*h₂esseh₂-

1. ḫaššanitt(i)-

This word is found in a dedicatory inscription datable to the reign of Arbinas at the beginning of 4^th c. BCE.

[D.S.]

For the restoration of N 325.12, see Melchert (DLL:80) and Schürr 2008a:179.

[D.S.]

The word xaha- was equated etymologically with Hitt. ḫaššā- c. ‘hearth’ by Laroche 1979c:64 (followed by Bousquet 1992a:184, Melchert (DLL:80), Hajnal 1994a:147, Rieken 1999a:246f., Schürr 2008a:179). Bousquet 1992a:184 explains that the sentence me=ẽne=hm̃mẽti xahadi refers to the installation of the hearth (altar) together with the statue of Arbinas, mentioned in the preceding sentence (line 3). For translations of the passage, cf. Gehrisch 2018a:199 and Sasseville 2021a:402. Overall, the strong etymological approach can be supported also from the contextual perspective.

[D.S.]

This word [k]asa- is not securely attested as such (see under Graphic Features), but it is found in a dedicatory inscription dated to the 12^th year of the reign of Alexander The Great, i.e. 323-322 BCE; see Buckler 1924a:71, Gérard 2005a:20.

[D.S.]

Buckler 1924a:71 observes that the first letter a in asaãν opens the line due to damage of the stone, thus assuming that the hole was already there when the inscription was made. Later, Gusmani 1964a:267 n. 50 points out that a letter could be missing before [?]asaãν (thus also Melchert 2001e, and Yakubovich; see Lyd. asa-). We argue under Meaning that the letter to be restored could be ḳ^?, yielding ḳ^?asaãν, although it must be made clear that a new collation of the inscription is necessary. Differently, Schürr 2000a:117 n. 10 emends to asf^!ãν without any justification, which is unmotivated and therefore not accepted.

[D.S.]

The syntactic role of the word [.]asaãν in its sentence is clear. It is the direct object of the verb pill ‘he gave’, and it is given to the person referenced by the enclitic pronoun =mλ ‘him’, which could either refer to the Greek god Zeus or to Timles, the dedicator. Gusmani 1960a:283 assumes that the pronoun refers to the dedicator and that Zeus is the subject. Therefore, he translates [.]asaãν with ‘favor’, i.e. ‘(Zeus) gave favor to him (scil. Timles) (thus also Gusmani 1964a:66, followed by Gérard 2005a:127). Differently, Hajnal 2004a:198 equates Lyd. asaãν etymologically with Hitt. ḫaššā- c. ‘hearth’ and Lyc. xaha- ‘hearth (altar)’ and then takes Timles as the subject of the verb pill ‘he gave’ and Zeus as the indirect object. Therefore, he suggests that a hearth altar was dedicated by Timles to Zeus and translates: “He gave him an altar’. Due to recent progress in Lydian phonology, we would expect the Lydian cognate of the word for ‘hearth’ to begin with the letter k (see Oettinger 2017f, Oettinger 2021a). Therefore, if the word is indeed asaãν and not [.]asaãν, the etymological equation with Hitt. ḫaššā- c. ‘hearth’ and Lyc. xaha- ‘hearth (altar)’ must be rejected. However, it has been noticed that the presence of another letter is expected before the initial a of asaãν, and the photo given in Buckler 1924a allows us to see some traces of a sign in spite of the damage to the stone. With Hajnal’s etymological connection in mind, we can tentatively read the sign ḳ^?, i.e. ḳ^?asaãν, which would give us the perfect cognate of Hitt. ḫaššā- c. and Lyc. xaha-, including the stem in *-eh₂- (Lyd. -ãν, Melchert 1994a:369), as pointed out by Hajnal 2004a:197f. In sum, the contextual interpretation of Hajnal is accept here.

[D.S.]

The lexeme [k]asa- is an oxytone a-stem, which is made clear by the geminate spelling of the -aã-, as well as by the nasalization of the vowel -ã- (Melchert 1994a:369, Hajnal 2004a:198).

[D.S.]

HW² Ḫ:400-409.