*sérlo-

Attested five times, the word occurs in texts from Amuq, Tabal, and Commagene. The pertinent inscriptions date to between the 10^th and the 8^th centuries BCE.

[AH.B.]

The barely attested form in ARSUZ 2, §21 is included in the above table on the basis of the attestation in ARSUZ 1, §21. Both inscriptions record the same content and only differ in line spacing and occasional spellings variants, but not in the actual words chosen.

It is not clear if the form attested in KULULU lead strip 1, §3.7 should be emended to 〈SUPER+ra/i〈-la〉-sa〉, or whether it should be assumed to show the likely assimilation of /VrlV/ to /VrrV/, considering that HLuw. shows wide-spread rhotacism, cf. Melchert 2003b:179-182 and Dinçol, Dinçol, Hawkins, Peker & Öztan 2015a:68.

[AH.B.]

The meaning suggested for the lexeme is based on both its etymological connections as well as its contexts of attestation. With respect to the latter, the context of ARSUZ 1, §§20-21 proves to be the most informative: *a-wa/i-mu SUPER+ra/i pu-tà *a-wa/i-mu OMNIS-mi REX SUPER+ra/i-li-na i-zi-i-tà, approx. /a=wa=mu sarra puda a=wa=mu tanimi hantawatti sarlin izzida/, ‘He lifted me up, and he made me chief to every king’, describing the benevolence the author believes the storm-god has shown him.

The previous interpretation of the word as the adjective /sarla/i-/ ‘high, upper’ as suggested by Hawkins 2000a:512 cannot be upheld in the face of the KULULU lead strip 1 evidence. Entries §3.7 and in particular §9.63 show that the phrase /sarli Tunas(a)/ should very likely be parsed as ‘the chief of (the town) Tuna’, instead of as a two-part town name ‘Upper Tuna’.

[AH.B.] [I.Y.]

Long assumed to be the adjective itself (cf. Hawkins 2000a:512), the word /sarla/i-/ is better analysed as a common gender noun. However, it derives from the unattested adjective /sarla/i-/ ‘high’ by conversion and therefore represents a substantivised version of it.

[AH.B.] [I.Y.]

1. /sarli/
2. /sarlaya/
3. /sarl(a)i-^(di)/
4. /sarladi/
5. /sarlada/
6. /sarlahid-/
7. /sarlatt(a)-/

All attestations are incomplete. They are found in ritual fragments from the Kuwattalla tradition.

[E.R.]

Checked against the photographs in the Mainzer Fotoarchiv. – The restoration of the acc. sg. c. form follows Yakubovich & Mouton 2023a:166.

[E.R.]

Without context, the meaning assignment depends on the analysis of the stem formation, which suggest that the šarli- forms represent reflexes of the adjective šarla/i- ‘upper’ attested in Hittite transmission and posited as the base word of the entries listed under Derivatives. Yakubovich & Mouton 2023a:112 (also Mouton 2023a:131) assume that it is used in Luwian context as the epithet of the Sun-god, hence the translation ‘supreme’.

[E.R.]

The case forms with -i- point to a stem with i-mutation, viz. šarla/i-, as does the i-stem adjective borrowed into Hittite (DCL:s.v.).

[E.R.]

The lexeme occurs in the rituals of Pupuwanni and Anniwiyanni. It is also attested in personal names and place names, for which see HEG Š:916.

[E.R.]

CHD Š:277 and DCL:s.v. analyze šarliya as neuter nom./acc. pl. Such forms in -iya are very rare compared to forms in endingless -i and ablauting -aya. However, karuwiliya at KUB 33.106 iii 52’ provides a parallel. – The reading š]ar^?-li-aš-ši-in-zi claimed for KUB 35.25 rev. 3’ by Yakubovich & Mouton 2023a:212 does not find support through collation of the photograph. Apart from the worn surface of the tablet in general, the alleged Winkelhaken of the ŠI sign is located too high above the virtual middle line (cf. ŠI in rev. 11’). Accordingly, the form is excluded here.

[E.R.]

Checked against the photographs in the Mainzer Fotoarchiv.

[E.R.]

On account of its form and stem formation (derivative of the root šar- ‘up, above’ by means of an -l- suffix, see under Stem), šarli- must be an adjective denoting superposition, just like its cognate stems in Hieroglyphic-Luwian and Lydian (since Laroche 1959c, see also Kronasser 1966a:479, Starke 1990a:398 n. 1434, HHw:145, EDHIL:735f., Yakubovich 2010d:236, HEG Š:916f., HED SA:184). The contexts bear this assumption out. At HT 35 rev. 5, an upper millstone is mentioned, and at VBoT 24 iii 8, the upper parts, i.e. the surface, of dough is taken off from on top in order to prepare a bread (n=ašta šarliya šer arḫa daḫḫi “I take away from on top the upper (parts)” (slightly modified from CHD Š:277f., which see for contexts and translations).Cf. CHD Š:277f. for several outdated semantic interpretations. In addition, NINDA šarli- is frequently read as ^NINDAšarli- and disconnected from šarli- ‘upper’, see Kronasser 1966a:479, Ünal 2007a:616, HHw:145 s.v. šarli- c., HEG Š:917 s.v. šarli- c.

[E.R.]

While it is agreed that šarli- is derived from šar- ‘up, above’, the nature of the suffix has been interpretated in various ways. Whereas some scholars assume an inherited Hittite suffix -li- (EDHIL:735f., HEG Š:917, HED SA:184), and Yakubovich 2010d:236 proposes šarli- < *sarili- with Luw. -ili-, Melchert (DCL:s.v. šarl(ā)i-) claims that the adjectival examples of šarli- are the reflex of Luw. šarla/i- with generalization of the i-stem variant. Although Melchert does not explicate which of the attestations of šarli- he regards as adjectival, his analysis represents the most economical solution and, moreover, explains the distribution of the occurrences in terms of text type and chronology (vis-à-vis genuinely Hitt. šarazziya- ‘upper’); see also below under Reconstruction.

[E.R.]

The opinions about the origin of šarli- correlate with the assumed origin of the suffix -li- (see under Stem). Thus, Laroche 1959c:295, Yakubovich 2010d:236, and Melchert (DCL:s.v. šarl(ā)i-; still undecided Melchert 2005a:449) do not only posit an adjective šarla/i-, but also see it attested in the adjectival forms listed above (see under Forms and, in addition, CLuw. šarla/i- ‘supreme’). The position is accepted here.

[E.R.]

This noun is attested in inscriptions of various genres, all of which are found in Sardis. The inscription LW 71 is dated to the 4^th century BCE, whereas other texts can be only dated within the broad range of 5^th - 4^th century BCE.

[I.Y.]

The restoration of [šer]ḷiš šrmlị[š] in LW 71 is reliable.

[I.Y.]

The mutually interconnected connected inscriptions LW 23 and LW 24 make it contextually clear that šerl(i)- refers to a high authority representing the temple of Artemis (cf. Lyd. širma-). The only interpretation problem concerned with this term is whether it is used with reference to a person or an office. According to Meriggi 1935a:74 n. 6, this is an office in LW 23-24 but a person in LW 10. The uniform interpretation ‘administration’ is preferred in Gusmani 1964a:194f. But both the juxtaposition of šelli- and wora- ‘son, child’ in LW 10 and the ability of šerli- to make a declaration in LW 24 speak rather in favor of a personal interpretation. Therefore, without denying the possibility that this etymological adjective could, in principle, be used with reference to an office, one can suggest that all of its available attestations are compatible with reference to a supervising administrator.

[I.Y.]

Synchronically, this is a semi-vocalic stem, as is expected of a noun endowed with the suffix -l(i)-, which is otherwise deployed for forming possessive adjectives. 

[I.Y.]

1. šarloki-^(d)