The Anatolian Fate-goddesses and their different traditions

ALFONSO ARCHI* The Anatolian Fate-Goddesses and their Different Traditions 1. Išduštaya and Papaya In an often quoted passage of an Old-Hittite ritual for the erection of a new palace, KUB 29.1(+) (CTH 414),1 the king says: “To me, the king, have the gods (that is) – the Sun-god(dess) and the Storm-god – entrusted the land and my house. I, the king, shall rule over my land and my house. ... To me, the king, has Ḫalamašuit (the Hattic Throne-goddess) brought from the Sea the (insignia of) authority (and) the coach; thereupon have they opened to me the land of my mother (i.e. the Sun-goddess) and called me Labarna, the king. From then on I have been directing my request to the Storm-god, my father. ... The Thronegoddess hails the Eagle: Go! I am sending thee to the Sea ... The Eagle says: I have searched. Only Išduštaya (and) Papaya, the primeval goddesses of the netherworld, the daughters-in-law, (kat-te-ir-ri-eš ka-ru-ú-e-li-e-eš DINGIRMEŠ ku-ú-še-eš) are kneeling ... One holds a distaff, they hold full spindles.2 They are spinning the years of the king. The shortness of the years, their calculation cannot be seen.” (I 23-II 10) This ritual has a general Hattic background.3 In particular, Išduštaya and Papaya are Hattic goddesses,4 who appear in Hattic texts, KUB 28.15 I 5a: Eš-du-uš-ta-ya [; KBo 37.11 II 14, 15: Pa-a-pa-a-i-ya-a (without divine determinative). For the Hattians, life was compared to a thread, a metaphor well diffused also in the Indo-European milieu (it is attested in Greek, Latin, Germanic and perhaps also in Indo* 1 2 3 4 Università La Sapienza, Roma. Carini 1982. An English translation was provided by Albrecht Goetze in ANET 357–358. A bronze “middle-whorl-spindle” (14 cm long, diameter of the disc: 4.5 cm), and a silver one with a golden tip (16 cm long, 7 cm in diameter) were found at Horoztepe, Özguç – Akok 1958, 15 f. (with figs. 25-26), 45, 51 and Pl. VIII 1-3. For another bronze spindle, see Koşay 1951, Pl. 197, 1. For (GIŠ)ḫueša- “spindle”, and (GIŠ)ḫulali- “distaff”, see Oettinger 1976, 64–66. The textual documentation has been represented by Ofitsch 2001. An etymological derivation of (GIŠ)ḫueša- from ḫueš- “to live” is unlikely, HED H, 343. At least, for most of the interpreters, see Klinger 1996, 125 f. and 140 f. For Išduštaya, see Otten 1976–1980a; for Papaya, see Frantz-Szabó 2003–2005. Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 46.30.84.116 Heruntergeladen am | 25.03.14 14:17 Alfonso Archi 2 Iranian and Slavic literatures),5 which the Hittites received instead from the Hattic substrate. Išduštaya and Papaya coexisted (as will be shown here below) with the Hittite Fate-goddesses, the Gulšeš, who never were assimilated to them. They used a different technique: that “to engrave, inscribe”, gulš-, the destiny of mankind. 1.1 Celebrations in the ḫešta-house6 In the texts in Hittite, Išduštaya and Papaya7 appear mostly in the cult for the chthonic gods of the ḫešta-house in Ḫattuša (CTH 645), where the purulli-festival was celebrated, that is the Hattic festival of the Earth (wur), in spring, “when the land prospers (and) thrives.” These rites had the aim of guaranteeing that life continued. According to the OH manuscript KBo 17.15 Vs. 9-17 (StBoT 25 no. 27), the worshipped gods were: Lelwani - Šiwat - Tašammat - Tašimmet - UTU - Ištuštaya - Papaya - Ḫašammila Zilipuri.8 NH duplicates of this list are KBo 17.40 + 25.177 I 1-5 (+ KBo 24.111 I! 2-17);9 the fragmentary KBo 23.69 Rs. 1-8. Further lists of the same festival are: KBo 13.216 VI 1-6: Išduštaya] - Pappaya - Ḫašammmili - Zilipuri - [. KBo 25.71(a) + KBo 31.208(b) 1-13; [Išdušt]ya Papaya (in a 14 + b 10). KUB 58.28 III 2-IV 8: ] Išduštaya ..... Lelw[ani] ..... [U.GUR] - Šitarz[una GIŠ AB-ya] - GIŠḫattalwaš GIŠ - Zappa - MUḪI.A. KUB 58.50 V 3-11: ] Išduštaya - Pappaya - [Ḫašammmil]i - [.10 The redaction of this festival which was celebrated in the ḫešta-house on the eleventh day of the Spring festival (AN.TAḪ.ŠUMSAR) lists the following gods, IBoT 3.1 (CTH 609) 44-49: Lelwani - UD.SIG5! - (taknaš) UTU - Papaya - Išduštaya - Ḫašamili - U.GUR Šitaršuna - GIŠAB-ya - ḫatalwaš GIŠ - Zappa(š) - MUḪI.A.11 5 6 7 8 9 10 Giannakis 1998. Another festival of Hattic origin with Išduštaya (and) Papaya is documented by the fragment KBo 37.161, in ll. 2-5: Zalinu [ ] Wurunkatte [ ] NIN.É.GAL Išt[uštaya Papaya ] Eštanu. For the writings of the two names in the documents in Hittite, see van Gessel 1998, 206 f. and 349 f. Cfr. Yoshida 1996, 94. Haas – Wäfler 1976, 86 f. KBo 25.30 (Išduštaya in l. 15) belongs either to CTH 645 or CTH 609. Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 46.30.84.116 Heruntergeladen am | 25.03.14 14:17 The Anatolian Fate-Goddesses and their Different Traditions 3 Lelwani and his circle were deities of Hattic origin.12 Lelwani recieved the Hattic epithet of katte “king,” in the bilingual mythological section of a ritual for the building of a palace for the king, KBo 37.1 lk. Sp. 5-6 - r. Sp. 5: (the Storm-god) DŠāru (= DTāru) kātte DLēlwani kātte - DIM-aš LUGAL-uš Lēlwaniš-a LUGAL-uš.13 The two gods give their approval for the Sun-goddess to build for herself a palace in Liḫzina. Ḫašammili (who appears also in the ḫešta-celebrations) takes part in this building as the blacksmith of the gods (ll. 9-21). Hittite Šiwat, “Day,” Hattic Izzištanu,14 logogram UD.SIG5 “Propitious Day,” was the day on which one dies. Taknaš UTU was Wurunšemu/Urunzimu “Mother of the Earth,” an epithet of the Sun-goddess Eštan qualifying her as a chthonic deity.15 Zilipuri was a god connected with the hearth; his logogram, U.GUR,16 is the same as Šulinkatte. In the list KUB 44.23 Zilipuri is replaced by Šulinkatte (also a Hattic god).17 In the Hattic-Hittite Bilinguis KUB 2.2 + 48.1 II 37 ff., where the gods build a palace for the king, Zilupuri “the king,” katte / LUGAL-uš, builds the throne (ḫānwašuitt- / ḫalamašuitt-) (ll. 14-18).18 Tašimmet was a “concubine” of the Storm-god.19 The deities Šittarzuna and Zappa are not sufficiently characterized. The Window (luttai/GIŠAB-ya) and the Wood of the bolt (ḫatalwaš taru/GIŠ) were important elements connecting the inside with the outside of the temple and often received offerings in the regular cults.20 The Years (MUḪI.A) were symbolic representations of the years of the dynasty, kept in the ḫešta-house, under the protection of the gods of that temple.21 If the Fate-goddesses had the task of establishing the length of mortals’ lives and, therefore, were deities of life, also the other Hattic deities of the ḫešta-house acted in that fearful borderland that separates life from death. This border was represented by the Propitious Day (the day of one’s death). Zilipuri provided the hearth and the throne, the former representing the unity and continuity of the family and the latter, of royal 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 The same list, ending with U.GUR, is also in ll. 60-62; see Haas – Wäfler 1976, 92 f. A parallel passage is KUB 41.27 V 1-4, with Zuppa(š) and MU.KAMḪI.A. See further, KUB 58.69 I 12-17: Išduš[taya] ... P[apaya], see García Trabazo – Groddek 2005, 180. On Lelwani, see the monograph by Torri, 1999. Previous studies are: Otten, 1950; von Schuler, 1980–1983. See, further, Haas, 1994, 245; Klinger 1996, 167–169; Taracha 2009, 49 f. (on Lelwani's circle). Schuster 2002, 156 f. Otten 1976–1980b. In the Funerary ritual for the royal family, Izzištanu / UD.SIG5 and taknaš UTU are the gods who receive more offerings, together with the Soul, ZI (Ištanzana). Yoshida 1991, 58–61. Torri 1999, 11 f. 16. Schuster 1974, 70 f. Klinger 1996, 173. Archi 1966, 89–92; Popko 1978, 42–48. Torri 1999, 22–27. Similarly, the hieroglyphic sign L.336 depicts the pithos (kept in several temples), where barley was kept at the harvest. In spring it was ground and used for making bread, symbolizing the continuity of the harvest from year to year, see Archi 1973. Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 46.30.84.116 Heruntergeladen am | 25.03.14 14:17 Alfonso Archi 4 power. The Sun-goddess of the Earth ensured a favourable journey to the afterlife. It was Lelwani, the deity to whom the ḫešta-house was dedicated, who established when an individual’s life would end (which explains why she was linked to Išduštaya and Papaya).22 The queen Puduḫepa asks Lelwani to intercede with the other gods to grant long lives to her husband Ḫattusili and herself.23 This same queen makes various vows to Lelwani for the life of his Majesty.24 It is to Lelwani that one turns in order that the princess Gaššuliyawia may be cured.25 According to the Annals of Tutḫaliya I, Lelwani (together with the principal gods) accompanied the king into battle. In the case of a trial, the palace officials had to swear to Lelwani that they had faithfully performed the tasks they had been assigned (KUB 13.35 I 6-7). Political treaties were also deposited in the temple of Lelwani, evidently because it was her task to put an end to those unfaithful to the pacts undertaken.26 Although Išduštaya and Papaya are defined as kattereš karuileš “primeval goddesses of the netherworld” in the ritual KUB 29.1, they, together with Lelwani, must be distinguished from the karuileš šiuneš, kattereš šiuneš, Hurr. enna durenna “primeval gods,” and enna ammattena “ancestor gods,” terms which qualify the primeval, inferior gods of Hurrian origin.27 Of the gods of the ḫešta-house, only the Sun-goddess of the Earth (the Netherworld), taknaš UTU, found a correspondence with Ereškigal, the Sumerian “Queen of the Great Below,” and Hurr. Allani, that is the queen of the Netherworld.28 The Fate-goddesses may be considered underworld gods, only because they determined precisely when an individual was to reach pass to the Netherworld. 1.2 Other contexts a) 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 The two Hattic Fate-goddesses appear (so to say, for attraction) behind the Hittite Parcae, the Gulšeš, in the Telepinu Myth. “All the gods” are sitting in assembly under a hawthorn tree. Only the Fate-goddesses are mentioned by name, together with the Hittite goddesses of prosperity and the tutelary-deities involved in the ritual to which the myth is associated, KUB 17.10 III 30-32: Torri 1999, 49–51. KUB 21.27(+) III 31-38: “You, Lelwani [my Lady], let the life of Ḫattušili, your servant, and of Puduḫepa, your servant, [come forth] from your mouth before the gods! ... If you, Lelwani, my lady, will speak favorably [to the gods] and will keep your servant, Ḫattusili, alive and grant him long years, months, days, I shall come ...”. See Lebrun 1980, 333 f.; Singer 2002, 104. Otten – Souček 1965, 16 f., I 2-4: “Der Göttin Lelwani, meiner Herrin, habe ich für das Leben der Person der Majestät (dieses) Gelübde abgelegt: ‘Wenn du, o Göttin, meine Herrin, die Majestät für lange Jahre bei Leben und Gesundheit erhälst...”. KBo 4.6 (CTH 480); see Torri 1999, 41 f. See the passages quoted by Torri 1999, 59–61. Laroche 1974; Archi 1990. Torri 1999, 89–97. Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 46.30.84.116 Heruntergeladen am | 25.03.14 14:17 5 The Anatolian Fate-Goddesses and their Different Traditions “[Papapya], Ištuštaya, the Fate-goddesses (Gulšeš), Miyatanzipa, Telepinu, the Tutelary-god (Innar/KAL), Ḫapantali [and ].” b) KBo 4.13 + KUB 10.82 (CTH 625) is a great celebration at Ḫattuša, in the palace (ÉTIM GAL), on one of the days of the spring-festival AN.TAḪ.ŠUM, listing a large number of gods on the occasion of several offerings.29 Although this manuscript is late (probably from the period of Tuthaliya IV),30 the scribe used several older documents.31 The first offering list (I 1-48), starts anomalously (at least according to the Hattic-Hittite tradition), with Heaven and Earth (the Netherworld), the Hattic Fate-goddesses, two other deities of Lelwani's circle, and quite probably with Lelwani herself (ALLATUM): I 1 3 [I UDU AN] ⌈I⌉ ⌈UDU⌉ ER- E-TU[M D AL-LA-TUM(?)] I UDU DIš-du-uš-ta-ya [I UDU DPa-pa-ya] I UDU DTa-ša-ma-za I UDU ⌈D⌉[Ta-ši-mi-iz]. I UDU The presence of Heaven and Earth is according to an Akkadian-Hurrian model.32 There are then some tutelary spirits (of the Front, Tongue, A[...], Fault); some qualities of the Storm-god. The great gods appear first at line 17. The Hittite Parcae, Gulšeš, appear in this festival much more frequently than the Hattic ones, together with their own circle, that of the gods assuring prosperity: II 19-22, IV 1-3, IV 21-24: Telepinu - Ḫalki - SUMUQAN; Gulšuš DINGIR.MAḪMEŠ-uš Ḫarištašši - U.GUR U.GUR URUḪayaša33 VI 32-38 (dupl. KBo 19.128 VI 17-24):34 XV DINGIRMEŠ: Gulšuš DINGIR.MAḪMEŠ-uš - Kuzanašu (/ GUNNI) - U.GUR Ù U.GUR URUḪayaša SÎN (/ EN.ZU) - MUL - Išpanza (/ GE6-anza) - Ḫašmaiu (/ Ḫašammili) Kattaḫḫi (/ SAL.LUGAL) - Ḫarištašši - Ḫilašši - tepu pedan - EME-aš ḫandanza - zipu Šarrumar (/ lammar tartan) - UD.[SIG5]. 29 30 31 32 33 34 Haas 1994, 775–781, who suggests that this celebration was performed the day before the “first day” of the AN.TAḪ.ŠUM-festival. For alternative suggestions, see Schwemer 2004. Otten 1971, 51, who pointed out the many parallelisms between KBo 14.13 + KUB 10.82 and KBo 19.128. As Forlanini 2007, has shown, with insight. See the ritual KUB 9.28 I 3-9 (dupl. KBo 27.49, 3-7): Sun-god, Storm-god of heaven, Storm-god of the country, thousand gods, Heaven (and) Earth, [...], Moon-god, Grain (Dagan), NIN.É.GAL, Ištar Ninatta Kulitta, Taraweš Gulšeš Ḫilaššiš, Mountains (and) Rivers of Ḫattuša, thousand gods. The first and third lists start, and the second ends with: DU ÉTIM GAL, “of the Palace”, Otten 1971, 22 f. Otten 1971, 45–47. Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 46.30.84.116 Heruntergeladen am | 25.03.14 14:17 Alfonso Archi 6 This last list includes gods directly related to the inhabitants of the palace and their fate: Hearth, Hatt. Kuz(z)ana/išu, Hitt. Ḫašša; the celestial bodies: Moon, Star, and Night, which influence human beings; Ḫarištašši: connected with ḫarištani- “storeroom”;35 Ḫilašši: the Genius of the courtyard; tepu pedan “Little Place” (perhaps a euphemism for the netherworld and/or the grave);36 Tongue Fit; ... Separation (// ... Moment); Propitius Day (the day on which one dies). c) It is difficult to understand why Išduštaya and Papaya appear in a ritual concerning an oath for an army employed in the Hurrian lands, KUB 9.1 II 30. The king has to say secretly that he (a former Macbeth) had encountered the Fategoddesses, II 1-9: “The king [recites] as follows: ‘[ ] took (3rd pl.) the king (acc.) and the lords (acc.) 1 pālza. I, the king, met the two goddesses: Papaya (and) [Išdu]štaya, and I camped’. The two (IITAM)37 met he! [The king] whispe[rs] these words by night in the land of the town of Ḫimmuwa.” d) Papaya appears together with Kataḫzipuri (Hittite Kamrušepa), the Hattic goddess of magic, in KUB 56.17, an obscure text concerning the elimination of omens announced in an “unfavourable dream,” Ù ḪUL.38 2. The Gulšeš 2.1 The Hittite contexts The verb gulš- means “to carve, engrave, mark, inscribe, write.” The thematic noun D Gulša- appears as personified theonym (in general plural): “Fate-goddesses.” The Luwian forms are DGulza-, DGulzanzipa-; Palaic DGulzan(n)ika-.39 The idea that the “lot, fate” (cfr. Gk. moîra) was “marked, engraved” for every individual from his very birth was, therefore, common amongst Anatolian peoples of Indo-European language 35 36 37 38 39 Haas 1994, 261, note 74. CHD P, 339 f. Here, better than “twice". Klengel 1988. Carruba 1966, 34–37, has demonstrated that this verb and divine name are written phonetically (not ideographically). For the verb gulš-, see Oettinger 1979, 203 f.; in general, HED K, 239–244. For the Luwian data, Melchert 1993, 107 f.; Starke 1990, 462–464 and Melchert 2003, 284. For Palaic D Gulzan(n)ikas, DGulzan(n)ikeš, see Carruba 1972, 27, and the list in van Gessel 1998, 255. For Gulšaš in the festival of Zaparwa (in Hittite), see KBo 13.217 V 16, 20. The list of gods in the Palaic ritual KUB 35.165 Rs. 13-18 has, beside the Gulzannikeš, a list of Hattic and Palaic-Hittite gods: Kataḫḫzipuri, Ilaliyantikeš, Ḫašamili, Kamama, Ḫilanzipa, Gulzannikeš, Uliliantikeš, see Carruba 1970, 19. Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 46.30.84.116 Heruntergeladen am | 25.03.14 14:17 The Anatolian Fate-Goddesses and their Different Traditions 7 and this undoubtedly predates the introduction of writing. The earliest attestations of this root are given by the personal names Kulšata, Kulziya(r) of the Old Assyrian period.40 The act of counting, incising a sign for every unit of measurement, is described in a myth, KUB 33.118, 5-6: UD.KAMḪI.A-uš kap[puwaizzi IT]U.KAMḪI.Agulaškiz[zi] “(Mount Wašitta) counts the days, keeps incised the months.” It is possible that, with the spread of writing in certain spheres, the custom of writing the fate was attributed to the Gulšes: GIŠ(:ḪUR)gulzattar, derived from gulš-, means “inscribed wooden tablet.”41 The vocabulary KBo 13.2 rev. 2 has: [nam-ta r = šīmta šâmu] = gulšaš gulšuwa[r] “determine the fate” (CHD L-N, 44 s.v. lappiya-). (D)Gulšas was the translation for Akk. šīmtu “fate”. The Akkadian Wisdom of Uruk is known from the archives of Ugarit, Emar and Ḫattuša, where it received a Hittite translation; ll. 145-147: a-[na u4]-mi [ši-ma]-ti-ka (dupl.: a-na u]m-me ša-a šim-ma-ti-ka) 9 KURUM6MEŠ ŠID-nu-m[a mu-t]a-a-nu [re-š]u-uk-ka “(Le grenier de ta maison, sur toute [l'étendue] de sa [p]ièce, est rempli de grain;) au jour de ta mo[rt] on comptera (seulement) neuf rations: c'est l'épidemie que tu auras pour capital!”42 The Hittite version, misunderstanding this passage, translates rēšu literally with “head,” KBo 12.70 Vs. 39-42: GIM-an-ma-ta D Gul-ša-aš UD.KAM-uš ti-an-zi nu 9-an a-ra-li-i-en kap-pu-u-wa-a-an-zi na-an-ta ki-it-kar-za zi-ik-kán-zi “lorsque les Parques fixent l'avenir (/ les jours), elles comptent neuf arali, et le portent à ta tête.”43 In the KIN oracles (belonging to the Hittite tradition), the tokens called DGulšaš minumar / DNAM minumar “favour of Fate” may alternate in the same text.44 There are “unfavourable / well-being Gulšaš,” KUB 58.108 I 5, 8, IV 8: idaluš DGulšaš, IV 10, 13: :ušantariš DGulšaš. KUB 23.85, 5-6: “You, Tattamaru, had married the daughter of my sister, (but) then the Gulšeš treated you badly, and she died on you.”45 KUB 43.72 II 11: DGulšaš idālu gulaššuwar “bad decree of the Fate-goddesses.” Although the following ritual for Tuthaliya III presents certain elements from Kizzuwatna (and perhaps some others taken from a Babylonian ritual), the passage with the Gulšeš and the Mother-goddesses (DINGIR.MAḪMEŠ) presents the usual Hittite formulae, KUB 43.55 II 11-21 (dupl. KUB 58.101 Vs. 1-19):46 “In regard to this matter we have just now summoned as witnesses the [... Mo]thergoddesses and the Fate-goddesses. [And i]f a man is at any time born, [then] as the 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 Laroche 1966, 97. The attributes of the Roman Parcae are not only the implements for weaving, as for the Moirai, but also the volumen, where they fixed the fate in writing. Translation by Arnaud 2007, 148–179, who has provided a recent edition of the text. Laroche 1968, 782. This fact has been noted by Laroche 1948, 125. For minumar in connection with other terms as a token of the KIN oracles, see Archi 1974, 135. Hagenbuchner 1989, 2. 15. Haas 1988, 87–91; Taracha 2000, 58–61. The translation is that of Beckman 1983, 245. A similar invocation to the Fate-goddesses is KUB 55.42 4-8. Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 46.30.84.116 Heruntergeladen am | 25.03.14 14:17 Alfonso Archi 8 Fate-goddesses and the Mother-goddesses on that day designate well-being (aššul) for him – this is the day! May you Fate-goddesses and Mother-goddesses designate (gulašten) life, [...] strength, long years, [future li]fe, success, love of gods and human beings ... for the king (and) queen.” The Fate-goddesses, active at the moment of birth, follow man throughout his entire life. The middle Hittite ritual of Ḫantitaššu (“the woman of Ḫurma;” CTH 395), was performed “if the years are disturbed (nininkanteš) for a man or a woman,” and addressed not only to the Sun-god, but also to the Gulšeš, KBo 11.14 I 16, II 36 (the “words of the goddess Kamrušepa” are also mentioned in II 25). The Gulšeš, generally associated with DINGIR.MAḪ, that is Ḫannaḫanna, or the DINGIR.MAḪMEŠ (as well as the Darawa, Darawaeš, Luw. Darawanzi),47 are deities in charge of well-being. They appear together with Telepinu and Ḫašamili, of Hattic origin, and play an important role as tutelary deities in the (Hattic-)Hittite cults. The Gulšeš and DINGIR.MAḪMEŠ appear in the birth ritual KBo 24.6 Vs. 3.48 The Telepinu Myth, KUB 17.10 III 30-32, mentions: “[Papapya], Ištuštaya, the Fate-goddesses (Gulšeš), Miyatanzipa, Telepinu, the Tutelary-god (Innar/KAL), Ḫapantali [and ].” The pantheon of the city of Karaḫna, KUB 25.32(+) (a late manuscript) I 4-19, lists: several tutelary gods of nature (KAL), the Storm-god of the army, U.GUR, ZA.BA4.BA4, Pirwa, Aškašipa, [MUNUS.LUGAL], Ḫalki, Telipinu, Moon-god, Antaliya (a local deity), Immarniza, MAḪ, Gulšeš, Ḫašamili.49 DINGIR.MAḪ(MEŠ) and Gulšeš are also associated with each other in other myths of Hittite tradition. VBoT 58 (Disappearance of the Sun-god) I 32-34: “[Go,] call the Fategoddess (DGulaššan) and Ḫannaḫanna (DINGIR.MAḪ). If those (other gods) have died, [then] these too (who assure the future of the land) may have died. [Did] Frost (Ḫaḫḫima) [come] to their gate too?” KUB 33.24 (Disappearance of the Storm-god) I 37-38: “The Storm-god's father went to the Fate-goddess and Ḫannaḫanna ...”50 They appear together in some rituals, such as that dictated by Pupuwanni, KUB 7.2 (CTH 408) I 15-16 and KUB 41.3(+) I 20: Storm-god, Sun-god, Tutelary-god of nature (Innar), Gulšeš, Daraweš.51 KUB 15.31 is an evocation of “the DINGIR.MAḪMEŠ and the Gulšeš, (i.e.) the DINGIR.MAḪMEŠ and the Gulšeš of the gods and of the persons of the human beings, (and) Zukki (with) Anzili” (I 1-2, 36-37, II 4-5).52 47 48 49 50 51 52 Carruba 1966, 30 note 48, suggested identifying the DINGIR.MAḪMEŠ with the Darawaeš (for the sequence Gulšeš - Darawa, see, e. g., KBo 30.124 Rs. 1, 12). This is not possible because of passages such as KUB 35.84 II 9: Gulšeš DINGIR.MAḪMEŠ Daraweš; KBo 24.101 Rs. 6: DINGIR.MAḪ Gulšeš Tarawa. Beckman 1983, 224 f. See also KBo 30.4 III 7-8. Dinçol – Darga 1969–1970, 100 f. See, further, the passages from KBo 4.13(+) quoted above, 1.2. See Hoffner 1990, 21. 27. Bawanypeck 2005, 277 f. 286. Haas – Wilhelm 1974, 148–155 (with the duplicate KUB 15.32). Another evocation of the Gulšeš, DINGIR.MAḪMEŠ and Daraweš, KUB 35.84, belongs to the Luwian milieu. See also the catalogue Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 46.30.84.116 Heruntergeladen am | 25.03.14 14:17 The Anatolian Fate-Goddesses and their Different Traditions 9 In the annual festival for the goddess Ḫuwaššanna of Ḫupišna (cl. Kybistra) (with Luwian elements), KBo 20.72(+) (and parallel texts; CTH 694), Ḫarištašši, together with the Gulšeš and UD.SIG5 “Propitious Day”, appear regularly besides Ḫuwaššanna, the Storm-god and the War-god ZA.BA4.BA4 (KBo 20.72(+) II 7, III 12-13, et passim; KBo 20.48 Rs.? 14-16; KBo 20.51 I 8). Ḫarištašši is a god of the house and the family. In KUB 12.5 I 14-15, the queen “drinks” Ḫarištašši, the bed and the couch (natḫi, namulli).53 In this ritual, therefore, Ḫuwaššanna (a deity whose functions are those of a mother-goddess), has beside her: 1) the tutelary god of the place where a woman who has just given birth and her newborn child lie, together with bed and couch; 2) the Fategoddesses; 3) the God of the Day on which one dies. These three are the tutelary gods of the crucial moments in a person’s life: birth, determination of one’s fate, and death.54 The Fate-goddess and the Mother-goddess of a living or deceased person could acquire their own, particular individuality. The cult inventory KUB 48.114 I 5-10 has: D Gulšaš DINGIR.MAḪ-aš-a ŠA DUMU.NITA AMA-ŠU ḫannaš ḫuḫḫaš “Fate-goddess and Mother-goddess of the son of his mother, (his) grandmother, grandfather;” DGulšaš DINGIR.MAḪ-aš ŠA DAM IŠaḫurunuwa “... of Šaḫurunuwa's wife;” DGulša[š DINGIR.MAḪ-aš ŠA ITutḫa]liya LUGAL Ù ŠA [ “... of Tutḫa]liya, the king and of [ his ...].”55 It is the singer of Kaneš who sings (in Hittite) for the Gulšeš of the river bank (wappuwaš) [and the DINGIR.MAḪMEŠ], KUB 9.21, 6-8 (in ll. 3-5, 9-10, also the Tutelary-god of the river and the Gods of the river receive offerings).56 The ritual of Tunnawiya, KUB 7.53 + 12.58 (CTH 409), of Hittite-Luwian tradition, explains why rituals took place at the river bank.57 Water purifies and the clay of the river is uncontaminated. This same clay is essential to the rite as it was used to shape the “evil tongues”, the destruction of which eliminated evil spells. In I 27-51 the Old Woman goes to the river bank, offers to Ḫannaḫanna (DMAḪ), and recites: “Here, Ḫannaḫanna of the river bank, I have come back to you. And you, Ḫannaḫanna from which river 53 54 55 56 57 KUB 30.56 III 4: “When they draw the Mother-goddesses of the person (NÍ.TE-aš DINGIR.MAḪMEŠ) from the road,” Dardano 2006, 212. “Ḫannaḫanna of the person of the queen,” DINGIR.MAḪ ŠA NÍ.TE MUNUS.LUGAL, is mentioned in Bo 5048 I 17, see de Roos 2007, 256. Otten 1972–1975. Lombardi 1999, see in particular 225–229. KUB 51.30 Vs. 6-9 lists offerings for the Hearth, the Throne (DDAG-ti), the Window for the Gulaššeš (GIŠAB-ya DGul-aš-ša-aš), the Inner Chamber for Ḫarištašši (É.ŠÀ-ni DḪa-re-eš-ta-ši). Ḫarištašši is mentioned in KUB 32.87 + KBo 23.72 + KBo 39.137 + KBo 43.154 Vs. 35-39 (a fragmentary passage) after the Mother-goddesses and the Fategoddesses. See also DINGIR.MAḪ MUNUSAMA DUTUŠI “(offerings to) Ḫannaḫanna of His Majesty's mother; DINGIR.MAḪ MUNUS.LUGAL-aš “Ḫannahanna of the queen,” KBo 23.72(+) Vs. 12, Rs. 30. McMahon 1991, 190 f. In KUB 44.12 VI 5-6, the singer sings for this goddess in Hattic, which is anomalous. The text has been studied by Goetze 1938; the attribution of this ritual to the Hittite-Luwian tradition has been reasserted by Miller 2004, 452–461. Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 46.30.84.116 Heruntergeladen am | 25.03.14 14:17 Alfonso Archi 10 bank this clay is taken, take (it) in your hand, and cleanse this sacrificer with it; purify the twelve parts of his body.” After some other offerings, she says: “Just as you, O spring, keep gushing up silt back up from the dark earth, in the same way remove evil uncleanness from the limbs of this person, the sacrificer.” Then, the Old Woman brings there the clay of the river bank (and) the clay of the spring. She shapes two clay figures, twelve clay tongues, two clay oxen, etc.58 2.2 Rituals with Hurrian elements In the first tablet of the ritual of Allaituraḫi, the Old Woman of Mukiš, we find a similar situation, but this time addressed to the Gulšeš instead of Ḫannaḫanna (KUB 17.27 II 438). The Old Woman uses first the clay for some magic actions. Then, she goes back to the river bank and offers to the Fate-goddesses of the river bank, saying: “Eat, Fate-goddesses of the river bank (wappuwaš). If the wicked sorcerer gave the image of this man either to the river bank or to the current of the river, give it back to him!”59 The purifying properties of the water and the silt washed by the currents of the river are of universal significance. The elimination of evil spells through the destruction of the clay tongues and figurines which represent them in tangible form are common to Hittite magic. Such practices cannot be attributed to foreign influence, even though Allaituraḫi came from a markedly Hurrianized sphere. We cannot exclude the possibility that the ritual (of the late period) was extensively reformulated at Ḫattuša. The Fate-goddesses of the river bank and the Mother-goddesses (DINGIR.MAḪMEŠ) are also associated with each other in a fragmentary ritual, Bo 3617. There is first the simile of the prolific pig (I 4-5), typical of Hittite tradition. There then follows the account of the separation of earth and sky, with the gods dividing between those who inhabit Heaven and those of the Netherworld. This is a mythology of Mesopotamian tradition, borrowed through the Hurrians.60 The sacrificer says on the river bank: 58 The analogy between the work of magicians and potters is expressed in the ritual of Iriya, the ḪAL, KUB 30.35 + 39.104 (CTH 400) I 6-9: “And exactly where the potters use to take [the clay] of the river bank, you will go there, and you will say to the river bank (nu kuwapi wappuw[aš IM LÚ.]MEŠBÁḪAR imma daškanzi): ‘O my river bank, [why] I came (to) it; why I took (this) trouble (dariyaḫḫun)?’”, see Gurney, 1937. Haas 2007, 15. 26. The text (and its duplicates) has been published and studied by Otten – Siegelová 1970, who pointed to the Mesopotamian origin of this theme. Notice that this theme is found also in the myth Kingship in Heaven, where some gods “went down to the Dark Earth,” see Hoffner 1990, 40. LÚ 59 60 Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 46.30.84.116 Heruntergeladen am | 25.03.14 14:17 The Anatolian Fate-Goddesses and their Different Traditions 11 “When they took Heaven and Earth, the gods split up; the upper gods took Heaven, but the lower gods took Earth and the Netherworld. Everyone took its own. You, O river, took for yourself purification, life of progeny, and procreative power(?). Now, because (someone) says to someone else: it is terrible, (then) he goes back to you, O river, and to the Fate-goddesses and Mother-goddesses of the river bank, who create man.”61 In this passage, šamnai-, šamniya- “to create” refers to creation from clay, a well known image in both Sumerian and Babylonian myths, an analogy with the work of potters and sculptors.62 The basic meaning of the verb seems to be: “to found, to implant.” The verb is used in the Kumarbi myths (Kumarbi, the Mother-goddesses “created DN”), and in Gilgameš. The Prayer of Kantuzzili (for which Babylonian material was at disposal) has: “O my god, you have made me (iyaš), you have created (šamnāeš) me.” This verb expresses also the creation of artifacts by smiths, i. e. “to forge” (HCD s. v.). In KUB 58.108 IV 5-10, the verb šamniya- is again referred to the well-being, procreating, (:ušantāra(i)-) Gulšeš: “He/She sacrifices one fattened ušantari-sheep to the Gulšeš ... The Old Woman says: ‘I have removed [from ...] the evil Gulša. [Whom] the ušantari Gulša has created, I, the ušantari Gulša have bound back...’”63 The idea that mankind was shaped from clay occurs also in a ritual for the evocation of the Underworld gods, KUB 7.41 (and duplicates; CTH 446) of clear Hurrian origin,64 I 39-48: “He goes to the river bank ... He speaks as follows: ‘I, a human being, have now come! As Ḫannaḫanna takes children from the river bank (DINGIR.MAḪ DUMU-tar wappui65 daškizzi), I too, a human being, have come to the river bank to summon the Primeval (karuiliēš) gods ... Aduntarri the diviner, Zulki the dream interpretess... (gods belonging to the well-known Hurrian enna turena).”66 Analysis of these rituals shows that Ḫannaḫanna and all the Mother-goddesses, together with the Gulšeš, were connected in Hittite magic with the river banks. Here the “evil tongues” were modeled, images of the sacrificer(s) and of the ones responsible for the witchcraft, to then proceed with the elimination of the evil spells. The Hurrian magic attributes to these goddesses the act of creating mankind, shaping man from clay, a concept that goes back to the Sumerians. 61 62 63 64 65 66 The wappuaš DINGIR.MAḪ(MEŠ) are mentioned in several rituals, see, e. g., KBo 11.17 II 6; KBo 13.210 Rs. 2, 9. Frymer-Kensky 1987, 129–131. See Otten – Siegelová 1970, 33 f., where :ušantār(a)i- is also discussed; CHD Š, 125b. The document has been studied by Otten 1961. Recent translations of this complex ritual have been given by Collins 1997 and Miller 2008. This is a “dative of disadvantage.” On the Primeval Hurrian god, in this ritual called also Anunnakū, see the studies quoted above in note 27. Further literature in Taracha 2009, 126 note 710. Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 46.30.84.116 Heruntergeladen am | 25.03.14 14:17 Alfonso Archi 12 2.3 Contexts of Hurrian origin The Hittite versions of the Hurrian myths translate (when possible) the personal names of the gods: Tarḫuna (nom. DU-aš) for the Storm-god Teššup, Ištanu (nom. DUTU-uš) for the Sun-god Šimigi; similarly, in the Classical Age, an educated person used Jupiter in Latin and Zeus in Greek. The names of the Hurrian Fate-goddesses Ḫutena and Ḫutellura were translated with Gulšeš and DINGIR.MAḪMEŠ/ḪI.A. The Hurrian fragment KUB 45.61 tells of Ullikummi's birth, according to the analysis by Mauro Giorgieri. The Hittite version of Ullikummi has: “The Fate-goddesses (Gulšuš) and the Mo[thergoddesses lifted / took the child and] they placed him on Kumarbi's knees.” The Hurrian passage, KUB 45.61 II 5-6, may be translated as follows: “The goddesses Ḫutena [and Ḫutellura] brought him (i. e. the child) to his (i.e. Teššub) lap, holding him.”67 The Gulšeš and DINGIR.MAḪMEŠ are found also in Ḫedammu, see fragments nos. 18, 11 and 19, 7;68 in Gilgameš, KUB 8.59, 89: “The Sea cursed Gilgameš, [...] and the Fate-goddesses;” in Gurparanzaḫ, KUB 17.9 I 36-38: “(The river Aranzaḫ) went by DINGIR.MAḪ. The Fate-goddesses saw the river Aranzaḫ; [to eat] and to drink they gave [to him].”69 The Gulšeš and DINGIR.MAḪMEŠ of the “circle (kaluti-) of Ḫebat” mentioned in texts related to the cult of Tešub and Ḫebat of Aleppo, and those of other Hurrian cults introduced into Ḫattuša, are actually the goddesses Ḫutena and Ḫutellura. KBo 27.191 (CTH 787) I 1-5: Dakidu, Gulšaš DINGIR.MAḪMEŠ, Išḫara. KUB 20.59 (CTH 616: 29th day of the AN.TAḪ.ŠUM festival, for Ea and his circle) VI 14-16 (dupl. KBo 9.140 III 14-16): DINGIR.MAḪ Gulšeš, Izzummi (vizier of Ea) Kalli; KUB 20.59 III 57: ] Ea, Damkina, [...], Fate-goddesses, Izzummi. Ritual of the MUNUSŠU.GI (CTH 500), KBo 24.71, 4: NIN.É.GAL, A.A, Gulšaš DINGIR.MAḪMEŠ. Ritual of Ammiḫatna (CTH 471), KBo 5.2 III 7-12: Ḫepat, Išḫara, Allani, Nikkallu, IŠTAR, Gulšaš DINGIR.MAḪ. Ritual of Palliya (CTH 475), KBo 44.98 + 35.198 (+) 15.43 (CTH 475) II 14-15: Ḫalki (= Dagan), Ea, Ḫutena Ḫutellura; III 14: ŠA DU DGulaššaš DINGIR.MAḪḪI.A-aš.70 Substitution ritual, KUB 17.14(+) (CTH 421) Vs.! 8-17: “(several Storm-gods) Šeri and Ḫurri, Sun-goddess of Arinna, Ḫebat, Šarruma, Ḫaddašši, Enlil, Ninlil, Moon-god, Ningal, Ea, Damkina, Tutelary god (of) Ḫuwaššanna, Tutelary-god of the hunting bag, Zitḫariya, DINGIR.GAL, Šanda, the gods of my body, the gods of my person, the Fate-goddesses, the Mother-goddesses, the gods of the land, the gods of the city, Mountains, Rivers...”71 67 68 69 70 71 Giorgieri 2001, 137–141. For an edition of KUB 45.61 see Salvini – Wegner 2004, 41 f. (no. 9). The Hittite passage of Ullikummi is manuscript A III 11-12, see Güterbock 1952, 152 f. Siegelová 1971, 62 f. Pecchioli 2003, 484–486. Groddek 2004, 74–76. Kümmel 1967, 60 f. See, further, KUB 9.28 I 3-9, in note 32 above. Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 46.30.84.116 Heruntergeladen am | 25.03.14 14:17 13 The Anatolian Fate-Goddesses and their Different Traditions 3. The Hurrian Ḫutena and Ḫutellura and the West-Semitic Kotharāt Emmanuel Laroche analyzed the name Ḫutellura as ḫute-ll-ur°-na: plural (-na), comitative (-ra-); Ḫutena as a nominal form, deriving both from the verb ḫut(e/i). From their equivalent Gulšeš, and the DINGIR.MAḪMEŠ, he deduced that they were female divinities, and suggested the meaning “to favour” for the verb, in agreement with passages in the Mittani letter. The goddesses who determined one’s fate were seen as benevolent entities, auguring well.72 Ḫutena is “She of favouring:” ḫud=we=na.73 In the Hurrian birth ritual KBo 27.1, 10 (= ChS I/5, no 98): MUNUSŠi-in-ti-ma-a-ni ḫu-ti-il-lu-r[i], ḫutilluri means “midwife”, being apposition of the personal name Šindimani.74 Ḫutena and Ḫutellura belong to the circle of Ḫebat, as it was established at Aleppo. Some manuscripts have the list (A) (here below);75 (B) gives the sequence of the goddesses according to the manuscripts concerning the festival of Teššub and Ḫebat of Ḫalab celebrated at Ḫattuša (KBo 14.142 I 20-28, dpl. KUB 27.13 I 13-18, CTH 698). (C) is the ordo received at Ugarit76: A Ḫebat Ḫebat Šarruma Ḫebat muš(u)ni Ḫebat kunzišalli Darru Dakidu Ḫutena Ḫutellura Išḫara Allani Umbu Ištar Ninatta Kulitta ... 72 73 74 75 76 B Ḫebat (Ḫalap) Ḫebat ḫalziyauwaš Šarruma Allanza Ḫebat mušni Ḫebat ḫalziyauwaš Ḫebat Allanzu Ḫebat kunzišalli Takitum Gulšeš DINGIR.MAḪMEŠ Išḫara Allani Nikkal Ištar Ninatta Kulitta ... C 1. Hebat 2. Išḫara 3. Allani 4. Ḫutena Ḫutellura 5. Ninatta Kulitta 6. Dakit 7. Nikkal Laroche 1948, 124–126. Salvini 1988, 169 f., has suggested the meaning: “to praise.” Haas 1994, 309. This has been noted by Haas 1994, 483 with note 131. This is the list presented by Laroche 1948, 121–124. Laroche 1968, 519. This list is according to the texts RS. 24.295, AO 17.269 (CTA 172), AO 25.167 (CTA 173). RS. 24.261 adds Adamma Kubaba. Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 46.30.84.116 Heruntergeladen am | 25.03.14 14:17 Alfonso Archi 14 The festival for Teššub and Ḫebat of Lawazantiya (CTH 699), KBo 21.34 III 58-63, has: Ḫebat - Ḫebat Šarruma - Dakidu - Ḫutena Ḫutellura - attaš DINGIRMEŠ DINGIR.MUNUSMEŠ keldiya. The “Ugaritic pantheon” (RS. 1.17; RS. 24.264 + 280) has: several Ba‘al's - Earth and Heaven - k rt (Kotharāt) - Yarah (the Moon). The k rt are translated dSa-sú-ra-tum in the Akkadian version (RS. 20.24) of this pantheon. A comparison with the Hurrian god-lists from Ugarit show that these goddesses were equivalent to Ḫutena Ḫutellura.77 The Ugaritic-Akkadian equivalence explains the functions attributed to these goddesses. Akk. šassūru is a Sumerian loanword, which means “womb.” The Sumerian and Akkadian Mother-goddess were assisted by seven assistants called “wombs,” the Šassūrātu, who, because of their Ugaritic equivalence, have to be identified with Birth-goddesses.78 There were seven Kotharāt; they appear in the Aqhat epos as goddesses of conception and pregnancy (KTU 1.17 II 26-40); in the Myth of the Marriage of Yarah and Nikkal they are invoked as “daughters of the Star (hll), swallows” KTU 1.24, 4-42).79 k r means “wise, cunning;” Kothar (from the same root) is the god of magic and technique. The name Kotharāt therefore fits well the tutelary goddesses of pregnancy and birth. This name is derived from *kšr “to be skilled, to achieve,” a root attested to not only in West-Semitic but also in Akkadian. The cult of the Kotharāt was diffused in the Middle Euphrates region from the beginning of the 2nd millennium. An older version of an offering list from Mari (preceding the “Babylonization” of the local scribal school) presents already the equivalence between the Eastand West-Semitic birth goddesses, ll. 7-8: dSin-zu-ru-um dKà-ma-šu-ra-tum (kawašurātum); the later version, ll. 11-12, has: dŠa-zu-[ru-um] dKu-ša-[ra-tum] (kûšarātum).80 Emar VI/3, 378 II 18 has: dingirmeš ka-ša-ra-ti ša i-ši-ḫi.81 Ḫutena and Ḫutellura, according to the Hurrian version of Ullikummi (and also the Gulšeš together with the DINGIR.MAḪMEŠ, when they are the translation of Ḫutena and Ḫutellura in the Hittite version of Ullkummi, Ḫedammu and the other literary texts of Hurrian origin) were goddesses of birth, like the Kotharāt in the Ugaritic documentation.82 It is probably that the Hurrians settled in Syria modelled their Birth-goddesses on the Akkadian and Syrian ones. Proof is that ḫutilluri is the apposition to Šindimani in a 77 78 79 80 81 82 For the Akkadian version, see Nougayrol 1968, 44 f. Since the different sources, in three different languages and writings, are organized in a rather “unfriendly” way in Ugaritica V, it is useful to use the tables in Dietrich – Loretz 1988, 300–305; del Olmo Lete 2008, 43. Stol 2000, 80–83. For the names of the seven Kotharat and a translation of Yarah and Nikkal, see del Olmo Lete 2008, 34 and 94 f. For the Kotharat in general, see Pardee 1995, who quotes dḪu-le-e-li, in Emar VI/3, 368 73, Arnaud 1986, 328, in relation to Ugaritic ḫll. The two lists, originally published by Georges Dossin, have been reinterpreted by Lambert 1985, 529 f. (who quotes in note 8a, dKa-ma-šu-[ra-]tum, CT 25,30, 13); see, further, Durand 2008, 198 f. Arnaud 1986, 372. In the birth rituals of Hittite tradition only the DINGIR.MAḪ(MEŠ) usually assisted at the birth; the Gulšeš appear only in one ritual, see the list of gods in Beckman 1983, 323. Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 46.30.84.116 Heruntergeladen am | 25.03.14 14:17 The Anatolian Fate-Goddesses and their Different Traditions 15 Hurrian birth ritual KBo 27.1 (= ChS I/5, no 98 l. 10: MUNUSŠi-in-ti-ma-a-ni ḫu-ti-il-lu-r[i], mentioned above) with the meaning of “midwife”. As Volkert Haas has remarked, the first element of Šindimani is šind(i) “seven,” showing that the Ḫutena Ḫutellura goddesses were a heptad, as well as the West-Semitic Kotharāt.83 4. Concluding remarks The study of religious beliefs, particularly those of an ancient civilisation, enables us to identify certain deeply-rooted aspects of a culture. The case of the Fate-goddesses is a good example through which we can understand how the Hittite pantheon was gradually formed. 83 a) For the Hittites (and the other Anatolian populations of the 2nd millennium who used an Indo-European language) Fate was not “what has been said,” Latin fātum. It was “what has been marked, engraved,” gulš-, for each individual. This idea is in some way similar to Greek moîra “lot” (Latin has mereo “to merit” from the same root). The idea that thread may metaphorically represent life, attested to by a Hittite ritual, was not an Indo-European heritage, as for the Greek, Latin and NorthEuropean cultures. This came, instead, from the Hattians, who settled in Central Anatolia before the Hittites. This reduces the chance of shared Indo-European traditions being documented by the Hittites. The years may be weighed (as Zeus did with the destiny of the humans, Hom. Il. 22, 209-212), KBo 21.22 Vs. 18-20: kāša GIŠ.ÉRIN karpiyemi nu Labarnaš taluqauš MUḪI.A-uš ušneškimi kāša GIŠ.ÉRIN karpiyemi n-ašta MUNUS Tawanannaš taluqauš MUḪI.A-uš ušneškimi “Lo, I pick up a scale and put up for weighing the long years of Labarna; lo, I pick up a scale and put up for weighing the long years of Tawananna” (HED K, 92). The action of weighing had the meaning of proving and reaffirming the value of goods, as in KUB 24.12 III 4-25, where precious goods put on a scale are offered to a deity in substitution because of the king’s health (Taracha 2000, 90–93). b) Išdustaya and Papaya were the Hattic Fate-goddesses. A Hittite ritual (with Hattic background) presents the two goddesses creating the thread of fate. They were the “infernal (i.e. belonging to the Netherworld) primeval goddesses, the daughter-in-laws (perhaps because related to Lelwani),” katterreš karūelēš DINGIRMEŠ kūšeš. They belonged to that group of Hattic gods for which an- Haas 1994, 372 f. Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 46.30.84.116 Heruntergeladen am | 25.03.14 14:17 Alfonso Archi 16 cient and complex rituals were performed to celebrate the new year, to favour the rebirth of nature. One of the symbolically most important acts was the substitution of the “Old Year” and the “hunting bag,” KUŠkursa- (a kind of cornucopia), with the “New Year” and a new “hunting bag.” Išdustaya and Papaya appear in only a few other documents. The Hittite ritual which included the narration of the Telepinu Myth (a Middle Hittite redaction with the mythologem of the disappearing god, probably of Hattic origin) lists these goddesses beside the Hittite deities of prosperity and Fate-goddesses: the Gulšeš. This is a cumulative process: no god with this kind of role or tasks was to be absent. The important festival KBo 4.13(+) (CTH 625), celebrated at Hattuša is, instead, a late redaction which includes god-lists of different periods and traditions. Išdustaya and Papaya (together with the Hattic dyad Tašammat and Tašimmet) are included in the first section representing a cosmogonic order with Hurrian traits. The attribute “primeval,” karuili-, “perhaps literally ‘at dawn,’ and thus ‘primordially,’”84 is well-suited to the Fate-goddesses. The formula kattereš šiuneš (DINGIRMEŠ) “inferior, infernal” also qualifies the earlier gods who live in Earth, tagnaš šiuneš, as opposed to “the gods of Heaven,” according to the Hurrian pantheon. Here, the influence of the Babylonian culture (the Anunnakū, A.NU(N).NA.KE4) is clear. The Hattic-Hittite “inferior” gods did not belong instead to an older generation but made up the lower section of a system that made an inner distinction between “gods of Heaven and gods of Earth (the Netherworld).”85 It is well-known that the Hittite dynasty assimilated the gods and festivals of the preceding Hattic rulers when the capital was moved to Ḫattuša. The Hattic Sun-goddess Eštan (Hittite Ištanu), called also Arinnit(i/u) “she of Arinna” from her major cult-place, and Wurunšemu “Mother(?) of the Earth,” became the major deity of the pantheon. The Storm-god Taru was assimilated to the corresponding Hittite god, Tarḫuna, Luwian Tarḫunt(a) “the Mighty.” Minor deities, such as Išdustaya and Papaya, survived in the Hattic cults relating to kingship and the exercise of power. For daily requirements, instead, the other gods were called upon: those of Hittite tradition like the Gulšeš. Išdustaya and Papaya were not assimilated with the Gulšeš as they were strongly characterised by their specific, original cults. Lelwani too, the first deity of the pantheon of the ḫešta-house, maintained her individual nature and was not assimilated with any Hittite-Hurrian deity. The Hurrian goddess of the Netherworld, “the Bolt of the Earth,” was Allani, whose name was expressed also 84 85 HED K, 114. Laroche 1974; Archi 1990. For the Hurrian karuileš deities to be drawn from Earth, see, e. g., KUB 7.41 I 45-52, see Otten 1961, 120; KBo 17.94 III 27-28, see Haas – Wegner 1988, 354 (no. 77). The Gulšaš received also the epithet karuiliš, KBo 20.82 II 3, 29 (CTH 434). Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 46.30.84.116 Heruntergeladen am | 25.03.14 14:17 The Anatolian Fate-Goddesses and their Different Traditions 17 with the Sumerogram EREŠ.KI.GAL. For this reason, the Hittites chose ALLATUM (an Akkadian derivative from Hurrian allai “lady,” used in Syria and transmitted also to Babylonia) as the allogram for Lelwani. Some god lists have both Lelwani/ALLATUM and Allani/EREŠ.KI.GAL, showing that they were two different goddesses.86 86 c) The Hittite Gulšeš determined each individual’s fate from the moment of birth and, consequently, were often associated with Ḫannaḫanna and the DINGIR.MAḪMEŠ, the Mother-goddess(es), who helped women in labour. In Hittite society, these two groups of goddesses belonged to the private sphere. A passage in the birth ritual KUB 30.29 is significant on this point: “To the gods the allotments are given. The Sun-goddess in Arinna has seated herself, and (the Throne-goddess) Ḫalmašuit in Ḫarpiša likewise, ... KAL in Karaḫna likewise, the awesome Telepinu in Tawiniya likewise, ... But Ḫannaḫanna there did not remain a place; so for her, mankind remained (as) a place” (Vs. 9-15). Gulšeš and Mother-goddess(es) were close to the needs of the family and the individual; therefore, they appear in rituals more frequently than other gods of the official cult. This Mother-goddess (often in the plural) was not a continuation of the Anatolian “Great Mother”: a concept constructed by J. J. Bachofen and which has enjoyed great success but which finds no justification in the documentation. The relationship earth-mother-fecundity, so widespread in ancient cultures, never produced a Great Goddess in the Mediterranean or Near East which can be historically identified. The maternal archetype, which is a “primordial image” of the psyche according to Carl Gustav Jung, gave origin to several divine representations, with different rank in each pantheon. d) Ḫutena and Ḫutellura are two groups of goddesses who derive their name from the verb ḫut(e/i) “to favour.” The Ugaritic lists equate them with the seven Kotharāt “the Skilled” (Akk. Šassūrātu from šassūru “womb,” a loan-word from Sumerian), the goddesses who fostered conception and pregnancy until birth. The documents from Mari and Emar show that these goddesses were known throughout northern Syria, at least from the Amorrite period on. It is, therefore, quite possible that they contributed in forming the nature of Ḫutena and Ḫutellura, a process which can also be documented for other Hurrian deities who found counterparts in the Semitic cultures of Syria (first of all Teššub Torri 1999, 64–72 and 79–113, has shown that Lelwani/ALLATUM and Allani/EREŠ.KI.GAL were two distinct goddesses of the Netherworld, one belonging to the Hattic-Hittite cult, the other to the Hurrian-Hittite one (see also Yoshida 1996, 50). Lelwani was considered a female deity at least from the time of Ḫattušili III on. There are, however, some data which show that Lelwani was originally a male god, Torri 1999, 53–57. Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 46.30.84.116 Heruntergeladen am | 25.03.14 14:17 Alfonso Archi 18 and his consort Ḫebat). Perhaps, the idea that the Gulšeš created human beings (according to rituals of Hurrian origin) is derived from the ability ascribed to the Kotharāt to form the child in pregnancy; an ability transmitted to Ḫutena and Ḫutellura, and from them to one of their Hittite equivalents: the DINGIR.MAḪMEŠ and the Gulšeš. Ḫutena and Ḫutellura are present, as midwives, at Ullikummi's birth. They were, therefore, above all, birth goddesses (like the Parcae; cfr. Latin parēre “to assist”). The Hittite version (which translates the names of the Hurrian gods, when possible), has both Gulšeš and DINGIR.MAḪMEŠ. The use to have these two groups of goddesses often together in festivals and rituals may derive also from the fact that Gulšeš and DINGIR.MAḪMEŠ are the usual translation for Ḫutena and Ḫutellura, and occur frequently in the Hurrianized documents. ADDENDUM At the Eigth International Congress of Hittitology (Warsaw, 5-9 September 2011). Willemijn Waal has suggested that DGUL-ša- should be red DKuwanša-, not DGulša- / D Gulza(nnika/nzipa)-. This is hardly possible because DKuwanša- is usually preceded by DWaškuwattašši- (van Gessel 276), what is not the case of DGUL-ša-. Moreover, the root kulš-, kulz- is attested in the name-giving already from the Assyrian period. Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 46.30.84.116 Heruntergeladen am | 25.03.14 14:17 The Anatolian Fate-Goddesses and their Different Traditions 19 Bibliography Archi 1966 A. Archi, Trono regale trono divinizzato nell'Anatolia ittita, SMEA 1, 1966, 76–120 Archi 1973 A. Archi, Fêtes de printemps et d'autumne et réintegration rituelle d'images de culte dans l'Anatolie hittite, UF 5, 1973, 7–27 Archi 1974 A. Archi, Il sistema KIN della divinazione ittita, OrAnt 13, 1974, 113–144 Archi 1990 A. Archi, The Names of the Primeval Gods, Or 59, 1990, 114–129 Arnaud 1986 D. Arnaud, Textes sumériens et accadiens, Recherches au pays d'Aštata, Emar VI/3 (Paris 1986) Arnaud 2007 D. Arnaud, Corpus des textes de bibliothèque de Ras Shamra-Ougarit (1936-2000) en sumérien, babylonien et assyrien, AulaOr Supplementa 23 (Sabadell 2007) Beckman 1983 G. M. Beckman, Hittite Birth Rituals, Studien zu den Boğazköy-Texten 29 (Wiesbaden 1983) Carini 1982 M. F. Carini, Il rituale di fondazione KUB XXIX 1. Ipotesi intorno alla nozione etea arcaica di regalità, Athenaeum NS 60, 1982, 483–520 Carruba 1966 O. Carruba, Das Beschwörungsritual für die Göttin Wišurijanza, Studien zu den Boğazköy-Texten 2 (Wiesbaden 1966) Carruba 1970 O. Carruba, Das Palaische. Texte, Grammatik, Lexicon, Studien zu den Boğazköy-Texten 10 (Wiesbaden 1970) Carruba 1972 O. Carruba, Beiträge zum Palaischen (Istanbul 1972) Collins 1997 B. J., Purifying a House: A Ritual for the Infernal Deities (1.68), in: W. W. Hallo – K. L. Younger Jr. (eds.), The Context of Scripture 1. Canonical Composition from the Biblical World (Leiden 1997) Dardano 2006 P. Dardano, Die hethitischen Tontafelkataloge aus Ḫattuša (CTH 276-282), Studien zu den Boğazköy Texten 47 (Wiesbaden 2006) Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 46.30.84.116 Heruntergeladen am | 25.03.14 14:17 Alfonso Archi 20 del Olmo Lete 2008 G. del Olmo Lete, Mythologie et religion de la Syrie au IIe millenaire av. J.C. (1500-1200), in: G. del Olmo Lete (ed.), Mythologie et religion des Sémites occidentaux II (Leuven 2008) 165–264 de Roos 2007 J. de Roos, Hittite Votive Texts (Leiden 2007) Dietrich – Loretz 1988 M. Dietrich – O. Loretz, Ugaritische Rituale nebst einem Opfertext aus Mari, in: O. Kaiser (ed.), Texte aus der Umwelt des Alten Testament. Rituale und Beschwörungen II, 3 (Gütersloh 1988) Dinçol – Darga 1969–1970 A. M. Dinçol – M. Darga, Die Feste von Karaḫna, Anatolica 3, 1969–1970, 99–118 Durand 2008 J.-M. Durand, La religion amorrite en Syrie à l'èpoque des archives de Mari, in: G. del Olmo Lete (ed.), Mythologie et religion des Sémites occidentaux I (Leuven 2008) 161–703 Forlanini 2007 M. Forlanini, The Offering List of KBo 4.13 (I 17'-48') to the local gods of the kingdom, known as Sacrifice List, and the history of the formation of the early Hittite state and its initial growing beyond central Anatolia, in: A. Archi – R. Francia (eds.), VI Congresso Internazionale di Ittitologia, Roma 5-9 settembre 2005, SMEA 49, Bd. I (Roma 2007) 259–280 Frantz-Szabó 2003–2005 G. Frantz-Szabó, Papaja, RlA 10, 2003–2005, 324 Frymer-Kensky 1987 T. Frymer-Kensky, The Planting of Man: A Study in Biblical Imagery, in: J. H. Marks – R. M. Good (eds.), Love & Death in the Ancient Near East: Essays in Honor of Marvin H. Pope (Guilford 1987) 129–136 García Trabazo 2002 J. V. García Trabazo, Textos religiosos hitita (Madrid 2002) 477–505 García Trabazo – Groddek 2005 J. V. García Trabazo – D. Groddek, Hethitische Texte in Transkription, Keilschrifturkunden aus Boghazköi 58 (=Dresdner Beiträge zur Hethitologie 18) (Wiesbaden 2005) van Gessel 1998 B.H.L. van Gessel, Onomasticon of the Hittite Pantheon Part 1, Part 2 (Leiden 1998) Giannakis 1998 G. Giannakis, The ‘Fate-as-Spinner' motif: A study on the poetic and metaphorical language of Ancient Greek and Indo-European (Part I), IndogermF 103, 1998, 1–27 Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 46.30.84.116 Heruntergeladen am | 25.03.14 14:17 21 The Anatolian Fate-Goddesses and their Different Traditions Giorgieri 2001 M. Giorgieri, Die hurritische Fassung des Ullikummi-Lieds und ihre hethitische Parallele, in: G. Wilhelm (ed.), Akten des IV. Internationalen Kongresses für Hethitologie, Würzburg 4. - 8. Oktober 1999, Studien zu den Boğazköy-Texten 45 (Wiesbaden 2001) 134–155 Goetze 1938 A. Goetze, The Hittite Ritual of Tunnawi (New Haven 1938) Groddek 2004 D. Groddek, Fragmenta Hethitica dispersa XIII, AoF 31, 2004, 73–86 Güterbock 1952 H. G. Güterbock, The Song of Ullikummi, JCS 5, 1952, 135–161 Gurney 1937 O. R. Gurney, Note on Hittite Philology: wappu, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 69, 1937, 113–115 Haas 1988 V. Haas, Das Ritual gegen den Zugriff der Dämonin DDÌM.NUN.ME und die Sammeltafel KUB XLIII 55, OrAnt 27, 1988, 85–104 Haas 1994 V. Haas, Geschichte der hethitischen Religion (Leiden 1994) Haas 2007 V. Haas, Notizen zu den Ritualen der Frau Allaituraḫi aus Mukiš, AoF 34, 2007, 9–36 Haas – Wegner 1988 V. Haas – I. Wegner, Die Rituale der Beschwörerinnen schen Sprachdenkmäler I/5 (Roma 1988) SAL ŠU.GI, I: die Texte, Corpus der hurriti- Haas – Wäfler 1976 V. Haas – M. Wäfler, Bemerkungen zu Éḫeštī/ā- (1. Teil), UF 8, 1976, 65–99 Haas – Wilhelm 1974 V. Haas – G. Wilhelm, Hurritische und luwische Riten aus Kizzuwatna (Neukirchen-Vluyn 1974) Hagenbuchner 1989 A. Hagenbuchner, Die Korrespondenz der Hethiter, Teil 1+2, Texte der Hethiter 16, (Heidelberg 1989) Hoffner 1990 H. A. Jr. Hoffner, Hittite Myths (Atlanta 1990) Klengel 1988 H. Klengel, Papaja, Kataḫzipuri und der eja- Baum. Erwägungen zum Verständnis von KUB LVI 17, in: Fiorella Imparati (ed.), Studi di storia e di filologia anatolica dedicati a Giovanni Pugliese Caratelli (Firenze 1988) 101–110 Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 46.30.84.116 Heruntergeladen am | 25.03.14 14:17 Alfonso Archi 22 Klinger 1996 J. Klinger, Untersuchungen zur Rekonstruktion der hattischen Kultschicht, Studien zu den BoğazköyTexten 37 (Wiesbaden 1996) Koşay 1951 H. Z. Koşay, Les fouilles d'Alaca Höyük. Rapport preliminaire sur les travaux 1937-1939 (Ankara 1951) Kümmel 1967 H. M. Kümmel, Ersatzrituale für den hethitischen König, Studien zu den Boğazköy-Texten 3 (Wiesbaden 1967) Lambert 1985 W. G. Lambert, The pantheon of Mari, Mari 4, 1985, 525–539 Laroche 1948 E. Laroche, Teššub, Ḫebat et leur cour, JCS 2, 1948, 113–136 Laroche 1966 E. Laroche, Les noms des Hittites (Paris 1966) Laroche 1968 E. Laroche, Documents en langue hourrite provenant de Ras Shamra; Textes de Ras Shamra en langue hittite, in: J. Nougayrol – E. Laroche – Ch. Virolleaud – C. F. A. Schaeffer (eds.), Ugaritica V. Nouveaux textes accadiens, hourrites et ugaritiques des archives et bibliothèques privées d'Ugarit; commentaires des textes historiques (première partie) (Paris 1968) 447–544. 769–784 Laroche 1974 E. Laroche, Les dénominations des dieux ‘antiques’ dans les textes hittites, in: K. Bittel – P. H. J. Houwink ten Cate – E. Reiner (eds.), Anatolian Studies Presented to Hans Gustav Güterbock on the Occasion of his 65th Birthday (Istanbul 1974) 175–185 Lebrun 1980 R. Lebrun, Hymnes et prières hittites (Louvain-la-Neuve 1980) Lombardi 1999 A. Lombardi, Una festa per Ḫuwaššanna celebrata da una regina ittita, SMEA 41, 1999, 219–244 McMahon 1991 G. McMahon, The Hittite State Cult of the Tutelary Deities, Assyriological Studies 25 (Chicago 1991) Melchert 1993 H. C. Melchert, Cuneiform Luvian Lexicon (Chapel Hill 1993) Melchert 2003 H. C. Melchert, Hittite antaka- ‘loins’ and an Overlooked Myth about Fire, in: G. Beckman – R. Beal – G. McMahon (eds.), Hittite Studies in Honor of Harry H. Hoffner Jr. on the Occasion of His 65th Birthday (Winona Lake 2003) Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 46.30.84.116 Heruntergeladen am | 25.03.14 14:17 The Anatolian Fate-Goddesses and their Different Traditions 23 Miller 2004 J. L. Miller, Studies in the Origins, Development and Interpretation of the Kizzuwatna Rituals, Studien zu den Boğazköy-Texten 46 (Wiesbaden 2004) Miller 2008 J. L. Miller, Ein Ritual zur Reinigung eines Hauswesens durch eine Beschwörung an die Unterirdischen (CTH 446), in: B. Janowski – G. Wilhelm (eds.), Omina, Orakel, Rituale und Beschwörungen. Texte aus der Umwelt des Alten Testament, Neue Folge, Band 4 (Gütersloh 2008) 206–217 Oettinger 1976 N. Oettinger, Die Militärische Eide der Hethiter, Studien zu den Boğazköy-Texten 22 (Wiesbaden 1976) Oettinger 1979 N. Oettinger, Die Stammbildung des hethitischen Verbums (Nürnberg 1979) Ofitsch 2001 M. Ofitsch, Zu heth. ḫueša-: Semantik, Etymologie, kulturgeschichtliche Aspekte, in: G. Wilhelm (ed.), Akten des IV. Internationalen Kongresses für Hethitologie, Würzburg 4. - 8. Oktober 1999, Studien zu den Boğazköy-Texten 45 (Wiesbaden 2001) 478–498 Otten 1950 H. Otten, Die Gottheit Lelwani der Bogazköy-Texte, JCS 4, 1950, 119–136 Otten 1961 H. Otten, Eine Beschwörung der Unterirdischen aus Bogazköy, ZA 54, 1961, 114–157 Otten 1971 H. Otten, Ein hethitisches Festritual, Keilschrifttexte aus Boghazköi XIX 128 (=Studien zu den Boğazköy-Texten 13) (Wiesbaden 1971) Otten 1972–1975 RlA 4 (1972–1975) 121 s. v. Ḫarištaš(š)i Otten 1976–1980a RlA 5 (1976–1980a) 175 f. s. v. Išduštaja Otten 1976–1980b RlA 5 (1976-1980b) 227 f. s. v. Izzištanu Otten – Siegelová 1970 H. Otten – J. Siegelová, Die hethitischen Gulš-Gottheiten und die Erschaffung der Menschen, AfO 23, 1970, 32–38 Otten – Souček 1965 H. Otten – V. Souček, Das Gelübde der Königin Puduḫepa an die Göttin Lelwani, Keilschrifttexte aus Boghazköi XIX 128 (= Studien zu den Boğazköy-Texten 1) (Wiesbaden 1965) Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 46.30.84.116 Heruntergeladen am | 25.03.14 14:17 Alfonso Archi 24 Özguç – Akok 1958 T. Özguç – M. Akok, Horoztepe. An Early Bronze Age Settlement and Cemetery (Ankara 1958) Pardee 1995 D. Pardee, Kosharoth, in: K. van der Toorn – B. Becking – P. W. van der Horst (eds.), Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible, 2nd. ed. (Leiden 1995) 915–917 Pecchioli Daddi 2003 F. Pecchioli Daddi, From Akkad to Ḫattuša: the History of Gurparanzaḫ and the River that gave him its name, in: P. Marrassini (ed.), Semitic and Assyriological Studies Presented to Pelio Fronzaroli by Pupils and Colleagues (Wiesbaden 2003) Popko 1978 M. Popko, Kultobjekte in der hethitischen Religion (nach keilschriftlichen Quellen) (Warszawa 1978) Salvini 1988 M. Salvini, Die hurritischen Überlieferungen des Gilgameš-Epos und der Kešši-Erzählung, in: V. Haas (ed.), Hurriter und Hurritisch, Xenia 21 (Konstanz 1988) 157–172 Salvini – Wegner 2004 M. Salvini – I. Wegner, Die mythologischen Texte, Corpus der hurritischen Sprachdenkmäler I/9 (Roma 2004) Schuster 1974 H.-S. Schuster, Die Hattisch-Hethitischen Bilinguen, I. Einleitung, Texte und Kommentar (Leiden 1974) Schuster 2002 H.-S. Schuster, Die Hattisch-Hethitischen Bilinguen, II. Textbearbeitungen (Leiden 2002) Schwemer 2004 D. Schwemer, Von Taḫurpa nach Ḫattuša. Überlegungen zu den ersten Tagen des AN.DAḪ.ŠUM Festes, in: M. Hutter – S. Hutter-Braunsar (eds.), Offizielle Religion, lokale Kulte und individuelle Religiosität, AOAT 318 (Münster 2004) 95–412 Schwemer 2009–2010 RlA 12 (2009–2010) 155–157 s. v. Schicksal. B Siegelová 1971 J. Siegelová, Appu-Märchen und Ḫedammu-Mythus, Studien zu den Boğazköy-Texten 14 (Wiesbaden 1971) Singer 2002 I. Singer, Hittite Prayers (Atlanta 2002) Starke 1990 F. Starke, Untersuchungen zur Stammbildung des keilschrift-luwischen Nomens, Studien zu den Boğazköy-Texten 31 (Wiesbaden 1990) Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 46.30.84.116 Heruntergeladen am | 25.03.14 14:17 The Anatolian Fate-Goddesses and their Different Traditions 25 Stol 2000 M. Stol, Birth in Babylonia and the Bible. Its Mediterranean Setting, Cuneiform Monographs 14 (Groningen 2000) Taracha 2000 P. Taracha, Ersetzen und Entsühnen. Das mittelhethitische Ersatzritual für den Großkönig Tutḫalija (CTH *448.4) und verwandte Texte (Leiden 2000) Taracha 2009 P. Taracha, Religions of Second Millennium Anatolia, Dresdner Beiträge zur Hethitologie 27 (Wiesbaden 2009) Torri 1999 G. Torri, Lelwani. Il culto di una dea ittita, Vicino Oriente Quaderno 2 (Roma 1999) von Schuler 1980–1983 RlA 6 (1980–1983) 595–598 s. v. Lelwani Yoshida 1991 D. Yoshida, Ein hethitischs Ritual gegen Behexung (KUB XXIV 12) und der Gott Zilipuri/Zalipura, Bulletin of the Middle Eastern Culture Center in Japan 4, 1991, 43–61 Yoshida 1996 D. Yoshida, Untersuchungen zu den Sonnengottheiten bei den Hethitern, Texte der Hethiter 22 (Heidelberg 1996) LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ANET2 AOAT AoF BMECCJ 4 CHD CTA CTH DBH HED IndogermF JCS KBo KUB MARI Or. J.B. Pritchard (ed.), Ancient Near Eastern Texts, 2nd ed., Princeton, New Jersey 1955. Alter Orient und Altes Testament, Kevelaer - Neukirchen -Vluyn. Altorientalische Forschungen, Berlin 1974 ff. H. I. H. Prince Takahito Mikasa (ed.), Essays on Ancient Anatolian and Syrian Studies in the 2nd and 1st Millennium B. C. (Bulletin of the Middle Eastern Culture Center on Japan, 4), Wiesbaden. The Hittite Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of Chicago, Chicago 1980 ff. Herdner, Andrée, Corpus des tablettes en cunéiformes alphabétiques, Paris 1963. Laroche, Emmanuel, Catalogue des textes hittites, Paris 1971. Dresdner Beiträge zur Hethitologie, Dresden / Wiesbaden 2002 ff. J. Puhvel, Hittite Etymological Dictionary, Berlin - New York - Amsterdam 1984 ff. Indogermaniche Forschungen, Berlin. Journal of Cuneiform Studies, Cambridge, MA Keilschrifttexte aus Boghazköi, Leipzig/Berlin 1916 ff. Keilschrifturkunden aus Boghazköi, Berlin 1921 ff. MARI. Annales de Recherches Interdisciplinaires, Paris 1982 ff. Orientalia. (Nova Series), Roma 1931 ff. Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 46.30.84.116 Heruntergeladen am | 25.03.14 14:17 Alfonso Archi 26 OrAnt RlA SMEA UF Oriens Antiquus. Roma 1962 ff. Reallexikon der Assyriologie, Berlin 1928-1938; 1957 ff. Studi micenei ed egeo-anatolici, Roma 1966 ss. Ugarit-Forschungen. Internationales Jahrbuch für die Altertumskunde SyrienPalästinas, Kevelaer - Neukirchen-Vluyn 1969 ff. Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 46.30.84.116 Heruntergeladen am | 25.03.14 14:17