Ritual, Religion and Reason

Studies in the Ancient World

in Honour of Paolo Xella

Edited by
Oswald Loretz, Sergio Ribichini,
Wilfred G. E. Watson and José Á. Zamora
 Alter Orient und Altes Testament
Veröffentlichungen zur Kultur und Geschichte des Alten Orients
und des Alten Testaments

Band 404

Herausgeber
Manfried Dietrich • Oswald Loretz • Hans Neumann

Lektor
Kai A. Metzler

Beratergremium
Rainer Albertz • Joachim Bretschneider
Stefan Maul • Udo Rüterswörden • Walther Sallaberger
Gebhard Selz • Michael P. Streck • Wolfgang Zwickel

2013
Ugarit-Verlag
Münster
 Ritual, Religion and Reason

Studies in the Ancient World

in Honour of Paolo Xella

Edited by
Oswald Loretz, Sergio Ribichini,
Wilfred G. E. Watson and José Á. Zamora

2013
Ugarit-Verlag
Münster
Ritual, Religion and Reason.
Studies in the Ancient World in Honour of Paolo Xella
Edited by Oswald Loretz, Sergio Ribichini,
Wilfred G. E. Watson and José Á. Zamora
Alter Orient und Altes Testament, Band 404

© 2013 Ugarit-Verlag, Münster

www.ugarit-verlag.de
Alle Rechte vorbehalten
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced,
stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means,
electronic, mechanical, photo-copying, recording, or otherwise,
without the prior permission of the publisher.
Herstellung: Hubert & Co, Göttingen
Printed in Germany

ISBN 978-3-86835-087-6

Printed on acid-free paper

 Paolo Xella
(photo by Gesualdo Petruccioli)
 Contents

Introductory

Ritual, Religion and Reason: Rarefied regions of research ..................................... xi

Publications of Paolo Xella ..................................................................................... xv

Section I. Archaeology – Art History – Numismatics

Paolo Matthiae
La déesse nue et le dieu au panache.
Aux origines de l’iconographie de l’Ishtar d’Ébla .................................................... 1
Gabriella Scandone Matthiae
Hathor e il cigno. Su un reperto egiziano dall’ipogeo reale di Qatna ..................... 25
Claude Doumet-Serhal – Jwana Shahud
A Middle Bronze Age temple in Sidon. Ritual and communal feasting ................. 33
Valérie Matoïan
« Du vin pour le délice de l’assoiffé » .................................................................... 61
María Eugenia Aubet
Cremation and social memory in Iron Age Phoenicia ............................................ 77
Roald Docter
Bichrome ware amphorae from Al Mina, Kition, and Carthage ............................. 89
Cecilia Beer
Amulettes phénico-puniques entre vie et mort (entre quotidien et tophet) ........... 103
Gioacchino Falsone
Sul culto dei betili a Mozia. A proposito di un cono sacro ................................... 125
Francesca Spatafora
La necropoli di Palermo tra primo ellenismo ed età repubblicana.
Nuovi dati preliminari ........................................................................................... 137
Francisca Chaves Tristán – Mª Luisa de la Bandera Romero
Pequeño hallazgo de plata en Boos (Valdenebro, Soria, España),
finales del s. III a. C. ............................................................................................. 149
Nabil Kallala
À propos d’une attestation nouvelle du signe de Tanit à el-Gouisset
(l’antique Vcubi), dans la région du Kef, au N–O de la Tunisie ........................... 163
viii Contents

Section II. Philology – Epigraphy

Maria Giovanna Biga

Ancora sul sacrificio umano nel Vicino Oriente antico ........................................ 167
Francesco Pomponio
A fragment of a Neo-Sumerian barley record ....................................................... 175
Giuseppe F. Del Monte
Due note sul “Canto di Ullikummi” ...................................................................... 181
Pierre Bordreuil
Baal l’accusateur ................................................................................................... 189
Gregorio del Olmo Lete
KTU 1.107: A miscellany of incantations against snakebite ................................ 193
Manfried Dietrich – Oswald Loretz
Mustertext einer Beschwörung gegen Zauberer (KTU 1.169 = RIH 78/20) ........ 205
Dennis Pardee
On the edge again .................................................................................................. 229
Josef Tropper – Juan-Pablo Vita
Verschlissene Kleider in Ugarit.
Bemerkungen zu den Wirtschaftstexten RS 19.104, KTU 4.168 und 4.182 ........ 237
Kevin J. Cathcart
Offences and curses in Northwest Semitic inscriptions ........................................ 243
Maria Giulia Amadasi Guzzo
“Re dei Sidonii”? .................................................................................................. 257
Rossana De Simone
Un alfabetario punico da Selinunte ....................................................................... 267
Josette Elayi
Un nouveau sceau phénicien inscrit ...................................................................... 271
Mhamed Hassine Fantar
Propos sur la toponymie d’Afrique du Nord ......................................................... 277
André Lemaire
ʿOzibaal de Byblos ? (XIe s. av. n. è.) ................................................................... 289
Herbert Niehr
Die phönizische Inschrift auf dem Sarkophag des Königs Ešmunazor II.
aus Sidon (KAI 14) in redaktionsgeschichtlicher und historischer Sicht ............. 297
Wolfgang Röllig
Die phönizische Inschrift der Reliefstele von Ivriz, Türkei .................................. 311
Hélène Sader
Two Iron Age stamp seals from Tell el-Burak, Lebanon ..................................... 321
 Contents ix

Wilfred G. E. Watson
Loanwords in Phoenician and Punic ..................................................................... 327
José Á. Zamora
The Phoenician inscription on an alabaster urn from the “Laurita Necropolis”
in Almuñécar (Granada, Spain). A new edition and interpretation ...................... 347
Paolo Merlo
L’iscrizione presunta fenicia AHI 8.015 di Kuntillet ʿAjrud. Un riesame dei dati 371
Fiorella Scagliarini
L’alfabetizzazione nella religione araba preislamica
e nei primi secoli della civiltà islamica ................................................................. 381

Section III. History – History of Religions – Historiography

Anna Maria Gloria Capomacchia

I temi eroici nelle religioni del Vicino Oriente antico .......................................... 387
Maria Grazia Masetti-Rouault
Le dieu de l’orage, la grêle et le « Grand Froid ».
Notes sur la continuité de la culture syrienne antique
et ses relations avec la civilisation du Proche-Orient ancien ................................ 397
Marie-Claude Trémouille
Remarques sur Comana de Cappadoce et sa déesse ............................................. 407
Simon Wyatt – Nicolas Wyatt
The longue durée in the beef business .................................................................. 417
Paola Negri Scafa
L’ambito religioso a Nuzi. Questioni concernenti il personale cultuale ............... 451
François Bron
Divinités féminines en Arabie du Sud préislamique .............................................. 461
Sergio Ribichini
Agros e Agruheros. Immagini e gente d’un tempo che fu .................................... 467
Federico Mazza
A proposito di letteratura fenicia e punica.
Riflessioni su alcuni aspetti della produzione intellettuale
nel mondo fenicio e punico e sul ruolo della cultura ellenistica ........................... 479
Marie-Françoise Baslez
Du marzeaḥ aux « confréries joyeuses ».
La commensalité sacrée dans le Proche-Orient hellénisé ..................................... 491
Giampiera Arrigoni
Il giuramento di Cidippe nell’Artemision di Delo ................................................ 505
Marisa Tortorelli Ghidini
Uovo, tunica splendente e nuvola. Una triade orfica in Damascio ....................... 519
x Contents

Giuseppe Garbati
Tradizione, memoria e rinnovamento. Tinnit nel tofet di Cartagine ..................... 529
Mohamed Tahar
De la prosternation des Carthaginois .................................................................... 543
Giuseppe Minunno
A note on Ancient Sardinian incubation ............................................................... 553
Mª Cruz Marín Ceballos
La diosa astral ibérica y sus antecedentes orientales ............................................ 561
Francisco Marco Simón
Salpina, ¿Proserpina?
A propósito de un texto execratorio de Córdoba (AE 1934, 23) ........................... 581
Nicholas C. Vella
Vases, bones and two Phoenician inscriptions.
An assessment of a discovery made in Malta in 1816 .......................................... 589
Massimo Cultraro
Angelo Mosso e la “religione mediterranea”.
Alla ricerca delle radici del sacro tra materialismo e scienze neurobiologiche .... 607
Riccardo Di Donato
Il giovane Pettazzoni, l’antico e le religioni. Premesse di storia della cultura ..... 619
Nicola Cusumano
Aspetti della storiografia moderna su ethne e religioni nella Sicilia antica .......... 629
Hedwige Rouillard-Bonraisin
Alberto Giacometti et les Baʿalim du Levant.
Rêveries sur une possible inspiration .................................................................... 643

Indices

Topics .................................................................................................................... 659

Texts ...................................................................................................................... 663
Words .................................................................................................................... 674
 Loanwords in Phoenician and Punic

Wilfred G. E. Watson, Northumberland

Questa modesta nota è in omaggio al mio amico e collega Paolo, con cui avevo
scambiato lettere già prima del nostro primo incontro alla RAI di Münster, tanti anni
fa. Mi aveva invitato infatti a contribuire al primo numero di Studi epigrafici e
linguistici sul Vicino Oriente antico e, dieci anni dopo, anche a fare parte del
Comitato Scientifico della stessa rivista. Per riflettere su quanto Paolo abbia
arricchito la nostra conoscenza delle lingue fenicia e punica, ho preparato un
catalogo ragionato delle parole straniere, adottate come prestiti o in traslitterazione,
che appaiono in queste lingue.

1 Introduction

As yet, there has been no comprehensive study of loanwords in Phoenician and

Punic1. Stieglitz (1998) explained three Phoenician month names as loans from
Hurrian and Muchiki discussed only two words2. Several Greek loanwords were
identified by Dothan (1985) and Mankowski (2000) included Phoenician words in
his survey of loanwords from Akkadian3. Since Phoenician and Punic are relatively
late Semitic languages, it is more likely that they borrowed Semitic and non-Semitic
words from Akkadian, Ugaritic and even Aramaic4.
It is well known that there are several bilinguals or quasi-bilinguals involving
Phoenician: notably, the inscriptions from Çineköy (with Luwian)5, Karatepe (with
Luwian)6 and Pyrgi (with Etruscan)7 and some inscriptions are also in Greek, Latin
or Numidian8. There is even a trilingual, in Neo-Assyrian, Luwian and Phoenician,

1
Note that the very term “Punic” may derive from the non-Semitic word puwwā, “red dye,
madder”; cf. Astour 1965, 346 and HALOT, 918.
2
Muchiki 1999, 45; the words are Phoen. ʾy, “coastland” and ḥtm, “seal”. However some of
the Egyptian loanwords in Hebrew discussed by Muchiki (1999, 236–258), also occur in
Phoenician and Punic. For Ugaritic–Phoenician isoglosses, see del Olmo Lete 1986. On Eg.
ʿr.t, “upper room” as a loan from Semitic see Xella 1996.
3
A brief survey of loanwords in Phoenician and Punic are given in PPG, 141 §208; see also
Watson 1996,711 and Gzella 2012, 72–73.
4
See Healey 1983. For a list of Phoenician and Punic loanwords in Egyptian see Hoch 1994,
538–539 and for Semitic influence on Egyptian spells see R. C. Steiner 2011. For Semitic
loans in Greek see Masson 1967 (my thanks to Sergio Ribichini for help with this reference).
5
Tekoğlu – Lemaire 2000, a reference I owe to Paolo Merlo’s contribution in this volume.
6
See Bron 1979 and Lawson Younger 1998.
7
Schmitz 1995.
8
See KAI 42, 47, 52, 66, 127, 139, etc.
328 Wilfred G. E. Watson

that was found at Incirli9. All these indicate that there was an interchange of
languages which resulted in loanwords10.

2 List of loanwords

Here is a list of loanwords in Phoenician and Punic that have been proposed, based
on the two standard lexica (CSL and DNWSI) with additional material. Not all these
suggestions are correct and some new ones have also been included11. For lack of
space, the discussion is very limited12 and calques are not discussed13. It is important
to differentiate between reasonably clear loanwords (2.1), uncertain entries (2.2) and
transcriptions from Greek or Latin (2.3). However, occasionally the distinctions are
blurred. There are also several incorrect entries (2.4), listed for the sake of
completeness.

2.1 Clear loanwords

There are several words that are clearly borrowed from a range of languages and
these are listed here.
ʾgnn, “krater” (DNWSI, 9) ultimately derives from Hurr. ag-, “to carry” and was
borrowed by Semitic, e.g. Akk. agannu, “Schale” (AHw, 15) and Ug. agn,
“cauldron, bowl” (cf. DUL, 26)14.
ʾdn, “platform” (KAI 37A 14), is a loan from Hurr. adani, “stool”15 as has been
proposed16. The word is clearly Hurrian, as it derives from the root ad-, “to
support”17. It was also borrowed as Heb. ʾeden, “pedestal, base” (cf. HALOT, 16).
18
ʾy, “coastland” , like Heb. ʾî, “coast, island” (HALOT, 38) and Ug. iht, “islands,
coastal region” (DUL, 32), is borrowed from Eg. iw, “Insel”19.
ʾmn, “craftsman, etc.”20, comes ultimately from Sum. ummia, via Akk. ummânu,
“craftsman, artisan etc.”21.

9
Kaufman 2007.
10
On the Çineköy and Karatepe inscriptions, Payne (2006, 134) commented:
Cilicia preserves two Luwian-Phoenician bilinguals and because we have no reason to
believe that large groups of Phoenician speakers settled there, we are led to conclude
that Phoenician was adopted as a prestige language, replacing the former lingua franca
Akkadian in the coastal region.
11
These new proposals are for ʾdrt, gl(ʿn), ḥṣ, ḥrz, kndr, kpln, lqnh, mzrḥ, nn, skʾ, sml(t), ʿgʾ,
ʿqrt, ʿrpt and pqt.
12
Unless marked “Punic”, all the words listed here are Phoenician. For occurrences, cf.
DNWSI and KAI.
13
Clearly the expression in the Karatepe inscription ʾrk ymm wrb šnt wrʾšytnʿmt w ʿz ʾdr,
“length of days and many years and a pleasant old age and powerful strength” (KAI 15 A iii
5–6) is a calque on balāṭ ūmē rūqūti šebê littūtu ṭūb šēri u ḫūd libbi, “a life of many days, the
satisfaction of growing very old, good health and happiness” used in Assyrian royal
inscriptions (see CAD L, 220a and Malamat 1982). For possible Latin calques in Punic, which
cannot be discussed here, see De Simone 2003.
14
See the discussion in Mankowski 2000, 21–22. Note, also, perhaps, Gk ἂγγος (Mycenaean
a-ke-ha), “vessel” (EDG 1, 10).
15
“Schemel” (Wegner 2000, 39).
16
Watson 1997, 92–93.
17
Cf. Görke, 2010, 132 with further references and examples.
18
CSL, 12–13; DNWSI, 4.
19
Wb 1, 47.4–113. Cf. Lambdin 1953, 147; Muchiki 1999, 239.
 Loanwords in Phoenician and Punic 329

ʾšt, “pillar(ed-hall)”22 is a loan from Akk. asaʾītu, “tower (of fortification

wall)”23. As Mankowksi notes, Akk. asaʾītu does not occur before MA, is only
written syllabically, has a range of spellings in the plural24 and has no Akkadian
etymology, so it must be a loanword in that language25.
ʾtnm, a month name (KAI 37A 41), corresponds to the non-Semitic month name
Attana (also written Attannati and Attanašwe) used in Alalaḫ and Nuzi (CDA, 31),
which derives from Hurr. attan, “father”26.
brzl, “iron”, occurs in several other Semitic languages27, but Rendsburg
concludes that it was originally a non-Semitic triconsonantal word (a Wanderwort or
Kulturwort) with an affixed –l28. It is probably Luwian in origin29
bt ʾḥd, “one household”, is an expression that occurs only in the Luwian-
Phoenician bilingual (line 10) and corresponds to Akk. bītum ištēn, “one family”30.
dt, “decree” (KAI 37B 1), is probably an indirect loan from Persian dāt (cf.
DNWSI, 263). It was also borrowed as Akk. dātu, “law, decree” (CDA, 58) and Heb.
dāt, “order, law” (HALOT, 234b).
ḥyr, “(month of) ḫiyaru”31, is a loan from the Hurrian month name ḫiyaru, which
also occurs at Ugarit as ḫyr, syllabically ḫiyaru32.
ḥrd, “guard” (KAI 145:5, fem. plural) may be a loan from Hurrian ḫuradi-,
“warrior” via another Semitic language33.
ḥtm, “to seal”34: “This root and its derivatives are found extensively throughout
the Semitic languages... All of these correspond to Eg. ḫtm, “a seal, signet ring”,
attested from the earliest stages of the language”35.
ṭbʿt, “signet ring” (KAI 51:10), comes from Eg. dbʿwt, “signet, seal” (FCD, 322),
also borrowed as Heb. ṭabbaʿat, “signet-ring” (HALOT, 369)36. As Muchiki notes:

20
KAI 178:2–3; DNWSI, 71. For the occurrence, in Latin characters, in an inscription from
Libya, see Mankowski 2000, 34 n. 90.
21
Cf. CAD U/W, 108–115.
22
KAI 10:14; 37A 14, B 5. Perhaps it is also to be read in the new Bodashtart inscription line
5; cf. Xella – Zamora 2004, 289 and 297 n. 52.
23
CDA, 25b; cf. CSL, 36–37; DNWSI, 130.
24
Note the spellings asaʾittu, asītu and isītu in the singular (CDA, 25b; CAD A/2, 332b).
25
Mankowski 2000, 40–41. It was also borrowed in Hebrew, Syriac, Mandaic, Arabic, etc. Is
there any connection with Gk ἄστυ “town”, which has a good IE etymology (EDG 1, 158–159)?
26
Stieglitz 1998, 213, who also discusses whether Heb. hāʾētanîm is Semitic. Note also Gk
ἄττα “father” (EDG 1, 165) which is Indo-European.
27
Akkadian, Arabic, Aramaic, Hebrew, Mandaic, Syriac, Ugaritic, etc.; cf. Rendsburg 1982,
54. For Phoen./Punic cf. CSL, 55; DNWSI, 196.
28
Rendsburg 1982. “The ultimate source of the word is unknown”, according to Mankowksi
(2000, 50), who cites Artzi 1969 but not Rendsburg 1982. Similarly, “Das Wort wurde im 3.
Jt. v. Chr. aus einer unbekannten Sprache ins Semitische (vermutlich ins Akkadische) entlehnt
und von dort ins Westsemitische” (Sima 2000, 327).
29
From Luwian *parzil(i)-, as shown by Valério – Yakubovich 2010, although they do not
mention Rendsburg 1982.
30
CAD B, 293 (6b). The equivalence was identified by Tekoğlu – Lemaire 2000, 998.
31
KAI 40:1; 49:38; 81:5; 119:3.
32
DUL, 416–417; cf. Stieglitz 1998, 214–215.
33
Possibly from Ugaritic ḫrd, “(royal) guard, militia troop(s)” (DUL, 403); see Stieglitz 1981.
Schmitz (2011, 74) notes: “The relation to BH ḥǎrādâ "trembling, fear" (HALOT: 351) is
uncertain”, but he makes no mention of Hurrian.
34
CSL, 116–117; DNWSI, 413–414.
35
Lambdin 1953, 151; see also Muchiki 1999, 246–247 and R. C. Steiner 2011,
330 Wilfred G. E. Watson

“the absence of a proper Heb. etymology... makes the Eg. origin of this word
most likely”37.
ṭnʾ, “basket”38, like Heb. ṭeneʾ “basket” (HALOT, 377), is a loan from Eg. dnit,
“basket”, “bowl”39.
yn, “wine” (DNWSI, 455), is ultimately a Kulturwort transmitted to Hittite as
u̯ iyan(a)-, to Hieroglyphic Luwian as wiyan(i)- and to Indo-European and Semitic40.
kndr, “pot(stand)” (KAI 139:2)41, is borrowed from Akk. kandurû, kandarû,
“rhyton”, “potstand”42. This is a new suggestion.
kr, “a dry measure” (KAI 43:14)43, is probably a loan from Akk. kurru(m),
“measure of dry capacity” (CDA, 168b), which in turn was borrowed from Sum. gur
with the same meaning. It may be a culture word44.
krr, “name of a month”45, is the Hurrian month name kirāru (CDA, 159)46.
ktn, “linen tunic”47, was borrowed in Greek as χιτών (also as κιθών), “body-
garment, shirt”, and is probably a Pre-Greek (Anatolian) culture word48.
lyškh, “chamber”49, corresponds to Heb. liškāh, “hall”, a by-form of niškāh with
the same meaning50, and to Gk λέσχη “lounge, public building”51, all possibly
borrowed from Anatolia (cf. EDG 1, 850).
lly, “demon”52, like Heb. lîlît, “Lillit” (HALOT, 528), was borrowed from Akk.
lilium, lilītu, “storm demon” (cf. CDA, 182) which in turn comes from Sum. líl,
“wind, breath” (cf. CAD L, 60b).
lp, “cooking pot”, may correspond either to Gk λοπάς “dish” (EDG 1, 849) or to
Gk λέβηϛ “kettle, cauldron” (EDG 1, 840)53.
lqnh, “basin”54, may come from (Pre-)Greek λεκάνη, “basin, dish” (EDG 1, 847).
mgn, “to offer”55 and mgn, “gift”56 are loans “from Indic magha- ‘wealth, riches;
gift’ … The word was in turn borrowed by the Akkadians from Hurrian, see [Akk.]

36
See Lambdin 1953, 151; CSL, 119.
37
Muchiki 1999, 247, who adds: “It is almost certain that Semites borrowed ṭbʿt 'signet-ring'
as well as ḥtm 'seal'”. See previous entry.
38
CSL, 121; DNWSI, 426.
39
FCD, 314; “bowl, vase, basket” (DLE II, 250). Cf. Lambdin 1953, 151 and Muchiki 1999,
247. It also occurs as Chadic *din-, “cooking pot”, as dinai and dəәnai (cf. Orel – Stolbova
1995, 163 §712).
40
See EDG 2, 1059 and Brown 1969, 147–151 and the survey in Zamora 2000, 266–277.
41
For other proposals see CSL, 145; DNWSI, 518.
42
Cf. CDA, 145b; CAD K, 149. It may also have been borrowed as Ug. kdr, “rhyton” (KTU
1.50:10; 4.275:8; 5.22:3,10) and is a loanword in Greek as κάνθαρος “drinking cup” (EDG 1,
634–635).
43
CSL, 148. However, it may be an abbreviation of krš or of kkr (see DNWSI, 538
with references).
44
Cf. Mankowski 2000, 73. It was also borrowed as Gk κόρος with the same meaning (cf.
EDG 1, 754–755).
45
KAI 159; 277; CIS I 92.
46
Stieglitz 1998, 215.
47
KAI 24:12; CSL, 151; DNWSI, 547–548.
48
See EDG 2, 1635, with discussion and references.
49
Neo-Punic; CSL, 161; DNWSI, 576.
50
Cf. HALOT, 536–537, 730.
51
See Brown 1969, 151–153.
52
KAI 29:14; cf. CSL, 158; DNWSI, 578.
53
See Dothan 1985, 87–88; DNWSI, 580.
54
As lqnʾt in KAI 162:5, Punic; cf. DNWSI, 584.
 Loanwords in Phoenician and Punic 331

mag/kannu, mag/kannutu ‘gift’ … The -ann(u) ending clearly shows the Hurr-
ian intermediacy”57.
mzl, “luck, fortune”58, is a loan from Akk. mazzaltu, “position” of divine
constellations (CDA, 205). The belief that one could ask favours of astral deities “led
to the meaning 'luck' (good or ill) attested in Phoenician and later Hebrew
and Aramaic”59.
mḥz, “forum”60 is borrowed from Akk. maḫāzu, “(market) town, quay” (CDA,
190a): “The fact that the Aramaic, Hebrew and Punic forms lack the aleph [as in Ug.
ma/iḫd] suggests that they descend ultimately from Akkadian”61.
mynkd, “imperial chief”62, is a loan from Libyan63.
mlḥ, “sailor”64, is from Akk. malāḫu, “sailor, boatman”, which in turn is a loan
from Sum. má.laḫ4, “boatman”65. It was also borrowed by Arabic, Aramaic and
Hebrew66. It is uncertain whether the Phoenician word was borrowed directly from
Akkadian or through an intermediate language.
mr, “lord” (KAI 145:7) is a loan from Aram. mryʾ, “lord”67.
mt, “land”, found only in the Incirli Inscription (back: line 11) is Akk. mātu,
“land, country” (CDA, 204b), also a loan in Aramaic (DNWSI, 706–707). Kaufmann
comments that its use in the trilingual “relates exclusively to the names of Assyrian
political units... Thus we must still treat this as a foreign word rather than as a
loanword in Phoenician”68.
mtn, “pestilence” (Incirli Inscription, right: line 4), from Akk. mūtānu,
“epidemic, plague” (CDA, 224a), is a common loanword in Aramaic as mwtn69.
nbl, “dry land”, occurs in the Bustān eš-Šēḫ (Bodashtart) inscription and is a loan
from Akk. nābalu, “dry land, mainland” (CDA, 228a)70.
nzq, “to suffer damage” (KAI 24:14): Tropper notes that as the verb nzq with
this meaning is otherwise confined to Aramaic (cf. DNWSI, 724), so it must be
an Aramaism71.
sgn, “governor”72, may be a loan from Akk. šaknu, “governor” (CAD Š/1, 180),
as are Aram. sgn, “prefect, governor” (DNWSI, 777) and Heb. *segen, “official,
principal” (HALOT, 742).

55
KAI 29:1–2; cf. CSL, 165; DNWSI, 593.
56
Also as mgnh, “gift, offering”, unless it is a PN; cf. DNWSI, 594.
57
Bush 1973, 43 n. 39; also Kaufman 1974, 67. For arguments that the word is Semitic see
O’Connor 1989.
58
KAI 42:5; cf. CSL, 168; DNWSI, 609. In KAI 43:1 read mš l nʿm, “effigy for good fortune”
(cf. DNWSI, 590).
59
Mankowski 2000, 87.
60
Parallel to Lat. forum in KAI 124:2; cf. CSL, 169; DNWSI, 611.
61
Mankowski 2000, 90.
62
Neo-Punic: KAI 120:1–2; CSL, 175; DNWSI, 621.
63
Alternatively, it may derive from Punic ngd, “to report”; cf. DNWSI, 621 with references.
64
CSL, 179; DNWSI, 632.
65
Cf. CAD A/1, 149–152; cf. AHw, 592b.
66
As mentioned by Mankowski 2000, 93, although he makes no reference to Phoenician.
67
HALOT, 1921–1922. See Schmitz 2011, 75.
68
Kaufman 2007, 23. This may apply to other so-called loanwords discussed here.
69
Kaufman 2007, 25; contrast Kaufman 1974, 74. It occurs in line 2 of the Bukān Inscription;
see Cathcart’s contribution to this volume.
70
In line 4; cf. Xella – Zamora 2004, 297 n. 45.
71
Tropper 1993, 44; but cf. CSL, 211.
332 Wilfred G. E. Watson

slmt, “stairs”73, like Heb. sullām, “stepped ramp” (HALOT, 757), is possibly a
loan from Akk. simmiltu, “ladder, stair” (CAD S, 273), which may be Anatolian.
Mankowski concludes that either there were two different words (Semitic sullam and
an unknown Anatolian word borrowed as Akk. simmiltu) or an original sullam was
preserved in Phoenician, etc., which underwent some changes in Akkadian74.
ss, “horse”75, has equivalents in several Semitic languages and seems to have
been borrowed quite early, possibly from Proto-Indo-European *h1eḱu-, “quick,
swift”76. It occurs in Hittite as ekku- but also as Luwian *azzu- or *ašu- and as
Hieroglyphic Luwian ásu-, all meaning “horse”77.
ʿbrt, “(the metal) lead” (KAI 89:6), from Akk. abāru, “lead” (CDA, 2a), possibly
via Heb. ʿoperet, “lead” (cf. HALOT, 863) and ultimately from Sumerian. Probably
a Kulturwort.
ʿgʿ, “cake of bread”78, like Heb. ʿugāh, “round flat loaf” (HALOT, 784) and
Mari Akk. ḫūgum, “a loaf or cake” (cf. CDA, 119), corresponds to Eg.
ʿg(w)t, “Röstkorn”79.
ʿqrt, “granary, storehouse” (KAI 26A i 6), may be a loan from Akk. qarītu,
qirītu, “grain-store” (CDA, 285), with prothetic ʿayin80. This is a new proposal.
ʿrpt, “porch, portico”81 is not necessarily a loan from Akk. urpatu, “tent, canopy”
(CAD U/W, 236) as both derive from Common Semitic ʿrp, “to cover”, although the
specific meaning “porch” may come from Akkadian82. Note also Gk. ἐρεφω “to
cover, provide with a roof”, from IE *h1rebh, “cover, roof” (cf. EDG 1, 456).
pḥ, “metal plate” (DNWSI, 904) is borrowed from Eg. pḫ3, “small board
(of wood)”83. It was also borrowed by Heb. *paḥ, “thin plate of metal”
(HALOT, 922a)84.
plg, “district”85, is possibly a loan from Akk. pilku, “boundary, district” (CAD
P, 373)86.

72
KAI 146:4; cf. CSL, 225. The reading is uncertain; cf. Mankowski 2000, 106 n. 380.
73
CSL, 229; DNWSI, 788.
74
Mankowski 2000, 118.
75
KAI 26A i 6–7; cf. CSL, 231; DNWSI, 795. It also occurs in the Incirli Trilingual.
76
As shown by Kloekhorst 2008, 10, 239. According to Beekes: “This form must have been
thematicized in PIE to *h1eḱuo- after the separation of Anatolian”, and from this are derived
Sanskrit áśva, Gk ἳππος, Latin as equus, etc. (EDG 1, 598). See also SED II No. 199 (Semitic
terms for “horse” were borrowed from an IE satəәm-language) and the comments by Takács
2012, 116 on its occurrence in Egyptian.
77
In fact, it occurs in the Karatepe Inscription and in the Çineköy bilingual: see Tekoğlu –
Lemaire 2000, 978.
78
KAI 138:4; cf. CSL, 237; DNWSI, 824.
79
Hannig 1995, 164; also Eg. ʿwg, “(Getreide) rösten” (Wb I, 173); however, cf. Heb. ʿûg, “to
bake” (HALOT, 794b).
80
See also Akk. karû, qarû, “grain-heap, grain-store” (CDA, 149b). For other derivations of
ʿqrt see CSL, 256 and DNWSI, 883.
81
KAI 10:6, 12; 19:1; 23:2; 118:1; 122:2; 129:2; cf. CSL, 258; DNWSI, 889.
82
For a fuller discussion see del Olmo Lete 1998a.
83
Eg. pḫ3 derives from pḫ3, “to split wood”; cf. Lambdin 1953, 153; EDE II, 500.
84
Cf. Muchiki 1999, 253; EDE II, 499–500.
85
KAI 18:3; cf. CSL, 264; DNWSI, 913.
86
Or it may simply be cognate, as noted by Mankowski 2000, 130 n.474.
 Loanwords in Phoenician and Punic 333

qnh (also qnʾ), “reed”87, has equivalents in Akk. qanû, “reed, cane” (CDA, 284),
Ug. qn, “cane, etc.” (DUL, 704), Heb. qaneh, “reed” (HALOT, 1113), etc.88 It also
occurs as Myc. ko-no-ni-pi and Gk κάννα (Ionian κάννη), “reed”89.
šyš, “alabaster”90, like Heb. šayiš, “alabaster”91, is a loan from Eg. šs, šst,
“alabaster” (FCD, 270, 271).
šky, “ship”92, is from Eg. skty, “ship”, sktt, “boat, ship”93 possibly indirectly
through Ug. tkt, “a type of boat” (DUL, 904) or Heb. śekiyyāh, “ship”
(HALOT, 1327a).
šryt, “beam”, is a loan from Akk. šārītu, “metal beam or bar”94, borrowed from
Aram. šāritā, “beam, architrave”95.
šrn, “monument”96, is probably a loan from Akk. šurinnu, “(divine) emblem”
(CDA, 387)97.
ššmn, “sesame” (DNWSI, 1197), like Ug. ššmn, “sesame”98, is a loan from Akk.
šamaššammū, šamšammū, “sesame” (CDA, 353)99.
tw, “cella shrine”100, may be a loan from Aram twʾ, “chamber”101.
tklt, “expenses” (KAI 37A 1), may be a loan from Akk. takīltu, a mathematical
term of some kind (cf. CAD T, 73)102.
tmʾ, “commander”103, is either from Akk. tamû, “to take an oath, to swear” (CAD
T, 159) or it is a form of Gk ταµία, “housekeeper, conductress” (EDG 2, 1447).
tnr, “oven” (DNWSI, 1224) has equivalents in Semitic104 but also in several
other languages105.
trtn, “commander” (Incirli Inscription, line 7), Heb. turtān, “commander in
chief” (HALOT, 1798–1799) and Akk. tartānu, turtānu, ta/urtannu, turtennu, “a

87
See CSL, 289; DNWSI, 1014.
88
It may be Proto-Semitic (*ḳanaw-); see Kogan 2012, 235–236 (§15), although he does not
refer to Greek.
89
As Beekes states, the word may originally have been Anatolian, adding: “note further
the Mycenaean form pointing to variation α/ο, which is also a sign of Pre-Greek origin” (EDG
1, 636).
90
For the text, now in a private collection, see Heltzer 1998, 77.
91
HALOT, 1483. In later Hebrew also as šēš, “alabaster” (HALOT, 1663).
92
Punic: cf. DNWSI, 1133; not in CSL.
93
DLE II, 88; FCD, 252; cf. Lambdin 1953, 154–155 and Muchiki 1999, 255–256 with
further references.
94
CAD Š/2, 63b; cf. AHw, 1187.
95
DJBA, 1181a; DJPA, 566b; cf. Bonnet 1995.
96
For the text (the word occurs in line 4) cf. Xella – Zamora 2004 and 2005.
97
As proposed by Bonnet (1995) and accepted by Xella – Zamora 2004, 297 n. 41 and 2005,
121 n. 4. See also Zamora 2007, 102–103.
98
According to Tropper (UG, 277, cf. 108), probably a loanword from Akk. šam(aš)šammu,
“sesame”, lit. šaman + šamni, “plant oil” (CDA, 353a).
99
Also borrowed in Greek as σήσαµον “seed and fruit of the sesame plant” (EDG 2, 1325);
see Masson 1967, 57–58.
100
KAI 277:5; cf. DNWSI, 1204–1205.
101
Jastrow 1903, 1649. See the discussion in HALOT, 1672 under Heb. tāʾ and cf. Watson
2009, 20.
102
For discussion see Watson 1997, 90.
103
KAI 1:2; CSL, 341; DNWSI, 1218–1219. Alternatively it may be read t + mʾh , i.e. as the
accusative marker + mʾh, “centurion”.
104
Akk. tinūru, “oven, kiln” (CAD T, 420); Heb. tannûr, “oven” (HALOT, 1763), etc.
105
Including Armenian, Persian and Turkish; cf. Greppin 1991, 204; Kaufman 1974, 108.
334 Wilfred G. E. Watson

high military official” (cf. CAD T, 489) or “field marshal” (CDA, 401) are all loans
from Hurr. ta/e/u/urtānu, with similar meanings106. This is the first occurrence of the
word in Phoenician.

2.2 Uncertain entries

Some suggestions that have been made are no more than uncertain, but further
discoveries may show that they are correct. They are listed here.
ʾdrt, “metal vessel”107 corresponds to Akk. adaru, “(silver) vessel” (CDA, 4b;
AHw, 11) and Aram. ʾdrh, “a type of container” (DJPA, 36b). This is a new
suggestion, but whether these are loans or simply cognate is uncertain.
ʾṭwmṭʾ may come from Gk. ἔντοµιδα, “incision” or εντοµατα, “testicles” (cf. L-S,
488) or even Gk ἀτµητός “uncastrated” (L-S, 244), although explanations from
Semitic have been proposed108.
bṣ, “byssus” (KAI 24:12-13), Punic bwṣ, “byssus” (KAI 76A:6)109 also occurs as
Akk. būṣu, “fine linen, byssus” (CDA, 50b), Heb. bûṣ, “byssus” (HALOT, 115b) and
Gk βύσσος “‘Byssos’ flax and the linen made from it” (EDG 1, 249), which “is
ultimately Indian”110.
ggp, “(round) vase”, corresponds to Akk. kukkubu, “rhyton” (CDA, 165)111 and
to the Ug. PN kkbn, “Flask”(KTU 4.734:2) as suggested by Xella112. It is not clear
whether it is a cognate or a loanword.
hbrk, “steward”113, has three explanations114: (i) It is a loan from Akk. abarakku,
“steward, housekeeper” (CDA, 1b), itself a loan from Sum. agrig, “housekeeper”.
However, as Lawson Younger notes: “the interpretation of hbrk as a loanword from
Akkadian abarakku is not proved, simply unproven”115. (ii) It means “blessed” from
brk, “to bless”116. (iii) It is a loan from Eg. ib-r.k, “attention!”, also borrowed as Heb.
ʾabrek, “watch out!” (HALOT, 10). On the basis of the Hieroglyphic Luwian text,
Phoen. hbrk bʿl probably means “the blessed of Baʿal”117 and so it may not be
a loanword.
ḥṣ, “arrow” (DNWSI, 397) would seem to be Common Semitic118, but note Gk
ἰός “arrow”, from IE *(H)isu, Sanskrit íṣu- (cf. EDG 1, 595).

106
As shown by Wilhelm 1970.
107
Line 5 of the Akko inscription; see Dothan 1985, 83.
108
Cf. CSL, 12; DNWSI, 43.
109
CSL, 45; DNWSI, 185.
110
HALOT, 115b; cf. Wyatt 1995, 68. Note that Ph. glʿn, “one-eyed”, which occurs in the
second Arlan Tash Inscription (line 4) and perhaps as km glt (rev. 7) and corresponds to ʿnytm,
“orphan eye” and ʿn bdd, “lone eye” (rev. 2)—discussed by Avishur 1978—is curiously
similar to Gk γιλός (adj.) “one-eyed” (EDG 1, 273), which in turn is of uncertain derivation.
111
Also spelled kukkupu, quqqubu, etc.; cf. CAD K, 499; AHw, 500b.
112
Xella (1992, 85–86), who posits the root as *gb(gb), “to be round”. As an alternative, he
suggests “bracelet” or the like, based on Akk. guggubu, gubgubu, “(a precious ornament or
gemstone)” (CDA, 95). Note also Akk. gugupinnu, “ornament” (CDA, 96b).
113
KAI 26 A i 1; cf. CSL, 80; DNWSI, 269.
114
See Arbeitman 1980; Lambdin 1953, 146; Lawson Younger 1998, 33–35; Mankowski
2000, 16–20 and Muchiki 1999, 236 with earlier bibliography.
115
Lawson Younger 1998, 34–35.
116
Bron 1979, 28–32.
117
As Lawson Younger (1998, 35) concludes.
118
Akk. ūṣu, uṣṣu (CAD U/W, 289) Heb. ḥēṣ (HALOT, 342) but Ug. ḥẓ and ḥd (DUL, 382).
 Loanwords in Phoenician and Punic 335

ḥrz, “parapet, bastion, etc.”119. The meaning comes from context. Whether there
is any connection with Akk. ḫurīzu, “villa, palace” (CDA, 122), a loan from Hurrian,
is very uncertain indeed.
kbrh, “side”120, may be a loan from Akk. kibru, “bank, shore, rim, border, edge”
(CDA, 156) or the two words may simply be cognate.
kpln, “amphora”, written on an amphora (DNWSI, 530), has equivalents in Ug.
dug
kap-pa-al-la-nu, “jar” (PRU 6, 158:5) and Gk κύπελλον, “bulbous drinking vessel,
beaker, goblet”, which is “a widespread ‘Wanderwort’” (EDG 1, 804)121.
krs, “vase, amphora” (DNWSI, 536) and Punic krsy, “vase” (DNWSI, 537) may
be loans from Gk κρωσσός “water-pail, pitcher”122. However, the equivalents in
Aram. qwrz/krwzʾ, “jug, jar” (DJPA, 503) and Ug. krs/śu, “container” (DUL, 457),
indicate that the word may be Semitic.
krsy, “throne” (DNWSI, 537) may be a loan from Aram. krsʾ or kwrsy, “chair,
throne” (DJPA, 254b)123, but this meaning is uncertain. It only occurs in the
expression mlṣ krsym, which may mean “interpreter of the Cretans”124.
mply (or mpl), “huts, cottages”, may have been borrowed from Lat. mapalia
(DNWSI, 673), but it seems to be a Punic word (cf. LD, 362)125.
mzrḥ, “native”126, like Heb. ʾezraḥ, “the native, full citizen” (HALOT, 28b), may
be a loan from Akk. umzarḫu, unzarḫu, “native, house born (slave), homebred
(animal)” (CAD U/W, 156–157), which seems to be a Hurrian loanword127.
mšṭr, “official” (Punic myšṭr) and mšṭrt, “administration” (DNWSI, 1123), also
borrowed as Eg. mas=ti3=ra, “office” (Hoch 1994, 154)128. According to
Mankowski129: “… the intrusive y mater in Punic myšṭr … certainly points to a
borrowing”. See on šṭr below.
nḥr, “dolphin”130, corresponds to Akk. nāḫiru, “dolphin” (CDA, 232), though
whether it is a loan is uncertain131.

119
KAI 81:4; cf. DNWSI, 404. Unless it means “fence”, based on Aram. ḥirzaʾ, “a thorny
bush used for hedges”, and other cognates (cf. CSL, 113), although this is doubtful.
120
KAI 19:1; cf. CSL, 138; DNWSI, 487.
121
If related to Semitic *kap(a)l, “groin, buttocks, back” (SED II, 332) it may be correspond
to Eg. kf3 (< *kfl), “Hinterteil, Boden (eines Topfes), Ende” (Wb V 120, 6–8); “hinder-parts of
bird, bottom of jar” (FCD, 285), on which cf. Takács 20012, 123 (but with no reference to
Sem. kpln, “amphora”).
122
L-S, 851; EDG 1, 788. Or it may correspond to Gk χρῆσις “loan, etc.” (EDG 2 , 1649); cf.
DNWSI, 536.
123
For possible relationships to Akk. kussû, kussīum, “chair, throne” (CDA, 170), Ug. ks/śu,
“seat, throne” (DUL, 460) and Heb. kissē, “throne” (HALOT, 487) and to Sum. guza, see
Mankowski 2000, 70–71 and Kaufmann 1974, 28. According to G. Steiner (2003, 633 §2.1
25) Sum. guza is a loan from Semitic.
124
For discussion see Piacentini 2003, 23.
125
On mrzḥ, “religious feast/guild” (DNWSI, 691), Avigad – Greenfield (1982, 125 n. 32)
note: “the two spellings mrzḥ and mrzʿ in Ugaritic raise the possibility that this is a non-
Semitic word”. However, no further explanation is available.
126
CSL, 168–169; DNWSI, 609–610.
127
Although Deller 1990 noted: “Das Wort ist sicher nicht semitisch; eine vermutete ḫurri-
tische Herkunft liess sich bisher nicht beweisen”; similarly, Deller 1974, although he makes
no reference to Phoenician (my thanks to Jordi Vidal for this reference). However, it may be
Semitic and correspond to Latin turma; see the discussion in Schmitz 2011, 68–69 and 70–71.
128
For a possible Hebrew equivalent see HALOT, 645a and Mankowski 2000, 143 n. 533.
129
Mankowski 2000, 143 n. 532.
130
Punic: KAI 165:3; cf. DNWSI, 725, unless it means “youth” (CSL, 212).
336 Wilfred G. E. Watson

nn, “descendant” (DNWSI, 734), like the Ugaritic PN nn, “Descendant” (KTU
4.52:11), may be a loan from Eg. nn, “son” (GHWb, 415), but this is very uncertain.
pqt, “rations”132, could be a loan from Akk. piqittu, “provisions” (CAD P, 388),
but the meaning and derivation remain obscure. This a new proposal.
prmn, “servant” (KAI 37A 11), may be the meaning here if it is a loan from Hurr.
purame, “servant”, unless it is a personal name with the same meaning133.
skʾ, “to die”: the meaning is from the context. In the absence of cognates, one
could suggest a loan from Eg. ski, “to perish”134, but this is very uncertain.
sml, “image”, occurs several times135 and corresponds to Heb. semel, “image,
sculpture” (HALOT, 760) but has no clear etymology. It is uncertain whether there is
any connection with Gk σµῑλη “knife, wood-carving knife, scalpel, chisel,
instrument for artisans, physicians, sculptors, etc.” (cf. EDG 2, 1368).
smlt, “image, statue”136: see previous entry.
šdḥ, “wine (?)” from Eg. šdḥ, “pomegranate wine” (DLE II, 141)137.
šṭr, “to write” (as šʿṭr, a participle)138, from Akk. šaṭāru, “to write” (CAD Š/2,
225–241), may have been borrowed by Hebrew, although more probably they are
simply cognate139. See above under mšṭr.
tpp, “to strike”, as mtpp, “drummer” (polel participle) in KAI 49:7 (CSL, 344;
DNWSI, 1226) seems to be Common Semitic140. However, Brown has argued that,
like Gk τύπτω “to beat with a stick”, Semitic tpp derives from an Anatolian
language141. In fact, verbs are rarely borrowed.

2.3 Transcriptions

The following are transcriptions of words that are Greek, Latin or Libyan.
ʾksdr, “chamber”142, also written ʿksndrʿ (KAI 129:2) = Gk ἐξέδρα “hall, arcade,
parlour, saloon” (L-S, 498).
ʾmprʿṭr, “emperor”143 = Lat. imperator, “a commander, leader” (LD, 289).
bʿṣṣ, “pedestal” (DNWSI, 185) = Lat. basis, “a pedestal, base” (LD, 74).
dygmʿ, “sample” (DNWSI, 245) may be the same as Greek δεῖγµα “sample,
pattern, proof, specimen” (L-S, 328; cf. EDG 1, 309).
dnr, dnʿr, “denarius”144 = Gk δηνάριον borrowed from Lat. denarius, “denarius”
(L-S, 340).

131
See also perhaps Ug. anḫr, “dolphin” or “sperm whale” (DUL, 79).
132
KAI 151:3; cf. CSL, 271; DNWSI, 784–785.
133
As first proposed in Watson 1997, 92 and 95 with discussion and references.
134
FCD, 251; also Eg. sk3, “untergehen, zu Grunde gehen” (Wb 4, 311.9–312.17); Eg. sk, “to
destroy, perish” (DLE II, 85–86).
135
E.g. KAI 12:3–4; 13:2; 26C iv 15, 19; 40:3; 41:1; 43:1–2; 91:1; 145:7; cf. CSL, 230;
DNWSI, 792–793.
136
KAI 33:2; cf. CSL, 230; DNWSI, 792–793.
137
Although the inscription may be in Hebrew and the interpretation is very uncertain; see
DNWSI, 1111.
138
See DNWSI, 1123
139
HALOT, 1475–1476. For discussion, see Kaufman 1974, 101 and Mankowksi 142–143.
140
Borrowed by Greek as τύµπανον “kettledrum, hand drum”; cf. Masson 1967, 94–95.
141
Brown 1969, 165. This may be IE *steup-, “to push, beat” (EDG 2, 1518).
142
Punic; cf. DNWSI, 52.
143
Punic: KAI 173:2; cf. DNWSI, 73b.
144
Punic: KAI 130:1–3, etc.; cf. DNWSI, 83, 256; PPG §208c.
 Loanwords in Phoenician and Punic 337

drkmn, “drachm” as either a weight or a coin145 is identical with Greek δραχµή

“drachm” (EDG 1, 352).
ḥnwṭ, “statue”146 = Gk χωνευτά “formed of cast metal”147, although this
is uncertain148.
ṭmʾ, “section”149 is either from Gk τόµος, “a cut, slice” (L-S, 1563; cf. EDG 2,
1465), or Lat. tomus, “a cutting, chip, shred” (LD, 607).
kwlb, “capital (of a column)”150, is from Lat. columna, “a pillar, column”
(LD, 117).
klyṭʾ, “capital” (DNWSI, 512), is from (Pre-)Greek κάλαθος “basket; capital of a
pillar” (EDG 1, 620).
kl[n]pyš, “cabinet-maker, carpenter”, which occurs in line 4 of a fragment of text
related to the Karatepe inscription, is not Luwian but, as proposed by Schmitz151, a
transcription of Gk κλινοποιός “maker of bed(stead)s, cabinet-maker” (cf. L-S, 815).
knprs, “basket carrier”152 = Gk κανηφόρος “carrying a basket” (cf. EDG 2, 1563).
knṣwlʿt, “consulate”153, is from Lat. consulatus, “the office of consul” (LD, 144).
lgm, “flask”, is from Gk λάγυνος “flask, flagon; a measure”154, as proposed
by Dothan155.
lṭr, “kilo”156, is equivalent to Gk. λίτρα “a pound” (L-S, 898), “a Mediterranean
word, originating from Sicily”157.
lyṭʾ (DNWSI , 574): see on klyṭʾ above.
mmry, “memorial”158 = Lat. memoria, “memory, remembrance” (LD, 368).
mṣṣkwy, “architect (?)” = Libyan mṣṣkw with the same meaning (cf.
DNWSI, 677).
nmrsy, “(a profession)” = Libyan nmrsh (DNWSI, 733).
sdl, “sandal” (Punic), is from (Pre-)Greek σάνδαλον “sandal(s)” (EDG 2, 1305),
as is Lat. sandalium, “a slipper, sandal” (LD, 533)159.
synṭr, “senator”160 = Lat. senator, “a senator” (LD, 546).
ʿydls, “public officer”161 = Lat. aedilis, “a public officer” (LD, 24).
ʿksndrʿ: see ʾksdr above.

145
Weight: KAI 60:3; coin: KAI 60:6; cf. CSL, 76; DNWSI, 262; PPG §208b.
146
KAI 12:1; 64:1; cf. CSL, 109; DNWSI, 388.
147
L-S, 1749; cf. EDG 2, 1654.
148
Dussaud (1925, 273) commented: “En hébreu et en arabe, la racine ḤNṬ se rattache aux
pratiques d’embaumement et aux plantes aromatiques. Le vocable ḥanouṭim, «les embaumés»
convient parfaitement aux autels sur lesquels on brûle les parfums et l’encens” and he
translated: “autels à parfums”.
149
Neo-Punic; cf. CSL, 120; DNWSI, 424.
150
CSL, 140; DNWSI, 493.
151
Schmitz 2008, 6, with further references.
152
KAI 40:2; cf. DNWSI, 520; PPG §208a.
153
CSL, 146; DNWSI, 520.
154
Cf. L-S, 869 and EDG 1, 820.
155
Dothan 1985, 88; however, see DNWSI, 566.
156
Punic: KAI 66:1, etc.; cf. CSL, 157; DNWSI, 574; PPG §208b.
157
EDG 1, 867. See the discussion in Schmitz 1994, 9.
158
Punic: DNWSI, 647.
159
A “mot voyageur” according to Dupont-Sommer 1968, 117, 130–131: cf. also CSL, 225–
226; DNWSI, 778.
160
Punic; cf. CSL, 227; DNWSI, 784; PPG §208a.
161
Punic: KAI 125; cf. DNWSI, 839; PPG §208a.
338 Wilfred G. E. Watson

pʾdy, “platform”162= Lat. podium, “a balcony” (LD, 454)163.

pyqʾ, “horseman”164, is a form of Gk ἱππικός “belonging to a horse” (cf. EDG
1, 597).
pkš, “pyksis” = Gk πύξος “a box of boxwood”165, as proposed by Dothan166.
plyṭm, “citizenry, government” (KAI 145:9) = Gk πολίτευµα, “the business of
government” (L-S, 1240b; cf. EDG 2, 1220), as identified by Schmitz167.
psṭy, “position” (Punic) = Lat. positio, “a placing, putting, posture” (LD, 458),
but this is very uncertain (DNWSI, 922).
qwʿṭrbr, “four magistrates”168, is equivalent to Lat. quattuorviri, “a college of
four magistrates” (LD, 491).
qlʿrnt, “cellar”, Heb. qîllārîn, from Gk κελλάριον and Lat. cellarius, “relating to
a store-room” (LD, 97) as proposed by Schmitz169.
qnṭnry, “fortified boundary line”170, is Lat. centenarius, “containing or relating to
a hundred” (LD, 98).
qʿdrygʿ, “four-horse chariot” (KAI 122:2), is from Lat. quadrigae, “a team of
four horses abreast”171.
qʿysr, “Caesar”172 = Lat. caesar, “Caesar” (cf. LD, 84), possibly via Gk καῖσαρ.
qrṭr, “krater” (Punic), is possibly identical with Gk κρατήρ, “mixing bowl” (EDG
1, 675) but the reading is uncertain (cf. DNWSI, 1033).
qrqyn, “herald’s staff”, may be from Gk κηρυκήϊον “herald’s wand”173, but is
probably a PN (cf. DNWSI, 1036).
tbl, “tablet”174= Lat. tabula, “board, plank, writing-tablet” (LD, 591).
trpy, “victory monument”, in an inscription from Cyprus, is identical with Gk
τρόπαιον “trophy” (EDG 2, 1503)175.

2.4 Incorrect entries

Incorrect lemmata that have been proposed are listed here.

ʾdln, is not borrowed from Akk. dullu(m), “work”, as dl, with prothetic aleph and
nunation176. Rather, it is the perfect of the verb *ʾDL, “to (en)close”, cognate with
Akk. edēlu, “to shut” (CDA, 65)177.

162
Neo-Punic: KAI 126:10; cf. CSL, 262; DNWSI, 900; PPG §208c.
163
Note that Punic pws, “tomb” may equal Lat. fossa, “a ditch, trench, channel” (LD, 254b),
but this is unlikely and the context is difficult (cf. DNWSI, 903).
164
KAI 153:3; for other proposals see DNWSI, 910–911.
165
L-S, 1347; probably a loanword from Italy, where the box tree is native; cf. EDG 2, 1259.
166
Dothan 1985, 87; cf. DNWSI, 911.
167
Schmidt 2011, 76, with many additional references.
168
Punic: KAI 125; cf. DNWSI, 1019; PPG §208d.
169
Schmitz 2010, 34 n. 11; cf. DNWSI, 886 (under ʿrbh) for discussion.
170
Punic: KAI 179:2, etc.
171
Ph. qps is not a loan from Eg. qps, “basket” (cited in DNWSI, 1018, under qs) since that
word was borrowed from Semitic as kupta (cf. Hoch 1994 §456).
172
Neo-Punic: KAI 120:1; 122:1; 173:2; cf. CSL, 291. See also DNWSI, 1018 (under qsr).
173
Proposed by Garbini 1975, 437ff. For the Greek cf. EDG 1, 690.
174
Punic; cf. DNWSI, 1202.
175
As proposed by Yon – Sznycer 1991, 806–808, 818.
176
As proposed by van Selms 1971.
177
Peri 1996, 67–70.
 Loanwords in Phoenician and Punic 339

ḥzʿn (KAI 34:5) is not a loan from Akk. ḫazzānu, “mayor” (CSL, 101) but
divided as ḥz ʿnm means “inspector of wells” (DNWSI, 361).
m(ʾ)š, “statue”178, may be a loan from Eg. mswt, “Gestalt, Form, Aspekt (e.
Gottheit)”179. However, having surveyed all the proposals, Xella considers as
“possibile, e meno priva di problemi di quanto non sembri” the suggestion by Rocco
(1970) that mš and mʾš derive from Semitic *ʾw/yš180.
mzzt, “doorpost” (CSL, 168), occurs in the Arslan Tash inscription, which may
not be authentic181. In any case, it is not a loan from Akk. mazzāzu, “position, etc.”
(CDA, 206), since, like that word and Heb. mezûzāh, it derives from Proto-Semitic
*ZWZ, which in the N-form means “to stand”182.
mrnr (KAI 179) is unlikely to be Gk µάρµαρος, “white stone, marble” (cf. EDG
2, 907), as has been proposed and remains unexplained (cf. DNWSI, 694).
mšr, “wealth”, is not a loan from Akk. ma/ešrû, “riches, wealth” (CDA, 203) but
derives from Phoen. *šry/w, “to be rich”183.
skn, “steward”184 is not a loan from Akk. šāknu, “governor”185. In fact, Akk.
sākinu (and sūkinu), “prefect, governor” are loans from West Semitic (cf. CDA, 312,
327)186. See above on sgn.
spr, “document”187 is not a loan from Akk. šipru, “message”, but, like Heb.
sēper, “inscription, letter, etc.” (cf. HALOT, 766) derives from Common Semitic
spr, “to count”. In fact, Akk. sipru, “document” (CDA, 324) is borrowed from Aram.
spr with the same meaning188. Phoen. spr, “scribe”, is also Common Semitic.
qps, “basket” is not a loan from Eg. qps, “basket”189, since that word was
borrowed from Semitic as kupta, “basket”190.
šp, “oil-lamp”, does not correspond to Akk. šappu(m), “bowl” (CDA, 358),
which is equivalent to Ph. sp, “bowl” (DNWSI, 796)191.

178
As mš in KAI 5:1; 6:1; 43:2, 7; as mʾš in KAI 118:1; 119:1, 4; 127; 161:3; 172:4; 277:9;
etc.; cf. CSL, 200; DNWSI, 590. Xella (2001, 38) concludes: “sulle etimologie astratte – in
più tutt’altro che dimostrate – devono prevalere i dati testuali. Da questo punto di vista, a mio
avviso, non vi sono dubbi che il fenicio m(ʾ)š significasse primariamente non già «dono»,
bensì «statua», certo oggetto non raro di offerte votive effettuate dagli uomini alle divinità”.
179
Hannig 1995, 362. More correctly, Eg. ms.wt (OK), msj.t (NK), “Gestalt o.ä. (eines
Gottes)” (Wb II 140–141); see EDE III, 555. Note that P. Montet (apud Cumont 1928, 172)
rejected the meaning “statue” for Eg. mś.
180
In a “Postilla etimologica” (Xella 2001, 37). My thanks to Sergio Ribichini for help with
this reference.
181
See Amiet 1983; Teixidor 1983 and van Dijk 1992.
182
Mankowski 2000, 85, following Huehnergard 2002, 161–178.
183
As explained by Peri (1996) with the cognates Arab. tariya (trw), “to be rich” and Akk.
šarû, “to become rich” (CDA, 361b); see also del Olmo Lete 1998b.
184
KAI 1:2; 31:2; 103:2; cf. CSL, 228.
185
See Kaufman 1974, 98.
186
For discussion, but with no mention of Akk. sākinu or sūkinu, cf. Mankowski 2000, 112–
114, with further references.
187
CSL, 232–233; DNWSI, 798–801.
188
See the argumentation by Mankowski 2000, 121–123, although curiously he makes no
mention either of Akk. sipru, “document” (cf. CAD S, 304) or of Akk. sepīru, “scribe writing
alphabetic script” (CAD S, 225), both loans from Aramaic.
189
As cited in DNWSI, 1018, under qs.
190
Cf. Hoch 1994 §456.
191
As explained by Amadasi Guzzo 1990, 25; cf. DNWSI, 1181.
340 Wilfred G. E. Watson

trš, “must, new wine” (DNWSI, 1234), like Ug. trt, “new wine” (DUL, 880)192,
seems to be Semitic193. Further support for this comes from a possible equivalent in
Mari Akk. turšummu, “a type of wine” (CAD T, 489).

3 Conclusions

The probable ultimate origins of loanwords are set out here in the first two tables
(with uncertain words in brackets). The third table lists words in Phoenician and
Punic that are transcriptions from Greek and/or Latin and Libyan, although these are
loans only in a rather loose sense.

source language loanwords in Phoenician / Punic

Akkadian bt ʾḥd, (ggp), (kbrh), kndr, mzl, mḥz, (mšṭr), (mšṭrt), mt,
mtn, nbl, (nḥr), sgn, slmt, ʿqrt, plg, (pqt), (šṭr), šryt, šrn,
ššmn, tklt, tmʾ
Aramaic (krsy), ktn, mr, nzq, šryt, tw
Table 1: Loans from Semitic languages.

source language loanwords in Phoenician / Punic

Anatolian lyškh, (slmt), qnh, (tpp)
Egyptian ʾy, ḥtm, ṭbʿt, ṭnʾ, (nn), (skʾ), ʿgʿ, pḥ, (šdḥ), šyš, šky
Greek (ʾṭwmṭʾ), (gl[ʿn]), (krs), lp, lqnh, (sml), (smlt), tmʾ
Hurrian ʾgn, ʾdn, ʾtnm, ḥyr, (ḥrd), (ḥrz), krr, (mzrḥ), (prmn), trtn
Indian (bṣ), mgn
Indo-European (ḥṣ), ss, ʿrpt, (tpp)
Latin (mply)
Libyan mynkd
Luwian brzl
Persian dt
Sumerian ʾmn, kr, lly, mlḥ, ʿbrt
unknown ʾšt, hbrk, yn, kpln, tnr
Table 2: Loans from non-Semitic languages.

source language loanwords in Phoenician / Punic

Greek ʾksdr, dymʿ, ḥnwṭ, klyṭʾ, kl[n]pyš, knprs, lgm, lṭr, sdl,
pyqʾ, pkš, plyṭm, qrṭr, qrqyn, trpy
Latin ʾmprʿṭr, bʿṣṣ, kwlb, knṣwlʿt, mmry, synṭr, ʿydls, pʾdy,
pṣty, qwʿṭrbr, qnṭnry, qʿdrygʿ, qʿysr, tbl
Greek or Latin dnr, dnʿr, drkmn, ṭmʾ, qlʿrnt
Libyan mṣṣkwy, nmrsy
Table 3: Loan-transcriptions from Greek, Latin or Libyan.

192
See Brown 1969, 168–170; Gordon 1978; Zamora 2000, 243–246.
193
Xella 2003; he concludes (685): “la scoperta che già a Ebla esisteva un dio del vino di
nome Zilašu implica l’ammissione dell’origine semitica del teonimo e, di conseguenza, del
personaggio… Come si sia passati da Zilašu a trt / tyrwš e, attraverso l’ittita tuwarsa, al "tirso"
con tutte le sue implicazione resta ancora un processo in gran parte inafferrabile”.
 Loanwords in Phoenician and Punic 341

It is important to distinguish between words in Phoenician and Punic that are

borrowed directly from another language (e.g. the month name krr) and indirect
loans, i.e. loanwords already current in a Semitic language that are then transferred
to its sister or daughter languages (e.g. ʾmn, “craftsman”, from Sumerian).
Surprisingly, many words come from Hurrian (probably via Akkadian or Ugaritic)
and from Egyptian, possibly directly, but remarkably, in view of the bilinguals and
trilinguals (see above), there is only one loanword from Luwian (brzl), which may
have been borrowed indirectly.
Out of the approximately 1000 Phoenician and Punic words recorded in DNWSI,
30 or so are loans from non-Semitic and about 25 are either loans from or cognate
with other Semitic languages. A few, such as kpln, “amphora”, tnr, “oven” and yn,
“wine” may simply be Wanderwörter. There seems to be some clustering of
loanwords in at least two inscriptions, namely, the Kition Tariff194 and the Incirli
Trilingual. Also, several month names were borrowed from Hurrian195.Table 3
shows that 14 loan-transcriptions come from Greek, 14 are from Latin and another
five may come from either language. Two or three are from Libyan. It is a pity that
some words, almost certainly borrowed from Phoenician, such as *nbl, “harp”,
*qnmn, “cinnamon” and *tklt, “purple wool”, do not occur in that language196, but
they may appear in texts yet to be discovered197.

References

AHw: W. von Soden, Akkadisches Handwörterbuch, 3 vols. Wiesbaden 1965–1981.

Amadasi Guzzo, M. G., 1990: “Noms de vases en phénicien”, in Semitica 38, 17–20.
Amiet, P., 1983: “Observations sur les ‘Tablettes magiquesʾ dʾArslan Tash”, in Aula
Orientalis 1, 109.
Arbeitman, Y., 1980: “E Luvia Lux”, in Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society
12, 9–11.
Artzi, P., 1969: “On the Cuneiform Background of the Northwest-Semitic Form of
the Word brdl, b(a)rz(e)l, ‘Iron’”, in Journal of Near Eastern Studies 28, 268–
270.
Astour, M. C., 1965: “The Origin of the Terms ‘Canaan,’ ‘Phoenician,’ and
‘Purple’”, in Journal of Near Eastern Studies 24, 346–350.
Avigad, N. – Greenfield, J. C., 1982: “A Bronze phiale with Phoenician Dedicatory
Inscription”, in Israel Exploration Journal 32, 118–128.
Avishur, Y., 1978: “The Second Amulet from Arslan-Tash”, in Ugarit-Forschungen
10, 29–36.
Bonnet, C., 1995: “Phénicien šrn = accadien šurinnu? À propos de l’inscription de
Bodashtart CIS I 4”, in Orientalia 64, 214–222.
Bron, F., 1979: Recherches sur les inscriptions phéniciennes de Karatepe. (Hautes
études orientales 11). Geneva – Paris.

194
See already Watson 1997.
195
Possibly directly or through Ugaritic; see Stieglitz 1998. These month names are not listed
in DNWSI.
196
Cf. Masson 1967, 69; EDG 1, 707 and HALOT 1732–1733 respectively.
197
My thanks go to Kevin Cathcart and Nick Wyatt, who read through early drafts, made
helpful comments and provided references.
342 Wilfred G. E. Watson

Brown, J. P., 1969: “The Mediterranean Vocabulary of the Vine”, in Vetus

Testamentum 19, 146–170.
Bush, F. W., 1973: “The Relationship between the Hurrian Suffixes ne / -na and
-nni/e / -nna”, in H. A. Hoffner (ed.), Orient and Occident. Essays presented
to Cyrus H. Gordon. (Alter Orient and Altes Testament 22). Neukirchen-
Vluyn, 39–52.
CAD: I. J. Gelb et al. (eds.), The Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the
University of Chicago. Chicago IL 1956–2010.
CDA: J. Black – A. George – N. Postgate (eds.), A Concise Dictionary of
Akkadian (SANTAG Arbeiten und Untersuchungen zur Keilschriftkunde 5).
Wiesbaden 2000.
CIS: Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum.
CSL: R. S. Tomback, A Comparative Semitic Lexicon of the Phoenician and
Punic Languages (Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series 32).
Missoula MT 1978.
Cumont, F., 1928: “Nouvelles archéologiques”, in Syria 9, 166–172.
De Simone, R., 2003: “Traduzione nelle epigrafi neopuniche nordafricane?”, in R.
Regalzi (ed.), Mutuare, interpretare, tradurre: storie di culture a confronto. Atti
del 2o Incontro «Orientalisti» (Roma, 11–13 dicembre 2002). Rome, 155–168.
del Olmo Lete, G., 1986: “Fenicio y Ugarítico: correlación lingüística”, in Aula
Orientalis 4, 31–49.
del Olmo Lete, G., 1998a: “Le phén. ʿrpt, l'acc. urpatu(m) et le groupe lexical ʿ/-r-b/p”,
in Transeuphratène 14, 167–174.
del Olmo Lete, G., 1998b: “Notes on Semitic Lexicography I (*trr, try/w)”, in Aula
Orientalis 16, 187–192.
Deller, K.-H., 1984: “Assyrisch um/nzarḫu und Hebräisch ʾäzraḥ”, in Zeitschrift für
die Assyriologie und vorderasiatische Archäologie 74, 235–239.
Deller, K.-H., 1990: “aB umšarḫum, mA umzarḫu, nA unzarḫu/unzaḫḫu, nB
unzaraḫ”, in Nouvelles Assyriologiques Brèves et Utilitaires 1990, 63 Nr. 85.
DJBA: M. Sokoloff, A Dictionary of Jewish Babylonian Aramaic. Ramat Gan –
Baltimore MD 2002.
DJPA: M. Sokoloff, Dictionary of the Jewish Palestinian Aramaic of the Byzantine
Period. Ramat Gan 1990.
DLE: L. H. Lesko, A Dictionary of Late Egyptian, 2 vols. Providence 2002, 2004.
DNSWI: J. Hoftijzer – K. Jongeling, Dictionary of the North-West Semitic
Inscriptions 2 vols (Handbuch der Orientalistik I/21). Leiden 1995.
Dothan, M., 1985: “A Phoenician Inscription from Akko”, in Israel Exploration
Journal 35, 81–94.
DUL: G. del Olmo Lete – J. Sanmartín, A Dictionary of the Ugaritic Language in
the Alphabetic Tradition (English Version Edited and Translated by W. G. E.
Watson), 2 vols. (Handbuch der Orientalistik I/67). Leiden 20042.
Dupont-Sommer, A., 1968: “Une nouvelle inscription punique de Carthage”, in
Comptes rendues de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres 112, 116–133.
Dussaud, R., 1925: “Inscription phénicienne de Byblos d’époque romaine”, in Syria
6, 269–273.
EDE: G. Takács, Etymological Dictionary of Egyptian, vols. I-III (Handbuch der
Orientalistik I/48). Leiden 1999, 2001, 2008.
EDG: R. Beekes, Etymological Dictionary of Greek, 2 vols. (Indo-European
Etymological Dictionary Series 10). Leiden 2010.
 Loanwords in Phoenician and Punic 343

FCD: R. O. Faulkner, A Concise Dictionary of Middle Egyptian. Oxford 1962.

Garbini, G., 1975: “Studi di epigrafia fenicio-punica”, in Annali dell’Istituto
Universitario Orientale di Napoli 35, 433–442.
Gordon, C. H., 1978: “The Wine-Dark Sea”, in Journal of Near Eastern Studies
37, 51–52.
Görke, S., 2010: Das Ritual der Aštu (CTH 490): Rekonstruktion und Tradition eines
hurritisch-hethitischen Rituals aus Boğazköy/Ḫattuša (Culture and History of the
Ancient Near East 40). Leiden.
Greppin, J. A. C., 1991: “The Survvial of Ancient Anatolian and Mesopotamian
Vocabulary until the Present”, in Journal of Near Eastern Studies 50, 203–207.
Gzella, H., 2012: “Phoenician”, in H. Gzella (ed.), Languages from the World of the
Bible. Boston – Berlin, 55–75.
HALOT: The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, 5 vols. (translated
and edited under the supervision of M. E. J. Richardson). Leiden 1994–2000.
Hannig, R., 1995: Die Sprache der Pharaonen (2800-950 v.Chr.). Großes Hand-
wörterbuch Ägyptisch-Deutsch (Kulturgeschichte der antiken Welt 64). Mainz.
Healey, J. F., 1983: “Phoenician and the Spread of Aramaic”, in P. Bartoloni et al.
(eds.), Atti del I Congresso Internazionale di Studi Fenici e Punici. Roma, 5-10
Novembre 1979. Vol. 3. Rome, 663–666.
Heltzer, M., 1998: “Phoenician Epigraphic Miscellanea”, Aula Orientalis 16, 77–84.
Hoch, J., 1994: Semitic Words in Egyptian Texts of the New Kingdom and Third
Intermediate Period. Princeton NJ.
Huehnergard, J., 2002: “izuzzum and ītulum”, in T. Abusch (ed.), Riches Hidden in
Secret Places: Ancient Near Eastern Studies in Honor of Thorkild Jacobsen.
Winona Lake, 161–178.
Jastrow, M., 1903: Dictionary of the Targumim, the Talmud Babli and Yerushalmi
and the Midrashic Literature. New York.
KAI: H. Donner – W. Röllig, Kananäische und aramäische Inschriften,3 vols.
Wiesbaden 1962–1964.
Kaufman, S., 1974: The Akkadian Influences on Aramaic (Assyriological Studies
19). Chicago IL.
Kaufman, S., 2007: “The Phoenician Inscription of the Incirli Trilingual: A Tentative
Reconstruction and Translation”, in Maarav 14, 7–26.
Kloekhorst, A., 2008: Etymological Dictionary of the Hittite Inherited Lexicon
(Leiden Indo-European Etymological Dictionary Series 5). Leiden.
Kogan, L., 2012: “Les noms de plantes akkadiens dans leur contexte sémitique”, in
R. Hasselbach – N. Pat-El (eds.), Language and Nature. Papers Presented to
John Huehnergard on the Occasion of his 60th Birthday (Studies in Ancient
Oriental Civilization 67). Chicago IL, 229–269.
Krahmalkov, C. F., 1974: “A Carthaginian Report of the Battle of Agrigentum 406
B.C. (CIS I 5510.9–11)”, in Rivista di Studi Fenici 2, 171–177.
Lambdin, T. O., 1953: “Egyptian Loan Words in the Old Testament”, in Journal of
the American Oriental Society 73, 145–155.
Lawson Younger, K., 1998: “The Phoenician Inscription of Azatiwadda. An
Integrated Reading”, in Journal of Semitic Studies 43, 11–47.
LD: D. P. Simpson, Casell’s Latin – English / English – Latin Dictionary.
London 19875.
L-S: H. G. Liddell – R. Scott, Greek-English Lexicon. Oxford 1940.
344 Wilfred G. E. Watson

Malamat, A., 1982: “Longevity: Biblical Concepts and Some Ancient Near Eastrn
Parallels”, in H. Hirsch – H. Hunger (Hrsg.), Vorträge gehalten auf der 28.
Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale in Wien, 6.-10. Juli 1981 (Archiv für
Orientforschung Beiheft 19). Horn 1982, 215–224.
Masson, E., 1967: Recherches sur les plus anciens emprunts sémitiques en grec
(Études et Commentaires LVII). Paris.
Mankowski, P. V., 2000: Akkadian Loanwords in Biblical Hebrew (Harvard Semitic
Studies 47). Winona Lake IN.
Muchiki, Y., 1999: Egyptian Proper Names and Loanwords in North-West Semitic.
(SBL Dissertation Series 173). Atlanta GA.
O’Connor, M., 1989: “Semitic *mgn and its Supposed Sanskrit Origin”, in Journal of
the American Oriental Society 109, 25–32.
Orel, V. E. – Stolbova, O. V., 1995: Hamito-Semitic Etymological Dictionary.
Materials for a Reconstruction (Handbuch der Orientalistik I/18). Leiden.
Payne, A., 2006: “Multilingual Inscriptions and Their Audiences: Cilicia and Lycia”,
in S. L. Sanders, ed., Margins of Writing, Origins of Cultures (Oriental Institute
Seminars 2). Chicago IL, 121–136.
Peri, C., 1996: “A proposito dell’iscrizione di Tabnit”, in Rivista di Studi Fenici 24,
67–72.
Piacentini, D., 2003: “Il verbo «tradurre» ed il termine «traduttore» nel Vicino
Oriente. Tre esempi: sumerico, eblaita, fenicio”, in R. Regalzi (ed.), Mutuare,
interpretare, tradurre: storie di culture a confronto. Atti del 2o Incontro
«Orientalisti» (Roma, 11-13 dicembre 2002. Roma, 13–38.
PPG: J. Friedrich – W. Röllig, Phönizisch-punische Grammatik. 3. Auflage, neu
bearbeitet von M. G. Amadasi Guzzo (Analecta Orientalia 55). Rome 1999.
Rendsburg, G. A., 1982: “Semitic PRZL/BRZL/BRDL, « Iron »”, in Scripta
Mediterranea 3, 54–71.
Rocco, B., 1970: “Alla ricerca di un’etimologia (mʾš/mš)”, in Annali dell’Istituto
Universitario Orientale di Napoli 30, 396–399.
Schmitz, P. C., 1995: “The Phoenician Text from the Etruscan Sanctuary at Pyrgi”,
in Journal of the American Oriental Society 115, 559–575.
Schmitz, P. C., 2008: “Archaic Greek Words in Phoenician Script from Karatepe”, in
American Society of Greek and Latin Epigraphy Newsletter 12/2, 5-9.
Schmitz, P. C., 2010: “Late Punic Words for Textiles and Their Production”, in Studi
epigrafici e linguistici sul Vicino Oriente antico 27, 33–38.
Schmitz, P. C., 2011: “The Large Neo-Punic Inscription from Hr. Maktar. A
Narrative of Military Service”, in Studi epigrafici e linguistici sul Vicino Oriente
antico 28, 67–93.
SED II: L. Kogan – A. Militarev, Semitic Etymological Dictionary. Vol. II. Animal
Names (Alter Orient und Altes Testament 278/2). Münster 2005.
Sima, A., 2000: Tiere, Pflanzen, Steine und Metalle in den altsüdarabischen
Inschriften. Eine lexikalische und realienkundliche Untersuchung (Akademie der
Wissenschaften und der Literatur, Mainz. Veröffentlichungen der Orientalischen
Kommission 46). Wiesbaden.
Steiner, G., 2003: “Akkadische Lexeme im Sumerischen”, in P. Marrassini (ed.),
Semitic and Assyriological Studies Presented to Pelio Fronzaroli by Pupils and
Colleagues. Wiesbaden, 630–647.
Steiner, R. C., 2011: Early Northwest Semitic Serpent Spells in the Pyramid Texts
(Harvard Semitic Studies 61). Winona Lake IN.
 Loanwords in Phoenician and Punic 345

Stieglitz, R. R., 1981: “Ugaritic ḫrd ‘Warrior’: A Hurrrian Loanword”, in Journal of

the American Oriental Society 101, 371–372.
Stieglitz, R. R., 1998: “The Phoenician-Punic Menology”, in M. Lubetski –
C. Gottlieb – C. Keller (eds.), Boundaries of the Ancient Near Eastern World. A
Tribute to Cyrus H. Gordon. Sheffield, 211–221.
Takács, G., 2012: “Semitic Fauna Terminology and Afro-asiatic”, in F. Corriente –
G. del Olmo Lete – Á. Vicente – J.-P. Vita (eds.), Dialectology of the Semitic
Languages. Proceedings of the IV Meeting on Comparative Semitics Zaragoza
11/6-9/2010 (Aula Orientalis Supplementa 27). Sabadell, Barcelona, 113–129.
Tekoğlu, R. – Lemaire, A., 2000: “La bilingue royale louvito-phénicienne de
Çineköy”, in Comptes rendus de l’Académie des inscriptions et belles lettres 144,
960–1006.
Teixidor, J., 1983: “Les tablettes d’Arslan Tash au Musée d’Alep”, in Aula
Orientalis 1, 105–108.
Tropper, J., 1993: Die Inschriften von Zincirli (Abhandlungen zur Literatur Alt-
Syrien-Palästinas 6). Münster.
UG: J. Tropper, Ugaritische Grammatik (Alter Orient und Altes Testament 273).
Münster 2000.
Valério, M. – Yakubovich, I., 2010: “Semitic Word for ‘Iron’ as an Anatolian
Loanword”, in T. M. Nikolaeva, ed., Исследования по лингвистике и
семиотике: сборник статей к юбилею Вяч. Вс. Иванова [Studies in
Linguistics and Semiotics: A Collection of Articles for the Anniversary for
Vyacheslav V. Ivanov] (Languages of Slavonic Culture). Moscow, 108–116.
van Dijk, J., 1992: “The Authenticity of the Arslan Tash Amulets”, in Iraq 54, 65–68.
van Selms, A., 1971: “Akkadian dullu(m) as a Loan-word in West Semitic
Languages”, in Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages 1, 51–58.
Watson, W. G. E., 1996: “Non-Semitic Words in the Ugaritic Lexicon (2)”, Ugarit-
Forschungen 28, 701–719.
Watson, W. G. E., 1997: “Comments on the Phoenician Tariff Inscriptions from
Kition”, in Die Welt des Orients 28, 89–95.
Watson, W. G. E., 2009: “Jottings on Some Ugaritic Words”, in Studi epigrafici e
linguistici sul Vicino Oriente antico 26, 15–21.
Wb: A. Erman – H. Grapow, Wörterbuch der ägyptischen Sprache, 7 vols. Berlin
1926–1963.
Wegner, I., 2000: Einführung in die hurritische Sprache. Wiesbaden.
Wilhelm, G., 1970: “ta/erdennu, ta/urtannu, ta/urtānu”, in Ugarit-Forschungen 2,
277–282.
Wyatt, N., 1995: “Jonathan’s Adventure and a Philological Conundrum”, in
Palestine Exploration Quarterly 127, 62–69.
Xella, P., 1984: “Sul nome punico ʿbdkrr”, in Rivista degli Studi Fenici 12, 21–30.
Xella, P., 1992: “Matériaux pour le lexique phénicien – I”, in Studi epigrafici e
linguistici sul Vicino Oriente antico 9, 81–93.
Xella, P., 1996: “Ägyptisch ‘r.t «Obergemach, Dachterrasse» und semitische
Parallelen”, in Studi epigrafici e linguistici sul Vicino Oriente antico 13, 19–24.
Xella, P., 2001: “Fenicio m(ʾ)š, «statua» (Matériaux pour le lexique phénicien. III)”,
in K. Geus – K. Zimmermann (Hrsg.), Punica – Libyca – Ptolemaica. Festschrift
für Werner Huß, zum 65. Geburtstag dargebracht vom Schülern, Freunden und
Kollegen. Leuven, 21–40.
346 Wilfred G. E. Watson

Xella, P., 2003: “Sulla più antica storia del vino”, in P. Marrassini (ed.), Semitic and
Assyriological Studies. Presented to Pelio Fronzaroli by Pupils and Colleagues.
Wiesbaden, 680–689.
Xella, P. – Zamora, J. Á., 2004: “Une nouvelle inscription phénicienne de Bodashtart
sur la rive du Nahr al-Awwāli près de Bustān eš-Šēḫ”, in Bulletin d’Archéologie et
d’Architecture Libanaises 8, 273–299.
Xella, P. – Zamora, J. Á., 2005: “L’inscription phénicienne de Bodashtart in situ à
Bustān eš-Šēḫ (Sidon) et son apport à l’histoire du sanctuaire”, in Zeitschrift des
Deutschen Palästina-Vereins 212, 120–129.
Yon, M. –Sznycer, M., 1991, “Une inscription phénicienne royale de Kition, Chypre”,
in Comptes rendues de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres 135, 791–823.
Zamora, J. Á., 2000: La vid y el vino en Ugarit (Banco de Datos Filológicos Semíticos
Noroccidentales, Monografías 6). Madrid.
Zamora, J. Á., 2007: “The Inscription from the First Year of King Bodashtart of
Sidon’s Reign: CIS I, 4”, in Orientalia 76, 100–113.