/malhassa-/, LIBATIO-ha-sà

This lexeme is attested five times in inscriptions from Boğazköy and Emirgazi, dating to the 13^th century BCE.

[A.P.]

[A.P.]

The meaning of this word remained somewhat unclear for a long time due to the mostly logographic spelling. On a contextual basis, Hawkins 1975a:130 (again in Hawkins 1990a:307) deduces a meaning such as ‘offering’ vel sim. But only van den Hout’s (apud Hawkins 1995a:43, 101) linking it with CLuw. malḫašša- ‘ritual’ provided more clarity. In the HLuw. contexts of attestation, the word is used with the verb /piya-⁽ⁱ⁾/ ‘to give’ and represents a benevolent action towards the great-king (thus in EMİRGAZİ) or the gods (in SÜDBURG). In EMİRGAZİ 1B and D, the respective clauses at §34 represent the protasis of a curse formula and read: kwa/i-i(a)-sa-pa-wa/i-mu LIBATIO-ha-sa₅ NEG-wa/i DARE, approx. /kwis=ba=wa=mu malhassa nawa piyai/, meaning ‘But (he) who does not give me rituals’, followed by the punishment to be expected in the apodosis (cf. Hawkins 1995a:89).

[AH.B.]

With only the nom./acc. pl. or coll. attested, it is clear that the word is a neuter noun, but it cannot be said with certainty which stem class this noun belongs to. For CLuw., van den Hout 1984a:76 considers an s-stem, but a (subsequently remodelled) a-stem is just as likely for HLuw., if not more, yet further textual evidence is required to decide the matter. Melchert (CLL:131) hypothesises that the CLuw. word may be a plurale tantum in -ašša-, followed by Sasseville 2018a:303f. who adduces further evidence.

[AH.B.]

This lexeme is found in ritual texts, especially in the rituals of Kuwattalla and Šilalluḫi in the expression “lord of the ritual”.

[D.S.]

Attestations of the logogram SISKUR without at least one phonetic complement are left out.

Concerning the dative singular form of the genitival adjective, Starke 1985b:151, 165 emends instead to SÍSKUR-aš-ša-an{-za} in order to obtain the expected dative singular stem final -aššan. However, Melchert 2000a:174f. argues persuasively that the genitival adjective has developed an additional -nz- morpheme in the oblique cases indicating the plurality of the modifying noun, i.e. the base noun malḫašša- ‘ritual’, and therefore emends instead to SÍSKUR-aš-ša-an-za-〈an〉 (left open by Yakubovich 2010d:49f., who prefers to wait for more evidence). Proof of the preferred emendation by Melchert 2000a has now been uncovered by the emergence of the fragment DBH 46/2.33, 12’ (identified as Luwian by Sasseville 2020a:53), where a duplicate of the same passage is found and the gen. adj. dat. sg. ends in -aš-ša-an-za-an.

The gen. adj. dative plural -aš-ša-an-za-an-za, which is emended by Starke 1985b:134 to -aš-ša-an-za{-an-za} is rightly criticized by Melchert 2000a:174f. and accordingly left undiscussed here.

[D.S.]

Checked against the photographs in the Konkordanz (Mainzer Fotoarchiv).

[D.S.]

The meaning of Luwian malḫašša- could be easily deciphered due to the interchangeability of malḫaššaššiš EN-aš with the logographic spelling EN SÍSKUR ‘lord of the ritual’ (Forrer 1922a:218, Otten 1953a:65, Laroche 1959a:65f., Starke 1990a:55, Melchert in CLL:131). For the reverse syntactic position, i.e. SÍSKUR-aš-ša-an-za-〈an〉 EN-ia, as an imposition of the genuine Luwian word order, see Otten 1953a:65 and Starke 1990a:55. Concerning the semantics of the noun, Sasseville 2021a:22 points out that Luw. malḫašša- can refer to the ritual objects, supported by a newly-joined passage of the Puriyanni-ritual, in which the malḫašša are carried in by the lord of the ritual.

[D.S.]

The lexeme malḫašša- is indeed a plural tantum as already suspected by Laroche 1959a:65f. (thus also Starke 1990a:108, CLL:131). Sasseville 2018a:303-305 reaffirms the different types of substantivizations of the genitival adjective suffix -ašša/i-, and malḫašša- would reflect a collective noun in -ašša- in this case. It is a derivative of a noun *malḫa- so far unattested in Luwian (Starke 1990a:108) but found in Lycian mla-.

[D.S.]

1. malḫaššalla/i-

2. malḫaššallaḫit-

This word is found in vow text.

[D.S.]

nom./acc. coll.	ma-al-ḫa-aš-ša	KUB 56.20, 15	(CTH 590, NS)
	SÍSKUR-š[a	KBo 67.49, 5’	(CTH 670, NS)

I owe the attestation of KBo 67.49 to Melchert pers. comm.

[D.S.]

The sign following ma-al-ḫa-aš-ša(-)x has been considered part of the same word by de Roos 2007a:256, who reads mal-ḫa-aš-ša-a[l-la-aḫ-ḫi-it], implicitly thinking of the lexeme malḫaššallaḫit-. However, the traces left of the sign checked against the photo of the Konkordanz (Mainzer Fotoarchiv) do not quite support the reading of the sign AL (cf. the same sign occurring in the same word). It is more likely that the sign belongs to the following word (thus CHD P:39, Tischler 2016b:30; neither makes any suggestion regarding the broken off sign, although a reading LU[GAL^? is tempting). One should notice the very small amount of space left between words on the fragment in general. Moreover, malḫašša as the direct object of the verb karpzi would provide a good interpretation of the sentence; see under Meaning.

[D.S.]

Despite the fragmentary context and the unclear meaning of the passage, malḫašša- should refer to the offerings dedicated by the king.

[ … ]-pí pé-ra-an EGIR-pa ú-ez-z[i … ]-za DINGIR^LUM ma-al-ḫa-aš-ša(-)x[ … ] kar-ap-zi (KUB 56.20, 14-16)

‘[ … ] will have free access to [ … ] the god(?) will pick up(?) the ritual offerings [ … ]’

The transitive use of karp-^(mi) with the reflexive particle =za would mean ‘to lift, pick up’ (HW 2nd ed. K:181); contra de Roos 2007a:257 “he shall fulfill”. For the first part of the sentence with peran appa uwe/a-^(mi), see CHD P:39. In any case, the translation must be considered tentative, since the putative syntactic roles of the preserved words are not entirely assured.

[D.S.]

The word malḫašša- is a collective/plurale tantum, see under the Cuneiform Luwian equivalent.

[D.S.]

The Luwian origin of the word is beyond doubt; see CLuw. malḫašša-.

[D.S.]

For the lemma head see CLuw. *malḫa-.