In the years since the study “Puzzling words and spellings in Babylonian Aramaic magic bowls”,Footnote ¹ the number of published incantation bowl and metal amulet texts has increased considerably. Three editions of public collections: British Museum (2000);Footnote ² Museo Nazionale d'Arte Orientale (2001);Footnote ³ and the Hilprecht-Sammlung (2005)Footnote ⁴ appeared shortly after that article was written. In addition, some specimens from private collections have come to our attention: the Moussaieff Collection (1995, 1999, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007);Footnote ⁵ the Paolo Costa Collection (2005),Footnote ⁶ and the Martin Schøyen Collection (1999, 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006).Footnote ⁷ However, puzzling words and hapax legomena are still extant from previous editions of these incantation texts and have not been corrected or etymologically placed, although better variants have been published in the meantime. A considerable number of these “ghost words” found their way into the latest Dictionary of Jewish Babylonian Aramaic by Michael Sokoloff (Reference Sokoloff2002).

It should be pointed out that in many instances it is not a matter of misread words, but rather corrupted spellings or scribal errors caused by text transmission or translation of incantation formulas from one Aramaic dialect to another.Footnote ⁸ There are also cases of the breakdown of “standard spellings” causing deviating graphic forms.Footnote ⁹ Often, a single missing letter may lead editors and lexicographers astray. The result in such cases is the complete incomprehension of the whole text passage on account of a misinterpreted word or a garbled spelling.Footnote ¹⁰ However, Morgenstern (Reference Morgenstern2005: 350) is certainly right when he points out: “Accordingly, it seems that one must be particularly wary of correcting supposed ‘mistakes’ in the language of the magic bowls. Frequently, these ‘mistakes’ are nothing but phonetic or dialectal variants of the more formal written language”. Still, certain “ghost words” are in need of being eliminated to keep faulty and non-existant lexemes out of future studies.

The new set of puzzling words presented here is arranged according to the alphabetic sequence of their first published reading. Accordingly, the article deals mostly with obscure spellings, or misread examples, and to a far lesser extent with misinterpreted meanings. However, the majority of the lexemes under discussion do not belong to the group of non-standard spellings where weakening of gutturals, apocope and other phonetic matters caused deviating forms. This study is not concerned with proper names, such as those of gods, angels and demons, or with various magical abbreviations, many of which still elude our understanding.

1. אזה in, PN בת PN חביל קומה כל בישה ובטילו אזה מן “he destroyed all evil from her presence, they annihilated ’zh from PN bat PN” (AMB B13: 8–9) can now be emended and corrected, on account of a parallel passage presented below, to PN בת PN מן ^sicחביל קומ〈ת〉ה בלבישה ובטיל ראזה “destroy the body in her garment and annul the mystery from PN bat PN”. The space between ראזה and ובטיל is quite large, therefore the badly executed resh is not part of ובטיל.Footnote ¹¹ The plene spelling of ראזה is obviously induced by a Mandaic “Vorlage”, since only this Aramaic dialect tends here to spellings with aleph; compare other attestations, e.g. in a KBA bowl also dependent on a Mandaic text ובשבעה ראזי תחתאי “and by the seven lower mysteries” (Moussaieff 102: 13). Apart from the orthography of ראזה, the assumption of a Mandaic prototype for the formula of AMB B13 is supported by many other indicators (concepts of the Aramaic incantation type, demon story, lexemes, orthography; see below). Several similarities with Mandaic have already been pointed out (Naveh and Shaked Reference Naveh and Shaked1985: 204–14).

כל בישה, as split up by Naveh and Shaked, does not suit the context. It is clearly to be read בלבישה. A parallel text produced by the same scribe refers to two male antagonists instead of one PN בר PN חביל קומתיהו בלבישהו ובטיל ראזה מן ביתיה ומן דירתיה ד “destroy their body in their garment and annul the mystery in the house and the dwelling of PN bar PN” (Christie's bowl, l. 6). The succession of verbs ^!רמי לה פולקתא בפומה תבר … שפיך^! … מחינה^! … חביל … ובטיל^! ראזה “throw her a bridle into her mouth break … pour out … wound her … destroy … and annul the mystery” (AMB B13: 8–9; collated reading) are clear masculine singular imperatives on account of the indicating מחינה “smite her” instead of מחונה “they smote him” (Naveh and Shaked Reference Naveh and Shaked1985: 198–9). The imperatives are introduced by an imperfect second singular תיתי “you shall bring” in l. 6 (see below under ת}יתי}, no. 70).

2. אידי “fates”, in איבטל) אידי שמיה) “the evil fates of the sky … (were annulled)” (AMB B13: 14, 20) can hardly be derived from Hebrew איד as suggested by Naveh and Shaked (Reference Naveh and Shaked1985: 200–03), since a Hebrew lexeme in a good Eastern Aramaic phrase is less plausible. One would at least expect the eastern term גד for “fate”. Because of hidden Mandaic concepts in the whole incantation formula, אידי could be read אורי “lights” with resh instead of dalet and waw instead of yod corresponding to Mandaic ‘wry’,Footnote ¹² which would better accord with the context. Another option might be the alternative reading אירי that would be based on Mandaic ‘yry’ “watchers”, as in the corrupted spelling אירי^sic (Borsippa bowl l. 9 [KBA]; see below under והרמגוני). Then אירי can be taken for a dissimilated variant of *עירי comparable to the weakening of ‘ayin as in ואלימני (AMB B13: 19; see below).Footnote ¹³ There are two possible translations איבטל אורי (/אירי) שמיה “annulled (itpaʿal) are the lights(/watchers) of heaven”.Footnote ¹⁴

3. איכא “is (?)”, in ונירדא וקיריתא ולוטתא ושיקופי(תא) (דאיכא ב)גיתא “vow, calamity, curse, affliction that is (?) in the world” (MSF B23: 4) was translated by Naveh and Shaked (Reference Naveh and Shaked1993: 132) with a question mark. Thus it is not included in their glossary. However, there is nothing peculiar about the spelling and meaning of איכא, since it is the expected particle of existence “there is”, the augmented variant in Central Babylonian Aramaic (Babylonian Talmudic Aramaic, Mandaic). For the first time איכא occurs in a koiné Babylonian Aramaic bowl text, and was not integrated in Juusola (Reference Juusola1999) as a peculiarity for the bowl texts.Footnote ¹⁵ The passage can be read and translated, ונירדא וקיריתא ולוטתא ושיקופית〈א〉 ד^?איכא בגותא “and vow and imprecation and curse and affliction that exist inside” (see below under גיתא). In the meantime another attestationFootnote ¹⁶ of איכא came to our notice: דאכא ב/כינא בחילן דילן “where exists understanding/nature in our own power” (BM 91767:11 = CAMIB 040A).Footnote ¹⁷

4.אילן, in כשורי אילן “these boards” (Moussaieff 145: 11) (BTA) is a tentative translation by Levene (Reference Levene2003b: 103) that can be corrected to “beams of wood”. אילן appears here in the absolute state of the genitive of material (see below under [מיצחו]).Footnote ¹⁸

5. אינשי, in קלהון דהנין אינשי קרה צנף ילול “The voice of these men called out: the howl shrieked!” (Pearson bowl ll. 6–7) is not “men” as understood by Geller (Reference Geller1986: 102–03), but “women”, since it refers to the preceding group of female family members who are cursing איפיכה לוטתא דאימא וברתא דכלייתא ויחמתא דרחיקתא וקרביתא^! דקימא בדברה וקימא במתה “overturned is the curse of the mother and daughter, of the daughter-in-law and the mother-in-law, of the far and the near female relative that exists [adjective קיים] in the desert and in the town” (Pearson bowl ll. 2–3). The homonymous spelling אינשי occurs again in והון גברי ואינשי “and be men and women” (AMB B6: 6) and in a recently published KBA text כל חרשי … דגברי ודאינשי “all sorcery … of men and women” (BM 91771: 6–7 = Müller-Kessler Reference Müller-Kessler2001/02: 125). It is the graphic equivalent of Mandaic ‘ynšy’. אינשי is also attested in a variant without aleph לוטתא דגברי Footnote ¹⁹וינשי דקימין בדברא “the curse of men and women that exist [adjective קיים] in the desert town” (AMB B2: 4) and again דגברי ודינשי (BM 91723: 1 = CAMIB 034A). The Pearson bowl passage can now to be read and translated קלהון דהנין אינשה קדח צנף יליל “the voice of those womenFootnote ²⁰ shouted,Footnote ²¹ shrieked, (and) howled”. This also explains the “deviating” demonstrative pronoun הנין, which is in fact a deictic pronoun of distance “those”, and not of nearness, “these”.Footnote ²²

6. אלי, in אתו אלי חרשי בישי “the evil sorcerers came to me” (BM 135563: 5–6 = Müller-Kessler and Kwasman Reference Müller-Kessler and Kwasman2000: 162)Footnote ²³ is hesitantly explained by Nebe as a deictic pronoun plural of nearness “es kamen diese Zauberer”.Footnote ²⁴ This could be an option to place the unexpected preposition על* > אל in this unique BTA text. However, אתי על is a common idiomatic expression in Aramaic incantations. It is attested in a bowl text with BTA dialectical overtones (אתא עליהון (/עליכון “he (Gabra, Lord Bagdana) came against them(/you)” (AMB B13: 9, 13) and recently in the af‘el, איתיתי עליכון מחבלא “I brought upon you destruction” (Moussaieff 50: 4) (SLBA), לא תיתון עלה “do not come against her” (Moussaieff 101: 7) (SLBA), איתי עליכון “I shall bring against you” (Moussaieff 164: 10, 11; BTA overtones).Footnote ²⁵ Dissimilated variants and calques from translations of other Aramaic dialects are always feasible, and to be expected, as Müller-Kessler and Kwasman (Reference Müller-Kessler and Kwasman2000: 163) pointed out. Cf. also אליכו “against you” (see no. 29 below).Footnote ²⁶

אתי על is also at home in the Mandaic magic phraseology. The idiom describes demons who come to do harm against someone. It can be found in quite a number of Mandaic magic stories bhn't' gbr' swr'yẖ m'wmyn'lkwn ḏ-srh{'} w't' ‘lykwn w'škhynkwn kwlkwn “By that Suraian (scribal error for nwkr'yẖ ‘alien’) Gabra I adjured you, by the one who threw himself down and came against you and discovered you all” (13Aa16–19 = BM 135791 I; unpubl.); kḏ ‘tyt ‘l' 'n' gwb'q ryš ml'k' ‘wz bnẖ ḏ-bwzn'y ml'kywn ḏ-kwlhyn “When I, Gubaq-Dew, the chief angel (and) Uz, the sons of Buznay, the king of all, came against her” (YBC 2364: 24–5 = Müller-Kessler Reference Müller-Kessler1996: 188, 190); w‘syr['] wrgyl' l‘gr'ywn ḏ-l' n‘twn ‘l 〈p‘yr nwkr'y’ gbr'〉 w〈‘l〉 m'm’y pt m'rt' ‘ntt' “and boun[d] and hobbled are their feet so that they cannot come against 〈Pir Nukraya, the man〉 and Mamay pat Martha, the woman” (5Bb12–14 = BM 132955 + ; unpubl.). Further examples are to be noted in late Mandaic magical sources.Footnote ²⁷

7. אלימני, in ניקטול סבי באסניהו ואלימני באישכריהו ני[סחו]פינהו לדר[ד]קי בשוקי “let us kill the old in their granaries, and the dumb in their wagons; let us sweep away the children in the market places” (AMB B13: 19) is not derived from the adjective אילם “mute”, as suggested (Naveh and Shaked Reference Naveh and Shaked1985: 203, 213), which only occurs in אילמין בפומיהון “mute in their mouths” (AMB B6: 7). It is a dissimilated spelling of עולימני “the young ones”. Compare the Mandaic spelling conventions, 'lm'ny' as a variant of ‘(w)lym'ny',Footnote ²⁸ but also etymologically written ‘wlymyẖ (Christie's lead roll l. 35; see below). However, in l. 12 of AMB B13 one finds the historical spelling, עולימא ועולמתא “the young boy and girl”. The nun before the emphatic plural ending י- in אלימני indicates the plural-forming suffix -ān, sometimes > -ōn, and not the diminutive. This old plural formation, productive in most Semitic languages, is randomly added in Aramaic before the external plural ending of certain word categories.Footnote ²⁹ Recent attested examples are: groups of people, drdqwny' “male children” (BM 103358: 6 = CAMIB 099M) (M); šly:ṭny' “rulers” (Ex 15: 15) (CPA); plants, parts of them, and their products, ני(ברזרעוני* > ביזר(ו “seeds” (Giṭṭin 68b) (BTA),Footnote ³⁰b'zrwny' (M), bzrwnh (MS 1928/54: 7) (KS); pyqwny' “blossoms” (M), bs:mnyn “balsam” (Mark 16: 1P^c) (CPA); y'rqwny' “greeneries” (M); nṣ:ny' “blossoms” (Cyril of Jerusalem 9: 10) (CPA); materials, ṣybwnyẖ “dyes” (Christie's lead roll l. 70) (M), myšknyn “leathers” (Hebr. 11: 37) (CPA); other terms, ḥwdr'nẖ “his circumferences” (Khuzistan lead roll b31) (M), ḥdrnwh:y (AO 17.284: 6) (BS); מעינה “her intestines” (Moussaieff 155: 9) (SLBA); מיצרניה “his borders” (Bava Batra 68a) (BTA). There are plenty of further examples in other dialects.

The reference to the small, the young, and the older ones belongs to the topos of Aramaic magical stories, e.g., for the first time it appears in the Uruk incantation, ma-⌈a-a⌉ qu-da-am ra-⌈ab⌉-ra-bé-e ú-ma-' ⌈dar⌉-da-qé-e ⌈ni-še⌉-e u ga-ba-re-e “what is before the great and the small ones, the women and the men” (recto ll. 10–12);Footnote ³¹ in Mandaic ḏ-mhnqy' y'ldy' wg'ṭly' lṭ'ly' ‘wly’ w‘lym'ny' wm'wly' s'by' “who strangle the infants and kill the children and the young ones, and carry off the old ones” (Ligabue lead roll 87–90; unpubl.); variant hynwn ḏ-mhnqy' wgṭly' 〈lṭ'ly'〉 ‘wlym'ny' wmwly' s'by' (Macuch lead roll 1a73–75; collated);Footnote ³²kḏ y'n'qyẖ w'p ‘wlymyẖ ws'by' l' šbqyt “while you neither spare the infants nor the young ones nor the old ones” (Christie's lead roll ll. 34–6). מיעולימיהון ועד סביהון מירברביהון ועד דערדקיהון “from the great to the small ones and from the young to the old ones” (Christie's bowl ll. 4–5).Footnote ³³ The passage in AMB B13: 19, therefore, has to be understood as follows: “let us kill the old ones in their granaries and the young ones in their fields,Footnote ³⁴ let us sweep away the children in the market streets”.Footnote ³⁵

8. אסרתא “band (?), bundle”, in Sokoloff Reference Sokoloff2002: 151; see below under דסותא.

9. אסירתא, in אסירתא (עיל)את ברזין וכהעאזר אס[י]ר […] [אסיר](תא) עילאת אסיר אספדיס עילאה באספדיס […] באס[ור] (ד)עולאם “bound is ‘yl't in the mysteries and kh‘'zr bound is […] bound is ‘yl't, bound is the supreme Aspades with Aspades […] in the bond of eternity” (Paolo Costa Collection bowl 2: 1–3). אסירתא cannot be a passive participle, but only a concrete noun “binding”. The passage was completely misread by Moriggi Reference Moriggi2005: 52. It reads אסיר רזא עילאה ברזא תחתאה אסיר רזא תחתאה ברזא עילאה אסיר אספריס עילאה באספריס תחותאה אסיר אספריס תחתאה באספריס עילאה “bound is the upper mystery by the lower mystery; bound is the lower mystery by the upper mystery; bound is the upper sphere by the lower sphere; bound is the lower sphere by the upper sphere”. Compare also the KBA bowl example ברזי עילאי וברזי תחתאי ובשבעה רזי עילאי ובשבעה ראזי תחתאי (Moussaieff 102: 12–13). The phrase is obviously based on a Mandaic theme, found in a magical bowl in similar words, ‘syr{'} r'z' ‘l'y’ br'z' tt'y' ‘syr r'z' tt'y' br'z' ‘l'y' ‘syr r'z' ḏ-‘wspyr' ‘l'y' br'z' ḏ-‘wspyr' tty' ‘syr r'z' ḏ-‘wspyr' tt'y' br'z' ḏ-‘wspyr' ‘l'y' (Princeton bowl ll. 4–10),Footnote ³⁶ and in a more elaborate text in the later magical source (DC 43 J 179–80, 183–5; unpubl.), which is in parts also identical to the Paolo Costa Collection bowl 2, אסיר רזא דשימשה ברזא דסיהרא אסיר רזא דסיהרא ברזא דשימשה (l. 3), and corresponds again to ‘syr r'z' ḏ-š'myš br'z' ḏ-syr' {‘syr' ‘syr' ‘syr'} ‘syr r'z' ḏ-syr' br'z' ḏ-š'myš (DC 43 J 181–3; unpubl.). The Princeton text deviates after ḏ-‘wspyr' ‘l'y' from the Aramaic square script version.Footnote ³⁷

10. אספדיס “Aspades”, in אסיר אספדיס עילאה באספדיס “bound is the supreme Aspades with Aspades” (Paolo Costa Collection bowl 2: 2) is not to be read with dalet as in Moriggi Reference Moriggi2005: 52, but with resh. It must be a Greek accusative or dative form of σϕαῖρα “sphere”. אספריס has not been attested so far in the various Jewish Aramaic dialects,Footnote ³⁸ only in Mandaic as ‘(w)sp(y)r' in pre-Classical Mandaic bkšwr'yhyn lygṭyt w‘sr⌈y⌉^t^ qwmb't rq‘yh' {brb} bmrb{d}' wlgyṭ' w‘syr' ‘wspyr' “I grasped and bound the arc of the firmament in the west by their [= goddesses] beams; and grasped and bound was the sphere” (1Cf7–9 = BM 134699; unpubl.), tyštg'š kwlh' ‘wspyr’ ḏ-šwmy' “you shall stir up each sphere of heaven” (Munic lead roll Ia33–4; unpubl.); for its appearance in context see above under אסירתא. However, אספריס is treated here as masculine, as in the early Mandaic Princeton text, l. 10 (br'z' ḏ-‘wspyr' ‘l'y'), and in other early Mandaic examples cited above, despite its being feminine in Greek, but the late Mandaic parallel shows, br'z' ḏ-‘spyr' ‘l'yt' (DC 43 J 184).Footnote ³⁹

11. אצמומי, in אצמומי “arrows of iron” (AMB B13: 14) as translated (Naveh and Shaked Reference Naveh and Shaked1985: 200–01, 213) is either a corrupted spelling of איצטמומיה “his spear” (Moussaieff 4:? [2.4] = Shaked Reference Shaked2006: 373), or an assimilated variant of איסטמומי < στόμωμα as found in איסטמומי פרזלא “spears of iron” (BM 91776: b2 = CAMIB 036A), or in Mandiac ‘sṭmwm’ ḏ-zyw' “spear of radiance” (7Bb33 = Lidzbarski lead roll 147), ‘syry' hrby' syypy' ^sicw‘sṭmwmy' ḏ-by〈l〉db'by' “swords, scimitars, and spears of the enemies” (McCullough bowl C4–5; collated reading),Footnote ⁴⁰ and later among other examples with regressive assimilation in hyrby' sypy' w‘ṣṭmwmy' wskyny' (Ginzā yamīnā 143: 19). A similar explanation was given by the Geonim, respectively. The ל in the Talmudic passage כסטומא לפרזלא (Berachoth 62b) is employed as a genitive particle. Another variant appears in a Syriac magical context 'sṭmw:m' “spears” (syriaque I52 = Gignoux Reference Gignoux1987: 14).Footnote ⁴¹

12. אריסותא, in ומן לוטתא ומן אשלמתא ומן אריסותא ךפרזלא “and from curses and from spells and from submission (?)” (AMB B11: 4) reads א}חטיתא} “harms” instead. The scribe obviously wanted to start again by analogy with aleph.Footnote ⁴²

13. ארני, in דמות אסא שוניא וארני “(in) the shape of myrtle, tree of chastity and pines” (AMB B13: 12) is hardly “pine”. No etymology is given by Naveh and Shaked Reference Naveh and Shaked1985. In this spelling the word has not been attested in the dictionaries. The first tree אסא is doubtless “myrtle” and borrowed from Akkadian asû. The second is שוניא “chaste tree” and is derived from Akkadian šunû. The third ארני is problematic. Sokoloff (Reference Sokoloff2002: 391) connects it with Syriac rw‘n' by explaining it through a complicated development to *הרענא, since in Šabbat 35b for הרני a variant אדאני is found. It is conceivable that ארני is borrowed from Akkadian as well, i.e. erēnu “cedar”, although the common Aramaic term for “cedar” ארזא occurs, according to Naveh and Shaked, in the same line. This, however, reads איבא as in the parallel מיתחזתון ליה בדמות איבא ואילנא “and you appear to him in the image of a cloud and tree” (Christie's bowl l. 9). The parallel variant by the same scribe shows דמות אזא שוניא וארא “myrtle, chaste tree, and bay tree” (Christie's bowl l. 10). Also this tree name is a loan or cognate with Akkadian ēru “bay tree”, listed under ערא (Sokoloff Reference Sokoloff2002: 878), and is attested for the first time in Mandaic as dlyb't wkyw'n ‘st'pw b'r' “Delibat and Kewan were gathering in a bay tree” (Munic lead roll IIc12–13; unpubl.).

14. ביבי “canal?”, in כרסיה ימא דלא ביבי “his belly is a lake without canals” (AMB B13: 6) is the correct meaning of ביבא, as suggested by Naveh and Shaked Reference Naveh and Shaked1985: 200–01, but was doubted by Sokoloff Reference Sokoloff2002: 199. The word is also attested in a Syriac bowl text among the client's belongings, dbythy 〈w〉dbybhy dPN br PN “of the house 〈and〉 of the canal (= gutter?) of PN bar PN” (AO 17.284: 1–2) (BS). ביבא or in Classical Syriac bwb' is a loan from Akkadian bību; see Müller-Kessler Reference Müller-Kessler2006b: 267. That the spelling in the Syriac bowl text does not conform to Classical Syriac can clearly be demonstrated by the deviating vocalization, which is often the case in such Syriac bowl texts.Footnote ⁴³

15.bḥzw' “?”, in … ṣwḥt' qll' wbḥzw' ḥṭyn' dptkr': wnydr' d'lh': mllt' dnyq:bt' “… the shouting, the contempt, and … the harm of the Patikars and the vow of the (male) gods, the speech of the female (goddesses)” (AO 17.284: 3–4) (BS) is an odd spelling. It was misunderstood as “Schande” (Müller-Kessler Reference Müller-Kessler1998: 335) and followed by b'wz' “visioni” (Moriggi Reference Moriggi2004: 292). By taking into account all of the available text parallels, the etymological placing of this noun can be put right. In the Mandaic variants bḥzw' is written byzy' (Macuch lead roll Ia12) or b‘z'hy’ “הבוז (?)” (Khuzistan lead roll b10–11). The koiné Syriac version from Nippur has [b]wzḥ' (IM 60960: 5 = TMH 7 3A) and the KBA variant shows another noun pattern ביזיונא (Borsippa bowl l. 5). bḥzw' is an obvious scribal error for bwzḥ' that can clearly be assigned to the Aramaic root √bzḥ “to mock” on the basis of the koiné Syriac Nippur variants such as [b]wzḥ' (IM 60960: 5 = TMH 7 3A) and in another incantation formula bwzḥ' (HS 3039: 4 = TMH 7 35).Footnote ⁴⁴ The Mandaic form b‘z’ḥy' confirms again that historical spellings were still extant in the pre-Classic language stage. No attestations of the root and its derivation are registered yet in the Mandaic dictionary.Footnote ⁴⁵ A spelling without ḥet Footnote ⁴⁶ is to be noted in SLBA bowl texts, מרי בוזא וקללא “lord of mockery and disgrace” (CBS 2952: 3 = AIT 5) and in the parallel 〈מרי בוזא וקלל〈א (MSF B14: 5).Footnote ⁴⁷

16. בישמיש, in בישמיש {מי} מיתקריתון “you are called by Shamish(?)” (AMB B13: 11) is not in need of correction and has to be differently divided, בישמי שמי מיתקריתון on account of a parallel variant that has בישמי שמיה מיתקריתון “by the names of his name you are called” (Christie's bowl l. 8).Footnote ⁴⁸ The he of the suffix 3 masculine singular was omitted by the scribe as later in the text נקיט *ליה > נקיט לי (l. 16).Footnote ⁴⁹

17.byt 'klk':, in 'drwn' gwty' dbyt 'klk': “the inner room of the dining hall” (MS 1928/54: external) and wl' nyḥṭwn bbyth wbmzwnh wb‘bwrh 'nšh wbyrwnh wbyt *'klky': dywy‘' br ršnyndwk (MS 1928/54: 7–8) “and that they cannot harm the house, the food, the corn, the people, the outside court(?), and the dining hall of Yawiʿa son of Rašnendukh” (Shaked Reference Shaked2000: 63, 75–7). I opted for reading byt 'kly' “dining hall” instead.Footnote ⁵⁰ However, the first reading by Shaked does seem to be correct, since byt *'klk': fits even better into the context. 'klk': is well attested in the Babylonian Talmud as א)כלכא) “storehouse for grain”, a loan from Akkadian kalakku,Footnote ⁵¹ which occurs as bīt kalakki in Neo-Babylonian.Footnote ⁵² Read and translate now, 'drwn' gwty' dbyt 'klk': “the inner room of the storehouses” and wl' nyḥṭwn bbyth wbmzwnh wb‘bwrh 'nšh wbzrwnh wbyt 'klk': dPN br PN “and they shall not harm the house and the food and the corn and the seed and the storehouses of PN bar PN”. Shaked's interpretation of the Pahlavi inscription has to be reconsidered.

18. בסיא “trampled”, in וסחוף כל איסתרתא סחפונהי לפתורהו שדונהו לאגנהו זלח להו חלבא בארבעא זויתא בסיא לקרניהו תברו לשיפורהו שויא לחדותהו נסיסא “and he wrecked all the goddesses, they wrecked their table, they cast away their chalice, they sprinkled fat in the four corners, they trampled upon their horns, they broke their trumpets, they turned their joy into grief” (AMB B13: 16–7) is clearly to be read כסיא instead of בסיא (Naveh and Shaked Reference Naveh and Shaked1985: 200–01) as in the parallel (Christie's bowl l. 14). Sokoloff (Reference Sokoloff2002: 224) rightly points out that the connection with Mandaic √bsy “to trample on” is doubtful.

Since all pronominal and object suffixes refer to איסתרתא, whose temples are destroyed, they have to be read י)הי)- for י)הו)-. The acting antagonist (Qanṭoniel) is addressed in the imperative masculine singular. Accordingly, read and translate וסחוף כל איסתרתא סחפינהי לפתורהי שדינהי לאגנהי זלח להי חלבא בארבעא זויתא כסיא נסיסא לחדותהי שויא לשיפורהי (/שבר) לקרניהי תבר “And hurl down all goddesses [= the statues of them], place upside down their [fem.] altars, fling down their [fem.] chalices, sprinkle for them [fem.] milkFootnote ⁵³ in the four hidden corners, break [note Christie's var.] their [fem.] horns and their [fem.] trumpets turn into gloomy joy”.Footnote ⁵⁴

19. גאוני, in דאמריתו ניזי נורי גאוני גברא מיגיני בארעא “That which you say, ‘Let us go and shoot(?) the pride(?) of the mighty one the protectors on the earth’” (AMB B13: 15) has to be a plene spelled form as in Mandaic g'wn' “colour, species”. The Christie's bowl l. 13 has נוכו instead of נורי. The passage has to be understood as: “because you say, ‘let us go and devour species of strong ones (and) protectors on earth’”.Footnote ⁵⁵

20. גורגיא, in גורגיא דאיגרא (Borsippa bowl l. 6) underwent the most puzzling change through text transmission. The bowl Syriac version reads here sky' d'gr': “the watching of the roofs” (AO 17.284: 5) and the Mandaic variants show another word, bkyt' ḏ-‘l ‘ng'ry’ “the weeping on the roofs” (Macuch lead roll Ia20–21) and bkyt' ḏ-‘l ‘ng'ry’ (Khuzistan lead roll b16–17; collated reading). While the Syriac variant sky' can be explained through a confusion between samek and bet in the Manichaean Syriac script, the square script variant remains enigmatic. According to the preceding Mandaic text parallels of the word pair, mṭ'ry' ḏ-bry't' (Macuch lead roll Ia19–20); m'ṭry' ḏ-byry't' (Khuzistan lead roll b16–17) “the guarding of the alleys” one expects something like “watching” or “looking”. גורגיא was explained by Harviainen (Reference Harviainen1981: 11) as “clamour”, from Syriac √grgy. However, it would then be parallel to the following Mandaic word pair of variants pt q'l' ḏ-šynt' “the voice of …” (Macuch lead roll Ia22) and pt q'l' ḏ-šwqy' “the voice of the market-streets” (Khuzistan lead roll b17–18; collated reading).

21. גילא, in גביה גבא דיגילא “his back is alum” (AMB B13: 6) reads clearly in the variant גביה גבא דגללא “his back/body is a back/body of stone” (Christie's bowl l. 4). One has here a description of a mighty warrior whose body is made of impenetrable material. Alum (calium sulfate and alium sulfate) is too soft to describe the body of a warrior.Footnote ⁵⁶ A similar concept, of a strong and unconquerable body, appears in a KBA bowl text, ואזלנא אנה … בקומתי גציצ〈ת〉א דפרזלא קרקפתי דפרזלא קומת דנורא דכיא {ול} ולבישנא לבושא דאדמסא דכיא וממללא “and I came … with my net-like body of iron, my skull of iron, my body of pure fire, and I was clad in a garment of pure and forged steel” (CBS 2945 + CBS 2923:1–2 = AIT 2 + 4).Footnote ⁵⁷

22. גיס, in את〈א〉 מריא אתא גיס קריב עליהון “There came the lord, there came the troop. He came against them” (AMB B13: 6–7) is not an absolute form of גיסא “robber band”, as Naveh and Shaked (Reference Naveh and Shaked1985: 207) assumed, but has to be taken here as an imperative pe‘al of √גוס. This verb is loaned from Akkadian gâšu. It is in use in BTA and Mandaic.Footnote ⁵⁸ Translate את מריא אתא גוס קריב עליהון “you, lord, come, meet, (and) fight against them” (< BTA).Footnote ⁵⁹

23. גיתא “the inhabited world”, in ושיקופי(תא) (דאיכא ב)גיתא “affliction that is(?) in the world” (MSF B23: 4) is not derived from Iranian gētīk as Naveh and Shaked (Reference Naveh and Shaked1993: 132–3) understood it, but is in fact the feminine Aramaic word גותא “inside”. The whole passage can be translated, וכל לוטתא … ושיקופת〈י〉א דאיכא בגותא “and every curse … and plague that exists in the inside (of PN bar PN)”. The reason that it can only be גותא here is that the client asks to be free of all kinds of evil entities, which can be deduced from the succeeding sentence, PN בר PN קיריא וקובלא^! 〈ו〉צעקתא דאית לי הוה דילי אנה ומללתא “and the speaking, the calling, and the countercharm, (and) the screaming which I have, I had, I, PN bar PN” (MSF B23: 4–5).Footnote ⁶⁰

24. דוריגי “…”, in דוריגי ונידרי ולוטתא ושיקופיתא וזיגוריתא “ladders (?) and vows and curses and afflictions and …”Footnote ⁶¹ (MSF B23: 2). The term is neither obscure nor connected with Babylonian Aramaic דרגא “step, ladder” as suggested by Naveh and Shaked (Reference Naveh and Shaked1993: 132–3), but was misread for חיטיני “harms”. A meaning such as “step, ladder” hardly fits into the context of evil actions. Compare a similar account of negative human characteristics occurring in a koiné Syriac bowl text, bzywn' wḥyṭwn' wnydr' wnwsy' wsgdt' w'šlmt' “mockery and harming and vow and trial and adoration and treachery” (IM 44107: 11–12)(KS).Footnote ^62,Footnote ⁶³

25. דדיבתה, in ראישיה ראישא דאריא ככיה ככי דדיבתה שיניה שיני דנמרא “his head is the head of a lion, his molar teeth are the molar teeth of a she-wolf, his teethFootnote ⁶⁴ are the teeth of a tiger” (AMB B13: 4) reads correctly בדיבוזה. The parallel text shows דבוזא “of the goat” (Christie's bowl l. 3). The AMB bowl reading can now be emended to בוזא .{ב}דיבוזה is a loan from Iranian, probably Middle Persian, buz (MacKenzie Reference MacKenzie1971: 20). It is attested for the first time in Aramaic,Footnote ⁶⁵ but already occurs in the compound כרבוז “oryx” Ḥullin 59b (Aruch) < Middle Persian xarbuz.Footnote ⁶⁶

26. דמם “to come to rest”, in -ונידימין עלה ד “and may they come to rest upon” (Moussaieff 102: 9) (KBA) need not be derived from a root mediae geminatae דמם as Levene (Reference Levene2003b: 142) suggests. I propose connecting it with √דמיFootnote ⁶⁷ however, it could be II-w/y as well. דמם as verbal root has not yet been attested in the Jewish Aramaic dialects. If one reads resh instead of dalet and waw instead of yod in the second syllable, it is a pe‘al of √רום “to rise upon”, נירומון. The verb רום would better accord with the context PN וד PN ונידילון עליהון חרשין בישין ונירומון עלה ד “and evil sorcerers will be liftedFootnote ⁶⁸ (√דלי) upon them and will raise against PN and PN” instead of Levene's “may evil sorceries be drawn against them, and may they come to rest upon Ahatoi and Awirta”.Footnote ⁶⁹

27. דני “jars”, in אקרקפה דני (Moussaieff 101: 12) (SLBA) is hardly a plural in the emphatic state of דנא “jar” as proposed by Levene (Reference Levene2003b: 41), since this meaning does not make sense in this context. דני must still be considered unclear. The same is true for the text variants דני (HS 3010: 6 = TMH 7 6) and דיני (HS 3033: 7 = TMH 7 7).

28. דסתרא, in ובחתמתא דסרתא דארעה “and with the seal(ing) of the band of the earth” (Borsippa bowl l. 11) (KBA) as read by Harviainen (Reference Harviainen1981: 5) and emended to א > סרתא> by Sokoloff (Reference Sokoloff2002: 151), who analysed it as a feminine noun with the meaning “band(?), bundle”. The correct reading of the clearly legible passage is ובחתמא דסדנא דארעה “and with the seal of the anvil of the earth”.Footnote ⁷⁰ Compare the Syriac variants, wḥtm sdn' d'r‘' (IM 60960: 13–4 = TMH 7 3A) (KS) and bḥtm:y sdn' d'r‘' (AO 17.284: 10) (BS). A recent attestation is ברזא דארעה ובסדנא דרקיעה “by the mystery of the earth and by the anvil of the firmament” (MS 1911/1: 4 = Shaked Reference Shaked2006: 377). This expression is a well-known concept of the Gnostic world.Footnote ⁷¹

29. הניה, in לא הניה אהניה לא הניה אהניה מיטול דמשיפנא אנין מיכול דשייף מיכול דנסי מיכול דקריט דנישמתה לא שייף ולא נסי ולא קריט “Not these over these, and not these over these. For I rub them from all that is rubbed, from all that is removed, from all that is broken. For the soul is not rubbed, not removed, not broken” (Moussaieff 4:? [2.7–2.9], Shaked Reference Shaked2006: 374) cannot be a demonstrative pronoun plural of nearness and has not been attested in this spelling in Aramaic. A demonstrative pronoun cannot be negated by לא. This subclause of cause needs in the main sentence a finite verb. Read and translate, לא הניה אהניה ולא הניה אהניה מיטול דמשיפנא אנין מיכול דשייף מיכול דנסי מיכול דקריט דנישמתה לא שייף ולא נסי ולא קריט “It did not affect him, it will affect him; it did not affect him, it will affect him, because I desiccated them; of all that he desiccated, of all that he took [BTA √נסב; hardly √נסי], of all that he broke; on account of the soul he did not desiccate, he did not take, and he did not break”.Footnote ⁷²

Further down in the same incantation text Shaked considers הניה a singular feminine demonstrative pronoun “this” next to the regular BTA form הא in, אי הניה מומתא תיאברו והא שבועתא לא תקבלו תיהוי אליכוה אחרמתא וגזירתא דהוי אחירמן טורא “if you trespass against this adjuration, and if you do not accept this oath, may there be against you a ban and a decree, which is on Mount Hermon” (Moussaieff 4:? [3.2] Shaked Reference Shaked2006: 374), although the first part of the conditional clause needs here a perfect. Read and translate, אי הניה מומתא תיאבדו והא שבועתא לא תקבלו תיהוי אליכוה אחרמתא וגזירתא דהוי אחירמן טורא “ifFootnote ⁷³ it affected him (the great primordial father), you would make [<√עבד] an adjuration and you would not receive this oath, (and) there would beFootnote ⁷⁴ this ban and decree against you [chiasmus], which wasFootnote ⁷⁵ on Mount Hermon”. This sentence and the following one is a curse formula reminiscent of the ones found in Sfire, Tell Fekheriye and now the Bukān inscription.

30. הע]ומדין], in ה[ד]ין אסרה הדין חתמ[ה הע]ומדין וקימין לעולם לאזחא ולאפ((ו))קא “This is the binding, this is the sealing that exists and subsists for ever, for removing and driving out” (MSF B20: 2/3; KBA). The reading and addition by Naveh and Shaked (Reference Naveh and Shaked1993: 126–7) is unlikely, since a Hebrew active participle and a Hebrew relative clause construction are hardly to be expected in a good Aramaic sentence. The text reads here הדין אסרה הדין חתמה דעמידין וקימין לעולם לאזהא^! ולאפקא “This bond (and) this seal that exist and subsist for everFootnote ⁷⁶ to expel and drive out …” (SLBA). עמידין וקימין לעולם is a Standard Western Aramaic phrase and can also appear in the text frame of an Eastern incantation. Despite the Hebrew loan of √עמד, it shows the expected Aramaic morpheme, a participle active /qātil/ with the plural ending ין-.Footnote ⁷⁷

31. והרמגוני “…”, in נטריא והרמגוני אינון נינטרוניה “they will be guard and (+ one word) for him” (Borsippa bowl l. 9–10) (KBA) was the first reading by Harviainen (Reference Harviainen1981: 5). Greenfield and Naveh (Reference Greenfield and Naveh1985: 103) divided into אגר דמגיני instead. It has to be read אירי^! מגיני, on account of the parallels in the Syriac bowl version nṭwr': ‘yywr': wmgyn': (AO 17.284: 8) and Mandaic n'ṭry' ‘yry' wmg'ny' (Macuch lead roll Ia48–9).Footnote ⁷⁸ The diverse Aramaic text variants prove that ^!אירי can be only a dissimilated variant (/‘ < ’/) and corrupted spelling of the Syriac form ‘yywr' “watchers” (√‘wr) and its Mandaic counterpart ‘yry'. It parallels נטרי “protectors” and its synonym מגיני “keepers”, a nomen agentis of √נטר “to protect”,Footnote ⁷⁹ of which another attestation, מיגיני, is to be noted in an Aramaic bowl text (AMB B13: 15).Footnote ⁸⁰

32. ותיתסיב דחמיש מיא “et qu'ell vieilisse de cinq cents (ans)” (private collection l. 2, 3). This misread passage by Gorea (Reference Gorea2003: 79–80) is a well-known introductory phrase in Aramaic magic formulas and reads ותיתסי ברחמי שמיא “you may be healed by the mercy of heaven”. It occurs frequently, e.g., ויתסי ברחמי שמיה (Borsippa bowl l. 2, 3), דיתסי ברחמי שמיא (AMB B11: 8) etc.

33. זבין “people with gonorrhoea/discharge”, in ואם לא אתי עליכון מיא מיפום שבע זבין “and if not I shall bring against you water from the mouths of seven people with gonorrhoea/discharge” (Moussaieff 164: 11) as interpreted by Levene (Reference Levene2007: 62) is loaned from Akkadian zābu “to stream”, and means “river, stream” as in Mandaic. It recently occurred in an Aramaic magic bowl text for the first time: עופא רבא דזיבי “the great bird(s) of the rivers” (Moussaieff 145: 10) (BTA). The sentence should be translated “and if I do not bring water from the mouth of seven rivers/streams”.Footnote ⁸¹

34. וזיגוריתא “…”, in ונידרי ולוטתא ושיקופיתא וזיגוריתא “and vows and curses and afflictions and …” (MSF B23: 2) (KBA) is not “wasp” or unclear as Naveh and Shaked (Reference Naveh and Shaked1993: 132–3) understand it. If dalet is read instead of resh, it is זיגודיתא “adoration”, a noun derived from √סגד√ > זגד.Footnote ⁸² The variant form sgdt' occurs in Syriac bowl texts, wnydr' wnwsy' wsgdt' w'šlmt' “and the vow and the temptation and the adoration and the treachery” (Helsinki bowl l. 12) (KS), wnydr' wnsy' wsgdt' w'šlmt' (IM 44107: 12) (KS).Footnote ⁸³ One might also consider an emendation to מ〉זיגודיתא〉 with an identical meaning. This noun has been attested in Mandaic, m'sgwt',Footnote ⁸⁴ in a koiné Syriac bowl text, msgwdyt' (HS 3039:5 = TMH 7 35), and in comparable accounts of evil entities, e.g. in a KBA incantation text ונידרי ולוטתא ושיקופתא ומזגידתא (BM 91771: 7 = Müller-Kessler Reference Müller-Kessler2001/02: 125).Footnote ⁸⁵

35. זכוריתא, in וחומרי זכוריתא (?) על חדיוהון מחתון להון “and they have caused rings of divination (?) to descend on their chests” (Moussaieff 6: 11) (KBA) as suggested by Shaked (Reference Shaked1995: 213–15) should be read and translated: וחומרי זכוכיתא על חדייהון מחתין להון “and they laid beads of shining glass on their chest”.Footnote ⁸⁶ זכוכיתא occurs in BTA as זכוכיתא חיורתי “white (transluscent) glass” (Giṭṭin 68a) and זכוכיתא רומיתא (Ḥullin 84b) as a variant of זוגיתא.Footnote ⁸⁷ It proves that the BTA variants זכוכיתא cannot be taken as corrupt, but that they are phonetic spellings of Mandaic zg'gyt' and Syriac zgwgyt', corresponding to Akkadian zakakātu, zukukūtu “glass”. The other two variants, BTA זוגיתא and Mandaic zg'wyt', are correct too, since they are based on the same intervocalic elision of /g/ as in Mandaic trn'wl' “cock” and z'w' “spouse”.Footnote ⁸⁸ Shaked's reading and interpretation hardly fit into the context, since, when “the angels adorn themselves with shining garments and a sparkling crown”, why should “they have caused rings of divination (?) to descend on their chests at the same time”?Footnote ⁸⁹

36. זלעיקא in באדא אכלא רבא דזיוא {סורא} ספסי{פ}〈ר〉א רבא דזלעיקא “with a great mace of splendour, a great sword of ray” (CBS 16041: 15 = AIT 27; unpubl. passage) (KBA)Footnote ⁹⁰ is probably identical to Mandaic and Syriac zlyq'. It is spelled here with the mater lectionis ‘ayin before yod, comparable to Mandaic graphic conventions to indicate long vowels /ī/, /ē/, /ū/. The whole passage is obviously a translation of a Mandaic “Vorlage”, therefore the KBA dialect style.Footnote ⁹¹

37. חי חי מץ, in בשום טיטינוס חי חי מץ פגרי רעש ופגרי רגש “In the name ṬYṬNWS ḤY ḤY MṢ bodies of commotion and bodies of tumult” (Moussaieff 101: 11–12) according to Levene (Reference Levene2003b: 40–41), for which Morgenstern (Reference Morgenstern2005: 352) suggested the reading הוהי מץ, can be understood through its text parallels which constantly show בשים טיטוניס חיי חמץ פגרי רעש ופגרי רגש “In the name of Ṭiṭinos my life turned sour, my body reacted, and my body trembled” HS 3005: 5, HS 3010: 4, HS 3033: 5 = TMH 7 5–7); (Istanbul 1167: 8–9); (BM 117824: 18 = Müller-Kessler Reference Müller-Kessler2001/02: 123).Footnote ⁹²

38. דייי רבא, in ובישמיה דייי רבא מלאכה דיתליה (AMB B2: 6) is clearly to be read דייורבא. Read also ובשמיה דיורבא מלאכה דאית ליה (BM 91720: 13 = CAMIB 007A) instead of Segal (Reference Segal2000: 49), ובשם היתבא רבא מלאכיה דאית ליה. This Jewish angel name occurs frequently in Mandaic incantation texts and is based on a Jewish concept, see now ‘stkyt whwz'ytẖ lywrb' kḏ y'tyb bškynt' ḏ-npš[ẖ wl]ml'ky' ḏ-mnhry' škyntẖ ḏ-q'ymy' (BM 117880: 8–9 with Müller-Kessler Reference Müller-Kessler2001/02: 131; Ford Reference Ford2002: 242–3).

39. יפרזון see under ניפחזוניה.

40. כוני “planet”, in הפיכי כוני (BM 91727: 5 = CAMIB 009A) according to Sokoloff (Reference Sokoloff2002: 564) reads הפיכי כוכבי.Footnote ⁹³ The planet Kewan כיון is attested once in a bowl (BM 91771: 5 = Müller-Kessler Reference Müller-Kessler2001/2: 125) and twice in similar formulas (YBC 2393: 3; VA 2492: 5 [unpubl.]). The spelling כוני would be rather unusual for כיון.Footnote ⁹⁴

41. כ)פידיה), in כ)פידיה גילגלי בעננא) “his shoulders are the spheres in a cloud” (AMB B13: 5) clearly reads קוליה and in parallel קליה (Christie's bowl l. 4). The compound “kp-yd” as proposed by Naveh and Shaked (Reference Naveh and Shaked1985: 207), is not feasible in Aramaic.Footnote ⁹⁵ גילגלי is employed here as a plurale tantum corresponding to Mandaic g'rgwly' in the sense “rumbling, thunder”.Footnote ⁹⁶ The passage has to be understood as: “his voice is the thunder/rumbling in a cloud”.Footnote ⁹⁷

42.l'pwly' in l'pwly' bny' 'n'š' “to prostrate humankind” (BM 117880: 10 = CAMIB 081M) is a scribal error for l'p〈d〉wly'. This emendation is possible on account of similar usage in wb'y' lpdwly' ‘t't' mn gbr' “and she tries to separate wife from man” instead of emended lprw{l}〈ṭ〉y' (YBC 2364: 23–4). The parallel has w‘n[tt’ mn] gbr' lyplwdy' (6Ba70–71 = BM 132948),Footnote ⁹⁸ and in another bowl the variant appears: ḏ-‘tt’ mn gbr' t‘pl'd (MS 1928/5: 13; unpubl.).Footnote ⁹⁹ This verbal root pdl is obviously a shortened variant of √pndl = √pndn corresponding to Syriac √plhd “to separate, tear off, disperse”.Footnote ¹⁰⁰ Although the root is not yet attested in Babylonian Talmudic Aramaic, it belongs to the lexical geography of Babylonia. A Mandaic parallel shows a synonym instead, af‘el of √npq, l'npwqy’ “to drive out” (1London bowl l. 11 = Müller-Kessler Reference Müller-Kessler2001/02: 131).

43. לימ(ו…)א “…”(Moussaieff 145: 4) instead of Levene Reference Levene2003b: 100, is to be read לימעביא “to accumulate”, as in the parallel לימ(ע)ביא (MS 2053/159:4). It is an infinitive peʿal of √עבי “to be thick, dense”.Footnote ¹⁰¹

44. מגזא “…”, in חרשא טנפא ומגנא ומגזא (MSF B24: 4) cannot be derived from √גזי or the expected spelling would be מגזיא. The verbal root is √גזז “to cut off”. The verb preceding ומגזא reads ומגזא, and not ומגנא as Naveh and Shaked (Reference Naveh and Shaked1993: 134, 136) suggested. It is obviously a case of dittography.

45. מדובקא see under מרובין.

46. מולה, in ומחתא מוח ומולה מן אודנה “and smites the brain and the earlap from her ear” (Moussaieff 1: 5) is not feasible according to Shaked (Reference Shaked1995: 209). A translation “smites” needs to be spelled מחיא for a participle of the verbs III-y. It is, however, an active participle af‘el of √נחת.Footnote ¹⁰² מולה is definitely an active participle af‘el of √יבל√ > יול, as in the Mandaic extant root √יול (Drower and Macuch Reference Drower and Macuch1963: 188) by intervocalic shift /w/ < /b/ (see also below under מקבלתא ,קבלאתא). Translate now “(Ruḥa) places (it) on her brain und takes it from her ear” (SLBA).Footnote ¹⁰³

47. מיצחו, in וכליל מיצחו בראשיהון תריץ להון “and the crown of his forehead stands upright on their heads” (Moussaieff 6: 11) is translated by Shaked (Reference Shaked1995: 213–14). מיצחו is a nominal form with the abstract forming suffix ו- derived from √צחח “to shine, sparkle” and can be understood as “and they erected a crown of splendour on their heads”. A Hebrew lexeme (?) in an Aramaic sentence is in general not the rule in eastern magical texts. There is also a clear Mandaic concept behind the incantation formula.Footnote ¹⁰⁴

Such an absolute state is employed in Aramaic to describe the material out of which objects are made, named genitive of material, e.g. in אטור גלל “on a mountain of stone” (Moussaieff 145: 1), כשורי אילן “beams of wood” (Moussaieff 145: 11), סוסטמין דברזל 〈ב〉ריחיה דברזל ושושלן ד[אבר “shackles of iron, boltsFootnote ¹⁰⁵ of iron and chains of [lead]” (Wiseman bowl 9 = TMH 7 11d),Footnote ¹⁰⁶ but far more frequent is the alternative construction with the genitive particle and emphatic state, ^?ואשינא רבתא דגללא “and on a great rock of stone” (Moussaieff 145: 1), ואטורא רבה דגללא (MS 2053/159: 1), ^!טינרא רבה דיגללא “a rock of stone” (AMB B13: 14), and וגביה גבא דגללא “and his back is a back of stone” (Christie's bowl, l. 4), which can be clearly read.Footnote ¹⁰⁷ Even if there is a tendency to avoid the absolute and replace it in later eastern Aramaic texts by the emphatic, the early texts still employ correct forms, and show very few deviations.Footnote ¹⁰⁸ Another option for expressing the genitive of material is to use an adjective formed with the suffix -āy (Zugehörigkeitsadjektiv), as found in a pre-Classic Mandaic text 'n' [ṭwr'] rb' ḏ-gl'l' wgwrmyz' r[b'] ḏ-przl'y' “I am the great mountain of rock and the great fist of iron” (Christie's lead roll ll. 3–5), and in a BTA bowl example, וקר{ק}פ〈ד〉נא רבא דניסכאיא “a great warrior of cast (iron)” (Moussaieff 145: 12).

48. מהרין, in ומן מהרין תקיפין ומן מללא בישא “and from mighty spells and from evil speech” (AMB B11: 3)Footnote ¹⁰⁹ reads מסרין “treachery”. It is an abstract plural noun of √מסר and is attested in the bowl text K 3449: 6 too. Another variant shows a plene spelling in the emphatic plural מאסרי (Geller D5: 9).Footnote ¹¹⁰

49. מנידין, in ואילין משמתין ומנידין גזירין ותבירין “and these are anathematized and thrust away, cut off and broken” (BM 91723: 2 = CAMIB 034A) is a continuous falsa lectio from Rodwell (Reference Rodwell1873) (מנודין), Halévy Reference Halévy1877, Chwolson Reference Chwolson1882, Schwab Reference Schwab1890, Jeruzalmi 1963, Isbell 1975, and recently Segal Reference Segal2000. The word clearly reads ומנזרין “and excommunicated”, a pa‘el of the SLA lexeme √נזר. It accords here far better with the row of banning verbs.Footnote ¹¹¹

50. מקבלתא, in מקבלתא דאובהתא (Borsippa bowl l. 5–6) (KBA) is a garbled writing of *תקבלתא דאורחתא as can be seen by the Syriac variant tqblt' dḥršt' (AO 17.284: 4 according to the handcopy of Fuÿe Reference de la Fuÿe1924). tqblt' is derived by the merging of intervocalic /b/ < /w/ from *tqwlt' as also attested for KBA, BTA אישתוש ,נישתוש /w/ < /b/ > /m/ (Moussaieff 102: 11; 145: 8) and other examples.Footnote ¹¹² The Mandaic variants provide the missing link for this lexeme, t'qblt' {ḏ-}ḏ-‘whr't’ “stumbling blocks of the road” (Macuch lead roll Ia17–18) and wtyqlt' ḏ-‘whr't’ (Khuzistan lead roll b14–15).Footnote ¹¹³Mem and taw can easily be confused in the Mandaic script and may have caused just such a puzzling spelling in the transmission of the text formula; see also below under קבלתא.Footnote ¹¹⁴

51. מרובין “educators (?)” in וטולנין ולילין וימרובין “shadow spirits, liliths, educators (?)” (MSF B15: 6)Footnote ¹¹⁵ occurs again as מריבין (Geller A18) and as מדובקי (Geller A7).Footnote ¹¹⁶ All three can clearly be read מרזבין “gutter-demons”. מרזבין also appears in the Moriah bowl l. 25.Footnote ¹¹⁷ Another attestation מרזביא is found in the unedited Nippur bowl (12 N 387: 3),Footnote ¹¹⁸ and now רוח מ{זר}〈רז〉יבי “spirit of gutter demons” (Moussaieff 1: 6).Footnote ¹¹⁹ The latest attestation is מרזביא (VA 3854: 5).Footnote ¹²⁰ מרזבין is a phonetic variant of נרזביןFootnote ¹²¹ as found in other bowl texts ניר〈ז〉בי (K 2080: 8)Footnote ¹²² and נרזבי “gutters, roof sprouts” (Gordon H3).Footnote ¹²³ Both מרזבין and נרזבין are well-known demon groups that frequently appear in Mandaic incantation formulas.Footnote ¹²⁴ The eastern attestations and Qumran Aramaic מרזבין “sluice” (Enoch^c 238: 16)Footnote ¹²⁵ are definite loans from Akkadian nan/mṣabu “gutter”Footnote ¹²⁶ and show a dissimilated form in Aramaic.Footnote ¹²⁷

52. מרזקופתא “hanging”, in ונידרי ולוטתא ושיקופתא ומזגידתא ומרזקופתא (BM 91771: 7 = CAMIB 039A) reads מרזהיפתא “…” instead. It is a nominal form of the saf‘el סרהב “to hasten, to be angry” based on the sound shifts /z/ < /s/ and /p/ < /b/.Footnote ¹²⁸

53. משישבי, in נהורא חשיכית בבי אחדית משישבי סכרית “the light I darkened, the doors I closed, the windows I shut” (BM 91776: 14 = CAMIB 036A), better read as משושבי. It could be a nominal form of the Akkadian šaf‘el stem of wašābu, a loan in Aramaic; cf. also mūšabtu “a part of a house?” from Šumma ālu (tablet 46).Footnote ¹²⁹ משושבי is attested next to this KBA bowl in Mandaic, where it puzzled Drower and Macuch (Reference Drower and Macuch1963: 280), who interpreted mšašbia as “window”. A preferable interpretation is to take it to mean “door in a gate” or “porter's lodge”. One could also consider a connection with Qumran Aramaic שפש “door in a gate” 5Q I i 8 and the Talmudic Hebrew word משופש.Footnote ¹³⁰

54. ניפחזוניה, in …נינטרוניה ונישיזבוניה ניפחזוניה וניכלכלוניה ל “they will guard and save and encourage and maintain …” (Borsippa bowl l. 10) (KBA) is a misspelling of ניפ〈ר〉הזוניה “they shall abstain him”.Footnote ¹³¹ It can be corrected after Mandaic parallels n‘prhzwnẖ (Khuzistan lead roll c8) and nypr[h]zwn'[n] (Macuch lead roll Ia50–51) and the Syriac variants nprḥzwnwn (IM 60960: 10 = TMH 7 3A), with metathesis nprzḥwn (AO 17.284: 8), which provide the expected spelling.Footnote ¹³² Another corrupted form is יפרזון, but without he in ויגערון ויזיעון ויפרחון ויפקון ויפרזון (BM 131669: 2–3 = CAMIB 020A). The verb is of Iranian origin and probably loaned from Middle Persian phrēz 1 “to abstain, restrain” into Central Babylonian Aramaic. In the Mandaic dictionary it is connected with Modern Persian parhīz.Footnote ¹³³ Obviously Mandaic 'prwz 'l'hy' (DC 40: 491; unpubl.)Footnote ¹³⁴ is a short form of prhz as well, and not a loan from Hebrew.Footnote ¹³⁵

55. עברא,Footnote ¹³⁶ in ותובי כי עברא על ליביה כ[…]תא על מחו “and sit like a slave on his heart, like a … on his brain” (BM 91767: 4–5 = CAMIB 040A) is clearly to be read נירבא, and not with ‘ayin and resh עברא “bolt” as suggested by Ford in Morgenstern Reference Morgenstern2007a: 13. The letter ‘ayin is always well executed by the scribe in this bowl text.Footnote ¹³⁷ It is an obvious misspelling of צירבא “lead or purified silver” (AO 1177: 4). Read ותיבי כי נירבא על ליביה כ[י פר]זלא על מחי “and sit like lead on his heart, like ironFootnote ¹³⁸ on his brain”.Footnote ¹³⁹

56. סגמה, in סגמה פומה “(that spirit) shuts up her mouth” (Moussaieff 1: 11)Footnote ¹⁴⁰ is a puzzling root from an etymological point of view, since the verb √sgm does not exist in Aramaic. It has been correctly translated by the editor as “shuts up” for obvious contextual reasons. Sokoloff did not integrate this verbal root in his JBA dictionary on account of doubt. However, the same spelling can frequently be found in Mandaic in the passive participles pe‘al and pa‘el: ‘syr' wsdym' wmsg'm' wrgyl' ‘str' rbty' “bound and fettered, and shackled and hobbled is the great Ištar” (CBS 2941: 10 = AIT 39), in an enlarged version: ‘syr' wsdym' whdym' wsgym' wmsg'm' wrgyl' wmr'gl' ‘str' rbty' (1London bowl ll. 21–2; unpubl.); and in a very short variant ‘syr' ‘str' rbyty' ḏ-byt 'bwg'd'n' (1Ba255–6 = BM 132947+ ; unpubl.), it is missing. According to the Mandaic dictionary there is another passage with an imperfect l'sgwm lyspyh'twn (DC 44; unpubl.).Footnote ¹⁴¹ All spellings of the verb sgm are graphic errors for sṭm “to shackle, stop up”, as gimel and ṭeṭ can be easily confused in the Mandaic script. The two characters are often not clearly distinguished by the scribes, as the present author experienced while decipering Mandaic metal amulets.Footnote ¹⁴²

57. ספסיפא, in באדא אכלא רבא דזיוא {סורא} ספסי{פ}〈ר〉א רבא דזלעיקא “with a great mace of splendour, a great sword of ray” (CBS 16041: 15 = AIT 27; unpubl. passage) is an obvious scribal error for Iranian ספסירא “sword”. It is frequently attested in BTA texts and occurs once in Mandaic as s'bsyr' in Shafta ḏ-Pishra ḏ-Ainia (= DC 21: 201).Footnote ¹⁴³

58. -עד אמא ד, in עד אמא דנינדי מוקריה על גללי “until his brain was bespattered on the stones” (Moussaieff 163: 24) is a misspelling of the conjunction -עדמא ד “until”, and not of (עד אימת(י, as Levene (Reference Levene2003b: 9) explained.Footnote ¹⁴⁴ Alternatively, on account of a similar form עדאמי דנמטי זבן ואידן דאכא בינא “until comes time and season so that there is understanding” (BM 91767: 11 = CAMIB 040A) it might simply be considered as a plene spelling of עדמא.Footnote ¹⁴⁵

59.‘dylt', in wdkwl dš't' (my') mn […] (w)‘dylt' wb(‘)q' dndryn lh l_ “and anyone who drinks water (?) from … and the accusation and convulsion that they pour down on …” (MSF B26: 3) (KS) is not possible. The whole passage is to be read: wdkwl dš't' my' mn nhr' w'[kl] gblt' wm⌈ny⌉' dndryn lh l_ “and everyone who drinks water from the river and e[ats] dough, and the vessels that one vows to him …”.

60. פולקתא, in רמי לה פולקתא בפומה “He cast a hatchet into her mouth” (AMB B13: 8) and similarly in the variant רמי להו פולקתא בפומיהו (Christie's bowl l. 6). Naveh and Shaked (Reference Naveh and Shaked1985: 208) connected it with p(y)lg' “axe”, attested in Syriac and Mandaic. However, the feminine ending in פולקתא makes this doubtful. I wonder if it is not an error for Mandaic pygwdt' bpwmẖ “bridle in his mouth” (DC 43 J 149; unpubl.),Footnote ¹⁴⁶ but without a Mandaic parallel, פולקתא remains enigmatic. Translate “cast him/them a bridle into her/their mouth”.

61. פלגוד, in ולא כולה פלגוד … ולא כולה משריתיך … ולא כולה מרכבתיך “and not the whole plgwd …, and not the whole of your camp … and not the whole of your chariot” (Moussaieff 6: 19) according to Shaked (Reference Shaked1995: 213–5) reads פלגיך “your phalanx”, and also in l. 16, where the scribe erred, since it should be read פלגיה, on account of succeeding ומן כולה משריתיה …ומן כולה מרכבתה. A recent attestation is לפלגא דשידי “for the phalanx of Šedas” (Moussaieff 145: 4).Footnote ¹⁴⁷

62. פרחוני, in הלין מלאכי ניהוון פרחוני ומיצרי ביני טב לביש “these angels will be exorcists (??) and boundaries between good and evil” (Borsippa bowl l. 9 [KBA])Footnote ¹⁴⁸ is an error for פרשוני “divisions” according to the only extant variant in Mandaic lhwwlẖ Footnote ¹⁴⁹pw{r}rš'n' myṣry b‘ny' byš' lṭ'b' “(the four angels) may be for him division (and) borders between bad and good” (Macuch lead roll Ia45–7). Also the scribe of the Syriac text variant erred, nhw' pr〈š〉wn' wmyṣr' byny dbyš': wlṭb' (IM 60960:10 = TMH 7 3A).Footnote ¹⁵⁰

63. פיריוטי, in בעלדבבי תקיפי ופיריוטי בישי “mighty enemies, evil pirates” (K 3449: 6), can hardly have the meaning “pirates” as suggested by Geller (Reference Geller and Rendsburg1980: 60). Although the reading of the text could not be checked, the interpretation of פיריוטי as “pirates”, from Greek πειρατής, is impossible in a Mesopotamian magic text of that period. פיריוטי is obviously a spelling mistake for פיטיורי. The word is of Iranian origin and was explained by Shaked (Reference Shaked1985: 106) as being borrowed from Middle Persian paityārak-. Shaked did not mention the earlier Mandaic attestations piṭiara for which Furlani (Reference Furlani1954), followed by Drower and Macuch (Reference Drower and Macuch1963: 370b) had proposed a derivation from √pṭr. פיטיורי frequently occurs in Mandaic magic texts. It is employed as the Iranian counterpart of the Akkadian loanword בעלדבבי “enemy”. In the Mesopotamian Aramaic incantation type Iranian terms are often juxtaposed with Akkadian ones, שידי – דיוי ,אלהי – פתכרי, and there are more examples in Aramaic demon lists to be noted.

64. קבלאתא, in ונידרי ולוטתא ושיקופיתא וזיגוריתא Footnote ¹⁵¹וקבלאתא “and vows and curses and afflictions and … and charms” (MSF B23: 2–3) is a hapax legomenon. קבלאתא can hardly be an unattested plural of קיבלא “countercharm” as Naveh and Shaked (Reference Naveh and Shaked1993: 132) interpreted it, but is obviously a corruption of תקבלאתא “stumbling blocks” < תקולאתא /b/ < /w/, see above under מקבלתא.Footnote ¹⁵²

65. קומה “from her presence” (AMB B13: 8) as read and translated by Naveh and Shaked (Reference Naveh and Shaked1985: 198–9) would be a hapax form of the preposition קודם “before” in the period of Late Aramaic from Babylonia. For its obvious correct interpretion see above under אזה.Footnote ¹⁵³ However, the preceding קמה in שפיך מוקרה קמה “spill out [not שפיד pierced; imperative not perfect] her brain before her” (AMB B13: 8) and in the variant שפיך מוקריהו קמיהו “spill outFootnote ¹⁵⁴ their brain before them” (Christie's bowl l. 6) is the expected BTA form of קודם. The preposition appears again in דחתימה ליה נפשיה מיטול דחתימא ליה נפשיה לאבא רבה קדמאה ותריצה ליה קמיה דאדמסא דכייא ותריצא ליה קמיה לאבא רבא קדמאה “for his soul is sealed for him, for his soul is sealed for the great primordial Father, and (the soul) is erected before him as a shield/protector of pure steel, and it is erected before him, for the great primordial Father” (Moussaieff 4:? [2.1–2.3] = Shaked Reference Shaked2006: 373).Footnote ¹⁵⁵

66. קינא, in אכיף ימא קינא “I am standing upon the shore of the sea” (Moussaieff 145: 9) – in the parallel text קאינה (MS 2053/159:9) – is neither a misspelling nor a verbal form of √קום with elision of /m/ and a shortened suffix of the independent personal pronoun first singular נא-, as translated by Levene (Reference Levene2003b: 103). Morgenstern (Reference Morgenstern2007b: 265) still maintains the suggestion that both forms represent phonetic spellings for historical קאימנא by apocope of /m/ as to be found in BTA. However, קאינה/קינא is not a verb here, but a case of a noun IIIy, which by epenthesis of קניא “reed” becomes קאינא .קאינא was obviously borrowed in this spelling from Mandaic q'yn',Footnote ¹⁵⁶ as is to be noted in other examples in this text that certain orthographic features, lexemes, and concepts speak for a Mandaic forerunner. ימא קינא corresponds to y'm' ḏ-swp in Mandaic. The other reason why the interpretation as a verb cannot be correct is that, according to the structure of the text, a finite verb – third person and not first person – should start the sentence “he bend down the reed sea”. The anonymous speaker opens the magical story in direct speech in l. 1 (אטור גלל קינא “I stood on a mountain of stone”) and continues then at the end of l. 9, אמנליה משיילנא ליה מומינא ליה לעופא רבא דזיבי “I said, asked (and) adjured the great bird of the rivers”.Footnote ^157,Footnote ¹⁵⁸

67. qrd'n', in wmn bwrṣẖ ḏ-qrd'n' ḏ-sykyn' w‘swq' ḏ-przl' “and from the edge of the corrosion of a knife and a splinter of iron” (Christie's lead roll, 60–62)Footnote ¹⁵⁹ is a hapax legomenon in Mandaic. It is obviously derived from the verb √qrd “to corrode” plus the noun-forming suffix -ān. Although the Mandaic dictionary lists a verb √qrd and connects it with the pa‘el of √qrd in Syriac (Drower and Macuch Reference Drower and Macuch1963: 415), Brockelmann (Reference Brockelmann1928: 693a) doubted the reading and suggested √bdr instead. The root could be cognate with Arabic √qrd “to corrode”. An alternative solution may be that this is a case of n/l interchange, and then it would be connected with Syriac qrdl' “hanging pot”, borrowed from Greek καλδάριον. In this case the passage would have to be translated “and from the edge of a hanging pot, of a knife, and a splinter of iron”. Another possibility could be a confusion of letters in the script, i.e. one might read mem instead of qof, which can easily be confused in Mandaic script. mrd'n' would be then “spindle”, as attested in Geonic Aramaic and Syriac (Sokoloff Reference Sokoloff2002: 704).

68. {רכיבי}, in כי איסתרא דליות אתיא ברישיכו {רכיבי} אריא רכיבא מורניתא בידה נקיטא מנסבא {גונא לאילהי} וזרגונא לאילהי וזרגונא לאיסתרתא “like the goddess Deliwat (who) comes at your head, mounting a lion, holding a lance in her hand, handing over a zargona to the gods and a zargona to the goddesses” (AMB B13: 15). The passage is not in need of emendation, as Naveh and Shaked (Reference Naveh and Shaked1985: 212) claimed: “{rkyby}, {gwn' l'ylhy} in both cases the scribe seems to have corrected himself without crosssing out the wrong words”. The text itself makes good sense, if read: כי איסתרא דליות אתיא ברישי כו{כ}כיבי אריא רכיבא מורניתא בידה נקיטא מנסבא גונא לאילהי {וזרגונא לאילהי} וזרגונא לאיסתרתא הפכלהו לאילהי בחרשי “coming like the Ištar-Delibat with a head(s) of stars (Strahlenkranz), riding a lion, holding a lance in her hand, handing over a … to the gods and a golden coloured (star) to the goddesses, he overturns the gods with sorcery”. There is only one case of dittography {וזרגונא לאילהי} to be noted and a scribal error in כו{כ}כיבי.Footnote ¹⁶⁰

The description of the deity Delibat is reminiscent of the Late Babylonian concept of the warlike Ištar in Mesopotamian iconography, where she is considered the hypostasis of Ištar, and therefore one calls her Ištar-Delibat.Footnote ¹⁶¹ She is quite a controversial goddess, known to have a lion and a weapon as her divine symbols. Her astral function is that of a venus deity, hence the mention of a head of stars (Strahlenkranz). Further, it is supported by the Mandaic concept, ṣ‘hm' ḏ-dlyb't “the radiance of Delibat” (Khuzistan lead roll d6–7 = Naveh and Greenfield 1985: 98).

The cult of Delibat and her Aramaic background can be traced back to her rise as deity in the Late Achaeminid and Hellenistic periods according to the cuneiform sources, where her name occurs in the onomasticon from Uruk.Footnote ¹⁶² Later she merged with the Iranian deity Anāhīd.Footnote ¹⁶³ Her Akkadian epithet ezzetu “awe-inspiring” – only the Urukain Ištar carries it – is in Aramaic “zyzt”, which became the Arabian al-‘Uzzā, “the Venus-star”,Footnote ¹⁶⁴ the Arabic elative form of ‘zyzt’. She features in many Mandaic magical texts as goddess of love, lyb't m'rty' šwpr' wrg'g' “Libat, mistress of beauty and desire” (DC 46 226: 7)Footnote ¹⁶⁵ and square script bowl texts as well, ובישמיך דליבת עזיזתא מרי רזי רחמתא “and in the name of the awe-inspiring Delibat, lady^! of the mysteries of love” (CBS 2937 + CBS 2977: 1 = Müller-Kessler (in preparation)).

69. שולניתהון “their ghosts”, in ואם לא איתי עליכון קניא שב גובי דשב נשי חרשתא רכבין יתיה ותמני שולניתהון “and if not I shall bring against you a rod of seven pieces that seven sorcerous women are riding and their eight ghosts” (Moussaieff 164: 11). שולניתהון is identical to שלניתה in אנתי לילתה לילת דברה שלניתה וחטיפיתא “you are Lilith, Lilith of the desert, the robbing one and the snatching one” (CBS 16020: 2 = TMH 7 11a). The meaning “ghost” taken up by Levene (Reference Levene2007: 62) is derived from an emendation of שלניתה by Scholem to *טולניתה, which found its way into Sokoloff's JBA dictionary; however, all text passages read שלניתא/ה.Footnote ¹⁶⁶ As the root שלל is not productive in Aramaic, it must be a loan from Hebrew or Akkadian.Footnote ¹⁶⁷ The text passage should be read and translated ואם לא איתי עליכון קניא שב גובי דשב נשי חרשתא דסכין יתיה ותמני שולניתהון “and if he does not bring upon you a reed of seven pieces of seven sorceresses who see him and their eight robbing ones”.

70. שיפורי, in שיפורי ושמהתא (Gordon D2) and in ושיקופתא ואשלמתא ושפורי ושמהתא (VA 2416: 10 = Wohlstein Reference Wohlstein1894: 11; collated) has no connection with the Hebrew word שיפורא “shofar, trumpet”, as Sokoloff (Reference Sokoloff2002: 1139) would like to understand it by following previous editors. Although homonymous, they are both shortened variants of שופהרי, meaning something like “exorcism” or “slander”. The noun seems to have an original h; compare other variant spellings in KBA [corrected] ו〈א〉שלאמתא שופהרי ועמומתית (BM 91771: 1–2 = Müller-Kessler Reference Müller-Kessler2001/2: 125),Footnote ¹⁶⁸ in Mandaic, šwp'ry' w‘wbdy' “exorcisms and magical practices” (2Bb10–11 = BM 132956 + ; unpubl.), and br špwhr' w'l'hy' wp'tykry' (DC 47 Drower Reference Drower1946: 331).Footnote ¹⁶⁹

71. שיקא “Šiqa-demon”, in הפיך היפיכה ארעה היפכה שיקא (Pearson bowl l. 1) and again in הפיך היפיכה {ארע} ארעה היפיכה שיקא (IM 9726: 1) is not an unattested “Šiqa-demon”,Footnote ¹⁷⁰ but is probably a corrupted spelling of ש(ו)מיא “heaven”, as already pointed out by Geller (Reference Geller1986: 104). Thus the feminine form היפיכה,Footnote ¹⁷¹ since ש(ו)מיא is considered singular and feminine in the Late Aramaic dialects of the East; compare now the new parallels הפיכא הפיכא הפיכה שמיה הפיכה ארעה “overturned, overturned, overturned is the heaven and overturned is the earth” (BM 91745: 1 = CAMIB 005A), הפיכא הפיכא הפיכא הפיכא הפיכא הפיכא הפיכא הפיכא ארעא וישמיא (BM 91713:1–2 = CAMIB 001A).Footnote ¹⁷²

72. תברא “misfortune”, in ולא תיהי ליה לא תברא בימאמה ולא 〈ת〉(ב)רא בליליה “and that he should not have a misfortune either by day or by night” (MSF B25: 8) was suggested by Naveh and Shaked (Reference Naveh and Shaked1993: 137–8). This ghost word תברא has to be read here in the first instance as חברא “companion” and in the second צותא “escort”. It can now be translated ולא תיהיליה לא חברא בימאמה ולא צותא בליליה “and you (fem. sing.) shall not beFootnote ¹⁷³ for him a companion at daytime and an escort at night”; compare a similar parallel from Nippur לא חברא ביממא ולא צותא בליליה (HS 3016: 5–6 = TMH 7 11), and a shortened version לא צותא דליליה ודיממה (Moussaieff 156: 9), and a Mandaic example wl' thw〈y〉lẖ ṣwt' bym'm' wl' lwy' blyly' (Christie's lead roll ll. 92–3).Footnote ¹⁷⁴

73. ת}יתי}, in ת}יתי בידיה חרבא דקטלא} “he(?) comes and in his hand there is a sword of slaying” (AMB B13: 6) is not a scribal slip, but correct, since with תיתי “you shall come” opens the direct speech after the description of מריא בגדנא “lord Bagdana”. This mighty and great lord Bagdana is summoned to kill an anonymous Lilith and other demons. The act of killing is described from l. 8 onwards in the form of imperatives (see above under no. 1). The parallel shows תיתי בידיה חרבא דייקטלא “you shall come with a sword that kills” (Christie's bowl l. 4).Footnote ¹⁷⁵

74. תמרורתיה, in ולא תי(מ)ירון בתמרורתיה (MSF B25:8)Footnote ¹⁷⁶ is a tautological phraseFootnote ¹⁷⁷ and should be read and emended to ב{תמ}דירתיה (SLBA lexeme) or better to לא תידורין ב{ת}מדורתיה (CBA lexeme) “and you (fem.) shall not dwell in his dwelling”. L. 11 shows the SLA lexeme דירתיה.Footnote ¹⁷⁸

Abbreviations

All Assyriological abbreviations follow the CAD

AHw:

von Soden Reference von Soden1965–81

AIT:

Montgomery Reference Montgomery1913

AMB B:

Naveh and Shaked Reference Naveh and Shaked1985

AO 17.284:

Müller-Kessler Reference Müller-Kessler1998: 334

Borsippa bowl:

Harviainen Reference Harviainen1981

BS:

Bowl Syriac

BTA:

Babylonian Talmudic Aramaic

CAD:

Oppenheim Reference Oppenheim1956–

CAMIB:

Segal Reference Segal2000

Christie's lead roll:

Müller-Kessler Reference Müller-Kessler and Renger1999b

Christie's bowl:

Christie's New York Antiquities Friday 7 December 2000, lot 734 (A Mesopotamian Incantation Bowl) by the same scribe as of AMB B13

CPA:

Christian Palestinian Aramaic

CSA:

Central South Babylonian Aramaic

Gordon D:

Gordon 1934

KBA:

koiné Babylonian Aramaic

Khuzistan lead roll:

Greenfield and Naveh Reference Greenfield and Naveh1985

KS:

Koiné Syriac

MS:

Martin Schøyen Collection

Macuch lead roll I b:

Müller-Kessler Reference Müller-Kessler1998

MSF B:

Naveh and Shaked Reference Naveh and Shaked1993

SLBA:

Standard Literary Babylonian Aramaic

TMH 7:

Müller-Kessler, Reference Müller-Kessler2005a