Omen 38.67'
Frank Simons, 2021, "Šumma ālu, Omen 38.67", Nicla De Zorzi et al., Bestiarium Mesopotamicum, 2018-2021; accessed 10/08/2026 1:30 a.m. at tieromina.acdh-dev.oeaw.ac.at/omens/Omen-38-67-/tei
PHILOLOGICAL COMMENTARY
K 03726+ iv 1-2 and Sm 0472+ r 2' are kept separate in If a City 2, 286 (*38.68' and *38.71' respectively). Their association here is not without doubt, but it is supported by the fact that K 03726+ iv 3-5 almost certainly duplicate Sm 0472+ r 3'-4' (38.68'-69'). Also, together they produce a credible omen within the context of chapter 38. The same can be said of the next omen, 38.68'.
The missing part of the apodosis could be reconstructed with ŠUB-e nadê 'abandonment of the house' as in 38.36', 39', 41', 48', 68'. Alternatives are e-neš É 'weakening of the house' (38.46') and BIR-aḫ É 'dispersal of the house' (38.56', 38.58'-59').
In common with the CAD, If a City 2 understands nammaštu to mean a single, non-specific animal in these omens. This is unlikely for a number of reasons. First, the basic meaning of the word is 'a group of animals'. As can be seen from the references gathered in the CAD (N/1, 234-235 s.v. nammaštu), it is used almost exclusively as a group noun. The only text, outside of the present omens, in which it seems to be used for a single animal (SAA 8 158, 2 and 11) is an astronomical omen report, and the context is very unclear - indeed, in Hunger's translation, nammaštu is ignored. Second, the context of chapter 38 means that a single generic 'creature' makes little logical sense. The chapter as a whole is concerned with destructive insects, and for this to be disrupted in the middle by 10 or 11 omens concerned with 'a creature' is very unlikely. Third, several of the individual omens (notably 38.74' and 38.75') make very little sense with the translation 'creature'.
Nonetheless, the normal translation 'herd of (wild) animals' is plainly impossible in the present context, given that the majority of the omens are concerned with a nammaštu inside a man's house. One other text seems to use nammaštu with the same meaning as is intended here - a line in the therapeutic vademecum (BAM 379, iv 20 - see Stadhouders 2011, 35 20 and 2012, 17 20) reads as follows:
|
[ÚDAG/KAL? ú]ṣa-ṣu-un-ti MU.NI nam-maš-ti ina É LÚ NU GÁL.MEŠ |
|
|
[ÚDAG/KAL? ] ṣaṣunti šumšu nammašti ina bīt amēli lā bašê |
|
[The DAG/KAL?-plant] - it is called ṣaṣuntu-plant; (a drug) for keeping vermin out of a man’s house.
This offers confirmation that nammaštu can be used to refer to groups of smaller animals, but in the present context 'vermin' is perhaps too loose a translation. Chapter 38 as a whole seems to be concerned with vermin, and several of the nammaštu omens (particularly 38.73'-38.76') imply that the animals grouped by nammaštu are basically of the same type. As such, we suggest that the meaning in the present context is 'swarm'. This is to be contrasted with the more usual word for swarm tibûtu (CAD T, 392b s.v. tibûtu 3) which seems to have been reserved for overwhelming and devastating plagues of locusts. In the omens edited here, the meaning is more likely to be something like a swarm of bees or flies - something composed of hundreds or thousands, rather than millions, of individual insects, and therefore able to fit inside a man's house.
