abas

Hapax in the so-called Longer Strategos Votive Inscription of unknown date (see the discussion s.v. śa) from Side.

[Zs.S.]

Genitival adjective

gen. pl.?

abase

S3, 1

The attestation follows Pérez Orozco 2007a:136 checked against the photograph in Darga 1967a:Res. 8 (= Neumann 1968a:Taf. I.2 = Brixhe 1969a:Planche II) and Zinko & Zinko 2019a:426 Fig. 21.5. The segmentation of this word is assured due to the parallel structure in the phrase “jewase abase iśtratagejaś śa jewase masarasẹ^?”.

[Zs.S.]

On the reading of the second sign as ‹b› see the discussion s.v. *tbi^?at.

[Zs.S.]

The parallel structure of the phrase “jewase abase iśtratagejaś śa jewase masarasẹ^?” in which this word is attested was first noted by Ševoroškin 1975a:163f. and since masarase is connected to the word ‘god’ (see s.v.), he looked for an antonym and suggested ‘Mensch’ identifying it as gen. pl. Accepting this grammatical identification, Pérez Orozco 2007a:136, 138f. (cf. already Pérez Orozco 2003a:107) specified it as a genitival adjective and (just as already Meriggi 1978d:914f.) cautiously suggested a demonstrative pronoun ‘este’ based on similar Luwic words (cf. e.g. Luwian apa-, see s.v., followed by Lebrun 2012b:356). Eichner 1993a:128 translated as ‘Feind’, which was also claimed by Zinko & Zinko 2019a:421, although with two question marks and without reference to Eichner.

Eichner did not provide any argument for his translation (what he called “unverbindlicher Übersetzungsvorschlag”) and did not take into account the parallel phrase and thus, it can be excluded (Nollé 2001a:635 described it as “phantasievolle Übersetzung”). Pérez Orozco’s translation is formally fitting, but not semantically, as ‘this’ can hardly be paired with ‘god’. This problem is also reflected in his final translations, which do not make much sense (“de aquí/estos jewas de la estrategía y de los jewas divinos” and “sus jewas de la estrategía y sus jewas divinos”). Ševoroškins translation is semantically perfectly fitting, but there is no supporting evidence from any Anatolian language (his examples are based on an outdated reading). Regarding the context it is probable that the subject, the strategos, did something with the office or period of the strategos of the a. j. and of the divine j., but it is unknown what (cf. s.v. iśtratageja).

Accordingly, the meaning of this word remains unclear.

[Zs.S.]