Page 288 - The Art & Architecture of the Ancient Orient_Neat

NOTES
emanating from Assyria directly. One cannot 115. Karatcpc Kazilari, plate xvi, 110. 83.
ascribe the north Syrian revival of sculptu re to 116. Thus the beautiful ivory head found at
Urartian influence, because at Tell Halaf and Zin- Perakhora seemed oriental to its discoverer Payne
^irli it antedates the Urartian ascendancy in Syria. (Journal of Hellenic Studies, Li (1931), 192, figure 8).
106. Barnett in Iraq, xir, 39- Barnett points out in But no exact parallel, especially not with eyes set in
Journal of Hellenic Studies, loc. cit., that on the reliefs bronze, is known in the Levant. Yet it differs
from Ankara the griffin is shown open-mouthed, strikingly from the ivory head from Samos which is
knobbed, and horse-eared, as in Greek and Etruscan Greek (op. cit., lxviii (1948), plate iii(b)). Barnett’s
bronzes. But the griffin demons at Sakjcgcuzi show suggestion (op. cit., 25, n. 153) that the Perakhora
these features too (Akurgal, op. cit., 80 and plate head and the earliest Spartan ivories derive from
xliv); here, too, it might be due to Urartian in­ Cilicia was made when the discoveries at Karatcpc
fluence, but (probably contemporary) ivories from had just become known. But this site is thoroughly
Van also show the griffin demon open-mouthed derivative and provincial and the suggestion is
although without knob or horse-ear. Iraq, xn improbable. A number of bronze shields found in
(1950), plate xv. The question remains open. Crete arc likewise of uncertain affinities, although
107. H. Th. Bossert, N. Bahadir Alkim, H. f am- E. Kunze, Krctischc Bronzereliefs (Stuttgart, 1931),
bcl, ct al., Karatcpc Kazilari (Birinci On-rapor) Die has made a strong ease for their local origin.
Ausgrabungen auf deni Karatcpc. Turk Tarik Kurumu 117. Iliad, xxra, 741 ff; cf. vi, 289 ff.
Yayinlarindan V. Seri, No. 9 (Ankara, 1950). This 118. Schacfcr-Andrae, Die Kunst des alten
contains an up-to-date bibliography of the litera­ Orients (Berlin, 1925), 495 (1942 edition, p. 535).
ture already published concerning the discoveries. Illustrated London News, 28 July 1951, 136, figures
An excellent critical study of the problems raised 9 and 12.
has been written by Machteld J. Mcllink, in Biblio­ HO. Journal of Near Eastern Studies, in (1946), 155
theca Orientals, vii (Leiden, 1950), 141-50.
ff., plate ii. It seems a provincial work.
F 1S7 10S. Mcllink, op. cit., 147 ff. There arc historical, 120. Gordon Loud, Khorsabad, 11 (Chicago, p. 1S9
palacographical, philological, and archaeological
1938), plates 49 and 50.
arguments in favour of this late date.
121. Published by R. D. Barnett in Iraq, xn
109. Mcllink, op. cit., 148.
(1950), 1-43.
no. Orientalia, xvn (Roma, 1948), plate xxxiii. 122. W. Otto, Handbuch dcr Archacologie (Miin-
The statue was actually found at Domuztepe, a hill chcn, I939). plate 173, 3 and 4.
facing Karatcpc across the river, and apparently
dependent upon it. 123. R. D. Barnett, Journal of Hellenic Studies,
lxviii (194S), 1-25. It is there also maintained that
in. These arc well studied by Dr Halct f ambcl,
in Oriens, 1 (194S), 147-62. the ivory carvers, too, formed a closed guild of
ambulant craftsmen. It seems to me that export
112. Dr Mcllink, op. cit., speaks of ‘a different
from a few Levantine centres explains more satis­
ethnic background of the artists’; she means, 110 factorily the close resemblance between pieces
doubt, cultural rather than cdinic.
found, say, at Crete and at Nimrud or Khorsabad.
113. Karatcpc Kazilari, plate xiii, figure 68.
p. 1 S3 114. The relevant material has been studied by 124. This matter is well dealt with by R. M.
Mcllink, op. cit., 144, col. 2. Her argument that the Cook, hi Journal of Hellenic Studies, lxvi (1946),
67-98.
ship depicted at Karatcpc suggests that the sculpt ors
knew Sennacherib’s reliefs at Nineveh is not con- 125 .Journal of Hellenic Studies, uii (1933), 295,
elusive, since that king, as she (quoting D. D. figure 19.
Luckcnbill, Annals of Sennacherib, 73 and ff.) 126. Forschungcn und Fortschritte, vm (1932), 161.
rightly states, had the “Hitrite” people build ships 127. The most convincing connexion with
for him at Nineveh and Til Barsip in which he put Urartu is established by an arrangement by which
Phoenician and Cypriot sailors’. The Karatcpc the handle is fixed to bronze cauldrons. The pair
sculptors may, therefore, have depicted such a ship of loops is attached at the cauldron by means of
ccausc such craft plied on Cilician and Phoenician winged bulls’ heads or human figures. There is, for
ports, and not because they knew the sculptures at instance, an example from Delphi showing a purely
Nineveh; if they did, we should have expected Assyrian figure. Kunze (Kretische Bronzereliefs, An-
more signs of influence of these sculptures on the hang II) listed eight from Urartu, and two from
Karatcpc reliefs.
Etruria, while there arc over forty Greek imitations,
259