V36 C:23 ITI.˹APIN˺ HV – Difference in cardinal number.^179
G:8 ITI.GAN
V37 C:23 dNin-si 4 -an-na ina
dUTU.ŠÚ.A
SV(2) – C has an expansive plus.^180G:8 ina dUTU.ŠÚ[
V38 C:24 ITI.˹NE˺ HV – C records Ω as occurring in the month
G:10 ITI.APIN of Abi, while G has Arahsamnu.^181
V39 C:25 ITI.˹NE˺ HV – C records Γ as occurring in the month
G:11 ITI.ŠU of Abi, while G has Du’ūzi.
V40 C:25 ina UTU.ŠU.A OV – C lacks the divine determinative for ṣīt
G:11 ina dUTU.È šamši, present in G.
(^179) C has the period of superior conjunction as two months 15 days, while G seems to necessitate 3 months
and 14 days. 180
181 C has the pronoun denoting the subject, which is only implied in G.
According to E. Reiner, BPO 1, 21-23 the confusion of month names began at an early stage in the text
when both months and days were recorded as simple numerals. In such a text the figures representing
months could suffer the same corruption as has been noticed in the present documents (see note ). Here a
misreading between five and eight would have occurred, which is not difficult to imagine if the source text
was damaged or poorly written. The next variant requires a misreading between four and five, which is
similarly imaginable. Another type of textual corruption for month names written as logograms has been
noted above (see note ).