/hantil(i)-/

This lexeme is attested 15 times in the HLuw. corpus and has a geographically wide distribution, ranging from the centre of the old Hittite area around Hattusa, to Amuq in the south, and Commagene in the east. The relevant inscriptions date to various points throughout the entire HLuw. period between approx. 1200 and the early 7^th century BCE.

[AH.B.]

Another possible attestation of the present lemma is identified by van Quickelberghe 2013a:260f. in KARAHÖYÜK, §16, whose context he reads as la/i/u-kar-ma(URBS) FRONS tal-pi-i(a)(URBS) with FRONS as an independent word, instead of regarding it as part of the next toponym as Hawkins 2000a:290, 294, who reads la/i/u-kar-ma(URBS) FRONS.*282-pi-i(a)(URBS). As the sign FRONS is but a tentative reading for the passage, which is quite worn and features a number of idiosyncrasies, van Quickelberghe’s interpretation is not followed here, although it remains a possibility.

[AH.B.]

The meaning of the present lexeme was elucidated quite early, mainly because of its evident relation to /hant(a)-/ ‘face’ and its CLuw. full cognate ḫantil(i)- ‘first’, for which see already Meriggi 1957a:222 and Laroche 1959a:40. However, its use in the bilingual inscription in KARATEPE proved less enlightening at first, because the HLuw. version does not fully match the Phoenician version of the text in those passages and the signs were ill understood.To get an impression of the difficulties scholars faced, see the now outdated translations and commentaries in Bossert 1950a:33 and Bossert 1953a:322f. In addition to that, the attestations of /hantil(i)-/ are found mostly in partially damaged contexts that do not lend themselves to illustrating its semantics. However, the passage of TOPADA, §3 is well-suited to illuminate its meaning for putting it into contrast with another adjective: wa/i-mu pa+ra/i-za_x-ta_x(URBS) 8 REX-ti-sa POST+ra/i-zi/a FRONS-la/i/u-zi/a-ha x[...?](-)sa-ta_x, i.e. /wa=mu Parzanta 8 hantawattis apparinzi hantilinzi=ha [...] asanta/ ‘In the city Parzanta, eight kings, The HLuw. form is a singular, which is expected after all numerals above ‘four’, see Bauer 2014a:88-100. lesser and more important, were [hostile] to me’ (cf. Hawkins 2000a:455). This wording, as Hawkins 1975a:150 points out, mimics the antonymous pair of Hittite ḫantezzi- ‘first’ and appezzi- ‘last, backmost’, for which see e.g. EDHIL:264. That Luw. /hantil(i)-/ corresponds to Hittite ḫantezzi- was already pointed out by van [1852]van Brock 1962a:121. The meaning assignment can therefore be regarded as certain.

[AH.B.]

An adjective, the form is derived with the suffix /-il(i)-/, either directly from the noun /hant(a)-/ ‘face’ or from the denominal adjective /hanti(ya)-/ ‘first’, the latter of which is more likely in semantic terms. The suffix is subject to i-mutation, as is common for adjectives and which in the case of /-il(i)-/ probably led to their dethematicisation, see Melchert 2001b:266f.

[AH.B.]

1. /hantili/

The attestations of the adjective are found mostly in birth incantations. The earliest copies show MS, but king Ḫantili- belongs to the dynasty of the OH kingdom, thus attesting to the word for that period.

[E.R.]

Restoration and analysis of [ḫa^?-an^?-t]i-la-za-aš=pa=aš in KUB 35.123 iv 2’ are only tentative. The reading is supported by another occurrence of ḫantil(i)- a few lines further on. The spelling -za-aš-pa-aš represents the final consonant cluster of the dat./loc. pl. /hantilants/ with enclitic particles =pa=aš, which parallels that of the dat./loc. pl. p[ár]-na-an-za-aš-pa /parnants=pa/, where the sibilant is repeated before the initial stop of the clitic (see Starke 1990a:44). For the frequent omission of the nasal before consonants, cf. Melchert 2003b:182.

[E.R.]

None of the fragmentary contexts allow a semantic interpretation of the lexeme, but both the word formation and the equation with HLuw. FRONS-li- ‘first’ leave no doubt that its meaning is ‘foremost, first’ (see already Meriggi 1975a:222 in spite of the outdated morphological analysis; accepted in Laroche 1959a:40, HW 2nd ed.:384, CLL:53, HED Ḫ:111, HEG A-K:150, Tischler 2008a:39, Starke 1990a:129, EDHIL:288). Meriggi 1975a:222 also recognized the Luwian origin of the name of the OH king Ḫantili- (Laroche 1966a:no. 275).

[E.R.]

The forms of the adjective clearly point to a stem in -C(i)-, “halbkonsonantisch” according to Starke’s terminology. As to the suffix, however, opinions differ. While Starke 1990a:129, 345 starts from ḫantiya- > ḫanti- and assumes that ḫanti- was suffixed with -al-, Melchert 2001b:266 reconstructs *-ilo-. Rieken 1996a:292 and Melchert 2003b:195 posit -il(i)- as the suffix, implicitly deriving the word from the root noun ḫant-. Differently, Eichner 1992a:44f. analyses ḫanteli- as ḫante- (< dat./loc. sg. *h₂n̥téi̯) + suffix -li-. None of the derivations can be excluded on formal grounds, but parallelism with *šar-la/i- ‘upper, superior’ (← adverb *ser ‘above’) suggests that the adverb ḫanti lies at the basis of ḫantil(i)-. The adjective was derived by suffixation of *-lo- > -la- and underwent apocope of its final syllable in the neuter nom./acc. sg. (Melchert 2001b:266; for *-ílom and *-úlom > -il and -ul, see Rieken 2008a).

[E.R.]

For the lemma head see PAnat. *Hant-.