P21 I iii 15’ ŠID-ma OV – Q has a phonetic complement
Q 5 P 7 ŠID-ŠID-n[u ˹ma˺^ recount.” appended to the verb √manû, “recite,
(^) P22 A
U 6^1 iii 20’ na-an-gub-bé-en na-an-gub-bé OV(l) nunciation.– Possible difference in pro-^700
(^) P23 A
U 7^1 iii 23’ SAR omits verb SV(2) – U has the addition of the √šabāṭu, “to sweep.”^701
P24 A U 9 1 iii 25’ omits šá lacking in U.SV(1) – The relative particle 702 ša is
(^)
(^700) The lack of terminating ‘-n’ in the orthography of U may be read as a difference in the Sumerian subject
post-position, where A has the 2ms subject “na-an-gub-bé-en,” “by him you shall not tarry,” against the
3mpl form in U “na-an-gub-bé,” “by him they shall not tarry.” A more likely resolution is to read the
shorter form in U as dropping /n/ for phonetic reasons (W. Horowitz, personal communication). In any
case, one cannot assume that Neo-Assyrian scribes were familiar with classical Sumerian, especially con-
sidering that the short form appears in manuscript U, which is a Late Babylonian school text that includes
only an excerpt of the ritual. 701
Elsewhere the sign SAR has the meaning √šabāṭu, “to strike, to sweep (in a ritual context)” so there is
no reason to read the sign differently here. The line in U reads: “EGIR-šú SAR šá DINGIR.MEŠ
DUMU.MEŠ um-ma-ni DUḪ-ár,” arkišu tašabbiṭ ša ilāni mārē ummâni tapaṭṭar, “after it you sweep (or
strike), you dismantle the gods of the craftsmen.” This is reminiscent of STT 73 67, “ÙR SAR A.MEŠ
KÙ.MEŠ SUD,” uri tašabbiṭ mê ellūti tasallaḫ, “you sweep the roof, you sprinkle pure water.” Although
the syntax here is similar, the verb tašabbit in U still lacks a clear object, and so the phrasing remains awk-
ward. Clearly the phrase without the verb in manuscript A is preferred. As noted above, manuscript U is a
Late Babylonian school text and so may not be considered a very reliable representative of the ritual text. 702
The line in manuscript A reads: [arkišu] ša [ilāni] rabûti tapaṭṭar, “afterwards you dismantle the offer-
ing arrangements of the great gods” (see C.B.F. Walker and M.B. Dick, Transliteration, Translation, and
Commentary, 67, for this translation). The lack of the relative particle in U does not alter the meaning of
the text.