īppatarrišša-⁽ⁱ⁾

All three attestations of the verb are found in the duplicate incantations embedded in MS^? and NS manuscripts of the Kuwattalla tradition.

[E.R.]

3sg. pret. act.	i-ip-pa-tar-ri-eš-ša-ta	KUB 35.48 ii 15’	(CTH 760, NS)
	ip-pa-tar-ri-ša-at-ta	KUB 35.45 ii 22	(CTH 760, NS)
	[ip-pa-tar-ri-š]a-at-⸢ta⸣	KBo 29.10, 2’	(CTH 760, MS?)

The verb form a-ap-pa-at-ri-〈wa〉-an-zi (KBo 6.26 i 28) with a diagnostically Luwian spelling of a-aC- (vs. ap-p° elsewhere) is non-existent, because its initial a- is erased (CLL:22). Accordingly, as Melchert (ibid.) points out, the alleged base †*āppattar/āppattn- posited by Starke 1990a:498 lacks its foundation, whereas nothing speaks against a Hittite verb appatriye/a-^(mi) ‘to distrain’. However, contra CLL:22, Kronasser 1966a:491, and Sasseville 2021a:493f., it is not derived from a heteroclitic abstract noun in -ātar/-ann-, but from a Hittite instrument noun in -tra-.

[E.R.]

Checked against the photographs in the Mainzer Fotoarchiv.

[E.R.]

The verb is used transitively, parallel to šaḫḫanišša-⁽ⁱ⁾: ([Sun-go]d, divine lord, give them (to me), the enemies, the lords of vengeful words, traps, judgments, curse, perjury,) ku-i-ša-an ša-aḫ-ḫa-ni-iš-ša-at-ta ku-i-ša-an ip-pa-tar-ri-ša-at-ta “Whoever imposed service on it, whoever distrained it,” (the ritual patron’s shape, flesh, bone(s) ...)” (KUB 35.45 ii 21f., largely following Mouton, Puértolas Rubio & Yakubovich, pers. comm.). Adducing Hitt. appatriye/a-^(mi) ‘to distrain’ and šaḫḫan- ‘feudal service’ for a semantic and etymological comparison, Rosenkranz 1952a:71 suggests ‘to distrain’ also for CLuw. īppatarrišša-⁽ⁱ⁾. In spite of being easily reconcilable with the context, the translation entered the handbooks only slowly, thus CLL:91, Melchert 1994a:79, 241, Sasseville 2021a:153 n. 32 and 493f., implicit Starke 1990a:505 (but not DLL:52, HHw:62). However, the skepticism pronounced in Rieken 1999a:341 with n. 1674, i.e. that Hitt. appatriye/a-^(mi) is a legal term unexpected in a ritual, is unnecessary, since the same would apply to šaḫḫanišša-⁽ⁱ⁾ ‘to impose service on’, and a metaphorical use is always possible (cf. HED A, E, I:99 and Sasseville 2021a:493f.); cf. now also Simon 2010b:261: ‘Besitz ergreifen’.Güterbock 1956a:130 and DLL:52 consider a connection with ipatarma-, now interpreted as ‘west’; cf. under Reconstruction of the lemma head.

[E.R.]

There is a consensus that the present verb is a -šša-suffixed denominative verb in -i-^(ti) (Starke 1990a:507, Melchert 1994a:241, Melchert 1997b:132, Sasseville 2021a:153 n. 32 and 493f.). For its base, Melchert (CLL:91, Melchert 1994a:241) reconstructs an instrument noun in -tar- (< *-tro-) ‘means of seizing’ (cf. ‘means of sitting’ in ištarta- ‘throne’), which explains the r-stem base perfectly and is therefore adopted here.

[E.R.]

For the lemma head see CLuw. āp(p)-^(ti).