This fragmentary letter mentions bird oracle inquiries, and the reference to the “daughters” in the heading, presumably the daughters of the king, suggests that the oracular consultation was requested for some concern regarding the princesses (see Martino S. de 2005d, 313, Hoffner H.A. 2009a, 185). This content closely recalls the letter KuT 50, much better preserved, which also contains bird oracle reports for one or more “daughters” belonging to the royal family.

• H.A. Hoffner, Letters, 2009: 184-186
• M. Marizza, Lettere, 2009: 108
• S. Alp, HBM, 1991: 210f. (Nr. 49)
• Y. Sakuma, Diss., 2009: II 650f. ("CTH 573/581")

Alp S. 1991b, 210-211; Hoffner H.A. 2009a, 184-186; Marizza M. 2009a, 108; Sakuma Y. 2009b, II, 650-651.

Autography: Alp S. 1991a, n. 49 (= HKM 49).

MS (mh.); diagnostic signs AḪ, LI, TAR.

Note the use of the term wara(i)- (rev. 16 wa-ra-e-eš), only attested in bird reports of early date (MS). A discussion of this word ‘(bird) mate, companion’ in Trameri A. forthcoming.

The corpus of letters from Tapikka (Maşat Höyük) dates to the first half of the 14th c., and might have been written during the late reign of Arnuwanda I or during the reign of Tudḫaliya II/III. Most of them are probably to be dated in the latter’s reign.

Houwink ten cate Ph.H.J. 1998a, 161 suggested that the group of letters HKM 46-51, based on prosopographic observation and their contents, constitutes the earliest group of documents, potentially attributed to the late reign of Arnuwanda I. Although it is possible that some of these letters were earlier than the bulk of the texts, confidently attributed to Tudḫaliya II/III, the arguments for a finer dating of this group are not conclusive (for a discussion, see previously Hout Th.P.J. van den 2007c, 392, Hoffner H.A. 2009a, 40).

Other editions restored the fragmentary name of one of the four authors of the letter as Atiunna (Alp S. 1991b, 210, followed by Hoffner H.A. 2009a, 184-185). This name might be attested in two other letters from Tapikka (HKM 23 obv. 4; HKM 50 obv. 2) and can be identified with another Atiūnna, mentioned in the letter ABoT 65 (rev. 8´; lo. e. 3´). However, this prosopographic link is fragile, since in all three cases the reading is fragmentary. In the present letter this restoration is quite uncertain, and a different reading (Atiyali?) is possible, based on the visible sign traces (with Sakuma Y. 2009b, II, 650).

For a previous discussion of the prosopographic links among these letters, see Martino S. de 2005d, 307-308; Hoffner H.A. 2009a, 185.

Heavily damaged from fire, partially vitrified.