An Old Babylonian Version of the Gilgamesh Epic Part 15

35. Read _i-na [as]-ri-su [im]-hu-ru_.

36. Traces at beginning point to either _u_ or _ki_ (= _itti_). Restoration of lines 36-39 (perhaps to be distributed into five lines) on the basis of the a.s.syrian version, Tablet I, 4, 2-5.

Column 3.

14. Read _Kas_ (= _sikaram_, "wine") _si-ti_, "drink," as in line 17, instead of _bi-is-ti_, which leads Langdon to render this perfectly simple line "of the conditions and the fate of the land"(!).

21. Read _it-tam-ru_ instead of _it-ta-bir-ru_.

22. Supply _[lu_Su]-I.

29. Read _u-gi-ir-ri_ from _gar_ ("attack), instead of separating into _u_ and _gi-ir-ri_, as Langdon does, who translates "and the lion." The sign used can _never_ stand for the copula! Nor is _girru_, "lion!"

30. Read _Sibmes_, "shepherds," instead of _sab-[si]-es_!

31. _sib-ba-ri_ is not "mountain goat," nor can _ut-tap-pi-is_ mean "capture." The first word means "dagger," and the second "he drew out."

33. Read _it-ti-[lu] na-ki-[di-e]_, instead of _itti immer nakie_ which yields no sense. Langdon's rendering, even on the basis of his reading of the line, is a grammatical monstrosity.

35. Read _gis_ instead of _wa_.

37. Read perhaps _a-na [na-ki-di-e i]- za-ak-ki-ir_.

Column 4.

4. The first sign is clearly _iz_, not _ta_, as Langdon has it in note 1 on page 216.

9. The fourth sign is _su_, not _su_.

10. Separate _e-es_ ("why") from the following. Read _ta-hi-[il]_, followed, perhaps, by _la_. The last sign is not certain; it may be _ma_.

11. Read _lim-nu_ instead of _mi-nu_. In the same line read _a-la-ku ma-na-ah-[ti]-ka_ instead of _a-la-ku-zu_(!) _na-ah ... ma_, which, naturally, Langdon cannot translate.

16. Read _e-lu-tim_ instead of _pa-a-ta-tim_. The first sign of the line, _tu_, is not certain, because apparently written over an erasure. The second sign may be _a_. Some one has scratched the tablet at this point.

18. Read _uk-la-at ali_ (?) instead of _ug-ad-ad-lil_, which gives no possible sense!

Column 5.

2. Read _[wa]-ar-ki-su_.

8. Read _i-ta-wa-a_ instead of _i-ta-me-a_. The word _pi-it-tam_ belongs to line 9! The sign _pi_ is unmistakable. This disposes of note 1 on p. 218.

9. Read Mi = _salmu_, "image." This disposes of Langdon's note 2 on page 218. Of six notes on this page, four are wrong.

11. The first sign appears to be _si_ and the second _ma_. At the end we are perhaps to supply _[sa-ki-i pu]-uk-ku-ul_, on the basis of the a.s.syrian version, Tablet IV, 2, 45, _sa-ki-i pu-[uk-ku-ul]_.

12. Traces at end of line suggest _i-pa(?)-ka-du_.

13. Read _i-[na mati da-an e-mu]-ki i-wa_.

18. Read _ur-sa-nu_ instead of _ip-sa-nu_.

19. Read _i-sa-ru_ instead of _i-tu-ru_.

24. The reading _it-ti_ after _d_Gis is suggested by the traces.

25. Read _in-ni-[ib-bi-it]_ at the end of the line.

28. Read _ip-ta-ra-[as a-la]-ak-tam_ at the end of the line, as in the a.s.syrian version, Tablet IV, 2, 37.

30. The conjectural restoration is based on the a.s.syrian version, Tablet IV, 2, 36.

Column 6.

3. Read _i-na si-ri-[su]_.

5. Supply _[il-li-ik]_.

21. Langdon's text has a superfluous _ga_.

22. Read _uz-za-su_, "his anger," instead of _us-sa-su_, "his javelin"

23. Read _i-ni-ih i-ra-as-su_, i.e., "his breast was quieted," in the sense of "his anger was appeased."

31. Read _ri-es-ka_ instead of _ri-es-su_.

In general, it should be noted that the indications of the number of lines missing at the bottom of columns 1-3 and at the top of columns 4-6 as given by Langdon are misleading. Nor should he have drawn any lines at the bottom of columns 1-3 as though the tablet were complete. Besides in very many cases the s.p.a.ce indications of what is missing within a line are inaccurate. Dr. Langdon also omitted to copy the statement on the edge: _4 su-si_, i.e., "240 lines;" and in the colophon he mistranslates _su-tu-ur_, "written," as though from _sataru_, "write," whereas the form is the permansive III, 1, of _ataru_, "to be in excess of." The sign _tu_ never has the value _tu_! In all, Langdon has misread the text or mistransliterated it in over forty places, and of the 204 preserved lines he has mistranslated about one-half.

NOTES