The reading of this name remains uncertain; note that the masculine name determinative is absent, or mistakenly written (A?).
Or ar-ḫa ku-wa-at-k[a?.
Elsewhere DAB-an-na-aš (gen.); however, see the same formulation in e.g. AT 454 and KUB 52.41.
The extra sign is hardly AM; based also on the spelling of this name elsewhere in the text (e.g. rev.? III 11′), it is probably a mistake.
|
See obv.? 13´.
The syntax of this sentence, as well as the analysis of the two Sumerograms, is not transparent. Although the verb is oddly fronted, the continuation of the text suggests that it must be either “the road (NOM.) of (/to) Arinna” that was the ‘topic’ confirmed through oracles, or something else, but not expressed, “confirmed on the road (D/L.) of/to Arinna”.
At the end of the following line, completely erased, we can recognize from the visible traces the same formula once again: […] *〈〈 … (five unreadable signs) … Let the birds confirm (it)〉〉*.
According to Sakuma Y. 2009b, II, 274, an additional sentence “Behind the road” is also expected in this gap, but the available space might be insufficient for this restoration. Very likely restoration, with Sakuma Y. 2009b, II, 274, based on the previous and next movement. Tentative; it is unclear whether there is enough space for this additional sentence in the gap at the end of rev. III 6´.
Depending on the length of this bird’s name, it is possible that the additional sentence “Behind the road” ( EGIR KASKAL-NI) was written in the gap at the beginning of III 21´ (e.g. Sakuma Y. 2009b, II, 278); however, the space is limited. The verb to be restored is possibly peššiya-, based on the technical usage with organs: a precise parallel in KUB 8.36 III 12 (a tablet catalogue), mān antuḫši auleš EGIR-an peššiyazi “If the throat (artery) of a man ‘throws’ behind” (see CHD P, 322 §9). Hout Th.P.J. van den 1995c, 91-92 n. 113 does not consider this word to be the same as tita- ‘breast’ and suggests: “Wenn aber für das Auge, für die Pupille, nicht hinter …”, followed by Sakuma Y. 2009b, II, 282-283. This term would thus be the same as Luw. tītīt(a)- ‘pupil’ ( Tischler J. 2008a, 200; Rieken, eDiAna-ID 3004), found in the Kuwatalla rituals, but all these forms also have a final -t root. As the previous paragraph refers to the ‘throath’, or even the ‘troath artery’, the reading ‘breast’ perhaps cannot be excluded in context. For this interpretation, it is implied that the use of IGI here is adverbial (= menaḫḫanda).
|
