No title

L

^

,

z

:4 t:

-

I .a.. -e

-

way this _ l | according civilization to 1 was Leir able pl asure. lto respond At th same to its time, physical the labors l setting. of the

BiblicalArchaeolo A Publication of the American Schools of Oriental Research Volume 52 Numbers 2 and 3 June/September1989

i

tes

62

_

GregoryMcMahon

_ _ _ _ _

Earlyin the secondmillennium B.C.E., a groupof Indo-Europeans madetheir way into Antolia, the areaknown todayas Asia Minor. These people eventuallybuilt a greatempirerivalingthat of Egypt. Their culturallegacycan be seen todayin rock carvings,huge stone monuments,hundredsof pieces of writing,and in severalbiblical passagesreferringto the Hittites.

_

l

g _

and History in Hittite

78

Anatolla

Ronald . Gorny The successfulpolitical integrationof Anatoliansettlements into the Hittite state seems to havebeen somewhatdependenton the

__ __

|

Page62

The Rel gion of the Hittite

98

Likethe king andother membersof the rulingclass, the gods stood farabovethe ordinaryHittite, dispensingfavorsor punishments I

peasantagrlculturallstandpastorallstwerethe basis upon which est d.

The Hittites gracefullyabsorbedthe variousinfluences that surroundedthem while developingan unmistakableart style of

-

l

1 l [ittite Literature

N

*

130

Ahmet Unal

l

@

[11vstratethc literaryvaluesand

Page98

| X b

,

_> l ,7^ ;:f ,,)

|

| |

Glossary

143

BookReviews LettertotheReaders Introducing the Autho s

146 59 60

' |

Onthecover:Seemingly basking in the afternoonsun is this monumental lion sculpture, one of two that flank the western gateway entrance to the UpperCity of the ancient Hittite capital, Hattusa. Photo by Ronald L. Gorny.

^ ) t

Page109

I

Biblical Archaeologist is publishedwith the financialassistanceof the EndowmentforBiblicalResearch,a nonsectarianfoundationfor the studyof the Bibleandthe historyof the ChristianChurch.

BiblicalArchaeologist,June/September 1989

57

ORIENTAL RESEARCH SCHOOLS OF AMERICAN MD 21211(301)889-1383 OFFICE,ASOR,711WEST40TH STREET,SUITE354, BALTIMORE, ADMINISTRATIVE P.KyleMcCarter,President EricM. Meyers,First Vice Presidentfor Publications WalterE. Rast, Second Vice Presidentfor Archaeological Policy GeorgeM. Landes,Secretary KevinG. O'Connell,Assistant Secretary I4l lden Gibbs, Treasurer CsnughW.Thompson, Jr.,Chairmanof the Boardof Trustees Norma Kershaw,Directorof Tours Susan FosterKromholz,Executive Director

ASORNewsletter;P.KyleMcCarter, Editor BiblicalArchaeologist;EricM. Meyers, Editor Bulletin of the American Schools of OrientalResearch;WalterE. Rast, Editor Journalof CuneiformStudies;Erle Leichty,Editor Editorfor Books, WalterE. Aufrecht

W. F. Albright Institute of Archaeological Research (AIAR). P. O. Box 19096, 91 190 Jerusalem, Israel. Seymour Gitin, Director Edward E. Cohen, Board Chairman Joe D. Seger, President Carol Meyers, First Vice President Joy Ungerleider-Mayerson, Second Vice President John Spencer, Secretary-Treasurer Baghdad Committee for the Baghdad School. Jerrold S. Cooper, Chairman Near Eastern Studies, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21218. American Center of Oriental Research (ACOR). P. O. Box 2470, Jebel Amman, Amman, Jordan. Bert de Vries, Director Robert Coughenour, President Lawrence T. Geraty, Vice President Marjorie Cooke, Secretary Anne Ogilvy, Treasurer

Biblical Biblical Archaeologist (ISSN0006-0895}is publishedquarterly(March,June,September,December}by the JohnsHopkins University Pressfor the American Schools of OrientalResearch(ASOR},a nonprofit, nonsectarianeducationalorganization with administrativeofficesat 711West40th Street,Suite 354, Baltimore,MD 21211. Subscriptions.Annual subscriptionrates are $19.95 for individualsand $30 for institutions. There is a special annual rateof $17 for students and retirees.Single issues are $7 for individuals and $10 for institutions. In Canadaand Mexico, add $3.40 for annual subscriptionsand $2 for single issues. In other foreigncountries, add$8.40 for annual subscriptionsand $2 for single issues. Ordersshould be sent to the Johns Hopkins University Press, 701 W.40th Street,Suite275, Baltimore,MD 21211(telephone:301-338-6988;telex: 5101012198, JHUPress Jnls1. Second-classpostagepaid at Baltimore, MD 21211and additionaloffices. Postmaster:Send addresschanges to Biblical Archaeologist, the JohnsHopkins University Press, 701 W.40th Street,Suite 275, Baltimore,MD 21211. Copyrightt 1989by the American Schools of OrientalResearch. All rights reserved.No portion of this journalmay be reproducedby any process or technique without the formal consent of the American Schools of Oriental

Damascus Committee. Giorgio Buccellati, Chairman Center for Mesopotamian Studies, University of California, 405 Hilgard Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90024.

Archaeologist

P. O. BOX H.M., DUKE STATION, DURHAM, NC 27706

58

Cyprus American Archaeological Research Institute (CAARI1. 41 King Paul Street, Nicosia, Cyprus. Stuart Swiny, Director Charles U. Harris, President Lydie Shufro, Vice President Ellen Herscher, Secretary Andrew Oliver, Jr., Treasurer

(919} 684-3075

Researchand the JohnsHopkins University Press.Authorizationto photocopy items for personalor internal use is grantedfor librariesand other users registeredwith the CopyrightClearanceCenter lCccl TransactionalReportingService, providedthat the copier pay the base fee of $1.00 per copy plus $.10 per pagedirectly to CCC, 21 CongressStreet, Salem, MA 01970. This consent does not extend to other kinds of copying,such as copyingfor generaldistribution,for advertisingor promotionalpurposes,for creatingnew collective works, or for resale. 0006-8095/$87$1.00 + .10 Editor Associate Editor Book Review Editor Art Director Senior Editor Staff Editor Editorial Assistant

Eric M. Meyers Lawrence T. Geraty James C. Moyer Linda Huff Leslie Watkins Todd McGee C. E. Carter

Editorial Committee Peter B. Machinist Walter E. Aufrecht P. Kyle McCarter Edward F. Campbell David W. McCreery Douglas L. Esse Carol L. Meyers James Flanagan S. Thomas Parker Volkmar Fritz Jack Sasson Seymour Gitin Neil A. Silberman Jo Ann Hackett Mark S. Smith A. T. Kraabel L. Michael White Thomas E. Levy

Biblical Archaeologist, June/September1989

Advertising.Correspondenceshould be addressedto the JohnsHopkins University Press, 701 W.40th Street,Suite 275, Baltimore,MD 21211(telephone:301-338-69821 Biblical Archaeologist is not responsible for errorsin copy preparedby the advertiser. The editor reservesthe right to refuse any ad. Ads for the sale of antiquities will not be accepted. EditorialCorrespondence.Article proposals, manuscripts,and editorial correspondenceshould be sent to the ASOR PublicationsOffice, P.O.Box H.M., Duke Station, Durham, NC 27706. Unsolicited manuscriptsmust be accompaniedby a self-addressed,stampedenvelope.Foreign contributorsshould furnish international reply coupons. Manuscriptsmust conformto the format used in Biblical Archaeologist,with full bibliographicreferencesand a minimum of endnotes. See recent issues for examples of the properstyle. Manuscriptsmust also include appropriate illustrations and legends.Authorsare responsiblefor obtainingpermission to use illustrations. Composition by LiberatedTypes,Ltd., Durham,NC. Printedby PBMGraphics, Inc., Raleigh,NC. Publisher The JohnsHopkins University Press

Letter

to the

Readers

The

archaeologyand history of Anatolia are relativelyunknownto those outsidethe field. Althoughstudiesof the classicalandbiblical lands are routinely included in a Western liberaleducation,Anatoliaremainsa virtualunknown. It is a criticalregion,a physicalbridgebetweenEastand West,yetourignoranceof if oftenblocksagenuineunderstandingof the landsextendingout fromit in all directions.Ourintentin this issueofBiblical Archaeologist is to helpalleviatethis situationbypresentinginformation aboutpastandpresentarchaeological researchin ancient Anatolia.In so doing,it is hopedthat Anatolia-and the Hittites-will becomeless of an enigma. The opportunityto share my interest in Hittite Studieswasfirstpresentedto mebackin 1986byJamesC. Moyer,professorof religiousstudies at SouthwestMissouri State University (who has since become book revieweditorforBAI,andMartinWilcox,then executive editor of BA. A series was being initiated to present informationaboutthe neighborsof Syro-Palestine in the biblicalperiod.It seemedlogicalto dedicatean issue to the Hittites, a peoplelong knownto the readersof BA becauseof their inclusionin the Bible.I agreedto bring the issuetogether,andherearethe resultsof thoseefforts. Thefirstchallengewasfindinga wayof bringingthe Hittites to life, knowingthat a full treatmentwas not possible,evenin anentireissue.It wasalso importantto set abackdropagainstwhichthehistoryof Syro-Palestine might be betterunderstood.It was assumedthat many readerswouldnot be familiarwith Anatolia,or Hittite studiesin particular,so a broadpresentationof a fewkey topics,bolsteredby an extensivebibliography, seemedto be the best approachto take.Withthat in mind I chose fivebroadareasof interest:history,archaeology, religion, art,andliterature,subjectsthatwouldprovidethe reader with a goodintroductionto Hittite civilization. I was fortunateto be ableto securethe servicesof a fine groupof specialistswhose articlespresentcareful and insightfulscholarship.GregoryMcMahoWs article describesthe majoreventsin Hittitehistory,focusingnot only on kings andbattles but also on the civilizatioWs

positionin the biblicalworld.GaryBeckmaSscontribution discussesthe natureandpracticeof Hittitereligion, which, as the articleby JeannyVorysCanbypoints out, hada greatimpacton, andwasdirectlyrelatedto,Hittite art. Ahmet Unal'sarticle revealsthe flavorof Hittite literature,its variousformsandthe powerof its narrative. Finally,I havetriedto placethe Hittitesin the contextof Anatolianarchaeology,especially in light of environmentalforcesthatwereoperatingon the centralplateau at the time. It is hopedthatfuturearticleswill roundout the skeletonformedhere,especiallyin areaswherethe HittitestoucheduponSyro-Palestine. Thiswasa sizableproject,andthe effortsof all those involvedaregreatlyappreciated.Foremoston my list of those to thank are the individualcontributors,who exhibitedgreatpatiencein me as well as hardworkand dedication.Needless to say,the final responsibilityfor eacharticlelies with the individualauthor.I alsowantto thank the many friendsand colleagueswho readand commentedon variousportionsof the issue. Their insights provedto be invaluable.GaryBeckman,Gregory McMahon,and C. E. Carterdeservespecial credit for laboringoverthe glossaryentries,and,finally,I wantto thankJimMoyer,without whose confidencethis issue wouldnot havebeenpossible.

< XyXt/tr? RonaldL.Gorny Chicago,Illinois

BiblicalArchaeologistttune/September 1989

59

IntroducingtheAuthors Gregory McMahon

With an emphasis on ancient history, ancient Near Easternlanguages,andTurkishlanguageandliterature, GregoryMcMahonreceivedhis Ph.D.fromThe Oriental Instituteof TheUniversityofChicagoin 1988.Currently a professorin the Departmentof Historyat the University of New Hampshire,he hastaughtcourseson ancient NearEastern,Greek,andRomanhistoryas well as WestHe ern civilization,worldhistory,and historiography. in Bosphorus of the University the hasstudiedTurkishat in the year sequence a full has taught and Istanbul Turkishlanguageat The OrientalInstitute.Dr.McMahon

RonaldL. Gorny

.

teanny VorysCanby

60

Biblical Archaeologist, [une/September1989

.

Ahmet Unal

has receivednumerousfellowships,includingan Overseas ResearchFellowshipfrom the AmericanResearch Institutein Turkeyll985) anda FulbrightFellowshipfor researchin Turkey(1984-19857.

pedition, and the German ArchaeologicalInstitute's expeditionto Bogazkoy. Shewasa visitinglecturerat the OrientalSeminarat JohnsHopkinsUniversityfor five yearsand,for 17years,curatorof the ancientNearEasternandEgyptiancollectionat the WaltersArtGalleryin RonaldL.Gornyis a Ph.D.candidateinAnatolianarchae- Baltimore.From 1984 to 1986 she was Visiting Edith ologyat The OrientalInstitute.His dissertationinvolves PoradaProfessorof Ancient Near EasternArt and Ara reexaminationof the second-millennium remainsfrom chaeologyat ColumbiaUniversity.CurrentlyDr.Canby the Institute'sexcavationsat Alisar Hoyuk in central is a ResearchAssociateat TheUniversityMuseum. Turkey. Granteda FulbrightFellowshipto studyin Turkey forthe 1984-1985academicyear,he has traveledexten- A native of U,sakin westernTurkey,Ahmet Unal has sivelyin Turkeyaswell as Israel,wherehe hasworkedon studiedhistory,Ottomanand ancienthistory,Hittitolexcavationsat TelDanandAshkelon.He coordinatedthe ogy,Assyriology,and Near Easternarchaeologyat the articlespresentedin this issue. universitiesof Ankaraand Munich,wherehe received his Ph.D.in 1972.Since1988he hasheldalifetimeprofesGaryBeckmanis AssociateProfessorof Hittite at Yale sorship for ancient Anatolianstudies, languages,and UniversityandAssistantCuratorof the YaleBabylonian Hittitologyat the Universityof Munich.He has taught Collection. He has written widely on the social and Hittite andancienthistoryat the universitiesof Ankara culturalhistoryof the Hittitesand,since 1980,has been and Konyaand, since 1985,has workedon the Hittite a collaboratoron the Hittite DictionaryProjectat The DictionaryProjectatTheOrientalInstitute.Dr.Unalhas OrientalInstitute. participated in differentexcavationsin the Hittitehomeland,in particularAlacaHoyuk,andhas conductedhis JeannyVorysCanbyreceivedher Ph.D.fromBrynMawr own excavationsat Cengeltepenear Yozgat.He has College.She has excavatedin Turkeywith The Univer- authoredbooks on Hittite history and divinationand sity MuseumoftheUniversityof Pennsylvania's Gordion many articlespertainingto differentaspectsof Hittite expedition,the TurkishHistoricalSociety'sKultepeex- language,history,geography, archaeology, andculture.

The Joint Expedition to Caesarea Maritimahas two volumes of reports on its excavations at Caesarea on the Sea'' available. PreliminaryReports in Microfiche. 1971-1978 RobertJ. Bull,Editor Drew University Institutefor Archaeological Research (Orderfrom Eisenbrauns, PO. Box 275, Winona Lake, Indiana, U.S.A.46590)

te---

Volume IV of the Final Excavation Reports. The Pottery and Dating of VaultI JeffreyA. Blakely Archaeological Assessments, Inc., and Institutefor Archaeological Research (Orderfrom the Edwin Mellen Press, 1?0. Box 450, Lewiston, New York,U.S.A. 14090) w>

BiblicalArchaeologist7 June/September 1989

61

J

,

'

.

by

Gregory

McMahon

At the ;vesternentranceto the UpperCityof Hattusais themonumentknownas Lion lions Gate,namedforthe twoheavy-chested thatguardit. Thelion on therighthandside of thegateway,shownin profileon facing pageright,is almostintact.Noticehow the maneis renderedin a complicatedpatternof incisedtutts.Carvedout of two verylarge archedblocks,thelions werecut to fit each otherexactly.All photosin thisarticleareby McMahon. Gregory

62

nearthe beginning Sometime of the secondmillennium B.C.E., a groupof IndoEuropeansmadetheirway into Anatolia,the areawe know todayas AsiaMinor.Thesepeople carveda new faceon the peninsula situatedbetweenthe BlackSeaand They the easternMediterranean. establisheda powerfulkingdom, built a greatempire,andinfluenced theirneighborsin the ancientNear Eastforseveralcenturies.Vestigesof theirgreatempirecanbe seen today in hugcstonemonuments,rock carvings,hundredsof texts,andin severalbiblicalpassagesreferringto the Hittites.

Biblical Archaeologist, Tune/September1989

Pre-HittiteAnatolia-TheAssyrian Co10nyAge The earliestwriting,andtherefore the beginningsof historyin Anatolia, canbe tracedto the OldAssyrian ColonyAge,a periodlastingfrom about1925to 1650s.c.E.lDuringthis time Assyrianmerchants,basedin Assur,establishedtradingcoloniesat severalAnatoliancites and,through them,dida thrivingbusinessin metalsandothercommodities.The bestknownof these tradingcolonies (karumin OldAssyrian)is Kanes, Kultepe. the site of modern-day Excavationin the upperlevelsof the karumat Kaneshas uncovered cuneiformtabletswrittenin a dis-

Theearliestwriting,andtherefore the beginnings of historyin Anatolia, canbe tracedto theOldAssyrian ColonyAge.

At the topof thisglacis,alongthesouthernboundaryof the UpperCityof Hattusa,is the monolithicentrywayknownas the SphinxGate.Oneof the sphinxesthatguardedthegateis still visibletbut theothertwo arein theIstanbulandBerlinMuseums.Thelowerportal,or posterngate(Yerkapl in lbrkish,meaning"ground-gate"), opensinto a tunnelthatruns underneaththe earthworks andentersinto the UpperCity.

tinctivescriptanddialectof AkkadiancalledOldAssyrian.Mostof these documentsarecommercialin nature-correspondencewith the home officein Assur,recordsof goodstransported,andcontracts. As exemplifiedbywrittentrade agreements,the foreignbusinessmen enjoyedformalizedrelations with theirAnatolianhosts.The localprincegrantedtradingconcessionsandprotectionto the merchantsand,in return,taxed commercecarriedout in his domain. The OldAssyrianrecordscontain some nameswith Indo-European elements,attestingto the presence of Indo-Europeans who wouldlater

createthe Hittite kingdom. Fromthe discoveryof tablets writtenin OldAssyrianfoundin the palaceat Kanesit is evidentthat the localAnatolianprincesadoptedthe importantnew technologyof writing. Thesetabletswerepresumablywritten by an Assyrianscribeemployed bythe prince,but a letterto king Warsamaof Kanesfromthe kingof Mama,Anum-Hirbe,indicatesthat writingwaspracticedin otherparts of Anatoliaas well (Balkan1957). In additionto writing,the Assyriansbroughtwith them the cylinderseal, a type of seal developedin Mesopotamia.The cylinderseal is a small cylinderof stoneor metal

with an incisedinscriptionand/or scene.Whenrolledacrossa wet clay tabletthe seal leavesan impression of the legendinscribedon it and thus signsthe tablet.Manyof the OldAssyriantabletsaresealedin this way,as arethe clay"envelopes" in which some of the tabletswere enclosed.Thatthe cylindersealwas adoptedbythe local inhabitantsmay be inferredfromthe Anatolianmotifs on the seals in additionto the expectedMesopotamianforms. Developmentof the Hittite State Wearenot certainwho put an end to Assyriancommercialactivityin Anatoliain the eighteenthcentury

BiblicalArchaeologistZlune/September 1989

63

King

Pithana Anitta

Relationship Royal

MiddleChronologyl LowChronology2 .

sonof Pithana

early18thCentury Century mid-18th

@

Labama gattusili I Mursil.iIlt}3 gantili ZidantaIlt} Ammuna guziya Ilt} lElipinu Tahurwailil*} Alluwamna Hantili II ZidantaIIIe} Muniya

I

>

^

u

Q

J 2

D

^

|

z

i

2

2

S

o

2

>;;

1680-1650 1650-1620 1620-1590 1590-1560 1560-1550 1550-1530 1530-1525 1525-1500

knownHittiteking first son of Labarna nephew/adopted son of Hattusili I4 sonladopted grand of MursiliI andbrother-in-law assassin of Hantili son-in-law sonof Hantili sonof Anununa? of Ammuna sonof ZidantaI?/brother-in-law of HuzziyaI son-in-law sonof Alluwamnas

1500-1450

IIle t}

1600-1570 1570-1540 1540-1530 1530-1500 1500-1490 1490-1470 1470-1465 1465-1440 1440? 1440-1430 1430-1420 1420-141C2 1410-140CR 1400?2

Muwatalli Ilkt) lUdhaliya 6 ArnuwandaI8 lUdhaliya III lUdhaliya Itheyounger)lt) Hattusili IIle}

late18thCentury early17thCentury

ML'M .L

M 2X:LL ^ sonof HuzziyaII?' II of Thdhaliya son-in-law I sonof Arnuwanda sonof lUdhaliya

0"^

ms

i

2 2

;:

L u

.

J

M

i

;

^

.

i

L.

;

L M

:

.

1450-1420 142S1400 1400-1380 1380?

^

ffi

L ffi ;i

1400 1380 1370-1360 1360-1343 1343?

|

i

1343-1322/181° 1322/18 1322/18-1296 1296-1273 1273-1266

son of Thdhaliyam, maybe Hattusili II son of Suppiluliuma I son of Suppiluliuma I son of Mursili II son of Muwatalli II 1266-1235 1275-1250 son of Mursili II 1235-1215 1250-1220 son of Hattusili m ? ? son of Muwatalli II/cousinof lUdhaliya tV14 1215-121015 1220-1215 son of lUdhaliya IV Amuwandam 1210-120016 1215-1200 son of ThdbaliyaIV SuppiluliumaII disputed KEY Itimurdered l*}positionunclear leRexistencedebated Id1deposed IkOkn4gship 1380-1340 1340L1339 1339-1306 1306-1282 1282-1275

-

SuppiluliumaI ArnuwandaII MursiliII MuwatalliIIIl MursiliEld}l=Urhi-lEsub) gattusili El2 lUdbaliyaIV13 Kar ntalk}

Note: This table was compiled by RonaldL. Gorny.Exceptwhere noted, the datesused here areschematizationsbasedon a few known synchronismsandthe use of a time span of 20 years per generationwith adjustmentsmade for kings thoughtto be long-livedandthose thoughtto be short-lived.The lack of accurate chronologicalor genealogicaldatafor the Hittite kings precludesthe possibility of accuratechronologicaldatingat this time. All bibliographiccitations arelisted in the bibliographyof RonaldGorny'sarticle. lMiddlechronologyafter frameworkestablishedby JohnA. Brinkmanl1964}. Hittite dates basedon approximatedates suggestedby O. R. Gurneyl1981:218}. GernotWilhelm andJohannesBoese l19871. 2Lowchronologyafwter 3Sackof Babylon,1595B.C.E. middle chronologyll531B.C.E. low chronology. 4SeeBeal ll983b1 5SeeOtten l1987b}. I is a shadowyfigurewhose existence is uncertain.He was originally 6Tudhaliya proposedas the first king of this name becausethe name Tudhaliyawas foundat the beginningof one variantof the sacrificiallists as the fatherof one PU-sarruma 1KUBXI 7; compareOtten 1968:122).Consequently,the conventionthat begins the numberingof the Tudbaliyasin this fashionwas establishedat an early date. The sequence of that variant, however, has remained enigmatic, and many

64

Biblical Archaeologist7Tune/September1989

Hittitologists would disputethe existence of this figure,beginningthe sequence of Tudhaliyaswith our presentTudhaliyaII lcompareAstour, 1989: 50-511.The early system is retained here as a means of explaining different numbering systems foundin the literature. 7SeeOtten 11987b1. 8Forpossible coregencyof TudhaliyaII and ArnuwandaI, see Philo Houwink tenCate 11970:58, note 2}, O. Carruba11977:166-69, 177, note 71,andO.R.Gurney 1979: 214-151.

9CompareAstour 11989:73}. °CompareWilhelm andBoese 11987}. Battleof Kadesh,fifth year in reignof RamessesII,around1275 B.C.E. l2Treatywith RamessesII,twenty-firstyearin reignof RamessesII,around1259 daughterto RamessesII,thirty-fourthyearin reign B.C .E.; marriageof ElattusiliIII's of RamessesII,around1246 B.C.E. IV,see C. Mora(I987>. ForpossiblecoregencybetweenElattusilim andTudl}aliya See Neve 11987a:402-04}, Otten 11988},andvan den Hout 11989:87-105}. CompareSinger11987:417}. Singer11987:418}. Wenteandvan Siclen 119771wouldset this dateat 16Compare 1175 B.C.E.

Hittitecivilization wasa mixof theearly Hatticculturewiththatof theIndo-European newcomers and,later,withthatof theHurrians. B.C.E., but we knowthat the foundation of a Hittitestatefollowedshortly thereafter(Guterbock1983:24-25, note 8).Mostof ourtextualevidence forthe historyof the Hittite kingdom comesfromthe archivesfound at the Hittite capitalat Hattusa, present-day Bogazkoy/ Bogazkale,a villageeast of Ankara.Otherimportantevidencehas comefromarchaeologicalsites includingAlacaHoyuk, Alis,arHoyuk,andMa,satHoyuk. The termHittite derivesfrom the place-nameHattiused forthe pre-Indo-European inhabitantsof centralAnatolia.The Hittites,who wereIndo-Europeans, referredto themselvesas Nesites, or peopleof Nesa (Kanes),a traditionsupported by the evidenceof Hittite namesin the tabletsfoundat Kanes.Whatwe call Hittite civilizationis a mix of the earlyHatticculturewith that of the Indo-European newcomersand, later,with the cultureof the Hurriansof northernMesopotamia. One of the most importantand obviouscontributionsof these newcomerswastheirlanguage,the languagewe call Hittite today,the oldest attestedIndo-European language. Curiously,the Hittitesdidnot get theirwritingfromthe merchants basedin Assur;theirscriptmost closelyresemblesOldBabylonian andmayhavebeenborrowedfrom the scribesof northernSyria,an area in the orbitof the OldBabylonian dynastyof Hammurapi(Guterbock 1983:24-25; Hoffner1973:204). Bythe beginningof the OldHittite period(sixteenthcenturyB.C.E.), the newstatehadborrowed the cuneiform writingsystemandadaptedit to the Hittite language,beginninga distinctivelyHittite scribaltradition. The archivesat Hattusacontain texts writtenin severaldifferent

languages,the most predominantof which is the Indo-European Hittite. The othermajorlanguageof the archiveis Akkadian,the Semitic languageof Mesopotamiathat the Hittitesusedearly,alongwith Hittite, forstaterecordsand,later,for internationalcorrespondence and diplomacy. Texts,includingbilinguals, werewrittenin Hatticandin two otherIndo-European languages, LuwianandPalaic.In addition, manytexts datingmostlyto the laterstagesof the kingdomcontain, or arewrittenin, Hurrian,the agglutinativelanguageof the peopleof southernAnatoliaandnorthern Mesopotamia.Sumerian,the Mesopotamianlanguagethat wasalready usedexclusivelyas a scholarlylanguage,is attestedat Hattusain the commonuse of Sumerianlogograms as well as in vocabularylists that give Sumerian,Akkadian,andHittite equivalents.An Indo-Aryan languagerelatedto Sanskritis the originof a few technicaltermsin horsetrainingtexts adoptedfrom the Hurrians. In trackingnoticeablechanges that took placein the Hittite languageandwritingsystemduringthe roughlyfourcenturiesof the kingdomfsscribaltradition,modern scholarsuse the notedcharacteristics of the languagein a particular periodto datetexts that cannotbe datedby othercriteria.Because manyof the textsfoundin the Hittite archiveswereconsideredimportant enoughto be copied,Hittitologists areinterestedin the dateof an original compositionas well as that of a particularcopy.Thus,forexample,a clearlyOldHittitetext such as the Anittatext (CTH1)2mayexist in copieswrittenin bothOld Script andNew Script.

The OldHittite Kingdom.The Old HittiteKingdommaybe saidto begin with Labarna I, the firstkingof the dynastythat establishedthe kingdomof Hattusa.Twoearlier kings,Pithanaandhis son Anitta, bearan as yet unclearrelationshipto the firstHittite dynastyof Labarna (Guterbock1983:25).Pithanaand Anittaoccurin OldAssyriantexts (Gurney1981:19),anda daggeror spearheadinscribedwith "thepalace of Anittathe king"discoveredin the city districtat Kanesprovidesadditionaldocumentation.This dagger couldindicatethat Anittawasking at Kanesor,if the destructionof this levelcanbe attributedto him, that the daggerwas lost there.According to the Anittatext, the one text from the Hittite statearchivesattributed to him, AnittaandPithana,basedat theirhome city of Kussara,created an empiremadeup of neighboring smallkingdoms.Anittalatermoved his residenceto Kanes/Nesa.Among the kingdomsthat he conqueredwas Hattus,which hadhada karum.He sowedweedson the site andcursed anywho wouldrebuildit. In the Hittite formof the name,Hattusa,a Hittite stem vowelis addedon the olderHatticname,Hattus. It is uncertainhow longit was afterPithanaandAnittabefore LabarnaI establishedthe firstOld Hittite dynasty.His son, Labarna II, changedhis nameto HattusiliI, which means"manof Hattusa,"and mayhaveresettledHattusaand madeit his capital.It wasduringthe reignof HattusiliI that the Hittite stateemergedinto the light of history.Withthe exceptionof the Anitta text, which wasdiscoveredin the city he hadsacked,the Hittite state archivesbeginwith HattusiliI. By the time of his death,Hattusilihad

Biblical Archaeologist7lune/september 1989

65

sixteenthcenturyB.C.E., carriedon Hattusili'straditionof campaigning andextendingthe empire.Following the directionof Hattusili'scampaignssouth,MursiliI pushedthe Hittite armydeepinto Mesopotamia andsackedBabylonaround1531 B.C.E. This raidendedthe OldBabyloniandynastyof Hammurapiandis the most importantsynchronism betweenHittite andMesopotamian historyforthe earlyperiod.Babylon wasthe deepestinto Mesopotamia the Hittiteseverpenetrated,however. Above:Overallviewof themainchamber an open-airrocksanctuary of Yazlllkaya, The attackwasnothingmorethana locateda mile northeastof Hattusa.A grand raidanddidnot representa serious processionof Hittitegodsis carvedin a long attemptto controlMesopotamiaas relieffriezethatfollowsthe contoursof the naturalchamber.Themaleandfemalesides faras Babylon.Unfortunatelyfor of theprocessionmeetin themainscene, Mursili-and forHittite dynastic The visiblein themiddleof thephotograph. stability-his absenceduringthe IV, sanctuarydatesto thereignof Tudhaliya towardthe endof theHittiteEmpire.Left: Babyloniancampaignallowedthe Thisrockreliefof MuwatalliIIis locatedat developmentof a palaceintrigue. Sirkeliin southernAnatolia,onanoutcropping of rockat a bendin the CeyhanRiver.Ruling Uponhis returnMursiliI wasmurat the beginningof the thirteenthcentury dered,andthe Hittite statewasbeset is knownfortwomajor B.C.E., Muwatalli with dynasticdifficultiesthatled to events:theBattleof Kadesharound1275B.C.E. a successionof weakOldHittite a andhis movingthecapitalto Tarhuntassa, city somewherein southernAnatolia,thus kingswho couldnot keepup the shiftingtheempire'scenterof gravitytoward campaignsnecessaryto maintain Egyptianfrontier. Syriaandthe troublesome an empire. not only establishedthe capitalthat The most importantkingof the wouldservethe Hittitekingdomfor end of the OldHittiteperiodis most of its history;he hadcreatedan Telipinu,the kingknownforthe empireby campaigninginto outside TelipinuEdict(CTH191,a proclamationdealingwith the subjectof areas,especiallysouthinto Syria. ThePoliticalTestamentof HattusiliI dynasticsuccession.The text chrondescribesthe problemsencountered icles some of the internalproblems by this kingin findinga successorto anddisunityexperiencedsince the the throne;it also givesinsightsinto deathof MursiliI and,in an effortto the institutionof the Hittite asput an endto the turmoil,sets forth sembly,which the kingaddressed rulesto determinelegitimatedynas(Beckman1982:437-391.The docu- tic succession.Problemsof succesment,which is fromthe statearsion provedto be disastrousforthe chives,indicatesthatHittiteproce- OldHittite state,but the kingdom duresfordynasticsuccessionwere demonstratedsufficientpoliticalrefairlyfluidduringthe earlydaysof siliencyto survivethis earlyperiod. the kingdom. Fiveor six ephemeralkingssucceeded Hattusili'sadoptedsuccessor TelipinubeforeTudhaliyaIIbegana new,strongerdynastythat ruledin wasMursiliI who,in the mid-

66

Biblical Archaeologist, fune/September1989

Thiselaboraterockrelief,whichdatesto theEmpireperiod, was carvedon a giantboulderat Imamiuluin central drivinga Anatolia.Thecentersectionshowsthe Storm-God chariotpulledby bullsoverbowingmountaingodsheld up bysmallergods.Thehgureto theleft,perhapsa Hittite prince,carriesa bowoverhis shoulder.Thefigureto theright is a goddess,possiblyIstar.

the MiddleHittiteperiod. The MiddleHittite Kingdom.Tudhaliya II'snew dynastydrewstrength fromthat king'srenewedinterestin campaigningas the earlyOldHittite kingshaddone(seeBeal 1986for new evidenceforHittite conquest anddiplomacyunderTudhaliyaIIl. LaterMiddleHittite kingswere unableto continuethe campaigns, however,andit wasleft to SuppiluliumaI in the laterfourteenthcenturyB.C.E. to renewHittite conquests abroadandinauguratethe New Hittite, or Empire,period. The MiddleHittiteperiodis distinguishedpartlyon linguisticand paleographic groundsbasedon a characteristicformof the language (MiddleHittite)anda distinctive type of script(MiddleScript).Our understanding of the late OldHittite andMiddleHittiteperiodssuffers froma scarcityof documentationeventhe numberandpropersequence of kingsbetweenTelipinuandSuppiluliumaI is disputed.Unliketheir neighborsin Mesopotamia,the Hittites didnot keepas a formalpartof theirstaterecordsa list of rulers. Theydidkeeplists of offeringsmade to deceasedkings,which help in reconstructingthe namesandsequencesof the kings,but not all of the kingsareincludedin these lists, andsome of those who areincluded neverbecameking.Therefore,the only surewayto establisha dynastic sequenceis to findrecordsforeach kinganduse the genealogicalinformationcontainedin them. For some kingsof the middleperiodwe do not havesuch records.Some kingsareattestedonly by sealsor seal impressionsthatgivetheir nameandancestry. Perhapsthe best knownMiddle Hittite king is ArnuwandaI, who

:X century ruledin the mid-fourteenth Withhis queen,Asmunikal, Arnuwanda wrotea prayer(CTH375) thatpoignantlyreflectsthe political situationof the MiddleHittite era. In the prayer,the kingandqueen bemoanthe loss of the important cult city of Nerik;at the sametime, they remindthe godshow well the Hittiteshavecaredforthem, in contrastto the Kaska,the barbarian peoplesof the northwho nowhold Nerik.The importanceof maintaining cult offeringsto all the godsis reflectedin the prayerwhen ArnuwandaandAsmunikalpromiseto continueto givethe godsof Nerik all theirofferingsby movingthe site of theirworshipto Hakpis,a city still underHittite control. The Kaskapeoplereferredto in the prayerwereone of the most troublesomeneighborsof the Hittites. Situatedin northcentralAnaB.C.E.

<xrsE

' 'i -aris';'

tolia, northof the Hittite homeland, they werea roughtribalpeoplewho hadno centralizedcapitalandwere thereforedifficultto pin downand conquer.Inperiodsof strengththe Hittiteswereableto keepthe Kaska tribesat bay,but they exertedconstantpressureon the northernborderof the kingdomandwereready to takeadvantageof anyweaknessin Hittite militarycapability.In spite of its greatreligiousimportance,the cult city of Nerikwasnot recovered until HattusiliIIIwas ableto reestablishHittite controlhalfa centurylater. Informationaboutthe Middle Hittitekingsis also availablein a seriesof unusualtexts that scholars texts that designateas instructions, set forththe dutiesof a particular officeror a groupof stateofficials.In instrucadditionto Arnuwanda's (CTH157), tions to his "mayors"

1989 BiblicalArchaeologistfune/September

67

Above:Twomen,orgods,raisetheirarmsto a seateddeity(notvisiblein photo)on this rockrelieflocatedat GavurKales1,southwest of Ankara.Thereis no inscription,andthe butits framework, reliefhasno architectural of Hittiteimperialart. styleis characteristic Aboveright:ThisNeo-Hittitereliefdating fromtheeighthcenturyB.C.E. depicts of thekingdomof Tuwanuwa Warpalawa Tarhu,a godof vegetationand worshipping storms.Locatedat IvriznearKonyain southernAnatolia,thesculptureshowsAssyrian influence,especiallyin the treatmentof the beardsandhair,whicharetightlycurledand capandrobe carefullysculpted.Warpalawa's also couldbeAssyrian,butthe hbula,or clasp,thatholdshis robetogetherappearsto be Phrygian.

which detailstheirdutyto maintain securityin cities throughoutthe kingdom,thereis an extremelyinterestingseriesof instructionsto the borderguards(CTH261),usuallydenotedbythe Hittiteswith the Akkadianphrasebel madgalti,"lordof Thesetexts make the watchtower." clearthe prioritygivento guarding the frontiersandkeepinghostile neighboringlandsundersurveillance

68

duringthe MiddleHittitekingdom, a periodof militaryweakness. The HittiteEmpirePeriod.Withthe accessionof SuppiluliumaI in the centuryB.C.E., the mid-fourteenth middleperiodof relativeHittiteweakness ended,andthe finalphaseof the kingdom,the Empireperiod,began. SuppiluliumaI wasan exceedinglyvigorouskingwho,like the firstHittitekings,campaignedevery yearin orderto increasethe size of the kingdomandcreatea trueempireencompassingdifferentgeographicregions.Afterreestablishing Hittitepowerin centralAnatolia, Suppiluliumadirectedhis energies towarda formidableneighborto the southeast,the stateof Mitanni.This Hurriankingdomhadgrownstrong duringthe periodof Hittiteweakness,becomingone of the major powersof the ancientNearEastand establishingequaldiplomaticrelations with Egypt.Afterbeingdefeatedin his firstencounterwith the Mitannianking,Tusratta,Suppiluliumamounteda secondcampaign

Biblical Archaeologist} June/September 1989

againstthis powerfulenemy,attacking the Mitanniancapital,Wassukanni, andsackingit. Tusrattaescapedand set up a kindof government-in-exile, but Mitanni'sdaysof powerwere numbered.Suppiluliuma,meanwhile, proceededto correspondwith Egyptianpharaohsof the Amarna periodjustas Tusrattahaddone beforehim. Althoughthe Hurrianstatehad beenvanquished,Hurrianculture, especiallyliteratureandcultpractice, continuedto flourish;takenup by the Hittites,it waspreservedin their literarytradition.The Mitannian capital,with its statearchiveswritten in Hurrian,has not yet beendiscovered.MostpreservedHurriantexts come fromHattusa,an indicationof the greatculturalinfluenceexerted by the Hurrianson the Hittitesin the empireperioddespitethe collapseof theirpoliticalpowerbase. It wasperhapsas much as 30 yearslaterwhen Suppiluliumareturnedto Syria(Gurney1981:30-31) and,takingadvantageof the final

*w /

_-

R

s

-

w ,4s,,,, }

-

.

.C,

;.>,

,

^,

E

t

t

Thefortressat Karkamis becamethe centerof Hittitecontrolin Syria.

^

r -< ;

_.

v

,

- F_z,,

t

w

s

, .

*

-

o

*

.

i i. -{

- fv

s ;W

Above:Ancient Sam'al,locatedatmodern-day Zincirliin the areasouthandeastof the Hittitehomeland,wasthesiteofa Neo-Hittite (sometimescalledSyro-Hittite) kingdom. Removedin timefromtheAlacaHoyuk sphinxesof theEmpireperiod,thissphinx fromZincirliwasmanufactured at Yesemek, a Hittitequarryandsculptureworkshop.It is currentlyhousedin thegardenof the Gazianteparchaeological museum.Aboveright: Carvedinto thelivingrockat a mountain passat Hanyeri(Gezbel)in centralAnatolia is thisreliefof a late EmpireHittiteprince. Theprince,who carriesa spearanda bow,is accompaniedbya hieroglyphic inscription. Birdsarealsoseenflyingin the air.

collapseof Mitanni,annexedmore of northernSyria,includingthe strategicfortressat Karkamis.This site becamethe centerof Hittite controlin Syria,wherea viceroyfor

vf+j.^ .; B

tt

ow ^ .

X,,

S

t.

e

.

,

s

.

,

,,-

_

' otS'

i'

A

Syria,usuallya royalprince,was stationed.Suppiluliumahadeliminatedhis most powerfulsouthern neighborandthus openedthe road to Syria,an importantcomponentof the Hittite empire.This wasto have seriousrepercussionsin NearEastern politics.Assyria,which hadbeen keptin checkby its neighborMitanni, wasnow freeto expandits territory,andthis expansioneventually broughtAssyriainto conflictwith the Hittitesnearthe end of the empireperiod(Singer1985).Hittite expansioninto Syriacoincidedwith a revivalof Egyptianinterestsin the samearea,leadingeventually,around 1275B.C.E., to the battleof Kadesh. Suppiluliumaalso turnedhis

. f

3|eS

- -o

S

'

-,#

4

x

#

.

,

>b

f

t

,

__"t'-'*' -

>,_:

zesict .

^

iC

SX

.-

ff

_ *

^

--

j

l

}w

fE

,

ali

4

attentionwest, towardthe landof Arzawa,which,in the MiddleHittite period,hadbecomestrongenoughto corresponddirectlywith the Egyptianpharaoh.The Hittite kingwas againableto subduethese neighboring landsandincorporatethem into the empire.However,when Suppiluliumadied,followedbyhis son,Arnuwanda,theirsuccessor,MursiliII, faceda revoltin the landsof Arzawa. The campaignsof this Mursiliare particularlywell knownbecauseof two differentseriesof annalsin which the youngkingdescribeshis campaignsandthe peopleshe conquered.Manyrulersfromthe surroundinglandsthoughtMursiliwas too youngto ruleandthereforetried

BiblicalArchaeologist7 Sune/September 1989

69

wasan activequeen. wife,Puduhepa, Hattusili's shebrought of a priestof Kizzuwatna, Daughter homeland. culturefromherHurro-Luwian Hurrian Thisblockmonument,madeupof individual stoneswith deitiescarvedin relief,is located at EflatunPlnar,a late Empirecult site at a springin westcentralAnatolia.Themonument,whichis about23 feetlong,has a typicallyHittitelayeredcompositionin whichthecentraldeitieshelpsupportthe wingedsun-disc,symbolicof Hittiteroyalty.

to detachthemselvestromthe Hitt1te Egypt,but continuedHittite control of the areaindicatesthat the victory orbit,but Mursiliprovedthem muchof his belongedto the Hittites.The other wrongby reconquering father'sempireandconsolidatingit noteworthyeventof Muwatalli's forfuturekings.Mursilicampaigned reignin the earlythirteenthcentury in otherareasas well. He repeatedly B.C.E. washis movingthe capitalto a city somewherein journeyednorthto subduethe Kaska, Tarhuntassa, southernAnatolia.This city has not andhe hadto makeone major expeditionto Syriato replacethe beendefinitelylocated,but EmmanuelLarochehas suggested viceroyat Karkamisandforcethe Kalesias a possiblesite Meydanc1k Syrianprovincesto recognizethe (Mellink1974:1111.Locatinga new new imperialdeputy. The reignof MursiliII'sson, capitalin southernAnatoliashifted Muwatalli,is especiallynoteworthy the empire'scenterof gravitytoward becauseof two majorevents.Oneis Syriaandthe troublesomeEgyptian frontier.The brotherof Muwatalli, the battleof Kadesh,around1275 between HattusiliIII,was left in chargeof the B.C.E., a directconfrontation the Egyptiansandthe Hittitesover northernportionof the kingdom andgiventhe statusof a lesserking. borderdisputesin Syro-Palestine (Murnane1985).UnderMuwatalli WhenMuwatallidied,his son UrhiTesubsucceededhim jasMursiliIII) the the Hittitesoutmaneuvered andsoon cameinto conflictwith his Egyptianarmyled by RamessesII, uncle.Havingretakenmuchof the who wasfortunateto escapewith northernareaforthe Hittites,inhis life. This didnot preventthe pharaohfromdescribingKadeshas a cludingthe cult city Nerik,Hattusili attempts of it in IIIrespondedto Urhi-Tesub's victoryin his representations

70

Biblical Archaeologist, Tune/September1989

to excludehim fromhis shareof the ruleby deposinghis nephewand usurpingthe throne.This incident gaveriseto one of the mostunusual documentsin the Hittitearchives, the Apologyof HattusiliIIIlCTH811. In it the kingtells his versionof the story,justifyinghis actionsbynoting the greatwrongsdoneto him by andthe specialpatronage Urhi-Tesub shownto him by the goddessIstar. HattusiliIII,rulingin the midthirteenthcenturyB.C.E., provedto be an excellentking.He inheriteda smoothlyoperatingempireandkept it thatway.Duringhis reignrelations with Egypt,strainedsince the battle at Kadesh,werenormalized.The treatythat wasdrawnup between these two greatpowersaround1259 B.C.E. iS uniquein the ancientNear East;it is extantin the languagesof bothparties.The Egyptianversion wasinscribedon the walls of a templeof Ramesses.The otherversion waswrittenin Hittite on a clay tabletthatwasdiscoveredveryearly in the excavationsat Hattusa. Hattusili'swife, Puduhepa,the daughterof a priestof Kizzuwatna (Cilicia),was an exceedinglyactive queen.Onhis wayhome fromhelping his brother,Muwatalli,at the battleof Kadesh,Hattusiliwas instructedby Istarto stopin KizzuwatnaandwedPuduhepa.Puduhepa broughtHurrianculturewith her homeland, fromherHurro-Luwian which,when she laterbecame queen,hada greatimpacton Hittite

A largeunfinishedstelafromthelate Empireperiodstill lies in the areawhereit wasfound,at FaslllarnearEfldtunPlnar in westcentralAnatolia.Visibleherearetheheadandfigure who wearsa conicalcapand whohashis of the Storm-God righthandraisedabovehis head.A copyof this stelais set up in thegardenof theMuseumof AnatolianCivilizationsin Ankara.

culture.Shealsoprovedto be a very vigorousmonarchin her ownright, in conductingroyalcorrespondence her ownnameandremainingactive in affairsof stateafterher husband died (Singer1987:415;Otten 1975). Withthe deathof HattusiliIII, his son Tudhaliya,the fourthkingof that name,took the throne.Ruling at the end of the thirteenthcentury enjoyedthe peace B.C.E., Tudhaliya won byhis fatherandtheirpredecessorsandis best knownforhis efforts towardreligiousreform.The Hittite religioustendencytowardan eclecticism in which everygod,no matter what its origin,is to be propitiated ceremoniesis with the appropriate exemplifiedbeautifullyin the cult of Tudhaliya.Thesetexts inventories arelists compiledby specialdeputies commissionedbythe kingto visit cult sites throughoutAnatoliaand makean inventoryof all the religious accoutrementsin the area; cultic equipment,personnel,and traditionalcult ceremoniesareall Tudhaliya listedas cultparaphernalia. IValso triedto makesurethat traditionallocal cults continuedto performthe requiredritualceremonies, andhe broughtsomelocal cults to the capitalas well. The potentialforconflictalong borderwas the Hittite-Assyrian finallyrealizedduringthis monarcks reign.A majorbattlewas foughtbetweenTudhaliyaIVandan Assyrian ruler,probablyTukulti-Ninurta (Singer1985).Tudhaliyaalso correspondedbothwith the Assyrian courtandwith the Egyptianpharaoh. sonssucceeded Twoof Tudhaliya's him on the throne.ArnuwandaIII ruledforonlyaboutfiveyears,andwe havelittle materialfromhis reign. His brother,SuppiluliumaII,is almostcertainlythe last king of the

Hittite Empire,althoughthe recent discoveryof a tombintendedforhim 1989)has castdoubt (Bayburtluoglu on this long-heldideabecauseif Suppiluliumawasburiedin a tomb theremust havebeenat leastone kingto followhim. In anycase,correspondencefromUgaritdatingto his reignindicatesthat disasterwas on the way.In the correspondence, the rulerof Ugarit,respondingto the pressureof invaders,appealsto the greatHittite kingforhelp.Apparently,however,the Hittitesneededhelp as well. The EgyptianpharaohMerneptahsent aidto the Hittites-grain to alleviatethe effectof faminenearthe endof the empire(Singer 1987:415-16). The actualend of the Hittite Empirecanonly be guessedat, for the obviousreasonthat no one was left to chroniclethe eventafterthe capitalwas takenaround1200B.C.E. (seeSinger1985and 1987forprob-

lems in datingthe fall of the empire). Withthe sackingof Hattusa,the centralizedHittitepolity cameto an endforever,as didthe Hittite cuneiformscribaltradition;no Hittite cuneiformtabletsthat post-datethe fall of Hattusahavebeendiscovered in eitherAnatoliaor Syria.The site waslateroccupiedby the Phrygians andlaterstill by the Byzantines. Afterthe fall of the empire,many cities in AnatoliaretainedtheirHittite characterbut eventuallydevelopeda distinctiveculturecharacterizedbya mixtureof Anatolian andSyrianelements. The Hittitesandthe Bible SeveraldifferentHebrewwordsor phrasesin the OldTestamentare usuallytranslatedas Hittite or Hittites3One is asonsof Heth,"which occursonly in Genesis.See Genesis 10:15fora listingof Hethas one of the sons of Canaan.The "daughters

1989 BiblicalArchaeologist,fune/September

71

-

of Heth,"translatedas "Hittite women"in the RevisedStandard Versionandthe New International Version,occursin Genesis27:46.In thatpassage,Rebekahvoicesfearof the localnon-Hebrews becauseshe doesnot wantJacobto takea foreign wife.Thusthe patriarchsperceived the Hittitesas earlyinhabitantsof Canaan,or,in the broadestsenseof the term,Canaanites. ThemorecommonHebrewword usedto denotethe Hittites,hittl, is alsobasedon the nameHeth.This formmaybe usedto designatethe ethnicityof an individual,forinstance,"Ephron the Hittite"in Genesis 23:10.Ephronfs appearance in Genesis23 alongwith manyexamples of the sons of Hethconfirms theiridentificationwith the Hittites. This word,hittl, is alsousedin lists of peopleslivingin the promised land.In modernversionsof the Old Testamentthe singularformis used in a genericsenseandusuallytranslatedin the plural,"theHittites."In this waythe Hittitesareincludedin what is consideredto be the standardlist of the sevenmajorpeoples of Palestine:the Hittites,the Girgashites,the Amorites,the Canaanites, the Perizzites,the Hivites,and the Jebusites-as,forexample,in Deuteronomy7:1.The one attested exampleof a pluralfeminineform occursin a list of the foreign(nonIsraelite)womenadmiredby Solomon jl Kings11:1),againindicating thatthe Hittiteswerea recognizable localethnicgroup. The fiveoccurrencesof the term Hittite in the masculinepluralform deservespecialmention.Unlike most otherformsof the word,which havea narrowlydefinedusage,the masculinepluralformis usedin widelyvaryingcontexts.In Joshua

72

2-

"kingsof the Hittites"refersto some of the rulerswho importedchariots andhorsesfromSolomon.Finally,in 2 Kings7:6the veryrumorof the kingsof the Hittitesandthe kings of Egyptis sufficientlyalarmingto causethe Syriansto flee while be-

s

;^ *X; e

ws

X

.

wiS,.sx -

-

*;

-

-

-

-

4w. v

A kingof theNeo-Hittitekingdomof Milid, locatedat Arslantepecloseto present-day Malatya,is depictedin this 10-foot-tall limestonestatuedatingfromtheeighthcentury B.C.E. andcurrently housedin theMuseumof AnatolianCivilizations,Ankara. Theking's wavyhairandcurledbeardareevidenceof anAssyrianinfluenceas arethepose,flll robe,andsandledfeet.Thekingholdsa scepterin his righthandandclutchesa cloak in his left. Sculpture in theround,as opposed toreliefsculpture, wasrarein Hittitetimesbut wascommonlyproduced bytheAssyrians.

1:4the phrase"landof the Hittites" is usedas partof God'sdescription of the landpromisedto Moses.The samephraseis usedin Judges1:26, which tells the storyof the man who betrayedBethelto the Israelites andescapedto the landof the Hittites. In 1 Kings10:29,andits parallel in 2 Chronicles1:17,the phrase

BiblicalArchaeologistZ lune/September 1989

.

sleglng

l

n

wamarla.

Referencesto the Hittitesin the patriarchalnarrativeindicatethat Abrahamencounteredthem as a settled peopleof Palestine.Indeed,the Hittiteswereincludedin another description,in Genesis 15:20,of the landpromisedto Abraham.The concernfelt by IsaacandRebekahabout the foreignwives theirsons might taketurnedout to be justifiedwhen EsaumarriedJudithandBasemath lGenesis26:34),two Hittitewomen. RebekahworriedthatJacobwould also choosea bridefromamongthe localnon-Hebrewinhabitantsof Canaan,includingthe Hittites. Whenthe Hebrewsreturned fromEgyptunderMosesandJoshua, they againencounteredthe Hittites, alongwith manyotherCanaanite peoples.WhenMoses'spiesreturned after40 daysandmadetheirreport at KadeshBarnea(Numbers13:29), they locatedthe Hittites,Jebusites, andAmoritesin the hill countryand othergroupson the coastor in the Negeb.Joshua11:3cites the same threepeoples,plus the Perizzites,as inhabitantsof the hill country.References to the Hittitesalso appearin God'scatalogingof the peoplesthe Israelitesmust fightin orderto conquerthe promisedland.In Deuteronomy20:16-18the Israelitesare toldthat they must utterlydestroy the Hittites tamongothers),indicating thatHittite territorywasin the heartof the regionthat the Israelites wereto takeover.Somekindof political organizationis indicatedby

periodandthe Karkamis (Carchemish) wasa majorindependentkingdomin theOldTestament greatestcenterof Neo-Hittitesculpture.It had a distinctivestyle thatinfluencedsurrounding cities.Theseorthostats,largestoneslabsdecoratedwithreliefcarvingandusedas architectural ornamentation, arefromKarkamisanddatefromtheninthcenturys.c.E.Thewarscenerelief shownherewas carvedon alternatingblack(basalt)and whitestones,averageheightabout 5l/2feet.Thebasaltstoneshaveapparentlyweatheredtheyearsbetterthanthe whitestones. in theMuseumof AnatolianCivilizations,Ankara. Theseorthostatsarecurrentlyhoused

the referenceto the kingsof the Hittites, Amorites,Canaanites,andso on in Joshua9:1-2. The patriarchsalso encountered the HittitesaroundHebron(Genesis 23)andBeer-sheba(Genesis26:24; 27:46),andmost of the evidencewe haverelatingto theirlocationat the time of the conquestis consistent with those locations.The exception to this is Joshua1:4,in which the areaaroundthe Euphratesis referred to as "thelandof the Hittites."This doesnot fit with the otherreferences to the Hittitesas one of the local peoplesof southernPalestine;it probablyrefersto the neo-Hittite principalitiesof northernSyriadating to this period. Fromthe conqueston the Hebrewsstruggledwith the problemof Canaaniteinfluence,partlybecause they didnot completelyeradicate the local inhabitantsof Palestine. Oneof the Canaanitepeopleswhom

the Israelitescontinuedto encounter in the periodof the judgeswerethe Hittites.Judges3:5-6 notethe failure of the Hebrewsto eradicatethe Hittites and,consequently,the resulting interminglingof the peoples, andthe includingintermarriage religious assimilationof "Canaanite" influences. ThoseHittiteswho survivedthe Israeliteconquestof the promised landcontinuedto interactwith the Hebrewsduringthe periodof the monarchy.Oneof KingDavid'scomradeswhile he wasbeingpursuedby SaulwasAhimelechthe Hittite, him whomDavidaskedto accompany into Saul'scampat night (1Samuel 26:61.AhimelecksHebrewnameindicatesthat he hadbeenintegrated into Hebrewsociety.Chapters11 and 12of 2 Samueltell the storyof Uriahthe Hittite,who livedin Jerusalem,servedin the Hebrewarmy, wasone of David'smightymen, and

hada Hebrewwife. Hittiteswereamongthe Canaanite peoplesruledbyKingSolomon. As mentionedpreviously,1 Kings 11:1-2mentionHittitewomenas some of the foreignwomenin Solomon'scourt.Solomonalso forced the Hittites,alongwith otherCanaanitepeopleswho hadsurvived the conquest,to workon his building projects(1Kings9:20-21and theirparallelin 2 Chronicles8:7-8). that referIt is understandable encesto the Hittitesof Solomon's time woulddescribethem as local Canaanitepeoplewho wereleft over fromthe pre-conquestdays,but I Kings10:29(andits parallelin 2 Chronicles1:171detailsa relationshipwith Solomonthat doesnot fit into this context.This passagedescribesSolomon'sexportationof horsesandchariotsto the kingsof the Hittitesandthe Arameans. TheseHittitescannotbe the same groupSolomonwasusingforforced labor.The pairingof Hittite andArameankingsindicatesthat these monarchsshouldbe locatedin the city-statesof northernSyria,states thatwereof Neo-Hittiteand/or In the years Arameanbackground. afterSolomon,duringthe periodof the dividedmonarchy,the reputation of the kingsof the Hittites coupledwith the kingsof the Egyptianshelpedout the northernkings, andthis also raisesthe questionof which Hittitesarebeingcited.During the Syriansiegeof Samariadescribedin 2 Kings7:6,the attackers fledtheircampwhen they heardthe soundof a greatarmythat they convincedthemselveswasmadeup of the kingsofthe Hittitesandthe EgyptianshiredbyIsrael.It is extremely unlikelythat the local Palestinian Hittiteswho hadearlierworkedas

Biblical Archaeologist, [une/September1989

73

ThisNeo-Hittitereliefof a "mixedbeing," a sphinxwith a lion andman'shead,is alsoon an orthostatfromKarkamisandalsodatesfromtheninthcenturyB.C.E. Thereliefis carvedon basaltin thedistinctiveKarkamisstyle.Noticethatthe tailhas a bird'shead.A little more than4 feet tall, thesculptureis housedin theMuseumof AnatolianCivilizations,Ankara. A modernthree-dimensional copysits at a trafficsignaloutsidethe trainstationthere.

forcedlaborunderSolomonwould nowbe a vital militaryforcein the sameregionas Israel;again,this mustbe a referenceto the kingsof Neo-Hittiteprincipalitiesin Syria. In the Exilicandpost-Exilic periodsthe Hebrewscontinuedto comeinto contactwith, or recall previouscontactwith, the Hittites in Palestine.Oneof Ezekiel'sprophecies refersto the ancestryof Jerusalem:ayourmotherwas a Hittite andyourfatheranAmorite"(Ezekiel 16:45;16:3similar).When,in the late sixth centuryB.C.E., the Hebrews returnedfromexile in Babylon,Ezra wasfacedwith the samecrisisof intermarriage thathadcausedproblems forIsaacandRebekahandfor Solomon.In Ezra9:1-3,he is horrifiedbyinformationthat the Hebrews havetakenwivesfromall the local tribesof Palestine,includingthe Hittites.This representsa serious breachof Israelitepurityfrom idolatry,no less gravea matterthan it was at the time of the conquest. The patriarchaldescriptionof the promisedlandas the landof the Canaanites,the Hittites,the Amorites,andso on is againrecalledin Nehemiah9:8. Referencesto the Hittitesin the OldTestament seemto referto twodistinct groups.Onegroup,describedas the descendantsof Canaanthrough the eponymousancestorHeth,were encounteredbyAbrahamaround Hebron.Becausethese sons of Heth werelivingin the heartof the land thathadbeenpromisedto the Israelites,Godcommandedthe Hebrews,upontheirreturnfromEgypt, to destroythe Hittitesutterly.That the Hittiteswerenot completely eradicatedbut continuedto inhabit southernPalestine,includingthe areaaroundJerusalem,canbe seen

74

in the referencesto them in the Hebrewarmy,as forcedlaborconscripts,andas possiblewivesforthe Hebrews-all the wayuntil the returnfromexile in Babylon.MostOld Testamentreferencesto the Hittites makesensewhen theyarepictured as a localCanaanitepeoplewho wereneverquiteexterminatedduring the Hebrewconquestof Canaan. Fivereferencesin the OldTestament,however,do not fit this picture (Gelb1962:613-14).The reference in Joshua1:4,forexample,which describesthe areaaroundthe Euphratesas beingHittite territory, cannotreferto the Hittitesof Hebron but ratherto the Neo-Hittitekingdomsof northernSyrialseeBoling andWright1982:122-23fora differentview).InJudges1:26,the referenceto the manwho, afterbetrayingBethel,goesto the "landof the Hittites"couldreferto either southernPalestineor northern

Biblical Archaeologist 7une/September1989

Syria,but in view of the use of the phraseeres hahittim ("land of the Hittites")-Joshua1:4beingthe only otheroccurrenceof this phrase-it is quitepossiblethat it, too, refersto the Neo-Hittitearea.RobertG. Boling (1975:59)has indirectlyimpliedthat he understandsthis phraseas referringto the areaof the AnatolianSyrianHittites.Also,references to the "kingsof the Hittites"who imported horsesandchariotsfromSolomon (1Kings10:29and2 Chronicles1:17) mustindicatea powerfulandwealthy groupof kings,not a local Canaanite peoplewho hadbeenenslavedby Solomon.The samecanbe saidfor "thekingsof the Hittites"whose reputationalonecausedthe Syrian armyto flee (2Kings7:6).Bycontrast,the Neo-Hittitekingdomsfit quitewell in termsof chronology andgeography; theywerein the sameareaas the Syriansandthus wereknownto them, andthe plural

Referellvesto tlle EIittitesill tlle ()1(1l8estvllllellt see111 t() refel t() tsso distillctnrolllS:()11eill I'vllestille,

lEe

tlll()tllel

Hurrians

ill

Allvlt()litl

and

t111

the

11()l'tll

S\rl'ivl.

Horites

The Hurrianswerea neighboring peoplewhoseculturegreatlyinfluenced thatof the Hittitesaftertheywereconqueredby Suppiluliuma I earlyin the Empireperiod.Probablyoriginatingfrom the mountainsof eastern Anatolia,the Hurriansin the mid-secondmillenniumB.C.E. formedthe state of Mitanniandbecamea majorpoweralongwith the Babylonians, Egyptians, andHittites.The Hurriansspreadout overa largepartof the ancientNear East,throughnorthernMesopotamiaand Syriaand south into Palestine (Bright1981:63). Evidencethat they migratedall the waythroughPalestine anddownintoEgyptmaybefoundin the occurrenceofHurriannamesamong those of the Hyksos,foreignrulersof Egyptduringthe secondmillennium (Hoffner1973:224-25). Whenthe HyksoswerefinallyexpelledfromEgyptin themiddleofthe secondmillennium,someoftheseHurrianssettledin Palestine (Hoffner1973:225). E. A. Speiser(1962: 664-66) identifiedthe Hurrianswith the Horites, Hivites,andJebusitesof the OldTestament.He temperedthis identification, however, byalludingbriefly (1962:665) to anindigenousgroup, locatedaround Seir,calledHorites.Thissituationis perhapsanalogousto confusionoverthe term Hittite for indigenousand foreigngroupswith similarnames.The identificationofHurrianswithHoritesandotherCanaanitepeopleshasbeen contestedby Rolandde Vaux(1967).H. A. Hoffner(1973:225) agreedwith Speiserthat the Jebusites,some of whom had identifiablyHurriannames, couldbeHurrian.Itis verylikelythatHurrianshadsettledin Palestinebefore the conquest,and,therefore,we wouldexpectthatthe Israelitesencountered themduringtheirconquestof the promisedland.Inthis periodthe Egyptian nameforPalestinewasHuru,presumably becausetherewasa sizablepopulation of Hurriansin the region(Bright1981:116;Speiser1962:664). R.K.Harrison(1983:245) followedSpeiser'ssuggestionthatJebusiteand Horitewerelocal termsforpeopleknownelsewhereas Hurrians,citingthe archaeological evidencefor Hurriansin Palestineduringthe fifteenthand fourteenthcenturiesB.C.E. K.A. Kitchen(1983:242) hasbeenmorecautious, preferring to keepthe Hurriansdistinctfromthe Hivitesuntil we havemore evidenceregarding theiridentity.EdwinYamauchi(1983:256), while noting de Vaux'sobjectionsto locatingthe Hurriansin mid-second-millennium Palestine,has acceptedevidenceof HurriannamesforJebusiterulersas an indicationthat they may indeedhave been Hurrians.Thus it is at least possiblethat Hurrianscan be foundin the Old Testamentas the Horites, Hivites,andJebusites.

betweenthe "sonsof Heth"of Palestine andthe "menof Hatti"of Anatolia andnorthernSyria(seeGelb 1962:614; Hoffner1973:213-14; Speiser1983: 169-705.The use of hitti to referto bothmayreflect nothingmorethanthe similarityof the namesHethandHatti (Hoffner 1973:2145.This doesnot implythat the two groupscalledHittitesin the OldTestamentmaynot be related ancestrallyfromsome periodantedatingourearliestrecordsor that the CanaaniteHittiteswerenever confusedwith the Hittitesof the Anatolianor northSyriankingdoms who mayhavemigratedinto Palestine andsettledthere.Aharon Kempinski(1979)has arguedconvincinglyforextensivepenetration of the Hittites into Palestineafter the fallof Hattusa,andcertainly thereis archaeologicalevidenceof Hittite culturalinfluencein Palestine duringthe LateBronzeAge (Shanks1973:234-35, plate63c; CallawayandCooley1971:15-195.For the periodcoveredby the OldTestament,however,the termsusually translatedas Hittitesreferredto two distinctgroupsof people.

Syriain the OldlPstamentPeriod The historyof northernSyria(and southernAnatolia)in the periodbetweentheHebrewconquestof Canaan andthe fallof the northernkingdom of Israelis basicallythat of the ArameanandNeo-Hittitekingdoms, sometimescalledthe Syro-Hittite "kings" fits verywell with the nature only fiveoccurrencesof the plural of these states,which werenot uniformhittim in the OldTestament. kingdoms.Assyriandocumentsdating to the firstmillenniumB.C.E. fiedinto one politybut consistedof This maynot be significant,but it referto northernSyriaas the landof severalsmallkingdoms. couldbe some indicationof a disHatti,reflectingtne continued tinctionmadein the text between It is noteworthythat these five referencesto the Hittites,which,on the Hittitesof Palestine,descendants presenceof smallHittite statesin the basisof context,shouldbe of Heth,andthe Hittitesof Anatolia the southernpartof the formerHitunderstoodas referringto the Neotite Empirein spiteof the collapseof andnorthSyria,the men of Hatti. the Hittitepolityin centralAnatolia. Weshoulddistinguish,then, Hittitesof northSyria,arealso the

BiblicalArchaeologistt/une/Septem ber 1989

75

Thecollapseof Hattusa signaledthe endof theHittiteEmpire, butmanycities retained theirHittitecharacter forcenturies. Althoughthe collapseof the capital at Hattusasignaledthe endof the HittiteEmpire,manycities throughout the empireretainedtheirHittite characterforcenturiesafterthe imperialstructurehadvanished.These Neo-Hittitecities showa cultural mix ofHittiteandArameanelements in a periodof increasinglystrong Arameanpresencein Syria.The annals of the Assyriankings,who eventuallyincorporated all of these cltles lnto t.zelremplre,provlc.eone of the availablesourcesforthe political historyof these states.The archaeologicalrecordfromthis period includesarchitecturalremainsand manyexamplesof Neo-Hittitesculpture.Localdocumentationconsists basicallyof inscriptionsin hieroglyphicLuwianandAramaic;there is no corpusof nonmonumental documentationanalogousto the Hittite archivesat Hattusa. As hasbeenmentioned,the city of Karkamis,locatedon the moderndaySyria-Turkey border,wasa provincialcapitalduringthe HittiteEmpire; afterthe empirefell it becamethe centerof an independentkingdom. Excavationsat the site haveuncovereda wonderfulseriesof orthostats, stoneslabscarvedin low reliefand usedto decoratepublicbuildings. Muchof this sculpture,which dates to the firstmillenniumB.C.E., iS on displayin the Museumof Anatolian Civilizationsin Ankara.The artof the surroundingstatesreflectsthe influenceof the Karkamisschool,a style that mayhaveindirectlyinfluencedthe Greeksvia the Phrygians. Oneofthemostspectacularof all the Neo-Hittitesites wasKaratepe. Becausethe orthostatshavebeenpreservedin situ, the modernvisitorcan walkthroughthe city andget a sense of whatit lookedlike in antiquity. .

76

.

.

.

.

.

3Biblicalpassagesusedin this article arefromthe RevisedStandard Versionor the New International Version.

Bibliography

Alklm, U. B. 1968 Anatolia I (Fromthe Beginningsto the End of the 2nd Millennium ThereliefsandlongbilingualinscripB.C.).Cleveland:WorldPublishing tion of kingAzitawandawrittenin Company. hieroglyphicLuwianandPhoenician Astour,M. illustratethe blendingof Hittiteand 1989 Hittite History and Absolute Chronology of the BronzeAge. Gothenburg: Phoeniciancultureat this site. PaulistromwsForlag. TheNeo-Hittitestateswerequite Balkan,K. definitelyheirsto Hittitecivilization, 1957 Letterof KingAnum-Hirbiof Mama to KingWarshamaof Kanish.Ankara: but theydevelopeda distinctiveculTurk TarihKurumuBasimevi. tureall theirownby synthesizing Bayburtluoglu,I. AnatolianandSyriantraditions.As 1989 The Most InterestingFindingof indicatedby referencesto them in Bogazkoyin 1988 Campaign:The the OldTestament,these principaliRemainsof a RoyalTomb(Interview with Dr. PeterNeve). Museum ties hadsome contactwith the kingdom(s)of the Hebrewsfurthersouth Beal, R. (Muze}1:59-61. in Palestine.Theyneverunifiedto 1983a Studies in Hittite History.tournal of createa polityon the scaleof the CuneiformStudies 35: 115-26. Hittite Empire,andthis fragmented 1983b The Hittites After the Empire'sFall. Biblical IllustratorFall:72-81. politicalsituationmadethemeasy 1986 The History of Kizzuwatnaand the targetsforAssyrianexpansiondurDate of the SunassuraTreaty.Oriening the earlyfirstmillenniumB.C.E. talia 55: 424-45. As eachstatewasabsorbedinto As- Beckman,G. of the syria,culturallyas well as politically, 1982 The Hittite Assembly.tournal American Oriental Society 102: it lost its distinctiveHittite-Aramean 435-42. character.Thus,forsouthernAna1986 Inheritanceand RoyalSuccession tolia andnorthernSyria,the period among the Hittites. Pp. 12-31 in immediatelyfollowingthe NeoKanissuwar:Studies in Honorof Hans Guterbock.Chicago:The Hittite stateswasone of Assyrian OrientalInstitute. domination,a dominationthatevenK. tuallyextendeddownto the northern Bittel, 1970 Hattusha. The Capitalof the Hittites. kingdomof Israel. New York:OxfordUniversity Press. Boling, R. G. 1975 ludges. Series:The Anchor Bible. Notes City, NY:Doubleday. lThisdate,andall datescitedin this Boling, R.Garden G., and Wright,G. E. article,arebasedon the low chronology 1982 loshua. Series:The Anchor Bible. datingsystem.Underthe middlechronGardenCity, NY:Doubleday. ologydatingsystemthe ColonyAge Bright,J. lastedfromaround1925to 1725B.C.E. 1981 A History of Israel, third edition. Philadelphia:WestminsterPress. Fora largerdiscussionof issuesrelated Callaway,J.A., and Cooley,R. E. to an absoluteHittitechronology, see 1971 A SalvageExcavationat Raddana,in RonaldL.Gorny'sarticlein this issue. Bireh.Bulletin of the American Also see, in this article,Gorny'slist of Schools of Oriental Research201: Hittiteandpre-Hittitekingsandtheir

reignsaccordingto bothdatingsystems. Gelb, I. J.9-19. 2Hittitologistsidentifyindividual 1962 Hittites. Pp. 612-15 in The InterHittitetextsbytheirnumberin the preter'sDictionary of the Bible, comprehensive (whencompiledlCataedited by G. A. Buttrick.New York: loguedes texteshittitesbyEmmanuel AbingdonPress. Gurney,O. R. Laroche(Paris:EditionsKlincksieck, 1973a Anatoliac. 1750-1600B.C.Pp.228-55 19711, whichis abbreviated CTH.

Biblical Archaeologist, fune/September1989

in volume 2, part 1 of The Cambridge Ancient History, third edition,

Kempinski, A. 1979 Hittites in the Bible: What Does edited by I. E. S. Edwardsand others. Archaeology Say? Biblical ArchaeCambridge:CambridgeUniversity ology Review 5.4: 21-45. Kitchen, K. A. Press. 1973b Anatoliac. 1600-1380B.C.Pp.659-85 1983 Hivites. P. 242 in The International Dictionary of Biblical Archaeology, in volume 2, part 1 of The Cambridge Ancient History, third edition, edited by E. M. Blaicklock and R. K. edited by I. E. S. Edwardsand others. Harrision. Grand Rapids, MI: Regina Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity Reference Library. Press. Kosak, S. 1977 Some Aspects of Hittite Religion. 1986 The Gospel of Iron. Pp. 125-35 in Series:The SchweichLectures 1976. Kaniss7lwar, Studies in Honor of Hans Guterbock. Chicago: The Oxford:OxfordUniversity Press. 1981 The Hittites. New York:Penguin Oriental Institute. Books. Mellink, M. 1974 Archaeology in Asia Minor. AmeriGuterbock,H. G. 1957 Towarda Definition of the Term can lournal of Archaeology: 78: Hittite. Oriens 10:233-39. 105-30. 1958 Kanesand Nesa, TwoFormsof One Metzger, H. 1969 Anatolia II. First millennium B.C. to AnatolianName. Eretz Israel 5:46-50. 1983 Hittite Historiography:A Survey. the End of the Roman Period. London: Barrie and Jenkins. Pp.21-35 in History, Historiography, Murnane, W. and Interpretation, edited by 1985 The Road to Kadesh. Chicago: The H. Tadmorand M. Weinfeld. Jerusalem:MagnesPress. Oriental Institute. Otten, H. Harrison,R. K. 1975 PuduXepa: Eine hethitische Konigin 1983 Hurrians.P. 245 in The Interin ihren Textzeugnissen. Mainz: national Dictionary of Biblical Akademie de Wissenschaften und Archaeology, edited by E. M. Blaickder Literatur. lock andR.K.Harrison.GrandRapids, Shanks, H. MI:ReginaReferenceLibrary. 1973 An Incised Handle from Hazor Hawkins, J.D. 1982 The Neo-Hittite States in Syriaand Depicting a Syro-Hittite Deity. Israel Anatolia."Pp.372-441 in volume 3, Exploration lournal 23: 234-35. Singer, I. part 1 of The Cambridge Ancient 1977 A Hittite Hieroglyphic Seal ImpresHistory, second edition, edited by I. E. S. Edwardsand others. Camsion from Tel Aphek. Tel Aviv 4: bridge:CambridgeUniversity Press. 178-90. 1988 Kuzi-Tesuband the 'GreatKings'of 1985 The Battle of Nihriya and the End of Karkamis.Anatolian Studies 38: the Hittite Empire. Zeitschrift ffir 99-108. Assyriologie und Vorderasiatische Hoffner,H. A. Archaologie 75: 100-23. 1969 Some Contributionsof Hittitology 1987 Dating the End of the Hittite Empire. to Old TestamentStudy.Tyndale Hethitica 8: 413-21. Speiser, E. A. Bulletin 20: 27-55. 1973 The Hittites and Hurrians.Pp. 1962 Hurrians. Pp. 664-66 in The Inter197-228 in Peoples of Old Testament preter's Dictionary of the Bible, Times, edited by D. J.Wiseman. edited by G. A. Buttrick. New York: London:OxfordUniversity Press. Abingdon. 1983 Genesis. Series: The Anchor Bible. 1980 Histories and Historiansof the Ancient Near East:The Hittites. OrienGarden City, NY: Doubleday. talia 49: 283-332. Surenhagen, D. Houwink, ten Cate, P. 1986 Ein Konigssiegel aus Kargamis. 1970 The Records of the Early Hittite Mitteilungen der Deutschen OrientEmpire (c. 1450-1380 B.C.). Istanbul: gesellschaft 118: 183-90. NederlandsHistorisch-Archaeologisch de Vaux, R. Instituut. 1967 Les Hurrites de ltistoire et les 1974 The Earlyand LatePhases of UrhiHorites de la Bible. Revue Biblique Tesub'sCareer.Pp. 123-50 in Anato74: 481-503. lian Studies Presented to Hans Yamauchi, E. Gustav Guterbock on the Occasion 1983 Jebusites. Pp. 256-57 in The Interof his 65th Birthday, edited by national Dictionary of Biblical K. Bittel and others. Istanbul:NederArchaeology, edited by E. M. Blaicklands Historisch-Archaeologisch lock and R. K. Harrison. Grand Rapids, Instituut. MI: Regina Reference Library.

ANATOLIA FromPrehistoricTimes to the Comirlg of Christiarlity

ANCIENT TURKEY A Traveller's Historyof Anatolia SETONLLOYD "Verywellwrittenandveryreadable, presentedwiththe masteryandwisdom of longandintimateexperience." Crawford H. Greenewalt, Jr.

$25.00atbookst(res (r ordert(ll-free 1-800-822-6657. Visa& MasterCard only.

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIAPRESS Berkeley94720

Statementof Ownership, Management,and Circulation October1, 1989 Title: Biblical Archaeologist. Publication Number 0006-0895. Frequency:Quarterly.Four issues published annually.Subscriptionprice: $30.00 institutions, $19.95 individuals.Locationof office of publication:The JohnsHopkinsUniversityPress,701W. 40th Street, Baltimore,MD 21211.Headquartersof publishers: Same. Publisher: The Johns Hopkins UniversityPress,701 W.40th Street,Baltimore,MD 21211.Editor:Eric M. Meyers,ASOR Publications Office, P.O.Box H. M., Duke Station, Durham, NC 27706. Owner:The American Schools of Oriental Research,711 W.40th Street, Suite 354, Baltimore, MD 21211. The purpose, function, and nonprofit status of this organizationandthe exemptstatus for federalincome tax purposeshavenot changedduring the preceding 12 months. The averagenumber of copies of each issue duringpreceding12months are: (A1Total number of copies printed:7,437; (B1Paid circulation,mail subscriptions:4,929; (C1Totalpaid circulation:4,929; (D1Freedistribution:98; IE1Total distribution:5,027;(F1Copiesnot distributed:2,410; (G1Total:7,437.The actualnumberof copiesof single issue published nearest to filing date are: (A1Total numberof copies printed:7,700;(B1Paidcirculation, mail subscriptions:4,892; IC1Totalpaidcirculation: 4,892;ID1Freedistribution:90;IE1Totaldistribution: 4,982; IF1Copies not distributed:2,718; IG1Total: 7,700. Icertifythat the statementsmadebyme above arecorrectandcomplete.MarieR.Hansen,Assistant Directorand JournalsManager.

BiblicalArchaeologist,fune/September 1989

77

.

'- \ ........ XCXZalp_ lvur .RKalesl ' lf

*

* Kar.lhoyllk

;

*

1 1* Fa;lllar

1 riz *

,,Kar.lt:{nc

MAldt

(,.atal F30xilk /\/> > \ Ta>\ 4 :'A! \ I S;lmt,

Kark.llllis

|

wS

a

>\ .

w

r

*-

\\!,l9S.lk.s,] 11i '

Cr

\;I

{)\

\\\'X \ I

. Ug.lrit i

*/K.l.lt

sh

Bull)\tloll

!

78

_

Biblical Archaeologist} tune/September 1989

story in Hittite Anatolia by Anatolian

Archaeology

Ronald

L.

Gorny

A

Modern Turkeywas referredto by severalnamesin antiquity.The termAsia MinorcomesfromGreekandwasprobablyfirstusedin the fifthcenturyC.E. Use of thewordAsiamayultimatelygobackto Assuwa, the Hittitedesignationfor a partof thewestempeninsula.ThetermAnatoliais alsoderivedfromGreekasa referenceto theEast.Itis,however,a ratherlatetoponyn,probablyfirstusedbyaByzantinewriterin thetenthcenturyC.E. Bothtermsarenowusedasrathergeneralappellationsforthe peninsulaoccupiedby the modernnationof Turkey,with Anatolia beingin moregeneraluse becauseof its preservation in the TurkishformAnadolu. The historyof the Anatolianpeninsulahas been long andcolorful.Overthe centuriesthe landhasbeenhometo Hittites,Phrygians, Persians,Greeks,Romans, andTurks,to mentiononly a few.Thesepeoplesleft indeliblemarkson the faceof the peninsula,the meaningsof whichareonly nowbeginningto be fully realized. Althoughthe literaturehaslongsinceprovideda skeletaloutlineof the region'shistoricaldevelopment, the archaeological processoffleshingout this outlinewith intangibleevidenceis still in its infancy.Thearchaeology of Anatoliais, in fact,a stilldeveloping discipline,butits bloodlinesrundeep.As the offspringof twoprestigious progenitors-biblicalandclassicalstudies-it canclaiman illustriouslineage. TheEasternoriginsof Anatolianarchaeology canbefoundin the ancientstudy of the BibleIcompareMellink 1966b:113-15;Ramsay1907, 1972;Ceram1956: 22-45}.Becausethe geographical settingof Asia Minorformedthe backdropfor muchof the New Testament,earlybiblicalscholarsdevelopeda keeninterestin it, travelingacrossthelandanddescribingit in detail.Modernarchaeologists continue todrawinsightandinspirationfromtheseearlyexplorations. IntheWest,Anatolian archaeologywasgroundedin a longstandinginterestin classicalstudiesIMellink 1966b:111-13},a disciplinerootednot only in the literatureof nativewriters,such astheGreekhistorianThucydides, butalsoin thespectacular ruinsof classicalcities scatteredacrossAsiaMinor.Fromthis forumcameattemptsto vindicateHomeric traditionandHeinrichSchliemann's 11875,1884}ultimatediscoveryof Troy. Inviewofthisheritage,it is notsurprisingthatAnatoliawasinitiallyviewedas peripheralto biblicalandclassicalstudiesandlongremainedsubservientto both. Theearlyyearswerefocusedon the acquisitionof museumpiecesfromthe region's richsupplyof classicalmonuments.As suchAnatolianstudiesdidlittle morethan help illuminatethe historicaleventsof its "foundational" traditions.Eventhough the biblicalandclassicaltraditionshad intermingledat Anatoliansites such as Ephesus,Sardis,and PergamonIYamauchi1980X,these contactswere generally viewedin termsof secularGreektraditionsconfrontingsacralBibletraditions,or vice versa.Anatoliaremainedin the background. Therewaslittle discussionof the nativecultureintowhichthe two traditionshadbeenimplanted. The subsequentdevelopmentof Anatolianarchaeologywas influencedby severaloccurrences. OnewasthepreviouslymentioneddiscoverybySchliemannof the stratifiedremainsof Troy.Furtherworkat the site by W.Dorpfeld11902}and C. W.Blegen11963} revealedTroyto bethe centerof a nativeAnatolianculture.This was followedby the first stratigraphic excavationsat Ali,sarin centralAnatolia. Therewasalsoexcavationworkin thepreclassicallandsof Lycia,Lydia,andPhrygia largelyundertaken byarchaeologists whosefascinationstemmedfroma background in classicalstudiesIMellink1966b:112-13}.Morerecently,southeastAnatoliahas beenopenedforintensiveworkastheresultofsalvageoperations alongtheEuphrates River.Thishasencouraged scholarswitha Syro-Mesopotamian background to lend Continued on page 80

natoliais a largegeographical unit, muchof which is archaeologically unknown.1The focusof this articleis the centralplateau,the portionof Anatoliamostly enclosed by,or in proximityto, the regioWs primaryriver,the K1zllIrmak(River Halys}.Withinthe boundsof this catchmentareaarethe remainsof severalancientcities thatplayedkey rolesin the developmentof Hittite Anatolia. Kanes(modern-day Kultepe}2 wasthe centerof an Assyriantrade networkthat tappedinto the resourcesof the plateauat the beginningof the secondmillenniumB.C.E. Hattusa(modern-day Bogazkoy/ Bogazkale}3 wasthe capitalof the powerfulHittite Empireuntil it fell around1200B.C.E. In addition,the moundat Acemhoyuk,which lies nearthe southernshoreof the great SaltLake,is thoughtby manyto be the site of the importantcity of Purushanda(compareOzguvc 1966: 29-30; KempinskiandKosak1982: 99-100).Althoughothercities such as Hurma,Zalpa,andWahsusana alsoplayedimportantrolesduring this period,Kanes,Hattusa,and Acemhoyukseem to best epitomize the urbansettingof centralAnatolia at the beginningof the second millennium. Anatoliahas alwaysbeena land dominatedbyvillagesandpeasants (Tenney1938:628),an agrarianand pastoralsocietyin which the basic relationshipis the one between humanbeingsandthe land.This theme is pervasivein the warpand woofof Hittite culture,touching everysphereof life. This subsistence patternwasfraughtwith difficulties, however,as the plateauwas subject

BiblicalArchaeologist,fune/September 1989

79

Byits verynatureAnatolian archaeology should focuson villagesandfarmsteads thathavealways represented themosttypicalformof settlement. to the vicissitudesof a fickleenvironment(Unal1977).Iftheywere to surviveandprosper,peasants,pastoralists,andprinceshadto acknowledgethe primacyof the landand come to gripswith its environmental framework. Althoughthe nomenclatureof Anatolianarchaeologyis still problematic(seeaccompanying sidebar), it is not difficultto identifya common threadwoveninto its historical fabric.Byits verynatureAnatolian archaeologyshouldfocuson the villagesandsmallfarmsteadsthathave alwaysrepresentedthe most typical formof settlementin Anatolia.The peasantswho inhabitedthese settlementshavelongformedthe backboneof civilizationon the plateau. Unfortunately, only a smallnumber of villageshavebeenexcavated,and the few attemptsthathavebeen madeto analyzevillagelife in ancient Anatoliahavebeenbasedon a combinationof speculation,modern analogies,andwhatlittle canbe gleanedfromtextualsources(see, forinstance,Macqueen1986:74-75, 111-115;Archi 1973).This forces archaeologiststo relyon evidence fromthe excavationsat majorcities as a meansof understanding daily life in HittiteAnatolia.Unfortunately, such excavationstendto provide scholarswith an undeniablyurban slant (compareAdams1984:81, 113). Althoughthereareno reliable studiesof the demographicsituation that existedduringthe Middleand LateBronzeages,it appearsthat,beginningwith EarlyBronzeIII,there was a drasticdeclinein the number of urbansettlementson the plateau. Settlementsthat survived,however, experienceda concurrentincreasein size lMellaart1971:406-101.This doesnot meanthatthe city wasan 80

their exFuerti!sc to the field, and this has begun to illuminatethe borderlandx betweellAnatoliaandSyria.Onediscovery,however,hashadthe greate;timpactof all. This is the discoveryin centralTurkeyof Hattusa,the Hittitecapital. Thedi;coveryandcontinuedexcavationof Hattusaprovedto be a landmarkin the archaeology of the ancientNearEast.Locate(ion the centralplateauat the site of mo(lern-day Bogazk(\y/Bogazkale, Hattusawasa monumentalcity.Evidenceof its formcrglorycanstill be e;ecnin the vestigesof the materialculturerecovered from itxruins.Cuneiformrecordsfoundat the ;ite provideda literarytouchstoneagainst which discoveriesin otherareaxcoul(lbe measured.They documenteda native Ansltolian culturethathadonccbeena worldpower,effectivelyproviding Anatolian archacc)logy with a centralfocus.Moreimportant,the (liscoveryof this important city 1e(1 to thcactiveinvolvement of Turkisharchaeologists whoadoptedthe Hittites with a sense of nationalprideand whose leadcrshiphelpedfashionAnatolian Studiesintoanindepcndcnt fieldof research.The(iiscoveryof Hattusamust,therefore,1e coneii(lered the mo;t criticalclcment in the emancipationof Anatolian archaeologyfromits earlyidentificationwith the biblicalandclassicaltraditions. This left it freeto developan identityof its own. The discoveryof the Hittites,however,led to new problcms.Oneof the most troubling(iifficultiesconcernsthe nomenclatureusedto definethediscipline.The discoveryof Hattusacreateda tendencyto pinpointHittitestudiesas the central focusof AnatoliaIlhistoryandarchaeology, imF)lying a kindof Hittitearchaeology. Thisis a criticalissuebecausethecontemporary definitionof Anatolianarchaeolc)gy has I ecome intertwinedwith the problematicunderstanding of the termHittite9. Thisproblemhasplaguedbothphilologistsandarchaeologists sincethediscipline's inception(Guterbock1')z7:233-39;Mellink1')t(r:2-tS; Hoffner1973:197-200). Evenafterdecadesofresearchanddiscussion,philologists(Steiner1')811 andarchaeologistsIMellaartl')XI)aresitilltryingto cometo griFus with this question The emphasisOI1 Hittite Anatolistends to obscurcthe fact that Anatolian archaeolc)gy transcendsthe boundsof boththe Hittitecapitalandits empire.It is becomingclearthat a criticaltask forfutureAnatolianscholarswill be to define moreaccuratelythe roleof Hittiteurchueology withinthe framework of theoverall disciF)line. Bywhatcriteriado we (leei(leto classifysomethingas Hittite' Whereis the dividingline betweenHittiteandAnatolian?This problemis not unlikethat whichfa(:esthoseattemptingto definethe roleof biblicalarchaeologywithin the contextof Syro-Palestillian archaeology. Manyof thecautionsthathavebeenvoiced in this regardareworthrepeating(Toombs1982:89-91;Dever1982:103 07). LikeanynewdisciplineAnatolianarchaeology hassufferedthrougha periodof growingpains.Methodologically the disciplineis still in a processof maturation. Greatstrideshavebeenmade,however,andAnatolianarchaeologyhas undergone substantialchangessince its inception.Recentyearshavewitnesseda changing perceptionwithintheranksofarchaeology asa whole(Dever19X71 thatis beginning to filterdownthroughthe ranksof Anatolianarchaeologistsas well (Bittel1980: 27(}. Basicto this changeis the understanding thatindividualsitesaremoreappropriatelyunderstoodin the contextof complexsocietiesthat emergedunderthe influenceofanintricatesetofinternalandexternalforces(compare Schneider1977; Kohl197S,1979).This realizationhas led also to changesin the excavator's intentions,the theoryandmethodologyof excavation,the managementof data,andthe synthesisof all aspcctsof the datainto well-roundedpublishedinterpretations. Suchchanges,however,havenot occurredacrossthe board.Theyareacceptedin varyingdegreesbyindividualinstitutionsor excavators. This limitedacceptanceis reflectedin the lackof a clearlydefinedmethodologyforworkin Anatolia.

Biblical Archaeologist, Tune/September1989

anomalyduringthis period,but it doesleadus to believethat urban ruinspresentneithera comprehenslve nora necessarly accurateplCtureof dailylife on the plateau. Characteristically, the two cities fromwhich we possesssubstantial data,KanesandHattusa,arenotable fortheircosmopolitanandsyncretistic natures.Kanesbuilt an internationalreputationas an important terminalof long-distancetrade.Hattusa,on the otherhand,developed its uniquecharacterin a dualroleas the capitalof a far-flungempireand the centerof an ever-growing cult. The characterof these cities, however,wasprobablyatypicalof what wasto be foundthroughoutthe larger partof Anatolia.The realAnatolia wasto be foundin villagesandsmaller landholdingsscatteredthroughIn theearlyyears,interestin Anatoliawasfocusedon theacquistionof museumpieces out numerousvalleysthat characfromtheregion'srichsupplyof classicalmonumentsandnot on thenativeculture.The terizedthe Anatolianlandscape. subsequentdevelopment of Anatolianarchaeologywasinfluencedbyseveraloccurrences, oneof thembeingHeinrichSchliemann's discoveryin thelatenineteenthcenturyof the The ancientAnatolianinhabistratifiedremainsof Troy. Furtherworkat thesite showed7ioyto be thecenterof a native tants whomwe callthe Hittiteswere, Anatolianculture.Picturedhereis a rampleadingto thegatewayentranceto the 7FoyII aboveall else, a pastoralpeople, settlementdatingto the EarlyBronzeAge.Photoby RonaldL.Gorny. peasantsandagriculturalists who depended on a positive interaction Perhapsthegreatestchangein recentarchaeological methodandtheoryin Anatolianarchaeology is the tendencyto usea morescience-oriented, interdisciplinary with the land(compareBeckman 1988;Hoffner1974;von den Driesch approach(Bittel1980:276l.Theunderlyingmotivationforsuchanapproachis the and Boessneck1981;Klengel1986). realizationthatanexcavationis capableof revealingmorethanfragmented historiTheplateau'senvironmentalframecal accountsandceramicsequences.It should,in fact,relateas nearlyas possible workhada greatdealto do with how the dynamicrelationshipbetweenthe inhabitantsof a site andthe worldaround them.Thisamountsto no less thanan understanding of humanbehaviorandhow these remarkablepeoplesustained culturalprocessestakeplace.A finalanalysisof this relationshipmustincludethe themselves,in cities as well as integrationof datainto the archaeological interpretation, which in the pastended villages,a factof which we are upin unincorporated addendaandappendices.Ofparticularnotehereis the ability constantlyremindedin boththe arto discernthe roleof theenvironmentin determiningthe natureof civilizationand chaeologicalandliteraryrecords. culture.A premeditated determination to identifysuchelementsandincludethem Unfortunately, archaeologists, arin the synthesisallowsthe archaeologist to prepareexcavationstrategiescapableof thropologists, and historians have revealingunderlying,oftenintangiblerelationshipsthatarenotreadilyapparentin only recentlybegunto seriously the grossmaterialremains.In practicaltermsthis methodologyoften calls fora examinethe roleof environmental moreproblem-oriented approach especiallydesignedto gainaccessto specificdata researchwithin the frameworkof thatwill maketheserelationships discernible.Suchresearchin Anatoliais relatively recent,andtheresultsof suchworkareonlybeginningtoappear(compare Anatolianarchaeology(Angel1972; Marfoe 1979,1987;Zimanskyl9SS5). It is hopedthatin the futuresuchresearchwill prove Deighton1982;Archi1973;Zimanto be the ruleratherthanthe exception. sky 1985;Adams1981;Weiss1982; NeumannandParpola1987). .

.

BiblicalArchaeologist} tune/September 1989

.

81

to the It has oftenbeensuggestedthat theHittitesmay be tracedbackarchaeologically tombsat AlacaHoyuk,suchas therectangular peoplewhofashionedthe third-millennium shafttombsshownhere,whichdateto theEarlyBronzeIII.Servingas finalrestingplacesfor severalgenerationsof the city'sroyalhouse,thesetombscontainednumerouspreciousmetal gravegoods.PhotobyRonaldL.Gorny.

The Proto-HittitePeriod It hasoftenbeensuggestedthatthe originof the Hittitesmaybe traced to the people backarchaeologically who fashionedthe tombsof Alaca 1954:212-14; Hoyuk(Frankfort Gimbutas1963: 822-23; but compareBurneyandLang1972:49-50j Mellink1956:39-58). Linguistically, peoples the Hittite-spealring however, aregenerallylinkedwith the movepeoplesinto mentof Indo-European Anatolia,which is thoughtto have occurredduringthe secondhalfof the thirdmillenniumB.C.E. (Burney andLang1972: 86-89; Gimbutas 1963;Winn1974;Yakar1976,1981; Mellaart1981,compareSteiner, 1981).The actualdetailsof human movementsduringthis periodremainextremelyunclear,andthe lackof dataallowsforwidelydiffering opinions.Thatvariousethnic groupssuchas Hattians,Nesites,4 andHurriansareapparentlysubsumedunderthe moderndesignation Hittiteonly confusesthe situation. Whereasthe Hatticpeoplesof the north,to which the Alacaculture mustbelong,showedstrongconnections with the east,the Nesites are nowbelievedto havebeenassociated migrations with the Indo-European that camefromthe west (compare Steiner19811.Thusit is quiteposatsiblethatthe archaeologically part testedHittitesof the northern of the plateaumaynot be the ethnic equivalentof the originallinguisticallyattested,Hittite-speaking peopleswho migratedfurthersouth (Steiner1981).Thereforeourcurrent designationof Hittite shouldbe understoodto representan artificial categorizationof the peopleswho livedunderthe politicalbannerof Hattusa.All that canbe saidabout the originsof the Hittitesis that

82

they lie hidden,fornow,within the fabricof late Anatolianprehistory. Hittitecultureevidentlyevolved slowlyandin relativeisolationuntil its developmentwasspurredbythe arrivalof the OldAssyriantrade merchantsat the beginningof the secondmillenniumB.C.E. (Mellink 1966b:1211.Theseforeignmerchants establisheda widespreadnetworkof tradingcommunitiesin centralAnatolia.This networkwasmadeup of mercantilecentersknownaskarums andwabartumsthatwereestablished as suburbsof alreadyexistingsettlements tOrlin1970:25-29; Larsen 1976:230-41).The OldAssyrian merchantschoseKanesas the hub of theiractivitiesin Anatolia.The peripheralportionof the network consistedof outlyingsettlements withinwhich the Assyriansestablishedtradecentersthat weresubjectto the Assyriankarumat Kanes ;Larsen1976:277-282).Kanesas-

Biblical Archaeologist, Tune/Septemberl 989

sumeda positionof leadershipin the OldAssyriantradenetworkand, as such,possiblyprovidedan economicprototypeforthe political centralizationof powerin Hittite Anatolia.Forthis reasonit assumes a criticalrole in ourunderstanding of stateformationin earlyHittite Anatolia. It maybe suggested,therefore, thatthe Hittiteprocessof political centralizationdrewinspiration from,andoccurredpartlyin responseto, the emergenceof Kanesas the centralfocusof the OldAssyrian tradenetwork.This processbegan an introductoryphaseof widespread integrationof localAnatolianpoli. structure tzes1ntoa suprareg1ona. tOrlin1970:58, 171,183).This situation is not unlikethat foundin ethnographicallyandhistoricallydocumentedexamplessuggestingthat underlike conditionssimilarresponseswill occurin a wide variety .

.

.

Schematicmodelof the OldAssyriantradenetworkthat operatedduringthe ColonyAgein the earlysecondmillennium centers,knownas B.C.E. Thisnetworkwasmadeupof mercantile karums,thatwereestablishedas suburbsof alreadyexisting settlements.Basedin Assur,the OldAssyrianmerchantschose Kanesas thehubof theiractivitiesin Anatolia.Modeladapted fromLarsen(1987).

delineatethe ethnoculturalzones of Anatoliain the secondmillennium fromSinger's B.C.E. Extrapolating model,it becomesapparentthat Kaneswassituatedat the intersection of these zones,which placedit on the cuttingedge,if you will, of a vigorousethnoculturalexchange takingplacebetweenthese zones. Havingthis kindof activityfunnel throughthe gatesof the city must havemadeKanesespeciallyinfluenits geographic tial. Furthermore, positionon the northernterminus of severalpassesthroughthe Taurus Mountains(Garelli1963:96-100; Orlin 1970:39-43) allowedKanesto dominatethe lines of communication andexchangebetweenthose passes.As suchit wasthe idealcenter fromwhich to controlthe redistributionof tradecommodities.This fortuitousset of circumstancesprobablyhelpsexplainwhyKanesultiof cultures(GallagherandRobinson regionalstateshadconflictsthat 1953;Robinson1976;Smith 1976). couldbe resolvedonlyby imposing matelybecamethe focalpointof the tradebetweenAnatoliaandAssyria. Inmorepracticalterms,cenone city'sauthorityoveranother. tralizationof Assyrianeconomic The factthat the kingof Purushanda As the preeminentmarketplaceof activityin Anatoliaallowedforthe seems to havebeencalledthe "great Anatolia,Kanesbecamethe gateway orderlyexploitationof resourceson king"(seeLarsen1976:268-69, note throughwhich the hinterlandof the plateau.The advantagesand 56)suggeststhat the processof cen- Anatoliacouldbe reachedfromthe plainsof northernMesopotamia benefitsinherentin the positionof tralizationwaswell underwayby 1971;Hirth 1978;com(Burghardt Kanesmust havebecomeobvious the end of the OldAssyrianperiod pareSmith 1976:319, 336). veryquicklyto manywithin the hadachieved andthatPurushanda Gatewaycommunitiesareassocommunityof nativeAnatolian an earlyadvantagein the drivefor ciatedwith the formationofdendriterulers.Whilethese rulerswouldhave hegemony.Perhapsit wasthe role like marlretnetworksthat developin wantedno doubtto emulatethe Kanesplayedwithin the OldAsresponseto the demandsof longeconomicsuccessof the Assyrians, syriannetworkthathelpedoffset theywouldhavehadto overcomethe Purushanda's pre- distancetradeor the settlementof initial advantage, disparatecharacterof the Anatolian paringthe wayforthe far-reaching sparselypopulatedareas.A gateway communitymightdevelopalong city-states,eachof whichwaslimited conquestsof the earlyAnatolian importantnaturalroutesof travel to a regionthat probablyextended king,Anitta. somewherebetween30 to 60 miles The Roleof Kanes.Oneexplanation andcommunicationandat the intersectionof passagepointsbetween fromthe city itself andincludedboth forthe initial economicprimacyof the city anda limitedhinterland.An Kanesin the OldAssyriantradesys- distinctnaturalor culturalzones 1971:270, 272-73; Hirth (Burghardt obviousremedyforthis political tem maylie in two aspectsof its wouldhavebeenthe fragmentation strategicsituation.On the one hand, 1978:37; compareSmith 1976:319, concentrationof powerinsidecenas ItamarSingerhas indicated(1981: 336). An intersectioncoulddevelop betweenzonesof agriculture,natural tralAnatoliaitself. Inevitablythese 119-34),it mightbe possibleto

Biblical Archaeologist, [une/September 1989

83

Kanesultimately becamethe focalpointof andAssyria,the thetradebetweenAnatolia of Anatolia. preeminent marketplace resources,andpastoralism;in the marginalareasthat act as borders betweenregionsof densepopulation; at the interfaceof zoneswith differing technologies;or at the pointof contactbetweenareaswith different sociopoliticalorganizations.Gatewaycommunitiesarehierarchically organizedwith all subsidiarymarket This9-inchdagger,orspearhead,inscribedwith "thepalaceofAnittatheking"wasfoundin thecity districtof the ancientsite of Kanes.ThedaggercouldindicatethatAnitta,a kingof activitydirectedtowardthe gateway Kussara, actuallyruledoverKanesduringthe ColonyAgeor,if destructionof thepalaceis community(Johnson1970;Burghardt attributedto him, thatthedaggerwaslost there.Notethattheoriginaltwoholesthrough 1971:284),which is linearlylinked whichtheheadwasattachedto the shaftwerefilledin andremadefurtherdown.Photo with the far-removed coreareafrom courtesyof TahsinOzguc^. wherethe initial economicimpulse periodis unclear.On the one hand, centeranda patternof previousreoriginated(Hirth1978:38-39; gionaldominance. textualevidencesuggeststhat,beSmith 1976:319).Theirprimary The questionthen arisesas to causeof its strategiclocationwithin functionis to facilitatethe flowof what happenedwhen one of the the contextof the Assyriantrade tradein andout of these contrasting network,the roleof Kaneswasprikarumcities went into declineor areas,to act as a gatewaythroughthe marilyeconomic.Nevertheless,the ceasedto exist. It maybe thatthe naturalirregularitiesof the real promotionof Kanesto the dominant Assyrianshada systemof zonesin world(Burghardt 1971:269;Hirth positionin this networkmusthave which the Assyriankarumswerelo1978:37-38). beenpromptednot onlyby its strate- cated,one perzone.If a karumcity Kanesseemsto haveplayed gic locationbut by a longpatternof wasdestroyedor abandonedforsome such a rolein a similarpatternof reason,it maybe that the karum consistent,albeitlimited,regional long-distancetradealreadypredating dominance(Orlin1970:236-41). was reinstitutedin anothercity the arrivalof the OldAssyriantraders Onlyundersuch conditionscould within that zone.This mayaccount (Matthiae1981:176).The earlydate the merchantsbe assuredof having forthe elevationof severalcities that of this patternnow seems to be con- the securityandstabilitynecessary apparentlydidnot havekarumsin firmedbythe new discoveriescom- forsuccessin long-distancetrade. periodIIto karumstatusduringthe ing fromthe moundof Kanes(Ozguc Theestablishment of karumsat cities KultepeIbperiod(Larsen1976:239). 1986)andcanbe consideredto have such as Purushanda, Wahsusana, Tawiniya,forinstance,mayhaverebeenin placeduringthe last phase Hurma,andHattusamust havebeen placedHattusaafterits defeatat the of the thirdmillennium,if not earlier dictatedby manyof the sameconhandsof Anitta.Washaniya likewise (Orlin1970:88-89; Marfoe1987; cernsthat led to the nominationof mayhavereplacedeitherWahsusana Algaze1987).Byestablishingthem- Kanesas the focalpointof the sysor Purushanda aftertheirpolitical selvesat Kanesthe Assyrianswere tem. The hinterlandsdominatedby demise.SamuhaandTimelkijaare only followinga time-honoredMeso- these smallregionalpowerswerenot two othercities that also mayfit potamiantraditionof tradewith the particularlyexpansive,but a forinto this pattern.It maybe that highlandsof Anatolia.As suchthey tuitousblendof socialandenviron- throughsuch a systemthe Assyrians mayhavebeenableto securea mar- mentalfactorsencouraged the growth wereableto maintaina senseof ket fortheirown surplusgoodsas of these cities into alternativegate- equilibriumthroughoutthe trade well as exercisea greaterdegreeof waysthatpiercedthe farthestreaches systemin times of politicaldistress. controloverthe redistributionand, of Anatoliaand,as such,became Socioeconomicfactorsnotwithindirectly,the productionof Anato- logicallocationsforthe establishstanding,the physicalsettingin lia'shighlycovetednaturalresources. ment of outlyingtradecenters. centralAnatoliacanbe viewedas The exactpoliticalrelationship Thus,it appearsthattherewasat the commondenominatoraround betweenKanesandneighboring least somerelationshipbetweenthe which the cultureof the plateau Anatoliansettlementsduringthis initiallycoalescedto giveHittite establishmentof anAssyriantrade

84

Biblical Archaeologist, fune/September1989

Locatedon thenorthernterminusof severalpassesthroughthe TaurusMountains,Kaneswas of tradecommoditiessuchas precious theidealcenterfromwhichto controltheredistribution products.As thepreeminentmarketplaceof Anatolia,Kanes metals,wine,andagricultural becamethegatewaythroughwhichthehinterlandofAnatoliacouldbe reachedfromthe Schematicmodelof commoditiesadaptedfromLarsen(1987). plainsofnorthernMesopotamia.

cultureits peculiarcharacter.The physicalenvironmentprovidedthe regionwith a unifiedsubsistence basethat must havehelpedinitially to nurturea commonbondbetween the variouspeoplesof the plateau. This perceptionmust havebeen heightenedby the emergentOld Assyriantradenetwork,which providedthe possibilityof structured andcentralizedauthority.Suchinsightsmayhaveimbuedthe region with its firstsense of supraregional politicalpowerandeconomicunity. In this respectthe OldAssyrian tradenetworkmayhavehelpedto forthe political lay the groundwork integrationprocessthroughwhich the diverseelementsof central Anatoliawerefusedinto a viable state (Orlin1970:58, supraregional 183).Oncethis processwas initiated,

the only questionappearsto have beenwho wouldfinallycontrolthe systemonce the processof political integrationwas completed5 The PbliticalUnificationof CentralAnatolia The highlychargedactivityswirling aroundKanesultimatelybrought abouta metamorphosisin central Anatoliathat probablybeganas an emergingsense of self-awareness amongthe inhabitantsof the plateau. As previouslynoted,small citystatesformedaroundlocal centers suchas Kanes,Hattusa,Wahsusana, Zalpa,andPurushandaat a very earlystageof Anatolianhistory.The of the OldAssyrian appearance tradersmayhaveaccentuatedan alreadydevelopingpatternof larger regionalunits by andever-expanding

providingthe inhabitantsof the plateauwith botha senseof common identityanda centralfocus.In the shorttermthe growthof regional kingdomsled to internecineconflicts,as the closely situatedstates competedforspace.In the finalanalysis, however,such strugglesrepresentedonly the initialphaseof an integrationprocessthatultimately bequeathedthe reinsof political powerin centralAnatoliato Hattusa. The emergingstatesof central Anatoliahadalsobecomepocketsof densepopulationin which the stratificationof societyhadgreatlyaccelerated(compareSmith 1976).The rise of urbanizationandelitism is probablyto be linkedwith an increaseddemandforluxurygoodsand the abilityof the elite to manipulate regionaltradepatternsin theirfavor as well as to the increasingefficiency of militarytechnology(Adams1984: 109-14; Hirth 1978:35; Smith 1976). Withthis jumpin the urbanpopulation, increaseddemandforresources of andcommodities,the appearance to necessity the and socialelites, controlthe productionandredistribution of tradegoodsmust havebecomeincreasinglyimportantfactors in interstatecompetition.Other factorsmayhavebeeninvolved,of course,but it is within the context of heightenedeconomiccompetition thatwe canbest understandthe internecinepoliticalstrugglesof the Anatolianstatesduringthe early partof the secondmillenniumB.C.E. (Steiner1981: 163-64). The dramaof this periodof rivalry is narratedin severalHittite texts, amongthem the AnittaText(Neu 1974: 10-15), the TelipinuEdict(1-6) (Hoffmann1984),andthe Annalsof andSaporetti HattusiliI (Imparati 1965;Goetze 1962;Kempinskiand

1989 fune/September BiblicalArchaeologist7

85

Kosak1982;see AhmetUnal'sarticle on Hittiteliteraturein this issue). Thesetexts suggestthat these citystateshadoutgrowntheirrolesas regionalgatewaycentersandhad developedinto politicallyastutecentralplacesthatwerecapableof competingon eventermswith Kanes 1971:284;Hirth 1978: (Burghardt 42-431.Thus it seemsthat the heightenedpoliticalconsciousness of the plateausignaleda significant new roleforcentralAnatolia.Once only peripheralto the majorcivilizations of MesopotamiaandSyria,this highlandareawastransformedinto the coreof the nascentHittite state. Out of this politicalmaelstromHattusaeventuallyemergedas the dominantcity in the region. The Riseof Hattusa.Lilreothersites in centralAnatolia,Hattusamay haveoriginallybeenchosenforsettlementbecauseof its environmental assets.Waterwas abundant,andthe precipiceof Buyukkaleofferedprotectionfromhostileelements(Bittel 1970:30).In addition,the surrounding valleysofferedarableland,and the regionappearsto havebeen wooded(Bittel1970:12-13;compare Brice1978:141).Moreimportant,it waswell-positionedto tapinto both the east-westandnorth-southtrade routes.As such it waswell-suitedfor the Assyrians,who sawin the city's strategicpositionan idealsecondary gatewayto the farthestreachesof northernAnatoliaandthe thickly populatedBafraregionwherethe importantcity of Zalpawaslocated (Haas19777.Assyrianmerchants passedthroughthis gatewayto trade theirgoodsandcommodities,and theirpresencemust havebroadened considerablyHattusa'ssociopolitical consciousness.As this politicalconsciousnessevolvedinto a complex

86

Typicalviewof an excavationareain thekarumat Kanes.Enormousamountsof potterywere andhavebeenfoundin situ}thusprovidingvaluableinformationaboutdemographic preserved duringtheperiod.Photoscourtesyof TahsinOzguc. patternsandceramicdevelopment

stateideology,the city beganto struggleforcontrolof its owndestiny. The emergenceof Hattusaas a politicalpowerin centralAnatolia seemsto havebegunat an earlyperiodandoccurredin severalphases. Infact,if we cantrustthe texts,Hattusa,like Kanes,musthavealso beena regionalpoweras earlyas the twenty-thirdcenturyB.C.E. when a kingof Hatti"is said certain"Pamba, to havebeenone of 17kingsto op-

Biblical Archaeologist, fune/September 1989

posethe incursionof the Akkadian kingNaram-SinintoAnatolia(Guterbock 19387.Later,around1750B.C.E., Hattusawas still recognizedas one of the principalregionalpowerson the plateau.In the AnittaTextits king,Piyusti,is mentionedas a principalopponentof the proto-Hittite dynast,Anitta,duringhis conquests in centralAnatolialNeu 1974:137. Anitta'ssubsequentconquestof Hattusa seems to havebeen only a

1

s

r

v

_g_> e-_.g _|___ w -\,e_ V w dlscovered 5. _% S_ ditious J' @ 132, % \,,X, at gionalpowers,notonlyduringbut but "fruitstands" note illuminate ,, dating _t (Bittel the ;1its burnished ture, local 8). karum }asoneofthedominantreascendancy to possibly powers 1970). (bottom the the Hattusa pitchers site of were Old history by Old left), its Literary at only unable one Assyrian Hittite (top Kanes. repeatedly of and vigorous texts. of brought left) to Anitta's the this capitalize materiColony These red, were era toown __

.

_

8

;'r

-

,

Hattusa wasdestroyed severaltimes,but otherlocalpowerswereunableto capitalize permanently on theresultant politicalvacuum. V x

^

_

_

-_=

9-

:

;


. 1977:4-23>.The Hittitesthemselves Thatis, syncretizationhadfinally referredto their"thousandgods,"but beencarriedout. This processis also manyof these figuresarecitedinfre- reflectedby an invocationfroma quentlyin the texts andremainlittle prayerof queenPuduhepa: morethannamesto us today.This Sun-Goddess of Arinna,my multiplicityis due in partto a resislady,you arethe queenof all tanceto syncretization.Forexample, lands!In the landof Hattiyou manyHittite townsmaintainedinhaveassumedthe nameSundividualstorm-gods,decliningto Goddessof Arinna,but in reidentifythe local deitiesas manifesspectto the landwhichyou .

.

.

Biblical Archaeologist, June/September1989

99

w

t.- thrive continuum. only There when the wasdeities no strictwho

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

havemade;theland)of cedars ;thatis, Syria), youhaveassumedthenameHebat.2 Thissystematizing approach reflected theopinionof onlya smallgroupat theHittitecourt,however, andatno timewasa singleunitaryhierarchy ofgodsestablished. _

ThePlaceof theKing TotheHittites,theuniversewasa

_ ;] _t f $

.

-

.-

.

* s

-* -

-,

t

*

r

'

separation betweengodsandhumans. Thetwoclassesofbeingswereinterdependent andexistedalongside the worldofplantsandanimals,from whichbothultimatelydrewtheir sustenance. Thegodswereliterally dependent ontheofferings presented byhumans,who,conversely, could controlled thebasicprocessesof naturewerewelldisposedtoward the agriculturists andstock-breeders. Thissituationis wellillustrated bya complaint ofkingMursiliII: All ofthelandofHattiis dying, sothatnooneprepares the sacrificial loafandlibationfor you(thegods1. Theplowmen whousedto workthefieldsof thegodshavedied,so thatno oneworksorreapsthefieldsof thegodsanylonger.Themillerwomenwhousedto prepare

Above: The 711ans-tacete(l Sun1itit godcl.

s

l.st:lr. \N 170.%L'1-C'Llll77

inC111(ied

kSCXE1(11it\:' blI761b1TIl1UC1 C50177l?61t.L1;7;7f River,is a rathercruderepresenta--tion of KingMuwatalliII(1306to *s 1282B.C.E.) wearingceremonialrobes. ->; ; All of the last fivereliefsarelocated j v in placeswherethe sculptorwould -s- haveneededscaffolding,which sugegeststhat the locationswerechosen 4^ forsymbolicreasons. . Fourreliefsshowingprincesor > minorkingswith theirnamesspelled : out alsohavebeenfound.In Cilicia, , a princedressedin a shortkilt and carryinga bowwascarvedon a rock overlookingthe CeyhanRiverat y -Hemite,about25 miles northof the reliefof KingMuwatalli.At a passin : easternAnatolia,in the Taurus Mountainsat Hanyeri(Gezbel;see Alk1m1968:figure111;Bittel 1976a: , s figure201),the princefacesa group of figures:the bull of the WeatherGodstandingwith its hindlegs on a ; ; rectangularmountainandits fore^ legs on the personification of a mountain.An evenmoreelaborate , reliefwascarvedon a giantboulder f at Imamkulu,which is on the road t b to the Hanyeripass(Bittel1976a: ru figure203).In frontof a princethe Weather-God mountshis chariot, ;

-

i_ Thelackof an architectural framework in all rockreliefsdatingto theHittiteEmpireis evidencedin thisreliefof a Hittiteprincecarryinga bowandwearinga divinecap.More than 71/2feet tall, thereliefis locatedin westernAnatolia,at thepassat Karabelsoutheastof Izmir. PhotobyteannyVorysCanby.

124

Biblical Archaeologist, June/September1989

on threebowingmountaingods who, in turn,standon genii.A bird flies in the air.Tothe righta winged goddessopenshercloakandstands nudeon a towerof foureagleswith one head.In farwesternAnatolia,at the passat Karabel,southeastof Izmir,is anotherprincewith a bow

'

_

ThegreatestHittiterockmonumentis the locatedjusta open-airsanctuaryYaz1llkaya, shortwalkfromtheHittitecapital,Hattusa. of rockformedtwo A naturaloutcropping semienclosedchambersthatservedas a kind of cella to a small templein front.Both chambersaredecoratedin rockreliefs.In the largechamber,on the walloppositethegrand procession,is this 8l/2-foot-tallcarvingof Ddhaliya,probablythefourthHittiteking identifiedbythisname.Largeandstocky, thepgureis wrappedin ceremonialrobesand wearsa tight-pttingcap.Abovehis extended rightarmis an elaborate,carefullycarved cartouche.Becausethepgureis depictedas standingon a sacredmountain,somebelieve he representsDdhaliyaafterhis deathwhen, accordingto Hittitebelief,he becamea god. PhotobyteannyVorysCanby.

who,in this case,wearsa divinehat (Bittel1976a:figure206). The greatestHittite rockmonument is the open-airsanctuary,Yazlllkaya,a shortwalkfromthe Hittite capital,Hattusa(Bittelandothers 1975;Bittel 1976a:figures232-41). A naturaloutcroppingof rockformed two semienclosedareasthat served as a sortof cella to a small templein front.On the walls of the largerbay is a reliefshowinga grandprocession of godsandgoddessesgathered fora new year'sfestival.The gods fromthe left andthe goddessesfrom the rightmeet on the backwall wherethe chiefdeitiesof the realm arepictured.On the left, the great standson two bowing Weather-God mountaingods.He facesthe SunGoddessof Arinna,heregivenher Hurrianname,Hebat.Shestandson a lionessthat, in turn,standson rectanglessymbolizingmountains. Peekingout frombehindthe legs of

the two deitiesaretwo divinebulls. Behindthe goddessherson,Sarruma, standson a smallerleoninecreature, which also standson rectangularshapedmountains.Behindthis god of the Weatherthe granddaughters Godaredepictedas standingovera eagle. double-headed The compositionhereis very main simple.Eventhe many-layered The spacscene is straightforward. ing of the figuressuggeststhatthe processlon,as lt wounc. ltSwaym andout of the naturalrockface,was slow andstately.Manyof the deities areidentifiedby nameswrittenin Hittite hieroglyphs,phoneticallyor Mostof the names logographically. that canbe readareHurrian,andthe godsappearto be arrangedin the sameorderas in Hurriantexts.The style of the figuresandthe typeof monument,however,areentirely Hittite.No king'snameappearsin the procession,but an over-life-size .

.

.

.

figureof one of the kingsnamed Tudhaliya-afoottallerthanthe greatestgodof the procession-was carvedon an oppositewall of the largechamber(Bittel1976a:figure 253).Manyscholarsthink this relief indicatesthatTudhaliya(usually identifiedwith the fourthkingof this name)hadthe greatline of figurescarved,but I think the king's figurewasa lateraddition.The king standswrappedin ceremonialrobes wearinga tight-fittingcap.He is stockywith a verylargeheadand enormousearsbut ratherdelicate features.Overhis extendedright handis an elaborate,carefullycarved cartouche.Somebelievethe figure representsthe kingafterhe had died,or,as the Hittites said,had "becomea god,"since he is depicted as standingon a sacredmountain. It is also thoughtthat the small bayservedas a funeralchapelforthe sameking.The reliefsherearequite differentfromthose in the procession, as eachdepictsa singleunconnectedscene.On one wall is a pictureof a giantdaggerpartlysunk into the rock(Bittel1976a:figures 252, 254).The hilt of the daggeris madeup of two lions, shownvertically,in a stalkingposition;above

1989 125 fune/September BiblicalArchaeologist7

Above:Reliefs in the small bay at Yazlllkaya aredifferentfrom those in the long procession, as each depicts a single unconnected scene. One relief, partly sunk into the wall, is of a giant dagger.The hilt of the daggeris made up of two lions shown vertically in a stalking position; above them are two lion protomes surmounted by the head of a god. Right: A comparableceremonial axe was found in a hoard at Farkisjla.Decorated with numerous images, including falcon heads, a lion protome,and a winged sun disc supported by two bird-men,the axe contains a rich compendium of Hittite motifs. Photo of daggergod by leanny VorysCanby;photo of axe courtesy of KurtBittel.

126

them arelion protomessurmounted by the headof a god,probablyNergal,the Mesopotamian godof the underworld,orhis Anatolianequivalent. Theseelementsareconvincingly combined.A comparableceremonialweapon,an axe,wasfoundin a hoardat Sarkislain easternCappadocia(Bittel1976a:figure341; 1976b:20-27, platesVII-XII1. The curvedendof the bladehas falcon headson eitherside,andon bothflat sides,at the bottom,is a figurewhose bodydisappearsinto a U-shapedobject.The figurewearsa short-sleeved longdresstightlybelted.On one facea tall conicalhat has horns,

Biblical Archaeologist, [une/September 1989

but nonearedepictedon the other. The figuresupportsthe pawsof a crouchinglion protome.On the backof the lion a godstandswearing a highconicalhat with hornsand dressedin the robeof the Hittite kingor Sun-God.Abovethis figureis a wingedsun disc supportedbytwo bird-men.The butt of the bladehas threefalcon-headed lions with wings on the flat side anda wingedlion aboveandbelowthe shafthole on the narrowside. On the faceoppositethe DaggerGodin the smallchamberat Yazzllkaya,twelvegodswith scimitars overtheirshouldersareshownrunningin unison,theirbodiesoverlapping(Bittel1976a:figures250 and2511.Thesegods,who areshown at the endof the processionin the mainchamber,areassociatedwith Nergalin a Hittite text (Guterbock 1975b:191-921.Behindandfacingin the samedirectionas the DaggerGodis a figureof KingTudhaliyaIV (around1250to 1220s.c.E.1beside the toweringfigureof his personal god,Sarruma(Bittel1976a:figures 252 and2531.The godencirclesthe monarchRs shouldersin orderto grasphis righthandandguide him-a subtlecompositionmirroring the relationshipbetweena king andhis personalgodexpressedin the Hittitetexts.All scenesfacethe endof the small chamberwhere thereis a statuebasewith a nearby inscription,which,again,givesthe nameof a Tudhaliya.Somevery largefeethavebeenfoundthatmay belongto this statue(Neve1982: 389-91,figures8-101. Mostscholarsdatethe reliefsin boththe smallchamberandthe mainchamberto the sameperiod, the late thirteenthcenturyB.C.E. Clearly,however,thereis a stylistic

differencebetweenthe long scenein the mainchamberandthe individually composedscenesin the small chamber.The latterreliefsarenot physicallyjoined,andthey do not agreein scale,groundline, orbasic composition.Insteadof the concrete layeringof symbolsthat characterizes the mainscene of the procession, elementsarewoveninto the complexsinglefigureof the DaggerGodin the smallchamber.Thegraceful expressionof the king'sintimate, dependentrelationshipwith his personalgodin the small chamberbears little resemblanceto the arrogant representationof the deifiedkingin the mainchamber.The proportions of the latterking aredifferentfrom those of the king in the small chamber,andthe delicatefaceis verydifferentfromthe heavyfeaturesof the runninggods(Bittel1976a:figure 2511.Howeverthe variousscenesat shouldbe dated,they Yazzllkaya showthe wide rangeof sculptural approachesachievedby the Hittites by the end of theirempire.The high is verywornand reliefat Yazzllkaya damaged,but wherethe surfaceis preservedit showsbroad,clearforms smoothlyfinishedwithout much interiormodelingor inciseddetail, such as seen at the LionGateand the King'sGate. Sculpturein the round.Verylittle sculpturein the roundhasbeenpre- a plasticcurve,andher strangeears served,but we knowthat it didexist aresimilarto those of the sphinxes becauseof the sculpturedfeet (men- foundin the UpperCity (Neve1987: figures18a-dl.A fragmentof a very tionedabovelandthe largecloaked bodyof a figuremorethan 5l/2-feet sensitivelycarvedover-life-size humanfacewasfoundon the slopes tall foundin a levelprecedingthe gatesculptureat AlacaHoyuk(Kos,ay of the citadel(Boehmer1972:208, Also number2156,plateLXXXl. 1973:78-79, platesXL-XLIl. Numerousfiguresknownfrom foundin earlyimperiallevelsat HatHittite stonesculptureas well as tusa is the half-life-sizeheadof a goddessor queen(Bittel1976a,19841. othertypesof sculpturewereproThe figure'seyebrowsarerenderedin ducedin preciousmaterialson a

tiny scale.Althoughthey displaythe bold,clearformsthat aretypically Hittite,these piecesareoftenmore subtlyandmeticulouslyhandled thanmost of the largersculptured pieces.Therearegoldgodswith knees (Bittel1976a: hyperextended figures167-681,anda goldfigureof a womanseatedas if rockingwhile staringinto a bowl (heroracularmirror7}is quiteremarkable(Bittel 1976a:figure171;see Guterbock

Biblical Archaeologist, Tune/September1989

127

1961:149;Haas1977:87).Also made of goldis a fine pendant,partof the NorbertSchimmelcollection,showing a specialchildattendedby a femalefigure(Bittel1976a:figure 173)The structureof a baby'sbodyis skillfullyrenderedin a rockcrystal figure(Canby1986:54-57,figure5-1). Wealsohave,fromthe excavations at Tarsus,a cloakedrockcrystalfigure (Bittel1976a:figure176).Made of ivoryarea figureof an olderchild fromNuzi (Bittel1976a:figure174), a mountaingodfromHattusa(Bittel

128

1976a:figure248),andan elaborately carvedplaquefromMegiddo(Frankfort 1954:130,figure57). Conclusion In spiteof the numerousartifacts, monuments,androckreliefsthat havebeenfoundso far,we still have a greatdealto learnaboutHittite art.Fragmentsof wallpaintingwith designshavebeenfoundin the Upper City of the Hittitecapitalat Hattusa (Neve1983:438-39, figure11),and thereis a wealthof new sculptured

Biblical Archaeologist, fune/September 1989

NumerousHittitefigureswerecarvedout of preciousmaterialsduringtheEmpire period,buton a tinyscale.Thisfinegold pendant,at left, whichactuallymeasures less than2 inches,depictsa childsittingin a nurse'slap.Photocourtesyof theNorbert Schimmelcollectionin theMetropolitan Museumof Art,New York.Thebodyof an in thisrockcrystal infantis skillfullyrendered figure,above,whichis almost3 inchestall. ArtGallery,Baltimore. of the Walters Courtesy

fragmentsof typeswe knewnothing aboutuntil recently(Neve1987:figures 11,17, 18;1988:figures20-22). The firstroyalHittite tombwasuncoveredby PeterNeveat Hattusain 1988,andit has two reliefblocks. shepherdswill no doubt Wandering comeuponmorerockreliefs,all of whichwill helpus betterunderstandthe developmentof Hittite art

NY: Doubleday. 1975a Die Inscriften. Pp. 167-87 in Das Hethitische Felsheiligtum Yazlllkaya. Berlin: Gebr. Mann. 1975b Einschlagige, Textstellen. Pp. 189-92 in Das Hethitische Felsheiligtum Yazlllkaya. Berlin: Gebr. Mann. 1983 Hethitische Gotterbilder und Kultobjekte. Pp. 203-17 in Beitrage zur Bibliography Altertumskunde Kleinasiens: Festschrift fur Kurt Bittel, edited by Akurgal,E., and Hirmer,M. R. M. Boehmer and H. Hauptmann. 1962 The Art of the Hittites. London: Mainz: Philipp von Zabern. Thames and Hudson. Guterbock, H. G., and Alexander, R. Alklm, U. B. 1983 The Second Inscription on Mount 1968 Anatolia I: ArchaeologiaMundi. Sipylus. Anatolian Studies XXXIII: Geneva:Nagel Publishers. 29-32. Alp S. Haas, V. 1968 Zylinder-und Stempelsiegel aus 1977 Magie und Mythen im Reich der Karahoyukbei Konya.Series:Turk Hethiter. I Vegetations kulte und TarihKurumuYayinlarindan,Series Pflanzen magie. Hamburg. V,Number 26. Ankara. Harper, P. O. Bittel, K 1969 Dating a Group of Ivories from Ana1976a Die Hethiter.Munich:Beck. tolia. The Connoisseur November: 1976b Beitragezur Kenntnishethitischer 156-62. series: Bildkunst. Monograph derHeidelberger Kos,ay,H. Sitzungsberichte 1973 Alaca Hoyuk Excavations: PrelimiAkademiederWissenschaften: nary Report on Research and DisKlasse4. Philosophisch-historische coveries, 1963-1967. Series: Turk Heidelberg. Tarih Kurumu Yayinlarindan, Series V, 1984 KopfeinesBildwerksausderfruhen Number 28. Ankara. In Zeitdessogennatengrossreichs. BogazkoyVI:Fundeaus den Grabun- Loon, M. van 1985 Anatolia in the Second Millennium gen bis 1979. Berlin. B.C. Series: Iconography of Religions Bittel,andothers XV, Number 12. Leiden. 1975 Das Hethitische Felsheiligtum Mellink, M. J. Yazlllkaya.Berlin:Gebr.Mann. 1970 Observations on the Sculptures of BoehmerR.M. Alaca Huyuk. Anadolu xrv 15-27. 1972 Die Kleinfundevon Bogazkoyaus den Grabungskampagnen1931-1939 Muscarella, O., editor 1974 Ancient Art: The Norbert Schimmel und 1952-1969. Berlin. Collection. Mainz: Philipp von Canby,J.V. Zabern. 1969 SomeHittiteFiguresin the Aegean. Neve, P. Hesperia (tournalof the American 1982 Die Ausgrabungen in BogaskoySchool of Classical Studies at Hattusa 1981. Pp. 383-92 in Archa141-49. Athensl XXXVIII: ologischer Anzeiger. Berlin: Walter 1975 TheWaltersGalleryCappadocian de Gruyter. Tabletandthe Sphinxin Anatoliain 1983 Die Ausgrabungen in Bogazkoythe SecondMillenniumB.C.tournal Hattusa 1982. Pp. 427-40 in Archaof Near EasternStudies 34:225-48. ologischer Anzeiger. Berlin: Walter 1976 TheSculptorsof the HittiteCapital. de Gruyter. Oriens antiquus XV:33-42. 1984 Ein alter-hetitisches Relief von 1986 TheChildin HittiteIconography. Buyukkale. Pp. 91-98 in Bogazkoy Pp.54-69 in Ancient Anatolia: VI: Funde aus den Grabungen bis Aspects of Changeand Cultural 1979. Berlin. Development:Essays in Honor of 1986 Die Ausgrabungen in BogazkoyMachteld t. Mellink, editedbyJ.V. Hattusa 1985. Pp. 365-406 in ArchdCanbyandothers.Madison,VVI: ologischer Anzeiger. Berlin: Walter Universityof WisconsinPress. de Gruyter. H. Frankfort 1939 Cylinder Seals. London:MacMillan. 1987 Die Ausgrabungen in BogazkoyHattusa 1986. Pp. 381-410 in Archd1954 The Art and Architectureof the ologischer Anzeiger. Berlin: Walter Penguin. Ancient Orient. Baltimore: de Gruyter. H. G. Guterbock, 1988 Die Ausgrabungen in BogazkoyPp.139-79in 1961 HittiteMythology. Hattusa 1987. Pp. 357-390 in ArchaMythologies of the Ancient World, ologischer Anzeiger. Berlin: Walter GardenCity, editedbyS.N. Kramer.

de Gruyter. Ozguc, N. 1965 The Anatolian Groupof Cylinder Seal Impressionsfrom Kultepe. Series:Turk TarihKurumuYayinlarindan,Series V,Number 2. Ankara. 1966 Excavationsat Acemhoyuk.Anadolu X: 1-52. 1968 Seals and Seal Impressionsof Level Ib from KarumKanish. Series:Turk TarihKurumuYayinlarindan, Number 25. Ankara. 1980 Seal Impressionsfrom the Palacesat Acemhoyuk.Pp. 61-99 in Ancient Art in Seals, edited by E. Porada. Princeton,NJ:PrincetonUniversity Press. 1983 Sealings from Acemhoyuk in The MetropolitanMuseum of Art, New York.Pp. 413-20 in Beitragezur Altertumskunde Kleinasiens:Festschrift fur KurtBittel, edited by R. M. Boehmerand H. Hauptmann. Mainz:Philipp von Zabern. Ozguc,T. 1954 Fragmentof a Lion Statue found in the LatePhase (Ib}of the Colony Period.Belleten 18:445-47. 1983 New Findsfrom Kaneshand What they Mean for Hittite Art. Pp.421-26 in Beitragezur Altertumskunde Kleinasiens:Festschriftfur Kurt Bittel, edited by R. M. Boehmerand H. Hauptmann.Mainz:Philipp von Zabern. 1986 New Researchesat the Trading Centerof the Ancient Near East. Series:Turk TarihKurumuYayinlarindan,SeriesV,Number 41. Ankara. 1988 Inandiktepe,An Important Cult Centerin the Old Hittite Period. Series:Turk TarihKurumuYayinlarindan, .. SeriesV,Number 43. Ankara. Ozguc, T., and Ozguc, N. 1953 Ausgrabungenin Kultepe 1949. Series:Turk TarihKurumuYayinlarindan,Number 2. Ankara. Parrot,A. 1951 Cylindrehittite nouvellement acquis (AO201338}.Syriaxxviii 180-87. Spanos,P.Z. 1983 EinigeBemerkungenzum sogenannten Niobe-Monumentbei Manisa (Magnesiaad Sipylum}.Pp.477-83 in Beitragezur Altertumskunde Kleinasiens:Festschriftfur Kurt Bittel, edited by R. M. Boehmerand H. Hauptmann.Mainz:Philippvon Zabern. Tas,yurek,A. 1976 The KebenHittite Rock Relief from Silifke. TurkArkeoloXiDergesi XXII: 99-100. Temizer,R. 1979 AnkaraAnadolu Medeniyetleri Muzesi. Ankara.

1989 129 BiblicalArchaeologist,fune/September

;"

-

aC

'

v

-

^#X w

-

-

*

v

wsas

x-

-v

rhe Power of Nr>tiw connectionmaynot seem obvious,but written sourcesarean integral partof the archaeological record.In additionto beingthe cornerstoneof anyhermeneutical process,they arean importanttool in helpingus understandthe mute archaeological remains.Written sourcesarecriticalin the studyof HittiteAnatolianot only because historitheyprovidestraightforward cal accountsof the Hittitesbut also becausethey illustratethe literary valuesandabstractthoughtprocessesthat pervadedeveryaspectof Hittite life.The studyof Hittite literatureillustratesthat archaeologyandphilologyareindeed complementarydisciplinesandthat theirrelationshipmustbe carefully cultivatedif we areto unravelthe puzzlesof the past.In the following pagesI will discussthe underlying elementsof the Hittite literarytradition andpresentseveralpassages fromvarioustexts to showboththe developmentof thattraditionand -thepowerof its prose. The

This is certainlynot the correct a impressionto give.The Hittites ; built no institutionthat approached the functioningof a library.Wecannot evenbe surethat the structures in whichtabletshavebeenfound wereactuallyintendedto be tablet houses,or archives,in the physical senseof the word.Thus,in this article, the wordarchiveis usedto denotethe collectionsof tabletsthat havebeenfoundthroughoutthe Hittite capital.Relativelyfew tablets havebeenfoundin the provinces compareOzguvc 1978:57-58). ThetabletsunearthedatHattusa werescatteredin buildingsthroughout the site. In the LowerCity,tablets werefoundin severalroomsof Temple1,the greattempleof the Weather-God (Otten1955:72;Bittel 1970:13-14;Naumann1971:430; Akurgal1978:302).Onthe acropolis, site ofthegreatfortressofBuyukkale, tabletswerefoundin threestructures-BuildingsA, E,andK lBittel 1970:84-85, 163).Manytabletswere also foundin the so-calledHouseon the SlopelSchirmer1969:20),perhapsthe scribalschool lMacqueen The HittiteArchives 1986:116,note 71).Moretabletsare The obviousplaceto beginanydisbeingunearthedin the UpperCity cussionof Hittite literatureis the (Otten1984:50, 1987:21;Neve archivesat the Hittite capitalof Hat- 1985:334, 344, 1987a:405, 1987b: district tusanearthe modern-day 311),amongthem a sensationaltabBogazkalelsee townof Bogazkoy/ let madeof bronzethat wasfound Akurgal1978:300-01).Although underneaththe pavingstonesalong- particularsystemof distribution. little has beenwrittenaboutthe ar- sidethe innercity wallsnearYerkap lAnoverviewof findspotsaccording chives(Laroche1949;Otten 1955, Neve 1987a:405;Otten 1988,1989). to CTHnumberscanbe foundin 1984,1986),it is fromthese written Cornil1987.) Wecan sayverylittle about sourcesthat we get ourinitial imWehavedeterminedhowthe the physicalstructuresin which pressionsof the roleliteratureplayed the Hittiteskeptandstoredtheir tabletswereorganizedfromthe in the Hittite state. structuresin whichthey were tablets.At Hattusatabletswere Wemustbe cautious,however, foundcollectedin temples,houses, housedas well as fromthe so-called when speakingof the Hittite armagazines,andperhapsspecialtab- shelf lists lLaroche1971:154).It is chives.The wordarchiveconnotes let houses.Otherswerediscovered presumedthat these shelf lists were a buildingor structureandimplies in widelyscatteredareasanddumps. placedas indicesin frontof the tabthe notionof a libraryor the like. Theredoesnot seem to havebeena lets forquickreference.Someof the :oW

---S

c -

vt

1989 fune/September 130 BiblicalArchaeologistJ

0z

i v---*-


;bymaintainingthatCypriotmilkbowlsappeared in the MiddleBronzeI (page39),although theydidnot appearbeforethe endof MiddleBronzeIIandflourishedonly duringthe LateBronzeAge;andbyrepeatedlyreferringto CypriotBase-Ring wareas ring-basewarewithoutnoting thatit wasimportedfromCyprusor that the distinctionbetweengenuineand imitationexamplesis one of provenance, not chronology(pages50 and51). Mare'sfundamentalmisunderstandremainsof Jeruingof the archaeological salemis evidentin everychapter.His discussionof the BronzeAgeincludes referencesto EarlyBronzeAgeretaining walls (pages37 and38),whichactually dateto the LateBronzeAge;descriptions of two MiddleBronzeAgewallsfoundby Kenyon(pages39, 41),whichareactually two descriptionsof the samewall;anda to depict (page38)purporting photograph Kenyon's MiddleBronzeAgecity wall, whichactuallyportraysstonefills from DespiteMare'snobleintentions,the the LateBronzeAge. TheArchaeologyof the JerusalemArea, workis intrinsicallyflawedbyhis failure Onthe IronAge,Mare'sdescription by W HaroldMare,323 pp.,GrandRapids, to analyze,synthesize,or interpretpriwatersystemsis parof the underground MI:Baker Book House, 1987; $19.95. marysources.Mare'sbookis little more ticularlyincoherent.IntreatingWarren's volumeuncritically Shaft,forexample,Maredatesit variousthana cut-and-paste Aftermorethan 120yearsof archaecompiledfromsecondarysources,prily to the MiddleBronzeAge(page42) a ologicalexplorationin Jerusalem, marily:KathleenKenyon(1967),J.Finegan andto the tenthcenturyB.C.E. (page991. synthesisof the city's comprehensive (1969),andBenjaminMazar(1975). Inaddition,his wholesaleadoptionof remainsis longoverdue. Mare'srelianceon the interpretations archaeological of Kenyon's opinionthat"theIsraelites. . . Intensiveexcavationthereduringthe othershasresultedin a bookrifewith lackedanyskillasmasonsandcraftsmen" last 20 yearshas,however,bothgreatly factualerrorsandinternalcontradictions (page79)indicateshis lackof familiarity increasedthe availablearchaeological thatreflectthe author'sunfamiliarity with studies,suchas YigalShiloh's

Romanadvanceinto Galileeduringthe FirstJewishRevolt(page141)but should readVespasian.Whateverthe causeof theseerrors,theymakethe bookan unreliableresourceforthe generalreader. in the historicalreconInterspersed structionaresectionsandchapterson relevantliteraryworks(forexample,Ben Sirais discussedin the chapteron the beginningof Seleucidrulel,religious groupslachapteris devotedto the Sadducees,Pharisees,Essenes,andthe the lattertwo are Qumrancovenanters; andeconomicconditreatedseparately), tions (forexample,heavytaxationunder Herodthe Great).Manyof these discussionsarehelpfullespeciallythe repeated admonitionsto keepin mindthatvery little wenton in Palestineafterthe midsecondcenturyB.C.E. withoutthe acquiescenceof Romel,but somecommentsarepuzzling.Inhis consideration has of the ministryof Jesus,Jagersma only the followingto sayaboutthe parables:"Ofcoursethe parableshavea veryimportantplacein Jesus'proclamation of the comingkingdomof God. Anyonewho takesthemseriouslywill alsounderstandtheirmeaning"(page 128).Whatdoesthis mean?Moreto the point,howdoesthis commenthelpthe generalreaderunderstandthe historical periodor the preachingof Jesus? In additionto the 161pagesof text, the bookcontainsextensivenotesand indexesas well as helpfulchronological tablesandmaps. Scholarswill recognizemanyinaccuraciesin the bookand,unfortunately, learnverylittle fromit. Thatis to be expectedin a bookaimedat informingthe reader," but those sameinaccu"general racies(perhapsdueto the copyediting) will not be so evidentto the nonscholar. Thusthe bookfailsto meet its objective of providinga reliableguideforthe interestednonspecialist. JamesR. Mueller Universityof Florida

1989 147 BiblicalArchaeologist,fune/September

(1979),on Israelitearchitecture. His chapterson the Persian,HelBibliography lenistic,andRomanperiodsnot onlyfail Avigad,N. to presentluciddiscussionsof questions, 1983 Discoveringterusalem. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson. suchas the lines of the city'sfortificaBroshi,M. tion wallsor its watersupplysystem; 1977 Along Jerusalem'sWalls.Biblical theyalsoincludereferencesto suchnonArchaeologist40: 11-17. existentitems as "potteryrepresenting Burgoyne, M. H. Maccabean-Hasmonean motifs"(page1351 1971 Some Mameluke Doorwaysin the and"Rhodian (Hellenistic)jarhandles Old City of Jerusalem.Levant3: 1-30. with Hebrewinscriptionsstampedon 1973 T.anq BabA1-Hadld,A Mamluk Street thernX' (page1595. in the Old City of Jerusalem.Levant Inhis chapteron the Byzantineperi5: 12-35. od,Maredismissesthe "Garden Tomb" 1974 The Continued Surveyof the Ribat. Kurd/Madrasa JawhariwaComplex as the tombof Jesuson the groundthat in T.arlqBabA1-H. adld, Jerusalem. it is a Byzantinetomb,withoutmentionLevant6: 51-64. ingthatit wasoriginallycut in the Iron 1979 Twenty-FourMedievalArabicInAgeas partof the northernnecropolisof scriptions from Jerusalem.Levant the FirstTempleperiod. 11:112-37. Tothe periodbetweenthe Islamic 1982 A Recently DiscoveredMarwanid conquestin 638 C.E. andthe endof Inscriptionin Jerusalem.Levant14: Turkishrulein 1918,Maredevotesa 118-21. scant30 pagesof text.The shortshrift Finegan,J. giventheseperiodsflies in the faceof his 1969 TheArchaeologyof the New Testament. Princeton,NJ:PrincetonUniexpressedbeliefthat,of the culturalinversity Press. fluencesexertedon Jerusalem, "greatest of all, perhaps,wasthe culturalimpact Kenyon,K. M. 1967 terusalem:Excavating3000 Yearsof of ChristianityandIslam"(page18).In History.London:Thames and describingCrusaderJerusalemMareasHudson. sertsthatthe modernchurchof Saint Mazar,B. Anneis builton the samesite as the 1975 The Mountain of the Lord.New Crusader churchof SaintAnne(page283), York:Praeger. apparently failingto realizethatthe Shiloh, Y. modernchurchis one of the finest 1979 TheProto-AeolicCapitaland Israelite Ashlar Masonry.Series:Qedem 11. examplesof Crusaderarchitecturein ferusalem:The HebrewUniversity. Israel.Similarly,Marewritesthatthe Turkishwallsof the city followed"the JaneM. Cahill samecourseseen today"(page290)withDavid Tarler out notingthatthe Turkishwallsarethe HebrewUniversity of Jerusalem wallsseentoday!Mare'scursorytreatDiscoveringthe BiblicalWorld,byHarry ment of Islamicarchitecture failsto mentioneitherthe surveyof Mameluke Thomas Frank,Revised Edition by buildingspublishedbyM.H. Burgoyne TamesF.Strange}280 pp. Maplewood, (1971,1973,1974,1979,1982Jorthe NT:Hammond Incorporated,1987; Ayyubidtowerandinscriptionpublished $16.95 (paper). byMagenBroshi(1977:13-17). Inadditionto the factualandinter- Discovering the Biblical World,first pretativeinadequacies, thebookis fraught publishedin 1975,wasdesignedas an introductory volumeforstudentsinwith technicaldeficiencies:Mapsinterestedin gainingan overviewof the tendedto illustratethe city'splanin varioushistoricalperiodslackexplana- worldandeventsthatprovidedthe torydescriptions; mosttechnicalterms background forthe biblicalstory.Harry appearing in the glossarydonotappearin ThomasFrankusedthe biblicalstoryas the focalpointforthe bookanddrew the text;andmanysignificantbibliographicalreferencesareomitted,forex- uponotherresourcesto helpbringnew to biblicalhistory.These ample,NahmanAvigad(1983)andothers. understanding Mare's linearapproach to archaeology resourcesincludedcolormaps,numerous andhis uncriticaladoptionof oftencon- colorphotosof sites,structuresorartitradictoryinterpretations proposedby facts,archaeological informationgained otherauthorsin largelyoutdatedtexts throughexcavations,andinformation areboundto confusethe generalreader fromancientsourcessuchas the Jewish historian,Josephus. Inotherwords, as well as bewilder the professional.

148

Biblical Archaeologist, tune/September 1989

Frankattemptedto integratearchaeologicaldata,ancientsources,andattractivevisualaidswith biblicalhistory in a story-telling format.Although Frank's goalwassomewhatambitious, the continuedcirculationof the book reflectsits continuingvalue. Inthe revisededition,JamesF. Strangehasattemptedto retainFrank's masteryat communicatingthe biblical storywhile improvingandupdatingthe book'sstyleandinformation.Revisions canbe seenin severalareas:the prosaic style andreadabilityof the book,archaeologicalinformation,maps,photos,and the selectedbibliography. Strangehasimprovedthe proseand flowof the text bydeleting,abbreviating, or completelyrewritingsomeparts.His revisionsusuallyinvolveone ortwo sentencesorparagraphs. Themostextensive revisionof this natureis seen in chapter 14,whereinformationabouteventsrelatedto the discoveryof the DeadSea Scrollsis reducedfromapproximately twopagesto oneparagraph. Changesof this typehavegreatlyimprovedthe readabilityof the textbyremovingcumbersomeandunnecessarydetails.However, the vastmajorityof the text remainsthe same.In someplaces,additionalinformationhasbeenincorporated in the text.Thesechanges,whetherdueto the revisionof oldmaterialorthe incorporation of newmaterial,weremadebyusing a slightlysmallerprint.This technique allowsthe informationandpagenumberingof the revisedtext to correspond with thatof the originaltext in most places.Thenumberof chaptersand chaptertitles remainsthe same. Themostsignificantchangeinvolves archaeological informationin the text. Correctionshavebeenmadein places whereold conclusionshavegivenwayto newones,suchasTellBeitMirsim'sassociationwith Debir.Inthe revisededition, Debiris deletedfromthe text (page11). Mostimportantis the new information fromrecentexcavations, datacovering the discoveriesat Ebla(pages16,33),the altarfoundat MountEbal(page70),an excellentaccountof the historyof the Qumrancommunitybasedon the archaeologicalevidence(pages186-89), informationaboutNazarethin the time of Jesus(page203),the archaeological discoveriesat Sepphoris(page205),and newinformationaboutCapernaum based on recentexcavations(page207).Some of the abovearetreatedverybrieflyand

othersmoreextensively,but all provide importantinformationandenhancethe valueof the text. Boththe mapsandphotosof the Franktext werehelpfulvisualaids.Most of the mapsandphotosremainthe same in the revisededition,althoughsomeare moreappropriately located.Thereare severalnew or revisedmaps,including anupdatedmapof archaeological sites in IsraelandJordan(page14J,a mapof the meanannualrainfallof the land (page26J,a humiditychart(page26J,a mapofTheLastYearsof Judah(page126J, anda mapof The SevenChurchesof AsiaMinor(page238J.Also,severalnew city planshavebeenadded.Theyinclude the plansof Nineveh(page124J,Lachish (page128J,the Qumrancommunity(page 187J,the agoraof Corinth(page229J,and Rome(page236J.Therevisededitionalso containssomenew andimprovedphotos, includingphotosof a claytabletfrom Ebla(page33J,rampartsandhousesat Jericho(page66J,the remainsof Saul's fortress-palace at Gibeah(page78J, animalfigureson the wallof the Isthar Gatein Babylon(page130J,the ruinsof Qumran(page178J,the OldCity of Jerusalem(page209J,the LionGatein Jerusalem(page219J,the TaurusMountains andthe CilicianGates(page222J,andan Inscriptionto AntoniusFelix(page233J. Althoughmanyof thesephotosareadditions,someweretakenfromthe oldtext buthavebeenimprovedorprovidea new andbetterview of the sites.Unfortunatelysomephotosin the revisededition areof a muchpoorerqualitythanin the firstedition,suchas the photosof the Ophelridgein Jerusalem (page87Jandthe ivorycarvingfromMegiddo(page106J. Changeshavealsobeenmadein the selectedbibliography. Manysourcesin the originalbibliography havebeendeleted,and14newentriesappearin the revisededition.Abouthalfof the new entriesarebooksthathavebeenpublishedsincethe firsteditionappeared. Mostof the new sourcesrelateinformation aboutarchaeological discoveriesor providediscussionaboutthe natureof the discipline.Sincethe greaterpartof the text remainsthe same,the revised editionmustbe classifiedas a minor ratherthana majorrevision. The most importantcontributionof the neweditionis updatedarchaeological informationthatStrangebringsto the text.Unfortunately, the greatestdisappointment of the revision also lies in

this area.It seemsthatthe valueof the bookwouldbe enhancedif morearchaeologicalinformationhadbeenincorporatedin the text.Inorderto do that,however,HarryThomasFrank'sstory-telling stylewouldhavehadto be sacrificed. The revisededitionperhapsshowssigns of one otherweakness.Strangeincorporatednewmaterialthroughoutthe text, but it seemsthatmoreattentionwas givento someof the laterchaptersof the book,especiallychapter14,Scrollsfrom the Wildernessof Judea,andchapter15, Jesus,areasof studyin whichStrange specializes.The revisionwouldhave beenmoreextensiveandvaluablehad Strangebeenaccompaniedin the project bysomeonewho specializesin the study of the earlierperiodsof biblicalhistory andarchaeology. Nonetheless,the revisededitionof Discoveringthe Biblical Worldstill stands as a tributeto HarryThomasFrank,and JamesStrange's appreciation of Frank's style andtalentsis to be commended. Withthe revisionsmadeby Strange,this volumecontinuesto be a valuableresourceforstudentsinterestedin gaining an overviewof the worldandthe events thatprovidedthe background forthe biblicalstory. LaMoineDeVries SouthwestMissouriStateUniversity BiblicalArchaeology: the World,the Mediterranean, the Bible,by Henry 0. Thompson,xxviii + 467 pp. New York: ParagonHouse, 1987; $25.95 (hardcover), $14.95 (paper).

Thisvolumecontainsthe basicingredientseveryintroductionto biblical

archaeology needs.The chaptersare short,andtheycoverthe rightsubjects. ArchaeologyItself(pages3-42Jintroducesthe goalsandmethodsof biblical archaeology. TheHistoryof Archaeology (pages43-158Jtracesthe fieldfromits humbleanddisorganized origins-in the workof graverobbers,the journalsof pilgrims,the diariesof wealthytravelers, thehobbiesofmerchantsanddiplomatsto the highlyspecializedandinterdisciplinarystudythatit is today.ArchaeologyandScience(pages159-212Jshows howthe artof biblicalarchaeologyinheritedsophisticatedtechnologyfrom scienceslike WorldWarIIaerialreconnaissanceandthe spaceprogram. ArchaeologyIlluminatesthe Bible(pages281418Jreviewsthe discipline'scontributions to the interpretation of biblical literaturefromancientIsraelandearly Christianity.Therearealso chapters calledDailyLifein BiblicalTimes(pages 213-80JandArchaeologyandReligion (pages419-50J. Eachchapterhaslengthydocumentation,a list of additionalreadings,and is generouslyillustratedwith black-andwhitephotographs on matpaper.There areseveralhand-drawn mapsanddiagrams,a glossaryof technicalterms,and a subjectindex. Anyonewho teachesanintroductory coursein biblicalarchaeology will find this bookto be a good,disciplinedreview of the manynames,dates,places, andtechnicaltermsanystudentneedsto know.Thompsonalsoincludessome fine anecdotes,whichwill addto any classpresentation.Finally,his documentatiorsprovidesan easybibliography to the standardarticlesfromwhichto composea classreadinglist. I mustadd,however,thatalthough the bookcontainsthe necessaryelementsof a goodintroductionto biblical archaeology, theirqualityandpresentation wouldnot givethe beginningstudenta solidstart.Consideringthe scope of the taskthatThompsonhasundertaken,no singlelimitationis necessarily significant,but,takentogether,I think theymightdiscourage,ratherthanencourage,a beginningstudent.I think beginnerswill findthe bookto be very disconnected.The chaptersandparagraphsneedclearertopicparagraphs and sentences,illustratedbyparticulardiscoveries.I thinktoo muchof the data wererecited,ratherthanorganized.I wasalsodistractedwhenfigures,terms,

Biblical Archaeologist, June/September1989

149

chapter(page3) concernsthe physical topics,anddiscoveriesthathadalready Mannersand Customs in The Bible. An of the Semiticpeoplein the appearance IllustratedGuide to Daily Life in Bible beenintroduced,defined,or discussed millenniumB.C.E. ldlhatdid second early + xxvi Matthews, H. reor Times, by Victor weresubsequentlyreintroduced thepatriarchsand theirwiveslook like: 283 pp. Hendrickson, 1988; $14.95. defined,on the one hand,or simply The answer?Theywereshort,dark referencedon the other;forexample, haired,andhadprominent,flatnoses! This lucidvolumewaswrittenbyan "Itwascitedearlier...." expertin the fieldof cul- As evidence,Matthewsbothrefersto of newevidence acknowledged The interpretation turalanalysisandancientNearEastern andvisuallydepictsthe famousBeni in the fieldis takingplaceat a veryfast Hasantombpaintingsdatingto Egypt's texts.VictorMatthewswritesforan pacethesedays,so I wassurprisedthat Thompsonreiteratedsomeoutdatedas- audienceseekinggreaterunderstanding MiddleKingdomthatshowsomeSemitic pastoralistsin Egypt. sumptionsthathavebeenrefinedin the of the customsof the biblicalperiod. Inanothercontext,Matthewsdisthe covering chapters five theories has the book The example, For years. past25 cussesmarriagecustomsof the periodby on slalrelimeplasterandthe settlement periodsfromthe ancestralstoriesin firstcitinga coupleof accountsfrom Genesis,whichMatthewscautiously in the hill countrybyIsrael(page218J, Genesisandthenplacingthemin a the seminomadicoriginsof Israel(page putsin the earlysecondmillennium culturalcontext.He notes,for wider revolt (KochbaJ chariot the Cochba of use Bar the to Hyksos' B.C.E., the 223J, and in the secondcenturyC.E. Thesechapters example,thatthereareexamplesof con(page242J, whichwerestaplesof the worldof Period;Exodusand tractsfromthe Mesopotamian are:ThePatriarchal WilliamF.Albright,G. ErnestWright, press doesn't He wife. a for working men SettlementPeriod;MonarchyPeriod; andJohnBrightera,arecitedwithout a seeking of or confirmation of issue the Intertestamental and Return; seem and also Exile There adequatemodification. to be someinaccurateinterpretations. andNew TestamentPeriod.Eachchapter dateforthe ancestralstorieson the basis Forexample,firedamagein the cemetery hasa briefhistoricaloverviewfollowed of suchcontracts;he doesn'tevenname bya moreextensiveseriesof entriesthat the cities in question.Inthe sameconat BabedhDhrawasmorelikelythe funeral fit the title andsubtitleof text,he mentionsbrieflythe accountof appropriately resultof tombdesecrationthan sendingJacobto Labanto get a wifeand the book. cremation(pagellJ;the GardenTomb thatthis playsan importantrolein the In the preface(pagexxJthe author cemeteryis generallydatedto the first storyline of the ancestors,particularly writesthatthe bookhas somethingto centuryratherthanthe IronAge(page sinceEsauhadmarriedHittitewomen. alike. person lay and offerthe scholar 394J, andthe JaffaGate,not the New Esau's Thenhe makesthis observation: Gate,wasremodeledforKaiserWilhelm's Whiletrue,the volumeis heavily his parents.It also stu- action"disappointed weightedtowardthe undergraduate visit (page394J. dentorotheradultsengagedin personal fits into a literaryandtheologicalmotif Findingthe rightillustrationsfor studyof the Bible.Twoobservationsare designedto showhowEsaudisqualified a text or a classis nevereasy.A lot of himselfas Isaac'sheir"(pages22-23). availand available, not offeredbywayof explanation. is material good This sectionseemsto me to be quite One,the bookdoesnot havefootablematerialis not alwaysgood.Highhelpfulandbalanced;it providesa miniandmaps notes,so thatno discussionof a topic resolutioncolorphotographs mumof detail,is clearlywritten,and interinvolvesan assessmentof differing arealmostas mandatoryforbookson is sensitiveto culturalandliteraryconbiblicalarchaeologyas theirproduction pretationsor theoriesputforwardby cerns.I wouldsaysimilarthingsabout Theblack-and-whiteotherscholars.Hencescholarscannot costsareprohibitive. the brieftreatmentof the accountof andline drawingsusedin use the volumeto findout the latest photography ofIsaacin Genenear-sacrifice Abraham's prethis bookareeffective,althoughthe pho- theoriesof socialstratificationin the story that notes Matthews 22. sis in customs burial done. how poorly or was Israel exilic reproduction tographic musthavebeenpartof the reasonwhy Somephotoslackgoodcontrast,andsome earlyJudaismmayormaynot depict fromthe dead. Israeldidnot offerchildsacrificeas well ideason the resurrection arenot croppedto focusthe viewer'satasholdupAbrahamas the modelofpiety. This commentis an observation,not a tentionon the importantitems. Thereis a helpfulsummaryof vilTheglossaryis anexcellentfeature complaint,forthe volumeis well-written lagelife in the secondchapter,which andengagingforits primaryaudience. in booksof this kind,but Thompson's Two,whenthe authorstatesthathe coversearlyIronAgesettlementsin the glossaryneedsmoreterms.It omitsboth centralhill countryof Palestine.It is takesup topicsin chronologicalorder, widelyusedtechnicaltermsandterms andinformative,integratinginforbrief up taken are topics that there means example, For really he text. the definedin mationfromseveralanglesthattogether in the orderof the canonicalstoryline. areno glossarydefinitionsforburnish assistone in depictingearliesttribal Informedreadersof the Bibleknow,for (page270J, dolmen(page149J,robber in the promisedlandof Canaan. Israel example,thatscholarsassigndiffering trench(page254J, orslip (page216J, commentin this chapteron the One that so Genesis, in accounts the to text. the dates in defined is each although settlementperiodis deceptivelybrief, Finally,morecarefuleditingwouldhave anyworkthattakesup accountsin the in the canoni- however,andraisesperhapsthe most orderof theirappearance preventeddefinitionsin the textfrom an analysis intriguingissuerelatedto dailylife and providing not is cal storyline conflictingwith thosein the glossary. biblicalculture:popularreligion(page82). Forexample,ostracais clearlydefinedin of customsaccordingto theirchronologicaldevelopmentbut is actuallypro- The contextforthe commentis the the text (page236J but ambiguouslydevidinga topicalapproachthatis arranged author'sreferenceto the storyin Judges finedin the glossary(page455J. 17of the Levitewho hada household Don C. Benjamin bythe orderof the booksin the Bible. agravenimage. shrineandwhofabricated Theopeningquestionof the first RiceUniversity

150

Biblical Archaeologist, tune/September 1989

Why,Matthews asks, would a Levite, responsible for the teaching of the law, do such things? The answer,he writes, "almostcertainly is that 'popularreligion,'the religion of the local villages, was not the pure monotheism required by the law at Sinai."Leavingaside the issue of whether early Israelhad a pure monotheism like that mentioned by Matthews, he is right to point to the considerablevariety of religious practices that must have characterizedvillage life in IronI Palestine. He quite correctly refersto excavationsfrom the period in question that show some household cul-

descriptionhas manypointsof contact with EgyptianandPhoenicianelements. Behindthe buildingof the templelie manyfascinatingstoriesabouta tribal societythatdevelopsinto a statewith a kinganda royalty-supported chapelin the capitalcity.Now is this also an exampleof popularreligion?Thatis, is the templean exampleof a typeof widespreadpopularpietythatwasmoreurban based?Matthewsagaintakesup the questionof popularreligionin the context of the monarchicalperiodandin thatsectionseemsto suggestthat,by definition,popularreligionwasnot whatwaspracticedin the "officialreligionof Jerusalemandthe temple"(page 1381.Muchdepends,therefore,on the definitionof popularreligion.A related questionthatis not discussedconcerns whethertherearetypesof Yahwistic popularreligionthatarenot particularly syncretic.Or,is it not possiblethat whenhe describessomeof the basepractices of the Canaanitefertilitycult he is reallydescribinga typeof Canaanite popularreligionthatwouldhaveembarrassedotherpractitioners of Canaanite religion? Withregardto the book'slongestsection,whichdealswith the monarchical periodsin IsraelandJudah,it is instructive to compareits treatmentof daily life with thatof the recentlypublished workbyPhilipJ.King,AmosJ Hosea, Micah-An Archaeological Commentary {Philadelphia: Westminster,1988).

The booksshareseveralelements.First amongthemis a lucidandorganized prose.King'sbookis morearchaeologicallyfocused,however,andmoreprofuselyillustrated.The strengthof Matthews'booklies in the description of patterns.He will takeup a topictic vesselsandthe remainsof sheep weaponryandsiegepractices,forexbonesfromsacrificialceremonies.Yet ample-and weavetogetherbiblical his remarkaboutthe villagesis too references,anthropology, andmilitary brief,sincethe issue of popularreligion strategyin an illuminatingway. is extremelyimportantto the question Overall,this is a helphllbookand of whatkindsof literatureandtestioneI wouldrecommendto a Biblesurvey moniesthe Bibleactuallycontains. classin a churchor anundergraduate Whatneedsdiscussionin this con- program.Ifthe readerconcentrateson text is the relatedissue of syncretism. the basiccontentsof the scripturesin Thatis a phenomenonamplyillustrated theirhistoricalcontext,this bookcanbe in the pagesof the Bibleandfromthe a helpfulintroductionto the cultures fromwhichthe scripturesemerged.Furexcavator's work.Definedneutrally, syncretismmightmeannothingmore thermore,thereareseveralindexesthat thana combinationof ideasandpracaddto the volume'susefulness. tices with differentculturalorigins. J.AndrewDearman Thus,elsewherethe authorcanrightly AustinPresbyterian Theological pointto the templein Jerusalem, whose Seminary

Akhenaten:Kingof Egypt,by Cyril Aldred,320pp.,107illustrations.New York:ThamesandHudson,1988;$35.00. CyrilAldredis generallyregarded as the leadingauthorityon the Eighteenth DynastypharaohAkhenaten(Amenophis IVIandthe Amarnaperiod.Aldred's latestworkis a welcomeadditionto the studyof one of Egypt'smost interesting personalities.Manysuperbblack-andwhitepicturesandveryfewtechnical termsmakethis bookattractiveto generalreaders,but scholarswill benefit fromit as well. Inthefirstsection,Aldredintroduces the readerto the archaeological evidence andliterarytestimonyrelatingto Akhenaten.The readeris takenstepbystep fromthe earliestdiscoveriesandinterpretationsto currentproblemsthatremainunsolved.Inthis way,the readeris introducedto the Amarnaperiodas well as to the scienceof Egyptology. Thenext sectionreviewsthe historical milieuof Egyptin the Eighteenth Dynasty.Afteran analysisof foreignand internalaffairs,Aldredexploresthe role of the "God's Wife,"the ChiefQueen. The powerandimportanceof the Chief Queen'sroleis demonstrated, especially with regardto the legitimizationof the succeedingpharaoh. The thirdsectionof the bookis devotedto the enigmasthatveil the reign of Akhenaten.Aldredtakesreaderson a detectivehuntandallowsthem to form theirownjudgmentaboutthe meritof eachclue.A casein pointis the complex questionof a coregencybetweenAkhenatenandhis father,AmenophisIII, whichhasbeenthe subjectof an ongoing debate.Aftera reviewof the evidence andthe opinionsofotherscholars,Aldred offershis ownpersuasiveopinion.The sameapproachis usedto examinethe intriguingproblemsconcerningthe Amarnaletters,the physicalpathology of Akhenaten,andhis religiousheresy. WasthenewreligionthatAkhenaten introducedto Egypttrulymonotheism? Aldreddemonstratesthatalreadyin the EighteenthDynastytherewasa syncretism of religiousbeliefsthatembraceda monotheisticconceptionof a supreme solardeity.Whereasbeforehim the existenceof othergodswassometimesunderstoodas the emanationsof one deity, Akhenatenabolishedall godsexceptfor his one god,the Aten (solardisc). Theconstructionof Akhenaten's

BiblicalArchaeologist,fune/September 1989 151

new city is of considerableinterest. NamedAkhetaten,"theHorizonof the Aten,"it wassituatedon the eastbankof the Nile River,midwaybetweenMemphisandThebes.Aldredoffersa novel explanationforthe selectionof the city's site.The configuration of a rockformation on the eastbankcorresponds to the hieroglyphakhet, meaninghorizon. Akhenatenstatedthatthis wasthe place wherethe Atenrevealeditself to him. Aldred'sreasonableconclusionis that Akhenatensawthe Aten (solardisc) risingthroughtwohills andinterpreted the spectacleas the manifestationof the sacredsymbolforhorizon.Akhetaten wastrulythe centerof the universefor Akhenaten. It is to Aldred'screditthathe does not tryto interpretproblemswhenhe is on insecureground.Tothe readerwho has occasionalpangsof frustrationin this regard,I bidyouwelcometo the disciplineof Egyptology. GarthAlford SouthwestMissouriStateUniversity The First Historians: The Hebrew Bible and History, by BaruchHalpern, xv +

285 pp. San Francisco:Harper@ Row, 1988;$22.95.

Somebooksareso refreshing,so innovative,thattheygivethe readermorethan whatis expected.The FirstHistorians is thatkindof book.BaruchHalpern's thesis, "todeterminewhatancientIsraelite historiansthoughthistorydemanded,to illuminatethe disciplineto whichthey subjectedthemselves," is masterfully presented.Afterdetailinga briefhistory of historical-critical andliterary-critical examinationsof the HebrewBiblein the last fewcenturies,Halperndevelops,in a seriesof chaptersdealingwith specific narratives, the followingcriterionfor historywritingin the biblicaltext: ".. . doesthe workparlaythe available evidence(sources1 into coherentnarrative about eventssusceptibleto reconstructionfromthe sources?. . . didthe narratorhavereasonto believewhathe or she wrote,or didthe narratordepart at will fromthe sources,concoctingfreely aboutmattersconcerningwhichhe or she hadno, or contradictory, evidence?" (page125. Thebulkof this volume,chapters 5-11 (comprising his partsIIandIII),is a reexamination of the historicalandliterarycharacterof the DeuteronomicHis-

152

torian(MartinNoth'sDtr}.Although Halpernaddsto the "alphabet soup"so commonlyusedby scholarswho deal with this material,his use of H{Dtr)and E-Dtr-xto denotethe historianandthe exilic editorhelpsharmonizethese modelsand,if adopted,will providemore logicto the studyof the FormerProphets. Inhis studyof the Judgesframework,Solomon'sreign,andthe beginningsof the monarchy(1Samuel8-12), Halperndemonstrates thatH(Dtr),while inconsistentin placesdueto conflicting sourcematerials,uses an"antiquarian logic"in dealingwith theseconflictsto createa masterfulreconstruction of Israelitehistorythatinjectsthemeand vocabularyonlywherecontentandcontext demand.Halpernrejectsthe idea thatthe historianwasin anyway"apatheticaboutaccuracy" or"indifferent to dissonance." Tracingthe "inventions" or stylistictrailof H{Dtr)is, as he says,like lookingfor"aneedlein a haystack." It is the use of sourcesthatmost oftenindicatethe presenceof this historian. Readersof BiblicalArchaeologist will findthis bookuseful.Theywill probablygainthe mostfromHalpern's examinationof EhudandDeborahin chapters3 and4. Chapter3 dealswith the storyof Ehudin Judges3. Whatis particularlyinterestinghereis the meticulousreconstruction of events-but not throughspeculationon whatcouldhave happened.Halpernconstantlyreiterates the pointthatnothingneedbe addedto the text,thata closerreadingof the text, plusthe use of archaeological andsociopoliticalcluesgivenin the text,will allowforproperreconstruction. Bycitingcomparisonsof the architecturalstyleusedin the secondmillenniumandthatusedlaterbytheAssyrians, the blt hilani,Halpernis ableto ascertainthe movementsof the characters withinthe Moabitepalace.Inaddition, Ehud'sadherenceto protocolis demonstrated,anda logicalsuggestionis made forthe meaningof the misdaron,which waswhatEhudusedto escapefroma lockedroom,leavinghis victim'sbodyto be discoveredlongafterhe hadwalked rightpastthe guardsandcourtiers.The conclusionis then drawnthatthe writer drewuponearlieroraltraditionsanda personalknowledgeof the Jordan Valley andarchitectural stylesto createan economical,realistic,"antiquarian reconstruction" of Israelitehistory. In chapter4, SiseraandOldLace,

Biblical Archaeologist, fune/September 1989

Halpernsystematicallyshowshow Judges4 is dependenton the lyricalversion of the storyin Judges5, The Songof Deborah.Goingpointbypoint,he exposesthe logicusedbythe ancienthistorianin the proseaccount.Forinstance, Siserais not describedas lyingdownat the time of his assassinationin Judges5. Halpernpositsthatthe historianplaced himin apronepositionin chapter4:19-21 to completethe logicof gravity,aim,and stealthneededto completethe act. Halpern's use of geography in determiningSisera'srouteof flight,the placementof Heber'scamp,andthe battlesite nearMountTaborareall drawnfrom archaeological insightandthe use of sourcesbythe historian.Theonlyfault thatcanbe foundwith this is the impressionof a ratherwoodenor mechanicalborrowing bythe historianfromthe poem.It doesnot allowfor,or at least doesnot touchon, the veryimportant themeof hospitalitythatis foundin bothversions.CertainlyHalpernhas createda modelfromwhichto expand the studyof this text,but it shouldnot excludeall of the factorsrelevantto the scenesbeingdepicted. Halpern's use of humoris refreshing.He lightenswhatat times is an extremelytechnicaldiscussionbyhis injectionof punsandmodernallusions {forexample,"Ehudcalling").Unfortunately,his frequentuse of technical terminologywill obscurehis meaning formanygeneralreaders. The FirstHistorians shouldbe added to everyacademiclibrarythathasa collectionon biblicalstudiesandIsraelite history.It challengesthe scholarlyestablishmentto rethinkthe characterof historiography in ancientIsraelandsuggests thatold standardsof literarycriticism shouldbe reevaluated. VictorMatthews SouthwestMissouriStateUniversity

BOOKPUBLISHERS Please send all review copies tc>: Dr. JamesMoyer Department of Religious Studies Southwest Missouri State University 901 South Nationsl, Box 167 Springfield,MO 64804 0095