Cult inventory

(CTH 528.117)

Textual tradition

A

A1

KUB 54.67

Basis of the edition

The present edition is based on the photographs available at the Mainzer Photoarchiv of the Hethitologie Portal Mainz, as well as the available hand-copies and relevant secondary literature up to 2019. When the original manuscripts have been collated, this is noted in the commentary.

Commentary

Collated (March 2020). Based on the curvature, this fragment belongs to a single-columned tablet.

The edition expands on a transliteration provided by M. Vigo (e-mail 8.11.2018). Vigo proposes to classify the fragment as CTH 641 “der Kult von Išḫara.” A daniti-priestess is mentioned both here and in KBo 21.42 as well in other texts, but this does not seem enough to attribute the fragment to CTH 641. The text can be considered a cult inventory, dealing with the review of faults in the celebration of festivals and in the provision of offerings (cf. the frequently occurring term karšant- “missing,” also appa kittari “it remains to be investigated,” i 7′). Additionally, the text deals with measures to be taken in order to overcome such faults. Noteworthy is especially the construction of a new shrine for the goddess Kattaḫḫa of Ḫadanta; to this purpose, her cult seems to be temporarily transferred to Tawiniya (iv 12′-15′). The references to Tawiniya and Ḫa(n)ḫana suggest a geographical setting in the central districts. The text mentions twice a “king” in fragmentary context (iv 6′, 17′), furthermore the “Commander of Ten” (i 11′, iv 16′, 18′, 19′), the rarely attested daniti-priestess (i 6′), and the PNs Tametti (i 7′), Tarupšiya (iv 9′), and Maḫa(-) (iv 21′).

Palaeography and orthography: Cursive script. Late KU (i 3′ and passim). Note the unusual spelling pé-eš15-ke-ez-[zi] (i 11′) and the spelling LUGAL-RU (iv 17′).

i 5′: The form [a]rriyadaza is unclear; a connection with ariyatt- is problematical in view of the geminated consonant.

i 6′: On the daniti-, a priestess or female cultic attendant, see Zehnder 2010: 22-23 with literature.

i 12′: On the sacred building called šinapši-, see CHD Š 378.

iv 2′: Cf. the LÚ É.GAL ABUBITI attested in other cult inventories.

iv 5′: Note the GN Ḫanḫana spelled with nasal reduction, as attested also elsewhere.

iv 7′: On the expression appa kittari, cf. KUB 57.108 + KUB 51.23 ii 10′ and DAAM 1.36 i 50.

iv 9′: Cf. the likely reading of a PN [mt]aruppašiyaš in KUB 52.31 i 17 (CHD Š 300 with discussion).

iv 11′: For the LÙŠÀ.TAM (probably to be equated with LÚḫamina-), see Nakamura 2002: 57-58.

iv 21′: The PN does not appear in the published repertoires.

iv 22′: The traces of the sign preceding ŠA are not compatible either with AŠ or with MAR.

CC BY-SA 4.0 Michele Cammarosano | Produced as part of the research project Critical edition, digital publication, and systematic analysis of the Hittite cult-inventories (CTH 501-530), funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) – project number 298302760, 2016–2020.