*sérk-/sr̥k-´

1. /sark(a)-/

1. šargašamma/i-

2. šarkatt-

3. šarkiwal(i)-

This lexeme is found in the festival for the Palaic pantheon.

[D.S.]

The grammatical analysis of the attestation in KUB 35.165 obv. 6 has been highly disputed; see under Meaning.

[D.S.]

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

[D.S.]

Melchert 1994a:224 separates šar-ku-ta-at into two words, i.e. šarkut=at ‘he -ed it’, which accommodates most easily the syntax of the passage (followed by Sasseville 2019a:27 n. 32). Melchert (apud Sasseville 2019a:ibid.) suggests the meaning ‘to lift’ based on an etymological comparison with Hitt. šarku- ‘eminent’. This makes better sense of the syntax overall, since it denotes the action performed by the king and queen after they break the bread, but before they distribute it (Sasseville 2019a:27). From a contextual perspective of festival cults, we can compare the action expressed by Pal. šarku- with the one of Hitt. karpan ḫar(k)-^(mi) ‘to hold up’:

[2 ḫar-ši-ia-al]-li ka-a-ša-an 2 NINDA.GUR₄.RA [ki-an-da ka-a]-e-a 2 NINDA.GUR₄.RA ki-an-da [LÚ^{MEŠ GIŠ}BANŠUR ^LÚ.MEŠMU]ḪALDIM kar-pa-an ḫar-kán-zi (KBo 23.59 iv^? 7’-9’)

‘[Two bread bask]ets: “Herein [lie] 2 bread loaves and therein lie 2 bread loaves.” [The table-men] and the cooks hold (them) up.’ (Popko 1994a:250f., 254f.)

Therefore, the meaning ‘to hold up, to lift’ can be assigned to Pal. šarku-. A different approach in the literature has been to assume a noun in the ablative-instrumental case (Starke 1982a:416 n. 40, Weitenberg 1984a:286, Eichner 2010a:53. Likewise, Carruba 1972a:46 suggests that šarkutat is a noun referring to a type of bread, meat or sacrificial animal. His semantic interpretation is based on the assumption that šarkutat is a nominative/accusative neuter noun. However, these “formal” interpretations all fail to offer a proper translation of the sentence.

[D.S.]

CHD Š:267, HED SA:173f., EDHIL:734. The participle šarkanti- c. (and once šarkant- c.) ‘petitioner, litigant’ (CHD Š:265f., HEG S:903f.) is considered by García Ramón 2019a as a Luwian lexeme in Hittite Transmission due to the apparent i-mutation like in the Luwian suffix -nt(i)-. However Puhvel (HED Sa:174) had already pointed out that a Luwian origin must not be the case, since other genuine Hittite words show sporadic i-inflection. This topic is explained at length by Rieken 1994a (page 50 on Hitt. acc. pl. šarkanduš beside šarkantiuš), who demonstrates that the strong Luwian influence in the late Hittite period has caused some disturbances in certain Hittite nominal paradigms, though mainly in a-stems. Technically speaking, both Hittite and Luwian may have had a substantivized participle built on the root verb šark-, but whether this particular word is really Luwian in origin or Hittite with secondary Luwianized inflectional influence remains uncertain until further data emerge.

[D.S.]