).

{ a dug₃-ga ur-ra u₂-numun ur-bar-ra-kam
ir ^dnin-kilim amar kir₄ cu nu-zu ka₅-a bar kucu₂^ku₆
ugu₂ugu₄-bi kur-bi-ce₃ nu-sag₉ jalga-bi suh₃-a
muc₃-me-ni dim₂ hul jalga-ni i₃-lu₃ dim₂-ma-ni X }[1]

This man is called a cripple, a brazen thief, and a son of hound. He’s charged with spreading evil talk, being quarrelsome, and never calming quarrels. With any apparent sense of irony, the man being insulted is said to speak with an “evil mouth {ka hul}.”

Other Sumerian texts dehumanize men in ways from specifically contextual to broadly applicable. In a dialogue between contending scribal-school officials, one characterizes the other in their work context: “an idiot stretches out linen for the bugs {lu₂-tumu eḫi-e gada ba-an-la₂}” and “a pig weaves a counting cloth { šaḫa₂ tu₉u₂-tu-gu-um al-tuku₅-tuku₅}.”[2] Taken from that work context, “idiot” and “pig” readily serve to disparage men generally. Another Sumerian text thus calls a man “a fool {lu₂ lil₂-la₂}” and “a pig splattered with mud {cah₂ lu-hu-um-ta su₃-a},” as well as “a dog {ur}.”[3]

Women are similarly disparaged in Sumerian texts. A diatribe against a woman begins with the same term used for a disparaged man, “the evil mouth {ka ḫulu-a}.”[4] Like the man who is a brazen thief, a woman is characterized as “having no shame {teš₂ nu-tuku}.”[5] Particularly telling is the gender-symmetric treatment of dogs. A diatribe known as “Woman perfecting evil” calls a woman a “horny dog {ur-˹gi₇˺}.”[6] In a dispute between two women, one calls the other, “a dog raising its paw, always after men {⸢ur⸣ šu zi-ga egir mu-lu-ne-⸢ka⸣}.”[7] If men are dogs, women are also dogs in Sumerian literature. Moral failings match across gender: “an unfaithful penis matches an unfaithful vagina {jic₃ lul-la gal₄-la lul-la-ke₄ ba-ni-in-sig₁₀}.”[8]

In contrast to ancient Greek and Latin literature in which men’s genitals are figured much worse than women’s, Sumerian literature gender-symmetrically disparages both. A man is disparaged as having “flaccid penis, blocked butt, a single testicle hanging down {ŋeš₃ per gu-du keše₂ šeri AŠ tu-lu}.”[9] A woman is similarly sexually disparaged:

distorted butt, small vulva, extremely long pubic hair!
thick genitals, person with blocked up, sick womb!

{ gu-du zar/zara₅ galla₄la tur siki galla₄la gid₂-gid₂
pe-zi₂-ir ḪAR lu₂ ša₃ la₂ pa₄-ḫal-la }[10]

A “flaccid penis” corresponds to a “small vulva” in suggesting sexual nonfunctionality. A “blocked butt” is similar to a “distorted butt” and a “blocked up, sick womb” in indicating unhealthful blockages. Such terms don’t generally characterize Sumerian references to genitals. Sumerian love poems describe women’s vulvas with earthy physicality and praise them for being sweet. Moreover, women in these poems ardently seek sexual intercourse with men and delight in receiving men’s penises. Genitals could be disparaged in Sumerian literature, but at least such disparagement was gender-symmetric in significant ways.

Streams of insults directed against men and women are summarized similarly. For men, a summary rhetorical question derides the man’s masculinity: “And you, you are a man {u₃ ze₄-e lu₂-lu₇-me-en}?”[11] Insulting a woman uses a similar rhetorical question, “And you, you are a woman {u₃ ze₄-e munus-me-en}?”[12] Sumerian culture valued both women and men. Individual persons in that culture valued these different gender identities.[13] Valuing one’s own gender identity makes such gender-categorical insults effective.

Gender symmetry in some forms of disparagement in Sumerian literature doesn’t imply gender equality in disparagement generally. In a Sumerian text, a father castigates his disobedient son at length:

Numbskull, windbag, fingernail, toenail, liar, windbag, burglar, foul-mouthed man, stinking man, rude, rabid man, drooling idiot … crippled, foul-smelling necromancer, stinking oil, stinking man … stinker, stinking milk, stinking butt that stinks and stinks again, a dog that sniffs the ground, windbag.

{ saĝ-DU-a lu₂-tumu šu-si ĝiri₃-si lu₂-lul lu₂-tumu lu₂ la-ga e₂ buru₃-buru₃ lu₂ sikil du₃-a lu₂ hab₂-ba-am₃ na-ĝa₂-ah lu₂ mu₂-da eme za₃-ga bar-bar sag šu zi bi₂-ib-du11-ga sag ur₃-ur₃ lu₂ hu-hu-nu ir-ha-an du11-ga ir-hul-a i₃-hab₂ lu₂ hab₂-ba ir-ha-an-di pil₂-pil₂-la₂ x-hul-a ga-an-šub niĝ₂-tur hab₂-ba-am₃ ki-sim gu-du hab₂-ba in-ur₅ in-da-ur₅ ur-gi₇ saĝ us₂-sa si-im-si-im al-ak-e lu₂-tumu }[14]

No record exists of a father speaking similarly to his disobedient daughter. Later Assyrian literature developed even more pungent disparagement of men. Bel-etir, son of Iba, is called a “shit bucket of a fart factory {išpīk zê ṣarritim}.”[15] Gender equality will not be achieved until women are similarly insulted, or both men and women are always treated with dignity and respect.

* * * * *

Read more:

• intimate friendship, not Shamhat, civilized Enkidu and Gilgamesh
• reconstructing ancient songs for schoolboys: Juvenal vs. sugar & spice
• Marbod of Rennes in history of gender-equality double-talk

Notes:

[1] He is a good seed of a dog (Diatribe C) (t.5.4.12) vv. 1-4, cuneiform transliteration (composite text) and English translation of Sjöberg (1972) (modified insubstantially) via the Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature, second edition (ETCSL). The “(X)” indicates a lost term. The subsequent quote, “evil mouth {ka hul},” is similarly from He is a good seed of a dog, v. 9.

[2] Two scribes (Dialogue 1), vv. 14, 15, cuneiform transliteration (composite text) and English translation of Matuszak (2019b) via DSSt: Datenbank sumerischer Streitliteratur {Database of Sumerian Dispute Literature}. For a monograph on this text, Johnson & Geller (2015).

This text comes from the context of the Old Babylonian “Tablet house / House in which tables are assigned {Edubba / e₂-dub-ba-a},” c. 1800-1600 BGC. On disputes in the Edubba-a, Ceccarelli (2020). For a related text, The advice of a supervisor to a younger scribe (E-dub-ba-a C) (t.5.1.3).

[3] A diatribe against Engar-dug (Diatribe B) (t.5.4.11) vv. 1, 8, 17, cuneiform transliteration (composite text) and English translation of Sjöberg (1972) via ETCSL.

This and related diatribes and disputes likely from the Edubba-a probably were sung or performed. Ceccarelli (2020) pp. 49-51, Matuszak (2023) p. 608. In November, 2020, the Zipang collective performed a Sumerian literary debate between two women (apparently an adaptation of Two Women B) at Being Human: A Festival of the Humanities, a UK national humanities festival. The Zipang collective also performed this debate at the Fourth Workshop on Gender, Methodology and the Ancient Near East, June 3-4, 2021, based in the University of Helsinki, Finland. This workshop apparently excluded meninist perspectives.

[4] Matuszak (2016) p. 230. The Evil Mouth {Ka hulu-a} has not yet been edited or published, but Matuszak has a forthcoming edition. For further discussion of this text, Matuszak (219a) and Matuszak (2023).

[5] Two Women B, v. 30, cuneiform transliteration and English translation via DSSt. The insult text of tablet MS 2865 similarly describes a woman: “She has absolutely no shame, she’s acting there as if she were the mistress of the house {teš2 nu-tuku-e nin e2-a-gen7 mi-ni-in-AK}.” Matuszal (2016) p. 231.

[6] Woman Perfecting Evil, v. 4, from Matuszak (2023) pp. 607-8. Woman Perfecting Evil also has not yet been edited. Matuszak has an edition forthcoming. In context, “horny dog” apparently implies a licentious dog.

[7] Two Women B, v. 155, via DSSt. The subsequent verse declares, “The young men, who live in the city quarter, can’t sleep because of her {⸢mu-ru⸣-uš tur dag-ge₄-a til₃-la u₃ ⸢nu⸣-[mu]-⸢un⸣-ši-ku-ku}.”

Ancient Mesopotamian texts could use “prostitute,” appropriately contextualized, as disparagement for a woman. In Two Women B, one woman called the other woman “a prostitute {kar-ke₄}.” That woman brought a lawsuit and sought a verdict against this offense:

She called me a whore.
She caused my husband to divorce me. Grant me a just verdict!

{ kar-ke₄ ma-an-du₁₁
dam mu-un-taka₄ di ge-na dab₅-mu-ub }

Two Women B, vv. 170-1, via DSSt.

Whether women prostitutes existed in ancient Mesopotamia has recently become bitterly disputed among scholars. Matuszak tactfully footnoted:

While this is not the place to review the discussion revolving around the term kar-ke₄/ḫarimtu, it is clear from 2WB 152 et passim that kar-ke₄ is employed as a swearword (‘whore!’) and alleges extra-marital sex, since the woman so called is repudiated by her husband on the grounds of adultery accusations.

Matuszak (2019a) p. 261, ft. 19. More obliquely, Matuszak elsewhere footnoted:

One of the protagonists calls the other a kar-ke₄, which in this context can justifiably be translated as ‘whore.’

Matuszak (2016) p. 230, ft. 4. Discussing a treaty between the Assyrian king Aššur-nerari V (reigned 755–745 BGC) and Mati’-ilu, king of Arpad, another scholar footnoted the translation of ḫarimtu:

There has been some debate regarding the translation of ḫarimtu as prostitute. Julia Assante argued for its reinterpretation as a single woman, who operates free of direct male authority, rather than a prostitute (1998). Jerrold S. Cooper more recently presented the case for its translation once again as prostitute (2016a: 211–212). In this text, prostitute seems the most likely translation, given that the imagery is placed to insult Mati’ilu and imply the loss of both his sexual potency and agency.

Konstantopoulos (2020) p. 365, n. 26. Discussion of prostitution in ancient Mesopotamia seems to me a quite telling intellectual debacle. See notes [3] and [5] in my post on men and female prostitutes from ancient Mesopotamia to medieval Europe. On the continuing influence of this intellectual debacle, see note [25] in my post on Enkidu and Shamhat.

[8] Proverbs: collection 1, Segment D, 6.1.159 (l. 42), cuneiform transliteration and English translation via ETCSL.

[9] Two scribes (Dialogue 1), v. 11, cuneiform transliteration (composite text) and English translation of Matuszak (2019b) via DSSt. “This is one of the classic lines of Sumerian scatalogical invective.” Johnson & Geller (2015) p. 107. Johnson & Geller, however, have a significantly different translation of Two Scribes, v. 11: “(You have) a penis stuck up your ass, with only one testicle hanging down.” Id. Knowledge of Sumerian is still regrettably less than perfect. Further scholarly progress should clarify this classic insult.

[10] Two Women B, vv. 148-9, cuneiform transliteration and English translation via DSSt. Similarly, “no man who sleeps with her takes pleasure in her (too) small vulva {galla₄^la tur-tur-ra lu₂ nu₂ da-a-ni la-ba-an-ḫul₂-l[e]}.” The Evil Mouth {Ka hulu-a}, text Ax i 17, from Matuszak (2019a) p. 263. In medieval European literature, in contrast, women sought to make their vaginas smaller.

Recognizing the mutuality of heterosexual relations, an Early Dynastic (dating about 2900-2350 BGC) insult associated female sexual unattractiveness with male sexual failure:

she who causes (the penis) to be shriveled

{ ḫáš/ḫaš₄ giš-bír / ⸢mu-ḫa⸣-ab-bi-ir-tum }

BT 9,20′ / ED 78, Sumerian / Akkadian transliteration and English translation from Klein (2003) pp. 142-3.

[11] Dialog 2, v. 75, cuneiform transliteration of Manuel Ceccarelli via DSSt, English translation from Matuszak (2023) p. 609.

[12] Two Women B, vv. 102, 120, cuneiform transliteration and English translation from from Matuszak (2023) p. 609. The DSSt translation has, “And you, you belong to womankind?!”

[13] Cf. Konstantopoulos (2020), which doesn’t recognize women’s gender advantages and adopts a totalizing myth of patriarchy. Sumerian literary debate poems depict the ideal role for men as being a scribe, and the ideal role for women as being a homemaker. Many more opportunities thus existed for women to be recognized as “ideal women” than for men to be recognized as “ideal men.” Mutuszak discussed this issue in a podcast entitled, in accordance with dominant gynocentric imperatives, “Misogyny and the ideal Sumerian woman.” See Thin Edge of the Wedge, Episode 2.

[14] The Father and His Disobedient Son / Der Vater und sein missratener Sohn, vv. 147-158, cuneiform transliteration and English translation (modified insubstantially) from De Zorzi (2019) p. 223, based mainly on Sjöberg (1975).

[15] Lackey of a dead god, incipit “O Bel-etir, you kidnapped catamite, doubly so” (SAA 3.30), Assyrian text from Livingstone (1989) p. 66, English translation from Foster (2005) p. 1021. For an excerpt with notes and commentary, De Zorzi (2019) p. 227. This text is from the seventh century BGC. Id. p. 226.

[image] Stef Connor and Phoebe Haines performing their adaptation of disparaging the man Engardu based on the Sumerian text Engardu the Fool / Diatribe Against Engar-dug. Via YouTube.

References:

Ceccarelli, Manuel. 2020. “An Introduction to the Sumerian School Disputes: Subject, Structure, Function and Context.” Chapter 3 (pp. 33-55) in Enrique Jiménez and Catherine Mittermayer, eds. Disputation Literature in the Near East and Beyond. Berlin: De Gruyter.

De Zorzi, Nicla. 2019. ‘“Rude Remarks not Fit to Smell:” Negative Value Judgements Relating to Sensory Perceptions in Ancient Mesopotamia.’ Pp. 217-252 in Annette Schellenberg and Thomas Krüger, eds. Sounding Sensory Profiles in the Ancient Near East. SBL Ancient Near East Monographs Series 25. Atlanta, G: SBL Press.

Foster, Benjamin R. 2005. Before the Muses: An Anthology of Akkadian Literature. Third Edition. Potomac, MD: CDL Press.

Johnson, Justin Cale and Markham J. Geller. 2015. The Class Reunion: An Annotated Translation and Commentary on the Sumerian Dialogue, Two Scribes. Leiden: Brill.

Klein, Jacob. 2003. “An Old Babylonian Edition of an Early Dynastic Collection of Insults (BT 9).” Pp. 135–149 in Walther Sallaberger, Konrad Volk, and Annette Zgoll, eds.Literatur, Politik Und Recht in Mesopotamien: Festschrift Für Claus Wilcke. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.

Livingstone, Alasdair. 1989. Court Poetry and Literary Miscellanea. State Archives of Assyria, v. 3. Helsinki, Finland: Helsinki University Press.

Konstantopoulos, Gina. 2020. “My Men Have Become Women and My Women Men: Gender Identity and Cursing in Mesopotamia.” Die Welt Des Orients: Journal for the Study of Christian Social Practice. 50(2): 358–75.

Matuszak, Jana. 2016. “‘She Is Not Fit for Womanhood’: The Ideal Housewife According to Sumerian Literary Texts.” Chapter 13 (pp. 228-254) in Brigitte Lion and Cécile Michel, eds. The Role of Women in Work and Society in the Ancient near East. Berlin: De Gruyter.

Matuszak, Jana. 2019a. “Assessing Misogyny in Sumerian Disputations and Diatribes.” Pp. 259-272 in Agnès Garcia-Ventura and Saana Svärd, eds. Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Gender, Methodology, and the Ancient Near East. Barcelona: Edicions de la Universitat de Barcelona.

Matuszak, Jana. 2019b. “Es Streite Wer Kann! Ein Neuer Rekonstruktions- Und Interpretationversuch Für Das Sumerische Schulstreitgespräch ‚Dialog 1‘.” Zeitschrift Für Assyriologie Und Vorderasiatische Archäologie. 109(1): 1–47.

Matuszak, Jana. 2023. “Humour in Sumerian Didactic Literature.” Pp. 597-612 in Robert Rollinger, Irene Madreiter, Martin Lang, and Cinzia Pappi, eds. The Intellectual Heritage of the Ancient near East: Papers Held at the 64th Rencontre Assyriologique International and the 12th Melammu Symposium, University of Innsbruck, July 16-20, 2018. Vienna: Austrian Academy of Sciences Press.

Sjöberg, Åke W. 1972. “‘He Is a Good Seed of a Dog’ and ‘Engardu the Fool.’” Journal of Cuneiform Studies. 24(4): 107–19.

Sjöberg, Åke W. 1973. “Der Vater Und Sein Missratener Sohn.” Journal of Cuneiform Studies. 25(3): 105–69.