The land of the Hittites : $b An account of recent explorations and discoveries in Asia Minor, with descriptions of the Hittite monumentsGarstang, John
History
The land of the Hittites : $b An account of recent explorations and discoveries in Asia Minor, with descriptions of the Hittite monuments
Garstang, John
Hittites; Turkey -- Antiquities
At the eastern limits of the great plains we reach Kilisse Hissar, the
site of the old-time TYANA.[437] It is shut in on three sides by ridges
and low outlying hills, but is open to the plain, and accessible from
Eregli and from Bulghar-Madên. It can hardly be doubted that this was
the chief city for the region we are considering, even in Hittite times,
to judge from its importance in the minds of classical writers and from
the extensive nature of its mounds and ruins. Strabo[438] describes it
as ‘built upon the mound of Semiramis’ which was ‘fortified with good
walls.’ Here, curiously enough, no Hittite monument has been brought
to light, probably because haphazard excavation in the mound is hardly
possible, owing to the fact that it is almost covered by the modern
houses. None the less, a Phrygian inscription of Midas[439] attests the
antiquity of the site; and three separate Hittite inscriptions seen in
the neighbouring places of Bor, Nigdeh, and Andaval may be reasonably
believed, as is supposed, to have come from the same source.
The most instructive and interesting of these monuments is that from Bor,
which is a monumental stela, recovered in two main portions at different
times at an interval of twelve years or more.[440] Even now the stone is
not complete; as may be seen from our illustration the fitted edges do
not quite correspond, so that a small portion is missing from the height,
while the left-hand edge is entirely broken away. The upper part measures
thirty inches by sixteen, with a thickness of eight inches. The lower
part is five inches taller, so that the whole must have been six feet or
more in height. Fortunately, on the fragments that have survived, there
is to be seen nearly the whole figure and face of a man, clearly the
priest-king, as well as an indication of the nature and arrangement of
the inscription. The figure is carved in high relief, with a projection
amounting in places to three inches, while the hieroglyphs are incised
upon the background. The figure occupied a height equivalent to eleven
bands of the hieroglyphs, of which fourteen are indicated. We have no
means of judging how wide the stone was originally, as the bottom is
fractured and the top has plainly been re-dressed since it was broken,
to correspond with the narrower width. We are inclined to think that the
larger and more important portion of the stone is still lacking. For the
attitude of the figure is that of adoration or of a suppliant. The man is
depicted with his back near the edge of the stone, and his hands raised
before his chin, exactly as on the rock monument of Ivrîz.[441] Now on
the stelæ in which one figure alone appears, like those of Carchemish and
Marash,[442] the personage, be he priest or king, occupies the central
position on the stone, and almost its whole height. He stands in those
cases with one arm outstretched grasping his staff, while the other arm
is close to his side; on the one he faces to the left, on the other to
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account