Another example of this type of variation is found at V65. Here we see that B varies from
all of the other parallel sources in its apodosis, apparently giving a prediction that con-
cerns matters unrelated to those mentioned in tablets C, M and N. The text of B is dam-
aged, and it is difficult to tell from Langdon’s copy whether enough remains to confirm
the reading by Reiner of mērešu iššir. However, it seems clear from what is visible in the
copy made by Langdon that a reading of B that follows C, M and N is impossible. C, M
and N all seem to agree, although the exact meaning of the apodosis is uncertain, and M
and N are badly damaged.^204 What seems clear is that the focus of the apodosis in B, be-
ing the arable land, is significantly different to the focus in C, M and N. The latter refer
instead to events in a far away land.
B is our oldest source, dating to the late eighth century B.C.E. It was presumably kept in
the Babylonian city of Kish, where it was uncovered during Langdon’s excavations in
- The other variant sources date from the late seventh to middle of the sixth century
B.C.E., and come from Babylonia as well as Nineveh. The congruence of the later
sources here indicates that B, although the oldest text, is not necessarily the most accurate
text in terms of quality of scribal transmission. It may be that B preserves a more original
apodosis, but the agreement of the other sources suggests that B is perhaps at variance
here with the popular text. Regardless of which source preserves the more ‘correct’ apo-
dosis, this variant does show that the earlier source does not automatically possess the
most integrity.
(^) replaced it with the tablet containing section IV, before copying only the first part of the incorrect apodosis
from omen 59. Such a situation seems, at best, unlikely. 204
See note above.