The text reports an oracle inquiry aimed at determining whether the gods approve of the king’s proposed winter stay in Ḫattuša. Simultaneously, it seeks to identify the potential dangers the king might encounter there and how they can be avoided. After addressing the questions concerning Ḫattuša, the inquiry explores alternative locations for the king’s winter residence, including Aleppo (or more precisely, the vicinity of the temple of the Storm-god of Aleppo), Katapa, or Ankuwa. Unlike the detailed inquiry regarding Ḫattuša, the questions about the other locations are limited to whether the gods approve of the chosen place and, in the case of Katapa, whether the king’s life will be safe there. However, the inquiry pertaining to Ḫattuša delves into greater detail and comprises a series of questions that address several potential threats, such as high fever, internal or external revolts, negative omens or oracle signs from birds, contaminated water or food, heavy rainfall, fire, unintentional harm caused by human actions (referred to as “misbehavior of the hand”), an accident on the road (referred to as “misbehavior of a horse”), or an epidemic within the army.

• A. Archi, SMEA 16, 1975: 141f.
• B. Christiansen, Kasion 13, 2025: 57ff.
• L. Warbinek, KIN, 2020: 467-484
• R.H. Beal, CoS 1, 2003: 207-211
• R.H. Beal, FsPopko, 2002: 29ff. Anm. 80; 82; 85f.
• R.H. Beal, THeth 20, 1992: 156 mit Anm. 565f.

KUB 5.4 is one of the earliest Hittite oracle texts made available to the public in a cuneiform copy by Arnold Walther in the year 1922 (Walther A. 1922a, 17-19). Five years later, Walther published the joining fragment KUB 18.53 and some corrections to the copy of KUB 5.4 (Walther A. 1927a, 40-41). Although Hittite was little studied at this time, Walther’s copies are very accurate and sometimes show parts of the text that are not or hardly visible on the photographs.

A translation of the whole text in the English language was published by Beal R.H. 1997a, 207-211. The translation combines sections of CTH 563.2 KUB 5.4+ with parts of CTH 563.1 KUB 5.3+, using KUB 5.4+ as the main text and switching to KUB 5.3+ when the corresponding passage in KUB 5.4+ is either broken off or was not originally part of KUB 5.4+.

Another partial edition has been published by Warbinek L. 2020a, 467-484. Similar to Beal’s work, Warbinek treats KUB 5.3+ as a parallel text to KUB 5.4+ without discussing their relationship to each other. Like Beal, Warbinek uses KUB 5.4+ as the main text and incorporates passages from KUB 5.3+ that extend beyond KUB 5.4+. A comparative analysis, including translation and discussion of the relationship between the two texts, is forthcoming from Christiansen (Christiansen forthcoming). The present edition (Christiansen xxx) is the first to provide the complete text with annotated transliteration, transcription, and translation. Other studies discuss specific linguistic, graphical, or content-related features of the texts (see S. Košak, hethiter.net/: hetkonk (2.plus), notae originalis, and Warbinek L. 2020a, 467-484).

Preservation

The upper part of the tablet is relatively well-preserved, whereas a large portion is broken away from the lower part. As a result, only the beginnings of the lines are preserved from obv. I 37-53, and only the ends are preserved from obv. II 40-48. For rev. III and IV, apparently only blank sections are missing. Many of the damaged portions of the text can be reconstructed on the basis of the stereotyped form and content, as well as similar passages of the parallel text CTH 563.1 KUB 5.3+.

Layout and graphical features:

The tablet is divided into four columns and 26 paragraphs. A notable feature is that several paragraphs are completely or partially left blank. Specifically, obv. I § 7 has approximately 12 blank lines, obv. II §12 has two blank lines at the end, §16 has three blank lines at the end, §19 has around four lines at the end, §20 is completely blank, rev. III §24 is completely blank, rev. III §26, and rev. IV (to the extent preserved) are completely blank. The writing is meticulously executed, with deeply impressed signs on the clay.

Dating:

NH / NS (IIIb)

Paleography:

ḪA is predominantly attested in the older variant with two Winkelhaken (obv. I 53; obv. II 27, 28, 36). However, there is one instance where it is written with only one Winkelhaken (obv. II 14). This variant is primarily found in the LH period (IIIC), but can already be seen in texts dating back to the time of Ḫattušili III.SeeAccording to the handcopy, two additional occurrences can be found in obv. I 55 and obv. II 15, although it cannot be definitively determined from the photographs whether the second Winkelhaken is missing or not. KI is written in the pre-LS variant with only one vertical (cf. obv. I 11, 30, 33, 35, 42; obv. II 6, 12, 25, 35). UN, which also has an LS variant, is not attested. Other signs exhibit the NS variants (IIIb). For example, AK is written with four horizontals and two verticals (obv. I 53; obv. II 15, 28), while URU has the middle horizontal protruding to the left (see, e.g., obv. I 3, 4, 6, 16, 17, 18, 19). Other signs such as MEŠ, DA, and IT are attested in the older variants. Considering that the text is likely not a copy from an older manuscript, the fact that only ḪA is once (or a few times) written in the variant predominantly seen in LS suggests that the text was likely written in the middle rather than the end of the 13th century BCE (about the reign of Ḫattušili III or the first half of the reign of Tutḫaliya IV). Comparing it to the parallel text CTH 563.1 KUB 5.3+, it can be inferred that both texts were written during the same time period (IIIb) but by different scribes. This aligns with the hypothesis that both texts are records of one and the same oracle inquiry conducted by two distinct teams of experts.

(für Bemerkungen zu sprachlicher Datierung, Fachsprache, Verwendung spezieller Wörter oder Ausdrücke o.ä.)

(für Bemerkungen zur Entstehungsgeschichte, Überlieferungsgeschichte, Fundorten etc.)

(für Einordnungen in einen historischen Kontext, insbesondere bei Nennung von Königsnamen et al. im Text)

For detailed information regarding the relationship to the parallel text CTH 563.1 see the introduction to CTH 563.1.

(für Bemerkungen zu besonderen Riten, Handlungen, Personen, Gottheiten o.ä.)