jewas

Attested twice 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.?

jewase

S3, 1 (bis)

The attestations follow Pérez Orozco 2007a:138f. checked against the photographs 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 its first sign (N7) as ‹j› instead of ‹w› as previously assumed see the discussion s.v. iśtratageja. On the reading of the third sign (N6) of this word as ‹w› and not ‹j› as previously assumed proposed by Pérez Orozco 2003a:15f. (contra Schürr 2016b:150f.) see the discussion in Simon 2020e:201 n. 3.

[Zs.S.]

There are different proposals for the meaning of this word. Ševoroškin 1975a:163f. translated it as ‘verehrt’, Meriggi 1978d:914f. as ‘arma/trophea’, similarly Eichner 1993a:128 as ‘Waffe’ (which was also claimed by Zinko & Zinko 2019a:421, although with two question marks and without reference to Eichner), and finally Pérez Orozco 2007a:138f. claimed that it is “probablemente” a religious or ceremonial term in gen. pl. from *iyawassa-.

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”). Latter problem applies also to the contextually fitting suggestion ‘trophea’ of Meriggi. Neither Ševoroškin nor Pérez Orozco provided arguments for their translations and none of them illuminates the text.

Remarkable is the similarity of jewase to Hitt. ewa- ‘a kind of grain’ <*yewo-, but it does not elucidate the meaning of the inscription, either.

All in all, the meaning of this word remains unknown.

[Zs.S.]