Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m42fx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-21T16:23:26.888Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Hollows, “Cup-Marks”, and Hittite Stone Monuments1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 December 2013

David Ussishkin
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Hollows and “cup-marks”, i.e. small round depressions of various sizes, are associated with a number of Hittite and Neo-Hittite stone monuments. They are carved on the surface of the monuments and in the case of rock reliefs they are cut in the surface of the adjacent rock. This phenomenon, hitherto hardly noticed, is not accidental, and undoubtedly the hollows and cup-marks had a cultic function. It seems that various substances, probably liquids, were placed in them as part of the rituals practiced in connection with the monuments in question. In one or two cases the cup-marks are too small to have contained anything and they probably had solely a symbolic meaning.

I had the opportunity of studying these monuments during tours in Turkey in 1972. However, I could not visit all the known monuments, and thus the data presented here are probably incomplete. Although the appearance of hollows and cup-marks in connection with monuments seems to be a wide-spread phenomenon, it has to be stressed that many monuments are without them. I could find no hollows or cup-marks associated with the relief of the King's Gate at Bogazköy, in Eflatun Pinar, Gavurkale and the gate of Alaca Hüyük, on the statue at Fasillar, or on the bulls' base of the statue at Karatepe.

Type
Research Article
Information
Anatolian Studies , Volume 25 , December 1975 , pp. 85 - 103
Copyright
Copyright © The British Institute at Ankara 1975

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

2 Cf. Garstang, J., The Land of the Hittites, London 1910, pp. 149–52, Pl. XLVIIGoogle Scholar; Gelb, I. J., Hittite Hieroglyphic Monuments, Chicago 1939, pp. 14, 29 no. 22, Pl. XXXVIIIGoogle Scholar; Bossert, H. Th., Altanatolien, Berlin 1942, nos. 550–2Google Scholar; Akurgal, E. and Hirmer, M., The Art of the Hittites, London 1962, Pls. 100–1Google Scholar.

3 Garstang, J., LAAA 24 (1937), pp. 64–6, Pls. XVIII–XIXGoogle Scholar; Gelb, , Hittite Hieroglyphic Monuments, p. 37 no. 48, Pls. LXVIII–LXIXGoogle Scholar.

4 Güterbock, H. G., LAAA 24 (1937), pp. 66–8Google Scholar.

5 Bossert, Altanatolien, nos. 553–4; Akurgal and Hirmer, op. cit., p. 109, Pls. XX, 98; Bittel, K. in Bittel, K. et al. (eds.), Anatolian Studies presented to H. G. Güterbock on the Occasion of his 65th Birthday, Istanbul, 1974, pp. 65–72Google Scholar.

6 Cf. note 3, above.

7 Cf. plans in Bittel, K., Naumann, R. and Otto, H., Yazılıkaya, Architektur, Felsbilder, Inschriften und Kleinfunde, Leipzig 1941Google Scholar (WVDOG no. 61), Tafeln 37–40, and photograph in Tafel 3 no. 4. The caption of the photograph reads: “Künstliche Mulde in einen Felsen vor der Hauptkammer”.

8 For photographs of the gate and the lions cf. Puchstein, O., Boghasköi, Die Bauwerke, Leipzig 1912 (WVDOG no. 19), p. 75, Abb. 52, Tafeln 23–4Google Scholar; Bittel, K., Boğazköy, Die Kleinfunde der Grabungen 1906–1912, Part I, Leipzig 1937 (WVDOG no. 60), Tafel 7Google Scholar; Bossert, Altanatolien, nos. 472–3; Vieyra, M., Hittite Art, 2300–750 B.C., London 1955, Pl. 12Google Scholar; Akurgal and Hirmer, op. cit., Pls. XVI–XVII.

9 The stone-slab containing the paws of the right-hand lion was found in situ when Puchstein cleared the gate. The stone-slab with the paws of the left-hand lion was restored by him to its original position (Puchstein, ; Boghasköi, p. 74Google Scholar). Thus the small stones which can be observed beneath the left-hand stone-slab were probably placed by Puchstein to secure the latter in its place.

10 von Luschan, F. et al. , Ausgrabungen in Sendschirli IV, pp. 288–9, 362–9Google Scholar, Abbildungen 194, 261–8, Tafel LXIV; Bossert, Altanatolien, nos. 901–4; Vieyra, Hittite Art, Pl. 76; Orthmann, W., Untersuchungen zur späthethitischen Kunst, Bonn 1971, p. 545 no. E/1, Tafel 62Google Scholar: c–e.

11 Frankfort, H., The Art and Architecture of the Ancient Orient, London 1954, p. 180Google Scholar; Orthmann, W.apud Bittel, K. et al. (eds.), Vorderasiatische Archäologie, Studien und Aufsätze (Festschrift Anton Moortgat), Berlin 1964, pp. 221–9Google Scholar.

12 The cup-marks are indicated on the drawing of the base published in Ausgrabungen in Sendschirli IV, p. 289, Abb. 194.

13 SirWoolley, C. L., Carchemish, Part III, London 1952, p. 159, Pl. B34a–bGoogle Scholar; Orthmann, op. cit. (n. 10), p. 501, no. Bb/2.

14 Woolley, C. L., Carchemish, Part II, London 1921, Pls. B25, B26aGoogle Scholar; Carchemish, Part III, pp. 199, 260, Pls. 47a, B54b; Bossert, Altanatolien, no. 830; Vieyra, Hittite Art, Pl. 57; Akurgal and Hirmer, op. cit., Pl. 109; Orthmann, op. cit. (n. 10), p. 512 no. H/11, Taf. 32: c, e.

15 Carchemish, Part III, pp. 192, 243, Pls. B53a, B54a; Orthmann, op. cit. (n. 10), p. 509 no. F/17, Taf. 32: a–b, d.

16 Orthmann (n. 11, above); Hawkins, J. D., AS XXII (1972), pp. 96–7Google Scholar.

17 Dr. A. Kempinski drew my attention to the possible comparison and parallelism between the rituals associated with our hollows in the water-shrines and Hittite rituals which are associated with the underworld and with ritual-pits dug in the ground near the water. Cf. Vieyra, M., RHA 69 (1961), pp. 47–55Google Scholar; Hoffner, H. A., Journal of Biblical Literature 86 (1967), pp. 385–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar. On water in Hittite cult cf. Neve, P., Regenkult-Anlagen in Boğazköy-Hattuša. İstanbuler Mitteilungen, Beiheft 5 (1971), pp. 34 ffGoogle Scholar.

18 Bittel, K. et al. , Die Hethitischen Grabfunde von Osmankayasi, Berlin 1958 (WVDOG no. 71), p. 4, Taf. III no. 2Google Scholar.

19 Bittel, K., Hattusha, The Capital of the Hittites, New York 1970, pp. 108–11Google Scholar.

20 Puchstein, , Boghasköí, p. 74Google Scholar: “Die Plinthen scheinen auch als Sitz gedient zu haben; sie … weisen oben südlich eine, nördlich drei Höhlungen von Tropfwasser auf”.

21 Bittel, , Grabfunde von Osmankayasi, p. 4Google Scholar.

22 Bittel, , Boğazköy, Die Kleinfunde, p. 11, Taf. 8 nos. 2–3Google Scholar.

23 On the relief and its base cf. Carchemish, Part III, pp. 159, 241–2, Pls. 29, 30, 31a, B33; von der Osten, H. H., Explorations in Hittite Asia Minor–1929, Chicago 1930 (OIC no. 8), p. 75, Fig. 74Google Scholar; Bossert, Altanatolien, no. 857; Vieyra, Hittite Art, Pl. 49; Akurgal and Hirmer, op. cit., Pl. 116; Orthmann, op. cit. (n. 10), p. 501 no. Bb/1, Taf. 23: a.

24 The base is made of limestone and not of basalt as stated by Woolley, in Carchemish, Part III, p. 159Google Scholar.

25 Carchemish, Part III, pp. 159, 171, Pls. 29, 30, B33a (right-hand corner).

26 Carchemish, Part II, pp. 93–4 and Fig. 27.

27 Ibid., pp. 92–3, Pls. 12, B27a. It seems relevant to add that in Tell Halaf as well offering-tables were placed in front of monuments erected at the entrance to the bit-ḫilani palace. Cf. Freiherr von Oppenheim, M. et al. , Tell Halaf II, Die Bauwerke, Berlin 1950, pp. 61, 64, Tafeln 5, 10–11, Plan 5Google Scholar.

28 Cf., for example, cup-marks on megalithic tombs in Israel in Anati, E., Palestine Before the Hebrews, London 1963, Plates on pp. 278, 281Google Scholar.