PHILOLOGICAL COMMENTARY

Note that K 06315+ 22' in our score does not correspond with K 06315+ 22' in If a City 2's (287) score: for the different line count, see the comment to 38.63'.

There is a phonetic association between the name of the animal, ḫurbabillu, and the verb of the apodosis, iḫarrub.

The section 38.63'-38.65' is unusual in that each creature is the subject of just a single omen. In each case, the ominous sign is that the animal 'is seen in a man's house'. It is also worth noting that, while the other creatures dealt with in this tablet are insects, those in this section - a type of gecko, a porcupine, and a salamander(?) - are significantly larger, as well as being less well attested in the textual record. Nonetheless, plausible explanations can be given for each animal as a pest, and so there is no major break with the theme of the chapter as a whole.

The ḫurbabillu is the subject of a thorough lexicographical investigation (see Simons forthcoming). The CAD translation for ḫurbabillu for 'chameleon' can no longer be maintained, and 'porcupine' seems very likely to be the correct interpretation. This makes good sense in the present context as the porcupine is a serious crop pest in modern India, and doubtless caused the same problems to the people of Mesopotamia.