V17 A:19 GÁL.ME OV – A has the plural marker ME, against
B:19 GÁL.MEŠ MEŠ in B and C.^168
C:6 GÁL.MEŠ
V18 A:21 [K]Ù.GI.GA.KAM OV(l) – Difference in grammatical form, or
B:21 G]A.KAM possible difference in pronunciation.^169
C:8 KÙ.GI.GA.KAM
D:6 KÙ.GI.GA.KAM
J:19 KÙ.GI.GA.KE 4
(^168) Compare the opposite situation at V14 where A preserves the plural marker MEŠ, against MEŠ in B and
C in the word GAR.ME(Š). 169
KE 4 is read as the genitive case marker “-k” plus the ergative post-position “-e,” and is a commonly oc-
curring writing of this grammatical form (see J.L. Hayes, A Manual of Sumerian Grammar and Texts [AR-
TANES 5; Malibu: Undena Publications, 2000^2 ] 42-43). An alternative reading is to read the last sign
KAM as KA 13 , as is indicated in M. Thomsen, The Sumerian Language: An Introduction to Its History and
Grammatical Structure (Copenhagen: Akademisk Forlag, 1984^2 ) 90. This way the last sign in this word
could be read as the Sumerian genitive case marker, where the suffix “-ak” > “-k” (M. Thomsen, The
Sumerian Language, 94). The final /a/ in the other sources might be read as a nominalising particle, though
its grammatical function in this context is unclear. In fact, the entire construction is rather unusual gram-
matically, as was noted already when this line was first interpreted (see F.X. Kugler, Sternkunde und
sterndeinst in Babel: assyriologische, astronomische und astralmythologische Untersuchungen [2 vols.;
Münster in Westfalen: Aschedorffsche Verlagsbuchh, 1910] 2.257-311). On the unusual spelling of ‘gold’
here, see J.D. Weir, Venus Tablets, 28. The ability of first millennium scribes to transmit this obscure
Sumerian phrase accurately is perhaps doubtful given the difference in forms this variant reflects.