KBo 34.131/CTH 544.3 is a fragment with omens that likely concern animals.

The tablet was copied by H. Otten and C. Rüster in KBo 34. Riemschneider K.K. 2004a: 165–66 did not edit the tablet because no photograph of the text was available to him. The text is edited here for the first time.

A: A tall, roughly drop-shaped fragment from the right side of a tablet, including parts of the edge. The surface is grainy and abraded. It preserves traces of eighteen lines of cuneiform script.

A: Late Middle Script or New Script: We find the late forms of ḪAR, URU, which first appear in late Middle Script. Clear New Script signs are absent, except perhaps for E with the first vertical clearly surpassing the upper horizontal, but cf. the caveats in Leonard T.D. 2025a: 150.160; G. Wilhelm apud Seeher J. 2005b: 77.

The script is tidy and spacious, differing substantially from KBo 34.136.

Because of the poor state of preservation, little can be said about the language. In §2′ the postposition andan, ‘in, inside’ is used, whereas most omen texts employ anda. Unfortunately, the context is lost, making it unclear whether it is used ‘correctly’, i. e., to indicate a place in which something is or happens, as in older Hittite, or whether the distinction between anda and andan has already been blurred, as is occasionally observed in New Hittite (Salisbury D. 1999a: 65–71). It is possible – though uncertain due to the fragmentary state – that the text employs tamaiš where we would expect KI.MIN in an Akkadian text.

KBo 34.131 is a fragment with omens that probably concern animals, as l. 12′ of side A mentions defecation. The references to a man’s house and to the city indicate terrestrial omens. An indirect join with KUB 34.22 or KUB 43.14 is not impossible, but not particularly likely either.

Similar in vocabulary and theme are the dog omens and pig omens of šumma ālu. Although a direct parallel cannot be established, the fragment most likely concerns animals larger than the lizards and ašku-animals in the other animal omen tablets from Ḫattuša. It cannot be ruled out that these are still passages of the same text, however.