Urkesh toponomastics

 updated as of June 12, 2002

Urkeš

t1                        For the reading Urkeš rather than Urkiš, see Buccellati and Kelly-Buccellati 1995/96, “Storehouse”, p. 1, n. 1; Buccellati and Kelly-Buccellati 1996, “King”, pp. 69-71.

                            Contrary to what might seem at first, the Old Babylonian writing Ur-gi-iš.KI confirms the reading Urkeš rather than Urkiš. The reason is that in Hurrian orthography (as known from the Mittani letter found at Amarna) the two signs KI / GI render the phonemic opposition /Ki/~ /Ke/ (see Giorgeri 2000, “Schizzo”, p. 181 and 182). Accordingly, the OB writing of the name should be transliterated Ur-ke₂-eš₁₅-KI. And note that in the Urbana itinerary the name is written Ur-ge-eš (Goetze 1953, “Itinerary”, p. 53f.).  This implies that even in letters written in Akkadian, the OB scribes respected Hurrian conventions when referring to Urkesh.