PHILOLOGICAL COMMENTARY

• We reconstruct the missing portions of the protasis from 32.A.19 and 32.A.105’. As the entwined lizards fall onto a man’s right foot in 32.A.105’, we would expect them to fall onto his left foot in the above omen (32.A.106'). Indeed the above apodosis is found in another omen involved a single lizard falling onto a man’s left foot, 32.A.19.

Examining the hand copy of VAT 09793 and the photograph of VAT 10167, however, there is not enough room for the entire protasis to be reconstructed. Therefore it must be assumed that the referent of sign MIN is no longer just kit-pu-lu-ma ‘entwined’, as in the previous omens, but also now includes ana UGU GÌR NA ‘on a man’s … foot’ from 32.A.105’.

Both If a City 2 and KAL 1 leave the protasis uninterpreted (see comment below).

• For a discussion on the interpretation of MUNUS.LUḪ, see the commentary at 32.A.19.
• As mentioned at 32.A.105’, If a City 2’s reconstructed transliteration (176, *32.34’) continues to interpret the referent of (KI.)MIN to be EME.DIR.MEŠ. The edition also omits MUNUS before the sign LUḪ (visible on VAT 10167’s photograph). If a City 2 (176-77, *32.34’) reconstructs and translates as follows:

         DIŠ EME.DIR.MEŠ […].MEŠ-ma DU₈.MEŠ LUḪ GIR₃.MEŠ-šu2 TUK-ši
         If lizards [ …] and separate, he will acquire a foot-washer.

While KAL 1 (16-17, Rs. 36’ A36’ and B19’) reads the signs preserved on the manuscripts as above, with slight differences in the breaks, it also does not reconstruct the protasis and translates (KAL 1, 16-17, 74 Rs. 36’) as follows:

Wenn[Eidechsen] dito (= umeinander gewunden sind und) … , und sich dann trennen: Er wird ein Zittern seiner Füße bekommen.

On the hand copy of VAT 09793 from Ebeling (KAR 393), there is part of an unknown sign before …MEŠ­-ma. As it does not provide any extra information and KAL 1 was written by collating the manuscripts, the reading above follows KAL 1 (16-17,  Rs. 36’ B19’) in placing x completely within brackets.