EXTISPICY

Extispicy treatises are known from the Old Babylonian to the Late Babylonian period, and references to cuneiform signs are attested in texts from all phases of this tradition.²² The earliest relevant entries occur in three Old Babylonian treatises on liver omens published in Goetze 1947.²³ They present the signs either in the form of the actual graphemes or invoke them by their ancient names.²⁴ Two of the texts describe the shape of what was called the naplastum in Old Babylonian times, a groove on the lobus sinister of the liver of the sacrificial lamb.

The small tablet Goetze 1947: no. 14 (whose sign forms display archaizing tendencies) includes the following omens:

1) BAD IGI.BAR ki-ma BAD a-sa-at LU i-ni-ak (line 5)

If the naplastum is like (the grapheme) BAD, the man’s wife will have (illicit) sexual intercourse.

No etymographic link between protasis and apodosis. Given that the BAD sign consists of a straight horizontal wedge ending in a hole-like Winkelhaken, it seems quite conceivable that the entry is informed by sexual symbolism of a Freudian type. The prediction is negative.

2) BAD IGI.BAR ki-ma BAD-ma u si-lum i-na SA-sa na-di as-sa-at LU i-ni-a-ak-ma / mu-sa i-sa-ba-as-si-i-ma i-da-ak-si (lines 6-7)

If the naplastum is like (the grapheme) BAD and a hole is in its center, the man’s wife will have (illicit) sexual intercourse, and her husband will seize her and kill her.

The reference to the killing of the wife could be related to the reading of BAD as US = matum “to die” (and similar meanings of the sign), but whether the author of the text had really intended such a link is doubtful. If the interpretation provided in the preceding note is correct, it may be more likely that he regarded the BAD sign as a representation of the illicit sexual union, and the hole in its center as an expression of its violent termination by the husband.

The prediction is negative.

3) BAD IGI.BAR ki-ma KASKAL sar-ru-um ka-ab-tu-ti-su i-da-ak-ma / bi-sa-su-nu ma-ku-ur-su-nu a-na bi-ta-at i-la-ni i-za-az (lines 8-9)

If the naplastum is like (the grapheme) KASKAL, the king will kill his magnates and distribute their goods and possessions to the temples of the gods.

Lieberman (1977: 149-50) suggested that the prediction is based on paronomasia, with KASKAL (which was apparently read kaskas in Old Babylonian, see below no. 7) being associated with the Akkadian verb kasasu “to gain control of, to acquire.” This explanation is ingenious, but since kasasu does not occur in the apodosis, not completely convincing. The prediction is negative.

4) [B]AD 1IGI.BAR ki±-ma BAD mar-sa-^am± ^glsNA i-ka-la-su (line 14)

If the naplastum is like the grapheme BAD, the bed will confine the sick man.

The apodosis could be motivated by a reading of BAD as matum “to die” (see no. 2), but the link is not obvious. The prediction is negative.

5) [BAD IGI.BA]R \ ki-ma x± sa-ap-hu-ut LU i-pa-hu-[ur] (line 15)

[If] the naplastum is like (the grapheme) x, the man’s scattered (relatives?) will come together again.^[51]

Lieberman (1977: 149) argued that the protasis, like the preceding one, refers to a grapheme. The respective sign is damaged but could be PAB/KUR, in which case there would be no obvious etymographic link between protasis and apodosis.^[52] The prediction is positive.

Another Old Babylonian tablet dealing with the naplastum is Goetze 1947: no. 17, likewise written in an archaizing script:

6) BAD IGI.BAR ki-ma pa-ap-pi-im ^ugl-ba-ab-tam DINGIR i-ri-is (line 47)

If the naplastum is like (the grapheme named) pappum (i.e., PAB), the god wants an ugbabtum-priestess.

As recognized by Lieberman (1977: 148 n. 19), the entry is based on paronomasia between the grapheme name and the second syllable of ugbabtum. The prediction is positive.

7) BAD IGI.BAR ki-ma ka-as-ka-as ^dISKUR i-ra-hi-is (line 48)

If the naplastum is like (the grapheme named) kaskas (i.e., KASKAL),^[53] the god Adad will inundate.

As recognized by Lieberman (1977: 148), the prediction is based on the sign name's resemblance with kaskassu “overpowering,” a frequent epithet of Adad. The prediction is negative.

Two more graphemes are mentioned in the small Old Babylonian tablet Goetze 1947: no. 61, which deals with the liver's lobus quadratus, called sulmum “Well-being” in Akkadian:

8) sum-ma i-na ma-as-ka-an su-ull-mi-im HAL / LUGAL ki-sa-ti i-na ma-ti i-li-am (lines 9-10)

If in the place of the Well-being there is (the grapheme) HAL, a king of the world will arise in the land.

No etymographic link between protasis and apodosis. The prediction is positive.

9) sum-ma i-na ma-as-ka-an su-ul-mi-im / [h]a-lu-um pa-li a-ka-di-im ga-mir-ir (lines 11-12)

If in the place of the Well-being there is (the grapheme named) hallum (i.e., HAL), the dynasty of Akkad is ended.

Noegel (2007: 13) suggests this protasis-apodosis string could be based on a reading of HAL as zazu “to divide,” a verb sometimes used to describe how countries lost their territorial integrity. This explanation, while not impossible, remains conjectural. The prediction is negative.

Lieberman (1977: 149) assumed that the first entry of the text, [sum-m]a i-na ma-[as]- ka-[an s]u-ul-mi-^im± PA, refers to a grapheme as well, but it seems more likely that PA is to be understood as a logogram for larum “branch, bifurcation,” and that the phrase means: “If in the place of the Well-being there is a ‘branch.'”^[54] Lieberman is right, however, when he

passage is very accurate; the space with the traces of the sign is indeed quite narrow. If one read HAL, one could construct a link with the apodosis (tablet 14 of Aa equates HAL with paharu, see MSL 14, 290 line 24), but the traces do not really favor this reading.

ECKART FRAHM

points out (1977: 149) that the kakkum (“Weapon”), an often mentioned small piece of liver tissue that sticks out in the form of a club or peg (Koch-Westenholz 2000: 48-51) and is usually regarded as inauspicious, probably owes its name to the cuneiform grapheme GAG, even though the word is later written with the logogram ^glsTUKUL.

The occurrences of kakkum in extispicy texts are far too numerous to be listed here.

Neo-Assyrian and Neo- and Late Babylonian extispicy texts include more references to cuneiform graphemes than the Old Babylonian treatises so far available to us. We begin our overview with texts that describe the manzazu, or Presence, a designation of the groove on the liver’s lobus sinister that came to replace the Old Babylonian term naplastum (see above, nos. 1-7). Koch-Westenholz 2000: no. 11, one of the manuscripts of Manzazu, the third chapter of the extispicy series of the first millennium, includes the following entry:

10) BAD NA GIM PAB/KUR su-bat-ka [ana subat nakrika issir] (line 10')

If the Presence is like (the grapheme) PAB/KUR, your camp [will charge the camp of your enemy].

The restoration of the apodosis (which is missing in Koch-Westenholz’s publication) is based on nos. 12 (a commentary on this entry) and 44. The reading of PAB/KUR as nakru “enemy” provides an etymographic link between protasis and apodosis, but the shape of the sign, two wedges crossing each other, might have played a role as well — the wedges symbolize quite well the attack of one army on another. The prediction is positive. For an essentially identical protasis, with a different prediction, see above, no. 6 (see also no. 5).

Two first-millennium commentaries on Manzazu include references to omen entries dealing with cuneiform graphemes. These commentaries are of particular interest because they provide us with explicit information on how the Babylonian and Assyrian scholars of the first millennium interpreted such omens. The first commentary is Koch-Westenholz 2000: no. 20:

11) [summa] 5-su NA GIM HAL UMUS KUR MAN-ni HAL za-a-zu be-e-ru pa-sd-tu (line 20)

[If], fifth, the Presence is like (the grapheme) HAL, the political situation of the land will change. HAL (means) “to divide, to select, to efface.”

The unraveling of the political situation predicted in the apodosis could be seen as being mirrored by the HAL sign with its notions of division.

But the commentary is not interested in focusing on this link. Instead, it explains that the comparison in the protasis refers to a Presence that is split and (partially) effaced.^[55] This is not surprising since the entry is part of a longer commentarial section listing older omens that were regarded as equivalent to the omen commented on in the first place, summa manzazu ina qablisu pasit kakki rabsuti ahitu “If the Presence is effaced in its center, (there will be) idle weapons — inauspicious” (line 16). The shape of the HAL sign provides a good illustration of this particular condition of the Presence.^[56] ^{^[57] The prediction, the same as in no. 46 (which is likewise based on the occurrence of a HAL), is negative.
²⁹ For a similar explanation of HAL, see below, no. 27. While zazu and beru are well-attested renderings of HAL (see, e.g., MSL 14, 290, Aa 14, i 17, 21), the equation between HAL and pasatu is not known from the lexical tradition (see CAD P, 249) and probably
An entry in line 70 of the text has been claimed to refer to a grapheme as well, but this seems doubtful:
BAD NA 3-ma BAR.MES SUB.MES DIS e-lis DIS sap-lis DIS ina bi-ri-su-nu re-dis (var. om.) GIR 3-ma GIM an-nim-ma (var.: AN-a-n[im]) GIS.HUR-sU-nu
Koch-Westenholz translates this difficult passage as follows: “If there are three Presences and they lie separately, one above, one below, one parallel between them, three Paths and their design is like the sign AN(?).” It is true that AN was named an(n)u in ancient Mesopotamia.³¹ Nonetheless, it seems unlikely that the entry, apparently a commentary on Koch-Westenholz 2000: no. 7 line 11, really refers to the AN sign — which, whether in its earlier or in its later form, simply does not look like the configuration observed here. Probably, we should rather normalize the last words of the entry as kima annimma usurtasu and translate: “Its drawing is like this.” If understood correctly, the phrase would refer to a sketch, to be consulted by the reader of the commentary, of the ominous configuration described in the omen.
In fact, ms. I of the text, K. 12845+, has an empty space, traversed by a horizontal ruling, before kma, a feature that could reflect the occurrence of such a sketch on the tablet from which the manuscript was copied.^[58] Note, furthermore, that in the preceding entry of the commentary (line 69), there is an unmistakable reference to a sketch, even though it is phrased somewhat differently: GIS.HUR-su-nu ana IGI-ka “you have their design before you.” The writing AN-a-nim in ms. I remains strange, however, and one cannot completely exclude the possibility that the scribe who wrote this tablet might mistakenly have taken what was originally a reference to a sketch as a statement about the grapheme AN. 12) BAD NA GIM PAB/KUR KI.TUS-[ka subat nakrika SI].SA-ir : BE MAN-u NA GIM
BAR (line 104)
If the Presence is like (the grapheme) PAB/KUR, [your] camp will charge [the camp of your enemy] — if, second, the Presence is like (the grapheme) BAR.^[59]
This is a commentary on example no. 10. It establishes that the occurrence of a BAR on the Presence has the same — in this case apparently auspicious — significance as that of a PAB.
13) [summa manzazu kima PAB(?) ilu NIN].DINGIR.RA APIN-es u-lu AN.MI (line 107)
[If the Presence is like (the grapheme) PAB(?), the god] wants an ugbabtu- priestess, or (there will be) an eclipse.
text) or an older one. The late HAL is a sequence of two horizontal wedges, which could represent the two elements of the split Presence, but it is also possible, as pointed out to me in a personal communication by A. R. George, that the horizontal wedge of the earlier form of the sign represents the manzazu-crease, while the oblique wedges of this form make a cross that obliterates (pasatu) its middle part.
³¹ For the sign name (often written ^da-nu(m)), see Gong 2000: 102.
The restoration of the protasis is uncertain; it is based on the assumption that the omen is essentially identical with the Old Babylonian omen entry quoted above as no. 6, with manzazu replacing naplastum in the protasis and the subject preceding the object in the apodosis. Note that there seem to be no other references to ugbabtu-priestesses in first-millennium extispicy texts, and that the entry occurs in a commentary section that refers several times to cuneiform graphemes (lines 104, 113, and perhaps other badly damaged lines). In the light of example no. 19, the grapheme mentioned in the protasis could, however, also have been a KUR. The first prediction is positive, the second negative.
14) BAD sal-su NA GIM BAD SUB-ti ERIM-ni (line 113)
If, third, the Presence is like (the grapheme) BAD (there will be) a defeat of the army.
The entry may display the same rather vague etymographic link between protasis and apodosis that we have discussed above under no. 2. The protasis is essentially identical with that of nos. 1 and 4. The commentary quotes the entry because it regards it as equivalent to the badly broken omen presented in line 111.³⁴ The prediction is negative.
The Manzazu commentary Koch-Westenholz 2000: no. 19 includes two additional references to cuneiform graphemes:
15) BAD MAN-U MU.NI NA GIM AN NUN KUR [ibbalkitusu ileqqe] (line 38)
If, second, the Presence is like (the grapheme) AN, the prince [will take] the land [that rebelled against him].
Restored after another Manzazu commentary, Koch-Westenholz 2000: no. 25 line 29.³⁵ No obvious etymographic link between protasis and apodosis. The entry is presented in a section with omens deemed equivalent to the enry “If the Presence is long, the days of the prince will be long.”³⁶ The prediction is positive.
16) BAD NA GIM BAD ina SUHUS-su ka-ra-su-u GAR (line 97)
If the Presence is like (the grapheme) BAD at its base,³⁷ there will be disaster.
The entry may display the same rather vague etymographic link between protasis and apodosis that we have discussed above under no. 2. The protasis is similar to that of nos. 1, 4, and 14. The prediction is negative.
The Well-being, already known to us from the Old Babylonian examples nos. 8 and 9, is associated with cuneiform graphemes in later texts as well. The barutu excerpt KAR 423 from Assur, its partial duplicate K. 10137 (Koch-Westenholz 2000: no. 105), and Koch-Westenholz 2000: no. 64 all include the following three short entries:³⁸
17) BAD SILIM GIM AN DUG(-ub) lib-bi (KAR 423 ii 53; Koch-Westenholz 2000:
no. 105 line 2'; no. 64 line 44)
If the Well-being is like (the grapheme) AN, (there will be) happiness.
For the same apodosis, see examples no. 80 (grapheme: IGI) and 86 (graphemes: SE and PI). No obvious etymographic link between protasis and apodosis. The prediction is positive.
18) BAD SILIM GIM HAL tam-ta-a-ti/tu> (KAR 423 ii 54; Koch-Westenholz 2000:
no. 105 line 3'; no. 64 line 45)^[60]
If the Well-being is like (the grapheme) HAL, (there will be) deprivation.
The wording of the apodosis may have been inspired by the fact that “division,” a concept indicated by the sign HAL, implied the dispersal of an original total. The prediction is negative.
19) BAD SILIM GIM KUR AN.MI (KAR 423 ii 55; Koch-Westenholz 2000: no. 105 line 4'; no. 64 line 43)
If the Well-being is like (the grapheme) KUR, (there will be) an eclipse.
No etymographical link between protasis and apodosis. The prediction is negative.
Koch-Westenholz 2000: no. 64 includes five additional omens referring to cuneiform graphemes, one of which is also attested in KAR 423 and Koch-Westenholz 2000: no. 105:
20) BAD SILIM GIM BAD ina ^giSTUKUL ERIM-ni NUN i-ger-ri-ma ' (KochWestenholz 2000: no. 64 line 36)
If the Well-being is like (the grapheme) BAD, my army will turn against the prince in battle — new break.
For the possibility that there is a vague etymographical link between protasis and apo- dosis, see above, no. 2. The prediction is apparently negative.
21) BAD SILIM GIM PAB/KUR DU IGI ERIM-ni LAL-mu (Koch-Westenholz 2000:
no. 64 line 38)
If the Well-being is like (the grapheme) PAB/KUR, the leader of the army will be captured.
There is no obvious etymographical link between protasis and apodosis, even though one could speculate that the latter, with its indirect reference to an important capture made by the enemy, could have been to some extent inspired by the well-known equation PAB/KUR = nakru “enemy.” The prediction is negative.
22) BAD SILIM GIM GAM KUR NUN ana BAD₄ NIGIN-hur (Koch-Westenholz 2000:
no. 64 line 39)
If the Well-being is like (the grapheme) GAM, the land of the prince will gather in a fortress.
There is no obvious etymographical link between protasis and apodosis, but note that GAM means, inter alia, matu “to die,” a connotation that might have influenced the negative prediction.
23) BAD SILIM GIM U GU₄.UD-ii UR.MAH kas-du(var. KUR-du) (Koch-Westenholz 2000: no. 64 line 41; KAR 323, ii 56; Koch-Westenholz 2000: no. 105 line 5')
If the Well-being is like (the grapheme) U, (there will be) a successful attack by lions.
The translation follows Koch-Westenholz's. Instead of U, a sign that looks like a hole, one could also read BUR^{^[61]} and assume that the protasis refers to a real hole (sllu), but since the preceding and the following lines include references to graphemes, this seems less likely. There is no obvious etymographical link between protasis and apo- dosis. The prediction is negative.
24) BAD SILIM GIM U-ma ke-pi GU₄.UD-ii UR.MAH NU kas-du (Koch-Westenholz 2000: no. 64 line 42)
If the Well-being is like (the grapheme) U but blunt, (there will be) a nonsuccessful attack by lions.
Compare no. 23. There is no obvious etymographical link between protasis and apo- dosis. The prediction is positive.
Another sulmu-omen mentioning a grapheme is attested in KAR 423 ii 60-61 and in Koch-Westenholz 2000: no. 105 lines 9'-10':
25) BAD SILIM GIM TAR ^dugUTUL nap-tan LUGAL GAZ-pi sd-ri-ip nu-ri / i-Inar^?l- ru-ut u-lu GU.ZI ina SUⁿ ^luSU^!.SILA^!.GAB i-tar-ru-ur
If the Well-being is like (the grapheme) TAR, a dish at the king's meal will break, the lamplighter will tremble, or the cup will shake in the cupbearer's hand.^[62]
There are obvious etymographical links between the protasis and two of the predictions. TAR, with the reading has, means seberu “to break,” a synonym of the verb hepu, which is used in the first apodosis to describe the breaking of the royal dish.
of the verb has to await collation of the tablet, it should be noted that a trembling lamplighter (who might spread fire all over the place) seems scarier — and therefore a better fit for a negative apodo- sis — than one who is merely afraid. Furthermore, the semantically related verbs naratu and tararu are attested together elsewhere, in K. 9759 line 9 (see CAD T, 208a, 1d).
TAR is, furthermore, the Sumerian equivalent (and logographic writing) of tararu, the verb employed in the third apodosis, which, in addition, begins with tar. All the predictions are negative.
The Pan takalti commentary Koch-Westenholz 2000: no. 79 from Nineveh explains some of the examples presented above as nos. 17-25. The explanations are preceded by a badly damaged phrase that seems to refer to graphemes and may have functioned as a heading of the section following it:
[summa... mi'^!-hf^!]-il-ti sa-a-ti / [u]-lu EME [... sa (...)] iq-bu-u ana IGI-ka
(line 8)
[If] you have before you [...] cuneiform sign(s) (with explanations from) (bilingual) satu-lists or (monolingual) lisanu-lists [..., which...] said.⁴²
After a horizontal ruling, the text includes various entries on cuneiform graphemes observed on the Well-being:
26) BAD SILIM GIM AN AN sd-mu-u [(... AN)] e-lu-u a-sd-re-du / EN SIG ZE i-saq- qu-ma [(...)] a-sd-re-du-tu DU-ak (line 9)
If the Well-being is like (the grapheme) AN: AN (means) “sky,” [(... AN (means))] “upper” (and) “first in rank”; it (the Well-being) rises towards the thin part of the Gall Bladder [(...) — the...] will reach the highest rank.⁴³ Compare no. 17. If understood correctly, this passage provides one of the few examples of an explicit link based on etymography between a protasis referring to a grapheme, in this case AN, and its apodosis. The commentary begins with listing a number of Akkadian renderings of AN, of which samu “sky” and elu “upper” are well attested in lexical and bilingual texts, while the reference to asaredu seems to be based on semantic association. Apparently drawing on the equation of AN with elu, the commentary then claims that the omen refers to a Well-being “rising” towards the Gall Bladder. The positive prediction referring to asaredutu at the end of the entry (cf. the apodosis in example no. 17) is justified by the preceding equation of AN with asaredu. For similar explanations, see below, nos. 36 and 40.
27) BAD SILIM GIM HAL HAL za-a-zu HAL be-[e^?-ru^? (HAL)] be-e-su pa-sd-tu / tam-ta-a-tu> BAR-ma MURUB.MES-[su] pa-ds-tu (line 11)
If the Well-being is like (the grapheme) HAL: HAL (means) “to divide,” HAL (means) “to select,” [(HAL (means))] “to fork” (and) “to efface” — (there will be) deprivation; it (the Well-being) is divided and [its] center effaced.
Compare no. 18. The equations given for HAL are very similar to the ones provided in example no. 11 and must go back to the same learned tradition. No attempt is made to create an explicit link between protasis and apodosis. Compare also the following entry.
28) BAD MAN-u MU.NI SILIM GIM TAR [(...)] (line 12)
If, second, the Well-being is like (the grapheme) TAR [(...)].
Compare no. 25. It is possible that neither an apodosis nor an explanation is to be restored at the end of the line, and that the commentator quoted this protasis only because he thought it was equivalent to the preceding one (no. 27).
29) BAD SILIM GIM PAB/KUR e-ge-ru e-de-ru e-x-[...] / a-ha-mes sap-su sd-pa-su e-ge-ru [...] (line 13)
If the Well-being is like (the grapheme) PAB/KUR: “to cross” (and) “to wind around,”... [...] they grip each other; “to grip” (is synonymous with) “to cross” [.].
Compare no. 21. The commentary tries to clarify the nature of the configuration described in the omen by associating the sign PAB with egeru “to cross” (cf. nos. 30, 42) and other, similar verbs. The equations seem to be based solely on the shape of the sign and not on any lexical references.
30) BAD MAN-u MU.NI SILIM 2-ma GIM PAB/KUR it-gu-ru tam-t[a'^!-a'^!-tu^!...] / [...] Ixl-gi SILIM RA-is-ma PIS₁₀ NU TUKU^? [...] / [...] Ixl pe-tu-u u ra-ha-[su...] (line 14)
If, second, there are two Well-beings and they are crossed like (the grapheme) PAB/KUR, (there will be) deprivation [...]... the Well-being is submerged and has no bank [...]... “to open” and “to submerge” [...].
Compare the preceding entry — the present one was apparently regarded as equivalent. There is no obvious etymographical link between protasis and apodosis (if the latter is correctly restored).
The Multabiltu commentary Koch 2005: no. 25 includes a broken reference to yet another grapheme observed in connection with the Well-being (line 89):
31) [... mi]-hi-il-tu SILIM GIM GI
[...] cuneiform sign, the Well-being is like (the grapheme) GI.
Too little is preserved to make much sense of this entry.
Another feature of the liver occasionally associated with cuneiform signs is the pitir sumeli or “Left Split,” a fissure half a finger long.⁴⁴ The first entries of the second tablet of Multabiltu, the tenth chapter of the extispicy series (Koch 2005: no. 3), read as follows:
32) BAD DU₈ 2, 30 GIM AN DAM [amili DAM-s]a us-dak (line 1)⁴⁵
If the Left Split is like (the grapheme) AN, [the man’s] wife will have her [husband] killed.
No etymographical link between protasis and apodosis. The prediction is negative.
33) BAD DU₈ 2, 30 GIM HAL DAM LU [ana ha]-ri-mu-ti E (line 2)
If the Left Split is like (the grapheme) HAL, the man’s wife will become a prostitute.
No obvious etymographical link between the protasis and the apodosis (unless one argued that the apodosis implies a “divided” loyalty on the part of the wife). The prediction is negative.
34) BAD DU₈ 2, 30 GIM BAD URU KUR DAB-bat (line 3)
If the Left Split is like (the grapheme) BAD, you will seize the enemy city.
No obvious etymographical link between protasis and apodosis (but cf. the remarks on no. 2). The prediction is positive.
35) BAD DU₈ 2, 30 GIM HA DAM LU DAM-sd u-kas-sap (line 4)
If the Left Split is like (the grapheme) HA, the man’s wife will cast a spell on her husband.
No obvious etymographical link between protasis and apodosis. The prediction is negative.
Koch 2005: no. 25 provides an unfortunately severely damaged commentary on these entries:
36) BAD DU° 2, 30 GIM AN AN sd-m[u^?-u^? (AN) e^?-lu^?]-u / ul-lu-ma IGI-et E [zitti
...] DU° (line 2)
If the Left Split is like (the grapheme) AN: AN (means) “sky,” [(AN means)] “upper” ([el]u); it (the Split) is elevated (ullu), and next to the “House [of Division”...] it is split.
Compare no. 32. The explanation is reminiscent of the one provided in example no.
26, on which my restoration sa-m[u-u] is based.⁴⁶ Unlike there, the present entry seems not to deal with the apodosis, though; it simply states that the occurrence of the sign AN, because it means, among other things, “upper,” points towards a Split that is elevated. For a very similar commentary on the same entry, see no. 40.
37) BAD DU° 2, 30 GIM HAL BAR-ma [...] DU° (line 3)
If the Left Split is like (the grapheme) HAL: it is divided⁴⁷ [...] it is split.
Compare no. 33. The explanation seems to focus on the shape of the sign HAL, but there may also be an etymographical component, since both HAL and BAR are logograms representing zazu “to divide.”
38) BAD DU₈ 2, 30 GIM BAD ana Ixl^[63] [...] sag (line 4)
If the Left Split is like (the grapheme) BAD: towards... [...]....
Compare no. 34. Too broken for an analysis.
39) BAD DU₈ 2, 30 GIM HA D[AM...] ri (line 5)
If the Left Split is like (the grapheme) HA, [the man’s] wife [...]...
Cf. no. 35. If this entry, unlike the preceding ones, really quoted the complete apodo- sis, it would have provided little space for explanations.
Another commentary on example no. 32 can be found in Koch 2005: no. 30 i 5'; it is very similar to no. 36:
40) [summa (.) D]U₈ 2, 30 GIM AN AN [sd-mu]-u e-lu-u ul-lu-ma IGI-et KUR SU.S[I
...]
[If (...)] the Left Split is like (the grapheme) AN: AN (means) “sky” (and) “upper” (elu); it (the Split) is elevated (ullu), and next to the area of the Finger [.].
Note the reference to the “area of the Finger” instead of the “House [of Division],” mentioned in no. 36.
One text, ms. I of the Padanu commentary Koch-Westenholz 2000: no. 42, includes a sketch of a Left Split looking like a grapheme.^[64] The entry shows a horizontal line with a bifurcation on the left side, followed by the words:
41) BAD DU° 2, 30 GIM BAD (rev. 3)
If the Left Split is like (the grapheme) BAD.
Note that the drawing looks like a BAD rotated 180 degrees. This is so because the diviner studied the liver with the sacrificial animal lying on its back (Koch-Westenholz 2000: 39).
One omen, Koch-Westenholz 2000: no. 27, refers to a grapheme to describe a configuration on thepadanu, or Path (like the manzazu a groove on the liver’s lobus sinister):
42) BAD GIR 2-ma GIM PAB/KUR it-gu-ru KUR ina ri-°i-i-ti ana KUR MAS.ANSE i-hab-bat (line 18)
If there are two Paths and they are crossed like (the grapheme) PAB/KUR, the enemy will steal cattle from the land on the pasture.
bring to mind the Mesopotamian clay models of livers and other organs, which were often inscribed, usually with omens; see Meyer 1987; Wiseman and Black 1996: no. 60. To my knowledge, cuneiform signs observed on the exta are never referred to in the texts on these objects, but the very existence of inscribed liver models and models of other parts of the exta may have contributed to the diviners’ interest in grapheme-related omens.
The mentioning of an enemy — KUR = nakru — in the apodosis is probably based on the reference to the respective sign in the protasis. For the association of PAB with lines crossing each other, see also nos. 29, 30, 43, 54, and 55. The omen following in line 19 is similar; it reads: BAD GIR 2-ma GIM BAR-tu> it-gu-ru GAL-^glsGAG EN-su i-bar “If there are two Paths and they are crossed like a Cross (pillurtu), the rab- sikkati-official will revolt against his lord.” The choice, in the apodosis of this entry, of the predicate i-bar is clearly inspired by the cross-shaped logogram BAR, used to write pillurtu; but the entry does not directly refer to a grapheme.
Koch-Westenholz 2000: no. 88 includes a grapheme-related omen referring to the Path to the left of the Gall Bladder (padan sumel marti), a groove on the lobus dexter of the liver (iv 8-9):
43) BAD MAN-u MU.NI GIR 2, 30 ZE 2-ma GIM PAB/KUR GIB.MES / NUN re-su-su TAG₄.MES-su
If, second, there are two Paths to the left of the Gall Bladder and they lie crosswise like (the grapheme) PAB/KUR, the auxiliaries of the prince will abandon him.
No obvious etymographical link between protasis and apodosis (but see the remarks on no. 21). The prediction is negative.
Several references to graphemes are included in Clay 1923: no. 13, a treatise on the coils of the convolutions of the sacrificial animal’s colon (tiranu):
44) BAD SA.NIGIN GIM PAB/KUR KI.TUS-ka a-na KI.TUS KUR-ka SI.SA (line 28) If the coils of the colon are like (the grapheme) PAB/KUR, your camp will charge the camp of your enemy.
Compare nos. 10 and 12, with the same etymographical link between protasis and apodosis. The prediction is positive.
45) BAD SA.NIGIN GIM AN ERIM-ni NUN GABA.RI NU TUKU-si (line 29)
If the coils of the colon are like (the grapheme) AN, the army of the prince will have no rival.
No etymographical link between protasis and apodosis. The prediction is positive.
46) BAD SA.NIGIN GIM HAL UMUS KUR MAN-ni (line 30)
If the coils of the colon are like (the grapheme) HAL, the political situation of the land will change.
Compare no. 11, which, after a reference to HAL, offers the same apodosis. The prediction is negative.
K. 85 (Koch 2005: no. 75), a small tablet from Nineveh, deals with the occurrence of eight graphemes, all of them inauspicious, in the center of the right side of the Gall Bladder. The first entry reads:
47) BAD ina MURUB₄ 15 ZE AN^! GAR NU SILIM-at / ina NU SILIM-ti SILIM-at (obv.
1-2)
ECKART FRAHM
If there is (the grapheme) AN in the center of the right side of the Gall Bladder,^[65] it is unfavorable, in an unfavorable (extispicy), it is favorable.
Koch interprets the grapheme referred to in the entry as a QA, but the sign on the tablet most probably represents the ancient form of AN, as already recognized by Lieberman (1977: 148). Otherwise, with the exception of the sign HAL in line 3 (see below), the tablet is written in the Neo-Assyrian ductus.
The following six entries in K. 85, written in an abbreviated way, are identical with the first one, but mention different graphemes. Their contents can be summarized as follows:
48-53) BAD ina MIN HAL^! (obv. 3) / PAB (obv. 4) / KASKAL (obv. 5) / N1 (obv. 6)
/ U (obv. 7) / EN IN (obv. 8) GAR MIN (obv. 3-8)
If ditto, (and) there is (the grapheme) HAL / PAB / KASKAL / N1 / U / EN (or)
IN, ditto (applies).
Koch interprets the grapheme referred to in obv. 3 as KUD, but the sign on the tablet represents almost certainly the ancient form of HAL. Note that the two signs mentioned in obv. 8, EN and IN, are listed together not because they look similar or have the same meaning, but apparently because of their almost identical phonetic values. The lines following the quoted passage refer to occurrences of a piece of flesh (siru) (obv. 9), a “cuneiform sign” (mihiltu)^[66] (rev. 1), and a white Gall Bladder (rev. 3); two entries (rev. 2, 4) remain unclear. All these configurations are regarded as inauspicious.
Two further references to the sign PAB, one of which is related to the Throne Base (nidi kusse, perhaps the liver’s impressio renalis), while the other occurs in connection with Feet (sepu, apparently a groove in the form of a throw-stick), can be found on a tablet from Susa and another from Assur. Both tablets are written in Middle Babylonian script:
54) DIS SUB.BA GU.ZA 2-ma GIM PAB/KUR su-te-gu-ru ARAD.MES 3, 20 as-ma-: mi-is GAZ-ku (Labat 1974: no. 4, obv. 9)
If there are two Throne Bases, and they are crossed like (the grapheme) PAB/ KUR, the servants of the king will kill one another.
No etymographical link between protasis and apodosis (what matters, instead, is the symbolically charged configuration of the two Throne Bases). The prediction is negative.
55) BAD i-na GUB ZE 2 GIR.MES GIM PAB/KUR it-gu-ra ana IGI KUR E-ma he-pi ka 1x1 [...] (KAR 454, obv. 30)
If there are two Feet to the left of the Gall Bladder and they lie crosswise like (the grapheme) PAB/KUR, you will go forth towards the enemy, broken...
[.].
The grapheme KUR in the protasis mirrors the reference to the enemy (KUR = nakru) in the apodosis. The prediction is probably positive, but this is not completely certain.
sign” seems more appropriate. A mihiltu is also referred to, in broken context, in line 72 of tablet 1 of Multabiltu (Koch 2005: no. 2).
Several conclusions can be drawn from this sample of grapheme-related extispicy omens. One is that the number of different signs mentioned in the texts is fairly small, with a few dominating the corpus. In the sequence of their frequency, the graphemes are:⁵² PAB (twelve times),⁵³ BAD (eight times),⁵⁴ HAL (seven times),⁵⁵ AN (six times),⁵⁶ KASKAL (three times),⁵⁷ U (three times),^{58 *} and BAR, EN, GAM, GI, HA, IN, KUR, N1, and TAR (each one time).⁵⁹ Example nos. 47 and 48, from a tablet otherwise inscribed in the Neo-Assyrian ductus, render the signs AN and HAL in their “Old Babylonian” forms, and it cannot be excluded that other signs mentioned in the post-Old Babylonian texts, even though they are written in their later forms, referred the diviners to configurations on the exta that they thought resembled the older sign forms as well.⁶⁰ PAB, BAD, HAL (in its old form), AN, KASKAL, and BAR are all very simple signs consisting of a few wedges crossing each other,⁶¹ and it is most probably the resemblance of these signs to certain lesions or cysts on the exta that explains why they are so frequently invoked. Like the pillurtu, or Cross, a symbol associated with concepts such as mutiny, murder, and chaos,⁶² the signs in question were usually regarded as inauspicious, the only clear exceptions being examples nos. 5(??), 6, 8, 10, 15, 17, 24, 26, 34, 44, and 45, which have positive predictions.
Of particular interest for our investigation is the question to what extent the apodoses of the omens seem to be “etymographically” derived from the signs mentioned in the protases. Overall, obvious links of this type can be found in only a few omen entries. Examples nos. 3(?), 6 (= 13?), 7, 25 (two apodoses motivated etymographically), and 26 are based on rather sophisticated philological associations, whereas examples nos. 10 (= 12, 44), 42, and 55 are less creative. In these latter cases, the link between the observations and the predictions depends on a reading of the PAB sign as nakru “enemy,” a word that occurs in the apodoses. This reading may also have informed several entries whose apodoses do not include the term nakru but refer to situations in which enemies play a role, and some apodoses in omens referring to the observation of a BAD and a HAL sign might have been based on such rather loose associations as well; but this is far from certain.⁶³
In the case of the references to the grapheme PAB, there seems to be a tendency for positive predictions (nos. 6, 10, 44, and perhaps 55) to be more often informed by etymography than negative ones. Since the sign was, apparently, inauspicious in general, it seems that positive interpretations of it had to be based on some additional hermeneutical effort. Given its cross-like shape, one would have expected the sign AN to be normally inauspicious as
well (which it is in examples nos. 32 and 47), but strikingly, most omens mentioning it have a positive prediction (see nos. 15, 17, 26, and 45). This may be due to the sign’s Akkadian readings ilu “god,” elu “upper,” and samu “heaven,” all imbued with positive connotations, even though these words do not occur in the apodoses in question. In a few cases, we find references to cuneiform signs observed in different contexts followed by the same apodosis (see nos. 10, 12, and 44; and 11 and 46). Here, an interpretative tradition seems to have developed around the signs at some point.
A few extispicy commentaries from the first millennium B.C.^[67] show us how Babylonian and Assyrian diviners interpreted omen entries referring to cuneiform signs. Interestingly, only one commentary entry, example no. 26, establishes a link between a grapheme-related protasis and an apodosis. All the others (nos. 27, 29, 30, 36, 37, 40) have a different purpose. Often drawing on Akkadian readings of the sign in question, they try to elucidate the exact nature of the ominous configuration associated with it.^[68] While at first glance surprising, this hermeneutical approach is, in fact, quite in line with the main goal of extispicy commentaries in general: to illuminate the exact meaning of the various protases, and to adduce differently phrased but equivalent omens. Since the wording of the apodosis did not really matter in extispicy — of interest was only whether it was positive or negative — the commentators of the barutu corpus usually abstained from a careful analysis of the predictions.
Cuneiform characters are featured in yet another extispicy treatise. The Late Babylonian “orientation tablet” BM 32268+, published in Koch 2005: no. 107 (ms. A), associates various graphemes, in iii 24'-28' (a partly broken passage), “first with a feature of the Liver in the order of inspection, secondly with another part of the intestines in what could be reverse order, and finally with yet another feature of the Liver” (Koch 2005: 71). KU is linked to the Presence, the Coils of the Colon, and the Path to the right of the Gall Bladder, TE to the Path, the Door Beam, and the right Seat, BAR to the Pleasing Word and the left Seat, GU to the Strength, the Rib Cage, and the Back [of one side of the lungs?], and A to the Palace Gate, the Breast Bone, and the Weapon. The rationale behind these associations remains obscure.}

<< | >>

↑

Source: Annus Amar (ed.). Divination and Interpretation of Signs in the Ancient World. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press,2010. — viii, 352 p.. 2010

EXTISPICY

More on the topic EXTISPICY: