Ashurbanipal 180

1x x ⸢baq⸣-qé “... (like) gnats”: In his note to this epigraph, R. Borger (BIWA p. 317) suggested a possible reading for the first two broken signs as ⸢AN.TA⸣, which would be consistent with the traces on the tablet. Alternatively, possibly take the signs together as x x-⸢ḪU⸣-KI.

2The scribe wrote the šá at the beginning of the line almost directly underneath the first two signs of the previous line, with only a little space between the top of the former and the bottoms of the latter. But apparently, the scribe then decided that this line need not be written so closely to the previous one, and thus wrote out the rest of the line lower on the tablet than the šá sign, making that sign raised compared to the other signs of the line.

3For this epigraph, see the on-page note to text no. 175 i 8´–14´.

4[ŠEŠ.MEŠ-šú^?] “[his brothers]”: There is a question as to whether or not there is sufficient room to restore ŠEŠ.MEŠ-šú at the beginning of the line. The signs of the line are spread out over a larger amount of space than the signs of other lines, and the signs of ŠEŠ.MEŠ-šú would need to be written more closely together for them to fit. For this reason, R. Borger (BIWA p. 310) restored [a-di^?] “together with” in the break, although it would be unusual for a-di to appear here instead of ŠEŠ.MEŠ-šú. It is possible that the scribe used the smaller sign PAP for “brother,” but this would not be the usual orthography. Given that the elements ŠEŠ.MEŠ-šú “his brothers,” qin-ni-šú “his family,” and NUMUN É AD-šú “the seed of his father’s house” always appear together in this context in Ashurbanipal’s inscriptions, and that in the previous line it-ti ^mtam-ma-ri-tú “with Tammarītu” is written closely together while the rest of the signs of that line are fairly spread out, ŠEŠ.MEŠ-šú is tentatively restored in the break.