His high position in Hurrian religion reflected the widespread importance of weather gods in northern Mesopotamia and nearby areas, where in contrast with the south agriculture relied primarily on rainfall rather than irrigation.

[19] dIŠKUR is first documented as the representation of the name of a different weather god than Ishkur in the case of Adad in pre-Sargonic texts from Mari, though this scribal convention was unknown further west, in Ebla, in the same period.

[50] Piotr Taracha [de] argues that Teshub was initially not the head of the Hurrian pantheon, and only reached this position as a part of what he understands as a broader phenomenon of growing prominence of weather gods in the early second millennium BCE.

[52] However, Daniel Schwemer [de] argues that Teshub's status as the supreme deity of the Hurrian pantheon belonged to him since the dawn of recorded history, and arguments on the contrary lack solid proof.

[58] In Hittite art, all weather gods, among them Teshub, were depicted similarly, with long hair and beard, dressed in conical headdress decorated with horns, a kilt and shoes with upturned toe area, and with a mace either resting on the shoulder or held in a smiting position.

[69]A single text, KUB 33,89+, preserves a different tradition about Teshub's parentage and refers to the moon god Kušuḫ as his father, but this attestation remains isolated and its broader implications are uncertain.

[128] However, as noted by Gary Beckman, full conflation of deities was rare in Hittite religion, and generally should be considered “late and exceptional”, with individual weather gods maintaining separate identities.

[132][l] While in Hittite texts postdating the introduction of Hurrian deities, Teshub might appear alongside Šuwaliyat,[135] who corresponded to Tašmišu, there is no evidence that a connection existed between this Anatolian god and Tarḫunna in earlier periods.

[162] While no inscriptions dealing with any building projects or votive offerings related to the worship of Teshub can be attributed to local kings, it is presumed they nonetheless engaged in such activities, and the lack of textual evidence might be accidental.

[176] It remained in use in later times, but the main deity of the city was no longer Teshub; the local god was instead identified as Tarḫunz in hieroglyphic Luwian inscriptions, Hadad in Aramaic texts, and Adad in Akkadian ones from both Babylonia and Assyria.

[179] Sources from Kizzuwatna often link him with ḫamri ((é)ḫa-am-ri), a type of buildings originally associated with oath-taking and judicial procedures in Upper Mesopotamia and in the north of Babylonia, as already attested in the early second millennium BCE.

[183] A festival meant to guarantee the well-being of the royal couple dedicated to the gods of Kummanni, including “Teshub Manuzzi”, was later celebrated in the Hittite Empire, but according to copies from the times of Puduḫepa the instructions were passed down from Kizzuwatna.

[112] His hypostases associated with them are all listed among the witnesses in a treaty of king Shattiwaza[186][n] The enumeration of these manifestations, as well as various local deities, had a political dimension, and was meant to help with defining the area regarded as the core territory of the kingdom.

[195] Lluís Feliu outright rejects the possibility that a Hurrian deity is meant and instead interprets it as a reference of a hypostasis of Dagan analogous to dKUR en ḫa-ar-ri, attested in texts from Emar.

[59] Taracha assumes a further Hittite hypostasis of Teshub was the weather god “of the camp” (KARAŠ),[215] who he interprets as his aspect as the king's tutelary deity in war due to his apparent association with Zitḫariya [de], well attested in such a role.

[58] Teshub is among Hurrian deities identified on the reliefs from the Yazılıkaya sanctuary, the central of which (42) depicts him standing on the napes of two mountain gods, alongside his family: Ḫepat (43), Šarruma (44), Allanzu (45) and Kunzišalli (46).

[145] Erik van Dongen also argues that the old label needs to be reconsidered and acknowledges Teshub, rather than Kumarbi, as its primary character, though he considers a title more broadly referring to kingship in heaven rather than to a singular deity to be preferable.

[66] Both of the main participants in the conflict are aided by various allies, with Teshub being backed chiefly by figures associated with the sky, for example Šauška, Šimige, Kušuḫ, Ḫepat, Takitu, Tašmišu and Aštabi, and Kumarbi with these dwelling in the underworld[246] or the sea.

[247] Their plots do not reflect Hittite tradition, but rather the beliefs of Hurrians inhabiting the north of Syria and Mesopotamia, as indicated by their geographic setting, with direct references made to locations such as Tigris, Mukish or Mount Hazzi.

[276] In a further preserved passage someone informs Ea about Teshub's curse; in the past it has been suggested that this deity, whose name is heavily damaged, is the poorly known possibly Hattian goddess Tauri, but this is now considered implausible.

[283] On the basis of identification of LAMMA as Karhuha Archi proposes that the myth was originally composed in Carchemish during a period of Mitanni domination under the influence of other narratives today considered to be parts of the Kumarbi Cycle, and that while its fragmentary preservation makes interpretation difficult, Teshub's victory over the local god might have reflected the acceptance of supremacy of said dynasty.

[297]Kumarbi is the next to be berated, and apparently takes offense in it, which according to Harry A. Hoffner might mark the point at which the two, portrayed as allies in earlier sections of the cycle, start to become estranged, which ultimately culminates in Ea advising Teshub instead in the Song of Ullikummi.

[311] Presumably the broken beginning of the second tablet contained an explanation of this misunderstanding, as in the next surviving passage Teshub reacts to the bad news and reassures the sun god that he can sit down and eat and drink wine now.

[309] However, after she dresses up, adorns her hair with seashells and starts signing, a wave informs her that the target is deaf, blind and unfeeling, which makes him immune to any such efforts, and suggests that she should instead try to get Teshub to confront him as soon as possible, as he will only continue to grow more dangerous.

[309] Other gods, including Aštabi, attempt to fight Ullikummi, but he continues to grow and eventually blocks the gates of Kumme, trapping Teshub's wife Ḫepat inside, unable to find out what happened to him.

[337] For example, driving the primeval deities into the underworld is also mentioned in a passage from a purification ritual (KBo 10.45 + ABoT 2.30), which also states that the weather god was responsible for establishing the tradition according to which birds, rather than cattle or sheep, were seen as an appropriate offering for them.

[302] Parallels between the myths about Teshub's struggle for kingship and between motifs from Greek mythology have been pointed out, with his ascent to the position of the head of the pantheon compared to the history of Zeus presented in Hesiod’s Theogony.

[266] According to Amir Gilan, derivatives of certain elements of the myths about Teshub might have reached Greece through the kingdom of Walistin, which retained aspects of earlier theology of Aleppo in the first millennium BCE, as indicated for example by inscriptions from Arsuz.

[369] In her similarly critical evaluation of Haas’ proposal, von Dassow calls his interpretation of the text “incoherent” and highlights that to justify it, he attempted inserting hypothetical elements not present in the actual narrative into it, such as the motif of food from the underworld, consuming which results in imprisonment there.

[38] Beckman notes that while full translation and interpretation of this text is presently not possible, Teshub is seemingly “ubiquitous” in it, which can be contrasted with both the Akkadian original and the Hittite adaptation, where the respective weather deities play no significant role.