winta-

This lexeme is attested in a decree written by the Persian Priest Mitridaštas, which has been accurately dated to 542-541 BCE (Euler & Sasseville 2019a:134).

[D.S.]

Buckler 1924a:44 reads wintaḍ^? and hesitates for the last letter between d and w (repeated in Gusmani 1964a:259f. n. 23). Having autopsied the inscription in Izmir, Gusmani 1975a:266 (and Gusmani 1980a:108) suggests instead a new reading with s, i.e. wintaṣ^? (followed by Melchert 1992a:44, Melchert 2001eand Euler & Sasseville 2019a:131). Nevertheless, an RTI image file would be necessary to obtain more certainty and clarity concerning the reading of the last letter.

[D.S.]

The meaning of the word winta- diverges strongly in the literature, also due to the uncertainty regarding its lexical category (cf. Brandenstein 1931b:41f., Carruba 1960a:59, Gusmani 1964a:225f.). Meriggi 1935a:114 n. 110 sees an ablative in wintad meaning ‘with honor’, although there is no evidence for an ablative in -ad in Lydian. As properly recognized by Melchert 1992a:44 n. 22, the noun wintaṣ^? stands in apposition to ess šyrmas ‘this temenos here’ and, thus, winta- specifies which kind of temenos has been set up for Qλdãns and Artemis. One should note that even if the reading with ḍ in winta- at the end turned out to be correct, the same syntactic analysis would be fine, since a neuter noun can stand in apposition to another noun in the common gender. Dusinberre 2003a:230 also adopts this syntax and translates winta- as ‘offering’, which is not impossible but lacks independent support (left untranslated by Gérard 2005a:130). Yakubovich 2019c:309 divides the clause into two, i.e. dacuwers=t wintaḍ^? ‘they erected winta’, in order to recover the 3pl. pret. act. ending -rs and the enclitic particle =t, which is contradicted by the attestation of piferst appearing as the last word of the inscription. For the interpretation of the ending -erst as 3sg. pret. med., see Sasseville 2021a:382-385.

In a new analysis of the inscription LW 23 including the archeological perspective, Euler & Sasseville 2019a:131 connect the root of winta- to the Hittite root verb wēn-/win-^(mi) ‘to take a woman sexually’, analyzing it as a formation in -ta- (cf. Hitt. šeš-/šaš-^(mi) ‘to sleep’ → šašta- c. ‘bed (to sleep)’), thus yielding the literal meaning ‘a place where the man takes the woman sexually’ → ‘bed camp/chamber (vel sim.)’. This further supports their hypothesis that Qλdãns is the deified ruler Kroisos, who receives the goddess Artemis of Ephesos as a wife after his death, just like Hercules received the goddess Hebe as a wife upon entering Mount Olympus (Euler & Sasseville 2019a:147-149, who further compare the similar situation between the deified Phrygian king Midas and the goddess Kybele). The semantic assignment ‘bed camp/chamber (?)’ is thus independently supported and adopted here.

[D.S.]

The noun winta- is treated here as a formation in -ta- c. derived from the root win- (Sasseville 2015a:291; cf. Brandenstein 1931b:42, Melchert 1992a:44 (winta- < *win-V-ta-, to explain the preservation of the -n- before -t-, which is not necessary because of the morpheme boundary.)).

[D.S.]

1. fẽtwinta-

2. fẽtwinte-

For the lemma head see Lyd. *win-.