ahãma-

This lexeme is found in an inscription on the Pajawa sarcophagus, which can be dated to the first half of the 4^th century BCE and maybe more precisely to ten years after the arrival of the Persian satrap Artumpara; cf. under Meaning.

[D.S.]

abl./instr.

ahãmadi

TL 40c.9-10 (Xanthos)

Whether the word is to be taken as an ablative of time or an ablativus causae (thus Neumann 1984b:91 and Gehrisch 2018a:59) depends on the meaning of ahãmadi; see under Meaning.

[D.S.]

The word ahãmadi is found in a dating formula and is modified by the ethnicon arn͂na(s)- ‘Xanthian, of Xanthos’.

m(e)=e=prñnawaxã 10 uhahi : ẓiti : ahãmadi : arñṇadi

‘I built them at the end(?) of the tenth year from/because of the Xanthian ahãma.’

Carruba 1978b:168 n. 20 takes ahãmadi as a participle and suggests that ahãma- means ‘reconstructed, occupied’, but does not expound on his translation. Starke (apud Neumann 1984b:91) suggests that ahãma- reflects a Luwian stem in -man-/-mn-, building abstract nouns, and further takes ahãma- as a cognate of ahata-, which was translated by Neumann as ‘victory’ (now ‘peace, rest’), and assumes the same meaning for ahãma-, i.e. “from the Xanthian victory” (followed by Starke 1990a:297, Gehrisch 2018a:58f.). Melchert (DLL:2) compares Hitt. āšš­-^(mi) ‘to remain, stay’ and suggests the meaning ‘occupation’, though without explaining what it would mean in the context. The word is left untranslated in Schürr 2012b:28.

If we take the context into consideration, the author of the inscription, Pajawa, claims that he has helped the Persian satrap Artumpara to instal his army in Xanthos. Since it is very likely that Artumpara succeeded Arbinas, the last of the Lycian dynastic family of the “Harpagids” who ruled over western Lycia (Keen 1998a:151f.), the dating of the inscription should refer to the Persian occupation led by Artumpara. Therefore, the meaning ‘occupation’ for ahãma-, which would be supported on etymological grounds, fits, whereas the meaning ‘victory’ does not make sense on contextual grounds. If this reasoning is correct, the sentence above would have to be translated as ‘I built them at the end(?) of the tenth year (starting) from the (Persian) occupation of Xanthos.’. Therefore, the ablative ahãmadi arñnadi would have to be taken as an ablative of time.

[D.S.]

Because of the ending -adi (*-éh₂ti), ahãmadi cannot represent a participial ending -me/i-, but must be taken instead as a substantive in -ma-. Starke 1990a:297 analyzes Lyc. ahãmadi as an original man-stem within the frame of his investigation of Luwian stems in -man-/-mn- (followed by Melchert (DLL:2), who however assumes that the suffix was reanalyzed as -ma- c. in Lycian). Martínez Rodríguez 2018a:276-278 follows Starke, but assumes that the suffix remains in Lycian a neuter stem with the ending -ã in the nom./acc. sg. and -adi in the abl./instr. In each case, the possibility of having an original stem in -ma- c. (< *-meh₂-) is omitted from the discussion. The connection with the Lycian word hẽmenedi of uncertain meaning, which Starke 1990a:297 uses as evidence, is actually contradictory on inflectional and morphological grounds.

[D.S.]

1. Ahamãsi (PN) (Lebrun 1990a:167, Neumann 2007a:5)

For the lemma head see PAnat. *(h₁)ass-.