G37 T 2 i 4’ a-zak-ka-r[a OV – T has the syllabic spelling of √zakaru,
W 1 i 27 MU-ra “to speak, mention,” against the logographic spelling in W.
(^) G38 T
W^21 i 8a’ i 31a [i]-DUG˹qab^4 .GA ˺-bi √OV – T has the logographic spelling for qabû, “to say.”
(^) G39 T
2 i 8b’ MU-[ra] OV – T has th√zakaru, “to speak, mention,” against the syl-e logographic spelling of
W 1 i 31b i-zak-ka-ra labic spelling in W.
(^) G40 T
W^21 i 9’ i 32 ta-qab-ba-áš-šu-nu-tu ta-qab-b[a-áš]-˹šú-nu-ti˺^ accusative singular.OV(l) – W has the wrong case vowel for the^528
(^) G41 T
W^2 i 12’ 1 i 34b ul a-šak-ka-n[a] ul a-šak-kan OV(l) – Difference in grammatical form.^529
G42 W1 i 34b še-pi-i-a T2 i 12’ p]i-ia-a-ma OV – Long /i/ is marked in W, against long /a/ marked in T.
G43 W1 i 34b še-pi-i-a T2 i 12’ p]i-ia-a-ma SV(1) – The in W. enclitic particle “-ma” is lacking
(^) G44 C i 1a’ (^) ˹GURUŠ.MEŠ˺ OV – T and c have the determinative LÚ de-
T c 2 i 23b’ lú GURUŠ.MEŠ noting professional office, lacking in C.
1 i 10’ l ú GURUŠ.MEŠ
G45 C i 1a’-b’ T ˹GURUŠ.MEŠ˺[ ] SV(3) – C and T have a different line order to c. (^530)
2 i 23b’-24’ l˹úlu GURUŠ.MEŠ ˺ ˹i˺-[ b]i-
c 1 i 9’-10’ ši-bu-ti i-[zab ] RUŠ.MEŠ i-[ ] lú GU-
(^528) This could reflect Assyrian dialectal influence, where the Standard Babylonian form (^) šunuti > šunu in
Neo-Assyrian (cf. J. Huehnergard, Grammar, 600). According to A.R. George, Gilgamesh, 440, this is a
case of unusual Kuyunjik orthography where the wrong case vowel is written for the pronominal suffix. 529
530 T appears to mark the ventive suffix, which is lacking in W. C and T have the order “young men ... old men,” against the reverse in c. See A.R. George, Gilgamesh,
424, where this variation is categorised as “lines transposed.”