waššārāḫit-

Attested in Luwian rituals in MS and NS.

[Zs.S.]

abl.-instr.	wa-aš-ša-ra-ḫi-ta-ti	KUB 35.45 ii 9	(CTH 760, NS)
	wa-˹aš˺-[ša]-ra-ḫi-˹ta-ti˺	KUB 32.10 + KUB 35.19 i? 15’	(CTH 761, MS?)
	[wa]-aš-ša!-ra-ḫi-ta-˹ti˺	KUB 35.22, 4’	(CTH 761, MS)
	[wa-aš]-˹ša˺-ra-˹ḫi˺-ta-ti	KUB 35.21 rev. 14’	(CTH 761, MS)
	wa-aš-ša-ra-a-ḫi-ta-ti	KBo 9.143 rev. iii! 15’	(CTH 763, MS)
unknown	˹wa˺-aš-ša-˹a-ra-a˺-[ḫi-	KBo 29.9 obv. 2’	(CTH 760, NS)

The attestations follow CLL:263 (cf. also Laroche 1959a:109 and Starke 1990a:164), the transliterations are checked and slightly modified based on the photographs of the Mainzer Fotoarchiv. Restorations are based on the common formulaic nature of all instances except KBo 29.9 obv. 2’ (cf. under Meaning) and follow Starke 1985b:85, 89, 162. CLL:263 restores also KBo 29.9 obv. 2’ as “wa-aš-ša-a-ra-a-ḫi-ta-ti”, but the fragmentary context does not allow the identification of the form and thus Starke’s restoration (Starke 1985b:123) is followed here.

Starke 1990a:164f. claims that the plene spelling -ša-a-ra- in KBo 29.9 obv. 2’ cannot be correct, because he believes that the second vowel of the underlying word, waššar- (see s.v.), is not real in the oblique cases serving for derivation, but there is no reason for this assumption and thus to question the validity of this spelling.

Unsubstantiated is the transliteration of Kammenhuber 1986a:87, who modified wa-aš-ša-ra-ḫi-ta-ti of KUB 35.45 ii 9 into wa-aš-ta^!-ra-ḫi-ta-ti (based on the obsolete identification of the stem as waštara- by Otten 1953a:85 with n. 11, see under Meaning), despite the other instances and the scholarly literature (for which she was rightly criticized by Poetto 1997a:327 n. 24).

[Zs.S.]

There is a general agreement regarding the meaning (Bossert 1954a:91; Laroche 1954a:123, Laroche 1959a:109; Starke 1990a:164; CLL:263; Hutter 2003a:263; Tischler 2008a:223, HEGU-Z: 384, Tischler 2016a:429; Yakubovich 2010d:49; Maier 2013a:219; Marcuson 2016a:296, 301; Simon 2016b:325; Ünal 2016a:976 [he falsely books the word as “waššaraḫitati”]), which is based not only on the context (a positive act of the gods), but also on the fact that it almost always appears in the phrase “DINGIR^MEŠ-aššanzati waššārāḫitati”, an equivalent of the Hittite phrase “DINGIR^MEŠ-aš āššiunit” ‘favour of the gods (instr.)’ (independently observed by Laroche 1954a:123 and Bossert 1954a:91; repeated by Puhvel 1980a:69, cf. also Starke 1990a:164; on the Hittite phrase see HW 2nd ed. A:403). A meaning ‘shepherd’ was suggested by Otten 1953a:85 (and uncritically followed by Kammenhuber 1986a:87), based on his identification of the word as waštara- following [wa]-aš-ta-ra-ḫi-ta-˹ti˺ in KUB 35.22, 4’, which turned out to be, however, a scribal error in view of the other instances.

[Zs.S.]