The two fragments comprising CTH 533.7 are all that survive of a text listing omens with lunar halos. The surviving omens deal with stars standing in the lunar halo.

• K.K. Riemschneider, DBH 12, 2004: 124f.

H. Otten and C. Rüster published manuscript A in KBo 34, F. Ehelolf manuscript B in KUB 34. Riemschneider K.K. 2004a: 124–125 published manuscript B as ‘unidentifiable astrological omens’, because the duplicate was not published until 1991 (KBo 34, VI). It has so far remained unedited.

A: A roughly oval, cracked fragment from the bottom of a likely multi-column tablet that apparently had no colophon, unless it was added on the margin. It contains five fragmentary lines of spacious script.

B: A roughly pentagonal piece with a notable ‘nose’ to the right, from the bottom of a likely multi-column tablet. Nine damaged lines of spacious script survive, including the rest of a colophon.

A: Old Script or Middle Script: Old AḪ; Á can have slightly stepped horizontals (1/2). Note also the form of TA, starting with the horizontals and verticals forming a square lattice, a form also found in the treaty of Zidanza II with Pillija of Kizzuwatna (KUB 36.108, obv. 6). Also noteworthy are the broad and strongly right-leaning heads of the verticals, a feature that is typically associated with Old Script.

B: New Script: ḪAR has its horizontals completely in front of the Winkelhaken, which are ‘closed’ (1/1), New LI (1/1), perhaps Á and DA once without a broken central horizontal (l. 5′; the broken horizontal is copied in KUB 34, but not visible on the photograph).

Since so little is preserved, little can be said about the language. It appears that the text used an otherwise unattested middle form of ḫilae-, ‘to have a halo’, but the passage is damaged. So this remains conjectural until further evidence comes to light. The text (correctly) uses the postposition andan for ‘in’ as opposed to ‘into’ (anda) for the position of stars; most Hittite omen tablets do not make a difference and use anda throughout. Since only one attestation is preserved, it is unclear whether this is chronologically relevant. Still, since manuscript A shows Middle or even Old Script signs, it is very much possible that manuscript B is a modernizing copy of A.