Page 216 - The Art & Architecture of the Ancient Orient_Neat

ARAMAEANS AND PHOENICIANS IN SYRIA
dc great by the king of the Danunians and afterwards himself ruled over the plain of
111a
Adana. Excavations show that the fortress was built all in one, and likewise destroyed by
a single great fire. This may have happened between 725 and 720 B.C., since Sargon of
Assyria refers to a subjected Cilicia, or in 680 b.c., when Esarhaddon led a campaign
there. The later date is the more probable.108 The sculptures - orthostats found in two
gateways - would then be later than any we have discussed so far. They also strike one
as deriving from other sources. The Mesopotamian themes, such as the griffin demon,
arc barbarously malformed, and they appear alongside purely Egyptian motifs, for in-
stance thc dwarf-god Bes. These two facts, in combination, suggest a Phoenician source
for the repertoire, and this conclusion is corroborated by the sphinxes guarding a gate.
They do not resemble any member of their race discussed in this chapter, and show their
Phoenician origin by the piece of embroidered cloth which covers their front legs; it is
a standard feature of the ivory sphinxes of Phoenicia which we shall discuss in the next
section. Now Esarhaddon defeated, on the campaign of 680 b.c., a coalition of the
Phoenician Abdimilkutti of Sidon with Sanduarri of Sis, which is modern Kozan, thirty
miles north-west of Karatepe.109 The builder of Karatepe translated his inscription from
Hittite hieroglyphs into Phoenician, not into Aramaic. And, so far, the structures ex­
cavated on the site show no trace of a bit-hilani, which one would expect in a locality
wliich formed part of the north Syrian province. On the other hand, a large statue, over
seven feet high, and placed on a pair of bulls, recalls those found at Zin^irli and Car-
chcmish.110 The sculptures111 were carved on the spot and their makers were innocent
even of such skill as had been acquired in north Syrian centres between the ninth cen­
tury, when the south gate of the Citadel of Zin^irli and the palace of Tell Halaf were
erected, and the late eighth century, when the Carchemish and Sakjegeuzi sculptures
were cut. The workmen of Karatepe were much less competent. They made, as guardian
figures, two Hons, maneless and high on the legs, and the two heavy-headed sphinxes
to which we have referred. All these figures had inlaid eyes. The reliefs sometimes pos­
sess a liveliness uninhibited by an awareness of the artistic problems involved in their
composition. Signs of haste and lack of skill are as much in evidence as lack of sculptural
tradition; some pieces are unfinished. Others, though adjoining and connected by sub­
ject-matter, are inconsistent in style.112 This is die case, for instance, with the orthostats
which combine to represent a scene of feasting (Plate 165, A and b). They differ in size,
are unevenly divided, and carved in divergent styles. On the left, servants bring food and
musicians play their instruments. These are heavy figures, placed woodenly side by side.
Some of the details, such as the beards and headbands of die serving-men, as well as the
modelling in general, suggest a faint acquaintance with north Syrian work.113 But the
adjacent orthostat to the right seems pure improvisation. The ruler is shown at table,
with a throne and footstool, hi front and behind (meaning, probably, on either side)
stand servants with fly-whisks. Underneath the table heavily laden with food, a monkey
seems to be picking up scraps, hi the lower register additional provisions, including meat
on the hoof, are brought. Not a single figure is well constructed, but a general air of
lively activity pervades the scene, aided by the queer, rather appealing profiles of the
people, with the mouth drawn on the lower outline of the face.

187