iiiFnSymT 0 T 1 The passage must refer to a certain rite or procedure celebrated during the rituals (such as a rite of ‘re-installation’?). For the formulation appa tiyawaš, which has no exact parallels, see the colophon of Muwatalli’s prayer for the Storm god of Kummani (KBo 1.11): DUB 1KAM ŠA D10 ar-ku-wa-ar ti-ya-u-wa-aš “First tablet, of the presentation of the plea to the Storm god”. iiiFnSymT 1 T 2 Tentative. For the equivalency between KUR URUGAM-TI and KUR šaplīti ‘Lower Land’, see also A. Kryszeń (hethiter.net/: HiTop). With pai one expects ANA (‘for’) here, rather than INA; possibly, the rites are to be carried out in the Lower Land. iiiFnSymT 2 T 3 Lit. ‘of perjury’, ‘of curse’: quasi a merism, arraḫḫaniya- ‘ranting, slandering, cursing’; tiwataniya- ‘swearing, cursing’. Syntactically, these two terms are unlikely dependent from UNMEŠ-tar, whose attached enclitics introduce a new sentence. Due to the word order, it is equally unlikely that the head noun(s) of these genitives are the “male and female servants”, or any of the previous listed people. As reflected in the present translation, tentatively, we understand them as free-standing genitives (Hoffner H.A. – Melchert H.C. 2024a, 334-335) with the function of subject, probably referring to the people responsible of murder, and implicit subject of the following sentence. However, we cannot exclude that these “perjurers and slenderers” are to be included in the preceding list of people, “(the matter of …) (and of) the perjurers and slanderers”. iiiFnSymT 3 T 4 Tentative. The passage is difficult, and kuit might also be interpreted as a conjunction: “because (these) people (obj.), they (sbj.) murdered one by one”. Either way, the subject of kuennešker (“they killed”) is not expressed, while the victims are presumably the “free men”, members of the house of Arma-Tarḫunta and the relatives of AMAR.MUŠEN-na. The subject cannot be UNMEŠ in any case, a neuter singular. iiiFnSymT 4 T 5 Lit. ‘swiftly’, also ‘hastily’, ‘rashly’.