Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-9q27g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T15:20:03.087Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The “Autobiography of Ariyahinas's Son”: an Edition of the Hieroglyphic Luwian Stelae Tell Ahmar 1 and Aleppo 2

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 December 2013

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

Extract

I am very happy to be able to offer to Oliver Gurney, to whom I owe many years of generous and unstinted teaching, advice and support, a token Hieroglyphic repayment for my Cuneiform debt to him. I only trust that this contribution of mine to this journal, being the first which has not had the benefit of his careful scholarship and judicious criticism, will not fall below his high standards.

Of the two large stelae found at Tell Ahmar (the ancient Til-Barsip), the mutilated TELL AHMAR 2, now in the Louvre, names as its author a certain king Hamiyatas, who presumably ruled the city Til-Barsip and its surrounding territory, although his and his kingdom's titles have been carried away by the damage to the stele. In the remains of his genealogy, Hamiyatas names Masuwarazas, perhaps his father, but perhaps grandfather or even earlier forebear. The broken stele TELL AHMAR 1, a new edition of which is here presented, has lost the name, office and titles of the author and preserves only his genealogy, “Hapatilas's great-grandson, the ruler Ariyahinas's son” (by which patronymic he must be named by us).

Type
Research Article
Information
Anatolian Studies , Volume 30 , December 1980 , pp. 139 - 156
Copyright
Copyright © The British Institute at Ankara 1980

Access options

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

References

1 The abbreviations used in this article are as noted in Hawkins, J. D., Davies, A. Morpurgo and Neumann, G., “Hittite Hieroglyphs and Luwian: new evidence for the connection” (Nachrichten der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, Phil.-Hist. Klasse, Nr. 6, 1973Google Scholar), preliminary note on p. [3] (and this article abbreviated HHL). The system of transliteration employed is as tabulated in An. St. 25 (1975), 153–155Google Scholar; note also additional transcriptions of logograms into Latin, BESTIA, CAPERE, CENTUM, FILIA, PURUS, as listed in KZ 92 (1978), 116Google Scholar; Florilegium Anatolicum (Paris, 1979), 156Google Scholar; Studia Mediterranea P. Meriggi Octuagenario (hereafter Studia … Meriggi; Pavia, forthcoming); also FORTIS (HH, no. 28); IUDEX (HH, no. 371); FLAMMAE(?) (HH, no. 477); MALUS1 (Glossar 2 no. 9.3); MALUS2 (Glossar 2, no. 405a–b); REL2 (Glossar 2 no. 161). Note also that in the transliteration the symbol ∥ with a number in the margin is used to mark the line division in the texts.

This article, like its predecessors, owes much to the collaboration and timely criticism of Professor Anna Morpurgo Davies, for which I am most grateful.

The two stelae forming the subject of this study (TELL AHMAR 1 and ALEPPO 2) are now located in Aleppo Museum, and my thanks are due to the Direction Générale des Antiquités et des Musées, Damascus, and to its Director General, Dr. Afif Bahnassi, for permission to study them, and to the staff of the Museum for their assistance and courtesy while I was working there.

2 Both were found on the surface out of archaeological context: Thureau-Dangin, F. (and Dunand, M.), Til-Barsib (Paris, 1936), 134 ffGoogle Scholar.

3 A recent examination of the historical background of the TELL AHMAR stelae, together with comprehensive bibliographical references, has been presented by Ussishkin, D., “Was Bit-Adini a Neo-Hittite or Aramean state?” (Or. NS 40 (1971), 431–437Google Scholar). The most recent edition of the text of TELL AHMAR 2 is that of Meriggi, P., Manuale II/2 (Rome, 1975), no. 281Google Scholar, to which Poetto, M., “Una revisione dell' iscrizione luvio-geroglifica di Til-Barsip II” (Or. Ant. 17 (1978), 279–285Google Scholar), adds notes on collations and some useful photographs.

4 For this name, my collation agrees with that of Poetto, , loc. cit., 279 f.Google Scholar: read ma-su-wa/i+ra/iza-s[a] (or possibly ma-su-za-wa/i+ra/i-s[a]).

5 Ussishkin, loc. cit., 432 f., reports the doubts on the relationship, which are occasioned by a comparison with TELL AHMAR 1, 1.1, where the genealogy includes only the great-grandfather and father, in that order—cf. footnote 7.

6 The earlier editions are: (i) Meriggi, , RHA 111/18 (1935), 51–57Google Scholar with pls. 1–2; (ii) Hrozný, , IHH III, 465–480Google Scholar; (iii) Meriggi, , Manuale 11/2, no. 280Google Scholar.

7 For a consideration of this genealogy, and the reading of the father's name, see below, note on TELL AHMAR 1, § 1.

8 This of course follows the Hier. Luwian practice, in which the patronym is expressed by a genitive dependent upon, or genitival adjective in agreement with, the nomen; thus our hero would indeed have been known as [PN]Iariyahinas(is)—cf. An. St. 25 (1975), 148Google Scholar.

9 The idea goes back to Hrozný, , IHH III, 474, 480, 489Google Scholar; cf. recently Orthmann, , Untersuchungen zur spätheth. Kunst (Bonn, 1971), 183Google Scholar—corrected by Hawkins, , ZA NF 63 (1973–1974), 308Google Scholar. See the edition below, §§ 11–13.

10 See below, Analysis of historical content (p. 154 f.), where the information provided by both stelae is combined on the assumption of this identity. The uneconomical postulation of a second Hamiyatas by Meriggi was based on an attempt to date TELL AHMAR 2 earlier than I while accepting the Hamiyatas of the latter as son of the author (RHA III/18 (1935), 45 f.Google Scholar). My edition, I hope, makes clear that the TELL AHMAR I reference is to a past (not future) Hamiyatas, and this recognition makes possible the identification with the author of TELL AHMAR 2 and the consequent establishment of that stele as the earlier work.

11 Entered in the Aleppo Museum register as having been seized by the police during an attempt to smuggle it out of the country. First edited by Barnett, R. D., Iraq 10 (1948), 137Google Scholar and Plates XXIII–XXIV; and recently by Meriggi, , Manuale II/2, no. 307Google Scholar.

12 I have already quoted some relevant passages (§§ (8), 9–11, 24–25)—An. St. 25 (1975), 134Google Scholar and Fig. 1, 140, 146 and Fig. 4.

13 The fact that it was apparently found inside Syrian territory does of course restrict the provenance to those centres of Hieroglyphic inscriptions within the modern frontiers, i.e. Hamath or Til-Barsip, or (very partially and less likely) Carchemish or Unqi.

14 I cannot add very substantially to the interpretations of Meriggi, , Manuale II/2, 212–217Google Scholar, except on a different reading of a clause, ll. 5–6, for which see below, note on TELL AHMAR 1, § 10; and on the verb LITUSS (-)pa-la-ni-ia-, for which see Kadmos 19 (1980), 138 ffGoogle Scholar.

15 Donner and Röllig, KAI 2, no. 215; Gibson, , TSSI II, no. 14Google Scholar.

16 Loc. cit., above, footnote 3.

17 See Ikeda, Y., Iraq 41 (1979), 76 fCrossRefGoogle Scholar.

18 The tribal designation DUMU Iadini, “of Bit-Adini”, is typically Aramean, and the PNIaḫuni, “our brother” generally Semitic. There is, of course, no possiblity of identifying the name with any appearing in the Hieroglyphic stelae—see above note on TELL AHMAR 1, § 1.

19 See Orthmann, , Untersuchungen zur spätheth. Kunst, 46 ff.Google Scholar; also recently Genge, H., Nordsyrischsudanatolische Reliefs (Copenhagen, 1979), 52 fGoogle Scholar.

20 Grayson, , ARI II, § 426Google Scholar.

21 III R 8, col. ii 35 ffGoogle Scholar. = ARAB I, § 603Google Scholar.

22 E.g. that of Landsberger, , Sam'al, 34, n. 70Google Scholar (Hapatila- = *Hepa-atal).

23 E.g. that of Barnett, , Carchemish III, 263Google Scholar (Hamiyata- =I/KURhamataya, “the Hamathite”).

24 The excavators seem to have no special grounds for identifying the pre-Assyrian remains as Aramean other than the a priori assumption that the city was Aramean before the Assyrian conquest (Til-Barsib, ch. IV A, esp. pp. 94 f.).