adru

This word is found on a silver bowl dated to the late 5^th or early 4^th century BCE. (Neumann 1979a:50) and very likely also on the inscribed pillar of Xanthos dated contextually to shortly after the ascension of Artaxerxes II in 405-404 BCE. and stylistically around 400 BCE. (Borchhardt & Eichner 1997-1999a:19f.).

[D.S.]

acc. sg.	adru	N 323.4 (in a private collection in Istanbul)
		TL 44b.47 (Xanthos)
	aḍṛụ	TL 65.5 (Isinda)

The word adrude (TL 44b.47) has been taken as a verbal form by Meriggi 1963a:4 and Gusmani 1979c:227,Eichner 2005a:31 n. 168. There are two problems with this interpretation: First, the subject would have to be mahãi, which is however nominative plural. Thus, this would create a mismatch in number. Taking mahãi instead as accusative plural is difficult, because the expected form would be *mahãnas (contra Gusmani ibid., Eichner 2005a:31 n. 168). Contra Neumann 2007a:4, the suggested segregation into adru=de is not possible, because the particle =de occurs only in Wackernagel’s position in the sentence (DLL:1). A more promising interpretation is offered by Neumann 2007a:4, who suggests reading adru (a)de with elision, i.e. ‘he made an adru’ (followed by Schürr 2012a:123). The attestation in TL 65.5 dependent on the segmentation of the sequence is very tentative.

[D.S.]

Neumann 2007a:4 opens the possibility of reading an -l- instead of -r-, i.e. adlu. This is phonologically unlikely, because the sequence -dl- in Lycian assimilates to -ll- (see under Lyc. B *kille).

[D.S.]

Neumann 1979a:52 suggests that adru (N 323.4) denotes the object upon which the inscription is carved, i.e. ‘bowl’ (likewise DLL:1) or perhaps simply ‘gift’. The former is more likely, if one adduces the etymological connection with the Luwian root /ad-/ ‘to eat’ (Schürr 2012a:123), i.e. ad-ru ‘that with which one can eat’. Thus, the meaning ‘bowl’ suggested by Neumann becomes very convincing and the sentence can be translated as zzezuḅeje adru ḍḍawu ‘I give the bowl to Zzezube.’. As to the other attestation in TL 44b.47, mahãi could be genitive plural depending on adru ‘bowl’, i.e. me=i mẽ adru (a)de mahãi (TL 44b.47) ‘He made likewise for him (scil. the Storm-god) a bowl of the gods.’. Since the context is about post-war offerings to the Storm-god, this interpretation is contextually supported.

[D.S.]

Based on this sole attestation, it is difficult to posit the exact stem class of the noun. Carruba 1979b:83 and Melchert (DLL:1) assume an a-stem with its late accusative singular in -u (< -ã). Since u-stems in Lycian are transferred to the paradigm of a-stems, one could be dealing instead with a stem adruwa- c. (*adruwã > *adruwu > adru) (Eichner 2005a:31 n. 168). This should be left open until further evidence comes forth.

[D.S.]

For the lemma head see PAnat. *h₁éd-/h₁d-´^(ti).