iv (cont.)

73’ A_{iv 2ff} DIŠ NA SAG.KI.DAB.BA TUK.TUK ^u2IGI-lim ^u2IGI-20 ^u2tar-⌈muš^?⌉ [(x)] ⌈^u2⌉an-ki-nu-te[1] / ^gišḪAŠḪUR ^gišGI ^u2ḪAR.ḪAR U₂.ḪI.A ŠEŠ-ti DIŠ-niš ta-pa-[aṣ (ina) ^uruduŠEN].⌈TUR^?⌉[2] ŠUB tu-šab-šal / ta-ša₂-ḫal 10 GIN₂ LAL₃ 1/3 SILA₃ I₃ ḫal-ṣa ana ŠA₃ ŠUB ana DUR₂-⌈šu₂⌉ DUB-ma TI

(ruling)

74’ A_{iv 5f} DIŠ KI.MIN ^u2IGI-lim ^u2IGI-20 NUMUN ^gišŠINIG NUMUN ^u2tu-lal / TEŠ₂.BI SUD₂ ina GEŠTIN.SUR ba-lu pa-tan NAG-ma TI-uṭ

(ruling)

75’ A_{iv 7f} DIŠ KI.MIN ŠIM.ḪI.A DU₃.A.BI-šu₂-nu ina GEŠTIN.SUR u KAŠ.⌈SAG⌉ tu-la-bak ŠEG₆–šal ta-ša₂-ḫal / 10 KISAL[3] LAL₃ 1/3 I₃ ḫal-ṣa ana ŠA₃ ŠUB-di x [(x)][4] ⌈ta⌉-ḫi-ṭa-šu₂-ma TI-uṭ

(ruling)

76’ A_{iv 9} DIŠ KI.MIN ^u2ḪAR.ḪAR ^u2KUR.KUR ⌈NAGA⌉.[SI].⌈MEŠ⌉ x [x x] x ⌈NU⌉ pa-tan NAG.MIN-ma TI-uṭ

(ruling)

77’ A_{iv 10f} DIŠ KI.MIN ^u2IGI-lim ^u2IGI-20 NUMUN ⌈^u2?⌉x [x x x x x x] x ⌈ina^?⌉ ⌈KAŠ⌉ ⌈ŠEG₆⌉-šal / ta-ša₂-ḫal 10 KISAL LAL₃ 1/3 SILA₃ […] ⌈TI⌉

(ruling)

78’ A_iv12ff DIŠ KI.MIN ^u2IGI-lim PA ^gišŠE.⌈NA₂⌉.[A …] / TEŠ₂.BI GAZ SIM ina ⌈KAŠ^?⌉ […] / DIŠ KI.MIN ^gišḪAŠḪUR a-[pi^? …]

(ruling)

79’ A_{iv 15f} DIŠ NA SAG.⌈KI⌉ […] / ^na4AN.ZAḪ/NE^? ⌈GE₆^?⌉ […]

(ruling)

80’ A_{iv 17f} DIŠ KI.MIN ⌈^na4⌉[5][…] / ⌈TEŠ₂⌉.[BI[6] …]

(gap of around 1 line)[7]

81’ B_{iv 1’f} ⌈DIŠ⌉ ⌈KI.MIN⌉ x […] / ZU₂.LUM ⌈SA₅/mal₂^?⌉ […]

(ruling)

82’ B_{iv 3’ff} DIŠ NA SA SAG.KI.MIN-šu₂ x[8] […] / ^u2ŠAKIR ^u2⌈EME⌉-UR.⌈GI₇⌉ ⌈^u2?⌉[…] / U₂ BABBAR lu-ur-⌈pa-na⌉ ^na4as-[ḫar^? …] / _{⌈:⌉ ⌈IM⌉.BABBAR} ^na4_NIG2.KALA.GA […]

(ruling)

83’ B_{iv 7’} DIŠ KI.MIN KU.KU ^na4AŠ₂^!(PA).GI₄.⌈GI₄⌉ […]

(ruling)

84’ B_{iv 8’f} DIŠ KI.MIN PA ^gišŠINIG SIG₇-⌈su⌉ […] / ana ŠA₃ ^na4PEŠ₄[9] tu-x […]

(ruling)

85’ A_{iv 30’ff} x x[10] / [^na4mu]-⌈ṣa⌉ ⌈^na4⌉[x …] / [U₂^?].ḪI.A an-⌈nu⌉-[ti …] / ⌈EN₂⌉ [ur]-sag ^dasal-lu₂-⌈ḫi⌉[11] ⌈ša₂/GAR^?⌉ x […]

B_{iv 10’ff} DIŠ NA ina DAB GIDIM [SAG.KI-šu₂ GU₇–šu₂ u₂-maḫ-ḫa-ṣa-šu₂] / ⌈SA^?⌉ IGI.MIN-šu₂ u₂–⌈zaq⌉–[qa-tu-šu₂ SA(.)GU₂–šu₂ GU₇.MEŠ-šu₂][12] / ⌈^na4⌉mu-ṣa ^na4x […] / [(x)] x an bar[13] x […] / ⌈EN₂⌉ ur-sag ^d⌈asal⌉-[lu₂-ḫi …]

(ruling)

86’ A_{iv 34’f} DIŠ ⌈NA⌉ SAG.KI<–šu₂> DAB-su-ma IGI.MIN-[šu₂ …] / DIŠ-niš SUD₂ ina ⌈KAŠ/I₃^?⌉ […]

B_{iv 15’f} [DIŠ] ⌈NA⌉ SAG.KI-šu₂ ⌈DAB^?⌉–[su-ma …] / [DIŠ^?]-⌈niš^?⌉ ⌈SUD₂^?⌉ […]

(ruling)

87’ A_{iv 36’f} DIŠ ⌈NA⌉ SAG.KI-šu₂ lu ša₂ ⌈ZAG⌉ [lu ša₂ GUB₃ …] / u ⌈IGI⌉.MIN-šu₂ a-pa-a ^na4mu-⌈ṣa⌉ […]

B_{iv 17’ff} (break of appr. 7 lines)

(ruling)

88’ A_{iv 38’ff} ⌈DIŠ⌉ ⌈NA⌉ SAG.KI.ME-šu₂[14] ZI.⌈ME/MEŠ^?⌉ […] / [saḫ]-⌈le₂⌉-e AR₃^!.MEŠ x […] / ⌈KUŠ^?⌉ MUŠ GE₆ x […]

(ruling)

89’ A_{iv 41’f} ⌈DIŠ⌉ ⌈NA⌉ SAG.⌈KI-šu₂^?⌉ ⌈DAB^?⌉–[su-ma IGI.MEŠ/pa-nu–šu₂] ⌈iṣ⌉–ṣa-nun–⌈du⌉ [(ina KI.NA₂–šu₂) ZI-bi/i-teb-bi ŠUB-ut/i-ma-qut ŠU.GIDIM.MA][15] / ⌈^u2IGI-lim⌉ [^u2tar-muš^? (x x) ina] ⌈KAŠ⌉ DU₁₀.GA NAG.MEŠ-⌈šu₂^?⌉ […][16]

B_{iv 23’f} [x (x) ^u2]⌈IGI-lim⌉ ⌈^u2tar-muš⌉ ⌈^u2⌉[…] / ⌈SIG₂⌉ ⌈BABBAR⌉ ^u2⌈NINNI₅⌉ NITA₂ NU.NU ⌈EN₂⌉[17] [7-šu₂^? ŠID-nu^?][18]

(ruling A only)[19]

90’ A_{iv 43’f} [x x x x x (x)] ⌈KEŠ₂^?⌉[20]–su A.RI.A NAM.⌈LU₂.U₁₈⌉.[LU SAG.KI-šu₂ TAG(.TAG).MEŠ ^na4mu-ṣa] / [ni-kip-ta₅ DIŠ-niš] ⌈SUD₂⌉  ina I₃ ^gišEREN ḪI.ḪI ŠEŠ₂.⌈MEŠ-ma⌉ ⌈x (x)⌉[21]

B_{iv 24’bf} […] / A.RI.A NAM.LU₂.U₁₈.LU SAG.⌈KI-šu₂⌉ […] / ni-kip-ta₅ SUD₂ ina I₃ ^gišEREN ḪI.ḪI ŠEŠ₂.⌈MEŠ⌉ […]

(ruling)

91’ A_{iv 45’f} [DIŠ NA SAG.KI.DAB.BA^?–ma SA](.)⌈GU₂⌉.MEŠ-šu₂[22] GU₇.MEŠ-šu₂ ŠU.GIDIM.MA ^gišsi-ḫu ^gišar₂-ga-nu / ⌈^u2⌉[ba-ri-ra-ta₅ GI] ⌈ŠUL⌉.ḪI GAZ SIM ina A GAZI^sar tara-bak LAL-su

B_{iv 26’f} DIŠ NA SAG.KI.DAB.BA-ma[23] SA(.)GU₂–šu₂ GU₇.MEŠ-šu₂ ŠU.GIDIM.MA ⌈^u2⌉[si–ḫu …] / ^u2ba-ri-ra-ta₅ GI ŠUL.ḪI GAZ SIM ina A GAZI^sar […]

(ruling)

92’ A_{iv 47’} DIŠ ⌈NA⌉ SAG.KI.DAB.BA-ma^? TA] ^dUTU.E₃[24] EN EN.NUN.UD.ZAL.LE GU₇–šu₂ ⌈ur⌉–rak UŠ₂

B_{iv 28’} DIŠ NA SAG.KI.DAB.BA-ma TA ^dUTU.ŠU₂.A EN EN.NUN.UD.ZAL.LE x […]

(ruling B only)

93’ A_{iv 48’} DIŠ ⌈NA⌉ [SAG.KI.DAB.BA-ma^?] ⌈ŠA₃⌉.ŠA₃ GU₃.GU₃–si ŠU.GIDIM.MA ša₂-ne₂-e ^diš-tar UŠ₂

B_{iv 29’} DIŠ NA SAG.KI.DAB.BA-ma ŠA₃.ŠA₃ GU₃.GU₃–si ŠU.GIDIM ⌈ša₂^?⌉–[ne₂-e …]

(ruling B only)

94’ A_{iv 49’} DIŠ NA ⌈SAG⌉.[KI.DAB.BA-ma^?] ⌈ma⌉–gal BURU₈ ⌈KI.NA₂⌉ ⌈la⌉ ⌈i-na⌉-aš-ši UŠ₂

B_{iv 30‘} DIŠ NA SAG.KI.DAB.BA-ma ma-gal BURU₈ KI.NA₂ la ⌈i⌉–[na-aš-ši …]

(ruling B only)

95‘ A_{iv 50‘} DIŠ NA ⌈SAG⌉.[KI.DAB.BA-ma^? ma]–gal GU₃.GU₃–si SA SAG.KI-šu₂ ⌈ma^!?-gal^?⌉ ⌈te-bu^?⌉-x x x x x (x) ⌈UŠ₂⌉[25]

B_{iv 31’f} DIŠ NA SAG.KI.DAB.BA-ma ma-gal […] / ⌈SA⌉ SAG.KI-šu₂ ma-gal te-bu-⌈u₂⌉ x[26] […]

(ruling)

96‘ A_{iv 51‘} an-nu-⌈tu₄⌉ […] x SAG.KI.DAB.BA ⌈ḫe₂-en-sa/EN SA.GIG^?⌉ x x (x)[27]

B_{iv 33‘} ⌈an-nu⌉-tu₄ ⌈x x x (x)^?⌉[28] ⌈SAG^?⌉.[KI …]

(ruling)[29]

catchline:

A_{iv 52‘} šum-ma SAG.⌈KI.DAB⌉.[BA ŠU].⌈GIDIM⌉.MA ina SU NA il-ta-za-az-ma NU DU₈

B_{iv 34‘} x x […]

rubric:

A_{iv 53’} DUB 2.KAM₂ [DIŠ] ⌈NA⌉ UGU-šu₂ KUM₂ u₂-kal[30]

colophon: (BAK 329)[31]

A_{iv 54’} E₂.GAL ^mAN.⌈ŠAR₂-DU₃-A^?⌉ [LUGAL ŠU₂ MAN KUR AN.ŠAR₂]⌈^ki⌉ ša ^dAG u ^dtaš-me–tu₄ GEŠTU.MIN ra-pa-aš₂-tu₂ iš-ru-ku-šu₂

A_{iv 55‘} e-ḫu-uz-[zu GEŠTU.MIN na]–⌈mir⌉-tu₄ ni-siq tup-šar-ru-ti

A_{iv 56‘} ⌈ša^?⌉ [ina LUGAL.MEŠ-ni a-lik maḫ-ri–ia mam₂]–⌈ma⌉ ⌈šip^?⌉-ru ⌈šu⌉-a-tu la i-ḫu-uz-zu

A_{iv 57‘} [bul-ṭi TA] ⌈UGU⌉-ḫi EN UMBIN ⌈liq⌉–[ti BAR.MEŠ ta–ḫi]–⌈zu⌉ nak–la

A_{iv 58‘} a-zu–gal-lu–ut ^dNIN.URTA u ^dgu-la ma-la ba-aš₂–⌈mu⌉ [ina tup-pa-a-ni aš₂]–⌈ṭur⌉ as-niq IGI.KAR₂–ma

A_{iv 59‘} a-na ta-mar-ti ši-ta-si-ia qe₂–⌈reb⌉ [E₂].⌈GAL^?⌉-[ia] ⌈u₂⌉-kin

[1] Or sum. (^u2)AN.KI NU.TE “It does not reach heaven or earth”?

[2] Although the restoration follows Attia/Buisson (2003), 9 the space within the break does not seem enough for restoring four signs.

[3] The parallel BAM 159 ii 48 has, comparable to UGU 2:73’, 10 GIN₂.

[4] The traces at the beginning of the break look like MUNUS or a similar sign. The break has not been noted in Attia/Buisson (2003), 9. The parallel BAM 159 ii 48 has within the position of the break of ms. A the phrase ana DUR₂–šu₂, known from UGU 2:73’.

[5] Attia/Buisson (2003), 10 suggests the reading ni-[…] which is possible. Otherwise, since the entry before mentions minerals these are likewise supposed to be part of the used material medica in this entry.

[6] Restoration according to Attia/Buisson (2003), 10 following the copy of BAM 482. Otherwise, the sign UR/TEŠ₂ is not that distinct on the actual tablet.

[7] This approximation follows the margin of the length of a gap of 11 lines suggested in BAM V, 482 iv by Köcher together with the number of lines given following in ms. B. See also Attia/Buisson (2003), 10.

[8] The traces look slightly like the beginning of GU₇.

[9] Or read ^na4IŠKILA as indicated in Attia/Buisson (2003), 10. Otherwise, Borger, MZ, Nr. 608 seems to be uncertain concerning the correct reading of the logogram.

[10] The first sign looks like DIŠ and the traces above might belong to a ruling-line. If this is correct, the whole symptom description of B iv 10’-11’ would surprisingly have to be expected in A iv 29’ which is, due to the bad condition of this passage in ms. A, uncertain.

[11] Most likely referring to Utukkū lemnūtu tbl. 10:1ff. The following GAR is curious and might belong to a following secondary attribution regarding the incantation cited.

[12] Th restoration follows roughly Sakikkû 4:34 (cf. Scurlock, Ghost-Induced Illnesses (2016), no. 118). Since the diagnosis is already stated at the beginning of the entry it is most likely not mentioned again at the end.

[13] Obviously a corrupt reading comparing to ms. A iv 31’ ([U₂^?].ḪI.A an-⌈nu⌉-[ti …]). Attia/Buisson (2003), 16 gives the alternative interpretation of this passage being part of the materia medica-chain as [^na4]AN.BAR which is otherwise curious since all other line beginnings of mss. A and B match the content of each other concerning their location.

[14] In Attia/Buisson (2003), 10 mistakenly transcribed as SAG.KI.MEŠ-šu₂ following Köcher’s copy in BAM 482.

[15] Fir restoration cf. the parallel AMT 97/4:6‘ whose therapeutic prescription refers interestingly to the next entry (90’) in UGU 2. The exact wording might likewise follow the parallel Sakikkû 4:19 which notes usually the logographic spellings (e.g. IGI.MEŠ-šu₂, NIGIN-du, ZI-bi etc.), excluding the specification ina majjālišu.

[16] The alleged parallel Jastrow rev 28 in Attia/Buisson (2003), 10 is highly uncertain (cf. also the collations in Scurlock (2003), 17 rev 28 which differ from the readings in Attia/Buisson (2003), 10 as well as the unexpected continuation of ms. B).

[17] This might likewise be the beginning of the next entry in ms. B. There seems to be a corruption between both mss. concerning the evaluation of the material as separated content (or not).

[18] See Scurlock, Ghost-Induced Illnesses (2016), no. 88.

[19] Since only ms. A divides the passges by a ruling entries 89‘ and 90‘ might likewise be regarded as on entry.

[20] See again Scurlock, Ghost-Induced Illnesses (2016), no. 88.

[21] Cf. for restoration the parallel AMT 97/4:7’f.

[22] The plural marker on GU₂ might suggest the alternative normalization of the logogram as dâdānūšu instead of šerʾānū kišādišu. The respective parallel in Sakikkû 4:16 does not note the plural explicitely.

[23] This form is most likely a corrupt reading of the expected SAG.KI DAB-su-ma. Cf. the parallels for the following entries in Sakikkû 4:11, 13, 12, 9. It is further uncertain, if the same curious form has to be restored in ms. A, here as well as in the following four entries citing diagnostic omens.

[24] Cf. Sakikkû 4:13 which suggests a corrupt reading in B adding the time reference (^dUTU.E₃) of the following entry Sakikkû 4:14.

[25] The parallel Sakikkû 4:9 continues (DIŠ SAG.KI-šu₂ DAB-su-ma KI.MIN SA SAG.KI-šu₂ ma-gal ZI.MEŠ) UGU SAG.DU-šu₂ DU₈ ŠU GIDIM₇ GAM.

[26] Curiously, the sign traces do not look like the expected ⌈UGU⌉, ⌈e⌉-[li] or similar but rather like U₂, KID etc. Cf. maybe the variant of the apodosis u₂-šam-ša₂ in Sakikkû 13 (the parallel to UGU 2:92 but without the variant). In general, the space provided in ms. A seems not to be enough for the signs given in the parallel Sakikkû 4:9 (see above).

[27] Another possible reading, which would skip the problem with the odd Sumerian in the second half, is SAG.KI.DAB.BA.KAM₂ EN SA.⌈GIG^?⌉ x (x). Even if the form after annûtu is not clear, it would describe the contextual scope of the tablet. The last sing traces in ms. A, looking like a Winkelhaken, might hint on the sign ⌈KAM⌉ (SA.GIG.GA.KAM^?).

[28] Could this refer to the number of entries, like ⌈2 šu(= abbr. for šu-ši) x (x)⌉ “120 (entries?) for headache and symptoms …”? The position is tempting to read an-nu-tu₄ ⌈bul-ṭe₄⌉ x […] and similar as has been done in Attia/Buisson (2003), 11 but it looks rather different from these. The first trace might be DIŠ or MIN, the following sign looks like MA or ŠU. The last one or two sign-traces are squeezed in-between and might belong to sth. like MAN and DI or TE but these readings are far from certain. Assuming that the first one or two signs are likewise squeezed it might be read ⌈bul-ṭu₂⌉ with question mark. The middle sign might be read KUR instead of MAN and suggest the reading ⌈lat-ku^!⌉ which would be otherwise odd since the adjective should be (following the pronoun at the beginning) be plural. Therefore, the whole passage is far from clear but sincerely not just read bul-ṭe₄.

[29] Contra Attia/Buisson (2003), 11 ms. A shows a ruling-line before the catchline of the third tablet.

[30] Cf. also the possible rubric of ms. B in K. 7822+: ⌈DUB⌉ ⌈2.KAM₂⌉ ⌈DIŠ⌉ ⌈NA⌉ ⌈UGU^?⌉-[šu₂ …]. The ascription to this subchapter of the NMS is likewise suggested by the special distribution of the rubric, much comparable to ms. A.

[31] See again K. 7822+ which might belong to ms. B and shows likewise BAK 329.