EA 290. Jerusalem [client letter][via aemw/amarna]

1Moran (1975b: 152, followed by Tropper 1998: 667 n. 13), takes the gloss as marking a "minor pause" before the relative ša.

2For other possible interpretations of the first word in the line, see Moran's (1992: 334 n. 2) note to the text, citing previous literature. The interpretation of the form as a WS passive of mahāru in CAD M/1 s.v. mahāru mng. 8b overlooks the larger context of the passage.

3For this use of a qatal form in the apodosis, see Baranowski (2016b: 174). LU₂.MEŠ is a determinative with ha-bi-ri, which is written on the following line, but the atf checker witll not allow this.

4The Glossenkeil serves to mark that habiru has run over from l. 23 and belongs with LU₂.MEŠ (Moran 1975b: 152).

5The function of the Glossenkeil is difficult. Moran (1992: 334) reads the wedges as KUR, and it is not discussed in Tropper (1998: 667 n. 13).

6Belmonte Marín (2001b: 82) lists this attestation of the toponym s.v. Gintu/Gintu-Kirmil (see EA 289: 19 for another abbreviated writing), presumably because of the spelling with gin₈. But the association of the toponym with Šuwardata makes it more likely that this is the same toponym mentioned earlier in this same letter that is spelled gi-im-ti and also associated with Šuwardata. Rainey's (2015: 1124, 1597) restoration of the signs [u₃ L]U₂!, "[and (?) the ru]ler(!) of Gath," at the beginning of the line is unlikely because Šuwardata himself is generally accepted to be Gath's ruler; see Naʾaman (1979: 683f.) Cf. Rainey's (1995: 489) translation ("[wi]th? the city of Gath").