Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T20:45:41.419Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Hittite Name of Til Barsip: Evidence from a new Hieroglyphic Fragment from Tell Ahmar

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 December 2013

J. D. Hawkins
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Writing in Carchemish, Vol. III (1952), Richard Barnett brought the evidence of the two Hieroglyphic Luwian stelae found at Tell Ahmar (the Assyrian Til-Barsip) to bear on the Karkamiš chronology. At that date, immediately after the discovery of KARATEPE, the value of a number of Hieroglyphic signs was still not established, which hampered the readings of some of the rulers' names. Also the actual dynastic information provided by the two mutilated stelae lay still largely out of reach. It is nevertheless remarkable that the progress in interpretation of these and related monuments over the last thirty years has tended to confirm the datings originally proposed by Barnett. Thus it is with great pleasure that I offer to Richard Barnett in this volume a new piece of information which elucidates some points on the TELL AHMAR stelae and permits an interesting new interpretation.

Type
Research Article
Information
Anatolian Studies , Volume 33 , December 1983 , pp. 131 - 136
Copyright
Copyright © The British Institute at Ankara 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Recent treatments of Bit-Adini (including Til Barsip) from historical, sculptural and epigraphic points of view include: Ussishkin, D., Orientalia 40 (1971), 431–7Google Scholar; Orthmann, W., Untersuchungen zur Spätheth. Kunst (Bonn, 1971), 182–4Google Scholar; Meriggi, P., Manuale di Eteo Geroglifico II/2 (Rome, 1975)Google Scholar, nos. 280–4, 307; Genge, H., Nordsyrisch-südanatolische Reliefs (Copenhagen, 1979), I 52–5Google Scholar; Poetto, M., Oriens Antiquus 17 (1978), 279–85Google Scholar; Hawkins, J. D., An. St. 30 (1980), 139–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 Ikeda, Y., Iraq 41 (1979), 78 f.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3 I R 30, col. ii 9 = ARAB I, § 716.

4 Thureau-Dangin, F., Revue d'Assyriologie 27 (1930), 17Google Scholar (= Til-Barsib (Paris, 1936), 148)Google Scholar, ll. 19–20.

5 Parpola, S., Neo-Assyrian Toponyms (Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1970), 199Google Scholar s.v. (2 attestations).

6 Ibid., 353 s.v.

7 Made known to me in the Autumn 1981 by the kindness of Dr. Hatice Gonnet, to whom I also owe the photographs on Fig. 2. I am indebted to the authorities of the Louvre Museum for permission to publish the piece.

8 Poetto, M., Oriens Antiquus 17 (1978), 279 f.Google Scholar; Hawkins, J. D., An. St. 30 (1980), 139CrossRefGoogle Scholar and note 4.

9 Cf. Ussishkin, D., Orientalia 40 (1971), 432 f.Google Scholar, citing Hrozný, B., Inscriptions Hittites Hieroglyphiques III (Prague, 1937), 481 note 6Google Scholar.

10 The name could of course be equally well read Masuwara: the reason for selecting Masuwari will be seen below (footnote 23).

11 Cf. J. D. Hawkins, A. Morpurgo Davies and G. Neumann, Hittite Hieroglyphics and Luwian: new evidence for the connection (Nachrichten der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, Phil.-Hist. Klasse Nr. 6, 1973), 180, 183Google Scholar.

12 An. St. 30 (1980), 142 fGoogle Scholar.

13 Ibid., 146 § 5.

14 LOUVRE fragment 1. 2 has the remains of what seems to be a rather unusual context: …]mi[…]i[…]-′ ∣tá-t[i]-z[i?] ∣IRA-lá/í/u-i-z[a …

The verb IRA(-)zasali- (see Florilegium Anatolicum, p. 152, for the form), is normally found in the imperative with a god or gods as the subject, “may the god(s) be angry!” The previous two words are best restored as (a)minzi tatinzi, “my fathers”, nom./acc. plur.; (a)miyanza tati(ya)nza, dat. plur., is also possible. The combination of “my fathers” whether nom., acc. or dat. plur. with the verb “be angry” is certainly unparalleled. “My fathers [were] angry” or “[the gods were] angry [with] my fathers” seem possible interpretations in spite of the lack of parallel.

15 See Meriggi, , Manuale II/2, 217Google Scholar, correcting the reading of Laroche, HH no. 462. With this the second piece of evidence quoted by Laroche for no. 462 = pá disappears – the first, the alleged identification of Barga is also to be discarded, since the ethnic adjective in KARKAMIS A 1 a, § § 3 and 36 should be read (*349) sà-*462-ka-wa]i-ni- (URBS): cf. Hawkins, , An. St. 22 (1972), 109Google Scholar. However there are two additional pieces of evidence which still point to the value pá: (1) the identification of Hier. (LOQUI) pá+ra/i-ta with Cun. Luw. paratta, “curses” (Hawkins, , Morpurgo Davies and Neumann, HHL, 175Google Scholar); (2) the word DOMUS+RA/I(-) pá+ra/i-nu-w[a/i … (KARKAMIŠ fragment A 28g, 2), probably to be identified with the common verb DOMUS+RA/I-nu- (read *paranu-?: see Laroche, HH, no. 248; cf. Hawkins, , An. St. 20(1970), 105Google Scholar).

16 del Monte, G. and Tischler, J., Die Orts- und Gewässernamen der hethitischen Texte (RGTC 6; Wiesbaden 1978), 267Google Scholar s.v.

17 Weidner, E., Politische Dokumente aus Kleinasien (Leipzig, 1923), 22–5Google Scholar (KBo I, 1 rev. 14′–21′), especially notes 6 and 8.

18 Forrer, E., Forschungen II/1 (1926), 44 f.Google Scholar

19 Goetze, A., Journal of Cuneiform Studies 7 (1953), 60Google Scholar.

20 Klengel, H., Geschichte Syrians I (1965), 51 f., and 89Google Scholar.

21 Astour, M., Orientalia 38 (1969), 407Google Scholar; Journal of Near Eastern Studies 31 (1972), 105Google Scholar.

22 Del Monte and Tischler, op. cit., 48 s.v. Astata.

23 For rhotacism see now Davies, A. Morpurgo, KZ 98 (1984)Google Scholar, forthcoming. The rhotacism would presuppose a pronunciation Mazuwadi. It must be admitted that the TELL AHMAR inscriptions belong to the earlier group, contemporary with the Suhis-Katuwas group at Karkamiš, in which Professor Davies has not observed evidence of spoken rhotacism, represented in the orthography. It may well be, however, that a place name might show the change earlier than th e general language, as represented in conservative scribal orthography. For the rest of the phonetic correspondences between the Cun. and Hier. names, Cun. zu is normally used for su (i.e. sú) in Boǧazköy Akkadian, where also t is likely to represent d (as opposed to tt=t). The final -i of Mazuwati may or may not represent the vowel of the stem form, but has led me to prefer Hier. Masuwari against Masuwara.

24 As an alternative, Weidner's original restoration (loc. cit., note 8), “of [the land of Mitanni]”, would eliminate this potential objection.