*qutbe

Reconstructed from a personal name attested as a graffito in Egypt (the tomb of Montuemhat in Thebes) from around the mid-7^th c. BCE (during the rule of Psammetichus I).

[Zs.S.]

nom. sg.

qutbe

E.Th 8

The attestation follows Adiego 2007a:408, but no photograph is available for checking since the graffito has never been published properly. On an alternative reading see the criticism in Schürr 2010c:195 with refs. Schürr also suggests that the acephalic word ]tbeś in C.Si 1 (perhaps a personal name in genitive, Adiego 2007a:441) is to be restored as [q]tbeś, which is possible, but cannot be proved. This name is known also in Greek transmission as Κυατβης (Adiego 1994a:37, Adiego 2007a:408, for the sources see Zgusta 1964a:260 §765; Blümel 1992a:18; LGPN V.B:249; Valério’s suggestion, Κοτοβηους “might be a variant” [Valério 2015a:344 n. 65] is both formally and geographically [the name is attested in Lydia] problematic).

[Zs.S.]

Since the entire graffito consists of this single word, Adiego’s identification as a personal name (Adiego 1994a:37, Adiego 2007a:408), which is generally accepted (Schürr 2010c:195 and Valério 2015a:344 n. 65), is plausible. Schürr 2010c:195 connects this name to *qtblem and qtblo (see s.vv.), without elaborating the details. If this connection is correct, then qutbe should also be included in this dictionary as it would therefore be built upon a Carian word. The problem is threefold: First, although *qtblem and qtblo received a semantically fitting etymology as ‘invigorating’ and ‘alive’ (see the details s.vv.) as alleged cognates of Cuneiform Luwian ḫuitwal(i)- ‘alive, living’, which would also fit here semantically, their connection with this Luwian word is phonologically problematic as it would have led to forms with *-db-.

Second, if Κυατβης is indeed its equivalent in Greek transmission, then the connection with Cuneiform Luwian ḫuitwal(i)- <*H^wedwól(i)- (see s.v.) is phonologically problematic also due to the implied *e > a change, which is not paralleled (yet) in Carian. One could, however, solve this problem with an o-grade nomen agentis <*H^wodwó- ‘the living one’ (cf. Greek οὖρος ‘Hüter’ <*sor-wó-, Oettinger 2017c:253 with ref.; on the problem of *o > a in Carian see the remarks s.v. *qtblem).

Third, the final [e] remains unclear in all proposals.

All in all, a connection to *qtblem and qtblo is possible, but cannot be proved and even if this is correct, the uncertain etymology of these words does not allow one to determine the meaning of qutbe.

[Zs.S.]

Last updated: 24 November 2020