teture

This lexeme is attested on the inscribed pillar of Xanthos, dated shortly after the ascension of Artaxerxes II in 405-404 BCE.

[D.S.]

Based on our own photograph, the letter 〈r〉 in teture is written like an 〈a〉. Since both letters are very similar, it is surely a scribal mistake, because the sequence -uae would be unparalleled in Lycian, while -ure makes much more sense both phonologically and morphologically. Kalinka 1901a:44 reads an 〈r〉. Shevoroshkin 2002b:141 reads wrongly **tutltu. Schürr 2018b:60, 63 reads the second letter as 〈l〉 instead 〈e〉, although the lower part of the sign is damaged. Based on our own photograph, the vertical stroke can still partly be seen, thus we read tẹtur^!e (contra Schürr ibid.).

[D.S.]

The word teture is formally a dative plural, which must agree with the dative plural trm̃mile ‘Lycians’ in spite of the discontinuous syntax. The sentence stipulates that king Gergis must prepare the offerings for the Storm-god in the Lycian teture-s. Therefore, the word teture could refer to a place. Contra Neumann 2007a:353 and Gehrisch 2018a:96, the dative plural teture cannot agree with the dative singular trqqñti ‘to the Storm-god’ and, therefore, it cannot represent a divine epithet. Moreover, to posit a dative singular -e for the stem or teture is not convincing. The only stems where a dative singular in -e could exist would be s-stems (see Schürr 2017-2018a:272). For an overview of the outdated literature see Neumann ibid.

[D.S.]

Based on its only attestation, we cannot decide which nominal stem lies behind teture. It could be a mutated common gender stem, i.e. teture/i-, a neuter stem, i.e. teture-, a common gender e-stem or an a-stem, i.e. tetura-.

[D.S.]