This tablet, which was found in Ashurbanipal’s libraries in Nineveh, contains a commentary on three or more chapters of the divinatory series Šumma Ālu. The tablet is very similar to other ṣâtu commentaries on the same series written in Babylonian script and found in Ashurbanipal’s libraries, such as CCP 3.5.17 (Ālu 17-20), CCP 3.5.30 (Ālu 30-32), CCP 3.5.41 (Ālu 41-44), CCP 3.5.57 (Ālu 57-58), CCP 3.5.94 (on Ālu 94 alt [ṣâtu 2c]), and CCP 3.5.103 (Ālu [...], 103, 104 alt, and [...] [ṣâtu 2c]). All of them are small tablets with no colophon, which contain commentaries on three or more chapters of Šumma Ālu. In all of them each section is followed by a ṣâtu 2b or 2c rubric. It is conceivable that all these tablets originally stemmed from the same library, and were brought to Nineveh at a later point. More information on their provenance may be obtained from the study of the numeration of the chapters of Šumma Ālu reflected in their rubrics, which differs to a large extend from that of the Assyrian copies of Šumma Ālu found in Nineveh.
This tablet preserves two rubrics on the reverse, which classify the text as a ṣâtu 2b commentary on Šumma Ālu 73 and 74. The text contained on its obverse should therefore belong to a previous chapter, perhaps Šumma Ālu 71 or 72. Since there is no edition of these tablets, only occasionally it is possible to relate the glosses in the commentary with actual entries from a manuscript (see below lines o 4’, 6’, 7’, r 2’, 5’ and 7’).
The text is concerned only with philological issues. The tablets it deals with contain bird omens: as a consequence, one of the main interests of the commentary is to provide Akkadian reading for bird names written logographically. The explanations provided for the most unconventional writings come from the lexical tradition: thus r 5’ an.zi.nam.lá = mimma šumšu napḫar iṣṣūrāti is elsewhere attested only in Antagal III 211; and r 10’ ígiramušen = igirû is known in Diri IV 303 and Ḫarra XVIII E 14f.
As the rest of the Babylonian ṣâtu commentaries on Šumma Ālu from Nineveh, this tablet would be better described as a short vademecum or companion to its base text rather than as an independent hermeneutical treatise.