*Hón-/Hn-´

1. /haniyatta-/
2. /haniyattastarr(i)-/
3. /hanhaniwan-/

The word is only attested in two NS manuscripts of the Instructions for Priests and Temple Personnel (CTH 264), cf. Miller 2013a:244–265 for further details on this text.

[A.B.]

3sg. pres. act.	ḫa-an-ḫa-⸢ni-ia-i⸣	KUB 13.4 obv. i 27’	CTH 264, NS
	ḫa-an-ḫa-ni-ia-i	KUB 13.4 rev. iii 63	CTH 264, NS
	ḫa-an-ḫa-ni-ia-i	KUB 13.5 rev. iii 34’	CTH 264, NS

The attestations follow Laroche 1959a:39, HW (2nd ed.) Ḫ:158; CLL:51; HED H:89; HEG A–K 148f., (cf. Rosenkranz 1950a:191; Starke 1990a:388, n. 1402; Ünal 2007a:159; Ünal 2016a:149; van den Hout 2007a:246, EDHIL:284, and Zorman 2007a:759). The transliterations have been checked against the photos of the Mainzer Fotoarchiv.

[A.B.]

Laroche 1959a:39 did not propose any meaning for this word. The other authors suggest a variety of possible meanings, depending on how they interpret the context of KUB 13.4 obv. i 22’–27’. The transliteration is based on the photo from the Mainzer Fotoarchiv, and also, the hand copy as well as transliterations, restorations and translations of Miller 2013a:248f., CHD Š:57 under the lemma *šakuwannant- (cf. Sturtevant & Bechtel 1935a:148f., van Brock 1964a:139, HW (2nd ed.) Ḫ:158, HEG S:747 and HED H:89 and Sa:48–50) have been taken into account:

(22’)zi-an-za-ma 1-aš-pát ìr-šu? ⸢ku⸣-wa-pí a-na en-šu pé-ra-⸢an⸣ ša-ra-a ar-ta-ri (23’)na-aš wa-ar-pa-an-za nu pár-ku-wa-ia wa-aš-ša-an ḫar-⸢zi⸣ (24’)⸢nu⸣-uš-ši na-aš-šu a-da-an-na pé-eš-ke-ez-zi na-aš-ma-aš-ši a-ku-wa-an-na ⸢pé-eš⸣-ke-ez-zi (25’)nu-za a-pa-a-aš en-šu az-zi-ik-ke-ez-zi ak-ku-uš-⸢ke⸣-ez-zi ku-⸢it⸣ (26’)na-aš zi-an ar-ḫa la-a-an-za na-at-ši-kán an-⸢da⸣ ⸢da⸣-me-en-⸢kiš-ke-et-ta⸣ (27’)ma-a-na-aš an-da-ma ku-wa-pí igi-wa-an-na-an-za na-aš-⸢kán ul⸣ ḫa-an-ḫa-⸢ni-ia-i⸣

(22’)The mind (of a deity and of a man) however, is indeed one (and the same). When a servant stands up before his master, (23’)then he is washed and he wears clean (clothes?) (24’)and he keeps giving him (something) to eat and he keeps giving him (something) to drink (25’)and since this one, his master, eats and drinks regularly, (26’)he is of a detached mind and he is continuously connected to him, (27’)but if he is ever drawing attention (in a negative way, by doing something wrong), will he (the master) not ḫanḫaniya-?

The texts passage aims at explaining the rationale behind the need for purity serving the gods. The meaning of ḫanḫaniya- is connected to the interpretation of igi-wa-an-na-an-za (= Hitt. šakuwannant- of uncertain meaning) in the same sentence.

Sturtevant & Bechtel 1935a:149 assume that the servant is the subject of both verbs “If, however he (the slave) is ever dilatory (?), and is not observant (?) (...)”, cf. HW (2nd ed.) Ḫ:158: “Wenn er (der Sklave) aber irgendwann säumig (ist) und er nicht aufmerksam ist (…)”, deducing a meaning ‘to be observing, attentive, mindful’ for ḫanḫaniya-.

HEG S:747 assumes that the master is the subject: “Solange er (der Herr eines Sklaven) aber (gut) betreut ist und er (ihn) nicht tadelt”, deducing a meaning ‘to blame’ (cf. HEG A–K:148f., Tischler 2008a:42 and Tischler 2016a:149, similarly Süel 1985a:350 ‘to blame, to punish’).

In contrast, van Brock 1964a:140 considers a change of subject: “mais s’il (l’esclave) est négligment, ne le blâme-t-il pas?”.

CHD Š:57 (not completely excluding a different meaning for šakuwannant-) translates: “But if ever he (i.e. the master) is neglected (?) (or: he (i.e., the servant) is idle), is he (the master) not displeased?” (cf. HED Sa:48–50). Also suggested have been: ‘to be malicious’ (cf. CLL:51, Melchert 2005a:448, EDHIL:284 and van den Hout 2007a:231, n. 59), ‘to be malevolent’ (cf. Zorman 2007a:759) and ‘to be vexed(?), be dissatisfied(?)’ (cf. Hoffner & Melchert 2008a:173). Miller 2013a:249 translates ‘perturbed’, and Klinger 2001a:74 opts for: “Wenn er bemüht ist, wird er (der Herr) keinen Fehler an ihm finden”. Finally, Ünal 2007a:159 (cf. Ünal 2016a:149) considers the options: ‘to observe?’ ‘to be malicious?’, ‘to be displeased’.

The second attestation of this verb is found on the rev. iii of the same tablet in lines 62–68. The transliteration is based on the photo of the Konkordanz, and the hand copy as well as transliterations, restorations and translations of Miller 2013a:259f., 389 n. 488 and Sturtevant & Bechtel 1935a:160f. (cf. also HED H:89 and Klinger 2001a:79) have also been taken into account:

(62)nu tùgḪI.A pár-⸢ku-wa-ia⸣ [(ú-e-eš)]-tén nam-ma-aš-ma-aš-kán iš-ḫi-⸢i⸣-ni-uš umbinMEŠ-ia (63)da-a-an e-eš-⸢du⸣ nu-uš-m[(a-aš)]-kán dingirMEŠ-aš zi-an-za le-e ḫa-an-ḫa-ni-ia-i

(62)And you must [(wear)] clean clothes. Furthermore, your(pl.) hair and nails (63)must be trimmed. The soul / mind of the deities shall not ḫanḫaniya- (about?) y[(ou)].

The duplicate to this passage KUB 13.5 rev. iii 34’ is fragmentary but the corresponding line also shows: [… z]i-an-za le-e ḫa-an-ḫa-ni-ia-i (…).

The contexts show that the verb ḫanḫaniya- is used to describe a reaction to inappropriate behavior or, as HED H:89 puts it, "some form of displeased temper", but they do not allow for an exact determination of the meaning.

Another option to shed light on the meaning of this word is to compare it with similar Hittite and Luwian words. For the generally assumed rejection of a connection to Hitt. ḫanna- ‘to judge’ (this connection had been suggested by Neumann 1973a:248) on morphological grounds, cf. Starke 1990a:388 with n. 1402, EDHIL:284, HEG A–K:147 remains undecided but sceptical. Furthermore, a connection with Hitt. ḫān-/ḫan- ‘to draw liquids’ (cf. EDHIL:281f.) can be excluded since it does not fit the context.

Starke 1990a:388 with n. 1402 connects ḫanḫaniya- with equally reduplicated HLuwian /hanhaniwan-/, (“MALUS₂”)ha-ha-ní-wa/i- ‘bad thing’ (see under the respective lemma), questioning the interpretation suggested by van Brock 1964a:139ff. and supporting instead a meaning ‘be malicious’. A connection to HLuw. hanhaniwa- is also listed under ḫanḫaniya- in CLL:51, which furthermore considers a connection to a Luwian word *ḫaniya- (cf. below) and suggests a meaning ‘be malicious’ (the same meaning is suggested for fragmentary CLuw. word  *]ḫaniya-, cf. under Origin). But this meaning and a connection to corresponding Luwian words is rejected by HW (2nd ed.) Ḫ:158, who follows van Brock 1964a. Hoffner & Melchert 2008a:173 suggest a translation as ‘to be vexed (?), be dissatisfied(?)’ based on a connection to Hieroglyphic Luwian *hani(ya)- ‘malicious’ (for a Luwian verb /*haniya-(i)/, cf. under Reconstruction), also EDHIL:284 relates ḫanḫaniya- to the Luwian haniya- group. This meaning would fit the context by representing a malevolent attitude or mood. For formal connections, cf. under Origin.

HEG A–K:148f. considers a possible connection to another Glossenkeilwort:ḫanḫaman- (of unknown meaning). Furthermore a connection to the plant-designation ḫanḫanišaSAR- (?), cf. HW (2nd ed.) Ḫ:158 could be considered. But since the meaning of both words is unknown, they do not help to clarify the semantics of ḫanḫaniya-.

[A.B.]

Although it appears with Hittite inflection (cf. under Forms), ḫanḫaniya- is generally assumed to be of Luwian origin, cf. Laroche 1959a:39, van Brock 1964a:139, CLL:51, HW (2nd ed.) Ḫ:158, HED H:89, EDHIL:284, and the lists of Luwianisms by Melchert 2005a:448 and van den Hout 2007a:246. One reason for this classification is the gloss marker, which could point to a Luwian origin but does not necessarily prove it (cf. Schwartz 1938a:75, 78 and Melchert 2005a:445).

With regard to the morphology of the word, Van Brock 1964a:122 assumes a doubling of the entire verbal root, cf. Hoffner & Melchert 2008a:173 who consider a reduplicated form of a verb *haniya-. This verb could either be Hittite or Luwian. The fragmentary CLuw. word  *]ḫaniya-mentioned under Meaning could show the attestation of such a verb, but this assumption is uncertain because it is probably acephalic.

The assumed base verb could also be attested in HLuwian haniya- ‘malicious’ (cf. under Meaning). If one of these options applies, ḫanḫaniya- would be a Luwian loanword in Hittite.

For another Glossenkeilwort that probably also belongs to the same base, cf. the lemma ḫaninu-.

[A.B.]