*arou̯eh₂-

A hapax legomenon, this lexeme is attested once in an inscription from Karkamiš, which is dated to the late 8^th century BCE.

[AH.B.]

In the editio princeps (Hawkins, Tosun & Akdoğan 2013a:3), the form 〈a+ra/i-wa/i-ta〉 in ADANA 1, §2 is analysed as a 3pl. pret. act., i.e. /arawanta/ ‘they set free’, but see discussion of the meaning below.

[AH.B.]

The link to the slightly more frequently attested noun /arawann(i)-/ ‘freeman’ is quite evident and was first suggested in the editio princeps by Hawkins, Tosun & Akdoğan 2013a:3. It receives further support from the context, because the verb occurs in ADANA 1, §2, a dedicatory inscription on a stele for the storm-god providing details about who set it up. One clause reads wa/i-mu za-ti (“MÁ”)ma-sa-hu-na-li (DEUS)TONITRUS-hu-ti PRAE^? a+ra/i-wa/i-ta, i.e. /wa=mu zatti mashunalli Tarhunti parran arawatta/ ‘He (scil. the country-lord from the previous clause) set me free^? before this Tarhunza of Prosperity’. Orthographically, the attested form is ambiguous regarding number and can stand for 3sg. /arawatta/ or 3pl. /arawanta/, but since the preceding clauses only mention the lord of the person who set up the stele without introducing any further actants, it seems more appropriate to assume a singular verb form.

[AH.B.]

The lexeme is likely a factitive verb in /-a-/, derived from a putative adjective */arawa(/i)-/ ‘free’, which is not attested in HLuw., but whose direct cognate can be found in Hittite arāwa- ‘free’, see Sasseville 2021a:65 and Rieken & Sasseville 2014a:304f. Luwian factitives in /-a-/ usually inflect according to the ti-conjugational pattern (Sasseville 2021a:65).

[AH.B.]

This lexeme is attested in two votive inscriptions found in the areas to the east and south of Sardis respectively. The first inscription can only be approximately dated to 5^th or 4^th century BCE, the second one mentions the 12^th regnal year of Alexander and thus can be dated to the late 4th century BCE.  

[I.Y.]

Despite the fragmentary preservation of the first form, its restoration seems secure, because the preceding word faτaν is identical in both inscriptions.

[I.Y.]

The second context makes it clear that rawal denotes a favorable action by Zeus in response to which the commissioner of the inscription erects a votive object. Accordingly, the meaning ‘to grant’ was proposed in Brandenstein 1931b:35 and accepted in Gusmani 1964a:189. The question is how to reconcile this meaning with the formally attractive comparison with Hitt. arawaḫḫ-⁽ⁱ⁾ ‘to free’, offered in Gusmani 1980a:86. One possibility is to start with the basic meaning ‘release’ and assume that it was used in these contexts for the revelation of the divine will (for example, via oracular inquiry), which was favorable for the commissioner of the inscription.    

[I.Y.]

The comparison with the Hittite stem arawaḫḫ-⁽ⁱ⁾ speaks on face value for the factitive stem rawa-^(t), but as long as the absence of lenition is not confirmed through the synchronic attestation of diagnostic forms, this stem assignment must remain tentative (Sasseville 2021a:65).

[I.Y.]

HW 2nd ed. A:257