Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T07:50:53.228Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An Addition to the Prayer of Muršili to the Sungoddess and its implications

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 December 2013

Hans G. Güterbock
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

It is now forty years since Oliver Gurney published his dissertation entilted “Hittite Prayers of Mursili II”. His careful analysis of the texts as well as his translation have stood the test of time admirably. While writing, Gurney learned about the prayers to the Sungod which had been found in the 1930s, but their publication came too late for inclusion in his work. Since then much has been written about these recent finds and their relation to the texts of Muršili. On this happy occasion I want to offer to my friend a hitherto unpublished fragment which forms part of the prayer to the Sungoddess of Arinna (KUB 24.3), completing the beginning of column ii. It was H. Otten who recognized it as belonging to that tablet; he must have communicated this fact to E. Laroche, who included it as 544/u under nr. 376, A, in the second edition (1971) of his Catalogue des textes hittites (CTH).

Type
Research Article
Information
Anatolian Studies , Volume 30 , December 1980 , pp. 41 - 50
Copyright
Copyright © The British Institute at Ankara 1980

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Gurney, O. R., “Hittite Prayers of Mursili II,” Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology 27 (Liverpool, 1940Google Scholar).

2 See Gurney, op. cit. pp. 10 and 83.

3 E.g., ten Cate, Ph. H. J. Houwink, Numen 16 (1969) 88CrossRefGoogle Scholar; idem, The Records of the Early Hittite Empire (1970), 33–35.

4 Translations only were given by the present author in Neues Handbuch der Literaturwissenschaft, Vol. I: Altorientalische Literaturen, ed. by Röllig, W. (Wiesbaden, Athenaion, 1978) (abbr. HbLit.), p. 230Google Scholar; The Frontiers of Human Knowledge: Lectures held at the Quincentenary Celebration of Uppsala University 1977 (1978) (abbr. Frontiers), p. 136 with n. 26Google Scholar.

5 JAOS 78 (1958) 244Google Scholar; HbLit. 230 with n. 51; Frontiers 135.

6 Comparison of the older prayers among themselves, without that of Muršili, is the subject of an article by Marazzi, M. and Nowicki, H. (Würzburg), “Vorarbeiten zu den hethitischen Gebeten (CTH 372, 373, 374),” Oriens Antiquus 17 (1978), 257–278Google Scholar.

7 I keep this siglum so as to avoid confusion. For my reason for keeping this fragment under 372 see presently. Laroche's copies C and E are here assigned to 374; his F and G are duplicates to A col. iv and thus not needed here.

8 See JAOS 78, 242, n. 27Google Scholar. This attribution was not noted by the authors of OrAnt. 17, 263Google Scholar.

9 They differ from tablet to tablet; see the rendering in JAOS 78, 239–241Google Scholar.

10 Gurney, , AAA 27, 20Google Scholar: “Hymn of Praise” (a) To Telipinu, (KUB 24.1) ii 20–22, and p. 22: (b) To Sun-goddess of Arinna, (KUB 24.3) i, 29–34; also translated by Goetze, , Kleinasien, 2d. ed. (1957) 136Google Scholar; Güterbook, , Frontiers 135Google Scholar.

11 KUB 31.129.

12 KUB 31.130 obverse.

13 372, D = KUB 31.133 begins.

14 KUB 36.75 col. i + Bo 4696, Otten, H.—Rüster, C. ZA 62 (1972), 231 fGoogle Scholar.

15 Duplicate C = KUB 31.134 begins.

16 KUB 31.135 + 30.11, obverse.

17 KUB 30.11 obv. 1′ in traces, continued by KUB 31.135 obv. 8′.

18 This is line 1′ of KUB 24.3 col. ii. Walther's estimate of ca. 10 lines is reduced to 7, so that 1′ = 8.

19 For the better preserved parts (i 52–61 and 65–68) see JAOS 78, 241Google Scholar and HbLit. 227, (8)–(10); for the transitional paragraph see JAOS 78, 242Google Scholar and JNES 33 (1974) 324Google Scholar.

20 JNES 33, 323–327Google Scholar.

21 KUB 36.75 + 1226/u ii 1′–6′ (ZA 67,56) with duplicate KBo 22.75 + 221/w 1′–6′ (ZA 64, 241).

22 Ibid. 7′–12′, edited JNES 33, 323 f.Google Scholar, with parallel KUB 30.11 rev. 2′–5′; cf. HbLit. 229.

23 CTH 373 = KUB 30.10 rev. 10, cf. JNES 33, 326Google Scholar; in CTH 372 the small fragment KUB 31.132 corresponds; cf. OrAnt. 17, sketch on p. 261, col. iii 13* f.

24 Some of these were briefly mentioned in Frontiers, p. 138. The most obvious innovation is the introduction of the particle -za in nominal sentences that have the pronoun of the second person as subject, for which see Hoffner, H. A., JNES 28 (1969), 225–230Google Scholar.