Two more variants of this type involve possible extra dates given in N for the period of
western visibility of Venus (V 69 and V70). The recorded dates in N 7-8 for Ξ and Ω
each have two occurrences of the sign UTU, meaning ūmu, “day.” In N 8 two numbers
are recorded, showing that the dual dates offered in N were for successive days, perhaps
reflecting some uncertainty on the part of the copyist as to which number was contained
in his exemplar. This is possibly connected with the phenomenon observed where dates
between the sources differ by one day. It is conceivable that the scribe who coped N sup-
plied two dates for the one astronomical event because he was confronted with a similar
discrepancy in his sources, or possibly possessed a damaged source that left some uncer-
tainty as to the exact figure recorded.
Another example of expansion is found at V42. In C we read zunnū ina šamê mīlū ina
nagbī ibaššû, while the text of G is more compact: zunnū u mīl[ū ibbaššû]. This variation
alters the style of the text but has no impact on meaning. It is significant that two copies
of this text stored in the royal libraries at Nineveh display stylistically divergent versions
of this apodosis.
One further example of varying apodoses is found at V45. The apodosis in C consists of
the compound statement “EBUR KI.A SI.SÁ ŠÀ KUR iṭ-ṭab,” ebūr rutibti iššir libbi māti
iṭâb, “the harvest of the wet-land will succeed, the heart of the land will be well.” In con-
trast H retains the signs “KI]N-ár E[BUR.” The last sign preserved in H seems to be the
first sign of the apodosis in C, but the first partial sign and the fully preserved phonetic
complement that attaches to it seems to require that in H we find the word išapparar be-
fore the expected apodosis. Judging by other apodoses that also feature this term, we can
assume that the apodosis in H originally had a reference to a messenger sent by a king
before the statement concerning the harvest of the irrigated land.
Hermeneutic Variants
There is a high number of hermeneutic variants in our sources. The majority of these re-
late to differences in numerals which may be explained as mechanical errors in transmis-