UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA

MEDICAL CENTER LIBRARY

SAN FRANCISCO

HISTORY COLLECTION

ART OF THE WORLD

NON-EUROPEAN CULTURES

THE HISTORICAL, SOCIOLOGICAL

AND RELIGIOUS BACKGROUNDS

THE ART OF GREECE

Its

Origins in the Mediterranean and Near East

by

EKREM AKURGAL

Mis
CROWN PUBLISHERS
H
->

/i

INC.,

NEW Y ORK

Translated by

Wayne Dynes

i - Assurnasirpal n ( 883-8 j$ B.C.) hunting lions.

Alabaster relief from the Northwest Palace at Kalkhu (Nimrud)
British Museum. Height 92 cm.
Cf pp. 30 jf.

Frontispiece: plate

FIRST PUBLISHED IN

966 HOLLE VERLAG

966

GmbH, BADEN-BADEN, GERMANY

FIRST PUBLISHED IN GREAT BRITAIN IN 1 96 8

ENGLISH TRANSLATION
1 968 BY METHUEN & CO. LTD
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CATALOG CARD NUMBER: 68-9056
PRINTED IN HOLLAND

CONTENTS
Lists of plates (8). List of figures (9).

Acknowledgements

(10).

FOREWORD

13-14

PART ONE: THE ORIENT

I.

NEO-ASSYRIAN ART

System of Near Eastern

16-48

art (16). Five stylistic phases. Fundamentals of 'conceptual' ap-

proach (16). Attitudes and gestures. Ideal representation (17). Perpendicular positioning.
'Escape' from conceptual principle. Third dimension and composition. Horizontal perspective
(21). Progressive development. Threshold of discovery of perspective (22). Causes of failure.

Political and social structure (25).

Art

Art in service of state.

of narration. Continuous narration. (27)

style (28). Obelisk of Assurnasirpal

Archaic

Harmony. Flat

Classical style (30).

Changes
Plastic

powerful contours (30).

Stylistic

and

sty ligation (31).

New compositions. Transformations (37). New features of lion

New warrior types. Activity in provinces (39).

Transitional style (32).

(37).

'

II (28).

relief,

iconographic features (30). Chariots (31). Lions.

Assyrian art as Classical model (2 5 )

in chariot details (38).

style

(39).

Monumentality and

plasticity.

Styligation of knee-cap (40).

Coiffure (40). Modification of lion type (41).

Realistic style (41). Change in hair

Change

style.

in lion type (42).

Egyptian

lion

combat (43). From schematism to

naturalism (44). Climax of realism (44). Spatial depth and composition (45). Great battle
scene. Design and composition (46).

form. Climax of Assyrian sculpture (43). Lions

Assyrian architecture (46). Four

II.

centres.

in

Nimrud. 'Fort of Sargon\ Nineveh

(47).

BABYLONIAN ART

Achievements of ancient
stone

(49).

49-52

Near Eastern peoples

Hanging gardens

(50).

(49). Literature, art

City walls

(51).

Ziggurat.

and

religion.

Boundary

Ishtar Gate.

Persian

conquest (52).

III.

ARAMAEAN ART

Aramaean

head-dress (53).

53~66
Spiral

curls,

curl by

the

ear (53).

Secular outlook (53).

Kilamuwa relief (54). Barrakab relief (a). Stele of princess. Aramaean

tiara (56). Hair style. Fold rendering (59). Modification of Hittite animal figures (60).
Aramaean- Hittite lion figures (61). Aramaean-Hittite griffin. Flowering of Aramaean

Funerary

stelae.

art (62). Chariot relieffrom Sakfegd^u (62). Other Aramaean-Hittite carvings (65). Role of

Aramaeans

in architecture.

NEO-HITTITE ART

IV.

67-142

Antecedents of Syro-Hittite-Luvian complex (67). Spread of Aramaeans. 'Neo-Hittite

art' (67). Hieroglyphic script.

Architecture. Bit Hilani. Niqmepa's Palace

Building]. Building

(71). Hilani

Minoan- Mycenaean

(69).

Hilanis

buildings.

(73). Hilani

III

II,

Palace (75). Flowering of hilani tradition. Sakfego\u hilani (75). Tell

Halaf

features.
I.

hilani.

Upper
Abdi-

ilimu (77). Spread of hilani (78). Neo-Hittite building elements. History of orthostat (79).

Other architectural elements. Base (80). Bases from Zincirli and Tell Tainat. Carchemish
type in Assyria (85).

Furniture fragments

in

Animal

ivory.

pedestals

(86).

Portal

animals (87). Lion base from Carchemish. Columns. Necking rings (88). Capital. Carchemish capital with leaf crown and abacus (89).

Ivory imitations.

Ionic

capital (93).

Phoenician capital (93).

(94).

Neo-Hittite sculpture (94). Three styles. Early Neo-Hittite style (1100-900/850)

Empire tradition. Malatya orthostat relief (9 5). Dating. Assyrian elements.

Middle Neo-Hittite
elements.

style

(900-750/730)

Assyrian elements. Neo-Hittite hair

from Malatya

Tell

Syro-Hittite and Mitannian style

(98).

Neo-Hittite costume. Works

(99).

Middle Neo-Hittite sculpture from

scenes (100).

(96).
style

Zincirli (100). Criteria for dating chariot

Dating. Middle Neo-Hittite lions (103). Zincirli

Ain Dara

lions (105).

Middle Neo-Hittite

lions.

Hama

lions (105).

griffin head.

Middle Neo-Hittite sculpture from Carchemish

(106). Anatolian Hittite features

Use of chariot s^nes for dating (109). Katuwas = Pisiris.

Sculpture from Tell Halaf. Middle Neo-Hittite traits in Tell Halaf sculpture (1 1 1).

(107).

Two

Assyrian

different style trends.

traits.

Syro-Phoenician traits (113). Dating. Carvings from Tell Halaf. Anklets

(116). Coiffure (116). Flame-like styligation.

Small finds as elements

in dating (117). Tell

Halafgoldplaquette. Two Phrygian bronze vessels {1 1 8). Period of small orthostats (760-7 30).
Late Neo-Hittite style. Araras reliefs (121). Assyrian elements. Syro-Phoenician
elements (122). Links with Zincirli and Sakfego^u (122). Origin of Araras reliefs.
Aramaeanizing Hittite carvings. Funerary stelae (127). Stele of a couple. Stele with
family scene (129). Stele of boy with woman (129). Attributes of various professions (131).
Dating (132). Rock relief at Ivri%. Hittite elements (135).
Karatepe sculptures (135). Phoenician

Two

styles.

style elements.

Nursing mother with child (156).

Phoenician group (137). Expressionistic work with humorous overtones.

Ara-

maean-Hittite group (138). Dating. Phoenician influence (141).

V.

PHOENICIAN AND SYRIAN ART REGION

Phoenician

art. Eclecticism (143).

Egyptiani^ing

143-160
c

style (143).

Baghdad Mona Lisa' (144).

Woman

at the Window'. Aphrodite cult in Babylon (144). Ivories from Arslan-Tas. Lion
type of Sargonid style (147). Khorsabad ivories (148). Other Phoenician styles. Kerameikos

bronze bowl (148).

Nimrud

Link with Urartian

bronze bowl. Tridacna shells (150). Ivory statuette from Samos.

sirens (155).

Syrian art centres (156). Eclecticism.

sphere (160).

Nimrud ivory

box. Finds at Gordion. Iranian

PART TWO: GREECE

EARLY GREEK ART AND

VI.

ITS

CONNECTIONS WITH THE NEAR

EAST

162-222

Near East. Maritime

Homeric age (163). Earliest Near Eastern work in Greece (163). Religion and
mythology the first imports. Illuyanka myth (165). Origin of Typhon myth (165). Source of
First encounter between East and West (162). Earliest Greek finds in

trade of

Hesiod's 'Theogony* (166). Adoption of Phoenician alphabet. First Greek colony in

East:

Al Mina (168).

Attic

influence

at

Near Eastern influence on Greek

and

ruler.

Near

Al Mina.

Rise of Orientalising style (170).

Escape from tyranny of compass

York bronze group (170). Near Eastern

style (169).

New

prototypes (172). Dipylon statuettes (173). Syrian crowns. Syrian origin of stepped-wig
coiffure.

Goldsmiths''

work from Rhodes (175). Other Syrian

influences.

Egyptian

influences

(176).

Hittite influences (176). Borrowing of Hittite lion type (177). Ivory lion from Samos.

Macmillan

aryballos.

Olympia bronze

lion (181).

Hittite origin of griffin type.

Griffin

protome of Barber ini cauldron (185). Sphinx. Pegasos. Centaur. Gorgon's head. Chimaera
(187). Artemis as 'Mistress of the Beasts' (188). Herakles (188). Theseus and Minotaur.

Myth
style.

of King Oedipus (189). Warrior figures. Hittite belt (190). Aramaean-Hittite hair

Aramaean

origin

of chiton (192). Urartian

bronzes (194). Further Urartian influences.

influences.

Near Eastern

Other

influences from

Luristan

vase shapes (200).

Orientalizing style in Cyclades (202). Earliest lyre representations. Orientalising

style in Ionia (207).

Wood carving from Samos

Hand'gestures (209). Love scene of Zeus and

Origin of philosophy and exact sciences (207).

(207). Hieros gamos. Hittite pictorial motif'(208).

ivories (212). Two types of swastika motif Syrian origin of Archaic smile
Phrygian
elements
(214).
(215). Ivory mirror. Phrygian technique of painting (217). Louvre

Hera. Ephesian

bronze plate (217). Silver bowl from Black Sea area. Origin of Greek fold rendering (219).
Origin of Ionic column-base (222).

liver

revetments (222).

EPILOGUE

223-224

APPENDIX

225-258

Notes to

text (225).

Map

(246).

Index (248).

LIST OF
Alabaster

relief,

COLOUR PLATES
43 - Ivory head, Syrian style
44 - Urartian rock-cut tombs, Lake

North-west Palace,

Nimrud

Alabaster

relief,

45a, b - Attachments of a

South-west Palace,

Nimrud

4,

18

Alabaster relief, Khorsabad

- Alabaster relief, North Palace,

Nineveh
6

23

Nineveh
Lion-hunting relief, North
Nineveh
Alabaster

relief,

Griffin

24
26
29
68

70
76
119
120, 121

123
128

30 -

Rock relief, Ivriz

- Mother with child:

130
orthostat, Karatepe 142
35
40 - Bronze bowl, Phoenician work
153
41 - Ivory box, Nimrud
154
42 - Gold crown, Syrian style
156

LIST OF

164
167
168

47 - Gold plate, Ziwiye

48 - Zeus and Typhon: bronze group
49 - Ivory statuette, Dipylon (Athens)

171

172

Gold work, Rhodes

175

- Early Attic krater

52, 53 - Protocorinthian aryballos, The51

bes

54-56 - Cycladic

163

bronze caul-

dron, Gordion
46 - Bronze lion, Patnos

50 -

Palace,

protome, Praeneste
19 - Neo-Babylonian boundary stone
20 - Ishtar Gate, Babylon
25 - Gold plaquette, Tell Halaf
26, 27 - Funerary stele, Maras
28 - Funerary stele, Maras
29 - Funerary stele, Maras
18

1 5

Van

177

178, 179
griffin

oinochoe 182, 184, 185

57 - Griffin head, Olympia

58 - Bronze statuette, Olympia

186

59 - Tripod leg, Olympia

60, 61 - Cauldron decoration,

191

Olympia

189
194, 195

62 - Oinochoe (detail), Dipylon (Athens)

63 - Chiot cup (detail)
66 - Ivory statuette, Ephesos
67 - Silver bowl, Pontus
68 - Architectural revetment, Diiver

197
203
213
216
220

HALF-TONE ILLUSTRATIONS

- Alabaster relief, Nimrud

33
1 - Alabaster relief, South-west Palace
Nineveh
34
1 2a - Corner orthostat, Zincirli
35 above
1 2b - Orthostat relief, Nineveh
3 5 below
- Funerary stele, Zincirli
1
36
14 - Royal figure: relief, Sakcegozu
57
15a - Genii: relief, Sakcegozu
5 8 above
15b
Sphinx: relief, Sakcegozu
5 8 below
1 6a, b - Portal lion, Sakcegozu
63
1 7 - Lion protome, Olympia
64
2 1 a, b - Lion base, Carchemish
81 above
21c, d - Lion statuette, Al Mina
81 below
22a - Orthostat block, Malatya
82 above
22b - Orthostat block, Carchemish
82 below
8

23a - Temple-palace (reconstruction),

9-1

Tell Halaf
91 above
23b - Relief, Sakcegozu
91 below
24a, b - Statues, Tell Halaf
92
3 1 - Gate sphinx, Karatepe
133
32-34 - Orthostat reliefs, Karatepe 134, 139, 140
145
36 - Tridacna shell, Assur
146
37 - 'Mona Lisa', Nimrud
151
38 - 'Woman at the Window', Nimrud
- Phoenician bronze bowl, Kerameikos
39

(Athens)

152

64 - Zeus and Hera: wood carving, Samos 205

65a-d - Ivory statuette, Dipylon
206 above
(Athens)
206 below
65e-f- Zeus and Hera
206 below
65g - Funerary stele, Tanagra

LIST OF FIGURES
i

- Transport of colossal
- King crossing a river

bull statue

3- Arm-muscle stylization
4- Horse's head-dress
5

" Thigh

67io ii 12 ~
*3

38

stylization

chariot (reign of S argon)

40
42
43

Lion type (reign of Sargon)

45

Kilamuwa

54

relief, Zincirli

Portal sphinx, Zincirli

5 5

Portal lion, Zincirli

60

Portal lion

from inner

citadel gate,

Zincirli
14,

5 3

31

stylizations

Knee-cap

52 - Colonnette, Zincirli

22

I 5

- Portal

lion, Sakcegozii

l617-

Griffin head, Sakcegozii

18 -

Niqmepa's

19-

Citadel, Zincirli

Griffin

head
Palace, Tell

20 - Hilani buildings, Zincirli

Hilani in, Zincirli

Upper

Palace, Zincirli

56 5 7
5 8
59 60 5 5

103
103

103

65
71

72
72

74
74
74
74
74
77

67 - Lion, Malatya
68 - Lion base, Carchemish
69 - Lion base, Carchemish
70 - Lion
71, 72

109

no

85

86

36

Base, Zincirli

86

87

37

Base,
Base,

87
87
88

42

Khorsabad
Nineveh
Socle model, Nineveh
Relief, Nineveh
Relief, Khorsabad
Relief, Nineveh

87

38

43

Base,

44

Furniture piece, Zincirli

Furniture piece, Zincirli
Niche, Tell Halaf
Deity on lion base, Tell Halaf

41

45

46
47
48
49
5
5i

Nimrud

Lion base, Carchemish

Column, Assur
Capital, Khorsabad
Cauldron base, Tell Halaf

79
80

84
84
84
85
85

88
89

90

88

91

88

92

89

93

89
89

94

90

95

94
96
96
96
97

lion, Zincirli

74 - Lion base, Zincirli

75 - Lion, Tell Ain Dara
76 - Ivory lion's head, Samos
77 - Ivory lion statuette, Al Mina
78 - Chimaera, Carchemish
79 - Griffin demon, Carchemish
80 - Warrior relief, Carchemish
81
Ibex bearer, Carchemish
Storm god, Til Barsib
King Katuwas, Carchemish
B3

35

78

relief, Zincirli

- Portal

104
106
106
106
108
108

73 - Lion, Zincirli

Lions, Tell Tainat

Yazilikaya, centre scene
Gate, Zincirli
Palace entrance, Tell Atchana
Base, Carchemish
Base, Carchemish
Base, Khorsabad
Base from Building K, Zincirli
Base, Tell Tainat
Base, Zincirli

40

102

- Griffin demon, Zincirli

66 - Chariot relief, Zincirli

26

39

Zincirli

102

65

Hilani, Tell Halaf

34

demon,

99
100

61

25

32

98

64 - Griffin and sphinx, Zincirli

Hilani, Sakcegozii

33

98

63 - Griffin

24

31

98

101

Hilani, Tell Tainat

29
30

98

Carchemish
Basalt capital, Tell Halaf
Sandstone capital
Capital,

Phoenician capital
King Tuthaliya iv, Yazilikaya
Illuyanka, Malatya
61 - Storm god, Zincirli
62 - Orthostats, Zincirli

23

27
28

pia

61

65

Atchana

98

- Capital relief, Tell Tainat

- Head-piece of cauldron base, Olym5 4

32

Lion's head, Arslan-Tas

War

96

97
98

99
100

Head, Carchemish
Head, Carchemish
- Chariot relief, Carchemish
- Winged lion with human head, Tell
Halaf
- Hunting scene, Tell Halaf
- Lion, Tell Halaf
- Phrygian cauldron, Tell Halaf
- Phrygian pitcher, Tell Halaf
- Bronze bowl, Tell Halaf
- King Araras and Kamanas, Carchemish
- Relief of Araras (detail), Carchemish
- Belt from relief of Sennacherib
- Belt from relief of Araras
- Animal figure, relief of Araras
- Sandals and chiton, relief of Araras
- Sandals and chiton, Sakcegozii
- Man with a balance, Maras

10

II

III

112
112
113
113
113

113

"5
115

116
116

117
117
122
122
1

22

i-4
124
125
125

126

126
126

101 - Scribe,

Mara?
Mother with child, Praeneste
103 - Bronze bowl, Kerameikos (Athens)
104 - Idalion bowl (detail)
105 - Female figure: tridacna shell, Assur

137
138

105a - Tridacna shell, Bayrakli

106 - Ivory box (detail), Nimrud

155

102 -

149
150
155

157
IO7-I 10 - Ivory boxes (detail), Nimrud
157
158
III- Ivory statuette, Toprakkale
- Phoenician ivory plaque, Arslan-Tas 159
I 12
176
113 - Grazing stag
176
114- Lion, Protocorinthian aryballos
180
II 5 - Lion, Protocorinthian kotyle-pyxis
ll6- Chimaera, Protocorinthian aryballos 181

117- Griffin demon, Toprakkale

Il8- Assyrian Pegasos
119- Urartian Pegasos

183

120 - Herakles struggling with the lion

121 - Theseus struggling with the Minotaur
122 - Assyrian helmet

123 - Assyrian helmet

124- Assyrian helmet

125 -

Greek helmet

131 - Luristan bronze

132- Luristan bronze

133 ~ Horse on Cycladic oinochoe, Aegina
134- Boar on oinochoe, Bayrakli
- Lion on terracotta, Pazarli
135
I36- Ibex on a terracotta revetment, Pazarli

139

Etruscan horse

Lion on a plate, Rhodes

Bronze figure, Kazbek

152a-- Apollo

amphora

155

196
196
196
196
199
199
199
199
199
199
199
199
199

Lyre, Bayrakli

- Lyre,

200
200
200
201
201
201

202
202

208

Cycladic

154-

193

and Artemis:

152b - Lyre on Cycladic amphora

- Lyre, Karatepe
153

192
192

199
199

204

relief

151 - Marriage of Paris and Helen: Corinthian krater

188

193
193

126- Urartian attachment, Vetulonia

I27- Lion, Ziwiye
128 - Lion on amphora, Cycladic
129- Urartian attachment, Toprakkale
I30- Early Attic krater

137
I38

187
187
188

140 - Lion
141 - Urartian lion
142 - Early Attic foot cauldron,
Kerameikos (Athens)
143 - Early Attic krater, Piraeus road
144- Early Attic krater
145 - Assyrian krater
146 - Assyrian krater
147- Vessel handle with lotus
148 - Basin with lotus blossom, Gordion
149- Basin with ring handles, Gordion
150- Menelaus courting Helen: shield

(^andarli

156- Pyxis with hieros gamos theme

157- Swastika emblems
158a-- Ibex on mirror, East Greek
158b-- Lotus anthemion on mirror
159- Rinceau ornament from oinochoe

210
21

211

211
211
212

214
215
215
217

160 - Detail of an East Greek bronze plate 217

218
161 - Ibex on mirror, Median
218
162 - Griffin mirror, Median
218
163- Scythian animal figure
218
164 - Gorgon on Rhodian plate
165- Cuirass (detail), Olympia
219
166 - East Greek ivory statuette
219
221
167- Aeolic capital, Neandria
168- Capital, Bayrakli
221
221
169 - Urartian furniture piece (detail)
221
170- Urartian furniture piece (detail)
222
171 - Columna caelata, Ephesos

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The line-drawings and

the map were executed by R. Epikman and M. Erdim in accordance with

sketches and directions given by the author. R. Epikman: Figs. 27, 59, 67-69, 71, 99, 129, 135, 136;
M. Erdim: Figs. 3-17, 32-39, 44, 45, 48, 49, 53, 54, 66, 70, 72-98, 100-2, 111-19, 125-8, 130-4, 139-49,
152-5, 158-65, 168-70.

10

SOURCES OF ILLUSTRATIONS
The following museums kindly allowed reproduction of
Adana, Archaeological Museum 92 left, 120, 121
Aleppo, Archaeological Museum
92 right
Ankara, Archaeological Museum
57, 58, 63,
81 above, 82 below, 216
Athens, Kerameikos Museum
152, 153
Athens, National Museum
172, 206
Baghdad, Iraq Museum
146, 151
Baltimore, The Walters Art Gallery
1 5 6
Berlin, Staatliche Museen
33, 35 above, 36,

London,
35

on the following pages:

Museum

British

3, 18, 23,

185

Rome,

Villa Giulia

68

Tubingen, Archaologisches

Museum

24, 29, 34,

below, 154, 158, 175, 178, 179, 182, 184,

Munich, Antikensammlungen
177
New York, Metropolitan Museum
171
Olympia, Museum
64, 186, 189, 191, 194, 195
Oxford, Ashmolean Museum
81 below
Paris, Louvre
20, 26, 128, 168

70, 76, 91, 145

Istanbul, Archaeological

the plates

Institut

19-

Universitat

119, 123,

Van, Archaeological

203,213

der

Museum

167

Photographs were kindly supplied by: E. Akurgal, Ankara, 119, 142, 164, 167; Deutsches Archaologisches Institut, Athens, 64, 152, 205, 206; E. Berna, 120, 121 M. Chuzeville, Vanves, 20, 26, 128,
168; Photo Derounian, Aleppo, 92 right; M. A. Diigenci, 123, 130, 163, 164, 167, 203, 213, 216, 220;
R. Gnamm, Munich, 177; B. Gorgiic, 58 below, 63 A. Giiler, 58, 133 Hirmer Foto-Archiv, Munich,
146; N. Kontos, Athens, 153, 172, 186, 191, 194; The Mansell Collection, London, 34; Foto Marburg, 91 above, 92 left; J. Remmer, Munich, 68; J. Skeel, Pluckley, Kent, 158, 175, 182, 184, 185.
The other photographs were provided by the museums mentioned.
;

FOREWORD

problem of the relation between early Greek art and the

Near East have engaged the attention of many scholars
over a period of several generations. But only two monographs exist that treat
the problem as a whole. The first general survey came from the pen of the Danish
Particular aspects of the

civilizations of the ancient

scholar Frederik Poulsen:

Der

Orient und die friihgriechische Kunst, Berlin, 191 2.

second comprehensive study, The Greeks and Their Eastern Neighbours, was
published in London in 1957 after the early death of its author, the English
J. Dunbabin. While both writers discuss the most important
Greek elements of style and iconography that can be traced to Near Eastern
sources, they do not attempt a systematic examination of the eastern models them-

archaeologist T.

selves.

Emil Kunze and Humfry Payne made progress

in this field, although they

had

only a limited opportunity to deal with eastern art works. Other important

came from Paul Jacobsthal, Gerhart Rodenwaldt, Karl Schefold

and Pierre Demargne, who also, however, were restricted to questions of detail,
since the mass of the material lay outside their field of specialization. In the last
few decades our knowledge of this subject has been further enlarged by the work
of a number of scholars. Such distinguished archaeologists as Pierre Amandry,
R. D. Barnett, G. M. A. Hanfmann, Helene Kantor, Massimo Pallottino, P. J. Riis
and Hans Walter deserve mention here. As we have duly noted on several
occasions in this book, many Classical archaeologists, working in the context of
their special fields of research, have added important observations bearing on the
question of the relationship between East and West.
By contrast, this volume gives full coverage to the main art centres of the Near
East between 1000 and 500 B.C., presenting and discussing the most important
works of art. The identification of a large body of Near Eastern models should
put the question of East- West relations in this period on a sound basis.
Every work of art depends on an existing tradition and upon the circumstances in
which it was created. To some extent every art work reflects the characteristics of
earlier and contemporary artistic trends in its immediate setting and broader
environment. In seeking to place an art object chronologically and geographically,
we must first identify the component features of its style and iconography. Only
contributions

through

preparatory tracing of the significant features to their various sources

with some precision the time and place of production as well as the
interpretation of the work in question. The validity of the results depends on the

can

we

this

fix

scope of the material available for comparison. This method, which I have used
over the past twenty years to classify and to date artistic creations of several

and areas of the Near East and Anatolia, is employed more intensively
inasmuch as for the first time I have an opportunity to treat the
production of the Near East in its totality.

cultures

in this book,
artistic

Wilhelm Pinder's maxim, to the effect that 'styles have no sharp chronological
boundaries and do not follow one another, but they overlap and interact', suggests
that archaeologists in their stylistic investigations should think not simply in terms

of dating, but should attempt

more thorough-going
logical

along the

classification

data define themselves.

lines

of the method outiined above

according to

Starting

material, the following chapters present a

stylistic

from a

developments. Chrono-

detailed examination of the

number of art

styles

and chronologically.
of volumes the publishers have developed a

and

ateliers

which

are clearly distinguishable geographically

For

this series

presentation that has allowed the author to direct the

work

special

method of

to art connoisseurs

and those interested in ancient archaeology, on the one hand, and to specialists
in the field, on the other. The notes at the end of the book will permit the reader
to check the author's statements and to pursue the subject further. The numerous
line drawings should lighten the reader's task, but they also have a special function
of their own: to 'describe' as much as possible, and especially to clarify the
stylistic features

of individual works, for these are not always easy to discern in the

photographs. Since Near Eastern

muscles but

stylize

artists usually

do not model bodily

parts

and

them, these aspects can be more exactly rendered in the graphic

medium. Our drawings, many of which are published here for the

first

time,

should not be regarded as substitutes for photographs but as a 'graphic description

and commentary' to the objects under discussion.

The procurement of the colour and black-and-white illustrations was made
possible through the courtesy of the directors and keepers of the following
museums and institutes: Richard D. Barnett, Keeper, Department of Western
Asiatic Antiquities, British Museum; Prof. Dr. Kurt Bittel, President of the Deutsches Archaologisches Institut, Berlin; Dr. Dietrich von Bothmer, Curator,
Department of Greek and Roman Antiquities, Metropolitan Museum of Art,
New York; Necati Dolunay, Director of the Archaeological Museum, Istanbul;
R. W. Hamilton, Keeper, Department of Antiquities, Ashmolean Museum,
Oxford; D. Haynes, Keeper, Department of Greek and Roman Antiquities,
British Museum; Miss Dorothy K. Hill, Curator of Ancient Art, Walters Art
Gallery, Baltimore; Prof. Dr. E. Homann-Wedeking, University of Munich;
Prof. Dr. Emil Kunze, Director of the Deutsches Archaologisches Institut,
Athens; Prof. Dr. Gerhard Rudolf Meyer, General Director of the Staatliche
Museen, Berlin; Andre Parrot, Membre de PInstitut, Conservateur en Chef,
Musee du Louvre; Raci Temizer, Director of the Archaeological Museum,
Ankara; Dr. N. Yalouris, Director of the Museum at Olympia; the National
Museum, Athens; the Kerameikos Museum; the Iraq Museum, Baghdad; the
Museo della Villa Giulia, Rome; Tubingen Museum.
Ankara, July 1966

14

Ekrem Akurgal

PART ONE

The Orient

Thou canst not, and that dost make thee great,

Thou never dost begin that is thy fate.
Thy song wheels round as does the starry frame,
End and beginning evermore the same,
And what the middle brings we clearly see

Is

what the opening was, the end

shall be.

Goethe, West-Eastern Divan,

of Hafiz, 6th poem, ist stanza 1

II

Book

ij

I.

NEO-ASSYRIAN ART
(1045-61O

SYSTEM OF
EASTERN

ART

It is

Near Eastern
history, and
unsuited to style analysis. Yet

generally held that the 'conceptual' and conventional nature of

excluded any real

art

B.C.)

development during the course of

stylistic

its

works of this region are

shows at least five successive stylistic phases
during its four hundred years of existence. Thus the style did change considerably,
although the basic conceptual approach, which ignores the third dimension,
that consequently the art

Neo-Assyrian

for example,

art,

persisted relatively unaltered during these four centuries. Later

in Neo-Assyrian art individual styles developed under almost

who

we

all

shall see that

the great kings

actively patronized art. In the reign of Shalmaneser in (854-824 b.c.) there

different styles that flourished alongside

were even three

one another. But most of

the pictorial formulae of the conceptual attitude held firm until the end of the

empire.
Five

stylistic

phases

The

basis for distinguishing a time sequence of five stylistic phases in

Assyrian art

lies

Neo-

primarily in iconographic changes and in technical devices and

achievements, since these provide the surest criteria for dating works of

But

that in ancient
if

Near Eastern

art personal

art.

order to

show

or local inflections of idiom did

exist,

have often given special emphasis to

stylistic peculiarities in

infrequently. In the course of our account

it

will

become

clear that Assyrian

some ways comparable to those that took

Greek Archaic period and in fifteenth-century Italy.
This cumulative or progressive development in Assyrian art, which brought

art

underwent an

artistic

evolution in

place, for example, in the

artists

almost to the point of discovering perspective, will be stressed in the

discussion that

is

to follow.

Here by way of introduction we shall only mention

underlying the dominant artistic attitude of the

briefly certain general factors

Near
Fundamentals of
'conceptual' approach

East.

Linear perspective

of the

first

an

is

artistic

achievement that

half of the fifth century b.c. All art

we owe to the Greek civilization

works of the ancient world,

in-

cluding those of the Greeks, that date before this discovery were executed ac-

cording to the principles of conceptual

art.

The

essential aims of conceptual art1

and distinctness of form and content, together with idealization of the

and objects represented. 2 These basic principles govern the artistic forms
and stylistic rules of the conceptual approach. Frontality is perhaps the most
obvious consequence of this programme, for works shaped or drawn frontally
are clarity

figures

simplest and most ideal representation of external reality.

Oblique views and foreshortening are therefore avoided.
As has been indicated, Neo-Assyrian sculptors and painters worked within the
offer the clearest,

norms prescribed by conceptual art. Therefore they drew

but what their minds selected as important or
characteristic. Thus an Assyrian statue in the round
just as in Egyptian or any
other conceptual art was created by synthesizing four planes standing at right

limits

not so

of the

stylistic

much what

their eyes saw,

16

would cut in from straight sides front and

3
Ricbtungsgeradheit,
i.e. frontality, which has been
right.
The
term
and
back,
coined by H. Schafer, 4 is a useful way of describing this aspect of the conceptual
angles to one another; the sculptor
left

rendering.

On

the plane surface conceptual art presents the

following system 5 the head appears in

:

is

the

seen frontally

presented frontally,

be regarded

feet

amounted to an

ideal

is

rendering of the

human body

according to the

clearest aspect, in profile,

this part.

an unsuccessful attempt

as

representations

view of
while the legs and
clearest

its

The

but the eye

shoulders and the chest are

appear in profile

(PI. 3).

This

is

not to

at representation; for the Assyrians it

human body. Adherence

to the conceptual

not a matter of the presence or lack of skill rather

;

affirmation of certain preferences to the exclusion of others.

The

it

reflects

artists

the

choose to

show the chest and shoulders frontally because this aspect displays these parts of
body most clearly and most 'beautifully'. If necessary, the Assyrian artist can

the

dispense with the principle of conceptual representation. While slaves, prisoners

and unimportant persons 6 required by the subject matter may appear in profile,
contrary to the dictates of conceptual art, the king even when he is shown in
action retains the noble form of the full breadth of the bust 7 (Pis. 1-4).
The idealized art of the Assyrians naturally called for a proud and dignified bearing
in the human figure. The king, who personified the might of the state, had to be
noble and absolutely superior. The attitude and gestures of the ruler and the
important personalities of the court were consequently always calm, measured
and aristocratic (Pis. 1-8). They symbolized the political supremacy of the Assyrians and served to overawe neighbours and enemies.
Neo-Assyrian artists departed from their principle of ideal attitudes and aristocratic gestures only when they had to depict foreign peoples, enemies or slaves.
Here they could adopt a more realistic rendering. With their wild and vehement
gestures the Arab figures of the time of King Assurbanipal are a striking instance

of

this realistic representation

of the language of gesture. 8

human figure was the

Nowhere in their art do we
find a real portrayal of individual human features. 9 The depiction of the human
face, whether of a king or a simple soldier, always took a conventional form. The
The demand
reason

why

for idealism in the representation of the

the Assyrians had

Attitudes and
gestures

no

art

Ideal representatio

of portraiture.

by virtue of his larger scale and the noble expressiveness of his

mention his splendid coiffure and elaborate clothes. By contrast,
Assyrian art are immediately recognizable by their deviant hair style

ruler stood out

gestures, not to

foreigners in

and

The

dress.

cruel conduct of warfare

and the

grisly scenes depicted in relief

on

the

orthostats (upright slabs forming the base of walls) reflect a thoroughly absolutist

concept of government in which

all

power was concentrated

resented by the figure of the king. Barbaric atrocities

impalements and flayings

in the state as rep-

mutilations, massacres,

Atrocities

were prominent instruments of Assyrian policy, which

was exclusively directed towards domination. In their annals the Assyrian kings
openly boasted of these acts. Assurnasirpal 11 had this written about himself:
17

conquered the towns of the country of Luhuti. I made a great slaughter among
them, destroying, rending asunder and burning with fire. I captured living
warriors and impaled them on stakes before their towns.' 10 Scenes of this type
were often shown in orthostat reliefs to impress the spectator with the immense
'I

power of

When

Perpendicular
positioning

gruesome fate of his enemies.

want to show things in rising country, they depict them
the slope of the ground-line, so that trees and buildings stand

the king and the

Assyrian

artists

at right angles to

vertically in relation to the incline rather than in relation to the horizon. 11

This

The Assyrian artist knows

but he always places them (as Unger

accords with the conceptual rendering of the design.

that

objects tend to stand vertically,

all

rightly notes) 12 in
situated.

treat parts
reflects

immediate relation to the

little

piece of

ground where they

are

This conception, which neglects the totality of the picture in order to

of it separately, fitting them together as relatively autonomous units, 13

preference and not incapacity as one might at

first

assume.

It is interesting

to note that in the orthostat reliefs of Nineveh an artist of the Assurbanipal period

shows

row of

figures descending a 45 -degree-angle slope 14 not vertical to the

plate 2 - Tiglath-Pileser in (745-727 b.c.) on his war chariot. Alabaster relief

Palace at Kalkhu (Nimrud). British Museum. Length i.pj m. Cf. pp. 32 f.

m
JSfcfti

ppim
18

MKtei
.

ft

f,

M*^wk

from the South-west

slope

on which they stand but

The

vertical to the horizon

just as

we would

expect

seems to have recognized that his figures would look

were
placed at right angles to the ground according to the
if
they
men
like falling
representation.
But even in this period trees and buildings
conceptual
of
principle

in western art.

artist

on sloping ground continue to appear in the old way: perpendicular to the groundIn the mind of the Assyrian artist the trees and buildings were so firmly
anchored to the ground that he felt little temptation to betray the basic principle
line. 15

of conceptual representation.
The artists of the Sennacherib period found a clever device for retaining this
conceptual principle on which they set such great store. Some slaves toiling up a
hill

with baskets

filled

with stones are perpendicular to the ground-line and to the

horizon, for the artist has introduced 'steps' into the slope which were not present
in reality but

An

which served

as ground-lines for the figures. 16

unmistakable 'escape' from the conceptual principle occurs, however, in a

of King Assurbanipal in which the figures, who are climbing a hill, appear

relief

17
at right angles to the horizon.

Yet in the rendering of the

trees

on

'Escape'' from

conceptual princip,

this relief

the artist has remained true to the conceptual rule. In such instances one sees
artists

trying out

new

devices, but without ever freeing themselves completely

from the bonds of the conceptual attitude.

Adherence to the demands of clarity and distinctness of form and content made
the conceptual artist renounce overlappings within the picture plane. Conse-

up

which could be stacked parallel in tiers.

dominant in the Archaic and Classical styles.
'Stacking' of the tiers is known in the first three Neo-Assyrian styles, but it occurs
seldom and is restricted to two or three tiers. Yet the narrative history scenes of
the Assyrians, which tended to report events in as much detail as possible, impelled
artists to multiply the superimposed strips of figures and scenes so as to extend
their illustrations vertically up the surface of the orthostats. This procedure
formed the basis for the richly illustrated reliefs of the reigns of Sennacherib
and Assurbanipal, which are among the outstanding achievements of ancient
Near Eastern art.
Perhaps the most remarkable creation of this period is the relief showing the
transport of a colossal bull statue across a river, which comes from the South-west
Palace of King Sennacherib in Nineveh and is now in the British Museum
(Fig. i). 18 This carving displays two important accomplishments of Neo-Assyrian
art: the rendering of the third dimension and the principle of a unified compositional design. Using the rudimentary perspective device of the lines of men
snaking diagonally up the relief to the left and right, the artist succeeded in
creating the effect of depth, an effect enhanced at the bottom by the river, which
is understood as foreground, as well as by the friezes of the row of soldiers and
of the mountain landscape at the top, which is understood as background. Moreover, the artist enlivened the scene with formal ingenuity and vivid incidents;
he placed the main element of the action, the colossal statue, at the focal point
and the chariot of the king, who directed the enterprise, on the upper left. In
quently, figures are lined
Serial

arrangement

is

in rows,

especially

Third dimension
and composition

plate

- Sargon n (721-705

B.C.).

Paris. Height 2.68 m. Cf. p. 40.

20

Alabaster relief from Dur-Sharrukin (Khorsabad). Louvre,

way

complex but unified composition emerges that is unique in the history

art. Furthermore, it is noteworthy that in the mountain
landscape the artist shows some of the trees in front of the mountains and others
behind them, so as to endow also this part of the scene with a certain effect of

this

of ancient Near Eastern

space.

There

is

no mistaking the

effort to

provide a kind of 'horizontal' perspective. Yet

despite this great advance the artist

still

puts

many of the

trees at right angles to

Horizontal
perspective

the slope of the ground-line. 19 Although this Assyrian sculptor had a well-developed

sense of the third dimension, he seems to have been unaware of any comprehensive

system that would have enabled him to conquer

different type

it

definitively.

of spatial rendering appears on another

relief

of Sennacherib's

which shows the king and his retinue crossing a river that runs through a
mountain valley (Fig. 2). 20 Here the artist has inverted the trees and hills on the
section below the river. Some scholars have interpreted this method of representation as a kind of 'mirror perspective'. 21 However, the Assyrian artist did not
consider his reliefs from the standpoint of the viewer, but in terms of the column
advancing to the right. If one examines the scene from the viewpoint of the king
and his retinue, one will see that the trees right and left of the river are represented
in the same lying or standing position. The trees on the tributary are also shown
in the same fashion on both sides of the stream.
time,

fig.

From

- Transport of a colossal bull statue across a river. Relief of Sennacherib (704-681 B.C.).
Nineveh. British Museum. Cf note 18 and p. 19.

21

fig. 2 - The king crossing a river.

Cf

Progressive

development

Threshold of discovery

of perspective

note

Relief of Sennacherib

(70 4-681 B.C.).

From

Nineveh.

20 and p. 21.

The foregoing considerations suggest that the art of the ancient Near East underwent a gradual development that involved an advance from linear drawing to
plastic modelling (p. 44), from schematism to naturalism (p. 45), and from simple
parallelism to complicated design and composition with effects of depth.
It is probably right to assume that the artists who created the great compositions
of the time of Sennacherib and Assurbanipal were on the verge of discovering the
it seems unjustified to regard the slow
and ultimately incomplete evolution of art in the Near East as simply indicating
stagnation. The quick tempo of life in our modern age, and the love of innovation
that has affected mankind since the beginning of Greek civilization, have raised
the level of our expectations so that we are tempted to measure earlier conditions
by our own standards.
The shift from conceptual to perspective vision was achieved by the Greeks in the
course of a cumulative development. 22 In a period of two and a half centuries,
from about 750 to 500 B.C., the Greeks worked in a conceptual manner essentially
like that of the Near Eastern peoples and their own Minoan and Mycenaean
forerunners. 23 Following H. Schafer, we may say that for all peoples of the world

principles of perspective. Consequently,

conceptual art represents a

So

it

would not be

first

stage in the rendering of the physical environment.

correct to assert that the Greeks

capacity for artistic expression that differed

The Greeks themselves

22

from

had an innate or a priori

Near Eastern peoples. 24

that of

created their almost photographically objective

method

plate 4 - Assurbanipal (668-630 b.c.) on horseback hunting an onager. Alabaster

at Nineveh. British Museum. Height of detail j} cm. Cf. p. 42.

relief

from the

North Palace

*3

Ml^'

plate
British

- Fleeing and wounded onager. Alabaster relief from the North Palace
Museum. Height of detail j$ cm. Cf. pp. 42, 4).

of design only after a

ong period of development

at

that required

Nineveh

(cf. PI. 4).

much experimen-

tation.

How

then can

we

explain the remarkable

phenomenon

that the principle of

perspective representation was never revealed to the peoples of the East, despite
millennia of activity in sculpture and painting? Art historians have suggested a
Causes offailure

reas ons for this failure. Here we need mention only the most
and ethnic characteristics'; 'incapacity', 'inability' or 'unwilling-

number of different
important:

'racial

ness'; 25 'attachment to

idealism'; 27

and

(the

peoples concerned. 28

24

old traditions'; 26 the highly developed 'sense of artistic

all) the 'world view' of the

most general explanation of

Anyone

intensively concerned with the art

admit that there

is

some

truth in

all

and culture of the Near East

will

these proposed factors. It seems to me,

however, that an entirely different cause, which acted strongly to maintain the
'rigidity' of art forms in the Near East, has not been taken into consideration.
The chief reason for the retention of the conceptual approach must lie, I believe,
in the political

The

and

social structure of the states

of the ancient Near East.

strongly centralized control exercised over Near Eastern art and

its almost
complete dependence on the royal courts must be one of the main factors retarding

was the most effective

Near Eastern rulers and, like writing, was a
privilege reserved to the royal family and the priestly caste.
Greek art owes its rich and creative development to the democratic structure of
the city-state system. The best works of the Greek Archaic period were made for
private citizens as well as on commission from members of the ruling circles.
Consequently the monumental art of the Greeks, which ranks as one of the great
achievements of craft enterprise, is directly dependent on economic conditions.
The intense commercial and artistic competition of the city-states and their
citizens set a challenging series of tasks for artists and workshops, promoting an
organic development of artistic activity as a whole. This economic and cultural
competition meant that artists who were still working mainly within the framework of conceptual procedures during the Archaic period were under constant
pressure to seek out new and better methods; this laid the foundations for the
unfolding of western culture and art. In the Near East too there were art objects
that were produced commercially to be sold on the market, but these were confined mainly to works of the minor arts (Pis. 36-43) and pottery. As long as the
monumental art of the Near East remained a state monopoly, 29 it could not develop
in the conditions of freedom offered by the democratic states of Greece.
In the course of our discussion we shall see that in the Near East also, wherever
art was fostered by a broad segment of the population and especially by the
wealthy strata of the middle classes, artists anticipated Greek sculptors and
painters in that they were stimulated by commercial and artistic competition to
explore new paths and try out new methods. But since the East enjoyed opportunities of this kind infrequently and only for short periods (cf. Pis. 26-28, 36-43),
its craftsmen had no chance to overcome the conceptual point of view.
The Neo-Assyrian empire, which was founded at the end of the second millennium,
dominated the Near East from 883 to 626 b.c. During this period the Near
Eastern peoples were directly or indirectly subject to Assyrian hegemony.
Paralleling this political domination, Assyrian art, which ranks as one of the
finest achievements of the ancient Mesopotamian world, exercised an important
influence upon the art of other countries. The imposing sculptures that adorned
Assyrian palaces became the Classical style of the ancient Near East and were
taken as models by all neighbouring peoples.
Among Near Eastern artistic centres of the first half of the first millennium there
were hardly any that managed to remain free of Assyrian influence. The late

Political

and

social

structure

the organic evolution of artistic creativity. Pictorial art

means of propaganda

available to

Art

in service

of

State monopoly

Assyrian art as
Classical model

*5

st

plate 6 - Assurbanipal on
detail

26

90 cm. Cf. p. 41.

his

war

chariot. Alabaster relief

from Nineveh.

Louvre, Paris. Height of

Hittites, the Urartians

and the Syro-Phoenician peoples,

as well as the great

complexes of the Iranians and Scythians, were deeply affected by Assyrian

art. For a time Babylonia too submitted to the domination of Assyrian art. This
remarkable pre-eminence of Assyrian art permits us to use Assyrian style elements
cultural

comparison of the various dependent traditions

as a criterion for chronological

and by
of

art

this

means

during the

to

work out

first

a fairly satisfactory picture of the overall evolution

half of the

As has been noted above,

first

millennium

b.c.

the Assyrians maintained an

official imperial art which

by the bureaucracy. Propaganda was a prime aim of this
art, together with the glorification of the king and his deeds. The greatest artistic
achievement of the Assyrians lay in the realm of orthostat reliefs, which decorated
the imposing palaces of Kalkhu (modern Nimrud), Dur-Sharrukin (modern
Khorsabad) and Ninua (Biblical Nineveh; modern Kuyunjik). These splendid
pictorial narratives, which have been called 'picture prose' by A. Moortgat 30
and 'pictorial epic* by H. Frankfort, 31 display a continuous montage comprising
various scenes of a particular event, especially victorious campaigns of the
Assyrian kings. The picture cycles were usually accompanied by explanatory
inscriptions on the surface of the reliefs (Pis. 9-1 1).
Sculptors of Neo-Assyrian times were the creators of this new art of narration. 32
Although the Egyptians also had a kind of narrative art, 33 their wall reliefs show
only separate scenes of an event without linking them in an integrated sequence
of successive phases of a single action. Nor is the famous Sumerian victory stele
of Eannatum, 34 which does present several actions but not a precise sequence
covering the whole event, a continuous narrative of the type found in NeoAssyrian wall reliefs. The well-known Akkadian victory stele of Naramsin 35

was

closely supervised

depicts a particular

typical

moment, 36 but does not provide

example may help to

Neo-Assyrian period. 37

clarify the character

relief

Art

of narration

a continuous description.

of the

of narration in the

art

from the time of Assurbanipal, which shows

hunting and sports exercise of the ruler in the royal game park, 38 presents the

same

lion in different positions three times in succession (PI. 12b).

a keeper releases the lion

same

from

a cage

by

lion springing to the attack, although

with an arrow. In a third phase, on the

the king and his bodyguards,

who

On

raising the gate. In the centre

left,

it

the right

we

see the

has already been hit in the back

the same

wounded

lion leaps towards

fend him off with bows and arrows.

This continuous narration of a connected

series

of actions

is

an Assyrian

dis-

Continuous narratk

The
god Nusku, dating from the years 1 241-1205 B.C. and now in the Berlin
Museum, shows a male figure, probably King Tukulti-Ninurta 1, in two successive
moments of adoration before the altar. 39 Neo-Assyrian artists developed this
procedure further, and in the wall reliefs of Nineveh that illustrate war campaigns
covery, found as early as the Middle Assyrian period.

symbolic base of the

light

created magnificent examples of the genre (Pis. 9-1

1).

Pictorial narration according to the continuous principle ceases with the

Assyrian
at

art.

end of

Later the device emerges again in the Hellenistic Telephos frieze

Pergamon 40 and perhaps

earlier in the

north frieze of the north porch of the

27

Erechtheion on the Athenian Acropolis. 41 Strictly speaking, the depiction of a

set of historical events as seen in Assyrian monuments recurs only in Roman art

Rome. 42 As L. Schnitzler has convincingly shown, 43

the architect Apollodoros of Damascus had the idea of illustrating the commemorative column of his imperial patron after the fashion of ancient Near

in the

Column of Trajan

in

Eastern obelisks.

ARCHAIC STYLE

Neo-Assyrian pictorial

art first appears in the reliefs

of an obelisk erected in the

second or third year of the reign of Assurnasirpal n (883-859). This monument,

which E. Unger ascribed to Assurnasirpal i, 44 has been shown by B. Landsberger
Obelisk of

Assurnasirpal

to belong to the age of Assurnasirpal n. 45 Despite

its

mediocre quality,

work

this

form and content, pure and unconthe first monument in world history to

reveals the basic Neo-Assyrian elements of

taminated by foreign admixture. This

is

depict several scenes of a particular event in a continuous sequence. It

to note that the reliefs of the obelisk correspond to the text incised

ment, which they

few

scribes,

important

is

on

the

high priests and some princes. For the average viewer the pictures

played the leading role, and consequently they receive more space than the

The

obelisk

monu-

This text could have been read only by a select

illustrate.

was erected to

text. 46

glorify the achievements of Assurnasirpal n,

who

on the monument no less than twenty times. Similar picture cycles

commemorating the res gestae, the deeds of the ruler, will concern us in splendid
examples from later periods in Neo-Assyrian art history. This obelisk marks the
beginning of the new art of sculptural narration, which ranks as one of the
appears

greatest creations of

The

Neo-Assyrian

obelisk documents the

remain in force until the

fall

main

art.

'pictorial laws'

of Assyrian

of the empire two hundred and

art,

fifty

which were to
years later.

guide-lines of the conceptual approach have already been discussed above.

we

shall

emphasize a few iconographic features that distinguish the

The
Here

reliefs

of

from the works of the following periods. Certain technical details

have been pointed out by E. Unger. 47 The chariots do not terminate at the rear
in shields as they do in the succeeding Classical style. The outline running from
the upper border of the forward part of the chariot box to the end of the shaft is
low and there is never a richly decorated band, as in the works of the Classical
this obelisk

style.

The

royal chariots lack the third

man who

regularly appears in scenes

from the following style periods. The head-dress of the horses includes three
feathers, which are inserted in a rosette rather than in the horseshoe-shaped
clamp found in reliefs of later times. The head-dress also lacks the two long
pennants which are usual in the horses of royal chariots of the Classical style.
The reliefs of the obelisk may be distinguished from the carvings of the succeeding
style by the entirely different handling of the hair at the nape of the neck of the
figures. Coiffure

played an important role in Assyrian

placed hair knot that

is

art.

The

long, diagonally

characteristic of the Classical style does not appear

on

obelisk. Rather the sculptor uses for his figures short, often spirally rolled

hair or else a long

queue that

persistence of the fashions of

z8

falls far

down

the

neck

the back. This hair style indicates the

Middle Assyrian

art.

plate 7 - Wounded lion. From the great lion-hunting relief of Assurbanipal in the North Palace
Nineveh. British Museum. Height of detail about 40 cm. Cf. p. 42.

As has

already been suggested, the major difference between this

Assyrian

which arose under Assurnasirpal

first

Neo-

and the period to follow lies

in the quality of execution. The clumsiness of the artist, who was without doubt
the best master to be found at the royal court, shows that at the time Neostyle,

Assyrian art was

still

style as the 'Archaic'

in

its

11,

formative stage. Consequently,

phase of Neo-Assyrian

art,

we

can describe

of which the obelisk

this

may be

the last important document. In any event it gives us a vivid idea of pre-Classical
work. In view of the great difference between this obelisk and the splendid
orthostat reliefs that are almost contemporary, one is entitled to wonder whether

E.

Unger may not have been

of Assurnasirpal

1.

right after

all

in attributing the obelisk to the time

at

CLASSICAL

STYLE

The

was created

Classical style

in the time of the great king Assurnasirpal

is

during the

first

efflorescence of the

classicism raised the traditional art forms to true monumentality.

Harmony

Neo- Assyrian empire. Its

iconographic features as well as the conceptual pictorial laws were largely anticipated in the Archaic obelisk we have been discussing and even earlier in the
Middle Assyrian art48 of the second half of the second millennium. Neo- Assyrian

(883-859), that

The high

quality

of execution, the stately calm, and the ripe harmony give these carvings an im-

posing dignity and grandeur. The works of this period,

like the Classical

other civilizations, were eagerly imitated in later times.

The middle phase of Neo-

Hittite art

took a great many

Classical style,

and Urartian

stylistic

art

came

works of

and iconographic details from the Assyrian

into being under the strong influence of

the Assyrian Classical style.

Flat

relief,

powerful contours

The

general character of the Classical style

the reliefs with

off

by inner drawing

leg muscles

is

defined by the

flat

upper surface of

powerful, but linear contours. Most of the body parts are set

its

lines

and

show modelling

styli2ations.

that

is flat

Even

the highly schematized

in execution.

The

arm and

finest carvings in this

art style (Pis. 1, 8), which are now preserved in the British Museum, 49 come
from the North-west Palace of King Assurnasirpal n at Kalkhu. Among these
are the lions 50 of the portal of the Ninurta Temple at Kalkhu and a half-life-size
statuette of the king from the same temple. 51
Although they lack homogeneity of style and differ somewhat from the sculpture

of Assurnasirpal
824)

still

11

in iconographic details, the carvings of Shalmaneser in (854

belong to the Classical phase of Neo- Assyrian

from the reign of

dated about 829 B.C. and

now

in the

Museum

art.

Noteworthy objects

king are his Black Obelisk from the citadel of Kalkhu, 52

this

now

in the British

Museum, and

his statue

from Assur,

of the Ancient Orient in Istanbul. 53 During excavations

at

Imgur Enlil (Balawat) in 1878 and 1956 bronze revetment reliefs were found that
came from two gates of Assurnasirpal n and one gate of Shalmaneser in. 54 Best
preserved are the reliefs of Shalmaneser ill's gate, which now belong to the British
Museum. 55 The reliefs, which are somewhat summarily executed, tell of the
military campaigns of the king in various border districts

and neighbouring

adjoining the Assyrian empire. Short captions explain the scenes.

The

states

scene of the

dedication of the royal stele erected in 853 B.C. is interesting. Here we find for
the first time the indication of a particular landscape setting, an original rendering

of the grotto sources of the river Tigris. 56

Stylistic

and

iconograph ic features

The iconographic and

stylistic aspects

tions of the

Near

East.

of the most significant

period (Fig.

3a).

Not

shaped form (Fig.

human

style are

of great importance,

club-like stylization of the lower-arm muscles

stylistic features

Classical style,

of

human

is

one

figure representation in this

in was it replaced by a fanMoreover, the big diagonally placed shock of hair of the
57
as well as the felt cap recalling a fez with a conical
8)

until the reign of Tiglath-Pileser

3 b).

figures (Pis.

The

1,

attachment, 58 and the royal tiara

30

of the Classical

for they provide firm criteria for the chronological ordering of the artistic tradi-

(Pis.

1,

2, 6)

are characteristic features of the

providing useful indicators for dating.

Dependable

criteria for

some details of the chariot

box with quivers arranged criss-cross
the back to close the box, which is decorated

dating are also provided by

Chariots

representations, such as the small chariot

fashion and the shield, placed at

with notching and sometimes with a

feature

is

lion's

head

as well (PI. 8).

An

important

the band with transverse decorations that connects the shaft-end with

the upper rim of the chariot box. The head-dress of the horses consists of three
plumes or a single wide plume in the form of a flat purse, 59 inserted in a horseshoe

clamp, from which two long pendents hang fluttering in the wind (Fig.

4).

connection the lions must not be neglected. 60 Typical features of the lion
figures of this period are the gaping mouth with the tongue just slightly projecting,

In

this

the triangular, half-open ear and the

(PI. 8a). It is also characteristic that

two furrowed

rolls

of

flesh

Lions

beneath the eyes

these folds press closely against the lower

edge of the eyes and that the upper fold has a gland-like shape and

is

thicker and

larger than the lower one.

Of

great importance

is

the

W-shaped

stylization of the thigh muscles,

appears not only in the lion figures, but in

In

many

cases this stylization

especially in the British

is

all

purely W-shaped (Fig.

Museum

bronze

reliefs
c). 63

the guise of a four-tined fork (Figs. 5b,

which

stylization

the animals depicted in this period. 61

5

a) ; 62 in

from a gate

As we

other instances,

at Balawat,

it

takes

shall see, this stylization

underwent formal transformation within Assyrian art and was imitated in many
artistic styles of the Near East. Thus it is a useful pointer for the dating of art
works of the first half of the first millennium B.C.
Unlike the relatively homogeneous forms of the sculptures of Assurnasirpal 11,
the carvings of Shalmaneser in show three different styles. While the statue of
Shalmaneser n in Istanbul is entirely in the Classical manner, 64 the relief scenes on

Three different styh

the Black Obelisk 65 (note especially the lion figures) are rather different in style

and iconography. A third style, which belongs in a category of its own, is represented by the bronze reliefs from Balawat, in which the elongated figures are
executed somewhat summarily although still in a plastic fashion. 66 This last style
also shows some peculiarities in details of the iconography. The quivers of the
chariot box, for example, are not crossed, as in the reliefs of Assurbanipal n,

but are arranged in a different way: while one of the quivers keeps the diagonal
position, the other

is

set

upright on the front of the chariot box.

Our identification of three contemporaneous but

distinct styles in the

Shalmaneser

period shows that the Near East was not unfamiliar with local and personal
variations in art, although the

figs. 3a,

dominant centralizing tendency restricted their scope.

b - Left, Fig. 3a: Assyrian arm-muscle

pth century B.C. After A. Parrot

Assur, PI. 41. Cf p. 30. - Right, Fig. 3b:
Assyrian arm-muscle stylization in use from reign

stylization.

',

of Tiglath-Pileser in (745-727 B.C.) onward. Cf.

PP- 30, 37.

Style as vehicle for

local

and personal

inflections

fig. 4 - Assyrian

horse's

century B.C. Cf. note j?

No change in Assyrian
art from 823 to

746

pth

head-dress.

and p. 31.

from 823 to 746 B.C. art

of Shamshi-Adad v (823-810)
together with the stelae of Adadnirari in (809-782)

In the obscure period of Assyrian history that

seems to have undergone no

real

change.

The

lasts

stele

Museum, 67
and of the vizier of King Shalmaneser iv (78 1-772), both in the Istanbul Museum, 68
show male figures, whose head-dress, hair and beard style, arm-muscle stylization

in the British

and dress

are just the

same

as those

we have

encountered in works of the Classical

style.

TRANSITIONAL
STYLE

After the death of Shalmaneser in Assyria underwent a period of decline, and the
half of the eighth century represents a real pause in

first

during the reign of Tiglath-Pileser

in this period the empire
East.

Not

became the

m (745-727)
greatest

development. But

its

Assyria clearly recovered, for

power ever seen

in the ancient

Near

only did Tiglath-Pileser in restore Assyrian hegemony in Asia Minor,

but he evolved a

new

social

and

cultural policy.

He

declared himself king of

Babylonia and thus found a solution for the tangled problem of Assyro-Babylonian

by providing for a seemingly equal association of the two states in a

As A. Moortgat has rightly said, he was more interested in
forging a unified culture in the Near East than in affirming Assyrian hegemony
for its own sake. 69 This same comprehensive vision permitted him to reorganize
the administrative structure of the empire and to rehabilitate the neglected prorelations

personal union.

vinces.

The

reign of Tiglath-Pileser in, which saw a complete overhaul in the social and

cultural spheres, also witnessed a

new

represent the

may
The

A eiv

compositions

plate

change in the approach to

paths for the Classical trend of the ninth century.

first

art,

which found

Some modest

efforts

hesitant steps in this artistic reformation. Consequently,

appropriately term this phase of Neo-Assyrian art the 'transitional

one

style'.

transitional style is less elegant than its Classical predecessors. The relief is
even lower, and the bodily forms are lightly modelled. The main accomplishment
of this style lies in the artists' striving to forge a type of composition suited to
broad, high wall surfaces. The reliefs from the time of King Tiglath-Pileser from
the Central Palace at Kalkhu clearly show that the artists of this period were

- Assurnasirpal

11

b.c.) hunting
$j cm. Cf. p. 31.

(883-859

Staatliche Museen, Berlin. Height

lions. Alabaster relief

from Kalkhu (Nimrud).

plates 9-1 1 -Battle scene: King Assurbanipal's victory at the river Ulai over Te'umman, king of
Elam. Alabaster relief from the South-west Palace of Sennacherib (704-681 B.C.) at Nineveh. British
Museum. Height 1.32 m. Cf. pp. 42, 4;.

ak

r 2*

u,l
t

r
\z^Sk
,5

^V^MBf

Bp'
KH^VnT

1"'

4f

p
i'^'M

'

v [v,g^^2y^K/^

,-~-

"F9Sm^-M^:

,3

^fc**|^-

1P^"

>

flfl

^fj.

'

'^

34

s^g

v^

A;
.:

<t>
^

w.r

12a

12b

v4

-- \^J!Cy*iiti

mr
.

,-,-

v^**

^i
^y^

^^^Mii

prepared to grapple with the problem of rendering spatial relations on the pictorial
surface. This phase of experimentation yielded a

number of

interesting results.

A relief illustrating the transportation of booty and people taken from a conquered
city 70

shows a surface composition on the

regarded as an

effort to

by the hooves of the

of a

line receding

work out

five

left side

of the picture that

may be

The diagonal

formed

a perspectival solution.

uppermost animal

line

figures does in fact give the impression

towards a vanishing point. In the Classical

style standing or

lying figures were carefully stacked in rows one above the other.

Another sculptor of the time of Tiglath-Pileser in depicted the figures of three

who are to be thought of as lying next to one another, in the stacked
arrangement. 71 If the artist of the above-mentioned series of five animals represented them not one atop the other, but in overlapping fashion, this procedure
cannot be an accident. Moreover it is important to note that the upper rows of
animals and the scribe figures have no ground-line. It seems clear that the sculptor
enemies,

has

left

the earliest

The two
meant

known

attempt

at a perspectival

rendering of spatial relations.

palm-trees that appear in his composition are space dividers, which are

to suggest the third dimension.

We

shall see

below

that these efforts

were

carried further in the realistic style of the seventh century.

number of

stylistic

and iconographic features of the

a transformation in the transitional phase.

somewhat

taller; in

of the Classical
fact that these

The

Classical style

The head-dress of

underwent
became

Transformations

the kings

addition to the diagonal band at the base found in examples

style,

some horizontal bands appeared

bands are decorated with

as well. 72

novelty

is

the

rosettes.

conical extension of the head-dress has

become

larger (PI.

2).

Conversely the

knot has become a bit smaller than in the Classical style, and it is not placed
so markedly diagonally as in the works of the ninth century, but in many instances
approaches a vertical position. 73

hair

The

club-like stylization of the lower-arm muscles persists, but at the

new

fan-like stylization

is

employed

(Fig.

3b). 74 It

interpretations of the muscles to appear side

by

side

is

same time

not unusual for the two

on the same

Fan-like muscles
loner

arm

slab.

The lion figure also undergoes considerable change. In the time of Tiglath-Pileser in
the flesh folds stylized in the form of two palmette leaves beneath the eyes are
modelled more clearly and plastically (Fig. 6). 75 In the ninth-century examples
the upper of these two palmette-like stylizations takes the form of a protruding

New features

gland 76 and the second form below

is noticeably smaller. But in the time of

two bulges are equal in size and form. It is also characteristic
these forms found immediately below the eyes in the ninth century become

Tiglath-Pileser in the
that

plate 12a - King Barrakab and his secretary. Corner orthostat from Zincirli (Sam'al). Basalt. Aramaean
About 730 b.c. Staatlicbe Aluseen, Berlin. Height 1.12 m. Cf. pp. jjf.
plate 12b - Continuous narration of an event. Orthostat relief from Assurbanipal's Palace at Nineveh.
British Museum. Cf. p. 27.
plate 13 -Princess at a funerary meal. Stele from Zincirli (Sam'al). Basalt. Aramaean style. About
730 b.c Staatlicbe Aluseen, Berlin. Height 1.12 m. Cf. p. }6.
style.

37

of

li

even larger in the time of Tiglath-Pileser in, so that they

fill

the whole cheek area

of the lion's face. 77

The

changes

lion's ear also

but a disk-like

its

To

shape.

form appears on the upper

be sure,

surface, 78

it is still

which

is

open

in this period,

to persist as an identi-

fying characteristic of the Assyrian figure.

The W-shaped
changed:
is

somewhat

(Fig.

Changes

in chariot

details

it is

stylization of the thigh invented

now more

altered. 79

nearly a

The

W,

original

though these

flourish side

richly decorated

band

form of the

stylization can

following period. In

way to

The rope

by

found

is

it

many

be

easily

recognized

on new standard forms,

style (PI. 2). The

features take

with those of the Classical

of Tiglath-Pileser in, 80 but

many

chariots depicted

a simple rope, 81

There, however,

side

upper rim of the chariot

that links the shaft-end with the

persists in the reign

gives

style hardly

d, e).

In the representation of chariots

box

during the Classical

but the part next to the belly of the animal

and

by

it

disappears completely in the

of the transitional style

artists

this is usual in chariots

as early as the chariots

hangs slack so that

it is

of the succeeding

it

styles. 82

of the obelisk of Assurnasirpal n.

hidden behind the horse but hence;

up high and is always visible under the reins. The crossed quivers
of the chariot box, which were fashionable in the Classical style, have disappeared.
From the time of Tiglath-Pileser in one sees only a vertical quiver on the front of
forth

it is

pulled

the chariot; the second quiver has apparently been banished to the other side of
the chariot in the background.

The number

In the transitional style both the wheel and the chariot box are larger.

of wheel spokes
(as in

is

now

and the wheel no longer has only one rim

two thin ones and a heavy one, held together

fixed at eight,

the Classical style) but three,

figs. 5a-p - Thigh styligations from Near Eastern

animal figures (pth-/tb century B.C.) - a: Assyrian
.

Cf. Pis. 1, 8, p. $3. b, c: Assyrian art. 9th century B.C. Cf. Barnett,
Assyrian Palace Reliefs, PL ijj. Cf p. 31. art.

di)m

9th

century B.C.

Assyrian

Second half of 8th century B.C.

Mesopotamien, PI. 218. Cf.
above. - f: Assyrian art. Reign of Sargon. After
Strommenger, Mesopotamien, PI. 220. Cf. p. 41. g-i: Assyrian art. Reigns of Sennacherib and
Assurbanipal. Cf. Strommenger, Mesopotamien,
d, e:

Cf.

art.

Strommenger,

Pis. 2$ 4, 238, 249. Cf. p. 41. -j, k: AramaeanHittiteart. 730-joo B.C. Cf. Figs. 12, ij, p. 60.-

V) \A
*

(3b~fH

^
a/

I,

m: Aramaean-Hittite

sphere.

Early yth century

(Cf. Capena Bowl, Brown, Etruscan Lion,

PI. ja; Cauldron base from Praeneste, Akurgal,

B.C.

Kunst Anatoliens, p. ;8, PI. 26.) Cf. p. 60. n-p: Urartian art. yth century B.C. Cf. Akurgal,
A, 1962,
Kunst Anatoliens, p. 36, PI. 13; Er^en,
p. 410, PI. 18; Akurgal, Kunst Anatoliens, p. 37,
PI. 1 j. Cf. Fig. i2 7 p. 197.

four places. 83

The enlarged

size of chariot box (and wheel) is

accommodates three persons, instead
of two as in the ninth century. 84 The surfaces of the chariot box now display
ostentatious ornament. In the chariot the king is often shaded by a richly decorated
canopy (PL 2).

with clamps

at

probably due to the fact that

it

now

usually

A characteristic feature of the reliefs of Tiglath-Pileser in are soldiers with helmets

ending in a point, long lances and a short round
drical horse's head-dress for the

shield. 85

The

New

warrior type.

three-staged, cylin-

attachment of streamers 86 as well as the royal

form of a flower or a fan, which the king carries in one hand,

and the Aramaean scribe, accompanied by an Assyrian scribe 87 all these are
motifs and themes that first appear in the time of Tiglath-Pileser in.
One of the most important changes in the artistic situation under Tiglath-Pileser in
was the reaction against the highly centralized Classical style of the preceding
period, which encouraged a lively art production in the provincial cities. The
orthostat reliefs of Arslan-Tas 88 and the wall frescoes of Til Barsib 89 come from
two palaces in the province of Syria. Since the figural scenes from these two sites

Equine head-dress

attributes in the

belong

fully to the transitional style, they

Tiglath-Pileser in. 90

Both the

Activity in proi

have been correctly dated to the time of

and the Arslan-Tas orthostat

Til Barsib frescoes

show all the peculiarities of the transitional style we have been discussing.
The Arslan-Tas works do not have the high quality of the contemporary carvings

reliefs

of the South-west Palace in Kalkhu.

On

the other hand, the wall frescoes

from
(A

Til Barsib rank as the finest pieces of Assyrian painting that have survived.

portion of these wall-paintings comes from a later restoration in the time of

Assurbanipal.) 91

Sargon
ful in

11

(721-705) was a worthy successor of Tiglath-Pileser in.

He was

success-

PLASTIC STYI

preserving everything that his great forebear had constructed and established.

In the field of art patronage he even surpassed him.

After Sargon ascended the throne, he began to look for a

new

site

for his capital,

which was
Dur-Sharrukin or 'fort of Sargon' (the modern Khorsabad), was an imposing metropolis, with great monuments proclaiming the Assyrian ruler's might.
The entrance to the palace, which led to the king's throne-room, was decorated
with orthostat reliefs over four metres high as well as with Lamassu demons in
which he

fixed in the

neighbourhood of Nineveh. This royal

city,

called

relief, which must have made a powerful impression on the visitor.

The kings of friendly neighbouring states and the vassals and envoys, who came

high

to seek an audience with the great king, had to pass along sculptured walls

depicting the heroic deeds of the ruler until they reached the throne, which was

supported by a base with a cautionary scene. This showed Sargon borne in his
chariot across the bodies of fallen enemies, while his soldiers erected pyramids

war

human heads. 92
The monumentality of the

of

orthostat reliefs led to a rounded or 'plastic' style that

assured the carvings of the time of Sargon their pre-eminence as the finest and

Monumentality
plasticity

works of Assyrian history (PL 3). If one examines a splendid winged-bull

god, the Lamassu figure in the Louvre which comes from Sargon's palace, 93 one

best art

39

am

fig. 6 - Lion's head. Detail of a portal lion

from Arslan-Tas. Assyrian art. Reign of
Tiglatb-Pileser III

(J4J-J27

B.C.). Cf. note

y8 and p. $j.

flat treatment of the two preceding styles has been

overcome. Here the figural elements are worked well out of the relief ground with

can see that the limitation of the

all details

The new

carefully shaped.

of forms is especially apparent in the treatment of the

While in the Lamassu figures of the Classical style 94 the flatly worked locks
appear in the form of clusters of vertical wavy lines, here we see the hair plastically
worked and modelled with corkscrew curls. As a relief of a winged god in the
Museum of the Ancient Orient in Istanbul 95 and several other reliefs show, the
corkscrew curl was already known in the ninth century, 96 although it was rarely97
employed. 98
plastic rendering

hair.

The new 'plastic' treatment enabled the sculptor to render forms naturalistically.
Thus the beard and hair are no longer decorative adjuncts, but living forms
presented in their
flat

full natural

orthostat reliefs (PI.

3),

roundness. This plasticity

is

also felt in the relatively

where the body and muscle forms

than in the carvings of earlier styles

are

more

salient

(Pis. 1,8).

Most of the iconographic and stylistic elements introduced in the transitional style
became fixed rules in the period of the Sargonid style. The fan-shaped stylization
of the lower-arm muscle 99 first employed in the time of Tiglath-Pileser is now the
only accepted way of showing this part of the body (Fig. 3b), and this convention
Stylization of

persisted in the following periods. In the plastic style the stylization of the knee-

knee-cap

new form (Fig. 7b). Whereas in the reliefs of the ninth century it
had consisted of three rolls of equal thickness 100 (Fig. 7a), in the carvings of the
time of Sargon (PI. 4) a new stylization appeared; the middle roll was reduced in
size, acquired a pearl-like form and was enclosed by the upper and lower rolls
meeting in the form of an arch (Fig. 7b). 101
The royal tiara keeps the shape usual in earlier times. However, the tendency to
enlargement has gained ground, so that the tiara and its conic finial become
noticeably higher. 102 Moreover, the head-dress is more ornate.
The coiffure style of the transitional style was developed further. In comparison
with previous work, the shock of hair on the nape of the neck is shorter and

Coiffure

40

cap acquired a

on the

shoulders, not yet quite vertical 103

3) as in the succeeding styles of the time

of Sennacherib and Assurbanipal.

smaller, lying only at a slight diagonal

(PL

The

fashion for richly decorated chariot boxes that appeared in the transitional

style 104

continued (Fig.

ninth century
rope,

fell

8).

The rope connecting

the top front of the chariot

box

now general. The luxurious band which was normal in

and common in works of the Tiglath-Pileser style instead of

with the shaft-end

is

out of fashion. For horses the cylindrical

in the transitional style,

is

now

tassel holder,

the
the

which appeared

a fixed rule.

shift. The pouches beneath

They may be clearly recognized
in the lions of the big hero figures from the palace of King Sargon 11, now in the
Louvre (Fig. 9). 105 In the time of Sargon the W-shaped thigh stylization of the
animal figures commonly resembles that of the previous transitional style. 106
But often the half of the
next to the animal's belly is remodelled. In some
instances the form seems to consist of two joined U shapes (Fig. jf). 107 Other
animals have a disk held in place by a rolling arch on the thigh (Fig. 5g-h). 108

In this style the lion type undergoes a noteworthy

the eyes

now usually consist of three

stringy folds.

Modification of
lion type

Since artists of this period did not represent the muscles in a linear

modelled them

careful study of the trial

adhere in a general

The

style,

but

forms cannot be worked out exactly, even through

pieces in the Louvre. But there is no doubt that they

plastically, these

way

to the

W scheme.

general process of accommodation of Assyrian culture to Babylonian models

continued even after Sennacherib (704-681) destroyed Babylon and carried off
the Marduk figure to Assur. His son Esarhaddon (680669) restored the god

Marduk

and began to reconstruct the destroyed city. Assurbanipal

his youth was devoted to the tasks of peace and to works
of scholarship and art, worked towards a synthesis of Babylonian and Assyrian
to his place

(668-626),

who from

culture. 109

Assyrian sculpture, however, remained untouched by the influence of Babylon,

REALISTIC

The reliefs in the British Museum from

the time of Sennacherib and Assurbanipal come from the South-west Palace in
Nineveh. The art works of the reigns of the two kings show easily recognizable
differences, so that two sub-styles may be distinguished; but since most iconographic elements in works of the two periods are almost the same, we may dis-

STYLE

since

was managed

it

entirely

by the

court.

regard the fine points of this differentiation.

In this period the royal tiara with

than

its

larger

its

conical finial

predecessors in the Sargonid style

(PI. 6).

is

even larger and more ornate

The wheels of

the chariots are

in older works
number of people

and consequently easy to distinguish from those depicted

(PI. 6).

Since the capacity of the chariots also increased, the

accommodated

is

usually four and only rarely three. 110 In the time of Sennacherib

the wheel regularly had eight spokes, but in the reliefs of Assurbanipal a sixteen-

spoke type

many

is

found

as well.

The

royal canopy over the chariot

cases has a richer decoration than in the earlier styles.

is

broader and in

From

the time of

Sennacherib, however, one finds chariot boxes without any decoration. 111
chariots

shown

in the art of Sennacherib's reign

may

be

easily distinguished

The
from
41

figs. 7a, b - Above, Fig. ya: Knee-cap stylization. Assyrian art. 9th century B.C. Cf. note 100
and p. 40. - Below, Fig. yb: Knee-cap stylization. Assyrian art. Sargonid. Cf. note 101,
PI. 3 and p. 40.

those of the Assurbanipal period. Typical of Assurbanipal era

sides of the chariot

box

are enclosed

work

is

that the

and strengthened by several (usually four)

metal bands. 112

The

on

head-dress of horses took

new form

in this period. It

conical, but almost horseshoe-shaped or nearly circular (PI. 4)

out with

As

is

no longer

and

is

lower-arm muscle

in the preceding plastic style the

shape (Fig.

3).

However, a

distinction

is

is

modelled in a fan-like

observed, for in the Sargonid period

the stylization consisted of three dissimilar lines, whereas here there are

in hair style

One of the main

two

lines

line. 114

of almost equal length and one short

Change

decked

113
fine, closely set feathers.

characteristics of this style

is

the vertical placement of the shock

of hair on the nape of the neck. Unlike the royal

tiara,

from the ninth century

until

the time of Sennacherib the hair shock decreased steadily in length, so that

reached

its

shortest

form

it

As a consequence of this shortentook on a fully vertical position.

in the seventh century.

ing the formerly diagonal shock of hair

From

the time of Sennacherib the comparatively short shock of hair lay with its
weight vertically on the shoulders. 115 The generally reduced plasticity in the

full

rendering of the forms

of the Sargonid period

is

expressed in the treatment of the hair.

(PI. 3)

ringlets are plastically treated.

success

The

hair shock

has a round and open form, in which the individual

This type of design was cultivated with especial

by an outstanding master,

as well as the orthostat reliefs

who

seems to have created the Lamassu figures

with the king accompanied by his priests

(PI. 3)

and the Assyrians with drinking vessels. 116

In carvings of the Sennacherib and Assurbanipal periods the individual ringlets of
hair are schematically arranged so as to form horizontal and vertical rows
(Pis. 4, 6). 117 It must be added that in comparison with the Sargonid style the
realistic style worked less plastically (though still with more modelling than in the

two

styles

of the

preceding the

realistic

realistic one).

Thus, for example, the curls in the carvings

type are always clearly stylized as coiled spirals, calling for a certain

By contrast, the flatly executed reliefs of the Classical

have hair and beard locks that are exclusively characterized by a

plasticity in their rendering.

style generally

cluster of vertical

Change

in lion type

In the

wavy

lines.

realistic style the lion

type undergoes a fundamental change. In place of the

palmette stylizations beneath the eyes one

(PI.

7).

118

The

respect to the plastic style (Fig.

g i)

We

also find the

5, 7,

9-1

1). It is

scheme of the two paired

easy to see that both types are simply transformed

stylizations. In later times this thigh stylization

traditions,

42

has four thin string-like folds

shapes of unequal width 119 as well as the round disk 120 accompanied by a

rolling arch (Pis.

now

thigh stylization of the animal figures remains unchanged with

which further modified and developed

was borrowed by various

it.

art

fig. 8

- War

Reign of

Assyrian

chariot.

Sargon

( 721-7 oj

art.

B.C.).

Cf.

104 and p. 41.

note

noteworthy that for the first time in Assyrian art the sculptors of the
type with a face free of furrows and styhzations.
Beside the lion type we have been discussing with four thin skin folds (PI. 7)
there are lions preserved from the North-west Palace at Nineveh with faces
carefully modelled without the skin fold. 121 There is no doubt that these lion
figures were created under the influence of Egyptian models. As is well known,
Egyptian lion figures have a smooth face without furrows or stylizations. 122 It
is understandable that Egyptian influence should have been effective in this
period, since under Esarhaddon the Nile kingdom was temporarily incorporated
into the Assyrian empire. Below we shall see how hints of Egyptian art appear

It is especially

realistic style created a lion

Egyptian

lion forn.

in the design of Assyrian battle scenes. 123

The animals shown

art (Pis. 4,

5, 7).

mark the climax of Neo-Assyrian

which show remarkable qualities of

in the art of Assurbanipal

These

naturalistic figures,

Climax of Assyru
sculpture

observation and capture the excitement of momentary actions, rank not merely
as

one of the greatest achievements

of emotional states and of sudden

of one Hon driven by whips
ready to spring while his
of the mare on the
the

relief

we

movement

(PI. 7).

is

The

are

naturalistic rendering

so far advanced that in the case

can sense the animal's rage and fury as he crouches

tail flays

the ground. 124

Then how touching

is

the anxiety

with the fleeing and wounded onager, which comes from

Nineveh. 125 She looks back in terror to
time before she starts her gallop, leaving it to be

North Palace of King Assurbanipal

see her helpless foal for the last

devoured by the dogs

Near East, but

in the art of the ancient

outstanding landmarks in world art as a whole

(PI. 5).

The

at

attitude of the head, the position of the ears,

the trembling lips and nostrils as well as the tense leg muscles convey perfectly
the fleeing animal's distress.

The

orthostat reliefs

from the North-west Palace of King Assurbanipal abound

in

magnificent figures of animals in various attitudes and emotions. Especially

convincing and expressive are the springing and attacking

and dying ones

(Pis. 4, 5, 12b).

Siphnian Treasury

Pergamon Altar
striking

how

at

Comparing

lions,

and the wounded

these scenes with the reliefs of the

Delphi, the Alexander Sarcophagus in Istanbul and the

in Berlin,

all

later

Greek works showing

far the realistic creations

of the Assyrian

artists

H. Frankfort has pertinentiy observed that Assyrian

events. 126 Apart from religious imagery, there is nothing

lion combats,

it

is

surpass them.

artists

often depict real

Lions

in

cow bat

in Assyrian art that could

reality. Frankfort has also pointed out that in fact the body-to-body
combats of man and lion continued to take place in much the same fashion in the
district of the upper Euphrates until fairly recent times. The lion fighter wrapped

not exist in

43

his left

arm

in a great

mass of black goat's hair or in coarse cloth to protect himand claws. When the Hon sprang to the attack the

self against the beast's teeth

man

extended his protected

sword

left

arm, 127 leaving his right arm free to wield the

body. 128 Assyrian kings claimed to have accomplished

against the lion's

who

such heroic deeds single-handed. Assurbanipal,

has

left

us the finest hunting

by the ear and run it through

of the North Palace at Nineveh, where he

scenes of antiquity, boasts of having seized a lion

On

with a spear. 129

an orthostat

relief

by the tail, he declares: 'I am Assurbanipal, king of the

world, king of Assyria. For my princely enjoyment I laid hold of a lion by the tail,
and at the bidding of Ninurta and Nergal, the gods who are my lords, I split his

is

shown holding

skull

a lion

with the axe in

The preceding

my

hands.' 130

considerations

show

clearly that in the course of

two

centuries

Assyrian art underwent a gradual development leading from schematism to a

splendid naturalism. This advance

is

also recognizable in other matters of style.

We

have seen, for example, how the figures in the orthostat reliefs of the ninth
century seem like enlarged drawings. In the time of Sargon, however, the figures
are worked in relatively high relief and the forms of the body are modelled with
sculptural fullness.

Then

in the carvings of the Sennacherib period the plastic

tendency diminished to some extent.

In

reliefs

of the Assurbanipal period

human and

animal figures give evidence of

careful observation of nature.

The W-shaped

stylization of the thighs of lions

and other animals, which appeared

outlined in a linear fashion or simply incised in the ninth century (Pis.

i,

8),

131

modelled in naturalistic forms in the seventh century. Moreover,

the leg-muscle stylization in the guise of a pendent tulip, which was rendered

was
as

plastically

an incised drawing in the animal figures of the ninth century, 132 acquired

plasticity in the orthostat reliefs

and
Plastic fullness

of the seventh century

4-7, 9-1 1). The flat

moved in the eighth and

(Pis.

linear hair treatment of the ninth century (Pis. 1, 8)

seventh centuries towards a naturalistic rendering, which captured the plastic

fullness of the organic

forms in a convincing way

figures of the lions in ninth-century

works

(Pis.

The stiff 'posed'

become living images of
The artists were splendidly

(Pis. 3, 4).

8)

and threatening beasts (Pis. 4, 5, 7).

endowing the animals' countenances with the emotions of pain

roaring, raging
successful in

1,

and wrath, anxiety and menace.

In order to understand the advance that Neo-Assyrian art made in the time of
Assurbanipal over the stage reached in the Classical style of the ninth century,
one need only compare any horse figure of the Classical style with the mare on the
relief of King Assurbanipal (PI. 5), which we have already discussed. The Assyrian
animal figures of the seventh century rank among the finest achievements that
exist in the visual arts.

Climax of realism

While the

realistic

treatment of animals in hunting

astonishing perfection,

human

figures are

still

reliefs

of Assurbanipal reached

imbued with the time-honoured

comparable
by the standards of the conceptual approach.
tendency was dominant in Greek art throughout its whole course. In the fifth and

idealism defined

44

- Assyrian lion type. Reign of

Sargon (721-70J B.C.). Cf. note 10
fig. 9

and p. 41.

human

fourth centuries B.C. especially,

figures normally appear with highly

Greek art similarly avoided the rendering of details and forms

of expression that were neither 'beautiful' nor 'ideal'. Here too Neo-Assyrian art
could be very severe (see above, p. 17). No disturbing features mar the dignified,
serious and proud faces of the men (Pis. 1-4, 6), 133 and no unworthy or low gesture
is allowed to disrupt the harmony of the whole. At the same time this artistic
concept of working with ideal principles allowed the creation of naturalistic works
both in the Near East and in Greece, except that while Near Eastern art follows
the 'conceptual approach', the Greek predilection for 'visual reality' permits a
idealized features.

corresponding naturalism.

Above we have considered at some length the great advance Neo-Assyrian artists
made in the treatment of spatial depth and in the creation of a homogeneous
composition (p. 19). In conclusion we must note that the orthostat reliefs of the
time of Assurbanipal stand at the summit of Assyrian art. The scenes showing
Arabs

fleeing, falling, fighting

evidence of the Assyrian

Spatial depth and

composition

with one another or sleeping in their tents give

artists'

superb powers of observation. Especially natu-

which one Arab falls down from a camel and

its feet by beating its legs with a stick,
while two others desperately fight one another. 134 The interrelationship of the
human figures, with their lively gestures and attitudes, and the camel forms a
remarkable design, which compares favourably with the Amazon and Centaur
battles in Greek art. The artist points a surprising contrast between the mask-like
impassivity of the Arabs' countenances and the expressive movement of the faces
of the camel and the horse.
ralistic

and

another

An

attractive

tries to

is

a scene in

bring the prone animal to

outstanding achievement of Neo-Assyrian art

victory over

Te'umman, king of Elam, on

is

the scene of Assurbanipal's

the river Ulai. 135

Great

battle scene

The composition

both grandiose and dramatic, depicting the scenes as a vital and well-organized
(Pis. 9-1 1). The action moves in stormy vehemence from left to right,
ending in the river where the enemy is slaughtered to the last man.

is

whole

45

The

brief but expressive

words of the inscription on the

slab heighten the

drama

of the relentless struggle. The scene depicted on a separate ground-line on the

upper left shows Te'umman kneeling after being struck by an arrow (PI. u). 136
An inscription explains what is happening: 'In desperation Te'umman tells his
son: Shoot

me

with your bow.' 137 Nearby on the right

is

a longer caption that

'Te'umman, king of Elam, who was

wounded in a fierce battle, and Tamritu, his eldest son, who took him by the
hand, fled in order to save their lives and hid in a thicket. With the help of Assur
and Ishtar I slew and beheaded them.' 138 In the scene below this inscription we
see an Assyrian soldier killing the son of Te'umman with a club, while another
describes the sad end of the king and his son:

severs the king's head. 139

Another

tragic episode of the battle

joining slab (PI.

9).

An

is

narrated in words and images

on an

Elamite prince sinks down, struck by an arrow. 140

ad-

Above

him appears the following inscription: 'Urtaku, the foster son of Te'umman,
though wounded by an arrow, had not yet ended his life. He called an Assyrian
to behead him with the words: Come, cut off my head, then take it to the king,
your lord, and let him show mercy.' 141 But the king showed no mercy. The
battle continued in all its horror and ruthless vehemence until no more enemies
were

left (PI. 11).

Anyone who
Design and
composition

is

acquainted with Egyptian battle scenes will recognize influences

from the Nile kingdom in this Assyrian orthostat relief. Paradoxically, the continual fighting with Egypt seems to have strengthened the bonds with this ancient
civilization. The Assyrian artist must have known battle scenes such as those
still visible in the temples at Thebes on the upper Nile, and have been strongly
influenced by them.
But in the naturalism and lively expressiveness of his own figures the Assyrian
artist went far beyond his Egyptian predecessors. Especially impressive is the
scope of the composition as a whole. The vertical sweep of the river up the slab
is

a felicitous inspiration that gives the picture spatial depth (PI. 11).

Through

one above the other give the impression of lying

or standing on the ground at different distances from the observer. In distributing
the isolated trees from bottom to top among the figures and scenes he seems to
have wanted to show that the figures do not float in the air but stand or lie on the
ground like the trees. This was the last attempt by Near Eastern art, at the end of
its glorious history, to advance toward a solution of the problem of space. As
in the relief of the transportation of the colossal bull statue (Fig. 1) from the time
of Sennacherib, this effort led the artist to the threshold of the discovery of
this device the figures floating

perspective.

ASSYRIAN
ARCHITECTURE

The kings of the Neo-Assyrian period were

palaces

Assyrian sculpture
Hittite building
elements

46

It

who

erected imposing

seems, however, that Assyrian architecture

On the contrary, from northern Syrian and Hittite centres

borrowed such building types and decorative features as the bit
columns, ornamental capitals, sculptured bases and orthostats adorned with

neighbouring countries.
the Assyrians
hilani,

great builders

unlike
did not exercise a significant influence over the cultures of

and temples.

reliefs.

Sargon

Hittite palace,
lions [that

is,

states this expressly:

which

is

'I

erected a bit appati in the fashion of a

called bit hilani in the

Amurru language

portal lions] weighing 4610 talents, in shining bronze;

eight paired
.

four high

columns of cedar wood taken from the Amanus 1 had placed on lion colossi.' 142
The important question of the borrowing of Hittite building elements, which were
also imitated to some extent by the Greeks, will be taken up in a later chapter.
The kings of the Neo-Assyrian period (883-606) built not only in Assur, but in
the three more northerly capitals of Kalkhu (Nimrud), Dur-Sharrukin or 'Fort of
Sargon' (Khorsabad) and Nineveh or Ninua (Kuyunjik).
In the great walled city of Kalkhu, which measures about 2100 by 1670 metres,
the outstanding English archaeologist M. E. L. Mallowan has recently uncovered
remains of important buildings containing princely finds. 143 Here lay the palaces
of Assurnasirpal 11 (North-west Palace), who had selected this place as his capital,
and two buildings of Shalmaneser 11, the Central Palace and the so-called 'Fort',

Four

centres

together with other notable structures of the succeeding Assyrian periods. 144

The

Central Palace and the South-west Palace of

residences in the time of Tiglath-Pileser in.

(Tell

The

Nimrud were

also used as royal

provincial palaces of Til Barsib

Ahmar) 145 and Khadatu (Arslan-Tas), 146 both

in Syria, belong to the time of

this king.

Sargon

built his capital,

1.7 kilometres, in a

which has an enclosure wall measuring about

very short space of time,

six years.

He

1.8

by

Fort of Sargon

lived there until his

later. 147 The palaces and the temple stood at the north-west corner
The palace where Sargon lived had three gates, decorated with
showing demons and genii, leading into a courtyard measuring about

death two years

of the
reliefs

citadel.

100 by 100 metres. Behind this courtyard was a second rectangular one, from
which a passage on the left side led to the throne room, with its entrance guarded
by Lamassu and Gilgamesh figures over 4 metres high. 148 The palace precinct,
which included a temple, where the six great gods were all worshipped, and a
ziggurat, was surrounded by an enclosure wall. However, the higher northwestern part of the residential palace straddled the city wall, so that from the
outside this area gave the impression of a projecting bulwark. 149

As

E.

Strommenger has

recently noted, Assyrian palace complexes were assembled

having a wide throne room between an outer and

The temples, which were also building complexes with courtyard
systems, had cult rooms with a broad vestibule and a longitudinal cella. 151 The
private dwelling areas were suites of rooms usually consisting of a courtyard, a
large and small chamber and a bathroom. 152 The walls were constructed of mud
brick. In the more stately buildings the lower parts of the walls were adorned
as courtyard systems, often

inner court. 150

with sculptured or plain orthostats or

else

with glazed bricks depicting animals. 153

Sennacherib (704-681) rebuilt Nineveh as a capital. 154 He erected the South-west

Palace, where Assurbanipal was later to reside for a time until his new North
Palace could be completed. In the Neo-Assyrian period Nineveh extended for

Nineveh

and 2.1 kilometres in breadth. Most of this area has not

by archaeologists. From the inscription of a stele of Senna-

4.2 kilometres in length

yet been explored

47

cherib in the Archaeological

Museum

processional avenue called the 'royal

and

its

width fixed by ordinance

at

in Istanbul

street'. 155

we

learn that

Nineveh had

This was paved with stone slabs

26 metres. All the citizens had to observe

'Whosoever among the inhabitants of

house on to the street beyond the prescribed limits shall
be impaled upon the roof- tree of his own house.' 156
this ruling, for as the inscription states:

Nineveh

48

shall build his

II.

BABYLONIAN ART

Babylonia was one of the oldest civilized countries of the ancient Near East. In
Hammurabi, in the eighteenth century B.C., the Mesopotamian world

the age of

when Babylonia became

remained very high, and the
victorious Assyrians recognized this superiority. In a sense the Babylonians were
the Greeks and the Assyrians the Romans of the ancient Near East. In the fields
reached a culminating stage of development. Later,

dependent on Assyria,

politically

its

cultural level

of religion and literature especially the Assyrians were strongly influenced by

this

older civilization.

In the seventh century

Babylon was

B.C.,

not long before the Ionic philosophers appeared,

the spiritual capital of the world. All the

still

wisdom and knowledge

of the ancient East, the legacy of thousands of years of practical experience, were

known to the priests of this city.

What then were the intellectual accomplishments
two and

of the Near Eastern peoples

Achievements of

a half millennia since the discovery of writing about

ancient

3000 B.C.? The study of surviving documents suggests that in the middle of the
seventh century men had not yet reached the stage of scientific thought that was

peoples

in the course of

to be realized

two generations

later in the

Ionian Greek

cities

Near Eas

of the west coast

who had received a careful scholarly and priestly

youth and who accumulated a large personal library, has left an

of Anatolia. 157 Assurbanipal,

education in his

on the spiritual life of the ancient Near East.

'Marduk, the wise one among the gods, gave me a broad ear, a perceptive mind.
Nabu, the scribe of the universe, Ninurta and Nergal gave my figure manliness
interesting account that throws light

and incomparable strength. I understood the revelation of the wise Adapa;

I have seen the hidden treasure of the whole art of the scribes in the houses of
heaven and earth ... I can solve the most complicated tasks of division and multiplication. I read the artful writing table of Suman and the dark Akkadian, which
is hard to ascertain. I understand the text of stones that come from the time before
the flood

The

.'
.

status

of the exact sciences

among

clearly expressed in these succinct

the

Near Eastern peoples seems

words of Assurbanipal.

The

to be

solution of very

complicated tasks of division and multiplication must have been the highest
men at that time had devised for practical purposes from their

achievement that

Other surviving written sources confirm that the intellectual

Near East in the mathematical and astronomical fields had
not reached the stage of scientific research. 158 The strength of the Near Eastern
peoples lay in the realms of literature, art and especially religion. Their greatest
contribution to world culture was the discovery of cuneiform writing and above
all the Phoenician alphabet, which with some modification serves most of mankind
daily experience.

activity of the ancient

today as a

common

Literature,
religion

resource.

Babylonia, which had played a leading role in the

artistic field in the

second quarter

49

of the second millennium, during the Hammurabi period, once more became an
important art centre after the end of the thirteenth century. The Babylonian

boundary stones of the

outstanding

Boundary stone

Vertical pleats

artistic

late

second and early

first

millennium are carvings of

expression with a unique character. 159

The

representations of

men, animals and fables have a fully Babylonian stamp in both iconography and
style. These art works had a great influence upon Luristan bronzes, and many
reflections are evident in the products of the late Hittite workshops. 160 Outstanding in the latter group is the Neo-Babylonian feather crown 161 of the genius
figures from Malatya and Tell Halaf. 162 Moreover, the unusual coiffure of Queen
Gula on the boundary stone of King Nebuchadnezzar i, now in the British
Museum, 163 is the same as that worn by King Sulumeli at Malatya.
Only a few sculptures have survived as evidence of Babylonian art from the
period of the Neo-Assyrian empire. The political hegemony of the Assyrians
seems to have considerably restricted the possibilities of development for BabyIonian art. A boundary stone of King Mardukapaliddina n (721-710), which
comes from the year 714, 164 continues the long-established custom of the Babylonian boundary stone in a modified style (PL 19). The text records King Mardukapaliddina's gift to the magnate Bel-akhe-irba of a tract of land. In his right hand
the king holds an object of unknown meaning, possibly symbolizing the gift.
The recipient raises his right hand in grateful acknowledgement. Above the two
figures we find (from left to right) symbols of Nabu, the mother goddess, Ea and
Marduk. Both figures wear a belted tunic that has a cluster of vertical pleats
running from the belt to the feet.
This cluster of pleats, which also appears in the figures shown on other Babylonian boundary stones 165 and on a Babylonian seal, 166 is part of a Babylonian
fashion in dress that spread over the entire Near East in the last quarter of the
eighth century and in the seventh century. 167 We find it at Zincirli, 168 Sakcegozii 169
(Pis. 12a, 13; Figs. 98, 99), Carchemish (Fig. 93) and in Luristan. It recurs on
Syrian ivory reliefs (PL 41 Fig. 106), and even appears on Assyrian reliefs of the
time of Esarhaddon 170 and Assurbanipal. 171
After the fall of the Neo-Assyrian empire Babylonia regained its independence to
enjoy renewed prosperity in the sixth century, the time of its greatest brilliance.
Nabupolassar (625-605) and especially his son Nebuchadnezzar 11 (604-562) built
great fortresses, palaces and temples that became a byword for magnificent luxury
among later generations. The city walls of Babylon ranked as one of the seven
wonders of the world, and sometimes the Hanging Gardens of Semiramis in
;

Krischen has rightly noted, 172 the

Tower of Babel would have been named as a third Babylonian wonder of the
world, if this tower had still stood in its original form, or at least as a ruin, when

Babylon were included

as well.

And

as F.

list was drawn up in Hellenistic times.

The 'Hanging Gardens' of Babylon were not in fact built by Semiramis but by
Nebuchadnezzar. As E. Unger has suggested, 173 they may have been laid out

the

Hanging gardens

following an earlier version by Semiramis,

An
50

inscription

on

a stele in

Assur 174

if

there

states that

is

any truth in the

Sammuramat,

that

is

tradition.

Semiramis,

was the consort of Shamshi-Adad V (823-810), mother of Adadnirari in (809-782)

and daughter-in-law of Shalmaneser in (854-824); and the inscription on a relief
stele in Istanbul 175 indicates that Semiramis held the regency on behalf of her young
son for five years. Since Shamshi-Adad V extended Assyrian rule to Babylon in
8 1 2-8 1 1 it is not impossible that Semiramis also reigned in Babylon and laid out
first hanging gardens there. A square vaulted structure measuring about
40 metres on each side, to the north-east of the southern citadel of Babylon, which
lies west of the Ishtar Gate, has been regarded as the base of the Hanging

the

Gardens. 176

It seems that the building originally consisted of a series of steps

forming terraces and reaching a height of 30 metres. 177 The building type was
bold and new, and the general layout, with fresh green trees standing out against a
mass of imposing constructions in reddish-brown brick, must have been highly

impressive.

Babylon was the

show

that

its

largest

and best fortified

city

of the ancient Near East. Excavations

walls stretched for 20 kilometres.

brick. In projecting

and exposed

They were

built of

unbaked

City walls

mud

spots, especially those in contact with water,

the walls were strengthened with baked brick masonry, using asphalt as mortar. 178

The system consisted of a main wall 6.5 metres thick and a 4 metre-thick advance
The general layout closely recalls the Byzantine city walls of Istanbul. 179
The rectangular city lay athwart the river Euphrates, which divided the area into

wall.

Ziggurat

whole having an almost square

shape. 180 In the centre of the city stood the tower of Babel, that is the Etemenanki
ziggurat of Marduk with its 'high temple' and south of it the 'deep temple' of
Esagila. The main avenue, the so-called processional street, 181 ran from the
a small western

and a larger eastern

part, the

northern part of the eastern quarter, paralleling the course of the Euphrates, then

made

a right turn towards the west, and led across a bridge to the western quarter.

This processional street linked the main temple of Esagila with a festival building
lying outside the city. 182 Parts of the street and one of
Ishtar Gate, have been excavated

Museum on

somewhat reduced

and then

its

great entrances, the

partially reconstructed in the Berlin

scale (PI. 20).

The

side walls of the street

Ishtar Gate

were

decorated with striding lions 183 in glazed relief bricks, and the gate had dragons
in the same technique. These dragon figures 184 repeat the pictorial type of the
dragon we know from the Babylonian boundary stones (PL 19), while the lion
figures are clearly based

on Assyrian models. As the two thick palmette-shaped

go back to Assyrian prototypes from

skin folds beneath the eyes show, the lions

the time of Sargon. Similarly, the softly modelled thigh muscle in the shape of a

W derives from the lion figures of Sargon.

The

Palace of Nebuchadnezzar

of the time of Sargon, for

it

11

185

betrays close connections with the architecture

straddles the city wall

and consists of numerous court

complexes. 186 These links are significant, since they show that the Babylonians,
while influencing the Assyrians in
their art

The

many

fields, also

took important features of

from the conqueror.

great architecture of the late Babylonian period could not play the leading

historical role

it

merited, for

it

entered too late

upon

the stage of world history.

51

Ionian architecture, which had already developed in the second quarter of the
sixth century, can hardly
Persian conquest

building.

The

people of the

The

splendour.

be considered to have been influenced by Babylonian

who conquered Babylon at that time (538), were the only

Near East who had the resources to erect buildings of comparable
Persians,

Persian empire took over the entire heritage of ancient

tamia. Cyrus created history's

peacefully and took

first

up residence

universal state.

'When

Mesopo-

entered Babylon

in the palace of the princes amidst joyful cele-

Marduk inclined the white heart of the Babylonians towards

thought to honour him daily
All the kings of all quarters of

bration, the great lord

me, because I
the world who dwell in throne-rooms, from the upper sea to the lower sea,
.'
they all brought their heavy tribute and kissed my feet in Babylon
Although the intellectual leadership of the world passed from the Near East into
the hands of the Greeks in the beginning of the sixth century, Babylon remained
a cultural centre of the first rank even into Hellenistic times, so that Alexander
planned to establish the new capital of his world empire in this ancient metropolis
.

of the East.

5*

III.

ARAMAEAN ART

During the second half of the second millennium, bands of Semitic nomads, who
are usually lumped together under the name of Aramaeans, began to stream from
their original home in the Arabian desert towards Babylonia, northern Syria and
the eastern Tigris district. 187 As early as the first half of the eleventh century the
Aramaean Adad-apal-iddina usurped the Babylonian throne. 188 From that time
onwards the peaceful Aramaean penetration of Babylonia progressed steadily.
In the same way the Aramaeans settled in northern Syria and southern Anatolia,
so that in the eighth and seventh centuries b.c. with few exceptions the chief cultural
and economic centres were in their hands.
The political history, as well as the language and culture, of the Aramaeans have
been discussed in a fundamental monograph by A. Dupont-Sommer. 189 Here
I shall

confine myself to interpreting 190 the art of this important people. 191

Below it will be shown, in discussing late Hittite art, that it is primarily to the
Aramaeans that architecture owes the creation and development of the hilani
building type and the elaboration of the tectonic order of columns with bases and
capitals (p. 73). At Zincirli (the ancient Sam'al) the Aramaeans also produced
fine works of sculpture that may be regarded as their own creation (Pis. 12-17;
Figs. 10-16).

The artistic monuments of Zincirli are provided with Aramaean inscriptions and
show stylistic characteristics unparalleled in either Assyrian or Hittite art. Among
the Zincirli carvings
in

its

we

find a turban-like cap,

which

recalls the

Assyrian

Aramaean
head-dress

tiara

general make-up, but which can be regarded as an original type of head-

dress because of

its

conical form. It appears in

all

the

Aramaean scenes

at Zincirli

and in some Anatolian monuments of the eighth and seventh

centuries (PI. 30). 192 Since Phoenician ivories 193 and metal bowls 194 show a very
similar conical cap, it seems that the Aramaeans brought this head-dress with them
from the south.

(PI.

12a, Fig. 10)

Aramaean art
The Aramaean

further characteristic of

comes from Assyrian

beard in a

way

art.

is

the spiral hair curl. 195 This actually

Spiral

arranged the spiral curls of the

the ear

artists

that anticipated the Sargonid hair style.

The

curl

by the

curls, curl

ear

seems to have been an Aramaean invention. Moreover, the

ubiquitous type of fold treatment found on Aramaean carvings seems to derive
from an old Aramaean tradition (Pis. 28, 35). Of course, it may be that here the

(PI. 12; Fig. 11) also

Aramaeans were considerably stimulated by the Hittites and the Babylonians. It

is important to note, however, that the particular type of fold treatment, which
will be discussed further below, is only found on Aramaean monuments or late
Hittite works influenced by them.
One of the most important characteristics of the Aramaeans is, I believe, their
generally secular outlook, and this is clearly evident in their art.

Secular outlook

53

by

fig. io

- King Kilamuwa (832-810

B.C.) with

bis son. Basalt. Relief from Zincirli (Sam'al).

Staatliche

Cf

Funerary

stelae

Aluseen,

Berlin.

Height

jj.j

cm.

below.

The erection of stelae with funerary scenes of feasting is also a specifically Aramaean
practice.

Study of the carvings

at Zincirli (Sam'al) reveals that at this site a

well-developed

Aramaean court art196 existed alongside the traditional folk art of the small states,
at least from the middle of the ninth century onwards. We know that at Zincirli
two different ethnic groups lived side by side with one another. For Kilamuwa
prided himself on having 'brougnt to an end feuding between the Mushkabim
and Ba'ririm\ 197 In our opinion these two groups can be clearly identified by
their works of art.
The Aramaeans were the ruling class; their court art is elegant and graceful
(Pis. 12-17). The indigenous Luvians, whose culture had been shaped by the
were their subjects, but they continued to prefer their own
ruggedly old-fashioned art (Figs. 61-66). In order to show the people that indi-

Hittite tradition,

genous customs were respected, the Semitic princes had the entrances and the
orthostats of citadel gates decorated with carvings in the Hittite manner. But in
palaces this antiquated art found no place, and monuments in the Aramaean style
were preferred (PL 12; Fig. 11). The peaceful coexistence of the Mushkabim and
Ba'ririm seems to have lasted for a long time, for only in the second half of the
eighth century were the Hittite lion figures pulled down (Figs. 71, 72), to be

Kilamuwa

relief

replaced by new lion monuments in the Assyrian manner (Figs. 12, 13). The
Aramaeans no longer needed to pay lip service to the Luvian-Hittite tradition.
This shows that they had become undisputed lords of the country. 198
The oldest Aramaean art work is a ceremonial relief of a king, from Zincirli
(Fig. io). 199

The

large tuft of hair gathered at the nape of the neck places the relief

in the ninth century, as can be seen

54

from comparison with Assyrian prototypes

- Portal sphinx from Hilani II

AiS.p. $)lt Fig. 240,
PL jj. Aramaeani^ing Hittite style.
About 730 B.C. Archaeological Museum
fig. ii

at Zincirli. After

Istanbul.

Cf.pp. J4, ;6.

(Pis. 1, 8).

The

Aramaean characteristics. The

must represent King Kilamuwa, whose name is indicated
slab. 200 The second figure behind him is dressed in the same
left hand a pouch the size of a fist, and in his right, like

head-dress and the spiral curls are

larger figure in front

on the other pictorial

way; he holds in his
Kilamuwa, a chalice-like blossom, evidently an emblem of royal dignity. The
second figure is probably the king's son. Both men have faces with hooked noses
of Semitic type. The shaven upper lip of the bearded king may derive from Hittite
models (p. 96), which the Aramaeans were at first probably glad to imitate.
A colossal statue from Zincirli, now in Berlin, 201 with an Aramaean inscription
on the front of the robe of 'King Panamuwa, the son of Karal', represents the
god Hadad. The statue, which may be dated by the inscription to about 790,
has a stylized beard with Aramaean spiral curls.
An outstanding relief from Zincirli shows the Aramaean King Barrakab with
his secretary (PI. 12a). 202 The short Aramaean inscription on either side of a moon
symbol mentions the donor and his god: 'I, Barrakab, the son of Panammu/my
God Baal/Harran.' Both figures have the hooked nose of Semitic type. The king
wears an Aramaean tiara and has hair and a beard, stylized with Aramaean spiral
curls. The elegant curl by the ear is also Aramaean. The shoulder folds of the
mantle, an invention of Aramaean artists, appear here for the first time. The king
is seated upon an ornate throne. He raises his right hand to emphasize the words
addressed to the secretary. In his

left

hand he holds

Barrakab

relief

a palmette-like flower,

The modestly dressed secretary holds under his

left arm a hinged book, probably made up of papyrus leaves, and in his left hand
a writing case with a place for ink and a brush. With his clenched right hand he

possibly a sign of royal majesty.

salutes the king. 203

55

Funerary

stele

of a

princess

Another Aramaean work from Zincirli is the funerary stele of a princess with her
lady-in-waiting. 204 The bottom of the slab tapers to a point so that it could be
fixed to a pedestal (PI. 13). The custom of setting a funerary stele over the tomb
was unknown in Mesopotamia and is specifically Aramaean. 205 The grave reliefs
of the Neo-Hittite principalities that have been found so far are all wholly
Aramaean, Aramaeanizing (Pis. 13, 26-30; Figs. 100, 101), or at least influenced
by Aramaean carvings. At the top of the funerary stele under discussion we see a
winged sun disk decorated with palmettes, the emblem of royal power. This
winged sun device derives from Egyptian rather than Hittite sources. The
princess

Aramaean

tiara

sits

upon

a simple throne with a plaited cushion before a table with a

funerary meal. She wears an

Aramaean

tiara.

The brim of

this conical

cap

is

decorated with six-leaved rosettes, continuing at the back on to a trailing ribbon.

Her

skirt has parallel folds recalling the

Barrakab

(PI.

12a).

Among

shoulder folds on the mantle of King

her jewels one must note a Phrygian fibula on her

popular fashion accessory in the last third of the eighth century and
around 700 B.C. The flower in her left hand must be a princely emblem. The
abundant offerings on the table include a bowl with flat loaves and meat patties,
which remain favourite dishes in the south-eastern Anatolian provinces even
today. Nearby are a smaller bowl with roast fowl and two vessels which probably
contained salt and spices. The handmaiden holds a knife in her left hand and in her
breast, a

The figures belong to the same human

on the other Aramaean reliefs. The stylistic link of the figures with
the relief of King Barrakab dates the funerary stele to the beginning of the last
quarter of the eighth century. The Phrygian fibula on the princess's breast conright a fly-whisk, a princely attribute.

type found

firms this date.

The reliefs from Zincirli we have been discussing, together with other carvings
from the same site as well as all the sculptures of Sakcegozii 206 (Pis. 14-16;
Figs. 11, 14-16) and finally the statue of a king from Malatya, 207 are all creations
of a single sculptural school. We must regard the style of the carvings as Aramaean,
since Hittite features, apart from a few details of the animal figures (p. 60),
have almost entirely disappeared.
Three characteristic features of this Aramaean style the cap-like head-dress, the
have been discussed above. Moreover, the
spiral curl and the curl by the ear
hair at the nape of the neck of the Zincirli princess (PI. 13) seems to be specifically

Hair

style

Aramaean, and

it

recurs even

more

strikingly in the portal sphinx of Zincirli

and genii (PI. 15 a), and in the lion-slayer of the

all from Sakcegozii. In this hair style several spiral

(Fig. 11), in the sphinxes

lion-

hunting

curls

fall

relief (PI. 22b),

down

to the shoulder in a thick mass. In Assyrian reliefs this coiffure

is

often

used to characterize foreign peoples. Assyrian artists used to render the Babylonians
of the seventh century with a similar hair style. Since a strong influx of Aramaean
elements makes

itself felt

from the

late

second millennium onwards,

plate 14 - Royal figure. Orthostat relief from Sakcegozii. Andesite. Aramaean

Archaeological Museum, Ankara. Height 86.) cm. Cf. above.
56

style.

it

follows

About 730

B.C.

&*l**i^J&*

\f
>* %.***'#-

fc%*^va*.

fcn

**+

mm
^u,"h4

"'

that this hair style

must be linked

sirens of the tridacna shells

to the

Aramaean immigrant population. The

have similar hair curls

falling to the shoulder (PI. 36c),

and these were apparently usual among Semitic peoples. The Syrian reliefs also
show a very similar hair style at the nape of the neck (PI. 43 Fig. in). It is interesting that a limestone statuette from Amman in Jordan 208 shows the same kind
of hair style. Thus the Aramaeans seem to have brought it from their original
homeland.
The statuette from Amman, which stands 45 centimetres high, wears a mantle of
the type already seen in the Aramaean reliefs of Zincirli 209 (PI. 1 2a) and Sakcegozu
(PL 14). The mantle is arranged in diagonal folds, with one of the ends held in one
hand at chest height. This form of mantle recurs in the Malatya royal statue. 210
It is quite possible that Malatya also had come into the hands of the Aramaeans
at the end of the eighth century, for the royal statue is a true repetition of the royal
relief from Sakcegozii (PI. 14). We note that apart from the dress the two figures
have the same hair and beard style and that in their right hands they bear the same
royal symbol. The more ordinary Amman statuette is a somewhat less successful
example of the fashion. But there is no doubt that it too follows the same mantle
type. It may be that the Aramaeans brought this mande with them from their
homeland, subsequently modifying and refining it. The Aramaean mande with
its thick shoulder folds (Pis. 12a, 14) recurs on the human-headed attachments of
an Urartian cauldron found at Vetulonia in Etruria (Fig. 126). 211
The rendering of the folds themselves is a long-established custom in the Near
East, but the mantle falling over the shoulders is a new fashion created by the
Aramaeans. Although it derives from Babylonian models (PI. 19), the long tunic,
emphasized at the back with a cluster of vertical pleats, became the normal
fashion in the Aramaean world during the second half of the eighth century. It
appears in most of the male figures of Zincirli and Sakcegozii (Pis. 12a, 14;
Figs. 98, 99). The same garment with vertical pleats behind is, however, also
found in contemporary Syrian ivories (PI. 41; Fig. 106) and on the Araras relief
;

Fold rendering

(Fig- 93)-

The costume of

the

two

genii of Sakcegozu fertilizing a palmette-tree (PI. 15 a)

follows Assyrian models of the transitional and Sargonid styles

wears a mantle, which leaves the advanced foot

free,

(PI. 3).

The

figure

with a fringe that forms a

buoyant curve over the thigh and then falls straight down to the ankles. The lionslayer of the lion-hunting relief from Sakcegozu represents a distorted version of
the same costume (PI. 23b). The handsome sandals of the male figures of Zincirli
and Sakcegozu (PI. 14, Figs. 98, 99) also have a special form and decoration,
evidendy Aramaean inventions. Almost identical sandals appear in the Carchemish
Araras

relief (Fig. 93).

plate 15a - Genii. Orthostat relief from Sakcegozii. Andesite. Aramaean style. About 730 b.c
Archaeological Museum, Ankara. Height 86.5 cm. Cf. p. j6.
plate 15b - Male sphinx. Orthostat relief from Sakcegozu. Andesite. Aramaean style. About 730 b.c
Archaeological Museum, Ankara. Height 86.) cm. Cf. p. j6.

59

fig.
at

- Portal lion from Hilani III

After AiS PI. J7,

Aramaeani^ing Hittite style.

Zincirli.

below.

About 730 B.C. Archaeological

Museum, Istanbul. Cf. pp. j$ and
below.

Modification of

Hittite animal figures

Building on the Hittite tradition, the Aramaean

created entirely

new

types of animal figures.

artists

of Zincirli and Sakcegozii

number of animal carvings from

belong to this category: the portal Hon from Hilani 111 (Fig. 12), the portal
from the southern hall P, two portal lions from the inner citadel gate (Fig. 1 3),
the two sphinxes on columns, the portal sphinx from Hilani 11 (Fig. 11), and
finally the animal figures from Sakcegozii (PI. 16; Figs. 14, 15).
The animal figures mentioned from these two sites have the following common
style elements: the n-shaped reserve area on the shoulder, which often has an
x-sign; the stylization of the front legs, which consists of one (Figs. 12, 13) or
two (Pis. 15b, 16; Figs. 14, 15) wedge shapes; the W- or N-shaped stylization of
the thighs (Figs. 11-15); and the /.-shaped stylization of the ankle (Figs. 11, 12,
especially the double-wedge schematization of the front legs
15). These details
and .'.-shaped stylization of the ankle are so unusual and original that they
must be hallmarks of a single workshop. Thus the same artists worked contemporaneously for Zincirli and Sakcegozii.
The lion of the lion-hunting relief from Sakcegozii has the same thigh and leg
stylization and seems to show the same ankle schematization as well (PL 23b).
The W- or N-shaped stylization of the thighs in Aramaean art, which develops
as a modification of the W-shaped Assyrian scheme (PI. 16; Figs. 15, 5J-k), was
later borrowed by other northern Syrian workshops and by Urartian ones (Fig.
5Ip). Two bronze works of northern Syrian origin found in Etruria, the bowl
from Capena212 and the cauldron base from the Barberini Tomb in Praeneste
(Fig. 5 m), 213 show animal bodies with W- or N-shaped thighs. L. Brown thought
that the thighs of the lion figures on these works show a flame-like stylization, 214
but it is clear that it is really an N-shaped scheme, as comparison of these two
examples with the thigh stylization of a lion from Zincirli shows (Fig. 12). Moreover, we have been able to link the sphinx figures of the cauldron base from the
Barberini Tomb to Neo-Hittite and Aramaean works on account of other stylistic
Zincirli

lion

features. 215

60

fig. 13

- Portal

lion

from

p.

$42, Fig.

2ji,

the inner

After AiS,

citadel gate at Zincirli.

PL

47,

below.

Aramaeani^ing Hittite style. Reign

of Sargon (721-70; B.C.). Archaeological

Museum,

Istanbul.

Cf. pp.

J 3, 62.

Among Aramaean
Assyrian

traits.

sculptures the lion heads (Figs. 14, 15)

The

three-flap ear, the rich

show predominantly

furrowing of the nose and the two

Aramaean-HittiU
lion figures

palmette-shaped stylizations beneath the eyes point to particular Assyrian models.

Yet despite the added Assyrian

their overall Hittite character.

style elements these

Aramaean

lions

have kept

Like the body, the head has not entirely

lost its

was usual among Hittite lion

figures (PI. 21). For this reason the two palmette-like stylizations on the face did
not point upwards, as was the case with the Assyrian lion figures (PL 8a), but
downwards. The excessively large and thick canine teeth are a further trait of
middle Neo-Hittite lion figures, which lingers in the lions of Zincirli and Sakgegozii.
Aramaean artists created a type of griffin head that was eagerly imitated by later
artists (PL 15 a, Fig. 16). This represents an Aramaean transformation of the
cubic form.

figs. 14, 15

The cheek bones

- Portal

lion from

are clearly formed, as

A ramaean- Hittih
griffin

Sakfegb\u. Cf. Plate 16 and p. 60.

61

which

Hittite figure type (Fig. 79), in

of the lion and the horse.

The

traits

of the eagle are combined with those

chin area of the bird-men from Sakcegozii

is

no

longer consistently shaped as part of the beak, as in Hittite and Assyrian examples,

The wide-open beak with the

that the Aramaean artists of
Sakcegozii combined the eagle head with that of the lion to make a single unit.
An important modification is the change of the spiral curl at the crown of the
head into a knobby thickening (Fig. 16). It is significant that at Sakcegozii the
but clearly takes the form of a lion muzzle (Fig.
outstretched tongue and the

other bird head

still

mane

shows the

spiral

suffice to

ending

the spiral ending into a conical thickening

in the

round made by goldsmiths, and

as imitations

16).

show

at the

top of the head. This change of

was probably

reliefs

first

carried out in figures

of Sakcegozii seem to have originated

of such metal prototypes.

In summary, the griffin-head type created by Aramaean

artists

has the following

mane, wide-open beak, lolling tongue, chin

muzzle, mane roll and lock, which at the top and

characteristics: horse's ear, horse's

form of a lion's
bottom forms a spiral or else a knobby finial at the top. This type of griffin head,
which we first defined fifteen years ago, 216 is an Aramaean invention. At Zincirli
and Sakcegozii it was given not only to bird-men but also to griffin figures with
leonine bodies, as at Carchemish. 217 The griffin relief from an orthostat in Ankara
(Fig. 17) is the only example 218 in which the head of a griffin-man of the Sakcegozii
type (PI. 15 a) is combined with a leonine body. The head of the Ankara griffin
is very much damaged at the top, so that one can no longer determine whether
the big lock ended above in a spiral or in a round thickening. Otherwise this head
has all the features found in the griffin-man of Sakcegozii.
By association with the relief of King Barrakab (PI. 1 2a), 219 which is datable by
area in the

Flowering of

Aramaean

art

its

inscription, the Zincirli animal figures

Sakcegozii animal figures

to the

same period. The

may be

placed about 730. Since the

come from the same workshop

activity

of

this

(p. 61),

they must belong

remarkable school of sculptors must be

last third of the eighth century. The previously mentioned

from the inner citadel gate of Zincirli (Fig. 13) appear to have been
created in the time of Sargon (Fig. 9) on account of the three palmette-shaped
stylizations beneath the cheek bones. Although they are the latest examples of

placed mainly in the

portal lions

such lion figures, they

still

have the

lolling

tongues of Hittite

lions. It

may be

that the sculptor intentionally retained this old-fashioned trait, so that his figures,

which were erected near

should not appear too

lions in the

startling.

middle Neo-Hittite

right side of the lower border show, he created his figures

the middle Neo-Hittite

Chariot relieffrom
Sakfegb\ii

The

plates

6a,

About 730
62

by reworking

lions

of

style.

old-fashioned-looking relief of the lion hunt with a chariot in Sakcegozii

(PI. 23 b)

from

style (Figs. 71, 72),

In any case, as the remains of lion claws on the

originated in the last third of the eighth century, like the other carvings

this site.

Because of the dress of the lion-slayer and the shoulder and leg

b - Portal lion from Sakcegozii. Basalt. Aramaean style with Assyrian-Hittite elements.
Museum, Ankara. Height 84 cm. Cf. Figs. 14, ij and p. 60.

b.c. Archaeological

WHS?

figs. 1 6, 17 - Left, Fig. 16: Griffin headfrom an orthostat relieffrom Sakfegd^u. Cf. Plate ija
and pp. 61, 18J. - Right, Fig. ij: Griffin bead from an orthostat relief from Ankara. Basalt.
Aramaeani^ing Hittite style. About 700 B.C. Archaeological Museum, Ankara. Cf. note 218
and p. 62.

stylizations

tioned

it

of the lion

may be

characteristic

As my examination of

which have already been men-

the original suggests, despite

lion has a lightly indicated palmette

mouth

features

linked to the other Sakcegozii orthostats.

its

entirely Hittite face, the

form beneath the cheek bone. The open

also lacks the characteristically Hittite feature of the outstretched tongue.

furrowed only at the tip. The winged sun

found in the carving of the genii with
the palmette-tree (PL 15a). The stylization of the wings is almost the same on both
slabs. The richly decorated band connecting the chariot box with the shaft-end
Following Hittite practice the nose
disk

is

more

is

in the Hittite vein than that

appears in Assyrian art no later than the time of Tiglath-Pileser (745-727). Thus
there is no objection to a dating about 730. The Hon head at the rear of the chariot

box, which must be regarded as the decoration of a shield placed there, certainly
belongs to the Classical style, though it may be claimed here as a conscious

As O. Nuoffer recognized many years ago, 220 the curving rail of the
box is a sign of technical advance. The richly decorated horse blanket also
appears on chariots depicted on Syrian ivories, 221 which probably originated in
archaism.
chariot

the last third of the eighth century. These

low box and the same bar behind

Zincirli, Sakcegozii,

works

in ivory also have the

same

small,

as in the Sakcegozii relief.

Maras, Karatepe and several other

number of carvings with strong Aramaeanizing

traits.

have yielded a large

But since in many im-

sites

Other AramaeanHittite carvings

plate 17 - Lion protome from Olympia. Ornament for the rim of a cauldron. Late Neo-Hittite style
with Assyrian-Aramaean and Neo-Hittite elements. Late 8th century b.c Olympia Museum. Height
about 2 j cm. Cf. p. 181.

OS

portant ways these sculptures rest on indigenous Hittite-Luvian traditions, they

will

Role of Aramaeans in
architecture

be discussed in the section on the Neo-Hittite

One
fe\d.

word must be said on the

In the section on Neo-Hittite

last

activity

style.

of the Aramaeans in the architectural

architecture (p. 69)

it

will

be shown that the

development of the hilani building type and the elaboration of the columnar order
with capitals and base actually took place in such Aramaean arts centres as
Zincirli, Sakc^gozii and Tell Halaf. The new approach to building found in Hittite
culture, which was on the point of dying out, may only be explained as the result
of the life-giving new spirit brought by the immigrant Semitic Aramaeans.

66

IV.

In the

first

half of the

first

NEO-HITTITE ART

millennium

B.C. the small

Neo-Hittite states of southern

Anatolia and northern Syria produced outstanding works of architecture and

sculpture that strongly influenced other cultures
later

first

the

Near Eastern lands and

Greece and Etruria.

Neo-Hittite culture depends on antecedents of the Syro-Hittite-Luvian civilization

of the second millennium

B.C.,

which incorporated important Hurrian and

Minoan-Mycenaean elements. In the course of the first quarter of the first millennium Assyrian, Phoenician and Aramaean contributions were added, producing,
in the ninth and eighth centuries, a great efflorescence of culture in the Hittite
centres, from which impressive art works survive. Especially important was the
Aramaean part in the formation of the new culture in southern Anatolia and
northern Syria, for the Aramaeans began to invade the area at the beginning of the
first

Antecedents of Sjn
Hittite-Luvian

complex

millennium.

The first of their conquests, according to Landsberger, 222 was the seizure of the
kingdom of Til Barsib by the tribal chieftain Adin about 950. He was followed
by Gabar Sam'al at Zincirli about 920. The Aramaean takeover of the area continued by stages into the seventh century. Art monuments show that Tell Halaf
became Aramaean during the eighth century and Karatepe towards the end of
this century. By 700 the Aramaeans had infiltrated the area of Maras and Gaziantep
and possibly had reached far as Ivriz, south of Konya. Similarly, Malatya may
also have become Aramaean in the second half of the eighth century. Only

Spread of

Aram a

Hattena and Carchemish stayed Luvian-Hittite until the Assyrian conquest. 223

The term

'Neo-Hittite

art' is

best suited to the architecture and figural art of this

hybrid culture. In earlier publications

have given

a detailed analysis

Neo-Hittite arf

of Mitannian

and Syro-Hittite elements together with Assyrian and Aramaean ones in NeoHittite figural art, but I have also insisted that the art as a whole is a continuation
of the Anatolian Hittite tradition, 224 since the basic features of these monuments
bear an authentic Hittite stamp.
also, while the Mycenaean-tinged northern Syrian traits of the
second millennium come into prominence, such Anatolian Hittite features as
gates, orthostats with reliefs, animals flanking the entrance, and animal protomae

In architecture

addossed to piers

persist.

Since southern Anatolian and northern Syrian states are also linked to the
rites and symbols, and by the name of their kings (for example,
Lubarna-Labarna, Qatazilu-Hattusili, Muttali-Muwatalli), we must admit that
the term 'Neo-Hittite' is justified. 225 Paolo Matthiae has contributed an outstanding
study that deals exhaustively with the monuments of Syrian art during the second

Hattusa by religious

millennium. 226 In iconography and style the objects assembled in his book are
not nearly so close to Neo-Hittite sculpture as the Anatolian and Hittite works of
the imperial period were.

67

plate 1 8 - Griffin protome from Praeneste, Etruria. Bronze. Late Neo-Hittite

style with Hittite-Aramaean and Assyrian elements. Late 8th century b.c. Villa
Giulia, Rome. Overall height 27 cm. Cf. p. i8j.
68

The

hieroglyphic script

Hittites' to the Hittites

another important cultural element that links the 'Neoof the imperial period. As B. Landsberger has recently

is

shown, 227 the hieroglyphic script was created in the Luvian-speaking area for
But this script seems to have reached its full development only
during the period of the Hittite empire and in the Hittite capital. During the
fourteenth and thirteenth centuries it was in use also in Kizwatna (that is, in the
land of the Luvians) as the official script of the Hittite empire. The use of the
hieroglyphic script on public monuments of the Neo-Hittites is therefore a
tradition that derives from the Hittite empire.
The most important achievements of the Neo-Hittite cultural centres lie in the

Hieroglyphic script

that language.

The building type known as the bit hilani or hilani, of which

the earliest known instance is King Niqmepa's Palace of the fifteenth-fourteenth
century B.C. at Tell Atchana on Syrian soil (Fig. 18), became a standard archifield

of architecture.

form

and eighth centuries. It must

one of the most remarkable architectural inventions of the ancient
Near East. As R. Naumann has justly said, 228 we are dealing with a building that
has a vestibule with one to three supports on the front side, behind which lies a
large main room with a hearth. Around the main room are grouped smaller
rooms. 229 A staircase leading to un upper storey often appears on one side of the
vestibule. The door splayings generally feature animal sculptures and the lower
parts of the facades have orthostats bearing reliefs.
The earliest example (Fig. 18), Niqmepa's Palace at Tell Atchana, has all the
features of the later hilani buildings of northern Syria. 230 It is possible, however,
as H. Frankfort has suggested, 231 that the eighteenth-century Yarimlim Palace at
Tell Atchana represents a first step towards this form. The reception hall of this
palace (5, 5 a) is divided into two rooms by two short spur walls with four wooden
supports between them. 232 Behind the reception hall is a large room with a centre
support (2) and two small side chambers. This spatial grouping around a hall,
where the main part is reached by an entrance with four supports, recalls the
similar arrangement of the official rooms of the Niqmepa Palace (Fig. 18).
R. Naumann has pointed out a number of building elements in Yarimlim Palace
that derive from Minoan Crete. 233 Among these are the large windows of the
first storey, divided into three lights by two wooden columns on basalt bases,
which recall representations on Cretan faience plaques, frescoes in Cretan style
showing a bull procession, and the partition of the reception hall, which gives it the
appearance of a Cretan state room.
The use of columns in the reception hall of Yarimlim's Palace and in the vestibule
of Niqmepa's Palace (Fig. 1 8) is undoubtedly a case of Minoan-Mycenaean influence, for columned halls are unknown in Mesopotamia. The isolation of the
palaces as free-standing buildings is entirely alien to the Near Eastern tradition.
Comparable arrangements of rooms are found only in Hattusa, Troy and in the
Mycenaean cities. 234
During the period from the fifteenth to the thirteenth century all fields of artistic
activity in Syria experienced strong Minoan-Mycenaean influence. In this contectural

be regarded

ARCHITECTUI
Bit Hilani

in the Neo-Hittite cities of the ninth

as

Niqmepa

s palace

69

plate 19 - Neo-Babylonian boundary stone from the time of Mardukapaliddina ir

B.C.). Black marble. Staatliche Museen, Berlin. Height 46 cm. Cf. pp. jo, ji.

(721-710

70

may point to the chamber tombs of the Isopata type in Ras Shamra
and to the Mycenaean elements in the Mitannian seals of Syria. C. Schaeffer 235 has convincingly shown that a Syro-Mycenaean style flourished in the
fifteenth century and that a Mycenaean colony developed there in the thirteenth
nection one

(Ugarit)

century. It
at Tell

is

therefore possible that the device of supports in the

two

palaces

Atchana was borrowed from Minoan-Mycenaean buildings.

Building J 236 at Zincirli is the oldest hilani of the Neo-Hittite period (Fig. 19).
It is dated about 830 by an inscription of Kilamuwa found on the site. The palace
(Fig. 20) divides into

The

official

an

official

part includes

section (J 1-3) and a residential section (J 4-14).

25 metres by 6 and 8 metres

two big rooms about

respectively. In the 8-metre-wide entrance

supports, although

no

Minoan-Mycenaeai
features

trace

opening

of them has been found.

we must

restore

one or two

A hearth was installed in the

main room.
Later, Building J was enlarged by adding a public reception house, Building K,
consisting of official rooms (Fig. 20). 237 At the top of a flight of eight steps stood

on decorated

a vestibule with three columns

vestibule

was the reception

basalt bases (Fig. 33).

with a fixed hearth. 238

hall

On

Building J

Behind the

the short side of the

reception hall before the hearth was a limestone base, near which

many fragments

of ivory figures were found, which evidently came from furniture placed in

this

room.

The decorated

bases suggest that Building

of the eighth century

fig. 18

(p.

- Niqmepas Palace

83).

at

The

Tell

was erected

in about the last third

Building

building inscription of Barrakab 239 found

At-

chana. The earliest hilani building, ijtb-itfh

century B.C. Cf. note

230 and p. 69.

71

fig. 19

citadel

at

PL

p. 71.

fig. 20
Zincirli

- North-west part of
citadel.

After fdl,

the
vol.

38-39, 1923-4, P- *63> Cf. p. 71.

72

- The

(Sam'al). After AiS,

Zincirli

iyj.

Cf

may

in the debris south of the Barrakab facade

side of the entrance of the vestibule, as F.

originally have

von Luschan has

been on the west

maintained. 240 This

assumption, which is of course unproved, accords with our dating. B. Landsberger 241
interprets the inscription as follows:

'I,

Barrakab, son of

Panammu, King of

Sam'al, servant of Tiglath-Pileser, lord of the [four] parts of the earth, because of

good conduct of my father and my own good conduct, was placed on the
my father by my lord Rakkab-El and my lord Tiglath-Pileser; and my
house
was more miserable than any; and I hunted beside my lord, the
father's
king of Assyria, in the company of great kings, lords of silver and lords of gold
and I succeeded to my father's house and made it finer than the house of [any of]
the

throne of

my brothers the kings envied every fine thing of my house

and my fathers, the kings of Sam'al, had no fine house. They had the house of
Kilamuwa, but this was [both] winter and summer house for them; and I built

the great kings ; and

this house.'

has suggested, 242 the 'house' mentioned in the inscription

As Wachtsmuth

probably Building

Four other

J.

hilani buildings

The

is

have been excavated in

Zincirli that are closely linked

Hilani buildings

them is Hilani iv, which is not a self-contained building, 243

but part of a hall, which opens on its long side towards the south on to Court R
(Fig. 20). The building divides into two parts: a longer western hall (4) with
adjoining rooms to the west, and a short eastern hall (1), behind which lie a main
room and a subordinate one (2, 3). Rooms 1-3 form a unit that reproduces the
in date.

oldest of

hilani

scheme. The reduced vestibule of Hilani iv had only one column, resting

upon

a sphinx that has

orthostat relief of

come down

King Barrakab

245

to us in a

and west

reliefs

state. 244

The

fine

with his secretary (Fig. 12a) stood on the

west side of the eastern projecting wall of

Orthostat

much-damaged

this vestibule.

with musicians and other renderings decorated the

east,

south

sides of the massive pier 246 that

formed the end of the wall between

The eastern part of the long hall thus formed a

two parts of the open hall.

noteworthy ceremonial facade leading to the reception hall of King Barrakab.
The longer section to the west functioned somewhat like a Greek stoa. In fact
this long portico hall heralds the early halls of Samos from the age of the Orientalizing style. It seems likely that the Greek stoa derives directly from such
prototypes as the Zincirli building. Hilani iv and its western columned extension
were built about 730, as is shown by the inscribed orthostat relief with the enthe

throned Barrakab

Not long

(PI. 12a). 247

of the northern hall with Hilani iv there followed

and Hilani 11 (Fig. 20). 248 The orthostat reliefs 249 of Hilani in
(Fig. 12) come from the same workshop that created the Barrakab carvings
250
which belongs to Hilani 11 (Fig. 11),
(p. 56). The orthostat relief with a sphinx,
also comes from this workshop (p. 5 6). These links suggest that Hilanis in and 11
belong to the last quarter of the eighth century. Somewhat later, although
evidently still from the same building project, are the three large halls of the
Hilani

111

after the erection

Hilanis

11

(Figs. 20, 21)

southern Building P, which encloses Court

R on

three sides (Fig. 20). 251

A portal
75

and

ill

FIG. 21

FIG. 22

FIG. 23

TOMBS

FIG. 24

FIG. 25

- jFV. 21: Hilani ill at Zincirli. 72J-700 B.C. Cf note 248 and p. 73. - Fig. 22:
Upper Palace at Zincirli. About 660 B.C. Cf. note 22 j and p. 7/. - Fig. 23: Hilani at Tell
Tainat. About 730 B.C. Cf. note 2j6 and p. yj. - Fig. 24: Hilani at Sakfegb\u. About
730 B.C. Cf. note 2jy and p. yj. - Fig. 2j: Hilani at Tell Halaf. 730-700 B.C. Cf. note 2j8
and pp. 7 j, 77.
figs. 21-25

74

which probably comes from this latter building, shows the same formal type
in and n.
The largest building of the town is Hilani I, which measures 52 by 34 metres
(Figs. 19, 20). 252 Unfortunately we have no satisfactory point of reference whereby to date it. But R. Naumann 253 has plausibly suggested that it may be the latest
lion,

as the lion figures of Hilanis

Hilani

of the hilani buildings, belonging to the early seventh century. Since Zincirli was
not occupied by the Assyrians until Esarhaddon's conquest about 670, 254 the
building activity of the Aramaean princes may have reached its height in the

Upper Palace of Zincirli, 255 which the

Esarhaddon
erected
on
the
ruins of Hilani 1 (Fig. 22), we find
Assyrians under
two hilani structures (A-G and H-L). As is customary in Assyrian architecture,
however, they are only parts of a larger palace complex. The overall effect is
different, for in the new hilanis the staircases flanking the vestibule have been
given up, showing that there was no second storey. However, the latest building
(R-Z) of Zincirli (Fig. 22) shows that the building norm established in Syria
from the second millennium onwards, which provided for palaces as free-standing
first

quarter of the seventh century. In the

units (p. 71),

The
The

still

persisted tenaciously in the Assyrian period.

flowering of the hilani type

real

hilanis

(Fig. 2 5) 258

of Tell Tainat (Fig.

belong to

this period.

falls

in the second half of the eighth century.

2 3 ), 256

The

Sakcegozii (Fig. 2 4 ) 257 and Tell Halaf

vestibule of the Tell Tainat hilani (Fig. 23)

has three columns at the front, as does the vestibule of Building

The

Upper Palace

two buildings come from

Flowering of hilani
tradition

at Zincirli

same workshop (Figs. 33,

259
has drawn attention
34) and are virtually interchangeable (p. 83). R. Naumann
to the close parallels in the plans of the two buildings. The walls seem to have
been executed in the same technique, 260 and the two palaces were probably
designed by a single master. The period of the erection of the Tell Tainat palace
can be determined by the lion base (Fig. 26) 261 of the megaron which is situated
close to it. The excavators believe that the megaron structure existed before the
rest of the palace was built. But both were in use at the same time. The paired
lions of the base in question show two small palmette stylizations of the skin

(Fig. 20).

bases of the

the

folds beneath the eyes, a characteristic of the reign of Tiglath-Pileser in (745-727;

Allowing for an interval of a decade between its erection and that of the
megaron, it would date (at the earliest) from about 730.
The Sakcegozii hilani (Fig. 24) also shows close links with the Zincirli monuments.
The arrangement of the vestibule of the Sakcegozii hilani with only one column
on a sphinx base 262 appears earlier in Hilani iv at Zincirli (Fig. 20). Also note-

Fig. 6).

worthy

is

Sakfegd\ii hilani

the close similarity between the orthostat reliefs of Sakcegozii (Pis.

14-16) 263 and the figures of the ceremonial facade of Hilani iv at Zincirli

(PI.

2a).

Moreover, the sphinxes 264 of the two buildings seem to come from the same
workshop. Consequently the palace of Sakcegozii should be dated about 730,
along with Hilani iv.
The Tell Halaf hilani (730-700 B.C.), which is generally dated in the second half
of the ninth century, 265 should rather be attributed to the last third of the eighth

Tell

Halaf hilani

century, the height of fashion for the hilani form. This temple-palace (Fig. 25)

75

plate 20 - Ishtar Gate from Babylon with coloured enamel tiles. Latter
part of reign of Nebuchadnezzar n (604-562 B.C.). Staatliche Museen Berlin.
>

Height 14.30 m. Cf. p. ji.

76

fig. 26 - Column-base
Tell

Tainat.

8th century B.C.

Cf

from

lions

Second

half
note

of

the

261 and

P-7J-

has the same simple plan

at Zincirli

of the

by

last third

this

time normal

that appeared in the examples

of the eighth century. Hilanis

the same spatial disposition (Fig. 20).

The

11

and in

at Zincirli

have

Tell Halaf hilani consists of a vestibule,

and several ancillary rooms laid out in a row behind. Building K

comparable scheme. Only the ancillary rooms could not be introduced in this last building because no space was available. The temple-palace
of Tell Halaf also shares the three-support scheme in the vestibule with Building K
at Zincirli and the hilani at Tell Tainat (Fig. 23). The stairway of the terrace
a central hall

(Fig. 20) has a

of steps of Building

(Fig. 25) also bears a great resemblance to the flight

at

Zincirli.

Especially noteworthy

is

the fact that the temple-palace of Tell Halaf has

dwelling quarters such as are found in the older

hilani

but served only as an audience building. Thus

it

type

hilani,

Building

no

J, Fig. 20),

belongs to the developed and

perfected hilani type. These comparisons should suffice to

of Zincirli and the Tell Tainat

(cf.

show that, like Hilanis i-iv

the imposing temple-palace of Tell Halaf

belongs to the last third of the eighth century. It was erected during the height
of Aramaean-Hittite civilization the second half of the eighth century. Aramaean-

Hittite sculpture
It

is

also a creation of the

does not seem likely

second half of the eighth century (p. 55).

should have been invented

at all that the earliest hilani type

in the relatively provincial area of southern Anatolia

and northern

Syria.

Other

reasons, to be discussed later (p. in), also indicate that the temple-palace of
Tell Halaf is a creation of the late eighth century. The Tell Halaf structure is a

mature building in a

style that has

reached

its classic

stage of development. Great

who was certainly one of

most successful designers of this period, is even known by name: Abdiilimu. 266 This sensitive architect must have created other buildings in the Near
East, some of them possibly still awaiting the excavator's spade.
We have seen that another master was active at the same period at Zincirli and
Tell Tainat. But Abdi-ilimu was the leading personality. Not only did he create
in the temple-palace of Tell Halaf an imposing and formally perfected hilani,
but with his monumental figures of gods on animal bases he invented a new form
times create great buildings.
the

The

Tell Halaf architect,

Architect Abdi-ilL

77

fig. 27 - Ya^ilikaya, centre scene.

Ajter Akurgal, Kunst der Hethiter,

p. 79, Fig. 19. Second half of 13th

century B.C. Cf. below.

of support (pp. 87, 119) that ranks as an outstanding artistic achievement. The
wide and 6 metres high with the splayings

vestibule has an entrance 10 metres

two winged sphinxes. The entrance lintel is supported by three powerful

gods (PL 23a) standing on animal colossi. 267 On the right the 'Great Mother'
rose over a lioness, in the middle the storm god stood on a bull and on the left
the divine son appeared on a lion. Thus we have a triad 268 in the Hurrian-Hittite
sense, such as was found at Yazilikaya in the thirteenth century (Fig. 27). At the
entrance to the temple-palace the visitor encountered five animals and three
deities in frontal position. All the figures had inlaid eyes in coloured stone that
produced a menacing effect. They served to make the visitor aware of the power
of the gods and of the prince as well. Taken as a whole, this was an artistic
achievement of unique effectiveness and impressive beauty (PI. 23a).
In the second half of the eighth century the hilani spread outside the southern
Anatolian northern Syrian area. Tiglath-Pileser in (745-727), who was the first
Assyrian king to build a hilani, announced: 'In the centre of Kalkhu I built for
my amusement a palace in cedar wood and a bit hilani after the manner of a
palace in the land of the Hittites.' 269 Above we have cited the inscription of
Sargon 11, where he speaks of a building in the manner of the Hittite hilani
buildings (p. 46). In fact at Khorsabad a detached building has been found of the
type of the hilani of Zincirli. 270 Sennacherib and Assurbanipal also boast of palaces
built in the Hittite fashion. Assurbanipal speaks as follows: 'I had timbers from
first-class cedar trees in Sirara and Lebanon placed over the palace. Doors of
flanked by

Spread of hilani

sweet-smelling

columns
of the

wood

had covered with copper and

covered with gleaming bronze and

hilani.' 271

fixed to the portals. Fine

I erected the chittu

of the portal

Hilani buildings of the two kings have been found in

Kuyunjuk

as well. 272

Neo-Hittite
building elements

78

The

previously noted inscription of Sargon

11

shows

that the Assyrians

took from

Neo-Hittite architecture not only the hilani type but also such building elements

fig. 28

from

- Citadel

gate

north-east.

the

at

Zincirli

After

AiS,

Fig. }. Cf. below.

columns from tall cedar trunks placed on lions'. Orthostats

and such features as bases for supports, columns and capitals were
borrowed by the Assyrians from their neighbours in northern Syria and southern
as 'paired lions or

with

reliefs,

Anatolia.

We

will first discuss the prototypes in the Neo-Hittite states

and then

their

Assyrian derivatives.

The

first

orthostats, the big stone slabs used to revet the lower sections of walls

them from moisture, have been found

History of orthosta

Yarimlim Palace
at Tell Atchana. 273 Like the later examples these orthostats are of basalt, but they
have no reliefs. The next examples, also without relief decoration, come from
Niqmepa's Palace (Fig. 1 8) at Tell Atchana. 274 The earliest orthostats with reliefs
have been found at Alaca near Hattusa. In the time of the empire they decorated
the lower part of the city wall at the Sphinx Gate. 275 The first orthostats with
reliefs from Neo-Hittite times come from Malatya and Zincirli, 276 where they also
served to embellish the lower part of a gate complex (Fig. 28). 277 Like the orthostats of Alaca they consist of stone blocks running through the thickness of the
to protect

wall.

By

as early as in the

contrast, the orthostats created for Assyrian buildings in the following

period are slabs that function not as supporting members but as a protective and
decorative revetment. The Assyrians took this type of relief orthostat from Hittite
monuments. However, they developed these revetment slabs into an essential
part of the facade of Assyrian monumental architecture, so that the finest orthostats
of Assyrian palaces markedly surpass their Hittite prototypes in form and quality.
Possibly on account of contact with Assyrian work, the later buildings of southern
Anatolia and northern Syria no longer have the earlier type of orthostats in the
form of solid blocks running through the thickness of the wall, but are invariably
slabs. Thus, in Zincirli, where orthostat blocks were usual in the ninth century,
slabs appear in the eighth. Places that flourished later, such as Sakcegozii and

Karatepe, have only orthostat slabs.

slab type exclusively

Not

surprisingly, Tell Halaf also

another reason for dating

this

building to the

employs the
last

quarter

of the eighth century.

The

first

standard architectural elements of the ancient Near East, such as bases

seem to have been under Phoenician influence

in the cities of southern Anatolia and northern Syria in the ninth and eighth
centuries. Since Mesopotamian architects had no stone for building and even

for supports,

columns and

capitals,

Other architectural
elements

79

fig. 29

- Entrance

to

Niqmepa's

Palace. Tell Atchana. (Cf. Fig. 18.)

After Naumann, Architektur Kleinasiens, p.

130, Fig. 121. Cf. below.

had to import wood from the Lebanon, the form of the column with a base and
capital could not develop in that country. In second-millennium Anatolia, where
the imposing architecture of the Hittites arose, architects would surely have
developed fixed types of columns with bases and capitals if relations with Crete
and Mycenae had been somewhat closer, and if the Hittite empire had not been
cut short at

its

height.

The Phoenician

cities

with Egypt and whose

of the early
art

first

millennium, which were in close contact

continued the Mycenaean tradition of the thirteenth and

twelfth centuries (p. 71), invented the type of capital with overhanging

of leaves (Fig.

crown

58).

Neo-Hittite architecture developed primarily in those

cities

of southern Anatolia

and northern Syria whose population had been Aramaeanized. The Phoenician
element and the fresh wave of Neo-Hittite art is thus explained by the invasion
of the Aramaeans, who spread north and west from their original home in the
Arabian desert. 278 On the other hand, during the ninth and eighth centuries the
cities of southern Anatolia and northern Syria seem to have continued the strong
Mycenaean tradition with which they had been familiar since the sixteenth century.

Through the interaction of various elements in the encounter of PhoenicianAramaean culture with the Luvian-Hittite tradition, new base and capital forms
were created in the small
Base

The

first

states

of southern Anatolia and northern Syria.

appearance of a tectonically designed and

artistically

shaped base to

support a column as an independent building element occurred in the

cities

of

southern Anatolia and northern Syria in the eighth century. The column-bases of

Egyptian and Minoan-Mycenaean art consist of simple disks, usually rather low.
bases in Tell Atchana 279 belong to this category (Fig. 29). In this connection

The

plate 21a - Lion base from Carchemish. Basalt. Early to middle Neo-Hittite style. Reign of Katuwas,
Pisiris (second half of 8th century B.C.). Archaeological Museum, Ankara. Height 82 cm. Cf. Fig. 69
and p. io).
plate 2 ib - Detail of Plate 21a.
plates 21c, d - Lion statuette from Al Mina. Ivory. Middle Neo-Hittite phase. Second half of 8th
century b.c Ashmolean Museum, Oxford. Length y.i cm. Cf. Fig. yy and p. 181.
i.e.

80

it is

of some interest to note that the simple base

language. Originally meaning 'brick', the

word

is

called a 'plinth' in the

appears to

come from

the

Greek

Minoan

may be that in Minoan-Mycenaean times builders began to place a

the wooden column, calling this type of base a plinth a term
under
brick
that persisted into Greek times. The simple plinth served to enlarge the contact
surface, to protect the wooden column from damp and to stop it from sinking
into the ground. The column-bases of the Neo-Hittite period are essentially
language. It

tile

distinct from these simple plinths of brick and stone that were in use in Egyptian
and Minoan-Mycenaean art, for they formed specially emphasized, tectonically
shaped building elements. At Zincirli, Carchemish, Tell Tainat and other NeoHittite sites column-bases have been found that are almost Ionian Greek in their

tectonic quality (Figs. 30-43). Bases that like the later Ionian ones comprise
parts

two

a rectangular plinth and a torus in the shape of a cushion or drumhave

come

to light at Carchemish and especially at Zincirli (Figs. 30,

kind has also been found

3 1)

280
.

A base of this

281

But the best examples are from

Khorsabad, 282 Sargon's capital. They were probably imported from one of the
Neo-Hittite cities. There are two large basalt bases, of which the torus diameter
measures 1.45 metres at the top (Fig. 32). With this large diameter the columns
resting on the torus must have consisted of a bundle of wooden shafts held together with bronze rings.
The column-bases of the Neo-Hittite period that have no plinths are just as tectonic
in their effect as those with plinths, for they are richly decorated and strongly
articulated so that they have an impressive structural character. The finest examples
are the bases of Building K at Zincirli 283 (Fig. 33) and from the hilani of Tell
Tainat (Fig. 34). 284 Almost identical, they come from the same workshop and
belong to the same period. They comprise an ornate drum with two rolls of leaf
ornament and a middle 'belt'. The leaves of the lower roll are standing and those
of the upper one hanging. A closer look at the lower roll (Fig. 33) enables one to
make out the individual leaves quite clearly. The leaves taper symmetrically, and
each has a stem-like middle rib. Below the individual leaves are in contact and
quite thick. Halfway up they begin to taper so that interspaces appear, producing
at Arslan-Tas.

a striking contrast of light and shade.

marked by

The edges of

Bases from Zincirli

an& Tell Tainat

the individual leaves are

a 'seam' that looks like a rib. In the upper roll individual leaves are not

first because the ribs of the leaves are twisted like rope and the
have been obscured, so that the unit is no longer the single leaf but a
metope-like spacing from rib to rib. 285 The ornamental composition of the upper
roll also shows that the sculptor was not entirely clear in his understanding of the
hanging leaves. He has not brought his ornamental form, which consists of two
vertical volutes in the shape of a Phoenician capital, into the leaf, but has joined

distinguishable at
leaf edges

plate 22a - King Sulumeli offering a libation to the storm god. Orthostat block from Malatya.
Basalt. Early Neo-Hittite style. 1050-850 B.C. Height 86 cm. Cf. p. 9J.
plate 22b - Priestesses. Orthostat block from Carchemish. Basalt. Middle Neo-Hittite style. Reign of
Katuwas, i.e. Pisiris (second half of 8th century). Archaeological Museum, Ankara. Height 1 m. Cf. p. 99.

83

to two adjacent leaves, so that the shape of the individual leaf is largely obscured
by this symmetrical composition of palm volutes. The individual leaves of the
upper roll may be understood only by comparing them with those of the lower.
As F. von Luschan has rightly perceived, 286 the drop-like form that hangs from
the curls of the long upright volutes on either side is a female inflorescence which
we find in all Phoenician palm-tree renderings 287 it recurs on the palm-tree of the
Sak^egozii relief (PL 15 a). 288 Under this female inflorescence there hangs on either
side a palm leaf which seems about to drop, which is intended as a space-filler.
Above the large upright palm volutes a young palm frond is symmetrically
arranged on either side. The narrow middle roll, which has an interlace band,
compresses the torus in the centre like a heavy rope and gives the tectonic structure
it

of the base an organic

The way

in

vitality.

which the

eyelets

of the interlace band on the Zincirli bases are

which has
been pointed out above. Interlace bands with rosette decoration appear in the
building ornamentation of Hama. 289
As has been mentioned, the bases from Tell Tainat (Fig. 34) are almost identical
decorated with rosettes

is

a further indication of Phoenician influence,

The only

reproductions of the Zincirli examples.

lines

Other bases from

Zincirli

of the two great upright palm volutes are not

differences are that the

back

placed parallel

(as at Zincirli)

and in contact, but diverge in the lower part. Also the interlace band of the
middle roll takes a somewhat different form. These differences between the bases
of Tell Tainat and the Zincirli pieces are probably attributable to the preferences
of two different masters, who were active or who trained in the same workshop.
Another base in basalt (Fig. 35), which has been recovered from Zincirli, 290
where its original position could not be determined, has the same tectonic
structure. The ornament, however, is simpler, with the same leaf crown in the
upper and lower roll, except that it is inverted; moreover, it dispenses with the
interlace band in the middle roll. This base probably comes from the same period
as the four bases discussed above, which may be dated about 730 by reference to
the lion base of the Tell Tainat temple-palace (Fig. 26, p. 75).
that should be mentioned was found detached

Another column-base

original context in the debris of Court

torus are

worked from

a single block.

at Zincirli (Fig. 36). 291

The

The

decoration of the torus

is

from its
and

plinth

a simplified

- Fig. 30: Column-base from Carchemish. After Naumann,

Architektur Kleinasiens, p. zji, Fig. 130. 8th century B.C. Cf. note 292 and p. 8j. - Fig. 31:
Column-base from Carchemish. After Naumann t Architektur Kleinasiens, p. 131, Fig. 129.
8th century B.C. Cf note 293 and p. 8j. - Fig. 32: Column-base from Khorsabad. J21-70J B.C.
figs. 30-32 (from left to right)

Cf. note 282 and p. 83.

84

version of the palm motif seen

on

the

two bases of Building

K at Zincirli (Fig.

3 3).

There are four palm leaves each with a female inflorescence which are conceived
as paired double volutes. With its simplified decoration this last column-base mav
be considered a late work produced towards the end of the eighth century. It
deserves special attention since it is designed with two clearly differentiated parts,
a plinth

and a

torus. Socles consisting of a plinth

and

seem to be an inThe columnand some further examples from the Neo-Hittite

a torus

vention of the art centres of southern Anatolia and northern Syria.

bases mentioned

from

Zincirli

states (to be discussed below) rank as the oldest instances of the socle type with

plinth

and

torus.

The above-mentioned round

base 292 from the vicinity of Carchemish (Fig. 30)

is

another example of the socle with plinth and torus. Like the Zincirli piece,

is

worked from

principle of the

it

crown of standing leaves is arranged on the

found on the bases of Building K at Zincirli,

a single block. Its

row of

leaves

and the leaves take the same form, but the style is different. Another basalt base
from Carchemish (Fig. 31), 293 the lower part of which is broken off, appears to
judge from what remains also to have been a socle with plinth and torus that
was carved from a single block. Both the form of the leaves and their arrangement
are quite different from the examples at Zincirli (Fig. 33) and Tell Tainat (Fig. 34):
the leaves aie wide and rounded and the middle ribs take the form of palm fronds.
These two socles from Carchemish may be regarded as examples of further
development of the cushion base, of which simple prototypes are known from
Zincirli and Arslan-Tas. 294 All of these, including the last-named examples, consist
of a plinth and a torus. This suggests that the plinth-and-torus base was generally
diffused in the area of southern Anatolia and northern Syria.
Assyrian artists took up this Carchemish type of base, which they developed
eagerly. Three bases from Khorsabad (Fig. 37) 295 and four bases from Nineveh
that were found in front of Sennacherib's Palace (Fig. 38) 296 reproduce the round
socle type of Carchemish. In the socle model from Nineveh (Fig. 39) 297 the
Carchemish type recurs, although without the plinth, for in this case the torus
rests on the back of a sphinx. Assyrian reliefs also depict the simple cushion types
of Neo-Hittite architecture with and without leaf decoration 298 which have no
plinths (Figs. 40-42). 2 " The pieces of furniture shown on the relief of Assur-

figs. 33-35

at Zincirli. About
(from left to right) - Fig. 33: Column-base from Building
283 and p. 83. - Fig. 34: Column-base from the hilani at Tell Tainat. About
284 and p. 83. - Fig. 3j: Column-base from Zincirli. 730-700 B.C. Cf. note

7 30 B.C. Cf. note

730 B.C. Cf. note

2po and p. 84.

Carchemish type
Assyria

in

fig. 36 - Column-base from Zincirli. 730-700 B.C.

Cf. note 291 and p. 84.

banipal's victory banquet300 have bases

Assyrian

reliefs

and

capitals that

with architectural facades. In Assyria

resemble those found in

the main base types

all

of the southern Anatolia-northern Syria area seem to have been enthusiastically

emulated.

A rectangular base from Nimrud, 301 on which stands a sphinx (Fig. 43),

presents a socle type in

which the tectonic structure

separating three torus-like profiles

closely

two deep scotiae (grooves)

recalls the structure

of the base of

the Ionic order.

Furniture fragments
in ivory

Having encountered the bases as architectural members, we should now examine

their appearance in the minoi arts. Especially interesting are the ivory throne
fragments 302 found in a side chamber next to the bathroom L 5 at Zincirli (Figs. 44,
303 Here we find a very similar decoration to, and the
same tectonic structure
45).

K in several versions (cf. Fig.

33). The ivory carvings are

work both in the rendering of the individual
forms and in the execution of the whole. The cushion type of torus was employed
in the architecture of many Neo-Hittite sites (Figs. 33-36). The ivory carvings
as,

the bases of Building

considerably superior to the stone

incorporated into furniture mainly imitate the art forms of architecture without

adding anything of note. Furniture fragments in ivory imported from southern

Anatolia and northern Syria have also been found at Nimrud. Richard D. Barnett

them and brought them into relation with examples from Zincirli. 304
Building L, in which the ivory throne fragments from Zincirli were found, 305
was built in the time of Barrakab at the earliest. This provides a very welcome
point of reference for dating the base and capital forms to the second half of the
has identified

eighth century.

Animal pedestals

The animal

pedestals (PI. 23a; Figs. 46, 47) played a

much

greater role in

and without

Neo-

any case
use of the animal base as a column-bearing architectural member seems to be a
Neo-Hittite invention. The impetus for this discovery may have come from
Hittite art than the decorated column-bases with

Hattusa, where lions and sphinxes took

on

plinths. In

the function of wall-bearing animals,

flanking both sides of the portal as a monolithic block running through the
thickness of the wall.
a lion figure

The

from Alaca

307

portal sphinxes

represent portal animals with the upper bodies treated

as three-dimensional sculpture projecting

body, however

from the Yerkapi 306 in Bogazkoy and

from the wall; the main part of the

the part that bears the pier or side wall

is

shown

in relief. In the

context of these portal animals of Bogazkoy 308 and Alaca, 309 in which the forequarters of the sphinx appear
invisible, also

were intended

decorative element.

86

on

the front of the pier, 310 while the other parts are

as load-bearing

members, and not simply

as a

figs. 37-39 (from left to right) - Fig. 37: Column-base

from Khorsabad. 721-70 j B.C. Cf. note 29 j and p. 8j. Fig. 38: Column-base from Nineveh. Second half of 8th
century B.C. Cf. note 296 and p. 8j. - Fig. 39: Socle
modelfrom Nineveh. 721-70; B.C. Cf. note 297 and p. 8j.

The next-oldest portal animals in the form of palace sculptures are found at Tell
Atchana in palaces or temples of the thirteenth century. 311 The earliest NeoHittite examples come from Malatya. 312 The Assyrian imitations derive from NeoHittite prototypes, as the Assyrians themselves admitted (p. 78). Inspired

Portal animals

by

portal lions of this type, such as those of the lion gate at Malatya, the architects of

Neo-Hittite times (who in contrast to the Hittites of the imperial period were

acquainted with column-bases) had the bold and arresting idea of using animal
pedestals as substitutes for column-bases.

The

lion base

from Carchemish

(Fig. 48),

one of the

earliest

column

pedestals in

animal form, 313 in fact shows two lions attached to a round base like two portal

Lion base from

Carchemish

The derivation from portal animals is also clearly recognizable in the

contemporary statue bases of Neo-Hittite art (Figs. 48, 74; PL 21). Only with the
second half of the eighth century do we find properly developed animal pedestals.
animals.

The

lions

and sphinxes of the animal socles of the

Sakcegozii and Tell Tainat, which

century, were

all

no longer applied to the

turn supported a column.

(Fig. 26). 314 It

also depart

is

sides,

The only example

Hittite concept of the portal animal

hilani buildings

of

Zincirli,

originated in the last third of the eighth

is

Animal pedestals
developed form

but actually bore a base which in

that

is

fully freed

from the Anatolian

from Tell Tainat

the paired lion piece

characteristic that the animal bases of Tell

Halaf (Fig. 47) 315

from the old-established motif of the portal animals and show a new
is one more indication that this highly interesting building should

concept. This

be dated to the

last third of the eighth century (p. 77).

Like the Assyrians, the Neo-Hittites probably used 'splendid columns of aromatic
cedar trunks from the Lebanon', which they 'covered with gleaming bronze'

Columns

In any case excavations of Neo-Hittite ruins have not yet brought to

any remains of stone columns from a monumental building. But we do
have stone columns of considerable size, such as the column in the Staatliche
Museen in Berlin, which was carried off to Assur from a site in the southern

(p. 47).

light

87

X5Z1
figs. 40-42 - Above, Fig. 40: Relief from AssurbanipaV s Palace at Nineveh. After Perrot

and CbipieZy Histoire de I'Art, vol. II, p. 143, Fig. 42. Original in British Museum (Barnett,
Assyrian Palace Reliefs, PI. 136). Cf. p. 93. - Below, left, Fig. 41: Relief from Khorsabad.
After Perrot and Chipie^, Histoire de I'Art, vol. II, p. 142, Fig. 41. Original in Chicago
(Loud, Khorsabad, Figs. 83-89). j2i-yoj B.C. Cf. note 331 and p. 93. - Below, right,
Fig. 42: Relief from AssurbanipaV s Palace at Nineveh. After Perrot and Chipie^, Histoire de

VArt,
Pis.

vol. II,

p. 143, Fig. 42. Original in British

133-4). Cf. note 332. For Figs. 41, 42

cf.

Museum

(Barnett, Assyrian Palace Reliefs,

also p. 93.

Anatolia-northern Syria area (Fig. 49)> 316 and a limestone capital with the beginning of a shaft from Khorsabad (Fig. 5 o), 317 the original purpose of which is

not known. Evidently there were columns with shafts that tapered both above

Necking

rings

and below. The standard column type of this period has a cylindrical shaft (Figs.
50, 52). By contrast the column found at Assur mentioned above, as well as the
fragment of a column attached to a capital shown on a relief from Tell Tainat
(Fig. 53), are prismatic. One cannot help being reminded here of the Ionian
columns of Archaic Greece, in which the flat fluting produces a similar effect.
The shaft of the Assur column (Fig. 49) terminates in a torus necking, set off
above and below by small but effective rings. The same profile recurs in the
necking of a serpentine colonnette 318 from Zincirli (Fig. 5 2). It is possible, however, that in these instances the torus, as in a Neo-Hittite head-piece of a cauldron

stand found at Olympia (Fig. 54) 319 represents a part, not of the column,

VWWW\/WAAAAA^A/^VA^yyy.

88

figs. 43-45 - Above, Fig. 43: Base from Nimrud. First half
of jth century B.C. British Museum. Cf. note 301 and p. 86. Below, Fig. 44: Furniture piece. Ivory. From Zincirli. Late 8th
century B.C. Cf. note 302. - Bottom, Fig. 4J: Furniture piece in
ivory as Fig. 44. Cf. p. 86.

but of the

capital.

Yet

it

seems that the column neckings in Neo-Hittite architec-

ture were invariably profiled or at least had shaft rings, for almost
in the

minor

arts (Figs. 44, 45)

or depictions on

reliefs (Figs. 41, 42)

all

columns

show

rings

on the necking, which are meant to form a transition between column and capital.
The Assur column (Fig. 49) in any case repeats the necking profile of the serpentine
colonnette from Zincirli (Fig.

Anatolia-northern Syria area.

it is

of basalt. 320

2)

an indication

The same conclusion

The lower fragment of

the

of
is

its

origin in the southern

suggested by the fact that

column (which has been

restored)

has a badly preserved inscription 321 that unfortunately gives no help in dating
the column.
steles at

From the location of the column, which was found in the row of
W. Andrae has argued in favour of the period of Assurnasirpal n. 322

Assur,

However, the

Capital

on the necking show that it belongs to the standard type of

northern Syrian column and could not have been made before the eighth century
(p. 90). The lower end is profiled, like the upper end of a Neo-Hittite column,
so that a ring stands between the shaft and base, linking the two architectural
members organically.
Like the base, the Neo-Hittite capital had a characteristic form. The surviving
examples show clearly that a crown of pendent leaves was the main feature. It
rings

(Figs. 44-58) and usually had a

lower part consisting of a torus or a circle of standing palmettes. Thus one can
distinguish two types of capital according to whether the design is simple or

was often provided with an abacus-like element

complex.

It

should be noted, however, that the two are basically variants of a

single type.

323
has a
smaller capital from Carchemish with an adjoining fragment of shaft
doubled shaft-ring, pendent leaves and an abacus-like addition (Fig. 55). On a

from Tell Tainat (Fig. 53) a similar capital is represented; this consists of
double shaft-rings on the necking of the column, a circle of pendent leaves and a

Carchemish capita
with leaf crown an
abacus

relief

89

fig. 46

- Niche

in fafade

at Tell Halaf. After

Halaf

Cf

vol. 11,

Plan

of hilani

Naumann,

j.

Tell

7 3 0-7 00 B.C.

p. 86.

high extension on which a Phoenician leaf capital is shown. As R. Naumann has

noted, 324 the tree-like ornaments to the right and left of the leaf formation probably
depict decorations that in reality would have been attached to the sides of the
'abacus*.

The

stone capital with part of a shaft from Khorsabad (Fig. 50)

Assyrian imitation of Neo-Hittite prototypes, as

we have come

to

know

is

an

them.

It also has necking rings, a pendent leaf crown, and a low, round 'abacus'. The
column which was carried off to Assur (Fig. 49) likewise consists of a ring and
two necking rings, a leaf crown and a low 'abacus'. The figure reproduced here
shows a very plausible reconstruction by R. Naumann (Fig. 49). 325 The ten dowel
holes above the bowl probably served for the attachment of a large leaf crown in
bronze. A column representation from a house model from Tell Halaf (Fig. 5 1) 326

reproduces the capital type discussed, with a necking ring, pendent leaf crown,

upper termination as a high 'abacus' and a saddle beam. The basalt capital from
Tell Halaf (Fig. 56), which rested on a basalt column and supported a large bird
in the same material, 327 has no 'abacus'
it is just a crown with eight pendent

leaves.
It

may be

that stone capitals with

existence, for examples are

two rows of leaves, one atop the other, were in

the ivory works made by

known from Nimrud among

Neo-Hittite craftsmen. 328

Ivory imitations

There are also somewhat more intricate capitals, comprising shaft-rings, torus,
standing palmette circle, pendent leaf crown, and often an 'abacus'. A serpentine
colonnette from Zincirli (Fig. 52) and Neo-Hittite ivories from Zincirli (Fig. 45)
and Nimrud 329 belong to this type. An ivory fragment from Zincirli (Fig. 45)
shows the same capital form in two identical, but opposed versions. The previously mentioned head-piece of a bronze cauldron support from Olympia shows
the same capital type with torus, crown of standing palmettes and pendent leaves
(Fig. 54); consequently it must come from a southern Anatolian-northern Syrian
workshop. A small sandstone capital in the British Museum (Fig. 57), 330 which
possibly formed part of the balustrade of an Assyrian building, should be added

plate 23a - Reconstruction of ceremonial grouping at the entrance to the temple at Tell Halaf. Basalt.
Middle Neo-Hittite style with late Neo-Hittite elements. 730-700 B.C. Tell Halaf Museum, Berlin.
Height of divine figures without columnar attachments 2.7/ m. Cf. p. ioj.

plate 23b - Lion-hunting

relief

from Sakcegozu.

Museen, Berlin. Height 1.18 m. Cf. p. 62.

90

Basalt.

Aramaean

style.

730-700

B.C.

Staatliche

23 a

I
w-

G%

S~

an

noa

W--
X
/ .v

%\\\W

to this group.

The

from

There

capitals.

were generally

leaf circles
are,

either standing

on bases or hanging

however, exceptions.

By contrast the Ionic capital type was not found in the Near East, whether
among the Neo-Hittites, the Assyrians or the Phoenicians. A relief from Khor-

Ionic capital

sabad, preserved in the Oriental Institute in Chicago, 331 represents a pavilion in the

form of a temple

in antis, in

which the columns appear

(Fig. 41). Unfortunately this detail

raphy and the

to carry Ionic capitals

sketchily. I believe that

deceptive in this regard, and that what

relief itself are

photog-

is

shown

of Neo-Hittite type (Figs. 51-57). The modern draughtsman

copied another pavilion from an Assyrian relief in the Palace of Assurbanipal

must be a

who

shown very

is

capital

Nineveh 332 has shown the

left columns in the form of two

But the fine photograph reproduced in
R. D. Barnett's Assyrian Palace Reliefs 333 shows that this is actually a Phoenician
capital of the same type as the other capitals of the pavilion. If one turns the
photographs in Barnett's volume upside-down, one sees that the column-base
in the form of a crown of standing leaves gives the impression of an Ionic capital,
as is the case also with the above-mentioned capitals of the pavilion on the relief
from Khorsabad. Indeed, if true Ionic capitals were present in the Near East we
should surely have some definite evidence of their existence.

at

superimposed Ionic

The Phoenician

capitals

of the

capitals (Fig. 42).

capital

with vertical volutes 334 occurs

abacus of a capital depicted on a

from

as

an ornament on the

Phoenician capital

and again
on the throne of a goddess depicted on a relief from Carchemish. 335 But the
Phoenician volute capital (Fig. 5 8) does not seem to have been employed as an
relief

Tell Tainat (Fig. 53)

independent feature in Neo-Hittite architecture.

Neo-Hittite architecture derives

its

ornament

especially the decorative motifs

from Phoenician prototypes

Phoenician influena

of bases and capitals that derive from the palm-tree

(p. 84).

circles

Hittite

But the tectonic design of such individual elements as the plinth, torus,
of leaves and palmettes has a pronounced indigenous character. The Neo-

crown of

K at

quality elsewhere

Zincirli (Fig.

new and original. The same is

The tension that appears in the

is

of other architectural elements.

of Building

undoubtedly belongs to the orbit of Phoetrue of the design

torus of the bases
gives the whole base an organic elasticity

leaves, for example,

nician influence, yet the shape

3 3),

found only in Greek

architecture.

From

the loosely arranged

vegetable forms of Phoenician architecture Neo-Hittite craftsmen created building

elements that convey solidity and powerful structural harmony.

All three components of the Neo-Hittite column base, shaft and capital are
independent architectural members made up of various elements. The NeoHittite column is an architectonic unity with an organic structure consisting of
foot,

body and head. As

history's first tectonically ordered

column type

this

plate 24a - Deity from Tell Halaf. Basalt. Middle Neo-Hittite style with late Neo-Hittite elements.
730-700 B.C. Archaeological Museum, Adana. Height 1 m. Cf. p. 11 /.
plate 24b - Great goddess on lioness; from Tell Halaf. Basalt. Middle Neo-Hittite style with Luc
Neo-Hittite elements. 730-700 b.c Archaeological Museum, Aleppo. Height 2.7j m. Cf. p. 116.

93

achievement deserves special recognition. A century and a half had to pass before
the Ionian architects took up the tectonically articulated column of the NeoHittites

HITTITE

SCULPTURE

and developed

it

further.

In the world of ancient Near Eastern civilization a special place belongs to the
sculpture of the Luvian-Hittite principalities,

which was carried on vigorously

in southern Anatolia and northern Syria after the break-up of the Hittite empire.

in quality because of its provincial and conservative

comparison of these sculptures with the highly accomplished monuments of contemporary Assyrian art makes their modest standing readily apparent.
Yet Neo-Hittite sculpture is historically important because of its unique inter-

The work was unexceptional

character.

mediary role in regard to the last Assyrianizing and Aramaeanizing style currents.
The geographical position of the Neo-Hittite principalities and favourable historical conditions

account for the fact that the art works of these centres stimulated

end of the eighth century.

by no means homogeneous. They
vary according to locality, but can be grouped in three main styles: early NeoHittite style, the middle Neo-Hittite style and late Neo-Hittite style.
Untouched by Neo-Assyrian influence, this first stylistic phase continues the
metropolitan tradition of Hittite art that flourished in Anatolia and northern
Syria during the second millennium. In fact it is only known to us from the gate
the rise of the Orientalizing style in Greece towards the

Three styles

EARLY NEOHITTITE STYLE

(1100-900/850)

The

sculptures produced in the principalities are

fig. 47

- Deity on a

lion base.

From

niche

fafade of hilani at Tell Halaf. After

Naumann, Tell Halaf vol. Iiy Fig. p.
in

730-700

94

B.C.

Cf p.

87.

sculpture of Malatya (PL 22a), which may be regarded as a faithful continuation

of the sculpture of Hattusa and Alaca. 336 The iconographic type of the kings with
the winged sun disk and the kalmush is the same as in the prototypes of imperial
times. In reliefs

gods wear the same peaked caps

as the

gods of Yazilikaya (Figs.

27,

In both cases the caps are decked out with horns in front and at the rear,
while inside they have divine emblems, which appear elsewhere only in Yazilikaya
59).

(Figs. 27, 59). 337

knees

is

The

short kilt with the centre pleat and a curved seam above the

also found, as well as the belt consisting of a simple leather or metal band,

known from
the same

scenes at Hattusa.

crescent

pommel

The sword which

as in the reliefs

the gods wear at their side has

of the empire

338
;

later, in

the middle

Empire

tradition

was to be transformed. Other empire elements in the early

Neo-Hittite style will be mentioned below in discussing the middle Neo-Hittite
phase. Syro-Hittite and Mitannian motifs and stylistic features will also be treated
Neo-Hittite stage,

it

at that point.

The

fine orthostat

blocks from Malatya that formerly embellished the facade of

the city wall flanking the

main gate show the king performing

religious rites

and

manner of the art of the empire (PI. 22a). On the relief illustrated
two successive scenes appear. On the left we see the storm god in his chariot
drawn by two bulls. On the right, having descended from the chariot, the god
accepts a libation poured by King Sulumeli. The god's right hand holds a boomerang and his left a thunderbolt. Behind him two hieroglyphs placed at head
height the divine ideogram above and below the storm-god emblem identify
him further. The horns and the divine emblem of his peaked cap are very summarily indicated. They are most clearly recognizable on the figures of the relief
plaques with the dragon Illuyanka (Fig. 60), who is killed by the storm god in
the presence of his son. The round objects in the scene are probably hailstones,
which the god hurled down at his adversary.
Unfortunately we have no criteria to fix the chronological limits of the early
Neo-Hittite style. To go by the date of the destruction of the empire the earliest
possible date must be placed about 11 80 B.C., but it is hard to say at what point
after 11 80 the new style actually began. The close stylistic link of the gate sculptures to works at Hattusa and Alaca speaks for a relatively early start. In a special

Malatya

orthostat

relief

are entirely in the

study of the problem

about the middle of the

suggested that the upper limits of

1

ith century 339

this style

should be

Dating

set

The lower boundary may be placed about

900/850 because of the intrusion of Assyrian style elements at that point. But in
it seems best to allow a range of two full centuries,

the absence of reliable clues

from about 1100 to 900/850, for the unfolding of this style.

Above it was suggested that the early Neo-Hittite style shows no Assyrian
features. Yet the Malatya orthostat block with the libation scene (PI. 22a) has one
Assyrian characteristic, for the way the relief shows the storm god first travelling
in his chariot and then standing to receive the king's homage corresponds to the
principle of continuous narration familiar from Assyrian art (p. 27). Unfortunately this Assyrian trait offers no firm basis for dating: the method of continuous
narration is known from the time of King Tukulti-Ninurta (1 241-1205) and was

Assyrian elements

95

fig. 48

- Lion

from

base

Car-

Cf. Plate 68. Early to

middle Neo-Hittite style. Second half
cbemish.

of 8th century B.C.

Archaeological

Museum, Ankara. Cf.

p. 8 7

still

popular as

late as the

seventh century. 340

was practised

the early Neo-Hittite style

It

since the artists

MIDDLE NEOHITTITE STYLE

(9OO-750/73O B.C.)

The

really

had

direct

must be assumed, however,

in Malatya (or

centre) at least as early as the eleventh century;

knowledge of the

art

note

31 3,

that

some other Neo-Hittite

no other conclusion

is

possible,

of the Hittite empire.

important figurative art of the Neo-Hittite principalities was produced

in the middle period,

direct continuation

which (unlike the

early Neo-Hittite style)

is

not simply a

of the imperial Hittite tradition of Anatolia. Alongside the

persisting strands of imperial origin,

striking examples 341

new

characteristic elements appear.

The

Carchemish (Figs. 78-86) and

Zincirli (Figs. 61-66). As in the early Neo-Hittite style the male figures depicted
on works from these two sites wear the wedge-shaped beard with shaven upper
lip (PI. 22a; Fig. 60), the long hair with a curl at the end sometimes reaching down
as far as the elbows, and the short kilt with a centre pleat and a thick seam over
the knees. They wear the belt of the imperial period, 342 with a double fold above
and below. Such pictorial types as two-headed sphinxes and especially sphinxes
with peaked horned caps from Carchemish (Fig. 78) and Zincirli (Fig. 64), hark
back to the days of the empire (Fig. 27). 343 As in the Syrian Hittite and many
Anatolian Hittite examples, the caps worn by gods are decorated with one or two
pairs of horns (Figs. 61, 78, 82). In figures from Carchemish and Zincirli, just as
in reliefs from Malatya, Hattusa and Alaca, weapons are generally carried on the
shoulder. The type of sword sheath with a curved end found at Carchemish and

best and

Zincirli

most

is

were found

at

a lingering relic of Hattusa, although the

sword

itself

has a

pommel

of modified type. The theme of a divine or human couple developed in Hattusa, 344
with the female figure standing or sitting on the left and the male on the right,

- Above,

after Naumann, Architektur

Museen, Berlin. Cf. note 316, pp. 88,
90. - Below, Fig. jo: Limestone capital with shaft ring from Khorsabad. After Perrot and

figs. 49, 50

Fig. 49:

Column from Assur. Restoration

Kleinasiens, p. 140, Fig. IJ4. 8th century B.C. Staatliche

Chipiez, Histoire de

96

VArt,

vol.

11,

p.

216, Fig. 74.

8th century B.C.

Cf

note 317, p. 90.

fig.

- House model

5 1

Halaf

serving as

persisted in Neo-Hittite art.

teristic

base. Basalt.

Tell Halaf.

After Naumann, Tell

Noteworthy

is

the fact that the type of lion charac-

of the empire continues almost unchanged in both the early and middle

style stages; this fact will

The

a cauldron

n, Fig. p. Second half of 8th century B.C. Cf. p. 90.

vol.

early

be further discussed below.

and middle Neo-Hittite

style

phases

that are foreign to Anatolian Hittite art.

The

show many iconographic

tassel at the

features

top of the horned cap,

number of horns (Figs. 61, 78, 82), the absence of ear-rings, the upward stretch of one arm are details that stand in marked contrast to the traits of
the imperial age. 345 The fact that the other hand of the god always holds some
the reduced

Syro-Hittite and

Mitannian

style

elements

hand was always

was clenched. It is also a
non-Hittite feature that the storm god should hold a thunderbolt in one hand,
even though this attribute appears in his emblem (PL 22a). The cluster form of the

object

is

non-Hittite, for in the reliefs of the empire the god's

stretched slightly forward but never held anything, as

thunderbolt

is

Most of these features that are lacking in

borrowed from Mitannian and Syro-Hittite prototypes

likewise non-Hittite.

empire works are

details

study following
have shown in an
the hybrid animals of Neo-Hittite the creatures partaking of

of the second millennium. Similarly

A. Moortgat 346

it

earlier

as I

art,

on Mitannian
and Syro-Hittite models. The mythological scenes from Carchemish and Tell
Halaf that show a man killed by two others belong to the repertoire of the SyroHittite and Mitannian complex of the second millennium. 347
After about 850 B.C. this mixture of Anatolian Hittite features and Syro-Hittite
and Mitannian components was further enriched by Assyrian, Phoenician,
Aramaean and Babylonian contributions, which give an altogether different
physiognomy to Neo-Hittite art.
A characteristic aspect of the middle Neo-Hittite style phase is the introduction
of isolated Assyrian motifs. The war chariot (Figs. 66, 86) is the main motif that
the Neo-Hittite workshops of this phase took over from Assyrian art. The models
favoured were chariots of the Assyrian Classical (Pis. 1, 8) and transitional (PL 2)
styles. Another Assyrian motif is the wounded lion that appears on an orthostat
the qualities of lions and birds, are pictorial types ultimately based

Assyrian element,

97

fig.

Cf

- Serpentine

p. 8 9

colonnette

from

Zincirli.

After

AiS

vol.

PL

v,

27.

8tb century B.C.

from Malatya. 348 The replacement of the Hittite sword with its crescent pommel
and the sheath curving at the end (PI. 22a; Fig. 60) by the new long sword, often
provided with a long tassel (Fig. 62), 349 is another sign of Assyrian influence. The
old-fashioned shoes with their turned-up and pointed toes were no longer popular
(PI. 22a). The traditional hybrid creatures continued to wear them, but the kings

adopted the

new vogue

identifying the gods

aspect of the

new

for dainty sandals.

The omission of

from the picture surface of the orthostats

stylization.

The

hieroglyphic labels
(PI. 22a) is

monumental inscriptions.
The ninth century saw a great flowering of Assyrian power and
nasirpal

ir

another

use of hieroglyphics continued, however, in

culture. Assur-

(883-859) strengthened the internal organization of the realm.

As 'King

of the Four Quarters of the Earth', Shalmaneser in (854-824) accomplished the

greatest extension of Assyria. In fact, only in the reign of this king did Assyrian

over the

art gain its far-reaching influence

styles

of neighbouring countries. As

has been suggested, the process of Assyrianization began in Neo-Hittite art about
the middle of the ninth century.

strong

new wave of

Assyrian influence

may

be observed in the time of Tiglath-Pileser in (745-727). Consequently, the middle

Neo-Hittite phase, which shows only isolated and fairly modest Assyrian in-

must come somewhat earlier, about 850-750 B.C. Thus the main development of the middle Neo-Hittite phase falls naturally into the obscure period of
weakness of the Assyrian empire that lasted from 824 to 750.
Despite the above-mentioned traditional features and the concomitant foreign
borrowings middle Neo-Hittite style strikes a special note of its own. Its leading
fluences,

Neo-Hittite hair

style

characteristic

is

new

hair style that

is

specifically Neo-Hittite. Typical

of

this are

the corkscrew curls, often forming a knot at the nape of the neck (Figs. 62, 66, 83).

This bundle of locks

up so

is

made up of a mass of hair of which

that a twist occurs (Fig. 83). This hair style

is

the lower end is rolled

normal for male heads of the

figs. 53-57 (from left to right) - Fig. ; y. Capital depicted on a relieffrom Tell Tainat. After
vol. 41, 1957, Fig. 12. Second half of 8th century B.C. Cf. p. 8p. - Fig. J4: Bronze
head-piece of a cauldron base. Found at Olympia. Late Neo-Hittite ( Aram aeanting Hittite)

AfA,

Second half of 8th century B.C. Cf. note 319 and p. 88. - Fig. jj: Small capital with shaft
end from Carchemish. 8th century B.C. Cf. note 323 and p. 89. - Fig. j6: Capital from Tell
Halaf. Basalt. After Naumann, Architektur Kleinasiens, p. 139, Fig. iri. Second half of

style.

8th century B.C. Cf. note

British

Museum. Cf.

note

327 and p.
330 and p.

90.

Fig. 77: Small sandstone capital. 8th century B.C.

90.

~m
98

Phoenician capital with projecting

FIG. 58
leaves.

Cf. note 334 and p. 93.

middle Neo-Hittite period.

It persists in

Neo-Hittite art until the middle of the

eighth century, to be displaced only in the second half of the eighth century by

The above-mentioned mass at the nape of the

male heads of the second traditional style, seems to

the Assyrian-Aramaean spiral curls.

neck, which appears in

all

have developed from the hair volute

Hittite style (Fig. 62, right).

The

at the

early Neo-Hittite style probably took place

Assyrian treatment.

At

under the influence of the comparable

It is clearly discernible

Zincirli, in addition to the

nape of the neck in the early Neo-

creation of the rolled hair at the nape during the

open type of

on many

hair

mass

reliefs

at the

from various

sites.

nape of the neck,

we

knot (Fig. 61-65).

of the middle Neo-Hittite

also find closed volute rolls that already give the appearance of a

This round hair knot

style.

On

Assyrian

people of the

hill

is

one of the

reliefs

characteristic traits

of the ninth and eighth centuries

country. 350

Towards

it

serves to identify

the end of the eighth century the knots

were replaced by the Sargonid arrangement (PL 3).

The concentric composition of the head locks is a Neo-Hittite innovation of the
middle phase (Fig. 83), which probably owes its origin to Phoenician models. A
later ivory box in the British Museum shows examples of this hair style (PI. 41).

As a Neo-Hittite feature it persists into the seventh century (Fig. 93).

The simple long tunic worn by the male figures is a characteristic feature of dress
in the early and middle Neo-Hittite phases. The tassels hanging from the belt
(Fig. 62) seem rather to be an Assyrian fashion, as the figures on the Black Obelisk
of Shalmaneser in suggest. 351 The wide metal belt, with a rounded edge above and
below,

is

another characteristic of the middle Neo-Hittite phase.

male figures

79 fF.). Quite novel

on carvings of the middle Neo-Hittite phase.
(Figs. 61

ff.,

is

It

It

Xeo-Hittite

occurs only in

woman's cloak that appears

runs up over the head, covering
the

and extends down the body as far as the feet. Otherwise, women
wear the same long and simple tunic as men, secured by a belt at the waist. This
belt consists of thick, twined cords arranged parallel fashion (PL 22b); wealthy
ladies would have had their belts covered with gold and silver. These belts, 352
which were already known in the second millennium, also appear on the figures of
a drum discovered in the Idaean Cave in Crete. 353 It recurs on some female ivory
all

but the

face,

figures of Syrian manufacture. 354

Now we

must examine some

individual

sites.

facets of the

middle phase that are represented

at

lion-hunting relief and a genius relief from Malatya are worth

mentioning. 355 With

its

Works fro
Malatya

animal and chariot depictions the lion scene goes back to

Assyrian models. The genius figure wears a Neo-Babylonian feather crown and
has wings of Assyrian type. Moreover, the attributes the genius holds in his

hands are borrowed from Assyrian

art.

Since the chariot scenes of Assyria on

99

cost,

fig. 59 - King Tuthaliya IV, protected by the god

Sarruma. Ya^ilikaya. Second half of 13th century.

Cf

note

33J and pp. pj,

2 op.

which the Malatya chariot carving depends themselves belong to the first half
of the ninth century, the Malatya sculptures must have been executed at the earliest
in the middle or during the second half of the ninth century. 356

MIDDLE NEOHITTITE

SCULPTURE

FROM

ZINCIRLI

(832-810 B.C.)

Criteria for dating

chariot scenes

The chronological position of the

works may be

Zincirli

We have a considerable number of examples

fixed with

some

certainty.

of the middle Neo-Hittite style from

from the southern city gate (Figs. 64, 65) 357 and from
the outer citadel gate (Figs. 61-63, 66) 358 two portal lions from the inner citadel
gate (Figs. 71, 72), 359 lions from gate building Q (Fig. 73), 360 the great statue with
paired lions (Fig. 74) 361 and the stone block with the relief of the storm god. 362
The chariot and lion depictions provide criteria for firm dating. As has been
indicated, the Assyrian models of the Neo-Hittite chariot carvings were first
created in the time of Assurnasirpal 11 (883-859). The war chariot from Zincirli, 363
which is carved on one of the ortho stats of the outer citadel gate, certainly derives
from examples of the Classical style (Fig. 66). A comparison of the best Neothis site: orthostat reliefs

Hittite examples, the chariots depicted at

chariot carving (Pis.

1, 8)

makes

it

Carchemish

(Fig. 86),

with any Assyrian

unmistakable that the Neo-Hittite works are

defective copies of the splendid Assyrian models. Consequently, the chronology

of the Assyrian development is decisive for dating the chariots of the middle NeoHittite style.

Compared with

the above-mentioned best examples of the middle

Neo-Hittite style (Fig. 86), the Zincirli chariot carving (Fig. 66) is rather mediocre.
The sculptor has quite misunderstood the details of the harness. The link of the

horse to the shaft and the shaft to the chariot is only clear in the relief: the artist
has not taken much trouble with these important features. It is certain, however,
that he modelled his
style (Pis. 1, 8).

We

work mainly on

chariot reliefs of the Neo-Assyrian Classical

fashion, as well as a shield attached to the

100

box with the quivers set criss-cross

back of the chariot box with a lion head

find the small chariot

- The storm god

fig. 60

killing the serpent Illuyanka.

Hethiter, PI. 104, below. Early Neo-Hittite

as decoration.
set

The

style.

Malatya. After Akurgal, Kunst der

iojo-8jo

B.C. Cf. p. 9J.

head-dress of the horse with a plume in the form of a brush,

atop a horseshoe-shaped clamp and trailing two fluttering streamers,

from

is

derived

models (Fig. 4). 364 That the chariot box of Zincirli has the
rear edge but at the centre is evidence not of an early date, but of

similar Assyrian

axle not at

its

the clumsiness of the provincial master. Revealing

is

the fact that the griffin

protome, which ought to have decorated the shaft-end, has been mistakenly

The upper front end of the chariot box seems to be connected

At this point chariots of the type in
question usually have a richly decorated band (Pis. 1, 2, 8). The sculptor may
have also misunderstood this feature and shown only the upper edge of the band
attached to the reins.

to the end of the shaft with a thick cord.

(Fig. 66).

The

protome represented on the chariot relief of Zincirli suggests that the

better Neo-Hittite models which he was copying. In fact shaft-heads
the form of a griffin protome recur on a chariot relief of Carchemish as well as
griffin

carver
in

on

knew

the chariots of the orthostat slabs of Tell Halaf. It

may

be, as the Hittite look

head suggests (Fig. 79), that this emblem was a feature of the NeoHittite w^orld. In any case, such griffin protomae seem foreign to Assyrian art.
In a splendid alabaster orthostat of Assurnasirpal n in the Staatliche Museen in
Berlin, 365 the shaft-end has an animal head that cannot be clearly identified (PI. 8).
of the

Our

griffin

stylistic analysis clearly

shows

that the Zincirli chariot depiction arose in

The above-mentioned

orthostat

Zincirli are consequently to

be dated

direct or indirect imitation of Assyrian models.

block and with

it

the oldest

works from

in the middle of the ninth century at the earliest.

Thus

works of sculpture connected

King Haya {ca. 8 5 ooldest group of sculptures may just

the southern city gate, the citadel gate and the

with them
832). It

may come from

Dating

the reign of Kilamuwa's father,

must be admitted, however,

that this

101

Kilamuwa himself (832-810). Kilamuwa, who set

Aramaean style at the
entrance to Palace J, may have had sculptures in Hittite style erected on the city
and citadel gates to show respect for the indigenous people of his kingdom.
In an inscription 367 he emphasizes that he overcame disputes between the Mushas well

up

come from

the time of

366
in the
building inscription with a relief of himself

kabim (probably the local Luvian-Hittite population) and the Ba'ririm (Aramaeans)
and that he was 'father and brother' to the local people, unlike earlier kings who
had been accustomed 'to treat them like dogs'. Kilamuwa, who was known as
Bar TM (x) in Aramaic, deliberately adopted a Luvian name. 368 Thus it may well
be that the Zincirli works executed in the middle Neo-Hittite style all come from
his time.

At

first

glance the

from the southern city gate (Figs. 64, 65) have an oldone compares them with the sculptures of the outer citadel

reliefs

fashioned look, but

if

gate (Figs. 61-63, 66)

it is

groups are identical in

pendent

only the difference in quality that

style

and iconography. Coiffure,

tassels are directly anticipated in the reliefs

is

dress,

apparent.

and

belts

The two

with their

of the outer citadel gate

(Fig. 62), 369 together

(Figs. 61, 62). It

with the griffin-man type (Figs. 63, 65) and the sword shape
should be noted that the city fortifications are probably contem-

citadel. Of course it may be that the two sculptural

groups mentioned came from two different workshops, both active in the Sam'al

porary with those of the

kingdom
It

in the last third of the ninth century.

has already been noted that the lion figures

(from

figs. 61-65

known from

to right) - Fig. 61: Storm god.

From

the time of the empire

outer citadel gate. Zincirli. After

832-810 B.C. Cf.p. 99 and above. Fig. 62: Orthostats from outer citadel gate. Zincirli. After AiS, p. 21 /, Figs, ioj-107, PL 3/.
Middle Neo-Hittite style. 832-810 B.C. Cf.p. 99 and above. - Fig. 63: Griffin demon. Orthostat

AiS, p. 21

102

left

Fig. 114,

PL

41a. Middle Neo-Hittite

style.

continued unchanged in both the early and the middle Neo-Hittite

portal lions of Malatya (Fig. 67), like all the middle Neo-Hittite lions

style.

The

at Zincirli

and Carchemish (PI. 21 Figs. 68, 69), are essentially variants of the
which can be described as follows.
The head and face always have a cubic shape. The ear takes a round form when it

(Figs. 70-74)

same

pictorial type,

projects (PL 21), a heart shape

when

(Figs. 73, 78).

it lies flat

thickenings that appear by the upper part of the ear

(PI. 21; Figs. 68, 69) are a typical Hittite feature.

The neck

lower part of the face generally takes the form of a

lacking, a circle of

mane

upon

button-like

the roll of the

Middle Neo-HL
lions

mane

fold that borders the

roll. If

usually serves to set off the face.

The

the roll-like fold

The

auricle

is

is

generally

bounded by the roll of the mane (Figs. 68, 73, 78). The upper part of the nose,
which often shows folds of skin at the root (Figs. 71, 72), is straight. The tip of
the nose is often provided with folds of skin (Figs. 68, 72). The high cheek bones
are generally bounded by a semi-ellipsoid roll (Figs. 68, 72). Folds of skin beneath
the eyes never occur. Although the mouth is usually wide open (Figs. 68-72),
it

may

also be firmly closed (Fig. 67). Especially characteristic

is

may even appear

The mane is rarely

the tongue

way in
shown with the mouth closed (Fig. 67).
stylized. In
reliefs the paws are generally schematized as claws (Figs. 70-74, 78).
The middle Neo-Hittite lions of Zincirli are somewhat mediocre, but iconographi-

protruding and depressed against the lower

lions

cally they are faithful

lip. It

examples of the type. There are the

relief lions

this

Zincirli lions

of the southern

gate (Fig. 70), the portal lions of the inner citadel gate (Figs. 71, 72), the lions of

After AiS, p. 218, Fig. n6 PI. 42b. Middle Neo-Hittite

8)2-810 B.C. Cf. pp. 99, 102. - Fig. 64: Griffin and sphinx. Orthostat from southern
city gate. Zincirli. After AiS, p. 206, Fig. 97, PI. 34. Middle Neo-Hittite style. 832-810 B.C.
Cf. p. 102. - Fig. 6j: Griffin demon. Orthostat from southern city gate. Zincirli. After AiSy
p. 20 /, Fig. 9 j, PI. 34. Middle Neo-Hittite style. 832-810 B.C. Cf. p. 102.

from

outer citadel gate. Zincirli.

style.

103

and the paired lions with the standing figure of the

finer paired lions and the portal lions of Gate
Building Q agree in almost all details, forming a closed group that departs
considerably from the style of other middle Neo-Hittite lions from this site. The
difference between the portal lions of the inner citadel gate (Figs. 71, 72) and the
Gate Building

(Fig. 73)

deified king (Fig. 74).

The much

of the outer citadel gate (Fig. 70) is especially evident in the soft and
rounded treatment of the bodies. It is hard to tell whether this stylistic discrepancy
reflects a difference in date or simply a change in approach. It is very likely, howrelief lions

Gate Building Q was erected at the same time as Building J. Plans

of the north-west sector of the citadel clearly show that both
photographs
and
370
The paired lions
these structures were built in the same project (Figs. 19, 20).
supporting statues were outside the gate near the south-east corner of Building J
ever, that the

(Fig. 19; indicated St). 371

The

sculpture

was probably

set

up during

the erection

of Building J or shortly after its completion. Recently W. Orthmann has clearly

demonstrated that the standing figure represents a deified king. 372 The circumstances

may have been

as follows.

Kilamuwa,

who had

embellished the interior

wished to pay some

So he erected a royal statue in Hittite
style outside his Aramaean palace in accordance with the custom of the land. This
was understood, I believe, not as portraying a particular king, but as the image of
of the north-west sector with Aramaean works (Fig.

10),

flattering attention to his native subjects.

the deified ruler in a general sense.

the image of a deified king

is

On the thirteenth-century reliefs

represented behind the

moon and

of Yazilikaya

sun gods, but

without the addition of the ideogram of a particular king. 373 This was possibly a
case of circumspect piety.

Any local person who was

with divine emblems would be tempted to regard

it

confronted by a ruler figure

as portraying his

own power-

Thus suggestion was preferred to direct statement. In this way

with its divine emblems represented a deceased and consequently

ful deified king.

the statue

fig. 66

- War

chariot.

outer citadelgate. Zincirli.

p.

211, Fig.

Neo-Hittite
Cf. p. 100.

104

102,
style.

PL

Relief from

After AiS t

39. Middle
832-810 B.C.

deified king, but since

it

bore no name inscription and did not embody any

could also pass as the statue of the reigning monarch. The

and the paired lions with the statue of the deified king
lions of Gate Building
particular king,

it

are in any case

works of the Kilamuwa

era.

This gives us another point of reference

to buttress the dating of the middle Neo-Hittite sculptures of Zincirli in the period

of ca. 832-810.
In the following period the Hittite art tradition seems to have fallen more and

more

into abeyance. In sculpture at this site

it

continued only in lions and

griffins,

although with ever diminishing force. Yet lions of the middle Neo-Hittite type
are known from various sites in Syria and Phoenicia (see below). The lions of the
Tell Halaf sculptures (PL 23a; Fig. 89) and of the Luristan bronzes (Fig. 132) also

belong to

The

this type.

from

Hama

are especially important because they are datable

by
and E. Fugmann 376 have shown
that the great lions of Hama must be dated before 800, probably about 825. The
resemblance of the lions from Hama to the Zincirli lions of the inner citadel gate
is astonishing. The cubic shape of the face and body, the outstretched tongue
resting on the lower lip, the projecting round ears and the furrows of the nose, the
special modelling of the cheek bones all accord with the features of the Zincirli
lions. Thus they provide a useful confirmation for the view that the Zincirli
works should be ascribed to the last third of the ninth century.
At Tell Ain Dara in northern Syria Feisal Seirafi 377 has excavated a colossal portal
lion of outstanding quality (Fig. 75), which he has convincingly dated in the
lion figures

the circumstances of excavation. 374 P.

Hama

lions

375
J. Riis

Tell

Ain Dara

good parallel to the colossal lions of

Hama, for the cubic shape of the face and body, the outstretched tongue resting
on the lower lip, the pronounced cheek bones and the projecting round ears
found there recur in the Tell Ain Dara lion. The latter piece shows a stylized roll
on the legs recalling that on the Hama lions. 378 The volute shape of the claws and
ninth-eighth centuries. This lion provides a

stylistic features that are also found in the lions of

Malatya 379 and Carchemish. 380 The lion from Tell Ain Dara is thus representative
of the middle Neo-Hittite style. It may have been carved at the end of the ninth
or in the first half of the eighth century.

the thick enclosing folds are

The ivory

lion statuette from Al Mina (PI. 21c, d; Fig. 77) is a characteristic

example of the middle Neo-Hittite style (p. 181). With its palmette-like folds
beneath the eyes and its round ears, however, the ivory lion head from Samos
(Fig. 76) belongs to the late Neo-Hittite style (p. 180).

The middle Neo-Hittite

Hittite art

style created a griffin-head type that is peculiar to

proper has the griffin-head type only in combination with a

it.

human

Middle Xeo-Hit,
griffin

head

body (Figs. 63, 65, 79). But in our period griffin figures with lion bodies are also
known; examples have been found at Carchemish, 381 Zincirli 382 and Tell Halaf. 383
Characteristic of the Hittite griffin-head type are the eagle head with horse's ears

and the big hair curl spiralling at the top over the head and again beneath the
neck (PI. 2 1 a). The big lock and the horse's ears appear only in Hittite, AramaeanHittite,

and

later in

Greek and Etruscan

art.

105

figs. 67-69 - Above, Fig. 6j: Detail of portal lion. Malatya. After
Akurgal, Spathethitische Bildkunst, p. 46, PI. )}. Early Neo-Hittite
style. iojo-Sjo B.C. Cf. p. 103. - Below, left. Fig. 68: Lion base.
Carcbemish. (Cf. Fig. 48.) After Akurgal, Spathethitische Bildkunst,
p. 4J, Fig. 39. Early to middle Neo-Hittite style. Second half of 8th
century B.C. Cf. p. 103. - Below, right, Fig. 69: Lion base. Carcbemish.
(Cf PI. 2 1 a, b.) Early to middle Neo-Hittite style. Second half of 8th
century B.C. Cf. p. 103.

MIDDLE NEOHITTITE

SCULPTURE

FROM
CARCHEMISH

Carchemish was one of the most important centres of the middle Neo-Hittite
style. From this site the following middle Neo-Hittite sculptures should be
mentioned: mythological scenes (Figs. 78, 79), 384 procession reliefs (Fig. 81), 385
warrior figures (Fig. 8o), 386 musician scenes, 387 victor reliefs (Fig. 86), 388 the
sculptures of the royal gate, 389 a great relief of the
relief

of Katuwas (Fig. 83),

391

moon and

sun gods, 390 the

paired lions with the statue of Atarluhas

b; Fig. 69), 392 paired lions with the statue of a deified king, 393
(Figs. 26, 68), 394 a bull base 395

Although these carvings are

style,

they display

two

lions

and other isolated works.

characteristic

different trends.

scenes, the procession reliefs, the warrior

106

(PI. 21a,

column

examples of the middle Neo-Hittite

To

the first belong the mythological

and musician scenes, as well as many

from the royal gate and the stair gate. These form a homogeneous group.
The second trend, which is due to another workshop, includes the Katuwas
relief, the orthostat series with victory scenes, the seated image of Atarluhas 396
and the head of the statue of the deified king. 397
The first group is mainly characterized by a strong dependence on the Anatolian
Hittite tradition. The two-headed sphinx (Fig. 78) and the griffin-men supporting
the heavens (Fig. 79) are hybrid creatures of mythological type that stem from the
Hattusa repertory. The horned cap of the gods, the long queue that reaches as
far as the elbows and curling at the bottom, the elongated wedge-shaped beard
and the sword sheath curv ing at the end are other features linking the mythological
scenes of Carchemish to the carvings of Malatya and Hattusa. Most of the orthostat
slabs under discussion show a preference for flat surfaces. Another peculiarity of
this workshop is the reluctance to use the middle Neo-Hittite hair curl. It does
appear on a number of pieces of the group (Figs. 84, 85), but so inconspicuously
reliefs

that

it

can only be recognized after careful scrutiny.

of the old school followed the

new

It

Anatolian Hittit
features

seems that the sculptors

fashion unwillingly.

One of

the masters

manes of his horses with this hair curl, but he omits it in his figures
of gods and heroes. He also avoids showing the Assyrian hunting chariot, prestylizes the

ferring his

own

idiosyncratic chariot box. 398

workshop enjoyed

The products of

the traditional

greater popularity, and reliefs of this same type are also found

in Til Barsib. 399 Hallmarks of the

workshop are the strong projection of the chin

PL 22b) and the stylization, in the form of two or three
pearls (Fig. 78), the claws on the lion's paw in the foreground. These two
features recur in the works from Til Barsib mentioned above (Fig. 82). 400 All
the lions created in the middle Neo-Hittite style at Carchemish must be regarded
as products of this workshop. The lion bases (Fig. 68, 69; PL 21a) may also
belong to this group, though the statues they support should be attributed to
bones (Figs. 78,

80, 81

the other school of sculptors.

The
the
86)

statues

the

Katuwas
403

make

seated figure of Atarluhas, 401 the head of the deified king, 402

relief (Fig. 83)

up

Neo-Hittite hair

and the orthostat

a separate stylistic group.

style,

reliefs

with scenes of victory (Fig.

The connecting

and the best examples of

this

link

is

the middle

found anywhere are among

these works.

H. G. Giiterbock has rightly emphasized the close relationship between the

mythological scenes and the victory reliefs. 404 The reason for this similarity is
probably that both series belong to the middle Neo-Hittite style. It is clear,
however, that despite the close stylistic relationship they follow two different
trends.

The

carvers of the victory reliefs, that

are artists representing a

new

is

different styU

the sculptors of the second trend,

current in Neo-Hittite culture.

dilection for Assyrian motifs, such as severed heads 405

They show

a pre-

and hands, and depict

Assyrian war chariots being driven over the bodies of slain enemies (Fig.

Even when they

Two

trends

86).

present warrior figures in the early Neo-Hittite manner, they do

not hesitate to place a miniature figure or the severed head of a defeated enemy
hand of the victor. 406 This grim practice would have been unthinkable in the

in the

107

fig. 70 - Lion

relief.

Orthostat

from

outer citadel

After AiS,p. 226, Fig. 127, PI. 4ja.

middle Neo-Hittite style. 832-810 B.C.

gate. Zincirli.

Early

to

Cf.p. 103.

traditional middle-Neo-Hittite style or early Neo-Hittite style. Yet in Zincirli,

where the native population was subject to a ruling caste of Aramaean origin,
there was no purely Hittite workshop. As we have seen, in this city the Assyrian
and Aramaean mentality dominated the approach to art from the beginning.
Despite the differences in approach and the clearly divergent stylistic tendencies,
the two trends of the middle Neo-Hittite style of Carchemish described above
were contemporary. One of the finds gives proof of this. As H. G. Giiterbock
has indicated, 407 the second warrior figure from the right on the orthostat with
the warrior scenes is unworked in the lower section because it was covered by the
base and therefore invisible to the observer. The paired lions and the statue resting
on them (with a splendid head 408 in the style of the Katuwas relief) were thus
erected in the same building campaign as these fine examples of the more traditional tendency. The warrior figures, like the reliefs with the mythological scenes,
have the same prominent jaw-bone and the same long queue with a curl at the
bottom reaching as far as the elbow.

figs. 71, 72

- Portal

lion

from

inner citadel gate.

After AiS, pp. 230-4, Figs. 138-40,

PI. 46. Early to middle Neo-Hittite style. 832-810
B.C. Cf. pp. ioo y 103.
Zincirli.

108

fig. 73 -Lion from Gate Building O. Zincirli. After

AiS, p. 244, Figs. iji, 1 j 2; p. 271, Fig. 177;
p. $69, PI. 6j. Middle Neo-Hittite style. 8)2-810
B.C. Cf. pp. ioo, 103.

As W. Orthmann

has aptly demonstrated, 409 the statue mentioned depicts a

one can draw the same conclusions in this instance as

The Carchemish statue must also be a generic representation

deified king. I believe that

at Zincirli (p. 103).

of the deceased and therefore deified king with a

specific allusion to Katuwas.

Katuwas, who commissioned all the sculptures of the middle Neo-Hittite style at
Carchemish from two workshops, must also have erected this statue of a deified
ruler. It forms a pendent to the cult image of the storm god Atarluhas which was
set up in front of the inner royal portal. 410
It is worth while to attempt to date the inception of the middle Neo-Hittite style
at Carchemish (and consequently of the reign of Katuwas) with the aid of the

archaeological material.

shown on

chariots chiefly

The

The only

certain point d'appui for dating

the victory reliefs (Fig. 86).

on

The Carchemish

is

Use of chariot
for dating

the chariots

sculptor created his

the basis of Assyrian models in the Classical style (Pis.

war

1, 8).

411

plume in the
form of a broad tuft is set in a horseshoe-shaped holder bedecked with two cords
or bands (Fig. 4). In the Carchemish horses the bands or streamers are replaced by
a bundle of hair fluttering in the wind. There is no doubt that this is a modification
horses' head-dress derives

from

similar Assyrian sources; the

of Assyrian motifs. This modified type seems to be a middle Neo-Hittite

for the warrior reliefs of the traditional type have the

band

that connects the shaft-end with the

same shape

speciality,

upper front edge of the chariot box

also a typical feature of the Assyrian chariot scenes in the Classical style (Pis.

The

small chariot

which serves

box and the

as a clasp, are

in the Classical style.

Only

The

(Fig. 80).

shield attached at the

back with

its

is

1, 8).

boss decoration

important characteristics of the Assyrian chariot

the treatment of the sides of the chariot

box

relief

at Car-

chemish points to Assyrian models in the transitional style (PI. 2). We have seen
above (p. 3 8) that the embellishment of the chariot box with rosettes or similar
motifs first appears in the time of Tiglath-Pileser in (745-727). Consequently
all the sculptures of the middle Neo-Hittite style at Carchemish (and the reign of
Katuwas) must date after 745 But how can this dating be reconciled with Assyrian
sources indicating that in the period 745-717 a king named Pisiris was reigning in
.

Carchemish? Some years ago

I tried to

solve this problem in

my book

Spdthethi-

109

seen

tische Bildkunst,

where

Pileser,

but somewhat

so-called
style

earlier. 412

weak period of

unchanged,

as

so
in Assyrian

that the
may have taken place not in the time of Tiglath-

assumed

the chariot types are concerned

art

shift

at least

far as

But the Assyrian sculptures we have from the

the Assyrian empire (824-745) continue the Classical

we have

seen

(p. 32).

Therefore

now

believe that in this

period chariot renderings did not undergo any transformations of style and type.
For intensive research in the Neo-Hittite period confronted me with a new
I was struck by the fact that until now hieroglyphic scholars have nowhere found evidence of the name of King Pisiris. How could it be possible that
this king who was in power for twenty-eight years (745-717), if not even longer,

problem.

did not leave a single inscription in hieroglyphics,

notoriously eager to boast of their

were
Katuwas

Pisiris

when

the Neo-Hittite kings

achievements and works?

therefore

asked myself whether Katuwas and Pisiris could not be two names for the same
king. I. J. Gelb 413 and after him H. G. Giiterbock 414 have shown that many
Hittite kings bore double names. So it is quite possible that Katuwas, who named
himself with this style in the hieroglyphic monuments, was

under

way

his personal

name of

Pisiris.

to the dating suggested above, but

that the last king

ments. If

Pisiris

known to the Assyrians

This hypothesis not only serves to open the

it

frees us

from the unlikely assumption

who

reigned in Carchemish from 745 to 717 erected no monuwas identical with Katuwas, we can attribute all the middle

Neo-Hittite sculptures of Carchemish to the third quarter of the eighth century.

it is possible that some of the work was continued until 717 when
Carchemish was conquered by Sargon. At that time Araras dismantled some of
Katuwas' sculptures to replace them with work of his own (Fig. 93).

Naturally

figs. 74, 75 - Left, Fig. j 4: Lion base of standing image of the deified king. Zincirli. After
Akurgal, Kunst der Hethiter, Pis. 126, 12J. (Cf AiS, pp. 363 ff. y Figs. 262-9.) Middle
Neo-Hittite style. 832-810 B.C. Cf. pp. 100, 103. - Right, Fig. yj: Colossal portal lion at
Tell Ain Dara, northern Syria. Middle Neo-Hittite style. 8th century B.C. Cf. note 37 j and p. 10 j.

no

figs. 76, 77 - Left, Fig. 76: Lion's bead. Ivory. Found on Samos. After Buschor, Altsamische
Standbilder, vol. Ill, Figs. 214, 21 j. Aramaeani^ing Hittite style. Late 8tb century B.C.

Cf. pp. 10 j, 1 So.

Middle Neo-Hittite
pp. 10 j, 1S1.

Right, Fig. yj: Lion statuette

style.

from

Al

Mina.

Ivory. (Cf. Pis. 21c, d.)

Second half of 8tb century B.C. Ashmolean Museum, Oxford. Cf.

SCULPTURE

Halaf.

FROM TELL

noteworthy workshop of middle Neo-Hittite sculpture was active in Tell

A homogeneous style that can be termed middle Neo-Hittite can be seen
in the small orthostats 415 which decorated the southern outer wall in the southern
part of the west wall and east wall of the hilani building (Fig. 87), in the big orthostats 416 which were built into the niche walls right and left of the hilani entrance
(Pis. 88, 89), and also in the figures in the round from this site (Pis. 23, 24). 417
In form and content the basic features of the sculpture of Tell Halaf are clearly
middle Neo-Hittite. The two-headed sphinx, 418 the scene of a man slain by two
others, 419 the animal-men with peaked horned caps that appear either without

HALAF

Middle Xeo-Hit
traits in Tell

sculpture

disk, 420 the

boomerang held in
which the man appears to the
woman's right423 all these are pictorial ideas and motifs that belong to the
early and middle Neo-Hittite styles. As G. Loud has shown, the demons with
double lion heads 424 and the running hero with bent knees and raised hands 425
from Tell Halaf appear on an ivory relief426 of the late second millennium from
attributes (Fig. 87) or else bear the

winged sun

the hands of gods, 421 or of heroes, 422 the couple in

Megiddo

that bears the impress of strong Hittite influence.

The Megiddo

piece

due to the impetus of

Anatolian Hittite art. Of course it is also possible that the Hittite features mentioned reached Tell Halaf by way of Phoenician art, since (as will be shown) the
Tell Halaf sculptures betray close links with Phoenician culture. But many Hittite
motifs at Tell Halaf, such as the triad consisting of the sky god, the great mother
and the divine sun (PI. 23a), seem to come directly from Hattusa. 427
The long tunic with short sleeves, simple belt and fringe at the bottom 428 tallies
with Katuwas' costume at Carchemish (Fig. 83). Similarly, the short apron with a
vertical fold in the middle, the simple belt and the hem without a fringe correspond
to the pattern of male dress in the early and middle Neo-Hittite styles (Figs. 60-65,
79-83). Without exception, the bearded figures appear in the Hittite fashion with
the upper lip shaven (Figs. 87, 88). The mythological figures that were taken over
in Neo-Hittite art 429 wear long queues curled up at the bottom as in the Carchemish sculptures. The chariot shaft ending in the form of a griffin protome 430
suggests that the spread of these motifs in the Near East

shows

that the chariot type does not

come

straight

is

from Assyrian models, but

in

He

from Neo-Hittite intermediaries. This terminal feature is absent in Assyrian art.

Note that as in the Zincirli chariots the Tell Halaf sculptor has mistakenly placed
the griffin head on the reins (Fig. 66). Moreover, the form of the head-dress of the
horses and the cross-hatching of the rope connecting the chariot box to the
shaft-end are derived from Zincirli, along with the chariot type as a whole. The
lion type offers a true parallel to the early and middle Neo-Hittite works. The lions
of Tell Halaf appear with mouths wide-open, outstretched tongues pressing on the
lower

lip,

curl of the

the stylized ear heart-shaped, the tip of the nose furrowed, the small

mane and

the face in cubic shape (Fig. 89; PI.

23a").

These are

faithful

imitations of early and middle Neo-Hittite figures as seen at Malatya, Carchemish

However, there are also many interesting stylizations

manner of Syro-Phoenician animal figures. The griffin heads of Tell Halaf431
have spiral locks on the neck and the beaks closed. It is certain that these two
and

Zincirli (Figs. 67-74).

in the

features are characteristic traits of the middle Neo-Hittite griffin type.

A big bird's

head from Tell Halaf432 shows the same two large locks on the neck and the same
'hem' on the lower part of the neck as in the griffin heads of Carchemish. More-

figs. 78-83 (from left to right)

vol. 1,

PI.

- Fig. 78: Chimaera. Carchemish. After

14a. Middle Neo-Hittite

style.

Second half of 8th century B.C.

Fig. jp : Griffin demon. Carchemish. After Woolley, Carchemish,

Woolley, Carchemish,

Cf pp.

vol.

1,

PL

100, 107, 188.

12.

Middle

Second half of the 8 th century B.C. Cf. p. 101. - Fig. 80:

Warrior. Carchemish. After Woolley, Carchemish, vol. I, PI. B 2a. Middle Neo-Hittite style
(traditional school) Second half of 8th century B.C. Cf.p. 107. - Fig. 81: Ibex bearer. Carchemish.

Neo-Hittite

style (traditional school).

112

over, the alternating use of basalt and limestone in the orthostats

it is

also

found

at

is

Neo-Hittite

Carchemish.

Assyrian influence was marked, for the Aramaean kings of Tell Halaf adopted
the Assyrian script and language. Apart from the chariot reliefs, 433 which copy

Assyrian

traits

Assyrian models without real understanding, Assyrian features appear in the

coiffure, dress and weapons. 434 The cloak worn by the gods is also Assyrian, as
well as the thick shock of hair diagonally placed at the neck, the pointed helmet,
the round shield and the short sword.
Very close links existed with Syro-Phoenician

only inspire the palmette-tree 435 that appears in

table

filler

motifs 436

on

culture. Phoenician
late Hittite art,

models not

but also the vege-

the small orthostats (Fig. 112). Special mention

must be

made of the small orthostat slab showing a man climbing to the top of a palm-tree
on a ladder, 437 a scene that seems foreign to this area and was probably suggested
by Syro-Phoenician models. The ship scene 438 may also be attributed with certainty
to Syro-Phoenician influence. Entirely Phoenician

is

the motif of a

fighting a lion (and in one instance a hybrid creature). 439

After Woolley, Carchemish,

vol. I,

PL

winged man

The pose with arm bent

22b. Middle Neo-Hittite style (traditional school)

Second

half of 8th century B.C. Cf. p. 107. - Fig. 82: Storm god. Til Barsib. After 7'bureau- Dangin,
Til Barsib, Pis. p, 10. Middle Neo-Hittite style, Carchemish workshop (traditional school).

Second half of 8th century B.C. Cf. p. 107. - Fig. 8y. King Katuwas (Pisiris) of Carchemish.
13d. Middle Neo-Hittite style (modern school).
After Woolley, Carchemish, vol. II, PI.

Second half of 8th century B.C. Cf. pp. ioj,

no.

Syro-Phoenician
traits at Tell

Hi

back aiming the sword is characteristically Phoenician; it appears on Phoenician

440 recurring on Phoenician bowls
of the
ivories of the late second millennium,
441 The embellishment of the poloi (cylindrical
B.C.
centuries
seventh
eighth and

and palm-trees 442 is a feature of Syro443

Phoenician architectural ornament known to us from Hama.
444
In the context of these close links with the south the concentric arrangement
of the curls of hair and the hair mass, which is overlaid with a square pattern of
445
must be due to the influence of Phoenician works,
incised lines suggesting a net,
caps) of the gods with alternating rosettes

which provide the best examples of

The Phoenician

this linear stylization

of hair (Figs. 103-111).

character of the stylization of the bodies of the Tell Halaf animals

been demonstrated by R. D. Barnett. 446 Together with

Barnett's statements the following schematizations can be found: (1) flame-like
forms on the thigh of the rear leg; (2) diagonally incised lines running parallel
to the silhouette of the back from the root of the tail to the shoulder and commonly
bounded at either end by a series of short strokes; (3) abdominal hair with zigzag
stripes forming hatched triangular fields; (4) V-shaped mane tufts; (5) ankles in
the form of lozenges with horizontal double lines.

(Figs. 87-89) has recently

All five elements of stylization are

common

to the animal bodies of the Tell

Halaf sculptures and Syro-Phoenician ivories. The sculptors of Tell Halaf did

omit the two or three pearls generally shown between the diagonal

lines

of the

ankle in Phoenician ivories, 447 because basalt did not invite such detailed rendering
(Figs. 87-89).

The

one feature that appears elsewhere only on

Tell Halaf lion type (Fig. 89) has

the portal lion of Tell

Ain Dara. This

is

a thick diagonal or horizontal line leading

mane

to the edge of the eye (Fig. 75). The lion

which comes from the time of King Sargon, has a similar
cord-like fold that runs from the ear to the palmette stylizations beneath the cheek
bone. This may represent a variant of the stylization found in the lions of Tell

beneath the ear from the

from

roll

of the

Zincirli (Fig. 13),

Halaf.

Dating
(730-700 b.c.)

The

links connecting the

middle Neo-Hittite

main

features of the Tell Halaf sculpture with the

style indicate a date

within the period 850-750/730 B.C. Howthis span the works

number of stylistic features suggest that within

originate from the very end, and even betray traces of the
ever, a

Before entering into this question,

stats (originally

it

late

Neo-Hittite

style.

should be pointed out that the small ortho-

numbering over 200) form

group

apart. It has

long been recog-

on the htlani building and that

were erased by Kapara to make way for

nized that the small orthostats were re-employed

many

earlier inscriptions

on the

slabs

own. A. Moortgat 448 has dealt with this question in detail, concluding that the
small orthostats must belong to the older building erected before the time of

his

Kapara.

He

has also pointed to a

the small orthostats

number of

regarded as differences in quality. 449

114

that

At

this

point

it

is

(as

he

distinguish

states)

worth noting

must be
several

and costume in the large orthostats and in the sculptures in the

do not appear on the small orthostats and which may serve as criteria

features of style

round

stylistic differences that

from the other carvings, but which

fig. 84
PI.

- Head. Detail of

mythological scene. Carchemish. After Woolley, Carchemish,

1 jb. Aliddle Neo-Hittite style (traditional school with features of

vol.

iy

more advanced trend)

Second half of 8th century B.C. Cf. p. ioy.

The

and the hunter figures (Fig. 88) on two

wear Assyrian costume, which
first appears in Neo-Hittite art in the demons of Sakcegozu (PI. 15a). The garments
consist of a short tunic and a long cloak. Characteristically, the seam of the cloak
exposes the forward leg, leaving it free. This fashion was current in Neo-Assyrian
art from the ninth century onwards. In the second half of the eighth century,
however, it took on a modified form that differs in cut from the examples of the
Classical style. In the ninth century 450 the almost straight outer edge of the seam
of the cloak starts well above the belt, which it leaves almost free and runs almost
straight to the ankles. But in the sculpture of the time of Sargon the outer edge
of the cloak's seam begins below the belt; from this point it trails down in a
buoyant curve (PI. 3). The demon reliefs of the SakcegozLi orthostats (PI. 15a)
have the same costume as seen in the examples mentioned of the time of Sargon.
This type persisted in the transitional style of Neo-Assyrian art (p. 32), for a
very similar instance occurs from the time of Tiglath-Pileser in. 451 It appears
that the demons of the Sakcegozu reliefs derive from models of the TiglathPileser period, while the Tell Halaf examples in turn depend on models such as
those found at Sakcegozu. We have seen above that the chariot carvings of Tell
Halaf come not from Assyrian but from Neo-Hittite prototypes (p. 112).
Some genius figures of the small orthostats of Tell Halaf452 have the same costume
in its older Assyrian form. The costume as well as the iconography of the genius
figures goes straight back to Assyrian works. The big shock of hair on the nape
of the neck also comes from Assyrian models in the Classical style, whose influence persisted into the middle of the eighth century. In any event, the costume
of the hunter and god figures (Pis. 23, 24; Fig. 88) is much closer to examples
from Sakcegozu than to the costume of the small orthostats from Tell Halaf.
This comparison demonstrates that the makers of the large orthostats and figures
of gods knew later Neo-Hittite features that were unfamiliar to those who carved
the small orthostats. One decorative feature, which at first sight might seem trivial,
the triple zigzag or wave motif, which may be seen on the fore ankle of the lion
figure of the hilani entrance (PL 23a), 453 attests the strength of the late Neofor dating.

figures of

gods

(PI. 23a)

large orthostat reliefs in a niche of the hilani facade

Hittite-Aramaean current. This decorative motif appears for the

the lions of Sakcegozu (Fig. 14) and in Hilani in at Zincirli (Fig.
730.

No

fig. 85
PI.

decoration of this kind

- Head. Detail of

may be

first

454

2)

Carvings from Tt

Halaf

time in

from about

seen on any of the older lions belonging

mythological scene. Carchemish. After Woolley, Carchemish,

1 1 a. Aliddle Neo-Hittite style (traditional school with features of

vol.

/,

more advanced trend).

Second half of 8th century B.C. Cf. p. ioj.

"5

fig. 86

- War

chariot.

Carchemisb.

After Woo/ley, Carchemisb, vol. in,

PL B 42a. Middle Neo-Hittite style
(modern or advanced school). Second
half of 8th century B.C. Cf. pp. ioj,

109.

Anklets

to the middle Neo-Hittite style.

The goddess 455 wears four

anklets

on each leg. 456

work, the female figure of a couple from

Maras (PL 26). It is clear that these were understood as real circlets because the
Tell Halaf goddess wears two further sets of four as bracelets. It is noteworthy
that on many Syrian ivories also the ankles are adorned with four circlets. The
fashion of wearing four anklets may have been current in Syria during the last
Similar anklets recur in a late Neo-Hittite

quarter of the eighth century.

The long

Coiffu

round 457

spiralling locks of the

recall the hair style

in the Tell Halaf couple extended in the

(PI.

15 a).

The same

Toprakkale (Fig. in), which date

from the time of Rusas 11 (685-645). It is found again in the human-shaped
Urartian cauldron attachments (PI. 45), belonging to the last quarter of the eighth
century. All these comparisons show that the large orthostats and the sculptures
in the round of Tell Halaf were made in the last third of the eighth century.
Some years ago I dated the Tell Halaf sculptures which are discussed here for the
sake of comparison to the ninth century at the earliest. 458 But an exhaustive
coiffure recurs in

woman

of the demons of Sakcegozii

two Syrian

ivories

The

artists

shows, as

at

stylistic analysis

found

we have

seen, that these sculptures are really late works.

of Tell Halaf adopted the style of Syro-Phoenician ivories for their

fig. 87 - Winged lion with human head. From the series of small orthostats. Tell Halaf. After
Tell Halaf, vol. in, PL 87a. Middle Neo-Hittite style. 760-730 B.C. Cf. pp. in, 114.

116

animal figures. The flame-like stylization on the thighs and the other stylizations

of the animal bodies certainly appear on Phoenician ivories

Flame-like

styli\

end of
the second millennium. We now know, however, that ivories with the same
animal body stylizations were also produced in the last quarter of the eighth
century.

wan

Through

his successful excavations at

number of the

has demonstrated that a

Nimrud

as early as the

M. E.

(Kalkhu),

finest ivories

may be

L. Mallo-

ascribed to the

end of the eighth or indeed to the seventh century. 459 Moreover, R. D. Barnett
has repeatedly affirmed a dating at the end of the eighth or the beginning of the

seventh century. 460

M. E.

L.

for the Tell Halaf sculpture.

Mallowan has

To

also spoken in favour of a late dating

be sure, he admits that the carvings might be as

early as the last quarter of the ninth century, 461 but does not exclude the possibility

that

some

The

genius drawing his sword with a backward thrust of the arm, in a very

orthostats might have been extended later.

characteristic gesture, to

meet a threatening lion is a motif that appears on Phoeand seventh centuries, as has already been noted

nician bowls of the eighth

(p. 114).

Other features

eighth century.

It is

all

point to a late dating, possibly to the

last third

of the

not necessary to rehearse these arguments here, for there

is

another important criterion that definitively resolves the question of dating.

tomb

in the north-west part of the hilani area secreted a cache of gold

bronze objects with

style

and

elements that provide reliable criteria for dating the

Small

finds as

elements in dating

Tell Halaf buildings and sculptures. According to the excavators the well-lined
underground chamber lay below the front of the terrace of the hilani; consequently
it

belongs to the time of Kapara, to the so-called old building period

This means that the

hilani

than the cache material.

a

'

(p. 119).

46 2

building and the sculptures in the entry niche are later

Of the many funerary

few may be mentioned here:

gifts

recovered from the tomb only

a half-oval plaquette in

gold

(PI. 2 5), 463

three bronze

figs. 88, 89 -Left, Fig. 88: Hunting scene. From the series of large orthostats on the facade.
Tell Halaf. After Tell Halaf, vol. Ill, PI. 103. Middle Xeo-Hittite style with late XeoHittite traits.

730-joo

style

in, 114. - Right,

Halaf After Tell Halaf,

B.C. Cf. pp.

orthostats on the fafade. Tell

with late Xeo-Hittite traits.

J30-700

Fig. 89: Lion.

vol. Ill,

PL

From

the series of large

106. Middle Xeo-Hittite

B.C. Cf. p. 114.

"7

Tell

Halaf gold
plaquette

464
vessels (Figs. 90-9 2)

Hrouda

B.

claims was

and three gold

ear-rings. 465

scene that certainly recalls the depictions

somewhat

in a

The gold

plaquette,

which

a piece of jewellery for the front of a head-dress, has a

different style.

The

on

stylization

the small orthostats, although

on

the thighs of the rear legs

it is

may

be a simplified version of the flame-like notchings. But it may also be interpreted

in terms of the M-shaped scheme found on animals of the Neo-Hittite style
(Figs.

5J,

12, 13), for the

other four stylizations that

we

find in animal bodies of

Moortgat has shown, 466 the tree

in question. Then, too, the parallel lines of the

the small reliefs are lacking (Fig. 87). Yet as A.

is

almost the same as in the

reliefs

on many animal figures of the small orthostats. 467 The gold

plaquette may come from a Syrian goldsmith's workshop that had close links
with the art centres of northern Syria and Anatolia. The imbricated pattern
suggesting a hilly landscape on which the palm-tree stands also comes from the
Anatolian Hittite sphere. The coloured enamel inlay oiiginally filling both the
cells of the palmette and imbricated pattern is a technique that was at home in
goats' necks recur

Syria.

Two Phrygian

bronze
vessels

Two

of the bronze vessels are entirely Phrygian in style (Figs. 90, 91). The
cauldron has the specifically Phrygian knuckle-bone handle 468 and an overall shape
that recalls the bronze cauldrons of the deinos type
(Fig. 91)

with

its

vertical

and

tall

from Gordion. 469 The pitcher

handle placed at a right angle to the elongated

tubular spout follows a characteristic shape of Phrygian

date

from the

last third

of the eighth century

of Phrygian pitcher was very pupular in the Near East.

examples has come to light

at

art. 470

at the earliest.

These two vessels

In any event

One of the

this

finest

type

ceramic

Carchemish. 471 Similar Phrygian pitchers are depicted

and on an orthostat from Karatepe (PI. 32). 473 The two

Phrygian bronze vessels from the Tell Halaf cache thus provide a reliable criterion
for dating the hilani and its carvings to the last third of the eighth century
dating that has already been established on the basis of other stylistic comparisons
in architecture (pp. 73, 87) and carvings (p. 115). Moreover, Tell Halaf has
yielded a small sherd in the old Phrygian style. 474 It is only a tiny fragment, but
there is no doubt that it is a typical Phrygian product, which belongs to the third
quarter of the eighth century 475 and thus confirms our dating.
The bowl with the lotus-star handles (Fig. 92) speaks for the same dating. B.
Hrouda has set forth the close parallels for this vessel in finds from Til Barsib,
Cyprus, Olympia and Nimrud. 476 One may also cite a piece from Gordion (Fig.
477
a fragment in the Metropolitan Museum in New York (Fig. 147) 478 and
148),
finally ceramic copies from the Kerameikos cemetery in Athens (Fig. 144). 479
The Phrygian bowl may be placed at the end of the eighth century at the earliest.
The Phrygian and Greek imitations indicate that in the last quarter of the eighth
century the oriental originals were very much in demand. In this way we have a
further confirmation of the fact that the buildings and sculpture of the Kapara
era may be dated to the period ca. 730-700.
A. Moortgat has convincingly attributed the gold ear-rings to the ninth century. 480

on

472

a Carchemish relief

It is

118

not particularly surprising that this jewellery

is

several generations older than

plate 25 - Semi-oval pla-

from Tell
Gold with enamel

quette

Halaf.
inlay.

730-700
Archaeological Museum,
Syrian

style.

tanbul.

Height of plaquette

B.C.
Is-

6.) cm. Cf. p. 117.

the other objects deposited in the cache. Items of jewellery, notably ear-rings,

were given by parents and especially by grandmothers to their children and

grandchildren. They ought not to be used in dating the cache in question. Since
we have dated the large orthostats (Figs. 88, 89), the sculptures in the round
(Pis. 23, 24), and consequently the hilani building (Fig. 25) of Kapara in the last
third of the eighth century, we ought to date the older building and the small
orthostats (which are fairly close to the large orthostats in time) approximately to
the second third of the eighth century. The carvers of the small orthostats were
modest stonemasons. The master w ho executed the large orthostats was probably
trained in the same workshop in which the small orthostats were made. The
highly gifted artist who carved the sculptures in the hilani recess must also have
belonged to this workshop, since he employed the same iconographic and
r

stylistic

repertory as

all

the other sculptors of Tell Halaf.

cated and his artistic innovations

him we owe
minor

show him

He was

Period of small
orthostats

(760-750 B.C.)

highly sophisti-

to be a master of unusual stature.

To

the transformation of the small supporting figures of the Syrian

monumental creations. He invented the pictorial motif of

a happy blend of sculpture with architecture (Pis. 23, 24).
of the constant pressure of Assyrian and Aramaean influences

arts into

the

'caryatids', 481

As

a result

the

and northern Syria were

gradually obliterated. These two foreign influences, combined with those of other
neighbouring countries, generally appear in mixed form in the carvings of the

traditional Hittite features of the art of southern Anatolia

LATE NEOHITTITE ST

119

plate 26 - Funerary stele of a couple from Maras. Late Neo-Hittite

stylistic phase (Aramaeanizing Hittite style). Late 8th or early 7th century
b.c. Archaeological Museum, Adana. Overall height 1 m.
Cf. p. I2j.

120

plate 27 - Detail of Plate

26.

late

Neo-Hittite phase, so that an eclectic style results. 482 However, there were

also

workshops

that cultivated a purely Assyrian or purely

Aramaean manner.

Among the finest and most important exemplars of this style are the Araras reliefs
from Carchemish, now in Ankara (Figs. 93, 94). 483 The essential hallmark of

Araras

change in these carvings

Assyrian elements

lies

in the replacement of the middle Neo-Hittite lock

reliefs

by the Assyrian corkscrew curl. The shock of hair at the nape of the neck
typically Assyrian in its form and stylization, corresponding to the coiffure in

(p. 99)
is

fashion during the Sargonid period.

The

elegant decorative belt (Figs. 93, 96) also represents Assyrian fashion trends.
known in Assyrian art from the time of Sennacherib (Fig.

Belts of this type are

95).

484

Noteworthy is the new fan-shaped stylization of the arm muscles of Sargonid

3) in the figures of Araras and Kamanas (Fig. 93).

type (Fig.

121

figs.

90-92 (from

left

to right)

Fig. 90: Phrygian bronze cauldron from Tell Halaf.

the cache in the north-west of the hilani.

After Tell Halaf

vol.

iv, PI. jo,

Fig. 17.

From

Late 8th

Cf p. 118. - Fig. pi: Phrygian pitcher from Tell Halaf. From cache in north-west
After Tell Halaf vol. IV, PI. 48, Fig. 8. Late 8th century B.C. Cf. p. 118. Fig. 92: Bronze bowl with star handles from Tell Halaf. From cache in north-west of hilani.
After Tell Halaf vol. iv, PI. 48, Fig. 7. Late 8th century B.C. Cf. p. 118.
century B.C.

of

Syro-Phoenician
elements

hilani.

There are strikingly close

ment of the
in

similarities

with Syrian ivories. The concentric arrange-

was previously noted as a sign of Syrian influence

the middle Neo-Hittite style (p. 99). With their concentrically formed curls,
curls (Figs. 93, 94)

the heads of the Araras reliefs resemble so closely those of the Syrian ivory reliefs

(PL 38; Fig. 106) that one must assume that there was a new and more powerful
wave of Syrian influence. The flame stylizations on the thighs of a goat-like animal
figure (Fig. 97) 485 bespeak the direct influence of Syrian models. The hair arranged
in separate curls (Fig. 94) appears in very similar form both in the ivories of the
486
and in the Assyrian reliefs of the time. 487
43)
link with the sculptural workshops of Zincirli and Sakcegozii seems even

Syrian style
Links with Zincirli
and Sakfego'zu

(PI.

The
more important. The

tunic and cloak of the Araras figures are almost duplicates

of the garments of the Sakcegozii

reliefs (PI. 14).

the hand. In one instance, the cloak of the

One end of the

woman

cloak

is

held in

with the youngest child, there

an exact correspondence with the Sakcegozii and Zincirli figures.

sceptres of Araras (Fig. 93) and his officers recall the attributes seen on two
warrior reliefs from Karatepe (Fig. 34a) and on a number of ivory reliefs from
Nimrud, which are probably to be regarded as Syrian. 488 The parallel vertical
folds that adorn the back of the garments in the Araras reliefs were originally
a Babylonian discovery (PI. 19). But we find them also on Syrian ivory reliefs
is

The

(PI.

41)

and on the orthostats of Sakcegozii (PI. 14; Figs. 98, 99). The Carchemish
from the carvings of the last-mentioned

sculptor probably took this detail

southern Anatolian site. Note that the sandals of his figures (Fig. 93) are identical
with those of the Sakgegozii figures (Figs. 89, 99). The same goes for the stylization

on

the upper part of the forelegs of the goat-like animal of the Araras relief that

consists of

two broad

staffs

One should

is no doubt that we are

workshops (Pis. 15,16; Figs. 11,15).

or bands (Fig. 97). There

dealing here with a product of the Sakcegozii

note in passing that these style characteristics recur in the strongly

Assyrianized lion of the late eighth century from Havuzkoy. 489

Despite their Assyrian and Syro-Phoenician style elements, the Araras

reliefs of
Carchemish retain a certain Hittite flavour. For instance, it is entirely in the Hittite
tradition that the king should present his successor to the great men of the country,

122

plate 28 - Family scene. Funerary

zing Hittite

style).

stele from Maras. Basalt. Late Neo-Hittite stylistic phase (AramcaniLate 8th or early 7th century B.C. Archaeological Museum, Istanbul. Cf. p. 129.

"3

fig. 93 - King Araras with his son Kamanas.

Carchemish. After Woolley, Carchemish,
I, PL B 7a. Late Neo-Hittite
style.
717-691 B.C. Archaeological Museum,
Ankara. Cf. p. 121,

vol.

the assembly of nobles, 490

who

are depicted

on

the preceding relief slabs.

The way

which the arms are placed is also still Hittite. King Araras holds his son
protectively by the wrist as the god Sarruma grasps King Tuthaliya iv at Yazilikaya
in

(Fig. 59). 491

Origin of

Araras

reliefs in the

period

(717-691 B.C.)

is

another specifically Hittite feature.

slabs depict the

fig. 94

PL B
124

The use of hieroglyphics

whole royal family with the queen and the children, who are
playing with dice and tops; the mother holds the youngest child in her arms.
For his reliefs King Araras was able to make use of slabs previously carved in the
middle Neo-Hittite style, and a bearded figure still survives on the edge of the
relief slab showing the children. 492 The other slabs also show remains of older
reliefs along the lower border. 493 The Araras reliefs were first dated by Freiherr
von Bissing to about the year 720. 494 Although he gave no reasons for this dating,
he clearly stated that the reliefs were 'at present the latest we have from Carchemish'. Some years ago I compared the style of these reliefs with Assyrian
carvings in order to demonstrate by a careful stylistic analysis a dating towards the
end of the eighth century. In fact the style characteristics discussed above suffice
to show that the Araras reliefs were produced in Sargonid times. The somewhat
diagonally placed round shock of hair on the nape of the officers' necks and the
fan-like arrangement of the musculature of the arms may just as easily come from

The

- Detail of

7a. Cf. Fig.

the great relief of Araras. Carchemish. After Woolley, Carchemish,

93 and pp. 121, 12/.

vol. 1,


figs. 95, 96 - Above, Fig. pj: Belt from
an Assyrian relief of Sennacherib (704-681
B.C.). After Strommenger, Mesopotamien,
PL 231. Cf. below. - Below, Fig. 96: Belt
on the Araras reliefs. After Woo Iley, Carchemish, vol. 7, PI. B J. Cf. p. 121 and
below.

models of the time of Tiglath-Pileser in as from those of Sargon (p. 37). But the
nape hair of some officers of the Araras slabs 495 and especially the hair of the two
princes (Fig. 93) is vertically arranged and lies on the shoulders, so that the work
can only have been carved during or after the Sargonid era (PI. 3). The plastically
formed lock ends and the round nape shocks are done in completely Sargonid
style. In some figures of the Araras orthostats, the way in which the neck hair is
arranged in loose overlapping locks (Fig. 94) closely recalls the neck hair of the
Gilgamesh figures of Sargon. 496 The features shared with the Sakcegozii reliefs
the cloak with the end held in one hand (cf. the mother with the child and the
animal), the vertical rear folds of the sandal type and the stylization of the front
legs of the goat-like animal (Fig. 97)
96),

which is

suggest a date

after 730.

The

belt (Figs. 95,

a creation of the Sennacherib period, also indicates a date towards the

end of the eighth century. Since the Araras reliefs appear in place of the Assyrian
middle Neo-Hittite reliefs of Katuwas (i.e., Pisiris; see p. 121), they must have
been executed after the conquest of the city of Carchemish by the Assyrians in
717 B.C. Assyria did not maintain a regular governor in the city only two governors
are mentioned, in 691 and 646, as active in Carchemish in the name of the Assyrian
kings. Consequentiy, the usurper Araras 497 and his son Kamanas may have
;

reigned in the interval between 717 and 691.

later ascription to a date during
first third of the seventh century is possible, but the comparisons adduced

the

above point rather to the period from 717 to 691.

B. Landsberger has clearly shown that in the Anatolian provinces Assyrian power
declined in the period between 705 and 685 B.C. 498 He believes that for a time the
provincial capital of Sam'al could not be held for Sennacherib. He 'had to go to
great trouble just to keep a part of the Anatolian legacy of his predecessor, except

which was lost for ever, probably as early as

Under these political conditions it is possible that
ascend the throne, claiming a modest degree of independence

for the province of Tabal-Hilakku,

the end of Sargon's reign.' 499

Araras was able to

for Carchemish.

Some

reliefs before 750. But the basis of

have studied the problem with the friendly assistance of
the hieroglyphic scholar F. Steinherr. 500 One of the chief arguments for this dating
depends on the identification of certain hieroglyphic signs on the Araras reliefs
with the name of the Assyrian king Assurdan (771-745). But this group of signs

hieroglyphic specialists date the Araras

their dating

is

uncertain.

125

fig. 97 -

Animal figure from the great relief of

Araras. After Woolley, Carchemish, vol. I, PL B 8.
Late Neo-Hittite style. 717-691 B.C. Cf. pp. 122,
I2J.

can just as easily be interpreted as Essarhaddon (680-669). Hieroglyphic specialists have decided in favour of the reading Assurdan because they assume that
Araras could not have reigned after 717, that is after the Assyrian conquest of the
city of Carchemish. However this may be, the identification does not seem to be
correct. I

must

recall

here the

critical

remarks of

J.

Friedrich, 501

who

has

shown

Th. Bossert's Carchemish interpretations to be without foundation. E. Laroche

interprets the hieroglyphs

anonymously

as simply 'an Assyrian king' 502

seems to disagree with Th. Bossert's view.

Further supporting evidence advanced by hieroglyphic scholars

and thus

also

the Urartian

name

'Sasturis'.

But anyone

who

is

the reading of

has carefully studied Th. Bossert's

article 503

must be convinced of the impossibility of this identification. For his

names Midas and Muski. 504 If these readings are
valid, however, the identification with Assurdan cannot hold. Midas, who is
mentioned in the Assyrian annals between 717 and 709 as king of Phrygia, cannot
easily be a contemporary of Assurdan. All this shows that these decipherings are
far from providing certain criteria for dating.
interpretation also involves the

- Above,

Fig. 98: Back pleats of chiton and sandals on the

After Akurgal, Spathethitische Bildkunst, p. 37, Fig. 20.
Cf. Fig. 93 and p. 122. - Left, Fig. 99: Back pleats of chiton and
sandals on a relief from Sakgegp^ii. After Akurgal, Spathethitische Bildkunst, p. 37, Fig. 19. Aramaean style. About 730 B.C. (and later).
figs. 98, 99

Araras

relief.

Archaeological

126

Museum, Ankara. Cf. p. 122.

The Aramaean carvings discussed above

They were presented in a

Hittite style.

(p.

3) in fact issue

from the

late

Neo-

separate chapter in order to give due

recognition to the merits and contributions of the

Aramaean population. From

ARAMAEAN-

IZING HITTI1

CARVINGS

the art-historical point of view, however, they must be seen in the larger context

of the

The
the

late

style

Neo-Hittite

of a great

Aramaean trend

traits,

style.

many

funerary stelae from Maras and Gaziantep belongs to

56).

(p.

But since they show many

stelae

Funerary

stele

they will be treated here with the late Neo-Hittite carvings.

This group includes a masterpiece of unusual expressive power, the funerary

of a couple from Maras
side,

Funerary

characteristic Hittite

with their

feet

on

(Pis. 26, 27). 505

The man and woman

sit

stele

by
They hold one

frontally side

stools, like the Zincirli princess (PI. 13).

of

couple

another affectionately, each with one arm on the partner's shoulder. The sadness
sitters are deceased. The man's hair and beard
have curls in the Aramaean fashion (Pis. 12, 14). The woman, however, wears the
same low Hittite polos with rich ornament as the Kupaba figure in the middle

of their faces indicates that the

Neo-Hittite style from Carchemish. Her belt

women

Carchemish

is

of the middle Neo-Hittite

also the

same

as those

style (PI.

22b).

The

of the

placing of

woman to the left of her husband corresponds to an old Hittite custom which
had been established in Anatolia since the early historical period and which
became a fixed rule in the art of the empire (Fig. 27). The cluster of grapes the
man holds in his right hand refers to his profession: he was probably a rich wine
merchant. His wife holds a mirror in her left hand like an aristocratic Hittite lady.
Her garment has a Phrygian fibula, a favourite item in the fashionable costume of
the time. She wears unusually rich ear-rings (PI. 27b). Apart from the pendents on
the ear lobe, there are other parts (which were probably made of pearls or precious
stones) placed on the edge of the auricle. She also wears a nose-ring, which may be
compared with that of a Phoenician mask from Dermech. 506 The small mantle

the

with

its tip

inserted in the belt recalls the dress of Ionian sculptures of the sixth

century b.c.

with several
Their dress

As in the case of the Tell Halaf goddess (PI. 24), the ankles are adorned
circlets. The man is clad in the same kind of long tunic as his wife.
follows the simple fashion of the middle Neo-Hittite style. The belt,

although unusually wide in

this instance,

corresponds in essentials to other middle

Neo-Hittite depictions (Figs. 60-66, 79-83).

wears an apron in front;

this is

As an

up-to-date addition, the

man

probably an Aramaean contribution. Both figures

wear sandals, which leave the toes free. The funerary stele from Maras seems to
belong to the end of the eighth century at the earliest.
The stele ranks among the finest artistic creations of the ancient Near East.
Together with the Karatepe sphinx and some Syrian ivory heads from Nimrud
(Pis. 37, 3 8), it is one of the few works of the East in which the faces of the figures
express a particular emotional state. For their animal figures, of course, the
Assyrians liked to have faces showing painful suffering or howling fury (Pis. 1-8)
these were modelled with remarkable expressive power. But the faces of their
human figures have a mask-like rigidity. In the course of the eighth century
artists and workshops of the peoples of northern Syria and southern Anatolia

Depiction of menl
states

1^7

128

(who were strongly influenced by Aramaean and Phoenician

thanks to their free commercial and

artistic activity, to

forge a

culture)

were

able,

new art of sculpture,

which must be regarded as a great advance, an achievement of historical importance. The workshops which were not dominated by autocratic rulers and thus
had no propaganda mission to fulfil (p. 16) had the chance to escape from the
bonds of the conceptual art attitude and to represent the various moods and
impulses of the human mind. (This situation is in some ways comparable to the
free democratic competition of the cities of early Renaissance Italy.)

The craftsmen

of southern Anatolia and northern Syria could portray figures with threatening
(PI. 31),

sad (Pis. 26, 27) and even laughing (Pis. 37, 38, 43) countenances. Thus
up a whole new vein of art: they created a lyric realism.

these artists opened

from Maras now

smaller funerary stele

a married couple

husband's

left.

and

their daughter.

In his right hand the

As

in Istanbul (PI. 28) 507

in the larger stele, the

man

shows

woman

a family,

sits

on her

Funerary

stele

wx

family scene

holds a chunk of meat, symbolizing the

nourishment of the dead in the after-life. On the table are other food items, various
roasts and flat loaves, which have been offered for the use of the deceased. The
man's left hand holds an ear of grain, the symbol of the yearly rebirth of natural

and possibly also a sign of personal resurrection. The woman places her
hand protectively on her daughter's shoulder; her left hand holds two
spindles. The daughter, who is standing, holds a spindle in her left hand and a
mirror in her right. The man's hair and beard is worn in the Aramaean fashion

fertility

right

spiral curls. His clothing consists of a long tunic with a simple belt, as in the
costume of the men of the middle Neo-Hittite style (Figs. 62, 83). But in his lap
is an accessory of a new Aramaean type, a folded garment which seems to emerge
from the belt. Mother and daughter wear the same costume, the long tunic of
the middle Neo-Hittite style (PI. 22b), although at the bottom this is arranged in

with

Aramaean fashion as seen in the figure of the Zincirli

The type of belt worn by the two women is already known to us

thick vertical folds in the

princess (PI. 13).

from works of the middle Neo-Hittite

tip

of the cloak

down

trails

young

the

woman

An

freely.
girl

(PL 22b). In the daughter figure the

The

three figures are wearing elegant sandals.

has the same circlets as the Tell Halaf goddess

stele (PI. 26).

The

On

(PI.

her ankles

24)

and the

chairs are quite simple, recalling

in middle Neo-Hittite art.

interesting

and

attractive relief, also

with a boy standing on her lap

tionate embrace,

(PI. 29).

which we have noted

popular in Hittite

from Maras, 508 shows

This

in the

is

two previous

reliefs

art since the days of the empire (Fig. 59). It

woman

a seated

woman

a variation of the scene of affec-

Funerary
with

stele

woman

and which was

may be no

accident

of her son in the Hittite fashion

26, 28; p. 208). Mustafa Kalag has recently published an unknown funerary

that here too the

(Pis.

style

inserted in the belt, while the fringe of the mother's cloak

of the Maras funerary

shown

those

is

stands

on the

left side

plate 29 - Funerary stele of Tarhunpiya from Maras. Basalt. Late Neo-Hittite stylistic phase (Aramaeanizing Hittite style). Late 8th or early 7th century b.c Louvre, Paris. Height 7/ cm. Cf. above.
129

of

plate 30 - Rock

relief at Ivriz.

Hittite stylistic phase

Cf. p. 1 /.

130

King Warpalawas confronted by the vegetation god. Late Neostyle). About 730 B.C. Height of divine figure 4.20 m.

(Aramaeanizing Hittite

woman sits on the man's right side. But the

mediocre quality of this piece suggests that the sculptor was unfamiliar with
Hittite practice. In our slab the boy seems to be the deceased person. His mother
stele

holds

from Maras, 509 in which the

him on her

he evidently died at a fairly early age. The two knuckle

hand may, if they do really represent knuckle bones,
the son was not an adolescent, but still depended on his 'mother's'

bones beneath
indicate that

lap, for

his left

(or nurse's) guidance. Studying the original in the Louvre, I believed that the

bobbin-shaped object beneath the boy's left hand consists of two knuckle bones.
But now, looking at the photograph, I have the impression that the bobbinshaped object

is

out of his hand.

attached to the end of the cord in order to prevent

Anyhow

the fact that the

boy

is

it

slipping

standing on the woman's lap

Yet the boy had learned to read and write. He is holding the
hand between the thumb and index finger as if ready to write.

indicates his youth.

stylus in his right

At

the top of the slab are five characters in Hittite hieroglyphics that

as 'Tarhunpiya'. 510

This was the dead boy's name.

One

may be

read

of his favourite games in

must have been catching birds. This was an aristocratic diversion among
Near Eastern magnates and wealthy men until recent times. That the boy had
wealthy parents is proved by his training in reading and writing and the jewels.
Although he is wearing a simple Hittite belt, the collar of his long tunic is
decorated with elegant embroidery. His upper arm and wrist are adorned with
bracelets, and his neck displays a torque. Both ends of the bracelets terminate in
lions' heads, the ends of the torque in ducks' heads. These five pieces of jewellery
were probably made of gold. Love of luxury is seen also in the adornment of the
as on the
ear with fine jewels. Apart from the pendents on the ear lobes, we note
female figure of the large funerary stele from Maras (PI. 26) decorative pieces
around the auricle, which were probably worked with pearls or precious stones.
Like all the other figures of the Maras funerary stelae, the boy is wearing elegant
sandals. The 'mother' is dressed in the same fashion as the two female figures of
the funerary stele with the couple and their daughter (PI. 28). Her cloak is cut in
exactly the same way as the garment of the mother on the relief under discussion
with the difference that the lower part of her tunic has no folds, but hangs down
smoothly. In our relief, the woman's tender embrace of the child recalls the woman
with the child on the Araras relief 511 and the mother with daughter in the previously described relief from Maras (PI. 28). In the Maras stele mentioned above,
published by M. Kalas, 512 the same motif recurs, in which the child is depicted
in an upright standing position. Some years ago, following F. von Luschan,
513 Another
I identified the slabs we have been discussing as funerary stelae.
funerary stele from Maras, which is now in Paris (Fig. ioo), 514 shows a man
holding a balance in his right hand. This seems to characterize him as a merchant.
He has the same coiffure with spiral curls as is found in the reliefs under discussion.
Another funerary stele from Maras, now in Adana, shows a man with a stylus 515
and a writing tablet, who is therefore a scribe (Fig. 101).
All these slabs featuring figures with tools and objects from daily life do not as

life

some

scholars believe

depict gods, but should rather be interpreted

as

images of

Funerary

stelae

Attributes of
various profession.

I3i

deceased persons

who

are

commemorated with

the tools of their profession.

Recently Mustafa Kalac/516 has published a slab depicting a storm

god which

Maras and the neighbourhood cult stelae following the

Hittite-Luvian tradition were also produced. However, in this case the god, who
has a beard with Aramaean spiral curls, is shown in the usual way with the horned
conical cap, trident and hammer. A winged sun disk on the god's head probably
indicates that he is to be understood as the figure of a deified king. However this
may be, from this stele it is clearly evident that Hittites and Luvians also lived in
Maras and that the cult stelae are to be distinguished from funerary stelae through
such unmistakable divine attributes as the horned cap and the trident. If the figures
on reliefs we have classified as funerary stelae were actually divinities the artists
would have provided them with the appropriate emblems, as in the case of the
relief showing the storm god.
The funerary stelae from Maras and vicinity belong to the same period and
radiate the same spirit. The fine spiral forms that are modelled in high relief on the
hair lock ends of the boy's head on the Paris stele (PL 29) follow the Sargonid
fashion (PI. 3). They have the same natural curl effect and volumetric fullness
as in the reliefs of the time of Sargon. Both the Sargonid and Aramaean spiral
lock ends have a knob-like thickening in the centre. The lock ends of the wine
merchant from Maras (Pis. 26, 27) are executed in the same high relief. This
close dependence on Sargonid work, which is reflected especially in the hair style,
suggests that the funerary stelae from Maras should be dated to the end of the
eighth century. The close relation with the Sak^egozii reliefs, which is noticeable
in the Aramaean treatment of the folds, also speaks in favour of a dating towards
the end of the eighth century. The mother and daughter of the Maras stele (PI. 28)
have garments with thick masses of folds, probably following Aramaean models,
e.g. the costume of the Zincirli princess (PI. 13). Since the funerary stele of the
clearly indicates that in

Dating offunerary
stelae

princess of the Barrakab period

funerary stelae
slightly later,

was executed about 730

may have been made

about 700.

B.C. (p. 56), the

Maras

in the last third of the eighth century or

It is possible,

however, that the custom of erecting

Maras and

richly carved funerary stelae continued into the seventh century in

vicinity.

In the above-mentioned book

which lack divine

to stand alone. In their

to fix

them

in the

have pointed out that none of the

attributes, are orthostats

undamaged

ground or

rather are they

state they

in a stand.

Thus

stelae

of Maras,

monuments intended

had a lower projection

that served

these stelae should be understood

as funerary stelae (Pis. 26, 29, Figs. 100, 101).

With their scenes of family life,

captured in a touching and lively idiom, they herald the Attic funerary stelae of
the Greek Classical style.

plate

31

- Gate sphinx

About 700
132

at

Karatepe. Late Neo-Hittite

B.C.. Cf.
C.f. pp.
t>h 129,
r->a i$j.
r )-,
b.c.

stylistic

phase (Aramaeanizing Hittite

style).

V
iPS

mm;-

*u.z

''Sir*

///;

**&&:*

&rt

&*,$"

6V-

I I

W'?

m*

An important

question

still

remains to be discussed. The funerary stelae of Maras

Aramaean population, but the objects

from the indigenous tradition. The ears

are the creations of the subsequently settled

the figures hold in their hands are derived

of grain
chemish

(PI. 28)

appeared previously in the middle Neo-Hittite figures of Car-

(PI. 22b).

As we know from Hittite texts, the spindle and the mirror are
women. The banqueting or drinking scenes with a seated

attributes of Hittite

and an adorant before represent an old motif of the mountain people of

may be noted at Kiiltepe 518 as early as the beginning of the
second millennium B.C. The Aramaeans transferred these cult scenes to funerary
stelae. Moreover, the flat loaves and meat patties on the table are local fare still
common today in southern Anatolia and northern Syria.
The great relief of Ivriz is a splendid example of the Aramaean Hittite style
(PL 30). 519 The god's cap and the spiral locks of the two figures are Aramaean
features. Then too the placement of the horns on the god's cap occurs earlier in
the case of the Hadad from the time of the Aramaean king Panamuwa 520 (p. 55).
The king is consistently garbed in the new fashion, with a richly adorned tunic
and an Assyrian cloak, recalling the one seen in the reliefs of the Barrakab period
from Zincirli and Sakcegozii (PL 14). His headgear is unusual and recurs, as
Poulsen and Barnett have noted, 521 in an ivory priestess figure from Ephesos
(PL 66). The profiles of the two figures with their strongly curved noses further
suggest that this is an Aramaean work. Noteworthy is the fact that the king is
wearing certain Phrygian items of personal adornment. The belt and the fibula are
similar to the metal belts and fibulae found at Gordion. A similar belt recurs in a
Samian ivory statue in the form of a lyre handle made about a century later (p. 215).
A great many iconographic and stylistic features attest to the persistence of the
Hittite tradition. The god appears in a gesture of homage, as was usual in the art
of the empire. 522 The dress and attitude of the god are almost purely Hittite. As
on the Hittite reliefs (PL 22a) the seam of the kilt swings up over the knees. 523
The position of the arms and hands follows the pattern set in works of the empire
period. 524 The character of the scene makes it clear that the Aramaean donor
erected this monument for his Luvian-Hittite subjects. The hieroglyphs, which
were not usual among the Aramaeans, who had their own script, were intended
figure

Anatolia, 517 which

for the benefit of the indigenous population.

represented was Warpalawas,

Urballa from 738 B.C. 525

The

sculptures found

north of Adana are

It

who

is

The inscription indicates

known

seems, therefore, that

by Th. Bossert and

among

relief at

Hittite elements

that the king

from Assyrian sources as

the relief was executed about 730.

his associates (Pis. 31-35) at

Karatepe

Aramaean Hittite style. 526

be drawn from these works have been

KARATEPE
SCULPTURES

presented by Bahadir Alkim 527 and Halet CJambel. 528 Recently Paolo Matthiae has

plate 32 - Musical scene. Orthostat

(Aramaeanizing

Hittite stylistic phase

relief
style).

Ivr

to us

the latest exemplars of the

Hitherto the most important conclusions to

Rock

from the south

About 700

portal at Karatepe. Basalt. Late

B.C. Cf. pp. 136, 138.

Neo-

529 Shortly to
be issued is the final publication
published a detailed monograph.
by the archaeologist Halet (Jambel, who has been closely concerned with the

finds for

many

years

and

who

expectation of this publication

Phoenician style
elements

erected a remarkable

we must

museum on

the

site.

In

some of the
of Karatepe are Aramaean

confine ourselves here to

main problems of these carvings. The sculptures

works 530 showing considerable Phoenician influence. Such themes and
motifs as Bes (an Egyptian demigod), monkeys, palms and ships, which otherwise
do not appear in Anatolian sculpture, point to the close links between the Karatepe
531
The apron worn by the sphinxes of
region and the Semitic centres of the south.
532 is another motif from the Syro-Phoenician repertory (PI.
Karatepe
31). The
Hittite

found on these sphinxes 533 are also a Phoenician style element. 534 The
costume of the genius figures and the form of the winged sun disk are further
proofs of the links between the Karatepe sculptures and the south. The conical
cap worn by the king and some other figures seems more Phoenician than
Aramaean, since it is somewhat elongated. Noteworthy is the long tunic of the
nursing mother, which is grooved in parallel folds from top to bottom (PL 35).
Although a similar fold treatment is common in Hittite art, 535 the Karatepe reliefs
seem rather to have been inspired by Syrian and Phoenician models. 536 The
iconography of the relief the theme of the mother nursing a standing boy is
entirely Phoenician-Egyptian. Egyptian models are discernible not only in the
unusual motif of nursing, but also in the way in which the boy grasps the arm of
his mother. 537 However, the sculptor has taken the theme not directly from Egyptian work, but from versions produced by Phoenician masters, for it is encountered
on Phoenician bowls of the eighth and seventh centuries (Fig. 102). 538 In somewhat
different form the same motif is known at Ras Shamra 539 as early as the second half
of the second millennium. The scene showing King Asitawata eating while attended
epaulettes

Nursing mother with

child

by musicians

also points to southern influence. In the Phoenician-type reliefs

(p. 153). We must mention
comes from Phoenician art.
with rubbery arms and legs. The rear

of the Syrian ivories the same pictorial theme appears

another important feature of the Karatepe

Many
feet

orthostats of Karatepe

and

show

figures

legs of the kneeling figures are

Similar rubbery limbs appear

reliefs that

wound about like

on the kneeling

snakes' bodies (PL 34b).

figures of the Phoenician tridacna

The use of a

characteristic representational device of this kind can

undoubtedly points to close links between Karatepe and
Phoenicia. Our examination of the Tell Halaf sculptures has established that they
shells

(PL 36d).

hardly be an accident:

show perceptible Phoenician influence. But the Karatepe carvings, which

employ Phoenician inscriptions and a considerable number of southern motifs,
have advanced much further in assimilating Phoenician culture than the sculptures
of the kingdom of Kapara found at Tell Halaf (Pis. 23, 24).
Halet (Jambel's careful studies of the Karatepe sculptures have permitted her to
ascribe them to two different masters. 540 Master A executed the large slab with the
king enjoying a festive meal (PL 33) and Master B the adjoining orthostat with
the musicians and servants bearing food and drink (PL 32). Moreover Halet
(Jambel has rightly perceived that the two masters had collaborators who shared
too

Two

136

styles

it

Man with a balance. Funerary stele from Moras. After Vieyra,

Aramaeani^ing Hittite style. About yoo B.C. Paris, Louvre. Cf p. 131. Right, Fig. 1 01 : Scribe. Funerary stele from Maras. After Akurgal, Spathethitiscbe Bildkunst,
PL 42b. Aramaeani^ing Hittite style. Late 8th century B.C. Cf. p. 131.
figs, ioo, ioi
Hittite Art,

PL

Left, Fig. ioo:

j}.

in the work. Especially the orthostats that she attributed to the circle of Master

show two hands

that are quite distinct in the quality of their

seems to have had

assistants,

quality. Consequently,

we

work. Master

own level of
with the sculptures of Karatepe not in terms

but these were more nearly up to his

will deal

of two masters, but of two groups.

great

many

carvings

(Pis.

33-35)

Phoenicianizing style (Group A), while the rest of the sculptures

more or less
(Group B).

The

in the tradition of the

Aramaean

orthostat slabs, 541 which have a

we have mentioned

of the figures shown on these slabs

(Pis. 33-35).

Hittite art of Zincirli

monopoly on

is

show

(PI. 32)

stand

and Sakcegozii

the Phoenician style features

above, form a separate group. Furthermore, the

ethnic group, probably Phoenicians,

nose

A also

racial

Phoenician grouA

type

homogeneous. These are men of a particular

who may be recognized by a strongly curved

By comparison with

the Phoenician type of the Karatepe reliefs

Aramaean figures (Pis. 12-1 5) is less pronounced. None the

less the Karatepe works do not show a true Phoenician style, but a strongly
Phoenicianizing one. A number of style elements of these slabs are Assyrian or
Aramaean, even Hittite. The warriors wear Assyrian pointed helmets of the eighth
and seventh centuries. 542 The helmet tipped forward like a 'Phrygian cap' worn by
some of the Karatepe warriors finds its closest parallel in Assyrian art of the late
eighth and seventh centuries. 543 Only the trailing plume, which recalls Greek
representations, is not found in Assyrian art. The sword 544 carried by some figures
the nose shape of the

37

PIG.

Italy.

02 - Mother with
After Frankfort,

at their sides

Detail of Egypto-Phoenician howl.

child.

AAAO, p.

(PL 34a) 545

is

From

Praeneste (Palestrina) y

200, Fig. 97. Cf. p. i}6.

very similar to the weapon seen on the Zincirli statue

Moreover, the belts of some figures on these slabs (PI. 34a) correspond
closely to middle Neo-Hittite examples from Zincirli and Carchemish (Figs. 61-65,
546
The way in which a hero of Karatepe carries a calf on his shoulder
79-8 3 ).
(PI. 34a) is a middle Neo-Hittite pictorial motif (Fig. 31). We find the musical

on two

lions.

instruments in the middle Neo-Hittite and

and northern

Syria: the

double

flute (PI.

Aramaean

reliefs

32) appears in

of southern Anatolia

Carchemish and the

elongated lyre (PI. 34d) in Zincirli 547 and Tell Halaf. 548 As A. Dessenne has shown, 549
the

end of the sphinx's tail on the Karatepe reliefs in the form of a water bird's
550
and
is a Hittite motif found in Carchemish, Zincirli (Figs. 64, 78)

head

Sakcegozii (PL 15b).

Expressionistic

work

with humorous

The markedly

expressionistic scenes of the Phoenician

gayer approach that seems almost comical.

overtones

table, the scene

group are animated by a

The monkey under

playing their weapons as well as the Bes with

two monkeys on

merry scenes of burlesque that reveal the strength and

provincial but attractive sculpture. These carvings
spirit

of gaiety should not be regarded as formal

rather as the capricious decoration of a

her child

is

the king's dining

with birds of prey and a hare, the bear dance, the warriors

summer

special

imbued with
reliefs

dis-

his shoulder, are

charm of

this

a Mediterranean

of a great palace, but

residence.

The mother nursing

a masterpiece of its kind, not because of the beauty of the execution or

the naturalism of the volumes, but because of the unique expressiveness of the

method of narration (PI. 35).

The other orthostat slabs belong
naive

Aramaean

Hittite

group

to a style apart that

would be unthinkable

without the influence of the sculptures of the Barrakab period

at Zincirli

and

Sakcegozii. I should like to suggest that the fine slab with musicians (PI. 32)

was by one master and the other reliefs 551 of the same group were made by
assistants in the workshop. It is unlikely that reliefs so different in quality could
stem from a single hand. This master and his assistants clearly continue the
tradition of the sculptural schools that created the works of the Barrakab period in
Zincirli and Sakcegozii. The figures of these groups have a similar hair knot on
the nape of the neck with the same plastically formed lock ends as were produced
in the Aramaean centres (Pis. 26, 30). Moreover, the stylization of the mass of
hair of the figures (PI. 32) in diagonal lines is known from carvings of the Barrakab

From the carvings of Sakcegozii we are familiar with the cloak

advanced leg free (PL 15 a). The sandal-like shoes with turned-up
toes and thongs to fasten them at the ankles have appeared in the Ivriz god and
king (PL 30). The pitcher with the long spout and the high handle, which the

period (PL

14).

that leaves the

plate 3 3 - King Asitawata at a festive meal. Orthostat relief from the south portal at Karatepe.
Basalt. Late Neo-Hittite stylistic phase (Phoenicianizing style). About 700 B.C.
Cf. p. 136.
138

foremost servant on the upper register holds in his

Phrygian.

An

who

assistant,

left

hand,

is

specifically

collaborated in the execution of these slabs, carved

a Hittite tutelary god borne by a bull. 552 Since the indigenous population of the
country was Luvian-Hittite, the Semitic prince felt obliged to commission work

Next to the Phoenician inscriptions

he had hieroglyphic texts inscribed. There is no doubt, however, that the Phoenician style was primary, for the main part of the principal scene was entrusted
to the master who was proficient in this style. The creator of the banquet scene
was a sensitive artist; his rival, who carved the music scene, was certainly a considerable sculptor, but he was somewhat old-fashioned and showed little imaginain the ancient language of Anatolian tradition.

tion.

The

The

characteristic

latter artist's assistants are little

Aramaean

more than

provincial drudges.

features of the Karatepe carvings indicate a pro-

visional dating in the last quarter of the eighth century.

handle and the long spout that

slab (PL

last third

2) is actually a typical

of the eighth century

is

The

Dating (ca.
7 00 B c-)
-

held by the foremost servant on the musician

Phrygian pitcher that dates

(p.

vessel with the high

1 1

8).

at the earliest

Such Phrygian pitchers were

still

from the
in use in

the early seventh century. Consequently the Karatepe sculptures can hardly have

been made before the

The

late eighth century.

finely placed citadel

valley

of Karatepe ('black mountain') overlooking the Ceyhan

was the summer residence of King Asitawata, whose name

in the inscriptions of the orthostats.

main scene

With

We

is

mentioned

see the king at a ceremonial meal in the

hand he reaches for one of the flat loaves

meat patty in his left hand. Three more meat
patties lie in the bowl. Similar meat offerings appear on the table of the Zincirli
princess (PL 13). Two servants wave fans to drive annoying insects away and
provide fresh air. The next slab to the left shows cooks and servants bringing
more dishes for their lord: roast hare, meat, fruit and drink. On the lower register
of the main scene servants lead in an ox and a lamb for the feast. We may think
of the musicians (PL 32) as playing monotonous, though perhaps highly rhythmic
(Pis. 32, 33).

his right

in the big bowl, while he holds a

melodies.

The shape of the

lyre closely resembles that of the earliest lyres

shown

Terpander of Lesbos, who was active at the beginning of the seventh

century, may have had his seven-stringed lyre made after the model of these Near
in

Greek

art.

Eastern instruments

The

(p. 211).

orthostats of Karatepe have been regarded as evidence of the cultural imports

of the Aramaeans. 553

Phoenician influen

The increasing Aramaeanization of most of the Neo-

and eighth centuries lends substance to

Yet the marked and unmistakable Phoenician traits that we

Hittite states in the course of the ninth

this interpretation.

have been able to identify in the sculptures of Zincirli, Sakcegozii, Tell Halaf
and Karatepe illustrate the way in which the creative strength of this Semitic
expansion northwards was nourished by Phoenician sources.

plate 34 - Reliefs from the western series of orthostats on the north portal at Karatepe.
Neo-Hittite stylistic phase (Phoenicianizing style). About 700 b.c. Cf. p. i}6.

Basalt. Late

141

plate 35 - Nursing mother with child from the western series of orthostats
on the north portal at Karatepe. Basalt. Late Neo-Hittite stylistic phase
(Phoenicianizing style). Cf. pp. i$6, 138.

142

V.

PHOENICIAN AND SYRIAN ART REGION

The study of art works from

Zincirli, Sakcegozii, Tell Halaf and Karatepe clearly

shows that in the late ninth and throughout the eighth centuries much of northern
Syria and southern Anatolia underwent strong influence from the Semitic south.
The vital centre of this Semitic expansion lay in Phoenicia. Perhaps the most
important debt of the late Neo-Hittite style to the Semitic peoples was the tectonic
shaping of the columnar order with base and capital brought by the Aramaeans
who had immigrated from the south (p. 80). The elaboration of the palace type

may

called hilant

also be linked to the

by the southern immigrants

new approach

to architecture introduced

Also significant were influences in the field

of building ornament, especially plant motifs of Syro-Phoenician origin (p. 83).
Widespread were Syro-Phoenician fashions in hair styles and in men's costume,

and influences from

(p. 69).

source appeared in the choice of themes and the stylization

this

of animal figures (pp. 113, 122). In this chapter we shall examine the Phoenician
and Syrian originals that lay behind these developments.

From

the middle of the second millennium B.C. Phoenician art occupied a special

Near Eastern world. Admittedly it had a largely eclectic approach,

but from Egyptian, Mycenaean and Hittite style elements Phoenician artists
successfully created original art works that enjoyed wide popularity in the Near
East and throughout Mycenaean Greece in the late second millennium b.c. In
the ninth, eighth and seventh centuries the Phoenician art centres of the first

place in the

millennium

still

Eclecticism

mainly continued the tradition of the second millennium, so

that the persistence of such motifs as the sphinx

Mycenaean type

is

The Phoenician

artists

metal, faience

PHOENICIAN

ART

and

actually

due

and

griffin figures

of the Minoan-

solely to the continuity of Phoenician art. 554

of the ninth-seventh centuries produced works in ivory,

glass,

which were exported

to

all

countries of the then civilized

world. 555 But they must have maintained workshops in several places in the

many metal bowls and faience pieces)

have not yet been paralleled among the material recovered

Mediterranean, for art works (including

have come to

light that

in Phoenicia

itself.

In his basic publication the archaeologist E. Gjerstad has

bowls found in Cyprus on the basis of stylistic observations, 556

identifying a number of them (which he terms Cypro-Phoenician) 557 as products
of Phoenician artists settled in Cyprus.
classified the

Works

show a strongly Egyptianizing style may also be claimed as Phoenician

The genius figures with the Egyptian double crown 558 and other figures

that

products.

EGYPTIAMZ
STYLE

wearing a conical cap in the form of a reduced Upper Egyptian crown 559 are
characteristic of the Egyptian style of Phoenician art. Also the hair stylized in the
form of short but thick rods 560 is a faithful imitation of Egyptian prototypes. As
562
in the figures of an ivory plaquette from Nimrud 561 and another from Samos,
the hair

is

often schematized in the Egyptian

version of an Egyptian wig. In these

two

manner with long

thin rods

plaquettes the shape of the face, the

143

placement of the hands and arms as well as the costume are entirely in the Egyptian
style. Moreover, Egyptian hieroglyphs have been added to the Nimrud plaquette.
The seats as well as the sceptres the seated figures hold in their hands are further

Without exception the

style. Also
among the ivory carvings of Nimrud, which have been

Egyptian motifs. Yet the execution

clearly Phoenician.

is

563 and Khorsabad 564 belong to this

ivory carvings found in Arslan-Tas
565
a series of female figures

regarded as Syrian, must be ascribed to this style on account of their Egyptian

wigs and the eyes, which are treated entirely in the Egyptian fashion. The Nimrud
ivories that have been labelled 'Syrian' include some that I would regard as
Phoenician works because of their strongly Egypto-Phoenician traits.
It

seems, however, that

artists

of the

first

rank were

at

work

in Assyria or Syria

who were not Phoenicians, but who produced outstanding ivories in the Egyptianizing style of Phoenician art. In M. E. L. Mallowan's excavations at Nimrud
in the Egyptianizing style have been found that in the modelling of
forms are clearly distinct from other Phoenician-Egyptian heads. I would
mention particularly two splendid works, the 'Mona Lisa' and the 'Woman at the

some heads

facial

Baghdad Mona
l

Lisa''

Window', both in the Baghdad Museum.

The 'Mona Lisa' head 566 wears her hair in the Egyptian-Phoenician manner; she
has a well-formed oval face with modelled features (PL 37).

The

triangular

mouth

open and seems to smile. The same joyful expression is radiated by the
vital almond-shaped eyes. M. E. L. Mallowan, who had the good fortune to find
this fascinating work, has aptly compared it with the smiling maidens of the
Athenian Acropolis and of the cities of Ionian Anatolia, which were made five
is

or
1

Woman

at the

Window'

slightly

six generations later. 567

The second

head, that of the

'Woman

at the

Window', 568 stands much

closer to

Phoenician works than the 'Mona Lisa' in the rendering of the hair and ears

But the formation of the lips and the modelling of the mouth area and
it from the other Phoenician ivories of Nimrud and
Arslan-Tas which show the same theme. The faint smile with the deeply sunk,
angular mouth is achieved with the same fine expressiveness as is found in the
sculptures of the archaic Ionian world of the sixth century. The motif of the woman
at the window is linked with the cult of Aphrodite Parakyptousa. This cult
flourished in Cyprus 569 and Babylon. 570
Herodotus 571 tells a somewhat unlikely story about this cult: 'The most infamous
of their customs is one that obliges every Babylonian woman once in her life
to go and sit in the temple of Aphrodite and allow a strange man to have intercourse with her. And many women who, being proud of their wealth, disdain to
mix with the rest, are brought to the temple in covered carriages drawn by teams,
and there take their places attended by a great retinue of servants. But for the most
part they sit in a great crowd, wearing a cord around the head in the precinct

(PI. 38).

the chin clearly distinguish

Aphrodite

cult in

Babylon

plate 36 - Tridacna

shell found at Assur. Phoenician work. First half of the 7th century B.C. Staatliche
Museen, Berlin. Overall height 16.4 cm. Cf.
pp. ijo ff.

144

36 c

36d

36

37

of the goddess, whilst some come and others go straight gangways are left clear
passing in all directions between the women, and along these the strangers walk
;

and make their choice. And a woman who has once sat down there will not leave
and go home until a stranger has thrown a silver coin into her lap and lain with
her outside the temple. After throwing the coin the man must say: 'I demand thee
in the name of the goddess Mylitta', for so the Assyrians call Aphrodite. Whatever
the value of the coin, she will not refuse

coin

is

hallowed. She goes with the

first

it,

for that

would be unlawful,

man who throws and

rejects

for the

none.

By

having intercourse she has discharged her duty to the goddess and she goes
away to her home; thereafter she is not to be won by any gift however great.
Those women who excel in beauty and stature are soon released, but such as are
ugly have to wait long before they can comply with the custom, sometimes as

much
same

The

as three or four years. In

some

parts of Cyprus there

is

custom of the

kind'.

by Herodotus in such highly coloured terms surely existed in

it was neither obligatory nor
generally practised. 572 The 'women at the window' were the acolytes who in
emulation of their mistress would show themselves in order to entice men from
the street and unite with them in the service of the goddess. The cord that
Herodotus mentions seems actually to have been worn by the prostitutes around
the head, for it is found in examples from Arslan-Tas and Khorsabad 573 comcult described

Babylon, but the cuneiform texts indicate that

parable to the

The

ivories

Nimrud

piece. 574

from Arslan-Tas have been dated

century because

among

who had

to the second half of the ninth

box with the

The owner has been identified with King

the finds are three fragments of an ivory

box made. 575

Hazael of Damascus,
whose reign falls in the second half of the ninth century. 577
But the circumstances in which they were found in Khorsabad and Nimrud and
the stylistic criteria of the ivory carvings do not agree with this dating. Among
the pieces from Arslan-Tas preserved in the Louvre is a lion head in the Assyrian
style with three palmette-leaf skin folds under the eyes. It has already been shown
that this lion type appears first in the time of Sargon (Fig. 9). Like the bull heads

name

Hazael,

the

Ivories from

A)

Tas

576

Lion type of
Sargonid

style

It seems likely
ornaments were sometimes broken off
and the old heads replaced with new ones. But it ought not to be assumed that a
bed was in use in a princely house for a century. Consequently, the Egyptianizing
ivory plaquettes, like the lion head mentioned, probably come from the time of
Sargon (720-705). The surviving fragments of the Hazael box may not be adduced
as comparative material for dating since they show neither figurative scenes nor
decorative motifs. The pieces probably came from a jewellery box which was

(PL 12a), the lion heads belong to the decoration of furniture.

that in the course of time the projecting

made

in the ninth century, but

which was preserved for

long time in the princely

plate 37 - 'Mona Lisa'. Woman's head. Ornament on a piece of furniture. From Nimrud. Phocnicianizing style. Early 7th century b.c. Iraq Museum, Baghdad. Height 16.1 cm. Cf. pp. 12

147

as a precious gift or prize of war. One should note, however, that the name
Hazael was not borne exclusively by the Aramaean king of Damascus. A. DupontSommer has already pointed out this difficulty, remarking that the ivories of

house

come from Damascus 'if it were certain that the name Hazael,
which appears on the box fragments from Arslan-Tas, actually refers to the king
Arslan-Tas might
of Damascus.' 578
Kborsabad

ivories

The ivory carvings from Khorsabad, 579 which probably come from the same
workshop as those from Arslan-Tas, are firmly dated, for the palace of Khorsabad
was built by Sargon on a virgin site that was to be abandoned again after his
death (p. 39). M. E. L. Mallowan has convincingly shown that some of the
ivories in the Egyptianizing style which he discovered come from the time of
Sargon, while the rest were produced as late as the seventh century. 580 I would
prefer to assume that the fine Assyrian works in the Egyptianizing style were
made in the seventh century. In the chapter on Assyrian art we have seen that
from the time of Esarhaddon onwards (680-669) Egyptian influences made themselves felt in Assyrian

works

So

(p. 43).

it

is

understandable that Phoenician

ivories in the Egyptianizing style or Assyrian adaptations of

use in the

of the

first

Nimrud

half of the seventh century. A. Parrot 581 has

ivories could

Moreover, the appearance of

and Rhodes,

them should be in
shown that several

have been sent to King Esarhaddon as tribute.

such Greek centres 582 as Samos, Crete

this style in

as well as in Etruria, indicates that the artists responsible for

active far into the seventh century.

it

were

plaquette of this type, which has plant

ornament only, has come to light in the Erythrai excavations, which I recently
began with H. Gultekin, director of the Izmir Museum. This piece was found in the
temple debris, which contained works from the years 670-545 B.C. A number of
Phoenician and Syrian ivory workshops were active until the end of the seventh
century. The Ionian art of ivory-carving probably grew up in imitation of
Phoenician-Syrian models (p. 219). The animal figures in the Phoenician Egyptianizing style also show distinct Egyptian influences. For example, the lion faces
are always done in the Egyptian manner, without folds and with the mouth
closed. But the lions from Beisan, 583 with their open mouths, outstretched tongues
and pronounced cheek bones, follow Hittite precedent. The sphinxes always wear
Egyptian double crowns. Yet the epaulettes are probably a Phoenician invention.
H. Kantor has also derived the apron found on Phoenician sphinxes from Egyptian
models. 584

The

griffins 585 usually

continue the Hittite-Mycenaean version of the

Phoenician prototypes developed in the

OTHER
PHOENICIAN
STYLES
Kerameikos bronze
bowl

late

second millennium. 586

Apart from the Egyptianizing fashion, other stylistic currents existed in Phoenicia.
At present, however, it is not possible to distinguish Syrian products from wares
that might have been made in Phoenicia itself. But the bronze bowl that has come
to light in a
(Pis. 39,

tomb of

the late ninth century in the Kerameikos 587 in Athens

40; Fig. 30) certainly belongs to Phoenician art.

composition and some

bowl from Idalion

stylistic details

(Fig. 104). 588

very closely

Common

The manner of its

recall the figural scenes

surface

on

the

to both are the rosette in the centre

of the interior of the bowl with a bulge at the ends of the petals which are bordered
148

fig. 103 - Phoenician bronze bowl.

B.C. Cf. Pis. 59, 40

Found in a tomb oj the Kerameikos, Athens. Late 9th

century

and p. 148.

by a plaited band, and the wide pictorial frieze framed by a plaited band at the top
and bottom. Moreover, the figures of the two bronze bowls have similar folds
on the garments and a related linear stylization of the hair. The blossoms borne by
the figures on the Kerameikos bowl recur in the right hand of the enthroned
woman of the Idalion bowl. The hatched rendering of the hair found on the
figures of the Kerameikos bowl, which is nothing more than a linear translation
of the Egyptian hair fashion,

is

The figures of the

The Kerameikos bowl is the only

typical of Phoenician art.

tridacna shells also display this device (PI. 36).

Phoenician work that can be dated with any precision.

material associated with

metric

style),

it

On

the basis of

Greek
Geo-

in the burial (including clay vessels of the early

K. Kiibler has placed the bronze bowl in the

last

quarter of the

ninth century, 589 thereby happily confirming the dating E. Gjerstad proposed for
the Idalion bowl.

With the help of the Cypriot vase types depicted on it, E. Gjerstad

has dated the Idalion bowl in the eighth century. 590

As K.

Kiibler has rightly

149

fig. 104 - Detail of Idalion bowl.

After KiB, p. 104, Fig. j and

p. 107, Fig. /. Cf. p. 148.

indicated, the Idalion piece

meikos bowl.
Nimrttd bronze bowl

must have been made somewhat

later

than the Kera-

591

A bronze bowl from Nimrud showing a lion hunt with a chariot 592 may be claimed
as a

Phoenician work.

of a bird motif as

filler

The sphinx with

the Egyptian double

crown and the use

point to Egyptian influence. But the kneeling lion hunter

with the linear stylization and the concentric arrangement of the hair as well as
the checkered clothing ornamentation
figures

on

is

shown

has a long horizontal back line and abdominal hair,

found on the animal figures of the Syrian ivory

(Figs. 87-89).

The

three parallel stripes

reliefs

two

The

ivories.

The

strongly Assyrianizing style of Hittite

lion

characteristic motifs

and the Tell Halaf sculptures

on the thigh of the

rear leg are possibly a

transformation of the flame-like stylization that appears at the same spot

above-mentioned Syrian

The

in the Phoenician style.

the tridacna shells have a similar clothing decoration (PL 36).

on

the

and the body of the animal show a

derivation. The lion has rather pronounced
face

cheek bones, but the other features follow the Assyrian lion type. The two skin
folds of the palmette-leaf type beneath the eyes

and chin bones indicate that the

bronze bowl belongs to the second half of the eighth century at the earliest. The
body stylization mentioned, however, suggests an origin towards the end of the
eighth century.

Tridacna

shells

may be
Nimrud bowl.

bronze bowl from Olympia 593

category as the previously mentioned

ascribed to the same

tridacna shells are authentically Phoenician in style. A splendid example

from Assur shows figures that must be regarded as typically Phoenician because
of their hair style and dress as well as the lavish use of palmette and lotus (PL 36).
W. Andrae has provided a careful description and fine interpretation of this
work: 594 'The thick hinge of the shell has been sculpturally modelled into a human
(female) head, and the outer surface of the shell is engraved to show an ornately

The

plate 38 - 'Woman at the Window'. Ivory plaque from Nimrud. Phoenicianizing

century b.c Iraq Museum, Baghdad. Height 6.8 cm.
Cf. pp. 144, 214.
150

style.

Early 7th

39a
-

'.".*

/*:*** 7

WS

j*ky.'

39 b

plate 40 - Another view of the bowl

in Plate 39. Cf. Fig. 10 3 and p. 148.

patterned mythical animal with four wings, each of which shelters a winged

sphinx amidst lotus rinceaux

engraved, as
angel figure.

if

(PI.

36).

The

outer edge of the inner side

the images of this broad strip were arranged to be viewed

The innermost

is

also

by the

part of the shell remains smooth, probably being

intended to receive liquids for drinking or libation. In the living shell creature the

organs were placed here, against this smooth

and wings of the angel figure enclose them, just as

vital

The extended arms

still there. The
strip on the inside has a

surface.
if

they were

concept of protection seems to be assumed. The pictorial

musical emphasis. Between the sphinxes one sees on either side of a central palm
pairs of female musicians, who turn towards a kneeling youth.
Beginning from the left their instruments are as follows: first lyre, second lyre,
tambourine and flute. Thus we have a small orchestra consisting of strings, per-

two

cussion and wind instruments.' Actually the engraved repertory of the tridacna
shells

shows few Egyptian

influences.

Only the sphinx under the

left

arm of

the

plate 39 - Bowl from the Kerameikos in Athens. Bronze. Phoenician work. Late 9th century
Kerameikos Museum, Athens. Diameter ij.j cm. Cf. Fig. 103 and p. 148.

B.C.

153

plate 41 - Ivory box. From the South-west Palace

Museum. Height 6.7 cm. Cf. p. ijy.

at

Kalkhu (Nimrud). Late 8th or

early 7th century

B.C. British

siren (Andrae's 'angel figure') wears the Egyptian double crown, while the rest
have a completely Phoenician look. They wear epaulettes and long hair, which
the artist has stylized in the form of cross-hatching (PI. 36a). This linear hatching
treatment is also favoured for the decoration of body parts and clothing (PI. 36a, d),
and must be regarded as one of the chief distinguishing marks of Phoenician art.

The human figures, their clothes, hair and feet are always stylized with hatching.
The women wear epaulettes, which are also found on the sphinx figures. Poulsen
has rightly noted that the Egyptian lotus blossoms are translated into a Phoenician
idiom here. 595 Recently H. Walter and K. Vierneisel have convincingly shown

154

fig. 105

- Female

ZA

series,

new

figure. Detail from inside of tridacna shell from Assur. After Andrae,
11 (4j). First half of 7th century B.C. Cf Plate $6 and pp. 1/4, 21 p.

that centres of production of tridacna shells lay in the 'south Phoenician' artistic
area. 596

Samos 597 is astonishingly

from Assur (PI. 36b, e). As H. Walter and K. Vierneisel
have recognized, a Samian ivory statuette of a youth with hands folded on his
chest, an apron and a leaf-pattern crown (PI. 36c) is also Phoenician. 598 This work
provides a good parallel to the figures on the Assur tridacna shell. Like the
Samian statuette the head of the angel (PI. 36c) has long thick locks falling forward
on the shoulders on both sides, a strongly curving nose and especially a peculiar
ear shape. 599 The strikingly narrow incised eyebrows of the statuette and the angel
speak in favour of the view that both works belonged to the same artistic circle.
Since the details mentioned do not appear on Syrian statuettes, this style must be

The angel head of

a tridacna shell from the island of

similar to that of a piece

regarded as Phoenician.
Finally something

Link with

the tridacna shell

sirens

must be said about the great similarity between the angel of

and the attachments of the Urartian bronze cauldron. The same

is represented in both cases. The position of the extended arms is

and the neck hair on the nape of the neck, consisting of several long
tresses, follows the same scheme. The eye-lid edges drawn out at the sides of the
Urartian attachments (PI. 45) 600 are also found in the figures of the tridacna shell
(PI. 36a, d). The triangle executed with double lines and provided with rings
feature of the Urartian repertory of ornament601
recurs on the inner side of a
tridacna shell from Nimrud. 602 Above we have related the neck tresses to Aramaean
art and to Phoenicia (p. 59). Urartian goldsmiths probably borrowed this hair
style from Aramaean models. The other similarities may be explained as the
product of the interplay of styles fashionable in the Near East during this period.
As P. Amandry has recently shown, 603 tridacna shells were fashionable in Mediterranean lands throughout the seventh century. A tridacna shell was found in the

siren type

identical,

fig. 105 a

Bayrakli
ytb

- Tridacna

shell from

(Old Smyrna).

century

B.C.

Late

Unpublished.

Cfp.ijd.
155

Urartia,

plate 42 - Gold crown. Syrian style. Second half of 8th century or

Gallery, Baltimore. Cf. pp. ijp 174.

later.

Walters

Art

temple debris of Old Smyrna from the

examples from

Nimrud and Assur

late

(PI. 36)

seventh century (Fig. 105a).

must belong to the

first

The

half of the

seventh century.

The Phoenicians must have

also created outstanding pieces of furniture, and

and G. Pettinato have produced an important essay on this question. 604
The art of middle Assyrian workshops need only be mentioned briefly, since the
problem has recently been systematically treated in fundamental studies by
R. D. Barnett 605 and H. Kantor. 606
The main art activity of the middle Syrian cities lay in the realm of works in metal
and ivory. In discussing Aramaean (p. 59) and Neo-Hittite (p. 119) sculpture,
we were able to establish that these objects were in large measure influenced by

F. Canciani

SYRIAN ART
CENTRES

156

fig.

06 - Detail of Syrian ivory box from Nimrud (Cf. Plate 41). After Barnett, Nimrtid
20 (S3). Cf. below.

Ivories, p. 67, Fig.

Syrian models.
pleats

The

of the tunics

concentric arrangement of the coimire and the vertical back

(PI.

41

Fig. 106), the stylizations of animal bodies

plant motifs (Fig. 112) are relevant in this connection.

We

find

all

and various

these stylistic

produced by Syrian workshops. The works discussed here

seem to come from the late eighth or early seventh century. But one must
assume that there were prototypes going back to the ninth century in the same or

features in the objects

actually

a similar style. Regrettably,

sequence for Syrian

it is

not yet possible to establish a precise chronological

art.

The

Syrian workshops themselves followed an eclectic approach. The back pleats

mentioned were taken from Babylonian fashions (p. 50); the concentric arrangement of the hair and the plant ornament were due to Phoenician art. But the
Syrian craftsmen considerably modified the Phoenician motifs, and especially
those of Egyptian origin, so that they no longer looked foreign. However, Syrian

Eclecticism

creations enjoyed great popularity in the centres of the hinterland.

As R. D. Barnett has shown, 607 the chief focus of the Syrian workshops was in
Hama. P. J. Riis has confirmed this identification. He states that among the
hitherto unpublished finds of Period

Museum

of the Tell Halaf statues

ment of Hama

Zincirli

(Pis. 23, 24) existed

among

the architectural orna-

(pp. 84, 114).

fine work in Syrian style is the ivory box from Nimrud now in the British
Museum. 609 The box shows a princess at a festive meal with a retinue of musicians

scene with the music-playing figures here, since

illustrate the

preserved (PL 41

Fig. 106).

The

it is

small orchestra has five players. Seen

Nimrud

ivory bo:

the best

from front

- Details of Syrian ivory boxes. Fig. ioj: After Barnett ,

20 (S 9). - Fig. 108: After Barnett, Nimrud Ivories, p. 6j,
Fig. 20 (S 4).- Fig. 1 op: After Barnett, Nimrud Ivories, p. 6j, Fig. 20 (S 20).- Fig. no:
After Barnett, Nimrud Ivories, p. 6j, Fig. 20 (S 12). Cf. pp. ij8, 219.
figs.

07-1 10 (from

Nimrud

He

workshop. 608
bases (Fig. 33) and the

from

we

in

E of the Hama citadel in the Danish National

are ivory splinters that actually represent discards

Models for many of the plant ornaments of the

poloi

Chief focus

Ivories, p.

left to right)

67, Fig.

157

Miwei

plate 43 - Head of a woman. From the South-east Palace at Kalkhu (Nimrud). Ivory. Syrian
Second half of 8th century b.c. or later. British Museum. Height 4.4 cm. Cf. pp. ijp, 175.

style.

two girls, one behind the other, playing double flutes, a tamtwo men, each with a psaltery. In a separate scene, these
figures are followed by a lady of the court. As a whole the reliefs on the box
recall the main scene of the Karatepe reliefs (Pis. 32, 33), in which King Asitawata
is similarly shown with a company of musicians at a festive meal. However, the
seated woman of the ivory box is not a goddess, 610 but a princess. Because of the
wig-like treatment of the musicians' hair, the figures of the ivory box may be
to back they are

bourine-player, and

style. The dress of the figures

on other Syrian ivory objects (Figs. 107-10)

placed in the Phoenicianizing category of the Syrian

on

the

and in

M.

box

is

early

the same as that found

Greek works

E. L. Mallowan has

the period between 824

these pieces

fig.

in

that the ivory objects in the Syrian style belong to

and 703

b.c. 611

He

thinks,

go back to the time of Sargon. 612 The

however, that the majority of

coiffure of some figures with

-Syrian ivory statuette. Found at Toprakkale (Urartu). After Barnett, Nimrud

129. Late 8th century B.C. British Museum. Cf. pp. J9, 1/9, 192.

Ivories, PI.

158

(Figs. 164-66).

shown

fig. 112 - Phoenician ivory plaquette

at

Arslan-Tas.

PL 36

Arslan Task,

Found

Tbureau- Dangin,

After

(no. 61). Second half

of 8th century. Cf. Fig. 113.

Sargonid hair knots, which appear on some other ivory boxes in the Syrian
style, 613 agrees well with this dating. A golden 'crown', now in the Walters Art
Gallery, Baltimore, 614 has been ascribed to the Syrian style
(PI. 42). 615

He

asserts that the

winged sun disk with the

by

C. Watzinger

star in the

middle

(this

appears on the back of the crown), 616 as well as the plant forms behind the ibexes

and the

stylization of the

naked goddesses are Syrian.

work in the original, but I am inclined

on account of the summarily executed
the same as in the figures of the ivory
like coiffure is

trend.

have not seen

this curious

to agree with C. Watzinger's attribution

eyes of the naked

women, 617 which

are

box discussed above. Moreover, the wig-

arranged in the manner of the Syrian ivories of the Phoenicianizing

similar hair style

Nimrud ivory box (Fig.

ment of the wig

is

not

is

seen in the two musicians playing psalteries on the

To my knowledge, however, a truly identical arrangefound among the published art works of the ancient Near
41).

East. 618

A masterpiece of particular elegance is the well-preserved ivory head of a woman

now in the British Museum (PI. 43). 619 The piece shows the
woman with a fine low polos and long hair, stylized into several
tresses fall vertically

mouth
face,

and are rolled into

spirals at the ends.

head of a young
thick tresses.

The

slightly

The
open

gives the head a vitality that, together with the full and round forms of the

makes an

hair strands.

attractive contrast to the austere linear handling of the eyes

The

and the

carver must have been one of the most accomplished artists of

work ranks immediately after the fasci'Mona Lisa' of the Baghdad Museum (PI. 37) as one of the finest creations
of ancient Near Eastern art. The hair style of the head (cf. Fig. 1 1 1) may be dated
to the last quarter of the eighth century at the earliest (p. 56). Thus this remarkable
the period. For vital expressiveness his

nating

ivory

may have been produced

in the late eighth or indeed in the early seventh

century.

At
at

this point we must mention two splendid ivory works that were recently found
Gordion, plaques that formed part of an ensemble of horse- trappings. 620 One

Finds at Gordion

plaque depicts a nude, winged 'mistress of the beasts' standing on a bull's head.
On the other plaque is a chimaera. Before it is a lion's head, and at the height of the
shoulders a

appears frontally.

The two plaques belong to an eclectic

The position of the 'mistress of the

be localized in northern Syria.

must
on the bull, her polos adorned with

style that

beasts'

human head

rosettes,

and the

tails

of the sphinxes

159

at the end are specifically Hittite traits. As we have shown

above (note 343) the chimaera is a Hittite invention. Furthermore, the details of
the lion's head of the chimaera, the open mouth with the tongue protruding over
the lower lip, the styli2ation of the chin bones in the form of a half-ellipse and the
furrowing of the tip of the nose are unmistakable characteristics of the Hittite lion
(PI. 21 Figs. 68-74). The cubic forms of the lion's head also bespeak the Hittite
character of the work. Yet other details of the two Gordion plaques show that
these Hittite traits were combined with forms of Syrian art. The facial features of
the human heads are worked entirely in the Syrian fashion, and the shape of the

with birds' heads

eyebrows, the big locks

eyes, the incised

to

one

attitude.

similar

at the ear, as well as the

turn of the head

towards the spectator are characteristic features of the Syrian artistic

Since the plant ornament of the plaque with the chimaera appears in

side

forms on other Syrian art objects, we are justified in regarding these

work dependent on a strong Hittite tradition. These Syrian-

ivories as Syrian
Hittite imports

found

at

Gordion

are precious

documents in determining the

chronology of Syrian ivories. At Gordion they were found

belongs to the

late

eighth century at the

earliest. 622

at a level 621 that

This gives us a criterion for

further study of the dating problem.

IRANIAN
SPHERE

In order to complete our panorama of Near Eastern culture in the

first

millennium,

Iranian spheres

we would have

(cf. Pis.

first

half of the

to examine the products of the Urartian

and

44-47). But since the art of the Iranian regions has already

been discussed in another volume of the art of the world series,* we shall be
content simply to mention this theme below in the framework of Near Eastern
contacts with Greece (pp. 192, 197); for other aspects we refer the reader to
Professor Porada's excellent monograph.
* E. Porada, Ancient Iran,

London, 1965. See

Kunst^entren, Ankara, 1968.

60

also E. Akurgal, Urartaische und altiranische

PART TWO

Greece

VI.

First encounter
between

East and
West

EARLY GREEK ART AND ITS CONNECTIONS

WITH THE NEAR EAST

we are well informed

and archaeologically took place towards the middle of the second
millennium B.C. This confrontation took place as a result of Mycenaean expansion.
C. Schaeffer's successful excavations at Ras Shamra in Syria have clearly shown
that this period saw a fruitful exchange in art between these two poles of world
culture. 623 It is evident that the Mycenaeans played the donor role in this encounter.
It would surely have led to other fruitful exchanges if disturbances in the Aegean
world about 1200 B.C. had not put an end to the favourable situation. There
followed a dark age in which Greece, 624 Anatolia and some other parts of the
Mediterranean world reverted to a primitive stage of existence. Since culture
had been limited to a thin upper crust among the Mycenaeans and Hittites, the
fall of political power sealed the doom of that once flourishing intellectual life.
In Greece the knowledge of writing disappeared and with it the whole intellectual
heritage. What remained was simply a practical acquaintance with techniques
required for the accomplishment of daily tasks. Only through the intermediary
role played by Phoenician and Syrian workshops were a few motifs and style
elements of Mycenaean art preserved for the following age. The Aegean migration
also ruined the cultural life of Anatolia, 625 where the Hittites had maintained a
The

first

encounter between East and West about which

historically

great independent culture for almost 800 years. 626 After the

fall

of the Hittite

empire central Anatolia sank into a period of stagnation lasting almost 400 years.
It was left to the southern Anatolian and northern Syrian principalities to continue
the cultural heritage of the Hittite world. In Syria also, as

W.

F. Albright has

shown, 627 the traditional culture was able to unfold further without interruption.
It must have been about the middle of the ninth century that the Greeks were
able to follow in the footsteps of their

appearance in the entrepots and colonial

Earliest Greek finds
in

Near East

162

Mycenaean ancestors by making their

of the Near East. Although they

cities

had already begun to found cities in western Anatolia about 1000 B.C., 628 the
earliest Greek finds that have come to light at various sites in the Near East can
scarcely be earlier than the beginning of the eighth century. As V. Desborough
has recently demonstrated, 629 these comprise exclusively skyphoi (drinking vessels)
in the late Protogeometric style of Cycladic origin; Desborough dates them within
the period between 900 and 750. 630 These skyphoi were not export wares, for by
this period the Greeks possessed much better works which they could send to
the East. Consequendy, these pieces must be everyday vessels used by Greek
merchants from the Cyclades active in the Near East. Greek exports to the eastern
lands of the Mediterranean began only much later, not before the seventh century.
The skyphoi that have been found must have belonged to individual Greeks
resident in Near Eastern cities. These immigrants were pioneers of the future
Hellenic trade colonies in the Near East, of which the oldest (as we shall see) was
founded towards the middle of the eighth century.

r-,vplate 44 - Urartian rock-cut tombs

In this
is

first

in the citadel

on Lake Van. 8th century

phase of relations between early Greece and the Near East, which

datable to the period 825-750, maritime trade

still

shows 631

dominated

seems to have remained in

coastal trade in the

as a famous passage in the

Homeric age. It may be no

accident that the earliest confidently dated Near Eastern art object found in Greece

comes from Phoenicia.

It is

bowl (Pis. 39-40, Fig. 103) ascribed in the

The bowl was found in a tomb in the Kera-

the bronze

previous chapter to Phoenician

art.

Maritime trade
Homeric age

the hands of the Phoenicians. This sea-faring people

Iliad clearly

B.C.

Earliest

Near

Eastern work
Greece

meikos at Athens. On the basis of associated vessels that are typical of the early
Geometric style, K. Kiibler has dated it to the last quarter of the ninth century.
Thus the Greeks had learned to appreciate Near Eastern products as early as the
end of the ninth century, when they became accustomed to use such pieces as
grave goods. It may be that there are even older works of Near Eastern origin
16}

in

oj

#*"'%-

35a|

>*(F

.^jL

VP^
^EST^

St.

KWftSPjj

la

plate 45 a, b - Male and female attachments of a bronze cauldron. Found in the Midas tomb

at

Gordion.

Urartian. Late 8th century b.c. Cf. p. 195.

still

hidden in Greek

thus far none

soil,

is earlier

but

it

seems that of the Near Eastern finds published

We can regard this very

than the Kerameikos bronze bowl.

important piece as a landmark, permitting us to

fix

the upper chronological

phase of early Greek-Near Eastern contacts about 825.

Near Eastern products may of course have been appreciated by the Greeks from
limits

of the

first

However, in this early phase imported

upon Greek art. We know of no single Greek
influences that belongs to this earliest phase of East- West

the very beginning of the early Greek period.

wares had very

little

influence

work showing

eastern

contact, that

to the period 825-750. Probably

is

Greek

foreign art works at this time, since they were too

of the Geometric
the Greeks were

style,

still

then at

its

at the stage

height.

At

artists

much

had

little

interest in

involved in the current

the beginning of the eighth century

of collecting impressions. They observed, learned

and listened eagerly to stories about the Easterners and their marvels. The great
store of knowledge the peoples of Mesopotamia had built up in all aspects of
cultural life

over the course of two millennia since the discovery of writing, the

magnificent buildings and the general liveliness of the fabled eastern world must

have made a very deep impression on the Greeks. But at this time they were not
yet mature enough to be able to profit fully from the manifold riches of the East.
It

164

was

in accordance with their level of culture that the

Greeks should

first

be

r-i- -'<

JHi

influenced by the religion and mythology of the Near Eastern peoples. Every

Religion and

seaman or merchant from the Near East could tell the Greeks something about
the venerable gods and the wonders accomplished by the legendary heroes of that
strange world. Then too the Greeks who began to travel in the Levant in the
ninth century learned by hearsay to know the gods and myths of this fabulous
world. The Near Eastern religions and myths that the Greeks knew through
word of mouth were probably the earliest influences of the East on the West.
At the end of the eighth century at the latest the mythical elements of eastern
origin in the works of Homer and Hesiod had already taken on a stable Greek
form, so that the period of their acquisition from the Near East must go back
a long way beyond the middle of the eighth century. From the legends which the
Greeks took over orally from the Phoenicians and other peoples they slowlv
built up their own world of mythology. Some examples of the epic tales that
reached the Greeks from the Near Eastern peoples in the first half of the eighth
century have survived. Especially noteworthy are the Illuyanka myth and two
epic works, the legends known as the 'Heavenly Kingdom' and the 'Song of
Ullikummi\ According to the Illuyanka myth, 'The dragon Illuyanka defeated
the storm god, taking his heart and eyes. The storm god sought to revenge himself.
He took the daughter of a man named Arm as his wife and begat a son. When the
son was grown he married the daughter of the dragon Illuyanka. The storm god
commanded his son: "If you go into your wife's house, ask her for my heart and
eyes." When he then went to ask for the heart she gave it to him. Later he asked
her for the eyes, and she gave them to him. He took them to his father and so
restored his father's heart and eyes to him. After his person had regained its
former state the god went to the sea to do batde. In the struggle he came close
to defeating the dragon. But the storm god's son took the loser's side. And he
cried aloud to his father: "Include me! Don't spare me." Then the storm god
killed the dragon Illuyanka and his own son.' An orthostat relief from Malatya
has a scene from the Illuyanka myth (Fig. 60). 632

mythology the first

This old Anatolian myth kept

its

in the

Illuyanka myth. In the

Roman

Illuyanka myth

popularity into the days of Classical antiquity.

A story of the batde of Zeus and Typhon, which forms

by Apollodoros

imports

the basis of a description

period, 633 reproduces the

Typhon myth Zeus

main

loses not only his heart

features of the

and eyes in the

with the monster but also the sinews of his hands and feet. In the Illuyanka
myth the lost organs were recovered with the help of the storm god's son and his

fight

wife, the dragon's daughter. In the

Typhon

story

it is

Hermes who purloins

the

who

has

sinews while his companion Aigipan distracts the dragon's daughter

Origin of Typhot

myth

been charged with looking after them. The Anatolian origin of the Typhon legend
is evident from the geographical names in the myth. The mountain that is mentioned, Mount Cassius, stands on the Syrian coast just south of the river Orontes.

The Korikian Cave where Typhon

lives lies

on

the Cilician coast, as the

myth

Aeschylus and Pindar also place the Typhon myth in Cilicia. Thus the
version of the Typhon legend that appears in Apollodoros' work certainly derives
has

it.

from ancient Anatolian models. Greeks may often have heard the myth when they
165

encountered Levantine peoples

century (see below).

at

Al Mina towards the middle of the eighth

The rendering of the Illuyanka myth in art, of which we hitherto know only the
Hittite example from Malatya mentioned above (Fig. 60), seems to have provided
the model for the Hydra as represented in Greek art (p. 95). One must assume,
however, that apart from Hittite representations of Illuyanka the Greeks knew
other Near Eastern dragon-battle scenes, instances of which are found in Mesopotamia.
Source of Hesiod's
Theogony

The

epic

known

as

'The Heavenly Kingdom'

generations of gods: 634 Anu,

Kumarbi and

is

theogony presenting three

Anu is the Babylonian

the storm god.

name of a god who corresponds to

Kumarbi emasculates Anu by ripping out his genitals

sky god and Kumarbi represents the Hurrian

the Sumerian deity Enlil.

with his teeth.

him
at

He

swallows the semen, but then

spits

it

out again

that otherwise he will be pregnant with three terrible deities.

having swallowed

my manhood.

when you

will finally

fruit

dash your head

of
.

my

body.

You

will

tells

are pleased

But don't be pleased over your

have given you three fearful gods as the

point

when Anu

'You

insides. I

come

against the rocks of the

to the

moun-

tains.'

The

earth

became pregnant from the seed Kumarbi spat

The following very

out.

fragmentary section of the clay tablet probably described

how

the earth gave

god and two other deities. From other parallel texts it is evident
that the storm god became king in place of Kumarbi. It has long been known
that Hesiod's Theogony derives fiom this Hurrian myth. Hesiod also tells of three
generations of gods: Ouranos, Kronos and Zeus successively ruled the heavens.
Here too the first god was emasculated by his son. Hesiod relates that in the night,
while Ouranos was entwined in love around his wife Gaia, Kronos cut off his
father's private parts with an enormous sickle and threw them behind him. From
birth to the storm

the bloody drops the earth brought forth the Giants.

From

however, which were carried by the waves

sea, arose the

far

over the

the private parts,

foam-born

Aphrodite.

The 'Song of Ullikummi'

tells 635 how Kumarbi created the monster Ullikummi

out of diorite in order to regain the kingdom of heaven with his help from his

god Tesup. After a long struggle the storm god defeated the stone
monster to remain the king of the heavens for all time. This epic also seems to
have influenced Greek mythology. In Hesiod's Theogony we learn how Zeus, after
his victory over Kronos and the Titans, was again attacked by the monster Typhon.
son, the storm

The sequence of events is the same. Moreover, the scene of the epic is the same in
both versions 636 once more Mount Cassius on the Syrian coast, where the Greeks
founded their colony of Al Mina about the middle of the eighth century.

Adoption of
Phoenician alphabet

66

The Greeks' adoption of the Phoenician alphabet, which they improved by

introducing signs for vowel sounds, is the most important result of the meeting
between East and West. The rise of Greek script, of which the earliest piece of
evidence is a famous Attic prize amphora of about 730, probably occurred in the
first half of the eighth century, as W. F. Albright has cogendy argued. 637

plate 46 -Bronze lion from Patnos. Urartian

style.

8th or 7th century B.C. Archaeological Museum,

'an.

Height 7 cm.

As the firmly dated early Protocorinthian pottery from the Greek colony of Al
Mina on the coast of northern Syria indicates, the Greeks seem to have successfully
rivalled the Phoenician maritime trade only

towards the middle of the eighth

century. Tolerated by the Neo-Hittite principalities of northern Syria,

shipping of their own, the Greeks managed to gain a

coast of Syria, and

from

this

real

First Greek color

in

Xear East:

Al Mina

who had no

foothold on the northern

base they gradually took over the Near Eastern

traffic.

In a close study of the pottery found at Al Mina M. Robertson has

shown

that

was colonized towards the middle of the eighth century. 638 V. Desbo639
rough,
who has treated systematically all the early Greek ceramics found in the
Near East, comes to the same conclusion. 640 In any event towards the middle of
the eighth century Greece seems to have undergone a great change. In the second
this site

i6-

plate 47 - Gold plate from Ziwiye. Mannaean. First half of 7th century b .c. Louvre,
Cf.p. 189.

Paris.

half of the eighth century

most of the Hellenic centres of any note seem to have

participated directly or indirectly in the brisk maritime trade of the Mediterranean.

seems to have played an

this traffic. F. Johansen has convincingly shown that during
the eighth century the Athenians were active participants in Greek Mediterranean

Although Attica

is

scarcely represented at

Al Mina,

it

important part in

At tie

influence at

Al Mina

trade. 641

The

popularity of ships in Attic vase-painting of the Geometric style, the

Rhodian ceramics about the middle of the eighth century,

Atticizing phase of

and the Geometric sherds of an Attic krater from Hama are three useful pieces of
evidence advanced by F. Johansen. 642 In my opinion the Hama sherds 643 may
even come from the first half of the eighth century. We shall soon see that the

Near Eastern art influences appear for the first time in Attic works.
Crete probably played an important part in contact between the Greeks and the
earliest

168

Near East. 644 Then such art centres as Olympia, Corinth, Boeotia, the Cyclades,
Samos and Miletos must have been outstanding entrepots for the maritime traffic
of the age. At all these sites art works have been found that either come from the
Near East or show Near Eastern features and motifs.
Quite possibly the Geometric style accomplished its shift from flat, abstract
ornament to figural representation mainly through the impact of Near Eastern
forms. Greek contact with the Near Eastern world began when the Geometric
style had passed its peak and was on the point of entering a new phase, a phase
that spelled the displacement and breaking up of the geometric character from
which it takes its name. A great number of vessels, which are decorated with
small lines or stripes and with dots, clearly show that a phase of decline had already begun. 645 If the figural innovations of the ripe and late Geometric styles had
not appeared, Geometric art would probably have been condemned to complete

NEAR EASTE
INFLUENCE

GREEK STY

degeneration.

Not only

did Near Eastern artists have exotic animals and mysterious legendary

creatures to

hand on

as

models, but they practised a kind of

art resting

upon

bounds they were able to work with a free

hand. Under the influence of the eastern examples Greek vase-painters were able
to free themselves from compass and ruler 646 as well as from the oppressive discipline of compositions in metopes and strips. It is a striking fact that with the rise
of the figural style lions (Fig. 114), griffins, sphinxes, Centaurs, animal combat
groups and grazing animals (Fig. 113) themes and motifs that heretofore had
been entirely lacking in Greek art suddenly appeared on gold plaquettes, in
vase-painting and on bronzes.
The emergence of the new Greek style after 7 5 o occurred at a time in which the
whole Near East was undergoing a great upsurge. Before 745, that is before the
beginning of the reign of the great Assyrian king Tiglath-Pileser in, there was
little substantial cultural and artistic activity in the Near East. Great movements
of art generally occur in times of political upswing; this may be seen almost
everywhere in the history of world civilization. The renewed strength of the
Assyrian empire after an obscure period of weakness lasting some seventy years
stimulated the rise of active artistic centres in the Neo-Hittite Aramaean and
Syro-Phoenician principalities, which began to supply the great Assyrian palaces
and to export their products throughout the civilized world.
The numerous Near Eastern works of art that appeared in many places in Greece
show clearly that the new stylistic trend was stimulated by these prototypes.
But Greek artists did not take as their models all Near Eastern works found in
Greek sanctuaries. Votive gifts presented by Easterners living or travelling in
Greece might not necessarily correspond to Greek taste, and these form an exception. Assyrian and Egyptian products held little interest for the Greeks.
Figures of deities with horns and other outlandish Near Eastern attributes found
no favour, nor did figures with elaborately dressed hair. An examination of the
earliest Greek sculptures shows that they are usually close to works of the Hittites
and Syrians. The strongly Phoenicianizing products also look quite strange next

venerable tradition, and within

its

Escape from

tyrar

of compass and rah

169

We

shall see that in Greece only those Egyptian and Phoenician

were modified in northern Syrian centres found acceptance.
The Greek creations have a particular affinity with Hittite art. The calligraphic
contours of the figures and the cubic animal bodies of Hittite art (PI. 21 Figs. 68,
69, 78-85) are in fact quite close to the Geometric and linear approach of the
eighth-century Greeks. We shall also show that the formal idiom of Greek animal
figures of the seventh century was mainly shaped by the employment of Hittite

to

Greek works.

style elements that

style elements.

Near Eastern imports, known from the

examples

(PI.

39, 40; Fig.

late

ninth century only in isolated

103), multiply astonishingly after the

The common appearance of Near Eastern

middle of the

on

ripe and late

Geometric vases is a clear reflection of this. For the present we may therefore
ascribe the upper chronological time limit of the Orientalizing influence to the
middle of the eighth century. But of course the Orientalizing style proper did not
come into full vogue until the beginning of the seventh century. Yet it is note-

eighth century.

worthy

emerged towards the middle of the eighth

became increasingly important during the second half of the eighth

that the trend gradually

century, and
century.

motifs

As

has been noted, the

first

signs are the appearance of grazing animals

and gold plaquette work. 648 In the second half of the eighth
century there followed lions, animal combat groups, sphinxes, griffins and
Centaurs figures inhabiting an entirely new world.
In the course of the ensuing discussion we shall see that Near Eastern motifs
appear for the first time in art works produced in mainland Greece, especially in
Attica. The islands and Ionia followed after a considerable time lag. The process
of orientalizing was a Greek fashion trend that spread slowly from west to east.
If the Orientalizing style begins in the mainland as early as about 750, it appears
on the Cyclades and on Rhodes only about 700, as Schiering has rightly noted. 649
Its flowering in Ionia came still later, about 650 at the earliest. While it was
obsolete on the mainland as early as about 625, it enjoyed a kind of Indian summer
in the East Greek world which lasted until the middle of the sixth century. The
following paragraphs will treat in detail the earliest Near Eastern influences in
in vase-painting 647

Rise of Orientalising
style

mainland Greece.

A
New

York bronze
group

work of outstanding merit

stands at the head of the phase of

art that

Museum, New York (PL 48). 650 This piece ranks as one of the earliest
Greek works to be influenced by the mythology and sculpture of the Near East.
According to E. Buschor's perceptive suggestion651 the group shows Zeus fighting
the primeval monster Typhon for the mastery of the world. Typhon, who is
known to us from Hittite mythology, was a monster made of diorite (p. 165).
In Hesiod 652 and later in Pindar he is a creature with one hundred heads. In
Greek art of the sixth century he appears as a snake with the upper body of a man.
If Buschor's hypothesis is correct, we must assume that for the Greeks at the
beginning many pictorial motifs had not yet acquired final form. As the German

politan

scholar rightly observes, until the

170

Greek

begins about the middle of the eighth century: the bronze group in the Metro-

first

quarter of the seventh century 'Centaur*

plate 48 - Zeus and Typhon. Bronze group. Early

Greek. Shortly after the
middle of the 8th century.
Metropolitan Museum, New
York.

Height

11

cm.

Cf.

p. 170.

was

to

mean

a very different creature. 653

The

finest

Near Eastern prototypes of the

as that found

interestingly enough, with almost the same iconography

in Greek
monuments appear on Babylonian boundary stones.
Centaur

654

art

This legend-

ary type must have been a discovery of the Babylonian world.

In the

New York

group only the mythical content and the iconography of the

By contrast, the formal idiom of both figures is
Greek, and indeed (as E. Kunze has correctly pointed out) 655 still purely

horse monster are Near Eastern.

entirely

Geometric. The figures are a sculptural version of the silhouette figures characteristic

of the ripe and

rendered just as

late

flatly as in

Geometric

style

of vase-painting. Everything

is

The unorganic treatment of

the large

triangular lower part of the face follows the style principles of Geometric

The metal-worker who

of his time, a pioneer

art.

created the bronze group was one of the leading artists

who exercised an active influence on the great transformation

of Greek art after the middle of the century. His group

of Greek

still

on vases of the Geometric period.

head with its projecting bony nose and

the scenes depicted

art that has

since in depicting the

is

the

first

masterpiece

come down to us. The artist is outstandingly

god about a head higher than the monster he

successful,

achieves a

gradual rhythmic build-up from the juxtaposition of vertical parts. This crescendo

1-1

plate 49 - Ivory statuette from the Dipylon at Athens. Early Greek. Late 8th century
Museum, Athens. Height 24 cm. Cf. p. 173.

of rhythm begins with the horse's

god.

The

tail

i.e.

National

and concludes with the upright figure of the

projecting and receding volumes of the figures as well as the horizontal

placement of the four arms and the trunk of the horse's body make a pleasing
contrast to the predominant vertical composition of the whole.

group

is

not only the

earliest sculptural

The

New York

rendering of a mythological event in the

notable Greek achievement in the field of sculpture

Hellenic world, but also the

first

in the round. This superb

work may have been

created just after the middle of

the eighth century.

Near Eastern
prototypes

172

The most important Near Eastern

influence

on

early

Greek art was exercised by

They made an essential

Syrian and Phoenician products, especially those in ivory.

contribution to the rise and expansion of the Greek Orientalizing

years this question has given rise to considerable discussion
F.

Matz has emphasized the

style.

In recent

among archaeologists.

close links of the 'Daedalic' style with the

Near

Homann-Wedeking 657 and D. Only658 have noted common features

shared by early Greek sculptures and Syrian ivories, and Dunbabin has also sought
East. 656 E.

prototypes in Syria. 659 In the following section

we

question in the light of the results obtained in the

shall discuss this

first

important

part of this book.

Syrian and Phoenician ivories have been found throughout the Greek world. 660

on Crete, Samos and Rhodes 661

belong to the same stylistic group as that from which the Nimrud ivories derive
(Pis. 37, 38, 41, 43). Dunbabin has singled out two Syrian products found in
Corinth. 662 One is a matrix in Corinthian clay, but shows a pronounced Syrian
style, the other a clay statuette, which Dunbabin regards as a Syrian import. 663
Both pieces give clear evidence of the popularity of Syrian products in Greece.
Hitherto the soil of Attica has failed to yield Near Eastern ivory objects comparable
to the Nimrud pieces. However, some Greek ivory statuettes, which come from
a tomb in the Dipylon cemetery at Athens, 664 show that the artists were inspired
to a great extent by Syrian originals. Two of these are illustrated here. One of
them, the larger, is a masterpiece of early Greek art (PI. 49). The smaller is a work
of lesser quality (PL 65a-d). The standing position, the arms closely pressed

The ivory

carvings that have

come

to light

against the body, as well as the po/os, are

all

Dipylon

statuettes

features of Syrian prototypes that

tall, medium or low po/oi,

Greek works. The Greek carver of the smaller ivory statuette
(PL 65a-d), which comes from the same tomb 665 keeps the leaf ornament of the
Syrian polot^ but the carver of the larger piece has replaced this motif with a
meander, the leading ornamental motif of Greek Geometric art. 667 The hair style
seems to be a reworking of the Syrian fashion. The mass of hair, which consists
of long closely packed locks, actually recalls the forms of Syrian ivories. Yet
the way in which the hair is merely bound together in a mass at the back, and not

recur in Attic statuettes.

such as

we

The

Syrian originals wear

find in

allowed to appear in individual tresses

The

severely rectangular mass of hair

at the front, is

is

not paralleled in Syrian

also un-Syrian.

The herring-bone

art.

pattern

of stylization does of course appear in Syrian art (PL 43), 668 but in its present
strong and simple form it corresponds to the type represented in the decoration
of Greek Geometric vases.
Still

more important, however,

are the differences evident in the

body

structure

of the ivories from Syria and Attica. Anyone would be struck by the powerful

dynamism of the Greek works, which

profile

achieves an impressive

power

in the sharp

of the faces and the engaging accentuation of the volumes of the body.

The Greek statuette has a true freshness of appearance, but at the same time it
seems somewhat harsh in comparison with the idealized beauty of the female
figures of the Near Eastern ivories (Pis. 37, 38, 43). The Syrian models represent
the last flowering of a refined courtiy art depending on an old tradition, while the
Attic statuette may be regarded as a milestone in the rise of a young and vigorous
Greek art. The statuette with the leaf-pattern polos breathes the same Greek
173

and body forms and has the same

meander polos. That the effect is
less lively and that the buoyant accents of the body structure are lacking, are due
to its master, who was probably not one of the leading ivory carvers. As D. Only
has justly remarked, 669 he created a 'work that was strongly dependent on the
spirit (PI. 65a-d). It

shows comparable

face

rectangular hair mass as the statuette with the

Near

East'.

As long

as thirty years

ago R.

sculpture. 670

He

Hampe

published subtle

stylistic

observations

49) in the line of development of late Geometric

clearly demonstrated the 'more flowing' and 'recent' character

placing the Dipylon statuette

(PI.

of the late Geometric pottery associated with the statuette in the tomb, and thus
convincingly dated it to the end of the eighth century. 671 In some penetrating

remarks Alscher has recently stressed the advanced style of the Athenian ivory
statuette and the late type of the associated pottery, confirming Hampe's dating. 672
This conclusion accords with the results of our earlier researches on the Syrian
and Phoenician ivories found in what was once Assyria. I believe that I have
proved that these Near Eastern carvings come from the time of Sargon (721-705
p. 160). Since the small Dipylon statuette faithfully reproduced the leaf-pattern
together with the other statuettes
polos of the Syrian carvings, it seems to belong
of this tomb to the same period that gave rise to its models.
Syrian art works in the manner of the ivory pieces from Nimrud and the gold
crown in Baltimore (PI. 42) served early seventh-century Greek artists as prototypes. Following models of this kind they produced their 'Daedalic' human
figures, thereby creating a homogeneous style, which might be called panHellenic, since it dominated all parts of the early Greek world at that time. The
overwhelming majority of seventh-century Greek statuettes shows a hair style
that has been called the 'stepped-wig' coiffure. The useful monograph by R. J. H.

Syrian crowns

Jenkins collects almost the entire available corpus of material. In these figures

we

find hair of

coiffure

is

medium

length cascading

down

with horizontal waving. This

a Syrian invention, although in Syrian art the hair usually has a vertical

articulation (PL 36a).

However, the Nimrud

hair following the horizontal scheme. 673

ivories also include examples with

The nude goddesses of

the Syrian gold

crown show a similar stepped arrangement of the hair (PL 42). Whether it is
waved horizontally or vertically, in some Syrian examples the hair leaves the ears
free, and these project forward in a rather unnatural way (PL 38). 674 The same
markedly projecting ears recur in a number of early Greek examples. 675 It is
exceptional that the goddesses of the Syrian crown wear crowns over the hair,
since the other Syrian examples have no head-dress. In the Cretan statuettes 676 and
in some Spartan ones 677 the stepped-wig coiffure is generally combined with the
polos* 78
Syrian origin of the
stepped-wig coiffure

The early Greek hair style of the stepped-wig type is distinguished from Syrian
prototypes only by the fact that it usually shows short pearl or spiral locks at the
on the forehead. 679 In some pieces small circles appear at this point. The
forehead locks are lacking in the Syrian prototypes. None the less, this detail too
hairline

may
174

derive

from Near Eastern models, for in other Syrian

ivories

and in some 680

PLATE 50
Cf. below.

Golden work from Rhodes.

Neo-Hittite Aramaean

during the

last

reliefs (Fig.

'Daedalic'.

u) 681

Second half of 7th century

B.C. British

Museum.

the forehead locks occur in this fashion

quarter of the eighth century.

The stepped-wig

hair style with forehead locks

full-scale sculpture

and continued

was taken over from small and

The woman on the limestone

in modified form.

metope from Mycenae 682 has the same hair style as that of the early 'Daedalic'
statuettes. The splendid statuette from Auxerre in the Louvre 683 and the Nikandre
statue in the National Museum, Athens, 684 both from the middle of the seventh
century, already show the modified form in which the hair is divided into a fore
and hind part and is broken up into separate locks. This disaggregate 'Daedalic'
hair style is found in the torso of a female figure from Eleutherna in Crete 685
and in the seated woman from Hagiorgitika in Arcadia. 686 In these figures, however, the hair mass is bound on the sides and behind the head with a fillet. The
statues of Kleobis and Biton have the same modified hair arrangement, although
the tresses are bound only at the back with a loop. 687
The early Greek versions of Syrian coiffure persisted in some works of the
'Daedalic' style
especially in the figural scenes of Rhodian goldsmiths' work
until the late seventh century B.C. (PI. 50). On some Rhodian jewellery688 the

Goldsmiths^ work

from Rhodes

175

motif of the Woman at the Window

Other Syrian
influences

Since

it

has been

shown

lives on, as

we know it from

that the 'Daedalic' hair style derives

Syrian art

from

Syria,

(PI. 3 8).

it

should

be noted that the arms and hands closely pressed to the body as well as the overall
attitude of early Greek small sculpture also reflect Syrian originals. Ivories found
at

Nimrud have an

identical posture

with arms and hands closely pressed to the

body. 689 Characteristically, Greek statuettes of the seventh century keep to this
Syrian placement of the arms. Even the female statuettes from Dreros have the

Egyptian

influences

same position of the arms and hands, although these pieces are in bronze. 690
The attitude of the arms and hands pressed close to the body remains dominant
in Greek small sculpture until the middle of the seventh century. Yet it is a
striking fact that hands clenched in a fist occur first in the Nikandre statue.
Recalling that this is the earliest example of Greek monumental sculpture, one is
justified in explaining the shift in attitude as a result of contact with Egypt. It
is not by chance that the first evidences of the Egyptian statue type, which
combines the hands clenched in a fist with the monumental proportion of the
whole, occur in this sculpture from Naxos. The Naxians may have been among the
first Greeks to visit Egypt, for the Nesoi Naxikai, i.e. Naxian Isles, lay near the
North African coast. 691 But the real Egyptian transformation of Greek sculpture
happened only in the last quarter of the seventh century with the splendid figures
of gods and kouroi of youths. As G. Hafner has justly remarked, 692 there is no
gainsaying the fact that the Attic kouroi of the turn of the century follow the
stylistic

laws of Egyptian sculpture in the position of the arms and in the hands

clenched in a

fist,

as well as in

having one foot advanced. P. Gilbert has also

published some illuminating observations

on Egyptian

influences. 693

There is no
doubt that the Greeks owe the idea of monumentality and the statue type of their
figures to the Egyptian example. But in the course of a few generations they
brought to perfection a form that we must regard as one of mankind's finest
achievements.

Hittite influences

The Greeks of
centres.

the early seventh century also received stimulus

from

Hittite art

Importation of Neo-Hittite art works began as early as the end of the

The bronze lion protome from Olympia (PI. 17), the ivory lion's
head from Samos (Fig. 76), the ivory lion from Al Mina (PI. 21c, d; Fig. 77) 694
eighth century.

figs. 113, 114

bleche, PI. ij.

- Right: Lion

-Left: Gracing stag from a Greek gold band. After Ohly, Griechische GoldAttic Geometric style. Second half of 8th century B.C. Cf Fig. 112 and p. 169.
figure

from a

Protocorinthian aryballos.

korinthische Vasenmalerei, PI. 9, Fig. 7.

176

joo-6yj

Found on Rhodes. After Payne, Proto-

B.C. Cf. p. iyy.

r*^S

:*-->-

plate

5 1

- Early Attic krater. Early 7th century

and the two ivory

we

lions

Ant ikensamm lung,

B.C.

from Thasos, 695 which

Munich. Height 39 cm. Cf.p. 180.

F. Salviat has recently published,

which were exported from the

Greek centres at the end of the eighth and the beginning of the
seventh century. As H. Payne has recognized, the lion type of Protocorinthian

are (as

Near East

shall see) late Neo-Hittite originals,

to the

vase-painting standard in Corinth in the

first

half of the seventh century goes

back to Neo-Hittite models. Following H. Payne, 696

years ago. 697

on an

The

pursued

this

question some

oldest Protocorinthian lion figure with Hittite features occurs

aryballos 698 of the

first

the heart-shaped stylization of

Rhodes (Fig. 114). It has

mane and the protruding tongue

black-figured style from

the ear, the rolled

Borrowing of Hiti
lion typt

&
plate 5 2 - Protocorinthian aryballos from Thebes (Macmillan aryballos).
Polychrome style. About 650 b.c. British Museum. Height 6.8 cm. Cf. p. 180.
178

plate 53 - Lateral view of the Macmillan aryballos in Plate

52.

fig.

115- Lion

kotyle-pyxis.
ma/erei,

from

figure

Protocorinthian

After Payne, Protokorinthische Vasen-

PI.

if,

Fig.

century B.C. Cf. below

Second quarter of yth

1.

and p. 194.

on the lower lip. The

oldest lion figures in the early Attic style also belong

Yet the first influences were adopted with some hesitation,
so that one is confronted with a case of 'inspiration' rather than with a faithful
imitation. Such details as the talon-shaped claws, the ears in the form of a heart,
the rolled mane and the eyebrows of these Corinthian lions (PL 5 1) are the same
as those of the Neo-Hittite originals (Figs. 70, 73, 74, 78). Otherwise the Corinthian
lion represents a reworking of Hittite archetypes. We noted above that the calligraphic line of the Neo-Hittite reliefs closely corresponded to the geometric and
linear approach cultivated in early Greek art (p. 169). This affinity between Greek
and Hittite sculpture is particularly noticeable in the second black-figured style
that lolls

to this type (PI. 51).

of Protocorinthian vase-painting.

The second

black-figured style,

which was dominant

in the second quarter of the

seventh century, presents other elements not noted by Payne.

The

lion figures of

belong to a hybrid type (Figs. 115, 116), in itself characteristic of the

early and middle Neo-Hittite styles. Yet they bear the main hallmark of the late
this style

Neo-Hittite
15).

" The

style,

are directed
late

the palmette-shaped stylization beneath the eyes (PL 16; Figs. 14,

palmette folds beneath the eyes on the lion protome from Olympia

downwards,

Neo-Hittite practice

upward
The above-mentioned

feature has an
Ivory lion

from Samos

is

in contrast to Assyrian
(cf.

PL

slant (Pis.

16, Figs. 12-15).

1, 7,

work and

in accordance with

In the Assyrian lions the same

8; Figs. 6, 9).

Neo-Hittite ivory lion head from Samos (Fig. 76)

a fine example of the Near Eastern originals imitated by Corinthian and other

Greek

painters.

With

late

its

cubic facial forms and open

extended and lolling on the lower

lip,

mouth

the Samian lion head

and middle Neo-Hittite lion figure (PL

tive of the early

is

21

revealing the tongue

basically a representa-

Figs. 67-74).

But the

palmette-shaped skin folds beneath the eyes and the rounded ears betray strong

Assyrian influence. Thus

it

could derive from an Aramaeanized centre of the

Neo-Hittite art region, such as Sakcegozii or Zincirli, which was active in the last
quarter of the eighth century.
Macmillan aryballos

The Corinthian

painters

Hittite lion type.

For

seem only gradually to have become accustomed to the

faithful imitations

the Protocorinthian aryballoi in the

of Hittite lion figures appear only on

polychrome

style (Pis.

2,

3),

which originated

in the middle of the seventh century. 700 Characteristically Hittite features (p. 103)
on these Corinthian lions are the open mouth, the protruding tongue that presses

on the lower
180

lip,

the arched

form of the cheek bones, the heart-shaped

ear as well

- Chimaera on a Protocorinthian aryAfter Payne, Protokorinthische Vasenmalerei,

fig. 116
ballos.

PL

20, Fig. i. Second half of jth century B.C. Cf.

Fig. 7 8 and pp. 180, 194.

as the cubic shapes of the face. All these iconographic

and middle Neo-Hittite

on

Hittite lions of the early

An

ivory lion of the same type has

of the Al Mina excavations. 701

come

and

stylistic details

appear

(PL 21; Figs. 68, 69).

to light in the Greek occupation levels
styles

must have been made in a northern Syrian or

Anatolian Hittite centre (PI. 21c, d). Apart from the open mouth with projecting
tongue, it shares with the Corinthian Hon type the furrowing along the whole
length of the nose. This lion statuette, found in a Greek colony, indicates that
such small-scale works in ivory and bronze may have found their way to Corinth.
The lion protome of the Barberini cauldron, 702 found in a tomb at Praeneste,
belongs to the same early and middle Neo-Hittite lion type. Like the small ivory
lion from Al Mina, it is an import from the East. 703
A repousse bronze lion from Olympia (PI. 17), 704 which has not only the palmettelike stylization beneath the eyes but also Assyrian features in the form of the ear
and in details of the face, provides a good parallel to the splendid late NeoHittite lions of the Aramaeanizing Hittite style from Sakcegozii (PL 17). Like
the parallel examples at Sakcegozii, the Olympia lion protome comes from the
last quarter of the eighth century. It too was made in a northern Syrian centre.
It is interesting to note that, while this protome belongs to a style dominant in the
Near East between 730 and 700, imitations of the type began in Corinth in the
second quarter, perhaps even

It

as late as the

middle of the seventh century.

Ivory lion from

-Al

Mmo

Olympia bronze

It is

understandable that Corinthian painters, starting to weary of the somewhat simple

style

of pure linear patterns, were on the look-out for novelty. Consequently

they turned to Near Eastern prototypes, such as the protome from Olympia

and the two recently discovered ivory lions from Thasos, which were much finer
and more attractive than the Hittite lion figures proper.
The comparisons and observations advanced hitherto make it clear that Near
Eastern art objects in differing styles were exported to Greece from the end of the
eighth century onwards and remained on the market for a long time, perhaps
into the middle of the seventh century. It is quite possible that production of
small-scale objects in late Neo-Hittite centres did not cease even after the Assyrian
conquest. I am particularly glad that this assumption, which I formulated some
705
has happily now been
fifteen years ago from clear archaeological evidence,
corroborated by the discovery of the two Thasian ivory lions. F. Salviat has
recently published these ivory pieces, which are worked in the middle NeoHittite style. According to find circumstances they are datable to the second
181

plate
British

182

4 - Griffin oinochoe. Cycladic. Found on Aegina. About 650

Museum. Height 1.4/ m. Cf. Fig. 16 and p. 18).

b.c.

117 - Griffin demon from Toprakka/e, near Lake Van

(Urartu). After Barnett, Nimrud Ivories; PL 131. Aramaeani^ing

fig.

Hittite

style.

Late 8th century B.C. Cf. p. 184.

quarter of the seventh century. In his article Salviat trenchantly characterizes the

important position which these two fine pieces occupy in

art history. 706

As

the

French scholar shows, they stand quite close to the ivory lions of Zincirli. The
form of the eyes and face and the type of nasal furrowing closely link them to the
ivory lions of Al Mina. The lion head of the chimaera on an ivory relief from

Gordion

(p. 159)

belongs to the same type. 707 All four examples, like the Zincirli

ivory lion, lack the palmette-like stylization beneath the eyes, an indispensable
characteristic of Assyrian lions or Hittite ones influenced

We may

by Assyrian

art (PI. 16).

therefore ascribe the four statuettes to the middle Neo-Hittite style

However, the

which the Thasian pieces were found shows that

earliest. 708 This was how the northern Syrian
lion figures looked that were available to the Greek artists as models in the
first half of the seventh century. 709 In some instances the Greeks modified their
lion figures by introducing elements of other Near Eastern styles. But the basic
features of the Greek lion figure of the Hittite-Protocorinthian type persisted
for a long time. The Hon figure painted on the inner surface of a Chiot cup from
(Jandarli (ancient Pitane) shows a 'degenerate' but attractive offshoot of the
(p. 103).

level in

they were buried after 680 at the

seventh-century type

(PI. 63).

The late Neo-Hittite griffin was another Near Eastern mythical creature popular
among Greek artists. Some years ago, in my book on Neo-Hittite sculpture, I
showed that the leading characteristics of the Greek griffin type derived from late
Neo-Hittite models. 710 Here

should like to compare a Greek piece, the

Cycladic griffin oinochoe from the middle of the seventh century 711
British

Museum (Pis.

orthostats, dating

The following

54-56), with the head of a bird creature

from the

last

features appear

fine

in the

from the Sakc^gozii

quarter of the eighth century

on both bird heads:

now

Hittite origin of
griffin type

(PI.

15a; Fig. 16).

horse's ears, a

knobby

ex-

crescence in the middle of the forehead, wide-open beak, lower part of the beak

183

ate

55

- Detail of Plate 54.

in

form of a lion's muzzle, the mane

roll,

and long locks running in a

spiral

down

to the neck.
article appearing in the same year as my book, R. D. Barnett
convincingly connected the Greek griffin figures with two ivories from Nimrud

In an illuminating
(Fig. 117). 712

184

But since the points of agreement between the Greek

griffin

type

plate 56 - Detail of Plate

54.

and the Sakcegozii orthostat

reliefs are

much broader and

themselves display northern Syrian Hittite influences,

the pieces

it

from Nimrud

seems that the Greek

depend on late Neo-Hittite models. Griffin figures of this pictorial type

have been found in Etruria and at several Greek sites, especially Olympia, Delphi
and Samos. 713 The griffin protome of the Barberini cauldron (PI. 18), 714 of which
griffins

we have

already noted one of the lion protomae,

is

a twin of the

demon head

Griffin protome of
Barberini cauldron

from Sakcegozii (PL 15a; Fig. 16). If it were executed in the casting technique,
this Etruscan griffin protome could undoubtedly be identified as a true Greek
imitation of the Near Eastern original. But since it is made of a bronze sheet
hammered in repousse, it may be regarded as a Near Eastern work. P. Amandry has
clearly shown that the hammered bronze griffin protomae were originally filled
with an asphalt-like substance and that this technique had long been in use in the
i8<

plate 57 - Griffin head from Olympia. Greek work. About 650

Cf.p.187.

B.C.

Olympia Museum.

Near East. 715 Thus it is possible, as Amandry assumes, that all griffin and lion
protomae in bronze repousse technique are Near Eastern works. 716 The first Greek
works modelled upon them were probably cast heads and protomae. 717 The clay
griffin

186

oinochoe in the British

Museum (Pis.

54-56) shows that the Greeks created

figs.

1 1

8,

119 -Left, Fig. 118: Pegasos. After FrankPL $jc. Middle Assyrian style. Last

fort, Cylinder Seals,

quarter of second millennium B.C. Cf. be low. - Right,

Fig. up: Pegasos on a Urartian bronze plate. Aft

T. O^guf, Belleten,

vol.

2j, 1961, p. 290, Fig. 24.

below.

no

griffin

type of their own: they were content to render faithful imitations of the

of late Neo-Hittite art.

head from Olympia reproduced here (PI. 57) belongs to H. Jantzen's
monumental group, 718 and was made about the middle of the seventh century by a
griffin figures

The

fine

Greek metalworker.
Another Near Eastern hybrid, the sphinx, 719 appeared at about the turn of the
eighth to the seventh century in Greek art of Crete and the mainland. Apart from
the comprehensive and useful monograph of A. Dessenne, 720 we have discussions
by F. Matz 721 and H. Walter 722 of this mythical creature, 723 which played a considerable role in Greek religion. Once more objects from Syrian workshops may
be cited as the closest prototypes, for the female sphinx is a creation of Syrian art
centres (Fig. 11). Other evidence for this is provided by the side-burns, the short
spiral locks and the stepped-wig coiffure, three Syrian features that recur in the
sphinxes depicted on Protocorinthian vases of the second black-figured style. 724
The other hybrid creatures serving as motifs in early Greek art, which appear
towards the end of the eighth century, may be mentioned here briefly, for E. Kunze
has treated them in a basic work entitled Archaische Schildb cinder. So I shall limit
myself to pointing out the Near Eastern prototypes of a few of the imported

Sphinx

hybrid creatures.

The

best collection of material illustrating early

Greek mythology

remarkable book by K. Schefold, Myth and Legend

new

in

is

found in a

Early Greek Art, in which

Greek mythology are presented. 725

We have already met the sirens 726 on attachments on Urartian cauldrons and
among angel figures on Phoenician tridacna shells (PI. 3 6). The figure of Pegasos 727
seems to be a creation of Assyrian art (Fig. 118). Later it became very popular in
Urartian art (Fig. 119), whence it may have come to Greece. The Centaur 728
was often depicted in the Near East on Babylonian boundary stones. Greek
artists may have begun to imitate it towards the end of the eighth century,
following examples on imported Babylonian textiles. The Gorgon's head 729
derives from Syrian prototypes, as H. Kantor has recently shown. 730 The chimaera 731 first occurs in Greek art on Protocorinthian vases in two different
pictorial types. In one 732 it has a hybrid lion and human head (Fig. 116); in the
ideas about

Pegasos

Centaur

Gorgon's head

Chimaera

187

figs.

20,

121 - Left, Fig. 120:

with the lion.

Herakles struggling
Shield-buckle

relief.

After Kun^e,

Archaische

Schildbander,

About 600

B.C. Cf. below.

PL
-

j$.
Right,

Fig. 121: Theseus struggling with the

Minotaur. Shield-buckle relief. After

Archaische
Schildbander.
Kun%e,

About 600

B.C. Cf. p. 189.

The second chimaera type became standard in the

known to Hesiod. 734 The first type is a faithful
middle Neo-Hittite archetype (Fig. 78). 735 The chimaera with the

other 733 a lion and goat head.

following period;
rendering of a
lion-goat head

is

it

was

also

probably a version elaborated by early Greek

artists.

more one finds that some Greek

divinities either betray close links with the Near East or represent direct borrowings. Herodotus tells us that the cult of Aphrodite found on Cyprus and on the
Greek island of Cythera was transplanted from Ashkelon in Palestine. 736 The

The more one

studies the question of origins the

unpleasant account of the goddess's birth found in Hesiod

close connection with the

Artemis as 'Mistress
of the Beasts'

Near Eastern

The nature goddess Artemis, 737 when she appears

of the Beasts'

(PI. 50), is a

shown

of Anatolian Hittite origin. 740

in the iconographic type

known

creation of the

that the iconographic type of

Sicyonian sculptor Kanachos. E.

Didyma about 500

known

to the Persian capital of

Ecbatana shortly

its

original

home

200 years

B.C. It

Simon 741 has published

with a collection of the

to

Apollo Philesios

is

A cult image of this god holding a stag in one hand

stood in the sanctuary of Apollo at

188

166) suggests a

Near Eastern world. The

Artemis of the Olympian pantheon seems to be only partially derived from this
Near Eastern archetype. N. Yalouris has shown that Athena too in her guise of
'Mistress of the Horses' derives from this motif. 738 Moreover, he has demonstrated
that the goddesses Artemis, Hera and Demeter occasionally appear as 'Mistress
of the Horses' as well. He has rightly stressed that the goddesses took up the
age-old theme of 'Mistress of the Beasts', but that this motif gradually lost its
Near Eastern character. 739
as 'Mistress

E. Bielefeld has recently

Herakles

(p.

Ishtar (p. 147).

was made by the

careful studies together

evidence regarding this work, which was taken

after the battle

of Lade, to be returned

later.

According to Herodotus Herakles came from Phoenicia. 742 As F. Brommer 743

has pointed out, 744 at least three of Herakles' deeds are of Near Eastern origin:
the Stymphalian birds, the struggle with the Nemean lion and the slaying of the
Hydra. The scheme of Herakles' struggle with the Nemean lion (Fig. 120) is
a Greek reworking of the Near Eastern battle motif associated with the name of

plate 58 - Warrior. Bronze

statuette

found

at

Olympia. Late 7th century

b.c.

Olympia Museum. Height

ij.} cm. Cf. p. 190.

the hero Gilgamesh (PL 47). Theseus' struggle with the Minotaur also appears
in this fashion (Fig. 121). Herakles himself is a Greek manifestation of the universal

hero of the Near East, Gilgamesh. 745

relief (Fig. 60) the

storm god is

We

have noted above that on the Malatya

accompanied by his son in his struggle with the

Theseus and
Minotaur

Hydra-like monster. This accompanying figure recalls Iolaus, Herakles' faithful

who

Hydra. H. Goldman has

on Near Eastern archetypes, citing other
common features that link the Greek hero with his Mesopotamian precursor. 746
In a careful study F. Dirlmeier has recognized Anatolian and Near Eastern
elements in the myth of King Oedipus. 747 H. Kantor has drawn attention to a
comrade,

drawn

supports

him

in his battle with the

attention to this dependence

Myth

of King
Oedipus

189

number of Near Eastern motifs of mythical type adopted in Greece. 748 There is
still much to be said about Near Eastern influences in the realm of religion and
mythology. 749 I believe, however, that a reasonably clear picture has emerged,
so that we can curtail discussion of these problems, which really extend beyond
the bounds of our subject, in order to continue our investigations into art history.

must be emphasized that the deities imported from the Near East
and mythological features were soon fully accommodated
in both form and iconography to the Greek character. In his monograph on
early Greek legends Karl Schefold has said: 'One concept, at any rate, which
is typically Greek is seen in the fact that all the antagonists are descended from
the same mother, the Earth, whose children also include men. Thus the
ancient oriental dualism, which divided the world into a light and a dark side,
In conclusion

it

as well as the religious

collapsed.' 750

Warrior figures

Five splendid bronze statuettes from Olympia 751 that form a separate group 752
reveal

some

down to

late

Neo-Hittite influence.

are helmeted figures

shown naked

weapons
must
have been made at intervals over a long period. 753 Here we illustrate one of a pair
(PI. 5 8), which together form the last link in the chain. Although these two pieces
belong to the end of the seventh century, they follow the very same pictorial
type 754 as the earliest statuettes, which are datable to the beginning of the seventh
century. According to E. Kunze's fine interpretation, they represent the youthful
Zeus; the form was repeated throughout the century in the Altis (Olympia's
sacred precinct). 755 The wide belt, which appears both in these two later pieces
(PI. 5 8) and also in the earliest statuettes, is familiar to us from Hittite art. It is
found on female figures of the middle and late Neo-Hittite styles (PI. 22b;
26-28) and on many male and female figures of Assyrian and Syrian reliefs. It
seems to have been a kind of sash, which was made of fine material and wound
around the body. It made its way into Greece as early as the end of the eighth
century along with the Orientalizing tendency. The same may be said of the helmets of the statuettes, although this type of helmet is only found in complete
form in a specimen from the middle of the century, the so-called 'Steiner' figure; 756
this form too goes back to the Near East. This helmet type, with its plume
probably spears and

Hittite belt

They

the belt around the waist; in their hands they must have carried
shields.

As E. Kunze has

explained, the five statuettes

on Assyrian reliefs of the second half of the

somewhat modified form it recurs in the warriors
of the orthostat reliefs of Karatepe (PL 34b). 757 The Urartian attachments in the
form of a double head from Vetulonia in Etruria (Fig. 126) 758 help us to visualize
the Near Eastern pieces which must have served Greek artists as models. However,
Near Eastern objects featuring the above-mentioned helmet type must have been

projecting forwards, often occurs

eighth century (Fig. 122). In

known in Greece as

early as the last quarter of the eighth century, for the fragment
of the upper end of a tripod leg in Olympia 759 shows a relief with two warriors,
one of whom wears the same kind of helmet (PI. 59). 760 The helmet of the other
warrior has a different shape, which is also of Assyrian origin (Fig. 123). 761 The

form of the plume of a bronze helmet in the Geometric

190

style

from Argos

(Fig. 125)

plate 59 - Tripod leg found at Olympia. The struggle over the

Delphi tripod, with Herakles on the right and Apollo on the left.
Bronze. Late 8th century B.C. Olympia Museum. Height offigures about
10 cm. Cf. p. ipi.

191

is

a faithful rendering of the helmet

plumes found on the

reliefs

of Tiglath-

Pileser in (Figs. 123, 124).

Aramaeani^ing In this connection

Hittite hair style

it

seems appropriate to ask whether any statuettes of the early

seventh century, which have long cascading hair with dense thick locks, do not
their coiffure to Near Eastern models. One might refer to a bronze statuette
from Olympia 762 and another in the Athens National Museum. 763 Both have a
hair style that closely recalls that of the late Neo-Hittite- Aramaean reliefs (PL 1 5
Figs. 11, in). That there was no lack of late Neo-Hittite bronze objects in Olympia
is proved by a bronze relief showing a man with an Aramaean nose (Pis. 12-15)
and Aramaean dress. His cloak, 764 which winds diagonally around the body and
is held at the tip by one hand, is also found on reliefs from Zincirli and Sakcegozii
(PI. 14). As on the reliefs from Sakcegozii (PI. 14) and Zincirli, the figure on the
Olympia relief also wears a chiton with the back part enlivened by a cluster of
vertical pleats (Figs. 98, 99). Moreover, the hair of the head and beard is stylized
in the Aramaean fashion, except that the execution is less careful than on the
Sakcegozii relief. The Aramaean bronze relief from Olympia, which comes from

owe

the last quarter of the eighth century, demonstrates afresh that even in this early

period Greek

artists

had models

in the shape of

Near Eastern

originals

from the

southern Anatolian and northern Syrian areas. But the Greeks imitated only those

Near Eastern objects and

traits

that suited their

own

tastes

and experience.

Objects such as the bronze relief from Olympia seem to have had

no appreciable

effect.

The

Aramaean

origin of

chiton

Urartian influences

close links of early Greek art with the Near East that have been indicated
above suggest that the origins of many other stylistic features of Greek sculpture
in the seventh century are to be sought in this quarter as well.
The word chiton, which ultimately derives from the old Akkadian language, was
transmitted to the Greeks by the Aramaeans. 765 It may be that chitons were
imported as fabrics made in the Near East. The long tunic worn by the Nikandre
figure, the Auxerre statuette 766 and other seventh-century works is a simple
garment, that is found throughout the world without need for positing foreign
influence. But the belt appearing on the two pieces mentioned and on most of the
figures of the seventh century points strongly to the dress of the middle NeoHittite figures (p. 95; Pis. 21, 22; Figs. 79-82). Such comparisons are sufficient
to show that the long body tunic (together with its name and belt) derives from
the Near East.
Near Eastern influences from the Urartian and Iranian art spheres must have
reached Greece as early as the end of the eighth century. Urartian attachments
in the form of human figures were the most popular export objects of the Near

figs. 122, 123 - Above, Fig. 122: Assyrian helmet. After Barnett and Falkner, Sculptures of
Tiglath Pileser, PI. 36. Second half of 8th century B.C. Cf. p. 190. - Below, Fig. 123: Assyrian
helmet. After Barnett and Falkner, Sculptures of Tiglath-Pileser, Pis. jo, ji, 62. Second half of
8th century B.C. Cf. p. 190.

192

figs. 124-6 (from left to right)

Fig. 124: Assyrian helmet. After Barnett and Falkner,

Sculptures of Tiglath Pileser, PI. 73. Second half of 8 th century B.C. Cf. p. 192. -Fig. i2j: Greek
helmet. Found at Argos. After Demargne, Naissance de Vart grec, p. 360, Fig. 473. Late
8th century B.C. Cf. p. 190.

- Fig. 126. Urartian attachment from Vetulonia, Etruria. After

century. Cf. p. 190 and below.

Akurgal, Kunst Anatoliens, p. 46, Fig. 26. Early yth

East after the

late

Neo-Hittite griffin attachments, which have been discussed

above. Urartian cauldron attachments

Delphi and many other Greek

sites.

(PI.

An

45) have been

found

at

Olympia,

attachment showing a bearded figure,

which has come to light at Olympia, 767 is a companion piece to the attachment
from Vetulonia 768 in Etruria (Fig. 126). Both again closely parallel the bearded
head from Gordion reproduced here (PI. 45). Figures of this kind were eagerly
imitated in the great centres of the late eighth and early seventh centuries. More
than thirty years ago E. Kunze published a fundamental study of the entire corpus
of material. 769 Here we reproduce three photographs of two bird creatures from
Olympia that formerly adorned the rims of two bronze cauldrons (Pis. 60, 61);
Kunze has convincingly explained them as reworkings of foreign models produced
by 'already mature, purely Greek' artists. 770 Although the Urartian pictorial type
of bird creature has been continued faithfully and the equally Urartian ornament
on the chest has been retained, it is clear that the idiom of the forms and ornament
has a strongly Greek stamp. 'The organic fusion of the parts, the firm buoyant
contours, the treatment and articulation of the hair,' the angular formation of the
face

and the projecting pointed nose are

Greek art of the

Greek versions of

characteristics of early

late eighth and early seventh centuries. 771 That

many of

these

Urartian models originated only in the

first quarter of the seventh century or

been irrefutably shown by R. Hampe. 772 Above (p. 181) we have
tried to demonstrate that Near Eastern griffin and lion attachments were enthusiastically imitated well into the beginning of the second half of the seventh

even

later has

century.

Greek vase-painting of the

motifs that

may be

first

half of the seventh century

traced to Urartian and Luristan bronzes.

shows

The

a wealth of

lions of early

Attic (PI. 41), as well as those of the earliest Protocorinthian vases 773

(PI.

114),

93

recall in their general

appearance the lion figures of Luristan bronzes. 774 The

buoyant diagonal movement of the running animal figures in early Greek vases
corresponds to a scheme that had been developed earlier in the
art of eastern Anatolia and Iran (Fig. 1 27). A characteristic feature is the abdominal
line, which is continued directly by the wide outstretched and superimposed
forelegs, so that from the thigh to the tip of the fore feet a single diagonal line
runs straight through. The earliest examples of this scheme in the Greek world

(Figs. 115, 116)

appear on Attic, 775 Protocorinthian 776 (Fig. 115) and Cycladic (Fig. 128) vases.
It is likely that Corinthian artists also took up some Urartian motifs. Whether
the early Protocorinthian dot-rosettes are derived

from the very

similar decorative

motif in Urartian art (Fig. 129) is not clear to me. But the half and quarter rosette
of the animal frieze style derives from Near Eastern models, as R. D. Barnett
cites, we meet these rosettes
on Luristan bronzes. 778 It is revealing that the rosettes and ornamental
circles appearing on the thighs of the human figures of an early Attic krater 779
(Fig. 130) and on those of a bronze statuette of the first quarter of the seventh
century from Olympia, 780 recur in Luristan in the thighs of animal figures (Figs. 131,
132). The heart-shaped stylization of the shoulder blades as found among the
animals depicted in Cycladic vase-painting (Pis. 54-56; Fig. 133) was a standard
device among artists working in metal. 781 However, the use of the same scheme

has proved. 777 Apart from the examples Barnett

Other mfluences from

Luristan bronzes

especially

for the thigh of the rear legs

(Fig. 134).

is

characteristic of painters of the animal frieze style

In various Near Eastern countries this part of the animal was often

stylized in the

form of a

special

muscle configuration (Fig.

appears on the thighs of the horses depicted

on

5).

The

S-spiral

which

the Cycladic vase in the British

plate 60 - Bird creature. Cauldron decoration. Bron2e. Found at Olympia. Greek work
models. Early 7th century b.c. Olympia Museum. Height 6 cm. Cf. p. 19$.

after Urartian

6 1 - Bird creature. Cauldron decoration. Bronze. Found at Olympia. Greek work after Urartian
models. Early 7th century b.c. Olympia Museum. Height 14 cm. Cf. p. 19).

plate

Museum

(Pis.

54-56, Fig. 133),

may

also derive

from Luristan bronzes,

since

metal-workers there were accustomed to adorning animal thighs with similar

motifs (Figs. 131, 132). In their schemes for the thigh area Near Eastern

always proceeded by stylizing the muscles as found in nature (Fig.

Phrygian

frieze plaques (Figs.

painting in the animal frieze

135, 136) then

took over

this

artists

5).

The

motif from vase-

style. 782

19s

figs. 127-9 (fro

A.

Tre'sor de Ziiviye, p.

Godard,

Le

left

to right). Fig. izj: Lion from a silver horse-trapping. Ziwiye. After

124, Fig. 109. Mannaean art. Early 7th century B.C.

Cf. p. 194. - Fig. 128: Cycladic lion on a Naxian amphora. After Mat%, Geschichte der griechiscben Kunst, PI. ijj. Second quarter of yth century B.C. Cf. p. 194. - Fig. 129: Urartian
attachment from Toprakkale. After Akurgal, Kunst Anatoliens, p. 40, Figs. 18, p. 505;

Appx.

Fig. 9. Late 8th century B.C. Cf. Fig. 9, p. 194.

The S-spiral depicted on the thighs of Cycladic horses recurs as a decorative motif
on the same area of the body in an ivory lion from Artemis Orthia 783 and in
Etruscan art (Fig. 137). 784 It was also used in a similar way as filler in animal
bodies depicted in the animal-frieze style (Fig. 138). 785 The only example of an
S-spiral used as body ornament that I have been able to find in the Near East
appears on the glutei represented on a bronze statuette 786 from Kazbek (Fig. 139)
and on the shoulders of the ibexes of a silver bowl from Unye near Samsun in
Anatolia (PI. 67). But it may be assumed that this device must have been familiar
as a body ornament on Luristan bronze animals, for the Greek and Etruscan

fig. 130
in Berlin.

p. 194.

196

- Detail of an
After

CVA,

early

Attic krater

Berlin, PI. 20.

Cf

PLATE 62 - Row of men, one of whom holds a phorminx. Detail of a late Geometric Attic oinochoe
from the Dipylon. Second half of 8th century b.c. Arcbdologiscbes Institul, University of Tubingen. Cf.
p. 204.

examples mentioned can only be derived from

artistic centres

plateau such as those of Luristan. Luristan artists

of the Iranian

may have brought

the motif

with them from their homeland in the Caucasus, where the S-spiral had been very
popular from the Bronze

Age onwards. 787 The

'harmless strolling lions', 788 of the

earlier onToprakkale shields. 789

which appears in many north Ionian
an accidental similarity, but may depend on the

kind found in East Greek vase-painting, appeared

Further L'rurtiun

The lower

influences

lip

curling into a volute shape,

need not reflect

influence of Urartian models (Fig.
lions (Fig. 140),

141).

79

The

stylistic

trends of the Orientalizing

period led the Greeks to take up various shapes of vessels. K. R. Maxwell-Hyslop

has indicated the important role of Urartian art in the transmission of Near Eastern

and Etruria. 781 Towards the end of the eighth century

the new Orientalizing fashion was so powerful that the Urartian cauldron type
and its accompanying base ousted the traditional Greek tripod together with the
vessel forms to Greece
T

197

FIG. 13:

FIG. 133

FIG. I32

FIG. 134

FIG. I36

I98

FIG. 137

FIG. 139

FIG. 140

figs. 1 31-41. - Fig. iji: Luristan bronze. After Godard, Bronzes du Louristan, PL 42.
Early yth century B.C. - Fig. 132: Lion from a bronze plate from Luristan. After Ghirshman,
Perse, p. 70, Fig. pi. Early yth century B.C. - Fig. i$y. Horse depicted on a Cycladic griffin
oinochoefrom Aegina. After P. Bocci, Studi miscellani, 2, PI. p. (Cf. Figs. J4-J6.) - Fig. 154:
Boar depicted on an oinochoe in the animal-frieze style from Bayrakli (Old Smyrna) After
Akurgal, Kunst Anatoliens, p. iyp, Fig. 126. - Fig. 1 31 : Lion depicted on a terracotta revetment
from Pa%arli. After Akurgal, Phrygische Kunst, PI. J2b. Second half of 6th century B.C. Fig. 1 )6: Ibex depicted on a terracotta revetment from Pa^arli. After Akurgal, Phrygische
Kunst, PI. j 4b. Second half of 6th century B.C. - Fig. 1 jj: Horse on a Bucch e ro oinochoe. Late
yth century B.C. After Studi Etruschi, vol. 30, ip62, PI. 24, Fig. 2. - Fig. 13$: Lion on a
plate from Nisyros, Rhodes. After Kardara, Rhodiake Angeiographia, PL 2yo; Clara Rhodos,
vols, vi- vii, pp. j 06-8, PL 1. - Fig. ijp: Bronze figure from the Kazbek Treasure in the
Caucasus. After Bossert, Kunstgewerbe, vol. iv, p. 10, Fig. 2. - Fig. 140: Lion from a vessel
in the animal-frieze style. After Schiering, Werkstatten, PL 14, 2. - Fig. 141: Urartian lion
.

type.

After Akurgal, Kunst Anatoliens, p. 302, Fig.

6.

Cf. pp. ip4Jf. (Figs. iji-S), ip6

(Fig. i)p), ipy (Figs. 140, 141).

IQ9

cauldron with ring handles. Early Attic and Protocorinthian vase-painters liked
show the new cauldron with its animal protomae and conical base. 792 Elsewhere

to
I

Eastern vase
shapes

have shown that the base of the bronze cauldron from Praeneste in Etruria

is

Near Eastern work in the style of the Sakcegozii reliefs. 793

The Near Eastern shapes of metal vessels were even imitated in clay by early
Attic potters. Attic foot cauldrons and foot kraters from the Kerameikos (Fig. 142),
from the Athenian Agora and the road to Piraeus (Fig. 143) 794 are Greek versions
of Near Eastern models. R.

Hampe

has recently pieced together several vases

on the art market. They

Mainz (Fig. 144). Similar cauldron
shapes and conical feet were often depicted on Assyrian reliefs (Figs. 145, 146). 795
Moreover, the plastically formed lotus blossoms (Fig. 147), which were attached
to the cauldron rim in the manner of animal protomae, often occur as decorative
ornament on vessels in the northern Syrian and Anatolian art spheres. Above
we have encountered vessels with similar ornament from Tell Halaf (Fig. 92),
Til Barsib, Cyprus and Nimrud 796 (p. 118). The last example, in ivory, shows a
type of lotus bud very close to examples found in early Attic ceramics. Another
piece with a handle decorated with a lotus blossom (Fig. 147) is in the Metropolitan
Museum, New York. Like the piece found at Nimrud it must have come from a
Syrian workshop. The early Attic imitations may have been inspired by Near
from hundreds of small
are

now

early Attic sherds he acquired

exhibited in the Schonborner Hof,

Eastern metal vessels resembling that in New York.

Tumulus in

at

As R. Hampe has recognized, 797

Gordion, excavated by German archaeologists, has yielded a

- Fig. 142. Early Attic foot

After Hampe, Friihattischer Grabfund, p. 49, Fig. 30. Early yth century B.C. -Fig. 143: Early Attic
krater from the road to Piraeus. After Hampe, Friihattischer
Grabfund, p. j2, Fig. 33. Early yth century B.C. - Fig. 144:
Early Attic krater. After Hampe, Friihattischer Grabfund, Pis.
6, y. Early yth century B.C. Cf. above and p. 201.
figs.

142-4 (from

left

to right)

cauldron from the Kerameikos.

(from left to right) - Fig. 14/: Assyrian krater from a relief of the Sennacherib
After Max well- Hy slop, Iraq, vol. 18, 19 j6, p. ijj, Fig. ij. - Fig. 146: Assyrian krater
from a relief of the Sennacherib period. After Maxwell- Hy'slop, Iraq, vol. 18, 19 J 6, p. ij$,
Fig. 4. - Fig. 14/: Handle of a vessel with a lotus blossom. After Perrot and Chipie^, Histoire
de T Art, vol. Ill, p. 797, Fig. JJ7. Metropolitan Museum, New York. Cf. p. 200 and below.
figs. 145-7

period.

bronze cauldron 798 showing the same lotus blossoms on the handles (Fig.

But the handles are not ring-shaped

as in the early Attic

144); instead they are semi-circular as in the

New York

Gordion object may be an import from the Near

148).

cauldron in Mainz (Fig.

East.

piece (Fig. 147).

Ornaments

The

like lotus

blossoms are foreign to the nature of Phrygian

art. Therefore this vessel cannot

have been made in central Anatolia. 799 Furthermore, a bronze basin has been
found at Gordion which, with its ring handles (Fig. 149), is a version of the Greek

tripod cauldron. 800

Gordion, 801 from which the bronze basin with

lotus-blossom handles comes, may be dated about 700. Therefore the Near
Eastern pieces that served the Attic potters as models were exported to Attica
about 700. That these foot cauldrons were popular at this time is shown by the
Karatepe reliefs. The main scene of these reliefs (PI. 33), as K. R. Maxwell-

Tumulus in

at

Hyslop has perceived, 802 has a foot cauldron of the type under discussion standing
a little table of its own between the man with a fan and the dining-table. Although the rendering leaves much to be desired, it cannot be doubted that it
shows a foot cauldron of our type.

on

This observation

about 700 or
certain.

is

important, in as

at the earliest to the

Of course the Greek vases

much

as the dating of the

end of the eighth century

Karatepe

reliefs

(p. 141) is virtually

are often modified versions with their

own note

of originality. Lotus blossoms are sometimes replaced by ring handles (Fig. 143),
a characteristic feature of the Greek Geometric tripod cauldron. In some instances

Near Eastern blossoms have been combined with Greek ring handles (Fig. 144).
Moreover the proportions of the cauldrons and their conical bases are often, as
Hampe has aptly noted, 803 adjusted to the Greek feeling for form. But the close
dependence of the Greek works on their Near Eastern models (Figs. 145-148)
is

unmistakable. 803 *

201

figs. 148, 149 - Left, Fig. 148: Bronze basin with lotus-blossom handles. Found at Gordion.
After Korte, Gordion, p. 72, Fig. jo. About yoo B.C. - Right, Fig. 149: Bronze basin with
ring handles. Found at Gordion. After Korte, Gordion, p. 72, Fig. J2. About 7 00 B.C. Cf.p. 201.

Towards the end of the seventh century the Orientalizing style was replaced in
sculpture by monumental sculpture and in vase-painting by the black-figured
style. However, the Near Eastern style elements continued to be taken over by
the Greeks, though to a decreasing extent, of course. R. M. Cook has pointed
to an important Near Eastern influence upon the technique of the black-figured
style:

'Geometric

artists hfid

occasionally incised a zigzag line to relieve a dark

band, but the systematic use of incision probably came from the engraving of

metalwork, a process introduced into Greece from the East;

this

would account

for the unnecessary incising of outlines in earlier black-figure work.' 804

Orientalising style
in the Cyclades

The fine Melian amphora 805 of the second half of the seventh century in the Athens
National

Museum

(Fig.

appeared somewhat

the far

2a) displays a

wealth of Near Eastern motifs, which

than on the mainland.

show an important event from the legend of the sanctuary
Delian Apollo: 806 with the Hyperborean maidens the god returns from
north to be received by his sister Artemis. The ceremonial grouping of the

The main scene seems

of the

1 5

later in the Cycladic islands

to

whereby in divine and royal couples the female figure always stands at
left (p. 127) has been consciously followed here. The two deities
on the Melian amphora are shown at the moment of meeting, as in the main
scene at Yazilikaya (Fig. 27). The maidens raise their hands in greeting. Since in

Hittites,

her male consort's

both instances the scenes are to be regarded

as directed

towards the observer, the

god stands on the goddess's right on the amphora and at Yazilikaya. Zeus and
Hera 807 (Pis. 64, 65), Menelaus 808 and Helen (Fig. 1 5 o), Paris 809 and Helen (Fig. 151)
were all shown in the same way. 810 Especially the wooden piece from Samos
attests that in early Greek art, just as in the comparable late Neo-Hittite Aramaean
couple from Maras (PI. 26), the female figure follows Hittite usage in always
appearing to the

left side

on the amphora appears

of her partner, whether seated or standing. The goddess

in a simplified and altered version of the Near Eastern

theme of 'Mistress of the Beasts'. 811 The wings, which show the horse to be a
divine steed, have the early Neo-Hittite sickle shape, which the Greeks took over
from the Luristan bronzes. 812 The small rosette, which adorns the thigh of the
left-hand warrior in the combat scene on the neck of the amphora, 813 points to
influence from Luristan bronzes (p. 194; Figs. 131, 132). The griffin protome
appearing at the end of the chariot shaft is a Hittite motif known to us from
chariot senes at Zincirli (Fig. 66), Carchemish and Tell Halaf (p. 111). In Greek
art it first appears on this amphora. Later the motif occurs in Ionian sculpture 814
and vase-painting 815 as well as on architectural reliefs in terracotta 816 of East
Greek art. The long trailing garments worn by Artemis and the maidens as well as
by the women on the neck of the vessels recall the dress of figures on Hittite
reliefs (PI. 22a). They appear in similar form on Syrian and Phoenician reliefs
from Nimrud (Figs. 107, no). The long tunic with its pointed train was usual
in these Syrian reliefs.
is

The

lattice

pattern of the garments of the Melian figures

a favourite motif (p. 154) of Phoenician (Pis. 36, 39) and Syrian 817 (PI. 41;

Figs. 107, 108) art. Since Syro-Phoenician ivories

plate 63 - Chiot cup

(detail).

Found

were exported to Greece

at (^andarli (Pitane).

About 560 b.c

until

Archaeological Museum,

Istanbul. Cf. p. 1S3.

205

fig.

150 - Menelaus

courting

Archaische Schildbander,

PI. II.

Shield relief. After Kun%e,

Early 6th century B.C. Cf. p. 202.

Helen.

end of the seventh century (p. 148), it is not difficult

by Syro-Phoenician art. The women's heads
depicted on metope registers around the foot of the amphora 818 also speak in
favour of links between Melian vase-painters and Syrian art, for they recall the
theme of the 'Woman at the Window', a favourite motif of Syrian ateliers (PL 38).
The lyre in the god's hand (Fig. 1 5 2b) has a very similar form to that of the phorminx on a late Geometric oinochoe from the Dipylon, 819 which is now in Tubingen
(PI. 62). Both derive from Near Eastern models, for the lyre shown on the
Karatepe reliefs (PI. 32, Fig. 153) has almost the same form as that on the Greek
vase. None the less the Melian lyre presents a novelty of great importance: it
has seven strings. Lyres of similar shape with the same number of strings are
represented on two sub-Geometric vessels of the second quarter of the seventh
century. They came to light in excavations at Old Smyrna 820 (Fig. 154) and at
Pitane (Fig. 155). These two vessels and the Melian amphora constitute the earliest
known representations of the seven-stringed lyre. The phorminx, the instrument
of the Homeric age, has four strings. 821 The early Greek lyres of the mainland
possessed between three and five strings. Near Eastern lyres, however, generally
had many strings, in some instances reaching the figure of twenty- three. 822 Neither
the Near Eastern nor the early Greek lyres from the mainland represented in art
the middle or even until the

to accept the possibility of influence

Earliest lyre
representations

show

a standard

number of strings this begins only in the examples painted on

two vessels from Old Smyrna and Pitane. It is probably
;

the Melian vases and the

no accident

newly invented lyre with seven

must have been just at the
beginning of the second quarter of the seventh century that Terpander of Lesbos
became acquainted with Anatolian music at Lydian banquets, as a fragment of
Pindar relates. 823 Perhaps it is due to this contact of Greek singers with Lydian
and Phrygian music that the sequential transition from the four-stringed phorminx to the seven-stringed lyre took place. The impulse to increase the strings
came from outside, but the seven-stringed instrument is a Greek achievement.
Henceforth it became standard on all lyres, providing the basis for the European
that the earliest representations of the

strings first appear

musical

on

vessels of East

Greek

origin. It

scale.

plate 64 - Sacred marriage of Zeus and Hera.

Wood carving from the Heraion of Samos. Last quarter

of 7th century b.c. Lost. Height 19.1 cm. Cf. pp. 207
jf.
204

64

The Melian amphora

is

not the only object that reveals the multiple Near Eastern

influences current about the middle of the seventh century in the Cyclades.

have seen above that the Cycladic oinochoe in the British

Fig. 133) also

shows a great many

style

Museum

We

(Pis.

54-56;
elements that derive from Near Eastern

models. 824

The

relations of the East

Greek world,

especially

its

Ionian areas, with the Near

East began only about 650. Although Samos was one of the Greek centres that

Orientalising style in

Ionia

imported and imitated Near Eastern works towards the end of the eighth century
the Hellenic East failed to play a role in the development of early Greek
825
art.
Samos, like the whole of western Anatolia, seems to have undergone a

(p. 180),

period of stagnation in the

half of the seventh century. 826 After the middle

first

of the seventh century, with the founding of colonies, a great upsurge under
areas of the Ionian world. 827

At this time most

Greek East came into direct contact with the Near East. But the results
of this contact were entirely different from those produced by the meeting of the
Greek mainland with the Near East in the course of the eighth century. At that
time the Greeks were still inexperienced and could only profit from the Near
East in restricted fields. But now, when Hellenism found itself at a much more
advanced stage of cultural development, the East Greeks were able to use their
Near Eastern contacts to deal with fundamental questions of spiritual and intellectual life. For this reason the birth of philosophy and the exact sciences
occurred not on the Greek mainland, but in the Greek cities of the west coast of
Anatolia. At this time the mainland had left behind its Orientalizing phase, and
had begun to concern itself with the consolidation of its social structure and the
development of intellectual life, using native Greek components. After the middle
of the seventh century the Near East and especially the newly discovered Egypt
seem to have become the goals of Ionian Greeks in search of new knowledge and
experience. Thales of Miletos travelled extensively as a merchant, visiting Egypt
and acquiring a wide background in various fields. Another Milesian, Anaximander,
who designed a world map and a chart of the heavens, probably studied the ancient
astronomical lore of the Near Eastern peoples in some great centre such as
Babylon. The Ionian natural philosophers received manifold impulses from the
Near Eastern lands, but in an astonishingly short time they discovered the method
Milesian leadership

is

evident in

all

parts of the

Origin of philosophy

and exact

sciences

of scientific research, thereby rasising intellectual activity to an altogether different

level,

one on which the foundations for the western

Eastern elements are evident in the Ionian world in

We

shall discuss this

of the

late

matter

first

spirit

all

in relation to sculpture.

seventh century from Samos

(Pis. 64, 65) is

could be

built.

realms of cultural activity.

The

fine

wood

carving

Wood

carving from

Samos

an East Greek creation, 828

plates 65a-d - Ivory statuette from the Dipylon, from the same tomb as the piece shown in Plate 49.
Late 8th century B.C. National Museum, Athens. Height 10.8 cm. Cf p. 174.
plates 65 c, f - Zeus and Hera (see Plate 64).
plate 65g - Funerary stele of Dermys and Kittylos. Limestone. Found at Tanagra. Late 7th century
B.C. National Museum, Athens. Overall height 2 m. Cf. p. 209.

207

fig.

1 5 1

- Marriage of Paris and Helen. From a Corinthian

krater.

After

Scbefold, Friih-

griechische Sagenbilder, PI. yoa. Cf. p. 202.

number of Near Eastern traits. On account of the eagle visible

between the heads of the figures the couple may be identified unmistakably as
Zeus and Hera. This attribute also confirms that this piece with its markedly
Near Eastern aspect is actually a Greek product.
In this carving Zeus and Hera are shown in a sacred marriage scene. A very
similar hieros gamos scene is found on the short side of a steatite pyxis 829 of northern
Syrian-Aramaean origin belonging to the late eighth century (Fig. 156). Just as
in the Samian carving, the male figure holds the breast of his consort, who stands
revealing a great

Hieros gamos

on his left flank.

The hieros gamos scene reflects the alliance concluded between the Indo-European
storm god and the Mediterranean fertility goddess. 830 This link had already come
end of the third millennium with the immigration of the IndoEuropean peoples into Anatolia. The main scene at Yazilikaya (Fig. 27) is the
oldest known depiction of the alliance between the autochthonous Hattian goddess Wurusemu and the foreign storm god of the Hittites. 831 Since, however, in
this league of equals the storm god was still the preferred partner, it follows that

into being at the

Hit tite pictorial

motif

he should stand on the right

as the place

side.

In Hittite texts the right

always standing to the right of his consort, has retained

times

down

is

expressly characterized

of honour. 832 This pictorial motif of the divine couple, with the god
to the present.

number of examples

are

its

validity

known from

from

Hittite

Neo-Hittite

The Samian wood carving represents one of the many

examples that could be cited from Greek Archaic times (p. 202). Later, the Jupiter
Dolichenus reliefs re-echo the same theme. 833 During the Roman empire the ruler

art (p. 127; Pis. 26-29).

pair appear in the Hittite position

Cathedral in medieval

wife Uta.

And

Germany

finally in state

on

Even in Naumburg
on the right side of his

a series of cameos.

the donor Eckhard stands

ceremonies of our

own

day the royal pair regularly

follow the old Hittite scheme.

The wood carving from Samos shows another Hittite feature whereby each
partner places his arm on the shoulder of the other. This attitude was already
noted in the case of the Maras couple (PI. 26). It recurs in Greek art on the
208

Dermys and Kittylos from the end of the seventh century

The same motif also found favour in Egyptian art. In fact Phoenician
Neo-Hittite sculptors took it from Egyptian models. The Greeks must

funerary stele of
(PI. 65 g). 834

and late
have received

wood

it

indirectly via Syrian or late Neo-Hittite works, since the

carving shows only

As D. Ohly

traits

Samian

of Near Eastern character.

rightly says, 835 Hera's gesture of grasping Zeus'

arm may be comwhere Achilles seizes the

wrist of the old man's right hand, so as to 'take the fear from his heart'. Although
this friendly and attractive gesture found literary expression in Homer, it must be
noted that it is not exclusively Greek, but is a common custom of Mediterranean
lands that can be traced in the Near East from very early times. On a Phoenician
bowl one sees a goddess nursing the young king (Fig. 102). The latter holds the
goddess's wrist, just as Hera does in the Samos carving. The god Sarruma, who
is embracing King Tuthaliya, holds him by the wrist. Moreover, King Araras,
who proclaims his son crown prince on a relief from Carchemish (Fig. 93), leads
him by the wrist. This motif seems to be ultimately of Egyptian origin since it
appears on wall reliefs there from the fifth dynasty onwards (p. 136).
It is uncertain whether Hera's gesture is to be interpreted simply as a sign of
pared with the scene of Achilles and Priam in the

agreement. Rather

it

seems

Hand gestures

Iliad, 836

likely that in this case, in

accordance with the Mediter-

ranean temperament of the Ionian Greek character, two contradictory feelings,

affirmation
recalls a

and

denial, are expressed simultaneously.

The carving from Samos

passage in the fourteenth book of the Iliad where the poet

tells

the

charming story of the meeting between Zeus and Hera on Mount Ida in northwestern Anatolia. In fact the Samian wood carving almost looks like a sculptural
version of the love scene described by Homer. In the sculptural group Zeus holds
Hera's breast in the Iliad he enfolds the goddess in his arms in the sweetness of
his desire. On the other hand the way in which Hera takes the wrist of her consort
can signify, as we have said, both acceptance and refusal, paralleling her attitude
in the epic poem, where she seems freely to reject the entreaty of love's embrace,
while in reality she has come from afar to join her husband on the marital couch.
Here is the passage from the Iliad 837 in the translation by R. Lattimore.

Love scene of Zeu

and Hera

But Hera light-footed made her way to the peak of Gargaros

on towering Ida. And Zeus who gathers the clouds saw her,
and when he saw her desire was a mist about his close heart
as much as on that time they first went to bed together
and lay in love, and their dear parents knew nothing of it.
He stood before her and called her by name and spoke to her: 'Hera,
what is your desire that you come down here from Olympos?
And your horses are not here, nor your chariot, which you ride in.'

Then with

false lying purpose the lady Hera answered him:

going to the ends of the generous earth, on a visit
to Okeanos, whence the gods have risen, and Tethys our mother,
who brought me up kindly in their own house, and cared for me.
C

am

209

fig.

1 5

2a - Artemis receiving Apollo at Delos.

From

a Cycladic amphora. Second half of

yth century B.C. Cf. p. 202.

I shall

since

go

to visit these,

now

and resolve

their division

for a long time diey have stayed apart

of discord,

from each other

and from the bed of love, since rancour has entered

their feelings.

In the foothills by Ida of the waters are standing

my

horses, who will carry me over hard land and water.

Only now I have come down here from Olympos for your sake
So you will not be angry with me afterwards, if I
have gone silently to the house of deep-running Okeanos.'

Then

in turn

Zeus

who

gathers the clouds answered her:

when you can go there

and turn to love-making.
For never before has love for any goddess or woman
so melted about the heart inside me, broken it to submission,
'Hera, there will be a time afterwards

But

as well.

as

now

now

let

us

go

to bed

.'

Then with

false lying purpose the lady Hera answered him:

'Most honoured son of Kronos, who sort of thing have you spoken?
If now your great desire is to lie in love together

here on the peaks of Ida, everything can be seen.

Then

what would happen if some one of the gods everlasting

saw us sleeping and went and told all the other immortals
of it? I would not simply rise out of bed and go back
again, into your house, such a thing

2tO

would be shameful.

No,

if this is

there

is

my

your heart's

desire, if this is

chamber, which

my

your wish, then

beloved son Hephaistos

has built for me, and closed the leaves in the doorposts snugly.

We

can go back there and

Then

down,

since

bed

is

your pleasure.'

Zeus who gathers the clouds answered

do not fear that any mortal or any god

in turn

'Hera,

will see, so close shall

about

lie

Not even

us.

although beyond

all

be the golden cloud that

Helios can look at us through

her:

gather
it,

others his light has the sharpest vision.'

So speaking the son of Kronos caught

his wife in his arms.

There

underneath them the divine earth broke into young, fresh

and into dewy clover, crocus and hyacinth

it held the hard ground deep away from them.
There they lay down together and drew about them a golden
wonderful cloud, and from it the glimmering dew descended.
grass,

so thick and soft

It

should be remarked in passing that Homer's description contributes a small

detail to the question of

Near Eastern

influences.

The

lotus plant alluded to in the

concluding verses of the love scene points to the region of Syria and Phoenicia,

where older and probably rather different versions of the divine love scene may
have been sung.
D. Ohly has convincingly shown that the chiton of the god in the Samian wooden
carving is to be found on contemporary Greek reliefs, for example on a Laconian
ivory pinax. 838 But if we survey the field of Near Eastern models we will find the
same costume in even more striking form in Syrian art (Fig. 108). An almost
identical chiton is worn by the man of a Syrian ivory from the Barberini tomb at
Praeneste. 839

A critical examination of the faces

of the two deities discloses un-Greek features,

and
Yet the Samian piece is a Greek work; the free and lively attitudes
of the figures attest this. The goddess is clothed entirely in the Greek manner.
As Ohly has shown, 840 she wears a cape, such as is found also in the Auxerre
statuette and in the sculptures at Prinias in Crete. The same garment occurs in a
fine wooden statuette recently excavated on Samos. 841 The manifold Near Eastern
motifs cited are not simply imported elements: rather they are ingredients of a
new formal idiom that have already been modified and adjusted to suit Greek
especially in the supple, full forms, as well as in the curved, over-fleshy nose

the thick

lips.

(from top to bottom) - Fig. ij2b: Lyre depicted on Cycladic amphora in

(cf. PI. 32). - Fig. IJ4: Lyre shown
on a deinos sherd from Bayrakli (Old Smyrna). After Akurgal, Kunst Anatoliens, p. //,
Fig. 3. Second quarter of jth century B.C. - Fig. ijj: Lyre depicted on a sub-Geometric krater
figs. i52b~5

Fig. i j za.

from

Fig. i jj: Lyre shown on a relief at Karatepe

(^andarli (Pitane). Unpublished.

Cf p.

204.

- Steatite pyxis showing the hieros gamos {sacred marriage')

After Barnett, Nimrud Ivories, p. 130, Fig. 48. Aramaean

fig. 156
theme.

work of northern Syrian

Museum. Cf. p. 208.

taste.

The

type.

Second half of the 8th century B.C. British

carver of the Samian group was an artist working in the Greek style,

but he probably had a rather exotic name.

Ephesian

ivories

further creations of the Ionian area influenced by the Near East we may
mention the ivories from Ephesos. 842 A spinning woman in ivory from the late
seventh century, which comes from the Artemision at Ephesos (PI. 66), still
depends on the Near Eastern tradition in the formation of the incised eyebrows
and eyelids; but like the related eunuch priest it is a work of Ionian ivory carvers.
Elsewhere I have shown that the cylindrical form of the lower body, which is
shaped in the fashion of the xoana (wooden cult images), and the motif of the

As

moment of action are Greek traits. 843 The

we have here one of the Lydian maidens,

spinning figure caught in a particular

non-Greek

who (as

facial

type suggests that

Aristophanes indicates in The

Clouds')

were instructed to hold the goddess

Artemis in great honour. 844

the thick bracelets

the heavy necklace made up of big pearls and especially

has a Near Eastern look. One thinks involuntarily of the

Aramaean female

statuettes

The

spinner's jewellery

art, which have similar thick

by the ear also recalls Hittite or Aramaean
female figures. As F. Poulsen and more recently R. D. Barnett have emphasized, 845
the bonnet bedecked with pearls bears great similarity to that of the late NeoHittite King Warpalawas of the last quarter of the eighth century. I believe that it
consists of a kind of head-dress that is known to us from Greek literary sources
as the mitre. We know that Sappho wanted for her daughter a brightiy coloured
Sardian head-piece, but she could not buy it because Pittacus, Mytilene's ruler,
had forbidden the import of luxury goods from abroad. 846 Here is the passage in
a translation by Mary Barnard. 847

bracelets (Pis. 25-28).

Don't ask

The

of

late

spiral curl

me what

to

wear

have no embroidered
headband from Sardis to

give you, Cleis, such as

Neo-Hittite

plate 66 -

Priestess. Ivory statuette from EpheLate 7th century b.c. Archaeological Museum, Istanbul. Height 10. r cm. Cf. p. 212.

sos.

wore
and

my

mother

always said that in her

day a purple ribbon

looped in the hair was thought
to be high style indeed
but

we were

dark:
a girl

whose

hair

is

yellower than

torchlight should

wear no

headdress but fresh flowers.

Two

types of

swastika motif

Syrian origin of

Archaic smile

on King Warpalawas' long

from Ephesos. In this
swastika the arms do not originate from a single central point, as was normal in
the swastikas of the Geometric style (Fig. 157); instead they start from two centres
(Fig. 157). The swastika form mentioned appears in Phrygian art as an ornament
in wood carvings. Phrygian artists must have acquired 'sub-Geometric' swastikas
of this type from Near Eastern textiles, such as the garment Warpalawas wears
on the Ivriz rock relief (PI. 30). In later periods of antiquity the Phrygians were
famous for their embroideries and cloths. 848 An ivory from Ephesos representing a
eunuch priest 849 displays the same swastika found on the textiles (Fig. 157).
The artist probably took the motif from Phrygian textiles.
Another essential feature the Greeks borrow from the Near Eastern world is the
'Archaic smile', which makes its appearance in Greek art about the middle of the

The unusual

chiton

swastika motif (Fig.

(PI. 30) links

1 5

7) that appears

the Ivriz relief with the ivory carvings

seventh century, to remain dominant throughout the Archaic period. 850

hardly be an original invention of the 'Daedalic'

artists,

It

Syrian models that were influential during the orientalization process of the

smiling.

first

Baghdad Museum (PL 37)

other women depicted in Syrian ivories (Pis. 38, 43) are already shown
It seems very likely that early Greek artists had a special predilection for

half of the seventh century.

and the

can

but must go back to

this attractive Syrian

The 'Mona

Lisa' of the

ivory work. In any event the sudden appearance of the motif

together with other Near Eastern elements speaks in favour of an eastern origin.

The

Syrian artists had been able to express the smile only by distorting the lips,
and the eyes lacked any genuine radiance. The first examples from the Greek
mainland also lack any smiling quality in the eyes. It was the accomplishment of

Ionian

artists that in

the faces they created they were able to

the lips with an air of radiant happiness.

with smiling eyes

fig.

1 5

the ivory

- Swastika emblems. Above,

the costume of

214

may be

The

endow

the eyes and

oldest example of an art object

eunuch priest from the Artemision

in metal work and vase-painting; below,

King Warpalawas at Ivriz, PI- 3)- Cf> above.

at

Ephesos.

in textiles (cf.

figs. 1 5 8a, b - Above, Fig. if 8a: Ibex depicted on a bronze

mirror in Berlin. After Greifenhagen, Antike Kunst, vol. 8, 19 j6,
p. 16, PI. j. East Greek work. First half of 6th century B.C.

Cf. p. 216.
mirror.

- Below,

Fig. 1 j 8b: Lotus anthemion

The spinning woman (PL

66),

from

about a decade

the

same

earlier, still lacks these

Like the newly published ivory statuette of a man,

this
is

shows the smile only

in the modelling of the

now

mouth

gay eyes.

in Berlin (Fig. 166),

area.

The

Berlin statuette

strongly anchored to the Near East. In an informative article A. Greifenhagen

has weighed

all

the possibilities in the light of clear stylistic and iconographic

observations, rightly stressing the close connections with Syrian ivories. Yet he
justified in calling this fine

may have been

is

Of course its creator

Ephesos who still worked

ivory an Anatolian Greek work.

a carver of Syrian origin active in

style of the traditional Syrian school. With the long shoulder

forward in spiral fashion, the hair style of the sphinx serving

predominantly in the
tresses,

which

jut

as a base is quite Syrian (Fig. 166).

action, as

is

The

the case with the spinning

static attitude like that

statuette

woman

is

(PL

not captured in momentary

66).

Rather the figure has a

of the Syrian support figures from Nimrud. The gentle

As Greifenhagen has
shown, the chiton folds resemble those of Syrian ivories. As has been indicated,
the smile is not an exclusively Ionian characteristic; it can just as easily be a Syrian
peculiarity. To be sure, the eyes are not almond-shaped as in the Nimrud statuettes,
but almost the same eyes appear in a Phoenician statuette from Samos which
A. Geifenhagen illustrates. As he points out, the only certain Greek element seems
to be the disk ear-rings. Greifenhagen rightly shows that this fine statuette may
belong to the end of the seventh century.
In addition to Near Eastern influences, the Ionian objects have features that
derive from Phrygian art. A Samian ivory youth 851 of the late seventh century
wears a belt which may be seen in similar form on the Ivriz rock relief (PL 30)
and especially in Phrygian metalwork. 852 N. Firatli 853 has correctly compared a
Phrygian bronze belt with that of Warpalawas. Moreover, R. S. Young has
correctly linked a bronze object from Gordion, which probably represents a belt,
with that of the Ivriz king. 854 Finally, I may refer to the observations of J. Boardman, 855 which demonstrate that as late as the sixth century the Greeks were still
importing and copying Phrygian belts. Elsewhere we have shown that a number
of Phrygian products, such as the Phrygian fibula and the Phrygian plate with
bobbin-shaped handles, made their way into Greek centres. 856 In addition we
were able to prove that various style elements of Phrygian art were borrowed by
Cycladic ateliers. 857 Recently I. Strom has contributed new observations along
these lines. 858 The Greeks, especially the Ionians, must have been under strong
influence from the indigenous Anatolian peoples. G. M. A. Hanfmann has rightly
undulations of the body also appear in Syrian statuettes.

Phrygian elements

21

plate 67 - Silver bowl from the Pontus. Late Cimmerian work. Late 6th century
B.C. Archaeological Museum, Ankara. Diameter ij.j cm. Cf. p. 218.

spoken of the important role of the native peoples of Anatolia in the formation
spirit. 859 Thus the charm of Ionian art is partly due to the exotic
contribution of the indigenous people of Anatolia. 860
In the seventh and sixth centuries B.C. Near Eastern influence clearly slackened.
It is found only in the islands and in Anatolia, with rare appearances on the
of the Ionian

mainland.

Two
Ivory mirror

works may be cited from

Near Eastern influences.

interesting

farious

this last

period that

still

show

multi-

A. Greifenhagen has recently published an engraved bronze mirror, which he

rightly classifies as an East Greek work. 861 He compares this mirror (Fig. 1 5 8a, b)
with another mirror in the British Museum. 862 The London mirror863 does indeed

show some reminiscences of Urartian art, such

and abdomen of the ibexes (Fig. 161) and the
216

as the spiral locks

griffins' tails

on

the neck

terminating in the

fig. 159 - Rinceaux ornament from an oinochoe in the animal-frieze

Werkstatten, Supplement 8, Fig. 3. Cf. below.

shape of a shaving brush (Fig. 162).

believe,

however, that

style.

After

Schiering,

this piece represents

Median work. The stylization of the thighs of the animal figures, which consists
of a curve and a hump, betrays the Iranian origin of the mirrors. This is well
known to us from Median works and counts as an important component of
Achaemenid art. The bulls' heads and palmettes of the London mirror recur
(as R. D. Barnett and A. Greifenhagen have already noted) on a sword handle
from Chertomlyk, 864 also a Median piece.
The stylization of animals' bodies with rows of dots and short lines is a metalwork
technique that was also popular among East Greek vase-painters. The lotus
anthemion on the Berlin mirror decorated with rows of dots (Fig. 1 5 8b) closely
recalls the rinceaux and lotus ornaments (Fig. 159) of the Rhodian and Anatolian
vases in the frieze style, which are also adorned with rows of dots. 865 Some
animal figures in the frieze style also display the same type of adornment on the
shoulders and legs. 866 I have connected this type of painting in the frieze style
with Phrygian art, 867 and, moreover, I have shown that Cycladic vases revealing
this technique (Fig. 128) were inspired by Phrygian models. 868 Recently C. Kardara
has further developed these ideas in her illuminating study of Rhodian vasepainting, where the problem is discussed at length. 869 I believe, however, that the
scope of Phrygian influence was limited. Some years ago K. Schefold proved
that there was a connection between the white slip of Orientalizing East Greek
vase-painting and Phrygian art. 870 Other neighbourly links with Phrygia could be
pointed out. Yet the importance of

Phrygian technique
of painting

these various influences should not be

all

exaggerated: one must not forget that after the

first

quarter of the seventh century

the flowering of Phrygian art and culture was over and that in the time of the
frieze style, after 650, the provincial

under strong Greek influence.

Phrygian workshops themselves had

believe that R.

M. Cook

Since this technique of using rows of dots and short lines

vase-painting in the frieze style,

we

which was recentiy published by

support of

this

characteristic of

F. Villard, 872

is

same tech-

A bronze plate in the Louvre,

(Fig.

believe F. Villard

is

The

figures

show

160), recalling that

a similar

body

stylization of

rows of

of the Berlin mirror (Fig. 158a,

correct in assuming a

Rhodian

artist. 874

b). I

This technique

may

000

fig. 160

Louvre bronze plai

an attractive piece of evidence in

assumption. F. Villard plausibly ascribes the bronze plate to the

East Greek sphere. 873

engraved dots

is

are justified in assuming that the

nique was also employed in East Greek metalwork.

fallen

also shares this view. 871

- Detail of a bronze plate in the Louvre. After

East Greek work. Cf. above.

Villard,

OOOOOOOOOQt

Monuments

Piot, 48, p. 48, PI. j.

217

have been common also to other centres of the East Greek world. Thus the
Berlin mirror as A. Greifenhagen rightly assumes 875 can be claimed as an East

Silver bowl from

Black Sea area

Greek work of the first half of the sixth century. A silver bowl placed by E. Gjerstad
in his Cypro-Egyptian in group has a linear ornament of human and animal
figures, which recalls the East Greek bronze works under discussion. 876 But the
figures of the Cypro-Egyptian bowl are embellished with parallel lines without the
rows of dots and short lines on the bronzes. Thus the two East Greek works seem
to have followed the tradition of the Urartian style employing short lines. 877
The very late Urartian features of the London mirror that have been discussed
above are clear evidence for this.
Finally I may return to a previously mentioned silver bowl (p. 196) recently
found at Unye east of Samsun on the Black Sea coast (PI. 67). In H. Luschey's
classification 878 this piece belongs to the type of Greek phiale showing a simple
series of bosses. With its limitation to five bosses only it is a unique piece, since

figs. 1 6 1-4 - Lefty above, Fig. 161: Ibex depicted on a bronze mirror in the British Museum.
After Antike Kunst, vol. 8, 196 j, p. iy, Fig. 1. Median work. Cf. p. 216. - Left, centre,
Fig. 162: Griffin shown on the same mirror as in Fig. 161. - Left, below, Fig. i6y. Scythian
animal figure from the axe of the Kelermes Treasure. After Piotrovsky, Vanskoye Tsars tvo
(Urartu), PI. jj. Second quarter of 6th century B.C. Cf. note 881 and p. 217. - Right, Fig. 164:
Gorgon depicted on a Rhodian plate in the British Museum. After Arias and Hirmer, Greek
Vase Painting, PI. 29. Early 6th century B.C. Cf. p. 21 p.

218

fig. 165

- Detail of a

cuirass

from Olympia. After Olympia,

vol.

iv PL
y

j$. See be low.

known up to now have at least six or eight, and often more,

even-numbered bosses in a row. 879 Within this broad type the Unye piece stands
closest to the example from the Oxus Treasure in the British Museum, 880 which
also has figures between the bosses. The ibexes of the Onye bowl (as I have shown
the boss vessels

elsewhere) 881 betray close links with Caucasian-Iranian art centres.

The S-spiral
on the shoulders recurs in a lion depicted on an Orientalizing vase (Fig. 1 3 8), and
on the Kazbek bronze statuette from the Caucasus (p. 196 Fig. 139). The stylization
;

of the leg muscles, which consists of parallel

ribs, is

found

in the

same form

in the

Scythian figures 882 of the Kelermes Treasure 883 (Fig. 163). The curious 'wings' of
the ibexes together with the palmettes with two volutes opposite one another,

bowl with Median and

form of a divided
heart connects the piece with the series of terracotta plaques from Pazarli(Fig. 136).
The thick pointed horn with its pronounced knobbing recalls the horns of ibexes
depicted on objects from the Ziwiye Treasure 885 and those of the Luristan bronzes. 886
Moreover, the double-lined half-circles on the abdomen and shanks are ornamental
features of Mannaean art. 887 The bowl may have originated as an offshoot of
Cimmerian art in the second half of the sixth century.
The treatment of folds first found in Greece in Ionian sculpture may likewise be
traced to Phoenician, Syrian (PI. 39, Figs. 106-1 10) or Aramaean sculptures of the
late Neo-Hittite style (Pis. 12-14, 26-28, 31-35). We have discussed this problem
in detail elsewhere. Here I simply note that the first attempts towards a fold
system of this type are found earlier in the vase-painting of Cycladic, Rhodian
and Thasian ateliers. We have assumed 888 that Urartian works may have played a
mediating role, since various ateliers seem to have been active in Toprakkale

attached to the ends of the five-pointed

Achaemenid

until the

The

star, link

the

stylization of the thighs in the

Origin of Greek
fold rendering

beginning of the sixth century. Phoenician and Syrian ivories (Figs. 107-

may

110)

objects. 884

also

have influenced Greek vase-painters, for these ivories were

exported to Greece until the middle of the seventh century

been noted that the

trailing

also

has already

garments on Cycladic vases with their decoration in

lattice

designs or other linear patterns (Fig.

ivory

reliefs (Figs.

plate of the

(p. 148). It

1 5

2) find their

best parallel in Syrian

Gorgon on a Near Eastern

early sixth century from Rhodes, which is now in London (Fig. 164), 889

shows diagonal

104-110).

lines

The costume of

the

running from the belt to the seam

at the

bottom

that are

probably to be regarded as folds. The Syrian ivories just mentioned have figures
wearing similar garments enriched by the indication of folds. The Rhodes Gorgon
shares the trailing garment with figures deriving

on a
that

piece of

armour from Olympia

found on tridacna

fig. 166

- Ivory

196j, p.

1 j 1, Fig. )2.

from Syrian workshops. A woman

wears a garment identical with

(Fig. 165)

shells.

After Greifenhagen, fahrbuch der

East Greek work. About 600 B.C. Cf p. 220.

statuette in Berlin.

Berliner Museen, vol.

7,

219

plate 68 - Architectural revetment from Duver near Burdur, south-western Turkey. East GreekAnatolian work. Late 6th century b.c. Cf. p. 222.

The

of Cycladic and East Greek Orientalizing vases may have used as

models works of Phoenician, Syrian and perhaps Urartian origin, which
were on the market until the mid-seventh century and considerably later. With
artists

their

great hesitation, perhaps about 570, sculptors adopted the foreign

rendering folds.

It is characteristic that

method of

the earliest examples of fold treatment in

sculpture consists of parallel vertical folds, and

shows a kind of modelling that is

found in the Gorgon figure on the above-mentioned Rhodian plate (Fig. 1 64)
and in the East Greek ivory statuette of the late seventh century in Berlin (Fig. 166).
also

In Crete fold treatment seems to have been employed already in the second
quarter of the seventh century even in small sculptures. Among the remarkable
finds

early

brought to light by D. Levi's successful excavations at Gortyna there is an

Greek terracotta relief showing the murder of Agamemnon. 890 In this relief

Aegisthus wears a long gown, the skirt part of which has vertical folds resembling
the vertical lines of the vase-paintings that have been discussed. Long garments
with vertical folds are also worn by the figures on Melian vases of the early sixth
century. 891

220

The garment of

the 'Mistress of the Beasts'

on

bronze

relief

from

figs. 167-70 (from top to bottom) - Fig. i6y: Aeolic capital from Neandria (cf. Akurgal,
Kunst Anatoliens, p. 28 J, Fig. 2J3). See below. - Fig. 168: Capital from Bayrakli (Old
Smyrna). After Akurgal, Kunst Anatoliens, p. 282, Fig. 2ji. Late yth century B.C. See below. Fig. 169: Urartian piece of furniture (detail). Bronze. After Akurgal Anatolia, vol. j, i960,
PI. 6. Early 6th century B.C. See below. - Fig. lyo: Urartian piece of furniture (detail) from
the Melgunov Treasure. After Barnett, Iranica Antiqua, vol. II, 1962. First half of 6th century.
',

See below.

Olympia seems
In the

field

to be arranged in comparable folds, although of a

wavy

type. 892

of architecture the Ionians especially emulated the Near Eastern

The Aeolic

and more generally the first capital shapes

Near Eastern models. The foliate capital
from Old Smyrna, 893 which dates from the end of the seventh century (Fig. 168),
shows a circle of pendent leaves, which is found in the bases and capitals of late
Neo-Hittite architecture of about a hundred years earlier (Figs. 33-35). Furthermore, the way in which the Smyrna capital is drawn in at the centre, and especially
the finely curved profile of the circle of leaves, recalls some of the Zincirli bases
(Figs. 33-35, 44, 45). The Near Eastern base and capital forms were carried
throughout the Mediterranean world, including Ionia, by Syrian and late NeoHittite furniture in ivory (Figs. 44, 45) until the middle of the seventh century and
probably later. Urartian bron2e furniture with capitals and pendent leaf crowns
(Fig. 169) have even been found in a Scythian tomb, 894 which K. Schefold has
dated to the second quarter of the sixth century (Fig. 170). 895 The similarity
between these Urartian pieces and Ionian work is startling. What distinguishes
them is the buoyant profile of the Greek creations (Fig. 171), which is lacking in
Urartian pieces, although the motif remains the same. It is particularly noteworthy
that the Urartian models mentioned above originated at the same time as the
Ionian works. The Smyrna capital shows that Ionian architects were capable of
forming their building elements as early as the end of the seventh century. Apart
from imported objects of the minor arts the Ionian builders must have seen
various vase, column and capital forms at Near Eastern sites. It has been shown
that in Assyrian art of the late eighth and the entire seventh century the late NeoHittite building forms were enthusiastically copied (p. 46). From such great
monuments of this time, which stood in situ until the fall of the Assyrian empire
in 606 B.C., Ionian artists may have taken their cue. The Smyrna capital represents
one of the earliest experiments carried out by a Greek sculptor (Fig. 168). Similarly,
the Aeolic capital (Fig. 167) developed towards the end of the seventh century
after Phoenician models which Ionian artists could study both in imported objects
of the minor arts and in the monuments themselves. But the Ionic capital, as I
believe I have shown in my book The Art of Anatolia* is an Ionian creation,
peoples.

capital (Fig. 167)

of Ionian architecture were created

after

representing a transformation of the Aeolic capital into a new shape in accordance

with the Greek sense of form. In the repertory of Near Eastern capital forms there
is not a single example that can be compared with the Ionic capital. The capitals
on a relief from Khorsabad, which have been drawn so as to look like Ionic
capitals, are really capitals

with a crown of leaves.

221

Origin of Ionic

column-base

The type of column-base found in Ionian architecture is largely dependent on

Near Eastern models. In its general form the tectonic structure of the Ionic
column-bases from the old Artemis temple in Ephesos (Fig. 171) was directly
anticipated by late Neo-Hittite artists (Figs. 33-35, 44, 45).
All three components of the Ionic base the plinth, the spira and the torus are

present in the column-bases of late Neo-Hittite buildings.

example

(Fig. 171)

is

made up of two deep grooves and

The spira of the Ephesian

three tori.

rectangular

sphinx base, which was found at Nimrud, shows the same profile (Fig. 43).
Astonishing similarities exist even in some details ; thus we find the idea and the

way

in

which the Ionic column necking

is

profiled with rings already in late

Neo-Hittite examples (Figs. 44, 45, 49, 50). Still more important, however, is the
general tectonic character which is found in antiquity in this pronounced form

only in

late

The lower

DUver revetments

Neo-Hittite and Ionian architecture

(p. 86).

columns modelled in relief, the columnae caelatae of the

Artemis temple at Ephesos (Fig. 171), constitute a very successful translation of
Hittite orthostats into the Ionian idiom. Moreover, the frieze of the Ionian temple
and the terracotta revetments (PI. 68) are, as has long been recognized, decorated
with rich figural scenes following the practice of Near Eastern building facades
parts of the

(PI. 2c). 897

mmm

archaic
the
caelata from
fig. 171 - Columna
Artemis tempi* at Ephesos. After Durm, Baukunst
der Griechen, p. 319, Fig. 301. About jjo B.C.

See above.

EPILOGUE

Our

has clearly demonstrated that at the beginning of their

and seventh centuries B.C., the Greeks were greatly influenced
by the Near East and that Greek art came into existence as a result of impulses
from this foreign source. From the Near East the Greeks took not only the
Phoenician alphabet, the greatest intellectual achievement of mankind, but also
a varied selection of elements in the fields of religion, mythology and literature.
One need only recall the numerous Near Eastern influences on the Greek pantheon
and the close links between Hesiod's Theogony and Hurrian-Hittite mythology.
An altogether new mythological world with such fantastic figures as griffins,
sphinxes, Centaurs, sirens, chimaeras, and images of Pegasos and the Gorgon
fascinated Greece in this period. Moreover, the human figures of early Greek art
betray unmistakable Near Eastern traits. Hair in the 'stepped- wig' style, the long
and short chiton, the two types of belt, as well as garment folds in the early
Archaic style are (as we have shown) direct imitations of Near Eastern fashions.
Helmet shapes, various musical instruments, such vessel shapes as the aryballos,
deinos (cf. footnote 803a), krater and foot krater represent versions or even
imitations of Near Eastern works. Countless motifs, ornamental schemes and
also guiding rules employed by Greeks artists were borrowed from their Near
Eastern neighbours. The 'Archaic smile' was a Syrian discovery. Even the preceding short summary suffices to show that the Near Eastern peoples played a
great part in the formation of Greek art and culture. This was a peaceful encounter
of unique importance, with the Near East the donor and Greece the recipient.
In this way the Greeks learned much from the Near East, but they were also able
in a short time to take over the intellectual leadership of mankind. They created
an entirely new world, which became the cradle of western civilization.
The small city-states of the Greeks, which naturally staked no claims to universal
dominion, prepared a favourable soil for the development of freedom of action
in all fields of social and cultural life. Commercial and artistic competition was the
main driving force behind the Greek miracle. Merchants, artists and men of
every occupation were always on the look-out for the finest, best and newest
things. This free competition facilitated the emergence of a spirit of inquiry.
Thus from the mysterious wisdom of Near Eastern priests and from the millennial
lore of the Orient, philosophy and the exact sciences developed in the sixth
century b.c. in the Ionian territory of Anatolia. From the monologues of Near
Eastern poets there grew the intricate Greek drama, in which events were not
stylistic analysis

history, in the eighth

narrated but portrayed in living action.

As

early as the seventh

and

sixth centuries writing

was no longer the privileged

possession of the priestly caste or of court scribes, but the

common

property of

whole people. Inscriptions on vases, statues and bronze objects clearly show
that writing was widely diffused and that a great many citizens were literate. A
the

223

comparable
cities

social structure

may be observed

in the Phoenician

of the Near East in the eighth and seventh centuries

b.c.

and Aramaean

In these

cities,

too,

developed that involved a broad segment of the

population. Monumental art, however, remained the monopoly of the king. The
decisive factor was not the competition of citizens and communities, but the
an intense

artistic

activity

absolute will of the ruler. Yet in Greece, where in addition to the king or tyrant
leading citizens could also commission large and important works, the artist

had unrestricted access to all that was best and newest. Thus, after three centuries
of experiment and development, toward the middle of the fifth century Greek
artists discovered the third dimension, light and shade, and perspective. These
achievements laid the foundations for western

224

art.

NOTES TO TEXT
1

On

35-54; Schaefer and Andrae, Propyl.

Kunstgesch., pp. 12-18.
On the main principles of conceptual art
see Unger, Sumer. undakkad. Kunst, pp. 20-5
ibid., Assyr. und baby/. Kunst, pp. 42ft". ibid.,

Soden, Herrscher im Altertum, Berlin-Gottingen-Heidelberg, 1954, p. 86.

'conceptual' art see Schaefer, Leistung,

pp.

30

prose'

8
9

10

11

12
13

14

expression

came

212-14,

to

my

ZA,

vol. 23, 1965, pp. 274-97,

attention while this book was

in the press.

253-4, 258.
Ibid., PI. 243 (below).
Schaefer and Andrae, Propyl. Kunstgesch.,
p. 164; Unger, Assyr. und baby I. Kunst, p. 43.
H. Gressmann, Altorientalische Texte %um
Alien Testament, Berlin-Leipzig, 1926, p. 339.
Unger, Assyr. und baby I. Kunst, Fig. 64;
Frankfort, Art and Architecture, Pis. 103, 106.

31

Unger, Obelisk, p. 55.

Unger, Sumer. und akkad. Kunst, p. 21.
Frankfort, Art and Architecture, Fig. 107.

34

Strommenger, Mesopotamien,

35

Ibid., Pis.

Ibid., Pis. 224, 241,

Ibid., Figs. 103, 106.

16

Strommenger, Mesopotamien,

17

Ibid., PI. 246.

18

Unger, Assyr. und baby I. Kunst, Fig. 65

(After A. Paterson, Assyrian Sculpture, The
Hague, 191 5).
It should be noted that Assyrian artists,
despite their attempts to create a sense of
depth in orthostat reliefs, overlooked the
simplest details. For example, the forelegs
of a lion on a relief of Assurnasirpal 11 are

on

32

33

Unger, Assyr. und

22

Schaefer, Leistung, p. 35.

H.

J.

61,

1957,

Kantor, 'Narration in Egyptian Art',

A]A,
38

PI. 233.

38

On

vol. 61, 1957, pp. 44-54Pis. 66-9.

122-3.

the 'art of narration' in Babylonian art

Ann

AJA,

Perkins,

vol.

61,

1957,

pp. 54-62.
See H. G. Giiterbock, 'Narration in Anatolian, Syrian and Assyrian Art', AJA, vol. 61,
1957, pp. 62-71.
Frankfort, Art and Architecture, p. 99, PI.
108b.

39

H. G. Giiterbock,

op.

Parrot, Assur, p.

5,

Mesopotamien, PI.

188; T. B. L. Webster,

Hellenistic

don, 1967,
40

such questions see Frankfort, Art and

Ibid., p. 42.

Blancken-

pp. 44-91.

cit.,

pp. 6 2 f., PI. 2ih;

Fig. 8;

Strommenger,

Art (art of the world), Lonp. 105.

H. von Blanckenhagen, 'Narration

Hellenistic and Roman Art', AJA, vol.
P.

1957, pp.

79m On

in
61,

the 'art of narration' in

Greek art before the Hellenistic age see

G. M. A. Hanfmann, AJA, vol. 61, 1957,

Architecture, p. 91.
21

Architecture, p. 73, calls

On the 'art of narration' see Kantor, Perkins,

see

same plane in the relief as the chariot

wheel behind which they are depicted (cf.
our Fig. 1 or Strommenger, op. cit., PI. 203).

Art and

'pictorial epic'.

Giiterbock,
Hanfmann, von
hagen, Witzmann, A]A, vol.

37

20

Frankfort,
it

the

On

'pictorial

Grundlagen der bildenden Kunst

in Assyrien',

21.

15

19

the

Strommenger,

(cf.

article 'Die

pp. 35-7.

Unger, Sumer. und akkad. Kunst, p.

Strommenger, Mesopotamien, Pis.
232-44.

uses

Mesopotamien,
p. 37). His study 'Die Bildgliederung der
jungassyrischen Wandreliefs', Jahrbuch der
Preussischen Kunstsammlungen, 1930, was unfortunately unavailable to me. B. Hrouda's

Obelisk, pp. 3 iff.

Schaefer, Leistung, p. 36.

4 Ibid.,

Moortgat

babyl. Kunst, Fig. 64.

23

Ibid., p. 34.

pp. 71-8.
E. Bielefeld, 'Zum Problem der kontinuierenden Darstellungsweise',
A, vol. 71,

24

Ibid.,

pp. 34, 51 and note 46.

Unger, Sumer. und akkad. Kunst, p. 16.

31-4; H. Kahler, Rome and her

Empire (art of the world), London, 1963,

25

26

Ibid., p. 19.

27

Ibid.,

28
29

41

p. 129.

pp. 12, 23.

Schaefer, Leistung, pp. 34, 51 and note 46.
Cf. also B. Meissner, Babylonien und Assyrien,
vol.

I,

Heidelberg, 1920, p. 315;

1956, pp.

W. von

42

L.

Schnitzler,

'Die

Trajansaule

und

mesopotamischen Bildannalen', Jdl,

43

die

vol. 67,

1952, pp. 43-77pp. 44ff, 7 6ff.

Ibid.,

"5

44

Unger,
Ktinst

bildende

64

Bergvblker,

65

A. Moortgat, Die

Obelisk',

des

Orients

alten

und

die

Berlin, 1932, pp. 52fF., Pis. 28, 29; A.

Jeremias, Handbuch der altorientalischen Geisteskultur,

2nd

ed.,

Berlin-Leipzig,

45

B.

Frankfort,

1929,
66

p. 404, Fig. 227.

Landsberger,

Ankara,

Sam'al,

p. 57, n. 144; p. 24, n. 48

46

Unger, Obelisk,
Ibid., p. 51.

may

48

On Middle Assyrian sculpture see A. Moort-

p. 30.

(p.

gat, 'Assyrische

Glyptik des

13. Jhd.',

off.;

13 (47), 1 941, pp.

rische Glyptik des 12. Jhd.',
5

ibid.,

ZA,

ZA,

'Assyvol.

14
(48), 1944, pp. 23-44; T. Beran, 'Assyrische
Glyptik des 14. Jhd.', ZA, vol. 18 (52),

141-215; U. Moortgat-Correns,
in K. Bittel (ed.), Beitrdge %ur mittelassyrischen
Glyptik in vorderasiat, Archdologie: Studien und
Aufsdt^e A. Moortgat %um 6j. Geburtstag
gewidmet, Berlin, 1964, pp. 165-77; Frankfort, Art and Architecture, pp. 65-72; Strommenger, Mesopotamien, p. 36.

67

68
69

70

1957, pp.

Strommenger,

op.

cit.,

50

Ibid., Pis.

200-1.

Ibid., Pis.

196-7.

52

Ibid., PI. 208.

53

Ibid., PI. 207.

54

For literature on reliefs at Balawat see

Strommenger, Mesopotamien, p. 107.

55

Ibid., Pis.

57

58

60

62

75

77

209-14.
Unger, Assyr. undbabyl. Kunst, p. 29, Fig. 41.
On the hair tuft see Thureau-Dangin,
Arslan-Tash, p. 85; ibid., Til-Barsib, p. 45.
Schaefer and Andrae, Propyl. Kunstgesch.,

Strommenger, Mesopotamien, Pis. 206 (above),

210 (above), 204 (below), 213 (below) and
in second row from bottom.

78
79

On W-shaped stylization of thighs see

Akurgal, Kunst Anatoliens, pp. 31-2.
Strommenger, Mesopotamien, Fig. 202 (above
and middle, for the bull and the recumbent
lion), Fig. 208 (above right, for the camels);
Tine-shaped stylization may be noted in the
rendering of several horses on the bronze
gate at Balawat. Barnett, op. cit., Pis. 155
(above and middle), 140 (above right),
142 (above left). See also Yadin, Art of

226

p.

71.

Ibid., PI.

71, 85, 99.

2;

Thureau-Dangin, Arslan-Tash,

See especially the lion hunt relief of Assur11

in Berlin (Unger, Assyr. und

403 and Fig. on same page.

baby I. Kunst, Fig. 85).

Barnett and Falkner, Sculptures, PI.

See

2.

Thureau-

Dangin, Arslan-Tash, PI. 3.

Thureau-Dangin, op. cit., PI. 3.
Barnett and Falkner, Sculptures, Pis. 6, 36;
Strommenger, Mesopotamien, Fig. 218. See
also

the

horses

in

the

wall-paintings

at

Til Barsib (Parrot, Assur, Fig. 347).

80 Barnett and Falkner, op. cit., PL
71.
81 Ibid., Pis.
16,
82

On

44, 81-3.

the rope between the chariot

box and

the shaft-end see E. F. Weidner, Die Reliefs

der assyris chen Kb'nige, (Archiv fur Orient83

11,

Reliefs',

A. Scharff and A. Moortgat, Agypten und

Vorderasien im Alter turn, Munich, 1950.
Frankfort, Art and Architecture, Fig. 94b;
Strommenger, Mesopotamien, Fig. 218; Barnett and Falkner, Sculptures, PI. 6.
Strommenger, op. cit., Fig. 217.
Barnett and Falkner, op. cit., Pis. 85, 98.

also the portal lions at Arslan-Tas:

On stylistic questions relating to the depiction of lions see Akurgal, Spdtheth. Bildkunst,

Warfare, vol.

an neuassyrischen

fdl, vol. 73, 1958, pp. 1-8, PI. 1.

Unger, Assyr. undbabyl. Kunst, Fig. 43.
Ibid., Figs. 42, 53.

Pi. 3.

84

forschung, 193 9-, Suppl. 4), Pt. 1, p. 4.

Unger, Die Reliefs Tiglatpilesers ill aus Arslan-

Tash, Istanbul, 1925, p. 15.

chariot also

The ninth-century war

some-

times has a three-man complement (cf. for

example the bronze gate at Balawat: Strommenger, Mesopotamien, Fig. 214). The actual
number of occupants, however, seems to
have been two during the ninth century.
The small chariot box also looks too small

Barnett, Palace Reliefs, PI. 14.

63

on this door one

number of masters
W. Nagel, 'Meister- und

banipal

pp. 39-79.
61

107). See also

74 Ibid., Pis.

76

p. 688, Fig. 533.

59

72

Architecture, Fig. 93.

Figs. 209-14. Strom-

cit.,

correctly states that

73 Ibid., PI.

Pis. 19 1-9.

51

56

71

op.

distinguish a large

Gesellenarbeit

vol.

49

Art and

Strommenger,

menger

1948,

(end of note).

47

Strommenger, Mesopotamien, Fig. 207.

Schaefer and Andrae, Propyl. Kunstgescb.,
Fig. 544; Strommenger, op. cit., Fig. 208;
Unger, Assyr. und baby I. Kunst, Fig. 82;

for a heavier load.

85

Unger,

86

Ibid., p. 16.

87

Thureau-Dangin,

op.

cit.,

pp. 15, 18.

Til-Barsib,

p.

45.

The

88

same motif recurs on orthostat reliefs in the

South-west Palace at Kalkhu (Strommenger,
op. cit., Fig. on p. 218 (above); Barnett and
Falkner, op. cit., PL 6).
Unger, op. cit.; Thureau-Dangin, Arslan-

111

Tash.

112

113

Unger, Assyr. und baby I. Kunst, Fig. 64.

Schaefer and Andrae, Propyl. Kunstgesch.,
Fig. 564; Frankfort, Art and Architecture,
PI. no; Strommenger, Mesopotamien, PL 24S.
Strommenger, op. cit., Pis. 252, 258.

114

Ibid.,

The

115

Ibid., Pis.

Rooms xxn and xxvn were

116

Ibid., Pis.

restored in the reign of Assurbanipal (p. 45).

Unger, op. cit., pp. i5ff.; Thureau-Dangin,
Arslan-Tash, pp. 85tT.

117

Ibid., Pis. 247, 251, 254, 258.

90

118

Barnett, Palace Reliefs, Figs. 61-2; Schaefer

91

Thureau-Dangin,

89

Thureau-Dangin,
in

frescoes

92
93

Til-Barsib, pp. 45 ff.

94

Ibid., Pis.

95

Ibid., Pi. 192.

96

E. A. Wallis Budge, Assyrian Sculptures

99

119

198-9.

121

Falkner, Sculptures, Pis. 36, 55.

Cf. also W. Nagel, 'Meister- und Gesellenarbeit an neuassyrischen Reliefs', /<//, vol. 73,

122

1958, pp. 1-8, Fig.

123

100 Ibid., PI.

Ibid., Pis.

102

Ibid., PI.

103

found
op.

125

op.

Schaefer and

121;

Fig.

cit.,

Fig.
562;
234; Parrot, op.

Kunstgesch.,
PI.

cit.,

p. 44, Fig. 53.

Strommenger,

op.

Pis.

cit.,

255-6; Parrot,

pp. 58-61, Fig. 65 Barnett, op. cit.,

Figs. 67-8, 70, 72.
G. Rodenwaldt, Die Bildwerke des Artemiscit.,

See also Unger, Assyr. und baby I. Kunst, p. 4;

Schaefer and Andrae, Propyl. Kunstgesch.,
Fig. 559; Strommenger, Mesopotamien, PI.
260; Barnett, Palace Reliefs, Fig. 90.
Frankfort, Art and Architecture, PI.

Strommenger,

op.
cit.,

cit.,

112;

PI. 259.

126

Frankfort, op.

in the Classical style

127

Loc.

They are,
form from the

128

See also a scene of lions in combat on an

ivory plaque from Ziwiye, in which the

cit.,

PI.

different in

220).

p. 99.

cit.

hand a spe-

lion-slayer places with his left

ninth-century examples.
104

5 5-

Barnett,

226-7.

(Strommenger,
however, quite

Barnett, Palace Reliefs, Figs. 58, 78; Strommenger, op. cit., PI. 249; Parrot, Assur,

tempelsvon Korkyra, Berlin, 1939, pp. 188-90

Akurgal, Griechische Reliefs aus Lykien, p. 9.
124

225-8.

224; Parrot, Assur, p. 13, Fig. 15.

An exception are the Lamassu figures,
which have almost the same long diagonal
tufts that are

Pis.

op.

193.

101

Pis.

cit.,

Akurgal, Spat be th. Bildkunst, p. 27, n. 67.

The spiral lock also occurs in sculptures of
the reign of Tiglath-Pileser 111: Barnett and

Pis.

564,

108-n; Strommenger, Mesopotamien,

Andrae, Propyl.
Strommenger, op.

in

1.

Art and

Architecture,

Fig.
120

Strommenger, Mesopotamien,

Propyl. Kunstgesch., Figs.

248-50, 257, 260-1.

Museum: Reign of Ashur-nasir-pal,

88j-86o B.C., London, 1914, Pis. 29, 49;

98

233-60.
220-7.

566; Frankfort,

the British

97

244.

and Andrae,

Til-Barsib, p. 46. Cf., for

example, the great hunting scene with the

chariot: Parrot, Assur, p. 345, Fig. 268.
Frankfort, Art and Architecture, p. 78.
Strommenger, Mesopotamien, Pis. 220-1.

PL

Yadin, Art of Warfare, p. 300, Fig. 2 p. 420,

Fig. 1 P. E. Botta and E. Flandin, Monu-

cially

105

ments de Ninive, 2 vols., Paris, 1849.

p arro t, Assur, p. 32, Figs. 36, 38; Strommenger, Mesopotamien, PI. 225.

129

Haarlem, 1950, p. 93, Fig. 81).

O. Weber, Assyrische Kunst, Berlin, 1924,

106

p arrot)

130

mouth

p,

cit.,

p.

266,

Fig.

341; p.

37,

Strommenger,

op.

los

p arro t, Assur,

p. 32, Figs. 36, 38.

109

A. Scharff and A. Moortgat, Agypten und

Vorderasien im Altertum, Munich, 1950,

cit.,

PI. 220.

Andrae, Propyl. Kunstgesch.,

Fig. 556; Frankfort, Art and Architecture,
Pis. 102, 106, no; Strommenger, Mesopotamien, PI. 248.

into

Godard, Le

the

Tre'sor

animal's

de

Ziwiye,

Strommenger,

Mesopotamien,

pp.

PI. 261.

107

pp. 414-26.
Schaefer and

(A.

object

p. 13.

Fig. 43-

110

prepared

131

Schaefer and

Andrae, Propyl.

Kunstgesch.,

Fig. 537 (see the lion beneath the h

Frankfort, Art and Architecture, PI.

Strommenger,
132
133
134
135

op.

cit.,

Frankfort, op. cit., p. 131.

See Unger, Assyr. und baby I. Kunst,
Strommenger, Mesopotamien, PI. 24;.
Frankfort,

Art and

Strommenger,

op.

S4;

PI. 202.

p,

Architecture, Pis. 104-s

cit.,

Pis.

238 -

..

127

136

The complete scene

fort, op.

is

reproduced in Frank-

37

Strommenger, Mesopotamien,

38

Ibid., p. 116, PI.

39

Ibid.,

40

Frankfort,

41
42

43

44
45

46
47

48

49

172

p. 116.

240.

PL 239 (240).
Art and

middle of

171

Pis. 104-5.

cit.,

173

Architecture, PI. 104 (in

plate).

Strommenger, op. cit., p. 116.

H. Weidhaas, 'Der Bit Hilani',

ZA,

1939, p. 109.
E. L. Mallowan, Iraq, vol. 12, 1950, and
the following volumes.
Strommenger, Mesopotamien, pp. 39, 103 ff.

Thureau-Dangin, Til-Barsib.
Thureau-Dangin, Arslan-Tash.
Frankfort, Art and Architecture, pp. 73-81;
Strommenger, Mesopotamien, pp. 39, 109-12;

Krischen,

Ibid., p. 31.
Ibid., p. 31

176

F. Krischen, op.

177

178
179

183

PL

184

pp. 39, 109-12.

29; Barnett, Palace Reliefs, col. Pis. 6, 7;

op. cit., col. PL 43; Parrot,

Assur, p. 176, PL 224.

Schaefer and Andrae, op. cit., Fig. 521;
Barnett, op. cit., col. PL 4; Strommenger,

61
62

63

Neugebauer, The Exact

2nd ed., Providence
pp. 29m, 97E
pp. 48,

W. King,

Sciences

in

186

187

Babylonian Boundary Stones and

Schaefer

65

L.

66
67

Unger, Assyr. und baby I. Kunst, Fig. 3 1

Akurgal, Spatheth. Bildkunst, p. 32 and n. 20.

68

At

and Andrae, op. cit.,

Strommenger, op. cit., PL 274.
cit.,

on the

PL

188
189

174,

is

very

the thigh muscle

the bull in Parrot, Assur,

190

191

Pis. 72, 74, 103.

reliefs

from the North

p. 37, Figs. 19,

20, Pis. 43a, b.

C. J. Gadd, Stones of Assyria,

London, 1936.

Mesopotamien,

lucid survey of
in
bis

Aramaean

A. Moortgat,

%um
im

121,

40,

p.

history will be

Vorder-

Geschichte

Hellenismus in

Altertum,

Agypten und

Munich,

1959,

Ibid., p. 387.

A. Dupont-Sommer, Les Arameens

L'Orient ancien

517;

Akurgal, Spatheth. Bildkunst,

228

Vorderasien

problema

dell'arte aramaica',

RSO,

34, 1959, pp. 141-7, has unfortunately

192

193

194

(Coll.

illustre, 2), Paris, 1949.

My rst studies of Aramaean art were

published several years ago: Spatheth. Bildkunst (see index on p. 163). See also my
study Kunst der He th iter, pp. 100-5.
The article by the Italian scholar G. Garbini,
'II

Hall and in Hilani in the male figures have

only part of the bunched pleats visible at the
rear under the cloak. AiS, p. 243, Fig. 150,
Pis. 58-61.

170

p.

pp. 329, 386m, 400, 432, 454.

272.

op.

Strommenger,

asiens

PL

64

169

cit.,

W-shaped scheme can be discerned

difficulty: see

found

516; Strommenger, Mesopotamien,

Zincirli

Parrot, op.

Fig. 61.

01-2.

Halaf, vol. ill, Pis. 92b, 94b, 95b.

Schaefer and Andrae, Propyl. Kunstgesch.,

W. King,

The modelling of
with

(R.I.), 1957,

Memorial Tablets, London, 191 2.

Akurgal, Spatheth. Bildkunst, p. 134.
Strommenger, Mesopotamien, Pis. 270-2.
Akurgal, Spatheth. Bildkunst, PL 25a; Tell

Fig.

PL 277;

cit.,

faint.

p. 38, Fig. 66.

O.

L.

Strommenger, Mesopotamien,

p. 221 (below).

Antiquity,

60

185
5.

Ibid., p. 38.

59

Strommenger,

Strommenger,

Fig. 221.

Ibid.,

Assur, p. 173, Fig. 220.

op.

58

Strommenger, Mesopotamien, p. 121, Fig. 61.

Schaefer and Andrae, Propyl. Kunstgesch.,

cit.

Fig.

p arro t,

Loc.

42.

182

52

56

cit.,

i8i

cit.

55

and Fig.

40;

p.

Ibid.,

Parrot, Assur, p. 98, Figs. 107, 108.

11 3-1

in

p. 121, Fig. 61.

Loc.

Strommenger, op. cit., pp. 39,

Unger, Assyr. undbabyl. Kunst,

Baukunst

Ibid., p. 49.

180 Ibid.,

50

53

der

Mesopotamien, p. 122, Fig. 62.

F. Krischen, op. cit., pp. 30m, Pis. 6-9.
Ibid., pp. 39fT.

51

54

Weltwunder

Babylonien und Ionien, Tubingen, 1956, p. 9.

Unger, Assyr. und baby I. Kunst, p. 60.

175

Parrot, Assur, p. 8.
Parrot, op. cit., pp. 3off., Figs. 35-8; Strom-

menger, op. cit., Pis. 220-7.

Strommenger, op. cit., p. 109, Figs. 51-3.

F.

(on the narrow side of Asar-

stele).

174

11 (45),

M.

AiS, PL
haddon's

vol.

been

unavailable to me.
See also the relief at Karadag: Bossert,
Altanatolien, PL 761. In Assyrian reliefs too
the Anatolian peoples are shown wearing a
similar kind of head-dress (Barnett and
Falkner, Tiglathpileser, Pis. 18, 47, 121).
Barnett, Nimrud Ivories, PL 14 (M 1), PL 19.

Frankfort,
Fig. 96.

Art and

Architecture,

p.

198,

61

195

"

197

Akurgal, Spatheth. Bildkunst, pp. 27ft

Ibid., pp. 23, 25, 27-8 (N 75), 32, 36, 38,
1 20-1
(N 206), 130 (N 278), 134, 136;
Akurgal, Kunst der Hethiter, pp. 100-4.
W. Andrae, in MDOG, vol. 80, 1943, p. 30;
Akurgal, Spatheth. Bildkunst, p. 27, n. 74;
B. Landsberger, Sarrfal, Ankara, 1948,
pp. 53
Ibid.,

200

AiS, p. 375, Fig. 273.

AiS, PL 6; Bossert, Altanatolien, PL 955.
AiS, pp. 175, 325, PL 54; Schaefer and
Andrae, Propyl. Kunstgesch., PL 36 (between
Figs. 596 and 597), p. 707.
Schaefer and Andrae, Propyl. Kunstgesch.,

PL

p. 707;
204

205

206

229

129.

Naumann,

211
212

1,

PL

31.

PL
PL

Ibid., p. 9.

215

Akurgal, Kunst Anatoliens, pp. 58-9, Figs.

216

Akurgal, Spatheth. Bildkunst, pp. 80-6.

Carchemish ill, PL 3 8 A.
Akurgal, Spatheth. Bildkunst, pp. 840"., PL 49a.
AiS, Pis. 60B, 67.
O. Nuoffer, Der Wagen im Alter turn, Leipzig,

218
219

220

221
222

1904, p. 82.
Barnett, Nimrud Ivories, Pis. 33-4.
B. Landsberger, Sarnal, Ankara,

chaeologia
230
231

224

225

Geograpbica

(Hamburg),

vol.

7,

1958, p. 14.
Naumann, Architektur Kleinasiens, pp. 354-8.
Frankfort, Art and Architecture, pp. 139-40.

232

Naumann,

233

Ibid., p. 356. Sir

pp. 354m
L. Woolley has also pointed

to the links with

Minoan-Mycenaean culture.

op.

cit.,

Antiquaries* Journal, vol. 17, 1937, pp. 1 ff.

vol. 18, 1938, pp. 1 ff.; vol. 19, 1939,

235

ff.

Akurgal, Kunst der Hethiter, pp. 5 8tT., 76.

Ugaritica /, p. 33 //, p. 21. See also Woolley,
op. cit. and R. Naumann, 'Hausmodell von
Tell Halaf ', Jahrbuch fur kleinasiatische For;

schung (Heidelberg), vol.

238

2,

1953, p. 255.
Architektur

Naumann,

op.

p. 365.

Naumann, op. cit., pp. 365-6.

AiS, PL 67, pp. 2 55 fT., 3 77 ff.

240

AiS, pp. 255, 377 ff.

241

Landsberger,

242

p Wachtsmuth,

Ibid., p. 38.

Akurgal, Spatheth. Bildkunst', ibid., Kunst der

Hethiter, pp. 90-105; ibid., In Historia
(Zeitschrift fur alte Geschichte, fasc. 7, Wiesbaden, 1964), pp. 1 iyff.
On the peoples of the Neo-Hittite principalities see B. Landsberger, op. cit., pp. 83ft".,
98ff.; H. G. Guterbock, 'Toward a Definition of the Term Hittite', Oriens, vol. 10,

243-53;

AiS, pp. 255-9, 290-300; Naumann,

cit.,

239

1948,

AiS, pp.

Kleinasiens, p. 365.
237

233

pp. 37 ff.
223

p. 77;

vol.

i62ff., 167ft"., 170-1; ibid., 'The Origin

of the Bit Hilani', Iraq, vol. 14, 1952,
pp. 120-31; B. Hrouda, 'Die Churriter als
Problem archaologischer Forschung', Ar-

36-7.
217

ZA,

108-68; R. Naumann,
1939, pp.
Hilani,
Hilammar und Torbau', Ver-

pp.

214

Bit Hilani',

1923-4,
1,

pp.

234

b.

vol.

no. 61, pp. 44-9; ibid., Architektur KleinFrankfort, Art and Architecture,

5a.
5

38-9,

asiens;

Akurgal, Kunst der Hethiter, Pis. 106-7.

Akurgal, Kunst Anatoliens, p. 46, Figs. 25-6.
W. L. Brown, The Etruscan Lion, Oxford,
Ibid.,

vol.

Der Raum,

bffentlichungen der Deutschen Orientgesellschaft,

LAAA,

1940; Bossert, op. cit., pp. 791-5;

Akurgal, Kunst der Hethiter, Figs. 106-7.
R. D. Barnett, in Annual of Department of

Sendschirli', fdl,

(45),

Garstang, in
vol. 1, 1908, vol. v,
1913; Bossert, Altanatolien, Pis. 875-83.
L. Delaporte, Malatya I: la Porte des Lions,

i960,
213

On

H. Weidhaas, 'Der

Architektur Kleinasiens.

Antiquities offordan, 195

209
AiS, PL 62.
210

op. cit., pp. io7ff.

Architektur Kleinasiens, p. 360.
the bit hilani see R. Koldewey in AiS,

pp. 158-69; ibid.,

Paris,
208

Naumann,

von

AiS, pp. 161, 346, PL 60; Schaefer and

Andrae, Propyl. Kunstgesch., Fig. 593.
Akurgal, Spatheth. Bildkunst, pp. 12 iff.
J.

207

228

1962, pp. 1-1

'>

199

203

227

Rome,

with Plates.
Landsberger,

pp. 183-93 F- Oelmann, 'Zur Baugeschichte

von Sendschirli', fdl, vol. 36, 1921, pp. 8598; F. Wachtsmuth, 'Die Baugeschichte

Akurgal, Kunst der Hethiter, pp. 100-2.

202

226

ff.

198

201

1957, pp. 233-9; ibid., 'Carchemish', fXES,

vol. 13, 1954, p. 114.
P. Matthiae, Ars Syra,

op. cit., p. 71; see also AiS,

pp. 1 68ft, 38of.; F. Oelmann, 'Zur Baugeschichte von Sendschirli', fdl, vol. 36,

1921, p. 94.
in fdl, vol. 38-9,

1923-4,

p. 161.
243

The term

mann

Hilani iv was coined by F. Oel-

quoted above, p. 92.

In the publication of the excavations it is
called 'Eastern Hall': AiS, pp. 159ft
in his article

229

244

AiS,

245

Ibid.,

246

^/J", pp.

247

/#.,

PL 60b,

Ibid.,

pp.

p. 163, Pis. 73, 74; p. 165, PI. 77PL 60b, pp. 346ff.; Akurgal, /Tj/ d?r

283

Hethiter, PI. 131.

248

3 5 off.

347 Akurgal, op.

p.

1 5 iff.,

cit.,

Naumann,

I54ff.;

PL

31

Archiiek-

285

Ibid.,

PL

251

Ibid.,

pp. 308-17.

252

Ibid.,

pp.

286

55, pp. 330-3.

253

Naumann,
Loc.

255

AiS, pp.

op.

287

Pis. 20-1.

141ft".,

cit.,

AJA,

257

J.

288

Naumann,

op.

p. 374,

cit.,

vol. 41, 1937, p. 9, Fig. 4.

vol. 5, 191 3,

Garstang, in

258

Tell

259

Naumann,

260

AJA,

261

Halaf

//<*.,

LAAA,

pp. 3765"., Plan 1-3,

11,

op.

cit.,

289

3.

10.

5,

292

LAAA, vol.

264

Bossert, Altanatolien, pp. 877, 900.

R. Naumann in Tell Halaf 11, p. 381; ibid.,
Archiiektur Kleinasiens, pp. 26off; A. Moortin Tell

W.

Halaf iv,

1,

1908,

PL

42.

293

294

gat in Tell Halaf in, pp.

266

290
291

p. 365.

262

265

22ft".;

B.

295

296

Date of the Kapara

Tell

268

D. Opitz in Tell Halaf III, p. 117.

H. Weidhaas, 'Der Bit Hilani', ZA, vol. 11
(45)> J939, P- 108; cf. also AiS, p. 189.
AiS, p. 188, Fig. 84; Parrot, Assur, Fig. 10,

271
272

273

274
275
276
277

279

280

281

193 1-8),

Copenhagen, 1958, p. 205, Fig. 258.

AiS, PL 33a; p. 197, Fig. 88; pp. 35 8ff.
AiS, p. 361, Fig. 260; p. 320, Fig. 226;
pp. 321 ff.
Carchemish

II,

p. 155, Fig. 61.

Ibid., Fig. 60.

Naumann,

Archiiektur Kleinasiens, p.

130,

G. Loud, 'Khorsabad 11', OIP, vol. 40, 1938,

PL 32 (B 48), nos. 15-17, p. 3 1 P- 9 6
>

The base published by Frankfort {Art and

Architecture, p. 88, Fig. 35) does not originate from Khorsabad, as stated, but from

PI. 11.

vol.

11,

p. 223, Fig. 82; in Frankfort,

and Architecture, p.

82,

Fig.

35;

O. Puchstein, 'Die ionische Saule

sisches

Bauglied

orientalischer

Art

and

in

als klas-

Herkunft'

p. 8.

(Sendschriften der Deutschen Orientgesellschaft,

Weidhaas, op. cit., pp. 110-11; AiS, p. 190.

AiS, p. 190, Figs. 85-6.
Frankfort, Art and Architecture, p. 139.

no. 4), Leipzig, 1907, are each one of the

four bases that originate from the Palace
of Sennacherib. The figure given by Frankfort is redrawn from the one given by Puchstein, and has been confused with the bases
from Khorsabad. The drawing in Perrot
and Chipiez, op. cit., is not faithful to the
original. All four bases are in London.
Schaefer and Andrae, Propyl. Kunstgesch.,

Ibid., p. 145.

Akurgal, Kunst der Hethiter, Pis. 90-7.

AiS, PL 46.
L. Delaporte, Malatya r. la Porte des Lions,
Paris, 1940, pp. 88-97; Akurgal, Remarques
stylistiques,

278

Akurgal, Kunst der Hethiter, PL 134.

E. Fugmann,
Architecture des periodes prehelle'nistiques (vol. 11 (i) of Hama: Fouilles et

Niniveh (Kuyunjuk). The figure represented

in Perrot and Chipiez, His to ire de Part,

267

270

OIP,

Nimrud

Period at Gazan (Tell Halaf)', Anatolian

269

Ivories',

1939, Pis. 34-5; Barnett,

nos. 15-17.

Studies, vol. 6, 1956, p. 81.

Halaf II,

52,

Figs. 123-6.

Hrouda

p. 115.

F. Albright, 'The

Chicago and one

Hatay, Antakya).

recherches de la Fondation Carlsberg,

PL

vol. 41, 1937, p. 13.

pp. 9ff., Fig. 7.

J. Garstang, in
263
Ibid., PL 40 ff.

at

Ivories, Pis. 3, 4, 21, 25 etc.

p. 374.

Fig. 460.
256

museum

AiS, p. 359.
AiS, p. 360.
G. Loud, 'The Megiddo
vol.

cit.

141ft".;

Fig. 152; p. 255, Fig. 163; p. 291, Fig. 198;

p. 293, Fig. 201; pp. 358 ff.
AfA, vol. 41, 1937, p. 15, Fig. 8 (two bases

base in the

250-4

(pp. 338-45).

254

284

G. Loud, 'Khorsabad 11', OIP, vol. 40,

1938, PL 38, 41B, C and p. 30, Fig. 2.
AiS, Pis. 53a, b; p. 237, Figs. 146; p. 244,

in the Oriental Institute,

tur Kleinasiens, pp. 368, 374.

249 Ibid., Pis.
56, 57b, 58, 59 and Figs.
250

282

297

pp. 1-114.

A. Scharff and A. Moortgat, Agypten und

Vorderasien im Altertum, Munich, 1959,
pp. 386f.
Bossert, Altanatolien, p. 572.
Naumann, Archiiektur Kleinasiens, p.
Figs. 124-6.

Thureau-Dangin, Arslan-Tash, PL

230

5 (2).

298

299

130,

Fig- 575Barnett, Palace Reliefs, p. 136;

Mesopotamien, p. 236 (above).

Strommenger,

G. Loud, 'Khorsabad 1', OIP, vol. 38,

p. 76, Fig. 88; p. 72, Fig. 83. Barnett, Palace
Reliefs,

pp.

Architecture,

133-4;

PL 106

Frankfort,

(above).

Art and

300

A fine photograph is in Parrot, Assur, p.

302

shapes of bases and capitals in

this relief see O. Puchstein, op. cit., p. 36,
Figs. 44-5.
Perrot and Chipiez, op. cit., vol. 11, p. 225,
Fig. 85; Barnett and Falkner, Sculptures,
Pis. IIO-II.
AiS, 'Kleinfunde', PI. 63, pp. 82f.; see also
PI. 33 (above, right).

303

Ibid., p. 303.

304

Barnett,

305

AiS, pp. 301-5.

306

Akurgal, Kunst der Hethiter,

333

334

Pis. 66-9.

Carchemish

336

Akurgal, Remarques
Akurgal, Spatheth.

337

Art and

Architecture,

313

Carchemish

314

AJA,

318
319

II,

Verbffentlichungen

no.

24),

pp. 30-5, PI. 17, Figs. 33-4.

Perrot and Chipiez, Histoire de Vart, vol.

11,

344

AiS, 'Kleinfunde', p. 32, Fig. 27, PI. i2g.

Matz, Geschichte der griechischen Kunst,

345

F.

Ibid., p. 34.

323

Bossert, Altanatolien, Fig. 823 ; R. Naumann,

'Hausmodell von Tell Halaf ', Jahrbuch fur

cit.,

346

p. 34.

347

vol. 21, 1962, pp. ii4ff.

349

Ibid.,

Fig. 6.

350

pp. 4 6ff.
Schaefer and Andrae,

351

Fig. 540; Barnett, Palace Reliefs, PI. 9.

Schaefer and Andrae, op. cit., Fig. 545.

Naumann, Architektur Kleinasiens, p. 142.

.', p. 253, Fig. 10;
Naumann, 'Hausmodell
.

Architektur Kleinasiens, p. 140, Fig. 154.

.', p. 247, Fig. ib;
Naumann, 'Hausmodell
Tell Halaf 111, p. 15, Fig. 14.
Tell Halaf in, Pis. 138-9, pp. 11 7-1 8.

Nimrud

Barnett,

(above,

352

Ivories,

PI.

78

(S

pp.

Propyl.

86ff.

Kunstgesch.,

H. Seyrig, 'Statuettes trouvees dans les montagnes du Liban', Syria, vol. 30, 1953, p. 25,
E. Kunze, Kretische Bron^ereliefs, Stuttgart,
193 1, PI. 49; P. Demargne,

La

naissance de

I'artgrec, Paris, 1964, pp. 356-7, Figs.

left).

78 (S 258) (above, 2nd row).

Perrot and Chipiez, Histoire de Vart, vol.

469 (tr. by S. Gilbert and

don, 1964).

Ibid., PI.

G. Loud, 'Khorsabad

stylistiques,

PI. 12.
353

254)

11,

354

p. 726, Fig. 386.

331

mJNES,

kleinasiatische Forschung, vol. 2, 1953, p. 251,

330

Paris, 1957, PI. 18 (224, 226), pp. 94 ff.

Akurgal, Spatheth. Bildkunst, pp. 111-18.
On this position of the arm see Akurgal,
Kunst der Hethiter, p. 77; K. Bittel, In
Historia {Zeitscbrift fur alte Geschichte, fasc. 7,
Wiesbaden, 1964), p. 125.
Akurgal, Spatheth. Bildkunst, pp. 125ft".
On this pictorial theme see H. J. Kantor,

Akurgal, Remarques

329

On the motif of the two-headed sphinx, the

chimaera, see Akurgal, Spatheth. Bildkunst,
pp. 125^ In addition to the five examples
given here, see also the chimaera on the ivory
plaque from Megiddo with strong Hittite
features (G. Loud, 'The Megiddo Ivories',

348

ibid.,

328

65.
see Bossert,

Syria,

OIP, vol. 52, 1939, PI. 11 (44g). Two further

examples from the second millennium are
in A. Dessenne, Le sphinx: etude iconographique,

p. 216, Fig. 74.

Andrae,

belt in

ff.

51,

Altsyrien, Pis. 608-9.

(Wissen-

322

327

p. 46, Figs.

pp. 98-114.

For the same

Deutschen
Leipzig, 191 3,

321

326

342

der

Frankfurt, 1950, PI. 249a.

OLZ, 1920, p. 208.

325

stylistiques,

Akurgal, Spatheth. Bildkunst, pp. 142

Akurgal, Kunst der Hethiter, Figs.

32.

320

324

Akurgal, Remarques

341

PI. 103.

W. Andrae, Die Stelenreihen in Assur

op.

pp. 1-114.
pp. 6 ff..

H. G. Giiterbock, 'Narration in Anatolian,

Syrian and Assyrian Art', AJA, vol. 61,

vol. 41, 1937, p. 14, Figs. 6, 7.

Tell Halafn, p. 68, Fig. 31.

Orientgesellschaft,
317

Bildkunst,

stylistiques,

Ibid.,

343

schaftliche

340

395).
p. 160,

151c.

Akurgal, Kunst der Hethiter,

316

Pi.

339

Kleinasiens, p.

312

315

111,

1957, p. 65.

Front parts of lions were also featured on

the pillars of Temples 11 and v at Bogazkoy

PL

(from Megiddo).
64 b.

Altsyrien, Pis. 1012-3

335

338

PI. 78, p. 210.

90-1.
Ibid., col. Pis. 16-17.

Frankfort,

Biblical Archaeologist, vol. 22,

23-4.

(Naumann, Architektur
311

y. Yadin, in

1959, p. 11, Fig. 8 (from Hazor); Bossert,

309 Ibid., PI. 88.

310

Barnett, Palace Reliefs, pp. 133-4; Frankfort,

Art and Architecture, PI. 106 (above).
Barnett, loc. cit.

Figs. 1-9.

Nimrud Ivories,

307 Ibid., Pis.

308

332

On

Fig. 60.

301

52,

i\

Fig. 83; p. 77, Fig- 89.

OIP,

vol. 38, p. 72,

Barnett,
left)

Nimrud Ivories,

PI. 2 3 (S8a-f,

J.

465-6,

Emmons, Lon-

PI. 16 (S 3),

S 26), PI. 27 (S

2),

(above,
(above,

left).

ft)]

355

Akurgal, Remarques

356

Ibid.,

357

358

384

stylistiques, pp. 63-94.

pp. io8ff.
AiS, pp. 202-8, Figs. 94-101, PI. 34.

208-29,

pp.

/&/</.,

Figs.

102-34,

385

386
387

Pis.

388

35-45359
360

Ibid.,

390

p. 369, Fig.

391

Ibid.,B 33.
Carchemish 11,

269; PI. 65.

362-9, Figs. 262-8;
Kunst der Hethiter, Pis. 126-7.

363

AiS, p. 211, Fig. 102, PI. 39.

Strommenger, Mesopotamien, Pis. 204(below),

395

213 (below).
G. R. Meyer, Durch

397

pier Jahrtausende

396

alt-

vorderasiatischer Kultur, Berlin, 1962, p. 136,

367

AiS,

400 Ibid., Pis.

9-10.
401 Carchemish

p. 375, Fig. 273.

B. Landsberger, Sam'al, Ankara, 1948, p. 53.

pp. 53, 55 and notes 138-9.

Ibid.,

369

Cf.

AiS,

p. 215, Figs.

AiS,

371

Loc.

372

W. Orthmann,

399

1 5

1-2; p. 262, Fig. 168.

404

'Hethitische Gotterbilder',

sat%e

A. Moortgat %um

(ed.

K.

Bittel,

405

und Auf-

(vol.

Fugmann,
Seirafi

op.

p.

156, Fig.

188

(5

pp. 236, 268.

A. Kirichian, Les

de

Syrie,

xv,

pp. 3-20, Figs. 1-2, Pis. 4-10;

in
A, 1964, pp. 138-46.

1965,

sat^e

E
410

411

Fugmann,

379

Akurgal, Kunst der Hethiter, PL 103.

Carchemish II, B 28b; Carchemish ill,

op.

cit.,

II,

p. 207, Fig. 261.

1964, p. 223.
Carchemish 11, B 25.
The splendid comprehensive study by the
Italian archaeologist Maria Giulia Amadasi,
Uiconografia del carro da guerra in Siria e

me

these
8a.

AiS, p. 222, Fig. 121, PL 38c (PL 43b).

Tell Halaf in, Pis. 89, 116.

Auf-

6j. Geburtstag, Berlin,

iconografico

nell'antico

Oriente

terrano, 1965) in the series Studi semitici:

48a,

III,

A. Moortgat %um

motivo

'Hethitische Gotterbilder',

Rome, 1965, only became available

while this book was in the press.
study of this subject has long been overdue.
I should like to congratulate Professor
Sabatino Moscati on the useful studies which
his Institute has produced. See also no. 9
(P. Matthiae, Studi sui rilievi di Karatepe, 1963)
and no. 13 (M. Bisi, II grifone: storia di un

W. Orthmann,

378

Mu\esi

Palestina,

annates

vol.

eti

Vorderasiatische Archdologie: Studien und

et

cit.,

and

cit.,

828.

W. Orthmann,

to

archeologiques

54 b.
Carchemish

Carchemish in, B 43b; Akurgal, op.

PL 23; ibid., Kunst der Hethiter, PL 117.
Carchemish ill, B 45a, B 46a.

PL
409

P. J. Riis, in Hama 11 (iii), 1948, pp. 19,

198; ibid., in Gnomon, vol. 35, 1963, fasc. 2,

232

vol. 13, 1954,

408

p. 206.

383

mJNES,

Kilavu^u, p. 26.
Carchemish in, B 54a; Bossert, Altanatolien,

978-9); p. 157, Fig. 189(5 E 980-1); p. 175,

Fig. 215 (6 B 597-8, 602); p. 193, Fig. 245;
p. 203, Fig. 256; pp. 207-8, Figs. 261-4.

382

H. G. Giiterbock,

H. G. Giiterbock, N. O^guf.

of Hama: Fouilles

n(i)

Copenhagen, 1958,

381

Akurgal, Spatheth. Bildkunst, PL 23 a.

408

recherches de la Fondation Carlsberg, 19 31-8),

380

Bossert, Altanatolien,

828.

407

F.

26a.

Hrouda,

Nagel), Berlin, 1964, pp. 222fF.

Akurgal, Kunst der Hethiter, p. 86, PL 79
(below).
E. Fugmann,
Architecture des pe'riodes prehelle'niques

377

B 25, B
B 54a;

6j. Geburtstaggeividmet

E. Heinrich, B.

W.

376

111,

Pis. 1-10.

p. 106.

cit.

Vorderasiatische Archdologie: Studien

375

Carchemish

PL
403

p. 244, Figs.

Thureau-Dangin, Til-Barsib,
11,

402

106-7 with PL *,

(p. 207, Fig. 98).

370

374

26a.

398

368

373

25,

57 (p. 139); Unger, Assyr. und baby I.

Kunst, Fig. 85.

Fig.

13d.

Carchemish III, B 53, B 54a.

Carchemish 11, B 32.
Carchemish ill, B 47.
Akurgal, Kunst der Hethiter, PL 109.
Bossert, Altanatolien, PL 828 (head of royal
statue); Akurgal, Spatheth. Bildkunst, PL 10a
(lion base of royal statue).
Carchemish 1, B 10b.

394

cit.,

393

Fig. 108.

op.

Akurgal,

Ibid.,

Akurgal,

pp.

53

392

362

366

//,

389

pp. 230-6, Figs. 137-8, 140, PI. 46.

1 5 1-2; p. 271, Fig. 177;

Ibid.,

365

B 9 - B 16.
B 18 - B 26.
1, B 2 - B 3.
11, B 17b - B 18b.
ill, B 37 - B 47.
-B60.
/,

Ibid., p. 244, Figs.

//</.,

361

364

Carchemish
Carchemish
Carchemish
Carchemish
Carchemish

412
413

treat

important

themes

in

medi-

both

Near

Eastern art.
Akurgal, Spatheth. Bildkunst, pp. 87-8.
I.
J. Gelb, 'The Double Names of the

Hittite Kings', Roc^nik orientalistyc^ny, vol.

17, 195 3> PP414

416
417

VOl. IO, I956, pp. I2lf.

Halaf in, pp. 37-99,

Tell

418

Ibid., Pi.

419

Ibid., PI.

420

Ibid.,

Ibid., PI.

422

Ibid.,

423

Tell

424

Ibid.,

88 (A 3 152,
102 (A 3 176).

PL 87 (A

421

153).

10a (107b, 108), PI. 13b, PI. 149.

Pis. 19b, 20b, 21, 22a.

Halaf in,

PL
PL

PI. 146.

93a.

Ibid.,

426

G. Loud, The Megiddo

iof.,

Halaf

11,

PL
PL

429

Ibid., Pis. 87, 104,

430

Ibid.,

431

Ibid., Pis. 89, 116.

433

Ibid.,

452

Barnett and Falkner, Sculptures, PL 105.

Tell Halaf in, Pis. 94b, 95 a, 96a.

453

Ibid., Pis. 120, 128.

454

Ibid., p. 342, Fig. 253.

455

Ibid.,

456

Barnett,

Ivories,

OIP,

vol. 42,

PL

PL 133; Parrot, Assur,

Nimrud Ivories, PL

467

Tell

Halaf in, PL

458

Akurgal, Spatheth. Bildkunst,

459

156; pp. 67, 143.

M. E. L. Mallowan, in Iraq, vol.

147.
p.

65,

note

2,

1935,

vol. 14, 1952, p. 48; ibid.,

vol. 15, 1953, PP- 16, 22.

11; Parrot, Assur, p. 86,

60

ibid.,

61

Nimrud Ivories, pp. 133-5.

E. L. Mallowan, in Iraq, vol. 19, 1957,
p. 17, note 1.

62

Tell

63

Tell

64

Ibid.,

107-8.

Ph. 136-7.

89; Parrot, op.

p. 155, Fig. 189.

pp. 197-8;

41.

p. 93, Fig. 102.

cit.,

1 if.

Fig- 95428
Tell Halaf in, Pis. 10, 108.

432

vertically.
451

104.

1939, pp.
Tell

Berlin,

Sargon. The front edge of the cloak does

not have the same fine curve, however, that
we find with the examples of the latter half
of the eighth century, but falls almost

10-100;

150), PI. 104 (Ba, 2).

425

427

Pis.

pp. 15-22.
Ibid., pp. 99-110, Pis. 103-9; PP- 22-30.
Ibid., pp. 35-7, Pis. 1-9; pp. 1 10-9, Pis. 11049, 156-60.

Kultur,

altvorderasiatischer

1962, p. 157, Fig. 71), has a similar form to

those of the reigns of Tiglath-Pileser and

H. G. Giiterbock, 'The Deeds of Suppiluliuma as told by his son Mursili 11',

JCS,
415

tausende

H6-54.

Barnett,

M.

Halaf 11,
Halaf iv,
pp.

p. 394; Tell
p. 3,

65ff.,

PL

PL

1,

Halaf

Fig.

in, p.

5.

1.

48, Figs. 7, 8;

PL

30,

Ibid., Pis.

41-2.

434

See also

Ibid., p. 42,

Ibid., Pis.

pp. 2 if.
70-8.

85

435

66

Tell

436

/*/., Pis.

83-5, 125.

67

Ibid., Pis. 49, 50a, 51b, 55a,

437

Ibid.,

88

On

43a.

Kunst

108;

ibid.,

114.

Phrygische Kunst, Pis. 57-9, pp. 8 iff.

A. and J. Korte, Gordion, Berlin,

1904,

Fig. 17.

ibid.,

PI
PL
PI

33a.

438

Ibid.,

439

Ibid.,

440

Frankfort, Art and Architecture, PL 149b.

E. Gjerstad, in Opuscula Archaeologica, vol. iv,

69

1946, Pis. 7, 9, 10; Frankfort, op.

Fig. 96.

70

441

442
443

Tell

Halaf 111,

E. Fugmann,
helleniques

p. 198,

architecture des periodes pre-

of Hama: Fouilles et
Fonda Hon Carlsberg, ipji-$),
p. 204, Fig.

257 (above,

Tell

445

Ibid., Pis.

446

Barnett,

447

Ibid., Pis. 19, 20.

Halaf ill,

448

Tell

449

Ibid.,

450

Pis. 18-20.

72

73

75

Nimrud Ivories.

Halaf

III,

pp.

67ff., Figs.

PL

3a,

p.

43-8.

Akurgal, Kunst Anatoliens,

p.

Si, Fig. 48;

10-12,

Phrygische Kunst, Pis.

i 5 ff.

pp. 2 3 rT.

Akurgal, Kunst Anatoliens,

ibid., Phrygische Kunst,

27-8, 30, 35-6, 88, 102.

Strommenger, Mesopotamien, Pis. 191, 193.

relief from the reign of Assurnasirpal n,
now in Berlin (Barnett and Falkner, Sculptures, PL 127; G. R. Meyer, Durch vierfahr-

71

74

left).

444

Anatoliens,

17,

20,

82, Fig.

49;

23-5.

n(i)

Copenhagen, 1958,

64b, 65.

the knuckle-bone handle see: Akurgal,

ibid.,

Pis. 130-1, 133.

(vol.

recherches de la

cit.,

pp.

PL 33, nos. 61-3.

Halaf III,?. 6.

PL

p.

13.

Carchemish 11, B 30b.

Akurgal, Kunst der Hethiter, PL 142.
Tell Halaf iv, PL 62, no. 197.
Akurgal, Kunst Anatoliens, pp. 73ff., Fig.
43-4; ibid., Phrygische Kunst, pp. 1-8,

78

Figs. 1-9, Pis. 1-7; pp. 33-6.

Tell Halaf iv, pp. 66f.

77

A. and

78

J. Korte, op. cit., p. 72, Fig. 51.

Perrot and Chipiez, Histoire de Tart, vol. in,

p. 797, Fig. 557.

79

R.

Hampe,

Mainz, i960,
80

Tell

Bin

fruhattiscber

Pis. 6-7, p.

Halaf III, pp.

4*

Grabfund,
-1.

7 f.

233

481

mention here an Assyrian caryatid from

reign of Sargon, made of gypsum,
which was found in Greece but has now
been lost. F. Matz, Geschichte der griecbischen
I

the

482

Kunst, Frankfurt, 1950, PL 248a.

Akurgal, Spatheth. Bildkunst, pp. xiv, 74ff.,
i 43 ff.

483

Carchemish

Pis.

1,

4 -

8.

484

Strommenger, Mesopotamien,

485

Carchemish

486

Barnett,

487

PI.

1,

Barnett, op.

489

Akurgal, Spatheth. Bildkunst, Pis. 31, 32b,

Akurgal, Kunst der Hethiter, p. 56.

490
491

Ibid.,

492

Carchemish

493

Ibid.,

494

Fr.

PL

w-pia, 66, 199; Contenau, op.

M.

513

Akurgal, Spatheth. Bildkunst, pp. 12 1-5.

Contenau, op. cit., pp. 2215-6, Fig. 1244.
Akurgal, op. cit., PL 42b.

496

497

498

34.

pp.

M.

518

6,

930-1,

(n.

501

620
521

1,

Paris,

522
523

524

i960, p.

182,

under

1,

vol.

1,

195

On

506

508

PL

Altanatolien,

(n.

187),

137

PL

140,

PL

24.

AiS, PL 6; Bossert, Altanatolien, PL 955.

P. F. S. Poulsen, Der Orient und die fruhKunst,

Berlin,

1912,

p.

102;

R. D. Barnett, in JHS, vol. 68, 1948, p. 20;

E. Akurgal, in AJA, vol. 66, 1962, p. 376.
Akurgal, Kunst der Hethiter, PL 93 (below).

PL 102, col. PL 22.

The same illustration as in the previous note:

Ibid.,

as

Tuthaliya

Mitteilungen,

iv

vol.

(Steinherr,
15,

1965,

in

pp.

D. D. Luckenbill, Ancient Records of Assyria

s.v.

Urballai.

t. Bossert, 'Die phonizisch-hethitischen

Bilinguen von Karatepe', Oriens, vol. 1,
1948, vol. 2, 1949; Archiv orientalni, vol. 18,

Report on a new Hittite Site, Istanbul, 1946.

U. B. Alkim, in Belleten, vol. 12, 1948,
pp. 5 3 3 fF. Pis. 120-34; ibid., 'Les resultats
archeologiques des fouilles de Karatepe',
,

Akurgal,
Spatheth. Bildkunst, PL 40; Catalogue of the
Exhibition 'Kunst und Kultur der Hethiter'
Akurgal, Kunst der Hethiter, p. 102, PL 139.
D. B. Harden, The Phoenicians, London, 1962,
805;

RHA,

Akurgal, Spatheth. Bildkunst, p. 28, Fig. 18,

vol. 9, 1948-9, pp. 3 fL; ibid.,

'Explorations of Ancient Roads Passing
Karatepe', Anatolian Studies, vol. 1, 195 1,
pp. 19-20.
H. ambel, 'Karatepe: an Archaeological
Introduction to a recently discovered Hittite

PL

Site in

PL
507

527

the funerary stele of the couple see

Bossert,

118

106,

vol.

1,

Ibid., p. 66.

2),

1950; fahrbuch fur kleinasiatische Forschung,

1, 1 950-1, vol. 2, 1952-3; H. T. Bossert
and H. ambel, Karatepe: a Preliminary

p. 182.

H. T. Bossert, 'Zur Geschichte von Karclassici e orientali,

(n.

281); ibid., Kunst der Hethiter,

and Babylonia, Chicago, 1926,

526

(p. 342).

kamis', Studi

505

30

1-35.

17-23).
525

p. 63.
504

23,

Pis.

7, 9(n. 57),

from Karabel near Izmir, which

Franz Steinherr has recently identified with

Friedrich in RHA, vol. 56, 1955, pp. 27ft".

E. Laroche, Les hieroglyphes hittites, Paris,
i960, vol.

503

alien

a relief

J.
502

7.

Kunst des

bildende

from Kultepe, pp. 1-86,

griechische

vol.

PL

p. 283,

10.

Akurgal, Spatheth. Bildkunst, pp.

Istanbuler

t ie
literature about the reading of
'Assurdan', see E. Laroche, Les hieroglyphes

Kargamis

cit.,

PL

See now the fine publication by N. Ozgiic,

The Anatolian Group of Cylinder Seals: Im-

assurance

p or

hittites,

Kalag, op.

13,

AfO,

8 off.

500

8.

p. 283,

A. Moortgat, Die

col.

Ibid., p. 81.

cit.,

517

pressions

Carchemish I, VLB 5 b.
p arrot} Assur, p. 32, Fig. 36; Strommenger,
Mesopotamien, p. 222. It must however be
said that in the case of the hair-dress of the
Gilgamesh figure this is not a matter of
fashion but a characterization of the figure
as a hero.
B. Landsberger and his pupils, Sumeroloji
Arastirmalari, p. 1 o 1 9 ; Forrer, Provin:(en,p.$ 3
B. Landsberger, Sam'al, Ankara, 1948,

499

1,

Kalac, op.

616

p. 184.
495

PL B

Carchemish

612

619

in

vol. iv,

Orients und die Bergvblker, Berlin, 1932, p. 64.

7b.

PL B 8.
W. von Bissing,

cit.,

511

Pis. 8-12.

PL B

Lux,

Oriente

p. 2216.

85, p. 40, Fig. 1.

1,

Ex

in the annual

515

488

M. Kalac

vol. 18, 1964, pp. 280-3, PI- IO

510
E. Laroche, Les hieroglyphes hittites, p. 287,

614

PI. 231.

8.

Nimrud Ivories, Pis. 70-6.

Strommenger, op. cit., PL 222.
cit.,

509

528

77.

41.

G. Contenau, Manuel

d'archeologie orlentale,

vol. iv, 1947, pp. 2215-6, Fig. 1244.

234

Southern Anatolia',

Oriens, vol.

1,

1948, pp. 147-9; ibid., in Belleten, vol. 12,

1948, pp. 35-6.

529

530

P.

Matthiae, Studi sui relievi di Karatepe,

1963, pp. 1 1 33, Pis. 1-32.

Fig.

141-50.
Akurgal, Kunst der

PP- 39, 39-44On the Minoan-Mycenaean griffin and

533

Ibid.,

PI.

Matthiae, op.

Pis.

24;

He tbiter,

141-50.

Pis.

141,

A.

144; P. Matthiae, op. cit.,

Le sphinx: etude

Barnett,

Frankfort,

PI.

Ivories,

Arslan-Tash,

Art and

Thureau-

Kubaba from

chemish: Carchemish

PI.

111,

1946, p.
557

Architecture, PI. 171.

Car62a; Bossert,

PI. 858.

Art and Architecture, p. 198,

96; Barnett, Nimrud Ivories, Pis. 26
(above, left), PI. 27 (above, left), 32 (middle),
44-5, 88-9.
Frankfort,

55

H. Ranke, 'Ein agyptisches Relief

ton',

JNES,

vol.

in Prince-

Ibid.,

539

56:2

561

1950, pp. 228-36,

also similar examples in

541

542

543

H.

in

vol.

12,

1948,

Falkner,

Kunstgesch.,

Sculptures,

p.

22,

Figs. 4, 10, 14, Pis. 25-6, 41-2, 50-1.

544

Akurgal, Kunst der Hethiter, PL 148.

(c

Parrot,

menger,
Pis.

(above).

40, 1938,

Pis. 59 (S 97,

S 186),

Fig.

Strom(between

185;

PL

OLZ,

56.'

R. Herbig, in

570

Barnett,

571

H.

572

Barnett, op.

573

Thureau-Dangin, Arslan-Tash, Pis. 34-5

G. Loud, 'Khorsabad 11', OIP, vol. 40,

Nimrud

cit.,

pp. i45ff.

1938, Pis. 5 1-5.

Barnett, op. cit., pp.

575

Thureau-Dangin,

76

577

Ibid., p.

op.

149ft".
cit.,

pp.

136; Barnett, op.

cit.,

p. 126.

36rT.

A. Dupont-Sommer, Les Arameens (Coll.

L'Orient ancien illustre, 2), Paris, 1949,

547

AiS, PL 62.
Tell Halaf in, PL 100.
A. Dessenne, Le sphinx: etude iconographique,
Paris, 1957, p. 205 and notes 2, 3.
AiS, Pis. 34e, 38c, 43 (above).
H. ambel, in Belleten, vol. 12, 1948, PL xi,

579

Loud,

580

M.

146-9.

pp. i45rF.

The Histories of Herodotus of

Halicarnassus, Oxford, 1962, pp. 84-5.

574

1927, pp. 917-22.

Ivories,

Carter,

Ibid., p. 106.

551

PL

L. Mai lo wan, Twenty-five Years of

Mesopotamian Archaeology, London, 195 6,p-5 6.
fine photograph of the head will be found
in the Catalogue of the Exhibition 'Schatze
aus dem Irak', Berlin, March 1965, PL 51

578

550

JHS,

268 and 269).

17b.

549

in

M. E.

Carchemish

548

alternatively

(below).

Assur, p. 151,
Mesopotamien,

Ibid., Pis.

pp.

Nimrud Ivories,

545

PI.

48);

PL

vol. 68, 1949,

546

11,

1).

(Cat. no. 128).

Belleten,

and Andrae, Propyl.

pp. 569-71.
Barnett and

(M

88-9.

p. 200, Fig. 97.

pp. 35-6; ibid., in Oriens, vol. 1, 1948,

pp. 147-9.
Akurgal, Kunst der Hethiter, Pis. 143-50;
(^ambel, op. cit., PI. 8, Fig. 2, Pis. 9-1 1,
Fig. 7, PI. 15; P. Matthiae, Studi sui relievi di
Karatepe, Rome, 1963, Pis. 6, 7, 16-21, 22a,
23-4.
Schaefer

14

Thureau-Dangin, op. cit., Pis. 19!?.

G. Loud, 'Khorsabad 11', OIP, vol.
Barnett,

1962, PI. 25.

ambel,

JHS,

Pis. 19-26.

Pis. 51-5.

Syria, vol. 31, 1954, PI. 8; P. Matthiae, Ars

Syra. Contributi alia storia de IF arte figurativa
sirana nelle eta del Medio e Tardo Bronco,

Rome,
540

PL

Ivories, Pis. 3,

57-9, 88-9.

vol. 68, 1949,

583

4,

8ff.

561

9,

Art and Architecture,

pp.

Thureau-Dangin, Arslan-Tash,
Ibid., Pis.

W.
538

Ibid.,

580

2oa-c; cf.
Wreszinski, Atlas %ur altagyptischen
Kultur, Leipzig, 1923-36, Pis. 198, 383.
E. Gjerstad, in Opuscula Archaeologica, vol. 4,
1946, PI. 4 (middle); H. Miihlstein, Die
Kunst der Etrusker, Figs. 7, 8; Frankfort,
Pis. 9,

its

Spatheth. Bildkunst,

2.

EM Barnett, Nimrud

Fig.

537

1948,

E. Gjerstad, in Opuscula Archaeologica, vol.

30-1;

E.g., the basalt stele of

Altana tolien,

see Akurgal,

Ankara,

On Phoenician art in general see D. B.

Harden, The Phoenicians, London, 1962.

(i).

17-8,

pp.

2.

Sam'al,

p. 81, no. 246.

Dessenne,

Nimrud

Dangin,

PL

cit.,

Landsberger,

survival,

144-5.

iconographique, Paris, 1957, PI. 38

536

Pis. 2-5,

B.

Ibid., Fls.

535

cit.,

Akurgal, Spatheth. Bildkunst, p. 147 (postscript); ibid., Kunst der Hethiter, pp. 103-4,

532

534

op.

8-15.

Pis.

531

12-14; Matthiae,

7, Pis.

Rome,

3 8ff.

op. cit., Pis. 51-5.

E. L. Mallowan, 'Excavations at

Nim-

rud', Iraq, vol. 13, 195 1, pp. 1-20, Pis. 1-10;

ibid., vol. 14, 1952, pp. 45-5 3, Ha
ibid., vol. 15,

PP- 93-7.

1953, p. 22;

ibid., vol. 21,

1959,

612 Ibid.,

681

p arr ot, Assur,

682

See the composition in Barnett,

p. 154.

Nimrud

pp. 128-9.
Frankfort, Art and Architecture, Fig. 147.
Thureau-Dangin, Arslan-Tash, Pis. 30-1;

Ivories;
583
584

H.
585

op.
586
587

588

J.

Kantor, in JNES, vol.

p a rrot, Assur,
cit.,

PL i;KiB,V\. 104,3(107), 5.
Kraiker and K. Kubler, op. cit., pp. 20 iff.

1946,

W.

690

E. Gjerstad, op. cit., pp. 15, 17.

W. Kraiker and K. Kubler, op. cit., p. 205.
Frankfort, Art and Architecture, Pis. 172 B,
173 B; KiB, p. 106(4).
P. F. S. Poulsen, Der Orient und die Jriih-

591

592

593

Barnett, op.

R. Zahn, Sammlung Baurat Schiller, Auction

sale catalogue 1929, pp. i2f., no. 106 A.B.,

13; KiB, 106(1, 2).

w/, Andrae, in ZA,

615

11

595

pp. 88-98, Figs. 1-8, Pis. 10-14.

P. F. S. Poulsen, op. cit., p. 68.

596

h. Walter and K.

Vierneisel,

(45),

616
617

AM,

Ibid., p. 40,

600
601

622

PL

84, Figs. 3, 4.

625

628

cit.,

p. 69, Fig. 71.

P.

(Zeitschrift

des

Deutschen

Paldstina-

626

Nimrud Ivories; ibid., 'North Syrian

and Related Harness Decoration', VorderArchdo/ogie:

A. Moortgat %um

Studien

6j.

und Aufsat^e

R.

also

vol.

66,

1962,

S.

Young,

1957',

AJA,

Gordion

'The
vol.

62,

1958,

Barnett, op.

cit.,

Pis.

16-17 (S

Akurgal, Phrygische Kunst, pp. ii2ff.; ibid.,

Kunst Anatoliens, pp. 1-7.
Akurgal, Kunst der Hethiter.
w/ p Albright, 'North-east Mediterranean #

in: Studies presented to Hetty

Goldman, New York, 1956, pp. 144-64.
Akurgal, Kunst Anatoliens, pp. 9-20; ibid.,
'The Early Period and the Golden Age of

V.
A.

AJA,

R.

d'A.

On

vol. 66, 1962, pp. 369-79.

Desborough, Protogeometric

Oxford, 1952, pp. 18 iff. and Appx.

question see also the informative

observations and remarks by J. Boardman,
'Early Euboean Pottery and History', BSA,
vol. 52, 1957, pp. 1-29; ibid., 'Greek Potters
in Al Mina', Anatolian Studies, vol. 9, 1959,
this

pp. 163-9.
630

Desborough,

Protogeometric

Pottery,

pp.

192-3.
631

Homer, The

632

A. Goetze,

3).

Ibid., p. 191.

the cultural remains of this period see

Pottery,

Geburtstag gemdmet,

P. J. Riis, in Gnomon, vol. 35, 1963, fasc. 2,

p. 206.

236

See

Ionia',
629

vol. 15, 1956,

pp. 153-73; ibid., in JNES, vol. 21, 1962,
pp. 93-117, Figs. 1-20, Pis. 11-15.
Barnett, op. cit., p. 49.

E. L. Mallowan, in Iraq, vol. 15, 1953,

1 off.

AJA,

in

Ibid., p. 164.

Berlin, 1964, pp. 21-7.

606
H. J. Kantor, in JNES,

M.

Ivories,

Dark Ages'

Barnett,

pp.

Nimrud

V. R. d'A. Desborough, The Last Mycenaeans,

Oxford, 1964; ibid., Protogeometric Pottery,
Oxford, 1952.

84, Fig. 3.

Vereins, vol. 81, 1965, pp. 88-108).

611

Young,

S.

Ugaritica I-III.

gungen

609

R.

On

627

610

31.

624

Amzndry, in Syria, vol. 35, 1958, pp. 101-2.

F. Canciani and G. Pettinato, 'Salomos
Thron', Philologische und Archaologische Erwa-

608

PL

cit.,

See further similar examples of the hair-

623

P. F. S. Poulsen, op.

607

R. Zahn, op. cit., PL 40.

See the fine detail photograph in D. Only,

Campaign of

74, 1959,

Akurgal, Kunst Anatoliens, p. 42, Fig. 20.

Ibid., pp. 39ft"., Figs. 17-19; see now Akurgal, Urartaische und altiranische Kunst^entren,
Ankara, 1968, pp. 27-36.

asiatische

Archaologie,

der

Pis. 46-7.

603

605

Handbuch

p. 807.

PL 70 (S 183); Strommenger, Mesopotamien, PL 264 (above).

602

604

1,

dress mentioned in Barnett,

1939,

vol.. 74, 1959, PI. 84, Fig. 2.

PL

Watzinger,

pp. i46ff.

598

Ibid.,

C.

108

Pis. 57, 59, 88-9.

619
Barnett, op. cit.,

pp. 40-1.
597

599

n. 34 (p. 146).

op.
618

621

AM,

and
vol.

620

vol.

18, 22 (above), 26-7.

bleche des 8. Jahrhunderts, Berlin, 1953, p.

griechische Kunst, Berlin, 191 2, p. 2, Figs. 12,

594

Pis.

cit.,

Pis. 29, 40; Bossert, Geschichte des Kunstgewerbes, vol. 4, 1939, p. 149, Fig. 1; ibid.,
Alt-Syrien, p. 774; D. Only, Atheniscbe Gold-

Pis. 9, 22, 25 (S 11).

689

Mesopotamian

of

p. 55.

614

190; Barnett,

Akurgal, Spdtheth. Bildkunst, p. 82, note 246.

w/_ Kraiker and K. Kubler, Kerameikos v,
vol. 1, Berlin, 1954, pp. 20 iff., PI. 162.
E. Gjerstad, in Opuscula Archaeologica, vol. 4,

London, 1956,

613

19, i960, p. 7.

Fig.

156,

p.

Years

Twenty-five

Discovery,

Iliad,

Book xxm,

Kleinasien,

744.

2nd ed., Munich, 1957,

pp. 139-40.
633

Apollodoros,

1,

41.

Cf.

T.

J.

Dunbabin,

The

and

Greeks

London,

their

p.

1957,

Eastern

56,

n.

5;

Neighbours,

Archdische Schildbdnder: ein Beitrag %ur friihSageniiber-

652

653

und

lieferung, Berlin,
634

635

pp. 178

1950, p. 83, n. 2.
H. G. Giiterbock, Kumarbi, Zurich - N.Y.,

Bildgeschichte

geschichtlichen

1946, pp. 6- -12.

Ibid., pp. 13-28.

636

Ibid.,

637

W.

pp.

654

655

656

94ft".

F. Albright, in

AfA,

vol.

54,

1950,

657

839

M. Robertson,
pp. 16, 21.
V. R. d'A.

in

fHS,

vol.

60,

641

BSA,

vol.

37,

1936-7,

ff.

Hesiod, Theogony, 82 5ff.

E. Buschor, op. cit., p. 130.
L. W. King, Babylonian Boundary Stones and
Memorial Tablets, London, 191 2, PI. 29A.
E. Kunze, in AM, vol. 55, 1930, p. 144.
F. Matz, op. cit., p. 485.
E. Homann-Wedeking, Anfange der griechi131.

1940,
658

Desborough,

Oxford, 1952, pp. 18 iff., 192-3.

See also the discussion by J. Boardman in
fHS, vol. 52, 1957, pp. 24-5; ibid., in
Anatolian Studies, vol. 9, 1959, pp. 163-9.
The problem is also treated very well by
T. J. Dunbabin, The Greeks and their Eastern
Neighbours, London, 1957, pp. 25-31.
K. F. Johansen, 'Exochi', Acta Archaeologica,

D. Ohly, Athenische

Goldbleche des

8.

659

T.

Dunbabin, The Greeks and their Eastern

London, 1957, pp. 36ff.

J.

Neighbours,
660

Loc.

661

Barnett,

662

Dunbabin,

663

cit.

am

Nimrud Ivories,

pp. i2 8ff.
pp. 37fT., PI. 8, Figs. 4-7.
not quite sure whether this work

(Dunbabin,

op.

cit.,

op.

cit.,

PI.

8,

Figs.

vol. 28, 1958, pp. 1-195.

Ibid.,

643

Ibid., p. 108, Fig. 207.

oval face with triangular chin,

644

For a contrary view of the exceptional

importance of Minoan art, as argued by
Lowy, see E. Homann-Wedeking, Die

indicates that the statuette originates

pp. 189, 191.

griechischen Grossplastik, Berlin,

P.

931;

Demargne, La Crete

dedalique: etudes sur les origines d'tm renaissance,

La naissance de Part grec,

pp. 346 ff. See also D. Levi, 'Arkades',
Annuario, vols. 10-12, 1927-9, pp. 15-710;
ibid., 'I bronzi di Axos', Annuario, vols,
Paris, 1947; ibid.,

13-14, 1930-1, pp. 143-6; ibid., 'Scavi di

Gortina', Annuario, vols. 17-18, 1955-6,
pp. 1-82; J. K. Brock, Fortetsa: Early Greek
645

648

664

J.

M. Davison,

648

Attic Geometric Workshops,

Haven, 1961, Figs.

D. Ohly, Athenische

1,

665

Goldbleche des

hunderts, Berlin, 1953, Pis.

649

650

^fj

Schiering,

Werkstatten

8.

866

Jahr-

ff.

E. Buschor, 'Kentauren',

AJA,

vol.

decorated with a meander. R.

Hampe,

griechische Sagenbilder in Bootien,

Athens, 1936,

photograph

PI.

38,

in

Friih-

which the mean-

be identilied, see E.
Homann-Wedeking, Anfange der griechischen
der design can

27a.
651

vol. 18, 1893,

attischer FriedhoF, in
pp. i27ff. ; Perrot, in BCH, vol. 19, 1895,
pp. 2 73 ff.
Barnett, Nimrud Ivories, Pis. 70-4.
The helmet of the head of Amyklaion is also

p. 37; for a

orientalisierender

Keramik auf Rhodos, Berlin, 1957, p. 107.

F. Matz, op. cit., pp. 83, 514 (n. 62),

E. Kunze, in AM, vol. 55, 1930, pp. i47ff.,

5-8; W. H. Schuchardt, Kunst der
Griechen, p. 56f. R. Hampe, Friihgriechische
Sagenbilder in Bootien, Athens, 1936, pp. 36ff.
All told there were five statuettes; of one
only the remains of a leg have been preserved. A. Brueckner and E. Pernice, 'Ein

AM,

867

5, 8 etc.

from

Berlin, 1933, p. 10.

New

however,

Pis.

Tombs, Cambridge, 1957.

F. Matz, Geschichte der griechischen Kunst,
Frankfurt, 1950, PI. 11.
H. Payne, Protokorinthische Vasenmalerei,

647

is

an early Greek master. As I am not familiar

with the original, and the photograph in
Jenkins (R. J. H. Jenkins, Dedalica: a Study
of Dorian Plastic Art in the Seventh Century,
Cambridge, 1936, PI. 11, 10) does in fact
show non-Greek features, I should prefer
to leave the question open. But the statuette
does in both instances illustrate the great
influence exerted by Syrian art upon Greece.

1950, pp. 98ff. On the problem of Minoan

art see E. Kunze, Kretische Bron^ereliefs
Stuttgart,

5)

4,

With its Phoenicianizing Syrian hairdress and moulded eyes it constitutes a good
parallel to the gold crown (our PI. 39). The
Syrian.

642

Anfange der

fahr-

hunderts, Berlin, 1953, p. 108.

Protogeometric

Pottery,

640

in

schen Grossplastik, Berlin, 1950, pp. 19, 116,

p. 164.
638

comments by

934> PP- i28ff. See also the

H. L. Lorimer

Kunze,

E.

888

still

Grossplastik, Berlin, 1950, p. 23, Fig. 9.

cit., PI. 70, Fig. S

Barnett, op.

*37

669

D. Ohly, Atheniscbe
Berlin,

hunderts,

Goldbleche des

1953,

108

p.

n.

R.

691

Hampe,

Bbotien,

PI.

35

(p. 147).
670

arms that hang loosely

Jahr-

8.

and

Friihgriechische

Athens, 1936, pp.

Sagenbilder

692

671 Ibid.,
672

673

pp. 37-8.
L. Alscher, Griechische Plastik, Berlin, 1954,
pp. 29-31 and n. 46 (pp. 126-7).
Barnett, op. cit., Pis. 57 (S 226), 88 (S 293),
Ibid., Pis. 4,

675

F.

Matz,

pp.

36ff.,

677

678

679

680
681
682

Museum

at

1950,

pp.
115),

'Daedalic'

small-scale sculpture to

monu-

Matz,
op. cit., PI. 274a), which, as in the case of
some Syrian prototypes, is decorated with

mental sculpture, in view of the fact the

rosettes. (Barnett, op.

may be

R.

J.

H. Jenkins,

op.

cit.,
cit.,

(F.

Greek kouroi are represented in the

same statuesque way? Knoblauch's position
earliest

seen as a reaction against earlier

statements which exaggerated the extent of

Pis. 70-1.)
Pis. vi (3-6).

Egyptian influence (see also N. Himmelmann-Wildschutz, Bemerkungen %ur geo-

Barnett, op. cit., PI. 73 (S 204 a, b).

Akurgal, Spatheth. Bildkunst, PI. 37a.
F. Matz, op. cit., Pis. 87-8.

683

Ibid., PI. 79.

684

Ibid., PI. 78.

685

Ibid., Pis.

125-6.

686

Ibid., Pis.

127-8.

687

K. Schefold, Friihgriechische Sagenbilder, Munich, 1962, 2nd ed., 1964, PI. 38; L. Alscher,

694

R. A. Higgins, Greek and

695

Roman

feivellery,

London, 1961, PL 18E; P. F. S. Poulsen,

Der Orient und die friihgriechische Kunst,
Berlin, 1912, p. 142, Figs. 158, 160.
689
Barnett, op. cit., Pis. 74-6.
690
F. Matz, op. cit., Pi. 80. It is true that they
are of hammered bronze plate ; but the fact

arms are pressed close to the body

has nothing to do with insufficient strength
in the bronze plate, as we can see from
another figure from Dreros, which is also
worked in embossed technique, but has
that the

238

metrischen Plastik, Berlin, 1964, p. 22).

L. Woolley, in Antiquaries Journal, vol. 17,

1935, pp. 1-15; ibid.,

pp. 1-30, 133-70.
F. Salviat, in

BCH,

mJHS,

vol. 58, 1938,

vol. 86, 1962, pp.

95-

116, Figs. 1 11.

696

Griechische Plastik, Berlin, 1954, Figs. 7oa-g.

688

Berlin,

(Studien, p. 44, n.

are undeniable, but so too is

Egyptian influence. How otherwise could
one explain the sudden transition from

Oxford, 193 1, PI. 47,

terracotta head in the National

Athens has a diadem

Grossplastik,

Knoblauch

differences

Necro-Corinthia,

30-1).

Egyptian sculpture should not be used as

arguments against Egyptian influence. These

1906-10, Pis. 96a, 97(1), 119(1-4), 121 (1-2).

See also an example from Athens (H. Payne,
Fig. 11).

Homann-Wedeking holds

Greek monumental sculpture had already

got under way. The great differences between
early Greek monumental sculpture and

Berlin,

Athens,

School at

d'expressionisme dans

the other hand, holds that the influence

of Egyptian sculpture is only felt later, after

pp. i48ff., Figs. 173-4.

R. M. Daw kins (ed.), The Sanctuary of Artemis
Orthia at Sparta, Excavated and Described by
British

trait

on

2,

the

'Un

the great kouros of Sunion {Die Anfange der

Figs. 39-44, 65, 69; J. Schafer,

PI. 6; P. F. S. Poulsen, Der

Members of

P. Gilbert,

griecbischen

Reliefpithoi,

191

1, Leipzig, 1920), p. 246.

Geschichte der griecbischen Kunst,

the view that

was only a slight degree of 'Egyptianization', which can be seen, for example, in

Orient und die friihgriechische Kunst,

ionische Kolonisation {Philologus,

there

1950, Pis. 65b, 89, 90a, 91a,

274a; R. J. H. Jenkins, Dedalica
., Cambridge, 1936, Pis. 1 1, 11 5, 10, vii 2, 4.
D. Levi, in Annuario, vols. 17-18, 1955-6,
.

Die

G. Hafner,

E.

Frankfurt,

676

F. Bilabel,

Cbronique d'Egypte, vol. 36, 196 1, pp. 255-68;

ibid.,
Passage en Grece, Brussels, 1959.

Kunst,

der griecbischen

cit.,

l'architecture de l'Egypte et de la Grece',

88-9.

Geschichte

op.

p. 97.
693

96 (S 313).
674

Matz,

suppl. vol. 14, fasc.

in

36ft".

(F.

80a (centre)).

H. Payne, Necro-Corinthia, Oxford, 193 1,

pp.

697

698

67ff.

Akurgal, Spatheth. Bildkunst, pp.

Bayrakli, pp. 93fT.
H. Payne, Protokorinthische

76fT.; ibid.,

Vasenmalerei,

Berlin, 1933, PI. 9, Fig. 7.

699
this question see Akurgal,

On

Spatheth.

Bildkunst, p. 77.
700
701

702
703

H. Payne, op. cit., Pis. 21-3.

L. Woolley, in Antiquaries Journal, vol. 17,
1937, pp. 1-15; ibid., mJHS, vol. 58, 1938,
pp. 1-30, 133-170, especially p. 147.
Akurgal, Kunst Anatoliens, Figs. 41-2.
Ibid., pp. 60, 66-70.

704

705

E. Kunze, Olympia Bericht //, pp. io6ff.,

PL 45. Kunze was the first to identify the
true character of these protomae and their
'homeland in the area immediately affected
by Assyrian art' (p. 108).
Akurgal, Spatheth. Bildkunst, p. 74 (for the
discussion of the ivory lion from Zincirli,
cf.

720

721

722

F. Salviat, op.

707

See above, n. 620.

708

Salviat, op.

land, vol. ix, pp.

723

709

After this book had already gone to press

there appeared the fine volume by H. Gabel-

mann,

pp. 95-116, Figs. 1-11.

725

%um friihgriechischen Lbwenbild,

in which the most important of

the questions dealt with here are discussed

thoroughly and systematically.

was un-

726

711

712

Akurgal, Spatheth. Bildkunst, pp. 80-6.

A. Conze, in JHS, vol. 46, 1926, p. 204, 8;
F. Matz, Geschichte der griechischen Kunst,

730

713

tions,

see

the

1949,

731

732

733

Greek

works

pp. 241-8); Festschrift fiir H. Jantzen, Berlin,

vol. 73, 195 8, pp. 26-49,
195 1, pp. 26-9;
suppl. pp. 28-52. I should also like to
mention the article by J. L. Benson, which
contains informative comments {Antike
Kunst, vol. 3, i960, pp. 58-70, Figs. 3-4,
Pis. 1-2). The fine and comprehensive study
by Anna Maria Bisi, // grifone: storia di un
motivo iconografico neWantico Oriente mediterrano, Rome, 1965, only became available
to me after this book had gone to the

734
735

AM,

Enciclopedia

715

P.

718

Ibid., p. 95.'

717

U. Jantzen,

Universale

dell' Arte;

737

738

718

719

58ff.

JNES,

vol.

21,

1962,

cit.,

op. cit., pp. 630".; K. Schefold,

pp. 16, 35-6, 52, PL 22.

H. Payne,
PL

Ibid.,

op.

PL 20(1).
For a fine example from
Salviat and N. Weill, in

cit.,

20(2).

vol. 84, 1 960-1, pp. 347-86, Pis. 4-6.

Hesiod, Theogony, 320-3.
On the iconographic history of the chimaera
in the Near East, see Akurgal, Spatheth.
Bildkunst. See also the present volume,

Herodotus, 1, 195.
E. Kunze, op. cit., pp. 74ff.
jsj
Yalouris, Athena als Herrin der Pferde,
Basle, 1950, pp. 1-102 with 16 Figures.
Ibid., p. 102.

E. Bielefeld, 'Ein altanatolisches Motiv bei

Kanachos', Istanbuler Mitteilungen, vol. 12,
1962, pp. 18-43, Pis- 4 _ 9E.

Simon, 'Beobachtungen zum Apollon

Philesios des Kanachos', Charites: Festschrift

E. Langlotz, 1957, pp. 38-46,

742

Herodotus, n, 44.

743

F.

Griechische Greifenkessel, Berlin,

1950, pp.

Kantor, in

E. Kunze,

fiir

i955>PP- 53 ff-> n os. 33-189.

See similar heads from Olympia and Delphi
in U. Jantzen, op. cit., PL 26, pp. 65 ft"., 84.
E. Kunze, Archaische Schildhander: ein Beitrag
Zur fruhgeschichtlichen Bildgeschichte und Sagen-

J.

740

Akurgal,

in Syria, vol. 35, 1958, pp. 87ff.

iiberlieferung, Berlin,

H.

739

Kunst Anatoliens, Figs. 39, 40.

Amandry,

Berlin,

p. 187.
738

741

press.
714

.,

BCH,

by

U. Jantzen, Griechische Greifenkessel, Berlin,

1955 (Hanfmann, Gnomon, vol. 29, 1957,

Early

pp. 83, 90, 93.

pp. 7 iff.

Thasos, see F.

griffin representa-

fundamental

in

pp. 93-117.
op.

68,

Mu-

1950, pp. 64S.

Ibid., pp. 61, 70-1, 134.
Ibid.,

vol.

Vasenmalerei,

17.

by A. Hicks, Myth and Legend

Greece, London, 1966.
E. Kunze, Archaische Schildhander

Ibid.,

pp. 1-25, PL 11.

On the problem of

1957,

Fruhgriechische Sagenbilder,

729

Frankfurt, 1950, PI. 180.

R. D. Barnett, in JHS,

den

37/

Kallmiinz,

K. Schefold,

a long-felt need in exemplary fashion.

fulfils

Reliefpithoi,

PL

727

However,

delight that Gabelmann's

informative

Studien

Schafer,

Protokorinthische

728

my

J.

Berlin, 1933,

work

express

ff.

pp. 31-3.
H. Payne,

should like to

excellent study.

63-72, Pis. I
also the

see

fortunately not able to take note of this

710

sphinxes

nich, 1962, 2nded., 1964; English translation

Studien

Berlin, 1965,

On

griechischen
724

p. 112.

cit.,

F. Matz, 'Kretische Sphingen',/J7, vol. 65-6,

pp. 91-102.
H. Walter, 'Der Sphinx', Antike und Abend-

comments by

706

etude iconographique,

Paris, 1957.

also p. 48, Fig. 40).

cit.,

A. Dessenne, Le sphinx:

Brommer,

Heldensage:

Vasenlisten

Herakles,

Marburg, 1956, pp.

744

*ttr

Theseus,

7ff., 25ft".,

On

this see also T. J.

and

their

Pis. 5-8.

griechischen

Aigeus

.,

54ft".

Dunbabin, The Greeks

Eastern Neighbours, London, 1957,

p. 52.
745

On

Gilgamesh

see

H. Often,

in Istanbuler

Mitteilungen, vol. 8, 1958, pp. 93-125.

*39

746

Hesperia, suppl.
747

748

749

F. Dirlmeier,

Herakles',

766

F.

Matz,

1949, PP- 164-74.

Mythos von Kdnig Oedipus,

767

P.

Amandry, Greet

788

Akurgal, Kunst Anatoliens, pp.

and

'Sandon

Goldman,

H.

8,

Der

vol.

1962,

21,

769

K. Schefold, Friihgriechische Sagenbilder, Mu2nd ed., 1964, p. 17.

E. Kunze, Olympia Bericht iv, pp. 118-24,

770

nich, 1962,
Pis.
752

753

754

38-46

F. Willemsen, in

AM, vol. 69-70,

1954-5, pp. 12-32, Pis. 1-18.

E. Kunze, op. cit., pp. 1191".
Ibid., pp. 122-3.
Ibid., Pis. 38-9; E. Kunze, Neue Meisterwerke der griechischen Kunst aus Olympia,
Munich, 1948, Figs. 14-15; L. Alscher,

756

771
772

773

op.

cit.,

pp. 35-51.

Ghirshman,

PL

9, Figs. 2, 7.

Perse, p. 382, Fig. 585; p. 376,

Fig. 512.

777

Rome,

Athenische

778

1963, PI. 7.

Goldbleche

Berlin, 1953,

PL

des

8.

Jahrhunderts,

779

780

28(2).

In Olympia bronze statuettes from the last

quarter of the eighth century have also been

Fig. 69; pp. 66ff., Fig. 29.

On the question of the helmet types that

originated in the Near East, see M. Pallottino, Urartu, Greece and Etruria, pp. 32ff.

PL 63;

cf.

Demargne,

Herrmann has

op.

cit.,

p.

pertinently

Fig.

with the sculptures of Sakcegozii

and correctly classified the piece.
A. Cuny, in RHA, vol. 7, 1945-6, p. 12;
E. Dhorme, Les premieres civilisations,
pp. 303^ T. J. Dunbabin, The Greeks and

relief

(p. 83),

their

240

Eastern Neighbours,

London, 1957,

p.

8.

cit.,

Pis. 9a, b, 10, 15-16, 18, 57a, 65a.

Survey of Persian Art, vol. iv,

32 A, 33 B (on the thighs of two
recumbent small animals). Ghirshman, Perse,
p. 375, Fig. 498; p. 70, Fig. 91 (on the

A. U. Pope,

PL

of the two lions in the centre).

A. Godard, L'art de VIran, Paris, 1962,
(tr. by M. Heron, The Art of Iran, London,
1965), P- 44, Fig. 41.

422.

compared the

thighs

also Pis. 64, 66.

329,

188.

Nagel, Altorientalisches Handkunstwerk,

Parrot, Assur, p. 163, Fig. 212; Strom-

1958,

H.-V. Herrmann, Olympia Bericht V, pp.

8 iff., Figs. 37-8. A fine photograph is in
P.

PL

cit.,

menger, Mesopotamien, PL 188.

R. Eilmann, in CVA, Berlin, 1, PL 20;
K. Schefold, Friihgriechische Sagenbilder, 2nd
ed., Munich, 1964, PL 36a.
E. Kunze, Olympia Bericht IV, p. 121,
Pis. 40-1. For similar ornaments on the
buttocks of figures in Greek vase-painting,
see E. Kunze, Olympia Bericht iv, p. 121,
and C. Karousos, in Jdl, vol. 52, 1937,
pp. i84f. See also an Attic vase fragment in
Schefold, op. cit., p. 65 (above). For the
same decorative motif on vases, see Schefold,
op.

781

Olympia Bericht vn, Pis. 62-7; P. Demargne,

La naissance de Vart grec, p. 319, Figs. 405-6.
p Matz, Geschichte der griechischen Kunst,
Frankfurt, 1950,

w/^

PL 46

found, with the same conical helmet with

overhanging plume. Olympia Bericht 1, p. 66,

765

Amandry,
cit.,

E. Kunze, Neue Meisterrverke der griechischen

Kunst aus Olympia, Munich, 1948, p. 12,
no. 20; nos. 21-2 {Bericht 1, pp. 72ff., PL 21);
Antike, vol. 15, 1939, pp. 36fF., Figs. 23, 25.
E. Kunze, op. cit., pp. 12-13.
R. Hampe, Friihgriechische Sagenbilder in
Bootien, Athens, 1936, p. 35.
H. Payne, Protokorinthische Vasenmalerei,
Berlin, 1933,

774

K. Schefold, Friihgriechische Sagenbilder, Munich, 1962, 2nd ed., 1964, PL 4b; D. Only,

764

E. Kunze, Kretische Bron^ereliefs, Stuttgart,

E. Kunze, Olympia Bericht IV, p. 123.

Ibid., PI. 42; L. Alscher, op. cit., Pis. 39a-d.

Karatepe,

763

Figs.

H. Payne, op. cit., PL 130".

R. D. Barnett, 'Ancient Oriental Influences
on Archaic Greece in the Aegean and the
Near East', Studies presented to H. Goldman,
New York, 1956, p. 232.

Akurgal, Kunst Anatoliens, p. 46, Figs. 26, 28.

E. Kunze, Neue Meisterrverke der griechischen
Kunst aus Olympia, Munich, 1948, Figs. 4-5

762

4orT.,

F. Matz, op.

758

761

4, Figs. 4, 6.

776

H. ambel, in Belleten, vol. 12, 1948, p. 49,

PL xi, Fig. 7. P. Matthiae, Studi sui rilievi di

760

PL

38a, b.

PL

757

753

et Orient,

775

Griechische Plastik, Berlin, 1954,

755

69-70.

Pis.

1963, pp. zGjff.; P.

pp. 1-20; Akurgal, op.

pp. 93-116.
See also H. L. Lorimer, 'Uber Zeus Dipaltos',
vol. 37, 1936-7, p. 178, where it is
correctly traced back to Assyrian prototypes.

751

cit.,

25-6.

2nd ed., Mainz, 1965.

H. J. Kantor, in JNES,

BSA,
750

op.

782

This heart-shaped stylization of the shoulder

and the hips of the body also occurs in
Celtic art: P. Jacobsthal, Early Celtic Art,
Oxford, 1944, PL 207; A. H. Springer,
Handbuch der Kunstgeschichte, 6 vols., Leipzig,
1923,

vol.

1,

p.

10,

Fig.

28.

The

Celtic

example probably derives from prototypes

On a Luristan bronze,
noticed that both the
shoulder and the hips have the same heart-

in the frieze style.

however,
shaped

783

stylization

and

(Y.

A.

798

Ibid., Fig. 52.

The Phrygians exported splendid vessels to

the Near East, as we have seen in our discussion of the Tell Halaf sculptures. On the
other hand, they also imported

works of art (AfA,

See also a horse with the same 'S'-shaped

Akurgal, Kunst Anatoliens, Figs. 17, 20-1),

and were under the influence of late NeoHittite art (Akurgal, op. cit., p. 83). See also

tion,

which

simo

Pallottino.

C.

Boardman, in Anatolia, vol. 6, 1961,

pp. 179-89. But the most important influences on Phrygian art were those from

the

Rodiaki Angeiografia, p.

Kardara,

ESA,

5,

25a, b;

129, Figs.

1930, p.
Geschichte

(ed.),

des

aller Zeiten

ESA,

1930, p. 39, Fig. 53,

F. Hancar, 'Einige Giirtelschliessen aus
vol.

Kaukasus',

789

790

ESA,

vol.

193

6,

dem

cit.

Cf. also the recent

belmann,

803

work by H. Ga-

adds a few new comments

Winckelmann-Programm,
1964,

792

K. R. Maxwell-Hyslop, in
1956, p. 152, and Figs. 1-5.
H. Payne, Protokorintbische

Iraq,

vol.

793

etc.

R.

Hampe, Ein

1,

Grab-

fund, Mainz, i960, p. 56, Fig. 42.

Akurgal, op. cit., pp. 56-8, Figs. 36-7.

794

R.

795

Apart from the examples collected by Hyslop

Hampe,

op.

cit.,

pp.

49ff.,

Figs. 30-3.

(see note 791), cf. also a further representation on Assyrian reliefs, also reminiscent of
804

See also P. Jacobsthal, Greek Pins and their

Connexions with Europe and Asia, Oxford,
1956, Figs. 209-18.

805

stemmed

kraters

(Barnett,

Reliefs, PI. 107).

796

R.

Hampe, Ein friihattiscber

i960, p. 48.
The Cycladic

18,

amphorae

Grabfund, Mainz,

(E. Pfuhl, Malerei

Urartian vessels (T. Ozgiig, Altintepe,

;

PI. 13, p. 6, Fig. 7).

The round

Corinthian aryballoi occur already on

Survey of
Luristan bronzes (A. U. Pope,
Persian Art, O.U.P., 1958, vol. 4, PL 69A,
C; 70 B) and on metalwork of northern Iran
(Negahban, Preliminary Report on Marlik
Excavation, Teheran, 1964, PL 12, Figs, in,
140). The deinos, too, may probably be a
Greek modification of Urartian and Phrygian
bronze cauldrons (cf., e.g., Akurgal, Kunst
Anatoliens, p. 50, Fig. 30; A. and G. Korte,
Gordion
., Berlin, 1904, p. 68, Figs. 44-8;
see also the present volume, Fig. 90).
R. M. Cook, Greek Painted Pottery, 2nd cd.,
.

Palace

Attic

vol.

Vasenmalerei,

friihattiscber

mounds), see also pp. 39, 49, 103.

K. R. Maxwell-Hyslop, in Iraq,

PI. 3, Fig. 3

18,

Berlin, 1933, PI. 9, Figs. 3-4; PI. 11, Figs.

(our Fig. 149; oral communication).

Akurgal, Phrygische Kunst, p. 130 (table of

among

pp. 6-12).
791

467-

14-17).

und Zeichnung der Griechen, 1923, vol. 3,

Figs. 18-19, 99-100, 105) as well as the
'Lydion' have a shape such as we encounter

who

{Marburger

1956, p. 152.

803a

Fig. 2; p. 149, Fig. 3.

Akurgal, Kunst Anatoliens, p. 179.
Loc. cit.

Loc.

802

142,

p.

1,

801

54;

5,

Pis.

points in particular to the presence of bronze

basins with Greek ring-handles at Gordion

Kunstgewerbes

und Vblker, vol. iv, p. 10, Figs. 1-2.

On Caucasian objects with 'S' spirals, see
A. M. Tallgren, 'Archaeological Studies in
Soviet Russia', ESA, vol. 10, 1936, p. 169,
Figs. 25 (4); ibid., 'Caucasian Monuments',

in vine Congres

Thus G. Wiilker of
Heidelberg has shown the influence of
Greek bronzes on Phrygian works; she
74,

vol.

Greek world (Akurgal,

International d' Arche'ologie Classique, pp.

278,

A. M. Tallgren, 'Caucasian Monuments',

Bossert

vol. 66, 1962, Pis. 46-7;

J.

Fig. 270.

788

Oriental

H.

The source of this representaencountered as the frontispiece

to an Italian brochure, I owe to Mr. Mas-

787

A. and G. Korte, Gordion: Ergebnisse der

Ausgrabungen im fahre 1900, Berlin, 1904,

800

PI. 24, Fig. 2.

786

Grabfund, Mainz,

p. 72, Fig. 51.

spiral: Studi Etruschi, vol. 30, 1962, p. 298,

785

Hampe, Ein friihattiscber

799

., PL 152, Fig. 2b.

Miihlstein, Fig. 65 (on the hips of the
lion on the gold plaque from Praeneste).
.

R.

i960, p. 48.

Godard,

Bronzes du Luristan: Collections Graeffe, The

Hague, 1964, PI. 35). Therefore the painters
of the animal frieze must have derived their
skill from Luristan prototypes.
R. M. Dawkins (ed.), The Sanctuary of

Artemis Orthia
784

797

later

p. 45-

and M. Hirmer,
22-3 F. Matz, Geschichte
der griechischen Kunst, Frankfurt, 1 9 5 o, PL 1 7 1
See our note 71

Le

vase grec, Pis.

P. E. Arias
;

241

806

London,

ed.,
807

The other

1955).

deities,

Hittite ceremonial

808
809

810

811

may

E. Pfuhl, Meisterwerke griechischer Zeichnung

und Malerei, p. 9 (tr. by J. D. Beazley, new
too,

follow the same

scheme:

see, e.g.,

Hermes

and Kalypso (K. Schefold, Friihgriechische

Sagenbilder, 2nd ed., Munich, 1964, Pis. 9a,
b), Herakles and Deianeira {ibid., PI. 57c).
K. Schefold, op. cit., Pis. 68-9.
In the last vasepainting four further couples in addition to
Helen and Paris are represented in the same
scheme.
On this ceremonial rule among the Hittites
and other peoples, see above, p. 127, and
Akurgal, Spatheth. Bildkunst, pp. 111-18;
also below, p. 208.
Barnett, Nimrud Ivories, PI. 26 (above, centre
and left). On the early history of this motif,
see pp. 82-3; compare the fine Syrian ivory
'Mistress of the Beasts', found at Gordion
Pis.

Ibid.,

(A/A,

32,

57b,

70.

Strom,

I.

in

Acta

Archaeologica, vol. 33, pp. 221-78.

826 Akurgal,
in AJA, vol. 66, 1962, pp. 372*?.
826 Akurgal,
Kunst Anatoliens, pp. 175ft".
827

Ibid.,

828

1962, pp. 37 3 ff.

D. Ohly, 'Holz',

pp.

7 8ff.;

ibid.,

AJA,

in

AM, vol.

vol.

66,

68, 1953, pp.

77-

83, Pis. 13-15.

829

Barnett,

830

On

Nimrud Ivories,

this see F.

Halle,
831
832

p. 130, Fig. 48.

H. A. Klinz, Hieros Gamos,

(Dissertation);

1933

Gamos', RE, suppl.

833

'Hieros

ibid.,

iv, col. 112.

Akurgal, Kunst der Hethiter, pp. 50-2.

In the text of Anitta it is stated: '.
as soon
as he enters the inner room, he will sit
before me on my right hand'; see Akurgal,
Kunst der Hethiter, p. 22.
Akurgal, Spatheth. Bildkunst, pp. 1 10-18;
for the same motif on Roman cameos see
.

ibid., p. 116, n. 173.

834

vol. 66, 1962, PI. 46).

consult the informative study by the

Danish archaeologist

A Survey of Persian Art, O.U.P.,

G. M. A. Richter, The Archaic Grave Stones

London, 1961, Figs. 31-3.
D. Ohly, in AM, vol. 68, 1953, p. 80.
The Iliad of Homer, tr. R. Lattimore, Chicago,

812

A. U. Pope,

1958, vol. 4, Pis. 28-34.

835

813

K. Schefold, op. cit., PI. 10, P. E. Arias and

M. Hirmer, Le vase grec, Pis. 22-3.
On the griffin protome at the end of the

836

837

Ibid.,

chariot shaft see Akurgal, Bayrakli, p. 95.

Akurgal, Kunst Anatoliens, p. 238, Fig. 207;
G. Mendel, Catalogue du Muse'e de Brousse,
1908, PI. 1 M. Schede, Meisterwerke, Pis. 4a,
b; see also Akurgal, Bayrakli, p. 95, n. 176.
T. L. Shear, Sardis x, Cambridge, 1926,
Figs. 11, 17 and Larisa II, Pis. 8-10, 34-6;
see also Akurgal, Bayrakli, p. 15, n. 175;
A. Akerstrom, Architektorische Terrakotta-

838

D. Ohly,

839

P. F. S. Poulsen, Der Orient und die friihgriechische Kunst, Berlin, 191 2, p. 58, Fig. 58;
W. L. Brown, The Etruscan Lion, Oxford,

840

D. Ohly, op. cit., p. 78.

G. Daux, 'Chronique des

fouilles et

decou-

vertes archeologiques en

Grece en

1961',

814

815

of Attica,

818

platten in Stockholm,

Lund, 195 1,

Pis.

1,

3.

841

842

Barnett,

818

K. Schefold, Friihgriechische Sagenbilder, 2nd

ed., Munich, 1964, PI. 10; Arias and Hirmer,

843

Le

845

819

Ivories, PI.

27 (above,

Matz,

Geschichte

der griechischen

844

Kunst,

Frankfurt, 1950, PI. 12 (Late Geometric

Attic pitcher in Tubingen, B 4; height
0.325 m.). See also M. Wegner, Das Musik-

Akurgal, Kunst Anatoliens, p.

821

L. Deubner, 'Die vielsaitige Leier',

846

vol.
op.

54,

cit.,

1929, pp.

pp.

194-200;

848

29ff.

M. Wegner,

823

Loc.

824

On other questions connected with

op.

cit.,

mfHS,

vol. 68, 1948, p. 20; see also

Akurgal, 'Early Period and Golden Age

of Ionia', AJA, vol. 66, 1962, p. 376.
M. Mazzarino, in Atenaeum, vol. 21, 1943,
pp. 57-8; C. Roebuck, Ionian Trade and
3.

New

Translation by M. Barnard,
Berkeley-Los Angeles, 1958.
E. Buschor, Beitrage %ur Geschichte der
Sappho-, a

griechischen Textilkunst,

p. 48.

see also E.

cit.

seventhcentury Cycladic vase-painting the reader

242

847

M. Wegner,

822

pp. 195-6.
Aristophanes, The Clouds, 599-600.
P. F. S. Poulsen, op. cit., p. 102; R. D. Bar-

Ibid.,

Colonisation, p.

15, PI. 3.

AM,

p. 78.

BCH, vol. 86, 1962, p. 882, PI. 30.

On ivory works from Ephesos see Akurgal,

nett,

leben der Griechen, Berlin, 1949, PI. ia.

820

cit.,

Kunst Anatoliens, pp. 192-218.

left).

vase grec, PI. 22.

F.

op.

i960, PI. ia.

817

Nimrud

1962, pp. 487ff.

pp. 302-3.

Munich, 191 2,

von Lorentz,

in

RM,

p. 36;

vol. 52,

1937, PP- l6 5ff849

Akurgal, Kunst Anatoliens, p.

98, Figs. 158-9.

850

das Weinen und das Lachen

Vienna, i960 (Osterr. Akademie
der Wissenschaften, Philos.-histor. Klasse,

H. Kenner, Vber

872

p Villard, Monuments et memoires publie's par

I'Academie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres
(Fondation Eugene Plot), vol. 48, pp. 25-8,

873

Ibid.,

in der Kunst,

Sit%ungsberichte, no. 234, vol. 2), pp. 63

851

852
853

854

855

E. Buschor, Altsamische Standbilder, vol.

Berlin, i960, Figs. 238-48.
Akurgal, Phrygische Kunst, p. 85.

and n. 30, PI. 26, Fig. 19.

J. Boardman, 'Ionian Bronze

Belts',

Pis. 8-1

Knudson, 'From

1965, p. 19.
876

E. Gjerstad, in Opuscula Archaeologica, vol. 4,

877

Akurgal,

1946, PI. 14.

a Sardis

Tomb:

857

858

860

861

Ibid.,

O. M. Dalton, The Treasure of

London, 1926, PI. 8 (no. 18).

881

Akurgal, in Antike Kunst, vol. 9, 1966.

B. B. Piotrovsky, Vanskoye tsarstvo: Urartu,

882

884

885

886

Akurgal, 'Early Period and Golden

Age of

889

vol. 2, 1962, p. 89, Fig. 6; ibid., in British

Museum

Quarterly, 26, PI. 42; A. Greifenhagen, op. cit., p. 17, Fig. 1.

R. D. Barnett, 'Median Art', p. 88, Fig. 5.

Schiering,

Werkstatten

orientalisierender

Keramik auf Rhodos, Berlin, 1957, suppl.

870

PL

16,

Figs.

1,

5,

6;

C.

7, 8.

Rodiaki Angeiografia, p. 35, Fig. 6; p. 92,

Fig. 58; p. 155, Figs. 1 22-3; p. 279, Fig. 271.
Akurgal, Bayrakli, p. 86.
Akurgal, Phrygische Kunst, pp. 46-7; ibid.,
Kunst Anatoliens, p. 83; cf. also note 857.
C. Kardara, op. cit., pp. 35-88.
K. Schefold, 'Knidische Vasen und Ver-

R.

M. Cook,

pp. 502-7.

in

Gnomon, vol.

890

Kardara,

wandtes',/*//, vol. 57, 1942, pp. 131, 134-6,

138.
871

37,

2, p.

31, Fig.

of the Ancient

1,

p.

33, Fig.

E. L.-B. Terrace, The

37, Fig. I(i);

Near East

the world, London,

887

i6ff., PI. 5.

888

869

P. Calmeyer, in Berliner Jahrbuch fur Vor- und

cit.,

in

Boston,

p. 37, Fig. I(i))

E. Porada, The Art of Ancient Iran, art of

A. Greifenhagen, 'Schmuck und Gerat eines

lydischen Madchens', Antike Kunst, vol. 8,

Ibid.,

Haarlem,

de Ziwiye,

tre'sor

Fig. 42 (P. Calmeyer, op.

R. D. Barnett, 'Median Art', Iranica Antiqua,

868

A. Godard, Le

Art

vol. 66, 1962, pp. 374-5.

Ibid., p. 17, Fig. 1.

867

1959, Pis. 54-5.

W.

Oxus,

the

See also the Urartian examples in Akurgal,

Kunst Anatoliens, p. 34, Figs. 9, 10.
Akurgal, in Antike Kunst, vol. 9, 1966.

Philology, vol. 61, 1953, p. 22.

863

866

pp. 61-2.

Moscow,
883

862

865

Phiale, Bleicherode, 1939,

880

Fruhgeschichte, p.

AfA,

46,

41,

1950, p. 23, Fig. 13.

G. M. A. Hanfmann, 'Ionia: Leader or

Harvard Studies in Classical

1965, pp.

864

H. Luschey, Die

Follower?',

Ionia',

pp.

879

pp. 221-78.
859

Anatoliens,

pp. 6 iff.

a Lydian Pottery Imitation of a Phrygian

Metal Bowl', Berytus, vol. 15, 1946, pp. 59-69.

Akurgal, Kunst Anato/iens, p. 83; see also
below, n. 868.
I. Strom, in Acta Archaeo/ogica, vol.
33,

Kunst

Figs. 25-8.
878

vol. 6, 1961, pp. 179-89.

36E

A. Greifenhagen, 'Schmuck und Gerat eines

lydischen Madchens', Antike Kunst, vol. 8,

Ana-

Akurgal, Phrygische Kunst, pp. 81-93; ibid.,

Kunst Anatoliens, pp. 100-3, 206 and n. 170,
172. On the Phrygian fibulae found in
Greece, see U. Jantzen, 'Phrygische Fibeln',
Festschrift fur Friedrich Mat^, pp. 39-43,

pp.

874 Ibid.,
p. 41.
875

from the Phrygian Necro-

polis of Ankara', Belle ten, vol. 23, 1959,

pp. 206-8, Figs. 1-5.
R. S. Young, in A.JA, vol. 62, 1958, p. 152

tolia,

856

'Finds

Piratli,

36-47, Pis. 3-5, Figs. 1-2.

ff.

iv,

p. 260, Fig. 56;

Sagenbilder,
891

1965, p. 122, PI. 33.

E. Porada, op. cit., p. 113, PI. 28.

Akurgal, Kunst Anatoliens, pp. 219ft".
Arias and Hirmer, Le vase grec, PI. 29.
woman on a cuirass from Olympia (F. Matz,
Geschichte der griechischen Kunst, Frankfurt,
1950, Fig. 34) wears the same costume that
we find on Phoenician tridacna shell renderings (our Fig. 105).
D. Levi, in Annuario, vols. 33-4, 1955-6,

JHS,

2nd

K. Schefold, Frubgriecbiscbe
Munich, 1964, Fig. 33.

ed.,

vol. 22, 1902, PI. vi (1).

892

F. Matz, op.

893

Akurgal, Kunst Anatoliens, p. 282, Fig. 251.

R. D. Barnett, in Iranica Antiqua, vol. 2,
1962, PL 6; E. H. Minns, Scythians and
Greeks, Cambridge, 191 3, p. 172, Fig. 69.

894

896

K. Schefold,
12,

1965,
896

36;

cit.,

in

ibid.,

PI. 290.

ESA,

vol. 12, 1938, pp. 9,

der Archdologit,

Handbuch

vol. 11, p. 454 (table).

Akurgal, Kunst Anatoliens, pp. 288-93

ibid.,

'Vom

aolischen

Anatolia, vol.

5,

zum

ionischen

The revetment depicted here

from Diiver, near Burdur
Anatolia.

At

to various museums all over the world.

See A. Akestrom, Bulletin of the Museum
of Mediterranean and Near Eastern Antiquities (Medelhavsmuseet), Stockholm, vol.

way

Kapitell',

i960, pp. 1-7.

this site

originates

in south-western

grave robberies took

place, the proceeds of

which found

4, 1964,

pp. 49-5

3,

Figs- 1-4-

their

NOTES
The following abbreviations

are used for journals:

AA

Archaologischer Anzeiger: Beiblatt

A/0

Berlin
Archiv fur Orientforschung, Berlin

zum Jahrbuch

des Deutschen Archaologischen In-

stituts,

AJA

AM

Annuario

BCH
BSA
CVA
BSA

JCS
Jdl

JHS

JNES

LAAA
MDOG
OIP

OLZ

RHA
RSO
VA

ZA

American Journal of Archaeology, Boston

Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archaologischen Instituts, Athenische Abteilung, Berlin
Annuario della Scuola archaeologica di Atena, Rome
Bulletin de Correspondence Hellenique, Paris
Annual of the British School at Athens, London
Corpus Vasorum Antiquorum, Paris
Eurasia Septentrionalis Antiqua, Helsinki
Journal of Cuneiform Studies, New Haven
Jahrbuch des Deutschen Archaologischen Instituts, Berlin
Journal of Hellenic Studies, London
Journal of Near Eastern Studies, Chicago
Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology, Institute of Archaeology, Liverpool
Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orientgesellschaft, Berlin
Oriental Institute Publications, University of Chicago
Orientalische Literaturzeitung, Leipzig
Revue Hittite et Asianique, Paris
Revista degli Studi Orientali, Rome
Vorderasiatische Abteilung der Staatlichen Museen, Berlin
Zeitschrift fur Assyrologie, Leipzig

The following abbreviations

are used for published works:

AiS

Akurgal, Bayrakli

F. v. Luschan (ed.), Ausgrabungen in Sendschirli: Mitteilungen

aus den orientalischen Sammlungen der Berliner Museen.
1:
Fasc. xi, 1893
111: Fasc. xiii, 1902
iv Fasc. xiv, 191
v:
Fasc. xv, 1943
E. Akurgal, Bayrakli: Zeitschrift der Philosophischen Fakultat,

Akurgal, Kunst Anatoliens

Ankara, vol. 8, 1950.

E. Akurgal, Die Kunst Anatoliens von Homer

bis

Alexander,

Berlin, 1961.

Akurgal, Kunst der Hethiter

E. Akurgal, Die Kunst der Hethiter, Munich, 1961; English

translation by C. McNab: The Art of the Hittites, London,

Akurgal, Phrygische Kunst

Akurgal, Remarques stylistiques

E. Akurgal, Die Phrygische Kunst, Ankara, 1955.

E. Akurgal, Remarques stylistiques sur les reliefs de Malatya,

1962.

Akurgal, Spatheth. Bildkunst

Barnett,

Nimrud Ivories

Barnett, Palace Reliefs

Ankara, 1946.
E. Akurgal, Die spathethitische Bildkunst, Ankara, 1949.
Catalogue of the Nimrud Ivories, with other
R. D. Barnett,
Examples of Ancient Near Eastern Ivories in the British Museum,

London, 1957.
R. D. Barnett, Assyrian Palace
the Sculptures of Babylonia

244

Reliefs and their Influence on

and Persia, London, i960.

Barnett and Falkner, Sculptures

R. D. Barnett and M. Falkner, The Sculptures of Assur- Nasirapali ii (SSj-Sjp B.c.) y Tiglath-Pileser
London, 1962.
H. T. Bossert, Altanatolien, Berlin, 1942.
H. T. Bossert, Altsyrien, Berlin, 195 1.
Report on the Excavations at Djerabis on behalf of the British

m,

Bossert, Altanatolien
Bossert, Altsyrien
Carcbemish i

Museum. Part

1.

Introductory by D. G. Hogarth. London,

1914.

Carchemish

Report on the Excavations at Jerablus on behalf of the British

11.
The Town Defences. By C. L. Woolley.

Museum. Part
London, 1921.
Carcbemish

Report on

in

the

Excavations at Jerablus on behalf of the British

Museum. Part in. The Excavations in the Inner Town. By

L. Woolley. The Hittite Inscriptions. By R. D. Barnett. London,
1952.

Frankfort,

Art and

Architecture

Ghirshman, Perse

Naumann,
KiB

Architektur Kleinasiens

Olympia Bericht i-iv

Parrot, Assur

Perrot and Chipiez, Histoire de Part

Schaefer, Leistung

H. Frankfort, The Art and Architecture of the Ancient Orient,

Harmondsworth, 1954.
R. Ghirshman, Perse: Proto-ir-aniens, Medes, Acbe'me'nides,
Paris, 1963. Translated by S. Gilbert and J. Emmons:
Persia from the Origins to Alexander the Great, London, 1964.

Naumann, Architektur Kleinasiens, Tubingen, 1955.

F. Winter, Kunstgeschichte in Bildern, Leipzig.
E. Kunze and H. Schleif, Bericht uber die Ausgrabungen in
Olympia, mit Beitragen von R. Eilmann und U. Jantzen.
Berlin, 1944.
A. Parrot, Assur, Paris, 1961. Translated by S. Gilbert and
J. Emmons: Niniveh and Babylon, London, 1961.
G. Perrot and C. Chipiez, Histoire de Vart dans Vantiquite.
Vol. 11: Chaldee et Assyrie, Paris, 1884. Vol. 111: Phe'nice-Cypre,
Paris, 1885.
H. Schaefer, Die Leistung der agyptischen Kunst, Leipzig, 1929.
R.

Herausgegeben

von

der

Vorderasiatischen-Agyptischen

Gesellschaft, Vol. 28.

Schaefer and Andrae, Propyl. Kunstgesch.

Strommenger, Mesopotamien
Tell

A. Schaefer and W. Andrae, Propylaen Kunstgeschichte, 11,

2nd ed., Berlin, 1925.
E. Strommenger, Fiinf fahrtausende Mesopotamien, Munich,
1962. Translated by C. Haglund: Mesopotamia, London, 1964.

Max

Freiherr von Oppenheim, Tell Halaf.

Die Prahistorischen Funde. By H. Schmidt. Berlin, 1943.
11:
Die Bauwerke. By F. Langenegger, K. Miiller, R. Naumann. Berlin, 1950.
in: Die Bildwerke. By A. Moortgat
D. Opitz. Berlin,

Halaf i-iv

1:

Thureau-Dangin, Arslan-Tash
Thureau-Dangin, Til-Barsib
Ugaritica

i-m

de
11:

Ras Shamra.

Kttnst

Unger, Sumer. und akkad. Kunst

Yadin, Art of Warfare

Paris, 1939.
Paris, 1949.

Nouvelles etudes

hi: Sceaux et cylindres bittites

Unger, Assyr. und baby I.

Unger, Obelisk

1955iv. Die Kleinfunde aus historischer Zeit. By B. Hrouda. Berlin,

1962.
F. Thureau-Dangin, A. Barrois, G. Dossin, M. Dunand,
Arslan-Tash, Paris, 193 1.
F. Thureau-Dangin and M. Dunand, Til-Barsib, Paris, 1936.
C. F. A. Schaeffer, Ugaritica: Etudes relatives aux decouvertes

et autres decouvertes de

Ras

Shamra. Paris, 1956.

E. Unger, Assyrische und babylonische Kunst, Breslau, 1927.
E. Unger, Der Obelisk des Konigs Assurnassirpal / aus Xinive,
Leipzig, 1932 (Alitteilungen der altorientalischen Gesellschaft,
vol. 6, fasc. 1-2).
E. Unger, Die sumerische und akkadische Kunst, Breslau, 1926.
Y. Yadin, The Art of Warfare in Biblical Lands in the Light of
Archaeological Discovery, London, 1963.

24s

EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN AND NEAR EAST

ILLUSTRATING THE CONNECTIONS BETWEEN EASTERN AND GREEK ART
246

Erivon

'Kwmir-Blur

bnUpe
Topr (*><*

L.UJMIA

Ttp*

HMr

247

INDEX
(The numerals in

abacus
Abdi-ilimu

italics refer to the plates and figures.)

8 9 f.,

93

77
217, 219
209

Achaemenid
Achilles

Adad-apal-iddina
Adadnirari in

53
3

Adana
Adapa
Adin

2 , 5i

i3i> 135

49
67
182, 1 8 4- j, 198
220
221, 221

Aegina
Aegisthus
Aeolic capital
Aeschylus

Agamemnon
Agora: cf. Athens
Aigipan
Akkad, Akkadian

Albright,

W.

Al Mina

135

49, 166

174
1 90

Altis

Amandry,

P.

155, 185

Amanus
Amazons

47
45

Amman

59

amphora

166, 196, 202fF., 207, 210-1, 241

Amurru

47

Anatolia 196; central 162, 201; eastern 194;

north-western 209; southern 53, 67, 77fT.,
88ff., 94, 119, 122, i27f., 135, 138,
143, 162; south-eastern 56; south-western

851".,

244; western 162, 207; west coast of 49;

Ionian 144, 223;
,

art 118, 200;

myth

165, 189; music 204;

provinces 125; sculpture 136; vases 217;

Anatolians 135, 215, 228

Anaximander
andesite

Andrae,

W.

207
jy-8
89, 15 of.

angel
153^ 187
animals: bases 77, 86f.; in combat 43^., 169^;
hybrid 97; sculpture 69; animal-men in;
cf.

friezes,

species

248

67, 136; inscription 53; kings 113,

135, 148; palace 104; pottery 212; prince
75; relief 56, 59, 138; sculpture 127, 212,

219; style 3J-6, 56, J7-8, 63, 91, 102, 121;

stylization 192;
art,

influenced by Babylonian 53, 59; by

by Syrians 1 5 6f. ; influence on
5 3

Hittites

Anatolia 119; on n. Syria 119; Aramaeanization //, 60-1, 65, 6j, 94, 98, III,
s.

81, 105, ///, i66ff., 176, 181, 183

alphabet
Alscher, L.

66

6if.,

79, 86, 95 f.
162, 166

Alexander the Great 52; Sarcophagus 43

Alkim, B.

Aphrodite 144, 166, 188; cf. Mylitta

Apollo 191, 202, 2 jo; Philesios 188
Apollodoros of Damascus
28
Apollodoros of Greece
165
Arabs 17, 45; Arabian desert 53, 80
Aramaean: architecture 53, 66, 104; art 53-66,
155 artists 60, 62; cities 224; costume 132,

165

165

F.

116, 129

Anu

220

27, 49, i9 2

Alaca

62, 6j y 121

anklet

192; elements 67, 137; funerary stelae 54,

56; head-dress 136; hair style 127, 132,
138; Hittite art 38, 105; Hittite sculpture

i8y 20, 23-4, 26, 33-4, 101

alabaster

Ankara

stylization and under individual

1 21-2, 123, 127, 128, 130, 137, 137, i8of.,

183, 192;

Aramaeans

80, 102, 108, 127, 135, 141, 143, 192

Araras
59, no, i2if.,
Arcadia
Archaic: smile 214, 223; style
early Archaic 223

i24fT., 124-j,

19,

Argos

28ft".,

209

175
65, 222;
190, 193

212

Aristophanes: Clouds

armour

219
Arslan-Tas
39, 40, 47, 83, 85, 144, 147^, IJ9
Artemis 188, 202f., 210; Orthia 196
J 76, 177, 178-9, 181, 223, 241

aryballos

Ashkelon

188

Asitawata, King
Assur (god)
Assur(city) 30, 41, 47,
i

136, 139, 141, 158

88f., 96,

46
14 j, 150, ///,

55 f.

King 17, 19, 22, 23, 26, 27, 29, 34,

3$, 39, 4iff., 47, 49^-, 7, 86, 88, 93, 227

Assurbanipal,

3h

125^

Assurdan in
Assurnasirpal
Assurnasirpal

28f.

3, 28f., 3of., 33, 47, 98, ioof.,

225
Assyria, Assyrian 174, 181; animals 126; architecture 46f., 75, 79, 90; art 32, 38, 40, 42-3,
45, 53, 59, 6 5, 94, 101,

no,

112, 148, 169,

187, 221, 238; artists 43, 144; caryatid 234;

chariot 107; costume 115, 135; hair style

99; head-dress 32, 137; helmet 190, 192-3;

history 32, 49, 67, 1251".; kings 44, 73, 78,
125, 169; krater 201; language 113; lion

Baltimore, Walters Art Gallery

159, 174
banqueting scene
135, 141, 204
Barberini Tomb 60, 185, 211; cauldron from
60, 181, 185; ivory from 2 1
Ba'ririm
102
y

M.

183; palace 47;

relief 46, 85f., 93, 122, 124^, 12J, 190, 200,
228; sculpture 41, 43, 46, 54, 61, 79, no,

Barnard,

180; scribe 39; script 113; stylization 31,

32, 37, 42; transitional style 32, 38f., 401".,

Barrakab 3J, 55^ 62, 71, 73,

Barrekub: cf. Barrakab

59, 97, 109;

,
Classical 30, 97, 109;

basalt 3J-6, J4, 63, 6j, 69, 71, 79, 82, %$., 89^,
91-2, 97-8, ii3f., 128, 134, 139-40, 142
battle scene
34, 45^, 166, i88f., 203

type

4;,

Neoart,

180,

150,

87,

Middle

187;

27f.,

16-48, 94, 100, 115;

influence upon Aramaean

and

art

upon Babylonian art

50; upon Hittites 27; upon Iranian art 27;
upon Scythian art 27; upon Syro-Phoenicians 27; upon Urartians 27
script 61, 63-4, 113;

Assyrianization
Assyrians

94, 98, 122, 150

49, 75, 87, 93,

no,

Atarluhas

io6f.,

Athena

49
109
188

Athens: Acropolis 28, 144; Agora 200; Dipylon

172, i73f., 197, 204, 206; Erechtheion 28;

Kerameikos

118,

i48f.,

150,

149,

1J2-3,

National Museum 175, 192,

Piraeus 200; Athenians 168;

i63f\, 200, 200;

202,

238;

Athenian sculpture 174

Attic:

amphora 166; funerary

attributes

56, 122, 135

175, 192, 211

Auxerre

218

axe

Baal
Babel, tower of

Babylon
51,

41, 49tT., 76, 144, 147, 207; Ishtar

Museum

5 1,

87, 101, 215, 217^, 220, 233

Pergamon Altar

43

Bes

136, 138

Bielefeld, E.

188
bird 90, 97, 131, 138, 150, i59f., 183, 188, 193,
194-j; cf. under individual species
bird-men
62
Bissing, Freiherr von
1 24
bit appati

175
177, 180, 187, 202

black-figure style

boar
Boeotia

198
169

Bogazkoy 86; Temple

boomerang

231;

11

Temple v 231
95, in
126, 135

Bossert, Th.

boundary stone
bow and arrow
bowl 56, 60, 114, H7f.,

of., 70,

171, 187
27,

46

136, 138, 141, 143, 148ft".,

149, 1 jo, 1J2-3, 163, 196, 216, 2i8f.
bracelet
131, 212

mud brick 47, 51

Museum 3of., 41, 50, 90,

British

Gate

47

Biton

brick 47, 83;

99, 157, 159,

183, i86f., i94f., 207, 2i6ff., 230

Brommer,

76

187;

53, 59; models 41; seal 50;

late Babylonian architecture

Neo-Babylonian

Baghdad Museum
Balawat

190, 192, 215, 223

Berlin

51

on Aramaeans
51;

belt 99, 102, 121, I2f, 125, 129, 131, 135, 138,

55

Babylonia, Babylonians 32, 53, 56; art 49-52;

boundary stone 50, 171, 187; costume 122;
deities 166; influence on Assyrians 51;
textiles

ijj, 156, 198, 204, 211, 221, 221

bear dance
138
beard style 32, 40, 55, 96, 107, 127, 129, 192^
Beisan
148
Bel-akhe-irba
50

bit bilani: cf. hilani

GeoAl Mina

stelae 132;

metric style i/6, 197; influence at

168; ivories 173; kourai 176; krater 176;
statuette 173; vase 194;
Early: cauldron 200, 201 krater 777, 194,
200; style 180; vase-painter 200; Atticizing
phase 168
Attica
168, 170, 173
,

86, 132, 135, 138

Bayrakli

125, 127

astronomy

212

Barnett, R. D. 86, 114, 135, 156^, 185, 194, 217;

Assyrian Palace Reliefs 93

50, 70, 99

144, 159, 214

3 of.,

226

188
F.
bronze: basin 201, 202, 241 belt 215 bowl 60,
I48f., 149, 150, 1 6 3 f cauldron 60, 90, 122,
;

155, 164, 193, 194-J, 20of., 241 on column

87; furniture 221; gate 226; group i7of.,
1 71; head-piece of cauldron 98; helmet 190;
lion 167, 176, 181; mirror 21 j, 218; plate
;

187, 198, 217, 217; protome 68, 181 relief

30, 220; ring 83; statuette 189, 190, 192,
;

240

196, 219, 2 4; tripod leg 191; cf. Luristan,

coins

repousse

columna caelata
column 71, 73, 78ft".,

60

Brown, L.
Bucchero oinochoe

199

bull 19, 21, 46, 78, 95;

head 147, 159, 217

Burdur

220, 244

Buschor, E.

170

Byzantium
(^ambel,

H.

camel

45

156
183, 20}, 204, 21/
60

Canciani, F.
(^andarli

Capena
Carchemish 67; base

<?/,

83,

<*V,

85, 87; capital

89, 96, 98; chariot 109, 116, 203; costume

50, in; footwear 59; griffin head 62, 112;

head-dress 96; history

Hittite style at

no; middle Neo-

108, 113,

135, 138;
mythological scene 97, ///; portal lion 103,
106; pottery 118; relief 93, 101, 118, 121,
127,

124, 125^, 209; sculptors 122; statuette 81

Cassius, Mt.

idtf.

casting technique

185

Caucasus 196, 199, 219; Caucasian-Iranian art

centres 219
cauldron 38, 60, 90, 96 98, 122; attachments 59,
116, 155, 164, 187, 193; decoration of 64,
1 9 4- j ; deinos type 118; foot cauldron 2oof.,
200; with ring handle 200, 241; cf. Barbe',

rini

cedar

wood

47, 78f., 87

cella

47
240

Celtic art

Centaur

45, 1695"., 187, 223

Ceyhan valley
chamber tomb

141

71
chariot 28, 31, 381*., 4if.s 62, 65, 95, 97, 99^
101, 107, 109, 110-3, 115, 150, 203, 209,
225 ; cf. war chariot

Chertomlyk

21

Chicago, Oriental Institute

93
chimaera
ii2 y 1 5 9f., 181, 18 j(., 223, 231
Chiot cup
183, 203
chiton

126, 192, 211, 2i4f., 223

chittu

78
165

Cilicia

Cimmerian
citadel: Lake Van 163;

21
cf.

',

39^

42, 44,

clay: statuette 173; tablet 166; vessel 149,

Cleis

250

83, 87ff., 90, 93, 96, 106,

143; base 53, 66, 69, 71, 75, 77, 80, 83ff.,
8 4- j, 86f., 86-7, 89, 89, 93, 94, 96, 22 if.,
222; capital 53, 66, 80, 86, 88f., 93f., 96,
98-9, 143, 227, 221

conceptual art
Cook, R. M.

i6f., 22, 25, 28,

200
212

98

127

202, 217

Copenhagen, Danish National

copper

Museum

157

78
Corinth, Corinthian 169, 173, 177, i8of., 194,
208, 241
17, 50, 55^, 59, 62, 95, 99, 102, in,
113, 115, 122, 127, 129, i3if., 1 35f., 138,
i43> 150, 154, 158, 192, 203, 211, 2i9f.,

costume

228, 243
court art
Crete
69, 80, 99, 148, 168,
cross-hatching

crown

155,

25, 29, 41,

173*?., 187,

Neo-Babylonian feather
Egyptian 143

50,

cuirass
cult 144;
stele

image

188, 212;

99;

Upper

219, 243
47; scene 135;

room

132

cuneiform writing
cup
Cyclades:

54

211

112
if 6, 159, 174; double 148, 150;

amphora

49, 147

183, 203

202, 210, 211

art centre 169;

oinochoe 182, 183, 184-j, 198, 207; Orientalizing style 170, 202, 220; Phrygian style,
influence of 215, 217; skyphoi 162; vasepainting i94f., 219
Cyprus: bowl 118, 143, 149; cult of Aphrodite
144, 147, 188; Cypro-Egyptian bowl 218
Cyrus
5 2
188
Cythera

Daedalic

173^-, 2I 4> 2 3 8

Damascus

148
118, 211, 223, 241

deinos

deities 39, 47, 78, 82, 92, 93, 94, 95, 97, 100,

in, 113, ii4ff., 127, 129^,

132, 135, 138, 141, 147, i59> l6 5> 171, 174,
176, 188, 190, 204, 208, 211, 223; cf. under
102, 107, 109,

individual deities

202, 210
Delos
Delphi 185, 191, 193; Siphnian Treasury 43

188

Demeter

Zincirli

Classical style 19, 25, 28, 30, 37^,

65, 100, io9f., 115, 227

colonnette

219

147
222

demon
Dermech
Dermys
Desborough, V.
Dessenne, A.

39, 47,

in,

ii5f., 183, 185

127
206, 2o8f.
162, 167

138, 187

diadem

238
188

Didyma

166, 170

diorite

Dipylon:

cf.

Athens

Dirlmeier, F.

189

dragon
Dreros

51, 95, i65f.

176, 238

drinking scene 135; vessel 42

cf.

skyphos

Dunbabin, T. G.

flowers

53,148

147; architecture 47, 78;

capital 88, 90, 96; column-base 83, 84, 85,
87, 230; ivory carving 148; relief 20 , 40,
39,

88, 93, 221

39, 211

flute

138, 153, 158

footwear 98, 122; cf. sandals

"Fort of Sargon": cf. Dur-Sharrukin
fortifications

Frankfort, H.

69

217, 217, 240

Fugmann, E.

105
funerary: feast 36; gifts 117; stele 54, 56, 120-1,
123, 127, 128, i29f., 132, 135, 137, 206,
208f.

85^, 89, 146, 147, 156, 221

furniture

Diiver

102

of.,

27, 43,

Friedrich, J.
126
frieze 19; animal-frieze style i94f., 196, 198-9,

173

Dupont-Sommer, A.
Dur-Sharrukin

220, 244

Gabar Sam'al

Ea

50
62, 105, 208

eagle

Eannatum

27
118, 119, 127, 215
188
208

ear-ring

Ecbatana

Eckhard

Egypt, Egyptian 80, 207; bowl 136, 138; crown

67
166

Gaia
Gargaros

209

gate sculpture

94, 133

Gaziantep
Gelb, I. J.

67, 127

no

genii 47, 50, 56, j8, 59, 65, 99, 115, 136, 143
Geometric 149, 164, 1690"., 173, 176, 190, 202,

influence

214; Early 163; Late 174, 204; Protogeometric 162; sub-Geometric 204, 211,
214
166
Giants

on

Gilbert, P.

143, 148, 150, 154; hair style 149; hiero-

glyphs 144; influence on Aramaean art 56,

136; influence on Assyrian art 43, 46;

on Greek art 169, 176; influence

Neo-Hittite art 209; influence on
Phoenician art 209; plinth 83; sculpture
176, 238; Egyptianizing style 143^, i47f.,
238

Elam

34, 45 f.

Eleutherna

175

emblem

95, 97, 101, 104

embossing
enamel

238
76, 119
166
135, 212, 213, 2i4f., 222, 222
i65f., 209

Enlil

Ephesos
epic

Erechtheion:
Erythrai
Esagila

cf.

Athens
148

176

Gilgamesh

47, 125, 189,

234

143, 149, 218

Gjerstad, E.
glass

143
118, 122, 125, 126, 188

goat
gold 99,

ii7f., 17 J ; band 176; crown ij6, 159,

plate 168;
174; jewellery 131, 1 7 5 f
plaquette 119, 169^; smith 62, 118, 155
.

Goldman, H.
189
Gordion 118, 135, 1 59f., 164, 193, 201, 202, 215,
241 Tumulus in 20of.
Gorgon's head
187, 21 8f., 220, 223
220
Gortyna
Greece, Greek 162-224; Archaic 16, 88, 208;
;

Etruria 59^, 67, 68,

197, 200; Etruscan art 105, 185, i96f.

architecture 47, 93; art 44f., 105, 137, 141,

166, 187^, 193, 202f., 207, 223; artists 169,
i92f.; battle motif 188; ceramics 149, 167;
cities 49, 207, 223; colonies i66f., 181, 207;

Euphrates

43, 51

deities

excavations 30, 51, 75, 87, 105, 117, 144, 148,

griffin

Esarhaddon

41, 43, 50, 75, 126, 148

148, 185, 190, 193, 193,

181, 200, 204, 211, 220

faience

69, 143

fan

39,

Feisal Seirafi
fibula
Firatli,

42
105

56, 127, 135, 215

N.

215

188; drama 223; gold band 176;

type 1830"., 186; hair style 175 hero
;

189; lion 183; lyre 204; mythology i87fT.

painters 25, 180; phiale 218; plinth 83;
relief 211, 220; religion 187; ring-handle
201, 241 sanctuary 169; sculptors ::<;, tli;
sculpture 169, 173ft"., 176, 192, 238; stoa 73;
terracotta 220; trade 164, 168; tripod I97f.,
;

201

vase 204;

251

art,

1-/GS.

Egypt 176; Hittites

192m; Luristan 1931"., 203;

influence on, of
;

Iran

Near East 163^,

169^"., i74f. ; Syria 237;

Urartian sphere 192^;
, East I70,
207, 21 J, 2l6ff., 21 J, 21 9, 220,
220; vase-painting 169, 197, 201, 204, 2i9f.

Athens, Attica, Ionia, Rhodes and other

Greek islands etc.
Greifenhagen, A.
215m, 218
griffin 143, 148, 223; attachments 193; bronzes
i69f.; demon 102-3, JI2 J ^3>' nea ^ 61, 6j,
105, 112, 186; man 102, 107; mirror 216,
218; oinochoe 182, 183, 184-j, 186, 198;
cf.

>

plaquette 169; protome 68, 101,

vase-painting i69f.

Gula,

in,

Queen

Giiltekin,

Herodotus

Hesiod

H.

in,

165, 189^, 234

173

240
69, 95, 124^, 135, 141, 144
208, 212

high priest

28

hilani 46f., 53, 66, 71, 71, 73, 75, 78, 83, 8j, 87,
90, 94, in, ii4f., 1 17m, 122, 143

Hittite: architecture 47, 80; art 53, 65, 105, 170,

190; belt 131; centres 67; deities 141;

hieroglyphs 131; history 162; influence on

Aramaeans 53, 55; lion type 150, 177, i8of.,

183; mythology 166, 170; palace 47; reliefs

135; sculpture 54, 60, 62, io2f., 104, 148,
180; texts 135, 208; late Hittite 53, 80, 83,
113; Hittites 27, 135, 162, 169, 202, 208;
cf. Neo-Hittite(s)

no

107^.,

107,

165, 170, 188; Theogony 166, 223

hieroglyphs
hieros gamos

50
148

Giiterbock, H. G.

144, 147, 188

hero
herring-bone design
Herrmann, H.-V.

gypsum

234

Hadad

135

Homer

Hafner, G.
Hagiorgitika

176

horse: blanket 65; ears 62, 105, 183; mane 107;

monster 171; sculpture 44f., 172^; trap-

Homann-Wedeking, E.

175
102,

138, 143, 149^, 155, 169,

212, 214,

173E, 187,

192*".,

215m, 223, 227, 234, 237;

cf.

stylization

Hama

84, 105, 114, 157, 168

Hammurabi
Hampe, R.

49
174, 193, 200

Hanging Gardens
hare
Hattian
Hattusa

griffin

67, 69, 79, 86, 95^, 107,

Hermes
252

Hydra

166, i88f.

Hyperboreans

202

217;

Ida,

122

Idalion
Illuyanka

1 86,

101
i47f.

demon 1 8 5 f
\%~ii.\ human

double

i/8,

159,

772, 159, 196, 198, 21 j, 216, 218, 219

209f.

ibex

Mt.
Idaean Cave

Imgur

Enlil: cf.

99
ijo
95, 165^

i48ff.,

Balawat

190;

Indo-Europeans

208

187,

inlay

77^>

inscription 27, 46f., 5 of., 55, 62, 71, 73, 84,

102, no, 114, 1 3 5 f , 141, 223
.

Iolaus

211
188, 202, 20J-6, 2o8ff.
188, i88f., 191

165

189

Ionia, Ionian 197, 207, 209, 215: architecture 52,

221; architect 94; art 216; artist 214;

column 93, 221; columnbase 83, 222; ivory carving 148; order 86;
Orientalizing style 207; sculpture 127, 219;
smile 215
Iran 27, 160, 192, 241; art 52, 192, 194, 197;
metalwork 241; mirror 217; cf. Ecbatana
Ishtar 46, 188; cf. Babylon
Isopata
7l
capital 93, 221;

190, 212, 220; cf. polos

Herakles

118
hunting: chariot 107; scene 23, 27, 29, 44, iij,
150
Hurrian 67, 166; Hurrian-Hittite 78, 223

in

"Heavenly Kingdom"
165
Helen
202, 204, 208, 242
helmet 39, 113, 137, 190, 192, 192-3, 223, 240

Hera

head-dress, stylization

208

204; lion 40, 61, 65, ///, in, 147, 160,

176, 180, 183; cf. Gorgon
head-dress: of animal-men in; of genii 143;
of gods 1 3 5 ; of horses 32, 39, 42, 101, 109,
112; of human figures 32, 53, 56, i36f.,

Hephaistos

cf.

Hrouda, B.

138, 141

Havuzkoy
Haya, King
Hazael, King
bull

173, 238

Iliad 168, 209fT.

of.

Hattusili: cf. Qatazilu

head:

pings 159, 196; on vase 194, 198-9, 203;

40m, 50, 53, 55 f., 59, 981".,

107, ii3f., 116, i2if., 125, 127, 129, 132,

hair style 17, 32,

165

Istanbul, Archaeological

Museum

3 of.,

40, 48,

129
Italy

ivory:

box

99, 147, IJ4, 7/7,

1 5

7f

129
carver 174;

furniture 86, 89; head 105, 127, i/8, 159,

176, 180; pinax 211; plaque 143, 147, IJ9,
159, 227, 231 ; relief 50, in, 122, 150, 219;
statuette 81, 105,

Ivriz

in,

206,

181, 183, 196,

vessel 200

135, 155, 772, 173,

212, 213, 215, 220;

Museum

Krischen, F.

214

187

Jenkins, R. J. H.
jewellery 56, 131, 212;

174
cf.

bracelet, ear-ring

166, 21 of.

K.

Kiibler,

Jordan

59

Jupiter Dolichenus

208

M.

i29f., 13 if.

1 3 5

Kumarbi

166

Kunze, E.

127

Kuyunjik:

Lamassu

47, IJ4, 1 j 8, 227;

vessel 118, 150, 200

89,

tridacna shell

kalmusb

Kanachos
Kantor, H.
Kapara

28, 67, 69, 73, 125

39

1 5 5

kotyle-pyxis
kouros

on orthostat 97f., 112, 114, nj;

on portal 60-1, 63, 100, 103^,
106; protome 64, 176, 181, 183, 1 8 5 f

pillar 231

105,

relief 27, 51, 103^, 108, 109, zz^

revetment

199; slayer of 56, 62f., 227; stylization 31,

37f., 105; vase-painting 169^, 176, 177,
777, 180, 180, 199; winged in, 114, 116
literature 49, 223; cf. epic and under individual
writers

217
81-2, io6fF., 109*?., 113, 125

Kelermes Treasure
Khadatu: cf. Arslan-Ta
Khattena
Khorsabad: cf. Dur-Sharrukin
Kilamuwa, King
J4, 54f.,
Kittylos

227; hunting scene

106, 108;

on

127

Kardara, C.

Kleobis
Korikian Cave

43f., 188, 188,

*9, ii, 56, 59 f-> 62 > 9i, 99; iv o f y 181, 183,

196; on Luristan bronze 194; paired lions

136

220

combat

234
citadel 141

95
78, 80, 87

59, 88, 96, 113, 175, 206

lion 4 j, 54, 62, 122, 148, 150, 7^7; attachment
293; base 75, 81, 87, 96, 107, no; in

orthostats 79,
118, 134, 139-40, 190; reliefs 122, 134, 136,
139-40, 190, 201, 204, 211; sculpture 65,
;

i73f., 221

libation 153; scene 82, 95

148, 156, 187, 189^

1 17ft".,

126
209

leather

188
114,

188

Landsberger, B.
Laroche, E.
Lattimore, R.
leaf design

95
121, 124, 125

Kamanas

211
39 f-> 42, 47, 227

limestone

kilt

Nineveh

figures

T 57> 173^-, 176, 185; Ninurta Temple

30; North-west Palace 30, 47; palaces 27;
relief^, 203; South-west Palace 18, 19, 39,

86,

7 /7>

Katuwas
Kazbek

cf.

Labarna: cf. Lubarna

Laconia
Lade, battle of

Lebanon
Levi, D.

135ft".; stele

171, 190, 193, 238; Archaische Schild-

b cinder 187

117;
Central Palace 32, 47; citadel 30; excavations 117; ivories 90, 122, 127, 143^, 7/7,

Kalkhu: architecture 47; base

art 143

i49f., 163

Kiiltepe

lance

168

Johansen, F.

Karabel
Karatepe 67;

50

Kronos

148

Jantzen, H.

Kalac,

krater 168, 177, 200-1, 208, 211, zz*,; foot krater

200, 223

Kupaba

67, 130, 135, 138, 2i4f.,

Izmir. 234;

8;

196, 199, 219

21 8, 219

lotus

150,

175
165
/ 80
176, 238

2oof., 201-2, 211,

217

in
67
1
1

9 3 ff. ,

i96f.,

198, 203, 219,

24of.

67

95, 135
20 , 2o8f.

3f.,

Lubarna, King
Luhuti
Luristan 50, 105,

71, 10 if., io4f.

1 5

Loud, G.

Luschan, F. von
Luschey, H.
Luvian, Luvians

73, 84, 131

218
54, 69; Luvian-Hittite 54, 67,

80, 94, 102, 141

Lydia
lyre

204
135, 138, 141, 153, 204, 211

Macmillan aryballos:

cf.

Protocorinthian

253

Mainz, Schonborner Hof

Malatya 67; genii 50, 99; lion-hunting

200
relief 99;

mythology 101, 166, 189; Neo-Hittite

portal animals 87, 106, 112; orthostats 79,
82, 95f., 98, 165; sculpture 56, 59, 105, 107
Mallowan, M. E. L.

47, 117, 144, 148, 158

Mannaean
Maras

16 8, 196, 219

65, 67, 116, 120-1, 123, 127, 128, 1311*.,

70

Marduk

5 if.

41, 49,

50,70

II

mask

127

Matthiae, P.

67,

Matz, F.
Maxwell-Hyslop, K. R.

173, 187

135^

197, 207
i73f.

meander
Media, Median
megaron

217, 21

Megiddo
Melgunov Treasure

187, 189^, 223; cf. Illuyanka

21

Nabu

49f.

Nabupolassar

8
',

Naumann, R.

Naumburg
Naxos

83;

126

67
cf.

Muttali

162, 175, 229

254

22, 67, 69, 71, 80, 83, 143,

column-base 83 costume 99;

;

stylization

vessel

117;

118;

Neo-

art, influence on, of Assyria 97f., ii9f.;

of Phoenicia 93, 113, 117, 137, 141; of

Syria 122; influence of,

on Etruria 67; on

Greece 67; on Tell Halaf inf.;

, early 81-2, 94f., 96f., 99, 103, 106, 107^,
10 8, inf., 118, i8of., 203; middle 62,
8 1-2, 92, 94f., 96, io6ff., 108-9, 1 1 off., no,

112-3, 114,

nj-6, 117,

i2if.,

i24f.,

127,

129, 135, 138, i8of., 183, 188, 190, 192;

late 64, 68, 86, 91, 92, 94, 177, i8of., 185,

187,

190,

193,

202,

Aramaeanization
Nergal
New York, Metropolitan

209,

212,

Museum

221;

cf.

44, 49
118, i7off.,

192
46

Nile

Nimrud:
;

67-142, 208; bronzes 192;

cauldron 88; cities 69;

Hittites 69, 87, 93;

2 oof.

102
musical scene
138, 223; cf.

93;

167,

Nikandre

phorminx, tambourine

Mycenae, Mycenaean

87ft".;

106
27, 32, 97, 114, 118
54,

Muski
Muttali
Muwatalli:

column

i65f., i7of.

musician 73, 106, 136, 153, 1 5 yf.

134, 141; instrument 135,
flute, lyre,

89,

66fF., 71, 78, 85ff., 89,

orthostat 79, 113; principalities 79,

169; reliefs 56, 175, 180, 192;
sculpture 94, io6ff., inf., 156, 183; sites

Syria 69

brick

76
188

capital

96,

Minotaur

cf.

of.,

lion

lion 61

Midas, King
126, 164
Miletos 169; Milesians 207
Minoan, Minoans 22, 67, 229; architecture 71,
83; art 80, 83; language 83; influence on

brick:

craftsmen 90, 93; griffin head 105; hair

style 98f., 116; hilani 69ft".; ivories 90;

175

Mushkabim

50

II

95f., 22if.; art

217, 241

monster

221
I

Neo-Hittite: architecture

219

188, 189
mirror
21 j, 2i6ff., 218
"Mistress of the Beasts" 188, 203, 220; "of the
Horses" 188
Mitannian
67, 71, 95, 97
"Mona Lisa" head
144, 146, 159, 214
monkey
136, 138

208

Naxians 176

176, 196;

Nemean

202m, 207,
Menelaus
202,
merchant
207,
Mesopotamia
52, 56, 69, 79,
metal: band 42, 95; belt 99, 135; vessel 143,
200; metalwork 187, 195, 202, 214, 215,

metope

69, 75, 90

Cathedral

Neandria
Nebuchadnezzar
Nebuchadnezzar

221
220
204
223
189

Melos, Melian

mud

50
27
27

Naramsin

in, 231

Moortgat, A.

97, io6ff., ///, 153, 165^, 170, 172,

Mytilene

75

moon god

147

mythology

narrative art

135, 'i7> 203, 208

marble

Mardukapaliddina

Mylitta

cf.

Kalkhu

47f., 78; AssurbanipaFs

Palace $j, 88, 93; column-base 87; North
Palace 23-4, 29, 4^., 47; reliefs 22-3, 26,
27, 29; Sennacherib's Palace 85; South-

Nineveh: architecture

west Palace 19, 34, 41, 43, 47

Ninua: cf. Nineveh
Ninurta
Ninurta Temple: cf. Kalkhu
Niqmepa, Palace of: cf. Tell Atchana

49

7
2
1,

Nisyros
notching

203; bowl 114, 117, 136, 149, 149^, ij2;

83, 90, 93, 99; cities 80, 224;
furniture 156; inscription 136; ivory 117,
148, 155, 1 j 9, i72ff., 219; mask 127; relief
203; sculpture 215, 219; trade 167; vase
220; workshop 162; Phoenicians 93, 163,

199

capital

Nuoffer, O.

65

Nusku

27

obelisk 28f., 38; Black Obelisk 3of., 99

Oedipus, King

Oelmann,

i89f.

229

F.

offering scene

129, 141

i73f., 209, 211

Ohly, D.
oinochoe 182, 183, 184-j, 186, 197-8, 199, 204,
207, 217

Okeanos
Old Smyrna:
Olympia:

2091".
cf.

Bayrakli

bowl

art centre 169;

192;

cauldron

88,

90,

118, 150;
98,

193,

bronze
194-j;

cuirass 219, 219, 243; griffin head 186, 187;

lion protome 64, 176, i8of. ; relief 22of.
statuette 189, 190, 240; tripod 191

onager

165;

Egypt 136, 144, 148;

on Neo-Hittite art 84, 93, 97,
99, 113, 117, 137, 141; on northern Syria
79, i27f. on southern Anatolia 79, i27f.
phorminx
197, 204
;

Phrygian: belt 215; cauldron 118, 122, 241;

fibula 56, 127, 135; frieze plaque 195;
metalwork 215; ornaments 201, 214;
painting 217; pitcher 118, 141; sculpture
138; influence of, on Iran 215
pinax
211
Pindar
165, 170

23-4
Orientalizing style 170, 173, 190, 197, 202, 207,
214, 217, 219

Piraeus:

Orontes

pitcher

165

Orthmann, W.
Ouranos
ox

104, 109

Oxus Treasure

219

59,

150,

Panammu: cf. Panamuwa

Panamuwa, King
Paris (god)

84, 89f., 93,

180,

217,

105,

219;

cf.

39, 41, 13 if., 147, 175,

217
Parrot, A.
Patnos
Payne, H.

148

167
177, 180
198, 219

Pazarli

Pegasos

Pergamon

187, 187, 223

Altar:

perspective
Pettinato,

phiale

G.

cf.

38f.,

141
2

143, 148, 157, 159

195, 219, 227, 231;

69, ///, 1596,

plaquette ii7f., 119, 143^, 147^, 1/9, i6g(.
plate 199, 218, 220; bronze 19 8, 215, 217, 217;

gold 168
polos

173^
178
216

114, 127, 157, 159,

Polychrome
Pontus

style

Porada, E.

160
1

pottery 25, 118, 170, 174, 21 2;

cf.

aryballos, cup,

drinking vessel, Geometric, krater,

oinochoe, pitcher, Protocorinthian, skjp/jos,

deinos,

vase, vessel
55, 73, 135

202, 208, 242

Louvre Museum

122,

Pittacus

plaque

stylization

Paris,

^andarli

cf.

portraiture

palm, palmette 37, 55^,

147,

Pitane:

141

188

118,

Katuwas

plant motif

Palestrina: cf. Praeneste

ii3f.,

Athens

cf.

Pisiris: cf.

166

painter 16, 25; painting 39; cf. vase-painting

palace 39, 461"., 5 if., 54, 69, 75, 78f., 87, 148,
169; cf. Kalkhu, Nineveh, Tell Atchana,
Til Barsib
Palestine

influence on, of

art,

influence of,

Berlin
2 if., 37,

46

156
218

philosopher
49
Phoenicia 136, 148, 155, 163, 188, 211; Phoenician alphabet 49, 166, 223; art 143-160,

135, 154, 212

38, 60, 68, 13 8, 181, 2oof.

Poulsen, F.
Praeneste

Priam

209

priest 42, 49, 214, 223; priestess 82,

Prinias

135, 213
2

prince 28, 46, 125, 141; princess 36, 56, 127,

132, 141,

i 5

7f.

procession relief
Protocorinthian 167, 176, 178-81, 180, 187,
200

protome
psaltery

pyxis

Qatazilu
quiver

64, 67, 68, 176, i8of.,

106
1

93f

200, 238
1 s

8f.

212
67
3*

Rakkab-El
Ras Shamra

73
71, 135, 162

relief 17, 27, 29, 40, 441"., 47, 51, 67, 89, 97, 132,

208, 211; Alaca 96; Arslan-Tas

syrian

85f.,

50,

Carchemish

io6ff.,

225;

190,

in,

Sardis

1 5 8f. ; history no; lion 41, 4/, 51, 53, 61,

62, 114; palace 41, 47, 148; relief 20, 44,
233; sculpture 115, 124, 147, 174; styliza-

39; As-

Balawat

31;

113, 118, 121, 124,

Dur-Sharrukin 20,
42, 88; Gortyna 220; Hattusa 96;

tion 38, 42;

J2j, i25f\; Delphi 43;

27, 39,

214; Kalkhu 18, 27, 321"., 39,

203, 227; Karabel 234; Karatepe 118, 122,
1 3 5f., 140, 190, 201, 204, 211; Malatya 951*.,

Ivriz

135,

Nineveh 21-4, 26, 27, ?-/,

88; Olympia 192; Sakcegozii

99;
46,

115, 122, 126, 185,

61, 6j, pi,

41,

431".,

56, J 7-8,

192, 233,
115 ; Tell

240; Tell Atchana 69; Tell Halaf

Tainat 88, 93, 98; Til Barsib 107; Zincirli
J4, 5 5f\, io2ff., 104, 122, 192, 228
49, 165, 190, 223

religion

Renaissance, European
repousse technique
revetment

129

212

Sargon II, Sargonid: caryatid 234; chariot 43;

costume 59; hair style 53, 99, 121, 125, 132,

cf.

Dur-Sharrukin

Sarruma

100, 124, 209

"Sasturis"

126

sceptre

122, 144

Schaeffer, C.

71, 162

H.
Schefold, K. 217, 221

17, 22

Schafer,

Myth and Legend

187,

190

W.

Schiering,

170
28

Schnitzler, L.

scribe 28, 39, 131, 223; cf.

sculptor

Nabu

16, 25, 27, 37, 40, 62, 101, 188

sculpture 41,

no,

190, 2ip, 220; Alaca 86, 95;

Riis, P. J.

105, 157

Athens 174, 206; Auxerre 175; Bogazkoy

86; Carchemish in; Ephesos 214; Hama
105 Hattusa 95 Ionian 127; Karatepe 137,
141; Kalkhu 215; Malatya 100; Sakcegozii
56; Samos 20 j, 207, 209, 211; Tell Halaf

rinceaux

153, 217

105,

i85f.

79, ipp, 244

148, 168, 170, 173, 175^, 176, ipp, 217,

Rhodes

21 8>

rites

rock

7^0,135,215

relief

28, 165, 208;

Column of Trajan

rosette

37, 56, 84, 109, 114, 159, 194, 203

II

Sakcegozii: art 66, 122, 143, i8of.

27, 218, 219, 221

Scythian
seal

50, 71

artist

61-3; relief 56, J7-8, 65,

I22 > I2 5, I2 6> *3 2 > *35>
138, 141, 183, 192, 200, 240
Sakjegeuzi: cf. Sakcegozii
cf.

177, 181, 183

Zincirli

head ///, 176, 180;

Shalmaneser II
Shalmaneser III
Shalmaneser IV

art

centre

of.

36, 141, 143

shield

169;

31, 47, 51
16, 30, 31, 51, 9 8f.

32

Shamshi-Adad

32,

204
113, 136

31, 39, 65, 109, 113, 188, 190, 197,

ship

188

Sicyon
silver 99;

Sammuramat: cf. Semiramis

Samos 202; architecture 73;

59>

60;

Salviat, F.

5 3ff->

Sennacherib: artists 19; belt 125; hair style 42;

palace 78, 85, 230; relief 21-2, 34, 41, 44,
46, 12 j ; stylization 38

H5 f

8 4, 91,

Semites, Semitic
Senjirli: cf. Zincirli

portal lion 60,

Sam'al:

115, 117, 136, 241; Zincirli 53,

cf. gate, relief

116

costume 50, 59; demon head 185; griffin

head 62, 6j; hair style 56; hilani 74, 75, 87;

*h

in,

Semiramis

28

Rusas

10 if., 105;

67, 95

Rome, Roman

bowl

196, 216, 218; coin 147; horse

trapping ip6
Siphnian Treasury:

cf.

Delphi

185; Heraion
20 j, 207fF.; ivory 173; plaquette 143, 148;
statue 135, 155, 215; wood carving 204,

skyphos

207fT.

snake

136, 170

"Song of Ullikummi"

165,166

Samsun
sanctuary
sandal
sandstone

griffin

196, 218
169, 188, 202, 20J, 212
59, 122, 126, 127, 129, 131, 138
90,

Sappho
sarcophagus:

256

zic).

p8

212
cf.

Alexander

78

Sirara

59, 154, 187, 22 3

siren

162

Sparta
spear

sphinx 148, 154,

174
44, 19
i59f., 169^, 187, 215;

base 73,

75, 87, 222; gate 129, i$$9 137; portal 54,

//, 56, 60, 86; relief 56, j8, 103, 136, 138;

two-headed
chimaera

96,

107;

winged

153;

222

spira

sporting scene

27

steatite

212

Steinherr, F.

125

of Adadnirari III 32; of princess 36; of

Shamshi-Adad
32; of vizier of Shalman-

stele:

IV

eser

32; inscription

on

47,

89;

of.,

victory stele 27; cf. cult, funerary

stone: capital 90; column 87; plinth 83;
basalt, limestone, marble

Strom,

cf.

Strommenger, E.

47
217; ankle 60;
arm-muscle 31, 32, 37, 40; beard 55, 127;
chin bone 160; flame-like 60, 114, ii7f.,
122, 150; forelegs 60, 62f., 122, 125, 228;

animal

stylization:

143,

157,

hair 55, 114, 121, 143, 154, 159, 173; heartshaped 60, 112, 118, 177, 194, 219, 240;

knee-cap 40, 42; leg-muscle 44, 219;

palmette-shaped 42, 6if., 75, 114, i8of.,
183; pearl-shaped 107, 114; S spiral 194,
i96f., 219; thigh 38, ;?<?,4if., 44, 51,60,118,
217; tine-shaped 226
Stymphalian birds
188
Sulumeli,

King

50, 82, 95

Suman

49
27
sun disk 56, 65, 95, in, 132, 136, 159; god 106
swastika
214, 214

Tabal-Hilakku

95f.,

102,

98,

107,

i\$i. 9

symbolism

27, 50, 55, 59, 67, 129

Syria, Syrian: art 143-60, 203^, 209, 211; artist

144; costume 211; crown ij6; furniture

221; goldsmith 118, ij6; hair style I74f7.;
ivory 50, 59, 65, 99, 116, 122, 127, 136,
148, 150, 156, 1 j 8, 160, 162, i72f., i74f.,

211, 215, 219;

metalwork 156; palace

39,

pottery 148; sculpture 169, 176;

47, 75
vase 220;
5

northern

46f., 53, 60, 67, 69, 77ff.,

85^,
i2 7 f., 135, 138,
143, 159^, 162, 167, 170, 181, 185, 200, 212;
art, influence on, of Babylonia 157; of
,

88ff.,

94, 105,

no, n8f.,

Tell

Tell

Atchana:

Syro-Mycenaean

style

95, 97

71

Syro-Phoenician art 112, n6f., 204; hair style

143 ivories 1 14, 203 motifs 136; ornament,
;

46

206
128, 131
27

Til Barsib

141, 150, 157, 241; stylization 117; templepalace 77; vessel 200; weapon 113
Tell Tainat: column-base yj, 83f., 8j, 87; hilani

8 j, 87; relief 88f., 93, 98

Tell Tainat

74, 75, 77, 83,

Tell Tayanat:

temple

cf.

46f., 87, 91,

in ant is

231; temple-palace 77, 84;

93

Terpander

141, 204

head 238; plaque 219;

revetment 198, 222

terracotta:

relief 220;

Tesup

166

Tethys

209

Te'umman, King

34, 45 f.
187, 214, 214

textiles

Thales

207

Thasos
Thebes
Theseus

177, 181, 219

46
188, 189

throne
thunderbolt

86, 93

95, 97
41, 5 5 f

tiara

Tiglath-Pileser in 73, no, 115, 169; Assyrian

influence under 98 chariot 65, 1 09 costume
;

233; hair style 40, 124; head-dress 192;

hilani 78; history 32; lion 37f., 75; lion's
head 40; palace 47; relief 18, 39, 192, 233;

67

i53> 158

105, no, 114

base 80; hilani 69; palace
sculpture 87; Palace of Niqmepa 69, 7/,
71, 80; Palace of Yarimlim 69, 71, 79
Tell Halaf 67; architecture 117; art 66, 143;
capital 90, 98; cauldron 118, 122; chariot
1 01, 203; costume 113; deities 92, 94, 127,
129; hair style 113, 116; hilani 74, 75^,
90, 94, 122; hunting scene 117; lion type
114; lyre 138; mythological scene 97;
orthostat 79, 101, ny; plaquette 117, 119;
sculpture 50, io4f., 11 iff., ii4f., 119, 136,

Minoan-Mycenaean art 69 influence of, on

Aramaean art 156; on Greek art 237; on
Ionian art 148
Syro-Hittite-Luvian civilization
Syro-Hittite motifs

166

Ahmar: cf.
Ain Dara

137;

117,

handle 217

169
125

tambourine
Tamritu
Tanagra
Tarhunpiya
Telephos frieze

Sumer

sword

143; principalities

114,

tablet

Tell

215

I.

architectural

cf.

stylization 30, 40, 75, 124, 227; warrior

type 39
Tigris
30, 53
Til Barsib: frescoes 39; history 67; palace
relief 107, ny, vessel 118, 200
tile

257

166

Titans

tomb

117, 148, 149, 164, 174, 206, 211, 221

Toprakkale
116, ij8, 183, 196, 197, 219

torque

Walter, H.
i
54 fM 187
warfare 17, 27; war chariot 18, 26, 39, 42, 104,
116, 226; warrior io6rT., 112, 122, i37f.,
189, 190, 203

131

torus

83,

841*., 88ff.,

93, 222

Warpalawas

130, 135, 212, 2i4f., 214

trade i62f., i67f., 170, 173, 192, 203, 207, 211,

Watzinger, C.

241
tridacna shell 59, 136, 14;, 149, 150, 153, ///,
155, 187, 219, 243
tripod
190, 191, 1971"., 201

weapon

Troy
Tubingen University

69, 83 ; import of 80; cf. cedar

Woolley, Sir L.

229

writing 49;
Wiilker, G.

241

Tukulti-Ninurta

in,

tunic 99,

Turkey:

cf.

Tuthaliya

27, 95

115, 122, 127, 129, 157, 192, 203

IV

170, 171

166

Unger, E.

28f., 50

Onye

196, 2i8f.

Urartu, Urartian: art 187, 216, 219; attachments

116, 155, 187, 190, 1921*., 193, 196; bronze
167, 193; cauldron 59, 116, 155, 164, 187,
190, 193, 197, 241; furniture 221, 222;

motifs 194, 199; plate 187; rock-cut tomb

163; stylization 38, 60; vessel 220, 241;

Toprakkale

Urballa

13

Urtaku
Uta

46
208

Van, Lake

163, 183

vase 171, 187, 193ft"., 220; vase-painter 200, 217;

vase-painting i68f., 170, 177, 180, i94f.,
197, 202f., 214, 2i9f., 242
vessel 149, 199, 200, 201, 241; boss vessel 2i8f.
vestibule
47, 75, 77
Vetulonia
59, 190, 193, 193
victory scene
107, 109

K.

154^.

Villard, F.

volute

votive gift

258

bow,

cf.

lance,

shield, spear

"Woman

at the

Window"

wood: carving 20 j,

cf.

144, ///, 204

zojff., 21 if.,

214; column

cuneiform, hieroglyphs
208

xoana

Yalouris,
34, 45

Ullikummi

Vierneisel,

190;

Ras Shamra

Ulai

cf.

138,

100, 124, 209, 234

1651".,

cf.

159
113,

Wurusemu

Anatolia

Typhon
Ugarit:

69
204

96,

85, 93,

217
219
169

N.

188

Yarimlim, Palace

of: cf. Tell

Atchana

Yazilikaya 78, 78, 95, 100, 104, 124, 202, 208

86
Young, R. S.
215

Yerkapi

Zeus

165^, 170, 171, 190, 202, 20J-6, 2o8ff.

ziggurat
Zincirli: architecture 66; base 83^,

157, 221; bathroom L 5 86;

belt 102; Building J 72, 77,

47, 51
8j-6, no,

beard 96;
102,

104;

77, 83, 8j, 85^, 93; cauldron

97; chariot ioof., 104, 112, 203; citadel 60,

Building

61, 62, 71, 72, 79, iooff., 102-3, I0 4> I0 $>'

colonnette 88, 90; costume 50, 96, 102;
Court R 84; funerary stele 36, 127, 132;
furniture 89; Gate Building
io4f., 109;
griffin 62, 101, 105; hair style 56, 96, 102;
head-dress 5 3 hilani 71,78; Hilani 175,77;
Hilani II //, 60, 73, 77; Hilani III 60, 60,
73, 74* 77. TI 5, 228; Hilani IV 73, 229;

Hittite motif 138; lion 60, 103, 105, 108-9,

no, 114, 180, 183; North Hall 228; relief

J 4, 54, 56, 59, I0 4, J o8, 135, 19 2 , 22 ;
sculpture 65, ioof., 122; stylization 6of.
Upper Palace
Ziwiye

74, 75

168, 196, 219, 227

JUL

THE LIBRARY
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA

22 70

San Francisco Medical Center

THIS BOOK

IS

DUE ON THE LAST DATE STAMPED BELOW

Books not returned on time are subject to fines according to the Library
Lending Code.
Books not in demand may be renewed if application is made before
expiration of loan period.

14

DAY

EiudKgfrEfK L D AN

s ^l4I97b CTl5197^AY
14

DAY

Re URN ED
.

OCT 2 9
SEP

1 5 197G

nE7ur<;;EL
2 4 1994

DA

(4

DEC

1 5

1970

day
-

5 7972

mo
6

muwm
MAR

2 9 1994

25m-10,'67(H5525s4)4128

611422

3 1378 00611

HISTORY
COLLECTION

4220