Все
 
 
 


Hittite ānt- and related lexemes
 
Код статьиS086919080028904-1-1
DOI10.31857/S086919080028904-1
Тип публикации Статья
Статус публикации Опубликовано
Авторы
Иванов Валерий Алексеевич 
Должность: Аспирант
Аффилиация: Московский Государственный Университет имени М.В. Ломоносова
Адрес: Российская Федерация,
Название журналаВосток. Афро-Азиатские общества: история и современность
ВыпускВыпуск 6
Страницы42-51
Аннотация

There are two terms designating “equal” in cuneiform texts from Ḫattuša-Boğazköy, namely annauli- and ānt-. The lexeme ānt- has been connected with the Luwian terms ayawala- and ayal(a/i)-. The first one is a hapax in Hittite cuneiform corpus found in the so-called Tawagalawa letter (CTH 181), while the second one appears several times in the royal hieroglyphic inscriptions from Masuwari (Tell Ahmar).

Although the meanings and etymologies of all these terms were discussed in recent scholarship, they have never been analyzed as part of a lexical system. The present article focuses on the contextual study of these terms.

The author comes to the conclusion that Hitt. annauli- is to be interpreted as “of equal status”, while Hitt. ānt- means “equal by appointment”. Thus, the lexeme annauli- describes the balance of powers in the Ancient Near East of the 2nd millennium BCE, when all the Great Kings were supposed to be equal to each other. The term ānt- designates a substitute, who becomes equal to the ritual patron in the course of the ritual, while the term annauli- is mentioned in texts as the antonym of the ritual substitute. The Luwian terms ayawala- and ayal(a/i)- are ultimately derived from the Luwian verbal stem aya- “to do”, while Hitt. ānt- is possibly cognate with Latin aequus “equal”. The term ayal(a/i)- is a title linked to the performance of certain duties by the heir apparent, and ayawala- is connected with the ability of a prince or high official to act as king’s deputy.

Ключевые словаHittite language, Luwian language, Tawagalawa letter, substitution rituals, Hittite diplomacy
Получено05.12.2023
Дата публикации26.12.2023
Кол-во символов24280
Цитировать  
100 руб.
При оформлении подписки на статью или выпуск пользователь получает возможность скачать PDF, оценить публикацию и связаться с автором. Для оформления подписки требуется авторизация.

Оператором распространения коммерческих препринтов является ООО «Интеграция: ОН»

Размещенный ниже текст является ознакомительной версией и может не соответствовать печатной.
1 All animals are equal But some animals are more equal than others George Orwell, Animal Farm
2 Hittite cuneiform texts from the archives of Ḫattuša contain two terms: annauli- and ānt-, which are assumed in modern scholarship to have the same interpretation “equal (person)”. These terms appear in a variety of contexts: international correspondence and treaties, literary and lexical texts, ritual and omen texts. The present research focuses on the semantic difference between these lexemes. The connection with two additional Luwian terms: ayal(a/i)-, occurring in hieroglyphic inscriptions from Tell Ahmar, and ayawala- from the Tawagalawa letter (CTH 181), will be discussed as well.
3 An extensive body of literature is devoted to this topic. The majority of contexts containing Hitt. annauli- are cited in [Puhvel, 1984, p. 64–65]. This term frequently appears in the texts of treaties and correspondence between rulers of Bronze Age Anatolia. Hitt. annauli- and its Akkadographic equivalent MEḪRU1 can refer to the balance of power in the Near East when the great king of Ḫatti calls other mighty kings his “equals” (1–2). The etymological analysis of annauli-, supposedly a Luwian loanword, is undertaken in [Yakubovich, 2021, p. 237–238]. According to this paper, it is derived from a Luwian local adverb an(ni)- “con-” with the help of the suffix -wa-, which marks a social status in the Anatolian languages, and therefore the whole lexeme can be literally translated as “co-rank-ed”. 1. For the interchangeability of annauli- and MEḪRU, see the treaty between Ḫattušili III of Ḫatti and Ulmi-Teššub of Tarḫuntašša (CTH 106, KBo 4.10 obv. 46′ ma-a-an A-NA DUTU-ŠI LUGAL ku-iš-ki ME-ḪI-RI-ŠU a-ra-a-i ‘But if some king of equal rank rises up against My Majesty, …’) and the parallel passage in the treaty between Tudḫaliya IV and Kurunta (CTH 106, Bronze tablet iii 39 ma-a-an-ma A-NA LUGAL KUR URUḪA-AT-TI an-na-ú-li-iš ku-iš-ki a-ra-a-i ‘But if someone of equal rank rises up against the king of Ḫatti, …’). The translations are given according to [Beckman, 1999, p. 109–124].
4 (1)… A-˹NA D˺UTU-ŠI ku-e-eš ˹LUGAL˺.MEŠ an-˹na-ú˺-li-e-eš2 LUGAL KUR URUMI-IZ-RI LUG[AL KUR URUŠa-an]-ḫa-ra LUGAL KUR URUḪa-ni-˹kal˺-pát na-aš-ma LUGAL KUR Aš-šur ‘The kings, who are equals of My Majesty – the king of Egypt, the ki[ng of Babyl]onia, the king of Ḫanigalbat, or the king of Assyria’ KUB 21.5 rev. iii 24–25, CTH 76.B: Treaty of Muwattalli II with Wiluša [Beckman, 1999, p. 90]. 2. I cannot support reading this term as an-[te(?)]-e-li-e-eš, which is proposed in [Kitchen, Lawrence, 2012, p. 556–557] following one of the readings offered by Friedrich [Friedrich, 1930, S. 179]. First of all, there are no other examples of writing ānt- without scriptio plena (see examples 4–7), so the comparison with this lexeme is not possible. Second, there are many contexts where annauli- is “equal”, for example, see (Bronze Tablet iii 39; KUB 14.3 obv. ii 13–15 (Tawagalawa letter); KBo 22.6 obv. i 25′–26′ (ŠAR TAMḪĀRI epic)). Third, the signs TE and NA of KUB 21.5 have a lot in common (see KUB 21.5 obv. i 20, rev. iii 19, 22), therefore, their comparison with the partially broken second sign in the word under discussion cannot testify in favor of one of them. Moreover, although the last double vertical of the hypothetical E is present in the autography of KUB 21.5, it is absent on the photo at the Konkordanz and therefore the reading Ú is preferable.
5 (2)LUGAL.MEŠ-ia-mu ku-i-e-eš LUGAL MI-IḪ-RU-TI LUGAL URUMI-IZ-RI-I LUGAL KUR Ka-ra-an-du-ni-aš LUGAL KUR Aš-šur *LUGAL KUR Aḫ-ḫi-ia-u-wa-ia* ‘And the kings who are my equals in rank are the king of Egypt, the king of Babylonia, the king of Assyria, *and the king of Aḫḫiyawa*.’ KUB 23.1+ rev. iv 1–3, CTH 105: Treaty of Tudḫaliya IV with Šaušgamuwa of Amurru [Beckman, Bryce, Cline, 2011, p. 602–603].
6 Another passage containing annauli-, which is found in a fragment belonging to the Kuwattalla tradition, CTH 761 (3), deserves a separate treatment. This is the only instance where annauli- occurs in a Luwian context.
7 (3)[… š]ar-li-aš-ši-in-zi tar-pa-a-aš-ša-a-an-zi […] ma-a-na-aš ˹MUNUS˺?-iš za-ú-i-˹na˺-aš ma-a-na-aš a-x-[…] ma-a-na-aš an-˹na˺-ú-li-iš ma-a-na-aš tar-pa-a[š-ša-aš …] ‘[…] substitutes for the upper […], whether she (is) woman, (then) here she (is). Whether he (is) [… , (then) here he (is)]. Whether he (is) of equal rank, whether he (is) a substi[tute …]’ KUB 35.24+ rev. 3′′–5′′, CTH 761: Great Ritual [Yakubovich, Mouton, 2023, p. 212 – 213].
8 One can see that Luw. annauli- stands in opposition to Luw. tarpašša- in this fragment. Merisms of such a type, mentioning two possibilities, one of which fully excludes the other one, appear frequently in the Hittite-Luwian incantations.3 Luw. tarpašša- is translated as “substitute”4 and designates a special ritual actor, which is associated with the ritual patron (becomes equal to him), takes his miasma upon himself and is destroyed at the end of the ritual [Gurney, 1977, p. 52; Soysal, 2004, p. 103–104, n. 11]. Since tarpašša- is paired with annauli-, which also means “equal”, the sense of opposition between these two terms is not immediately clear. One can, however, argue that other contexts mentioning annauli- refer to natural equality. According to the Hittite stance, there was unchangeable quantity of centers associated with the great kingship: Egypt, Southern Mesopotamia, Northern Mesopotamia, Anatolia and the Aegean. In order to become a great king, a ruler should establish his control over the whole territory of the one of these centers [Alexandrov, 2007, c. 20]. Therefore, great kings of the Ancient Near East were equal by virtue of their positions (1–2), while the change of status was virtually impossible.5 It is hard to imagine that a pharaoh could become a substitute for a Hittite king. Thus, the incantation from the Kuwattalla tradition reflects the opposition between natural equality and equality by assignment (substitution). 3. Such pairs can consist of juxtaposed antonyms, for example “dead”/“living”, “past”/“future”, or an exhaustive description of a small closed set, for example “mother”/“father”, “brother”/“sister”, see [Mouton, Yakubovich, 2019, p. 213].

4. Its Hittite equivalent is tarpalli-.

5. The mention of kings of both Assyria and Ḫanigalbat in (1) reflects the political situation in the first half of the 13th century BCE, when there was no single ruler who could expand his dominance over the whole of Northern Mesopotamia. The Assyrian expansion aimed at establishing control over the heartland of Mitanni, where the center of the more ancient great kingdom was situated. Only in the mid-13th century BCE, after the subjection of the land of Ḫurri, the Assyrian great kingship was recognized by the Hittites (CTH 171, KUB 23.102), although the relations of “brotherhood” between the two rulers were not introduced [Alexandrov, 2007, c. 24–25].
9 The Hittite lexeme ānt- has a more complicated interpretation history due to the paucity and complexity of contexts where it appears, cf. [Goedegebuure, 2002, p. 61–64]. The first suggestions about its meaning were based on the ritual texts and a lexical list (4–5). The initial idea, proposed by Güterbok [Güterbok, 1950, S. 228] in the course of his investigation of Hittite names containing element -muwa-, was to see here the logogram A.A-an-za with the reading muwanza. Neu [Neu, 1983, S. 16, n. 76; S. 223] proposed the meaning “strength, power” for the Sumerographic interpretation.

Всего подписок: 0, всего просмотров: 105

Оценка читателей: голосов 0 

1. Александров Б.Е. Идеология «великоцарственности» в Анатолии Позднебронзового века. Третья международная конференция «Иерархия и власть в истории цивилизаций». Под ред. Д.М. Бондаренко, А.А. Немировского. М.: Центр цивилизационных и региональных исследований института Африки РАН, 2007. C. 15–27.
2. Bachvarova M.R. From Hittite to Homer. The Anatolian Background of Ancient Homeric Epic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016.
3. Beckman G. Hittite Diplomatic Texts; 2nd Edition (Society of Biblical Literature. Writings from the Ancient World 7). Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1999.
4. Beckman G., Bryce T., Cline E. The Ahhiyawa Texts. (Society of Biblical Literature. Writings from the Ancient World 28). Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2011.
5. Black J., Green A. Gods, Demons and Symbols of Ancient Mesopotamia. An Illustrated Dictionary. Ehrhardt; Bath: The British Museum Press, 2004.
6. Cognetti C. Totenkult und Ahnenverehrung im hethitischen Anatolien. Vorstellungen, Rituale und Institutionen (THeth 32). Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag WINTER, 2021.
7. Foster B.R. The Age of Agade. Inventing Empire in Ancient Mesopotamia. London; New York: Routledge, 2016.
8. Friedrich J. Staatsverträge des Ḫatti-Reiches in hethitischer Sprache. 2. Teil: Die Verträge Muršiliš' II. mit Manapa-Dattaš vom Lande des Flusses Šeḫa, des Muwattalliš mit Alakšanduš von Wiluša und des Šuppiluliumaš mit Ḫukkanāš und den Leuten von Ḫajaša (mit Indices zum 1. und 2. Teil) (MVAeG 34/1). Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1930.
9. Goedegebuure P.M. KBo 17.17+: Remarks on an Old Hittite Royal Substitution Ritual. Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions. 2002. No. 2. Pp. 61–73.
10. Gurney O.R. Some Aspects of Hittite Religion. The Schweich Lectures of The British Academy 1976. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977.
11. Güterbock H.G. Die Elemente muwa und ziti in den hethitischen Hieroglyphen. Archiv Orientální. 1950. No. 18. S. 208–238.
12. Güterbock H.G., Hoffner H.A., van den Hout Th. The Hittite Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. Chicago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. 1989–.
13. Haas V. Geschichte der hethitischen Religion (HdO I/15). Leiden; New York; Köln: Brill, 1994.
14. Hawkins J.D. The Inscription. Tell Ahmar II. A New Luwian Stele and the Cult of the Storm-God at Til Barsib-Masuwari. G. Bunnens, J.D. Hawkins, I. Leirens (eds.). Louvain; Paris; Dudley: Peeters, 2006. Pp. 11–31.
15. Heinhold-Krahmer S. Zur Bronzetafel aus Boğazköy und ihrem historischen Inhalt. Archiv für Orientforschung. 1991. No. 38. S. 138–158.
16. Heinhold-Krahmer S., Rieken E. (eds.). Der „Tawagalawa-Brief“: Beschwerden über Piyamaradu. Eine Neuedition (UAVA 13). Berlin; Boston: De Gruyter, 2020 [unter Mitwirkung von J.D. Hawkins, J. Hazenbos, J. L. Miller, E. Rieken, M. Weeden].
17. Hoffmann I. Das hethitische Wort für ‘Sohn’. Hittite and Other Anatolian and Near Eastern Studies in Honor of Sedat Alp. H. Otten, H. Ertem, E. Akurgal, A. Süel (eds.). Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi, 1992. Pp. 289–293.
18. Houwink ten Cate Ph.H.J. The Hittite Usage of the Concepts of ‘Great Kingship’, the Mutual Guarantee of Royal Succession, the Personal Unswerving Loyalty of the Vassal to his Lord and the ‘Chain of Command’ in Vassal Treaties from the 13th Century B.C.E. Das geistige Erfassen der Welt im Alten Orient – Sprache, Religion, Kultur und Gesellschaft. C. Wilcke, J. Hazenbos, A. Zgoll (eds.). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2007. S. 191–207.
19. Kitchen K.A., Lawrence P.J.N. Treaty, Law and Covenant in the Ancient Near East. Vol. 1. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2012.
20. Kümmel H.M. Ersatzrituale für den hethitischen König (StBoT 3). Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1967.
21. Melchert H.C. The Hittite Word for “Son”. Indogermanische Forschungen. 1981. No. 85. Pp. 90–95.
22. Melchert H.C. Anatolian Historical Phonology (Leiden Studies in Indo-Europaean 3). Amsterdam, Atlanta: Rodopi, 1994.
23. Melchert H.C. Spelling of Initial /a-/ in Hieroglyphic Luwian. ipamati kistamati pari tumatimis – Luwian and Hittite Studies Presented to J. David Hawkins on the Occasion of His 70th Birthday. I. Singer (ed.). Tel Aviv: the Emery and Claire Yass Publications in Archaeology, 2010. Pp. 147–158.
24. Melchert H.C. A Dictionary of Cuneiform Luvian. Ann Arbor: Beech Stave, forthcoming.
25. Meriggi P. Über einige hethitische Fragmente historischen Inhaltes. Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morganlandes. 1962. No. 58. S. 66–110.
26. Mouton A., Yakubovich I. Internal or External Evil: a Merism in Luwian Incantations. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London. 2019. No. 82. Pp. 209–231.
27. Neu E. Althethitische Ritualtexte im Umschrift (StBoT 25). Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1980.
28. Neu E. Glossar zu den althethitischen Ritualtexten (StBoT 26). Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1983.
29. Puhvel J. Hittite Etymological Dictionary Vol. 1: Words beginning with A; Vol 2: Words beginning with E and I. Berlin, New York, Amsterdam: Mouton Publishers, 1984.
30. Rieken E., Sasseville D. Social Status as a Semantic Category of Anatolian: The Case of PIE *-ṷo-. Munus amicitiae – Norbert Oettinger a collegis et amicis dicatum. H.C. Melchert, R. Rieken, Th. Steer (eds.). Ann Arbor; New York: Beech Stave, 2014. Pp. 302–314.
31. Rieken E., Yakubovich I. The New Values of Luwian Signs L 319 and L 172. ipamati kistamati pari tumatimis – Luwian and Hittite Studies Presented to J. David Hawkins on the Occasion of His 70th Birthday. I. Singer (ed.). Tel Aviv: the Emery and Claire Yass Publications in Archaeology, 2010. Pp. 199–219.
32. Soysal O. On Hittite (LÚ) Ānt- “(The) Equal (One) > Rival” Again. Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions. 2004. No. 4. Pp. 99–105.
33. Yakubovich I. Were Hittite Kings Divinely Anointed? A Palaic Invocation to the Sun-God and its Significance for Hittite Religion. Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions. 2005. No. 5. Pp. 107–137.
34. Yakubovich I. The Anatolian Connections of the Greek God Enyalius. Linguistic and Cultural Interactions between Greece and Anatolia. In Search of the Golden Fleece (Culture and History of the Ancient Near East 122). M. Bianconi (ed.). Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2021. Pp. 233–245.
35. Yakubovich I., Mouton A. Luwili. Hittite-Luwian ritual texts attributed to Puriyanni, Kuwattalla and Šilalluḫi (CTH 758–763). Volume I: Edition and commentary. In cooperation with Laura Puértolas Rubio (StBoT 72). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2023.

Система Orphus

Загрузка...
Вверх