A New Decipherment of the
Hittite Hieroglyphics
By R. Campbell Thompson, Esq., M.A., F.S.A.
Communicated to the Society of Antiquaries
taaaa»3J*'"'"'
Oxford
Printed by Horace Hart for the Society of Antiquaries
1913
-d
on
THE LIBRARY
OF
THE UNIVERSITY
OF CALIFORNIA
LOS ANGELES
A New Decipherment of the
Hittite Hieroglyphics
By R. Campbell Thompson, Esq., M.A., F.S.A.
Communicated to the Society of Antiquaries
Oxford
Printed by Horace Hart for the Society of Antiquaries of London
1913
»
*
ARCHAEOLOGIA
VOL. LXIV
7>77r.
I- — A New DecipJierineut of tJie Hittite Hieroglyphs. By R. Cajipbell
Thompson, Esq., M.A., F.S.A.
Read 21st November, 1912.
§ I. I HAVE ventured to la}^ before scholars a new system of decipherment
of the Hittite hieroglyphic inscriptions, based on a study of those already
published, and those which were found during the season of 191 1, when I was
employed by the Trustees of the British Museum on the excavations at Car-
chemish. The Trustees have most kindly given me permission to quote from
these new texts of 191 1 as far as is necessary to prove my system of decipher-
ment and grammar, even to the names of the petty chiefs which occur in them,
and they have asked only that I shall refrain from discussing the historical
side of their inscriptions, so that their own priority of publication at a later
date be not anticipated. I wish therefore to thank them for a concession which
I fully appreciate.
The new texts of 191 1 from Carchemish do not differ outwardly to any
great extent from those already known and published, for no bilingual was
found. But a large and almost complete slab came to light inscribed with six
lines of about six hundred closely-written Hittite characters, which ultimately
formed the base of my decipherment, and after several months' wor^ on it
I came to the conclusion that theije were several kings' names concealed therein.
Such results as I have embodied in this article differ almost entirely from
previjous systems of decipherinent, and, omitting the ob\'ious ideograms, I can
agree only with a few of Professor Saycc's \-alucs ' out of his whole syllabary.
All credit is due to him for Q and £3 determinati^'e for-place-names : \^) det. for 'god':
""^Ijjiyf ^^0^ in his suggested'value, the god Tesup (I cannot agree with ' Sandes ') :
5: his brilliant identification of the cit3'-name spelt "^ [J □?□ Vt with Tyana
{PSBA., XXV, 1903, 179), although I differ slightly from him in his ultimate values, reading T{ay
n(a): L\ 'king', which Jensen held (ZQuVIG., 48, 1894, p. 302) (which I prefer to translate
n
VOL'. LXIV
1S47671
2 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
and with his translations hardly at all. But although I cannot often concur in
his methods of decipherment. 1 wish to acknowledge my indebtedness to all
'lord'): yf 'tree': perhaps ^, ^^ two numerals: ' ^>^JJJJy buuT. In '^;^^ 'k-' first. saw
the idea of making a treat}- {TSDA., vii, 1882, 276), wiiich he altered later to 'to love' (PSBA., xxv,
1903, 156) ; I believe that his former suggestion was nearer the truth, as I think it refers to the making of
blood brotherhood (§ 87). In the two forms of cFc> he found the idea of 'great' or 'lord '([ believe it to be
used as the plural of \^ 'great', 'chief'); but unhappily' his suggestion, made in 1882, tliat ^~~^
meant 'killing' or 'conquering' he changed to the incorrect one of 'power', a view whicli Rolands
(PSBA., xx\, 1899, 210) also held. cR maj' be, as he suggests, the ideogram for 'chief. In f?/)^'
translated from the earliest period of decipherment as ' I (am) ' or ' He sa^'s ', Professor Sa^xe, I
believe wrong!}', ultimately (like Jensen and others) inclined to the former. lie is nearly right,
I believe, ultimately in calling J zvn, na (properly ;///, rt'/), and correctly sees in it tlie mark of the
first person singular of the verb, althougli his example (which I read kal-nii ' 1 ', the cuneiform
kotliiiii, not a verb at all) is singularly unfortunate [PSBA., xxiii, 1901,95): he is nearly correct in
0h with is (I believe it is as) ; on what I believe are incorrect grounds he obtained correct values
for (&np lias and ^^ '"', and on unsatisfactory evidence ultimately called ffrnj ar (I believe it is ir
with a 'tang'). (See his articles PSZ?^., xxV; 1903 ; xxvii, 1905.)
Jensen, although we need not much concern ourselves with his system, rightly 1 think,
recognized that 11 1 1 meant ' lord ' [Hittiter uud Armenier, sign-list), and he very nearly lighted on what
I hold to be a most valuable clue in seeing that <:^^ 1 1 K ofo g contained the name of Hamath, and
even went so far as to explain the latter two characters as 'king', from a comparison with
other texts, the whole reading according to him ' King "bf Hamath'. But he failed entirely to
give syllabic values to the name of Hamath, saying that its first character might in some cases
be a plural ending, and in the translations in Hittiter itiid Aniiciiicr he relinquished the view that
this group meant Hamath [ZDMG., 48, pp. 30*1 flf. : see also Messerschmidt, Bancrkiingcn zu dm Hctt.
Insclir., p. 15, who quotes him). Sayce also came close to seeing this, but his incorrect division of the
signs in the inscription prevented him from identifying it, and I cannot agree in the least with his
latest translations of the Hamath inscriptions {PSBA., xxxiv, 1912, 217). Jensen was led astray,
I think, entirely in seeing Syennesis in the name which I read A-r-ar-a-s (§ 12).
A word must be said for Menant (' Elements dii Syllabaire lieteen ', Aead. des. Inser. xxxiv, 1892) who
saw in ^ (which I believe to be c) a vowel a (p. 100) ; and Peiser saw in Qg the division mark, and in
5)(§ the mark of an ideogram, according to Sayce, the plural (see, however, the sign-list at end of this
article). Ball [PSBA., x, 1888, p. 447) recognized in the proper name, which I believe to be Benhadad
(§ 33. note), a royal name of which the first character was the god Dadi. W. H. Rylands.(to whose
energy much of the collection of Hittite material in the early days of the study is due) noted that ' on
the shoulder of the [Mar'ash] lion at Constantinople is a human figure', which, unfortunately, he says
formed no part of the inscription (PSBA., ix, 1887,375) : nevertheless, it has been omitted in the copy
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 3
the work which he has done. During the last quarter of a century his labours
have been indefatigable in securing new texts or accurate copies of the well-
known inscriptions : if a new hieroglyphic or cuneiform text was discovered,
he examined or published it whenever he could, and his lists of every possible
in Messerschmidt's Corpus. I do not think we need concern ourselves with the work of Conder
or Gle3'e.
The greatest stumbhng-blocks in the way of decipherment appear to have been the bihngual Boss
of Tarkondemos, and two groups of hieroglyphs which occur several times in the Carchemish texts, in
which has been recognized, I believe entirely erroneously, the name Carchemish, spelt variantly
(a suggestion due to M. Six), and consequently to several characters were assigned values due to
the supposed variants. Personally, I believe the latter part of these groups to contain the words
Nineveh and Assyria, and that none of the phrases has an3-thing to do with Carchemish at all (see § 51).
After the Societj^ of Antiquaries had offered me the courtesy of hearing this paper read on
November 21, 1912, Dr. Rusch, a German scholar, saw a brief notice of the meeting in the Orientalische
Liieraiurzeitiing of the January following. As he had been working on a sj'Stem of his own during
the same time as mj'self, he not unnaturall}' wished to draw attention to such claims as he might have
to any priorit}' of decipherment ; and to this end wrote to the President of this Societ}' giving references
to notices of his S3'stem, and sending to him a manuscript copy of his labours. I think that I can
satisf^r Dr. Rusch that our systems are so fundamentally different that one of us is wrong. His work
is referred to in Deiitscher Reiclisanzcigcr, 1911, No. 269; 1912, Nos. 38, 114; and by von Scala in
Internalionaler Ardiacologen-Kongrcss, Okt., 1912. The following is the list of proper names which
he has discovered in the hieroglyphs, according to the Deutsch. Rcichsan:., in a reference to a meeting of
the Vorderas. Gesellschaft: — Lapa, Lupastius, Teschubis, Teschub-Tarchu,Teschupiha,Teschuputias,
Targurtisar, Argurstis, Motan-u, Hatti-Teschub, Arha, Arrapa, Kisch, Kuti, Kararkarti, Patesi, Sutech,
Tarchus, Maarsi, Sigur, Huchu, Motar, Gurtis, Gurtius, Sepasuvu, Tarmispa, Teschup, Tarchi-Hattis,
Ischtar-Gurtis, Teschupgurtisicha, Archa, Haartichamis, Motargurtis, Aryatarpa, Hapagurti, Luku,
Teschuparpas, Pasaas, Tarchumispas, Teschupas, Tarchusapasus, Teschupucha, Teschuptis, Tarchu-
hattis, Argurmis, Gurt3-as, Motaragurmis, Gurpas, Teteschup, Teschupgurtispas, Teschupicha,
Teschupti-tarchurus, Arra, Hattisteschup, Teschuparra. From this list I think that it will be obvious
that our two methods of decipherment have nothing in common, as onl\- in one single word (the
name of the god Tesup, long ago discovered) do we agree, and I hardly- think it worth while to discuss
his manuscript translations in which I cannot follow him. He goes so far as to adopt Professor Sayce's
values for the signs for god, Tesup, ' land ' (the double peak), 5, the armed hand as Kricg, ' throne '
[Elircuplatz], and the ideographic value ' water', with the numeral nine, and the two (unused) numerals
three and four, and in the second of the two numeral signs quoted in § i, nolc, he sees ' 1000 ' : the sign
of the two legs running was given the possible meaning of' to run ' by Menant {Elanetifs, 1892, p. 105) ;
and he sees in a number of obvious ideograms their picture values, such as the sign of the head with the
tongue protruding, the ideographic meaning ' speak ', the foot (I deny the leg) ' to go ', and the Tesup-
sign the lightning or serpent, in which I gladly concede to him an}^ priority as far as I am concerned.
As far as I can see, the values for the remainder of his signs, which are liberally compared to both
Egyptian hieroglyphs and Assj'rian cuneiform signs, are different from mine. He has relinquished
the view (I believe an erroneous one) that the larger figure at Ivriz is a god, but his attempt to read
the name as ' Hatti-Tesub ' is impossible, for he includes the first word 'I am' as part of the name.
I have gone thus fully into Dr. Rusch's S3'Stem because it is unpublished for the most part, and
I wish to make it quite clear that we differ entirely.
In the following pages it will be found that the footnotes frequently give sign-values and trans-
literations for convenience sake before the evidence of such equivalents in the main body of the article
has been reached.
B 2
4 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
kind of geogTaphical or personal names or of Hittitc cuneiform words have
been invaluable.
§ 2. The materials available for the study of decipherment were (i) the
two well-known bilino'uals, the 'Boss of Tarkondemos' and the seal of Indi-
limma, which have been as much a stumbling-block as an aid to students ;
(2) the I littite cuneiform literature, consisting of the two Arzawa letters and the
tablets from Asia Minor'; (3) the hieroglyphic texts themselves. The two
bilinguals had been thoroughly worked over by decipherers, and the only satis-
factory values which were likely to be an aid were those given to BB and A .
The Hittite cuneiform literature offers a far better starting-point. In this case,
although the transliteration of the cuneiform signs is a comparatively easy
matter, the translation is altogether another question : nevertheless one of the
Arzawa letters has been made out with fair accuracy, and it is possible to
reco«"nize the same grammatical forms recurring in the transliteration of the
few other tablets which have been published. As Professor Sayce has pointed
out, particularly noticeable in these cuneiform texts, which are written about
the fifteenth-fourteenth centuries b.c, is the undoubted adoption of Assyrian
words, not only the Sumerian ideographs for ' king ', ' son ', ' city ', &c., but simple
words spelt out such as pa-/// 'before' (literally ' face '), rr-^v, ad-/)/ 'father', a-;/a
' to ', /-//a ' in ', and ad-d/ii ' I gave ' (§ 89).
§ 3. During the excavations of 191 1 a stela was dug up which had been
found in the excavations of thirty years before, and buried deeply so as to
preserve it.- The sculpture on it represented a seated figure, and it was
inscribed with Hittite hieroglyphics which had been first copied and published
by Mr. .St. (liad Boscawen, his copy being re-published by Messerschmidt in
' Abbreviations in thi.s article: A i, A ii = the two Arzawa letters (see Knudtzon, Die zwei
Arza-a'a-Bricfc : Die cl-Aiiiania Tnfchi, 270 ft'.). Al = Aleppo Tablet, Sayce, PSBA., .x.xix, 1907, 91 :
B = Belck, A)intolia, ii : C = Chantre, Mi^^ion en Cappadocc : D = Sa3'ce, J RAS , 1908, 985 : E = Sa^xe,
1907, 913: F = ibid., the second tablet: G — Sayce, J RAS., 1909, 974: H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P,
tablets published //;/(/. 963 ff. : Id. — Ideogram : Liv. = tablets published by Pinches, Livcrfioo/ Aniia/s,
vol. iii : Mi, M ii, &c. = Messerschmidt, Corpus Inscripfioiiiim Hctlificanuii : Rams. = Ramsay,
PSBA., xxxi, 1909, 83 (an inscription on Kara Dagh) : TA, Tel Ahmar = Inscription from Tel Ahmar,
Wogarih, Liverpool Aniiah, ii. 165 (in man}' cases I have added emendations to his text from m}- hand-
copy made from the actual stone while emplo^-ed by the Trustees of the British Museum) : Winckler =
Mittcil. d. Deiitseh. Orient. Gescllseliaft, i(p~i, no. 35 : Y = Sa^xe and Pinches, The Tablet from Yiizgat
{Royal Asiatic Society Monographs, 1907): Z = some Hittite cuneiform tablets published by me in
PSB.L, xxxii, 1910, 191 : ZDMG. = Zeitschrift der Denfschen Morgcnldndischcn Gesellsehajt.
^ Not 'left there to be destro3'ed', as Professor Sa^'ce describes it {PSBA., xxvii, 1905, 210).
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 5
his Corpus Inscriptioiniiii Flettiticantiu, pi. XV, b. In passing this daily on ni}-
way to the diggings I was attracted to the recurrence of an elaborate sign
i[^ in the first line \\-hich runs '
ODQQ
^a^G^ *
I
Q€
DO-
It occurred to me that possibly this sign might from its first position be the
second syllable in the name of the well-known Hittite king Sangar (preserved
in the records of the Assyrian kings Assurnasirpal and Shalmaneser), and in its
second position the first s^-llable of the name Carchemish (in Assyrian Gargamis).
In this latter identification I was wrong, but in the former, I think, right, and
my hypothesis, thus correct in identifying 'Sangar', proved ultimately to be
accurate in its value for gar in both words.- By a happy coincidence I found
the following similar groups in a phrase on the long inscription which I men-
tioned in § I, which led me to believe that the hypothesis that they stood for
Sangar of Carchemish was worth following up.
Now /f^ had always been supposed to be the sign of the Hittite nominative
in -5, so that the two groups
:^ DDDQ
<^
and
ae
(this second group
^li^ ©©) QDQQ
beginning with 0(2- long recognized as a division-mark) might be supposed to
end at (^% s, as nominatives. On this assumption the second case gives DODD
-gars, and the first -gar- ^3 -s ; clearly if the word were Sangar we could
read DDOQ = sau easily in the second case ; but how will that agree in the first,
where „ takes the place of QDDD, and Ifft „ the place of COp ?
§4. Egyptian grammar here, however, offers a clue, with its 'phonetic
complements ' ; and on this assumption if ODDD and
onan
both = sa//, the second
^ The Hittite hierogl3-phs read houstroplicdoii, but for the con\-enience of the text I shall alwa^'s
write them beginning from the left. nnhnl
^ I did not recognize for a long time that the obvious reading for the last word was iy^
San-gars, and not Gar-gam(?)-s, the characters being arranged so as to please the e3'e. This second
Sangar must have been grandfather of this Sangar who wrote the inscription, according to the ancient
habit of calling a son after his grandfather. ,
A NEW DECIPHHRAIENT OF THE
may well be read cither as (s)s(7// or sa //{//): similarly if
^(ir we ma}" ^^■ell read the second as {s')g(7r or g(tr{r).
and
c^
both =
Now in the case of the o-roiip
5
the last sign but one
marks it as a place-name ; hence from our hypothetical values (allowing- ir for
the foot-character) we get ^Gar-g-? -s + 'place'-? Clearly we ha\-c Gargamis
here, the only sign wanting being the broken one."
There are therefore the foUowino- \-alues suo-o-ested :
ODDD S(7//
gar or kay •*
I
// or 5
^ S {f^
§ 5. Take next a group in one of the new Carchemish texts (reading it in
its ob\-ious order) :
=3
'£ c#0Z3
This clearly is a place-name from the last character: the last but one is s, and
the last but three is g or /- : hence we get
?.?.^^(/.).?.^, + ' place'.
It is a reasonable hypothesis to see Gargamis again in this, and by reading
KA-R-G{JC)-M1-S obtain the following hypothetical ec|uations :
# = %)^^ ©
/'.
////, \\ith
t^ = o(^/c) from the preceding section, and ^ s as before.
§ 6. The sign T is one of the commonest in the hieroglyphic texts : and just
as T and J are both found, so are the parallels J and I . Hence we shall
not be far wrong if we see in 11 the addition of a vowel to I , which we know
to be a consonant; and as we already have o^o = a (from Tyana, § i, iiotc\
the possibilities for the A'owel arc c, i, u (from the Hittite cuneiform). Similarly
' Or transpose these last two characters.
* This must be restored 1 ;;/
" With regard to s as distinct from A, the Hittite cuneiform in seven or eight hundred
words shows barely a dozen certain cases of s : notabl}- we find a word sa-au, A ii, 7. For the
reason that so few cases occur I am for the present using only s in the hierogl^'phs : for a discussion
on this see §90.
* For a third indication of the value of this character cf. Gar-a-li, i.e. b~\\>, § 11.
we should reasonably see in
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 7
the sig-n
with the vo\\-el c, /, or // added, which
is a step towards our suggested \^alue ////.
Take the Ivriz sculpture of two figures facing *ieach other, each with a short
inscription close to it. That near the larger of the two figures begins
folio ^ i*> '
As was mentioned in § i, (^ 1i|^^^P' is the god Tesup, and hence we can
define f as a separate word. This is at once endorsed by the inscription
near the second figure which begins similarly with the same two characters :
so also does M xlvi i c •
The second group in this last phrase is to be found in the Hamath texts j\I iii,
B 2 : iv, A, 2 : iv, b, 2, but whether it is really the same word or words is
doubtful. To these we may add also Al liii 4 I ^- Hence J °''° is a com-
plete word. ■'■ ^ ^
To what shall we compare this word iiii-a which can begin historical
inscriptions, and is followed, once at least, by a divine or personal name ? In
many Oriental inscriptions (for instance, the Behistun rock) the customary
words in such a place are 'I am'. Now in that misleading text, the Boss of
Tarkondemos, Professor Sayce suggested that the first word inc-e in the cunei-
form legend, on the analogy of the Arzawa -uii ' my ', should be translated
'I am'.- Hence, if my suggestion is right that w^e should expect the Ivriz
hieroglyphs to begin ' I am ', and if Professor Sayce is right in seeing ' I am '
in the Hittite cuneiform word nie-e, the hypothesis that the hieroglyphic word
is mi-a ' I am ' is so far reasonable, and we may be now fairly sure that J
' M xxxiv (Nachtrag). My cop}', made from the rock in igog, is the same for ////-' ; on the reading
of the proper name see the translation at end. ^ ~»
2 ' In spite of the strangeness of the expression I am inchned to see in me y~ Wy the Hittite
first personal pronoun ' {PSBA. xxi, 1899, 204). For the cuneiform text on the ' Tarkondemos ' Boss see
translation at end, ' I am Targassa-?-wi '. Sayce was very nearly right in his final value loa or ua for
J. Halevy considered f ] as the signs for a vowel ; Hommel (in his list of signs settled ' without
any doubt', PSBA. xxi. 233) considered this correct ; and Jensen also couples T T as ' a d.i. a und
o (auch u ?) ' {Hittikr iiini Aniiciiicr, sign-list). Sayce in PSBA. xxiii. 99 held that T denoted the
first singular of the verb, and consequently ' J will be / or ya ' ; this he altered to iva or ua in 1905
(PS^^-J. xxvii. 2451, but curiously read as ii'«5.
8 A NKW DECIPHERMEXT OF THE
really has the \MlLie ////. It is unnecessary for me to give here the well-known
cases of -//// = 'my" in cuneiform, which will be found in § 57. .
We can then proceed further and say that as this sign is ////, then alone
is 111, and that it follows that just as is // or s, so J will be /// or si.
As a corollar) it seems probable that afa has more the value of a helping
\-owel than a simply : T should be read perhaps ;///-' rather than mi-a.
§ 7. We have now fair evidence that our group is a town ending in -iiiis,
and our next point to prove is whether ^ really is g{li). Consider, then, a
group from the inscription on the bowl said to come from Babylon, or, as the
British Museum labels it, from Abu Habbah (M i):
^ ® c£j fin a
-^ \ar n \<^ (^
The sign \mnp' is clearly a 'bowl', as has long been known (§ i, note), and the
second group begins with the name for the god Tesup.' Although I can rarely
agree with Professor Sayce, he has translated it ' this bowl for the god Sandes \^
which seems to me to be very near the correct rendering (although I in no wise
accept his transliteration ^_^ fr= 'tc--/'). The ideogram ' bowl' and the god's
name give the distinct clue that the bowl was dedicated to the god, and if so,
we shall probably find that ^ '=^ means ' for the god Tesup V making the
necessar}' alteration in the translation of the god's name.
Now, by our hypothesis we should read this as ' God'-7^esiip-g{k)-n or
' God' -7^esiip-g{k)-s, and hence \\c must see in this g{k)-n or g{/^:)-s a post-
positive preposition ' to ' or ' for '.
Do the Mittite cuneiform texts throw anv lifiht on this, and does the word
^ occur often enough in the hieroglyphs to justify our supposing that it is
such a common part of speech as a preposition ?
Consider, then, the following passages from cuneiform tablets : —
(1) (W 19) AHi-iA ia-iiin '"Muttalli-is a-as-sn-nh-ta iiu-iun-lcau niaJj-au Nisi-r?//-
na-za &c.
' An examination of the hieroglyphic texts will show that, in sense at least, the name may be
written with or without the addition of ^^^p'.
2 PSBA. xxvii, 1905, 192. His last rendering (PSBA. xxxv, 1913, 12) does not seem so good :
' this bowl, in the temple of Sondes (the god) of Atuna I have made.'
■■ The word following thjs group is distinct and well known, and is thus correctly separated.
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 9
(2) In the same text
ki-is-ha-ha-afmt-iuu h\i\-\K.
Now these two words mtuiu and nnmukan are made up of the words ////,
mil, and kaii. Nit is undeniably 'to', for it is the first word of the cuneiform
letter obtained at Aleppo ntt ""'e-ltmt-u ba-a-bi-ia 'Unto "'"e-him-ti, my father'
(Al. i). It occurs constantly in Hittite cuneiform thus, to give only a few
examples : —
uu-niii Ai, 25 : A ii, 10. nu-td-ta A i, 22, 28: A ii, 19: Y r. 12. nu-tts,
Y II, 15. nu-ns-si A i, 14. nu-tts-sa-an Y r. 26. iiu wa-ra-at-mn Y 4. mi
wa-ra-an Y 23. nit nia-as-ta-nn Y 14. mt ''"Za-ga-ga-an Y 26. nit a-bit-it-nn-na
Y 28, 31. nit nia-a-an Y r. 11. //// '"'Su-gi Y r. 37.
Next, -;//// is undoubtedly a collateral to the -uii possessive of the Hittite
cuneiform, and the nie-e mentioned above ; it occurs :
wa-ra-at-niit (A i, 18 : Y4). ia-iiiit (Winckler 19). ma-at-niu (Winckler 19).
zi-ik-niii (verb, imperative (?) with -///// A ii, 21). Possibly nia-niu (A i, 17).
We have, therefore, nii-mii ' to me ', as well as nit-niit-kan, exact meaning
uncertain until -kan is determined. Consider then:
(3) DU.LUGAL-Xw/ fa/i-/ji.. . (F 7) (Dtf.LUGAL is the Assyro-Sumerian
ideographic ' son of the king ') : faljlji. ... is the same causative conjugation of
ta 'to give' as ta-a-hit-ii-iit ... (D 19): ta-ah-hit-itn (Y y. 4): tah-hit-ta (Y r. 18).
This causative formation has long been recognized (see Knudtzon, Die El-
Aniarna Tafeln : Sayce, Y, p. 50).
(4) MULUPi mar-cfis a-na LUGAL-X77// (N i).
(5) M 3 begins . . . LU-kan bi-e-te-ir.
(6) \JJQjW^-za-kan (Liv. ii, 7) ; \J^GX\^-its-za-kan (Z i, 5) ; LUGAL-/^i-
katt {ibid., 11).
(7) nta-a-an-na-kan (N 3).
Other examples are ki-i-kan (A ii, 14) ; . . .za-kan (Z ii, 7) ; -ns-kn-kan {ibid., 8) ;
and the remarkable Assyro-Hittite phrase at the beginning of a letter (Z i, 2)
sa-li-im i-ia-zi SU M.-kan 'there is peace unto me, &c.' Clearly then here is a recog-
nized postpositive form -kan, which can be seen from (3) to mean ' unto ' (' unto the
son of the king cause to give '), which may be strengthened by an additional
preposition affixed such as nii, or the Assyrian ana ' to '. Its nearest English
equivalent is perhaps ' to-ward '. This so exactly coincides with the postpositive
n that we need no longer have any doubt about c£S = g{f^) ^'^nd
= ;a'
' ^
11 postpositive occurs with and without suffixes man}' times in the Hittite hieroglyphs
(see §33, note: for examples without suffixes see e.g. M ii, 2: x.xi, 4, 5; lii, 3; TA 4, &c., in the
VOL. LXIV. c
lo A NEW DECIPHERiVIENT OF THE
§ 8. Next, to show that c^ = ka. It must be distino-uishcd from the value
of the foot-sign /' in some wa3\ and the distinguishing- m.nk, tlie vowel, will he
obvious from the following instances, and, although the proof of the value of
this character would ha\'e been more obvious at a later stage of my thesis,
I shall trv to demonstrate it here. It will be clear, particularly from the tnms-
lation of AI xv h at the end of this paper, that in I'^/Q) -A'-/^'--'-', the second
word of the second quotation in § 3, we ha\'e a proper name. This name
occurs in the same form in tlie inscription from which the first quotation in the
same section is taken,' and hence we have it twice in the same connexion with
Sangar on two different inscriptions. But more than this, in this latter inscription
we also find I ^^I^ciill V-Xv?-/'-//, i.e. N-k-s in an oblique case with our
postpositive preposition lean : and this form AWca occurs clearly as a personal
name twice in M Hi, 2 and 4 (from Mar'ash, see translations at end). Hence
there is little doubt that ^ represents /v/, in a word of which the nominative
ends /.'-s. I cannot identify this A^-/'-5 with any name in the Assyrian
inscriptions.
§ 9. To prove that 53 " ^' "^^^^'^ ^^^ ^^*^"^ gradually throughout this
article. The cumulative evidence of A'-r-a, i. c. R7rn, a chief of Kauai § 35) ;
the name Assyria, As-y-a, varying with As-ir (§51); the king A-r-ar-a-s^
Ariarathes (§ 12); Adad-id{^)-r, Benhadad (§ n, note 4); our word Ka-r-k-nii-s
above ; the grammatical forms s-r-a ' they send ', f-c-r-a ' they say ' compared
with the cuneiform sa-ra-a (§ 48) make it certain.
We can now proceed to a further decipherment of names.
There is a very important series of texts from Hamath or the neighbour-
hood. Three contain almost the same inscription (M iii b, iv a, iv b), which
translations at end.) ^ifJ would appear to have the value of both g and /• ; for it can take the place of
g in Sangar and Gargamis (which, however, the Hebrews wrote Karkemis), and it is used in the
following^phrases : Ar-mn h K-as-k ' Aram, chief of Kaskai ' (§§ 24, 35) ; K-r-a Ij in M xi, 4, 5, the chief
Kirri (§^ 27, 35J : K-a-u-a-u-i Kaf-f-c ' the Kauai of Kate ' (^§ 27, 60), and in a new jerabis inscription on
which are mentioned several kings of the ninth century we find K-a-k, i.e. Kaki (§ 24, see § 87). On TA 4
U-'m-k (the place-name 'Amk) occurs: cf. M xxxii, 3, and Am-k on a new Jer. inscr., §52 (5). Moreover the
sign |( b gar is used to spell the first syllable of the chief's name t'lP (M Hi, 4), and iience we may
consider that the distinction between g and k was not very great. In Egyptian, for instance, the word
Carchemish could be spelt with A k or 'vIIJ^) /-. I shall therefore represent the Hittite symbol
henceforth usuallj' as k for the sake of simplicity.
1 There are even traces of the diagonal mark which indicates a proper name (see § 17).
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS ii
varies only in two places : two are longer texts (M vi continued by M v), and
there is one more (from Restan, about 20 kilometres south of Hamath) pub-
lished by Sayce, PSBA., xxxi, 1909, p. 259. These texts all begin with the much-
discussed group %^ , a figure with its hand pointing to its face over DO DO.
mm
This figure used to be held to mean either ' I (am) ' or ' saith ' by practically
all decipherers ' : but with the prior claim of our J ^^^ mi-a to the meaning
' I am ', the sense of ' saith ' at once becomes the probable one. Now in the
Restan text and M vi after %^ come >H jr^ e=j , while in M iii b, iv a, iv b,
we have "^ °B£° S ^/Q) (^""ranging it thus in order for convenience).
Clearly we can mark ^(5^^% and Jf?(^\\A as the same word, the
second being defined as a nominative ending in s. We know that % is n{(.i),
and hence we have a name, possibly of a ruler of Hamath, ending in -na.
Here again we must start with a hypothesis. Since we have now good
grounds to suppose that an inscription from Jerabis (Carchemish) was written
in the time of Sangar, it is not unreasonable to suppose that the Hamath texts,
which have many apparent points of similarity to those of Carchemish, may
have been written about the same time. Supposing that this were so, and
that the name which we are discussing is really a king of Hamath, we must
needs apply the name Irhulina, who, as is well known from the inscriptions of
Shalmaneser H, was a king of Hamath and an ally of Benhadad (Adad-idri)
at this period. We are thus far to the good that the n of the last syllable is
represented by ^ ii{(j) in our word.
^ E.g. Sayce {TSBA., vii, 1882, p. 2781 thought that frQ implied to speak or say, but later
considered that it=:' I ', though with much to be said in favour of ' he says ' (PSBA., .x.xi, 1899, P- -i3*-
Hommel held that Menant was correct in making (r^ ' I (ist sing) (resp. ^f^ gyj] ' I am '1 ' (cf. his
list, loc. cit. 233). Messerschmidt inclined to ' I ' and not 'he says', as Peiser would have itiMitteil.
der Vordcras. Gesclbcli., 1898, 6) : but in The Hittitcs, 1903, 28, he admitted both possibilities.
Jensen [HUtiter iind Anuciiicr, sign-list) also considered it ' I '. For reasons stated later
I hope to show that the meaning ' I ' is impossible, and that 'say' is the probable one. In its
usage a cursory examination shows that there is not much apparent difference in the sense of
(n) <f\j- (/>) (Ln QlOfl' ^^' ''• ((/? °[1° DSIOQI' '^^"'-' ^^'^ '"'^Y I't^gard the additions as auxiliaries. This is
discussed in § 74.
c 2
12 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
For the purposes of our hypothesis, divide the name Ir-hn-Ii-na syllabically,
like San-gar, and apply it to the hieroglyphs :
Do any of the first three characters appear elsewhere with these values ?
§ lo. Take ^^ //- first. A study of Hittite cuneiform grammar shows that
final -/> is used to express one of the persons in a verbal conjugation : for
instance, the common xoo\. pa shows the form pa-a-ir (Z ii, 9 : Y22) ; a-/c/-ir{Y 32,
Zl^ ZS)^ is probably a \'erb ; and similarly bi-c-tc-ir {W 3).' As it seems reason-
able to suppose, -ir is therefore a fairly common verbal termination, and if we
could find words supposed to be verbs in the hieroglyphs constantly ending in
ff^, it would go far to show that f^ = /;-.
Consider, then, the word oioCB^ or oioC3I<^ w^hich occurs several times in
the hieroglyphs. We hav^e already met it in the dedicatory inscription on the
bowl (§ 7), and it also occurs on a new Jerabis inscription/' and in AI viii, a,
3 : xxiii, a, 2 : xlviii, 2. This word is made up of offa a^ c — (3 ^(^) or t{a), and
what is uncommonly like our sign j^ without the little stroke in the middle.^
If this is a verb a-t\a)-i)' it would certainly seem as though we had found the
Hittite cuneiform root fa 'give', which has long been known, and compares
with the Indogermanic root in SiSco/xi. (The forms found are : a-TA-a)i-zi, G 16 :
TA-a-i, Y r. [25], 26, 27, [28], 30, 34, 35, [36], 42, 47, 48: [B i4(?)]: "C vi, 12 : D 11,
18, 20; E 7, 12, 15, [16]: K I, g: TA-a-e C ii, 3 : TA-a-an-zi E 1: TA-an-zi
D6, /'. 10: E8: i(-TA-a/i-zi A i, 22: causative, TA-a-hn-it-nt . . D 19: TA-
ah-hu-itii Y /'. 4, [5]: 'J\-lh-hn-ta Y r. 18). This supposition becomes at once
practical when the value 'give' is apphed to the verb in the bowl-inscription
' a bowl + ;/(<■?) unto the god Tesup //-w-//-5^ \/give'. We have thus fair evi-
' The text runs : (32) . . . iva •■••Gnl-as-sa-an ""Mah hal-zi-is-lin siiin-ku-iva a-bi-e a-ki-i[r\ (33) . . .
c-ia im-ma *a-ki-ir )iin-iiie a-bi-e-el urn ba.bu-«s ha-ah-hi-ma . . . (34I . • ■ Ija-ali-lii-ina-as '^"IM-ni tc-iz-zi
kii-u-si-wa bi-is-sa-at-ti . . . (35) . . . -si Iju-u-ma-anlc-cs a-ki-ir inn-inc ki-i-iii G.IL-ri . . .
^ The text runs : L U-kan bi-e-te-ir . . .
^ Another instance of this final -ir in the hierogl^-phs is IC °i°/^ <C^ = ■ «■ ^—iriM .\xxii, 5).
ofo (^ ^ occurs in M xxxii, 2, 4, and in xxxiii, 2, 6, and if ^ be tlie root, then we can add
this example to our list (on this question see translation to M ix, 3, jio/c, at end).
* For full proof see § 15. In order not to make matters too complicated, it is shown in ^ 17 that
this little stroke or tang is frequently added to characters to show that a proper name is indicated.
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS • 13
dence that ^ = //', and ^ is only this character with a tang- added to denote
a proper name.'
§ II. The third sign $:v , by our hypothesis //, occurs on the seal M xli, i,
where the characters read (§§) W SFCD <^ "S^ "V °k\ |^ ^^^^s last character
may be meant to be read before the //(^O)- '^ he first god-name is Tesup : the
second occurs constantly in proper names (M i ; ix, 2, 4 ; x, i, 3, &c.). It is
customary for a Babylonian seal inscription to contain the name of its owner
and the god of whom he considers himself the worshipper, and we may naturally
consider that the same holds good in Hittite, so that the patron deity here_ is
Tesup, and that the owner's name begins with a god's name and ends with
7/{a)-a-/i-s, or, having regard to the possible position of s, perhaps s-u{a)-a-/i.
This word iid/i occurs in the name rar-ga-as-na-al-li, m one of the texts found
by Winckler at Boghaz Keui (W 19) ""'"'^'" Ha-pal-la-iiia a-na "'7^ar-ga-as-na-al-li
ad-din 'the land of Hapallama unto Targasnalli I gave'. As Targu or Tarhu^
is a well-known Hittite god, it is not unreasonable to suppose that we have here
on our seal the name Targasnali, the king to whom Hapallama was given.
Where the seal actually came from is doubtful.
Another proof of // comes from a name in M lii, 4 °l° \ | ™™ * CD-,
as our values would show, Gcir-n-H iii IX-a-^. The 'IX' (who appear elsewhere)
are frequently an indication that a chief's name precedes ; the phrase usually is
'So-and-so, a chief (&c.) of the Nine'. Hence Garali is a chiefs name, and as
Karal "^IP is known as the father of Panammu, a king of la'di (who also occurs
' In ^^ (M vi, 2), \\ ^ (M iv, .\ 2: B 2), \ i^'y (M xxxii, i), the second character as
it stands cannot be confused with ^ ir, if the texts have been copied correctl}- : in the
Restan text, which is practically a duplicate at this point of the Hamath texts, we find ^^ simply,
so that the additional sign probably has no material value. On the other hand, I cannot find any
satisfactory comparison for this final b(a) (as § 40 shows it be) in the cuneiform texts.
M xvi A shows a verb ending with an animal's head, but it is not quite clear whether this is -u
or -ir (§ 50, 6). Incidentally, I should add that further proof that ^ = //' will be found in the place-
name rt5-/r, which varies with rts-/--<7 (= Assyria, § 51).
- Knudtzon, Die =u)ci Arzaiva-Bricfe, 1902, p. 19, gives the following list of names in which this
god-name occurs: Tarkondemos, Tarkondimotos, Tarkodimantos, Tarkuaris, Tarkumbiou [gen.),
Trokoarbasios, Trokozarmas, Trokokombigremis, (T)arki6nin, Tarkundberran, Tarkondarios, Das-
tarkon (a fortress in Kataonia), Lycian Trqqas, Trqqiz, Trqqfita, Trqqhti, Trqqiitasi, &c. As is
well known, Tarliu in Tarhulara (the prefect of Gurgum or Markasa, WAI. ii, 67, 45, 58: in, 9,
52; B.M. tablet, K i66o) is the same god.
14 • A NEW DECIPHERIMENT OF THE
in Hittite, § 28), from the Sinjcrli inscriptions, \vc may consider that this
identification of the two names is sound.
§ 12. On (j\) = //// I must refer the reader to § 38, as that section is the
most fitting" tor more proof of this value : I think, however, that the discovery of
HiDiii and Hmii, the forms of a personal name quoted in § 37, note, very probably
the same as the Assyrian form .-Ihuiiii, the chief of Bit-Adini, is conclusive.
Moreover, I now come to a variant form of Irhulina's name on the larsre
inscription from Jerabis, which mentions Sangar's name. This new form is
written
This word begins a new sentence, and (when the full text is published) it will
obviously be seen to be a proper name. The three middle characters we know
are -huli-ni: the first must therefore be some compound of -;'. Professor
Sayce g"a\'e to c:::^ (which is possibly the same as our character here) the value
ar on the grounds that it was part of the place-name Argana in M iv, a, 2, which
I think is incorrect : the value ar for our character is, howe\x'r, probably correct,
as may be seen from the name of the king of Tyana-^ °^©<Il°f°/^- ilii-'^
name Professor Sayce in PSBA., xxv, 1903, 192 read A-m-ar-a-s, \ery nearly
correctly, but he unfortunately rejected his first value ar for another {gal\ and
read it next as Aumgalas {PSBA., xxvii, 1905, 200). and finally {PSBA., xxxiv,
1912, 270), as Ayminyas. My reading would make it A-r-av-a-s (using our
hypothesis for r from § 5), which can at once be compared with Ariarathes, the
Greek form of a name of several kings of Cappadocia, the first one known to
us from Greek sources living about the middle of the fourth century b.c.
These two examples go far to prove the value ar: a third, and most
convincing one, is the name of Arame, spelt Ar-am, ' chief of Kask ' (§ 35). We
have thus proved the names Irhulina, Arhulini, and have additional evidence
for 53 = ;' from Ariarathes.
' I question the correctness of my copy of this character (zi) from the stone ; if I were copying
it again 1 should look for ^^^^ or less probably \i. 1 believe the form Arhulini is also to be seen
n M Hi, 2, concealed in ^v^ /^ ^ J (reading //// for the second syllable).
1
^ M xxxiii, I : cf xxxi, c, 3: xxxii, i, 2, 3: xxxiv, A, b, c
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS
15
§ 13. Having- now found the name of the king of Hamath, the next problem
should be to find the name of Hamath itself. The Assyrian cuneiform texts
give the beginning of this word as Am- or Ham-, so that we may look for a
weakened initial breathino". As we know that
and
are the postpositive
signs of a place-name, we should be able to see the name Hamath in these
Hamath texts in the groups
o|]o B M iv A, B, I, and partly on M iii, b, i.
Restan.
oQo
^ A M vi, I.
CZID
(^) m
m
(3)
OS
(2.
00
Obviously these groups are too long for ' Hamath .^
But all three are clearly forms of the same group. Obviously the character
<:^ of (i) is only an abbreviation of the ram's head ^f^ of (2) and (3). This is
a very important point, endorsed by the two large Mar'ash inscriptions AI xxi
and M Hi, where the place-name mentioned in each near the beginning is
given respecti\^ely under the two forms
3f°€
(xxi) and
'^ Ni4 X/O^' (badly written, but distinguishable in Alesserschmidt's copy)
°''°'^fl (^^ A (Hi). Moreover, the group ^c^J^ of M vi, 3 (bis) will ulti-
mately be seen to be the same as rr ^^1 in M xi, 2 (§ 28). Since <^) = y<^
as an abbreviation, we may well expect to find other animals' heads in similar
abbre\'iations, a broad question to which we shall return later (§ 15).
§ 14. Having thus settled that all three groups are merely variants of the
same phrase, it remains to split them up into their component parts. An
examination of the hieroglyphic texts generally will show that a group of signs
* Emend thus, instead of ir.
See note to § i.
i6
very much like
A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
De
(§
j /Qj, the first part of (i\ (2), and (3), occurs constantl}',
no matter where the inscription may have come from ; that is, that they are
some word or words haxing nothing- to do with ' Hamath ', and consequently
if the name ' Hamath ' is here at all it is concealed (as was sug'o'ested many
years ago, only to be rejected, § i, iiofc) in ,^) r'TI qIJq (g A- These
passages are :
{a) Hamath, ]\I iii, r 1 : i\', a, b, i : M vi and Restan. See § 13.
{h) Kirtschoglu, M vii, t cf=^ ?h P
1
(.) Malatia. Mxvi, , |=[<s,] tp J(?)| ^^(?)'
WMalatia,M.xlvii^|||/^2'
(r) Bulgarmaden, M xxxii, i : Bor, ]\1 xxxiii, 2 : Mar'ash, M xxi, i : M Iii, 4
(two of these must be restored thus, the ob\'ious characters being obliterated) :
(C ojo
K
IC
(/) Mar'ash, M Hi, 1 ^^^ | J ^^ &c.
rrvn ^ ^ Ofo
<^JiliJ ^®
•c
ofo
{g) Agrak (M xxxi) ; the Bogtcha stele (M li) ^ X J
OS
4
(//) Tel Ahmar ( i ) os ^-^ 4
' An examination of the photograpli in Hogarth's article in Rccucil dc Travaiix, xvii. 25, shows
that these are possible readings.
2 The difference between this group and the others is so marked that it would be safer to collate
it before lajing too great stress on it. Compare, however, no. (/') further on.
IIITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 17
(/) Tel Ahmar (4) gg
o?o
(y) Tel Ahmar (5) os
{k) Newjerabis ic V Jl
(yi> f"
olo 4
Here are nineteen cases with very little variation,- beginning- with a hand
outstretched, the sign being marked as an ideogram by the di\'ision-sign before
and after.
§ 15. Several deductions can be made from a comparison of these groups : —
(i) The ox's head in the form /^ of (/) and probably {c) is represented
by the form ^^ in {li) and (/), and by ^V in (y): it becomes abbreviated
to ^ (emended)' in one case inO?),and still further to the linear ^„5 in {e\ (g), and
{/e). This equation
is of the greatest importance, not only because of the reading of the words in
which such \'ariant forms occur, but because it will throw lio-ht on the origin of
*c^'
f^ />. For, since the ox's head takes the forms ^=^/ ~fjii/^ ^^^^^ ^^^^ ^'^^^
head <^ - /^, we can at once admit the probability of the form ^, linear
^^ ii\ as the abbreviated forms of the unhorned calf's head /^ of M ii, 7.
M ix, 3, AI X, I, M XV, B, 3, M xvi. \[t).
(2) The /| of (^), (^) varies with the [jj ^ us ot {a\ (/). (//), (/), and
the (|l ^ II is of (r), (/). Hence % = //is. Jensen thought that this marked the
' This emendation of the form of this character in this passage (Restan i) is proper from the
forms shown in other Hamath texts, e.g. M iv, a 2 : b, 2 : vi, 2 : and the variations in the Mar 'ash
texts, M xxi, 4, Hi, 4.
VOL. LXI\'. n
i8 A NEW DFXIPHERMENT OF THE
nominati\'e case, and therefore ended in -.? ; Professor Saycc quotes him,
noticing- at the same time that it interchanges in M xxi with the 'goat's head'
{PSBA. XXV, 1903, 173) (' we must assign to it the vahies of either s, is,yas, or as ').
(3) The variant g = ^^ (remarked by Sayce from the Babylon inscription,
PSBA. xxiii, lyoi, 99) is made certain by these groups : the (g oi {a\ {&), (c), (^^),
(//), (/), (J) is replaced by "^^^ in (/ ). This is endorsed by the evidence of the
variants given in § i(), and the following comparisons :—
M xxi, I ^f^ (gj with M Hi, i P^ D\ and M ii, i (the Babylon text)
Oc
'^ ii"il ' nnm^A-- vi/ 0/0 , w
r-, a|aV; and M iii, b, 3 S § % ^^'ith M ii, 1 Sn'^ and 4 <^ ^•
§ 16. But our present need is to show that, as in our I lamath texts, we
ha\-e a group begmning constantly with ^^, and differing only slightly m its
other characters. Hence we may remox'c this groujD bodily from our Hamath
group (§ 13), leaving the last fi\'e characters /^ cTD olo g A to represent the
w^ord ' Hamath '.
Now Professor Sayce's identification of Tyana in '^ "tcH ofo v^ oj-o C^A
(Bor, M xxxiii) has given us the \'alue of (/(a) or /{a) for CZQ (he considers it ///),
marking also the final group of° C ,<^ A , which is only our oHog of the Hamath texts
With a case-ending (and, of course, the postpositive ' place '). If this * g (|^j '
is a constant at the end of place-names, we can then see the word Hamath in
our grouj) ^^ CIS ofa (g A composed simply of the two signs ^^ CJJ.
With the view^ of eliminating this olog(/Aj I append several place-names
for comparison :
(1) ^ (? A (M iii, B, 2).
' I sec that I have accidentally omitted the small 'tang' to the character III here.
'^ Professor 833x0 thought that it indicated the adjectival termination, but, as will be seen from
§ 39, this is impossible.
lilTTITE HIEROGLYPHS 19
(2) CSr^ ® A ^^ similar passage to (i) in M iv, a, 2).
oQo
g ouo
^
rang)
(3) a T A (MlV, B,2).
(^) ^^^A (^^i ^-^i' 0. lor ^vhich M lii, 1 oivcs .<^ ^
^^\ ^\ , ■# A.
In these, as is obvious, although they are decidedly names of different
places, o(|o (g occurs in all with various terminations, and another noteworthy
point is that in (4) (g varies with ^^s^. ^s is shown in § 15 (3).
Hence °0c € ||j has nothing to do with the actual spelling of the root-letters
of ' Hamath ' in our group, and we may be satisfied that if 'Haniath' does
occur on the first line of the Hamath inscription M iv, a, b, vi, it will be
spelt with the two signs /^ 1 — g .
Now we already know that CB = f^(/0 or f((r), and hence, if there is any-
thing in our theory, the ram's head y^ with its abbreviation ^ will be
//am, Am, or Ham. In order to prove this it will be necessary to take a longer
cast, and turn to the large new inscription from Jerabis.
§ 17. This inscription, as we have already seen (§§ 3, 12), contains the names
of Sangar and Irhulina. A further examination convinced me that there were
many more kings' names on it, and I shall now discuss them.
If the Hitdte hieroglyphic inscriptions be carefully examined it will be
seen that certain groups are indicated by a stroke, frequently diagonal <^. placed
in front. More particularly is this so in places where we should expect a
proper name, i.e. after the first or second word. For instance, Mar ash, M xxi.
begins % good '^ ^-.^j^^i W j^ ^|^^jg represented twice more in this inscription)' ;
as we saw in § 3, the name Sangar is also marked by 'l,-' and again in 1. 2 of the
' The first figure is to be seen on the hon in the cast in the Museum (see note to § i).
- From this (sUghtly obscure) diagonal '^' it is clear that the first part of this word is not to be
D 2
20 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
same inscription we find :S' ^^5=^- 1" ^^ ii the first words arc d)i iin ^ S!-' .
On the other hand, in the Mar'ash inscription M Hi, which begins in a similar
manner to M xxi (also Mar'ash), quoted above, and M x\-i, a, the '^ appears to be
W
left out from ^ . This siqn ^ is therefore not a necessity, but where it does
occur we can at once suspect a proper name.
But this sign added to proper names throws a new light on certain small
tangs which are found affixed to certain characters, as has been suggested in
the sign I'r in Irhulina. The name of the king of Tyana, ic -'4.©<]] ^\° (Tb
^-r-<7r-(7-s{M xxxiii, i. Sec.) begins with .-J + ' tang ' : Tyana itself is written ^\•ith
its first character V3, i.e. Jla) + 'tang'. In M iii, n, 2 ^ (S b, i^ ^ place-
name ; so also "^ 'S ft A &c., in the Mar'ash inscriptions (M xxi,xxiv, xxv.lii).
These are definite examples of both place- and personal-names, and with this
clue it will be easy to recognize the position of a certain number of names in
the inscriptions.'
§ 18. Proceeding with this tang-clue, we may examine the text on the lion-
hunt slab from Malatia (M x\i. a). This begins
i.e. ////-// /-^? (or ') [ ]//-(■-///, ^- ^\ ' t^iiR '■-''" j) 'tang"-.s". Whether the first
compared (as Sajxe took it to be) with °^°, the word ordinarily placed second after ^w at the
beginning of inscriptions. |Q ^
' It must, however, be noted that in certain cases characters marked by a tang do not denote
a proper name, but in some respect call attention to it, and apparently the tang sometimes indicates
a vowel sound.
- I would suggest, in spite of the evidence afforded by M xvi, c (Menant) and the Malatia inscrip-
tion published b}' Sa3'ce {PSBA. xxvi, 1904, 23; see M xlvii), both of which read £\, that we should
read (J^ Iin here, making the whole ^■ljn-l'-t-"i, and providing some value *r for j|, so that the
whole may represent Irhulmi. Two of the other kings at least in this inscription are known to be his
contemporaries from the hierogb'phic texts. At the same time this is only a suggestion until'we have
a certain value for the first character: for another possibility see p. 112. On c see ^ 46.
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 21
king- be Irhulini or not, it is clear that his name is followed by three other
names, the first a most famous and ubiquitous one ^ , well known from the
'Babylon' inscription J\I ii ; Aleppo, M iii, a; Hamath, M iii, b: here in
Malatia ; Mar'ash, M xxi, Hi ; and in the long inscription from Jerabis. The
king marked by ^::^ is found in a new Jerabis inscrij^tion, and \r-s occurs
in the Tel Ahmar inscription (1. 4) as i^ (j. We have thus the names of four
contemporary kings.
§ ly. The first word iiiiiiia or ///////" calls for a remark. We have seen (§ 6)
that J qId mi- , the probable equivalent of the dic-c on the ' Tarkondemos ' Boss,
followed by a (king's) name, means ' I (am) ' : there need then be little hesitation
in translating ///////' as 'we (are)', since four names follow. It occurs here, and
in the two others from Malatia, where the kings' names differ considerably,
M x^■i, c 1,1 I » I ♦ ^^S *g &c., and Sayce, PSBA., xxvi,
1904, 23 (A'l xlvii) II , &c.
We have, therefore, several names, many of which will be found to occur
elsewhere, and all contemporary, dating from the ninth century B.C. What is
also important is that an inscription may contain several names (all presumably
kings or chiefs) together, to which I would draw attention, because it is a clue
to the reason for the existence of so many Hittite inscriptions, which will be
seen to relate to alliances between the various chiefs. It so happens by good
fortune that our knowledge of the names of the petty kings who ruled the
lands near Carchemish at the time of Sangar and Irhulina is extremely good,
and, at the risk of being prolix, I think it is an apt place to give a brief resume
of the history of this period as we find it in the cuneiform records ot Assur-
nasirpal and Shalmaneser.'
§ 20. Little definite is known of the history of Assyria during the period
after the great conqueror Tiglath-Pileser I (r. 11 00 b.c.) until the first quarter
of the ninth century when Assurnasirpal came to the throne. Little by little
apparently the lands conquered by his fathers had seceded from the i\ssyrian
' I am indebted for much of this historical sketch to Maspero's Passing of the Empires, where an
excellent and full account of the conditions prevailing in the Hittite lands in the ninth century is given.
22 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
empire, and on his accession he found a diminished kinodom, with its
boundaries contracted to a small compass. To his energy is due the regenera-
tion of his country and the expansion of the Assyrian empire, which was to
attain more than its pristine glories under the next king Shalmaneser II.
Assurnasirpal's first campaign was directed against the districts north-west
of Assyria, even as far as the sources of the Tigris ; the next campaign in this
same year was pressed still further westwards as far as Kummuh (Commagene) '
and Mushku. The news of these successes spread abroad, and in consequence
many of the neighbouring tribes sent to pay homage ; the Laid (supposed to
be principally on the right bank of the Euphrates between the Khaljur and the
Balikh), Haianu, king of Hindanu (in Shalmaneser's time there is a Haianu,
king of Samal); in the next year the Suhi on the Euphrates sent their chief
Iluibni to Nineveh with gifts. But a revolt in the north-west again broke out,
and Assurnasirpal again marched to the sources of the Tigris and punished
the rebels. After this success he received the homage of the neighbouring-
princes, including Amme-baal ^ of Bit-Zamani ; at Ardupa he took tribute from
one of the Hittite kings. As Maspero says (p. 21), in less than three years the
Assyrian king had forced the marauders of Nairi and Kirhi to respect his
frontiers.
§ 21. It was next in 880 that he took the field against the north-west,
receiving as usual at first the tribute of Kummuh. It was at this unfortunate
hour that the people of Bit-Zamani, not caring for the Assyrian tendency of
their chief Amme-baal, murdered him, and set Bur-Ram^nu on the throne ; the
Assyrians avenged his death, flayed Bur-Ramanu, appointed Ilanu his brother
to succeed him, and mulcted the inhabitants in an enormous tribute.
This increase in power in the Assyrian state led the tribes to the west
again to give trouble, and the two chief tribes, the Suhi and Laki, made over-
tures for help to Babylon. But, although help was given, in the end the
Assyrian arms triumphed, and the Suhi and Laki were defeated, being pursued
for two days as far as the frontiers of Bit-Adini, the state which lay between the
Balikh and the Euphrates, as far north at least as Tel Ahmar, the ancient Til
Barsip.-' From this date onward for a quarter of a century the Assyrians had
' For the latest evidence of the position of Kummuh, see L. \V. King, PSB/l., xx.w, 1913, 73.
- Am-me-ba-'-la, the son of Zamani. The name appears to be Semitic. This Ammc may well be
the same as in Pan-ammu, the name of two kings of Sam'al (Sinjerli) some distance west of Bit-Zamani
(of Heb. i'N'Qy, the father of Bath-Sheba, i Chron. iii. 5I. Hence Amme-ba'al may mean ' Amme is (my)
lord', just as Pan-Ammu would mean 'Face of Ammi ' (cf the Phoenician phrase ^jw is and the
Heb. name ^n:«2)
^ Thanks to the kindness of tiie Trustees of the British Museum I was allowed to publish one of
the results of an expedition on which they sent Mr. T. E. Lawrence and me from Carchemish to
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 23
to reckon with Ahuni the shekh of this land of Bit-Aclini, a recurrent enemy
who was in touch with the many Hittite states, and held the approaches to
Carchemish from the East, one of the great main roads to the sea. Yet Assur-
nasirpal wasted no time in securing a certain measure of homage from him : he
invaded his territory in 877 b. c, and received tribute from him after a sanguinary
encounter.
§ 22. It was in 876 that, having again received tribute from Bit-Bahiani,
Azalla, and Bit-Adini, the Assyrian king came face to face with the loose-knit
Hittite power which had been uneasily watching the gradual ascendance of a foe
who had been scotched for two hundredyears. Carchemish was its eastern outpost,
a citadel built on a high mound abutting on the Euphrates, with the landward
side enclosed by a widespread rampart ; a palace lay at the southern foot of
the mound. The citadel itself covered the top of the mound, with its main
postern in the middle, where the dip still shows where the road of cobbles and
pebbles ascended to the gateway ; Shalmaneser portrayed it two or three times
on his bronze gates at Balawat. Yet this outpost, although apparently solid
behind its river defences, had never withstood the foe from the east, and well
might the little states of mountain and plain, even down to great Damascus,
grow timorous at the growth of the great robber. Indeed, Isaiah's vivid
utterance of the paralysing terror of his approach marks what all these petty
nations must have felt at any time from now down to the end of the seventh
century : ' He is come to Aiath, he is passed to Migron ; at Michmash he hath
laid up his carriages : they are gone over the passage : they have taken up their
lodging at Geba ; Ramah is afraid ; Gibeah of Saul is fled. Lift up thy voice,
O daughter of Gallim : cause it to be heard unto Laish, O poor Anathoth.
Madmenah is removed ; the inhabitants of Gebim gather themselves to flee."
At any rate, this expedition of Assurnasirpal to the land of the Hittites
came apparently in the nature of a surprise, for none of these independent
states gave serious trouble to the conqueror, most of them yielding at once on
sight of his army, and paying tribute without further ado. It was an extra-
ordinary progress. Sangar of Carchemish preferred discretion to fighting, and
gave the Assyrian king great gifts, besides sending Carchemishian chariots,
cavalry, and infantry with the Assyrian host. Assurnasirpal pressed forward to
Hazaz, an outlying city belonging to Lubarna, took tribute from it, and crossed
the Ifrin, moving on Lubarna's capital Kunulua. Lubarna imitated Sangar,
Tel Ahmar, a copy of the fallen lions inscribed in cuneiform which Mr. Hogarth had seen on his visit
there. The inscription thereon shows beyond a doubt that Til Barsip was Tel Ahmar, and not
Birejik (see PSBA., x.x.xiv, 1912, 66).
24 A NEW DECIPHERMENT Ol^^ THE
and boiioht himself off with gifts and service ; Assurnasirpal made the city
Aribua his base, whence he was able to punish the recalcitrant tribes of Luhiiti
and ultimately continue his triumphant march to the Mediterranean. He
washed his weapons in the Great Sea, and actually received the tribute of Tyre,
Sidon, Byblos, Mahalata, Maisa, Kaisa, Amurru, and Arvad. It was a great
feat, and one w^hich was to have a far-reaching eftect on the Near East.
The sixteen remaining years of his life were marked only by one campaign
in 867 (to the north of Assyria), and the first part of his march was spent in
gathering the usual tribute from the districts of Kipani, Salla, Assa, and Kum-
muh. Thence he moved by Assa and Kirhi to the hostile districts of Adani,
and after much fighting reached Amida, and ultimately returned home. He
died in 860, and his son Shalmaneser II (Sulmanu-asarid) succeeded him.
§2^. It cannot be supposed that the inhabitants of Syria, Palestine, and
Cilicia were willing to sit down with folded hands and accept quietly the
situation which was forced on them by Assurnasirpal's daring raid. True, they
had, as far as we can see now, been caught napping, and each one of them had
been compelled to yield in turn before e\'er they could combine in the usual
Hittite fashion against the common foe. For the Hittitcs had always loved the
making of alliances ; it was the one safeguard which these heterogeneous states
possessed either to protect themselves against bullies such as Egypt or Assyria
or to mete out punishment to troublesome neighbours. Ever since the days ot
Rameses II, when the Egyptians made alliance with Khetasar, prince of the
Hittites, they had recognized the principle of union." The Assyrian raid of 876
gave the necessary impetus, and for sixteen years the kings and princes of the
lands of Northern Syria and Palestine made their preparations quietly for
defensive alliances against Assyria.
§ 24. The storm burst when Shalmaneser ascended his father's throne in
860. First he was compelled to attack Ninni of Simesi, and thence he assailed
Kaki (or Kakia) of Hubuskia or Nairi, pressing as far as Sugunia, a fortress
belonoino- to Arame, the kino- of Urarta. Only a little while later came the begin-
ning of his Syrian wars, when he set forth again from Nineveh westwards against
1 An interesting example of this is found on the Aramaic stele discovered somewhere in these
regions by Pognon (where exactly he will not reveal) and published by him in /user. Sent., p. 158.
It is a stele written by Zakir, king of Hamath and c'vS who describes his fight against ' Bar-Hadad,
the son of Hazael, king of Aram ' who had united against him the following coalition : ' Bar-Hadad and
his army and Bar-Ga's and his arm}-, the king of Kaweh (Kauai) and his armj^ the king of 'Amk
(Assyrian Unki) and his army; the king of Gurgu[m] and his arm}', the king of Sam'al and his army,
the king of Malaz (Malatia) and his army.' Noticeable is it that Kummuh is not mentioned.
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 25
Ahuni of Bit-Aclini, who had now joined one of the great alhances formed by the
kings of those of the Hittite and Syrian states which lay nearest Assyria. After a
preliminary skirmish with Ahuni, whose country on the east of the Euphrates
was naturally the first to withstand the Assyrian onset, Shalmaneser pushed on
to the Euphrates, after receiving the tribute of Hapini of Til-abna, Ga'uni of
Sar[u] . . ., and Giri-dadi of Assa. He crossed the ri\'er, and received his usual
tribute from Katazilu of Kummuh, a country always subservient at this period
to the Assyrians, and captured several of Ahuni's towns on the west of the
Euphrates. He went as far as Gurgum, where the king jMutallu paid tribute
and sent his daughter into the Assyrian harem/ and then encountered the
allied forces under Haianu of Samal, Sapalulme of Patin, Ahuni, and Sangar
of Carchemish, and defeated them. He attacked the allies again near the
Orontes, where they had been reinforced by Kate of Kauai, Pihirim(?) of Cilicia,
Buranate of Jasbuka, and Ada . . ., and once more defeated them, and then he
received the tribute of the kings of the sea-coast, finishing his campaign with
presents from Arame of Bit-Agusi. He assessed a yearly tribute on Sangar of
Carchemish and Haianu, and secured the fidelity of these kings by recei\'ing
their daughters in marriage. At the same time, for reasons stated in § 87, this
may possibly have been some years later, after 850 b.c. There were, of course,
the usual doles from Katazilu of Kummuh. He fought another battle with
xAhuni, dro^•e him across the Euphrates, and made that river his western
boundary, establishing in 857 an Assyrian garrison at Til Barsip (Tel Ahmar).
Here he set up a large monolith sculptured with a representation of himself,
and adorned one of the gates in the enceinte with two lions inscribed with a
cuneiform inscription recounting his prowess.
He had thus secured the crossing at the Euphrates should need arise for
another expedition to the west ; next he was compelled to deal with Ar( r )ame,
the king of Urarta, whom he defeated with great loss, and during this campaign
he again attacked Kaki, the king of Hubuskia, with similar success.
§ 25. But the great struggle for which the lands of Syria and the Hittites
were preparing \\as not long to be deferred. Hitherto the great kingdom of
Damascus had avoided coming to blows with Assyria, and, as Maspero (p. 41)
well points out, Assurnasirpal in his raid had discreetly confined himself to the
left bank of the Orontes : ' it was Damascus which held sway over those terri-
tories whose frontiers he respected, and its kings, also suzerains of Hamath
and masters of half Israel, were powerful enough to resist, if not conquer, any
^ The texts say nothing of Mutallu joining the coalition of Ahuni.
VOL. LXiv. 1:
26 A NEW DECIPlIKRMliN'r OF 1111':
enemy who mioht present himself.' But the king of Damascus, at this time
Benhadad II (Adad-ichi), who appears to ha\-e been a \'ery shrewd diplomatist,
can ha\'e had no eas\- feeling-s at these incursions, and he assumed suprenie
control oA'cr a o'reat alliance wherein were found as confederates Irhulina ot
Hamath, Ahab of Israel, the troops of the lands of Kauai, Muzri, Irkanata,
Usanata. as well as those of Matinu-ba'al of Arwad, Adunu-ba'al of Siana,
Gindibu' the Arab s/ick/i, and Ba'sa the son of Ruhubi of the Ammonites, 'iheir
numbers are o-i\'cn at nearly four thousand chariots, nearly two thousand
cavalry, a thousand cameleers, and between fifty and sixty thousand infantry,
all described in the official Assyrian records as the forces of Adad-idri, Irhulina
' with the kino-s of the Hatti and of the sea-coast '.
It was in 854 that the smouldering fire broke out. Shalmaneser had set
out to puni.sh Giammu, the s/ick/i of a district near the Balikh river, no great
distance from Nineveh, and the people of his tribe, fearing the As.syrian.s,
murdered their chief So he collected his re\Tnue in Pitru ' from the members
of that Hittite coalition, most of whom had fought him so short a time pre-
viousl)': Sangar of Carchemish, Kundaspi of Kummuh, .Arame of Bit-Agusi,
Lalli of Milid, Haianu of Samal, Kalparuda of Patin, and Kalparuda {sic) of
Gurgum. This over, he proceeded to Aleppo, where hc^ made sacrifices to
Tesup (Adad), the great god of the Hittites, and then captured the towns Adinnu,
Mas-(or Bar-)ga, and Argana-, belonging to Irhulina of Hamath, an overt act of
hostility which roused the Hittite coalition about his ears. The two armies
met at Karkar, and, as Maspero says, the battle was long and bloody, and the
issue uncertain, yet not unfa\'ourable to Damascus. It showed to the Hittites
that the old \'irtue of alliances was still as strong as ever, and in consequence
Shalmaneser was obliged to suppress a rex'olt in Til-abni the v^ery next year;
a serious war in Babylonia occupied two years (852-851), and in 850 Sangar of
Carchemish and Arame (of Agusi) again gave trouble, doubtless because the
pressure from the As.syrian side was lightened. Maspero remarks that, since
the indecisive battle of Karkar, the western frontier of the Assyrian empire had
receded as far as the Euphrates, and the king had been obliged to forego the
annual Syrian tribute, but now that the Babylonian war was ended the Assyrians
could again assail Syria. In 849 the army was mobilized for the second Syrian
campaign, and the Syrian army of Benhadad, with the twelve kings of the
Hittites, met the Assyrians, and although the latter records claim a \-ictory, it
' Are we to see on the slab from Carchemish M xii, 2 (perhaps a fragment of No. i, which is sculp-
tured with an Assyrian winged figure) the name Pitru (VVitru) in M-t-r (= IF-f-r)-' country ' + ' king ' ?
^ On the Bronze Gates of Balawat is represented the capture of another city ' Astamaku of
Irhulini'.
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 27
seems almost less probable than in 854, for for three years little was done.
Aoain in 846 the two forces jomed battle again, the Assyrian army this time
numbering- 120,000, but the results seem in no way to have favoured the
Assyrian arms, and Syria had rest from Assyria until the death of Benhadad
when he was smothered by Hazael.
§ 26. From this point onwards the good fortune of Damascus waned. To
quote Maspero,' 'It was to Benhadad that it owed most of its prosperity;
he it was who had humiliated Hamath and the princes of the coast of Arvad,
and the nomads of the Arabian desert. He had witnessed the rise of the most
energetic of all the Israelite dynasties, and he had curbed its ambition ; Omri
had been forced to pay him tribute, Ahab, Ahaziah, and Joram had continued
it ; and Benhadad's suzerainty, recognized more or less by their vassals, had
extended through Moab and Judah as far as the Red Sea. Not only had he
skilfully built up this fabric of vassal states which made him lord of two-thirds
of Syria, but he had been able to preserve it unshaken for a quarter of a cen-
tury, in spite of rebellions from several of his fiefs and reiterated attacks from
Assyria. Shalmaneser, indeed, had made an attack on his line, but without
breaking through it, and had at length left him master of the field. This
superiority, however, which no reverse could shake, lay in himself and in him-
self alone ; no sooner had he passed away than it suddenly ceased, and Hazael
found himself restricted from the very outset to the territory of Damascus
proper. Hamath, Arvad, and the northern peoples deserted the league, to
return to it no more.'
Hence in 842 Shalmaneser again crossed the Euphrates and challenged
Hazael ; a bloody battle was again fought, Hazael lost an enormous number of
infantry, cavalr}^, and chariots, and yet merely ran away to fight again another
day. Meanwhile the Assyrian king, after fruitlessly besieging him in Damascus
and destroying the pleasant gardens about it, carved a monument to himself on
a rock, and received tribute from the kings of Tyre and Sidon, and Jehu.
§ 27. Two years later Shalmaneser set forth to punish the different chiefs
who had taken part in the coalitions against Assyria, dealing with each one
singly, now that they were no longer allied, so that they collapsed utterly.
The Kauai were the first to bear this fresh attack in 840; in 839 there was
another campaign against Hazael, and the usual receipt of tribute trom Tyre,
Sidon, and also from Gebal ; then again for two years (838-837) to the north-west
to Tabal, where twenty-four chiefs were reduced to subjection, and Uetas
{Oniasit ?), the stronghold of Lalli, the king of Malatia, was captured. A cam-
' Passing uf the Empires, p. 83.
E 2
28 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OE THE
paign in Namri in 836 drew the Assyrians away from these regions for a short
time ; but they were baek again in 835, receiving the tribute of ' the kings of the
Hittites', and invading the land of Kauai, where Timur, the fortress ot its chiet
Kate, was assaulted, and Muru, the castle of Arame, son of Agusi, was taken
over by the Assyrian king. In 834 'for the fourth time' Kate was attacked,
and deposed by the Assyrians in favour of his brother Kirri ; they actually
reached Tarsus. In the following year, under the Assyrian general Dayan-Assur,
they invaded Urarta. Arame of Urarta had ceased to be ruler here by this
time, and Seduri (=SardurisM had taken his place; but a revolt in 832 among
the Patinai, who killed their king, Lubarna, and put Surri on the throne, evidently
occurred too early for the Assyrians to take full advantage of their initial successes
in Urarta. Dayan-Assur was dispatched against them, punished them, and i)ut
Sasi on the throne. For the next three years the Assyrian army was occupied
on the north-west frontier, against Kirhi and Hubuskia, as far as the Mannai ;
and then, shortly afterwards, arose the internal troubles, when Assur-danm-pal,
the son of Shalmaneser, raised the standard of re\'olt against his father, only to
be put down by his brother Samsi-Adad, who ultimately came to the throne in
824. His records show at once how great the cataclysm had been, and although
he was perpetually at war, he nev^er regained the whole of his father's kingdom,
and apparently w^as only able to restore the western boundary of the empire to
the line of the Euphrates at Carchemish.
§ 28. So much for the Assyrian records of the ninth century when Sangar
and Irhulina were ruling their respective cities. I have gone thus fully into this
history, because I believe that the system of decipherment of the Hittite hiero-
glyphs which I am putting forward will show, as I ha\'e mentioned before, that
many of the Hittite inscriptions hitherto published deal with alliances made bythe
Hittite, Syrian, and other princes and kings of this date, and that many of the
names which occur in Shalmaneser's records are to be tound on them.
First, to complete the proof that ^^^ = ^^m^ /laiii, or /jam (§ lO).
Take first a quotation from the new long inscription ot Jerabis :
9
In AI xi, 2, we find n ^ <>«< Jf , and in M xv, h, 3 ,„ r/ 7^ , all Carchemish
Pointed out by Sayce in JRAS. xiv. 44. - Read (]) for my copy.
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 29
inscriptions. Siniilarly in a new Jerabis inscription ;.. <|> ^ ® where we
are justified in restoring the first group in accordance with our other three
inscriptions by reason of the group which follows it. Lastly, compare "t ^
(M vi, 3, bis, a Hamath text).
Now if it were not for the obvious addition ot the 'tang' to the head-dress
on the face, in M xi and x\-, we might consider that this group was merely some
recurrent grammatical expression ; but this 'tang' entirely justifies us in believing
that this group is a proper name, and, as Sangar and Irhulina are also on the long
new inscription, it is reasonable to see in it a contemporary chief. The last
character we know to be -/ni; we have the suggested value am, ham, or liajii for
the ram's head (from the name of Hamath, § 16): so that we have to identify
a king's name written in three characters, the first of which is a head of which
the back part has been cut away so as to leave only the face (this is distinct in
the long inscription) followed by -ammi, -Jiammi, or -liammi. With which of the
numerous kings' names of this period can w^e identify it ?
The known names of this period which correspond to this final -ammi^xo. Gi-
ammu, Kalammu and Panammu. Now it has been mentioned in § 2 that Assyrian
words were absolutely and without doubt adopted by the Hittites in their cunei-
form writing, and one of them which stands out as certain is the word pan i used
for ' before ', and literally ' face '. Hence we are at once led to see in
the name Pan-am-mi. Two kings of this name are known from the Sinjerli
inscriptions, one the son of Karal (of la'di), the other the son of Bar-.sr (of Samal).'
The latter Panammu died during the reign of Tiglath-Pileser H, i. e. some time
after 745 ; Sachau assigns the date 790(?)to the former, the son of Karal. But
we must either see in our Panammi of the Hittite hieroglyphs a grandfather of
this Panammu, and father of Karal (according to the usual and well-known
method of preserving the grandfather's name in the grandson) or what I think
is more probable, and quite reasonable, we must assign an earlier date to the
first Sinjerli Panammu, allowing at least 100 years to the three reigns,
Panammu I, Bar-sr, and Panammu n,and consider that Panammu 1 was reigning
about 845. This theory for the reading" Panammi is well supported by the
discovery of the name Karal under the form G{K)ar-a-li in AI lii, 4 [written by
Benhadad] (§ 11); and we can thus assign M lii to a date earlier than M vi, xi,
• This group (the brother of Panammi) possibly occurs on M vii, i badly written.
- See Cooke, North Semitic Inscriptions (the Sinjerli Inscriptions).
^o
A NEW DECIPIIERMRNT OF THE
and XV, n, and possibly than M xxi and ix (see § 52, //o/c). From the inscriptions
of Shahnaneser we learn that Samal was ruled by Haianu certainly in 854, and
hence la'di and Samal must have been separate king'doms at this time.
Thus is our assumption that ^<^^ = (//// contirmed, and that our suo-gestion
for the identification of ' Hamath ' in § lO is sound. (For additional proof of the
occurrence of Panammu's nam(\ from the probability of the phrase 'BarTJaya,
his brother ', see § 73 (<:;)).
§ 2y. With this /^ am, we can turn to a passage in the Mar'ash inscrip-
tions which contains this sign in two names.
W xxi—
OQOQ W
M lii-
=d^
og
OQO
ae
©
000=
ol)o
^D
0<S.
%\ f
a\0
K-e " "0
A
Both of these inscriptions, as is clear, have as their subject the chief or
king ®=!x speaking. The name of the country in which these inscriptions were
found is presumably contained in
J<? <^ <#> ^ * (S I /^ or OS ^ ^ C^ afp C^ (j) ^^^
As we saw in § lO, the °If° ^S J)/ or dId '^^> [jj Q^' may be disregarded for the
present as not being part of the name. We have therefore to find the name of
the country in <^^ <^ ^.
The first character is clearly the same as the second with the addition of
' Restored from parallel at beginning of 1. 4 and M xxi, 2.
2 Also in M XXV, 3 <i)^ O "^'^P) "^^ A M and xxiv, 11 <^
'-^, all from Mar'ash.
^ PVom these two variants a value "i- is suggested for ^ , which takes the place of £^. This
is also apparent m two other cases in the two quotations above. The ibex's head never, as far as
I know, takes the place of s after /'(in ni, mi], and hence we must read it as or us. The former
becomes a certainty when we consider K-as-k (Kaskai, § 35), As-ir, As-r-a (Assyria, § 51). (See
note to ^ 1.)
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 31
the 'tang', which indicates proper names, so that the name will begin with
two syllables or characters the same. Now the name of the city of IMar'ash,
long known to be the ancient Assyrian Markasi, is obviously unfitted for this
identification : but the same cannot be said for the district Gurgum in which
Markasi lay.' For the letter r as a medial has always given trouble, and tends
frec[uenth' in ancient transliterations to drop out altogether ; even at this very
period with which we are concerned the king of Urarta is called Seduri by
Shalmaneser, a form now generally recognized to be intended for the Sarduri
of the later periods. The Turuspa of the Assyrians became Qcoo-Trla in Greek
script, pC'^il varies with ptran : ravyd/xyAa is the modern Karamles (which seems
to point to an ancient Kar-gamili) containing similar consonants to Gurgum-
Gugum.2 Secondly, we have already prox^d that ^^^ = ir/n, and hence if we
apply the word Ciu(r)gum to our hieroglyphic group we should get
G// - g// - am
which is quite plausible. If this be so, then it will probably lead to our reading
/^ as "/// ■ {am and /////) ; the problem before us is then to prove from elsewhere
that <^ = gu.
Now in the Tel Ahmar inscription (1. 3) there occurs a proper name marked b}'
'!^ .:y^;.
the 'tang' ^'.■''■'■/. This name occurs in the proper names of Malatia, W xvi, c
as ^, quoted in § 19: it this be read according to our sign values we shall
obtain a name, probably that of a chief, Gu-am or Gu-'m, and we can recognize
in this the name of the chief Giammu of the district near the Balikh river,
not far from Tel Ahmar and Carchemish. As is mentioned in § 25, his district
was invaded by Shalmaneser in 854, and his own people murdered him.
§ 30. In M xxi, I (quoted above, § 29) we find a group "^"^^^ which
' Tarljiilara is prefect of Gwrgixm [IVAI.W. 67, 45, 58: iii. 9, 52) or Markasa (Assj-rian tablet
in B.M. K 1660).
^ It must be remembered that both Assyrian and Aramaic forms of Gurgum would be trans-
literations of the native name.
^ J^ u-'iii-k = i'liki = 'A ink occurs on T.A. 4. See ^ 52 (5).
* That the word ends here is clear from a comparison with M Hi, i (quoted also § 29I, where
in ^^/^ (parallel with [ ^p* /^ which follows our word immediatel}- in M xxi) is clearly a
distinct word.
32 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
appears from its ' tang ' to be a proper name : it occurs also in 1. 3, the first
character being "^^^ Now this character appears nowhere else, as far as 1
know, and since the stone lion on which the inscription is carved is crowded
with characters, it is very probable that we have here a 'conflate' sign made
up of <3 <^'' ''i^i*^! T . so that \\-e can read tlic wliolc group as Ar-am-mi. Now
Arame is the name of both the king of Urarta and the king of Bit-
AgLisi, neither of them far from Mar'ash, and both were defeated by Shal-
maneser (§ 24). In AI xi, 4 he is called ' Ar-am, chief of K-as-k', i.e. Kaskai
(§ ■i^'^, and from this and from the propinquity of his name to that of
Sangar in the Assyrian records we may assume that the Arame of Bit-Agusi
is meant.
§ 31. Proceeding witli these same quotations from the Mar'ash texts, we
have seen that ra is a king's name, to which is added ^^2= and ,^ in M ii :
here in M xxi and lii this addition is affixed to the word "^s « (in the form fif
o?fag^ and °^i^>^£^)- Hitherto we have only commented on this addition in
let •
place-names, but clearl}' from our c|uotations from M ii it may be also added
to personal names. Hence, since we have already identified Gurgum, tlic
place-name immediatelv followino- oe j'Ks , we can see a personal name in this
latter group.
The connexion of this personal name with (kn-gum in the Mar'ash inscrip-
tion is settled for us quite simply by the Hittite seal figured in M xlii, 5, on
which the inscription runs dowm one side
[iikJ <^ O "^
and up the other Ilk Q <^<^ <^ (reading thus, in this order), i.e. it is dupli-
cated, as in the ' Tarkondemos ' Boss. Here clearly is our place-name, <#> <#>^
Gu-gu-m = Gurgum, with hk as [king] of it. The seal inclines us to the
reading of the signs in the order n^Q, which is favoured by I.A. i, || and
M ii, I, n ; but on the other hand M xxi and hi give a™«. Neverthe-
less, in whatever way it is to be read, we have proved that
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 33
BOOD- or
s a
was the name of the king of Gurgum contemporaneous with Arame, and of
the two kings who we know were living about this period, Mutallu and Kal-
paruda, the former from the shortness of its appearance seems the more
probable. In order to show that the second hieroglyphic group above really is
Mutallu we must turn aside for proofs on entirely fresh lines.
§ 32. If the various ' hand '-signs be examined it will be seen that
(forearms crossed, probably in order to make blood-brotherhood) is probably a
'stenographic' form of the hieroglyph ^^^^ of M x, i (see § i), and from this
latter we obtain the clue that the former also is an ideogram tor ' alliance ' or
' brotherhood '. By pursuing this idea further it is not far to \f, the hand
holding the dagger, which Professor Sa3^ce at first considered to express the idea
of ' killing' or 'conquering' {7^SB^-J. vii, 1882, p. 276), and altered later, I believe
erroneously, to ' great '. His first idea was, I think, much nearer, and personally,
like Dr. Rusch, I believe it gives the idea of ' fighting' and hostility. The hand
holding the graving-tool ^i^ similarly gives the word for ' engraving '.'
^ If the cast of the Mar'ash lion in the B.M. (IVI xxi) be examined it will be found to have the
second paragraph (i.e. the end of 1. i) thus: ' Benhadad unto the son of his brother ... li ' (i.e.
Mu-tal-li?); and in the middle of the second line it is possible that four characters read *Mu-*tal-li-s
(see translation at end).
^ We find similar ideas in Egyptian ideographs, u q = 'to give', (^ = ' to grasp', (_H 'to fight'.
The Hittite ^^ and ^t^ may then be suspected to mean 'to take ' and ' to place ' respectively.
This hand holding the graving-tool occurs in M iii, b, 3 ; iv, a, 3 (and is broken away in v.), where
presumably Irhulina says 'I have graven our covenant (?) with (So-and-so)'. Similarly in a new
Jerabis inscr. (see § 68 (10)) ' So-and-so hath graven (?) covenants with me'. That it does not mean
simply 'to write', as I first thought, is shown by M ii, 4 'our allies have graven the leg(?)(= base?)
of the memorial (?) ' (see § 48 (5)) ; moreover, the picture in the hierogl3'phs points to a large tool held
in the grip, unlike a pen. As is shown in § 48, we have the root t-e certainly meaning 'to say' (in
M ii, 5 this is paralleled by the ideograph ' engrave ') ; a third root s which occurs in similar passages
must have a similar meaning, and 1 propose the value ' write' on the following grounds : — The actual
root is certain from the word s-r-a following chiefs' names (in exactly the same manner as t-e-r-a
'they say'); e.g. '(NN in the land of?) s-r-a: kat-n:t-c: I ; have written. We are of one speech
(accord),' &c. (TA 4 : § 61) (cf. . . . ; f{a) s-r-a 'enemy ' : 1-k-n-m : g{k)-iiin c-a-l[a) ' have written, Against
my (? = our?) common enemy I will go with thee ', TA 3). Cf. also M xxxii, 3 . . . ? aii-iias ID (or 6'-)
Ani-k: ID; -n s-r-a: ' god'-' I'riend'-k-iii-iiis-k-n: Kar-a-fal(?)-k-ii, ' . . . . aiuias, chief (?) of Amk a . .
have written : Unto {or, By?) the god of (our?) friend, unto Karatal(?)' (see M. xxi, 2, 5, 6, comparing
VOL. LXIV. F
34 A NEW DHCIPHERMENT OF THE
§ 33. On the analogy of these suppositions let us suppose that ^^^, the
hand outstretched in welcome, so constant in the groups in § 14, indicates
' friendship ', and compare the opening phrase of the two Mar'ash texts M xxi
and lii quoted in § 29. The first part of the sentences is the same in each case,
except for the vertical hand ^ varying with @. The first group m ^m is
'saith ' from § 9 : hence the line in M lii will begin—
'Saith (king) X ' friend '-/•-//-// /-^ (king) Y^Mutallu ?V?- . . .-s [of] G//-gu-
in-n- ^lii^ -u-s- place \
Now the postpositi\'e k-n (cuneiform kau) is already known from § 7 to mean
'to', and as an examination of the cuneiform texts will show that -s is the
suffix of the third person singular (§ 57) we may suppose that we have a posses-
sive here, placed after the /•-//, 'Saith (king) X unto his friend (?) (king) Y
(Mutallu ?) of Gurgum '. A comparison of similar texts will show that this is
there ' god '-' brother '-/c-iii-ji-n/s and ' god '-' friend '-k-ni-nis). The perfect of this verb 5 with the augment
occurs in a newjer.inscr. in tiie form a-s-f. ' So-and-so: lD-u{a) a-s-t " brother "-c-/e.- saii-t-n-s (or snii(itys-
i{d)) hath written a (our) ..." Like a brother(s) thou makest us (or thou actest) " ' (§§69, 76). The word
°f°(Oii) '^'^'^ occurs once elsewhere. A form s-tt-ii appears in 'The pledges (?) of So-and-so s-ii-n
(1 have written)' (new Jerabis): ii-in-n s-ii-n 'a covenant (?) I have written' (new Jerabis). In the
case of M xv, b are we to read 11. 2 3 hats n-ii kat-u-n: "Paii-aiii-ini n-iii-n s-u-n (§71)? In the next
Hne ihiihii s-ti-ii ends the inscription following after a chief's name. A form s-ii occurs M lii, 3.
I had at first thought that this root s meant 'to send', but I believe that the meaning ' write '
is the correct one, on account of the following noun s-c, which would seem to come from it. The
most striking instances appear to me to be in (1) M xxxiv, a (Ivriz) : ' I am Tesup-mis . ., I am
Ariarathides ; we have given our alliance (hands) ; (1. 3) s-c " ally" -lui f{a)-?, the writing of our alliance
giv[ing].' S-e here must mean some tangible proof of the alliance. (2) M xxxiii, 2: 'This tablet of
making alliance hath brought gifts (?): tc (^) s-c-i{a) : f-a : iiii-f[a) ID ; "T{a)-a-uas, thy letter did speak
concerning (?) T3'anian wood.' (On this quotation see translation at end.) The other instance which
I know is: — {M. '\] "Gu-n-nas man (?yiiiii s-e: ii-in-n-e ' god' Targn(lyr-r-s ' god '■Sii/[?yc-s: ini-iii,
' Gunnas(?), my . . . (?), hath accepted (?) the writing of the covenant of Targu-ras (and) Sul(?)-es.' (See
translation at end.) Does s-e-n-iiii in this text also belong here ?
Are we to see the root in the verb after kat-iiii {ibid.) and read s-uii'^ (see § 70, iioh-). In M vii, 2
gii(?);-e-H io(?) ID s-e n-iii-ii-an ii-f(?} . ■ san . . . the phrase is the same ('writing of our covenant')
as in the previous example, and considering the limited possibilities of the verb 5 we shall probably
not be far wrong in considering the meaning to be 'write' with a noun s-c (whatever number or case)
' a writing'. Is this endorsed by the Hittite cuneiform ?
The meaning 'write' fits the following case :— (Y r. 11) ;/// iiia-a-an ""UD-ns a-as-su kii-e ta- . . .
' Unto our lord (§ 44) the Sun-god (i.e. king) they have written, "Gifts giving . .."' (the next line
ending ' for a gift a poor man brings to thee a sheep '), where I take a-as-sit to be the augmented
tense of s with it termination, as in § 71.
Other possible occurrences of the root are (G 16) iiaiii-ma-ai GIS-NI-if sa-ra-a Ini-it-ii-ia-an-zi :
(Y ;-. 1) . . . ta na is AN .EN . ZU . NA si-i-e-it . . . : (Y r. 2) . . . a-ar BABU.GAL-as bi-tiis si-i-e-it ameli
MES : (Y /-. 4) . . . sa li-it alj-lia-fi sa-at ii-ul fa-alj-lni-un. Cf. sa-a-ak-ki (Y 20) ; [s]a-ia-at (A ii, 5).
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 35
extremely plausible, and when we find the ist person singular and plural suffix
(-;// and -an) used in a similar way the suggestion becomes a certainty ' : —
(3rd person singular)
(.)Mii,i'^^f. U^ '/^/'ot^ "J^'Saith.-eN.,king,Y
(Mutallu ?) ^r-^!i5^-5.- %-k-n-s (i.e. 'unto his ^ (king) Y (Mutallu ?)).'
ill) M xxii #:: ^ % ' Saith Tesup-k a-s-k-uis (i.e. 'unto his as' %
(r) M Hi, 3 ^ '^ ^ 1^ "If ® ■ S-^ith »»'(king) X #-/-«/-,< Q
(i.e. unto his friend (?) Q^').'
{d) M xxi, I ' Saith (king) X *. . . . ^ '^ ^ <^ = A'^'"'^"-^ "^^^^^Ay-ani-nii) ' unto
his \h Arammi '.
1 A list of the suffixes will be found in § 58, with the reasons for their identification, and I have
consequently not repeated them here. The examples for k-n with ist pers. sing, and pi. are
(I) TA 7: ^ (H i.e.: ID; k-n-m ' unto my table (?)' ; (2) M x, 7 ^|f ID-/-;/-w 'against mine
enemy'; (3) M lii, 5 ^T \Y)-k-n-n-m 'to my?'; (4) M ii, 4 T|| S q fTFT V '"■"-"-'^'-"■'^" "-t^")-^
' for our memorial (?) he hath given.'
^ I am much inclined to suggest that these two signs are afi(]^ a-/iii, and to recognize the
word as one of those adopted by the Hittites from Assyria, translatmg it ' brother' on the analogy
of a-bi-c (Y 32, 33), a-bu-u-iis (Y 37, 38), a-bit-ii-uii-un (Y 27, 31), &c., ' father '. There is the bare possi-
bility of alju occurring once for 'brother' in the Hittite cuneiform (Al. r. 18, a letter) ili-lii CIS CD
'"Za-ar-sc-AN-MAR-TU a-Iia-ti-iva liaf-ra-at {' Zarse-MaYiu, thine other brother?'): the Sumerian
ideograph is, however, often used. (See § 89.) Tesup-k occurs elsewhere in the hieroglyphic texts.
■■ This is a name which occurs elsewhere : see § 49.
^ This name is so important and occurs so frequently that it is better to discuss it here.
F=s^ occurs on the long Jerabis inscription ; on M ii, i, 4, 6 (from Babjlon) : iii a, i (Aleppo) : iii b,
3 (Hamath) : xvi, a, i (Malatia) : xxi, i, 2 and lii, i, 3 (IVIar'ash). Ball, as far back as 1887 [FSB A., ix,
1887, 447), recognized that this was a royal name of which the first part was Dadi. This king is one
of four who have written the Malatia inscription, the first being probably Irhulina: on the long
Jerabis inscription he is mentioned again with one of these kings, and he is the actual writer of the
two long Mar'ash inscriptions to Mutallu. In the Malatia as well as the Mar'ash inscriptions he
is undoubtedly suggesting an alliance with the reigning king of those lands, and from the ubiquit}-
of his name it is clear his power was widely recognized.
The name is made up of the sign for Tesup without the god-sign ; then an unknown sign
which I have not met outside this name ; and finall}' the sign r. Thus we get Tesitp-1-r, or, since
Tesup is Hadad, Hadad-l-r, which looks ver}' much as though we had the Assyrian form of the
F 2
36 A NEW DECIPIIHRMENT OF THE
§ 34. From these examples it appears tliat suffixes can be added to k-ii,
the forms being" k-ii-m, k-ii-Ji-ni, k-ii-s, k-iii-s, k-i/is, k-ii-iiis,^ k-ii-aii. W^e arc also
in possession of five terms of address : —
(i) ^ ' friend ' or ' ally', varyino- with (2).-
(2) (g) ( proved to mean ' brother ', § 38).
(3) °^^Ck ^^-s (01" perhaps =a-Iiii 'brother', § }yi, nofc 2).
(4) @ (called 'chief by Sayce, and considered thus ('man' or 'hero') as
certain by Menant, he. cit., 104 : see § 73 (/->)).
(5) jh. (considered as ' king ' by Sayce : I should prefer ' lord ', see translation
of M xxi, M lii, at end).
With this possible clue from the vertical hand as 'friend', we may turn to
the horizontal hand with the thumb in the same place ^>3 in the frequent
group (§ 14) m^ <S ^ T M ('hand': (s ^ ^a in /-//is). It is marked, as has
been pointed out, by 'word dividers ' before and after, so that it is an ideogram ;
the omission in the f//)vc Hamath texts of gV shows that this is probably not an
accident, l^ut that this syllable or word is unimportant. Mi-nis seems to be
cognate with our word nu'-j/i- ' we ' ; so that it looks as though we should arrive
at some such meaning for the first lines of the Hamath texts as 'Saith Irhuh'na
to N, " Make alliance with us ".' Knowing the necessity to the Hittites for such
alliances at this period, it does not seem improbable. How then, shall we explain
& and 0/ o-rammatically ?
name of Renhadad II, Adad-id-ri. When we consider the frequence of his name, that lie is mentioned on
Irhuhna's inscription at Hamath, that he writes to Mutaliu of Gurgum and his adopted (?) son, and Arame,
telling them of the alliances of several kings, among whom are Karal, Kate and Nks, and probably
Panammu and Irliulina. that he joins with Irhulina(?) and two other kings to ask alliance with the
king of Malatia, and, as negative evidence, that he is not mentioned in the later published texts of
Carchemish, in which occurs the name of Kirri (who was not put on the throne of the Kauai until
834, § 27), we ma}' well see Benhadad in this name, reading his name Tesiip [Hadadyid (or iz?]-r.
' And also k-s, presumably' by assimilation for k-ii-s in M x.xxii, i : xxxiii, i. At first sight k-ii-uis
would lead one to suspect ist pi. suffix rather than 3rd sing., especially when 'make alliance with
us' frequently follows, and the difficult case ' brother '-/■-;;/ ;//;/-(7s 'unto the son of. . brother' (M xxi, i)
occurs. But we find k-n-'s in the same line as k-n-ui-s, referring to the same subject (M xxi, i), and
in M xxxiii, i ' make alliance with us' follows the simplest form k-s. Moreover, the doubled n occurs
in the ist pers. sing, k-n-n-ni as well as /'•//-;/;, and consequently the balance of evidence is in favour
of our seeing the 3rd pers. in k-n-iiis.
^ See the note to § 67.
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 37
6 :;S. The g is distinct from ^ clearly, for (^ is three times left out : g is
.' -J^' ^^ alia -' QlQ ^^
also the equivalent of ^^^ (§ 15(3)). In M xi, 4 (^ occurs, which must
either be a god's name, or more probably the second sign is an adjecti\'e
qualifying 'god', in which case it is probably 'great'. This group occurs
in a new inscription from ferabis thus 4 ^ S^^-
t ^1 . .
With this value ' Q-reat the qtoud which occurs twice in M x (4 and 6) ^
- * ^ mdnnD
should mean 'chief of the Nine', whoever they may be: similarl)' we find
|/ in M Hi, 2, and (except for dc) thus also in a new Jerabis inscription.
^(^iiiiiiiii
This clue (^^^ or (§ = ' great', 'chief') leads us to far-reaching conclusions.
'Affirmeth (sweareth) Ar-am chief of K-as-k ', i.e. Arame, chief of Kaskai.'
Hence it should prove a clue to the existence of names of chiefs or kings in
the hieroglyphs.
Take then the group U (1. 4) and ^ (1. 5) in the same inscription,
which reads ^©Qfla, K-r-a ( + ' chief), the a in the first case being marked by
a 'tang'. The inscription has already been shown to contain the names of
Arame (above) and Panammi (1. 2, § 28) ; hence it belongs to the date of Shal-
maneser, and, moreover, not too early in his reign. The name may be easily
Identified with KIrri who was placed on the throne of the Kauai by Shalmaneser
in place of Kate his brother (§ 27). It will be seen in § 49, that other chiefs'
names are similarly indicated, and we can therefore consider this sign as proved
to mean 'Q-reat'. There should therefore be no difficultv in finding its value
from the Hittite cuneiform.
§ 36. The adverb hu-n-wa-an " in the first Arzawa letter is the equivalent of
^ The word kask undoubtedly ends at the -k, for the next word is well known. The Kaskai
are a well-known tribe to the north-west of Assyria, and it is probable that this is a more definite descrip-
tion of one of the two kings called Arame by Shalmaneser, either of Bit-Agusi or Urarta (see § 30).
I have suggested 'affirm' or 'swear' for the ideograph of the head with protruding tongue (see end
of note to § i).
'■^ It occurs A i, 6, 7,10 : Y [8J, 15, 35, ;-. 33(7) : cf Ini-iva-ait-fi V 9 ; /iii-ii-a'ii-aii-da A i. 26 : /jii-is V
zj4, cf. Y 6 : Iiii-ti-i-ia-an-fc-cs Z i, 7 : liu-{u)-i-l)a D 14 : E 12 : Ijit-it-iva-as-id C vi, 9, &c. Particularly com-
pare the name in Assyrian letters "'Hu-tc-sHp, B.M., K 1037, 1067 (period c. 700 B.C.), ' Great is Tesup'.
38 A NEW DECIPHRRMENT OF THE
the Babylonian danuis^ in the greetinii-s of the letter tablets : ' thy houses, thy
wives, &c. /j/i-ii-7i<a-an DMK-iii c-cs-fii may they be very well '. The wa-an may
very likely "be the adverbial termination, equivalent to an accusative : bc-ri-iva-au
occurs ((} 23, iii-jni-da-as i-wa-ar bc-ri-ioa-aii a:;-::i-ig-gaii-zi), which may also be an
ach'crb. So that we are probably right in seeing in Jju-ii-iva-an the root // or ////
'great': and if so e and (Jli^ will probably indicate a similar sound.
§ 37. Now there is in 1 littite cuneiform an interesting causative conjuga-
tion formed by adding -////- to a root, e.g. iip-pn-n/j-/ii A i, 18, np-pa-{a/j)-/jii-ini
A i, 15, 28 (from the well-known root pn) : fn-ah-lju-iiii Y r. 4, [5] tah-Jiu-da . . .
Y r. 18 (from the root fa ' to give ') : tc-cJj-liii-uu Y ;-. 7 (from the root tc ' to say').
Other forms are sii-ub-bi-ia-aJi-Iji D r. 5, su-itb-bi-ia-ali-Iia-au-zt D r. 7, sn-ulj-lja-
aJj-hu-nn Y r. 6. Can we consider this <§ or [{|](\j in ^^ ^('^ ''^s akin to this ?
The following examples from the hieroglyphs give interesting results : —
OS
(i) (A new Jerabis inscr.) ^ ^ ; 'ally': + hQ)-n \.
'c nil '^ n
(2) (M ii, 2) H n ^ p:^ 11 i[j : ^v^;- ^i^'i-^i\ ■ ' all)- ' : + // (?)-//.
IIS DS OS
(3) (TA 4) ^ I IJj^ £: • • • ' enemy '-/w/-5 : ' ally ' : + /j (?)-;.-«(«) (?).
The last example (whether u(a) be correct or not, p. 125) would adduce the
verbal termination for the first person plural for our consideration.
In cases (i) and (2) the subject is plural, in case (i) personal names being
used. We should therefore suspect for both these groups verbs in the third
person plural, for which ending -//-V the Hittite cuneiform offers an obvious
parallel in its frequent verbal forms ending in -a;/,:;/. For instance, in A i, 22
nu-ut-ta Ji-iva-an-zi u-ta-au-zi ku-sa-ta DU-SAL-//, 'Unto thee they . . ., they give
the dowry (?) of thy daughter'. The forms iiivanzi utaiizi indicate a verbal
ending in -anzi. Other forms which occur are abawanzi G 20, atmizi G 16,
' Bu. 88, 10-13, 43 (Bezold-Budge, Tell-el-Amarna Tabids, no. i, 1. 6).
- My copy made in 191 1 from the stone gives \r, but I have no hesitation in suggesting that it
should be nnS. from a comparison with other texts.
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 39
aruuansi G 2, 8, 10, arriibanzi G 5, asmianzi G 20, asyiiansi G 13, bennnwanzi
G 8, 9, beniuiauzi G i, /ri'//c/ D 6, r. 10, E i, 9, iiiuiiiyauzi G 15, issaiizi P 8.
Thus we have clearly a [third person plural] cndinq- in -anzi, coinciding with our
hieroglyphic ?| , which we can now read -n-zi with certainty. In our present
case the sense of ' ally ' + hQ)-n-zi is obviously ' They make alliance ', and we
can eliminate any doubt about it after an examination of two other phrases.
In the first, from a new Jerabis inscription, the writer has given us the noun
itself and the verb formed from the noun, thus showing how the causative might
be made
tfS
8 CD
where the base of the verb is in the second group, the verb coming first
and marked with m ( = 7011, i. e. the cuneiform inua- ?) at the beginning and ter-
minating with the causative h-n-zi. In the second (a new Jerabis inscription)
we find 4 III "^ mi-n-zi ^-h-n-zi} ® is the character in M xxi which
^ In order not to stra}' too far from the subject of \ = c/, I append cases of the use of s/ placed
after names. An excellent e.xample of this in the hierogl^'phs is given in § 3 : San-gar-s N-k-s
"G«r-^-;//-5 + ' place '-c/. Now a postpositive zim the case of nouns occurs in Hittite cuneiform, and
Professor Sayce rightly hazarded that it meant ' in ' in the instances in cuneiform in which he met it : —
C I, 15 Ma-a-an HJGAL-us"'lA-ri-in-ua-az'^'"Ha-at-tn-»i-pa-iz-zii^\n the city Hattu-sipa') : ibid.,
r. 2 "'"la-ii-il "'"Ha-tz-zi nit """'CJS.PA LUCAL-tis. Similarly we maj' see it perhaps in "S' 30
. . . ak-ki-is liar-as-zi tc-ri-ib-zi zca-a-far iia-a-i hal-di-iii-iia . . . : and possibly L 2 iiaiii-iua-qan E[l or
LAHl)-iz-zl
Other words end thus in -:/ which ma}^ be nouns, but it is difficult to be definite about them, as
both -aiizi and -izzi appear to be verbal terminations. But ''"Tenusizzi (K 7) is fairl}' certain with
a slightly' different meaning than 'in' for the preposition. 'In' is definitely the sense in our
hieroglyphic passage ' Sangar (and) Nks in Carchemish '. That this is no quid pro quo is obvious from
the Jerabis text M xv, b For other examples of this postpositive -zi, cf. in a new Jerabis inscription
^ « : Mi-zi-ir-zi + ' place ', ' in Mizir ', i. e. Muzri, to the north-west of Assyria : V^ (1 A 4) :
W I) %
?-' place '-c/ 'In the land of?' (unless it should mean 'in the speech of the land', which I think
unlikely). The same use of -c/ as in ''"Tenusizzi occurs in the hieroglyphs of M ix, 4, where -c/ takes
the place of -5 in the parallel passage in 1. 2 in the same inscription after all three personal names; and
M X, 2 (rnjTjjrm I'i /'" 1 X'Zi ' agalust the chiefs of the Nine ' (quoting their names). Cf. also ^ -^ Hit-iii-zi
' with (or against) Ahuni ' (TA i), Ahuni being the chief of Bit-Adini, the neighbourhood of Tel Ahmar
40 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
replaces ^ in the introductoiy speech of M Hi, and it must therefore have
some such meaning as 'friend'. Whatever //////;;/ may mean (§ 69), 'they have
made friendship ' or a similar sense would suit ^-//-//-z/. The same word is
indicated in the same inscription f^ |j] = @\/-/^-''^--^-
§ 38. But a suggestion comes from a comparison of the groups containing
Panammi's name (§ 28), where we find a group ©> vy repeated with and without
® £^ after it, even separated from it by a character. From the table of Hittite
cuneiform pronouns (§57) -s means 'his', and in the quotation from M xi, 2 (§ 28) the
last group, "Y^ </, looks like a plural verb such as we have here, of which we
have already seen the singular in § 35. Hence the group after Panammi gives
us the impression that it is another name, and the obvious rendering for our sign
would be ' brother', i.e. ' Panammi (and) R his brother swear'. (For additional
evidence, see § 73.) This meaning 'brother' fits AI xxi, i (§ 29), 'Saith Ben-
hadad unto his brother Y (Mutallu?) of Gurgum', and also our word (p-//-//-:/,
which will give us the sense 'they have made brotherhood'. (^I^ -/''-/''--/,
although spelt somewhat difterently, will gi\'e the same sense : the character \y
is discussed in § 73 (a). It is almost unnecessary to call attention to the ancient
practice of making brotherhood, which is discussed in § 87.
But we may also derive additional evidence for the value // from <s=&, which
will be seen to be the same as the sign (^) //// from the two forms Q^ (JNI ix,
2, 5) and ^(M XXX, b). In M x ^ 'chief of the Nine" occurs (11. 4, 6) after what
^V QLODIID
may well in each case be^a personal name, and r^^m once (1. 2) after what may
-where this inscription was found ; his name occurs twice in M Hi (11. 1 and 2), c\_ \ ^ j '• "Hit-ii(u),
Wo, ^^ ^1 ~
with a tang, indicating a personal name (see § 24). I or the cases of jn) (j/^-s/ ' with them ' see the list
of pronouns, § 58. ^
Under this heading doubtless should come the cuneiform -:a in such phrases as iiia-a-an-^a
Li'GAL-us ' unto our lord king' (see § 44I, iiain-nia-za (A ii, 22), ani-mn-uk-kn-za (W 19), &c. But as
we find both i-ia-an-ii [Y 7; P 4), and i-ia-aii-ici (P 11), which may be only careless variants owing to
the final \owel of the Hittite zi being slurred, it does not seem unlikely that this -za is merely a
variant of -zi.
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 41
well be three personal names, and hence I should be inclined to regard a=^ hit
(= ^) ^^s a plural of ]|[ // and read here 'chiefs of the Nine '. Professor Sayce
recognized in cf==i) the sign of supremacy, translating m][[i][[i] ^'^^ though it referred
to a singular subject. If 6=^ (/in) is the plural of ijj // it might also read ///or /je on
the analogy of the ordinary plural (§ 63), but it is impossible to lay do^^•n many
rules as yet for the grammar.
"^^
[Other passages in which ci=5i occurs are : {a) Ip ^^ -M iii- R: i^', a:
" DQQD OQDQO
iv, B ; the (j^ also occurs in these inscriptions, (d) ^ M ix, 2, 5 : xi, 3 : xxx, b.
(c) i 1 7 111 M xii, I. (//) several times apparently in M x\iii, especially
^5 iiSii- (^') ^ ^^ ^^^' B- <^/) A ^^ ^^^' -^' ^^^^'' 2: Rams, several
times: see the 'edicule' at Boghaz Keui, AI xxvii, d, e. {g) ?M xxxi, c, 4.
o<s no rt=^ (KS
D|]D
(//) M xxxv, 3 S- (/■) TA 5 ^ 21 I k ^„.]
r^ ji f^ ^i
§ 39. We have settled therefore the value of // with its causal effect on
verbs, its meaning ' great ', and its probable connexion with the sign ////. We
can now pursue the subject further, and seek the explanation of the final d|o g^
a-/i-s in both personal and place-names.
. In § 29 the two quotations from M xxi and Hi run thus, 'Saith Benhadad
unto his brother Y (Alutallu ?)-c7-//-c75- : 6V/-^v/-'///-rr-//-//-<'^s--" place ",' and 'Saith
Benhadad unto his ally Y (Mutallu ;^H?[//]-.s-: 6"//-^j07/-V//-^/-//-//-.s--" place 'V The
following throw additional light on it : —
Or) M ii, 1, 6, 7}'sii/>-i(/{?)-r-a-/i-s : i7)., 4, Tc^up-idO)-r-a-li. (Cf also M iii, b, 3,
§15,(3)).
{b) TA I 8 ooa YU\IutaUu Y)-a-/i-s (cf. M ii, i, which is the same except
for 'vk in place of ^).
{c) The place-names in M iii, b, 2 : iv, a, 2 : b, 2}
^ These may be transliterated ? -r-an-a-li-s-' place ', Ar{?)-}iin!!{?)-(i-/i-n(is-e-a-' place ', B-s-Ii-r-n-li-uas-
' place '. See § 56.
VOL. LXIV. G
42
A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
((/) The name of Hamath, y(////-/{a)-(r-//-' p\cice'-'\oYd'-/-i7 (M [iii, b, t] : iv,
A, B, I : M vi, and Restan i).
{(') M xxxiii, T (see § 12): "A-r-ar-n-s: "'l\a\a-u{a\n-li-s-' \)\d,<ZQ\
There are other instances, but these are enough. It is noticeable that in
no case does the writer of an inscription apply the termination <7-//-5 to himself;
it is always to the person (or city) \\'hercof he speaks, or even to his own city.
It seems to be a compliment, and from its form connected with our root // ' great ',
and Jensen's earlier suggestion ' king ' was a reasonable one (see § 1, note). I do
not think that the a represents a definite article, as I can find nothing to identify
as a parallel, nor can I find any word in Hittite cuneiform with which to
compare a-Ij-s. I am inclined to see in it an intensive form (like the Greek
arej/^f, ao-TrepxeV), and uscd in tcHTis of address, meaning 'the very great'. It
is at least noteworthy that it is applied to Hamath in the Hamath texts,
which would compare with the ' Hamath the great' of Amos vi. 2. Moreover,
in the inscription of Bar-Rekub from Sinjerli (Cooke, North Semitic liisci'iptions,
172) we find the phrase 'IN" 'riN'i TiS 'satraps and nJje oi la'di", TiS being com-
pared {ibid., p. 178) to the Assyrian/^)'//)'?/'/, and nx 'apparently a title like n*K
1. 3', and it does not seem improbable that we have here our Hittite word.
§ 40. Having come thus far, we ran now turn to o-^
flg
m
a a
and the first point is to discover the walue of the ox-hcad.
ajfa
rhere is a common
DffQ
word ^ of which we may cite the following instances: —
{b) Ibid., 7
^ qOq
Q&
^:\ KiS^ }m
(0 ^^^h^ hO &
0<£
0(S
i'^)
M xxi,
*^
vQQQ-
gnfe [
1 =^
11
DQQ
('')
New
Jerabis
^ 51
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 43
^ oQa QDQQ „Ofi
(/) Newjerabis U °Q°
Now in the first case (a) if q^^ be, on the analoo'V of %0 , a verb, ^^
will probably not be one. In (d), (r), and (<•/) ^^ is used directly before the
nouns 'friend', Panammi, and Mutallu(?): hence, if it be not a verl3, it may be
a preposition. In (c) and (/) a most noticeable interchange of III and || suffixed
ffH <3^5,(l °^° °^° °11° ,
becomes T ||, and ell^ becomes ^. li ^ he a preposition,
then fil and | are (pronominal) suffixes.
m
§ 41. We have therefore to follow up the problem:— Can we compare this
with any preposition beginning with (7 existing in Hittite cuneiform ? X^ow
the word ada is ob\'iously a preposition in Al. /'. 8 ff a-ba-it GIS-S.^R sa Diir-
nibfi-bab-ine \ GIS-SAR ga-ua-ri-is \ GIS-SAR sa Lis-ine-ainil-ii)ii a-ba Ijan'an-
luc I a-ba-u GIS-SAR sa Diir-ki-ine, ' With (or from) them the garden of D., the
garden . . ., the garden of Lisme-amilum with (or from) the paths, with (or from)
them the garden of Durkime.' It occurs also possibh" in Scheil i, 3, ... fa-an-
ha-ta si{})-uf-ta a-ba /jal[l)-siC) . . .
It is therefore quite reasonable to consider that the hieroglyphic preposi-
tion "^ a-? is the equivalent of the cuneitorm preposition a-b(r, i.e. that
<^ = b{a).'
Hence we can now read our group in § 40 as 'ally' + /i b(a)-a mi-ni-s- (or
in two cases, § i4(^), 'ally ' + h b(a)-a in is). We have no difficulty now in seeing
' The names which occur containing this character, Bauli the son of Mutallu, — banin, a chief of
the ' Nine' (M Hi, i, 2, &c.), Bark, a chief of the ' Nine'(§ 73>, give no further proof one waj' or the
other, as I cannot identify them with known kings, although Ba'ali is of course possible as a name, and
Ilu-ibni was king of Suhi. Indeed the opening speech of M ii, ' Saith T(a)-?-ar-s unto his lord(?)
Mutallu, " Thy father (?) (and) Benhadad the great have given thee a memorial-stela (?) for the com-
memoration (?) (glory (?l) of Tesup (Hadad)" ', holds out more prospect of confirmation of the value
b{a), for we have seen that the Assyrian word abti ' father ' had been taken over into the language of
the Hittite cuneiform, and here w^e have a-b{a)-u-i[a). (See § 89.) For a-b(a]-ir, see notes to trans, to
M ix at end, which shows that b and p interchange in the hieroglj'phs like k and g. For additional
examples of the prep. a-b((i) see M i: ix, 2: x, 2, 5, 7, 8: xi, 2, &c.
- In three similar texts (Hamath) the b(a)-a is omitted altogether.
G 2
44 A NRW 1)KC'I1MII<KMHN'1^ OF TllR
that this 'ally' + // is the caiisati\c conjugation 'make alliance'; the minis, as
was sugo-ested in § 34, seems to be an oblique case of ///////' 'we", which is
strengthcMicd by the occurrence of mis twice in its place (§ 14, g\ ^^'hich points
to the same oblique case of ;///' ' 1 '. But the l)[(i)-a is a difficulty : the easiest
way to translate it would be ' Make alliance with us', reading ^?-/w, our pronoun
mentioned above. But it is not written a-ba, and is ncx'cr written so in the
nineteen cases which I ha\'c collected, and therefore we must either consider it
as a fanciful method of writing a-ba. on the analogy of the spelling of
Mutallu and Targui?*) (§ 91), and the higgledy-piggledy arrangement of the
\-ery phrase in which this word occurs (see § 14), or that this b{a)-ii [or p{a)-a)
is a preposition distinct from anything which we ha\'e found. Our knowledge
is not yet secure enough to accept the former view, and at the same time
I cannot find an}- equivalent for ba in Hittite cuneiform. Nevertheless, the
sense of the group is clear, and for convenience sake 1 shall adhere to what
I think is the most probable rendering, ' Alake alliance with us'.'
§ 42. Notably at first sight iM x from Carchcmish, a basalt slab inscribed
with eight lines of hieroglyphs and sculptured with a king in high relief, deals
with an alliance. The most striking sign in the whole of the system of hiero-
glyphs is written here twice, and nowhere else, that of "©^§, which (as is
discussed in § 87) must refer to the making of blood-brotherhood or an alliance.
It is preceded in 1. 1 by the name of the god Targu (if our reading in § 1 1 is right),
which occurs again in 1. 3 followed by ^ M^. But in iM ix, 2, 4: xi, i, also
from Carchcmish. there is a proper name 7arg//-r-s{d, &c. ) in close connexion
with the name [[Ln^ [who is also the writer of our text M x], and it docs not
seem unlikely that the Targu of M x may be an abbre\'iation ior the i argu-ras
of M ix.-^ For, as we have seen, the name is followed by the hieroglyph of the
open hand (= 'ally'), and if W^ is m/i, as I suggested in § 31 in the name
Mutallu, we should get 'Targu(-ra.s), my ally V' The full translation at the end
will make this clearer.
' Tlie a-l)[n)-f{(j) which occurs on TA i immediately following the phrase 'make alliance with us'
must belong to the succeeding sentence. In TA 4 it is interesting to see the phrase ^p^,')] ■ 'ally':
us m.
+ /Mi-{ii{a]) : ' we have made alliance ' for the ultimate agreement (§ 37 (3)). G 111 va/
- The seal M x.x.\i.\, 10 is a case in point, as it contains only llic name (^ <^> IV Turi^ti
which should be a personal name, since it is on a seal.
^ -mil is a form of -;///, the ist pers. sing. pron. suff., ^•^ 57, 58.
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 45
§ 43. Wc can thus return to the proof of 000= = mit, and we can find addi-
tional evidence in the name "rr^, ''-(^''-inii (M xix, 4), which may be the same
as that in a new Jerabis inscription "^ which ends with -mi. We can see it
«L OS
flillh
again as a first personal suffix in TA 3 in c^ :g(/c)-in/t "I will go' (see trans-
lation at end).'
§ 44. With the view that Wp = mit we can proceed to find the value of ODD,
which is apparently used only as an ideogram, and Jensen ^\"as probably right
in suggesting the meaning 'lord' as its equivalent. We find it written AA ODO
after a chiefs name and his country, e.g. 'lord of lands' -' (M ix, i : x, i : xviii,
B, 3): AI xvi gives |l p A DOD "^^ "^^^^ *^* Tabal ' (see translation at end).
Compare also the seals M xl, 12, 14.
Now we find a word ma in Hittite cuneiform which has all the appearance
of meaning ' lord '. It occurs at the beginning of Z i, a cuneiform letter from
Boghaz Keui: ma-a-an-za LUGAL-us i-na "'"A-ri-iit-na, 'Unto our lord the king
in the city Arinna',- and the third paragraph begins ma-a-aii LUGAL-us, 'our
lord the king'. Ma-a-an occurs Y 15, r. 8, 11, 35, 40: C i, 15: N 6: ma-au B 5.
Ma-as is apparently the nominative case N 2 {iiti-iis ma-as sii-kii-es-ni\ and cf.
//// ma-as-ta Y 14). This nominative assumes a curious form in Y /'. 42, on
account of the adopted Assyrian possessi\'e -ia ' my ' : a-na AN. UD mas-si-ia
i-iia BANSUR AN. UD ta-a-i ' Unto the Sun-god, my lord, on the table of the
Sun-god, give '. It also occurs thus on E 5, [i i], 14' : K 4 : and once as ma-si-ia,
G II. The dative case without the suffix 'our' is found twice in W ly, ma/i-
an ma-za a-bii-ia '"Mur-si-li-is il-li-is ki-sa-at ahi-ia ma-za-gaii '"Muttalli-is, 6cc.
■ How are we to read org A occurrina; three times on a text M xxxv from near Tyriaeum (also
perhaps T^-rasion, Tyganion, Totarion, or Tetradion)? Are we to see Tcr-icu-iiin in it?
" 1 cannot help thinking that the plural is correct here, p^ , it is true, is used as a determinative
for a countr\-, but it ma}' be in its form ' double A ', and consequently may well have the value of
a /^htrnlis c.\ci-llcntiae, as ^-. ' chiefest afod ' seems to have, for ^^ is used for the plural of | //
'great' (§ 381. The phrase AA A on the ' Tarkondemos ' Boss is translated kir imiti ali, litera ly,
' king of countrj'-city '. / - .i LLi
^ On Arinna = the Egyptian Arnna of the Rameses-Khetasar treaty, see Sayce PSBA., xxi, [899,
196 : xxiii, 1901, 98.
* Professor Sayce was the first to see the meaning ' my lord ' for iiias-.^i-ia in this passage.
46 A NHW JJliClPHERMENT OF THE
Hence wc may consider ma in cuneiform = ' lord ". Now we ha\-e seen
sufficient proof that OD[h = w//, and hence it is not unreasonable to explain
the simple three strokes without the tang (which has been proved to mean
'lord') as having the value ina, which will at once give us an equation similar
to the cuneiform ma ' lord '. [From the character we might therefore infer that
the Ilittitc word for ' three' was ma\
[We might go a step further and see in the cuneiform >iiah-a!i \\\ W kj (by
resolution into wc?' + // + <•///) 'our (?) great lord '(////-/// //-/v/// mali-aii i/is/-ai/-/m-z'a
' unto me our(?) great lord for our people ' ?) ; more readily (/7;/>/r///) mah-aii ina-
za a-bii-ia 'our great lord to the lord (?), my father': perhaps ma-ah-Iia-aii G 4,
12, 19: ma-ah-lji-ta-au ('thy great lord'), Y y. 10. At any rate, we find in the
hieroglyphs ma-h-n{a\nis ' son (?) of our great lord " (M ix, 2) : tei^.) san{?i) ma-
/j-n "A-r-ar-n-/ii-f {})' Sixiih. Araranins our(?) great lord' (M xxxii, i) : 1-B-r-k-
k-2i{or //(«)(?)) : ma-h-ii-s ' . . . Bark, our great lord ' (TA 3 : thus my copy). (See
translations at end for these quotations.) ']
Having now come halfway to proving that M Ws='{fi''l:->i>i') = mii-fal;, the long
Jerabis inscription comes to our help here for the second syllable. Flere a name
is written ^^~~^' 'the second sign being our supposed A// with a 'tang'), and
since we know the last character //, and are suggesting tal for the second, it is
plausible that we should read the whole name Mut-"tal-li, which is quite in
' On the basis that the hieroglyphic iiia-h-n-s, &c., meaning 'our great lord' is found in cuneiform
as iiiali-aii, &c., it might be profitable to see if the hieroglyphic groups 'god '■Ij-iii-n ' by my great god '
(M xxi, 4), mt-t-m : ' god '-//-;// '(as) my great god (is) with me ' (or similar oath, new Jerabis inscription,
§ 81) can be identified in cuneiform also, so that we might learn the Hittite word for 'god '.
A word which might possibly solve this difficulty occurs as arahzanta in A ii, 19 ; arha, G 4, 12,
14, ]6 ig (cf Liv. ii, 15) : S i, 2 : ar-ha-a-an, S i, r. 9.
^■[-ra-ah-za-aii-ta can be divided up into a noun arah with zn + anin a compound preposition
(cf- §§ 37 "'^''''- 79) similar to ina-za-gan (W 19) ; ara + lj can then be compared to nrlja quoted above.
Examples of its occurrence are : —
(A ii, 19) mi-itf-ta kat-ziiii-iis a-ra-ah-za-an-ta [as-s\it-u-li liar-kaii-[d\n ' to thee his kat fori?) the great
god(?) . . . .' (G 4, 12, 19) iiia-alj-lja-aii ina-as ar-lia la-a-an-zi. (G 14) / iib-na u-zn-uli-ri-iii-UD-DU-a
ar-lia ia-fa-aii-zi (' I iibiia of ... to the great god (?) they have given '). (G 16) na-as ar-lia a-ta-an-zi
' this to the great god (?) they have given '. The simple word a-ra-aii (?) occurs C iii, 6.
1 hat ara = ' god ' is therefore only a suggestion ; at the same time it is interesting to see the
number of personal and place-names beginning with this: Ariamnes and Ariarathes (both names of
kings of Cappadocia), Arame (of Bit-Agusi), Aranda, Ardys, Arnuanta, Arinna (place-name = Boghaz
Keui?), Arantu (Orontes), Arpad, Araziki, Argana, Arzasku. It is hardly necessary to compare the
Assyrian and Babylonian Babili, Irba-il, Dur-Assur, Dur-ili, Dur-Samas, Kar-Assur, &c., for place-
names compounded either simpl}' with ' god ' or a god's name. But, on the other hand, ar is a possible
value for the ' house '-sign (§ 18, nofe 2), and ar-/ia may mean simply 'palace'.
■^ In M xxiii a, 2 there is a group which might conceivably be read the same way.
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 47
keeping- with the date of the inscription. By referring finally to §31, we are,
1 think, justified in accepting" Mii-tal; as certain. (On the cjuestion of the arrange-
ment of the signs in Mit-tal, see § 91.) [The sign Q^ is difihciilt to pro\'e other-
wise than in the word Alutallu. There is a chief's name ^^^ Tal-s in W ix,
2 (cf 5), xi, 3. and another '=• 7nl-/i-s in M xxxii, i and xxxiii, i, but I cannot
identify either of them. It is also probable that M^A *^^ i'^'. -^^ 3' *i'0"^
Hamath) might be read Tal-H Ani-s-' place ', for \vhich latter city I would suggest
Emesa (tloms), i.e. 'Tal(as) the chief, of Homs'.]
§ 45. Our next problem is to solve the common sign ||. || occurs con
stantly at the end of a certain class of words. These are afo 1 p | = a-f(a)-
(see § 70), opf^y = a-s-^ (twice in a Jerabis inscription), ^^^ ^ ^ (M ix, 4,
three times : TA 4 ; for others, see § 70) ; and particularly in the double sign
\l (i.e. nl backwards and 0).' Now we have already seen (§10) that afa CS ^
a-f{a)-ir is a \'crl3 from the root fn, and hence the form ofo CH |l a-f{a)-M may
reasonably be supposed to be part of the same conjugation. The other words
are clearly of the same form, ^7-v/-[|, the only difference being the middle
character.
Now a prefixed to the root occurs also in Hittite cuneiform ' : —
a-ta-au<i (G 16, the conjugation of our word afo CC |(j ^^'ith the third plural
termination (§ 37) in place of If), a-aii-tc-it {G 5), a-ap-pa (Y 6: Z i, 4), a-as-su
(Y ;-. II), a-as-sii-iilj-ta (W 19), a-i-is-ini-it (Y r. 6), a-ki-ir (Y 33, 33), ar-nu-an-zi
(G 2, 8, 10), ar-rit-ba-an-zi (G 5), az-zi-ik-kaii-zi {G 7, 23), az-zi-ik-ki-ta-iii [X 18).
' Note, however, that in the proper name T || {Kat-t-c) it is written thus, to make the
distinction (§ 60). ^ ^
2 But besides this initial a we find / and e : e. g. i-iaan-zi (Y 7, P 4), ia-M-aii-zi (G 14), i-ga-if (A i, 27),
im-mi-ia-an-zi (G 15), e-sa-at (W 19). This seems to indicate that the sound of afo was not given
a definite equivalent in cuneiform, but that the scribe wrote down the sound as he thought he heard it
This is supported by the cuneiform value nie-c for T afo ;,,/.\
48 A NEW DRCIPHERAIKNT OF THE
Since -af/:;i marks verbs (§ 37), we may see in this ajb a an augment, like the
Indog-ermanic *e = Skr. a-, Armen. c-, Gr. «-,' an indication of past time.
Now, since the form ohJ~ }f indicates a verb in a past tense, we shall
lind a suo-o-cstion for I in the common termination of the Hittite cuneiform
'&&
A-erbs (besides the augmented forms a-aii-tc-it, i-ga-it, &c.): — bi-i-c-it (\ 21, 25 :
S i, /'. [i], 6), bi-c-i\t\ (C iii, 1 1), ki-c-it ( AI 2), kit-it (Y 16, r. 19 : C ix, 4 : L 4, 5 : W 19).
pa-{a)-it (Y 16, r. 10: S i, 10: F 2), fe-it (Y 4, 16: [A ii, i]). This is a third
person ; ie-it is supposed to be a third person ' he says '.- Let us suppose then
that n = /, and apply it to the following cases.
§ 46. In the hieroglyphs there occur three phrases containing onh' slight
grammatical changes : —
(,)(NewJerabis, lllfl ^ i^l^'^ |[
(2) (New Jerabis)
t
c^^h
ii *&i\
ajQ
,>1 '30D OQOO
c^^P
%
oQd
)
(3)(NewJerabis)||f ^|(=|qo^ %
Here t| ( |-//) and -¥^^ (a-b{aytC.)) of (i) are replaced by 1 1|(|-^<'
and °I1°^>7 {n-b{a)-n) of (2). As is shown in § 57, the nominal suffixes from the
Hittite cuneiform are :
Sing, (i) -////, -///// Plural ( 1 ) -//, -/ici, -iii
(2) -fiu -//, -til (2) -iiK'.)
(3) -5, -i/, -.sVr, -sii (3) -//
The ist and ^rd sinonlar we mav ob\-iouslv eliminate, and as we have here
// to represent 1st pL, we can reduce the possibilities of jjl to three, -ta{-ii,-tii\
?//(?), and -// : so that our theory for / is growing probable.
Turn next to the first word in the three quotations. In this word the sign
IJ is always written backwards when used with (D as a ' conflate ' sign ; m^
is a common word either by itself or with the addition Qo|o r-a. If / be
correct here, what is d) ?
' Brugmann, Comp. Gmiuiiiar of the Indo-G. Languages (tr. Conway and Rouse), § 477.
- See Sayce, Y p. 64.
49
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS
A comparison of the words
(tr) ^oooi /w?-//-CD (see above, Nos. i, 3) with og^aQo I :/wm/ (AI xxxii, 5),
(Z^) I ' ll //-w-//-<D (AI xi, 3) and even [l T|(D //-W-///-0 (AI xxiii, a, 2) with
T Ij //-;//-// (new Jerabis),
as well as the forms If (p (AI lii, 3),
(a new Jerabis inscription), a
proper name (§ 49), shows that (D is probably a vowel,' and, in common nouns,
that probably representing a plural. If so, it is / or e (see § 63 for the plurals of
Hittite cuneiform).
§ 47. Now there is a small word ap in the hieroglyphs which is fairly
common, which our hypothesis should make e-a or /-a equivalent to a word I'-a
in the Hittite cuneiform. First, let us take the latter: —
(A) Prepositive :
(i) (W 19) : uu-j/m ahi-ia a-na Rad MeSe ti itt-ti ti-it-ta-nn-iif mat ali eli-ti ia-
m 71 ina{kii\ui-ia-ali-ha-an-ui.
(2) {Ibid.) liar-ta ahi-ia ia-uiu.
(3) (Y 28) iva-m-as gi-im-ra-as i-as iin a-bu-u-iui-ua.
(B) Postpositive :
(4) (Y ;-. 45) I LU a-na AN. UD ^'"Te-li-bi-iiu-ia SUM sa-aii . . .
(5) (D 9) AN. MES MULU. MES-ia . . . -si-is-sa-an{}).
(i) and (2) ia-init, (3) i-as point to a preposition ia with personal suffixes:
we may translate (2) ' . . . my brother with me ', and (3) ' ... all of it with him unto
our father'.' In the postpositive cases (4) can be translated 'One sheep unto
the Sun-god with the god Telibinu (?)... hath (or have) given ', and (5 ), if the
text be correct, ' the gods with men '. Now in the hieroglyphs © pQa occurs
written as though it might be pre- or post-positive also, but owing to the
Hittites' method of writing their characters in a manner pleasing to the eye it
is not always clear which method is intended : —
(6) (New Jerabis) | ® = : IX nii-e-a {ox e-a-iiii).
(7) (New Jerabis) 'So-and-so" 111 il J*^ 4o = u-ni-ii-c ini-e-a {or c-a-iiii):
engrave .
,8) (New Jerabis) jl ® ""^ 1' «^ 4 | = i{a)-e-a (or e-a-t{a))\Mi-zi-ir-zi- 'place' t-e.
^ Menant arrived at the conclusion that it was a vowel (' Elements du Syllabairc lic'tccn ', Acad dcs
Inscr., xxxiv, 2nd part, 1892, p. 100). He considered that it = a.
^ The preponderance of Assyrian words in this line makes it comparatively easy to translate.
VOL. LXIV. H
50
(9) TA 3 1^ aflo
lint t{a)-c-a (or c-a-t{a)).
(10) M iii, B, 3
A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
f-
i£3
fl(g
m-i
oUc foS
® +
o[]o
(3
.s-/'-r/ ID: -I-l:-u-Jii
g^
(/')-
kaf--ni} u-iii-u-au ■■
'engrave' r-^? 7^.?///-/^/(?)-;'-rr-//-///-' place ' (see § 68 (5)). Cf. also M iv, a, 3.
(11) The first quotation in § 28 : Paii-ajii-iiti san c-a (name) 'brother'-^.
Now if Qoflo = c-a = cuneiform ia = 'with', it should fit these instances.
In (6) and (7) iiii-c-a or c-a-iui are obviously compounded with the first
person singular suffix; hence we get 'The Nine with me' for (6). In (8) and
(9) t{(i)-c-a or c-(i-t{n) is similarly^ compounded with the second person singular
'with thee'. (10) is c-a 7^es/ifi-iii(^)-r 'with Benhadad the great' (or possibly
'with the city of Benhadad the great'). In (11) for ' Panammi sa/i with R his
brother ', see §§ 38, 52, and 73. We may thus consider that we have found the
hieroglyphic equivalent of the cuneiform ia 'with", and that = c^ or /.
§ 48. I f-c can now be explained. It is a word which occurs frequently
in the hieroglyphs by itself and with the termination ojjo, which by our values
we must read r-a. Similarly we find fc^ ' engrave ' either singly or with the
same termination r-a: hence we may consider that (i) f-c is similarly a \'crb,
(2) QdQo I'-a is a \'erbal termination. Since a verbal termination -ra-a occurs
in Hittite cuneiform, we may finally regard the evidence for ^ = ras conclusive.
Examples of this use of -ra-a in cuneiform are : —
(i) Pa-ra-a in Ya. 38: LAH AN-lini Ija-at-ki iia-as-ta pa-ra-a. 23,5:
as-sa kit (or iua)-as pa-ra-a. (But see p. 103 on the possibility oipa = hat)
(2) sa-ra-a in G 16. iiaiii-ma-as GIS-NI-it sa-ra-a Jut-it-ti-ia-an-zi.
(3) E-ra-a in C ii, 3 . . . ik-ra-a-e e-ra-a ta-a-c &c., and 1. 5 . . e-ra-a fi-iui-
inar-ta &c. Uncertain.
Pa in (I) is a well-known verb (see notes to translation of M ix at end), sa
is less well known in cuneiform,^ but occurs in the hieroglyphs (see § 32, note)
in the root .?. Indeed, we actually find «r + r-a in hieroglyphs.
(4) TA4: (two chiefs) fl-s
' It is possible that this is a sculptor's error for
stone and Hogarth's from the cast both read ///.
- Proved in § 60. ■ Proved in ^ 68, note.
* Si-i-e-it ^ r. i, 2 is probably an instance : perhaps c-ia-af W 19.
^^oflo • ^-' place '-r/ s-r-a.
('our' and not 'my'j, but my copy from the
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 51
An examination of the hieroglyphs will show that this termination r-a
indicates a third pers. pi. of a verb : beside the exx. in § 46 and (4) above, we find
(5) M ii, 4 ' our allies ' 'c fea Q o|o || f/ ^ '^ 1/ (1 ^ ^^-v-a m-ii-u-s :
ID-n 'have graven the leg(?) of the monument*?)'. Compare also
(6) M Hi, 3: OS DODD ©* -^^ ;f~'^[]:.y,w-;-« 'ally', 'enemy "-/(?)-/&-//
'they make alliance again.st a common (?) foe'.
Our problem Is therefore to investigate the meaning of a verb t-c.
In the Hittite cuneiform we find a verb te, for w^hich Professor Saycc has
suggested the meaning ' say ' : —
Y 4. nu lua-ra-af-mit te-if (' unto my ivarat ' he speaketh ').
Y 16. a-pa-a-sa pa-it AN . IM-ni tc-it ki-i; &c.
A ii, I, a letter beginning '"A-ta-iiiu ki-\i t\e-it '" Lab-ba-\i\a (or ana a-ta-inii
' unto my father ', &c.).
Y 17. at-ti-is-si aii-ni-is-si te-h-zi . . . ('her father her mother say' ?).
Y 23. ... IM-sa te-iz-zi nu wa-ra-an kit-it.
Y 34. ... ha-ah-hi-nia-as AN . IM-ni tc-iz-zi.
Y r. 10. nin-ga-nii AN . UD-sa te-iz-zi.
B 3. ... \f\a tc-iz-zi hal-nie-da-as.
te-eh-lju-iin occurs Y /-. 7 (i.e. -^tc with causative -Ijh-^.
The sense of ' speak ' or ' say ' fits admirably with the hieroglyphs ; the
three cases quoted in § 46 all begin with the word t-c-y-a ' they say '. Hence,
we can say definitely that | = t-e = 'to say': and that just as an ideogram is
used by itself for the singular (§ 47 (7) and (10)). and with r-a added for the
plural (§ 48 (5)), so is a verb spelt out like t-c used alone for the singular (§ 47
(8)),and with -;'-^r added for the plural (§ 46) like s-r-a (§ 48 (4)) and san-r-a (§ 48
(6)). /^-a apparently marks an imperfect tense.
§ 49. We can now turn back to examine the chiefs' names which are
marked by a final k (§ 35).
One of these is Nis-t-//, who occurs thus in a new Jerabis inscription;
without the N in M xxi, 2, and a new text (here ' tanged '): M lii, 3 (§ 50 (3)) ' Saith
' Torp, he. clt., compares the warat-inii of A i, 18 with hhnltd 'brother'.
- The ki-i here looks rather hke the Assyrian ki-i, a conjunction, ' that'.
H 2
52 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
Bcnhadad unto his friend Nis-t-c ' : and TA 4 as |^ ||J [7 ^^, and probably
in M V, 4 as W^\ || \v. (?) '■ I cannot identify him with any king's name
that I know, but his name is interesting, because it shows that a chief's name
may be used with or without a final // arbitrarily.
Another name in the long inscription from Jerabis is -^ % ^ ^.
thus endino- in -;/(r/) 's-N. The sign ^fa' has such an important bearing on
the reading of a king's name that I was very chary of accepting the value nm
to which all indications pointed, until I found a variant that seemed to me to
leave no doubt about it. The following is my evidence for this character /////.
§ 50. First it occurs in passages where it seems to demand the meaning
' son ' (suggested by Prof. Sayce (see p. 129)). Cp. the Mar'ash texts (§ 29) :—
(i) (Mxxi, I, first paragraph) 'Saith Benhadad unto his brother Mutallu
the great, of Gurgum the great ; unto his lord ' Arammi //in *{fiys : "-?-m-/i-{n)ms
(i.e. Arammi, the son of -nili)'.
1 f«/(or its abbreviation) = u, from the following:— In Hittite cuneiform -n. is the termination of
the 3rd pers. pi. suffix (see §57), ka/-/ii, a-ba-ii, nn-u-ZUN, it-ul: this is found in hieroglyphs in kat-u,
<i-b{ayu,t-a-u, mi-r-a-ii, u-zi: the particle a-n which appears to be the °fa ») of the hieroglyphs (§ 83) :
s-u-n : the verbal n- (in u-ta-an-zi, &c.) is
since
the verbal termination -itn (§ 71) appears in
found in H A^ Q o\M n-h{a)-y-a-t{d) (see translation of M ix at end). It would be clear that
Nis-t and Nis-t-e are found, any addition would probably only be the mark of a case-ending, although
this need not be so necessarily.
That ^ is an abbreviation for !^ is obvious from a-b[o\ [jl^ (M xxi, 4, &c.), a- /jj (xxi, 4), and
2 My hand-copy from the stone has « zi, which seems obviously wrong : the mscnption was
very often difficult to copy with certainty. ^
3 I think Professor Sayce is practically right in translating ^ 'king' from the 'Boss of
Tarkondemos ' : I have preferred the word ' lord ', as it appears to mc to be a term of respectful
address to an equal. The value is apparent from a comparison of two groups: (i) the group ^
(e.g. Rams.; Boghaz Keui, M xxviii : Kolitolu-Yaila, M xxxv, 2: Fraktin, M xxx, a). This group
seems to be used chiefly if not entirely in the Western States. (2) ^ used, as an epithet of the kmg
at Fraktin, M xxx, b, and of the king on the Carchemish inscriptions M ix, M xi, and one new one.
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 53
(2) (M lii, I, first paragraph) ' Saith Benhadacl unto his ally Alutallu the
great, of Gurgum the great ; unto his lord Bauli {n)nin-as : Mii,-tal;-a-h-nis
(i.e. Bauli, son of Mutallu, the great): "make alliance with us".'
(3) (M Hi, 3, second paragraph) ' Saith Benhadad unto his ally Nis-t-e
" B{ci)-a-u-li-iiiu (i.e. Niste, the son of Bauli): "make alliance with us".'
(4) (M xxi, I, second paragraph) '(Saith) Benhadad " brother "-/C'-;^/ nin-as
. . . -lis : " ally " : -?-? ''-am-niii Nis-t B{a)-a-u-li-nin-as, &c.' (i.e. ' unto the son of his
brother [Mutal]li(?), the son of the ally of my (?) ancestors, Nist, the son of Bauli ').
(5) (M xxi, 2, third paragraph) ' (Saith) Benhadad " ally " -k-ni nin-as :
Mii-tal;-a-Ji-nis : " ally" : -n{a)-a-s "B{a)-a-mi " ;//// Li {or, . . li)- Tesnp '' : "ally " : -Ji{a)-a
7iis-n{a)-a "Ar-ani-mi nin{it)-nis "-1-li-s' (i.e. 'unto the son of his ally Mutallu the
great, our ally, Bami, the son of Li {or, . . li)-Tesup, our ally, our nis ; Arammi,
the son of . . li ').
„,fi)_ n
(6) TA I
1-i
a)©/a^<3
OS
. . . ' place ' : ' lord '-k-jt "E-r-s-k-ay nin{n)-s : ' ally ':?..('.... unto the lord of the
land . . . Erskar, son of the ally of [our] ancestors . . ') (or read as on p. 1^4).
The meaning of this last phrase will become clear from Malatia, M xvi,
'We Irhulini(?), Benhadad, So-and-so, and So-and-so.
0(2 _
6cc.'o
^^PlVlooo Jl
teijy/ji^'-ii 7\(i)-l?(i/'°-''p\ace"-nuj ni-ni: "ally ":?-?-/// Z,^r/( ?)-//(?) send " to the
Professor Sayce's suggestion that /)\ is the royal headdress seems a good one. At any rate, it is
l\ ■ ^ A .
not improbable that /.A is closely allied to ^ in meaning: and since we have seen that (S=&
= 'chiefs', the plural ol ^\;\ (§ 38), we should have the value for these groups 'lord of chiefs'
or similar meaning, which is exactly what we should expect, the equivalent of the 'king of kings'
of the Oriental. It is clear that AA [j[j[) (^^ 44) 'lord of lands' is not far different from AA A
on the ' Boss of Tarkondemos '. ' SS LD
* To avoid a repetition of the character in t3'pe, I am using my value /;/;/, always with the
reservation that its proof rests on what follows in this section.
° Sayce reads cp from the stone in Constantinople, but the B.M. cast suggests a parallel to M xvi.
" Emended from a comparison of M lii, 4, with the B. M. cast.
' Read thus for M xxi uas. [The value 1^ = //(?s is shownon M iii, 15,2 where //-s takes the place of
this character on M iv, a 2, and iv, b 2: and also on M xxi, 4, where after the 'chair' hieroglyph occurs
W' ^"^'"ch is replaced by I f^ 'i-<is in a similar passage in M lii, 5.]
■* Probably a place-name but not easy to read.
1" For Tabal see translation of M xvi at end.
' u or ir : see § 6g.
" See § 73 (al
54
A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
lord of Tabal, son of the ally of our ancestors,' Lalli(7): (make alliance
with us) '.'
In this last case ///-/// 'son' replaces the group 7iin{ii)-s in (6), thus giving
definite indication of the value of the flower-character. With ;//-;// = * son ' we
can translate the first line of M xv, b (§ 3 ) . . . "San{7i)-{g)gay-s Bai'(J)-hu-nin{ii) '
' lands '-// niai^Y ^^i-^is •" San-gars, ' Sangar, son of Barhu (?), great chief of lands,
son of Sangar '. The custom of calling a son after his grandfather is well
known, so that we may here again see proof that nin = ///-// = son.'' Additional
proof, if it were needed, is to be found in the Ivriz inscription discussed in § 87
(see also the translation at end), where Tesup-mis, who has been adopted by
A-y-ai'-a-s, calls \\\msQ\i .l-y-ay-a-iiiii-s (i.e. Ariarathides), while A-r-ar-a-s on the
same sculpture greets him as ii"-ui-iiii ' my son '. To conclude the proof of
the value of the character ;//;/ we may notice cases (5) and (6) of the next section,
where it is followed and preceded by //.
We may therefore read the name of the chief "^fe ^ £s
n{a)'-s-H i.e. the Ninni against whom Shalmaneser fought (§ 24).
as Niii-
§ 51. With the value ///// for '^^ we may approach what has been perhaps
the o-reatest crux in Hittite hieroglyphics. Who or what is concealed in the
following phrase ?
(1) M ix, I ^ d OQDfl
(2) M ix, 2 1^ cr ODQQ
(3) M ix. 4 °'|^ c:ff> DQDD
(4) M xi, M^ a? 00 00
' These characters are uncommon, and form a group. It seems to n;e that this must mean
' the dead ' or some similar phrase, and certainly the whole phrase ' ally of our dead fathers ' is
a most probable one. The, other occurrences of which I know are M xxi, 2, his, and M lii, 4, where
the same meaning is suggested (see translation at end and §87); if this be right, the ideographs might
be explained as a burial-shaft and a coffin.
- See § 14 (f).
" I would suggest the name Bar(?)-hu which occurs on TA 3, but it is a doubtful reading.
See also § 73.
■■ Character doubtful, but it may be nia, or perhaps the title discussed on p. 77.
■ For s3-ntax and nominative of this word, see §^ 66, 84.
'■ Allowing, of course, for the emendation of my hand-copy mentioned in § 49, note.
(5) New Jerabis
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS
DOOO ^M
<r
55
<^^
(6) J\f xviii, B (from Gurlin) [h <F I'll H^^TA' As is noted in the
preceding section, '^p' is followed by // in (5) and preceded by // in (6).
(8) AI xi, 2 \^ ^ oflOQ ^ ojl
(9) One of the new Jerabis inscriptions has apparently for a distinct word
Now these groups (i)-(4), (6)-(8) have hitherto been held by general con-
sensus to contain the word Carchemish, from the time that it was suggested
by Ai. Six to Professor Sayce (see PSBA. xxv, 1903, 142) until Jensen {Hittitcr
11 ud Arnieniev, 30), whose views are endorsed by Messerschmidt {Corpus, A'ac/i-
frag, 9). I cannot in the least agree with this identification : and (9) from
Carchemish, badly rubbed though it may be, with the characters mutilated,
throws its evidence into the balance against this, by giving us (if my reading-
be correct)
ffn? ^^ ^^ distinct from the latter half of this long group. Since
the groups (i)-(8) all indicate that a place-name is concealed towards the end
of this group, and (9) possibly shows that the first two characters form a word
by themselves, it is not unlikely that this first group, which is sometimes marked
with a tang, is a personal name. This becomes certain when the final epithets
of (t) and (7) 'ruler of countries', and of (2)-(5) 'lord of chiefs' are taken into
consideration ; and hence the place-names mentioned in the groups will show
his dominions. Eliminatino- his name we fjet :
OQQQ
DQDD
QODQ
ey
X3 DllDi
sail Nin-ini-s-' city ',
sail As-ir-' city '-' country ',
sail As-r-a-' city '-' country '.
Obviously son lYiuniis, san Asir, and sail Asva; 'sail of Xine\"eh ', 'sail of
Assyria ". Then in that case does QDDO san = ' king ' ?
' This reading is due to Professor Saj-ce.
- This character is obvious on the stone in the B.M.
•• Rams. 4 appears to contain this name if />{ <^ QA .^s-zV-c/-' country', 'in Assyria'.
56 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
§ 52. San and snii occur in Hittite cuneiform thus: (A ii, 7, 8) //// [s]a-aii
Ija-aii-ta-an am-nie-el ka\j'\-t\ii\b-ia \s\a-an Jji-is tu-si. This sa-aii occurs on Y 22
^A^. UD-nn sa-au /ii-cs-/caii-zi, and inasmuch as sa-aii is followed by ha-ati-ta-txn
and sa-au by Jji-cs it is possible that sa-an = sa-an, the V// being our root ' great '.
' The Sun-god, the great king ' is plausible for Y 22. Bit(J)-sa-a-ui occurs on a Tel-
cl-Amarna tablet (Berlin, 199, 7), but the context gives no help ; ' house of the
king', i.e. 'palace', is tempting, but there is no evidence for it.
The hieroglyphs will help us more : —
(1) (§ 28) ' Panammi san with R his brother.'
(2) M xi (§ 40) traces, followed by saii-e a-b(a) : "Pan-a/ii-i/n' '(So-and-so) the
kings with Panammi '.
(3) M XXXV, I (Sayce's corrections) where the place-name is followed by
DODD S, which, as it stands, can be read 'great kino"'. Similarly in 1. 2
{Bar(})-/a/{l)-s), the name of the king, is followed by ODQD (^ \ sans.
(4) '^ ^=S\=, QQDD M Hi, 4, looks like a king's name ('So-and-so the king').
(5) We find some personal names thus compounded: ]\I x, 2 (3!)^ ^\i/7/7.
TA4^^ QaoQ \^J ^^^,andprobably(newJerabis)<!|>(rO^^C:^'
the name of a ' chief of the Nine ' (M x, 2), who is ^-^^^ of U-"m-k, i.e. Unki, the
Amk of the Zakir stele (§ 23, >iofe 1 ) and present day. His name appears similar
to Chemoshmelek, Malkiel, Ellimclek, Adramelek, Nabu-malik, &c. Compare
also the seal-names M xxxix. 6 ']J\J ^]/ im ^ '/'cs/tp-'^-san-s (\\\i-'^p{) 'Tesup
is king ' : M xl, 6 '^/[P ^^ w\\//// ' Tesup, friend of the king ', or ' Tesup, befriend
the king ', like Adad-nirari or Adad-sarri-usur (if the ' hand ' sign is that out-
stretched in welcome).
Notable is the beginning of the three Hamath texts M iii, b, \\, a, b,
'Saith unto *^^ ^) sa/i-s "Ir-/ji/-/i-/i{a)-s! The hieroglyphs read Iin : an (§§38,
68 note) ; the verb ' to say ' takes an accusative (§ 85), and I can only see in
this, ' Saith Irhulina unto the nobles of the king, (" Make alliance with us for
(? or against) the king of Hamath ")" (§ 80).
' Read : ? -s(?)-anAiii-k ' ?-saM of Amk, &c.' s-nii (§ 68, nofe) appears to be equivalent to DDDD ■ ^^- (^1
also s-iKi, TA 6 (see translation at endl. Comparable to this name is the name d[ t i^h M xx.\i.
The god-name (^a % occurs on M xliii, 8, with ' god'-Torj^ii, under the winged sun-figure, and
hence I have assumed it to be the sign for the sun-god. With regard to Amk, I cannot help thinking
that U-'ni-k is the proper reading on M xxxii, 3.
HITTTTE HIEROGLYPHS 57
If sails means 'king', \\c can compare 2veWeo-«f, a common name of the
kings of Cilicia, the first known dating )3ack to the sixth century. The final
-if would be the Greek termination added to sa/i-s : the upsilon in the first
syllable would represent that helping vowel which is found in Ariarathes (spelt
A-r-ar-(i-s in Hittite), perhaps, too, in Ariamnes, the Assyr. Kiakki (?for Kaki,
which also occurs, spelt k-n-k in Hittite), and the Turkish forms Kiamil for
Kamil, &c. r^
§ 53. At any rate there appears to be considerable probability that DDDO
sdfi = 'king", and in our groups in § 51 we have 'king of Nineveh' and 'king
of Assyria' with the same name j p3 c;;^ in front of them. Moreover, these
groups are followed by either ' ruler of countries ' ((i), (7)) or ' lord of chiefs ' ((2),
(3), (4), is)). Hence we must see some king of Assyria concealed in this name,
and since the texts containing it also mention Panammi, Arame, Kate, and
Kirri, it must be Shalmaneser II. But this name is too long syllabically for
'these two characters, and if we read it thus (in syllables) it must be shortened
to the form found in Hosea x. 14, Shalman, which is supposed by Wellhausen
and Nowack to be another Shalmaneser.^ On the other hand, the first character
represents a god's name in other passages, and it may be that here as in the
other proper name 1^ ^ 0, the sign for ' god ' has been purposely omitted
(as also in M xxxii, i, and the seals M xxxix, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9), and in such a case
it would be difficult to define the value of <:3=^. In that case the god would be
the equivalent of Sulman.
•
§ 54. I only know one other case in which the first character occurs ; it is
in another name in texts of the same period as the above : —
(M i) (^ |=-j CU)"(D|Q^ : and on a new Jerabis text where the termina-
tion is -ei/i in the place of -cs.
Speculation on the possibilities of this name as yet seems ill-advised, and
unfortunately it is almost as unprofitable to seek help from c^ = i/nv/C).
§55. This latter character occurs (i) in a place-name in a new Jerabis
^ Abbreviations in Assyrian are not uncommon : Suzubu is short for Nergal-usezib or Musezib-
Marduk. Compare also Pul. Indeed, on M x, it looks very much as though the Hittite king's name
also was abbreviated (see translation at end).
'^ This character occurs or is omitted apparently arbitraril3' after the god Tesup's name ; it would
appear to be the winged disc (see Ramsay's inscription, PSBA. xxxi, 1909, 83). It occurs alone
syllabically in M iii, b, 2 : vii, i (?) : xii, 3 : TA 6.
VOL. LXIV. I
58 A NEW nF,riPIIRRMRN'r OF TIIK
inscription [ / <^ o[]a "^A "?-///^w(?W^//-' place '(it is almost certain thatthe broken
sign over the ideograph for ' land ' does not belong to this word) ; (2) a place-name
J\I iv,A.2c:::;3= ^^^3/^*^^° ^ '^ 0oQo A ".//-( ?*)-wrw(^W^//-//r^s^-r-r^' place"; (3) a chief's
name in M xi, 3, ^^f^/f^ £^^^ Mii/iiJyaiii-s-H, recurring in 1. 4'. We find
Arman (?) of (2) paralleled in the two texts M iv, r : iii, a by B-s-li-r, which might
be Tel-Basar (ancient Til-Basere), and }-r-(vi, for which I can suggest nothing.
Professor Sayce, reading c:;^ as ga, would make Argana out of (2), a place
near Hamath, but this is impossible unless we read it gai/, which is against our
suggestion man. If Ar-man were right, and if there were a change from r to
/, Arman might be Alman, Aleppo : or possibly, recognizing the Hittite cunei-
form // = wi and the hieroglyphic ;///' = loi, and that d took the place of ;/ as
in A-nin-na = the Adinna of the Assyrian records, we might see Arpad in
Arman. (i) is entirely unsolved. This, too, might be some form representing
Halman, Aleppo, but with so little support it is far better to lea\'e the question
unsolved without confusing the issue until more texts are published. This
need not interfere with the translation ' [Shalmaneser (?)] king of Nineveh ' or
' king of Assyria ' which I have suggested.
§ 56. This is a fitting place to discuss whether the form v
''Paii-iui
saii-s ' Pan-mi, the king ', is a variant spelling of Pan-am-mi (which is defined
once by san following). The two never occur on the same text (nor does either
occur on M Iii, which mentions Garali, who was the father of Panammi). The
syllable Pan is marked by the tang in the form of a curved line over the fore-
head, and the wiiole is thus distinguished from vl ^^^ T te{J)-sau-]n} ' I have
said' (M V, i, 4); this form "Paii-ini sa/i-s occurs M ix, i : xv, a, i (?): xix, c, 18:
xxi, 4 : "Pan-iui san-iias occurs M xxi, 3 : "Paii-iiii without sans, M xxii : xxxii, i,
4 : "Pan-jni-ii, Al xxi, 4. I am inclined to believe that this is only Panannni
spelt incorrectly: the places Mar'ash, Carchemish, Izgin, Bulgar-Maden (if the
text is right) are all probable places to find his alliance courted : even in
Bulgar-Maden we find Nis-t, a king of the Mar'ash texts, quoted next his name
(if I have read the occurrences aright). It is certainly a curious coincidence
that the phrase ' "throne"-;/-(«)c75-;////-X'-;/' should occur only in M xxi, 4, spoken
by "Pan-nii-n, and in M Hi, 5 by ' Gar-[a-li ?], son of the Nine ' (Garali being
mentioned under (probably) the same title in I. 4).
^ I can only offer a ver}' poor suggestion here, that this name occurs in M viii, 4, Al-}i-u[a)-ii!,
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 59
The Personal Pronouns.
§ 57. From a discussion of some of the proper names we can now turn
to the grammar, examining" the grammatical forms in both Hittite cuneiform
and hieroglyphs. Ihe personal pronouns (suffixes) are as follow in Hittite
cuneiform ' : —
Sing. I : -MI : AN . UD-uii ' for my Sun-god ", A i, 13 : kat-ti-ini * as for me ', A i,
3 : E .ZUN-nii DAM . MES-nii DU . MES-nii, &c., ' unto my houses,
my wives, my sons, &c. (there is well-being) ', ibid.
-Mu: nia-iiui 'my lord', A i, 17: wa-ra-at-niii, ibid., 18: uu-init 'to me',
A i, 25, &c. : ia-inu ' with me ', W 19.
(attached to nom. sing.) -mis : ha-la-as-mi-is Y r. 6: "'"ha-lu-ga-tal-as-nii-is ' my
messenger', A i, 23: ki-is-si-ra-as-iui-is-wa Y 39: cf Y 24.
(attached to ace. sing.) -min: Ija-hi-ga-tal-la-an-nii-in, A i, 12.
(attached to an oblique case pi.) -mas : DU . MES-as-nia-ns ' my sons', Y 42.
Sing. 2 : -TA : kat-ta ' as for thee ", A i, 7 : nn-ut-ta ' unto thee ', A i, 22.
-Tu : (cf. tu-el A i, 24, &c.).
-Ti : DU. SAL-ti • for thy daughter ', A i, 22 : E.ZUN-ti DAM. MES-ti
dO . MES-ti, &c., ' unto thy houses, thy wives, thy sons, &c. (may there
be well-being) ', A i, 8.
(attached to nom. sing.) -tis(?) : u-iis-ti-is ? C ii, r. 7.
(attached to ace. sing.) -tin: "'"ha-lu-ga-tal-la-at-ti-in A i, ly: perhaps kab-bu-wa-
at-tin, Y 19.
(attached to oblique case pi.) -tas ? (cf. ki-is-ta-as, Y r. 17 bis\
Sing. 3 : -s: nii-its ' to him ", Y 11, 15, &c. ; i-as 'with him ", Y 2%.
-si: HH-us-si 'unto her", A i, 14 {nn-si 'unto him ? ', Al /'. 13): SAG.
DU-si ' for her head ' A i, 14 : at-ti-is-si au-ui-is-si " to his(?) father, to
his(?) mother', Y 17.
-sa(?): ha-lu-ga-tal-la-sa, A i, 1^ : ''"Te-li-bi-nn-sa, Y r. 9.
-su : {fia-ak-tani-su Y r. 14, with na-ak-tani-nii in the next line).
[The forms nii-su-iis, x\l 8 : aii-tii-ith-sii-iis, A i, 25, arc possibly to be inserted
here: -sa-au is common: E .AN-is-saipx fa, as in the cuneiform?)-^?// 'his(?)
temple', O 3: ka-in'-vs-sa-an W 19 : ci.i^) nii-tis-sa-a 11. \ r. 26: particularly ///(/-
a-an-sa-an ' his (?) lord ', Y r. 8 : na-as-sa-au, Y r. 7, &c.]
PI. I : -na: a-bu-ii-nii-na 'our father' (pointed out by Sayce), Y 27, 28, 31 : nia-
a-au-]ia-kan 'unto our lord'? N 3.
^ Sayce gives the following forms (Y p. 49): mis or iiics, pi. iiuii, 'mine', gen. dat. mi {inn), ace.
min : /as, /is ' thine ', gen. dat. ia, ii, in, ace. tan, tin, pi. ids-, sas ' his'. See also Torp and Bugge in
Knudtzon, Die zivei ArzirMiBi-icfe.
I 2
6o
A NEW DECIPHERMENT OE THE
-Ni (there are several words ending in -///, Init the meaning is nni
certain): hut lua-iii 'our lady(?)', A i, 12, is possible.
-N : ma-a-an 'our lord', Z i, 9: /na-a-aii-za 'unto our lord', ih. 1.
-NAS (cf. na-as-ta ' unto us ' ?, A i, 19).
(attached to ace?) -nan (cf. Jjal-za-a-i-ua-an ?, A ii, v^^: kn-iia-aii-za-iia-an, Y (>).
Pi. 2; -UT ? in nn-itt, Y 44 : ti-{inymi-nt, Y 8, 20 (cf. ti-{iii)-nu-zi, Y 15, 27) : ti-it-
ta-iiii-iit, W 19? (cf. the form ta-a-ljii-u-iit . . (D 19)).
PI. 3 : -u : kat-tu, E 8, 16 bis: a-ba-it ' with (or from) them ', Al /'. 8, 11 : iiii-ii-ZUN
' unto them ', Y 12 : n-iil, Y passim : A ii, 4, 6, 8 : Si, -''. 4. There are
also several words ending in -//, but the meaning is uncertain.
77/c Absolute Prouoitii.
In § 6 we have already seen nie-e ' I am ' ; ' myself was suggested for i-ia-zi
(Y p. 49) by Sayce, and since then it has been settled by Z i, 2, which is the
greeting of a letter to the king sa-li-iiii i-ia-zi ' I am well \ the word idzi being-
borrowed from the Assyrian iasi. But the most common independent pronominal
series is found by adding the suffixes to a base kat, i.e. kat-ti-mi (A i, 3), kat-ta
(A i, 7), kat-tn (E 8, 16 bis). Their use is clear from A i, 3 ff. kat-ti-nii DMK-in
' I am well " followed by a long list ' it is well with my houses, my wives, &c.'
The next register (1. 7) begins dii-uk-ka kat-ta hit-u-iua-aii DMK-in c-cs-tit 'as for
thee, mayst thou be very well '.'
§ 58. The corresponding pronouns in the hieroglyphs are : —
Sino-. I : -MI
(§ 47) :
^
kat-{t{a))-iiii ' as for me ' (§ 61) : aflD
OS
(§80): '^
e-a-iiii ' with me '
////-/.•-////' with me' (§81): ||dQd ^At{a)-a:-ini"iovi\€
lni:-ini-zi ' among(?) my nobles' (TA5): verbal suffix :
ns a-an-t:-mi: (M ix, 4).
1^
-MU : ^!^ DQ[^ ' ally '-iiiu ' my ally ' (§ 42).
-m: T||I T iiii-t-iii 'with me' (new Jerabis, §§ 35, 81):
' enemy '-/v/-//^ 'against my enemy' (§ '^i, note).
-m-n: (g|) (g1 'god'-//-///-// (M xxi, 4), apparently 'by my great god'
in an oath.
-Mi-N (are we to include here M ii, 5, /'-//-////-// ?).
' Knudtzon, Die El-Ainania Trt/t///, pp. 270 ft'. : Die cwei A i-aiva-Brie/e {with additions by Torp
and Bugge).
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 6i
Sing. 2: -t(a) : ^ || /caU(a) 'as for thee' (§ 61): °Qa^^. /-%)-/(>?) 'with thee'
(§ 46) : .^ °D° ® al /vr-w-£?-/(^?) ' thy friend.s(?)' (§§ 46, 88) : °0o
a-b{n)-ii-f{ii) ' thy father' (?) (§89): verbal suffix qodq
.s7//^ ///-/( (A) " I will
make with thee ' (M ix, 2).
-tan: T I Hi^ n-i)i-n-t-an ' thy covenant' (§ 68).
Sing. 3: -s: T/Q l^(^it-s (§ 61): -/('-//-5 (§ 33, //i?/^) : 'Panammi the king with R
brother-ft ' (§ 28).
[-SAN : are we to consider the following as an example ?
)iii-r-a It :-s-n{ii)' go^ '-r-c ar-k-ni {rQ3.d thus (?))...' before his chief(s) by the gods
we have sworn (?)' (a possible translation ; see translation at end, jNI vi). Cf. also
h-s-?i{(i), vii, I,]
PL I : -na: J«s^:;^(i(g^ o|)o : ' ally ' : -//(r?)-^ 'our ally' (Ivl xxi, 3) (also uis-n{a)-ti
' our son ').
i: cS °0°| k-a-ni 'our friend (?)' (for k-a-n-iii, § 46): ' ancestors '-J
;// (§ 50) :
-N]
kar-iii ' our kar^ (AI ix, 5) : also ' ally '-/// ' our alliance
{or hands) ' M xxxiv, a, 2 : ID-k-ni ' our war " (M ix, 5).
-N : 'T'l kat-u • we (are)' (§ 61 ) : °il°^ j a-l\ayii 'with us ' (§ 46).
-n(a): s-c ' ally '-//(r?) 'document(s) of our alliance' (M xxxiv, a, 3).
-an : I \\ V)^ 11 /i^ iii-ii-ii-k-ii-aii ' for our memorial(?) ' (M ii, 4) :
t °1° ^/^ 1/ ini-r-a-au^ :t-e 'before us he hath said' (M ii, 6):
' (as) the god Tesup 1 y 3%' iiti-t-aii(^.) (is) with us' (new Jerabis)
(also ii-in-ii-aii, INl i : iii, b, 3 : iv, a, 3 : iv, b, 2).
-NAS (cf "t j £^ kat-u-s (§ 61)): ^% ' brother '-//rr5 'our brother'
(M vii, i) (cf ' <z\\.y'-h\aii)-ii-s (or iias) 'our great city' (M iii, b: iv,
^ A division-mark has been omitted in the hieroglyphs here.
"62 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
A, b) : ' throne '-//-(//)as ' our (?) throne ' (M xxi, 4 : Hi, 5)) : verbal suffix
ar-k-it-as (M vi, 3).
-Nis probably, in ay-iiis 'join us ' as a verbal suffix (translations to M
xxi at end). (Is iiiii (J\I ix, 4) as a verbal suffix, or ///-// (AI ii, 6) as a
nominal suffix, to be placed here ?)
PI. 2 : -UT ? Cf. t ® °''° (jj' (I ^'li-^'-'^-^'-^ ' hQioxQ you '(?) (M xxxii, 5) : ofa jn' A
c-a-u-t 'with you' {ib. 3): or should we see it in || [<>/ ^ /-//-;;/ (M xi.
3), like the tu-cl of the cuneiform ? [Is ' 440 /-// ' (J\I viii, 3) to be
placed here ?]
PI. 3: -u: jM/vr/-// (§61): *^W a-b{a\u 'with them' (§ 40, M xv, a, 2):
^ *^ t{a)-a-ii 'to them' (§8oj: j^ ^ it-rJ 'for them' (§ 37, note 1, TA 5, 7),
and probably [jl' nln ^'-^''-''/ 'with them " (JNl xxxiii, 9). (As an example
of words endin<)" with -//, are we to see it in the -/// of )ii-ni-u, from
111-71-71, M ii, 2 ? (see translation of M ii at end).
The Absolute Proi70it/i.
§59. We have seen (§§ 6, 19) that both T°f° ////-" or iiii-a 'I (am)' and
="1° ////-///- ' or iii7-i7i-a ' we ' occur, with an oblique case J £^ /777-s and TJ |^
iiu-7ii-s (§ 14). It seems that the series formed by adding the suffixes to the base
IS more common.
§ 60. By following" up the suffixed pronouns in the hieroglyphs we find
that -w/, -t{(i), -s, -II (-lias), -11 can all be appended to the base T (see §§ 58, 61),
which, on the analogy of the Hittite cuneiform kattiiiii, katta, &c. (§ 57), would lead
us to read this character kat. Fortunately there is sound proof of this from at
least one proper name, and perhaps two, in the -hieroglyphs. One is the name
Kat-ii-a-ii-t
of the district Katna {A up., King, Annals, 281), M ix, 4
(see end tor a fuller translation), the -a-ii-f being the gentilic termination as in
K-a-ii-a-ii-t below. The second is still better vouched for : X |l (g "Kat-t-c-H
(M Hi, 5) is evidently a chief, both from the ' tang' and the h\ the name occurs
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS
6:
again in ix, 4 (and possibly in M vi, 2 : xix, 5, 7 : Hi, 3) ; in the long Jerabis
inscription it occurs in such a way as to leave no doubt who is meant, settling
at the same time definitely the value of U = u, thus ^ qqd W dQd (y M \y\'^
K-a-u-a-u-t Kat-t-e ' the tribe Kauai of Katte '. Kate (as the Assyrian records
spell him) .was chief of the Kauai (§ 27).
§ 61. With the \\alue kaf proved, we can examine the occurrences of this
pronoun :
ist pers. sing, kat-iiii: (i) (§ 47 ( 10)) kaf-nii ii-iii-ii-au - ' engrave ' c-a Adad-idQ)-r
a-h-in-' place ', ' I our agreement engrave with Benhadad the greatfs
city (?)]'. A similar phrase occurs on M iv, a, the difference lying-
in the name Tal(^)-H ^///-x-' place ', 'Talas(?) the chief of Ams
(Homs:')'(§44)-
«
(2) i^t"'^^ kat-iui:g{JS)\ 'I (will) come' W ^■iii, 2. On g{k) as an
ideogram sec § 70. Cf. also M 1 : \\\ b, 2 : xxxiv, i. The form
kaf-f{a)-ini occurs on a new Jerabis inscription.
2nd pers. sing. kat-t{a) : (i) (§ 46 (2)) ^-e-7'-a kat-t{d) k-a-ni a-b{a)-n san{/i)-s-t{a):,
' They say " Thou (as) our friend (?) with us shalt act ".' On k-a-/n'
see § 88. Cf. M x, 5.
3rd pers. sing, kaf-s: (i) (M ii, 6) ]| <^ 'c jj | f) ]( '^ ^^'<'^-s- '--''i-'i t-c- 'He to
our (?) alliance (?) saith '. On the meaning ' alliance ' see § 67, note i.
(2) New Jerabis f ^ §^ f oe qQd ^^^<;ri^ kat-s ''.-11 : a-f(a)-/r ' He a . . .
(?) hath given '. The ideogram is difficult : a character somewhat
similar occurs in TA 4, 5 [tis). Cf also M viii, 4 : xi, 4, 5 : xv, b, 2 :
xxiii, 3 ; Ramsay, PSBA. 1909, '^■}^.
ist pers. pi. kat-ir. (i) (§ 46, i) t-e-y-a kat-ii k-a-ii-c-t[a) a-b(a)-t(a) 'They say "A\''e
(are) thy friends (?) with thee "" '.
(2) {ib. 3) f-e-r-n kat-ii k-a-ii-e a-saii-ii-t{ii) ' They say " We (as) friends (?)
have acted towards thee '" ".
' I copied these two characters
I
, an obvious error.
- See § 68, note i.
64 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
(3) (TA4) kI joe^os^V-^'^^^-^^-^-^'--^-- '^^'c ■'^^^^ ^"e speech' (i.e. in
accord) or more simply (//;. 5) o« T Q<s U .• /v^/-// .•/; 'we are one'.
Cf. Mxi,4.
2ncl pers. pi. (not found).
3r(l pcrs. pi. hat-ir. (i) A new Jerabis inscription "^ ^J) pF' <\ || 1 — [\
Ku €\ T^ °Q°' "-^^"^-^^^^-^^-^'-t^^T^^'^^'^^-'' ^-^''''' ''^o Miittallii tlicy ]ia\-c
written (?)'. (On s-r-a see §§ 32 note, 69: on -ii-t[a) % 79.)
(2) M xlviii, 2 '^ f /^/'.^n ic QlQCD^^) :kat-ii-k-ii:ii-t\a)-ir'\.Q> them he
hath given '.
§ 62. There are some other forms witli hat which must be mentioned here.
(i) A77/-//-5, which seems to be an accus. ist pers. pi. New Jerabis:
ll ^h f I ^ \o)-(i l^-at-ii-s ' for us ' (§ 80).
(2) Kat-k (\\hich may be a proper name ?), M xii, 1,3: xxxiii, 9 : xlvi, 2.
(3) Kaf;-a, M i and xh'i, i, for which I cannot suggest any explanation
unless it be a form of kat-ii.
The Hittitc Noiui.
§ 63. The noun in cuneiform shows the following cases : »
Sing. nom. -us, -as: AN. UD-iis, Y r. 1 1 : LUGAL-ns, A ii, 16 : AN. IM-as Y 21 :
"'"ha-lu-ga-tal-as, A i, 23.
ace. -////, -an : AN . UD-nn, Y 21, 22, 26: ''"Te-Ii-bi-nu-nn, Y 29: Nl-an, A i,
14: ""'/ia-/n-ga-fal-/a-an, A i, 12.
gen. -as: I su-ha-la-U-ia AZAG-GI-as, Ai, 15.
dat. -/: AN. UD-i, Y 2t : LUGAL-i. Z i, iS-^
^ The nominative and accusative have long been known ; Sayce considers that the genitive-dative
case was expressed by a vowel, and that -sa denoted a case of dependency and probably the vocative.
' The nom. and ace. pi. terminated in -as and -ns, as well as in -t or -d, but the relation between the two
terminations is not 3'et clear, -an appears to have been the suffi.x of the gen. pi.' (Y p. 48). See
Torp and Bugge in Knudtzon, Die zzvei Arzawa-Briefc.
I believe the dative is best exemplified by (i) AN. IM-as AN.UD-i bi-i-e-it (Y 21) where the god
Hadad is nom. and ' sun-god ' (i.e. the king?) is in an oblique case, not the accus., after bi-i-c-if, a verb.
In Y 9, 17, 26, 31, 34, 37 occurs a word or name lia-alj-lii-iua-as of which ha-ah-hi-iin-uii is found in
Y 38. Certain names occur in the nominative without -s.
- AN.IM makes AN.IM-ni, Y 34.
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 65
? abl. -sa : .-iN. UD-sa, X r. 10 : AN . IM-sa, Y 20. 23 : "" Te-li-bi-nii-sa, Y v. 9 :
'""lia-lu-ga-tal-la-sa, A i, 23.
This last case, the ablative, seems to me somewliat doubtful, and the -sa may
perhaps be a suffix (cf. § 57).
Masc. Plural. Nom. -c ' :
An oblique case -as' : AN. MES-as, Y r. 8, q, 10 : GAL-GAL-as A i, 4, 8 :
HAR.SAG.MES-as, Y 10 : [neuter, KUR-e, A i, 27 ?]
[accus. -a// : AN. MES-an, Y r. 5].
I am inclined to see the genitive plural in the cuneiform -ai in A ii, 14
ki-i-kau ah-bi ku-is es-sai'-\iis'\ Ijal-za-a-i na-aii aii-pa . . lia-af-fa-an-iia-asLUGAL-us\
perhaps {2\)zi-ik-iini cs-sav-as as-sii-u-Ii /ja-af-/'a-[(i\-i iiam-iua-aa tag-au EGIR-au
i-ia. Ha-at-ra-a-i also occurs ibid., 13, but it is difficult to decide whether words
ending in -/ are not in the dative singular. Compare also C ii, 3 ik-ra-a ma (?) ///
tab (?)..• with C ii, r. 3 . . . ik-ra-a-e c-ra-a fa-a-e.
The Hieroglyphic Equivalents.
§ 64. About the masc. nom. sing. -.<r there is no difficulty ' : the proper names
end either in ^ {Araras, M xxxiii, i : 7'argit-r-s, ix, 2, &c.), or, like Labbaia, have
no case ending {Tesiip-id(T)-r, § 33, iiotc\ "Gii-aiii X A 3): Paii-mi saii-s, ' Panmi,
the king', gives an example of -.v with common nouns (§ 52 ff.). The accus.
sing, in -u{a) is clear, e.g. ' bowl '-//(^r) (§ 7): gu-in-ii{a) (see notes to M i at end).
The genitive in -5 is equally clear: ( J\I ii, i) \Saith T(a)-?-ar-s unto Mutallu the
great, his son (?), Thy father (?)i;ir e^Q °'°\^ ^^^CC ^^\
Tesitp-id{T)-r a-h-s " god ^^-Tesup-s: kar-k-n, &c., (and) Benhadad for the gloiy (?) of
Tesup (;/////// [their memorial (?)] have given thee).' (Al ii, 4) ' our allies (?) have
graven Tfl |^/^' V f] '*^ m-ii-n-s : ID-ii : "the lcg(?) of the /////// [memorial (?)] ".'
M iii, B, I : iv, a, 1 : i\^ b, i show it in '^^ ^^ DDQQ £^ hit: -a 11 saii-s ' unto
the nobles of the king' (§ 52). We must sec the dati\'c in -/ in Nis-t-e (§ 50(3)),
and either in the form (^-^^r^© CD Taigu-r-c in a new Jerabis inscription
(from Targu-ras) or in the mutilated form Targu-\y\-iii, M xi, 3, parallel to the
form (^ b) W ® I '^.-c-iii (like AN . IM-nioi the cuneiform) on a new Jerabis
^ This is made certain from the hieroglyphs.
^ GAL-GAL-as occurs in the opening phrase of A i, ' it is well unto the chiefs of ni}- people'.
^ Sayce and Jensen both recognized this.
VOL LXIV. K
66 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
inscription. The o-eniti\'e of this latter name ends in -c-s{M i). Proper names
apparently ha\'e also a case ending in -//, e.g. A^/s-f-// (§ 49), Paii-mi-n (Mxxi, 4),
Bay-k'U (M i). I cannot find any case of the ablative or instrumental in -sa.
The masc. plural nom. -c is more easily determined from the hieroglyphs
than the cuneiform : § 46 shows this plainly, kat-ii k-a-;/-c-f{n) n-b{(i)-f{a) 'We are
thy friends (?) with thee', san-c 'kings' occurs in AI xi, 2 (§52 (2)) (or is this
dat. sing. ?).
The neut. plural accus. ends in -c (we may assume that the nominati\'e was
the same): 'So-and-so f JCD >i-">-ii-^' agreements with me graveth ' (§ 47 (7):
for other instances see § 68): U/yt^^ '^-b-r-e in the accus. aftera \^erb (§ 37).
The masc. plural accus. is found in -a// in ljii:-aii ' unto the nobles ' (M iii,
B, I : iv, A, I : iy, b, i, § 52).
The genitive plural ends apparently in a-c : e.g. in a new Jerabis inscription
f ll \ I / ODODDDDOO °a° ^'i^-t-lj 'i-^^s ' IX-a-e ', (So-and-so and) ' Nist the chief,
the sons of the Nine ' (the reading of the first and third characters is a little
doubtful) : similarly M Iii, 4. This is comparable with the -a-/ oi the cuneiform.
O// certain Nouns.
§ 65. The word f 01' ' sou ' partly described in § 50. The nominati\'e appears
to be nis, for we find
(i) d^ \A^ ^l°'° • ' ^^^^>' :-n[a)-a nis-n{a)-a ' our ally, our son ". M xxi, 3.
(2) Perhaps O/IT "^ °(° [1 /? W ^^ J- <:? ^ || U//^ Tcsuf^-a-n nis Tesnp-
n/i-ani //is C^a/'-san-s, '(Saith) Tesup-an son of Tesup-ammi (?)•■ son of
Garsanas (" make alliance with me ")." M xxxi (Nachtrag).
(3) Perhaps osj^ qj] | QQ[H^ D^ /^|J jj Q^ *i^f ^^A" (name) nis-
n//i-k : "Xis-t-//: a-a//-t (TA 4).
(4) Perhaps M xi, 5 {/t-s)-Targ/i-nis. (Cf. the name Haiani (§73)-)
The accusative has been shown (§ 50) to be /////.
' Are Wf to regard this ii-aa as an ublique case of the plural of ;//5 (§ 65I ?
tDQO
^ were possibly a variant for
-u- o9o °'^°
^ ' : M Iii. 5r,V?/--[r7 ?]-//(?) ;// SL^ ® where
the alternative in 1. 4 is IX-a-c: cf. xxi, 4 : xxiii a, 2.
" Are we to read thus instead u\' ni'i-aiii on account of the 'tang' which calls attention to Jiii?
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 67
I believe the dative occurs as /// in the following-;
IC ^ o|o
(5) H cjC I innnm o|o k . Car-<i-// ni IX-a-e : ' Garali, son of the Nine '
(AI Hi, 4, also 5 (?|). In § 50 (0) iti-iii is probably written for /////.
§ 66. The syntax of the genitive relationship of this word is difficult if the
nominative iiis be admitted instead of iiiiii^ : however, the cases given in § 50
prox'idc certain rules.
(1) "Ai'aiuiiii inii{ii)-s : "-?-iuli{ii)iiis
(5) "Araiiiiiii /////{//)-// /s "-?-//-s
(2) Bauli {]i))iin-as : Miital-a-Jj-iiis
(TA i) Hu-ui-zi iiiii{ii)-s : Mntal-a-Jj-s
(6) "Erskar uin{u)-s : ' ally ' : ' ancestors ' . . .
(M XV, B, i) [Sangaras] . . . iii-ii-s : San-gars
(With (6) above compare the ///-/// of § 50 (6), and "B{a)-a-niiQ) iiiii : ' ally ',
'ancestors', M Hi, 4.)
Postpositive, § 50 (3) AHsfe "Bauli-iiiii
(4) A^ist Baiili-niii-as
(M xy, B, i) Sa//{)/)-{g)gar-s Bai{^)-/jii-iii//{u)
(M xxxiv. A, 2) Arai'aiiiiis (cf. Professor Sayce's \'iews, p. 129).
Compound, § 50 (4) ' brother '-/--/// iiiii-as . . . lis : ' ally ' : ' ancestors'.
(5) ' ally '-/'-/// iiiii-as : Mutal-a-Ii-uis : ' ally ' : -//{a)-as "B{a)-a-i/ii iiiii
. . li-Tesup: 'ally': -n{a)-a iiis-i/(a)-a.
The possibility of /[/ uis being a linear or con\-entional lorni ot |^, and
the probability of the latter being a picture of a phallus and used for ' son '
(discussed in § 73), must also be considered.
Under these circumstances we can either consider //is and //i//s {//i////is, &c.)
to be different words, or, as far more probable, //is to be the same as //i//s, on
th(,> analogy of /'-5 written for /.--//s in M Hi, i : xxxiii, i, 6cc^ The dative ///, if
the character has been read rightly, indicates that the root letters are not ///// :
moreo\'er, //-as occurs twice in the place of this /// before IX-a-c, indicating
probabl}' a plural, but at any rate some form of this //is. If //is = //i//s we can
easily see the accus. in ///// and the dat. in ///. From the comparison ot texts
above, //i//{//)s, //i //{//)-// is, {//)// i/i-as, iii-i/s appear to be the same. We apparently
get //is-c as a plural in M ix, 4.
^ Other possible instances of « assimilated before a sibilant are: cuneiform /-/W-c/(Y r. 39) b}- the
side of i-ia-an-zi (Y 7, P 4), pa-iz-zi (for pa-in-zil) (S i, 12 : F i, 3, &c.), k-iz-zi (for te-in-zil) (Y 17, 23, 34,
r. 10).
K 2
68 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
§ 67. 77/6' //(mu Jj Y' 0- I cannot find a value for cither of the two first
characters; the Teg', however, forms the name of a kino- in M xvi, a: xix, i,
and TA 4. But the word appears to mean 'pledges' or 'oaths', e.g. Restan 2,
' Saith . . . ?, Before the altar (?) (which) I have made, " god "-r-e ar-k-iiii \/ ^Z' CD-
t{ii) by the god(s) I swore (?) thy pledges'. (F'or the difficulty of connecting
ar-k-iiii \\\W\ opKO'i 'an oath' see § 88); a plural subject in a new Jerabi's
inscription qs ^"^ ^ 0(S J^^*® :/^"-''/ 'ally' ': ?-?-r^^' 'for the alliance pledges,
&c.' : M xi, 2 ' the kings with Panammi (and) Bar-hi (§ 73) V^ ^ , ^ ^q /D-zi
?-}-e "Utter (swear) the pledges" of [Shalmaneser (?)] king of Assyria ' (§§ 28,51); a
new Jerabis text, So-and-so J? y oflb 0(^j® ^-^ oflo czu 'pledges to . . . (a
chief) have gi\en ' : a new Jerabis text, ' pledges of (So-and-so and So-and-so)
s-//-// ( = I (?) have written) '.
§ 68. 77/c' noun n-iii-n. The word T I n-ni-n appears to mean 'covenant',
'agreement ': it can be (i) 'written " ?, (2) ' engraved ', (3) 'given ' : (4) the words
I'sini^ rsnni, for which I have suggested the meaning 'join ' in the other passages,
can be applied to it. It is not found in the nominative : —
(U
I n-)n-n s-u-ii (]\I XV, B, 4) (' I (?) have written a covenant').
(2) . . . "ran-am-iiii u-iii-n s-u-n {ibid. 3).
' This is the 'hand' sign upright, without distinction of the fingers fas in § 34), the four fingers
being nierel}' indicated like a glo\'e and not spread apart. It will be observed that these two forms
rarely occur on the same inscription (cf. M. ix, 2, 3), and a comparison of texts will show that they are the
same character with the same meaning ' friend ' ; also on M ii, the similarity of the horizontal hand
('ally') with this upright hand will be at once remarked. The form which can almost be called
transitional is to be seen in M xi, 2, ' all}-
f)-'
an-zi ' they have counted as an ally' (or, 'in alliance'].
In M ix. 3 we meet this hand three times: ' I will make sonship (§ 73) with thee " ally "-r-.s it-l){a)-r-a-t{a)
ii/s-z! mi-t : mi : " all}' "-//-»/ ir-r-a-ha) " ally ''-d-t[n\ : ? -c-^-k ini-iii . . ., ? will take thee as a son (in sonship)
with me, our allies (alliance) will join thee, in thy alliance ..^s^we(?) acceptf?).' In M ii, 3, 4, what
I at first thought was a personal name, readi
ngit as^^
(D, must be explained as ' ally '-e-iii ' our
allies ', witii an accus. ' all}' '-iii-n in 1 6. Clearly in 1. 4 we have a plural verb after it, and ' ally '-e-iii here
is certainly not preceded by a nominative, but rather an accusative from the preceding sentence,
whatever its meaning may be : and I should translate this phrase ' our allies have graven the [leg?] of
the memorial stela'. Similarly we must read 'our allies' in 1. 3.
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS
(3)1
OS
^
^
°^'i^^ . . . n-in-n-t-an
iiii-ni a
69
. {ibid. A, 3) ' thy
covenant we accept (?) '.
(4) ' A bowl unto Tesup
n-in-n-an a-t{a)-iy : a-n. kat-iiii : s-unC): (J-bici) Bay-k-u (as) our agree-
ment he hath given which I wrote (?) with Bark' (Al i). (For tin
see § 71, note).
(5) § 47 (10), M iii, B, 3 kat-mi n-m-n-an ' engrave ' e-a Tesup-icH^yr-a-h-ni-
' place' 'I am engraving a covenant with Benhadad the great['s city?] ".
(6) (TA 5)
OS
i
©
©■^^ ^1
OS
oe
<3
Qg
□ □
. . . .• n-m-ii-an r-s-iiii e-a B{a)-t : 'ally' / ar-nii
: liii : -mi-zi : n-m-ii-aii a-b{d)-t{(i) . . . ' our covenant I have joined(?), with
Bat alliance I have joined ; for my chiefs our covenant with thee . . .
Cf. also M vii, 2 : M liii. On the meanings 'join ' see notes to trans-
lation of M xxi at end.
(7) • • • f? 1/ OS III nfo I Qfc^ I . . ii-zi: u-m-n-a-n a-b{ii)-t{d) ' iox them,
our covenant with thee (at my feast I have joined t-s : ' bowl ' ;-nin-
//-5'(TA7).
Plural (8) (M xi, 3) Certain chiefs I f I (D m n|'o dJ n-m-n-e : a-t{ii) 'have given
covenants '.
(9) (M xxiii, A, 2)A chief (?) j || oaoaoOa^ ii-ni-ni-e : a-^a)-iy 'has
given covenants .
(10) (§ 47 (7)) So-and-so //-;//-//-(' w/-6W? ' covenants with me hath engraved'.
Cf. also M vi, 2 : xi, 2. See § 88 for a suggested Indog. com-
parison.
N-in-n occurs also with a word mini {x\, 5 : (3) above : cf. M i), probably ' we
have accepted ' (§ 75).
^ ^^ (which is the linear form of ^ir^, as was pointed out by Sayce, PSBA., x.\i, 1899, 205)
= (111 is proved (i) from M iii, 2, li-AN-n-s and 'w, a, 2 li-AN-nas, varying with iv, b, 2, Ij-iuis: (2) M ii, 4
m-n-u-k-n-AN a-f[a)-f 'for our memorial (?l he hath given', and ibid. 6 mi-r-a-AN : t-c 'before us he
saith ' : (3) the common n-in-n-AN ' our covenant ' compared with n-m-ii-a-n once (TA 7I ; (4) )i-in-ii-t-aii
'thy covenant' (M xv, a, 3). The oath in a new Jerabis inscription with a singular subject takes the
form mi-t-m 'god'-//-/// '(As) mj' great god is with me", with a plural subject becomes 'as for me and
So-and-so Tesup-s mi-t-^^ (if my reading is right, which seems in every way probable), i.e. mi-t-an
' (as) Tesup is with us '.
70 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
Verbs.
§ 69. The Inipcyfect. The simple verb is found in such idcoo-rams as ^
' saith ' (Restan 2 : M Hi, 3), |ici ' cngraveth ' (M iii, b, 3), &c., where the subject
may follow or precede. Similarly we can see this historic present in the
syllabic ^ t-c 'saith'; and since the group If© Dib (§46) is found in similar
passages, except that the subject is plural, we can see in this -r-a the mark of the
3rd pers. plur. of this present or imperfect.
The first person of the unaugmented tenses ends with -iii, -mi, -nin, similar
to the ist pers. nominal suffix, and the meaning is that of a present (historic or
otherwise) and future, much the same as the Hebrew imperfect. For instance,
M V, I ^ ODQOl' 1^^ T t'-'(^-)-^^(i'i-iiii ID-L'-iiii' ' I promise I will fight ': TA 3
(§ 47 (9)) s-r-a ID : J-k-it-jii : k-jiiii c-a-t{a) ' They have written, "Against my ( ? read //,
our ?) common foe I will go with thee '": M ix, 3 # gjffl uis-lMu-t{ay\ will make
sonship with thee '. If li W
Moreover, the idea of this present or imperfect tense being that the duration
of the action still continues, we find (M Hi, 3) DDQO © ol° #^ ^^^ Q ^^ j
saii-r-a 'ally' ID-IiJ)-k-u 'They have made alliance against a (common?) foe.'
Hence I propose to call this unaugmented tense the imperfect.
[The terminations -///, -////, -niu are represented in the Hittite cuneiform in
e-es-iiii (Y ;'. 3), pa-i-iiii (Y 43), Ija-a-nii ? (a, ii, 4).]
The second person of the imperfect may perhaps be seen in saii{ii)-s-\a)
which occurs twice; the mofe probable is kat-t{a) k-a-Nla-b{a)-n san{H)-s-f{(i) (§ 46),
' Thou makest friends (?) with us (or, actest as our friend (?) with us) ' ; on a new
Jerabis inscription we find © ^ os ODDa|^| ' brother '-/'-.■ (or ' brother '
-c-k) : S(Hi{ii)-s-t{a) (or sa//-f{(i)-i/-s 'like a brother (or brothers) thou actest (or
makest us) '. The difficulty lies in the various possibilities which our present
ignorance will not allow of our determining.- [It may be that this termination
is to be seen in cuneiform, mc-ini-is-ta a, ii, 2, 5, ki-is-ta-as (Y y. \^bis)\. I do not
' Cf. ar-iiii, translation to M xxi at end, note.
- That this form sau{ti)-s-/{a) might have an intransitive force is possible, .sa/i having all the active
meaning of 'to make', 'to do'. We are too much hampered by lack of examples at present to say
that this -s- in saiiUiya-fia) forms a middle voice, or that the form -5-/(rtj for the 2nd person singular
termmation is comparable to vid-isli in Latin (an s Aoristj.
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 71
think that r-s-t in M ix, 5 is a second person : it is more probably third person,
but whether the final -t is a suffix or part of the verbal termination is difficult to
say. For we hav^e seen that one form of the 3rd pcrs. sino-. of the imperfect is
a simple verbal form without terminations : and it is quite doubtful whether in
'f A 5 saii{ii)-t or saii{ii) c-a-t{a) is meant, or if in a new Jerabis inscription ' who
So-and-so (ace. (?)) /--//-/' where the verb is similarly doubtful (§ 83 (2)). Hence
r-s-t is the example on which this -/ termination depends. It is true that the
forms tc-it (Y 4, 16, 21 : a, ii, i (?)): pa-{a)-if (Y 16, /'. 10: S i, 10, &c.), bi-i-e-it
(Y 21, 25 : S i, r. I (?), 6) are common, but I cannot help thinking" that these are
quite as probably perfects, the augment, so clearly written in the hieroglyphs,
perhaps being slurred and hardly audible to the people who wrote cuneiform.
It is, of course, not infrequently added (see § 70) but the forms in -// without it
are common, just as we find -/> a termination of the augmented \-er]) in the
hieroglyphs, which in cuneiform is found in such forms as pa-a-ir ' (Y 22) as well
as a-ki-ir (Y 33, 35). I must therefore leave this form r-s-t doubtful. The
ist pers. plur. ends like the nominal suffixes with -ii{a), e. g. iiii-i/(a) /D-san-!/(a)
(Restan 2) ' we have accepted (?), we have signed (?) ', and probably
-k-n{a) 'we will fight' (M lii, 4).' The 2nd pers. plur. possibly occurs in
©©lyll r-r-u-t in a new Jerabis inscription; this may be a form similar to
ir-r-a-it-t M xv, b, 3 (see translation to M xxi, notes, at end). Ti-iii-nu-uf (Y 20)
and ti-iin-ut (Y 8) occur in cuneiform alongside fi-iii-iiit-zi (Y 13, 15), and ti-iin-zi
(Y 27), but what part of speech these are is doubtful.
The 3rd pers. plur. is found in -itzi as well as the -r-a quoted at the
beginning of this .section. In M ii, 2 we find sau-ii-zi t{a)-k-ii '^-zi :g{k)ar saii-/i-zi:
' ally ' : -li-ii-zi ' they have made . . . (?), ■ they have made a commemoration (?),
they have made alliance ' ; and yet in the same inscription t-c-r-a ' they say ''
occurs in the historic present. In § 37 nii-n-zi 'brother'-//-//-.:-/ 'they have
accepted (?), they have made brotherhood' appears to be the sense. [It occurs
in the unaugmented tense in cuneiform in sii-iin-na-an-zi (D 14), sii-iiu-iii-^ua-
an-zi{K 4), sii-uii-iii-aii-zi (K 5\ &c. See § 37.]
' I have not enough examples in the hierogI\-phs to say definitely whether this -r sound was used
in the singular in unaugmented tenses. Yet the cases fe{?)-r-r M viii, 2 : /tC^)-r->iis (M xxxi) : /<•(?)-/-
{il)i(i/.) : the possibility of a badly written b = ir in M iv, a, b, 2 : M vi, 2 : M xxxii, i : and of the word
}--k-)' {M ii, 6: xi, 5) must not be lost sight of.
'■^ A possible form with a suffix is r-iiiii-ii-i[a), TA 5, &c.
■■■ Are we to see in this sait-ii-zi t\a]-k-ii ? si (or san-ii-:/-/Ui\ ?-/'-//-:/) either 'they have made (it)
for thee ..." (or they ha\'e made it, the}' have . . .), or, still more probably, comparing it with TA 4,
' the}- have made [a feast ? [takna)] ? '
72 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
Another form of the \^erb appears to be in -/(?) for any person of the singular,
and -11 for the plural, and the verbs in these cases appear to be placed almost
always (if not always) after their subject. Now the verb in h'riz b (M xxxiv)
is apparently to be read fc{Y)-/ii (§ 73) ; in this case it follows ii/i-a ' I am " (' I am
. . . Araras greeting my son "), and in this case, although the sc-nse demands the
first person singular, the verb has no distincti\'c mark, but remains the same as
the third person impf. of § 73. It is possible that this postpositive form in -/,
-71 represents a participle. A similar case occurs in the plural in ]\I x\-i, a,
'We arc (four kings) greeting (r?/' sending a message to) (/<'(?)-///-//, jjrobably) the
lord of Tabal", where although the sense is of the ist pers. plur. the verb
termination is -// (as I read it). A parallel to the plural is to be found in M ix,
2 . . . (three kings, nominative) ' ally '/-/-.• //)-// (§^ JO) '(are) accepting as an
ally', and most probably M x, 5 (the order being flue to the desire for sym-
metry) ^SjM'^' ^^ (read IX ID-u) 'the Nine (are) making brotherhood": and
perhaps s-ii (M lii, 3). [An example of -// in Hittite cuneiform occurs m pa-a-it,
Y r. 12.]
The participle used as a noun may perhaps be seen in M x, 2 a-b{a) san{ii)
ID-k '(Make brotherhood) with one making war'.
oa
From ^^ ^ : ' ally ':-// ' make thou alliance ', the imperative would seem to
have the same form as the simple root. Hence we are probably not wrong in
seeing an imperative in M x, i ^^^^ODQD I^-s(T'i ' make thou brotherhood '; //;. 8,
^^^/^ ^ ^^ ^-^ ™d(] a-lAa) ID: ID-k sau{ii) 'with a foe make war'
(or ist pi.?). Hence I see in ar-iiis 'join us' (see translation of M xxi at end).
§ 70. On the other hand a di.stinct past tense is marked by the augment
ula a. The most frequent form is that ending in -/ [found probably in cuneiform
a-a-aii-ta (Y 24), and i-ga-it (A i, 27), which seem to come from the roots /HJiP au
and ei£J ^?(^')]- Taking t{a\ which is the best-known root, we find ' (new Jerabis)
□|D crB|. r^ (gg) -^J^j [. . .] a-t{ii)-t 'bowl'; 'god^'-Tcsup ... 'he hath given
a bowl to(?) Tesup(?)' (or does a-t{ti)-i belong to a preceding" word ?).
' In M ii, I ff. we might see in °l° il n-tSa)-t the 3rd pers. plural with the 2nd pers. suffix i\a).
'Saith T\av^.-ar-s unto his son (?) Mutallu "Thy father (and) Benhadad the great have given thee
{n-tX(i)-i{n)) a memorial-stela (?j for the glor}' (?j (commemoration (?)) of Tesup " '.
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 73
Similarly =^ gi/c) ' a foot ', and so ' to come, to go ' (according to the way in
which the toes are pointing) is found in °D°-^|I ^'-i,^(^'K ^-S- (^^ '^' S)
Bs ^ g Qg 1) °|- ofla oQd^iI H^ f^ -^^ I ■ <"^^me;)-//.-// /X-a-e a-g(/c)-/
r-s-t'i-k-iii 'So-and-so the Chief, the chief of the Nine(?),' hath come : he will join(?)
our war'. A-g{k)-t Gii-aiu-izi) 'Giammu hath come ' or 'he hath come to Giammu '
occurs on the Kellekli stone (Hogarth, Aiiiiah of Arch, and .liiflirop., ii ). * |1)|
a-s-t is another, from the root .v, which appears to mean ' to write'. It occurs twice
in a new Jcrabis text; 'So-and-so ii« £*fl)| : ID-iiia) a-s-t . . . hath written'.
Other words are °^#^|j ^r-au-f (M ix, 4 /cr), and perhaps °^° f^ || (TA 8).
I ha\'e not been able to discover the 2nd pers. sing, or plur., but I think the
ist pers. sing, is fairly certain. Three times a word a-h-iui occurs (M ii, 5, § 81),
'Before them a shrine (?) a-h-iiii I made': Restan 2, iui-\)''{\a ID a-h-nii ' be-
fore (?) the altar (?) (which) I made': M Hi, 5 : 'ally ' : ^^//-w/ 'I made alliance".
It seems to occur in the form a-/j-iii, M xxxii, 5.
The ist pers. plur. with the 2nd sing, suffix is concealed in * ^^^^ ||
a-sai/-N-f(a) in the quotation in § 46. Had it not ])ecn for the phrase in iM ix, 2
a-b{a)-t{a) sa//-///-/(a) ' with thee l\vill act (towards) thee ', I should ha\-e suggested
that mv copy was in error in |j /. Apparently we may see the ist plur. m
o|l«>a)^ H(a)-a//, M xxxiv, a, 2.
Hie 3rd plur. ends like the impf forms in -//r/ [in cuneitorm a-ta-aii-zi G 16,
a-ba--.va-aii-zi. G 20, &c.], e.g. ofe^QflOQ | |^ a-saii-ii-zi (new Jerabis) and ^\^p%
a-aii-zi (M X, 6).
§71. There are, however, other verbal forms in this augmented tense.
For instance, the common a-sau{n) used as auxiliary: ofa CB ^^-tM'^) used as a
3rd pers. plur. in (certainly) two cases, one a new Jerabis inscription and the
other M xi, 3 '(several chiefs) n-m-ii-e : ^7-/(^7) .• have given covenants'. (^For a
case with a suffix ^^^ footnote to § 70.) Another form for the 3rd pers. plur.
appears to end in -// ; d|dQQ0q8 a-san-u ('they have acted (as) friends', M hi, s),
probably di^J^^\ ^^-f^'-n 'they have come' (M xxxi, Nachtrag), and possibly
□!□ Q^fij^ a-f\a)-u (M xl\i) : but there is a doubt about this.
1 On this variant see § 64, note 2.
VOL. LXIV.
74
A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
There are also the forms in -/> quoted in § lo, which appear in be the
3rd pers. sing.
We find a possible form in -//-//, occurring' only as £\ W I \-//-// (assuming
that the root is the verbal 5 'write') (new Jerabis), ' pledges (?) of (So-and-so)
s-//-//': (new ferabis and M xv, b, 3 and 4) n-iii-ii s-ii-ii 'I have written (?) a
covenant '.
[Cuneiform shows it in (e.g.) ta-ali-liit-iiii (Y /-. 4, [5]), sit-iili-ha-ali-liii-itii (Y
;'. 6), tc-clj-ljii-iiii (Y r. 7), &c. : pn-a-iin (W 19) shows from its parallelism with
(id-diii ' I gave" that it is ist pers. sing.']
§ 72. Hie //- forms which appear frequently in Hittite cuneiform \jip-pix-
{alj)-liii-iiii s^pa, i\ i, 15,28: up-pa-aJj-Jji A i, 18: ii-fa-nn-.zi, /^^ A i, 22, &c.]
occur in /i-b{a)-?'-a-f(a) (M ix, 3, see i/otc to translation at end): n-//a-aiii-Nti {M.
ii, 3), and probably an instance in M ix, 5.
§ 73. (//) We ha\'e already discussed the causative conjugation in § 37,
which has shown examples of a noun ('brother', 'ally ') with a -//- verbal forma-
tion after it. One or two new points arise which are of interest. In M xxxiii,
2 we find icQ )^ ^ ic <^^ ic C [\- and altliough it is difficult to be certain
of the meaning of the first ideogram, I am much inclined to agree with
Professor Sayce and see the idea of a 'stela' or 'tablet' in it." Whether //{n)-s
is ' this ' or ' our ', the last group ' all\' ' : -/j-s appears to be a nominal form of the
causative conjugation in the genitive, so that we may translate 'this tablet (?)
of making alliance ', or e\'en a participle used as an adjective in the nominative.
In this form of the causative we have now found (i) the hieroglyphic
imperatix'e 2nd sing., ending in -// (are we to see this in the cuneiform ///////■zcv?/,-'
A i, 14 ?) : (2) the hieroglyphic imperfect 3rd plur., ending in -/jiiai, corresponding
to the -aljliaiizi oi the cuneiform: (3) and possibly the hieroglyphic ist plur. of
the same in -/j////{n). For the ist and 3rd pers. sing, in the cuneiform the
views in Knudtzon, Die EI-Aiuanta 7'afc///, p. 270 ft"., are that -Ijljiiii is the ist
pers. and -///// the 3rd pers. Now, in addition, I believe that the group ti O,
This has long been accepted in the Arzawa letters. It rather suggests that
might have the
value of ?//; in IVI i ' a bowl for Tcsup (as| our covenant he(V) hath given : a-n kat-iiii : s
n-b[a]
Bar-kn which I (have) written (?) with Bark ' : but the suggestion is without support. (See ^ 32, note)
- At the same time in two of the passages in which it occurs it appears to be preceded by a numeral,
(S** eg' X
once ' ten ' and once a ' hundred ', if Professor Sa3'ce's very plausible explanation of g=^ ^x^^^^v' ^'^ ' '+"+° '
be correct. <£^ AXA
•'• Ta-a-i (Y r. 26, 27, &c , D 11, &c., E 7, 12, &c.) has all the appearance of an imperative
UrniTE HIKROCxLYPHS 75
a fairly common word, contains the causative termination for the 3rd pcrs.
sing, (besides the participle, § 69), at any rate when used as the first word in
a sentence, and on this assumption the second character should have the
value -///. I submit the following- to support sucli a theory :—
At first I thought that this character had some such value as // from a new
Jerabis inscription, where I found a form ®\7 ^^\ I \j ' brother"-?- Ii-ii-zi
' they have made brotherhood ', when the usual form for thi;^ word is simply
@ \ I 9| 'brother'-//-//-,:/ (§ 37), my idea, prol)abh' erroneous, being that this
apparently redundant character was a helping //, added to support the ordinary
causal endine; and bv considerino- it as // came to the conclusion that it could
form a causative of the third person singular as in the word mentioned abo\-e.
But latterly it seemed unlikely that the sign could only be a simple //, as there
were already two signs for this, and in that case, if it contained the sound // at all
it must be augmented to a full syllable by at least a vowel either in front or
behind (say /), which at once obviously changed the (hypothetical) group
'brother '-///(?)-//-//-,:/ into a form difficult to explain on the model of the cunei-
form causatives. Yet on the ground that the value /// made the group Kj'I'^ ^"^^
a causative of the ideograph ' say ' of the form demanded by the cuneitorm, it
was still worth pursuing as a hypothesis. Now this group takes the place of
the ordinary ' saith ' (or ' I am '), as in M x, i, and if the second character is really
a causative ///, we may well suggest ' causes to say ', i. e. ' sends a message ' or
'greet' for the meaning : in just the same way s^te 'say' occurs in cuneiform (cf.
Y 4, 16, 21, &c.) as well as its causative te-eh-hiMin (Y ;'. 7). M x, on which it
occurs, (if my translation is right) was sent as a present, or at any rate marks
a message from Shalmaneser(?) to Carchemish (this explains the Assyrian
figures on the companion stelae). Next, on M x^'i, a (see translation at end) we
have 'we (four kings) fi If '^ru-) ^■^- 8'reet (or, send a message to) (the lord of
Tabal)' and in the rest of the inscription they suggest an alliance. In Al xix, 1
the group appears to occur again, but the text is mutilated. M xxxiii gives
'Araras ofTyana the great to his lord TalhasCy li-ii-s-t. Make alliance with us'.
Here again the idea is of sending a message ; while in the hriz text quoted at
the end of § 69, ' greet ' or ' send a message ' will fit W) cjuite well (see the trans-
lation at end). For M xxxv, 2 I can suggest nothing : the word also occurs in
Rams. No. 4. (For the view that some of these are participles see § 69, end).
■L2
76 A NEW DHCIPIII^RMHNT OF '1"HH
Hence there issoine initial reason, at an)' rate, to tliink tliat our character can
lorm -/// caiisatives, and, as a barely possible parallel (at least until some trans-
lation is sug-o-ested for it), the grou]) ^p in M Hi, 5.
With tliis sui^-gested \'alue ///we can apply it to the phrase * brother"-///-//-//-^/,
where it is apjxarentl)' redundant l)ecause of the ])arallel 'brother'-//-//-.::/
Obviously if /// is the value, it cannot be a helping sound in the causative forma-
tion, tor the cuneiform forms arc (|uite distinct on this point: but it might well
be a phonetic complement to the sign for 'brother', which suggests at once the
Assyrian word a/j/. As has been seen (§§ 2, 28, n footnote; for the full list sec
§ 89) scN'cral Ass}-rian words were adopted in I littite cuneiform many centuries
before the date of this inscription, among them certainly abit 'a father", and a
possible instance of aim ' brother ' (see § 33, footnote) ; phonetic complements arc
by no means uncommon (§ 4), and consequently the evidence for the value ///
accumulates w itli this explanation.
We can now examine the name of the brother of Panammi, who has already
been referred to in §§ 28, 38. In § 28 we find three instanc-es of a grouj) fi^W-
a name following closely after Panammi, and in § 38 it is show n that he is actually
described in the hieroglyphs as Panammi's brother. The two first quotations
in § 28 may be translated ' Panammi the king, with R his brother ' and ' Panammi
(and) R swear'; and with these clues it should be possible to learn the pronun-
ciation of his name '.
First, we can examine the character ^ which occurs sN'llabicallv in another
proper name vp /--// in M 1 {/cot-mi : s-n/i ? .• a-l\a) ID-/' ' I have written (?) with
("tang' ) //->-/• ') ; in M xxi, 3 where it is written ^-/'-// ; in J\I xi, 4 it is made defi-
nitely a chief's name by the sign //, y"^ (g = (" tang ")-lD.-/'-// = ' ID-I\ the chief ;
and in M x,2 it is one of three names of persons who arc described as 'chiefs of the
Nine ' (S-s-'^, ' Sun-god 'sa/f, ID-/-). Consequently there is no doubt that we ha\-e
' In the long text from Tel Ahmar the name occurs in 1. 8 spelt ordinarily (without Panammi) ; in
1. 3 we find a group ^ij ^^. which, although the lower half of the line is broken away beneath,
gives at least at first sight some colour to the belief that this group is a variant (' head '-//;/) for the name
of the brother of Panammi I' head '-///(?)l. Against this, however, I must mention that M w, b i (§ 3)
contains a possibility that this name ' head '-//// is the father of Sangar, and son of another Sangar : the
first character is ver^- difficult to read, but if the line on M xv, n 1 runs as I have suggested in § 3, it
would be difficult to reconcile this name ' head '-//« as the brother of Panammi. However this may be,
it has, of course, no eficct whatever against our reading the name of the brother of Panammi as
' iiead '-///.
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 77
a chiefs name spelt with ^ (with or without the tang marking names) and the
sign /'. We may* now turn to another name which occurs in a group three
times ©'1^5^ t3cS '^-'^-bin)-r-k (TA 3, 5, M hi, i). This form does not occur in
an\- of the texts quoted above, and hence will not clash with their groups in any
way ; and I propose to suggest a hypothesis for the identification of the two
groups, making Q^J\ = Bar-k. \i we could prove the first two characters in
l-}-b{a)-r-k to be a title, so that the name is really B{a)-r-k, we should have gone
far to prove our point.
Now it is noticeable that M xxi and M lii, both from the same king to the
same king, and about the same date, do not coincide in their mention, the one
bearing one form, and the other the other. It is not improbable for two such
inscriptions to mention the same chief's name, and hence these two may be the
same name spelt differently ; at the same time it must be admitted that Karal
occurs in the one and not in the other, and hence we cannot base very much on
such small evidence. But we can go further in the question of titles. In M xix,
B, 8 we find part of our title used in 1 ID.AV, where ID. (if correct)*replaces
iiiiiini
the more usual // 'chief; are we then to consider that we have 'l-i\\\Q-B{a)-y-k ' for
our name ? In relation to this we find a curious parallel in two groups, M xxxiii
(Nachtrag), 0, ic ©H ^y* gft , and what is presumably the same in M lii,2 (cf.5)
""\/ /j0^ "^Sh^ *^ ^^'^' ^ 1''^^''-" ^'^ot done Messerschmidt's copies justice in drawing
the sign as ///: a new Jerabis text spells this name in the same way as M lii, 2,
without ,-, but is distinct in using No. 45 of my list, and not /// in this passage).
Here it is clear that the circle may again be omitted, and it might indeed well
be that it is merely the sign for ' brother ' ( @ instead of ®. a form which I copied
more than once while working at Carchemish). At any rate, whether it be
'brother" or not, it can clearly be omitted; so that whether we see in Q)\
a title, or merely 'brother' of the titled person, is immaterial for our purpose.
W we have seen (if the text is copied rightly) is equivalent to 'chief (cf.
M XV, B, I ?), and hence, since the circle-sign may be added or omitted in the
other group, it does not seem an improbable theory that ' ?-?-/;( r/ )-/'-/'' provides us
with the name B{n)-r-/c with a description or title attached. With the probability
of this name B(a)-)'-k, should we not read the ^^ as Bar-/c (making ^ ^dar),
which occurs in inscriptions contemporary with those containing the form 'title-
B{(r)-r-/c'?
78 A NKW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
For another case of ^ (in one case with the tono-ue out) compare the name
(or possibly the title of an officer) QL f=^ f^ in M \i, i. and Restan i (§9). This
occurs as ^ y~^ in a new Jcrabis inscrij^tion. 1 can offer no explanation
except to mention in comparison the name Bar-ga s, a chief on the Zakir-stela,
of a later period (§ 23) : the hand \\-ith the dagg-cr is used phonetically in
Rams. 1-6 in the king's name if- W^ 1 \ ^^ "C'//C)-'^-f(i/-s, and again pho-
netically with the sign /• when it means ' to fight ', but that is as far as I can go
in these comparisons.
{b) To proceed with this head-sign. It occurs as a noun in M ii, i, 'Saith
T-?-ar-s unto his hari^) Alutallu the great '. Now in the corresponding phrases
(§ 34) w^e find the words ' brother ', ' friend ', ' lord " used, and hence here it looks
as though bar had assumed an Aramaic \'alue ' son '. This is strengthened
by the next word in the line, which reads a-b{(i)-it-f(a), which is surprisingly like
the Semitic (be it Assyrian or Aramaic) for ' father " with 2nd pers. sing, pronoun
attached ; ahii is one of the Assyrian words borrowed in Hittite cuneiform, like
pcvii, and possibly a/jii (§ 90). It does not seem unlikely that common Aramaic
words may have been borrowed {abit 'father', pain 'face',' (^li^' 'brother' are
practically the same as the Aramaic words) by the Hittites of the ninth century,
seeing how close their relations with the Syrians were. The exca\^ations of
Sinjerli which have revealed sculptures of undenied Hittite workmanship, and
yet inscriptions in Aramaic, are enough to show how interwoven these tribes on
the border of the Hittite-speaking and i\ramaic-speaking lands were. It cannot,
however, be supposed that the head-sign bar (J) originally meant 'son ' to the in-
ventors of the hieroglyphs, but far more probably (as Sayce actually suggested
for the pictograph) 'chief, and at the same time I am very loath to discover
Aramaisms or other Semitisms in Hittite on slender evidence.
(c) If there be any value in the foregoing hypotheses, the name of Panammi's
brother will then be Bar-hi, and without wishing to force a comparison, it is
certainly a curious coincidence that one of the later-found Sinjerli Aramaic texts
(von Luschan, Ausgrabnngcn in Se//dsc/iir/t\ \x. 374 ff , translated by Reiser, OLZ.,
191 1, No. 12, 540 ff".), shows the following:
'I am Kalammu bar-Haya: Gabbar ruled over la'di ; and Bel-po'el
was his son. And Bel-po el adopted my father Haya, and Bel-po'^l adopted
(him) as chosen brother. And Bel-p6'el adopted me, Kalammu, as full
son ' (&c.).
Haya is written x*n in 1. 9, and it is commonly accepted that he is the Haiani
of the Shalmaneser inscriptions (see the aforementioned Aiisgrabuiigeu and OLZ.
^ Cf. the inscription of Kalammu referred to in (t).
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 79
on this point) who is described therein as ' son of Gabbaru '. Inasmuch as the
true son of Gabbar, Bel-p6 el, adopted him as a brother, the Assyrian description
could hold good.
From the Sinjerli texts and the Assyrian inscriptions we can reconstruct
a fairly accurate genealogical tree of the kings of the two adjacent kingdoms of
Samal and la'di :
Sam'a/. ^"'<^>-
Gabbar (A, S.i'
1
Haiani (A.) (Haya, S.) by adoption brother of Bel-Po'el (S.), c. 860
(callecf ' Son of Gabbaru ', A.) paid tri-
bute to Shalmaneser, 854 b.c. (A.) ,„,,r- riDUJl
KaraP (H., S.), contemp. of Benhadad,
Kalammu bar-Haya(S.MBar-hi, ?H.) ruled | f. 860-845
subsequent to 854 b.c. f? in H. called ' brother ' of] Panammu I " (H., S.I, contemp. of Benha-
^ dad, probably ruled about 845-815.
Bar-Sr iS.l, son (?| of Panammu I.
Panammu II * I A., S.) died in the reign of Tiglath-
I Pileser II, after 745 (S I. . -.-t^-wudi ii
Bar-Rekub (S.I. Aznyau (A.), reign of Tiglath-Pileser II.
We have therefore little difficulty in making Kalammu bar-Haya of Sam'al
a contemporary of Panammu I of la'di, and, having regard to the history of
preceding king's, these latter too may A'ery well have made brotherhood, which
would be' a reasonable hypothesis to strengthen my translation for the Hittite
phrase ' Panammi the king with his brother Bar-hi '. There is nothing to prevent
Kalammu having been called Bar-Haya instead of by his own name : it was no
uncommon thing, for the Semites at any rate, to speak of M, the son of N, as
simply ' the son of N ' : thus ' the son of Kish ' ( i Sam. x. 11), ' the son of Jesse '
(i Sam. XX. 27, 30, 31, &c.). Even in Hittite we can point to another example,
for the Ivriz inscription appears to be the record of just such another case of
adoption ; the larger figure who says ' I am Tesup-mis ' goes on to call hmiself
A-y-av-a-ui}i-s, i.e. 'son of Ariarathes ' (apparently a distinct name, Ariarathides,
occurring thus on M xxxii, i, not merely a description), while the smaller figure
' A. = occurs in Assyrian inscriptions, H. = Hittite, S. = Sinjerli.
- Father of Panammu I, occurring (if this system of decipherment be correct) in a Hittite inscription
(M Hi) sent by Benhadad to Mutallu of Gurgum (^§ 28, 87I.
' Occurring in Hittite on inscriptions contemporary with Sangar (M xv, h| Irhulina (M vi),
Muttallu (M xxi?|, Kate (M ix?), Kirri (M xi), Aram of Kask (M xi), and Benhadad (M xxi?|. As
Panammu II died probably not long after 745 b.c. (see the Sinjerli inscription of BarRekubl,
Panammu I may quite well have been on the throne as early as 845. He must have been contem-
porary with the last years of Benhadad, who was murdered some time between 846 842.
* Bar-Rekub describes his ancestors as living in the palace of Kalammu.
8o A NEW DECIPHERMENT (W THE
sa}^s ' I am . . Araras (Ariarathes) sending a message to (or greeting) ii"-ui-iiii,
i. c. mv son ".'
An interesting suggestion comes from the hieroglyph of the ' hand grasping'
in one of the ' Panammi ' groups in § 28. The phrases are ' Panamml, the king,
with Barhi his brother ', or e\'cn ' Panammi and Barhi ' simply : but we also hnd
the closed hand inserted between the words ' Barhi' and ' his brother'. Now this
hand-sign occurs in a phrase (M ix, 2) 'Targu-ras, Shalmaneser(?), king of
Nineveh, chief of lords, (and) Talas have accepted ('hand" + //) the ... of our
great lord . . . as an ally', and again in a new Jerabis inscription ('hand';
c^5c///-//-^/ ' they have accepted") (see translation at end, M ix, notes): and with
the view that it implies 'acceptance in alliance' we can see the same meaning
in it when written with Barhi, 'his accepted (i.e. adopted) brother Bar-Haya'.
To recapitulate the evidence for the name Bar-hi = Bar-Haya. The sign
which I have called /// occurs apparently as the causative termination (if the
verb ' to say ' : it also occurs as a phonetic complement to the word ' brother ',
which may be the borrowed Assyrian word alji. The sign which I have
called bar is used in a proper name Bar-k, for which there is .some reason to
believe the variant B(a)-r-k is written in contemporaneous texts, and there is the
bare possibility that this \'alue bar was used in a borrowed Aramaic word
' son ' (although I lay no stress on this). We find these two signs forming a
personal name Bar-hi, who is described as the brother of Panammi, and
a Sinjerli text gives us a king Kalammu bar-Haya, who is the adopted son of
Bel-po'el, probably Panammi's grandfather, and in one case a sign which might
reasonably be explained as meaning ' accepted ' or ' adopted ' is used in describ-
ing this Bar-hi. Chronology prevents us reading Bar-k = G-bar = Gabbarit.
To conclude this section on causatives we must mention a form ^ (2
(M ix, 3) ID-li-m-t{a) ' I will make . . . thee '. Looked at as a picture the ideogram
suggests a phallus; in that case 'son' is the natural rendering. But we have
already (§ 66) found that the character B iiis = ' son ' ; are we to suppose that
w is the full form of /?, ^\ hich is merely its abbreviation (as was suggested in
§ 66), like <^, cf^, ^^ for the animals' heads ? This seems a possibility, for it
is not uncommon to find both the full form and the abbreviated form in the
same inscription (M xxi, M Hi, the sign b{a)). The text of M ix, 2 (end) can
then read ' With thee will I act : I will make sonship with thee ' : and this is
^ The Hiltite inscription from Kirtschoglu (M viil, not very far from Kalammu's kingdom, seems
to contain the name Bar-hi badly written m the first hne. (See translations at end.)
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 8i
followed by '^-r-s i!-b(n)-r-a-t{a') 'son'-^/ iui-t:-mi ' . . . ? will take (?) thee for a son
with me\ . i • at
The character m occurs M xi, 3,4 (where it may mean 'son'), and m M x,
6, where it is used after a-aii-zi. In AI ix, 4 this phrase is found thus with tf| :
Kat-t-e : uis-e a-an-t-iiiii B{a)-t nis-c a-au-t-uiii ' Kate hath counted us C:) as sons( ?),
Bat hath counted us {'^) as sons (?) '.
§ 74. The auxiliary verb. As has been already noted (§ 9, note) the verb
t^ can be used either simply or with an auxiliary DDOD sau or 4° ODOD | a-sau{u\
which thus suggests its meaning ' make, do, act ', and it will be found that these
meanings suit die context where sau is used as a \'erb by itselt : ' like (a)
brother(s) thou actest(or makest us)' (§ 76), 'thou actest (as) a friend (?) (or makest
friends) with us' (§ 46), and others. In compounds, other than that quoted at
the beginning of' this section, we find it with ^^, an ideograph evidently
meaning 'to accept' (cf. M ix, 2), as in a new Jerabis inscr. |^ °^™°| ^
ID;-a-san-u-zi 'they have accepted': with \J^ (Restan 2) 'to sign'; and in
the phrase '"H im \\: g{l^)ar-san-n-zi {\\ li, 2) before the words 'they have
made alliance ', parallel to the case of mi-n-zi before the words ' they have
made brotherhood " (new Jerabis inscription). Mi-n-zi we may perhaps trans ate
'they have accepted' (see below), and perhaps (it a comparison with an Indog.
root^be not out of place) we may see in ^(/>?r the Indog. kar- 'to mention,
praise ', g{J.^)ar-saiMi-zi being then ' they have made a commemoration '} Simi-
larly in M x, 5 kat-t{a) \_a\-b{a) . . .' g{/^)ar-san-m, but ^^•hat its meaning is is not
certain. An additional example for the meaning ' make ' appears in the phrase
'let us make (sau) war' (M x, 8).
§ 75. Since winzi has been referred to it may be discussed here. We find
the root in //////(>?), ///////, minzi, e.g. (new Jerabis inscription after a plur. subject)
1 It is a fitting place here to discuss the meaning of Q i^^mikar) (§ 3 ff.) ; besides occurring in
Sangar, Gargamis, Carn/i, G<irsans(l), &c., and with san, as above, we find it in (i) M ii, 2 'Thy father (?)
(and) Benhadad, the great, have given thee a memorial-stela for the kar of Tesup ' ; (2) M ix, 5 A great
tablet!?) of our kar ir-r-a k... (i.e. they have joined) '. Now this can either be referred to the kar
' commemoration ' mentioned above, or we can consider it as equivalent to the Assyrian kant, supposed
to be the Kar or Gar in Gargamis, ' a fortress', ' wall '. I incline to the former, ' the commemoration
(praise) of Tesup' being indicated by his figure beside the inscription, 'the great tablet (?) ot our
commemoration ' being the actual inscription on which the covenant was written. (On the meaning ot
the sign ' tablet ' see § 73, a.)
VOL. LXIV.
82 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
nii-ii-zi ' brother '-/j-i/-.':/ ' they ha\'c ////, tlicy have made brotherhood ' : (Restan 2,
after a suggestion for alliance) /Jii-i/{ij) ^^-S(i//-//((i) 'We ha\x> ////, we have
signed': and in the form ;////// (although whether it is a participle (§ 69) or a
lorm of the 1st ])ers. plur. impf is uncertain) in (iM xi, 5) //-///-// K-r-a-lj : vii-iii
'the covenant of Kirri, the chief mini' : (M i) s-c : ii-iii-ii-c NN : ini-iii 'the
writing of the covenants of NN iiiiiii' : (M xv, a, 3) n-ni-n-t-aii : iiii-iii 'thy
covenant n/i//i\ Possibly the perfect is found in M Hi, 2 tr-nii.
Now in the above cases everything points to //// meaning ' to accept ' : it
is a stronger meaning than 'to consider', 'to see ' (as I first thought, comparing
the Tndog. ///cv/, by supposing the // to be hidden in the termination), for the
whole point of these inscriptions seems to me to be the indication of a definite
intention to become an all}', and not merely the consideration of such a course-
Hence 'accept' seems to be the best translation, at any rate provisionally.
7/ic P/rposifio/is, &c.
§76. 'Jiic paiiiclc K(Ki).
In llic liittite cuneiform we find an enclitic /v occurring thus: (the last
paragraph of A ii) ylB .ZUN\_k\ii-c ii-fa-ai/-:i 11 11 iic-e\s-i^a-ui b\ii\-ka Ija-at-ri-cs-ki:
( Y 19) //-/// k/i-it-ki {kii-H occurring separatel}- Y /'. 8). This occurs in the hiero-
glyphs: (§ (),)) © ^ "'^ OiO l^^jl/ brother ■-/w\-.s7^//(//)-5-/(/0 Tike (a) brother(s)
thou actest ' (or saii-t{a)-ii-s 'thou makcst us"?) (or possibly the -c marks the
case-ending of ' brother ') : perhaps M ix, i ' god '-// /- ' like a great god ' (see
translation of M ix at end, note to 1. 1) : //;/;/. I/2, ' ally ' ;-/■ ' like a friend '. Cf M
Hi, 4, where /- occurs o])viously l)et\\cen two words (probably a noun) of which
it is not a part.
§ 77. The prepositions are: °f°/^ a-b{a) 'with', cun. a-ba, §40: T| ////-/
'with', cun. iiia-at{J), §81: Ojfa c-a 'with', cun. i-a, §47: |[ ^lQt\a)-a'\.c\cx\x\.
enclitic fa, § So : dJq ini-r-a ' before ', § 81 : || W //-// (see trans, to M x\', b,
1. 2), the equivalent of the cuneiform ////, § 7.
Enclitic :— ^^ l] /■-// 'for', 'to', cun. kaii, § 7: jjCII] 'i-t{a) 'to', cun. -aii-fn,
§ 79 '• W/^'' ' ii'' ' ' f'^i' ' cun. cv, ^cr, § 37, note.
§ 78. Enclitic CIB A/0 occurs as distinct from ci]3 ''''-/'(''O' ^"^^ •^^ these are
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 83
paralleled in the cuneiform it is fairly easy to see the difference between them.
The former occurs in hieroglyphs thus :
(1) (New |era1)is) nODDODOOQ f (D °h i=B /\ r-a-////-/{<n (the word which
follows is distinct and well known) 'the Nine with me -f<r\
(2) TA 7 II QDDD I IJ O^ D« I &c. . . >v///(//)-/(/0-A") ■• //>
(On M i,( <^i©o|° ai<C>°'° ^^c- '/i'C')/r-r-(7 f(a) ^o-^/:<r. Jvra being marked
as a proper name with a tang m M xxiii, a, 2, see translation at end.)
A remarkable instance occurs m cuneiform (G 15) // ///'-//^/ SE . CAN it-ti-
iu-uu-fa im-mi-ia-an-zi. Now there is no question that i-ui-din-7im {\ 21) and
ad-diii (W 19, bis) have all the appearance ol the Assyrian word tor ' he, I gave ;
similarly it-ti-iu-uu might well be ' they gave ' ; and inasmuch as iminiauzi is also
a verb in the 3rd pers. plur. it seems likely that -ta is 'and" (it Indog. compari-
sons are permissible I would suggest de, the Greek 5.'). Another example occurs
in P 9, . . . a-bi-e-ta ub-be GISAL, where cdn might be the Assyrian word tor
' father', and ta has been attached to it. Y /-. 18 offers a possible example ot a
verb + /^i, \x' tah-hu-ta(t), taJjhn being part of the well-known causative conj. ot
ta ' to give '. .
Now we have two examples in the hieroglyphs where the -tKa) occurs;
in (1) after a pronoun, and in (2) after a verb, which may fittingly be compared
to the ta ' and ' of the cuneiform.
It "is, however, no uncommon thing to find ' and ' left out m the hieroglyphs
in a composite subject: M li, i ('thy father (?) (and) Benhadad ') : TA 4 (two
personal names unconnected): M ix, 2 (' Targu-r(a)s, Shalmaneser(?), king ol
Nineveh, lord of chiefs, Tal(a)s ") : M xi, 2 (' Panammi (and) Barhi have sworn ) :
AI xvi (four kings unconnected).
§79. The -ta 'and' is probably distinct from -aii-ta in cuneiform, which
appears to be an enclitic preposition, notably m the greeting A i, 5, where it
is added to -kan, i.e. KUR.KUR . ZUN-mi-kaii-au-ta human DMK-iii, while in
the corresponding phrase in 1. 10 we have simply KUR . ZiJN-ti hfiiiian DMk-
in e-es-tu. Cf. G 6 i-na bit AMEL .ZU-an-ta lv-c-/j/i-ta-aii-zi : Y 39 GAL-ri-ia-
aii-ta: EGIR-au-ta A i, 18 : Id-na-an-ta (Y r. n) varying (?) with ki-na-a-au-ta (Y
r. 23): a-ya-ah-:za-au-ta A ii, 19: LUGAL-an-ta Liv. i, 8, &c. The one case m
the hieroglyphs of which I know appears to mean ' to " : —
(New Jerabis inscription) ""^ |7 B' \ | '^^ f ^ £^^ oitQ ^ ■"-'^''^^•)-
tal-li-ii-txa) kat-ti s-r-a ' Unto MuttalkH?) the)' have written '.
M 2
8-4
A NEW DKCIPHERMENT OF THE
§ 80. 'J he preposition ta.
In the Hittite cuneiform there is a postpositive preposition -ta, e.g. B 11
LUGAL-i-ta : ci ii-iiit-wa-au-ta Y r. 34 compared with ii-iiii-tc-es, ib. 2^ : DIMK-
(i//-t(j A i, 16, unless these belong to the preceding section. This is found in
the hierogivphs, sometimes before, sometimes after its noun.
t((j)-(i leaf -lis : (new Jerabis).
offo
Dira
tu})-a ii-c ' unto us ' ? (new Jerabis).
afa ^<^T :t[a)-a:uii 'unto mc " (Al \-iii, a, 2).
(c y o|o W ic :t{(i)-(i-/i : ' to them ' (M xxxii, i).
||af° rMj /^K) [|] t{(i)-ii : ii-m-)i S-//-11 : (or should this t((T)-(7 govern a pre-
ceding noun ?) (new Jerabis).
It is postpositive in the Hamath inscriptions (M [iii, b], iv, a, iv, u) ' Saith
Irhulina unto the nobles of the king, Make alliance with us , liii-t{a)-a-!i-" place "-
h^t{ii)-a' \ and Restan and Hamath, Mvi, 'Saith @) ^=^--v unto Irhulina, Make
alliance with us A //i-t((7)-a-/i-'' place"- 1 \-t{a)-a'. Now^ as this .stands, according to
our meanings of the words, it can only read ' t(7 the lord of Hamath, the Great',
and its actual sense is not easy to see, unless it be ' for (on behalf of) '. At
the same time 'against' appears to be the meaning in the two following-
quotations :—M Hi, 2 'NN, the .sons of the Nine' ^ °\° S^ '*^ | ^
°'°^'V4 '^ ^ ^ '^<:^ <^ CD f ^c, tUiya /D:N-/ca A-nn/-N(ay place' :
//is-// ; ' ally ' (i/'-e[-h(it(?)] ' against a foe of Nka of i\dinnu (?) their son, alliance
have joined (?)' (one reading ; see translation at end). Ct. also 1. 4.
(New Jerabis) "''P^ * t ||* % rf ^M : v«c>r7-//// t{n)-a ID
T{ci)-bal- place " ' I will march against a foe ot Tabal '.
(Other cases oi t{(i)-a occur M vi, 2 : xxiv, b, 2 : xxxiii, 2.)
§ 81. The preposition j © °l° //li-r-a seems to mean 'before', ' in the pre-
sence of (the cuneiform ///i-i'a-a in W 19 is apparently a place-name). We find
almost every personal suffix attached to it: ///i/'a///i. ///i/'at{n)Q), //li/'a//, //ii/'a//t,
/////'(I//.
{I) .-/cuts ///i-)'-a-//ii ' he in my presence " (M \'iii, a, 4).
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 85
(2) t0ol° j) t [I ! '<^ ?) \^ 1 iiii-r-a-t{d)iu-t-nii: ii-h-aiii-nii: {W ii, 3) 'before
thee with me he hath ... me '. (See, however, translation at end.)
(3) J o?o ^ icj/ "/i-i'-ci-iin :t-c ' in our presence he hath said ' {ib. 6).
(4) !{ O ^\^ it ?l'^ iiii-r-a-ii-t\ ' before you ', apparently in M xxxii, 5.
(5) T© o|o 1? ,'^ ffh °'° ^J iiii-i'-a-ii : ID: a-Ji-iiii 'in their presence the
shrine (?) I enlarged (built) (?)' (M ii, 5).
It is used obviously with this meaning in M xi, 4, ' Sweareth Aram, the
chief of Kask, nii-r-a ' god '-// before the (or his) great god '. Cf also, for another
instance, M vi, 2.
Mini ' before ' is therefore fairly certain. We can proceed next to another
proposition iii-t, which is not improbably the same as the ina-at of W 19 (////
mat ali eli-ti iiis-ta-bai'-ha ti-ni-aii lua-at-mit '" ''"Sin-'':' Tesup-as, &c.). One instance
of in-f-iiii ' with me ' has already been given (see this section (2)) : it occurs again
M ii, 4 {lu-t-iiii lu-ii-ii-k-u-aii a-t{ci)-t ' with me for our stela Q) he hath given ').
An instance of the 3rd pers. pi. is M xv, 2 1 || f ) I'l-^-'t ' ^vith them '.
From in-t we may proceed to a form ini-t which seems to Idc merely a fuller
form of ///-/. In consequence of the existence of a root mi in the verbal forms
//liii(a), jiii/n\ niii/zi{^ 75), ////-/ in some of its occurrences had the appearance ot a
verb, but this was undeniably opposed by the almost certain absence of the exist-
ence of an impf. 3rd sing, form in -/, and I am compelled to relinquish this \'icw.
The following examples make its use as a preposition certain : (AI ix, 3,
see translation at end) itis-h-iii-i[a): }-y-s ii-b{a)-r-a-t{ii) iiis-zi nii-f:-/ni 'I will
make sonship with thee ; . . . ? will take thee for a son with me.' A form
of oath (new Jerabis inscription) ^^ |1 T °^ (^g)^^ T /^-'/'-^-//^ •• 'god'-//-///
' (As) my great god is with me 'varies with t || ' ' (^ \\ t ^'^'^'"' 'god'-//-///-//
(cf. M xxi, 4) (in the case of a plural subject a new Jcrabis inscription gix^es
' As for me and So-and-so, " god "-Tes/ip-s ini-t-aii (?, nearly certain) (As) Tesup is
with us'). In \l ii ///-/of 11. 3, 4 apparently varies with ////-/ as in 1. 6 :''. ; ? ////-/
:AhuQ)-nis-h-k-n : iiii-r-a-aii : t-e 'So-and-so with Ahuni(?) the chief in our presence
hath said'. Other instances of ////-/'with' arc to be seen in M lii, ibis, and
presumably M iii, b, iv, a, b ////-/ ' place ';-6' : M v, 3.^
' A perplexing group which occurs three times is haVci iiti-t in the following passages: M vii, i
'Saith . . Make alliance with us (the b{a) of bUiUi is omitted) /{a]-a iiii-f Bar-Iii [^ 73) " brother "-;/rt5' ;
86 A NEW DFXIPIIERMENT OE THE
§ 82. '/'lie tcnuinatioii -r, ri.
\\\ the cuneiform several nouns arc given the ending -ri. These occur in —
( 1 ) Z i, 4 : /lal-rJ-ia-ri SUM-kanGAL-ZUNas-sa .... Hal-za is well known from
A ii, \${/tal-za-a-i-iia-an\ C i, 16 {/jai-za-i-kisQ)), Y 38 {//(fZ-za-is), Y27, 29.
(2) //vV/. 12 : f(7-(is 'S\M-ri-aii-ta-au ns-ni (?) ....
(,V) V 35 : . . . -.sV Jjii-u-)na-aii-ic-cs a-ki-ir mn-iiic ki-i-iii G. IL-ri . . .
In the hieroglyphs we find —
(4) M V, 1 : U (gg) © (® ^<^^(?)0ofl° ' go(.V-r-c nr-k /rO'y-r-a'\n-:i{r)
hath sworn (?) by the gods'.
(5) Restan 2
J[©]oto [I^ afogj (gDQd) ^^^1 J<^0
w /-[/'(? )]-^i' 'altar" a-/j-iiii 'god'-/'-r ar-k-ii:i ?-} -c-i[a). ' Before (?) the
altar (?) (which (?)) I have made, by the gods I have sworn (?) thy
pledges (?) '. •
(6) Mvi,2: |)||0(D |e* f^ £h\j mmm ^^1 \^%®
°h\l ^W)% ^^/^^ //-///-///(?)-(' iiii-r-a H;-s-ii{i-i) 'god'-r-^' ar-k-iii
?-?-c' a-n ' god ^-I'-c ar-k-as-ii '■'■ ' cox'cnants before his (?) chief(s) by the
gods we ha\'e sworn (?), So-and-so who by the gods swore (?) * unto
us ' . . .' (see translation at end).
§ 83. Y'/h' 7L'or(/ ofa M a-//.
In Hittite cuneiform in one passage (A i, 12) we find a word a-//. The
quotation runs ka-a-as-iiia-at-ta it-i-c-iiu-iiii '"Ir-sa-ap-pa "'"Ija-lu-ga-tal-Ia-aii-ini-iii
a-ii nia-iii DU-SAL-fl AN. UD-iiti kti-iii DAM-aii-ui u-iua-ta-aii-zi ' Irsappa
my messenger a-ii (i.e. to whom) our lady thy daughter, the gift for my Sun-god,
M x.xxiii, 2 (.see translation to M i.x at end, notes) /c(?) s-e-t{a) : l{a)-a : ini-t: ' wood ' ; "T{a)-a-iias ; and in
a new Jerabis inscr. /(a)-(7 uii-t-k-n. Are wc to regard it as a compound ' regarding, for, on belialf of ?
In the last case it is possible to see in nii-t the reading mi-t(a) ' with thee ', and as is shown above (M ii, 6)
tin-i. . k-n is a proper compound like nn-nm-kan ; but at the same time the existence of the word t-k-n
must not be forgotten (see translation of M ii, notes at end).
' I have suggested /;- instead of the text-reading of as (the ibex head) which is close to a break in
the stone : as-r-a is unintelligible to me, while Ir-r-a is a known name. But this is very doubtful.
^ Text has [jj. ■' Transpose and read ar-k-n-as. ■* On this word ar-k see §88.
" Are we to add here the terminations in -r, i. e. lr-hu\t)li-ni-r M xxiii, 3 : ' enemy '-a-ar TA 5 ?
HriTITE HIEROGLYPHS 87
as (his) wife they o-ive.' We find a A\-nrd °h U a-ii in similar passages in hiero-
glyphs, thus : ^
(i) New Jerahis : *^ ©Hi "^ [|°'^ ''^-" ''-s<i-ha) : ' who join(?) thee '.
n-ii
{N) : i'-ii-t{ii) ' wlio (So-and-so)
Diron
oe
<% M. ■■ <r-// : N-ka
(2) New Jerabis : °W) (name) "^O
has . . . .' (See § 69.)
(3) M hi, 4: (§ Ti) : Gar-a-Ii, iii IX-a-c
'Karal, son of the Nine, who Nks . . .'.
(4) M ^'i, 2 : . . . . ' co\'enants before his (?) chief(s) by the gods (?) we have
sworn (?) : (a chief's name) a-ii " god "-r-^ ar-k-ii-as (So-and-so) who
by the gods swore (?) unto us.' (See § 82(6).)
Other instances are M xi, 5 : perhaps xix, 4. Possibly * n-ii in M i may
be the accusative or the neuter. The translation appears to be ' who ', ' which ',
the relative pronoun. •
Sxiitax.
§ 84. The nominative sing, ends in £\ >-, but it is not uncommon to find
proper names which do not. For an instance of the nominative -.? in the subject
of a \'erb, cf. sau-s in "Paii-mi sau-s M ix, i, but it is easier to find proper
names rather than common marked with the nominative sign, e.g. Irlniliuas (§9);
the name in Al ii, i, &c. The accusative sing, in I // is used after a verb, i.e.
AI ii, 4, § 64 : the pi. in -an ' Saith Irhulina unto //// : -iui sans the nobles ot the
king ' (§ 52).
The genitive relationship is expressed : —
(i) By the mere juxtaposition of the two nouns, when they' are proper
names, e.g. J/-'/-/'^r/ G//-^o-//-'/// 'Alutallu of Gurgum'(§3i); Sit/Q)-inani^)
sail As-r-a-'Tp^diCQ ' Shalmaneser(?) king of Assyria' (§ 51) ; Ay-aui h
K-as-k ' Arame, chief of Kaski ' (§ 35), K-a-u-a-u-i Kat-t-c ' the Kauai of
Kate ' (§ 60). [So also in cuneiform e\-en when not proper names :
Nl-au SAG . DU-si ' oil for her head ' (A i. 14) : ? /c//-sa-/a DU . SAL-ti
' for thy daughter's dowr}^ (?) ' (A i, 22)].
(2) On the other hand the dependent noun may precede, e.g. ' place '-.l/(^
' Lord of countries ' (§ 44), "San{ii)-{g)gar-s BayQ)-ljit iiii/{n) ' Sangar,
son of Barhu(?)' (§ 3). Cf § 66. [In cuneiform .1\ . UD-titi k-ii-iii
' the gift of my Sun-god ' ? § 83.]
88 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
(3) The dependent noun may precede with the mrirk of the genitive case,
e.g. 'go6.'-7'esifp-s : k(V'-/c-// 'for the memorial (1^) of Tesup ' (§ 64);
' engrave '-r-n ui-ii-u-s : ' leg '-// ' they ha\'e grax'cn tlic leg (?) of the
memorial (?) ' (§ 64).
(4) The dependent noun may follow in the genitive, e.g. hit : -an sans 'the
nobles of the king" (§ 52).
(5) The complicated system in § 66, to which the examples of M ii. 3 niust
be added : Am-\i'\-a-s : ID : -11 in : ID ; -s : yliii-r-a-s : ID ; -iiiii{ii) : ID ;
-s : Ani-]'-a-s : ID : -ni//{//) : ID ; -s, &c.
§ 85. Ilic order of icords /// n sentence.
The subject of the sentence —
(1) May precede the \Qxh: Ani-r-a-s 'engrave' k-/i-I/-s, &cc., 'Amras hatli
engraved ...' (M ii, 5): kat-mi n-ni-n-an 'engrave' e-a Tesnp-il{})-
r-a-Ji-m-' place ', ' I have engraved our covenant with Benhadad the
Great('s city?)' (M iii, b, 3): kcit-s : ]jat{J)-ni-n t-e 'He saith unto
(our?) alliance (?)' (M ii, 6): Kaf-t-e : nis-c a-an-t-nin (M ix, 4).
(2) May follow the verb : te{J)-san Ijii : -an san-s "Ir-/jn-/i-n{a)-s 'Saith Irhulina
unto the nobles of the king' (§ 52). This is most common in the
opening phrase of inscriptions.
(3) Participles (if participles they be) are preceded by their subject (§ 69):
a case of a participle used as a noun occurs in M x, 2 (§ 69).
(4) Imperatives may go at the end of the sentence (? § 69), or at the begin-
ning, cf M x, I, ' make brotherhood ' (and the causal imperati\'e, § 37).
The finite verb frequently is put at the end of a sentence: a-/)(a)-n-/(a)
Iesn/)-/(/(?)-r-a-//-s ' god '- I'esnp-s : kar-k-n : ni-ni-n a-tXa)-t{a\ ' Thy father (?) (and)
Benhadad the Great for the glory (?) of the god Tesup have given thee a
memorial (?) ' (M ii, i) ; or the object may be put at the end, following the verb :
'god'-;--^ ar-k-jni }-}-e-f{a) 'by the god(s) I have sworn (?) tliy pledges (?)'
(Restan 2).
The adjective follows the noun : 'god'-// 'great god' (M xi, 4), 'we are one
speech' (§61), 'My great god' is 'god'-//-/// (§ 81).
Adjectives are formed from nouns by the addition oi -nas: e.g. in Hittite
cuneiform (as Professor Sayce pointed out) an-p\a. .] /ja-at-fa-an-na-as LUGAL-iis
(A ii, 15), which may mean 'the Hittite king', if the adjective be allowed to
precede its noun. In hieroglyphs I hax'e found it in M xxxiii, 3 'wood';
" T{(i)-a-nas ' Tyanian wood '.
The verb 'to say' may be used either with an accusative directly following-
it, as in M iii, b, i, or the subject may follow and then the object marked by the
enclitic preposition /'-// (as in M xxi, i).
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS
89
§86. Scheme of Verbs in the Hieroglyphs. (See § 69.)
Imperfect Tense.
Person
Singular 3
Singular
Singular
Plural
2
T
Plural 3 (a)
3(^)
2
I
Ending
■s-f{a)
-III, -mi, inn
-r-a
•n-zi{-zi)
-»-/(?)
-ii\a), -i!i(?), -n
■I
■u
T-E ' he saith ' : SAN 'he maketh ' AR-K ' he swore '.
SAN-s-f(a) ' thou shalt act '.
SAN-iii ' I will make ' : ^^^-K-iiiU) ' I will fight ' : K-nm ' I will
go ' : AR-K-iiii ' I have sworn ' : AR-iiii ' I have joined '.
T-E-r-a 'they say': SAN-r-a 'they have made': S-r-a 'they
write '.
Ml-n-zi 'they have accepted!?)' : SAN\n)-zi 'they have made'.
{R-r-n-f\.
MI-n{a) 'we have accepted (?)' : {ID}-SAN-n{a) ' we will make . . .' :
probably W-K-nUi) 'we will fight': AR-K-ni 'we have
sworn ' ? (§ 82) : SAN-n ' let us make ' (M x, 8(?) : lii, 5I.
Imperative.
SAN ' do thou make '.
Participle (?).
{TE(?)-ht ' greeting' , see Causatives).
^X3-" ' accepting ' (?) : S-ii (?) ' writing ' (?).
Singular
3 ('?)
-/
3(^(?))
-ir
2
I
■mi
Plural
3 M
■ii-ci
3i^J
—
2
I
[//, s
Perfect Tense (see § 70).
a-T{A)-t ' he gave ' : a-K-t ' he came ' : a-S-f ' he wrote ' (?) : a-AN-t
'heset'(?).
rt-r(^)-/r (see § 10).
Not found.
a-II-mi ' 1 made '.
{ID)-a-SAN-u-:i ' they have accepted ' : a-AN-:i ' they set (?) '
a-T{A) 'they gave'.
Not found.
[//, see suffixed forms]
Suffixed Forms (see § 58).
Impcrjcd. SAN-m-t(a) ' I will make with thee ' : r-iiin-ii-t(a) (TA 5) : r-s-zi-i{a) (§ 83).
Perfect. a-AN-t:-mi ' he hath set me ' : a-SAN-n-fUi\ l§ 46(3)).
The Causative Conjugation (§§ 37, 6g, 73).
The following forms exist : iiiipf. TE[l)-lji 'he greets' (or 'sends a message'): ' brother '-//-«-s;
' they have made brotherhood ', : ' ally' ■.-ij-ii-zi ' they have made alliance ' : ma-Q-B-R-lj-n-zi ' they have
made Rbr' (? perfect augmented): ms-lj-m-tia) 'I will make sonship with thee'. Imper. :'ally':-//
• make alliance ' : verbal noun :' ally ' : -h-s ' making alliance ' : participles TE(^)-lji, TE{l)-hi-ti{^).
VOL. LXIV. N
90 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
The Historical Bearing of the piil>lished Hieroglyphic Inscriptions.
§ 87. Thanks to the kindness of the Trustees of the British Museum, as
I stated in § I, I have been able to draw much of the preceding material for my
decipherment of Hittite from sources which were available to few, the inscrip-
tions found at Carchemish in 191 1 when I was there. Whether my system is
correct or not is for others to decide ; I must reiterate my indebtedness to
Professor Sayce's pioneer discovery of the name Tyana, but thenceforward our
respective methods of decipherment and translation coincide in few points other
than those given in the note to § i. The proof of a decipherment of this kind
depends in a great measure on the power which it affords to read and identify
well-known proper names, and once a number of such names have been identi-
fied, such as occur in the same period, by the use of the same x'alues for the
characters in each case, the correctness of the method is in a fair way to be
established. In this article I have put forward a system which identifies in the
inscriptions already published the personal names of 'Aram, chief of Kask'
(§§ 24, 30, 35), Araras (= Ariarathes, § 12), Guam (= Giammu, § 29), Hunu
(= Ahunu, § 12), Karal{%\\\ k"ra{= Kirri, §§ 27, 35), probably Lalli (§ 50 (6)),
and possibly Shalmaneser {^ z^s)\ Targasnalli {^ 11), and the place-names ^;//x
(= Homs? translation of M iv, a, at end), Amf(a) (= Hamath, § 16), Aninna
(= Adinnu ?, § 80), A sir, Asra (= Assyria, § 51), Bashar (= Til-Basere ?, § 55),
Gitgum (= Gurgum, § 29), M{ii>)tr (= Pitru ?, translation to M xii, 2, at end),
Ninmi [^ Nineveh, § 51), Nram (= Naharaim ?, translation of TA, at end), 7a
(the country of the Tai tribe ?, translation of M xxxii, 2, at end), Vabal (§ 44),
Umk ( = Amk, § 52), and the tribal name Katnaut (the Katnai, § 60). But still
more important is the occurrence together on one unpublished inscription of
many well-known names (several of which I have also identified elsewhere) :
Sangar (§ 3), Carchemish (§ 4), Arhiilini (§ 9 ff.), ' Panammi (§ 28), the king with
Bar-hi (= Bar-Haya, § 73) his brother', Miittallit (§ 31), KcVc (= Assyr. Kaki,
Kakia, § 7, note, § 24), Ninni (§ 49), ' the tribe Kanaut of Katti ' ( = the Kauai of
Kate, §§ 27, 60), Benhadad (§ n, note), and the place-name Mizir (Muzri, § 37,
)iote), which will go far, I hope, to prove my thesis. The syllabic values thus
deciphered allow of our transliterating the inscriptions correctly, and ot
obtainino- at least the base for a moderate and sensible idea of their meaning
from the various clues afforded to us.
In the following short section on the historical interest of the published
Hittite inscriptions, in accordance with the Trustees' wishes, I am omitting all
reference to the connected historical contents of the new inscriptions of 191 1
(which are the latest which I have seen), and particularly the long text, which,
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 91
as I venture to judge even from my meagre translations, will on publication
be seen to throw a flood of light on the history of this period.
In the case of the published inscriptions with which we arc now con-
cerned, I shall assume, for this section at least, that my translations are mode-
rately correct.
Hitherto in dealing with the period or the ninth century b.c. we have been
able to draw our information from Assyrian or Hebrew sources, with sparse
notices from the Aramaic inscriptions ; we can now for the first time see the
Hittite point of view, and realize something of their political necessities and
diplomatic methods. The phrase ' Make alliance with us ', which occurs about
a score of times in the hieroglyphic inscriptions, allows us at once to infer that
the majority of published Hittite texts relate to the making of defensive or
offensive alliances. Certain it is from history that the Hittites and Syrians
were accustomed to make treaties both with foreign nations and amongst
themselves : we have only to read the Egyptian, Assyrian, Aramaic, and
Hebrew records to recognize this custom. Moreover, the kings were wont to
adopt or make brotherhood with one another, as Bel-p6 el did with Haya, and it
is quite probable that the elaborate hieroglyph of two men crossing arms (No. 68
of my list, which is shortened elsewhere to the form No. 82) represents the act ot
making blood-brotherhood by opening a vein in the arm of each and allowing
the blood to mingle. The treaty of Kheta-sar and Rameses II in the fourteenth
century is a good instance of an alliance : Shalmaneser, too, in the ninth cen-
tury mentions by name the different chiefs who ally themselves against him ;
Benhadad's ' leagues ' arc well known from the Old Testament and the Assyrian
texts ; and Zakir in his stele quoted in the note to § 23 names the kings who
join 'Bar-Hadad, the son of Hazael' in war against him. Consequently we
can approach the question of treaty-making by the Hittites on their stelae with
some prior acquaintance with their customs.
In the hieroglyphic texts, when a Hittite king sought alliance, he would
begin his inscription with a direct invitation : — ' Saith Benhadad unto his
brother Mutallu the great, of Gurgum the great', suggesting bluntly 'Make
alliance with us '. There seems to me to be at least two possibilities about
such inscriptions : one is that they were sent actually and bodily in some sort
as gifts, but in the main as a letter with an invitation to alliance ; the other
that they indicate the overtures and conversations between the kings con-
cerned, and when the pourparlers for the alliance had been discussed and
concluded over a meal eaten in brotherly love, the inscription was recorded in
the same place as a final formality binding both to their agreements. The first
is certainly indicated by M xvi, a, the inscription from Malatia, wherein
Benhadad and three other members of a coalition address themselves to
N 2
92 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
Lalli (?), the king' of Tabal (Malatia), ' [O thou] son ot the ally of our torcfathcrs,
Lalli(?), make alliance with usV This stela (r2om. x 60 cm. x 30 cm.) would
be an easy matter to transport, and the same might well be said of the
Mar ash lion and others. In the case of the inscription found at Restan, twenty
kilometres distant from Hamath, we find that it begins in an exactly similar
way to the long inscription from Hamath, and hence it appears as if one was
sent as a missive.
Be this as it may, if the ruler ot a city were inclined to accede to an
inxitation for alliance, whether the invitation was verbal or sent thus, he had
only to display the stela in the market-place for such as could read to con
and explain to their fellows, just as the Egyptian king inscribed his treaty with
the Hittites on the walls of Karnak. With this explanation we can proceed to
the historical contents of the published inscriptions, beginning with the rela-
tions of Benhadad II of Damascus with the surrounding tribes.
The need for Hittite and Syrian alliance against the great power Assyria
is obvious from the Assyrian history given in § 20 ff., and it was Benhadad, a
Napoleon of his time, who knit the tribes together. If the name of the king
Tesup (Adad)-?-r of the Hittite be, as I think it was, Adad-idri or Benhadad,'
we can see from his inscriptions his far-reaching and ubiquitous power and
influence. He is tireless in making treaties with the sturdy highlanders to the
north of Syria, whose gods were the gods of the hills. He left at least two
monuments of his energetic diplomacy at Mar'ash, the ancient Markasi ot
Gurgum, whereon he had inscribed his alliance with Mutallu ^ of Gurgum, his
' son ' Bauli,' and his 'grandson'(?) Nist ' ; the earlier of these is published in M lii,
the later in M xxi. He begins by asking his 'friend', or, as he calls him in the
later of the inscriptions, his 'brother' Mutallu, to make alliance with him, tabu-
lating in his request the names of his Syrian and Hittite allies as an induce-
ment to persuade him to join his alliance.* It is not easy to tell what Mutallu
did, for the Assyrian account represents him (see § 24) as paying tribute to the
Assyrians in their western campaign of 859, but, from the efforts which Benhadad
made to secure his help, he was accounted a valuable ally. Among the allies
whom Benhadad holds forth to Alutallu as future friends we find, in M lii,
' It is curious to see this same reminiscence of previous alliance appearing in Asa's message to
Benhadad (i Kings xv. 19), 'There is a league between me and thee, and between my father and
thy father '.
' See § 33 for this identification : § 25 for his history.
^ See § 24 for his histor}': his name occurs on the following published monuments — M ii, i:
xix, 2(?): xxi, i, 2, 5: [xxii] : [xxiii, 2, 3?]: lii, i, 5(?): Seal xlii, 5: TA i.
^ Unidentified at present (§ 41, note i) : name occurs M xxi, 2 : lii, r, 4.
^ Unidentified at present (§ 49) : M v, 4 (?) : xxi, 2 : lii, 3 : TA 4.
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 93
Hiinu,' who must be Ahunu of Bit-Adini ; Bark ^ (unidentified, but well known
in Hittite); Tesup-mina ^ (presumably the accus. of Tesup-mis of Ivriz) ; Nks/
who is mentioned with Sangxir on M xv, b, and described by Benhadad as (chief)
of Aninna, probably the Adinnu of the Assyrian inscriptions, one of the first
towns of the district of Hamath to fall before Shalmaneser ; probably Arhu-
lini/ i.e. Irhulina of Hamath, Benhadads great friend ; Garali," i.e. Karal of the
Aramaic inscriptions of Sinjerli, the father of Panammu I ; Katte,' whom the
Assyrians call Kate of the tribe of Kauai. We may put the date of this inscrip-
tion at c. 860 B.C. In the second inscription, a few years later than the former,
Karal has dropped out, being probably dead, and a ' Pan-mi the king ' ' is men-
tioned, in whom I am inclined to see Karal's son, who is usually written
Pan-am-mi '■' ; Arammi '" is also mentioned, doubtless the Arame of Bit-Agusi
or Urartu, called ' Aram of Kask ' on M xi. If we put this inscription later
than 859 we must assume that Mutallu was still a power in the land : if earlier
than 850 Pan-mi cannot well be Panammi.
From Mar'ash, too, comes a sculpture (M xxii) representing Tesup-k and
[Mutallu (?)] at their historic banquet, making alliance, for this is the meaning of
those so-called 'ceremonial feasts' which have nothing to do with gods or their
worshippers. Just such another feast-sculpture is found at Karaburshlu, and
another at Malatia (M xvi,B), which is inscribed with the name oiA-[ra{^j\-iiii-s
(i.e. Arame?). It is to this custom that reference is made, I believe, in TA 7,
' our covenant with thee at my feast I have joined ' (§ 68 (7)). Before leaving
the subject of Mutallu of Gurgum, it is worth recalling that his seal is in
existence, and his name is twice inscribed on it, ' Mutal of Gu(r)gum'(M xlii,
5, §31). . .
Benhadads records do not, however, end with the two inscriptions to
Mutallu. He is one of four kings (of whom Irhulina may possibly be another)
who join in sending a message to the king of Tabal (whose name therein must
1 See § 24 for his history : name occurs M lii, i, 2 : TA i. For the lost o, cf. Gusi (Shahii. Mo.,
II, 12) with Agusi (ib., 27). I have used the phrase Bit-Agusi for his district for convenience. (Cf.
Maspero, Les Empires, p. 34.
2 See § 73 : name occurs M i : vi, 4(?) : x, 2 : xi, 4 : xxi, 3 : xxiii, c, 2(?) : hi, i : TA 3, 5.
^ Name occurs M xxxii, i, 2, 4(?) : xxxiii, 3, 12: xxxiv, a, i : hi, 2.
* Name occurs M xv, b, 2 : lii, 2, 4.
■■ See § 25 for his history : name occurs M iii, b, i : iv, a, b, i : vi, i : Restan i : x\-i, a, i (?), c, i (?) :
xlvii, i(?): xxiii, 3(?): hi, 2 (?).
" See Sinjerli inscription of Panammu I (Von L\xs,Qhd,n, Ausgrabungeii), § 11 : name occurs M In,
4.5C?)- ,. ,
■' See § 24 for his history : name occurs M vi, 2 (?) : ix, 4 : xix, 3(?», 8 : hi, 3(?), 5.
* See § 56. « Name occurs M ii, 3 (?) : vi, 3 : xi, 2 : xv, b, 3 : TA 2 (?).
'•> See § 24 ft. for his history, and § 30 : name occurs M xi, 4 : (? xvi, b) : xvi, c, 2 : xxi, i, 3.
94 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
be read Lalli') on a lion-hunting stela found near Malatia, 'We Irhulina(?),
Benhadad, I' and ? greet (or send a message to) the lord of Tabal, the ally
of our forefathers : O Lalli, make alliance with us." This again must be
prior to 854. Again, the Babylon stela (M ii) (which we must assume was at
some time carried to Babylon as loot), from Ta-?-ar-s to Mutallu, 'his son(?)',
states that Benhadad was concerned in presenting the image of Hadad (Tcsup)
which forms part of the stela, and that other well-known kings have taken part
in the gift, among whom is a king named Amras, which must be the same name
as Ambaris, a king of Tabal in Sargon's time (see translation of M ii. at end).
Benhadad is also mentioned on the Aleppo inscription : and one of the Hamath
inscriptions of Irhulina ends with ' I have engraved our co\'cnant with Benhadad
(or the city of Benhadad) the great'.
Next to Benhadad in importance comes his great friend Irhulina, king ol
Hamath. Three of his inscriptions, varying but slightly, chiefly in proper names,
come from Hamath ( AI iii, b : iv, a : iv, b), and in these he speaks to ' the nobles
of the king', asking them to make alliance.^ Another inscription, a long one,
comes from Hamath (j\I vi), and another from Restan, twenty kilometres south
of Hamath, which show that a certain Bar-?-s spoke to Irhulina, asking alliance
which was agreed on, while a certain chief, whose name I cannot read,' tells
Bar-?-s apparently that he has sworn his pledges before an altar which he has
made. The lono- text from Hamath mentions this same chief ' who swore to us
by the gods ', and Panammi, [with Irra*(?)] and possibly Kate.
Benhadad and Irhulina are the two most noteworthy chiefs in the great
coalition against i\ssyria ; the remaining components of Benhadad's leagues are
summed up in the Assyrian records roughly in such expressions as ' besides the
kings of the Hittites' or 'the twelve kings of the Hittites',' or written out more
fully (as in the case of the battle of Karkar) so as to include Ahab (whose name
I cannot find in the Hittitc inscriptions), the Kauai, whose chief Kate occurs
frequently in Hittite, the Aluzrai," and some other tribes.
The kings of Sam'al and la'di play a great part in these inscriptions, as has
been already mentioned. Besides the mention of Karal in a Mar'ash text,
Panammi occurs fairly frequently and we have also the ' brother of Panammi ',
whose name, as I have tried to show in §73, is to be read Bar-hi, i.e. Bar-Haya
* See translation of M xvi, a at end. - On the difficulty which follows see § 80.
" His name occurs [M iii, b, 2]: iv, a, b, 2: vi, 2: Restan 2: x'lx, a, 5.
* Unidentified: name occurs M i : v, i (?) : xxiii, 2.
■'' I cannot help thinking that the ' Nine ' who are so often mentioned in the hieroglyphs are
connected with these ' Tw^elve ' in some way.
" Note that Shalmaneser calls himself niitsaiiikit ""'""Miizni u ""'"'Urartu on his Til-Barsip
inscription (see m}' article, PSBA., xxxiv, 1912, 72, loj.
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 95
(Kalammu). It is possible that Bar-hi's name is to be read on the Kirtschogki
inscription (M vii) which comes from Amk.
From the Sinjerh inscription of Kalammu we learn that Assyria helped him
against a kingdom which appears most probably to have been Gurgum, a fact
which indicates the break up of the Syro-Hittite alliance at some time not long
after the murder of Benhadad, and the absorption under Assyrian influence of
the kingdom of Sam'al, which appears to have been popular in the time of
Panammu II, who is declared to have been the vassal of Tiglath-Pileser by
Bar-Rekub, his son. The proof of the backsliding of Kalammu to Assyria is of
great importance in the explanation of the Carchemish texts ; for, if Kalammu
is Bar-hi, the brother of Panammi, it will be natural to expect Panammi to have
left the Hittite coalition too, and become subservient to Assyria, and, in conse-
quence of this evidence of defection, it is not unlikely that Sangar of Carchemish
and others who wavered between the two powers, sometimes paying tribute to
the Assyrians, sometimes fighting against them, ultimately broke away from the
Hittite coalitions, and yielded to the expanding might of Assyria. The latest
mention of Carchemish in Shalmaneser s reign is apparently in 850 b.c, when
Sangar is still on the throne : after this there is nothing further known from the
Assyrian records about either Sangar or Carchemish until a brief mention of
the city in Samsi-Adad's time. In other words, Shalmaneser had no further
trouble with Sangar after 850. The reason is not far to seek : in the monolith
inscription, after describing his w\arfare with Sangar in his eponym year, he goes
on to state that he assessed him in a yearly tribute, and took his daughter into
his harem, and in the adjacent lines he describes a similar procedure with
' Haianu, son of Gabbaru '. What year this was is doubtful ; I do not think we
can fix it accurately, as the text not improbably describes a long process of
subjection. It is likely that his marriage represents the end of hostilities.
AIoreo\'er, he was firmly establishing himself at Til-Barsip which was by now an
Assyrianized city, and hence it was only natural for Sangar to attach himsclt
to this great new power. Further, as we have seen from the inscription ot
Kalammu, Sam'al was turning to Assyria for help against Gurgum (?) a little later,
and it seems therefore clear that the Hittite coalition gradually dissolved after
the death of the master-mind Benhadad. Indeed, his successor Hazael is
deserted b}' almost every element of the former coalitions. With the death ot
Benhadad came the opportunity for Shalmaneser to break the individual power
of each state singly, which had given him trouble : Sangar, Haianu ( Haya), and
Arame had yielded, and after these we find the Kauai attacked in 840, 835,
and 834 (in the latter two years Kate, their chief, is mentioned by name), in 838
Tabal. and in 837 Lalli of Milid with the kings of Tabal are overwhelmed;
wiiile in 834 Kirri, the brother of Kate, is put on the throne of the Kauai.
96 A NEW DFXIPHERMENT OF THE
If \vc omit the text Al x\', b, ;i limestone slab which apparently contains
over a portrait of Sangar the inscription relating to alliances with Nks and
Panammi, we cannot help noticing the difference of the well-known Carchemish
texts exhibited in the British Museum from other published Hittite monuments.
These Carchemish texts are of basalt, one graven with an Assyrian winged
figure, a small replica of the winged figures of Assurnasirpal's palaces ; a second
is graven with the figure of a king holding a staft, as Assyrian kings are repre-
sented sometimes. The two longest inscriptions in the Museum are broken, one
being inscribed on a column, which looks as though it had been transversely
cut to admit of a Hittite full-face sculpture and guilloche pattern being
engraved thereon.
In § 51 ft". I have tried to show that these three inscriptions contain the name
of [Shalmaneser] ' King of Ninex'ch ', or ' King of Ass3n-ia ', and I hope to show
that they bear the records or suggestions of alliances between Shalmaneser and
the king of Carchemish and the chiefs of the neighbouring districts, one perhaps
being his direct message to the former with a sculpture of himself
M xi, as far as I can make it out, first relates that certain ' kings, with
Panammi (and) Barhi have sworn the pledges of (?) Shalmaneser (?), the king of
Assyria ', thus referring to the ultimate friendship of Sam'al and la'di with
Assyria. Next we meet with the names Targu[r ?]-ni, Shalmaneser (?) king of
Nineveh, and others who have 'given covenants'. L. 4 'Aram, the chief of
Kaski, hath sworn before (his) great god (that) he . . . ', &c., and finally comes
the mention of the covenant of ' K-r-a the chief, who can be none other than the
Kirri ' appointed in Kate's stead, which would lead us to assign this inscription
to 834 B.C. approximately. This would make M ix somewhat anterior in date :
in this text mention is made ot a king called . . -as, ' Shalmaneser (?), king of
Nineveh, the lord of lands, like a great god, (and) Pan(am)mi (?) the king'
discussing friendship and the making of brotherhood. Moreover it apparently
says that Kate and Bat ' ' count us (?) as sons '. The Targu-ras ■' mentioned on
these two inscriptions would almost appear to be a king of Carchemish subse-
quent to Sangar ; for we now find on M x the abbreviated form Targu simply.
This, a slab engra\-cd with the king's figure, is directed to the king of Carchemish
apparently ; ' Shalmaneser (?) king of Assyria, lord of lands, sendeth a message
to Targu-(ras) " make brotherhood with one making war against Sas . ., [also
a king named 'The Sun is king', the ruler of Amk according to TA 4 ?], Bark,^
chiefs of the Nine : O Targu(ras), my all}-, . . /■ is a foe : [do thou with him] make
' Name occurs M viii, 4 : xi, 4, 5. - Occurs also in TA 5.
" Name occurs M i (as Targu-r-r-s) : ix, 2, 4 : xi, i : cf. xi, 2: xii, 4: xxxii, 2.
■* See § 73. •- ■''' See translation of M x, at end.
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 97
war : ?-ar, a chief of the Nine, is a foe '" '. Finally he ends with ' Against my foe
[be friendly] with a friend : with a foe let us fight '.
Once outside Carchemish do we find Shalmaneser's (?) name, on the Gliriin
inscription which is too mutilated to give good sense ; GUriln is probably the
Guriania described in an Assyrian letter (K 1080), as Professor Sayce pointed
out. Once also do we find the name Assyria apparently on the inscription found
by Professor Ramsay on the Kara Dagh, fifty miles south-east of Konia ; it must
not be forgotten that even Tiglath-Pileser I (iioob.c.) made incursions far into
the north-west.
Lastly, in this class we have the great inscription ot Tel Ahmar (Til Barsip) ;
it makes Ahuni (Huni) to be the son of Mutallu, although whether it is the real
or adopted son is impossible to say, and invites him to alliance, apparently also
mentioning Barhi [perhaps Panammi (?)], Guam ' (Giammu of the Balikh region),
Bark, ' the Sun is king ' the ruler of Amk mentioned above, Nist (the ' son ' of
Bauli, from Mar'ash inscriptions), and the kings represented by the hare -sign and
the leg-sign, both contemporaries of Benhadad (M xxi and M xvi, a). Since
Giammu was murdered by his own people in 854, and the coalition of Haianu,
Ahuni, Sangar, &c.,was between 860-857, we may fix the date of this inscription
at about this period. It is noteworthy in Shalmaneser's monolith inscription that
just preceding the account of this coalition we find Ahuni and Alutallu closely
mentioned. Whether Haianu was really alive, or whether his son had by this
time taken his place, as seems likely from the inscription, is a difficult point.
Finally, on the Aintab inscription (Garstang, LimdoftlieHittitcs, pi. XLI)
we meet the proper name c£J oflo«£l K-a-k\ i. e. the Assyrian Kaki or Kakia.
(For his histoiy see § 24.)
Turning from these inscriptions which begin with the machinations of
Benhadad and Irhulina among the tribes and ultimately end with the dominance
of Shalmaneser, we may examine the last group from Andaval, Bulgar-maden,
Bor, and Ivriz (M xxxi-xxxiv), which appear, from the names in them, to be
about Shalmaneser's date. Notably do we find Tesup-mis- (who apparently
occurs as Tesup-min(a), accusative, in j\I lii, 2) whose portrait is given on the
rock at Ivriz. These four inscriptions are concerned with the relations between
A-r-ar-a-s - (which must be Ariarathes, the name of several kings of Cappadocia),
the king of Tyana, Tesup-mina, Tal-h-s \ and others : Araras suggests alliance
^ See § 25 for the history : name occurs M xvi, c, i : Kellekli, § 70.
- The position of the land of Salla appears to be to the north-east of Bit-Adini, and hence is
perhaps too remote for us to compare its king Adad-'me (Adadimmi, Adadmil who paid tribute to
Assurnasirpal, with Tesup mis. The names, however, are worth comparison. His name occurs
as Tesup-mis M xxxiii, 12 : xxxiv, a, i : Tesup-mi-nia), [M xxxii?]: xxxiii, 3: Hi, 2.
' Name occurs M xxxi, c, 3: xxxii, i, 2, 3: xxxiii, a, i : xxxiv, a, 2, b, i.
* Occurs M xxxii, i : xxxiii, i.
VOL. LXIV. O
98 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
to Tal-h-s, and sends him a present of 'Tyanian wood' (M xxxiii). Tesup-mis
was adopted by Araras as his son, in proper fashion, so that Tcsup-mis takes
as another name Araranins (the equivalent in Greek woukl be Ariarathides ; see
M xxxii, I, where it is used clearly as a name). The two king-s have made
a record of their new relationship on the rock at Ivriz : the smaller, Araras,
greets his new son in so many words, and the larger amplifies his name Tesup-
mis by the addition ' I am Araranins'. '
On the question of the Indogevnianic origin of the Hittite I.nng/iage.
§ 88. Since the publication of the Arzawa letters in cuneiform it lias been
held that the language in which they were written was Indogermanic, and the
subsequent discovery of 'Hittite' cuneiform tablets from the Hittite country
settlecl the point that Hittite cuneiform showed practically the same language as
the Arzawa letters. It was held that the terminations -////, -ta, the nominative s,
the accus. -//, the root da ' to give ', the word hat-ra-a (erepof), among many
other suggested comparisons, all pointed to an Indogermanic origin.
As I cannot claim to be an Indogermanic scholar, I have only ventured to
make wliat seemed to be the most probable comparisons, placing the Hittite
and the suggested Indogermanic words side by side for others to discuss.
Persona/ suffixed pronouns, eo)npared ivith ///dog. perso//aI pro//o/i//s'}
Hittite. -////, -/////, -/// .• -t{a) : -s : -na, -ni, -n, -an .•-///(?) .•-//,
Indog. (accus.). *en/e, *W(", -//ie(//i) : */(/y)r, */(//)r(///) : *s{/j)e, '*se{n/) : ^'nes,
*//ds, *//s, *ns///e : */jes, */jos, *//s///e.
There would be little difficulty in seeing the Indog. in the Hittite ///i-ir ' I
(am)', for in Old Irish the accus. does duty for the nominative (Brugmann,
§ 439, 2). The plural //ii//ia is more difficult.
The ease-e//di//gs of the i/iase. //on// i// the si//g//Iar.
Hittite (sing.): {//)-s : {af// : {gfs : {d.)-i.
Indog. : {//\s : {a\/// : ( g.)-s : {d.)-ai.
' Can A-r-ar-a-itiu-s be the original of the Greek form 'Apiaiiin^i (the name ot two kings ot
Cappadocia. one the father of Ariarathes I) ; or sliould we see the -/ic?;? in the -mina of Tesup-mma, in
which case Tesitp- would take the place of Aria- [— Ara ' god ? ', § 44, iio/c 1 1 ?
^ I have taken the grammatical forms from Brugmann's Coiiip. Gram, of the /in/oi^rniiaiiic
Languages. I am much indebted to Professor Conway of Manchester University and Mr. Lionel D.
Barnett of the British Museum for advice on this matter, and particularly for their timely caution
against the danger of making comparisons : they are, of course, not responsible for anything in this
section, which is, after all, only a collection of suggestions.
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 99
The Hittitc p\m:i\(/L)-c : {(i.)-a// : (g.)-a-e :[(d?)-(7s from cuneiform] does not
follow the primitive Indog. -es, -71s, -om, -bh- -ni-, but rather those forms taken by
the Greek -01, -ov9, wv, -ois. The neuter plur. remains -c in the accusative, i.e.
//-///
■N-c (§ 68).
77/ c tci/scs of the verb.
Imperf. Hittite : v/-;///, s'-in : ■J-s-t{a)i^) : V : V-iiia) : /-//-/(?) .• V'i-^i-
Pres. Indog. : V-mi : s^-si : V-fi : ^0//es{/) : -/-/e : ^/-////.
Perf. Hittite (augmented tense)
(7-y-//i/ : ? .• ci-v^-f : [(T-^^-u § 86] / ? .' a-s^-n-zi.
Pret. Indog. : e-V-ni : e-V-s : e-^-t : e-s/-])ic{jii) : eW-te :e-V-iif.
The ending -r-n, which only occurs in the 3rd pers. plur., is comparable to
the Aryan -/- 'almost exclusively in the 3rd plur.' (Brugmann, § 1077), e.g.
Avest. -;". The Hittite ending -r, -ir (3rd pers. sing., § 69) may perhaps be
connected with this, but compare Brugmann, § 1076 ff.
The prepositions in § 77 will suggest Indog. equivalents : a possible enclitic
t(a) = 'and', Gk. 5e (§78): 'like' (§ 76) comparable to Indog. relative forms.
The following roots and meanings seem to be fairly certain : sa/i ' make, do ',
Skr. Jdii, Z. mn ' create '. /' ' go, come ', Indog. gd. (The hieroglyph for the sign
k is a foot.) t{a) ' give ', Skr. da.
The sense of the following words fits the translation ; the Indog. meanings
are comparable : ar-k 'to swear', Gk. op/co? 'an oath' (a difficult comparison to
maintain): c/r 'tojoin', Indog. dr- 'to fit": [^/-/( //)(?) ' father (?)', Gk. arra]: k-a-n
' friend (?)', Skr. cdiias 'favour", Z. cinaiih 'love' (Indog. s^k'niin), or s^kd 'to
love': kar 'commemoration', 'praise' (Alii, 2, notes), Indog. /car: ui-ii-u 'a
memorial stela (?)', Indog. men ' consider ', &c. (M ii, 2): n-m-n 'a covenant,
agreement (?) ', cf Indog. no in 11 'a name '(Skr. nanian). See §68. The Hittite
sense apparently does not allow of it meaning ' signature ', but it is possible
that the meaning ' agreement ' arose out of the primitive idea of signing a name.
The Indog. root no = ' to mark, designate '.'
Compare also the suggested Indog. words in the list of signs. A curious
parallel is suggested by the word QDQO ~^an, both ' to make ' and ' a king ', for the
English word king is supposed to come ultimately from the root gen ' to create ',
the Sk\\jd/L
' We have to add to these the following words from Hittite cuneiform: al-ti-is-si 'his, her
father!?)', like «-/(//)(?) above (Y 17) (cf. a-fa-vm, A ii, i| ; a ii-iii-is-si 'his, her mother (?)' (Y 17) aj'm,
arms; e-es-mi, e-es-tn, Indog. >/ as- 'to be' (A i, 7, 10: Y r. 3I : hat-ra-a, erepo's? (or pa-ra-a A i, 20 :
ii, 10: B 2 : P 16: Y r. 38 (but see § 481I.
o 2
loo A NEW DECIPHERMENT (3F THE
Consonantal changes.
It would seem probable that Hittite 5 sometimes varied with Skr./ as in
sanj'dn, and as ' ibex ', Ved. ajds ' he-goat ', but it is diffieult to say anythino- with
certainty yet until the Indogcrmanic origin has been thoroughly proved. At
the same time the Hittite s also represents the Indog. s (as in the nominative s).
Assyrian li'ords in Hittite.
§ 89. As is to be expected, Hittite cuneiform, being borrowed from Mesopo-
tamia, shows several Babylonian words. Some of these are written idco-
graphically : -AN. MES-as ' gods ' (Y r. 8, 9, 10), AN. IM-as (&c.), Tesup (Y 3,
21, 38), AN. UD-i (&c.) the Sun-god (Y 21), /T^/A^-^Vz-^^i ' country ' (A i, 25), dO .
MES-as 'sons' (Y 42), HAR-SAG-MES-as 'mountains' (Y 10), LUGAL-iis
(A ii, 16), &c., &c. ; but more important are those written syllabically, for they
show for certain that several foreign words were actually borrowed and pro-
nounced as written. These are a-hii-ia (W 19), a-bi-ia 'my father' (Y r. 39)
ia-bi-e Y 32, 33, a-bu-it-iis Y 37 ,38, a-bii-ii-im-na Y 27, 31, &c.): possibly a-Ija-ti
(= aim ' brother ' ?, ^'^^^^ note), ad-din ' I gave ' (W 19), a-na ' to ' ( Y passim : A [i, 2],
ii, 5 : Al. 7, &c.), be-el AN-lini ' lord of the gods ' (Y r. 37, 40), -ia ' my ' (G 11, K 3,
Y r. 42, &c.), i-ia-si 'to me' (Z i, 2): i-id-din-wa 'he gave' (Y 21), it-ti-
in-nu-ta (G 15), i-na 'in' (G i, 6, &c., Y /'. 30, Z i, i, 8), -ka 'thy' (Y 2, 7), ki-i
'that(?)' (Y 16, &c.), hal-za-is (&c.) ' fortress(?) ' (Y 38, &c.), nia-da-at-as ' tri-
bute (?)' (D r. 14), pa-ni 'before', lit. 'face'' (Al. /'. 4: Y /'. 36, 40: a-na pa-ni
H 7, W 19), sa-ti-ini 'peace' (Z 2), sn-tiini ' peace ' (Al. 10). Hence it is not
surprising to find in the hieroglyphs -U = pan ' face ', and perhaps a-b{a)-n-t{a)
'thy father' (M ii, i), a-/jn{?) ' brother' (§ ^t, note), with the phonetic complement
/// indicated after the ideogram for ' brother ' (§ 73), and possibly the Aramaic
bar ' son ' in ^^ bar (§ 73).
V7ie yllpliabet.
§ 90. Up to the present this decipherment shows a, b{p), t, c, g{k), //, /, /,
ni{w), n, r, s, t, n, z as the alphabet in use : the Hittite cuneiform shows in addi-
tion g (distinct from k), d, p, k (rarely), s, rarely s. N appears to be sometimes
assimilated when preceding .v or ::. The question of j>' or .v is a difficult one, but
this much can be said that the nominative of the tablets from Boghaz Keui
is represented by the cuneiform .v {;"Mnr-si-ti-is, &c.), while in the eighth century
we find it in .y {Pi-si-ri-is, W.A.I, iii, [), 51). At the same time Sa-an-ga-ra is rcprc-
' SI ( = pa-aii) is used thus apparently, in D 18, E 15, O 2.
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS loi
sented by the Hittitc hieroglyphics S(7//-g(7r-s,where the sa// is the same character
as that for the root meaning 'to make', Skr. jd/i, Z. zaii, and yet the Skr. nom.
is marked by s. Hence it seems probable that about the middle of the second
millenium b.c. the Hittites distinguished between s and i; whether they did in
the ninth century is a difficult question which is suggested by Pi-si-yi-is, but the
evidence is not sufficient for us to decide. At the same time the possibility
even in the earlier period of sa-an varying with sa-an in the cuneiform is sug-
gested in § 52, where also a possible variant s-an for sun in the hieroglyphs is
given. As, however, sail is the only hieroglyphic word I have as yet found
doubtful in its sibilant, I have not made any distinction, using 5 as the symbol
for the nominative termination, &c.
B apparently varies with / in hieroglyphs, as is discussed in the notes to
the translation of M ix at end.
§ 91. The hieroglyphs show the following: —
Animals : Ibex, bull, ram, horse or ass, calf or dog. The camel rarely, if
ever, represented.
Birds: Only one kind, apparently an eagle.
Fegefables : Two or three kinds of leaves, flowers, or grasses ; a tree.
Dwellings : Ground plan of a house : the tent is a possibility in the form
of a wigwam.
Implements : Firestick (?), knife, graving tool, vessels of pottery, cord, quiver,
tablet (?), altar (?), table, grave-shaft (?), coffin (?), waterskin (?).
Parts of the body : Full figure, upper part of body, male head, face, hand,
foot, leg, uterus (?), penis (?).
Parts of animals: Horns.
Natural objects: Lightning (compare the Hittite idea with the three-
pronged thunderbolt in the hand of Hadad), fire, water, mountains.
Clothes: High cap.
Labour : A scribe is represented by a seated figure holding a graving tool :
a hand holding a graving tool.
Numerals: I, HI, IV, IX by separate strokes; 10 and 100 apparently by
especial symbols.
From the above it may be inferred that the originators of the s}stem ot
Hittite hieroglyphs were a pastoral people keeping cattle and sheep, living in
mountains where the rain or cold compelled them to live in houses or steep-
sided tents, where among the fauna were counted ibexes and eagles ; their
draught beasts were horses or asses, not the camel, which is practically useless
in highlands ; they used a decimal system of counting ; possibly the firestick —
if my suggestion is right -indicates a terrain without flints. For weapons they
lo:
A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
had bows (?) and arrows (?), and knives probably of bronze ; they were adepts
in making pottery. Apparently they buried in coffins in shafts or artificial
caves; one of the pots drawn is much like the shape of those used in early
burials at Carchemish.
The use of these pictures is similar to that of most j^icture-writings ; by
metathesis, e.g. the name for the ibex as is used for the syllabic \-alue as. But
the ideographic value was sometimes retained, either in the original sense or in
some transferred allied meaning; e.g. a tree would indicate 'wood ', but a hand
outstretched ' an ally ", or a foot ' to go '. There were two ways of indicating an
ideogram : one by oe placed before and after, as oe ^> os ' an ally ", the other by
s a' placed after, as ^>. These indications are not indispensable : and the latter
cannot be said to mark a plural in the face of TA 4, ' we are one speech ".
As in Egyptian, phonetic complements were used, '^p' ///// may be used
by itself or with the addition of // ; ODQD sir// is similar in its apparently arbitrary
complement I // ; Sangar's name maybe written ^^^^ mji -=^ £^ Sii//{//)-g{oa/')-s
or simply Sa//-ga/'-s. As in Egyptian also, we find the hieroglyphs arranged to
present a s\mimetrical appearance at the cost of their more exact order, parti-
cularly when the phrase is well known. This latter method gives us a reason
for the usually inverted order of the name Mu-tal, and possibly b{a)-a = a-b{(i) in
the common phrase ' Make alliance with us ' ; and if a common group ('god ' +
gii + ' bird ') is equivalent to Targu, as I have tried to show in § 1 1, it is reasonable
also to explain this in a similar way, the bird then having the value fa/\
It is surprising that determinatives, as understood in Egyptian, should be so
little used, and it is striking to see how effectively the Hittites dispensed with
them. As far as I know there are only (i) the god-sign placed before god-names,
and frequently omitted if the god's name forms a component of a personal name :
(2) the sign for city or country, used after place-names, which is frequently
omitted, as in K-as-/c (§ 35), U-/ii-k (§ 52 (5)), K-n-/i-a-/t-t (§ 60), Kat-i/-a-ii-t (§ 60),
and even G/i-g/i-//i (= Gurgum) on a seal (§31): (3) the stroke (written usually
diagonally) indicating a personal name following, which may be omitted at
pleasure: and similar to this the 'tang' marking place or personal names (§ 17).
§ 92. It will have been remarked throughout this article that no trace of
the native name 'Hittite', 'Hatti', 'Heta', has been discovered: moreover,
the translations of all the North Syrian Hittite hieroglyphs which comprise the
greater part of our texts and are herein given, reveal no indication of such
a word. Here is a problem which we must set ourselves to solve.
^ Unless this has a syllabic value : see sign-list, No. 8.
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 103
From Wincklcr's texts there seems good reason to think that in the fourteenth
century Boghaz Keui was called "'"Ha-at-ti (Wincklcr, Orient. Lit. Zcit., Dec,
1906, Sonderabzuq-, 15: L. W. Kinq-, Chronicles concerning Early Babytouiaii Kings,
i, 148) : and the king of the Hittites57r/77/ rabu sar '"•^'""'"Haf-ti (W 27). We may
therefore expect the word Hatti to be found in the texts of Central Asia Minor
if anywhere, which include those of Boghaz Keui, Fraktin, and Kara Dagh
(Rams.).
Fraktin (M xxx, see translations at end) shows two kings, one possibly
Mautenre, as the Egyptians called IMutallu, making offerings to gods, and in
a single line to the right an inscription which reads ' ally '-ni-zi-' country " ' ally '-e
ar-iui. This shows that our sign for ' ally ' is used phonetically : and hence we
must read tentatively, ' I have joined alliance with(in) ?-///-countrv.' Are we to
see a value hat for this 'ally '-sign, reading, //(7/-T^'-country ?
Similarly in Rams. 6, after the king's name, are we to see the ' hand-sign '
followed by ' country ', the whole group being thus //i'/Z-country ?
An examination of the later texts will show that this hand-sign certainly has
a syllabic value : —
{a) ID-r-s, AI ix, 2-3: 'X, Y, and Z as an ally (allies) have accepted [with
thee] : I w ill act with thee, I will make sonship with thee : ID-r-s
n-b{a)-r-a-t{a) nis(?)-si nii-t : ;///( = ? they take thee for a son with me).'
(/;) ID-r-a, W vi, 3 : tc(>.)IDi^)-r-a ' god'-Tcsnp-nui.
{c) ID-r, M xxxiii, 12: a-b{a)-ir'^.-e-ni li-n-s-t\a) ID-r ' godi'-Tcsup-ini-s.
{d) ID-ir-u, AI xxxiii, 11.
{e) ID-ir-e, M xxxiii, 3 : ' I ha\'e commanded b{a)-ir-f{a) ID-ir-c-tni : c-a-f{a),
&c. (i.e. that my ID-ir-e bring it).
Hence there appears to be a word which, on our assumption of a \'alue hat,
would read hat-r-s, hat-r-a, hat-r, hat-ir-n, hat-ir-e (plural).
Hittite cuneiform shows a word Iiatra : —
A i (17) (paragraph) a-ni-ia-at-ta-as ina-nui ku-c ta-as ha-at-ra-a-*es (18) iib-bi
wa-ra-at-nni nc-it-ta up-pa-ah-hi EGIR-an-ta (19) na-as-ta "'"ha-ln-ga-
tal-la-at-ti-in ani-iiic-el-la (20) "'"ha-ln-ga-tal-la-an EGIR-pa hat-ra-a hii-
n-da-a-ak (21) na-i na-at it-ii'a-an-du.
A ii (10) (paragraph) nn-niit '" Lab-ba-ia-an EGIR-pa hat-ra-a {^^^ \J^s-t\ii'\
aniel as-su-nii-ia li-li-iua-\i'i\h-hii-n-an-zi (12) na-i bis-im-na-nnt inc-nii-
an ab-bi-az (13) EGIR-pa ha-at-ra-a-i.
A ii (21) (two paragraphs) ^•[/]-//'-[w]// es-sar-as as-[s]n-n-li (22) ha-at-ra-[a]-i
nani-)na-za [Z]^?^"" EGIR"" (23) i-i\a\ \ (24) Ab-zun kn-e n-ta-an-zi
(25) ;/// ne-e\s-r'\a-ni b\_ii\ka ha-at-ri-es-ki.
I04 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
\_P(i-ra-(i in Yr. t^S, LAH AN-liiu Jja-af-ki (or di) ua-as-ta pa-ra-a . .: P i6 . . .
)ia-ta pa-ra-a : B 2 ... A UG.IL -i pa-ra-a . . . s/-//?, appears to be more
probable than hat-ya-a, on account of the well-known root pa (§ 48).]
I admit I cannot suggest anything better than 'other' which has already
been suggested. ' Messenger ', which is to be expected in M xxxiii, 3 for Jjai-ir-c,
is already accounted for by the word "'"Ijahtgatalla : and Ijat-r-s, in M ix, 3, is
a difficulty. What can be said is that, leaving the question of the meaning, there
seems to be some probability for the existence oihatya both in hieroglyphs and
cuneiform, on the assumption that the hand-sign is liat, it being possible that
the Fraktin and Kara Dagh inscriptions spell out the name Hatti as IJat-w-
' country' and //cr/-' country '.
Out of this arises another problem : supposing that we have identified the
word Haiti in the hieroglyphic texts of the proper Hittite district, how is it that we
have found no indication of such a place-name in the later ninth-century North
Syrian texts which are far more numerous, especially when the Assyrian cunei-
form still constantly uses the expression Hattil
I can only offer a tentative suggestion that the name was not used by the
' Hittite ' allies in the ninth century: but that they called themselves or were
known as ' the allies ' which (on our assumption that the ' ally ' (' hand ")-sign has
the value //^r/j would be pronounced by the Hittites as ' /jaf-e' : and that the
Assyrians (and Hebrews) borrow^ed this as a vague term for the Hittite
coalitions, under the impression that it meant their country ; or possibly, by
coincidence, since the Egyptians had met the Heta in Northern Syria, the word
haf-e 'allies' assumed the position which the old gentilic Heta had aforetime
held in this land.
I
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 105
TRANSLATIONS
I append the following suggestions for translations to the greater part of
the texts published in Messerschmidt's Cor'pus. Naturally much is tentative,
and the copies of the inscriptions themselves still lack much in accuracy-
I have begun with the inscriptions of the king whom I have identified with
Benhadad.
(A) The Benhadad (?) Inscriptions.
M xxi, tJie lion froiu May ash. The inscription is from Benhadad to
Mutallu, the king of Gurgum (Markasi), and incidentally to Arammi (of Bit-
AgCisi), probably the one who is known as the ' Chief of Kaski ' (M xi, 4), Bauli,
Nist, and Bami, mentioning ancient alliances and inviting them to continue in
this friendship. As is usual in such cases, he mentions the names of other
Hittite chiefs who are prepared to join him. Date, second quarter of ninth
century, probably a little later than M lii, which mentions Karal, while M xxi
only speaks of 'Pan-mi' (=Panammi?). I have collated the text as well as
I can from the cast in the British Museum.
(i) Te{T)-a-san{ii)"Tesup-id(^)-r ' brother '-/v/-///-5 .• "Mu-tal ;-a-h-as : "Gii-gu-iu
Saith Benhadad unto his brother Mutallu, the great, of Gurgum,
-^-//-//-^5-' place ' ' lord '-/'-//-i- "Ar-ain-mi >/i/i{ii)-s : "?-///-//-{;/)// /s
the great : (also) unto his lord Arammi, the son of I'-nili
: ' ally ' :-[//] d(a)-a lui-uis " Tesitp-id(^.)-i' ' brother "-/'-/// niii-as
' Make alliance with us.' Benhadad unto the son of his brother
(2) [J/?/(?)-/^i'/(?)]-//-5 : ' ally ' : ' ancestors '-am iiin Nis-t B{ii)-a-n-U iii)i-as
Mutallu (?), the son of the ally of my(?) ancestors, Nist, the son of Bauli :
"Mi- ? ; Miii^y^-Ii-s : ' ally ' :-e ' ancestors '-a/// ?-j//a//{}) ar-nis
Mi-? (brother?) (of) Mu(?)-?-li (?), the allies of myli*) ancestors, ?* , 'Join us.'
"Tesup-id{J)-r ':\\\y'-k-//i i/i/i-as : "Mu-tal ;-a-li-ii is
(Saith) Benhadad unto the son of his ally IMutallu the great
(3) : ' all)" '■.-n{a)-a-s "B{ti)-a-iiii 11 in '^.-li-Tesup : ' ally ' :-//((j)-a uis-//{a)-a "Ar-aui-nii
our ally Bami, the son of j*-li-Tesup (?) our ally, our son. Arammi.
nin{ii)-iiis "?-/i-s : ' ally ' :-c ar-uis (or f{ti)-nis)
the son of . . . li, 'Join us as allies' {or 'give us hands in alliance').
VOL. LXIV P
io6 A NEW PRCTPHERMENT OF THE
' god '-if{a)-k "Paii-)iii saii-iias Bar (?)-/'-// : ' ally ' :-//- . . .
Like (By?) our god, Panammi(?) the king (and) Bark [have ?] made alliance
-II is 'ally'(?)-^-/i'
[with] us, like allies (?)
(4) }-san-as ' lord '-/■-// /.v "Pa/h/iii sai/s : Gai'-b{a)-iii
? (Saith Benhadad) unto his lord Panammi(?) the king, Garbani,
sm/-)ias : 'god '(?) ^//-<5'(c7)(?)-.w/(?) }-a-k-i/is : ? ;aiii li iiis saii-ii
the king, . . . (name) : unto his [Nine ?] ?, ' [Sonship ?] we will make ' :
' lord '-/'-// /V .• A-b{(i) : feQ)-sai/{//)-iii : ID-k-iii 'god'-//-///-// "Paii-iiii-u
unto his lord Aba(?), ' I promise I will fight." By my great god, Panammi(?)
a-b{ii)-ii : feQ)-san : ally ':-/'-// .- ID-// iias-k-ii-iiiu [ox, ID-{ii)iias iini-k-ii)
\\\\\\ them spoke for alliance, ' A throne for my sons (///', our throne for me)
//--'/ lias '^.-a-u : f{a)-a : ' ally ' ;-I-ii-?i{a)
we will make,' (and) the sons of the Nine(?) [said ?], 'Our only ally
//-/ (or /-// ?) // / {ii)iias
are ye ' {or for our common alliance have spoken). The chiefs of the sons
(5) '^-(T-e : h ; "M{T)-ani-aiii-'^-a
of the Nine (?), the chiefs M(?)-am-am- ?-a {or M(?)-am of Am-?-a)
Gar-b{a)-} M/i-c ' god'-Tcs/ip-ii-uis-k-n 'god '-//-/// s-/c-e "-?-///-/'
Garba . . . (?), . . . unto our god Tesup, our god, are . . . -ing(?) ? -nik (a chief)
.- a-b{a)-u : ? niiMiis ' brother '-k-ii-iiis : N- ? ///// c 11
{or, ? (a chief) like us) with them a feast (?) . . . : unto our brother
'gocV 'hvo\.\\QY'-k-//i-{//)/n's : "M/i-fn/; a-//{a)-ii/i ti-f:a-b{a) : Mn-tal ; a-ii{a) . . : .
Unto the god of our brother Mutallu I . . . you : with Mutallu . . .
' all}'' '-C ar-iii-it (or, ' ally ^-e-iii ar-it) . . : //// . . .
as allies we are joining them {or, our allies are joining) . . .
(6) ... ///e : f{a)-[a] k ; [ID ?J-/'-//// .■ kaf-i/ : a-b{a) . . Gar-'^-c ' ally' . . . '"''^v^ // arar :
to go against [a foe (?)] : they with
au (? or ' ally ')-// .•//... /////-/' a-b{a)-n ' god ' ' ally ^-k-iii-nis : kat-a-iui : ID-iii-nm :
they have set (?)... with us : unto the god of our ally I myself am . . .
' ally '-?-5-// .• a-u
alliance . . . , who
(7) .• kil)-sa//-/ii : ID-k-m
promise I will fight.
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 107
Notes. 1. i. On 1. i, see §§ 17,30, 33 ff-, 50. On 'brother', § 38: on Gurgum, § 29: Mutallu,
§ 31 : Arammi, either the king of Urarta or Bit-Agusi, § 30. The character in the unknown name
following might be the hare's ears : possibly the -iii might belong to iiin-n-{iii)-s, and we might see an
inverted lal in this character, reading Lal-li, but it is hardly to be considered. For the syntax at end
of line, see § 66.
1.2. On 'ancestors', §50: Nist, § 49: Bauli, § 41, note: the name following might begin
"IV-mi . . .: see notes to translation of M vi, p. 115. The character after 'ally' may be ;/ or e.
Ar-nis. A verb is necessary here, parallel to 'make alliance with us' in the previous phrase.
A similar phrase occurs in M Iii, 4 (' Saith Benhadad unto his ally Niste, the son of Bauli, make
alliance with us : Bami, son of the ally of [our] ancestors ') kat-fiis ar. If it is an imperative form
(parallel to t{a) of M i, san of M x, i), we can see in nis and kat-nis the oblique case of -n, kat-n 'we '
(similar to that in the form luiiiis from ;/;////' 'we ') and probably a by-form of -iias (§ 581, and translate
the whole 'join us ". The finite verb occurs in M vii, 2— : ' ally ' : ar-mi ' I have joined the alliance ' :
the same phrase is used in TA 5 (see ^ 68j, M xxiii, c, and probabl}' TA 4. TA 7 gives ' (in) our
covenant with thee at my feast ar-iiii I join '. Perhaps we should see it in M ix, 4 ?-a ar-e Kat-n-a-u-t,
&c., ' ... the Katnai are ioining . . .' (see translation p. 117). (I admit that the sense has been suggested
by the Indoger. ar.)
Are we to see the root of ar in ir-r-a-Ha) (M ix, 3 'will join thee'); ir-r-a-ii-t 'theyl?) will join
you ' (M XV, B, 31 ; and perhaps an imperative rr (? M viii, a, 2, ' So-and-so ; teC] r-r a-havu hath
said, Join (?) with them,' doubtful), and r-r-n-t in a new Jerabis inscription ? Cf. also ' Benhadad (and)
Tesup-k : r-n-zi-t\a\ : ID-n : share (?) for thee the head' (M ii. 4), .• r-«-c/-/(rt) occurs also on a new
Jerabis inscription where it might well have this sense. It is remarkable to see that r can apparently
be doubled ; cf. the forms of the proper name Targu-r-r-s (genitive, M i) and Targn-r-s (nominative,
ix, xi). This is certain from a comparison of M i, and a new Jerabis inscription, which show
7V?r^«-r-r-5 and Targii-r-e in juxtaposition to the name ' god' -Su/{?}-e-s and ' god' -S 11/ (Ij-e-ni respec-
tiveI3^ Compare also r-ti, M ii, 6.
In addition to these words beginning with r, we also find a series, r-s-iiii, r-s-iiiu, i-s-t{a) (to be
placed here ?), r-s-si. r-s-mi and r-s-iuu are used with n-m-ti ' covenant ' as an object (§ 68 : M liii) :
r-s-/iii occurs on a seal (M xlii, i) : r-s-/(a) is doubtful (§ 69) ; r-s-zi is used in § 83, ' will join (?) thee ',
and once more on a new Jerabis inscription, and possibly in TA 3. The meaning which fits
the word is again 'join ', but we cannot suppose that r and r-s both represent roots meaning ' to join ' :
either there must be some difference of meaning, or a different voice might possibly be indicated.
Again, where are we to place a-ii . . . (name) r-ii-fUD (§ 83)?
Another word beginning with r is r-iiin[n)-t\a) which appears to be from the root r-ii, ist pers. plur.
with suffix f[a). It occurs on TA 4, 5, 8 always followed by ' Make alliance with us '. I can only
suggest some such meaning as "ask, request'.
There are only about half a dozen words which I have been able to find beginning with r in
Hittite cuneiform, and none of them are of any help here : possibly ir-ri-is-sa-[an] D r. 10, and
ar-nii-a)i-zi G 8, 10, &c., might conceal similar roots.
1. 3. Bami, also M Iii, 4. Pan-mi san-s, § 56: Bark, ■^ 41, note, § 73.
1. 4. With Gar-Mahni, cf. the name Garbatas, the shield-bearer of the Hittite king in the war with
Rameses II. On the possible abbreviation or synonym for 'the Nine', see § 64, iio/c . The phrase
about the throne which Panammi (?) uses is similar to one spoken by Karal, his father, M Hi, 5. T{a)-a
ought to be the ordinary particle fa here, but some part oU-e 'to speak ' would fit excellently.
M Hi, //'om Mai' ash. The date is a little earlier than that of M xxi.
Benhadad suggests alliance to Mutallu of Gurgum, and Bauli, urging that
Ahunu and others [are friendly] and that certain chiefs have joined against
possible foes of Nks (the friend of Sangar). Nist and Bami. are also invited,
it being claimed that Karal (of la'di) and Kate (of Kauai) [are well disposed].
p 2
io8 A XFAV DKCIPHEKMENT OF 11 IE
{i) 'rcQ)-a-sa/i{n) 'rcsii/)-id{?)-r ' VL\\y'-k-ii-i/i-s : Mii-tal ; -a-\Ij\-s : "G/t-gn-m
Saith Benhadad unto his ally Mutallu, the great, of Giirg-um,
-a-h-ii-s- place ' .• ' lord '-k-s B{ii)-a-ii-li ' {ii)nin-as : Mn-tal ;-a-Ii-iiis : ' ally ' :-//
the great : unto his lord Bauli the son of Mutallu, the great : ' Make
d((7)-[a] iiii-ii-s . . 11 (or t{a)-a) "H/i-ii/i AQ)-[t{a)'>]-ii{ay place ' ..n.. (title ?)
alliance with us'. Ahunu of A[di]ni(??),
U-li-n-e (title ?) B{a)-r-k iiiii-u a]i-n{a)
Ulini(?), Bark we have set as our son (?) :
(2) ' gQd'-7^esiip-nii-Ji{a) : r-k-ii : (title)?; B{a)-iiin : Ij ; ii-as IX-a-e
[To] Tesup-mis we have [sworn (?") that] -Banin (?), the chiefs, the sons of the Nine
t[ii)-a ID : N-ka A-iiiii-u{ay \AdiCc' : iiis-ii : ' ally ' r//'-(? La l{}) /cat (J)-}
against a foe of Nks of Adinnu (?), their son, are joining in alliance. [Lalli ?]
"Ar-hn-li-ni'^')ni-r-a:t-e : '^ ;-a]i{i) as e : "//u-//u /r{?)-r-a-//-t{?)
in the presence of Arhulini (?) saith, ' Our (?) .... Ahunu will join (?) you (?) '
A' ;-//i{?)-;/iu k c : t{a)-a {II ?*) ; ar a ni a mi ? . .
I will go . . to
(3) : ini-t{a) . . ' ixWy'-c ar-e : san-r-a ' ally ' ID-I{?)-/e-;/
With [thee ?] they are joining as allies : they will make alliance against a
//I (?)- . . -e : Gu-?-/i//-r : s-n k-a-ni-u :
[common] foe. [The people (?) of] Gu-?-hur(?) have written (that) their friend
Kat{T)-t-e : ID-k-ii-s : iiii-t iii{})-. .-e uis-e : iiis-it : a-saii-ni ID :
is Kate(?). Against his enemy with the [people?] their sons(?) we have accepted(?)
Te (?) " Tesiip-id {})-?' ' ally '-k-ni-s : Nis-f-e
as sons (?). Saith Benhadad unto his ally Nist
(4) "B{a)-a-ii-/i iiiit : ' ally ' :-// h{a\a ini-iiis "B{a)-a-nii 11 in : ' ally' ' ancestors'
son of Bauli, ' Make alliance with us ' : Bami son of the ally of
-? kat-nis ar : t{a)-a ?-? sail : ID-k-n{a) /ii{}) . . -c-n{a)
[my?] ancestors, 'Join us; against ?-?, the king, we will fight: our [people (?)]
ni\^)-..-c-t{a){})-k mQ): .-e I{l)-k : Gar-a-li ni IX-a-e
like thy (?) [people (?)], like one (?) [people (?)].' Karal the son of the Nine,
.• a-ii : N-ka
who [with] Nks
{^ ...:?\\y' \av : a-ID ''.-k-ii-ii-ni k; y-k-in-t{a) :
joineth alliance, hath [graven (written)?] for my . . . : 'To come I [swear?] to thee(?)'
^ Probably to be read thus. ^ Doubtful : I have read the 5 as [lu.
IIITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 109
ID;-hi-c (or, y-k-in t-e ID;-hi) "Kat-t-c h : ' ally ' .- a-//-//// r-ki^.)-mi : (title '^)-
Acceptingi?) Kate, the chief, alliance I have made, ...
B[a)-itiii, n ill-Ilia) ii-in-u.-m-ii <:'-[^'?] • • ■" a-san{-ii) : feQ)-saii-n{a)
Banin(?), our son, my covenant [with?] . . . hath made. \Ve(?) have said(?)
? Mii-tal{>.); n-ii{a) ?-/' //)(?) Gar-\_a-/n^ iii IXC)-a-e : t-e-v-a . . : /c-(7-[ii . .] .•
Alutallu (?) Karal (?), son of the Nine (?) say ... friends
a-saii-iiC) : saii-ii : ID-ii-as-k-ii-iiiit
they (?) have made, we will make a throne for my sons (or variant as in M xxi, 4).
(6) Mutilated.
Notes. 1. i. "Hit-nti, § t2 : on possible titles, •^ 73. The group at the end of the line is difficult,
and might possibl}^ be read ' all}' '-ninC)-7i-ii{a) ' our all}- '.
1. 2. Tesup-mina, ^ 87. For r-k-n see notes to translation of M ii. Aninna perhaps Adinnu.
§87: the following phrase is difficult; perhaps read A-nin-niay p\3.c&' -.-tiis : 'ally' ar-ti kal-e of
Adinnu, they are joining alliance with them (?) : d. 1. 4. Perhaps we might see the word inu-e as in
M xxi, 5 near the end of the line.
1. 3. The phrase a-san-nilD is difficult, and possibly the reading of the hand-sign may not be
correct : perhaps ' we have made alliance' is the sense, nis-ii might mean ' their son ', but the sense
is difficult.
1. 4. Kat-nis looks like a form of kat-u-s 'us', the equivalent in M xxi, 2 being ar-nis 'join us'.
Cf 1. 2, perhaps, ar-u kat-c, kat-c being some case oi kat-nl Karal, § 11.
1.5. After "Kat-t-eh less probably read :' ally ' :-(7-// mi-r-a[l)-mi, i.e. 'Kate hath made alliance:
before me,' &c. Cf the phrase in M xxi, 4 'our throne for me'; but the words might be divided
differently. For ' a throne for my sons ' we should expect ID ii-as-k-n-m{u).
M xxii,//w// Mar ash. A sculpture of an alliance feast, two kings (one of
whom is Tesup-k) facing each other at a table laid with flat bread.
Right side : Te{l)-saii Tesnp-k a-/jit(^)-k-/iis . . .
Saith Tesup-k unto his brother (?). . .
Left side : . . . Mii-tal(J})-n{a) : ///(or kafym n . . iii(^)-a-''. Paii-ini i(?)-//(^?)(?) a-b{a)-n
i.e. Mutallu (??) . . . Panammi (?) the king (?) with them.
M xxiii, A, a broken statue from Mar ash.
(i) ... [//-///]-///-(? Tesitp-l/'^iiis a-d(a) ? . . a-d{a) ..;... 11 .. .
. . . covenants of Tesup-ras (?) with
(2) Ahu(l'^)-n-uis n-in-iii-e : a-t{a)-ir ?-?-// /c-a-ii(a) ?/? /XC)-a-c
Ahuni(??) covenants hath given : ?-?-li (i.s) our friend : ? ? of the Nine
'•/r-r-a a-ar aCytaNi : hi\^);-e
Irra hath joined (?) ?
no A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
(3) Iv-hiiiJ)-li-iii-r n-f{(i)n' " ■ ■ .[-fe }]-r-a ID... kat-s
to (?) Irhulina(?) hath given . . . have [said ^] ' A tablet ... he
/-<?) ' ally (?)' ; ar-
saith (?) we will join
(4) n{a) ?//.../•../•.. l\a) r a ' god '
alliance'
Notes. 1. i. On Tesup-[i"a ?]-nis, see M xi, 3 and notes to Hittite seals further on.
M xxiii, c. Copy too bad to translate, but see Sayce, PSBA., xxv, 1903,
284. xxiv, A contains the group in M ii, 6. b contains the name of Gurgum.
M xxv, a stela beginning ' Saith Ar(?)-mi ' (Arame ?) mentions Gurgum in the
third line.
M ii. A stela sculptured with representation of the god Hadad (Tesup),
and inscribed with seven lines of inscription, which describes how the stela
was made by various kings, among them Benhadad, and presented to Mutallu,
king of Gurgum. Period, middle of ninth century. Found at Babylon, whither
it had probably been carried as a trophy.
(1) :TeiJ)-a-saii{ii) "Tya)-l-ay-s : Mii-tal;-a-Ij-s : bav(?)-k-u-s
Saith Ta?aras unto his son (?) {py, lord ?) Mutallu, the great,
a-b{a)-u-t[ a) Tesitp-idQ)-r-n-/j-s
' Thy father (?) and Benhadad, the great,
(2) ' god '- Tesitp-s : kar-k-ii : in-ni-ii a-tXa)-\a)
for the commemoration (?, glory (?)) of Tesup their memorial-stela have
saii-ii-zi t[ii)-k-n iini{^)-z:i : kav saii-ii-zi
given thee. They made a feast (? ?), they (?)..., they made a commemoration (?),
: ' ally " : -Ij-u-zi ?-z/ niti-zi
they made alliance ... as a son (?)
(3) 'ally '-^-;// .• }-aiii nii-r-a-f{a) iii-t-nii : n-h-am-nii : Ai]i'\i'\-a-s : ID;-
our allies [„ " "l.^^'^^ P^'.^sence, oi'X ^^.^^^ ^^^^ j^^^^j^ _ ^^^_ p^^^^^^^ ^j^^ _
iPan(?)-am-mi thy r-a]
nin : 'country (?) '/--^ •' Ain-r-a-s : ID;-uiu{ji) : ' country (?)' /-5 .• ^Ii/i-r-
... of his country (?), Amras the wood of his country (?), Amr-
(4) -^?-5 .• /A--^///''(''^) •■' country (?)';-•**■ in-t-iiii ni-ii-n-k-ii-an a-t\a)-t
-as the stone of his country (?) with (unto) me for our memorial-stela gave.
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS m
7csnp-idC)-y-n-/i'rro(y-Tcsnp-/c : r-u-zi-tia) : ID-n : '^Wy'-e-ni:
Benhadad (and) Tesup-k have [shared (?) for] thee the head (?), our alhes
' engrave '-j'-a iii-?/-u-s
have engraved
(5) :'leg(?)'-;^ .• ID; te{T)-mi : r-ii-mi-ii : Am-r-a-
[the leg^(?, base ?)] of the memorial-stela ... [1 have told my share ?] Amras
' engrave ' k-n-li-s (or k-li-ii-s) : 1-ka /j-s-t{ii) : Aiii-r-a-s : t-e k-ii-li-s (or
hath engraved ? thou shalt make (?) Amras hath said ?
k-li-n-s) : 1-ka h-s-t{a) ini-r-
thou shalt make (?) Before
(6) a-u : ID; a-h-mi : /D,-? mi-t : A/j/iC?)-iiis-h-k-n : mi-r-a-an
them [the shrine ?] I made ^? (a chief) with Ahuni (?:^) the chief in our
t-e : ID-N : rO)-k-r f(n)-a . . Tcsi/p-idQ)-r-a-/j-s ' god'-Jesiip-s :
presence said [" We (? will)] . . . a . . . that Benhadad the great may join(?) thy
ID-f{a) : r-it : knf-s : ' ally '-///-//
inscription(?) of Tesup." He unto our allies
(7) f-e : ' tablet (?) '-? /r-z/
said "The tablet (?)..."•
Notes. The figure of Hadad is noticeable because it carries the triple thunderbolt as in Assyria,
but the Hittite hieroglyph for Hadad, probably the lightning flash, drawn in a zigzag, much as it is
conventionally represented by ourselves (see footnote to § i), is probably not Semitic in conception.
1. I. I cannot identify T{a}-?-ar-s: it seems clear that the last character but one is or and not f{a)
(cf. the sign for Ha) in 1. 2), and the first character is certainly distinct from the ar. Mutallu, § 31 : the
position of the words ' unto his son (?) ' is difficult, as they usually precede the proper name to which
they relate : bar{?), perhaps Aramaic ' son ' (?), § 89. but possibly Professor Sayce's suggestion ' chief
is right : nevertheless a-b[a)-n-f{(J) seems to mean ' thy father' rather than ' with you ', especially as the
verbs in 1. 2 are in the plural. Tesup-id(?)-r, § 33, 7io/c.
1. 2. Kar, as is mentioned in s^ 88, might be referred to an Indog. kar- ' praise', 'mention . It
occurs twice in this line, and again in M ix, 5 ' a great tablet (?) : kar-m (or kar-u-ni) {u)ir-r-a ... of our
commemoration they have joined '(?)■ On m-ni-u, m-n-ii, see § 88: are we to see in the -i-n the
distinction ' their memorial ' ? T(a)-k-n, cf. TA. 4 san-r-a Ha)-k-}i(<J) ' they have made [a feast ?] ' : or
should the words be divided san-n-si f-am[l) k-n-zi ' they made . . ., they came ' ? Niii-zt, note to M ix, 4.
1. 3. ' Ally Vwe' ' our allies', § 67, iiofe. The fifth sign is doubtful, and gives cause to alternative
translations. Amras may very probably be the same name as Amris (Ambaris), the king of Tabal
in the time of Sargon, who was the son of that Hulli who was set on the throne of Uassurme by
Tiglath-Pileser. If this be so, then our Amras was probably king of Tabal also, an ancestor of
these, and since Lalli was king of Tabal at least between 854 and 837, we must count Amras, who
was a contemporary of Benhadad, as the predecessor and perhaps father of Lalli. Noticeable is it
on M xvi that Benhadad and three other kings invite (apparently) Lalli to alliance, calling him ' son
of the ally of our fathers '. Amras provides the stone of his country for the stela, which is actually
112 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
of dolerite. Professor Sayce suggested 'stone', 'wood', 'brick' for the ideographs in this passage,
and doubtless he was partly right. I am doubtful about ni}' reading 'countr}-', for the sign has taken
a curious form, if correctl}' drawn.
1. 4. M-n-u-k-n-an, i.e. uiim-kan-an, § 33, iiofc. R-u-zi, 31XI plur. impf of V i\ see note to ar-nis
translation of M xxi, 1. 2.
1. 5. r-n-iiii-n, i.e. ni-)uiii(^), accus. of a noun from the root r as in preceding note?
1. 6. A-lj-iiii, also Restan 2, and perhaps M lii, 5, ist sing. perf. from V Ij ('great'). In the name
Aliii\l)-}iis I have doubtfully suggested that the Hittites read their sign for 'brother' as aim fas in
Assyrian, and as is apparently' suggested b}' the causative formation, § 73 {a)). But the proper form in
Hittite for the name Ahuni, the chief of Bit-Adini is apparently Hunu, Huni (M lii, i, note); and yet
possibly' a similar form to Ali!i{l)-uis occurs on M xxiii, .\ 2 (q.v.) as Alju{l)-it-iiis. R-k-)\ apparently-
Vrk + r (impf.). The root rk occurs possibly in r-k-r, M xi, 5 ; in r-k-ii, M lii, 2 (. . title (?) B-r-k iiiii-ii
an-n(a), Tesup-mi-ti[a) r-k-n ?-B[a)-iiiii, &c. ... ' Bark, we are adopting as our son : Tesupmina we }'k(?),
Banin,' &c.) : similarly i--k-n-i\a) 'we rk thee' (new Jerabis) ; r-k-ii{a) in M viii, b, 4(?): r-k-ni-t, M lii, 5,
I can only suggest that it may be the impf of the root from which ar-k ' to swear (?) ' comes (§ 88, and
the translations of Restan 2, and M v, vi). On r-ii see note to ar-nis, translation of M xxi, 1. 2.
M xvi, A, the slab from Malatia {Aiilid): .sculptured with two men in a
chariot hunting a Hon with a clog : apparently imitated from the style of iVssur-
na.sirpal. (See § 87.) Date, second quarter of the ninth century.
(i) Mi-iii-a /niy/jitQyii-e-Ni (or, /r{?)-/iu(?)-//-///-s) rcsup-id(i)-r "?-s "?-s
We Irhulina(?), Benhadad, ?-s, ?-s
fe{?)-/ii-?i (or />) 7\a)-bal-' place '-inn iii-iii : ' ally ' : ' ancestors '-///
send a message to {or greet) the lord of Tabal, the son of the ally of our ancestors,
(2) L(i/Q)-h\}) ' ally '-//(?) : ' ally ' :-[/'] b{a)-a ;///-///->(?)
'OLalli(?), our (?) ally, make alliance with us.'
Notes. 1. i. On the first part of 1. i, and the two parallel inscriptions (M xvi, c : Sayce, PSBA.,
xxvi, 1904, 23), see ^§ 18, 19: the texts of these two latter give in a similar (incorrect?) form the name
which I have ventured to emend to Irhulini(?), and the chiefs Gu-am (Giammu), Ar-am (Arame), and
some names which 1 cannot read. Certainly the text in PSBA. is another suggestion for alliance. On
/(■(?)/// see ^ 73. 1 have suggested Tabal as the equivalent for [?| ijv^ A (there is no question about
this reading from a comparison of the photograph and the same place-name on a new Jerabis text) ; we
know that the first character is i{a), the last character is the determinative for ' place ', and Tabal is a well-
known district in the region north-west of Assyria, near Malatia, in the cuneiform texts. If this is
correct we must see Tabal as the region of which Malatia (Milid) was the capital. On the latter
half of 1. I, see § 50. JP^ \\ (?) ' for which I have suggested Lal(^)-liC), Lalli being king of
Malatia at this period: the sign ^\\ lA;/ ?,/«?) is not common, except on seals, where it uccurs
so frequently as to suggest that it has the ideographic value ' seal ' (certainly on M xl, 14, 18 : xli, 2, 9 :
' Ok // is fairly plain on the photograph [Recueil, xvii, 25).
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 113
xlv, 6, 7 : and perhaps on the ' Tarkondemos ' Boss, M xlii, 9). This, however, may be only
a coincidence: it occurs otherwise in a name (^ /\ci£i ''^ ^'^^^^' ^' 4'- ^"*^ '" ^'^ -'^-'^-'^''' <Sayce's
corrections) appears what must be a name sP W (^J.'^^hich also occurs (?) in M hi, 2, where we
find yv C . The character also occurs in M xii, 5.
Now in the event of YY being the equivalent of ' seal ', inscribed on the seals above the name ot
the owner, we should see /aim the cuneiform with such a meaning, but the few instances which I can
find are by no means certain. (Al. r. i) (so many) CIS . SE sa-ar-m-as ina sunt ab-bi CIS . US IV I
(? possibly ma)<vn la-li-ia "^"Da-bi-il, &c. : (C i, 15I Ma-a-an LUGAL-its ■''"A-ri-in-na-az "'"Ha-at-tu-si-pa-
iz-zi nu """'GIS . PA la-li sir-ri-di-is-sa-an hal-za-i-kisQ) : cf. also the causative from ///: (A ii, 10) uii-mii
'"Lab-ba-ia-an EGIR-pa hat-ra-a [i^-t[ii] amel as-sit-mi-ia li-li-wa-[a]li-ljii-u-an-zi, and (A i, 14) iiu-iii-ii
li-il-IiH-iva-i Nl-an SAG 'DU-si. The first mentions ' in the name of my father ' followed by lalt-ia :
the last suggests ' sealing oil for her for her head '. But the whole matter is doubtful.
M xvi, B. An alliance-feast scene from near Malatia, with part of a hunting
scene similar to the above. The inscription on the hunting scene begins ////-"
' I am ' . . . ; the name o\'er one of the kings feasting is A-'^.-iui-s (Arame ??).
(B) The Irhulina Inscriptions.
The Hamath inscriptions: date, middle of ninth century. M iii, v,, found
at Haiuafh: from Irhulina to 'the chiefs of the king', recording an alliance.
(i) Tei^.ysan hit. --an saii-s "Ir-/jH-li-n{a)-s : ' ally ' :-// ;///-[//]-5
Saith Irhulina "unto the chiefs of the king, ' Make alliance with us.'
\Ai]i-ta-a-Jy place ' ' lord '-t{(i)-d\
[To(?) the lord of Hamath, the great]
(2) [/<?)-%) (or />) ?-^-?] w/-/ ' place '/-^-// nas-mi "''.-r-au-a-h-s-
[?-e-' hath said ] ' With the chief (?) of the lands I will . . . (?) the
' place ' ' place '-h-an-n-s
town of ?-ran, the great, our great city.'
{D kat-uii ii-iu-ii-au 'engrave' e-a resup-id(J)-}'-a-h iu-^\^q.q(?) . . .
I our covenant am engraving with Benhadad the great . . .
M iv, \, found at Ha mat//. Similar to the above, except the change of two
names.
{i) Tc{'^)-san hu;-an sans "Ir-Iju-Ii-n{ii)-s : ' ally " :-// ;///-//-x
Saith Irhulina unto the chiefs of the king, 'Make alliance with us.'
VOL. LXIV. Q
114 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
Ani-ta-a-li-' place ' ' lord '
To (?) the lord of Hamath the great
{2) -t{d)-a teiJ)-b{(i){Q)X ir) ?-^-? w/-/ ' place ' ;-^-/; nas-iiii "AyiJ)-maii{})-
?-e-? hath said, ' With the chief (?) of the lands I will ...(?) the town of
a-h-nas-c-a-' place ' ' place '-h-aii-iias
Arman (?), the great, our great city.'
(3) kat-nii ii-iii-ii-aii 'engrave' e-a Tal{J)-h ^w-5-' place '
I our covenant am engraving with Tal(as ?) the chief of Horns (?)
M iv, B, found at Hinnat/i. Similar to the above, except the change of a
name.
(i) TeQ)-saii lju:-au sau-s "Iy-Jni-U-u{a)-s •/ oWy' -.-h iiii-7i-s
Saith Irhulina unto the chiefs of the king, 'Make alliance with us.'
A ni-f{a)-a-/j-' \or6.'
To(?) the lord of Hamath the great
(2) -f{ci)-a te {J)-b{a) (or ir) ?-^-? iiii-t ' place ' ;-e-lt nas-nii B{a)-s-h-i'-
?-e-? hath said, ' With the chief (?) of the lands I wall ...(?) the town of
a-h-nas-' place ' ' place '-h-nas kaf-nii n-m-ii-aii
Tel Bashar (?) the great, our great city.' I our covenant (am engraving
with So-and-so).
Restau (Sayce, PSBA., xxxi, 1909, 259). From Bar-?-s to Irhulina, recording
an alliance.
(i) Te{J)-saii "Ir-hii-U-u{ci) Bar-}-s [: ' ally ' :-//] b{iT)-a iiii-ii-s A iii-t{n)-a-h-
Saith Bar-^s unto Irhulina, ' Make alliance with us.' With (?) the
' place ' ' lord '-/(«)-« -i
lord of Hamath the great ,
(2) iiii-N{a) ID-san-n{ci) teij) ?-^-? }ui-\j'\-a ID
we have accepted (?), we have signed (?). ?-e-? hath said ' Before the altar
a-Ii-iiii 'god'-r-^ ai'-k-mi l-l-e-t{ii)
(which) I made by the god(s) I have .sworn (?) thy pledges (?) '.
M x\,fyoin Hamath. This begins in the same way as the Restan text, but
the remainder is much mutilated. L. 2 has apparently the name Kat-t-e, and
ends with ii-tn-iii-e vn-y-a /j;-s-n{a) ' god'-r-e ar-k-iii 1-c-l (3) a-ii ' god '-r-e ar-k-n-as
Pan-ani-nii e{J)-IiiJ) }-iiii l-e-mi K-r-a-u-h, &c., ' covenants before his chief(s) by
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 115
the god(s) we swore : ?-e-?, who by the g-od(s) hath sworn to us (andj Panammi
. . . Kirri, the chief," &c. There is a possibihty of Bark's name in 1. 4 : on
Liimm (?) see below. M vi is continued by M v :—
(i) . . . ' god '-r-e ay-k MY)-y-a ' god ' ' tablet '-mi fe{})-san-iiii ID-k-nii ?-^ . . .
... by the gods Irra(?) hath sworn ' By my god X I promise I will fight.' . .
(2) ... an mi-e-a ID-mi }-an ' engrave ' •'Li{});n-r-n-ii />-?/ ir ?-/'
. . . with me ; I have signed (?) our . . . Li(?)'urnu hath engraved ? ?
(3) ... // an e-a //(?)/ ka mi li na ini-t h{J); ka nas ? ?
with us (?) ' with
(4) . . . // ' god '-h-n "Nis-t nisQ)-u te(^)-r-a teQ)-san-mi ID-mi . . .
... by our great god, to Nist their son (?) they have said, ' I promise I will
sign(?)'. ..
Notes. It will be seen that these inscriptions are either to or from Irhulina, who was ruler of
Hamath in the middle of the ninth century. The opening phrases present several problems,
notably the explanation of the preposition fa. As will be seen, in the first three the Maya 'with' is
lacking before minis, but it is put in in the other two : and although we might assume the translation
of the first three to be ' Said Irhuhna to the chiefs of the king, " Make alliance with us, the lord of
Hamath the great," ' it is impossible in the other two texts, unless we consider that Irhulina is again
the nominative which is contrary to the case-endings. I cannot do more than to leave the matter
doubtful : possibly M vii might throw some light on it, as the text actually runs : ' ally ' :-// a iiii-iiis f{a)-a ;
but the lost b{a) may be merely a scribal error. 'Against' (§80) would demand historical confirmation.
For c h nas mi, cf. M xlvi, which begins mi-a e-h-nas-mi ID-k-m, but it does not seem probable that
we should 'have a proper name in the Hamath text here. Moreover, a verb (?) nasta occurs in Hittite
cuneiform : EGlR-an-ta na-as-ta •'"'Ija-ln-ga-tal-la-at-ti-in am-me-el-la ' thereupon thou didst ... thy
messenger ..." (A i, i8j.
The name of the town -ran should give the syllabic value for the first character, but I know of
none to fit, except Harran, which is not likely. The character may perhaps be seen in the chiefs name
in M vii. The parallel places in the two similar inscriptions are Ar(?)-man(?) ( = Aleppo?) and Bashar,
which might be Tel-Bashar (see my article PSBA., xxxiv, 1912, 70). In M iv, a, 3, Tal may perhaps
be compared with Talas of the Carchemish texts. In Restan i I cannot identify Bar-'^-s (see ^ 73) :
on nii-7i{a) see § 75. The ideogram which I have translated 'altar' has something of the appearance
of certain large stones found near Hittite sites, with cavities hollowed in the surface, which might
perhaps have been altars. On ar-k see § 88 : on ' pledges (?) ', § 67.
Li(?);-u-r-n-u, which seems to have every indication of being a proper name, both from its syntactical
position and the'tangs on two of the characters composing it, occurs again similarly in M vi, 4: and it
exactly coincides with the name Liburna, occurring also as Lubarna, a king of Patinai, in the cuneiform
inscriptions of Assurnasirpal. A Lubarna occurs also as king of the Patinai in the later years of
Shalmaneser: and since'the Patinai are included in the Hittite coalitions of his earlier campaigns, we
may at once consider that there is some evidence for regarding the Hittite Li(?l;-urnu as the same as
the Liburna of the cuneiform. /./(?) backwards appears to call attention to the proper name.
In this case we come to the interesting equation for the sign which I have represented as ';'
throughout this article, that ';' = the Assyrian b, or quite probably something like a digamma or it'.
An examination of its occurrence in the grammatical phrases of the hieroglyphs shows how probable
this is : —
Q2
ii6 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
(1) The probable equivalence of gu;-a (M i) [and gii(?};-c-u, M vii, 2?) with gii-'iii-a (M x, 6|, and
gu-'m-ii[a) (M xxxiii, 2), is so far evidence that ';' ma}' be the variant of;;/ (= iv).
(2) In M X, 2 //// is used for a plural of // in Ijii IX ' chiefs of the Nine ' (cf 11. 4, 6|. But we also
find /i;)i-as IX-a-c followed by ar-c (a plural participle ?|, M lii, 2 (the form occurs apparently in M xxi, 4)
while the singular is undoubtedly // /A'( ?)-«-£-, M ix, 5. This would certainly add evidence to the view
that ';"= udv).
(3) Additional possibilities may be found in the name l-;B{a)-itin for which I have hazarded the
comparison Ilu-ibni, a very doubtful point (M lii, 2, §4i,;/o/f): Mu-tal; [ = Mii-tal-n>l, § 31): Bar-Iji; or
Bar-hi simply (for Bar-Haya ?, § 73).
(4) Hittite cuneiform shows (i) a final iwi : I2) a medial iva. The instances of (il point so much to
the wa in these cases being a separate particle (a-Ija-ti-iva Al r. iq, a-pa-a-as-iva Y 29 alongside of
a-pa-a-sa Y 16, 20, a-iif-ti-wa Y 42, i-id-din-K'a Y21I that it is better to draw our evidence from (2) where
there is less confusion. Cf. a-iia ab-l>i-iiia{ = a'a)-irt-hi-(Vi ('unto thy fathers ?'), A ii, 5, kab-bn-KHi-at-tin
Y 19: particularly in ii-nn-te-es beside tt-nu-tva-an-ia in o-ita I CIS BANSUR . . . ki-i ii-iiii-k-cs fa-a-i
(Y 1:26] and / CIS BANSUR n-uii-iva-nn-fa a-na AN . UT (a-a-i (Y ;-. 34) ' Give (up) to one table . . .
as thy (?) linn' and 'Give one table as thy iiiiu to Shamash.' Still more noticeable are the forms
liu-{u)-i-b(i}i)a (D 14 : E 12), /iii-i-b{iii)(!-oi!-/a (D 19), Ijii-iva-aii-fi (Y 9), hu-ii-ma-an (A i, 6, 7, 10 : Y 8 (?), 15),
liu-u-ma-aii-ta (A i, 26), which are all from the root // ' great '. It seems not improbable that this inserted
zi'a indicated a plural sometimes, and the two forms iii-im-iii-ica-aii-zi (K 4) and sii-iiii->ii-an-zi (K 5) seem
to show that it may be inserted or left out at pleasure in this case at least. The forms tn-cl (Y 2, 10),
u-if (A i, 24), kit-in (A i, 13 : Y 7, but cf kit-iva-bi Y 25, kii-iM-bi-ia Y ;-. 26) show that a digamma is not
needed in these cases.
The sign ';' is so often represented after an ideogram that there is much reason in the explanation
of Peiser that it marks an ideogram, or of Sayce that it marks a plural. But M xxi, 2 apparently
shows an instance where it begins a word.
(C) The Inscriptions from Carchemish : about the middle of the ninth
century.
M ix. A broken inscription containing details of an alliance, mentioning
Shalmaneser (?), Panammi (?), Targu-ras, Talas, Kate, and Bat.
(i) 7e{})-a-san{//) ..-as ".SV//(?)-///'r?//(?) 5^w yV7//-w/-5-' place ' ' country '-5-///^?
Saith . . -as : Shalmaneser (?), king of Nineveh, the lord of lands,
' god '-/j-/c "Pan- mi sans a-b{ii) . . .
like (by) a (the) great god : Panammi (?) the king with . . .
(2) ... san-t(a) nia-/j-n{a)-nis ' god'-7argn-rs "Sn/(?)-n/an(?) san A7n-m/s-' place'
. . . son(?) of our great lord, Targu-ras, Shalmaneser (?), king of Nineveh,
////-'chief "Va/s 'ally';-/- .• /D-n a-l){a)-f{a) san-ni-
chief of lords (and) Talas as allies have accepted. With thee I will do
(3) t{a) nis-h-ni-f{a) : /jat{})-i's ii-bia)-r-a-f{a) nis-zi
it {oy act with thee) : I will make sonship with thee : . . . will take (?) thee as a
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 117
////-/ .- //// ' ally '-ii-ni iy-y-a-t{a) ' ally ^-zi-t{a) : ?-e-s-k uii-ni . . sciJi . . .
son with me : our allies will join thee in thy alliance : ?-esk we will accept . . .
(4) ... a-an-t-mi : Kat-t-e : iiis-e a-aii-t-iiiu B(a)-t nis-e
... [as a son] hath counted me : Kate as sons hath counted us : Bat as sons
a-au-t-iiin :'^.-aay-e Kat-ii-a-ii-t ' goA'-Targu-r-zi :"Snl{'^)-iiian{?)
hath counted us : ... the Katnai are joining ( ?j with Targu-ras, Shalmaneser (?)
(5) 5^7// A7//-//^/-' place '-j/ ////-' chief "Tal-zi : 1-h : h IXQ)-a-e
king of Nineveh, chief of lords, (and) Talas. . . . ?, the chief, a chief of the
a-k-f r-s-t{a) 1-k-ui ' tablet '-//
Nine (?) hath come : he will join (?) thee (?) against our enemy : a great tablet (?)
kay-u-ui ir-r-a . . k . . . :
of our commemoration (?) they join (?) . . .
Notes. 1. i. The name of the writer may possibly be a form of that which occurs on a new
.Jerabis inscription ^^VjIIi/^^f''^ ?-«5, but I do not think it likely. On Shalmaneser, ^ 51. It seems
possible that the ' great god ' may be an expression for the Sun-god. Shalmaneser, in his inscriptions,
calls himself 'king of multitudes ... the Sun of multitudes' |0b. 15 ff.: Mon. i, 5: but cf. M xxi, 3).
On the possibility of Pan-mi sans being the same as Pan-am-mi san see § 56. By the time that
this inscription was written Kalammu bar Haya had presumably been helped by the Assyrians, and
Panammi had become a friend of Assyria also.
1. 2. On ina-li-n(a) ' our great lord ' see § 44. Talas may be the chief of Am-s, i. e. Homs (?l, M iv,
.\, 3. The ideogram of a closed hand appears to mean ' to accept ' especially in alliance or adoption.
It occurs particularly noticeably in the epithet of Barl?|-hi (§ 73I ' his accepted (adopted) brother'. We
find it once in a new .Jerabis inscription ^^ o^ QQDQ I ^^^ ID; a-san-n-:i: ' they have accepted '.
For the phrase 'I will act with thee' (or similar), see TA 4 : for ' I will make sonship ', § 73. On
[lai-r-s see § 92. The word !i-bia)-r-a-f{a) is difficult ; it occurs once again on a new Jerabis inscription
as a verb undoubtedly, of the form ic- (^ 72). The problem is to discover the root : is it /!>(«)-;- [which
I admit is tempting from its apparent similarity to the Indog. b/icro ' to bear'], or is it simply b(a) ? The
pros and cons appear to me to be as follows : —
U-b{a)-r-a-t{a) [like ir-r-a-t{a)l] may be of the form t-c-r-a (the root with r-a added for the plural), and
if we are to see a plural (or collective) in the two nouns which precede each, then the question of root
is practically solved. Now the root b[a) (or b{a)-ir) is found with and without the augment a, and, as in
the case of u-b[a)-r-a-t{a), the meaning appears to be certainly ' bring ', ' take '. I believe, however, that
any Indogermanic comparison would be misleading, and that we must see in it the root b{a), more
particularly because of the common root pa in Hittite cuneiform, which apparently means the same.
It is peculiarly strange that no discovery of a sign for / in the hieroglyphs has resulted from our
investigations: and it is certainly noticeable that the number of roots in Hittite cuneiform which can
be definitely stated to be spelt with p is (as far as the te.xts published up to now show) exceedingly
small, and, if we except proper names, can probably be reckoned on the fingers of one hand. But
there is one such root which is very frequent in its forms, the root pa, in which I am much inclined
118 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
to see our root %), on the assumption that the sign for bin) could be used for />{a) on occasion (like bit
and pu in Assyrian). If the occurrences be compared, the meaning will be obvious :—
(M xxxiii, 2)
ico\o^^^^ K<p^\^ 'cO>^^ -c^icC A'^^AcD||icj|ofo ic|[j
= .• n-b{a)-ir :gii-m-n{d) : ' tablet '-72{a)-s :' ally ' ■.-[i-s : fe(?) s-e-t(a) : t{aya : lui-t ' wood ' ; " T{a)-a-iias : fe(?)-iin
b{a)-ir-t{a) l!at(^)-ir-c-)tii:c-a-f{a) ' wood ' "T{aya-;iiii-ii{a) ' Our tablet of making alliance bringeth a gift (?) :
th}- letter did speak concerning (?) Tyanian wood. I have commanded (that) my ...(?) should bring
(it) thee ; with thee is the Tyanian wood ! ' (or similar translation, see translation to M xxxiii). A-b{ayir
occurs again on 1. 7, and in M xxxii. 2, 4.
In cuneiform we find the following forms: pa-i-nii Y 43 : pa-at-ta C ii, 2, pa-a-at-ta Cii, 6:
pa-a-it Y r. 10 : pa-i'i F, 2 : S i, 10 : Y 16 : pa-a-n Y r. 12 : pa-n Al. 11 : pa-iz-zi F i, 3 : L 3 : S i, 12 :
Liv. i, 13 : pa-is Y 11 : pa-a-ir Y 22 : Z ii, g: pa-a-nii W 19 : ttppa-ah-hi A i, 18 : iippa-{ali]-hii-nii A i, 15,
28. The meaning appears in Y r. 12 (Such-and-such) pa-a-ii ku-is "'"imtskiiiii nn-ut-ta I LU pa-a-ii
' . . . bringeth ; as a gift(?) a poor man to thee I sheep bringeth ', and W igiiam-ma i-na iiidti alt mi-ra-a
pa-a-itii ' I brought tiaiiiina (a covenant?) into the land of Mira(?) '. The causatives in Ai are also trans-
lated similarly.
I am therefore inclined to eliminate the possibility b{a)-r, and see only b(a) = pa as the root. (For
gu-'vi-Ji[a) see notes to the translation to M i, p. 123.)
1. 4. A-an-t-iiii, § 32. B{ayt occurs TA 5. The translation is difficult : the phrase ' to set [an] as
a son ' occurs on TA 4 and perhaps M x, 6 : 'to set as an ally', M xi. 2. The Kat-n-a-ii-t are, I presume,
the tribe of Katnai, east of the Euphrates, to the south-east of Bit-Adini.
1. 5. I cannot suggest an3'thing for the chief's name, but see notes to M viii : for the abbreviation
for the Nine see §64. A-k-t is the perfect of the root k 'to go'. On r-s-t see translation to M xxi,
note on ar-nis. The sign ^^1 indicating ' fighting ' or ' hostility ', is to be distinguished from ^--^ci£J,
particularly in M x, and may be exemplified by the following quotations : —
^^ appears as an epithet after two chiefs' names in M x, 4, 6; and also with the prepositions
k-n [ID-k-u-in 'for m}' enemy', 1. 7, and k-nt, as here) and a-b{a) (1.8); while in the line preceding a-b{a)
is used before ' all}' '. This would appear to fix its meaning as ' enemy ', and we can apply it to the
other cases : (TA 3) s-r-a ID : I-k-n-ni : k-mn c-a-t[a) ' They have written, " Against my (? or should it be
emended to 11, ' our ' ?) common foe I will go with thee " ' : (TA 4) s-r-a : kat-ii : t-e : 1; ID-a-ar ' They
have written, " We are of one speech (or intention) against (?) a foe " ' : (TA 5) .• ka/-n : 1 ; ID-a-ar ' We
are one against (?) a foe ' : (M lii, 2), various chiefs of the Nine .• f{a)-a ID ; N-ka : A-iiin-tii'iy place '
: nis-ii : ' aWy ' ar-e 'against the enemy of Nks of Aninna (Adinna), their son, have joined alliance':
[lb. 3) .• san-r-a 'ally' ID-K^.vk-n 'they have made alliance against a (common?) foe'. A new Jerabis
^° K P RA •• k:-a-mi t\a)-a ID /Vo-/-^?/-' place '
inscription gives ^'^ "j-j ^^^
' I will march against an enemy of Tabal '. (I ha\e accidentally' drawn the foot the wrong way round.)
On tiic other hand when ^-^ k is added, a verb appears to be intended. (M v, i) ' god '-r-c ar-k
Ir(?yr-a 'god'-l-mi te(?ysan-mi ID-k-mi ' Irra(?) hath sworn (?) by the gods, " By my god ... I have
promised I will fight." ' A similar phrase occurs in M xxi, 4, 7. M x is full of indications of its meaning
(see the next translation) ; ID-k-in ' I will fight ' occurs in M xii, t, 2 and 3, 2. M lii, 4 gives .• i(aya ?-?san
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 119
.- lD-k-u{a) 'against ?-?, the king, we will fight.' [The e=£] k ma_y possibly be dropped in M Hi, 3 nis-u:
a-san-ni ID, but the sense is difficult, and not much stress can be laid on this, for the words suareest an
emendation of the copy in Messerschmidt to the ' hand ' (alliance) sign.] The meaning for p q
is probably, as Professor Sayce suggested, ' a tablet ' ; certainly M x.xxiii, 2 bears this out (but see
p. 74, note) : possibly kar-ii-ni is ' our commemoration, record ' in accordance with the root kay discussed
in the notes to the translation of M ii. «.
M X. A stela from Carchemish, with a figure of a king in hioh relief
holding- a staff. From the translation given below it appears to be an inscription
from Shalmaneser (?) ' the king of Assyria ' to Targu-(ras), (king of Carchemish ?j,
treating of alliance.
(i) Te{J)-/n SnlQ)-nia>i{}) sail ^5--/;'-' place '-' country ' ' country '-//m ' god'-'Jargit
Shalmaneser (?), king of Assyria, lord of lands, sendeth a
' brotherhood 'sa/i
message to (greeteth) Targu(-ras ?) : ' Alake {or making) brotherhood
(2) a-b{a) saii{}i) ID-k S-s-1 ' god '-' sun "-' king ' BarQ)-k
against (with) one making war(:) against Sas- . . ., (and) [Samas-sarri, Chemosh-
//// IX-si
melek] (and) Bark(?), the chiefs of the Nine,
(3) 'god '-7}?;'^// 'ally'-///// l-ii-t{n) ID...
Targu(-ras ?) is my ally ; ?-nt (is) a foe . . .
(4) ••• ID-k saii-ii }-nr Ij IX ID
[with him] we will fight {01% do thou fight) : ?-ar, a chief of the Nine (is) a foe :
(5) ' brotherhood '-// IX kat-t{ii) \(i\-h{a) ■ ■ kar
. the Nine have made brotherhood. Do thou with ... a commemoration (?)
(6) saii-iii : uis : a-aii-zi JVI-l-k-k h IX ID gu-in-a
make (for) me. They ha\'e set as a son M-kak, a chief of the Nine, a foe. Gifts
(7) li-iTi a-iriii-s ID-k-ii-iii ij-b{a) ' all}- ' : . . .
[between (?) us (?) have been (?) exchanged (?)], (so) against my enemy with
alliance {or with friend) . . .
(8) ... a-b{a) ID : ID-k saii-n
[let us join] : with a foe we will fight {or, do thou fight).'
I20 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
Notes. 1. i. Te{l)-li!, § 73: As-ii; § 51. As far as can be seen in this text, which is written in an
abbreviated fashion, 'Targu' is an abbreviation for the Targu-ras of the other Carchemish inscrip-
tions ; at an}' rate it obviously cannot refer to a god here. This hieroglyph of making blood-brother-
hood occurs in this text onl}', as far as I know : there is a shortened form (see sign-list, no. 82) : it is
difficult to see whether it is an imperative, participle, or even finite verb.
1. 2. Ab(a) is almost certainly ' with ' from § 40, but 1. 8 shows the meaning ' fight with ' ; the
sense of 1. 2 may be either ' Make alliance together with any one making war against XX ', or ' Making
alliance against any one hostile, (namely) XX '. S-s-1 is a difficult^' ; the last character occurs in M xi, 4
where the group maj' be a name ?-a/;-;// (see translation to M xi). 'The-Sun(?)-is-king', the equivalent
of so man}- Semitic names, occurs (?) on TA 4, where he is apparently the ruler of Amk.
1. 3. The group at the end of this line is apparently a name ending in -ii-t{a) ; its first character
occurs as an ideogram (?) in TA 4, 7, 8. The onl}' name in the Ass^'rian texts which I can find at all
comparable is Bur-a-na-te of the Yasbukai who joined the earlier coalition against Shalmaneser in the
time of Sangar (§ 24), but as he was captured, it is unlikely that this is his name. Hence there
is no probability that this character reads bur.
1. 4. I cannot identify this chief's name. For kar saii-iii, see the notes to M ii (p. 1 11) : it may be
either ' I will make a commemoration ', or 'do thou make for me '.
I. 6. For the chief's name cf M xi, 5. Gu-'ni-a, notes to translation to M i (p. 123).
1. 7. Li-au a-aiii-s, a difficult phrase. Li occurs in M xxxiii, 1 and the Bogtcha stela (which must
probably be thus emended) ' . . . greeteth li-n s-f(a) " Make alliance with us ".' Are we to translate this
li-ii s-t{a\ 'unto us thou didst write', seeing in the //the postpositive preposition -/ so common in
cuneiform ? [Examples are : Many cities names in C i, e.g. "'"la-ti-il: fit-c/(2nd pers. pi. of the pronoun),
A i, 24, Y 2, 10: D 5 : ii-!// (3rd pers. pi.) A ii 4, 6, 8: Y passim.] a-am-s (also M xxxiii, 4) should clearly
be an augmented tense of the verb, but I cannot offer any suggestion for the termination -sunless it be
that of a middle or passive voice, as is suggested by r-s-zi ' they will join ' middle voice from ■//■? See
notes to translation to M xxi and the possible form san-Ji-st(a) (§ 69) ; a-ain-nis occurs on M vii, 2,
where ' have exchanged (with) us ' (or similar) is a possible rendering.
M xi. A column from Carchemish ; of which one semi-circumference is
engraved, the other apparently having been shorn away to make room for a
full-faced carving of a Hittite(?) figure (god or king) with the distinguishing
guilloche below. It is possible that later inhabitants of Carchemish, having
no respect for the ancient mention of As.syria or alliances therewith, used the
column, which came as a present from some ' Assyrianizing ' king, for their
own purposes.
(i) (Mention of largu-i'as))
(2) ... //( ?) /'(?) san-e a-b{a) : "Pau-am-ini Bavi^yhi ' swear '-3/ ^?-^
. . . ' ... kings, with Panammi (and) Bar-Haya(?) have sworn the pledges (?)
"Sii/{J)-uiaiiQ) .w// ^.?-;'-^7-' place '-' country ' 'allyW a-au<i ' lord '(?)-///
of Shalmaneser (?), king of Assyria ; as an ally they have set [my(?)
n{a)-zi u-ni-n-c "?-?-/'-<'7 nis-Ji{a){^)i/ e . . .
lord (?) with (?) us (?)] : the covenants of . . . ra (a chief), our (?) son, ...
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 121
(3) ... Targ/t-\j'^\iii "Su/{l)->uaii{?) j-*-/// .A 7//-///-' place' ////-'chief S/aiiO-aui-
. . . Targ-u-ra.s, Shalmaneser (?), king of Nineveh, chief of lords, Manam (?),
s-/j Tal-s Kai'-s-aiu-iui {or Kar-aiu-iui-s) iiis ?-iu-e u-iu-ii-c : a-t(a)
the chief, Talas, Karsammi the son of ?-me, cox'enants have given :
' lord '-/// '^-a-c-iii nia-iii tcQ); ?-;/' t-ii-zi k-k . . .
[my lord(?), . . ., my master] saith '. . . with you go . . .'
(4) . . . s san-zi ID-Ii ' .swear ' Ar-aui h K-as-k uii-r-a
. . . they have made [. . ., the chief]. Aram, the chief of Kaski, hath sworn before
'god'-// kcrf-s ? ///>-/' ? /){(j){?) /// ;/(a) k ///// "K-v-a-lj
the great god (that) he . . . Kirri, the chief,
ID; kat-ii "Bar{?)-k-Ij a-t"
hath sent a runner (^) (that) 'We (and) Bark, the chief, have spoken (?) with
"?-(V/-//i kaf-s lVI(Vi{})-nni . . .
(or, the father of) ?-anni : he (and) Manam (?) . . .'
(5) . . . ktr/ ID-li ii-jii-u K-r-a-lj : iiii-iii : ' s\\'ear ; '?-//
...[..., the chief] the covenant of Kirri, the chief, hath accepted(?). ?-u
kat-s Mi^-k-k : /d'(?) ;'-/'-/' c/-// (numeral) 'tablet ' Tal-as
hath sworn (that) he (and) Mi-?-k-k {or Mi-? will come) Talas
U-s-Taj'gu-nis : ID ka-s-t{a) a-t\a) 1-e ' brother '-r/ .. i' . .
the son of U.s-Targu, a feast (?) . . . they have given ... as a brother . . .
Notes. 1. 2. On the beginning, see § 52. For ' the}' treat as an ally ', cf. M ix, 3 ' take thee for
a son '. For "?-?-;--« perhaps read ' (the covenants) of . . ? " engrave " (?) + r-a they have engraved (?) '.
1. 3. ' Manam (?| the chief : Manam (?) occurs on a new Jerabis inscription.
1. 4. For the first ideogram, see TA 5, 7. ' Aram of Kask ' is discussed in § 30 : Tiglath-Pileser I
includes the Kaskai among the Hittites (Cyl. II, 100). The sign after kaf-s is doubtful, but is not
man (?). K-r-a = Kirri, §§ 9, 27 : the tang on the a is probably to mark it as a personal name rather
than to add a case-ending. This is the only place which I know for the character of the two legs
running. At" ma}' be a verb : if it be the augmented tense of \^/, I would suggest \^te ' to say ' for it.
' Father' (p. 99) is, however, a possibility. It would be tempting to read Bar-kig) as G-^r/r = Gabbaru,
of la'di, but as Panammu was also king of la'di, it is impossible. The name ?-«//;;/' occurs on a new
Jerabis inscription.
1. 5. Mini, § 75. The name J/i-?-[k-k] is difficult : it might perhaps be compared to M-l-k-k M x, 6.
R-k-r apparently occurs as a word M ii, 6, q.v. The ideogram of two heads facing each other over
a vessel would almost suggest the meaning 'feast' ; it occurs again, e.g. M xxiii, c, i, so as to leave
little doubt that it is one group.
Al xv,B. A stela from Carchemish, sculptured with a representation of a
king feasting (my corrections made from the stone in 1911).
(i) ..."SaN(ii)-{ir)gay-s Bar^tyiiit iiiu[n) //' country ' ///r/(?) ui-ii-s : Smi-gar-s
. . . Sangar, son of Barhu 0), the chief, lord of lands, son of Sangar,
VOL. I.XIV. R
122 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
(2) "N'-k-s k-a-ii saii-s N-ka-k-n kat-s u-u kat-u-ii
(and) Nks the friend (i*) of the king. For Nks he unto (?) them (?)
(3) :"Pan-aiu-}ui ii-iii-ii s-u-ii : ir-r-a-ii-t :
Panammi an agreement I have written : they (?) will join you.
(4) . . tal(^)k ID-Jj ii-iii-ii s-ii-[^) u
?, the chief, an agreement I have written.
Notes. I cannot help thinking that there may have been more of the inscription to the right
over a figure of Ni<s.
1. I. On the identifications see § 3. On Barhu see § 73.
1. 2. For Nks see § 8. K-a-n, §§ 46, 88. Sans is the genitive of san, cf. § 52, 64, N-ka occurs
in M lii, 4, but the whole passage above is difficult ; the possibilities of reading the words kat-ii-s u-kat
ihu, or other permutation, make translation hazardous. For iiii 'to' see §§ 7, 77.
1. 3. S-ii-u, ^ 71 : ir-r-a-ii-t, see translation to M i.\, 3, and notes to xxi, 2.
1. 4. The last chief's name occurs on a new Jerabis inscription.
lyie siuallev pieces from Carclieinish M xii, i, part of a winged figure
.sculptured in the style of the date of Assurnasirpal, with a few characters : 2,
the place-name .)/-/-/'-' place', i.e. //^ -/-;', probably Pitru, described in Shalmaneser's
records as on the west of the Euphrates on the Sajur ' : M xv, a (i) . . .s . . am . .s. . .
[Pa/i]-mi snn-s ... (2) . . . a-b{a)-u paii{'^.) . . s . . s /ii{})-mn m-t-u : l-ii{a\aii : a-b{a)
' lord '■n{(i) . . . (3) . . . ii-m-ii-t-aii : mi-iii a- ...}.. . ii-t : . . . (4) . . . . f{a) . . : . .
(D) Various Inscriptions of the Hittite Allies.
M i. The bowl said to come from Abu Habba or Bab)'lon ; date, latter halt
of the ninth century. It is difficult to be certain where the inscription actually
begins, but apparently it is a dedicatory offering in commemoration of a cove-
nant between Irra, Bark, Targu-ras, and other chiefs, which was in the end
probably carried off as loot to Babylonia.
Te(?) Ir-r-a t{a) gii;-ii s-e-ii-mi {sxo) "Gu-ii-iias maii{l)-mu
Saith Irra, [Give(?) as a gift (?) my inscription (?) Gunnas, my...]:
s-e : ii-m-ii-c ' god'-'/}jroy/-r-r-s 'god'-S///{?)-e-s : mi-ni
the documents of the covenants of Targu-ras (and) Sul(?)es we(?)havc accepted(?)
kat;-a mai/{})-k-n{a) : ? :f((i)-s ?-' bowl '-Ji{a) ' god ' -Tesitp-k-ii ii-m-ii-aii a-t{a)-ir
a bowl for Tesup for our co\'enant hathgi\'en,
.• a-11 kat-mi : s-ni/{}) : a-b{a) Bav-k-u
which (covenant) I wrote(?) with Bark.
^ 'Ana-Assur-utir-asbot . . . which the Hatti call Pitru ' |0b. 38J.
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 12
Notes. It is a difficult text, parti}' because of its brevity. Irra is distinctly marked as a proper
name on M xxiii, 2, and possibly occurs on M v, i. Whether he is to be seen in the ir-r-eoi M vii, 2 ;
viii, 3, 4 is doubtful. T{a) is possibly the root ta ' to give', but the sense of this paragraph is unintelli-
gible to me.
Gu;-a { = gn-K<-a'^, p. 116) occurs perhaps in M vii, 2 ; _§-//(?);-c-z« (numeral?) ' tablet ' 5-c »-///■//■«;;,
&c. (see translation further on) ; and it seems quite possible that it is to be seen \ngii-in-ii{a) (=jyu-w-it{a)\
in M xxxiii, 2 : a-b[a)-ir : gii-'iii-ii{a) : ' tablet '-ii{ci)-s : ' ally ' :-//-.s- ; ' Our tablet of alliance bringeth a gift '
(see the full translation to M xxxiii, further on): perhaps ^//-';;/-rt, M x, 6. Gii-'m-iiia), as far as I can
see is the equivalent of the cuneiform ku-is, kii-i}i, &c., and the numerous cases in which it occurs point
to it meaning 'gift'; the forms ku-is, ku-in, indicate that it is hu-ivis, ku-iviii. Examples are (nom.) (A i,
22 ff.), ' Unto thee they . . . they give knsaia (dowry (?)) for thy daughter, my messenger (and) his(?)
messenger ' ; kii-is tii-el n-it a gift unto you ti-it (a verb) ' (cf. A ii, 14) : Y r. 12 kii-is "'"MASDA nn-iit-ta
I LU pa-a-u ' (as) a gift a poor man unto thee a sheep bringeth (?) ' : Liv. i, 13, XC)TU kii-is pa-iz-zi
' ten(?) shekels (as) a gift they bring (?)'. Accus. ku-in (A i. 13) ' I have sent(?) Irsappa my messenger to
thee a-Ji ina-ni DU . SAL-fi AN , UD-rni ku-in DA M-an-ni ii-iva-ta-an-zi ' that our ladyl?) thy daughter, to
m}' Sun-god as a present to wife they may give ' : (Y 7) DU.MES-ka ku-in SA.GA-in i-ia-aii-zi' thy sons
a gift land) goods they . . .'. Ku-if (Y 16, r. 8, &c.) may be apparentl}' a verb (cf. W 19 nu-iiiu ""Istar
belti-ia ku-it ka-ni-es-sa-an ' Unto me my lady Ishtar granted his (her) friendship (?) '). Ku-it-ki (Y ig, r. 39 ;
C ix, 4) is another form ; perhaps hi-na-an-za (Y 5, 6) ; ku-iva-a (Y r. 11), ku-wa-bi (Y 25, r. 26), ku-e ta-as
(A i, 17), ku-c ta-ni-ik-ki (Y r. 9) are possible forms of the same root. It seems, therefore, fairly clear that
the hieroglyphic gu-'niUv)-n{a} (the accus.) is the same as ku-in in cuneiform.
On s-c see § 32, nofr. N-ni-n, § 68. The name Targn-r-r-s occurs in the form Targu-r-r-s-c in
M xxxii, 2, and Targu-r-r . . in a new Jerabis inscription; the shorter form Targu-r-s, Targu-r-zi {and
even Targu simply?) on the Carchemish inscriptions published by Messerschmidt (is it the same
name as Tarhulara, chief of Gurgum, c. 740, p. 31?). For the next names cf (3§)
®
(oblique case), which occurs on a new Jerabis inscription : on the value of the god's name see § 53.
Mi-ni, § 75, and for the form, §69: it is more probable here than ini-ni-a 'we'. Kaf;-a occurs on
M xlvi, I. On an as a possible accus. from a-u 'who' see §83: on s-/w(?), § 71. Bark is a well-
known name on the Mar'ash and Carchemish inscriptions.
The Aleppo inscription, of which probably the best copy is that of
Professor Sayce in PSBA., xxxiii, 191 1, 227, is too mutilated for translation.
It mentions Tesup-id(?)-r (Benhadad).
The Inscription from Tel Ahiiiar. The text of this was first published by
D. G. Hogarth in \\\ii. Liverpool Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology, ii, from
squeezes taken by Miss Gertrude Bell : and when I was sent down with Mr. T. E.
Lawrence from Carchemish by the Trustees of the British Museum to Tel Ahmar,
I was able to make a direct copy of the inscription again trom the actual
stone, which shows that the published text needs correction in several places.
The stone was perfect a few years ago, but an Arab, being mad, claimed to have
read the Hittite inscription and broke the stone in order to obtain the treasure
which it concealed.
Tel Ahmar was the ancient Til Barsip which was occupied and colonized
by Shalmaneser, so that the Hittite inscription probably dates to the earlier
R 2
124 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
years of his reign or late years of Assurnasirpal. Among the names in the
inscription are Huni (Ahuni, the ruler of Til Barsip), IMutallu, Nistu, Giammu,
Bark, and Barhi (Bar-Haya ?), which date it fairly accurately.
(i) [ Lacuna ] . . ///-?-// //(?y place ' : ' lord '-/--//-.v "B-y-k-ar inii{ii)-s
[Saith . . . unto his lord X of] the country . . . : unto his lord Erk(ar), the son
:' ally ':' ancestors ' . . . [hiatus] . . . iiiaitQ) ar} ? Hit-iii-zi uiii{]i)-s :
of the ally of [our] ancestors to Huni (Ahuni) son of
Mu-tal;-a-li-s : ' ally ' : -// 6{a)-(r nii-//-s (j-b{a)-f{a) : te(})-fii ?-;/
Mutallu the great, ' Make alliance with us.' For thee we have commanded (?) [as
: ' ally ' : -//-? a-f" (?) .■ ' bowl \-inn{it)-s
a sign ?] of making alliance . . . our bowl
(2) ' god '- Tesup-s ' god '-ii-iii-s : ' lord '-/--//-// /V ' god '-Gnr-gii ?-aNh} : ' god "-?/ /r k
\ for Tesup, our god. Unto his lord | Gargu (of?) ?-ani-?, (proper
[ Unto his lord, Tesup, our god f
ka s ' god '-?-?-5 )'-cQ)-zi e-a : h-s-c-i/-' place ' ' god '-?-.s- . . . [hiatus] . . . ' god '-
names) of the country . . . ,
Targii-y-\r ?]-5-(? ?...■' place (?) ' .• ? ? ///// c ' god ' . . //'-/' . . .? 5 .? . . . [hiatus] . . .s tr-?
Targu-ras(?) lrk(ar?)... ?
////-/ a-l){a)-} . . fe(?) . . mi . . iii : ID : -mi-} (line ends)
with ? my (?)enemy
(3) ? .• ? .:/(?) /// . . f{a) //(?) . . //" . . m : ? ^?-?-' place " r-niii-ii . .'t . . i' . .c . . c . .} . .
? ? we asked (?)
zi ... [hiatus] . . . .• BavQ) ..Ijii... ;-({(i) s-r-n ID : I-k-ii-m
Barhu (?) ' . . . have WTitten ' Against my [sic) common foe
.• /'-///// t{a)-e-a "Gii-am ii{n) ....c[ Tesup ?]-?-[/']--^^ ••/''.. nis ..t..t.. i'-\s\-:;i-t{a) :
I will go with thee : Giammu (and) . . . (and) [Tesup-ras 'f\ will join thee :
(title ?) B{a)-)'-k k-zi (or n{ii) ?) .• ma-h-n-s '^-s-f t{a)-a : ID; N-y-
like Bark . . . {oy for Bark), our great lord thou shalt fight (?) against(?) ? ' Unto
(4) am-k-n 'god '- 'Sun '(?Ksv?// '^-as U-m-k
Naram (Naharaim ?) (the chief) ' The Sun (?) is king ', the ruler (?) of Amk
^^ \bar\, certain, but the group may not be Barhu.
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 125
"1-e "?-// .- fe{}) ' country '-^/ s-r-a
u-u u- A :> /4.U u- c\-i f (in the speech of the land ?) ) ,
(the chieO ?-e, (the chief ) ?-ii, j (in the land of . . . ?) J have written,
kaf-/i : t-c : I;ID-a-ay san-y-a t{a)-k-it{a)
' We are of one speech (mind) against a foe.' They have made [a feast ? ?],
ID..r : ? ID-k-n-s : ' ally ' -.-h-n :
an enemy . . . [saying] ' Against his foe let us make alliance ;
n{a)-zi : ID-]i{ii) ID-n{a) t-j\ = r-t ? ) a-an-t [or -an a-s-f ?] . . . [hiatus] . . .
among (with) us our . . . [he joineth ?] ; he hath set ... '
'^;-as ar-e : '^.;-iiii }-c nis-iiiii-k : "Nis-t-ii : a-an-t
joining [our ?] . . . my . . . (The chief) ?-e like my son (the chief) Nist hath set
' ally ' :-/// ar r-nin-t{a) : ' ally ' -.-h b{a)-a nii-ni-s
join(ing) my alliance. He (we) asketh(?) thee ' Make alliance with us.'
Q)-e sail U-s-'^. : a-b(a)-n-t{a) : san-n /{a) e . .? k ?/ ay-e ? t-k s-e-n
Alaketh (?)... Us-?( ?) ' With you we will act (towards you ?)'... joining (?)
(5) ... IDr..r .. f{a) . . nia-n{a)-n-n{a) : n-ni-n-an r-s-nii e-a B{a)-t : ' ally ' :
our lord : our covenant I havejoined(?) withBat : I have joined
ai'-nii : /in : -nii-::i : n-ni-n-an a-b{a)-f{a) : ?-// . . n-s . . .
alliance among (with, for) my nobles : our covenant (is) with thee : the chief ? . . .
[hiatus] . . . -c : ' ally (?) '-//-//// //-r/ .■ ID-n{a) : ID r;-nii ?-// ar-n-[s ?]
alliance (?) I have made among (with) them ; our ?, the chief, hath joined
. . . 'lis : kat-n : I; ID-a-ar a-b{ci)-t{ci) r-nin-n-i{a)
us (?) (saying) ' We are one against an enemy with thee : we ask (?) thee
: ' ally ' -.-h b{a)-a ini-n-s ID-a Jiii-f : '^-li : "l-ni-h{^) ' san-n
" Make alliance with us " the chief (and) ?-/«"(?) : let us act
c-a-tiii) : (title ?) B-r-k-k-n ?.--a : h-e-ei^)
with thee ' Unto Bark o-reat . . . s
(6) mi ...-?.• /// ///" /' II //(?) .• }-y-a : ini{})-f /(?)-/t-;^ ' bowl ' / s-n-::i
[together ?] a bowl [they have
(or //-5-.C7) ['god'] Tesup-k-n .■?.•? .• a-t{ii)-t : teQ) ? ...
inscribed ? oy, for our bowl] to Tesup ... he hath given
(7) ... a III : ' ally ' :-// in " ■ ■ ■ ^ [lacuna] . . . san-n-f{a) -/(a) .- ?; ay ' ally (?) ' ay
make alliance will act with thee
^ It cannot be the "1-iii-li of M xxi, i ?
126 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
/i-n{ii) e e t{ii) e tici) a t{a) ;////-//(<■?') ?-// /' it-si : ii-iii-ii-a-u
like ?, the chief, among them : our covenant
a-b{(.i)-t[ii) : IL);-k-ii-i]i : ai'-iiii t-s : (?) ' bowl ' ;-!iiii-it-s
with thee at my feast I joined : ? our bowl
(8) 'god'- 71:vs-/// r? -/;(/;•)-? .• ''. } saii-ii-f{a) . . : ?,• ///r?//(^) 'ally '(?) r/r //-//-//f.r)(?)
for Tesup brought
a-ID-t : t-e u ari^) (rr{?) : Bn;i?)-/// y-uiii-t{a) : ' ally ' : . . .
saith (?) Bar-Haya(?) asketh (?) thee : ' [Make] alliance [with us] '
[large hiatus] . . niii-r-a ? e ' ally '-c t{a) . . .
Notes. In spite of the attempted translation being such a patchwork I thought it better to piece it
together thus, rather than to give a collection of selected phrases.
1. I. Erkar, cf. 1. 2 (or Erskar, cf. p. 53). I cannot suggest any identification for his name. On
■ancestors' cf translation to M xvi, a and § 50. Are we to consider that Mutallu had taken Ahunu
as his adopted son, or should the ' son ' be part of the writer's words ? The character before zi occurs
also on M i, and I have hazarded the suggestion 'sign ' as a translation : or are we to read a chief's
name here, including the 'face' sign, and comparing 1. 4 ? ^/"occurs M xi, 4. The word nin-n-s
is difficult : is it an elaborate form of ' our'? This gift of a bowl to Tesup is mentioned again on
11. 6, 7 : cf. M i.
1. 2. On ' Tesup our god ' cf the phrase in M xxi, 5 'god '-Tcsiip-ii-nis-k-n ' god '-ii-ni. Paii-[ani\iiii
might be suggested as a possible restoration for /<?(?) . . ;;;/.
1. 3. Giammu, the ruler of the Balikh district. For r-[s\-zi-tui) see ^ 83. How are the characters
after B-r-k to be read : B-r-k-k : ma-h-zi n-s ' like Bark with our great lord ' ? N-r-am is possibly
Naharaim, Tel el Amarna Na-ri-ma, Eg. Nlin'un : place-names are not necessarily marked b}' the
determinative.
1. 4. The name of the ruler of Amk occurs (?) on M x, 2 : the two names following his, although as
3'et unreadable, occur in the northern inscriptions, Malatia and Mar'ash respectively. The word
following, tc[l pan ?|-' country '-zi, is difficult : is it a name of place or person, or does it simply mean ' in
the language of the country ' (Naharaim) ? For -ar, -r as an enclitic preposition see §82, note: at the
same time ar might be part of the root 'to join '. Takna, notes to translation to M ii, 2 (p. iii). The
group following ' let us make alliance ' occurs also in 1. 5 : there is some doubt about the grouping of the
hieroglyphs : here we might read :' ally ':-//-;/ .• n{a)-zi: ID-n{a] ID-n(a\ or :' ally '■.■/i-n-n{a) : ID-zi : ID-n(a).
The example in 1. 5 : ' ally (?) '-/j-iui ii-zi : lD-n[a\ : ID r;-nii seems to point to the former being correct.
The first ID looks like a flame, and is used with // in 11. 5, 7 and in M xi, 4, 5, and without, in xxxiii,
10, probably (at any rate in TA) to indicate a chief's name. The second, the curling line, occurs also
with n\a] on a new Jerabis inscription : (So-and-so) ID-n[a) a-s-t ' hath written a . . . ' (§ 70). I can offer
no satisfactory translation. 'So-and-so hath reckoned Nist as though he were my son ' : Nist was
the son of Bauli, the grandson of Mutallu, either by birth or adoption. R-nin-t{a) occurs again in
1. 8, and as r-niii-n-/{a) in 1. 5, which makes it probable that an additional // suffixed indicates ist pers.
pi. ; I can onl}' suggest the meaning ' ask ' for it. (See p. 107 for the root ;--//.)
1. 5. On n-nt-n-an /■■s-nii see § 68. Bat occurs on M ix, 4. On 'nobles' see ^ 38.
1. 7. See ^ 33, no/c. For f-s cf the Hittite cuneiform fa-as, which occurs Z i, 8, fa-as i-na "'"A-ri-in-na
and 12 fa-as a!n-ri-aii-fa-an. It might possibly mean ' this ". (Cf. the t{a)-s on M. i, p, 122.)
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 127
M vii. From a statue found at Kirtschoglu : date, middle of ninth century.
From an unknown king of a place not far from Panammi's state, mentioning
' our brother Barhi' (Bar-Haya ?) and recording an alhance.
(i) Te{?)-i7-sa//(//) ... -.'ally' -.-/j [/)(c7){?)]-(7 m/-// is f{a)-a i/N-/ Bay(>)-hi{})
Saith [Panammi ?*]... ' Make alhance with us concerning (?) Bar-Haya (?)
' brother '-nas ' god '-' place '-/j-s-n{(i) "'^.-tal-n
our brother ' : by the great god of his land unto -tal (a chief)
(2) t-c k; ir r e a-aiu-uis : gnQ);-e-ii (numeral]^) 'tablet'
he hath said, ) 'Come ' their gifts (?) ... a tablet (?)
or "?-fa/-i/ hath said, I
s-e u-m-u-an ii-t . . saii-iiii ^7-(^(f2')(?)-[//( ?)-/(?) ]
the writing of our covenant [with] you I ha\'e [written ^] : [with you ?] (hands)
: 'ally" ; ar-iiii . . .
alliance I have joined.
Notes. 1. 1. On fa mif, see note on p. 85. On Barhi I?) see § 73. For ' the great god of his land'^
cf. § 81, and the translation to Restan Ip. 114), M vi, 2, and M xi, 4; or should we read n{aVs 'our'
(land)?
1. 2. Irre can hardly be a form of the chiefs name Irra (cf. I.3 of M viii): on a-nin-iiis see the
notes to translation of M x, 7. Aniii, notes to translation of M xxi.
M viii. From Iskanderun : date, second half of ninth century. Record of
an alliance.
Top line broken.
(2) .•rt'-?-//(V7)/v7/-//(/0 'ahy ',-///// 6WW/ :^,• /<?) r-r a-b{d)-u
? we (and) my ally with us, . . . j^ (a chief) promiseth he will join (?) with
kat-ini : k ; 1-a-an : f{a)-a : mi
them I will come . . . Unto me
(3) ii{a)-l ID;-ii/n//0)-u{a) ' brother '-ii{a) ' ally ' ; Ir-r-e a-f{ij)-ii' . . it 440 /-//
? -manna, our brother, the ally of Irre (?) hath given . . 440 ///.
an;
Hath appointed (?)
(4) /r-i'-e : A/-;/-//(a)-//7 '?;-// i'-k-ii{d) ' ally ' :-c K-r-a-ii : kaf-s lui-r-a-iiii :
as the allies of Kirri. He in my presence
(5) .• tcO) H})-jni : //C) . . : a ..: ar-'' a-ar-it . . /j-'^-s-ii/i ^
hath said, ' 1 will come(?) '
128 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
Notes. It is a veiy difficult text, and I have inserted only a tentative translation.
1. 2. It is possible that the hieroglyphic name '?-;' is the same as that in M i.\, 5.
1. 3 For Ir-r-c see M vii, 2. '440' was suggested by Professor Sayce (PSBA., xxvii, 1905, 199).
1. 4. On Mannam see note to M xi, 3: on rkii((ij see note to M ii, 6: on K-r-a-u, M xi, 4.
M x\m,froi/i Gfnn'iu (middle of ninth century), b, 1. 2, contains the name
'Shahiianeser (?) king- of Nineveh', and 1. 5 contains the names of some chiefs
of the Nine. Beyond this the characters are too obUtcrated for any translation.
M xix,y/w//' /s-^/// (middle of ninth century). It begins ' Saith \{-?--^' (one
of the kings of M xvi, a?). There are mentioned — irl— t -(n'-iint 1. 4,
Cn fV ( ■-' ) 1. 3. ^(^) '• 7' ^<i^-^-ciJ) 1- 8, possibly Gnr-[n]-/i 1. 16, Paii-mi sa//-s, 1. 18.
M XX, from fn/a/zira \ too obliterated for an attempt at translation.
Garstang, Land of the Hittitcs, pi. XLI, an inscription from Aintab (middle
of ninth century). (1) broken, (2) kat-n-s I'-J ///-:■■/ : k'-a-k //-//, (3) ..//?.. n-ii//{})r
111 . . .} The chief interest in this text (which I have copied from a
photograph) is the name K-a-k, which also occurs similarl}' spelt in the long
Jerabis inscription mentioned in § 87. It is obviously the Kaki of Shalmancsor,
§24.
M xxvi,/;w// Karaburslilu. An alliance feast, inscribed.
(E). The Ariarathes Inscriptions (middle of ninth century).
M xxxiv, at Ivriz. A rock sculpture at the headwaters of a clear moun-
tain stream. The larger figure (Tesup-mis) holds corn and grapes in his hands :
the smaller (Ariarathes) makes the sign of greeting.
A. Over the larger figure is the inscription
(i) lui-a ' ^oA'-Te sup-in is (Y)-s kat-iiii
I am Tesup-mis, the (?): I am
(2) "A-r-ay-a-uiii-s a-t{a)-an ID.I.-ni
the 'son of Ariarathes '. We have given our hands (alliance):
(3) s-c ' ally '-;/(^7) /(^r)"?
the documents of our alliance giv[ing]
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 129
B. Over the smaller figure
(i) jui-a iiiN-iiasQ) "A-r-
I am . . . Ar-
iarathes o-reetinQ-
(2 ) ai'-a-s te{})-/n
iarathes
(3) ii"-iii-iui
my son
Notes. I cannot make anything of the inscription C, except that the name A-r-ar-a-s occurs in it.
The Ariarathes here portrayed is, I assume, much earUer than any of those kings of Cappadocia
of his name given in Greek records. I do not doubt m3'self that the Tesup-mis here sculptured is the
same as the Tesup-min(a| (accus.) on M hi, 2, which would make the date of this inscription about
the middle of the ninth century. This is endorsed by the names Targu-r-r-s-e and Pan(am)mi in
M xxxii : (title ?) B(a)-ninfn), xxxiii.
1. 2 (A). Tesup-mis calls himself ' son of /Vriarathes ', probably having been adopted. (The discovery
of this postpositive 'son' is due to Professor Sayce(PS5^., xxvii, 1905, 234: cf ibid., 225, 1. i : 226,
1. 2)). Ariarathes is the king of Bor (M xxxiii) In B, i are we to read iim-fia] (see pi. LVII of Gar-
stang. The Land of the HiltUes) ' thj- niii ', which would suggest niu = ' father ' (parallel to ma = 'lord') ?
1. 3 (A). For s-e, see nofe 2 on p. 33.
M xxxm,/ro/u Bor. Sculptured with the figure of a king wearing the
same flat head-dress as Araras at Ivriz.
(i) .-'A-r-ar-a-s .■ ''T(a)-a-//(i7)-(7-//-s-' place ' .-'lovd'-Zc-s .■ Tal-li-s : fc(T)-/ji
Ariarathes of Tvana, the great, unto his lord Talhas sendeth greeting
//-// s-t{a)
{or a message) [Unto (?) us (?) thou (?) didst write (?)]
(2) :'ally': -// b(a)-a mi-iiis : a-b{a)-ir : gii-iii-//{(i) ' tablet '-//(^?)-5
' Make alliance with us.' Bringeth a gift our tablet
: ' ally ' : -/j-s : feQ) s-e-f{n) : f{a)-a
of making alliance ; thy letter did speak concerning (?)
(3) .• ////-/ ID; "T{a)-n-nas : fc{})-iiii l\a)-ir-f(n) /jnfC)-ir-c-nii
Tyanian wood. I have commanded (that) should bring (it) (thee) my
.• ( ? ) c-n-/( a) ID " T{a)-a-uin-n{a) : ' god '- Tcsiip-ini-i/{a)
messengers (?) : (now) with thee is the (our ?) Tyanian wood ! Tesup-mis
(i.e. thou hast Tyanian wood).
(4) .vr-(?) .• k-k;-au-iii : a-aiu-s n-t "'^iiii-ii
(5) . . //' . . //" (6) ...//.■ (title ?) B{a)-ni)i{ii) (7) :a-l){a)-ir "'^-k-n . . /is . . .
Banin hath brought
VOL. LXIV. S
I30 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
(S) . . . n . . s :".////-/((r)-//as :'\ovd'-(j (q) ii-c-a : kat-k .• (title?) [Banin ?]
the lord of 1 lamath w ith them Katk (?) . . . Banin '■;...
(lO) ... 'ally'-[// /'(^O-''] nii-iiis ID-ii[a) : ii{a)-t (ii) : /jai(^)ii'-ii . . .
'[Make] alliance [with] us.' their messeng-cr (?)
( 12) . . . /•(?) a-b{ii)-i)' 1-c-iii li-u-s-t\a) //^^/'(?)-/" god '-Tcsup-vii-s . . .
. . . hath brought our ... to us (?) and the messenger (?) of Tcsup-mis . . .
NoTKS. 1. I. On Tvana, see ^ i, iio/c. Tallias, M .\x.\ii, i. On //-;/ s-t, cf. notes to translation
to M X. 7.
1. 2. (iH-'in-ii{a\, see notes to translation to M i (p. 123).
1. 3. "T[(i)-a-iias, § 85, /i(jf{?)-ir-e, lial[?)-ir-ii, 1. 11, liafQVr, 1. 12, § 92.
1. 4. On a-niii-s, sec notes to M x.
1. 10. On the ideogram, see notes to T\ (p. 1261.
M xxxi, cfi'oni .liidaval. It mentions ".l-i'-nr-ct-l in 1. 3.
M \\x\\, fro//i Biilgay Madcii.
Professor vSayce {PSB.J., xxi, 1899, P- 205) says of this inscription: 'I
should advise those who did not spend hours over the squeezes of the Bulgar
Madcn inscription when they arrived in England to leave that inscription
alone,' and from the appearance of it in Messcrschmidt, although I have never
seen the squeezes, I should quite concur. Either the inscription changes the
recognized forms of the characters, or we ha\^e several of them written back-
wards (e.g. //as 1. 2, //(a) 1. 2, / 1. 2, 11 11. 2, 3). It begins :
(i) Tc(^)-b{n)-a-sn //{//) : Testip-//{(i) "Pn //-//// Nis-f : Tal-h-s
Say (cr, have said) (unto?) Tesup-[mi ?]-s Pan(am)mi, Nist, Talhas, (and)
Tes//p-a-/i{J)-s : ' ally ' :-// b{ii)-a //i/-///s : "A-/'-a/'-a-//i//-s : ' lord '-/'-\ . . .
Tesup-aus (?), ' Make alliance with us.' Araranins (= Tesup-mis) unto his lord
k-n-//is(J) : Ta/-/j{})-s : ///s[T);-s : f{(i)-a-// : fr{?)-S(f //{//) : ///a-lj-/i
Talhas, his son(?) unto them: Our great lord
(2) "A-z'-a/'-a-z/i-Sjl] : 'lord '-/'-// .• ka/';-a //as(^)-///i-e (i-b{ii)-//' 'god'-
Ararani[ns ?] said unto the lord : ... hath brought
L(7/[})-/c-//{ti) : i)-/c-//(a) : ' all}' '-//-// : a . . . //{a) ' god ' Tcs//p-/ii/ ' god ' Tayg/t-r-/'-s-c :
Tesup-mi(s) (unto ?) Targu-ras,
r"-//{(i) t{^)-e : "Ar-// : -a-ii-f : "M/i-//i-e :
our . . . .saith, ' The tribe (or "R-//{a)-t{J)-c of the tribe) of Arwaut (?) Mume,
'l\a)-a- country '-// .•
chief of the citv of Taia . . .'
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 131
Notes. For the rest I can suggest little : proper names apparently occur, notably in 1. 3,
te\l)-san-nil-e-t{a) : 1-an-ims V (I)- in-k : 1 D ;-n s-r-a ' god '-' friend '-k-iii-iiis k-n : kar-a-talC)-k-n ' telling us (?)
. . eta (and) -annas of Unki a . . . have written, " Unto (by?) the god of our friend we will come (?)...'"
(better than as hyphened on p. 331, and at the end of the line, ' Our great lord Araran(a)-[?] hath spoken
with you.' In 1. 5, ' god'-li-in: a-l-ir : k-a-ii mi-r-a-u-t : 'by my great god, he hath . . . friend (?) in your
presence ' (or does this latter phrase belong to the following words ?).
Piecemeal as it is, it seems that we have here, graven on the rock, the record of an invitation to
an alliance which was accepted by Tesup-mis (or ' Ariara-nins' as he calls himself, because of his
adoption by Araras). The word Ar-u-a-u-t is interesting, as it may possibly be the Aramean tribe
which the Assyrians called Rutin (WAI, i, 37, 44: 41, 36: ii, 67, 7): the place ' T{a)-a' might be the
cit}^ Ta-ia-a of the Patmai, mentioned in Shalmaneser's monolith (ii, 11) (see also WAI iii, 9, 44):
and in 1. 3 apparently we have the name of a king of Unki ending in -annas.
The names Ru'ua, Taia, Unki give probabilitj' to the correctness of the reading Panammi, since
they are places in the Hittite or Aramean districts: similar^ Targu-ras, who occurs on Carchemish
inscriptions, and Nist (of the Mar'ash texts), add their evidence.
(F) The Royal Name at Boghaz Keui.
M xxvii-xxviii. The hieroglyphs, containing the king's name and titles
(xxviii, 1-3 : Emir Ghazi, M 1, 5) are difficult to identify: xxviii, i clearly begins
with the name of a god (most probably the sun), a figure, probabl}^ of the god,
standing on what must be the sign ((a) (it is fairly clear in the photograph which
I took, PSBA., xxxii, 1910, 240) : on either side of this are what must be the sign
// standing on what is certainly ay. Outside these are the groups for ' lord of
chiefs,' the whole group being paralleled by Rams., where the king's name
' Un(?)-?-tal-s, lord of chiefs,' is spelt in much the same way, with Tesup written
large above, and ' lord of chiefs 'on both flanks.' In the Boghaz Keui name the god's
name of i is represented apparently by the god-sign in 2, and hence the name may
possibly be read ' S\xvL-goA-t{a)-ii-ar . It would be reasonable to expect this name
to coincide with one of the great kings of Boghaz Keui when its power was at
its height in the fourteenth centur}^ : and of these we know Subbiluliuma
(Sapalulu), IMursil (Alaurasar), Muwtallu (Mautenel(r)), Hattusil (Khetasarj,
Dudhalia, Arnuanta. The most similar of these is JMuwtallu, when spelt in the
Egyptian way, Mautener, which would give rise to several problems if
the identity were maintained. The arguments against would be (i) that
Mautener is the Egyptian form of a name which those Hittites of the fourteenth
century who understood cuneiform wrote Mu-iv-at-ta-al-U (W 43), which the
Assyrians in the ninth century still wrote Mutallu, the Hittite hieroglyphs of
that period showing Mu-tal; (or Mii-tal-io),- a difterencc from the Boghaz Keui
^ In this latter case, however, the variants (the name is written five times) show that the name
Tesup has no share in the name.
- The seal M xlii, 5 is proof that Mutallu of Gurgum spelt his own name Mu-tal, "and that it is not
merely the error of a foreigner such as Benhadad.
s 2
132 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
form; (2) that .I///7t' has not yet been found as an important Hittite god, and
particularly the Sun : (3) as yet the characters, beino- difterent from the ordinary
forms, are uncertain in identification. On the other hand there are certain
arguments in favour: (i) that it is probable that it is one of the six names
cjuoted, and Mautenelir) at first sight is the most likely: (2) that nearly five
centuries ha\'e elapsed hQiwcQn Mii-^v-nf-fn-al-Ii of Boghaz Keui and Alutallu of
Gurgum.
(G) The Sculi'ture at P'rakhn.
M XXX. Two royal figures making offerings at the altars of then- gods. In
.-/ the god is simply labelled ' god ', and the worshipj^er ' lord of chiefs "?, lord
of chiefs'; \nB the god is called 'great (plural) god' and the worshipper's name
reads ' Ma{J)-f{a)-N-r, lord of chiefs ', which makes it probable that the name is the
same as the royal name at Boghaz Keui, and hence we should see in the first
doubtful character the equi\'alent for the god's name forming jjart of the afore-
mentioned king's name (cf. p. 135, no. 2, and pi. XLVII, Garstang, Land of t!ic
llittifes).
The inscription (C'j, as has been discussed in § yj, runs, as 1 read it, H(it(^.)-
/;/(7^)-.:r/-' country ' 'allyW(?) ar-iiil 'With JJatti (IJat-wj-land I have joined
alliance '.
(H) Hittite Seals and Impressions.
M xxxix, 3, 7, 8, 9. The reading is ' Palace 'J'csnp-r-iiis : the termination -iiis
probably indicates the genitive, the nominative being Tesup-ras, analogous to
Targu-ras. Nos. 2-9 w^ere found by Layard in Sennacherib's palace at
Kuyunjik. 6. y(75///-.s7?'//-5 ' Tesup-is-king '. 10 (also from Nineveh). ' God '-7"^//;js,'-//.
Either this is an abbreviation for some king's name beginning with Targu, or we
may compare the description of the silver tablet of the treaty of Rameses with
Khetasar whereon were impressed the seals of Ra and Sutekh.
]\I xl (all of which were bought in Constantinople, having been brought
from the interior of Asia Minor). 2 reads either Nis-Tcsiip, Tcsitp-Nis ('Son of
Tesup"), or H-Tesup ('Great is Tesup '), 'the great lord'. For the last name
see § 36, note. 6. 'Jesnp-/jaf{Y)-saii ('Tesup, friend of the king'). 11, 15, 16 read
apparently S-k. 10, 12 apparently the same : 12 reads ' Lord-?-/, lord of the land '
(the crooked hieroglyph cannot be >//s, making the name Nist ?). In 17 the
name begins with Tesup, in 18 the same doubtful character occurs as in 2.
M xli, I. Targasnalli, § 11. 2. A king on the right beneath the winged disc,
and the group which Professor Sayce, I think erroneously, identified with
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 133
Ishara. In front of the god the inscription 'Scal(?j of Am- . .' See note to
M'xIv, 8.
M xlii, I. Apparently inscribed r-s-nn' . . . which would almost lead us to
think that r-s-z/n' meant 'I have signed' rather than 'I have joined' (p. 107).
5. 'Mutallu of Gurgum', § 31. 9 is that difficult bilingual, the so-called
'Tarkondemos Boss'. The cuneiform runs
Mc-e '" I ar-gas-sa-\ J-nC' p'^'^' ^f^'' '"^''^^ ^^'^
(' I am T., king of country-city'). j>-^ is a possible equivalent of the i^ of the
tablets. Professor Sayce suggested that the goat's head might be compared to
Tpayoi, and read thus so as to form the equivalent of the first part of the cunei-
form. It must be noticed that this head may be distinct from that of the ibex
head as. A possible reading of the hieroglyphs is La/(}) "7argiiC)-san-f(a)
' country ' ' lord ' = ' Seal (?) of Targu-santa, lord of the land '.
M xliii, 7 looks much as if it were LalQ.)" Mii-tal "Gii-gii- iii-iiis- Qowwixy'
' Seal (?) of Mutal of Gurgum '. On 8, obv., are the sun-god, Targu, and an
ideogram for a god, which may or may not be the sun, descripti\'e oi the
winged figure ; if it is, then we have the hieroglyph for the sun-god. The rev.
bears a name B{a)-ii{a)-s ?
M xlv, 8. The bilingual of Indilimma. The-cuneiform reads ' Indilimma
(Indisima), the son oi \^ . . -, the servant of Ishara ' (the reading Ser-
^ - [Se-n--da-mu j - "^
damu is due to Professor Sayce, PSBA., xxv., 1903, 143). The four Hittite hiero-
glyphs presumably are the equivalent of some part of the cuneiform : the two
W A form a group which occurs near the king on M xli, 2 : round the inner
ring of xliii, 2, 4 : after the name, ibid., 6. The first character of this pair does
not, as far as I know, occur in the form which M xlv, 8 gives it, away from the
seals ; the second occurs in the published texts M xi, 3 : xii, 5 (a chief's name ?) :
the chief's name A-'^.-)iii-s xvi, b : xxi, 2 : xxxii, 5 (c?-?-/>) : xxxiii, 4 {ii-T) : liii. On
the seals it is difficult to distinguish, and in some cases there is no distinction
between it and the sign for ' lord ' or ' country '.
I can only offer a few suggestions for the remaining texts in M. M liii
froni Nigdeh runs ////-' M-.-na s-yQ)-a h nis ii-iii-ii-aii fc(^) y-s-mit //is. * I am
AI-?-na, son of Sra(?) the chief: our covenant . . I (?) have joined (?)..' is
possible. For S/^a // //is see JM xlvi, from Karaburna, which mentions the
134 A NEW DECIPHERiMHNT OF THE
group often (as well as ITJ (1. :)(?), and the ' flame '-ideograph (1. 2) for a
chiefs name, which occurs in TA). Apparently' it begins Mi- c-lj-iun-)ui (for
this second word see the Hamath texts), and tlic unusual group, about the
fourth word, occurs in Al lii. The text from Ekrek (M xxxi) runs (i) "Tcsiip-
a-ii-iiis "Tcsiip-ini- )u-iiis Kar-saii-s : ' ally ' :-// b{a)-(i-iii/-s : a-k-ii te(J)-y-nis : "A-y-s
/j/i-ii-nas Kat-k mts-aiii-mi : fc(})-r : >iii-f{a) : c iiiii . . . (1. 2) . . . a-l ' Tesup-annis (?),
Tesup-mimnis(= Tesup-amminis ?), Karsanas, Make alliance with mc : they
have come . . .' (see § 65). M xlviii from Erzerum(?) mentions the 'Nine ' and
"Gii-g-Jiis, which is to be compared to the writer of the Bogtcha stone "Gii-g-n-i/is
{PSBA., xxxii, 19 10, 173).
The stone from Kellekli (Hogarth, Liv. Annah, ii. 172) shows the name
Cn-aiii (Giammu), 1. 2, and possibly ' Lal(?)-li(?) of Ta-bal(?)', 1. 3.
I shall consider myself fortunate if only a part of this decipherment proves
to be correct ; and if any of it ultimately appears to be of value I would con-
nect it with the memory of my father, Reginald E. Thompson, M.D., who, almost
until the day of his death, took a lively interest in the progress of the work.
To the kindness of Sir F. G. Kenyon, K.C.B., D.Litt., Director of the British
Museum, I am much indebted, both for the many facilities which he has granted
me, and for the encouragement which his interest in the work has given.
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS
^35
A LIST OF HITTITE SIGNS
I append a list of signs with references to the evidence for their values. It does not pretend to
be complete, and the Sanskrit words from Pick's Vergleiclieiuics IVorterbitcli are added merely as
suggestions.
ODD .m
II
12
12
13
' One ' iTA 3, &c.) : the mark of personal or place-names, either as a separate
character, or affi.xed to some part of one of the characters in the form of
a tang, § 17. It is not indispensable for names.
MA: 'lord', as ideogram in phrase 'lord of lands ',§ 44 (the third finger:
cf Skr. mall ' great ').
S^A"tomakc',§74: value from Srt7/-^;^n;'-s, §31= cuneiform sa« ?) = 'king',
§ 52 : possibly interchanging with s( ?)-<?;;, § 52, iio/c. (Zend san ' create ', and
cf. ' king' from same root).
No. 4 witii a tang iM. .xlii, 9).
' Nine ' : apparently referring to some nine who formed a league ?, § 35.
Word-divider (§ i nofe).
//(:= '^^ § 15) 'great', 'chief, §§35, 49: value from causative formation,
§ 37, and htc-H-zva-an, § 36 : verb, § 70.
See § I, nofc (Sayce ultimately, PSBA., xxvii, 1905, 247, det. of ideographsl.
I am inclined to see a a' in this character : see notes to translation of M
V, p. 115.
? : see §§ 7, 70, and p. 126.
A or breathing : value from augment in verbs, §§45, 70, T{a)-a-n{a) (=Tyana,
Dana), ^ i, note: K-a-k, § 87 : K-r-a, § 35.
A + tang, apparently not A U (from A-r-ar-as, § 12, and a-san-ti-:i, ^ 70).
^ (= €. § 15'- ' g''eat ', * chief, §§ 35, 49 : value from causative formation, § 37,
and IjH-u-iva-an, § 36 : verb, § 70. (Originally 'water?', cf. Skr. klid 'spring'.)
N: value from phonetic complement to Sangar, § 3 : from k-n, § 7 : ist plur.
suffi.x, § 58: verbal term -//-:/', §§ 37, 69: accus. in -//, cf. M ii.
A^ with a tang, apparently NU ?, § 37 note.
NI: value from ^;--//«-//-/// varying with rr-liH-li-ii[a). ^ 12, 1st pers. plur. suffix,
§ 58, and from No. 12.
136 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
f/S M, II': value from ist sing, suffix, § 58: from (',ar-h-iii(^y.^, § 4 : AVz/rc, § 51,
I and from No. 15. (Original meaning uncertain.)
1
-..j^
MI, IVI : value from Ka-r-k-iiii-s, §6: /;;/-', ■^6 : Mi-zi-ir, § 37 : Niiiwi, § 51.
ist sing, -suffi.x, § 58: verbal ending, § 69.
MI with tang, occurs M xxi, 2 : xlvi, 2.
fA /\ KAT: value from Kaf-t-c, § 60: Kut-ii-a-u-t, § 60: and pronom. base knf-
j 11 m kat-mi, Sec, § 61. (Originally a spear(?) ; or perhaps a firestick with
• ^' socket(?), I ndog.ytVr/' kindle'.)
16. \. ^ No. 16 with a tang, M lii, 5.
'^ \ A
N(A): value from 7'(rt)-a-»(fl) (Tyana), § i, iiofc: from accus., § 64: name
LI: value from Ir-hu-li-ii{a), § 11: T(V{j;a-s-n(a]-a-li, § 11: Gar-a-!i, § 11
Miit-tal-li, § 44 : Lal(i)-Ii, § 50. (Originally ' knife ', Skr. //"/ ' cut ').
18.
\i\{^]: value ironi 1 \u)-u-ii\u} (lyaiia;, \: 1, nun . iium iiccub., y 04; uaiii
I)--liu-!i-iiUi\, § 9: Targa-s-ii[a)-a-li, § 11 : verbal ist plur. terminaticMi, ^ 69.
19
.1
' son ', A7S : value from \-ariants iii-s, § 15 : ' son ', ■^ 65.
19 A. W \{jj^ No. 19 with tang l^^ 49).
20. <o) fm 'Son', probably long form of No. 19, § 73. (Perhaps 'phallus'.)
_ /?j\ -, -sf)/- NIN : accus. of ' son ' : varying with ///'-;;/, § 50, and found in names Nin-n-s,
21. ^mW \j\f) Nin-ivi, Niii--iV,^ ~f>, ^i. Phonetic complement // before or after, § 51.
ZI : value from postpositive preposition, § 37, 710/f : verbal 3rd plur. termination
-iKi, § 37 : place-name Mi<i-ir = Miizri, § 37, note.
xxi, 5, read No. 83 or No. 84, badly copied : the cast of the monument
shows it fairly certainl}'.
T\A): value from 2nd sing, suffix, § 46: 3rd sing, verbal termination in
\.^
f. j I [A): value Irom 2ncl smg. suttix, C; 40: 3rci smg. veroa
\| perfect, § 45: prep. f{a)-a, \ 80 : place-name T[a)-hnl, § 80.
7-^ ' to say ', §§46,48-
26. (^ Numeral (?) probably roo (M viii, 3, § i, uofc).
J
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 137
27. ^^ Numeral (?) probably lo (M viii, 3, § i, note).
28. ,|^ §52.
29. (^ TA5.
30. ^ Occurs as chief's name (?), M xi, 4, 5 : xlvi, 2 ; TA 4, 5, 7.
31. S New Jerabis.
3^' w^^ fif\ ^ marks nominative, §§ i, note, 64. (Originally a cord, cf. Skr. si ' bind '.)
/^^\ /" — \ HU (or perhaps //+some other vowel), value from Ir-lju-li-na, § 12, Hu-n",
33- (yny/ , \J\j , § 37, ;/o/«?, and the plural of//, No. 11, § 38.
33 A. ^"^ (^ No. 33 with a tang, § 38.
33 B-
' lord of chiefs ', §§ 38, 50, note, and also other compounds.
34- I^ § 33. ^lote.
35- C—O ■ ^^ 3 <^:^^ ^<^ -J/? from Ar-ljn-li-ni, § 12 ; A-r-ar-a-s, § 12 : Ar-ani-mi, §§ 30, 35.
35 A. c ^^n ^ dh No. 35 with a tang, § 55, M i, i. (Possibly the former is not.)
3^- CZ^ MAN{1), from SHl{l)-man{l), § 51. Cf. § 55.
^ — ^ . n f^—r^ ^^-^^ '^'^ &'^"^ ' ■ ^""^"^ T(a)-a-n(a] = Tyana, § i, ;/o/e (properly No. 37 a) :
37- UJ — j , IQU . C U ■ ^w-/(rt|=Hamath, § 16: ■«■/(«), § 79. {i(a) 'give' = Skr. dd.)
37 '^- ^ D No. 37 with a tang, M ii, i : xxxiii, i.
38. N^ See note to § 44 and p. 126.
39- ^flir' ^nir irr ''^'^•^' variant of N-S, lY-AS, § 50, note.
39 A. till- ^ No. 39 with a tang, M xlviii, 3.
VOL. LXIV. T
138 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
4°- ^p Cj3 ^^ • '^°'' evidence see § 9 (a pot : cf. Skr. ri ' pour 'J.
41- '' '^vliiL^ '' Ideogram ibr a ' bowl ', § i, nofe.
I \ Ir 11 ^ ^'^^ ■ ^'°'" '^^"■''"''''' ^^ 3^ *°" "^*-^ ^""^^ °f ^hese, see § 44).
No. 42 with a tang, § 44.
42
nnnj
43-
44
s^ 55-
□y M /// (value from the name Bar-Iu\ and formation of causative), §§ 38, 73 (a pot (?)).
cf. Skr. hu ' pour (an offering) ')
45- ^ ?73-
46. n New Jerabis.
47. ^^ ^i /D or /Z? onl)' in the name of Benhadad, § 33, nofe : cf., however, M, xliii, 6
48
49- ■-( Z £. ^ ^ '^^ sun-god (?j, from the seal, M xliii, 8, see § 52, nofe. Variant probably
^ -^^ § 52 (5)-
^°' In ^^^ ^ -^'^'' ^' ''■^^ translation, p. 133
Used in spelling a chief's name, § 82 (6),M xi, 5.
52. rf Ideogram for a ' throne ', M xxi, 4, lii, 5.
GAR, KAR (from San-gars, Gar-k-ni-s, Gar-a-li, \\ 3, 1 1). See § 74, nofe. (Cf.
Kar-b(a)- . . (^)-ni I M xxi, 4), with Karparunda of Patina (Shalm. Ob., reliefs)).
53- i=a SUL (?) : a god's name, §§ 51, 55.
54. \^^ ' Table ', § 33, nofe.
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS
139
DO-
111
57 -^
58, [J]
59. ,=Jr\L^
CD
61. (^
62. (^
64. ®
60.
6s.
65 A.
66. ^^gp7
66 a. ^q;^
67- ^^^nri;^
'Altar'?, v^82.
' House '. (Possibly -R in some form : see \;§ 18, iiofc, 44, nofc)
Used in spelling a chief's name, § 82 (6) : ideogram used to describe part of
a construction or building, M ii, 4.
No. 57 with a tang, M xi, 2.
' Shrine (?) ', M ii, 6.
See ^§ 43, 52 : ideogram used to describe part of a construction or building,
Mi'i, 3.
E, from r-a, § 47 : plurals, §§ 46, 64 : case-ending of names, § 46.
No. 60 with a tang, M iii, b, 2 : iv, a, b, 2 : xlvi, i.
A' A, from Ka-r-k-iui-s, N-ka, §§ 5, 8.
Determinative for 'god ', § i, note.
Ideogram for 'brother', 5§ 38, 69: varies with M 'ally', § 34 (2). (Probably
'uterus'.) '-'
TA3.
GU, from Cii-git-'ni (Gurgum), Gii-ain (Giammu), § 29.
No. 65 with a tang (in name Gii-gii-'iii, ^ 29, Gn-g-{}i)-U!s, p. 134).
Apparently omitted or inserted at will in two gods' names, §^ 7, note, 54, 7iote.
No. 66 with a tang, M iii, b, 2.
Forms part of a proper name on a new Jerabis inscription.
Ideogram for ' blood brotherhood ', §§ 32, 42.
T 2
140
A NEW DECIPHKRMRNT OF TITR
Ideogram for ' feast ' (?l. P- ^21.
W^ \jh 'Scrilx' writing", § 74.
70
7f-
72.
73-
74-
75- @)
75 A
76.
77-
^ ,
Ideogram for ' to speak ', §§ 9, 33, 69.
PAN {'face') from Paii-aiii-iii!, § 28 (see § 561 in composition : \TE(?) = ] 'to
say ' : witli /// probably TE-Hl, § 73 : name of a place (?), § 48 (4).
72 A. v] 'tf V\^y No. 72 with a tang, M ii, 3 : ix, i : xi, 2, &c.
§73-
Ideogram for ' to swear ? ', § 35.
BAR from Bar-hi= Bar-Haya, and Br-k as a variant of B-r-k ?, §§ 38, 73 = ' man '
or 'chief (if borrowed Aramaic — son, §§ 34 (4), 73). (Skr. vim ' man'.)
No. 75 with a tang, p. 76.
Ideogram for 'chief, p. 52, iio/c 3.
Ideogram for ' ally ', §^ 14 ff., 32 ff., § 37.
78. ^^ ^//^ 0^ AN 'to place?', ist pi. suffix, §§ 32, iwfc, 58, 68, note, 70.
78 A. ^^ Abbreviation for No. 78, § 68, note.
79. ^^ — ] Ideogram for ' to take ', § 32, iiofc.
80.
Ideogram for 'hostile'; 'to fight' (with ...^ l, §32 and p. 118: syllabic
value, § 73.
h. f=3
Ideogram for ' to engrave (write) ', §^ 32, 69.
82.
83-
84.
85-
86.
86 .A.
87.
ss, J
88 a. jV
90.
91- <^
93-
94-
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS
Ideogram for ' blood brotherhood ', § 32.
HA T[l), § 92 : ' ally ', § 67, note.
141
Same as
See § 37.
34(11, distinct (?) from No. 85.
MUT, from the name Mtit-tal-li, §§ 44, 79.
Perhaps same as No. 86, M xxiii, 2, 3.
Same as No. 81
Ideogram for 'leg' ('base?'), §§ 18, 64: syllabic value, § 67: used in chief's
name, M xvi, a, i : xix, 1,3: TA 4.
No. 88 with a tang, § 18.
Ideogram for ' to run ?', M xi, 4 (§ i, note).
Used in a god's name, M xxix, 11 : see M iii, a, i.
G, K 'to come ', value from Sau[n)-{g]gar-s, § 3 : k-it, § 7 : Ka-r-k-mi-s, § 5 :
K-as-k, § 35 : K-r-a, § 35 : K-a-k, § 7, note : U-'iii-k, § 52 (5). (A foot ; Yed. gd,
' to go ', ' come '.)
Ideogram for ' to go ', § 70.
M hi, 3.
B{A), §§ 15, 40.
95. //< (r=^ (j //?, §15: from //--////-//-//a, §10: verbal termination, § 10: y^ 5-//', §5T :;/o/r, § II.
142 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF THE
/^^/^^ ^^. '^ ('^), from Aiii-f{a), § 13: Paii-aiii-iiii, ^ 28: G/z-rr;;; (Giammul, §29:
^^'^ *^===^ ^ Ar-am-mi, §30: Git-<^ii-'iii (Gurguml, §29: L'-'in-k, §52. (Ram's head,
9° \^ ^_^ Skr. <7t7 'sheep ').
97. y) (Id 6', see § 49, Jiofc, and § 77.
97 A. |m|ta No. 97 with a tang, M v, 2 : vi, 4.
98. y>j M ix, 3: X, 4.
AS, variant of 5 in composition : value from K-as-k, As-ir, As-r-a, § 29, note.
^^' J^ (Ibex' head: Skr. ajd 'he goat'.) (Is the animal's head on the ' Boss of
^ Tarkondemos ' not an ibex, but a goat ?)
^f^-^ Q^ ^„\ Hare, used in spelling a chief's name, M xix, 7: M xxi, i (?|, 3, 5: xlvi, i :
loi. "W )/ Used in spelling the name of the god Targu, § II (value TV? 7?(,?j).
^\ No. loi with a tang, § 18. Used in spelling a chief's name, M xvi, a, i, and
^°^ ^ ^Ka a new Jerabis inscription.
102. V^ i?y^Z, from /"(f?)-/;*-?/-' place', § 50. (Horn with tang.)
103. (f Mv, 3(?l: TA7.
104. A Postpositive determinative for ' country ',' city '.
Postpositive determinative for 'country', 'city', §§ i, 44, notes.
/K Ideogram for ' lord ", ^ i, note, k 34 (5I, § 44, Jiote.
07. A See translation to M xlv, 8, p. 133.
10^.
106
io8.
109.
109 A.
- Y
- Y, !
"3 I.!
USA.!-
„. f ^
II
II
117.
118.
119.
120.
^A
-■ o
122. I I
123.
HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS 143
Ideogram probably for ' tablet ' or ' stela ' : see translation to M ix, notes, p. 1 19.
Used in spelling a personal name, M x, 2 ; and a new Jerabis inscription.
No. 109 with a tang, M xi, 4.
Ideogram for the god Tesup (lightning?), §§ i, 33, notes
M ii
I 3-
Ideogram for 'tree', 'wood', § i, note, M ii, 3: xxxiii, 3.
Possibly UN, § 71, iio/e.
No. 113 with a tang, § 73.
§ 64, iiofe : syllabic value, § 67
In a chief's name, ^ 67 (in a new Jerabis text, and M xv, b, 4) ; cf M xxix, 13.
M xxxii, 5 ; TA 2 (used in a god's name).
§ 73-
Possibly No. 104, W ii, 3, 4. ,
LAL(?] (or LAI), value from Lal{?}-li{?}, § 50 (='sear?, iee translation to
M xvi. A, p. 112).
M xi, 3.
M ix, 4 : X, 6. * ,
Ideogram for ' ancestors ', § 50 (grave shaft^nd coffin (?)).
M xii, 3, 2.
144 A NEW DECIPHERMENT OF HITTITE HIEROGLYPHS
125-
126.
127.
?
In composition, M v, 2 : vi, 4 : xxiv, a : lii, 3, 4.
M vi, 4, 5.
M viii, B, 2.
M ii, 6 : xix, 20 : xlvi, 3.
^
.* **
•^
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY
Los Angeles
This book is DUE on the last date stamped below.
UC SOUTie^N REGOHAt USP^Pv ctr;.
D 000 594 652 C
PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE
THIS BOOK CARD 1
^MUBRApYQ^
>i
=>3
%JITV3J0>^
iJriver^ltv Research Library
^1
in
CO
3
X
o
JT)
I
n
1
1
1
-J
1
1
ro
1 J
•— 1
J
T)
—J
1
— '
,X
* wa^«i
MtTJl-/
«^:>^- . \.