Kulturgeschichten: Altorientalistische Studien fur Volkert Haas zum 65. Geburtstag.
His friends, colleagues, and pupils dedicated the Festschrift under review to Berliner Hittitologist Volkert Haas on the occasion of his sixty-fifth birthday. The volume includes thirty-seven articles submitted by forty-two scholars from various fields, including Mesopotamian archaeology (represented by R. Dittmann and A. Green and A. Hausleiter), Assyriology (H. Freydank, S. Lundstrom, M. S. Maul, J.-W. Meyer, H. Neumann, J. Renger, and G. J. Selz), and biblical studies (M. Kockert and H. Pfeiffer).
The largest number of contributions, however, focus on ancient Anatolian studies, primarily on Hittitology, as this has always been the main interest of the honoree of this volume. Among these, four articles address Anatolian archaeology: S. Alaura (pp. 1-17) reconsiders the terra-cotta fragments of bull figure(s) from H. Winckler's early excavations at Bogazkoy / Hattusa and their unknown find spot, which the author believes to have been a storage room for "unfinished or damaged" cult objects in Hittite times (p. 2). She also refers to the Hittite written sources concerning damaged cult objects; cf. also O. Soysal, Hethitica 14 (1999): 131f., 132 n. 55a.
P. Neve's brief article (pp. 291-93) presents some thoughts on the architectonic structure of Eflatunpinar. Sadly, this famous spring-sanctuary situated in the modern town of Beysehir had over the years been converted into part of a fish farm, but it has become of current interest thanks to the rescue and restoration excavations led by Turkish archaeologist A. S. Ozenir, who also keeps the scholarly community informed with his systematic publications; see most recently 2000 Yili Anadolu Medeniyetleri Muzesi Konferanslart (Ankara, 2001), 35ff., and Akten des IV. Internationalen Kongresses fur Hethitologie, ed. G. Wilhelm (= StBoT 45, Wiesbaden, 2001), 532ff, Recent interpretation of Eflatunpinar would indicate that it was one of the sacred pools or dams built in the time of the later Hittite kings Tuthaliya IV and Suppiluliuma II (pp. 292f.). There is also a large mound situated near this sanctuary, and the find of a small fragment with hieroglyphic Luwian signs suggests that there was also a royal inscription at Eflatunpinar, like those found at Yalburt and elsewhere. Thus, current data, including the location of Eflatunpinar in the southwestern part of the Konya Plain, would indicate that the site is another geographical, or even possibly historical, link to the lost Kingdom of Tarhuntassa.
Additional studies on archaeological topics are contributed by B. Brentjes on the region of Urfa (pp. 59-72), and by H. Kuhne on Gavur Kalesi near Ankara (pp. 227-43).
Philological contributions on diverse topics of Hittitology comprise a great deal of the Festschrift. Among the historical studies, G. M. Beckman (pp. 51-58) edits CTH 655 in transliteration and translation, with commentary. Although this composition is not of a historical nature, since the early years of Hittitology it has always been one of the most frequently referred-to sources for Old Hittite history. The join proposed here, KBo 3.63 + HFAC 40 (p. 54), is essential because of the mention of Mursili I and Hantili I in the same context (HFAC 40:2'-4'). This relates this text directly to Hantili I. Therefore, speculation about whether the king Hantili appearing in CTH 655 should be identified with the second ruler bearing this name is now definitely ruled out. The subject of the entire text seems to be a purification ritual against cultic impurities caused by Hantili I. Knowledge of this important composition can be furthered through some additional unpublished fragments. Bo 3243 was already cited by C. Kuhne, ZA 67 (1977): 258. Further, three tiny pieces found in the Bogazkoy excavations of 1967-69 have recently been identified as pertaining to CTH 655, and will be treated in a future issue of ZA.
H. Klengel summarizes and re-examines the role of the rulers of Halab and Karkamis during the New Kingdom (pp. 191-96). I. Singer discusses Hittite history of the thirteenth century B.C. in view of the fate of the Hittite capital Hattusa and the rising political power of Tarhuntassa (pp. 395-403). P. Taracha deals with Mycenaeans, Ahhiyawa, and the Hittites and their relations to western Anatolia based on the royal letter to an Ahhiyawan king (KUB 26.91--CTH 183) (pp. 417-22).
Cult and Religion: A. Archi examines and compares the rituals of Emar that contain Anatolian elements with the rituals of Hatti (pp. 19-28). D. Bawanypeck and S. Gorke treat the ritual for the Stormgod of the Meadow as part of CTH 652 (pp. 29-50). S. De Martino edits two small fragments of religious content from the Old Hittite milieu (CTH 650) (pp. 73-80). A. Gilan presents a detailed study of combat games in Hittite festivals, a topic that has attracted many scholars over the years since H. Ehelolf's first study in 1925 (pp. 113-24). M. Popko deals with the priests of Arinna, a leading city in the Hattian cult (pp. 327-31). M. Salvini and M.-C. Tremouille provide a photo, handcopy, and text edition of a new fragment of the Telipinu-Festival in Hanhana and Kasha (CTH 638) from a private collection in Italy (pp. 377-82). R. Strauss proposes an interpretation of a Hurrian conjuration in the Ammihatna ritual KBo 5.2 ii 22-27 (CTH 471), the subject of her dissertation in progress (pp. 405-16).
The oracular institution as an essential part of the religious life of the Hittites is discussed here in two studies: J. Orlamunde investigates the system of KIN-oracles on the basis of the New Hittite text KUB 5.1 + (CTH 561), part of her current dissertation (pp. 295-311). The reviewer's publication in ZA 90 (2000): 85ff., a discussion of the system of KIN-oracles on the basis of the Old Hittite oracle report KBo 18.151 in letter format (CTH 827), seems not to have been available to her; on the other hand, Th. P. J. van den Hout has utilized it for his study of the older, mostly Middle Hittite, oracle records (pp. 423-40). He agrees with the Old Hittite dating of KBo 18.151, obviously the oldest sample of Hittite divination to date. He also discusses the divination outcome italuwa bait in rev. 19 of the same document, and argues that italuwa here may be taken, as elsewhere, as the very poorly attested pl. nom.-acc. neut. form *idaluwa rather than as sg. italu, with the enclitic particle of direct speech = wa. However, another sentence expressing the result of a KIN-divination, from the Middle Hittite letter KuT 49 obv. 7-8: idalu=wa dan nu=war=at=kan EGIR-pa [.sup.d]Halmassuitti "The evil has been taken and (given) back to Halmassuitta" still allows the possibility of interpreting italu=wa bait as "The evil has gone" in quoted speech (at least on the syntactical level), as maintained in ZA 90: 91. Most recently, a further Middle Hittite (bird) oracle fragment (KBo 22.263) has been identified by the same contributor in NABU 2002/42.
Focusing on society and economy, H. A. Hoffner contributes an informative summary of the role of merchants and trade in the Hittite Kingdom (pp. 179-89).
The second largest number of articles pertains to Hurritology, most treating the grammar and lexicography of Hurrian and Urartian: M. Giorgieri discusses the equation of Hurr, telippa and Hitt. nu- ... maknut in the bilingual KBo 32.14 iv 15-16 / iii 14-15 (pp. 125-38). Chr. Girbal comments on the independent pronouns of the 1. pers. sg. in Urartean (pp. 139-44). J. Hazenbos studies the syntax of some modal forms in Hurrian (pp. 171-77). In a non-linguistic essay, J. Klinger makes observations on the Hurrian tradition and on the Hurrian text corpus from Hattusa (pp. 197-208). As he points out (p. 202), the available written sources have not yet revealed any evidence for Hurrian influence in Old Hittite times, either in traditional literature or in the state cult. The long-held speculation that one may detect an established cult of the Stormgod (= Tessob) of Halab already during the Old Kingdom has been recently opposed also by D. Schwemer, Wettergottgestalten Mesopotamiens und Nordsyriens im Zeitalter der Keilschriftkulturen (Wiesbaden, 2001), 495. A similar view had already been maintained by the reviewer in Hethitica 14: 122f. n. 26.
In a long article, D. Prechel and T. Richter deliver some thoughts on Hurrian incantations in the Old Babylonian tradition (pp. 333-72). I. Wegner discusses the Hurrian words selli "house" and parhi "courtyard" (pp. 441-47). For selli one should also see J. Fincke, AoF 21 (1994): 341f, with n. 30. The only useful information available about the obscure Hittite noun suwanti(ya)- (pp. 445f.) is that it denotes an object which is a (body?) part of animals used in magic rituals. In the ritual of Salasu against sorcery (KBo 19.145 iii 43-47--CTH *788) the suwanti(ya)- is manipulated in connection with the "release of a bound person" (i.e., freeing a bewitched person from a spell). The expression ishiyandan la--"to untie the bound one" (iii 45'f.) might reveal the function and nature of the suwanti(ya)- that it probably serves to bind or to tie. After it was "taken (away?)" the bound persons can be released. Therefore, string-shaped body parts of animals like the tail, or better, intestine(s), are conceivable. Note also the phrase ANA SA.G[U.sub.4] suwanti[n ...] in KBo 24.110(+) iv 4', in which suwanti(ya)- stands in connection with SA "sinew." G. Wilhelm deals with the Hurrian word naipti "pasture" (pp. 449-53).
The only contribution on Hieroglyphic Luwian is offered by A. M. Dincol and B. Dincol (pp. 81-84), who determine the hieroglyphic sign for the cuneiform designation LU [.sup.GIS]SUKUR. This spear- or lance-like sign appears on the seals Bo 84/573, Bo 85/385, and Bo 87/134; the authors propose to transliterate it with Latin LANCEA "lance," and as part of a profession with LANCEARIUS "lanceman / lance carrier." The other spear- or lance-like sign (L. 173) has already been identified by S. Herbordt as the equivalent of cuneiform [.sup.GIS]MESETU and has been named Latin HASTA "spear." Since we usually translate [.sup.GIS]MESETU as "lance," but [.sup.GIS]SUKUR as "spear," it seems necessary to invert the proposed designations for these two hieroglyphic signs. The implement L. 173 "lance" is exactly the same as the one depicted on the Alacahoyuk reliefs. By its shape it is not suitable for throwing, but rather for officials or royal guards to carry on for ceremonial occasions (cf. Latin lancea). The difference between the weapons can be clearly observed on one of the friezes of Alacahoyuk where they appear together; see M. J. Mellink, Anadolu / Anatolia 14 (1970): 16f. (drawing) and pl. V, fig. g (photo). Further observations on (LU) [.sup.GIS]MESETI and (LU) [.sup.GIS]SUKUR are now in BiOr 60 (2003): 42-43.
As his bibliography (pp. xiii-xxiv) shows, since 1969 Volkert Haas has produced nearly two hundred publications (including books, articles, reviews, contributions to reference books, etc.), not only on Hittitology and Hurritology, but more broadly on ancient Near Eastern Studies as well. Therefore this well-done and nicely produced Festschrift is a fitting tribute to him, with its rich contents covering numerous ancient Near Eastern topics.
THE ORIENTAL INSTITUTE, CHICAGO
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Publication:||The Journal of the American Oriental Society|
|Article Type:||Book Review|
|Date:||Jul 1, 2003|
|Previous Article:||Tosefta Bava Kamma: A Structural and Analytic Commentary with a Mishna-Tosefta Synopsis.|
|Next Article:||Fingierte Welten in der agyptischen Literatur des 2. Jahrtausends v. Chr.: Grenzuberschreitung, Reisemotiv und Fiktionalitat.|