Τεθυμμένος

Notes (1)

1. The headword, attested only in lexicography, is probably derived from uncompounding the form e)pitequmme/nos, the perfect middle/passive participle, masculine nominative singular, of the verb e)pitu/fomai (I am burnt up, but metaphorically I am inflamed, e.g. by love, or I am furious); see generally LSJ s.v.
   The lemma might at first glance seem to be a rare variant -- or a propagated, mistaken spelling -- of tequme/nos, perfect middle/passive participle, masculine nominative singular, of the verb qu/w, I offer, I sacrifice; see LSJ s.v. This form occurs in e.g. Xenophon, Hellenica 5.1.18 (web address 1). Indeed, as Adler reports, tequme/nos was inserted above the headword in Suda ms M, and tequme/nws was substituted for the headword in ms G. But the gloss (see next note) indicates that the first alternative is more likely.
1. 1The headword is identically glossed in Timaeus' Platonic Lexicon s.v. and in Photius' Lexicon (tau111 Theodoridis); aside from the present Suda entry, the lemma appears nowhere else. Adler calls attention to the similarity between the gloss and a scholion to Plato, Phaedrus 230A (web address 2). In the dialogue, Socrates wonders whether he might be a qhri/on e)pitequmme/non, a furious or rabid wild animal, but literally a beast having been completely burned up; cf. Hesychius s.v e)pitequmme/nwn and Etymologicum Magnum 458.40. To follow the arc of Adler's hint to its very end, therefore, it seems that lexicographers in late antiquity uncompounded the participle e)pitequmme/non (from the verb e)pitu/fomai, I am completely inflamed; see generally LSJ s.v.) and altered the gender to masculine, thereby deriving the headword. ↩