Poverty, Pessimism, and Comedy in Ancient Mesopotamia - Oldest Stories Podcast 

We're SO back. 🎉

RU-vid randomly suggest this to me, and it sounds like an interesting subject (I'm an anthropologist). I can't wait to have enough time to hear it :]

It strikes me as I listen that it might be a work using an on-the-face-of-it reasonably possible scenario, that of the master thinking a plan of action bad if one as lowly and unsuccessful as a slave thinks it a good idea, to present something we run into nowadays as well, that of there seemingly being a proverb in favor of everything and, in fact, even opposite ones on every subject. For example: "The squeaky wheel gets the grease." Set against "The quacking duck gets shot." (Which I believe I personally first ran into in a Bugs Bunny cartoon.) It just seems like they'd've been completely aware of that and to me feels funnier that way, so I like it. More objectively, it does seem they'd've had the same "problem" (some "wise" saying available to back up any chosen course of action) and that the story's nominal structure is veyr thin and quite just that: nominal, not enhanced at any point, not questioned either, just there providing the backdrop to deliver the pairings. And it seems that in any audience, the more mixed the better (ages, sexes, just... lots of "natural" antagonists to give meaningful looks at a partner or neighbor as one or another pairing clearly hits home), there could then be quite a bit of self-generated humor. Which is the best kind as one seldom gets wrong what he himself will think funny. Wrong to himself that is. Others might easily have a different take on things. So the performer could likely count upon a longer time on stage, less time dumped unceromoniously in the nearest dung heap...

possible interpretation of the dog balls proverb: a pair of wrinkly dog balls may not hold much appeal to most of us... but to their owner, they are precious. (and delectable.)

The dog and "only take, not put down" joke... well yes, clearly just funny in average use, and we have a REALLY good little comic version on the internet today (the "only throw... no take" one). But consider who else, than "dog", has an "only take, not put down" problem: kings and religious leaders (then and now, for that matter). So maybe originally it was just "dog" or maybe not, perhaps it was originally, or either way, for long, long times, a remedy of the grousing kind to a local potentate, of whatever level, being somewhat graspy. (Naturally, a bigger problem of the kind always eventually had more severe remedies enacted.) Hence, the idea would be that the king was being no more than a dog, not even human, in his graspiness.

Is there enough historical data on banditry and piracy in Mesopotamia?

Mmm... you know, or never more than a joke.