Bird Divination in Mesopotamia

KASKAL Rivista di storia, ambienti e culture del Vicino Oriente Antico

Volume 6 (2009)

BIRD DIVINATION IN MESOPOTAMIA NEW EVIDENCE FROM BM 108874∗

Nicla De Zorzi

The divinatory text BM 108874 preserves omens mostly taken from the falcon (surdû). According to its colophon, it has to be dated to the reign of the Kassite king Meli-Šipak (1186-1172 B.C.). A copy of the text was first published by Gadd 1927, pl. 48, who artificially combined it with the Neo-Assyrian duplicate K. 6278+ (see below sub 2.).

In the following, a commented edition of BM 108874 will be offered, along with a general presentation of what is currently known about bird divination in Ancient Near Eastern cuneiform sources. An analysis of the divinatory interpretative apparatus of the text is provided in the final part of the article.

1. Bird divination in cuneiform sources

1.1. Anatolia

A significant evidence for bird divination in the Ancient Near East comes from the Hittites.1 Following and recording the flight and other movements of various types of birds was the task of

∗ It is my pleasure to thank L. Milano and P. Corò for having made many valuable suggestions and for their costant encouragment. The trustees of the British Museum are thanked for permission to edit BM 108874 and K 6278+ and to quote unpublished texts. The staff of the Department of the Ancient Near East has provided all possible assistance during my two stays in London. I express my sincere thanks to I. Finkel and M. Geller for having provided collations of some difficult points. I would also like to thank M. Maiocchi for his precious technical assistance with the copies of the tablets. Any mistakes and omissions are, of course, my own.

1. The evidence is thoroughly discussed by Archi 1975, 119-180, Ünal 1976, 27-56 and Beal 2002, 65-73,

with pertinent literature. See also van den Hout 2003, 119-120.

86 Nicla De Zorzi

the Hittite “bird watchers”, the LÚIGI.MUŠEN and the LÚMUŠEN.DÙ.2 According to the divinatory texts, the LÚIGI.MUŠEN is the one who is responsible for observing the flight of the birds, whereas the LÚMUŠEN.DÙ plays a role in the ritual context following the observation.3

In Hittite bird divination the oracular field is usually longitudinally divided by a river or a road and the flight is described in its relationship with these elements. The basic structure of the observation includes the first seeing of the bird, its coming by, the patterns of its flight within the field, its going away. A rich terminology made by preverbs or adverbs gives additional informations about the flight.4 After that, the bird watcher gives the result; then the name of the senior haruspex is given and the result is again offered in the Hittite equivalent of quotation marks.5

Another type of divination involving birds was in use among the Hittites, the @URRI-bird oracle.6 This was performed by a different professional, the diviner / exorcist LÚ@AL / LÚAZU (= bārû). No description of the phenomenon is given in this case: only its being a favourable or unfavourable oracle being stated. The oracles were performed by the equivalent of the Akkadian bārû, it has therefore been argued that the @URRI-bird divination prescribed the observation of the exta of the bird.7 Moreover, in Neo-Assyrian texts the word @URRI seems to describe a bird nesting in a burrow: this has led to the suggestion that the Hittite @URRI-birds simply gave a response by grabbing either the head or the tail.8 Others have eventually suggested that it was a poison oracle, of the sort performed on chickens by the Azande in Sudan.9

A religious text involving birds was found at Sultantepe (STT 341). The tablet has a Neo-Assyrian duplicate from Niniveh (CT 41 5) and a parallel (KAR 125) from Assur. It is based on “birdcalls” of various birds interpreted as mythological references: the birds examined were thus connected to a deity whom the phrase was applied to.10

2. Or occasionally a combination of the two: LÚIGI.DÙ. See Archi 1975, 129 and Beal 2002, 65 n. 63. 3. For the Hittite “bird watchers” see Archi 1975, 130. For the rituals of the Hittite augures see most

recently Bawanypeck 2004, 31-46 with pertinent literature. 4. For the species of birds observed see Archi 1975, 141-144. For the oracular fields and the bird

movements see Archi 1975, 150-157 and Beal 2002, 65-68. As van den Hout 2003, 120 points out, most of the technical terms describing bird movements are Luwian terms.

5. See Beal 2002, 70-71 and van den Hout 2003, 120. 6. For divination through the @URRI-bird see Archi 1975, 139-141, Kammenhuber 1976, 11, Beal 2002,

71-72, van den Hout 2003, 119 and Tognon 2004, 59-82. 7. Archi 1975, 140 and Gurney 1981, 151, followed by Kammenhuber 1988, 89. Boissier 1935, 30 n. 1 had

previously suggested that the words erai- and zizzipki, which sometimes describe the @URRI-bird, were a part and a configuration of the liver respectively.

8. Gurney 1981, 153. Accordingly, the erai- and the zizzipki were marks or disfigurations on the bird body, which could change the result of the investigation. See Beal 2002, 72.

9. See Beal 2002, 72 on Evans-Pritchard 1937, 258-351. 10. See Lambert 1970, 111-117. The practice of relating birds to deities is also known from Mesopotamian

omen texts. For instance, CT 40 49: 41: šumma(DIŠ) na-an-na-ru i##ūr(MUŠEN) Sîn(d30) zumuršu(SU-šú) sāmu(SA5) u pe#û(BABBAR) ... “if the nannaru, the bird of the god Sîn, is body is red and white...” (see also CT 40 49: 31, 36, 37, 43). The text probably belongs to the divinatory series Šumma ālu ina mēlê šakin for which see below, 89.

Bird Divination in Mesopotamia - New Evidence From BM 108874 87

1.2. Syria

The first evidence for bird divination in Syria comes from Mari, where it probably existed alongside other practices such as hepatoscopy and divinatory ecstasy.11

A letter dated to Ya~dun-Lîm (ARM 26 229: 14-16) refers to a woman’s dream being confirmed by means of the observation of i##ūrāt ~urrim “partridges”: i-na i##ūrāt(MU&EN.@Á) ~u-ri-im / wa-ar-ka-sà ap-ru-ús-ma / na-a\-la-at “by means of partridges / I investigated on it (the dream). / (The dream) was seen” (Durand 1988, 469).

In another letter (ARM 26 145: 13-17) the diviner Šamaš-‘înâya complains: [i-n]a ~a-al-#í-im â / wa-á^-ba-ku ú-ul bārîm([DU]MU.MÁ&.&U.SU13.SU13) / ú-ul sú-um-ma-timMU&EN / i-na-ad-di-nu-[n]im

“[i]n the district where / I live neither [divi]ner / nor doves / they give me” (ibid., 309). A text known as the “Ritual of E^tar” suggests the freeding of i##ūrāt ~urrim to stimulate the

ecstasy of a diviner (see Durand 1988, 386).12 According to Durand 1988, 38, i##ūr ~urrim is a general word for any bird living in a hole, while summatum is a more precise indication of the actual bird used in the ritual.

Further evidence for bird divination in Syria comes from Alala~.13 A number of administrative texts (mostly lists of cereal allocations) from Alala~ VII indicate that birds were fed and used for offerings and divination. The activities of two bird fowlers (LÚMUŠEN.DÙ uându), Kinni and Aya-ârru, are well documented.14

Moreover, the text Al T 269 (Zeeb 2001, no. 35): 16 allocates to a man named Ku-uz-zi 1 ½ pa emmer for buying eight birds. In Al T 274 (Zeeb 2001, no. 11): 30 one Ku-uz-zi is described as LÚÚZU bārû “diviner”. Unfortunately, divinatory texts concerning birds have not been found at Alala~.

However, a parallel is found in the inscription of Idrimi (ca. 1500 B.C.) who claims to have dwelt for seven years among the @apiru where he practiced augury and extispicy: i##ūrī(MUŠ[email protected]) ú-za-ki / pu~ādī([email protected]) ab-ri-ma “I freed the birds and ispectioned the lambs” (ll. 27-28) (Dietrich-Loretz 1981, 204).15 The birds were probably released in order to interpret their flight.

1.3. Mesopotamia

In ancient Mesopotamia birds were normally used as a means to tell the future.16 Predictions could be made in two different ways: either observing their flights and behaviours, or their physical peculiarities prior and after the sacrifice.

11. The evidence is discussed by Durand 1997, 273-282. 12. On this ritual see Durand-Guichard 1997, 35-39 and 46-63. See also Durand 2000, 124-129. 13. The evidence is discussed by Zeeb 2001, 264-283. 14. See ibid., 264-267 and 280-282. 15. For the inscription of Idrimi see Dietrich-Loretz 1981, 201-269 and Mayer W. 1995, 333-350. For further

commentaries on ll. 27-28 see McEwan 1980, 62, Archi 1975, 120 and Zeeb 2001, 272-273. 16. The evidence for bird divination in ancient Mesopotamia has been recently discussed by McEwan 1980,

58-64. See also Maul 2003, 85-86.

88 Nicla De Zorzi

The first form of divination is attested as early as the second millennium B.C., while much of the material comes from the first millennium omen series Šumma ālu ina mēlê šakin “If a city is set on a height”.17 The professional who is in charge of this divinatory technique is named dāgil i##ūrī “observer of birds (for divination purpose)” in Neo-Assyrian sources.18

The second form of bird divination - we can term it “bird-extispicy” - is known since the Old-Babylonian Period.19 Despite most of the Old-Babylonian divinatory texts concerning extispicy deal with the inspection of the entrails of a lamb or a sheep offered and slaughtered to the gods, administrative texts confirm that also deliveries of birds and oil for divination purposes were in use.20 The signs observed on the sacrificial bird were its colours and the disfigurations of some parts of its body.21 The professional in charge of the performance was the diviner-bārû.22

The association of birds, oil and sheep offerings with divination is confirmed by an unusual text (K 57) published by Nougayrol 1967, 35-37. It seems to be a sort of manual for the art of the diviner.23 Its first paragraph (ll. 1-13), structured like an omen compendium, provides a list of

17. The series, which, like other omen collections, developed over the course of several hundreds years, was standardized around the middle of the seventh century B.C. The standard or latest version of Šumma ālu consisted of at least 107 tablets, covering almost all the common occurrences of daily life in ancient Mesopotamia. Gadd 1925-1931 made the first attempt to treat the series as a whole, although earlier publications of parts of the series had been already provided by Boissier 1894-1899 and Holma 1923. Nötscher 1928, 1929, 1930 used the texts published by Gadd 1925-1931 as a basis for the first serious study of the series. In more recent times, Moren 1978 has attempted a reconstruction on the basis of all the published and a lot of unpublished witnesses. She has then edited the tablets 1-21 (Freedman 1998) and recently the tablets 22-40 (Freedman 2006).

18. The evidence is collected by CAD D, 25. A list of court personnel, published by Fales – Postgate 1992, no. 1, mentions three dāgil i##ūrī among other professionals: the scribe (tupšarru), the diviner (bārû), the exorcist (āšipu), the physician (asû).

19. The first Old-Babylonian texts dealing with the physical features of sacrificial birds were published by Goetze 1947, no. 51-53. In his review of Goetze 1947, Kraus 1950, 145 pointed out that the anatomical terminology for the parts of the body of the bird was similar to that of other extispicy texts concerning the sheep, thus suggesting that MUŠEN “bird” was a term used to describe a feature of the exta (followed by CAD I/J, 213: 4 and AHw, 390: 6). The theory was refuted by Nougayrol 1967a, 23-38. Final proof for bird-extispicy in Mesopotamia appears in a religious text, Rm 222+513 – quoted by Nougayrol 1967a, 31 - published by Starr 1983, 62-63. Lines 22-24 read as follows: i-na i##ūri(MUŠEN) e-pu-šu-ma / i-na ta-mi-it a-kar-ra-bu / ki-it-tam šu-uk-nam “in the bird which I sacrifice and / in the tamītu prayer which I say / (establish) the truth”. A similar divinatory request dated to the Seleucid period is published by McEwan 1980, 59-69. An Old-Babylonian omen report giving the result of the inspection of a sacrificial bird is published by Tsukimoto 1982, 106-110. Another bird-extispicy text found at Susa was published by Labat 1974, no. 7.

20. For oil deliveries see Pettinato 1966a, 21. The administrative text BE 6/1: 118 (Ranke 1906) mentions six birds ana nēpešti bārî “for the performance of the diviner”. See also Veldhuis 2006, 489 n. 10.

21. See Nougayrol 1967a, 34. Note that the protases of some first millennium Šumma ālu-texts also refer to the colours of the birds observed. For instance, the protasis of CT 40 49-50: 29 reads as follows: šumma(DIŠ) i##ūru(MUŠEN) šá qabal(MURUB4) gul-gul-li-šú pe#û(BABBAR) ma-la zi-bi i-ma-#i u zumuršu(SU-šú) sāmu(SA5) “if a bird has a white (spot) in the middle of its skull and it reaches as far as its throat and its body is red ...” (see also CT 40 49-50: 30, 35, 40). For CT 40 49-50: 29 see Nötscher 1930, 186.

22. Nougayrol 1967a, 37 and Archi 1975, 119 n. 5. See also Janković 2004, 23 and n. 87. 23. A parallel text is the divinatory “vademecum” KAR 151 (Nougayrol 1967a, 35 n. 1). The concluding

sections of KAR 151 include a lecanomancy ritual and a list of favourable and unfavourable days for the


divinatory practices: extispicy (?) (l. 1 is broken), hemerology (ina uddagiddî (?) l. 2), 24 astrology (ina attalî Sîn “(if the diviner makes divination) by means of the eclipse of the moon” l. 3; ina attalî Šamaš “by means of the eclipse of the sun” l. 4), lecanomancy (ina šamni “by means of oil” l. 5), bird-extispicy or augury (ina i##ūri “by means of a bird” l. 7; ina i##ūr ~urri “by means of a partridge” ll. 8-9; ina summati “by means of a dove” l. 10), libanomancy (ina nignakki “by means of a censer” l. 11). Line 12 reads: šumma([DIŠ]) ina niqê(SISKUR.SISKUR) immeri(UDU.NÍTA) tes-li-su ma~-r[at “[if] (the diviner makes divination) by means of the sacrifice of a sheep – his prayer will be accepted”. The second paragraph (ll. 18-20) bears omens taken from the mannerism and the behaviour of the diviner and its customer during the investigation; the third (ll. 25-31) concerns aleuromancy, i.e., divination from the scattering of flour on water.25

With regard to augury, the first source of the genre is an Old-Babylonian tablet found at Ur and published by Weisberg 1969-1970, 87-104. It records 25 omens whose predictions involve at least six different kind of birds.26 The birds are the heron (igirû), the mesukku-bird, the “mountain bird” (i##ūr šadî), the eagle (erû), the “hunting-falcon” (kassūsu).27 Their activities are: nest-building (qinnam qanānum), entering the city (ana libbi ālim erēbum), costantly flying (nawûmŠtn) over the town or the army, being costantly seen (amārumNtn) in the city, eating (akālum), seizing (#abātum) or fighting (ma~ā#umGt) with another bird.

During the first millennium much of the material concerning birds was collected into the omen series Šumma ālu, possibly Tablet 64 to Tablet 79. Tablets 64 and 65 deal with eagles (erû) acting in the city or in relationship to the army;28 Tablet 66 deals with falcon (surdû) omens;29 Tablet 67 deals

performance of an extispicy, which are in accordance with hemerological texts as well as with extispicy reports and queries. The most important edition of KAR 151 is by Koch 2005, 273-296. On the relationship between KAR 151 and hemerological texts see Livingstone 1993, 97-113.

24. On UD.DA.GÍD.DA = uddagiddû (AHw 1400b and Borger 2003, 381: “ausgefallener 30. Monatstag”; Nougayrol 1967a, 36: “jour férié”; George 1992, 153: “extracalary day”) see Landsberger 1949, 254 n. 31.

25. See Guinan 2002, 15-16. 26. The tablet is a forerunner to the bird tablets of the first millennium series Šumma ālu, as demonstrated by

the fact that one of his omens occurs verbatim on a Neo-Assyrian Šumma ālu tablet from Niniveh: Weisberg 1969-1970, 104 and Moren 1998, 13. For further Old-Babylonian forerunners to Šumma ālu see Durand 1988, 483-506, Joannès 1994, 303-312 and Guichard 1997, 305-328. See also Freedman 1998, 13.

27. For Akkadian and Sumerian bird names and their occurrences among cuneiform sources see Salonen 1973. A catalogue of Sumerian bird names has been recently provided in Veldhuis 2004, 213-305. For Akkadian bird names see also Black – Al Rawi 1987, 117-126.

28. No attempt is made here to deal with unpublished sources. According to Freedman 1998, 339, the incipit of Tablet 64 is contributed by CT 41 13: 32. It reads: šumma([DIŠ) erû(Á.MUŠEN]) ana bīt(É) amēli(LÚ) irrub(TU) bītu šû (É.BI) […] “[if an eagle] enters a man’s house _ that house [...]”. The texts have been reconstructed on the basis of CT 41 14 + CT 39 25 (see Moren – Foster 1988, 278): on the obverse it deals with fish omens (Tablet 63 according to Freedman 1998, 339), while on the reverse it deals with eagle omens. The incipit of Tablet 65 is contributed by CT 41 14: rev. 9-10. It reads: šum4-ma e-ru-ú ma-du-tu4 ina ~arrāni(KASKAL) eli(UGU) um-ma-na-a-ti iš-ta-na-a’-ú miqitti(ŠUB-ti4) um-ma-na-a-ti ibašši(GÁL-ši) “if numerous eagles are repeatedly flying in front of an army on campaign _ the downfall of the army will occur”: see Moren 1978, 210-211 and 213 (against Weisberg 1969-1979, 104, who identified CT 41 14: 9 with the catch-line of Tablet 67).

29. The incipit of CT 39 24 describes falcons walking on the road. According to its colophon, CT 39 23-24 should be identified with Šumma ālu Tablet 66.

90 Nicla De Zorzi

with the actions of crows (āribu) and eagles in relationship to the army;30 the incipits of Tablets 68-70 are not preserved; Tablet 71 deals with chickens (ittidû) being seen in the city;31 Tablet 72 deals with birds entering the city;32 the incipits of Tablets 73-78 are not preserved.

Tablet 79 is the most complete tablet of the group.33 It deals with falcons acting during the military campaign of the king and more specifically during the journey to the land of the enemy (ana māt nakri ~arrāna #abātu) and the establishing of a camp (madakta šakānu). The signs observed are the flight patterns of the falcon such as crossing (etēqu) and circling around (sa~āru); behaviours such as hunting a prey (bu’ura našû), fighting with another bird (#alta epēšu), flapping the wings (kappī salālu), screeching (šasû), defecating (zê nadû) or urinating (šīnāti šatānu). Another context of observation is the palace of the king: the birds are described entering (erēbu), nesting (qinna qanānu) and giving birth ((w)alādu) in the palace. Most of the apodoses predict the outcome of the king’s campaign.

The reconstruction of Šumma ālu bird tablets is an hard task due to the small number of preserved colophons. It is therefore difficult to exactly identify the bird omen texts within the series: most of them describe the behaviour of various birds, such as the eagle and the crow but also the partridge (i##ūr ~urri), the swallow (sinuntu), the dove (summatu), the goose (kurkû), to mention just a few examples, within different contexts.34

Additional information about Šumma ālu bird omens is provided by the rituals designated to ward off the evil predicted by an omen. It was a common practice in ancient Mesopotamia to recur to the appropriate rituals to ward off danger, when the omens observed portended illnesses or similar things. These apotropaic rituals bear the Sumerian title NAM.BÚR.BI and list a combination of ritual actions and prayers for the exorcist’s performance.35 A great number of Namburbis are

30. The Tablet is preserved at least in three copies (Moren 1978, 212-213). The first is CT 39 25, whose

incipit corresponds to the catch-line of CT 39 23-24: 34-35: šumma(DIŠ) ummānu(ERÍN.NI) ~arrāna(KASKAL) illakma(DU-ma) āribu(UGA.MUŠEN) ana pān(IGI) ummāni(ERÍN.NI) ištanassi(GÙ.DÉ.DÉ) ummānu(ERÍN.NI) ~arrāna(KASKAL) illiku(DU-ku) ul(NU) iturrâ(GUR.RA) “if the army goes on campaign and a crow is repeatedly calling in front of the army _ the army that went on campaign will not return”. The second is CT 39 25, an excerpt tablet whose incipit corresponds to CT 39 25. The third is an unpublished tablet, BM 38341, which quotes the first 6 lines of CT 39 25.

31. According to Freedman 1998, 340, the incipit of Tablet 71 is contributed by an unpublished tablet, BM 46598: 1: šumma([DIŠ) ittidû(DAR.MUŠEN]) i-na āli(URU) inammar(IGI) ana libbi(ŠÀ) āli šiâti(URU.BI) [...] “[if a chicken] is seen in the city – inside that city ...”. BM 46598 has been recently joined to BM 43899 (courtesy of Ch. Walker).

32. BM 46598: 23 contribues the incipit of Tablet 65: [… MUŠ]EN ana libbi(ŠÀ) āli(URU) irrubam(TU-am) ik x ana libbi(ŠÀ) āli(URU) irrubam(TU-am) lumnu(@UL) ana āli šiâti(URU.BI) […] “[if a…bir]d entered a city…will enter the city _ evil will…to that city”(see Freedman 1998, 340).

33. Published by Leichty 2003, 259-284. 34. For unplaced bird omens see Moren 1978, 243-246. Two bird omens from Assur are published by

Heeßel 2007b, nos. 27 and 28: the first (VAT 9921) is a fragment of a Neo-Assyrian tablet concerning the partridge (i##ūr ~urri); the second (VAT 13802) is a fragment of a Middle-Assyrian tablet dealing with the actions of various birds (see also Weidner 1952-1953, pls. 11-12). Unplaced is also the little fragment from Nimrud published by Wiseman – Black 1996, no. 47. We should add to the list IM 74500, published by Fawzi 1978, 40-66, which concerns crows entering the house of a man, acting on the roof, the window, the door of the house or in various spatial relations to a man.

35. Most of the namburbi rituals were published by Caplice 1965-1973 and 1974. The most recent edition is by Maul 1994.


occasioned by ill-portending bird omens, mostly taken from falcons, doves and partridges entering the house of a man.36

2. Text edition of BM 108874

BM 108874 is a small, carefully polished and perfectly preserved omen tablet in Babylonian script (see Fig. 1, photo, and Fig. 2-3, copy). It includes 25 omens taken from the observation of the flight patterns of the falcon (surdû) in different contexts: while “a man” goes off on his errand (omens 1-2), is about to make a journey (omens 4-5), goes against the enemy (7-11), is about to make a sacrifice (12-15), is brought to the palace under guard (16-17), begins to build his house (18-19), is about to plow a field (omens 23 and 25). Omens 20-22 describe the behaviour of the falcon while in the man’s house a patient is sick. Omens 3, 6 and 24 concern the flight patterns of the raven (āribu) while a man goes off on his errand (3), is about to make a journey (6), throws the seed (24).37

The British Museum preserves a Neo-Assyrian version of the text, K 6278+Rm 2 389 (see Fig. 4). Gadd 1927, pl. 48, published a mixed copy in Neo-Assyrian script of K 6278+ and BM 108874, artificially combining the former, which is defective in some parts, with the latter.

However, K 6278+ shows a number of orthographical variants and, above all, a different order: BM 108874: 12=K 6278+: 18; BM 108874: 13=K 6278+: 23-24; BM 108874: 14=K 6278+: 21-22; BM 108874: 15=K 6278+: 19-20; BM 108874: 24=K 6278+: 37; BM 108874: 25=K 6278: 36. Three omens show a reverse order of the flight patterns: K 6278+: 28 (= BM 108874: 18), K 6278+: 29 (= BM 108874: 19), K 6278+: 33 (= BM 108874: 20). Moreover, K 6278+: 13 (= BM 108874: 9) preserves a different apodosis, while K 6278+: 23 (= BM 108874: 13) preserves a different version of the first part of the protasis.

Two fragmentary omen tablets in Neo-Assyrian script, K 6880 and Sm 100+Rm 425, published by Holma 1923, pl. 12 and 20 respectively, concern the flight patterns of the falcon and probably duplicate K 6278+.

The colophon of BM 108874, copied by Gadd 1927, pl. 49 and published by Hunger 1968, no. 65, identifies the tablet as a copy (GABA.RI) of an original from the land of “Subartu” (SU.BIR4KI), written during the 3rd _ 2nd regnal year (MU.3.KÁM.2.KÁM) of the Kassite king Melišipak (1186-1172 B.C.).38 Unfortunately, the provenience of the tablet is unknown.

36. See Caplice 1965, 108-115 for a catalogue and id. 1967, 34-38 and 273-286 for specific texts. See also

Maul 1994, 229-270. 37. According to Veldhuis 2004, 226 the Akkadian āribu means both “raven” and “crow”, i.e., Sumerian

Ú.NÁG.GAMUŠEN and BURU4MUŠEN respectively. 38. The geographical identification of Subartu fluctuates from period to period (the classical works on the

issue are Ungnad 1936 and Gelb 1944. See most recently Michalowski 1986, 129-156 and Archi 1998, 3-5). In the Middle-Babylonian Period it seems that it should be identified with Assyria (see Sassmannshausen 2001, 131-133). Accordingly, the reference to Subartu might reflect the political and cultural interrelations between Babylonia and Assyria after the invasions of Aššur-uballi\ I (1353-1318 B.C.) and Tukulti-Ninurta I (1233-1197 B.C.). The double numbering of regnal years is not unique in Kassite chronology, although its exact meaning is uncertain: see Brinkman 1976, 410-411.

92 Nicla De Zorzi

2.1. Transliteration (see Fig. 2-3)

Obv. 1. DIŠ NA ana Á.ÁŠ-šú ZI-ma ŠÚR.DÙMUŠEN TA 15 NA ana 2,30 NA i-ti-iq Á.ÁŠ-su

KUR-ad

2. DIŠ KIMIN ŠÚR.DÙMUŠEN 15 NA iz-ziz-ma ta-~e-e NA DU-ak NA.BI KI DU-ku

Á.TUG TUK-ši

3. DIŠ KIMIN Ú.NÁG.GAMUŠEN iz-zi-iz-ma GÙB NA GÙ-si NA.BI KI IGI.MEŠ-šú

GAR-nu DU-ma @A.LA KÚ

4. DIŠ KIMIN KASKAL ZI-ma ŠÚR.DÙMUŠEN TA 2,30 NA ana 15 NA i-ti-iq-ma ana ku-

tal-li-šú GUR NA.BI KI DU-ku @A.LA KÚ ŠÀ.BI DÙG.GA

5. DIŠ KIMIN KASKAL ZI-ma ŠÚR.DÙMUŠEN TA 15 NA ana 2,30 NA i-ti-iq NU KUR

Á.ÁŠ

6. DIŠ KIMIN KASKAL ZI-ma Ú.NÁG.GAMUŠEN ina 15 NA GUB-ma GÙ-si NA.BI KI

IGI.MEŠ-šú GAR-nu NU DU-ak ŠÀ.BI NU DÙG.GA

7. DIŠ NA ana KÚR ZI-ma ŠÚR.DÙMUŠEN TA 15 NA ana ku-tál NA NIGIN-ma ana 2,30

NA i-ti-iq NA.BI KÚR-šú KUR-ad

8. DIŠ NA ana KÚR ZI-ma ŠÚR.DÙMUŠEN TA 2,30 NA ana 15 NA i-ti-iq ta-~e-e NA

ŠUB-ma DU NA.BI ina ŠÀ KÚR @A.LA KÚ

9. DIŠ NA ana KÚR ZI-ma ŠÚR.DÙMUŠEN TA 2,30 NA ana 15 NA te-bi-ma a-na EGIR-šú

GUR NA.BI EN KÚR-šú KUR-šú ina TAG4 ana É-šú TU

10. DIŠ NA ana KÚR ZI-ma ŠÚR.DÙMUŠEN TA 2,30 NA ana 15 NA i-ti-iq ù 2,30 NA i#-

bat-ma ta-~e-e NA DU NA.BI di-ik-tam GAZ

11. DIŠ NA ana KÚR ZI-ma ŠÚR.DÙMUŠEN TA 2,30 NA ana ku-tal NA NIGIN-ma ana 15

NA i-ti-iq NA.BI KI DU-ku ~u-bu-us-su i~-~a-bat ŠÀ.BI NU DÙG.GA

12. DIŠ NA SISKUR.SISKUR ana AN-šú ana na-qé-e ZI-ma ŠÚR.DÙMUŠEN TA 15 NA ana

2,30 NA DIB-iq NA.BI AN-šú SISKUR.SISKUR-šú ma-~i-ir

13. DIŠ NA SISKUR.SISKUR ana AN-šú BAL-ma TA É AN-šú ana É-šú ZI-ma

ŠÚR.DÙMUŠEN TA 15 NA ana ku-tal NA NIGIN-ma ana 2,30 NA DIB NA.BI

UD.MEŠ-šú GÍD.MEŠ TI.LA UD.MEŠ GÍD.MEŠ

14. DIŠ NA SISKUR.SISKUR DIŠ AN-šú ana na-qé-e ZI-ma ŠÚR.DÙMUŠEN TA 2,30 NA

ana ku-tal NA NIGIN-ma ana 15 NA DIB NA.BI UD.MEŠ-šú LÚGUD.MEŠ ina MU-

šú a-na UŠ

15. DIŠ NA SISKUR.SISKUR ana AN-šú ana na-qé-e ZI-ma ŠÚR.DÙMUŠEN TA 2,30 NA

ana 15 NA DIB šib-sat AN-šú u EŠ18.TÁR-šú UGU-šú GÁL SISKUR-šú Ú NU NA KI


16. DIŠ NA GIM EN.NU.UN ana É.GAL ÍL-ma ŠÚR.DÙMUŠEN TA 2,30 NA ana 15 NA

DIB UGU EN KA-šú GUB-az GABA.RI NU TUK

Rev. 17. DIŠ NA GIM EN.NU.UN ana É.GAL ÍL-ma ŠÚR.DÙ TA 15 NA ana 2,30 NA DIB

LÚ.BI KI.ŠÚ-šu GÍD.DA

18. DIŠ NA APIN É BE-ma SIG4 ŠUB-ma ŠÚR.DÙMUŠEN TA 2,30 NA ana 15 NA DIB

É.BI DAGAL-iš EN É.BI LIBIR.RA

19. DIŠ NA APIN É BE-ma SIG4 ŠUB-ma ŠÚR.DÙMUŠEN TA 15 NA ana 2,30 NA DIB

ŠÀ É NA.BI NU DÙG.GA

20. DIŠ ina É NA GIG GIG-ma ina še-rim ina ku-tál É GIG ŠÚR.DÙMUŠEN TA za-mi-i ša

2,30 ana za-mi-i ša 15 DIB GIG.BI ár-~iš ZI-bi

21. DIŠ ina É NA GIG GIG-ma ina še-rim ina ku-tál É GIG ŠÚR.DÙMUŠEN TA za-mi-i ša 15

ana za-mi-i ša 2,30 DIB GIG.BI GIG-su GÍD.DA

22. DIŠ ina É NA GIG GIG-ma ina še-rim ina ku-tál É GIG ŠÚR.DÙ i-ša-a’ GIG.BI

BA.UŠ

23. DIŠ NA SAG A.ŠÀ ana ma-~a-#i ZI-ma ŠÚR.DÙMUŠEN TA 15 NA ana 2,30 NA DIB

TI.LA.ŠÀ ša A.ŠÀ IGI-mar

24. DIŠ NA ŠE.NUMUN È-ma Ú.NÁG.GAMUŠEN ina UGU-šú DU-ma ina 2,30 NA GÙ-si

AB.SÍN GUN-sà ut-tar

25. DIŠ NA SAG A.ŠÀ ana ma-~a-#i ZI-ma ŠÚR.DÙMUŠEN TA 2,30 NA ana 15 NA DIB

AB.SÍN GUN-sà LÁ-\a

Colophon: KÚR 25 MU.BI GABA.RI KUR SU.BIR4KI ITIAPIN.DU8.A UD.8.KÁM

MU.3.KÁM.2.KÁM

me-li-ši-pak LUGAL î-pir šá ŠU IEN-AŠ-ŠEM DUMU IAN-TUK-ni

DUB.SAR TUR.RA IN.SAR

List of variants in K 6278+

2. l. 2 : [DIŠ] NA KIMIN for DIŠ KIMIN; l. 2: ZAG for 15; 3. l. 3: [DIŠ] NA KIMIN for DIŠ KIMIN; l. 3: DU for iz-zi-iz-ma; 4. l. 4: [DIŠ] NA ana for DIŠ KIMIN; 5. l. 6: [DIŠ] NA ana for DIŠ KIMIN; 6. l. 7: [DIŠ N]A ana for DIŠ KIMIN; 7. l. 8: ana LÚKUR for ana KUR; 8. l. 10: ana LÚKUR for ana KUR; l. 11: ta-~e-e LÚ id-di-ma DU-ik for ta-~e-e NA ŠUB-ma DU; 9. l. 12: ana LÚKUR for ana KUR; l. 12: ZI-ma ana EGIR-šú GUR-úr for te-bi-ma a-na EGIR-šú GUR; l. 13: the apodosis is NA.BI EN KÚR-^ú KUR-ád MUNUS.MEŠ ana URU-šú GUR-ra; 10. l. 14: ana LÚKUR for ana KUR; l. 15: ù GÙB for ù 2,30; l. 15: di-ik-ta-šú GAZ-ak for NA BI di-ik-tam GAZ; 11. l. 16: ana LÚKUR for ana KUR; l. 16: ana ku-tál-li for ana ku-tal; l. 16: ana ZAG for ana 15; l. 17: ~u-bu-us-su i~-~ab-bat for ~u-bu-us-su i~-~a-bat; 13. l. 23: iq-qí-ma for BAL-ma; l. 23: È-ma between É AN-šú and ana É-šú; l. 24: ana [ku]-tál-li for ana ku-tal; l. 24: ana GÙB NA DIB-iq for ana 2,30 NA DIB; l. 24: GÍD.D[A.MEŠ] for GÍD.MEŠ; 14. l. 21: [DIŠ] NA KIMIN-ma for DIŠ NA SISKUR.SISUR ana AN-šú ana na-qé-e ZI-ma; l. 21: ana ku-tál-li for ana ku-tal; l. 21: ana ZAG NA DIB-i[q] for ana 15 NA

94 Nicla De Zorzi

DIB; l. 22: LÚGUD.DA.MEŠ for LÚGUD.MEŠ; 15. l. 19: DIB-iq for DIB; l. 20: the apodosis is NA.BI šib-sat AN-šú u DEŠ18.TÁR-šú GÁL.MEŠ-šú SISKUR-šú NU ma-~ir; 16. l. 25: [ki]-i ma-#ar-ti for GIM EN.NU.UN; l. 25: na-šú-šú for ÍL-ma; l. 26: the apodosis probably begins with [NA.B]I; 17. l. 27: DIB-iq for DIB; 18. l. 28: the direction of the flight has a reverse order; 19. l. 29: the direction of the flight has a reverse order; l. 29: DIB-iq for DIB; l. 29: the apodosis begins with NA.BI; 20. l. 31: [DI]B-iq for DIB; 21. l. 32: DIŠ ina É NA KIMIN-ma for DIŠ ina É NA GIG GIG-ma; l. 33: šá for ša; l. 33: the direction of the flight has a reverse order; l. 33: DIB-i[q] for DIB; 22. l. 34: DIŠ ina É NA KIMIN-ma for DIŠ ina É NA GIG GIG-ma; 23. l. 35: SAG.{DU} for SAG; 25. l. 36: DIŠ NA KIMIN-ma for DIŠ NA SAG A.ŠÀ ana ma-~a-#i ZI-ma

2.2. Translation

Obv. 1. If a man goes off on his errand and a falcon crosses from the right of the man to the left of the man _ he will attain his desire.

2. If ditto a falcon stays on the right of the man and proceeds alongside the man _ that man: wher(ever) he goes, he will have gain.

3. If ditto a raven stays and caws to the left of the man _ that man: he will go where he decides and he will enjoy a profit.

4. If ditto goes on a journey and a falcon crosses from the left of the man to the right of the man and returns to his back _ that man: wher(ever) he goes, he will enjoy a profit; his heart will be satisfied.

5. If ditto goes on a journey and a falcon crosses from the right of the man to the left of the man _ not attaining of the desire.

6. If ditto goes on a journey and a raven proceeds to the right of the man and caws _ that man: he won’t go where he decides and his heart won’t be satisfied.

7. If a man goes against an enemy and a falcon circles from the right of the man to the back of the man and crosses to the left of the man _ that man: he will conquer his enemy.

8. If a man goes against an enemy and a falcon crosses from the left of the man to the right of the man and execrates next to the man and (then) flies (away) _ that man: he will enjoy shares of booty in (the country) of the enemy.

9. If a man goes against an enemy and a falcon flies off from the left of the man to the right of the man and returns behind him _ that man: the lord of his enemy while leaving his land will return to his house.

10. If a man goes against an enemy and a falcon crosses from the left of the man to the right of the man, takes the left of the man and proceeds alongside the man _ that man: he will cause losses.

11. If a man goes against an enemy and a falcon circles from the left of the man to the back of the man and crosses to the right of the man _ that man: wher(ever) he goes, he will be robbed of his property; his heart won’t be satisfied.

12. If a man is about to sacrifice to his god and a falcon crosses from the right of the man to the left of the man _ that man: his god has accepted his sacrifice.


13. If a man sacrifices to his god and gets up from the house of his god to his house and a falcon circles from the right of the man to the back of the man and crosses to the left of the man _ that man: his days will be long; he will have a long life.

14. If a man is about to sacrifice to his god and a falcon circles from the left of the man to the back of the man and crosses to the right of the man _ that man: his days will be short; he will die within this year.

15. If a man is about to sacrifice to his god and a falcon crosses from the left of the man to the right of the man _ the anger of his god and his goddess will be upon him; his sacrifice ... (?)

16. If a man is brought to the palace under guard and a falcon crosses from the left of the man to the right of the man _ he will triumph over his adversary and he will have no rival.

Rev. 17. If a man is brought to the palace under guard and a falcon crosses from the right of the man to the left of the man _ that man: his confinement will be long.

18. If a man dugs the foundation of a house and laids the bricks and a falcon crosses from the left of the man to the right of the man _ that house will become large and the lord of that house will become old.

19. If a man dugs the foundation of a house and laids the bricks and a falcon crosses from the right of the man to the left of the man _ {the inhabitant of the house of that man won’t be happy}.

20. If in the house of a man a patient is sick and in the morning behind the house a falcon crosses from the outer left corner to the outer right corner _ that patient: he will [recover] soon.

21. If in the house of a man a patient is sick and in the morning behind the house a falcon crosses from the outer right corner to the outer left corner _ that patient: his sickness will be long.

22. If in the house of a man a patient is sick and in the morning behind the house of the sick a falcon flies away _ that patient: he will die.

23. If a man is about to plow a (fallow) field and a falcon crosses from the right of the man to the left of the man _ he will see luxuriance of the field.

24. If a man throws the seed and a raven goes upon it and caws to the left of the man _ the furrow will increase its yield.

25. If a man is about to plow a (fallow) field and a falcon crosses from the left of the man to the right of the man_ the furrow will decrease its yield.

Colophon: Total: its line are 25. Copy (from an original) of the country of Subartu, the month of Ara~samnu, the 8th day, the 3rd year, the 2nd year of the king Melišipak work of (?) that the hand of Bēl-nadin-ûmi, son of Ila-uârânni young scribe, wrote.

96 Nicla De Zorzi

3. Remarks on paleography and grammar

Palaeography: on l. 9 the sign before ana É-šú TU it is possibly to be read TAG4 (ezēbu). In the colophon the sign after LUGAL is not clearly written. Hunger 1968, 34 interpreted it as KI& (ki^âti) “totality”. It seems to be rather two signs, IGI and UD (perhaps î-pir “work of”), where each has been written over traces which were not properly erased.

The sequence Ú NU NA KI on l. 15 can’t be explained. The interpretation of the scribe’s name is rather difficult: the last sign is &IM, but the sequence EN-A&-&IM is not elsewhere attested. &IM might be a pseudo-cryptic writing for ûmu “name”: accordingly, the scribe’s name would be Bēl-nadin-ûmi (I owe this idea to I. Finkel). The reading of the second name IAN-TUK-ni as Ila-uârânni was suggested by Hunger 1968, 34.

Orthography: the text makes use of a high percentage of logograms but a good number of syllabic spellings are also attested. Some verbs appear both in syllabic and logographic form: the preteritum 3rd singular of etēqu is mostly i-ti-iq in the first part of the text and DIB or DIB-iq in the second part. The verb tebû is mostly written with ZI, but note (l. 9) te-bi. One notes that the praeteritum 3rd singular of izuzzu is spelled both iz-zi-iz (l. 3) and iz-ziz-ma (l. 2).

Other syllabic spellings of verbal forms in BM 108874 are: i#-bat (l. 10), i~-~a-bat (l. 11), ma-~i-ir (l. 12), i-ša-a’ (l. 22), ut-tar (l. 23), ma-~a-#i (ll. 23 and 25).

The verbs of K 6278+ have mostly logographic form. However, one notes that K 6278+: 11 (= BM 108874: 8) has id-di-ma for ŠUB-ma and K 6278+: 23 (= BM 108874: 13) has iq-qí-ma for BAL-ma. Other syllabic spellings of verbal forms in K 6278+ are: i~-~ab-bat (l. 17), ma-~ir (l. 20), na-šú-šú (l. 25).

In BM 108874 the term kutallu is syllabically spelled either with tal(RI) (ll. 4, 11, 13, 14) or with tál(PI) (ll. 7, 20, 21, 22), while K 6278+ always spelled it with tál(PI).

For the conjunctive, both u (BM 108874: 15 = K 6278+: 20) and ù (BM 108874: 10 = K 6278+: 15) are attested.

In BM 108874 the 3rd m. sg. possessive suffix is normally written -šú. However, one notes that on l. 17 an older -šu is attested. Moreover, the relativ pronoun has the form ša (ll. 20, 21 and 23) and not šá, which is the form attested in K 6278+.

With regard to prepositions, BM 108874 makes use of the logographic abbreviations AŠ for ina and DIŠ for ana. However, one notes the syllabic writing a-na on l. 9 and l. 24.

Morphology: a certain inconsistency is noted regarding the tense-usage. &umma is normally followed by preterites but one notes the present illak (DU-ak) on l. 2 and the stative te-bi on l. 9; the apodoses usually have present-futures but note the stative ma-~i-ir on l. 12.39

39. The majority of the verbs have in fact logographic form. When written logographically, the verb does not

distinguish person, gender, aspect or mode. A more extensive study of the verbal morphology within divinatory texts is highly desirable: see briefly Glassner 2005, 292-296.


4. Commentary

ana #ibûtīšu itbi in the protases of omens 1-3

The term #ibûtu, “need, want, request”, is widely attested in letters from the second and the first millennium as well as in divinatory texts (CAD $, 167-169: 1).

The lexical list Erim~uš 1: 194-196 (Cavigneaux et al. 1985, 18) associates #ibûtu with erištu “wish, request” and ~iši~tu “need, lack”. The compiler of the standard commentary to the omen series Šumma izbu used similar evidence in explaining the apodosis É.BI ina BAD u~-ta-a^-î-i~ (Šumma izbu 1: 64) with the justification ~i-î~-tum = #i-bu-tú (Leichty 1970, 213). However, the two terms are not exactly interchangeable, as shown by a Neo-Babylonian letter, TCL 9 114: 15, which reads as follows: #i-bu-tú u ~i-ši~-tú ... bēlī liš-pu-ra “may my lord write about wish(es) and need(s)” (see CAD @, 204 sub ~iši~tu, lexical entries).

In divinatory texts #ibûtu is widely used with the verbs epēû and ka^ādu to indicate a “purpose” that is to be achieved (CAD $, 169-170: 2). The expression ana #ibûti tebû may then be interpreted as “to leave (in order to achieve) a purpose”, “to start an undertaking” (CAD $, 169: 2a).

The protasis of BM 108874: 1-3 (šumma amēlu ana #ibûtīšu itbi) is paralleled by the first lines of two texts, K 139 and K 3995 (Virolleaud 1911, 116 and 125-126), which deal with divination from stars “twinkling” (#arā~u(SUR): CAD $, 100 sub #arā~u C) in various relations to the observer (right side, left side etc.). These are designated to provide a yes or no answer (damqu “favourable”; a~ītu “unfavourable”) to the question of success or failure. What follows next is a quotation of K 139: 1-4:

K 139: 1-4

1. šumma(DIŠ) amēlu(NA) ana #ibûtīšu(Á.ÁŠ-šú) itebbīma(ZI-ma) kakkabu(MUL) ištu(TA) imitti(15)

amēli(NA) ana šumēl(GÙB) amēli(NA) i#arri~(SUR) damqu(SIG5)

2. šumma(DIŠ) ištu(TA) šumēli(150) ana imitti(15) i#arri~(SUR) a~ītu(BAR)

3. šumma(DIŠ) kakkabu(MUL) ina ku-tál amēli(NA) ištu(TA) imitti(15) ana šumēli(150) i#arri~(SUR)

a~ītu(BAR)

4. šumma(DIŠ) kakkabu(MUL) ina ku-tál amēli(NA) ištu(TA) šumēli(150) ana imitti(15) i#arri~(SUR)

damqu(SIG5)

1. “If a man leaves (in order to achieve) his purpose and a star twinkles from the right of the man to the left of the man – favourable.

2. If (it) twinkles from the left to the right – unfavourable. 3. If a star twinkles on the back of the man from the right to the left – unfavourable. 4. If a star twinkles on the back of the man from the left to the right – favourable.”

The same protasis occurs in the fragmentary behavioural omen text Sm 332 (Köcher - Oppenheim 1957-1958, 69, 71, 75-76), which shows three relevant groups of protases: the first

98 Nicla De Zorzi

refers to animals seen by a person (ll. 1-14), the second to human beings encountered while walking along the street in the morning (ll. 15-33 and rev. ll. 1-11), the third to persons seen in the street (rev. ll. 12-29).40 The first line of the second section reads as follows: šumma(DIŠ) amēlu(NA) ana #ibûtīšu(Á.ÁŠ-šú) sūqa(SILA) ittiqma(DIB-ma) ka-su-u ana pānīšu(IGI-[šú) ...] “if a man goes down a street on his errand and a person in fetters in front of [him (crosses ?)...]”.

Interestingly, the expression ana epēš #ibûti “for the achievement of a purpose” occurs in Old- and Middle-Babylonian extispicy reports as well as in first millennium extispicy compendia as one of the standard topics of investigation for the diviner.41

The structure of the Old-Babylonian extispicy reports, although not strictly standardized, often includes an introduction mentioning the purpose, the client and the god to whom the divinatory sacrifice was offered, thus demonstrating that extispicy was performed to obtain answers to very specific questions.42

The content of the queries is related to the subject on whose behalf the extispicy is performed: when the client of the diviner is the king, as in the great part of the Old-Babylonian letters and reports from Mari published by Durand 1988, the queries concern either public matters such as the safety of the land, the security for troops and emissaries, the vagaries of a war, or private matters such as the well-being of the king and his family and the relationship between the king and the gods. Sometimes also economic affairs are investigated. Conversely, when the client is private, the queries mostly concern the health of the individual, his relations with the gods, his economic affairs.43

According to an Old-Babylonian report, published by Ungnad 1908, 257-274 pl. 6, an extispicy was performed ana epēš #ibûti, “concerning an undertaking”, to be achieved in the month of Addaru. The introductory statement of a similar Old-Babylonian report (BM 26594: Richardson 2002, 239 nr. 3), preserves the name of the client on whose behalf the extispicy (ana epēš #ibûti) was performed. Accordingly, the liver-reading can be clearly situated in time and space. The beneficiary of the report is one Galdani, whose business activities in Sippar during the middle years of Ammi#aduqa’s reign are well documented.44 Even if the report itself doesn’t give any specific information about

40. Köcher-Oppenheim 1957-1958, 62-80 published an Old-Babylonian physiognomical-behavioural omen,

VAT 7525, as well as a number of later behavioural divinatory texts. These might be located within the Tablets 80-86 of the divinatory series Šumma ālu (see Moren 1978, 219-222 and Freedman 1998, 1-14). Interestingly, the omens of Sm 332 (and its duplicate Funck 3) are partially paralleled by a section of the first tablet of the diagnostic series Sakikkû (SA.GIG) “Symptomes”. On this subject see briefly George 1991, 158.

41. For Sargonic, Old- and Middle-Babylonian extispicy reports see: Goetze 1957, 89-105; Nougayrol 1967b, 219-235; Kraus 1985, 127-218; Starr 1977, 201-208; Meyer 1987, 245; Jeyes 1989, 190-191 n. 51 (with unpublished examples listed on 187 n. 6); Al-Rawi 1994, 21-63 nr. 5; Koch-Westenholz 2002, 131-145; Richardson 2002, 229-244; Veldhuis 2006, 487 n. 2, with more literature on Old-Babylonian extispicy reports. For introductory informations on the omen compendia see Maul 2003, 71-73.

42. See Koch-Westenholz 2002, 140 and Veldhuis 2006, 487-497. 43. For a more detailed analysis of the material from Mari see Durand 1988, 24-59. On the content of public

and private queries see also Jeyes 1989, 38-41 and Koch-Westenholz 2002, 141-143. 44. See Richardson 2002, 232 n. 19.


the occasion for the extispicy, it might be suggested that the inconveniences of the commercial activity were of enough concern to induce Galdani to seek divinatory support.45

One adds that in Old-Babylonian letters and in legal texts ana epēš #ibûti frequently means “to do business” (CAD $, 170: 3; see also similar formulations with #ubûtu quoted by CAD E, 218-219: 2c sub epēšu). Thus the evidence suggests that, although in divinatory texts the expression should be understood in its broadest sense (i.e., any kind of undertaking), it might frequently refer to business ventures.46

As early as the Old-Babylonian Period, omen compendia quoting individual omina for specific purposes were drawn up.47 What follows next is a quotation of BM 80906 (Jeyes 1989, 122-124 pl. 5):

BM 80906: 10-13

10. šumma(BE) {a-na} ~arrāni(KASKAL) um-ma-ni a-šar i-la-k[u zi-tam i-kal]

11. šumma(BE) {a-na} mar-#í-im [i-ba-al-lu-u\]

12. šumma(BE) a-lam la-wi-a-at! ša libbi(ŠÀ) a-lim u#-#[i-am-ma še-pé-ka i-na-ši-iq]

rev. 13. šumma(BE) a-na kakki(GIŠ.TUKUL) a-bu-{un}-[na-at um-ma-ni-ka i-la-pa-at]

10. “If (the divination is performed) for the campaign _ my army, wherever it go[es, will have

profit].

11. If (the divination is performed) for the patient _ [he will recover]. 12. If you are besieging a city _ the townsman will co[me out and kiss your feet]. rev. 13. If (the divination is performed) for the armed forces _ (the enemy) at the co[re of your

army will strike].”

In the course of the systematization of the material, whole tablets were devoted to a single topic: for instance, the seventh tablet of the Multābiltu – the final chapter of the first millennium extispicy series – concerns extispicies performed for the health of the patient; tablets 8 and 10 concern extispicies performed for warfare; tablet 9 concerns extispicies performed for the land.48

A passage of Multābiltu 2 (Koch 2005, 114-115) gives the standard list of the purposes of an extispicy and labels ana epēš #ibûti within it:

45. Richardson 2002, 233 conjures that “the reading was undertaken in connection with an upcoming boat

journey”. 46. See Koch-Westenholz 2002, 144. 47. For Old-Babylonian omen compendia see Goetze 1947 and Jeyes 1989. 48. The canonical version of the exispicy series (Iškar bārûti or simply Bārûtu) consists of nine chapters with

collections of omens concerning various parts of the entrails and a final chapter called Multābiltu, which contains general rules of divinatory interpretation. The most recent edition of the Multābiltu is by Koch 2005, 85-272. On Aššurbanipal’s Bārûtu see Jeyes 1997, 61-65 and Koch-Westenholz 2000, 25-31.

100 Nicla De Zorzi

CT 20 43-48: i 59-61

59. bi-rit imitti(15) ia-um-ma šumēlu(150) šá nakri(KÚR) ana šulum(SILIM) šarri(LUGAL) ana

kakki(GIŠ.TUKUL) ana ~arrāni(KASKAL)

60. ana #a-bat āli(URU) ana šulum(SILIM) mar#i(GIG) ana zanān(SUR-an) šamê(AN-e) ana epēš(DÙ-eš)

#ibûti(ÁŠ)

61. u mim-ma ma-’-da-a-ti têrta(UR5.ÚŠ) teppušma(DÙ-ma)

59. “The right middle pertains to me, the left to the enemy. For the well-being of the king, for warfare, for the campaign,

60. for taking a city, for healing the sick, for rain, for undertaking an enterprise 61. and whatever else you perform the extispicy.”

Similar lists are recorded by the Ni#irti Bārûti (“the secrets of the art of the diviner”) material.49 These later texts, which tabulate standard lists of divinatory topics and general rules of association between the protasis and the apodosis, represent the diviner’s learned effort to reach a great degree of abstract generalization.50 Large sections of one of the best preserved Ni#irti Bārûti texts, TCL 6 5 from Seleucid Uruk, contain lists of two or more protases quoted in close succession and joined to lists of divinatory topics: ana alāk ~arrāni “going on a campaign”, ana epēš #ibûti “undertaking an enterprise”, ana #abāt āli “seizing a city”, ana erēb mār šipri “admitting a messenger”, ana epēš asûti “performing medicine” and predictions on the fate of the patient or whether the diviner should make a prognostication at all. For instance, TCL 6 5: 53-54 (Koch 2005, 305) reads as follows:

TCL 6 5: 53-54

53. šumma([BE]) padānu(GÍR) šināma(2-ma) a-~i-e maqtu(ŠUB.MEŠ) danānu(KAL) lā(NU) šakin(GAR-

in) šaplānu(KI.TA-nu) #ululta(TUK!) īši(GIŠ.@UR) šá imitti(15) pa\er(DU8)

54. [ana] alāk({DU}) ~arrāni({KASKAL}) u #abāt(DIB-bat) āli(URU) u epēš((DÙ) #ibûti(ÁŠ) u mim-ma!

šá a-su-ti šalmat(SILIM-at)

53. “[If] there are two Paths and they lie separately, the Strength is not there (and) the Lower Part has a covering, the Design on the right side is split _

54. it is favourable [for] going on a campaign, and seizing a city, and undertaking an enterprise, and performing any kind of medicine.”

49. The Ni#irti Bārûti seems to include texts concerned with extispicy which do not belong to any of the

chapters of the extispicy series itself. See Borger 1957, 190-195 and most recently Koch 2005, 273-534. 50. See Koch-Westenholz 2000, 23-25.


Elsewhere, the list of “divinatory purposes” is found with small variations in a lecanomancy ritual published by Zimmern 1901, 196 no. 82: ii 21’-23’: ana šulum(SILIM-um) šarri(LUGAL) ana sà-kap nakri(KÚR) ana šulum(SILIM-um) #ābi(ERIN2) [...] ana epēš(DÙ-eš) #ibûti(ÁŠ) ana zanān(SUR-an) šamê(AN-e) {ana} [...] ana #ummirātī(ŠÀ.SÈ.SÈ.KI.MEŠ) u mim-ma ma-la [...] “for the well-being of the king, for slaying of the enemy, for the well-being of the army [...] for undertaking an enterprise, for the rainfall, for [...] for (fulfilling) ambitions and anything else [...]”.

The topic is not restricted to impetrated omens.51 A section of Šumma ālu 79 preserves a similar list among omens taken from the observation of the behaviour of various birds (mostly the falcon) in relation to the king. Šumma ālu 79: 77 (Leichty 2003: 267) reads as follows: šumma(DIŠ) i##ūru(MUŠEN) KIMIN šurdû(SÚR.DÙMUŠEN) ištu(TA) imitti(15) amēli(NA) ana šumēl(150) amēli(NA) ittiq(DIB) ašaršu(KI-šú) ilammi(NIGIN) ana ka-la damqu(SIG5) šumma(BE-ma) ana bīt(É) mar#i(LÚGIG) illak(DU) amēlu šū(NA.BI) iballu\(DIN) šumma(BE-ma) ana epēš(DÙ-eš) #ibûti(Á) #ibûssu(ÁŠ-su) ikaššad(KUR-ád) šumma(BE-ma) epēš(DÙ-eš) a-su-ti qība(ME-a) išakkan(GAR-an) šumma(BE-ma) ana epēš(DÙ-eš) tā~āzi(MÈ) nakra(KÚR) ta-sa-kip šumma(BE-ma) ana [#a]-bat āli(URU) āla(URU) i#abbat(DIB-bat) “if a bird ditto and a falcon crosses from the man’s right to his left and goes around his place – everything will be good. If he is going to the house of a sick man – that man will live. If he is carrying out an enterprise – he will attain his desire. If he is practicing medicine – there will be no prognosis. If he is making war – you will drive out the enemy. If he is [tak]ing a city – he will take that city”.

Therefore, given the widespread use of standard lists of divinatory topics within all types of divinatory techniques, it should not surprise that the protases of BM 108874: 1-11 and 20-22 record the following contexts: starting an undertaking (ana #ibûtīšu tebû ll. 1-3), starting a journey (ana ~arrāni tebû ll. 4-6), going against an enemy (ana nakri tebû ll. 7-11), having a sick man into his house (mar#u marā#u ll. 20-22).

However, it might be remarked that, while the first millennium standard omen compendia (such as the Barûtu) usually connect long lists of ominous signs to a wide range of standard occasions, in BM 108874 each observation confines its implication to a particular case which is declared in advance.

From this point of view it might be compared with an unusual first millennium divinatory text from Sultantepe (STT 73) which quotes only impetrated omens and records all steps of the oracular

51. One distinguishes two basic types of divinatory practices: omina oblativa, i.e., observation of unsolicited

omens, and omina impetrativa, i.e., techniques designed to elicit omens. More types of impetrated divination were current for the the Old-Babylonian Period than later on: extispicy; libanomancy, i.e., divination from the configurations of the smoke from a censer; lecanomancy, i.e., divination from the shape taken by drops of oil in a basin of water; aleuromancy, i.e., divination from the scattering of flour on water. Later, impetrated omens ceased to be part of the standard repertoire and the diviner’s attention turns to unsolicited omens such as celestial and meteorological events, abnormal births, human behaviour and physiognomy, animal behaviour. For further analysis and literature see Guinan 1997, 421-422, Maul 2003, 381-386 and id. 2007, 361-372.

102 Nicla De Zorzi

consultation, from the description of the occasion to the prayer of the petitioner and the ritual preparation for receiving the sign.52

STT 73: 61-75 prescribes two prayers to the constellation Ursa Major (MULMAR.GÍD.DA, “Costellation Wagon”) in order to help obtain a sign through a dream (incubation).53 The first prayer (ll. 61-64) is followed by the description of the ritual preparation for sleeping (ll. 65-68) and by the interpretation of the dream styled as in an omen compendium. What follows next is a quotation from the very last section (Butler 1998, 356-357):

STT 73: 69-70

69. šum-ma mím-ma nadinšu(ŠUM-šú) mar#u(GI[G) iballu\(T]I) šum-ma mím-ma lā(NU) nadinšu(ŠUM-šú)

mar#u(GIG) imât(UGx)

70. šum-ma ana epēš(DÙ-eš) #ibûti(Á.ÁŠ) teppuš(DÙ-u[š]) mím-ma nadinšu(ŠUM-šú) #ibûssu(ÁŠ-su)

ikaššad(KUR-ád) lā(NU) nadinšu(ŠUM-šú) lā(NU) ikaššad(KUR-ád)

69. “If (in his dream) something is given to him _ the sic[k man will get wel]l; if something is not given to him _ the sick man will die.

70. If you perfor[m] this to foretell the success of an enterprise, if they give him something _ he will have success; if they do not give (him) anything _ he will fail.”

In the second prayer the petition to Ursa Mayor is addressed in the second person. STT 73: 73-75

(ibid., 357-358) reads as follows:

STT 73: 73-75

73. (end of preceding line) ina ba-li-ki mītu(LÚ.UGx) lā(NU) imât(UGx) ù bal\u(TI) ~ar-ra-an lā(NU)

i#abbat(DIB-bat)

74. š[um-m]a ~arrān(KASKAL) te-ba-ku #i-[bu-t]i akaššad(KUR-ád) mim-ma lid-di-nu-ni

75. [šum-ma ~arrāni(KASKAL)] te-ba-ku #i-[bu-t]i lā(NU) akaššad(KUR-ád) mim-ma lim-~u-ru-nin-ni

52. STT 73 was edited by Reiner 1960, 23-35 (see also id. 1995, 70-73). A new edition of the text has been

recently published by Butler 1998, 349-377. STT 73 adds to the known types of impetrated omens three prior unattested: dream-incubation, sprinkling of an ox with water to observe its reaction, psephomancy, i.e., divination from the casting of stones within a fixed field of observation. On psephomancy see also Finkel 1995, 271-276 and Maul 2003, 87.

53. For the practice of incubation, i.e., sleeping in temples or sacred places for oracular purposes, in the Ancient Near East see most recently Butler 1998, 217-239. For further prayers to Ursa Mayor see Mayer 1976, 429.


73. “(end of the preceding line) Without you the dying man does not die and the healty man cannot go on his journey.

74. I[f] in this journey I am undertaking I am to succeed, let them give me something (in my dream).

75. [If in this journey] I am undertaking I am not to succeed, let them receive something from me (in my dream).”

The obtaining (or not obtaining) of a sign through a dream is associated with three of the most common circumstances seeking divinatory investigation - the health of the man, the outcome of his journey, the success of his ventures - although, as in BM 108874, these are previously stated, i.e., the divination is occasioned by specific and individual cases.

#ibûssu ikaššad in the apodosis of omen 1

The apodosis of BM 108874: 1 states that the man #ibûssu ikaššad “will attain his desire” (CAD $, 169-170: 2c).

The expression #ibûta kašādu frequently occurs in omens taken from birds in the standard version of the divinatory series Šumma ālu. The apodoses of Šumma ālu 79 concern the outcome of the king’s military activities (Leichty 2003). For instance, the apodoses of omens 2, 3, 5, 16, 17 read as follows: šarru(LUGAL) e-ma illaku(DU-ku) #ibûssu(ÁŠ-su) ikaššad(KUR-ád) “the king: wherever he goes, he will succeed in his enterprise”.

However, the fate of the “man” (amēlu) is object of divinatory enquiry too. The apodosis of Šumma ālu 79: 81 reads as follows: amēlu šū(NA.BI) ašar(KI) illaku(DU-ku) #ibûssu(ÁŠ-su) ul(NU) ikaššad(KUR-ád) “that man: wherever he goes, he will not succeed in his enterprise”.

The last section (ll. 122-138) of the mentioned above STT 73 lists similar predictions of success or failure – kašād #ibûti “attaining (one’s) desire” and lā kašād #ibûti “not attaining (one’s) desire” – obtained by pouring water over the head of a recumbent ox and observing its reaction.54 What follows next is a quotation of STT 73: 122-125 (Butler 1998, 363):

STT 73: 122-125

122. šum4-ma alpu(GUD) is-su-us-ma it-bi kašād(KUR-ad) #ibûti(ÁŠ)

123. šum4-ma alpu(GUD) is-su-us-ma ul(NU) it-bi lā(NU) kašād(KUR-ad) #ibûti(ÁŠ)

124. šum4-ma alpu(GUD) itbīma(ZI-ma) lēssu(TE-su) ana imittīšu(15-šú) iddi(ŠUB) lā(NU) kašād(KUR-

ad) #ibûti(ÁŠ)

125. šum4-ma alpu(GUD) itbīma(ZI-ma) lēssu(TE-su) ana šumēlīšu(150-šú) iddi(ŠUB) kašād(KUR-ad)

#ibûti(ÁŠ)

54. See Reiner 1960, 28-29 and id. 1995, 72.

104 Nicla De Zorzi

122. “If an ox wailed and (then) got up – attaining of the desire. 123. If an ox wailed and (then) didn’t get up – not attaining of the desire. 124. If an ox got up and lowered his cheek to the right – not attaining of the desire. 125. If an ox got up and lowered his cheek to the left – attaining of the desire.”

The introducing prayer (ll. 110-117) invokes the “divine judges” (ilū dajānū), which should let the ox provide a sign, as follows: šum-ma annannna(NENNI) mār(A) annanna(NENNI) #ibûssu(ÁŠ-su) i-kaš-šá-du “whether NN, son of NN, will attain his desire” (l. 117) (ibid.).

A similar prayer is preserved on the reverse (ll. 3-6) of a partial duplicate to STT 73, the Assur text LKA 138.55 The prayer is addressed to Šamaš, “lord of judgement” (bēl dīnim) and Adad, “lord of divination” (bēl bīri) as follows (l. 4): annanna(NE[NNI) mār(A) annanna(NENNI) #ibûssu(ÁŠ-su) ikaššadu] “N[N, son of NN, may attain his desire]” (McEwan 1980, 64).56 In this case the divinatory technique invoked is the observation of the bird flight (ll. 5-6): lu-ú ku-dur-ra-nuMUŠEN lu-ú kap-pu-rap-šuMUŠEN lu-ú a-ra-ba-nu-úMUŠEN ištu(TA) imittīja(ZAG.MU) lil-su-ma-[am-ma ana šumēlīja …] “let either the wren(?), the broad-winged bird or the arabanû-bird fly swiftly from my right [and to my left...]” (ibid.).

Interestingly, the end of LKA 138: 4-6 can be at least partially restored by means of a first millennium Šumma ālu bird omen text, CT 39 23-24: 28-29, which duplicates these lines and adds a ritual (ll. 30-32) to seek the flight.57

The obverse of LKA 138 concerns divination through the observation of shooting stars. This divinatory technique also appears in STT 73: 85-87, 92-99, 104-109. The first section (ll. 85-87) is introduced by a prayer addressed to Ninlil with the following petition (ll. 86-87): ki-i annanna(NENNI) mār(A) annanna(NENNI) /#ibûssu(ÁŠ-su) i-kaš-šá-du kakkaba(MUL) ištu(TA) imittīja(ZAG-ia5) lil-su-ma-am-ma ana šumēlīja(GÙB-ia) lītiq(DIB-iq) “if NN, son of NN / is to have success, let a (shooting) star pass from my right towards my left” (Butler 1998, 360).

The second section (ll. 92-99) begins with a prayer addressed to the stars of each of the three paths of heaven, which should let (ll. 98-99) kakkabu(MUL) [ištu(TA) imittīja(ZAG.MU) lil]-su-ma-am-ma ana šumēlīja(150.MU) lītiq(DIB-iq) / {šum}-m[a ana #ibûti(Á.Á&) ištu(TA) ark]atīja([EG]IR.MU) a-na pānīja(IGI.MU) lītiq(DIB-iq) “one star sho[ot from my right] and pass towards my left / if [(this ritual being performed) regarding an aim] let it pass [from beh]ind me towards in front of me” (ibid., 362). One notes that the verb lasāmu “to run fast” (CAD L, 104-106) describes both the course of the shooting stars (STT 73: 98) and the bird flight (LKA 138: rev. 5-6).

Finally, in STT 73: 104-109, the directions of the shooting stars in relation to the viewer (right side, left side, front, back) are observed in order to give a favourable (damqu) or unfavourable (lā damqu) answer.

55. On LKA 138 see Reiner 1960, 28 and Butler 1998, 350. 56. For the role of Šamaš and Adad as gods of divination see Lambert 1997, 85-98 and most recently id.

2007, 1-5. 57. See Reiner 1960, 29-31 and Riemschneider 1975, 233. On the relationship between STT 73, LKA 138

and &umma ālu bird omens see Archi 1975, 119-120.


The third section parallels the mentioned above Virolleaud’s astrological texts, K 139 and K 3995, which deal with divination from stars twinkling (#arā~u) in various relations to the observer, although in STT 73: 104-109 the stars don’t twinkle but “pass by, cross” (etēqu). Similarly, omens from tablet 2 of the astronomical compendium MUL.APIN “Plow Star” describe stars either twinkling (#arā~u) (iii 42’-45’, 46’-47’, 50’-51’) or crossing (etēqu) (iii 48’-49’) from west to east.58

The closest parallel to Virolleaud’s texts issues from a section of the second tablet of the diagnostic series Sakikkû (SA.GIG) “Symptoms”, which deals with omens derived from stars twinkling (#arā~u) after omens derived from various animals (birds, reptiles and insects) and before omens derived from lights and lighting seen by the exorcist (āšipu) going to the house of the patient. The predictions concern the life or the death of the patient as well as in some cases success or failure (kašād/lā kašād #ibûti).59 Lines 63-66 (Heeßel 2001-2002, 34) read as follows:

63. šumma(DIŠ) kakkabu(MUL) ištu(TA) imitti(15) amēli(NA) ana šumēl(150) amēli(NA) i#ru~(SUR-u~)

damqu(SIG15) ana mar#i(GIG) imât(BA.ÚŠ)

64. šumma(DIŠ) kakkabu(MUL) ištu(TA) šumēl(150) amēli(NA) ana imitti(15) amēli(NA) i#ru~(SUR-u~)

a~ītu(BAR) ana mar#i(GIG) iballu\(AL.TI)

65. šumma(DIŠ) kakkabu(MUL) ana pān(IGI) amēli(NA) i#ru~(SUR-u~) kašād(KUR-ád) #ibûti(AŠ) ana

mar#i(GIG) imât(BA.ÚŠ)

66. šumma(DIŠ) mi-i~-ra ana pān(IGI) amēli(NA) i#ru~ma(SUR-u~-ma) eli(UGU?) ītiq(DIB-iq) lā(NU)

kašād(KUR-ád) #ibûti(AŠ) ana mar#i(GIG) iballu\(AL.TI)

63. “If a star twinkled from the right of the man to the left of the man – favourable; the patient: he will die.

64. If a star twinkled from the left of the man to the man right of the man – unfavourable; the patient: he will recover.

65. If a star twinkled in front of the man – attaining of the desire; the patient: he will die. 66. If (a star) twinkled directly in front of a man and passes by him ? – not attaining of the desire;

the patient: he will recover.”

The evidence discussed above suggests that some divinatory techniques such as the observation of the bird flight as well as the course of the shooting stars and the behaviour of the oxen are probably considered to be relevant in certain circumstances when the divination concerns the fate of the common man.60

58. The astronomical compendium MUL.APIN was edited by Hunger - Pingree 1989. One of the sources for MUL.APIN 2 is a 4-column tablet from Sultantepe, STT 331-334 (see ibid., 7).

59. The second tablet of the series Sakikkû is edited by Heeßel 2001-2002, 24-49. 60. An expository text from Sultantepe (STT 400: 28-36) contains a list of birds attached to particular deities.

Worth mentioning is that two of them (ll. 35-36) are explained as i##ūr(MU&EN) lā(NU) ka^ād(KUR)

106 Nicla De Zorzi

Interestingly, the professional acting in Sakikkû 2 and in STT 73 is the exorcist-āšipu, to whom the “Manual of the exorcist” Esagil-kīn-apli attributes a competence on purussû(EŠ.BAR) kakkabī(MUL.MEŠ) i##ūrī(MUŠEN.MEŠ) u alpī(GU4.MEŠ) u urī#ī(MÁŠ.ANŠE.MEŠ) “the oracular decisions by the stars, the birds, the oxen and the goats” (rev. 2), as well as on hepatoscopic omens, the astrological series Enūma Anu Enil and the series Šumma ālu (rev. 16).61 Therefore, it might be argued that under certain conditions the āîpu could assume the functions of a diviner.62

Finally, let us turn back to the subject of the apodosis. Some late literary texts include rituals prescribing the release of two doves of opposite sex in the opposite cardinal directions of sunrise and sunset in order to secure the good will of higher authorities.63 They are possible to be interpreted as apotropaic rituals in which evil is transferred to another animate being.64 One of the most noticeable aspects of these texts is that they describe cult practices which seem to have been performed for the benefit of the common man.65 For instance, BAM 318: iv 24 reads as follows: {e}-ma illaku(GIN-ku) ma-gir kīma(GIM) ili(DINGIR) ni-iz-mat libbīû(&À-^ú) ika^âd(KUR-ad) “wherever he goes it will be favorable. He will achieve his wish like a god” (Livingstone 2000, 379).

nēmela irašši in the apodosis of omen 2; zitta ikkal in the apodosis of omen 3

The apodoses of BM 108874: 2-3 read as follows: amēlu ^ū ašar illaku nēmela irašši “that man: wherever he goes, he will have gain” and amēlu ^ū ašar pānūšu šaknū illakma zitta ikkal “that man: wherever he decides to go, he will enjoy a profit” respectively.

The term nēmelu means “benefit, gain” (CAD N/2, 157: 1). In Old-Assyrian letters and Old-Babylonian legal texts it specifically means “surplus, profit from partnership and other business ventures” (CAD N/2, 159: 2). In divinatory texts it indicates profit on business activities. The Old-Babylonian extispicy report YBC 11056: 2-4 (Goetze 1957, 91) refers to the performance of an extispicy as follows: a-na sa-~i-ir-ti ša i-ša-mu /i-na su-qí ši-ma-ti a-na ne-me-li /in-na-ad-di-in “concerning the trading goods which he bought – whether they will be sold in the market for a profit”. Moreover, standard expressions such as nēmela rašû “to have gain”, nēmela amāru “to see gain”, nēmela akālu “to enjoy gain”, nēmela kašādu “to attain gain” are well attested in the apodoses of divinatory texts from both the second and the first millennium (see CAD N/2, 158: 1c).

The term zittu means “share” (of an inheritance, of an income, of the profits of a business enterprise, of agricultural produce, of booty) (CAD Z, 139-144).

In divinatory texts the expression zitta akālu means “to enjoy (commercial) profit”, but also “to enjoy booty” as a result of military activities. Both appear in BM 108874 (l. 3 and 8 respectively).

#ibûti(Á&) “the bird (portending) failure to achieve one’s goal”. See Lambert 1970, 113. The same list appears in the late explanatory text NIBRUKI NÍ.BI.TA DÙ.A “Nippur Built of Itself”: see George 1992, 144.

61. Recent editions of the “Manual of the exorcist” are by Geller 2000, 242-254 and Jean 2006, 62-82. On purussû “oracular decision” see Butler 1998, 36-37.

62. See also Reiner 1960, 30. 63. These are discussed by Livingstone 2000, 375-387. 64. On this subject see recently Schwemer 2007b, 26-27. 65. Livingstone 2000, 384.


The first meaning is attested in Old-Babylonian smoke omens (UCBC 755: 8: Lutz 1929, 367-377 pl. 2-3), Old-Babylonian oil omens (CT 3 3: 2: Pettinato 1966b, 65) and late hemerologies: for instance, the hemerlogical text KAR 212: iii 3’ records a day “(propitious) for enjoying a profit” (ana zitta akāli). Elsewhere, the expression zitta akālu, “to have (business) profit”, is found in the Old-Babylonian bird omen text published by Weisberg 1969-1970, 87-104 (iii 6’ and iv 13’), as well as in late bird omens (for instance: CT 40 49: 48, CT 40 49: 54, CT 40 50: 12).

Conversely, zittu “booty”, frequently occurs in Old-Babylonian oil omens (CT 3 2: 15: Pettinato 1966b, 62) and Old- and Late-Babylonian extispicy texts (see CAD Z, 143-144: 1e).

Finally, one adds that zittu and nēmelu are connected in a first millennium tamītu text from Nimrud, ND 5492 (Lambert 2007, nr. 1). The tamītus are a corpus of Babylonian oracle questions addressed to the gods Šamaš and Adad as a duo. The first question (ND 5492: 1-23) concerns an historical matter: “@ammurabi’s going on a campaign to seize Kasallu~~u” (ll. 24-25: alāk ~arrāni ana #abāt URUKasallu~~i ša @ammurapi).66 ND 5492: 19-20 reads as follows: it-ti zitti(@A.LA) né-me-li ka-#a-ri / u šallat(NAM.RA) āli šuātu(UR5-tú) šal-meš iturrūnimma(GUR.MEŠ-nim-ma) “will they (the soldiers) then safely return with a share of the abundant profit and spoil of that city ?” (ibid., 24-25).

dīktam idâk in the apodosis of omen 10; ~ubussu i~~abbat in the apodosis of omen 11

BM 108874: 7-11 concern military activities. Many Mesopotamian omens concern the so called “battle divination”, but they usually have the king as their subject.67 The precariousness and the dangers of the war always induced the king to consult the oracles before entering battle to make certain that the gods supported his cause. However, the Babylonian tamītus confirm that the fate of the soldier was object of divinatory enquiry too.68

BM 108874: 7-10 prognosticate favourable outcomes for the man: the defeat of the enemy (omen 7), the defeat of the enemy’s lord (omen 9), the booty within the enemy’s country (omen 8).

The apodoses of omens 10 and 11 reads as follows: amēlu ^ū dīktam idâk “that man: he will causes losses” (CAD D, 139-140), amēlu ^ū ~ubussu i~~abbat libbaû ul i\âb “that man: he will be robbed of his property, his heart won’t be satisfied” (for ~abātu “to commit a robbery” see CAD @, 10-11: 2).

Worthy of mention is that dīkta dâku and ~ubta ~abātu are often associated in letters and historical texts (see CAD @, 10: 1 sub ~abātu A). Further parallels are found in the mentioned above tamītu text ND 5492. The third recorded oracle question (ND 5492: 96-159) concerns “the safety of those who go out of the city” (l. 160: ana ûlum ā#īt ālim) and worries that enemies could attack the soldiers who go out of the city: i~-tab-tu it-tab-lu x [.. / ú-lu i-id-du-ku i-x [... “(if) they should rob, carry off, . [.. / or kill .. [... (the soldiers who go out of the city)” (ll. 141-142: Lambert 2007, 30-31). The fourth question (ll. 161-182) concerns the safety of the “watch” (ma##artu EN.NUN) against the enemies (see the subscription, l. 183). ND 5492: 176-177 read as follows: ma-’-a-da šá da-a-ki la i-

66. Several tamītus offer questions from king about campaigns or other historical matters. On the historical

values of these texts see Lambert 2007, 20. 67. For Old-Babylonian battle divination see most recently Hamblin 2006, 186-192. Most of the Neo-

Assyrian queries to the sungod concern the king’s military activities: see Starr 1990. 68. See Lambert 2007, nos. 1, 4, 5, 6.

108 Nicla De Zorzi

duk-ku / šá ~a-ba-ti la i-~ab-ba-tu “(the enemy) will not kill as appropriate, will not plunder as appropriate” (ibid., 32-33).

ND 5492: 297-298, a tamītu “for things going well up to the deadline of the year” (ana šulum balā\i ana adān šatti), provides a list of dangerous occurrences: tīb ~abbātī “attack by robbers” (for ~abbātu “robber” see CAD @, 13-14) as well as tīb nakri “enemy attack”, tīb nēši “attack of a lion” and tīb me~ê “onset of a storm” (ibid., 38-39).

niqâ ana ilīšu ana naqê itbi in the protases of omens 12-15

Omens 12-15 concern the relationship between the man (amēlu) and his god (ilšu) during the performance of a ritual sacrifice (niqâ naqû).

The term niqû(SISKUR) is the most used Akkadian term for “offering” (CAD N/2, 252-259).69 It is cognate with the verb naqû(BAL) “to pour out (as a libation), to offer” (CAD N/1, 336-341). However, as remarked by Lambert 1993, 195 and Limet 1993, 243, the Sumerian SISKUR has other Akkadian renderings, thus suggesting that it originally covered a broader semantic field: ikribu, sullû, suppû, teslītu, tēmiqu, tēninu (all terms for “prayer” to a god), nu~~u “appease”.

In third millennium sources the niqû-offering usually consisted of animals which were meant to feed the gods: the animals offered were mostly sheeps, oxen and goats, although birds were also used.70 As the offering of an animal for meat means first having to slaughter it, the term niqû indicates the “sacrifice” and the expression niqâ naqû means “to make a sacrifice” (CAD N/1, 338: 3a).71

In Old-Babylonian divinatory texts niqâ naqû refers to the ritual slaughter of the sacrificial sheep for purposes of extispicy.72 The slaughter of the animal for divination was performed by the diviner, the bārû, on behalf of his client, whom the sources term bēl niqê “the owner of the sacrifice”.73 The performance of the “divinatory sacrifice” followed a settled procedure and was characterized by a number of prayers and rituals intended to propitiate the gods to give a favourable omen.74 According to a Neo-Assyrian source published by Zimmern 1901, nos. 1-20: 115, the diviner slaughtered the sacrificial sheep ana il amēli “for the man’s god”, i.e., the personal god who functioned as an intermediary between the great gods and the individual and whose favour needed to be stimulated through regular offerings.75

69. On SISKUR in third and second millennium cuneiform sources see Limet 1993, 243-255. The niqû-

offering is well attested in Neo-Assyrian, Neo-Babylonian and Hellenistic temple rituals as well as in Neo-Babylonian and Achaemenid administrative texts. For the Hellenistic evidence see McEwan 1981, 169, Lanciers 1993, 203-223 and Linssen 2004, 158-160. For a general overview on ritual offerings in Mesopotamia see Lambert 1993, 191-201 and Mayer - Sallaberger 2003, 93-102.

70. Mayer - Sallaberger 2003, 95. 71. For animal sacrifice in Mesopotamian religion see most recently Scurlock 2002, 389-403. 72. Jeyes 1991-1992, 24. 73. On the Babylonian bārû see Lambert 1998, 141-159. 74. For the procedure of the slaughter see Foxvog 1989, 167-176. The most important edition of the rituals

of the diviner is by Zimmern 1901, nos. 1-25 and 71-101. These are discussed at some length by Starr 1983, Jeyes 1991-1992, 22 and Scurlock 2002, 397-399.

75. On the “personal god” see van der Toorn 1996, 66-93, Abusch 1998 and id. 2002, 27-63.


As remarked by Leichty 1993, 238, the interwining of propitiation of the gods, ritual and divination in Mesopotamia was so strong that “the act of slaughtering and the performance of rituals became subjects of divination in and of themselves”.

As early as the Old-Babylonian Period divinatory texts dealing with the behaviour of the sacrificial sheep were drawn up.76 Similar omen collections were found in the library of the king Aššurbanipal.77 For the most part these omens deal with the movements of the victim before and after the slaughter and their apodoses are predictions about the favourable or unfavourable attitude of the gods towards it.

Further references to religious and cultic activities are attested in the first millennium omen series Šumma ālu: Tablet 11 describes works in temples and to temple statues in addition to prayers and rituals performed there by the king;78 a section of Tablet 41 preserves omens relating to accidents that may happen to the king or a noble riding his processional chariot, to his chariot horses or to a god’s chariot horses;79 the little we know of Tablet 52 refers to the fire produced by the king’s brazier during cultic activities.80

The second part of the series (from Tablet 80 on) is dedicated to human behaviour.81 The section concerns man’s attitudes before and during the sleep (Tablet 82); man’s experiences upon awaking and going about his business (Tablets 84-85);82 accidents that occur during everyday activities and personal mannerism (Tablet 87); man’s sexual behaviours (Tablets 103-104);83 man’s familiar life (Tablet 105). As remarked by Guinan 1990, 10 and Leichty 1993, 241, the faulty acts described by some omens of Tablet 87 derive the ominous import from their correlation to the diviner/supplicant’s behaviours.84 Moreover, at least three tablets of the section are completely dedicated to cultic activities: Tablets 95-96 describe incidents occurring to a person on his way to prayer; Tablet 120 deals with happenings during the New Year’ festival.85

Gadd 1927, 9 underlined the similarity between BM 108874: 12-15 and the protases of a fragmentary unpublished omen text, K 4000. The tablet is unfortunately preserved only on its right

76. YOS 10 47-49; VAT 9518, published by Ebeling 1931, 41-44 no. 9. 77. A number of first millennium sources were published by Meissner 1933, 118-122 and 329-330. For a list

of new texts see Leichty 1993, 240 nn. 11-14. For some Hurro-Hittite parallels see Hoffner 1993, 116-119 and most recently Cohen 2007, 233-251.

78. The tablet has been recently edited by Freedman 1998, 181-190. 79. For Tablet 41 see Nötscher 1930, 19-29 and Moren 1978, 179-183. For religious references within the

apodoses of Tablet 41 see Moren 1978, 181. As Gadd 1927, 6-7 pointed out, many connections can be traced between &umma ālu Tablet 41 and Tablet 120, which contains omens taken from the New Year’s festival (see also Moren 1978, 183, Sallaberger 2000 and Guinan 2002, 14).

80. The main source of Tablet 52 is CT 40 44: see Nötscher 1930, 79. On the content of this tablet see also Moren 1978, 197-198.

81. For an outline of the content of Tablets 80-120 see Freedman 1998, 2. 82. Similar omens are part of the collection of Šumma ālu tablets of the scribe Nabû-zuqup-kēnu: see Guinan

2002, 15. 83. For erotomancy in Mesopotamian cuneiform sources see Guinan 1990, 10-11 and id. 1998, 38-55. 84. See also Guinan 2002, 15. 85. For Tablets 95-96 see Nötscher 1930, 218-226 and Moren 1978, 232-235. The most recent edition of

Tablet 120 is by Sallaberger 2000, 227-262. For processional omens as part of the personal collection of the scribe Nabû-zuqup-kēnu see Guinan 2002, 14.

110 Nicla De Zorzi

side for a total of about 12 lines. The preserved protases (K 4000: 1, 2, 5, 7, 10) read as follows: šumma(DIŠ) amēlu(NA) niqâ(SISKUR.SISKUR) ana ilīšu(DINGIR-šú) [...] “if a man (performed) a sacrifice to his god [...]”.

Moren 1978, 233-234 relates K 4000 to Šumma ālu 95-96. The incipit of Tablet 95 is preserved by CT 39 39-40: 48: šumma([DIŠ]) amēlu(LÚ) ana ili(DINGIR) i-kar-rab-ma egirrû(INIM.GAR) ar-~iš i-ta-nap-pal-[šú] ar-~iš im-man-gar ilu(DINGIR) te#-lit-su iš-m[e] “[if] a man is praying to a god and an oracle repeatedly answers [him] promptly _ he will be accepted promptly; the god has hea[rd] his prayer” (Nötscher 1930, 216).86 However, most of the preserved omens of the Tablet are contributed by CT 39 41-42: rev. iii and record circumstances wherein an oracle (egirrû) responds to a man’s prayer.87 Lines 1-13 describe an oracle saying “yes” or “no”. Lines 15-25 refer to an oracle being heard in various spatial relations to the individual (right and left, in front, behind). Lines 26-33 refer to oracles of various animals (a donkey, an ox, a sheep, a dog, a pig, a goat, a bird). The apodoses indicate whether the person’s prayer will be granted or not.88

The incipit of Tablet 95 is contributed by the excerpt text CT 39 34-36: 112 too.89 The obverse of the tablet and the first paragraph of the reverse (ll. 64-79) are occupied by fire omens (Šumma ālu 94).90 The tablet proceeds with a section on divination casting flour upon water (ll. 80-92).91 CT 39 34-36: 93-111 extracts from an unplaced chapter whose incipit is: šumma(DIŠ) amēlu(NA) ana bīt(É) ilīšu(DINGIR-šú) itbi(ZI) “if a man goes to the temple of his god” (Nötscher 1930, 206). Our knowledge of this chapter is mostly due to another excerpt text, CT 39 38: 8-15, whose subject are cultic prescriptions (mainly taboos).92 A parallel protasis, connected with the flight patterns of a falcon, is contributed by CT 40 49-50: 34: šumma(DIŠ) amēlu(NA) ana bīt(É) ilīšu(AN-šú) itbīma(ZI-ma) surdû(SÚR.DÙMUŠEN) ana imitti(15) amēli(NA) ītiq(LU-iq) damqu(SIG5) “if a man goes to the temple of his god and a falcon crosses to the man’s right – favourable” (Nötscher 1930, 186).

86. No attempt is made here to deal with unpublished sources. The first part of CT 39 39-40 shows omens

derived from a man’s shoe being devoured by a pig, an ass, a horse and proceeds with observations of the objects upon which a man might sit, and (on the reverse) of the nervous twitching of various members of his body: see Boissier 1905, 175-178, Gadd 1926, 7 and Nötscher 1930, 214-218.

87. KK 2238 + 4018 are published in CT 39 41-42 as a composite text with KK 9697 + 12855 (which begins with the catch-line of CT 39 39-40), K 6960, KK 12822 + 13964 + Sm 623 (all fragmentary duplicates): see Gadd 1926, 8, Nötscher 1930, 218-225 and Moren 1978, 233.

88. On divination by egirrûs “(overheard) utterances” in Mesopotamia see Oppenheim 1954-1955, 49-55 and Bottéro 1974, 98. Finet 1982, 48-56 analyzes a case of cledonomancy at Mari. Sometimes also the divine message received in a dream is called egirrû: see Butler 1998, 155-157.

89. Nötscher 1930, 208. 90. For Tablet 94 see Nötscher 1930, 199-202 and 204. See also Moren 1978, 227-232 and Freedman 1998, 2. 91. Nötscher 1930, 204-206. The practice of the aleuromancy, i.e., divination based on the scattering of flour

on water, is documented by CT 39 34-36 as well as by a Late-Babylonian text (AO 3112) published by Nougayrol 1963, 381-386. On aleuromancy see also Maul 2003, 85. Guinan 2002, 26 stresses the similarity between this section and the third paragraph of the “manual of the diviner”, the mentioned above K 57, for which see Nougayrol 1967a.

92. For CT 39 38 see Nötscher 1930, 206-208. According to Freedman 1998, 342, the chapter šumma amēlu ana bīt ilīšu itbi and the preceding section on casting flour upon water are so anomalous that they probably “represent an interpolation into the series rather than excerpts from a series tablet”.


The content of Šumma ālu 96 might parallel that of BM 108874: 12-15. According to Moren 1978, 234, the Tablet concerns omens taken from the animals and birds that may cross the path of one on his way to prayer. Unfortunately, all that we know of this Tablet is half a dozen broken lines on a corner fragment, CT 39 43. CT 39 38: 2-7 preserves some further lines. The second half of the protasis and the apodosis can be restored by means of CT 39 41-42: 10-11: [...] u4-um ana ili(DINGIR) ut-nin-nu sūqa(SILA) ina alākīšu(DU-šú) #erru(MUŠ) ana pāni(IGI) [...] / te#-lit-su še-ma-at a-ra-an-šú pa\ir({DU8}) “[if a man], on the day he prays to a god, while walking in the street, a snake in front of him [...] – his prayer is heard; his guilt is forgiven” (Freedman 1998, 343).

ilšu niqâšu ma~ir in the apodosis of omen 12; šibsāt ilīšu u ištarīšu elīšu ibašši in the apodosis of omen 15

The apodoses of omens 12 and 15 focus on the favourable or unfavourable attitude of the gods towards the performance of the sacrifice.

Many divinatory texts refer to the “oracular decision” (purussû) of the personal god (ilû) and personal goddess (i^tarû) concerning the future of the man. What follows next is the prayer which the petitioner of STT 73: 52-55 addresses to the “gods of the night” (ilānu bēl mušīti) (l. 55): itti(KI) ilīja(DINGIR-ia5) ištarīja(D15-ia5) šu-ud-bi-ba-nin-ni-ma lu-u en-še!(KUR)-ku di-ni li-di-nu purussû(EŠ.BAR-{a}-[a) lip-ru-su] “allow me to speak with my personal god (and) personal goddess and, either they pass judgment (as to whether or not) I will be weak, (or) [may they take] the oracular decision concerning me” (Butler 1998, 354). The pertinent incantation rubric reads as follows (l. 56): itti(KI) ilīšu(DINGIR-šú) u ištarīšu(DEŠ18.TÁR-šú) da-ba-bi-im-ma arkat(EGIR) ramānīšu(NÍ-šú) pa-ra-si “(it is the text) to speak with his personal god and his personal goddess, and to learn his future” (ibid.).93

BM 108874: 15 predicts an unfavourable outcome for the man: the term šibsātu refers to the “divine anger” (CAD Š/3, 382-383) provoked by man’s guilts (such as cultic impurity or not observance of the requests made by the god) and resulting in his misfortune.94 Note that šibsātu is a feminine plural: K 6278+: 20 preserves the correct plural form, GÁL.MEŠ, of the verb bašû, while BM 108874 has the singular form GÁL.

A first parallel can be found in CT 31 30-32: 29, which concerns the behaviour of the sacrificial sheep: šumma(DIŠ) immeru(MIN=UDU) īnāšu(IGI.MEŠ-šú) ezbā(TAG4-ba) ilu(DINGIR) ina niqê(SISKUR.SISKUR) amēli(LÚ) ul(NU) izziz(GUB-iz) šib-sat ili(DINGIR) ana amēli(LÚ) bašâ(GÁL.MEŠ) “if sheep’s eyes are left (?) – the god wasn’t present in the slaughter of the man; there will be anger of the god towards the man”.

A second parallel can be found in CT 39 34-36: 81, within a section of 12 omens taken from wheat being cast into water: šumma(DIŠ) ina mê(A) šinâšu(MIN-šú) lā illakū(DU-ku) šib-sat ili(DINGIR) ana amēli(LÚ) “if (flour scattered) in the water does not go twice – anger of the god towards the man” (Nötscher 1930, 204). CT 39 34-36: 80 equates the apodosis of BM 108874: 12:

93. Butler 1998, 36-37. Note that purussû also means “legal decision” (CAD P, 529). For legal and divinatory

texts sharing technical terminology see Abusch 1985, 99 and id. 2002, 33 n. 22. 94. On this subject see most recently Abusch 2002, 27-63.

112 Nicla De Zorzi

šumma(DIŠ) qēmu(ZÍD) na-da ina mê(A) šinâšu(MIN-šú) i-la-ku ilu(DINGIR) niqâ(SISKUR.SISKUR) amēli(LÚ) im-~ur “if flour scattered in the water goes twice – the god has accepted the slaughter of the man” (ibid.).

A third parallel is found in the apodosis of a physiognomic omen, CT 28 25-27: rev. 34: šumma(DIŠ) tirku(GE6) pānšu(IGI-šu) kīma(GIM) nab-lu šib-sa-at ili(DINGIR) ana amēli(LÚ) “if the surface of the dark spot is like a flame – anger of the god towards the man” (Böck 2000, 211).

To these remarks one adds that the expression šibsāt ili “anger of the god” is often included in the formulary of the Neo-Assyrian divinatory queries to the god Šamaš.95 The structure of the queries prescribes, after the closing formulas, a list of “ezibs formulas”, which are instructions about the proper performance of the rituals associated with the divination.96 For instance, PRT 41+ (= Starr 1990, no. 81) states: e-zib šá ik-rib ili(DINGIR) mé-reš-ti šib-sat ili(DIN[GIR) u D15] “disregard that a votive offering requested by the god, anger of god and goddess...” (l. 19) (see also ibid., no. 199: 6).

Similar formulas occur at the end of the tamītus.97 One of the ezibs at the end of ND 5492: 319-320 reads as follows: e-zib šá ik-rib me-riš-ti šib-sat ili(DINGIR) / u ištar(D15!) elīšu(UGU-šú) bašâ(GÁL-a) ilšu(AN-šú) ištaršu(D15-šú) ittīšu(KI-šú) / [šab]-su kám-lu “ignore that a prayer of petition for anger of god / and goddess may be upon him, his god and goddess with him / may be [ang]ry and furious” (Lambert 2007, 40-41).

GIM EN.NU.UN ana É.GAL ÍL in the protases of omens 16-17

The protasis of BM 108874: 16-17 is logographically spelled DIŠ NA GIM EN.NU.UN ana É.GAL ÍL, while K 6278+: 25 has the syllabic spelling [šumma amēlu ki]-i ma-#ar-ti ana ekalli(É.GAL) na-šú-šú, which is duplicated by a Šumma ālu bird omen text, CT 40 49-50: 1 [šumma amēlu kī m]a-#ar-ti ana ekalli(É.GAL) na-šú-šú-ma i##ūru(MUŠEN) ištu(TA) šumēl(GÙB) amēli(NA) […].

The interpretation of the sequence is rather difficult. The Sumerian EN.NU.UN has various Akkadian renderings: ma##artu “watch, guard” (mostly EN.NUN) (CAD M/2, 333-340), ma##āru “guardian, watchman” ((LÚ)EN.NU.UN) (CAD M/2, 341-344), #ibittu “prison” (CAD $, 155-157).98 K 6278+: 25 preserves the syllabic spelling ma-#ar-ti. The term ma##artu, since the Old-Babylonian Period, indicates the “watch”, i.e., the men assigned as guards (CAD M/2, 334-335: 1). At Mari, for example, ma##artum and bazā~ātum “border guards” designate the garrison troops assigned to defend outer cities.99 In the Old-Babylonian Period it refers to the “duty (service)” performed for the palace or the temple (see CAD M/1, 339-340: 6). The tamītu ND 5492 records a ta-mit ana

95. The most recent edition of the divinatory queries to the god Šamaš is by Starr 1990. 96. According to Starr 1990, xii, the main purpose of the ezib formulas is “to eliminate any

misunderstanding, untward event, mishap, or cultic impurity caused by thought, word or deed, which might affect the outcome of the extispicy”.

97. Lambert 2007, 18 gives the following interpretation of the ezib clauses: “means of asking the two gods that even though certain contingencies had not been covered in the wording of the question, reliable answers would still be given”.

98. For the Akkadian renderings of EN.NU.UN see also Borger 2003, 286. 99. Hamblin 2006, 197. Many references from Mari are listed by CAD M/1, 335: 1b. See also Durand 1998,

381.


šulum(SILIM-um) ma##arti(EN.NUN) “tamītu for the safety of the watch” (l. 183: Lambert 2007, 32-33), which refers to the guard duty for the security of the fields against enemies (ll. 164-165). In the Neo-Assyrian Period the term is widely used to indicate the “watch” for astronomical observation.100

Even though the beginning of the line is broken, it seems that the preposition used in K 6278+: 25 is kī (ki-i) and not kīma (GIM). Note that the reading ki-i rather the more common GIM is confirmed by the ezib formula of a Neo-Assyrian medical query, AGS 147 (= Starr 1990, no. 276): 12: e-zib šá di-nim ūmu(UD-mu) an-ni-i ki-i \âbu(DÙG.GA) ki-i ~a-\u-u “disregard the (formulation) of today’s case, be it good, be it faulty”. Compare it with AGS 72 (= ibid., no. 77): 9: e-zib šá ik-rib di-nim ūmu(UD-mu) annî(NE-i) kīma(GIM) \âbu(DÙG-bu) kīma(GIM) ~a\û(LÁL-ú).101

Moreover, a pronominal suffix of 3rd person singular, which doesn’t appear in the version preserved by BM 108874, is added to the verb (na-šú-šú) in the Neo-Assyrian version of the protasis.

Thus the evidence suggests that BM 108874 and K 6278+ preserve two partially different versions of the protasis. The dictionaries, following the mixed text edition of Gadd 1927, pl. 48, translate the sequence as follows: “when the guards bring a man to the palace” (CAD M/1, 334: note the wrong reading EN.NUN for EN.NU.UN); “if when they bring a man to the palace under guard” (CAD N/2, 92). Nötscher 1929-1930, 180 translates it as follows: “(wenn ein Mensch) sich als Verhafteter zum Palast begibt”, giving to ma##artu the passive meaning of “(one) who is watched”, i.e. captured, taken into arrest.102

eli bēl dabābīšu izzaz in the apodosis of omen 16; kīlašu irrik in the apodosis of omen 17

The bēl dabābi is either the “adversary (in court)”, i.e., the man’s personal adversary, or the “enemy in general” (CAD D, 3-4), thus being used as a synonym of the most common Akkadian term for “enemy”, i.e., nakru.

The context of the observation and the wording of the apodosis might suggest a correlation with some Mesopotamian magical texts centred on the action of the “personal adversary” (bēl lemutti / bēl dabābi / bēl amāti, occasionally also bēl lumni and bēl dīni), who frequently appears in anti-witchcraft incantations and anti-witchcraft rituals as the male complement of the witch (kaššāptu) - the performer of destructive magic - and whose sorceries were thought to cause misfortune, mostly social problems, such as dismissal by authorities, defeat in lawsuit and slander.103

The various aspects of the misfortune caused by the bēl dabābi are described in SpTU 2 22: ii 8-16 (Weiher 1983) in the following terms:104

100. For all the relevant references see Hunger 1992, 327a. 101. On this evidence Borger 2003, 399 remarks: “das reicht aber nicht aus, um für gim die Lesung kī

anzusetzen”. 102. See Nötscher 1929-1930, 182. 103. For a list of texts involving the bēl dabābi see most recently Schwemer 2007a, 30 nn. 13-15. For the

sorceries performed by the bēl dabābi see Abusch 1985, 91-100. For an overview on the image of the witch (kaššāptu) in Mesopotamia see id. 2002, 3-25. A full discussion of the role of the bēl dabābi in anti-witchcraft rituals has been recently offered by Schwemer 2007b, 70-71, 81-84 and 127-131.

104. SpTU 2 22 and some parallel texts are discussed by Abusch 2002, 27-63. See also Geller 1988, 1-23.

114 Nicla De Zorzi

SpTU 2 22: ii 8-16

8. šumma(DIŠ) amēlu(NA) bēl(EN) lemutti(@UL-ti) irî(TUK-î) bēl(EN) dabābīû(KA-^ú)

zīru(@UL.GIG) dibalû(DIB.BAL.A) zikurudû(ZI.KU5.RU.DA.A)

9. kadabbedû(KA.DIB.BI.DA) e-pi^ lemnēti(@UL.ME&) lawûû(NIGIN-^ú) ina pān(IGI)

ili(DINGIR) ârri(LUGAL) kabti(IDIM) u rubê(NUN) û-u^-ku[n?]

10. gi-na-a šu-dur urra(U4) u mūša(GI6) ina-an-ziq #ītu(ZI.GA) sad-rat-su

11. kar-#i-šú ikkalū(KÚ.MEŠ) a-ma-tu-^ú u^-tan-nu-ú i^-di-i~-^ú ipparis(TAR-is)

12. ina ekallīû(É.GAL-^ú) la ma~-ra-šú ûnātūû(MÁŠ.GI6.MEŠ-šú) par-da

13. ina ûttīû(MÁŠ.GI6-šú) mītūti(ÚŠ.MEŠ) i-dag-gal ubān(ŠU.SI) lemutti(@UL-tì) arkīû(EGIR-šú)

tar#at(LAL-at)

14. īn(IGI) lemutti(@UL) irteneddīû(U&.ME&-^ú) di-na i-ta-na-dar itti(KI) bārî(LÚ@AL) u ^ā’ili(LÚENSI)

15. dīnû(DI-^ú) u purussêû(E&.BAR-^ú) la ûr-î amēlu(LÚ) ^ū(BI) qāt(&U) amēlūti(NAM.LÚ.U18.LU)

kimiltim(DIB-tim) dMarduk(DAMAR.UTU)

16. ireddûû(U&-û) ilu(DINGIR) ârru(LUGAL) kabtu(IDIM) u rubû(NUN) ittīû(KI-^ú) ana

sullumi(SILIM-mi) eli(UGU) bēl(EN) dabābīû(KA-^ú) ana ûzuzzi(GUB-zi)

8. If a man has an adversary, his adversary in court, (and) hate, distortion of justice, cutting of life, 9. aphasia, all these evils he does; he besieges him; in front of the god, the king, the noble and the

prince he is caused to be in bad repute; 10. he is constantly frightened; he worries day and night; losses are suffered regularly by him; 11. people speak defamation about him; his words are changed; his profit is cut off; 12. in his (= of the king) palace he is not well received; his dreams are confused; 13. in his dreams he sees dead people; a finger of evil is pointed at him; 14. an evil eye constantly pursues him; he constantly fears the lawsuit; by the diviner and the dream

interpreter 15. his judgement and his oracular decision are not secured; this man: “the hand of the man” (and)

“the wrath of Marduk” 16. follow him; (so that) the god, the king, the noble and the prince may make peace with him

(and) cause him to triumph over his adversary.”

Similarly, the subscript to a Late-Babylonian ritual text (VAT 35: 18) against the witchcraft performed by the bēl dabābi reads as follows: [ina] mu~-~i bēl(EN) amātīû(INIM-^ú) izzazzu(GUB-zu) “he will triumph over his adversary” (Schwemer 2007b, 129-130).


In the main, the Mesopotamians ascribed to the action of witchcraft personal distress (physical and/or psychological) as well as circumstances involving socio-economic loss of wealth and social status.105

Interestingly, a parallel text to SpTU 2 22, BAM 316: ii 9’-10’, issues the idea that witchcraft causes misfortune by provoking the anger of the gods: šib-sat ili(DINGIR) u ištari(DU.DAR) elīšu(UGU-šú) bašâ(GÁL-a) ilu(DINGIR) u ištaru(DU.DAR) / ittīšu(KI-šú) ze-nu-ú kiš-pi ep-šú-šú itti(KI) ili(DINGIR) u ištari(DU.DAR) šu-zu-ur “the anger of god and goddess is upon him, god and goddess / are angry with him; witchcraft has been practiced against him; he has been cursed before god and goddess” (Abusch 2002, 31-32). The text ends (ll. 22’-25’) with a ritual performed for the reconciliation with the personal gods (l. 22’: ilšu u ištaršu ittīšu isallimu) and the attainment of favourable omens (l. 22’: egirrûšu iššir), thus focusing on the close relationship between propitiations of the gods, rituals and divination.106

The tamītu ND 5492: 249-255 connects the action of the bēl dabābi with witchcraft and sorcery: ina a-mat nir-ti tuš-ši u nu-ul-la-ti / mi-qit [pî ...] x ZIB [x] a-~i-ti / ina a-mat mu-ša\-pi-li a-r[i-i] / ù GAB-na-’i-i ina a-mat bēl(EN) ik-k[i-šú] / ù bēl(EN) dabābīšu(DU11.DU11-šú) ina a-mat bēl(EN) i-di-[šú] / ù bēl(EN) man-za-zi-i-šú ina a-mat ep-ši / ú-pi-ši k[iš-pi] ru-~e-e ru-se-e “(will the man be spared) from the matter of murder, slander, falses accusation / malicious talk [...] .. [.] hostile speech / from the matter of the slanderer, the . [..] / and the ...; from the matter of someone angry with [him] / and his prosecutor; from the matter of “the lord of [his] side” / and “the lord of his rank”; from the matter of magic / voodoo, wi[tchcraf]t, black magic and sorcery ... ?” (Lambert 2007, 36-37).

The connection between the protasis and the apodosis of omen 17 seems to rely on the association of ideas (guard, ma##artu – prison, kīlu). The apodosis reads as follows: amēlu ^ū kīlašu(KI.ŠÚ-û) irrik “that man: his confinement will be long”.

Long detention is frequently attested in omen apodoses (see CAD K, 359-360: 1b). The tamītu ND 5492: 343 worries that kīlu “prison”, mēsiru “confinement” and dannatu “distress” might befall a man (see Lambert 2007, 39-40). A fragmentary incantation against the bēl dabābi (KAR 253: Ebeling 1949, 196-202) refers to the imprisonment of the adversary (l. 17: ina ki-li [...]-^ú).

Interestingly, kīlu(KI.ŠÚ) “prison” seems to be the subject of an unfortunately not preserved Neo-Assyrian war ritual for the king, whose incipit (KI.ŠÚ AL.DIB) is mentioned by the manual of the exorcist Esagil-kīn-apli (obv. 23: see Jean 2006, 60).107 It follows the incipit of a ritual “to cross into the steppe land” (EDIN.NA DIB.BÉ.DA) and a ritual “that the arrow of the enemy doesn’t come near a man” (GI LÚ.KÚR NU.TE.GE26.E.DÈ) respectively. A famous letter of an Assyrian

105. See Abusch 2007, 375-376. 106. On this subject see also Stol 1993, 33-36, Heeßel 2000, 49-54 and id. 2007a, 120-130. As shown by

Abusch 2002, 40, the idea of witchcraft overpowering the personal gods and thus causing man’s misfortune is probably a later addition within the corpus of anti-witchcraft literature, corresponding to a diminution of the importance attributed to the personal god. The development should be located at the time that witchcraft became part of the āšipūtu in either the Old-Babylonian or as late as the early Kassite Period (see also ibid., 56 and n. 88).

107. 107. For the reading of KI.ŠÚ as kīlu “prison” see Casini 1990, 127-134. On KI.ŠÚ AL.DIB (kīlu #abātu) “imprisonment” see also Geller 2000, 254 n. 23. Conversely, Jean 2006, 60 translates the expression as follows: “pour qu’il tienne son poste”.

116 Nicla De Zorzi

king (CT 22 1) demanding the collection of various scholarly texts from the Ezida in Borsippa refers to a “series ‘battle’” (iškar tā~āzi) as well as to the ritual “to cross into the steppe land”.108 Further military rituals are partially attested in the correspondence of the Neo-Assyrian āšipūs.109

The relationship between war rituals and bēl-dabābi and anti-witchcraft rituals has been recently re-qualified by Schwemer 2007a, 29-42. However, Mesopotamian war rituals are not very well known because of the fragmentary state of preservation of the sources. Moreover, as the correspondences between ritual and divination are still to be investigated, the interrelations suggested above cannot be proved definitely at present. uššē bīti iptīma libitta iddi in the protases of omens 18-19

The flight patterns of the falcon are observed while a man “opens the foundations of a house and laids the brick” (uššē bīti iptīma libitta iddi).

The protasis parallels the incipit of a first millennium ritual (Si 12) concerning “the opening” of the foundations of a house.110 It reads: [e-nu]-ma uššē(UŠ8) bīti(É) tepettû(BAD-ú) ina ar~i([IT]I) \ābi(DU10.GA) ina u4-mu šal-mu kīma(GIN7) uššē(UŠ8) tepettû(BAD-ú) libitta(SIG4) tanaddû(Š[U]B-ú)... “[wh]en you open the foundations of a house, on a good [mon]th, on a favourable day, as you open the foundations and you l[ai]d the brick...” (Ambos 2004, 132-133). It is followed by a list of ritual prescriptions in order to propitiate the gods Ea, Šamaš and Asallu~i, the “great gods, builders of settlements and shrines” (l. 11: ilâni rabûti bānû dadmī u ešrētī), as well as Kūbu and Kulla “lord of fundaments and bricks” (l. 7: bēl uššē u libnāti).111 The expression uššē petû describes the uncovering of the old fundaments which preludes to the laiding of the first brick of the new fundaments (libitta nadû).

In ancient Mesopotamia divination and ritual are closely interrelated on the occasion of building activities.112 All phases of the building of a house or a temple were followed by purification and apotropaic rituals to devert the bad omens. This was particularly true, because of its religious implications, in the case of the building of a temple, when the king’s professionals, the bārû “diviner”, the āšipu “exorcist” and the kalû “lamentation-priest”, were involved in the performance of the pertinent rituals.113 The bārû investigated the gods’ attitudes prior to the beginning of the activities; the āšipu purified the place prior to the laiding of the fundaments and dedicated the

108. The most recent edition of the text is by Frame - George 2005, 280-281. 109. A number of war rituals were published by Ebeling 1953, nos. 3-4, Elat 1982, 5-25, Mayer 1988, 145-164,

id. 1990, 14-33, id. 1993, 313-337. A new war ritual is published by Schwemer 2007a, 29-42. Further evidence comes from the Hittite (see Beal 1995, 63-76) and Ugarit (see Prechel 2003, 225-228). For the Neo-Assyrian evidence see also Jean 2006, 91-96.

110. For first millennium foundation rituals see most recently Ambos 2004. For a brief overview on Neo-assyrian foundation rituals see also Jean 2006, 102-103. On the Hellenistic evidence see Linssen 2004, 231-233.

111. For a detailed analysis of the role of the gods in Mesopotamian foundation rituals see Ambos 2004, 21-28. 112. See ibid., 35-36. On the relationship between omens and rituals see also Sallaberger 2000, 261-262. 113. The rituals performed by these professionals during building activities are discussed by Ambos 2004, 7-14.


building; the kalû appeased the gods by means of prayers during the development of the construction.114

Moreover, omens taken from accidents occurring by building activities appear in three omen series: the series Īqqur īpuš “He demolishes and (then) he rebuilds”, the series Šumma ālu (tablets 1-21) and the series TUKUM.BI ITIAPIN.DU8.A.TA “If from the month Arahsamnu”.115 The latter is unfortunately known only from its incipit, šumma(DIŠ) ina libbi(ŠÀ) āli(URU) igārātu(É.GAR8.MEŠ) i-qup-pá “if within a city the wall collapses”, which corresponds to the incipit of the kalû ritual e-nu-ma igār(É.GAR) bīt(É) ili(DINGIR) i-qa-pu “when the wall of the god’s house collapses”.116

The incipit of Si 12 indicates that choosing a propitious time (ina ar~i \ābi ina ūmi šalmi) for building activities was considered of great importance. This was the goal of the series Īqqur īpuš: the chapters 1-33 of the series give chronological indications for building activities to houses and temples, while chapter 41 concerns grave building.117 The incipit of chapter 1 reads as follows: šumma(DIŠ) ina ITIXY uššē(APIN) bīti(É) iptīma(BE-ma) libitta(SIG4) iddi(ŠUB) “if in the month XY he opens the foundations of a house and he laids the brick” (Labat 1965, 58).

Šumma ālu 5 concerns houses under construction.118 Many omens of this tablet refer to the month in which the foundations of a house are laid or to happenings during building activities. For instance, &umma ālu 5: 20 reads: šumma(DIŠ) i-nu-ma uššē(APIN) bīti(É) na-du-ú egirrû(INIM.GAR) damiq(SIG5) id-bu-ub KIMIN “if, when the foundations of a house are laid, a positive oracle speaks – ditto” (Freedman 1998, 89).

šumma ina bīt amēli mar#u mari# in the protases of omens 20-22

The behaviour of the falcon is observed while in the house of a man someone is sick (mar#u mari#). The health of the individual is one of the standard topics of Mesopotamian divinatory enquiry and it is widely attested in extispicy reports and queries.

Interestingly, the same three omens occur in the second tablet of the diagnostic series Sakikkû (SA.GIG), omens 3-5.119 These are followed by jackal (zibû) (ll. 7-12), raven (āribu) (ll. 13-16), partridge (i##ūr ~urri) (ll. 17-18) and dove (summatu) (l. 18) omens.120 The tablet concerns the encounters made by the exorcist (āšipu) on his way to the house of the patient.

114. See also Jean 2006, 102-103. 115. The series Īqqur īpuš was edited by Labat 1965. For the series TUKUM.BI ITIAPIN.DU8.A.TA see

Ambos 2004, 29-31. The house omens of &umma ālu are discussed by Guinan 1996a, 61-68. For parallels between Īqqur īpuš and Šumma ālu see Freedman 1998, 159, 162-167 and Ambos 2004, 31-32 and 36.

116. The incipit of the series is preserved by the Babylonian “diviner’s manual”: see Oppenheim 1974, 199: 13. For the kalû ritual enūma igār bīt ili iqâpu see Ambos 2004, 29 n. 206 and 171-192.

117. On the content of Īqqur īpuš see also Maul 2003, 57-58. 118. See Freedman 1998, 87-108. 119. The diagnostic series has been recently edited by Heeßel 2000. For the second tablet of the series see id.

2001-2002, 24-49. One manuscript of the tablet (D, from Sippar) preserves a variant apodosis for omen 3 and 4: see ibid., 41.

120. An Uruk parallel to the jackal and raven omens is published by Weiher 1983, no. 32: see Heeßel 2001-2002, 41.

118 Nicla De Zorzi

Sakikkû 2: 3-5 differs from BM 108874: 20-22 in the reverse order of the bird flight: from right to left in the first omen and from left to right in the second, such as in K 6278+: 33.

The serialization of Sakikkû is attributed to the Babylonian scholar Esagil-kīn-apli, who served as ummānu “scholar” under the king Adad-apla-iddina (1068-1047 B.C.).121 It has been recently suggested that Esagil-kīn-apli might have used for his work, at least in some cases, a number of already existing traditions, rather than producing them by himself.122 However, a direct borrowing from BM 108874 to Sakikkû 2 is hard to imagine. On the other hand, the existence of clear parallels between the diagnostic omens and the terrestrial omens of the series &umma ālu has been frequently emphasized, although the direction of the borrowings is still debated.123 The presence of the same three omens both in Sakikkû 2 and K 6278+ (even if the text is not fully preserved) is not final proof of a direct borrowing, but it nevertheless suggests a possible identification of K 6278+ as part of the series &umma ālu.

From the point of view of the interpretation of the text, one notes that the second part of BM 108874, i.e., from omen 16 on, focuses on circumstances which usually involve the exorcist-āšipu, or, perhaps, the mutual action of both the exorcist and the diviner: witchcraft (?) (omens 16-17), building activities (omens 18-19), diagnostics (omens 20-22).

qaqqad eqli ana ma~ā#i itbi in the protases of omens 23 and 25; zēra uddu in the protasis of

omen 24

The flight patterns of the falcon and the behaviour of the raven are observed during agricultural activities such as the plowing of a field (omens 23 and 25) and the throwing of the seed (omen 24).

The noxious presence of birds during agricultural activities is confirmed by letters, administrative and literary texts as well as by the archaeological evidence.124

Ur III texts from Umma mention the hiring of men against crows.125 Old-Babylonian letters from Mari attest to the employing of guardians (ma##arū) in order to protect fields (eqla na#āru) from wild animals and birds.126

A small collection of Old-Babylonian incantations (YOS 11 69) instruct how to fight against four different types of pests.127 The subscript to the second incantation (rev. l. 7) indicates that it is meant for catching the ravens (KA.INIM.MA Ú.NAGA.GAMUŠEN DAB5.BA).

The Sumerian proverb SP 3.182 (= SP 7.92) refers to a BURU4MUŠEN (“crow”) that devours the crop: A.ŠÀ BURU4MUŠEN.GIN7 ZÚ E.DA.RA.A@ “you can devour a field like a crow” (Alster 1997, 110 and 163).128

121. On Esagil-kīn-apli see Finkel 1988, 143-159. 122. Heeßel 2000, 104-110 and id. 2001-2002, 26. 123. See Freedman 1998, 12 and Heeßel 2001-2002, 26 n. 20. 124. Some ploughing scenes on cylinder-seals represents crows flying down on the furrows: see Osten-Sacken

1999, 265-278. 125. Veldhuis 2004, 227. 126. The evidence from Mari is discussed by Wassermann 1999, 341-354. 127. On YOS 11 69 see Wassermann 1999, 348-349, Cavigneaux – al Rawi 2002, 10 and Veldhuis 2004, 300. 128. On SP 3.182 see also Cavigneaux – al Rawi 2002, 49 and Veldhuis 2004, 227.


A balag-composition to Inanna describes the chasing away of BURU5MU&EN (“sparrows”) from the grain (l. 419) (Kramer 1987, 71-90).129

An Assyrian list of portents (CT 29 48-50) refers to a seed crow (?) (BURU5.&E.NUMUN) which give birth in the city (l. 6).130 The lexical list @AR.RA = ~ubullu 18: 342 (Landsberger 1962) also records a BURU4.&E.NUMUNMU&EN = e-rib ze-ri (see CAD A/2 sub āribu, lexical entries).

Worth mentioning is the similarity between the Akkadian words for raven/crow (āribu / (h) ēribu) and locust (erbu).131 The Sumerian word for “locust” is BIR5(NAM)(MU&EN). However, in the post Old-Babylonian Period the use of BIR5 (NAM) for locust was replaced by BURU5, which in the Old-Babylonian Sumerian literature denoted the sparrow, thus contributing to various misinterpretations in antiquity as well as in modern Assyriology.132

The locust was the most common cause of field pest in Mesopotamia.133 The Sumerian agricultural manual known as “The Farmer’s Instruction” (Civil 1994) refers to the danger of locusts that destroy crops (ll. 64-66). The manual of the exorcist Esagil-kīn-apli (obv. 22: Jean 2006, 67) lists various agricultural exorcistic rituals: ritual against “the flooding of Adad” (U4.DÈ.RA.RA DIB.BÉ.DA), an “exorcism of the steppe land” (MAŠ.MAŠ EDIN.NA) and a ritual against the “tooth of the locust” (ZÚ BURU5 DIB.BÉ.DA).134 An Old-Babylonian agricultural incantation from Meturan (H 103: Cavigneaux – al Rawi 2002, 14-56) describes the exorcist laying its nets against noxious animals into the steppe land (l. 1: MAŠ.MAŠ EDIN GÚ I.NI.IL.LA). One of the animals mentioned is the locust (H 103: ii 1’).

An unfortunately not well preserved tamītu (K 11310: Lambert 2007, no. 17) also refers to locusts (erbi [email protected]).

5. Text structure and divinatory interpretative apparatus

A great effort has been so far devoted to the study of the technical apparatus of Mesopotamian extispicy texts.135 Conversely, discussions on the principles of interpretation of Mesopotamian terrestrial omens are rather rare.136

This paragraph offers an analysis of the features of the divinatory interpretative apparatus of BM 108874. However, it should be remarked that, as we don’t possess the signifying code, the approach used here is highly speculative.

129. On BURU5MU&EN “sparrow” see Veldhuis 2004, 229-231. For the chasing away of sparrows from the

fields see also Ana ittīû (Landsberger 1937) 4: i 49-50. 130. On CT 29 48-50 see Guinan 2002, 31-40. A BURU5.&E.NUMUNMU&EN also appears in a &umma ālu bird

omen text, CT 41 1: 2, unfortunately only partially preserved. 131. Wassermann 1999, 345 n. 20. 132. The problem of the difference vs analogy between BIR5 and BURU5 is extensively analyzed by

Cavigneaux – al Rawi 2002, 44-50. See also Civil 1994, 104 n. 83, Black 1996, 25 and Veldhuis 2004, 224-22. 133. The evidence is discussed by George 1999, 291-292. 134. For the ritual against “the tooth of the locust” see ibid., 295-298. 135. Major contributions on extispicy are Starr 1983, 14-24; Meyer 1987; Jeyes 1989, 51-92; Leiderer 1990;

Starr 1990, xxxvi-lv; Koch-Westenholz 2000, 38-70; Glassner 2004, 63-80. 136. See Guinan 1989, 227-235; id. 1993, 61-67; id. 1998, 38-55; id. 2002, 7-40.

120 Nicla De Zorzi

Already from the analysis of the first group of omens (1-3) one gets a glimpse on the divinatory logic:

PROTASIS APODOSIS Context Bird behaviour Prediction

1 man: starting an enterprise falcon: crossing from the right of the man to his left

success of the enterprise

2 DITTO falcon: staying on the right of the man and proceeding alongside him

having gain

3 DITTO raven: staying and cawing to the left of the man

enjoying a profit

The description of the bird behaviour is organized according to the binary opposition right/left, which is the most productive in Mesopotamian extispicy and, in the main, in all kind of divinatory techniques.137 The right side is usually associated with positive values; the left side, conversely, is associated with negative values. In 2 the staying of the falcon on the right side leads to a positive prediction. 3 predicts a similar positive outcome, though the bird stays on the left: looking back to the signs, one gets that the outcome of the third omen results from the product of two values, i.e., the negative value (_) of the left side combined with the negative value of the raven (_), an inauspicious bird, leads to a positive prediction (_)×(_)=(+).

The “principles” so recovered seem to be confirmed by 6 and 24, where the behaviour of the raven is again observed.


6 man: starting a journey raven: proceeding to the right of the man and cawing

not going where planed; discontent

24 man: throwing the seed raven: staying and cawing to the left of the man

increasing of the furrow’s yield

In 6 the product of the positive value of the right side (+) with the negative value of the raven (_) leads to a negative prediction (+)×(_)=(_). In 24, as in 3, the negative value (_) of the left side combined with the negative value of the raven (_) leads to a positive result (_)×(_)=(+).

The “rule” may be summarized as follows: positive sign combined with positive sign leads to a positive result (+)×(+)=(+); negative combined with negative leads to a positive result (_)×(_)=(+); negative combined with positive leads to a negative result (_)×(+)=(_). If the protasis contains two or more terms they could be treated like individual elements.138 See, for instance, 7-11:

137. On the opposition right/left in divinatory texts see Guinan 1996b, 5-10. 138. The rule of the product of signs is widely applied in extispicy texts: see Koch-Westenholz 2000, 43.



7 man: going against an enemy falcon: circling from the right of the man to his back and crossing to his left

conquest of the enemy

8 man: going against an enemy falcon: crossing from the left of the man to his right and excreting next to him

booty in the country of the enemy

9 man: going against an enemy falcon: flying off from the left of the man to his right and turning back

leaving of the enemy’s lord; returning home

10 man: going against an enemy falcon: crossing from the left of the man to his right and taking up a position to his left and proceeding alongside him

causing losses

11 man: going against an enemy falcon: circling from the left of the man to his back and crossing to his right

being robbed of the property; discontent

In 7 the falcon circles from the right side (+) to the back, which is usually associated with negative values (_). The negative product, (+)×(_)=(_), in combination with the negative value of the crossing of the bird to the left side (_), gives a double negative (_)×(_)=(+), i.e., a positive result. The application of the rule in 8 suggests that, at least within the divinatory system of BM 108874, the act of excreting next to a man is charged of negative values. The positive predictions of 9 and 10 themselves derive from the product of three values, one positive and two negatives.

Although the protasis of 11 shows a similar structure, the outcome of the omen is negative. The disrupting of the standard pattern seems to be catalyst of a new interpretative principle.139 7 and 11 might be read as an antithetical pair: the opposite directions of the flight lead to antithetical predictions.

The organization by antithetical pairs also appears on 12-15, which could be read as two intersecting pairs of omens (12/15; 13/14). In 12/15 the positive/negative outcomes of the apodoses derive from the binary logic itself rather than from the sum of the sign values of the protases.


12 man: going to sacrifice to his god falcon: crossing from the right of the man to his left

the god accepts the sacrifice

15 man: going to sacrifice to his god falcon: crossing from the left of the man to his right

anger of his god and his goddess upon him

With regard to 12, the crossing of the bird from right (+) to left (_) leads to a positive prediction. 15 correlates an antithetical prediction with the opposite direction, from left (_) to right (+), of the bird flight.

139. See Guinan 1989, 229. Similar structures occur in the teratological omen series Šumma izbu: see De Zorzi

2007, 362-376 (unpublished MA thesis).

122 Nicla De Zorzi

With regard to 13-14, the application of the rule would lead to a negative result in both cases:


13 man: going to sacrifice to his god and returning home

falcon: circling from the right of the man to his back and crossing to his left

long days; long life

14 man: going to sacrifice to his god

falcon: circling from the left of the man to his back and crossing to his right

short days; death

The opposite directions of the bird flights (from right to left in 13 and from left to right in 14) determine opposite predictions.

To these remarks one adds that whether the falcon’s flight starts from the right and reaches the left or vice versa, it seems not to have by itself any influence on the positive/negative value of the prediction.140 See, for instance, 1 and 5:


1 man: starting an enterprise (ana #ibûtišu itbi)

falcon: crossing from the right of the man to his left

success of the enterprise (#ibûssu ikaššad)

5 man: going on a journey falcon: crossing from the right of the man to his left

not attaining of the desire (lā kašād #ibûti)

Even though the flight have the same pattern (crossing from right to left), the corresponding predictions have an opposite polarity. The only difference between them is the context of the observation. Moreover, in 1 the connection between the protasis and the apodosis is strengthened by the repetition of the term #ibûtu.

16-17 and 18-19 are two couples of antithetical pairs. With regard to 16-17, the flight of the bird from left (negative side) to right (positive side) leads to a positive prediction, while the flight from the opposite direction leads to a negative one.


16 man: being brought to the palace

falcon: crossing from the left of the man to his right

staying above the enemy; no rival

17 man: being brought to the palace


long confinement

140. Conversely, in K 6278 the flight from the right side always has a positive value.



18 man: digging the foundation of a house and laiding a brick

falcon: crossing from the left of the man to his right

enlargement of the house; long life of the owner of the house

19 man: digging the foundation of a house and laiding a brick


unhappiness of the inhabitants of the house

With regard to 18-19, the antithetical meanings of the apodoses are determined by the opposite direction of the bird flight. As for 16-17, the flight from left to right is associated with a positive result.

Finally, another feature of the text worth mentioning is the presence of triadic patterns of organization. See, for instance, 20-22:


20 man: in his house someone is sick

falcon: crossing (in the morning behind the house) from the outer left corner to the outer right corner

getting up soon


falcon: crossing (in the morning behind the house) from the outer right corner to the outer left corner

long sickness


falcon: flying away (in the morning behind the house)

death

The first two omens of the triad represent an opposite pair. In 20 the flying of the bird from left to right determines a positive outcome (as in 16-19). Conversely, the flying from right to left in 21 determines an opposite negative outcome. The protasis of the third omen of the triad describes a completely different behaviour of the bird (flying away): its prediction has a stronger inauspicious value than the prediction of the negative member of the previous pair.

See also 23-25:


23 man: plowing a (fallow) field falcon: crossing from the right of the man to his left

seeing luxuriance of the field (bulu\ libbi ša eqli immar)

24 man: throwing the seed raven: going upon it and cawing to the left of the man

increasing of the furrow’s yield (šer’u bilassa uttar)

25 man: plowing a (fallow) field falcon: crossing from the left of the man to his right

decreasing of the furrow’s yield (šer’u bilassa uma\\a)

23 and 25 may be paired as polar opposites: the antithetical meaning of the apodoses is related to the opposite order of the bird flight. Moreover the apodosis of 24 is symmetrically opposite to that of 25 (biltu atāru/biltu ma\û). Finally, one notes the phonetic association between bul\u “health, vigour, luxuriance” (23) and biltu “yeld” (24 and 25).

124 Nicla De Zorzi

6. Conclusions

Our study of BM 108874 has provided us with a number of insights that are worth summarizing briefly here.

First, the existence of many interconnections between terrestrial omens and other types of divinatory texts, such as extispicy omens, dream omens, astrological and diagnostic omens has been demonstrated. Moreover, it has been pointed out that some of the omens of BM 108874 seem to share their terminology with various rituals (war, foundation, agricultural rituals) belonging to the sphere of competence of the exorcist-āšipu.

The idea of the overlap and exchange among the different mantic disciplines has been frequently emphasized by Assyriologists.141 However, no serious attempt has been made so far to collect and analyze comprehensively all the evidence. For instance, the recent edition of the corpus of Babylonian queries-tamītus by Lambert 2007 calls into question their connections with the related category of the ikribus, i.e., ritual texts prescribing rites whereby the answer to a tamītu was obtained. The sharing of technical terminology between BM 108874 (terrestrial omens), the tamītus and some anti-witchcraft rituals suggests that the analysis of the complementarities among the various fields of Mesopotamian scholarship should be pursued in order to better understand the ways and the strategies of textual transmission.

In the final part of the article, we tried to shed some light on the divinatory logic of BM 108874. It has been stressed that, despite the great effort which has been so far devoted to the study of the technical apparatus of Mesopotamian extispicy texts, discussions on the principles of interpretation of Mesopotamian terrestrial omens are rather rare and their hermeneutic principles of interpretation remain to be investigated. An effort towards a better understanding of the divinatory language would provide many insights into the role of writing and script in the divinatory process and the function of Mesopotamian literary devices.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abusch T. 1985, “Dismissal by Authorities: Šuškunu and Related Matters”, Journal of Cuneiform Studies 37, 91-100.

——— 1998, “Ghost and God: Some Observations on a Babylonian Understanding of Human Nature”, in A. Baumgarten et al. (eds.), Self, Soul and Body in Religious Experience (Study in the History of Religions 78), Leiden.

——— 2002, Mesopotamian Witchcraft. Toward a History and Understanding of Babylonian Witchcraft Beliefs and Literature (Ancient Magic and Divination 5), Leiden.

141. See Parpola 1993a, 52 and id. 1993b, xiii-xvii for the Neo-Assyrian concept of “scholarship”. For the

overlap of the various divinatory practices see Rochberg-Halton 2000, 359-375 and most recently Noegel 2007, 27-35.


——— 2007, “Witchcraft literature in Mesopotamia”, in G. Leick (ed.), The Babylonian World, Oxon, 373-385.

Alster B. 1997, Proverbs of Ancient Sumer. The World’s Earliest Proverb Collections, Bethesda. Ambos C. 2004, Mesopotamische Baurituale aus dem 1. Jahrtausend v. Chr., Dresden. Archi A. 1975, “L’ornitomanzia ittita”, Studi Miceneo ed Egeo-Anatolici 16, 119-180. ——— 1998, “The Regional State of Nagar According to the Texts of Ebla”, in M. Lebeau (ed.),

About Subartu. Studied Devoted to Upper Mesopotamia Vol. 2. Culture, Society, Image (Subartu 4), Turnhout, 1-15.

Bawanypeck D. 2004, “Die Rituale der hethitischen Auguren. Zur Bedeutung ihrer Tätigkeit für das Könighaus und zu den Traditionen ihrer Rituale“, in M. Hutter – S. Hutter-Braunsar (Hrsgg.), Offizielle Religion, lokale Kulte und individuelle Religiosität: Akten des religionsgeschichtlichen Symposiums „Kleinasien und Angrenzende Gebiete vom Beginn des 2. bis zur Mitte des 1. Jahrtausends v. Chr.“ (Bonn, 20-22 Februar 2003) (Alter Orient und Altes Testament 318), München, 31-46.

Beal R.H. 1995, “Hittite Military Rituals”, in M. Meyer – P. Mirecki (eds.), Astral Magic and Ritual Power (Religions in the Graeco-Roman World 129), Leiden-New York-Cologne, 63-76.

——— 2002, “Hittite Oracles”, in J.L. Ciraolo – J.L Seidel (eds.), Magic and Divination in the Ancient World (Ancient Magic and Divination 2), Leiden – Boston – Köln, 57-81.

Black J.A. 1996, “The Imagery of Birds in Sumerian Poetry”, in M.E. Vogelzang - H.L. J. Vanstiphout, (eds.), Mesopotamian Poetic Language: Proceedings of the Groningen Group for the Study of Mesopotamian Literature (Cuneiform Monographs 6), Groningen, 23-46.

Black J.A. – Al-Rawi F.N.H. 1987, “A Contribution to the study of Akkadian Bird Names”, Zeitschrift für Assyriologie 77, 117-126.

Boissier A. 1894-1899, Documents assyriens relatifs aux présages, Paris. ——— 1905, Choix de textes relatifs à la divination assyro-babylonienne, Genève. ——— 1935, Mantique Babylonienne et Mantique Hittite, Paris. Borger R. 1957, “nisirti bārûti. Geheimlehre der Haruspizin”, Bibliotheca Orientalis 14, 190-195. ——— 2003, Mesopotamisches Zeichenlexicon (Alter Orient und Altes Testament 305), Münster. Bottéro J. 1974, “Symptômes, signes, écriture”, in J.P. Vernant – L. Vandermeersch et al. (eds.),

Divination et Rationalité, Paris, 70-193. Böck B. 2000, Die babylonisch-assyrische Morphoskopie (Archiv für Orientforschung Beiheft 27), Wien. Brinkman J. 1976, Materials and Studies for Kassite History 1, Chicago. Butler S.A.L. 1998, Mesopotamian Conception of Dreams and Dream Rituals (Alter Orient und Altes

Testament 258), München. Caplice R. 1965-1973, “Namburbi Texts in the British Museum”, Orientalia Nova Series 34 (1965),

105-131; 36 (1967), 1-38; 39 (1970), 111-151; 40 (1971), 133-183; 42 (1973), 508-517. ——— 1974, The Akkadian Namburbi Texts: An Introduction (Sources from the Ancient Near East 1), Los

Angeles. Casini M. 1990, “Carcere nella terminologia accadica”, Egitto e Vicino Oriente 13, 127-134. Cavigneaux A. – Al-Rawi F. 2002, “Liturgies exorcistiques agraires (Textes de Tell Hadad IX)”,

Zeitschrift für Assyriologie 92, 1-59. Cavigneaux A. et al. 1985, The series Erim-~uš = anantu and An-ta-gál = šaqû (Materials for the Sumerian

Lexicon 18), Rome. Civil M. 1994, The Farmer’s Instruction. A Sumerian Agricultural Manual (Aula Orientalis Supplementa 5),

Barcelona. Cohen Y. 2007, “Akkadian Omens from Hattuša and Emar”, Zeitschrift für Assyriologie 97, 233-251. De Zorzi N. 2007, La serie divinatoria &umma izbu: metodi, procedure, operatività (unpublished MA thesis

Università Ca’ Foscari Venezia), Venice. Dietrich M. – Loretz O. 1981, “Die Inschrift der Statue des Königs Idrimi von Alalah”, Ugarit-

Forschungen 13, 201-269.

126 Nicla De Zorzi

Durand J.-M. 1988, Archives Épistolaires de Mari 1/1 (Archives Royales de Mari 26), Paris. ——— 1997, “La divination par les oiseaux”, Mari, Annales de Recherches Interdisciplinaires 8, 273-282. ——— 1998, Les documents épistolaires du palais de Mari, tome II, Paris. ——— 2000, Les documents épistolaires du palais de Mari, tome III, Paris. Durand J.-M. – Guichard M. 1997, “Le rituels de Mari”, in D. Charpin – J.-M. Durand (éds.),

Florilegium Marianum III. Recueil d’études à la mémoire de Marie-Thérese Barrelet (Mémoires de N.A.B.U. 4), Paris, 19-78.

Ebeling E. 1931, Tod und Leben nach den Vorstellungen der Babyloniern, Berlin – Leipzig. ——— 1953, Beschwörungen gegen den Feind und den bösen Blick aus dem Zweitstromlande (Archiv Orientální

17/1). Elat M. 1982, “Mesopotamische Kriegsrituale”, Bibliotheca Orientalis 39, 5-25. Evans-Pritchard E.E. 1937, Witchcraft, Oracles and Magic among the Azande, Oxford. Fales F.M. – Postgate J.N. 1992, Imperial Administrative Records, Part I (State Archive of Assyria 7),

Helsinki. Fawzi R. 1978, “Crows: A Means to Tell the Future”, Sumer 34, 40-66. Finet A. 1982, “Un cas de clédonomantie à Mari”, in G. Van Driel (ed.), Zikir Šumin. Assyriological

studies presented to F.R. Kraus on the occasion of his seventieth birthday, Leiden, 48-56. Finkel I. 1988, “Adad-apla-iddina, Esagil-kīn-apli, and the Series SA.GIG”, in E. Leichty – M. De

Jong Ellis – P. Gerardi (eds.), A Scientific Humanist. Studies in Memory of Abraham Sachs (Occasional Publications of the Samuel Noah Kramer Foundation 9), Philadelphia, 143-159.

——— 1995, “In Black and White: Remarks on the Assur Psephomancy Ritual”, Zeitschrift für Assyriologie 85, 271-276.

Frame G. – George A.R. 2005, “The Royal Libraries of Niniveh: New Evidence for King Ashurbanipal’s Tablet Collecting”, Iraq 67, 265-284.

Freedman S.M. 1998, If a City is Set on a Height. The Akkadian Omen Series Šumma Alu ina Melê Šakin. Volume 1: Tablets 1-21 (Occasional Publications of the Samuel Noah Kramer Foundation 17), Philadelphia.

——— 2006, If a City Is Set on a Height: The Akkadian Omen Series Šumma Alu ina Melê Šakin. Volume 2: Tablets 22-40 (Occasional Publications of the Samuel Noah Kramer Foundation 19), Philadelphia.

Gadd C.J. 1925-1931, Cuneiform Texts from the Babylonian Tablets όc., in the British Museum 28, 37, 38-41, London.

Gelb I.J. 1944, Hurrians and Subarians, Chicago. Geller M.J. 1988, “New Duplicates to SBTU II”, Archiv für Orientforschung 35, 1-23. ——— 2000, “Incipits and Rubrics”, in A.R. George – I.L. Finkel (eds.), Wisdom, Gods and

Literature. Studies in Assyriology in Honour of W.G. Lambert, Winona Lake, 225-258. George A.R. 1991, “Babylonian Texts from the Folios of Sidney Smith. Part Two: Prognostic and

Diagnostic Omens, Tablet I”, Revue d’ Assyriologie et d’ Archéologie Orientale 85, 137-163. ——— 1992, Babylonian Topographical Texts (Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 40), Leuven. ——— 1999, “The Dogs of Nin-kilim”, in H. Klengel – J. Renger (Hrsg.), Landwirtschaft im alten

Orient (Berliner Beiträge zum Vorderen Orient 18), Berlin, 291-299. Glassner J.-J. 2004, “La leçon d’un devin paléo-babylonien”, Revue d’Assyriologie et d’Archéologie

Orientale 98 , 63-80. ——— 2005, “L’aruspicine paléo-babylonienne et le témoignage des sources de Mari”, Zeitschrift für

Assyriologie 95, 276-300. Goetze A. 1947, Old Babylonian Omen Texts (Yale Oriental Series 10), New Haven - London. ——— 1957, “Reports on Acts of Extispicy from Old Babylonian and Kassite Times”, Journal of

Cuneiform Studies 11, 89-105. Guichard M. 1997, “Présages fortuits à Mari (copies et ajouts à ARMT XXVI/1) ”, Mari, Annales de

Recherches Interdisciplinaires 8, 305-328.


Guinan A. 1989, “The Perils of High Living: Divinatory Rhetoric in Šumma ālu”, in H. Behrens et al. (eds.), DUMU-É-DUB-BA-A. Studies in Honour of Ăke W. Sjöberg, Philadelphia, 227-235.

——— 1990, “The Human Behavioral Omens: on the Threshold of Psychological Inquiry”, Bulletin of the Canadian Society of Mesopotamian Studies 19, 9-14.

——— 1996a, “Social constructions and private designs. The house omens of ûmma ālu”, in K.R. Veenhof (ed.), Houses and Households in Ancient Mesopotamia, Istanbul, 61-68.

——— 1996b, “Left/Right Symbolism in Mesopotamian Divination”, State Archives of Assyria Bulletin 10/1, 5-10.

——— 1997, “Divination”, in W.W. Hallo (ed.), The Context of Scripture, Leiden-New York-Milan, 421-426.

——— 1998, “Auguries of Hegemony: The Sex Omens of Mesopotamia”, in M. Wyke (ed.), Gender and Body in the Ancient Mediterranean, Oxford, 38-55.

——— 2002, “A Severed Head Laughed: Stories of Divinatory Interpretation”, in J.L. Ciraolo – J.L Seidel (eds.), Magic and Divination in the Ancient World (Ancient Magic and Divination 2), Leiden – Boston – Köln, 7-40.

Gurney O.R. 1981, “The Babylonians and the Hittites”, in M. Loewe – C. Blacker (eds.), Divination and Oracles, London, 142-173.

Gurney O.R. – Finkelstein J.J. 1957, The Sultantepe Tablets 1, London. Gurney O.R. – Hulin P. 1964, The Sultantepe Tablets 2, London. Hamblin W.J. 2006, Warfare in the Ancient Near East to 1600 BC. Holy Warriors at the Dawn of History,

London - New York. Heeßel N.P. 2000, Babylonisch-assyrische Diagnostik (Alter Orient und Altes Testament 43), Münster. ——— 2001-2002, “Wenn ein Mann zum Haus des Kranken geht...”, Archiv für Orientforschung

48/49, 24-49. ——— 2007a, “The Hands of the Gods: Disease Names, and Divine Anger”, in I.L. Finkel – M.J.

Geller (eds.), Disease in Babylonia (Cuneiform Monographs 36), Leiden, 120-130. ——— 2007b, Divinatorische Texte I. Terrestrische, teratologische, physiognomische und oneiromantische Omina

(= Keilschrifttexte aus Assur literarischen Inhalts 1) (Wissenschaftliche Veröffentlichungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft 116), Wiesbaden.

Hoffner H.A. 1993, “Akkadian šumma immeru Texts and their Hurro-Hittite Counterparts”, in M.E. Cohen et al. (eds.), The Tablet and the Scroll. Near Eastern Studies in Honour of William W. Hallo, Bethesda, 116-119.

Holma H. 1923, Omen Texts from Babylonian Tablets in the British Museum Concerning Birds and Other Portents, Leipzig.

Hout T. van den 2003, “Orakel (Oracle). B. Bei den Hethitern”, in D.O.Edzard et al. (eds.), Reallexicon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen Archäologie 10/1-2, Berlin – New York, 118-124.

Hunger H. 1968, Babylonische und assyrische Kolophone (Alter Orient und Altes Testament 2), Neukirchen-Vluyn.

——— 1992, Astrological Reports to Assyrian Kings (State Archives of Assyria 8), Helsinki. Hunger H. – Pingree D. 1989, MUL.APIN. An Astronomical Compendium in Cuneiform (Archiv für

Orientforschung Beiheft 24), Horn. Janković B. 2004, Vogelzucht und Vogelfang in Sippar im 1. Jahrtausend v. Chr. (Alter Orient und Altes

Testament 315), Münster. Jean C. 2006, La magie néo-assyrienne en context (State Archives of Assyria Studies 17), Helsinki. Jeyes U. 1989, Old Babylonian Extispicy. Omen Texts in the British Museum (Uitgaven van het Nederlands

Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten 64), Leiden. ——— 1991/1992, “Divination as a Science in Ancient Mesopotamia”, Jaarbericht van het

Vooraziatisch-Egyptisch Gezelschap “Ex Orient Lux” 32, 23-41.

128 Nicla De Zorzi

Joannès F. 1994, “Un précurseur paléo-babylonien de la série šumma ālu”, in H. Gasche et al. (eds.), Cinquante-deux réflexions sur le Proche-Orient offertes en hommage à Léon de Meyer, Louvain, 303-312.

Kammenhuber A. 1976, Orakelpraxis, Träume und Vorzeichenschau bei den Hethitern (Texte der Hethiter 7), Heidelberg.

——— 1988, Hethitisches Wörterbuch2, Heidelberg. Koch U.S. 2005, Secrets of Extispicy. The Chapter Multābiltu of the Babylonian Extispicy Series and Ni#irti

bārûti Texts mainly from Aššurbanipal's Library (Alter Orient und Altes Testament 326), Münster. Koch-Westenholz U. 2000, Babylonian Liver Omens. The Chapters Manzāzu, Padānu and Pān tākalti of the

Babylonian Extispicy Series mainly from Aššurbanipal’s Library (Carsten Niebuhr Institute Publications 25), Copenhagen.

——— 2002, “Old Babylonian Extispicy Reports“, in C. Wunsch (ed.), Mining the Archives. Festschrift for Christopher Walker on the Occasion of his 60th Birthday (Babylonische Archive 1), Dresden, 131-145.

Köcher F. – Oppenheim A.L. 1957-1958, “The Old-Babylonian Omen Text VAT 7525”, Archiv für Orientforschung 18, 62-80.

Kraus F.R. 1950, “Review of: Goetze A., Old Babylonian Omen Texts”, Journal of Cuneiform Studies 4, 141-154.

——— 1985, “Mittelbabylonische Opferschauprotokolle”, Journal of Cuneiform Studies 37, 127-203. Labat R. 1951, Traité akkadien de diagnostics et pronostics médicaux, Leiden. ——— 1965, Un calendrier babyloniens des travaux, des signes et des mois (séries īqqur īpuš), Paris. ——— 1974, Textes littéraires de Suse (Mémoires de la Délegation en Perse 57), Paris. Lambert W.G. 1970, “The Sultantepe Tablets. IX. The Birdcall Text”, Anatolian Studies 20, 111-117. ——— 1974, “DINGIR.&À.DIB.BA Incantations”, Journal of Near Eastern Studies 33, 267-322. ——— 1993, “Donation of Food and Drink to the Gods in Ancient Mesopotamia”, in J.

Quaegebeur (ed.), Ritual and Sacrifice in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the International Conference Organized by the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven from the 17th to the 20th of April, 1991 (Orientalia Lovaniensa Analecta 55), Leuven, 191-201.

——— 1997, “Questions addressed to the Babylonian Oracle: The Tamītu Texts”, in J.-G. Heintz (ed.), Oracles et Prophéties Dans L’ Antiquité: Actes du Colloque de Strasbourg 15-17 Juin 1995, Strasbourg, 85-98.

——— 1998, “The Qualification of Babylonian Diviners”, in S.M. Maul (ed.), Eine Festschrift für Rykle Borger zu seinem 65. Geburtstag am 24. Mai 1994: Tikip Santakki Mala Basmu (Cuneiform Monographs 10), 141-158.

——— 2007, Babylonian Oracle Questions (Mesopotamian Civilizations 13), Winona Lake. Lanciers E. 1993, “Die Opfer im Hellenistischen Herrscherkult und ihre Rezeption bei der

einheimischen Bevölkerung der hellenistischen Reiche”, in J. Quaegebeur (ed.), Ritual and Sacrifice in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the International Conference Organized by the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven from the 17th to the 20th of April, 1991 (Orientalia Lovaniensa Analecta 55), Leuven, 203-224.

Landsberger B. 1937, Die Serie ana ittiû (Materialien zum sumerischen Lexicon 1), Roma. ——— 1949, “Jahreszeiten im Sumerish-Akkadischen”, Journal of Near Eastern Studies 8, 248-297. ——— 1962, The Fauna of Ancient Mesopotamia: Second Part @AR-ra = ~ubullu, Tablets XIV and XVIII

(Materialien zum sumerischen Lexicon 8/2), Roma. Larsen M.T. 1987, “The Mesopotamian Lukewarm Mind. Reflections on Science, Divination and

Literacy”, in F. Rochberg-Halton (ed.), Language, Literature and History: Philological and Historical Studies Presented to E. Reiner, New Haven, 203-225.

Leichty E. 1970, The Omen Series Šumma izbu (Texts from Cuneiform Sources 4), Locust Valley.


——— 1988, “Ashurbanipal’s Library at Niniveh”, Bulletin of the Society for Mesopotamian Studies 15, 13-18.

——— 1993, “Ritual, “Sacrifice”, and Divination in Mesopotamia”, in J. Quaegebeur (ed.), Ritual and Sacrifice in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the International Conference Organized by the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven from the 17th to the 20th of April, 1991 (Orientalia Lovaniensa Analecta 55), Leuven, 237-242.

——— 2003, “Šumma ālu LXXIX”, in G.J. Selz (Hrsg.), Festschrift für Burkhard Kienast zu seinem 70. Geburstag darchgebragt von Freunden, Schülern und Kollegen, Münster, 259-284.

Leiderer R. 1990, Anatomie der Schafleber im babylonischen Leberorakel. Eine makroskopisch-analytische Studie, München.

Limet H. 1993, “Le sacrifice SISKUR”, in J. Quaegebeur (ed.), Ritual and Sacrifice in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the International Conference Organized by the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven from the 17th to the 20th of April, 1991 (Orientalia Lovaniensa Analecta 55), Leuven, 243-255.

Linssen M.J.H. 2004, The Cults of Uruk and Babylon. The Temple Ritual Texts as Evidence for Hellenistic Cult Practices (Cuneiform Monographs 25), Leiden-Boston.

Livingstone A. 1993, “The case of the Hemerologies: Official Cult, Learned Formulation and Popular Practice”, in E. Matsushima (ed.), Official Cult and Popular Religion in the Ancient Near East. Papers of the First Colloquium on the Ancient Near East – The City and its Life held at the Midlle Eastern Culture Center in Japan, March 20-22, 1992, Heidelberg, 97-113.

——— 2000, “On the Organized Release of Doves to Secure Compliance of a Higher Authority”, in A.R. George – I.L. Finkel (eds.), Wisdom, Gods and Literature. Studies in Assyriology in Honour of W.G. Lambert, Winona Lake, 375-387.

Lutz H.F. 1929, “An Old-Babylonian divination text”, University of California Publications in Semitic Philology 9/5, 367-377.

Mayer W. 1995, “Die historische Einordnung der ‘Autobiographie’ des Idrimi von Alalah”, Ugarit-Forschungen 27, 333-350.

Mayer W.R. 1976, Untersuchungen zur Formensprache der babylonischen “Gebetsbeschwörungen” (Studia Pohl: Series Maior 5), Rome.

——— 1988, “Ein neues Königsritual gegen feindliche Bedrohung”, Orientalia Nova Series 57, 145-164.

——— 1990, “Ein Ritual gegen Feindschaft im Museo Nazionale d’Arte Orientale zu Rom”, Orientalia Nova Series 59, 14-33.

——— 1993, “Das Ritual BMS 12 mit dem Gebet ‘Marduk 5’”, Orientalia Nova Series 62, 313-337. Mayer W.R. – Sallaberger W. 2003, “Opfer. A. I. Nach schriftlichen Quellen. Mesopotamien”, in

D.O. Edzard et al. (eds.), Reallexicon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen Archäologie 10/ 1-2, Berlin – New York, 93-102.

Maul S.M. 1994, Zukunftbewältigung. Eine Untersuchung altorientalischen Denkens anhand babylonisch-assyrischen Löserituale (Namburbi) (Baghdader Forschungen 18), Mainz am Rhein.

——— 2003, “Omina und Orakel. A. Mesopotamien”, in D.O.Edzard et al. (eds.), Reallexicon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen Archäologie 10/1-2, 45-88.

——— 2007, “Divination and Culture and the Handling of the Future”, in G. Leick (ed.), The Babylonian World, Oxon, 361-372.

McEwan G.J.P. 1980, “A Seleucid Augural Request”, Zeitschrift für Assyriologie 70, 59-69. ——— 1981, Priest and Temple in Hellenistic Babylonia (Freiburger Altorientalische Studien 4), Wiesbaden. Meissner B. 1933, “Omina zur Erkenntnis der Eingeweide des Opfertieres”, Archiv für Orientforschung

9, 118-122 and 329-330. Meyer J.W. 1987, Untersuchungen zu den Tonlebermodellen aus dem Alten Orient (Alter Orient und Altes

Testament 39), Neukirchen-Vluyn.

130 Nicla De Zorzi

Moren S. 1978, The Omen Series “šumma ālu”: A Preliminary Investigation (Ph.D. Diss. University of Pennsylvania), Philadelphia.

Moren S. – Foster B.R. 1988, “Eagle Omens from Šumma Alu”, in E. Leichty – M. De Jong Ellis – P. Gerardi (eds.), A Scientific Humanist. Studies in Memory of Abraham Sachs (Occasional Publications of the Samuel Noah Kramer Foundation 9), Philadelphia, 277-283.

Noegel S.B. 2007, Nocturnal Ciphers. The Allusive Language of Dreams in the Ancient Near East (American Oriental Series 89), New Haven.

Nougayrol J. 1967a, “«Oiseau» ou Oiseau”, Revue d’ Assyriologie et d’ Archéologie Orientale 61, 23-38. ——— 1967b, “Rapports paléo-babyloniens d’haruspices”, Journal of Cuneiform Studies 21, 219-235. Nötscher F. 1928, “Haus und Stadtomina der Serie šumma ālu ina mêlê šakin” (Orientalia 31),

Rome. ——— 1929, “Die Omen Serie šumma ālu ina mêlê šakin”, (Orientalia 39-42), Rome. ——— 1930, “Die Omen Serie šumma ālu ina mêlê šakin”, (Orientalia 51-54), Rome. Oppenheim A.L 1954-1955., “Sumerian inim.gar, Akkadian egirrû, Greek kledôn”, Archiv für

Orientforschung 17, 49-55. ——— 1974, “A Babylonian Diviner’s Manual”, Journal of Near Eastern Studies 33, 197-220. Osten-Sacken E. 1999, “Vögel beim Pflügel”, in H. Klengel – J. Renger (Hrsgg.), Landwirtschaft im

alten Orient (Berliner Beiträge zum Vorderen Orient 18), Berlin, 265-278. Parpola S. 1983, “Assyrian Library Records”, Journal of Near Eastern Studies 42, 1-29. ——— 1993a, “Mesopotamian Astrology and Astronomy as Domains of Mesopotamian

‘Wisdom’”, in H.D. Galter (ed.), Die Rolle der Astronomie in den Kulturen Mesopotamiens: Beiträge zum 3. Grazer Morgenländischen Symposium, 23.-27. September, 1991 (Grazer Morgenländischen Studien 3), Graz, 47-59.

——— 1993b, Letters from Assyrian and Babylonian Scholars (State Archives of Assyria 10), Helsinki. Pettinato G. 1966a, Die Ölwahrsagung bei den babyloniern. Band I: Einleitung (Studi Semitici 21), Rome. ——— 1966b, Die Ölwahrsagung bei den babyloniern. Band II: Texte und Kommentar (Studi Semitici 22),

Rome. Prechel D., 2003, “Von Ugarit nach Uruk”, in W. Sallaberger – K. Volk – A. Zgoll (eds.), Literatur,

Politik und Recht. Festschrift für Claus Wilcke, Wiesbaden, 225-228. Ranke H. 1906, Babylonian Legal and Business Documents from the time of the First Dynasty of Babylon,

Chiefly from Sippar (The Babylonian Expedition of the University of Pennsylvania 6/1), Philadelphia. Reiner E. 1960, “Fortune-Telling in Mesopotamia”, Journal of Near Eastern Studies 19 (1960), 23-35. ——— 1967, “Another Volume of Sultantepe Tablets”, Journal of Near Eastern Studies 26, 177-200. ——— 1982, “A Manner of Speaking”, Zikir Šumin. Assyriological Studies Presented to F.R. Kraus on the

Occasion of his Seventieth Birthday, Leiden, 282-289. ——— 1995, Astral Magic in Babylonia (Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 85/4),

Philadelphia. Richardson S. 2002, “Ewe Should Be So Lucky: Extispicy Reports and Everyday Life”, in C.

Wunsch (ed.), Mining the Archives. Festschrift für Christopher Walker on the Occasion of his 60th Birthday (Babylonische Archive 1), Dresden, 229-244.

Riemschneider K.K. 1975, “Kappu-rapsu and pattarpalhi-”, Journal of Cuneiform Studies 27, 233-234. Rochberg-Halton F. 2000, “Scribes and Scholars: the \upšar Enuma Anu Enlil”, in J. Marzahn – H.

Neumann (eds.), Assyriologica and Semitica. Festschrift für Joachim Oelsner anlässlich seines 65. Geburstages am 18. Februar 1997 (Alter Orient und Altes Testament 252), Münster , 359-375.

Salonen A. 1973, Vögel und Vogelfang im alten Mesopotamien, Helsinki. Sassmannhausen L. 2001, Beiträge zur Verwaltung und Gesellschaft Babyloniens in der Kassitenzeit

(Baghdader Forschungen 21), Mainz am Rhein. Schwemer D. 2007a, “Witchcraft and War: The Ritual Fragment Ki 1904-10-9, 18 (BM 98989)”,

Iraq 59, 29-42.


——— 2007b, Abwehrzauber und Behexung. Studien zum Schadenzauberglauben im alten Mesopotamien, Wiesbaden.

Scurlock J.A. 2002, “Animal Sacrifice in Ancient Mesopotamian Religion”, in B.J. Collins (ed.), A History of the Animal World in the Ancient Near East (Handbook of Oriental Studies 64), Leiden-Boston-Köln, 389-403.

Starr I. 1977, “Notes on Some Published and Unpublished Historical Omens”, Journal of Cuneiform Studies 29, 157-166.

——— 1983, The Rituals of the Diviner (Bibliotheca Mesopotamica 12), Malibu. ——— 1990, Queries to the Sungod. Divination and Politics in Sargonid Assyria (State Archives of Assyria 4),

Helsinki. Stol M. 1993, Epilepsy in Babylonia (Cuneiform Monographs 2), Groningen. Tognon R. 2004, “Il testo oracolare ittita KUB V 7”, KASKAL 1, 59-82. Toorn K. van der, Family Religion in Babylonia, Ugarit, and Israel: Continuity and Change in the Forms of

Religious Life (Studies in the History and Culture of the Ancient Near East 7), Leiden. Tsukimoto A. 1982, “A Report on Divination by Means of a Sacrificial Bird”, Orient 18, 106-110. Ungnad A. 1936, Subartu. Beiträge zur Kulturgeschichte und Völkerkunde Vorderasiens, Berlin and Leipzig. Ünal A. 1976, “Zum Status der ‘Augures’ bei den Hethitern”, Revue Hittite et Asianique 31, 27-56. Veldhuis N. 2004, Religion, Literature and Scholarship. The Sumerian Composition «Nanše and the Birds»

(Cuneiform Monographs 22), Leiden - Boston. ——— 2006, “Divination: Theory and Use”, in A.K. Guinan et al. (eds.), If a Man Builds a Joyful

House. Assyriological Studies in Honour of Erle Verdun Leichty (Cuneiform Monographs 31), Leiden, 487-497.

Virolleaud C. 1911, “De quelques textes divinatoires”, Babyloniaca 4, 101-128. Wassermann N. 1999, “Eqlam na#ārum : Pests and Pest Prevention in Old-Babylonian Sources”, H.

Klengel – J. Renger (Hrsg.), Landwirtschaft im alten Orient (Berliner Beiträge zum Vorderen Orient 18), Berlin, 341-354.

Weidner E. 1952-1953, “Die Bibliothek Tiglatpilesers I.”, Archiv für Orientforschung 16, 197-215. Weiher E. von 1983, Spätbabylonische Texte aus Uruk, Teil 2, Berlin. Weisberg V.D.B. 1969-1970, “An Old Babylonian Forerunner to Šumma ālu”, Hebrew Union College

Annual 40-41, 87-104. Wiseman D.J. – Black J.A. 1996, Literary texts from the Temple of Nabû (Cuneiform Texts from Nimrud 4),

Oxford. Zeeb F.T. 2001, Die Palastwirtschaft in Altsyrien nach den spätbabylonischen Getreidelieferlisten aus Alala~

(Schicht VII) (Alter Orient und Altes Testament 282), Münster. Zimmern H. 1901, Beiträge zur Kenntnis der babylonischen Religion (Assyriologische Bibliothek 12), Leipzig.

132 Nicla De Zorzi

Fig. 1. BM 108874 (The original dimension of the tablet are 8,4 x 4,2 cm).

133Bird Divination in Mesopotamia - New Evidence From BM 108874

Fig.

2. B

M 1

0887

4, o

bver

se

134 Nicla De Zorzi

Fig.

3. B

M 1

0887

4, re

vers

e

135Bird Divination in Mesopotamia - New Evidence From BM 108874

Fig. 4. K 6278+Rm 2 389 (from Gadd 1927, pl. 48)