Reading akkadian PRayeRs & Hymns An Introduction

466
ESSENTIAL BIBLIOGRAPHY:
READING AKKADIAN PRAYERS AND HYMNS: AN INTRODUCTION
Shamash and Adad. See page 201 and 88.
Text. Edition, Translation, and Study: W. G. Lambert. Babylonian Oracle Questions.
Mesopotamian Civilizations 13. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2007, 21–41,
especially 30–33. i
i Lambert passes over the text of the present prayer without any comments or notes (148).
1. d UTU EN di-nim d IŠKUR EN bi-ri
2. šá a-šal-lu-ku-nu-ši an-na ki-na
3. ap-la-in-ni EN SÍG u TÚG.SÍG an-nu-ú
Line 1: The diviner opens with an invocation to the gods of extispicy. d UTU = Šamaš,
the sun god, god of justice. EN = bēlu, “lord.” Dīnu, “decision, judgment.” d IŠKUR = Adad, a
storm god. For Adad’s role in divination, see page 86. Bīru, “divination” (both the act of
extispicy and the answer received). The epithets bēl dīnim and bēl bīri are typical for Shamash
and Adad when they are invoked for divinatory purposes. See the OB ikribu-like
prayer on page 85 and the ikribu-prayers generally (see Zimmern, BBR, nos. 75–101 [pp.
190–219]).
Šamaš bēl dīnim Adad bēl bīri
Line 2: Ša, a relative pronoun (“who, which”), refers to both Shamash and Adad as
the object of the first verb, thus “whom.” Šâlu, “to ask.” The verb is a 1cs durative with a
2mp dative pronominal suffix. The pronominal suffix is resumptive. As the verb indicates,
the body of the text should be understood in an interrogatory mode. Annu, “consent, approval,
‘yes’.” Kīnu, “firm, reliable, true.” These last two words belong with the following
imperative; they describe the kind of answer the diviner is requesting the gods give him.
ša ašallūkunūši anna kīna
Line 3: Apālu, “to answer, to reply.” The verb is a cp impv. with a 1cs accusative
pronominal suffix. The phrase in lines 2–3b is only attested here on the Nimrud MS that
preserves this tamitu. The other five tamitus in this Nimrud compendium move directly
into the identification of the person for whom the diviner is inquiring or into the stipulated
term. SÍG can be read as both šīpātu, “wool,” or šārtu, “hair.” TÚG.SÍG = sissiktu, “hem,
fringe.” Lambert argues that the phrase SÍG u TÚG.SÍG may have originally been understood
as “hair and fringe,” offering OB and MB parallels for support; but such an understanding,
he notes, leaves the ms annû, “this,” unexplained since we expect a fs, annītu. Thus, he
suggests that although the phrase originally meant “hair and fringe” it was misunderstood
in the MB period, when scribes read the first SÍG as šipātu, “wool,” and took the phrase as a
hendiadys: “wool and fringe” = “woolen fringe” (see Lambert, 15–17). In any case, the
item(s) referred to by the phrase is to be understood conceptually as a metonymic substi-