GIŠra-in

The from is only once attested in a LNS ritual fragment.

[A.B.]

acc. sg. c.

GIŠra-in

KBo 55.88 obv. i 3´

(CTH 470, LNS)

The attestation follows HEG U–Z:611 (under the lemma zaḫi-, not yet listed with attestation in other dictionaries), cf. Starke 1986a:161, Rüster & Neu 1989a:209 (HZl-Nr. 233), and Starke 1990a:479, n. 1752.

The transliteration has been checked against the photo of the Mainzer Fotoarchiv. The hand copy and literature indicate line 2’ for the attestation, but the photo shows traces of signs above line 1’, hence GIŠra-in should be noted as line 3’.

[A.B.]

 

The meaning of GIŠra-in is unknown; its inflection suggests that it could represent a Hittite or a Luwian noun. The context of KBo 55.88 shows the following (the transliteration is based on the photo of the Mainzer Fotoarchiv, additionally the hand copy and the transliteration of Starke 1990a:479, n. 1752 have been taken into account):

(2’)[... -]an kar-a[p- ...] (3’)GIŠra-in LÚnar[(-) ...] (4’)mu-za-ma ḫar-ra-an-za p[a?- ...] (5’)ku-it-ki ú-da-aš [...]

(2’)[...]take the […] (3’)the GIŠra-in, the musician[…] (4’)but the year(ly crop? is) crushed / spoiled […] (5’)anything you(sg.) brought here […].

GIŠra-in is a direct object in this text. The determinative GIŠ refers to plants or wooden objects (cf. Ünal 2007a:560 who assumes “a wooden object, possibly a container”, without further explanation, cf. Ünal 2016a:429). In Hittite texts, the Sumerogram ra represents the Hittite verb walḫ- ‘to hit / to strike’ (for which the more usual Sumerogram is gul, cf. Weeden 2011b:362, 601) and its derivatives (cf. HEG U–Z:241–254; EDHIL:945f.). The use of ra requires that the underlying word is in some way related to a verb of striking, either as a derivative (cf. HEG U–Z:611 cautiously assumed “Gegenstand zum Schlagen”) or as a homophonous word. Starke 1990a:477 (presumably because of the gloss marker) assumed that GIŠra-in could represent a derivative of the Luwian verb dūpi-/dūpai-, namely dupiyal(a/)i- and cautiously suggested a meaning “Keule” (or sim). Ceremonial weapons are used in rituals, but dupiyal(l)a/i- appears with the determinative URUDU and for a kind of weapon like the one suggested by Starke, one would expect the Sumerogram GIŠtukul (cf. Güterbock 1983b:214f.).

An object used in a ceremonial action of striking with the verb walḫ- is (GIŠ)māri- (see under the respective lemma). If the word either denotes a kind of sword (as considered by Alp 1983a:43, with n. 49 and discussed in HED M:66–69 and HEG L–S:133f.) or a musical instrument (note that GIŠra-in is immediately followed by LÚnar[(-) ‘musician, singer, priest’ in this context) that is played by striking or hitting (cf. Schuol 2004a:98), as considered by Schuol 2004a:122–124, it would fit the meaning of the Sumerogram ra. The determinative, the stem (including its possible Luwian origin as suggested by Starke 1986a:162 for the Hitt. abl. GIŠmārita[z from Luwian *mārit-), and the ritual context speak for this lexeme.

Another instrument that shows an i-stem, appears with the giš-determinative, and is attested with the professional designation LÚnar, is GIŠarkami- ‘drum’ (cf. Schuol 2004a:112–120). As noted by Schuol 2004a:112 (cf. HW (2nd ed.) A:304–306), the equation of this word with the Sumerogram GIŠbalag.di is very uncertain (cf. Shehata 2017a for balaĝ as a stringed instrument).

Lastly, HEG U–Z:611 tries to read GIŠra-in as an acc. sg. c. zaḫḫin (instead of more common zaḫḫain) of the verbal noun zaḫḫai-/zaḫḫi- ‘fight’. This assumption is based on the alternation of the Sumerogram ra.ra with the verb zāḫ- ´to fight, to crush´ in omen-texts in the phrase: ‘the weather god strikes / crushes (the crop)’, cf. Riemschneider 2004a:282.

All of these proposals are more or less possible. (GIŠ)māri- appears to be a good candidate, but with only one attestation and due to the fragmentary context, it remains an open question.

[A.B.]

The form is not included in CLL or in the general overviews of Luwianisms by Melchert 2005a or van den Hout 2007a. The gloss marker may point to a Luwian lexeme (or a lexeme of Luwian origin) written with a Sumerogram, cf. Starke 1990a:478f., n.1752 (cf. Weeden 2011b:1f.), but it does not necessarily account for it (cf. Schwartz 1938a:75, 78 and Melchert 2005a:445). Until further evidence appears, the remainder of the form and its morphology remain unclear.

[A.B.]