Volume 2 • Issue 1 • 2021
volume 2, issue 1, 2021
- Vorwort, Zsolt Simon 9
- Lycian Wexssere, Waxssepddimi and related forms, Ignasi-Xavier Adiego 11
- Palaeographic dating of Lycian inscriptions. A critical review of former studies and a new approach, Birgit Christiansen 27
- Lycian relative clauses, H. Craig Melchert 65
- The distribution of -a- and -e- in the Lycian genitival adjective suffix, Stefan Norbruis 77
- Observations on the Xanthos trilingual: syntactic structure of TL 44a, 41‒55 and the Lycian terminology of art and war, Rostislav Oreshko 95
- Worttrennung in den lykischen Inschriften, Annick Payne 145
- Die Deutung von lykisch terñ und ihre Konsequenz für die Kriegspolitik Lykiens, David Sasseville 161
- Überlegungen zu lykischen Inschriften bei Kadyanda, Diether Schürr 173
- Once again on the etymology of the Lycian personal name Trbbe͂ nime/i-, Matilde Serangeli 183
- Ḫinduwa: Kindye oder Kandyba?, Zsolt Simon 197
- Hungarian Assyriological Review author guidelines 205
In this paper, I address the problem of the Lycian coin legends attributed to two dynasts of the same name – Wexssere I and Wexssere II – on the basis of some very recent re-readings and novelties published by Koray Konuk. Now we actually have different forms (wexssere, waxssebllimi, waxssepddimi, uxssepddimi), that seem to be chaotically distributed. The present paper proposes to consider Waxssebllimi to be older than Waxssepddimi and Uxssepddimi, and to analyze it as a foreign name, possibly Carian, later adapted to Lycian as Waxssepddimi-Uxssepddimi; thus, contra Konuk, I suggest that these names may refer to the same person. As for the relationship of waxssebllimi–waxssepddimi–uxssepddimi with wexssere, the existence of an apparent interchangeability between the two can be attributed either to a double denomination practice or to the fact that wexssere was a place name, not a personal name. By accepting either hypothesis, the alleged chaotic distribution disappears and much simpler models of dynastic sequence can be envisaged. Although the interpretation of wexssere as a place name seems much more attractive, it cannot be accepted definitively at present due to certain numismatic objections.
The aim of this article is a critical examination of earlier palaeographic studies of Lycian inscriptions. The starting point is the corpus of inscriptions whose contents provide information on their dating. On the basis of a survey of the letter forms attested in these texts, an attempt will be made to reconstruct their development. This is intended to provide a solid foundation for future palaeographic studies and other research on Lycian history, culture and language. The study will demonstrate that some letters actually show developments that can be used for palaeographic dating of inscriptions without a text-internal indication of their date of origin. However, it should be taken into account that most of the letter variants already appear in inscriptions that were composed during the reign of Erbbina / Arbinas, and thus in the beginning of the 4th century BCE This fact has been overlooked in previous studies. It therefore cannot be ruled out that an inscription showing these variants may date back to the first half of the 4th century, although these variants are more frequently attested in younger inscriptions.
In addition, palaeographic dating is made more difficult by other circumstances too. The letter forms should therefore only be taken as a rough indication of the inscription’s date of origin. Greater certainty might be achieved through a cumulative approach. However, the starting point has always to be the inscriptions with text-internal information about their dating. It is therefore essential to examine them carefully with regard to their palaeographic characteristics before using other criteria.
Lycian relative clause syntax generally matches that of Hittite and other Anatolian Indo-European languages, with some minor differences due to Lycian SVO word order. One putative major contrast is that Lycian seems to have at least one example showing “overt wh-movement”. Arguments are made that opening formulas with enclitic =ti in funerary inscriptions contain a reflexive particle, not “cleft” structures with the relative pronoun.
The Lycian genitival adjectival suffix A -Vhe/i-, B –Vse/i– is attested both with -a- and with -e-. The present treatment suggests that the main principle behind this variation is morphological, and tries to determine the default variant for each stem type, as well as to find explanations for the seeming exceptions. Lycian A and B are treated separately, but give comparable results. The ultimate origin of the suffix is argued to have been *-osio(-), which directly accounts for the variant with -e-. The variant with –a– is its counterpart in the a-stems. Some additional light is shed on the workings of Lycian vowel assimilation processes.
The paper offers a new analysis of the passage of the Xanthos trilingual containing a detailed description of the military exploits of the author of the inscription (TL 44a, 41‒55). The first part (§§1–2) discusses the overall structure of the passage and the meaning of the key term of the text, hãtahe, for which an interpretation ‘victory’ (gen. sg.) is proposed. The subsequent paragraphs discuss separate words and particularities of the syntax of the passage. The new proposals include, among others: tupelija- ‘script, writing(s)’, tupa ‘images, reliefs’, axa- ‘deed, exploit’, ahata- ‘foundation, platform’ (§3); hẽmen- ‘shooting, hunting’ (§3); terñ ‘when’ (adverb with temporal function) (§4); zẽm̃tija ‘formidable’ (§5); nele ‘acropolis’ (§5); ese … tebe-/taba- ‘join with’ (§6); tarbi = trbbi ‘against’ (§7); hbãt- ‘hoplite’ (§8); uwe ‘day’ (§8). The most important historical implications of the new analysis concern Trbbẽnimi and Xerẽi, who are argued to be allies (not enemies) of the author, as well as Herikle, who is identified as a governor (sehaxlaza-) of Kaunos, connected with the Persian king. The resulting translation of the text is proposed in §11.
This article discusses the different forms of word separation in Lycian inscriptions, framing patterns of graphic separation in a neuro-psychological context. A new approach is introduced which offers an explanation to inscriptions that have so far been deemed inconsistent or non-compliant with orthographic rules.
In the present paper, it is argued that the Lycian word terñ previously interpreted as a substantive is in fact a conjunction. A syntactic analysis of the word across the corpus reveals that it is restricted to the position after the finite or, if applicable, non-finite verb. Afterwards, a passage of the inscription on the inscribed pillar of Xanthus, in which terñ is attested several times, is reinterpreted accordingly. The new syntactic and grammatical interpretation of the passage has contextual consequences regarding the political history of Lycia during the Peloponnesian War. Therefore, a new translation of TL 44a.41–55 shedding a different light on the relationship between the Lycian king Gergis, son of Harpagos, and the Lycian dynasts Trbbẽnimi and Xerẽi is offered and then discussed within the historical frame.
Kadyanda has so far yielded five Lycian inscriptions, four of them unusual. Three are treated here: TL 32a as an example of a false friend (ladã is not lada), TL 34 for the reconstruction of the beginning, and TL 35 for the extraordinary dating formula and its syntactic embedding, reinforcing its dating to 282/281 BC.
This paper deals with the etymology of the Lycian PN Trbbe͂nime/i-. It will be argued that it is composed of elements of Indo-European origin. Reference will be made to formal and semantic parallels from Anatolian languages of the 2nd and 1st millennia BC and from other Indo-European languages.
This paper argues that the linguistically impeccable identification of Ḫinduwa with Kindye is excluded by geography and the identification of Ḫinduwa with Kandyba is problematic both linguistically and geographically. Only a third settlement that must be close to Tlos fits the attested geographical information.