On Recent Cuneiform Editions of Hittite Fragments (II).

• Author: Oguz Soysal
• Position: Book review

The aim and structure of this article are the same as those of its first installment in JAOS 129 (2009): 295-306. The cuneiform edition under review, Keilschrifttexte aus Boghazkoi, vol. 47 (henceforth KBo 47), represents a collection of work by various scholars (H. Otten, Chr. Ruster, G. Wilhelm, E. Neu, H. M. Kummel, J. Miller, D. Schwemer); accordingly, the quality of the hand copies varies from text to text. The content of the fragments is mostly dull, with the exception of nos. 7 and 147. The present review therefore endeavors primarily to highlight and discuss hapax legomena, rare and problematic Hittite word forms from these fragments which will be useful for future lexical studies.

KBo 47 has previously been reviewed by V. Haas, OLZ 101 (2006): 307-8, and in more detail by D. Groddek, WO 38 (2008): 248-53. In addition, in DBH 33 (2011) Groddek published transliterations of the texts from KBo 47; this is a very helpful tool for all us. Since he has masterfully discovered a large number of joins and duplicates, there is not much remaining here to offer to the readers of the present review. In this regard, my only contribution is a direct join given under no. 120, for which I have also included a photo taken in the Ankara Anadolu Medeniyetleri Milzesi in June 2011. In order to enrich the contents of the review I have decided to take into account also DBH 33 when necessary.

For reasons of space. Groddek's book is not always cited in discussions by page numbers; however, all corrections (marked with "pace Groddek") and alternative suggestions refer to his DBH 33, if not otherwise indicated. For problematic signs and text passages I have gratefully utilized the tablets' photos at Konkordanz der hethitischen Texte (http://www.hethport. adwmainz.de); each photo's identification is given here in parenthesis following Konkordanz (Citatio: hethiter.net/: PhotArch .). For some brief discussions on Hittite lexicography (e.g., sumanzana- [sup.(NA4)]sur(a)-,[sup.LU]tazelli-,[sup.GIS.]Gitipa-. and tiuna-), I have made use of the information from the first drafts for the Chicago Hittite Dictionary (CHD) written by me between 1996 and 2008.

ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS TO INDICES

No. 1: [[sup.m]...-LU]GAL-ma-za (1.2'), [sup.m]Nu-u-ua-an-n[a(-)...] (1.6'), and [sup.m]Zu-x-[...] (1. 7').

No. 11 obv. (7') and 10': Read [sup.m.inGAL].[sup.d.U-da-cs] and remove [sup.m.GAL]-[sup.d.ISTAR] from the indices, p. xvii.

No. 48 obv. 3: [[??] Zi-in-t]u-hi-ia.

No. 91 rev. 8':[??] Ha-sa-[mi-li-in].

No. 111 1. 2': [[.sup.HUR.SAG]]Ha-az-[??]zi[??].

No. 133 obv. 5: [[.URU.Sa-p]]i-nu-ua-, obv. 7: [[.sup.URU]S]u-lu-pa-as-si-.

No. 146. 1. 3': Read [...]-[??]x[??]-tul/DUL and not [??]ISTAR as listed in indices, p. xvi.

No. 147 rev. 9': [??][??]-si-is, (i.e., Watara-hasis = Atra-basis), see remarks below.

No. 154 rev. 6': [.sup.URU]Sa-la-as-ha-[??]](-)[...?]; rev. 7': [??]LAMMA-pi-i[??][n?] for [??]LAMMA.SUM(E.Laroche, NH[1966], no.1748)?

No.159 obv. 2: Read 1 ga-par-t[a?-an?] (see remarks below) and not [??]Ga-par-x as listed in indices, p. xvii.

No. 184 obv. 8': According to the tablet photo (hethiter. net/: PhotArch BF00354) read [d][??] [.sup.URU[??]]-man-ni (not [.sup.URU]pi-i[n-...]]), pace indices, p. xviii) [??][[U ?.sup.URU....

No. 193 1. 6' [.sup.URU]Pi-is-ka-n[a ? (-)...].

No. 213 rev.? 7': [.sup.HUR.SAG]Hu-u[a-at-nu-ua-an-da]? Cf. KUB 58.15 i 10,15 (CTH 530).

No. 214 i 31': [??] Nupatik z[almana(ya)] or z[almathi].

No. 227 iii 5' +no. 223 iii 12': [??][A]r-[ma]-[??].

No. 235 rt. col. 7': [??][??]=[ta-an-ta].

No. 239 iii 4' [??]-ma-an-[ni].

No. 241 obv. ? 9' [[??]Da-si-mi]-iz (=[??]Tasimmet) is mistakenly listed in indices, p. xvii under Tasimi, who is a different deity.

No. 242 obv. ? 3': [??] UTU-as/AS and rev.? 5' [[??]LAMMA [.sup.URU]Ta-u-r]i-sa; all readings are uncertain.

No. 258 1. 3': [[.sup. HUR.SAG]Da-ha-a]n-na.

No. 264 obv. ? 5': [??] Du-ua-x-[...] should be removed from indices, p. xvii.

No. 273 1. 7': [sup.URU]Ka-l[??]-[as-ma].

No. 278 1. 5': [[??]Pi-ri]-in-ki[r.sub.8(?)].

No. 291 1. 3' [??]Zu-uz-zu-u-ua-l[a].

No. 300 left col. 1'[??]Ni-ga-lu-ia

REMARKS ON INDIVIDUAL TEXTS

No. I has some words which can be interpreted as personal names as well, see above.

No. 3 1. 4': Is [.sup.GIS]ku-pa-as here related to ku-u-pa-as [ZU.sub.9].SI in KUB 42.34:5', or should we rather read GIS KU-BA-RU thick(-cut) wood?, timber?' going back to Akkadian kubaru A < kabaru (CAD K [1971], 4 and 481)?; 1. 6': One might restore [[DUG.DU.sub.10]U]S.SA, but the following KAS beer' does not permit this possibility.

No. 4 1. 3': dankuwanusk 'to make dark' and 1. 4': dankutar (for *dankuwatar?) 'darkness' are both hapax legomena, and are already listed by J. Tischler, HEG III/8 (1991), 111, as then-unpublished occurrences; 1. 9': Even if Groddek's reading [??]-x-li-is-x[(restore perhaps is-k[i-it] like da-an-ku-ua-nu-us-k[i-it] in 1. 3') is correct, no logical meaning can be produced here, either with esharnu- or any other known verb.

No. 5 seems to be a fragment of a catalog tablet, and not an incantation (CTH 458). For the repeated word .I-PAT see KUB 30.46 rt. col. 7'-10' (CTH 277.1) without the presence of paragraph strokes.

No. 7 includes numerous unique MH lexemes and forms. The narrative is more interesting and enigmatic than one would expect from an incantation (CTH 458). The text has strong agricultural features, with the mention of (domestic) animals, plants, and fields. Obv. 3': [su]-[??]-ni-it-te-en "may you (pl.) [s]ow" (cf. obv. 21': na-ta-an A-NA NAM.HI.A se-er ar-ha su-u-n[i-iz-zi] "He (= the landlord) so[ws] reed all over the districts"); obv. 5': If not an unknown word, na-an-ni-ua-an-z[i] can only be an infinitive form of nanna- I nanni(ya)- 'to drive', with preceding [[GU.sub.4?]NITA.HI.A-us [bu]lls?' as the direct object of the sentence; obv. 6', 13': With ti-i-u-ni-is(-za) and [ti]-[??]-u-ni (d.-1.), one suspects the Hittite counterpart of Palaic tiuna-, denoting the 'bull' (cf. H. Otten, AfO 22 [1968-69]; 112; differently 0. Carruba, StBoT 10 [1970], 75; Pal. [1972] 38, 49-50, and GsMoreschini [1998], 152); for more on this subject, see my contribution in a forthcoming Festschrift; obv. 12': complete as ha-a-[ra-[as.sup.MUSEN]]; obv. 10'-13': The setting here is obscure. It seems that before (or behind) a curtain, a theatrical act involving the eagle and the tiuni- is performed before the members of the district community and the general(s); obv. 14': (andan) is-ta-an-da-a-u-en "we lingered / tarried in" add to J. Puhvel, HED 1-2 (1984), 464. The following word nu-na-sa[...] is probably for nu=(n)nas=a[s] or=a[t]; obv. 15': a-ri-si-e-es-na-as. (versus regular form ariyasegnag) is-pa-an-za "(on) the night of the oracle (performance)"; rev. 2': [i]s-sa-ra-si-il may render a complete word and a primary form of issarasila- (a kind of plant); rev. 4': Despite E. Neu's interpretation of NUMUN.HI.A-ni (sg. "collective" loc.) in StBoT 26 (1983), 263 n. 48, I reserve the possibility of reading NUMUN.HI.A-NI "our seeds"; rev. 8': ,sarkuwawar is a hapax of unknown meaning and to be added to CHD S/2 (2005); rev. 9': Perhaps [[.sup.DUG?]is-pa-an]-du-zi-it-te-e[t] "wi[th] your [liba]tion(-vessel?)," and not [...]-ap-zi-it-te-et (pace Groddek); rev. 11': According to the tablet photo (hethiter.net/: PhotArch BF00704) ar-nu-t[i] (pres. sg. 2) rather than ar-nu-n[u-...].

No. 8 obv. 5: On [.sup.TUG]katte[lluri] see S. Kosak, ZA 80 (1990): 147. The unpublished occurrence [.sup.TUG]]kat-te-el-lu-u-r[i] in Bo 6833 i 5' is followed by sar-ku-zi 'puts on footwear' in the first line after a break, and this information would give a better idea about the identity of the garment in question, although it is possible that other objects may have been mentioned in the gap between the 11. 5'-6'.

No. 9 is not to be assigned to CTH 458, but to the MH "protocol of dynastic succession" (CTH 271 or CTH 275), as the unique usage of parhandaru "let them banish" would hint. 1. 2': [na-ak-k]i-i-is.; 1. 3': [...[.sup.LU]KUR-SU e-es]-tu na-an par-ha-an-d[a-ru], cf. KUB 36.109:10' (CTH 275) and KUB 34.41+ 5', 10' (CTH 271); 1. 6': Perhaps as part of a conditional sentence [... na-at-t]a-an is-ta-ma-as-zi-ma "but [if] he [does no]t listen to him."

No. 11 obv. 4': Compare with a-ut-ti in obv. 3' and tentatively restore [a-as-s]a?-u-it IGI. HI.A-i[1 a-ut-to] "[you will look] with [benevollent eyes"; obv. 7' and 10': Contrary to KBo 47 (indices, p. xvii) and Groddek. I read the proper name [??]GAL.[??]U-da-as(Ura-Tarhundas) instead of [??]GAL.[??]ISTAR. For a critical comparison, the identical "da" sign is present here in obv. 12'. This PN and the title [GAL] QAR-TAP-Pi in obv. 8' exactly match the person [??]GAL.[??]U GAL QAR-TAP-PI "Ura-Tarhunta, the master charioteer" in the witness list of the Bronzetafel iv 38 (CTH 106.A.1). See now my article in Colloquium Anatolicum 11(2012): 320 n. 35.

No. 15 is reminiscent of KUB 45.47 i 30-34 (CTH 494.A), including the phrase [...=kan ANA [.sup.NINDA]n] ,ahhiti ser [dai in 1. 6'.

No. 16 rev. 6'-8' can be entirely restored after the catalog tablet KBo 31.4 vi 31"-33": [ma-a-an [DUMU.sup.LU] SANGA tak-na-as / [[??]UTU-i] tar-pa-a-al-li-i[n] / [pa-a-i][??] QA-TI. Against the hand copy, on the tablet photo (hethiter.net/: PhotArch B1117d) there is no sign trace before rarpalli[n] in 1. 7'. but it appears to be present in the following line before QATI.

No. 17 rev. rt. col. 2'-3': It would be a noteworthy detail for Hittite religious history that the fate divinities DINGIR.MAH and Gulsa were honored by cultic drinking from a pig-shaped silver BIBRU, if Groddek's restoration S[AH] for 1. 3' is correct. The "protective deity of the spear" also has a pig-shaped BIBRU as its representative drinking vessel: [??]LAMMA [.sup.SUKUR].../[(ISTU BI)]BRI[??]A[(H KU.BABBAR eku)][??] (KUB 40.110) rev. 2'-3'// KBo 48.71:9'-10'). I wonder, therefore, if one should expect in KBo 47.17 rather a special king of pig, e.g...