*u̯(e)i̯s-to-

Hapax in a Hittite ritual in NS.

[Zs.S.]

gen.? sg.

NINDAú-i-iš-ta-aš

KUB 9.17, 16’

(CTH 685, NS)

The attestation follows EDHIL:1013 (cf. also Berman 1972a:56; Ünal 2007a:805, Ünal 2016a:595) checked against the photograph of the Konkordanz.

The form is defined by Starke 1990a:73 n. 170 as a genitive, but as an acc. pl. by McMahon 1991a:220f. (followed by Tischler 2016a:568). According to EDHIL:1013 its case is unknown, but he translates the passage in genitive with question mark. The passage is as follows (KUB 9.17, 15’-16’, transliteration and translation following McMahon 1991a:220f.):

LÚ ^GIŠ˹TIR˺ ^NINDAú-i-iš-ta-aš NINDA-an ú-un-ga-na-an-ta-an ḫar-zi pal-ú-˹iš˺[-ki-iz-zi-ya^?]

‘The grove keeper holds w. (and^?) *unganai-ed bread (and) recites(?)’

The acc. pl. ending -aš appears, however, only with i-stems, thus the ending is normally -iyaš (Hoffner & Melchert 2008a:71), except very few isolated cases with -aš (Melchert 1995b:271). Since the dat. pl. does not seem to make sense here, one must assume either this very rare by-form of an i-stem or a genitive (e.g. a genitivus materiae) as ‘an *unganai-ed bread (made^?) of wīšta-’. The latter option is followed here cautiously, since it is more frequent.

[Zs.S.]

Due to its determinative NINDA meaning literally ‘bread’, there is a general agreement that this word denotes a bread type (Laroche 1955a:75; Kammenhuber 1955b:364 n. 1, Kammenhuber 1956a:8, Kammenhuber 1959a: 18f.; Neumann 1962a:208 n. 13; Berman 1972a:56; Hoffner 1974a:190; Ünal 2007a:805, Ünal 2016a:595; EDHIL:1013; Tischler 2016a:442 [but cf. below]). Nevertheless, since Hittite texts refer with NINDA to a broad variety of breads and pastries, it is more prudent to assume a broader semantics as ‘a type of bread or pastry’ (with Friedrich 1957a:23; Tischler 2008a:228, Tischler 2016a:568).

Its single attestation (cf. above) does not permit a more precise definition of its meaning, thus only its etymology remains as a possible clue. However, its etymology is not clear (cf. EDHIL:1013 and Tischler 2016a:568f., both with refs. and here below; EDHIL:1013 underlined the lack of semantic evidence for the meaning ‘Kringel’ proposed by Starke 1990a:73, 495 on the basis of an etymology from an alleged PIE root *weis- ‘to turn, twist, wind around’), thus it is not helpful either.

[Zs.S.]

Although Starke 1990a:73 n. 170 claimed that this word is “sicher” a loanword from Luwian, it is still considered to be genuine Hittite, without even mentioning the hypothesis of Starke (EDHIL:1013 and Tischler 2016a:568f.; not included in the list of Luwianisms of Melchert 2005a and van den Hout 2007a, either) or, at best, as a loanword from Palaic wīšta- ‘a type of bread or pastry’ (EDHIL:1013). Starke based his proposal on the theonym ^DWīštašša/i- and the toponym ^URUWīštawanda- ‘rich of wīšta-’, both of which go back to this bread or pastry type in his opinion. However, as discussed s.v. wīštašša/i-, it is not possible to exclude that these terms are derived from a homonymous word or (alternatively and more economically) wīšta- refers to a matter or plant, which was used for making this specific bread or pastry and this wīšta-matter or plant is the base of both the theonym and the toponym. If the latter assumption is correct, one must assume that also Luwian had a word wīšta- due to the specifically Luwian suffix in ^DWīštašša/i- and in fact also wištatnim(m)a/i- ‘a type of bread or pastry’, a Luwian loanword in Hittite (see s.v.) requires the existence of wīšta- in Luwian due to its Luwian suffixes (as pointed out by Tischler 2016a:568). Thus the question is whether this Hittite wīšta- is a genuine Hittite word or a loan from Luwian or Palaic. Since synchronically speaking nothing requires a loanword, only the etymology could decide this issue, but until its etymology is unclear, one must leave the Luwian status of this word open.

[Zs.S.]

Last updated: 29 April 2020

This lexeme is found in the incantations of the festival for the Palaic pantheon.

[D.S.]

nom. sg. c.	ú-iš-ta-a[š]	KUB 35.165 obv. 13’	(CTH 751, OS or MS)
	ú-iš-ta-[aš]	KUB 35.165 obv. 14’	(CTH 751, OS or MS)
	[ú-i]š-ta-aš	KUB 35.165 obv. 18’	(CTH 751, OS or MS)
	[ú-]iš-ta-aš	KUB 35.165 obv. 19’	(CTH 751, OS or MS)
	ú-i-i[š-ta-aš]	KUB 32.17 + KUB 35.167 4’	(CTH 751, MS?)
	ú-i-iš-˹ta˺[-aš]	KUB 32.17 + KUB 35.167 5’	(CTH 751, MS?)
	ú-iš-ta-aš	KUB 32.17 + KUB 35.167 11’	(CTH 751, MS?)
	ú-iš-ta-aš	KUB 32.17 + KUB 35.167 12’	(CTH 751, MS?)
nom./acc. pl. n.	ú-i-iš-ta	KBo 19.152 + KBo 27.77 ii 6’	(CTH 751, MS)
	ú-i-iš-ta	KBo 19.152 + KBo 27.77 ii 7’	(CTH 751, MS)

The word wīšta- is always attested in the same two formulas and it must be regarded as an adjective modifying p/wulašina- ‘bread’: This is supported by its nom./acc. pl. n. forms (KBo 19.152 + KBo 27.77 ii 6’, 7’), where it should agree with the collective [p/wulāšina], which is broken off. This eliminates the possibility of seeing wīštaš as a substantive in the genitive case. Another reason why it can be excluded that wīštaš is a substantive in apposition to p/wulašina- is that we expect the appositional element to follow the head noun. Its interpretation as an adjective, on the other hand, finds support from the word order, which is always the same for the two formulas: ATTRIBUTIVE ADJECTIVE + GENITIVE + HEAD, i.e. wištaš (nom. sg. c.) šamlūwaš (gen. sg.) wulašinaš (nom. sg.) // wištaš (nom. sg. c.) malitannaš (gen. sg.) wulašinaš (nom. sg.); cf. for this type of word order in Hittite, see Hoffner & Melchert 2008a:254.

[D.S.]

Checked against the photographs in the Konkordanz.

[D.S.]

No meaning has been assigned so far in the literature for Pal. wīšta-; cf. Kammenhuber 1959a:18f., Carruba 1970a:76, Eichner 2010a:47f. In all its attestations, the Palaic adjective wīšta- modifies p/wulašina- ‘bread’. It is used with two different types of bread, viz. apple-bread and honey-bread. One of each kind is offered to each deity of the Palaic pantheon in CTH 751. In the Hittite version (CTH 750), this apple- and this honey-bread equate to 1 NINDA.GUR₄.RA EM-ṢA and 1 NINDA.GUR₄.RA KU₇, offered to the same deities (cf. KBo 17.35+ ii 18’-32’, KUB 51.24 9’-14’ et passim). Görke (pers. comm.) suggests convincingly that Palaic wīšta- equals GUR₄.RA (Hitt. ḫarši-) ‘thick (bread), a loaf (of bread)’. Consequently, we obtain a perfect equation between the breads offered in the Hittite version of the Palaic festival and in the corresponding Palaic incantations:

1 NINDA.GUR₄.RA EM-ṢA = wištaš šamlūwaš wulašinaš ‘one thick apple bread (sour bread loaf)’

1 NINDA.GUR₄.RA KU₇ = wištaš malitannaš wulašinaš ‘one thick honey bread (sweet bread loaf)’

In sum, we assign the meaning ‘thick’ to Pal. wīšta-. This semantic assignment can be supported further on etymological grounds; see below.

[D.S.]