ISSN: 0041-4255
e-ISSN: 2791-6472

A New Funerary Stele from Karkemish and New Values for Some Anatolian Hieroglyphic Signs

Hasan Peker

Istanbul University, Faculty of Letters, Department of Ancient Languages and Cultures, Istanbul/TÜRKİYE

Keywords: Karkemish, Iron Age Funerary Stele, Anatolian Hieroglyphic Script, Luwian, Birds of Prey.

Introduction

The renewed Turco-Italian Excavations at Karkemish since 2011 have contributed to a new understanding of this capital city through its many occupational phases, especially as regards the Late Bronze and Iron Ages, corresponding to the Empire and Late Hittite historical phases[1] . The epigraphic materials from the latter phase that have been retrieved[2] do not just expand the already substantial corpus of Hieroglyphic Luwian inscriptions from the Iron Age known thus far, but also continue to provide new historical and linguistic insights, which in turn allow us to put forward novel interpretations of previously known inscriptions. This article represents a case in point. In the religious and administrative core of the Late Hittite city, the so-called Lower Palace area, we retrieved the top part of an inscribed funerary stele (KH.16.O.378) made of limestone[3] . The front and left sides of the stele are partially preserved, with three-stepped crenelations on its top bearing a rosette in their middle. The inscription runs sinistroverse. An edition of it is presented below (§ 1). The name of the owner of the stele is lost; only the owner’s qualification as “the woman of Tarhu-wasu” and the profession of Tarhu-wasu as the “sacred priest of the Harmanean god(dess)” are preserved. However, the spelling of this professional name in the present text offered the cue for a study of the Anatolian hieroglyphic sign L375 and a series of related signs, whose results are reported in the second part of this article (§§ 2-3).

1. Edition of the Funerary Stele KH.16.O.378

Date: Early 8th century BCE (based on paleography)[4].

Dimensions: ht. 39.5 cm; w. 41.5 cm; th. 25.5 cm; line ht. 9.5 cm.; preserved line length: 34.5 cm.

UTM 37S coordinates: 412291.262 E, 4076588.19 N; elevation 351.7 m amsl.

Current location: Gaziantep Museum.

Figure 1. Top, left, and front sides of the stele (KH.16.O.378)

Figure 2. Drawing of the inscription on the stele

Transliteration

[za-wa/I STELE-za f PN I ]TONITRUS-hu-wa/i-su-sa

(DEUS)hara/i-ma-na-wa/i-na-sa-a |PURUS-L375-sá FEMINA-ti-sa

Translation

[This stele (is) of PN,] wife/woman of Tarhu-wasu,

the sacred priest of the Harmanean god(dess).

Commentary

[I ]TONITRUS-hu-wa/i-su-sa, “of Tarhu-wasu”. The name Tarhu-wasu can be interpreted as a possessive compound: “(Having) the favor of the Storm-god”; or as a Satznamen: “The Storm-god succeeds / The Storm-god (has) succeded”[5] . This name is well attested in the Hittite Empire period[6] as well as in the Late Hittite one; in fact, this could be the same individual as the one who is mentioned in CEKKE § 17l[7] .

(DEUS)hara/i-ma-na-wa/i-na-sa-a, “of the Harmanean god(dess)”. Harmana possibly played an important role in the cult of the consort of the Stag-god, Alanzu(wa), in the Bronze Age pantheon of Anatolia. The attestations for this yet unlocated city of the Iron Age[8] are as follows:

KARKAMIŠ A15b § 10[9] :

(DEUS) hara/i-ma-na-wa/i-na-sa-pa-wa/I (URBS)DEUS.DOMUS -tà AEDIFICARE+MI-ha

“I built the temple of the Harmanean god(dess)”.

KULULU 5 § 1[10]:

(DEUS)á-la-zú-wa/i-sa|| hara/i-ma-na(URBS)

“(the deity) Alanzuwa, in the city of Harmana”.

It seems that, during the reign of Yariri, a Harmanean deity was introduced into the pantheon of Karkemish with a temple consecrated to him/her (and the findspot of our stele may suggest that this temple was located in the Lower Palace area). In light of KULULU 5 § 1 (see above), one can perhaps equate this deity with Alanzu(wa)[11].

|PURUS-L375-sá = kummayalli(ya)s, [12] “of the sacred priest”. The L375 sign should be analyzed as a phonetic complement and the only phonetic value that can apply to it is /li/ (for additional attestations of L375 = /li/, see below). The word kummayalli- is also attested in cuneiform Luwian, in KUB 35.110. The present text makes it clear that the word in question represents a title of a cult official, a kind of priest. It can be equated with Hitttite suppis LÚSANGA, “sacred SANGA-priest”, or simply “sacred priest”.

2. The Anatolian Hieroglyphic Signs L375 and L144 (= *521[13]): New Values

2.1. The phonetic value of L375

The L375 sign is attested in several texts as a syllabogram[14] to write the verb lili(ya)-, meaning, we suggest, “to change; improve; alter, falsify”. MANUS/MANUS.L218 might add or imply a negative sense, while SA4 adds a positive sense to the verb: “to improve”[15]. The preverbs/adverbs arha and sara delimit or denote the intensity of the action.

Table 1. Attestations of L375 and the verb lili(ya)-

2.1.1. Attestations of L375 in the writing of the verb lili(ya)-:

2.1.1.1. GÜRÜN upper § 6[17] (curse protasis):

za-pa-wa/I (COR[18])za+ra/i-sà REL-i-sa|| ARHA (MANUS)li-L375-ti
za=pa=wa zar(t)-sa kwis arha liliti
“(He) who shall change this will (lit. heart)…”

2.1.1.2. ŞIRZI (side) § 5[19] (curse protasis):

|za-pa-wa/I || i-mara/I PES2 .PES-pa-mi-na |REL-sá |ARHA |li-L375-ti
zan=pa=wa immara tarpamin kwis arha liliti
“(He) who shall alter/change this countryside path[20]...”

2.1.1.3. ŞIRZI (top) § 8 (curse protasis):

[|z]a[-I]a-pa-wa/I [kwi/a]-za-ma[-ia] |ARHA [|]REL-sá [|]L375-[li-t]I
zaya=pa=wa kwanzamaya arha kwis liliti
“(He) who shall falsify/change these carvings, …”

2.1.1.4. CEKKE § 21[21] (curse protasis):

ni-pa-wa/I FINES-hi-zi ARHA MANUS.L218-lu/a/I ha-I
nipa=wa irhinzi arha lili hai
“or he shall be convinced[22] to change the frontiers,...”

2.1.1.5. TELL AHMAR 5 § 12[23]:

|SUPER+ra/i-a-wa/i-ta |(SA4)li-li-ia wa/i-na-*a |COR-tara/i-i-na BONUS-li-ia-nu-wa/I
sara=wa=an=ta liliya a=wa=an atrin walliyanuwa
“You (= Hamiyata) improve him up! And exalt him, himself!”

2.1.2. Attestations of L375 in the writing of personal names:

2.1.2.1. KARKAMIŠ A16e1[24]

DOMUS-ní-L375[…] (= Parnili)

2.1.2.2. ASSUR letter d § 1 (CHLI, 535)[25]

DOMUS-ni-L375-[I]-ia in

2.1.3. Attestations of L375 in hapax legomena:

2.1.3.1. KARKAMIŠ A19j1 (CHLI, 204):

[wa/i-mu]-tá (DEUS)ku+AQUILA-sá || L129-ri+i-L375 a-tá za-a-ti |á-sa5 -za-ta-a [< a >=wa=mu]=ta Kupapas arili anta zati assazata
“And inside the alili-bird (= through the observation of an augural bird), thus spoke Kubaba to me: …”

2.1.3.2. SULTANHAN § 46-47 (CHLI, 467; curse protasis):

|za-pa-wa/I |a+ra/i-ma-za |REL-sa-a |za+ra/i-ti-ti-i-I || |ni-pa-wa/i-ta-a |“FEMINA”-na-ti-i-sa |ta-L375-li-i-sa |pa+ra/i-sa5 +ra/i |u-pa-i
za=pa=wa aramanza kwis zartiti nipa=wa=ata wanattis talilis parsari upai

“He who desires this renown, either he (is) of a TALILI-women (and) brings/ carries[26] it (=the name/renown) by (that) occasion...”.

Although the hapax legomenon ta-L375-li-I could theoretically be also read as *talali, [27] this is not enough to posit a vocalization in /a/ of the L375 sign in the Late Hittite period; therefore, a transliteration of it as li4 is suggested here.

One can observe that the L74 sign (whose form is also very similar to L375) is possibly the cursive form of the L129[28]. Both the phonetic (/ali/) and logographic (augural bird of prey) values fit the contexts of all the known attestations (see Table 2, below).

Figure 3. Forms of L129 (KARKAMIŠ 19j1, KARKAMIŠ 17kk**) and L74 (KARKAMIŠ A28a1, SUVASA C, TOPADA § 25)

Table 2. Attestations of L74 (= cursive form of L129)

2.2. The Phonetic Value of L144 (= the “Empire” forerunner of L375)

The appearance of the L375 sign is a bird-head with a sketchy body presenting an abstract depiction of its bumpy fore-neck and chest. One can observe that L144 has a similar form (see Table 3) and can be interpreted as the Transitional and Empire Period form of L375. The examples below support this equivalence. We may also add the L461 sign as a homonym of L144, as the occurrences of the former suggest that it was used to write an identical syllable or word.

Table 3. Forms of L375 and L144

Table 4. Attestations of L144 and L461 with the values /ala/i/ and/or ALA

In addition to having these phonetic values in personal names, the L144 sign was used to write a conjugated verb in KARAHÖYÜK (ELBİSTAN) § 18[49]: SUPERL144-ha, sarla/iha[50], “I offered/exalted”.

3. The New Values Attributed to L375 and L144: Some Consequences

3.1. Comments on some spellings (in table 4 above) that include L144 and/or L461

3.1.1. L144-OMNIS = Alantalli

This personal name, which is otherwise known from cuneiform sources,[51] is possibly a derivative of *alant-, “(he who) belongs to the place”,[52] and may then mean “local? ”. Or it could be a derivative of the toponym Alanta.[53] A possible alternative writing of it, L128+li, occurs in KARABEL A[54]. Finally, note the similar name Alantimuwa, “Having the might of the place”, written either I LOCUS-ti||-L273-wa/i-sa or I LOCUS-la/i-ti-mu-wa/i-sa in sources from the Late Hittite period[55].

3.1.2. L144-mu(wa/i) = Alamuwa[56]

An alternative writing of the same name in the Late Hittite period is [ I ]á-lá/í-mu(wa/i)- sá[57]

3.1.3. L144-tá = Alanta

See Alantalli, above.

3.1.4. a-L144-L461 = Alalli

This can be interpreted as “He who belongs to Ala”.

3.1.5. (DEUS.FEMINA)L461 = (divine-woman/lady) Ala

BOROWSKI 26 clearly shows that the divine name Ala could be written with the L461 sign alone. Thus, L19 in STAG-rhyton[58] and EMİRGAZİ altars should be analyzed as a logogram instead of considering it as a part of the name of the goddess Ala.

3.2. The spellings of the divine name Ala and the epigraphs of the STAG-rhyto

One of the personal names in Table 4 above is a theophoric compound with the name of the goddess Ala. One can legitimately assume that the name of this goddess could also have been written otherwise, that is, syllabically[59] or with a homophonic value. In fact, the L172 sign has the phonetic value /ala/ when it occurs in the initial position in the Empire period[60]. If we assume that L172 was also used to write the homophonic divine name Ala, then the epigraphs on the STAG-rhyton might be interpreted as follows:

Figure 4. Forms of OMNIS2 (L430) and ala (L172).

The epigraph on the right must go with the individual who libates and the offerers, according to the direction of the sign OMNIS2 (L430)[61]. In fact, both signs of this epigraph are dextroverse, and the first sign is not CERVUSx but rather L172 (ala), here used, presumably, to write the name of the goddess Ala (Fig. 4). Furthermore, the libating individual (and/or his gesture of adoration) along with all the other offerers depicted here can be taken as a part of the inscription itself: LIBARE (and) ADORARE[62], “to libate/offer (and) worship”. Thus, the scene with the epigraph on the right can be read as follows:

Ala OMNIS2 (LIBARE = depiction of offerers)

“Libating/offering to all (the names of) Ala.”[63]

While the epigraph on the left reads:

FRONS2 [64] REGIO OMNIS2 FILIA

“The foremost daughter of the entire country/all lands”[65].

Or, as a less likely alternative, by interpreting L19 (FRONS2 ) as a postposition:

(depiction of Ala and/or her bird of prey[66] = ALA) FRONS2 REGIO OMNIS2 FILIA Ala OMNIS2 (LIBARE = depiction of offerers)

“In front of Ala, the daughter of the entire country/all lands, libating/offering to all (the names of) Ala”.

3.3. Attestations of L461 and L19 (FRONS2 ) in Context

One can apply the interpretation proposed above for the sign L19 (FRONS2 ) to the inscription of EMİRGAZİ altars. The sign L19 (FRONS2 ) follows the divine Mount Sarpa as a postposition in all attestations (listed below).

3.3.1. EMİRGAZİ 1 § 2-3:[67]

wa/i-*a (DEUS)MONS.THRONUS FRONS2 CERVUS3 .L463-zi/a PONERE zi/a-ha-wa/i-mi STELE pa+ra/i-*a PONERE

“I set up the stone/object of the stag(-god) of the countryside (= EMİRGAZİ 1 A-D) in front of (=at the foot of ? ) the Mount Sarpa, and afterward I put this stele (= EMİRGAZİ 2 or lost).”

3.3.2. EMİRGAZİ 1 § 26 (curse apodosis):

See 3.4.1.1 below.

3.3.3. EMİRGAZİ 1 § 29:

wa/i-na-*a (DEUS)SOL SOL+RA/I (DEUS)TONITRUS.CAELUM (DEUS) CERVUS3 -ti.L463 (DEUS)MONS.THRONUS FRONS2 (DEUS.FEMINA) L461 su-na-sa-ti PUGNUS-mi-tu

“May the Sun-goddess of Arinna, the Storm-god of the sky, the Stag-god of the countryside, in front of the divine Mount Sarpa, make him firm/strengthen him with the abundance of Ala”.

3.3.4. EMİRGAZİ 1 § 30:

REL-i(a)-sa-ha (DEUS)MONS.THRONUS FRONS2 CERVUS3 .L463-zi/a PONERE

And (he) who will put the Stag(-god) of the countryside-stone in front of the divine Mount Sarpa…

3.3.5. EMİRGAZİ 1 § 37:

wa/i-tu-*a (DEUS)CERVUS3 -ti.L463 (DEUS)MONS.THRONUS FRONS2 (DEUS.FEMINA)L461 su-na-sa-ti á-na+ra/i-zú-ha-ti PRAE hwi/a-i(a)-tu

“May the Stag-god of the countryside, in front of the divine Mount Sarpa, run before him with the abundance (and) forcefulness of Ala!”

Accepting a further attestation of L19 used as a logogram (FRONS2 ) in KARAKUYU might improve our understanding of this inscription, as well:

3.3.6. KARAKUYU:[68]

FRONS2 MONS.THRONUS (MONS)L417(3)-wa/i-tá (MONS)su-na+ra/I CERVUS4 .IACULUM HATTI(URBS)×MONS.TU TONITRUS.PURUS. L417(4) REL-i-pa[69]

“(I/he) hunt(ed) in front of (=at the foot of ? ) the Mount Sarpa, Mount Saluwanda, Mount Sunnara, (and) indeed, (at) the Storm-god’s sacred vault of Mount Tudhaliya in(side) Hattusa”[70].

3.4. Royal L398 and Ala’s L398

A controversial sign, L398, is attested both in association with the goddess Ala and as an epithet (or a part of it) of the king connected with hunt (and/or hunting ground). The form of the sign looks like a rectangular object(?), an encircled area(?), or also a piece of ground being shaped. We tentatively suggest it could be a kind of road (cf. sub 2.1.1.2 and fn. 16, above). The sign in question has possibly the phonetic value /tu/ in KARAHÖYÜK (ELBİSTAN) and on some seals (see 5.2). All the known attestations of L398 in context are given below.

3.4.1. L398 as a logogram:

3.4.1.1. EMİRGAZİ 1 § 26 (curse apodosis):

wa/i-tu-tá-*a (DEUS)SOL SOL+RA/I (DEUS)TONITRUS.CAELUM (DEUS) CERVUS3 -ti.L463[71] (DEUS)MONS.THRONUS FRONS2 (DEUS.FEMINA) L461 REX.L398-zi/a sara/i-zi/a INFRA tara/i-zi/a-nú-wa/i-tu

“For him, in front of the divine Mount Sarpa, may the Sun-goddess of Arinna, the Storm-god of the sky (and) the Stag-god of the countryside turn/throw down the superior/high royal L398s of Ala!”

3.4.1.2. EMİRGAZİ 2 § 13:

[(DEU]S)SOL SOL+RA/I a-mi DOMINUS.NA [RE]X.L398-ha-ti PONERE[72] “[And] (I) put (them[73]) by/from/via (my) royal L398(s), for/to the Sun-goddess of Arinna, my lady”.

3.4.1.3. YALBURT Block 16-10:[74]

(By the grace of the Storm-god, I conquered all lands,)

CERVUS4 wa/i-sà-ti || wa/i-mi-*a HEROS L463.L398 CERVUS4 .IACULUM MAGNUS.REX

“and by the grace of the Stag(-god), I (am) the Hero, the Countryside-L398, the Hunter, the Great King”.

3.4.1.4. EMİRGAZİ 3:[75]

(DEUS)CERVUS3 -ti.L463 wa/i-sà-ti wa/i-mi-*a CERVUS4 .IACULUM L463. L398 H[ERO ...]

“and by the grace of the Stag-god of the countryside, I (am) the Hunter, the Countryside-L398, the H[ero ...].”

3.4.1.5. BoHa 19.411 and BoHa 19.695-696:

MAGNUS.L398

“Great/Chief (of) L398(s)”.

3.4.1.6. BOROWSKI 16:

HI-VIR.ZI/A BONUS2 L398

“Hekur-ziti, wealthy (man of) L398”.

3.4.2. L398 as a syllabogram:

3.4.2.1. KARAHÖYÜK (ELBİSTAN) § 24:

a-wa/i-sa (DEUS)TONITRUS POCULUM.PES.L67 LIS-L398 a-sa-tu

a=wa=as Tarhunzas POCULUM.PES.L67 (za)sali(ya)s=tu astu

“Let him, the Storm-god of ELBİSTAN, be the prosecutor against him!”

3.4.2.2. Bo 5.8:[76]

zi/a-L398 REX.FILIA,

“Zitu,[77] the Prince.”

3.4.2.3. BoHa 19.623:

LINGUA+CLAVUS-L398-tà-sa = Haddudasa.

3.4.2.4. BoHa 19.598:

BOS-L398 = (M)u(wa/i)tu? .

3.4.2.5. BoHa 19.765:

x-L398-x

3.4.2.6. BoHa 19.698-699:

L144-L461-L398 = Ala/i-alatu or L144-L461.L398 = Ali-ALA-L398 (possibly “high? Ala’s road”).

3.4.2.7. BOROWSKI 36:

cccL398-sà-LUNA/sa? = Tusasa?

Similar constructions to that of 3.4.2.5 can be observed with REX.L398 (3.4.1.1 and 3.4.1.2) and L463.L398 (3.4.1.3 and 3.4.1.4). Alternatively, one could suggest “royal road” for REX.L398; “countryside road” for L463.L398; and, as an epithet of the king, “hero of the countryside road(s)”, for L463.L398.HEROS (3.4.1.3) and HEROS.L463.L398 (3.4.1.4).

Table 5. List of discussed signs

Conclusions

The spelling PURUS-L375-sá in KH.16.O.378 reveals that L375 has a phonetic value /li/. The graphic resemblance of the sign L144 (= *521) with L375 leads us to identify it as the “Empire” (and “Transitional”) form of L375, while its attestations on seals and in KARAHÖYÜK (ELBİSTAN) allow us to posit a phonetic value /ala/i/ for it. Furthermore, the L375 sign (sometimes misidentified as L19) is attested with L461 in several inscriptions and seal legends. A contextual analysis of these attestations provided new readings and interpretations for these signs.

In addition, we could establish that the L19 sign has both phonetic (á) and logographic (FRONS2 ) values in the Empire period. Occurrences of L19 together with the goddess Ala show that this sign is not part of the spelling of the goddess’ name, but it rather represents a postposition. The logographic values (“in front of / at the foot of ? ” and “foremost”) suggested in this paper fit the attestations of L19 in EMİRGAZİ altars, KARAKUYU inscriptions, and the left side of the STAG-rhyton.

As for the signs originating from a bird of prey (see the signs for BUTEO in Table 5), they occur with the phonetic values /ala/i/ and /li/ in a series of personal names (see Table 4). Finally, a newly recognized verb, lili(ya)-, “to alter/change; improve”, allows us to improve our comprehension of several passages in Iron Age hieroglyphic inscriptions (see 2.1).

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Baykan, Daniş, “İkonografide MÖ 1. Bine Kadar Alıcı Kuşlar”, Işık Şahin’e Armağan (Studies in Honour of Işık Şahin), eds. S. Melike Zeren-Hasdağlı - Emre Taştemür, Trakya Üniversitesi Yayınları, Edirne 2022, pp. 39-58.

Bauer, Anna H., Morphosyntax of the Noun Phrase in Hieroglyphic Luwian, Brill, Leiden - Boston 2014.

Beran, Thomas, “Stempelsiegel und gesiegelte Bullen”, MDOG, Vol. 93, 1962, pp. 59-68.

Bittel, Kurt - Naumann, Rudolf - Beran, Thomas - Hachmann, Rolf - Gottfried, Kurth, Boğazköy III, Funde aus den Grabungen 1952-1955, Verlag Gebr. Mann, Berlin 1957.

Bittel, Kurt - Güterbock, Hans Gustav - Neumann, Günter - Neve, Peter - Otten, Heinrich - Seidl, Ursula, Boğazköy V. Funde aus den Grabungen 1970 und 1971, Gebr. Mann Verlag, Berlin 1975.

Bossert, Helmuth Theodor, “Die Felsinschrift von Şırzı”, AfO, Vol. 17, 1954-1956, pp. 56-70.

Canby, Jeany Vorys, “Falconry (Hawking) in Hittite Lands”, JNES, Vol. 61, 2002, pp. 161-201.

d’Alfonso, Lorenzo, “War in Anatolia in the Post-Hittite Period: The Anatolian Hieroglyphic Inscription of Topada Revised”, JCS, Vol. 71, 2019, pp. 133-152.

Astour, Michael C., “The Kingdom of Siyannu-Ušnatu”, UF, Vol. 11, 1979, pp. 13-28.

Dinçol, Ali, “Adana, Hatay ve İstanbul Müzelerinde Bulunan Hitit Hiyeroglif Mühürleri/Hethitische Hieroglyphensigel in den Museen zu Adana, Hatay und Istanbul”. JKF, Vol. 19, 1983, pp. 173-249.

Dinçol, Ali - Dinçol, Belkıs, Anadolu Medeniyetleri Müzesinde Bulunan Hitit Hiyeroglif Mühürleri/ Hethitische Hieroglyphensiegel im Museum für Anatolische Zivilisationen, Ankara Turizmi, Eskieserleri ve Müzeleri Sevenler Derneği Yayınları, Ankara 1981.

Dinçol, Ali - Dinçol, Belkıs, “Neue hethitische Siegelabdrücke aus den Ausgrabungen von Soli und aus der Privatsammlung Halûk Perk”, Prof. Dr. Haluk Abbasoğlu’na 65. Yaş Armağanı EUERGETES Festschrift für Prof. Dr. Haluk Abbasoğlu zum 65. Geburtstag, 1. Cilt, eds. İnci Delemen - Sedef Çokay-Kepçe - Aşkım Özdizbay - Özgür Turak, Suna - İnan Kıraç Akdeniz Medeniyetleri Araştırma Enstitüsü, Antalya 2008, pp. 383-387.

Emre, Kutlu - Çınaroğlu, Aykut, “A Group of Metal Hittite Vessels from Kınık – Kastamonu”, Aspects of Art and Iconography: Anatolia and Its Neighbors: Studies in Honor of Nimet Özgüç, eds. Machteld J. Mellink - Edith Porada - Tahsin Özgüç,Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi, Ankara 1993, pp. 675-713.

Gelb, Ignace J., “Hittite Hieroglyphic Seals and Seal Impressions”, Hetty Goldman, Excavations at Gözlü Kule, Tarsus II, Princeton University Press, Princeton - New Jersey 1956, pp. 242-256.

Goedegebuure, Petra, “The Hieroglyphic Luwian particle REL-i=pa”, Acts of the Third International Congress of Hittitology, eds. Sedat Alp - Aygül Süel, Nurol Matbacılık, Ankara 1998, pp. 233-245.

Goedegebuure, Petra, “The Hieroglyphic Luwian Signs *128 (AVIS ‘BIRD’) = waX and *30 = HAPA”, Acts of the Ninth International Congress of Hittitology, Cilt 1, ed. Aygül Süel, T.C. Çorum Valiliği İl Kültür ve Turizm Müdürlüğü Yayınları, Çorum 2019, pp. 295-316.

Görke, Susanne - Kozal, Ekin, “Birds of Prey in Pre-Hittite and Hittite Anatolia (c. 1970–1180 BCE): textual evidence and image representation”, Raptor and Human Falconry and Bird Symbolism throughout the Millennia on A Global Scale, Book 4, eds. KarlHeinz Gersmann - Oliver Grimm, Wachholtz Verlag - Murmann Publishers, Kiel - Hamburg 2018, pp. 1667-1689.

Hawkins, John David, The Hieroglyphic Inscription of the Sacred Pool Complex at Hattusa, Harrassowitz Verlag, Wiesbaden 1995.

Hawkins, John David, “Tarkasnawa King of Mira ‘Tarkondemos’, Boǧazköy Sealings and Karabel”. AnSt Vol. 48, 1998, pp. 1-31.

Hawkins, John David, “Tudhaliya the Hunter”, The Life and Times of Hattušili III and Tuthaliya IV: Proceedings of a Symposioum held in Honour of J. De Roos, 12-13 December 2003, ed. Theo PJ. van den Hout, Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten, Leiden 2006, pp. 49-76.

Hawkins, John David, “Hittite Monuments and Their Sanctity”, Sacred Landscapes of Hittite and Luwians. Proceedings of the International Conference in Honour of Franca Pecchioli Daddi, Florence, February 6th–8th 2014, eds. Anacleto D’Agostino - Valentina Orsi - Giulia Torri, Firenze University Press, Firenze 2015, pp. 1-9.

Hutter, Manfred, “‘The Lady’ Kubaba (ANCOZ 1 § 2, etc.) in Hieroglyphic Luwian”, NABU, Vol. 2016/4, 2016, pp. 30-32.

Kennedy, Douglas A., “The inscribed Hittite seals in the Ashmolean Museum”, RHA, Vol. 63, 1958, pp. 65-84.

Kennedy, Douglas A., “Sceaux hittites conservés à Paris”, RHA, Vol. 65, 1959, pp. 147-172.

Klein, Jeffrey J., “Urartian Hieroglyphic Inscriptions from Altintepe”, AnSt, Vol. 24, 1974, pp. 77-94.

Laroche, Emmanuel, “Les hiéroglyphes d’Altintepe”, Anadolu, Vol. 15, 1971[1973], pp. 55-61.

Marchetti, Nicolò, “Recent archaeological discoveries at Karkemish. Anatomy and trajectories of a capital city on the Middle Euphrates”, News from the Lands of the Hittites. Scientific Journal for Anatolian Research, Vol. 3-4, 2020, pp. 251-400.

McMahon, Gregory, The Hittite State Cult of the Tutelary Deities, The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, Chicago 1991.

Melchert, H. Craig, Cuneiform Luvian Lexicon, Self-published, Chapel Hill 1993.

Melchert, H. Craig, “Hieroglyphic Luvian REL-ipa ‘indeed, certainly’”, Indo European Perspectives, Papers from the 18th East Coast Indo-European Conference, eds. Mark RV. Southern, Journal of Indo-European Studies Monograph, Washington D.C. 2002, pp. 223-232.

Melchert, H. Craig, “Naming Practices in Second- and First-Millennium Western Anatolia”, Names in Ancient Anatolia, ed. Robert Parker, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2013, pp. 31-49.

Melchert, H. Craig, “Enclitic Subject Pronouns in Hieroglyphic Luvian”, AJNES, Vol. 6/2, 2011, pp. 73-86.

Müller-Karpe, Andreas, “Kulthandlungen und Kultpersonal in hethitischen Palästen”, Cult, Temple, Sacred Spaces. Cult Practices and Cult Spaces in Hittite Anatolia and Neighbouring Cultures, Proceedings of the First International HFR Symposium, Mainz, 3-5 June 2019, eds. Susanne Görke - Charles W. Steitler, Harrassowitz Verlag, Wiesbaden 2020, pp. 179-220.

Peker, Hasan, “Some Remarks on the Imperial Hittite Sealings from the 2017 Excavations at Karkemish”. NABU, Vol. 2017/4, 2017, pp. 178-179.

Peker, Hasan, Anadolu Hiyeroglif Yazılı Belgeler 1: Geç Hitit Karkamış Krallığı Yazıtları, Ante Quem, Bologna 2022.

Peker, Hasan, “Philological Remarks on the Sealings from Empire Period of Karkemish”, Administrative Practices and Political Control in Anatolian and Syro-Anatolian Polities in the 2nd and 1st Millennium BCE, eds. Clelia Mora - Giulia Torri, Firenze University Press, Firenze 2023, pp. 127-159.

Poetto, Massimo, “Un nuovo verbo luvio-geroglifico: zapa-, e la sua correlazione al luvio cuneiforme zapp(a)-”, Ex Anatolia Lux. Anatolian and Indo-European Studies in Honor of H. Craig Melchert on the Occasion of his Sixty-fifth Birthday, eds. Ronald Kim - Norbert Oettinger - Elisabeth Rieken - Michael Weiss, Beech Stave Press, Ann Arbor - New York 2010, pp. 296-302.

Poetto, Massimo - Salvatori, Sandro, La collezione anatolica di E. Borowski, Gjes Edizioni, Pavia 1981.

Rieken, Elisabeth - Yakubovich, Ilya, “The new values of Luwian signs L 319 and L 172”, Ipamati kistamati pari tumatimis. Luwian and Hittite Studies Presented to J. David Hawkins on the Occasion of his 70th Birthday, ed. Itamar Singer, Published by the Emery and Claire Yass Publications in Archaeology (Bequeathed by the Yass Estate, Sydney, Australia) of the Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University Tel Aviv 2010, pp. 199-219.

Simon, Zsolt, “What was built in the Hieroglyphic Luwian inscription of ŞIRZI?”. NABU, Vol. 2014/4, 2014, pp. 151-152.

van den Hout, Theo PJ., “The Silver Stag Vessel: A Royal Gift”, Metropolitan Museum Journal, Vol. 53, 2018, pp. 114-127.

Weeden, Mark, “Tuwati and Wasusarma: Imitating the Behaviour of Assyria”. Iraq, Vol. 73, 2010, pp. 39-61.

Weeden, Mark, Hittite Logograms and Hittite Scholarship, Harrassowitz Verlag, Wiesbaden 2011.

Weeden, Mark, “Hittite Epigraphic Finds from Büklükale 2010-14”, Anatolian Archaeological Studies, Vol. 19, 2016, pp. 81-104.

Yakubovich, Ilya, “Nugae Luvicae”, Anatolian Languages, eds. Vitaly Shevoroshkin - Paul J. Sidwell, Association for the History of Language, Canberra 2002, pp. 189-209.

Yakubovich, Ilya, “The Luwian Word for ‘Place’ and its Cognates”, Kadmos, Vol. 56/1-2, 2017, pp. 1-27.

Abbreviations

* before numerals see CHLI, p. 24.

BoHa 14. Boehmer Rainer Michael - Güterbock, Hans Gustav, Glyptik aus dem Stadtgebiet von Boğazköy. Grabungskampagnen 1931-1939, 1952-1978, Gebr. Mann Verlag, Berlin 1987.

BoHa 19. Herbordt Suzanne - Hawkins, John David, Die Prinzen- und Beamtensiegel der hethitischen Großreichszeit auf Tonbullen aus dem Nişantepe-Archiv in Hattusa, Verlag Philipp von Zabern, Mainz am Rhein 2005.

BoHa 22. Dinçol, Ali - Dinçol, Belkıs, Die Prinzen- und Beamtensiegel aus der Oberstadt von Boğazköy-Hattuša vom 16. Jahrhundert bis zum Ende der Grossreichszeit, Verlag Philipp von Zabern Mainz am Rhein.

CHD. The Hittite Dictionary of the Oriental Institute, Chicago, 1980-.

CHLI. Hawkins, John David, Corpus of Hieroglyphic Luwian Inscriptions 1. Inscriptions of the Iron Age, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin-New York 2000.

L before numerals. Sign numbers after Laroche, Emmanuel, Les hiéroglyphes hittites I. L’écriture, Editions du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris 1960.

NH. Laroche, Emmanuel, Les Noms des Hittites, Librairie C. Klincksieck, Paris 1966.

NEWELL. von der Osten, Hans Henning,. Ancient Oriental Seals in the Collection of Mr. Edward T. Newell, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago-Illinois 1934.

TK I. Peker, Hasan, Texts from Karkemish I. Luwian Hieroglyphic Inscriptions from the 2011-2015 Excavations, Ante Quem, Bologna 2016.

SBo 2. Güterbock, Hans Gustav, Siegel aus Boğazköy II, Berlin 1942.

Footnotes

  1. The Turco-Italian Archaeological Expedition of the Universities of Bologna, İstanbul and Gaziantep, funded by the Italian Ministry for Foreign Affairs, by that for Education, Universities and Research, and by the University of Bologna is directed by Nicolò Marchetti, with the author as deputy director. We gratefully acknowledge the cooperation with the Turkish Ministry of Culture and Tourism (Directorate General for Cultural Heritage and Museums). Nicolò Marchetti and Gianni Marchesi provided useful comments on this manuscript, for which I am grateful, although I solely bear responsibility for the views expressed here. For abbreviations, which are not given in the text, see The Hittite Dictionary of the Oriental Institute, Chicago, 1980- (CHD).
  2. Nicolò Marchetti, “Recent archaeological discoveries at Karkemish. Anatomy and trajectories of a capital city on the Middle Euphrates”, News from the Lands of the Hittites. Scientific Journal for Anatolian Research, Vol. 3-4, 2020, pp. 312-330.
  3. The stele comes from a secondary context of Abbasid date, F.6637, in area C North.
  4. The cursive forms of ma and na should be noted; wa/i shows a hook-shaped central stroke. For the dating of these signs, see Hasan Peker, Texts from Karkemish I. Luwian Hieroglyphic Inscriptions from the 2011-2015 Excavations, Ante Quem, Bologna 2016 (here after abbreviated as TK I), p. 27.
  5. Cf. TOPADA §18 in John David Hawkins, Corpus of Hieroglyphic Luwian Inscriptions 1. Inscriptions of the Iron Age, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin - New York 2000 (here after abbreviated as CHLI), p. 425. See, H. Craig Melchert, “Naming Practices in Second- and First-Millennium Western Anatolia”, Names in Ancient Anatolia, ed. Robert Parker, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2013, pp. 31-49.
  6. See NH 1278; KBo 32.1 rev. 5, 9, 11 (I Tar-hu-wa-šu-); KBo 15.28 obv. 3 (IdU-SIG5 ).
  7. Cf. the similar name TONITRUS.GENUFLECTERE-pa-wa/i-su-[…] in MARAŞ 11 § 7 (CHLI, p. 271).
  8. Harmana of the 13th century BCE may be located between Galba (Tell Irīz? ) and Mulukku/Tell Mulūk; see Michael C. Astour, “The Kingdom of Siyannu-Ušnatu”, UF, Vol. 11, 1979, p. 22; and RGTC 12/2, p. 33, Harmana = West Sem. ʿArmānu.
  9. CHLI, p. 131; Hasan Peker, Anadolu Hiyeroglif Yazılı Belgeler 1: Geç Hitit Karkamış Krallığı Yazıtları, Ante Quem, Bologna 2022, Cat. 20.
  10. CHLI, p. 485.
  11. The goddess’ name is also attested as a personal name (or an epithet) on a seal impressed on several sealings from Karkemish (KH.20.O.283+) dating to Iron Age I. The relevant inscription reads as follows: a) zi/a BONUS2 SIGILLUM ma-ti-i(a) BONUS2 FEMINA b) DARE-ma á-la-zu(wa) BONUS2 FEMINA, “ This good seal (is) of Matiya, the wealthy woman; given by Alanzu(wa), the wealthy woman”; or, less likely, “This good seal (is) of Matiya, the wealthy woman (and of) Piyama-Alanzu(wa), the wealthy woman”.
  12. A fully phonetic writing of this word occurs in MALPINAR § 7 (CHLI, p. 342).
  13. The sign is already listed under L144, (the number *521 should be deleted). See NEWELL 376 in Table 3 (E) and Table 4.
  14. The very similar sign L74 is certainly a logogram (see SUVASA C in Table 2).
  15. SA4 as the logogram of the word kwannala-, “carver”, in BOYBEYPINARI 1-2 § 11 (CHLI, p. 336) and İVRİZ frags. 1-3 (CHLI, p. 530) also adds a positive sense.
  16. Here L129 is a logogram for Luwian *arili and the possibly rhotacised form of *alili-, denoting an augural bird and/or a bird of prey (cf. Hit./Luw. alila-, ali(li)li-, aliliya-, al(l)iya-, ālli- in HED 1, 34; and kallikalli-, “falcon”, in HED 4, 24). The /ala/i/ value of the L144 sign (“Empire” forerunner of L375) is presumably derived from the onomatopoeic name of this bird. The only other attestation of L129 is in KARKAMIŠ A27 kk** (CHLI, p. 213). The Latin term BUTEO can be proposed for L129 (which is a sort of bird of prey, possibly “buzzard/hawk/falcon”, serving augural, ritual, and hunting purposes), and BUTEO2 for its cursive form L74 (see Fig. 3), in order to separate them from the general AVIS group. L132 with the phonetic value /ara/i/ is probably a member of the BUTEO group, too (see Table 5). The sign L128 AQUILA (as a bird of prey? ) and categorisation of its attestations would be beyond the scope of this paper. But three examples of L128 might be given here: with a logographic/syllabic value on SBo 2.164 reads zi/a-L128-VIR, Zi/al(l)a/izi? or L128-VIR.ZI! , Ali(li)-ziti/Ala-ziti, KARABEL A reads L128+li, Alantalli (see below) and with a logographic value on SUVASA C (see Table 2). If these attestations are a graphical confussion of L128/L129 even in the Empire period, then in the late period L128 and its cursive form L71 (very similar shape maybe the same with L375 on SULTANHAN) with phonetic value wax is further extent of this confussion (cf. Petra Goedegebuure, “The Hieroglyphic Luwian Signs *128 (AVIS ‘BIRD’) = waX and *30 = HAPA”, Acts of the Ninth International Congress of Hittitology, Cilt 1, ed. Aygül Süel, T.C. Çorum Valiliği İl Kültür ve Turizm Müdürlüğü Yayınları, Çorum 2019, pp. 295-316).
  17. CHLI, p. 296.
  18. According to our collation, the sign is COR and not ANNUS (cf. CHLI, p. 296).
  19. CHLI, p. 323.
  20. It might be a “beaten earth road” (constructed also for hunting/ritual purposes?), which passed next to the inscription. See Helmut Theodor Bossert, “Die Felsinschrift von Şırzı”, AfO, Vol. 17, 1954-1956, pp. 56-70; Cf. CHLI, pp. 322-324; Zsolt Simon, “What was built in the Hieroglyphic Luwian inscription of ŞIRZI?”. NABU, Vol. 2014/4, 2014, p. 151. The passive participle form of the verb tarpa-, “trample”, also fits such a meaning; see Ilya Yakubovich, “Nugae Luvicae”, Anatolian Languages, eds. Vitaly Shevoroshkin - Paul J. Sidwell, Association for the History of Language, Canberra 2002, pp. 189-209.
  21. CHLI, p. 146.
  22. The verb ha(i/ya)- can be compared with Hit. hai-, “to believe, trust, be convinced” (HED 3, 9).
  23. See CHLI, p. 232; and cf. H. Craig Melchert, “Enclitic Subject Pronouns in Hieroglyphic Luvian”, AJNES, Vol. 6/2, 2011, pp. 73-86.
  24. CHLI, p. 198.
  25. Cf. the personal names Parnawari (possibly meaning “Help to the house(hold)”), written (“L69”) pa+ra/i-na-wa/i-ri+i-sa in KARKAMIŠ A17a1 § 6 (CHLI, p. 192); Parniwari, written |DOMUS-niwa/i+ra/i-ia in ASSUR letter b § 1 (CHLI, p. 534) and [|DOMUS]-ni-wa/i+ra/i-ia in ASSUR letter g § 33 (CHLI, p. 537); and Parnapi(ya), written DOMUS-na-pi (see Ali Dinçol - Belkıs Dinçol, “Neue hethitische Siegelabdrücke aus den Ausgrabungen von Soli und aus der Privatsammlung Halûk Perk”, Prof. Dr. Haluk Abbasoğlu’na 65. Yaş Armağanı EUERGETES Festschrift für Prof. Dr. Haluk Abbasoğlu zum 65. Geburtstag, 1. Cilt, eds. İnci Delemen - Sedef Çokay-Kepçe - Aşkım Özdizbay - Özgür Turak, Suna - İnan Kıraç Akdeniz Medeniyetleri Araştırma Enstitüsü, Antalya 2008, p. 383).
  26. Cf. CHLI, p. 639
  27. It is possible that there was a confusion between L375 and L71. If so, then we can read taL375-li-i as tawal(l)i- (from tawa, “eye”) and translate this word as “favorite” or, in this context, “mistress”.
  28. See above, sub 2.1.3.1 and Fig. 3.
  29. The sign LITUUS here might represent a falconer’s tool such as the curve-ended stick for flushing game (cf. Jeany Vorys Canby, “Falconry (Hawking) in Hittite Lands”, JNES, Vol. 61, 2002, pp. 162 and 170) or a hunting tool. However, LITUUS is also a logogram determining verbs of perception such as *mana-, “to see”; uni-, “to know”; aza-, “to love”; tiyari(ya)-, “to guard, supervise”; etc. in the hieroglyphic writing (CHLI, p. 380). The sign complex VIR.L74 (literally, “man of L74”) could also stand for “falconer” (he who hunts with a bird of prey) or “bird-catcher” (he who catches augural birds and/or birds of prey) or “bird-watcher” (he who observes birds to take omens). These three highly connected professions’ cuneiform correspondents as LÚIGI.MUŠEN, LÚMUŠEN.DÙ and LÚIGI.DÙ, and a comparison of the sign L135(2) with LÚIGI.MUŠEN see Mark Weeden, Hittite Logograms and Hittite Scholarship, Harrassowitz Verlag, Wiesbaden 2011, pp. 250-251 and BoHa 19, p. 311. A Contrary view for L135(2) as MEDICUS/ MAGUS (LÚHAL “exorcist” or LÚA.ZU/LÚAZU ‘physician’) suggested by A. Dinçol and B. Dinçol (BoHa 22, pp. 67-68.) had further support from the Karkemish excavations. The sign L135(2) has a clear depiction of a reptile (a kind of horned viper) with a blunt nose and a protrusion that looks like a horn on a cylinder seal (KH.17.O.448) from Karkemish (see Hasan Peker, “Some Remarks on the Imperial Hittite Sealings from the 2017 Excavations at Karkemish”. NABU, Vol. 2017/4, 2017, pp. 178-179; Hasan Peker, “Philological Remarks on the Sealings from Empire Period of Karkemish”, Administrative Practices and Political Control in Anatolian and Syro-Anatolian Polities in the 2nd and 1st Millennium BCE, eds. Clelia Mora - Giulia Torri, Firenze University Press, Firenze 2023, pp. 131, 148, Fig. 19) and it has also supported by the new finds from Kayalıpınar (see Andreas Müller-Karpe, “Kulthandlungen und Kultpersonal in hethitischen Palästen”, Cult, Temple, Sacred Spaces. Cult Practices and Cult Spaces in Hittite Anatolia and Neighbouring Cultures, Proceedings of the First International HFR Symposium, Mainz, 3-5 June 2019, eds. Susanne Görke - Charles W. Steitler, Harrassowitz Verlag, Wiesbaden 2020, pp. 209-212).
  30. Both the photographs and the drawing (CHLI, pls. 252-253) show that there is enough space for the ni sign (L411) above the sà sign.
  31. TOPADA §§ 25-26, “The Parzu/atean cavalry and all rebels stood (still? ) at our borderland(s) where(ver) the enemy brought/carried away the spoils, and the women-children into slavery.” § 27, “And they/he did not guard it (=my borderland)”. ‘The enemy’ mentioned here might be ‘the first of first’ on § 21. The subject of the § 27 might be ‘The Great (of) Horse(s)’ on § 16 (with the Parzu/atean cavalry and all rebels) and he looks like neglected guarding the borderland(s) of Wasusarma while ‘the enemy’ was raiding it. As for the verb on § 27 which is transliterated as AVIS2 -i(a)+ra/i by L. d’Alfonso, we suggest x+L462 as a logogram instead of AVIS2 . and the ‘x’ looks like a handle of an object (maybe a kind of shield) and x+L462 could be connected with ‘protect, guard’ concept (see also TK I, pp. 17 and 36). Thus, we could take the verb as tiyari(ya)- ‘guard; supervise’ on both §§ 16 and 27. Cf. CHLI, pp. 452-453; Mark Weeden, “Tuwati and Wasusarma: Imitating the Behaviour of Assyria”. Iraq, Vol. 73, 2010, pp. 39-61.; Lorenzo d’Alfonso, “War in Anatolia in the Post-Hittite Period: The Anatolian Hieroglyphic Inscription of Topada Revised”, JCS, Vol. 71, 2019, pp. 133-152.
  32. Cf. Alliya (HKM 100 obv. 12’) and Alli (StBoTB 4.22 obv. 31 and 33; KUB 58.96 rev. 7).
  33. Or Ali-muwa.
  34. Bo = Excavation inventory numbers in Thomas Beran, “Stempelsiegel und gesiegelte Bullen”, MDOG, Vol. 93, 1962, fig. 54.
  35. See below, sub 3.4.
  36. See NH 30.
  37. The drawing of it must be turned 90° clockwise.
  38. Catalog numbers in Ignace J. Gelb, “Hittite Hieroglyphic Seals and Seal Impressions”, Hetty Goldman, Excavations at Gözlü Kule, Tarsus II, Princeton University Press, Princeton - New Jersey 1956, pp. 242-256. The reading of the name as Harpali(ya) is based on the value /har(a)/ of the sign *505 (Emmanuel Laroche, “Les hiéroglyphes d’Altintepe”, Anadolu, Vol. 15, 1971[1973], pp. 55-61; Jeffrey J. Klein, “Urartian Hieroglyphic Inscriptions from Altintepe”, AnSt, Vol. 24, 1974, p. 87.), which reads 1 ½? á-*505-ku 2 tu and has parallels in the ALTINTEPE pithos inscriptions (see CHLI, pp. 588-589) in aharku (= aqarqi) and turuza/turaza (= ṭerusi). The alternative value /har(a)/ for the sign in question is not otherwise attested. An additional attestation of *505 in BOĞAZKÖY 21 (SÜDBURG) § 7, ta-*505(URBS), may stand for Tahara, a hydronym known cuneiform sources; see RGTC 6/2, 211; cf. John David Hawkins, The Hieroglyphic Inscription of the Sacred Pool Complex at Hattusa, Harrassowitz Verlag, Wiesbaden 1995, p. 21.
  39. Cf. similar names in NH (nos. 905-923).
  40. Catalog numbers in Kurt Bittel, Rudolf Naumann, Thomas Beran, Rolf Hachmann, Kurth Gottfried, Boğazköy III, Funde aus den Grabungen 1952-1955, Verlag Gebr. Mann, Berlin 1957.
  41. Catalog numbers in Douglas A. Kennedy, “Sceaux hittites conservés à Paris”, RHA, Vol. 65, 1959, pp. 147-172.
  42. A male name Zantara is attested in AT 107:21. Ala-Zithariya could also be taken into account.
  43. Catalog numbers in Douglas A. Kennedy, “The inscribed Hittite seals in the Ashmolean Museum”, RHA, Vol. 63, 1958, pp. 65-84.
  44. Catalog numbers in Massimo Poetto, Sandro Salvatori, La collezione anatolica di E. Borowski, Gjes Edizioni, Pavia 1981.
  45. See KuT 50 rev. 54.
  46. See NH 34; KuSa 1/1.3 rev. 5; and BoHa 19.644.
  47. L461? is placed horizontally over L172. A similar arrangement can be observed in BOROWSKI 26.
  48. See Hawkins, ibid, pp. 88-102.
  49. CHLI, p. 290.
  50. sarla-, “to offer; exalt” (CHLI, p. 147; cf. H. Craig Melchert, Cuneiform Luvian Lexicon, Selfpublished, Chapel Hill 1993, p. 191).
  51. See NH 25 and Bo 86/299 iv 36.
  52. See Ilya Yakubovich, “The Luwian Word for ‘Place’ and its Cognates”, Kadmos, Vol. 56/1-2, 2017, pp. 1-27.
  53. RGTC 6, 6.
  54. See Hawkins1998.
  55. SHEIZAR §8 and BOYBEYPINARI 1 § 11 (see CHLI, pp. 417 and 336, respectively).
  56. See NH 24 and DBH 46/2, 158 obv. 23’.
  57. ŞARAGA (see Massimo Poetto, “Un nuovo verbo luvio-geroglifico: zapa-, e la sua correlazione al luvio cuneiforme zapp(a)-”, Ex Anatolia Lux. Anatolian and Indo-European Studies in Honor of H. Craig Melchert on the Occasion of his Sixty-fifth Birthday, eds. Ronald Kim - Norbert Oettinger - Elisabeth Rieken - Michael Weiss, Beech Stave Press, Ann Arbor - New York 2010, pp. 296-302).
  58. For the previous readings of both epigraphs, see Theo PJ. van den Hout, “The Silver Stag Vessel: A Royal Gift”, Metropolitan Museum Journal, Vol. 53, 2018, pp. 114-127. Van den Hout mentions the logographic value of L19 but prefers the phonetic reading, and recognizes the sign on the top of the epigraph on the left as a determinative (REGIO).
  59. Some examples of Ala written syllabically in the Late Hittite period are probably (FEMINA)á-lá/í- (ANCOZ 5; see CHLI, p. 350) and |á-la- (ERKİLET 2; see CHLI, p. 494), contra M. Hutter, who interpreted these spellings as writings of a Hurrian epithet (Manfred Hutter, “‘The Lady’ Kubaba (ANCOZ 1 § 2, etc.) in Hieroglyphic Luwian”, NABU, Vol. 2016/4, 2016, pp. 30-32).
  60. Conventional transliteration of L172 in the Empire period is ala in the initial position, and (a)la in the other positions; lá/i in the Late Hittite period (Elisabeth Rieken, Ilya Yakubovich, “The new values of Luwian signs L 319 and L 172”, Ipamati kistamati pari tumatimis. Luwian and Hittite Studies Presented to J. David Hawkins on the Occasion of his 70th Birthday, ed. Itamar Singer, Published by the Emery and Claire Yass Publications in Archaeology (Bequeathed by the Yass Estate, Sydney, Australia) of the Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University Tel Aviv 2010, pp. 199-219).
  61. We suggest to interpret the second sign as L430 (OMNIS2 ) rather than DEUSx . The sign L430 with a horizontal (side A) and a vertical stroke (side B) inside is attested at Karkemish on a biconvex button seal (KH.19.O.137) dating to the Early Iron Age. An almost identical form with an attached ra/i (L383) is attested in ANKARA 12B (for the catalog numbers, see Ali Dinçol, Belkıs, Anadolu Medeniyetleri Müzesinde Bulunan Hitit Hiyeroglif Mühürleri/ Hethitische Hieroglyphensiegel im Museum für Anatolische Zivilisationen, Ankara Turizmi, Eskieserleri ve Müzeleri Sevenler Derneği Yayınları, Ankara 1981.) and İSTANBUL 33A (for the catalog numbers, see Ali Dinçol, “Adana, Hatay ve İstanbul Müzelerinde Bulunan Hitit Hiyeroglif Mühürleri/Hethitische Hieroglyphensigel in den Museen zu Adana, Hatay und Istanbul”. JKF, Vol. 19, 1983, pp. 173-249). The name on ANKARA 12B can be read pú+ra/i-L172? = Purilla, which is attested in HKM 99 and the name on İSTANBUL 33A can be read pú+ra/i = Puri(ya).
  62. Cf. the whole body of a depicted person standing as a syllable of the individual’s name (in BoHa 19.400); the customized L1-2 signs; and the depiction of an individual to represent a pronoun in the Iron Age (KARKAMIŠ A1b, KARKAMIŠ A3d, ARSUZ 1, KARKAMIŠ A6, MARAŞ 1 and 4, etc.). The scene here looks like a thanksgiving ceremony to the goddess Ala after a (sacred/royal) deer-hunt (dissected body parts of a deer are under a tree). Hunting scenes are also depicted on the KINIK bowl (Kutlu Emre, Aykut Çınaroğlu, “A Group of Metal Hittite Vessels from Kınık – Kastamonu”, Aspects of Art and Iconography: Anatolia and Its Neighbors: Studies in Honor of Nimet Özgüç, eds. Machteld J. Mellink - Edith Porada - Tahsin Özgüç,Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi, Ankara 1993, pp. 675-713); on Alacahöyük orthostats; and SBo 2.220 and 221.
  63. Cf. the expression “to all the names of Ala” in cuneiform sources (KUB 2.1 obv. iii 26 and KUB 40.107+ 5’; see Gregory McMahon, The Hittite State Cult of the Tutelary Deities, The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, Chicago 1991, pp. 109 and 116; cf. Weeden, ibid, p. 267). The occurrence of this expression both in cuneiform sources and on the STAG-rhyton allows us to securely date the latter to the reign of Tudhaliya IV.
  64. Along with the depiction of forehead-eye-nose as FRONS, one can assign the same value to L19 (FRONS2 , graphically = FRONS + eye-lips-chin-neck) as the logogram of the words hanta, “in front of ”; hant(a)- n., “face”; hantahiti- c., “preeminence”; and hantili- adj., “foremost”.
  65. REGIO OMNIS2 means either “the entire country (of Hatti)” or “all lands” (cf. Anna H. Bauer, Morphosyntax of the Noun Phrase in Hieroglyphic Luwian, Brill, Leiden - Boston 2014, pp. 63-65). Also cf. “mistress/lady of all lands”, epithet of Ištar of Niniveh (EA 23); and Puduhepa as the “daughter of Kizzuwatna” in FRAKTİN.
  66. See Canby, ibid, pp. 161-201; Daniş Baykan, “İkonografide MÖ 1. Bine Kadar Alıcı Kuşlar”, Işık Şahin’e Armağan (Studies in Honour of Işık Şahin), eds. S. Melike Zeren-Hasdağlı - Emre Taştemür, Trakya Üniversitesi Yayınları, Edirne 2022, pp. 39-58; Susanne Görke, Ekin Kozal, “Birds of Prey in Pre-Hittite and Hittite Anatolia (c. 1970–1180 BCE): textual evidence and image representation”, Raptor and Human Falconry and Bird Symbolism throughout the Millennia on A Global Scale, Book 4, eds. Karl-Heinz Gersmann - Oliver Grimm, Wachholtz Verlag - Murmann Publishers, Kiel - Hamburg 2018, pp. 1667-1689.
  67. Cf. Hawkins, ibid, p. 88.
  68. Cf. John David Hawkins, “Tudhaliya the Hunter”, The Life and Times of Hattušili III and Tuthaliya IV : Proceedings of a Symposioum held in Honour of J. De Roos, 12-13 December 2003, ed. Theo PJ. van den Hout, Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten, Leiden 2006, p. 61; John David Hawkins, “Hittite Monuments and Their Sanctity”, Sacred Landscapes of Hittite and Luwians. Proceedings of the International Conference in Honour of Franca Pecchioli Daddi, Florence, February 6th–8th 2014, eds. Anacleto D’Agostino - Valentina Orsi - Giulia Torri, Firenze University Press, Firenze 2015, pp. 4-5; Mark Weeden, “Hittite Epigraphic Finds from Büklükale 2010-14”, Anatolian Archaeological Studies, Vol. 19, 2016, p. 92.
  69. If we accept that the inscription is complete, Luwian kwipa or kwi=pa is never attested in the final position of a sentence (see H. Craig Melchert, “Hieroglyphic Luvian REL-ipa ‘indeed, certainly’”, Indo European Perspectives, Papers from the 18th East Coast Indo-European Conference, ed. Mark RV. Southern, Journal of Indo-European Studies Monograph, Washington D.C. 2002, pp. 223-232; Petra Goedegebuure, “The Hieroglyphic Luwian particle REL-i=pa”, Acts of the Third International Congress of Hittitology, eds. Sedat Alp - Aygül Süel, Nurol Matbacılık, Ankara 1998, pp. 233-245). However, we may assume that kwipa is here used as =pat, like in Hittite sentences, or we may assume that a verb ‘to hunt’ was omitted (but this seems unnecessary).
  70. Graphically, the sign complex MONS.TU is placed within (marked by “×” in the transliteration) the HATTI sign, possibly to mean “in(side)”.
  71. An additional late attestation of the Stag-god of the countryside is in MALATYA 5: (DEUS) L463.CERVUS3 REX.PUGNUS+CULTER, “countryside-Stag-god of the mighty King”, or, less likely, “mighty countryside-Stag-god of the King” (cf. CHLI, p. 306). For the interpretation of L29 (PUGNUS+CULTER) and L30 (PUGNUS) as muwa(ti)-, “might; mighty”, see TK I, p. 191 fn. 4.
  72. The transliteration given here is based on photographs made by the author.
  73. The accusative object of the sentence is “people of Kwalatarna and Tlawa” (mentioned in previous section(s)).
  74. Cf. Hawkins, ibid, p. 69-70.
  75. Transliteration based on Hawkins, Tudhaliya, fig. 9 on page 74.
  76. Catalog numbers in Kurt Bittel, Hans Gustav Güterbock, Günter Neumann, Peter Neve, Heinrich Otten, Ursula Seidl, Boğazköy V. Funde aus den Grabungen 1970 und 1971, Gebr. Mann Verlag, Berlin 1975.
  77. Cf. the similar name Zidandu in NH (no. 1556).
  78. See fn. 16, below.

Şekil ve Tablolar

Figure 1. Top, left, and front sides of the stele (KH.16.O.378)
Figure 2. Drawing of the inscription on the stele
Figure 3. Forms of L129 (KARKAMIŠ 19j1, KARKAMIŠ 17kk**) and L74 (KARKAMIŠ A28a1, SUVASA C, TOPADA § 25)
Figure 4. Forms of OMNIS2 (L430) and ala (L172).
Table 1. Attestations of L375 and the verb lili(ya)-
Table 2. Attestations of L74 (= cursive form of L129)
Table 3. Forms of L375 and L144
Table 4. Attestations of L144 and L461 with the values /ala/i/ and/or ALA
Table 5. List of discussed signs