¹ Cf. now W. R. Sladek's very useful dissertation based almost entirely on my earlier researches and publications. Note, too, that UET VI No. 11 is a variant version of the second half of the myth that seems to end in medias res, and was probably continued on another tablet.

² Cf. now B. Alster's important monograph, Dumuzi's Dream, based largely on contributions by Falkenstein, Jacobsen, Van Dijk, and Kramer.

³ The text is still untranslated in large part; for partial translations cf. Kramer, , The Sacred Marriage Rite, pp. 127–130Google Scholar; Jacobsen, , Treasures of Darkness, pp. 49–52Google Scholar; Alster, , Dumuzi's Dream, p. 116Google Scholar. Note especially that the crucial concluding passage of the composition has been misunderstood to some extent in both The Sacred Marriage Rite and Treasures of Darkness (cf. my forthcoming study in the Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society).

⁴ Though the text is well preserved and almost complete, its translation and interpretation are difficult and problematic, and the present study is a pioneering effort to be corrected and amended by scholars with deeper linguistic and philological insights.

⁵ “Tammuz Reconsidered; Some Recent Developments” (Journal of Semitic Studies 7: 147–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar).

⁶ The fact that the poet envisaged Geštinanna as weeping for Dumuzi in localities named after Lugalbanda and Ninsun, localities which may have existed only in his imagination, indicates that the myth was composed during the Third Dynasty of Ur, when these two deities were deemed to be the parents of the king who was Dumuzi incarnate.

⁷ That is, šà-nam-tar-ra-ka which may of course also be rendered “in the midst of the fate decreeing”. In any case, it is to be noted that the “fate decreeing” motif appears rather abruptly and unexpectedly. It may be of course that Dumuzi's fate is adumbrated and foreshadowed in the address to Dumuzi that constitutes the first section of the composition, but it is also possible that our text is part of a Dumuzi myth of some length inscribed on more than one tablet.

⁸ The significance of this statement, assuming the rendering is correct, is not clear; on the surface it seems to imply that Dumuzi was a god who for some unstated reason had decided to mingle with mortal men. In “Dumuzi's Dream” on the other hand, Dumuzi claims that he is the husband of a goddess (line 206), and the implication is that he was a mortal who became a god as a result of his marriage to Inanna.

⁹ Lines 40–43 certainly seem to say that Dumuzi had some foresight and foretaste of his death and burial, but there is nothing in the text to indicate how this came about.

¹⁰ The appearance of the galla on the scene is rather abrupt and unanticipated; there is nothing in the preceding passage to prepare us for their advent, and this again may indicate that our text consists of the conclusion of a myth inscribed on more than one tablet (cf. note 7).

¹¹ Actually it is not the Nether World as a whole that seems to be depicted, but only the èš-lam of Ereškigal. The meaning of èš-lam is quite uncertain, perhaps it means “the lam-shrine,” lam being a rare word for “Nether World” (cf. CAD sub lammu, and note that the lam of ^dmes-lam-ta-è-a may also refer to the Nether World).

¹² Cf. e-zé (for udu) in line 73, me-ri (for gìr) in lines 74 and 86, and mu-tin (for geštin) in line 76 but note the Emegir lú-sipad in line 75 (and perhaps sipad in line 72).

¹³ Unfortunately as the commentary to this section notes, much of it is incomprehensible and the summary sketch of its contents here presented is far from assured.

¹⁴ The literal rendering of gu-bad-DU may of course be “the separating thread” or “the distant thread,” but neither meaning helps to clarify the witchcraft involved.

¹⁵ In the transliteration, three dots stand for two missing signs, four dots for three or more missing signs.

¹⁶ The sign is glossed ú-bu-ra.

¹⁷ The sign DU (read gen) is glossed by the sign MI.

¹⁸ The sign DU (read gub) is glossed by the sign GU.

¹⁹ Between and under lah ₄ and ur ₅ is an illegible gloss (perhaps la-aḫ-?).

²⁰ Preceding suḫ is an illegible sign.

²¹ In the translation, two dots stand for one missing word, three dots for two missing words, four dots for three or more missing words.

²² Cf. also line 103 of a-ab-ba ḫu-luḫ-ḫa (YNER p. 95) where the locative -a is governed by túg-dul. On the other hand, in line 205 of “Temple Hymns” where Inanna is said to cover the head of males with a cloth, the verbal form is sag-túg-dul-lu.

²³ Similarly in the a-ab-ba ḫu-luḫ-ḫa line cited in the preceding note, Enlil covers his head that he might not witness the suffering of his people.

²⁴ For other examples of líl-e-sìg cf. umuš-bi in-suḫ-àm líl-e bí-in-sìg-àm, “Its (Nippur's) reason has become confused, it has been demolished” (line 105 of the “Lamentation Over the Destruction of Nippur”); tùr-nun-e-ba-dù-a-bi líl-lu-gim íb-sìg, “The stall built by the prince has been demolished” (literally, “has been smitten like by the wind”), ibid, lines 1–2; zaraḫ-e á mu-ni-tal-tal-la líl-šè (variant líl-e) im-mi-in-sìg, “The wailing that had engulfed him, he (the man's personal god) demolished” (line 127 of Jacob Klein's manuscript of “Man and His God”).

²⁵ Dumuzi's nin-bàn-da is also mentioned in “Dumuzi's Dream” (line 14); for additional examples cf. Alster's comment to the line.

²⁶ For further details cf. note 4 of my article “Inanna and the numun-plant,” in the forthcoming Cyrus Gordon Festschrift; for the possible meaning of numún-búr, cf. CAD sub elpetu.

²⁷ Note, however, that one might have expected gìr-mu rather than gìr-mà if the translation is correct.

²⁸ In this line and the line following, Dumuzi seems to have envisioned vicious winds and storms accompanying his death; for similar motifs in connection with Dumuzi's death, cf. lines 12 ff. of the ’Dumuzi and the galla” passage cited in the forthcoming study mentioned in note 3 (cf. also the Flood motif involving Inanna and Dumuzi in lines 35 ff. of “Inanna and the numun-plant,” the composition mentioned in note 25).

²⁹ For bal-ri, cf. CAD sub ebertan and ebertu(A), and the rather obscure bal-a-ri of the Samsuiluna text published by Gertrud Farber-Flügge in the Kramer, Festschrift p. 177 ffGoogle Scholar.

³⁰ Note that du ₈ is also omitted in several of the variants cited in “Dumuzi's Dream” to lines 156, 182, and 218.

³¹ Note that a-nigín can be read a-nimin and is probably therefore but a variant form of enmen, immen “thirst,” (cf. CAD sub ṣumu). Note further that in SK 25 viii (cf. Krecher, , SK Ly p. 216Google Scholar) lines 45–46, nigín (without the preceding a) is to be rendered “thirst,” since it is juxtaposed to u ₄-šú “hunger” (this was first suggested by Mark Cohen in his forthcoming monograph on the iršemma, in his comment to lines 22–23 of the Nergal iršemma, CT 15 plate 14). Moreover a comparison of SK 25 viii 46 with its duplicate CT 15 plate 7 line 24, shows that the word for “thirst” can also appear in the form anaman (written a-nag-an) since it is juxtaposed to ú-kú, a variant of u ₄-šú; the rendering of CT 15 plate 7 lines 23–24 is therefore: “I (Inanna) am one whose fledglings of the nest are hungry, I am one whose young of the stall are thirsty.” For additional proof that a-nigín means “thirst,” “water deprivation,” cf. BE XXX No. 2 lines 30–31 that read:

ù-šub-ba-za ù-zi-ga-za sìr-re-eš na-ri-bé

guruš a-nigín-na-za šul(?) a-tar-ra-za sìr-re-eš na-ri-bé

Of your food that has been abandoned, of your food that has been carried off, she (your mother) will utter a chant for you,

Lad, of your water that has been with-held; young man, of your water that has been cut off, she will utter a chant for you.

Finally it is to be noted that the a-nigìn of line 71 of the Ninkasi hymn (Civil, , Oppenheim Festschrift p. 61 ff.Google Scholar) is also probably best rendered as “thirst,” though the context is not too clear.

³² Cf. Dumuzi's Dream p. 112–113.

³³ Note, however, that there is no dúr immediately preceding ba-gar-ra-àm in our text, and that the grammatical structure of maḫ-a-dúr-a is rather uncertain.

³⁴ The -bi following ki-gar-ra- is rather difficult, the rendering assumes that it refers to kur, that is, the substitute has been given over to the kur as its possession; it is not impossible, however, that the -bi is an error for -ni.

³⁵ The rendering of lines 51–52 is rather uncertain because of the ambiguity of the complex KI.BI.GAR.NA which may be read gisbun (or šubun)-na, although this hardly fits the context; the matter is complicated, however, by the fact that in the phonetically written passage SK 44 rev. 2–7, following the statements “Inanna was not alive” and “the spouse of holy Inanna was not alive,” there follows a word ni-eš-bu-na which is probably a phonetic writing for gišbun.

³⁶ Cf. especially Heimpel, , Tierbilder p. 224 ffGoogle Scholar.

³⁷ Cf. SEM 20 obv. 6 ff. and “Gilgameš and the Land of the Living” (B) line 31 ff. Note that the restoration of the initial complexes of lines 61–62 is a surmise only, and that the nuance intended by the ḫé- in imin ḫé-na-me-eš (lines 60–61) and in what seems to be no more than a variant writing imin-na ḫé-en-na-me-eš (line 62), is uncertain.

³⁸ Especially troublesome are the -ag complexes of lines 63–64; the seeming lack of a verb in line 65 and the uncertainty of this line's connection with what precedes and follows; the meaning of gu-bad-DU in lines 67, 69, 73; the identity of the individual to whom the -na- of the verbs in lines 67 and 69 refers (presumably it is Dumuzi); the meaning of dúr in line 71; the uncertainty of the reading and rendering of virtually all the complexes in line 72; the meaning of bala in line 74.

³⁹ Or perhaps ^gišmes is followed by a relative clause just as ^gišasal in the following line.

⁴⁰ In line 86 the missing subject element after ur may be due to the fact that ur is the subject of the intransitive be-e-ná as well as of the syntactically less important transitive mu-un-da-ab-kú.