ñtemle-

This lexeme is attested in the inscription of the inscribed pillar of Xanthos, dated contextually to shortly after the ascension of Artaxerxes II in 405-404 BCE and stylistically to around 400 BCE (Borchhardt & Eichner 1997-1999a:19f.), a dedicatory inscription of the ruler Arbinas (N 324; beginning of the 4^th c. BCE), and a long grave inscription (TL 29) datable to the reign of Alexander the Great.

[D.S.]

nom./acc. sg.	ñtẽmlẽ	TL 29.3 (Tlos)
		N 324.25 (Xanthos)
	ñtemlẽ	TL 29.3 (Tlos)
	[ñ]temlẽ	TL 44b.50 (Xanthos)

Differently, Melchert (DLL:46) takes [ñ]temlẽ (TL 44b.50) to be a genitival plural, although it seems more likely that we are dealing with a nominal clause with two nouns in a predicative relation, i.e. epi=d[e ñ]temlẽ (e)si tãma s(e)=e=we=nepe : astte : trm͂mis (TL 44b.49-51) ‘(In the aforementioned towns), a sanctuary is (now) a "building". Lycia had never made them (before).’ This implies that the king has erected "buildings" for the sanctuaries; see under Meaning.

[D.S.]

The restoration of [ñ]temlẽ after TL 29 is defended by Laroche 1979b:351 n. 10 and Bousquet 1992a:185 (followed by DLL:46). The word n͂temlẽ is obviously a univerbated noun (thus also Lebrun 1990a:169 n. 13) and thus should not be separated into n͂te=mlẽ (contra Gehrisch 2018a:40f.).

[D.S.]

Melchert (DLL:46) suggests that n͂temlẽ refers to a sacrificial installation based on the contexts and the etymological connection with Lyc. mla- (and Lyc. B mle-). In TL 29, n͂temlẽ refers to something has been destroyed during the war, but then repaired (or restored) again afterwards (Sasseville 2021a:452f.). Further, the attestation in the inscription N 324 reveals that a n͂temlẽ is something that can be placed or installed, whereas TL 44b.50 tells us that it is a kind of building (Lyc. tãma-). Therefore, the meaning ‘sanctuary, temple’ is the most adequate translation. Contextually problematic and outdated are the suggestions by Lebrun 1990a:169 n. 13 “Lat. gens”, Schürr 2012a:126, 135 “inhabitant”. The word is left untranslated by Eichner 2005a:32 n. 172. Shevoroshkin 2014a:241 suggests the meaning ‘altar (?)’, which is less likely than ‘sanctuary, temple’, especially since the Lycian A word for altar “kumezijẽ (θθẽ)” occurs already within the same context; see TL 44b.53-55.The etymological connection with Hitt. dammeli- ‘untouched’ is phonologically problematic, since the initial alveolar cannot equate to Lyc. n͂t-.

[D.S.]

While Melchert (DLL:46) suggests a common gender e-stem based on Lyc. B mle- c., a neuter stem in -e- is preferred here based on the attestation in TL 44b.50,  where we take n͂temlẽ as nominative singular,  thereby excluding a common gender stem. However, the neuter stem creates a discrepancy with the base word mla- c. Therefore, it is likely that we are dealing with a different nominal formation based on the same root, perhaps via the collective mla. In any case, n͂temle- is a compound made of n͂te ‘in(to)’ + mle- ‘votive offering’ (already Meriggi 1936b:264), representing the place in which votive offerings are dedicated. This harmonizes with the attributed semantics (see under Meaning).

[D.S.]

This lexeme is attested in the inscription of the inscribed pillar of Xanthos, dated contextually to shortly after the ascension of Artaxerxes II in 405-404 BCE and stylistically to around 400 BCE (Borchhardt & Eichner 1997-1999a:19f.).

[D.S.]

gen. adj. nom. sg. c.(?)

ñtemlesi

TL 44d.39-40 (Xanthos)

We assume an agreement with lbijẽi, which appears to be the subject of the sentence. Melchert (DLL:123) leaves it open.

[D.S.]

The word ñtemlesi is rightly recognized as a genitival form of the cognate of Lycian A n͂temle- by Meriggi 1936b:264 (thus also DLL:123, Schürr 2018b:74). The meaning of the Lycian B word is deduced from the Lycian A analysis (see above) and is further supported by the ritualistic context and the appearance of the cognate mlez ‘ritual, ritualistic offering (?)’.

mlez : ñtemlesi : mire : lide=be : lbijẽi : trelewñne (TL 44d.39-40)

‘The lbijẽi of the temple(?) li-ed the rituals/offerings for the mire of Trele.’

For the context, one should also compare Shevoroshkin 2014a:241 and Gehrisch 2018a:91.

[D.S.]

For the lemma head, see Lyc. mla-.