marušaša/i-

This word is attested in two inventory texts, although the second occurrence is found in a severely broken passage.

[E.R.]

Checked against the photographs in the Mainzer Fotoarchiv.

[E.R.]

This lexeme, including its formal and semantic interpretation, is a crux. In IBoT 1.31 we read: 1 ^GIPISAN SA₅ GÌR NU.GÁL ḫar‑ki‑aš ma‑ru‑ša‑ša‑aš. Already Güterbock 1956a:116 n. b opted for the reading ḫar‑ki‑aš ‘white’Götze 1956a:32, 37 read ḫur‑ki‑aš “… of a wheel” and left the word in question untranslated; this interpretation of ḫurkiaš as belonging to ḫurki- ‘wheel’ is still followed in Ünal 2007a:435 leading him to suggest ‘part of a wheel’ for marušaša-. and, since our lexeme could be considered a derivative of the family of words from the reconstructed base *maru- ‘red’, thought that it also referred to a color, viz. ‘red’; hence the translation ‘1 basket with no leg containing white and red (wool, clothes, garment)’ in Košak 1982a:8f.Already Götze 1956a:32, 37 drew attention to the possible connection with marušamma/i-. The absence of the conjunction -a between ḫar‑ki‑aš and ma‑ru‑ša‑ša‑aš would not be problematic, but the syllabic spelling of ḫar‑ki‑aš instead of the Sumerogram BABBAR is unusual. If marušaša- is a color term derived from *maruw-, it denotes ‘black, dark’ rather than ‘red’; see marwāi(ya)- ‘dark’ and maruwāi- ‘to blacken, darken’ (see also HED M:89f.).

CHD L-N:203 proposes a second possibility, namely that marušašaš is a noun, leading to the translation “one red reed basket/hamper (?) (which) has no foot, of (i.e. containing) white m.”, which is now favored by some scholars (see Zeilfelder 1997a:202, HHw:102, and HEG L-N:150f. (‘wertvolle Handelsware’, a translation not utterly ruled out by Zinko 2001a:421, n. 69). In any case, since the grammatical analysis of this lexeme seems to point to the Hittite genitive of a Luwian genitival adjective connected to the family of *maruw- (see below under Stem), parallel to ḫarkiaš, a translation “1 red chest, no feet. White (and) black (things)” is favored here (see Burgin 2022b:40f., 46, ultimately following Košak). Nevertheless, the asyndeton of two color words and the absence of an explicit head noun remains awkward and puzzling.Outdated is Kronasser 1966a:167, 189.

[E.R.]

Despite some previous doubts (see under Meaning), today the interpretation as a Luwian genitival adjective is the one encountering the least problems. Those scholars who already thought it belonged to *maruw- (DLL:69,HEG L-N:150f., HED M:89f.) long considered it an iterative -šša-⁽ⁱ⁾ derivative from the base verb maruwa- (see marušamma/i- ‘(of) dark blue, black’).HHw:102 treats marušaša- together with marrutti, likewise debated. CLL:141 and DCL:s.v. cite the word under marušamma/i- without commentary. In contrast, it is assumed here that we are dealing with the Hittite genitive of a Luwian genitival adjective in -ašša/i- formed to the base *maruš-, which semantically and grammatically stands up to scrutiny. This solution follows the suggestion by Rieken 1999a:195 n. 908 and the similar conclusions by Zinko 2001a:421 n. 69.

[E.R.]

According to the solution accepted here, with marušaša/i- as an ultimate derivative of the root maruw- and further as a genitival adjective to an s-stem *maruš-, we are dealing with a Luwian word; for the Luwian origin of the entire word family see the lemma head.

[E.R.]

*This lemma was written together with the trainee Marco Ammazzini.

For the lemma head see CLuw. *maruwa-.