iiiFnSym 0 1 iiiFnSymT 0 T 1 Similarly, lo. e. l. col. 5. iiiFnSymT 1 T 2 The context shows that the oracular inquiry attempts to find out whether the deity is angry about inadequate sacrifices. As the agreement between the required and actual oracle outcome shows, this is indeed the case. iiiFnSymT 2 T 3 Likely, the oracle question was followed by the requested outcome “Let the exta/KIN oracle be favorable/unfavorable” or “ditto”. Afterwards, probably the report of the oracle findings and the oracle outcome was recorded. iiiFnSymT 3 T 4 Presumably, “are you, o deity, angry about this?” is to be restored. iiiFnSymT 4 T 5 Presumably, “let the KIN oracle be favorable/unfavorable” is to be restored in the gap. As the following three blank lines indicate, the oracle findings and outcome were apparently not recorded. iiiFnSymT 5 T 6 With one or more divinities as the active symbol, two cola are to be expected in the gap (“he gods/X arose (and) took …). In case of a non-divine symbol as the subject, only one colon is to be restored (“… took …”). iiiFnSymT 6 T 7 Roszkowska-Mutschler H. 2007a, 195, restores URUT[u-ut-tu-wa. However, since the cult of Pirwa of Tuttuwa is already addressed in the first oracle inquiry (KBo 44.209 obv. I 1–16), it is more likey that the present paragraph (l.e. l.col. 1–6) deals with Pirwa’s cult in another city. A candidate might be the city Turuwaturuwa, which in Muwatalli’s Great Prayer specifies one representation of Pirwa as a genitive attribute in the list of invoced deities. It is preceded by Pirwa of Nenišaḫuwa and followed by Pirwa of Ikšuna (KUB 6.46 rev. III 29 // KUB 6.45 obv. II 62: ŠA URUnenišaḫuwa Dpirwaš ŠA URUduruwaduruwa Dpirwaš ŠA URUikšuna Dpirwaš). See Singer I. 1996a, 22; 61; Singer I. 2002c, 90; E. Rieken et al. (ed.), hethiter.net/: CTH 381 (TX 2017-12-02, TRde 2017-12-09).