25030

THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO

Date May 24,19 74

Dennis Graham Pardee

Author

The Preposition in Ugaritic

Title of Dissertation

Near Eastern Languages

and Civilizations_______________________Ph. D.____________________ June, 1974_______
Department or School Degree Convocation

Permission is herewith granted to the University of Chicago to make copies of the above title, at its
discretion, upon the request of individuals or institutions and at their expense.

Signature

Extensive Quotation or Further Reproduction of This Material by Persons or

Agencies Other than the University of Chicago May Not Be Made without the Express
Permission of the Writer.

Number of pages

Note:
 THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO

THE PREPOSITION IN UGARITIC

A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO
THE FACULTY OF THE DIVISION OF THE HUMANITIES
IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

DEPARTMENT OF NEAR EASTERN LANGUAGES

AND CIVILIZATIONS

BY
DENNIS GRAHAM PARDEE

CHICAGO, ILLINOIS
JUNE 1974
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREFACE

ABBREVIATIONS................................................. vii

Chapter
I. INTRODUCTION .......................................... 1

History of Discussion
Method
System of Text Reference

II. VERB/PREPOSITION COMBINATIONS

List of Attestations
Philological Notes
Chart of Perspectives
The preposition b: class I transitive verbs
The preposition Id: class I intransitive verbs
The preposition b.: class II transitive verbs
The preposition Jd: class II intransitive verbs
The preposition b: class III transitive verbs
The preposition b: class III intransitive verbs
The preposition 1: class I transitive verbs
The preposition 1.: class I intransitive verbs
The preposition It class II transitive verbs
The preposition JL: class II intransitive verbs
The preposition ,1: class III transitive verbs
The preposition ZL: class III intransitive verbs
The preposition ajr: class I only
The preposition bn: class I
The preposition bn: class III
The preposition bcd: class I only
The preposition jrd: class I only
The preposition mTn) : class II only
The preposition fcd: class III only
The preposition "^T: class I
The preposition ^T: class III
The preposition T^: class I
The preposition class III
The preposition qdm: class III only
The preposition qrb: class III only
The preposition t&t: class I
The preposition t&t: class III
The preposition tk: class III only
III. ANALYSIS OF THE PREPOSITION IN VERBAL CLAUSES . . 266

Perspective vs. Ambiguity

Cases of Ambiguity
Disputed Cases of Ambiguity
Perspective
Overlap
Non-directionality
Semantic Classes of Verbs and the Prepositional
Uses in Each
The Lexical Significance of the Preposition in
Relation to the Verb

IV. PREPOSITIONS IN NOMINAL CLAUSES 501

The Preposition b
The ja of Price
Temporal b
The Complex Preposition bd
The Preposition 1
The Preposition ][1
The Preposition yd
The Preposition a
The Preposition Tm
The Preposition tfrt

V. EXTENDED FORMS OF PREPOSITIONS AND COMPLEX

PREPOSITIONS 319

Extended Forms
Complex Prepositions
bd
bgr
bqrb
bris
btk
liE
lpn
Iris

VI. THE SEMANTIC FIELDS OF THE UGARITIC PREPOSITIONS . . 326

The Adverb ahr

The Preposition ajr
The Preposition b
The Preposition bn
The Preposition Ï7"d
The Preposition yd
The Preposition k
The Preposition 1
The Preposition mn
The Preposition "'d
The Preposition
 The Preposition cm
The Preposition qdm
The Preposition qrb
The Preposition tfr.t
The Preposition tk
Summary Graph

VII. CONCLUSION............................................. >2

Translation
Terminology
Methodology
Linguistic Classification of Ugaritic

APPENDIX: ATTESTATIONS OF UGARITIC VERB/PREPOSITION

COMBINATIONS IN LATER DIALECTS ............................. 3^9

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY ....................................... 391

INDEX OF TEXTS CITED ....................................... 396

iv
 PREFACE

Ugaritic came into being as a domain within the study of the

ancient Near East in 1928 when the proverbial peasant's plow struck an

ancient tomb not far from the mound of Ras Shamra in modern Syria.

Formal excavations, which go on to the present day under the direction

of C. F. A. Schaeffer, showed that the mound contained the ruins of

ancient Ugarit, already known from the Amarna letters. The site has

proved to be one of the most prolific in all of Syria-Palestine from

virtually every point of view: stratigraphy, ceramics, metal- and

ivory-work, architecture, and so forth. For the philologist the

richest finds were the thousands of texts, mostly on clay tablets,

containing writings in several of the languages of the Levant in use

during the latter half of the second millennium B.C. The present

study deals with one aspect of one of these languages, namely the

Northwest Semitic dialect called Ugaritic after the ancient name of

the city. The grammatical category 'preposition' is a sub-division of

the larger category 'particles', which includes, in classical gram­

matical terms, prepositions, adverbs, conjunctions, and interjections.

The decision to deal only with the prepositions is based on the rela­

tive importance of these particles for the understanding of the Ugari­

tic texts, an importance reflected in the discussion which has re­

volved around the Ugaritic prepositional system and its implications

for the later Northwest Semitic dialects since the early 1930’s.

v
 The impetus for the study came principally from classes in

Northwest Semitic philology conducted by Professors Stanley Gevirtz

and Joseph A. Fitzmyer at the University of Chicago. My deepest

thanks are due especially to the former for agreeing to direct this

dissertation even after his departure for California. Special thanks

are tendered also to the other members of my committee, Stephen A.

Kaufman, who directed my work in Chicago, and Gene B. Gragg. Vir­

tually everyone in the Oriental Institute has discussed one question

or another with me, but I must single out Ericq Reiner, who initially

backed the project in its orientation toward verb/preposition idioms,

John Brinkman, who read an early draft of my proposal, A. Leo Oppen­

heim, Johannes Renger, H. G. Gtiterbock, and Norman Golb. Finally,

no one who has completed a dissertation while married could forget

the "dissertation widow," in this case my dear wife Adèle.

vi
 ABBREVIATIONS

IQS: The "Manual of Discipline" from Qumran, Cave 1

AcOr (Hav.): Acta Orientalia—Copenhagen

AD: G. R. Driver, Aramaic Documents of the Fifth Century B.C.

AHw: W. von Soden, Akkadisch.es Handworterbuch

AION: Istituto Orientale di Napoli : Annali

AJA: American Journal of Archeology

ALNR: Atti della Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei: Rendiconti: Classe

di scienze morali, storiche e filologiche

ANET: J. B. Pritchard, ed., Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to

the Old Testament

AP: A. Cowley, Aramaic Papyri of the Fifth Century B.C.

ArOr: Archiv Orientalni

BA: Biblical Aramaic

BA: Biblical Archeologist

BASOR: Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research

BDB: F. Brown, S. R. Driver, and C. A. Briggs, Hebrew and English

Lexicon of the Old Testament

BeO: Bibbia e Oriente

BH: Biblical Hebrew

BH3: Biblia Hebraica, ed. Rudolf Kittel, 3d ed.

BIES: Bulletin of the Israel Exploration Society (= Yediot)

BJRL: Bulletin of the John Rylands Library

BMAP: Emil G. Kraeling, The Brooklyn Museum Aramaic Papyri

BO: Biblioteca Orientalis

vii
BZ: Biblische Zeitschrift

BZAW; Beihefte zur Zeitschrift fur die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft

CAD: Chicago Assyrian Dictionary

CBQ: Catholic Biblical Quarterly

CIS: Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarurn

CML: G. R. Driver, Canaanite Myths and Legends

CT: Cuneiform Texts from Babylonian Tablets

CTA: A. Herdner, Corpus des tablettes en cunéiformes alphabétiques

découvertes a Ras Shamra-Ugarit de 1929 a 1939

DISC: C. F. Jean and J. Hoftijzer, Dictionnaire des inscriptions

sémitiques de l'ouest

DN: Divine name

EA: Tablet from El-Amarna numbered according to J. A. Knudtzon, Die

El-Amarna-Ta fe1n

EI: Eretz Israel

FuF: Forschungen und Fortschritte

GGA: Gottingische Gelehrte Anzeigen

GKC: Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar, ed. E. Kautzsch, trans. A. E. Cowley

GLECS: Groupe linguistique d'études Chamito-Sémitiques: Comptes

rendues des seances

GN: Geographical name

HUCA: Hebrew Union College Annual

IA: Imperial Aramaic

IEJ: Israel Exploration Journal

IH: Inscriptional Hebrew

JANES: Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society of Columbia

University

JAPS: Journal of the American Oriental Society

JBL: Journal of Biblical Literature

viii
JCS: Journal of Cuneiform Studies

JNES: Journal of Near Eastern Studies

JNSL: Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages

JPOS: Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society

JQR: Jewish Quarterly Review

JRAS: Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society

JSS: Journal of Semitic Studies

KAI: H. Donner and W. Rbllig, Kanaanaische und aramaische Inschriften

KB: L. Koehler and W. Baumgartner, Lexicon in Veteris Testament!

Libros

NB: New Babylonian Akkadian

NEB: New English Bible

OA: Old Aramaic

OLP: Orientalia Lovaniensia Periodica

OLE: Orientalistische Literaturzeitung

OrAnt : Oriens Antiquus

PEQ: Palestine Exploration Quarterly

Ph.: Phoenician

PN: Proper name

PRU: Palais royal d'Ugarit

Pu.: Punic

RA: * Archéologie Orientale

Revue d'Assyriologie et d

RB: Revue Biblique

RES (plus year and page number): Revue des Etudes Sémitiques

RES (plus text number): Répertoire d'Epigraphie Sémitique

RHA: Revue Hittite et Asianique

RHPR: Revue d
*
Histoire et de Philosophie Religieuses

ix
RHR: Revue d
* Histoire des Religions

RSO: Rivista degli Studi Orientali

RSP: Loren R. Fisher, ed., Ras Shamra Parallels

RSV: Revised Standard Version

StANT; Studien zum Alien und Neuen Testament

SVT: Supplements to Vetus Testamentum

TLB: Tabulae Cunéiformes a F. M. Th. de Liagre Bohl Collectae

TS: Theological Studies

TZ: Theologische Zeitschrift

UF: Ugarit-Forschungen

UT: G. H. Gordon, Ugaritic Textbook

VD: Verbum Domini

VT: Vetus Testamentum

WO: Welt des Orients

WHS: J. Aistleitner, Worterbvch der ugaritischen Sprache

ZAW: Zeitschrift fur die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft

ZDPV; Zeitschrift des deutschen Palastina-Vereins

x
 CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Two primary considerations have been involved in the study of the

Ugaritic prepositions: the actual prepositional system prevailing in

Ugaritic and the implications of this system for later dialects. This

orientation is clear from C. H. Gordon’s treatment of the preposition

in the various editions of his Ugaritic grammars,1 where he proposes

biblical parallels to Ugaritic prepositional usages. It becomes most

obvious in Mitchell Dahood's many studies which he frequently prefaces

with such statements as : "The numerous instances of Ugar. 1., ' from',

enable the biblical philologist to propose translations different from

and superior to the traditional versions."2

^Ugaritic Grammar: The Present Status of the Linguistic Study

of the Semitic Alphabetic Texts from Ras Shamra, Analecta Orientalia 20
(Rome: Pontificium Institutum Biblicum, 1940), §9; Ugaritic Handbook^
Revised Grammar, Paradigms, Texts in Transliteration, Comprehensive
Glossary, Æalecta Orientalia 25 (Rome: Pontificium Institutum Biblicum
1947), §10; Ugaritic Manual: Newly Revised Grammar, Texts in Trans­
literation, Cuneiform Selections, Paradigms, Glossary, Indices, Analecta
Orientalia 55 (Rome: Pontificium Institutum Biblicum, 1955), &10;
Ugaritic Textbook: Grammar, Texts in Transliteration. Cuneiform
Selections, Glossary, Indices, Analecta Orientalia 5° thereafter —J
(Rome : Pontificium Institutum Biblicum, 1965), §10.

2"Ugaritic and the Old Testament," in Henri Gazelles et al., De

Mari à Qumrân: L'Ancien Testament: Son milieu.—Ses écrits^—S^s.
relecturesHuives. Homage à Mgr J. Coppens; Donum Natalicium losepho
Coppens Septuagesimum Annum Complenti D D D Collegae et Amici, vol. 1,
Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium, vol. 24 (Gembloux
and Paris: J. Duculot and P. Lethielleux, 1969), P- 27. See also* °y
the same author, Psalms I: 1-50: Introduction, Translation, and Notes,
The Anchor Bible, vol. 16 (Garden City, New York: Doubleday and Co.,

1
 2

The present study attempts to provide a description and analysis

of the Ugaritic prepositional system which will function as a basis for

comparisons with later dialects. For, while the bibliography of propo­

sals for innovative translations based on Ugaritic mounts, the only

comprehensive treatment of the Ugaritic prepositions to date is that

found in Gordon's grammars. The majority of scholars in Northwest

Semitic studies have accepted Gordon's conclusions, Dahood perhaps

most emphatically:

The chapter on prepositions [in UT] is exceptionally good, and

the biblical scholar or translator who has but a limited time to
devote to Ugaritic would be well advised to master the contents of
this section. ... The simple fact that la and IL both denote * from
in Ugaritic opens up untold possibilities for reaching the meaning
of the biblical text.1

Little heed seems to have been given, however, to such dissenting voices

as that of Edmund F. Sutcliffe, who claimed, with respect to the prep­

ositions 1_ and cl:

The conclusion to which we are led is that neither preposition

'means' from, but that both are so used in certain collocations of

1966), p. xxvi; "Congruity of Metaphors," SVT 16 (1967): 42, n. 4 from

p. 41; "The Phoenician Contribution to Biblical Wisdom Literature," in
The Role of the Phoenicians in the Interaction of Mediterranean Civil­
izations: Papers Presented to the Archeological Symposium at the
American University of Beirut; March, 19^7, ed. W. A. Ward (Beirut:
American University of Beirut, 1968), p. 139»

^Ugaritic-Hebrew Philology: Marginal Notes on Recent Publica­

tions, Biblica et Orientalia, No. 17 (Rome : Pontificium Institution
Biblicum, 1965), p. 26. It will become apparent from my study that I
consider this type of statement to be a fostering of dilettantism, a
little knowledge of Ugaritic prepositions is as dangerous as a little
knowledge of any other scholarly discipline. Without denying that all
of the post—Ugaritic Northwest Semitic dialects will benefit from the
insights gained from Ugaritic studies, it must nonetheless be said that
a rash application of Ugaritic translational necessities to the later
dialects by untrained persons will result primarily in harm. Our field
does not need "untold possibilities" and "greater maneuverability"
(ibid., p. 25), it needs discipline.
 3

words that the context suggests the idea of removal or separation

and must or can be replaced in English by from.l

The purpose of the present study, then, is to review the evidence

available for Ugaritic prepositional usages in order to furnish a more

complete understanding of the entire prepositional system in that lang­

uage, and, more particularly, to determine the semantic fields of the

various prepositions and the degree of ambiguity2 which existed there.

History of Discussion

Although several Jewish grammarians of the Middle ages had spoken

of one preposition serving in the place of another,in more recent

times obvious cases of b = ' from' were explained as mistakes1* or as

dissimilations.As may be seen from the last reference, the Phbnizisch-

punische Grammatik of Friedrich and Rollig, published in 1970 by two

highly respected Semitists, the explanation by dissimilation is alive

and well.

1"A Note on cal, Ie, and from, " VT 5 (1955) • 436-39-

See below, pp. 6-8, and Chapter III.

3Saadia: 3lbJ qy3mh3 mq'm mn; Ibn Janah: hbyt gm kn bcnyn mn;
for references and more examples, see Nahum M. Sarna, "The Interchange of
the Prepositions beth and min in Biblical Hebrew, " JBL ?8 (1959); 3H»

Friedrich Delitzsch, Die Lese- und Schreibfehler im Alten Testa­

ment nebst den dem Schrifttexte einverleibten Randnoten klassifiziert:
Ein Hilfsbuch fur Lexikon und Grammatik, Exegese und Lektiire (Berlin and
Leipzig: Walter de Gruyter and Co., 1920), §114a-c; SamuelRolles
Driver, Notes on the Hebrew Text and the Topography of the Books of
Samuel with an Introduction on Hebrew Paleography and the Ancient Versions
and Facsimiles of Inscriptions and Maps, 2d ed., rev. and enl. (Oxford:
Clarendon Press, 1913)* p. Ixvii. Driver lists several cases of b/m(n)
"confusion" which are pointed up by the Septuagint.

^Julian Obermann, "An Antiphonal Psalm from Ras Shamra," JBL 55

(1936): 30-31; Johannes Friedrich and Wolfgang Rollig, Phonizisch-
punische Grammatik, 2d fully rev. ed., Analecta Orientalia 46 (Rome :
Pontificium Institution Biblicum, 1970), §251-
 4

As early as 1902 the same Friedrich Delitzsch who explained Is =

• from
* as a mistake in his Schreibfehler was explaining the same phenom­

enon in several passages of Job on the basis of Akkadian ina * in

/
*

’from'.1 The publication of the Ahiram inscription by René Dussaud in

9 with its use of ^l in the expression brh C1 * flee from', though not
19242*

correctly interpreted immediately,did serve as a wedge further opening

minds to an understanding of the fact that Semitic prepositions do not

function precisely as do prepositions in the modern European languages.

1Das Buch Hiob neu Übersetzt und kurz Erklart (Leipzig: J. C.

Hi nri c hs'sche Buchhandlung, 1902), p. 145.

2"Les inscriptions phéniciennes du tombeau d* Ahiram, roi de

Byblos," Syria 5 (1924): 135-59»

^Here is a partial bibliography on J^l = 'from' in the Ahiram?

inscription: W. F. Albright, "The End of the Inscription on the Ahlram
Sarcophagus," JPOS 7 (1927): 125; idem, "The Phoenician Inscriptions of
the Tenth Century B.C. from Byblos," JAOS 67 (1947): 156; Mitchell
Dahood, "Philological Notes on the Psalms," TS 14 (1953): 85; idem,
Psalms I (1966), p. 26; idem, "Phoenician Contribution," (1968): 138;
Herbert Donner and Wolfgang Rollig, Kanaanâische und aramaische In-
schriften thereafter KAI], vol. 2: Kommentar (Wiesbaden: Otto
Harrassowitz, 1968), pp. 2, 4; Godfrey Rolles Driver, "Hebrew Roots
and Words," WO 1 (1950): 413; idem, "Hebrew Notes," VT 1 (1951): 247,
n. 9; idem, review of The Chicago Assyrian Dictionary, vol. 16, in JSS
9 (1964): 349; idem, review of E. Dhorme, A Commentary on the Book of
Job (transi. Harold Knight), in JTS n.s. 19 (19^6)'s 638; André Dupont-
Sommer, "L1inscription de Yehawmilk, roi de Byblos," Semitica 3 (1950):
43, n. 7; Friedrich and Rollig, Phonizisch-punische Grammatik , §§250,
284/7; Giovanni Garbini, Il Semitico di nord-ovest, Quaderni della
sezione linguistica degli”"annali, vol. 1 (Naples: Istituto Universitario
Orientale di Napoli, i960), p. 166; Hugo Grassmann, Altorientali sche
Texte und Bilder zum Alten Testament, 2d fully rev. and enl. ed. (Berlin
and Leipzig: Walter de Gruyter and Co., 1926), p. 440, n. Zellig S.
Harris, A Grammar of the Phoenician Language, American Oriental Series,
vol. 8 (New Haven: American Oriental Society, 1936), p. 91» Mark
Lidzbarski, ''Epigraphisches aus Syrien. II.," Nachrichten von der
Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Gottingen aus dem Jahre 1924: Philo-
logisch-Historische Klasse (Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung, 1925)»
pp. 45-46; idem, "Zu den phonizischen Inschriften von Byblos," OLZ JO
(1927): 455-56; Georg Schmuttermayr, "Ambivalenz und Aspektdifferenz:
Bemerkungen zu den hebraischen Prapositionen Id, JL, und mn," BZ n.s. 15
(1971)s 36; Stanislav Segert, "Die Sprache der moabitischen Konigsin-
schrift," ArOr 29 (1961): 228; L. Semkowski, "Note sur l'inscription
de Ahiram," Bibliça 7 (1926): 95; Sutcliffe, VT 5 (1955): 437.
 5

With the discovery of Ugaritic it became clear that a language

could function entirely without a preposition specifically denoting

,
*
•from and most authors began changing their explanation of how b

could seemingly be used in the place of mn. This enlarged perspective

soon influenced innovative translations of prepositions in Aramaic,

Phoenician, Hebrew, and Moabite.

In two notes on the prepositions in Ugaritic published in 1934

and 1935, Charles Virolleaud pointed out that the preposition mn 'from'

was not attested in Ugaritic and that and 1. were used to express

* from'

Two primary types of explanation were subsequently offered for

this phenomenon. H. L. Ginsberg suggested in 1938 that there was a

pronunciation difference according to the meanings 'in'/'to' and 'from'

for the prepositions b and K*

2 Perhaps due to lack of evidence,

Ugaritic itself being unvocalized, little attention has been accorded

to this explanation. C. H. Gordon did accept Ginsberg's suggestion in

%
the first edition of his grammar, and more recently James Barr has

considered it as one possibility of explaining the seeming ambiguity

4
of the Ugaritic prepositions.

^C. Virolleaud, "Les prepositions à Ras-Shamra," GLECS 1 (1934):

50; idem, "La préposition dans la langue de Ras-Shamra," GLECS 2 (1935):
13-14. Compare also his earlier statement: "... il convient, en tout
cas, d'observer que mn ne se rencontre nulle part ..." ("Un poeme
phénicien de Ras-Shamra: La lutte de Mot, fils des dieux, et d'Alem,
fils de Baal," Syria 12 (1931)= 204; compare also James A. Montgomery,
"Notes on the Mythological Texts from Ras Shamra," JAOS 53 (1933)' 112.

2"Women Singers and Wallers Among the Northern Canaanites," BASOR

72 (1938): 15, n. 9- See full quotation, below, p. 283.

^Ugaritic Grammar (1940), §9.1.

^Comparative Philology and the Text of the Old Testament (Oxford:

Clarendon Press, 1968), pp. 175-76; he was sharply (and correctly—see
 6

The other principal explanation was offered by C. H. Gordon.

After accepting Ginsberg's explanation in 1940, he began vacillating in

19M?" and totally changed his position in the second edition of his

grammar. 2 Here he pointed out that there was no evidence for different

vocalizations, that, in fact, Akkadian ina (comparable to Northwest

Semitic b in usage) is a vocalized form with no variation according

to its usages 'in' and 'from

.
* Dahood has drawn an even more modern

parallel: "Does French a, 'at, in', have a different pronunciation

when it means 'from'?"’'’

Gordon's positive argument was that the prepositions b and 1_

have both the meanings 'in'/'to' and 'from' as a common Hamito-Semitic

speech pattern. This argument has been the basis of his presentation
4
in successive editions of his grammars.

A primary point in this explanation is that the prepositions

are in themselves "ambiguous,and that they have, in themselves,

next paragraph and below, pp. 283—84) criticized by M. Dahood on this

point, "Comparative Philology Yesterday and Today," Biblica 50 (1969):
76-77.

^"Aramaic Incantation Bowls," Orientalia n.s. 10 (1941): 358:

"Since Dr. Leo Oppenheim kindly called my attention to la 'from' in
Neo-Babylonian (e.g., la-gâte = istu gate), I am not so sure that 1/b
'from' were vocalized differently from 1 'to/for' and b 'in' in Uga-
ritic ..."

Ugaritic Handbook (1947), §10.1; see also the same author,

review of Johannes Friedrich, Phonizisch—punische Grammatik [first
edition], in Orientalia n.s. 21 (1952): 121.

^Biblica 50 (1969): 77. I will argue below that French à does

not "mean" 'from', but is only to be translated so in certain idioms;
nonetheless Dahood's argument is valid as far as the argument for
pronunciation is concerned.
Slgaritic Manual (1955)1 §10.1; UT, §10.1.

The term was already used by Gordon in Ugaritic Grammar (1940)

§9.1, and has been a rather constant description of the Ugaritic prep-
 7

"opposite meanings." If the prepositions have opposite meanings, they

ositions through the intervening years ; e.g., W. F. Albright, "Archaic

Survivals in the Text of Canticles," in Hebrew and Semitic Studies Pre­
sented to Godfrey Rolles Driver ... in Celebration of his Seventieth
Birthday, 20 August 1962, eds. D. Winton Thomas and W. D. McHardy (Ox­
ford: Clarendon Press, 1963), p. 3; C. Brekelmans, "Some Considerations
on the Translation of the Psalms by M. Dahood: I: The Preposition b =
from in the Psalms According to M. Dahood," UF 1 (1969): 5; William
Chomsky, "The Ambiguity of the Prefixed Prepositions m, JI, b in the
Bible." JQR 61 (1970-71) : 87-89; Dahood, Psalms I (19%), p. 16; E.
Hammershaimb, review of Gordon, Ugaritic Manual, in JSS 2 (1957): 2?4
(Hammershaimb claims that "it would have been easy for Gordon to
demonstrate it [prepositional ambiguity] from the basic meaning of
these two prepositions [b and 1]," but he makes no attempt to do so
himself); S. Segert, ArOr 29 (1961): 228; idem, "Le rôle de l'Ugaritique
dans la linguistique sémitique comparée," in Ugaritica VI: publié à
* occasion de la XXXe campagne de fouilles à Ras Shamra (1968) sous la
1
direction de Claude F. A, Schaeffer, Mission de Ras Shamra, vol. 17,
Institut Français d’Archéologie deBeyrouth, Bibliotèque Archéologique
et Historique, vol. 81, ed. Jacques-Claude Courtois (Paris: Mission
Archéologique de Ras Shamra and Librairie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner,
1969), p. 475; Edward Ullendorff, "Ugaritic Studies Within Their
Semitic and Eastern Mediterranean Setting," BJRL 46 (1963-64): 248.
Some (see Segert above, for example) have referred to the 'ambivalence
*
of the prepositions rather than to their ’ambiguity
.
* Such terminology
might delineate the debate more sharply: the term 'ambivalence
* could
be used to indicate that the preposition b, for example, means in itself
both ’in
* and * from’, while ’ambiguity’ could be used to indicate that
one does not always know how to interpret or to translate a given pre­
positional usage, but does not accept prepositional ’ambivalence’ (and
I have occasionally used ’ambiguity’ in the latter sense). Since,
however, the use of the term ’ambiguity’ appears so extensively in the
relevant literature to indicate that the primary prepositions in the
Northwest Semitic dialects have opposite meanings (see next note), my
discussion has generally taken ’ambiguity’ in this sense.

■^.g., W. F. Albright, The Proto-Sinaitic Inscriptions and Their

Decipherment , Harvard Theological Studies 22 (Cambridge: Harvard
University Press, 1969), P» 23; Brekelmans, UF 1 (1969): 5 ; M. Dahood,
"Two Pauline Quotations from the Old Testament," CBQ 17 (1955): 21, n. 13;
idem, Psalms I (1966), p. 16; idem, Psalms II: 51-100: Introduction^
Translation, and Notes, The Anchor Bible, vol. 17 (Garden City, New York:
Doubleday and Co., 19^8), p. xxv; idem, Psalms III: 101-150: Intro­
duction, Translation, and Notes: With an Appendix, The Grammar of the
Psalter, The Anchor Bible, vol. 17A (Garden City, New York: Doubleday
and Co., 1970), p. 157; Driver, WO 1 (1950): 413; Garbini, Il semitico
di nord-ovest, p. 166; Robert Gordis, "Psalm 9-10 — A Textual and
Exegetical Study," JgR 48 (1957-58): 111-12; A. Haidar, "The Position of
Ugaritic Among the Semitic Languages," BO 21 (1964): 275; Andree Herdner,
"Remarques sur ’La Déesse cAnat’,’* RES 1942-45, p» 44, n« 1; idem, review
of Dahood, Ugaritic-Hebrew Philology, in Syria 46 (1969): 131; Anton
 8

must be "interchangeable.”

On the basis of the conceptions behind such terminology, the

Northwest Semitic dialects have been combed, more or less carefully (the

most has been done in biblical Hebrew), in a search for cases where the

interpretation of the various prepositions can be altered by reference

to Ugaritic usage. Such attempts range all the way from expanding the

list of attestations for a translation already recognized as valid for

a preposition (e.g., b = 'against’), to finding the exact opposite

meaning for a preposition from that which it normally has (e.g., 3el =

'from'2). In this search Mitchell Dahood has been by far the most

Jirku, "Eine Renaissance des Hebraischen," FuF 32 (1958): 211; K. A.

Kitchen, Ancient Orient and Old Testament (Chicago: Inter-Varsity
Press, 1966 [first American edition May, 1968], p. 162; Oswald Loretz,
"Weitere ugaritisch-hebraische Parallelen," BZ n.s. 3 (1959): 290;
Philippe Reymond, "Une nouvelle édition du dictionnaire de Koehler-
Baumgartner," TZ 24 (1968): 215; Sarna, JBL 78 (1959): 510, n. 6; S.
Segert, Ugaritica VI, p. 475; idem, "The Ugaritic Texts and the Textual
Criticism of the Hebrew Bible," in Near Eastern Studies in Honor of
William Foxwell Albright, ed. Hans Goedicke (Baltimore and London:
Johns Hopkins Press, 1971), p. 418; W. A. van der Weiden, Le Livre des
Proverbes: Notes philologiques, Biblica et Orientalia, No. 23 (Rome:
Pontificium Institutum Biblicum, 1970), p. 132; H. J. van Dijk,
Ezekiel's Prophecy on Tyre (Ez. 26, 1—28, 19): A New Approach, Biblica
et Orientalia, No. 20 (Rome: Pontificium Institutum Biblicum, 1968),
p. 89. All of these authors do not use the exact terms "opposite
meanings," but the assumption is behind their statements.

•^.g., Chomsky, Jgg. 61 (1970-71): 87; Dahood, Psalms II (1968),

pp. 303, 316; idem, "Additional Notes on the Mrzfa Text," in The Claremont
Ras Shamra Tablets, Analecta Orientalia 48, ed. Loren R. Fisher (Rome:
Pontificium Institutum Biblicum, 1971), P» 55; Sama, JBL 78 (1959) •
310-16; van Dijk, Ezekiel's Prophecy on Tyre, p. 84; C. F. Whitley,
"Some Functions of the Hebrew Particles beth and lamedh," JQR 62 (1971­
72): 199-206; Paolo Xella, "Nuovi testi da Ugarit," AION 32 (1972): 511.

2Gordon (with credit to M. Petruck), Ugaritic Manual, §10.1;

idem, UT, §10.1. Only one reference is proposed, Gen. 41:57: wëkol-
hâ3 are$ bâ3 û migraymâh lisbôr 3el-yosêp * The whole earth came to Egypt
to buy grain from Joseph
* • Since el is the primary marker of 'direc­
tion towards' in biblical Hebrew, it would be surprising indeed to see
it marking * direction from'. It is far more likely that el.is here
*
construed with bw3 ('come to Joseph ) and that the verb lisbor is used
 9

active, closely followed by his students and sympathizers (Anton C. M.

Blommerde, Kevin Cathcart, Walter Ludwig Michel, Liudger Sabottka, van

der Weiden, van Dijk"
*"). The other main influx of activity in this

specific area is from scholars who have linked the insights of the

medieval Jewish grammarians with the newer data available today (Chomsky,

Sarna, Whitley).

Reaction has been voiced to the approach based on opposite

meanings, but it has been quite diffuse. BrekeImans, for example, in

his article dealing with Dahood's treatment of the preposition Jb in the

2
first two volumes of the latter's Psalms commentary, accepted the

terminology of "ambiguity" and "opposite meanings," while at the same

time stressing the importance of what proved to be two key points in

my study: verb/preposition idioms and what Brekelmans called "point of

view" (termed "perspective" in the present study).

Others have pointed out the importance of interpreting preposi­

tional usage in terms of the verb with which the preposition is con­

strued. This goes back at least as far as Delitzsch's argument based

on Akkadian ina.^ He pointed out that a verb of separation + _b could

be interpreted as 'separate from'. This argument also came to the fore

Ip . .
in the explanation of brfc C1 in the Ahiram inscription. The position*
3

absolutely ('buy provisions') as in 42:2, 5« The text is thus translated:

'The whole earth came to Joseph in Egypt (stylistic variation of -ah //
3 el) to buy grain'.

^This group (and the list is only partial) has been called the
"Rome school"; see Moshe Greenberg's characterization of the methods and
presuppositions of its members, review of van Dijk, Ezekiel's Prophecy
on Tyre, in JAPS 90 (1970): 539-40.

2UF 1 (1969): 5-14. 5Hiob, p. 145 (see above, p. 4, n. 1).

Sàee bibliography above, p. 4, n. 3.

 10

of Dahood has been somewhat ambiguous in that he has stressed the

importance of interpreting the prepositions in light of the verb with

which they are used,1 though he has also claimed that a preposition can

have opposite meanings outside of a verb/preposition idiom: "In other

words, b can signify * from’ even when no verb is expressed, a conclusion

2
which seems to undercut the position of Hartman ..." Dahood’s

position is thus that b in itself means both ’in’ and ’from’ in verb/

preposition idioms and in nominal sentences.

Another point in the reaction to prepositional ambiguity is the

claim that the prepositions have distinctive meanings. Jared J. Jackson

has inveighed against considering prepositions as ’"wild cards’ which

can be translated in any fashion.Edward Lipinski has also spoken

out in favor of distinctive meanings:

The translation of the preposition b^ by ’from’ reflects a dangerous

trend of a certain lexicography which neglects the distinctive
meanings of Semitic particles, overlooks the difference between
Semitic idioms and modern Indo-European languages, and takes a step
backwards in our understanding of the mentality and of the languages
of ancient Semitic peoples. For the psalmist, if Dietrich’s and
Loretz’s interpretation [of Ps. 68:7, "Zur Ugaritischen Lexico­
graphie (II)," OLZ 62 (1967): $42] is correct, God does not bring
out the prisoners from their fetters, but he undoubtedly brings out

’"Ugaritic Studies and the Bible," Gregorianum 43 (1962): 68:

" . . . the precise force of these words of relationship [ba, la]
depends upon the verb with which they are used . . . "; Psalms I (1966),
p. 3: "The precise force of b, ’in, from’, depends upon the verb with
which it is employed.’’; ibid., p. 246: "With verbs of refusing, with­
holding, etc., 1^ denotes ’from’, as in Ugaritic ..."

^Psalms I (1966), p. 220; in reaction to L. F. Hartman's crit­

icism: "... the idea of ’motion from' lies not so much in the pre­
position as it does in the verb ..." (review of Dahood, Proverbs and
Northwest Semitic Philology, in CBQ 26 [1964]: 105)»

^See also his treatment of Ps. 139:4, Psalms III (1970), p. 287
(and compare my discussion below, p. 305, n. IT.

^Review of Dahood, Psalms I, in Pittsberg Perspective 7/2 (1966):

32.
 11

the prisoners who were in fetters. One should thus translate

that sentence as follows: 'God ... brings out those put in
irons' .-
*■

Dahood immediately attacked this statement, reiterating his belief in

prepositional interchangeability and challenging Lipinski to state

2
which particles he believes to have distinctive meanings.

Another point implicit in Lipinski's statement just quoted is

that alongside distinctive meanings there exists a need for the modern

interpreter to determine the ancient author's perspective (i.e., in the

text under discussion, God does not bring prisoners 'out from', he brings
out prisoners 'who are in1). This was the position of Sutcliffe,^ who

argued for basic meaning coupled with an analysis of the author's per­

spective (though he did not use this term). Sutcliffe's position has
4 5
been accepted explicitly by W. L. Moran and by Nicholas Tromp (one of
Dahood's students). *
In Brekelmans article already cited^ several

references are made to what he calls "point of view," that is, the

author's point of view on the action depicted by a verb/preposition

combination. Schmuttermayr in his recent lengthy article on the prep-

l"Psalm 68:7 and the Role of the Kosarot," AION 51 (1971):

536-37.

^"Hebrew-Ugaritic Lexicography X," Biblica 53 (1972): 587-88.

5VT 5 (1955): 456-59.

4
William L. Moran, "The Hebrew Language in Its Northwest Semitic
Background," in The Bible and the Ancient Near East: Essays in Honor
of William Foxwell Albright, ed. G. Ernest Wright (Garden City, New
York: Doubleday and Co., 1965 [Anchor Books edition; original copy­
right 1961]), p. 81, n. 70.

^Nicholas J. Tromp, Primitive Conceptions of Death and the Nether

World in the Old Testament, Biblica et Orientalia, No. 21 (Rome: Ponti-
ficium Institutum Biblicum, 1969), p. 48, n. 124.
6UF 1 (1969): 5-14.
 12

osition in Hebrew speaks of "Aspectdifferenz,” referring to the

same phenomenon as Brekelmans * "point of view." His conclusion,

however, leaves open the possibility of ambiguous meaning alongside

"Aspectdifferenz." The concept of perspective is also instrumental

in Wolfram von Soden's treatment of the preposition in Akkadian:

2
he speaks of "Blick."

One of the most important points which emerges from the various

criticisms of the position based on opposite meanings is that a dis­

tinction must be made between translation and meaning within the

translated language:

The fact that translators render a word in a certain way, does

not necessarily mean that the word has this meaning in Hebrew,
e.g. the preposition cim could be rendered 'toward, against, as,
like
* , but this does not imply that it really means anything
else than * with, in the company of, close to, beside, etc.* .3
h. .
Hartman admits that t) may well be translated * from
* in English, but

does not believe that the notion of * direction from

* resides in the

preposition itself. BrekeImansv criticizes several of Dahood

* s pro­

posals to interpret b, as meaning * from

* on the grounds that all that

may be involved is a translation problem. James Barr states this

aspect of the criticism quite clearly:

"hiZ n.s. 15 (1971): 29-51; see also, by the same author, Psalm
18 und 2 Samuel 22: Studien zu einem Doppeltext: Problème der Text-
kritik und Ubersetzung und das Psalterium Pianum, Studien zum Alten
und Neuen Testament 25 (Munich: Kosel Verlag, 1971), pp. 18-19, 56, 62,
76-77, 84, 95-94, 95, 170-71.

^Grundriss der akkadischen Grammatik, Analecta Orientalia 55/47

(Rome: Pontificium Institutum Biblicum, 1969), §114c.

5C. J. Labuschagne , review of Anton C. M. Blommerde, Northwest

Semitic Grammar and Job, in UE 5 (1971): 574.
%BQ 26 (1964): 105. 5UF 1 (1969) : 5-14.
 13

The insistence of scholars on the sense 'from

* may sometimes rest
on no more secure foundation than the fact that an English trans­
*
lation will use the word * from . But a translation can give a
correct general rendering of a passage, without providing in its
equivalences a correct understanding of particular lexical items
*

A final criticism I have found made by only one author, J. A.

Emerton.2 In objecting to the acceptance of b comparativum in the third

edition of the Koehler-Baumgartner Hebraisches und aramaisches Lexikon

he states:

. . . the probability that Hebrew sometimes uses t) in one sense

that is elsewhere expressed by mn does not prove that any sense
that can be expressed by the latter can also be expressed by the
former. The case for a comparative use would be stronger if it
could be shown that *
b is used thus in Ugaritic, as is implied
by Baumgartner
s
* phrase *wie ug. compar.*, but I know of no
passage in the Ugaritic texts where such a meaning is likely, and
the article of Dahood to which Baumgartner refers ["Hebrew-
Ugaritic Lexicography I," Biblica 44 (1963): 299-300] does not
mention one. Baumgartner thus accepts for beth a meaning which
is superfluous in Hebrew and is not found in the Ugaritic cognate
on which the theory is based.

The danger so clearly pointed out here is that of extrapolating one

sense of a particle into the semantic field of another: since b, is

used for mn in Ugaritic, therefore jo can have any of the functions of

mn in Hebrew, including its comparative function. Such a possibility

cannot be ruled out a priori, of course, because the extrapolation

^Comparative Philology, p. 177. I must stress here the im­

portance of this criticism. To my mind one of the greatest problems
in the description of the ancient Northwest Semitic prepositions as
"ambiguous" is its assumption that a given preposition has as many
"meanings" in the ancient language as we have options of translating
it in our modern language. This is false, as I hope to show in Chap­
ter III. Much of our difficulty in dealing with prepositions lies in
the problems of translation alone. The present study is not intended
as a panacea for the difficulties of translation, but as an attempt to
lay the groundwork of proper terminology and correct understanding of
ancient perspectives on action which must precede accurate translation.

^Review of L. Koehler and W. Baumgartner, Hebraisches unj

aramaisches Lexikon zum Alten Testament, j5d ed., in VT 22 (1972) : 507.
 14

could have occurred in the ancient mind as well as in the modern. But

Emerton makes well the point that we need more than proposals to see

this meaning in Hebrew; we need concrete evidence, if possible from

Ugaritic.^

A new phase of the study of prepositional usages was reached in

1965 when A. F. Rainey read a paper at the International Conference on

Semitic Studies held in Jerusalem^ in which he studied the use of the

prepositions in Ugaritic economic texts. His paper is evidence of a

trend in Ugaritic studies which, after devoting the most energy to the

mythological texts for the first twenty-five or thirty years, now show
signs of an attempt to come to terms with the prose documents.^ A

natural concern of this study is to correlate prepositional uses in

prose and poetry. Rainey has also carried the investigation a step fur­

ther by comparing Ugaritic usage with later Hebrew usage, especially as

seen in the Hebrew ostraca from Samaria, Lachish, and Arad. In the

]"It should be added that according to the theory of distinctive

meanings, the semantic field of the different prepositions will overlap
but will not exhibit complete interchangeability. One would thus expect
b not to be used exactly as mn, but only partially so (see below, Chap­
ter III).
p
"Some Prepositional Nuances in Ugaritic Administrative Texts,"
Proceedings of the International Conference on Semitic Studies Held in
Jerusalem, 19-25 July 19^5 (Jerusalem: The Israel Academy of Sciences
and Humanities, 1969), pp. 205-11.

■$To date the most comprehensive grammatical treatments are: Mario

Liverani, "Elementi innovativi nell’Ugaritico non letterario," ALNR,
Series 8, vol. 19 (1964): 173-91; S. B. Parker, Studies in the Grammar
of Ugaritic Prose Texts, Ph.D. dissertation, Johns Hopkins University,
19^7; published on demand by University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Michigan,
and High Wycomb, England.
^"Administration in Ugarit and the Samaria Ostraca," IEJ 12 (1962):
62-63; "The System of Land Grants at Ugarit in its Wider Near Eastern
Setting," in Fourth World Congress of Jewish Studies: Papers, vol. 1
(Jerusalem: World Union of Jewish Studies, 19^7), pp. 187-9%! "The
 15

course of this discussion he has used Ugaritic evidence, among other

sources, to counter Yigael Yadin's position that 1^ indicates owner

rather than recipient in the Samaria ostraca.

Most treatments of the preposition in Ugaritic, as should be

clear from this summary, have been piece-meal, or, in the case of

Gordon's contributions in his grammars, too lop-sided in favor of the

argument from ambiguity. Moreover, the Ugaritic evidence, inadequately

studied, has been the basis for far-reaching conclusions regarding pre­

positional usage in later dialects, principally in biblical Hebrew.

The purpose of this dissertation, then, is to provide the needed com­

prehensive study of Ugaritic prepositional usage.

Method

The present study is primarily a collection and analysis of the

evidence available for verb/preposition combinations in Ugaritic. The

basis of this orientation is the fact that each language uses verb/

preposition combinations idiomatically (see Chapter III), and no attempt

has been made in the past to assemble the evidence for verb/preposition
2
idioms in Ugaritic. Brekelmans pointed out the lack of such a study

in 1969:

It seems to me that to establish the fact that both and 1

have the meaning of 1 from
* , is only the beginning of the problem,

Samaria Ostraca in the Light of Fresh Evidence,” PEQ 99 (1967): 52-41;

"Semantic Parallels to the Samaria Ostraca," PEQ 102 (1970): 45-51;
"A Hebrew 'Receipt
* from Arad," BASOR 202 (19717: 25-29, esp. 28-29.

^Yigael Yadin, "Recipients or Owners: A Note on the Samaria

Ostraca," IEJ 9 (1959): 184-87; idem, "A Further Note on the Lamed in
the Samaria Ostraca," IEJ 18 (1968): 50-51.
2 ,
Though Gordon's treatment of the prepositions is generally good
in so far as translation is concerned, he makes no attempt to base these
translations on verb/preposition patterns.
 16

even in Ugaritic. Now it is surprising to see that nobody

hitherto has studied the precise usage of these prepositions in
Ugaritic. It is not the place to do this here, but at least
some remarks may not be omitted. If one studies the use of b
and 1 in connection with verbs, one discovers that there exists
no chaotic intermingling of both prepositions, but that, one
could almost say, a very systematic use did exist. So for
instance yrd 1 in Ugaritic always means 'to descend from' and
yrd b 'to descend into', the contrary not being attested.
Likewise y§3 b always means * to come forth, to go out from'.
The verb sty is always constructed with b, never with 1. The
implications of such facts are clear: it is impossible to say
that b and 1 in all situations may be rendered with ’from .
The whole system of the language has to be studied.

In spite of what appears to me now to be clear evidence against

it, I began this study with a bias in favor of "ambiguity" as a proper

term for the explanation of the phenomenon of b/1 = 'in'/'to' and 'from'

in Ugaritic. It was only when the analysis of the various verb/prep­

osition pairs was undertaken that the patterns of "perspective" began

to emerge and I became convinced that little communicative ambiguity

ever existed in Ugaritic. The obvious explanation of many verb/prep­

osition combinations by "perspective" led to the conclusion that the

prepositions were not, in themselves, ambiguous, but had definite

meanings, or perhaps more precisely, covered definite semantic areas

(e.g., ^1 as defined below, Chapter VI, covers the semantic area of

'at or near the top of). I am the first to admit that in my search

for basic meaning some usages have perhaps been forced onto Procrustean

beds. I do believe, however, that such cases are few, and that it is

safer to describe inexplicable cases as due to idiomatic usage (that

is, a semantic development has taken place from basic meaning to final

usage which we are unable to trace) than to return to an explanation

based on ambiguity and interchangeability.

1UF 1 (1969): 5-6.

 17

The main body of evidence concerning verb/preposition relation­

ships is to be found in Chapter II, "Verb/Preposition Combinations. ”

The first section is a list of all verb/preposition combinations with

text and translation. 1 It is impossible to say that the list is

exhaustive because of the broken and obscure nature of many of the

Ugaritic tablets. An attempt has been made, though, to include all

reasonably clear verb/preposition combinations which appear in Ugaritic.

My renderings are substantiated in philological notes appended to this

section. The evidence from the first section of this chapter is then

categorized as to "perspective" in a chart of all verb/preposition

combinations. Chapter III analyzes the use of the preposition with

verbs. Chapter IV deals with the preposition in nominal clauses,

Chapter V with the semantic content of the extended forms of the prep­

ositions and with that of the complex prepositions. Chapter VI is an

attempt to delineate the semantic fields covered by the various prep­

ositions and to illustrate the semantic fields by the use of graphs.

Chapter VII seeks to evaluate the thrust of the present study, par­

ticularly in the areas of translation, terminology, methodology, and

comparative value for the other Northwest Semitic dialects.

The original plan for this dissertation was to join to the

Ugaritic section a second part dealing with the implications of the

Ugaritic data for the post—Ugaritic Northwest Semitic dialects. On

the basis of the results which have emerged from the collection of

Ugaritic verb/preposition combinations, however, I have become con­

vinced that the degree of ambiguity present in the later dialects will

^or the omission of k from this list, see below, p. 331.

 18

only become clear through the exhaustive analysis of the attested

usages in each dialect. It has also become clear that such a study

was far beyond the scope of this dissertation, and only a beginning

could be made, a comparison of specific verb/preposition combinations

attested in Ugaritic with the later dialects (see Appendix). This

check-list permits one to see at a glance which Ugaritic usages are

attested in later dialects, though it cannot gauge precisely to what

extent the usage is native or foreign to a particular dialect—this

would entail an exhaustive study.

A constant pitfall in studying the Ugaritic prepositions is

terminology. The verb 'mean' should strictly speaking, according to

my explanation of the prepositions, be used only for 'basic meaning'

(e.g., J) means ' within the confines of, it does not mean 'into
,
* 'on',

or 'from', these are only correct translations into English of certain

Ugaritic usages and idiomatic developments). It is difficult to

maintain this distinction, but one should, nonetheless, use such terms

as 'bi is to be interpreted as', or 'is to be translated as

.
* As for

the ambiguity in the use of the words 'ambiguous/ambiguity ', see

above, page 6, note 5»

Finally: it is unfortunate that this study has ended up being,

partially at least, a debate with Mitchell Dahood. Unfortunate, because

it was not intended at the outset to be such. It turned out that way

for two reasons: 1) Dahood has done more than any one person (and his

work has been continued by the other members of the "Rome school") in

the area of correlating Ugaritic and Hebrew, and in his work he has

placed more emphasis than anyone else on the preposition—thus his

bibliography is extensive; 2) he assumes "ambiguity," "opposite

 19

meaning," and "interchangeability" of the prepositions, all notions

which have emerged as incorrect in my analysis.

System of Text Reference

The system of text reference used here for the Ugaritic texts

is essentially that of Richard E. Whitaker, A Concordance of the Ug­

aritic Literature.2 Briefly, it consists of Andrée Herdner's text

number,5 with Gordon's text number (UT) included in parenthesis wherever

it differs from Herdner's. For example, 14(Krt).1.24-25 means ÇTA,

text 14, column 1, lines 24-25 = UT, Krt, column 1, lines 24-25;

6.1.46(49.1.18) means CTA, text 6, column 1, line 46 = UT, text 49,

column 1, line 18. Where the text is not published by Gordon, only

Herdner's number is given with its lack in Gordon's collection indicated

^Brekelmans' remarks on correct methodology with respect to

Dahood's work are quite correct, UF 1 (1969)• 5» 1 might add, however,
that my extremely negative results with respect to Dahood's proposals
are perhaps indicative of results to be obtained from a close analysis
of others of his theories. His staunchest supporters have only claimed
that a fraction of his suggestions might prove correct (e.g., W. F. Al­
bright speaks of "a third"—"The Impact of Archeology on Biblical Re­
search-1966," in New Directions in Biblical Archeology, eds. David Noel
Freedman and Jonas C. Greenfield [Garden City, New York: Doubleday and
Co., 1971 (Anchor Books edition; original copyright, 1969)3, p. 12. For
two examples of negative evaluations of other of Dahood's frequently
utilized principles of interpretation, see Samuel B Wheeler, The In­
fixed -t- in Biblical Hebrew," JANES 5 (1970-71): 31: "With few ex­
ceptions, infixed —t- forms do not exist in biblical Hebrew."; Frank
Moore Cross, Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic : Essays in the History of
the Religion of Israel (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1973), P-
14o, n. 9(5: " . . . we must reject Dahood's postulation of a third
m.s. suffix written -jr . . . "

Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1972.

^Corpus des tablettes en cunéiformes alphabétiques decouvertes a

Ras Shamra-Ugarit de 1929 a 1939, 2 vols., Mission de Ras Shamra, vol.
10, Institut Français d'Archéologie de Beyrouth, Biblioteque Archéolo­
gique et Historique, vol. 79 [henceforth CTA] (Paris: Imprimerie
Nationale and Librairie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner, 1963)«
 20

by (-): App. I(-).1.14 = CTA, Appendix 1 (Herdner's Appendices 1 and 2

are on pp. 134-38 of CTA, vol. 1; figs. 98-101 in vol. 2), column 1,

line 14. Inversely, where Herdner has not edited a text, Gordon’s

number alone is given: i38.ll = UT, text i38.ll; 2064.15 = UT, text

2064.15. I have only varied from Whitaker’s system where a convention

seems to have been established in numbering texts published since UT:

the texts published in Ugaritica V^~ are numbered 601, etc.; those

2
published as The Claremont Ras Shamra Texts are numbered 701, etc.

To my knowledge, a series of numbers according to Gordon's system has

not yet been proposed for the texts published in Ugaritica VI.

I have adopted this system because, preferences aside, it is a

fact that among Ugaritologists no clear consensus has been reached for

using one of the two main systems rather than the other. In fact, each

has its advantages: CTA has the advantage of providing the final pub­

lication of the texts excavated at Ras Shamra between 1929 and 1939, and

the further advantage of classifying the texts logically according to

genre ; Gordon's system, on the other hand, has the advantage of being

able to incorporate immediately into its numbering system any body

of texts published and is therefore virtually complete at any given

time. Until that apocalyptic day arrives when the CTA appears in its

final volume, Whitaker's system is the best compromise.

ljean Nougayrol et al., Ugaritica V: Nouveaux textes accadiens,

hourrites et ugaritiques des archives et biblioteques privées d'Ugarit:
Commentaires des textes historiques (première partie), Mission de Ras
Shamraÿ vol. 16, Institut Français d'Archéologie de Beyrouth, Biblio-
teque Archéologique et Historique, vol. 80 (Paris: Imprimerie Nationale
and Librairie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner, 1968).

^Loren R. Fisher, ed., The Claremont Ras Shamra Tablets, Analecta

Orientalia 48 (Rome : Pontificium Institution Biblicum, 1971).

^Manfred Dietrich and Oswald Loretz, "Beschrifte Lungen- und

Lebermodelle aus Ugarit," Ugaritica VI, pp. 165-79»
 CHAPTER II

VERB/PREPOSITION COMBINATIONS

This chapter provides a list of the verb/preposition combinations

attested in Ugaritic with philological notes and a chart of perspectives

on action. The idioms are listed alphabetically according to the verb,

and, within the entry pertaining to one verb, according to the preposi­

tion. The roman numeral in each entry refers to the class of action to

which the passages in that entry are assigned (a chart of perspectives

is given on pp. 249-65, and a discussion of the notion on pp. 270-77)•

The line number(s) of each text reference indicate(s) the line in which

the preposition itself is found. An asterisk refers to a philological

note in the following section (pp. 106-24-9), also arranged alphabeti­

cally according to verb and preposition.

List of Attestations

3bd b* I ’perish in’

14(Krt). 1.24-25 (24) wbtmhn . sph yitbd

(25) wb . pjjyrh . yrj

The family perishes completely,

The succession entirely.

3bd 1 II ’destroy from’

607.5 (5) Inh . ml&s abd

* .
Inh . ydy (6) hmt

From it the charmer destroys,

From it he casts the venom.

21
 22

Repeated in lines 10-11, 16, 21-22, 27, 52, 37, 42, 47-48,
55-54, 59-60.

608.10 (10) hmt . Ip C. n]tk . abd .

ip . ak[l] (11) Elm . dl]

They destroy the venom from the

mouth of the biter,
They tear out (?) the poison (?)
from the mouth of the devourer.*
Also in line 20.

Jd (3wd ?) 1 III 'pay to' (???)

1010.19-20
* (19) n[r]n . al . tud (20) ad . at .
Ihm (21) ttm . ksp

adm b I 'rouge (oneself) with' (?)

19(1 Aqht).4.204
* (204) [a?]dm . tidlm . bglp yCm]

She rouges herself with glp ym.

3hb b I 'love in'

5(67).5.18-19 (18) yuhb . cglt . bdbr

*
prt (19) bsd . shlmmt

He loves a heifer in the steppe,

A cow in the sblmmt-field.

3fad b I 'take when'

17(2 Aqht).1.51 (51) a£d . ydh . bskrn

He takes his hand when he is drunk.

Also in .2.5, 19.

3 fad b I 'grasp by'

*

6(49).2.10 (9) tifcd . m[t] (10) bsin . Ips .

tssqCnh] (11) bqs . all

She grasps Mot by the hem (?) of

his clothes,
Siezes him by the extremity of
his garments.

11(152).1.1-2 (1) ylkh

.
* wyi&d . bqrbCh . . . ]
(2) Ct]tkh . wtifod . busCkh . . . ]
 23

He grows warm and grasps her

sexual parts,
She grows warm and grasps his
testicles.

3fod b II 'take from'*

*
1129.9-10 (8) ill . alp . spr . dt . aljd
(9) hrth . ahd . bgt . n&l (10) ahd .
bgt . knpy . w . ahd . bgt . trmn

Three oxen of §pr which his plowman

took, one from gt nhl, one from gt
knpy, and one from gt trmn.

Repeated in various stages of completeness in lines 11, 13,

14, 16.

3fad b/bm III 'take into1*

2.1(137).39 (39) [yu&]d . byd . ms&t .

bm . ymn . mhs

He takes in his hand a msfot-weapon,

In his right hand a mhs-weapon.

4(51).2.3-4 (3) eQjdt . plkh [. bydh]

(4) plk . (tVq)lt . bymnh

She takes her spindle in hand,

The spindle of ? in her right
hand.

10(76).2.6-7 (6) .
*
qsthn a^d . bydh
(7) wqscth . bm . ymnh

He takes his bow in hand,

His q§ct-bow in his right hand.

15(128).2.17-18 (16) ks . yi^d (17) [il . b]yd .

krpn . bm (18) [ymn .]

Il takes a cup in hand,

A flagon in his right hand.

16(125).1.47-48 (47) [m]rhh . yi&d . byd

(48) [g]rgrh . bm . ymn

He takes spear in hand,

? in his right hand.

603.2.6 (6) tijjd . knrh . byd[h]

 24

She takes lyre in hand.

2001.1.12-13 (12) mrhh . tiC^d bydh]

(13) s[jrh bm ymn

She takes spear in hand,

? in her right hand.

aM.l III ’take to/for'

137.2(93).11
* (10) fonts csr . sp (11) lbns tpnr
dafod Igynm

Fifteen jars (issued) to the

Tuppanuri’s men which they took
to (or: for) gynm.

3kl b I ’devour in’

4(51).6.25-26 (24) hn [.] ym . w£n .

tiki (25) ist [.] bbhtm .
nblat (26) bhk[1]m

One day and two

The fire devours in the house,
The flames in the palace.

Also in lines 27-28, 30-31.

3n (3wn ?) C1 I ’ prevail over’

*
608.8 (8) [grpl .] C1 . ar[s . Ian]

The cloud over the earth does not

prevail.

See also lines 9» 12, 19»

in*

3ny*

3rk Ipn I ’be long before’

1018.21 (20) w . urk . ym . bcly (21) 1 . pn .

amn • w • 1 . pn (22) il . msrm

May my lord’s days be lengthened

before Amon and before the gods of
Egypt.

3rs 1/1pn III ’make a request to’*

 25

602.2.3 (3) Ci]rs . lbcl

Ask Baal.

*
1018.19 (18) hy . npCs . a]rs (19) 1 . pn •
bc[l .] spn . bcly

I make a request for life to

my lord Baal Sapon.

1019.1.8 (7) irst . arst (8) lahy . lrcy

I make a request to my brother,

my friend.

*
2064.23 (23) alpm . arst . Ik

I asked you for oxen.

3rs cm III 'make a request to'

*
2065.14 (14) Ci]rs . cmy (15) mnm .^irstk
(16) dljsrt . w . ank (17) as tn .. 1 •
iby

Ask of me whatever your request

(might be for) what you lack and
I will send it to my brother.

3tw/y 1 III 'go/come to'

*

15(128).3.18-19 (18) tity • ilm . lahlhm

(19) dr il . Imsknthm

The gods go to their tents,

The assembly of the gods to their
dwellings.

20(121).2.4 (4) tcln . Imrkbthm .

tiCty . lcrhm]

They mount their chariots,

Go to their cities.

Repeated in 22.1(123).23

*
il

b3 (bw3) b III 'enter'

19(1 Aqht).4.213-14 (213i) agrtn . bat . bjjdk .

Cpgt] (214) bat . b<a>hlm
 26

Our mistress has come to your

home (?) *,
Pgt has come to your tents.

b3 C1 III ’enter before’*

15(128).6.6 (6) C1 . krt[.] tbun

They enter Krt’s presence.

bty b I 1 speak rashly during’ (?) *

4(51).3.21-22 (21) kbh . bj;t . Itbt

(22) wbh . tdmmt . amht

For during it they do indeed

rashly speak shamefulness,
During it the maids (rashly
speak) baseness.

bky bm I ’cry in’*

19(1 Aqht).1.34 (54) tbky . pgt . bm . lb

(35) tdmc . bm . kbd .

Pgt cries in her heart,

Sheds tears in her liver.

bky 1 III ’cry for’*

bky 1 I ’cry for’ (temporal)*
bky ed III ’cry until’

19(1 Aqht).4.173-78 (173) ybk . laqht (174) gzr .

ydmc . Ikdd . dnil (175) mt . rpi
lymm . lyrhm
(176) lyr^m . lent .
cd (177) sbct . snt .
ybk . laq(178)ht . gzr .
yd[mc .] Ikdd (179) dnil . mt .
r[ pi]

The warrior cries for Aqht,

Danil man of Rp3 sheds tears for
(his) child,
For days, for months,
For months, for years,
Until seven years (pass),
The warrior cries for Aqht,
Danil man of «2 sheds tears for
(his) child.

*
bll
 27

bny 1 III 'build for'

4(51).4.62 (62) ybn . bt . lbcl (63) km ilm .

whzr . kbn . airt

A house will be built for Baal like

the gods,
A court like the children of
Aiirat.

.5.90 (89) y[b]n (90) bt . Ik . km . a&k .

whzr (91) km . aryk

A house will be built for you

like your brothers,
A court like your kinsmen.

bcl b I * work in'

1024.3.6 (4) Iran . &zr (5) w . arbc . hrs

(6) dt . tbcln . b . pfrn

Eight "boar"-personnel (swine­

herds ?) and four craftsmen who
work in Pfan.

Repeated with variations in lines 8, 11.

b cl 1 III 'make for'

17(2 Aqht).6. 24-25 (24) ybcl . qst lcnt

*
(25) qsct . lybmt . limm

He will make a bow for Anat,

A qsct-bow for ybmt limm.

bcr atr/lpn I 'provide light behind/before

* * (S-stem)

4(51).4.17-18 (16) qds . yuhdm . sbcr

(17) amrr . kkbkb . lpnm
(18) air . btlt . cnt

Qadis begins to (?) give light,

Amrur like a star before,
Behind girl Anat.

b cr b I 1 burn in/on' (= * within the confines of)

*
2114.9 (8) akin . b . grnt (9) 1 • bcr

He even burned our food (while it

was still) on the threshing­
floors.
 28

bcr 1/lm III ’lead to' *

(?)

14(Krt). 2.101-2 (100) wysi . trjj (101) hdt .

yb r . Itn (102) alth .
Im . nkr (10J) mddth

The new bridegroom goes out

(to war),
He entrusts (?) his wife to
another,
His beloved to a stranger.

Repeated with variants in .4.190-91.

bgy b/btk I 'show in'

5(cnt).5.26-28
* (25) atm . wank (26) ibgyh .
btk . gry . il . spn
(27) bqds . bgr . nhlty
(28) bncm . bgbc . tliyt

Come and I will show it (to you),

In my mountain il §pn,
In the holy mount of which I took
possession,
In the lovely height of (my)
victory.

See also .4.65-64.

bqc b I 'split with'

6(49).2.51 (51) bhrb (52) tbqcnn

With a knife she splits him.

brd Ipn I 'cut before' (?) *

5(cnt).1.6 (6) ybrd . id . Ipnwh

(7) bhrb . mlht (8) qs . mri

Before him he cuts the breast,

With a sharp knife slices failings

brk 1 III 'bless to'"

17(2 Aqht) .1.24 (24) Itbrknn Hr . il aby

(25) tmrnn . Ibny . bnwt

May they bless him to Bull II

my father,
Extol him to the creator of
creatures.
 29

brr b II 'be pure (= free) of’*

brr ed III ’be pure (= free) until'

1005.5 (2) km . sps (5) dbrt . kmt (4) br .

stqslm (5) bunt . cd clm

As the sun is pure, so is Stqslm

free of unt-duty forever.

*
bt

gl (gyl) b II 'rejoice in' (= 'receive joy from')

*

16.1(125).15 (14) bhyk . abn . nlsmfc

(15) blmtk . ngln

In your life, our father, do we

rejoice,
In your not dying do we find joy.

Repeated in 16.2(125).99.

£md_ bm I 'laugh/chuckle in' *

(?)

12(75).1.13 (12) il . yzhq . bm (13) lb .

wygmd . bm kbd

Il laughs in his heart,

Chuckles in his liver.

EJL b III 'rebuke'*

*
2.1(137).24 (24) bhm . ygcr . bcl

Baal rebukes them.

2.4(68).28
* (28) bsm . tgcrm . cttrt

By name Attart rebukes (him).

601.1.11 (11) bhm . ygcr . tgr (12) bt . il

The doorman of Il's house rebukes

them.

.14 (14) bil . abh . gcr

He rebukes II his father.

(gwr ?) 1 I 'sojourn at
* (??)
*
EL
23(52).66 (66) tm tgrgr . labnm .
wl . csm . sbe . snt
 30

There they will live among rocks

And trees for seven years (??).

grs _b I 'drive out with'

?(cnt).2.16
* (15) mtm . tgrs (16) sbm .
bksl . qsth . mdnt

With a stave she drives out

captors,
With a bow-string opponents.

Sil b II 'drive out from'

*

702.1.8 (6) wm . ag(7)rskm . (8) b . bty

And if (?) I drive you from my

house . . .

£TS 1 II 'drive out from'*

l(cnt X).4.24 (24) grsnn . IkEsi . mlkh .

In^t . lkh£] (25) drkth

Drive him out from his royal

throne,
From the dais, from his sovereign
throne.

Same sequence in 2.4(68).12-13; 3(^nt).4.46-47.

dbb b I 'sacrifice in/on'

35(3).50 (50) id [. d]bh . mlk . 1 . prgl .

*
sqrn . b . gg

Then the king sacrifices to

Prgl-gqrn on the roof.

601.1.1 (1) il dbh . bbth . msd .

sd . bqrb (2) hklLh]

Il kills game (or: prepares a

feast) in his house,
Prey in his palace.

611.7 (1) id ydbh mlk (2) 1 us&[r] fclmt

(7) b qds ilbt

Then the king sacrifices to

Usbr-falmt ... in the sanctuary
of Ilbt.
 31

dbh 1 III ’sacrifice to’

*
14(Krt).2.76 (76) dbh . Itr (77) abk . il

Sacrifice to the Bull, your

father II.

35(3).50 and 611, passim, see above, dbh b.

1154.7 (7) dbh stqn 1 (8) rsp

tqn sacrificed to Resep

dmm 1 III ’wail for’

16.1(125).26 (25) bn . al . tbkn .

al (26) tdm . ly

Son, don’t cry,

Don't wail for me.

Also in line 30.

dmc b* I ’shed tears while'

14(Krt).1.27 (27) bin . [r]gmm . wydmc*

While repeating words he sheds

tears.

bm I ’shed tears in'*

* 1 III 'shed tears for'
c 1 I 'shed tears for' (temporal)

See texts cited under bky bm/1.

dc C1 I 'sweat upon'*

3(cnt).3.31 (29) him . cnt • tph . ilm .

bh . pcnm (30) ttt .
bcdn . ksl . tibr
(31) cln . pnh . tdc

When Anat sees the gods,

Her feet shake,
Behind, her back breaks,
Above, her face runs with sweat

Also in 4(51).2.18; 19(1 Aqht).2.94.

dpr b*

dry b I 'winnow/scatter with'

 52

6(49).2.52 (52) bbir . tdry (55) nn

With a sieve she winnows him.

.5.15 (12) clk . pht (15) dry . bhrb

On account of you I have experienced

scattering with a sword.

.5.16 (16) c[lk .] pht C. dr]y . bkbrt

On account of you I was winnowed

with a sieve.

drc b III 1sow/scatter in'

6(49).2.54 (54) bsd (55) tdrcnn

In the field she sowed him.

*
.5.19 (18) clk . pht (19) drc . bym

On account of you I have

experienced sowing in the sea.

flmr aj.r/1*

dmr b I 'make music with' (instrumental), ' . . . among' (locative)

602.1.4-5 (5) dysr . wy£mr

(4) bknr . wtlb .
btp . wmsltm .
bm(5)rqdm . dsn .
bhbr . k£r . tbm

. . . who sings and makes music

With lyre and flute,
With tambourine and cymbals,
Among greased dancers,
Among the good companions of Kotar.

hbr b I ' bow at a distance of, or ' through the extent of

5(cnt).6.17
* (17) balp . sd .
rbt (18) kmn .
lpcn . kt<r>
(19) hbr . wql

At (or: through) one thousand

"fields,"
Ten thousand kmn,
At the feet of Kotar
Bow and fall.
 33

Largely restored in l(cnt IX).3.2; same formula in 4(51).8

.24-27 (there mt is the deity rather than kjr).

hbr 1 III 'fall to/at"

l(cnt IX).2.15 (15) Llpc]n . cnt (16) [yhbr . wyql .

ystjhwyn . wy(17)[kbdnh . . . ]

At the feet of Anat they bow

and fall,
Prostrate themselves and honor her.

Also in 1(cnt IX). 3.2, 24; 2.3(129).5; 3(cnt).3.6; .6.18;

4(51).4.25; .8.26; 6.1.36(49.1.8); 17(2 Aqht).6.50.

hdy _b
*

hlk air I 'go after/behind'

14(Krt).2.94-95 (94) LaJir . tn . in . hlk

(95) air . lit . klhm

After two, two go,

After three, all of them.

Also in .4.182-83.

33(5).24
* (24) air . ilm . ylk . pcnm

They go on foot behind the gods.

hlk b I 'go in/through/with'

l(cnt X).4.7 (7) dl . ylkn . hs . ba[rs . . . ]

... that they might (not/indeed)

go hurrying through the land.

3(cnt).4.82
* (82) balp . sd .
rbt . knm
(85) hlk . a&th . bcl . ycn .
tdrq (84) ybnt . abh

Through one thousand "fields,"

Ten thousand knm,
Baal sees the progress of his
sister,
The stride of his father's
daughter (?).

Also in 17(2 Aqht).5.9 (same formulae, different char­

acters) .
 34

23(52).27
* (27) hlkm . bdbh ncmt

... who go with good sacrifices.

87(64).2
* (1) spr . m^r[glm] (2) dît . hlk .
b[ . . . ]

Document of watchmen (?) who

go ...

2001.1.3 (3) tlk bmdbrC . . . ]

She goes through (or: into [=

class III] ?) the desert.

hlk 1 I 'go by' (plus number)

14(Krt).2.92-93 (92) hlk . lai pm .

(93) wlrbt . kmyr

They go by thousands ? ,
By ten-thousands ? .

Also in .4.180-81.

hlk 1 Ill 'go to'

4(51).6.18-19 (18) y[tl]k . llbnn . wcsh

(19) l[sr]yn . mhmd . arzh

They go to Lebanon and its trees,

To Siryon and its best cedars.

16.6(127).27-28 (27) Ik . labk . ysb

Ik (28) l[a]bk . wrgm

Go to your father, 0 Ygb,

Go to your father and say . . .

33(5).26 (24) atr . ilm . yIk . pcnm

(25) mlk . pcnm . yl[k]
(26) sbc . pamt . lklhm

They go on foot behind the gods;

the king goes on foot, seven times
to (or: for ?) all of them.

601.1.17 (17) il . hlk . Ibth .

ystql . (18) Ihtrh

Il goes to his house,

Repairs to his court.
 55

hlk Ipn I 'go before'

1001.1.10 (10) . . . Ik . Ipny ...

. . . go before me (?) . . .

hlk cm III ’go come to’*

2060.15 C15) cmy . sps . bclk

(16) snt • sntm . Im .. 1 . tlk

To me, the Sun your master, for a

year, two years, why have you not
come?

hlm b I ’strike with'

601.1.8 (7) wdlydcnn (8) ylmn . htm (bqrc) .

tht . tlhn

The one he does not know he

strikes with a staff (with a
whip) under the table.

hlm bn III 'strike between'*

2.4(68).14 (14) him . ktp . zbl ym .

bn ydm (15) CipJt . nhr

He strikes the shoulder of

Prince Sea,
The chest of Judge River.

Repeated in lines 16, 22,, 25 (also with bn cnm 'between

the eyes').

1001.1.16 (16) ... yIm . b[n . c]nk . . .

... he strikes your fore­

head ...

him C1 III 'strike upon/above'

18(5 Aqht).4.23 (22) hlmn . tnm . qdqd

(23) illid . C1 . udn

Strike him twice on the head,

Thrice above the ear.

Carried out in line 34; also in 19(1 Aqht).2.79»

hlm tfrt I 'strike (someone who is) under'

 See above, him b, 601.1.8.

hpk 1 III 'turn against

*

*
RS 24.247 fcrdn yhlpk 1 mlk

Our guard will turn against the

king.

hry bm*

w^y or wtfr cm III * hurry to

* *
(?)

3(cnt).4.56 (55) cmy . pcnk (56) [tls]mn .

Lc]my . twtÿ. . isdk

May your feet run to me,

May your legs hurry (?) to me.

Also in l(cnt IX).2.2, 23; .3.11; 3(cnt).3.16; 7.2(130).17.

why or wtfr cm . . . tk III * hurry to . . . in

* (?)

Same sequence as preceding entry, except that tk frrsn is

added at end: l(ent IX).2.3, 23.

wpt btk III * spit into

**

4(51).3.13 (13) yqm . wywptn . btk

(14) p[^]r . bn . ilm

He arises and spits into

The assembly of the gods.

zd (zwd) 1 III * provide food for

* (?) *

24(77).8 (8) lydh tzd[ ]

You must provide food for his

hands.

See also line 12.

zg 1 III ’make a sound to

**

15(128).1.5-6 (5) arfo . tzg . lcglh

(6) bn . bpi . lumhthm

The cow lows to her calf,

The ? to their mothers.

frdy b I * see (something which is) in

*
 37

19(1 Aqht).2.106
* (105) bnsi[. cnh . wyphn .
yhd] (106) bcrpt [. nsrm . . . ]

When he lifts his eyes he looks,

He sees eagles in the clouds.

hkm cm I 'be as wise as' (or: III 'be wise unto')

4(51).4.42 (41) thmk . il . hkm .

hkmt (42) cm clm

You are indeed wise, 0 II,

You are as wise as eternity
(or: You are wise unto eternity).

hmm b*

bnn lpn I 'seek mercy (while) before'*

1020.3 (3) hnny lpn mlk

Seek mercy for me (when you are)

before the king.

bsp 1 III 'gather (liquid) for' (or: II 'gather from')

19(1 Aqht).2.51
* (50) smc . pgt . tkmt [. my]
(51) hept . lscr . tl

Hear, 0 Pgt, carrier of water,

Gatherer of dew for (or: from
[= which is on]) barley.

Same epithet in line 55 and in .4.199.

hrr 1 I 'roast on'

23(52).41 (41) h[l .] csr . thrr . list .

shrrt . Iphmm

Behold a bird roasts on the fire,

Broils on the coals.

Also in lines 44, 48.

hdw b II 'rejoice in' (= 'receive joy from') (?)

3(cnt).5.3O
* (29) al . tsm& . brCm . h]kl[k]
(30) al . a^dhm . by[..] ...

Do not rejoice in the erection

of your palace,
Do not ? .
See also 18(3 Aqht).1.9»
 38

ht3 b I ’sin in/by1

ht 1 III * sin against’

*
J2(2).14-15 (14) utfotin . bapkn . ub[q]§rt .
npëlkn . ubqtt] (15) tqttn
uthtin . l<d>bhm . wl$c

... or should you sin by anger,

or by impatience, or by any quar­
rel that you should get into, or
should you sin against the dbh-
offering or against the jc-
offering ...

Parallel passage restored in lines 8’-9-

ht3 b I ’do harm while’ (5-stem)

19(1 Aqht).3.151
* (148) knp . nsrm (149) bcl . y£br .
bcl . yibr . diy (150) hmt .
hm . tcpn . C1 . qbr . bny
(151) tshtann . bsnth

May Baal break the eagles’ wings,

May Baal break their pinions,
If they fly over my son’s tomb,
If they do him harm while he sleeps.

fasr bn* I ’be lacking among’ (or: II ’from among’ [= who was among])

6(49).2.18 (17) nps . bsrt (18) bn . nsm .

nps . hmlt (19) ars

A soul is lacking among men,

A soul of the multitude of the
earth.

I»
*»- bn I ’attack (while) among
*

3(cnt).2.6 (5) whin . cnt . tm(6)ths . bcmq .

tfotsb . bn (7) qrytm

Behold Anat smites in the valley,

Attacks among the cities.

Also in lines 20, JO; 7.1(131).5; 7.2(130).25 (last two

restored).

hrb b I ’dry on’ (= ’within the confines of’)

19(1 Aqht).l.J0 (JO) bgrn . yjjrb[ . . . ]

He dries on the threshing ­

floor ...
 39

bt3 b I 'smite' - 'be destroyed in' (?)•

4(51).8.19 (17) al . ycdbkm (18) kimr • bph

(19) klli • bibrn (20) qnh . t^tan

He must take you like a lamb in

his mouth,
Like a ewe-lamb you must be des­
troyed in his crushing jaws (?).

6(49).2.23 (22) cdbnn ank . imr . bpy

(25) klli . b£brnq<n>y • Jjtu hw

I will take him like

* a lamb in
my mouth,
Like a ewe-lamb he will be des­
troyed in my crushing jaws (?).

tbfa b* I 'slaughter in/during

* ; II * slaughter from' (partitive) (?)

*
1153 (1) bgt ilstmc (2) bt ubny sh .
dytn . stqn (3) tut tbb stqn
(4) bbz czm tbb s[h ?]
(5) bkl ygz tb^l sh

In gt ilstmc, (at) the house of

Ubnyi (as regards) his s (term in­
cluding sheep and goatsT which
gtqn provided: gtqn slaughtered
ewes; from the booty of^goats (?)
he slaughtered [his ?] s;
throughout the time he Tthey)
was (were) shearing (or: from
all the animals he [they] was
[were] shearing) he slaughtered
his s.

tbfa 1 III 'slaughter for'

17(2 Aqht).2.29 (29) alp . yfcbb . lki(30)rt

An ox he slaughtered for the kjrt.

tbn b I * grind with'

6(49).2.34 (34) brhm . tthnn

With mill-stones she grinds him.

Also in .5.15.

tb (tw/yb) b I ' plaster on' (temporal)

 40

17(2 Aqht).1.33 (33) tb . ggh . bym (34) CiiJj

... who plasters his roof

on a muddy day ...

Also in .2.7, 22.

til 1 III ' dew upon'

19(1 Aqht).1.42 (38) apnk . dnil . mt (39) rpi .

ysly . crpt . b(4O)^m . un .
yr . crpt (41) tmtr . bqz .
JI . ytil (42) Igribm

Thereupon Danil man of Rp3

Curses the clouds in the heat of
grief,
The rain which the clouds rain
down in summer,
The dew which descends upon the
grapes.

trd b II * drive out from'

3(cnt).4.45
* (44) trd . bcl (45) bmrym . spn

Could they drive Baal from the

heights of Sapon?

ybl b I 'bring in'

19(1 Aqht).1.19 (18) yCbl] . sblt (19) bglph

He brings ears in the husk (?).

ybl 1 III 'bring to'

19(1 Aqht).4.212 (212) rgm . lyjCpn . y](213)bl

Word is brought to Yfrpn.

Same expression, different characters, in 23(32).52, 59»

64(118).19
* (18) hlny . argmn . dCybl . n]qmd
(19) Isps

This is the tribute which Niq-

maddu brought to the Sun.

Also in line 25»

ybl cm III 'take to' (+ b = 'who is in'; or: ybl b = class III = 'take
to/into')
 41

607.2 (2) ql . bl . cm (3) il .

mbk nhrm . bcdt . thmtm

Take a message (?) to II

At the source of the two rivers,
At the gathering-place of the
two deeps.

Repeated with different divine names in each of the first

eleven sections of this text.

ydy b I ’scratch with’

5(67).6.17-18
* (17) gr . babn (18) ydy .
psltm . bycr
(19) yhdy . Ihm . wdqn

His skin he scratches with a stone,

Incisions (?) with a razor,
He cuts cheeks and beard.

Also in 6(62).1.2

ydc b I ’know when’

1021.8 (8) wb . cly skn . ydc . rgmh

When the soken comes up his word

will be known.

yld 1 III ’bear for’

10(76).3.21-22 (21) ibr . tld [. lbcl]

(22) wrum . lCrkb . crpt]

She bore a bull for Baal,

A wild bull for Cloud-rider.

The following texts contain the same expression whose sem­

antic content is uniform enough not to make it worth citing
them alls 10(76).3.36-37; 14(Krt).3.152-53; .6.298-99;
15(128).2.23, 25; .3.6 (for wld bn . tlk read wld bnt Ik);
.3.20-21; 17(2 Aqht).2.14.

ynq b III ’suck’

23(52).24 (24) ynqm . bap zd . atrt

... sucking the nipples of the

breasts of Atirat.

Also in lines 59, 61

 42

ypc 1 III * rise against

*

3(cnt).3.34-35 (34) mn . ib . ypc . lbcl .

srt (35) Irkb . crpt

What enemy rises against Baal,

(What) adversary against
Cloud-rider?

Also in .4.48-50

y§3 b I * go forth in
* (temporal)

1158.1.1 (1) byr[h] (2) pgr[m] (3) ysa[ ] . . .

In the month pgrm [ ? ] goes

forth ...

The same usage occurs, also in broken contexts, in 1158.2.1

and in 1159.1. These texts also seem to contain the complex
preposition bd (1158.2.5; 1159.5) and the preposition 1
(1158.2.4), both perhaps construed with y§J.

y§3 b/bd II * go forth from*

18(3 Aqht).4.26 (24) tsi . km (25) rh . npsh .

km . itl . brlth .
km (26) qtr . baph

His soul goes out like wind,

Like a breeze his life,
Like smoke from his nose.

Same expression in .4.37; restored in 19(1 Aqht).2.88.

19(1 Aqht).2.75 (75) bph . rgm . lysa .

bSpth [. hwth]

The word has hardly left his mouth,

The statement his lips ...

Same expression in .3.113, 127, 141.

*
147(90).2 (1) ili . dyga (2) bd . smmn
(3) largmn (4) Inskm

Copper which was conveyed by Smmn

as tribute, (distributed to) the
metal-workers.

1109.1 (1) spr . npsm . dysla . bmil&

Document of garments distributed

from the clothes-store.
 45

y§J b/btk III 'go forth to' (?)

*
12(75).1.20-21 (19) wzi (20) bain . tkm^
(21) btk . mdlbr (22) ilsy

Go forth to Alm Tkm (?),

Into the desert of Blx (?).

yg3 1 III 'go forth to/for'

12(75).1-14, 16
* (14) ji . at . Itls (15) amt . yr&
(16) Idmgy . amt (17) airt

Go forth to Tls, 0 maid of Yari&,

To Dmgy, 0 maid of Aiirat.

(S-stem) 17(2 Aqht).1.28-29

* (28) lars . mssu . qtrh
(29) lcpr . dmr . airh

He sends forth his incense for

the country,
Song for the land after him (??)

Also (with varying pronominal suffixes) in lines 46-47 ;

.2.2-5, 17 (all at least partially restored).

147(90).5-4 (text cited above at y§3 b).

(S-stem) 1020.5
* (5) rcy ssa idn ly

0 my friend, send me an idn (??)

ygq b I 'pour out (while) in'1

*
22.2(124).25 (24) tstyn . bt . ikl . bprc
(25) ysq[ .] birt . Ibnn

They first drink in the dining­

hall,
They pour out (drink) in the
heart of Lebanon.

y?q b 111 'pour out into'

5(cnt).2.52 (51) ysq . smn (52) slm . bsc

. . . pouring oil of "peace"

into a bowl ...

Also in 605.2.4.

14(Krt).2.71-72 (71) s[q . bg]l . hti (72) yn •

bglL . rs . nbt
 44

Pour wine into a silver bowl,

Honey into a golden bowl.

Carried out in .4.164-65.

160(55).5
* (5) CwJysq baCph.]

Then one pours it into its

nostrils.

Passim in this and the following text (161C56J) and in

RS 17.120 (published only in photographs, Ugaritica V,
pp. 625-27).

y§q 1 I 1 cast by' (plus number)

4(51).1.28-29
* (27) ysq . ksp (28) laipm .
brs . ysq(29)m . lrbbt

He casts silver by thousands,

Gold he casts by ten thousands.

y§q 1 III 'pour onto'

5(67).6.15-16 (14) ysq . cmr (15) un . Irish .

cpr . pltt (16) Iqdqdh

He pours ashes of grief on his

head,
Dust of wallowing on his pate.

yrd air I 'descend after

*

*
5(67).6.24 (24) a£r (25) bcl . ard . bars

After Baal I'll descend into

the earth.

Same expression (1st c.pl.) in 6(62).1.7.

yrd b I * descend in'

14(Krt).1.35-36 (35) wbhlmh (36) il . yrd .

b^hrth (37) ab adm

In his dream II descends,

In his vision, father of men.

yrd b I 'bring down (5-stem) with'

*
14(Krt).2.78-79 (77) srd . bcl (78) bdbhk .
bn . dgn (79) bmsdk
 45

Bring down Baal with your

sacrifice,
Son of Dagan with your food.

Carried out in .4.170—71.

yrd b III 1 descend into’

See yrd ajr, above, for two examples.

2.3(129).20 (20) lb[d?]m . (t/a)rd . bn[p]sny

Alone (?) (I/you) will descend

into our ? .

5(67).1.7 (6) lyrt (7) bnps . bn ilm . mt .

bmh (8) mrt . ydd . il . gzr

You must indeed go down into the

throat of Mot son of II,
Into the bitter waters of Hero
beloved of II.

.2.4 (3) ycrb (4) [bc]l • bkbdh •

bph yrd (5) khrr . zt

Baal enters his liver,

Goes down his throat like a
roasted olive.

*
24(77).43 (42) yrdt (43) bcrgzm

. . . going down to the nut-grove

yrd 1 II ’descend from’

*
5(67).6.13 (11) apnk . Itpn . il (12) dpid .
yrd . lksi . y£b (13) Ihdm [.
w]l . hdm . ytb (14) lars

Thereupon Lutpan, merciful god,

Descends from the throne,
sits upon the footstool,
Even from the footstool (and)
sits upon the earth.

6.1.64(49.1.36) (63) yrd (64) Ikht . aliyn . bcl

(65) wymlk . bars . il . klh

He descends from the throne of

Aliyan Baal,
Rules the whole land of II.
 46

14(Krt).2.8O (79) wyrd . krt (80) [lg]gt

May Krt go down from the roofs.

Carried out in .4.172.

16.6(127).37-38 (37) rd . Imlk . amlk

(38) Idrktk atb . an

Descend from your kingship (and)

let me reign,
From your dominion (and) let me
sit (enthroned).

Repeated in lines 52-53»

yrd Ipn I 1 descend before’ (?)

2001.2.8 (8) ... Ipnh yrd

? (context broken)

yrd cm I ’descend with’

6(62).1.8 (8) cmh . trd . nrt (9) ilm . sps

With her descends the luminary

of the gods Saps.

yr(w ?) b I 'shoot off by/while/among’ *

(???)

10(76).2.11 (11) tsu . knp . wtr . bcp

She lifts wing and takes off

flying.

.28-30 (28) wtr . blkt

(29) tr . blkt .
wtr . b£l
(30) Eb3ncmm • bysmm

She takes of going,

Does indeed,
Takes off dancing,
Among the fair and lovely ones

Same sequence abbreviated in .3.18-19.

yrw b I ’shoot (something which is) in’

23(32).38 (37) ysu (38) yr . smmh .

yr . bsmm . csr
 47
He lifts (the bow and) shoots
heavenwards,
Shoots a bird in the heavens.

yr(w ?) tk III 'shoot off to

* (???)

10(76).2.12 (11) tsu . knp . wtr . bcp

(12) tk . a& smk

She lifts wing and takes off

flying
To smk-swamp ...

ysn b/bm I * sleep while/on

* (temporal)

14(Krt).1.31 (31) bm[.]bkyh . wysn

(32) bdmch . nhmmt

While crying he falls asleep,

While shedding tears there is
slumber.

14(Krt).3»H9 (118) whn . spsm (119) bsbc .

wl . ysn . pbl (120) mlk

Behold at sunrise on the seventh

day
King Pbl will not be able to sleep

Carried out in .5.221.

ysn 1 I *(not) sleep at (the sound of)1 *

14(Krt).3.119-23 (119) wl . ysn . pbl (120) mlk .

Iqr . tiqt . ibrh
(121) Iql . nqht . hmrh
(122) lgct . alp . hrt .
zgt (123) klb . spr

... King Pbl will not be able

to sleep
At the sound of the lowing of his
cattle,
At the noise of the braying of
his donkeys,
At the bellowing of his plow-oxen,
(At) the barking of his bird-dogs
(?).

Carried out in .5.223-26.

ytn b I 'give in/during*

 48

*
4(51).5.70 (70) w<y>tn . qlh . bcrpt
(71) srh . lars . brqm

He thunders in the clouds,

Flashes his lightning to the earth.

14(Krt).J.150-51 (150) dbhlmy . il . ytn

(151) bjjrty . ab . adm

... whom in my dream II gave,

In my vision the father of men . . .

*
1107.6 (5) mlbs . trmnm (6) k . ytn . w . b .
bt (7) mlk . mlbs (8) ytn . lhm

When the clothing of the trmnm is

worn, clothing is issued to them
in the king’s palace.

ytn b II 1 give (one/some) of

6.1.46(49.1.18) (45) tn (46) ahd . b . bnk[.] amlkn

Give one of your sons that I may

make him king.

6(49).5.20
* (19) tn . ahd (20) ba&k

Give one of your brothers ...

ytn b/bd III ’put in'

l(cnt X).4.9-10 (9) ytn [. ks . byd]

(10) krpn . bklat yd

He puts a cup in one hand,

A flagon in both.

Same sequence in J(cnt) 1.10-11.

17(2 Aqht).5.26-27 (26) bd . dnil . ytnn (27) qst .

Ibrkh . ycdb (28) qsct

He puts the bow in Danil’s hand,

Places the qgct-bow on his knees.

55(18).19-21 (19) wytn . ilm • bdhm

(20) bd[.] ifcqm . gir
(21) wbd . ytrhd (22) bcl

Then he should entrust the gods to

them, Gjr to Ifagm and Baal to Ytrhd

See also below, ytn cm • • . b.

 49

ytn yd I *give/grant (something) along with (something else)*

1008.7-9
* (4) ytn (5) sd . kdgdl[ . bn ?]
(6) usry . d . b . ë[d]y
(7) m[.. y]d gth [yd]
(8) [ ] yd .
(9) [k]rmh . yd (10) [k]lklh

... has granted the field of

Kflgdl son of Usry which is in the
fields (?) of ? along with its
press area, along with its [ ? ],
along with its vineyard, along with
all that pertains to it . . .

ytn 1 I *give/grant for/as concerns1 (or: II ’give from’) (temporal)*

1008.1 (1) 1 ym . hnd (2) cmttmr . bn

(3) nqmpc ml[k] (4) ugrt . ytn

This day (or: from this day)

Amittamru son of Niqmepa, king of
Ugarit, has granted ...

Also in 1009.1.

ytn 1 III ’give/grant to’

3(ent).5.H (ID []d . lytn . bt . lbcl . kilm

(12) [whj]r . kbn • ajrt

. . . if (?) a house is not given

to him like the gods,
A court like the sons of Atirat.

This usage is frequent (I have counted 25 other cases) with

little semantic variation.

ytn cd III ’give/grant until

*

1008.14 (11) [w]ytn . nn (12) 1 . bcln . bn

(13) kltn . wl (14) bnh . cd . clm

... and granted it to Bcln son

of Kltn and to his sons forever.

Also in 1009.11.

ytn cl*

ytn cm(n) III ’head towards’ (in the expression ytn pnm cm)*

5(67).1.10 (9) idk (10) lytn . pnm .

cm . bcl (11) mrym . spn
 50

They head
Towards Baal on the heights
of Sapon.

Also in 4(51).8.2-4; 6(49).4.32; 14(Krt).5.24?; .6.266,

302; 18(3 Aqht).4.6.

ytn cm . . . b III/I 'head towards ... through' (in the expression

ytn pnm cm . . « b).
*

3(cnt).4.81-82 (81) idk . Ittn . pnm .

cm . bcl (82) mrym . spn .
balp . sd . rbt . kmn

She heads
Towards Baal on the heights of
Sapon,
Through a thousand "fields,"
ten thousand kmn.

Also in 4(51).5.85-86; 18(3 Aqht).1.21.

ytn cm . . . qrb III 'head towards ... in' (in the expression
ytn pnm cm . . . qrb).

2.3(129).4 (4) [idk .] lytn [ .] pnm .

cm[. ill . mbk [. nhrm •
qrb . apq . thmtm]

They head
Towards II at the source of the
two rivers,
Midst the fountains of the two
deeps.

Also in 3(cnt).5.14; 4(51).4.21-22; 5(6?).6.02-01;

6.1.32-33(49.1.4-5); 17(2 Aqht).6.47-48.

ytn cm . . « tk III 'head towards ... in' (in the expression

ytn pnm cm . . . tk).

2.1(137).14 (13) [idk . pnm] (14) al . ttn .

cm . pjjr . mcd .
t[k . gr . 11]

You must head

Towards the gathering of the
assembly
On Mount LI.

Also in l(cnt IX).3.21-22; 5(67).2.14-15.

ytn tfct I 'give (while) under*

 51

2.4(68).7
* (6) wttn . gh • ygr
(7) tht . ksi . zbl . ym

Ygr cries out

Under the throne of Prince Sea.

ytn tk III 'head towards

* (in the expression ytn pnm tk).

4($1).8.11 (10) idk . al . ttn (11) pnm .

tk . qrth (12) hmry

You must head

Towards his city Hmry.

Also in l(cnt IX).5.01; 5(cnt).6.15; 5(67).5.12; 10(76).2.9;

607.65.

ytn tk . . . cm III 'head towards . . . towards' (in the expression

ytn pnm tk . . . cm).

2.1(157).20 (19) [idk . pnm] (20) lytn .

tk . gr . 11 .
cm . pfolr . mcd

They head
Towards Mount LI,
Towards the gathering of the
assembly.

ytb b I 'sit in'

16.6(127).25' (25) ap . ysb . ytb . bhkl

Y§b sits in the palace.

601.1.15' (14) ytb . il . wb[n]* (15) atErt .]

il . yjb . bmrzh

Il and the sons of Atirat sit,

Il sits at the mrzb-feast.

602.1.2-5
* (2) il . ytb . b . citrt
(5) il tpt • bhdrcy

Il sits in cftrt,
Il judges in hdrcy.

2015 is made up of notations PN (bn PN) d ytb b GN.*

ytb b . . . t^t I * sit in ... at the feet of

* (?)

17(2 Aqht).5.6
* (6) ytb . bap . tgr .
tht (7) adrm . dbgrn
 52

He sits in the ? of the gate,

At the feet of the notables in the
threshing area.

Same sequence largely restored in 19(1 Aqht).1.22.

ytb btk I ’sit in'

*
603.1.2 (1) bcl . ytb . ktbt . gr
hd . r[..3 (2) kmdb .
btk . grh . il spn .
b[tk] (3) gr . tliyt

Baal sits as solidly as a mountain,

Hadd [ ? ] like a flood,
In his mountain il spn.
In the mountain of (his) victory.

I 'sit for' (temporal) *

6(49).5.7 (5) [ytb .3 b[c31 • • »

(7) lCymJm . lyrljm .

lyrjpn (8) Is nt

Baal sits ...

For days, for months,

For months, for years.

ZtbJ. III 'sit in order to' (.1 plus; infinitive)

2.1(137).20-21 (20) ap . ilm . l<l>h[m3 (21) ytb »

bn qds . linn

The gods sit down to eat 1

The holy ones to dine.

Same expression in 18(3 Aqht).4.19, 29-30»

yjb 1 III ’sit on

*
3(67).6.13-14" (12) yrd . lksi . ytb (13) Ihdm [.
w]l . hdm . ytb (14) lars

He descends from the throne,

sits upon the footstool,
Even from the footstool (and)
sits upon the earth.

6.1.58(49.1.30) (58) ytb . IkhtC » 3 aliyn (59) bcl

He sits upon the throne of Aliyan

Baal.
 53

6(49).5.5-6 (5) [ytb .] b[c]l . Iksi . mlkh

(6) [In&t .] Ikht . drkth

Baal site upon his royal throne,

Upon the dais, upon his sovereign
throne.

Much the same in 10(76).3.14-15 (bn dgn replaces Infrt).

16(126).5.24-25 (24) ib . bny . lmjb[t]km

(25) Ikht . zblkCm]

Sit (or: return), my sons, upon

your seats,
Upon your princely thrones.

16.6(127).23-24 (22) ytb . krt . lcdh

(23) ytb . Iksi mlk
(24) ln£t . Ikht . drkt

Krt returns to (or: sits on)

his 2d, *
Sits on the royal throne,
On the dais, upon the sovereign
throne.

ytb 1 III 1 seat on' (5-stem)

4(51).5.109 (108) tcdb . ksu (109) wyttb .

lymn . aliyn (110) bcl

A chair is placed and they seat

him (or: he is seated)
At the right of Aliyan Baal.

ytb tljt I 1 sit at the feet of (?)

See texts 17(2 Aqht).5.6 and 19(1 Aqht).1.22 above, at

ytb b . . . tfrt.

kly b* I 'be used in'

2004.2 (1) yn . d . ykl . bd.[...]

(2) b . dbh . mlk

Wine which was used under the

supervision of [ ? ] in the
mlk-sacrifice.

*
2093.1 (1) qmh . d . kly . b[ .] bt . skn

Flour which was used in the soken*

s
house.
 54

kly b I 'be used in' (N-stem)

1084.24 (24) mi[t]m . yn . hep . d . nkly

b . db[h ... 2

200 (units of) frsp-wine which

were used in the [ ? ]-sacrifice.

1086.1-5 (1) []ym . prc d nkly yn kd w kd

(2) w C1 ym kdm
(5) w b ill . kd yn w krsnm
(4) w b rbc kdm yn
(5) w b hms kd yn

[ ? ] on the first day that two kd

of wine were used; on the next day
*
two kd; on the third day one kd and
two krsn; on the fourth day two kd;
on the fifth day one kd.

1143.6 (6) ksp . d . nkly . b . sd

Money used in the field (then

follow amounts ,1 PN).

kly b II 'be used from'

16(126).3.13-16 (15) kly (14) Ihm . [b]cdnhm .

kly (15) yn . bhmthm .
k[l]y (16) smn bq[ ]

Bread was used up from their jars,

Wine was used up from their bottles
Oil was used up from [their ? ].

kly bd I ’be used under the supervision of’ (?)

See 2004.1 at kly b, above.

kly 1 III ’be used for’

1098.44 (44) [ . . . Jnkly . 1 . rcym

sbcm . 1 . mitm . dd

270 dd(-measures) of [ ? ] used for

the shepherds.

kly C1 I ’be used on’ (in the expression C1 ym)

1086.2 is cited above, at kly b.

kn (kwn) b/bqrb I 'be in'

 55

17(2 Aqht).1.26 (26) wykn . bnh . bbt •

ere . bqrb (27) hklh

So that he might have a son in

the house,
A scion in the palace.

Also in .1.44.

kn (kwn) 1 III 1*be for'

14(Krt).1.15 (15) £ar urn . tkn Ih

Flesh of a mother (?) she was

to him (??).

kn C1 III 'establish concerning/on/against' (L-stem) (?)

*
1161.7 (5) w . mnm . salm
(6) dt . tknn (7) C1 • crbnm
(8) hn hmt (9) tknn

And whatever claimants shall

establish (a claim) against the
guarantors, behold (these) shall
satisfy (?) them: [then follows
the list of guarantors].

krc 1 III 'bow at'

10(76).2.18 (18) lpcnh . ykrc . wyql

At her feet he bows and falls.

l3y b I 'be weak in' (?)

5(cnt).5.26
* (26) la . smm[ .] by[d . bn . ilm . m]t

The heavens are weakened in the

control of Mot, son of II.

Same expression in 4(51).8.2} and 6(49).2.25.

l'k 1 III 'send to' (direct object expressed)

4(51).7.45-46 (45) dll . al . ilak . Ibn (46) ilm . mt

cdd[ . ] lydd (47) il . gzr

I will not send a delegation to Mot

son of II,
Nor a messenger to Hero, beloved of
II.*
 56

l3k 1 III •send (word) to’ (direct object not expressed)

4(51).5.103
* (103) yOak . lktr . wfcss

A message is sent to Kotar-wa-

Hasis.

l3k 1 . . . cm III ’send to'

14(Krt).3.124
* (123) wylak (124) mlakm . Ik .
cm . krt (125) mswnh

He will send messengers to you,

To Krt in his camp.

l3k cmn I 'send (someone who is) with'

*
1012.34 (33) w . mlk . bely . bns (34) bnny .
cmn (35) mlakty . hnd (36) ylak cmy

... then may the king my lord

send an intermediary with these
messengers of mine (back) to me.

l3k cm(n) III 'send to' (direct object expressed)

*
138.8 (6) iky . Iht (7) spr . d likt
(8) cm . tryl

Where is the message-tablet which

was sent to Iryl?

1012.36 (see above, at L3k cmn I)

*
1021.4 (4) w ht . luk cm ml[k(t ?)]
(5) tgsdb . smlsn

So send Tgsdb (and) Smlsn to

(or: with) the king (or: queen).

2009.1.6 (5) Iht . slm . k . lik[t]

(6) umy . cmy

Since my mother sent me tablets

concerning (my) health ...

2060.18 (17) w . Iht . akl . ky (18) likt .

c * $
m sps

Since you sent tablets concerning

food to the Sun ...

*
2061.10 (9) ky . lik • bny (10) Iht . akl . cmy
 57

Since my son has sent me tablets

concerning food ...

l3k cm III 'send (word) to’ (direct object not expressed)

24(77).16 (16) ylak yrg ny[r] smm . cm

(17) &r[h]b mlk qz

Yaril}, illuminator of heaven, sends

word to grfrb, king of Qz.

53(54).11 (8) ht (9) hm . in mm (10) nhtu .

w . lak (11) cmy

Now if no one is stricken, send word

to me.

Other references (all letters): 1010.4; 1013.18; 2008.2.8;

2128.1.7.

lbs b I 1clothe/outfit in’

*
2106.17 (14) w . gmsm . ksp (15) Iqh . mlk .
gbl (16) lbs . anyth (17) bcrm

... and the king of Byblos took

50 (shekels of) silver to outfit
his ships in crm.

lbs cl*

Ifcm b II ' eat from/some of' (locative and partitive)

4(51).4.36 (35) lh[m] (36) btlhnt . Ihm

st (37) bkrpnm . yn

They eat food from tables,

Drink wine from flagons.

5(67).1.19 (19) bkl<a>t (20) ydy . ilhm

With both hands I eat.

23(52).6 (6) Ihm . blhm ay

Eat of any food.

611.10 (9) s 1 ilbt . slmm (10) kll yIhm bh

A sheep for Ilbt as a slmm-offering;

all may eat of it.

Ifrm lpn . . » bcd I 'feed before behind’ (5-stem)

 58

*
16.6(127).48-49 (48) Ipnk (4g) Itslhm . ytm
bcd (50) kslk . almnt

Before you, you have not fed the

orphan,
Behind your back, the widow.

ifrm cm I 'eat (together) with'

5(67).1.24 (24) wlhmm cm afcy . Ihm

(25) wstm . em . a[y<y>
* yn

Eat food with my brothers,

Drink wine with my brothers (?).

Ism cm III 'run to'

l(cnt IX).2.22 (22) [cmy . pclnk . tlsmn

(23) [cmy . twth . isd]k

May your feet run to me,

May your legs hurry to me.

Also in .2.1; .3.10; 3(cnt).3.16; .4.55; 7.2(130.16.

19b b I ' take on

* (temporal)
Iqb b I 'take/buy for' (b pretii)

*
1155.1-2, 6 (1) b . ym . hdj (2) b . yr& . pgrm
(3) Iqh . bclmcdr (4) w . bn . fclp
(5) w[
...]y
* . dC]cl (6) mi&d . b
(7) arbc . mat (8) ^rs

On the day of the new moon, in the

month pgrm, Bclmcdr, Bn-hlp, and
[ ? ? ] bought a mihd* for 400
(shekels of) gold.

Same usages in 1156.1—2, 6; 2006.1-2, 8; 2007.2-3» II*

iqb b i '( one who is) among/in takes'

*
2052.2 (1) ahd . kbd (2) arbcm . bfczr
(5) Iqh scrt

(4) Ü c§rh . Iqh (5) blpnt

Forty-one of the ^zr-personnel took

wool; sixteen took (goats' ?) hair.

Iqh b/bd II 'take from'*

3(cnt).1.16 (15) alp (16) kd . yqh . bfcmr

(17) rbt . ymsk . bmskh
 59

He takes a thousand kd from the

liquor,
Mixes ten thousand into his mixture.

19(1 Aqht) • 3»145 (14$) i£ . smt .

it . cjm .
wyqh bhm

There is fat,
There is bone,
And he takes some of them.

.4.216-218 (215) qh (216) ks . bdy .

qbct . bymnyE .
t]q(217)h . pgt . wtsqynh .
tqlCh . ks .] bdh
(218) qbct . bymnh

Take the cup from my hand,

The goblet from the other.
£Êt takes and drinks,
She takes the cup from his hand,
The goblet from the other.

1005.14 (12) w mnkm • lyqh

(13) spr_. mlk . hnd • (14) byd .

stqslm (15) cd clm

No one shall take this royal

decree from ^tqslm forever.

Same expression in 1008.17, 19; 1009.14, 17 (the form in

these texts is bd).

2059.18, 21 (15) w . (16) rb . tmtt (17) Iqh . kl .

£rc (18) bd[nt]m . w . ank
(19) k[l .] drchm (20) [....]ps[.]
(21) w[]lhm . bd (22) rb . tmtt . Iqht

The chief of tmtt removed all the

£rc from peril
* ; then I took all
their £rc, [ ?? ], and their
[ ?? ] from the chief of tmtt.

lqb b/bd/bm III ’take in/into’*

4(51).2.32 (32) qh . r^t . bdk t[ . . . ]

Take the net in your hand ...

14(Krt).2.66-67 (66) qh . im[r . bydk]

(67) imr . d[bh . bm] . ymn
 60

Take a lamb in one hand,

A sacrificial lamb in the other.

14(Krt).3.160 (159) Iqh (160) imr . dbh . bydh

(161) Ila . klatnm

He took a sacrificial lamb in

one hand,
A kid in both.

16.1(125).41-42 (41) qh . Ca]pk byd

(42) [b]r[lt]k . bm . ymn

Take your nose in one hand,

Your throat (?) in the other.

Iqh 1 III 1 take for'

*
23(52).31 (31) Cyqh .] il [.] mstcltm .
msteltm . Iris . agn

Il takes kindling (?),

Kindling (?) for the top of
the fire.

Also in line 36.

lqfr cd III 'take until’

1005.15; 1008.19; 1009.17 (see above at lqb b II).

Iqfr cm(n) III ’take to' (?)

*
1083.3, 5 (1) arbc . csrh . smn (2) d . Iqht .
jjlgdy (3) w . kd . istir . cm . qrt

(4) cSt cSrh . Smn (5) cmn . bn . aglmn

Fourteen (units of) oil which Tlgdy

took and a jar of istir (she took)
to Qrt (either a proper noun, or
'town'); eleven (units of) oil (she
took ?) to Bn-aglmn.

mfry b II 'wipe up (what is) in'/'wipe from’

3(cnt).2.31 (30) ymh (31) Cblbt . dm . dmr

They wipe up the soldiers' blood in

the house.

mbs b I 'smite with'

*
 61

6(49).5.2-3 (1) yifcd . bcl . bn . atrt

(2) rbm . ymhs . bktp
(?) dkym • ymfas . bsmd

Baal siezes the sons of Aiirat,

Numerous, he smites them with a
ktp-weapon,*
? , he smites them with a smd-
weapon.

mhs b I ’smite in
*

3(cnt).2.6 (5) whin • cnt . tm(6)t^s . bcmq .

t^tsb . bn . qrytm

Behold Anat smites in the valley,

Attacks among the cities.

Also in .2.19, 29; 7.1(131).4; .2(130).25.

mhs 1 HI 1 smite unto

*

3(cnt).2.19 (19) wl . sbct . tmt&sh

Unto satiety she smites ...

mhs C1 I 1 smite on account of

* *

18(3 Aqht).4.12-13 (12) at . C[1 . qsthJ (13) tmfash .

<tm&§h . C1 .> qseth

Will you smite him for his bow,

Smite him for his qgct-bow?

Same expression in 19(1 Aqht).1.14-15.

mhs C1 I 1 smite near

*

19(1 Aqht).3.152 (152) y 1km . qr . mym . dc[lk]

(153) mhs . aqht . gzr

Woe to you, spring of water,

For near you was Hero Aqht smitten.

Same expression with other items being cursed in .3.158;

.4.166.

mhs cm I 'smite with

* -► * fight with’

6(49).6.25 (24) ik . tmtCh](25)s . cm . aliyn . bcl

How could you fight with Aliyan

Baal?
 62

mtr b I ’rain in/during’

6(49).3.4-5 (4) bjjlm . IJpn . il . dpid

(5) bjjrt . bny . bnwt
(6) smm . smn . tmtrn

In a dream of Lujpan merciful god,

In a vision of the creator of
creatures,
The heavens rain down oil.

Repeated in lines 10-11.

19(1 Aqht).1.41
* (38) apnk . dnil . mt (39) rpi .
ysly . crpt . b(40)hm . un .
yr . crpt (41) tmtr . bqz .
tl . y|ll (42) Ignbm

Thereupon Danil man of Rp3

Curses the clouds in the heat of
grief,
The rain which the clouds rain
down in summer,
The dew which descends upon the
grapes.

mtr 1 III ’rain upon’

16(126).J.5-6 (5) lars . m[t]r . bcl

(6) wlsd . mjr . cly

Upon the earth Baal rains,

Upon the field the Most High
*
rains.

ml3 b I ’be full of (instrumental ?)

*

3(cnt).2.26 (25) tgdd . kbdh . bshg .

ymlu (26) lbh • bsmjjt

His liver is swollen with laughter,

His heart is full of rejoicing.

Same expression partially restored in 7.1(151)<8.

mlk b I ’rule in'

6.1.62(49.1.34) (62) lamlk . bsrrt . spn

I will not rule on the heights of

Sapon.

65 (65) wymlk . bars . il . klh

 63

He is king throughout the land

of II.

2062.2.2
* (1) w mlk . d mlk (2) b hwt . sph

And the king who rules in the

village/country (?) of (your)
family . . .

mlk C1 *
I 'rule over

4(51).7.50 (49) ahdy . dym(50) Ik . C1 . ilm

I alone will rule over the gods.

msk b III 'mix into' (or: I 'mix in')

3(cnt).1.17 (15) alp (16) kd . yqh . blpnr

(17) rbt . ymsk . bmskh

He takes a thousand kd from the

liquor,
Mixes ten thousand into his mixture

*
5(67).1.21 (20) hm . sbc (21) ydty [ .2 bsc .
hm . ks . ymsk (22) nhr

Behold seven portions in a bowl,

Behold a cup Nahar does mix.

Same expression in 604.11 but there the two lines are

reversed.

mgy (afar ?) . . . b I 'arrive

* (after ?)
...
* on’ (temporal)

14(Krt).4.195-96 (195) afcr (196) sptsjm . bEi]l£

(197) ym[gy .2 lqds (198) aEtrt .2 srm

Afterwards, at sunrise (or: after

sunrise) on the third day,
He arrives at the sanctuary of
Afcirat of the Tyrians.

Same idiom in .4.209 ; 20(121).2.5; 22.1(123)•24, 25 (and,

with b only, in 14[Krt2.3
108).
*

mgy 1 III 'arrive at'

3(cnt).2.17 (17) whin . cnt . Ibth . tmgyn

(18) tstql • ilt • Ihklh

Behold Anat arrives at her house,

The goddess reaches her palace.
Regular (attested over 20 times).
 64

mgy cm III 1 arrive at'

606.2, 11* (1) k ymgy . adn (2) ilm . rbm cm dtn

When the lord of the great gods

went to Dtn ...

(10) wym[g] (11) mlakk • cm dtCnJ

When your messengers get to Dtn . «

meh 1 III 1 trample to’

3(cnt).5.9 (9) [i]ms& . nn . kimr . lars

I will trample him like a lamb to

the ground.

6(49).5.4* (4) shr mt . ym§& . lar§

Mot sags (?), he tramples him

to the earth.

mr-E (mrr) 1 III 1 bless to’ *

17(2 Aqht).1.25 (24) Itbrknn l£r . il aby

(25) tmrnn . lbny . bnwt

May they bless him to Bull II my

father,
Extol him to the creator of
creatures.

mr^ (mrr) 1 II ’ drive out from’

2.4(68).20 (19) smk . at . aymr .

aymr . mr . ym .
mr . ym (20) Iksih .
nhr lkht . drkth

Your name is Aymr,

Aymr, drive out Sea,
Drive out Sea from his throne,
River from his sovereign throne.

mrg b* I ’overlay with’ (???)

4(51).1.33 (33) smrgt . bdm . Jjrs

. . . overlaid with red gold (???)

msh b I ’anoint when'

 65

*
10(76).2.25 (21) qrn . dbatk . btlt . ^nt
(22) qrn . dbatk bcl . ymsh
(25) bcl . ymsh . hm . bcp

Your powerful (?) horns, girl Anat,

Your powerful (?) horns will Baal
anoint,
Baal will anoint them in flight.

msr 1*

mt (mwt) b I 1 wreck at’*

2059.12 (10) any kn . dt (11) likt . msrm

(12) hndt . b . sr (15) mtt

Your (?) ship which you sent to

Egypt has wrecked at Tyre.

mtc b III 'throw into' *

(???)

4(51).2.6 (6) tmtc . mdh • bym .

tn (7) npynh . bnhrm

She threw her garment into the sea,

Her two ? into the currents.

mtr b . . . 1 I/III ’cut on . . . for

* (S-stem)

55(3).1, 2 (1) byrj) . [risyn . bym ,~hd£]

(2) smtr • Eutkl • lil . slmm]

In the month risyn, on the day of

the new moon, one cuts grapes for
Il as a slmm-offaring.

Same text in App. 11(175).1-2.

nbt b* I 1 adorn with* (??)

4(51).1.32 (32) kt . il . nbt . bksp

A divine ? adorned with (??)

silver.

ng (nwg ?) 1 II *
go away from'*

14(Krt).3.132 (131) wng • mlk (152) Ibty .

rhq . krt (133) Ihzry

Go away, 0 king, from my house

Leave, Krt, my court.
 66

Also in .5.261 and .6.280 (the order of stichs is reversed

in the latter instance and perhaps also in .5
261,
* which is
badly broken).

ngj b I ' seek out on (foot)’

12(75).1.40-41 (40) bcl . ngthm . bp'nh

(41) wil hd . bjjrz'h

Baal seeks them out on foot,

Il Hadd on ? .

ngj 1 I 'seek out for' (temporal)

6(49).2.26-27
* (26) ym . ynun . yctqn .
lymm (27) lyr^m .
rhm . cnt . tngth

A day, days do pass;

For days and months
Maid Anat seeks him out.

ndd atr I 'arise after

*

*
20(121).2.1-2 (1) Catrh . rpum] (2) tdd .
airh . tdd . ilnCym]

After him the Rpum arise,

After him the deities arise.

Repeated five more times in texts 21 and 22.1 (122 and 125).

ndd 1 III 'arise/pass/correspond to' (??)

25(52).63 (65) wndd . gzr . l<g>zr

One portion arises to the other (??)•

ndd lpn I 'arise before'

10(76).2.17 (17) Ipnnh . ydd . wyqm

Before him he stands, he arises.

ndy b I '(someone who is in one place) casts something out (which is

in another place)'

16.5(126).14 (14) my . b[ilm . ydy] (15) mrs .

grs[m . zbln]

Who among the gods will cast out

the illness,
Will drive out the sickness?

Repeated in lines 17, 20.

 67

ndy b I ’cast out on’ (temporal)

ndy b II ’cast out from’

*
4(51).6.33 (31) mk (32) bsb[c .] yCmm] .
td . ist (33) bbhtm .
n[bl]at . bhklm

Then on the seventh day

The fire is removed from the house,
The flames from the palace.

607.64-65
* (64) ydy . bcsm . crer
(65) wbsht . cs . mt

He casts the tamarisk from the

trees,
The tree of death from the bushes.

2124.1
* (1) ar& . td . rgm . bgr

The cow bellows from the mountain.

ndy 1 II ’cast out from’

607.5 (5) Inh . mlfcs abd .

Inh . ydy (6) hmt

From it the charmer destroys,

From it he casts the venom.

Repeated in each of the first eleven sections of text 607.

ndr b II ’vow from’

17(2 Aqht).6.21-23
* (20) wycn . aqht . gzr .
.
*
adr . tqbm (21) (b/d)lbnn
adr . gdm . brumm
(22) adr . qrnt . byclm .
mtnm (23) bcqbt . £r •
adr . bglil . qnm

Hero Aqht replies:

I will vow ash-wood from Lebanon,
I will vow sinews from wild bulls,
I will vow horns from rams,
Tendons from hocks of bulls,
I will vow reeds from <Slil.

ndr b/bm ... cmn II/III ’vow from . . . to’

50(117).14
* (14) bm . ly . ndr
(15) itt . cmn . mlkt
 68

From the tribute (?) they devoted

a gift to the queen.

*
1015.15 (12) hlny . cmn[]
(15) mlk . b.ty ndr (14) itt

Here, to the king, from the tri­

bute, they devoted a gift.

nh (nwfr) b I ’rest in’

6(49).5.19 (18) a£bn . ank . an^n

(19) wtn& . birty . nps

I will sit and rest,

My soul will rest within me.

Same expression in 17(2 Aqht).2.15.

ntt b I ’shake’

5(cnt).5.29
* (29) him • cnt . tph . ilm .
bh . pcnm (50) ttj .
bcdn . ksl . tjbr
(31) cln . pnh . tdc

When Anat sees the gods,

Her feet shake,
Behind, her back breaks,
Above, her face runs with sweat.

Same sequence (from bh on) in 4(51).2.16; 19(1 Aqht).2.95.

n£c b* III •plant in’

10(76).2.24 (24) njen . bars . iby

(25) wbcpr . qm . a^k

We have planted in the earth my

enemy,
In the ground your brother’s
adversary.

nsk 1 III ’pour into/on’

1( nt IX).2.20-21
* (20) Csk . slm] . Ikbd . ars
(21) [arbdd . Ikbd • s]dm

Pour out peace into the earth,

Amity (?) into the fields.

Same expression in 5(cnt).5.15-14; .4.54, 68-69, 74-75;

7.2(150).15-16.
 69

17(2 Aqht).6.37 (36) spsg . ysk (37) CUris .

hrs . Izr . qdqdy

Glaze is poured out on (my) head,

Lye on my pate.

npl b I 'fall by' (instrumental)

14(Krt).1.20 (20) msbcthn . bslh (21) ttpl

One seventh of them fell by the sword.

npl b I * fall (while) on'

*
2.1(137).9 (9) tpln . bgCbl . sntk]

You shall fall at the height of your

years.

12(75).2.37 (37) npl . bmsms [ . . . ]

... falls in.the msms (or: into

the msms [class III) ?).

npl _1 III 'fall at/to'

2.1(137).14 (14) [lpcn . il] (15) al . tpl

Fall at the feet of II.

Same expression in line 30 (more frequent is qll 1).

2.4(68).5 (5) lars . ypl . ulny .

wl . cpr . czmny

To the earth our strength shall fall,

To the ground our might.

5(67).6.31 (30) t[mg .] lbcl . np[l] (31) [la]rs

She comes to Baal fallen to the

earth.

Same idiom in line 8.

npc b I 'flourish in' (G-stem and N-stem ?)

19(1 Aqht).2.65 (64) ahi . an bs[ql] (65) ynpc . bpalt .

bsql ypc byglm

Oh that the b§ql would flourish in

the palt,
That the bgql would flourish in the
 70

Same syntax (with shit as subject) in line 72.

19(1 Aqht).5«159 (159) srsk . bars . al (160) ypc

May your root not flourish in the

earth.

npq 1 III * go out to' (??)

12(75).2.57 (57) ittpq . lawl

I go out to ? .

n§b b I * set up in'

17(2 Aqht).1.27 (27) nsb . skn . ilibh . bqds

He sets up the stela of his

ancestral deity in the sanctuary.

Also in line 45 and in .2.16 (with other pronominal suffixes)

ngl 1 III * escape to' (?)

2005.2.8 (7) w mlk (8) ynsl . ljcy

The king will escape to Tcy (??—

context broken).

nr (nwr) b III 'shine upon'

50(117).18’ (17) w . pn (18) mlk . nr bn

The face of the king shone upon me.

1015.10 (7) crbt (8) Ipn . sps (9) wpn . sps .

nr (10) by . mid

I entered before the king and the

king's face shone upon me very
brightly.

ns3 1 II 'lift up from'

2.1(157).27 (27) su [.] ilm . rastkm .

Izr . brktkm .
In . kht (28) zblkm

Lift up, 0 gods, your heads

From on top of your knees,
From your princely thrones.

Carried out in line 29.

 71

ns3 1 III 'lift up to'

4(51).8.6 (5) sa . gr . C1 . ydm

(6) frlb . Izr . rhtm

Lift up the mountain on (your)

hands,
The hill on (your) palms.

Same expression in 5(67).5.14.

16(126).3.13 (12) nsu . Er]is . hrim

(13) Izr [.] cdb . dgn

The plowmen lift their heads,

Upward the growers of grain (?).

23(52).54 (54) su . cdb . Isps . rbt .

wlkbkbm . kn[m ?]

Take a sacrifice (?) to great Sun,

To firm (?) stars.

(Gt-stem) 32(2).2-3 (2) Eytsi . lab . bn . il .

ytsi . Id] r . bn[ . il]
(3) [Import . bn . il .
Itkmn . wsnm]

May it be brought to the father of

the pantheon,
May it be brought to the assembled
pantheon,
To the gathered pantheon,
To Jkmn-w-5nm.

Repeated in lines 9'-9" , 16-17, 25-26, 33-35.

ns3 C1 III 'lift up on'

See 4(51).8.5 and 5(67).5.13, above at ns3 1 III.

ns3 tk III 'take to'

23(52).65 (65) su . cdb . tk . mdbr qds

Take an offering (?) into the

desert of qds.

sbb 1* III 'turn into' (G-stem and N-stem)

4(51).6.34-35 (34) sb . ksp . Irqm .

&rs (35) nsb . llbnt
 72

The silver turned into plates (?),

The gold turned into bricks.

sgr bcd I * close behind

* (?)

607.70-71
* (70) bcdh • bhtm . mnt .
bcdh . bhtm . sgrt
(71) bcdh . cdbt . tit

Behind her the house of exorcism,

Behind her the house she closes,
Behind her she effects three-fold
conjurations (?).

sc (scy or sw/yc) b II * sweep from

* *
(?)

14(Krt).3.111-13 (111) sct . bsdm (112) htbti

.
*
bgrnt . hpst
(113) sct . bn<p>k . sibt .
bbqr (114) mmlat

Swept from the fields will be the

wood-gatherers,
From the threshing-floors the
straw-gatherers ;
Swept from the fountains will be the
water-drawere,
From the wells the water-carriers.

Carried out in .4.214-16.

sp3 b I * devour among

* (or: II * devour from')

6(49).5.20 (19) ahd (20) ba&k . ispa

I alone among your brothers have

been devoured.

sp3 Ibl I * devour without

*

RS 22.225.4
* (5) tspi . sirh (4) Ibl . hrb .
tst . dmh (5) Ibl . ks

She eats his flesh without a knife,

Drinks his blood without a cup.

spr b I * count among

*

4(51).8.8 (8) tspr . by(9)rdm . are

You shall be counted among those

who go down into the earth.
Same expression in 5(67).5.15.
 73

spr 1 III 'count to/provide a reckoning for* (?)

23(52).57 (56) ytbCn] (57) yspr • Ijyns . 1§C . . . ]

They repeat (the section) five times.

1010.17
* (17) wl . c§m (18) tspr

You are to provide a reckoning of

the wood.

spr cm I ’count with' -• 'count like' (G-stem and S-stem)

17(2 Aqht).6.28-29 (28) assprk . cm . bcl (29) snt

cm . bn il . tspr . yr^m

I will cause you to count years

like Baal,
Like the gods shall you count months.

srr b I ’meditate in’

4(51).7.49 (47) yqra . mt (48) bnpsh .

ystrn ydd (49) bgngnh

Mot calls out in his throat,

Beloved meditates in his innards (?).

cdb b II 'prepare from'

17(2 Aqht).5.17 (16) cd[b] (17) imr • bpfod .

Inps . k£r (18) w&ss .
Ibrlt . hyn d(19)hrs

Prepare a lamb from the flock

For the throat of Kotar-wa-Hasis,
For the gullet of Hyn the handi-
crafter.

Carried out in line 23.

cdb b III 'take into'

4(51).8.18 (17) al . ycdbkm (18) kimr . bph

(19) klli btbrn (20) qnh . tfctan

He must take you like a lamb in

his mouth,
Like a ewe-lamb you must be des­
troyed in his crushing jaws (?).

Same idiom in 6(49).2.22.

 74

23(52).64 (63) ycdb . uymn (64) usmal . bphm

They put both right hand and left

in their mouth.

cdb bcd I *prepare/effect/carry out behind

* (?)

607.71 (see full text cited at sgr bcd).

cdb 1 III * prepare for

* (intentional); 'set on
* (realized)

*
14(Krt).2.81-82 (80) cdb (81) akl . Iqryt
(82) htt . Ibt . hbr

Prepare food for the town,

Grain for Bt-fabr.

Carried out in .4.172-73.

17(2 Aqht).5.17-18, 23-24 (see above at cdb b II).

.27 (26) bd . dnil . ytnn (27) qst .

lbrkh . ycdb (28) qsct

In the hands of Danil he puts the

bow,
On his knees he sets the q§ct-bow.

601.1.7 (6) il . d . ydcnn

(7) ycdb . Ihm . Ih

The god whom he knows,

For him he prepares food.

.10 (10) c£trt . tcdb . nsb Ih

(11) wcnt . ktp

Aitart prepares the nsb-cut for him

Anat, the shoulder-cut.

.12-13 (12) *
pn . Imgr lb . tcdbn (13) nsb .
linr . tcdbn . ktp

... lest they prepare the neb-cut

for the mgr lb.
The shoulder-cut for the cur (?).

db C1 III * position over

*

18(3 Aqht).4.21 (21) an[k . C]1 (22) aqht . cdbk

I will position you over Aqht

 75

cdb cm I 'handle with' - 'handle like'

*

6.1.51-52(49.1.23-24) (50) dq . anm . lyrz

(51) cm . bcl . lyedb . mrh
(52) cm . bn . dgn • kt msm

One of meager strength cannot run,

Like Baal cannot handle the spear,
Like Ben-Lagan, one who is lacking
beauty.

cdb tfrt I 'prepare (for someone who is) under'

601.1.5 (5) tht (6) ilhnt . il . dydcnn

(7) y$db . Ihm . lh

Under the tables, the god whom he

knows,
For him he prepares food.

cdn b I 'bring the season of . . . with'

4(51).5.69
* (68) wnap . cdn . mtrh (69) bcl
ycdn . cdn . ikt . bgli

Now Baal brings his season of rain,

He brings the season of jkt with
snow.

cflr b II 'save from'

18(3 Aqht).1.14 (13) wypltk . bn [. dnil . . . ]

(14) wycdrk . byd . btlt . [cnt]

He will rescue you, son of Danil [ ]

Will save you from the hand of girl
Anat.

czz b I 'be strong in' (D-stem: 'strengthen in') (temporal)

1019.1.6 (2) ilm (3) tgrk . tslmk (4) tczzk .

alp ymm (5) wrbt snt (6) bcd clm

May the gods guard you, keep you,

and strengthen you for a thousand
days and ten thousand years through.
out all time.

cly b/bm III 'go up into/against'

6.1.57(49.1.29) (56) apnk . cttr . crz

(57) ycl . bsrrt . spn
 76

Thereupon A£tar the terrible

Goes up on the heights of Sapon.

10(76).3.12 (12) ycl • bcl . bg[r . . . ]

(13) wbn . dgn . bë[ . . . ]

Baal goes up on Mount [...],

Ben-Dagan on C . . . ].

.28-32 (28) tcl . b£-}gr (29) mslmt .

bgr . tliyt
(30) wtcl . bkm . barr
(3D bm . arr • wbgpn
(32) bncm . bgr . t[l]iyt

She goes up on Mount Mslmt,

Up on the mount of victory,
She goes up crying on Arr,
On Arr and Sapon,
On the goodly mount of victory.

(S-stem) 6(62).1.16 (14) tsu aliyn . bcl .

Iktp (15) cnt . ktsth .
tsclynh (16) bsrrt . spn

She lifts Aliyan Baal,

On Anat ' s shoulder she does put him,
She takes him up on the heights of
Sapon.

(S-stem) 19(1 Aqht).4.186 (185) yscly . dgth (186) bsmym

He offers his dgj-sacrifice up

into the heavens.

Also in line 192.

1001.1.9-10 (9) urn . clt . baby

(10) [ . . . ] clt . bk

Mother rises against father,

[ . . . ] she rises against you (?)

ly 1 III 1 go up to'

4(51).1.24 (24) hyn . cly . Impfam

Hyn goes up to the bellows.

14(Krt).2.73 (73) C1 . Izr . [mg]dl

(74) wcl Ijr . [mg]dl .
rkb (75) tkmm . hm[t]
 77

Go up on top of the tower,

Go up on top of the tower,
Mount the "shoulder(s)" of the wall.

Carried out in .4.166.

16(126).4.14-15 (14) C1 . ltkm . bnwn

(15) Inijnpt . mspy

Go up to the "shoulder(s)" of the

edifice,
To the top of the height (?).

20(121).2.4 (4) tcln . Imrkbthm

They mount their chariots.

Also in 22.1(125).25

(2-stem) 69.2 (1) skn . dsclyt (2) tryl . Idgn . pgr

Stela which Tryl erected for/offered

to Pagan-pgr.

(5-stem) 70.2 (1) pgr . dscly (2) czn . Idgn . bclh

Stela (?) which czn erected for/

offered to Pagan his lord.

(S-stem) GLECS 10 (1964): 59

* pn arw dscly nrn 1 rspgn

"Lion's face" which Nrn erected for/

offered to Resep-gn.

cly cm III 1 go up to'

15(6).20 (20) wtcl . cm . il (21) abh

She goes up to II her father.

cms 1 III 'lift up to'

6(62).1.12 (12) cms mc . ly . aliyn . bcl

Please lift Aliyan Baal up on me.

cn (cyn) b*

cn (cyn) bn I ' see among'

10(76).2.16 (15) wycn • btlt . cnt

(16) ncmt . bn . aht . bcl
 78

He sees girl Anat,

The fairest of Baal’s sisters.

cny b I ’answer when’

14(Krt).2.60-61 (59) [wycn] . ir . abh . il

(60) d[mq]t . bbk . krt
(61) bdmc . ncmn . glm (62) il

Bull, his father II, answers

Good things when Krt cries,
When the goodly lad of II
sheds tears.

19(1 Aqht).4.179
* (179) [mk] . bsbc (180) snt .
wycn [. dnil . mt .] rpi
(181) y£b . gzr . m[t . hmmy]

Then in the seventh year

Danil man of Rpa answers,
Hero man of Hrnmy replies.

J£L b II ’answer from1

3(cnt).5.34 (33) ycny (34) il . bsbct . hdrm

btmnt (35) ap . sgrt

Il answers from seven rooms,

From eight chambers.

(cwp) 1 III 'fly to’

13(6).8 (8) wcp . l^r[c] . nsrk

Fly to the help of (?) your eaglets.

.JL. (cwp) C1 III ’fly over'

19(1 Aqht).3.15O (150) hm . tcpn . C1 . qbr . bny

... if they fly over my son's

tomb.

> b I 'be rough, hilly in' (??)•

2026.2 (1) sd . snrym . dt . cqb (2) b . ayly

Fields belonging to inhabitants

of Snr and which are hilly terrain
(?), located in Ayly.

cr (cwr) b II ’arouse from’

 79

6(49).6.32 (31) y r . mt (32) bqlh

Mot arouses from his prostration.

crb b I 'enter on/during' (temporal)

1162.1.1 (1) bil . ym hdj (2) &yr . crbt (3) Bps

During the six days of the new moon

of the month byr the sun sets . . .

crb b III ’enter

*

5(67).2.4 (3) ycrb (4) [bc]l . bkbdh .

Baal enters his liver.

14(Krt).1.26 (26) ycrb . bhdrh

He enters his room.

.2.65 (65) crb [. bjl . &mt]

Enter the shade of the tent.

Carried out in .3.159.

17(2 Aqht).2.26 (26) crb . bbth . k£rt

The Ktrt enter his house.

19(1 Aqht).4.172 (171) crb . b(172)kyt . <bbth>

*
bhklh . msspdt .
bhzrh (173) pzgm . gr

Mourners enter his house,

Wailers, his palace,
"Skin-cutters,1* his court.

23(52).62 (62) wcrb . bphm . csr . smm

(63) wdg bym

The birds of the heavens and the

fish (which are) in the sea enter
their mouth.

24(77).18 (18) tcrbm bbh(19)th

. . . that she might enter his

house.

crb b III ’guarantee

** (a second t) specifies the area of guarantee)
 8o

1161.3-4 (1) spr . crbnm (2) dt . crb (3) b .

mtn . bn . ayal} (4) b . jjbih

Document of guarantors who

guarantee Mtn son of Ayah as
concerns his hbj.

2046.1.1 (1) msry . d . crb . b . unj

(2) bn . qrrn . m£rgl

It is Mgry who guarantees the unj-

duty of Bn-qrrn the mdrgl [the text
continues with other proper names].

2079 (1) risym . dt . crb (2) b[.] bnshm

Men of ris who guarantee their men

[list follows : PN(N)1 crb b PNgJ.

2106.12* (10) ^ms . mat . arbcm (11) kbd . ksp .

anyt (12) d . crb . b . anyt
(13) 1 . mlk . gbl (14) w . ÿmsm . ksp
(15) Iqh . mlk . gbl (16) lbs . anyth
(17) bcrm . ksp (18) m&r . hn

540 (shekels) of ship-money which

were given as boat-guarantee to the
king of Byblos; the king of Byblos
also took fifty (shekels) of silver
to outfit his ships in crm. This
amount is their price.

2116.5, 6 (1) tldn (2) irkn (3) kli (4) plgn

(5) apsny (6) crb[. b PN] (7) w. b .
p[...] (8) aps[ny] (9) b . ysih[m]

[PNN], guarantee PNNg regarding

their flight.]

crb 1 III 1 give as guarantee to’

2106.13 (cited above at crb b III * guarantee1).

crb Ipn III ’enter before

*

1015.8 (6) umy (7) tdc . ky . crbt

(8) Ipn . sps

May my mother know that I entered

before the Sun.

rb C1 III 1 enter before*

 81

16.1(125).11 (11) C1 (12) abh . ycrbi

Before his father he enters.

Also in .2.112 and .6.39.

(S-stem) 15(128).4.17-18 ■(17) clh . trh . tscrb

(18) clh . tscrb . jbyh

Into his presence she ushers his

"bulls,"
Into his presence she ushers his
"gazelles."

csy 1*

ctk 1 III ’tie to'

3(cnt).2.12 (11) ctkt (12) rist . Ibmt .

snst (13) kpt • bhbsh

Heads she ties to her waist,

Hands she attaches at her belt.

See also 7.1(131)■,2-3, and perhaps 13(6).6-7.

ctq b . . . 1 . . . bd I/III * grow old in/pass to'

16.1(125).2-5
* (2) k[k]lb . bbtk .,nctq .
kinr (3) ap . hstk .
ap . ab . ik mtm (4) tmtn .
uhstk . Intn (5) ctq .
bd . ajt . ab srry

Like dogs we grow old in your house,

Like curs (?) in your court (?) ;
Must you so die, father,
Must your court (?) pass to wailers,
To women, 0 beloved (?) father?

Also in lines 16-19; .2.100-4.

gdd b I 'swell with'

3(cnt).2.25 (25) tgdd . kbdh . bshq .

ymlu (26) Ibh • bsm&t

Her liver was swelled with laughter,

Her heart was filled with rejoicing.

Also in 7.1(131)..7.

gly bd III 'be lowered into'

 82

19(1 Aqht).3.160 (159) srsk . bare . al (160) ypc .

ris . gly . bd . nsck

May your root not flourish in

the earth,
May your top be lowered into the
hand of the one who uproots you.

gly 1 III 'lower to'

2.1(137).23 (23) t[g]ly . illm . risthm .

Izr . brkthm

The gods lower their heads

To their knees.

Also in line 25.

gll b III 'enter'

3(<nt).2.14 (13) brkm . tgl[l] (14) bdm . dmr .

hlqm . bmmLc] (15) mhrm

To her knees she wades in the

blood of soldiers,
To her neck (?) in the gore of
warriors.

Also in line 27 and in 7.1(131)•9»

19(1 Aqht).3.156 (156) ymg . Imrrt . tgll . bnr

He goes to [a geographical name

which may contain the elements
KU

Also in line 158.

pdy b II 'redeem from'

1006.14 (12) w . pdyhCm] (13) iwrkl[.] mit

(14) ksp . by[d] (15) birtym

... and Iwrkl redeemed them for

one hundred (shekels) of silver
from the Beirutians.

pdy 1 I 'redeem for' (or: II 'redeem from') (temporal)*

1006.1 (1) 1 . ym hnd (2) iwrkl . pdy

This day (or: from this day) Iwrkl

redeems [a list of proper names
follows] .
 83

phy b I ’see when’

4(51).2.12 (12) bnsi . cnh . wtphn

*

When she looks up she sees ...

The same idiom occurs in 17(2 Aqht). 5. 9’, .6.10; 19(1 Aqht)
.1.28; .2.76, 105; .3.120, 134.

phy b I ’see (something which is) in’

19(1 Aqht).2.62-63 (62) yph . bpalt . bs[q]l

(63) yph . byglm . bsql

He sees bgql in the palt,

He sees bgql in the yglm.

Same idiom (with different nouns) in lines 69-70.

phy C1 I ’ experience on account of’

6(49).5.11-18 (11) clk . b[c]lm (12) pht . qlt

On account of you, Baal, I have

experienced humiliation [plus list
of things experienced, all pre­
ceded by clk].

Pi's' b I ’ ? with'
*

4(51).1.36 (35) hdm . ill (36) dprsa . bbr

A divine footstool ? -ed with ? •

ptb b/bqrb III * open in’*

4(51).7.17-18 (17) ypth . hln . bbhtm

(18) urbt • bqrb • [h]kl(19)m

He opens a window in the house,

A casement in the palace.

Also in lines 26-27.

ptfr bc d I 'open behind'

23(52).70
* (70) wpth hw • prs • bcdhm

He makes an opening behind them.

ptfe A III 'open for' (plus infinite

16.6(127).11-12 (11) npsh . llhm . tpth

(12) brlth . linn
 84

She opens his throat to eat,

His gullet (?) to dine.

ptb C1 I 'open on account of

4(51).7.20 (19) wEypjth . bdqt . crpt

(20) C1 hCwt] . ktr . wfcss

He opens ? clouds
At the command of Ko£ar-wa-Hasis.

gd (§wd) 1 III 'hunt/range to'

5(67).6.27-28 (25) ap (26) cnt . ttlk . wtsd .

kl.gr (27) lkbd . ars^.
kl . gbc (28) l[k]bd . sdm

Then Anat goes hunting,

On every mountain to the center
of the earth,
On every hill to the center of
the fields.

Same sequence in 6(49).2.16-17•

ghl cl*

6b (gyfe) b/bqrb III 'invite into’*

4(51).5.75-76 (75) sh . &rn . bbhtik

(76) e$bt . bqrb . hklk

Call the caravan into your house,

The trading-mission into your
palace.

Same idiom in lines 92 and 98-99} .6.44—45} 22.1(123)

.3, 8, 18.

sb (gyb) 1 III 'call out to'

6(62).1.11 (10) gm (11) tsh . Inrt . ilm . sps

She cries aloud to the luminary of

the gods Saps.

Same idiom in l(ent X).4.2; 4(51).2.29} .7.52; 6.1.44

(49.1.16); 6(49).2.37} .5.22; .6.23} 8(51 frag.).5}
14(Krt).5.228, 238; 15(128).4.2; 17(2 Aqht).5.15;
19(1 Aqht).1.49 [several of these references may contain
vocative 1 rather than the preposition construed with
 85

Sb (syb) 1 HI 'invite to'

15(128).4.27 (27) [llh]m . Isty . shtkm

I have invited you to eat and drink

Same idiom in .5.10; .6. 4; 601.1.2.

sb (gyb) cm III 1 cry out to'

5(67).1.22-23
* (22) shn [.] bcl . cm (23) aby C-]
qran . hd . cm . aryy

Cry, Baal, to my brothers,

Call, Hadd, to my kin.

Also in .2.22 (y§!bn in line 21).

23(52).69 (69) wsh hm

.
* cm . ngr . mdrc

They cry out to the guardian of

the sown.

S.bQ bm I 'laugh in’

12(75).1-12 (12) il . yzhq . bm (13) lb .

wygmji • bm kbd

Il laughs in his heart,

Chuckles in his liver.

§br 1 I 'broil on'

23(52).41 (41) h[l .] csr . thrr . list .

shrrt . Iphmm

Behold a bird roasts on the fire,

Broils on the coals.

Also in lines 45 and 48.

§ly b I * curse (while) in'

*

19(1 Aqht).1.39 (58) apnk . dnil . mt (39) rpi .

ysly • crpt . b(4O)hm • un •

Thereupon Danil man of Rp3

Curses the clouds in the heat of
grief ...

gpy b I 'cover with'

 86

1122.2 (1) tit mrkb[t] (2) spyt . b . {jrs

Three chariots covered with gold.

§q (§w/yq) b I 'sieze by
* (S-stem)

6(49).2.11 (9) ti^d . m[t] (10) bsin . Ips

tssqCnh] (11) bqs . all

She grasps Mot by the hem (?) of

his clothes,
Siezes him by the extremity of
his garments.

§q (§w/yq) 1 III 'press' (S-stem)

1012.27 (27) w . hn . ibm . ssq ly

... and the enemy is pressing me.

qbr b III 'bury in'

*

19(1 Aqht). 5.147 (147) yqbr . nn . bmdgt . bknk-

He buries him in ? ? .

qll b I 'fall on/at' (temporal and locative)

16.6(127).57 (57) tqln . bgbl (58) sntk

*

You shall fall at the height of

your years.

615.5 (5) bym . mlat (4) tqln . alpm

On the day of the full moon,

two bulls shall be felled (?).

Same expression (the form is y[ql]n!) in 56(9).1.11.

qll b III 'fall into'

(S-stem) 16.6(127).52 (52) sqlt . bglt . ydk

You have let your hands fall into

inactivity.

Also in line 45.

601.1.21 (21) b&rih . wtnth . ql . il

Il falls in his excrement and

urine.
 87

qll 1 III 'fall at/to'

2.4(68).23 (23) wyql . lars

... and falls to the ground.

Same idiom in line 26; and with pcn ('at the feet of') in
50(117).5; 51(95).5; 52(89).6; 1013.4; 1014.5; 2008.1.4;
2063.5; 2064.10; 2115.1.6; .2.5.

qll 1 III * arrive at/reach'* (St-stem)

3(cnt).2.18 (17) whin . cnt . lbth . tmgyn

(18) tstql . ilt . Ihklh

Behold Anat arrives at her house,

The goddess reaches her palace.

Thrice elsewhere in parallel with mgy (17L2 Aqht].2.25;

19C1 Aqht].4.171; 607.68), once with hlk (601.1.18).

qll C1 III 'fall on'

6(49).6.22 (21) mt . ql (22) bcl . ql . cln

Mot falls, Baal falls on top of him

qll tht III 'fall at' (only with feet)

(5-stem) 17(2 Aqht).6.44 (44) asqlk . tht (45) [pcny]

... and (lest) I fell you at

my feet.

Same idiom (elsewhere in G-stem) in 19(1 Aqht).3.109» 116,

124, 130, 138, 143.

qm (qwm) C1 I * serve/attend' (?) *

2.1(137).21 (21) bcl . qm . C1 . il

Baal attends II (?).

qny b I 'produce (?)/establish in'

17(2 Aqht).6.41 (41) [b..]m . tshq . cnt .

wblb . tqny (42) [...]

Anat laughs [in her ? ],

Produces [ ? ] in her heart.

702.1.4 (1) mrzh (2) dqny (3) smmn (4) b . btw

mrzfr which Smmn established in his

house.
 88

qny b I 'buy in' (or: class II 'buy from')

*

RS 24.325 (Ugaritica VI, p. 173).1 ,

(1) 1 agpjr k yqny gzr b aldyy

(Liver) for Agpjr when he bought a

servant in/from Alashia (or: an
Alashian).

q§§ b I 1 slice with

* *

3(cnt).1.7 (6) ybrd . id . Ipnwh

(7) bhrb . mlht (8) qs . mri

He cuts for him the breast-cut,

With a sharp knife he slices
failings.

4(51).3.42 (41) [wtp]q . mrgtm (42) [td .

bhrb . m]lht . qs (43) [mri]

Those that suck the breast drink,

With a sharp knife they slice
failings.

Also in .6.57; 5(67).4.14; probably in 17(2 Aqht).6.4

(restored).

qr (qwr) 1 III 'say to

* *

1001.1.5 (5) hm . tqrm . lmt

If you say to Mot ...

qr3 b I * call out in

* (or: II 'call out from')

4(51).7.48 (47) yqra . mt (48) bnpsh

Mot calls out within himself (or:

within his throat ; or: from his
throat).

*
608.38 (38) sps . bsmm . tqru

Saps calls out in (or: from) the

heavens.

Also in line 44 (partially restored).

qr3 b/bqrb III 'invite to/call to'

21(122).1.3 (2) [rpim . b?b]ty . ashkm [.]

iqra(3)[km . ilnym . bh]kly
 89

Rpum, I invite you to my house,

I call you, deities, to my palace.

Also in line 11 and in 22.1(123).4, 9» 20.

qr3 1 III ’call to'

607.2 (2) qrit . laps . umh

She calls out to Saps her mother.

Repeated (elsewhere the verbal form is tqru) at the beginning

of each of the first eleven sections of this text.

qr3 cm III 'call to'

*

5(67).1.23 (22) shn [.] bcl . cm (23) ahy [.]

qran . hd . cm . aryy

Cry, Baal, to my brothers,

Call, Hadd, to my kin.

Also in .2.23 (partially restored; yqrun is the verbal

form).

qrb b I 1 draw near when'

14(Krt).1.38 (37) wyqrb (38) bsal . krt

He draws near asking Krt ...

17(2 Aqht).1.16-17
* (16) mk . bsbc . ymm
(17) [w]yqrb . bcl . bhnth

On the seventh day

Baal draws near having mercy . . .

qrb 1 III 'approach'

4(51).8.16 (15) al (16) tqrb . Ibn . ilm (17) mt

You must approach Mot, son of II.

qry b I 'offer in' (or: III 'offer into') (??) (D-stem ?)

*

l(cnt IX).2.19 (19) Lqryy . bars . mlhjmt .

st bcp(20)[rm . ddym]

Offer food(-offerings) in the land,

Establish amity(-offerings) in the
country.

Restorations based on parallel passages : 3( nt).3»11»

.4.52, 67, 72 (?) ; 7.2(130).14.
 90

qry b I 'meet at'

3(cnt).2.5 (3) klat . tgrt (4) bht . cnt .

wtqry . glmm (5) bst . gr

Anat shuts the gates of her house,

Meets the messengers at the base (?)
of the mountain.

Also in 7.2(130).4, 24.

17(2 Aqht).6.43 (43) laqryk . bntb . psc

(44) [....] . bntb . gan

... lest I meet you on the

path of sin,
[ ? you] on the path of pride.

qry 1 III 'offer to' (D-stem ?)

19(1 Aqht).4.191 (191) qrym . ab . db^ .^lilrn

(192) scly . dg£h [.] bsmym

Offer, father, sacrifice to the gods,

Offer up a (I?) dgt-offering into
the heavens.

rbg 1 I 'recline at
*

13(6).9 (9) wrbs . Igrk . inbb

Recline at your Mount Inbb.

rgm 1 III * say to'

I have counted 50 examples (18 in poetry, 32 in prose)

with no semantic variation.

rgm C1 I * recite near/about/against' (??) (perhaps class III)

23(52).12 (12) sbcd . yrgm . C1 . cd

Seven times they recite (it) next

to/about/against the cd.

rgm C1 III 'declare/impose upon' (?)

1012.25
* (22) w . mlk . bcly (23) Im . skn . hnk
(24) lcbdh . alpm . s[sw]m (25) rgmt .
ciy . th

Why has the king my lord imposed

this on his servant : 2000 horses?
You have thus declared jeopardy (?)
upon me.
 91

rbg b I ’wash in/when

* (may be class II ’wash from' in one or two
cases)*

3(cnt).2.34-35 (34) [t]rhs . ydh . bdm . dmr

(35) Cu]soth . bmmc . mhrm

She bathes her hands in the

soldiers' blood,
Her fingers in the warriors' gore.

16.6(127).10 (10) wttb . trhs . nn . bdct

She returns and washes him when he

sweats (or: of sweat).

17(2 Aqht).1.34 (34) rhs . npsh . bym . r£

He washes his clothes on the day

of ri.

Also in .2.8, 23»

35(3).3 (3) btl£t cCsrt . yrths . mlk . brr]

On the thirteenth (day) the king

washes himself clean.

See also 36(9).1.10; App. 11(173).3, 34; 612.1.5; 613.1.

rb$ cd III * wash up to'

14(Krt).2.64 (63) rhs [. y]dk . amt

(64) usb[ctk .] cd [. 12km

Wash your hands (to) the elbows,

Your fingers to the shoulders.

Carried out in .3.158.

rfrq 1* II 'leave/go away from'

14(Krt).3.133 (131) wng . mlk (132) lbty .

rhq . krt (133) Ihjry

Go away, 0 king, from my house,

Leave, Krt, my court.

Also in .5.260 and .6.279 (order of stichs reversed in

latter instance and perhaps also in *
2
.560 which is
badly broken).

rfrq Ipn II 'go from before' (S-stem: 'send away from before')*
 92

3(^nt).4.84 (84) srhq . att . Ipnnh

He sends out the women (or: his

wife) from before him.

rhb bn *
I 1 soar among

18(3 Aqht).4.21 (21) bn . nsrm . arhp . ank

Among the eagles I will soar.

Carried out in line 31.

rfop C1 *
I * soar over

18(3 Aqht).4.19 (19) [ clhJ (20) ns rm . trjjpn

Over him the eagles will soar.

Takes place in line 30.

19(1 Aqht).1.32 (32) C1 . bt . abh . nsrm . trh[p]n

Over her father's house eagles soar.

rg (rwg) cm I * run with

* — * run like
*

6.1.51-52(49.1.23-24) (50) dq . anm . lyrz

*
(51) cm . bcl . lycdb . mrh
(52) cm . bn . dgn . kt msm

One of meager strength cannot run,

Like Baal cannot handle the spear,
Like Ben-Lagan, one who is lacking
beauty.

rks 1 III 'bind to'

1003.10 (7) &nbtm (8) tnn . Isbm (9) tst .

trks (10) Imrym . lbn[n]*

The forked tail of Tannin she puts

into fetters,
She binds him to the heights of
Lebanon.

rm (rwm) b/btk I 'be lofty in' (L-stem: 'erect in')

4(51).5.117 (115) hs . bhtm . tbnCnJ

(116) hs . trmmn . hk[lm]
(117) btk . srrt . spn
 93

A house you must quickly build,

A palace you must quickly erect
In the heights of Sapon.

Same expression restored in l(cnt IX).3.28.

15(128).3.3-4 (2) [mid . rm .] krt

(3) [btk . rpi .] are
(4) [bpipr] . qbs . dtn

Be most exalted, Krt,

Among the Rpum of the earth,
In the gathering of the assembly
of Dtn.

Restorations from lines 14-15.

rgn b *
?

607.61 (61) bhrn . pnm . trgnw

In/to/against Horon she ? (or:

her face ? ).

rqç b I ’swoop in1*

2.4(68).13-14 (13) trtqs . bd bcl

km ns(14)r . busbcth

Swoop in the hand of Baal,

Like an eagle in his fingers.

See also lines 15-16, 21, 23-24.

s3b b I *draw in (or: with)*

6.1.66-67(49.1.38-39) (66) [....]sabn . brhbt

(67) [....?]sabn . bkknt

Drawing water in jars,

Drawing water in urns (?)...

s3l b I 'inquire about’ (?) * (Gt-stem)

2008.2.10 (10) w . mlk . ystal . b . hn[d ?]

May the king inquire about this (?).

s3l cm III ’make a request to

* (or: class II * ask of
)
*

2009.2.4 (3) s[al] . isal (4) cmk . ybl . sd

I surely make a request to you for

the produce of the field ...
 94

s3r b/cm*

sdy b III •pour into' (?) *

6(49).4.42 (42) sd yn . cn . b . qbt[..]

Pour sparkling (?) wine into the

vat.

sftn b I 'be feverish in'

12(75).2.39 (39) bmtnm . ysfon .[...]

In his loins he is feverish.

skb b I 'sleep in'

1029.16 (15) bns . 1 . d (16) yskb . 1 . b .

bt . mlk

not of those who sleep

Personnel *
not (1?)
* in the royal palace.

skb cm I 'lie with — have sexual intercourse with'

5(67).5.20
* (19) skb (20) cmnh . sbc . lsbcm
(21) tsCc]ly . tmn . limnym

He lies with her seventy-seven times,

She bears him up (?) eighty-eight
times.

skb b I ' find in

* -» (N-stem) 'be found in/find oneself in' *
(- 'occur' ?)

2059-13
* (13) by (14) gsm . adr (15) nskh

They found themselves in a terrible

storm (??).

skn 1 III 'supply for, impose on, allot for'*

1010.6 (5) iky . askn

(6) ^sm . Ibt . dml

How can I supply wood for the

house of Dml?

*
1012.24 (22) w . mlk . bcly (23) Im . skn . hnk
(24) lcbdh . alpm . s[sw]m

Why has the king my lord imposed

this on his servant : 2000 horses?
 95

*
1143.14 (13) mit . Jjmsrn . kbd
(14) d . skn . 1 . ks . ilm

One hundred fifty (shekels of

silver) which are allotted for the
cup of the god(s ?).

skn C1 I ’settle on’

16.1(125).43 (43) Ik . skn . C1 . srrt (44) adnk

Go settle on the heights of your

lord.

slw b I ’repose in’

14(Krt).3.149 (149) aslw . bsp . cnh

I will repose in the gaze (?) of

her eyes.

slfr b III ’put into’

15(128).4.24 (24) yd . bs\. tslh

(25) hrb . bbsr . tstn

She puts her hand into the bowl,

Puts her knife to the meat.

Partially restored in .5-7.

slm 1 III ’be well for’

50(117).6 (6) 1 . umy (?) yslm

May it be well with my mother.

Always as wish in letter greeting formulae: 55(54).4;

55(18).4; 56(21).4; 59(100).1 [restored; pattern not that
of other letters]; 1013.5; 1016.4; 2009.1
3;
* 2010.4;
2059.4; 2061.4; 2065.I; 2159.4.

slm 1 III ’grant peace to’ (?)

RS 24.247
* mlkn yslm libh

Our king will grant peace to his

enemy.

slm cm(n) I ’be well with’

50(117).9, 11 (9) hlny . cmn[y] (10) kll . slm

(11) tmny . cm . umy (12) mnm . slm
(13) w . rgm . tib . ly
 Here with me everything is fine ;
send me word of how things are
there with you, mother.

Always as descriptive formula in letters: 51(95)«10» 15;

52(89).12; 1015.8, 9; 1015.14, 17; 2009.1.6, 8; 2059.6, 8;
2060.3; 2061.6, 7; 2115.2.8; 2171.3.

slm emn I 1 be at peace with’*

64(118).11 (10) [w]nqmd . [mlk . ugrt . lqll]

(11) [w]cmn . sp[s . mlk . rb]
(12) bclh . slm

Niqmaddu, king of Ugarit, did not

revolt but remained at peace with
the great king his lord.

smh b I ’(part of someone) rejoices’

17(2 Aqht).2.8
* (8) bd’niCl] (9) pnm . tsmfc .
wcl yshl piCt]

Danil’s face rejoices,

His brow glows.

smh b II ’rejoice in’ (= ’receive joy from’)

*

3(cnt).5.29
* (27) Cbnt .] bht(28)k . yilm .
bnt [.] bh[tk] . a[l . ts]mjj
(29) al . tsmjj . br[m . h]kl[k]

In the building of your house,

0 II,
In the building of your house do
not rejoice,
Do not rejoice in the erection of
your palace.

Also in 18(3 Aqht).1.8.

16.1(125).14 (14) bhyk . abn . nismfc

(15) bimtk . ngln

In your life, our father, do

we rejoice.
In your not dying do we find joy.

Also in .2.98.

smfr m(n) II ’rejoice in' (= ’receive joy from’)

 97

1015.11 (10) wum (11) tsmfo . mab

*

May mother find joy in father.

smc 1 I * hear concerning*

55(54).5-6* (5) 1 . trgds (6) w . 1 . klby

(7) smct . l}ti (8) nljtu

Concerning Trgds and Klby I have

heard that they have indeed (or:
with blows) been stricken.

smc 1 III ’listen to

* — 'hearken to (the 1 in most cases of smc 1 is
vocative :* Hear, 0 . . . •)

55(18).18 (17) [w]ht . ysmc . u&y (18) Igy

Now may my brother listen to my

voice.

2124.5 (5) smc ly '

Listen to me . . .

sns b III * tie/attach to* *

5(cnt).2.12-15 (ID ctkt (12) rist . Ibmt .

snst (15) kpt • bhbsh

Heads she ties to her waist,

Hands she attaches at her belt.

See also 7
*
1(151) «2; a comparable idiom may be attested
in 15(6).6-7
*

spk 1 III * spill on/to

*

17(2 Aqht).6.16* (15) [krpnh . t.. liars .

ksh . tspkm (16) Llcpr]

Her flagon she [ ? 1 to the earth,

Her cup she pours to the ground.

18(5 Aqht).4.24* (25) spk . km . siy (24) dm .

km . sjjt . Ibrkh

Spill (his) blood like a slayer,

Like a destroyer onto his knees.

Carried out in line 55.

sr (syr) C1 I ’sing before/to/about 1 *

(?)

17(2 Aqht).6.51 (51) wysr . clh (52) ncm[nl

 98

They sing a good song before

(about/to) him (or: they sing
before/about him, the good one).

sr (syr) C1 . . . b I 'sing before/to/about ... on

'
*

3(cnt).1.21 (20) ysr . gzr . tb . ql

(21) C1 . bcl . bsrrt (22) spn

The nice-voiced youth sings before/

about/to Baal on the heights of
Sapon.

srh 1 III 'flash to'

4(51).$.71 (71) srh . lars . brqm

He flashes lightning to the earth.

srp b I 'burn in/with'

6(49).2.33 (33) bist . tsrpnn

In fire she burns him.

See also .5»14.

st (syt) b/bm/bqrb(m) III 'put in(to)'

4(51).5.123-24 (123) bl . ast . urbt . bbh[tm]

(124) hln . bqrb . hklm

I must put a casement in the house,

A window in the palace.

There are over thirty-five other occurrences of st b- with

very little semantic variation.

st (syt) 1 I 'put/make for' (temporal)

19(1 Aqht).4.167-68 (167) cwrt . ystk . bcl .

Iht (168) wclmh .
lcnt . pdr . dr

May Baal make you blind,

For now and eternity,
For now and forever more.

st (syt) 1 III 'put to/on'

4(51).2.8 (8) stt . bPtr . list

(9) Jjbrt . Igr . phmm
 99

She sets a ? on the fire,

A ? on the coals.

There is little semantic variation in this idiom in the

poetic texts (about fifteen more cases); the more important
usages in the prose texts are given here:

64(118).17 (16) wipllm . mlk . r[b bclh ?]

(17) mgmt . Inqmd . [mlk . ugrt .] st

Then ïupiluliuma, the great king his

lord, made a treaty with Niqmaddu,
the king of Ugarit.

702.1.6 (5) wst . ibsn (6) Ikim

I have provided a storeroom (?)

for you.

2065.17 (15) mnm . irstk (16) d&srt . w . ank

(17) astn .. 1 . i&y

Whatever your request that you lack

I will send to my brother.

The nuance 1 send to’ is preserved also in 1171.4; 2060.55

;
*
and probably in 1022.6, 9 (broken).

st (syt) lpn III ’set before’

1012.29 (28) p . 1 . ast . atty

(29) ncry . th . lpn . ib

... and I would indeed (?) be

placing my wife and children in
jeopardy (?) before the enemy.

st (syt) C1 III ’set over’

2062.2.4 (3) cbd . mlk (4) d st . C1 . fcrdh

... the king's servant whom he

set over his guard/militia (?)...

st (syt) cm III ’send to'

53(54).19 (18) w . st . (19) b . spr . cmy

. . . and put it in writing to me.

st (syt) qdm . . . tk pn III 'set before'*

3(Cnt).4.85-86 (85) st . alp . qdmh .

mria . wtk (86) pnh
 100

He sets an ox before her,

A fatling in her presence.

Same expression in 4(51).5

107-8.
*

sty b I * drink at
* (temporal)

22.2(124).24" (24) tstyn . bt . ikl . bprc

(25) ygqC .] birt . Ibnn

They first drink in the dining-hall,

They pour out (drink) in the heart
of Lebanon.

sty b II * drink from

*

*
4(51).3.15-16 (14) stt (15) pt..] .^btlhny .
qlt (16) bks . istynh

I drink [ ? ] from the table,

Scorn from the cup I drink.

This idiom is regular (other references: 4[51].3.44; .4.37;

.6.59; 5t67].4.16; 17E2 Aqht].6.5; 19tl Aqht].4.219; 23t52].6
—the last two cases contain partitive b).

sty lbl I * drink without

*

*
RS 22.225.5 (3) tspi . sirh (4) lbl . hrb .
tst . dmh (5) lbl . ks

She eats his flesh without a knife,

Drinks his blood without a cup.

sty cd III ’drink until

*

601.1.16 (16) yst[. il . y]n . cd sbc

trt . cd skr

Il drinks wine till he is sated,

Must till he is drunk.

sty cm I * drink with

*

5(67).1.25 (24) wlhmm cm afey . lhm

(25) wstm . cm . a[^]<y> yn

Eat food with my brothers,

Drink wine with my brothers (?).

RS 17.434
* cm sps stn

Drink with the Sun,

 101

tbc b I 'go away on' (temporal)

17(2 Aqht).2.39 (39) mk . bsb[c .] ymm .

tbc . bbth (40) kjrt

Then on the seventh day

The kjrt leave his house ...

tbc b II 'go away from

*

See preceding entry.

19(1 Aqht).4.182-84 (182) t[bc . bbty] (183) blkyt .

bhkClJy . msspdt
(184) bhzry pzgm . gr

Leave my house, wailers,

My palace, mourners,
My court, "skin-cutters."

tbc 1 *
III 'go away to'

15(128).2.13 (13) tbc . lltpn (14) [il . d]pid

... go away to Lutpan, god of

mercy.

17(2 Aqht).5.32 (31) tbc . k£r (32)_lahlh .

hyn . tbc . lms(33)knth

Kotar went to his tent,

Hjrn to his dwelling.

tbc cm I 'go away with'

*
1021.7 (6) w tbc ank . (7) cm mlakth

And as for me, I am leaving with

his (or: her ?) messengers.

tr& .1* III 'acquire a wife for (oneself)'

24(77).29 (28) t(29)rfo Ik ybrdmy

Acquire Ybrdmy as your wife.

j(wy ?) b I 'be put, moored in' *

(???)

2059.25 (24) w . anyk . it (25) by . cky

Your ship is moored (???) in

Acco.
 102

j3r Ipn *
?

2.3(129).16 (16) Lytlir Jr . il . abk [.]

1 . pn . zbl . ym .
Ipn [. t]pt[. n]hr

? Bull II your father

Before Prince Sea,
Before Judge River.

Also in line 21.

jb (jwb) b I 1 return on' (S-stem) (temporal)

35(3).45 (45) rgm . yttb . b . Jd£

One repeats (? = cause to return)

on the sixth ...

Also in App. 11(173).49.

jb (jwb) 1* III 'return to/reconsider

*

3(cnt).4.7-8 (6) wtcn [. btlt . cnt]

(7) ytb ly . Jr . il [aby....]
(8) yïb . ly . wlh . [....... ]

Girl Anat replied:

Bull II my father will reconsider [?],
Will reconsider for his own sake (?)
[ ? ].

4(51).6.2 (1) wycn . k[jr . wjjsls

(2) t£b . bcl . lEhwty]

Kotar-wa-Hasis replied:
You will come around to my view,
Baal.

Repeated in line 15 and in .7.25.

4(51).7.8 (8) £b . IpdCr .] pdrm

Return to the city of cities (?—

preceding context broken).

4(51).7.42 (42) bkm . yib . bcl . Ibhth

Weeping Baal returns to his house.

(S-stem) 14(Krt).3.137 (136) wlJb (137) mlakm . Ih

He sends the messengers back to him

 103

16.6(127).22 (22) ytb . krt . 1 dh

Krt returns to (or: sits in/on)

his _jl ...

17(2 Aqht).6.42
* (42) tb lly . laqht . gzr
tb ly wlk

Reconsider, Hero Aqht.

Reconsider for your own sake.

19(1 Aqht).4.225 (225) whn dt . ytb . Imspr

? one returns to the recitation.

See also 32(2).27.

(S-stem) 50(117).13 (11) tmny . cm . umy (12) mnm . slm

(13) w . rgm . Jib . ly

Send me word of how things are

with you, mother.

Other instances of this idiom in letters: 51(95).18;

52(89).15; 138.18-19; 1013.11; 2009.1.9; 2115.2.12.

1001.2.7 (7) watb . Intbt

I will return to (or: sit on ?)

the path (?).

1006.19 (16) [un] t inn (17) iChJm ed tttbn

(18) ksp • iwrkl (19) wtb . lunthm

They will have no unt-duty until

they return Iwrkl's money; then they
will return to their unt-duty.

(5-stem) 2059.23 (21) w[]lhm . bd (22) rb . tmtt . Iqht

(23) w . ttb . ank . Ihm

. . . and their [ ? ] I took from

the chief of tmtt and I returned
them to them.

tb (jwb) cm III 'return to'

6(49).6.12 (12) ytb . cm . bcl . srrt (13) spn

He returns to Baal on the heights

of Sapon.

(S-stem) 1015.19* (16) wmnm . (17) slm cm (18) umy

(19) cmy . tttb (20) rgm
 104

May my mother send me word of how

things are with her.

tbr bcd *
I *break/be broken behind

3(cnt).3.3O (29) him . cnt . tph . ilm .

bh . pcnm (30) ttt .
bcdn . ksl . tibr
(31) cln . pnh . tdc

When Anat sees the gods,

Her feet shake,
Behind, her back breaks,
Above, her face runs with sweat.

Same sequence in 4(51).2.17; 19(1 Aqht).2.94.

jbr 1 Ill * break at/on/to

*

16.1(125).54
* (54) [ksl]h . lars . tibr

Her back(-sinews ?) is (are)

broken to the ground (?).

jkfc_b I * grow warm/shine when

*

24(77).3 (3) bsgCsg ?] sps (4) yrfc y£kh

When the sun goes down, the moon

shines.

jkr cm ? (S-stem)

15(128).1.4 (3) tiikrn . [...]dn

(4) cm . krt . mswnh

?
To Krt in his camp.

jm (tmin ?) 1 II * tear out from

* (?) *

608.10 (10) hmt . Ip [. n]lk . abd .

Ip . ak[l] (11) Elm . dl]

They destroy the venom from the

mouth of the biter,
They tear out (?) the poison (?)
from the mouth of the devourer

Also in line 20.

I * speak on
* (or: class II * speak from
* )
 105

1001.1.4 (4) Etn] . pk . bgr .

tn . pk . bfolb

Speak with your mouth on the

mountain,
Speak with your mouth on the hill.

jny 1 III 1 speak to'

Regular (nine cases, always parallel to rgm).

jcr 1 III 'arrange for' (?) *

3(cnt).2.21-22 (20) ttcr (21) ksat . Imhr .

lcr . tlhnt (22) Isbim
hdmm . Igzrm

She arranges chairs for the soldiers

Arranges tables for the troops,
Stools for the young warriors.

See also lines 36-57 and 7.1(151).5-6.

jpd 1 III 'set (feet) on'

4(51).4.29 (29) pcnh . lhdm . yipd

He puts his feet on the stool.

Same expression in 6(49).5

15
* î 17(2 Aqht).2.11.

jpt b I 'judge in'

602.1.3 (2) il . ytb . b . cttrt

(3) il tpt . bhdrcy

Il sits in cjtrt,
Il judges in hdrcy.

jrp b I 'swish in' (??)

*

1003.3 (3) bars (4) m&nm . trp . ym

In the land of Mfanm he swishes (?)

the sea.

js(m ?) C1 III ' prey upon' (??)

*

16.6(127).48 (47) ltdy (48) ism . C1 . dl

You do not throw out the one who

preys upon (?) the poor.
 106

Philological Notes

The purpose of these notes is to support the translations in the

preceding section and, more specifically, to discuss the semantic con­

tent of the verb/pre position combinations. It should be remarked,

though, that they are limited in scope. In order to keep this study to

a reasonable length, the notes are intended primarily to deal with the

meaning of a given verb, preposition, or combination of the two. Refer­

ence is made to other matters where a recent proposal, which has not yet

filtered into the standard works on Ugaritic, is accepted or discussed,

or where an older proposal, which seems to be correct, has been neglect­

ed. Frequently an effort has been made to include a reference to one or

both of the two recent publications which offer the best bibliographical

resources: Peter J. van Zijl, Baal: A Study of Texts in Connexion with

Baal in the Ugaritic Epics,and Johannes C. de Moor, The Seasonal Pat­

tern in the Ugaritic Myth of Baclu According to the Version of Ilimilku.^

3bd b (p. 21)

This idiom seems also to be attested in 2.4(68).3= wbym . mnh

labd . bym. The context is too broken to assure an interpretation,

but Driver’s translation, 12

’Verily I will flee from Yam . . . ,

is based on a meaning of 3bd yet unattested in Ugaritic.

abd 1: 607.5: abd (p. 21)

Michael C. Astour analyzes abd in texts 607 and 6o8 as a G-stem

1Alter Orient und Aites Testament 10 (Kevelaer: Verlag Butzon

und Bercker, 1972).
2
Alter Orient und Aites Testament 16 (Kevelaer: Verlag Butzon
und Bercker, 1971).

^G. R. Driver, Canaanite Myths and Legends, Old Testament Stu­

dies, No. 5 [henceforth CML] (Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1956), p. 81.
 107

transitive form, closer to Akkadian abâtu 'destroy

* than to

.
*
Hebrew = abad 'perish 1 The question of the stem to which abd

is to be assigned may not be resolved on the basis of present

evidence because both Dabada and ’abbada would appear in Ugaritic

script as abd. Because of its parallel ndy 'cast out', it must in

any case be considered transitive, and not intransitive, as André

Caquot takes it: "Contre lui le charmeur a été incapable. Qu'il

en chasse le venin . . . "2* Astour's version reflects a superior

stichometric analysis with proper attention paid to the parallelism

of the texts.

3bd 1: 60S.10: translation (p. 22)

This interpretation is due to Astour.5

3d 1: 1010.19-20 (p. 22)

Parker4 has proposed fwd as the root of tud (imperfect) and ad

(imperative). He points out the defects in others' arguments, but

does not himself provide a translation of the passage.

3dm b: 19(1 Aqht).4.204 (p. 22)

Both the text and the interpretation of this passage are unclear.

Gordon5 reads wtadm . tidlm and considers the first word as the verb

and the second possibly as a verbal noun: "And she rouges herself

with a rouging." The reading itself, however, which goes back to

lnTwo Ugaritic Serpent Charms," JNES 27 (1968): 18.

"Nouveaux documents ougaritiens," Syria 46 (1969): 245, cf.

p. 244.
5JNES 27 (1968): 30-31.

^Studies, pp. 52, 66-67, n. 26.

5UT, §19.82; see also §8.48.

 108

Charles Virolleaud’s original publication, has been called into

2 who proposes [..](a/.t)dm . tidm . bglp

question by A. Herdner*

Evidently the text left too little to authorize a reading

of the first two signs, and the third could be either a or ^t.

More recently J. C. de Moor has read p[g]t[.]adm . tidm and trans­

lated "Pughat painted herself red . . . 1,3 If the reading adm tidm

is adopted, adm could be an adverbial infinitive, and the words

bglp ym could indicate what was used to bring about the redness :

’She did indeed rouge herself with glp ym*. As for the word £1£,

it is only attested in Ugaritic in connection with grain (19L1 Aqht]

.1.19), BO the expression glp ym itself (with the final m restored!)

is doubtful in meaning (de Moor, in the article just cited, would

interpret glp ym as some type of sea shell used to produce dye—

£lp ym = ’husk of the sea'). Moreover, the very stem and meaning

of the form tidm are doubtful (Qal?, reflexive?).

3hb b: 5(67).5.18-19: bdbr (p. 22)

For the possibility of interpreting dbr // sfrlmmt as place

J
names, see Stanley Gevirtz, Patterns in the Early Poetry, of Israel.

^La légende phénicienne de Panel: Texte cunéiforme alpha­

bétique avec transcription et commentaire, precede d’une introduction
à 1’etude de la civilisation d'Ugarit, Mission de Ras-Shamra, vol. 1,
Haut-Commissariat de la République Française en Syrie et au Liban,
Service des Antiquités, Biblioteque Archéologique et Historique, vol.
21 (Paris: Librairie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner, 1936), p. 132,
line-drawing on Plate IV.

2ÇTA, 1: 91.

^"Murices in Ugaritic Mythology," Orientalia n.s. 37 (1968):

212-13-
^Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization, No. 32 (Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1963 [2d ed., 19733), PP» 9»
 109

3fad b: I ’grasp by’ (p. 22)

There are two forms of this idiom attested in both Ugaritic

and the later dialects:1* 3fad + direct object + b instrumental

* ) and 3fad b + oblique object ('X grasps the

(«X grasps Y by his Z

Z [of Y]’). I understand the latter as a transformation of the

former: ’X grasps [Y] by his Z’.

There may be a further instance of the idiom in Ugaritic in

17(2 Aqht).1.35 • Here Virolleaud restored the idiom 3fad byd

2
’take by the hand’.

3hd b: 11(132).1.1-2: tk& (p. 22)

The translation of jkb as ’grow warm’ is due to Marvin Pope.^

3fad b: II ’take from’ (p. 23)

Though 3fad b may be translated either ’take from' (class II)

or 'take in(to)' (class III), according to the attested forms the

usages break down in such a way that there is little or no ambi­

guity: 3fad b(y)d = 'take in (one's own) hand', 3fad b + locality

other than one's own hand = 'take from (a place)*. It might be

argued that 3frd b(y)d is really instrumental, but I have classi­

fied it as directional 'take into the hand', rather than 'take

(grasp) by means of the hand'. There does in fact seem to be a

conceptual difference between * he takes a weapon into (b) his

*
hand , and 'she grasps Mot by (b) the hem of his garment'. See

also the discussion of Iqfr b II 'take from

* , below, pp. 194-95.

1See Appendix, p. 351.

p
Panel, p. 187.

^Review of John Gray, The Legacy of Canaan, 2d ed., in JSS 11

(1966): 240.
 110

abd b: 1129.9-10 (p. 23)

This text is partially destroyed and its purpose is not clear

from the preserved portions. That ^gr is correctly rendered as a

proper name is obvious from the following entries where each con­

tains a proper name. As for the idiom hd b, Dahood has taken

afrd as an intransitive form: "... three oxen of SPR that are

skilled in plowing."1 He does take the b’s as meaning ’from’/

but presumably does not construe them directly with afad. But his

analysis of ferfch ("in plowing") raises questions: To what extent

do plow-oxen become skilled? Can directive -h indicate a skill?

What about the other uses of a&d in this text, where the expres­

sion is either d afad b GN, or afad far£?^

3fad b/bm: III ’take into’ (p. 23)

See note to 3fad b II ’take from’, above, p. 109.

3&d b/bm: 10(76).2.6-7: qsthn (p. 23)

On the problem of the pronominal suffix ^h + n, consult H. L.

Ginsberg, "Bacl and cAnat," Orientalia n.s. 7 (1938): 6; Gordon,

UT, p. 36, n. 5; Dahood, Psalms III (1970), p. 204.

3hd 1: 137.2(93).U (p. 24)

There is no certainty that the idiom here is 3fad 1, but if that

^Psalms II (i960), p. 227; of. *

1 «0 Ugaritic-Hebrew Philology
(1965), p. 12.

^"Ugaritic-Hebrew Parallel Pairs," in Ras Shamra Parallels:

The Texts from Ugarit and the Hebrew Bible, vol. 1, Analecta Orientalia
4q, pd_ Loren R. Fisher [henceforth RSP] (Rome: Pontificium Institutum
Biblicum, 1972], p. 134.

5The reading b . afad . brj of line 15 is difficult in any case

and should perhaps be emended to d . afad . &rj—no photograph of this
text has to my knowledge been published, so the reading canno e
verified.
 Ill

idiom is present, the meaning is probably * take to’. The text

consists of a list of sp(m) 1jar(s)* given to groups or to in­

dividuals. The tpnr of line 11 corresponds to the LU-Tup-pa-nu-ri

1 2
(or Tu-pa-la-nu-ri) of syllabic cuneiform. Herdner transcribes

lg ynm (cf. 1g ynh[] in 25C52].75). The separation into two words

is Herdner’s since the tablet shows neither a word divider nor a

3
space. C. Virolleaud in his editio princeps shaded the second

sign of the sequence, but transcribed 1 faynm and translated: ”15 sp

pour le bns de Tpnr, qui (les) prendra (pour les donner) aux faynm.”

This portion of line 11 is not visible in the published photo-

4
graph. Whether the reading is gynm or feynm is not of primary

importance for the possible idiom 3fad 1, for neither is easily

identifiable (there is a proper name Gyn). Since the bns tpnr have

already received one allotment of spm (thirty of them, the largest

number of the list, in line 6), it is possible that lines 10-11

are recording that the bns tpnr also received an allotment of jars

which they were to take to gynm (a personal or geographic name, or

perhaps a title or guild designation).

3n c l : 608.8 (p. 24)

This interpretation of lan is Astour’s.^ The passage has

•*"See Manfred Dietrich and Oswald Loretz, "Der Vertrag zwischen

Suppiluliuma und Niqmandu: Eine philologische und kulturhistorische
Studie,” WO 3 (1964-66): 240.
p
OTA, 1: 227.
^"Textes alphabétiques de Ras-Shamra provenant de la neuvième
campagne, ” Syria 19 (1958): 158-59»
^CTA, 2: plate LXXII.

5JNES 27 (1968): 51»

 112

received other interpretations, based in part on a parallelism

of 1 and C1 construed as prepositions (Astour takes the 1. of lan

as the negative particle). Only Astour provides an interpretation

which includes the surrounding context, though, so we have no way

of knowing the over-all interpretation of the other authors cited.

in (p. 24)

Strictly speaking not a verbal form, in is used with preposi­

tions in a fashion analogous to a verb meaning ' not to be' : in + t)

= 'there is not . . . in' ; in + 1 = 'not to have'; in + 21 = 'there

is none over' (3Ecnt].5.41).

3ny (p. 24)

*
Although in tant smm cm ar§ //that cm kbkbm2 the usage is

clearly nominal, the construction tant cm merits inclusion here

as derived from an extension of a root 3 n. C. Virolleaud^ first

suggested deriving tant from 3ny (= Hebrew 3nh^) 'groan, complain'.

4
The suggestion was taken up but altered by Umberto Gassuto, who

proposed that this root 3ny 'groan, complain' took on the meaning

1Gordon, UT, Supplement, p. 551; M. Dahood, "Hebrew-Ugaritic

Lexicography VII," Biblica 50 (1969): 556; idem, review of Ugaritica V,
in Orientalia n.s. 59 (1970): 578; Kevin J. Cathcart, Nahum in the
Light of Northwest Semitic, Biblica et Orientalia, No. 26 (Rome:
Pontificium Institutum Biblicum, 1975), P» 51»

25(cnt).5.21-22; .4.60-61; 7.2(150).19-20; and variant tunt

in l(cnt IX).5.14.

^La Déesse cAnat: Poeme de Ras Shamra publie, traduit et

commenté, Mission de Ras Shamra, vol. 4, Haut-Commissariat de la
République Française en Syrie et au Liban, Service des Antiquités,
Bibliotèque Archéologique et Historique, vol. 28 (Paris: Librairie
Orientaliste Paul Geuthner, 1958), p. 58.

**The Goddess Anath: Canaanite Epics of the Patriarchal Age:

Texts, Hebrew Translation, Commentary and Introduction, trans. Israel
Abrahams (Jerusalem: The Magnes Press, 1971 [original copyright 1951J),
p. 127.
 113

converse , an evolution comparable to that of the verb slab in

1 *

Hebrew. This derivation has been defended most recently by de

Moor,1 who keeps the original sense of *
.
'groaning Others2

derive tant from the root visible in Hebrew 'meet1, Arabic

3ny 'be the right time'. This leads to the translation, 'the

meeting of the heavens with the earth//of the deeps with the

stars'.

3rs 1/lpn: III 'make a request to' (p. 24)

Of the two English expressions 'make a request to' and * request

from', the first seems to be closest to the Ugaritic idiom. One

could put this combination in class II on the assumption that the

notion of 'passage from’ is included in the expression 3*

rs 1.
5 It

appears more probable, however, that it should be assigned to class

III with verbs of emitting sound, that is, the 1 indicates to whom

the verbal request is addressed. Of course this person is also the

source of the granted request, but that precise semantic notion is

not necessarily included in the expression 3rs 1 itself (see also

notes on 3rs cm and sDl cm, below, pp. 114-15, 234—35)»

3rs lpn: 1018.19 (p. 25)

The reconstruction of this text and its interpretation follow

Otto Eissfeldt.^

1Seasonal Pattern, p. 107.

^E.g., W. F. Albright, "Specimens of Late Ugaritic Prose,"

BASOR 150 (1958): 38, n. 13 (who also, by the way, pointed out the
"ballast variant" cmn in parallel with cm); Dahood, Psalms I (1966),
pp. 121, 292; Psalms II (1968), pp. 176, 275»

5"Bacal Saphon von Ugarit und Amon von Xgypten," FuF 36

(1962): 338-40. '
 114

3rs 1; 2064.23 (p. 25)

This line occurs in a broken context. All of line 23 reads

alpm . arst . Ik . w . l^E ]. Because of the broken condition of

line 24, it is unclear whether 1£] is construed with 3rs or not.

Virolleaud treated line 23 as a unit: "Les boeufs sont (pourtant)

ce que nous désirons (le plus), toi et moi.” The principal

difficulty with this interpretation is that arst (with a) must

be parsed as 1st c.s., 2d m./f.s., or 3d f.s. active (was Virolleaud

taking arst as a noun [= irst 1?] or as 3d f.s. construed with

alpm?). Parker,2 more correctly it appears, takes w . 1]E ] as per­

taining to the next line : w . 1^ ] (24) mn . bns . d . 1 . iC..J

* whichever (or: how many?) men (do) I have • . • ’

3rs cm: 2065.14 (p. 25)

Consult M. Dahood^ for the restoration [i]rs, as opposed to

[y]rs.^ Parker provides a discussion of the restoration and word

5
division adopted here in the light of Akkadian parallels.

The semantic content of this expression may be illuminated by

Akkadian erësu asar 1 ask from', attested in El Amarna (Tusratta

^Le Palais Royal d'Ugarit V: Textes en cunéiformes alpha­

bétiques des archives sud, sud-ouest et du petit palais, Mission de
Ras Shamra. vol. 11 [henceforth PRU V] (Paris: Imprimerie Nationale
and Librairie C. Klincksieck, 1965),p. 92.
p
Studies, pp. 25-26.

^Psalms II (i960), p. 287î review of Ugaritica VI, in

Orientalia n.s. 41 (1972): 135»
^Virolleaud, PRU V, p. 93î M. C. Astour, "New Evidence on
the Last Days of Ugarit," AJA 69 (1965): 256.

^Studies, pp. 59, 67-68; the restoration CiJrs is also

adopted by A. F. Rainey, "Observations on Ugaritic Grammar," UF 3
(1971): 160.
 115
letters) and Nuzi texts.1 Several authors have recently inter­

preted 5» in the Ugaritic passage in question as 'from

.
* 2 If this

analysis is correct, the full perspective is: X requests Y (which

is located) with Z
* . The alternative, which I have assumed in my

rs cm as being semantically equal to

translation, is to analyze 3*

>rs 1 'make a request to'. Though one might want to claim a dis­

tinction between the two idioms (3rs 1 = 'make a request to',

3rs cm = 'request from'), considering the paucity of attestations,

we are perhaps on safer ground in interpreting the verb in both

cases as a verb of 'addressing sound to'.

3tw/y 1: III 'go/come to'

Gordon's UT entry for this verb"5 gives the meanings 'go' and

'come'.It appears that 3tw/y in Ugaritic was not specifically

marked for direction. This is true, for example, of Arabic :

though 'come' is listed as the primary meaning, many of the

usages recorded in the Arabic lexica require a broader basis of

meaning than * come'.

"4>ee CAD articles asar (vol. 1, part 2, pp. 415-16) and erêsu A
(vol. 4, p. 2$ÏÏÏ. The distribution suggests Hurrian influence.

2Dahood, Ugaritic-Hebrew Philology (1965), P- 52; idem, Psalms

II (1968), p. 287: idem. Biblica 50 (1969): 550; Anton C. M. Blom-
merde, Northwest Semitic Grammar and Job, Biblica et Orientalia, No. 22
(Rome: Pontificium Institutum Biblicum, 1969), PP- 24, 104-5; Marvin
H. Pope, Job: Introduction, Translation, and Notes, The Anchor Bible,
vol. 15, Jd ed. (Garden City, New York: Doubleday and Co., 1975), P- 191

3§19.4O7.

^Contrast Joseph Aistleitner's "kommen" (Wbrterbuch der

ugaritischen Sprache, Berichte uber die Verhandlung der sachsischen
Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig, Philologisch-histonsche
Klasse 106/3, ed. Otto Eissfeldt [henceforth WUS] [Berlin: Akademie-
Verlag, 19633, §460).
 116

it (p. 25)
As is the case with in,1 the particle i£ is used with preposi­

tions in a fashion analogous to a verb: i£ + b = 'be in' (only

18[5 Aqhtl.1.18) ; iX + 1 = 'be to' - 'have' (six occurrences).

b3*
6 b:
5 19(1 Aqht).4.215-14: jjd = 'home' (?) (pp. 25-26)

On inner-Ugaritic evidence Richard J. Clifford has argued

v 2
that jjd is another word for tent ( //ahi, qrs).

b3 cl: III 'enter before' (p. 26)

This type of construction (verb of entering + 21 = 1 enter the

presence of, enter before') is paralleled semantically by Ugaritic

crb cl,^ by Aramaic C1 ‘I,2* by Arabic dafaala cala,^ by biblical

Hebrew bw3 cl,& hlk cl,7 and perhaps crb '1.& This wide-spread,

1See note to in, above, p. 112.

2The Cosmic Mountain in Canaan and the Old Testament (Cam­

bridge: Harvard University Press, 1972), pp. 51-54; compare Cross,
Canaanite Myth, p. 55, n. 45, who translates "domed tent."

^See this entry, above, pp. 80-81.

%an. 2:24; AP 15:5, 15 (A. Cowley, Aramaic Papyri of the Fifth

Century B.C.: Edited with Translation and Notes [Oxford: Clarendon
Press, 1925; reprint ed., Osnabrück: Otto Zeller, 19671); Warka 4 (see
C. H. Gordon, "The Cuneiform Aramaic Incantation," Orientalia n.s. 9
[1940]: 51; idem, UT, §10.15).

5E.g., 3alf layla wa layla, ed. W. H. Macnaghten, vol. 1 (Cal­

cutta: W. Thacker and Co.; London: Wm. H. Allen and Co., 1859), P* 34.

6Gen. 19:51; Lev. 21:11; Num. 6:6; Deut. 25:5; II Sam. 15:4; Job
29:15; 54:28 (see Carl Brockelmann, Grundriss der vergleichenden Gramma-
tik der semitischen Sprachen, 2 vols. [Berlin: Verlag von Reuther und
Reichard,' 1908, 19151, 2: 591; M. Dahood, "Northwest Semitic Philology
and Job," in The Bible in Current Catholic Thought, Saint Mary s Theo­
logy Studies 1, ed. John L. McKenzie [New York: Herder and Herder,
19621, pp. 69-70).

7II Kings 25:20.

$Ps. 104:54 (see Pio Suarez, "Praepositio ‘al = coram in Lit­

térature. Ugaritica et Hebraica-Biblica," VD 42 [1964]: 74-75; Dahood,
 117

though numerically infrequent, usage casts doubt on J. G. Février’s

attempt to derive a separate cl(t) from the root C11 ’enter

* with

the meaning *
in ’.^ His examples are: KAI 81:4 3s yb3 clt hfrrz s

mqdsm 31 "quiconque entre dans le HRZ de ces sanctuaires"; KAI 76 B 8

1st clt hfrdrt "pour placer dans le sanctuaire"; KAI 137î4-5 b3 h3lnm

31 clt hmqdsm 31 "Ces divinités (c’est-à-dire leurs statues) vinrent

dans ces sanctuaires"; and, with reserves, KAI 14:5-6 w3l ycmsn

bmskb z clt mskb sny "Qu’ils ne m’emportent point de cette couche

(funéraire) vers une seconde couche." Février admits that in the

last case the word clt may indicate ’position on’. In two of the

other three cases clt is used with a verb of entering. Because the

three are Punic or Neo-Punic in origin, it seems reasonable that It

’in' in these cases does not represent a different preposition than

clt ’on’, but is a further manifestation of ^l + verb of entering =

’enter before’. In the ancient sources it was used for one person

entering before or opportuning another, while in the Punic ex­

amples it seems to have developed to the point of denoting * enter

before or into
* an inanimate object, (st clt in KAI 76:8 appears

in a broken and difficult context and it would be dangerous to con­

clude much from that usage—though it should be noted that Edward

Lipinski has recently translated the idiom as "legen auf."^)

Ugaritic-Hebrew Philology [1965], pp. 31, 68; idem, Biblica 50 E19693 *

354; idem. Psalms III [1970], p. 47).

^"Sur le mot clt en phénicien et en punique," Semitica 5

(1955): 59-62.
p
See below, pp. 337-39.
^"Beth-Schemesch und der Tempel der Herrin der Grabkammer in
den Amarna-Briefen, ’’ VT 23 (1973): 445.
 118

bty b: I 1 speak rashly during

* (?) (p. 26)

The suggestion to see the root bty in the form tbt is due to

Aistleitner.1 He lists it as bt(w) and gives as cognate Hebrew

bjD/bth, parsing it as a tD form (though both Qal and Piel forms

are attested in Hebrew). There seems to be no evidence for what

the original final consonant was.

The other principal possibility is to take the form tbt as

coming from the root nbt 'look

* (in Hebrew normally in the Hiphil).
p %
Dahood and M. Pope have maintained this interpretation in spite
4
of Gordon's reticence in the last edition of his grammar. The

difficulty here is with the verbal stem to which it would be

attached: Hebrew nbt (regularly Hiphil, only one example of the

Piel) would indicate that tbt in Ugaritic should be parsed as an

Ophal. The doubtful nature of an Aphel causative in Ugaritic^

renders this analysis precarious.

bky bm: I 'cry in

* (p. 26)

This verb represents a category in which I have included nine

verbs,all of which portray actions that take place within or on

•* ~WUS, §507, "schwatzen, klatschen. "

2Psalms III (1970), p. 19.

Sarvin H. Pope, "A Divine Banquet at Ugarit," in The Use of

the Old Testament in the New and Other Essays; Studies in Honor of
William Franklin Stinespring , ed. James M. Efird (Durham, N. C.: Duke
University Press, 1972), p.174.

St, §19.456.

See, for example, Jonas C. Greenfield, review of Dahood,

Ugaritic-Hebrew Philology, in JAOS 89 (1969)t 175; Rainey, UF 5
(1971): 167-68.

See chart of perspectives, below, p. 255»

 119

the person of the subject of the verb. I have assigned them to

class I (action within the confines of), holding that there is

no motion 'from' involved in the act of 'weeping in one's heart'.

Dahood1 and Terence Collins2*have claimed, however, that for the

Canaanites the source of tears was thought to be in the stomach,

that they mounted the throat and came out the eyes. They trans­

late the Aqht passage something on the order of: 'Pgt wept from her

heart, shed tears from her liver'. For the translation, but not for
the elaboration of the idea, Dahood is beholden to Driver.-5 There

appears to be no doubt that the seat of weeping, laughter, and the

other actions expressed by these verbs of emotion was considered to

be within the person involved. The question, however, is whether

the ancients consciously conceived of the action passing from the

body, or whether they were simply stating the place within the

body where the action took place. One item that is not proved is

the alleged "pipe-line" from viscera to eyes. Both Dahood and

Collins claim that this is the throat. The only evidence that is

adduced, however, is the fact that the throat is wet or dry accord­

ing to the stage of grief (i.e., the throat dries up with much weep­

ing). Collins successfully shows that eyes, throat, and viscera were

conceived of as involved in weeping, but the link between the three

is tenuous. We know that the eye was considered as the spring of

1Psalms__I (1966), pp. 83-84; Psalms II (1968), p. xxiv; Psalms

III (1970), p. 122.
2"The Physiology of Tears in the Old Testament," CB£ 33 (1971):
18-38, 185-97.

5CML, p. 59.
 120

tears, that the throat could become dry, and that people weep

within the body (in Ugaritic; no good parallel is given for a

comparable situation indicated by a preposition in biblical Hebrew),

but these actions may represent three different areas of the body

involved in weeping (the actual shedding of tears, the resultant

post-nasal flow followed by sore throat, and the body racked by

sobs).

Some of the evidence in favor of Dahood's and Collin's inter­

pretation:

1) dmc bkbd: 'shed tears in the liver

.
* Since tears are seen

coming out the eyes, it is logical to assume that the flow was

considered to come from the liver and out the eyes. If bky bm lb

refers only to inner sobs, however, dmc may have lost somewhat of

its etymological force referring to the actual production of tears,

so as to denote simple 'weeping', because of its parallelism with

bky.12 As for the other element, kbd, it, like lb, frequently means

*
simply 'middle in Ugaritic (ikbd arg 'into the earth
,
* Ikbd sdm

"into the field

).
*

2) Ugaritic qr3 bnps (4[31].7.47-48) and Hebrew z q bib (Hos.

7:14) could both mean *

cry out from
.
* One could object, however,
2
that the line parallel to the Ugaritic text (ystrn ydd bgngnh ),

though obscure, seems to refer to inner meditation rather than to

shouting aloud.

"Slenahem Haran ("The Graded Numerical Sequence and the Pheno­

menon of • Automatism* in Biblical Poetry, ** SVT 22 [1972] : 238-67) has
discussed at length the phenomenon of "automatism, ** where only one
element of a parallel pair is to be taken literally.

20n gngn, see E. Y. Kutscher, "nwspwt Isprw si gwrdwn,"

Lesonenu 31 (19&6-67): 36.
 121

5) Amarna Akkadian imluk istu libbiya ’I took counsel with

my heart
* (EA 136:26-27) seems to be very close semantically to

Hebrew 3mr bib which regularly means 'speak to oneself, take

counsel with oneself' (see below).

Evidence in favor of interpreting all these actions as inner

manifestations :

1) Other than zcq bib just mentioned (only one occurrence), all

uses of bib in the Old Testament refer to inner action. This is

obvious in such cases as Gen. 17:17 (3mr bib) where Abraham speaks

to himself of his disbelief; in Est. 6:6 (also 3mr bib) where Haman

reflects to himself, silently; and in Ps. 28:3 (dbr bib) where

sâlôm 'peace' is spoken openly, but ràcâ 'evil' is spoken 'in the

heart' (see the same phenomenon with different vocabulary in Ps.

62:5: brk bph #qll bqrb 'bless openly//curse inwardly

* ). These

are the obvious examples, but the other cases of 3mr bib also seem

regularly to mean ’say to oneself

.
* This consistent usage (I have

counted twenty-six instances of 3mr blb[b], all meaning * say to one­

self’) belies Dahood

s
* rendering of dbr bib in Ps. 15:2, ” . . • and

who speaks truth from his heart ...” The implication of this

verse seems rather to be that the righteous man speaks the truth

even in his inmost thought. The fact that dbr is used in this

verse does not alter our conclusion based on mr bib, as is shown

by Ps. 28:3 cited above where dbr bib = 'speak secretly'.

2) gfrq (gfaq) bm lb (12L751.1.12-13) would seem to be a good

candidate for 'laugh from the heart

* (cf. English * belly-laugh
* ),

^Psalms I (1966), p. 83; see also RSV, NEB, Bible de Jérusalem:

"de son coeur."
 122

and it may well be. Nonetheless, when Sarah laughs bqrbh (Gen.

18:12) it was intended to be a secret bit of mockery.

5) There are no examples of 3mr, dbr, bky, etc., + mlb in

biblical Hebrew. Such usages, if they existed, might indicate that

a passage from the interior was thought to take place. The best

15»
*
example I have been able to find is hgh bib in Is. 59 which

may there mean 'speak from the heart1.

To sum up, there is evidence for and against the position that

the ancients conceived of crying, laughing, etc., as coming out of

the heart. I may be guilty of over-systematization (i.e., perhaps

some of the verbs in this category belong in class II), there may

be a degree of ambiguity involved (i.e., bib could indicate the

origin of the action with passage from, or lack of passage from

the inside dependent on circumstances or expressed in an idiomatic

fashion which we have not yet grasped), or we may not yet under­

stand exactly how the ancients understood these emotive phenomena.

For the present, I have included all Ugaritic examples of this

semantic class under class I, as displaying no motion. If further

evidence requires it, however, some of these may have to be re­

classified as belonging to class II.

bky 1: III * cry for' (p. 26)

*
Another text should probably be included under this heading
15(128).5.12 [1 .] krt . tbkn 'you shall bewail Krt'. Gordon1

2
restores C1 here rather than simple as do Charles Virolleaud,

1UT, p. 195.

"Le mariage du roi Keret (III K): Poeme de Ras-Shamra,

Syria 23 (1942-43): 168.
 123
12 3
H. L. Ginsberg, John Gray, and Herdner. Presumably this is

based on Hebrew usage where bkh C1 is to be translated both 'weep

upon' (e.g., Gen. 45:14) and 'weep for' (e.g., Judg. 11:37); and

on the space available, which, according to the published photo­

graph, seems to require about three spaces. Nonetheless, there

are at least two arguments which count against restoring ^1: 1)

bky 1 is the idiom attested in Ugaritic. This argument appears

weak in the face of Hebrew bkh 1, bkh cl, bkh Dl, and bkh + direct

object, all meaning 'weep for, bewail

.
* Ugaritic prepositions do

appear, however, to be more standardized than is the case in Hebrew

either because the time span and geographical area covered by the

Ugaritic texts are more restricted (and thus the extent of histo­

rical change and dialectical variation is reduced), or because the

corpus is smaller. 2) Verbs of mourning (bky, dmm, and dm ) are

only attested with 1^ in Ugaritic. It is better, then, to await an

attestation of bky C1 in Ugaritic before restoring it on the basis

of comparative evidence.

bky 1: I 'cry for' (temporal) (p. 26)

Originating with Ginsberg,^ the first 1/ s of lymm lyrfcm /^lyrtpn

lent have been translated 'from days to months // from months to

^H. L. Ginsberg, The Legend of King Keret: A Canaanite Epic

of the Bronze Age, BASOR Supplementary Studies 2-3 (New Haven: Ameri­
can Schools of Oriental Research, 1946), p. 25.

The KRT Text in the Literature of Ras Shamra: A Social Myth

of Ancient Canaan (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1955), P» 17»

5CTA, 1: 70.

^Ibid., vol. 2, plate XXIV.

5BASOR 72 (1938): 15 and n. 9-

 124

years'.1 As a translation, this use of 'from' may be acceptable.

It may be doubted, however, that the linguistic analysis of the

four 1/s should differ in any way. The sequence is a progression

of three elements, with the second element repeated to give a

standard bi-colon. The phrases are thus cumulative rather than

adversative and are to be understood: 'Unto days, (even) unto

months // unto months, (even) unto years’. The same is true of

labbôqer labbôqer in I Chron. 9:27. Although it would have been

possible in Hebrew to say mibbôqer labbôqer, the author chose to

say 'unto morning, unto morning' = * every morning' = 'from morn­

ing to morning' (in translation but not in linguistic analysis).

bll (p. 26)

2
Edward Lipinski has recently proposed to read and translate

6(49).4.42-43 as follows : t(43)bl Ihfat . C1 . umtk "brew beer on

behalf of your sib." The difficulties of reading and translation

in this text make any interpretation precarious.

bcl 1; 17(2 Aqht).6.24-25: ^nt (p. 27)

, 4
See Herdner-7 for the correct reading lcnt, instead of In or Ik.

^E.g., G. H. Gordon, Ugaritic Literature: A Comprehensive Trans­

lation of the Poetic and Prose Texts, Scripts Pontificii Institut! Biblici
98 (Rome : Pontificium Institution Biblicum, 1949)$ p. 99; idem, UT,
§10.11 (where he compares I Chron. 9:27); Driver, ÇML, p. 65; Aistleitner,
WUS, §1422/4b; Anton Jirku, Kanaanaische Mythen und Epen aus Ras Schamra-
Ugarit (Gutersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus Gerd Mohn, 19^2), p. 135.

2"The Goddess Atirat in Ancient Arabia, in Babylon, and in Ug-

arit: Her Relation to the Moon-God and the Sun—Goddess," OLP 3 (1972):
118.
5CTA, 1: 83, n. 12.

\n: Virolleaud, Panel, p. 206 and plate VIII; Gordon, UT §6.8

and p. 24'57 Ik: W. F. Albright and George Mendenhall, "The Creation of
the Composite Bow in Canaanite Mythology," UNES 1 (1942): 228 and n. 16.
 125

ber ajr/lpn: I ’provide light behind/before

* (p. 27)

Strictly speaking, Ipnm is an adverb ’before

* rather than a

preposition ('before her’, or the like), but the underlying con­

struction is bcr Ipn cnt ’burn before (= provide light and direc­

tions for) Anat’. The prepositional character of ajr btlt cnt is

also doubtful (see below). The division and translation adopted

here are based on the following argument. From col. V, line 82,

it seems that Anat accompanied Afcirat on her journey to Il’s abode

(since we are told in lines 82-85 that Anat rejoices at Il's

answer to Afcirat's request and flies off to tell Baal—of course

we could have an omission of Aiirat's message containing the good

news sent to Anat in some other locale). If Anat did accompany

Aiirat, then col. IV, lines 16-18, should be translated as above.

The image would then be that Qadis is preceding Anat and Aiirat

(perhaps a play on words on bcr 'lead') and is providing light,

while Amrur is following them and bringing up the rear, also

providing light. In this interpretation, lines 16-18 form a

tri-colon (at least in logic), while line 19 stands alone: 'Baal

went off to the heights of Sapon'.

The other main interpretation of ajr, to take it as a verb

meaning 'march' or the like,permits a division into two bi-cola:

Qadis began to shine,

Amrur like a star before.
Girl Anat did march,
Baal went off to the heights of Sapon.

If I prefer the first division, a tri-colon, followed by a single

^So Driver, CML, p. 97; Gordon, Ugaritic Literature, p. 51;

Aistleitner, WUS, §475? van Zijl, Baal, p. 95 (Gordon, Aistleitner, and
van Zijl construe Ipnm with atr 'march forward').
 126

parenthetical phrase, it is because this indicates that Anat was a

member of Afcirat's party (notice also the lack of a marker of fem­

inine gender on a£r). The reference to Baal shows the author’s

desire to place each of the protagonists in position for the fol­

lowing scene. Phrases of transition occur fairly frequently with­

out a parallel line,1 so the same may be true here.

b er b : 2114.9 (p. 27)

My understanding of this text is as follows : (1) 1 . drdn (2)

bcly , rgm (3) bn . farnk (4) mgy . (5) hb% . hw (6) fard . w . si hw

(7) qrt (8) akin . b . grnt Q) 1 . bcr (10) ap . krmm (11) frig

(12) qrtn . frig (13) w . dc . dc 'To Darrideni my lord say: Bn-brnk

came, he defeated the guards, and he plundered the city. He even

burned our food on the threshing-floors and destroyed the vineyards.

He destroyed our city and you must know it'.

The very plausible interpretation of ford as a military category

is due to A. F. Rainey.2 The identity of the bn farnk is to my mind

very doubtful and identification with Akkadian mar sipri^ is not

^.g., in this text, .4.8, $8; .5.64 (and frequently with the
verb cny ’answer, speak up’); .7.42.

2”The Social Stratification of Ugarit," Ph.D. dissertation, Bran­

deis University, 1962 (published on demand by University Microfilms, Ann
Arbor, Michigan, and High Wycomb, England), p. 143; idem, "The Military
Personnel of Ugarit," JNES 24 (1965): 24. Manfred Weippert (review of
Aistleitner, WUS, in GGA 216 [1964]: 186), though apparently unaware of
Rainey's suggestion, rejected Aistleitner ’s comparison with Akkadian
ardu/wardu (WUS, §1080). Manfred Dietrich and Oswald Loretz, also ap­
parently unaware of Rainey’s suggestion, proposed the same etymology
for hrd as that indicated by Rainey: the root apparent in Akkadian
fauradu ’a kind of soldier' ("Zur ugaritischen Lexicographie," BO 23
C1966]: 130). Rainey also suggests an organic relationship between
barâdu 'be alert' and burâdu 'a kind of soldier', a connection accepted
by AHw but ignored by CAD and Dietrich and Loretz.

5Virolleaud, PRU V, p. 137; Astour, AJA (1969): 258.

 127

only semantically questionable ('son of the message' / 'son of the

caravan') but difficult to account for in the context, since bn farnk

seems to be the perpetrator of the carnage described in the follow­

ing lines—at least if he is not the perpetrator none other is

named. It thus appears preferable to take bn fornk either as a

proper name or as a professional title, *

'your caravaneer , or the

like. The author would thus be complaining that a certain bn hrnk,

perhaps belonging to Darrideni's staff, has come and destroyed the

town. Lines 5-7 are very doubtful (though the verbal construction

seems to be infinitive+independent pronoun), but 8-11 seem rela­

tively clear. The verb bcr is translated as the specific action

'burn' rather than the more general 'plunder' because of its

parallel 'destroy'. The text is thus understood as saying that

bn hrnk has taken spoil from the town (5-7), but has destroyed the

surrounding food resources (8—11), and sums up the situation by

stating that the whole town has been destroyed (12-15). We thus

have a relatively clear attestation of bcr in the sense 'burn' ■*

'consume, destroy
* .

As for the preposition, what appears to be the basic meaning

of b 'within the confines of, is clear here: the grain was still

within the area circumscribed by the threshing area(s) when the

attack was made. The correct English translation is, of course,

'on'. The interpretation * destroy from' is a distinct possibility,

but it appears to me more likely that the phrase is provided ex­

pressly to indicate when the attack took place, i.e., when the

grain was still on the threshing floors.

 128

bcr 1/lm: III 'lead to' (?) (p. 28)

The meaning 'burn' attested elsewhere in Ugaritic and frequent

in biblical Hebrew has suggested that this passage should have some

connection with the new bridegroom's sexual passion, though the

translations vary widely.1 The list of actions in 14(Krt).2.96-

103, however, describes persons who would not normally participate

in warfare, but who in this case take special measures to do so

(the classes are: the orphan [?], the widow, the sick person, the

blind person, and last the trb bdj—the new bridegroom). Thus it

seems plausible to accept the interpretation which sees the new

bridegroom as making provision for his bride. Hence b r here is

associated with 3(^nt).4.70: L ]b 1 • mdlh . yb r 'Baal brings

his mdl
* (some storm phenomenon), and it is translated 'lead
.
*

The primary problem with this interpretation is of course the

etymology of b^r 'lead, bring, take'. It may be associated with

4 . .
Hebrew *bëcîr 'cattle
* : 'lead (cattle)' ■* 'lead', but this is

hardly more than speculation (Hebrew bicer seems rather to mean

* cause animals to graze *, cf. the Hiphil used for what animals do

^ee, for example, Driver, CML, p. JI, over against John Gray,
The Legacy of Canaan: The Ras Shamra Texts and Their Relevance to the
Old Testament, SVT 5, 2d rev. ed. (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1965), pp.
140—41; see also Wolfram Herrmann, "Das Aufgebot aller Krafte. Zur
Interpretation von I K II 96-1OJ = IV 184—191 und Dtn 20 5-7, ZAW
70 (1958): 215-20.

2Cf. Deut. 20:7; 24:5, and Ginsberg, Legend, p. 38.

■^Consult Gray, Legacy, p. 140, n. 5» for further bibliography.

^The comparison has been made by, e.g., C. H. Gordon, "Tr^,

tn, and nkr in the Ras Shamra Tablets," JBL 57 (1938): 409, n. 12,
and by Aistleitner, WHS, §559» The suggestion seems to have origin­
ated with H. L. Ginsberg, "Notes on 'The Birth of the Gracious and
Beautiful Gods,
"
* JRAS 1935, p. 62 and n. 1; cf. idem, Legend, p. 38.
 129
to a field in Ex. 22:4). In any case Rainey1 is in my opinion

correct in objecting to the ’’violence to the text . . . per-

2
petrated by Dahood" in emending ybcr to ycbr.

bgy b/btk: 3(cnt).3.26-28 (p. 28)

The translation of lines 26-28 is patterned on that of Cross.

There is room for doubt whether the exact connotation of bgy here
4 5
is ’show’, or ’seek’.

brd Ipn: I ’cut before’ (?) (p. 28)

Cassuto’s suggestion^ to see brd as the equivalent of Hebrew

prd 'cut, divide’ has at least not been disproved with the pas-
7
sage of time and the publication of new texts. Semantically

*
’cut provides an excellent parallel to ’slice’, and phono­
g
logically the b/p variation is unexceptionable.

brk 1: III 'bless to’ (p. 28)

Also to be included in the discussion of brk 1 is mr 1, also

q
’bless to’ on the basis of its parallel with brk 1.

3 (1971): 167.

2M. Dahood, "Some Aphel Causatives in Ugaritic," Biblica 38

(1957): 71-73.
•^Canaan-i te Myth, p. 156, n. 46. ^Gordon, UT, §19.476.

^Clifford, Cosmic Mountain, pp. 70n, 75. 8 9, pp. 107-8.

3 Anath
6 * *

?A. A. Wieder's comparison of brd in this text with prd in Hos.

4:14 ("Ugaritic-Hebrew Lexicographical Notes," JBL 84 L19651: 163-64)
poses many fewer problems than de Moor's recent attempt at solution:
redivide as ybr djd = 'he carved the suckling’ (did = "he-of-the-teat"
—Seasonal Pattern, p. 70).
8UT, §5.28.

9See Moshe Goshen-Gottstein, "C1 hbrkh," Lesonenu 32 (1967-68):

59-62, for a recent discussion of the semantic relationship between brk
and mr(r) ’be strong' -» 'strengthen'.
 130

Though the passive construction bârûk PN 1 DN was known pre­

viously, Ugaritic added the transitive use of brk 1 to the North­

west Semitic lexicon.1 Because brk 1 only appears in Hebrew in

passive formulae,2 the 1. of these expressions has often been taken

as indicating the agent of the passive verb (see below). The Ug­

aritic text shows us, however, that bârûk 18 is not the passiviza-

tion of bërëk 34el celyôn 3et-3abrâm, but of bërëk malkî.§edeq 3et-

3 abram 183ël celyôn. This use of brk + direct object + 1 + divine

name appeared in Phoenician subsequently to the publication of the

Aqht text: brktk lbclgpn wlkl 31 tbpnfrs 'I bless you to Baalsapon

and to all the gods of Tahpanhes'.5 The same construction appears

in an Aramaic ostracon published by André Dupont-Sommer: brktk

lyhh wltjnÇb ?] ’ I bless you to YHH and to HnCub ?]1. The idiom

has more recently been attested in the Aramaic documents from

Hermopolis West: brktk Iptfr *
1 bless you to Ptah’.5

1Though many have interpreted 1^ in this text as vocative 1

(e.g., A. Herdner, "Quelques remarques sur ‘La légende phénicienne de
Danel’ II, col. 1 et 2," RES 1938, p. 125; Driver, ÇML, p. 49), the
Aramaic and Phoenician parallels cited below at least maintain the
interpretation given here as a strong possibility. For the trans­
lation ‘bless to’, see Gordon, Ugaritic Literature, p. 86. In UT,
§9.16 he retains the interpretation ’bless to’, but takes the verb as
2d person singular.

2E.g., Gen. 14:19 bârûk 3abram Î83ël celyon.

^KAI 50:2-3; see André Dupont-Sommer, "Note on a Phoenician

Papyrus from Saqqara, " PEQ 81 (1949): 52-57*

4"Le syncrétisme religieux des Juifs d’Éléphantine d'après un

ostracon araméen inédit," RHR 130 (1945)* 17-28.

5E. Bresciani and M. Kamil, Le lettere aramaiche di Hermoppli,

Atti della Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Anno CCCLXIII—1966: Mem-
orie: Classe di Scienze morali, storiche e filologiche, Serie VIII,
Volume XII, Fascicolo 5 (Rome: Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, 1966),
letter III 1-2; similar expressions are found in I 2; II 2; IV 2; 1-2
VI 1; VIII 1-2, that is, in each letter except No. VII.
 131

Dupont-Sommer, in his commentary on the Phoenician text

cited,1 makes two statements on the origin of the expression

brk 1: 1) it is "practically equivalent to" brk b; 2) it "seems

to be directly influenced" by the passive construction bârûk 1

2
DN. Both of these statements are incorrect if my analysis of

brk 1 is accepted. The _b in such a phrase as brk bsm DN •bless

(someone) by a deity’is best explained as the _b of means and

this is probably also the correct explanation of the reflexive

4
form htbrk b DN * bless oneself by a deity
.
* This _b of means

* ) is a different concept
('state/effeet a blessing by means of

than the agent of a passive verb ('be blessed by

),
* and thus, if

we are to attempt to speak precisely, Dupont-Sommer’s identifica­

tion of brk b and brk 1 cannot be accepted.^ Now, is it possible

that jL in brk 1 expresses the agent of a passive verb? That the

IpEQ 81, p. 55 (see note 3, preceding page).

p
See also RHR 130, p. 22 (Note 4, preceding page); consult
further Joseph A. Fitzmyer, The Genesis Apocryphon of Qumran Cave I:
A Commentary, Biblica et Orientalia, No. 18 (Rome : Pontificium Insti-
tutum Biblicum, 1966), p. 158; more recently, K. R. Veenhof has again
stated that the _1 of bârûk 1§ indicates the agent of a passive verb
(review of Willy Schottroff, Per altIsraelitische Fluchspruch, in VT
22 [1972]: 382).
^See Ps. 129:8. ^Is. 65:16; Jer. 4:2; Ps. 72:17.

^The three cases of nbrk b (Gen. 12:3» 18:18; 28:14) are pro­
blematical in that nbrk b is taken up by htbrk b in Gen. 22:18 and 26:4.
Are the expressions both reflexive, both passive, or the first passive
and the second reflexive? Because of the clear cases of htbrk b which
are reflexive (cited in note 4), I tend to regard them all as reflexive
(for a recent defense of this interpretation, see E. A. Speiser, Gene­
sis: Introduction, Translation, and Notes, The Anchor Bible, vol. 1
[Garden City, New York: Doubleday and Co., 1964], p. 86). If the
Niphal forms are passive, though, it must still be pointed out that
the t) indicates the means employed by the agent (i.e., nbrk b would not
mean * be blessed by someone*, but ’be blessed [by someonej by means of
something or someone’).
 132

agent of a passive verb is not commonly expressed in the Semitic

languages is well known and was restated by the late E. Y. Kut-

scher: "... the early Semitic languages are generally dis­

inclined to use the passive construction whenever the agens is

known."1 In the paper just cited Kutscher gives some exceptions

to this general rule and proposes a classification which seems to

fit brk 1 quite well: the passivum majestatis where 1 expresses

the dative of agent when the agent is a high-ranking person or

deity. I believe we could accept this classification of brk 1

if we did not have the early attestation of transitive brk 1 DN

in Ugaritic, Phoenician, and Aramaic. The antiquity of the

Ugaritic example, if it is correctly interpreted, should restrain

us from considering the later Phoenician and Aramaic transitive

uses as derivations from the passive construction. Since we have

these ancient transitive uses attested, there is no reason why

the transitive usage should not be at the origin of the passive.

If it is accepted that brk 1 is of a different semantic con­

tent than brk b, and that the transitive 1 bless to’ is at the

origin of the more common passive construction, there remains the

problem of the meaning of brk 1 ’bless to

.
* Sidney Smith, in a

note to Dupont-Sommer’s PEQ article,states that brk 1 means

1"Two ’Passive’ Constructions in Aramaic in the Light of Per­

sian, " in Proceedings of the International Conference on Semitic Studies
Held in Jerusalem, 19-23 July 1963 (Jerusalem: The Israel Academy of
Sciences and Humanities, 1969), p. 148. John J. Scullion has remarked
concerning 1, = agent of passive verb: "Apart from baruk [sic] 1 ex­
amples are rare" ("Some Difficult Texts in Isaiah cc. 56-66 in the
Light of Modern Scholarship, ’’ UF 4 [1972] : 10?). If baruk 15 is re­
moved from the list, examples will be even rarer.

2"Note on Blessings, " PEQ 81 (1949): 57.

 133

’mention someone else's name for good to the deity’. I agree

with this description of brk 1 in terms of verbal action and have

classified the idiom among the verbs of emitting sound. Though

brk 1 may mean both ’declare a blessing in favor of someone to a

deity’ and ’effect a blessing on someone (by declaring it) to a

deity’, the analogy to the many verbs of sound production + 1_, as

well as the many cases of brk in Hebrew and elsewhere which refer

to the act of stating a blessing, indicate that the 1 points up the

one to whom a verbal blessing is directed. The notion of brk 1,

then, is that of expressing a verbal blessing, directed to a deity;

that of brk b is 'bless by’ (’state or effect a blessing by'); that

of brk + direct object (without a prepositional complement) is

'pronounce a blessing on someone' (when the subject is human), or

'effect a blessing on someone' (when the subject is divine).

2
Alongside brk 1 in biblical Hebrew there appears also brk Ipn.

This expression is to be interpreted ’pronounce a blessing upon

someone (while) in the presence of a deity' (or perhaps : ’pro­

nounce a blessing upon someone directed to the deity’—Ipn = 1).

3ârûr only appears in biblical

It is interesting to note^ that 1
*

Hebrew with lipne, and not with 1. It would appear that this

phenomenon has to be explained by the accident of occurrence or

by the psychology of the language, and not as a linguistic neces-

1He also states that brk.l occurs only in polytheistic environ­

ments—apparently inexact if bâruk/bërik lë (frequent in the mono­
theistic Old Testament writings and translations) is only the passiv-
ization of transitive * bless to’.
^Compare Ugaritic frnn Ipn, cited above, p. 37.

3With Veenhof, VT 22 (1972): 382.

 134

sity, for one would expect to find 3rr 1 * pronounce a curse upon

someone to a deity
* as the antonym of brk 1 * pronounce a blessing

upon someone to a deity

* •

The most recent study of the biblical bârûk formulae, by Josef

Scharbert,1 reaches similar conclusions regarding the verbal nature

of brk and the dative function of brk 1, but it does not make use

of the Ugaritic, Phoenician, and Aramaic evidence behind these

conclusions.

As a post—script it might be added that although brk 1 + direct

object appears in later Aramaic and even in later biblical Hebrew,

the phrase wbrk bcl kmtrys l3ztwd which appears in Dupont-Sommer's

edition of the Karatepe statue inscription^ must be a mistake.

Donner and Rollig provide a different text: wbrk bcl krntrys 3yt

3 ztwd,and this reflects Helmuth Th. Bossert * s hand-copy.

brr b: II *
be pure (= free) of
* (p. 29)

The interpretation of brr b as * be free of

* is clear from its

frequently attested Akkadian counterpart zaku istu. There are,

moreover, three attestations in Ugarit Akkadian of zaku ina ’be

*Die
■L' Geschicte der baruk-Formel, ** BZ n.s. 17 (1973): 1-28.

2E.g., I Chron. 29:20.

^"Azitawadda, roi des Danouniens î Etude sur les inscriptions

phéniciennes de Karatepe," RA 42 (1948): 176; repeated in Charles-F.
Jean and Jacob Hoftijzer, Dictionnaire des inscriptions sémitiques de
l'ouest [henceforth DISO] (Leiden: E. J. Drill, 1965)» P» •

SçAI 26, C, III, 16-17.

5"Die phonizischen Inschriften vom Karatepe nach dem Stande

von Herbst 1953," Turk Tarih Kurumu: Belleten 17 (1953): plate 9
(following p. 149); see also Albrecht Alt, "Die phonikischen Inschriften
von Karatepe," WO 1 (1949): 278. To my knowledge no readable photo­
graphs have been published yet.
 135

free of’, which seems to be an exact correspondence to Ugaritic

brr b: PRU III, pp. 112-13 (RS 15.114:12-13): u sarru uzakki

URU-5akna ina piIki (= Ugaritic bunj);1 PRU VI 45:28-29: sanïta(m)

sarru uzakki mgagbana ina ardûti sa sarri;2 PRU VI 52:3-5: mAki-

dTesub uzakki akil-LIM ina mamîti. Nougayrol translates the last

3
text: ’'Akitesub libère le chef-de-mille par serment ..."

There would be excellent parallels for this usage of ina = ’by

means of’. In a note, Nougayrol also considers the possibility

that ina mamîti could be interpreted as ’from the oath’, but he

rejects it because "on ne comprendrait plus la phrase qui suit."

The following sentence is u la imaggar ana itmïsu "mais il

n’accepte pas de le prononcer" (Nougayrol). It would seem, how­

ever, that this phrase could well be seen as explanatory. The first

twelve lines of the text would then be translated: 'This day, be­

fore witnesses, Aki-Tesub has freed the head-of-a—thousand from

oath and has not accepted (that is, Aki-Tesub) that he (that is,

akil-LIM) pronounce (it). The head-of-a-thousand and his sons are

free from the control of Aki-Tesub—who is from Armanu’. The -su

of itmïsu would thus refer to akil-LIM and not to the feminine noun

mamïtu. Since zakû istu qâti is used in the second part of the text

\jean Nougayrol, et al., Le Palais royal d'Ugarit III: Textes

accadiens et hourrites des archives est, ouest et centrales, Mission
de Ras Shamra^ vol. (> (Paris: Imprimerie Nationale and Librairie
C. Klincksieck, 1955).

2J. Nougayrol, Le Palais royal d'Ugarit VI: Textes en cunéi­

formes babyloniens des archives du grand palais et du palais sud
d'Ugarit, Mission de Ras Shamra, vol. 12 (Paris: Imprimerie Nationale
and Librairie C. Klincksieck, 1970).

^Ibid., p. 52. Ibid., p. 52, n. 3.

 136

it is clear that akil-LIM is being freed from some obligations.

The mamrtu would thus refer to his previous acceptance of those

obligations, from (a renewal of ?) which Aki-Tesub is now freeing

him. The mixture of idioms (zaku ina = zaku istu in the same

text) would be due to dialectical interference (Ugaritic on

Akkadian). Though comparatively rare, zaku ina is attested

outside of Ugarit, also.^

bj (p. 29)

2.4(68).28-29 contains what is probably a nominal formation

reflecting the idiom bj (bwj) 1:

(28) bj laliyn . [b^l] Shame on Aliyan Baal,

(29) bj . lrkb . crpt~~ Shame on Cloud-rider.

This sense of b£ seems to be more likely than * Hail!* proposed by

Dahood.2 because of the preceding idiom gcr b.^

gl b: II ’rejoice in' (= 'receive joy from') (p. 29)

The classification and interpretation of gl b is based on the

idiom smh m(n).^

gmfl bm: I 'laugh/chuckle in' (?) (p. 29)

The translation of the verb is derived from context ( // zfcq =

§foq). Dietrich and Loretz have proposed Aramaic gmd * contact,

shrink
* as a cognate.^ For laughing, however, one might expect

an idea of expansion (compare the use of ml 'be full' for the

^Consult the CAD article zaku v., vol. 21, pp. 25-32.

^Ugaritic-Hebrew Philology (1965)« P» 9»

^See notes on gcr b below, pp. 137—39$ especially on 2.4(68).28.

\see notes on smh b and smh m(n) below, P» 239»

5OLZ 62 (1967): 538.

 137

same phenomenon in 3[cnt].2.25 and 7.1C131J.7) rather than con­

traction of the liver. Not only may one argue from semantics, but

the phonological correspondence is not perfect, either. Aramaic

gmd may well be cognate with Hebrew gomed *short cubit

,
* which

renders precarious a connection with Ugaritic gmfl (the expected

phonetic correspondence is £ ■* Aramaic ji, Hebrew z). There also

seems to be a fairly close semantic connection between Aramaic

gmd ’shrink
* and Arabic gmd 'harden, thicken
* (d = .di), another

count against considering the Aramaic gmd as derived from an

original gmd.

gcr b: III * rebuke *

The precise semantic import of gcr b is difficult to establish.

S. C. Riefl has recently cited with favor the opinion of Ibn Ezra

that gcr b describes 'an act of depracation

* , while gcr + direct

object delineates *
an .
*
act of deprivation or destruction He
2
further cites with approval the attempt by A. A. Macintosh to

link gcr closely with the ideas of * anger

* and 'curse
.
* One can

say from the vantage point of Ugaritic that (1) the idiom gcr +

direct object does not appear in Ugaritic, and, though gcr is

sparsely attested, this may indicate that a distinction of the

nature envisaged by Ibn Ezra did not exist at the time of the

Ugaritic texts; (2) gcr b is put in the mouth of inferiors addres­

sing their superiors (gods and goddesses). It thus appears that

any linking of gcr with the notion of 'curse

* is, in the second

1"A Note on gcr," VT 21 (1971): 241-44.

A2** Consideration of Hebrew gcr, ** VT 19 (1969): 471-79»

 158

millennium at least, to be rejected. It is hardly possible that

the doorman of Il’s palace would be allowed to ’curse

* deities

(601.1.11). Rather, the term here bears the connotation which

Macintosh brings out so clearly in his study: * produce a loud

and rumbling sound *• Colloquial English * yell at

,
* which takes

on the meaning * rebuke in a loud and harsh voice

* , probably re­

produces quite well the nuance of gcr b as attested in the Ug-

aritic poetic texts. By not finding the notion of 'curse

* in the

Ugaritic attestations I so not mean to imply, of course, that in

time a verbal rebuke delivered in anger could not take on the

nuances of * curse
* *
and * deprivation .

gcr b: 2.1(157).24 (p. 29)

Dahood
* s rendering of bhm as * then
* (= _b * after
* + -hm

)
*
•these 12 must yield to the idiom gcr b where b indicates the

oblique object. This idiom is frequent enough in Ugaritic and

2
biblical Hebrew to make any other interpretation unlikely.

Moreover, taking bhm as an adverbial phrase meaning * then

* would

entail seeing in b alone the meaning 'from

* *
- 'after , a phenom­

enon which appears to me insufficiently supported for both

Ugaritic and Hebrew. The preposition ,b in Ugaritic is only to

be interpreted as * from
* in certain verb/preposition combina­

tions and in idiomatic nominal usages the background of which it

is usually possible to trace.

1Psalms I (1966), p. 122; accepted by Blommerde, Job, p. 19.

2Cf. Jonas C. Greenfield, "Amurrite, Ugaritic and Canaanite,"

Proceedings of the International Conference on Semitic Studies, p. 98.

•^See discussion of in nominal phrases and of the semantic

field of b, below, pp. 502-11, 527-50.
 139

gcr b: 2.4(68).28 (p. 29)

See van Zijl^ for a discussion, with bibliography, of this

passage. ) must
His solution ("with name cAttart roars harshly" 2*
5

be rejected, however. Once again gcr b in the meaning •rebuke *

must be retained. Literally the text translates: 'Attart rebukes

(his) name'. It seems to be a reference to the following rebuke

where Baal's name is in fact mentioned: bt laliyn . Cbcl] / bt .

Irkb . crpt 'Shame on Aliyan Baal, Shame on Cloud-rider'. I also

fail to see cogency in Dahood's rendering of gcr in this passage

by 'call'when the idiom ger b 'rebuke' is so well attested in

biblical Hebrew and not infrequently in Ugaritic (one factor in

Dahood's thinking seems to be the desire to translate gcr accord-

4
ing to its basic meaning, but unfortunately there is a b in

each phrase).

gr 1: I 'sojourn at' (??) (p. 29)

The various translations of this difficult text exhibit very

different suggestions for the root and meaning of the verb: Driver

grgr 'ran to and fro' = Ethiopie gargara 'rolled'; Gordon* be a

7
client of’, but in UT he suggests a possible derivation from a
Q
verb 'dwell'; W. F. Albright: 'be clients to'. My translation

supposes that the children born to II are to be raised in the

1Baal, pp. 4J-44. 2Ibid., p. 44.

•^Ugaritic-Hebrew Philology (1965), P» 9»

^See first note on gcr b, above, pp. 137-38.

5CML, p. 146. ^Ugaritic Literature, p. 61. 7§19.618.

&"The North-Canaanite Poems of Al’êyân Bacal and the 'Gracious

Gods,"' JPOS 14 (1934) : 137.
 140

steppe country, among the rocks and brush until a period of time

has passed. But yjb 1, seemingly a semantic parallel to gr 1,

means * sit on'.

grs b: I 1 drive out with' : J(cnt).2.16 (p. JO)

Moshe Held has made the greatest recent contributions to the

interpretation of this passage.

grs b/1: II 'drive out from

* (p. JO)

See discussion of "interchangeability" below, pp. 277-80.

dbb b: J5(J).5O: prgl . §qrn (p. JO)

For the classification of prgl gqrn as a deity, see J. C. de

p
Moor, "The Semitic Pantheon of Ugarit."

dbb 1: 14(Krt).2.76 (p. JI)

Of interest for this passage is 15(128).4.28 and .6.J:

[dbb . l]krt . bclkm There is a sacrifice for Krt your

lord.

db[& . Ikrt . a]dnkm There is a sacrifice for Krt your

master.

These phrases I interpret as nominal clauses. They are not to be

classified with dbfa. 1 1 sacrifice to', but rather with 1^ of belonging:

'there is a sacrifice to Krt1 = 'Krt has a sacrifice'. The implica­

tion is not that the sacrifice is being offered to Krt, but rather

that Krt is conducting a feast in his house which includes sacri­

fices to deities. This position is taken against Ivan Engnell, who

^■"Studies in Comparative Semitic Lexicography, " in Studies in

Honor of Benno Landsberger on his Seventy-fifth Birthday, April 21,
1965, Assyriological Studies. No. 16. eds. Hans G. Güterbock and
Thorkild Jacobsen (Chicago: University of Chicago Press), pp. 4OJ-4.
p
UF 2 (1970): 20J, No. 191 (with references).
 141

maintains that the expression dbfa. 1 indicates that Krt was a

deity.1 The closest parallel to the Krt text as I understand it

is II Kings 10:19 kî zebafr gâdôl lî labba'al ’I have a great sac­

rifice for Baal'. Here the second _1 does indeed refer to the deity

receiving the sacrifice, but the first 1^ is the indicator of owner-

p
ship. This interpretation is the most probable one for the Krt

text in question because of 14(Krt).2.?6 where Krt is clearly

enjoined to offer sacrifice to II.

Another interpretation is, however, possible: 'a sacrifice

for (= in favor of) Krt'. This rendering is made feasible by

RÊ 24.323: dbfrt byy bn sry 1 cjt d bqbr 'the sacrifice of Byy,

son of Sry, for c£t who is in the graveHere, as in the Krt

text, the construction is nominal. Understood in this fashion,

the Krt text would mean that at the upcoming feast sacrifices

would be offered (to deities) in favor of Krt.

dmc b (p. 31)

Wolfram Herrmann^ reads text 24(77).43-4$: bgbz tdmc llay

cm lgpn il flpid. He translates: "Auf der gbz-Pflanzen beweinen

sie den L’y mit dem Gütigen, El, der gem'ütvoll ist. " The in­

volved syntax is not impossible for this particular text, but

l"The Text II K from Ras Shamra: A Preliminary Investigation,"

Horae Soederblomianae 1 (1944): 7.

2See also Gen. 32:19 and the discussion of the two passages
by Rainey, PE£ 102 (1970): 49.

^Ugaritica VI, pp. 172-75»

Sfarib und Nikkal und der Preis der Kutarat-Gbttinnen : Ein

kultisch-magischer Text aus Ras Schamra, BZAW 106 (Berlin: Verlag
Alfred Topelmann, 19^8), pp. 22-23»
 142

Herdner disallows the key word tdm^.1

dmc b: I 'shed tears while': wydmc (p. 31)

2
As noted by Gordon, Jd + infinitive is often followed by a

verb introduced by w. The most frequent occurrence of this pheno­

menon is in the idiom bnsi cnh wtphn.

dmc bm: I 'shed tears in' (p. 31)

For the classification of dmc bm, see discussion of bky bm,

above, pp. 118-22.

dc cl: I 'sweat upon' (p. 31)

4
Antoon Schoors provides a brief discussion of this passage

with a partial bibliography.Most interpretations construe cln

as an adverb, 'above' or the like. None of the standard lexica

nor grammars, however, discusses an adverb cln (nor an adverbial end­

ing -n). Though 'above * may be acceptable in translation, the form

cln should probably be parsed as preposition _^1 + expansion -n^ +

3 f.s. pronominal suffix (calen + ha — calenna): 'upon her'. The

form tdc is then parsed either as 3 m.pl. yqtl, with pnm as subject

('upon her, her face sweats') or as 3 f.s. yqtl ('upon her, she

sweats'). The analysis of _^1 as a prepositional form is borne out

1CTA, 1: 103. * * §13.54.

2UT, * 6

^See at phy b, above, pp. 118-22.

"Literary Phrases," in RSP, 1: 68.

^See also W. F. Albright, "Anath and the Dragon," BASOR 84

(1941): 16; Dahood, Psalms I (1966), p. 281; Theodor H. Gaster,
Thespis: Ritual, Myth and Drama in the Ancient Near East (New York:
Henry Schuman. 1950). p. 214; Herdner, RES 1942-43, p. 41.

6See UT, §12.9, and Parker, Studies, pp. 44-45—this example

is not considered by Gordon or Parker.
 143

by the prepositional uses in the preceding parallel lines: bh =

biha and bcdn = bac dan + ha -* bacdanna.

dpr b (p. 31)

22.2(124).16 contains what may either be a word dpr (and if so

it may occupy the position of a verb) or a combination of d + pr

(pr = 12fruit
* ?):

(16) dpr . jlhn . bqcl

bqcl (17) mlkm

drc b: 6(49).5.19 (p. 32)

L. G. Perdue has recently interpreted bym in this passage as

* on the day of . . . * But this interpretation appears to be

very dubious, for two reasons : 1) in the preceding list (cIk pht

X b . . .) and in the parallel list found in 6(49).2.31-35, b

always indicates a concrete place or instrument and is never

temporal; 2) bym * in the day of ... * would require a temporal

substantive of some kind, whereas in this case it is followed by

tn afrd bafak. This phrase, by comparison with 6.1.45-46(49.1.17-18),

tn afcd bbnk * give one of your sons’, should surely be separated

2
from bym and be translated ’give one of your brothers'.

dmr afrr/1 (p. 32)

Some interpret flmr in 17(2 Aqht).1.29 and parallel passages

as a verb. See discussion below, at y§3 1, pp. 164-69»

hbr b: 3(cnt).6.17 (p. 32)

The formulaic unit balp sd rbt kmn is difficult to attach to

"'■"The Making and Destruction of the Golden Calf—A Reply, "

Bjblica 54 (1973): 241-42.
2
See also the note to this passage at ytn b, below, p. 178.
 144

a verb in some cases; the attempt to do so is somewhat artificial

but nonetheless necessary. In text 4(51).8.24 it appears correct

to construe this formula with the other formula hbr wql because of

the preceding context (nrt ilm sps §frrrt / la smm byd mdd ilm mt).

On the basis of 4(51).8.24 I have also construed balp sd rbt kmn

with hbr wql in l(cnt IX).3.2 and 3(cnt).6.17 because of the

separation of balp sd rbt kmn from the verbal element in the pre­

ceding context (ytn pnm tk . . .). It is not impossible, however,

in spite of this separation, that the complete formula in these two

texts is ytn pnm tk . . . balp sd rbt kmn, comparable to the formula

ytn pnm cm ... balp sd rbt kmn (4[513•5•86 ; 18[3 Aqht].1.21).

hbr 1: III 'fall to/at

* (p. 33)

The use of .1 with verbs of obeisance is also attested in Ugari-

tic with kr^ (10[?6].2.18), ngl (2.1C1373.14, 30), and ^11 (fre­

quent with lar§ and lpcn in letters; also with tfrt, seven times

in the Aqht text).

hdy b (p. 33)

If the alternative stichometric analysis of 5(67).6.17-19

discussed below at ydy b (pp. 161-62) turns out to be correct,

there will exist a case of hdy b:

(17) gr . babn (18) ydy . psltm . With a stone he scrat

incisions (?) on his
skin,
bycr (19) yhdy . Ifrm . wdqn With a razor he cuts his
cheeks and beard.

hlk atr: 33(5).24 (p. 33)

Another possibility exists for the interpretation of ajr: it

could be taken as a noun meaning '(holy) place1. Several sugges­

tions for such an interpretation in Ugaritic and other Semitic

 145

languages are given by de Moor, who translates the present passage

as follows: ’’the holy place of the gods he shall enter . . . ”1

A. F. Rainey translates similarly: "(To) the places of the gods

he goes ..."

hlk b: 3(cnt).4.82 (p. 55)

As was the case with hbr b in 5(cnt).6.17,^ the attribution

of the formula balp sd rbt kmn in the present text to a specific

verb is somewhat artificial but necessary. Here I have construed

the formula with hlk (literally: 'Baal sees the going of his

sister through . . . '), rather than with ^n ('from a thousand

"fields" . . . sees'). The deciding factor was the proximity of hlk

to b (balp sd . . » hlk ... ycn).

hlk b: 23(52).27 (p. 34)

This usage would seem to correspond to Hebrew "jo of accompany-

ment".^ The basic meaning * go/come in/among' is quite possibly

maintained in the present case: ' . . . who go surrounded by good

sacrifices' (literally: 'sacrifices of goodness').

hlk b: 87(64).2 (p. 34)

As remarked by Herdner,^ the second lacuna in this text should

perhaps be restored b[t mlk] (i.e., hlk + 0 as in 22.1C125]«3? 8;

21.1C122].1, 9; see discussion of verbs of movement + 0 on pp. 295-98).

^Seasonal Pattern, p. 194.

2"The Kingdom of Ugarit," BA 28 (1965): 119»

^See above, pp. 143-44.

Three examples are listed in BDB: Ex. 10:9; Hos. 5s6; II Chron.
50:6, see p. 251b; consult also Brockelmann, Grundriss, 2: 564-65.

^CTA, 1: 177, n. 2, citing Virolleaud.

 146

hlk cm: III * go/come to

* (p. 35)

The verb hlk to be translated 'come' (indicating motion in the

direction of the speaker) is frequent in biblical Hebrew.

him bn: III * strike between

* (p. 35)

It is quite possible that bn + part of body in the two expres­

sions bn ydm and bn cnm has taken on independent lexical status.

Cassuto2 has suggested that bn cnm means * upper part of the head
* .

As for bn ydm, there has been some discussion as to whether it

refers to the chest or to the back. The translation 'between the

hands'for bn ydm seems to imply a meaning 'chest'. In favor of

this interpretation is Arabic bayna yadani 'before'The most

recent discussion of bn ydm = 'upper back' (i.e., * between the

5
shoulders') of which I am aware is by S. E. Loewenstamm.

hpk 1: III 'turn against

* : RS 24.24? (p. 36)

Only extracts of RS 24.247, a series of omens based on ab­

normal births, have been published by C. Virolleaud, who points

out the close affinity of this text to the Akkadian summa izbu
n
omen series. The reading yhpk must be correct though Virolleaud

-t-E.g., Num. 22:16 (= hlk 31). 2Anath, p. 151-

-^E.g., R. T. O'Callaghan, "The Word ktp in Ugaritic and Egypto-

Canaanite Mythology," Orientalia n.s. 21 (1952/: 41; van Zijl, Baal, p. 37.

^See Brockelmann, Grundriss, 2: 413; C. H. Gordon, "Vergil and

the Near East," Ugaritica VI, p. 283. The latter cites the Arabic
phrase as parallel to Latin manus inter but does not refer to the
Ugaritic idiom.
^"Grenzgebiete ugaritischer Sprach- und Stilvergleichung: Heb-
raisch des zweiten Tempels, Mittelhebraisch, Griechisch," UF 3(1971): 96-97»

$"Remarques sur quelques inscriptions ougaritiques," GLECS 10

(1964): 59-60.

7So Gordon, UT, §19.1002.

 147

transcribed ynpk. The n may be a pure typist's error or it may

reflect a lapse on the part of the editor who was interpreting the

present form as an N-stem of hpk. In any case, the best parallels

to what seems to be the correct meaning of this omen apodosis are

to be found in the Hebrew Niphal (compare Is. 6?:10 wayyêhâpëk lâhem

lS3ôyêb 'he became their enemy'—see also Job 30:21).

hry bm (p. 36)

23(52).51 bm , nsq . w hr ,
bfrbq . bmbmt .
tqtLngn]^

This difficult text (paralleled in line 56 and partially, perhaps,

in 1?[2 Aqht].1.40-41) has recently been translated by Cross: "As

they kiss they conceive, As they embrace, they are made pregnant,
The two travail and give birth . . . "1 This syntax seems to be

paralleled in 14(Krt).1.31-32 bm bky wysn / bdmch nhmmt 'While

crying he goes to sleep, While shedding tears he slumbers' (bm +

verbal noun + w + infinitive [?] / b + verbal noun + second verbal

noun in feminine form).

wby/wtfr cm: III 'hurry to' (?) (p. 36)

By its parallel, Ism 'run', the meaning of the form twtfc is

fairly clear, but the root is less clear (wtfr, why, and ptfa are the
2
main possibilities).

wpj btk: III 'spit into' (p. 36)

For the purposes of the present attempt at classification, the

question is whether wpj btk is to be classed as I * spit (while) in

the assembly' or as III 'spit into the assembly'.

“^Canaanite Myth, p. 24. ^See Gordon, UT, §19.813»

 148

Some comparable expressions are:

IQS VII 13 w3ys 3sr yrwq 31 twk mwsb hrbym

' , . . and as for the man who spits in(to) the assembly
of the Many . . . '

This section of the Rule refers to actions both within and without

the assembly; however it seems more likely that the reference is to

a member of the assembly spitting during a session, than that it

refers to the action of a passer-by.

Josephus% Jewish Wars II 147 kai to ptusai de els mésous ë to

dexion méros phulassontai

(Loeb) "They [the Essenes] are careful not to spit into the
midst of the company or to the right ..."

Talmud Babli, Berachot III 5 (24b) hrq btpltw k3ylw rq bpny hmlk

•One who spits during his prayer is like one who spits
before the king'.1

The uses of btk, 31 twk, and els mésous all seem to refer to the
2
movement of the spittle, wherever the spitter may have been.

These expressions would thus be put in class III. The last quoted

examples, btpltw, bpny hmlk, and bpny frbyrw, on the other hand,

indicate the paraphrase * while praying, in the presence of, etc.1

(i.e., class I).

zd 1: III 'provide food for' (p. 36)

The history of this interpretation of .zd is treated by Herrmann.

1See also Talmud Babli, Hagiga 5a hrq bpny frbyrw 'who spits in
his neighbor's presence'.

2According to the usages listed by Jastrow (Marcus Jastrow,

A Dictionary of the Targumim, the Talmud Babli and Yerushalmi, and the
Midrashic Literature [Brooklyn: P. Shalom Pub. Inc., 1967 (reprint
edition)], pp. 1497-98) the object of the verb rqq/rwq. 'spit' is
regularly indicated by Id in the sense ' spit upon'.

5BZAW 106 (1968): 7-8.

 149

zg 1: III 'make a sound to' (p. 36)

Once again it is the root behind z£ which poses the principal

difficulty. Gordon^ refers to Ethiopie tazâwSca 'chat'; Aist-

leitner2 to Arab, zagâ 'weinen, schreien'; Driver^ to Arab, zagzaga

'speak faintly'; Ginsberg

** to Arab, zgd 'groan loudly
* (of a camel)

and to zgzg 'speak faintly' (preferring the former); Virolleaud^

compares Arab, zgzg * parler a voix basse', as well as zgm and zgd

'gémir, grogner
* ; more recently J. C. de Moor has spoken of "the

Semitic root zgy/zgg" (without elaboration). The particular root

in question may not, of course, be directly identified with any of

these, but be simply a member of the —zg— family by which various

vocal sounds are denoted.

It is very unlikely that there is an occurrence of this root

7
with b in 612.1.7 clm , tzg . bgb . @pn. Loren Fisher derives the

form tzg from the root —zg—, but takes it as a nominal formation.

It has been pointed out by de Moor, however, that the same word is

used in Hurrian ritual texts and is most probably, therefore, a

g
Hurrian loan-word.

bdy b: 19(1 Aqht).2.1O6 (p. 37)

The root ÿ.dy appears frequently in the Aqht text, but the idiom

1UT, §19.826. 2WUS, §887. 5CML» p. 149, n. 16

^Legend, p. 39. Syria 23 (l942-43): 140.

^"Studies in the New Alphabetic Texts from Ras Shamra II,1 .HF 2
(1970): 320.
^"A New Ritual Calendar from Ugarit," HTR 63 (1970): 486.

8UF 2 (1970): 320.

 150

frdy b restored here is not attested elsewhere.

hmm b (p. 37)

See note on hry bm (above, p. 147).

hnn Ipn: I 'seek mercy (while) before' (p. 37)

The construction frnn lpn appears to be semantically parallel to

2
brk lpn. The concept of the former is something like: 'say

words of the kind to acquire mercy for me (while you are) before

the king'. The verbal explanation is supported by such Hebrew

expressions as sâmactî 3et-tëpillâtëkâ wë3et-tëfrinnâtëkâ 3Sser

hitfrannantâ lëpânay 'I have heard your prayer and your plea for

mercy which you have uttered before me . . . ' (I Kings 9:3), and

wëhitpalëlû wëhitfrannënu lëpànêkâ babbayit hazzeh 'and they pray

and utter pleas for mercy before you in this house

* (II Chron.

6:24). The expressions ntn fan qdm (KAI 217:7-8) and ntn frn lcn

(KAI 10:9-10) seem to have less verbal connotations.^

bsp 1: 19(1 Aqht).2.51 (p. 37)

Several authors have interpreted frsp as 'scoop up, gather

(water)': Philippe Reymond,Gevirtz,^ Gray,Ulf Oldenburg,?

^See Herdner, OTA, 1: 89.

^See discussion of brk 1, above, 129-34.

^Ina Willi-Plein, "Jjn: Ein llbersetzungsproblem: Gedanken zu

Sach. XII 10," VT 23 (1973): 90-99, esp. p. 96.
^"Un tesson pour 'ramasser
* de l’eau a la mare (Esaie xxx, 14),"
VT 7 (1957): 203-7.

^Patterns, p. 36 ("draw").

^Legacy, p. 44; KRT Text, p. 38.

?The Conflict Between El and Bacal in Canaanite Religion, Supplé­

menta ad Numen, altera series, Dissertationes ad Historian Religionum
Pertinentes (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1969), p. 89 ("draw").
 151
de Moor,1 and L. Delekat.2* I am not sure, though, that the 1_ must

indicate whence the water is gathered (Reymond, Gray, Delekat). Nor

is the other possibility envisaged by Reymond (* asperger sur')5 the

only alternative. The frequent use of intentional 1 presents the

possibility of translating ’she scoops up/gathers dew for the bar­

ley’ (i.e., Pgt is the one responsible for making sure that dew

falls on the barley).

fodw b: 3(cnt).5.3O (p. 37)

For the classification of fadw b, see notes on smb b and smb

m(n).4 In the glossary of UT5 Gordon lists this passage under his

bdw
entry * • rejoice’. In Ugaritic Handbook and Ugaritic Manual^ he

n 8
read (a/t!)hdhm; in UT he reads t^dhm. Aistleitner's entry is

simply ^d without translation, but it suggests the reading t(?)fcdhm

Q
in the passage under discussion. Stanislav Segert would emend to
tfodhm. Dahood has worked with the reading tbd-,1 but has recently

acceded to Herdner’s reading ahd-, though he goes on to claim that

”... this does not seem to effect the smb // fadw parallelism.”15

Seasonal Pattern, p. 97.

2”Zum ugaritischen Verbum,” UF 4 (1972): 19.

5See also, for this interpretation, Gordon, UT, §19.884; Cross,

Canaanite Myth, p. 154, n. 36.
\elow, p. 239. 5§19.933 * p. 189 in both.
60n

7On p. 254. 8WUS , §1006.

* 10 11

$”Die Schreibfehler in den ugaritischen literarischen Keil-

schrifttexten in Anschluss an das textkritische Hilfsbuch von Friedrich
Delitzsch klassifiziert, ” BZAW 77 (1958) *• 202.

10Biblica 30 (1969): 78; De Mari a Qumrân (1969), p. 30.

11RSP, is 354. 12CTA, Is 19. 15RSP« Is 354.

 152

This may be true, but one would wish an analysis of the form

lining it up with tsmfo.

bt3 b/1: 32(2).14-15 (p. 38)

This entire text is still the object of debate, not only as to

matters of lexicographical and syntactical detail, but as to over­

all meaning, and even as to the genre to which it belongs. I cannot

follow Adrianus van Seims*
* recent "desacralization" of the text^ in

which he considers that bt3 should simply mean ’compensate

.
* There

are too many terms in the text which elsewhere in Ugaritic or in

Hebrew have cultic and/or moral connotations (sqrb, s, bt3« dbfr, and

the last two lines of each section ytsi lab bn il . . .)2 to remove

it from the cultic sphere as much as van Seims does (he considers

only the last two lines of each section to refer to a sacrifice to

the gods, whereas the remaining part lists gifts brought to the

Ugaritians by former oppressors). Van Seims is correct, in my

opinion, in seeing that the key to the text lies in the word which

appears as wnpy or as ypk(m/n), but his identification of the word

with a root npy * weave * breaks down on the phrase usn ypkm ld[b]bm

wl Ie (line 24), which he translates: "He will weave (it) for you

as a present for slaughterings and for offerings.However logical

it may be that former enemies should offer woven goods to the

Ugaritians, it is impossible that those woven goods could be used

as "slaughtered" offerings to the deities (does he mean that they

1"CTA 32: A Prophetic Liturgy," UF 3 (1971): 235-48.

^See Manfred Weippert, "Ein ugaritischer Beleg für das Land

*Qadi’ der agyptischen Texte?," ZDPV 85 (19&9): ^7»

5UF 3 (1971): 242.

 153

are used to purchase slaughtered offerings, or has he watered down

dbb to mean simply 1*present1 ?).

Unfortunately, none of the other solutions proposed for the key

words wnpy and ypk(m/n) really fills the bill, either. Since usn

ypkm of line 24 occupies the slot of utfctu in lines 6 and 8* (re­

stored from utfotin in lines 11 and 14), we would expect one of the

two words to be a verb and not both nouns.Secondly, we would

expect the two words to somehow contain the cultic remedy for the

, since the sections containing them end the tablet.

bfc34 Thus André
2
Caquot's suggestion to translate "votre beauté a changé," while

* , does not reflect the expected

perhaps indicating the result of bt

remedy. John Gray's translation "may a gift effect you atonement"^

is then very appealing, but the only etymology he can claim is Arab.

wpy. An imposing solution is still outstanding.

Incidently, both Caquot^ and Gray'’ analyze ulp in this same text

a.s u. + 1, + jd = Hebrew ûlëpî and translate 'in the manner of or

'vis-à-vis'. If correct this would furnish a further usage of bt3

with a prepositional phrase. The objection may be raised, however,

that taking u=. as the conjunction wa- -» u=. (as is required by the

Hebrew parallel, it cannot be Hebrew 'or') finds no good parallel

in Ugaritic. The case of u^ = 'and' in 64(118).6 claimed by Gordon^

"^"Compare UT, §19.1128, usn ypkm = "your beautiful gift."

^"Un sacrifice expiatoire a Ras Shamra," RHPR 42 (1962): 208.

^"Social Aspects of Canaanite Religion," SVT 15 (1966): 188.

4rhpr 42, p. 208. 5syr 15, p. 187.

&UT, §19.5, p. 548; the word is umlk (I). In this paragraph

Gordon apparently proposes that u^ is a separate conjunction and not
the result of a contraction of wa-.
 154

as an example of the phenomenon must be viewed as an inconsistency

since he had already abandoned the reading in his transliteration

of the text in question.All other cases of u=. are either clearly

2
the conjunction ’or' or may be legitimately analyzed so.

hta b: 19(1 Aqht). 5.151 (p. 58)

Both the reading and the interpretation of this passage are

unclear. Herdner^ inserts no question marks regarding the reading

tsbtann, though Virolleaud transliterated tsbtn^nn.2* Caster^

proposed not a new reading but a correction to tsfatnn, basing his

correction on 14(Krt).5.154 ybt whim "Krt awoke and ('twas) a dream."

The Aqht passage, however, does clearly have the aleph, and unless
is is deleted with Gaster or taken as a mater lectionis with Gordon,&

the form has to be parsed as a 5-stem of the root bt

* with energic

-n- and 5 m.s. suffix (tasabfri3anCrJ annu). If this analysis is

correct, then the S-stem may be assumed to mean, not 'cause to sin'

as the causative stem frequently means in Hebrew, but 'do harm to'

(cf. NB buttu 'damage, injure'). In this interpretation Danil is

not worried about the birds 'awakening' his dead son, but rather

about them harming his cadaver. Concern for the cadaver seems more

consonant with ancient thought patterns regarding proper burial than

^On p. 190 (there he transliterated wmlk).

^Since ulp is repeated, one might attempt to rescue the position

just criticized by saying that u=. is really correlative u- . . . u- (for
correlative u- see UT, §§12.2; 19.108) and thus corresponds etymologi­
cally to Hebrew 3o. This interpretation of ulp is not impossible, but
by loosening its ties with Hebrew ûlëpî one loses the primary compar­
ative evidence for the existence of the idiom.

^CTA, 1: 90 (correct tsbtann to tsbtann)« Panel, p. 165.

Thespis, p. 455. ^UT, §§9.14, 38; 19.951.

 155

a concern for awakening someone from death or disturbing someone

who is dead.l

bsr bn: 6(49).2.18 (p. 38)

Could bn in this text be 'sons' (bn = bbn), or perhaps an ex­

tended form of b (b + n)? U. Cassuto, in any case, translates bn

2
here as 'from'.

fit3 b: I 'smite' -* 'be destroyed in

* (?) (p. 39)

The problems of the two texts represented in this idiom have

been discussed, from the point of view of 6(49).2.22-23, by van

Zijl^ who furnishes bibliographical particulars. Two specific

problems must be treated here in connection with the idiom fat b:

1) the meaning and etymology of &t? ; 2) the grammatical analysis

of bjbr(n ?).

As to bt3, two principal appeals are made, one to Arabic

4
bata3a, 'hold back', VUIth Form 'hide, be afraid, carry away',
the other to Akkadian faatu 'smite'. W. F. Albright^ held that

the verbs in both Akkadian and Arabic (VIII th Form) mean 'break

up, smash, destroy'. The primary meaning of the verb in Akkadian,

however, is 'smite' since various diseases may be the subject of

1It is doubtful that birds could do what the artful necromancer

did to Samuel (I Sam. 28:13-14).

2"Baal and Mot in the Ugaritic Texts," IEJ 12 (1962): 81 (Eng­

lish translation of an article published in BIES 9 [1942]: 45-51).

^Baal, pp. 201-3.

^The latter is presumably the basis of Gray's translation,

"He was carried off" (Legacy, p. 68).

^"Two Letters from Ugarit (Ras Shamrah)," BASOR 82 (1941): 48.

 156

the verb as well as weapons. One could perhaps posit an original

, which could be used of diseases and weapons,

meaning ’destroy12

but (1) both often smite without destroying, and (2) this meaning

hardly squares with the treatments of hata3*

a in the standard Arabic

lexica which (pace Albright) give as the primary meaning one of

’holding back’, from which all the VUIth Form usages can be more
or less directly derived.^

The only other occurrence of the root fat3 in Ugaritic is in

text 55(54).7, 8, 10, a letter which seems to refer to the ravages

of pestilence (yd ilm). This text, then, would be another case of

ht3 referring to the effects of disease.

I believe that it is going much too far to claim that ”... the

verb fat3 ’to crush’ or ’to vanquish’ is now well established in Ug-
2
aritic and Phoenician and probably occurs in Hebrew.” In the only

Phoenician example the root is two-thirds restored, only the aleph

being extant.^ Moreover, the Hebrew example (Hab. 5:7) requires new

verse division and repointing, and must thus still be classed as

£t
conjectural. If I have translated ’destroyed’ it is an attempt to

find a common denominator for what diseases do as well as for what

happens to a small animal in a monster’s gullet.

As for parsing the form, because of the sequence &tD hw Gordon^

^The explanation of ihtata3a by inqamaca in the Lisan al-cArab

quoted by Albright certainly means ’be subjugated’ (i.e., it is a sem­
antic development of ’hold back’), not ’be broken up’.
2
Van Zijl, Baal, p. 201.
^See W. F. Albright, ’’The So-called Enigmatic Inscription from
Byblus,” BASOR 116 (1949): 12-14.
^Albright, BASOR 82 (1941): 48-49. 5UT, §15.57.
 157

has included it in his list of infinitives absolute. Brian Peck-

ham^ has concluded that it is an infinitive absolute of the Qal

2
passive stem. I believe that parsing it as a Qal passive parti­

ciple would find better parallels (the problem does not arise, of

course, with tfotan, which is a yqtl form).

The problem of b£br(n ?): M. Dahood proposed in 1955^ to read

btbrnqnh as bjbr ntcnh and to translate "be crushed by the grinding

of his teeth," taking ntcnh as a noun from a root nte and bjbr as
4
preposition plus infinitive construct. Two problems are immed­

iately evident: 1) reading n(20)tcnh, with only the first letter

of the word written in one line and the other letters in the fol­

lowing line v’ 2) taking _b + infinitive as indicating the agent of

a passive verb ("crushed by the grinding ..."); normally the _b

with a passive verb should not indicate agent.

Dahood
* s solution is tempting despite the orthographic dif­

ficulty, but I would alter his rendition of b as "by," and would

prefer to see the Jb as locative (* destroyed in his crushing fangs’).

l"The Nora Inscription," Orientalia n.s. 41 (1972): 461.

See Paul Jotion, Grammaire de l’hébreu biblique (Rome: Ponti-

ficium Institutum Biblicum^ 1923 [corrected ed., 1965^0» §58c.

3"The Etymology of MaltacSt (Ps 58, 7),” CB£ 17 (1955): 300-3.

4
Dahood has repeatedly argued for this reading since 1955, but
curiously there is no entry p/4it^ in RSP, vol. 1, though Dahood
equates ntc with Hebrew malté ot ( // pimo) in Ps. 58:7.
5
Other seeming examples of this orthographic practice in text
4(51) have a word divider before the last letter of the first line of
the sequence: .7.25-26, 55-56; .8.25-26, 34—35; the fact that the n
of qny/tcny is omitted by scribal error in 6(49).2.23 favors neither
reading.
&See above, on brk 1, pp. 129-34; Brockelmann, Grundriss, 2:
142-44.
 158

Another possibility would be to see the as temporal ('be des­

troyed when his fangs crush'), but this is made unlikely by the

parallel bph (locative). Yet another alternative would be to go

back to the Arabic etymology of fat*

3*
2 6
:

'He must take you like a lamb in his mouth,

Like a ewe-lamb you must be held fast in his crushing
fangs.'

frt3 b: 6(49).2.23: 'like' (p. 39)

Four solutions have been proposed for the lack of a comparative

k before imr: 1) supply the k:1 <k>imr; 2) double-duty preposition;£

%
3) single writing of a double consonant;^ 4) the original text was
4
an kimr (misplaced word divider).

tbb b (p. 39)

23(52).14 is frequently claimed as an example of tbfa b, with

the meaning 'cook in'? The reading itself, however, is disallowed

6 7
in CTA: tb . (?)[g]d . bfelb . // annfr bfamat. In a note, Miss

Herdner suggests the possibility of restoring the verb as tb<&> .

[g]d. But, beyond the difficulty of the reading itself, can tbfa

mean 'cook'?° It surely does not mean 'cook', as has been claimed

Regent, BZAW 77 (1958) : 198; Herdner, CTA, 1: 40.

2M. Dahood, "Ugaritic-Hebrew Syntax and Style," ÜF 1 (1969): 28.

^Wilfred G. E. Watson, "More on Shared Consonants," Biblica 52

(1971): 46.
\ranz Rosenthal, "Die Parallelstellen in den Texten von
Ugarit," Orientalia n.s. 8 (1939): 218.

^See most recently Schoors, RSP, 1: 29-32.

6CTA, 1: 98. 7Ibid., n. 9.

O "V
The alleged Hebrew parallels usually quoted have bsl--Ex.
23:19; 34:26; Dt. 14:21.
 159

by Gordon,1 in 4(51).6.40 and 22.2(124).12 where the parallel sql

S-stem of qll) 'fell' shows that 'slaughtering

* is meant and not

* cooking
* . It is methodologically unsound to propose the meaning

*
•cook in other Ugaritic passages where tbb does not have a paral­

lel or is only paralleled by ’eat’ or the like, which could follow

either slaughtering or cooking.

*
The meaning ’slaughter is borne out by Hebrew tâbab ‘slaughter
*

and Akkadian fcabafau 'slaughter

.
* Arabic jababa * cook
* seems to be

the best comparative evidence for the usual translation of 23(52).14,

but in all likelihood this is a semantic development from the mean­

ing ’slaughter
.
* Of course, if the Ugaritic text were complete,

the parallel with Hebrew bsl would be an indicator for tbb = * cook
* .

But because the text lacks the & of tbfa, the £ of £d, and no evi­

dence for the meaning of annb has yet been forthcoming, the only

basis for a connection with the biblical injunction against cooking

a kid in its mother’s milk is the Ugaritic bib /fynat (the Hebrew

text of the above quoted passages2 has bib in all three instances).

tbb b: 1153 (p. 39)

Text 1153 is very difficult, with few word dividers, and the

above treatment cannot lay claim to any degree of certainty.

'Slaughter
* seems preferable as a translation of tbb because in

text 1154 §tqn is clearly described as offering a sacrifice to

Resep and there the verb used is dbb. The slaughtering may have

been some type of preparation for a sacrifice or a sacral feast

since tbb is regularly used in the poetic texts to describe meal

1UT, §19.1029. 2Note 8, p. 158.

 160

preparations for the deities (though this itself is probably a

reflection of purely secular activities among humans). The concrete

situation depicted in the text is not clear to me : Why is §tqn

slaughtering animals he has provided himself? Or does ytn here im­

ply selling? If the * slaughter

* is sacrificial in nature, §tqn

could perhaps be a priest (cf. 1154) desacralizing flocks he has

sold for the next owner and superintending the sacrifices offered

during the period of shearing. On the other hand, the slaughtering

of animals could be secular: compare Nabal's practice of slaughter­

ing his own animals for his shearers (I Sam. 25:11)•

bbz czm is the most enigmatic portion of the text. Why booty

of goats? If czm does indeed mean 'goats' here, then js is an in­

dividual member of the flock of goats as in Num. 15:11; Dt. 14:4.

'Booty' may not be the best translation of bz: according to Eze.

54:8, 22, baz denotes animals taken (unrightfully) by shepherds

for their own food.^ Another conjecture might be offered: the

parallel bbz // bkl ygz seems to indicate that bz is an unidenti­

fied act carried out in conjunction with shearing goats' hair.

trd b: J(cnt).4.45 (p. 40)

The subject of trd is not clear. Van ZijP provides a recent

discussion with bibliography. He analyzes trd as an active parti­

ciple, 'the one who expels', and seems to see it as the direct

"'’There is a coincidence of terms in the Arabic proverb man azz

bazz 'to the winner the spoil', but I fail to see its relevance for the
present text.
2As regards gzz used for shearing goats' hair, compare it use
for §5an 'flock of sheep or goats' in biblical Hebrew; for goats in
Akkadian usage see CAD, 5: 59-60.

•^Baal, pp. 64-65.

 161

object of imtbs *
1 will destroy' of line 43. Others interpret £rd

as a verb construed with a new subject, indefinite, in an inter­

rogative sentence: "Is someone driving Baal from the heights of

Sapân . . . Cassuto takes Baal as the subject, but interprets

the verb as in a passive mood: "Has Baal been driven from the

2
heights of the North ... ?"

ybl 1: 64(118).19 (p. 40)

The other recipients of goods in this text are indicated by 1.,

3
though the verb ybl is not repeated.

ydy b: 5(67).6.17-18 (p. 41)

Somewhat of a consensus seems to have been reached in recent

years that ydy here should be derived from a root 'cut' (Arab.

wadâ [= wdy] 'tear, scratch'),

** rather than from nd% 'cast, set'.

Regarding the stichometric division, rather than the 5/2/5

division adopted here (which according to my count has a 8/7/9

syallable count), one might analyze the passage as a 4/4 bi-colon:

(17) gr . babn (18) ydy . psltm . With a stone he scratches

incisions (?) on his
skin,
bycr (19) yhdy . Ifrm . wdqn With a razor he cuts his
“4 4 cheeks and beard.

Dahood has recently suggested^ that the word ££, which is

Si. Dijkstra, "A Note on CTA 5= D.45-46," UF 2 (1970): 554.

2Anath, pp. 95, 155. ^ee Parker, Studies, p. 51.

\istleitner, VUS, §1145; Kjell Aartun, "Beitrage zum ugarit-

ischenLexikon," WO 4 71967-68): 286; T. L. Fenton, "Ugaritica-Bxblica,
UF 1 (1969): 69; de Moor, Seasonal Pattern, p. 195; G« «• Driver,
"Ûgaritic and Hebrew Words," Ugaritica VI, p. 185.

^Driver, CML, p. 157.

^RSP, i: 135; Orientalia n.s. 41 (1972): 155»

 162

usually taken as the direct object of be attached to the pre­

ceding line (mizrtm gr = 'a double girdle of leather

).
* This ana­

lysis leads to the following division and translation:

babn ydy psltm "With a stone he cuts his psltm

(sidelocks ?),
bycr yhdy lb® wdqn With a blade he scores his cheeks
and chin."

This suggestion, whatever other merits it may have, seems to founder

on the consideration that tablet 6(62) begins, after l.bcl, with the

word £T and then continues the above text. Though lines are fairly

frequently broken from column to column, it would be very surprising

to have not only a line broken, but a construct chain broken from

tablet to tablet. Nor could Dahood argue that the scribe of 6(62)

was observing a traditional order of lines, since the number of words

per line varies from tablet 5(67) to 6(62).

It might be added that if has been correctly identified with

Hebrew tacar 'razor

,
* derived by BDB and KB from the root 3rh 'bare
,
*

then the Ugaritic form is another %% preformative noun.

1The identification of ycr with tacar is made explicitly by

Aistleitner, WUS, §2097, and by Dahood, Orientalia n.s. 41 (1972J: 157-

20n this subject see Gesenius

* Hebrew Grammar, ed. E. Kautzsch,
ed. and trans. A. E. Cowley (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1910 L2d Eng.
ed.]), §85 d; Ludwig Koehler, "Jod als hebraisches Nominalprafix,
WO 1 (1950): 404-5 : idem, "Problems in the Study of the Language o

ï s.
sich,'" WO 5T1966): 182; Rudolph Meyer, Hebraische Grammatik, vol. 2,

John Knox Press, 1970), pp. 60-61; idem, Histoire ancienne d Israel des
origines à l'installation en Canaan (Pans: Librairie Lecoffre and
--- ---- - ---et1971),
J. Gabalda Cie., p. 328.
 163

y§3 bd . . . 1: 147(90).2, 3-4 (pp. 42, 43)

On the analogy of yg3 b 'go forth from', yg3 bd is inter­

preted as depicting the movement of the copper leaving Smmn's

hands. Thus the two 1's refer, one to the intended purpose of

the copper (largmn), the other to its destination within the

palace (inskm). The situation seems to be that Smmn delivered

copper as the tribute contribution of an unnamed town or guild

to the palace; within the palace the copper was entrusted to the

royal metal-workers for reworking. I have discussed this text

at length in an article to appear in Ugarit-Forschungen, vol. 6.

yg3 b/btk; III 'go forth to' (?) : 12(75).1.20-21 (p- ^3)

As may be seen from the listing under yg b class II, the idiom

normally is to be translated 'go out from'. This text looks like

an example of y§3 b/btk = 'go out in(to)'. Unfortunately, the text

itself is obscure, and it may have to be interpreted otherwise.

2 interpreted the b as 'from', but btk in line 21 as

C. Virolleaud1

'in'. Marvin H. Pope also translates: "... go forth from Ain

to the midst / To the midst of the desert Ilsiy . . . Arvid S.

Kapelrud has recently discussed the problem of mdlbr (written mlbr).

1See A. van Seims, "Yammu's Dethronement by Baal: An Attempt to

Reconstruct Texts UT 129, 137 and 68," UF 2 (1970)• 261.

2"Les chasses de Baal: Poeme de Ras-Shamra," Syria 16 (1935)•

250.
^Review of Gray, Legacy, in JSS 11 (1966): 234; see also
Gordon, UT, §19.193*
^"Baal and the Devourers," Ugaritica VI, pp. 322-23. Herdner
(CTA, 1:54) corrects to mdlbr. Segert (BZAW 77 [1958]: 205) has con­
sidered the possibility that the form mlbr is a dialectical variant
of mdbr.
 164

y§3* 1: 12(75).1.1^. 16 (p- ^5)

The 1* s of Itls and 1 dingy, unclear because of the general ob­

scurity of the text and particularly that of the words tls and
.... . 1
dmgy, may have to be interpreted as vocative.

y6a 1; 17(2 Aqht).1.28-29 (p. 43)

This text is one of the long-standing cruxes of Ugaritic

studies. The stichometric division given here was first pro­

posed, to my knowledge, by A. Herdner in 1938, and has been vir­

tually assured by Matitiahu Tsevat’s recent identification of ztr

in line 28 with Hittite sittar(i)- 'votive (sun) disk'.5 I am

unconvinced, however, by the rendering proposed by Albright for

these lines :

"Who frees his spirit from the underworld,

from the dust (death) keeps his footsteps.'

The biggest problem is conceptual: the text concerns a son's duty

toward his father. If he is 'freeing' his spirit from the under­

world the father must be dead. But if he is keeping 'his' footsteps

from the dust (= death), to whom does 'his' refer? It cannot be the

father, for he is already dead. And it should not be the son, for

that would require a shift from the son's duties toward his father

Iso Gordon, Ugaritic Literature, p. 53; Kapelrud, Ugaritica VI,

Marriage and Family Life in Ugaritic Literature, Pretoria Oriental

Series 1 (London: Luzac and Co., Ltd., 1954), p. 76.

2res 1938, pp. 126-27; W. F. Albright, apparently unaware of

Herdner's treatment, proposed the same analysis in 19 ( e a
Force' of Moses in the Light of Ugaritic," BASOR 94, p. 35).

^"Traces of Hittite at the Beginning of the Ugaritic Epic of

Aqht," UF ? (1971): 351-52.
%ASOR 94, p. 35.
 165

to activity on his own behalf. Very little advance has been made in

this line of interpretation since 1944, except to realize that dmr

can only with difficulty be taken as a verb meaning * guard, keep'.12

For a proper understanding of the text, at least three major

problems need solution: 1) the elements in parallel; 2) the approp­

riate meaning for the words dmr and ajr; 5) the meaning of yg3 1.
2
The parallelism is only sure at one point : arg // cpr. After

this one sure point there are three analyses possible:

(1) larg msgu qtrh a b c

1 pr dmr ajrh a' b' *c

Who causes his qjr to go forth larg,

Who dmr's his ajr lcpr.

This is basically Albright's analysis.

(2) larg msgu qfcrh a b c

lcpr flinr ajrh ' *
a (c' c' )

Who causes his qjr to go forth larg,

(Who causes) the dmr of his a£r (to go forth) lcpr.

This is the analysis behind Hoffner's treatment :

"... who from the ground causes his qjr to go forth,

from the earth the dmr of his place."5

(?) larg msgu qtrh a b c

1 pr dmr ajrh a' c1 d

Who causes his qfrr to go forth larg,

(Who causes) his dmr (to go forth)lcpr ajrh.

Gordon, UT, §19.727; Aistleitner, WUS, §2717. Harry A. Hoffner,

Jr., has recently interpreted dmr as "guardien" ^'Second Millennium Ante­
cedents to the Hebrew 3oh," JBÏT86 [19672: 387, 393-94). The usefulness
of the standard translations is vitiated by faulty stichometry (Driver,
CML, p. 49; Gordon, Ugaritic Literature, p. 86; Jirku, Kanaanaische
Mythen, p. 116).

2See Dahood, RSP, 1: 124-25, for a list of occurrences and

bibliography.
3JBL 86, p. 387; on p. 394 he interprets c£r as "smokelike
apparition."
 166

This analysis may be seen in van Seims' translation:

"Who sends out to the earth his incense,

To the dust wine after him. "■
*■

As concerns the meaning of jjmr: this is a homograph for two

2
meanings in Ugaritic, one having to do with music, the other with

strength."5 It is probably the latter meaning of 'strength

* which

is present in the Amorite proper name Zimri-X. A verbal form

•'be strong
* is not yet attested in Ugaritic.

Regarding the word ajr, it is best attested to date as a prep­

osition. Gordon's examples^ of ajr as a noun are probably all

prepositional usages. There is yet the much discussed air of

2060.^4, which seems either to mean * place', or else to be a

a
development toward Hebrew *
3*
2
* &ser. 7
7
6

y§3 1 is not attested frequently enough to enable one to come

to a decision regarding its standard meaning. The only other ex­

amples are even more difficult than this. Murray H. Lichtenstein

has pointed out some very rare occurrences of y§3 1 * go out from
*

^Marriage, p. 100.

2602.1.3-4 ysr wyflmr bknr ’he sings and makes music with the
lyre *.
%02.2.9 czk dmrk 'your power, your strength*; compare the
rather frequent use of dmr as a military term (UT, §19*727)•

\ee Rykle Borger, "Weitere ugaritologische Kleinigkeiten,"

UF 1 (1969): 3-4. For the discussion revolving around these meanings,
see S. B. Parker, "Exodus XV 2 Again," VT 21 (1971): 373-79, and Joshua
Blau and Jonas Greenfield, "Ugaritic Glosses," BASOR 200 (1970): 11—12,
with bibliography.

^Gf. van Seims’ translation, above, this page.

6UT, §19.424.

7 See Rainey, UF 3 (1971): 160-62 (with references).

 167

in biblical Hebrew and Akkadian. There is, then, some non-Ugaritic

evidence for the idiom yg3 1 'go forth from', but it is hardly con­

straining. Ugaritic text 147(90).3-4, on the other hand, seems to

provide an instance of yg3 1 'go/come forth to'. The regular He­

brew expression for 'go forth to' is yg3 Dl.

The philological and literary evidence for the solution of this

difficult passage is thus indecisive. With van Seims2 I believe

that the passage makes good sense when interpreted as reflecting

the cultic activities carried out by a son for, or in place of, his

father. There are three negative remarks to be made about van

Seims' analysis, however: 1) I have been unable to find any evi­

dence for a causative form of yg3 meaning 'offer', whether used for

incense or for any other cultic object; 2) dmr, which could con­

ceivably be a parallel term to qtr if it were an item used in the

cult, may perhaps be identified with Hebrew semer since the latter

means both 'lees' and 'wine left undisturbed on its lees', but it

would involve a third homographie form of dmr, and one may hesitate
IJ,
to go that far, at least until further evidence appears; 3) under­

1"Psalm 68:7 Revisited," JANES 4 (1972): 99, n. 23. It should

be observed that the construction in Ps. 68:21, the one biblical Hebrew
example of yg3 1 cited by Lichtenstein, is nominal and the underlying
construction is [hâyu] togâ3ot lammâwet '[there is] escape for [the case
of] death'. I do not wish to discount the example entirely, however,
since nominal formations frequently take the same preposition as the
corresponding purely verbal formation.

Carriage , pp. 100-2; his translation of this passage is cited

above, p. 166.

^Gray (Legacy, p. 110 and n. 1) accepts van Seims' position,

interpreting the passage as referring to funerary offerings. He trans­
lates $jmr as "wine left to settle on the lees."
Sœ lists no cognate for Hebrew semer (p. 994).
 168

standing qtr and flmr as 12incense

* and * wine
* , van Seims is obliged

to make them both go out ’to the earth

* . This is acceptable for

the wine, but incense would hardly go out *

to the earth in the

same sense as wine.1 Moreover, if the reference is to wine being

2
poured out on or into the father's grave, why is one of the several

verbs for * pour

* used rather than the enigmatic y§3*
?

In my translation, sg3 is not interpreted as * offer

* , but lit­

erally, *
* cause to go forth , that is, from the sanctuary mentioned

in the preceding lines. Thus the reference is to two things that

may issue from a sanctuary, the smoke of burning incense and the

sound of cultic song. The 1^ indicates for whom the incense are go­

ing forth. *
As for cpr 'land , see Akkadian eperu. The two lines

may, then, refer to a son carrying on cultic traditions, to a con­

tinuation of rites ensuring divine protection for the land. The

son must see to it that incense is offered regularly to placate

the gods, and that the srm are regularly employed in imploring

divine favor.

It is not impossible that the word ajr is to be construed as a

noun 'place
* (- 'sanctuary
* ?).5 In this case, dmr a&rh would be

1Gray (Legacy, pp. 109-10, n. 4) takes a£r as 'liquid-offering*

on the basis of an Arabic etymology.

2So van Seims, Marriage, p. 102; Gray, Legacy, p. 109.

\s3 1 in biblical Hebrew means ’go forth for*—e.g., Num. 53:54;

Eze. 16:14.
\}AD, 4: 189; meaning 8 = 'territory, soil* (including several
Alalah references).

5See Driver, CML, pp. 49, 154; and see the interpretations of
3sr qds in KAI 277:1 by, for example, J. A. Fitzmyer, "The Phoenician
Inscription from Pyrgi," JAOS 86 (1966)• 288-89; W. Rollig, "Beitrage
zur nordsemitischen Epigraphic (1-4)," WO 5 (1969-70): 110.
 169

interpreted * the song of his place (= sanctuary ?)', and the

reference would be to the son assuring cultic activities for his

living father:

Who causes his incense to go forth for the country,

The song of his place for the land.

y§3 1: 1020.5 (p. 45)

This is one of the most enigmatic of Ugaritic letters. The

line in question seems to be part of the writer's request which

may culminate in asking permission to sieze a person by the name of

Smn.1 Gordon's oblique suggestion2 to connect idn with Ugaritic

udn 'ear' by way of Egyptian is possible: 'My friend, lend me your

ear'On the other hand, the idn could be some concrete or ab­

stract favor which Gnryn is asking Mlkytn to send to him.

y§q b: I 'pour out (while) in': 22.2(124).25 (p. 45)

The understanding of line 25 is affected by that of line 24:

tstyn is parsed as 5 ®» pl» energic yqtl with no direct object ex­

pressed (rather than tst yn 'they drink wine', which is elsewhere

attested written tsty . . . yn [4(51).6.58] or tstn yn [601.1.5])»

The two prepositional phrases, then, indicate where and when the

action takes place. bprc seems to be summing up the enumeration of

'first day, second day . . . ', of lines 21-25, in preparation for

mk bsbc ymm 'behold on the seventh day

* of lines 25-26. The lack

of preposition in tstyn bt ikl is no problem since la is usually

^"Now attested in Ugarit Akkadian as Samunu (see PRU VI, p. 145)»

2ut, §19.87, 88.

-$Cf. Hebrew h3zn. The closest semantic parallel to s§3 3dn in

this sense would be found in Prov. 25:12 hby3 3zn 1 'apply the ears to'
(for this interpretation see Charles Krahmalkov, "A Letter in Ugaritic
Dialect," UNES 28 El 96^ : 265—he refers to hth 3zn 1).
 170

omitted before bt. The words birt lbnn indicate where the rpum

were located when they were doing the drinking (* they pour out

[drink while] in the heart of Lebanon

* ) and not the end-point of

a libation (12they pour out libations into the heart of Lebanon

* ).

ygq b: *
III * pour out into : 160(55)-5 (p- 44)

ygq baph is the regular conclusion to the preparation of a

remedy in the hippiatric texts. Although the vocabulary of these

texts is still elusive, we may surmise, on the basis of the three

roots ygq, dkk, and mss, that the various items used were reduced

to powder (ydk) and/or liquid (ymss) and literally poured into the

horse's nostrils.
Gordon's comparison1 of ygq bap with Hebrew ygq Ipny in Josh.

7:25 is not compelling. Whether the Hebrew passage means 'put into

the presence of
* as Gordon would have it, or simply that the two

hundred shekels of silver plus the gold and the garments were 'poured
o
out' in a heap, is rather immaterial for the Ugaritic hippiatric

texts. Elsewhere^ he claims the the Akkadian and Hittite hippie

**
texts show that the food was only presented to the horse, poured

1UT, §19.1141.

2I.e., is the biblical idiom 'pour out into the presence of

(class III) or 'pour out (while) in the presence of (class I)?

5UT, p. 94, n. 1; see also his review of E. Ebeling, Bruchstücke

einer mittelassyrischen Vorschriftensammlung fur die Akklimatisierung
und Trainierung von Wagenpferden , Deutsche Akademie der Wissenschaften
zu Berlin, Institut fur Orientforschung, Veroffentlichung No. 7 (Berlin:
Akademie-Verlag, 1951), in Orientalia n.s. 22 (1955): 252.

Akkadian texts published by Ebeling (reference in preceding

note); Hittite texts published by Annelies Kammenhuber, Hippologia
Hethitica (Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1961).
 171

out before it so it could eat. There is no doubt that such is the

case in the two corpora of texts mentioned. But it must be pointed

out that both these texts belong to a special genre, what Ebeling

calls instructions for "acclimatizing and training” of horses. The

training aspect is especially clear in the Hittite texts where a

training regime of nearly two hundred days is laid out. The food
offered to these horses is, therefore, their regular food.1 Also,

there is no prepositional complement to the verb 'pour out' in

these texts.

In the Ugaritic texts the situation is one of illness or irregu­

lar behavior and the items which are 'poured out' are not regular

food items, but various plants and drugs. These items are pulver­

ized and/or liquified and poured baph. Now it is not impossible

that they were poured into the horse's regular food and placed before

the animal. But since sick animals eat very little, it is more
2
likely that the reference is to direct application. A. M. Honeyman

has pointed out the parallel found in the writings of the Cartha­

ginian veterinarian Mago: per nares infundatur. Not only is the

expression the same as Ugaritic ygq bap, but the form of the Latin

text is, like the Ugaritic text, that of a prescription: 1) ill­

ness: cum urinae difficultate torqueatur equus; 2) remedy, .sji

priorum pedum ex infimis unguibus delimata scobis in hemina vini;

3) application: per nares infundatur; 4) result: cieri urinam. The

^ee Ebeling, Bruchstucke, p. 54, and Kammenhuber, Hippologia,

pp. 308-13, for the types of food.
2”Varia Punica,” American Journal of Philology 68 (1947): 80-81;
cf. Dahood, Ugaritic-Hebrew Philology (1965)« P» 3
*
 172

Ugaritic text follows this order exactly except that it omits the

result (no. 4).^

The factors militating against Gordon’s interpretation of bap,

then, are: 1) difference in genre between the Akkadian/Hittite

texts and the Ugaritic; 2) lack of prepositional usage in the texts

compared with the Ugaritic; 3) comparability in genre, form, and

prepositional usage between the Latin text cited and the Ugaritic

texts.

It might be added that Marvin Pope, in a communication delivered

at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Religion held in

Chicago, November 9, 1973, made reference to a proverbial saying

known in the Southern United States according to which medicine

must be injected into a horse’s nose by means of a hose to prevent

the horse from snorting and ejecting the remedy. I have not, how­

ever, been able to find a reference to a comparable practice in the

veterinary literature which I have been able to consult.

ygq 1: 4(51).1.28-29 (p. 44)

Here the problem is whether 1 indicates the end product of the

-z 4
gold and silver, or simply the weight of the metals cast. If the

first alternative is accepted, then the 1^ indicates the end-result

1Herdner (Syria 46 [1969]: 132) accepts the Carthaginian text as

”un argument irréfutable” against Gordon’s interpretation and cites
further evidence from Greek sources.

^See Pope’s passing comments in Stinespring , pp. 198, 201.

5So Loewenstamm, UE 3 (1971): 95, n. 6: "er goss Silber zu

tausenden (Geraten), Gold goss er zu zehntausenden (Geraten).”

Si. L. Ginsberg: "He'd melt silver by the thousands (of shekels),

Gold he’d melt by the myriads" (ANET, pe 132); Dahood: "He smelted sil­
ver by thousands (of shekels)" (Psalms III [1970], p. 182).
 173

of the action (class III), whereas in the second, the 1 indicates

the circumstances of the casting (class I).

Hebrew is of no help in the present instance because ygq 1 is

there attested only in the sense of 'pour out, cast for* (Ex. 25:12;

II Kings 4:40-41, etc.). Since there seems to be at present no evi­

dence for Ugaritic ygq 1 = German giessen zu, I prefer to compare it

with other Ugaritic passages where 1. + number = 'by

* the number:

4(51).1.44 dbh rumm Irbbt 'which has wild bulls on it by the ten-

thousands' ; and 14(Krt).2.92 —93 (and .4.180—81) hlk alpm bddy/wlrbt

kmyr * they go by thousands bdd / by ten-thousands kmyr'. For Hebrew

parallels to this use of 1^, see BDB, p. 516.

yrd air: 5(67).6.24 (p. 44)

Van Zijl1 and Schoors2 have furnished recent discussions of this

passage with bibliographical particulars. The passage in context

(lines 22-25) is properly divided and translated as follows

ysu gh wy§h He raises his voice and shouts :

bcl mt mylim Baal is dead! What of the nation?
bn dgn my hmlt Ben Dagan! What of the throng?
ajr bcl ard bar§ I will descend after Baal into the earth.
. 4
This division is much superior to the alternative :

bcl mt
my lim bn dgn
my hmlt arg ajr bcl
ard bars

1Baal, pp. 177, 179-80. 2BSP, ü 38-39-

5The division is Umberto Cassuto's ("sprwt mqr’yt wsprwt

kncnyt," Tarbiz 13 [1941-42]: 208 [last line only]) and Ginsberg’s
(ANET, p. 159).

^Accepted by de Moor, Seasonal Pattern, pp. 190, 194-95—to cite

only one recent work; consult the bibliographies assembled by van Zijl
and de Moor for further references.
 174

yrd b: I 1 bring down (S-stem) with' (p. 44)

Two main interpretations have been given of this line: one

sees srd as the Qal form of a root srd, cognate to Hebrew art
„ „ 1
'serve', the other interprets srd as the S-stem of yrd 'descend'.

Van Zijl adopts the latter interpretation, but his own translation

("Let Baal sink into your offering") borders on the absurd, and his

general interpretation hardly ameliorates the situation: "Baal is

the god of fertility and, as he sinks in the offering, he renders

it fertile. This means that if Keret eats the food, it will make

him fertile too." Although one might conceivably translate 'cause

Baal to come down (from his high dwelling) into your sacrifice . . .'

and interpret along the lines of van Zijl's proposal, I find the ana­

lysis of b as instrumental to be closer to attested ancient Near

Eastern thought patterns : 'Cause Baal to come down (from his high

dwelling) by means of your sacrifice." This is in line with the

concept of placating deities and bringing them over to the suppliant'

side by means of sacrifices. Parallels to this go back at least as

far as the Babylonian flood story with its Old Testament parallels.2

The Hiphi1 of yrd + Jo instrumental is attested in Hebrew (see Josh.

2:15 for a clear example), but there is no example of bringing a

deity down 'by means of

* (b). Of course angels descend by (b) a

1See van Zijl, Baal, p. 280, for one treatment and bibliography
(add to it M. Dahood, "Ugaritic Lexicography," in Melanges Eugene Tie-
serant, vol. 1, Ecriture Sainte-Ancient Orient, Studi e testi 251
[Vatican City: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 1964], p. 98; idem,
Psalms I [1966], p. 49; idem, Psalms II [1968], p. 51; idem, Psalms III
[1970], p. 156; Svi Rin, "Ugaritic-Old Testament Affinities," BZ n.s. 7
[19653‘ 50).

2Gen. 8:21 reafa. hannifrSab; see Alexander Heidel, The Gilgamesh

Epic and Old Testament Parallels (Chicago: University of Chicago Press,
1965 [Phoenix edition, first copyright 1946]), pp. 255-57•
 175

ladder (Gen. 28:12) and YHWH descends in (b) fire (Ex. 19:18), and

in a cloud (Ex. 34:5), but none of these is a really good parallel

to the thought of a human king bringing down a deity by means of

sacrifice. Nonetheless, since we learn from 14(Krt).1.35-56 that

Il came down in (yrd b) a dream, the best interpretation of srd

still appears to be the derivation from yrd.

A further argument against srd = Hebrew srt ’serve' is based on

the guild name jrtnm, which has been interpreted as meaning ser­

vants'. If the root £rt means 'serve', it must be behind srt, and

the possibility that srd means 'serve' is thus eliminated. M. Da-

hood has stated this argument explicitly,1* and others authors have

2
derived the Ugaritic guild name from the root jrt 'serve'.

yrd b: III 'descend into': 24(77).43 (p. 45)

Dahood5 and Jack M. Sasson
** have cited the parallel of this

text with Cant. 6:11 3*

el-ginnat 3ëgôz yâradtj 'I descend to the

nut-grove '.

yrd 1: 5(67).6.13 (p. 45)

yfrb 1 in the last line of this text is not to be understood as

ambiguous (ytb 1 = 'sit from', while yjb 1 regularly means 'sit

upon'), rather there is an ellipsis of yrd as I have tried to in­

dicate in my translation.

1Hebrew-Ugaritic Lexicography XI," Biblica 54 (1973)• 364.

2C. Virolleaud, "Les nouvelles tablettes alphabétiques de Ras

Shamra," CRAI 1952, p. 233; Rainey, Social Stratification, pp. 128,
146; idemTJNES 24 (1965) : 26; Gordon (UT, §19-2755) refers to Virol­
leaud's suggestion without accepting or rejecting it.

^Mélanges Tisserant (1964), p. 98; Biblica 54 (1973): 364.

**"Flora, Fauna and Minerals," RSP, 1: 434.

 176

yr(w ?) b: I * shoot off by/while/among1 (???) (p. 46)

The verb in the passages quoted is not clear. It is here

classified with yrw ’shoot'1 as superior to an early suggestion

of J. Aistleitner to derive it from ntr * spring/start up'.

ysn 1; I '(not) sleep at (the sound of)' (p. 47)

The idiom ysn 1 is not to be classed as indicating cause or

origin (class II), but as indicating circumstances (with the cattle

lowing he could not sleep)/ This particular usage of 1 happens

to have an exact correspondence in English 'for': 'King Pbl

cannot sleep for . . . '

ytn b: I give in/during

* : 4(51).5
70
* (pp« 47-48)

The problem in this text is whether to interpret ytn b as ex­

pressing movement 'from' ('he thunders from the clouds') or place

of action ('he thunders in the clouds’). Both versions are re­

presented in the two recensions of the Hebrew poem found in Ps. 18

(vs. 14 = rcm bsmym) and II Sam. 22 (vs. 14 = rcm n^rnyrn). Methodo­

logically, there is the question whether to interpret Ps. 18:14

(and the Ugaritic passage) according to the min of II Sam. 22:14/

1So Aistleitner, WUS, §1241 (yry); Gordon, UT, §19.1153 (pro­

visionally) .
2"Die Anat-Texte aus Ras Schamra, " ZAW 57 (1939): 196; main­
tained as a possibility in WUS, §1241.

^This derivation was accepted by M. Dahood who analyzed tr as

an infinitive (review of J. Hempel, L. Rost, eds., Von Writ nach ftg-
ran, in Biblica 41 [i960]: 195; idem, Melanges Tisserant [1964], p. 91).

San Dijk (Ezekiel's Prophecy, p. 84) calls the 1 "instrumental”

and compares it with min. "Circumstancial" appears to me a better word.

^So, for example, Dahood, Psalms I (1966), p. 108; idem, RSP,

1: 139, 304; Sarna, JBL 78 (1959): 312; Schmuttermayr, StANT 25 <1971):
76-77.
 177

or whether to give the tn version independent status over against

the min version.This is important for the interpretation of the

Ugaritic passage, since with ytn b the problem for us is one of

ambiguity: on the surface the Id can be interpreted as either 'in

,
*

'from’, or ’into’. It appears to me most likely the the min is an

interpretation in II Sam. 22:14 of the earlier Jo in Ps. 18:14.

The next question, however, is: Was the change to min an explicit

statement of the ancient understanding of Id, or is it a re-inter­

pretation of the b in terms of later concepts? I prefer the latter

alternative and base my opinion on the only unambiguous parallel,

of which I am aware, which is nearly contemporaneous to the Ugaritic

text in question: EA 14?:13-14 iddin rigmasu ina same kina addi

’who thunders in heaven like Adad'.^ I cannot but believe that the

author of this line would have removed the potential ambiguity pres­

ent in ina by the use of istu if his intention had been to express

movement ’from’ (unless the Akkadian is a pure reflection of Canaan­

ite idiom; Dahood^ translates ’from’ here, as does Cathcart^).

According to the analysis adopted here, then, there are three

ancient attestations of ’thundering in’, with a later, more specific

statement which uses a word 'from'.

^See Breckelmans, UF 1 (1969): 8-9; Schoors, PSP, 1: 23-24.

^F. M. Cross and D. N. Freedman, "A Royal Song of Thanksgiving:

II Samuel 22 = Psalm 18," JBL 72 (1953): 25, n. 35; Cross, Canaanite
Myth, pp. 158, n. 68, and 159»

^For this interpretation see Schoors, RSP, 1: 23-24.

^Psalms I (1966), p. 108.

^Nahum, p. 52.
 178

ytn b: I ’give in/during’: 1107.6 (pp. 47-48)

1 2
Rainey and Dahood have interpreted this passage as implying

movement ’from’ (’from the king's house clothing is given to them

).
*

It appears just as likely that movement may not be implied (i.e., it

belongs to class I rather than to class II). Rainey has interpreted

the form as an N-stem imperfect, though Qal 3 m.pl. indefinite 1 they

give
* is just as possible. Either analysis leads to a possible

translation which reflects lack of movement : * . . . clothing is

issued to them (or: they issue clothing to them) in the house of the

king
* . This translation becomes even more likely if the probable

etymology of jrmnm as * diners

* reflects an occupation or social sta­

tus exercised within the royal palace. If such is the case, there

is no reason to see the garments as leaving the palace. One might

add as a further argument that there was a specific idiom for

issuing clothes from the royal clothes store : yg3 b.^

ytn b: II * give (one/some) of

* : 6(49).5.20 (p. 48)

The lines following the quoted passage are difficult, but

comparison with the preceding entry (6.1.46[49.1.18]) should ensure

the correctness of this translation.

ytn yd: I *give/grant (something) along with (something else)* (p. 49)

C. Virolleaud^ immediately spotted the use of %d in 1008.7-8

as a preposition, comparable to qadu in the Akkadian contracts (fre­

Iproceedings, p. 210; PE£ 99 (1967): 36; Fourth World Congress,

pp. 187-831

Zpsalms II (1968), p. 183; RSP« 1: 139-40.

^See text 1109.1, above, p. 42.

^**Les textes alphabétiques de Ras-Shamra (Ugarit) provenant de

la XVIe campagne (1952),’* CRAI 1953, p. 209.
 179

quent in PRU III). The use of as a term corresponding to

Akkadian qadu would seem to indicate that the latter was somehow
related by the Ugaritic scribe to qâtu ’hand'.1 This association,

however, was never indicated explicitly by the scribes at Ugarit

(that is, the tables of logograms in PRU III, PRU IV, and PRU VI

furnish no examples of qadu expressed by the use of the Su sign).

The word zth 'its olive-grove' should perhaps be restored in

line 8, in spite of the broken signs indicated in Virolleaud's

hand copy,2 on the basis of the Akkadian documents published in

PRU III where the three regular elements in land contracts are

dimtu, serdu, and karânu ('press area, olive grove, and vineyard').

The proposed restoration is exactly paralleled in RS 16.353:7-8

(PRU III, p. 113): qadu Ê-dimtisu qadu GlS-serdisu qadu GI§-

karânî-(ME§-)su qadu gabbi mimmusu. There is as yet no clear

attestation in Ugaritic of a word for 'olive-grove'; zt is pro­

posed as a conjectural restoration based on such Hebrew texts as

Ex. 23:11 and Judg. 15:5 (zyt // krm).

ytn 1: give/grant for/as concerns' (or: II 'give from') (temporal)

(p. 49)

The occurrence of 1 ym hnd, obviously corresponding to istu ümi

annj of the Akkadian economic formulae, seems to provide absolute

proof for 1 = ’from' in temporal expressions. The idiom would also

seem to furnish the key for the proper understanding of lymm lyrfom

1So Virolleaud, ibid.

2C. Virolleaud, Le Palais Royal d'Ugarit II: Textes en cunéi­

formes alphabétiques des archives est, ouest et centrales, Mission de
Ras Shamra, vol. 7 (Paris: Imprimerie Nationale and Librairie C.
Klincksieck, 1957), p. 21.
 18o

as 'from days to months'.1 I believe, however, that another ex­

planation of lymm lyrbm is possible, and have provided the reasons

in the note to bky 1 just mentioned.

The present expression, also, may be explained from another

angle than simply that of 1^ meaning 'from'. It appears to me that

this angle becomes clear from an examination of all the temporal

uses of 1. These have been grouped under 1, class I, in the chart

of perspectives. The classification proposed implies that the 1.

of these temporal expressions provides the limits of action, but

not direction 'to' or 'from'While temporal ,b provides the

general limits of action with no notion of the future implied, 1

seems to provide the limits of action beginning now (= English

'from now') and lasting into a further period, with both periods

indicated by 1. That 1 indicates the beginning is clear from

19(1 Aqht).4.167-68 Iht wclmnh# lcnt pdr dr 'For now and eternity/

For now and forever'. That it also indicates end-point seems clear

from the expression lymm lyrfam where a short period is contrasted

with a long. There are two ways of analyzing such a situation: 1)

consider the first 1. of the contrasting expressions (and that of

1 ym hnd) as semantically different from the second and assign it

to class II as indicating the starting point of action, and then

assign the second 1^ to class III as indicating the point of arrival;

2) consider both_l's as semantically equal and as both indicating

1See note on bky 1, temporal, above, pp. 123-24.

^Below, p. 257.

"’See discussion of perspective, below, pp. 270-77•

 181

the circumstances in which the action takes place. The latter

nuance is well borne by English ’for’, as in ’for days and months,

for months and years

.
* I have preferred the latter analysis be­

cause it avoids the ambiguity of IL meaning both ’ from’ and ’to

*

at an interval of only one word.

In the expression 1 ym hnd, however, these considerations do

not seem to hold true, partially at least because of the corres­

ponding Akkadian formula. Perhaps it would be wiser to look at

the problem from the opposite angle, that of the Ugaritic scribe.

Since the formula istu ûmi anni is standard in the Akkadian docu­

ments from Ugarit, and since the Ugaritic texts of the same genre

are very limited, one may fairly assume that the Ugaritic formula

is a translation of the Akkadian, or at least is so strongly in­

fluenced by it that the Ugaritic words closest to the Akkadian

original would be sought out. Now, if the Ugaritic scribe did

not have a preposition specifically corresponding to Akkadian istu,

what was he to do? He could not use Jd, for this would imply no

future quality to the action.The preposition JL, however, was

used to indicate the first element in a temporal sequence, and it

was thus chosen as the best translation of the Akkadian, even

though it was not an exact translation of the original.

What is being suggested, then, is that this be looked upon as

an ancient translation problem, faced by the Ugaritic scribe with

a less explicit prepositional system at hand, who did as best he

could to find an answer. His closest parallel (at least the closest

l’On this day X gives ... * (see texts cited under lqb b,
above, p. 58, for a corresponding use of b).
 182

from what has been preserved to our day) was the text cited above,

Iht wclmnh // lcnt pdr dr. This parallel is especially relevant

since it contains the same further period clm as is used in the

economic documents (cd clm, 1008.14; 1009.11-12).

ytn C1 (p. 49)

1012.26 seems to contain the idiom ytn cl; (25) Im (26) 1 .

ytn . hm . mlk . cly 'why indeed has the king imposed them on me?'

(i.e., a quota of two thousand horses).But, because this is the

only example of ytn C1 attested in Ugaritic, Virolleaud's emenda­

tion <b>cly2 is probably preferable: 'Why did the king my lord

not provide them (himself)?' We would in any case need more ex­

amples of the l/cl confusion in Ugaritic before claiming a sit­

uation comparable to that prevailing with Hebrew al/cl.3 See fur­

ther discussion of text 1012 below at skn 1, p. 237.

ytn cm(n): III 'head towards

* (in the expression ytn pnm cm) (p. 49)

ntn pnym in Hebrew has slightly different uses than those

observable in Ugaritic: Dan. 9=3 ntn pnym 31 = 'turn face to deity

4
(in prayer)'; Eze. 14:8, etc., ntn pnym b = 'turn face against'.

Akkadian parallels are closer to the Ugaritic meaning.

-^Compare Gordon, UT, §10.13: "why hasn't the king given them
to me?"
2?RU II, p. 27.

^Gordon, UT, §10.13; Dahood, Ugaritic-Hebrew Philology (1965),

p. 31; idem, Psalms II (1968), p. 327; Cathcart, Nahum, p. 59-

\see the collection of passages by S. Gevirtz, "On Canaanite

Rhetoric: The Evidence of the Amarna Letters from Tyre," Orientalia
n.s. 42 (1973): 177.

5See von Soden, AHw, p. 702b (Mari and El Amarna—correctly

interpreted by von Soden as a Canaanitism).
 183

As for the semantic content of the expression, the Jjn is not to

be understood as providing in itself the notion of 'towards

.
*

Rather, the full perspective is * place one's face (so that it will

be) in proximity to'.

ytn cm . . . b; III/I 'head towards . . . through' (p. 50)

See note on hbr b, above, pp. 143-44.

ytn t&t: 2.4(68).7 (pp. 50-51)

This idiom should perhaps be assigned to some form of a root

-gr-.1 The syntactical problems of the lines preclude any immediate

solution. Dahood takes the first verbal form as passive (wttn gh =

"And his voice was given forth . . . "), and the second as active

(ygr tfrt = "... he screamed beneath . . . "). Though not impos­

sible, the change in voice, coupled with the enjambement necessary

in Dahood's interpretation2 make his solution at best doubtful.

The solution of van Seims,though speculative, respects the

clear poetic division:

"Scarce had the word left his mouth,

his word his lips,
as Depth uttered her voice
under the throne of Prince Yammu."

yfcb b: 16.6(12?).25 (p. 51)

Dahood
* s analysis^ of yjb here as derived from yfcb rather than

1So Gordon, UT, §19.985; Dahood, Psalms II (1968), pp. 226, 306.

2wttn gh ygr// tfrt ksi zbl ym = "And his voice was given forth,
he screamed beneath the throne of Prince Yamm."

5UP 2 (1970): 264-65.

^Mélanges Tisserant (1964), p. 101 (correct Ihkl there to bhkl),

citing Aistleitner, WUS, §1264.
 184

from (jwb) is undoubtedly correct, since there are no clear

examples of jb b = 1*
6return to' (though swb b is attested in bibli­

cal Hebrew as ’return into’, Gen. 43:18). This early analysis is

superior to that proposed in 1970,1 where the reading Ihkl is main-

2
tained and the verb is derived from tb.

yjb b: 601.1.15 (p. 51)

The reading wbCn] was proposed by J. 0. de Moor.^

yjb b: 602.1.2-3 (p« 51)

The analysis of cjtrt // hdrcy as geographical names is due to

B. Margulis;4 it has been accepted by Marvin H. Pope and Jeffray H.

Tigay.5 Others interpret the b as meaning ’with’ and take cfctrt //

hdrcy as divine names.$ I accept Margulis' proposal because there

are no other examples in Ugaritic of _b = ’in/among’ •* ’with’ (plus

one person or thing only), though something approaching this devel-

n |
opment is found in biblical Hebrew. A. J. Ferrara and S. B. Parker

1Psalms III, p. 147.

^The erroneous reading Ihkl is, by the way, an excellent illus­

tration of the persistence of error. Gordon read Ihkl in Ugaritic Hand­
book and in Ugaritic Manual (both p. 164), but corrected it to bhkl in
UT (p. 194); nonetheless in his discussion of the passage in UT, 910.10,
he refers to Ihkl. Dahood pointed out Gordon's error in UT, §10.10, in
his own book-length review (Ugaritic-Hebrew Philology C1965J, P» 29)«
but Ihkl shows up again in Psalms III (1970), p» 147•

^"Studies in the New Alphabetic Texts from Ras Shamra I," UF 1

(1969): 168.
U"A Ugaritic Psalm (RS 24.252)," JBL 89 (1970): 295-94.

^"A Description of Baal," UF 3 (1971)• 120.

6E.g., de Moor, UF 1 (1969): 177; Cross, Canaanite Myth, p. 21.

?See Appendix, pp. 358-59»

^"Seating Arrangements at Divine Banquets," UF 4 (1972): 37-39»

 185

suggest that yjb b here means ’sit next to’, but they recognize the

lack of parallels for the proposed translation.

yjb b: 2015 (p. 51)

See discussion of parallel texts without yjb, below, pp. 506-7.

ytb b . . . tbt: 17(2 Aqht).5.6 (pp. 51-52)

Though yjb b seems clear, yjb tbt is less so. M. Dahood^ has

proposed that we give serious consideration to Ginsberg's "beneath

a mighty tree"2 because of I Sam. 14:2: "And Saul was sitting at

the outskirts of Gibeah under the pomegranate tree [tafrat hârimmon]

which is on the threshing floor.This understanding of the Ugar-

itic text would require a location of the ap tgr outside of the

gate area proper.Schoors^ has recently provided evidence for the

interpretation of adrm as "dignitaries"; this is in line with my

translation 'notables'.
Greenfield has argued^ that trees are hardly suitable for

threshing-floors (though one might argue that as the gt is the

whole pressing area, grn could be the whole threshing area, with

trees beside the actual threshing floors) and that tfrt here actually

^■Review of L. A. Sinclair, An Archeological Study of Gibeah

(Tell el-Ful), and R. L. Cleveland, The Excavation of the Conway High
Place (Petra) and the Soundings at Khirbet Ader, in Biblica 44 (1965):
111.
p
^ANET, p. 151.

Sahood, Biblica 44 (1965): 111; "threshing floor" is migrôn

in the Hebrew text.
See J. C. Greenfield, "The Prepositions b tafrat
in Jes 57 5," ZAW 75 (1961): 227, n. 10, for further
bibliography on this interpretation.5
5RSP, 1: 59-60. 6ZAW 75 (1961): 226-28.
 186

means 'among'.1 Greenfield cites as Ugaritic parallels 2.4(68).6-7:

6 and qll tfet pcnm, an expression frequent in the

ygr tfrt ksi zbl ym,2*

Aqht text? meaning 'fall at the feet of someone', probably nearly

equal to qll lpen. He uses this nuance of tfrt to explain tfrt scpy
4
hslcym in Is. 57:5 as "among the clefts of the rocks." Dahood has

also made use of this interpretation of tfat in explaining Job 34:26.

One should hesitate, however, to see tfrt as taking on the very

general nuance of 'among', without an accompanying notion of low­

ness. The basic meaning of tfrt seems to be 'at or near the bottom

of and one might interpret yjb tfct adrm as 'he sits at the feet of

the mighty ones'.

yjb btk: 603.1.2 (p. 52)

This stichometric analysis is that of Pope and Tigay,^ as is

the derivation of ytb from the root yjb rather than from (jwb).

Dahood's claim to restore r[cy], though the restoration itself may

be valid, must be rejected to the extent that Dahood bases it on

rcy // ysb in Ps. 80:2.? The parallelism is good in the Psalm pas­

sage (though there it is triple: rchy/nhg//ysb), but r[ y] cannot

be considered parallel to ytb unless r y be taken as a verb, which

1j. Gray, "The goren at the City Gate: Justice and the Royal
Office in the Ugaritic Text ’Aqht," PE£ 85 (1953) : H9, suggests the
semantic development tfrt = 'in the place of'/'among'.

^But this is a difficult text, see above at ytn tfrt, p. 183.

Attested seven times, see above at qll tfrt, p. 87.

^The Bible in Current Catholic Thought (1962), p. 71.

^This interpretation is closely related to qll tfrt 'fall at the

feet of' —compare Dahood, Psalms I (1966), pp. 51» 116, 272; idem,
Biblica 54 (1973): 359.
6UF 3 (1971): 120-22. ?RSP, 1: 79» 222-23-
 187

Dahood does not do. The elements in parallel (assuming Dahood’s

restoration—which goes back to Virolleaud^) are:

bcl ytb kjbt gr a b c Baal sits enthroned like the

sitting of a mountain,
hd rcy kmdb *
a c* Hadd the Shepherd like a flood.

Here bcl = hd rcy (a = a’).

Pope and Tigay did, by the way, propose that a word other than

rcy be restored, such as rfob, rb, or rps, which, with yjb, would mean
2
’sit widely
* .

Another major problem in this passage is the exact understanding

of kjbt gr. I have taken it as a generic statement, literally ’like

the remaining in place of a mountain’ (jbt = a verbal noun of yjb)

Another translation which appears valid to me is Cross’ : ”Bacl

sits enthroned, (his) mountain like a dais.” Here jbt is taken as

a verbal noun which is concrete rather than abstract: ’place where

one sits’.

yjb 1: I ’sit for’ (temporal) (p. 52)

The sequence lymm lyrbm // lyrfam lsnt, particularly the semantic

1Ugaritica V, p. 557. 2UF 3 (1971): 122.

5So Pope and Tigay, UP 5, p. 118; this may or may not be what
de Moor had in mind in his translation "like the seat of a mountain,"
UP 1 (1969): 180.
^Canaanite Myth, p. 147; Clifford’s reading is similar though
he takes the k as emphatic: "Baal is enthroned, yea, (his) seat is the
mountain" (Cosmic Mountain, pp. 17» n. 14, and 77) •

^This interpretation goes back to Virolleaud’s editio princeps,

Ugaritica V, p. 558. See Loren R. Fisher and F. Brent Knutson, "An
Enthronement Ritual at Ugarit," JNES 28 (1969): 158, n. 4, for the
evidence behind jbt interpreted as a concrete noun (their interpretation
of the line as a whole is to be rejected, however, in favor of that
defended by Pope and Tigay, and reflected in the translations of Cross
and Clifford).
 188

import of the Vs, are discussed in notes to bky 1, above, pp.

123-24, and ytn 1, pp. 179-82.

yjb 1: III 'sit on': 5(67).6.13-14 (p. 52)

Two remarks are necessary here: 1) it should be repeated"

"
* that

the second line of this passage does not contain opposite meanings

of 1^ construed with the verb yjb ('he sat from the footstool to the

),
*
earth rather yrd of the first line has not been repeated and the

idiom is yrd 1 'descend from

;
* 2) the regular usage of yjb 1 in
2
Ugaritic and its occasional appearance in biblical Hebrew rule out

Dahood's interpretation of Imbwl ysb in Ps. 29:10 as * be seated from

the flood',as well as M. Pope's suggestion that the 1^ of Imbwl is

If,
comparative. Rather, the flood in that verse is likened to a throne

upon which the deity sits enthroned. Interpreting this statement as

a metaphorical description of YHWH's power seems to me superior to

analyzing mbwl as a noun meaning 'throne'.^

yjb 1: III 'sit on': 16.6(127).23-24: J^d (p. 53)

Only the elucidation of the exact nature of ^d could decide

whether yjb in line 22 is from the root £b (jwb) * return to the

throne room', or from the root yjb 'sit upon the cd* (some element

of the throne).

]"See above at yrd 1, p. 175.

^E.g., Ps. 9:5; Is. 47:1; see Dahood, RSP, 1: 235.

^Psalms I (1966), p. 180.

11 e
Review of Blommerde, Northwest Semitic Grammar and Job, in
Biblica 52 (1971): 150.

*
5J. N. Epstein, "mbwl (thl k"t y')—minbar, " Tarbiz 12 (1940):
82 (I owe this reference to Moshe Held).
 189

kly b (p. 53)

The distinction between kly b classes I and II may appear sub­

tle, but it is nonetheless valid: kly b class I indicates where or

when the consuming takes place ; kly b class II indicates the place

from which the consumed quantity has disappeared.

kly b: 2095.1 (p. 53)

This text continues in line 2: 1 . illdrm. This could repre­

sent a case of kly . . . 1, or it could be a nominal clause con­

structed with 1., a standard construction in economic texts. The

latter analysis assumes that line 1 is a superscription (the scribe

drew no horizontal line after line 1, however, as is usually done

after superscriptions).

kly b: I 'be used in' (N-stem): 1086.1-5: C1 ym (p. 54)

For C1 ym = 'the next day' see Gordon, UT, §19-1852, and de Moor,

UF 2 (1970): 319-20.

kn cl: III 'establish concern!ng/on/against' (L-stem): 1161.7 (p. 55)

This text has received a variety of interpretations, the most

12 3
enlightening of which are by M. Liverani, Rainey, and Parker.

My interpretation is based on no one of these, but is indebted to

all. The crucial questions are the stem and meaning of tknn in

both occurrences, and the case of hmt in line 8 (nominative or

accusative?). Liverani's study provides the best background to the

text, but his translation suffers from what appears to me to be a

misapprehension of the syntax of the passage : "E tutti i debiti

l"Due document! ugaritici con garanzia di presenza," Ugaritica

VI, pp. 375-78.
2UF 5 (1971): 159-60. ^Studies, pp. 10-11, 33-34.
 190

che verranno stabiliti, a carico dei loro garanti verranno sta-

biliti.”1 By his placement of the comma he seems to be putting

the major break before C1 crbnm, rather than after as the use of

hn would seem to dictate.

lay b: 3(cnt).5.26 (p. 55)

The obscurity of this passage precludes a definitive solution,

but I nonetheless hesitate to accept such a new meaning for Ugaritic

byd as ’because of'.2 Rather, the interpretation 'in the hand of

- 'in the power of is not only a better reflection of the original

concrete meaning of the prepositional phrase, but also seems better

to express the situation: Baal being out of commission, the rain­

producing heavens are in Mot's strangle-hold.

k 1:
l3*
5 4(51).7.45-46: dll, (p. 55)

The interpretation of dll // cdd is difficult; mine is based on

It
that of Moshe Held.

l3k 1: 4(51).5-105 (p. 56)

See Greenfield^ for a recent defense of the emendation yak -

^Ugaritica VI, p. 578.

2"The heavens sag because of divine Mot," M. Dahood, "Hebrew—

Ugaritic Lexicography I," Biblica 44 (1965)• 501-2; see also Dahood,
Biblica 54 (1975): 560; A. Caquot, "La divinité solaire ougaritique,"
Syria 56 (1959): 95; Thomas F. McDaniel, "Philological Studies in
Lamentations. II," Biblica 49 (1968): 200-1.

5So Martin J. Mulder, "Hat man in Ugarit die Sonnenwende be-

gangen?", UF 4 (1972): 82-85, with references; for another treatment
of this phrase, also with bibliography, see de Moor, Seasonal Pat­
tern, pp. 114-15.
^"Rhetorical Questions in Ugaritic and Biblical Hebrew,"
EI 9 (1969): 72, n. 15.

JAOS 89 (1969): 175

 191

y<l>ak.l gerdner1
2* has furnished a historical discussion of the

problem.

lak 1 . . . cm: 14(Krt).3.124 (p. 56)

It is possible that this passage should be divided in another

fashion:

wylak mlakm He will send messengers:

Ik cm krt mswnh Go to Krt in his camp.3

It would seem, however, that the balance of the stichometric anal-

4
ysis given in the text is preferable.
As regards mswnh, W. F. Albright's suggestion56
8 to read msknh
7

6 7
* his servants' can only be based on emendation: the photograph
g
clearly shows a w at 14(Krt).J.125. One might lay claim to an

emendation if only there were attestations of a Northwest Semitic

form mskn with the meaning 'servant/attendant/envoy'. (There is,

1Against Dahood, Ügaritic-Hebrew Philology, pp. 45-46.

2CTA, 1: 27, n. 2. 5So Rainey, Fourth World Congress, p. 188.

^See, for example, Ginsberg, Legend, p. 17; and, more recently,

H. Sauren and G. Kestemont, "Keret, roi de gubur," UF 3 (1971): 199;
Dahood, RSP, 1: 243.

^Unpublished, reported by M. Dahood, "Canaanite-Phoenician

Influence in Qohelet," Biblica 33 (1952): 206, n. 5; Mélanges Tisserant
(1964), p. 94.
6So Dahood in Biblica 33; in Mélanges Tisserant he claimed an
"erroneous reading."
7CTA, 2: plate XX.

8This is the only example of four which is clearly visible ;

two of the other three are restorations and the fourth example is un­
readable from the published photo (15[128].1.4 —CTA, 2: plate XXII).
There is no doubt expressed, however, in the line drawings and trans­
literations of Virolleaud (Syria 23 Î1942-43]: 138) and Herdner
(CTA, 1: 68; 2: fig. 38) as regards the reading mswn. It would seem,
therefore, that there are two attestations of mswn in different tab­
lets.
 192

of course, Akkadian muskënu, which was later borrowed into Hebrew

as misken 'poor'; *mskn could be an earlier borrowing into Ugar-

itic of the same word.) Dahood seems more recently to have aban­
doned his earlier position: in RSP1 he transliterates mswnh and

translates "couriers."

r’k cmn: 1012.54 (p. 56)

Note what seems to be a double usage of cm(n): 'send X along

with (Jjjm) Y to (cm) Z'. It might be pointed out also that others

interpret ylak as a passive form (yuJlak): "And 0 king, my lord,

2
let my agent together with my messengers be sent here to me ... "

l3k cm: 158.8 (p. 56)

Parker^ has provided a recent discussion of the difficulties

of iky in line 6.

l3k cm: 1021.4 (p. 56)

See note on this passage, below at tbc cm, p. 244.

l3k cm: 2061.10 (pp. 56-57)

cmy in this text could also be the inception of a nominal

clause : "Since my son sent a shipment of food, with me there is

plenty and abundance.It seems as likely, however, that the

word cmy is construed with l3k.^

1Vol. 1: 243.

Albright, BASOR 150 (1958): 58.

^Studies, pp. 101-4.

S. M. Sasson, "Canaanite Maritime Involvement in the Second

Millennium B.C.," JAOS 86 (1966): 154.

^In fact, because of the medial position of cmy, it may well

serve both clauses : Since you sent me tablets concerning food, there
is here with me plenty and abundance . . .
 193

lbs b: 2106.17 (p. 57)

See reference to this passage at crb b, below, p. 222.

lbs C1 (p. 57)

This idiom is apparently attested adverbially: 19(1 Aqht)

.4.208: wcl tlbs np§ ajt 'and thereupon she dons a woman's gar­

ment' .I A comparable usage is found in biblical Hebrew (Hiphil)

in Gen. 27:16. 2* takes _^1 in the Aqht text as equivalent

Gordon*

to Jvlh 'upon it'. If he is right, then the usage is prepositional

rather than adverbial.

Ifom Ipn . . . bcd: 16.6(127).48-49 (pp. 57-58)

See Held's interpretation of bcd ksl, Landsberger , pp. 404-6.

Ibm cm; 5(67).1.24: aCfr]<y> (p. 58)

For this restoration of ab in line 25, rather than the expected

ary, see Herdner, OTA, 1: 53» n. 9.

Iqh b: 1155.1-2, 6 (p. 58)

Text 1156 is an unbroken but shorter version of 1155- Unfor­

tunately, it is just the variant line of 1155 (line 5) which is

broken. In the light of 1156 it seems very precarious to interpret

mifed b in 1155.6 as 'plated with'-5 because in 1156 there is nothing

to be plated.

Iqb b: I '(one who is) among/in takes' : 2052.2 (p. 58)

The interpretation of the number abd kbd arb m as 'forty-one *

is due to M. Liverani.Text 2052 consists of six entries, the

■^For the interpretation of C1 as an adverb, see T. H. Gaster,

"The Furniture of El in Canaanite Mythology," BASOR 93 (1944): 22, n. 6.

2UT, §5.39. ^Gordon, UT, §10.4.

^"kbd nei testi amministrativi ugaritici," UF 2 (1970): 93, 104.

 194

last four of which consist of number + occupation + lqb + direct

object (either scrt 'wool1 or falpnt ’goats' [?] hair'), for example

lines 6-7: 'six artisans took wool'. The first two entries, how­

ever, break this pattern (lines 1-5). The purpose of these two

entries seems to be to record that some took wool, while others

took felpnt. This is deduced from the facts that (1) no desig­

nation of occupation is given in the second entry, while the first

entry contains the word 2) neither the first entry nor the

combination of the first two entries can be taken as the sum of

what follows, the sums simply do not tally; 5) b. of line 2 can­

not be taken as indicating the agent of the transaction,^ since

this leaves the first two entries without a subject. We are thus

led to conclude that bfazr is either a mistake for bbzr<m>, or that

bzr is to be seen as a collective (though this occurs with guild

designations, one would not expect such a usage following a pre­

position: cf. jmn bzr in 1024.5.4 over against [s]bc . b . brjm

in 1024.5.1).

lqb b: II 'take from'

lqb b is a good example of lexical specificity in prepositional

usages: it frequently means 'take from' (i.e., ja indicates where

^Elsewhere attested as royal personnel, both in poetic and in

administrative texts ; see Patrick D. Miller, Jr., "Animal Names as
Designations in Ugaritic and Hebrew," UF 2 (1970): 178-80.
p
So Virolleaud, PRU V, p. 67.

^Virolleaud, ibid.: "par (l'entremise du) bzr"; Otto Eissfeldt,

Neue keilalphabetische Texte aus Ras Shamra-Ugarit, Sitzungsberichte der
Deutsche Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, Klasse fur Sprachen, Lit-
eratur und Kunst, 1965/6 (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1965)« p. 24: "Nach
Z. 2 Bind diese Kaufe durch (b) einen bzr vermitt el t worden. "
4UT, §8.10.
 195

the direct object was located before the action took place); only

when the object of the preposition is the subject's own hand does

Iqb b mean 'take in

* (i.e., b there indicates where the direct

object is located after the action has taken place).

Iqb b: 2059.18, 21: dnt = 'peril' (p. 59)

For this interpretation of dnt, see Parker, Studies, p. 64.

Iqb b/bd/bm: III 'take in/into

* (p. 59)

See note above, pp. 194-95, to Iqb b II 'take from'.

Iqb 1: 25(52).51 (p. 60)

The context gives no indication why one would take kindling

from the top of the fire.^ Il is rather building a bed of coals

(for roasting the bird he is soon to shoot down) by burning small

2
pieces of wood.

A proposal to see another idiom formed with Iqb + preposition

meaning 'from' has been made by Edward Ullendorffhe would

interpret 19(1 Aqht).5.145-46 as containing the idiom Iqb b 'take

Ji
from'. The text itself, however, is so uncertain that I hesitate

to accept an otherwise unattested idiom—especially if Iqb 1 in

25(52).31 is correctly interpreted as 'take for'.

^So Gordon, Ugaritic Literature, pp. 59-60.

2 w
If mstcltm does indeed mean 'kindling', see Gordon, Ugaritic
Handbook,§18.1976 "kindlings," based on an Arabic etymology, vs. UT,
§19»2458 "effigies," based on Ethiopie; Aistleitner (WUS, §2028) takes
the term as referring to the women in the context: "zur Sippe hehorige
Frauen"; compare also the recent rendering by Cross (Canaanite Myth, p.
22) who translates "ladiesful" and does not interpret the 1^ as 'from'.

^"Ugaritic Marginalia," Orientalia n.s. 20 (1951)! 272-75­

4
See Herdner, CTA, 1: 90.
 196

Iqb cm(n): 1083.3t 5 (p. 60)

J. Hoftijzer has recently discussed the problems posed by

istir.1 If this word is analyzed as a verb, as does Hoftijzer,

there is no reason to repeat smn in line 4 (i.e., if the com­

modity is the same in lines 1-3 and 4-5, and if cm[n] depends
2
on istir in both sections, then there is no apparent reason to

repeat smn in line 4). If, however, istir is a commodity, then

the sequence is lqfr smn, (Iqfr) istir cm, (iqfr) smn cmn. Besides

these considerations, the primary difficulty with Hoftijzer

s
*

analysis of istir cm(n) as *

be owed by
* is that it is JjL which

indicates debt, both in Ugaritic and in the examples from the

Elephantine papyri cited by Hoftijzer (sDr cl).

mhs b: I * smite with

* (p. 60)

Perhaps we should add to the list of mb§ b = * strike with

*

the following two passages :

3(cnt).5.31 bgdlt . arkty . amCfas ?]

18(3 Aqht).1.10 [bjgdlt . arLkty . amfr§ ?J

’With my great long (arm ?) I will strike . . .

(?)
*

The restoration of the verb mb§ may be seen, for example, in Driver

CML, pp. 54, 55.

mbs b: 6(49).5.2-3: ktp (p. 61)

The definition of ktp as a weapon is due principally to 0

* Cal­

laghan.^

lnA Note on G 10835; 3istDir and Related Matters," UF 3 (1971)

361-64.

^Hoftijzer does not discuss this point, but it seems reasonable

so to assume.
50rientalia n.s. 21 (1952): 37-46; see also Moshe Held, **
mb§/
 197

mfrs cl: I 1 smite on account of’ (p. 61)

C1 denoting obligation"1" can also denote motivation. The full

perspective is probably ’the obligation (i.e., reason) for smiting

him resides on the bow’. This is well reflected in the English

idiom ’on account of’.

infer b: 19(1 Aqht).1.41: bqg (p. 62)

tmtr bqg might be translated ’rain upon the summer-fruit’.2

It appears better, however, to maintain the distinction infer b

’rain in/during’ ; infer 1 ’rain on’ : the parallelism is thus Id ’in’/

’ during’ # _b 1 in’/’during’ //I ’upon’ . For the interpretation of

§ly b, see note below, pp. 225-26.

mtr 1: 16(126).3.5-6: translation (p. 62)

3 4
For this translation I am beholden to Ginsberg and Dahood.

ml3 b: I ’be full of’ (instrumental ?) (p. 62)

This is one of those verbs which lies on the semantic overlap

between b and min: is the basic meaning of the idiom ml3* b ’be

full/fill with' (and b indicates the instrument), or is it ’be full

as a result of’ (where b/min indicate the source of the filling)?

Perhaps neither is "original” and the overlap resides in the nature

of the verb itself. In any case, b and min are both used with this

*mfas in Ugaritic and Other Semitic Languages (A Study in Comparative

Lexicography) ,11 JAPS 79 (1959): 170, n. 28.

]"See below, pp. 314, 357-59­

2H. L. Ginsberg, "A Ugaritic Parallel to 2 Sam 1 21,” JBL 57

(1938): 211, n. 9; Cathcart, Nahum, p. 136.

3ANET, p. 148.

^"The Divine Name cEli in the Psalms," TS 14 (1955): 454.

 198

verb (and the corresponding verbal adjective) in biblical Hebrew,

and such an overlap in usage indicates an overlap in semantics. I

have classified the usage of ml3 b in Ugaritic as instrumental

(class I) on the basis of Hebrew usage where _b is used beside min

in a higher degree of overlap than one would expect in that

language if the notion of source predominated.

mlk b: 2062.2.2 (p. 63)

Since mlk b regularly indicates the seat of reign and not the

extent of reign, both in Ugaritic and in the later dialects,frwt

should probably be interpreted here as 'village' or 'territory/

4. f 2
country'.

Cross has recently proposed the restoration [ymlk] b = 'rule

over
* in 602.2.8: "bal [yamluk] ba-fratkihu ba-namirtihu Verily

let him [rule] his offspring in his grace.Considering that

all the verbs of this sequence of lines have to be restored, how­

ever, and that the evidence is meager indeed for the idiom mlk b

in the sense 'rule over', the restoration inspires little con­

fidence.

msk b: 21
*
3(67)«1 (p. 63)

It seems quite clear that the verb ymsk of line 21 also

governs the first colon of this passage; this becomes apparent

from the version of this text which appears in 604.11 and which

reverses these two stichs:

^See Appendix, mlk b, pp- 372-73*

^For this meaning, see A. Herdner, review of Dahood, Ugaritic-

Hebrew Philology, in Syria 46 (1969): 132.

^Canaanite Myth, pp. 21-22.

 199

mt hm . ks . ym(10)sk . nhr Behold Nahar mixes a cup,

hm (11) sbc . ydty . bg^ Even seven portions in a bowl.

The difficult word mt is related by de Moor12 to 3*

mt (- ’truly’).

mgy ’arrive’ (p. 63)

# 2
Moshe Held has assembled the evidence for the meaning of mgy.

mgy afar (p. 63)

Dahood would see in abr in 14(Krt).4.195 the meaning ’with’

if.
a meaning which he would also see in 24(77).32-33» He follows

R. B. Y. Scott^ in considering this as the proper interpretation

of Hebrew 3afaar in several passages, afar in the Ugaritic text

under discussion may well be an adverb (’afterwards’) as analyzed

by Aistleitner.6 If Dahood’s analysis of the form as a preposition

is accepted, there is a gain in translating ’arrive at sun(-rise)’

rather than ’arrive after sun(-rise)’« The word afrr (and Hebrew

2a£ar) itself seems more often to connote ’immediately after'

"hjF 1 (1969): 187.

2"The yqtl-qtl (qtl-yqtl) Sequence of Identical Verbs in Bibli­

cal Hebrew and in Ugaritic,” in Studies and Essays in Honor of Abraham
A. Neuman, ed. Meir Ben-Horin (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1962), p. 289, n. 1»
idem, EI 9 (1969): 74, n. 32.

^Bjblica 44 (1963): 292-93; Gregorianum 43 (1962): 69; Mélanges

Tisserant (19^4), p. 84; Ugaritic-Hebrew Philology (1965), PP» 27-28;
accepted tentatively by Gordon, UT, §19.138.

%ee below at trb 1, pp» 244-46.

^"Secondary Meanings of 3afrar, after, behind,” JTS 50 (1949)•

178-79.
&WUS, §150. One may doubt that Dahood (Mélanges Tisserant, p.
84) is correct in ascribing to Aistleitner the analysis of afar as a
preposition when he translates "bei Sonnenaufgang” in WUS, §1491.
Aistleitner seems to be applying this translation to three different ex­
pressions (mk spsm, whn spsm, and afar spsm). Because §1491 is devoted
to adverbial -m, one might assume that the translation "bei” refers to
the ^m of spsm and not to the word abr.
 200

(whence the occasional legitimacy of translating 'with') than is

the case with English 'after' which refers to any time or distance

after, with no connotation of proximity or distance. This, of

course, does not imply that abr (Jafrar) indicated any other position

than 'after, behind'

mgy cm: 606.2, 11 (p. 64)

2
Note that de Moor proposes a restoration other than the verb

mgy in line 10.

m§b 1: 6(49).5.4 (p. 64)

The reading ym§b is not certain; it could be ymgi.^

mr
* 1: III 'bless to' (p. 64)

For the classification of this idiom, see note to brk 1, above,

pp. 129-34.

mrg b (p. 64)

1|. _
Once again the reading is not certain. The translation, in
any case, seems to require the b of substance here (though Clifford^

interprets bdm farg as "with poles of gold" [bdm = plural of bd]

rather than ' with red gold' [bdm = b. + dm] ).

msfr b: 10(76).2.23 (pp. 64-65)

B. Couroyer has discussed the different interpretations of

these lines.$ The poetic analysis of the passage proposed by

Though space does not permit studying all of Scott's proposals

here, suffice it to say that in only a few cases is it even questionable
that denotes 'position behind*. As a translation, on the other
hand, 'with' quite often better reflects English idiom than literal
'after, behind'.
2UF 2 (1970): 304. ^See Herdner, ÇTA, 1: 41, n. 9-

Sbid., p. 22, n. 4. ^Cosmic Mountain, p. 128.

^"Corne et Arc," RB 73 (1966): 510-21.

 201

S. E. Loewenstamm^ makes any other word division than that adopted

here very unlikely.2 As regards the interpretation of I) in bcp,

E. Lipinski^ has correctly characterized Dahood's translation "for

flight"^ as a "supposition gratuite."

It should be pointed out, as an aside, that the somewhat ob­

scure verse Ps. 92:11 has not, to my knowledge, been brought into

the discussion of this passage, though that verse associates qrn

and some form of anointing (bll):

You have raised my horn like that of a wild bull,

I have smeared it (or myself ?) with fresh oil.

msr 1 (p. 65)

Though there are clear prepositional usages in the following

texts, the meaning of msr is very problematical:

5(c nt). 5. 2 (1) Ct]st rimt (2) lirth .

msr . 1 . dd . aliyn (5) bcl

She puts corals (?) on her breast,

? to/for beloved Aliyan Baal.

Repeated in 7.2(150).10.

3(cnt).6.1O (9) smsr (10) Idgy . ajrt

(11) mg . Iqds , amrr

He ? to/for the fishermen of Aiirat,

Comes to Qadis (and) Amrur.

l"The Expanded Colon in Ugaritic and Biblical Verse," JSS 14

(1969): 180-81.

,g., Driver, CML, p. 117.

^"Les conceptions et couches merveilleuses de cAnath," Syria
42 (1965) : 69, n. 2.

Melanges Tisserant (1964), p. 95» He seems more recently to

have abandoned this interpretation for in Psalms III (1970), p. 179»
he translates qrn dbatk btlt cnt "Meet me that I may come to you, 0
Virgin Anath, "with Aartun (WO 4 [1967-68] : 289) and others—though
he does not give a complete translation of the lines involved.
 202

mtc b: III 'throw into

* (???) (p. 65)

Once again the meaning of the verb is very doubtful, though

there is a clear prepositional usage. From the context, the classi­

fication seems to be class III, perhaps something like * strip/throw

*
into

mt b: I 'wreck at
* (p. 65)

In his editio princeps C. Virolleaud derived mtt from mt (mwt)

? 5
.
*
'die In this he was followed by Gordon, Sasson, Eissfeldt,
G. A. Lehmann,Dahood,? F. C. Fensham,& and Liverani.9 I have

found three authors who disagree: Dietrich and Loretz^ analyze

mtt as the plural of mt ’man’ ; E. Lipinski^ derives the form from

Arabic matta ’pull (on a rope)’ and translates "a accosté." Both

interpretations make sense but lack sufficient philological basis :

1See Gordon, UT, §19.1575; Weippert, ZDPV 85 (1969): 43.

ZpRU V, p. 82; see also his earlier references, "Les nouvelles

tablettes alphabétiques de Ras Shamra (XVIIIe campagne, automne 1954),"
CRAI 1955, p. 77, and in an untitled article in GLECS 8 (1957-60): 65.

5UT, §144?. 1JAOS

4 *
5 * 86 (1966): 137.

^Sitzungsberichte Berlin (1965): 23—without specific reference

to the root, he speaks of "geraten."
6"Der Untergang des hethitischen Grossreiches und die neuen
Texte axis Ugarit, " UF 2 (1970): 55, n. 56—also without specific
reference to the root, he speaks of "havarierte."

w 7PsalmsI
* 9 10 (1966), p. 292—rendering "foundered," and comparing
sbr in Psi 48:8.
Q
"Shipwreck in Ugarit and Ancient Near Eastern Law Codes,"
OrAn 6 (1967)5 221—he considers this a case of "shipwreck."

9ALNR, series 8, vol. 19 (1964) : 184—" ... ha fatto naufragio. **

10B0 23 (1966): 131.

^"Recherches ugaritiques, ** Syria 44 (1967) • 282-83.

 20?

the comparative evidence at hand points only to a masculine ending

for the plural of mutu ’man'.1 As for Lipinski's suggestion, not

only is Arabic matta nowhere attested as in any way related to

boats (according to the lexica, in any case), but Lipinski's

categorical statement that "un navire ne 'meurt' pas" is belied

by the Old Babylonian text cited by von Soden: summa elippum

5 This is the only parallel I have been able to find

si imtüt.2*

for the root mwt used with ships,but it is at least a parallel

and should rank in preference above distant Arabic etymologies.

mtr b . . . 1 I/III 'cut on . . . for' (S-stem) (p. 65)

Aartun^ has derived smtr from a root mtr 'cut', a derivation

which is tempting because it makes sense of the text, but which is

based only on Arabic matara 'cut'. Aartun offers no explanation

of the 5-stem, but Lipinski reflects it in his translation "faites

5
couper.

nbt b (p. 65)

The root used here is questionable : both nbt proposed by

Gordon and nwb proposed by Dahood mean basically 'grow' and not

1Hebrew mëtîm, Akkadian mutü (EA 55:42 LÛ.ME§-mu-te-[MES-]su)

—there is also a feminine abstract mutûtu which Dietrich and Loretz
consider to serve as the plural.

2AHw, p. 635, the reference is to TLB 4, 35, 27 (also in line 25).

5Virolleaud (GLECS 8 [1957-60]: 65) refers to an Egyptian

parallel.
\o 4 (1967-68): 278-79; accepted by E. Lipinski, "cAnaq-Kiryat
’Arbac-Hébron et ses sanctuaires tribaux, " VT 24 (1974): 52.

5Ibid. 6UT, §19.1603.

7Psalms II (1968), pp. 95-94.

 204

1 cover, adorn
* . The older derivation from nbb * hollow out
* has

little to speak for it. Albright (crediting Z. Gotthold) gives as

a parallel Ex. 27:8 nëbub lufrot which he interprets along with the

Septuagint ’’’hollow (and) boarded over

* , i.e., * cast. * " The ob­

vious objection is that the idea of casting is not present in the

Exodus passage at all: wëgippîtâ aôtô nëfrôset (vs. 2) ’and cover

it with bronze’. In any case nbb does not, in itself, contain the

idea of ’casting’.

ng 1: II ’go away from’ (p. 65)

Gordon* nwg
2 lists this form under * (?), in part on the basis

of nûgôt in Lam. 1:4.

ngj 1: 6(49).2.26-27 (p. 66)

For the interpretation of lymm lyrfam, see notes on bky 1,

above, pp. 125-24, and on ytn 1, above, pp. 179-82.

ndd air: 20(121).2.1-2 (p. 66)

4 . •
Some years ago Marvin H. Pope identified tdd in these texts with

the root ndd/ydd/dwd 'stand

.
* Although these so-called Rephaim texts

are so fragmentary as to preclude definitive analysis, de Moor’s

‘LKurt Galling, "In der Werkstatt des Hephaistos von Ugarit,"

OLZ 59 (1956): 595; W. F. Albright, "The Furniture of El in Canaanite
Mythology," BASOR 91 (1945): 41, n. 16; T. H. Gaster, "A King Without
a Castle: Baal’s Appeal to Asherat," BASOR 101 (1946): 29, n. 61.

2UT, §19.1624.

^So Dahood, Melanges Tisserant (1964), pp. 95-96, a position

taken against Aistleitner*s derivation from ng(w) (WUS, §1740), a
proposal which seems to have originated with W. F. Albright ("New
Canaanite Historical and Mythological Data," BASOR 65 [1956]: 51)•
Albright compared Arabic ngw ’escape’. Driver (CML, p. 156) trans­
lates "hasted away," also comparing the Arabic verb just mentioned.
^’’A Note on Ugaritic ndd-ydd, " JCS 1 (1947): 557-41.
 205

translation, "may the shades set foot in its (i.e. the palace’s)

place,"1 seems to rely on two questionable bases; ajr interpreted

as a noun with am impersonal antecedent (what is the "palace’s

place"? I know of no such circumlocution for ’sanctuary’); the

meaning •set foot on’ is unattested for ndd.

ndy b: II ’cast out from’: 4(51).6.55 (p. 67)

Though a consensus seems to have been reached that ndy b here

means ’throw from’, one wonders if Albright may not have been

correct in his early interpretation: "Behold for seven days thou

shalt throw fire into the sanctuaries, flames into the temples."2

These lines would then be summing up the seven-day action of the

flames described in the preceding lines rather than stating what

was done after the seven days.^ In all other verifiable cases,

however, mk (which introduces the following stich) precedes what

happens on the seventh day of a sequence of seven days, and not

what happened during the seven days.

Even having attained the correct temporal interpretation of the

passage, the verb itself is not certain. To be derived from ndy,

it would have to be analyzed either as 5 f.s. passive ’ the fire was

cast out’,or as J m.pl. indefinite 1 they cast the fire out

.'
* ’

^Seasonal Pattern, p. 194. 2JP0S 14 (1954): 127.

^Or, more precisely, on the seventh day—see Moshe Held, "The

Action-Result (Factitive-Passive) Sequence of Identical Verbs in
Biblical Hebrew and Ugaritic," JBL 84 (1965): 275» 276, n. 18.

^Ronald J. Williams, "The Passive _£al Theme in Hebrew," in

Essays on the Ancient Semitic World, eds. J. W. Wevers and D. B.
Redford (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1970), p. 45.

5Aistleitner, WUS, §1756/5*.

 206

Whitaker lists this form under his root ndd, apparently inter­

preting it as Qal 'stand

* * leave1*
7
. Held has, in any case, given

very solid reasons why this form should not be derived from ndy
(Akkadian isatu nadu = * set fire
).^
* Gordon's derivation from a

root wdy 'depart'^ unfortunately has only a rather obscure Arabic

etymology.

ndy b: II 'cast out from': 607.64-6$ (p. 67)

There are two primary avenues of approach to this text, both

based on the parallel c§m// sfrt. Virolleaud^ gives to c§m the

common meaning of 'trees' and thus proposes that sfrt should be a

cognate to Akkadian safaatu, a kind of plant. Dahood, on the other

hand, takes s&t as the known term,^ and thus proposes that cgm

mean 'hole'More recently Dahood has interpreted bc§m in 607.64

as "violently,citing bëc5§em in Job $0:21 as the deciding fac­

tor. One must hesitate, however, to abandon the parallelism cg //

sfrt ' tree // bush' (see next paragraph).

Virolleaud interprets ndy b here as 'throw from

* ('throw the

tamarisk out from among the trees'), while Dahood interprets the

1 p
Concordance, p. 44$. JBL 84 (196$): 276, n. 19.
x L
\UT, §9.57. Ugaritica V, p. 571.

^E.g., in Psalms III (1970), pp. 25-26, admitting that Hebrew

safcat 'pit* is previously unattested in another Semitic language.
&He cites as parallel cgm in 12(75).1.24—it is doubtful, though
that cgm there is parallel with kry 'dig* as is claimed by Dahood
(Psalms I [1966], p. 6$; see also the same author, Biblica $0 C19&9]'
$5$; idem, UF 1 [1969]: 28). That text should be read and translated:
(2$) kry amt (24) cpr// cgm yd (25) ugrm 'Dig, maid-servant, the ground
^17ïtha^ïght)71îandthëfïëld* = a b c // d c ' .

7Biblica 54 (1975): $55.

 207

idiom as 1 throw into’ (’’He hurled the tamarisk into the Hole,
and into the Pit the tree of death";1 "He violently hurled the

tamarisk, even to the Pit the tree of death" ). Astour’s com­

parison of this text with the Sumero-Akkadian namburbi ritual^

would seem to tip the balance in favor of Virolleaud's inter­

pretation of these lines. Astour also compares sfat with Hebrew

AW ’ shrub, bush’.

ndy b: II ’cast out from’: 2124.1 (p. 67)

The meaning of this passage seems at first glance to be 'the

cow (which is) on the mountain casts out her voice’ = ’the cow

casts her voice from the mountain’. Others, however, have pro­

posed^ that bgr = b + infinitive of a root gry; a translation

something like ’by mooing’ is proposed. As for the verbal root be­
hind td, Dahood claims elsewhere^ that the parallel with Akkadian

nadu rigma dispels doubt as to the proper root from which forms
n
such as td and jrd are to be derived. This is undoubtedly true for

text 2124, but one would wish for more specific parallels, within

or without Ugaritic, to dispel doubts concerning the other passages

I have listed under nd£.

ndr b: 17(2 Aqht).6.21-23 (p. 67)

Many take the word adr, not as the 1 c.s. yqtl of ndr, but as

•‘'Psalms III (1970), p. 25. 2Biblica 54 (1973) : 555.

Aines 27 (1968): 24-25. ^Cf. Rainey, ÜF 3 (1971): 172.

5Dahood, Psalms II (1968), pp. 226, 306; Gordon, UT, §19.1985.

^Melanges Tisserant (1964), p. 96.

n
rSo also de Moor, Seasonal Pattern, p. 243.
 208

an adjectival form from the root fdr ’mighty’, in which case the

whole list functions as the direct object of the verb jrtn (of line

24). The explanation of adr as derived from ndr is best discussed

by Albright and Mendenhall.12

* J. C. de Moor provides a more recent

discussion with bibliography (and a defense of the text and trans-

2
lation of jqbm = ’ash-wood
* in line 20).

ndr b: 17(2 Aqht).6.21-25: (b/d)lb im (p. 6?)

According to Herdner5 the reading is either dlbnn or blbnn.

On the basis of parallelism alone Is would be preferable.

ndr b/bm . . . cmn: $0(117).14-15 and 1015.12-1$ (pp. 67-68)

Although the two passages containing this idiom are not clear,
Driver’s translation of ^mn as ’from’4 hardly solves the problems

involved.5 And the problem with Driver’s translation of ndr ijt

by "a vow of a generous gift"6 is that it leaves both passages

g
without a verb.? The only other passage to contain the noun i£t

is 14(Krt).4.200-l, where ndr undoubtedly is a verb (jrdr) : 'Then

1JNES 1 (1942): 227-29.

2”The Ash in Ugarit," UF 5 (1971): 349-50.

5CTA, Is 85. Slgaritica VI, p. 181.

5Despite Dahood's enthousiastic approval (Orientalia n.s. 41

[1972] : 15$)—be it noted that neither Driver nor Dahood attempts a
translation or explanation of the passage in context. Parker s ana­
lysis of cmn here as "describing a relationship between persons
(Studies, p. 60) is so vague as to be useless.

6Ibid.; cf. Virolleaud, PRU II, p. 29: "don votif."

?See Parker, Studies, pp. 87-88, and bibliography there for

attempts to parse ijt as from the quasi-verb it,; this analysis poses
a serious problem of gender, however, for there is no reason why ndr
as a noun should be feminine (in this analysis ndr should be the sub­
ject, though Parker does consider the possibility that i£t is 1 c.s.)
Q
If it is a noun; it is written iitt.
 209

Krt-tc vowed the iijt / of A£irat of the Tyrians / and of the God­

dess of the Sidonians

* . Whatever the solution may be to the Krt

text, it does provide the usage of ndr as a verb, which may well

be the case in the two passages under discussion.

The passages are by no means clear, but a comparison of the

context of both passages may at least indicate a general under­

standing of the situation:

50(117).13 w . rgm . lib . ly . . . and return word to me.

14 bm . jy . ndr From the tribute (?) they

devoted
15 ijt . cmn . mlkt a gift to the queen;
16 w . rgmy . lb moreover, I made my words
17 Iqt . w , pn smooth and the face of
18 mlk . nr . bn the king shone upon me.

1013:11 w , rgm[. tjb. l]y . . . and return word to me.

12 hlny . "mnL?l Here, to [perhaps nothing
restored]
13 mlk . b . jy ndr the king, from the tribute,
they
14 ijt . w . ht devoted a gift, and behold
15 [y?]sny . udrh he ? his ? .
16 w . hm . frt And if the Hittite
17 C1 . w . lïkt comes/goes up I will send
word

It is clear in both cases that the section dealing with ijt is a

new section following a standard epistolary formula. In text

50(117) the lines following the section in question relate a visit

paid by the king (of Ugarit) to another king (undoubtedly of a

superior country).This visit seems to have been accompanied by

a gift to the queen (of the superior country, not of Ugarit), and

its success depended in part on the gift and on the writer’s smooth

words.

"hsee text 1015 cited at nr b, above, p. 70.

 210

In text 1013, the line following the section being discussed

is unclear, the first letter of line 15 is broken away and the word

udr is difficult. It is not impossible, however, that this line, if

deciphered, would also indicate some token of favor from the super­

ior king, brought about by the gift from the king of Ugarit. The

superior king may well have been the king of Hatti (the sps of text

1015), and the favor elicited may well have to do with the king of

Hatti coming to the rescue (hm fat C1 . . . ) of the king of Ugarit

(and not to attack him as the ambiguity of the term _^1 might allow

one to believe).

ntt b: 3(cnt),3»29 (p. 68)

Because of the parallelism with the following lines (bh/^ bcdn

// cln),1 bh here should be taken as referring to Anat herself:

2
(literally) ’in her, her feet shake
* . This is preferable to
taking it as an action exercised against the messengers,^ or as

4 5
a temporal adverb. A recent discussion may be found in RSP, by

Schoors.

ntc b (p. 68)

See Driver, CML, p. 151, for a possible derivation from the

root frcn ’pierce

* .

nsk 1: l(cnt IX).2.20-21 (p. 68)

See discussion below at qry b, pp. 230-31.

^The passage is discussed at dc cl, above, pp. 142-43.

See, for example, Dahood, Psalms I (1966), p. 281; Held,

Landsberger , p. 405, for the last part of the text.

^So Driver, CML, p. 8? and n. 15.

^Dahood, Psalms II (1968), p. 142. ^Vol. 1: 67-68.

 211

npl b: I ’fall (while) on': 2.1(137).9 (p. 69)

This text is restored from 16.6(127).57, which has qll b.^

nr b: 50(117).18 (p. 70)

See my discussion of the context and parallels to this text

2
at ndr b/bm . . . cmn, above, pp. 208-10. Parker parses bn as

b + n (extended form of the preposition) +01 c.s. suffix.

sbb 1 (p. 71)

This idiom may be preserved in 16(126) .3

3-4
* (= 5C67].6.3-5 '•

[as analyzed by Held]) which Held*

3 divides and translates as

follows:

sb lqgm arg "The produce of the soil has turned into

brambles,
Iksm miyt cn into weeds the produce of the plowland."

sgr bcd: 607.70-71 (p. 72)

This passage has been interpreted as consisting of nominal

clauses,but the regular use of Hebrew sgr bcd lends philological

credibility to the verbal construction suggested here. T. H. Gaster

has pointed out the use of 1 closing
* in incantations.3 Also in

favor of interpreting sgrt as a verb is the use of ptfr in line 71.

Beyond this, however, several problems remain, among which: the anal­

ysis of mnt, the parsing of sgrt and cdbt, and the meaning of jlj.

^For the meaning of the expression, see note to qll b, below,

p. 227.
Studies, p. 44. 3JBL 84 (1965): 277, n. 22.

^"Behind him are houses of incantation, / behind him are houses

of chambers, / behind him is an edifice of bronze"--Astour, JNES 27
(1968): 26.

3"A Hang-up for Hang-ups : The Second Amuletic Plaque from

Arslan Tash," BASOR 209 (1973): 24.
&So Virolleaud, Ugaritica V, p. 572.
 212

As regards mnt, there are two leading possibilities: it could

either be construed as a verb in the same person as sgrt and cdbt

or as a noun. The regular use of mnt in this text as a noun leads

one to believe that it might well be a noun here also."1' If so,

these lines belong to the expanded colon construction discussed by

2 3
Loewenstamm and Y. Avishur. Avishur considers the lines pres­

ently under discussion but he interprets mnt as "a name or epi-

4
thet for the goddess." The use of mnt elsewhere in this text in

the sense of ’exorcism’, however, fits very well here. In my trans­

lation the parallelism is a b c // a b d // a d* e. Inter­

preting mnt as a verb, one might translate: 'Behind her houses she

exorcises, behind her houses she shuts, behind her she effects

three—fold conjurations (?) ' . Here the parallelism is a b c //

a b c' // a c’ ’ d.

As for the parsing of sgrt and cdbt, to my knowledge interpre­

tations previous to that of Avishur either took the forms as nouns

(Virolleaud, Astour) or as verbs parsed in the first or second per-

son.Avishur, however, interpreted mnt as the subject of the tri­

colon and parsed sgrt and cdbt as 3 f.s. qtl.& In my analysis this

interpretation is retained except that mnt is not parsed as the sub­

ject, but as the object of sgrt; thus the subject is not explicitly

stated in these lines but is the same as that of each strophe of the

text, the urn pfrl, etc., of line 1 (or perhaps her interlocutress sps

^So Virolleaud, Ugaritica V, p. 572. ^jss 14 (1969)• 176-96.

^’’Addenda to the Expanded Colon in Ugaritic and Biblical Verse,"

UF 4 (1972): 1-10.
\bid., p. 3. ^Caquot, Syria 46 (1969): 255» 4 (1972) : 3»
 213

—she is probably also, by the way, the subject of the strophe

beginning with line 61, whatever the difficult trgnw may be). In

this interpretation lines ?0-71a continue the goddess' actions

with regard to Horon first introduced in line 61, while lines 71b-

76 contain conversation between Horon and the goddess. Lines 71b-

72 are thus translated: 'Open the house of exorcism, open the

house and I shall go in, the palace and I shall enter

* .

The interpretations of jit have centered around the two pri­

mary meanings of that homograph: 'copper (or: bronze)' and

* three
* . The latter appears more likely in view of Caster
* s ob­

servation that the number three is elsewhere used in incantations.

sc b: II * sweep from
* (?) (p. 72)

The verb behind sct is generally related to biblical Hebrew

^For the reading uba, rather than Virolleaud's ubn, see L. R.

Fisher, "New Readings for the Ugaritic Texts in Ugaritica V," UF 3
(1971): 356, and Dahood, RSP, 1: 318. Fisher's interpretation(rant
ptfr bt wuba hkl "Charmed is the door to the house, even the entrance
of the temple") implies a stichometric division entirely different
from that supposed here (and which appears to me to be out of the
question). Dahood leaves the w of uba out of his transliteration
but translates as though it has to be restored: "ptfc bt uba hkl wistql
•Let the house be opened (and) the palace entered when I arrive'" (per­
haps the omission of the was just a slip). Here Dahood momentarily
abandons his usual keen sense of parallelism (b // stql) under the
duress of seeking out a Hophal in Ugaritic (not to mention the semantic
violence done to uba which he translates "entered" [i.e., the place
entered] while in the Hebrew parallel cited, I Kings 12:5, yuba re­
fers to the thing brought in). Unfortunately, I can offer no better
solution for the ji of uba which I translate * I shall go in'. The
forms yukl, yubd, and yuhb invoked by Avishur and Astour (cf. Gordon,
UT, p. 71, n. 1) as parallels to u- understood as 1 c.s. yqtl prefix
have recently received another explanation by J. Sanmartin Ascaso,
"Notizen zur ugaritischen Orthographie," UF 3 (1971): 173-80. It
might be observed, nonetheless, that b3 is nowhere else attested in
Ugaritic with the 1 c.s. yqtl prefix, so we have no inner-Ugaritic
point of comparison.
2BAS0R 209 (1973): 24.
 214

sôcâ in Ps. 55S9.12 There is disagreement, however, as to the root

and the form. Gray considered that the Hebrew form is derived from

a final weak root sàcâ. Greenfield objected that on the basis of

siyyëcattu harûab ’the wind swept it’ in some manuscripts of Mishna

Kilayim 5:7, the root should be taken as middle weak and the -t

should agree with the female workers in each line (passive parti­

ciple). Dahood refers to Greenfield’s work, but prefers a com­

parison with Arabic sacaya ’run’. He thus takes the root to be

final weak and parses it as a precative perfect 2 m.s. D-stem

("You must sweep . . . "). Sauren and Kestemont also derive the

verb from a root scy, but take it as perfect indicative ("S'encourra

de la compagne ...”). I find Greenfield’s argument from the

Mishna to be more persuasive than the Arabic etymology, but it

must be admitted that the evidence is yet very slim.

sc b: 14(Krt).3.111: htbt! (p. 72)

See Herdner, CTA, 1: 63, n. 7, for the emendation.

sp3 Ibl: RS 22.225.4 (p. 72)

. . 2
This text has appeared only in preliminary publication. As

the parallel with 1§153 in II Chron. 15:3 shows, Ibl is to be

parsed as ZL (preposition) + bl (negative particle).

^So Gray, Legacy, p. 142, n. 1; J. C. Greenfield, review of

Henoch Yalon Jubilee Volume, in JAPS 87 (1967): 70; idem, Proceedings
of the International Conference on Semitic Studies, p. 99; idem,
"Some Glosses on the Keret Epic," EI 9 (1969): 63; Dahood, UE 1 (1969):
20-21; Sauren and Kestemont, UP 3 71971): 198, n. 35»

2C. Virolleaud, "Un nouvel episode du mythe ugaritique de

Baal," CRAI I960, pp. 180-86.

5See Wilfred G. E. Watson, "Archaic Elements in the Language

of Chronicles," Biblica 53 (1972): 200.
 215

spr 1: 1010.17 (p. 73)

4 analyzes spr 1 here as equal to Hebrew spr + direct

Parker12
*

object.

cdb 1; 14(Krt). 2.81-82 (p. 74)

The translation 'prepare for’ has been maintained here because,

though the passage itself standing alone would be ambiguous as to

2
whether ’prepare for’ or ’prepare from’ is meant, in all other

texts where the idiom is attested cdb 1 quite clearly means ’pre­

pare for’. The suggestion that the 1. should mean ’ from’ was first

made, I believe, by W. F. Albright.This interpretation of the 1

is closely related to Albright's interpretation of bt fabr as ’gran­

it
*
ary . Ginsberg has pointed out, however, that since Krt’s town

was called gbr, the parallelism qryt # bt gbr could as well mean

'city# the house(s) of gbr' as Albright's 'city# granaries'.

Since Krt is preparing his people for a long campaign, it appears

quite possible that the reference is to those for whom he is pre­

^Studies, pp. 52, 66.

2M. Dahood opted, by inference, for the latter in "The Value of

Ugaritic for Textual Criticism," Biblica 40 (1959): 163, but was un­
decided in "Northwest Semitic Philology and Three Biblical Texts,"
JNSL 2 (1972): 19; Gordon translates "for," UT, §10.10; Sauren and
Kestemont translate "du silo/du cellier," UF 3 (1971): 196.

^"Some Canaanite-Phoenician Sources of Hebrew Wisdom," SVT 3

(1955): 11-12. See also his reference to the text in "The Role of the
Canaanites in the History of Civilization," in The Bible and the
Ancient Near East: Essays in Honor of William Foxwell Albright, ed.
G^ Ernest Wright (Garden City, New York: Doubleday and Co., 1965
[Anchor edition, original copyright, 19613), p. 482, n. 80. Here he
changed "for the bt gbr" of the first edition of this article (in
Studies in the History of Culture : The Disciplines of the Humanities
[Menasha, Wisconsin: George Banta Publishing Company, 1942], p. 36,
n. 80) to "from the bt gbr."
4
Legend, p. 37.
 216

paring the food ('for the household's] of gbr'), rather than to

the place whence the food is to come.

cdb 1: 601.1.12-13: Imgr lb (p. 74)

I have briefly discussed the interpretations and re-readings

of this difficult passage in a note on 16.1(125).1-5 to appear

in Ugarit-Forschungen , vol. 5»

cdb cm: I 'handle with' - 'handle like' (p. 75)

M. Dahood,1 de Moor,2 Held,5 and Rin4 are some of those who

have interpreted fm in 6.1.51-52(49.1.23-24) as ('with' -) 'like

.
*

My stichometric division of the text is somewhat eccentric in that

it applies the division of those who take S» æ3 'people'5 to a text

in which Jjn is interpreted as the preposition 'with' ■* 'like .

Heretofore those who took as a preposition have analyzed the

passage as a bi-colon, each member of which is rather long (es­

pecially the second):

kt —

One of meager strength cannot run like Baal,

Cannot handle the spear like Ben-Dagan one who is lacking
beauty.
This analysis may be correct, but it must be admitted that the lines

are long. In my analysis the passage becomes a tn-colon; its mam

disadvantage is that l%r% is left without a prepositional modifier

^Psalms I (1966), p. 309; "Nest and Phoenix in Job 29, 18,"

Biblica 48 (ÏW: 542; Psalms II (1968), p. 245; UF 1 (1969). 24-25.

Seasonal Pattern, pp. 202, 203. 84 (1965) : 280, n. 36.

4BZ n.s. 7 (1963): 32.

5See J. A. Emerton, "Ugaritic Notes," JTS n.s. 16 (1965)•

441-42; van Zijl, Baal, pp. 190-91»
 217

in its particular colon (though the prepositional idiom spread

over the two lines is undoubtedly rg/rg cm). In word for word

analysis, the parallelisms are as follows:

dq anm lyrg (a a) b
^m bcl lycdb mrfr cd (b
b
* )
cm bn dgn kt msm c (d’d’) (a12a')

cdn b: 4(51).5.69 (p. 75)

A recent discussion of this passage with extensive biblio­

graphy has been provided by van Zi jl

* Most analyses of the

passage assume a bi—colon of uneven members

* Van ZiJi’s division

is three words (wnap taken as one)// five words. Ginsberg’s

division is five words // three words. The most frequent pat­

terns in the surrounding lines are 4// 4 or "5// 5i or combinations

such as 4// 5 or 5/7 4// 5. This regularity leads me to divide

either 4// 4 or 3// 3 (with wnap counted as one word or two—

since its derivation is difficult we have no way of knowing what

its stress pattern in poetry may have been):

wnap ‘dn mtrh bcl Now Baal brings his season of rain,
ycdn cdn ikt bglZ He brings his season of jkt with snow
*

wn ap cdn Now indeed he brings his season,

mfrrh bcl ycdn Baal brings his season of rain,
cdn jkt bglj Brings the season of tkt with snow.

In the 3 // 3 division cdn in the first and third lines could be

analyzed either as the noun ’time, season’ (cognate accusative of

ycdn in the middle line), or as a £tl verbal form corresponding to

yqtl in the middle line (though the parallelism of a given verb in

1Baal, pp. 107-10 (though his translation in my opinion makes

little sense).

2Such as van Zijl’s; or Ginsberg’s, ANET, p. 133; or Olden­

burg’s, Conflict, p. 76
 218

the pattern qtl // ygtl // qtl is unknown to me in either Ugaritic or

Hebrew "literature—qtl ;/ qtl// ygtl, on the other hand, is known,

see Ps. 93:5).1 Cross has recently used the 4 // 4 division in

translating this text, but reads J^kt as £r and translates, "He has

appointed the wet and snowy season." The treatment by Dietrich

and Loretz^ is tempting on the surface because of its U// 4 division,

but it must be rejected because it does not fit the context. It

would have Baal ending (n3p) the rainy season, whereas in lines

70-71 the storm is in full force.

4
Because of the uncertainty with regard to the meaning of jkt

it is impossible to determine the exact nuance of b in bglj. Pro­

visionally I have interpreted cdn b as * bring the season of X

which is in/with Z
* , i.e., b indicates the circumstances required

for snow or which accompany snow.

cly 1: CLECS 10 (1964): 59 (p. 77)

This text was published in preliminary form by C. Virolleaud,

"Remarques sur quelques inscriptions ougaritiques." See also

Gordon, UT, §19.2356.

cn b (p. 77)

The idiom cn b seems to be present in 4(51).7.55-54: n [gpn]

"hboewenstamm, JSS 14 (1969): 189. ^Canaanite Myth, pp. 148-49.

5B0 23 (1966): 129.

Sf’or a possible explanation of jkt not discussed by van Zijl,

see Aartun, WO 4 (1967-68): 280-81 (however he ignores wnap at the
beginning of the passage and thus vitiates#his poetic division; the
same is true of E. Lipinski's treatment, "Epiphanie de Baal-Haddu:
RS 24.245," UP 3 [1971]: 86-87). Aartun
s
* explanation is based on the
very rare Arabic word jakka 1 travel
* which he translates in context
"... die Zeit des Umherziehens mit Schnee."
 219

wugr bglmt. Many emend, however, to bn glmt or else understand

bglmt as equivalent to bn glmt on the analogy of 13 = 'son' in

2
Phoenician and elsewhere.

cny b: 19(1 Aqht).4.179 (p. 78)

This expression most certainly means ' ... in the seventh

year ... answers', and not 'after the seventh year '. When an

action takes place for a given amount of time, a new action

usually begins during the last unit, not after the last unit, as

is shown by the use of the stock formula mk bsbc ymm after a se­

quence of days from one to six in 4(51).6.24-32, as well as in

17(2 Aqht).1.6-17. It will lead to utter anarchy to begin inter­

preting such clear formulae as mk bsbc ymm/snt in one place as

'in/on
* , in another as 'after'. The word ymm is probably to be

interpreted as singular ^m + enclitic jn. The phenomenon of a

period of X number of days with change in action taking place on

the last day is also frequent in Hebrew, for example : wayyafranu

3êlleh nôkafr 3êlleh sibcat yâmim wayhî bayyôm hassëbîcî wattiqrab

hammilbàmâ (I Kings 20:29) 'they camped over against each other for

seven days ; on the seventh day the battle was joined'

1See Segert, BZAW 77 (1958): 198; Herdner, CTA, 1: 30.

2So Gordon, UT, §19.481; Dahood, Biblica 41 (i960): 195.

^Gordon, UT, §10.5; Dahood, Psalms III (1970), p. 68; van der
Weiden, Proverbes, p. 109.
St. Dietrich and 0. Loretz, "Zur ugaritischen Lescikographie
(V)," UP 4 (1972): 34, interpret ^m in this formula as having semantic
significance, indicating the predicate of the nominal clause in
17(2 Aqht).1.16.

^For further literature on the subject, see Held, JBL 84

(1965): 276, n. 18.
 220

cqb b: I 'be rough, hilly in

* (??) (p- 78)

The interpretation adopted here is that of Virolleaud and

Eissfeldt.2 According to this interpretation ^b may be a sin­

gular noun * hilly ground

* functioning as predicate of a nominal

clause, rather than a qtl verbal formation. Other interpreta­

tions are : * situated in

* (Gordon), and * near to
* (Dietrich and

Loretz).^ In any case, cqb cannot be a verbal adjective since sd

at the beginning of line 1 is plural (lines 1-2 serve as the head­

ing for a list of fields) and a verbal adjective would have to

agree in number.
crb b; III * enter
:
* 19(1 Aqht).4.172: <bbth> (p. 79)

The insertion of bbth is purely conjectural, and to my know­

ledge has not been suggested previously. Moreover, it is itself

based on a restoration: Herdner's restoration of bbty at the end

of line 182 of this text.^ If the restoration there is correct,

however, then it should be adopted here also as an emendation.

If it is not accepted in both places there is a stichometric

problem:

crb bkyt bhklh

msspdtbhzrh
P%%m gr
Here pggm gr is left dangling. Driver solves this problem by

making pggm gr the subject of the following verb (jbk) in line

175, but the clear break after pggm gr in line 184 disallows this

IpRU pe IfO. 2Sjtzungsberichte Berlin (1965) - 19»

5UT, §19.1907. ^BO 25 (1966): 131.

5CTA, 1: 90, n. 10.

 221

forcing him to translate: ’’Depart weeping women from my palace,

wailing women (and) men that gash (your) flesh from my courtyard.

This varied stichometric division inspires little confidence. The

insertion of bbth in line 172, explained as a haplography by

homoioarkton (bkyt, bbth, bhklh), restores a regular stichometric

analysis.

crb b: III 1 guarantee * (p. 79)

This idiom is frequent enough and utilized in sufficiently

explicit passages to indicate that the meaning 1 guarantee’ is

essentially correct. The corresponding Hebrew idiom is crb +

direct object (+ JL in Prov. 6:1; cf. also crb clt in KAI 60:6,

where crb is a noun 'guarantor’) and in Akkadian it is lêqû

qâtâti (apparently reflected in Iqfr yd, 1040.8). PRU III, p. 37

(RS 15.81), though lexically distinctive2 in its usage of gabâtu

qâtâti, shows how the guarantee of a person functioned: if the

guaranteed person fled to another land, the guarantor payed a

fixed amount to the king.Unfortunately, the Ugaritic usages

have not aided us materially in understanding the literal mean­

ing behind the idiom crb b.^ For a discussion of the guarantee

concerning flight of the guaranteed person (and for a specific

treatment of texts 1161 and 2116) see Liverani, Ugaritica VI,

PP. 375-78.

1CML, p. 65. 2See CAD, 16: 32.

3G. Boyer, PRU III, pp. 305-7.

^Gordon (UT, §10.4) explains the b, of crb b as the _b of price

or equivalence. It is doubtful, however, that the Id of price may be

termed Id of equivalence (see below, pp. 308-9); this removes one point
of comparison in explaining the _b of crb b as _b of equivalence.
 222

crb b: 2106.12 (p. 80)

Jonathan R. Ziskind will publish a paper in a forthcoming

issue of JAPS in which he discusses the legal parallels and im­

plications of ship guarantees.

crb cl: * enter before

III * * (p. 80)

See note on b3 cl, above, pp. 116-17.

csy 1 (p. 81)

17(2 Aqht).1.30 grs d . csy . lnh (also in .1.49; .2.5, 19) has

been interpreted 'he casts out the one who oppresses him
* ; if csjr 1

does mean * oppress * it is semantically parallel to sgq (gq) 1 "press,

squeeze
.
* 1 The word lnh may not be a prepositional formation, how­

ever, but a participial or nominal form derived from In (iwn) spend

2
the night *.

ctq b . . . 1 . . . bd: 16.1(125).2-5 (p. 81)

In a note on this passage to appear in Ugarit-F orschungen, vol.

5, I have discussed the various interpretations of the text. To the

references assembled there add now M. Dahood, "Sol * Phoenix in Job

29=18 and in Ugaritic," CBQ 56 (1974): 85-88.

"^Several scholars equate csy here with Hebrew csh II 'oppress*:

Albright, BASOR 94 (1944): 55, n. 56; Gray, Legacy, p. 110, n. 5; M.
Dahood, "Tteltoot J^zb II in Job," JBL 78 (1959): 504. Delekat (UF 4
[1972]: 25) translates this verb as though it were from Hebrew _sh I
* do*; others interpret Hebrew csh I and II as semantic developments of
one root (KB, pp. 759-41; M. Dahood, Proverbs and Northwest Semitic
Philology, Scripts Pontificii Institut! Biblici 115 [Rome: Pontificium
Institution Biblicum, 19653, p. 14; Liudger Sabottka, Zephanja:—Versucj^
einer Neuübersetzung mit philologischem Kommentar, Biblica et Orientalia,
No. 25 [Rome: Pontificium Institution Biblicum, 1972],Ap. 157). Driver
(Ugaritica VI, p. 184) has explained csy by Arabic asa * turn away*, a
root which he also finds in several passages of the Hebrew Bible. He
translates the text: "Driving out him who rebels against him."

2So Albright, ibid.; Dahood, ibid, (both references in pre­

ceding note); see especially Gray, Legacy, p. 244.
 223

pdy 1: I 1*redeem for’ (or: II ’redeem from') (temporal) (p. 82)

See note on ytn 1, above, pp. 179-82.

phy b: 4(51).2.12: wtphn (p. 83)

As pointed out above in the note to dmc b (p. 142), t) +

infinitive in Ugaritic is frequently followed by w + verb.

prs3 b: I ' ? with' (p. 83)

The meaning of prsa is as yet guessed from context as related

to Hebrew prs 'spread'

ptb b/bqrb: III 'open in' (p. 83)

This idiom is put in class III because of the change in situ­

ation: 'open (something which was previously not) in'.

There may be an attestation of ptb b, class I 'open with', in

the lines following the cited texts :

(19) wCypJtfr . bdqt . crpt He opens the clouds with rain,

(20) C1 h[wt] . k£r . wfrss At the command of Ko&ar-wa-
gasis.

Also in lines 27-28.

This interpretation of bdqt (= Jd + dqt from wdq) seems to have

2 . .
originated with Izz-al-Din Al Yasin. C. Virolleaud's original

suggestion,^ however, is not impossible: bdqt would be a noun

cognate with Akkadian butuqtu 'flood, sluice channel, water conduit'.

The idea would be more akin to that of Mal. 3:10 (opening the win­

1See Albright, BASOR 91 (1943): 41, n. 19; Caster, BASOR 101

(1946): 29.

2fhe Lexical Relation Between Ugaritic and Arabic, Shelton

Semitic Series, No. 1 (New York: Shelton College, 1952), p. 151; this
interpretation was accepted by Gray (Legacy, p. 52, n. 2) and Gordon
(UT, §19.1082).

^"Un nouveau chant du poème d*Aleïn-Baal," Syria 13 (1932): 154.

 224

dows of heaven to pour out a blessing) than to Gen. 7:11 (opening

the windows of heaven to pour out a [destructive] flood). Against

this interpretation is the fact that I have not been able to locate

any metaphorical uses of butuqtu to denote the ’water conduits’ of

heaven.

ptb bcd; 23(52).70 (p. 83)

Gordon translates here "... he opened an aperture for

them . . . "1 Has bcd taken the meaning of ’through’ as in He­

brew: ’he opened an aperture (in order that) they (might pass)

through’, or is the guardian of the sown literally making an open­

ing for them which at the moment of making is behind them? Or has

bcd taken on the derived meaning also frequent in Hebrew ’on be­

half of, for the sake of'?

§hl C1 (p. 84)

The idiom §hl C1 appears to be attested in 17(2 Aqht).2.9, but

there the ^1 is usually taken as adverbial:

(8) bdlniCl] (9) pnm . tsmfa . Danil's face rejoices,

wcl yghl pit Above, his brow glows.2

I would propose, as a tempting solution, the emendation cl<h>;

this puts the elements in parallel (b/7 cl) into the same gram­

matical category: (literally) ’in Danil, his face rejoices / upon

him, his brow glows'. In UT, §5.39, Gordon gives several cases of

loss of postvocalic h. He does not mention the present case but

1UT, §6.3.

^For the interpretation of the passage, see H. L. Ginsberg,

"The North-Canaanite Myth of Anath and Aqhat," BASOR 98 (1945): 15,
n. 20; idem, "Lexicographical Notes," SVT 16 (19^7): 72-75; J• C.
Greenfield, "Lexicographical Notes II," HUCA 30 (1959): 144; Gevirtz,
Patterns, pp. 67-68, n. 49.
 225

includes one much like it (19C1 Aqht].4.2O8) discussed at lbs C1

(above, p. 193). If the present example may be correctly classed

in that category, then the emendation cl<h> to attain a preposi­

tional construction would not be necessary.

§b b/bqrb: III ‘invite into

* (p. 84)

The idiom gfr b regularly means * invite into’, but there is no

reason to consider that the element of directionality as such is

found in the preposition itself;1 rather, the full perspective is

'call (to someone in order that he end up) in’, i.e., the direc­

tionality is in the entire verb/preposition idiom and not in the

preposition alone.

gfr cm: III ’cry out to’: 5(6?).1.22-23 (p. 85)

On the basis of the following passage (23C52].69), I have

interpreted gfr cm as ’call out to

* here, although the passage

could conceivably be translated:

Cry, Baal, with my brothers,

Call, Hadd, with my kin;
And eat food with my brothers,
And drink wine with my kinsmen.

gfr cm: III ’cry out to

* : 23(52).69: w§b hm (p. 85)

Consult Gordon (UT, §6.3) for the proper understanding of

wgfr hm.

gly b: I * curse (while) in

* (p. 85)

The lines following this passage are given at til 1 and mtr b

(above, pp. 40, 62). The meaning * curse’ seems to be established

by Ugaritica V, texts 130 III 16’ (p. 235) and 137 II 46’ (p. 245).

^an Dijk, Ezekiel’s Prophecy, pp. 72, 76.

^Nougayrol’s translations are in the glossary, pp. 349« 352.

 226

In these texts the Ugaritic correspondent to Akkadian forms of the

root 3rr 1 curse' is gi-il-yu.1 The relevance of these polyglot

2
entries for the Ugaritic text at hand was soon pointed out. The

meaning ’curse’ for gly, which in Aramaic later meant ’pray', is

somewhat surprising, but apparently assured by the polyglot texts.

The stichometric analysis adopted here appears to me more regular

than Dahood's (the word count in his analysis is 4/2/5/5).^ It is

the same, to choose two chronological extremes, as U. Cassuto's in

1939^ and as Svi and Shifra Rin's in 1967.^

qbr b: III 'bury in' (p. 86)

For the classification of qbr b (class III—one does not 'bury

[while] in', one puts the body 'into' the tomb), compare Hebrew

qbr 31 (e.g., Gen. 23:19)

*

XFor the reading, see Delbert R. Hillers, "Additional Note,"

BASOR 200 (1970): 18; J. Blau and S. Loewenstamm ("’wgrytyt sly 'qyll,'"
Lesonenu 35 E1970-713 : 9) read gilyaEtu].

^Hillers, ibid.; Blau and Loewenstamm, ibid.; M. Dahood,

"Hebrew-Ugaritic Lexicography VIII," Biblica 51 (1970): 401-2; idem,
Orientalia n.s., 39 (1970): 576.

^Biblica 51 (1970): 401-2.

^"Daniel e le spighe: Un episodic della tavola I D di Ras

Shamra." Orientalia n.s. 8 (1959): 259. Cassuto interpreted %gl%
as ’pray'.
^"Ugaritic-Old Testament Affinities II," BZ n.s. 11 (1967):
191. They, mistakenly I believe, derive %r in line 40 from rr 'curse .
Though the elision of -3- has biblical parallels, I know of no good
Ugaritic parallels. Thus the parallelism is not sly# rr, but rpt#
yr# tl ' clouds# rain# dew*. More recently Blau and Loewenstamm
(Lesonenu 55 [1970-713 : 9) have derived %r from the root 'cast',
which they interpret as undergoing a semantic development to take on
the meaning 'curse'. Though this derivation is philologically more
acceptable than that of Svi and Shifra Rin, by no means does it
render imperative the parallel gly # yry. That proposed above
(crpt # yr# tl) retains its validity.
 227

q11 b: I * fall on/at * : 16.6(127).57 : sntk (p. 86)

Though I have taken snt here as meaning ’years' (the expression

1 2
would refer to maturity), Driver and J. A. Emerton have argued

for a meaning 'loftiness', or the like. 'Hill of your loftiness'

just might mean 'your high hili', but it appears more likely that

the reference is to destruction at maturity (as opposed to normal

death at old age).

ql 1 1 : III 'arrive at/reach' (St-stem) (p. 87)

Held-5 has provided convincing parallels for deriving *

stql

from the root qll or qwl rather than from a root sql^

qm el: I 'serve, attend' (?) (p. 87)

The interpretation 'attend upon' for this idiom is given by

Ginsberg.The best biblical parallel for this sense is Gen.

18:8 wëhû15 cômëd cSlêhem (Abraham attending his guests).

3*
* In

Hebrew, however, the expression is in itself ambiguous, having

either positive or negative connotations depending on the con­

text. And context is precisely what we are lacking for the Ugar-

itic example.

1CML, pp. 47, 148.

^"The Meaning of sênâa in Psalm GXXVII 2," VT 24 (1974): 29,

see also p. 31.
-5g! 9 (1969) : 74, n. 32.

\so Gordon, UT, §19.2472; Aistleitner, WUS, §2678; see Cathcart

Nahum, p. 67, n. 165, for references.

5ANET, p. 130.

^Some interpret C1 as 'before' : Gordon, Ugaritic Literature,

p. 13; Suarez, VD 42 (19^): 73; van Zijl, Baal, p. 25; Aistleitner,
WUS, §2417 ("neben"). Oldenberg (Conflict, p. 135) sees the hostile
notion 'arise against' here.
 228

qny b: I 'buy in' (or: class II 'buy from') (p. 88)

The idiom qny b 'buy from' rings false when analyzed as used

with an individual, as do the editors of this text ('the Alashian

* );

for the original perspective 'acquire (what was) in’ does not apply

(rather one would expect qny 1 'acquire [what belonged] to'). I

thus propose that alflyy here stands for the country itself. The

best evidence for this is aljyy // mgrm in 2095.2, 4 (itself a

difficult text). The full perspective would be 'acquire a ser­

vant (when [or: who was]) in Alashia'.

q§s b: I 'slice with' (p. 88)

In the first text cited q§ mri could be the object of brd, but

in the second q§ mri (the sequence and restorations are assured by

the parallel passages) seems to be independent of a verb (unless it

go back to Ifrm 'eat' of the preceding clause). This invites the

translation 'they slice the fatlings with a sharp knife'.

qr 1: III 'say to' (p. 88)

For this verb, see Gordon, UT, §§11.7; 19.2263; Dahood, Psalms

II (1968), p. 148.

qr3 b: I 'call out in' (or: II 'call out from'): 608.38 (p. 88)

» 2
Contrast Mulder, "Sapsu ruft also vom Himmel ..." and
Astour, "Saps cried from the heaven . . . "^ with Virolleaud who

considers this case ambiguous : "Sps dans les cieux (ou: du haut
jlj. . .
des cieux) parle d'une voix forte ..." Astour himself, in his

^Dietrich and Loretz, Ugaritica VI, p. 173; so also M. Heltzer,

"Some Gleanings to the Ugaritic Texts Inscribed on Clay Lung and Liver
Models," AION 33 (1973): 96.
2UF 4 (1972): 91. ^JNES 27 (1968): 33. Slgaritica V, p. 580.
 229

comment,12 considers the alternative translation, "Saps, in heaven,

cried ..." This in any case is the original perspective; the

question here is whether Saps is * calling to someone on earth ,

or simply 'crying out in the heavens'. There are too few cases in

Ugaritic to enable one to come to a decision, but 'cry out in does

appear to be valid in both attested cases (i.e., primary emphasis

may be on the place of crying out, rather than on the outreach of

the cry).

qrD cm: III 'call to

* (p. 89)

See note to sb cm: III 'cry out to': 5(67).1.22-23, above,

p. 225.

qrb b: 17(2 Aqht).1.16-17 (p. 89)

For the interpretation of Js in mk bsb ymm as ' on

* and not

'after',see note on cny b: 19(1 Aqht).4.179, above, p. 219.

As regards the unit bfrnt, two main problems are germain to the

present inquiry: 1) the force of b in bfcnt; 2) the interpretation

of bnt itself.
1) Dahood^ has taken the 1) as causal : "because of his groaning,

because of the wretchedness ..." It appears at least as likely

that the b is temporal ('when he bun*) or abstract-locative ( in his

state of performing bnn').

2) Does the suffix on bnth refer to Baal, entailing a transitive

force in but ('when he [Baal] has pity on'), or does it refer to

1JNES 27 (1968): 35.

2M. Dahood, "Hebrew-Ugaritic Lexicography VI," Biblica 49

(1968): 359.

^Ibid.i cf. also the same author in UF 1 (1969): 29.

 230

Danil (1 when he [Danil] pleaded for grace

)?
* I have opted for the

first solution, following, among authors I have consulted, Driver^

and van Zijl. 2 This decision is based on two considerations: a) the

root meaning of bun, is 'show mercy

,
* only in the Hithpael (in He­

brew) does the root take on the meaning of * plead for mercy
* ; thus

font may well be the G-stem infinitive (= Hebrew frannot); b) the best

Ugaritic parallel wyqrb bsal krt (14[Krt] .1.37-38) shows the same

construction as is proposed here: the subject of qrb is the same

as that of the following infinitive and the infinitive in both

cases has a following direct object. The entire text reads, then:

mk bsbc ymm Behold on the seventh day

wyqrb bcl bfrnth Baal comes near having mercy on
abynt dnil mt rpi The abjection of Danil, man of RpD,
anh gzr mt hrnmy The sighing of Hero man of Hrnmy
din bn Ih km afah Who has no son like his brothers,
w srs km aryh No progeny like his kinsmen.

qry b: I * offer in
* (or: III * offer into
* ) (??) (p. 89)

There are two primary avenues of approach to this text. One is

to translate mlfrmt as * war

* , in which case qryy must mean * banish
*

or the like : * Banish war from the earth / Put love in the land
* .

With the following two cola (lines 19-21 of the text quoted) this

forms the following four-element parallelism: mlfrmt // ddym // slm

// (arb?)dd = a// b : c/^ b

.
* The reference in mlfomt would be to
Anat's revenge of a type described in 3(cnt).2. See van Zijl^ for

a recent defense of this interpretation with rather extensive biblio­

graphical information.

The other avenue of approach is to derive mlfrmt from lfcm 'food'

and to see in slm the word for slm-offerings. The parallelism

1CML, p. 49. 2Baal, p. 269. ^Ibid., pp. 55-59»

 231

would then not be the antithetical parallelism mlbmt//...// slm,

but the synonymous parallel 'bread-offerings // . . . // peace-offer-

2
ings'. Dahood's argument from parallelism is weakened if the four

elements in parallel in lines 19-21 are all understood as offerings.

Although our Ugaritic data on the root qry are so meager as to make

a claim based on a single parallel shaky, one must nonetheless point

out that qrym // scly in 19(1 Aqht).4.191-92 seems quite clearly to

mean 'offer// offer up'It would thus seem that qry in the G-

stem means 'meet', in the D-stem (?) 'offer'. This second general
4
interpretation has recently been defended by de Moor.

rgm cl: III 'declare/impose upon' (?) : 1012.25 (p. 90)

See note dealing with 1012.22-39 at skn 1, below, p. 237•

rfr§ b: I 'wash in' (or: II 'wash from

* ) (p. 91)

M. Dahood has claimed^ that rfcg b means 'wash clean of', in

non-temporal clauses in Ugaritic and occasionally in Hebrew. In

my opinion the ambiguity of the Ugaritic passages must remain for

lack of decisive evidence. 3( "nt). 2.34-35 could be interpreted

n
either as 'wash in' or as 'wash clean of'. 16.6(12?).10 could

1This parallelism is claimed by Dahood as sufficient to "scotch"

any other interpretation (RSP, 1: 79, 262).

See preceding note. Cited at qry 1, p. 95»

^Seasonal Pattern, pp. 102-4.

^Most recently, "Hebrew-Ugaritic Lexicography IX," Biblica 52

(1971): 355-56; cf. also David Marcus, review of Kapelrud, The Violent
Goddess, in JANES 2 (1969-70): 113, on 3("nt).2.34-35»

$The two examples claimed are Ps. 58:11, where Dahood translates,
"He will wash his feet of the blood of the wicked," and Gen. 49:11, "Of
wine he washes his garments, his robes of the blood of grapes" (Psalms II
[1968], pp. 56, 63).

?F. Rosenthal, review of Virolleaud, La Deesse Anat, in Orientalia

n.s. 9 (1940): 294, was the first to translate 'wash from' here.
 2)2

be interpreted either as 'wash clean of' or 'wash when

* (temp­

oral b).1 Hebrew rabag b normally means 'wash in' (+ liquid with

which one washes ). Deviations from this pattern so as to con­

strue the idiom as meaning 'wash from' depend (1) on proving that

Ugaritic rfr§ b means 'wash from'; 2) on proving that the biblical

text in question contains either a chronological or a conscious

stylistic archaism. Moreover, though it is clear that rb§ can

mean 'wash', it is quite possible that it was semantically closer

to English 'bathe
* and could mean either 'wash' or 'dip into'. If

this is so, then we must be careful not to do away with images (a

literal case of throwing out the baby with the bath water) which

may appear to us to be hardy, but which may have been poetically

% 4
current. In this sense, de Moor has very plausibly suggested

that the purpose of 'bathing' the feet in blood was not to wash

them, but to color them red (as Anat colored herself red with

henna—)L c nt].2.2).

rbq 1 (p. 91)

Besides the idiom rfrq 1, there seems also to be attested the

idiom rfrq b (4[)1].7.5) , but both reading and translation are unsure

due to the damaged state of the text :

il [..?] rfrq . bgr (6) km . y[..] ilm , b§pn

]"There may be something else going on in this particular passage

since Ethiopie r^j. means 'sweat', that is, what is being washed here.

^See Brekelmans, UF 1 (1969): 10-11.

^E.g., if one can say that the eyes are bathed in milk (Cant.
5:12), one should be able to speak of bathing one's feet in blood or
one's garments in grape-juice.
^Orientalia n.s. 37 (1968); 212.
 233

rfrq Ipn: II 1 go from before1 (S-stem: * send away from before1) (p. 91)

On the basis of the clear cases of rfrq 1 = 'go away from', I

interpret rfrq lpn as meaning * leave the presence of, though rfrq

Ipn could be semantically distinct from rfrq 1 and mean 'go out to
meet' or the like.^

r? cm: 6.1.51-52(49.1.23-24) (p. 92)

2
Though my stichometric division removes yrg from direct con­

struction with cm, the idiom is nonetheless represented in the

three-step parallelism yrg, cm . . . cdb, cm. Rin^ has pointed

out the correct background of this expression: he compares it

with rwg 3t in Jer. 12:5 and sees the image as that of a race.

A paraphrase of the Ugaritic idiom would be something like:

'Racing with Baal, he cannot keep up'.

Driver's interpretation^ of Jjn here as 'from' (taking the verb

as r§§ 'grind
* ) has to my knowledge found no adhérants.

rks 1: 1003.10: lbn[n] (p. 92)

The restoration lbn[n] is Cross’ V> Virolleaud read lbt[].

■^For the former interpretation see M. Dahood, review of J. P. M.

van der Ploeg and A. S. van der Woude, Le Targum de Job de la grotte XI
de Qumran, in Biblica 54 (1973): 285; and vanZijl, Baalï ppë 69, 73—74;
for the latter see J. Obermann, Ugaritic Mythology: A Study of Its
Leading Motifs (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1948), p. 42.
Delekat (UF 4 [1972]: 12) interprets Ign in yet another fashion: he
takes it as meaning "vor ihr,” that is, as referring neither to 'going
away’ from Baal, nor as 'going out' to meet Anat, but as 'going away'
from before Anat : "Rasch hatte er die Frauen vor ihr entfernt ..."

^See note on cdb cm, above, pp. 216-17•

5BZ n.s. 7 (1963): 32. 4CML, p. 111.

^Canaanite Myth, p. 119; see also Clifford, Cosmic Mountain,

p. 60.
^PRU II, p. 12; so Gordon, UT, p. 216.
 234

rgn b (p. 93)

Dahood12 has interpreted rgn as meaning 'grow' (with pnm in the

2
sense of 'anger'—a doubtful proposition for Ugaritic); Astour

compares with Arabic ragana 'incline'.

rq§ b: I 'swoop in' (p. 93)

I have translated rq§ b 'swoop in', understanding that the

weapon in question (gmd) is one retained in the hand rather than

one thrown. Others^ have interpreted the idiom as meaning 'swoop

from'. To resolve the question satisfactorily, we would have to

know what kind of weapon the §md was, and would further need pic­

torial or epigraphic evidence of that or a comparable weapon

either retained in the hand during use or being thrown.

s3l b: I * inquire about' (?) (p. 93)

Does ystal mean 'inquire (for oneself)' as interpreted by

Gordon,4 or does it mean 'be consulted
* as interpreted by Parker?^

g=l cm; III 'make a request to' (or: class II 'ask of') (p. 93)

One might classify s3l cm in class II 'X asks for Y (which is)

with Z
* = 'X asks for Y from Z' (a similar problem arose in the

interpretation of 3rs cm, see note on pp. 114-15). If the latter

interpretation were adopted, however, the verbs of requesting

would be the only example of idioms with cm = 'from'. Hebrew sa al

^Psalms III (1970), p. 212; Biblica 51 (1970): 399-400; ,

Orientalia n.s. 39 (1970): 378; Dahood's position with regard to rgn
is accepted by Watson, Biblica 53 (1972): 197.

2JKES 27 (1968): 22.

^Oldenburg, Conflict, pp. 74, 97; van Seims, UP 2 (1970): 265;

van Zijl, Baal, pp. 35-3^.

SjT, §19.2369 ("let him ask"). ^Studies, pp. 49-50.

 35

min does exist, so the possibility of s3l cm meaning * request

from’ must be given serious consideration. If I have preferred

•make a request to’ (class III), it is because there are several

cases of verbs of sound production whose modifier is introduced

by cm. Thus I prefer to compare Hebrew sa3al 1 ’make a request to’.

s3r b/cm (p. 94)

For Hoftijzer's proposal to derive istir in 18(3 Aqht).4.15 and

1083.3 from s3r, see note on Iqb cm, above, p. 196.

sdy b: III 'pour into' (?) (p. 94)

The form sjd has rather frequently been derived from a final

weak root meaning 'pour'Some also interpret the as meaning

2 but in so dubious a passage, and with only one attestation

'from',*

of sdy b to judge from, it is hardly possible to reach a final

decision. It should be borne in mind, nonetheless, that none of

the other verbs which belong to this semantic sphere (ygq, msk^

nsk, spk) are attested with Id in the sense of ' pour from'.

skb b: 1029.16: 1 . . - I (p- 94)

The 1's might be taken as asseverative rather than negative.

skb cm: 5(67).5.20 (p. 94)

The problem with this text resides in the form ts[e]ly. It

Driver, CML, p. 148; Caquot, Syria 36 (1959): 94-95; de Moor,

Lipinski, OLP 3 (1972): 118; Mulder, UF 4
Seasonal Pattern, pp. 223-24;
(1972): 84.

2Dahood, Melanges Tisserant (1964), p. 99; Driver, ÇML, p. 113;

Gray, Legacy, p. 72; Jirku, Kanaanaische Mythen, p. 72; Mulder, UF 4
(1972): 84.

-$M. Liverani, "Il corpo di guardia del palazzo di Ugarit,

RSO 44 (1969): 192, n. 3.
She restoration goes back to 0. Virolleaud, "La mort de Baal
Poème de Ras-Shamra (I* AB)," Syria 15 (1934): 329»
 236

seems in any case to indicate a change of person from Baal to the

heifer, but it is unclear whether the form is active ('she bore

[him] up eighty-eight times')1 or passive ('she was mounted eighty­

eight times').2 The causative nuance of the S-stem is retained by

de Moor: "... she made him mount eight and eighty times.
ip
Delekat has recently proposed that the form is not 3 f.s., but

the infinitive absolute of the "ts-Stamm."

skfr b: 2059.13 (p. 94)

There is no easy solution to the problem of by. A. F. Rainey^

has suggested the emendation by<m>: 'When there occurred a mighty

rainstorm'. b% may, however, represent plene spelling for the

preposition bi alone: 'They found themselves in a mighty storm'.

The context does not allow for b£ to be taken as _b + 1 c.s.

suffix. Nor can nskfo be translated 'it was abandoned

because
*

the subject anyt is elsewhere in this text construed as feminine

(dt, hndt, mtt).

skn 1: III 'supply for, impose on, allot for' (p. 94)

For the possible distinction skn 1 + person = 'impose on',

while skn 1 + impersonal object = 'supply for', see Parker, Studies,

pp. 51-52.

^So M. 0. Astour, "La triade de déesses de fertilité à Ugarit

et en Grèce," Ugaritica VI, p. 14.
p
Driver, CML, p. 107; Gaster, Thespis, p. 192.
% L
seasonal Pattern, p. 183. UF 4 (1972): 15.

^Review of Herrmann, BZAW 106, in JAOS 90 (1970): 534.

6G. Rinaldi, "Nota," BeO 13 (1971): 26.

 237

skn 1: 1012.24 (p. 94)

B. Hartmann and J. HoftijzerL have proposed that skn here is

intransitive (Im skn = 'why does he tarry?'). According to the

general interpretation of Hartmann and Hoftijzer the author of this

text is requesting two thousand horses to be used as a ransom pay­

ment. Though such an interpretation is not impossible, the meaning

'tarry' for skn, upon which the interpretation rests in part, is not

elsewhere attested in Ugaritic. I thus prefer the interpretation

which sees the author complaining about a requirement to furnish

horses forced upon him by the king. He states that the loss of two

thousand horses will place him in extreme jeopardy; but if the king

he will furnish them just the same :

(22) w . mlk . bcly[] Why has the king my lord

(23) Im . skn . hnk _ imposed this
(24) lcbdh . alpm . s[sw]m on his servant : 2000
horses?
(25) rgmt . cly . th » Im You have thus declared jeo­
pardy (?) upon me. Why
(26) 1 . ytn . hm . mlk . <b>cly did the king my lord not
provide them himself?
(27) w , hn . ibm , sgq ly Now the enemy is pressing
me
(28) p . 1 . ast . atty and I would indeed (?) be
placing my wife
(29) ncry . th . lpn . ib (and) children in jeopardy
(?) before the enemy.
(30) hn . hm . yrgm . mlk Behold if the king my lord
(31) bcly . tmgyy . hn says: "You must send me
(32) alpm . sswm , hnd those 2000 horses,"
(33) w . mlk . b ly . bns then may the king my lord
(34) bnny . tmn . send an intermediary with
(35) mlakty . hnd these messengers of mine
(36) ylak ^rny back to me.
(37) w . tcl . th . hn Then the jeopardy (?) will
come (about ?). The
(38) [a]1pm . sswm 2000 horses
(39) t TT w . tb C ... ] so answer (?).

1"Ugaritic hnk-hnkt and a Punic Formula," Le Museon 84 (1971)î

532.
 238

skn 1: 1143.14 (p. 95)

For the interpretation of these lines, especially of kbd, see

Liverani, UF 2 (1970): 98-99-

slm 1: III 1*grant peace to’ (?) (p. 95)

This passage is the apodosis of an omen from the text referred

to in the note to hpk 1.^ The translation is that of Virolleaud^

though there are no good parallels for this precise nuance of slm
in any of the later Northwest Semitic dialects.^ The meaning ’be

at peace
* is attested in the Hebrew Qal stem, but the nuance 'make

peace for' is not attested for the Piel (the regular meaning is

'pay back to' + 1 or 31).

slm cmn: I 'be at peace with' (p. 96)

The combination of slm + cm(n) is usually used impersonally

('it is well with'). Only in text 64(118).11 is the idiom attested

il
in the sense 'be at peace (i.e., not at war) with'.

smb b: I '(part of someone) rejoices

* : 17(2 Aqht).2.8 (p. 96)

The syntactical peculiarity of this passage (regularly smb b

means * rejoice in', where b. indicates the cause of rejoicing), may

indicate that Ginsberg is correct in seeing in it a semantically

specific usage which he translates "Daniel's face ... lights up.

1Above, pp. 146-47 (Virolleaud, GLECS 10 [1964]: 60).

^Ibid.; accepted by Gordon, UT, §19.2424.

^Unless this be an Aphel or a Yiphil; see Josh. 11:19 163-hâyëta

cir 3aser hislima 3el-bënê yisrâ3 ël 'there was no city which made peace
with the Israelites'.

This is assured by the Akkadian parallel; see Dietrich and Lor-

etz, WO 3 (1964-66): 215-17; Parker, Studies, pp. 59, 67, n. 31.

^SVT 16 (1967): 72; see other references cited above at §hl cl,
p. 224, n. 2.
 259

smb b: II 'rejoice in' (= 'receive joy from') (p. 96)

The appearance of smh m(n) in Ugaritic and Hebrew (Prov. 5:18;

Eccl. 2:10) indicates that the b in verbs of rejoicing may indicate

the origin or cause of the joy.

smh b: II 'rejoice in': J(cnt).5.29 (p. 96)

The restoration and translation of this passage are based on

Herdner's reconstruction and analysis. The stichometric analysis

she presupposes^ is far superior to that evident in the recent

translation of A. Caquot and M. Sznycer: "'[Tu as bâti] ta de­

meure, o dieu, tu as bâti [ta] demeuCre], [rêj]ouis-toi, oui,

4
réjouis-toi de l'élévaEtion de ton pa]lais . . . '"

smh m(n): 1015.11: nab (p. 97)

The tablet clearly shows mab^ and any other reading must be

based on emendation.^ Moreover, it is not legitimate to transcribe

[c]m ab;7 there is no lacuna in the tablet and if one wishes to

emend, the notation should be <c>m ab.

XSo Dahood, Psalms I (1966), p. 55.

2CTA, 1: 19 and n. 4.

-^See also Loewenstamm, JSS 14 (1969) : 181, n. 2.

^"Textes ougaritiques, " in René Labat, et al.. Les religions, du

Proche-Orient asiatique: Textes babyloniens, ougaritiques hittites
(Paris: Librairie Arthème Fayard and Éditions Denoel, 1970), p. HO .

5pRU II, plate IX.

$J. Blau and S. Loewenstamm suggest the reading mad ("Zur Frage
der Scriptio Plena im Ugaritischen und Verwandtes,’’ UF 2 [197OJ: 22,
n. 16); van Zijl reads mid (Baal, p. 122); J. /
proposes the emendation of mab to mid (HUCA JO [1959]: 144, n. .14),
he has maintained his scepticism regarding the presence of mn in
Ugaritic (see JAOS 89 [1969]: 176).

7Aistleitner, WUS, §2626.

 240

smc 1: I ’hear concerning’: 53(54).5-6 (p. 97)

W. F. Albright proposed1 that we disregard the division line

after line 4 and translate: "Peace be to thee, to Trxds, and to

Klby." Though the division lines are not always observed (cf.

notably text 1010), it nonetheless seems more prudent, where good

sense results, to respect them. In this case the idiom smc 1

'hear concerning', though not paralleled in Ugaritic, finds a good

point of comparison in Gen. 17:20: ulëyisma e 1 sëma tika *con-

2
cerning Ishmael I have heard you'.

sns b: III 'tie/attach to' (p. 97)

This combination might mean 'tie up in' rather than 'tie to'

('tied up the hands in her girdle') .^

spk 1: 17(2 Aqht).6.16 (p. 97)

Note that the reading tspkm and the restoration of lcpr are

4
taken from Herdner.

spk 1; 18(3 Aqht).4.24 (p. 97)

The difficult term in this passage is siy. Aart un"? provides a

discussion of possible etymologies. The phrase lbrkh finds its only

Ugaritic parallel in 17(2 Aqht).5»27 where the bow is put on Aqht's

knees. If there is a connection between the two passages, it seems

^'Archaeological News from Syria," BASOR 54 (1934): 26; see also

the same author, BASOR 82 (1941): 47.

^For this interpretation of the Ugaritic text, see also van

Seims, Marriage, p. 127, n. 14; Liverani, ALNR 8/19 (1964): 185-84.

■^See de Moor, Seasonal Pattern, p. 88. The verb sns is discussed

briefly by Dahood.~BÏblica 54 (1973) : 362. For another interpreta­
tion of the word frbs in this text, see Dietrich and Loretz, UF 4 (1972):
50 (they take fobs as 'arm', a better parallel to bmt 'back').

\)TA, 1: 85, nn. 5, 6. 5W0 4 (1967-68): 293-94.

 241

to be that as Aqht once received a bow from Danil, the bow being

placed on his knees, so now by his act of defiance to the goddess

Anat, the bow on his knees will be replaced by blood on his knees.

Moreover, the expression fits the concrete situation well: Aqht

is seated (yjb, lines 18, 29) eating; when struck on the head he

falls forward, his head on his knees, with his blood drenching his

knees.

sr cl: I ’sing before/to/about’ (?) (pp. 97-98)

Suarez,1 Dahood,2* and Marvin Pope5 hold that the interpreta­

tion of syr C1 in Job 33:27 as ’sing before/in the presence of is

also valid for Prov. 25:20 and for the two Ugaritic examples cited

on pp. 97-98 (Pope cites only the ent text).

sr ^1 ... b: I ’sing . . . on’ (p. 98)

I have interpreted the b in the relevant passage (3^nt].1.21)

as designating where the entire action takes place. The _b could,

however, function as the predicate of a nominal sentence: ’ • . .

sings about Baal (who is/dwells) on the heights of Sapon •

st 1: 2060.35 (p. 99)

The text in question is bqi w stn ly ’inquire and send (it/him)

to me’. Dietrich and Loretz are undoubtedly correct in objecting

« . 4 ■
to Dahood’s over-specification of st 1 as ’write to’. It is one

1VD 42 (1964): 74.

2The Bible in Current Catholic Thought (1962), p. 70; Melanges

Tisserant (1964), p. 97; Biblica 54 (1973): 356-57-

3jpb: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, The

Anchor Bible, vol. 15 (Garden City, New York: Doubleday and Co., 1973
[3d ed.]), p. 252; see also van Zijl, Baal, pp. 49-51.

^BO 23 (1966): 132; Dahood, Ugaritic-Hebrew Philology (1965)»

p, 73; idem, ’’The Metaphor in Job 22. 22, ” Biblica 47 (1966) : 108-9;
 242

thing to point out that st, (and Hebrew sym) appear in contexts where

writing is involved, quite another to claim that those verbs take on

the specific meaning 'write'. The Ugaritic expression st bspr

(2106.3) is very close to English 1 put in writing' and is the attest­

ed idiom when the writer wanted to refer specifically to epistolary

correspondence, st 1 of the present text probably means 'send to'

(the recipient of the tablet is to seek something out for the sender
of the tablet and send it to him, not write to him about it)."1' My

interpretation is based on the fact that st 1 demonstrably means

'send to' in 2065.17 where the promise to 'write about' what the

writer's correspondent needs would hardly be a comfort.

st qdm: III * set before’ (p. 99)

The preposition £dm is very rare at Ugarit, clearly a preposi­

tion only in the two passages cited, where the parallelism demands

a preposition^ and not a verb.It seems to appear also in a very

difficult passage, the meaning of which escapes me (4[51].7.40):

(40) cn . bcl . qdm . ydh

(41) ktgd . arz . byrnnh

Here qdm ydh seems to be parallel to byrnnh, but the rest of the

4
passage remains obscure.

idem, Psalms I (1966), p. 251 (on pp. 132-33, however, he provides some
excellent parallels for st 1 = * send/give to'I); idem, Psalms II (i960),
p. 46.

^This position is taken with Rainey, UF 3 (1971): 162, against

Dahood (references in preceding note), Gordon (HT, §19.2410), Krahmalkov
(JNES 28 [1969]: 264), and Virolleaud (PRU V, p. 86).

^See the opinions assembled by van Zijl, Baal, pp. 124-25»

Bogaert, "Les suffixes verbaux non accusatifs dans le sémiti­

que nord-occidental et particulièrement en hebreu," Biblica 45 (1964). 235-36.

^The recent attempts at elucidation by van Zijl (Baal, pp. 145,

 243

sty b: I 'drink at' (temporal): 22.2(124).24 (p. 100)

See note on this passage at ygq b, above, pp. 169-70.

sty b: II **drink from

12 * : 15-16
5
*
4(51) (p. 100)
The one reservation I have to this rendering1 is that of

'drinking from the table *. The attested usage in Ugaritic is to

drink from a cup and eat from a table (4[51].4.36-37). The other
2
possibility is to derive stt from st ’put
.
*

sty Ibl: RS 22.225 (p. 100)

This text was published by Virolleaud, CRAI I960, pp. 180-86.

sty cm: RS 17.434 (p. 100)

This text has been referred to by C. Virolleaud^ but has not yet

Il V
been published definitively. Parker has suggested that stn might

be derived from st, (* send to the Sun'). This suggestion deserves

serious consideration but must await definitive publication of the

text.

tbc 1: III 'go away to' (p. 101)

tbc b clearly means 'go away from', but the situation is less
clear with tbc 1. I have interpreted it as 'go away to'5 on the

principle of avoiding ambiguity. Nonetheless, since the context

151-55) and de Moor (Seasonal Pattern, pp. 164, 167) carry little
conviction.
1Due to Held, Studies Neumann, pp. 189-90.

2Cf. Gaster, BASOR 101 (1946): 24.

5"Les nouveaux textes alphabétiques de Ras-Shamra (XVIIe

campagne 1955)»” CRAI 1954, p. 257.
^Studies, pp. 58-59» 67, n. 50.

5So Dahood with reference to 17(2 Aqht).5*52, Psalms II

(1968), p. 190.
 244

of 15(128).2.13 is broken and unclear, and since the antecedent of

-h (ahlh// msknth) in 17(2 Aqht).5.32 is ambiguous (it could be

either Kjr/Hyn or Danil), one cannot be dogmatic.12

*

tbe cm; 1021.7 (p. 101)

I interpret lines 1-8 of this difficult text as follows:

(1) lyblt . bbjm (2) ap ksphm (3) lyblt / (4) w ht . luk cm

ml[k(t ?)] (5) tgsdb . smlsn (6) wtbc ank . (7) cm mlakth smch /

(8) wb . cly skn . ydc rgmh 'You have not brought the hupsu's, nor

have you brought their (equivalent in ?) money. So send Tgsdb

(and) Smlsn to (or: with) the king (or: queen). And as for me, I

am leaving with his (or: her) messengers. Listen (for messages

from) them. When the soken arrives his word will be known'. In

this interpretation, the —h of sm h refers back to the word mlakt

which is to be understood as a feminine singular noun meaning

. 2
'messenger-corps' or the like.

trb 1 (p. 101)

Another verb/preposition idiom with trb has been proposed:

Dahood sees the idiom trb afar in 24(77)•32-33 and translates

'marry with'.-5 The text as read by Dahood is:

cmn nkl btny With Nikkal will be my marriage,

abr nkl yrb ytrb With Nikkal will Yarib enter into wedlock.

]"For tbc 1 understood as 'go from', see, for example, Dahood,

RSP, 1: 240; Rafael M. Serra, "Algunos posibles ejemplos de interferen-
cias de preposiciones en el hebreo biblico," Claretianum 7 (1967)•
301-2; Schmuttermayr, BZ n.s. 15 (1971): 31.

2See Parker, Studies, pp. 20, 37, n. 19, for a discussion with
references.
^See bibliography at mgy abr (above, p. 199) and add for this
passage M. Dahood, "Qoheleth and Northwest Semitic Philology," Biblica
43 (1962): 363-64; idem, Psalms I (1966), p. 302; Gordon, UT, §19.13».
 245

I find two major difficulties in this interpretation, one due to the

nature of the preposition ajyr, the other to the nature of text 24(77) :

1) It would be surprising to see afar lose its primary significance

at so early a period and come to mean ’along with’ (in the present

case the meaning ’after, behind’ cannot even be in the background,

for the male would not enter marriage ’behind’ the female)• It is

also questionable whether trfa, meaning ’acquire a wife by paying

the bride-price' ,1 would ever be construed with a preposition such

as afar used to introduce the woman being acquired. 2) Dahood’s

argument is strongest in the parallelism it sets up in these lines

(though he only finds the parallel cmn// afar in one other text, Ps.
p
73:23-24, itself very difficult). Text 24(77), however, is notor­

iously non-conforming in matters of length of cola and parallelism.

And so, though parallelism is by principle to be constantly sought

after, in this particular text we may legitimately propose an ar­

rangement of lines not exhibiting exact parallelism.^ It appears

preferable to translate: ’"With Nikkal is my marriage." Thereafter

YariJj pays the bride-price for Nikkal’.

Another problem which Dahood’s analysis ignores, and for which

no one has yet found a satisfying solution, resides in the word(s ?)

wncn immediately preceding the section as Dahood divides it. Lines

30-32 are as follows : wycn yrh nyr smm wncn cmn nkl frtny ... ’And

Yarih, luminary of the heavens, answered wncn: "With Nikkal is my

-hsee UT, §19.2603. 2RSP, 1: 297.

^This many translators have assumed: e.g., Driver, CML, p. 125

(though he is hardly to be taken as an authority in this matter since
he often ignores obvious parallelism); Gordon, Ugaritic Literature, p.
64; Herrmann, BZAW 106 (1968): 19.
 246

marriage . . . Whatever the correct solution to the problem of

wncn turns out to be, it seems to effect the supposed parallelism

of the lines following it.

t(wy ?) b: I 12be put, moored in

* (???) (p. 101)

One would be tempted to compare this form with Hebrew swh II

(Piel) ’put, set, place

* , were it not for Aramaic sawwê ’put, set,

place *, which would have to be a borrowing from Canaanite if the

original root is jwy. Those who have identified tjwy in 16.6(127).31t

44, with Hebrew swh have not discussed the problem raised by the
12 3
Aramaic verb. Virolleaud and Lipinski refer to Arabic twy

"s’arrêter, faire halte."

£3r lpn (p. 102)

Though the root of £3r is still unclear, attempts to explain

it which are based on j3r * flesh, etc.' seem better founded than

guesses from context.^

tb 1 (p. 102)
Besides the texts cited, R§ 22.225$ contains several instances

of jb 1, but the translation and stichometry are unclear to me. Of

n
others who have treated this text, only Lipinski interprets tb 1

"^Wieder, JBL 84 (1965): 160-62; Gordon, UT, §19.2662; Cross,

Canaanite Myth, p. 258, n. 174.
2PRU V, p. 83. ^Syria 44 (1967): 283.

^Oldenburg, Conflict, p. 131; Cassuto, Anath, p. 121.

5Van Seims, UF 2 (1970): 255-56 (moreover, Herdner’s readings

are to be preferred to van Seims’—CTA, 1: 10).

^Virolleaud, CRAI i960, pp. 180-86.

?M. C. Astour, "Un texte d’Ugarit récemment découvert et ses

rapports avec l’origine des cultes bachiques grecs," RHR 164 (1963)î
 247

as 'turn to', the others taking it as 'turn from'. Were the text

clear, one could see this as a good case of ambiguity (i.e., tb 1

in all other attested cases means 'turn to'), but such is not the

case. Not only is the interpretation not clear, as is obvious

from the widely divergent interpretations it has received to date,

but the very organization of the lines is subject to debate (I have

not given the text in transliteration here because at least three

stichometric divisions are possible), not to mention the root of

the form tjb (though none of the interpreters have done so, it is

not impossible that the idiom is to be taken as yjb 1).

tb 1: 17(2 Aqht).6.42 (p. 103)

Basing his argument on Albright's original suggestion,*
12 M.

2
Dahood interprets jb 1 here as 'turn from. In light, however,

of the regular idiom jb 1 'reconsider, come around to the view of

(a semantic development of jb 1 'return to'), such an interpretation

is to be rejected.^ The only real candidate for jb 1 = 'turn from'

is R5 22.225 (see preceding note), but that text is too enigmatic to

serve as the basis for an interpretation of the present passage.

jb cm: 1015.19 (S-stem) (p. 103)

There seems to be no semantic distinction between lib 1 and

tjb cm, though there is a syntactic difference: 1, never precedes

1-15; Lipinski, Syria 42 ( 1965) • 45-73; «J• G. Greenfield, "Studies in

West Semitic Inscriptions I: Stylistic Aspects of the Sefire Treaty
Inscriptions," AcOr (Hav.) 27 (1965): 16-18.

1BASQR 94 (1944): 34.

2E.g., "Hebrew-Ugaritic Lexicography IV," Biblica 47 (1966):

406; Psalms II (1968), p. 77.

5See Ginsberg, BASOR 98 (1945): 22.

 248

the verbal form as does _jn in the one attested occurrence.

jbr 1: 16.1(125).54 (p. 104)

As Herdner remarks,1 the restoration of ksl is somewhat doubtful.

frn 1: II 'tear out from' (?) (p. l°4)

For a possible derivation of jm, see Astour, JNES 27 (1968): 31.

^cr 1: III * arrange for' (?)

Since the root tcr demonstrably refers to the apportionment

2
Of food in text 3(cnt).1.4, the translations by Driver and E.

Lipinski,based on Arabic £acara 'break', seem premature. Not

only is the Arabic etymology referred to by both Driver and Lipin­

ski fragile to the point of uselessness (the major Arabic lexica

give only a few very specific uses of the root ta ara, if they list

it at all—they do contain a more frequent jagara, which means

'push'), but there is the meaning 'count' attested for Arabic

sacara, which looks for all the world like a borrowing from Hebrew-

Aramaic (Piel/Pael) 'count, measure, apportion' (claimed by

Lipinski as cognate to Ugaritic tcr).

For the time being, then, it seems best to interpret the

passage 3(cnt).2.21-22 as referring to preparations made for the

soldiers, and not to violence wreaked on them.

fcrp b: I 'swish in' (??) (p. 105)

4
This translation appears to be guess-work.

1CTA, 1: 73, n. 5. * 4 PP- 85» 151 *

2ÇÎS1»

"Banquet en l'honneur de Baal: CTA 3 (V AB) A, 4-22, UE 2

(1970): 78.
4See Gordon, UT, §19.2751; Cross.,Canaanite Myth, p. 119 (ag­
ainst Oldenburg's comparison with Hebrew srp, Conflict, p. 199, n. 1J.
 249

tsm cl: III 1 prey upon

* (??) (p. 105)

The interpretation of this form as a verb1 seems preferable to

taking it as a noun: ”Nicht legst du Byssos(-Gewander) dem Armen

an . . . "2 My opinion is based on an objection to translating

ndy C1 as ’clothe'; ndy to date is used in more pejorative and/or

violent meanings * throw out of, destroy from, uproot from'. Fur­

ther attestation is necessary to decide the issue.

Chart of Perspectives^

The preposition b: class I transitive verbs

1) X does A to Y while both are within the confines of Z

3hb b = X loves Y in Z

3kl b = X devours (Y) in Z (direct object not expressed)

bcr b = X burns Y in Z

bgy b/btk = X shows Y (something) in Z

dbb b = X sacrifices Y in Z (direct object not always

expressed)

ht3 b =X destroys Y in Z - Y is destroyed in Z (passive only)

tbh b =X slaughters Y in Z

ygq b =X pours out (Y) while in Z (direct object not

expressed)

ytn b = X gives Y (to B) while both are in Z

1See the summary treatment by Dahood, Ugaritic-Hebrew Philology

(1965), p. 75.

^Dietrich and Loretz, BO 25 (1966): 155.

■$It is necessary to stress here the ad hoc nature of this classi­

fication, especially with respect to subcategories. The chart is intend­
ed to make explicit the relative clause implicit in Ugaritic verb/prepo­
sition combinations, and is not considered a general linguistic state­
ment, particularly as regards languages with a higher degree of direc­
tionality in the prepositional system (on prepositional non-direction ­
ality in Ugaritic, see below, pp. 280-91).
 250

lbs b = X clothes/outfits Y in Z

mhs b = X smites (Y) in Z (direct object not expressed)

ngb b = X sets up Y in Z

sp3 b = X devours Y in Z — Y is devoured in Z (passive only)

spr b = X counts Y among Z •* Y is counted among Z (passive

only)

§ly b = X curses Y while in Z

qny b = X produces (?)/establishes/buys Y in Z

qry b (D-stem ?) = X offers Y in Z

qry b (G-stem) = X meets Y at Z

rfr§ b = X washes Y in Z

rm btk (L-stem) = X erects Y in Z

skfr b = X finds Y in Z — Y is found in Z (N-stem)

jp% b = X judges (Y) in Z (direct object not expressed)

jrp b = X swishes Y in Z (??)

2) X who is in Z does A to Y

= X who is among Z takes Y

ngj b = X who is on Z seeks out Y

ndy b = X who is in Z casts out Y

3) X does A to Y which is in Z

fody b = X sees Y which is in Z

ybl b = X brings Y which is in Z

yrw b = X shoots Y which is in Z

cdn b = X brings the season of Y with Z

phy b = X sees Y which is in Z

4) X does A to Y at Z time

3fad b = X takes Y at Z time

bty b = X speaks Y rashly at Z time

 251

ht3 b (S-stem) = X harms Y at Z time

%bh b = X slaughters Y at Z time

= x plasters Y at Z time

ydc b = X knows Y at Z time (passive ?)

ytn b =X gives Y at Z time

Iqb b = X takes/buys Y at Z time

mtr b = X rains down Y at Z time (mtr 1 used intransitively)

msb b = X anoints Y at Z time

mtr b (5-stem) = X cuts Y at Z time

ndy b = X casts out Y at Z time

czz b (D-stem) = X strengthens Y at Z time

cny b = X answers Y at Z time

phy b = X sees Y at Z time

rfr§ b = X washes Y at Z time (also Gt-stem reflexive)

sty b = X drinks (Y) at Z time (direct object not expressed)

tbc b = X goes away at Z time

Xb b (S-stem) = X repeats Y at Z time

5) X does A to Y with Z instrument

3dm b = X rouges (Y) with Z (reflexive ?)

3fod b = X grasps Y with Z

bqc b = X splits Y with Z

grs b = X drives out Y with Z

dry b = X winnows/scatters Y with Z

hlm b = X strikes Y with Z

tbn b = X grinds Y with Z

ydy b = X scratches Y with Z

yrd b (S-stem) = X brings down Y with Z

 252

Iqh b = X takes/buys Y with Z price

mhs b = X smites Y with Z

mrg b = X overlays (???) Y with Z

nbt b = X adorns (??) Y with Z

prs3 b = X ?’s Y with Z

gpy b = X covers Y with Z

gq b (S-stem) = X siezes Y by Z

qgg b = X slices Y with Z

s3b b = X draws Y in/with Z

srp b = X burns Y in/with Z

The preposition _b: class I intransitive verbs

1) X does A in Z

3bd b = X perishes in Z

bcl b = X works in Z

flmr b = X makes music among Z

hbr b = X who is in Z bows

hlk b = X goes in/through/with Z

bt3 b = X sins in Z

forb b = X dries in Z

yr(w ?) b = X shoots off by/while/among Z (???)

yjb b/btk = X sits in Z

kly b (G-stem and N-stem) = X depletes in Z

kly bd = X is used under the supervision of Z

kn b/bqrb = X is in Z

l3y b = X is weak in Z

mlk b = X rules in Z

mt b = X dies -* wrecks at Z
 253

nh b = X rests in Z

npl b = X falls while on Z

npc b = X flourishes in Z

cqb b = X is rough/hilly in Z (??)

ctq b = X grows old in Z

alLb = x falls when on Z

qr3 b = X calls out in Z

rm b/btk = X is high in Z

rqg b = X swoops in Z

sal b (Gt-stem) = X inquires about Z (?)

skb b = X lies/sleeps in Z

slw b = X reposes in Z

sr b = X sings in Z

t(wy ?) b = X is put/moored (?) in Z

&ny b = X speaks while on Z

2) X does A in Z (himself or part of body)

bky bm = X cries in Z

gmfl bm = X chuckles (?) in Z

dmc bm = X sheds tears in Z

ntt b = X shakes on Z

err b (Gt-stem) = X meditates in Z

gfoq bm = X laughs in Z

qr3 b = X calls out in Z

sfan b = X is feverish in Z

smb b = in Z, X rejoices

5) X does A at Z time

dmc b = X weeps at Z time

 254

y§3 b = X goes forth at Z time

yrd b = X descends at Z time (in a vision)

ysn b/bm = X sleeps at Z time

mgy b = X arrives at Z time

cny b = X answers at Z time

crb b = X enters at Z time

qll b = X falls at Z time

qrb b = X draws near at Z time

tbc b = X goes away at Z time

tkb b = X grows warm at Z time

4) X does A with Z instrument

flmr b = X makes music with Z

ml3 b = X is filled with Z

npl b = X falls by Z

gdd b = X swells with Z

The preposition b: class II transitive verbs

3fod b = X takes Y which was in Z

grs b = X drives out Y who was in Z

frbb b = X slaughters Y which was in Z

% rd b = X drives out Y who was within the confines of Z

ytn b = X gives Y who was in Z

Ifam b = X eats Y which was in/on Z

Iqb b/bd = X takes Y which was in Z

mfry b = X wipes up Y which was in Z

ndy b = X casts out Y which was in Z

ndr b/bm = X vows Y which was in Z

sc b = X sweeps away Y which was in/at Z

 255

cdb b = X prepares Y which was in Z

cflr b = X saves Y who was in Z

pdy b = X redeems Y who was in (the control of) Z

sty b = X drinks Y which was in Z

The preposition b: class II intransitive verbs

brr b = X is pure — free of Z

£1± = X receives joy from Z

hdw b = ditto

y§3 b/bd = X having been in Z goes forth (X goes forth from Z)

kly b = X having been in Z depletes (X depletes from Z)

cny b = X being in Z gives forth an answer (X answers from Z)

cr b = X having been in Z arouses (X arouses from Z)

sm# b = X receives joy from Z

tbc b = X who was at Z goes away (X goes from Z)

The preposition _b: class III transitive verbs

3fad b/bm = X takes Y into Z

drc b = X sows Y in Z

ygq b = X pours Y into Z

ytn b/bd = X puts Y in Z

Iqb b/bd/bm = X takes Y into Z

msk b = X mixes Y into Z

mtc b = X throws (???) Y into Z

ntc b = X plants Y in Z

cdb b = X takes Y into Z

ely b (5-stem) = X takes Y up to Z

ptfr b/bqrb = X opens Y (which was not previously) in Z

gfr b/bqrb = X invites Y into Z

 256

qbr b = X buries Y in Z

q11 b (S-stem) = X causes Y to fall into Z

gra b/bgrb = X invites Y to Z

sdy b = X pours Y into Z

elfe b = X puts Y into Z

sns b = X ties Y to Z

st b/bm/bgrb(m) = X puts Y into Z

The preposition b: class III intransitive verbs

b3 b = X enters Y

gcr b = X rebukes Z

wpj btk = X spits into Z

yng b = X sucks on Z

y§3 b/btk = X goes forth into (?) Z

yrd b = X descends into Z

nr b = X shines on Z

cly b/bm = X goes up into/against Z

crb b = X enters/guarantees Z

ctg bd = X passes to Z

gly bd = X goes down into (the hand of) Z

gll b = X enters Z

gll b = X falls into Z

The preposition ,1: class I transitive verbs

1) X does A to Y at Z

brd Ipn = X cuts Y before Z

frnn lpn = X has mercy on Y (i.e., says words to procure

mercy) before Z

ygg 1 = X pours Y by Z number

 257

Ibm lpn (5-stem) = X causes A to eat (Y) before Z

spJ Ibl = X devours Y without Z

smc 1 = X hears Y concerning Z

sty Ibl = X drinks Y without Z

2) X does A to Y for Z time

ytn 1 = X gives Y for Z time

ngt 1 = % seeks out Y for Z time

pdy 1 = X redeems Y for Z time

st 1 = X puts Y for Z time

The preposition ,1: class I intransitive verbs

1) X does A to Z

3rk lpn = X is long before Z

bcr Ipn (S-stem) = X provides light before Z

gr 1 = X dwells at Z (??)

hlk 1 = X goes by Z number

hlk lpn = X goes before Z

frrr 1 = X roasts on Z

yrd lpn = X descends before Z (?)

ysn 1 = X (cannot) sleep at Z sound

ndd lpn = X arises before Z

ghr 1 = X broils on Z

rb§ 1 = X reclines at Z

2) X does A at Z time

bky 1 = X cries for Z time

dmc 1 = X sheds tears for Z time

yjb 1 = X sits for Z time

 258

The preposition 1/ class II transitive verbs

3bd 1 =X destroys Y which was at Z

grs 1 = X drives out Y which was at Z

mr 1 = ditto

ndy 1 = X casts out Y which was at Z

ns3 1 = X lifts Y which was at Z

1 = X tears out Y which was at Z

The preposition 1: class II intransitive verbs

yrd 1 = X which was at Z descends

ng 1 = X which was at Z goes away

rfrq 1/1pn = ditto

The preposition I5 class III transitive verbs

1) X does Y to Z (and: X causes Y to be at Z) (realized)

3d 1 = X pays Y to Z (???)

3fod 1 = X takes Y to Z (or: for Z)

bcr 1/lm = X leads Y to Z

dbfr 1 = X sacrifices (Y) to Z (direct object not expressed)

til 1 = X causes Y (dew) to fall on Z

ybl 1 = X brings Y to Z

y§3 1 (S-stem) = X takes Y out to Z

y§q 1 = X pours Y to Z

ytn 1 = X gives Y to Z

ytb 1 (S-stem) = X seats Y at Z

l3k 1 = X sends (Y) to Z (direct object not always expressed)

mb§ 1 = X smites (Y) unto Z (direct object not expressed)

mgb 1 = X tramples Y to Z

nsk 1 = X pours Y into Z

 259

ns3 1 (G-stem and Gt-stem) = X lifts Y to Z

cdb 1 = X puts Y on Z

cly 1 (S-stem) = X offers Y to Z

cms 1 = X lifts Y to Z

ctk 1 = X ties Y to Z

gly 1 = X lowers Y to Z

1 = X invites Y to Z

qry 1 (D-stem ?) = X offers Y to Z

rks 1 = X binds Y to Z

skn 1 = X puts Y on Z

spk 1 = X spills Y on Z

srh 1 = X flashes Y to Z

st 1 = X puts Y to Z

st Ipn = X puts Y before Z

jb 1 (S-stem) = X returns Y to Z

£pd 1 = X sets Y on Z

la) verbs of sound production

3rs 1/lpn = X makes a request for (Y) to Z (direct object

not always expressed)

brk 1 = X blesses Y to Z

mr 1 = ditto

2) X does A to Y for Z (emphasis on intention or purpose)

bny 1 = X builds Y for Z

bcl 1 = X makes Y for Z

zd 1 = X provides food for Z (direct object not expressed)

frsp 1 = X gathers Y for Z

tbb 1 = X slaughters Y for Z

yld 1 = X bears Y for Z

 260

y§3 1 (S-stem) = X causes Y to go out for Z

Iqfo 1 = X takes Y for Z

mtr 1 (S-stem) = X cuts Y for Z

cdb 1 = X prepares Y for Z

ptb 1 = X opens Y for Z

trh 1 = X acquires a wife for Z (himself)

£cr 1 = X arranges Y for Z

The preposition 1_: class III intransitive verbs

1) X does A to Z (realized)

3tw/y 1 = X goes/comes to Z

hbr 1 = X bows to/at Z

hlk 1 = X goes to Z

hpk 1 = X turns against Z

fat3 1 = X sins against Z

ypc 1 = X arises against Z

y§J 1 = X goes forth to Z

yjb 1 = X sits on Z

krc 1 = X bows to Z

mtr 1 = X rains on Z

mgy 1 = X arrives at Z

ndd 1 = X arises/passes/corresponds to Z (??)

npl 1 = X falls to Z

npq 1 = X goes out to Z (??)

n§l 1 = X escapes to Z (?)

sbb 1 (G-stem and N-stem) = X turns into Z

spr 1 = X counts to/provides a reckoning for Z (?)

cly 1 = X goes up to Z
 261

p 1 = X flies to Z

crb 1 = X enters as guarantee to Z

crb Ipn = X enters before Z

ctq 1 = X passes to Z

gd 1 = X hunts/ranges to Z

gq 1 (5-stem) = X presses Z

qll 1 = X falls to Z

qll 1 (St-stem) = X arrives at Z

qrb 1 = X approaches Z

slm 1 = X (impersonal) is well to Z and X grants peace to Z

tbc 1 = X goes away to Z

jb 1 = X returns to Z

jbr 1 = X breaks to Z

la) verbs of sound production

zg 1 = X makes a sound to Z

gb 1 = X calls to Z

qr 1 = X says to Z

qr3 1 = X calls to Z

rgm 1 = X says to Z

smc 1 = X listens to Z (sound reception)

jny 1 - X speaks to Z

2) X does A for Z (emphasis on intention or purpose)

bky 1 = X cries for Z

dmm 1 = X wails for Z

dmc 1 = X sheds tears for Z

yjb 1 = X sits in order to Z

kly 1 = X is used for Z

kn 1 = X is for Z
 262

The preposition ajr: class I only

bcr ajr (5-stem) = X provides light behind Z

hlk ajr = X goes after Z

yrd air = X descends after Z

ndd ajr = X arises after Z

The preposition bn: class I

fasr bn = X is missing among Z

hsk bn = X attacks among Z

cn bn = X sees Y who is among Z

rfap bn = X soars among Z

The preposition bn: class III

hlm bn = X strikes Y between (Y's) Z

The preposition bcd: class I only

ifrm hcd (S-stem) = X causes A to eat (Y) behind Z

sgr bcd = X closes Y behind Z

cdb bcd = X effects Y behind Z

ptfr bcd = X opens Y behind Z

jbr bcd = X breaks behind Z

The preposition j£d: class I only

ytn yd = X gives Ï along with Z

The preposition m(n): class II only

smh m(n) = X receives joy from Z

The preposition _^d; class III only

bky cd = X cries until Z time

brr cd = X is free until Z time

 263

ytn cd = X gives until Z time

Iqb cd = X takes until Z time

rbs cd = X washes Y up to Z

sty cd = X drinks Y until Z time

The preposition class I

Jn C1 = X prevails over Z

dc C1 = X sweats upon Z

kly C1 (N-stem) = X is used on Z time

mh@ C1 = X smites Y on account of/near Z

mlk C1 = X rules over Z

phy C1 = X experiences Y on account of Z

ptb C1 = X opens Y on account of Z

qm C1 = X attends Z

rgm C1 = X speaks near/about/against Z (??)

rfrp C1 = X soars over Z

skn C1 = X settles on Z

sr C1 = X sings before/to/about Z (?)

The preposition _^1: class III

b3 C1 = X enters before Z

him C1 = X strikes Y upon/above Z

kn C1 (L-stem) = X establishes Y concerning/on/against Z (?)

ns3 C1 = X lifts Y onto Z

cdb C1 = X sets/positions Y over Z

cp C1 = X flies over Z

crb C1 = X enters before Z (S-stem = X brings Y in before Z)

qll C1 = X falls on Z

rgm C1 = X imposes Y on Z
 264

st C1 = X sets Y over Z

js(m) C1 = X preys upon Z (??)

The preposition J^mî class I

hkm cm = X is wise with - like Z

yrd cm = X descends with Z

l3k cmn = X sends Y with Z

Ifom cm = X eats with Z

mb g cm = X smites with — like Z

spr cm (G-stem and S-stem) = X counts Y with - like Z

cdb cm = X handles Y with - like Z

r% cm = X runs with like Z

skb cm = X lies - has sexual intercourse with Z

slm cm(n) = X (impersonal) is well with Z and X is at peace

with Z

sty cm = X drinks (Y) with Z

tbc cm = X goes away with Z

The preposition cm; class III

3rs cm = X makes a request for Y to Z

hlk cm = X goes to Z

why (?) cm = X hurries to Z

ybl cm = X takes Y to Z

ytn cm(n) (b/qrb/tk) = X puts Y so that it will be in Z

l3k cm(n) = X sends (Y) to Z (direct object not always expressed)

Ism cm = X runs to Z

Iqfr cm(n) = X takes Y to Z

mgy cm = X arrives at Z

ndr cm = X vows Y to Z
 265

cly cm = X goes up to Z

gb cm = X calls to Z

qr3 cm = X calls to Z

s3l cm = X makes a request to Z

st cm = X puts/sends Y to Z

jb cm (G-stem and S-stem) = X returns (Y) to Z

The preposition qdm: class III only

st qdm = X sets Y before Z

The preposition qrb; class III only

ytn qrb = X puts Y so that it will be in Z

The preposition tbt: class I

hlm tbt = X strikes Y who is under Z

ytn tbt = X who is under Z gives Y

y£b tbt = X sits at the feet of Z

cdb tbt = X prepares Y for B who is under Z

The preposition tbt: class III

qll tbt = X falls to Z (S-stem = X fells Y to Z)

The preposition tk: class III only

wby (?) tk (+ cm) = X hurries to Z

yr(w ?) tk = X shoots off to Z (???)

ytn tk = X puts Y so that it will be in Z

ns3 tk = X takes Y to Z

st tk pn = X puts Y before Z
 CHAPTER III

ANALYSIS OF THE PREPOSITION

IN VERBAL CLAUSES

Perspective vs. Ambiguity

The word "ambiguity" has long been current in Ugaritic studies

to describe the nature of Jd and 1. The use of this word implies that

these prepositions had opposite or widely different "meanings" and that

a writer or speaker of Ugaritic had few limitations on his use of a

given preposition. The wide use of the word "interchangeable" operates

on the same assumption.

I believe, however, that the list of verb/preposition combina­

tions contained in Chapter II shows that there existed a definite body

of verb + preposition idioms which effectively avoided the ambiguity

potentially present in Ugaritic. The modern reader of Ugaritic may

well be faced with ambiguity when analyzing a given text, but this is

owing primarily to his ignorance of Ugaritic idiomatic usage and to the

variations of idiomatic usage from prose to poetry and from one period

to another.

Cases of Ambiguity

grs b/1 1 throw out from

.
* This appears to be a clear case of

Igee, for example, C. H. Gordon's early statement in Ugaritic

Grammar, §9.1; for the history of the discussion, see above, Chapter I.

^See Chapter I and my discussion of overlap, below, pp. 277-80.

266
 267

interchangeability of b and 1?" The probative value of this example

is much lessened, however, by the consideration that grs 1 is poetic,

grs b prosaic. Unfortunately, we do not have enough examples to know

2
whether the prose/poetry distinction was more widely maintained or not.

ndy b/1 'cast from'. This seems to be another case of inter­

changeability, especially since both usages appear in one text (607.5,

64-65). Astour has, however, interpreted ndy b in text 607 as simply

meaning 'uproot among' (that is, there may be no notion of 'movement

from' involved).

ns3 1 'lift up from' and 'lift up to'. This is the only case of
4
this type of ambiguity which can be claimed as certain. Both usages

occur in poetry, but in different texts. Perhaps the difference, then,

should be described as diachronic.

Disputed Cases of Ambiguity

b3 b 'sortir de' (over against the attested meaning 'enter').

Sauren and Kestemont have translated tbu bkt in 16.6(127)«2-4 as "sors

du chaudron.Though bw3 mn is attested in Hebrew,$ the meaning there

is clearly 'come into (one place) from (another place)'. One must say

that the translation sortir for b^_ in this case is absurd, since b^_

^So Dahood, Claremont, p. 53; Xella, AION 32 (1972): 511-

^For a possible semantic distinction between the two idioms,

see below, p. 278.
5JNES 27 (1968): 22, 24-25; see also Gordon, Ugaritica VI, p. 280,
who refers to "uprooting and removal."
^Disputed cases are discussed immediately hereafter.

5UF 5 (1971): 218.

$E.g., Judg. 12:9, in the Hiphil.

 268

means entrer and to use it with "chaudron" would imply entering some

other place from the "chaudron," a physical situation which would

hardly be described in these terms in Ugaritic. Furthermore, the

attested use of b3 b in Ugaritic for 'enter into' should cause one to

hesitate before proposing that b3 b mean 'enter from' (let alone

'leave from').

yg3 i 'go forth to' and 'go forth from'. See note to y§3 1 in

17(2 Aqht).1.29 for a discussion of the problems involved.1 Though

a priori one cannot rule out a yg3 1 'go out from', the present evi­

dence is far from compelling in its favor.

cdb 1 'prepare for' and 'prepare from'. See discussion of

cdb 1 in 14(Krt).2.81-82 in Chapter II.2 Since there are several

cases of cdb 1 'prepare for', the Krt passage should not be inter­

preted differently.

cly b 'go up from' (regularly 'go up on'). All the available

evidence speaks against ambiguous usage here.^

1Above, pp. 164-69. Above, pp. 215-16.

^Dahood has recently translated cly b in 6(62).1.16 as * ascend

from' (" . . . she brought him up from the narrows of Zaphân"—Biblica
54 [1975]: 565). The interpretation appears impossible to me for the
following reasons: 1) cly b elsewhere means 'go/take up on/into',
used especially with mountains ; 2) ?rry gpn elsewhere refers to Baal' s
dwelling, which is on the upper reaches of the mountain. After Baal s
death, Attar is said to have 'gone up on Sapon' (ycl bgrrt §pn, 6.1.57
[49.1.29]), where later he said he could not reign (lamlk bgrrt gpn,
6.1.62L49.1.34]). In this sequence of events cly bgrrt gpn must refer
to going up to Baal's palace. The fact that Anat had to take the dead
Baal up to the grrt gpn in the text mistranslated by Dahood is simply
a reference to burial in or near the royal palace. If further evi­
dence is needed that Anat did not take Baal up 'from' the grrt §pn,
it is provided by the circumstances of Baal's death. According to
text 5(67).6.6-7, 28-50, Baal was found fallen to the earth in the
ncm arg dbr // ysmt sd sfrlmmt. It was from this lower region that
Baal's body had to be returned for proper burial in the region of his
palace.
 269

tbc b/1 'go from1. Since the attestations are few, and little,

if anything, is gained by translating tbc 1 by 'go forth from', it

appears preferable to maintain for the present the distinction tbc b

= * go away from', tbc 1 = 'go away to'.

jb 1 'return from' (regularly 'return to'). This claim to

ambiguity is clearly wrong.2

A claim for ambiguity could also be made for such verbs as Jhd

and Iqfr which are clearly attested with the preposition b in the mean­

ings 'take into (one's own hand)' and 'take from (someone else)1. This

very lexical specificity, however, discounts the value of an argument

based on ambiguity. For with these verbs we have sufficient attesta­

tions to show how idiomatic usages developed to the exclusion of am­

biguity. (The relatively frequent occurrences of 3fcd and lqb are also

useful in explaining the seeming ambiguity present in cdb b II/III,

where cdb b 'prepare, take from' is only attested once.)

Ambiguity might also be claimed for jo and _1 in such temporal

expressions as bky 1 and ytn 1, concerning which proposals have been

made to translate the preposition as 'from', while in other expressions

bky 1 means 'cry for, bewail

* , and ytn 1 means 'give to'. However

correct the translation 1 from' may be in these cases, I have argued

above in notes to the relevant passages that linguistically they are

not to be analyzed as having a separate "meaning.Should that posi­

tion eventually prove too adamant, one would still have to say that

^See note on tbc 1, above, pp. 243-44.

2See discussion of the idiom in 17(2 Aqht).6.42, above, p. 247.

^Chapter II, pp. 123-24, 179-82.

 270

different meanings developed as specific idioms in temporal over

against locative constructions.

Another type of ambiguity which one meets is that of idioms

which have too few attestations to enable one to come to a definite

conclusion regarding the exact semantic content of the verb/preposition

combination. A good example of this type is rhs b, upon which rather

far-reaching claims have been made for Hebrew, but which is only attest­

ed clearly in the meaning ’wash on' (temporal), with two other occur­

rences in contexts permitting the translations 'wash from' or 'wash in/

on'.1 One might also cite yg3 b which is clearly to be translated 'go

forth from' in several instances. There is one case, however, where it

may mean 'go forth into' (12L753.1.20-21), but this example occurs in a

difficult text and judgement had best be suspended on this particular

case.2 A further example is found in the idiom rqg b which may mean

either 'swoop in' or 'swoop from

* depending on what the gmd-weapon was

and how it was wielded.5

Perspective

Rather than to pursue the argument of ambiguity it appears to me

more fruitful to discuss the conceptual background of the idiomatic

verb/prepositi on usages. This conceptual background I have chosen to

call 'perspective
* . The explanation of seeming prepositional ambiguity
l
based on the concept of perspective is due principally to E. Sutcliffe,

though my indebtedness to J. Barr, C« Brekelmans, and G. Schmuttermayr

is no less deep.5 Sutcliffe pointed out that certain otherwise closely

1See note on rfrg b, above, pp. 251-32. ^ote, p. 163.

5Note, p. 234. 4VT 5 (1955): 436-39. 5See above, pp. 9-16.

 271

related languages (his examples were from French vs. English) may ex­

press the same concrete situation by the use of different prepositions

due to a different perspective on the action. By 'perspective' I am

referring to the point in the continuum of action to which the preposi­

tion refers in a given language's description of an action, and to the

specificity of direction supplied by a language's prepositional system.

The word 'perspective

* was chosen over two other candidates: *
'aspect

(Schmuttermayr speaks of "Aspektdifferenz") because it is already used

for verbal aspect, and 'point of view

* (used by Brekelmans) because it

is too cumbersome.

I will illustrate the concept of perspective by analyzing several

examples of usages which differ in French and English, two of them taken

from Sutcliffe's article.

'He took it from the table

* * a pris sur la table.
= il 1 Both of

these actions belong to my class II, indicating ’movement from', but

one language uses 'from', the other sur. Are we to assume that sur in

French is ambiguous, meaning both 'on' and 'from

?
* Such a claim is

hardly viable, and no native speaker would accept the general inter­

changeability of sur with da or depuis.The explanation lies in the

perspective of the speaker: English expresses the separation caused by

the act through the use of the preposition 'from

,
* while French looks

at the position of the object before the action took place. This ex­

ample is also illustrative of the necessity to distinguish clearly be­

tween meaning and translation. Barr has remarked in a somewhat dif­

ferent context: "The meaning of a word is its meaning in its own

^See Schmuttermayr, BZ n.s. 15 (1971)’ 48-49.

 272
language, not its meaning in some other."1 Though Barr was referring

to the dangers of etymologyzing, the remark is applicable to transla­

tion problems as well. The fact that prendre sur = English 'take from'

does not indicate that sur "means" 'from'. Rather sur means sur, and

its distribution happens to cover some idioms which in English contain

the element 'from'.

The situation represented in these phrases can also be used to

illustrate the "interchangeability" of the prepositions in English.

Though one cannot say "he took it on the table' (where the object

taken is expressed by a pronoun), one can say 'he took the book on the

table' (where the object is expressed by a noun). This is not evidence

for full interchangeability, however, because in English the choice of

prepositions is in this case a matter of emphasis: 'he took the book

on the table' emphasizes where the book was located (a paraphrase would

be 'he took the book which was on the table'), while 'he took the book

from the table

* emphasizes separation (a paraphrase would be 'he took

the book so that it was far from the table'). Thus the use of a spe­

cific preposition is dictated by the semantic import provided by each

lexical item. The import in this particular case is rather minor, but

it leads one to believe that if we knew Ugaritic as a spoken language,

it is quite probable that such minor distinctions would become apparent.'

Comparative Philology, p. 90.

The two phrases 'he took the book from the table* and 'he took
the book on the table* illustrate a further difference between Ugaritic
and the modern European languages. * He took the book on the table* con­
tains a reduced relative clause : * he took the book (which was) on the
table*. In my analysis of class II action in Ugaritic (see chart of
perspectives, above, pp. 249-65, and below, pp. 289-91) this reduced
relative is always implied. For example: yrd 1 = 'he (who was) on the
chair descended*; trd b = * he drove out (someone who was) on the moun­
tain* . On the other hand, because Ugaritic does not have a specific
 273

Another example may be adduced because it illustrates both the

perspective of 1 = 'from' and the "interchangeability" of prepositions:

il a arraché le tableau au mur = 'he tore the picture from the wall
* ;

il s'est arraché du lieu = 'he tore himself away from the place'. There

is little to be said about the first example except that French views

the action arracher as being applied first to the picture (as the direct

object), then to the wall (as the position where the picture was located

prior to the action), while English expresses the 'movement from'. The

second example illustrates that a single verb can be used with two pre­

positions, both of which are translated by one prepositions in another

language. Once again this usage of à and de with arracher in French

does not lead to the conclusion that general interchangeability of the

two prepositions exists in the language; it indicates rather that with

certain verbs of 'movement from' the preposition a can indicate the

point of origin (compare also French soustraire à = English 'subtract,

take from’).

The French preposition à also indicates point of origin in such

an idiomatic expression as piquer a: il a piqué son velo a Jean = 'he

stole John's bike'. This is important for our discussion of Semitic 1

because denotes belonging as does 1^ le vélo est a Jean = * the bike

belongs to John'. This usage reflects the "incorrect" expression le

vélo à Jean, which in idiomatic French means 'John's bike *. From these

lexical item to express 'position or direction away from*, it is impos­

sible to produce a phrase denoting separation which does not contain
a reduced relative clause (i.e., there is no way of saying 'it is off
the table', 'he is away from town'). 'Perspective' as defined above
(p. 271) refers to both the break in the continuum of action expressed
by the preposition and the presence or lack of directionality in the
preposition itself.
 274

considerations one may conclude that the idiomatic expression il l'a

piqué à Jean originated in the perspective 'he stole the bike (which

belonged) to John
* . This Indo-European perspective probably led to

such an expression as Modern Hebrew laqafr li hakise 'he took my chair'•

But less obvious examples of the perspective are also found in biblical

Hebrew, e.g., I Sam. 9:3 wattô3badnâ hâ3&tonôt lëqîs 'some of Kish's

asses were lost'. Here the 1. indicates both the owner of an indefinite

number of items and the owner of an indefinite number of lost items

(i.e., one might translate 'some asses wandered away from Kish'). The

same perspective may well be operative in 607.5 In mlfas abd (hint) ’from

it the charmer destroys (venom)'. Here the basic perspective may

either be 'he destroys venom which is located at its mouth' or 'he

destroys its venom'.

Another factor to be considered in the study of verb/preposition

relationships is that virtually the same concrete situation, when de­

picted by two semantically related verbs, will exhibit the use of two

different prepositions. Witness ways of saying 'take from' in French:

when using the verb prendre, the prepositional complement will fre­

quently be dans (il a pris la monnaie dans sa poche), but with the

verb enlever the regular complement will be de (il a enleve la monnaie

de sa poche). The fact that one can describe the same situation by the

use of two prepositions with basically opposite meanings, in a language

which has generally maintained the basic meanings of its prepositions,

should indicate to us that the same phenomenon is possible in Ugaritic.

This conclusion is buttressed by the fact that these two descriptions

of the same concrete situation can both be explained in terms of their

basic meanings by means of perspective (il a pris la monnaie [qui

était] dans sa poche = il a enlevé la monnaie [loin] de sa poche).

 275

Because Ugaritic lacks a specific preposition ’from’ to state

explicitly ’movement from’, the prime concern of one endeavoring to

ascertain the concrete situation depicted by a given verb/preposition

combination is to determine the perspective from which the author was

viewing the action. Theoretically any combination of verb + preposition

can be ambiguous, but the gradual accumulation of data should indicate

how idiomatic usages came about and provide a background against which

departure from regular idiom may be assessed. The purpose of the list

of verb/preposition combinations and of the chart of perspectives com­

prising Chapter II is to provide the available data and make an attempt

at categorizing the various usages as to movement 'to’ or ’from’, or

lack of movement. Were Ugaritic a living language we would be able to

ascertain with much greater detail just how the grid of verb/preposition

pairs was divided semantically, but the present evidence should at least

indicate that since many idiomatic uses can be pinned down, a far greater

number probably escape our attention. (It is also probable that a

greater number of "ambiguous" uses existed, owing to idiomatic expres­

sions whose original semantic import has been lost, to dialectic varia­

tion, or to historical change—all of which we are presently unable to

determine.)

We can thus say that idiomatic expressions explainable by per­

spective probably accounted for most verb/preposition combinations.

How much ambiguity may be seen in the use of the prepositions in Ugari­

tic? Within the Ugaritic language itself there was probably no more

ambiguity than in any other language, i.e., conventions build up which

remove ambiguity from every-day speech. But for the modern Ugaritolo-

gist every expression should, as a methodological presupposition, be

looked upon as potentially ambiguous.

 276

As illustrations of the possibilities of perspective we may con­

sider the concrete situations inherently possible in such an expression

« 1 -
as sty b ’drink . . . ’ In the expression sty bks, only one perspec­

tive is possible: class II ’drink from a cup

* (class I 'he drinks while

in a cup
* is depictable but absurd; class III *
he drinks into a cup
*

corresponds to no life situation). But were sty bbt attested, only

class I would be possible *

he drinks while in the house
* (class II *
he

drinks from the house

* is also depictable, it would suffice to fill the

house with wine and use it as a cup, but again absurd; class III ’he

drinks into the house’ could correspond to English ’he drinks his way

into the house’ but I doubt seriously that such an expression will ever

turn up in Ugaritic). From the above examples it becomes clear that

classes I and II are quite possible in the interpretation of sty b and

must be differentiated in studying a given text (though in this case the

differentiation is relatively easy owing to the absurdity of ’drinking

while in a cup’, or 'drinking from a house’).

With several verbs we have all three possibilities either at­

tested or else conceivable, e.g., ytn b: class I * clothing is issued

to them in the king’s palace’ (1107.6-8); class II ’she gave one of (b)

her sons’ (6.1.46[49.1.18]); class III ’he put a cup into his hand’

(l[cnt X].4.9-10).

Thus, while recognizing that preferred usages developed in Ugari­

tic and surely accounted for virtually all spoken usage, the interpreter

of these texts, because of his limited store of data and the possible

ingenuity of the ancient author, must remain open to the several possi­

bilities theoretically inherent in any given verb/preposition pairing,

"^Bee Brekelmans, UF 1 (1969) : 7; Dahood, Biblica 54 (1973) s 365-66.

 277

and must endeavor to reduce them to the most likely candidate by logi­

cal considerations and by knowledge of attested idioms. Besides un­

available data on idiomatic usage, some of the factors that could cause

a new expression to appear in any given tablet which is unearthed are

stylistic ambiguity, dialectical variation, and historical change.

Practically speaking, however, the observance of preferred usage seems

to have been the primary controlling factor in prepositional choice just

as it is in most communication. The exegete of Ugaritic texts thus has

at his disposal two major tools in deciding upon the concrete situation

behind a prepositional usage: the body of data provided by attested

verb/preposition idioms and the list of theoretically possible per­

spectives. Any new verb/preposition combination must be checked against

the two, and the exegete must exercise his knowledge of ancient thought

patterns to decide whether or not a Ugaritian "would have said this."

Overlap

From the preceding considerations it is clear that there are

three main sources of "ambiguity" in our interpretation of Ugaritic prep­

ositional usages : 1) the small degree of natural or stylistic ambiguity

which existed in the language itself; 2) differences in perspective be­

tween our modern European languages and the ancient Semitic languages;

3) our lack of knowledge of idiomatic usages developed over time to

avoid ambiguity. The last two are primarily methodological considera-

]"It must not be forgotten, in this context, that what is viewed

as logical in one language may not be so viewed in another. While it is
perfectly proper to say in English that one is reading the paper on the
plane *, were one to read it sur l'avion one would be in danger of a bad
cold at best and a bad fall at worst. It must also be borne in mind
that one language can develop a prepositional usage which is exactly the
opposite of that in another: French sous prétexte de = English ‘on the
pretext that’.
 278

tions rather than analyses of the language itself (that is, the prep­

ositions themselves did not contain the ambiguity; rather the problem

lies in our lack of understanding of complete idioms). To describe the

interrelationships existing between the various prepositions, the term

"interchangeability" should be dropped in favor of •overlap

.
* This

terminology implies that the prepositions, though not generally inter­

changeable, may in certain circumstances be close enough so that one

dialect, or for that matter one author, will choose one preposition,

while another will choose a different one. The use of the term "inter­

changeability" implies complete overlap, i.e., that the prepositions

are in free variation, that one can plug any preposition into any other

preposition’s slot. I doubt if any of those who use the term would go
that far in describing the extent of prepositional interchangeability,1

and this is why the term "overlap" is a more precise descriptive term

for prepositional interrelationships. It implies that the prepositions

have a specific semantic range, but that at the edges there are areas of

overlap. If we knew the ancient Northwest Semitic languages as living

entities we could certainly draw isogloss maps of the varying preposi­

tional patterns and isolate rather clearly the areas of overlap.

It should be further emphasized that the overlap in verb/preposi ­

tion usages is as much a function of the nature of the verb as it is a

function of the nature of the preposition. The nature of the verb grs,

for example, is such that one can drive someone out who is * seated on

(= ytb 11) his throne' (grs 1), or one can drive out someone who is ’in

-Lpella, for example, speaks of "frequente intercambiabilità"

(AION 52 [1972]: 511).

^By "isogloss" I am referring not only to geographical usages, but

also to stylistic, diachronic, and even purely personal usage.
 279

the house
* (ndy b), or one can throw out something which is * proper to

[the serpent]* (ndy 1).

Another distinction to be maintained is that between overlap in

prepositional meaning and overlap in idiomatic usages. This may per­

haps be best illustrated by the various uses of the verb l3k. The

prepositions 1_ and jjn, both used with l3k in the sense 'send to’, have

distinct basic meanings:1 1 = 'position at', 'belonging to', _jn =

' position with’, 'in company of. It seems that the two are quite

distinct in meaning and in fact they showed further separation in

Hebrew than was the case in Ugaritic. The distinction may be seen in

nominal uses where .1 normally means 'to' or 'belonging to', whereas

nominal ^m, though rare, denotes mutuality (3[cnt].4.6O and parallels)

and accompaniment (5C&7]*

5» 8, 10-11). The prepositions _1 and _m do,

however, have a much larger degree of overlap when used with verbs of

'motion to', because of the positional nature of the prepositions.To

send something so that it arrived at (1) someone's position, or to send

it so that it would end up being with (cm) a person, were two notions

that overlapped in Ugaritic.

By examining the differences between Ugaritic and the later

Northwest Semitic dialects in the area of prepositional usage, it also

becomes clear that the greater the number of prepositions, the greater

is the amount of overlap. For example, s3r b/mn, claimed as one of the

proofs that Id and mn are interchangeable in biblical Hebrew, is a case

^•See Chapter IV on nominal uses of the prepositions, and Chapter

V on semantic fields.
^There is one exception: 2062.1.1 tfrm ydn cm mlk 'message of Ydn
to the king' (the nominal address of a letter is elsewhere 1).

^See below, pp. 280-91. ^Sarna, JBL 78 (1959): 512.

 280

of semantic overlap: sar means 'be left over', and it is possible for

something which was 'a part of (= b) the quantity in question to be

left over, or it is possible for something to be left over after the

original quantity is decreased (= mn). Though s3r b would have ex­

pressed quite clearly the concrete situation, the fact that mn also

existed in Hebrew gave the possibility of making the statement slightly

more precise (though the precision in this case is more in the nature

of redundance since the semantic field of s3r only permits a comparison

between the original state and the present state with regard to a given

entity). Thus the addition of prepositions may lead to a greater degree

of overlap in usage.

Non-directionality

Implicit in the generally accepted notion that the prepositions

in Ugaritic are ambiguous and interchangeable is the idea that they are

ambivalent, that they in themselves have opposite meanings, for example,

that b means both 'in' and 'from', that 1_ means both 'to' and 'from'.1

A corollary to the position outlined above concerning perspective

is the concept that the prepositions do not in themselves mean * in/to'

and 'from', etc., but have one basic meaning with variations due to the

nature of the verb used with the preposition, to the perspective of the

author, and to idiomatic development of expressions.

The preceding statement is valid for prepositional uses in Ugari­

tic and, on the basis of my study of the Ugaritic prepositional system,

it would appear to be valid for the other Northwest Semitic dialects

1This is quite standard in discussions of prepositions; see, for

example, the various editions of Gordon's Ugaritic grammars and Garbini*s
agreement with Gordon that the ambiguity of meaning (i.e., ambivalence)
is native to Hamito-Semitic (Il semitico di nord-ovest, pp. 166-6?).
 281

(though detailed work has yet to be done on these dialects). In the

languages with which I am acquainted, I know of no case where the prep-

2
osition in itself possesses opposite meanings. Indeed the factors

which lead to the development of opposite meanings, such as euphemism

(Hebrew bêrëk = qillël), idiomatic or cultural variations (English 'bad

*

= 'good
* ), or literary style,$ could hardly play a role in the develop-

4
ment of opposite meanings in prepositions within a given language.

Rather, one would have to assume that the prepositions were originally

ambivalent (this seems to be the position of Gordon and Garbiiri/’), with

later semantic specification provided by the addition of lexical items

^Since it was the Ugaritic material which was decisive in the re­
definition of Hebrew prepositions, a re-appraisal of the Ugaritic system
should have comparable repercussions on Hebrew.

2This is not the case for any of the Northwest Semitic dialects,
nor for Akkadian ina and ana; Egyptian m, claimed by Gordon and Garbini
as a further example (Garbini, Il semitico di nord—ovest, p. 167; Gordon,
UT, §10.1), is beyond my competence but a glance at Alan Gardiner's
Chapter XIV would seem to indicate a system not far semantically from
Ugaritic (Egyptian Grammar: Being an Introduction to the Study of Hiero­
glyphs, 3d ed., rev. [London: Oxford University Press, 19571, pp. 124-37) .

^See William Empson, Seven Types of Ambiguity, 2d rev. ed. (Lon­

don: Chatto and Windus, 1947), especially chapters VI and VII which
deal with contradiction.
\see H. A. Gleason's helpful outline of distinctions between nouns
and prepositions, An Introduction to Descriptive Linguistics, rev. ed.
(New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1961), pp. 158-59.

^Garbini
s
* assessment of Sutcliffe's position appears to be basi­
cally in error. He claims that Sutcliffe's position "partendo dal pre—
supposto che il significato ' da
* delle preposizioni in questions rap-
presenterebbe una sviluppo secondario ..." (Il semitico di nord—ovest,
p. 166; in reference to Sutcliffe, VT 5 [19551: 436-39). It appears to
me that Sutcliffe was arguing, and I am arguing in any case, that the
prepositions never did in themselves mean * from
* . This "meaning" is not
a developed secondary meaning of the preposition, but the modern trans­
lation of a syntactic construction potentially, and perhaps actually,
present from the earliest form of the language. The recognition of this
original lack of a preposition * from
* does not, however, necessarily
imply original ambivalence of the other prepositions as I hope to show
in the remainder of this chapter.
 282

to the language. Not only is there too little evidence for this,

though, but it appears quite possible that there is another explanation

for the specific problem of the Ugaritic prepositions: they do not in­

dicate direction but position, they are non-directional in nature.

The prepositional systems of many languages exhibit a mixture of

directional and non-directional prepositions. English ’on', for example,

is in itself non-directional (’put it on the table * = ’put it so that it

will be located on the table’), while ’toward(s)’ is by nature direc­

tional since ’toward(s) ’ means 'in the direction of. A graph illus­

trating the English prepositional system would, then, indicate the

force of certain prepositions by points, the force of others by arrows.

Analysis of the Ugaritic system, however, has led me to believe

that Ugaritic has a far smaller number of directional prepositions than

do our modern European languages. This conclusion is based on the fol­

lowing considerations:

1) There is no specific preposition describing the direction

’from’ or the position ’away from' in Ugaritic. The appearance of m(n)

'from' in 1015.11 (if the interpretation is correct^) seems to indicate

that a preposition meaning specifically 'from' did at some time enter

the Ugaritic language, but was historically not a part of that language

as exhibited in both poetic and prose texts. The fact that there is no

lexical opposite number for a directional Id 'into' and IL 'to/toward'

leads to two opposing conclusions: either (a) the prepositions Id and IL,

owing to ambiguity or to different vocalizations, contained both mean­

ings 'into/to' and 'from'; or (b) the prepositions Id and 1^ were not

directional and thus no semantic opposite was necessary for communica-

]"See note to smb mln), above, p. 259-

 283

tion—rather, direction was supplied by markers other than the prepo­

sition. No hard evidence has yet been given for two vocalizations of

1 and _b, as the next paragraph will show, and lexical polarity (with

identical pronunciation) of so basic a particle as the preposition

seems at least deserving of doubt.

(2) There is as yet no good evidence for two vocalizations of

the prepositions 1 and _b corresponding to different meanings or for

gemination following the prepositions when they mean 'from'. These are

variations of one explanation of the various "meanings” of the Ugaritic

prepositions, the earliest argument for which I have found from the pen

of H. L. Ginsberg, dated to 1938:

The difference between bA meaning 'from' on the one hand and b

'in', 'with', 1^ 'to' on the other is not only that the former, whose
full forms are bn, In, are probably followed by gemination, but also
that they, like the mi(n) of other languages, are vocalized with i_,
whereas b 'in', 'with' and 1 'to' are shown by, among other evidence,
the analogy of the Syriac (before 'shwa'; e.g., basrârâ) and by many
Hebrew forms such as lahgm to have been vocalized originally with a.
This observation applies to Sabaeo-Minaean as well as to Ugaritic.

One must object, however, that not only is there no evidence for gemina­

tion following bA in any vocalized Semitic language corresponding to a

semantic distinction of the type required ('to' vs. 'from'), but there

is also no evidence for different vocalizations corresponding to dif­

ferent meanings. The closest thing that has appeared to date is the

reading le-e (second sign half broken) for the Ugaritic word correspond­

ing to Akkadian a-na in Ugaritica V, polyglot text no. 130 HI 5'» This

might lead one to the conclusion that 1^ 'to', the equivalent of Akkadian

ana, corresponds to Hebrew 3el/3ëlê, while JL 'from', the equivalent of

Akkadian istu, corresponds to 1 + short i. or a. But unfortunately the

1BASOR 72 (1938): 15, n. 9.

 284

istu entry is missing from this polyglot text. Until we do have con­

trasting vocalizations corresponding to the meanings ’in(to)/to

* and

’from’, we cannot be sure they existed. Of course if such ancient

vocalizations were discovered, corresponding to the opposite meanings

'in(to)/to
* and ’from’, the theory of non-directionality being pre­

sented here would receive a fatal blow. It appears much more likely,

judging solely from the attested vocalization le—e, that if a semantic

distinction is eventually discovered corresponding to two vocalizations

it will follow these lines : le will correspond to Hebrew 3el/3ëlê and

be directional ’unto’, while la/i will correspond to Hebrew 1 and will

be the marker of 'position at’ and ’relationship to' and will thus be

non-directional (such a semantic division seems to underlie Hebrew 1

vs. 3el/3ëlê, the latter of which is the principal marker of direction).1

It should be pointed out, in further support of the theory of non­

directionality, that Ginsberg's position regarding the difference in

vowels according to meaning has been disproved by the reading bi-i in

the next line of the polyglot text mentioned (if bi-i does indeed cor­

respond to Akkadian ina—the Akkadian line at that point is badly

broken), for Ginsberg's bi(n) should correspond to Akkadian istu and

2
mean 'from', whereas this bi, apparently corresponds to ina 'in
.
*

(3) There is no evidence for the expanded forms of the preposi­

tions (In, Im, bm, etc.) having any lexical significance at all, and

surely none of the proportions of * *

in(to)/to over against * *
from . On

"^Blau and Loewenstamm (UF 2 [1970] : 25, n. 55) and Blau and
Greenfield (BASOR 200 [1970]: Ï&) assume that Ugaritic had only^one pre­
position J. which was a contamination of li/la and ( ilay -*) _ile.

^For reaction to Ginsberg’s theory, see above, pp. 5-6.

^See below, Chapter V.

 285

the contrary, they seem to be free variants, or stylistic variants

(often ballast variants), of the respective short forms: Im appears in

14(Krt).2.102 while in .4.191 the parallel text has 1; in text 2.1(157)

In is to be interpreted as both * to
* (line 25) and * from
* (line 29)î in

text 16.1(125).4?-48 bm is a ballast variant of t) and must mean * in(to)*

(the use of 3fad as the verb assures this), but in 50(117).14 bm jy

should be translated 'from the tribute’.1

(4) The frequent use of the preposition _jn with verbs of move­

ment to indicate position at the end of a trajectory is in sharp contrast

with later dialects, where ^m indicates mutuality or accompaniment, and

occasionally comparability. This seems to indicate that 1 and _jn were

not considered different in Ugaritic as concerns directionality, but

that both were either ambivalent as to direction or else markers of

position rather than of direction.

(5) The only two prepositions in Ugaritic which seem clearly to

indicate direction are m(n), attested but once, and d * up *

to , until •

When one considers that m(n) is in all probability not native to Ugari—

tic and that there are no specific prepositions for the notions of

'through ,
* 'toward ,
* 'into , etc., one is constrained to admit that
*

there was little indication of direction within the Ugaritic preposi­

tional system. Moreover, the possibility deserves serious consideration

that neither m(n) nor _^d was originally a marker of direction, but that

m(n) indicated * position away *

from and ^d. * position at the end of a

*
trajectory .

Faced with the above considerations I have concluded that it is

1If properly interpreted —see note on ndr b/bm ... mn in

50(117).14-15 and 1013.12-13, above, pp. 208-10.
 286

wiser to describe the general Ugaritic prepositional system in terms of

position than to describe it in terms of direction. If this is correct,

b does not mean ’in1, ,

*
'from and 'into1, but 'position within the con­

fines of', and direction 'to' or 'from

,
* or lack of direction, are pro­

vided by verb, context, or idiomatic usage. The preposition 1^ does not

mean 'to
,
* * toward
* , and * from
* , but ‘position at
* , * pertaining to
* ,

* , or * belonging to
* related to * (the use of * to
* in these English ap­

proximations must not, of course, imply direction). It is with regard

to this preposition that my position departs the farthest from classical

grammars.1 The preposition Jjn does not only mean * along with
* in the

sense of accompaniment, but * position with

* , and can thus, according to

the nature of the verb, indicate the end-point of an action (l3k cm

* send to’, etc.). The preposition C1 does not mean only * above *, but

* position at or near the top

* , and can thus, according to perspective,

indicate position before action ('from

* —though no convincing example

has yet appeared in Ugaritic), during action ('above'), or after action

('above
,
* * before
* ). See Chapter V for a discussion of the semantic

fields of the various prepositions.

If the above insight is correct, then the long discussion as to

the various "meanings” of the prepositions will have been somewhat

fruitless. The Ugaritic prepositions do not have widely varied or

opposite meanings, but are used in widely varying circumstances to

describe many realities, and must thus be translated into a language

possessing many prepositions by the full range of prepositions available

in that language.

^Compare Brockelmann, Grundriss, 2: 377: ”Im Gegensatz zu bi

bedeutet la ursprunglich die Richtung auf ein Ziel . . • *'
 287

This leads to the distinction between translation and linguistic

analysis. Though in a dictionary entry_b, for example, would have en­

tries 'in', 'into', 'on', 'at', 'through' , and 'from', we are not there­

from to assume that for a native speaker of Ugaritic Jd "meant from" any

more than sur "means from" in French, though it might have to be trans­

lated thus occasionally. Moreover, the very fact that Ugaritic lacks a

specific preposition indicating 'direction from' or 'position away from'

should mean that a translation from Ugaritic into a language which makes

regular use of a preposition 'from

* will have more cases of ,b translated

as 'from' than would be the case if both the original language and the

receptor language had specific prepositions denoting 'from'. Thus a

translation from French will render sur, dans, and en only rarely as

'from' since French has not only these prepositions but also de and

depuis to indicate 'origin' and 'movement from'.

To say that Ugaritic did not express direction specifically by

the use of prepositions does not imply, of course, that the language

did not express direction; rather, that the expression of direction was

supplied by the verb, by context, or by idiomatic development. The

movement was there, but the indication of movement and direction was

not supplied by the preposition.

It is to be hoped that the analysis contained here is a linguis­

tic reality. But beyond this, the primary practical advantage in the

theory of perspective + non-directionality over that of lexical ambi-

^It should be clear that I do not disagree with Gordon's collec­

tion of facts showing surface ambiguity (UT, §10). Rather, it is our
interpretation of the facts that varies. Gordon explains surface ambi­
guity by original ambivalence ; I explain it by non-directionality and
perspective.
 288

valence is that it puts constraints on the exegete's ingenuity. Though

running through the various perspectives can itself lead to some ingen­

ious interpretations, the net ingenuity quotient is less than in an as­

sumed system of interchangeability where prepositional meanings are

blurred. If the prepositions are accepted as having specific positional

meanings, any interpretation must present a concrete situation consonant

with the positional meaning of the preposition in question. This is well

illustrated by the proposed interpretation of trfr afar discussed in the

note to that idiom alleged to appear in 24(77).32-33.1 Though one may

accept that Hebrew 3afrar should often be translated ’with' (Ugaritic

has no convincing examples), the position in question is 'just behind’

and not ’beside’ or ’before’, and any assumed idiom which does not con­

form to the basic meaning of the preposition is subject to doubt.

The same is true of b: if its basic positional meaning is ’posi­

,
*
tion within the confines of a translation ’from’ is only possible

where the perspective allows for the item in question being, at some

time during the time span of the action, in the position indicated by K

That is to say, this preposition cannot in itself indicate a position

’away from’, or ’off of’; there can by definition be no verbs of class

I, in which b, indicates where, how, or when an action takes place, con­

strued with t) = ’ from’ : ahbh bqrt could not mean ’he loved her outside

the city’, nor could dbfr s bqds mean ’he sacrificed a sheep outside the

sanctuary
.
* Moreover, a nominal phrase containing Jd = * from’ should be

an elliptical form of an original verbal phrase.

The rejection of ambiguity as the primary factor in the inter­

pretation of prepositional uses also puts a much heavier emphasis on

1Above, pp. 244-46 (at tr& 1).

 289

standard idiomatic expressions. If a standard idiom exists, an opposite

meaning of the preposition in question may only be proposed if the con­

text requires it; and even then one must endeavor to ascertain the cir­

cumstances which led to the new usage.

With my understanding of perspective and non-directionality now

outlined, it is possible to present a graphic illustration of the per­

spectives assumed to have existed in Ugaritic. The perspectives of the

chart given on pp. 249-65 may be schematized in the following manner

(an asterisk indicates the semantic import of the preposition, an

arrow the actual movement involved in the action expressed by the

verb/preposition combination):

Class I **---- **

Class II <----- *

Class III ------ **

Thus class I prepositional uses define only the circumstances of an

action, class II indicates where the action began, and class III indi­

cates where it ends. It will become clear by study of these symbols

that the addition of a preposition 'from' does not add a completely

new perspective, but a notion of directionality to class IIî the pre­

position in itself indicates both starting point and separation. Nor

does a directional preposition such as 3el add a new class; it is a

sub-class of class III in that it indicates in itself both point of

arrival and direction 'towards'Thus min and el are not just

]"I am assuming that Ugaritic 1^ corresponds most closely to Heb­

rew 1. Other possibilities are : 1) two pronunciations of Ugaritic 1^
(discussed above, pp. 285-84); and (2) Ugaritic 1, represents a fusion
of la/i and of 3ilay - 3ile and contains semantic elements of both. It
appears as likely, however, that the early Northwest Semitic preposi­
tional system was primarily non-directional and that the 1/ el dis­
tinction is secondary rather than original (the purpose of the secondary
3 el being to provide a directional preposition).
 290

asterisks, they are an asterisk joins an arrow, position plus direction.

This division into three perspectives according to motion 'to',

'from', or within limits was reached independently through the analysis

of the Ugaritic texts alone. Since that discovery, however, I have

found, through the kindness of H. G. Gtiterbock, that a discussion of

the problems involved in the various Hittite case endings and their

evolution have led E. Laroche to the following analysis of the pos­

sibilities of action:
L'existence désormais assurée d'un directif,en -a opposé au
locatif et à l'ablatif, et le rôle qu'il a joué dans la syntaxe
de la phrase ancienne, imposent la restauration du système de
l'anatolien selon un schéma équilibré.
a. Opposition du statique au dynamique, de la position au
mouvement ; en grammaire: du locatif et des cas 'motionnais'.
b. Opposition, à l'intérieur de la categorie 'notionnelle ,
du directif-latif (but, destination) a l'ablatif (origine, sortie,
éloignement). . , , . ,
Cette structure régulière est conforme a la nature des
*
choses et se réalise dans la majorité des langues.

This conforms rather closely to the system I have outlined above for

Ugaritic (the main accommodation for application to prepositional

usages being the inclusion in class I of not only stative verbs, but

also of verbs of movement when the preposition indicates the limits

within which the motion takes place). Furthermore, I also had come to

the conclusion that the categories outlined were not unique to the

language under discussion (in my case Ugaritic) but were valid for all

the languages I knew.

As a further step beyond this tripartite division I had also con­

cluded, as regards languages where a prepositional system dominates

rather than one of case-endings, that the categorization of action ac­

cording to this schema is not only important in that it forces us to

1" Etudes de linguistique anatolienne, III," RHA 28 (1970): 44.

 291

think through the exact type of motion conceived by the ancient author

in each prepositional usage, but also in that it furnishes means of

stating explicitly the extent to which one language or dialect resembles

another in prepositional usage: it permits us to chart explicitly pre­

positional isoglosses. The Appendix of the present study is intended as

a first step in the comparison of the Ugaritic idioms with other closely

related dialects. More detailed isolation of isoglosses will be pos­

sible after complete studies are prepared on the other Northwest Semitic

dialects, and, hopefully, on the other Semitic languages (though the

work is laborious, and, in languages as extensively attested as Arabic,

possible only on the scale of a sampling).

Semantic Classes of Verbs and the

Prepositional Uses in Each

The most interesting cases of patterning in verb/preposition

combinations have been discussed in the philological notes in Chapter

II, and will be listed here in summary fashion:

(1 ) verbs of entering + ^1 = 'enter the presence of'1

(2 ) verbs of blessing + ,1 = 'bless to'^

(5) verbs of emotion + b(m) + part of body = 'weep in', etc.*

5

4
(4) verbs of obeisance + ,1 + part of body = 'fall at'
5
(5) verbs of taking + b of place removed from or to

(6) verbs of rejoicing + b of origin of rejoicing

Other patterns do of course exist. Some are of an obvious nature, for

^Note to bD cl, pp. 116-17. ^Note to brk 1, pp. 129—5^.

5Note to bky bm, pp. 118—22. Note to hbr 1, p« 144.

5Notes to afrd b and Iqb b, p. 109 Chd b class II), and pp.
194-95 (Iqfr b class II).
&Notes to smfr b class II and smfa m(n), p. 259.
 292

example verbs of sound production all seem to take 1^ (brk 1$ mr 1, zg 1»

qr 1, rgm 1, jny 1, 1, qra l).1 Other patterns show up the semantic

distinctions between the prepositions, for example nek 1, spk 1 = 'pour,

spill on', while y§q b = 'pour into

* .

Because the chart of perspectives in ChapterII is based on the

various limits of movement, it would be useful here to analyze more

closely those verbs which in themselves contain the notion of movement.

These may be divided into three classes: verbs of 'motion to', verbs

of motion which do not have a direct reference to 'motion in' or 'out',

and verbs of 'motion out of/away from

* .

There are five verbs of 'motion to', three meaning 'enter' or the

like (ba, erb, gll), two meaning 'go to' or 'arrive at' (mgy, Cst]ql).

The first three are used regularly with _b (and with ^1. in the sense of

'enter before'), while the last two are used regularly with 1^ (mgy

also with cm).

There are at least thirteen verbs of motion which do not in them­

selves indicate 'movement from' or 'to'. Six are neutral as to direc­

tion (atw/y and hlk 'go/come', ctq 'advance', wfry [?] 'hurry', Ism and

rg 'run'), four indicate direction downwards (yrd 'descend', gly 'lower

*

npl and qll 'fall'), two refer to direction upwards (cly 'go up', rkb

'mount'), and one to returning (jb 'go/come back'). Of these thirteen,

only one uses 1^ to indicate ' point from which' (yrd). Regularly t)

The last two verbs are also attested once with _jn.

The use of 1^ with these verbs does not indicate that 1^ in itself
means * on/over/upon ’ (so H. J. van Dijk, "A Neglected Connotation of
Three Hebrew Verbs," VT 18 [1968]: 18), only that 1 was considered to
be the proper prepositional complement to verbs of pouring, perhaps
because the liquid could not by its consistency ever remain 'on' (= 1)
something, but would run down—though this is speculation.
 293
indicates * point of arrival in
* (yrd, ctq bd, gly, qll, cly)11 while 1

(or %i) indicates 'point of arrival at

* (hlk, Ism, npl, cly, rkb, tb).

There are five verbs of movement *

out of
* or *
away from
* (yg3,

ng, npq, rbq, tbc). Of these five, two are construed with t) to indicate

the point of departure (yg3 and tbc—with both .1 indicates the 'point of

arrival at
),
* while two of the other three indicate the point of depar­

ture by 1. (ng and rfrq). This is a higher rate of usages where 1 =

’from
* than in the other two categories (none among the verbs of 'motion

,
*
to one among the verbs which do not indicate 'movement to
* or 'from
,
*

yrd). One might take this as an indication that where the notion of

'movement from
* was included in the verb itself, the point of departure

could be indicated by _b or 1, though the choice was in all probability

dependent on whether the position was *

in or *
at (thus yg3 b = *
go

forth from in
).
* One cannot, however, base any far-reaching conclusions

on this third category since it is poorly attested and since some of the

more difficult texts of the Ugaritic corpus are classed here.

A further conclusion based on these verbs of movement is that a

verb such as hlk, meaning *

go/come
, with no specificity as to points

of departure or arrival in itself, should not be used with b^ or 1^ in

the meaning * go from

:
* 1) because the prepositions in themselves do

not contain the semantic import of *

from in this case not furnished by

the verb, and (2) because specific verbs of departing exist and this

permits the idioms hlk b *

go *
through (= *
go/come while within the con­

fines of
)
* and hlk 1 * go to
* (= * go/come so as to be at
).
*

cly b, used regularly with mountains, probably means * go up into

(the recesses of) a mountain*, while cly 1 means * go up to a mountain*,
just as in English one can say either * go up to the mountains* or *go up
into the mountains *, with the latter containing a somewhat more explicit
reference to entering a mountainous region or mountain forest.
 294

The uses of 1 = 'from' seem to form a specific semantic class in

themselves: when the cases of provable 'movement from' are examined

they exhibit what may be called a "privative" nature. That is, this

usage of 1 seems to have been used rarely for movement 'away from'

alone, but for movement involving 'privation from'. This is obvious

in such cases as 3bd 1 'destroy from', grs/mr 1 'drive out from', ndy 1

'throw out from', jm 1 'tear out from'. But it is also at least par­

tially true of yrd 1 where all but one attestation involves a person

descending from royalty (the exception being in the Krt text where the

king descends Iggt ' from the roofs'—14[Krt] .2.80, .4.172). In the case

of ng/rfrq 1 a person is being asked to leave because he is unwanted

(14[Krt].3.132, .5.260, .6.280), and the context of ns3 1 is that the

deities are being rebuked for dropping their heads to their knees

(2.1C137].27, 29).

Thus in every case but one, ZL seems to be used in a context of

privation or of forced dismissal of some kind. When compared with jo =

'from', three considerations would seem partially to dissolve the ambi­

guity which (for us) beclouds the use of such combinations as grs b

alongside grs 1. The first is that the form may well have been con­

sidered more emphatic than the construction with this is only a

guess, however, based on the fact that jl 'from' is so consistently

privative, while t) ' from' occurs most frequently in idioms which are

simply partitive or separative. The second consideration is to call

attention to what was said above (pp. 273-74) concerning the jL of be­

longing or 'relationship to
.
* The use of jL in an idiom denoting

'deprive someone of what belongs to him' may be operative in any case

where the position 'from which' pertains to the subject or object of

 295

the verb in a relationship of belonging or intimate association (e.g.,

ndy 1 and 1 for destroying poison [object] from the serpent's mouth;

ns3 1 for the deities [subject] lifting their heads from their own

knees). The third consideration is the possibility that the assumed

basic meaning of each preposition was what governed its use with a

verb (e.g., grs 1 = 'drive out from being seated on [y£b 1] the throne ,

grs b = 1 drive out from in the house'—these are the attested uses of

grs). The evidence for such attention to basic meaning is, however,

only with difficulty applied to some of the attested cases of ambiguity

(e.g., ndy b is 'throw out from the house

* , while ndy 1 is 'throw out

from the serpent's mouth'—in this case 1, though it may have originally

denoted * proper to/belonging to', seems at least secondarily to indicate

'position in'). Moreover, the development of preferred usages would

have to decide between opposite possibilities of directionality when

basic meaning leaves more than one possibility open (e.g., ns Igr

could logically mean either 'lift up on top of

* [class III] or * lift

something up which is on top of

* [class II], and in fact both usages

are attested; such ambiguity is so rare, however, that we have to

assume that preferred usages developed, eliminating potential ambiguity).

It is quite possible that only one of the above considerations, or

yet another which I have not perceived, initially led to the development

of any one of the difficult prepositional usages, while a combination

may have led to another. In any case, * privative

* .1 seems to be one

factor in explaining verb/preposition combinations.

The Lexical Significance of the Preposition

in Relation to the Verb

Were "ambiguity" and "interchangeability" accepted as proper

 296

terms to describe the prepositional system in Ugaritic, then the prep­

osition in itself would be at the same time lexically important (in

that it means both 'in/to' and ’from', itself indicating the direction

of the movement) and unimportant (in that only context can decide which

is the proper meaning in any given case).

The proper interpretation of a given prepositional usage is also

empirical in the system I have outlined above. It was maintained, how­

ever, that the development of preferred usages should always be taken

into consideration when deciding upon the correct interpretation of a

verb/preposition combination. It was also claimed that the various

possible interpretations are not due to ambiguous meanings of the prep­

ositions, but to various perspectives from which a speaker or author

may view the limits of action. This involves the claim that each of

the prepositions has a rather precise meaning, that this meaning refers

in the main to position rather than to direction, and that the notion

of movement or direction is supplied by the verb, the context, adver­

bial indicators, or idiomatic usage.

Finally, we must note that the total number of prepositions in

Ugaritic is quite low and that there are few complex prepositions and

no compound prepositions (see below Chapter V).

Now considering the verb, it must be noticed that the use of

specifically directional verbs does not correspond to the English

system of directional verbs (for example corresponds to English 1 go

in' and ’come in', this contrasting pair being used more idiomatically

than 'enter'). In colloquial English we use such a verb + preposition

as 'go in(to)', coupled with 'come in(to)', much more readily than the

corresponding verb 'enter' + direct object. The Northwest Semitic

 297

dialects, however, combine the features of 12enter

* and * go/come in(to)’

in that verbs of movement can be construed either with or without prep­

osition: one can say either b3 qrt or b3 bqrt for 1 enter the city
* =

* go/come into the city

* . Furthermore, one is hard pressed to come up

with a distinction between the two expressions in Northwest Semitic.

Some of the verbs used both with and without prepositions in

Ugaritic are listed here (only non-prepositional uses are given here,

consult Chapter II for verb/preposition combinations):

b3 : e.g., 15(128).4.21 and l(cnt IX).5.23, and five other instances

of b3 qrs mlk.

bky: both bky 1 and bky + 0 (6E62].1.16) denote ’bewail

.
*

hlk: Ik bty (22.1E123] *

3) = 'go to my house
* (?) ; cf. also line 8
and 21(122).1.1, 9.

yg3: d 1 yga bt mlk (2100.21) * which did not come from the king's
palace
* ; jgr ygu (16.1E125].52-53) ’he goes out the gate
.
*

yrd: rd bt hp£t arg (4E51]* 14-15)

*
8.7; 5E67].5 ’go down to the
lazar-house of the *
(nether-)world .

l3k: likt mg rm (2O59.ll) 'you sent to Egypt'.

Iqfo: ajt tqfa. btk (15E128].2.21-22) 'a wife you shall take into
your house'.

mgy: ltmgyn hdm ... lymgy apsh (6.1.59-61E49.1.31-33) ’do not

reach the footstool ... does not reach its top'.

cly: hm mt ycl bns (RS 24.277: 29, Ugaritica VI, p. 171) 'when
Death comes up against the people'.

crb: erb + 0 + bt^ * enter the house' is regular, e.g., 2101.16.

gd: tgdn pat mdbr (23E52J.68) 'they range the edges of the desert
* .
2
gfr: 44-45)
ygfa ajrt wbnh (3ECnt].5
* 'he cries to Afcirat and her sons'.

^Consult Dahood, Psalms III (1970), p. 59*

2
This translation is correct if jr il is indeed the subject ; see
Herdner, RES 1942-45, p. 48, n. 2*
 298

st%; tsty krpnm yn (4[51].6.$8) 'they drink wine from goblets'.

tbc: tbc mgrm (1084.27) 'he went to Egypt'; wbcl tbe mrym g£n
-7’4C51L4.19)" 'Baal departs for the heights of Sapon .

Solely from the point of view of number of attestations, verb +

preposition usages are more frequent than verb + 0 with verbs of move­

ment or in class I action where the preposition indicates the circum­

stances of action. Nonetheless one can, in many cases, imagine a total

lack of verb + preposition usages (i.e., the preposition adds little

semantically to the expressions attested without preposition, b—bt

is as clear as b3 bbt1 because the notion of entering is contained in

the verb).
Though one might imagine a complete system where no prepositions

are used at all,2 in terms of the Ugaritic language as it is attested,

the verb/preposition combination does not contain a high degree of re­

dundancy. Though there is redundancy with verbs of 'motion to' or 'from'

(b3 + b = b^_ + 0), in most cases the preposition does provide semantic

import. This may be observed in several classes of verbs:

(1) Verbs not specifically marked for direction: hlk b = 'go in/

through', hlk 1 = 'go *

to (without the prepositions hlkjd could mean

'go in', 'go through' , or 'go to the fiels').

(2) Verbs marked for direction: tbc Jb = 'go away from', tb , 1 =

•go away to'. Here the use of two prepositions indicates the origin and

the goal of action, though we are at somewhat of a loss to say why b was

because many of these verb + 0 combinations occur ^^h the noun

reasons.
2There could have been, for example, a system of verbs + noun
cases: hlk + genetive = 'go from', hlk + accusative = go to .
 299

used for 'from * and 1^ for ’to

* (though all attested cases of tbc b

do mean 'go away from in

).
*

(3) All verbs of action '*

for : dbfr s = *
kill/sacrifice a

sheep
;
* dbfr lilm = 'sacrifice to the *
.
gods

(4) All transitive verbs with a direct object plus movement

*to/from
* : grs bcl Igr 'he drives Baal from the mountain
.
* Con­

ceivably all such formations could be replaced by double accusatives

(garasa bacla gura could mean *

he drives Baal from E = with respect to]

the mountain
* ), but use of a preposition makes the statement more

explicit.

Though the list could be lengthened, I will continue by referring

briefly to another class of prepositional usages which does not pertain

directly to this section: nominal sentences. I mention this category

here simply to point out the usefulness of prepositions in sentences

which correspond to English sentences constructed with a form of the

verb 'to be
.
* 'He is in New York
* and 'he is New York
* of course convey

entirely different meanings, and a comparable situation exists in the

Northwest Semitic Languages: cbdk an (5C673.2.12) *

1 am your servant
*

is quite different from bhm qrnm (12E753.1.30) 'they have horns', or

tfrth kkdrt ris clh kirbym kp (3Ecnt].2.9-10) 'under her are heads like

kdrt, above her are hands like locusts'.

To close this chapter, a word about prepositional development.

As noted above, there are comparatively few prepositions in Ugaritic,

whereas in Hebrew there are not only more lexical items classed as

prepositions, but there are many compound prepositions (a class totally

lacking in Ugaritic). In Arabic the number of prepositions has increased

even more. This development, paralleled to a certain extent in the

 300
Akkadian prepositional system,1 would seem to indicate that the semantic

content of the preposition was seen to be a useful thing in communication.

("Was seen" refers, of course, to the genius of the language and not to

individuals.) This usefulness led to increasing numbers of prepositions

and prepositional phrases, and thus to increasing lexical specificity

for each item. While in Ugaritic yrd 1 was used for 'descending from',

Hebrew had several possible combinations (yârad min, yârad mëcal, yârad

me3et, etc.), each with a slightly different semantic content.

^on Soden, Grundriss, §114.

 CHAPTER IV

PREPOSITIONS IN NOMINAL CLAUSES

The task here has been considerably lightened by the work of A. F.

Rainey who has dedicated several articles to the functioning of the prep­

ositions in administrative documents.Briefly, his results are: b,

indicates both 'position in

* *
and 'origin (i.e., direction from another

point to the author of the tablet), bd indicates 'direction to

* (i.e.,

from the source of the tablet——* delivered to/through

* or the like), and

.1 indicates 'direction to
* (i.e., from the source of the tablet to the

recipient of the commodity).

In this chapter I will discuss the nominal uses of the preposition

in the poetic and in the administrative texts and will compare these

results with Rainey's conclusions regarding the administrative docu­

ments. An exhaustive list of occurrences was felt to be unnecessary

here, especially one including references to the administrative texts,

because a much higher degree of standardization in usage may be assumed

to have existed in nominal sentences than in verbal ones. It appears

legitimate to take the following as a working hypothesis: in order to

permit communication a smaller number of prepositional idioms could exist

side by side in nominal sentences where the full semantic load falls on

the preposition, than in verbal sentences where not only the verb is

^See references above, p. 14, nn. 2, 4.

301
 302

present, but often directional or positional adverbs as well. The

primary purpose of this chapter, then, is to discover the semantic con­

tent of the preposition in nominal sentences, what could and could not be

conveyed by the preposition without a verbal modifier.

The discussion will be arranged according to the importance of

the various prepositions as exhibited in frequence of usage: b and 1

first, then C1 (used frequently in economic documents to indicate a

debit account), followed by the less frequent occurrences in alpha­

betic order.

The Preposition h

Because the number is relatively small, I will include here my

entire list of nominal uses of Id in poetic texts.

3(=nt).4.89 ttpp anhbm dalp sd [guh bym] jl[ ] 'She beautified

herself with ...

Also in 3("nt).2.42-43; variant text in 19(1 Aqht).4.205.

This is a very enigmatic passage and the interpretations vary

2
widely, though the syntactic analysis is generally agreed upon.

The Jd seems best interpreted as locative in any case ('its _gu in

the sea', with guh defined as some kind of discharge [ygJ =

zsii). The one exception would be if guh were interpreted, not

as from yga, but as a noun parallel to anhbm dalp sd indicating

another type of cosmetic. In this case, one might translate

1The list may, of course, be incomplete, not only because of pos­

sibly overlooking some examples, but also because there are different
analyses possible for some passages.

^Compare de Moor's recent study (Orientalia n.s. 37 [1968]. 212—

215) with the translations of Driver (CML, p. 85) and Ginsberg (ANET,
p. 136).
 303
1gu-cosmetic from the sea
* .

4(51).1.25 bd fess mgbtm ’In the hands of Hasis (are) the tongs'.

4(51).1.35 kbt il nfat bgr 'A divine throne (with) a seat above1.

4(51).1.44 §c il dqt kamr * A divine cup chased as in Amurru,

sknt kfawt yman With forms like beasts of Yman,
dbh rumm Irbbt * .
With ten thousands of wild bulls on it

5(67).1.16 hm brlt anfrr bym ' . . . a dolphin in the sea'.

* 2
6.6(62).50 bym ars wtnn * In the sea are ars and tnn*.

12(75).1.30» 33 bhm qrnm km jrm ’Upon them are horns like bulls
wgbjt km ibrm And humps like buffaloes’.

wbhm pn bcl ’Upon them are faces (like)

Baal(’s)'.

The question in this passage is whether the phrase bhm pn bcl

refers to the monsters’ features (as I have translated), or

whether it refers to Baal’s first reaction at seeing them

('Baal’s face was toward/against them’).^

14(Krt).2.56 mrkbt btrbg ' . . . a chariot in a court . . . '

4
Repeated six times in text 14(Krt); part of a list of property.

16(126).3.9 ncm Ihtt bgn ' . . . goodness for the wheat in the
gn (?) . . . '

There appear to be other prepositional uses in the following

lines, but the difficulty of the text precludes solid identifi­

cation.

^See the recent interpretation of this passage by Dietrich and

Loretz, UF 4 (1972): 30-31.

^See de Moor, Seasonal Pattern, pp. 240, 242; Mulder, UF 4 (1972):

86; for another interpretation, see Caquot, Syria 36 (1959): 9©-99»

^Consult Schoors, RSP, 1: 44.

^For two other possible nominal constructions, one in the Krt

text, the other in text 23(52), see note to hry bm, above, p. 147.
 304

17(2 Aqht).s.7 tbt adrm dbgrn ' at the feet of the nobles
who are in the threshing-floor
* .

Also restored in 19(1 Aqht).1.23.

23(52).8 bdh ht jkl * In his hand is the sceptre (?) of child­

lessness,
bdh ht ulmn In his hand is the sceptre (?) of widow­
hood
* .

23(52).63 wcrb bphm cgr smm 'The birds of the heavens and the fish
wdg bym (which are) in the sea enter their
mouth
* .

This text refers to the size of Il's offspring, so great that

their mouth when open reaches from heaven to earth. Thus birds

of the heavens can fly into their mouth and fish in the sea are

swept into their mouth as water flows in. The translation * from

the sea'1 diminishes somewhat the grandeur of the image by inti­

mating that the fish have to leave the sea to enter the mouth.

24(77).45-46 hn bpy sprhn 'Behold in my mouth is their number,

bspty mnthn On my lips is their counting’.

602.2.9-10 czk dmrk l[a]nk 'May your strength, your protec­

tion, your power,
htkk nmrtk btk ugrt Your sway, your splendor be in
Ugarit,
lymt sps wyrh According to the days of sun and
moon,
wncmt snt il Even the goodly years of II.

603.1.7 rish bglj bsmm 'His head is in the snow (?) in the
heavens'.

2124.2 bpy tclgt 'In my mouth there is stammering,

bl§ny gr On my tongue groaning (?) *
.2

A glance at this list will show that several of these expres­

sions are from difficult passages, thus the translations are often

1So, for example, W. F. Albright, "Was the Patriarch Terah a

Canaanite Moon-God?" BASOR 71 (1938): 37; Gordon, Ugaritic Literature,
p. 61.

^On clg and gr, see Gordon, UT, §§19»1854a, 19*1985 ; Dahood,
Psalms II (1968), pp. 226, 306; idem, Biblica 50 (1969): 349.
 305

doubtful. Nonetheless, it seems legitimate to say that _b was not used

independently with a separative meaning in the poetic texts. Even in

the expression which has the closest parallel in verbal usage, bpy sprhn

// bspty mnthn (24[77].45-46—seemingly quite close to y§3 b used for

words leaving the mouth), .b does not have a separative nuance since the

spr and mnt are not yet spoken but come out in the next lines.1

The use of Jb in the administrative documents contains what is for

us a higher degree of ambiguity than is contained in the poetic texts

published to date. There are certain texts where b indicates the posi­

tion of an item (= 1 in1, class I of the verbal usages), others where it

seems to indicate position before movement (= ’from’, class II of the

verbal usages).

examples of Jd = ’in’ are ; 1109.6 w Ips d sgr bh * and a garment

with a sgr in it ' ; 2056.2 any al[jy] d b atlg 'an Alashian ship which is in

atlg'; R5 24.525: 3 (Ugaritica VI, pp. 172-73) dbfrt byy bn sry lcjt d b

Thus bpy sprhn means * their number is still in my mouth

* , and
this is the positive counterpart to the negative statement contained in
the verbal sentence bph rgm lyga (19C1 Aqht].2.75) 'the word had hardly
left [literally: .not left] his mouth . . . There is a good parallel
in Ps. 139:4 ki 3ên millâ bilsoni // hën YHWH yâdactâ kullâh ’When there
is not (yet) a word on my tongue, you, YHWH, know it entirely'. Here
the emphasis is on YHWH's knowing the word before it even reaches the
speaker's tongue. The expression is thus a third form of the basic
idea contained in the Ugaritic texts. Dahood's translation, "The word
is not even off my tongue" (Psalms III [1970], pp. 283, 287) is based
on the Ugaritic verbal sentence cited above (y§3 b) but assumes also
the meaning 'from’ for b in a nominal sentence. It appears to me, how­
ever, that the nominal parallel in 24(77).45-46 indicates the meaning
of b better than the verbal phrase.
Fisher has translated ]d in nominal phrases in two of the Ugaritica
V texts as ’from’: 612.1.6 and .2.1 (latter case restored—HTR 63 [1970]:
"^86) and 608.17 (ibid., p. 490, n. 20). The examples from text 612 are
discounted by Fisher's false identification of tzg (see note above to
.1, p. 149). mlk bcjtrt (608.17) he translates "Mik from Ashtaroth."
This is the only entry, in a list which otherwise consists of pairs of
deities, which contains a prepositional complement. Criteria, there­
fore, are lacking for a decision. Astour, for one however, saw no need
to translate 'from’ (UNES 27 [1968]: 30).
 306

qbr 'sacrifice of son of sr% for who is in the tomb'; 1012.10

hn ib d b mgsb 'Behold the enemy who is in Mukish'.

One category of administrative texts which contain b 'in' seems

to be those texts which contain reference to krm/sd PN b GN 'vineyard/

field of PN in GN'. For example : 1081.9 tit krm ubdym 1 mlkt b cnmky

'three vineyards of perpetual ownership (which belong) to the queen

(and which are situated) in cnmky'; 1104.3 sd bn ubrcn bgt prn 'field(s)

of bn ubrcn (which are situated) in gt prn*. It would seem impossible

that the meaning could be 'field from GN'.

At the other extreme are quantities of commodities which could

easily be shipped, such as wine (1084) or grains (1098). Rainey has

argued: "It is hard to understand why a scribe would want to record

moderate amounts of grain, tools, etc., which might be located in

various towns of the realm. . . . These are more than likely records

of shipments sent to the capital 'from' the several towns within the

kingdom of Ugarit.

Unfortunately, Rainey gives no criteria for distinguishing the

cases where b is to be interpreted as 'in' from those where 'from' is

the correct interpretation. This is especially acute in cases of lists

of proper names followed by the entry Id GN. Does the Jd there indicate

place of residence (in a census), or does it indicate place of origin

(for people who have come to Ugarit for one reason or another)? This

particular problem may perhaps be resolved by comparison with PRU VI 78,

a text which consists of entries PN ina GN ussab 'PN lives in GN'. Here

the use of the verb 'live/inhabit ' shows clearly that the text belongs to

^Proceedings, p. 210; see also Fourth World Congress, pp. 188-89.

^Cf. Gordon, UT, §7»9»

 307

a kind of census list (so 2015 of the alphabetic texts). But even

within the Akkadian tablets from Ugarit (and from Alalakh, see nos.

160-62) a degree of ambiguity exists since other lists do not make

use of the verb asâbu (e.g., PRU VI 79-80). Are we to assume that even

those texts which do not contain the verb asâbu imply that usage? Such

an assumption seems likely because PRU VI 80 uses the preposition ina

rather than istu (so Alalakh 161-62). If this conclusion is valid,

then b without an accompanying verb in administrative documents is to

be interpreted as ’in’ when it refers to real estate and human beings,

but as ’from’ when it refers to commodities which one may assume were

shipped to Ugarit.

It would be tempting to level all these usages and interpret

those texts which contain lists of amounts of wine and grain, etc., as

inventories of food stocks within the various small towns of the Ugari-

tian city-state. The purpose of such an inventory by the central admin­

istration would be to determine food stocks available for state use (cf.

the use of the word frpr ’rations’ in 2013). A further argument would be

from syntax alone : 1090.10-12 sbc yn Imrynm b ytbmlk ’seven (X—units of)

wine for the maryannu-personnel (who are) in yjbmlk’. There is no reason

to assume that the Id which follows mrynm should refer to yn. If there is

validity to this interpretation of 1090.10-12, then one might want to

apply the same understanding to text 1098 (in which Rainey interprets Id

as ’from’): btbq arbcm drc w csr dd drt w CaJrbc lcsrm lyfrsr bl bnh

(lines 10-11) ’In frbq (there are) forty jars of grain and ten jars of

millet ; twenty-four jars (were distributed) to yfrsr without any (for ?)

his son(s)’.

The reason I do not opt fully for the above interpretation of Id

 308

is that it seems to leave a semantic slot to be filled. If there is not

a b = 'from' in use in economic texts, then there is no way to record

shipments of commodities to the central administration; compare the use

of mn/1 in the Samaria ostraca for 'X from PNj_ to PN2'. Perhaps it is

incorrect, however, to retroject the situation at Samaria back into

fourteenth century Ugarit. Whatever the final solution may be, we must

admit that, for the time being, b presents a higher degree of ambiguity

for the modern interpreter of the Ugaritic economic texts than is gen­

erally the case in the poetic texts.

The of Price

A specific use of b is the so-called "b of price," where b pre­

cedes the amount paid for something in an economic transaction. This

usage is so regular that it does not need to be detailed here. From the

point of view of the present inquiry two questions must be discussed:

the semantic import of the b_, and the need for caution in its recognition.
Parker1 has classed the b of price as "expressing equivalence."2*

If by this is meant that in an expression such as 'one garment _b four

shekels' the b indicates that the garment and the four shekels are

equal,5 I doubt the validity of the interpretation. The doubt is based

on a usage discussed by Parker elsewhere : the use of ytn b 'sell for ■

1Studies, p. 48.

Gordon also refers to it as the b "of price or equivalence"

(UT, §10.4).

5This interpretation would seem to be based on the assumption

that the expression originated in a barter system.
^Studies, pp. 62-63.

5The idiom idiom itself is not attested in Ugaritic but ntn b is

found in Hebrew and Aramaic; cf. Ugaritic Iqb b in 1156.6 and 2006.8.
 309

This verbal usage could quite legitimately be claimed as the background

of the b of price in nominal clauses. If such is the case, then the

classic explanation of the J) of price as a variety of Jo of means12 seems

quite probable (ytn/ntn b means 'effect an exchange by means of

* and Jo

of price in nominal sentences is a transformation of the verbal idiom

by ellipsis of the verb).

The note of caution is best sounded by a reference to M. Liverani’s

2
discussion of jo in text 701.2. Liverani points out that it is absurd to

assume, as did the original editor, that seven talents of barley were

being sold for one talent (of silver—the text is sbc kkr scr bkkr a£dd).

Rather, the Jo is to be interpreted as ’according to’: ’seven talents of

barley according to the Ashdodian talent’. The most obvious parallel is,

of course, biblical Hebrew bëseqel haqqôdes (e.g., in Ex. 30:13)»

Temporal b

Besides the many uses of Jo in temporal verbal expressions, this

usage also appears in nominal clauses: 2011.1 spr frpr bns mlk byrfr

ijtCbnm] ’record of rations of the royal personnel during the month of

ittbnm’; 1107.12 jlj mat pjtm 1 mgmr b jlj snt ’three hundred (X-units)

of flax for (the deity) mgmr as a three year supply (for three years ?)’.

The Complex Preposition bd

The use of Jo with (y)d seems to take on separate lexical character

in the bound form bd. Rainey has gathered the evidence for bd in the

1GKC, §119 p; Brockelmann, Grundriss, 2: 366-67; and, more

recently, Friedrich and Rollig, Phonizisch-punische Grammatik, §283/8;
DISO, p. 51.
2"I1 taiento di Ashdod,” OrAnt 11 (1972): 194; see also Pella,
AION 32 (1972): 509-10.
 310

sense of *(delivered) to/through'where the complex preposition indi­

cates the intermediary for a transaction (the verbal idea behind the

nominal expression is probably something like * put into the hands of’).

His best evidence is from 1088.4 which contains bd while the preceding

and following lines have 1. Thus bd would seem to indicate an inter­

mediary while 1 indicates direct transfer. From a numerical standpoint,

however, the most frequent use of bd appears to be in texts describing

management or control of persons or real estate by a person other than

the owner.2 One of the best examples is text 2029 which is a list of

sd PNj bd PNg ’field of PNi managed by PNg'. This interpretation seems

to be rendered necessary by text 2030, the first column of which con­

sists of entries sd PNi 1 PNg indicating passage of ownership, while

column two consists of sd PNi bd PNg, indicating assumption (?) of

management.

The same usage is evident for persons, for example : 2072.1 r ym

dt bd iytlm * shepherds who are under the control of iytlm*; 1025.2 spr

bns mlk d bd prt ’document of royal personnel who are under the control

of prf.

The interpretation of bd in the poetic texts conforms more closely

to the etymological meaning of 1 in the hand(s) of’: 4(51).1.25 bd hss

mgbfrm 'in the hands of gasis (are) the tongs’ ; 23(52).8 bdh ht tkl bdh

ht ulmn ’in his hand is the sceptre (?) of childlessness, in his hand

is the sceptre (?) of widowhood’.

These usages of Jo and bd fit quite well the categories we might,

on the basis of the verb/preposition data, expect them to occupy in nom­

inal constructions : jo = ’in', 'from', bd = 'in the hands of, in the

^Proceedings, pp. 208-9» 2Gordon, JJT, §10.4.

 311

control of, by the intermediary of

.
* The real question which remains is

the resolution of the ambiguity if b = 'in', 'from'. I have suggested

that the ambiguity may not be present at all, but this seems, for the

present, too radical a solution. It now appears best to outline the

evidence, as I have done, for the two translations, and hope that more

evidence will be forthcoming.

The Preposition 1

Rainey's discussions have been especially pertinent for the cor­

rect understanding of 1 in economic documents. His basic conclusion is

that 1 indicates the recipient, the end-point, in an economic trans­

action, and never the point of origin; further that the usage is prob­

ably a nominal!zation of such verbal usages common to economic trans­

actions as ytn 1 or l3k 1. His conclusions appear acceptable to me

and I have found nothing to contradict them.

Attested nominal formations in the poetic texts are relatively

rare:

2.4(68).28-29 bj laliyn [bcl] 'Shame on Aliyan Baal,

bi lrkb crpt Shame on Cloud-rider' .

4(51).1.44 dbh rumm Irbbt ' . . . upon it wild bulls by the ten
thousands'.

5(67).2.2-3 [spt la]re spt Ismm 'Lip to earth, lip to heaven,

[wl]sn lkbkbm Tongue to the stars’.

6(62).1.1 lbcl '(Tablet belonging) to (the) Baal (cycle)'.

!;
*
See also 14(Krt).l.l; 16.1(125) 19(1 Aqht).1.1.

6(49).2.7-8 klb a[rh) lcglh 'Like the heart of a cow toward

her calf,
klb ja[t] limrh Like the heart of a ewe toward
her lamb,
km lb cn[t] ajr bcl So was the heart of Anat toward
Baal'.

See also lines 28-29

 312

14(Krt).1.9 bt mlk itdb * The house of the king perished

dsbc [a3fam Ih Who had seven brothers,
Imnt bn urn Eight sons of a mother
* .

15(128).4.28 [dbfr 1]krt bclkm 'There is a sacrifice for Krt

your lord'.

Also in .6.5 (Eajdnkm rather than bclkm)

16.3(126).7-9 ncm larg mtr bcl ’Good for the earth is Baal’s rain,
wlsd mfrr cly Even for the field that of Most
High,
ncm Ifrfct bgn Good for the wheat in the £n (?).

17(2 Aqht).6.34 dm Igzr srgk j&m 'For, to a hero, your lies are
filth'.

19(1 Aqht).3.152 y 1km qr mym 'Woe to you, well of water'.

See also lines 157, 165.

602.2.11 . . . btk ugrt ' ... be in Ugarit

lymt sps wyrfr According to the days of sun and moon . . . '

Nominal constructions appear in non-poetic texts of all genres.

One of the most frequent usages in total occurrences is the .1 appearing

in ritual texts to indicate the deity to whom a sacrifice is devoted,

for example : 33(5).7-8 §in slm[m] sbc pamt lilm sbc lkjr 'sheep of the

slmm-offering repeated seven times to II and seven (times) to Kolar

* .

This is clearly a nominalizâtion of such verbal formations as dbfr 1,

sfrt 1, scl 1, ybl 1, etc.

The preposition 1^ appears only twice without a verb in the

address of a letter: 1019.1.2 [t]%m iltl Imnn, and 1020.2 gnryn

Imlkytn. This is a nominalization of a verb/preposition idiom, most

likely rgm 1, rather than a directive use of _1 (perhaps more precisely:

it is an example of development from verbal/positional usage to inde­

pendent directional semantic content).

In the economic documents proper, 1^ indicates delivery to (145

[3183.5-8 = wheels to PNN; 159C593.2 = wine to PN; 1094.1-3 = oil to PN),

 515

the state of belonging to (1104.14—22—the first lines of this tablet

consist of entries sd PN b gt prn while lines 14-22 consist of entries

sd PN 1 gt prn/mzln), purpose (1159.2 arbc frmEr] lilt * four donkeys for

[= to carry] copper’), and transfer of ownership (2030, col. 1, is a

list of sd PNi 1 PNg).

Parker^ analyzes the 1 of compound numbers (e.g., sbc lsbcm

*
* seventy-seven ) as a preposition, explaining its function as that of

adding units to tens, tens to hundreds, and hundreds to thousands. C.

Virolleaud seems to have first suggested this idea of adding when he

translated arbc mat lalp as "quatre cents [ajouté] à mille." S. Loe-

wenstamm^ interprets this .1, however, as the 1^ of belonging: the 1^

indicates that the digits belong to the tens, etc.

The uses of 1 in nominal sentences thus seems to be fairly stan­

dardized, with no real problems of ambiguity, though we have no way of

distinguishing between the assumed ’delivered to

* of economic texts and

the possible * intended for

* . The primary nuances seem to be * delivered

* ,
to * ,
* sold/granted to * belonging to
* . The poetic text 6(49).2.7-8,

which speaks of the heart being toward (1 // air) another being, seems

to provide the best early evidence for incipient directionality of the

preposition itself. Several of the prose expressions, of which the

verbal origin is usually fairly transparent, may also indicate an

assumption of directionality by the preposition itself.

^Studies, pp. 52-55; Gordon also speaks of "additive 3-, ” UT, §7.40

^"Contribution à l'étude du vocabulaire de Ras Shamra,** GLECS 3

(1959): 71.

^"The Numerals in Ugaritic," Proceedings of the International

Conference on Semitic Studies (1969), p. 175.
 314

The Preposition 21

Nominal 21 in poetic texts is positional in nature, though I

have isolated only two clear instances:

j(ent).2.10 tfrth kkdrt ri[s] 1 Under her are heads like kdrt,
clh kirbym kp Over her are hands like locusts’.

Also in 7.1(131).9 (restored).

4(51).1.38 ncl il d qblbl 'A divine couch of ? ,

cln yblhm farg With golden ? upon it'.

Most occurrences of 21 in nominal sentences in prose documents

appear in economic texts and have the specific meaning of 'debit account

of', 'due by'. Once again, Rainey has discussed this usage along with

its Akkadian parallels.1 One could speculate that this nominal idiom

with C1 is to be derived from the notion of '(obligation) upon' someone

to render the payment or obligation in question.

clm in ritual texts (e.g., 33C5J.9; 612.1.7 and .2.3, 7) has been

interpreted by de Moor^ as a contraction of C1 ym 'on the next day', but

by Fisher^ as 21 + enclitic 'furthermore'.

The Preposition atr

6(49).2.9 km lb cn[t] air bcl ' ... so was the heart of Anat
——— toward Baal'.

See also line 30.

607 margin 1 ajr rsp cjtrt 'After (the section dealing with) Rsp,
(insert the section dealing with) ttrt*.

Proceedings, pp. 205—6; it should be pointed out that the volume

of Akkadian texts published since Rainey's article as PRU VI contains
more parallels to this usage, more, by the way, than to any other prepo­
sitional usage.
^Compare the parallel usage in Hebrew, e.g., II Sam. 18:11.

5UF 2 (1970): 319-20. 4HTR 63 (1970): 486, 497-500.

This interpretation is due to Astour, JNES 27 (1968): 21-22.

 315

The preposition ajr is locative/temporal in the second text (i.e.,

the one section is to be placed/recited after the other); it is direc­

tional in the other (Baal is dead and his whereabouts unknown, so Anat’s

heart goes out after him and prompts her search for him).

The Preposition yd

For a discussion of this preposition, see Gordon, UT, §19.1072,

and my note to ytn yd, above, pp. 178-79» Nominal uses account for all

occurrences except text 1008.

The Preposition cd

6.6(62).47-48 cdk ilm * Close to you are the gods,

hn mtm cdk Behold men (or: the dead) are close
to you’.1

If this interpretation of a very difficult text is correct, ^d has a

, . 2
very strong locative sense in this nominal construction.

The Preposition _lm

3(cnt).5.39 tfrmk il hkm 'Your counsel, II, is wise,

bkmk cm glm Your wisdom is like eternity,
byt fegt tbmk Lucky life is your counsel'.3

5(67).5.8, 10, 11 wat qb crptk 'And you, take your clouds,

rbk mdlk m%rtk Your wind, your trappings,H
your rain;

l"For this interpretation, see Lipinski, OLP 3 (1972) : 109, and

compare Mulder, UF 4 (1972): 86.

^Others interpret /d. here as a noun, e.g., Caquot, Syria 36

(1959): 97-98. A short discussion of the options available is provided
by de Moor, Seasonal Pattern, p. 242.

^Though _jn here may be directional ('unto eternity'; see, for

example, Dahood, Ugaritic-Hebrew Philology E19653, p. 32, and Cross,
Canaanite Myth, p. lé/, it could just as well be taken as comparative
(’the extent of your wisdom is on a par with eternity'—see my inter­
pretation of bkm cm in 4[513.4.42, above, p. 37).

^"Trappings" is a literal translation of an unknown weather

phenomenon (see Wieder, JBL 84 [19653 : 164).
 316

cmk sbct glmk 'With you (will be) your seven heroes,
tmn fonzrk Your eight "boars,"
jnk pdry bt ar With you Pdry bt Ar
cmk tlyl bt rb With you Tly bt Rb*.

Though in this text may be dependent on lq&, giving the idiom

'take with',1 the factor of separation has led me to translate

the clauses as nominal.

24(77).32 cmn! nkl frtny 'With Nikkal is my wedding'.

24(77).48-49 jtqt bqct *Jtqt, with her, Bqct,

tq^t cm prfat Tqft with Prht'.

702.2.6 tn ksp tql d cmnk 'Give silver, the shekel which is with
*
you .

1089.4 kdm cm [ ]n 'Two jars (of wine) to [ ]n' (??).

Elsewhere this text uses kd (yn) 1 or kd + construct state. Be­

cause of the broken word following cm, we cannot be sure of the

context, nor of the meaning of cm.

2
2062.1.1 tfrm ydn cm mlk 'Message of Ydn to the king'.

2063.12 cbdk b lwsnd [w ?] b §r cm mlk 'Your servants are (?) in

Iwsnd [and ?1 in §r with the king
.
* 3

Nominal is primarily positional (its directional use in 2062

probably being a nominalization of a verbal idiom) if the above interpre-

1So Clifford, Cosmic Mountain, p. 82.

^This may be the nominalization of l3k cm (so Virolleaud, PRU V,

p. 89), or perhaps of ^b rgm c m.

5The difficulty with this interpretation is that of military

cooperation between Tyre (if §r refers to the well-known Tyre) and
Ugarit (though economic cooperation between the two is clear from text
2059). Astour (AJA 69 [196$]: 257) and Mayer Gruber (review of van
Dijk, Ezekiel's Prophecy, in JANES 2 [1969-70]: 55-56) interpret bgr
here as a verbal form: * Your servant in lwsnd fortified his positions
with the king'. One must object, however, that b§r is not attested in
the pregnant meaning * fortify one's position
.
* _ Though relatively rare,
Hebrew bgr normally takes a direct object (hajjoma in Is. 22:10; merorn
cuzzah in Jer. 51:53—both Piel, the Qal in this sense only appears in
the passive participle).
 317

tâtions are correct. The texts are in several cases difficult, however,

and may in time require revised interpretations.

The Preposition tbt

3(cnt).2.9 tbth kkdrt ri[s] 'Under her are heads like kdrt'.

3(cnt).4.8O tn mjpdm tbt cnt arg 'Two strides under the springs
of the earth'.

6.6(62).45-46 sps rpim tbtk 'Saps, the rpim are under you,
sps tbtk ilnym Saps, the deities are under you'.

1053.1-3 ycdd tbt bn arbn / cbdil tbt ilmlk / qly tbt bcln nsk
2
This formula seems to indicate that PNi is replacing PNg.

Nominal uses of the Ugaritic prepositions thus appear to reflect

many of the nuances observable in verb/preposition idioms, the so-called

"ambiguous" meanings being the notable exception. It seems necessary to

assume at least for the present that the preposition jo has two principal

uses, 'position in
* and * position before movement' (= 'from'—notice

that direction 'into' is not expressed by b in non-verbal usage), but

none of the other prepositions displays such a wide degree of variation.

(The preposition 1, which could denote either 'delivered to' or 'in­

tended for' is perhaps the next greatest source of potential confusion

in our present state of knowledge).

A word might be said about directionality in nominal uses. I have

^Lipinski translates the nuance suggested by tbt here as "your

subordinates" (OLP 3 [1972]: 108); for another interpretation, see de
Moor, Seasonal Pattern, pp. 240-41 (and more recently, Mulder, UP 4
[1972]: 86). The primary alternative to my interpretation is to take
tbtk as a verb (btk). In favor of this analysis is the form rpim,
which apparently is in the oblique case ('0 Saps, you btk the rpim').
If ^d of the preceding lines is correctly analyzed as a preposition,
however (see p. 315)» it appears more likely that this portion of the
text should also contain a prepositional construction. The passage is
so difficult, however, that an adamant position would be premature.
p
So Parker, Studies, p. 60.
 318

interpreted cases of directionality as nominalizations of verb/preposi-

tion combinations. Though this is clear for most cases, the degree to

which the prepositions had in themselves taken a notion of direction­

ality is not obvious. One can in any case say that it was probably

the nominalization of directional verb/preposition idioms which trans­

ferred directionality to the prepositions to the extent that it is

observable in later dialects.

 CHAPTER V

EXTENDED FORMS OF PREPOSITIONS

AND COMPLEX PREPOSITIONS

Extended Forms

A discussion of the extended forms of Ugaritic prepositions in

prose texts has recently been provided by Parker.He discusses the

2 .
forms bm, km, Im, bn (= b^ + jn), mn, and Itn. From the poetic texts

should be added In (2.1C1571.25, 27, 29) and b dn (5Ê nt].3»50 and

parallel passages^). I would only voice a note of caution about cltn,

which occurs only once (2060.31) in a broken context, and which must

thus await further attestation before being fully accepted.

The most important conclusion derivable from the list of verb/

preposition combinations in Chapter II concerning the extended forms is

that complete agreement may be voiced with Parker's statement that:

"The alternation of simple b, 1, with the extended forms in otherwise

identical contexts and without semantic differentiation indicates that

If.
the latter are free variants of the former." I have found no evidence

whatever for semantic content in any of the prepositional extensions.

On the contrary, the degree of ambiguity present in the simple forms is

■'"Studies, pp. 44-46; see also Delekat, UF 4 (1972) : 23-24.

20n the last form, see also Dahood, Ugaritic-Hebrew Philology

(1965), pp. 51-52.
5See note to dc cl, above, pp. 142-43. ^Studies, p. 44.

519
 320

present in the extended forms. It would appear, then, that the uses

of the extended forms are of stylistic rather than semantic import.

Complex Prepositions

By "complex" is meant the combination of a preposition with a

noun (e.g., t) + qrb). The phenomenon of compound prepositions (the

piling up of two or more simple prepositions) has not yet been attested

in Ugaritic, though it is relatively frequent in Phoenician and Hebrew.

The semantic import of the nominal element in the complex prepositions

poses a more ticklish problem than that of the extending element in

extended forms. It appears that the situation of bqrb or Igr in Ugari­

tic is very close to Akkadian ina qereb and ana mufrfri, which become

simply 1in(to)1 and 'on(to)’. On the other hand, lpn supplies a

semantic precision lacking in 1.

bd

This complex preposition is too frequently attested to permit

a full listing. Its use in nominal phrases was discussed in Chapter

IV, pp. 309-11. When used with a verb, it seems to follow the con­

vention observed for a given verb + I) (e.g., yg3 bd 1 go from the hands

of’ in 147C90].1-2). As for semantic content, it develops beyond the

simple notion of ’in the hand’ and takes on the notion of ’by the inter­

mediary of, though I have found no cases of abstraction in Ugaritic

approaching the level of Hebrew ka3âser dibbartâ bëyad mSseh cabdekâ

P
’as you said by the intermediary of Moses your servant’ (I Kings 8:53).

■^See discussion of Im = 1_, In = ’ to’ and ’ from’ in text 2.1(137)

.25, 29, 27, and of bm = ’to’ in 1271(125).47-48 but ’from' in 50(117)
.14, above, pp. 284-25.

^See also I Kings 16:34; 17:16, etc., and Brockelmann, Grundriss,

2: 370
 321

The use of bëyad in this case has been completely abstracted since the

prophet was speaking and his hand did not even remotely come into play.

In Ugaritic there seems, on the basis of present evidence, to be some

semantic distinction between b%d and bd, the first preserving the lit­

eral meaning of ’hand', the second having both the literal meaning and

the derived meaning of ’intermediary'. Moreover, this semantic dis­

tinction has largely a poetry/prose distribution.

This combination is only attested adverbially•

4(51).1.35 kbt il nbt b%r 'A divine throne with a seat above
(= upon it ?)’.

bqrb
This complex preposition serves most frequently as a ballast

variant of b<:
4(51).5.76 sb frrn bbhtk! ’Call the caravan into your house,
^dbt bqrb hklk The trading-mission into your palace .

There are nineteen occurrences of bqrb hkl(m) (plus one of b^rb

bt, 4C511.7.13) listed in Whitaker’s Concordance, pp. 99-100.

19(1 Aqht).2.67 (and 74) tstk b(m) qrbm asm 'May it put you in the
granary' .

20(121).2.9 bqrb mLtct ilnym] 'In the gardens, 0 deities .

26(135).5 [ . . . 2b qrb cr 'In the city' (?).

There are five more occurrences of bqrb where the object of the prep­
osition has been lost.

bris
The complex bris occurs only in broken contexts, a total of three

times (twice with pronominal suffixes, 2.4L68].38 and 2.1L137].6, once

either as part of a geographic name or in the meaning 'at the head of,
 322

1009.7)• There is, therefore, too little evidence to arrive at a solid

conclusion regarding the semantic import of the complex preposition, but

it would seem perhaps to maintain its literal meaning * on the head' in

the two forms with pronominal suffixes, and to have taken on the meaning

1 leader of, in charge of

* in the prose text.

btk

This complex preposition is synonymous with bqrb, but its dis­

tribution is different in that it appears in more varied contexts ; this

seems to indicate that it is less formulaic in use.

3(cnt).3.26 atm wank ibgyh 'Come and I will show it (to you),
btk gry il §pn In my mountain il fpn,
bqds bgr nfrlty In the holy mount of which I took
possession,
bncm bgbc tliyt In the lovely height of (my) victory'

See also .4.63.

4(51).3.13 yarn wywpjn btk 'He arises and spits into

pLfalr bn ilm The assembly of the gods'.

4(51).5.117 frs trmmn hkElm] 'Hurry1 Let a palace be erected

btk §rrt gpn In the heights of Sapon'.

12(75).1.21 gi bain tkm 'Go forth to Ain Tkm (?),

btk mdlbr ilsy Into the desert of Ilsy' (?).

12(75).2.56 km ibr btk msms ' . . . like a bull in(to ?) the msms'

15(128).3.3 [mid rm] krt 'May Krt be greatly exalted

[btk rpi] arg Among the rpum of the earth'.

Restorations from lines 13-14.

602.2.10 frtkk nmrtk btk ugrt 'May . . . your sway, your splendor
be in Ugarit'.

603.1.2 bcl ytb kfcbt gr 'Baal sits as solidly as a mountain,

hd rL ] kmdb Hadd [ ? ] like a flood,
btk grh il gpn In his mountain il spn,
bttkj jrtliyt In the mountain of (his) victory'.
 323

The complex preposition lgr is roughly synonymous with it

provides the closest Ugaritic parallel to Hebrew/Phoenician C1 = 'from'

(see 2.1C1371.29 below).

2.1(137).23 t[g]ly ilIm risthm 'The gods lower their heads

lgr brkthm To their knees'.

Also in line 25.

2.1(137).29 tsu ilm rasthm 'The gods raise their heads

Igr brkthm From their knees'.

4(51).2.9 stt frptr list 'She puts the bptr on the fire
fobrj Igr phmm The bbrj on the coals'.

4(51).8.6 sa gr C1 ydm 'Lift up the mountain on your hands,

bib Igr rfetm The hill on your palms'.

14(Krt).2.73 C1 Igr [mg]dl 'Climb up on the tower'.

16(126).3.13 nsu [r]is br£m 'The plowmen lift their heads,

Igr cdb dgn Upward the growers of grain' (?).

17(2 Aqht).6.37 spsg ysk El]ria 1 Glaze will be poured on my head,

frr§ Izr qdqdy Lye on my pate'.

qdm * in front of', * before' is rare in Ugaritic and this semantic

slot is normally filled by lpn.

2.3(129).16 [yj]ir jr il abk ' ? Bull II your father,

lpn zbl ym Before Prince Sea,
lpn Ejîpt Cn]hr Before Judge River'.

Also in lines 21-22.

3(cnt).1.6 ybrd jd Ipnwh 'Before him he cuts the breast .

3(cnt).4.84 srbq ajt lppnh 'He sends out the women (or: his wife)
from before him'.

4(51).4.17 qds yufadm sbcr 'Qadis begins to (?) give light,

amrr kkbkb lpnm Amrur like a star before,
ajr btlt cnt Behind girl Anat'.

10(76).2.17 Ipnnh ydd wyqm 'Before him he stands, he arises'.

 324

1001.1.10 Ik Ipny ’ ... go before me . . . ’ (?).

1012.29 p 1 ast ajty ncry th Ipn ib . . . and I would indeed (?)

be placing my wife (and) children in jeopardy (?) before the enemy
.
*

1015.8 crbt Ipn sps * I entered before the king

* .

1018.21 wurk ym bcly Ipn amn wlpn il m§rm ’May my lord’s days be
long before Amon and before the gods of Egypt'.

See also line 19 (broken context).

2001.2.8 Ipnh yrd ' . . . goes down before him'.

Iris

ris occurs in this complex preposition in the senses of 'head'

and 'top'.

5(67)«6.15 y§q cmr un Irish 'He pours ashes of grief on his head,
pr pltt lqdqdh~ Dust of wallowing on his pate'.

17(2 Aqht).6.37 spsg ysk [1]ris 'Glaze will be poured on my head,

br§ Igr qdqdy Lye on my pate'.

23(52).31 [yqh] il mstcltm 'll takes kindling (?),

mst ltm Iris agn Kindling (?) for the top of the fire'.

See also line 5 (broken context).

58(20).1 and 59(100).! may contain Iris as the address of a letter.1

1001.1.7 [a]{m prtl Irish frmt tmj ?

Some observations may be made on the preceding lists :

(1) In many cases Gordon's "ballast variant" concept is valid.

(2) There are clearly discernable patterns in the use of the com­

plex forms (nineteen cases of bqrb hkl; btk used frequently for moun­

tains) . These patterns are at least partially related to the semantic

content of the complex preposition (the nominal elements in bqrb and btk

have little semantic import compared with Ipn, for example).

Gordon, UT, p. 129, n. 1. ^Ibid., §13.116.

 325

(3) The complex preposition bd is, on the basis of present attes­

tations, morphologically and semantically separate from byd (i.e., there

are cases where bd means 'in the hand[s] of, but none where byd means

'by the intermediary of).

(4) Ipn provides a semantic notion that is not present in 1

alone and thus cannot be classed simply as a ballast variant of .1, but

as a semantically separate lexical item. The complex preposition Igr

is three times used as a ballast variant of 1, and in all other cases

may have been used to fill out a line (e.g., tgly ilm risthm // Igr

brkthm; here brkthm alone would have been very short). As for Iris,

it is twice used literally (5L6?].6.151 // qdqd; 1?[2 Aqht].6.37, also

// qdqd), is once used for 'on top of (23C52J.31), and in the addresses

of letters may be equal to Akkadian ana muhfri PN.

Among the complex prepositions, then, there are varying degrees

of semantic specification, from little in bqrb to virtually independent

lexical status in Ipn.

 CHAPTER VI

THE SEMANTIC FIELDS OF THE

UGARITIC PREPOSITIONS

This chapter is intended as a summary of chapters II-V, based on

the various data and analyses assembled in them. As discussion has al­

ready been furnished for the extended and complex prepositional forms,

little will be added here, other than to fit them into the general prep­

ositional scheme.

An attempt has also been made here to indicate graphically at

the end of each sub-section how each preposition fits in a spatial box

depicting prepositional usages. This is summed up in a large graph at

the end of this chapter.

The Adverb ahr

See previous discussions of mgy (afar)/b and of trh afar in

Chapter II, pp. 199-200, 244-46 (at trh 1). In all extant Ugaritic

attestations, ahr could well be a temporal adverb 'thereafter'. This

is clearly the case when it is followed by a yqtl verbal form (2.1C137]

.30; 1?[2 Aqht].5

25),
* and is by analogy probably the case when it is

followed by a qtl form (4[$1].3

23
* and .5.106; 15C128].2.11—i.e., qtl

is parsed as 3 m.s. or pl. and not as infinitive + construct state pre­

ceded by a preposition ahr). As concerns the position indicated by a

putative preposition ahr, there is no reason to see that position as any

other than 'behind1, 'after'.

326
 327

The Preposition air

As all of the passages where this preposition occurs are doubtful

for one reason or another, explanatory notes to each occurrence have been

provided in Chapter II (notes to bcr, hlk, yrd, and ndd + air). Three of

these usages are locative (bcr, hlk, and yrd), one temporal (ndd). There

are further two nominal constructions, one locative/temporal, one direc­

tional (see above, pp. 314-15).

There seems to be no semantic deviation in Ugaritic from the prob­

able etymology * in the footsteps of' - 'after'. All cases preserve

quite well the meaning 'after', even the most questionable one, lb cnt

air bcl (6E49J.2.9): here the use of a£r expresses Baal's absence and

Anat's desire to go after him and find him.

The possibility of ajr appearing as an adverb has been discussed

by de Moor.^

The Preposition b

The preposition Id basically indicates position * within the con­

fines of'; in translation it appears most frequently as 'in', 'on',

'from', and 'into', depending on the nature of the verb and the author's

perspective.

From the perspective of class I, Jd indicates where (position in),

when (time in which), or how (circumstances in which) an action takes

place. The last category ('how') shades over very close to class II in

1UF 2 (1970): 305.

 328

many cases; that is, it is sometimes difficult to determine whether b

indicates simply the circumstances in which an action takes place, or

whether it indicates the cause from which an action originates. In

Hebrew, b would ideally indicate the circumstances, min the cause,

but there is a great deal of cross-over, with Id often to be translated

'because of. This is probably due to the fact that the categories of

1 circumstances (which permit)’ and •cause * are semantically quite close,

and to the fact that the historical antecedents of Hebrew probably did

not possess min and thus the cross-overs of Id and min hark back to such

a time (Ugaritic in any case has no specific marker to distinguish 1 cir­

cumstances [which permit]’ from ’cause’).

A semantic development of jo in class I is ’(go) among’ - '(go)

with’; this is seem most clearly in hlk b.1

In class II constructions, b, indicates position ’from which’

(either with movement as the primary notion, e.g., tb b ’go away from’,

or as partitive Id ’[one/some] of’). As has been stressed above, it is

the verb/preposition idiom as a whole which expresses ’passage from’; I

have also assumed that a verb/preposition combination is behind the in­

stances of b = ’from’ in economic tablets, though the criteria of inter­

pretation in this particular area are as yet unclear.

In class III action, b indicates position as a result of motion

'into'. I have also listed here verbs which indicate the oblique object

of b (gcr, ynq, and nr).2 With g^r and nr the force of b seems to be

'within the sphere of ■* ’upon' (* cast noise/light upon'). There is very

little evidence, however, for any general expansion of Id to take on the

■^See note above to hlk b in 25(52).27 (p* 145), and below, pp. 358-59

2Cf. Brockelmann, Grundriss, 2: 364.

 529

notion of ’upon'. The case of cly b, for example, used in the sense ’go

up upon (a mountain)’, probably means ’go up within the recesses (of a

mountain or a mountainous area)'. The other cases of b = ’(up)on’

cited by Gordon12
3 are largely a matter of translation and little overlap

with is evident (forb bgrn, for example, clearly means ’dry within the
2
confines of the threshing floor’, though one could quite legitimately

translate 'upon the threshing floor’).

The preposition ,b also appears in an adversative context and is

to be translated 'against'; the verb is cly.^ The preposition 1^ appears

with the same nuance, with another verb of arising, ypc. The fact that

this adversative interpretation of _b and .1 appears with two verbs of

arising would seem to indicate that such verbs were considered proper for

the expression of hostile action. There is as yet no candidate for J^l

with an adversative nuance in Ugaritic, but that preposition is used fre­

quently in Hebrew coupled with another verb of arising (qwm) in adversa­

tive contexts. It must not, in any case, be assumed that the preposi­

tion was the primary bearer of the meaning 'against' in such idioms.

With time, of course, such a nuance could easily be linked with the prep­

osition through idiomatic usage. A good example from English of a non-

hostile preposition which has a hostile nuance through verb/preposition

idiomatic usage is 'do to' vs. 'do for' (the first negative, the second

positive).

1UT, §10.4.

2The complete definition 'within the confines of is necessary to

indicate that Id marks position 'in' not only within a cube (a house, a
palace, etc. ) but also within the limits of a surface area.

3Text 1001.1.9-10.

Sext 3(cnt).3.34-35; .4.48, 49, 50; see also hpk 1 and hf 1.

 330

Thus the various interpretations of b in Ugaritic attest several

of the nuances discernable in the later Northwest Semitic dialects. The

total impression left by an examination of the attestations of b in Uga­

ritic, however, is that little semantic spread has occurred. Taking per

spective into account, b can be seen to have most frequently indicated

position 'within the confines of, with movement 'to' or ' from' provided

by verb, adverbial markers, context, or idiomatic usage.

The complex forms of b add little semantic precision: b%r is

semantically separate from _b, but is attested only once and should per­

haps not be considered as a complex preposition at all (its one ocur-

rence is, in any case, as an adverb); bris occurs only in broken con­

texts but appears to be preposition + independent noun; bd does provide

the semantic precision of 'by the intermediary of ; bqrb and btk func­

tion as ballast variants and/or semantic equivalents of b.

bgr/bris
b
bd
bqrb
btk

The Preposition bn

The preposition bn shows little semantic variation, meaning be­

tween
* and 'among
* (it is not limited to position between two referents

only). As noted above,it may, when coupled with %d and _n, take on

the lexical status of a complex noun.

bn

^Note to him bn, p. 146.

 331

The Preposition j/d

This preposition indicates position 'behind'. It is a synonym of

ajr in the Ugaritic texts, though in Hebrew it has several semantic

developments (for the possible meanings 'through' or 'on behalf of',

see note to ptfr bcd, above, p. 224).

bcd

The Preposition yd

yd is only attested in the meaning 'with', 'along with

* . There

is no evidence for it ever being used, as was _jn, with verbs of move­

ment to indicate end-point.

The Preposition k

At an early stage of the research behind this study an examina­

tion of all the occurrences of the preposition k in Ugaritic led to the

conclusion that an exhaustive presentation of k did not merit the neces­

sary time and space. The primary uses of k., * like ' and ' when' (i.e.,

spatial and temporal), show virtually no variation. Emphatic 1c and the

conjunction k are only homographs of the preposition k and do not,

therefore, fall within the scope of this study.

 352

The Preposition 1

The evidence for the non-directionality of 1. was presented in

Chapter III (pp. 280-91). This is observable in verbal usages where 1

indicates position ’at’, during, before, or after an action (respec­

tively in translation: 'at', 'from', 'to'). Position 'before' is

rendered explicitly by the complex preposition Ign. l^r is used prin­

cipally as a ballast variant of 1^, while Iris is used both literally

('on the head of') and in the sense of 'on top of.

One of the widest semantic sub-fields of 1^ is that of intention:

’X does Y for Z'. In this category of usage the result is not stated

to have reached the object of the preposition, but only to be 'intended

for' that purpose.

The translation 'against' for _1 is necessitated by the context

with the verbs hpk, ht3, and ypc. It was pointed out above (p. 329)

that adversative interpretations of the prepositions b, and 1, derive

from entire idioms rather than from an adversativeness inherent in the

prepositions themselves.

In nominal constructions, 1^ is used idiomatically to indicate

passage 'to' the recipient of a commodity (from the point of view of the

author of the tablet). This is probably the nominalization of such

administrative verbal ideas as ytn 1 or l3k 1; that movement is not

necessarily involved is clear from this usage of 1 in indicating trans­

fer of ownership in real estate transactions. I can presently see no

reason to accord to this directional usage attested in nominal forma­

tions the status of "primitive" or "original" formations, indicating the

original directionality of the preposition 1. Rather, the development

of an idiomatic usage where _1 indicated direction 'to’ in nominal con-

 333

structions derived from verbal expressions may have been a first step

towards a wider sense of directionality for 1 in later dialects. (Here

the big problem is the origin of the l/’l distinction in Hebrew, for in

Hebrew 21 is the primary marker of direction, not L. )

In temporal expressions 1 was used to indicate the range of

action from present to future ('from now ...to...'). I have

argued above that the notion corresponds most closely to English 'for

, and does not comprise, in itself, the meanings 'from' and

X-time12

•to'.1 If this is correct, then the discussion of whether Hebrew

lêcôlâm means 'to eternity

* or 'from eternity
* may be pointless, depend­

ing on the extent to which 1 in Hebrew temporal formulae is non-direc­

ti onal ('he sat enthroned for eternity' in English leaves unexplained

whether the eternity in question was thought to extend backward and for­

ward, or one or the other). Perhaps simply 'eternal' as an adjective

and 'eternally' as an adverb would be the best translations of 1$ ôlâm.

The preposition 1 shows its greatest semantic overlap with b and

cm : with b to the extent that the distinction 'go away from in' vs.

'go away from at

* is difficult to maintain; and with ^m to the extent

that the distinction 'send so as to be with' vs. 'send so as to be at'

or 'in the possession of is also difficult to maintain. Where such

distinctions were easily blurred, it is to be expected either that two

or more expressions would exist side by side with little semantic dis­

1See notes to bky 1, pp. 123-24, and to ytnl, pp. 179-82.

2See above, note to yjb 1 in 5(67).6.13-14, p. 188.

5Dahood has proposed (Psalms III [1970], p. 153) the translation

•eternal' on the basis of the ambiguity of 1; I would retain the trans­
lation but would base it rather on the timelessness of the expression
than on opposite "meanings."
 334

tinction, or that distinctions based on preferred usages would prevail

(the clearest example is slm 1 vs. slm cm).

Igr/lris

The Preposition nug

2
Only attested once, it is impossible to describe any semantic

field for mn in Ugaritic. It is of interest, however, for the elucida­

tion of the expressions smfo b/m(n).

It is unlikely that mn occurs elsewhere in Ugaritic. M. Dahood^

has analyzed mrbq(t)m of the prose texts as m(n) + rhq(t)m on the basis

of Akkadian istu rukis:m(n) + rbq(t) + jn = istu + ruq + -is. It is

more likely, however, because of the general absence of mn in Ugaritic,

that the proper analysis is mrbq(t) + jn ’at a far-away position

* . It

might be added that this analysis, to the extent that it is based on the

identification of mrbq(t)m as a m^ preformative noun, is sustained by

the recent appearance of mrhqm in a formula different from that pre-

1The texts are listed above, pp. 95-96.

2Text 1015.11—and even here doubts have been raised, see note
on smb m(n), above, p. 239
*

^"The Linguistic Position of Ugaritic in the Light of Recent Dis­

coveries," in Sacra Pagina, Miscellanea Biblica Congressus Internation-
alis Catholici de re Biblica, ed., J. Coppens et al., vol. 1 (Paris,
Gembloux: Gabalda, Duculot, 1959)» PP* 270-71
*
L
See Dahood, ibid., for references.
^So M. Pope, "Marginalia to M. Dahood’s Ugaritic-Hebrew Philo­
logy, " JBL 85 (1966): 465, who remains sceptical as to the semantic
import of ^m, and A. F. Rainey, "The Scribe at Ugarit: His Position
and Influence," Proceedings of the Israel Academy of Sciences and
Humanities 3/4 (1968): 136, n. 54.
 555

viously known from the letters. R§ 24.277 (Ugaritica VI, pp. 171-72)

reads in lines 29-51: hm qrt tufad hm mt ycl bns bt bn bns yqb cz w

yfrdy mrbqm 'If the city is taken, if Death comes up against the people,

the house of the sons of the people shall take a goat and shall see the

future' (at least this is the editors’ interpretation of yfady mrbqm, and

the alternative translation ’shall look on from afar’ does not seem pre­

ferable).

Little can be said about the origin of mn which is not specula­

tive. It was clearly not a part of ancient Ugaritic, since the only

attestation is in a letter (prose, relatively late). Whence it was

adopted belongs, therefore, to the realm of speculation, though two

main lines of discussion seem most promising: 1) It may have been a

nasalization of Jd + n with semantic specialization by adoption and

expansion of one segment of the semantic range covered by b. There

is little Ugaritic evidence, however, for the extended form la + n,^

and no explicit evidence that Ugaritic rn was m + n (though mab of 1015.11

is the expected result of m[n] + ab, by analogy to Hebrew). The link

2
with the mn of later dialects is thus obscure, but quite possible.

2) The second possibility would be to see it as a straight borrowing,

presumably from a proto-Aramean dialect (mn is much more frequent in the

See Parker, Studies, p. 44; actually bn is more frequent in

Phoenician than in Ugaritic—cf. Gordon, Orientalia n.s. 21 (1952):
121; E. Lipinski, Le poème royal du Psaume LXXXIX 1-5.20-58, Cahiers
de la Revue Biblique 6 (Paris : Gabalda, 1967), pp. 2o-28.

^For recent discussions of this possibility, with special

reference to the situation in South Arabic, see Segert, ArOr 29 (1961):
118; idem, Ugaritica VI, pp. 475-76; Schmuttermayr, BZ n.s. 15 (1971)•
57-59 (it must be repeated, though, that there is no evidence from
Ugaritic for a semantic distinction between any of the extended prepo­
sitional forms and their corresponding simple forms, nor for a biCn]
vs. ba opposition).
 3#
early Aramaic inscriptions than in Phoenician12
), or, conceivably, from

2
Egyptian.

mn
♦

The Preposition cd

In its attested verbal occurrences in Ugaritic, ^d uniformly

indicates the end point of a trajectory, in space ('up to') or in

time ('until'). These usages of _^d belong to class III and partially

overlap with 1_ in such expressions as lclm/cd clm * for/until eternity'.

The preposition would seem, however, to have a degree of direc­

tionality not possessed by 1'. cd ht would mean ' until now', not * for

now'. This is borne out by later dialects where J^d is the clearest

antonym of mn. Evidence for non-directionality of _^d is sparse : 1) the

difficult nominal usage of 6.6(62).47-48;^ and (2) the examples of He­

brew J^ad which appear to mean 'near to'.The use of cad in the biblical

texts to which reference is made is usually connected with the end of a

journey or the like ; cad implies that the movement of camping, for ex­

ample, was continued until the travellers reached a certain spot where

they set up final camp (this last spot is indicated by cad). Thus _^d

1See the article mn in DISO, pp. 155-57, and Albright's cate­

goric statement that mn is not Phoenician, JAOS 67 (1947): 158, n. 42.

2Cf. Gordon, UT, §12.9 (it must not be forgotten, however, that
Egyptian m is already close semantically to Ugaritic b).

^See above, p. 315•

Si. L. Ginsberg, "A Preposition of Interest to Historical Geo­

graphers," BASOR 122 (1951): 12-14; idem, "Postscript to Bulletin, No.
122, pp. 12-14," BASOR 124 (1951): 29-30; S. Speier, "On Hebrew cad_
Meaning, 'At, By, Near.'" BASOR 126 (1952): 27; Dahood, Psalms I (1966),
p. 257.
 337

could have originally indicated 1 position near/at the end of a trajec­

*
tory .

On the basis of attested usage, however, is the most clearly

directional of the standard Ugaritic prepositions. Its greatest degree

of overlap is with ,1 where the latter indicates the end of a trajectory

and in temporal expressions such as lclm. The possibility must not be

ruled out, nonetheless, that _jd was originally non-directional.

cd

The Preposition ‘.1

The basic meaning of _^1 is * position at or near the top of

* ,

leading to the translations ’upon

,
* ,
*
'above *
* over . There is as yet

no clear case of a verb of movement attested with _^1 in class II (com­

parable to Phoenician brfr C1 * flee from

* in KAI 1:2—the best possibility

for Ugaritic occurs in 16.6C127J.9» but there the context is partially

broken).

Two semantic developments from the assumed basic meaning call for

comment: * on account of
* (attested with mfrs, phy, and ptfr) and * before
*

(attested with b^_ and crb). The first is best explained as a develop­

ment of the idea of *(obligation) upon

* seen clearly, for example, in

nominal JjL which designates the debtor. For example, phy clk could be

paraphrased, * the responsibility for the fact that he experienced some­

thing is upon you

* . This is well reflected by the English expression

.
*
* on account of

The semantic development of J^l to ’before

* with verbs of entering

(which may occur with sr as well) was traced by E. Dhorme to an expan-

 338

sion of the simple idea of entering to one of entering upwardsî "L'em­

ploi de cal après le verbe bw3 nuance le sens de 1 venir

* en celui de

’monter’ (venir de bas en haut) . . . 1,1 According to this explanation

it would be expected to occur especially in cases of entering before a

king or deity (whose edifices would often be located at the highest

part of a town), and this is in fact the case in many of the attested

usages. If jsr is to be included in this category, however, then the

semantic development has completed its course to the point where C1

alone can mean ’before

* .

In part because of sr cl, and in part because of the speculative

nature of Dhorm’s analysis, I cannot refrain from further speculation:

could this usage of _^1 be another development of *(obligation) upon

* ,

*
here with the nuance of * opportuning ? That is to say, one who enters

before a superior (as is the case in Ugaritic) is opportuning the

superior by his presence; one who sings before royalty or deities, by

his very lowly status, runs the continual risk of opportuning. The

sense of ^l as expressing the opportuning nature of an action is of

course frequent in biblical Hebrew, and a good combination of the ideas

of * presence
* *
and ’opportuning may be found in the wretch Amnon’s

statement concerning his half-sister Tamar whom he has just raped:

silhu-nâ3 3et-zô3t mêcâlay hafruga ’throw this (troublesome wench) out

of my presence’ (II Sam. 13:17).

A further possibility for the interpretation of _^1 ’before

* is

that of equating it with ^1 'near’; thus ^1 ’before’ would not be a

separate development with a specific meaning ’before’, but would simply

^Le livre de Job (Paris: Gabalda, 1926), p. 387; cf. Dahood,

The Bible in Current Catholic Thought (1962), p. 69.
 339

mean * enter (so as to be) near to’. One may object, however, that in­

stances of 21 ’near’ are in contexts where the word modified by 21 is

indeed lower than the referent, e.g., C1 qr mym 'near the spring of

water' (19C1 Aqht].3.152-53)- Thus the full meaning of 21 'near' is

'beside but higher than'. This accords well with the proposed basic

meaning 'at or near the top of.

The preposition 21 thus has its own semantic range with little

overlap with other prepositions. The main cases of overlap are : 1)

with lris/lgr ' over, on top of; 2) apparently with Ipn in the meaning

'before' ; 3) at least to a degree with _b in the sense of 'on account of

(though 21 would appear to be the stronger of the two).

C1

The Preposition 2m

The ideas of accompaniment (class I) and of end-point of motion

or of sound-production (class III) are most frequent with this preposi­

tion. The partial overlap of 2™ with ]l in class III has already been

discussed above under 1^ (pp. 333-34)

The usage which requires comment here is the development of __m

to take on the nuance of 'like'. There are no visible markers for this

meaning and it must therefore be analyzed as a direct semantic develop­

ment from the notion of accompaniment. Thus rg m b 1 means 'run with

*
Baal = 'run along with Baal
* = * keep up with Baal
* = 'run as well as

*
Baal , all of which is well summed up in the translation * run like Baal
.
*

The point of comparison does not seem to be so much in resemblance or in

"t-See Dahood, Psalms III (1970), p. 396.

 340

identification (= k), as in accompaniment in performance. This usage

of _jn might best be compared with English 'keep up with', which implies
equality of performance rather than resemblance as such.1

The Preposition _qdm

The use of this preposition is limited to one clear case (in

two parallel passages). The meaning is clearly 'before' (its parallel

is tk pn).

The Preposition _qrb

It may be improper to term this word a preposition; its usage is

limited to one formula in six attestations. In each case qrb could be

the adverbial accusative of a noun rather than an independent preposi­

tion (the passages are listed at ytn cm . . . qrb, above, p. 50»

£Tb

The Preposition tht

This preposition is the antonym of C1 and its attested meaning

is 'at or near the bottom of'. The meaning 'under' is clearest when

1This explanation differs somewhat from Pope's emphasis on

commonality (Biblica 52 [19713 : 150)•
 341

used with tlfrn ’table

* (in text 601), and the meaning ’at the bottom/

base of’ is clearest in the usage qll tfrt pcn ’fall at the feet of’

(apparently the semantic equivalent of qll lpcn). The original meaning

of tfrt seems to have been ’place’,with the development ’at the place

of’ -* ’at the bottom/base of’, ’under’. It is at least clear from

Ugaritic that tfrt already denoted ’at a low point’/’under’.

The Preposition tk

tk alone appears in contexts similar to qrb and is surely to be

analyzed in the same fashion

tk

Summary Graph

Igr/lris
bzr/bris

(b)grh.
mn b d

1ESL
bn m
k
tht

^Greenfield, ZAW 73 (1961) : 226-28

 CHAPTER VII

CONCLUSION

The purpose of this study has been to determine the semantic

fields of the Ugaritic prepositions, and, more particularly, the degree

of ambiguity present within the system. To do so I have classified all

verb/preposition combinations as to motion •within1, 'from', or •to

.
*

As with most attempts at complete categorization within a limited num­

ber of headings, the individual entries range from the obvious to the

artificial. The attempt, nonetheless, has been worth the effort and the

debatable classifications (primarily among verbs which are not in them­

selves verbs of movement, such as 'see', ’hear1, 'sing', ’bless

,
* etc.)

are outweighed by the insights gained.

The primary implications of this study may be stated under four

headings: translation, terminology, methodology, and linguistic classi­

fication of Ugaritic.

Translation

If the conclusions regarding perspective and non-directionality

reached in Chapter III are accepted, then the major problems for the

exegete consist in grasping the ancient author's perspective and ren­

dering it in his own language. I am convinced that most of our prob­

lems with prepositional ambiguity in Ugaritic have been basically

translation problems. By this is meant that when in Ugaritic there was

one perspective on action and in English (or French or German) another

342
 343

one, the discrepancy was said to exist owing to the ’’meaning” of the

preposition: if a preposition had to be translated 'from’ it was as­

sumed that it meant ’from’. My thesis has been that an idiomatic trans­

lation is not necessarily equivalent to linguistic analysis. The fact

that English ’take from’ was stated as ’take (what was) in’ in Ugaritic

does not mean that English ’from’ equals Ugaritic b, only that using the

many prepositions of English to render the few of Ugaritic will occa­

sionally entail using ’from’ for b.

The other side of the translation coin is that the present study

has been confined almost entirely to semantic analysis of the preposi­

tions in Ugaritic—I have made no real attempt to grapple with the pro­

blem of correct translation into another language. It has been stated

that translating the few prepositions of Ugaritic into another language

will entail using the full prepositional system of that language, but

this is of course assuming a dynamic translation technique. An attempt

at a literal translation of the Ugaritic prepositions would require

rendering explicit many of the relative clauses which are implicit in

Ugaritic prepositional sentences. For example, ’he shot a bird in the

heavens’ equals ’he shot a bird (which was) in the heavens’. In this

case the relative clause is not needed in English, but in others it is:

’he took the cup (which was) in her hand’ (literal) equals 'he took the

cup from her hand’ (dynamic).

Terminology

Three frequently used terms have been criticized here as being

imprecise or incorrect : "ambiguity” (or ’’ambivalence ”), "opposite mean­

ings," and "interchangeability." I have held that it is incorrect to

say that the prepositions are ambivalent; further, it is only proper to

 344

say that they are ambiguous, beyond the relatively low level of ambi­

guity present in most communication, when speaking of our modern inabil­

ity to grasp ancient idioms. "Opposite meanings" is incorrect because

the prepositions are not ambivalent in meaning but have definite indivi­

dual semantic fields. "Interchangeability," implying free variation, is

best replaced by "overlap," which implies definite semantic areas for

each preposition with areas of overlap at the periphery.

With the lines drawn as has been done here, future writers on the

subject should make clear whether they consider the Ugaritic preposition

to have been in fact ambivalent and interchangeable, or whether they con­

sider a concept of restricted semantic field for each preposition to be

correct (the acceptance of restricted semantic field does not, of course,

imply accepting the semantic fields exactly as I have described them; the

debate in that area must in any case continue). With increased precision

in terminology the lines of battle, so to speak, can at least be drawn

clearly, permitting progress in study without useless skirmishes over

side issues.

Methodology

If basic meaning, or restricted semantic field, is accepted as a

correct description of the Ugaritic prepositions, this has serious im­

plications for methodology. Namely, one cannot propose any meaning for

any preposition in any grammatical or syntactical construction. Rather,

one can only propose a linguistic analysis (and, in turn, a translation)

which is consonant with the positional value of the prepositions. With

allowance for increased directionality, this is as true for the later

dialects as it is for Ugaritic: if Ugaritic, upon which many of the

innovative translations in later dialects have been based, can be shown

 345

to have had a prepositional system based on restricted semantic fields,

then a comparable revision of our views on the later prepositional sys­

tems should be undertaken. It is, of course, probable that semantic

developments, even extrapolations, took place from dialect to dialect

and from period to period. It is, on the other hand, highly unlikely

that we can from our limited vantage point delineate every step leading

up to a given idiom. Nonetheless, the attempt should be made to de­

lineate the verb/preposition idioms, nominal usages, and prepositional

semantic fields of each of the later dialects with an eye cast back on

the Ugaritic prepositional system.

The analysis of prepositional usage in the later dialects will

be, in one sense, more complicated than it has been in Ugaritic. In my

analysis of verb/preposition combinations in Ugaritic, the primary cri­

terion for classification was presence or absence of movement in the

action described by the combination of verb + preposition. In Hebrew,

however, the situation is more complicated. The availability of min

to denote separation provided the ancient author with the possibility

of expressing emphasis. In describing the act of saving someone, for

example, he could either put stress on the original distressful situa­

tion necessitating salvation by the use of _b, or he could emphasize the

fact of salvation by the use of min. Should we translate Job 5 • 19a- (bS^.

ses §ârot yaggilekka) ’from six distresses he will save you or when

you are in six distresses he will save you

* ? It appears obvious to me

^Recent authors who have translated * from

* are : Blommerde, Job,
pp. 19, 45; Dahood, The Bible in Current Catholic Thought (19o2), p. 71;
Sabottka, Zephanja, p. 5$; Walter Ludwig Michel, "The Ugaritic Texts and
the Mythological Expressions in the Book of Job (Including a New Trans­
lation of and Philological Notes on the Book of Job)," Ph.D. Dissertation
University of Wisconsin, 1972 (published on demand by University Micro­
films, Ann Arbor, Michigan, and High Wycomb, England), pp. 157, 273, »• 111»
 >6

that the latter translation expresses the ancient perspective (and this

is borne out by vs. 19b ubësebac lô3-yiggac bëkâ râc 'and in seven

[= when you are in seven distresses] harm will not touch you'). Whether

or not one should insist on bringing ancient perspective over into mod­

ern translation is a problem which will remain unresolved here.

Linguistic Classification
of Ugaritic

This collection of Ugaritic data, analyses, and comparisons with

later dialects (see Appendix) provides an element of comparison between

these dialects for establishing the linguistic position of Ugaritic.

Though more data need to be collected within the other dialects, it ap­

pears that the Ugaritic data assembled here on prepositional usages sup­

port the conclusion that Ugaritic is a Northwest Semitic dialect more

closely related to Phoenician and Hebrew than to Aramaic. It should be

stressed, however, that it is a separate dialect from Hebrew and Phoeni­

cian and a full-scale comparison of the prepositional systems would prob­

ably show as many points of dissimilarity with a given dialect as of

contact.

One of the most striking areas of dissimilarity, according to my

analysis, is in the sphere of directionality. Lacking a preposition

* from' and with a comparitively slight degree of directionality 'to/

toward', Ugaritic differs in this respect from all the other Semitic

languages (except perhaps Phoenician, for which there is as yet too

little early evidence).

Two clear illustrations of the differences between Ugaritic and

the later dialects are the comparative infrequence, outside Ugaritic, of

the use of 1 with verbs of movement to indicate point of departure (the

 >7

phenomenon is not only rarer in the later dialects but, with very few

and very dubious exceptions, it is not attested with the same verbs),

and the use of ^m to indicate point of arrival. Above (pp. 280-91) I

have analyzed these phenomena as due to the general lack of direction­

ality in the Ugaritic prepositional system as compared with later dia­

lects. This lack of marked directionality in the prepositions is im­

portant linguistically because it indicates a different fashion of

describing reality than is prevalent in the better known Northwest

Semitic dialects.

With respect to specific verb/preposition idioms the chart in

the Appendix will speak for itself. It shows that many Ugaritic idioms

are attested in later dialects (and many more would be attested if we

had more extensive Phoenician and early Aramaic sources—both as to

volume and as to genres), while others are not attested generally but

only in one dialect, or not at all. Several roots are not attested in

later dialects so we have no point of comparison. Even within the

idioms which have later morphological or semantic parallels, dialec­

tical or stylistic considerations have led to divergences : e.g., the

semantic parallel to Ugaritic nr b ’shine upon’ appears in Hebrew with

four different prepositions (3wr b, 3t, 31, cl; respectively in Ps.

119:35; 6?:2; Num. 6:25; Ps. 31:17). Another example is furnished by

ytb 1 'sit on', which is the regular Ugaritic idiom, but which is rare

in Hebrew.^ On the basis of regular Hebrew usage, one would have to say

that a dialectical divergence has developed from this idiom, with ysb 1

retained or borrowed as a stylistic archaism. Such a conclusion is

surely required for other idioms also.

!&ee note to yfcb 1 III, above, p. 188.

 348

These factors of comparability and différenciation are indicators

that, in the area of prepositional systems, as in other linguistic iso­

glosses such as phonetic inventory and case-endings, Ugaritic was a

dialect which preserved many archaic features when compared, for example,

with Hebrew. A detailed statement of the exact degree of comparability

in the specific area of prepositional systems must await analysis of the

later dialects.
 APPENDIX

ATTESTATIONS OF UGARITIC VERB/PREPOSITION

COMBINATIONS IN LATER DIALECTS

This appendix is not intended as a complete treatment of the

prepositional systems in the other Northwest Semitic dialects, but as

a check-list comparing attested combinations in Ugaritic with the other

dialects. This list will enable one at a glance to see which verb/prep­

osition combinations are attested in Ugaritic, then in Phoenician/

Punic, Aramaic down through the Elephantine documents, and biblical

Hebrew. My basis of comparison, since we are yet lacking exhaustive

comparative material on prepositions, has been dictionaries (BDB, KB,

DISC) and concordances (Lisowsky, Mandelkern ). All references to

texts published in KAI are to that text collection; if the text is not

in KAI the reference is to CIS or to the editio princeps or another

primary publication or collection (e.g., for Imperial Aramaic, AP, AD,

Ji
and BMAP ).

^Gerhard Lisowsky, Konkordanz zum hebraischen Alien Testament,

2d ed. (Stuttgart : Wiirttembergische Bibelanstalt, 1950).

^Solomon Mandelkern, Veteris Testament! Concordantiae (Leipzig:

Veit et Comp., 1896).

-%. R. Driver, Aramaic Documents of the Fifth Century B.C., abr.

and rev. ed. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 19&5)«

Emil G. Kraeling, The Brooklyn Museum Aramaic Papyri: New

Documents of the Fifth Century B.C. from the Jewish Colony at Elephan­
tine (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1953)»

349
 350

No attempt has been made to provide an exact statistical report

on numbers or attestations. If more examples are attested than cited,

I have indicated this by "etc."; if the number is frequent I have in­

dicated this. No extensive attempt has been made to determine which

verb/preposition combinations are regular in a given dialect; this can

only be done by an exhaustive analysis of the dialect in question. By

comparing the material cited here with that given for Ugaritic in

Chapter II, and then by comparing this with a concordance of biblical

Hebrew, for example, one can gain a fairly rapid, though rough, idea of

both the extent of change in attestations from Ugaritic to Hebrew and

of the extent of change in regular idioms. Exhaustive analysis would

enable one to reduce the degree of change to statistics.

Dbd b I 'perish in'

BH waDS.badtem baggôyïm (Lev. 26:38) 'you shall perish among the

nations' (etc.). The exact Ugaritic usage is not paralleled

('in entirety'), but the text quoted clearly belongs to class I.

Dbd 1 II 'perish (destroy) from

*

There is no exact parallel here, Hebrew regularly uses bd mn for

'perish from'. The closest parallels to the Ugaritic usage are

found in two passages: wattôDbadna hâDâtonôt lëqis (I Sam. 9

3)
*

'some of Qish's asses were lost' (the 1^ probably marks primarily the

owner of an indefinite quantity); wattë^abbed kol-zëker lamp (Is.

26:14) 'and you have caused all memory of them to perish

* (here the

1 is probably construed with zêker rather than with the verb bd

I have argued above Ep. 274] that the perspective * destroy X which

belongs to E= l] X
* may be one factor behind the expression of

•destroy from
* by the use of ,1).
 351

3d No verb/preposition parallel.

3 dm b No parallel with t>.

3hb b I * love in
*

BH wayye3?hab 3issâ bënabal sôrêq (Judg. 16:4) 'and he loved a

woman in Nahal âoreq

* (see also Prov. 17:17 for a temporal

construction).

3fod b I 'take when'

No parallel.

3fad b I 'grasp by (means of)'

OA 3bz bknp mr3h mlk 3swr (KAI 215:11) ’he grasped the edge of

his master's garment, the king of Assyria'.

IA hn y3frdn rsyC3 bknpy lbsk (AP: Ahiqr 171) 'if the wicked take

hold of the edges of your garment . . . '

These two passages contain the only cases of 3&d b which I have been

able to locate outside the Hebrew Bible. I understand the expression

3fad b, where _b indicates what is translated as the direct object ('he

grasps the edge . . . '), as a transformation of 3fad + direct object

+ Jd ('he grasps him by the edge . . . '). Both forms are attested in

Ugaritic. In Hebrew 3frz b is very frequent and shows a great degree

of overlap with 3hz 3t (cf. II Sam. 6:6 3&z b, which appears as 3frz

in I Chron. 13:9). The primary distinction which may be observed

between 3frd/z + b and 3hd/z + or 0 is that the former indicates

part of a larger entity, while the latter is used to indicate * taking

possession of (e.g., 'a house

* in KAI 216:11-12). The one example

of 3frz + direct object + b. which I have been able to locate in BH is

wayye3$boz 3et-habbayit baca§e 3arâzim (I Kings 6:10) * it joined to

the house by means of cedar beams'

 352

3fad b II 12take from’

This notion is expressed by 3frz C1 in Moabite (KAI 181:14),1 and

regularly by 3frd/z mn in Aramaic and Hebrew (I have found no

examples of 3frd/z b = 1 take from’).

3fad b III ’take into'

OA 3bz byd[y] (KAI 214:3-4) ’I took in my hand'.

The only example of this usage in BH is doubtful, Eccl. 9:12 refers

to taking in a net and in a trap; here the b is probably instru­

mental, 'by means of a net and a trap.

abd 1 III 'take to' or 'for'

BH we3ëhôz lëkâ 3efrâd mêhannëcârîm (II Sam. 2:21) 'take for your­

self one of the young men' (see also Cant. 2:15; I Chron. 24:6;

II Chron. 9:18).

3kl b I 'eat in'

OA wbymy gm 3kl (KAI 214:9) 'and in my days (Yaudi) ate . . . '

(temporal).

BH wë3âkaltè biscârêkë (Dt. 12:21) 'you may eat within your gates'.

The preposition _b is used with 3kl somewhat more frequently in

temporal expressions than in locative.

3rk lpn I 'be long before'

BH wëya3arik (!) cim sèmes wëlipnê yârëafr dôr dôrîm (Ps. 72:5) 'may

he live with (= as long as) the sun and before the moon for all

4.- । 2
generations'.

Ph. KAI 4:3-7 contains the association of the two ideas at a dis-

^See Segert, ArOr 29 (1961): 228.

2S. Paul, "Psalm 72:5—A Traditional Blessing for the Long Life
of the King," JNES 31 (1972): 351-55.
 353

tance: y3rk bclsmm . . . ymt yfrmlk wsntw el gbl kmlk gdq wmlk

ysr lpn 31 gbl qdsm ’May Baalsamem . . . lengthen the days of

Yehimilk and his years over Byblos as a just and upright king

before the holy gods of Byblos'.

3rs l/lpn/cm III 'make a request to'

As a verb 3rs 'request

* may be attested outside of Ugaritic once:
KAI 277:6 (Phoenician) 3rs bd = 'demand from'.1 If this interpre­

tation is correct, then the idiom is closer to Akkadian, where

erêsu ina is frequent, than to extant Ugaritic material. It has

been proposed by several authors^ that 3 rs bd here be interpreted

as 'be married by' (= 3rs), but this interpretation is at least

rendered difficult by its taking bd as the agent of a passive verb.

3tw/y 1 III 'go/come to'

OA This verb is attested with both 1 and j^l. in the Sefire inscrip­

tion only: y3th Ibry (KAI 22? Bl))'... will come to my

son . . . '; wy3th 3ly (KAI 224:20) ' . . . will come to me . . .

IA Attested with 1 and ^l in the Elephantine texts (e.g., 1 in AP

30:8; ^1 in AP 5:3; 26:13); also with b in AD 12:7.

BH lë3âhôr (Is. 41:23) 'afterwards'; hinnû 3âtânû 15k (Jer. 3:22)

'we come to you'.

BA lirusëlem (Ezra 4:12) 'to Jerusalem'.

1So interpreted by Dahood, Ugaritic-Hebrew Philology (1965), P«

52; Gordon, Ugaritica VI, p. 268; J. A. Fitzmyer, "The Phoenician In­
scription from Pyrgi," JAOS 86 (1966): 287, 292-93; Rollig, WO 5
(1969-70): 110, 114-15.
P
J. G. Février, "Remarques sur 1* inscription punique de Pyrgi,
OrAnt 4 (1965): 175-80; M. Delcor, "Une inscription bilingue étrusco-
punique récemment découverte a Pyrgi: Son importance religieuse," Le.
Muséon 81 (1968): 241-54; E. Lipinski, "La fête de l'ensevelissement et
de la résurrection de Melqart," Actes de la XVIIe Rencontre Assyriologi-
que Internationale: Université Libre de Bruxelles, 30 juin-4 juillet
1969» ed. André Finet (Ham-sur-Heure: Comité belge de recherches en
Mésopotamie, 1970), pp. 35, n. 2, 47.
 354

b3 b III * enter
*

This idiom is rather frequent in BH (e.g., Ex. 14:28), but more

frequent is bw3 31 meaning * enter into * (and not 1 come to ), e.g.,

Gen. ?:9 for entering the ark (though the notion of ’entering
* is

borne by the verb rather than by the preposition), bw3 3 1 is also

attested in epigraphic Hebrew, but in the sense * come to

* (KAI

193:11, Lachish).

b3 C1 III * enter before *

The semantic parallels were discussed above in the note to b 1

(pp. 116-17), and the semantic development in Chapter VI, pp.

337-39.

bty b I 'speak rashly in (during) '

BH If the connection of Ugaritic tb% with this root is correct,

bfr3 b is attested twice with ,b + 'lips

* (Lev. 5:4 and Ps.

106:33) and once with Jd + * oath

* (Lev. 5
*
4) ——none, therefore,

in a temporal construction.

bky b I * weep in
* + part of body

This usage is not attested elsewhere in Northwest Semitic (bë ozne

YHWH in Num. 11:18 refers to the person hearing the weeping, and not

to the one doing the weeping), but temporal usages (Gen. 50•17; Num.

14:1; Lam. 1:2) and instrumental/circumstancial usages (Is. 16:9;

Ezra 3:12) are attested in class I.

bky l/cd I/III 'weep for

/'weep
* until' (temporal)

Temporal ,1 is not attested with bky outside of Ugaritic, but bkh—d

is attested in Judg. 20:25»

bky 1 III 'weep for' (intentional)

BH This idiom is attested at least three times in BH (Jer. 22:10;

 555

48:52; Job JO:25), though bkh C1 (Lam. 1:16; Judg. 11:57, 58),

bkh D1 (Eze. 2?:51), and bkh 3t (Gen. 50:5) all mean 'wail for,

bewail
* .

tony 1 HI 'build for'

This usage is frequent in Phoenician (e.g., KAI 7:1-5; 14:17), is

attested in Moabite (KAI 181:10)/ and is frequent in BH (e.g.,

Gen. 8:20).

bcl b I 'work in'

Ph. Compare to3bt pcln kl mlk b§dqy wbfrkmty wbncm Iby (KAI 26 A I

12—15) 'all the kings made me a father (class III = make into )

because of (class I or II) my righteousness, my wisdom, and the

goodness of my heart
.
*

BH pcl b is attested in class I in both temporal (bimehem, Ps.

44:2) and locative (bëqereb hâ3âre§, Ps. 74:12) usages.

bcl 1 III 'make for

*
Ph. wpc1 3nk Irbty bclt gbl hmzbfr nfrst zn (KAI 10:5-4) 1
* made for

the great lady of Byblos this bronze altar

* (etc.).

BH This meaning is attested in Ex. 15:17; Is. 26:12; Ps. 51=20;

68:29; and in the derived meaning * do to

* in Job 7:20; 22:17.

bcr atr/lpn I 'burn while behind/before'

No parallel.

b cr b I 'burn what is in/on'

No parallel for the transitive use of bcr b (BH bcr b = 'burn in/

;
*
by bcr mn = *
a fire from Z burns’).

^See F. I. Andersen, "Moabite Syntax," Orientalia n.s. 55

(1966): 99.
 356

bcr 1 III 'lead to

* (?)

No parallel.

bgy b/btk No parallel.

bqc b I 'split with'

The closest parallels are in BH when t) expresses the agent of a

Niphal form (I Kings 1:40; Prov. 3:20).

brd Ipn No parallel (if brd is correctly related to BH prd).

brk 1 III 'bless to'

For parallels to this expression and an attempt at semantic eluci­

dation, see the note on brk 1, above, pp. 129-34.

brr b/cd II/III 'be free of/until'

There are no parallels with the root brr; for semantic parallels

see note to brr b, above, pp. 134-36.

£1JD III 'rejoice in'

BH gyl b is regular (no cases of gyl mn, though there is an ex­

ample of gyl cl, Zeph. 3:17).

gm£ b No cognate.

gcr b III 'rebuke

*

BH This usage is regular (I have counted ten occurrences of gcr b

and four of gcr + direct object, with no apparent semantic dis­

tinction) .

gr 1 I * sojourn at’ (??)

No parallel (the closest approximation being BH gwr Ipny in I Chron.

29:15). This lack of parallels casts even more doubt on the doubt­

ful derivation of Ugaritic tgrgr from *gwr 'dwell

* .

grs b I * drive out with

*
 357

BH ubëyâd bâzàqâ yëgârësëm më^argô (Ex. 6:1) ’with a strong hand

will he drive them out of his land’.

grs b II ’drive out from'

Ph. This idiom has been claimed for the Nora inscription (KAI

46:1-2),! but that inscription is notoriously difficult and

one would prefer more attestations of the idiom outside of

Ugaritic ('drive out from' is normally grs mn in BH) before

2
accepting it in Phoenician. F. M. Cross has recently inter­

preted grs b in the Nora stone as not being a verb/preposi­

tion combination, basing his analysis on a restoration of

lines assumed to have been present above those extant.^

grs 1 No class II parallel.

dbfr b I 'sacrifice in/on'

BH wayyizbafr yacâqob zebafr bâhâr (Gen. 31:54) 'Jacob sacrificed

on the mountain' (etc.).

dbfr 1 III * sacrifice to'

BH Frequent (also with lpny, e.g., Lev. 9:4).

dmm 1 No parallel.

dmc b/I No parallel.

dc C 1 No parallel.

^See most recently B. Peckham, Orientalia n.s. 41 (1972): 459*

2Though the general absence of mn in Phoenician is evidence in

favor of accepting this idiom in Phoenician—see Albright, JAOS 67
(1947): 158, n. 42.
5"An Interpretation of the Nora Stone,” BASOR 208 (1972): 13-19»
He restores and translates as follows: [a. hiltahim (?)] Cb. itt
sardina (?)] 1. ba-tarsîs 2. wa-garrisô hü3 3» ba-sardina sa- 4.^-lim
hû3 "ta. He fought (?)] [b. with the Sardinians (?)] 1. at Tarais, 2.
and he drove them out. J. Among the Sardinians 4. he is [now] at
peace ..." (pp. 15-16).
 358

dry b I *winnow/scatter with

*

BH zôreh bârabat ûbammizreh (Is. 30 = 24) * winnowed with shovel and

fork’; wâ3erzëm bëmizreh bësac&rê hâ3âreg (Jer. 15 = 7) * I will

winnow them with a fork at the gates of the land’.

drc b III ’sow in'

OA wyzrc bhn hdd mlb (KAI 222 A 36) ’and may Hadad sow in them

salt’.

BH 3àser tizrac bassâdeh (Ex. 23:16) 'which you sow in the field’;

wë3ezrâcêm bâcammîm (Zech. 10:9) ’I scattered them among the

nations' (other occurrences of zrc b belong to class I, i.e.,

they indicate the position of the sower rather than the final

position of the sown seed: Gen. 26:12; Ps. 126:5; Eccl. 11:6).

dmr b I 'make music with ... among'

BH (b instrumental): bënëbel câsôr zammSrû-lê> (Ps. 33=2) 'with the

ten-stringed lute make music to him' (etc.).

(_b locative): 3 àzammerkâ bal3ummîm (Ps. 57 = 10) ' I will chant

you among the nations'.

hbr b/1 No parallel.

hlk ajr I 'go after

*

There are only parallels with 3abar in BH (e.g., Gen. 24:4, 8, 61).

hlk b I * go in/through/with'

BH mi-hâ3 is hallâzeh hahôlëk bassadeh liqra3tenu (Gen. 24:65) 1 who

is the man coming through the field to meet us?'; lek ba areg

3el-kol-macyënê hammayim (I Kings 18:5) 'go through the land to

every spring' (BH5 would insert wënacâbor before ba areg, but in

light of the idiom hlk b = 'go through

* , the insertion would ap­

pear unnecessary); bincârenu ubizqënenu nelek (Ex. 10:9) * with

 359

our children and old people will we go

* ; bëgo nam ubibqaram

yêlëkû (Hos. 5:6) ’with their herds of small and large cattle

do they go’; wayyëlëku haragim ba3iggërot (II Chron. 50:6) ’the

runners went with letters’. The last example seems to be seman­

tically the most developed (one can hardly picture the literal

translation ’they went among letters'), though ’go among' is

probably at the origin of the semantic development (cf. also

hâlak bëqereb, Ex. 54:9).

hlk 1 I 'go according to' + number

I have found no parallel to hlk 1 + number, but hlk Irgl (e.g.,

I Sam. 25:42), hlk Idrk (e.g., Gen. 52:2), and hlk Islm (e.g.,

Ex. 4:18) are probably semantically related in the sense of 'go

according to'.

hlk 1 III 'go to'

IA wthk Ibyt 3bwh (BMAP 7:28) 'she will go to her father's house'

(etc.).

Ph. wylk zbfr Iki hmskt (KAI 26 A II 19-IH 1) 1 he brought [Yiphil]

sacrifices to each cast deity'.

IH Cf. hlk 31 in KAI 189=4-5 (Siloam Tunnel).

BH wëcatta hinni hôlëk lëcammi (Num. 24:14) 'Now I am going to my

people' ; ulëkû làkem lë3oh<51êkem 3el-3ereg 3afruzzatkem (Josh.

22:4) 'go to your tents, to your estates' (etc.—the last ex­

ample is included because of the piling up of prepositional

usages : ethical dative expressed by 1^, end-point of action ex­

pressed by _1, second end-point of action expressed by __lj ethi­

cal 1 and directive ^1 are much more frequent with hlk than

directive 1).
 360

hlk lpn I ’go (while) before’

BH bamminfrâ hahôleket lëpânây (Gen. 32:21) ’by the gift preceding

me'; lâleket lëpânây be3$met (I Kings 2:4) 'to walk faithfully

before me' (etc.).

hlk cm III 'go to'

hlk cm seems uniformly to mean 'go along with

* (class I) in BH.

DISO (p. 65) lists only one example of hlk cm, from Palmyrene

Aramaic, where hlk cmh spyr is translated "il s’est bien comporté

envers lui"; though "envers" is an excellent translation of _jn

here, the basis of the idiom is surely ’go along with’ and no

directionality is to be ascribed to cm.

hlm b I 'strike with’

BH bëkassil wëkêlappôt yahâlômûn (Ps. 74:6) ’with hatchets and

hammers they attacked'. (Other Ugaritic usages unparalleled.)

hpk 1 III 'turn against'

See note above, pp. 146-4?.

why (?) cm/tk No cognate.

wpt btk III 'spit into'

For later Hebrew and Greek parallels, see note on wpt btk, above,

pp. 14?-48.

zd 1 No parallel.

zg 1 No parallel.

hdy b I 'see X which is in'

IA [Zhr byJi npq mn smy3 whzh b3rq3 z3 hlyC 3 (NES 1785 B 3) 'There­

after Bel left the heavens and looked upon the earth •••[]'

It is unclear here whether b indicates the oblique object of hzy

('he looked upon the earth') or whether a direct object is con­

 361

tained in the broken words following z^_ (’he saw something in

the earth'). It is also unclear whether the b in fazy b with the

meaning * take vengeance on' (AP 30:17; 31:16) indicates the ob­

lique object ('look against') or whether there is the ellipsis

of a direct object.1 Both usages, frzh b + oblique object and

frzh + direct object + _b, occur in BH.

BH kën baqqôdes bâzîtîkâ (Ps. 63:3) 'so in the sanctuary I see

you'. This is the clearest parallel to the Ugaritic usage ; in

other cases of bzh b the b> indicates the object of the vision

(Is. 47=13; Mic. 4:11; Job 36:25; Cant. 7:1; also Ps. 27=4

according to the Massoretic pointing [instead of 'look upon the

goodness of YHWH', one might interpret * in well-being look

upon YHWH
j
* ).

hkm cm No parallel.

bnn lpn I 'seek mercy (while) before

*

BH wë3et-tëbinnâtëkâ 3Sser hitbannantâ lëpânay (I Kings 9=3) 'and

your prayer for mercy which you uttered before me * (also II

Chron. 6:24).

bsp 1 III 'gather (liquid) for' (or: II 'gather from

* )

Cf. BH bâsap min, Is. 30:14.

brr 1 No parallel.

bdw b II 'rejoice in'

No parallel (bdh b in Job 3=6 is 'rejoice during' [class I] and the

same combination is instrumental [also class I] in Ps. 21:7:

^Cowley, AP, p. 114: "... and we saw (our desire) upon

them." So GKC, IÏ19 k. Compare rà3â b in Ps. 112:8, and see the
discussion of Brockelmann, Grundriss, 2: 364.
 362

tëbaddëhu bësimbâ ’you will cause him to rejoice with exultation

* .

bt3 b I ’sin in
*

BH The use of _b to indicate that whereby one sins seems to be only

attested in preposition + pronoun phrases (Lev. 5:22, bShenna;

Eze. 37:2?, bâhem), though the expression bata3 bisgâga (Lev.

4:2, 27; 5:15; Num. 15:27, 28) is semantically closely related.

ht3 1 HI * sin against

*

BH Frequent (e.g., Gen. 20:6, 9).

bt3 b I * do harm while

*

No parallel.

bar bn No parallel.

b§b bn No parallel.

brb b I ’dry in’

No parallel (the closest is with instrumental b, in II Kings 19:24;

Is. 37:25).

bt3 b No cognate.

tbb b I/II ’slaughter in/from’

No parallel.

tbb 1 III 'slaughter/sacrifice to/for’

BH tâbabti lëgôzëzây (I Sam. 25:11) '(what) I have slaughtered for

my shearers’.

tbn b I ’grind with’

BH wëtâbanu bârëbayim (Num. 11:8) ’they ground with mills’ (exact

parallel to 6C493.2.34).

*
Dahood s derivation of bdh here as from the root ’see’ (Psalms I
[1966], p. 133) destroys the fine image created by the use of a semantic
cognate (bdh + smb) in the prepositional complement. See the criticism
of bdh = bzh ’see’ by Greenfield, JAOS 89 (1969): 175.
 363

tb b No parallel.

til 1 No parallel.

trd b II * drive out from’

No Northwest Semitic parallel. Schmuttermayr^ cites the Akkadian

parallel lemnüti ... ina zumrisu litrud 1*let him expel the evil
2
demons from his body’.

ybl b I ’bring in'

Somewhat comparable to the Ugaritic example are BH ubStafeSnunim

3ôbîlëm (Jer. 31:9) 1 in supplication will I bring them’; and

ubësâlom tubâlun (Is. 55;12) 'you shall be led forth in peace'.

ybl 1 III 'bring to'

IA Imwbl Igbry3 3Ih (AP 2:13) 'to take to these men'; ybltk Ibyt3

zyly (AP, Ahiqar 48) 'I will take you to my home'.

BH lëkâ yobilu mëlâkim sây (Ps. 68:30) 'kings will bring you pres­

ents ' (see also Ps. 45:15; 76:12; Is. 18:7; 53:7 Ccompared

with Jer. 11:191; Hos. 10:6; 12:2; Job 21:32).

BA wëhebêl himmô lëhekëlâ3 di babel (Ezra 5:14) 'and took them to

the temple of Babylon' (also Ezra 6:5).

ybl cm III 'take to'

No parallel.

ydy b No cognate.

ydc b I 'know when

*

BH wë!53-yâdac bësikbâh (Gen. 19=33, 35) 'he did not know when

she lay down

* (etc.).

1BZ n.s. 15 (1971): 33.

o
CT 16: 46:160-61; cited from CAD, 7: 142.
 364

yld 1 III * bear for'

IA bnn zy tld ly (AP 15:32-33) 'the children she will bear for

me' (etc., in IA and Nabatean).

BH wëyàlëdû lahem (Gen. 6:4) 'and they bore (children) to/for

them' (frequent).

ynq b III 'suck'

All Northwest Semitic usages, outside of Ugaritic, use the accusa­

tive for the object of the verb 'suck'.

ypc 1 III 'rise against'

No parallel (see Schoors, RSP, 1: 69, for the semantic parallel

ns3 b in Ps. 89:23)•

yg3 b I 'go out in' (temporal)

BH wayyëgë3 bayyôm hassënî (Ex. 2:13) 'they went out on the

second day
* (etc.).

yg3 b II 'go out from'

No parallel (see Lichtenstein, JANES 4 [1972]: 99, n. 23, for

Akkadian [w]agu ina 'go out from').

yg3 b/btk III 'go forth to' (?)

BH 3anî yôgë3 bëtôk migrâyim (Ex. 11:4) 'I will go out into

Egypt' (etc.).

yg3 1 III 'go out to'

BH wayyôgê3 là3ôr galmâwet (Job 12:22) 'he brings deep darkness

out into the light' (the regular locative expression in BH is

yaga3 3 el or 0 [1, before an infinitival complement] ).

ygq b I 'pour out (while) in'

BH bëkikkar hayyardën yëgâqâm hammelek (I Kings 7:46) 'the king cast

them in the plain of Jordan

* .
ygq b III * pour into’

BH wëgam-yëgôg bô mâyim (Eze. 24:3) 'also pour in water' (see also

Ps. 45:3; 41:9).

ygq 1 I 'cast by' + number

No parallel.

ygq 1 III 'pour onto'

No parallel (BH yâ?aq 1 = 'cast for').

yrd air I * go down behind'

No parallel (cf. BH yârad 3ab&re, e.g., Judg. 3:28).

yrd b I 'descend in' (temporal)

BH kî bayyôm hassëlîsî yèrèd YHWH (Ex. 19:11) 'for on the third

day YHWH will come down' (etc.).

yrd b I 'bring down with' (causative stem)

BH wattorïdëm bafrebel (Josh. 2:15) 'she let them down by a rope

(etc.).

yrd b III 'descend into'

Pu. yrd bcmq (KAI 145:8) 'descended into the valley'.

BH yaredu bimgôlôt këmô-^âben (Ex. 15:5) 'they went down into the

depths like a rock' (frequent).

yrd 1 II 'descend from'

No parallel.

yrd lpn I 'descend before'

BH wëyâradtâ lëpânay haggilgâl (I Sam. 10:8) * and go down before

me to Gilgal'.

yrd cm I 'descend with'

BH wayyërëdu cimmo (Judg. 3:27) 'they went down with him’ (etc.).
 J66

yr(w ?) b I ’shoot off while' (??) + infinitive/’go off among’ (??)

No parallel.

yr(w ?) b I 'shoot (something which is) in'

No parallel (yrh b in Ex. 15:4 is class III ['throw into']; in Ps.

11:2 and 64:5 it is class II [b refers to the position of the

shooter and not to that of the one shot];1 it is attested three

times with bdrk [bëderek, baddârek] in the Hiphi1 with the sense

'teach', but bdrk seems in each case to indicate the end-result of

being taught, not the position of the one being taught before or

during the action [Ps. 25:8, 12; Prov. 4:11; compared with Jel-

hadderek in II Chron. 6:27]).

yr(w ?) tk No parallel.

ysn b/1 No parallel to Ugaritic usages.

ytn b I 'give in/during'

BH wayyitën YHWH qôlôt umafrar bayyôm hahû3 (I Sam. 12:18) 'and

YHWH caused thunder and rain on that day' (ntn b temporal is

rare in BH).

ytn b II ' give one/some of

The partitive notion is regularly expressed by mn in BH (also

attested with mn in IA: AP 11:5-6).

ytn b III 'put into'

OA wntn hdd bydy frfrr (KAI 214:8-9) 'and Hadad put into my hands the

sceptor'.

BH Very frequent.

ytn yd No parallel.

^See Brekelmans' discussion of these two passages (UF 1 [19&9]:

7) with respect to Dahood's treatment in his Psalms commentary.
 367

ytn 1 I 1 give for' (temporal)

BH 3etten-lëkâ caseret kesep layyamlm (Judg. 17:10) 'I will give

you ten (shekels) of silver per year' (I have found no uses

of ntn 1 which approximate Ugaritic lym hnd ... ytn).

ytn 1 III 'give to'

Very frequent in IA and BH.

ytn cd III 'give until'

BH lekâ 3ettënenna ûlëzarcâkâ cad-colâm (Gen. 13:15) 11 grant it to

you and to your posterity forever' (ntn cd is rare in BH).

ytn cm ( .. . b) No parallel.

ytn cm . .. qrb III 'give ...to ... in'

No parallel (cf. nâtan bëqereb, Jer. 31:33).

ytn cm . .. tk (and tk . . . cm) III 'give . . . to . .. *

in

No parallel (cf. nâtan bëtôk, Gen. 41:48; Lev. 26:11, etc.).

ytn tfrt I 'give forth (while) under' (??)

nâtan ta^at in BH belongs to class III 'put in place of (Ex. 21:23;

Is. 43:4), or 'put under

* (Ex. 27:5).

yjb b/btk I 'sit/live in'

0A whn ly[sb]n b3rqk (KAI 224:6) * if they do not dwell in your

land'; whwsbt bh 3lhy (KAI 214:19) * I settled the gods in it'.

IA 3rtbsss mlk3 ytb bkrs3h (AP 6:2) * Artaxerxes the king sat on

his throne1 (etc.).

Ph. wcm z 3s ysb bn (KAI 26 A III 8) * the people who live there'

(also Yiphil in KAI 26 A I 20-21 and II 18).

Moabite wysb bh ymh (KAI 181:8) 'and he lived in it during his days'

(also in lines 10, 19, 31).

BH Very frequent.
 368

yjb 1 I 'sit for’ (temporal)

BH wëyàsëba hacir-hazz0 3t lëcôlâm ( Jer. 17 s25) ’ this city will

sit forever’ (etc.)

yjb 1 III ’sit in order to’

BH wayyëseb môseh lispôt (Ex. 18:13) 1 and Moses sat down to

judge’ (etc.)

y£b 1 III ’sit on'

OA sbw IthtkCm] (KAI 224:7) ’stay in your places'.

BH Ps. 9:5; 29=10; Is. 47:1—see note above, p. 188, on yjb 1 in

5(67).6.13-14; cf. also the type wattêseb limînô (I Kings 2:19)

’she sat at his right hand' (etc.).

ytb tfct I 'sit at the feet of’

OA Cf. ysb Itfrt (KAI 224:7) cited in preceding entry.

BH sëbû 3 is tafatayw (Ex. 16:29) 'stay in your places' (etc.). The

Ugaritic example has Danil sitting 'at the feet of the princes,

but the original meaning is probably 'in/at the place of as in

the biblical text cited (see note above, pp. 185-86).

kly b I 'be used in/during' (locative and temporal)

BH wayyiklû bëbôset yâmây (Jer. 20:18) 'that my days should dis­

appear in shame' (see also Eze. 5=12; 13=14; Ps. 31=11; 37=20,

etc.).

kly b II 'be used up from'

The closest parallel seems to be in BH: Ps. 119=87 kimcat killuni

ba3areg 'they almost destroyed me from the earth' (though the trans­

lation of the RSV correctly represents the author's perspective :

"They have almost made an end of me on the earth"; the jo indicates

where the author was before destruction) .

 %9

kly 1 III 'be used up for'

Here also the closest parallel seems to be kâla 1 in Ps. 119:81,

82, 123, in the sense 'languish for'. Of. also killâ 1 + infinitive

kly C1 No parallel.

kn b/bqrb I 1 be in'

Ph. wkn bymty kwl ncm Idnnym (KAI 26 A I 5-6) 'and there were all

kinds of good things for the Panunians in my time' (etc.).

BH ki 3en bëpîhû nëkônâ (Ps. 5:10) 'nothing is firm in their

mouths' (etc.).

kn 1 I 1 be for, belong to'

Ph. 31 ykn Im srs lm% (KAI 14:11) 'may they have no root below'

(etc.).

BH wësilëbû mànôt lë3ên nâkôn lô (Neh. 8:10) 'and send presents

to whomever has none' (etc.).

kn C1 III (L-stem only) 'cause to be upon/coneerning'

BH kwn C1 is not attested in the sense of 'establish concerning',

but only in locative expressions (Judg. 16:26, 29; II Sam. 5;12

Ps. 11:2; 24:2; Prov. 22:18).

kre 1 III 'bow to/at'

There are no parallels to krc + 1_ + 'feet' , but BH kara 1 in the

sense of 'bow down to (a deity)' is attested in I Kings 19:18;

Is. 45:23; see also Is. 65=12 'bow down to slaughter'(lattêbafr).

l3y b I 'be weak in'

BH nil3et bërôb cS§âtâyik (Is. 4?:13) 'you are wearied in/by your

many counsels'.

l3k l/cm No verbal usages.

lbs b No parallel to the Ugaritic usage.

 370

Ifrm b II 1 eat from' 1

BH ubal-3elfram bëmancammehem (Ps. 141:4) 'let me not eat of their

dainties' ; lëkû laframû bëlaframî (Prov. 9 = 5) 'come eat of my food'

(also Judg. 13:16). See also 3âkal b 'eat from/some of (Ex.

12:43, 44, etc.).

Ifrm lpn/bcd/cm I 'eat before/behind/with'

No parallel (cf. akal lipne/ m in Ex. 18.12).

Ism cm No cognate.

Iqfr b I 'take on' (temporal)

BH wayyiqqâfrëhû sâ3ûl bayyôm hahû3 (I Sam. 18:2) 'and Saul took

him that day' (etc.).

Iqfr b I 'take/buy for' (b pretii)

No parallel.

Iqfr b I '(one who is) among/in takes'

No parallel.

Iqfr b II 'take from'

BH (partitive) wayyiqëhu mêhem bëlefrem wâyayin (Neh. 5:15) 1 took

some of their food and wine'.

Iqfr b III 'take into'

BH wayyiqah bëyâdS "et-hà'ës (Gen. 22:6) 'and took in his hand the

fire * (etc.).

Iqfr 1 III 1 take to/for

*

IA Imlqfrh l3ntw (AP 48:3) 'to take her for his wife' (see also AP

10:16-17; BMAP 11:10-11).

BH wëlâqafrtâ lâk (Dt. 7:25) 'and take (them) for yourself' (very

frequent in both literal usages such as here and in the ethical

dative construction).
 371

Iqb cd *
III 'take until

I have found no parallel for this usage, of. lagah 18 olam in Mic.

2:9; and Iqh . . . cd (conjunction) in BMAP 11:10-11.

Iqh cm III ’take to' (??)

No parallel (all BH examples are class I 12take with').

mfry b II *wipe/efface from'

Ph. 3s ymh sm 3ztwd bscr z (KAI 26 A III 13-14) 'who effaces the

name of Azitawad from this gate' (see also KAI 26 G IV 15).

BH Dahood1 would see class II 'efface from' in Ps. 109=13 bëdôr

3ahêr yimmah sëmâm 'from the age to come may their name be

effaced' . It appears more likely to me, however, that the Id

here is simply temporal: 'In (the time of) a future generation,

may their name be effaced' (when, in the future, their name

should be perpetuated by their children, may this progeny in­

stead be wiped out).

mb? b I 'smite with'

No parallel.

mb§ b I 'smite (while) in'

The closest parallel is temporal (bëyom in Ps. 110:5)- timbag

2
raglëkâ bedam (Ps. 68:24) is difficult (many emend to tirbag,

though the verb may refer to forceful stamping of the feet ).

mbg 1 No parallel.

1Psalms III (1970), p. 104.

^See G. A. Briggs and E. G. Briggs, A Critical and Exegetical

Commentary on the Book of Psalms, The International Critical Commentary,
2 vols. (Edinburgh:~T. and T. Clark, 1906), 2= 110, for references.

^Dahood, Psalms II (1968), p. 146, translates timbag by

"churned."
 372

mh§ C1 I 1*smite near/on account of'

No parallel (Ps. 110:6 is difficult, but seems to mean * smite

upon').

m&§ cm No parallel.

mtr b I 'rain during'

No parallel (wëyamtër câlêmo bilfrumo of Job 20:23 might, if taken

as it stands, be translated 'he will rain upon him when he is in

his flesh', but this is very difficult1).

mtr 1 III 'rain upon

*

BH himjir 1 occurs in Ex. 16:4 with the sense 'cause to rain

(bread) for'.

ml' b I 'fill with'

BH milë'ûhâ mippeh 'el-peh bëtum'âtâm (Ezra 9:11) 'they filled it

from end to end with their uncleanness

* (etc.—Jo is also used

for the thing filled [e.g., mille3ta bo millu at eben (Ex. 28.17)

'you shall fill it with a stone filling']; min is used also to

indicate the item doing the filling Ce.g.. asrê haggeber 3aser

mille3 3et—'aspâto mëhem (Ps. 127:5) 'happy is the man who fills

his quiver with them']).

mlk b I 'rule in
*

OA zy ymlkn b'rpd (KAI 222 B 22) 'who will rule in Arpad

(since
*

Arpad was the capital of bt gs it is more proper to translate

1For other suggestions, see G. R. Driver, ''Problems in the Heb­

rew Text of Job," SVT 3 (1955): 81, and Pope, Job£, p. 153 (following
a suggestion of M. Dahood, "Some Northwest Semitic Words in Job,
Biblica 38 [1957]: 314-15).

^See J. A. Fitzmyer, The Aramaic Inscriptions of Sefire, Biblica

et Oriental!a, No. 19 (Rome: Pontificium Institutum Biblicum, 1967),
pp. 26-28.
 373

mlk b here as ' rule in’ than 'rule over', i.e., b indicates the

seat of reign, not the territory ruled).

BH 3aser-mâlak bëhesbôn (Josh. 13:21) 'who ruled in Heshbon' (etc.).

mlk C1 I 'rule over'

OA wmlkh C1 byt 3bh (KAI 215:7) 'and made him king over his father's

house
* .

Ph. mlk gbr C1 yJdy (KAI 24:2) 'Gbr became king over Yaudi (see also

KAI 10:2; 38:2: 277=3-4 and CIS, I, 92:2 [all nominal construc­

tions] ) .1

Moabite 3by mlk C1 mab (KAI 181:2) 'my father reigned over Moab
.
*

BH hamâlôk timlôk càlênû (Gen. 37:8) 'will you indeed rule over

us?
* (frequent in both verbal and nominal constructions).

msk b III ’mix in(to)’

BH YHWH mâsak bëqirbâh ruab ciwcim (Is. 19 = 14) *YHWH mixes into her

(= pours into ?) a spirit of confusion' (cf. also wësiqqûway

bibkî mâsâkti [Ps. 102:10] 'my drink I mix with tears', where b

indicates the quantity being mixed in rather than the greater

quantity) .

mgy b I 'arrive at' (temporal)

No parallel.

mgy 1 III 'arrive at'

BA wërûmeh yimfrë3 lismayyâ3 (Dan. 4:8, 17 ; of. also vs. 19) anJ

its top reached to the heavens' ; wëlâ3-mëtô lë ar it gubbâ

(Dan. 6:25) 'they did not reach the bottom of the den'.

^See M. Dahood, "The Phoenician Background of Qoheleth," Biblica

47 (1966): 266; Fitzmyer, JAPS 86 (1966): 290; Rollig, WO 5 (1969-70):
112.
 374

mgy cm III * arrive at1

No parallel.

m§b 1 No cognate.

mr No parallel.

mr 1-^ No cognate.

mrg b Root unsure.

msV b I 'anoint in' (temporal)

No parallel (only b, locative).

mt b I 'die/wreck in/near'

BH wayyâmot terab bëbârân (Gen. 11:32) 'Tenant died in Haran

* (etc.).

mtc b No cognate.

mtr b . . . 1 No cognate.

nbt b No sure cognate.

ng 1 No cognate.

ngj b I 'seek out on (+ foot)'

No parallel to the Ugaritic expression.

ngj 1 I 'seek out for' (temporal)

No parallel (ngs 1/31 = 'draw near to').

ndd ajr/l/lpn No parallel.

ndy b/1 No parallel.

ndr b/cm II/III 'vow from/to'

No parallel (Aramaic and Hebrew regularly use ndr 1 'vow to').

nfr b I 'rest in
*

BH ki kacas bëfrêq kësîlim yânuab (Bed. 7:9) 1 for anger rests in

the bosom of fools' (frequent).

ntt b No parallel.

nfrc b III 'plant in'

 375

BH wayyittac YHWH 3§15hîm gan-bëcêden (Gen. 2:8) 1YHWH God planted

a garden in Eden
* (frequent).

nsk 1 III * pour into/on

*

The only comparable usage is * pour out for

* (OA: KAI 224:7; BH:

II Sam. 23:16; I Chron. 11:18; Hos. 9:4, etc.).

npl b I * fall by
*

BH linpôl bafrereb (Num. 14:3) ’so as to fall by the sword

* (fre­

quent).

npl b I * fall (while) on

*

BH 3et-framôr 3abîkâ 3ô sôrô nôpëlîm badderek (Dt. 22:4) * the donkey

of your brother or his ox fallen on the way

* (frequent).

npl 1 III 'fall at/to

*

BH One finds lipnê raglâyw (Est. 8:3), cal-raglayw (I Sam. 25:24),

and tafrat ragiay (II Sam. 22:39 = Ps. 18:39) for * fall at the

feet of someone *, but not 1. The idiom nâpal la3areg is at­

tested (Am. 3:14, etc.).

npc b No cognate.

npq 1 III * go out to

*

Only attested as 1 + infinitive in BA (Dan. 2:14). Locative and

intentional uses are attested in Palmyrene and Nabatean (see DISO,

p. 182).

ngb b I * set up in
*

The closest parallel is BH lëhaggib yado binhar-përât (I Chron. 18:3)

* to set up his monument at the Euphrates

.
* A comparable intransi ­

tive use is 3gl5him niggab bacëdat-3ël (Ps. 82:1) * Elohim stands in

the council of El
.
*

ngl 1 III ’escape to

* (?)
 376

The Ugaritic passage is obscure and the parallels are somewhat

peripheral: the Niphal of n§l + 3el = ’escape to

* is attested in

Dt. 23:16; the Piel + 1 in II Chron. 20:25 in the sense of ’take

for oneself’ ; the Hiphil of 1. + mn in Jon. 4:6 in the sense of

'provide escape for ... from’.

nr b III ’shine upon’

No parallel (cf. 3wr b in Ps. 119:135, the subject being pânîm

as in the Ugaritic passages).

ns3 1 II 'lift up from'

BH No parallel (notice .1 + ran = 'from

* in 3essâ3 dêci lëmêrâhoq

[Job 36:3] 1
* will fetch my knowledge from afar').

ns3 1 III 'lift up to'

This use of ns3 1 occurs in somewhat comparable expressions: the

ethical dative in AP: Ahiqar 121 (s3 Ik ’take for yourself'), and

locative use in Ps. 24:4 (nâsâ3 lassaw3 'lift up the soul to vanity/

vain things’). Most uses, however, are in derived expressions: ’for­

give' (where JL is used to indicate both the sin and the sinner), 'mar­

ry', and 'conduct a census' (nâsâ3 rô3s 1).

ns3 C1 III 'lift up on'

0A wys3 C1 sptwh (KAI 224:15) ’and should he mention' (and else­

where in the Sefire inscription).

BH wayyissâ3 3et-bânâyw wë3et-nâsâyw cal-haggëmallim (Gen. 31:17)

’and he put his children and wives onto the camels' (frequent).

ns3 tk III 'take to'

No parallel (only nâsâ3 bëtok, e.g., Num. 1:49).

sbb 1 III ’turn into'

Though BH sâbab 1 is attested in the ethical dative construction

 377

(wënâsab lâkem haggëbûl [Num. 34:4] ’and your border shall turn’)

and to express transfer of property (wënâsabbu bâttêhem la^&bêrim

[Jer 6:12] ’their houses shall be turned over to others'), the sense

’turn into' is best paralleled by sabab k in Zech. 14:10: yissob

kol-hâ3âreg kâcârâba 'all the land shall become like a plain’

sgr bcd I ’close behind’

BH Frequent.

sc b ?

See note on sc b, above, pp. 213-14.

sp3 b/lbl No verbal usages.

spr b I ’count among’ = ’include among'

There is no parallel to this nuance ; the verb/preposition combina­

tion itself is attested, however (e.g., nësappërâ bëgiyyôn [Jer.

51:10] 'let us tell it in Zion').

spr 1 III 'count to'/'provide a reckoning for'

No parallel (BH sâpar 1 = 'count for oneself or 'for someone';

sippêr 1 - 'recount to').

spr cm I 'be numbered like'

No parallel.

srr b I 'meditate in' (?)

No parallel (the closest parallel to the apparent sense of the Ugari-

tic text, Ps. 16:7, does not use a preposition with the verb).

cdb b etc.

No parallel (unless câzab tacaz5b cimmo of Ex. 23:5 is to be derived

from this root and compared with Ugaritic cdb cm 'handle with-»like
* ).

^See W. F. Albright, "More Light on the Canaanite Epic of Aleyan

Baal and Mot," BASOR 50 (1933): 17, n. 40.
 378

cdn b No parallel.

cdr b II * save from’

No verbal parallel. Dahood1 would see the idiom ’save from’ expressed

nominally in Ps. 46:2: cezrâ bëgârôt nimgâ3 më35d ’ liberator

from sieges . . . ’ Whether God is a help ’from trouble’, or a help

'(when one is) in trouble', depends on the perspective of the author.

Since czr mn is attested elsewhere for ’save from

* (see Dahood for

references) , one would have to claim chronological or stylistic ar­

chaism for a use of czr b = 'save from' in Hebrew. Because one ex­

cellent example of czr b class I (temporal) is attested (ubëyôm

yësûcâ cazartîkâ [Is. 49:8] 'in the day of salvation I will rescue

you'), it is probable that such an interpretation should be given

to Ps. 46:2: 'What a help he has been in (time of) trouble1'

czz b I ’be strong in’ (temporal)

No parallel.

cly b III ’go up on’/’against’

BH hissâmerû lâkem cSlôt bâhâr (Ex. 19:12) 'take care not to go up

on the mountain'. See also Num. 13:17, 22, where the spies 'go

up' to the Negeb, i.e., 'enter the mountainous country of the

South' (cSlû zeh bannegeb wacalîtem 3et-hâhâr). Notice the fre­

quency of * going up into a mountain' in both Ugaritic and Heb­

rew. For 'go up against' there is no parallel; see, however,

the semantic parallel lâ^&lot calehem laggaba (Josh. 22:12) 'so

as to make war against them

* (etc. —see also the semantic paral­

lel to cly b of 1001.1.9-10 in Mic. 7:6, where the verb is £um

, „. 2
rather than ala).

"‘"Psalms III (1970), pp. xxvi, 95. 2Dahood, RSP, 1: 133.

 379

cly 1 III ’go up to’

BH hinnëh frâmik c51eh timnâta (Gen. 38:13) 'your father-in-law is

going up to Timnah
* (etc.).

cly cm III 'go up to'

No parallel (unless the Ugaritic text should be interpreted 'go up

with’: wShannacar yacal cim-3ebâyw [Gen. 44:33] 'let the boy go up

with his brothers' [etc.]).

cms 1 III 'lift up on’

No parallel (this is expressed by cms cl[t] in Phoenician [KAI

14:5-6] and Hebrew [Gen. 44:13; Neh. 13:15; I Kings 12.11;

II Chron. 10:11]).

cn bn No parallel.

cny b I 'answer when

*

BH là3ël hâc5neh 35tî bëyôm gârâti (Gen. 35:3) 'to the God who

answered me when I was in distress (etc.).

cny b II 'answer from'

There may be a parallel in BH 3ecenkâ bësëter racam (Ps. 81:8) 'I

answer you in/from my secret place of thunder' (the problem is whe­

ther the author's perspective was one of 'movement from' or simply

the location of the answerer); another possible case is Ps. H8.3.

min-hammë§ar qârâ3ti yyâh / cânënî bammerfrâb yâh 'From distress I

call on Yah / He answers me in/from the wide place' (here again the

problem is one of perspective, whether the author means b^mn to be

synonymous1 or was purposely playing off the difference between the

two prepositions).

1So Dahood, Psalms III (1970), p. 156.

 380

cp 1 III 'fly to'

No parallel (of. BH cwp 1 in Is. 6:6).

cp C1 III 'fly over'

BH bëcôpëpî barb! cal-pënêhem (Eze. 32:10) 'when I wave my sword

over (or: against) them' (yëcôpêp cal-hâ3âreg of Gen. 1:20

belongs to class I 'fly [while] over the earth', rather than

class III 'fly [from elsewhere so as to arrive] over the

earth').

cqb b No parallel.

cr b II 'arouse from'

No parallel (= BH cwr mn).

crb b etc.

There may be a verb/preposition parallel to crb C1 in Ps. 104:34

(see note to b3 cl, above, pp. 116-17).

ctk 1 No cognate.

ctq b . . . 1 . . . bd I/III 'grow old in'/'pass to'

BH câtëqâ bëkol-§ôrërây (Ps. 6:8) 'it passes away in all my dis­

tress' (the parallel is incomplete).

gdd b No parallel.

gly b/1 No cognate.

gll b III * enter

*

IA bbytk [l3] clt (AP ?:8) 'into your house I have not entered
*

(frequent).

BH wë=olalti becâpâr garni (Job 16:15) 'I have put my horn into

the dust *.

pdy b II 'redeem from

* (temporal)

No parallel (the best point of comparison is partitive Id in Ex. 15;13-

 381

wëkôl bëkôr 3âdâm bëbânêkâ tipdeh 'you shall redeem every human

first-born of your sons' [the same verse has pdh b instrumental] ).

pdy 1 I * redeem for' (temporal)

No parallel (cf• mibben—bodes [Num

* 18î16] 'at a month old )*

phy b/cl No cognate.

prs3 b No sure cognate.

ptb b etc.

I have been unable to locate close parallels for any of the

Ugaritic verb/preposition idioms.

§d 1 No parallel for the Ugaritic usage.

§b b etc. No parallel.

gfrq b I 'laugh in'

BH wattigfraq sâra bëqirbah (Gen. 18 î12) * Sarah laughed to herself •

gfrr i No parallel.

gly b No parallel.

gpy b I 'cover with’

BH waygap 3et—qarqac habbayit bëgal ot bërosim (I Kings 6»15) he

covered the floor of the house with boards of cypress (gapa in

BH usually takes the accusative of material).

gq b I 'grasp by'

This precise nuance is not paralleled, but Jo instrumental is attest­

ed : wayhi kî-hëgiqa llo bidbareha (Judg. 16;16) 'as she was press­

ing him with her words'. •

gq 1 III 'press, oppress'

In BH hëgîq 1 is the regular expression (see example in preceding

entry, with six other occurrences).

qbr b III 'bury in'

 382

Ph. w3l yqbr bqbr (KAI 14:8) ’and may they not be buried in a tomb’

(also in Nabatean and Palyrene Aramaic).

BH ûqëbartânî biqbùrâtâm (Gen. 4?:30) ’bury me in their tomb’

(frequent).

qll b etc.

No parallel in the sense of 'fall' (see npl tht as a semantic

parallel to qll tht)

gm C1 I ’serve, attend’

See note on this idiom, above, p. 227 (more frequent in IA and BH

is the sense ’arise against’).

qny b I ’produce/establish/buy in’

The closest parallel for ’buy in’ is BH wSniqnâ hassâdeh ba3areg

hazzo3t (Jer. 32:43) ’fields shall be bought in this land’ (no

parallel for the other nuances).

q§§ b No parallel.

qr 1 No parallel.

qr3 b I ’call out in’ (+ part of body)

The closest parallel I have been able to locate for qr3 b + part of

body is BH 3im-yihyeh côd sëmî nigra3 bëpî koi-3is yëhuda (Jer. 44:26)

’my name will no longer be mentioned in/from the mouth of any Judean’;

for gr3 b in general see baggar-ll 3eqrâ3 YHWH (II Sam. 22:7 = Ps.

18:7) ’in my distress I invoke YHWH’ (etc.).

gr3 b III ’invite into’

BH wëqârâ3ta lëyïsay bazzâbah (I Sam. 16:3) ’you shall invite

Jesse to the sacrifice’ (BOB, p. 895b, and BH5 suggest reading

^See Schoors, PSP, 1: 58.

 383

lazzâbafr, but the text as it stands might be interpreted

* summon [to participate] in a feast’).

qr3 1 III ’call to'

Of. the derived meaning ’declare to/for' in IA (AP 7:7-8, 10) and

the meaning ’call out to’ in later Aramaic (DISO, p. 263)î of. also

the meaning ’read to’ in KAI 193:10 (Lachish).

BH wayyiqrâ3 parôh lë3abrâm (Gen. 12:18) 'Pharaoh summoned Abram'

(frequent).

qr3 cm III ‘call to'

No parallel.

qrb b I ’draw near when'

BH wë3el-3issâ bëniddat tum3âtàh 153 tiqrab (Lev. 18:19) 'you

shall not approach a woman when she is in her impurity'.

qrb 1 III 'approach'

BA qërêb nëbûkadneggar litrac (Dan. 3:26) * Nebuchadnezzar

approached the gate' (etc.).

In other Aramaic dialects (see DISO, pp. 264-63) and in BH, qrb in

the G-stem is used with j^l or ^1; in the causative stems, however,

1 is commonly used to indicate the one to whom something is brought.

qry b/1 I/III 'offer in/to' (??)

No parallel (notice, however, BH hamqâreh bammayim c&liyyôtâyw

[Ps. 104:3] 'who laid the beams of his upper chambers on the

waters' ; for qry 1 compare haqrëh-në3 lëpânay [Gen. 24:12] 'grant

me success' [etc.]).

qry b I 'meet at'

BH 3aser qârëkâ badderek (Dt. 23:18) 'who met you on the way'

(etc.).
 384

rbg 1 I * recline at'

BH lappetafr hafrtei3t rôbêg (Gen. 4:7) 'sin is a rôbêg at the door'

see also Is. 14:30 (labetafr).

rgm l/cl No cognate.

rbs b I 'wash in/when'

BH bëbô3âm 3el-3ôhel môcêd ûbëqorbâtâm 3el-hammizbëab yirbâgû

(Ex. 40:32) 'when they enter the tent of meeting and when they

approach the altar they shall wash' (see further discussion in

note to rbg b, above, pp. 232-33)•

rfag cd No parallel.

rfrq 1/lpn II 'leave'

No parallel.

rbp bn No parallel.

rfap C1 I 'soar over'

BH wërûab 3$lôhîm mërabepet cal-pënê hammâyim (Gen. 1:2) 'the spirit

of God was soaring over the water'; cal-gozâlâyw yërafeëp (Dt.

32:11) * over his little ones he soars'.

rg cm I * run with -* like'

No parallel (see note on rg cm, above, p. 233, for a semantic

parallel).

rks 1 III 'tie to'

Cf. BH râkas 3 el in Ex. 28:28.

rm b/btk I 'be high in'

BH 3arum baggoyim 3arum ba3areg (Ps. 46:11) 'I will be exalted in

the nations, I will be exalted in the earth

* (etc.—the parallel

"4l. Cassuto, A Commentary on the Book of Genesis: Part I, From

Adam to Noah: Genesis I-VI 8, trans. Israel Abrahams (Jerusalem: Magnes
Press, 1961 [1st Hebrew ed. 1944]), pp. 210-12.
 385

in Ps. 10?: 32 and in the Ugaritic text 15E128]. 3. 2-4, 13-15,

provides the meaning of this passage, i.e., 'be exalted in the

presence of, in the estimation of, rather than * be exalted

above', as interpreted by Dahood.^

rgn b Root unsure.

rq§ b No cognate.

s3b b I 'draw water in/with'

The closest parallel is BH ûsë3abtem-mayim bësâsôn (Is. 12:3) 'you

shall draw water joyfully'.

s3l b I 'inquire about * (?) (Gt-stem in Ugaritic)

No parallel (sa'al b in BH regularly means ' inquire of, i.e., b

indicates the person interrogated rather than the subject of

interrogation).

s'l cm No parallel.

sfrn b No parallel.

skb b I 'sleep in
*

Ph. skb b'rn z (KAI 13:2-3) '(D lie in this box' (see also line 5

and KAI 11; 14:3)•

BH wëhassôkêb babbayit (Lev. 14:47) 'who lies down in the house *

(etc.).

skb cm I 'sleep with'

BH wëniskëba cimmo (Gen. 19

32)
* 'and let us sleep with him' (etc.
p
—also with 3 et ).

skb b I 'find/be found in'

IA gbry3 zy 3stkhw bbb3 (AP 34:4) * the men who were found at the

1Psalms I (1966), pp. 277, 282.

^GKC, §117 u; van Zijl, Baal, p. 173»

 386

gate' (also attested transitively, see DISO, p. 299)•

BA wëkSl kësap udëhab dî tëhaskab bëkôl mëdînât babel (Ezra 7:16)

'and all the silver and gold which you will find in all the

province of Babylon' (etc.).

skn 1 III * supply for/impose on/allot for'

No parallel (but see hiskîn 1 in Ps. 7:6 with the meaning 'put on').

skn C1 III 'settle on'

BH kî-sâkan câlâyw hecânân (Ex. 40:35) 'because the cloud had

settled on it' (etc.).

slw b I 'repose in'

BA 3Snâ nëbûkadneggar sëlëh h&wet bëbetî (Dan. 4:1) 'I Nebuchad­

nezzar was at ease in my palace'.

sift b III 'put into'

OA wyslhn 3lhn mn klmh 3kl b3rpd (KAI 222 A 30) 'and the gods will

send all kinds of devourers into Arpad' (etc.—Fitzmyer would

see an adversative sense 'against' in the Sefire text cited).

BH The adversative nuance 'against' is frequent in BH (e.g., Gen.

37:22; Ex. 22:7, etc.).

slm 1 III * be well for'

No parallel (compare BH sillëm 1 = 'restore to

* , with comparable

idioms in Aramaic, Akkadian ana muhbi ... sulmu, and BH salom 1

[II Sam. 18:29, 32, etc.]).

slm 1 III 'grant peace to'

See note to this idiom, above, p. 238.

slm cm I 'be well/at peace with'

Compare BH sàlêm cim, I Kings 8:61; 11:4; 15:3, 14.

^The Aramaic Inscriptions, p. 15»

 38?

smb b I ’(part of someone) rejoices’

Partially paralleled by samafc bënepes of Eze. 25:6.

smb b II ’rejoice in’

BH wësâmabtâ bëkol-hatfrob (Dt. 26:11) ’and rejoice in all the

good’ (regular).

smb mn II ’rejoice in
*

BH ûsëmab me3ëset nëcûrekâ (Prov. 5:18) ’and rejoice in the wife

of your youth’; kî-libbi sâmëab mikkol-cëmâlî (Eccl. 2:10) ’for

my heart rejoiced in all my labor’.

smc 1 I ’hear concerning’

BH ûlëyismâcë3l sëmactikâ (Gen. 17:20) ’ concerning Ishmael I have

heard you' (notice that the prepositional phrase precedes the

verb, as in the Ugaritic parallel).

smc 1 III 'listen to'

OA wsmc l[ql]h (KAI 201:4-5) 'and he heeded him'.

IA I3 mstmcn ly (AD 4:1) '(the troop) does not obey me' (etc.).

BH ki sâmactâ lëqôl 3 istekâ (Gen. 3;17) 'because you heeded your

wife' (frequent).

s ns b No parallel.

spk 1 III 'pour out on'

BH yjspôk là3âreg mërëràtî (Job 16:13) 'he pours out my gall to

the earth' (also in Lam. 2:11 [object is këbëdî]).

sr ^1 ... b I 'sing before/to/about (?) . . . in'

For sr cl, see note above, p. 241. The best candidate for 'sing in'

is qôl yësorër baballôn (Zeph. 2:14) ' ? singing in the window'.

srh 1 III 'flash to'

No parallel (Job 37:3 uses tabat).

 388

srp b I * burn in/with

*

IA b3stJ srpw (AP 31:11) * they burned with fire'.

BH bâ3ës tisrôpû (Ex. 12:10) 'you shall burn it with fire

* (fre­

quent) .

st b III 'put in(to)'

Pu. 3s 3ybl st bps z (KAI 69:18) 1 which was not entered in this

*
tablet (etc.).

BH 3âsit bëyësac (Ps. 12:6) 'I will put (him) in safety' (etc.).

st 1 I 'put/make for
* (temporal)

No parallel.

st 1 III * put to/on

*

BH kî sât-li 3$lôhîm zerac 3ahër (Gen. 4:25) 'for God has provided

me with another child' (frequent).

st Ipn III * set before'

No parallel.

st C1 III 'set upon/over

*

Ph. wst sm cly (KAI 26 A III 16—see also 26 G IV 18) * and puts

(his) name on it
.
*

Pu. 1st clt hfrdrt npt (KAI 76 B 8) * to put honey on the tomb
*

(see also the text published by J. Hoftijzer, "Deux vases a

inscription identique," VT 13 [19633 : 337-39)•

BH wîsîtëhû cal-3ere§ migrayim (Gen. 41:33) 'and he will set him

over the land of Egypt

* (etc.).

st cm III ’send to
*

No parallel (syt cm appears in Job 30:1 in the sense * put with

).
*

st qdm/tk pn III * set before

*

No parallel.
 389

sty b I 'drink at' (temporal)

I have found only circumstancial parallels (bësimmamôn [Eze. 12:19]

'in dismay'; bëleb-fcôb [Eccl. 9=7] 'with a joyful heart').

sty b II 'drink from'

IA bb[r3 z]k my3 styn (AP 27:8) 'they drank water from this well'.

BA wëyistôn bëhôn (Dan. 5:2) 'they drank from them' (also vss. 3,

23).

BH hSlô3 zeh 3&ser yisteh 3adônî bô (Gen. 44:5) ’is this not the

one my lord drinks from?' (also Am. 6:6, but more frequently

with mn).

sty Ibl No parallel.

sty cd III 'drink until'

BH wëlô3 sâtû cad-hayyôm hazzeh (Jer. 35:14) 'and they have not

drunk (wine) until this day'.

sty cm I 'drink with'

OA wtsEty n]bs pnmw cmk (KAI 214:1?) 'and may the "soul" of

Panamuwa drink with you'.

BH wëlistot cimmahem (Job 1:4) 'to drink wine with them'.

tbc b etc. No parallel.

trfa 1 No parallel.

t(wy ?) b I * be put, moored in' (???)

See note above, p. 246.

j3r Ipn No sure cognate.

jb b I 'return on' (temporal)

BH wayyâsob bayyôm hahu3 cêsâw (Gen. 33:16) 'Esau returned on

that day' (etc.).

tb 1 III 'return to
*
 590

OA yhtb hmw l3pg[nrbyl] (KAI 253:11) 'may he give them to PN'

(see also KAI 224:6).

IA wl3 htyb lh (AP 20:7) 'and did not return (them) to him’.

BH wë3abraham sâb limqSmô (Gen. 18:55) 'Abraham returned to his

dwelling' (frequent).

tb cm III ’return to'

No parallel.

£br bcd No parallel.

Xbr 1 III 'break to'

BH wëkol-pësîlê 3glôhêhâ sibbar lâ3âreg (Is. 21:9) 'and all the

idols of her gods he has shattered to the earth'.

b No parallel.

tkr cm No cognate.

tm 1 No cognate (unless it be smm).

jny b/1 I/III 'speak on/to'

No parallel (but compare wësinnantâm lëbânekâ [Dt. 6:7] 'you shall

repeat them to your children').

£cr 1 No parallel.

tpd 1 III 'set on’

BH wëlacapar-mâwet tispëtëni (Ps. 22:16) 'put me on the dust of

death' (also Is. 26:12).

jpt b I 'judge in'

BH wayyispôt sëmu3ël 3et-bene yisra el bammigpa (I Sam. 7

6)
*

’Samuel judged the Israelites in Mizpah' (etc.).

trp b No cognate.

tsm C1 No cognate.

^See Dahood, Biblica 54 (1975): 565

*
 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY1

Albright, William Foxwell. "Archaic Survivals in the Text of Canticles."

In Hebrew and Semitic Studies Presented to Godfrey Rolles Driver
. . . in Celebration of his Seventieth Birthday, 20 August 19^2?
pp. 1-7. Edited by D. Winton Thomas and W. D. McHardy. Oxford:
Clarendon Press, 196?.

Barr, James. Comparative Philology and the Text of the Old Testament.
Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1968.

Blommerde, Anton C. M. Northwest Semitic Grammar and Job. Biblica et

Orientalia, No. 22. Rome: Pontificium Institutum Biblicum,
1969.

Brekelmans, C. "Some Considerations on the Translation of the Psalms

by M. Dahood: I: The Preposition _b = from in the Psalms
According to M. Dahood." Ugarit-Forschungen 1 (1969): 5-14.

Chomsky, William. "The Ambiguity of the Prefixed Prepositions m, 1, b

in the Bible." Jewish Quarterly Review 61 (1970-71): 87-89.

Dahood, Mitchell. "Philological Notes on the Psalms." Theological

Studies 14 (1953): 85-88.

. "Two Pauline Quotations from the Old Testament." Catholic

Biblical Quarterly 17 (1955): 19-24.

, "Ugaritic Studies and the Bible." Gregorianum 45 (1962):

55-79.

. "Hebrew-Ugaritic Lexicography I." Biblica 44 (1965): 289-505.

. Ugaritic-Hebrew Philology: Marginal Notes on Recent Publica­

tions. Biblica et Orientalia, No. 17. Rome: Pontificium Insti­
tutum Biblicum, 1965»

. "Hebrew-Ugaritic Lexicography IV." Biblica 47 (1966): 405-19»

The only major studies of the Ugaritic preposition are those

found in the various editions of Gordon
* s grammars. Besides minor works
on the subject, therefore, I have included articles dealing with Hebrew
and/or Phoenician since the discovery of Ugaritic, as well as works on
subjects incidental to prepositions but which contain important allusions
to that subject.

391
 392

Dahood, Mitchell. Psalms I: 1-50: Introduction, Translation» and

Notes. The Anchor Bible, vol. 16. Garden City, New York:
Doubleday and Co., 1966.

. "Congruity of Metaphors." Supplements to Vetus Testamentum

16 (1967): 40-49.

. Psalms II: 51-100: Introduction, Translation, and Notes.

The Anchor Bible, vol. 17. Garden City, New York: Doubleday
and Co., 1968.

. "Comparative Philology Yesterday and Today" (review of James

Barr, Comparative Philology and the Text of the Old Testament).
Biblica 50 (1969): 70-79.

. Psalms III: 101-150: Introduction, Translation, and Notes

With an Appendix, The Grammar of the Psalter. The Anchor Bible,
vol. 17A. Garden City, New York: Doubleday and Co., 1970.

. "Hebrew-Ugari

. "Ugaritic-Hebrew Parallel Pairs." In Ras Shamra Parallels:

The Texts from Ugarit and the Hebrew Bible" 1: 71-382. Analecta
Orientalia 49. Edited by Loren R. Fisher. Rome: Pontificium
Institutum Biblicum, 1972.

Emerton, J. A. Review of L. Koehler and W. Baumgartner, Hgl?mgch$s upd

aramaisches Lexikon zum Alien Testament. Vetus Testamentum 22
(1972): 502-111

Février, J. G. "Sur le mot clt en phénicien et en punique." Semitica

5 (1955): 59-62.

Friedrich, Johannes, and Wolfgang Rollig. Phonizisch-punische Grammatik.

2d fully rev. ed. Analecta Orientalia 46. Rome: Pontificium
Institutum Biblicum, 1970.

Garbini, Giovanni. Il semitico di nord—ovest. Quaderni della sezione

linguistics degli annali, vol. 1. Naples: Istituto Universi-
tario Orientale di Napoli, i960.

Ginsberg, H. L. "Women Singers and Wailers Among the Northern Canaan­

ites." Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 72
(1938): 13-15.

Gordon, C. H. Ugaritic Grammar: The Present Status of the Linguistic

Study of the Semitic Alphabetic Texts from Ras Shamra. Analecta
Orientalia 20. Rome: Pontificium Institutum Biblicum, 1940.

. "Aramaic Incantation Bowls." Orientalia n.s. 10 (1941):

116-41, 272-84, 339-60.

. Ugaritic Hand
 393

Transliteration, Comprehensive Glossary. Analecta Orientalia 25»

Rome: Pontificium Institutum Biblicum, 1947.

Gordon, C. H. Review of Johannes Friedrich, Phonizisch-punische Gram-

matik. Orientalia n.s. 21 (1952): 119-23.

. Ugaritic Manual; Newly Revised Grammar, Texts in Translitera ­

tion, Cuneiform Selections, Paradigms, Glossary, Indices. Ana­
lecta Orientalia 55. Rome : Pontificium Institutum Biblicum, 1955.

. Ugaritic Textbook: Grammar, Texts in Transliteration, Cunei­

form Selections, Glossary, Indices. Analecta Orientalia 58.
Rome : Pontificium Institutum Biblicum, 1965.

Greenberg, Moshe. Review of H. J. van Dijk, Ezekiel

s
* Prophecy on Tyre.
Journal of the American Oriental Society 90 (1970): 556-40.

Hartman, Louis F. Review of M. Dahood, Proverbs and Northwest Semitic

Philology. Catholic Biblical Quarterly 2.6 (1964) : 104-6.

Held, Moshe. "The Action-Result (Factitive-Passive) Sequence of

Identical Verbs in Biblical Hebrew and Ugaritic." Journal of
Biblical Literature 84 (1965): 272-82.

Herdner, Andrée. "Remarques sur 'La Déesse cAnat.'" Revue des Etudes
Sémitiques l942-45, pp. 55-49.

Jackson, Jared J. Review of M. Dahood, Psalms I. Pittsburgh Perspec­

tive 7/2 (1966): 50-53.

Labuschagne, C. J. Review of A. C. M. Blommerde, Northwest Semitic

Grammar and Job. Ugarit-Forschungen 5 (1971): 373-74.

Lipinski, Edward. "Psalm 68:7 and the Role of the Kosarot." Istituto
Orientale di Napoli : Annali 31 (1971): 532-37.

Moran, William L. "The Hebrew Language in Its Northwest Semitic Back­

ground. " In The Bible and the Ancient Near East: Essays in
Honor of William Foxwell Albright, pp. 59-84. Edited by G.
Ernest Wright. Garden City, New York: Doubleday and Co., 1965
(Anchor Books Edition, original copyright 1961).

Parker, Simon Bruce. "Studies in the Grammar of Ugaritic Prose Texts."

Ph.D. dissertation, Johns Hopkins University, 1967. Published
on demand by University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Michigan, and
High Wycomb, England.

Rainey, A. F. "Administration in Ugarit and the Samaria Ostraca."

Israel Exploration Journal 12 (1962): 62-63»

. "Private Seal-Impressions : A Note on Semantics." Israel

Exploration Journal 16 (1966): 187-90.
 394

Rainey, A. F. "The System of Land Grants at Ugarit in its Wider Near

Eastern Setting." In Fourth World Congress of Jewish Studies:
Papers, 1: 187-91. Jerusalem: World Union of Jewish Studies,
1967.

. "The Samaria Ostraca in the Light of Fresh Evidence."

Palestine Exploration Quarterly 99 (1967): 32-41.

. "Some Prepositional Nuances in Ugaritic Administrative

Texts." In Proceedings of the International Conference on
Semitic Studies Held in Jerusalem, 19-23 July 1965* PP- 203-11
*
Jerusalem: The Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 1969
*

. "Semantic Parallels to the Samaria Ostraca." Palestine

Exploration Quarterly 102 (1970): 45-51­

. "Observations on Ugaritic Grammar." Ugarit-Forschungen 3

(1971): 151-72.

. "A Hebrew 'Receipt' from Arad." Bulletin of the American

Schools of Oriental Research 202 (197ÏT: 23-29-

Sarna, Nahum M. "The Interchange of the Prepositions beth and min in

Biblical Hebrew." Journal of Biblical Literature 78 (1959):
310-16.

Schmuttermayr, Georg. "Ambivalent und Aspektdifferenz: Bemerkungen zu

den hebraischen Prapositionen _b, .1 und mn. " Biblische Zeit­
schrift n.s. 15 (1971): 29-51.

Segert, Stanislav. "Semitistische Marginalien: III: Zur Phonetik und

Morphologie des Nordwestsemitischen (In margins des Bûches yon
G. Garbini 'll semitico di nord-ovest')." Archiv Orientalni 29
(1961): 106-18.

. "Le rôle de l'Ugaritique dans la linguistique sémitique

comparée." In Ugaritica VI: Publié à l'occasion de la XXXe
campagne de fouilles a Ras Shamra (1968) sous la direction de
Claude F. A. Schaeffer, pp. 461-77. Mission de Ras Shamra,
vol. 17. Institut Français d'Archéologie de Beyrouth, Biblio-
tèque Archéologique et Historique, vol. 81. Edited by Jacques-
Claude Courtois. Paris: Mission Archéologique de Ras Shamra
and Librairie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner, 1969
*

Serra, Rafael M. "Algunos posibles ejemplos de interferencias de

preposiciones en el hebreo biblico." Claretianum 7 (1967):
293-317-

Suarez, Pio. "Praepositio cal = coram in Litteratura Ugaritica et

Hebraica-Biblica. " Verbum Domini 42 (1964): 71-80.

Sutcliffe, Edmund F. "A Note on cal, l^, and from." Vêtus Testamentum
5 (1955): 436-39-
 395

van Dijk, H. J. Ezekiel

s
* Prophecy on Tyre (Ez. 26, 1-28, 1?): A New
Approach. Biblica et Orientalia, No. 20. Rome : Pontificium
Institutum Biblicum, 1968.

. "A Neglected Connotation of Three Hebrew Verbs. ** Veins

Testamentum 18 (1968): 16-30.

Virolleaud, Charles. "Les prépositions à Ras-Shamra. " Groupe linguis­

tique d
etudes
* Chamito-Sémitiques : Comptes rendues des seances
1 (1934): 50.

. "La préposition dans la langue de Ras-Shamra." Groupe

linguistique d'études Chamito-Sémitiques: Comptes rendues des
seances 2(1935): 13-14.

Whitley, C. F. "Some Functions of the Hebrew Particles beth and

lamedh." Jewish Quarterly Review 62 (1971-72): 199-206.

Yadin, Yigael. "Recipients or Owners : A Note on the Samaria Ostraca."

Israel Exploration Journal 9 (1959): 184-87.

. "A Further Note on the Lamed in the Samaria Ostraca." Israel

Exploration Journal 18 (i960): 50-51.
 INDEX OF TEXTS CITED

Ugaritic Texts
Cited CTA (UT)

l(cnt IX).2.1 58 2.3(129).4 50

2 36 5 33
3 36 16 102, 323
15-17 33 20 45
19-21 230-31 21-22 323
19-20 89 21 102
20-21 68 2.4(68).3 106
22-23 58 5 69
23 36 6-7 51, 183, 186
3.01 51 12-13 30
2 32-33, 144 13-14 93
10 58 14-15 35
11 36 15-16 93
14 112 16 35
21-22 50 19-20 64
23 297 21 93
24 33 22 35
28 92-93 23-24 93
l(cnt X).4.2 84 23 87
7 33 25 35
9-10 48 , 276 26 87
24-25 30 28-29 136, 311
2.1(137).6 321 28 29, 139
9 69, 211 38 321
13-14 50 3(cnt).1.4 248
14-15 69 6-8 28
14 144 6-7 88
19-20 51 6 323
20-21 52 10-11 48
21 8? 15-17 58-59 , 63
23 82, 323 20-22 98
24 29, 138 21 241
25 82, 285, 319, 2 230
320, 323 .2 232
27-28 70 3-5 90
27 294, 319, 320 5-7 38
29 70, 285, 294, 5-6 61
319, 320, 323 9-10 299, 314
30 69, 144, 326 9 317
39 23 11-13 81 , 97

396
5(cnt).2.15-15 82 5('nt).4.85-86 99-100
15-16 50 89-90 502-5
16 140 6-8 (Col.. E) 102
17-18 65, 87 5.9 64
19 61 11-12 49
20-22 105 14 50
20 58 26 55, 190
21-22 248 27-29 96, 259
25-26 62, 81 29-50 57
25 157 50 151-52
27 82 51 196
29 61 55-55 78
50-51 60 58-59 515
50 58 41 112
51-52 45 44-45 297
54-55 91, 251-52 6.9-11 201
56-57 105 15 51
42-45 502-5 17-19 52
5.1-5 201 17 144, 145
6 55 18 55
11 89 4(51).1.24 76
15-14 68 25 505, 510
16 56, 58 27-29 44
21-22 112 28-29 172-75
25-28 28, 522 52 65
26-28 129 55 64
29-51 51, 68, 104 54-55 505, 521
29 210 55-56 85
50 519 57-58 514
54-55 42, 529 42-44 505
4.44-45 40 44 175, 511
45 160-61 2.5-4 25
46-47 50 6-7 65
48-50 42, 529 8-9 98-99, 525
52 89 12 85, 225
54 68 16 68
55-56 36 17 104
55 58 18 51
60-61 112 29 84
60 279 52 59
65-64 28 5.15-14 56, 522
65 522 14-16 100
67 89 15-16 245
68-69 68 21-22 26
70 128 25 526
72 89 41-45 88
74-75 68 44 100
79-80 517 4.8 126
81-82 50 16-18 27, 525
82-84 55 19 298
82 145 21-22 50
84 92, 525 25 55
 398

4(51).4.29 105 4(51).7.45-46 190

35-37 57 47-49 73
36-37 243 47-48 88, 120
37 100 49-50 63
> 41-42 37 52 84
, 58 126 53-54 218-19
62-63 27 55-56 157
5.64 126 8.2-4 50
68-71 217-18 5-6 71, 323
68-69 75 7 297
70-71 48 8-9 72
70 176-77 10-12 51
71 98 15-17 89
75-76 84, 321 17-20 39, 73
85-86 50 23 55
86 144 24-27 32-33
89-91 27 24 144
92 84 25-26 157
98-99 84 26 33
105 56, 190-91 34-35 157
106 326 5(67).1.6-8 45
107-8 99-100 9-11 49-50
108-10 53 15-16 303
115-17 92-93 19-20 57
1116-17 322 20-22 63
123-24 98 21 198-99
6.1-2 102 22-25 225
15 102 22-23 85, 89, 229
18-19 34 24-25 58, 100
24-32 219 24 193
24-26 24 2.2-3 311
27-28 24 3-5 45
30-31 24 79
31-33 67 12 299
33 205-6 14-15 50
34-35 71-72 21-22 85
40 159 23 89
44-45 84 4.14 88
57 88 16 100
58 169, 298 5.6-11 315-16
59 100 8, 10-11 279
7.5-6 232 12 51
8 102 14-15 297
13 321 14 71
17-19 83 15 72
19-20 84, 223-24 18-19 22, 108
25-26 157 19-21 94
25 102 21 235-36
26-27 83 6.02-01 50
27-28 323-24 3-5 211
40-41 242 6-7 268
42 102, 126 8 69
45-47 55 11-14 45
 399

5(67).6.12-14 52 6(49).2.33 98
13-14 188, 333 34-35 32
14-16 44, 324 39, 362
15 325 37 84
17-19 41, 144 3.4-6, 10-11 62
17-18 161-62 15 105
22-25 173 18-19 68
24-25 44 22 84
25-28 84 „ . .. . 4.32 50
28-30 268 42-43 124
30-31 69 42 94
6(62).1.1 311 5.1-3 61
2 41, 162 2-3 196
7 44 4 64, 200
8-9 46 5-6 53
10-11 84 5 52
12 77 7-8 52
14-16 76 11-18 83
16 268, 297 12-13 32
6.1.32-33(49.1. .4-5) 50 14 98
36 8 33 15 39
44 16 84 16 32
45-46 17-18 48, 18-19 32
143 19-20 48, 72
46 18 178, 276 19 143
50-52 22-24 75, 20 178
92, 216-17 6.12-13 103
51-52 23-24 233 13 175
56-57 28-29 75-76 21-22 87
57 29 268 23 84
58-59 30-31 52 24-25 61
59-61 31-33 297 31-32 79
62 34 62, 268 6.6(62).44-46 317
63-65 35-37 45 47-48 315, 336
65 37 62-63 50 303
66-67 38-39 93 7.1(131).2-3 81
6(49).2.6-9 311 2 97
7-8 313 4 61
8-9 314 5-6 105
9-11 22, 86 5 38
9 327 7 81, 137
16-17 84 8 62
17-19 38 9 82, 314
18 155 7.2(130).4 90
22-23 39, 155 10 201
22 73 14 89
23 157, 158 15-16 68
25 55 16 58
26-27 66, 204 17 36
28-29 311 19-20 112
30 314 24 90
31-32 28 25 38, 61
32-33 32 8(51 frag.).5 84
 400

10(76).2.6-7 25, 110 14(Krt).2.71-7 2 45-44

9 51 75-75 76-77
11-12 47 75 525
11 46 76-77 51
15-16 77-78 76 141
17 66, 525 77-79 44-45
18 55, 144 79-80 46
21-25 65 80-82 74
25 200-201 80 294
24-25 68 81-82 215-16, 268
28-50 46 92-95 54, 175
5.12-15 76 94-95 55
14-15 55 96-105 128
18-19 46 100-105 28
21-22 41 102 285
28-52 76 5.108 65
56-57 41 111-14 72
11(152).1.1-2 22-25, 109 112 214
12(75).1.12-15 29, 85, 121 118-25 47
14-17 45 125-25 56, 190-91
14, 16 164 151-55 65, 91
19-22 45, 522 152 294
20-21 163, 270 156-57 102
25-25 206 149 95
50-52 305 150-51 48
50 299 152-55 41
55 305 154 154
40-41 66 158 91
2.57 69 159-61 60
59 94 159 79
56 322 4.164-65 45-44
57 70 166 76-77
15(6).6-7 81, 97 170-71 44-45
8 78 172-75 74
9 90 172 46, 294
20-21 77 180-81 54, 175
14(Krt).l.l 311 182-85 35
7-9 512 190-91 28
15 55 191 285
20-21 69 195-98 65
24-25 21 195 199
26 79 200-201 208-9
27 31 209 65
51-52 47, 147 214-16 72
55-57 44 5.221 47
35-36 175 225-26 47
37-58 89, 250 228 84
2.56 303 258 84
59-62 78 247 50
65-64 91 260 91, 294
65 79 261 65-66
66-67 59-60 6.266 50
 401

14(Krt).6.279 91 16(126).3.7-9 312

280 65-66, 294 9 303
298-99 41 12-13 71, 323
302 50 13-16 54
15(128).1.3-4 104 4.14-15 77
4 191 5.14-15, 17, 20 66
5-6 36 24-25 53
2.11 326 16.6(127).3-4 267
13-14 101 9 337
13 243-44 10 91 , 231-32
16-18 23 11-12 83-84
21-22 297 22-24 53, 188
23, 25 41 22 103
3.2-4 93, 384-85 25 51 , 185-84
2-3 322 27-28
6 41 31 246
13-15 384-85 32 86
13-14 322 37-38 46
14-15 93 39 81
18-19 25 44 246
20-21 41 45 86
4.2 84 47-48 105
17-18 81 48-50 58
21 297 48-49 193
24-25 95 52-53 46
27 85 57-58 86, 227
28 140, 312 57 211
5.7 95 17(2 Aqht).1.6-17 219
10 85 16-20 229-30
12 122-23 16-17 89
6.4 85 24-25 28, 64
5 140, 312 26-27 55
6 26 27 70
16.1(125).1-5 216, 222 28-29 43,
1 311 164-69
2-5 81 29 143, 268
11-12 81 30 222
14-15 29, 96 31 22
16-19 81 33-34 40
25-26 31 34 91
30 31 35 109
41-42 60 40-41 147
45-44 95 44 55
47-48 23, 285, 45 70
320 46-47 43
52-53 297 49 222
54 104, 248 2.2-3 43
16.2(125).98 96 3 222
99 29 5 22
100-104 81 7 40
112 81 8-9 96,
16(126).3.3-4 211 224-25
5-6 62, 197 8 91, 238
 402

17(2 Aqht).2.11 105 18(3 Aqht).4.6 50

13 68 12-13 61
14 41 15 235
16 70 18 241
17 43 19-20 92
19 22, 222 19 52
22 40 21-22 74
23 91 21 92
25 87 22-23 35
26 79 23-24 97,
29-30 39 240-41
39-40 101 24-26 42
5.6-7 51-52, 304 29-30 52
6 53, 185-86 29 241
9 33, 83 30 92
15 84 31 92
16-19 73 ^4 35
17-18 74 35 97
23-24 74 37 42
23 73 19(1 Aqht).1.1 311
25 326 14-15 61
26-28 48, 74 18-19 40
27 240-41 19 108
31-33 101 22-23 304
32 243-44 22 51-52, 53
6.4 88 28 83
5 100 30 38
10 83 32 92
15-16 97, 240 34-35 26
20-24 207-8 38-42 40, 62
20-23 67 38-40 85
21-23 208 41 197
24-25 27, 124 49 84
28-29 73 2.50-51 37
31-32 97-98 51 150-51
34-35 312 55 37
36-37 69, 323, 62-63 83
324 64-65 69
37 325 67 321
41-42 87 69-70 83
42 103, 247, 72 69-70
269 74 321
43-44 90 75 42, 305
44-45 87 76 83
47-48 50 79 35
50 33 88 42
18(3 Aqht).1.8 96 93 68
9 37 31, 104
10 196 105-6 37
13-14 75 105 83
18 116 106 149-50
21 50, 144 3.109 87
 403

42 21(122).1.2-3 88-89
19(1 Aqht).J.113
116 87 9 145, 297
83 11 88-89
120
124 87 22.1(123) 66
127 42 .5 84, 145, 297
130 87 4 88-89
134 83 8 84, 145, 297
138 87 9 88-89
141 42 18 84
143 87 20 88-89
145-46 195 23 25, 77
145 59 22.2(124).12 159
147 86 16 145
148-51 38 21-26 169-70
150 78 24-25 43, 63, 100
154-55 24 243
151
152-53 61, 339 23(52).6 57, 100
312 8-9 304 , 310
152
156 82 12 90
312 14 158-59
157
158 61, 82 24 41
159-60 70, 82 27 34, 145, 328
4.165 312 31 60, 195, 524, 325
166 61 60
167-68 98, 37-38 46-47
180-82 41 57, 85
79, 44 57
171-73
220-21 45 85
87 48 57, 85
171
26 51 147
173-79
179-81 78 52 40
219, 229 54 71
179
182-85 220-21 56-57 75
182-84 101 56 147
185-86 76 59 40, 41
61 41
191-92 90, 231
76 62-63 79, 504
192
63-64 74
199 37
22, 107-8 63 66
204
302-3 65 71
205
208 193, 225 66 29-50
40 68 297
212-13
213-14 25-26, 69 85, 225
116 70 83, 224
215-18 75 111
59
24(77).5-4 104
219 100
8, 12 56
225 103
66, 204-5 16-17 57
20(121).2.1-2
4 25, 77 18-19 79
5 63 28-29 101
30-33 244-46
9 321
66 32-35 199, 288
21(122)
145, 297 52 316
.1.1
 404

24(77).42-43 45 56(20).1 324

43-45 141-42 59(100).1 95, 324
43 175 64(118).6 153-54
45-47 304, 305 11 238
48-49 316 10-12 96
26(135).5 321 16-17 99
32(2).2-3 71 18-19 40
8‘-9 38 19 161
9’-9” 71 25 40
14-15 38, 152-54 87(64).1-2 54
16-17 71 2 145
25-26 71 137.2(93).10-11 24
27 103 11 110-11
53-35 71 145(318).3-8 312
33(5).7-8 312 147(90).1-4 42
9 314 1-2 320
24-26 2, 3-4 163
24 33, 144-45 43, 167
35(3).1-2 65 159(59).2 312
3 91 160(55).3 44, 170-72
45 102 161(56) 44
50 30, 31, 140
36(9).1.10 91
11 86 Ugaritic Texts
App. 11(173).1-2 65 UT Number Only
3 91
49 102 69.1-2 77
54 91 70.1-2 77
50(117).5 87 138.6-8 56
6-7 95 6, 8 192
9-13 95 18-19 103
11-13 103 601 341
208-10 .1.1-2 30
14-15 67-68, 285 2 85
14 320 3 169
17-18 70 5-7 75
18 211 6-7 74
51(95).5 87 7-8 35
10, 15 96 8 35-36
18 103 10-11 74
52(89).6 87 11-12 29
12 11 138
15 103 12-13 74, 216
53(54).4 95 14-15 51
5-8 97 14 29
5-6 240 15 184
7 156 16 100
8-11 57 17-18 34
8, 10 156 18 87
18-19 99 21 86
55(18).4 95 602.1.2-3 51, 105, 184-85
17-18 97 3-5 32
19-22 48 2.3 25
56(21).4 95 8 198
 405

602.2.9-12 304 1001.1.4 105

10-11 312, 322 5 88
605.1.1-3 52, 322 7 324
1-2 186-87 9-10 76, 329, 378
7 304 10 35, 324
2.4 43 16 35
6 23-24 2.7 103
604.9-11 198-99 1003.3-4 105
11 63 7-10 92
606.1-2, 10-11 64 10 233
10 200 1005.2-5 29
607.2-3 41 12-15 59
2 89 15 60
5-6 21-22, 67 1006.1-2 82
5 106-7 , 267, 274 12-15 82
10-11, 16■»' 21- 22, 16-19 103
27, 32, 37, 42 1008 315
47-48, 53-54 • 1—10 49
59-60 21-22 7-9 178-79
61 93, 213 11-14 49
63 51 14 182
64-65 67, 206-7, 267 17 59
68 87 19 59, 60
70-71 72, 211-13 1009.1 49
71-76 213 7 321-22
71 74 11-12 182
margin 1 314 11 49
608.8 24, 111-12 14 59
9 24 17 59, 60
10-11 22, 104 1010 240
10 107 .4 57
12 24 5-6 94
17 305 17-18 73
19 24 17 215
20 22, 104 19-21 22
38 88, 228 19-20 107
44 88 1012.10
611 31 22-39 237
.1, 7 30 22-25 90
9-10 57 22-24 94
612.1.5 91 25-26 182
6 305 27 86
7 149, 314 28-29 99, 324
2.1 305 33-36 56
3 314 54 192
7 314 1013.4 87
613.1 91 5 95
3-4 86 8, 9 96
701.2 309 11-17 208-10
702.1.1-4 87 11 103
5-6 99 12-14 68
6-8 30 12-13 285
2.5-6 316 18 57
 406

87 1122.1-2 86
1014.5
1015.6-8 80 8-10 25
7-10 70 9-10 110
7-8 524 11, 15, 14 25
10-11 97 15 110
11 259 , 282, 554-55 16 25
14, 17 96 1159.1-2 515
16-20 105-4 1145.6 54
247-48 15-14 95, 258
19
1016.4 95 1155 59, 159-60
1018.18-19 25 1154 159-60
19 115, 524 .7-8 51
20-22 24, 524 1155.1-8 58
1019.1.1-2 512 1-2, 6 195
2-6 75 1156 195
7-8 25 .1-2, 6 58
1020.1-2 512 6 508
57 1158.1.1-5 42
5
45, 169 2.1 42
5
1021.1-8 244 4 42
4-5 56 5 42
4 192 1159.1 42
6-7 101 5 42
8 41 1161 221
1022.6, 9 99 .1-4 80
1024.5.1, 4 194 5-9 55
4-6, 8, 11 27 7-8 189-90
1025.1-2 510 1162.1.1-5 79
1029.15-16 94, 255 1171.4 99
1040.8 221 2001.1.5
517 12-15 24
1055.1-5
1081.9 506 2.8 46, 524
1085.1-5 60, 196 2004.1-2 55
255 1 54
5
1084 506 2005.2.7-8 70
.24 54 2006.1-2 58
298 8 58, 508
27
54, 189 2007.2-5 58
1086.1-5
1088.4 510 11 58
1089.4 516 2008.1.4 87
1090.10-12 507 2.8 57
1094.1-5 512 10 95
1098 506 2009.1.5 95
507 5-6 56
.10-11
44 54 6, 8 96
1104.5 506 9 105
14-22 515 2.5-4 95
1107.5-8 48 2010.4 95
6-8 276 2011.1 509
6 178 2015 507
509 2015 51, 185, 507
11-15
42 2026.1-2 78
1109.1
6 505 2029 510
 407

2030 310 2115.1.6 87

Col. 1 313 2.5 87
2046.1.1-2 8o 8
2052.1-7 193-94 12 103
1-5 58 2116 221
2056.1-2 305 .1-9 80
2059 316 2124.1 67, 207
.4 95 2-3 304
6, 8 96 5 97
10-13 65 2128.1.7 57
11 297 2159.4 95
13-15 94 2171.3 96
13 236
15-22 59
18 195 Ugaritic Texts
21-23 103 Without
24-25 101 UT Number
2060.3 ’ 96
15-16 35 CRAI 1954, p. 257
17-18 56 R& 17.434 100, 243
31 319 CRAI I960, pp. 180-86
35 99, 241-42 RS 22.225 246-47
2061.4 95 .3-5 72, 100
6, 7 96 4 214
9-10 56-57 GLECS 10 (1964): 59-60
10 192 RS 24.247 36, 95, 146-47
2062.1.1 279, 316 (no RS number) 77, 218
2.1-2 63 Ugaritica V, pp. 625-27
2 198 ’ RS 17.120 44
3-4 99 Ugaritica VI
2063.5 87 RS 24.277:29-33 335
9-12 316 29 297
2064.10 87 RS 24.323 141, 305-6
23 25, 114 RS 24.325 88
2065.1 95
14-17 25
14 114-15 Phoenician Texts
15-17 99
17 242 KAI 1:2 4, 9, 337
2072.1 310 4:3-7 352-53
2079.1-2 80 7:1-3 355
2093.1-2 189 10:2 373
1 53 3-4 355
2095.2, 4 228 9-10 150
2100.21 297 11 385
2101.16 297 13:2-3 385
2106.3 242 5 385
10-18 80 14:3 385
12 222 5-6 117, 379
14-17 57 8 382
17 193 11 369
2114 126 17 355
.8-9 27 24:2 373
 408

KAI 26 A I 5-6 369 KAI 214:17 389

12-13 355 19 367
20-21 367 215:7 373
II 18 367 11 351
19-III 1 359 216:11-12 351
III 8 367 217:7-8 150
13-14 371 222 A 30 386
16 388 36 358
C III 16-17 134 B 22 372
IV 15 371 223 B 13 353
18 388 224:6 367, 390
38:2 373 7 368, 375
46:1-4 357 15 376
50:2-3 130 20 353
60:6 221 233:11 390
277:1 168
3-4 373
6 353 Imperial Aramaic Texts
CIS I 92:2 373
AD 4:1 387
12:7 353
Punic Texts AP 2:13 363
5:3 353
KAI 69:18 388 6:2 367
76 B 8 117, 388 7:7-8 383
81:4 117 8 380
137:4-5 117 10 383
145:8 365 10:16-17 370
11:5-6 366
15:5, 15 116
Moabite Text 32-33 364
20:7 390
KAI 181:2 373 26:13 353
--- 8 367 27:8 389
10 355, 367 30:8 353
14 352 17 361
19, 31 367 31:11 388
16 361
34:4 385-86
Hebrew Inscriptions 48:3 370
and Letters Ahiqar 48 363
* 121 376
KAI 189:4-5 359 171 351
193:10 383 BMAP 7:28 359
11 354 11:10-11 370, 371
RES 1785 B 3 360-61
Warka 4 116
Old Aramaic Texts

KAI 201:4-5 387 Biblical Aramaic

214:3-4 352
8-9 366 Dan. 2:14 375
9 352 24 116
 409

Dan. 3:26 383 Gen. 32:19 141

4:1 386 21 360
8, 17, 19 373 33:16 389
5:2, 3, 23 389 35:3 379
6:25 373 37:8 373
Ezra 4:12 353 17 376
5:14 363 22 386
6:5 363 38:13 379
7:16 386 41:33 388
48 367
43:18 184
Biblical Hebrew 44:5 389
13, 33 379
Gen. 1:2 384 45:14 123
20 380 47:30 382
2:8 375 49:11 231
3:17 387 50:3 354-55
4:7 384 17 354
25 388 Ex. 2:13 364
6:4 364 4:18 359
7:9 354 6:1 357
11 223-24 10:9 145, 358-59
8:20 355 11:4 364
21 174 12:10 388
11:32 374 43, 44 370
12:3 131 13:13 380-81
18 383 14:28 354
13:15 367 15:4 366
14:19 130 5 365
17:17 121 17 355
20 240, 387 16:4 372
18:8 227 29 368
12 122, 381 18:12 370
18 131 13 368
390 19:11 365
33
116 12 378
19:31
32 385 18 175
363 21:23 367
33, 35
20:6, 9 362 22:4 129
22:6 370 7 386
18 131 23:5 377
23:19 226 11 179
24:4, 8 358 16 358
12 383 25:12 173
61 358 27:2 204
65 358 5 367
26:4 131 8 204
12 358 28:17 372
27:16 193 28 384
28:12 175 30:13 309
14 131 34:5 175
31:54 357 9 359
32:2 359 40:32 384
 410

Ex. 40:35 386 Judg. 20:23 354

Lev. 4:2, 27 362 I Sam. 7:6 390
5:4 354 9:3 274, 350
15, 22 362 10:8 365
9:4 357 12:18 366
14:47 385 14:2 185
18:19 383 16:3 382
21:11 116 18:2 370
26:11 367 25:11 160, 362
38 350 24 375
Num. 1:49 376 42 359
6:6 116 28:13-14 155
25 347 II Sam. 2:21 352
11:8 362 5:12 369
18 354 6:6 351
13:17, 22 378 13:17 338
14:1 354 15:4 116
3 375 18:11 314
15:11 160 29, 32 386
27, 28 362 22:7 382
18:16 381 14 176-77
22:16 146 39 375
24:14 359 23:16 375
33:54 168 I Kings 1:40 356
34:4 377 2:4 360
Dt. 6:7 390 19 368
7:25 370 6:10 351
12:21 352 15 381
14:4 160 7:46 364
20:7 128 8:53 320
22:4 375 61 386
23:16 376 9:3 150, 361
24:5 128 11:4 386
25:5 116 12:5 213
18 383 11 379
26:11 387 15:3, 14 386
32:11 384 16:34 320
Josh. 2:15 174, 365 17:16 320
7:23 170 18:5 358
11:19 238 19:18 369
13:21 373 20:29 219
22:4 359 II Kings 2:19 141
12 378 4:40-41 173
Judg. 3=27, 28 365 19:24 362
11:37 123, 354-55 25:20 116
38 354-55 Is. 6:6 380
12:9 267 12:3 385
13:16 370 14:30 384
15:5 179 16:9 354
16:4 351 18:7 363
16 381 19:14 373
26, 29 369 21:9 390
17:10 367 22:10 316
 411

Is. 26:12 355 , 390 Amos 6:6 389

14 350 Jon. 4:6 376
30:14 361 Mic. 2:9 371
24 358 4:11 361
37:25 362 7:6 378
41:23 353 Hab. 3:7 156
43:4 367 Zeph. 2:14 387
45:23 369 3:17 356
47:1 188, 368 Zech. 10:9 358
13 361, 369 14:10 377
49:8 378 Mal. 3:10 223-24
53=7 363 Ps. 5:10 369
55:12 363 6:8 380
57:5 186 7:6 386
59:13 122 9:5 188, 368
63:10 147 11:2 366, 369
65:12 369 12:6 388
16 131 15:2 121
Jer. 3=22 353 16:7 377
4:2 131 18:7 382
6:12 377 14 176-77
11:19 363 39 375
12:5 233 21:7 361-62
15:7 358 22:16 390
17:25 368 24:2 369
20:18 368 4 376
22:10 354-55 25:8, 12 366
31:9 363 27:4 361
33 367 28:3 121
32:43 382 29:10 188, 368
35 = 14 389 31:11 368
44:26 382 17 347
48:32 354-55 20 355
51:10 377 33:2 358
53 316 37:20 368
Eze. 5:12 368 41:9 365
12:19 389 44:2 355
13:14 368 45:3 365
14:8 182 15 363
16:14 168 46:2 378
24:3 365 11 384
25:6 387 55:9 213-14
27:31 354-55 57:10 358
32:10 380 58:7 157
34:8, 22 160 11 231
37:23 362 62:5 121
Hoe. 4:14 129 63:3 361
5:6 145, 359 64:5 366
7:14 120 67:2 347
9:4 375 68:21 167
10:6 363 24 371
12:2 363 29 355
Amos 3:14 375 30 363
 412

Ps. 72:5 352 Prov. 4:11 366

17 131 5:18 259, 387
73:25-24 245 6:1 221
74:6 360 9:5 370
12 355 17:17 351
76:12 363 22:18 369
80:2 186 23:12 169
81:8 579 25:20 241
82:1 575 Cant. 2:15 352
89:25 364 5:12 232
92:11 201 6:11 175
95:5 218 7:1 361
102:10 373 Pool. 2:10 239, 387
104:5 383 7:9 374
3^ 116, 380 9:7 389
106:55 354 12 352
107:52 384-85 11:6 358
109:15 371 Lam. 1:2 354
110:5 571 4 204
6 372 16 354-55
112:8 361 2:11 387
118:5 379 Eat. 6:6 121
119:55 547 8:3 375
81, 82 369 Dan. 9:3 182
87 368 Ezra 3:12 354
125 369 9:11 372
155 376 Neh. 5:15 370
126:5 358 8:10 369
127:5 372 13:15 379
129:8 131 I Chron. 9:27 124
159:4 505 11:18 375
141:4 570 13:9 351
Job 1:4 389 18:3 375
5:6 361 24:6 352
5:19 345-46 29:15 356
7:20 355 20 134
12:22 364 II Chron. 6:24 150, 361
16:15 387 27 366
15 580 9:18 352
20:25 372 10:11 379
21:52 363 15:3 214
22:17 355 20:25 376
29:15 116 30:6 145, 359
50:1 388
21 147, 206
25 354-55 Akkadian Texts
53:27 241
34:26 186 PRU III
28 116 RS 15.81 (p. 37) 221
36:3 376 RS 15.114:12-13
25 361 (pp. 112-13) 135
37:3 387 R5 16.353:7-8
Prov. 3:20 356 (p. 113) 179
 413

PEU VI 45:28-29 135

52:1-12 135
78 306-7
79-80 307
Ugaritica V 130 III *5 283
16
* 225
157 II 46' 225
EA 55:42 203
136:26-27 121
147:13-14 177
Alalakh 160-62 307
CT 16 46:160-61 363
TLB 4 35=25, 27 203