DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.57036#0041
28
Bannlösung (nam-erim-bür-ru-da)
2.1. The ‘Guide’to the Performance of the Healing Procedure
entitled nam-erim-bür-ru-da (Texts nos. 1-2)
This research began with the discovery of an astoundingly well-
preserved but still unpublished clay tablet from the holdings of
the Assyrian healers (VAT 13760. here Text no. 1; see Fig. 3).
It contains the largely intact instructions for the execution of an
elaborate curative treatment aiming to remove the malcficcnt
power of a “ban” (mänütu) imposed by the gods upon an
individual, and to check and rescind the verdict of inflicting a
ban upon an individual, in order that a therapy of the physical
infirmity wreaked by the ban might achieve the intended
enduring effect.
Fig. 3 ‘Guide' to the perfonnance of a healing treatment termed
"Dispelling of a Ban” (VAT 13760. rev.; Photo from the Assur
Research Centre. Heidelberg)
In accordance with the conventions of the Feld, such a
Compilation would be designated a ‘ritual tablet’ (‘Ritualtafel’).
In the present context. this term may nevertheless be seen to be
a misnomer. It is not employed in what follows as it completely
fails to encompass the curative-therapeutic character of the
tractate. Instead of ‘ritual tablet’. reference will be made to the
‘guide’ to a curative treatment.
As is recorded on this tablet. the healer Kisir-Assur had
hastily copied the ‘guide’ from an earlier exemplar. in order to
prepare himself for the performance of the treatment therein
described. After closer inspection of the tablet. it became clear
that an additional example of this ‘guide’ was stored within
the healers’ domicile. In tum. this tablet fragment (LKA 150 =
VAT 13685; here Text no. 2). already published in cuneiform
facsimile in 1953 but never comprehensively studied. is heavily
damaged. Prior to the discovery of a new. far better preserved
duplicate (Text no. 1). it had been impossible to deduce as to for
what the treatment described in the latter text had been intended.
While the opening lines and introductory remarks are not
extant in either of the two textual witnesses. the content of the
rediscovered ‘guide’ leaves scarce doubt that presented herein
were the instructions for the healing procedure classificd within
the healer’s Curriculum under the designation nam-erim-bür-
ru-da.19
The utility of the ‘guide’ rested in its provisioning of the
healer on a single tablet. and thereby in precious little space.
with a swift overview of the course of this complex treatment;
this could extend over multiple days from initial preparations to
completion. and was to be perfbrmed at multiple venues. So as
to yield a better overview. the sections corresponding within the
‘guide’ to the numerous individual phases of the ban dispelling
procedure are separated from one anotherby means of horizontal
lines.
From the ancient Near Eastem healer’s standpoint. a prayer
to be intoned or the recitation of an incantation generally formed
the distinguishing element of such a Segment of treatment. even
though. from our own perspective, this would ratherbe expected
to have been informed by the spccific actions or healing
measures. For this reason. the dicenda occupy centre stage within
the ‘guide’. This notwithstanding. and very much in contrast to
other forms of transmission. these are never cited in full, but
rather only by means of their opening words. this resulting from
the paucity of space. The healers had developed correspondingly
extensive binding conventions so that a text to be discussed was
always named with the same standardised incipit. Moreover.
such an incipit conveyed even more far-reaching information
unrecognisable upon Erst glance. Every incipit was. in fact.
invariably bound to a highly spccific Situation, and. for the most
part. also to very precise treatments or remedial measures. Among
fully trained healers. this context would be so implicit that the
naming of an incipit sufficed to refer to the actions or measures
intended to accompany the recitation. The corresponding healing
instructions could accordingly be confined to a bare minimum.
or even entirely omitted.20
It swiftly became evident that various of the prayers and
incantations prescribed for recitation in the ‘guide’ were already
known. Many of the prayers published in 1956 by Erica Reiner
as the so-called lipsur litanies proved to be dicenda with a place
within the curative treatment termed nam-erim-bür-ru-da.
Within these litanies. the gods are repeatedly invoked in long
and initially seemingly monotonous sequences to ‘‘dispel (ill)”.21
19 The tablet's incipit would have been mämita ana pasäri, reflecting thereby
the gloss with which Kisir-Nabü had adomed the entry for nam-erim-
bür-ru-da inKAR44. obv. 12.
20 On this. see also S. M. Maul. BaF 18. 170 and 203-216.
21 See E. Reiner. JNES 15. 129-149 and. here the texts. nos. 26-37.
Nevertheless. no intimation could be found that the prayers classified by
E. Reiner as lipsur litany Type II 2 (K 2096 + K 13246; K 11631 and
K 6308: see ibid.. 144-146) are also to be ascribed to the procedure for
dispelling a ban. Strikingly. none of the three textual witnesses display the
mbric ka-inim-ma nam-erim-bür-ru-da-käm.
Bannlösung (nam-erim-bür-ru-da)
2.1. The ‘Guide’to the Performance of the Healing Procedure
entitled nam-erim-bür-ru-da (Texts nos. 1-2)
This research began with the discovery of an astoundingly well-
preserved but still unpublished clay tablet from the holdings of
the Assyrian healers (VAT 13760. here Text no. 1; see Fig. 3).
It contains the largely intact instructions for the execution of an
elaborate curative treatment aiming to remove the malcficcnt
power of a “ban” (mänütu) imposed by the gods upon an
individual, and to check and rescind the verdict of inflicting a
ban upon an individual, in order that a therapy of the physical
infirmity wreaked by the ban might achieve the intended
enduring effect.
Fig. 3 ‘Guide' to the perfonnance of a healing treatment termed
"Dispelling of a Ban” (VAT 13760. rev.; Photo from the Assur
Research Centre. Heidelberg)
In accordance with the conventions of the Feld, such a
Compilation would be designated a ‘ritual tablet’ (‘Ritualtafel’).
In the present context. this term may nevertheless be seen to be
a misnomer. It is not employed in what follows as it completely
fails to encompass the curative-therapeutic character of the
tractate. Instead of ‘ritual tablet’. reference will be made to the
‘guide’ to a curative treatment.
As is recorded on this tablet. the healer Kisir-Assur had
hastily copied the ‘guide’ from an earlier exemplar. in order to
prepare himself for the performance of the treatment therein
described. After closer inspection of the tablet. it became clear
that an additional example of this ‘guide’ was stored within
the healers’ domicile. In tum. this tablet fragment (LKA 150 =
VAT 13685; here Text no. 2). already published in cuneiform
facsimile in 1953 but never comprehensively studied. is heavily
damaged. Prior to the discovery of a new. far better preserved
duplicate (Text no. 1). it had been impossible to deduce as to for
what the treatment described in the latter text had been intended.
While the opening lines and introductory remarks are not
extant in either of the two textual witnesses. the content of the
rediscovered ‘guide’ leaves scarce doubt that presented herein
were the instructions for the healing procedure classificd within
the healer’s Curriculum under the designation nam-erim-bür-
ru-da.19
The utility of the ‘guide’ rested in its provisioning of the
healer on a single tablet. and thereby in precious little space.
with a swift overview of the course of this complex treatment;
this could extend over multiple days from initial preparations to
completion. and was to be perfbrmed at multiple venues. So as
to yield a better overview. the sections corresponding within the
‘guide’ to the numerous individual phases of the ban dispelling
procedure are separated from one anotherby means of horizontal
lines.
From the ancient Near Eastem healer’s standpoint. a prayer
to be intoned or the recitation of an incantation generally formed
the distinguishing element of such a Segment of treatment. even
though. from our own perspective, this would ratherbe expected
to have been informed by the spccific actions or healing
measures. For this reason. the dicenda occupy centre stage within
the ‘guide’. This notwithstanding. and very much in contrast to
other forms of transmission. these are never cited in full, but
rather only by means of their opening words. this resulting from
the paucity of space. The healers had developed correspondingly
extensive binding conventions so that a text to be discussed was
always named with the same standardised incipit. Moreover.
such an incipit conveyed even more far-reaching information
unrecognisable upon Erst glance. Every incipit was. in fact.
invariably bound to a highly spccific Situation, and. for the most
part. also to very precise treatments or remedial measures. Among
fully trained healers. this context would be so implicit that the
naming of an incipit sufficed to refer to the actions or measures
intended to accompany the recitation. The corresponding healing
instructions could accordingly be confined to a bare minimum.
or even entirely omitted.20
It swiftly became evident that various of the prayers and
incantations prescribed for recitation in the ‘guide’ were already
known. Many of the prayers published in 1956 by Erica Reiner
as the so-called lipsur litanies proved to be dicenda with a place
within the curative treatment termed nam-erim-bür-ru-da.
Within these litanies. the gods are repeatedly invoked in long
and initially seemingly monotonous sequences to ‘‘dispel (ill)”.21
19 The tablet's incipit would have been mämita ana pasäri, reflecting thereby
the gloss with which Kisir-Nabü had adomed the entry for nam-erim-
bür-ru-da inKAR44. obv. 12.
20 On this. see also S. M. Maul. BaF 18. 170 and 203-216.
21 See E. Reiner. JNES 15. 129-149 and. here the texts. nos. 26-37.
Nevertheless. no intimation could be found that the prayers classified by
E. Reiner as lipsur litany Type II 2 (K 2096 + K 13246; K 11631 and
K 6308: see ibid.. 144-146) are also to be ascribed to the procedure for
dispelling a ban. Strikingly. none of the three textual witnesses display the
mbric ka-inim-ma nam-erim-bür-ru-da-käm.