W 18214,10

List of personal names. Very fragmentary.

Fragment of a larger tablet, only the right-hand side is preserved. The first lines may have contained a kind of explanatory heading: they refer to temple oblates (širku) and are separated by an horizontal line from the rest of the texts which lists names and affiliations. In a few instances 2 names are linked by the preposition ša, “of” – possibly the second name refers to a supervisor.

In one line of the obverse, Eanna-šarru-uṣur’s name is followed by the expression “of the king”, ša šarri. Gehlken suggests 2 possible interpretations: either the text refers to the king's share in the temple's offerings ((//kurummat šarri), or (what he finds more likely) to rations that are set aside from the king’s contributions to the offerings. To support his hypothesis, he connects this tablet to the ration list YOS 17, 142.

The fragmentary condition of the text and the uncertainties linked to the onomastics do not allow any certain reconstruction. Tentatively, it accounts for the distribution of maintenance shares to temple personnel.

Some of the names listed are:

Ardia/Nabû-bāni-aḫi//Rīmūt-Ea

.../Nabû-tūru-līšir

List of personal names. Very fragmentary.

Fragment of a larger tablet, only the right-hand side is preserved. The first lines may have contained a kind of explanatory heading: they refer to temple oblates (širku) and are separated by an horizontal line from the rest of the texts which lists names and affiliations. In a few instances 2 names are linked by the preposition ša, “of” – possibly the second name refers to a supervisor. In one line of the obverse, Eanna-šarru-uṣur’s name is followed by the expression “of the king”, ša šarri. Gehlken suggests 2 possible interpretations: either the text refers to the king's share in the temple's offerings ((//kurummat šarri), or (what he finds more likely) to rations that are set aside from the king’s contributions to the offerings. To support his hypothesis, he connects this tablet to the ration list YOS 17, 142. The fragmentary condition of the text and the uncertainties linked to the onomastics do not allow any certain reconstruction. Tentatively, it accounts for the distribution of maintenance shares to temple personnel.

A = Ardia/Nabû-bāni-ahi//Rīmūt-Ea; B = broken name/Nabû-tūru-līšir