šaša-

This lexeme is attested in a ritual fragment.

[D.S.]

abl./instr. (?)

ša-a-ša-ti

KBo 29.54 l.col. 7’

(CTH 765, NS)

The grammatical interpretation as abl./instr. is generally assumed (CLL:192), although it could formally be a dative singular of a stem in -āt(i)- or even a verbal form of a stem in -ā(i)-^(di). Nonetheless, an abl./instr. seems more likely in view of the preceding word also ending with -ti and most likely agreeing with it.

[D.S.]

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

[D.S.]

Yakubovich (pers. comm.) suggests the meaning ‘seal (?)’ based on HLuw. (“SIGILLUM”)sa-sa-za, which is possible, but not independently supported by the context, as that is too fragmentary to permit any conclusion. Moreover, if the corresponding Luwian noun in Hittite Transmission belongs here, there would be a gender (and thus stem formation) conflict between the two cognates.

Another possible link would be with HLuw. (DOMUS)sa₅-sa₅-tà-ti, translated tentatively with ‘bed-chamber (?)’, and Hitt. ^TÚGšašt(a)- ‘bed’. One should also compare Luw. šaša- attested in Hittite Transmission, which may refer to an animal; see below.

Pending further evidence, no meaning is attributed here.

[D.S.]

Based solely on this attestation, the stem class of the noun remains obscure; cf. below.

[D.S.]

This lexeme is attested in an inventory text.

[D.S.]

Checked against the photograph in the Konkordanz (Mainzer Fotoarchiv). Burgin 2022b:436-438 suggests the reading ša^?-ta^?-an-zi instead, pointing out that the verticals distinguishing the two signs are hard to see on the photograph. Nonetheless, there is nothing motivating a reading with TA.

[D.S.]

Laroche 1959a:87 equates the noun to Hittite šāš(š)a- c. ‘(a wild member of the goat family)’, recognizing the Luwian nom. pl. c. ending -anzi. His lexical and thus semantic approach is followed by Košak 1978a:113 ‘antelope (?)’, Siegelová 1986a:462f., CHD Š:301 (doubted by Melchert in CLL:192, but translated with ‘seal (?)’ in Laroche 1959a:s.v.). Burgin 2022b:438 rejects the meaning ‘wild goat’ on contextual grounds, since the context refers to necklaces and bracelets. However, it is not inconceivable that it could refer to a piece of jewelry in the shape of a wild goat. In any case, more evidence is needed to confirm or disconfirm any suggestion.

[D.S.]

A nom. pl. c. of a Luwian a-stem is the more popular option. Melchert (DCL:s.v.) also sees the possibility of a verbal form of the verb šeš-/šaš-^(mi) ‘sleep’, but admits that the context renders this option unlikely.

[D.S.]

The word is treated as Luwian by Laroche 1959a:87 and Melchert (CLL:192), which is correct as long as the word šašanzi is a Luwian nom. pl. c. The fragmentary state of the context, however, calls for caution.

[D.S.]