[29] According to Bezold's investigation, _Verbalsuffixformen als Alterskriterien babylonisch-assyrischer Inschriften_ (Heidelberg Akad. d. Wiss., Philos.-Histor. Klasse, 1910, 9te Abhandlung), the bulk of the tablets in Ashurbanapal's library are copies of originals dating from about 1500 B.C. It does not follow, however, that all the copies date from originals of the same period. Bezold reaches the conclusion on the basis of various forms for verbal suffixes, that the fragments from the Ashurbanapal Library actually date from three distinct periods ranging from before c. 1450 to c. 700 B.C. [30] "Before thou comest from the mountain, Gilgamesh in Erech will see thy dreams," after which the dreams are recounted by the woman to Enkidu. The expression "thy dreams" means here "dreams about thee." (Tablet I, 5, 23-24). [31] Lines 100-101. [32] In a paper read before the American Oriental Society at New Haven, April 4, 1918. [33] See the commentary to col. 4 of the Yale tablet for further details. [34] This is no doubt the correct reading of the three signs which used to be read Iz-tu-bar or Gish-du-bar. The first sign has commonly the value Gish, the second can be read Gin or Gi (Brünnow No. 11900) and the third Mash as well as Bar. See Ungnad in Ungnad-Gressmann, _Das Gilgamesch-Epos_, p. 76, and Poebel, _Historical and Grammatical Texts_, p. 123. [35] So also in Sumerian (Zimmern, _Sumerische Kultlieder aus altbabylonischer Zeit_, No. 196, rev. 14 and 16.) [36] The sign used, LUM (Brünnow No. 11183), could have the value hu as well as hum. [37] The addition "father-in-law of Moses" to the name Hobab b. Re'uel in this passage must refer to Re'uel, and not to Hobab. In Judges 4, 11, the gloss "of the Bene Hobab, the father-in-law of Moses" must be separated into two: (1) "Bene Hobab," and (2) "father-in-law of Moses." The latter addition rests on an erroneous tradition, or is intended as a brief reminder that Hobab is identical with the son of Re'uel. [38] See his _List of Personal Names from the Temple School of Nippur_, p. 122. _Hu-um-ba-bi-tu_ and _si-kin hu-wa-wa_ also occur in Omen Texts (_CT_ XXVII, 4, 8-9 = Pl. 3, 17 = Pl. 6, 3-4 = _CT_ XXVIII, 14, 12). The contrast to _huwawa_ is _ligru_, "dwarf" (_CT_ XXVII, 4, 12 and 14 = Pl. 6, 7.9 = Pl. 3, 19). See Jastrow, _Religion Babyloniens und Assyriens_, II, p. 913, Note 7. Huwawa, therefore, has the force of "monster." [39] Ungnad-Gressmann, _Das Gilgamesch-Epos_, p. 111 _seq._ [40] Ungnad, 1. c. p. 77, called attention to this name, but failed to draw the conclusion that Hu(m)baba therefore belongs to the West and not to the East. [41] First pointed out by Ungnad in _OLZ_ 1910, p. 306, on the basis of _CT_ XVIII, 30, 10, where En-gi-dú appears in the column furnishing _phonetic_ readings. [42] See Clay _Amurru_, pp. 74, 129, etc. [43] Tablet I, 2, 39-40; 3, 6-7 and 33-34; 4, 3-4.