<<

EXTERNAL TEXTUAL SOURCES  NEOHITTITE STATES

Kenneth A. Kitchen University of Liverpool

1. Timescale

Th e narratives of 1–2 Kings include some three main direct mentions of “” in their narratives, two under , and one under the Omrides (ca. 970–840 BCE), in somewhat over a century. In diff ering contexts, two of these allusions link Egypt and the Hittites in one con- tinuum each time. In all three cases, the Hittites concerned are those now termed ‘Neo-Hittites’; in North and South-East they spoke and wrote in Late Luwian with Luwian hieroglyphs, the so-called ‘Hittite hieroglyphs’, and drew upon the old imperial Hittite cultural tra- dition. Th ese states and inscriptions lasted from ca. 1180/70 BCE down to ca. 650 at latest, most having been eliminated by by ca. 700.

2. Extent and Nature of Textual Sources

From the later 19th century down to the present, ever-increasing num- bers of the so-called Hittite hieroglyphic inscriptions on walls, stelae and statues have been discovered, and as rock inscriptions in these areas. Scattered portable examples have also turned up as far away as Assyria and in Babylon. Th eir Late is Indo-European (like Hittite and Luwian). Th e pictorial script expresses syl- lables (mainly consonant + vowels a, i, or u), alphabetic a, i, and u, and closed syllables by adding an “r-tick” to consonant + a-signs. Th ere are over 160 logograms or word-signs, to which syllabic (phonetic) signs can be added, to spell out part or all of a word.

A massive three-part corpus containing almost all the accessible inscriptions (other than seals, for separate treatment) with introduc- tions, translations and notes, and a volume of plates, has been issued in exemplary fashion by J. D. Hawkins,1 along with the detailed

1 J. D. Hawkins, Corpus of Hieroglyphic Luwian Inscriptions, I, Parts 1–3 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2000). 366 kenneth a. kitchen publication of the texts by Çambel.2 In this corpus we have over 220 inscriptions from 10 main Neo-Hittite kingdoms, besides a shower of minor fragments. Th is is about ten times the amount of early West-Semitic monumental texts (Old , Phoenician, Hebrew/ Moabite) currently available, and is an important resource of the fi rst rank for the culture and local history of North Syria and SE Anatolia ca. 1180–680 BCE, and for the whole of Levantine cultures (including biblical) during that epoch.3

3. The Historical and Cultural Backdrop

When the central power-base of the great Hittite Empire in central Anatolia ceased to function ca. 1180/70 BCE, and the line of its Great Kings ceased to rule, then the rulers of two of its major dominions set themselves up as more localised Great Kings instead, each with their group of vassal-rulers. Th us, in SE Anatolia, along the Taurus Moun- tains and into Cilicia, the Great Kings of Tarhuntassa (later, ) ruled over a series of vassals, 24 of them by the time of Shalmane- ser III. Far away from Mesopotamia, and within mountain-fastnesses, this ‘mini-empire’ could long remain independent of either Phrygian threats from the north, or Assyrian interference from the south-east, until well into the 1st millennium. Th e Great Kings of initially laid claim to dominion over several local neighbours: , and to the north; briefl y over Masuwari (later Bit- Adini) and Guzan out east of the ; over the future Ya’diya/ Sam’al westward; and over Unqi/Patina and Hamath southward. How- ever, between about 1000 and 920, these all broke away as independent states, and the rulers of Carchemish changed style to become simply “King of Carchemish” – aft er some 200 years, the ‘Great’ had gone, with the end of this second mini-empire. Th e growing infl ux of (and control by) was at once also a factor in this change and in turn led to the very brief rise (ca. 1020–990) of a third mini-empire, that of -Zobah (based on Bit-Rehob) under the of ’s

2 H. Çambel, Corpus of Hieroglyphic Luwian Inscriptions, II (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1999). 3 K. A. Kitchen, “Th e Hieroglyphic Inscriptions of the Neo-Hittite States (ca. 1200–700 BC): A Fresh Source of Background to the ,” in R. P. Gordon and J. C. A. de Moor (eds.), Th e Old Testament in Its World (OTS, 52; Leiden: Brill, 2005).