tulijeli(je)-

This lexeme occurs in the inscription of the inscribed pillar of Xanthos, dated contextually to shortly after the ascension of Artaxerxes II in 405-404 BCE and stylistically to around 400 BCE (Borchhardt & Eichner 1997-1999a:19f.).

[D.S.]

dat./loc. pl.

tulij!elije

TL 44d.5 (Xanthos)

Contra Neumann 2007a:388, this word cannot belong to the paradigm of tulijele/i-, whose dative plural would be *tulijele.

[D.S.]

As can be seen from early hand copies (Fellows 1842a), the word is spelled tuliselije (thus also Borchhardt & Eichner 1997-1999a:25). Based on comparison with tulijele/i-, it has been convincingly emended to tulij^!elije (Melchert (DLL:132), Schürr 2018b:82).

[D.S.]

The word tulijelije is clearly an adjectival formation in -i(je)- derived from tulijele/i-, both of which occur within the same poem (assuming side C and D constitute one continuous composition). It is translated correctly by Melchert (DLL:132) as ‘of the assembly’ (contra Schürr 2018b:95). If one takes the sentence as follows, tulijelije modifies something that seems to be the beneficiary of an animal sacrifice:

qretu=pe tulijelije putu trlluba zrppeduni=ke qezm͂mi (TL 44d.5-6)

‘He must qretu the putu-sacrificial animal for the trlluba of the assembly and Sarpedon qezm̃mi.’

Shevoroshkin 2011b:173 assumes trlluba and tulijelije to be asyndetically coordinated deities, which is not persuasive. Gehrisch 2018a:90 translates tulijelije as ‘assembly’ disregarding the adjectival suffix. The most straightforward analysis is to take trlluba as the head noun of the adjective tulijelije in the dative/locative plural.

[D.S.]

For the derivational base, see Lyc. B tulijele/i-.