LIBRARY OF THE EARLY CIVILIZATIONS |

SETON LLOYD Early

Highland Peoples of
NNT NKe)Ay’
zs * ih
Early Highland ae
Peoples of Anatolia
SETON LLOYD
The historical bridge between Asia and
Europe lies south of the Black Sea and
thrusts toward the Balkans. It is today
part of Turkey. At the center is a
plateau from which flow the waters of
the Tigris and the Euphrates. Westward,
lesser mountains extend to the Aegean
Sea, becoming, ultimately, islands of
the Greek archipelago.
This is Anatolia. Here lived, from
earlier times, a peasant race which was
continually overpowered by foreign
powers who grafted their culture on the
existing one.
This is the land of the Hittites, the
Hurrians and the Urartians. This is the
land to which Paris brought Helen, for
here was the city of Troy.
In this volume of the Library of the
Early Crilizations Seton Lloyd tells,
and ilhcst aces with photographs and
drawings, the history of Anatolia from
the Early Bronze Age (circa 2600 B.C.)
to the eighth century B.C. (about 300
years before the Trojan War.
The achievements of the Anatolians—
whose geographic division expressed
itself in great cultural diversity—were
astounding. Their jewelry and
artifacts delight and amaze with a
delicacy and sophistication that seem
antipodal to the stolid architectural
wonders of the fortress towns
Boghazkoy and Carchemish, Remarkable
too are the social institutions which
Professor Lloyd describes—the
existence, for instance, of a chamber of
commerce in the nineteenth century B.c.
Using the latest archaeological findings
and techniques, Professor Lloyd here
reconstructs one of the most intriguing
“bridge” civilizations in history.
SETON LLOYD is Professor of Western
Asiatic Archaeology at the University
of London, He has published a number
of books, including Ear/y Anatolia and
The Art of the Ancient Near East.
 Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2021 with funding from
Kahle/Austin Foundation

https://archive.org/details/earlyhighbeoplesOO0Ounse
 LIBRAKY OF THE BARLY CLIVILIZATIONSs
EDITED BY PROFESSOR STUART PIGCGOrE

Early Highland Peoples of ANATOLIA

EARLY HIGH

McGraw-Hill Book
AND PEOPLES OF
ANATOLIA
Seton Lloyd

Company New York

 DESIGNED AND PRODUCED BY THAMES AND HUDSON

© THAMES AND HUDSON LIMITED LONDON 1967

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
THIS BOOK OR PARTS THEREOF MUST NOT BE REPRODUCED IN ANY
FORM WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION OF THE PUBLISHERS
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CATALOG CARD NUMBER 67-25 811
PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN
38206
 CONTENDS

General Editor’s Preface

Introduction

The Early Metal Ages

The Anatolian Early Bronze Age
Alaca Hiiytik
The Pontic Tombs
Dorak and ‘Priam’s Treasure’
Architecture

Kiultepe in the Early and Middle Bronze Ages 38

The Early Bronze Age
The Middle Bronze Age

The Hittites 57
Boghazkoy
Yarilikaya and Hittite Religion

The Neo-Hittite States 84

Hittite Picture-Writing
Art and Architecture
5) Urarca 108

6 ‘The Phrygians 124

Bibliography 136

List of Illustrations 137

Index 143
 GENERAL EDITOR’S PREFACE

The land mass of Asia Minor, thrusting westwards from the Levant and the
Caucasus to the very quaysides of Constantinople, has throughout history
and prehistory made a bridge between the east and west, and not for nothing
did the Achaemenid kings build the Royal Road from Susa to Sardis. The
phases of Anatolian prehistory and early history described in Professor
Lloyd’s volume include some very remarkable instances of the peculiarly
international nature of the country and its civilizations in antiquity.
In the second half of the third millennium Bc we encounter a series of
spectacular finds best described as Royal Tombs and Treasures—tombs at
Alaca Hiiytik, Horoz Tepe and other sites in the Mahmatlar area; treasures
there, in the second settlement of Troy and probably elsewhere in the Troad.
Professor Lloyd includes here the now vanished objects allegedly from
tombs at Dorak, but some of us would prefer to suspend judgement on
these, since the numerous and extraordinary pieces cannot be regarded as a
valid, closed find established under archaeological control. However, the
finds from the other sites are dramatic enough, and the Alaca tombs, with
their rich offerings in gold, silver, copper and iron are members of a type
which Gordon Childe noted as a recurrent phenomenon in certain forms of
social organization, with examples in the Royal Tombs at Ur, the princely
graves of Shang China or the Mycenae Shaft Graves, the Scythian tombs or
that of Sutton Hoo. With tombs go treasures —-the interchange of gifts
between princes is part of the code of the heroic aristocracies of the ancient
world which also finds expression in the tombs; it is the Homeric kezme/ion,
of gold, bronze or iron; silver or fine cloth. Each prince accumulated
treasure and kept it secure, but the stock constantly changed as gifts were
received and reciprocated, circulating among courts and citadels over a wide
area, and for a long time.
The Alaca graves have their counterparts across the Black Sea in the
Kuban, with Maikop or Novosvobodnaya in the later third millennium, or
in the Caucasus rather later, as at Trialeti, Kirovakan or Lchashen, at the
last site with hide burials in a manner common in South Russia and again
present at Alaca. Contemporary with these later tombs are the Mycenae
Shaft Graves, structurally similar to Alaca, and types of gold-work and other
ornaments are also shared throughout the wide Carpatho-Caspian province,
where treasures range from Euboea and Poliochni on Lemnos, to later finds
such as those of Persinari in Rumania or at Borodino in Bessarabia, where
fine stone battle-axes echo those of the Trojan treasure.
With the Hittites establishing themselves in Anatolia by the beginning of
the second millennium Bc, we are confronted with a people who, owing to
their adoption of literacy through the cuneiform script, we know to have
spoken languages within the Indo-European group. Their presence in Asia
Minor, first attested in the Assyrian merchants’ documents from Niultepe,
constitutes our earliest surviving evidence for these languages, which of
course include Sanskrit and Greek, Latin and Celtic, as well as the Slav
group. The Hittites certainly reached the area in which they established their
kingdom from outside, imposing themselves as overlords (as did the Aryans
in India) on an already urban substrate culture. With the general archaeo-
logical and linguistic evidence pointing to South Russia as a likely original
home of Indo-European speech, the connections between the cultures north
of the Black Sea and Anatolia at the time of the Alaca Royal Tombs take
on an added significance.
After the collapse of the main strongholds of Hittite power at the end of
the second millennium sc, Professor Lloyd discusses the survival of a
fragmented Hittite culture in the Anti-Taurus and North Syria, and the two
successor-states of the Urartians of eastern Anatolia and beyond, and the
Phrygians on the west. Both were peoples skilled in metallurgy: Urartian
bronze vessels of high craftsmanship seem to have been traded westwards,
probably to North . rian ports, before the conquest of Urartu by Assyria in
the middle-eighth century. Their great cauldrons especially inspired the
manufacture of such vessels first in Greece, but within a couple of genera-
tions or so as far away to the north-west as the British Isles.
The Phrygians present many fascinating problems, some now being
resolved by the Gordion excavations. Here we see the Phrygians in their
eighth-century splendour -but when did their ancestors originally enter
Anatolia, and whence? Assyrian records imply them to be in Asia Minor by
the early eleventh century, and Greek tradition brought them from or
through Thrace. The great tumulus burials with wooden mortuary houses
described vividly in this book are in the manner of the Scyths and their
ancestors on the Russian Steppe. Is prehistory repeating itself, and are we
back in the same situation as that of the Alaca tombs?
STUART PIGGOTT
 INTRODUCTION

To the composite work called Dawn of Civilization 1 contributed a chapter

dealing with the early peoples and antiquities of Anatolia. In time, it was
restricted to the so-called Bronze and Iron Ages, because the earlier Chal-
colithic and Neolithic periods had already been effectively treated in another
chapter. The style and content of the essay were primarily directed towards
those who might be approaching the subject for the first time, but it was
also intended to carry a quota of authentically reliable and up-to-date in-
formation. Apart from the restricted length of the first essay, which resulted
in the rather cavalier treatment of certain subjects, six further years of in-
tensive archaeological research have now taken place in Anatolia, culminat-
ing in the summer season of 1965, when more than fifty expeditions, either
Turkish or foreign, contributed to our present total of archaeological
information.
All this has made a reconsideration of the old text necessary, and the greater
part of it has been re-written, in the hope of doing justice, not only to the
actual finds which have been made in recent years, but to the stimulating
interpretations with which scholarship has already illuminated them. And
here one should make a cautionary reservation, to the effect that an attempt
of this sort must depend for its success on the promptitude with which such
discoveries are published. Preliminary reports are often long deferred: or
they appear piecemeal as journal articles in a variety of languages. Where
they are available, I have tried to assimilate and summarize them, but would
wish to add that the task has been greatly facilitated by use of the admirable
‘summary’ which Machteld Mellink publishes annually in the Averican
Journal of Archaeology. In another American journal, with acknowledgements
to great scholars in the Anatolian field such as Kurt Bittel and Albrecht
Goetze, the same author has presented us with one of those periodical
assessments of trends and portents in archaeological interpretation, of which
few ate capable and to which many look forward. This, too, I have drawn
on in the following pages.
It should perhaps be added that not all archaeological enterprises at
present in progress obtain a mention in my review, even though they may
 already have continued for some years. This is because their results, as
announced to date, have been too technical in character for their wider im-
plications to be yet apparent. Among Turkish excavations in particular,
there are cases where, available at the moment are only the raw materials
from which important conclusions can be anticipated. Cases in point are
Sedat Alp’s stratigraphical sequence of Early Bronze Age settlements at
Karahtiyik-Konya; Nimet Ozgiic’s work on the Middle Bronze Age city
at Acemhtiytik near Aksaray (a complementary operation to her husband’s
excavations at Kanesh); Bahadir Alkim’s palace and tombs in the
Tilmenhtiytik-Gedikli mounds, and Kemal Balkan’s Urartian finds at Patnos.
For the rest, it is hoped that the accounts of new discoveries included in
these pages may serve to emphasize our improved understanding of Ana-
tolian antiquity and of the part played by this miniature continent in the
creation of Near Eastern civilization.
Sh

10
 CHAPTER ONE

The Early Metal Ages

Anatolia is a modern name applied to Asiatic Turkey; to

the great peninsula of Asia Minor, thrust out from the
main continent towards south-east Europe. The name is
taken from the Turkish form, Axadol/u, but at no time
until the present had Asia Minor been thought of as a
single political or geographical unit. The structure of the
country is dominated by the great Anatolian Plateau,
bounded on the north and south by mountain tidges
severing it from the coastal plains, where climate and
altitude combine to produce distinctively different terri-
tories. To the west the plateau descends more gently to
the Aegean and the Sea of Marmara: to the east it merges
gradually into the alpine landscape of Azerbaijan.
This geographical diversity is reflected in the prehistory
and early recorded history of Anatolia, which shows no
centralized or otherwise coherent pattern of development,
such as one may observe in Egypt or Mesopotamia. One
watches instead an assemblage of interdependent cultural
enclaves, variously reacting upon each other, though
effectively linked only by the great routes of passage for
trade and migration which traverse the peninsula from
end to end. Superficially, among early students of Ana-
tolian antiquity, this picture created a tendency to belittle
the probability that such a country could have made any
 independent contribution to the creation of Near Eastern
civilization. Anatolia came to be seen by them only as a
field for colonial activities or as a migratory transit-
station between east and west. In the course of time, this
view has come to be totally discarded, and it has on the
contrary proved possible to establish the integrity of the
country’s corporate tradition and the autonomous
character of its overall achievement. In fact, one of the
most striking results of thirty years intensified research
has been the discovery in Anatolia of a deep-seated
aboriginal culture, productive of ideas and capable of
transmitting them elsewhere.
If we are now to substantiate this claim, we must first
consider the successive phases which archaeologists have
been able to detect in the evolution of indigenous
societies and the influence upon them of contributory
Wz migrations. Later we shall find such conclusions sup-
plemented by evidence from historical and philological
sources and it will become possible to determine the
actual sequence of events with increasing precision. For,
like other regions of Western Asia, the story of Anatolia
divides itself into two distinct periods; that which pre-
ceded the use of writing and that which followed. In the
first, its reconstruction depends exclusively on the results
of excavation, while in the second these are augmented
by the testimony of written records. Anatolia comes com-
paratively late into the field of literacy, for our first
written documents are contemporary with the Old Baby-
lonian period in Mesopotamia; hardly earlier than the
nineteenth century BC which is a thousand years after the
invention of writing in Sumer and Egypt. It appears too,
not as an indigenous development but as a remote ex-
tension of Mesopotamian culture itself, and as a result of
the setting up of Assyrian trading colonies in the Assyrian
Plateau. The earliest documents in Anatolia are in fact
those written by Assyrian merchants in their commercial
centre of Kanesh (modern Kiiltepe) in Cappadocia, in
their own cuneiform script, which was adopted by the
contemporary Anatolian rulers of the city for their own
purposes. However, this early business correspondence — IM. 47
accounts, bills-of-lading or records of litigation — gives
us little precise historical information, and true historical
documents, with references to political and military
events, do not appear until five hundred years later, when
the Hittite kings, still using the cuneiform script as a
vehicle for their own Indo-European language, record
their achievements.
Our knowledge of all that happened in Anatolia before
this period accordingly depends exclusively on the
results of archaeological research. During the past three
decades this has fortunately been widely extended and
successful. It has carried back the story of human en-
deavour in these parts at least a further five thousand
years and has introduced us to peoples who would other-
wise have remained completely unknown to us. But, as
people, they do remain without exception anonymous;
so that, in discussing the sequence of developments in
these early periods, we are compelled to fall back on the
rather arbitrary terminology by which archaeology identi-
fies the chronological epochs to which they belong. Here
in Anatolia as elsewhere, the ‘Neolithic Revolution’ is
separated from the beginning of the Bronze Age proper
by a ‘Chalcolithic’ period. The Bronze Age is divided into
the ‘Early’, ‘Middle’ and ‘Late’ phases, the first occupying
in time the greater part of the third millennium Bc, the
second covering the period of the Assyrian colonies in
the first half of the second millennium and the third cor-
responding to the centuries illuminated by the Hittite
records, which ended with the destruction of the Hittite
Empire in about 1200 BC.
The clear historical character of this later period, the
evidence of political development and religious thought,
z =
SOUTH-
DATES | PERIOD NORTHWEST CEN TR AL WEST Suouo. iH EAS
= +——

612
(SARDIS) CARCHEMISH KARMIR BLUR
SE De IAN SS SINJERLI ALTINTEPE

ee oe ———————— NEO-HITTITES WOR SARE ied

TOPRAKKALE
oD UNE ES » % MALATYA PATNOS
900 GORDION Gee eon KAYALIDERE
; KARA
TROAD &] BOGHAZ-| BEYCE- ARS -
TROY | cr anos |KULTEPE |ALISHAR| ALACA ea" eee TARSU s HOOK -| KARAZ | MALATYA

1200
We VIA HITTITE t I
EMPIRE SMALL
5
a PRINCIPALITY
2] 0
WwW
=
a
1700 =i
HITTITE I
OLD T al a
Ww cae 3B | «incom
N SOUATTERS| MB IV
1750 z Ww
°. LEVELIB/< ARUM I
i =
(3) KARUM i= TABLETS MBI
1825 VW TABLETS |a . a
\ 850 ie LEVEL I i Vv
ay (2)KARUM|2 BURNT MBI
= K
1900 a TABLETS |G feels
(so)
S ra)
= a MB 5
= - a w 7
1950 ) e 5
— i
LEVELS |w A
Mmey |r W
Vv Ores |e &W |EBMd EBIb
fi ASSYRIAN] |
= KARUM
fo)
oe oe __MEGARON Jz
ee) WwW Mo) TEMPLE,© 6 x
a jo
x ALABASTER oe E Bla E Bila
ad IDOLS wa
lu a
= a

a Yo ie PONTI¢ sia

L 2300 L
a: fener
CEMETERIES y W
=|
lJ w
N oO

fo)
=
=we}
ac DORAK hs!
ipa) (o

es I YORTAN ma | 7? xVED- So EBT avail EBT

=! ee
2500 Ww IB ?
— 4

=
lJ

St
=
Z
YORTAN 8
a

BC) I XIX-XVI] EB! iaapar

é
o THERM! 3
000 Ww POLYOCHNI
oue8 KUMTEPE 4 ali

1 A diagram showing the comparative stratigraphy of excavations at Bronze and Iron Age sites
in Anatolia. The evidence of written records begins to be available in the nineteenth century Bc

14
 2 The excavated area of a small prehistoric
fortress at Mersin in Cilicia. The towered
gateway is flanked on one side by neatly
arranged quarters for the garrison, and on
es the other ‘by the more

luxurious residence

the sequence of royal names and the battles or treaties

associated with them, all serve to emphasize the con-
trasting impersonality of the ‘archaeological’ age which
preceded it. One cannot however fail to be impressed by
the astonishing detail of the anthropological picture
which it has proved possible to reconstruct, simply
through the patient and meticulous study of its material
remains. It should be mentioned at this point that, for the
purpose of this study, it may be necessary to assume some
previous knowledge of the earliest chapters in the archaeo-
logical story, the Neolithic and Chalcolithic phases having
been dealt with in a previous volume of the series. There,
against a background of painstakingly recorded strati-
graphy, distribution or typology and the cautious in-
ferences to be made from them, we have seen some of the
ereat highlights of recent discovery, when some aspect of
life in a prehistoric community was suddenly and bril-
liantly illuminated by chance or through the peculiar
ingenuity of an excavator.
Examples which come easily to mind are the Neolithic
township at Catal Hiiytik, a Chalcolithic village at Hactlar
and the miniature fortress at Mersin dating from the 2
early fourth millennium Bc. All these are to be considered
retrospectively if the theme of continuity in the evolution
 of essentially ‘Anatolian’ culture is to be traced to its
primitive beginnings. Meanwhile, for our present pur-
pose the thread must be taken up at the opening of the
Bronze Age in approximately 3000 BC.
The Anatolian Early Bronze Age
Already, at the beginning of the third millenntum Bc one
finds the country divided into six or seven fairly well-
defined provinces, distinguished by slight disparities in
their archaeological remains; and it is, as we have said,
in no way surprising that the form and disposal of these
Til. 3 is largely dictated by geography. The comparative study
of contemporary developments in them has been made
possible by the excavation in each of at least one well-
stratified ancient site. Thus, there is a north-west pro-
vince which includes the site of Troy, where excavations
have resulted in the determination of an exemplary
archaeological sequence. Next, a large part of the plateau
proper, including the famous Halys Bend, falls within
what has come to be called the Central Anatolian pro-
vince, and here too the Early Bronze Age is admirably
documented by Turkish excavations at Alaca Hitytik and
Kiultepe, the Middle Bronze Age also by Kiiltepe and the
Late Bronze Age by excavations at the Hittite capital,
Hattusas (Boghazkéy). Eastern Anatolia has an archaeo-
logical character of its own, less well known, but typified
by finds at Karaz, near Erzerum. There is an extensive
south-western province, whose Bronze Age history has
been revealed at Beycesultan, and a Cilician province
dependent on sequences discovered at Tarsus and Mersin.
Finally there are minor provinces such as that covering
the area watered by the Sangarius (Sakarya) river and
named after the site called Demirci Hiiyiik, a Pontic pro-
vince to the north of the Halys area, and the Konya Plain
about which mote is known in earlier periods. The com-
bined results of studies at all these sites have recently
 Modern Towns

== C. Anatolian
ilician
= Konya Plain
Lsyanbul ONIA
x i « = WILL Inner Phrygia
9 N, (RN Np Se > N. Central Anatolian
N.W. Anatolian Troy VI-VII
S.W, Anatolian Beycesultan TH-H
S. W. Anatolian - Eastern Variant

Qh ioe :
as \ att 7 I = Mycenaean - Greeks

Ee:
fe = 2S 7)
agit
if ZIReINS il

os URAR
oneBAP
e
g o
@ Harran Armd
Ld

x
les ASSYRJA
40 80 120 160 00240 Nimrud

6 120 180 240 300 360

metres

3 A map of Anatolia showing the ancient sites which have been excavated. The central plateau,
mountain ranges and coastal plains determine the country’s provincial divisions during the
Bronze Age

made it possible for archaeologists to sub-divide the

Early Bronze Age into three sub-phases, numbered from
the earliest upwards and it may perhaps here be convenient
to summarize the recorded developments during each of
these in turn.
The first phase, known as Early Bronze I, is everywhere
less well documented than those which succeeded it. No
royal tombs, temples or palaces have yet been found to
suggest the quality of luxury goods in circulation among
the privileged classes, or the trend in religious thought
and political organization. Already, however, there is evi-
dence to justify the distinction which has been made
between this period and the Chalcolithic Age which
preceded it. In its name, the word ‘bronze’ is in fact no
 more than a categorical convenience, since the bulk of the
metal now used is copper, and the toughening of copper
by an admixture of tin was as yet only properly under-
stood in the maritime trading centres with their more
sophisticated knowledge of metallurgy. Nevertheless
simple forms of metal objects are now fairly plentiful and,
judging from the frequency with which metallic shapes
are simulated in the designs of pottery, the coppersmith’s
craft may already have reached a fairly high standard. The
exploitation of Anatolia’s mineral wealth which now
began, created, by the end of the Bronze Age, a source of
supply to the principal countries of the Near East. At
Troy this period is represented by the first settlement
founded on virgin rock. It is a small fortress, hardly more
than a hundred yards in diameter, but it was the first site
to provide reliable criteria — pottery shapes and small
objects — of the Early Bronze I culture. This extended
beyond the Anatolian mainland to off-shore islands such
as Lemnos (Poliochni) and Lesbos (Thermi) where
archaeological characteristics of the era are perhaps even
better illustrated than at Troy itself. They include the
first instances of dwelling-houses built to the so-called
‘megaron’ plan: a rectangular hall with central hearth and
an open porch at one end; a device which two-and-a-half
millennia later dictated the form of a Greek temple. In
western Anatolia at this time the dead were buried in
extra-mural cemeteries often in large clay ‘pithos’ vessels.
Many of these have been brought to light by illicit ex-
ee | cavation at Yortan in the Troad, but the grave goods are
poor and no corresponding settlements have yet been
firmly associated with them.
Troy | was burnt and destroyed in some disaster, and
cultural changes in the more impressive citadel which
replaced it initiate a second phase of the Early Bronze
Age. Now at last we ate afforded a more revealing
panorama of contemporary life; a picture of native
4 A ‘face’ urn and other Early Bronze Age pottery from graves at Yortan in the Troad. These
correspond in time with the earliest fortress at Troy and with comparable settlements in offshore
islands such as Lemnos and Lesbos

dynasties controlling the various Anatolian provinces,

profiting from an advanced metal industry based on local
production centres, actively trading among themselves
and accumulating evidence of material wealth in their
fortresses and metropolitan centres. Troy II itself makes
its own contribution to this picture by its architecture and
by the hoards of jewellery and other luxury objects, found
by Schliemann buried beneath its palace and christened
by him ‘Priam’s Treasure’. Elsewhere in the Troad from Ils. 26-28
a group of Royal tombs (to whose discovery some
mystery attaches), we have the so-called ‘Dorak Treasure’, Ue rg=2 5
testifying to an even higher standard of craftsmanship and
a wider variety of precious materials. Finds of this sort
are no longer restricted to the north-west province.
Tarsus in Cilicia has another prosperous maritime culture
and, above all, central Anatolia comes into its own with
 an inland counterpart of these coastal dynasties, showing
a striking concentration of power and wealth. Here again
it is from a group of ceremonial burials — the now-famous
Royal Tombs at Alaca Hiiyiik —- that our knowledge is
obtained, and their contents have been supplemented by
similar burials, more recently discovered at Horoztepe
and Mahmatlar in the Pontic province. At Beycesultan
too, the type-site of the south-western province, there
are religious shrines with valuable evidence of ritual and
an important record of ceramic criteria among their
votive deposits. The finds in these inland provinces sug-
gest an intensive exchange of goods and traditions, de-
pendent here upon the great caravan routes, just as in the
coastal areas they are correspondingly facilitated by ship-
ping. Tombs and places of worship now add their quota
of religious and iconographic information. We may now
examine some of these finds in greater detail.
Alaca Hiyiik
Excavating in the deeper levels of the Hittite city-mound
at Alaca Hiiyiik, Turkish archaeologists discovered a
group of thirteen tombs, perhaps those of a local ruling
family in the Early Bronze Il phase, buried among the
paraphernalia of funerary ritual and accompanied by their
private possessions. The interments had evidently been
made at long intervals, over several generations. Some
were single tombs; others contained the remains of both
a man and a woman buried on different occasions, which
suggests that when the first interment was made the
location of the tomb must have been marked on the sur-
Ill. ro face. Men were accompanied by their weapons, women
by their ornaments or toilet articles, and both by domestic
i) vessels and utensils mostly of precious metals. Notable
among the weapons was a dagger with a crescent-shaped
handle and a blade of iron — a metal known to have been
many times more valuable than gold at this time — and

20
 5, 6 Bronze ornaments
from the Royal tombs
at Alaca Hiiyiik, called
‘standards’ for want of
a better name. In the
group of free-standing
animals (above) special
significance seems to be
attributed to the stag,
which would suggest
the mentality of a
mountain people. The
design (below) of an
open-work grill with
pendant ornaments is
less comprehensible,
though it has been
identified by some as a
sun symbol
7 From a Royal tomb at Alaca, a large copper figurine having boots and breasts overlaid with
gold. With it and stylistically comparable are appliqué ornaments of gold, representing paired
figurines of the ‘violin’ type associated in the Bronze Age with a mother-goddess cult

Ills, 12-14 among the personal ornaments, a gold filigree diadem

with a tassel of gold ribbon. Then there was a wide
variety of objects connected with the funerary ritual —
I//s. i500 strange open-work grills of bronze, sometimes adorned
with animals. These have been called ‘standards’ because
they were probably mounted at the head of a pole, and
Los ornaments featuring similar animals, finely wrought in
bronze and inlaid with silver, may have served the same
ES ae purpose. There were also strange metal figigurines, one of
which was of bronze with boots and breast S enriched with
cold. The tombs themselves were rectangular pits some-
times up to eighteen or twenty feet long and ten feet wide.

8 A bronze ‘terminal’ figure of a stag, its legs drawn together to fit

the narrow base, attachable perhaps to a ceremonial staff or the upright
element of a canopy. The inlaid ornament is of silver

22
 9 From a tomb at Alaca
Hiyiik, a jug of gold
with a very finely wrought
repoussé ornament. Less pre-
tentious vessels of this
shape ate found among
the pottery of the period,
sometimes ornamented,
with fluting or incisions

Ui. r0 They were lined with rough stone walling and covered in
with a ceiling of wooden beams. Laid upon this were the
Ga ae skulls and hooves of cattle, which had evidently remained
attached to the hides, the actual carcases having formed
part of a funerary feast. The area covered by most of these
tombs seemed far greater than was necessary to accom-
modate the bodies and surviving grave-goods which
were grouped with wide spaces between. It was therefore
assumed that these had been filled with other items of
perishable materials, including wooden furniture. This
was confirmed by discoveries subsequently made in the
two Pontic cemeteries which we have already mentioned.

24
 The Pontic Tombs
The tombs at Horoztepe and Mahmatlar, both of which
are in the neighbourhood of Tokat to the north-east of
Alaca Hiiyiik, provide an important supplement to those
at Alaca itself. The typology and associations of objects
from the three sources are most interesting when studied
collectively. Unfortunately, at the two Pontic sites less
could be learnt about the form and lay-out of the graves,
owing to the circumstances of their discovery. In both
cases this resulted from chance finds by peasants and in
that of Horoztepe much damage had been done by the
intrusion of a modern graveyard. Nevertheless, from the
latter at least, a great wealth of material has been tre-
covered through careful archaeological treatment. The
tombs, which approximated in size to those of Alaca
Huyuk, were not in this case lined with stone walls.
There was no trace of a timber covering or of animal
bones overlying them. The metal grave goods, which
appeared to have been deliberately bent or folded in order
to occupy less space, were piled untidily at the feet of the
skeletons, few remains of which survived. As we have
said, various forms of furniture were prominent, includ-
ing two tables, one rectangular and one oval, with four
legs ending in boot-shaped feet, all constructed of bronze.
There were also a wide variety of attachments in bronze
for other types of wooden furniture. Other objects are
without parallel at Alaca Hiiyiik; a grotesque figure in
bronze of a mother nursing a child, eight inches high; T/1.
sistrums (rattles) decorated with animal figures and new TV,
varieties of terminal ornaments in animal form. Small I.
objects only were of gold or silver. The remainder, of
bronze, included many household vessels; fruit-stands,
beak-spouted pitchers, basket-handled teapots, jars,
bowls, platters and cups as well as a number of weapons. Use T6
The stylistic evidence of all these objects has now been
very carefully studied and it has been concluded that
25
ro, 11 Artist’s reconstructions of
Royal tomb at Alaca Hiyiik.
the king lies upon a bier,
awaiting burial in a walled tomb in
which ‘ -eady buried
with her possessions and orna-
ments. Leff, the timber construc-
tion of the roof is shown and
upon it, heads and horns. still
attached skins of animals
sacrificed for the funeral feast
12-14 4. Jewellery, ’ gold vessels, ) ornaments and weapons from the Royal
} tombs. Above, ) a :gold
jug and a drinking-cup ornamented in repoussé, a bronze ‘standard’ of the open grille variety,
ld |buckle and pin with other ornaments (a/so below left). Below, a gold diadem with ribbon
and a gold bracelet, both in filigree work with a gold-mounted marble mace between. In the
metal-smith’s work of the period, few processes were unknown
 15, 16 Metal objects from rich cemeteries in the Pontic region some
hundreds of miles north of Alaca Hiiyiik. A grotesque female figure
in bronze (/eft) carries a child at her breast. Weapons (above) include
several forms of battle-axe. Unlike the Alaca tombs, these contained few
objects of gold or silver and are dated slightly later; ¢c2100 BC

those from Horoztepe show conclusively signs of tech-

nical development a little in advance of those from
Alaca. In fact their excavators have concluded that they
must be contemporary with or a little in advance of the
latest burial at Alaca, perhaps more properly belonging
to the third Early Bronze phase, for they are inclined to
date them to approximately 2100 Bc while the burials at
Alaca Hiiyiik may have started a good deal earlier. By
other forms of reasoning it has also been suggested that
techniques and practices evident in the Horoztepe ceme-
tery indicate a culture indigenous to the Pontic province,
and that the rulers buried at Alaca represent the temporary
intrusion into Central Anatolia of an alien aristocracy
from that source. Apart from this, other conclusions are
made possible by the combined inventories of these
ee oe. tombs. The figures of deer and bulls, evidently sacred

28
17, 18 Bronze objects from the tombs at Horoztepe in Pontus; a sistrum or ceremonial rattle
(left) decorated with carnivorous as well as ruminant animals, and (right) the ‘terminal’ figure of
a bull. Pontus is thought to be the original home of the Alaca Hiiyiik culture

emblems too, are notably un-Mesopotamian in style and

subject. The technique too, by which bronze is enriched
with more precious metals and coloured stones, appears
to be characteristically Anatolian and both prefigure
subsequent developments in the art of Hittite times.
Dorak and ‘Priam’s Treasure’
In striking contrast to these northern tombs are those
reported from Dorak, by which the character and wealth
of the north-western province at the same period were so
dramatically revealed. On a small rock promontory, over-
looking Lake Apolyont, near Bursa, a large cist-grave
measuring ten feet by six contained the body of a local
ruler and ‘his wife: a smaller one had a single male burial
and nearby ‘pithos’ burials were perhaps those of ser-
vants. The men had been buried with their weapons and

29
19-22 A ‘treasure’ of objects,
mostly in precious metals and
semi-precious stones, said to be
derived from tombs discovered
at Dorak in the eastern Troad,
though the elaborately wrought
figurines (above) may have a
different provenance. In ad-
dition to vessels (apposite above)
and weapons (/eft) of silver
and gold, the rare materials
used include amber, turquoise,
ivory and rock-crystal, as well
as iron, which was then more
valuable than gold. Also,
sufficiently preserved to retain
the colouring was the remnant
of a woven floor-covering
(opposite below), Etched upon
the blade of one silver dagger
(left, below centre) were drawings
of sailing-ships and a dolphin.
The treasure is thought to be
contemporary with settlement
Ilg at Troy; ¢.2300 BC
; * Se
|et
SN
 23 Found in a Dorak tomb, fragment of gold overlay from a piece of
furniture bearing the cartouche of Sahure, second king of the Fifth
Dynasty of Old Kingdom Egypt

the woman with her ornaments and personal belongings.

One man had the bones of his dog with him and, possibly
derived from some other source, there were female
figurines, perhaps of the ‘dancing- itl’ ot ‘concubine’ type,
whose dress and appearance are:meticulously reproduced
in precious materials. The tombs are dated, not only by
domestic vessels of gold and silver but, almost miracu-
lously, by a fragment of gold overlay from a wooden
throne, bearing an inscription in Egyptian hieroglyphs
which includes the name of Sahure, the second king of
Lees the Fifth Dynasty of Old Kingdom Egypt. Finally there
Vi, 22 were the remains of a woven floor-covering in which
both the pattern and the colours of the thread are still
distinguishable. The objects in these graves are from
several points of view completely distinctive. The
materials themselves are varied and rare enough to sug-
gest far-reaching trade facilities - amber for instance, and
turquoise, ivory and rock-crystal as well as iron — but the
modelling of organic and other forms is almost Egyptian
T/l. 79 in its elegance. The figurines are of interest, not only be-
cause they reveal a minor aspect of contemporary dress,
but because the highest form of craftsmanship is applied
to them as it also is applied to other profane objects, such
as weapons and domestic vessels. At Alaca it is reserved
for objects with religious purposes. Among the Dorak
finds there are other indications of reaction to environ-
ment. Not far from the site today, fishing boats pass and
dolphins play among the waters of the Marmara. And
here at Dorak are Early Bronze Age ships engraved on
I//. 20 the blade of a dagger while its point is decorated with the
shape of a dolphin. The Aegean background has replaced
the forests of north Anatolia.
The repertory of Early Bronze Age luxury goods in
north-west Anatolia is greatly enriched, particularly
where jewellery is concerned, by the ‘treasures’ dating
from the final occupation of the Second Settlement at

32
24, 25 Sketches of two cist graves at Dorak purporting to show the positions in which the
tomb-furniture was found. The male figurine in the larger grave on the left is accompanied by
the skeleton of his dog. The graves appear to be lined with dressed stone

Troy. With records of all these finds available, one obtains lis, 26-26
a clear view of the materials obtainable by trade, and the
techniques already devised for shaping and using them.
Among the metals are copper, iron, gold, silver, electrum
and lead, while bronze was occasionally made with im-
ported tin. Metal was treated by casting in closed moulds
or cire perdue, hammering or repoussé work, sweating or
soldering. Ornament was contrived by granulation, fili-
gree or cloisonné inlay. Semi-precious stones and other
ornamental materials included carnelian, jasper, nephrite,
obsidian, meerschaum, and _ locally made faience, in
addition to those already mentioned individually. Some
of them were used in making ceremonial models of con-
temporary weapons, of which the most varied collection
comes from Troy Ilg. There are battle-axes, rock-crystal 1M, 2
and lion-headed pommels for swords and daggers, and
dagger-blades of silver as well as bronze. Thete is also
evidence to suggest that shields and helmets were used,
though these have not yet been found.

33
26-28 Gold ornaments found by Schliemann beneath the palace in the second settlement at
Troy (¢. 2300 BC) and christened by him ‘Priam’s Treasure’. Above is a steel engraving of
Mrs Schliemann wearing some of the jewellery. Be/ow, a filigree bracelet and smaller ornaments
with designs based on the double spiral, a motif which appears throughout the Near East
at this period
29, 30 The ruins of Troy
(above), as they are seen
today. Right is a _ re-
constructed plan of Set-
tlement Ilg; a walled
fortress with a single,
heavily fortified entrance
gate. In the centre is the
great ‘megaron’ assembly-
hall and to the west the
residential palace. Area:
about five acres
 Architecture
It is also to the fortress of Level Ig at Troy that one
turns for enlightenment on the architectural appearance
Ill. 30 and lay-out of an Early Bronze city. The vast ‘megaron’
hall, occupying a central enclosure and standing among
the network of more normal sized buildings that surround
it, had a roof-span of thirty feet and can easily be recog-
nized for what it is — the main public building or assembly-
hall of the community. The actual residential quarters of
the ruling family can also probably be identified in a com-
plex of less pretentious buildings to the west of it. The
city-walls with their great towered gateway, constructed
of mud brick in a timber framework on a sub-structure
of dressed stone, seem almost disproportionately sub-
stantial in relation to the buildings which they enclose.
The private houses seem to have been lightly built of
brick on stone foundations and to have had fragile upper
storeys of plaster in a framework of wood. Closely
clustered together over narrow alley-ways, they must have
Til. 29 resembled the half-timber slums of Jacobean London.
When the Second Settlement was destroyed by fire it
must have burnt as easily; everywhere Schliemann found
fallen walls, their mud bricks baked into solid masses
among the calcined rubble of their stone foundations.
There is nothing recognizable as a temple in Troy II.
For some rare examples of religious buildings one must
turn to Beycesultan in the south-western province, where
ES they took the form of rectangular shrine-chambers
arranged in pairs (perhaps because they were dedicated
to separate male and female deities). Each had an ‘altar’,
surrounded by ex voto objects and consisting of twin
stelae between which the offerings were passed over a
built-in structure resembling the ‘horns of consecration’
in Minoan buildings of a later age. A feature also of the
Is. 37, oo
h<s ‘male’ shrine was an isolated wooden post reminiscent of
the ‘tree’ orpillar’ cults af Crete.

36
 4b
Yair

Seer
a;

31-33 At Beycesultan on the Upper Meander Early Bronze Age shrines are arranged in pairs,
perhaps with a dual dedication. In the centre is a complex altar (above) consisting of twin stelac
and ‘horns of consecration’. Below a similar shrine is reconstructed with its free-standing
wooden ‘pillar’. In both cases votive pottery is abundant and a portion of the chamber behind
the altar is screened off. Religious buildings of the Early Bronze Age are rare in Anatolia

37
CHAPTER TWO

Kiiltepe in the Early and Middle

Bronze Ages

The Early Bronze Age

The final centuries of the third millennium sc seem to have
been a time of major migrations. One of these occurred
at the beginning of the third Early Bronze phase. In
about 2300 BC a great wave of Indo-European peoples,
speaking a dialect known as Luvian, seems to have swept
over Anatolia from the direction of the Bosphorus,
occupying practically the whole south-western part of the
country up to a diagonal line drawn approximately from
the Marmara to the Gulf of Iskanderun. Their progress
was marked by signs of widespread destruction and for
about a century, at sites where remains of this period
have been found, there is every indication of a decline in
prosperity. The northern and central provinces, however,
remained unaffected and, in about 2200 Bc when contact
with the Luvian-dominated south-west had been te-
established, they found themselves able and ready to
resume profitable trade-contacts particularly with Cilicia
and the north Syrian markets beyond. Under these cir-
cumstances the focus of attention moves once more to
Central Anatolia and particularly to the site of Kiltepe
(KKanesh) which will presently, at the beginning of the
Middle Bronze Age, be illuminated by the advent of
literate Assyrian colonists. The merchants were to reside

38
in a suburb of their own at the foot of the mound, but
excavations of the pre-Assyrian levels on the mound
itself have begun to reveal the historical prelude to their
attival played out by indigenous peoples during the
closing phase of the Early Bronze Age.
This period is of special interest, and its stratigraphy
worth sorting out from the information so far available
in preliminary reports. It is the period of the so-called WF
‘Cappadocian’ painted pottery whose significance has
tended in the past to become extremely controversial.
First discovered by the American excavators of Alishar
and misleadingly labelled by them ‘Alishar III’ owing to
a stratigraphical misunderstanding, this brightly orna-
mental pottery with designs in several colours appeared
to them and others to be an exotic intrusion among the
drab burnished wares which were the rule elsewhere. By
some it had even been associated with the arrival of the
Hittites, an Indo-European people who, like the Luvians,
began to make their appearance in Anatolia at the end of
the Early Bronze Age. This theory has now been dis-
carded by the excavator of Kiiltepe, who sees it, not as an
importation from elsewhere but as a local development,
peculiar to the Cappadocian area evolved during the
Early Bronze HI stage from monochrome wares with
simpler designs (Alishar ‘Intermediate’). In following its
evolution he has been able to distinguish three successive
sub-phases each of them marked by important archi-
tectural and other developments on the Kiiltepe mound.
Perhaps the most important of these belongs to the
second sub-phase. It is a large building, now thought to
be a temple, which is built on the ‘megaron’ principle; a
square hall entered axially through an open porch, with
minor rooms annexed on both sides. The hall, which is lil-g¢
covered with white plaster, has a huge circular hearth in
the centre, surrounded by four wooden columns, and the
portico has low ‘sleeping-platforms’ on each side. There

39
 34 A building, now thought to be a
temple, of the ‘megaron’ type found
on the main mound at Kiltepe and
dating from a final phase of the
Early Bronze Age (¢.z100 BC). The
square hall with 4 columns, central
hearth and open portico with ‘sleeping-
platforms’ are all features to be found
in Mycenaean palaces almost a thou-
sand years later

are parallels to this building in exactly the same period at

Beycesultan Level VIII, but the close resemblance of this
example to the Mycenaean palaces of a thousand years
later is most striking. Another unique feature, appearing
in both the first and the second sub-phase of this ‘Cappa-
docian’ period at Niiltepe, is a class of alabaster figurines,
unique in Anatolia. Of two types represented, one appears
Tia to be a seated goddess: the other is more abstract and
L136 consists of a disc-like body with one or more projecting
heads, pig-tailed and wearing conical head-dresses.
Others again hold children and quite complicated groups
are attempted. Some of these idols were found in a new
type of grave; a circular stone tomb with two compatt-
ments, one for the body and the other for votive offerings.
Associated both with graves and buildings throughout
are forms of pottery and small objects which again sug-
gest a close trade connection with Cilicia, Syria and, in

40
35, 36 Alabaster idols from circular stone tombs a little older than the Early Bronze Age
‘megaron’ at Kiltepe. One type often represents a seated goddess (/eft). Others (right) are more
ideoplastic symbols with decorated, disc-like bodies and projecting heads

the case of certain small gold ornaments, even with Meso-

potamia. Pottery shapes include well-known features
such as the goblet with two high handles, called by
Schliemann the ‘depas amphikypellon’ and the so-called
‘tred-cross bowl’, which would be equally at home at this
time at Troy or in south-western Anatolia, as well as
‘Syrian bottles’ and a variety of typical Cilician forms.
Here then at Kiltepe, these final centuries of the Early
Bronze Age are beginning to be well documented. And
it is to the same site that we shall primarily turn to watch
the introduction of a literate culture in the Middle Bronze.
Before doing so, however, we should note an indepen-
dent development which has been taking place in eastern
Anatolia. Here, among the high altitudes of modern
Turkey’s eastern province, sites like Karaz, near Erzerum,
show, as might perhaps be expected, Early Bronze cul-
tures mote obviously connected with Azerbaijan and

4|
 even with the steppe region north of the Caucasus. At
Trialeti, near Tiflis, tumulus burials have been found
whose contents include East Anatolian black burnished
pottery, and, as burial mounds suggest a migrant people,
this has been associated with the movement which
brought Indo-Europeans to Anatolia. The discovery of
East Anatolian types among metal vessels as far atield as
the famous royal tomb at Maikop on the Kuban could
have the same implication.
The Middle Bronze Age
The first century of the second millennium 8c saw great
changes in the cities of Anatolia and a new era of cultural
progress and prosperity began. The city of Kanesh had
grown too big to be accommodated on the summit of its
Il. 35 ancient mound, and at its foot a new suburb was laid
out and surrounded by a wall almost two-thirds of a mile
long, making the total area of the town about 125 acres.
It is unknown whether in its early stages this suburb was
used exclusively by a commercial population, but after
its third rebuilding (Level 11), it became the home of an
Assyrian merchant colony (Aarum). The expanding As-
syrian kingdom, with its capital at Ashur, on the Tigris,
had taken control of the trade-route which brought metal
ores and other Anatolian products to Mesopotamia, and
had established half-a-dozen or more of such trading
posts in the most productive areas, of which Kanesh was
the most important. The status of these colonies in rela-
tion to the indigenous principalities has to be inferred
from the few relevant texts which have survived. There
is, unfortunately, no unanimous agreement among lingu-
ists as to the exact meaning of these but the majority are
satisfied that they existed by mutual agreement rather
than vassalage. The Aarwm seems in any case to have
resembled a ‘chamber-of-commerce’ through the autho-
rity of which prices could be fixed, debts settled and

42
 iv

37 A fine vessel with polychrome ornament in the ‘Cappadocian’ style from Kiultepe. These
painted wares (once wrongly associated with the arrival of the Hittites), appeared first in the
final phases of the Early Bronze Age and lasted until the Assyrian occupation in Level II of
the karum, the period of the famous Kiiltepe tablets

43
 a4
NX
Ny
SAA
Ge
S&S
IW
4

38 The main mound at Kiltepe (Kanesh) representing a walled city of the indigenous princes.
Meadows in the foreground are the site of the suburb where the Assyrian merchants created
a karum ot commercial settlement. Here they conducted their business, and lived on friendly
terms with their neighbours in the Anatolian city

transport arranged. Goods exported from Assyria included

cloths and fabrics of widely varying qualities - some of
them very costly — which were exchanged against copper
and other minerals including carnelian, amber and a little
iron, which at that time commanded five times the price
of gold. Silver was used only as a form of currency. The
goods were carried by the then-famous black donkeys of
Cappadocia in caravans. These were led or organized by
men called ‘transport factors’, who took responsibility
for the delivery of goods and payments. They were often
accompanied by official messengers carrying the equiva-
lent of ‘royal mail’. Something is known of the route they
took, which passed by Sinjar to the crossroads city of
Harran, then followed the ‘Royal Road’ of later times,
crossing the Euphrates at Birejik and mounting to the
Plateau by way of Marash and Elbistan. No case is
recorded in the tablets of a caravan being interfered with
on the way.

44
39 Flat-roofed house o f the Assyrian merchants in th e karum at Kiltepe. L ike small ¢ firms > >
each family Cc onducted its business in the ground-floor rooms ke eping its records in cuneiform
rT
script on clay tablets which were afterwards bak ed in tall ovens. They iV red on the floot above
and mad e
much us e of the flat roof on summer evenings. They buried th eir dead beneath the
floors of their house s with cert ain of their possessions. Among these are objects reminiscent
of their native Assyria
40 Reconstruction of the
entrence to the Assyrian
karum at Kiiltepe, a walled
suburb almost one-third of
a mile long. A caravan of
the famous black donkeys
of Cappadocia is entering
the Aarum after checking
in at the Anatolian city
above, and paying dues to
the ruling prince. The build-
ing on the right is perhaps
the headquarters of the
Assyrian mercantile organiz-
ation where caravans unload.
This institution served the
secondary purpose of a
tribunal for the fixing of
prices and the settlement of
disputes. It could arrange
for the deposit of securities
against a loan, or consider
a creditor’s claims against
a debtor’s capacity to pay.
In the picture merchants
are going about their busi-
ness and scribes keeping
their records on clay tablets
which are subsequently
baked. In the remote dis-
tance is the extinct volcano,
Mount Argaeus, which over-
shadows modern Kayseri.
The direction of the old
trade-route from Kayseri
to Ashur in Mesopotamia
is approximately known

4t Cuneiform tablets from Kiultepe, wrapped in

clay envelopes, labelled and bearing the impression
of a cylinder-seal. In the houses of the karum
these were arranged on wooden shelves or stored
in large earthenware vessels, labelled for identi-
fication
aoe
4
ey e
&
 Ket ®

42, 43 Gracefully shaped pottery used at

Kultepe in the time of the Assyrian merchants.
These vessels are usually covered with a cream
or bright red ‘slip’ and highly polished. Before
the excavations at Kultepe they were known
by the term, Alishar ir

The merchants in their suburb seem to have lived on

excellent terms with their Anatolian neighbours, and
there was frequent intermarriage. Every consignment of
I//. 40 goods, before delivery to the karum, had to pass through
the ‘palace’ of the native ruler in the Anatolian city above,
which exercised an option to buy and otherwise levied
taxes. But this was done in an equitable and orderly manner
and the colonists were otherwise left unmolested to prac-
tise their own customs. They seem for instance to have
buried their dead beneath their houses, and these graves
have been most fruitful of works of art, some of them of
7/1. iY Mesopotamian character. The houses themselves on the
other hand followed the old Anatolian tradition; a half-
timber construction on a stone foundation. Certain rooms
on the ground floor were used for storing tablets and the
whole business archive of a merchant family has some-
times been recovered from a single house. When the
tablets were found in place, they were generally neatly

48
44, 45 Houses at Kultepe were built
on a characteristically Anatolian
principle with brick walls on stone
foundation, rfeinforced with timber
beams and vertical posts. Rooms
setving as kitchens (right) had horse-
shoe-shaped hearths to support
cooking-pots, large baking-ovens,
braziers, water-coolers, storage-jars
and a variety of smaller vessels,
among which the brightly painted
“Cappadocian’ ware (above) provided
a touch of colour. The merchants
intermarried with the Anatolian
natives; so their domestic life con-
formed to local customs
46, 47 The potters of Kiultepe
showed an aptitude for model-
ling pottery in fantastic animal
forms. Even vessels used for
more practical purposes were
sometimes adorned with small

clay beasts or birds. The

ritual ‘pouring-vases’ seen here
represent the two current tech-
niques in ornament; (above)
the highly polished mono-
chrome finish and (be/on the

polychrome painted decoration

of “( appad clan vare
48 A steatite mould from
which clay plaques were
probably made representing
a ‘holy family’ of Anatolian
deities

stacked on wooden shelves or stored in earthenware

vessels, and their clay envelopes were often found intact,
bearing the impression of the merchant’s seal. Other
rooms on the ground floor were kitchens or domestic
offices, and here in orderly arrangement were found the
beautiful pottery vessels characteristic of Cappadocia at
this period. The fine polychrome painted vessels of the
‘Alishar IIT type had come into their own with the foun-
dation of the suburb at the turn of the second millennium
and persisted throughout the first colony period (Level
Il). They were, however, afterwards, gradually replaced by
the wonderfully graceful shapes of the later red or cream
burnished wares (‘Alishar I’), together with others, fan-
tastically shaped, with excrescences in the form of birds ile, 425 43
and animals, which seem peculiar to Kiiltepe. For at this
time the Anatolian craftsman’s talent for modelling both Ills. 46, 47
in telief and in the round reached a high degree of
ingenuity. There are religious subjects in which the icono- Ills. 49, 50
graphy of the Plateau people alternates with that of
neighbouring countries linked by trade; a lead figurine of
a bearded Anatolian god with a conical headdress and a

51
 49, 50 At Kiltepe human
figurines are depicted with
less assurance than animals.
Left, an ivory statuette;
an Ishtar figure of the sort
more closely associated with
Syria than Mesopotamia;
and (right) the head of a
theriomorphic vase

sickle in his hand; a steatite mould for a relief, showing a

family group of Anatolian deities, and in contrast to these
a seated figure of a naked goddess with painted pubic
triangle and hands supporting her breasts, which is more
characteristically North Syrian. The conventionalized
forms of animals are also popular and varied; single
animals (a lion, an antelope or a reclining pig), serve as
supports for clay goblets, or themselves serve as ritual
pouring vessels. ‘Rhyton’ drinking cups are decorated
with animals’ heads, bulls, rams, pigs, dogs and rabbits
all being represented.
The life of the arum at Niiltepe is divided into two
periods by some disaster which resulted in the destruction
of the suburb by fire, after which it was rebuilt for the
third time (Level Ib). Since we are now in the realm of
written history, the approximate dates of these two occu-
pations may be correlated with contemporary events in
Assyria, by textual references to the names of kings and
the eponymous magistracies of Ashur. In this way we find
that the Level IL occupation, which was the longer and
mote productive of the two, must have covered the
reigns of Erishum, Sargon I and Puzur-Ashur (¢. 1950-
1850 BC), while Level Ib was contemporary with that of
Shamsi-Adad I (¢. 1825-1750 BC). But a newsystem is now

52
51 Impression of a cylinder-seal from a Kiiltepe tablet. The ‘busy’ and almost overcrowded
design is characteristically Anatolian and among the motifs one recognizes the iconography of
an indigenous religion. Anatolian deities, associated with their appropriate animals and ritual
attributes, may be compated with those in the rock-reliefs at Yazilikaya (I//. 62) dated five
centuries later. This seal also bears a pictographic inscription

in use by which the Middle Bronze Age is divided into

four sub-phases; the first covering the two pre- Assyrian
occupations of the Kiltepe suburb (Levels II and IV),
the second corresponding to Level II and the third lasting
until the destruction of the Level Ib Arum in its turn by
a fire which the colony did not survive. The fourth phase
would then be taken to cover the interval between this
event and the foundation of the Old Hittite Kingdom.
The several occupations of the suburb find parallels in
contemporary building-levels on the main mound, where
the palaces of local rulers have occasionally produced
vitally Ne important
Pp cuneiform texts. The chronology
8) of
these too will presently be discussed.
One aspect of the finds in the karum is of importance,
since it once more emphasizes the existence of an authentic
Anatolian culture persisting through the vicissitudes of
migration and political change. With the introduction of
writing on clay tablets, the cylinder-seal also was adopted
and the native inhabitants began to carve seals of their
own. It is in the designs of these Anatolian seals that we
first see the art and religious concepts of the indigenous VE ya
people illustrated. For instance we see in them the icono-
eraphy of the Anatolian gods, complete with their sacred
furniture and ritual attributes, and we realize that these
 must have existed long before the advent of the Assyrians.
Here already are the processions of deities mounted on
their appropriate animals or on tiers of supporting figures
of lesser rank. From now onwards these and other con-
ventions will reappear as criteria of Anatolian tradition
in the art of the Hittites and elsewhere. Primarily then we
must infer that the Assyrians on their arrival in Anatolia
did not enter a cultural void. They found themselves
among a pattern of well-developed city communities with
a pronounced character and long-established traditions
of their own.
It is during the lifetime of the Assyrian colony at
Kiltepe that philologists have detected the presence in
Central Anatolia of a people now conventionally known
as the Hittites. The circumstances of their arrival and the
process by which they adapted the traditions and resources
of the country to their own requirements as an adolescent
nation have long been a subject of study; but it is one
which can hardly be discussed without some previous
reference to the general linguistic situation in Anatolia at
this time. This has until recently been much confused,
not only by uncertainty regarding the identity of the vary-
ing dialects, but by a bewildering lack of agreement re-
garding the transliteration of the names applied to them.
First then, to dispose of the pre-Indo-European lan-
guages, there is Akkadian (‘Babylonian’), the international
language of the time, and more locally there is the in-
digenous language of Central Anatolia, now known as
Hattian (“Khattian’, ‘Hattic’, ‘Khattic’). Next, the Indo-
European name used for the official language which we
call ‘Hittite’ is a term literally meaning ‘the language of
the town of Nesha’, the latter being identical with the
name Kanesh (Kiltepe). It might therefore, even more
accurately, be called ‘Kaneshite’. Finally, there are two
other Indo-European dialects; Luvian (‘Luwian’) spoken
as we have seen by immigrants into south-western

54
52 Discovered in an ecighteenth-century setting on the main mound at
Kiultepe, a bronze spearhead bearing the inscription — ‘Palace of Anitta,
the King’; he was the first king to make Nesha (Kanesh), his capital

Anatolia late in the Early Bronze Age, written with

the pictographs commonly called ‘Hittite Hieroglyphs’,
and the more obscure ‘Palaic’, spoken probably in the
northern district called Paphlagonia in classical times.
The first reliable testimony to the presence of Hittites
at Kanesh during the period of the Assyrian colony was
the occurrence of many recognizably Hittite names in the
recotds kept by the merchants. For the test, it was
necessary to turn to the Hittites’ own records of their
earliest history, and particularly to the half-legendary
‘Kings of Kussara’ (‘Kushshat’), from whom. their
heredity was supposed originally to be derived. An
ancient document re-copied in the Hittite archives gave
the name of a king called Pithana and of his son Anitta.
No city called Kussara has yet been identified, but, in-
cluded in an impressive list given by the text of cities
which Pithana conquered was the name of Nesha
(Kanesh) which his son, Anitta, had subsequently
adopted as his capital. The authentic association of a king
of this name with the early history of Kanesh has since
been proved by the discovery in a public building on the
mound at Kiiltepe of a bronze spearhead bearing the
simple inscription, ‘Palace of Anitta, the King’, and more
recently by the frequent readings of his name in texts,
both from the Kanesh karum itself and from Alishar.
From the archaeological context in which these texts were
found we are also able to obtain some evidence suggest-
ing an approximate date for the reign of Anitta. The
excavator of Kiiltepe is satisfied that the ‘Palace of Anitta’
was destroyed by the same fite which brought to an end
the second occupation (Level Ib) of the karum, an event
which must be attributed to ¢c. 1750 Bc. Assuming that
the Kings of Kussara were not themselves Hittites, there
is now a tendency in some quarters to equate this or the
previous destruction of the karum with a Hittite “con-
quest’; but before accepting this interpretation, one
 should first consider whether this word is in fact com-
patible with the character of the political ‘take-over’
which the newcomers were in the process of contriving.
Let us, therefore, consider their background.
One convincing argument for the arrival of the Hit-
tites in Anatolia from a north-easterly direction is based
on the burning or desertion during the twentieth century
BC of a line of settlements representing the approaches to
Cappadocia from that direction. This argument has been
extended to account for a westward movement of peoples
at that time, through the northern districts of the pen-
insula, ending with a change of population in the Troad
and the Middle Helladic invasion of Greece. The evidence,
however, from the Halys cities and Cappadocia does not
conform to this picture of an invading army, destroying
the settlements in its path and evicting their inhabitants.
The impression gained is rather one of peaceful infiltra-
tion, leading by degrees to a monopoly of political power
— like that of the Semitic Akkadians in the Sumerian
world of Mesopotamia, or later of the Kassites in Baby-
lonia. From their first appearance among the indigenous
Anatolians, the two populations seem to have mingled
freely, while the more flexible Neshian language gradu-
ally came to replace Hattian. Neither at this nor any later
stage are the symptoms apparent of conscious national-
ism or discrimination. What we do in fact watch is the
assimilation by the Hittites of Anatolian traditions and
practices. We see in their art and architecture, in their
religion and iconography, many elements which are not
of their own creation, but which emphasize their loyalty
to principles adopted before their arrival. If we seek for
qualities and predilections which may specifically be
attributed to their own national heredity, we shall find
them most obviously in their undoubted genius for
military and political organization, in their talent for
administration and their ambitious imperialism.

56
 COLCA PEK. Dae

The Hittites

One of the few cities listed in the conquests of Anitta

whose later identity can be recognized is Hattusas, now
known as Boghazkoy. Its situation in the centre of the
province enclosed by the curve of the Halys river must
have been a strategic one, for an early Hittite king moved
his capital thither from Kussara. Hattusas from then on-
wards became the dynastic seat of the Hittite king-
emperors and focal centre of their civilization. Excava-
tions at Boghazk6y resulted in the discovery of their
official archives and from these the shape of Hittite
history and civilization has since been reconstructed.
The information emerging from the archives would today
provide sufficient material for a history-book, complete
with kings’ names, numbered campaigns and dates of
individual battles or treaties, as well as chapters on such
subjects as social structure, economics, law and religion.
This great volume of information is impossible to sum-
marize usefully, and we shall therefore confine ourselves
to assessing the cultural status of the Hittites among
contemporary nations and their contribution to world
civilization.
No historian would today be deceived by the magni-
loquent phraseology and extravagant claims with which
the Hittite kings themselves adorned their records. Yet

57
 in the same records, minor episodes or incidental cir-
cumstances ate occasionally mentioned with no apparent
intention of impressing posterity, which nevertheless
serve to convince one of the respect engendered by Hit-
tite military prowess and political authority among the
other powers of the-contemporary scene. Even during the
earlier phase of their history — the ‘Old Kingdom’ — there
is the unquestionably authentic episode when Mursilis I,
in a campaign whose success must have exceeded his
wildest expectations, penetrated into Mesopotamia as far
as the walls of Babylon and, finding its defences un-
prepared, entered the city and slew its Amorite king.
Suddenly to find themselves masters in the Mesopotamian
capital, amid the pomp and luxury associated with so
great a centre of world civilization, must have astonished
Mursilis and his simple highlanders almost to the point
of embarrassment for they soon withdrew to a more
familiar climate. Later, in the time of the ‘Empire’, there
is also the attractive picture of Suppiluliumas, the great-
est of Hittite conquerors, receiving the Egyptian envoys
while encamped before Kadesh, and his almost in-
credulous bewilderment on understanding that they
brought with them a request from their queen, the widow
of Tut-ankh-amun, that one of his sons should become
her husband. Such a marriage actually took place after
the famous treaty made between the two kingdoms in
1269 BC, though in this case between a Hittite princess
and an Egyptian Pharaoh.
Boghazkoy
Perhaps the most effective testimony of all to the un-
doubted stature and ability of this Anatolian nation at the
height of its political ascendancy and worldly agerandize-
ment is to be found in a different quarter altogether.
A visit to the actual remains of the Hittite capital at
Boghazkéy, with its ruined palaces and _ temples,

58
 TaD RR ee
hesa

53 A cuneiform tablet from the

royal archives of the Hittites, found
in the citadel (Biiytikkale) of their
capital at HattuSas (Boghazkéy). These
tablets are written in the cuneiform
script of Mesopotamia, but their
language is that referred to by the
Hittites themselves as ‘Kaneshite’,
7.e. of the town of Kanesh (Kiiltepe).
Yet it differs from the indigenous
‘Hattian’ of pre-Hittite Anatolia and
also from other Indo-European dia-
lects such as the Luvian of the
‘Hittite’ hieroglyphs

monumental sculptures and the four-mile circuit of its

ponderously constructed walls cannot fail to leave one
with the conviction that this city has been the cradle and
home of a great imperial people.
The city spreads itself out on either side of a deep
rocky gorge and looks northwards over a wide cultivated
valley. The older part of the town is a mere four hundred
yards long, mounting up to a high citadel. Here was the
seat of government and in long store-rooms at some time
destroyed by fire, the thousands of tablets composing the UIT;
royal archive were brought to light. In ‘Imperial’ times
the old city became inadequate and a vast extension was
planned. Perhaps in the time of Suppiluliumas, a tre-
mendous crescent of fortifications was flung up over the
hillside to the south, making an enclosure which must
have a total area of well over three hundred acres. Here
the walls themselves present a prodigious feat of engineer-
ing for so early a period (fourteenth century Bc). Their
foundations are raised to a consistent level by a great
rampart of earth, partly faced with a sloping wall of

59
 54 A relief sculpture
from the door-jamb of
the: Kune s) (Gate: at
Boghazkéy, now in the
Ankara Museum. It de-
picts a warrior wearing
the Hittite ‘kilt’ and
conical helmet with ear-
flaps
dressed stone. Above this the sub-structure of the double
wall which stands about thirty feet high is built of enor-
mous stones, not laid in regular courses but meticulously
joined. The brick structure above this has of course dis-
appeared. There are chambered towers at short intervals,
Ty. je and in certain places outer ‘apron’ walls to prevent a
direct attack. A postern or sally-port is created at one
point by a stone vaulted tunnel passing beneath the
rampart. There are five main gates with flanking towers,
three of which have been named from the sculptures
Ills. 5 5-57 which adorn them — ‘Sphinx’, ‘Lion’ and ‘King’s Gate’.
Four buildings in the extended town have been identi-
fied as temples. One of them is an enormous limestone
building with a colonnade facing on to a wide central
court, and stands in a sacred enclosure or temenos en-
closing an immense number of store-chambers and other
subsidiary accommodation. In such buildings the actual
sanctuary, which contained a cult-statue, is built of granite.
It projects a little beyond the main facade in order to
obtain lateral lighting for the statue.

60
 The cult-figures themselves were missing from these
temples, and elsewhere very few examples were found by
the excavators of carving or modelling, so that our know-
ledge of Hittite art of this period is for the most part
derived from two other sources, namely the portal
sculptures adorning the city gates and from rock-reliefs Ills. 4-56
in the neighbouring shrine at Yazilikaya. The most
famous of the former is the ‘warrior’ from the King’s Oi ay |
Gate, now in the Ankara Museum. The figure is curiously
impressive, though its importance consists more in the
archaeological evidence which it presents of dress,
weapons etc., than in actual artistic merit. The lion and
sphinx figures too are primitive work and the interest of
the latter lies mainly in the fact that the dual sculptures
anticipate such features in Assyrian buildings by many
centuries (and those at Persepolis by a thousand years).
The German excavations at Hattusas are continued
annually during the summer season, more recently con-
centrated mainly on the high acropolis of the old city,
Biiytikkale. Their object here has been the architectural
analysis of the building remains; palaces, temples and
storage-buildings with their arrangement of terraces and
fortifications. Repeated rebuildings have retained the
Anatolian tradition of binding together stone and mud
brick in a framework of timber. Here too, the pottery
and other objects seem hardly to have departed from
precedents set by the inhabitants of Kanesh during the
Assytian colony period. In ceramics, there is still a pre-
ference for red polished surfaces with polychrome
painted and inlaid details. A recent and rather dramatic
find illustrating this technique was a pair of theritomorphic
vases almost three feet high; bull-shaped libation vessels,
whose form and purpose seems hardly to have changed
in five hundred years. The only art-form which at the
Hittite capital still seems conspicuously absent, though
represented on a very small scale at Kiiltepe,is sculpture

61
 55, 56 Portal-figure of a lion adorning a gateway
to the outer city at BoghazkGy. Here one sees
the first appearance of an architectural convention,
which culminated five centuries later in the
‘lamassu’ figures — winged bulls and _ lions
guarding the entries to Assyrian palaces. Sphinxes,
decorating another gate at Boghazkdy are
already designed as ‘double-aspect’ figures,
their bodies extending into the reveal of the
doorway

in the round. And this is perhaps due to a chance of

survival since the much damaged remains of a colossal
Hittite statue have now been found in an appropriate
level at Alaca Hiiyiik.
Yazilikaya and Hittite Religion
By far the most interesting sculptures both from an
artistic and a religious point of view, are the reliefs at
Yazilikaya. This beautiful shrine is situated outside the
Tl. 61 city at a point where a spring of fresh water must once
have discharged into a small valley shaded by trees. Deep
clefts in the limestone, open to the sky and carpeted with
grass and flowers, make a setting for the cult and the
reliefs are carved on the vertical sides of two main re-
cesses or ‘chambers’. Outside them can be seen the ruins
Ills. 59, 60 of an elaborately constructed entrance-gate, or propylon,
through which they were approached. The outer cham-
ber, which has traces of an altar-platform and was perhaps
used for ceremonies such as the ratification of treaties, is
decorated with a pageant of deities, some standing on

62
57, 58 Walls and gateways of the
outer town at BoghazkG6y. The
gates themselves (r7ght) and their
sculptures (above) form patt of a
powerful substructure of stone,
above which the walls were built
in sun-dried brick. In the re-
construction below one sees the
outer ‘apron-wall’ which afforded
extra protection
 59, 60 Plan of the famous
rock-sanctuary of the Hit-
tites at Yazilikaya (/eft) and
a reconstruction (right) of the
religious buildings through
which it was approached.
The path along which the
procession is passing winds
e oe an AG upwards from a one-time
metres eee
EE sacred spring

TH. 62 their appropriate cult-animal or identified by a group of

hieroglyphs. These figures are carved with no more than
average proficiency ; Bae those in the inner sanctuary are
animated and infused with a religious emotion which
craftsmanship alone could not have made articulate. The
Ills, 64, 65 figure of a young king (identified as Tudhaliyas IV), in
the protective embrace of a god is hardly less impressive
Ul. 67 than the symbolism of a huge dagger which appears
thrust into the rock before him.
The Hittites were a practical, intellectually unpreten-
tious people, devoid of the finer graces which adorned
some other Near Eastern countries in their time. But they
were born soldiers with great men to lead them and they
wete governed in peacetime by statesmen with a well-
developed imperial policy. Also, religion seems to have
played an important part in the conduct of their lives,
and their beliefs were based on some curious concepts.
One of the most remarkable scenes in the history of
ceremonial ritual must have been enacted during their
periodical festivals, when the priests and celebrants,

64
surrounded by helmeted guards and a throng of bullet-
headed townsmen, issued from the austerely monumental
public buildings of Hattusas and converged on the cause-
ways leading up the adjoining valley to their mysterious Ill. 60
shrine. Life in their fortified mountain-gorge had made
them intuitively conscious of a mystery inherent in the
natural rocks which surrounded them; and it was per-
haps among the clefts and caverns of Yazilikaya that their
sluggish emotions responded most easily to ritual
stimulation.
Perhaps we have here for the first time contrived to lay
a finger on one metaphysical aspect of the Hittites which
served to distinguish them from their Hattic predecessors.
If so, we should go further and seek for any cultural or
political innovations, foreign to Anatolia, for which they
wete responsible and which enabled them to lay the
imprint of Hittite nationality upon the history of the
period.
If we start then, for instance with the status of king-
ship, we shall find little to distinguish Hittite royalty from

65
 61-63 The rock-cut sanctu-
ary of the Hittites now
known as Yazilikaya, a short
distance outside the city-
walls of MHattuSas. It is
seen above from outside,
and below are some of the
relief sculptures of gods
and goddesses wet which
it is ornamented. The central
scene shows the MHurrian
W eather-g¢ »d, Teshub, stand-
ing upon images which
represent deified mountains.

Facing him is his consort

Hepatu. and her son
Sarumma. Beneath, the pro-
cession of minor deities is

prolonged around the side

of the cave. They include

figures from the MHurrian

as well as the old Hattian
pantheon and some are the

patron gods of Hittite cities

\ ee =
W a\: - i]

IF] i

| me |
a
\ i || | | |
Vy

:
a Hs S|
et | N !
bo i | )
\ i

vie" Lo

STN ae
Ne ay ANE
\\ ) \> \
Me
iNif
hs Go
rATY
afF
EL Pic iP 3
4
cd id ak
64, 65 Two rock-reliefs from the
inner chambers of the tock
sanctuary at Yazilikaya. Right,
above, on the east wall of chamber
B, King Tudhaliyas IV is seen
in the embrace of the young god.
The king is simply dressed,
wearing a round skull-cap and
carrying the curved pastoral staff:
above his head appears his own
monogram in hieroglyphs beneath
a winged sun-disc. The god
weats a short tunic; his station is
indicated by the tall conical horned
headdress decorated with divided
ellipses. On the east wall of
chamber A this same king is once
more depicted in relief (be/ow). His
mother, Puduhepa, wife of Hat-
tusili III, was a Hurrian princess
from Kizzuwatna, and during her
lifetime the Hittite state cult was
reorganized according to the Hur-
rian rite. This explains why the
gods and goddesses depicted in
the Yazilikaya sculptures all bear
Hurrian names in hieroglyphic
script
 Rags Sy” ge
Sg,
oi atte

that of any oper contemporary kingdom. Tt difesed, at

least from Egypt, in that the king was not in his lifetime
deified, though this occasionally happened after his death.
For the rest, his duty was to ensure the welfare of the
state, to wage war and under certain circumstances to act
as high priest. In the attendant political hierarchy, how-
ever, we are able to observe one feature which has
aroused considerable interest simply because it does
appear to be the expression of an exclusively Hittite
political conception. This is the so-called pank&ush which,
being literally interpreted as ‘the whole community’, has
been taken to imply some sort of national assembly. But
on closer examination, where privilege is concerned, one
finds that a very large part of the ordinary population are
excluded from this community. One is therefore im-
mediately led to suspect the presence of an exclusive
ruling caste; and, knowing the original role of the Hittites
as Indo-European intruders among the indigenous
Anatolians, to recognize in the pankush the mechanism
of racial domination. Any criticism, by modern standards,
of Hittite political practice which this may imply, 1
modified by the available evidence that this form of dis-
crimination was short-lived. The fact that, during the
final two hundred years of Hittite rule, no mention of
the pankush appears in the texts, can hardly be a co-
incidence. Again a more sympathetic aspect of Hittite
political idiosynctasy is suggested by their liberal pre-
ference for diplomacy as an ‘alternative to military action,
and their humane treatment of their enemies in the event

68
66,67 Two more relief sculptures
from chamber B at Yazilikaya.
On the east wall (right) are seen
the relief of Tudhaliyas IV in
the embrace of his god and near
it, in the foreground, a figure
which has come to be known as
the ‘Dirk God’; a _ colossal
sword appears to be thrust into
the rock, its hilt decorated with
the figures of lions and termi-
nating in the head of a god
wearing a horned headdress.
The symbolism of this device
is unexplained but its appearance
most impressive. Opposite this,
on the west wall (eff), is a
procession of twelve identical
gods moving in single tle

of military victory. As an example of the former, one

might cite their predilection for arranging royal marriages,
while the latter is confirmed by the total absence in their
records of any reference to punitive brutality or deterrent
‘frichtfulness’ such as that in which the Assyrians later
specialized. The superior social status of women was
another feature of the Hittite régime which appears to
suggest liberality of outlook.
In the end, however, one comes to the conclusion that
it is in the art of the Hittites, less in its subject matter
than its style and in the conventions which dictate its
imagery, that one recognizes the criteria and hallmark of
their collective individuality. The rigid and distinctive
conventions of Hittite imagery seem to have crystallized
into a canonical formula during the early decades of the
Empire in the late fifteenth century and to have been
retained almost without variation till the régime ended.

69
 68 Guarding the gate-
way to the Hittite city
at Alaca Hiyiik, portal
figures in the form of
sphinxes, carved partly
in the round. Judging
from the relief sculptures
with which the adjoining
walls are adorned, this
whole group must repre-
sent some of the earliest
examples of architectural
sculpture in imperial
Hittite times

The iconography and allusive symbolism of old Anatolian

religious beliefs and rituals may, as we have said, have
been scrupulously preserved and they may have been sup-
plemented by accretions from alien sources such as the
Hurrians with whom the Hittites were now perpetually
in contact; but their representation, whether modelled in
clay, cast in metal or sculptured in stone, now conformed
to a code of prescribed imagery which stamped it as
authentically Hittite.
The inventory of surviving antiquities and monuments
on which this argument is based is not, in fact, very
voluminous and some of the most outstanding examples
have already been enumerated. First and foremost of
course, at HattuSas itself, are the reliefs in the rock shrine
of Yazilikaya and the portal sculptures at the gates of the
extended city which date from the Empire period. But
there are other examples and categories of Hittite art
which have not yet been mentioned. There is a surviving
gateway in the wall of the Empire-period city at Alaca

70
69 Unconventional subjects are represented among the wall reliefs at Alaca Hityiik; wild
animals, hunted or in conflict, drawn with a freedom and in a style not normally associated
with Hittite art

Hutiytk where the Early Bronze Age tombs were found;

and here, in association with the much-weathered portal
figures in the form of sphinxes and lions, are orthostats, Il. 68
which ate carved in relief, sometimes with secular sub-
jects. This must be one of the earliest examples yet known
of this architectural device, since for the most part they
are sculptured on the actual blocks of masonry rather
than on upright slabs as the name ‘orthostat’ implies. In
any case they constitute a distinctive group both in style
and subject-matter. Apart from the more conventional
scenes of religious worship, they include figures of ant-
mals — lion, stag, bull and boar — hunted or in conflict, as Ill. 69
well as a group of performing jugglers. They are carved,
on basalt in very flat relief, the figures only slightly
modelled and depending on the fine calligraphic outlines
of the stylized animal forms.
In a rather different category are the rock-reliefs and
other monuments of the period, scattered fairly widely
over central and south-western Anatolia. Some of them,

71
 which fall within the ‘home-counties’ of the Hittite king-
dom, are undoubtedly the work of the Hittites themselves
and in certain cases are associated by hieroglyphic in-
scriptions with the names of actual kings. This group
includes the relief of King Muwattali on its rock over-
looking the river at Sirkeli, near Adana in the Hittite
province of Kizzuvatna; the two great rock-cut figures at
Ii. 70 Gavurkalesi, near Ankara, where there is also a masonry-
built Hittite tomb; and a much-weathered religious scene
on a tock at Fraktin, near Kayseri. There are others
which, rather disconcertingly, fall outside the geo-
eraphical area over which the Hittite kings had any, or
at all permanent political control. They include the royal
reliefs at Karabel, near Izmir, and the ‘Mother of the
Gods’ on Mount Sipylos, near Manisa, as well as the
ee} masonry-built shrine at Eflatun Pinar, beside Lake
Beysehir and the stone statue found near by at Fasillar,
about which we shall have mote to say. The Karabel
relief indeed has an inscription in ‘Hittite’ hieroglyphs,
but these do not give the names of known Hittite kings,
and, as has been mentioned elsewhere, these hieroglyphs
were in fact a vehicle for the Luvian dialect — the language
spoken in the kingdom of Assuwa, within whose terri-
tory the monument lies. Where, therefore, scholars have
in the past tended to explain these sculptures as victory
monuments commemorating Hittite conquests, their
general proximity to some form of water-supply has more
recently led them to be associated with a ‘spring-cult’ or
some other religious institution. Furthermore, since a
distinction can be drawn between this very ancient Ana-
tolian concept of ‘water-from-the-earth’, on the one hand,
and on the other, that of ‘water-from-the-sky’, associated
with the Indo-European mountain- and weather-gods,
this might again suggest pre-Hittite inspiration for the
Assuwan monuments. In this case, however, it has to
be admitted that, in the details of these sculptures, the

72
7o Rock relief carved beneath a Hittite fortress at Gavurkalesi between Ankara and Hymana
in central Anatolia.Two gods appear whose horned headdresses show them to be ofdifferent
rank

unmistakable criteria of Hittite imagery would be difficult

to explain.
Considering the extent and prolongation of excavations
at the site of the Hittite capital and elsewhere, the repre-
sentation of small-scale figurative art in materials such as
metal, stone or ivory is deplotably. and indeed inexplic-
ably scanty. Here we can do hardly more than mention
a male statuette in bronze from Boghazkéy and a tiny
gold figure of the same sort in the British Museum. There
remains the category of engraved seals, few of which have
been actually found but many of which ate known from
their impressions on clay. In this case, cylinder-seals of the
Mesopotamian type ate extremely rare. The Hittites used
stamp-seals, usually conical affairs with a flat base sut- Ul. 71
mounted by a ting or perforated boss for purposes of
suspension. The seal itself could be cylindrical or even
square, in which case subsidiary designs could also be

73
71 Seal-impression of a Hittite gold ring, showing a
god standing upon an appropriate animal between
two lions —

72 Miniature figure in gold of a

Hittite king, now in the British
Museum

carved on the sides. The main design consisted of a

central field containing a pattern of hieroglyphs and sym-
bols from a repertoire identical with that to be found in
the sculptured reliefs, and this was surrounded by a
border of guilloche or other ornament and sometimes a
cuneiform inscription. Royal seals incorporated the king’s
‘monogram’ again as in the reliefs.
We should now perhaps consider in detail the conven-
tions — both graphic and formal — which as we have said
constitute the recognizable criteria of Hittite imagery, in
all these monuments. And it should be said at once that
these can be conveniently and reliably identified from
whatever geographical provenance a Hittite work of art
may be derived. To illustrate this, one need only cite the
Ill. 76 case of a bronze statuette from Latakiya in the Louvre or
Ti 27 the beautiful gold cloisonné inlays from a fourteenth-
century tomb at Carchemish. By contrast one might point
Ui, FS to a male figurine from Tokat in the Hittite homeland, to
which, dating as it does from the sixteenth century Bc, the
imperial conventions have not yet been applied.

74
73, 74 The masonry-built
shrine erected over a spring
at Eflatun Pinar near Bcyse-
hir (above), as it appears
today, bearing much
weathered reliefs, probably
representing the Hittite pan-
theon. Recently associated
with this monument is a
giant statue of a _ god,
removed from its original
setting and found at Fassilar,
thirty miles away (see re-
construction righ?)
75, 76 Rare examples of Hittite figurative art in metal. Leff, a bronze figurine of a god from
Tokat, dating from the sixteenth century Bc and not yet fully adapted to Hittite conventions.
Right, a similar statuette from Latakiya, now in the Louvre, which conforms more closely to
the precepts of Hittite art

76
77 Component pieces from some large art-work, found in a fourteenth-century tomb at Carche-
mish. This form of inlay, called ‘clo/sonné’, consists of small compartments separated by ribbons
of gold and filled with vitreous enamel. Two of the figures are kings, carrying the curved
pastoral staff

For an examination, then, of the conventions them-

TH. 62
selves, the Yazilikaya reliefs might prove a convenient
point of departure. Here we see, though in minority
representation, the appearance of ordinary mortals; the
male with a beard but no moustache, a single ear-ring
and hair either short or in a pigtail. Mortal or god, the
male wears a belted tunic ending above the knee and
sometimes a longer cloak over it. Whatever weapons or
insignia are carried he holds one arm extended in front
of him and the other bent at the elbow against his chest.
Anatolian boots with upturned toes are also the rule.
Women hold both arms extended, but one is bent up-
wards in a beckoning gesture. Both gods and goddesses
of superior grade stand upon appropriate animals or on Il. 62
supporting minor deities. This is an age-old formula in
Anatolia which we have seen in the cylinder-seals of
Kiiltepe and which in fact has its roots in the Chalcolithic
ot Neolithic concepts of Hacilar and Catal Hiiyik. More
significant are, for instance, their headdresses, which are
distinctively Hittite. Gods wear the conical fluted cap Ill. 66
ornamented with horns, which vary in number and Vis oes
position according to their status. That of the supreme
cod only is also decorated with the divided ellipses which
are divine ideograms. All carry weapons or implements

77
 which are their special attributes. Goddesses normally
wear a cylindrical ‘polos’ or a flattened conical cap; but
those at Yazilikaya have a ‘mural crown’ which is also
worn by the Earth Mother of the Sipylos monument.
They too wear belted tunic and skirt, pleated robes of
this sort being characteristic. By contrast to the gods,
Te 65 kings wear a simple round skull-cap, horns being a sym-
bol ‘only of posthumous deification, and carry the curved
pastoral staff, now identified with the Hittite word
kalmush. Their figures ate usually distinguished by one or
more winged sun-discs, beneath which their ‘monograms’
appear in hieroglyphs.
The chief divinity of the Hittites, the Weather-God,
was held in equal respect by the Indo-European and the
autochthonous sections of the population. He was per-
haps to be identified with Adad, the Mesopotamian god
of thunder, by whose ideogram his name is usually rep-
resented in the texts. The Hurrians called him Teshub.
His proper attribute is the bull, mounted upon which he
appears in so many Hittite sculptures, and indeed re-
appears in Roman mythology under the name of Jupiter
Dolichenus. As for the great mother-goddess of Anatolian
antiquity whom the Greeks know as Cybele, she was
adopted by the Hittites from the old Hattic pantheon, but
her antecedents have now been traced by archaeology in
the Stone Age. The Hittites worshipped her as the Sun
Goddess of Arinna, but in the mixed iconography of
Yazilikaya she seems to be merged with the Hurrian god-
dess Hepat into a single composite deity. There were
minor gods and coddesses, many of whom can be recog-
nized at Y azilikaya, including the group of twelve, twice
represented there, whose names are not recorded in the
texts.
It is perhaps the two central figures of the Hittite pan-
theon who are represented in the sculptured relief at
Li, 73 Eflatun Pinar to which we have already referred. If so,

78
an interesting corollary is to be inferred from a recent
attempt to reconstruct its appearance. Here undoubtedly
we are dealing with a spring-cult, for the masonry-built
altar (or platform as it should perhaps be called), faces the
source of a stream running into Beysehir Lake. Just
recognizable on the face of the stone, beneath winged
sun--discs are figures including a god and seated goddess:
but there are also scattered fragments of some sort of
upper structure, including apparently one which can be
identified as part of a stone lion or leopard. These frag-
ments have recently been reconsidered in conjunction
with the remains of another monument also of trachyte
stone, the giant statue lying on a hillside at Fassilar,
thirty miles away. The Fassilar statue, almost unique as
an example of Hittite sculpture in the round, lies among
the ruins of a small classical city to which it seems likely
to have been carried as a trophy. Roughly sculptured and
thought by some to be unfinished, it takes the shape of a
god with appropriate head-dress and one arm upraised,
and it is supported by the engaged figures of two lions
also carved partly in the round. One scholar has now
suggested that this statue and the pedestal at Eflatun
might in fact be parts of the same monument. By the
process of mounting the one on top of the other (a pro- Ill. 74
cess which might almost be compared to superimposing
the Albert Memoual on the Albert Hall), he has contrived
the most impressive not to say convincing reconstruction,
in which the god and seated goddess of the relief are
repeated by more monumental figures above, each with
its supporting beasts.
Having mentioned Assuwa, let us now take a further
look at the other neighbouring states. A good deal is
known from the Boghazkéy records about neighbouring
states, against which the Hittite kings waged war, or with
whom they had more peaceful connections; and on the
map their location, inferred from the textual evidence, is

719
 shown in such a way as to be comparable with the rather
less equivocal division of the country into cultural pro-
vinces delimited by archaeological research. Some con-
troversy still persists in regard to the placing of Ahhiyawa,
because this name was applied by the Hittites to a people
who in the past have often been identified with the Ach-
aeans of Homeric legend. But archaeologists, finding that
the Ahhiyawa homeland can be located on the Anatolian
mainland without violating any logical inference from
the texts, have recently begun to favour a new theory
regarding this north-western province. It may, they con-
sider, have been from here that the first true Greeks
crossed the Aegean to colonize the European mainland
at the beginning of the second millennium pc. According
to this theory, the Ahhiyawans were themselves recent
arttivals, having appeared from the west simultaneously
with he attival of the Hittites from the east. By this
process of reasoning the Ahhiyawans would have been
a proto-Greek people who remained on the Anatolian
mainland during the centuries in which their own
colonists were creating the Mycenaean commune in the
Aegean. This would explain the close ties between the
Mycenaean merchants and the Trojans of the sixth settle-
ment — a facility not enjoyed by the Assuwans of the
central Aegean coast who were an Anatolian people and
perhaps distrustful of the Greeks.
At this point we should perhaps remind ourselves that,
by the time the Achaean Greeks organized the expedition
against the city of Troy described by Homer, the events
mentioned in the Hittite records were already becoming
historical. The best known date, computed by the Greek
chronologists of later times, for the fall of Troy (and one
which archacologists find most easy to accept), is 1192
BC. By that time, if any reliance is to be placed on Homer’s
list of Priam’s allies, the political scene in the Troad and
its hinterland was in the process of fairly rapid change.

80
The area we have tentatively identified as the Late
Bronze Age state of Ahhiyawa could hardly have te-
mained unaffected by the eastward migrations across the
straits, which were now beginning to take place at regular
intervals. Nevertheless, the survival of an Abhiyawan
element in the population of Priam’s Troy would explain
the cultural afhnity which Homer envisages between the
Trojans and the Greeks. It is a pity that no light was
thrown on this subject by the excavations of the Homeric
settlement at Troy itself (settlement VIIA), whose re-
mains had been largely destroyed by later foundations.
Turning to Arzawa, a state with which the Hittite
kings seem to have been continually at war without
effecting any permanent conquest, there is evidence from
the excavations at Beycesultan to show that the city there
partially excavated may, during the Middle Bronze Age,
have had the dignity of a state-capital. Amongst other
buildings dating from this period (1900-1750 BC), a
temarkably large palace was brought to light, planned in
a way which partly resembled those of Minoan Crete and
elaborately constructed of brick and timber on a stone
foundation. Its unusual amenities included a system of Ill. 78
sub-pavement passages, presumably for circulating hot
air in the winter; and though the destruction of the build-
ing by fire after looting, perhaps during one of the early
Hittite wars, has destroyed much other valuable evidence,
one gains the impression that the Arzawans were a people
of wealth and dignity. There was also a walled enclosure
full of large administrative buildings of a sort which
would have justified the expectation of written archives.
The fact that no inscribed material was found, though
there is reason to believe that Arzawa at this time fell
within the area inhabited by an Indo-European people,
speaking and writing the Luvian dialect, has led to some
speculation regarding the use of writing materials other
than clay tablets, which might have perished.

81
 78, 79 Buildings exposed by exca-
vations in an Arzawan city at
Beycesultan on the Upper Meander.
Left, a nineteenth-century palace
of ‘half-timber’ construction, with
its principal reception rooms on an
upper storey like the Minoan
palaces of Crete. Be/ow are later
buildings; the palace compound
of a minor prince of the Late
Bronze Age. Some of the buildings
are of the ‘megaron’ type

= m

(o] ? 10
metres
80 In a Late Bronze Age shrine at
Beycesultan, a ‘horned altar’ of
terracotta with a ritual hearth beside
it and votive vessels in the foreground.
As in the Early Bronze Age levels at
this site, here also the shrines are
arranged in pairs, perhaps having a
dual dedication to male and female
deities

In the Late Bronze Age, the city at Beycesultan lost its

importance and became the seat of a small feudal prince.
His palace compound which was partly excavated con-
tained residences in the form of ‘megara’ and elaborate
stabling accommodation for horses. Elsewhere a religious 17,79
shrine with a ‘horned altar’ once more recalled Minoan
symbolism.
Other states appearing on the map, apart from the so-
called Upper and Lower Lands which fall both historic-
ally and archaeologically within the sphere of direct
Hittite influence, include Kizzuvatna, over which the
Hittite kings usually maintained a fairly tight control
since it covered the lines of communication for campaigns
in Syria. At the end of the Early Bronze Age a people
called Hurri, coming from the neighbourhood of Lake
Urmia, had established themselves as a ruling class in this
area, and it was the Hurrian wife of King Tudhaliyas IV
who had been responsible for introducing an alien element
into the pantheon depicted in the reliefs at Yazilikaya. An
offshoot from Hurrian stock had also at this time created
the important state of Mitanni, whose territory extended
into northern Assyria. Apart from these, the most active
though historically obscure people were the barbaric
Kaskaeans of Pontus and Paphlagonia, who seemed per-
petually to be creating a ‘second front’ in the Hittite wars.

83
CHAPTER FOUR

The Neo-Hittite States

The Hittite Empire came to an end almost simultaneously

with the fall of Troy and the beginning of the Iron Age.
In the opening years of the first millennium Bc, Phrygians
from Thrace swept the country as far as the north-western
slopes of Taurus and destroyed the imperial strongholds
on the Halys.
The political history of the Hittite nation did not end
with the destruction of Hattusas and the expulsion of its
people from their homeland in Anatolia. Driven south-
ward from the cities and pasturelands of the plateau, they
descended through Anti-Taurus into the valley of the
upper Euphrates and pressed on further into the plains
of north Syria. These were familiar lands to them; for
their rulers had long been vassals of the Hittite kings and
the cities had paid tribute to the imperial treasury. Several
national elements now composed their population:
Aramaeans from the tribal lands in the south, families of
Hurrians and expatriate Hittites, once concerned with
imperial administration and trade. These latter now
gained political ascendancy and the cities, particularly the
old provincial capitals such as Carchemish and Sinjerli,
soon resumed the semblance of Hittite principalities,
though the non-Hittite element in their internal composi-
tion preserved for each its individual and independent

84
character. So the imperial régime was succeeded in the
Early Iron Age by a strange historical aftermath, during
which the Hittite world became no more than a con-
stellation of small and disunited city-states, striving by
miscellaneous alliances to maintain their independence on
the periphery of the Assyrian Empire.
Curiously enough this period of five centuries, during
which the cities in fact often became vassals of the As-
syrians or were subjected to non-Hittite rule when the
Aramaean element in their population got the upper hand,
has bequeathed to us a far greater heritage of archaeo-
logical remains than the imperial régime which preceded
it. The whole accumulation from this source creates a
curious picture of a hybrid civilization, spreading over a
wide geographical area, which does not conform to any
conventionally defined province in later times. The lin-
guistic diversity of the inscriptions and the complex
evidence of foreign influence on sculptural style, provide
a clue to the political insecurity and unstable fortunes of
the states themselves.

Hittite Picture-Writing
The period is sometimes known as ‘Neo-Hittite’ or “Syro-
Hittite’; and the cities not already mentioned include
Marash, Sakcagézii and, on the fringe of the plateau,
Malatya. Some of them have been partially excavated and
their public buildings have yielded, in addition to statues,
large quantities of stone slabs, sculptured in relief in a
style showing much foreign influence. The content of
the pictures and that of rock reliefs dating from this
period, like the one at Ivriz, is often supplemented by
inscriptions in a form of pictographic writing which the
Hittites had inherited from an earlier stage in their cul-
tural history. It was in fact the original vehicle for one of
the Indo-European dialects from which the Hittite lan-
guage was composed, but when these excavations took

85
81, 82 At Ivriz, on the northern
side of the Taurus range, a
rock-telief is carved where a
river gushes out of the hillside
to irrigate a fertile oasis of
fruit and vegetable gardens.
He rc depicte d is a local ruler of

the late eighth century Bc

a contemporary of Tig
pileser III, paying homage to a
cod of fertility. The style of the
carving shows Hittite, Assyrian
and Aramaean influence
83 Ruined gateway of a Neo-Hittite prince’s country palace overlooking the Ceyhan valley and
the plain of Cilicia at Karatepe

place it had not been deciphered. But inscriptions in

Aramaic and Phoenician do also occasionally occur
alongside the hieroglyphs, and it was the discovery of a
bi-lingual text of this sort in 1947 which eventually made
the decipherment of the pictographs possible. The dis-
covery was made at a place called Karatepe on the banks
of the Ceyhan river, where it breaks down through a
rocky valley into the plain of Cilicia. An eighth-century IH. 83
princeling, describing himself as a vassal of the king of
Adana, had here built himself a fortified country palace
with formally designed gateways which, in the fashion of
the time, he ornamented with sculptured reliefs. The Ils. 85, 86
sculptures (whose preservation 7” situ the Turkish govern-
ment has contrived) show a conspicuously low standard
of workmanship and a most perplexing confusion of
styles; but there is a long and informative inscription
repeated on either side of the main entrances, first in

87
 84 An example of
‘Hittite hieroglyphic’
writing, whose under-
standing has been much
facilitated by the dis-
covery at Karatepe of a
bi-lingual inscription
with the hieroglyphic
text repeated in Phoeni-
cian. These pictographs
were originally the
vehicle for an Indo-
European dialect
known as ‘Luvian’

Hittite hieroglyphs, and then in Phoenician. Since the

Phoenician script is already well understood, the ‘crib’
which is thus conveniently provided to the hieroglyphs
has been welcomed, like the Rosetta Stone or the Behistun
inscriptions in an earlier generation, as a linguistic key
which may give access to a whole new literature. But one
must hasten to add that this hope has not yet altogether
been fulfilled. It often takes a very long time for philo-
logists to decipher a script, even after ail the necessary
evidence has been collected. Meanwhile, our knowledge
of Syro-Hittite history continues to depend for the most
part on the dim reflection of events and personalities
which is to be found in the Assyrian annals.

Art and Architecture

Let us now give some attention to the diverse and com-
plicated subject of stylistic developments and influences
in the art of the Hittite “diaspora’. In doing so we shall
find our view of the material available limited almost

88
85, 86 Relief sculptures from the
palace gates at Karatepe. Here again
the Assyro-Atamaean influence is
more prominent than the Hittite,
and even Egyptian motifs are occa-
sionally recognizable. The orthostat
slabs are often badly matched both
in size and style. In the banqueting
scene (above), the musicians on the
left have hair and beards dressed
in the Assyrian manner, while the
servants attending a feast on the right
wear typically Aramaean caps. These
reliefs represent a crude and rather
hybrid form of art and were probably
executed by craftsmen of several
different nationalities

SEES
RH
eB

*
 \ cats4 w
sok re
eee oe
cat S4
ee
THE TEMPLE SS Ge o-
an UPPER TERRACE WALL 6 Sew e® at
A ~ “wh —_— wh xs
\ 3 ye neta a w
ah Baeety Sa Zz
a _—_ o
THE KING'S GATE ; :
THE HERALD'S WALL es

2 t HILANI
ROYAL BUTTRESS

PROCESSIONAL
ENTRY fo) 50 M

87, 88 Plan (above) of the principal public buildings of the Neo-Hittite period, excavated at
Carchemish on the Euphrates. A processional entry on the south-west side leads to an irregular-
shaped piazza, and beyond a wide stairway leads up to the high citadel above (not excavated).
From the piazza, a street also leads down eastward to a gateway in the quay-wall, perhaps the
oldest building of all. The wealth of the sculptures recovered from Carchemish are mainly
otthostats which decorated the walls of the piazza inside the processional entry. Right, the
appearance of a river-side fortress such as Carchemish is suggested by a scene depicted on one
of the famous bronze gates of Shalmaneser III discovered at Balawat near Nimrud

exclusively to sculpture in stone: nor will our study be

much concerned with its aesthetic appraisal, since neither
the details of its design nor its overall efficacy as an archi-
tectural ornament can be said to invite comparison with
the higher forms of contemporary art in the Near East.
This being so, we shall also have again to remind our-
selves that, up to the second decade of the present cen-
tury, it was by this material alone that the cultural status
of the Hittite nation could be judged. First, then, to con-
sider the excavated cities and other sources from which
Neo-Hittite antiquities are derived, one should start with
the two which have been most thoroughly explored,
namely Carchemish and Sinjerli.
I. 88 The site of Carchemish is fitted neatly into a bend of
the Euphrates at a point which at present coincides with
the Turco-Syrian frontier. The fortified city of Hittite
times is an Oval extension in a south-westerly direction of
the citadel on its ancient mound, and there is a further
extension in the form of a walled outer city. Any Hittite

90
buildings which existed on the citadel itself have been
made inaccessible by later occupations; so the British
excavations were mainly concerned with those surround-
ing an open piazza at the approach to the old mound on
the south side. The entrance to the piazza from the city TH, 87
in the south was through the ‘King’s Gate’, inside which,
on the right-hand wall, was a group of sculptures which
included something called the ‘Royal Buttress’. At right- I/. 90
angles to this and running eastwards was another range
of slabs known as the ‘Herald’s Wall’, after which one
turned left to face a gateway and stair leading to the
mound and saw on one’s left a third group called the
‘Long Wall of Sculptures’. Finally a long enclosed street TH. oT
led down eastwards to the Water Gate on the river quay
and here were some of the oldest sculptures of all, carved
on structural blocks of masonry. All the Carchemish
sculptures are derived from these various groups.
Other buildings adjoining the piazza were, to the west
a simply planned temple and to the south a reception-suite,

91
 89 Relief sculpture from
Carchemish showing two
soldiers on the march with
full kit. Their curious, high
helmets with a frontal crest
and apparently ribbons falling
down behind should be noted

conforming to the plan of what has come to be called

a bit hilani. The ‘hilan’ is an architectural convention
which is now conclusively proved to be of Syrian
origin. Its only association with the Hittites is due to a
confusion of terms in an inscription of King Sargon II,
who attributed its invention to the ‘Hatti’ (of the dia-
spora). Nevertheless, since we shall encounter it again at
Sinjerli and elsewhere, it should perhaps be described. It
consists in fact of a single, integral group of chambers, of
which the indispensable elements are — a single axial
entrance through a columned portico into a rectangular
reception-hall, a staircase leading to the roof, usually at
one end of the hall, and certain retiring-rooms behind.
The portico columns were of wood and required the
support of a substantial stone base. This provided the
raison d’étre for a characteristic feature of Neo-Hittite
architectural sculpture, which often took the form of
paired beasts; lions or bulls.

92
90, 91 Above, relief sculptures decorating the so-called ‘Royal Buttress’ (see plan, I//. 87)
facing the ‘King’s Gate’ at Carchemish. In a panel on the left one sees King Araras, a ruler of
Carchemish late in the eighth century Bc, and his son Kamanas. Carrying a child and leading an
animal of some species is the King’s wife, Luwarisas, right, and between the two are other
members of the same family. Be/ow is the so-called ‘Long Wall of Sculptures’ with reliefs
representing the Syrian ‘naked goddess’, the god Teshub, warriors riding in chariots, armed
infantry and some slabs entirely covered by inscriptions
 Regarding the sculptured orthostats themselves, it has
already been said that they are artistically unimpressive.
In the first place the slabs are small — seldom more than
three feet high — while the sculpture is technically im-
mature and the designs ill-balanced. Where the reliefs
of Imperial times were carved on white limestone or
trachyte of a fairly superior quality, the fashion became
prevalent in Neo-Hittite times of alternating such lime-
stone slabs with others of the black basalt which is so
plentifully available in North Syria. This latter is a hard
stone of irregular composition and the Hittite sculptors
were compelled to adapt their technique to its unrespon-
sive character; one suspects that in this way their stand-
ards of refinement in carving were gradually lowered. As
for the subjects of the designs there seems to have been a
free choice between religious and secular scenes, with a
slight preference for the latter. At Carchemish, one might
Lo take the Long Wall as typical; a procession of gods,
chariots and warriors, carved on a motley array of black
and white slabs which extend for a distance of over a
hundred feet. One of the first figures one recognizes is
Teshub, the Hurrian weather-god, next to whom, seen
in full face, is an unclothed female figure with hands sup-
porting her breasts, which one recognizes as the Syrian
IH. 92 ‘Naked Goddess’, last mentioned here when discussing
the Kiiltepe cylinder-seals of a thousand years earlier. In
this case she has wings and her body is enclosed in the
outline of a veil. After her come a number of slabs repre-
senting warriors riding in chariots, a slab covered with a
Ill. 89 hieroglyph inscription and a line of infantry bringing in
prisoners.
The ‘Herald’s Wall’ is really a round-the-corner con-
tinuation of the sculptures in the ‘King’s Gate’ and be-
longs to the same series. But here it is more difficult to
detect any coherent plan behind the arrangement of sub-
jects. Their understanding is further hampered both by

94
92, 93 More reliefs from the walls of the piazza at Carchemish. Above, details of the ‘Long
Wall of Sculptures’ including the Syrian ‘naked goddess’ with wings and the outline of a veil.
Below, a group of musicians with horn and large drum. The coarse texture of the black basalt
is well seen in these pictures
 94 Statue in the round of a
seated god with beard and
horned headdress. It is mounted
on a wide base composed of
two lions, also partly carved in
the round. The statue itself was
destroyed during the First
World War, but the base
survives in the Ankara Museum,
minus the head of one lion
which is in the British Museum.
In Neo-Hittite architecture,
bases like this one with paired
beasts are often used to support
stout wooden columns (cf.
Til. 98)

their poor state of preservation and by the fact that they

have clearly been replaced and rearranged during im-
provements to the piazza carried out by a succession of
kings. They include a banqueting scene, a group of
T77. musicians and a procession of acolytes among whom arte
priestesses wearing a veil or cloak draped over their high
I. ‘polos’ headgear. They bring offerings to Kubaba, the
protective deity of Carchemish, who is similarly dressed
71. but sits with her back to the procession. At Carchemish,
it remains only to mention one well-known example of
contemporary sculpture in the round; the statue of a
1. 94 huge seated god with square beard and horned head-
dress. He is supported on a pair of lions and the space
between them, in the Mesopotamian manner, ts filled by a
relief-carving of a beaked hybrid. In a similar group

96
 a

95, 96 Sculptures from the so-called ‘Herald’s Wall’

in the piazza at Carchemish. On the right, part of a
procession of priestesses wearing veils draped over the
cylindrical ‘polos’ headdress. They bring offerings to
Kubaba, the protective deity of Carchemish, recognizable
by the pomegranate which is her symbol. The careless
arrangement of these sculptures is emphasized by the fact
that she has her back to the procession

found at Sinjerli, the tall figure of a king stands upright Ill. 98

on a lion-base, with which he appears uncomfortably
out-of-scale.
At Sinjerli, the German excavations revealed public
buildings grouped inside a fortified citadel with inner and
outer gateways, once more raised upon the summit of an
ancient mound. In this case the citadel is entirely sur-
rounded by an extensive outer city, enclosed in a double
line of towered walls which form a perfect circle. In the Ill. roo
citadel there is an ‘Upper’ and a ‘Lower Palace’ creating
a complex of buildings which include at least four separate
‘hilani’ units. But at this site the sculptures seem mainly to
have been used as decoration for the gates and gate-
chambers. Their style will presently be discussed in con-
nection with the increasing evidence here apparent of

97
97-99 Sculptures from Sinjerli (ancient Sam/’al), including (/e/t) a stela of the Assyrian king
Esarhaddon (681-669 Bc), and (right) a standing figure of a god on a pedestal of paired lions.
Below, the Aramaean ruler, Barrekub, speaks with his scribe, seated upon a typical Assyrian
throne (cf. I//. 111)

98
too Plan of the city of
Sinjerli with a double circle
of outer city-walls, walled
citadel with doubly fortified
entry and buildings, known
to the excavators as the
“Upper and Lower Palaces’

Assyrian influence. Among their subjects, characteristic

features not previously observed at Carchemish are the
actual portraits of royalty, sometimes identified by in-
scriptions and occupying a single slab or stela in some
conspicuous position. The most famous of these is the
figure of Barrekup, an Aramaean ruler of the city, whom
we see seated on a very characteristically Assyrian throne,
in conversation with his principal scribe.
The contrasting geographical situations of Sinjerli and
Carchemish — the one in a typical Anatolian alpine valley
and the other on the fringes of the Mesopotamian plain —
is interestingly reflected in the structural principles of
building in the two cities. We have already mentioned
elsewhere the Anatolian practice of reinforcing stone and
mudbrick houses with a substantial framework of timber,
though not perhaps the belief, now well established, that
this device was introduced as a precaution against earth-
quakes. In any case, we do find at Sinjerli walls which

99
 incorporate so high a proportion of timber that the brick
and stone have become mere incidental filling, whereas
at Carchemish, on a solid stone substructure correspond-
ing to the height of the orthostats, the walls consist of
unreinforced brick-work. The fact that Carchemish is
situated just beyend the limits of a geographical zone
subject to earthquakes need not be a coincidence. Other
sites within the danger zone from which Neo-Hittite
sculpture is derived — Sakgagézii, for instance, the small
palace establishment near Sinjerli, and Tell Taynat, near
Antioch — both show half-timber construction, while
isolated orthostats discovered at Marash and elsewhere
may be from buildings destroyed in such natural disasters.
In referring to the ‘Hittite’ hieroglyphs which often
supplement the relief carving on Neo-Hittite orthostats,
Lil. rar we have mentioned how, in particular at Carchemish,
their decipherment has made it possible to reconstruct a
reasonably coherent genealogy of local rulers of whose
reions the approximate dates can be estimated. The co-
ordination with these dates of uninscribed sculptures,
according to a chronology of stylistic developments, has
proved a far more difficult task — a task which must
incidentally have been rendered doubly difficult for the
excavators themselves by the lack of comparative material.
It has, however, more recently been attempted by a Turk-
ish scholar, with a high proportion of the actual works
themselves at hand for closer study. Professor E. Akur-
gal’s conclusions on the subject are satisfyingly well-
substantiated and, with only minor reservations, are at
present generally accepted. Briefly, he makes an overall
division of the designs into categories, according to the
preponderant stylistic influences by which they are
characterized, and he demonstrates how these can be
adapted to a chronological pattern. Taking as a point of
departure a ‘traditional’ style still dependent on memories
of Imperial times, he distinguishes two successive phases

100
toi Relief slab from Carchemish carved
with typical Hittite hieroglyphs. It was the
discovery of bi-lingual inscriptions at
Karatepe (I//. 84) that facilitated the under-
standing of this writing

of increasing Assyrian influence, each corresponding to a

period of territorial expansion in the history of the Meso-
potamian state, and in the second phase, notes the
simultaneous accretion of unorthodox ideas from Aram-
aean and other North Syrian sources. And here at once
we begin to understand the complexity of the analyst’s
task. For we cannot forget that ‘traditional’ Hittite art,
beneath its uniform veneer of Imperial imagery, is itself
a composite affair, in which Hurrian-Mitannian elements
from North Syria are already superimposed on a basic-
ally Anatolian substructure. Nevertheless, Akurgal’s
‘traditional’ style of later times does emerge as a valid
determination.
The association of an actual chronology with this con-
servative style has presented a new difhculty. Scholars
have found it impossible to agree on an upper date-limit
for the revival of Hittite art in the ‘diaspora’. One would
expect this to coincide with the years following the

101
 exodus from the imperial ‘homeland’ in the twelfth cen-
tury Bc: but it has, on the contrary, been fashionable
until quite recently to postulate a ‘Dark Age’ of several
centuries following this event, dating from which no
cultural remains (either Hittite or Phrygian) are out-
standing. Where-Syria is concerned, this theory has been
rejected by excavators, who find evidence of continuity
in the archaeological remains of the period. But nothing
of this sort has been found in the Anatolian area. To
illustrate this we may consider one of the most authentic-
ally ‘traditional’ and therefore oldest groups of Neo-
Hittite sculptures; Arslantepe at Malatya, where a
Hittite principality is discovered still clinging to the
fringes of the Plateau. Here the evidence of pottery and
other archaeological considerations have led Akurgal to
suggest the mid-eleventh century as an upper date for the
oldest carvings.
A monumental gateway excavated by French archaeo-
logists at Malatya has now been reconstructed in the
Ankara Museum, showing its walls of ‘half-timber’ con-
Ill. 102 struction and a fine pair of guardian lions. The reliefs,
carved on the face of structural masonry, ate unusually
small — hardly two feet high — but they occupy a promi-
nent position, level with the tops of the lions. The scenes
are of special interest. The Hittite Weather-God rides in
a chariot drawn by two bulls: he descends from this
chariot and receives a libation from a king, identified
Lionas hieroglyphically by the name, Sulumeli. In another relief
he is seen, in the presence of his son, slaying Illuyanka,
the great serpent of Hittite mythology, and his attributes
appear in the form of curious homunculi who reach
Ill. 10g downwards among the symbols of falling rain. There is
little in these pictures for which one would not expect to
find parallels in the Yazilikaya reliefs. Gods and humans
are conventionally dressed and equipped and their ritual
gestures are Hittite. The only innovation is a horse-drawn

102
102 Sculptured portal
figure from the so-called
Lion Gate at Malatya.
This is one of the oldest
Neo-Hittite sculptures,
thought to date from the
mid-eleventh century BC

chariot in a lion-hunting scene, which may seem to IG TOs

anticipate Assyrian influence and is certainly later.
Later again, perhaps by several centuries, than the
Weather-God reliefs at Malatya is the colossal statue of a Ill. 106
king which once stood in the forecourt of the gateway.
Almost ten feet high and cut from a single block of stone,
this figure as restored stands upright in approximately
its intended position: but the circumstances in which it
was found were most curious. Its base still stood before
a niche in the north wall, but from this it had fallen face-
downwards on the stone pavement, losing in the process
its projecting right arm and damaging its face. Some time
later it had been rolled into a more decorous position on
its back, and a stone sarcophagus had been built around
it as though it lay in a tomb. Stylistically it belongs to
Akurgal’s second Assyrian phase, when both ceremonial
dress and coiffure had been adapted to Assyrian fashions.
Styles of representation in the portrayal of hair and
beard are important indications of the transition from the
first to the second Assyrian style. Characteristic of the

103
103-105 Relief sculptures from the Lion Gate at Malatya (ancient Milid). Above, the Weather God
called Sulumeli,
arriving in his chariot and receiving a libation from a king. Centre, a local ruler
(be/ow’) shows a
assisted by his son, slaying a dragon known by the name Hluyanka. A third relief
ng scene and is certainly of a later date. Being small in scale, these reliefs were not, as
lion-hunti
placed against the base of the walls, but were built into them at
was usual with orthostats,
higher level
106 Colossal statue of a king from the Lion
Gate at Malatya. There are stylistic indications
that this sculpture should be dated a good deal
later than the relief slabs built into the walls.
It would appear to represent the ‘second
Assyrian style’, popular in the second half of
the eighth century

first is a pattern consisting of separate but identical locks, I, rez

each one terminating in a voluted curl. In the second the Ill. 108
head is covered with a flat arrangement of concentric
curls, terminating in a projecting cluster at the nape of
the neck. Other features of Assyrian art which are promi-
nent in both phases include particularly the appearance of
chariots and horses; but there is also a great transforma-
tion in dress and weapons. The long Assyrian tunic with
a tasselled sash and the fringed shawl have now replaced
the short Hittite tunic and cloak. The long Assyrian
sword, carried on a sling, takes the place of the shorter
Hittite weapon with its crescent-shaped pommel. Shoes
too have changed and the upturned toes, so characteristic-
ally Hittite, are now only worn by men of low rank, as they
ate today by some Anatolian peasants. Akurgal considers
the first phase to begin in the mid-ninth century, when
the effects of Ashurnasirpal’s conquests were first felt,
and the second to coincide with Tiglath-pileser III and
Sargon II in the second half of the eighth century.

105
 107 Relief from Carchemish showing the
standing figure of King Katuwas. The arrange-
ment of the hair suggests the so-called ‘first
Assyrian style’

108 Another relief from Carchemish showing[>

a procession of officers. The hair-style here has
changed, and the clustering concentric curls
represent the ‘second Assyrian style’

Finally then we must note the signs which are evident

throughout the whole of this period, that distinctive
forms of Aramaean art have been developing in those
cities which have a preponderantly “North Semitic popu-
lation. They become increasingly noticeable during the
second half of the eighth century Bc, when the ‘tradi-
tional’ Hittite style seems to be on the wane, but they may
already be seen a little earlier at Sinjerli during the reign
of a purely Aramaean ruler like Barrekup. His portrait,
which we have already mentioned, is identified by an
Aramaic inscription, and, in contrast to the Assyrian
throne on which he sits, his headdress, hair and clothing
Ill. 98 show Aramaean modifications. One exclusively Aramaean
practice was the erection of a sculptured stela over a
tomb, and of these at least two notable examples survive,
both showing unmistakably Aramaean characteristics.
On one the gown of an Aramaean princess is secured by a
metal clasp which conveniently dates the work to the
very end of the period. It is a fibula of a Phrygian type

106
which is plentifully represented in finds from the Great TM. 143
Tumulus at Gordion, and it is also worn by the king
called Warpalawas (Urpalla) in the famous rock-relief at TSS 61, be
Ivriz on the south-eastern edge of the Plateau. Surmount-
ing a spring, from which a huge volume of clear water
issues to irrigate an oasis of fields and fruit-gardens, the
king in this carving pays homage to a god of fertility. The
dress and hair-style of the two figures now combine
elements of all three styles — Hittite, Assyrian and
Aramaean,
It remains only to refer again to the reliefs in the gate- T.83
way at Karatepe. Here, a fourth stylistic influence is evi-
dent, in elements of Egyptian art of the sort which have
reached their final decadence after adaptation and trans-
mission by Phoenician craftsmen. The resulting variety of Tis. Sy > 36

subjects and their haphazard juxtaposition might well,

one would think, have intimidated the most dedicated
att-historian; but they have in fact already been the
subject of much painstaking and effective study.

107
CHAPTER FIVE

Urartu

The land of Urartu first appears under the name Uru-

artri in Assyrian inscriptions of the thirteenth century
BC. By the ninth century it is inhabited by a tribal federa-
tion of Hurrian extraction united under a ‘king’ called
Arame, and his defeat by Shalmaneser I] is one of the
I/l. 109 scenes depicted on the famous Bronze Gates of Balawat
in the British Museum. After this a new Urartian dynasty
was founded and the kingdom was extended by conquest
to include provinces as far afield as Erzincan in the north-
west, Erivan which is now in Russian Armenia, and in
the south the Rowanduz area of Kurdistan. It was now
permanently centred in Van, and in approximately 850
BC a king called Sarduri | made his main stronghold on
Tl. rr0 the citadel rock there overlooking the lake. Into this
inner homeland surrounded by high mountains, the
Assyrians seemed unable to penetrate, and during the
century which followed the Urartians were able further to
extend their territory to Lake Urmia in the east, and in
the west even as far as North Syria, thus interrupting the
main trade-routes of the Assyrian empire. The first
Assyrian kine to deal effectively with this threat of en-
circlement was Tiglath-pileser II (747-727 Bc) who
drove the Urartians out of Syria and even made an un-
successful attack on Van itself. Then, in 713 Bc, came

108
PP nels Se DRSI A> Serer 2 es a i ee ee

109 One of the scenes depicted on the famous bronze gates from Balawat; Shalmaneser III of
Assyria conducting a campaign against the tribal federation in the neighbourhood of Lake Van
which subsequently became the state of Urartu. In the lower register his troops attack a city in
the mountains

Sargon II’s famous eighth campaign, in which he sacked

their southern provincial capital, Musasir, and annexed
the Urmia area. Early in the seventh century, the Urartians
also began to be threatened by enemies from the north —
Cimmerians first and then Scythians - and under Rusa
II came another defeat by the Assyrians. From then on-
wards, in much reduced circumstances, the state survived
in treaty relations with Assyria, until the destruction of
Nineveh by the Scythians and Medes in 612 Bc, soon
after which it was incorporated in the empire of Cyaxares.
Historically the Urartians then disappear and are replaced
geographically by the Armenians, an Indo-European
people of whose extraction there is no positive record.
Throughout the eastern provinces of modern Turkey,
the ruined cities of Urartu are everywhere to be seen,
their fortress walls often visible above ground. Built
usually on a strategic hilltop or mountainside, with a
strong citadel at the summit and a residential walled city
on the slopes beneath, they give an interesting clue to the
Urartian character. One notices the mountaineer’s pre-
ference for high places, the ponderous monumentality of
their architecture, remarkable feats of engineering and
pteoccupation with military security. With gold, silver
and copper mines available in the area, Urartian art and

109
 110 The great citadel rock
at Van, overlooking the
lake of that name which,
under the name of Tuspa,
became the first stronghold
and capital of the Urartian
state. Carved in cuneiform
script on the face of the rock
are inscriptions of the
Urartian kings, some of
whom were also buried here
in tock-cut tombs. In the
foreground are ruins of the
old Turkish city

craftsmanship, particularly in the realm of metal-work,

attained as we now know a high standard of excellence.
Much influenced at first by the more ancient tradition of
Tis. 112-115 Assyria, it later acquired strongly individual characteristics
which are of great interest.
The first, ill-directed excavation of an Urartian site was
made in the last century at the instigation of Sir Henry
Layard. On the shoulder of rock called Toprakkale, over-
looking the city of Van, the ruins of a temple dedicated
to the god Haldis were ransacked and the rich contents
of the building carelessly distributed to museums abroad.
They consisted mostly of elaborately decorated furniture
and ornamental objects of bronze or ivory. In recent
years it has proved possible to reassemble some of these
diagrammatically in their original relationship; and there
emerges a magnificent royal throne with its matching
ire: footstool, similar to those depicted in Assyrian reliefs.

110
t11-115 Examples of Urartian craftsmanship in metal, found
during the excavation of the Toprakkale citadel at Van. Centre,
a gold medallion and silver pectoral, both ornamented in repoussé:
below, right, bull’s head ornament from the rim of abronze cauldron,
and /eff, an ornamental figure in bronze, with chases for inlay,
probably part of a decorated throne. At the top is an Assyrian
relief of a feast scene in which Ashurbanipal’s wite is seated upon
a throne of the type which was recovered in fragments from the
Toprakkale excavations
O 50 I0OOM
a

116,117 Plans of the Urartian fortress-

city Tesheban excavated by Russian
archaeologists at Karmir Blur, near
Erivan. As usual, there is a heavily
fortified upper citadel, overlooking
the river Zanga, and below it an
extended residential town. The citadel
itself (/e/7) was partly occupied by a
building which was evidently the
residence of a provincial governor
and his court. It was built of mud-
brick on a substructure of heavy
masonry and covered an area of 1600
square metres. There were 120 cham-
bers, some of them containing rows of
giant ‘pithos’ storage-jars for wine or
grain (I//, 120)
118, 119 Model in
bronze from Toprak-
kale of a _ fortified
building similar to that
excavated at Karmir
Blur. This object has
been of great assis-
tance to archaeologists
in reconstructing the
facade of such a build-
ing, with its pro-
jecting- towers and
ornamental parapet.
Another fragment
from the same source
completes the silhou-
ette of the tower

The first scientific excavation of an Urartian fortress-

city was undertaken from 1936 onwards by Russian
archaeologists at a site called Karmir Blur, overlooking Lis TPO eS
the river Zanga near Erivan in Russian Armenia. The
results, of which no report became available in English
until 1953, were extraordinarily illuminating. Karmir
Blur proved to be the site of a large and entirely character-
istic provincial capital, dating mostly from the reign of
Rusa I, son of Argishti I, in the first half of the seventh
century Bc. Of the heavily fortified citadel, about half Ills. 117, 138
was occupied by the palace of a provincial governor, a
building covering 1600 square metres and containing
120 rooms, while on the slopes of the hill behind, there
was also a residential quarter, where the houses were
erouped in ‘insulae’ and disposed along parallel streets.
The citadel walls, twelve feet thick, were built of large
mud bricks on a substructure of huge undressed stones.
Roofs were flat and supported on beams of pine, poplar,

13
120 Giant ‘pithoi in a storage chamber at Karmir Blur. These vessels were usually marked on
the rim with the nature and quality of their contents. Sometimes a flooring of wooden planks was
laid level with their mouths in order to give easier access to them when in use

oak and beech. The rooms were lighted both by windows

high up in the walls and here and there by light-wells.
Their outer facades were ‘staggered’ at regular intervals
and provided with projecting towers, which must have
accentuated their apparent height. They are also known
to have terminated in crenellations whose appearance can
I/s. T75, 119 best be judged from a fragmentary bronze model of just
such a building which was among the finds made at
Toprakkale. Some of the largest rooms contained rows
of giant “pithos’ jars, about seven feet high, partly buried
in the ground. One room, whose walls were covered with
V7. mural paintings, contained eighty-two ‘pitho’, all marked
on the rim with measures of capacity written either in
Urartian hieroglyphs or in cuneiform. The majority were
intended for wine, but one contained ninety-six bronze
HL. cups, variously inscribed with the names of kings, Menua,
Argishti, Rusa and Sarduri. A huge collection of objects
was recovered from this and other parts of the building.

114
 121 From among the finds in
the citadel at Karmir Blur; a
simple bronze bowl bearing
an inscription. Mesopotamian
cuneiform was ordinarily used
as a vehicle for the Urartian
language, but for certain pur-
poses, notably the inscriptions
on storage vessels, a form of
pictographs had come to be
used, and these are not yet satis-
factorily understood, though
the meanings of some of them
are obvious

Included among them were innumerable weapons of

bronze and iron; swords, daggers, spears, quivers, arrow-
heads, including some of a Scythian type, a magnificent
bronze helmet decorated with lion-headed serpents and TS 7222
two rows of human or animal figures modelled in
repoussé, quantities of bronze ornaments from furniture
and jewellery, including gold earrings with granulated
decoration. The Karmir Blur reports at last provided a
sound basis for a study of Urartian archaeology.
Meanwhile, within the inner territory of Urartu which
forms part of Anatolia, Turkish archaeologists had begun
to contribute their own discoveries. Thanks to their
researches in recent years, two sites in particular have
revealed aspects of Urartian city life of which the Russian
excavations had left us in ignorance. The first of these was
Altintepe, near Erzincan, evidently the administrative
centre of a north-westerly Urartian province. Here, in
the flank of a natural hilltop, peasants discovered a

115
122, 123 Bronze helmets (above) derived from the excavations of the citadel at Karmir Blur,
finely decorated with repoussé designs. For comparison (be/on’) a fifth helmet of the same type,
in the British Museum, possibly from excavations at Van itself. Soldiers wearing such helmets
may be frequently seen in the Assyrian reliefs (I//. 130)

stone-built tomb, and from it, among other objects, there

emerged a magnificent bronze cauldron, decorated around
the rim with four bulls’ heads and mounted on an iron
tripod. This class of object now appears to have been a
characteristically Urartian device, though afterwards
widely distributed in countries further west. As we shall
presently see, fine examples, in which the bull protomes
are replaced by human figures, were subsequently found
in tumulus graves at Gordion and seem even to have
penetrated as far as Greece and Etruria. At Altintepe, the
full-scale excavation which followed has proved to be
one of the mést rewarding of our time. Confined at first
to the scene of the original discovery, several more tombs
were found, one of them still sealed and undisturbed.
Placed at the base of a deep cutting in the slope of the
citadel hill and subsequently covered with rubble, they
were constructed of neat ashlar masonry with slab-
vaulted roofs. There were usually three compartments :
124, 125 From an Urartian tomb at Altintepe (right) a bronze cauldron
decorated with bull’s-head protomes, standing on an iron tripod. Some-
times human heads were substituted for those of animals, > as these from
widely separated sites in Anatolia and the Mediterranean (/ef?)

one a vestibule, another a place for offerings and a third UL, F26
and largest the actual tomb-chamber itself. Sometimes
the burials were in stone sarcophagi, at others the bodies li E28
were laid directly upon the pavement. All round the walls
were square-headed niches, similar to those found in
rock-cut tombs of the Urartian period at Van and else-
where. In the undisturbed tomb, two sarcophagi con-
tained respectively the bodies of a man and a woman.
The woman had been buried fully dressed, wearing gold
buttons and a necklace of gold and semi- precious stones.
With her also in the tomb were a vase of Assyrian faience,
other pottery, metal trinkets and a bronze stool. All three
chambers were filled with similar objects, disposed in an
orderly manner on the floor; wooden furniture strength-
ened and embellished with ornamental bronze-work;
weapons, mostly of iron, including battle-axes, arrows,
lance-heads, daggers, knives and three-pronged forks.
Equally important finds in the outer chamber consisted

117
126-128 Masonry-built tombs (above and be/ow’)
built in the flank of the acropolis hill at Altintepe,
near Erzincan. Be/ow, a covered stone sarcophagus
is seen and wall-niches for offerings. The tombs
are vaulted with stone slabs, and usually comprise
several chambers for offerings, as well as the
actual burial chambers. The grave-goods were
extremely rich in metal-work. A winged horse
(left) engraved on a bronze belt recalls the
classical figure of Pegasus
of horse- and war-chariot trappings, all elaborately
decorated in bronze. Something of their original appear-
ance may be gathered from the repoussé ornament
on a bronze belt, on which processions of Urartian
horsemen appear amongst mythical animals. Finally, ener:
cuneiform inscriptions on some of the bronzes show
that the prince buried in this tomb was a contemporary
of Argishti II, son of Rusa I, who reigned between 713
and 679 BC.
At Altintepe, the hilltop acropolis itself proved no less
interesting than the tombs. Here for the first time the
well-preserved ruins of an Urartian temple were found,
to clarify the equivocal evidence from Toprakkale.
Further examples have more recently come to light,
occupying similarly prominent positions in Urartian
citadels at other sites such as Anzavur (Patnos), Cavus
Tepe near Van and Kayalidere in the Mus area, all bearing
so close a resemblance to that at Altintepe that the archi-
tectural convention for religious buildings at this time
can now be more perfectly understood. The plan is square,
with wide but shallow buttresses at each of the four
corners. Inside the sanctuary consists of a single square
compartment, hardly wider than the thickness of the
immensely heavy walls which surround it. These latter
are built to about a man’s height in neatly cut ashlar
masonry, sometimes with a dedication incised in cunei-
form in conspicuous positions and, above this, they can
be seen to have been carried up to a considerable height
in sun-dried brickwork. There is a single entrance on one
side with recessed jambs, sometimes an altar facing it
against the back wall of the sanctuary and some sort of
built-up offering table or stela-base outside. At Altintepe
the building is surrounded by a paved court, and aline
of stone column bases surrounding the building in the
centre of this suggests that part at least ofitwas roofed in.
The walls of the sanctuary show signs of mural painting.

119
 129 Fragment of a mural
painting from an Urartian
public building at Altintepe.
This figure is one of two genii
standing on either side of a
sacred tree; a familiar con-
vention in Assyrian art. They
catry a situla (bucket) in one
hand and hold up a pine-cone
in the other. This figure is
female and wears a horned
Se

There is one single instance among Assyrian records

Lil. 130
where the facade of an Urartian temple is depicted in a
sculptured relief. This is the temple at Musasir, which
was sacked by King Sargon H. The most notable fact
about this picture, discovered in Sargon’s palace at
Khorsabad, is that the building is covered with a gabled
roof. The low and squat proportion of the facade, as
shown, could well be due to the restriction of space
imposed on the sculptor. For, when looking at the plans
lil, 732 of such buildings which have now been recovered, no
architect would for a moment doubt that they suggest a
tower-like structure of considerable height. Nor need
one look far to find a form of monument combining
these two features (a tower-like structure with a gabled
roof). Remembered and imitated in a slightly later his-
torical setting, the sixth-century “Tomb of Cyrus’ at
Pasargadae provides a good example.
Also appearing to foreshadow some features of Achae-
menid architecture, a second public building was found
at Altintepe. This was a plain rectangular assembly-hall
some forty-five metres in length, its roof supported on
eighteen wooden columns arranged in three rows. Finally
it should be mentioned that several other features of
the Musasir relief can now be explained in terms of

120
 (ate
\

130, 131 Above, an Assyrian relief

from Khorsabad shows King Sargon
Il’s_ troops sacking the Urartian
temple at Musasir. Among the orna-
ments of the temple one sees cauldrons
on tripods (///. 725), ornamental spears
and shields used as wall ornament,
all of which have been found at
Urartian sites. The representation of a
gabled or pitched roof is a feature
alien to Assyrian architecture and
must be considered characteristically
Urartian. Right, the reconstruction
of an Urartian relief carving from
Adilcevaz, near Lake Van, perhaps
depicting the god Haldis standing on
an appropriate animal. The ornamental
spearheads of the Musasir relief here
appear again
 woven t af f
ea Me

132 The masonry substructure of another Urartian temple at Arin Berd, also near Erivan in
Russian Armenia. Like all temples of this type, its interior had been elaborately decorated with
brightly coloured mural ornament

archaeological finds. Circular shields decorating the walls,

symbolical spears of great size beside the doorway, and at
the apex of the gable, twin vessels on tripods at the
approach — identical objects to all these have now been
brought to light by actual excavations which have also
yielded the first examples of Urartian mural paintings and
il, 129 sculptured reliefs, clearly distinguishable both in style
See iea and subject-matter from those of Assyria.
Today then, it has come to be realized that the high
accomplishment and far-reaching significance of Urartian
culture has in the past been consistently underrated,
simply because its remains have been insufficiently ex-
plored. Urartu is now being presented to us as a nation
—and in its time a very great nation — whose history and
even identity seem to have been completely expunged
from the records of human memory for two-and-a-half
thousand years. Yet today, everything about it — its
racial characteristics, political and economic history and
its art — constitute one of the most intriguing problems in
Near Eastern archaeology.

122
133, 134 Above, a distant view of the citadel mound at Karmir Blur seen from the east. Be/ow,
the surviving ruins of the great hall in the citadel, with masonry piers which supported the roof
(Ge Ws TG, 177)

Bisa
CHV TER sis

The Phrygians

In the Assyrian annals one finds that, in addition to the

Urartian kings, enemies in the north against whom
Sargon II’s campaigns were directed included the name
of a ruler called ‘Mita of Mushkr’, which is today equated
with Midas of Phrygia. In the eighth century Bc, the
Phrygian kingdom comprised practically the whole of
central and west Anatolia, from Taurus and the Urartian
frontier in the east to Sardis and the Lydian hinterland of
the Aegean cities. Historically, the period of several
centuries during which Phrygian rule over this area had
been maintained, represents an historical interlude about
which, until recently, comparatively little has been known.
Today, mainly as a result of excavations at the capital
city of Gordion and elsewhere new interest has been
aroused in the character of Phrygian culture and its pos-
sible contribution to early Greek civilization. Before
excavations began, the available archaeological evidence
was confined to the surviving ‘Phrygian monuments’: a
group of rock-hewn sculptures, remotely situated in the
hills to the south-east of modern Eskisehir. Identitied by
their discoverers in the last century as royal tombs, it has
more recently been observed that each is situated near
a plentiful spring or other source of fresh water and most
scholars now prefer to associate them with an appropriate

124
religious cult. In several instances, their major interest
lies in the indication which they provide regarding the
character of Phrygian architecture. The most striking
example in this respect is the monument traditionally
known as the ‘Tomb of Midas’ at Yazilikaya. Here the
vertical rock-face is sculptured to represent the end
facade of a gabled building, decorated with geometrical
ornament in relief to represent terracotta tiles and crowned
with a very classical-looking acroterion.
Such tantalizing glimpses of Phrygian architectural
practice have been supplemented and also verified by the
results of excavation. Sometimes an investigation,
directed primarily towards Hittite horizons, found traces
of a subsequent occupation in Phrygian times. This hap-
pened for instance at Alishar, where the highest part of
the old Bronze Age citadel had been walled and fortified
by some Phrygian prince. At Boghazkoy (Hattusas), the
Buytikkale acropolis had been re-walled in Phrygian
times. Other sites, such as Pazarli, seem to have gained
in importance under the Phrygian régime; and from all of
them came new evidence of material culture to supple-
ment that from the rock-cut monuments; from Buyiik-
kale strange outlandish sculpture; from Pazarli, striking
architectural ornaments with relief designs in clazed USI ees
terracotta, and from everywhere characteristic Phrygian
pottery, much of it finely painted. However, an adequate LOL as
revelation of metropolitan life under the Phrygian rulers
had to await the full-scale excavation of Gordion begun
by American archaeologists in 1950.
The Phrygian capital is today represented by an enor-
mous mound overlooking the Sangarius (Sakarya) river
at a point where it is crossed by a famous highway; the
Royal Road of Achaemenian Persian times. The excavators
divided their attention between the mound itself and the T//. 138

numerous burial tumuli, dating from Phrygian and later

periods, which surrounded it. Deep soundings in the

125
 mound showed it to have been occupied at least as early
as the third millennium Bc and in the later Bronze Age
to have been an important outpost of the Hittite King-
dom. Clearly it had reached a state of maximum prosperity
under the Phrygian rulers, during a period in the eighth
century which terminated in the destruction of their
kingdom by Cimmerian invaders. An impressive picture
of the city’s aspect and character during this period has
been revealed by the excavations. After the preliminary
clearance of Hellenistic and Achaemenian remains beneath
Ti, 439 the summit, a Phrygian gateway of magnificent pro-
portions came to light, deeply recessed in the city walls
and strategically protected by flanking bastions of stone.
Furthermore as digging progressed inside the city,
three important public buildings were exposed, providing
in themselves the answers to many long-standing ques-
tions regarding Phrygian architecture. All three con-
formed to the so-called ‘megaron’ plan, now thought to
be of Anatolian origin, since it occurs in the Early Bronze
Age settlements at Troy and elsewhere. Each consisted
of a rectangular hall reached through a part-open portico,
one and sometimes both being provided with a huge
central hearth. Traditionally also, the walls consisted of
mud brick or stone, reinforced with a framework of

rwoO
<]135 Graceful polychrome
pottery, characteristic of the
Phrygian period, buried with
a young child in one of the
smaller tumuli at Gordion

136, 137 Terracotta panels

with reliefs decorated in
coloured glaze from _ the
Phrygian city at Pazarli in
central Anatolia. Right, a
heraldic design of opposed
animals. Below, watrior
figures which already antici-
pate the conventions of
Greek art
 aes v
ai
= ieee ona 4

138 A section of the Royal Road of the Achaemenid Persian emperors, leading from Susa in
southern Iran to the Lydian capital at Sardis. This excavation was made at Gordion where the
road crosses over the Sangarius (Sakarya) river

Te r4ar timber posts and crossbeams. Unparalleled however, at

this period was the pavement of one hall, which consisted
Ill. r4go of a mosaic of coloured pebbles, laid in geometrical
patterns. Being the earliest examples of this technique
yet discovered, it is understandable that the patterns used
can be seen to retain a memory of textile ornament.
Equally interesting were the indications that this type of
building had been covered with a gabled roof, such as is
suggested by the ‘Midas’ monument. Two pieces of
evidence seemed to point emphatically to this conclusion.
The first were grafhiti idly scratched on the plaster surface
of the walls, among which gabled buildings were twice
represented. The second was the discovery among the
debris of an acroterion or finial ornament for a gable,
similar to those seen crowning the rock-carved facades
of the Phrygian monuments. In the third and largest
megaron, it could indeed be understood that the span
between walls was too great for such a roof to be con-
structed without intermediate support. For this purpose

128
139, 140 Excavations in the
Phrygian city at Gordion.
Right, a broad gateway in the
main city-wall, flanked by heavy
stone bastions. Be/ow, inside
the town, a building of the
eighth century BC, its walls
reinforced with a framework of
timber. The pavement with its
intricate design composed of
coloured pebbles is probably
the earliest example of mosaic
work yet found
 two tows of stout wooden posts had been provided,
Ne Be incidentally helping to support a wooden gallery running
round three sides of the hall. Charred remnants of these
upper structures overlaid the pavement, and crushed
beneath them were found pathetic remnants of furniture,
elaborately ornamented with coloured inlays or decorated
with carved ivory plaques. Any disappointment felt in this
respect was relieved by the rich discoveries simultaneously
made in the contemporary tumuli outside the city.
The Phrygian method of burial for important person-
ages consisted in building a tomb-chamber of timber to
contain the body and grave-offerings. This was afterwards
roofed in and covered by an artificial mound of earth, to
protect the burial and to create a conspicuous monument.
Of the three tumuli excavated by the American expedi-
tion, one at least (Tumulus P), was of moderate size and
thought from the nature of its contents to have been the
TH Tas erave of a young princess. The largest was that tradition-
ally known as the “Tomb of Midas’, a colossal mound of
earth, today still more than 170 feet high, creating a for-
midable landmark in the Sakarya valley. In this case the
Yi, S42 excavators located the position of the actual chamber by
drilling vertically from above, and then drove a tunnel
towards it at plain level. The chamber, however, was
covered by an inner mound of stone rubble, held in place
by a retaining wall, and when this was breached, the
greater part of the rubble had to be drawn off leaving a
huge empty dome, with little to support the great weight
of the earth above. It was therefore with some trepidation
that an opening was eventually cut in the wall of the
chamber itself. Nor was the internal appearance of the
structure particularly reassuring. The baulks of juniper,
two feet square in section, from which it was built had
suffered comparatively little decay: nevertheless the roof
had partially collapsed and required temporary support
before the contents of the chamber could be investigated.

130
 GF Muscarela

141, 142 Structural details of Phrygian architecture at Gordion. Above,

the arrangement of upright posts and gallerics in a ‘megaron’-type
building, probably a palace. Be/ow, construction of the burial-chamber
beneath the great tumulus known as the Tomb of Midas

Nh,

UN
UM,
“Ul

‘afh

¢
 Meanwhile, the roof itself was of some interest, since it
was supported by three triangular ‘principals’, solidly
built of timber, to create the impression of a gabled
building. Here was further proof that the pitched roof was
a primary convention of Phrygian architecture.
As for the contents of the tomb, they proved to be
sensational enough. Directly beneath the opening, the
skeleton of a Phrygian king lay upon a huge collapsed
bed among the decaying remains of no less than twenty
rich coverlets. Behind, against the farther wall, were the
remains of elaborate furniture, inlaid with rare woods in
intricate patterns. One piece had consisted of shelves on
which rested many scores of bronze vessels. Its collapse
spilled out a cascade of metal over the floor, where it now
lay filling the whole chamber with the brilliant peacock blue
of patinated bronze. Against the side walls stood gigantic
copper cauldrons on iron tripods, which had contained
food and drink; these were ornamented at their rims with
Til. 124 the busts of bearded men or with female figures of the
type known later in Greece as ‘sirens’. Strange devices
of embossed leather which had decorated the walls also
coveted the floor. Some of the bronze vessels bore
Il, 145 inscriptions incised in wax, which should help to throw
new light on a Phrygian script today still impertectly
understood. But the most puzzling aspect of this tomb, in
view of the Midas legend, was the total absence of gold
and silver or weapons enriched with precious stones. The
only personal ornaments with which the king was pro-
vided consisted of more than seventy bronze ‘safety-pins’
(fibulae) contained in a linen bag.
Regarding the approximate date of these three Phry-
gian burials, it was first assumed that they must have
been made previously to the disaster associated with the
arrival of the Cimmertans, which took place in about
680 BC. Stylistically there was nothing among their con-
tents which would be inconsistent with a date late in the

132
143 An ornamental fibula or safety-pin from the great tumulus at
Gordion. An identical ornament is worn by King Warpalawas in the
Ivriz relief (I//. 82)

eighth century Bc. This assumption was satisfactorily

confirmed when a closer study of the grave-goods had
been made. A bucket-shaped vessel (situla) decorated
with a lion’s head is exactly depicted in a relief from the
palace of King Sargon II of Assyria (721-705 Bc). A Il. 146
fluted bowl, moulded from colourless glass which was Il. 144
discovered in the child’s tomb, elsewhere finds a precise
parallel in a glass jar inscribed in cuneiform with the
name of the same king. One of the studded bronze WW. 243
fibulae found in the Great Tumulus is identical to that
worn by King Warpalawas of Tyana at Ivriz. Warpalawas
is known to have become a vassal of Assyria in 738 BC. TS OL, a2
Five vessels of various shapes from the Great Tumulus
at Gordion bear short inscriptions in an alphabetical
script which at present cannot be read. Nevertheless,
some significance may be attached to the fact that three
of the five are inscribed on smears of wax overlaid on the Ni ays)
bronze. Ever since the discovery at Assyrian Nimrud, in
a comparably dated setting, of cuneiform inscriptions in
a ‘book’ whose ‘pages’ were prepared with wax, the pos-
sibility of a preference in ancient Anatolia for this system
of writing has been much discussed. It would explain for
instance the puzzling non-survival of written records in
the administrative centres of West Anatolian states from
the Middle Bronze Age onwards. As for the Phrygian
script itself, it must ee remembered that the earliest
Greek alphabetical script was at this period already in use
in the Aegean cities, and it was for long assumed that the
Phrygian system of writing must have been adapted
directly from this fairly accessible source. Against this
it has been argued that between Phrygia and the coast
lay the country of Lydia with a peculiar alphabet of its
own, and it has been alternatively suggested that both
scripts, Phrygian and Greek, have a common origin
elsewhere. North Syria is known to have been the area
from which the Phoenician alphabet was transmitted to

133
144,145 Treasures from the Phrygian tumulus burials at Gordion. Above, a bowl of colourless
glass with moulded ornament, a material extremely rare in the eighth century BC when rock-
crystal was more common. Be/ow, a bronze bow] bearing a Phrygian
le inscription engraved on a
tiny panel of wax near the rim
146 Found in the great tumulus at Gordion, a bronze situla or ceremonial bucket in the
shape ofa lion’s head. Identical vessels are carried by acolytes appearing in procession on
Assyrian reliefs of the eighth century Bc

the Greeks and it was there perhaps that both Greeks and
Phrygians simultaneously adapted the North Semitic
writing to their use by introducing vowels. By the great
eastern trade-route upon which it lies, Gordion is no
further from the Orontes than Greece.
Apart from alphabetical affinities and a preference for
gabled buildings, other equally significant aspects of
Phrygian culture suggest a relationship with con-
temporary Greece. There is already something European
in the background of Phrygian art, and when, after the
Cimmerian invasion in 680 Bc, the Midas dynasty came
to an end and its dominion was usurped by a Lydian
kingdom with its capital at Sardis, Anatolian culture
seemed to lose much of its individual character and to
assimilate itself to that of the now flourishing cities on
the Aegean coast. The timeless tradition of regionally
characteristic thought and behaviour, the seeds of which
had been sown in remote prehistoric times, had now run
its full course. The peninsula had become no more than
a bridge between east and west.

135
Bibliography
AKURGAL, E. Art of the Hittites, London, 1962
— Phrygische Kunst, Ankara, 1955
ARIK, R.O. Les Fouilles d’ Alaca Hoytik, Ankata, 1937
BITTEL, K. Grundziige zur Vorgeschichte Kleinasiens, 2nd ed., Tiibingen, 1950
BLEGEN, C.w. éf. al. Troy, 4 vols. Princeton, 1950, 1951, 1953, 1958
BOSSERT, H. A/fanatolien, Berlin, 1942 (Picture album)
CAMBRIDGE ANCIENT HISTORY FASCICLES
BLEGEN, C.w. roy, vol. I, ch. XVI; XXIV; vol: I, ch: XV; X XT
GURNEY, O.R. ‘Anatolia c. 1750-1600 Bc’: “Anatolia c, 1600-1380 Bc’, vol. Il, ch. VI; XVa
LEwy, H. ‘Anatolia in the Old Assyrian Tablets’, vol. I, ch. XXIV, 7-10
MELLAART, J. ‘Anatolia before ¢c. 4000 Bc’: “Anatolia c. 2300-1750 BC’, vol. I, ch. VII,
II-14; XXIV, 1-6
—‘Anatolia c. 4000-2300 Bc’, vol. I, ch. XVIII
FISCHER, P. Bogaykoy, Die Hethitische Keramik, Berlin, 1963
GARELLI, P. Les Assyriens en Cappadoce, Paris, 1963
GARSTANG, J. Prehistoric Mersin, Oxford, 1953
GARSTANG, J. and GURNEY, O.R. The Geography of the Hittite Empire, British Institute of
Archaeology at Ankara, Occas. Paper No. 5, London, 1959
GOETZE, A. ‘Die Annalen des Mursilis’. Mitrei/ungen der Vorderasiatisch-aegyptischen Gesellschaft,
38 (1933)
— Kizzumadna and the Problem of the Hittite Geography, Yale, 1940.
— Kleinasien, 2nd ed., Munich, 1957
GOLDMAN, H. Excavations at Gozlu Kule, Tarsus, vols. Il, U1, Princeton, 1950, 1956
GURNEY, o.R. The Hittites, Harmondsworth, znd ed., 1961
GUTERBOCK, H. ‘The Deeds of Suppiluliuma as told by his son Mursili IV, Journal of Cunei-
form Studies, X, 1956
HUXLEY, G.L. Achaeans and Hittites, Oxford, 1960
KOSAY, H.Z. Ausgrabungen von Alaca Hoyiik, Ankara, 1944
— Les Fouilles d’ Alaca Hoy#k, 1937-39, Ankara, 1951
LLOYD, S. and MELLAART, J. Beycesultan, Land II. British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara,
London, 1962, 1964
LLOYD, 8S. Early Anatolia, Harmondsworth, 1956
MELLAART, J. Earliest Civilizations of the Near East, London, 1965
MELLINK, M.J. “Anatolia: Old and New Perspectives’. In Proc. American Philosophical Soc.,
I10, 2, 1966
— ‘Anatolian Chronology’. In R. Ehrich, Chronologies in Old World Archaeology, Chicago, 1966
NAUMANN, R. Irchitektur Kleinasiens, Tubingen, 1955
6zGtc, N. Kiltepe-Kanis, Ankara, 1959
— Anatolian Group of Cylinder Seal Impressions from Kiiltepe, Ankara, 1965
6zGtc, vt. Excavations at Horoztepe, Ankara, 1958
— ‘The Statuette from Horoztepe’. In Anazolia, II], 1958
— ‘Excavations at Altintepe’. In Be//eten, XXV, 98, April 1961
— ‘Early Anatolian Archaeology in the light of Recent Researches’. In Anatolia, VII, 1963
— ‘The Urartian Architecture on the Summit of Altintepe’. In Anatolia, VII, 1963
— “The Art and Architecture of Ancient Kanish’. In Anatolia, VII, 1964
— ‘New Finds from Horoztepe’. In Anatolia, VIII, 1964
— Altintepe, Ankara, 1966
YOUNG, R.S. ‘Gordion of the Royal Road’, Proc. American Philosophical Soc., 107, 4, 1963
(see also American Journal of Archaeology for interim reports on excavations)

136
 List of Illustrations
The author and publishers are grateful to the many official bodies, institutions, and
individuals mentioned below for their assistance in supplying illustration material.
Illustrations without acknowledgement are from originals in the archives of Thames
& Hudson.

Chronological Table. Drawn by 12 Jewellery from Royal tombs, Alaca

Lucinda Rodd after the author Hiyik. Ankara Museum. Photo
Josephine Powell
Axonometric reconstruction of Mersin.
Drawn by Martin Weaver after Objects from Royal tombs K and L,
Garstang Alaca Hiiyiik. Ankara Museum. Photo
Josephine Powell
Map of Late Bronze Age cultures in
Anatolia. Drawn by Sholem Shotten 14 Gold jewellery and a mace from Royal
tombs K and L, Alaca Hiiyiik, Ankara
Yortan ‘face’ urns and spouted jugs. Museum. Photo Josephine Powell
British Museum. Photo John Freeman
15 Bronze figurine of a woman and child
Copper finial with stags from the Royal from Horoztepe. Ankara Museum
Cemetery, Alaca Hiuyiik. Ankara
16 Bronze axes from Mahmutlar. Ankara
Museum. Photo Josephine Powell
Museum. Photo Hamet Kosay
Copper finial with grill from the Royal
Cemetery, Alaca Hiiyik. Ankara 17 Bronze rattle from Horoztepe, Ankara
Museum. Photo Selahattin Oztartan
Museum. Photo Josephine Powell
18 Bull pole mounting from Horoztepe.
Gold, silver, and bronze figurines from Ankara Museum. Photo courtesy of
Royal tomb L, Alaca Hiiyiik. Ankara Professor T. Ozgiic¢
Museum. Photo Josephine Powell
19 Bronze and silver figures possibly from
Copper stag inlaid with electrum and Tomb II, Dorak. Drawn by James
gold from the Royal Cemetery, Alaca Mellaart
Huyik. Ankara Museum. Photo
courtesy Professor Stuart Piggott 20 Sceptres, ceremonial axe-heads from
Tomb II; sword-hilt and swords from
Gold jug from the Royal Cemetery, Tomb I, Dorak. Drawn by James
Alaca Hiiyik. Ankara Museum Mellaart

10 Reconstruction painting of the Royal 2. Silver vase, gold jug, bowl and drink-
Cemetery, Alaca Hiiyiik, by Gaynor ing vessel from Tomb HI, Dorak.
Chapman Drawn by James Mellaart

yi Royal tomb L, Alaca Hiiyiik. Drawn 22 Woven floor-covering from Tomb I,

by Martin Weaver after Akok Dorak. Drawn by James Mellaart

137
 25 Gold overlay with name of Sahure of 38 View of Kiiltepe from south-east.
the Fifth Dynasty, Dorak. Drawn by Drawn by Martin Weaver after Akok
Hubert Pepper after Mellaart
39 Reconstruction of a house, Area A,
24 Tomb II, Dorak. Drawn by Martin Level I in the Kiltepe karum. Drawn
Weaver after Mellaart by Martin Weaver after Akok

25 Tomb I, Dorak. Drawn by Martin 40 Reconstruction painting of the Kultepe

Weaver after Mellaart karum by Gaynor Chapman

26 Mrs Schliemann wearing some of 41 Four clay tablets from the Kiultepe
‘Priam’s Treasure’ from Troy LIlg. karum. Ankara Museum. Photos Dr
Steel engraving March 31st, 1877 in Nimet Ozgiic
The Queen and Lady’s Newspaper
42, 43 “Alishar I? burnished ware from
the Kiultepe Aarum. Ankara Museum.
27 Gold earrings from ‘Priam’s Treasure’ Photos Josephine Powell
Troy Ug. Archaeological Museum,
Istanbul. Photo Josephine Powell 44 ‘Cappadocian’ painted ware from the
Kiltepe Aarum. Ankara Museum.
28 Jewellery from Troy Ilg. Archaeo- Photo Josephine Powell
logical Museum, Istanbul. Photo Jose-
phine Powell 45 Reconstruction of a house, Area B.
Level II, in the Kultepe Aarum. Drawn
29 Troy (Hissarlik). Photo the author by Martin Weaver after Akok

30 Axonometric reconstruction of Troy 46 Terracotta lion rhyton from the

Ig. Drawn by Peter Pratt after Kiltepe Aarum. Ankara Museum
Mellaart
47 Terracotta lion rhytons from the
31 The ‘male’ shrine, Beycesultan. Drawn Kultepe Aarum. Ankara Museum.
by Martin Weaver after the author Photo Josephine Powell

32 The ‘male’ shrine, Beycesultan. Photo 48 Steatite mould from the Kiltepe
couttesy of the British Institute of karum. Ankara Museum. Photo Jose-
Archaeology at Ankara phine Powell

49 Ivory female statuette from the Kiltepe

33 Partial reconstruction of the ‘female’ karum. Ankara Museum. Photo Jose-
shrine, Beycesultan. Drawn by Martin phine Powell
Weaver after the author
50 Terracotta ram’s head from the
Kultepe Aarum. Ankara Museum,
34 Axonometric reconstruction of the
Bronze Age ‘megaton’, Kiiltepe. Photo Josephine Powell
Drawn by Peter Pratt after the author
5t Anatolian cylinder seal impression
from the Kiultepe Aarum. Ankara
355 36 Alabaster figurines from Kiltepe. Museum. Photo courtesy Professor
Ankara Museum. Photo courtesy of
T. Ozgiic
Professor T. Ozgiic
52 Inscribed bronze spearhead from the
37 ‘Cappadocian’ polychrome pottery urn Kiuiltepe Citadel. Ankara Museum.
from Kiltepe. Ankara Museum Photo Dr Nimet Ozgiic¢

138
53 Clay tablet from Boghazkéy. Staat- 71 Impression of a Hittite seal. Ankara
liche Museen, Berlin Museum

54 Warrior from the ‘King’s Gate’, 72 Hittite gold figurine. British Museum.
Boghazkéy. Ankara Museum. Photo Photo courtesy of the Trustees of the
Josephine Powell British Museum

55, 56 Lion Gate, Boghazkéy 73 Sculptured relief, Eflatun Pinar

57 Reconstruction of the outer face of the 74 Conjectural restoration of Eflatun

Lion Gate, Boghazkéy. Drawn by Pinar. Drawn by Lucinda Rodd after
Martin Weaver after Puchstein Mellaart

58 Reconstruction of part of the walls of 75 Bronze figurine from Tokat. Ankara

Boghazkéy. Drawn by Martin Weaver Museum
after Puchstein
76 Bronze statuette from Latakiya.
59 Plan of the sanctuary, Yazilikaya. Louvre
Drawn by Martin Weaver after Bittel
77 Gold cloisonné inlays from Carchemish.
60 Reconstruction painting of the sanctu- British Museum
aty, Yazilikaya, by lan Mackenzie Kerr
78 Partial reconstruction of the Arzawan
61 Yazilikaya entrance palace, Beycesultan. Drawn by Peter
Pratt after the author
62 Rock-relief, meeting of the king and
gods, Yazilikaya. After Akurgal 79 Plan of the Late Bronze Age com-
pound, Beycesultan. Drawn by Peter
63 Rock-relief, procession of divine and Pratt after the author
human beings, Yazilikaya. Drawn by
Hubert Pepper after Garstang
80 Reconstruction of the Late Bronze
Age shrine, Beycesultan. Drawn by
64 Rock-relief, King Tudhaliyas IV and
Martin Weaver after the author
the god Sharma, Yazilikaya. Photo
Josephine Powell
81 Reconstruction painting of Ivriz by
65 Rock-relief, King Tudhaliyas IV, Gaynor Chapman
Yazilikaya
82 Rock-relief, King Urpallu and the god
66 Rock-relief, running gods, Yazili- Tarhundas, Ivriz
kaya. Photo Josephine Powell
83 South-west gateway, Karatepe. Photo
67 Rock-relief, King Tudhaliyas 1V with Dursun Cankut, courtesy of Dr Halet
a dagger carved before him, Yazilikaya Cambel

68 Sphinx Gate, Alaca Hiiyiik. Photo 84 Hittite hieroglyphs. Relief from Carch-
Josephine Powell emish. Ankara Museum. Photo
Josephine Powell
69 Hittite carved stone slab from Alaca
Hiyiik. Ankara Museum 85, 86 Reliefs from south-west gateway,
Karatepe. Photos Dursun Cankut,
zo Rock-relief at Gavurkalesi courtesy of Dr Halet Cambel

139
 87 Plan of Carchemish. Drawn by Lucinda 100 Plan of Sinjerli. Drawn by Lucinda
Rodd after Woolley Rodd after Akurgal

88 Detail of a fortress on the Balawat tor Relief with Hittite hieroglyphs.

Gates. British Museum. Photo cour- Ankara Museum. Photo courtesy of
tesy of the Trustees of the British Professor O. Gurney
Museum
102 Lion from gateway, Malatya. Ankara
89 Relief of soldiers, Carchemish. Photo Museum
courtesy of the Trustees of the Brit-
ish Museum 103-5 Stone reliefs from Malatya. Ankara
Museum
90 ‘Royal Buttress’, Carchemish. Photo
courtesy of the Trustees of the British 106 Colossal statue of a king from
Museum Malatya. Ankara Museum

91 “Long Wall of Sculptures’, Carchemish. 107 Relief of King Katuwas from

Photo courtesy of the Trustees of Carchemish. Ankara Museum
the British Museum
108 Relief of officers from Carchemish.
92 Detail of ‘Long Wal! of Sculptures’, Ankara Museum. Photo Josephine
Powell
Carchemish. Photo courtesy of the
Trustees of the British Museum
109 Assyrian army defeating Urartians in
859 Bec. Detail of Balawat bronze
93 Relief of musicians, Carchemish.
gates. British Museum. Photo
Photo courtesy of the Trustees of the
courtesy of the Trustees of the British
British Museum
Museum

94 Seated god on lions, Carchemish.

110 Van Citadel from south. Photo
Photo courtesy of the Trustees of the Josephine Powell
British Museum
t11 Ashurbanipal feasting. Relief from
95 Seated goddess, Kubaba, Carchemish. North Palace, Nineveh. British
Photo courtesy of the Trustees of the Museum. Photo courtesy of the
British Museum
Trustees of the British Museum

Relief of priestesses, Carchemish. 112 Gold medallion from ‘Toprakkale.

Photo courtesy of the Trustees of the Staatliche Museen, Berlin. Museum
British Museum photo

OF: Stela of Esarhaddon of Assyria, 681- 113 Silver pectoral from Toprakkale.
669 BC, from Sinjerli. Staatliche Staatliche Museen, Berlin. Museum
Museen, Berlin. Museum photo photo

98 Basalt statue of a god standing on lions 114 Bronze throne fragment from Top-
from Sinjerli. Archacological Museum, rakkale. British Museum. Photo
Istanbul courtesy of the Trustees of the British
Museum
99 Relief of Barrekup from Sinjerli.
Staatliche Museen, Berlin. Museum 115 Bronze bull’s head protome from
photo Toprakkale. British Museum. Photo

140
 courtesy of the Trustees of the British 128 Sarcophagi in undisturbed tomb,
Museum Altintepe. Photo courtesy of Pro-
fessor T. Ozgiig
116 Plan of fortress of Karmir Blur.
Drawn by Stephen Molnar after 129 Fragment of Urartian wall painting.
Piotrovsky Photo courtesy of Professor T. Ozgiig

Liz Plan of city of Karmir Blur. Drawn 130 Sack of the Urartian temple at
by Stephen Molnar after Piotrovsky Musasir. Relief from the Palace of
Sargon at Khorsabad. After Botta
118 Bronze model of a tower from
Toprakkale. British Museum. Photo 131 Reconstruction of a relief from
courtesy of the Trustees of the Adilcevaz. Drawn by Lucinda Rodd
British Museum after Burney and Lawson
119 Bronze plaque with relief ofa citadel
132 Stone wall of the Urartian temple at
from Toprakkale. British Museum.
Arim Berd. Photo courtesy of
Photo courtesy of the Trustees of
Professor Stuart Piggott
the British Museum

120 Storerooms, Karmir Blur. Photo 133 Karmir Blur from the east. Photo
Professor B. B. Piotrovsky, courtesy courtesy of Professor Stuart Piggott
of Dr R. D. Barnett
134 Great hall, Karmir Blur. Photo Pro-
eae Bronze gilt dish from Karmir Blur. fessor R. Hovannisian, courtesy of
State Historical Museum, Moscow. Professor D. M. Lang
Photos Professor B. B. Piotrovsky,
courtesy of Professor D. M. Lang 135 Painted pottery from the ‘Child’s
Tomb’, Gordion. Ankara Museum.
T22 Urartian helmets from Karmir Blur. Photo Josephine Powell
State Historical Museum, Moscow.
Photo Professor B. B. Piotrovsky, 136, 137 Phrygian terracotta reliefs from
courtesy of Dr R. D. Barnett Pazarli. Ankara Museum. Photos
Josephine Powell
123 Unprovenanced Urartian helmet.
British Museum. Photo courtesy of 138 “Royal Road’, Gordion. Photo
the Trustees of the British Museum courtesy of Professor R. S. Young

124 Bronze human-headed cauldron pro- 139 Phrygian gateway, Gordion. Photo
tomes from Toprakkale, Olympia, courtesy of Professor R. S. Young
Gordion and Praeneste
140 Coloured pebble mosaic, Gordion.
125 Urartian cauldron and stand from Photo courtesy of Professor R. S.
Altintepe. Ankara Museum. Photo Young
courtesy of the Director
141 Megaron interior reconstruction,
126 Sealed entrance to undisturbed tomb, Gordion. Photo Professor R. 5S.
Altintepe. Photo courtesy of Pro- Young
fessor T. Ozgiic
142 Reconstruction of the ‘Tomb = of
ea Winged horse engraved on bronze Midas’, Gordion. Drawn by Martin
from Altintepe. Ankara Museum. Weaver based on information sup-
Photo courtesy of Professor T. Ozgiig plied by Professor R. S. Young
 143 Studded ornamental bronze fibula 145 Bronze bowl with inscription incised
from the “Tomb of Midas’, Gordion. in wax from Gordion. Photo coutt-
Photo courtesy of Professor R. S. esy of Professor R. S. Young
Young
146 Bronze situla from the ‘Tomb of
144 Glass bow] from the ‘Child’s Tomb’, Midas’, Gordion. Painting by Piet de
Gordion. Ankara Museum. Photo Jong, courtesy of Professor R. S.
Josephine Powell - Young

142
 Index
Numbers in italics refer to illustrations

Acemhiiyitik, 10 Barrekup, Aramaean king, electrum, 33

Adad, god of thunder, 78 106 Erishum, 52
Adilcevaz, reconstruction of Beycesultan, 16, 20, 36, 4o: Erivan, 108
relief, 137 compound, plan, 79: Erzincan, 108
Abhiyawa, 80-1 palace, 81, 83; 78: shrine, Eskizehir, 124
Akkadian language, 54 835 86, “female, 33;
Akurgal, E., 100-2 Tales sis se Fasillar, statue, 72, 79
alabaster figurines, Kiltepe, Birejik, 44 Fraktin, rock-cut scene, 72
40 bit hilani, 92
Gavurkalesi, rock figures, 72
Alaca Hiiyiik, 7, 16, 25, 28: Bittel, K., 9
Goetze, A., 9
gateway, figures, 70-1, Boghazkoy see HattuSas
gold, 33: figurine of Hittite
Sphinx gate, 68: Royal Bronze Age: Early, 16-36:
Tombs, 20-4, copper Middle, 38-55: Late, 81, king, 733 72
Gordion, 124, 135: bronze
finials, s, 6, copper stag, 83-135 bowl, z4y: burials, 130:
8, figurines, 7, gold jug, 9, Biyikkale, 61: acropolis,
Child’s Tomb, 130, glass
jewellery, 12-74, recon- 125
bowl, 144, pottery, 735:
struction, 70, stone slab,
Cappadocia, 44 megaron reconstruction,
69, Lomb L, 77
Carchemish, 84, 90-100: I4I; mosaic, rgo: Phry-
Alishar, 55: citadel, 125
Herald’s Wall, 92, 94: gian gateway, 739: Royal
Alkim, B., 10
King’s Gate, 92, 94: Long Road, 125; 138: ‘Tomb of
Alp, S., 9 Wall of Sculptures, 92, Midas’, bronze fibula,
Altintepe: acropolis, 119:
94; 91, 93: plan, 67: 143; reconstruction, 142;
assembly hall, 120: caul-
reliefs, 93, 96, 107, 108: situla, 146
dron and stand, 2):
Royal Buttress, 92; 90: Greece, 133-5
tombs, 115-19, sarco-
phagi, 128, sealed statue of seated god, 96;
94: tomb inlays, 923; 77 Hacilar, 77
entrance, 1726: winged Halys Bend, 16, 57, 84
horse, 727 Catal Hiiytik, 15, 77
Cavus Tepe, 119 Hattian language, 54, 56
amber, 32, 44 HattuSas, 16, 57-65, 70, 125:
Anadolu, 11 Chalcolithic period, 13, 15
Cimmerians, 109, 135 clay tablet, 53; destruc-
Anitta, Hittite king, 55, 57 tion, 84; King’s Gate,
Anzavut, 119 copper, 18, 33, 44
costume, 105 60, ys—7, warrior, 613; 54:
Aramaeans, 84 Lion Gate, 60: Sphinx
architecture: Early Bronze cuneiform, 8, 13
Cyaxares, King, 109 Gate, 60: walls, 58
Age, 36: Hittite, 88-114, helmets, Urartian, 722, 123
119: Neo-Hittite, 99-100: Cybele, 78
Hieroglyphs, Hittite, 55,
Phrygian, 126-30: Troy Demirci Hiiyiik, 16 100; 8&4, ror: see also
Ug, 36 donkey caravans, 44 picture writing, writing
Argishti II, 119 Dork 7) fomb - Le 25. Hittites, 39, 54-6, 57-81
Arim Berd, temple wall, 732 swords and hilt, 20, Homer, 80, 81
art, 69-74, 77-9, 88-114 woven floor covering, 22: Horoztepe, 7, 20: tombs,
Arzawa, 81 Tomb II, 24, axeheads, 25-8, bronze figurine, 7s,
Ashur, 52 20, bronze figures, 79, bronze rattle, 77, bull
Ashurbanipal, 111 gold vessels, 27, sceptres, pole mounting, 78
Ashurnasirpal, 105 20, silver vase, 21, Trea- Hurrians, 70, 78, 83
Assuwa, 79 sure, 19, 32-3, gold
Assytia, 109, 110, 133: trad- overlay, 23, iron, 20, 32, 44
ing posts, 42-54 ivory, 32
Eflatun Pinar: restoration, Ivriz: reconstruction paint-
Babylon, 58 74: shtine, 72, 78-9, ing, &r: rock reliefs, 85,
Balawat, Bronze Gates, 108: relief, 73 107; 82
detail, 88, 109 Egypt, 60, 68
Balkan, K., 10 Elbistan, 44 Kanesh, 13, 42, 54, 55

143
 Kaneshite language, 54 metallurgy, 8, 11-36, 110 impression, j7, 77:
Karabel, royal reliefs, 72 Midas, King of Phrygia, stamp, 73-4
Karahtriik-Konya, 10 124: ‘Tomb’, 130-2 Shalmaneser III, 108
Karatepe, gateway teliefs, Mitanni, 83 Shamsi Adad I, 52
87, 107; 83, bs, 86 mother goddess, 72, 78 ships, Early Bronze Age, 32
Karaz, 16, 41 Marsilis I, 58 silver, 33, 44
Karmir Blur, 733: citadel, Musasir, 109: temple, 120, Sinjar, 44
113-15, plan, 7746, relief, sack, from relief, 730 Sinjerli, 84, 90, 97: plan,
17g: gilt dish, r2z: great Muwattali, Hittite king, 72 too: relief, 99: sculpture,
hall, 134: plan of city, 99, 106; 97, 98
117: store rooms, 120: Neo-Hittite, 84-119 Sipylos, Mt, ‘Mother of the
tower model, TDG: Neshian language, 56 Gods’, 72, 78
Urartian helmets, 722 Nimrud, 133 spring-cult, 72, 79
Rkarum, 42-52, 55 Nineveh, 109: relief from Suppiluliumas, Hittite king,
reconstruction, 40 palace, 777 58,59 |
Kaskaeans, 83 Novosvobonaya, 7 Syro-Hittite, 84-119
Kayalidere, 119
Kirovakan, 7 Ozgiic, Nimet, 10 Tarsus, 16, 19
Kizzuvatna, 83 Tell Taynat, 100
Palaic language, 55 Teshub, god, 78, 94
Kiiltepe, 8, 16, 38-42; 38:
pankush, 68 textile floor covering, 32; 22
alabaster figurines, 7,5, Pasargadae, “Tomb of
36: ‘Cappadocian’ urn, Tiglath-pileser III, 105, 108
Cyrus’, 120 Tokat, 25: bronze figurine
37: Rarum, 42-52, 55, clay
Patnos, 10
tablets, 47, cylinder seal
Pazarli, 125
743 73
impression, jz, house Toprakkale: bronze caul-
Perssinari, 8 dron protomes, 124:
reconstruction, 39, 45,
Phrygians, 84, 124-35 temple, 110, 119, bronze
ivory statuette, 495
picture-writing, Hittite, 85-7 bull’s head, zrs, medal-
pottery, 42, 43, tecon-
Pithana, Hittite king, 55 lion, r72, pectoral, 773,
struction, 40, steatite
political practice, Hittite, throne fragments, 774,
mould, 48, terracottas,
68-9 tower model, 778
46, 47, fo ; Pontic tombs, 20, 24, 25-8
megaron, axonometric Trialeti, 7, 42
pottery: “Alishar IT, 51; 42, aroy, 9G) eros aoe segs
reconstruction, 74: spear-
43: “Alishar III? 39, 51: fall, 80: ‘Priam’s Trea-
head, y2
Alishar Intermediate, 39: sute’, 32-3; 26, 27
Kussara, 55, 57: kings, 55
animal shaped, 52; 46, 47, Troy Ig: axonometric
yo: Buyukkale, 61: Cap- reconstruction, 30: jewel-
language, 54-5
padocian, 39; 37, 44: lery, 28
Latakiya, bronze statuette,
Gordion, 735: Kiiltepe, Tudhaliyas 1V, Hittite king,
74376 40-1: ‘Syrian bottles’, 41:
Layard, Sir H., 110 64, 83
theriomorphic vases, 61: turquoise, 32
Lchashen, 7
Yortan face urns, 4 Tut-ankh-amun’s widow, 58
lead, 33: figurine, 51-2
‘Priam’s Treasure’, 29-33;
Lemnos, 18
26, By. Urartu, 8, 108-122
Lesbos, 18
Puzur-Ashur, 52
Luvian dialect, 38, 54, 72, 81 Van, 108: citadel, rzo
religion, 53-4, 62-5, 77-9
Mahmatlar, 20: tombs, 25- Rusa I, 119 Warpalawas, King, 107, 135
9, bronze axes, 76 Rusa _ II, 1ro9 weapons: Dorak, 20: Troy
Maikop, 7 Hg, 33
Malatya, 85: gateway, 102— Sahure, Pharaoh, 32 writing, 85-8, 133-5
3, lion, 102, reliefs, 703-y, Sakcagozii, 85, 100
statuc, 106 Sardis, 135 Yazilikaya: entrance, 67:
Marash, 44, 85, 100 Sargon I, 52 rock reliefs, 61, 62-5, 70,
‘megaron’, 18, 36, 39, 126: Sargon II, 92, 105, 109, ion S45, LOZ ozze
axonometric reconstruc- T20) Tad, 133 “Tomb of Midas’, 125,
tion, 74 Schliemann, H., 19 130-2: sanctuary, plan,
Mellink, M, 9 sculpture, 61-2 J9, reconstruction paint-
Mersin, 15, 16: axono- Scythians, 109 ing, 60
metric reconstruction, 2 seals: cylinder, 53, 73-4, 94, Yortan, 18: face urns, 4
144
Library of the
Early Civilizations
GENERAL EDITOR
PROFESSOR STUART PIGGOTT

This series of clearly and concisely

written volumes introduces the
archaeology, history, art and culture of
early civilizations to the student and
general reader. Each volume is written
by an authority who describes and
analyzes his chosen subject in the light
of the latest advances and discoveries.
A wealth of photographs and drawings
in both color and black-and-white
complement the text; and all important
finds and objects are illustrated—in
many cases for the first time in color.
Students and librarians will welcome
the appearance in individual, inexpensive
volumes of these up-to-the-minute
résumés; while to the general reader,
the extraordinary achievement of ancient
civilizations will come as a revelation.

OTHER VOLUMES NOW AVAILABLE

Early Mesopotamia and Iran

M. E. L. MALLOWAN

“The reader is tempted to savor every

visual detail . . . the long-vanished
human civilizations are brought back
to life.” —Library Journal. 43 color
plates, plus 99 halftones.

Egypt to the end

of the Old Kingdom
CYRIL ALDRED
“This superb little book—much of it
in pictures .. . does its great subject
full justice.” —New Yorker.
41 color plates, plus 95 halftones.

Earliest Civilizations of
the Near East
JAMES MELLAART
A portrait of our most ancient
ancestor—man of 9000 B.C.
30 magnificent color plates, plus
109 halftones.

continued on back
continued from back flap

Early Civilization in China

WILLIAM WATSON

“Few Western scholars are as knowledgeable about the material remains of

prehistoric and dynastic China. In his latest and characteristically well-
written study he roams over familiar ground . . . for the edification of
intelligent readers.” —Library Journal. 44 color plates, plus 90 halftones.

Civilizations of the Indus Valley and Beyond

SIR MORTIMER WHEELER ma

“A finely written and handsomely illustrated volume by Sit Mortimer

Wheeler, whose very name is indelibly associated with modern Indian
archaeology.’ ’_Library Journal. 23 color plates, plus 121 halftones.

The Royal Hordes: Nomad Peoples of the Steppes

Be) CEES

“Authoritative, well written, and attractively illustrated and printed, it

covers subjects on which almost nothing has hitherto been published for
the layman.” —Library Journal. 32 color plates, plus 109 halftones.

The First Merchant Venturers

WILLIAM CULICAN

“This fascinating book .. . is told well and richly illustrated with a mass of
material, much of which is out-of-the-way and unfamiliar.”—7imes
Literary Supplement. 30 color plates, plus 109 halftones.

The Stone Age Hunters

GRAHAME CLARK

The pivotal volume in the series, this provocative book presents the most
up-to-date available introduction to prehistoric man: his way of life, his
conquest of his environment, and his emergence into history, by a world-
acknowledged authority. 25 color plates, plus 113 halftones.

The Home of the Heroes: The Aegean before the Greeks

SINCLAIR HOOD

Carbon-14 testing suggests a remote antiquity in the Aegean, pre-dating

6000 B.C, The authot thoroughly examines new and older evidence, and
rejects cetiain current opinions on Linear B in favor of “outmoded” ones.
26 color plates, plus 96 halftones,

Ancient Greek Literature in its Living Context

HW. G. BALDRY Just Published

McGraw-Hill Book Company

330 West 42d Street, New York, N.Y. 10036
38206