wašš(a)-

All three attestations occur in ritual fragments related to the Kuwattalla tradition.

[E.R.]

nom./acc. sg.	wa-aš-ša-an-za	KUB 35.68, 10’	(CTH 763, NS)
	GIŠ⸢wa⸣-aš-ša-an-za	KBo 7.68 ii 6’	(CTH 764, NS)
abl./instr.	[w]a-aš-ša-ti	KUB 35.68, 10’	(CTH 763, NS)

For wa-ša-ta-ti at KUB 35.103 ii 7 cited in Otten 1953a:42f. n. 94, see under wašat(i)-.

See also Sasseville 2023a:93 for a potential sumerographic attestation as GIŠBA[NŠUR in a parallel passage.

[E.R.]

Checked against the photographs in the Mainzer Fotoarchiv.

[E.R.]

Based on the use of the determinative GIŠ for wood and wooden objects at KBo 7.68 ii 6’ and the context at KUB 35.68, 10’, in which first the house, then a stool and wašš(a)- are mentioned, Otten 1953a:43 already concluded that the word denotes a piece of furniture, possibly a table (not adopted in DLL:108). Bossert 1959a:64f. (followed in HW:428) was the first scholar to match HLuw. /wasi(ya)-/ (read wasaī at the time) with CLuw. ^GIŠwašš(a)-, but misinterpreted the words as ‘stool’. Later, Hawkins 1970a:86f. corrected the semantic assignment using the pictorial evidence from the monuments. He suggested ‘table’ instead of a second word for stool in the contexts transmitted in both languages. Finally, Carruba 1982a:44 drew attention to KBo 7.68 ii 5’-8’. In this passage, someone sits down to eat (7’), followed by a listing of pure items, first the ^GIŠwašš(a)-, then two kinds of bread, and finally another wooden implement. It is very likely that after the deity’s taking a seat at the (dining) table and the food offered are described. Therefore, the text provides further confirmation for Hawkins’ interpretation, which is widely accepted now (Starke 1990a:111, CLL:262, Maier 2013a:196; tentatively in HHw:s.v. and HEG U-Z:397).

[E.R.]

In contrast with HLuw. /wasi(ya)-/, the forms of the nom./acc. sg. waššanza and the abl. waššati clearly point to a neuter stem wašš(a)- (see Starke 1990a:111, CLL:262, Hawkins 2000a:346, HHw:s.v., HEG U-Z:397).

[E.R.]