isq(i)-

This lexeme is found in two inscriptions from Sardis that cannot be dated with any accuracy.

[D.S.]

acc. sg.	isqν	LW 80.5 (Sardis)
	isq(ν)	LW 10.15 (Sardis)
	fasqν	LW 80.7 (Sardis)

For the attribution of these two words to the same lexemes and the restoration of isq(ν) in LW 10.15 see Gusmani 1975b:18. Schürr 2011a:76 suggests interpreting fasqν as fa- + isqν, which occurs in the same context as isqν. This is indeed attractive, although he assumes that the i of isqν is elided before the prefix, which is contradicted by examples such as fiš- < fa-iš- (cf. fišfid, fištroẉν̣, fišqãnt). However, if one sees the initial sequence is- as a prothetic vowel originating in Pre-Lydian *sC- (see under Lyd. istupeλm(i)-), its absence in the prefix form fasqν can be better understood, i.e. fa- + sqν.

[D.S.]

Gusmani 1980a:61 points out that isqν in LW 80.5 takes as its attribute tawsẽν ‘great, powerful’, an epithet otherwise applied to deities, which implies that isqν could be a god. This receives tentative support from the other attestation (LW 10.15), occurring in an oracular context. Schürr 2011a:76 follows Gusmani and suggests further that it refers to a god of the underworld, because the two steles containing these inscriptions are funerary in his opinion. However, neither of the two mentions a grave (wãna-). Schürr’s argument is not valid at any rate, since various gods are called upon to protect graves in Lydian inscriptions without being necessarily associated with the underworld, e.g. Artemis, Kybele, the War-god (sãnta-). On a possible but unlikely preservation of this word in Greek transmission, one should compare Sh. Hawkins 2013a:205 with further literature.

[D.S.]

For the assumption of a mutated stem in isq(i)- based on the accusative singular in -ν, see Sasseville 2017a.

[D.S.]

No etymology possible.

[D.S.]