CTN 4, 182[via caspo]

1The copy, CTN 4 182, seems to suggest [B]I at the head of the line. The photograph suggests BU is better. The LI is not represented on the copy at all.

2The copy in CTN 4 182 is not entirely accurate here.

3I suspect the partial sign on the copy before NAM to be an erasure.

4The partial sign at the beginning of the line does not seem congruent with a DI, so [a]-di is an unlikely reading at the head of the line (compare Zgoll 2003: 45). The transliteration at eBL's Fragmentarium/Library (Heinrich) suggests reading the first visible sign as IM, thus [adi] im[ma]ti. If so, then adi must have been written in a very small hand or with EN, since there is likely only room for one sign in the break. There is room for the MA but the photograph shows no sign of it, even though the surface is legible enough to expect at least something of a hint of the sign.

5There may be a MA at the end of the line, in the break, as in a duplicate (see Zgoll 2003: 45). I am not sure there is room for it.

6The verb's derivation and meaning is uncertain. See Zgoll 2003: 64, who renders it "they rage," taking it from šamāru I (see AHw, 1154 and CDA, 353) instead of šamāru II, which means "to praise" or, in some contexts(?), "to gloat." CAD Š/1, 298 posits a third root from šamāru (C), whose meaning they give as uncertain, though they gloss some attestations with "gloat."

7Restore [a-di im]-ma#-ti at the head of the line? See note to line 8' above.