L E G A C Y O F T H E H I T T I T E S

Figure 8.11 Karatepe relief (after Akurgal 1962: plate 142)

independently, several scholars converged on readings that would make sense. In a stroke, the Karatepe bilinguals, which give us both by far the longest hieroglyphic inscription and a Phoenician inscription of no small importance for the study of early alphabetic writing, demonstrated the reliability of most of the readings that had been so painfully worked out.42

The text itself sheds some light on historical conditions in Cilicia around the time that the last filaments of the long Hittite tradition decayed into oblivion. The author of the text, whose name is now read Azatiwatas, created Karatepe and named it after himself (Azatiwataya). He had been put in power by the king of Adana, whom he calls Awariku and is generally identified with a figure known to us from Assyrian inscriptions as Urikki of Que. Azatiwatas essentially ruled as a regent of the subsequent kings of Adana.43 He speaks of making peace with various rebels and spreading prosperity in the land, but probably did not himself rule in Adana. Karatepe does not have monuments of any subsequent rulers, and we may assume that it was abandoned not long after his rule.

Land of Tabal

The southeast central part of the Anatolian Plateau was known to the Assyrians as Tabal. It encompassed the area of Kültepe and the territory north of the Taurus, no doubt including the “Lower Land” of the former Hittite Empire. We do not know how far west it actually extended and it was not always a unified kingdom. Inscriptions from Karadag˘ and Kızıldag˘ composed by a certain Hartapus, the son of Mursili, claim the title of Great King. The dating of these is problematic, since the sculptures associated with them look stylistically late, but the writing appears to date close to the time of the Empire.44 In any case, they are testimony to the existence

312

L E G A C Y O F T H E H I T T I T E S

of a line independent of Carchemish claiming the title of Great King after the collapse of Hittite Empire. The Assyrians never penetrated this land, although they interacted with its rulers, and proximity dictated that the influence of the Phrygians, both political and cultural, would eventually be felt here. Archaeologically it has less to offer in the way of sites and monuments in the Hittite/Luwian tradition than the areas to the south and east, but it is still very much a Luwian area.

Perhaps the most celebrated Neo-Hittite relief comes from the erstwhile territory of Tabal,

˙

located on a cliff face above a stream at Ivriz. It depicts a king, Warpalawas, dwarfed by the storm god Tarhunzas, to whom he pays obeisance. True to form, the god is wearing a horned helmet and kilt, but he is also holding grape vines and barley in his hands. Warpalawas is known to be a contemporary of Tiglath-Pileser III. His garments and jewellery show Phrygian traits and the rendering of his features is distinctly Assyrian—borrowings from the peoples who were to bury the Hittite tradition.

NOTES

1For a useful review of various theories on the causes of the collapse, see Drews 1993: 33–93, who treats them in chapters headed: “Earthquakes,” “Migrations,” “Ironworking,” “Drought,” “Systems Collapse,” and “Raiders” before offering his own theory of a revolution in military tactics in the remainder of the book. Dickinson 2006: 43–57 critiques the latter, adds more recent bibliography and, from the perspective of Mycenaean Greece, finds none of the traditional explanations broadly valid, but many containing aspects of the truth (p. 54)

2Genz 2000: 38–39.

3Genz 2000: 40–41.

4Postgate 2007: 145.

5When Hittite civilization first attracted the attention of European scholars, it was these monuments inscribed with hieroglyphic writing that were the focus of attention and the Hittites were regarded as an Iron Age people. The discovery of the cuneiform archives at Bog˘ azköy made it clear that Anatolia, not Syria, and the Bronze Age, not the Iron Age, were what defined the essence of Hittite civilization. The discovery of the cuneiform archives at Bog˘ azköy made it clear that Anatolia, not Syria, and the Bronze Age, not the Iron Age, were what defined the essence of Hittite civilization. The terminological problem has been further complicated by the recognition that the language of these hieroglyphic inscriptions is Luwian. The Assyrians and other ancient contemporaries of the Iron Age polities, however, called them Hittite, so the name is not entirely unjustified.

6Grayson 1991: 37.

7For a more comprehensive view of the Neo-Hittite world, two tools are essential: For inscriptions see Hawkins 2000, and for sculptures Orthmann 1971. Hawkins’s corpus supersedes all previous work, and since its publication there have been few additions. While Orthmann’s work is decades old, his conclusions are generally valid and no comparable overview has been produced.

8For early references to Carchemish, and indeed an excellent overview of the history and archaeology of Carchemish generally, see Hawkins 1976–80.

9Woolley 1952: Preface.

10Satellite images, such as those offered by Google Earth, provide a clear view of the current status of the site at 36° 49′70″N, 38° 1′E, although the excavated areas can only be vaguely made out.

313

L E G A C Y O F T H E H I T T I T E S

11Woolley 1952: Preface.

12Hawkins 1976–80: 436.

13Hawkins 2000: 73.

14Hawkins 2000: 73–74.

15Hawkins 2000: 76.

16Hawkins 2000: 76–78.

17Designated Sph. (späthethitische) I, II, IIIa, and IIIb. See Orthmann 1971: 143–148.

18Hawkins 1976–80: 444.

19Hawkins 2000: 283.

20Hawkins 2000: 283–286.

21For a sketch plan locating the sculpture, see Orthmann 1971: 521.

22The pronunciation of the first hieorglyph of his name is unknown, but the symbol is a clenched fist. It is customary to transcribe logograms in Hieroglyphic Luwian with their meanings in Latin as capital letters, thus “PUGNUS.”

23Hawkins 2000: 287–288. Orthmann, writing before the connection was established, tentatively dated the monuments to Sph. II, that is to say later than the earliest monuments at Carchemish (Orthmann 1971: 519–522). Bittel, in the same position, suggested a 10thto 9th-century date (Bittel 1976: 247).

24Assurnasirpal II marched from Hazzazu (mod. Azaz) across the river Aprê (mod. Afrin) to Kunulua, the capital of Patina, which is usually thought to be Tell Tayinat, in the Amuq plain. For the text, see Grayson 1991: 217. He would have passed right beside Ain Dara, which is on the Afrin, south of Azaz. The king he encountered was named Lubarna, clearly the same as the founder of the Hittite Old Kingdom dynasty, and testimony to the survival of Anatolian traditions here.

25The definitive publication on the temple is Abu Assa¯ f 1990. Since that book was published, there has been considerable restoration work at the site itself.

26For a discussion of the “Hittite” and non-Hittite characteristics of the temple and the site of Ain Dara generally, see Zimansky 2002.

27Abu Assa¯ f 1983.

28Stone and Zimansky 1999.

29Wartke 2005: 7.

30Wartke 2005: 19, 67.

31Naumann 1971: 411.

32Naumann 1971: 408.

33In her extensive discussion of Luwian art and architecture, for example, Sanna Aro omits it on the ground that the monuments are written in West Semitic languages and scripts, but admits this “seems to be sort of hairsplitting” (Aro 2003: 284).

34Hawkins 2000: 576, pl. 329.

35Orthmann 1971: 200.

36Orthmann 1971: 537, Taf. 55 (Zincirli A/3).

37Orthmann 1971: 545,Taf. 62 (Zincirli E/1).

38Wartke 2005: 86.

39Winter 1979: 125–132. Çambel (1999: 9–12) concludes that the thesis, while stimulating, is not supported by the way the Karatepe reliefs fit together.

40Hawkins 2000: 44.

41The definitive publication of the Karatepe texts is Çambel 1999.

42There was one major revision yet to come, for which the Phoenician version of the Karatepe bilingual could provide no help. Like most other early Semitic alphabets, Phoenician did not have characters for vowels, and four of the most common Luwian hieroglyphic signs were misread as vowels for many

314

L E G A C Y O F T H E H I T T I T E S

years. In the 1970s, thanks to the discovery of some hieroglyphic inscriptions scratched on jars at Altıntepe giving well-known Urartian words for liquid capacity, the readings of these signs were corrected. The language behind the hieroglyphs was then seen to be even closer to Luwian cuneiform than previously recognized (Hawkins, Davies, and Newmann 1974).

43Hawkins 1976–80: 410–411.

44Hawkins 2000: 429.

315

9

A KINGDOM OF FORTRESSES

Urartu and eastern Anatolia in the Iron Age (1200–600 BC)

The kingdom of Biainili, better known as Urartu, was perhaps the most powerful political entity to emerge on Anatolian soil in the pre-classical era. It did not control a territory quite as vast as the Hittite Empire, nor did it last as long, but it exhibited a stronger ability to mobilize resources and more thoroughly transformed the social, economic, and political conditions under which its subject populations lived. Ruling from Tushpa on the east shore of Lake Van, its kings controlled much of the territory that is now eastern Turkey, Armenia, and northwest Iran in the 8th and 7th centuries BC (Figure 9.1). They created an extraordinary network of fortresses and administrative centers and commanded a military establishment that rivaled Assyria. The testimony of Urartu’s inscriptions, abundance of its metalwork, and scale of its architecture leave no doubt of the resplendence of this civilization.

The kingdom was also a striking anomaly in the history of the region it dominated, which is not noted for political coherence or cultural complexity. Geographic conditions would appear to militate against any kind of unity in a land where mountain chains intersect in a confused pattern of ridges and volcanic peaks. Eastern Anatolia’s rivers, useless for transport, flow into a multitude of watersheds, ultimately reaching the Persian Gulf, the Black Sea, the Caspian, or the enclosed lakes Urmia and Van. Small, isolated pockets of land are found in areas where the valleys of these rivers occasionally open up, but most of the economically useful land is highland pasture. Short, dry, summers are followed by long, cold, snowy winters which limit human and animal mobility. It is not surprising that in most eras the territory that Urartu so successfully united has been characterized by low population, pastoral economies, and small settlements—if any settlements at all. In the time of the Roman Empire, and many other eras, it was a buffer zone between larger powers. For the Urartians, however, this unpromising land was the core of their polity and culture.

316