Last updated 10th July 2024: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 June 2015
The number of known Hittite rock-reliefs in Anatolia is limited: Karabel, Manisa, Yazılıkaya, Gavurkalesi, Fıraktin, İmamkulu, Taşcı, İvriz, Gezbeli, Sirkeli, and Hemite. Except the Late Hittite relief of Ivriz, the monuments, mostly scattered on the fringe of the highland, have to be ascribed to the Imperial Age (1450–1200 B.C.). Their geographic distribution allows some conclusions as to the extent of the Hittite sphere of influence. The question of the monuments' function is but one of the numerous problems still to be solved.
Apart from the reliefs of Yazılıkaya, Gavurkalesi and Fıraktin, which are all part of a sanctuary, the majority of the monuments at first sight seem to have been put up to demonstrate political power and may be interpreted as representations of the kings (Imamkulu, Taşcı, Gezbeli, Sirkeli and Hemite) or of local dynasts (Karabel and Manisa). This applies especially to the reliefs of Gezbeli and Hemite, which in their overall conception are so designed that the political element seems to dominate over the religious. Upon closer examination, however, we must admit that this explanation applies only perhaps to some of the Imperial Age monuments; those monuments in which the kings are shown in an attitude of prayer or as gods appear to have been erected with religious motives in mind. A further indication of religious function is the fact that the monuments are often associated with water in the form of a spring or a river.
1 Selected literature concerning these monuments: Garstang, J., The Land of the Hittites (London 1910)Google Scholar; idem, The Hittite Empire (London 1929); Bittel, K., “Die Felsbilder von Yazılıkaya”, 1st. Forsch. 5 (1934Google Scholar); idem, “Die Reliefs am Karabel bei Nif (Kemal Paşa)”, AfO. 13 (1940), 181–93; idem, “Karabel”, MDOG. 98 (1967), 5–25; Gelb, I. J., Hittite Hieroglyphic Monuments (Chicago 1939)Google Scholar; Bossert, H. Th., Altanatolien (Berlin 1942Google Scholar); idem, “Das hethitische Felsrelief bei Hanyeri (Gezbeli)”, Or. n.s. 23 (1954), 129–47; Riemschneider, M., Die Welt der Hethiter (Stuttgartc. 1959Google Scholar); Vieyra, M., Hittite Art, 2300–750 B.C. (London 1955Google Scholar); Akurgal, E. and Hirmer, M., The Art of the Hittites (London 1962Google Scholar).
2 Bittel, , MDOG. 98 (1967), 17 note 22Google Scholar.
3 Bossert, , Altanatolien, 57Google Scholar.
4 Barnett, R. D., “The Phrygian Rock Facades and the Hittite Monuments”, Bibliotheca Orientalis X (1953), 78 ff.Google Scholar; Neve, P., Regenkult-Anlagen in Boğazköy-Hattusa, 1st. Mitt. Beih. 5 (1971), 34 ff.Google Scholar; Ussishkin, D., “Hollows, ‘Cup-Marks’, and Hittite Stone Monuments”, AS. XXV (1975), 85–103Google Scholar.
5 First published by Burney, C. A. and Lawson, G. R. J. (“Urartian Relief at Adilcevaz, on Lake Van, and a Rock Relief from the Karasu, near Birecik”, AS. VIII [1958], 218Google Scholar and PL. XXXIVb) after a photo of the geologists Krummenacher and Wilson. Orthmann, W. (Untersuchungen zur späthethitischen Kunst [Bonn 1971], 51, 258 ffGoogle Scholar. and Ph. 14 f), too, reproduced the same photo, which was taken under unfavourable illumination and does not show details distinctly. For some further notes about this relief see Gonnet-Baǧana, H., “Le disque solaire hittite d'apres les documents archéologiques”, Anatolica XI (1976), 191 fGoogle Scholar. with Fig. 18; Bittel, K., Die Hethiter. Die Kunst Anatoliens vom Ende des 3. bis zum Anfang des 1. Jahrtausends vor Christus (München 1976), 284 fGoogle Scholar.
6 Surveys were conducted together with Mr H. Candemir, Director of the Archaeological Museum at Gaziantep. We further owe thanks to Professor O. R. Gurney for his critical reading of this manuscript and for valuable suggestions.
7 For the exact position see map Türkiye (ed. by Harta Genel Müdürlüǧü) 1:200,000 sheet G-XI Birecik (Ankara 1948), Is – 105. The site is situated on the left bank approximately 50 m. above river-level at the entrance to the Karasu canyon nearly 3 km. before the juncture with the Euphrates (on the map the canyon is marked by a hachure near the altitude sign 660).
8 G. E. Hutchinson, “Mammalia in the Hunting Scene from the Dura Mithraeum” (Appendix to Cumont, F., “The Dura Mithraeum”), in: Mithraic Studies, Proceedings of the First International Congress of Mithraic Studies, Vol. 1., ed. by Hinnels, J. R. (Manchester 1975), 211 fGoogle Scholar. with Figs. 13.2 and 13.3.
9 For the different types of antlers and stags represented see Güterbock, H.-G., “Siegel aus Boğazköy II”, AfO. Beiheft 7 (1942), 15 fGoogle Scholar. and the extensive collection by von Brandenstein, C.-G., “Hethitische Götter nach Bildbeschreibungen in Keilschrifttexten”, MVAG. XLVI (1943), 78 ffGoogle Scholar.
10 Cf. the Late Hittite relief of the tutelary god of the wild life and the hunt at Kültepe (Orthmann, op. cit. [n.5] 258 ff. with pl. 386; Bittel, op. cit. [n.5] Fig. 321).
11 For the sun sign and esp. the winged solar disk see e.g. Frankfort, H., Cylinder Seals (London 1935), 208 ff.Google Scholar; Bittel, K./Naumann, R./Otto, H., Yazılıkaya. Architektur, Fekbilder, Inschriften und Kleinfunde [= WVDOG 61], Leipzig 1941, 130 ff.Google Scholar; Beran, Th., “Das Zeichen ‘Sonne’ in der hethitischen Hieroglyphenschrift”, JKF. 2 (1965), 63–69Google Scholar; idem. “Zum Datum des Felsreliefs von Yazılıkaya”, ZA 67 (1965), 268 ff. 270 n. 29; idem, Die hethitische Glyptik von Boazköy I [= WVDOG. 76], Berlin 1967, 71; Otten, H., “Zur Datierung und Bedeutung des Felsheiligtums von Yazılıkaya”, ZA LVIII (1967), 226 ff.Google Scholar; Gonnet-Bagana, op. cit. (n.5), 167–96.
12 Orthmann, op. cit. (n.5), pls. 26a, 33e, 41b and 56c.
13 Ibid., pls. passim.
14 Ibid., 156 and pls. 2c, 4a and 57d.
15 Concerning the names of the God on a stag and his function see Przeworski, St., “Notes d'archeologie syrienne et hittite, IV. Le culte du cerf en Anatolie”, Syria XXI (1940), 62–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Güterbock, op. cit. (n.9), 15 ff.; idem, “Hethitische Götterdarstellungen und Götternamen”,Belleten VII (1943), 273–293 and 295–317; von Brandenstein, op. cit. (n.9), 78 ff.; Laroche, E., “Études sur les hieroglyphes hittites”, Syria 31 (1954), 99–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar; ten Cate, Ph. H. J. Houwink, The Luwian Population Groups of Lycia and Cilicia Aspera During the Hellenistic Period (Leiden 1961), 128 ff.Google Scholar; Goetze, A., JCS XVIII (1964), 91Google Scholar (Remarks to Otten, H., Keilschrifttexte aus Boghazköi 12[= WVDOG 77], Berlin 1963, 60Google Scholar); Laroche, E., Les norm hittites [= Etudes linguistiques 4], Paris 1966, 289 ff. and 295Google Scholar; Carruba, O., “Anatolico Runda”, SMEA 5 (1968), 31–41Google Scholar; lastly Kammenhuber, A., “Die hethitische Göttin Inar”, ZA LXVI (1976), 70 ffGoogle Scholar.
16 Orthmann (op. cit. [n.5], 258–63) examined the style of different presentations of tutelary gods in the Late Hittite period including the representations of the tutelary god of wild life and hunt at Haci Bebekli, Karasu and Malatya and his different attributes.
17 Akurgal, E., Späthethitische Bildkunst (Ankara 1949), 108 n. 139a and 123 n. 211Google Scholar.
18 Orthmann, op. cit. (n.5), 51 and 221; Burney and Lawson (op. cit. [n.5], 218) suggested a dating of the relief to 1000–750 B.C.
19 Bossert, Altanatolien, pl. 570; von Brandenstein, op. cit. (n.9), 79 f.; Akurgal and Hirmer, op. cit. (n.1), 52 and pl. 47. The relief is now in the Archaeological Museum, Ankara (Inv. No. 12467).
20 Bossert, Altanatolien, pl. 775; von Brandenstein, op. cit. (n.9), 81 and pl. III 10; Riemschneider, op. cit. (n.1), pl. 49; Akurgal and Hirmer, op. cit. (n.1), pl. 104. The orthostate is to be found in the Archaeological Museum, Ankara (Inv. No. 12249).
21 The orthostate (h. 1·19 m.; w. 0·65 m.; d. 0·39 m.) was brought to the Archaeological Museum Adana in 1932 (Inv. No. 1297). Dr O. A. Taşyürek enabled us to study this monument and helped us generously. Literature: Garstang, J., “A New Royal Hittite Monument from near Marash in Northern Syria”, LAAA. 4 (1912), 126 fGoogle Scholar. and pl. XXIII; idem, The Hittite Empire (London 1929), 307 f. and fig. 45; Bossert, Altanatolien, pl. 817; von Brandenstein, op. cit. (n.9), 78 f.; Akurgal, op. cit. (n.17), 5 with n. 37; Orthmann, op. cit. (n.5), 90 and pl. 14a. For the position of Haci Bebekli see the map Türkiye, op. cit. (n.7), sheet G–X Maraşs (1947), Is – 96.
22 Garstang, (The Hittite Empire, 307 fGoogle Scholar.) interpreted the animal as a bull; so did Demircioǧlu, H., Der Gott auf dem Stier (Berlin 1939), 129 n. 339Google Scholar. First recognized as a stag by von Brandenstein (op. cit. [n.9], 78 f.) and Akurgal (op. cit. [n.17], 150 No. 39).
23 Ussishkin, op. cit. (n.4) 86–9.
24 Ibid., 85–105.
