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.
Collated (March 2020). Fragment from the reverse of a likely three-columned tablet. Fine-grained clay, now grey in color.
The most notable feature of this fragment is the partially preserved description of a festival for the Storm god of Atalḫaziya, which can be identified with the EZEN4 MÁŠ.TUR, the festival of the goat kid, a typical kind of first fruits rite (iii 1′-8′, for this festival see also KUB 38.25 and IBoT 2.106). The festival envisages the offering of a lamb and a goat kid, who are presented intact (Š́ALM[UTIM]) before the gods along with the afterbirths of the goat kid. Interestingly, the “Lord of the district” plays a role within the festival, although it is not clear which one (supplier or ministrant). The town Atalḫazi(ya) belongs to the regional cluster of Ḫanḫana, to which the inventory may be assigned (Kryszeń 2016: 169-71).
Palaeography: Cursive script, with verticals slanting to the left and horizontals leaning downwards; the lines of the script tend to raise from left to right. Script size 3 mm. Late EN (iii 1′), ḪA with one Winkelhaken. The middle horizontals of signs like DA and GAL as well as inscribed wedges, e.g. in KÁN, are very feebly impressed and in some instances are not impressed at all.
iii 1′-8′: The proposed text reconstruction expands on, and differs from, the available previous editions (Hoffner 2004: 337-338, Groddek 2008: 214-215). On line 1′, Hoffner’s tentative reading U[Z6ḪI.]A is not possible, whereas A-NA perfectly fits the traces (collated on photo; CHD Š 279 reads SILA4, which does not fit well the traces). Furthermore, his restoration seems to assume too much text in the gap (cf. the restorations of the following lines, which are relatively secure). On line 2′, MÁŠ fits the traces and the context better than Hoffner’s and Groddek’s NU. The Lord of the District is mentioned on line 1′, but his role within the festival is not clear judging from the preserved text (was he really the ministrant, as Hoffner proposes, or just a supplier?), hence the restoration of impersonal forms in lines 2′-3′.
iii 1′, 5′: On UZUŠALITU “fetal membranes, afterbirth” and UZUḪAKURRATU “umbilical cord?” see Hoffner 2004, on the spelling see Groddek 2008: 215 fn. 503.
iii 3′, 11′: On the reading of this GN see Groddek 2008: 215 fn. 504.
iii 10′: The context in which snakes play a role is unclear (Collins 1989: 223).
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.