H42 LH iia 37 mu-ba-lí-iṭ OV – Different spellings of the
B mu-b[a-l]i-iṭ (^) brings life (to).”II/1 participle muballi 373 ṭ, “one who
(^) H43 LH iia 39 (^) me-e (^) OV – The ultimate vowel in √mê,
B iii 8 m]e “water,” is written as long in LH.
H44 LH iia 40 nu-úḫ-ši-im Not Counted – Possible error in
B iii 8 nu-ú ḫ-im B. 374
H45 B iii 10 mu-ul-la LH iia 42 mu-ul-li OV(l) – Possible difference in pro-nunciation. (^375)
(^) H46 LH iia 44 (^) mu-kam-me-er (^) OV(l) – Possible difference in pro-
B iii 11 mu-kam-mi-ir nunciation.^376
(^) H47 LH iia 46 (^) AN-nim (^) OV – The proper noun Anum is
B iii 13 d A-nim written with the divine determina-tive in B.
H48 B iii 13 u LH iia 47 ù OV – The conjunction is written with the sign U in B.
(^) H49 LH iia 48 AN.DÙL (^) OV – The noun (^) √ṣulūlu, “shade,”
B iii 14 ṣu-lu-ul is written syllabically in B.
(^373) B agrees with the fragment of the Old Babylonian duplicate of LH, AO10237.
(^374) The explanation given by D.J. Wiseman, "Hammurabi Again," 170, is that this is most likely an errone-
ous writing of the noun √nuḫšu, “abundance, plenty,” through the omission of the sign ŠI. Otherwise the
form in B could be read as nuḫḫu, from √nâḫu, “pacify, give rest,” but the meaning is unclear. The full
phrase in LH is šākin mê nuḫšim ana nišīšu, “provider of abundant waters for his people.” In B we would
therefore read šākin mê nūḫim ana nišīšu, “provider of relenting/abating waters for his people.” The sense
of the phrase in B might perhaps be understood in light of the passage in Gilgamesh XI 131 (according to
the line numbering in A.R. George, Gilgamesh, 710), where we read: inūḫ tâmtu (A.AB.BA), “the Deluge
ended.” But in the present context the reference to abating flood waters would be quite awkward. “Provider
of abating (flood) waters to his people” certainly interrupts the logical sequence of the phrase, so in the
light of Rule 1 the reading of an error in B is preferred. 375
The stele has the expected bound form of √elû, “to raise up.” The spelling in B may reflect the influence
of Neo-Assyrian pronunciation, where III weak /i/ > /a/ ( 376 cf. J. Huehnergard, Grammar, 602).
The writing of [e] as an allophone of /i/ could reflect a difference in pronunciation, perhaps under the
influence of the following /r/. The stem vowel of √kamāru, “to heap up,” is a/u, but i/i in Neo-Assyrian
(BGP 144). On the allophones of /i/ in Neo-Assyrian see note above and the references there.