{"id":569,"date":"2019-07-02T12:20:43","date_gmt":"2019-07-02T10:20:43","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.fu-berlin.de\/rereadingbabmed\/?p=569"},"modified":"2019-07-02T14:24:18","modified_gmt":"2019-07-02T12:24:18","slug":"epigastrium-abdomen-1-amt-43-6","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.fu-berlin.de\/rereadingbabmed\/2019\/07\/02\/epigastrium-abdomen-1-amt-43-6\/","title":{"rendered":"EPIGASTRIUM\/ABDOMEN 1 (AMT 43\/6)"},"content":{"rendered":"

– for AMT 43\/6 see also Thompson 1929: 58<\/p>\n

– concerning the fragment AMT 48\/2 (K. 8469, see AMD 8\/1, text 7.10 ms. S) which might be considered as a possible fragment of col. ii or iii of EPIGASTRIUM 1: in comparison to other two column witnesses of the bul<\/em>\u1e6d<\/em>u<\/em>-compendia the length of the lines seems to be too short which might hint on whether a three column recension (as it is witnessed for some therapeutic u\u0161burruda-collection in Ninive, comparable to K. 249+) or simply a differing format due to less content – this makes the identification of this fragment as witness for EPIGASTRIUM 1 rather doubtful<\/p>\n

– for another possible but not yet securely attributable fragment cf. AMT 39\/8 (Bu. 1889-4-26, 60) see transliteration below<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

A = 1881-7-27, 57 (AMT 43\/6)<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

i<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Ai 1f<\/sub> [DI<\/strong>\u0160<\/strong> NA<\/strong>] \u2308SAG<\/strong>\u2309 \u0160A3<\/sub>–\u0161u2<\/sub> na-\u0161i<\/em> MURUB4<\/sub>.ME\u0160-\u0161u2<\/sub> mi-na<\/em>–<\/strong>\u2308tu-\u0161u2<\/sub><\/em><\/strong>\u2309 GU7<\/sub>.ME\u0160-\u0161u2<\/sub><\/em> NA<\/strong> \u2308BI<\/strong>\u2309 [x x (x x)<\/strong>][1]<\/sup><\/a> \/ [u2<\/sup>]\u2308IGI?<\/sup>\u2309-lim<\/em> u2<\/sup>IGI-20 SUD2<\/sub> ina<\/em>!<\/sup> GE\u0160TIN.SUR NU pa-tan<\/em> NAG ina<\/em> A gi\u0161<\/sup>\u0160E.NU \u2308u2<\/sub>?<\/sup>\u2309 x [(x x)]<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    (ruling)<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. Ai 3ff<\/sub> [DI\u0160 NA<\/strong>] \u2308SAG<\/strong>\u2309 \u0160A3<\/sub>–\u0161u2<\/sub><\/em> DAB.DAB-su<\/em><\/strong> \u2308SAG<\/strong>\u2309 \u0160A3<\/sub>–\u0161u2<\/sub><\/em> MU2<\/sub>.MU2<\/sub>(.)<\/strong>\u2308ME(\u0160)\/ana<\/em>?<\/sup><\/strong>\u2309 \u2308GE6<\/sub>\/GIG?<\/sup><\/strong>\u2309 \u2308ga\/BUR2<\/sub>!?<\/sup><\/strong><\/span>\u2309[2]<\/sup><\/a> \u2308a\u0161<\/em>\/ina<\/em><\/strong>?<\/sup><\/strong><\/span>\u2309 [x x (x)<\/strong>] \/ [x x] \u2308ra\/sar?<\/sup>\u2309 GAZIsar<\/sup> MUN SUD2<\/sub> ina<\/em> A SIG3<\/sub>–a\u1e63 ana<\/em> DUR2<\/sub>-\u2308\u0161u2<\/sub><\/em>\u2309 [i-tab<\/em>\/DUB]-\u2308bak<\/em>?<\/sup><\/span>\u2309 x [x x (x)] \/ [x x x (x)] x u2<\/sup>ur2<\/sub>-nu<\/em>-\u2308u<\/em>?<\/sup>\u2309 \u2308u2<\/sup>\u2309\u1e2aAR.\u1e2aAR \u2308u2<\/sup>ti<\/em>\u2309-ia2<\/sub><\/em>-\u2308tu2<\/sub><\/em>\u2309 \u2308u2<\/sup>\u2309nu<\/em>-\u2308\u1e2bur<\/em>?<\/sup>\u2309-[tu2<\/sub><\/em>?<\/sup> (x x)] \/ [x x (x x)] x \u0161im<\/sup>GUR2<\/sub>.\u2308GUR2<\/sub>\u2309 \u2308gi\u0161<\/sup>LI?<\/sup>\u2309 GI.DU10<\/sub> gi\u0161<\/sup>\u2308TASKARIN?<\/sup>\u2309 x (x) u<\/em> \u2308mal-ma-li\u0161<\/em>\u2309 i-\u0161a2<\/sub>-qal<\/em> x[3]<\/sup><\/a> [x (x)] \/ [x x x (x)] \u2308ka\/ud<\/span>?<\/sup>\u2309[4]<\/sup><\/a> 2-\u0161u2<\/sub><\/em> \u1e2aAL<\/span>?[5]<\/a><\/sup> ina mi-i\u1e2b-ri<\/em>[6]<\/sup><\/a> \u2308AGARIN5<\/sub>\u2309 ana<\/em> DUR2<\/sub>–\u0161u2<\/sub><\/em> \u2308DUB\u2309-ak<\/em>-\u2308ma<\/em>?<\/sup>\u2309 [x x] \/ [x x x (x)] x ma ina<\/em> GE\u0160TIN.SUR.RA DUB-ak<\/em> KI.MIN ina<\/em> UD-\u2308\u0161u-ma<\/em><\/span>!?<\/sup>\u2309[7]<\/sup><\/a> ina<\/em> GA \u2308KU7<\/sub>\u2309.[KU7<\/sub> NAG (x)] \/ [x x x (x)] x u2<\/sub>-tab-ba-kam2<\/sub> ina u4<\/sub>-me-\u0161u-ma<\/em> I3<\/sub>.GI\u0160 BARA2<\/sub>.GA x [x (x)] \/ [x x x x (x x)] x u2 ina UD.NA2<\/sub>.AM3<\/sub>[8]<\/sup><\/a> [x x (x)]<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      (ruling)<\/p>\n

        \n
      1. Ai 11ff<\/sub> [ana<\/em> x x x<\/strong>] x \u0161u-\u1e63i2<\/sub>-i<\/em><\/strong> U2<\/sub>.KUR.RA GAZI\u2308sar<\/sup>\u2309 [x x x (x x)] \/ [x x x x x (x)] x u2<\/sup>LAL GI.DU10<\/sub>.GA SU\u1e2aU\u0160 x [x x x x (x x)] \/ […] x […]<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

         <\/p>\n

        iv<\/p>\n

        Aiv 1\u2018<\/sub> \u2308ina<\/em>\u2309 tup<\/em>-\u2308pa<\/em>!<\/sup>\u2309-a<\/em>-\u2308ni<\/em>\u2309 [a\u01612<\/sub>-\u1e6dur as-niq<\/em> IGI.KAR2<\/sub>–ma<\/em>]<\/p>\n

        Aiv 2\u2018<\/sub> \u2308a<\/em>\u2309-na ta-mar-ti<\/em> \u2308\u0161i<\/em>\u2309–<\/em>[ta-as-si-ia qe2<\/sub>-reb<\/em> E2<\/sub>.GAL-ia u2<\/sub>-kin<\/em>]<\/p>\n

         <\/p>\n

        AMT 39\/8 (Bu. 1889-4-26, 60) – ascription to EPIGASTRIUM 1 possible but not fully certain<\/p>\n

         <\/p>\n

        1\u2019 l. 1\u2019f [x x x (x)] x \u2308\u0161a2<\/sub>?<\/sup>\u2309 x […] \/ [x x x (x)] ina<\/em> I3<\/sub>.GI\u0160 \u1e2aI.\u1e2aI \u2308SIG2<\/sub>?<\/sup>\u2309 […]<\/p>\n

        (ruling)<\/p>\n

        2\u2019 3\u2019f [x x (x)] x \u1e63u \u0161<\/em>ap-<\/em>\u1e63<\/em>u<\/em> mu ni<\/span>[10]<\/sup><\/a> sa<\/em>\u1e2b<\/em>-\u2308le2<\/sub>-e<\/em>\u2309 […] \/ [x (x)] x tur tara-bak ina<\/em> KU\u0160 EDIN SUR-\u2308ri<\/em>?<\/sup>\u2309 […]<\/p>\n

        (ruling)<\/p>\n

        3\u2019 5\u2019f [DI\u0160 NA<\/strong>] \u2308SAG<\/strong>\u2309 \u0160A3<\/sub>–\u0161u2<\/sub><\/em> GU7<\/sub>–\u0161u2<\/sub> na-a\u01612<\/sub>-mu-\u0161u<\/em> DUGUD x<\/strong> […] \/ [x x (x)] \u2308ME\u0160?<\/sup>\u2309 x [x (x)] x [(x)] x x […][11]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

        [1]<\/a> AMD 8\/1, 128 restores \u2308ka<\/em>\u2309-[\u0161ip<\/em> (\u2026)] which is hardly visible on the tablet since the break begins at the end of BI.<\/p>\n

        [2]<\/a> BabMed Corpus AMT 43\/6 restores MU2<\/sub>.MU2<\/sub> x [ru-p<\/em>]ul<\/em>2<\/sub>–t<\/em>[i<\/em>(?) TUKU.ME\u0160(?) …], most likely referring to STT 102:7ff (DI\u0160 NA SAG \u0160\u00c0-\u0161\u00fa ru-p\u00fal<\/em>-\u2308ta<\/em>\u2309 \u2308TUK.ME\u0160\u2309-\u0161i<\/em>(irtana\u0161\u0161\u012b<\/em>) SAG \u0160\u00c0-\u0161\u00fa<\/em> \/ \u00fa<\/em>-\u2308\u1e63ar<\/em>\u2309-rap-\u0161\u00fa<\/em> NINDA(akala<\/em>) u<\/em> A(m\u00e2<\/em>) L\u00c1(mu\u1e6d\u1e6du<\/em>) UZU.ME\u0160-\u0161\u00fa<\/em> \u2308tab-ku<\/em>!?<\/sup>\u2309 \u2308NA\u2309 BI \/ U\u016011<\/sub>.ZU(ki\u0161p\u012b<\/em>) GU7<\/sub>(\u0161\u016bkul<\/em>)) and similar entries. This restoration is, due to the damaged condition of the passage, highly uncertain since no parallel is attested so far.<\/p>\n

        [3]<\/a> Maybe EN?<\/p>\n

        [4]<\/a> BabMed Corpus AMT 43\/6 has [\u2026] 1 2-\u0161u2 \u1e2bal but the traces after the break suggest at least two small horizontal wedges before DI\u0160, directly touching it at its middle and so suggesting a sign like UD or a sign similar to KA.<\/p>\n

        [5]<\/a> The interpretation as \u1e2aAL for z\u00e2zu<\/em> or similar (meaning \u201cto divide; to get a share\u201d) is based on context but not fully convincing.<\/p>\n

        [6]<\/a> \u201eEquivalent\u201c or \u201ein equal number\u201c.<\/p>\n

        [7]<\/a> Very uncertain compared to the sign forms in the next line.<\/p>\n

        [8]<\/a> (\u016b<\/em>mu<\/em>) bubbulu<\/em> \u201cnew years day\u201c.<\/p>\n

        [9]<\/a> According to layout and rim of the break the fragment K. 7239 + K. 15821 might join ms. A and restore most of the colophon but the join has yet to be tested.<\/p>\n

        [10]<\/a> Maybe identificatory MU.NE2<\/sub>(\u0161<\/em>um<\/em>\u0161<\/em>u<\/em>) \u201cis its name\u201d which is usually used within entries concerning with skin complaints as well as ailments of the sinews and muscles (see FEET and SKIN).<\/p>\n

        [11]<\/a> Since ME\u0160 is not frequently used within therapeutic prescriptions the second line of this entry might likewise have been part of the symptom description.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

        – for AMT 43\/6 see also Thompson 1929: 58 – concerning the fragment AMT 48\/2 (K. 8469, see AMD 8\/1, text 7.10 ms. S) which might be considered as a possible fragment of col. ii or iii of EPIGASTRIUM 1: in comparison to other two column witnesses of the bul\u1e6du-compendia the length of the lines … \u201eEPIGASTRIUM\/ABDOMEN 1 (AMT 43\/6)\u201c<\/span> weiterlesen<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1870,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[9],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-569","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-allgemein"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.fu-berlin.de\/rereadingbabmed\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/569","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.fu-berlin.de\/rereadingbabmed\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.fu-berlin.de\/rereadingbabmed\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.fu-berlin.de\/rereadingbabmed\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1870"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.fu-berlin.de\/rereadingbabmed\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=569"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.fu-berlin.de\/rereadingbabmed\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/569\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":573,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.fu-berlin.de\/rereadingbabmed\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/569\/revisions\/573"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.fu-berlin.de\/rereadingbabmed\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=569"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.fu-berlin.de\/rereadingbabmed\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=569"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.fu-berlin.de\/rereadingbabmed\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=569"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}

        colophon: (BAK 329)[9]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n