de Zorzi, 2011aN. de Zorzi, Divinazione e intertestualità : la serie divinatoria shumma izbu e il suo orizzonte culturale. PhD thesis, 2011.: 357
de Zorzi, 2014N. de Zorzi, La serie teratomantica Šumma Izbu. Testo, tradizione, orizzonti culturali. Sargon Editice e Libreria, 2014.: 465
de Zorzi, 2011aN. de Zorzi, Divinazione e intertestualità : la serie divinatoria shumma izbu e il suo orizzonte culturale. PhD thesis, 2011.[Edition]: 357
Frahm, 2011E. Frahm, Babylonian and Assyrian Text Commentaries. Origins of Interpretation. Ugarit-Verlag, 2011.: 207, 277
Lambert, 1992W. G. Lambert, Catalogue of the Cuneiform Tablets in the Kouyunjik Collection of the British Museum: Third Supplement. British Museum Press, 1992.[Commentary on Šumma Izbu V 62, 84-93]: 40
This small fragment was identified by Lambert as a commentary on the fifth tablet of the teratological series Šumma Izbu.1 It contains a few entries in a tabular format, which parallel those of the Principal Commentary on Šumma Izbu to a great extend. However, several of the entries of the Principal Commentary do not appear in this fragment. Since the libraries of Ashurbanipal have yielded no other tabular commentary on Šumma Izbu in Assyrian script comparable to the present one, this piece should perhaps be considered a somewhat divergent recension of the Principal Commentary, rather than an independent exegetical treatise.
The line numeration of the lines from Šumma Izbu V in the edition below follows that of the recent edition of N. de Zorzi.2
Powered by Oracc(Base text – Commentary – Quotations from other texts)
[bāmātu (Šumma Izbu V 82)] means "behind."
["Bag" (Šumma Izbu V 104)] "liver."
["Bag" (Šumma Izbu V 104)] "heart."
["As a hostage" (Šumma Izbu V 26 = 109)] means "pledge."
["A planet" (Šumma Izbu V 110)] means "Nergal."
[...] means "animals."
["Conflict" (Šumma Izbu V 113)] means "famine."
1Restored with the Principal Commentary l. 196. On the rationale behind the explanation, see de Zorzi Šumma Izbu (2014) p. 500.
2Restored with the Principal Commentary l. 203.
3Restored with the Principal Commentary l. 202.
4Restored with the Principal Commentary l. 177. On the rationale behind the explanation, see de Zorzi Šumma Izbu (2014) p. 498.
5Restored with the Principal Commentary l. 206.
6The entry probably comments on Šumma Izbu V 114. Compare the entry in the Principal Commentary, l. 211, TÙR KUR : būlu (the traces on the left hand column would fit TÙR, but not KUR).
7Restored with the Principal Commentary l. 208.