The Standard Ezibs
We are on much surer ground with the "standard" ezibs, whose overriding concerns are the proper form of the rituals and the cultic purity of everything connected with the divination, including the haruspex and his assistants, the sacrificial animal, and the place where the extispicy was performed. Since these ezibs follow each other in standard order in all the queries, we may refer to them as the standard ezib formulas. These formulas are discussed extensively by Klauber PRT, pp. xvii-xxiii, and the numbering system used there for the ezibs is retained here for reference purposes. To save space, Klauber did not include translations of the standard ezibs in his texts, but merely listed them by number because of their repetitive nature. The format of the present edition, with its side-by-side transliteration and translation, makes it possible to include translations of all the ezibs without making concessions to space limitations. The translations of the standard ezibs in the present edition are set in smaller type than the rest of the query.
Ezib 1 is attested in a short (a) and long (a+b) form, and reads in its entirety as follows: (a) ezib ša (ikrib) dīn ūmi annî kīma ṭāb kīma haṭû (b) ūmu erpu zunnu izannun, "Disregard the (formulation) of (the prayer for) today's case, be it correct, be it faulty, (b) (and that) the day is overcast, and it is raining." The Akkadian word rendered with "the (formulation) of" literally means "that of"; it is taken here to refer to everything associated with the prayer (ikribu) for the oracular 'judgment' (dīnu), which the haruspex said before slaughtering the sacrificial sheep, i.e. both to the prayer itself and the accompanying ritual acts.[[32]] The word dīnu here connotes a case brought before the divine judge. Note ABL 1396 (= LAS 71) r.3f, "let him speak his case (dēnšu) before the god." The divine response to an extispicy query was "written" on the entrails of the sacrificial animal.[[33]]
The second part of the formula (ezib 1b) is attested in only a few queries (see 43 r.1, 89:8, 90:10, 263:11, 272:13), probably simply because it, dependent as it was on weather conditions, was rarely needed. Cloudy weather during the performance of the ritual, hiding the face of Šamaš from the diviner, was probably interpreted as a bad omen.[[34]]
Ezib 2, ezib ša ellu lu''û immer[[35]] niqê ulappitu ulū ana pān immer niqê iptarriku, "Disregard that a clean or an unclean person has touched the sacrificial sheep, or blocked the way of the sacrificial sheep," may refer to the incidents on the way of the sacrificial sheep to the scene of the extispicy.
Ezibs 1a and 2 are sometimes combined into one (1+2). The combined formula is attested in complete form only in 77:9, and elsewhere in incomplete contexts. A shorter version, terminating in ulappitu, is also attested.[[37]]
Ezib 3, "Disregard that an unclean man or woman has come near the place of extispicy and made it unclean," is attested in two variants, (a) and (b), differing from each other by word order only: ezib ša (a) lu''û lu''ûtu ašar bīri usanniqūma ule''û; (b) ašar bīri lu''û lu''ûtu usanniqūma ule"û.
Ezib 4, ezib ša ina ašar annî lu''û/lu''ê bīra ibrû, is traditionally rendered "Disregard that an unclean person has performed extispicy in this place."[[38]] This is doubtful, however, since the word lu''u in this formula is several times attested in the genitive case (cf. 23 r.1, 25:6, 77:10, 110 r.1, 129:13, 149 r.1, etc.), and a syllabic spelling in a previously unpublished text (ab-[ru-ú], 221 r.1) indicates that the word (MAŠ-u), hitherto read ibrû, in fact is a first person form. Hence a more correct rendering of this ezib, at least in the cases listed above, seems to be "Disregard that I have performed (the) extispicy in this unclean place."
A fusion of ezibs 4 and 3 is attested in 77:10 and 229:4, ezib ša ina ašar annî lu''û bīra ibrû ulū lu''ûti DIB-MEŠ-ma ula''û[[39]] As already pointed out by Knudtzon (AGS, p. 36), the fused formula, omitting lu''û and ašar bīri which are found already in ezib 4, probably owed its existence simply to a desire to economize.
While ezibs 2-4 were concerned with the defilement of the extispicy by a (ritually) unclean person or site, ezib 5 is concerned with the possible imperfection of the sacrificial sheep:
ezib ša immer ilūtika (rabīti) ša ana bīri[[40]] barû maṭû haṭû, "Disregard that the ram (offered) to your (great)[[41]] divinity for the performance of the extispicy is deficient or faulty."
Ezibs 6 and 7, finally, are concerned with the effect of the diviner's own actions, either in word or in deed, on the ritual. These two ezibs, unlike the others, display a goodly number of additions or sub-sections to the basic formulas (6a and 7a). The wording of ezibs 6 and 7 is essentially identical, except for the fact that the former, phrased in the third person, refers to a person "touching the forehead of the sacrificial sheep,"[[42]] while the latter, in the first person, pertains to the haruspex himself. Klauber (PRT, p. xix) suggested that the "toucher of the sheep" was an assistant to the haruspex, and it is quite possible that this was indeed the case, because more than one person was involved in performing the ritual; cf. Fig. 2, and see also the discussion of ezib 6f below.
A composite ezib 6 formula, with all its attested parts included, runs as follows:
"Disregard that he who touches the forehead of the sheep (a) is dressed in his ordinary soiled garments, (b) has eaten, drunk, anointed himself with, touched or stepped upon anything unclean, (c) has seen fear and terror at night, (d) has touched the libation beer, the maṣhatu-flour,[[48]] the water, the container and the fire, (e) has altered, added to, or changed the ritual proceedings, (f) or has jumbled the oracle query in his mouth."
The composite formula, however, never appears in its entirety, and the constituent parts are usually abridged.[[49]] The most common combination is 6a, b, and e. In nos. 24, 81, 154, 156, 229 and 275, 6a alone constitutes the formula and is immediately followed by ezib 7. In no. 5, it is combined with ezib 5. Ezib 6d is sometimes combined with ezib 6a;[[50]] twice (120 r.3 and 221:3) it apparently totally merges with this formula, replacing its concluding words (after lāpit pūt immeri).
Ezib 6d occurs more frequently than its counterpart, ezib 7d. Ezibs 6c and 6f, on the other hand, are much more rarely attested than 7c and 7f (see below); to my knowledge, each occurs only once, in 108 r.2 and 69:3, respectively. This can hardly be accidental but is likely to derive from the functional difference between the haruspex and his assistant, since it was only the former who would normally have pronounced the query, the very subject of ezibs 6f and 7f.
As already noted, the composite formula of ezib 7, running as follows, largely parallels that of ezib 6:
"Disregard that I, the haruspex your servant, (a) am dressed in my ordinary soiled garments, (b) have eaten, drunk, anointed myself with, touched, or stepped upon anything unclean, (c) have seen fear and terror at night, (d) have touched the libation beer, the maṣhatu-flour, the water, the container and the fire, (e) have changed or altered the proceedings, (f) or the oracular query became jumbled in my mouth."
As noted above, there are significant differences in the actual distribution of the constituent parts of the two ezibs. Ezib 7c, for example, whose counterpart 6c is attested only once, is quite common, and sometimes follows immediately after 7a, as in nos. 63, 84, 129, 134, 136, 217 and 263. Ezib 7d, on the other hand, is only occasionally attested, e.g. 62 r.6 and 265 r.4 (in both cases, it follows 7b). The constituent parts of ezib 7 are subject to a similar variation as those of ezib 6, and also the formula as a whole has three major abridged variants:
(A) ezib ša anāku mār bārê aradka tamīt ina pîya uptarridu kūn qāti enû ušpelu "Disregard that I, the haruspex your servant, have jumbled the oracle query in my mouth, (or) changed or altered the proceedings."[[52]] In this version of the formula, (f) invariably precedes (e).
(B) ezib ša ina pî mār bārê ardīka tamīt iptarridu "Disregard that the oracle query has become jumbled in the mouth of the haruspex your servant." It occurs in 43 r.6, 67:5, 75 r.3, and passim.
(C) Another formula, attested only in a few cases, is an abbreviated version of 7a+b: e.g. 190 r.5, ezib ša anāku mār bārê aradka mimma lu''û ākulu aštû apšušu "Disregard that I, the haruspex your servant, have eaten, drunk, or anointed myself with anything unclean." Other examples are 139 r.7, 149 r.5, 154 r.15.
FIG. 2. Camp scene with priests (reign of Tiglath-Pileser III). ORIGINAL DRAWING I, 14.
We learn from the "standard" ezib-formulas that everyone and everything associated with the oracular proceedings had to be cultically clean. The cultic cleanliness of the haruspex, the sacrificial sheep and of the place of divination were necessary conditions for a successful divination. The contact of the unclean (described as lu''û, la ellu, and the like) or the uninitiated in the lore of the diviner, la kāšid ihzi of the rituals (passim in BBR, see below), with either the sacrificial sheep (ezib 2) or the place of divination (ezibs 3-4) had the effect of making a favorable divine response impossible. From ezib 5 we learn that the sacrificial sheep must not be deficient in any way and must equally be without blemish. According to ezibs 6 and 7 the diviner himself had to be most fastidious about his attire, as well as about what he ate and drank.
We learn as much also from the rituals of the diviner, such as BBR 1-20 and 75-101, the latter known as ikribus, "prayers." What is implicit in the ezib-formulas, is made quite explicit in these rituals. For the diviner, the following qualifications are called for: "He who is proficient in his lore and whose limbs are perfect,"[[53]] can partake in the oracular proceedings. The physically blemished (e.g., BBR 1-20:5, "one who is squinty-eyed or whose finger is infected"; cf. BBR 24:31), on the other hand, could not do so, nor could he near the consecrated ground which was "the place of oracular decision" (asšar purussê bārûti, BBR 1-20:6). Only after becoming cultically clean could the diviner approach the gods for an oracular decision.[[54]] As for the sacrificial sheep, it is clearly stated that it has to be "a pure, consecrated lamb whose limbs are sound" (BBR 98:7).
The ritual of the diviner started "at dawn, before sunrise" (BBR 11 r.iii 2 and duplicate ibid. 75-78:14) when he made his preparations prior to the performance of the divination. A similar description is found in BBR 1-20:69 and 149: "May your servant make his offering at dawn." An echo of the early practice of the divination may possibly be found in the ezib-formulas, e.g. 206:6 and 98 r. 1f (restored), e-zib ša ... ūmu išqa "Disregard that ... the day has already progressed."
FIG. 3. Camp scene with priest extracting entrails (reign of Assurnasirpal II). BM 124548.
32On ikribu and dīnu, see Starr Rituals, pp. 45f and 58, respectively.
33 See ibid. p. 57.
34 Cf. Klauber PRT, p. XVll. Note that taking an oath "before Šamaš" could be postponed by a month if the day set for the oath-taking ceremony happened to be cloudy (see Parpola LAS 2, p. 182, ad line 11'). In 206:5, the place of ezib 1b is taken by a reference to the lateness in the day, which seems to have had an equally inauspicious import for the outcome of the extispicy; see below, p. XXVII. The reading ŠÚ-pu = erpu is confirmed by glosses in astrological omens (e.g., RMA 87:5 and 257:1f) as well as by apodoses in OB extispicy texts (e.g., "the weather will be overcast (UD-mu-um i-ru-pa-am-ma) and it will rain," YOS 10 22:23, cf. Boissier DA 217:9 and PBS 2/2 123:8, and "the weather will be overcast (ūmum irrupma), (but) it will not rain," Riemschneider ZA 57 130:21f, cf. Denner WZKM 41212).
35 Normally spelled UDU in this formula, but once (45:11) UDU.NITÁ. This indicates that the sign has to be read immeru and taken as an independent word, not as a determinative.
37 See Knudtzon AGS, p. 34.
38 For variants, see ibid. p. 36.
39 Nos. 32 r.1 and 244:1 are to be restored differently, contra Knudtzon AGS, p. 108.
40 Spelled logographically (MÁŠ). The reading bīri is made certain by the phonetic complement -ri in 133:6.
41 Attested only occasionally in this ezib. For the texts in question see Knudtzon AGS, p. 37.
42 For puhāda lapātu, "to touch the lamb," another term for extispicy, see the examples cited in CAD L 85a.
43 For the syllabic writing of SAG.KI (pu-ut) and TÚG (ṣu-bat, attested only in 23 r.3 and possibly 244:2, [ṣu-ba?]-ti), as well as for the numerous orthographic variants of aršāti attested, see the glossary. Note also the interesting variant libšu in 154:4.
44 GUG4/NUMÚN is not attested syllabically, but GUG4 = kabāsu, so ukabbisu, suggested by Knudtzon and adopted by Klauber, appears to be the correct reading. Examples: 277 r.5; 267 r.4 (GUG4.MEŠ). KÚ is rarely written syllabically in this formula, only in 169:6, i-ku-lu, but more commonly with the phonetic complement -lu, as in 65:4; 159 r.5; 251:4, and possibly 7:11, [... KÚ]-lu.
45 AIthough gilittu is occasionally written syllabically (e.g. 136:5, 272 r.3), it is mostly attested as LUH-tu/tú, and occasionally ŠÀ.MUD, e.g. 108 r.2 (where ŠÀ.MUD serves for both gilittu and pirittu). Pirittu, on the other hand, is usually written syllabically pi/pí-rit-ti, but occasionally ŠÀ.MUD, as in 267 r.5; 270 r.5, etc.
46 The syllabic writing me-e for A.MEŠ is attested in the extant queries only in 45:13. Mihhu and haṣbu are always written syllabically; maṣhatu is always written ZÍD.MAD.GÁ.
47 DIRI is written in 225 r:4. with the phonetic complement -ru, which suggests a form of (w) atāru (ušātiru). For instances of the syllabic writing qa-ti, see Knudtzon AGS, p. 39. Note the writing uš-pel-lu in 225:4 and in 276 r.3; uš-pe-el-lu, 108 r.5.
48 The words mihhu and maṣhatu are well attested in the rituals of the diviner and in rituals in general: e.g., (barley) for (preparing) mihhu-beer and maṣhatu-flour for the gods," HSS 14 153:3 and reverse 3; see also ibid. 154:3 and ibid. 63:24. Mihhu is often described in rituals as being libated (mihhu naqû) with milk (šizbu), wine (karānu), beer (šikaru), etc. Note also in the rituals of the diviner BBR 87:7, ikrib mihhi kunni, ''ikribu for placing the mihhu-beer," and ibid. 75-78 r.75, ikrib maṣhati ... sarāqi, ''ikribu for scattering the maṣhatu-flour. On maṣhatu, see also Starr Rituals, p. 105.
49 Ezib 6b usually ends with ipšušu (ŠÉŠ-šú; for variants, see Knudtzon AGS, p.39). The last two terms in this formula are only occasionally attested (e.g. 267 r. 2 and note the abbreviated formula mimma lu''û ulappiti, 77:12), but more commonly in its counterpart ezib 7b, e.g. 24 r. 4 (ú-lap-pi-tu); 45:14; 53:3; 89 r.4; 267 r.4 (TAG.MEŠ); 277 r.6. DIRI IS rarely attested in ezib 6e, only in 225 r.4 and 276 r.3.
50 E.g., 8:3, 45:13, 51:15, 76:8, and 235 r.1
51 The last verb is normally omitted, but occurs, written LAL.MEŠ-ú, in 5:15, 8:5, 24 r.5, 32 r.5, 45:15, 51:17, 52:3, 77:14, 98 r.3. The reading uhtaṭṭû is confirmed by the syllabic spelling uh-ta-[aṭ-ṭu-u] in 126 r.5 and in 169:8. No. 98 r.3 inserts after LAL.MEŠ-ú the "non-standard" ezib UD-mu iš[qâ], restored from 206:6, where it appears to be attached to ezib 1.
52 E.g., 88 r.2, 90 r.3, 132 r.5f, 155 r. 3, 156 r.7f, 209 r. 5f, 275:5f, and passim.
53 BBR 79 K 3750b:3; see BBR 97 note 3; cf. BBR 1-20:4.
54 [ana dīnim mahar Šamaš u Adad isanniqma, "he arrives before Šamaš and Adad for judgment" (BBR 1-20:16). The diviner echoes similar sentiments in the so-called "Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priest": "I am (cultically) clean, I am approaching the assembly of the gods for judgment" (JCS 22 25ff, line 9f).
Ivan Starr
Ivan Starr, 'The Standard Ezibs', Queries to the Sungod: Divination and Politics in Sargonid Assyria, SAA 4. Original publication: Helsinki, Helsinki University Press, 1990; online contents: SAAo/SAA04 Project, a sub-project of MOCCI, 2020 [http://oracc.org/saao/saa04/formularyandterminology/standardezibs/]