PALAEOGRAPHY AND SCRIBAL PRACTICES IN SYRO-PALESTINE AND ANATOLIA IN THE LATE BRONZE AGE PAPERS READ AT A SYMPOSIUM IN LEIDEN, 17-18 DECEMBER 2009 edited by ELENA DEVECCHI NEDERLANDS INSTITUUT VOOR HET NABIJE OOSTEN LEIDEN 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS Abbreviations ix Pierre Bordreuil Écriture dextroverse/sénestroverse: quelques réflexions sur l’histoire de l’alphabet cunéiforme d’Ougarit 1 Eva Cancik-Kirschbaum Middle Assyrian Administrative Documents and Diplomatics: Preliminary Remarks Towards an Analysis of Scribal Norms and Habits 19 Yoram Cohen An Overview on the Scripts of Late Bronze Age Emar 33 Elena Devecchi The So-called ‘Mixed Ductus’ in the Akkadian Texts from Boğazköy 47 Françoise Ernst-Pradal Les signes I, IA et TUR dans les textes juridiques d’Ougarit 65 Jörg Klinger Literarische sumerische Texte aus den hethitischen Archiven aus überlieferungsgeschichtlicher Sicht. Teil I 79 Jared L. Miller The Palaeography and Orthography of Six Rituals ‘Redacted’ in the Manner of Arusna 95 Dennis Pardee {g} as a Palaeographic Indicator in Ugaritic Texts 111 Carole Roche-Hawley On the Palaeographic ‘Syllabary A’ in the Late Bronze Age 127 Theo van den Hout The Ductus of the Alalaḫ VII Texts and the Origin of Hittite Cuneiform 147 Wilfred H. van Soldt The Palaeography of Two Ugarit Archives 171 Juan-Pablo Vita Amurru Scribes in the Amarna Archive 185 Eva von Dassow Gloss Marking and the Language of the Alalaḫ IV Texts 201 Willemijn Waal Chronological Developments in Hittite Scribal Habits and Tablet Shapes 217 Mark Weeden Assyro-Mittanian or Middle Assyrian? 229 Indexes 253 Personal Names 253 Geographic Names 255 Texts 256 ABBREVIATIONS AA Archäologischer Anzeiger ÄAT Ägypten und Altes Testament (Wiesbaden) AAVV Various Authors AfO Archiv für Orientforschung AHw W. von Soden. Akkadisches Handwörterbuch. Wiesbaden 1965-1981. AJA American Journal of Archaeology AkkSyll W. von Soden – W. Röllig. Das akkadische Syllabar (AnOr 424). Roma 1991. ALASP Abhandlungen zur Literatur Alt-Syrien-Palästinas und Mesopotamiens (Münster) AlT D.J. Wiseman. The Alalakh Tablets (Occasional Publications of the British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara 2). London 1953. ANES Ancient Near Eastern Studies (Leuven) AnOr Analecta Orientalia (Roma) AO Antiquités orientales (inventory number of the Louvre Museum) AOAT Alter Orient und Altes Testament (Münster) ARU M. David – E. Ebeling. Assyrische Rechtsurkunden. Stuttgart 1929. AS Ain Shems/Beth Shemesh tablets ASJ Acta Sumerologica AuOr Aula Orientalis ATmB Alalaḫ-Texte, mittelbabylonisch – new numbering used in C. Niedorf. Die mittelbabylonischen Rechtsurkunden aus Alalaḫ (Schicht IV) (AOAT 352). Münster 2008. BAM F. Köcher et al. Die babylonisch-assyrische Medizin in Texten und Untersuchungen. Berlin 1963ff. BaM Baghdader Mitteilungen BASOR Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research BATSH Berichte der Ausgrabung Tall Šēḫ Ḥamad/Dūr-Katlimmu (Berlin) BCH Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique BE The Babylonian Expedition of the University of Pennsylvania BiMes Bibliotheca Mesopotamica (Malibu) BiOr Bibliotheca Orientalis Bk Büyükkale BLMJ Bible Land Museum Jerusalem BM British Museum Bo Boğazköy tablets (excavations 1906-1912) BoḪa Boğazköy-Ḫattuša (Berlin, Mainz am Rhein) BoSt Boghazköi-Studien (Leipzig) BPOA Biblioteca del Próximo Oriente Antiguo (Madrid) CAD The Assyrian Dictionary of the University of Chicago (Chicago – x ABBREVIATIONS Glückstadt) CAT M. Dietrich – O. Loretz – J. Sanmartín. The Cuneiform Alphabetic Texts from Ugarit, Ras Ibn Hani and other places (= KTU: second enlarged edition) (ALASP 8). Münster 1995. CDA J. Black et al. A Concise Dictionary of Akkadian (SANTAG 5). Wiesbaden 2000. CDLI Cuneiform Digital Library Initiative CHANE Culture and History of the Ancient Near East (Leiden, Boston, Köln) CHD The Hittite Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago (Chicago) ChS Corpus der hurritischen Sprachdenkmäler (Roma) CM Cuneiform Monographs (Groningen) CRAIBL Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres CTA A. Herdner. Corpus des tablettes en cunéiformes alphabétiques découvertes à Ras Shamra-Ugarit de 1929 à 1939 (MRS 10 - Bibliothèque Archéologique et Historique 79). Paris 1963. CTH E. Laroche. Catalogue des textes hittites (2nd edition). Paris 1971. CTMMA Cuneiform Texts in the Metropolitan Museum of Art (New York) CTMMA I I. Spar (ed.). Tablets, Cones and Bricks of the Third and Second Millennia B.C. New York 1988. EA El-Amarna tablets HANE/M History of the Ancient Near East/Monographs (Padova) HdO Handbuch der Orientalistik (Leiden) HED J. Puhvel. Hittite Etymological Dictionary. Berlin 1984ff. HSAO Heidelberg Studien zum Alten Orient (Wiesbaden, Heidelberg) HSS Harvard Semitic Museum Series (Atlanta) HW2 J. Friedrich – A. Kammenhuber. Hethitisches Wörterbuch. Zweite völlig neuarbeitete Auflage auf der Grundlage der edierten hethitischen Texte. Heidelberg 1974ff. HZl C. Rüster – E. Neu. Hethitisches Zeichenlexikon (StBoT Beiheft 2). Wiesbaden 1989. IBoT İstanbul Arkeoloji Müzelerinde bulunan Boğazköy Tabletleri(nden Secme Metinler) (Istanbul, Ankara) IEJ Israel Exploration Journal IF Indogermanische Forschungen JCS Journal of Cuneiform Studies KAI H. Donner – W. Röllig. Kanaanäische und aramäische Inschriften. Zweite, durchgesehene und erweiterte Auflage. Wiesbaden 1966-1969. KAJ E. Ebeling. Keilschrifttexte aus Assur juristischen Inhalts (WVDOG 50), Leipzig 1927. KAV O. Schroeder. Keilschrifttexte aus Assur verschiedenen Inhalts (WVDOG 35), Leipzig 1920. KBo Keilschrifttexte aus Boghazköi (Leipzig – Berlin) KL Kāmid el-Lōz tablets ABBREVIATIONS xi KTU M. Dietrich – O. Loretz – J. Sanmartín. Die keilalphabetischen Texte aus Ugarit einschließlich der keilalphabetischen Texte außerhalb Ugarits. Teil 1 Transkription (AOAT 24/1). Neukirchen-Vluyn 1976. KUB Keilschrifturkunden aus Boghazköi (Berlin) LANE Languages of the Ancient Near East (Winona Lake) LAPO Littératures Anciennes du Proche-Orient (Paris) LBA Late Bronze Age MARV 1 H. Freydank. Mittelassyrische Rechtsurkunden und Verwaltungstexte (VS 19). Berlin 1976. MARV 5 H. Freydank – B. Feller. Mittelassyrische Rechtsurkunden und Verwaltungstexte V (WVDOG 106). Saarbrücken 2004. MARV 8 H. Freydank. Mittelassyrische Rechtsurkunden und Verwaltungstexte VIII (WVDOG 119). Wiesbaden 2007. MC Mesopotamian Civilizations (Winona Lake) MesZl R. Borger. Mesopotamisches Zeichenlexikon (AOAT 305). Münster 2004. MIO Mitteilungen des Instituts für Orientforschung MRS Mission de Ras Shamra (Paris) Msk Meskéné tablets MSL Materials for the Sumerian Lexicon (Roma) MSL III R.T. Halock et al. Das Syllabar A. Das Vokabular Sa. Das Vokabular Sb. Berichtigungen und Nachträge zu MSL II. Indices zu MSL II. Roma 1955. MSL XIV M. Civil. Ea A = nâqu, Aa A = nâqu with their Forerunners and Related Texts. Roma 1979. OA Oriens Antiquus OAC Oriens Antiquus Collectio (Roma) OBO Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis (Göttingen) obv. obverse OLZ Orientalistische Literaturzeitung Or NS Orientalia Nova Series PAM Palestine Archaeological Museum PBS Publications of the Babylonian Section, University of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) PdP La Parola del Passato PIHANS Publications de l’Institut historique et archéologique néerlandais de Stamboul (Leiden) PN Personal Name PRU Le Palais Royal d’Ugarit (Paris) PRU II C. Virolleaud. Le Palais Royal d’Ugarit II. Textes en cunéiformes alphabétiques des archives est, ouest et centrales (MRS 7). Paris 1957. PRU III J. Nougayrol. Le Palais Royal d’Ugarit III. Textes accadiens et hourrites des archives est, ouest et centrales (MRS 6). Paris 1955. PRU V C. Virolleaud. Le Palais Royal d’Ugarit V. Textes en cunéiformes alphabétiques des archives sud, sud-ouest et du petit palais (MRS 11). Paris 1965. xii ABBREVIATIONS PRU VI J. Nougayrol. Le Palais Royal d’Ugarit VI. Textes en cunéiformes babyloniens des archives du grand palais et du palais sud d’Ugarit (MRS 12). Paris 1970. RA Revue d’Assyriologie et d’Archéologie Orientale RB Revue biblique rev. reverse RIH Ras Ibn-Hani tablets RlA Reallexikon der Assyriologie (Berlin – Leipzig) RS Ras Shamra tablets RSO Ras Shamra-Ougarit (Paris) RSO VII P. Bordreuil (ed.). Une bibliothèque au sud de la ville. Paris 1991. RSO XIV M. Yon. – D. Arnaud (eds.). Études ougaritiques. I. Travaux 1985-1995. Paris 2001. SAAB State Archives of Assyria Bulletin SAAS State Archives of Assyria Supplement (Helsinki) SÄK Studien zur altägyptischen Kultur SAOC Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization (Chicago) SCCNH Studies on the Civilization and Culture of Nuzi and the Hurrians (Bethesda) SEL Studi epigrafici e linguistici sul Vicino Oriente antico SMEA Studi Micenei ed Egeo-Anatolici StBoT Studien zu den Boğazköy Texten (Wiesbaden) StMed Studia Mediterranea (Pavia) TB Tell Brak tablets THeth Texte der Hethiter (Heidelberg) TNM Tell Nebi Mend tablets TR Tell ar-Rimah tablets TS Tell Soukas tablets TT Tell Taʿannak tablets UET Ur Excavations, Texts (London) UF Ugarit-Forschungen VAT Inventory Numbers of the Texts in the ‘Vorderasiatischen Abteilung der Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin’ VS Vorderasiatische Schriftdenkmäler der Königlichen Museen zu Berlin (Leipzig) VSNF Vorderasiatische Schriftdenkmäler der Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin, Neue Folge (Berlin, Mainz) WAW Writings from the Ancient World (Atlanta) WVDOG Wissenschaftliche Veröffentlichungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft (Leipzig, Berlin) ZA Zeitschrift für Assyriologie und vorderasiatische Archäologie ZDPV Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins THE PALAEOGRAPHY AND ORTHOGRAPHY OF SIX RITUALS ‘REDACTED’ IN THE MANNER OF ARUSNA Jared L. Miller1 At the 7th International Congress of Hittitology in Çorum in 2008 I presented an initial description of a group of tablets and fragments belonging to a series of heavily Luwian influenced Hittite rituals relating to the ‘great deity’ of Arusna.2 Since these Boğazköy tablets show a number of palaeographic and orthographic features of interest for the present volume, this paper treats further elements of the text group. Because these texts do not belong to those generally well known to researchers of the Ancient Near East, or even to Hittitologists, since some of the material remains unpublished and that which has been published in cuneiform copies has never enjoyed a philological treatment, it is appropriate to begin with some preliminary remarks. A proper edition of these rituals is in the works, but progress with the texts is still at a rather early stage, so that many of the comments here must be considered initial observations and hypotheses rather than conclusions. The group consists of some 43 fragments, which can be attributed to perhaps as few as four tablets. They are booked in S. Košak’s online Konkordanz under CTH 495.3 The first and most striking characteristic of these pieces is their miniscule script – most conspicuous in Bo 3288++ and a number of smaller fragments that may belong to it4 – as can be seen, for instance, by comparison with that of the historical fragment KBo 22.10 (Fig. 1). The largest block of fragments, Bo 3288++, will have had very nearly 100 signs per line, as compared to an average of some 30-50 signs per line for other Boğazköy tablets of comparable format. It would have run to at least some 120 lines, compared to around 80 at the most for other Hittite texts. 1 [email protected]; Institut für Assyriologie und Hethitologie, Ludwig-Maximilians- Universität München. 2 Miller 2010. 3 At http://www.hethport.uni-wuerzburg.de/hetkonk/hetkonk_abfrage.php; CTH 495.I and II as well as KBo 17.32+KBo 41.21 belong to other compositions. 4 I.e. KUB 57.15+Bo 7221+Bo 8825, KUB 46.41, Bo 7693, Bo 7694, Bo 8819, Bo 8820 (and perhaps Bo 8827), 1017/u and 1018/u. Of the remaining pieces, KUB 39.54+KUB 46.40 would seem to be the most similar to these. In fact, some of these smaller fragments might belong to KUB 39.54+KUB 46.40 rather than Bo 3288++. 96 J.L. MILLER Fig. 1. Comparison of KUB 46.41 (Bo 603), KBo 45.242 (16/t) and KBo 22.10 (Bo 69/169). Bo 3288++, though its obverse is entirely lost and its reverse is badly damaged, is one of the few pieces providing a significant amount of preserved text.5 Its broken edges reach almost to the original extent of the tablet. It was not divided into columns. The join with 126/u to the lower right demonstrates that this tablet originates from the Haus am Hang, from where, in fact, all fragments come that can be confidently attributed to this composition and for which a find spot is available, including KUB 39.54+KUB 46.40,6 which shows the same tiny script. A further feature which all these tablets and fragments share is a very late New Hittite script as well as very late graphic features, such as the writing pé-tan (DIN)-zi, so x common in the cult inventory texts from the reign of Tudḫaliya IV, as well as late grammatical features, such as the use of the local particle -kan throughout, except for a single occurrence of -san in a colophon (VSNF 12.58+KUB 46.39++ iv 2’). They thus date roughly to the second half of the 13th century. 5 See S. Košak’s sketch at http://www.hethport.uni-wuerzburg.de/hetskiz/sk.php?f=126/u. 6 For the join see Miller 2010: 505 fig. 2. SIX RITUALS ‘REDACTED’ IN THE MANNER OF ARUSNA 97 Further formal features of interest include a Randleiste on the sides of the tablets, preserved by Bo 3288++ and the further primary manuscripts KUB 46.42++ (Fig. 2), KUB 46.38 and KUB 46.39++. This is a rather uncommon feature among the Boğazköy texts, where a Randleiste is standard only at the bottom of each side and at the top of the reverse. A Randleiste on the left of the tablet is found only rarely. On KUB 46.42++ it can even be seen that such a Randleiste is present on the upper, lower, left and right edges on both the obverse and the reverse, which is, it seems, unique at Ḫattusa.7 Fig. 2. KUB 46.42 col. ii, with Randleiste. A further characteristic of Bo 3288++ is apparently unique in the archives of Ḫattusa.8 As is well known, the normal method of creating a paragraph divider is to draw 7 Willemijn Waal, who has recently completed her PhD on the formal aspects of the tablets from Boğazköy (Waal 2010), relates that she knows of only one other piece that certainly shows a Randleiste on the right side of the tablet, also a ritual fragment (KUB 46.65), while a second (KBo 2.25), pending collation, may perhaps have one. 8 As far as I can judge from the available photos and drawings, the examples listed by Hagenbuchner-Dresel (1999: 61 n. 40, sub ‘Paragraphenstrich und Keilschrift in einer Zeile’) are all fundamentally different features.