Based on the visible traces and the attestation in (Frg. 2) rev. III 3´, we propose this tentative restoration. An alternative, Ḫuḫašarpa/i (infra (Frg. 2) obv. II 14´, and passim; II 23´-24´ for the spelling with -i-) seems less likely. Ultimately, we cannot entirely exclude a different name.
For the rare usage of SÚR (which follows Mesopotamian conventions) instead of SUR₁₄.DÙ.AMUŠEN, typical of the Hittite texts, see Miller J.L. 2004b, 12.
Likely EGIR-an kat-ta(-)/ GAM(-), or similar, with Sakuma Y. 2009b, II, 594.
This spelling presumably stands for 1-(iš)+ya+kán (cf. previous line, 1-iš).
|