ḫurtiyalla-

The noun occurs in festival texts and an Old Hittite ritual.

[E.R.]

acc. sg.	[ḫ]u-ur-ti-ia-al-la-an	KBo 17.1 i 7’	(CTH 416, OS)
	ḫu-ur-ti-ia-[al-la-an]	KBo 17.1 i 13’	(CTH 416, OS)
dat./loc. sg.	ḫu-ur-ti-ia-li	KBo 17.1 i 7’	(CTH 416, OS)
	⸢ḫu-ur-ti-ia⸣-[li]-ia	KBo 17.1 i 16’	(CTH 416, OS)
	ḫu-ur-⸢ti⸣-ia-li-ia	KBo 17.1 i 17’	(CTH 416, OS)
abl.	TU7ḫur-ti-la-za	KBo 59.90 obv.? 6’	(CTH 625, NS)
dat./loc. pl.	[DUGḫ]u-ur-ti-ia-al-la-aš	KUB 45.55 obv. 10’	(CTH 628, NS)
	DUGḫur-⸢ti⸣-ia-al-la-[aš]	KUB 34.99, 8’	(CTH 628, NS)

The assignment of ^TU7ḫurtila- (listed only in Ünal 2007a:240) to the present lemma is not entirely certain, but in view of the frequent metonymic transfer of vessel names to the dishes prepared in them also attested for ḫu(wa)rti‑, ^TU7ḫurta/i- ‘decoction, infusion’ the most economic solution is to assume a syncope of ‑iya- > ‑i- and a deficient spelling of ‑ll-. Alternatively, ^TU7ḫurtila- could contain the unproductive suffix Hitt. ‑la- (ḫurti-la-) oder Luw. ‑il(i)- (ḫurt-il(i)-).

[E.R.]

Checked against the photographs in the Mainzer Fotoarchiv. – Reading of [^DUGḫ]u-ur-ti-ia-al-la-aš at KUB 45.55 obv. 10’ contra HW 2nd ed. Ḫ:773, since traces of the final vertical wedge of ḪU are still visible and thus exclude the reading U for the initial sign.

[E.R.]

The interpretation as a receptacle, possibly a wide one (‘Becken’), was first suggested by Friedrich (HW:77) and confirmed by the use of the determinative DUG for vessels. Friedrich’s interpretation was generally followed (e.g. by Otten & Souček 1969a:114, Neu 1985a:72), while the meaning was sometimes modified in view of the assumed etymological relationship with ḫu(wa)rti- ‘decoction, infusion, soup; decoction vessel’ and ḫurtalli- ‘mash, medley; opponent’, e.g. in HHw:56 “Aufgußkessel”, HW 2nd ed. Ḫ:77 2f.: “ein Gefäß (Auffangschale oder Becken)”, and here; cf. also HED H:439, Ünal 2007a:240.Outdated is Laroche 1951c:188 (related to ḫa/urziyalla- ‘lizard’), see Otten & Souček 1969a:114, HEG A-K:313.

[E.R.]

Synchronically, the stem varies between a stem in -alla‑, presumably abstracted from Luwian i-mutated ‑alla/i‑, and -ali‑, the same suffix influenced by the Hittite instrument noun suffix -āli- (Rieken 1994a:49).Melchert’s (CLL:77) analysis of ḫurtiyaliya as ḫurtiyali + =ya ‘and’ runs counter to the contextual evidence cf. HW 2nd ed. Ḫ:772f.

Etymologically, it can be regarded as received scholarship that the variants ḫurtiyal(l)i‑, ^DUGḫurtiyalla‑, ^TU7ḫurtila- ‘(a vessel and stew)’ represent a cognate of ḫu(wa)rti- ‘decoction, infusion, soup; decoction vessel’ and ḫurtalli- ‘mash, medley; opponent’. Jucquois & Lebrun 1979a:111 and HED H:439 assume that ḫu(wa)rti- constitutes the base, which was derived with -alla/i- (or its Hittite offshoots), whereas CLL:77 suggests a two-step process from ḫu(wa)rt(i)- with i-mutation via an unattested relational adjective *ḫu(wa)rti(ya)- to form the lexeme under discussion. Either option is viable, depending on whether one assumes an inner-Luwian chain, or accepts that ḫuwarti- is an early loanword into Hittite that served as the base for an inner-Hittite derivation with the suffixes ‑alla- and -alli- (→ -āli-) likewise borrowed into Hittite. Finally, it is conceivable, but perhaps less economical, that the inner-Luwian derivative ḫurt-alli- was restructured as ḫurtiy-alli- due to the influence of the i-stem loanword ḫu(wa)rti-. For ^TU7ḫurtila‑, see under Forms.Outdated is Kronasser 1966a:173 (nomen actoris, substantivized deverbal -la- adjective).

[E.R.]

Luwian origin of this member of the word family of Luw. ḫu(wa)rt- is considered, assumed or presupposed in Jucquois & Lebrun 1979a:111, CLL:77, Rieken 1994a:49, DCL:80.

[E.R.]

For the lemma head see ḫu(wa)rti-.