Cuneiform Commentaries Project Newsletter (August 2016)

August 18, 2016
Dear subscribers,
Several new texts have been recently added to the corpus of the Cuneiform Commentaries Project ( Please find a list below.
In addition: 
(1) Uri Gabbay has written an introduction to the comparative study of Akkadian commentaries and Early Hebrew exegesis (
(2) Steve Tinney has implemented several new features to achieve a smoother integration between the CCP website and Oracc. The most important are (1) it is now possible to color code the transliterations of commentaries and (2) the glossaries now link to the CCP website. Almost every transliteration on the CCP website has been revised and updated to reflect the new color codes implemented by Tinney.
Thanks are expressed to the following scholars, who have contributed their editions and feedback since the last newsletter: Sally M. Freedman, Uri Gabbay, Henry Stadhouders, and Zackary Wainer. We would like to renew our invitation for Assyriologists around the world to contribute their editions of as yet unedited commentary tablets, for which they will receive full credit.
Best wishes,
Enrique Jiménez (Senior Editor of CCP)
CCP 3.1.55.A (Enūma Anu Enlil 55 A): This tablet, found on Kuyunjik, Nineveh, preserves twenty lines from the middle of a commentary on the astrological series Enûma Anu Enlil. The preserved lines deal with the appearance of the Kidney Star (= Canopus?) (o 2′-8′) and the Ḫabaṣirânu Constellation (= Centaurus) (o 13′-17′, r 1′-2′), and these sections are delineated by single rulings. (Read more)
CCP 3.1.58.C.e (Enūma Anu Enlil 58(59)-62(63) Group C): This fragment preserves remains on a commentary on omens relating to the planet Venus. The tablet belongs to the British Museum’s “Babylon Collection,” and parallels a passage from a section of Enūma Anu Enlil dealing with Venus omens (see the textual notes below). It may be part of the commentary BM 42916+ (CCP 3.1.58.C.f). (Read more)
CCP 3.2.u1.A.b (Sîn ina tāmartīšu (?) A): K 3155 is a celestial-­divinatory commentary concerned with the Moon, though seemingly unconnected to any one tablet of Enūma Anu Enlil. That being said, this text has a number of parallels with Sîn ina tāmartīsu Tablet 1, as well as the Sultantepe commentary STT 2 339 (CCP 3.2.u1.A.d). (Read more)
CCP 3.5.49 (Ālu 49): This tablet preserves one of the latest datable commentaries. According to its colophon, the tablet was copied by Nabû-šumu-līšir son of Nabû-balāssu-iqbi, grandson of Marduk-zēru-ibni, of the Egibatila family. This same scribe is attested in two other commentaries: one of them, DT 36 (CCP 3.5.48), which is very similar to the present tablet in both format and contents, is commentary on the immediately preceding chapter of Šumma Ālu, Šumma Ālu 48. (Read more)
CCP 3.5.6.B (Ālu 6): This fragment contains remains of what appears to be a commentary on the 6th tablet of the series of terrestrial omens Šumma Ālu (see below the commentary on lines r 6′-7′). The fragment probably belongs to the same tablet as BM 48344 (81-11-3,1054 = CCP 3.5.6). (Read more)
CCP 4.1.4.B (Sagig 4): The present tablet contains the first 19 lines of a commentary on the fourth tablet of the diagnostic medical series Sagig. It belongs to the British Museum’s “Sippar Collection,” but it is likely to stem from Babylon or Borsippa and to date to the Hellenistic period. No fewer than eight lines of commentary (ll. 1-8) are devoted to elucidating the very first line of the tablet, which reads: (Read more)
CCP 4.1.7.C.a (Sagig 7): The present tablet contains a previously unidentified commentary on the poorly preserved seventh tablet of the diagnostic series Sagig, which deals with symptoms in the patient’s tongue. (Read more)
CCP 4.1.7.C.b (Sagig 7): This small and badly damaged fragment contains meager remains of a previously unidentified commentary on the seventh tablet of the diagnostic series Sagig. It belongs, in all likelihood, to the same tablet as BM 48727+ (CCP 4.1.7.C.a). The most relevant feature of the fragment is that it contains a notarikon analysis of the name of Šulak, according to which that demon’s name would mean “he of impure hands.” (Read more)
CCP 7.2.u55 (Uncertain): This small fragment preserves meager remains of a text written in tabular format. At least two columns and three sub-columns are preserved. Some of the entries are well attested in the lexical tradition, especially in the list Ḫarra = ḫubullu. It is likely that the fragment is part of an unusual lexical list, rather than a commentary. (Read more)
CCP 7.2.u57 (Medical recipe): This tablet, classified as a “commentary” in the catalogue of the British Museum’s “Babylon Collection,” is not an actual commentary, but rather a medical recipe with occasional glosses. The recipe lists a series of branches of different trees and various drugs, and urges the practitioner to cut them into pieces together. (Read more)
CCP 7.2.u59 (Materia medica (?)): This fragment, written in a neat and clear script but whose surface is badly eroded, contains remains of a commentary on a text of uncertain nature. Line 4′ suggests that the base text might be astronomical, but in view of lines 3′ and 5′ it seems more likely that it might be a medical text of sorts. (Read more)
CCP 7.2.u154 (Uncertain): According to the catalogue of the British Museum’s “Babylon Collection,” this small fragment is part of a commentary. This identification is suggested first by the presence of Glossenkeile in ll. 2′ and 8′, and secondly by the adverb šanîš in l. 5′. Line 8′ may contain a notarikon analysis of a noun or divine name. (Read more)
CCP 7.2.u160 (Uncertain): The only remarkable feature of this otherwise nondescript commentary fragment is the fact that it appears to mention a “cuneiform wedge” in l. o 7′. (Read more)