/hazziwid-/
‘rite, cult supply’
- Language
- Common Luwian
- Grammar
- subst, n.
- ID
- 3593
1. Individual Anatolian Languages
1.1 Hieroglyphic Luwian
/hazziwid-/, (*314)ha-zi-wa/i-
‘rite’1.1.1Transmission
This lexeme is attested twice in inscriptions from Malatya and Tell Ahmar, dating maximally from the late 10th to the mid-8th century BCE.
[A.P.]
1.1.2Forms
| nom./acc. sg. | /hazziwi=sa/ | (*314)ha-zi-wa/i-sà | TELL AHMAR 6, §13 (Tell Ahmar) |
| abl./instr. | /hazziwadadi/ | (“LIGNUM”)ha-zi-wa/i+ra/i-ti | ŞIRZI, §2 (Malatya) |
[A.P.]
1.1.3Graphic Features
1.1.3.1Phonological Interpretation
The phonological interpretation of this lexeme is reasonably certain, since it is twice attested in fully syllabic spelling. Moreover, the word has a direct cognate in CLuw. ḫazziwit- ‘rite’ (see CLL:67). The lenis quality of the stem final dental is proved by the fact that it undergoes rhotacism at ŞIRZI, §2, where it occurs between vowels. In the nom./acc. sg. form, the stem final dental is regularly deleted before the neuter particle /=sa, =za/ was attached, cf. Melchert 2003b:182.
The logograms used for a determinative are LIGNUM (sign *382) and *314, the latter of which has yet to ben fixed with a semantic interpretation. Both logograms occur with words from the domains of power and force, e.g. HLuw. /salhant-/ ‘greatness’ and HLuw. /tabariya-/ ‘command’ for LIGNUM, and HLuw. /kattun(i)-/ ‘weapon’ and HLuw. /hattastr(i)-/ ‘violence’ for *314. Their usage with the present word is therefore roughly in line with the semantics.
[AH.B.]
1.1.4Meaning
In the editio princeps, Bossert 1954-1956a:69 was able to identify the abl./instr. ending of the word at ŞIRZI, §2, but found the semantics too elusive to hazard so much as a guess. However, the interpretation of the CLuw. cognate ḫazziwit- ‘rite’ provides good sense also for the present lexeme, see Starke 1990a:181-183. Thus e.g. ŞIRZI, §2 reads: wa/i-ta á-mi-i-na DOMINUS-ni-na i-mára/i (DEUS)CERVUS3-ia-na (“LIGNUM”)ha-zi-wa/i+ra/i-ti u-sa-nu-sa-ha, approx. /wa=tta ammin nannin immara-Runtiyan hazziwidadi usnussahha/, meaning ‘I pleased my master (the Stag-god) Runtiya of the Open Country with rites’ (cf. Hawkins 2000a:323).
[AH.B.]
1.1.5Stem
This noun is a neuter abstract in /-id-/, probably deriving from an otherwise unattested adjective */hazziu-/ vel sim., whose meaning is somewhat opaque (Starke 1990a:183).
[AH.B.]
1.2 Luwian (Glossenkeilwörter)
ḫazziwi(t)-, (ḫazziwi-)
1.2.1Transmission
The lexeme is found in a variety of genres, viz. cult inventories, oracle reports, festival texts, and in a prayer, a Kizzuwatnean ritual, and a treaty. The attestations of the derived stem ḫazziwi(t)- (and ḫazziwi-) are limited to NS manuscripts, as opposed to Hitt. ḫazziu- attested as nom./acc. sg. ḫa-az-zi-⸢ú⸣ KUB 12.63 rev. 1’, ḫ[a-a]z-zi-ú KUB 17.21 ii 12’, ḫa-az-zi-⸢i⸣-ú KUB 30.39 obv. 9’ (according to Neu 1986b:111, the duplicate passage of KUB 30.39 obv. 9’ in the “modernized” version KBo 10.20 (line i 12) shows the i-stem form ḫa-az-zi-ú-i), ḫa-az-zi-e-u=š-še-et KUB 43.33 obv. 6, ḫa-az-i-ú KBo 20.51 i! 6’; gen. sg. ḫa-az-zi-ú-wa-aš KBo 22.242 ii 9, ḫa-az-zi-wa-aš KBo 22.242 iii 7 and KBo 38.59, 5’, ḫa-zi-ú-aš KUB 53.17 ii 35’ (at KUB 53.17 ii 35’ occurs at the end of line lacking space).)
[E.R.]
1.2.2Forms
| nom./acc. sg. | ḫa-az-zi-wi5 | KBo 2.8 i 30’ | (CTH 526, NS) |
| KBo 2.8 iv 6’ | (CTH 526, NS) | ||
| ḫa-⸢az-zi-wi5⸣ | KBo 40.53 ii 11’ | (CTH 579, NS) | |
| KBo 40.53 ii 13’ | (CTH 579, NS) | ||
| ⸢ḫa-az-zi-wi5⸣ | KBo 40.53 ii 16’ | (CTH 579, NS) | |
| VSNF 12.11 iii 13’ | (CTH 670, NS) | ||
| ha-az-zi-wi5 |
KUB 16.77 ii 33 | (CTH 577, NS) | |
| ḫa-zi-wi5 | KBo 40.53 ii 20’ | (CTH 579, NS) | |
| ḫa-az-zi-ú-i | KUB 58.58 obv. 11 | (CTH 530, NS) | |
| [ḫ]a-az-zi-i-ú-i | KBo 13.202, 6’ | (CTH 832, NS) | |
| ḫa-az-⸢zi⸣-ú-e | KUB 27.66 ii 14’ | (CTH 692, NS) | |
| ḫa-zi-*ú*-i | KUB 42.100 iii 26’ | (CTH 526, NS) | |
| gen. sg. (Hitt.) | ḫa-az-zi-wi5-ia-aš | KBo 2.8 iii 10’ | (CTH 526, NS) |
| ⸢ḫa-az-zi-wi5-ia-aš⸣ | KBo 2.8 iv 22’ | (CTH 526, NS) | |
| ḫa-az-zi-wi5-aš | KUB 30.41 left side 6 | (CTH 669, NS) | |
| [ḫ]a-az-zi-ú-⸢wi5?⸣-[aš?] | KUB 51.77 obv. 3’ | (CTH 666, NS) | |
| ḫa-az-zi-ú-i-ia-aš | KUB 55.54 iii 5’ | (CTH 652, NS) | |
| ḫa-az-zi-⸢ú⸣-i-aš | KUB 20.19 iii 2 | (CTH 635, NS) | |
| ḫa-zi-ú-i-ia-aš | KUB 58.5 i 4’ | (CTH 668, NS) | |
| ḫa-zi-ú-i-aš-š(=) | VSNF 15 ii 5 | (CTH 635, NS) | |
| dat./loc. sg. | ḫa-az-zi-wi5-ti | KUB 18.25 i 9’ | (CTH 577, NS) |
| nom./acc. pl. | ḫa-az-zi-wi5-ta | KUB 32.133 i 4 | (CTH 482, NS) |
| [ḫa]-az-zi-ú-e-da | KUB 14.13 i 34 | (CTH 378, NS) | |
| ḫa-az-zi-ú-iḪI.A | Bo 86/299 iii 66 | (CTH 106, NS) | |
| ⸢ḫa-zi-wi5ḪI.A⸣ | KUB 18.26 ii 8’ | (CTH 577, NS) | |
| gen. pl. (Hitt.) | ḫa-a[z-z]i-⸢wi5-ia⸣-aš | KuSa 1/1.27 i 10’ | (CTH 530, NS) |
| ḫa-zi-wi5-ia-aš | KUB 18.26 ii 9’ | (CTH 577, NS) | |
| dat./loc. pl. (Hitt.) | [ḫ]a-az-zi-wi5-ia-aš | KUB 16.26 ii 1’ | (CTH 582, NS) |
| ḫa-zi-wi5-aš | KUB 18.26 ii 12’ | (CTH 577, NS) | |
| ḫa-z[i-wi5-aš] | KUB 18.26 ii 17’ | (CTH 577, NS) | |
| ḫa-⸢zi⸣-wi5-i[a-aš] | KUB 50.44 ii 9’ | (CTH 572, NS) | |
| ḫa-az-zi-ú-i-ia-aš | KUB 42.100 iv 18’ | (CTH 526, NS) | |
| abl./instr. (Hitt.) | ḫa-az-zi-wi5-ia-za | KBo 2.7 ii 23 | (CTH 526, NS) |
The neuter forms of the nom./acc. sg. ḫazziwi probably belong to the -i(t)- stem, whereas the i-stem forms in -iyaš and -iyaza can be assigned to a common gender noun adapted to Hittite. – Pace HW 2nd ed. Ḫ:544, ⸢ḫa-az⸣ at KBo 2.8 iv 11’ more likely stands for KU6-az.
[E.R.]
1.2.3Graphic Features
Checked against the photographs of the Mainzer Fotoarchiv (no photos of KBo 2.7 ii 23 und KBo 22.242 iii 7’). – The attestation of LÚ.MEŠḫa-az-zi-ú-wa-aš iš-ḫe-eš features the so-called “unechte Nominalkomposition” with the determinative before the preposed genitive (KBo 58.129b i 8’, Neu 1986b:111f.), and together with the change of order between ḫa-az-zi-ú-i-ia LÚMEŠ (Bo 5383 r. col. 7’, 13’) and LÚ/MUNUSMEŠ ḫa-az-zi-ú-i-ia-aš (lit. ‘men/women of the rite’), this suggests that ḫazziwiyaš must be analyzed as a dependent genitive (not a free-standing unheaded genitive); see also HW 2nd ed. Ḫ:544 and Yakubovich & Mouton 2023b:335. Yakubovich & Mouton 2023b:335f. also argue against the equation of the term with the logograms SISKUR and SÍSKUR.
[E.R.]
1.2.3.1Phonological Interpretation
For ḫazziwi-, it is clear that -ú- and -wi5- represent a glide /w/, but there is no reason to assume that the same applies to word-final -ú in the base ḫazziu- (contra Weitenberg 1984a:276f., 305f., Neu 1986b:111f., CLL:67). On the contrary, the spelling ḫa-az-zi-e-u=š-še-et at KUB 43.33 obv. 6 makes a vocalic pronunciation very likely.
[E.R.]
1.2.4Meaning
The semantic interpretation as ‘rite’ goes back to independent lexical analyses by Götze 1933b:150 and Friedrich 1941-1944a:349 with n. 17. The latter plausibly inferred this from KUB 32.133 nu ke-e ḫa-az-zi-wi5-ta e-eš-ša-an-zi “and they shall perform this rite”, followed by the description of ritual activities (followed in DLL:45, HW:67f., von Schuler 1965a:165f., Kronasser 1966a:192, 240, HEG A-K:233, Weitenberg 1984a:246f., DCL:s.v.). As Yakubovich & Mouton 2023b:335 put it, they “constitute building blocks of both rituals and festivals” (contra Berman 1972a:95, who uses a more general translation ‘ritual’). Moreover, it has become clear that the word is also used metonymically for the cult supply (see Otten 1988a:48, followed by HHw:48, Starke 1990a:181, HW 2nd ed. Ḫ:543, Ünal 2007a:207).Following Archi 1973a:25 n. 76, the suggestion of Gurney 1940a:68 n. 1 that ḫazziwi(t)- denotes “some kind of entertainment” (still considered in Götze 1957a:163 with n. 5 and Weitenberg 1984a:246f.) can be regarded as outdated. However, this does not imply that entertaining activities such as dancing, singing, and playing music instruments cannot be included in the rites, see Starke 1985b:300 with n. 8.
[E.R.]
1.2.5Stem
The shortest stem of the sub-family, Hitt. ḫazziu- ‘rite’, occurs in rituals and festival texts as well as in an itinerary. Most, but not all of its attestations are found on MS tablets or belong to texts that go back to a pre-NH tradition, confirming the likely assumption that the u-stem constitutes the base of ḫazziwi(t)-; see already Neu 1986b:111f. (followed in DCL:s.v.; for the reverse assumption by Starke, see below), who regarded ḫazziu- as a borrowing from Hattian. However, an inner-Anatolian formation is likely. More precisely, although Hitt. ḫazziu- is substantivized, its stem formation parallels that of the adjective kuwaliu- in that it is derived from a thematic stem in -i(ya)- (cf. Rieken 2012a:278f., 281; different Starke 1990a:181-183, who interpreted -wi- as the combination of the suffixes -wa- plus -iya- and Hitt. ḫazziu- as a Hittitization of *ḫazzi=wa-). Over the course of the reduction of u-stems in Luwian, its unattested match *ḫazziu- was suffixed with the formant -i(t)- (likewise Hitt./Luw. arkiwi(t)- and ḫatiwi(t)-; contra Weitenberg 1984a:247f. miumiu(t)- and kištu(n)- do not belong to this class). It is the resulting stem ḫazziwi(t)- that underlies the neuter noun ḫazziwi(t)- and the i-stem ḫazziwi- in Hittite transmission (Starke 1990a:182).Outdated Kronasser 1966a:192, 240; Weitenberg 1984a:276f., 305f.; other attempts are listed in von Schuler 1965a:165.
[E.R.]
1.2.6Derivatives
1.2.7Origin
Scholars assume that ḫazziu-, ḫazziwi(t)-, ḫazziwi- all indiscriminately represent borrowings. While most resort to Hattian (Weitenberg 1984a, 246f., 276f., Neu 1986b:11f., HW 2nd ed. Ḫ:546, DCL:s.v.) or Hurrian (the latter on account of the “Hurrian endings” -ti and -ta; HED H:282-284, but see Starke 1990a:183), some do not decide between the two (Kronasser 1966a: 240, CLL:67). Even those who acknowledge the Luwian origin of the suffix -i(t)- believe in a loan word first borrowed into Luwian and transformed by the suffix, then passed on to Hittite (Neu 1986b:112 n. 20, HED H:282-284, DCL:s.v.). Only Starke 1990a:183, in accordance with the use of the gloss wedges at KUB 16.77 ii 33, seems to consider a Luwian origin, based on the putative suffix chain -wa- + -iya- + -i(t)-, although he does not address the etymology of the base word *ḫazzi-.On the second compound member -wiya- in female personal names, implausibly adduced by Starke, see Yakubovich 2013a. This gap can be filled now, since the verbal stem ḫazziye/a-(mi) ‘to engrave’ supplies a plausible basic meaning, which subsequently developed to *‘to count, account’ (in the context of book keeping) and further ‘to observe carefully’ and ‘to observe a (regular) rite’. The semantic change is paralleled by the word ‘rite’ (Lat. rītus, -ūs), itself a -tu- abstract noun *h2rei-tu- going back to the enlarged root *h2rei- ‘to count, observe carefully’ seen in OIr. renaid ‘to sell, exchange’, OIr. rīm, W. rhif ‘number’, Gk. νήριτος ‘countless’ (see EDLIL:s.v.). Also, NHG Recht ‘law’, which is semantically close to ‘rite’ in terms of obligation and regularity, has a cognate in the same semantic field, viz. NHG rechnen ‘to calculate’.
[E.R.]
For the lemma head see CLuw. *ḫatt-.