59

In 2007 two stelae, each bearing figures of the Storm-god leading a ruler and a duplicate Hieroglyphic Luwian

text, were discovered at Uluçınar (formerly Arsuz, classicalRhosos), on the Turkish coast south of İskenderun.

Discovery and descriptionDiscovery (by Ö. Çelik)The two ARSUZ stelae were found within the perimeter ofthe Uluçınar Special Training Centre of the Turkish Navy.No further details of the find-spot are available, but thestelae presumably turned up in the course of building opera-tions within the naval base. The discovery was reported tothe Hatay Archaeological Museum in autumn 2007 and thefirst visitors to the site from the museum, Demet Kara andÖmer Çelik, were told that the stelae were found in the campat a depth of 50cm during the course of electrical works.

The military authorities have not permitted further investi-gation in the area. Thus, all that can be safely said of theirprovenance is that it lies somewhere on the coastal strip westof the southern end of the Amanus range and north of themouth of the river Orontes. Both stelae were initially trans-ported to the old Hatay Archaeological Museum and arenow exhibited in the new Hatay Archaeological Museum.

DescriptionTwo stelae, each with near-duplicate inscriptions (figs 1–4). Obverse: figure of a Storm-god holding aloft the handof a king. Reverse (left side-back-right side) A1: nine-lineinscription; A2: eight-line inscription. Each inscriptionbegins upper right and runs sinistroverse along line 1,returning along line 2, and so continuing boustrophedon,ending line 9 right end (A1) and line 8 left end (A2).

Anatolian Studies 65 (2015): 59–77© British Institute at Ankara 2015

doi:10.1017/S006615461500006X

Two new inscribed Storm-god stelae from Arsuz(İskenderun): ARSUZ 1 and 2

Belkıs Dinçol,1 †Ali Dinçol, J.D. Hawkins,2 Hasan Peker1 and Aliye Öztan3

with a contribution by Ömer Çelik4

1Istanbul University, Turkey, 2School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, UK,3Ankara University, Turkey, and 4Hatay Archaeological Museum, Turkey

belkisdincol@gmail.com

Ali M. Dinçol in memoriam

AbstractIn 2007 two stelae, each bearing figures of the Storm-god leading a ruler and a duplicate Hieroglyphic Luwian text,were discovered at Uluçınar (formerly Arsuz), on the Turkish coast south of İskenderun. The inscription is the work ofa Suppiluliuma, son of Manana, king of the land of Walastin, now understood as the Luwian designation of the Amuqplain with its capital at the Iron Age site of Tell Tayinat. The stelae, probably dating to the later tenth century BC, recordthe successful reign of the ruler and his happy relations with the Storm-god. Historically important is a passage whichdescribes this Amuq king’s victory over the Cilician plain, the city of Adana and the land of Hiyawa.

Özet2007 yılında İskenderun’un güneyindeki Türkiye sahilinde Uluçınar’da (Arsuz) her ikisinde de Fırtına Tanrısı figürününyol gösterdiği bir yöneticinin tasvirinin yer aldığı, Luvi Hiyeroglifleriyle yazılmış birbirinin kopyası bir metin içereniki stel bulunmuştur. Yazıt, Manana’nın oğlu, Walastin ülkesi kralı Suppiluliuma’nın eseridir. Walastin ülkesinin, DemirÇağı’nda başkenti Tell Tayinat olan Amuk ovasının Luvice tanımı olduğu anlaşılmıştır. Muhtemelen MÖ. 10. yüzyılsonlarına tarihlendirilen steller, yöneticinin başarılı egemenliğini ve Fırtına tanrısıyla uyumlu ilişkisini bildirir. Bu Amukkralının Kilikia ovası, Adana kenti ve Hiyawa ülkesine karşı zaferinin anlatıldığı pasaj, tarihi açıdan önemlidir.

Anatolian Studies 2015

Dimensions. A1: total height of stele 2.21m; depth ofleft and right sides from the viewer’s perspective 28–39.5cm; reverse width 46–56cm; line height 9–9.5cm. A2:total height of stele 2.17m; depth of left and right sidesfrom the viewer’s perspective 44–46cm; reverse width 61–71cm; line height 13.5–14.5cm.

Condition. Good, apart from a break to each; thelargely duplicate texts permit the restoration of the lacunaein one from the other.

Script, line-dividers. Relief.Sign-forms. Monumental, A1 §5 cursive (m)u?/ ma?.Peculiarities. Initial-a-final consistently observed.Word-dividers. Frequent.

Authorship and area of originAccording to the text itself, it is the work of Suppiluliumason of Manana (alias Am[a]n[ana]), king of the land ofWalastin. This land, formerly read WaDAs(a)tin, has beenknown since its appearance on a fragment of inscription,TELL TAYINAT 1 fr. 3, excavated in 1937 (Gelb 1939).It reappeared in 1959 on the MEHARDE stele (Meriggi1959) and further on the SHEIZAR stele (Hawkins 1979);these latter two stelae bear inscriptions of Taita, king ofthe land of Walastin, and of his wife, Kupapiya. PieroMeriggi, on the basis of the Tell Tayinat fragment, inferredthat it was the Hieroglyphic Luwian designation of theAmuq itself (the plain of Antioch, Assyrian Unqi), whose

60

Fig. 1. Front and inscribed sides of the ARSUZ 1 stele.

Dinçol, Dinçol, Hawkins, Peker and Öztan

rulers were alternatively designated by the Assyrians bythe ethnicon Patinayya, ‘the Patinean’. He further notedthe surprise of finding monuments of its king as far awayas Meharde and Sheizar (near Hama).

Recently the excavations of the Temple of the Storm-god on the ancient citadel of Aleppo (Kohlmeyer 2009)have produced inscriptions of Taita, king of the land ofPalastin (formerly read PaDAs(a)tin: Hawkins 2011). Newdating criteria suggest that the Taita of the Aleppo Templeinscriptions is substantially earlier than the Taita ofMEHARDE-SHEIZAR, perhaps his grandfather. Thisearlier dating may account for the pa-/wa- alternation inthis toponym. The discovery of the ARSUZ stelae extendsthe distribution of the monuments of the kings ofP/Walastin further to the northwest.

At the same time, Meriggi’s original location of theland’s centre at Tell Tayinat looks increasingly probable.The discovery, during excavations at Tell Tayinat in 2012,of the upper half of a colossal statue bearing part of aninscription of a Suppiluliuma but not preserving the nameof his kingdom further increased the probability, but

without confirming it conclusively (Harrison 2014: 408).Now, two fragments excavated at Tell Tayinat have beenjoined by Mark Weeden and bear the toponym writtenwa/i-la-sà-ti-ni-za(REGIO). This writing with -la- promptsthe re-reading of Palistin/Walistin as Palastin/Walastin(Weeden 2015).

ChronologyA probable chronology of the P/Walastin inscriptionsbased on palaeographic criteria may be offered (table 1).Clearly oldest are the Aleppo Temple inscriptions, whichbelong to a transitional style between Empire and Lateperiod Hieroglyphic (ca 1200–1000 BC), and whichincludes almost all the Malatya inscriptions. The criteriaof this style include: (1) introduction of the zi/za and i/iadistinction by the addition to the latter of each pair of +a(zi+a, i+a); (2) continuation of the Empire period graphicphenomenon ‘initial-a-final’, which falls out of use in thelater ninth century BC; (3) use of the ‘crampon’ (L.386)as a determinative logogram VIR2 rather than its laterusage as a word-divider.

61

Fig. 2. Drawing of the inscription on the ARSUZ 1 stele (H. Peker).

Anatolian Studies 2015

The Aleppo Temple inscriptions display the archaic(‘transitional’) criteria (1)–(3); MEHARDE-SHEIZARshow criterion (2), but for (1) replace a recognisable +awith a single stroke at the base of zi and i, and for (3) havegeneralised the ‘crampon’ as a word-divider. The ARSUZstelae resemble closely in palaeographic, epigraphic andliterary terms the classic Suhi-Katuwa style of Carchemishpreserving ‘initial-a-final’, but innovating in replacingrecognisable +a with a double stroke and adapting the‘crampon’ as a word-divider; epigraphically, they maintainmonumental sign forms with no examples of cursive. Thevery limited number of these criteria exhibited by thefragments of TELL TAYINAT 1 generally agrees with thisstyle but appears somewhat more developed. The colossalstatue inscription TELL TAYINAT 4 maintains ‘initial-a-final’ but shows innovations (1) and (3), and further usesonly cursive sign-forms. A date significantly later thanARSUZ 1 and 2 is indicated, such as could be explainedif Suppiluliuma (I) of ARSUZ 1 and 2 were the grandfather

of Suppiluliuma (II) of TELL TAYINAT 4. Since ARSUZ1 and 2 are so similar to the Carchemish inscriptions of thelater tenth century BC, TELL TAYINAT 4 should date tothe mid ninth century; so Suppiluliuma II could plausiblybe identified with Sapalulme the Patinean encountered byShalmaneser III in 858 BC.

Note that the Halparuntiya associated with TELLTAYINAT 1 is unlikely to be the same man as Qalparundathe Patinean, contemporary of Shalmaneser III, 857–853BC, since that inscription appears palaeographically earlierthan the mid ninth century BC.

The emerging picture of the sequence of rulers of theAmuq is thus as follows. An 11th-century kingdom, theland of Palastin, ruled by Taita (I), dominated Aleppo.Under his descendant Taita II the land, now writtenWalastin, extended its ascendancy down to the area ofMeharde-Sheizar near Hama. The power-base of thisdynasty was probably already Tell Tayinat, where it maybe represented by the remains of Building Period 1

62

Fig. 3. Front and inscribed sides of the ARSUZ 2 stele.

Dinçol, Dinçol, Hawkins, Peker and Öztan

(buildings XIII and XIV: Harrison 2014). In the later tenthcentury BC, the land of Walastin, ruled by Suppiluliuma(I), conducted a war against Cilicia (the city Adana andland Hiyawa), and a descendant, Suppiluliuma II, maywell be identified with Sapalulme encountered by Shalma-neser III in 858 BC. By this date, the Assyrians (Assurna-sirpal II and Shalmaneser III) referred to the kings andpeople of the land as ‘Patinean’ (KURpa-ti-na-a-a), an ethnicadjective perhaps reflecting in shortened form the toponym

Palastin/Walastin; further, they referred to its capital cityas Kinalia/Kunulua, now certainly identified as TellTayinat; otherwise, Shalmaneser III and Tiglath-pileser IIIrefer to the land as Unqi, a geographical term: ‘low-lyingplain’ (Semitic ʿmq, modern Amuq). Thus the Luwiantoponym Palastin/Walastin may survive in the Assyrianethnicon Patinayya, where otherwise the geographical termUnqi was used. For further discussion, see now Weeden2013: 1–20; Galil 2014: 75–104.

63

Eleventh century (±) Taita I (ALEPPO 6 and 7)Tenth century (early) Taita II (MEHARDE-SHEIZAR)Tenth century (late) Suppiluliuma I (ARSUZ 1 and 2)Ninth century (early) Halparuntiya(?) (TELL TAYINAT 1)Ninth century (mid) Suppiluliuma II (TELL TAYINAT 4)

= Sapalulme (858 BC)

Table 1. The chronology of P/Walastinean inscriptions.

Fig. 4. Drawing of the inscription on the ARSUZ 2 stele (H. Peker).

Anatolian Studies 2015

64

Transliteration (figs 3, 4)A1. 1. §1 EGO-mi-i IPURUS.FONS.MI-sá |HEROS wa/i-lá/í-sà-ta-ni-za REGIO R[EXA2. EGO-mi IPURUS.FONS.MI |HEROS wa/i-lá/í-si-ti-ni-za REGIO REX

-n]a-na-si REX |FILIUS-ni-za ||Ima-na-na REX |FILIUS-ni-za

A1. 2. §2 a-wa/i mi-za-*a |tá-ti-za “LIGNUM”-la-ha-za |PUGNUS-ri+i-ha (IUSTITIA)tara/i-naA2. a-wa/i mi-ia-za-*a |tá-ti-za |LIGNUM-ha-za “IUSTITIA”-na PU[GNUS]-ri+i-[ha]A1. §3 wa/i-mi-*a REGIO SOLIUM-wa/i-haA2. 2. [... ...] || SOLIUM-nu-haA1. §4 (DEUS)BONUS-wa/i-mu (DEUS)VITIS-ia-sa-ha |“L.286”-li-tàA2. (DEUS)BONUS-pa-mu (DEUS)VITIS “L.286”+ra/i-li-tàA1. §5 a-wa/i OVIS(ANIMAL) 20 PANIS-li-sa |CRUS OVIS(ANIMAL)A2. a-wa/i |OVIS(ANIMAL) 20 PANIS CRU[S] |OVIS(ANIMAL)

3. CENTUM URCEUS-(m)u/ma?-ka/sà?|| BONUS2.VITIS-mi-zi CRUS+RA/ICENTUM-ni URCEUS-sa |BONUS2.VITIS-mi-zi-ha CRUS

A1. §6 a-wa/i REL-ti-i ara/i LIGNUM-ha-za PUGNUS-ri+i-haA2. a-wa/i REL-ti-i ara/i |“LIGNUM”-za |PUGNUS-ri+i-haA1. §7 |za-sa-pa-wa/i-mu URBS+MI PES2.PES(-)tara/i-taA2. 3. |za-sa-pa-wa/i-mu URBS+MI |PES2.PES ||(-)na-taA1. §8 wa/i-mu-tá-*a (DEUS)TONITRUS |MANUS-tara/i-na |PONERE-wa/i-taA2. wa/i-mu-tá-*a (DEUS)TONITRUS |“MANUS”-tara/i-na |PONERE-wa/i-taA1. §9 a-wa/i SUPER+ra/i CRUS-haA2. a-wa/i SUPER+ra/i CRUS-haA1. 4. §10 wa/i-tá-*a “1”-ti-i ara/i |INFRA-tá || CAPERE-haA2. [wa/i]-ta-*a “1”-ti-i ara/i [INFR]A-ta C[APERE]-haA1. §11 (A)TANA-sa-pa-wa/i-mu(URBS) (LIGNUM)tara/i-wa/i |PONERE-wa/i-taA2. (A)T[ANA]-sa-[pa]-wa/i-mu(REGIO) |“LIGNUM”-ru-wa/i PONERE-wa/i-tá ||A1. §12 a-wa/i |SUPER+ra/i CRUS-haA2. 4. a-wa/i SUPER+ra/i CRUS-haA1. §13 wa/i-tá-*a |hi-ia-wa/i-ha(REGIO) |(PES2)tara/i-zi-i-haA2. wa/i-tá-*a hi-ia-w[a/i …A1. §14 a-wa/i |PRAE-i CAPERE+CAPERE-L.417-na(URBS) mi-na-*a |L.273-i-naA2. ... ]CAPERE+CAPERE-L.417-na(URBS) [mi]-i-na-*a |“L.273”

|hi-nu-wa/i-ha ||hi-nu-wa/i-ha

A1. 5. §15 |za-pa-wa/i NEG2-ha |tá-ti-zi |i-zi-ia-taA2. |za-pa-wa/i NEG2-ha |tá-ti-zi |i-zi-ia-táA1. §16 |NEG2-ha-wa/i-tà |AVUS-ha-zi |i-zi-ia-taA2. 5. NEG2-ha-wa/i-tà AVUS-ha-zi |i-zi ||-ia-taA1. §17 wa/i-tà-*a EGO |i-zi-i-haA2. wa/i-tà-*a mu-*a |i-zi-i-haA1. §18 a-wa/i |za-na (DEUS)TONITRUS FORTIS-wa/i-ta-li-naA2. a-wa/i |za-a-na |FORTIS-li-na (DEUS)TONITRUS

6. mu-*a|| IPURUS.FONS.MI CRUS-ha Ima-na-na-si REX |FILIUS-ni-zamu-*a IPURUS.FONS.MI CRUS-ha Iá-m[a]-n[a- …

A1. §19 |za-sa-pa-wa/i-[mu] (DEUS)[TONITRUS ...] |[... ]-li-[...A2. ... ] |FO[RTIS]-wa/i-<ta>-li-na

... ] |PUGNUS-ri+i-ta6. |MANUS-tara/i-na || |PUGNUS-ri+i-ta

A1. §20 wa/i-mu-*a SUPER+ra/i |pu-tàA2. [w]a/i-mu-*a SUPER+ra/i VIA.PUGNUS-tàA1. 7. §21 wa/i-mu-*a OMNIS-mi REX SUPER+ra/i-li ||-na [|]i-zi-i-tàA2. wa/i-mu-*a [ ]-m[i … ]-na i-zi[...

Dinçol, Dinçol, Hawkins, Peker and Öztan

65

A1. §22 mu-pa-wa/i-*a |POST-n[a ... -n]a ... A2. ... ... ...] |REL-i-sa za-a-na DEUS

... ]-tá (“LONGUS”)i+ra/i-ti-iINFRA-tá |(LONGUS)i+ra/i-ti

A1. §23 [ ]-pa-wa/i-[...]-tá [z]a-na (PANIS)tú+ra/i-[...A2. |ni-pa-wa/i-tú-ta |za-a-na (SCUTELLA.PANIS)tú+ra/i-pi-i-na

ARHA CAPERE-iARHA |CAPERE-i

A1. §24a pa-ti-pa-wa/i-tá-*a MATER-na-tí-ni-sa (DEUS)BONUS-ma-sa||A2. 7. pa-ti-pa-wa/i-ta-*a MATER-na-tí ||-ni-i-sa (DEUS)BONUSA1. 8. §24b |tá-ti-sa-pa-wa/i-tú-tá (DEUS)VITIS-pa+ra/i-ia-sa |(PES2.PES)tara/i-za-túA2. |tá-ti-sa-pa-wa/i-tú-ta (DEUS)VITIS |(PES2.PES)tara/i-za-túA1. §25 CAELUM-pa-wa/i-tú-tá TERRA-REL+ra/i-sa-ha LIS-lu/a/i-sa-túA2. CAELUM-sa-pa-wa/i-tú-tá TERRA-REL+ra/i-sa-ha LIS-[ -t]úA1. §26 CAELUM-si-pa-wa/i-tú (DEUS)TONITRUS [LIS-l]u/a/i-sa sa-tú-*aA2. [CAE]LUM-si-i-pa-wa/i-tú (DEUS)TONITRUS LIS-lu/a/i-sa sa-tú-*aA1. §27 OMNIS-mi-wa/i REL-i-sa DOMINUS-ni-i-saA2. OMNIS-mi-wa/i |REL-i-sa DOMINUS-ni<-sa>A1. 9. §28 Ima-na-na BONUS2.SCRIBA-la || CAPERE+SCALPRUM

8. CAPERE.SCALPRUM-tà Ima-na-na || |SCRIBA-la

Translation§1. I (am) Suppiluliuma, the Hero, Walastanean/Walastinean King, the son of King Manana.§2. I took up my father’s power (and) rule,§3. and I myself settled the land.§4. The Grain-god and the Wine-god favoured me,§5. and for a sheep 20 (measures of) bread stood, for a sheep 100 jugs (of) good wine stood.§6. At what time I took up power,§7. this city opposed? me,§8. the Storm-god put his hand on me§9. and I overcame,§10. and I defeated (it) at one time / for the first time.§11. The city/land Adana ‘put me to the stick’,§12. and I overcame,§13. I routed? also the land Hiyawa, / or I turned? to the land Hiyawa also,§14. and I made my skill pass before the city …§15. This neither (my) fathers did,§16. nor did (my) grandfathers do it,§17. but I myself did it. §18. This mighty Storm-god (stele) I myself Suppiluliuma set up, King Manana’s son. §19. But [for me] this [Storm-]god raised (his) [migh]ty? hand,§20. and for me he … ed up,§21. and he made me superior to every king.§22. After me? who knocks down (lit. ‘lays low’) this god for me,§23. or takes away this bread from him, §24a. for him (his) ‘mummy’? the Grain-god,§24b. and for him (his) father the Wine-god,

may they always oppose?,§25. may Heaven and Earth prosecute him,§26. may Heaven’s Storm-god be (his) prosecutor,§27. who (is) Lord for all!§28. Manana, the (A1: good) scribe carved (it).

Anatolian Studies 2015

Historical contentThe general content of the ARSUZ text may be analysedas follows:

§§1–2. Titles and accession of Suppiluliuma son ofManana

§§3–4. Settlement of country and prosperity of reign§§6–10. Revolt(?) of an unnamed city, suppressed by

help of the Storm-god§§11–14. Encounters with the city of Adana and the

land of Hiyawa§§15–17. Achievements greater than those of his

fathers and grandfathers§§18–21. Erection of Storm-god (stelae) and divine

favour§§22–27. Curse protecting stelae, invoking the Grain-

and Wine-gods, Heaven and Earth, the Storm-godof Heaven (the universal lord)

§28. Scribal signature.

§§6–14 form the historical core of the text, and thoughthe exact wording leaves some possibility of doubt, themost likely understanding of these clauses is as a recordof victory over Adana and Hiyawa (Plain Cilicia). Thus:

§7. This (unnamed) city did something unfavourableto me (PES2.PES(-)tara/i-//-na-).

(§8. Blessing of the Storm-god).§§9–10. and I overcame, and I conquered at one time.§11. The city of Adana did something idiomatic to me,§12. and I overcame.§13. I turned (transitive? intransitive?) (to) the land

Hiyawa also,§14. and I made my WARPI pass before the city (name

unreadable).(§15–17. This neither my fathers nor grandfathers did,

but I did it).

This historical narrative is followed by the statementof the erection of the Storm-god stelae (§18) – where?Presumably in ‘this (unnamed) city’ (§7). Should we thinkthat this was where the stelae were found, in the localityof Arsuz, and that they were erected in different parts ofit? An alternative understanding may be proposed: the twoduplicate stelae were intended as victory monuments, eachto be set up in a different city (‘this city’), perhaps Adanaand the city of unread name. Where they were found wassimply a place where they were abandoned in transit tounreached destination(s). We can of course only speculateon this, but the duplicate character of the texts is sugges-tive. It is almost unparalled in Hieroglyphic Luwianinscriptions; only the KARATEPE text exists in duplicateversions placed on both gates of a city.

Commentary§1. Note the omission of case-endings: A1, A2, wa/i-lá/í-sà/si-ta/ti-ni-za, FILIUS-ni-za, also §18 below, A1; A2,PURUS.FONS.MI (A1, -sa); A2, ma-na-na (A1, -si). Thealternation -sà-ta- (A1) vs -si-ti in the toponym is alsocurious where elsewhere -sà-ti is regular.

§2. For this clause, cf. also §6, below.IUSTITIA(tara/i)-na: presumably stands for tarwana- ,

‘rule’, in addition to the usual salha(n)t-, ‘succession’(Hawkins 2000: 241).

PUGNUS-ri+i-, ‘rise, raise’: see Hawkins 2000: 380.The sense ‘raise’ > ‘pick up’ is probably seen in ASSURletters b §9, e §21; semantically comparable with Akkadiannašû, ‘raise, pick up, carry’.

§3. SOLIUM-wa/i-ha (A1) vs SOLIUM-nu-ha (A2): inter-esting alternative writings of causative isanu(wa)-, ‘seat,settle’.

§4. Clause which, like KARKAMIŠ A11a, §9 and A2+3,§7, introduces statements of ‘ideal prices’.

(DEUS)BONUS, the Good god: recognised elsewhereas Kumarma, a late form of the Hurrian Grain-godKumarbi, TELL AHMAR 1, §2; for the reading, seeHawkins 2004: 363.

(DEUS)VITIS(-ia): designated in the cited contexts bythe name Tipariya, an otherwise unknown theonym.

In §24a–b below, the Grain and Wine deities arepresented as mother (‘mummy’) and father respectively:unexpected reversal of sexes.

“L.286(+ra/i, A2)”-li-: unknown verb of unknownreading, which in the context must express generally‘favour’.

§5. Statement of ideal price, as KARKAMIŠ A11a, §10;A2+3, §8; and, in more detail, AKSARAY, §4. These areexpressed as here ‘for a sheep so much (measure)commodity (KARKAMIŠ barley; AKSARAY barley,oil(?), wine) stood’. The Neo-Hittite world was on the‘sheep standard’ rather than the silver standard, as may beobserved also in the Hittite laws, but we may remember thatthe ideal exchange rate was one sheep = one shekel of silver.

PANIS(-li-, A1): different word from the known turpi- .CENTUM-ni, A2 (CENTUM only, A1): for the

reading CENTUM-ni, see also SHEIZAR §2. -ni shouldbe the phonetic complement of CENTUM.

URCEUS (-ma?-ka?- or possibly -(m)u?-sà?-, A1, -sa,A2): the logogram pictographically representing a handledpitcher may have two different readings. For ma-kaperhaps read -(m)u-/ma-sà.

BONUS2.VITIS-mi-zi(-ha, A2): the logogram coupledwith MAGNUS appears on seals as a title and has been

66

Dinçol, Dinçol, Hawkins, Peker and Öztan

shown by B. Dinçol to equate to Cuneiform GAL.GEŠTIN(Dinçol 1998: 163–67). The known word for ‘wine’ ismatu(sa) (wiyani- is normally ‘vine’), and -mi-zi ispresumably an incomplete phonetic complement, nomina-tive (- accusative) plural common, indicating an unknownword for the commodity.

§6. ara/i read ari, ‘time’ (dative singular), elucidated byKARATEPE 1, §LXXIV. 404, ara/i-zi = Phoenician clm,‘time, age’. For etymology, see Starke 1990: 116 f. Anm.339a.

§7. zas(-pawamu)URBS, ‘this city’: which city? Can itmean the city in which the stele was to be set up as avictory symbol (unnamed)? In that case, perhaps adifferent city for A1 and for A2. See discussion underhistorical context.

PES2.PES(-)tara/i-ta (A1) // (-)na-ta (A2): apparentlytwo different but unidentified verbs, contextually hostileactions, ‘rebelled against/made war on (me)’. Thelogogram PES2.PES normally determines the verbtarpa/i- , ‘trample(?)’ (for which, see now Yakubovich2002: 202–08); cf. below §24b, PES2.PES(-)tarza-(iterative?). For the verb tarzi-/tarzanu-, ‘turn’ (Rieken2004: 457–68), itself normally determined with PES2 andto be kept separate, see below §13.

§8. This clause is perhaps rendered pictorially on the frontof each stele, where the Storm-god holds the king’s handaloft.

§9. SUPER+ra/i CRUS-, literally ‘stand up/over’, must inthis context signify ‘overcome’; also below §12.

§10. “1”-ti-i ara/i, ‘at one time/for the first time’ (dativesingular, “1”-ti-i cardinal or ordinal?).

INFRA-tá CAPERE-, literally ‘take down’, presum-ably here ‘defeat, conquer’; cf. MARAŞ 4, §4.

§11. (A)TANA(URBS): the first sign (L.429) occurs invarious forms in KARATEPE 1 to write the name Adana(§§ II.10, III.14, IV.20, V.22, VI.32, XXIV.125, XXXI.154,XXXII.161, XXXVII.198), corresponding to PhoenicianDNNYM or to ʾDN (§§V, XXXII, §XXXVIII.199). In§XXXVIII.199 the toponym is written not with L.429 butinstead -ta-na-, seeming to show a phonetic value TANAfor the former, which is thus transcribed, i.e. the usual á-TANA- = á-ta-na-. Here the prefixed á- is lacking, whichmay point rather to L.429 being a logogram, representingthe city name by symbol.

(LIGNUM)tara/i-wa/i (A1) = LIGNUM-ru-wa/i-i(A2): this alternation clearly represents (LIGNUM)taruwi(dative singular), ‘wood, stick, staff’, demonstrating that

on occasion the sign tara/i can be used for taru; cf. NİĞDE1, §1; İVRİZ 1, §3: tara/i-sá/sà, taken as representingtarusa, ‘statue’.

The clear translation ‘put on/to the wood/stick’, unin-telligible as it stands, may well be taken to express anidiom of negative import (mocking?/cheating?).

§13. hi-ia-wa/i(-ha)(REGIO), ‘(also) the land Hiyawa’(dative singular or concealed accusative singularcommon, Hiyawa(n)?): the ÇİNEKÖY bilingual inscrip-tion, translating the Phoenician DNNYM with thistoponym in place of Adana(wa), revealed it as the nameof the territory of Cilicia Campestris in contrast to Adana,the name of its capital city. That Hiyawa is the origin ofthe Assyrian designation Que (Qawe) can hardly bedoubted, while its connection with Hittite EmpireAhhiyawa, though questioned by some, can plausibly beargued.

(PES2)tara/i-zi-i-ha: E. Rieken, in her treatment of theLuwian verb tarza/i- (Rieken 2004: 457–68), initially takestarzi- as intransitive ‘turn’, with transitive causativetarzanu(wa)-, ‘turn’, but then, following a suggestion fromCraig Melchert, considers the possible interpretation oftarzi- as transitive. In the present context, uncertainty ofthe case Hiyawa (Hiyawi, dative singular or Hiyawa(an),accusative singular common) leaves either possibilityopen: either ‘I turned (routed) the land H.’ or ‘I turned tothe land H.’.

§14. CAPERE+CAPERE-L.417-na(URBS): city nameobscured by signs of unknown readings. CAPERE+CAPERE is found in the Late period only on HAMA 8,§2, replacing the usual DEUS determinative before a god’sname. The sign L.417 appears on the joining fragmentsKARKAMIŠ A24a19a+19 twice in parallel clauses bothwith FLUMEN-pi (‘PES2’)hi-nú-[…]; and what may bethe same sign in the Empire period on KARAKUYU line2, TONITRUS.PURUS.L.417 and on a seal from the siteof Külhöyük as part of a name TONITRUS.L.417-zi/aSCRIBA (Temizsoy et al. 1996: 83).

L.273(-i-na, A1 only): the main nominal reading ofL.273 is warpi-, and so presumably here, a concept whichseems to cover a wide range of meanings, ‘skill, craft,courage, virtue’, etc.

(PES2)hinu(wa)- is found with various objects: ‘myname to the sky’ and ‘abroad’ (KARKAMIŠ A6, §§2, 3);a river (KARKAMIŠ A15b, §§7, 8, 9 and cf. the similarA24a19a+19); ? (KÖRKÜN §3). The translation ‘cause topass’ seems sufficiently neutral to fit all contexts and soperhaps also here.

§§15–17. Common type of topos in Hieroglyphic Luwian,– ‘how I accomplished what my fathers and grandfathers

67

Anatolian Studies 2015

did not’ – used in establishing the factual negative(Hawkins 1975: 136–39 especially citations 32–36). It hasnow appeared in the Empire period (YALBURT block 4,§§2–4). For NEG2-ha … NEG2-ha, ‘neither … nor’, seealready KARKAMIŠ A2+3, §§3, 4; MARAŞ 4, §9.

Rieken’s treatment of the sign tà (Rieken 2007: 637–47) now permits us to recognise in -wa/i-tà (§§16, 17)- wa+ada, ‘… it’ (accusative singular neuter).

§17. The alternation EGO // *a-mu (A1 // A2) is useful.

§18. CRUS-ha, ‘made stand, erected’: clearly stands forcausative tanuwa-, though the omission to write -nu(wa)-is not common.

Ima-na-na-si (A1) // Iá-m[a?]-n[a? … (A2): the clearIá- on A2 seems to show a full writing of the patronym asAmanana-; cf. the Ugarit digraphic writing CuneiformAmanmašu Hieroglyphic ma-na-ma-su (see Laroche 1956:142–45).

§19. Restoration straightforward: |(FO[RTIS)]-wa/i <-ta>-li-na probable.

§20. SUPER+ra/i pu-tà (A1) // SUPER+ra/i VIA.PUGNUS-tà (A2): cf. KARABURUN §13, SUPER+ra/i-pa-wa/i-tu-ta ni-i ma-nu-ha pu-tu, ‘(for him (the male-factor) may the Haranean Moon-god go down(?) on (his)heart (and) KIHARANI), and for him may he in no wayPU up!’. Clearly sara pu- in both contexts denotes apositive action of a deity, intransitive on KARABURUN;thus here -mu should be indirect object (dative not accu-sative). A more precise interpretation must await aconvincing elucidation of the verb pu-. SUPER+ra/iVIA.PUGNUS-tà (A2): possibly logo-syllabic writing ofthe verb pu-; see parallel (logogram+full phonetic)MARAŞ 14, §9.

§21. SUPER+ra/i-li-, ‘superior’: cf. KARATEPE 1, §L,the only other attestation of SUPER+ra/i-li- = sarli-,though SUPER+RA/I-sa tu-na-sa(URBS), ‘upper Tuna’(KULULU lead strip 1, §3.7), must represent the sameword.

§22. POST[…: ‘after me’ or ‘for me after[wards …]’?(“LONGUS”)i+ra/i-: should be identified with the

word (“LONGUS”)ia+ra/i-ia-, ‘extend, stretch out’(Hawkins 2000: 104), to give with zanta, ‘down’, the sense‘stretch out down, lay out, prostrate’, expressing throwingdown the image.

§23. CAPERE-i (not tà-i, read lai): for the establishmentof Luwian ‘take’ as la-/lala- only, see Yakubovich 2008:20–24.

§24a. MATER-na-tí-ni(-i, A2 only)-sa: ‘mother’ is writtenMATER-na-tí (KARATEPE §III.15; İVRİZ 2, C l.’4),presumed reading anati-, and the meaning here is assuredby its pairing with tatis, ‘father’ (§24b). What is the extra-ni- doing? Could it be a diminutive or hypocoristic suffix(thus the suggested translation ‘mummy’)? To find theGrain-god (Kumarma) female and the Wine-god male isan unexpected reversal of the sexes.

§24b. (PES2.PES)tara/i-za-tú: rather than connecting withthe word tarzi-, causative tarzanu-, which is determinedby PES2 only (above, §13), this word may be the -za-iterative of (PES2.PES)tara/i- (above §7). Since we arehere dealing with the punishment of an offender, the wordmust have a negative sense.

§25. CAELUM(-sa, A2 only) ... TERRA-REL+ra/i-sa:elsewhere ‘heaven and earth’ as subjects of a verb appearwith the ‘ergative’ suffix -a(n)ti-, BOYBEYPINARI 2, §21.

§26. LIS-lu/a/i-sa-tú-, ‘prosecute’: as against LIS-lu/a/i-sa *a-sa-, ‘be the prosecutor’. For the readings -zasali-,‘prosecutor’, and -salisa/za-, ‘prosecute’, see Hawkins2000: 418; and note that the verb is intransitive, governingdative, literally ‘litigate (against)’.

§27. ‘who (is) Lord to/for all’: a remarkable religiousconcept is expressed here.

§28. ‘scribal signature’: for the most detailed example andcomment, with other examples, see KARATEPE 4(Hawkins 2000: 70). CAPERE+SCALPRUM (A1) //CAPERE-SCALPRUM (A2): both writings occur on theseother examples (Hawkins 2000: 70), some of which givealso the phonetic writing REL-za- (i.e. kwaza-).

Archaeological comments (by A. Öztan)Various archaeological discoveries of recent years inTurkey and Syria have provided important data on the IronAge history of the region, and the ARSUZ stelae will addto our knowledge. Whilst the precise original locations ofthe stelae are not known, the fact that fragments of the twostelae were found together indicates that they were locatedclose to each other. Both stelae are made of grey porousbasalt and have almost identical dimensions and forms.

ARSUZ 1ARSUZ 1 was recovered in two pieces. It is roughly quad-rangular in section and slightly rounded towards the top(see above for measurements). The front scene (width:bottom 59cm; top 32cm) is composed of five motifs; itshows the Storm-god and the king standing on a palmettebelow a rosette and winged disc (figs 5–7).

68

Dinçol, Dinçol, Hawkins, Peker and Öztan

69

Fig. 5. Front of the ARSUZ 1 stele. Fig. 6. Drawing of the front of the ARSUZ 1 stele.

Anatolian Studies 2015

(1) Rosette: the contours are rendered in high relief.Eleven petals emerge from a central cluster of six petals.

(2) Winged disc: the winged disc just below the rosettecovers the whole width of the stele. In the centre is a crosswith dots between the arms and two volutes hang downfrom the lower edge. Both wings are divided into twosections by a central diagonal band. The wing details arerendered by five lines in the central sections and six linesin the outer sections.

(3) Storm-god: the main component of the scene is theStorm-god, who promotes the king. The figure is facing tothe right; the head and the lower body are shown in profilewhile the upper part of the body is shown frontally. Thedeity wears a helmet with a knobbed top. A relief band,indicating the bottom of the helmet, surrounds the headand curves at the temple and over the ear. Another band,descending from the knob is attached to this curving line.The helmet has two pairs of horns and is decorated withsmall scales, which resemble mountain peaks (fig. 6).

The hair hangs down below the helmet and extendsparallel to the neck with oblique bands and a curl at theend resting on the shoulder. The beard, which covers thechin, has an almost rectangular shape; it merges with thehair near the ear, covering the whole neck. The beard curlsare rendered in four rows at the chin. On the cheek theyare curled towards the ear; below the ear they curl in theopposite direction. The right eye is shown frontally and isalmond-shaped. The eyelids are outlined by a thin line. Thefigure has a large nose, the lips are closed and the smallmouth and cheekbones are strongly indicated (fig. 7). Thecontours of the ear are rendered in relief and the auricle isindicated with two curves: a large one at the top and asmaller one at the bottom.

The deity is clothed in a short-sleeved shirt and shortkilt tied with a wide belt at the waist. The only details onthe belt are three ribbons of relief running across the centralportion. The kilt covers the legs above the knees, and thefringe is rendered by straight lines; the folded part of theskirt is indicated by a series of irregular lines. The onlydetails on the thick, strong legs are the kneecaps which aremarked by single bosses. The insteps are indicated with aslight curve and the deity wears shoes with upturned toes.

His left arm is bent at the elbow and raised towards hisface. In his left hand he holds a trident-like item withslightly curved prongs and a straight base, which repre-sents a thunderbolt (fig. 7). The long pole attached to thisis hidden behind the hand and the forearm, and emergesbelow the elbow to extend down towards the ankle. On thehand which grasps the pole close to the trident, the nailsare emphasised on two well-preserved fingers. The deity’sright arm is also bent and turned backwards. With this handhe grasps the king’s hand at the wrist and raises it. All thenails are clearly visible on this better-preserved right hand.

(4) King (figs 5, 6): the king is located just behind thedeity and is rendered at a smaller scale. His relatively shorthair is in the form of small curls at the top; it extendsdownwards behind the ear as three lines and curlsoutwards above the shoulder. The face is slightly upraised.The right eye is shown frontally and the eyelids areoutlined with two thin lines. The figure has a large noseand a small mouth with chubby, closed lips. The outercontours of the ear between the hair and the beard arerendered in relief, just like the deity figure.

Also like the deity, the king wears a short-sleeved shirtwith a rounded collar. The wide belt at the waist bears nodetails. He also wears a kilt, which covers the legs abovethe knees. The folded part of the kilt is formed as a singleline starting just below the belt and extending to the rightknee. Both the folded part of the kilt and the edges areornamented with fringes. Just like the deity figure, the onlydetails on the strong legs are the kneecaps marked bysingle bosses. The shoes with upturned toes are alsosimilar to those of the deity.

The king’s right arm is bent at the elbow and his handstretches forward at chest level holding a bunch of grapes.He has an ear of corn in his left hand, which is being raised

70

Fig. 7. Detail of the face, arm and trident of the Storm-godon the ARSUZ 1 stele.

Dinçol, Dinçol, Hawkins, Peker and Öztan

by the deity. The left arm is rendered disproportionatelylonger than the right.

(5) Palmette: placed centrally on the stele, a palmetterises immediately below the two figures. It consists of fourpairs of leaves, which emerge from a central conical stem.Each leaf is rendered by three lines, the middle one in highrelief. Two pairs of leaves rise up and out from the bottomof the stem, whilst the other two emerge from the top partof the stem to protect the flower in the centre. Both theStorm-god and the king stand directly on the top of thepalmette.

The relief of the carvings varies in depth between1.5cm and 3cm. The body and the arm of the Storm-godstand out 3cm from the background, whilst his helmet andthunderbolt are are raised 2cm and the palmette 3cm. Theface of the king sits 2.5cm above the background, his hand2cm and his body and kilt vary between 1.5–2cm.

ARSUZ 2ARSUZ 2 was recovered in three pieces. It is roughlyquadrangular in section and slightly rounded towards thenarrow top (see above for measurements). The front scene(width: bottom 71cm; top 47cm) is composed of fourmotifs; it shows the Storm-god and the king standing on abull below a winged disc (figs 8–11).

(1) Winged disc: the disc on the narrow, upper part ofthe stele is carved in a simple manner. The lower edge ofthe disc sits on a trapezoidal ‘body’ between the twowings. This body, which is rendered like the breast of abird, is bordered by single relief bands above and below,and by double bands at the sides. The internal, borderedsection is filled with circular motifs which decrease in sizetowards the top (figs 8, 9). The lower, hanging ends of theside bands both curl outwards to form a volute on eitherside. Between these volutes there are four almost parallelrectangular shapes hanging below the body. The extendedwings on either side are both arranged in three sections offeathers. Each section contains between six and eight rowsof rounded, rectangular shapes, which represent feathers.The shapes are arranged so as to emphasise the curve ofthe wing.

(2) Storm-god: the principal component of the scene isthe Storm-god, who promotes the king. The deity facesright; the head and the lower body are shown in profilewhereas the upper part of the body is shown frontally (figs8, 9). He wears a helmet with a knobbed top. A band deli-neates the lower edge of the helmet, which has two pairsof horns and is decorated with small scales, whichresemble mountain peaks (fig. 10).

The hair hangs down below the helmet extendingparallel to the neck as three lines, and curls on to theshoulder. Small locks of hair are rendered in detail. Thebeard, which starts as two rows of curls adjacent to the ear,

extends to four rows lower down the face and covers thewhole chin. All the small curls of the beard sweep to theright. The frontally-shown, large right eye is almond-shaped; a thin line outlines the eyelids. The deity has alarge nose, the lips on the small mouth are emphasised andhe has plump cheeks. The ear is outlined as a relief contourand the auricle is indicated by curves at the top and bottom.The neck, largely hidden by the beard, appears short andthick.

The deity wears a short-sleeved shirt with a roundedcollar and a short kilt. The hems of both the collar and thesleeves are indicated with bands. The wide belt across thewaist is left undecorated. The short kilt extends down overthe thighs. Similar in style to the hems of the shirt, thefolded part of the kilt is indicated by a band which startsat the left-hand side of the waist and drops towards theright knee. The hem of the skirt is decorated with a fringerendered by short lines. The only details on the thick,strong legs are the kneecaps marked by single bosses. Thedeity’s bare right foot stands on the back of a bull, whilehis left foot rests on its head. The toes are shown as ifviewed from above, with all five clearly visible on eachfoot.

The deity’s left arm is bent at the elbow and his handis raised towards his face. With this hand he holds the thun-derbolt symbol attached to a pole; the pole extends downtowards the top of his left foot. The lower part of the thun-derbolt, where it is attached to the pole, is rounded likeother examples; however, unlike other examples, only twoof the prongs are rendered since it is placed too close tothe edge of the stele to show three (figs 8, 11). The handholding the thunderbolt is damaged, but the nail on thepreserved thumb is well modelled. The right arm is alsobent and turned backwards. With this hand the deity graspsthe king’s hand at his wrist and raises it. All the fingers andnails on this well-preserved hand are clearly modelled.

(3) King: the king is located just behind the deity andis depicted at a smaller scale. The face and the upper partof the head are damaged and their details cannot bediscerned. The traces of carving preserved at the templeand behind the ear indicate that the king had short hair withsmall curls. The curl of hair above the shoulder also hassmall locks of hair depicted within it. The face is slightlyraised. The ear is outlined as a relief contour and theauricle is rendered by curves at the top and bottom. Thebeard, which starts beneath the ear and covers the chin, ismodelled in small curls. The contours of the nose, mouthand chin are visible (fig. 11).

The king wears a short-sleeved garment with a roundedcollar which extends down to his ankles. A wide belt holdsthe cloth at the waist. Poorly-preserved traces on the right-hand side might indicate the string of the belt (fig. 11). Hisbare feet stand on the lower back and rump of the bull. His

71

Anatolian Studies 2015

72

Fig. 8. Front of the ARSUZ 2 stele. Fig. 9. Drawing of the front of the ARSUZ 2 stele.

Dinçol, Dinçol, Hawkins, Peker and Öztan

right arm is bent at the elbow and his hand stretches forwardat chest level holding a bunch of grapes. He has an ear ofcorn in his left hand, which is being raised by the deity.

(4) Bull: the bull, as the sacred animal of the Storm-god, carries both the deity and the king (figs 8, 9). Its leftforeleg and right back-leg step forward, indicating motion.The head is positioned appropriately for such movement,being extended forward so the horn sits almost parallel tothe ground. The ear is in the shape of a leaf and its centreis slightly hollowed. The root of the upward curving hornin front of the ear is marked in relief. The large, almond-shaped eye is outlined with two lines. Above the eye arethree leaf-shaped motifs. The nostril on the fleshy nose isrendered in relief. The jaw line extending from the slightlyopened mouth is short. The dewlap in front of the thickneck is marked with a relief line. The forelegs are shownshorter than the back legs and curved lines distinguish thelegs from the body. The hocks are rendered by singlebosses on each leg, except the front-left leg. The hoovesare separated from the legs by a relief line. The rightforeleg is slightly raised so that the shoulder too is raised;thus, with this strong pose, the power of the bull is empha-sised. The scrotum is rendered as hanging behind the left

leg. The long tail hangs down beyond the left hind leg. Thelower portion, shown below the left hind leg, is shown astwo sets of filaments twisted round each other. Threeparallel, horizontal lines on the back, close to the top ofthe right hind leg, and traces of two small curls on therump suggest the bristles of the bull’s coat. The preservedheight of the ground on which the bull stands is 37cm.

Stylistic featuresThe motifs on the stelae are associated with the iconog-raphy of the Storm-god. This deity, who held a significantposition within all ancient Near Eastern cultures, embodiescelestial natural phenomena such as storms, lightning andrain. These features make him the source and the distri-butor of power and fertility. His main attributes are thethunderbolt and the bull. He acquired different names indifferent cultures and new elements were added to hisimage repertoire (Green 2003: 127–34, 198, 214–18). Themain figure on both the ARSUZ stelae is the Storm-godwith the thunderbolt in his hand. On ARSUZ 1 he standson a palmette so as to emphasise the fertilising element ofhis nature; on ARSUZ 2 he stands on his bull signifyinghis power.

73

Fig. 10. Detail of the head and helmet of the Storm-god onthe ARSUZ 2 stele.

Fig. 11. Detail of the Storm-god and the king on theARSUZ 2 stele.

Anatolian Studies 2015

Further differences between the two stelae can be notedin terms of their planning, design, the rendering of detailsand the use of space. These differences are due to the stelaehaving been executed by different sculptors.

In terms of planning, the overall shapes of the slabsvary, as do the dimensions of the areas prepared forcarving (figs 5, 8). A significant difference in terms ofdesign is the existence of a large rosette above the wingeddisc on ARSUZ 1. The differences observed in the detailsindicate that the sculptors worked in a free manner, apartfrom the limitation of the main, general theme. Thesedifferences in the details of the two stelae can be listed asfollows (figs 5, 8).

(1) The helmet of the Storm-god on ARSUZ 1 has acurved lower edge and the surface is divided by a verticalline which extends from the top knob to the lower edge.On ARSUZ 2 the helmet has a straight lower edge and isshown as a single surface.

(2) The beard of the deity on ARSUZ 1 is depicted asscattered curls. It extends down to the chest and covers thewhole neck. On ARSUZ 2, the beard is indicated byuniform curls and, through its trimmed edge, part of theneck is visible.

(3) The thunderbolt in the hand of the deity on ARSUZ1 is a short trident. On ARSUZ 2 it is longer. However,the latter is shown with just two (rather than three) prongssince there was not room to fit a third on the slab.

(4) The winged discs on the two stelae are rendered invery obviously different styles. For example, the disc sitsabove the wings on ARSUZ 2.

(5) On ARSUZ 1 both the deity and the king wear ashort kilt, which extends to the knees, and a short-sleevedshirt. On ARSUZ 2 the deity wears a short-sleeved shirtand kilt in the traditional style, but the king wears a longskirted garment.

(6) On ARSUZ 1 the deity and the king wear shoeswith upturned toes; on ARSUZ 2 they are both shownbarefoot.

Unfotunately, neither of the sculptors was successfulin using the space well. Due to a lack of space between thedeity and the king, the sculptor of ARSUZ 1 placed theking’s raised hand much too close to his face and, in orderfor the deity to grasp the king’s wrist, he had to elongatethe arm. The anatomically unrealistic elongation andbending of the arm results in an awkward and amateurishimage. On the contrary, the better arrangement of thefigures of the deity and the king on ARSUZ 2 indicate thatthe sculptor was more experienced in the use of the space.Nevertheless, since the left hand of the deity was placedtoo close to the edge of the stele, one prong of the thun-derbolt could not be shown. All these details indicate thatthe two stelae were produced by different craftsmen whorepresented their own artistic concepts.

The figures and motifs carved on the stelae are well-known elements of the second millennium BC and laterperiods in Anatolia, Syria and Mesopotamia. In this geog-raphical region, in the Syro-Hittite cultural zone, thewinged disc represents a celestial deity – the Storm-god,the Weather-god or the Moon-god (Bunnens 2006: 70–73)– and the Sun (Güterbock 1993: 225–26). In the HittiteImperial period and the succeeding Syro-Hittite period thismotif is seen in various compositional designs with severalversions of the wings, the disc and the ornaments withinthe disc (for example Orthmann 1971: Taf. 5 Birecik 1, 14Hacı Bebekli, Karasu, 20 Karkemish Aa/4, 38 Körkün,Meharde, 42 Malatya B4, 49 Sakçagözü A/1). Althoughthey were produced in the same time period the wingeddiscs on the ARSUZ stelae have different features.

The ornamented disc on ARSUZ 1 is placed centrallybetween the wings. The dual rendering of the wingsresembles the motif on the Malatya stele dated to the 11thto tenth century BC (Hawkins 2000: 313–14, pl. 152). Onthe other hand, a very close parallel in terms of the wingsand the decorative elements appears among theCarchemish figurines. The golden Sun-god, recoveredamongst a group of finds which comes from a grave datedto the Hittite Imperial period, is crowned with a wingeddisc (Woolley 1952: 250–57; Seidl 1972: 21–22, no. 11).The winged disc on the Carchemish figure is almostidentical to the motif on ARSUZ 1 in terms of the form ofthe wings and the disc with a cross motif with dotsbetween the arms (for a good photograph, with details, seeAkurgal 1962: pl. 53 above).

On ARSUZ 2 the same style of motif is shown, buthere the winged motif includes an area resembling thebreast of a bird in the centre. Similar arrangements are verycommon in the Syro-Hittite period between the tenth andeighth century BC. Primarily, the winged discs on TELLAHMAR 1, 2 and 6, and on other stelae from Qubbah,Birecik, Kürtül and Körkün are more or less the same(Orthmann 1971: Taf. 53, B/1–3; Hawkins 2000: pls 58,92, 99, 122).

The rosette motif, which is associated with the goddessIštar in the ancient Near East (Black, Green 1992: 108,156), is one of the most common motifs in Anatolia andSyria across all periods. With varying numbers of petals,it exists on most of the Tabarna/Tawananna and Hittiteroyal seals (Boehmer, Güterbock 1987: 79–84, Taf. XXXI,250A, XXXII, 252, Taf. XXXIII, 257, 258, 261). Itsaddition to ARSUZ 1 above the winged disc should beassociated with the concept of fertility narrated on thestele.

During the Syro-Hittite period most of the representa-tions of the Storm-god are depicted wearing a helmet witha knobbed top and a single or double pair of horns(Orthmann 1971: Taf. 5 Babylon 1, 14 İslahiye 2, 26

74

Dinçol, Dinçol, Hawkins, Peker and Öztan

Karkemish E/3, 38 Kürtül 1, Körkün 1, 53 Til Barsib 1/1–3; Hawkins 2000: pls 58, 92, 99, 177; Bunnens 2006: figs6–8). This style of helmet, which is also worn by acomposite creature on one of the Carchemish reliefs(Orthmann 1971: Taf. 27, E/8), may differ in terms of itssize, the size of the knob and the number of horns. Ingeneral terms, the helmets of the deities on the ARSUZstelae are similar to those on TELL AHMAR 2, TELLAHMAR/QUBBAH and ADIYAMAN 2, and also thatof the Storm-god on the Herald’s Wall at Carchemish.However, the ARSUZ stelae differ in terms of theirsqueezed forms and decorations. The surfaces of theARSUZ helmets are decorated with motifs similar tomountain peaks. The closest parallel to this motif appearson the MALATYA 13 stele housed in the Museum ofAnatolian Civilisations, Ankara, on the high polos ofKubaba, who sits on her throne above a deer facing thedeity (Hawkins 2000: pl. 164).

On the ARSUZ stelae we encounter two differenttypes of attire. The first is a short-sleeved shirt with arounded collar worn with a short kilt. These two items areseparated by a wide belt at the waist. In Anatolia, deitieswere depicted wearing a short kilt from the beginning ofthe second millennium BC; the hems and/or the foldedparts of the skirt were decorated with fringes. OnARSUZ 2 only the hem of the skirt of the deity isdecorated with fringes; however, on ARSUZ 1 the kiltsof both the deity and the king are decorated at the hemsand the folded parts. Several variations of this type ofattire can be seen in many other examples (Özgüç 1965:52, pls III, 8, V 14, XVII, 52, XXI, 62, 63; Boehmer,Güterbock 1987: Taf. XV 145–47). A new feature enco-untered on the ARSUZ stelae is the extension of the kiltsworn by the deity and the king on ARSUZ 1 down to theknees. These longer garments (compared to the deity’sskirt on the other stele) can be interpreted as a localcharacteristic incorporated by the sculptor. A skirtextending down to the knees with fringed edges, similarto the ARSUZ examples, is seen on the Storm-god of theNİĞDE 2 stele, which is dated to a later period, at theend of the eighth or the beginning of the seventh centuryBC (Hawkins 2000: 526, pl. 301).

The second type of attire depicted on the ARSUZ stelaeis the long skirt worn by the king on ARSUZ 2. A closeparallel to this garment, which is encountered in earlierrepresentations of ruler figures, is seen on the king onKARKAMIŠ A13d (Hawkins 2000: pl. 24). A male figureon a relief from the Borowski Collection wears similarclothes (Ussishkin 1987: no. 126). On the ARSUZexample, the long skirt ends just above the ankles and theedges are straight. The same features are seen on thegarment worn by the king facing the deity on theKELEKLİ stele (Hawkins 2000: pl. 9).

Both styles of attire include a wide belt. On ARSUZ1, horizontal strings in the central part detail the belt of thedeity. On ARSUZ 2 traces of two curves on the right-handside of the belt of the king are just visible.

The Storm-god is depicted on almost every stele thathas been recovered from the area of Syria and southernAnatolia. He is identified by both his thunderbolt and bullor by his thunderbolt alone. On the ARSUZ stelae theStorm-gods are depicted with trident-like thunderbolts.There are many detailed analyses of the iconography,meaning and varying depictions of this symbol (Hawkins1992: 53–82; Green 2003: 89; Bunnens 2006: 33–35).Here it should be noted that the thunderbolt symbol onARSUZ 1 has similar features to that on the KÖRKÜNstele. The bull, depicted as a sacred animal on just one ofthe ARSUZ stelae, is somewhat similar to examples on theTELL AHMAR/QUBBAH stele and on the Herald’s Wallat Carchemish (Orthmann 1971: Taf. 26 E/1, 27 E/6). Itssquat form emphasises the local character of the ARSUZdepiction.

On the other hand, the same god on the ARSUZ 1 stelestands on a palmette, a composition which has no exactparallel. Even though the concept is different, one of thereliefs on the Herald’s Wall at Carchemish has a palmettebetween two bulls (Orthmann 1971: Taf. 27 KarkemishE/ 6–7) and thus displays some similarity to the ARSUZ 1stele. In ancient Near Eastern iconography, the relationshipbetween the Storm-god and fertility is represented bysecondary elements such as particular animals, objects andplants (Green 2003: 32, 72–73, 79–80, 106–08, 207–08).According to the evidence of the ARSUZ 1 stele, thepalmette may be grouped amongst the secondary-elementplants. The palmette’s stem is strongly formed, and thismust, presumably, be an intentional element of the compo-sition, intended to emphasise its supporting function.Besides carrying the Storm-god, the palmette also carriesthe king, a unique feature of the ARSUZ 1 stele.

On both ARSUZ stelae, the king holds a similar objectin his raised left hand; this is probably an ear of corn.Although the outer contours resemble a pine cone(Kohlmeyer 2000: Taf. 19), considering the hatchings onboth sides of the mid-line, the motif is more likely torepresent an ear of corn on a stalk.

The object which the king holds in his other hand is along-stemmed item that widens towards the bottom. If theproportions on the carving are correct, then the stem andthe body of the item in question are of similar heights. Itis carried by being grasped between the thumb and theforefinger. According to the grainy surface on thepreserved part, it most probably represents a bunch ofgrapes. The depiction of a king with these attributes findsa parallel in the blessing figure of the Storm-god on theİVRİZ rock monument (Hawkins 2000: 516–17).

75

Anatolian Studies 2015

Concluding thoughts In written documents, most of the ancient Near Easternkings describe themselves as having been chosen bygod/gods to rule. In terms of the visual arts, however, suchclaims are not so evident. On the contrary, examples inwhich kings are seen to be protected by gods or depictedas being under the aegis of the divine are very limited.Well-known examples come from the group of so-calledUmarmungssiegel (‘embracing seals’, where the godembraces the king) of the Hittite Imperial period. On someseals used by Hittie kings such as Muwattalli II, MursiliIII and Tudhaliya IV, the kings are depicted under the armsof a god. Thus, although limited in number, the visualevidence does demonstrate that kings were under the aegisof the gods (Dinçol, Dinçol 2002: 91; Herbordt 2005: 69,Ab. 46 a–d, Taf. 39, 505, Taf. 40, 504, 506–07). Anotherwell-known example from the same period is one of thereliefs from the Yazılıkaya open-air temple, located nearHattusha, the Hittite capital (Akurgal 1962: pl. 85; Seeher2011: fig. 156). In this case, Tudhaliya IV is depicted underthe aegis of the god, Šarruma. Blessings and endorsementsof deities are also frequently mentioned in Syro-Hittiteperiod inscriptions. However, even on such stelae andreliefs only the deities are generally depicted. None-theless, on one of the orthostats in the Temple of theStorm-god at Aleppo and a stele found at Kelekli, the kingis depicted facing the deity (Hawkins 2000: 92, pl. 9;Kohlmeyer 2009: 195, fig. on 192).

The reliefs accompanying written documents showvarious expressions of the relationship between the kingand the deity, such as the deity holding the king’s hand andthus offering prosperity to him and/or the country duringthe king’s reign. The ARSUZ stelae are archaeologicallyunique in providing the most detailed depiction of thistopos. Another distinct feature is that they were producedas a pair, just like the TELL AHMAR 2 and TELLAHMAR/QUBBAH stelae. The narrative on the ARSUZstelae informs us that the Grain-god and the Wine-godfavour the king, but that military victories were given tohim by the Storm-god. This scenario is expressed by theking holding the attributes of the Grain-god and the Wine-god whilst the Storm-god raises his hand.

Another valuable contribution made by the ARSUZstelae to the field of archaeology is that they present avaried set of dating criteria, such as different helmet andgarment types, and feet depicted wearing shoes withupturned toes or bare. Notable new features seen in thesestelae are the depictions of the kings along with the deitieswith their symbols and of the deities as being barefoot, justlike the mortals.

Most of the parallels for the figures and motifs seen onthe ARSUZ stelae appear on objects dated to the tenth toninth century BC. Considering the features of the inscrip-

tions, such as palaeography and style, the most probabledate for the stelae seems to be the late tenth century BC.In this case, elements such as the low helmet, the bare feetand the bunch of grapes should be treated as earlyexamples of these motifs, which are generally understoodas late features.

AcknowledgementsThis work has been supported by TÜBİTAK, TheScientific and Technical Research Council of Turkey,within the framework of the Short Term R&D FundingProgram (project no. 108K607).

We thank Meltem and Metin Alparslan for their helpin applying for support and for museum work undertakenin 2009. We are grateful to Faruk Kılınç, former Directorof the Hatay Archaeological Museum, for his support, tomuseum assistants Demet Kara and Ömer Çelik, for theirhelp during the documentation process, and to photo-grapher Umut Durak, for his assistance during the collationprocess in 2013.

ReferencesAkurgal, E. 1962: The Art of The Hittites. London, Thames

and HudsonBlack, J., Green, A. 1992: Gods, Demons and Symbols of

Ancient Mesopotamia. An Illustrated Dictionary.London, The British Museum

Boehmer, R.M., Güterbock, H.G. 1987: Glyptik aus demStadtgebiet von Boğazköy. Berlin, Mann

Bunnens, G. 2006: A New Luwian Stele and the Cult of theStorm-God at Til Barsib-Masuwari. Louvain, Peeters

Dinçol, A., Dinçol, B. 2002: ‘Tabarna und Ädikula –Siegel. Die Siegel hethitischer Großkönige und Groß-königinnen’ in Die Hethiter und ihr Reich. Das Volkder 1000 Götter. Stuttgart, Theiss: 88–93

Dinçol, B. 1998: ‘Der Titel GAL.GEŠTIN auf den hethi-tischen Hieroglyphensiegeln’ Altorientalische For-schungen 25: 163–67

Galil, G. 2014: ‘A concise history of Palistin / Patin / Unqi /ʿmq in the 11th–9th centuries BC’ Semitica 56: 75–104

Gelb, I.J. 1939: Hittite Hieroglyphic Monuments. Chicago,University of Chicago Press

Green, A.R.W. 2003: The Storm-God in the Ancient NearEast. Winona Lake, Eisenbrauns

Güterbock, H.G. 1993: ‘Sungod or king?’ in M.J. Mellink,E. Porada, T. Özgüç (eds), Aspects of Art and Iconog-raphy: Anatolia and its Neighbours. Studies in Honorof Nimet Özgüç. Ankara, Tur̈k Tarih Kurumu Basımevi:225–26

Harrison, T.P. 2014: ‘Recent discoveries at Tayinat(ancient Kunulua/Calno) and their biblical implica-tions’ in C.M. Maier (ed.), Congress Volume Munich2013. Leiden and Boston, Brill: 396–425

76

Dinçol, Dinçol, Hawkins, Peker and Öztan

Hawkins, J.D. 1975: ‘The negatives in HieroglyphicLuwian’ Anatolian Studies 25: 119–56

— 1979: ‘The Hieroglyphic Luwian stelae of Meharde-Sheizar’ in Florilegium Anatolicum, Mélanges offertsà E. Laroche. Paris, de Boccard: 145–56

— 1992: ‘What does the Hittite Storm-god hold?’ inD.J.W. Meijer (ed.), Natural Phenomena. TheirMeaning, Depiction and Description in the AncientNear East. Amsterdam, Royal Netherlands Academyof Arts and Sciences: 53–82

— 2000: Corpus of Hieroglyphic Luwian Inscriptions 1:Inscriptions of the Iron Age (3 vols). Berlin and NewYork, de Gruyter

— 2004: ‘The Stag-god of the countryside and relatedproblems’ in J.H.W. Penney (ed.), Indo-EuropeanPerspectives. Studies in Honour of Anna MorpurgoDavies. Oxford, Oxford University Press: 355–69

— 2011: ‘The inscriptions of the Aleppo Temple’Anatolian Studies 61: 35–54

Herbordt, S. 2005: Die Prinzen- und Beamtensiegel derHethitischen Grossreichszeit auf Tonbullen aus demNişantepe- Archiv in Hattusa. Mainz, von Zabern

Kohlmeyer, K. 2000: Der Tempel des Wettergottes vonAleppo. Münster, Rhema

— 2009: ‘The temple of the Storm god in Aleppo duringthe Late Bronze and Early Iron Ages’ Near EasternArchaeology 72.4: 190–202

L. = Laroche, E. 1960: Les hiéroglyphes hittites. Paris,Centre national de la recherche scientifique

Laroche, E. 1956: ‘Documents hiéroglyphiques hittitesprovenant du palais d’Ugarit’ in C.F.-A. Schaeffer(ed.), Ugaritica III. Paris, Geuthner: 97–160

Meriggi, P. 1959: ‘Neue bildhethitische Fragmente ausSyrien’ in R. von Kienle (ed.), Festschrift JohannesFriedrich zum 65. Geburtstag am 27. August 1958gewidmet. Heidelberg, Winter: 323–37

Orthmann, W. 1971: Untersuchungen zur späthethitischenKunst. Bonn, Habelt

Özgüç, N. 1965: The Anatolian Group of Cylinder SealImpressions from Kültepe. Ankara, Türk Tarih Kurumu

Rieken, E. 2007: ‘Die Zeichen <ta>, <tá> und <tà> in denhieroglyphen-luwischen Inschriften der Nachgroßre-ichszeit’ Studi micenei ed egeo-anatolici 50: 637–47

— 2004: ‘Luwisch tarza/i’ in A. Hyllested (ed.), Peraspera ad asteriscos : studia indogermanica inhonorem Jens Elmegård Rasmussen sexagenariiidibus Martiis anno MMIV. Innsbruck, Institut fürSprachen und Literaturen der Universität Innsbruck:457–68

Seeher, J. 2011: Gods Carved in Stone: The Hittite RockSanctuary of Yazılıkaya. Istanbul, Ege Yayınları

Seidl, U. 1972: ‘Lapisrelief und ihre Goldfassungen ausKarkamiş’ Istanbuler Mitteilungen 22: 15–43

Starke, F. 1990: Untersuchung zur Stammbildung des keil-schrift-luwischen Nomens. Wiesbaden, Harrassowitz

Temizsoy, İ., Kaya, V., Çetin, N 1996: ‘KülhöyükKurtarma Kazıları’ Anadolu Medeniyetleri Müzesi1995 Yıllığı. Ankara, T.C. Kültür Bakanlığı: 37–88

Ussishkin, D. 1987: ‘Orthostat with a male figure’ in R.Merhav (ed.), Treasures of the Bible Lands. The ElieBorowski Collection. Tel Aviv, Tel Aviv Museum: 124

Weeden, M. 2013: ‘After the Hittites: the kingdoms ofKarkamish and Palistin in northern Syria’ Bulletin ofthe Institute of Classical Studies of the University ofLondon 56.2: 1–20

— 2015: ‘The land of Walastin at Tell Tayınat’ NouvellesAssyriologiques Brèves et Utilitaires 2015.2

Woolley, L. 1952: Carchemish. Report on the Excavationsat Jerablus on Behalf of the British Museum 3. London,The British Museum

Yakubovich, I. 2002: ‘Nugae Luvicae’ in V. Shevoroshkin,P. Sidwell (eds), Anatolian Languages. Canberra,Association for the History of Language: 202–08

— 2008: ‘Hittite-Luvian bilingualism and the develop-ment of Anatolian Hieroglyphs’ Acta LinguisticaPetropolitana 4.1: 9–36

77

ISSN: 00 66 -1 54 6

ANATOLIANSTUDIESJournal of the British Institute at Ankara

VOLUME 65 ■ 2015

C a m b r i d g eU N IV E R SIT Y PRESS

Bl A A BRITISH INSTITUTE at An k a r a

Understanding Turkey and the Black Sea

ANATOLIAN STUDIESJournal of the British Institute at Ankara

Anatolian Studies is the flagship journal of the British Institute at Ankara (BIAA). It publishes peer-reviewed research articles focused on Turkey and the Black Sea littoral region in the fields of history, archaeology and related social sciences.

Further information, as well as guidelines for submissions, may be found at http://joumals.cambridge.org/ank.

Academic EditorProfessor Roger Matthews (University of Reading)

Executive EditorGina Coulthard (British Institute at Ankara)

Editorial BoardDr Giilnur Aybet (Bahpe§ehir University, Istanbul)Shahina Farid (British Institute at Ankara)Dr Tamar Hodos (University of Bristol)Dr Claire Norton (St Mary’s University College)Dr Lutgarde Vandeput (British Institute at Ankara)

Anatolian Studies is a peer-reviewed journal.

Correspondence should be addressed to:The Executive Editor, Anatolian Studies British Institute at Ankara 10 Carlton House Terrace London SW1Y 5AH Email: biaapub@britac.ac.uk

With acknowledgements to The Society of Dilettanti.

Anatolian Studies is published by Cambridge University Press for the British Institute at Ankara.

Cover photo: architectural relief from Cibyra showing three pairs of heavily armoured gladiators. See ‘Gladiatorial games in the Greek East: a complex o f reliefs from Cibyra’ by Christof Bems and H. Ali Ekinci.

In d iv id u a l S u b s c r ib e r sIndividuals receive Anatolian Studies as part of membership of the British Institute at Ankara: further information on the inside back cover.

In s t it u t io n a l S u b s c r ip t io n R a tesAnatolian Studies (ISSN 0066-1546) is published once a year in July. The subscription price (excluding VAT) of volume 65 (2015), which includes print and online access, is £82 net (US$132 in the USA, Canada and Mexico) for institutions. EU subscribers (outside the UK) who are not registered for VAT should add VAT at their Country’s rate. VAT-registered customers should provide their VAT registration number. Japanese prices for institutions (including ASP delivery) are available from' Kinolcuniya Company Ltd, P.O. Box 55, Chitose, Tokyo 156, Japan. All prices include delivery by air where appropriate.

Orders, which must be accompanied by payment, may be sent to a bookseller, subscription agent or direct to the publisher: Cambridge University Press, Journals Fulfillment Department, UPH, Shaftesbury Road, Cambridge CB2 8BS, UK; or in the USA, Canada and Mexico: Cambridge University Press, Journals Fulfillment Department, 100 Brook Hill Drive, West Nyaclc, New York 10994-2133, USA.

C o p y in gThis journal is registered with the Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MAO 1923, USA. Organisations in the USA who are registered with the C.C.C. may therefore copy material (beyond the limits permitted by sections 107 and 108 of the US Copyright Law) subject to payment to the C.C.C. of the per copy fee of $30. This consent does not extend to multiple copying for promotional or commercial purposes. Code 0066-1546/2015. ISI Tear Sheet Service, 3501 Market Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA, is authorised to supply single copies of separate articles for private use only. Organisations authorised by the Copyright Licensing Agency may also copy material subject to the usual conditions. For all other use, permission should be sought from Cambridge or from the North American Branch of Cambridge University Press.

The journal is included in the Cambridge Journals Online service which can be found at http://joumals.cambridge.org.

This journal has been printed on FSC-certified paper and cover board. FSC is an independent, non-governmental, not-for-profit organisation established to promote the responsible management of the world’s forests. Please see www.fsc.org for information.

Printed in the United Kingdom at Bell & Bain Ltd, Glasgow.© The British Institute at Ankara, 2015.

ANATOLIANSTUDIESJournal of the British Institute at Ankara

ARTICLES1 New perspectives on stone bead technology at Bronze Age Troy

Geoffrey Ludvik, J. Mark Kenoyer, Magda Pienişzek and William Aylward

19 A Hittite treaty tablet from Oylum Höyük in southeastern Turkey and the location of Hassu(wa) Ahmet Ünal

35 Phoenician and Luwian in Early Iron Age Cilicia Ilya Yakubovich

54 Addendum to 'Phoenician and Luwian in Early Iron Age Cilicia' by Ilya Yakubovich J.D. Hawkins

56 Adanawa or Ahhiyawa? Reply to the addendum by J.D. Hawkins Ilya Yakubovich

59 Two new inscribed Storm-god stelae from Arsuz (İskenderun): ARSUZ 1 and 2 Belkıs Dinçol, Ali Dinçol, J.D. Hawkins, Hasan Peker and Aliye Öztan

19 A goddess among Storm-gods. The stele of Tavşantepe and the landscape monuments of southern Cappadocia Anna Lanaro

97 'Heroa' and the city. Kuprlli's new architecture and the making of the 'Lycian acropolis' of Xanthus in the early Classical period Catherine M. Draycott

143 Gladiatorial games in the Greek East: a complex of reliefs from Cibyra Christof Berns and H. Ali Ekinci

181 A new statue-base for Constantius II and the fourth-century imperial cult at Oinoanda N.P. Milner

VOLUME 65 ■ 2015