CTH 532.12 is a collection of lunar eclipse omens during the different night watches. Although only protases survive, it is obvious that the text is related to the later tablets 15 and 19 of Enūma Anu Enlil. The text is attested in one Akkadian exemplar (A: KUB 4.64+). The fragment CTH 532.7/KUB 8.6 could belong to the same text. Similar omens in Hittite translation are found in KUB 8.3 rev., but it is unclear if it really does run parallel.

The text was copied by E. Weidner in KUB 4. A first edition was drafted by Riemschneider K.K. 2004a: 55-56(A), a partial edition can be found in Rochberg-Halton F. 1988a: 168.

A: Piece of the upper left and a fragment from the lower reverse of a single column tablet without rulings or paragraph lines. The spacing of signs follows Mesopotamian conventions.

A: Layout and spacing of the tablet follow Mesopotamian conventions rather than Hittite word space. Signs typical for the Middle Assyrian variant called ‘Assyro-Mittanian’ (Wilhelm G. 1992h; Weeden M. 2012d: 238-248) found in the text are SAR with a ‘box’, IG with only one horizontal, ḪAR written ḪI+ÁŠ, KU as a narrow ‘box’ with two close verticals and the top horizontal on top of the first vertical, and TA with three equally high verticals (Schwemer D. 1998a: 10-11). Signs starting with two horizontals such as BA, TA and Ú often have the lower one indented and final wedges of signs are often lengthened before spacing (Schwemer D. 1998a: 11-12). Note, however, that the verticals are missing the typical broad extension to the right found in Middle and Neo Assyrian, and LUGAL does not have its Assyrian shape but rather the Babylonian form used in Syrian and Hittite texts.

The Akkadian lexemes appearing in exemplar A were collected by R. Labat in his treaty on Boghazköy-Akkadian (Labat R. 1932a). However, it is unclear whether this text was written at Ḫattuša or by a Ḫattuša scribe. Layout and sign forms are foreign and thus the tablet may not be suitable for an analysis of Boghazköy-Akkadian.

Some astrological omen texts from Ḫattuša are clearly Mesopotamian imports, such as the solar omen collection KUB 4.63. But unlike KUB 4.63, exemplar A of this text shows no clear Old Babylonian features. It is difficult to assess whether tablets of the Assyro-Mittanian type, to which this specimen may belong, were imported, written by Syrian scribes in Ḫattuša or written by a Hittite scribe versed in non-Boghazköy script. For each model there are examples or at least good arguments. Research on tablets in the so called ‘mixed ductus’ points to the existence of scribes who were trained in different languages and their scripts (Devecchi E. 2012b: 50-56). On the other hand there is ample evidence of foreign scribes at the Hittite court (Weeden M. 2016b: 159-162). A petrographic analysis may help establish were the clay of the tablet likely stems from (for the method and its possibilities see Goren Y. et al. 2011a).

The text starts with four omens concerning the beginning of an eclipse in the South, West, East, and North respectively. These four protases are known from the first four omens of the second section of Enuma Anu Enlil tablet 15 (Rochberg-Halton F. 1988a: 71; Fincke J. 2016a: 90-92), although in different order (South-North-East-West).

The text continues with quadruplets of omens which start and end during the first and second night watch respectively. Because the preserved parts of the four protases are identical, they must have continued after igmur, likely with the direction in which the eclipse cleared. This scheme is known from Enūma Anu Enlil tablet 19, section 2, as already observed by Rochberg-Halton F. 1988a: 167-168, and the difference between the first millennium protases and the Ḫattuša tablet are purely orthographic. But since the apodoses are destroyed, it is difficult to estimate how close the first millennium version is in fact to CTH 532.12.