The inscription on a pithos handle from Kämid el-Löz/Kumidi, KTU 6.67, reads simply ymn. The orthography, particularly the M, has close affinities to the orthography of texts written in the short cuneiform alphabet. As Pardee, 60, warns us, orthography alone does not indicate that a text is in this reduced alphabet. KTU 5.9 contains forms of B and D that look like short alphabet forms but as Pardee, says, the “rest of the text is “indubitably written in the long alphabet.”
The meaning of ymn here is not certain. As a common noun it means “right” or “right hand,” and there could have conceivably been another vessel with šm’l on its handle.
But, at Ugarit, ymn is a personal name; note bn ymn in KTU 4.64 iv:9, 4.69 ii:3 and 4.123:4 and ymn alone as a certain PN in KTU 4.277 i:5 and 5.1:3 (a list of PNs) and perhaps in other less clear contexts. And note the Hebrew names ימין and ימנה. There may also be an Amorite PN, Ya-ma-nu-um from somewhere. I need to track down an old book by Bauer to get the reference and check it out.
But Dietrich and Loretz, 228-30, suggest that in KTU 6.67 ymn stands for the Yamanu, “Cyprus.” I’d really like this to be a proper name but I worry that Dietrich and Loretz are correct.
As you can see, today I’m tightly focused on the most important questions of our age. Actually, this is a small part of a footnote to a footnote to a paper on my reading of the Tiryns ivory inscription that I hope to complete next week.
Dietrich Manfried and Oswald Loretz, Die Keilalphabete: Die phönizish-kanaanäischen und altarabishen Alpabete in Urgarit, Abhandlungen zur Alt-Syrien Palästinas (ALASP 1; Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 1988)
Padree, Dennis (2003.2004): “Review of Josef Tropper. Ugaritische Grammatik. 1056 pp. Münster, Ugarit-Verlag, 2000. (Alter Orient und Altes Testament 273).“ Archiv für Orientforschung 50 (2003/2004), 1-404 (online version).