29

WITCHCRAFT AND WAR:

THE RITUAL FRAGMENT Ki 1904-10-9, 18 (BM 98989)
By DANIEL SCHWEMER

War, and i m m i n e n t battle i n particular, p u t any B a b y l o n i a n o r A s s y r i a n k i n g , whose r ü l e and

security very m u c h depended o n successful campaigns, i n a precarious Situation. W h i l e careful
m i l i t a r y p l a n n i n g certainly helped to defeat one's enemies, v i c t o r y i n the end was determined by
the gods. Before entering battle, oracles were consulted to make certain that the king's decisions
h a d the gods' f a v o u r , a n d a number o f other rituals c o u l d be performed to ensure that the gods
1

supported the king's cause. These rituals — dubbed " w a r rituals" by m o d e r n scholarship — are
not very well k n o w n , and the texts a t t r i b u t e d to this g r o u p are a rather m i x e d set o f r o y a l rituals
related to the king's campaign and to p o t e n t i a l aggression by enemies. T h e y include t r a d i t i o n a l
2

B a b y l o n i a n rituals to be performed before setting o f f o n a m i l i t a r y campaign or i m m e d i a t e l y

before a major battle, as well as specifically Assyrian rituals for the same purpose. I t is not 3

suprising that t w o o f these texts include the Performance o f d i v i n a t i o n r i t u a l s , while others focus
4

on the b i n d i n g o f substitute figurines representing the enemies a n d also use figurines representing
the k i n g himself.'"' I n line w i t h the general ideology o f war, the rubrics o f the rituals clearly indicate
that the reason f o r the king's m i l i t a r y action is the enemy's aggression against his land, a n d that
the k i n g himself o n l y acts i n defence o f his o w n land's borders. I t seems that a l l these texts, apart
6

f r o m the A s s y r i a n rituals i n the n a r r o w sense, were assembled i n a "series ' b a t t l e ' " (iskar td/jäzi)
that is m e n t i o n e d i n the famous letter o f an A s s y r i a n k i n g d e m a n d i n g the collection o f various
scholarly texts f r o m the Ezida and scholars' houses i n B o r s i p p a . T h e same text refers t o rituals
7

(or a r i t u a l ) "So that i n Battle A r r o w s do n o t C o m e N e a r a M a n " that are also k n o w n f r o m the

catalogue o f exorcistic texts (KAR 44 / / ) . A p p a r e n t l y they were not t h o u g h t to be p a r t o f the
s

iskar tähäzi; b u t i n the letter the t w o text groups are named together w i t h i n a longer list and they
were certainly closely associated w i t h each other. Special namburbi rituals c o u l d be performed o n
campaign to avert evil indicated by accidents o f the king's chariot, but there is n o reason to
assume that they belonged to the iskar tähäzi t o o . O t h e r namburbi rituals were used t o protect
9

the land's borders w h e n an earthquake had signalled an i m m i n e n t invasion o f the e n e m y . 10

T h e royal war rituals are exclusively directed against the foreign enemy and exhibit m a n y
features that clearly distinguish them f r o m rituals to overcome one's personal adversary. The 11

latter g r o u p o f texts, directed against the bei dabäbi, bei amäti or bei lemutti (occasionally also bei

1 A large proportion of the extispicy queries that were °See Elat 1982: I Iff.,Text I : 1-2 (enuma üb nakri it lu
put before Samas during the reigns of Esarhaddon and nakru ana pal mätika ana lä tehe päs.su lä ene irtasu sakäpi).
Ashurbanipal address military matters (for the texts see SpTU 1. 12 obv. 26', STT 72"obv. 51 /,/ 251 obv. 16' and
SAA 4). This certainly does not refleet a S i t u a t i o n peculiar unpublished 81-2-4, 246 (cf. Elat 1982: 8): [ka.ini]m.ma
to the Sargonid period, but common practice through all nakri(k\iv) päMM(zag.bi) /ö(nu) ene(bal) x [...]. For the
]v e

periods of ancient Mesopotamian history. deposition of apotropaic substances at the land's border
2 For an overview of the relevant texts and an edition of see infra.
the few better-preserved texts see Elat 1982: 5-25. Mayer CT 22, 1: 18; for a recent edition of the text that has
I

1988: 145-64 added another fragmentary war ritual, draw- come down to us on two Late Babylonian exercise tablets
ing attention to the Assyrian war ritual and the relevant see Frame and George 2005: 280-1, with commentary
namburbi texts (p. 145). To these texts STT* 72 ./ 251 must discussing, among other things. the authenticity of the text
be added (see Reiner 1967: 190f. and Prechel 2003: 226 fn. 7 ibid. 281-3.
with further duplicates). C r 22, 1:21; KAR 44 obv. 23 // (recently re-edited by
8

3 Most recent edition: Deller 1992; cf. also SAA 3, 36 Geller 2000: 242-4).
and 37. See Maul 1994: 387-99.
II

4 This is the ease in PBS 12, 106 (cf. ittät samt' u erseti See Mayer 1988: 150-4, Maul 1994: 76-7.
10

addressing Sin and Samas in rev. 15. edition: Ebeling 1949: "See Elat 1982: 11-12; typical characteristics of war
178-83. Elat 1982: 5-7) and in Th 1905-4-9, 89 = BM 98583 rituals that differentiate them from rituals to overcome
(extispicy, edition: Mayer 1988: 146-9), cf. also SpTU 1, one's personal enemy include: king as main ritual client,
12 with a hemerological appendix on when to perform the term nakfijru as designation of the enemy, reference to
the ritual. the lands of the enemy and the king, plural characterisation
5See Elat 1982: 21-4, Text I I (BBR 57). STT 72 obv. of the enemy, references to the king's army, recitation of
31 ff. and SpTU 1, 12 obv. 7 ff., rev. 6ff.; cf. for the latter Sumerian prayers (ersemma, ersahunga).
Prechel 2003: 224-6.

Iraq L X 1 X (2007)
30 DANIEL SCHWEMER

lumni and bei dini), is closely related to a n t i - w i t c h c r a f t rituals. I n anti-witchcraft incantations the
bei dabäbi is the male c o m p l e m e n t o f the w i t c h (kassäptu), whose stereotype is p r i m a r i l y f e m a l e . 12

R i t u a l s against personal adversaries can take the f o r m o f a n t i - w i t c h c r a f t r i t u a l s , incantations

13

against personal enemies can be used w i t h i n anti-witchcraft r i t u a l s , a n d a n t i - w i t c h c r a f t incanta-

14

tions f o r m p a r t o f rituals against the bei dabäbi} The b a c k g r o u n d o f this overlap is obvious
5

enough, as i t certainly seemed reasonable to suspect one's adversaries a n d rivals o f e m p l o y i n g

illegal magical means t o fight their case. T y p i c a l l y , sorceries practised by one's bei dabäbi were
t h o u g h t t o cause p r i m a r i l y social problems, such as falling o u t o f favour w i t h the k i n g a n d nobles,
sufYering a defeat i n a lawsuit, falling v i c t i m t o slander, as well as the resulting depression, anxiety,
a g i t a t i o n and restlessness. W i t h i n this context, i t makes perfect sense t h a t rituals w h i c h c o u l d
16

be used to strengthen oneself against one's adversary, like the egalkura a n d surhunga rituals, were
t h o u g h t o f as being b o r d e r l i n e between legal äsipütu a n d illegal w i t c h c r a f t . 17

Just as the rituals against the bei dabäbi are o n l y directed against an enemy w i t h i n one's o w n
society, w i t c h c r a f t accusations — whether i n incantations o r i n c o u r t — usually target persons
w h o are m o r e or less close t o their v i c t i m . A w e l l - k n o w n element o f the w i t c h ' s stereotype is,
however, her i d e n t i n c a t i o n w i t h the t r a d i t i o n a l enemies o f B a b y l o n i a : she is said to be an E l a m i t e ,
a H a n i g a l b a t e a n , a G u t e a n , a Subarean, a L u l l u b e a n or a S u t e a n ; her v i c t i m is overwhelmed by
18

E l a m i t e a n d Sutean as by a flood, a m o t i f that clearly draws on the t r a u m a t i c experience o f enemy

hordes i n v a d i n g B a b y l o n i a . Nevertheless, proper a n t i - w i t c h c r a f t rituals were, for a l l we k n o w ,
1 9

never used by the k i n g as rituals against foreign enemies, a n d one o f the characteristics o f the
r o y a l war rituals seems to be that they are free o f t y p i c a l witchcraft m o t i f s , while sharing some
basic techniques o f figurine magic also employed i n a n t i - w i t c h c r a f t rituals.
This seemingly clear-cut d i c h o t o m y between w a r rituals o n the one h a n d , and bei dabäbi and
anti-witchcraft rituals o n the other, must, however, be qualified i n the l i g h t o f a new, b u t o n l y
very fragmentarily preserved w a r r i t u a l . K i 1904-10-9, 18 ( B M 98989, see Figs. 1-2) is a fragment
f r o m the lower h a l f o f a one-column tablet w r i t t e n i n an elegant, seventh-century A s s y r i a n l i b r a r y
h a n d . T h o u g h no c o l o p h o n is preserved, we can safely assume t h a t the tablet, f o u n d i n N i n e v e h ,
belonged to A s h u r b a n i p a l ' s l i b r a r y . T h e text was copied by F . W . Geers ( G 3 0 - 3 1 ) a n d sub-
sequently extracts have been cited by the CAD ( R 4 2 6 b ) , b u t i n view o f the fact t h a t n o t a single
line o f the text is completely preserved a füll e d i t i o n was never undertaken. The present a u t h o r
has n o t been able to identify any duplicates t h a t w o u l d p r o v i d e a more complete text, and i t is
therefore n o t w i t h o u t hesitation that an e d i t i o n o f the fragment is offered here. B u t i t seems to
me t h a t the overall content o f the text, w h i c h adds significantly to o u r knowledge o f w a r rituals
a n d their relationship to a n t i - w i t c h c r a f t rituals, justines a füll p u b l i c a t i o n o f the fragmentary text.
The text, w r i t t e n i n g o o d Standard B a b y l o n i a n , 2 0 has a l l the characteristics o f a w a r r i t u a l : The

1 2The female resp. male counterparts of each (belet dabäbi These types of rituals occasionally are included in lists
1 7

resp. kassäpu) are artificial creations of incantation rhetoric, of evil actions performed by the witch: see Lambert 1957-8:
and never occur except alongside the bei dabäbi resp. 290: 13 // SpTU 2, 19 obv. 25-6, Maqlü I 90, IV 14, V 63,
kassäptu, who both are well-attested as independent charac- KAR 35 rev. 27'ff. Cf. the comments by Scurlock
ters. For a füll discussion of the role of the bei dabäbi in 1989-90: 109f.
anti-witchcraft rituals and the relationship between anti- See Maqlü IV 119-23, KAL 2, 15 rev. I I I 42-3 //'
18

witchcraft and anti-enemy rituals see Schwemer, forthcom- KAL 2, 20 obv. 4'-5'.
ing, ch. IV. 1. c). See Maqlü I I I 78-81. The text can now be fully
1 9

1 3Cf. e.g. STT 256, IV R 55/2 (with duplicate

2 reconstructed (after Meier's edition the following new
BM 66627+ [coll.], see Mayer 1990: 14 fn. la, missing in duplicates have become known: CT 51, 188 obv. I I 5'-8';
Zgoll 2003: 287f.), A 2720 + 3022 (Ebeling 1949: 190ff.), STT 82 obv. I I l'-3'; SpTU 3, 74a obv. I I 23-6; UET 7,
KAL 2, 31, KAR 80 (KAL 2, 8), Bu 91-5-9, 143 + 176 obv. 128: 8-9; unpubl. BM 30426 obv. I I l ' - 2 ' [comm. T.
15ff. (Lambert 1957-8: 298), BAM 315 obv. I I 42ff., BAM Abusch]): la-ma-a-ni su-tu-ü e-la-mu-ü re-da-'a -ni, kät-ma-
1

434 rev. V 15ff. // BAM 435 rev. V 16ff. and various texts ni a-gu-ü e-du-ü sah-pan-ni, kassäptu(us .zu)
munus u su-ta-te
in SpTU 2, 22 + 3, 85. da-a-ni si-bit-sa, e-le-ni-tü e-la-ma-ta si-bit-sa mu-ü-tü (only
A case in question is the bilingual incantation Kür-kür
1 4 Orthographie variants between the manuscripts): "The
bil, used in KAL 2, 34 and other anti-witchcraft texts (see Sutean is surrounding me, the Elamite is pursuing me, I am
the duplicates and parallels noted in KAL 2). covered by a flood, I am overwhelmed by a wave! The
V A T 35 (collated and copied by the author), a ritual
15 witch is a Sutean, strong is her grip, the 'Deceitful one' is
against the bei dabäbi (cf. obv. 7, rev. 18), uses an incanta- an Elamite, seizure by her means death."
tion addressing a 2nd sg. fern., i.e. the witch (cf. asbat päki For the form ta'ätunu in obv. 16' and 17' and the
20

etc. in obv. 1-6). spelling si-sik-ta in obv. 14' see the commentary below.
See Abusch 1987: 101-5 fn. 35 and 1985: 91ff.
16
 WITCHCRAFT AND WAR 31

r i t u a l client is the k i n g (rubü, rev. 2 2 ' ) , the r i t u a l is directed against enemies (nakirü, obv. 18', 25',
26', rev. 2 6 ' ) ; its a i m is the p r o t e c t i o n o f the king's l a n d (rev. 9') against the enemies w h o reside
i n a foreign l a n d (rev. 2 6 ' ) . T h e text is subdivided by several rulings, and some text between obv.
and rev., t h o u g h n o t t o o m u c h , is lost; m o r e considerable p o r t i o n s o f the text are missing at the
beginning and p r o b a b l y also at the end. N o n e o f the subdivisions is f o l l o w e d by a r u b r i c , a n d n o t
all the preserved r i t u a l instructions are m a r k e d o f f by rulings f r o m the recitations w h i c h are
w r i t t e n o u t i n füll.
Because o f its fragmentary State the overall structure o f the text remains largely u n k n o w n . T h e
preserved p a r t o f the obverse begins w i t h the very end o f a prayer ( l ' - 2 ' ) , w h i c h is i m m e d i a t e l y
f o l l o w e d by another (?) p r a y e r addressing a g r o u p o f gods, possibly the stars ( 3 ' - 1 8 ' ) . A series
21 2 2

o f short recitations, maybe addressing participants o f the r i t u a l , comes next ( 1 9 - 2 3 ' ) . L i n e 24'
finally has the first short r i t u a l i n s t r u c t i o n , w h i c h is again f o l l o w e d by a prayer m e n t i o n i n g N e r g a l
and Ereskigal. C u r i o u s l y , the first line o f this prayer seems t o have the same text as the last line
o f the prayer i n obv. 3'—18'.
The beginning o f the reverse preserves the end o f a prayer, and this m a y be the end o f the
prayer beginning i n obv. 25'. A short r i t u a l i n s t r u c t i o n follows i n rev. 3'; i t p r o b a b l y o n l y advised
the exorcist t o have the k i n g recite the preceding prayer. The next short i n v o c a t i o n addresses the
deified n i g h t ( 4 ' - 9 ' ) and is f o l l o w e d by a similar short r i t u a l i n s t r u c t i o n ( 1 0 ' ) .
T h e n , after a r u l i n g , the text continues w i t h a longer r i t u a l i n s t r u c t i o n ( 1 1 ' - 2 7 ' ) . L i k e the
preceding prayer, this r i t u a l was p e r f o r m e d d u r i n g the n i g h t : the Standard r i t u a l arrangement i n
the beginning o f this section is set up before the m o o n g o d . W h a t follows is an apotropaic rite
whose basic structure is k n o w n f r o m other w a r rituals. Substances are b r o u g h t i n t o close contact
w i t h the k i n g and then deposited at the border to the enemy's l a n d . A n earthquake namburbi
advises the exorcist to collect hair a n d n a i l clippings o f the k i n g i n a porous b o t t l e a n d take i t to
the border. I n a d d i t i o n t o this rite, a w a r r i t u a l gives the i n s t r u c t i o n to carry o f f a girl to the
b o r d e r after the k i n g has had sex w i t h her. The purpose o f these rituals is t o transfer the evil
threatening the k i n g t o a substitute w h i c h t h e n can be removed t o the border, where i t affects the
source o f the evil itself, namely the enemy t r y i n g t o invade the king's l a n d . Here, neither a b o t t l e
2 3

n o r a g i r l serve as Containers for the evil that has befallen the k i n g ; also substances f r o m the
king's b o d y are n o t used. Instead, a figurine o f an apotropaic d e m o n is fabricated and identified
by name. T h e n a w h i t e p i g is slaughtered and the k i n g spills its b l o o d t o the f o u r c a r d i n a l
directions, certainly an a p o t r o p a i c rite p r o t e c t i n g the l a n d o n a l l sides. Possibly the dagger used
for k i l l i n g the p i g also receives a Special name, since i t shares the fate o f the figurine i n the further
proceedings. B o t h the figurine a n d the dagger are enclosed i n the pig's skin, w h i c h makes a perfect
Container for i m p u r i t y and evil, being pure and w h i t e f r o m outside, while h o l d i n g a l l the contagious
materials inside. The technique o f enclosing c o n t a m i n a t e d substances in a pig's skin is used n o t
o n l y here, b u t also i n a zikurruda r i t u a l . There, the upTsü, the magic substances and messages o f
witchcraft sent by the sorcerers are shut u p i n a pig's skin before their d e p o s i t i o n . Here, the 24

"leather b a g " is carefully sealed w i t h a clay bulla, then the k i n g puts his h a n d on the sealed
package and Orders the evil t o depart. F i n a l l y , the k i n g washes his hands over the bag, thereby
transferring his i m p u r i t y once m o r e to figurine, dagger a n d p i g skin. N o w the package is ready
to be deposited at the b o r d e r o f the enemy's l a n d . There i t protected the k i n g ' s l a n d , and an
i n v a d i n g enemy w h o encountered i t w o u l d inevitably be infected b y the evil that had befallen the
k i n g , namely an i m m i n e n t i n v a s i o n b y an enemy. I f so, the A s s y r i a n k i n g was certainly o n l y t o o
w i l l i n g t o execute the evil fate that his r i t u a l h a d determined f o r every aggressor w h o dared to
cross over whatever had been defined as his land's border.

A p p a r e n t l y , the r i t u a l d i d n o t end w i t h the deposition o f the bag at the border. B u t the few
r e m a i n i n g preserved lines are quite fragmentary, a n d n o further conclusions can be d r a w n . The
relationship between the r i t u a l section i n rev. 1 1 - 2 7 ' and the preceding prayers w i t h their short
r i t u a l instructions is n o t entirely clear. B u t since there is n o r u b r i c or double r u l i n g between the

21 Possibly the same prayer is continued after the ruling, of the war ritual STT 12 //' (obv. 1 ff.),
see the commentary below. See Maul 1994: 76-7.
2 3

2 2Note that the following sections certainly have a noc- BAM 449 ( + ) 458 obv. I 5: upisl sunüti ana libbi masak
2 4

turnal setting and that a prayer addressing all stars is part sahi takammi-[m]a (for the indirect join see Abusch 1984: 94).
DANIEL SCHWEMER
 WITCHCRAFT AND WAR
33

Fig. 2 K i 1904-10-9, 18 ( B M 98989) reverse.

34 DANIEL SCHWEMER

sections, i t seems n a t u r a l t o assume t h a t they are a l l part o f the same r i t u a l . W i t h i n the longer
r i t u a l sections no instructions for the recitation o f prayers o r incantations can bevfound. T h i s
implies that the prayers were n o t supposed to be recited d u r i n g this r i t u a l segment, b u t actually
preceded the final r i t u a l , a conclusion supported by the fact that the prayers thenjselves are
f o l l o w e d by short r i t u a l instructions concerning their recitation. P r o b a b l y all proceedings t o o k
place d u r i n g the night, t h o u g h the n o c t u r n a l setting only becomes clear f r o m rev. 4' onwards,
where the deified n i g h t is addressed.
W h i l e the latter i n v o c a t i o n draws o n Standard formulas, the prayer i n obv. 3 1 8 ' is m o r e
unusual. The gods i n v o k e d , possibly the stars, are asked n o t to listen to the prayers o f the
barbarians, n o r to accept their offerings. The enemies themselves are accused o f using witchcraft
and evil magic to b i n d the king's weapons, a concept that is n o t otherwise attested in such
u n a m b i g u o u s terms. The text takes i t f o r granted that the barbarians (ummän-manda) pray to the
same gods as the A s s y r i a n (or B a b y l o n i a n ) k i n g , and that these gods can even be convinced to
make c o m m o n cause w i t h the enemies. D i d the Assyrians assume that the distant Medes made
offerings to Assur, t h a t they tried t o b r i n g r o u n d Istar o f N i n e v e h by deceitful kispü rituals? D i d
the k i n g o f B a b y l o n t h i n k that the Elamites called on M a r d u k to break the weapons o f the
B a b y l o n i a n army? P r o b a b l y n o t . Since we are dealing w i t h a n o c t u r n a l r i t u a l and a p l u r a l i t y o f
gods is addressed, i t seems very likely that the divine stars are the addressees o f these lines; and
while the stars were regarded as the astral manifestations o f their gods by Babylonians and
Assyrians, i t was o n l y n a t u r a l to assume that these heavenly bodies — like sun and m o o n — were
regarded as divine b e y o n d the borders o f M e s o p o t a m i a as w e l l .
I t is i m p o r t a n t to note that the basic structure o f the present w a r r i t u a l — or namburbi r i t u a l
c o u n t e r i n g omens i n d i c a t i n g an i m m i n e n t attack o f the enemy? — has some s t r i k i n g similarities
w i t h that o f a n t i - w i t c h c r a f t r i t u a l s . The enemy is supposed to have set the gods against the k i n g
25

b y prayers a n d offerings, b u t also b y witchcraft a n d evil magic. The r i t u a l fights this threat by
r e t u r n i n g the evil t o its o r i g i n , thereby m a k i n g the enemies suffer the fate they h a d intended for
the k i n g . The vehicle used to take figurine and dagger to the border resembles a narüq upsäse, a
bag filled w i t h magically contagious m a t e r i a l that was dangerous to e n c o u n t e r . B u t the parallels
26

are l i m i t e d : the kispü-motif is only one o f m a n y i n this text, a n d the phraseology o f the prayers
is otherwise very different f r o m w h a t we usually find in a n t i - w i t c h c r a f t rituals. Nevertheless, the
present r i t u a l clearly shows that the witchcraft stereotypes c o u l d be applied t o a foreign enemy
and that evil r i t u a l activities o f a foreign enemy had to be countered by a defensive w a r r i t u a l ,
j u s t as the evil machinations o f the w i t c h h a d t o be f o u g h t o f f w i t h a defensive a n t i - w i t c h c r a f t
r i t u a l . W h i l e witchcraft suspicions, however, were m o s t l y dealt w i t h on a ritualistic level only, o u r
w a r r i t u a l p r o v i d e d the k i n g w i t h a ready l e g i t i m a t i o n to go ahead w i t h an attack o n the enemy's
l a n d , should foreign troops violate the border o f his l a n d .
W h i l e o u r text is so far the only w a r r i t u a l a p p l y i n g witchcraft stereotypes to the foreign enemy
o f the k i n g , and c o m m o n a n t i - w i t c h c r a f t rituals d o n o t target the foreign enemy, there is one
other r o y a l r i t u a l that accuses the foreign enemy o f sorceries against the k i n g . W h e n the k i n g
enters the first "house" d u r i n g the Bit rimki r i t u a l he washes his hands over a figurine o f the
enemy (nakru). 21 A c c o m p a n y i n g these r i t u a l actions the prayer Samas dayyänu siru sa same u
erseti is to be recited (UFBG 415, Samas 4 0 ) , parts o f w h i c h are preserved o n K 2380 (SRTp]. III).
The i n c a n t a t i o n text identifies the figurine used i n the r i t u a l (obv. 14-15: annü nakru ... annü
salamsu) and accuses the enemy o f h a v i n g performed witchcraft against the k i n g (obv. 22ff.).
Considering the fact t h a t the r i t u a l i n the second "house" o f Bit rimki is a clear-cut a n t i - w i t c h c r a f t
r i t u a l accompanied by washing over a figurine o f the w i t c h , one c o u l d have assumed that the
2 8

2 5For the structure of anti-witchcraft rituals see Thomsen 154) and ibid. 29 for the ritual tablet (PBS 1/1. 15 obv. 9).
1987: 58-63, Schwemer, forthcoming, ch. V. 3. b). The incantation identifies the evildoer explicitly as a woman:
2 6For narüq upsäse cf. Thomsen, 1987: 45 and Maul, Samas sa sabtanni ul Tdi lü sinnisat(munus) annü salamsu
1994: 445 with fn. 15, 79 with fn. 77. "Samas, I do not know the person who seized mc: for sure,
2 7For this restoration of the relevant passage of the ritual it is a woman, this is her figurine!" (1.4). Most rubrics
tablet (after PBS 1/1, 15 obv. 4) see Laissoe 1955: 29, advise washing over a figurine of the witch, but K 2563 +
Farber 1987: 250. rev. 21 prescribes washing over figurines of warlock and
2 8See Ltessoe 1955: 37ff. for the incantation and the witch; the ritual in PBS 1/1, 15 obv. 9 has washing over
following rubric (further duplicates noted in HKL I 263. I I the warlock's figurine only (probably corrupt).
 W I T C H C R A F T AND WAR 35

r i t u a l o f the first " h o u s e " was a Standard a n t i - w i t c h c r a f t r i t u a l as well — apart f r o m the usage o f
the t e r m nakru itself there is no evidence i n the preserved p o r t i o n s o f K 2 3 8 0 that the first r i t u a l
was directed against a foreign enemy ( l a n d ) . B u t given that the a p p l i c a t i o n o f witchcraft motifs
to the foreign enemy is n o w firmly established a n d the t e r m nakru usually — t h o u g h n o t a l \ v a y s 29 —
refers to a foreign enemy, there can be little d o u b t that the r i t u a l i n the first " h o u s e " o f Bit rimki
targets the enemy ( l a n d ) , while the r i t u a l i n the second " h o u s e " is devoted t o those w h o have
p e r f o r m e d sorcery against the k i n g f r o m w i t h i n his o w n l a n d .

K i 1904-10-9, 18 ( B M 98989), copy Figs. 1 - 2 . 30

obv.
] x x x [
2' [ ] x BAD m e s - w ana su p i r ? ka a n ? 1 x [

3' -t]üm si-la u su-lu-la ina muhhi(ugu)-sü-nu ^ as^-k[u-un\

4' -l]i-ka ak-la-sü-nu-t[i]
5' sa ... lä I]dü(z]u) u ilüt(dmg\v) -ku-nu M rabTtu(ga\) tu Tdü(zuy ~ u l

6' x x x (x x ) ü-s]a-lu-ku-nu-si a-na su-bu-ur gls kakki(tüku\) -i[a] mes

7' x x x (x x ) s]u-pu-sü-nu su-lu-sü-nu la ta-ma-ha-r[a]

8' la te-sem-ma(7)]-a da-ba-ab ummän(erm)-ma-a'-da
9' x-x-sü-nu la te-s\em-ma-a akalT(nmda) -sü-nu mi:s la takkalä(g\i ) 7

10' me(a) -sü-nu

mcs la tasattä(n&g)(V.) qu]t-re-ni-sü-nu la ta-ma-ha-ra
11' xxx {x) lu ina kis-p]i-sü-nu lu ina ru-he-sü-nu lu ina ru-se-sü-nu
12' gls Ä;a/i:/:ö(tukul) mes x-x-x-i]a la us-ta-ba-rü la ur-ta-su-ü la ik-kam-mu-u
13' ukanmkunusi(7!)] ü-sar-ri-ih-ku-nu-si
14' ukabbit-ku-nu(77)-s]f si-sik-ta-ku-nu sab-ta-ku
15' riis r]a-ma-ni-ku-nu zak-ra-tu-nu
16' ni]s d e«/z7(BAD) u nin-lil d ta-'a-tu-nu
17' ms gls Ä:a]Ä:fcr(tuk]ul ) -,SM ? mes ta-'a-tu-nu
18'
l]i-i-tu at-tu-ia-ma la-a sä nakirl(kür) mes

19' x i-bar-ri-qu ana lemnutiihul)"

20' ] sa kima(gim) nab-li i-qa-mu-sü-nu-ti

21' ] ina ta-ha-zi a-na arkT(egir)-sü la i-tar-ru

22' -s]ü-nu a-na sa-te-e pi-sü-nu pe-tu-u

23' -s]ü-nu kima(gim) imbari(im.dugud) ü-sä-az-bi-l\u\

24' uimhu]r(ig]i)-asrä(nis) tu-sä-äs-[sä]

25' li-i-t]u at-tu-ia-ma la sa 31 nak[irf(kü[r) m

26' 8 ] /ca£/r/(tukul)
l s na-ki-ri-[ia-]
27' dne]rgal(u.g]uv) u d eres-ki-[gal]
28' Ä;aÄ:Ä:]f(tuku]l ) ' -sü-nu T me s ta-[x-x]
29' n]u-u[s x x]
obv. breaks o f f

The bilingual incantation Kür-kür bil / Nakra aqallu is

2 9 was kind enough to read through an early Version of the
used regularly within non-royal anti-witchcraft and bei following transliteration and translation, for his valuable
dabäbi rituals (see fn. 14), where nakru cannot have been corrections and suggestions.
understood to mean a foreign enemy. Written over erased sä (or al).
3 1

1 would like to thank Professor W. G. Lambert, who

3 0
36 DANIEL SCHWEMER

rev.
1' [ l]u damiq('sig^yima]
2' [narbikunu lusäpi dalTlikunir] lud-lu[l]

3' [ ] tu-sä-aq-b[a]

4' [ ( E N ) müsu puluhtu liläti saläs(3)(7) mass]arätu(en.n]\m) sä m<:s müs[i](g[e ]) 6

5' [erätu nasrätu(1)] la sa-li-la-tu

6' [ana eri salli(l)] purussä(ss.bar) ta-na-di-na
T [anäku annanna mär annanna sa ilsu annanna] Hstar(l5)-sü rd munusannannTtu(nem\i-t[ü])
8' [müsu kallatu(7)] pu-su-un-t[ü]
9' [ina qibtt(l) (...) is -t]är d sep(gir) lemutti(hul)"
s ana mätT(km)-ia pur-si
10' [anriituil)] tu-sä-aq-ba

11' [ ( . . . ) asar sepu par-s]a-at qaqqara(ki) tasabbit(sar) me(a) ellüti(kü) tasallah(su)

ana mahariigi) sin(30)
d passüra(barisur)
gls tasakkan( 'gar ) """ l 1 1 1

12' [nignak(mg.ndi) buräsi(\\)(l)

s,T!1 tas]akkan(ga]r) suluppT(zü.\um.ma)
an zlsasqä(esa)
tasarraq(c\\xb) aq

13' [ s]ä qemi(z\Aa) ina muhhi(ugu) passüri(bcimur) te-ser

eis

14' [salam(nu) ... teppus-w^d qül-ma-a ina qätßu) imittT(\S)-sü tu-sa-am-sä-sü

15' [ s]ä a-me-lu-ti sum(mu)-sü ina nag lab (bar.sl\) sumeli(güb)-sü
tasattar (sar)"''
16' [ nakirT(7)]-ia sum(mu)-sü tasattar (sar) '' 0

17' [sahä(sah) / ^ « ( b a b b a r ) ina patri(gir) tatabbah-ma(V.)] dämi(üs) -sü ina käsi(gü.zi) mes dus

ta-ma-har
18' [rubü(wxn) dämT(üs) sa/zf(sah) (?) a-n]a süti(im
mes 1) iltäni(im 2 ) sadi(im 3) amurri(\m 4)
i-tab-bak-ma
19' [ mas]ak(ku]s) sahi(sah) pesi(babbar) sä ta-ab-hu
20' [ ] x [tal]appat([t]ag) at patra(gir) u salma(nu) ana libbi(sä)
tasakkan (gar)""
21' [ a ] k ina tJdi(im)
? ta-ka-nak
22' [ina kunuk(kisib)
nM ... ta-b]ar-ram rubü(nun) qäs(&u)-su e//(ugu) masak(kus)
sahi(sah) tasakkan(gar) ~ma)
J

23' [ su-uh(l)-r]a dup-pi-ra i-qab-b[i]

24' [ g a r ] « ä « w ( n a g ] a . s i ) ga.OT'(irn-babbar) qätT(su) -sü mm ina
me( a^[ ](?)
r mei

25' [ n]u-ia ina muhhT(\xgv)-ka a[s-hu-ut(7)]

26' [ ana mi-s]ir mät(kur) nakirT(km) H^-[zi-ib-sü] mes

21' [ ' ] x ul <? [x x x (x)] r 1?

28' [ ] x imbu' täm[ti(ka a.ab.b[a) (sie?)

29' [ t]im x [ ?

30' [ ]x[
rev. breaks off

obv.
1 'f. ( t o o fragmentary for translation)

3' "[ ... I.. .]ed, p r o t e c t i o n and patronage / ex[tended] over t h e m ,

4' [ ... ] ... I held the[m] back.
5' [What ... do(es) n o t k ] n o w , b u t y o u r ( p l . ) great d i v i n i t y k n o w s ,
6' [ . . . ] they [ i m ] p l o r e d y o u to smash m [ y ] weapons:
7' do n o t aeeept [their . . . ] , their [pra]yer ( a n d ) their pleading,
 WITCHCRAFT AND WAR 37

8' [do not list]en to the w o r d s o f the barbarians,

9' [to their . . . d o not l ] i s t e n ! D o n o t eat their bread (offering)s,
10' [do not drink their water (libations)], d o n o t accept their [in]cense (offering)s!
11' [ ... either b y ] their w i t c h c r a f t o r their sorceries or their ( e v i l ) magic
12' [let the weapons o / m ] y [ . . . ] n o t be smashed, n o t be b o u n d , not be defeated!
13' (7 have treatedyou with respect], I have glorified y o u ,
14' [/ have honoured you], I a m h o l d i n g the h e m ( o f ) y o u r (garments).
15' [ ... b y ] yourselves y o u are conjured,
16' [ ... b y ] E n l i l and N i n l i l y o u are conjured,
17' [by ... and ( b y ) ] his [wea]pons y o u are conjured!
18' [ ... V i c ] t o r y w i l l be mine, and n o t the enemies'!"

19' [ ... ] . . . fiash(es) against the evil ones.

20' [ ... ] w h o burns t h e m like a flame,

21' [ ... w h o ] does n o t w i t h d r a w in battle.

22' [ ... ] their 3 2 m o u t h ( s ) are open for d r i n k i n g [th]eir [ . . . ] .

23' [ ... ] had [ ... ] carry [ t ] h e i r [ ... ] like a fog.

24' [ ... ] y o u have ( h i m ) lift [ ( . . . ) ' H e a l ] s - t w e n t y ' - [ p l a n t ] .

25' [ ... victor]y w i l l be mine, and n o t the enem[ies'],
26' [ ... my] enemy's weapon
27' [ ... N e ] r g a l and E r e s k i [ g a l ]
28' [ ... ] y o u [ . . . ] their [weapon]s.
29' ( t o o fragmentary for translation)
obv. breaks o f f

rev.
1' [ , m]ay [...] be good, [then]
2' I shall [ p r o c l a i m y o u r greatness] ( a n d ) s i n [ g y o u r g l o r y ] . "

3' Y o u have ( h i m ) recite [ ... ].

4' " [ ( I n c a n t a t i o n : ) O Night, terror of the evening, o (you) three wat]ches o f the n i g [ h t ] ,
5' [wakeful, watchful], never sleeping,
6' [to wakeful and sleeping] y o u p r o v i d e a decision!
7' [ I a m N . N . , son o f N . N . , whose god is N . N . ] , whose goddess is N . N . :
8' [O night], veiled [bride],
9' [by the command of (... and) I s t ] a r exclude the evil f r o m m y l a n d ! "
10' Y o u have ( h i m ) recite [this].

11' [ ( . . . ) I n a se]cluded [place] y o u sweep the g r o u n d ( a n d ) sprinkle pure water. Y o u place

a table before Sin.
12' [ Y o u s]et up [a censer w i t h juniper] ( a n d ) strew dates ( a n d ) sasqü-Wom.
13' Y o u draw [ ... ] o f flour o n the table.
14' [ Y o u make a figurine ( o f . . . ) o f . . . a n ] d y o u have i t carry a hatchet i n its r i g h t h a n d .
15' [( • • • )]• Y o u w r i t e " [ . . . ] o f m e n " , its name, o n its left shoulder blade.
16' [ ... ] y o u w r i t e " [ . . . ] o f m y [enemies]", its name.
17' [You slaughter a white pig with the/a dagger and] catch its b l o o d i n a goblet.

32 Or: '"whose", see commentary.

38 DANIEL SCHWEMER

18' [ T h e ruler] pours out [the pig's b l o o d t ] o the south, the n o r t h , the east ( a n d ) the west,
then
19' [ ... . The s k i ] n o f the w h i t e p i g that has been slaughtered — — ^
20' [ ( . . . ) y o u sm]ear (it) [with . . . ] ; y o u place the dagger and the figurine inside (the
skin).
21' [ ... ] . . . y o u seal w i t h clay,
22' ( a n d ) y o u [se]al (the clay) [ w i t h a seal o f ... ] . The ruler places his h a n d o n the
pig's s k i n
23' saying: " [ ... turn] away, go away!"
24' [ ... the ' h o r n e d ' a l k a ] l i ( a n d ) g y p s u m of (washing) his hands
[he ... ] in w[ater ... ] (saying):
25' "/ have [stripped off] m y [ ... ] over y o u ! "
26' [ ... a n d ] he [removes i t t o the b o ] r d e r o f the enemies' l a n d .
2 7 ' - 3 0 ' ( t o o fragmentary for translation)
rev. breaks o f f

Commentary
Obv. 2': Apparently the end of a recitation. The signs B A D - w are clear enough, but the context is missing
m e s

and any Interpretation remains provisional. A reading mütänf(üs) -ia seems most likely, though the diction-
mes

aries do not know of any other attestation for the possessive pronoun attached to mütänü "deaths, epidemic,
pestilence". The traces after su suggest P I rather than si, so that one could read ana su-'pi-ka' "to your 1

supplications". Alternatively, one could read dämT(m) -ia ana maski(kus) mahar(\gi)-ka x [ . . . " . . . my
mlss d

blood to the skin. Before you, o god . . . " (cf. the ritual instructions in rev. 17'—20'). But since si cannot be
excluded, a reading ana kus-'si-ka' "to delay y o u " should be taken into account as well (käsu D , D-stem of
1

kiäsu "to help" not attested otherwise).

3'-4': The prayer in 11. 3'-18' addresses a group of gods (cf. 2nd p l . in 11. 5'fT.). Though this is not stated
explicitly in the preserved part of the text, there can be little doubt that the prayer is recited by or on behalf
of the king. The first line does not sound like a typical prayer incipit, and 11. 3'ff. may represent a continuation
of the text before the ruling (cf. the problematic rulings in 11. 19-23'). The first two lines describe actions of
the king in the past (clear Ist pret. in 1. 4'). The object of these actions is a group of people (3rd pl. in 11. 3'
and 4'). The only 3rd p l . referred to in the rest of the text are the enemies of the king, and the obvious
conclusion must be that they are referred to by the 3rd pl. forms in 11. 3'-4' as well. The overall sense of the
two lines is difficult to grasp, but 1. 3' seems to refer to putting the foreign enemies under the king's patronage.
The end of 1. 3' is lost, but a verbal form parallel to akläsunüti in 1. 4' is expected. The traces before the break
strongly suggest a reading AS, and sakänu is the obvious choice. The head of the following horizontal is very
low on the line, therefore we have restored as-k[u-un] rather than as-k[un]. I f -t]üm in the beginning represents
the end of a verbal form — and this seems to be the most likely Option — one can hardly escape a restoration
[... ak-t]üm " I overwhelmed". Then, the first half of the line possibly refers to the king's military conquest
of the foreign lands in question, the immediate result of which would have been the extension of the king's
patronage over them. The exact meaning implied by akläsunüti in 1. 4' remains uncertain, and a restoration
of the broken word in the beginning of 1. 4' is difficult: -ka can hardly represent the 2nd sg. gen./acc. suffixed
pronoun, since no 2nd sg. is addressed within the text. Therefore, the restoration of another verbal form
seems most likely, and al-l]i-ka " I went" (or usä-l]i-kal) seems to make better sense than forms of maläku
or palaku.
5': This stock phrase of prayer language is frequently attested in anti-witchcraft incantations and prayers.
It always refers to warlock and witch (see e.g. Maqlü I 87; KAR 80 [KAL 2, 8] obv. 27, rev. 26 //; LKA 154
+ 155 [KAL 2, 24] obv. 41, rev. 36 //; KAL 2, 15 rev. I I I 38ff. //, 32 rev. 6, 58: 6' //; BW, B: 18' [cf. KAL 2,
36 obv. I 36']; K 2785 + 7237 + 9026: 5'; K 2395: 12'; K 7930 ( + ) 8326 obv. 17'; K 2563+ obv. 4 [Laessoe
1955: pl. 1] // S T T 76 obv. 4; UFBG, 512: 36 [ I V R 59/1 + /,/ K 2565 + ]). Similar phrases are regularly
2

used in the Neo-Assyrian oracular queries placed before Samas (ilütka rabitu Tde "does your great divinity
know it?", ilütka rabitu idü "which your great divinity knows", see SAA 4 passim, for the same phrase in the
tamitus see Lambert 1997: 91). But the signs preserved in the beginning of the line must certainly be read
z]u-w, so that a two-part formula, as in the anti-witchcraft incantations, has to be restored. This formula
can hardly refer to the preceding two lines here; rather it should be interpreted as an introduction to the
description of the evil activities of the king's enemies. It remains uncertain how the subject of the first half
of the line is to be restored. Possible readings are [sa anäku lä i]dü(z]u") "[What I do not k]now, . . . " or [sa
ilu mamma lä T]dü(z]u ) "[What no god k]nows, . . . " (for the latter cf. LKA 154 + 155 [KAL 2, 24] rev.
u

15f. //, RIAA 312 [O 193] obv. I I 7f., also PBS 1/2, 133 rev. 9' // [Lambert 1957-8: 288ff.]). Since idü lacks
a suffixed pronoun (*Tdüsunüti), a translation "[As to whom I do not k]now, . . . " seems less likely, though
it would link the phrase better to the following lines.
 WITCHCRAFT AND WAR 39

6': The broken sign at the beginning of the line cannot be read s]al (ü-s]al-lu-ku-nu-si); traces of three
vertical wedges are clearly visible. For the defective writing of a contracted final vowel in a IH-weak verb cf.
here obv. 20': i-qa-mu-sü-nu-ti (cf. also the spellings s]u-pu-sü-nu su-lu-sü-nu in 1. 7'). In the broken first half
of the line a word for the enemies has to be restored, possibly followed by sa: "[The enemies (who) im]plored
you to smash m [ y ] weapons: do not accept [their . . . ] , their prayer . . . " .
7': Instead o f supüsunu sulüsunu one would rather expect supesunu sulesunu. Nevertheless the two wprds
can hardly represent anything but the accusative objects of lä tamahharä. The forms are therefore analysed
as late acc. sg. in -u.
8': For the restoration of the beginning cf. the following line. The unusual spelling ummän(erm)-ma-a'-da \
for ummän-manda occurs also in an inscription of Esarhaddon (Borger 1956: 51 variant to Ep. 8: 44). The
term itself is already attested in the Old Babylonian period as a pejorative designation of enemies ("barbarian
hordes"). In the Neo-Assyrian and Neo-Babylonian periods, ummän-manda usually refers to the Medes as
the wild, powerful and distant enemies par excellence (see most recently Lanfranchi 2003: 79-118, esp. 90-2).
Since our prayer is a traditional text from Babylonia, ummän-ma'da has probably the general meaning
"barbarians" rather than a more restricted ethnic connotation, though the ritual may well have been
performed by an Assyrian king against the Medes.
l l ' - 1 2 ' : lä ustabbarü seems to correspond with ana subbur kakkiya in obv. 6', and a genitive construction
is suggested by the available space and the partly preserved -i]a. A n alternative restoration [ . . . kakkü-i]a is
possible, but less likely. The verb russü was interpreted as "etwa (durch Wasser) aufweichen" in AHw 996a,
while CAD R 425b recently opted for a broader meaning "sully". The present context rather suggests a
meaning "bind". This finds further support in the translation of Sum. lä by russü in a bilingual proverb, and
W. G. Lambert indeed proposed a meaning " b i n d " for russü in his edition of the text (see BWL, 228: 17f.
with commentary ibid. 232). The sequence ubbiranni ukassänni usabbitanni urassänni (actions of the witch,
see Laässoe 1955: 39: 20 // STT 76 and 77 obv. 20) also suggests " b i n d " rather than "sully"; ST UrtassT-ma
anäku lübib later on in the same text admittedly makes perfect sense when understood as "let her be sullied,
but let me become pure", but magical binding always has a connotation of impurity, so that this attestation
by no means disproves a basic meaning "bind". The only two attestations of russü given by the dictionaries
where a meaning "to wet, to soak" seems to be demanded by the context are both fragmentary and
problematic (AbB 2, 4: 7 and Gilgames V I 38, for the latter see George 2003: 832, reading m[u-r]d -sa-a[t] !

"that [ w t e ] " ; note his caution that this tentative restoration is not supported by the Middle Babylonian
Version from Emar). But i f a verb russü "to wet" really existed — and apart from the two passages quoted
the noun rusü B " m u d " , "bad weather" (OB, see CAD R 426) seems to suggest so — I would prefer to keep
it separate from the better-attested russü "bind".
13-14': I n prayers usarrihkunüsi " I have glorified y o u " usually occurs as part of a series of similar actions
(see Mayer, UFBG 145 with the relevant attestations including the present). Instead of ukannTkunüsi one
could of course also restore alsTkunüsi, ashurkunüsi or esekunüsi. The spelling si-sik-ta-ku-nu (or zi-zik-ta-ku-
nu) is unusual in this period, but an Orthographie archaism (possibly triggered by the original the present
manuscript was based on) rather than a reflexion of Neo-Assyrian phonetics (see Hämeen-Anttila 2000: 10
for the spelling zi-zi-ik-tü in ABL 620 rev. 16).
15-17': The use of zakäru in 1. 15' and of tamü in 11. 16-17' does not seem to imply any difference in
meaning (for the usage of tamü and, less frequently, zakäru in this and related formulas see most recently
Scurlock 2005: 23). Usually agents of evil are addressed in this way; they are put under an oath and thereby
forced to stay away from the patient. But the preceding lines leave no doubt that a group of deities is
addressed here. This is confirmed by the unusual ms ramänTsunu "by yourselves" in 1. 15'. Agents of evil
would hardly be put under an oath by themselves. A t the same time the usage of this formula indicates that
a group of less important deities is invoked, and we have suggested above that the stars are the addressees
of these lines. The form ta'ätunu recalls Neo-Assyrian m > ', and Esarhaddon's succession treaty has the
Assyrian form ta'äkunu (SAA 2, 6: 384). I f one, however, aeeepts the derivation of tamitu "oracle question,
oracle, omen" from tamü (not awü), the Old Babylonian by-form ta'Ttum suggests that the Variation between
tamü and ta'ü is old (see Lambert 1997: 97-8). In the beginning of 1. 17' the broken sign looks very much
like K ] U ; probably another deity and his or her weapons are invoked here. The king's weapons figure
prominently elsewhere in the text, but one would expect -ia rather than -su i f they were referred to here.
18': Cf. obv. 25'.
19-23': Though separated by dividing lines the phrases in 11. 19-23' apparently share a common structure
and seem to belong to one section put between the prayer ending in 1. 18' and the ritual instruction with
following invocation in 11. 24'ff. Some of the motifs contained in these few fragmentary lines recall descriptions
of gods or kings in battle. Line 22' certainly has a pluralic entity as the logical subject (pTsunu), but ana
arkTsu in 1. 21' shows that this does not have to be the case in the other lines as well; so ibarriqu and usazbil[u]
may well be subjunetive forms. I f so, the person described in 11. 19', 20'f. and 23' is most probably the king
himself, whose military virtues are extolled. The mouths of 1. 22' then probably belong to the king's troops,
and the possessors of what the king's troops are ready to drink could then be the enemies. I f so, a restoration
dämTs]unu "their blood", first suggested to me orally by W . G. Lambert, would make very good sense,
though usually only the earth drinks the blood of the soldiers killed in battle. The motif in 1. 23' also seems
to be unique so far. Comparisons with imbaru " f o g " are common in royal inscriptions and regularly connected
40 DANIEL SCHWEMER

with verbs meaning "overwhelm" or "cover" (sahäpu, susbutu, katämu and suktumu). A restoration of the
present text as *usasbit[u] is, however, ruled out by the traces visible before the break, which clearly suggest
a sign of the Ku-type. Therefore a reading ü-sä-az-bi-l[u] seems most likely. While the individual sentences
as far as preserved are easy enough to understand, the overall meaning and function of this section within
the text is far less clear. The subdivision by dividing lines could imply that the lines of this section are only
incipits of longer recitations. But considering that we have two lines in one of the subdivisions (11. 20'f.) and
that the text otherwise seems to give the füll text of the recitanda, such an assumption is rather unlikely.
Short explanatory sections within a ritual text could take such a format; but they are very rare, ar^l there is
nothing in the preserved part of these lines that would support this idea. Possibly, these lines represent short
addresses to the king and his troops, maybe of the structure attä resp. attünu sa ....
21': For ana arkisu täru "turn back, withdraw (in battle)" cf. e.g. [sa ma]har kakkTpetüti u tib tähäzi danni
lä itüru "[who] did not withdraw [con]fronting drawn weapons and the mighty onslaught of battle" (Borger
1956: 103, 26). The unexpected spelling i-tar-ru instead of i-tur-ru can hardly be resolved by introducing an
otherwise unattested value tur for T A R nor can it be compared with misconstructed forms of middle weak
verbs as can be found in texts written by scribes who had acquired Akkadian as a second language (e.g. i-da-
a-ak-ku in K B o 1, 5 obv. I I 13). Probably this scribal error points to a pronunciation itorrü, as was argued
by von Soden with respect to comparable spellings (GAG § 9e for a > o before r, § 104g on OB i-ta-ar-ru,
2

for a critical discussion of a phonological Interpretation of such deviant spellings see Kouwenberg 1997: 400
with further references).
24': The spacing of the preserved signs indicates that only one sign is to be restored in the break at the
end of the line, therefore tu-sä-äs-[sä] rather than the expected tu-sä-äs-[sä-sü] (cf. also tusaqba instead of
tusaqbäsu in rev. 3' and 10'). Though the following lines certainly give the text of a recitation, this line seems
to be a ritual instruction. The ritual expert has the client, most likely the king, lift something, and this gesture
is accompanied by the following recitation. Probably the object carried by the client immediately precedes
tusassa. A number of anti-witchcraft rituals prescribe that the patient carry imhur-asrä plant in his left hand
(as well as lupine in his mouth and beer in his right hand, see KAL 2, 11 r. col. 18-23' with duplicates and
parallels indicated there), and the signs preserved at the beginning of the line suggest that a similar or the
same rite is intended here. For ritual instruction and recitation text not divided by a ruling cf. rev. 9'-10'.
25': Cf. obv. 18'.
28': Though the line probably ended in a 2nd sg./pl. verbal form, the text, as indicated by the reference to
kakk]Tsunu (?), seems still to be part of the recitation.

Rev. l ' - 2 ' : There is not too much missing in the break between obverse and reverse, so these lines may well
be the end of the prayer beginning in obv. 25'. Though Nergal and Ereskigal are mentioned in obv. 27', the
addressee(s) o f the recitation remain unknown. Once the complete text is known, the -kunu in the (largely
restored) final formula may have to be changed accordingly.
3': Possibly only (siptu) anriitu (x-su) is to be restored in the break.
4'-9': The opening lines of this prayer strongly resemble a passage within a prayer addressing Nuska for
auspicious dreams (KAR 58 rev. 1-18, most recent edition: Butler 1998: 344-8; cf. also Foster 2005: 718 with
further bibliography). The relevant lines there read (11-12, 15): musitu puluhtu liläti, saläs(i) massaräti sa
musiti eräti nasräte dalpäte lä säliläti, ..., ana eri salli purussä tanamdinä. Lines 4'-6' of the present text have
been restored accordingly, taking into account the space available in the break. Following the stock phrase
in 1. 7', the text apparently once more addresses the deified night. The epithet "veiled" can hardly refer to
anybody but müsu (or musitu), and the space available suggests the restoration of another word, most likely
kallatu, recalling the kallatu kuttumtu o f Maqlü's opening incantation and other texts. The addressee of pursT
in 1. 9' must be the night invoked in the preceding line. The broken D A R at the beginning of 1. 9' is almost
certainly the end of is -tär. A n identification of the deified night with Istar is not impossible, but note that
d s

according to the Maqlü commentary KAR 94 obv. 4'-6' / / A 405 (Ass. 13955Ü): 7'-9' the deified night of
Maqlü's opening incantation was identified with Gula (see Meier 1937-9: 240 fn. 26). The restoration of
another stock phrase seems to be the easier solution here.
10': The space available in the break and the spacing in the preserved part of the line suggest that only
annitu is to be restored.
11': Restore possibly D Ü . D Ü . B I or K I D . K I D . B I in the beginning of the line.
12': Instead oibura.su the censer may have been loaded with another aromatic, but buräsu is attested most
frequently in contexts such as the present.
13': The nature and purpose of the drawing on the offering table remain unclear to me.
14-15': Further specifications of the figurine (material, probably also male gender) have to be restored in
the break. Since the name of the figurine is written on its left shoulder, it must represent an evil power,
within the present context probably an evil demon with apotropaic function who is supposed to act against
the enemy after being placed at the border. Figurines of the warlike Sebettu used in the apotropaic ritual
Sep lemutti ina bit ameli paräsu hold a qulmü in their right hand and a dagger in their left hand (see
Wiggermann 1992: 46f., edition of the relevant text ibid. lff.). The present figurine does not hold a dagger,
but a dagger is deposited with the figurine.
16': I t is not entirely clear whose name is referred to in this line. Maybe the dagger, which is subsequently
used to slaughter a pig, then enclosed with the figurine in the pig's skin and finally deposited at the border
 WITCHCRAFT AND WAR 41

together with the figurine, receives a name as well. Then one could perhaps restore [patra teleqqe-ma ...
... y]a sumsu tasattar " Y o u take a dagger and write ' [ ( . . . of) m]y [ . . . ] ' , its name, (on i t ) " .
17': The tentative restoration of this line is based on 11. 19'-20'. The catching of the blood of a slaughtered
animal is attested elsewhere in anti-witchcraft rituals; cf. e.g. BAM 434 obv. I I I 7f. // BAM 445 obv. 36 //
AMT 35/3 rev. I V 4', where the blood is used as an apotropaic ointment. The pouring of the blood to the
four cardinal directions (cf. 1. 18') also is best understood as an apotropaic rite protecting not only the king
as the ritual client, but the whole land. \
18': For the restoration of rubü "ruler", i.e. the king, as the ritual client cf. 1. 22'. The use of rubü as the
term for king is rare in incantation rituals, but not without parallels; cf. e.g. the Bit rimki ritual tablet (SpTU
2, 12 obv. 10, 17, 20 etc.), the namburbi concerning the king's chariot (see Maul 1994: 387^99) and the
foundation ritual K 48 + , edited most recently by Ambos 2004: 117-25.
19': The restoration masak(kus) is based on 1. 22'.
21 '—2': The first half of the line gave instructions on how to close the pig's skin around the dagger and
the figurine of the enemy, before finally sealing the opening of the package with a sealed clay bulla. Seals of
different materials are used within such ritual contexts; most common are sadänu and subü stone. The first
sign preserved in the line could also be s]i or P ] I .
23': The short recitation over the figurine and the dagger consisted probably of a series of 2nd pl. imperatives
(hardly ventive with duppuru) addressing these two items.
24': Washing with ("horned") alkali, gypsum and water is well attested in anti-witchcraft rituals (cf. e.g.
LKA 154 + 155 [KAL 2, 24] rev. 36, 49 / / ) . Here, one would expect ina me qarna\ni gassi qätfsu ina m[uhhi
... imessi "he washes his hands with water, alkali and gypsum over . . . " . But a reading U [ G U is ruled out by
the traces after ina at the end of the line. It is therefore likely that the text had a more explicit description
of the ritual actions (maybe something like: "you mix alkali and gypsum (for the washing) of his hands in
water, and he washes etc.").
25': The broken sign before ia can hardly be anything but nu. We expect mimma lemnu or something
similar within the present context. I n view of the accusative plural mj\.-nu-u-a in BMS 12: 76 (with duplicate
är-ni-ia, see Mayer 1993: 320: 76, therefore simply corrupt for ar-nu-u-a?) a restoration lem-n]u-ia "my evils"
or rather ar-n]u-ia "my sins" seems likely. Alternatively, one could read sal]mT-ia. But the ritual does not
seem to involve a substitute figurine of the king that could be mentioned here. The 2nd sg. addressed by
muhhika is most probably the package made of the pig's skin.
26': For the restoration cf. e.g. Th 1905-4-9, 89 = B M 98583 obv. 6' (Mayer 1988: 145-7) or PBS 1/2, 106
rev. 29. See the füll discussion of this rite by Mayer 1988: 150-3.
27': One is tempted to read nakirü ana mät]i(ku]r) ul 'e^-[er-ru-bu\. the enemies] will not i[nvade the
lan]d"; but the traces are too ambiguous for any confident restoration.
28': Or rather ] x-ka a.ab.bfa? The broken sign in the beginning could well be N ] E .

References
A b b r e v i a t i o n s f o l l o w CAD a n d AHw; for KAL 2 see Schwemer, i n press.

Abusch, T. 1984. Magical and Medical Texts: Further Joins and Duplicates, RA 78: 93-4.
Abusch, T. 1985. Dismissal by Authorities: Suskunu and Related Matters, JCS 37: 91-100.
Abusch, T. 1987. Babylonian Witchcraft Literature (Brown Judaic Studies 132, Atlanta).
Ambos, C. 2004. Mesopotamische Baurituale aus dem 1. Jahrtausend (Dresden).
Borger, R. 1956. Die Inschriften Asarhaddons (AfO Beih. 9, Vienna).
Butler, S. A . L . 1998. Mesopotamian Conceptions of Dreams and Dream Rituals (AOAT 258, Münster).
Deller, K . 1992. Neuassyrische Rituale für den Einsatz der Götterstreitwagen, BaM 23: 341-6, pls. 67-9.
Ebeling, E. 1949. Beschwörungen gegen den Feind und den bösen Blick aus dem Zweistromlande, ArOr
17/1: 172-211.
Elat, M . 1982. Mesopotamische Kriegsrituale, BiOr 39: 5-25.
Farber, W. 1987. Rituale und Beschwörungen in akkadischer Sprache, in: TUAT 2/2 (Gütersloh), 212-81.
Foster, B. 2005. Before the Muses. An Anthology of Akkadian Literature (3rd edn, Bethesda).
1

Frame, G. and A . R. George 2005. The Royal Libraries of Nineveh: New Evidence for King Ashurbanipal's
Tablet Collecting, Iraq 67: 265-84.
Geller, M . J. 2000. Incipits and Rubrics, in: Wisdom, Gods and Literature. Studies in Assyriology in Honour
of W. G. Lambert, ed. I . L . Finkel and A . R. George (Winona Lake), 225-58.
George, A . R. 2003. The Babylonian Gilgamesh Epic (Oxford).
Hämeen-Anttila, J. 2000. A Sketch of Neo-Assyrian Grammar (SAAS 13, Helsinki).
Kouwenberg, N . C. J. 1997. Review of W . von Soden, Grundriss der akkadischen Grammatik, 3. Aufl., BiOr
54 (1997) 399-402.
Laess0e, J. 1955. Studies on the Assyrian Ritual and Series bit rimki (Copenhagen).
Lambert, W. G. 1957-8. A n Incantation of the Maqlü Type, AfO 18: 288-99, pls. X I - X V I .
Lambert, W . G. 1997. Questions Addressed to the Babylonian Oracle, in: Oracles et propheties dans l'antiquite,
ed. J.-G. Heintz (Paris), 85-98.
42 DANIEL SCHWEMER

Lanfranchi, G. B. 2003. The Assyrian Expansion in the Zagros and the Local Ruling Elites, in: Continuity
of Empire (?). Assyrier Media, Persia, ed. Lanfranchi et al. (HANE/M 5, Padua), 79-118.
Maul, S. M . 1994. Zukunftsbewältigung. Eine Untersuchung altorientalischen Denkens anhand der babylonisch-
assyrischen Löserituale {Namburbi) (BaF 18, Mainz).
Mayer, W. R. 1988. Ein neues Königsritual gegen feindliche Bedrohung, OrNS 57: 145-64.
Mayer, W. R. 1990. Ein Ritual gegen Feindschaft im Museo Nazionale d'Arte Orientale zu Rom, OrNS
59: 14-33.
Mayer. W. R. 1993. Das Ritual BMS 12 mit dem Gebet "Marduk 5". OrNS 62: 313-37.
Meier, G. 1937-9. Kommentare aus dem Archiv der Tempelschule in Assur, AfO 12: 237-46.
Prechel, D . 2003. Von Ugarit nach Uruk, in: Literatur. Politik und Recht. Festschrift für Claus Wilcke, ed.
W. Sallaberger et al. (OBC 14, Wiesbaden), 225-8.
Reiner, E. 1967. Another Volume of Sultantepe Tablets, JNES 26: 177-200.
Schwemer, D . in press. Rituale und Beschwörungen gegen Schadenzauber (Keilschrifttexte aus Assur literarischen
Inhalts 2, in WVDOG).
Schwemer, D . fortheoming. Abwehrzauber und Behexung. Studien zum Schadenzauberglauben im alten
Mesopotamien (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2007).
Scurlock, J. A . 1989-90. Was There a "Love-hungry" £>m<-priestess Named Etirtum?, AfO 36-7: 107-12.
Scurlock, J. A . 2005. Magieo-Medkal Means of Treating Ghost-Induced Iiinesses in Ancient Mesopotamia
(AMD 3, Leiden - Boston).
Thomsen, M . - L . 1987. Zauberdiagnose und Schwarze Magie in Mesopotamien (CN1P 2, Copenhagen).
Wiggermann, F. A . M . 1992. Mesopotamian Protective Spirits. The Ritual Texts (CM 1, Groningen).
Zgoll, A . 2003. Die Kunst des Betens. Form und Funktion, Theologie und Psychagogik in babylonisch-assyrischen
Handerhebungsgebeten an Istar (AOAT 308, Münster).