Article

Studies in Neo-Babylonian Onomastics: the use of the sign DÙ

---

Abstract

One of the readings of the Sumerogram DU is bane (to create), but the proper transcription is not always clear. Especially when it turns up in combination with other bivalent signs, the reading of names may be ambiguous.This article will treat the following questions :How should we read the sign DU in different names?Was DU-a(-a(-a) for Ibnaja and DU-ia for Banija used consistently?Were Banija, Ibnaja and Tabnea hypocoristics and, if so, for what types of names?Are there clear rules how to read sentence-type names that use logograms only? The example of DN-DU-SES/URU.It is concluded that Neo-Babylonian names with the element DU were written very consistently. DU-a(-a(-a)) only designated Ibnaja, DU-ia only designated Banija and DU was never used to transcribe tabni. Hypocoristics were used alternately with the long name but this was rare. DU-a(-a(-a)) could be a hypocoristic of DN-ibni and Ibni-DN, DU-ia could replace DN-bani-zeri and DN-bani-ahi, and Tabnea could be a hypocoristic of DN-tabni-usur. The transcription of (Ea-)DU-es-DINGIR(.MES) should be (Ea-)Epeg-ili (Ea,) artisan/sorcerer among/of the gods, not (Ea-)Eppes-ili. DN-DU-SES is sometimes written DN-ba-ni-SES or DN-DU-a-hi or could be shortened to Banija. Therefore, DN-DU-SES must be read DN-bani-ahi and not DN-tabni-usur.

How to Cite:

Thissen, C., (2014) “Studies in Neo-Babylonian Onomastics: the use of the sign DÙ”, Akkadica 135(2), 145–171. doi: https://doi.org/10.21825/akkadica.99647

Rights: © The author