arpaša-

The word occurs in two texts written during the times of Ḫattušili III., viz. the “Apology” and an oracle report.

[E.R.]

3sg. pres. act.	ar-pa-ša-a-i	KUB 5.1 iii 33	(CTH 582, NS)
3sg. pret. act.	ar-pa-ša-at-ta	KBo 3.6 i 30	(CTH 81, NS)
	⸢ar- pa-ša-at-ta⸣	KUB 1.1 i 35	(CTH 81, NS)

Checked against the photographs in the Mainzer Fotoarchiv. _­­– Forrer 1929a:130 and Sommer 1932a:62 n. 1 read ar-pa-ša-at-ta-pát^!. Still in Otten 1981a:6 the transliteration ar-pa-ša-at-ta-x is found, although the collation of the photos shows that there is no trace of any sign left after the final -ta. – For the unexpected spelling with singleton -š-, see Sasseville 2021a:488f.

[E.R.]

Forrer 1929a:130 was the first to suggest that arpašatta is derived from ()arpā-, which he interpreted as ‘setback’, thus arriving at an impersonal ‘it turned out as misfortune’ for the verb. Most scholars followed him broadly, with slight modifications of the meaning; cf. HW:32, Kronasser 1966a:555, 589, Otten 1981a:6f., HEDA, E, I:168, Ünal 2007a:59 (all ‘to become unfavorable, to turn out badly’), DLL:32, HW 2nd ed.A:340 and HEGA-K:65 (‘to fail, suffer defeat’); undecided Sasseville 2021a:490f. Influenced by the translation of Lycian erbbe(/i)- as ‘turmoil, battle’ and arpā- as ‘confusion, tumult, strife’, Melchert (in CLL:30, followed in HW:23) suggested ‘to be confounded’ (now withdrawn according to Sasseville 2021a:490f.). In the oracle text, only the translations that are not impersonal work for the passage: ⁽³³⁾kaskal ^URUta-ni-zi-la ku-wa-at nu.sig₅ karaš^ḪI.A ta mè ar-pa-ša-a-i ⁽³⁴⁾nu dingir^LIM a-pu-u-un gùb-tar uš-ke-ši “Why is the campaign to Tanizila not good? Will the army suffer a turmoil/suffer a defeat/be confounded by the battle? Do you, o god, foresee it (scil. the campaign) as an evil?” (see Ünal 1974a:70f.). However, the latter makes little sense in the context of the Apology: (And Arma-Tarḫunta, son of Zida, and furthermore other people did me harm and began to treat me badly) nu-mu ar-pa-ša-at-ta “and it arpaša-ed me” (see Otten 1981a:6f.). For this impersonal expression, none of ‘it caused me a turmoil/defeat/confusion’ provides good sense, especially since the law-suit before king Muwattalli was still to come.

In view of the fact that the Lycian match erbbe(/i)- contrasts with esete(/i)- ‘peace, rest’ (also of the dead), a meaning ‘to be restless/concerned, to be (a matter of) concern/unrest’ seems to be a better option; cf. the resulting translations “Why is the campaign to Tanizila not good? Will the army be restless/concerned by the battle? Do you, o god, foresee it (scil. the campaign) as an evil?” as well as (And Arma-Tarḫunta, son of Zida, and furthermore other people did me harm and began to treat me badly) nu-mu ar-pa-ša-at-ta “and it was a matter of unrest/concern for me.” This meaning conforms not only with the impersonal construction, but also with the base noun arpā-, which is translated as ‘unrest’ here.

[E.R.]

Since Forrer 1929a:130, it has been agreed that arpaša- is a derivative of arpā- (DLL:32, Kronasser 1966a:555, 589, HEDA, E, I:168, CLL:30, HW 2nd ed.A:340). More precisely, it represents the imperfective -šša-⁽ⁱ⁾ formation of an unattested denominative verb *arpā(i)-, built from arpā- (most recently Sasseville 2021a:490f.).

[E.R.]

The base ()arpā-, the gloss wedge marking, the use of the -šša-⁽ⁱ⁾, suffix and the 3sg. pret. act. ending -tta point all to a borrowing from Luwian (thus assumed in DLL:32, Kronasser 1966a:555, 589, HEDA, E, I:168, CLL:30, HW:32, HW 2nd ed.A:340, HHw:23, Melchert 2005a:451, van den Hout 2006a:240, Sasseville 2021a:490f.).

[E.R.]

For the lemma head see Lyc. erbbe(/i)-.