5 10 15 L. 19. REIS. 156, 13 reads [ in. ŠE-IB = ]ni-si-bu-na, but bu should be lipittu. The ideogram occurs frequently, but the translation seldom, e. g. REIS. p. 95 b, 37/38: ŠE-IB = lipittašu. L. 20, perhaps REIS. 156, 14 = L. 22. REISNER p. 156, 16 reads: [ ] GIG-IB(?) HA-AN; or better, GAŠAN-AN. MU-GIG-IB ištaritu BR. 1319; REIS. p. 98, 3/4, et al. GAŠAN-AN-NA is often translated (il) Ištar, e. g. REIS. p. 99, 41/42. For the whole line cf. REIS. p. 99, 62/63; also REIS. p. 193, 128/129; p. 104, 29 ff.; p. 105, 4ff. L. 23. NA-ÁM perhaps probably. = šimtu; uru-na-šu = ana ališa L. 25 (giš)AKKIL, Sb I, Rev. Col. IV, 5; cf. HWB 55. For this Babylonian form see REIS. p. 15, 11. L. 26. Cf. Reis. p. 132, 45. Reverse, 1. 23. The beginning is probably to be restored: DAMAL E-LUM [um]-mu kabtum or [ud-de E]-LUM mu kabtum. L. 45. ša ú-hal-lik-an [ ] IN-GÍL-LI-ÁM [ ]. The same šahluktu REIS. p. 7, 1617 et al. See VIROLLEAUD, 20 Prem. Suppl. No. 1391. 25 L. 7/8. VATH 410 Rev. begins. In the latter stands: im-huru-ma. In both texts the Sumerian personal suffixes are not strictly observed. L. 9/10. VATh 34 reads: a-mi-li im-hu-ru-ma. L. 11/12. On the margin and under ka is gu written small. VATH 1.5 reads: KA-IN-DA(?)-MA(?) GU (sic!) KA-NI-KUR-RA-A-AN. Note the form i-ša-as-si in both texts; also in REIS. p. 39, 29; and probably ASKT 127, 44 reads a-ša-aš (?)-si. ša-na-at permans. from is changed.' The idea is: comes to nought, is of no avail; 30 cf. KING, Tab. of Cr. Vol. I, p. 88, 1. 9. = L. 13. On the margin stands the sign U 10. VATH 7 reads GÚ-NE-URU-EN-NI-MU &c. L. 14/15. VATh 89 reads URU-A GE-IN-MU = ina ali-ia am-ti-ia. L. 16/17. VATh 10/11 reads: LI*-DI-A-NI, ar-da-tum. - zamarša 35 'her cry' (HWB 257, top). The parallel nissassu makes the meaning 'singing' impossible; cf. also REIS. p. 110, 31/32 and tazmertu (HWB 258a). For ardatu and edlu together see REIS. p. 8, 56 ff., also REIS. p. 95, 29 ff. et al. L. 18/19. VATH 12/13 reads GURUŠ-bi (i. e. edilšu), ina ER 40 (i. e. ali). — idlum = GURUŠ-MU; a better rendering would be idlia 'my man,' i. e. Ištar's, while VATh has 'his man,' i. e. Bel's. *REIS. reads SAR doubtfully. The sign is not clear. L. 20/21. in K. 2004. From here on the beginnings of the lines are lacking In VATH 14 read GA instead of BI (REISNER) on the end. VATH 1. 15 begins ar-da-tum. ardati KI-EL-MU, the suffix not being translated. With lines 20-23 cf. IVR. 27, 8—11b. maštaku = = not DAMAL (IV R. 27, 8). So also REISNER 5 p. 97, 67/68; p. 93, 34, et al. tasla, from bo, either 'pray,' II, or trust,' III. L. 22/23 = VATH 1. 16 17. bo VATh 17 reads id-lu biti e-mi-ti-šu ana ša-di-i ir-ta [], not a-di-i (REISNER); emutu = MY K. 2004; IVR. 27, 10/116. VATH 410; 10 L. 24/25 VATH 410, Rev. 1819. In both these the beginning of the lines is lacking, but is doubtless to be restored according to 29615, Rev. 2 ff. (Cuneiform Tablets in the Brit. Museum, Vol. XV, Pl. 7-9). — DAMAL-HE (the sign must be DAMAL) = ummu alittu REIS. p. 131, 58/59; 27, 26/27 et al. lu-ur-ra-ki, 15 prec. 1st pers. from 78; cf. AL1 108, 105: pi-iš e-gi-ir ar-ka-tum. = im-mar-an-ni. REISNER = rapâšu and Sb 161 reads ta for mar, but the sign is broken and can be just as well mar. For this idea cf. REIS. p. 96, 8/9: man-nu i-mur-ki who has seen thee (Ištar)? Also = = REIS. p. 95, 23/24: ul in-nam-mar (PAD). Similar are REIS. p. 150 20 (top): ki-rib-ša la a-te-e (PAD?) its interior is not seen (i. e. the word's; cf. p. 32, 15) and REIS. p. 15, 22/23; p. 50, 30/31; 54, Rev. 45 et al. VATH 1. 20, see under 1. 27. L. 27 VATH 21 22. In REIS. read ķu for mu. ša ina nap- 25 hari šaku appears to be a gloss; there is no Sumerian equivalent. The beginning of VATh is unfortunately illegible. REISNER reads: en (?)-ša?)-si-tu. Only tu is sure. It would be very remarkable if this phrase E-NE-EM &c., which occurs so frequently, had any other translation than amatu (Gula or Bel). Neither K nor VATh has the 30 Sumerian postposition or genitive particle; 29615 on the contrary has. REIS. p. 10, 153/154 reads e-ne-em (dimmer) MU-UL-LÍL-LÁ (without postposition) ina a-ma-ti &c. It is very unfortunate that this passage is broken, as it would probably throw some light on the relation of Ištar to the 'word' of Gula and Mullil. I have translated 35 as though it were ina amât &c. ru is written over an erasure. K. 2004 ends at this line. On its lower 40 margin is: ] hi I a-an, that is probably: 'excerpt one'; cf. REIS. Vorw. p. XI. še-te-'u-u, I, 2, enšu (BR. 9463). .שאה from Ù = labaru (BR. 9464) and L. 32/33 29615, Rev. 8. šú-nu E-NE-NE; har-bi E-RI-A (generally A-RI-A, HWB 288b); KI is probably placed after this as in names of places, and NE-EN is the plural. L. 34 35 (VATh 29/30). The second sign in 1. 34 is very dull, 5 but cannot be HE (cf. 1. 24/25). It may however be MUH; cf. REIS. p. 122, Rev. 3/4: DAMAL MUH-NA = ummu alittu. The last sign of 35 may be ni. For the same idea cf. REIS. p. 98, 29/30. Ištar speaks: ša ia-ši(?) na-an-na-ri ul-si-iz-za-an-ni also IV R. 5, Col. I, 60-63. -The Semitic translation is not above suspicion. Cf. REIS. 10 p. 110, 31/32: UŠ-KU-E SAR-ZU-BI LA-BA-DU LI-ZU DUB-DI SAR [ = şir-hi-šu, sinništu mu-di-a-at and also REIS. p. 106, 47/48: E-NE-EM-ZU 15 a-wa-[tim]. In our passage GAL appears to represent mûdât (but where elsewhere has it this meaning?) and (dimmer)E-A is not translated. A better translation would be ummu alittum mûdât şirḥa ša (il)E-A ina niši izsissini. Or is (il)E-A, the god of wisdom, here mûdat, and SAR-RA-GAL şirha? 20 = L. 36/37 (VATh 31/32). L. 37 is probably (il)Gu-la &c. mi-ša = DAMAL-NI 'her mother.' Why the third person? . e ta- kul kar- [şi] ki-bi 5 lim-ni-e-ti e ta- me da- me- ik- ta ti-iz-kar 10 sur- riš 6 ta-ta-mu- ú ta- ra1- aš- ši ar-ka-niš kit rab ni- ku- ú 10 ki- bi pi- i si- mat kut- rin- ni 15 an- nu- um- ma si- mat ilu- ú- ti su- up- pu- ú 10 su-ul- lu- ú 10 u la-ban ap-pi ud-da-at ta-nam-din-aš 12-šum-ma i-dan-ka bi-lat ina ih- zi- ka- ma a- mur đúp pi ina (1) So 33851. K. 3364 has mu (?). (2) K. 3364 has šá. (3) K. 3364 has ina. (4) 33851 has ma-și. — (5) K. 3364 has i. (6) 33851 has ša ta-ta. (7) 33851 has traces of raš. (8) 33851 reads ina sa-na-ka u at-me-e. K. 3364 reads à ina. (9) Sign UD. (10) K. 3364 has u. (11) So K. 7897. DELITZSCH reads ra-a-ti ti-i-ši. (14) K. 3364 omits ka. (12) K. 3364 omits aš. K. 3364 has ra-a ti-i-ši; (13) K. 3364 has ri-im. (15) So DELITZSCH. According to Cun. Texts XIII, pl. 30: te??). (1) Hardly more than two signs missing. (2) 33851 has only one sign legible (3) 33851 has only ma(?)-na-a(?)-hu (?) legible. The sign before in this line, viz. ú. (5) K. 7897 omits su (4) This sign is doubtful; there is no perpendicular wedge (6) 33851 omits e (7) K. 7897 has] li. — 8) 33851 (9) K. 7897 has b]i.i-ti. — (10) 33851 has the fragments of just one sign in this line, viz. ra, which may correspond to the first sign in K. 7897; the latter however is more like the end of zu. (11) Perhaps muk. - (12) 33851 has tu. Translation. Thou shalt not slander, (but) speak kindly; Him who slanders (and) speaks evil, With its recompense will Samaš visit(?) his head. Thou shalt not make large thy mouth, but guard thy lip; Daily present to thy god Offering and prayer, appropriate to incense. Before thy god mayest thou have a pure heart, 15 For that is appropriate to the deity. Prayer, petition, and prostration [burdens (?), Early in the morning shalt thou render him; he will judge thy 25 With friend and companion thou shalt not speak |