ḫap(a)i-^(di)

The attestations of this verb are broadly strewn, both chronologically, starting from MS texts, and regarding text types, mostly in the Kuwattalla ritual tradition, but also in a mythological incantation and a letter.

[E.R.]

1sg. pres. ind. act.	ḫa-pí-ú-i	KBo 8.17, 8’	(CTH 769, NS)
3sg. pres. ind. act.	ḫa-a-pí-ti	KBo 13.262, 5´	(CTH 761, NS)
	ḫa-˹pí˺-ti	KUB 32.9 obv. 7	(CTH 761, MS)
	˹ḫa˺-pí-ti	KBo 29.7, 2’	(CTH 761, MS?)
3pl. pres. ind. act.	[ḫa-pa-i]n-ti	KUB 35.45 iii 10’	(CTH 760, NS)
	ḫa-p[a-in-ti]	KUB 35.48 iii 11’	(CTH 760, NS)
3sg. pret. ind. act.	[ḫ]a-pí-ta	KUB 35.95, 5´	(CTH 766, N/A)
	˹ḫa-pí˺-ta	KUB 35.105 i 1’	(CTH 770, NS)
3pl. pret. ind. act.	ḫa-pa-i-in-[ta]	KBo 29.25 ii? 12’	(CTH 764, MS)
3pl. impv. act.	ḫa-pa-a-in-du	KUB 35.104, 10’	(CTH 758, MS)

Checked against the photographs in the Mainzer Fotoarchiv. – For restoration of [ḫa-pa-i]n-ti at KUB 35.45 iii 10’, see Melchert 1988b:239 n. 39 (contra Starke 1985b:145).

[E.R.]

While Laroche (DLL:40) and Oettinger 1979a:563 refrained from assigning any meaning, Starke 1990a:514,  567 identified the verb with the originally Luwian verb *ḫapāi-, reflected only as a loanword in Hittite, i.e. ḫapā(i)-^(mi) ‘to irrigate, to water’. He assumed a semantic range similar to that of Lat. imbuō ‘to water, wet, moisten; to defile; to contaminate’, which fits only the former of the two significant contexts at KUB 32.9 obv. 7 and KUB 35.48 iii 11’. In the former context, it is said that the evils should not ḫap(a)i- (= to contaminate?) the ritual client (acc.), but in the latter, the gods are requested not to ḫap(a)i- the evils (acc.) onto the body (dat./loc.) of the ritual client.

Alternatively, Melchert 1988b:239 suggests ‘to bind, fasten’ for the verb, which is compatible with both passages as evils can bind the ritual client and gods can bind evils to the ritual client.  Melchert 1988b:239 translates “attach itself to him, the lord of the sacrifice” at KUB 32.9, in spite of the lack of a reflexive pronoun. This is unexpected and, therefore, unnecessarily complicated. As further confirmation, he adduces the co-occurrence of the antonyms ḫap(a)i-^(di) ‘to bind, fasten’ and šā-⁽ⁱ⁾ ‘to release’ at KUB 35.105 i 1’ and i 6’f., respectively. This plausible interpretation is accepted by Sasseville 2021a:219-221, who stresses the iterative/distributive notion of the usage of the verb, and by Yakubovich 2017d (but implicitly rejected in HED H:112-114 and 118f.).

[E.R.]

The form as cited above with the -i-/-ai- allomorphy are sufficient to classify the verb as an -(a)i-^(di) stem; see most recently Sasseville 2021a:219-221 and the reconstruction under the lemma head.

[E.R.]

For the lemma head see PAnat. *Hep-.