Sakuma Y. 2009b, II 237 emends this form as GUN!, a sign which corresponds to GÚ+UN. However, the consistent spelling also in obv. 9´ supports the view that this form is not a mistake, presumably to be understood as an abbreviated form of the standard term GUN. Although rare, other attestations in other bird oracles also supports this view: four attestations in KUB 52.24 obv. I 19, rev. IV 1´, 3´, 6´, in particular, cannot be considered all mistakes; other instances appear in KBo 40.52+ 5´; KBo 40.54+ 1´, KBo 66.41 r. c. 8´, and possibly in KUB 52.21, obv. I 12´.
See note to obv. 5′.
The reading ḫi-šar]-lu-wa suggested by Forlanini M. 2008b, 146 does not match the visible traces of the tops of the broken signs. |
It is unclear how this relative clause fits in. It may be that a verb with the šulupi- bird as its subject has been omitted.
The presence of the quotative particle =wa here and at the start of the line is unexpected, though note the parallel at KBo 41.200 I, 13-14, pointed out by Sakuma Y. 2009b, II 238. In particular, the expression SI×SÁ-at-wa (if the reconstruction is correct) is not usually found in the middle of the record of the observation of birds, but after it. LÚKÚR is here interpreted as a genitive and part of the same symbol with DUḪ, since the ememy appears as the recipient of these symbols in the next clause.
Timetti is likely the other individual named here (cf. obv. 14′).
The meaning of these two lines is very unclear, though Sakuma Y. 2009b, II 239-240 points to a parallel in a Middle-Hittite oracle text (KBo 47.226, 2′-5′) which also contains a reference to mountains and the middle in a bird oracle. |
