orša(n)

Hapax on a votive object from Egypt of unknown provenance, dated to the first Persian rule of Egypt, i.e. last quarter of the 6th c. – 5th c. (O. Masson 1976a:83).

[Zs.S.]

nom.-acc. sg.? n.

orša(n)

E.xx 7

The attestation follows Adiego 2007a:391 (no photograph of this part of the inscription is available). On its exact grammatical category and form see the discussion under Meaning.

[Zs.S.]

There is general agreement that this word represents the direct object of its inscription (Hajnal 1997b:154; Adiego 1998b:19 [he did not add any commentary to this word in his glossary [Adiego 2007a:391] and in his detailed discussion of the inscription [Adiego 2019a:34–38]]; Melchert 2010f:182; Simon 2020d:407) and since we are dealing with a votive inscription written on the base of a lion-shaped votive object, it is logical to assume that it refers to the votive object itself. Accordingly, Melchert 2010f:182 cautiously assumed a nom.-acc. pl. n. (implying more than one votive object or a collective form) and Simon 2020d:407 a nom.-acc. sg. n. (also Hajnal 1997b:154 assumed an acc. sg., but his cautious derivation of the ending -a from *-ān is not lautgesetzlich, as pointed out by Simon 2020d:407 and incompatible with the acc. sg. c. ending -n). Melchert’s solution results from the generally assumed segmentation as orša. However, as Simon 2020d:407 pointed out, this segmentation is based on the circumstance that orša and the following word, nu (see s.v.), are written on different sides of the base, but this break does not necessarily coincide with word boundaries. Therefore, he suggested to segment oršanu as oršan u with the demonstrative pronoun u (see s.v.), which would provide a morphologically regular nom.-acc. sg. n., and to translate oršan as ‘lion’. The problem is that we do not know the original number of the votive objects and thus, a plural or collective interpretation cannot be excluded and it is also not entirely certain that the word refers precisely to the votive object or if it is just a general reference, i.e. meaning something like ‘(votive) object’, ‘offering’ or similar.

[Zs.S.]

No etymology can currently be given (although orša(n) may continue *ars-, the similarity to Proto-Turkic *arslan ‘lion’, probably an internal derivation from *ars- [for further analysis see Stachowski 2019a:64 with refs.], must be pure coincidence considering the immense chronological and geographical distance).

[Zs.S.]