An Old Babylonian Version of the Gilgamesh Epic/Corrections to the Text of Langdon's Edition of the Pennsylvania Tablet

APPENDIX.

Corrections to the Text of Langdon's Edition of the Pennsylvania Tablet^[1]

Column 1.

5.	Read it-lu-tim (“heroes”) instead of id-da-tim (“omens”).
6.	Read ka-ka-bu instead of ka-ka-’a. This disposes of Langdon’s note 2 on p. 211.
9.	Read ú-ni-iš-šú-ma, “I became weak” (from enêšu, “weak”) instead of ilam iš-šú-ma, “He bore a net”(!). This disposes of Langdon’s note 5 on page 211.
10.	Read Urukki instead of ad-ki. Langdon’s note 7 is wrong.
12.	Langdon’s note 8 is wrong. ú-um-mid-ma pu-ti does not mean “he attained my front.”
14.	Read ab-ba-la-áš-šú instead of at-ba-la-áš-šú.
15.	Read mu-di-a-at instead of mu-u-da-a-at.
20.	Read ta-ḫa-du instead of an impossible [sa]-ah-ḫa-ta—two mistakes in one word. Supply kima Sal before taḫadu.
22.	Read áš-šú instead of šú; and at the end of the line read [tu-ut]-tu-ú-ma instead of šú-ú-zu.
23.	Read ta-tar-ra-[as-su].
24.	Read [uš]-ti-nim-ma instead of [iš]-ti-lam-ma.
28.	Read at the beginning šá instead of ina.
29.	Langdon’s text and transliteration of the first word do not tally. Read ḫa-aṣ-ṣi-nu, just as in line 31.
32.	Read aḫ-ta-du (“I rejoiced”) instead of aḫ-ta-ta.

Column 2.

4.	Read at the end of the line di-da-šá(?) ip-tí-[e] instead of Di-?-al-lu-un (!).
5.	Supply dEn-ki-dū at the beginning. Traces point to this reading.
19.	Read [gi]-it-ma-[lu] after dGiš, as suggested by the Assyrian version, Tablet I, 4, 38, where emûḳu (“strength”) replaces nepištu of our text.
20.	Read at-[ta kima Sal ta-ḫa]-bu-[ub]-šú.
21.	Read ta-[ra-am-šú ki-ma].
23.	Read as one word ma-a-ag-ri-i-im (“accursed”), spelled in characteristic Hammurabi fashion, instead of dividing into two words ma-a-ak and ri-i-im, as Langdon does, who suggests as a translation “unto the place yonder(?) of the shepherd”(!).
24.	Read im-ta-ḫar instead of im-ta-gar.
32.	Supply ili(?) after ki-ma.
33.	Read šá-ri-i-im as one word.
35.	Read i-na [áš]-ri-šú [im]-ḫu-ru.
36.	Traces at beginning point to either ù or ki (= itti). Restoration of lines 36–39 (perhaps to be distributed into five lines) on the basis of the Assyrian version, Tablet I, 4, 2–5.

Column 3.

14.	Read Kàš (= šikaram, “wine”) ši-ti, “drink,” as in line 17, instead of bi-iš-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 [lùŠú]-I.
29.	Read ú-gi-ir-ri from garû (“attack), instead of separating into ú 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 Síbmeš, “shepherds,” instead of šab-[ši]-eš!
31.	šib-ba-ri is not “mountain goat,” nor can ut-tap-pi-iš 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 giš 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 šú.
10.	Separate e-eš (“why”) from the following. Read ta-ḫi-[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-aḫ-[ti]-ka instead of a-la-ku-zu(!) na-aḫ ... 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 âli (?) instead of ug-ad-ad-lil, which gives no possible sense!

Column 5.

2.	Read [wa]-ar-ki-šú.
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 = ṣalmu, “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 [šá-ki-i pu]-uk-ku-ul, on the basis of the Assyrian version, Tablet IV, 2, 45, šá-ki-i pu-[uk-ku-ul].
12	Traces at end of line suggest i-pa(?)-ka-du.
13	Read i-[na mâti da-an e-mu]-ki i-wa.
18	Read ur-šá-nu instead of ip-šá-nu.
19	Read i-šá-ru instead of i-tu-ru.
24	The reading it-ti after dGiš is suggested by the traces.
25	Read in-ni-[ib-bi-it] at the end of the line.
28	Read ip-ta-ra-[aṣ a-la]-ak-tam at the end of the line, as in the Assyrian version, Tablet IV, 2, 37.
30	The conjectural restoration is based on the Assyrian version, Tablet IV, 2, 36.

Column 6.

3.	Read i-na ṣi-ri-[šú].
5.	Supply [il-li-ik].
21	Langdon’s text has a superfluous ga.
22	Read uz-za-šú, “his anger,” instead of uṣ-ṣa-šú, “his javelin” (!).
23	Read i-ni-iḫ i-ra-as-su, i.e., “his breast was quieted,” in the sense of “his anger was appeased.”
31	Read ri-eš-ka instead of ri-eš-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 space indications of what is missing within a line are inaccurate. Dr. Langdon also omitted to copy the statement on the edge: 4 šú-ši, i.e., “240 lines;” and in the colophon he mistranslates šú-tu-ur, “written,” as though from šaṭâru, “write,” whereas the form is the permansive III, 1, of atâru, “to be in excess of.” The sign tu never has the value ṭu! 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.

---

1. The enumeration here is according to Langdon’s edition.