Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Key Takeaways
Figures
References
FAQs
All Topics
History
Ancient History

A New Join to the Hurro Akkadian Version of the Weidner God List from Emar (Msk 74.108a + Msk 74.158k)

Profile image of Frank SimonsFrank Simons

2017, Altorientalische Forschungen

https://doi.org/10.1515/AOFO-2017-0009
visibility

…

description

19 pages

Abstract

The present article offers an edition, copy and photographs of a newly identified join to the Hurro-Akkadian bilingual tablet of the so-called Weidner god list from Emar. The new fragment adds substantially to our knowledge of the Hurrian translation of the list and fills in some small gaps in the Akkadian portion. It also offers valuable evidence concerning the identities of three relatively little known deities: Ištarān, who is equated in the text with Kumarbi, Erragal who is equated with Tarḫunta, and INANNA-g a l g a.s ù, a wife of the god Amurru.

Key takeaways
sparkles

AI

  1. The newly identified join adds critical data on the Hurro-Akkadian Weidner god list from Emar.
  2. Three lesser-known deities are clarified: Ištarān, Erragal, and INANNA-g a l g a.s ù.
  3. This join enhances understanding of the theological equivalences between Hurrian and Akkadian deities.
  4. The Weidner god list is integral to Middle Babylonian scribal curriculum, containing 1,703 cuneiform tablets.
  5. The text exemplifies adaptation for non-native Sumerian and Akkadian speakers in ancient education.
Figures (5)
Tab. 1: Msk 74.108a + Msk 74.158k +’ Msk 74.180b
Tab. 1: Msk 74.108a + Msk 74.158k +’ Msk 74.180b
Obv. 7’ This goddess is one of the hairdressers of Sarpanitum according to An=Anum II 250,” where the correct reading of her name is spelt out fully. MiuSSar is, according to Krebernik, a false reading. The restoration in iib assumes the name was spelt syllabically for the Hurrian audience.
Obv. 7’ This goddess is one of the hairdressers of Sarpanitum according to An=Anum II 250,” where the correct reading of her name is spelt out fully. MiuSSar is, according to Krebernik, a false reading. The restoration in iib assumes the name was spelt syllabically for the Hurrian audience.
Tab. 2: Inanna-of-X. As can be seen, the only completely consistent element is that the list of Inannas opens with Uruk, though Nin-ugnim ‘Lady of the troops’ and Nin-é-an-na ‘Lady of the Eanna’ precede the Inanna names proper in two copies. The inclusion of related but non-Inanna-X names before the main list is also seen in the Canonical Temple List’ and in a Middle Babylonian list of temples found in the Schgyen collection.“ Unfortunately neither of these offer any reasonable restorations for line 26’. As can be seen, the only completely consistent element is that the list of Inannas opens with Uruk, though
Tab. 2: Inanna-of-X. As can be seen, the only completely consistent element is that the list of Inannas opens with Uruk, though Nin-ugnim ‘Lady of the troops’ and Nin-é-an-na ‘Lady of the Eanna’ precede the Inanna names proper in two copies. The inclusion of related but non-Inanna-X names before the main list is also seen in the Canonical Temple List’ and in a Middle Babylonian list of temples found in the Schgyen collection.“ Unfortunately neither of these offer any reasonable restorations for line 26’. As can be seen, the only completely consistent element is that the list of Inannas opens with Uruk, though
Fig. 1a—b: Obverse. Copy: E. Zomer, except Msk 74.180b (Salvini 2015: 144). Photo: Msk 74.158k Obv.; kindly provided by M. Salvini; digitally enhanced by M. Brouillard.
Fig. 1a—b: Obverse. Copy: E. Zomer, except Msk 74.180b (Salvini 2015: 144). Photo: Msk 74.158k Obv.; kindly provided by M. Salvini; digitally enhanced by M. Brouillard.

Related papers

Ancient Near Eastern gods Enki and Ea: diachronical analysis of texts and images from the earliest sources to the Neo-Sumerian period
Peeter Espak

2006

The current master's thesis is a continuation of a bachelor's thesis defended in June 2004 at the Faculty of Theology of Tartu University under the title "Diachronical Analysis of the Theological Concept of Enki and Ea." I would like to express my deep gratitude to Thomas Richard Kämmerer, Professor of Ancient Near Eastern Studies of the Faculty of Theology at Tartu University, for supervising the thesis and providing me with several critical comments during the preparation of the study. I am especially thankful to Professor Walther Sallaberger, whose suggestions and critical remarks during my six-month stay at the Institut für

View PDFchevron_right
Reconstructing the Pre-Merotic Indigenous Pantheon of Kush (Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions 18.2, 167-89)
Vicky Almansa-Villatoro

This article sets out to address questions concerning local religious traditions in ancient Nubia. Data concerning Egyptian gods in the Sudan are introduced, then the existence of unattested local pre-Meroitic gods is reconstructed using mainly external literary sources and an analysis of divine names. A review of other archaeological evidence from an iconographic point of view is also attempted, concluding with the presentation of Meroitic gods and their relation with earlier traditions. This study proposes that Egyptian religious beliefs were well integrated in both official and popular cults in Nubia. The Egyptian and the Sudanese cultures were constantly in contact in the border area and this nexus eased the transmission of traditions and iconographical elements in a bidirectional way. The Meroitic gods are directly reminiscent of the reconstructed indigenous Kushite pantheon in many aspects, and this fact attests to an attempt by the Meroitic rulers to recover their Nubian cultural identity.

View PDFchevron_right
Iranian gods in Hindu garb. The Zoroastrian pantheon of the Bactrians and Sogdians, second – eighth centuries
Frantz Grenet
View PDFchevron_right
The Middle Turkic Biblical ms. Evr. I bibl. 143 from the First Firkowicz Collection. Part II. The religious affiliation
Michał Németh

2025

The First Firkowicz Collection of the National Library of Russia in Saint Petersburg contains a Middle Turkic manuscript stored under accession number Evr. I Bibl. 143. It includes a translation of a large portion of the Torah written in the Hebrew script. In the present paper the author offers his own contribution to the question of whether this is a Rabbanite or Karaite work. This paper is a continuation of Németh (2025), in which it was argued that the language of this Biblical source is Middle Kipchak.

View PDFchevron_right
On Gods and Scribal Traditions in the Amarna letters, Ugarit-Forschungen 22 (1990), pp. 247-255.
Nadav Na'aman

The Amarna Letters, discovered more than a century ago, are still our main source for the history and culture of Canaan in the Late Bronze Age. Many details concerning the land and its inhabitants have been extracted from these letters and the overall picture is to a certain extent based on the analysis of this source material. Due to its central position in scientific research, the archive still deserves special attention and progress in the understanding of difficult passages and terms could contribute to a better understanding of the historical and cultural situation. On the other hand, mistaken interpretations may lead scholars to stray far from ancient reality, since in certain cases there are no other sources against which these conclusions and inferences may be checked.

View PDFchevron_right
Foreign Gods in Hatti. A New Edition of CTH 510
Michele Cammarosano

“Der erste Eindruck, den man empfängt, wenn man einen Blick auf die hethitische Götterwelt wirft, ist Chaos. Eine unendliche Fülle von Götternamen und Göttergestalten tritt uns entgegen”. These words, which open the chapter on Hittite religion in A. Goetze’s ground-breaking book, Kleinasien, come naturally to mind as one approaches the text CTH 510, a well-known Hittite cult inventory which lists gods, cult images and festivals of a great number of provincial settlements. The panthea of those towns and villages are almost as heterogeneous a mixture as one could want: unique among the entire corpus of Hittite texts, this composition witnesses the cult of Mesopotamian gods mixed together with a plethora of local, regional, and pan-Hittite Anatolian deities. After reviewing extant manuscripts and the composition’s Sitz im Leben, an edition of CTH 510 will be presented. It is based on a new reconstruction of the tablets and on the restitution of previously unpublished portions of text. By using an innovative methodology for the inspection and manipulation of 3D-scanned tablets, this paper also aims at illustrating the potential of a computer-aided approach for the study of cuneiform sources.

View PDFchevron_right
God lists from Old Babylonian Nippur in the University Museum, Philadelphia (AOAT 362)
Jeremiah Peterson
View PDFchevron_right
An Indo-European god in a Gudea Inscription
Daniel E Roiter
View PDFchevron_right
(2008) A Nimrud Manuscript of the Fourth Tablet of the Series Mīs Pî, CTN IV 170(+)188, and a Kiutu Incantation to the Sun God, Iraq 70, 189–204
Daisuke Shibata

Iraq 70, 2008

View PDFchevron_right
Traces of Administrative Reform in the Hebrew and Aramaic Epigraphs of the Al-Yahudu and Related Tablets
James D Moore

Nouvelles Assyriologiques Brèves et Utilitaires [N.A.B.U.], 2023

texts, seems to be more of an epithet than a divine name; the god's actual name does not appear in these texts, nor in any other legal or administrative text from the late Achaemenid period. However, a compilation of esoterica, commonly referred to as the Nippur Compendium (GEORGE 1992: 143-162), will shed some light on the matter. The Nippur Compendium (nibru ki ní.bi.ta dù.a) is known primarily from two late Babylonian manuscripts (IM 44150; IM 76975) with the same structure and content, and three additional, smaller tablets, two of which come from Nineveh (K 2892+ K 8397; K 10062) and the third one is a late Babylonian excerpt tablet (BM 38413, GEORGE 1992: 145-146). 2) The text begins with a listing of the names and titles for the city of Nippur and its main temple, Ekur, followed by a list of deities. This list, in which each deity is represented as 'lord of (my) city + of place name', occurs only in the two late Babylonian manuscripts, and is of particular interest to our case as it contains a series of 'dieux topiques' and their localities. Among the legible place names in the list, we find the lords of Borsippa and Dēr, but also deities of smaller settlements in the region between Uruk and Nippur, such as the lords of Šalammu and Kār-Ninurta (GEORGE 1992: 150: 19'; 21'; 24'). 3) Interestingly, the list happens to mention a deity by the name of Erimabinutuku, who is designated as the 'dieu topique' (bēl-āliya) of a place named uru sá.sá.érim (GEORGE 1992: §7, 22'). We suggest to slightly emend the reading of the toponym to sá.di.érim (sá=di), because this spelling (sá.di.érim) stands for the city of Šāṭir, as demonstrated by the late 5 th century BCE text TÉBR 32 (ll. 11 and 14). As noted earlier, the 'dieux topiques' section in the Nippur Compendium, refers not only to Šāṭir, but also to several other sites in the region between Nippur and Uruk, such as Šalammu and Kār-Ninurta, which, like Šāṭir, were still inhabited in the 5 th century BCE. Thus, our suggestion matches the evidence in the section on 'dieux topiques' in the Nippur Compendium in more than one way: they share the same spelling for Šāṭir (sá.di.érim), the same geographical horizon, and the same chronological framework. If we come back to the question of the identity of Lord-of-Šāṭir, it is now clear that according to the Nippur Compendium the deity Erimabinutuku is the Lord-of-Šāṭir. Despite the scarcity in textual sources regarding Erimabinutuku, the Sumerian composition Angim, allows us a better understanding of his nature. According to Angim, Erimabinutuku, the worshipped entity of Šāṭir, is named after one of Ninurta's divine weapons known 'to have established the people in heaven and earth' (COOPER 1978: 82, 146; GEORGE 1992: 447). Notes 1. See, for example, the case of 'Bēl-ālīya-ša-Šarrabānu'('lord-of-my-city-of-Šarrabānu', Baker 2004: 127:128). The city was also located in Bīt-Amukānu.

View PDFchevron_right

References (179)

  1. Litke (1998: 195).
  2. Litke (1998: 97).
  3. Litke (1998: 135).
  4. Gabbay et al. (2015: l. 26).
  5. Jiménez/Finkel (2016: ll. 1-9).
  6. Cavigneaux (1981: 86, ll. 73-74);
  7. van der Meer (1938: 58, ll. 8-9); Weidner (1924-1925: 16, ll. 9a-9c). Some manuscripts in each edition omit the extra lines.
  8. Litke (1998: 38).
  9. Litke (1998: 236).
  10. Litke (1998: 201).
  11. Krebernik (2006-2008: 190).
  12. Lambert (2013: 238-239).
  13. Shibata (2009: 40).
  14. Van Soldt (1995: 175, n. 30).
  15. See most simply Veldhuis (DCCLT). Weidner (1924-1925: 4) exemplar F is also substantially complete, but only easily readable in copy as the edition is subsumed into Weidner's composite text.
  16. Nougayrol (1968: 214, l. 58a).
  17. Nougayrol (1968: 218, l. 113a).
  18. Nougayrol (1968: 218, l. 140a).
  19. Wiggermann (1998-2000: 217-218). The syncretism of distinct figures within the Weidner list due to phonetic or graphic similarities can also be seen in the case of d DI DI. .KU KU 5 5 and d KU KU 5 (see commentary to obv. 9′-10′), who are both equated with Madānu in the Late Assyrian multi-column tablet. While this is perfectly reasonable (if incorrect) for d DI DI. .KU KU 5 , it is otherwise unattested for d KU KU 5 , which was originally a logogram for Qudma.
  20. Lambert (unpublished: I 316) = Litke (1998: 332).
  21. Livingstone (1986: 179, l. 44 and 191, l. 13).
  22. This is to be discussed in a forthcoming article by Henry Stadhouders and the current writer, provisionally entitled 'The Charred Drumstick and the Thunder Cymbal'. The details are too extensive to be treated here.
  23. Lambert/Millard (1969: 87, III vii 51 and 125, U rev. 15);
  24. George (2003: 708-709, XI 102). One manuscript of the Gilgameš tablet has [ d èr ? -ra ? ]-gal.
  25. Cagni (1977: 56, ll. 118-120).
  26. Cagni (1977: 54, ll. 81).
  27. Nougayrol (1968: 249, l. 50′).
  28. Nougayrol (1968: 249, n. 2).
  29. Nougayrol (1968: 246, ll. 34′′ and 36′′).
  30. Rutz (2013: 169). d [Utt]u? ([TAG.TÚ]G).
  31. Arnaud (1987: 35). Arnaud notes the possibility that this is a mistake covered by an erasure.
  32. Nougayrol (1968: 216, l. 85). Rev. 1′ The monolingual list has d tu-tu-ba-[...], but this is presumably a dittographic error, following d tu-tu in the preceding line. It is nonetheless possible that Tutuba[ki ? ] was intended, in which case the restoration here should be altered. In any case, the restoration is extremely tentative. Rev. 4′ Most exemplars of the Weidner list do not include a NIN at the start of this name. The Emar monolingual duplicate is silent -just the end of the line survives. 94 A single unprovenienced Old Babylonian manuscript does include the NIN, 95 and as this fits the traces more closely we have followed it here. Rev. 6′-7′ Ninnisig 96 and Ninimma are recorded in this order only in the monolingual Emar manuscript. In addition to Bab. Ug. and An, a small fragment from Uruk 97 also records the order Ninim[ma], Nin[nisig]. As discussed above, the Emar manuscripts seem to follow one another closely and so the restorations here follow the less well-attested tradition. Rev. 15′ d KAŠ KAŠ--TIN TIN-nam = d kurun-nam is the more usual writing of this name, 98 but is attested within the Weidner god list only in a Neo-Babylonian school exercise tablet BM 50676. 99 That KURUN is the reading of KAŠ KAŠ--TIN TIN in the name is certain from the writings in the Old and Middle Babylonian texts. The Tall Taban manuscript and the unprovenienced VS 24, 20 have d kúrun-na, 100 while Ugarit A and F, and the Emar monolingual have d.kur kúrun-nam. 101 KÚRUN is TIN, and a difference of spelling between two types of KURUN is far more likely than the omission of the syllable KAŠ. Kurunnam is the name of a minor deity worshipped in the temple of Gula at Nippur, mentioned in the Nippur compendium, 102 on a Kudurru stone from the reign of Marduk-apla-idinna I, 103 and elsewhere, 104 always in the circle of Gula. Rev. 16′ This line is damaged in the majority of manuscripts, though several texts preserve traces of some spelling of Ninnigarra. 105 In An=Anum V 135 this name is equated with the healing goddess Ninkarrak, a form of Gula. 106 Elsewhere, they are separate figures, but always associated with one another. 107 There are a number of problems with this line: The traces following the NIN are unclear. We have opted to read Ù, an error for the U of NIGAR, though P[À], as an error for PA 4 is conceivable. Our preference for Ù stems from the fact that PA 4 is not required in the 94 Rutz (2013: 169, l. 3′).
  33. Langdon (1928: 31 iii 8′) = W-B. 9.
  34. This name has been read Ninmú (Cavigneaux 1981: 192, l. 140; Rutz 2013: 169, l. 5′), Nin.ezen.n[a ? ] (Nougayrol 1968: 218, l. 128a), and Ninšar (Lambert, unpublished: I, 8-9). Nin-nisig, which is read by Cavigneaux and Krebernik (1998-2000b: 484-486), is confirmed by the Sumerian hymn known as Nuska B (CBS 8548: rev. 6): ˹ d NIN˺-NISIG-RA giš BANŠUR SI 12 -GA-ME-EN 'For Lady-Greenery, (Nuska) makes the table green.' The meaning of this line is not entirely clear, but the wordplay is unmistakeable and does not work if we read the name differently -NISIG 'greenery' is juxtaposed with SI 12 'green.' The text was edited most recently by Sjöberg (1977: 27-29) and by the compilers of ETCSL (http://etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk/section4/c4292.htm), but both misread the line in question. The correct reading of the line was shared with me by Hannelore Agnethler, who is preparing a new edition of the text.
  35. Von Weiher (1993: 116, l. 7-8).
  36. Gesche (2000: 337, l. 2′). See also rev. 16′ commentary.
  37. Shibata (2009: 36 iii 3′) and Veldhuis (DCCLT: rev. i 9). Shibata is partially restored from Veldhuis.
  38. Nougayrol (1968: 218, l. 136) and Arnaud (1987: 35, l. 91).
  39. George (1992: 159 v 14).
  40. Paulus (2014: 434 v 28), who following Borger (1970: 25), writes d kaš-tin-nam.
  41. E.g. Nougayrol (1947: 35, l. 5).
  42. Veldhuis (DCCLT: VS 24, 20 rev. i. 10);
  43. Nougayrol (1968: 218: 137);
  44. Arnaud (1982: 204, l. 141);
  45. Shibata (2009: 36, l. iii 4′). All but VS 24, 20 are restored from traces. 106 Litke (1998: 181).
  46. E.g. Böck (2014: 31). See also Cavigneaux/Krebernik (1998-2000a: 477).
  47. Lambert (unpublished: II, l. 61) = Litke (1998: 74, l. 63).
  48. Krebernik (2003-2005: 236).
  49. Gurney/Hulin (1964: pl. 256, 377, ll. 4′-5′).
  50. Gesche (2000: 337, ii 3′-4′).
  51. Gesche (2000: 337, ii 6′).
  52. Krebernik (1986: 199);
  53. Krebernik (2003-2005: 325). The reading is not included in Borger (2010).
  54. Gantzert (2011: 49, iii 15′′′).
  55. Nougayrol (1968: Pl. 124, ll. 100 and 135).
  56. Richter (2012: 49).
  57. Richter (2012: 86).
  58. Veldhuis (DCCLT: rev. i 14-16).
  59. Shibata (2009: 36 iii 9′-12′).
  60. Nougayrol (1968: 218-220, ll. 141-151).
  61. E and F = Nougayrol (1968: 218-220, ll. 142-151). L = Arnaud (1982: 204-205, ll. 142-151).
  62. Cavigneaux (1981: 92-93, l. 155-163).
  63. Van der Meer (1938: pl. 32). Transliterated in Cavigneaux (1981: 93, l. 159-163).
  64. Litke (1998: 156-158).
  65. Peterson (2009: 25-27, ll. 54-62).
  66. Peterson (2009: 86, ll. 1-4). 128 TCL 15, 10. Genouillac (1923: 102, v 14-19). This is generally understood to be the forerunner of An=Anum. 129 Van Dijk (1976: Pl. 69). 130 Peterson (2009: 50-51). 131 Gesche (2000: 512). 132 See below, rev. 20′.
  67. George (1993: 16, ll. 313ff.).
  68. INANNA INANNA-g a l g a -s ù , though very rarely attested, is the consort of the god Amurru, 138 the city god of Ninab. 139 The location of Ninab is still uncertain. An alternative spelling, according to Sjöberg, is Inab, 140 which Edzard tentatively gives as a reading for the city Ilip. 141 Reiner proved Ilip, also written k i . b a l . m a š . d à , to be the correct reading of the city previously read ì-lul or ì-nari. 142 Through this string of names, we come to an interesting point. If we accept the, admittedly uncertain, chain that leads from Ninab to Ilip, we must understand Amurru to be the city god of Ilip. INANNA INANNA-ì-lip ki , though absent from our manuscript and Cavigneaux's Neo-Babylonian texts, is present in each of the Middle and Old Babylonian versions in which this section is preserved. 143 In the Ugarit texts, INANNA INANNA-ì-lip and INANNA INANNA-g a l g a -s ù are either written consecutively or interrupted by only one entry. In the Tall Taban text, INANNA INANNA-g a l g a -s ù is missing, though as the tablet is broken in the middle of the Inanna section it may have been lost. Because INANNA INANNA-g alga-sù, 'Inanna the Queen' 144 is the name of Inanna as consort of Amurru, it must be equivalent to INANNA INANNA-ì-lip, city goddess of Amurru's city. The Ugarit versions of the list contain both names, but duplication of this sort is common in god lists. The Ugarit versions are mirrored by the sequence in the Old Babylonian Nippur god list ll. 56-57 ' 56 d Inana Mar-tu 57 d Inana Ì-lip ki ' 145 . Martu is the Sumerian equivalent of Amurru, and, as the Nippur god list is arranged along broadly theological lines, the succession of names therefore supports the identification suggested here. The absence of INANNA INANNA-ì-lip in Cavigneaux's Neo-Babylonian exemplars is perhaps to be explained by the relatively large lacunae at this point. Only a single manuscript preserves more than fragments of the list, 135 Litke (1998: 156).
  69. Following George (1993: 30, l. 342).
  70. ŠU is technically distinct from ditto, which is written MIN. It functions as a horizontal ditto mark -what is written in the neighbouring column, rather than the neighbouring row, is to be repeated.
  71. Beaulieu (2003: 327-328).
  72. Sjöberg/Bergmann (1969: 127).
  73. Sjöberg (1973: 30).
  74. Edzard (1976-1980: 52).
  75. Reiner (1961: 123, n. 7 and 124).
  76. Arnaud (1982: 204, l. 145) d inana.ì.nar-...; Nougayrol (1968: 218, A. l. 148) d inana.ì.nar ki , (F. l. 145) d inana.ì.nar.nagar ? .ra ki ; Shibata (2009: 36, l. 9′) d Inanna Ì-lip ki .
  77. Malkatu 'Queen' is the Akkadian translation given in An=Anum (Litke 1998: 157, IV 127) and Nabnitu (Finkel 1982: 84, l. 203), and George understands the same meaning in the Canonical Temple List (George 1993: 16, l. 324 and 30, n. 324).
  78. Peterson (2009: 14, ll. 56-57).
  79. Cavigneaux (1981: 93: 79.B.1/135 vii′ 155-163).
  80. George (1993: 155, no. 1168).
  81. Lambert (1989: 324).
  82. Cohen (1993: 137).
  83. Lambert (1989: 324).
  84. Peterson (2009: 52, ll. 71-72).
  85. Lambert (1989: 324).
  86. Lambert (1989: 324; 1973: 364).
  87. André-Salvini, B. (2004): Textes lexicographiques de Ras-Shamra-Ugarit (Campagnes 1986-1992), SMEA 46/2, 147-154.
  88. Arnaud, D. (1982): Les textes cunéiforms suméro-accadiens des campagnes 1979-1980 à Ras Shamra-Ougarit, Syria 59, 199-222.
  89. Arnaud, D. (1985): Recherches au pays d'Aštata, Emar VI/1-2: Textes sumériens et accadiens, Paris.
  90. Arnaud, D. (1987): Recherches au pays d'Aštata, Emar VI/4: Textes de la bibliothèque, transcriptions et traductions, Paris. Bartelmus, A. (2016a): The Role of Babylon in Babylonian Scribal Education. In: S. Yamada/D. Shibata (ed.) Cultures and Societies in the Middle Euphrates and Habur Areas in the Second Millennium BC. Vol. 1: Scribal Education and Scribal Tradtions (StCh. 5/1), Wiesbaden, 25-43.
  91. Bartelmus, A. (2016b): Fragmente einer großen Sprache (UAVA 12), Leiden.
  92. Beaulieu, P.-A. (2003): The Pantheon of Uruk During the Neo-Babylonian Period (CunMon. 23), Leiden.
  93. Böck, B. (2014): The Healing Goddess Gula (CHANE 67), Leiden.
  94. Borger, R. (1970): Vier Grenzsteinurkunden Merodachbaladans I. von Babylon, AfO 23, 1-26.
  95. Borger, R. (2010): Mesopotamisches Zeichenlexikon. Second Edition (AOAT 305), Münster.
  96. Cagni, L. (1977): The Poem of Erra (SANE 1/3), Malibu.
  97. Cavigneaux, A. (1981): Textes scolaires du temple de Nabû ša harê, Baghdad.
  98. Cavigneaux, A. (2012): Fragments lexicaux et littéraires du Musée d'Art et d'Histoire de Genève. In: C. Mittermayer/S. Ecklin (ed.) Altorientalische Studien zu Ehren von Pascal Attinger (OBO 256), Fribourg, 65-89.
  99. Cavigneaux A./M. Krebernik (1998-2000a): NIN-nigara, RlA 9, 477.
  100. Cavigneaux A./M. Krebernik (1998-2000b): NinSAR, RlA 9, 484-486.
  101. Civil, M. (1989): The Texts from Meskene-Emar, AulaOr. 7, 5-25.
  102. Civil, M. (2010): The Lexical Texts in the Schøyen Collection (CUSAS 12), Bethesda.
  103. Clay, A. (1912): Personal Names from Cuneiform Inscriptions of the Cassite Period (YOSR 1), New Haven.
  104. Cohen, M. E. (1993): The Cultic Calendars of the Ancient Near East, Bethesda.
  105. Cohen, Y. (2010): The "Second Glosses" in the Lexical Lists from Emar: West Semitic or Akkadian? In: L. Kogan (ed.) Language in the Ancient Near East. Proceedings of the 53 e RAI (Orientalia et Classica 30-31), Winona Lake, 813-839.
  106. de Genouillac, H. (1923): Grande liste de noms divins sumériens, RA 20, 89-106.
  107. Edzard, D. O. (1976-1980): Ilip, RlA 5, 52.
  108. Reade (1986: xxxiv).
  109. Reade (1986: xxxii).
  110. Feliu, L. (2003): The God Dagan in Bronze Age Syria (Trans.: W. G. E. Watson) (CHANE 19), Leiden.
  111. Finkel, I. J. (1982): The Series sig 7 .alan= nabnītu (MSL 16), Rome.
  112. Fleming, D. (2000): Time at Emar (MesCiv. 11), Winona Lake.
  113. Gabbay, U. et al. (2015): BM 36595 on: http://ccp.yale.edu/P469985
  114. Gantzert, M. (2006): Syrian Lexical Texts (3): The Peripheral Weidner God Lists, UF 38, 299-311.
  115. Gantzert, M. (2011): The Emar Lexical Texts. Vol. 1-3, Maastricht.
  116. George, A. (1992): Babylonian Topographical Texts (OLA 40), Leuven.
  117. George, A. (1993): House Most High (MesCiv. 5), Winona Lake.
  118. George, A. (2003): The Babylonian Gilgamesh Epic. Vol. 1, Oxford.
  119. George, A. (2010): The Colophon of MS 5007. In: M. Civil, The Lexical Texts in the Schøyen Collection (CUSAS 12), Bethesda, 274-279.
  120. Gesche, P. (2000): Schulunterricht in Babylonien (AOAT 275), Münster.
  121. Guichard, M. (2016): H.E.416: une copie scolaire de la "Weidner God-list", NABU 2016/2, 66-67.
  122. Gurney, O. R./P. Hulin (1964): The Sultantepe Tablets. Vol. 2, Ankara.
  123. Güterbock, H. G. (1951): The Song of Ullikummi: Revised Text of the Hittite Version of a Hurrian Myth, JCS 5, 135-161.
  124. Güterbock, H. G. (1980-1983): Kumarbi, RlA 5, 324-330.
  125. Hoffner, H. A. (1998): Hittite Myths (Second Edition) (SBL WAW 2), Atlanta.
  126. Jiménez, E. (2016): K.1 on: http://ccp.yale.edu/P237754.
  127. Jiménez, E./I. L. Finkel (2016): BM 47458 on: http://ccp.yale.edu/P461230
  128. Krebernik, M. (1986): Die Götterlisten aus Fāra, ZA 76, 161-204.
  129. Krebernik, M. (2003-2005): Pa(p)-nigara, RlA 10, 325-327.
  130. Krebernik, M. (2006-2008): Qudma, RLA 11, 190-191.
  131. Krebernik, M. (2009-2011): Ṣilluš-ṭab, RlA 12, 498.
  132. Lambert, W. G. (1960): Babylonian Wisdom Literature, Oxford.
  133. Lambert, W. G. (1973): Studies in Nergal, BiOr. 30, 354-363.
  134. Lambert, W. G. (1976-1980) Ištarān, RlA 5, 211.
  135. Lambert, W. G. (1989): A Babylonian Prayer to Anūna. In: H. Behrens et al. (ed.), DUMU-É-DUB-BA-A. Studies in Honour of Åke W. Sjöberg (OccPubl. S.N. Kramer Fund 11), Philadelphia, 321-336.
  136. Lambert, W. G. (1999-2000): Literary Texts from Nimrud, AfO 46-47, 149-155.
  137. Lambert, W. G. (2003-2004): Review of S. Izre'el, The Amarna Scholarly Tablets and Adapa and the South Wind, AfO 50, 394-396.
  138. Lambert, W. G. (2013): Babylonian Creation Myths (MesCiv. 16), Winona Lake.
  139. Lambert, W. G. (unpublished): An=Anum I, II, III and V.
  140. Langdon, S. (1928): Sumerian and Semitic Religious and Historical Texts (OECT 1), Oxford.
  141. Laroche, E. (1989): La version hourrite de la liste AN de Meskéné-Emar, CRAIBL 133, 8-12.
  142. Leichty, E. (1986): Tablets from Sippar 1 (CBT 6), London.
  143. Litke, R. (1998): A Reconstruction of the Assyro-Babylonian God-Lists, A n : d A-nu-um and A n : Anu ša amēli (TBC 3), New Haven.
  144. Livingstone, A. (1986): Mystical and Mythological Explanatory Works of Assyrian and Babylonian Scholars, Oxford.
  145. Maynard, J. A. (1919): A Neo-Babylonian Grammatical School Text, JSOR 3, 65-69.
  146. Nougayrol, J. (1947): Textes et documents figurés, RA 41, 23-53.
  147. Nougayrol, J. (1968): Textes suméro-accadiens des archives et bibliothèques priviés d'Ugarit, Ugaritica 5, 1-446.
  148. Paulus, S. (2014): Die babylonischen Kudurru-Inschriften von der kassitischen bis zur frühneubabylonischen Zeit (AOAT 51), Münster.
  149. Pedersén, O. (2005): Archive und Bibliotheken in Babylon: Die Tontafeln der Grabung Robert Koldeweys 1899-1917 (ADOG 25), Saarwellingen. Peterson: J. (2008): Neo-Babylonian Exemplars of the Weidner Godlist from Nippur in the University Museum, Philadelphia, NABU 2008/2, 46-48.
  150. Peterson, J. (2009): Godlists from Old Babylonian Nippur in the University Museum, Philadelphia (AOAT 362), Münster.
  151. Pfeiffer, R. H./E. R. Lacheman (1942): Miscellaneous Texts from Nuzi. Part 1 (HSS 13), Cambridge Massachussetts.
  152. Pfeiffer, R. H./E. A. Speiser (1936): One Hundred New Selected Nuzi Texts (1935-1936), AASOR 16, 1-168.
  153. Reade, J. (1986): Introduction. In: E. Leichty, Tablets from Sippar 1 (CBT 6), London, xiii-xxxvi.
  154. Reiner, E. (1961): The Year Dates of Sumu-Jamūtbāl, JCS 15, 121-124.
  155. Richter, T. (1998): Die Lesung des Götternamens AN.AN.MAR.TU. In: D. I. Owen/G. Wilhelm (ed.), General Studies and Excavations in Nuzi 10/2 (SCCNH 9), Bethesda, 135-137.
  156. Richter, T. (2012): Bibliographisches Glossar des Hurritischen, Wiesbaden.
  157. Roberts, J. J. M. (1971): Erra: Scorched Earth, JCS 24, 11-16.
  158. Roberts, J. J. M. (1973): The Earliest Semitic Pantheon, Baltimore.
  159. Rutz, M. (2013): Bodies of Knowledge in Ancient Mesopotamia (AMD 9), Leiden
  160. Salvini, M. (2015): Les textes hourrites de Meskéné/Emar. Vol. 1 (AnOr. 57/1), Rome.
  161. Scheil, V. (1898): Une saison de fouilles à Sippar (Abou Habba) [Janvier-Avril 1894], Paris.
  162. Schwemer, D. (2008): The Storm-Gods of the Ancient Near East: Summary, Synthesis and Recent Studies. Part 2, JANER 8/1, 1-44.
  163. Shibata, D. (2009): An Old Babylonian Manuscript of the Weidner God-List from Tell Taban, Iraq 71, 33-42.
  164. Sjöberg, Å. W./E. Bergmann (1969): The Collection of the Sumerian Temple Hymns (TCS 3), Locust Valley. Sjöberg, Å. W. (1973): Miscellaneous Sumerian Hymns, ZA 63, 1-55.
  165. Sjöberg, Å. W. (1977): Miscellaneous Sumerian Texts II, JCS 29, 1-45.
  166. Tanret, M. (2002): Per aspera ad astra. L'apprentissage du cunéiforme à Sippar-Amnanum pendant la période paléobabylonienne tardive (MHET 1/2), Ghent.
  167. Thureau-Dangin, F. (1939): Tablettes hurrites provenant de Mâri, RA 36, 1-28.
  168. van der Meer, P. E. (1938): Syllabaries A, B1 and B: With Miscellaneous Lexicographical Texts from the Herbert Weld Collection (OECT 4), Oxford.
  169. van Dijk, J. J. A. (1976) Texts in the Iraq Museum. Vol. 9 (TIM 9), Leiden.
  170. van Dijk, J. J. A. (1987) Literarische Texte aus Babylon, VAS 24, Berlin.
  171. van Soldt, W. (1995): Babylonian Lexical, Religious and Literary Texts, ALASP 7, 171-212.
  172. van Soldt, W. (2015): Middle Babylonian Texts in the Cornell University Collections. Vol. 1: The Later Kings (CUSAS 30), Bethesda. Veldhuis, N. (DCCLT): VS 24, 020 + SE 55 on: http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/dcclt/corpus Veldhuis, N. (2014): History of the Cuneiform Lexical Tradition (GMTR 6), Münster.
  173. Weiher, E. (1988): Spätbabylonische Texte aus Uruk III (SpTU 3), Berlin.
  174. Weiher, E. (1993): Uruk Spätbabylonische Texte aus dem Planquadrat U 18, IV (SpTU 4), Mainz am Rhein.
  175. Weidner, E. (1924-1925): Altbabylonische Götterlisten, AfO 2, 1-18 and 71-82.
  176. Westenholz, A. (1975): Review of J. J. M. Roberts, The Earliest Semitic Pantheon, JSS 34, 288-293.
  177. Wiggermann, F. A. M. (1997): Transtigridian Snake Gods. In: I. L. Finkel/M. J. Geller (ed.), Sumerian Gods and their Representa- tions (CunMon. 7), Groningen, 33-55.
  178. Wiggermann, F. A. M. (1998-2000): Nergal, RlA 9, 215-226.
  179. Yamada, S. (2016): Old Babylonian School Exercises from Tell Taban. In: S. Yamada/D. Shibata (ed.), Cultures and Societies in the Middle Euphrates and Habur Areas in the Second Millennium BC. Vol. 1: Scribal Education and Scribal Tradtions (StCh. 5), Wiesbaden, 45-68.

FAQs

sparkles

AI

What does the recent publication of Msk 74.108a+ reveal about the Weidner god list?add

The study reveals that Msk 74.108a+ is the first fully published Hurro-Akkadian bilingual manuscript of the Weidner god list, filling a critical gap in understanding its transmission.

How does the Hurro-Akkadian version differ from other exemplars of the Weidner list?add

The bilingual version employs distinct strategies for translating god names, often providing Hurrian equivalents rather than phonetic representations, differing from other manuscripts which may lack standardization.

What archaeological context surrounds the fragments of the Weidner god list?add

The fragments were found in the 'Diviner's Archive' at Emar, comprising over 1,703 cuneiform tablets related to administrative, ritual, and educational texts.

What is the significance of the join between Msk 74.158k and Msk 74.108a+?add

This join enhances our understanding of the text's continuity, contributing additional lines from the Hurrian columns that were previously missing or badly damaged.

How do the Hurrian translations in the Weidner list reflect local dialectal adaptations?add

Certain god equivalences, such as Šimigi for Utu, indicate localized theological adaptations rather than direct linguistic translations, exemplifying the influence of regional dialects in the curriculum.

About the author
Frank Simons
Trinity College Dublin, Post-Doc
Papers
16
Followers
264
View all papers from Frank Simonsarrow_forward

Related papers

Cuneiform Commentaries Project: CCP 6.7.A -Weidner's God List A
Klaus Wagensonner

2021

View PDFchevron_right
(2009) An Old Babylonian Manuscript of the Weidner God-list from Tell Taban, Iraq 71, 33–42
Daisuke Shibata

Iraq 71, 2009

Tell Taban, the ancient city of T 1 a : batum,1 which is located on the eastern bank of the River Habur nineteen kilometres south of the modern city of Hassake, has been excavated by the archaeological mission of the Kokushikan Univesity (Tokyo) between 1997 and 1999 and then from 2005 until now.2 The purpose of the excavation is the rescue-salvage of the site, which has been eroded year by year by the Hassake dam built on the Habur. Despite the less than optimal conditions, excavations have nevertheless uncovered a number of cuneiform texts, which date to the Old Babylonian period and the Middle Assyrian period.3

View PDFchevron_right
The Late Bilingual Exaltation of Ištar (Inannas Erhöhung)
Daniel Foxvog

This mythico-theological text in Akkadian with an accompanying Sumerian version, still quite fragmentary but originally at least five tablets in length, describes the transfer of divine powers from the highest Sumero-Akkadian gods to the goddess Inana-Ištar, mirroring her ascent to nearly the highest rank of the Assyrian pantheon in the later 1 st millennium BC. The following is a re-editing of all the exemplars of this composition known to me as of this writing. It comprises the seven texts (A-G) used by B. Hruška in his 1960 edition plus three newer texts (H-J), which all together preserve part of Tablet I, the first 46 lines of Tablet III, and part of the first half of Tablet IV. All are Neo-Assyrian or later in date. The free translations usually, but not strictly, follow the Akkadian rather than the often less comprehensible Sumerian. For notes and comments to individual lines see the previous editions. Many party-eroded signs have as a rule not been so marked; the CDLI editions of individual texts can provide more cautious transliterations.

View PDFchevron_right
“A Study of KTU2 1.82 and Ugaritic Mythology.” Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religion 13 (2013): 30-48.
Adam E Miglio

This article treats KTU 2 1.82: 1-7, an Ugaritic incantation. It deals, first, with matters of epigraphy, philology, morpho-syntax and lexicography. Thereafter, it discusses the contributions of this incantation to understanding Ugaritic mythology and religion. In particular, it assesses the relationship of KTU 2 1.82: 1-7 to the Ugaritic Ba ʕ lu Cycle. Ancient Near Eastern incantation texts are well known from the world of Syro-Mesopotamia, having been preserved as artifacts of the cuneiform culture that characterized this region for more than three millennia. These incantations were texts that, when spoken, were believed to bring about a desired religio-magical effect. From the Late Bronze Age city of Ugarit, in particular, incantations are attested in two general 'types.' The first may be classified as historiolae. Historiolae were comprised of formal mythological texts typically narrated in the indicative mood and accompanied by a ritual prescription. 1 The second form of incantation at Ugarit was simply a formula or spell without an accompanying mythological narrative that had a performative effect when uttered. 2

View PDFchevron_right
1985 Biblical Notes on Some New Akkadian Texts from Emar (Syria)
John Huehnergard
View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Assyriology
  • Hurrian Religion
    • 580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2026 Academia. All rights reserved