The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Anatolia ||

Page 1 of 25 The Land and Peoples of Anatolia through Ancient Eyes

PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2013. All RightsReserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in OxfordHandbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy).Subscriber: null; date: 19 March 2013

The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Anatolia: (10,000-323 BCE)Gregory McMahon and Sharon Steadman

Print publication date: 2011Print ISBN-13: 9780195376142Published to Oxford Handbooks Online: Nov-12DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195376142.001.0001

The Land and Peoples of Anatolia through Ancient Eyes

Gregory McMahon

DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195376142.013.0002

Abstract and Keywords

This article offers an overview of some of the earliest evidence of aperspective both Anatolian and foreign on the diversity of places, people,and languages in first millennium Anatolia. It discusses the Greek texts ofHomer and Herodotus as a source for the peoples of Anatolia. Both Homer'sIliad and Herodotus's Historia were composed by Greeks from Anatolia. Thearticle argues that these authors, separated by three centuries, provide uswith unique evidence of the Greek perspective on the geographical/linguistic/ethnic makeup of parts of Anatolia in their respective periods.

Anatolian scholarship, Greek texts, Homer, Herodotus, Iliad, Historia

This book provides extensive coverage of a wide range of sources,archaeological and textual, for the peoples of Anatolia. The wonderfullyrich archaeological evidence of prehistory is discussed in chapters on theNeolithic, Chalcolithic, and Early Bronze Ages in all regions of Anatolia. Withthe Middle Bronze Age and the introduction of writing to Anatolia, peoplessuch as the Assyrians, Hittites, Luwians, Urartians, Phrygians, and Greeksbegan to leave substantial written records of themselves; all of these groupshave one or more chapters dedicated to them or their language. The Hittitetextual corpus in particular provides a plethora of text references to namesof places and peoples, allowing scholars to create the foundation of a Hittitegeography and to correlate ancient and modern topoi. (See Forlanini (1998)and del Monte and Tischler (1978) for overviews of our understanding ofthe Late Bronze Age (LBA) geography of Anatolia.) Tarḫuntašša, temporarily

http://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/page/privacy-policy



the capital of the Hittite state, which remains unlocated, is the subject ofespecially intense interest (Alp 1995; Dinçol et al. 2000). Evidence fromLuwian sources in Anatolian hieroglyphic script is increasingly being used forthe geography of Neo-Hittite sites of the Iron Age (e.g., Hawkins 1998; Wäfler1983).

I have focused my discussion on a different kind of source—the Greektexts of Homer and Herodotus—for several reasons. Neither is discussedin detail elsewhere in this volume. Both Homer’s Iliad and Herodotus’sHistoria are composed by Greeks from Anatolia (Homer is certainly from theeastern Greek world and quite possibly from Anatolia itself). These authors,separated by three centuries, provide us with unique evidence of the Greekperspective on the geographical/linguistic/ethnic makeup of parts of Anatoliain their respective periods.

Figure 2.1 shows the “traditional” regions/ethnic groups of Anatolia inthe first millennium, according to Classical sources. These sources do notnecessarily factor in Neo-Hittite states or Assyrian control, but denoteregions which the Greeks, and later Romans, recognized as distinct fromeach other. Some were well-organized states, such as Lydia and Phrygia;others are simply regions of relative ethnic homogeneity. This fairly standard“Classical” map represents the latest and fullest characterization of majorAnatolian peoples and includes several peoples/regions not known toHerodotus. Galatia, for example, did not exist as a region until the arrivalof the Gauls in the third century (see Sams, chapter 27 in this volume).Lycaonia does not occur in Herodotus; although Xenophon (1.2.19) describesit as “hostile territory” (to the Persians) when Cyrus the Younger marchedthrough it in 401 b.c.e. The hegemonic nature of Hellenic culture led to thegradual but inexorable homogenizing of the Anatolian cultural landscapealong Greek patterns, a process greatly accelerated by the conquest andconscious Hellenizing of Alexander the Great, the rule of the Diadochoi,and the eventual absorption of the Pergamene and Seleucid kingdoms bythe Romans, who completed the process of bringing most of Anatolia intothe Greco-Roman cultural orbit. Before this Hellenization of Anatolia in thelater Classical and Hellenistic Ages, early encounters between Greeks andAnatolian peoples led to the Greek characterization of Anatolian peoples andplaces depicted in figure 2.1.

Homer, The Iliad

It is generally agreed that the story of the Iliad fits best into the end ofthe LBA, around 1200 b.c.e., and that Homer, if we can accept the ancient


http://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195376142.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780195376142-e-27#



attribution of this epic poem to a poet of this name, lived in the eighthcentury, probably in Smyrna or Chios (see Harl, chapter 34 in this volume,for linguistic evidence on Homer’s probable Anatolian origins). We do notknow how Homer acquired his material, as he lived four centuries after theevents he memorializes. The world he depicts seems to be a synthesis of hisown Archaic Greek world and his understanding of the LBA Mycenaean world,including his rather remarkable awareness that in the time of the Trojan Warthere were no Greeks living in Anatolia. Ironically, it now appears probablethat there were in fact Mycenaean Greeks in Anatolia in the LBA (see Bryce,chapter 15 in this volume, for Miletus VI as a Mycenaean settlement).Because most of the action of the Iliad takes place in Anatolia, Homermentions a number of Anatolian peoples therein. A good place to start iswith his Catalogue of Trojan Allies (Iliad 2.816–877), most of whom are,predictably, Anatolian.1

1. Trojans;2. Dardanians, led by Aineias;3. “They who lived in Zeleia,” “Trojans,” led by Pandaros;4. “They who held Adresteia and the countryside of Apaisos, theywho held Pityeia and the sheer hill of Tereia”;5. “They who dwelt in the places about Perkote and Praktion, whoheld Sestos and Abydos and brilliant Arisbe”;6. “Spear-fighting Pelasgians,” who lived in the area of Larissa;7. Men of Thrace;8. “Kikonian spearmen” (Thracians, subset of 7);9. “Paionians with their curved bows” (Probably Thracians, subset of7);10. Paphlagones, “from the land of the Enetoi where the wild mulesare engendered”;11. The Halizones, “from Alybe far away, where silver was firstbegotten”;12. Mysians;13. Phrygians;14. Maionians, associated with the “lake Gygaian” and Mt. Tmolos;15. Karians “of the outland speech,” including Miletos, theMaiandros, and Mykale;16. Lykians, led by Sarpedon and Glaukos “from Lykia far away.”

Based on our understanding of Anatolian geography and distribution ofpopulations, we may divide these allies into four groups. The first group,1–5, are people of the Troad, including those living in Troy itself. Since theyare presumably ethnically unified, these peoples are not identified by ethnic






designations, but rather simply as the inhabitants of various geographicregions, mostly cities, in the vicinity of Troy. I should point out here thatalthough the Trojans are clearly named for their city (i.e., place name isprimary), the name of the city in turn derives from an eponymous ancestorTros, the great-grandfather of Priam. The second group, 6–9, dependingon our interpretation of Pelasgian in this context, are non-Anatolian alliesfrom various parts of Thrace across the Hellespont. The third group, 10–11,are Black Sea peoples, one relatively poorly attested (Halizones), and onewell-known group (Paphlagones) whose land is well attested in Classicalsources. The fourth group, 12–16, consists of major peoples of the Aegeanand Mediterranean coast, with one group from the interior (Phrygians). Theallies in the final two groups are each described as a people, apparently anethnic group, which eventually gave its name to a region of Anatolia. All butone of these regions are on the “standard” Classical map. The exception isthe Maionians, discussed in more detail below.

Allies 1–5

First among the alliance defending Troy are, of course, the Trojansthemselves. There are several examples of Greeks and Trojans bearing thesame name, such as Agelaus (8.257, 11.302). This is presumably for literarypurposes and certainly need not imply that the Trojans were Greeks. Eventhe ability of Trojans and Greeks to converse on the battlefield and elsewhereis probably a literary convenience. This is made clear at 2.802–806, in Iris’saddress to the Trojans as the Achaians approach the city:

“Hector, on you beyond all I urge to do this, to do as I tell you:

all about the great city of Priam are many companions,

but multitudinous is the speech of the scattered nations:

let each man who is their leader give orders to these men,

and let each set his citizens in order, and lead them.”

As expected, the allied army of the Trojans is multinational, with“multitudinous” languages which will require native commanders of thecontingents. Thus Homer acknowledges here that even communicationwithin the Trojan forces was complex, and we may assume thatcommunication across battle lines was simplified by him for justifiablereasons of convenience.




The only epigraphic material discovered to date at Troy is a bronze biconvexseal, found in Level VIIB, with two personal names written in Anatolianhieroglyphic, a script typically used to write Luwian (Hawkins and Easton1996; see Jablonka, chapter 32, and Yakubovich, chapter 23 in this volume).See Beal (chapter 26 in this volume), also for the possible treaty relationsbetween Troy and the Hittite kingdom, and Yakubovich (chapter 23) forincreasing evidence of the importance of Luwian speakers in much ofAnatolia in the LBA. Troy was a very long-lived city, inhabited over centuriesby a variety of peoples; the evidence of the seal may indicate that theTrojans of the LBA were Luwian speakers.

The Dardanians led by Aineias are clearly not a different ethnic groupfrom the Trojans; Vergil certainly considered Aineias a Trojan. This group of“Trojans” presumably trace their descent to Dardanos, the grandfather ofTros, and/or they lived in the district of the Troad, which he was thought tohave governed. Although the Greek tradition that Dardanos came to theTroad to found Dardania from Samothrace does not accord well with thehypothesis of a Luwian ethnicity for the Trojans, this can be explained by thegeneral Greek tendency to look for Greek or Aegean origins for Anatolianpeoples.

Allies 3–5 are various local groups identified not as peoples but by place:“those of” towns, a land, a hill, and a river, all apparently in the Troad. Theirlack of ethnic designation suggests an ethnic background similar to theTrojans; the people of Zeleia are specifically called Trojans.

Allies 6–10

Ally 6, the Pelasgians, are probably not Anatolians. This word is used for apeople who are non-Greeks and are described as living in several places inGreece. This term is normally construed as a common Greek term for pre-Hellenic inhabitants of Greece; Herodotus 1.57 describes a distinctly non-Greek “language of the Pelasgian peoples who settled at Placia and Scylaceon the Hellespont.” The Pelasgian allies of the Trojans in the Iliad were fromLarissa, described as far from Troy; their placement in the Catalogue of TrojanAllies immediately before allies 7–9, who are “men of Thrace” (7) and twoother ethnic groups also from Thrace probably indicates that they came fromThrace as well.








Allies 10–11

With ally 10, the Paphlagones, we begin the list of peoples, mostly describedas groups with ethnic designations, who can be identified with “traditional”regions in Anatolia. The exception is the Halizones, who came from “Alybe faraway”; their proximity to the Paphlagones suggests that they also came fromthe coast of the Black Sea. Strabo 12.3.20–24 discusses various theoriesof who these people are. Paphlagonia is well attested as a region whosenorthern border is the Black Sea (figure 2.1, and Xenophon Anabasis book 5).

Allies 12–16

Ally 12, the Mysians, are also well documented; their home is in thenorthwest area of Anatolia, inland from the Troad. For Homer the GygaianLake is in Mysia, but also apparently in Maionia (Iliad 2.865, 20.391), which isunderstandable since Mysia and Maionia (later Lydia) border one another.

As allies, the Phrygians (ally 13) are identified as a people, and the placename Phrygia seems to be secondary and derived from the name of thegroup. In connection with Phrygia, Homer mentions both the Hermos(20.392) and Sangarios (3.187) Rivers and the city Askania further to thenorthwest. Priam at 3.184f. describes a visit to “Phrygia of the vineyards,”where he saw Phrygian men “with their swarming horses.” Priam was anally of the Phrygians when they were camped along the Sangarios and wereattacked by the Amazons, and his wife Hecuba was Phrygian (16.718–19).

The Maionians (ally 14) are a people located in the region later known asLydia. The home of the Maionians was “beneath Mt. Tmolos” (2.866), andtheir leader’s father was born “of the Gygaian lake” (2.865–866). See Bryce(chapter 15 in this volume) for the possibility of linking Maionians to theHittite place name Maša.

The Carians (ally 15) are well known from other classical writers, includingHerodotus. For Homer, Caria includes Miletos, the Maiandros River, and Mt.Mykale, on the far side of the harbor from Miletos. He does not mentionHalicarnassus, the other great city of Caria. Homer describes them as theCarians “of the outland speech” (barbarophonos). Presumably all of theseallies, and the Trojans themselves, were non-Greek speakers, but Homersingles them out for their barbaric (i.e., foreign to Greek ears) language. IfHomer was from Smyrna, in Ionia, he was probably in contact with Cariansand knew firsthand that they spoke a non-Greek language. See Morpurgo-





Davies (1982/83), Yakubovich, chapter 23 in this volume, and Melchert,chapter 31, for Carian as an Anatolian language.

Lycia and the Lycians (ally 16) are by far the best attested Anatolian peopleand place in the Iliad, other than the Troad itself. At least sixteen Lycianwarriors are individually named as casualties of the war, killed by Odysseus,Patroklos, and others. Given that Lycia is easily the furthest place fromTroy to provide an allied contingent of warriors, we may well ask about theconnection between Troy and Lycia and why the Lycians were so prominent inthe effort to defend Troy.

At Iliad 6.155ff., Glaukos, one of the two great heroes/leaders of the Lycians,describes his lineage, which is closely bound to that of his cousin and fellowleader Sarpedon. According to this, both were grandsons of Bellerophontes,who had been tricked into coming to Lycia to be executed, but slew theChimaira and other potential dangers, married the king’s daughter, and thusestablished his own dynasty there. Bellerophontes’s possible Corinthianorigins suggest a Greek heritage for the Lycians of the Iliad, but the fact thatthe land was called Lycia before his arrival indicates that the place nameprecedes the people called Lycians in the Iliad, who would thus seem to beGreek or at least led by Greeks. See the following discussion for a differingview from Herodotus. Certainly Glaukos has no trouble communicatingwith Diomedes when they discover on the battlefield that they are xenoi,guest friends, through their fathers. The references to the Lukka Lands inHittite texts, to be associated with Lycia, confirm that the place, inhabited byLuwian speakers, existed before the Greek tradition about their arrival there.

By contrast, Cilicians play a small role in the Iliad. Two references to theKilikes in Book 6 describe them as a people of Asian Thebe, in Troy’simmediate vicinity and one of the first cities sacked by Achilleus and theAchaians. The Kilikes may have fled the Troad after the Trojan defeat andmade their way to the Cilicia of the Mediterranean coast, although in Greektradition (but not in the Iliad), it was Greeks, under the leadership of the seerMopsos, who took the name of Kilikes and stayed in Anatolia, migrating towhat is now thought of as Cilicia. Confirming Mopsos’s connection to Ciliciais his occurrence in the bilingual Karatepe inscription (Hawkins 2000:45–67). See Beal (chapter 26 in this volume), for Mopsos’s connection to theAchaeans (i.e., Greeks).

Homer thus provides a perspective on the people, languages, and regionsof Anatolia, but only as it pertains to his narrative. His focus on his story







precludes more extensive discursions on interesting details of peoples andtheir origins.

Herodotus, Historia

By contrast, Herodotus of Halicarnassus exemplifies a Greek curiositythat ranges widely and provides a wealth of detail on anything he findsinteresting; Herodotus never met a story he did not like. Working in thefifth century b.c.e., approximately three centuries after Homer, he lived inan Anatolia permanently changed by the Greek migrations of the post-LBAperiod. The vast scope of Herodotus’s Researches includes a great deal aboutthe geography and peoples of Anatolia; in fact he typifies the incipient Greekinterest in geography. He is of course describing an Anatolia which was muchbetter known to the Greeks of his day than it had been to Homer, partlythrough the forcible unification of much of Anatolia by first Lydians and thenPersians.2

Herodotus is one of the earliest Greek authors to use the word Asia, alongwith Hecataeus and Anaximander. Not only does Herodotus utilize thisgeographical name, he also recognizes its origins in Anatolia. At 4.45, heacknowledges the Lydians’ rejection of the Greek tradition that Asia wasnamed after Prometheus’s wife, claiming rather that Asies, the son of Cotysand grandson of Manes, is the eponym for Asia, as well as for a tribe calledAsias in Sardis. The Lydian claim that the name originates in Anatolia is morein line with the probability that the name derives from the Hittite place nameAššuwa.

Two especially useful passages in Herodotus for the geography and peoplesof Anatolia are his catalogue of the Persian navy, 7.89–100, and thecatalogue of troops in Xerxes’s army, 7.61–88. The Anatolian contingentsof the navy are at 7.91–95, while the Anatolian levies for Xerxes’s armyare found at 7.72–77. Both of these lists describe the contributions of theprovinces of the Persian Empire to the army and fleet assembled by Xerxes in480 b.c.e. for his massive invasion of the Greek mainland.

Aiolia

The Aiolians are one of the three Greek tribes which traditionally migratedto Anatolia after the collapse of the LBA (see Greaves, chapter 21 in thisvolume). They are much less important than the Ionians, or even theDorians, in Herodotus’s account. Herodotus, in his general penchant for





symmetry, names twelve Aiolian towns to balance out the twelve primaryIonian cities. All but one of these Aiolian cities are little known; the exceptionis Smyrna, which was lost by the Aiolians to the Ionians (1.150).

Armenia

Most of the references to Armenia in Herodotus are geographical; heidentifies Armenia as the location of the headwaters of the Euphrates (1.180)and describes the distinctive round skin boats built by the Armenians tofloat goods, mostly wine, down to markets in Babylon (1.194). For him, theEuphrates is the border between Armenia and Cilicia (5.52). Armenia is partof the thirteenth Persian province according to his catalogue, along withneighbors in the Black Sea region (3.93).

Most interesting in Herodotus’s treatment of Armenia is his description ofthem in the catalogue of troops: “The Armenians, who are Phrygian colonists,were armed in the Phrygian fashion and both contingents [i.e., Phrygian andArmenian] were commanded by Archochmes” (7.73). Since he suggests thatthe Phrygians themselves migrated from Macedonia to Anatolia (see laterdiscussion), he is therefore claiming that the Armenians have come all theway from northern Greece to their home in eastern Anatolia. See Yakubovich(chapter 23 in this volume) for the Armenian self-designation, and Diakanoff(1984) for their early history. See Zimansky (chapter 24 in this volume) forthe earliest occurrence of the place name Armina/Arminiya, in the Behistuninscription.

Bithynia

The only substantive reference to Bithynians occurs in the catalogue oftroops: “The Thracians after their migration to Asia became known asBithynians; previously, according to their own account, they were calledStrymonians, after the River Strymon on which they lived and from whichthey were driven by the Teucrians and Mysians. The commander of theseAsiatic Thracians was Bassaces, the son of Artabanus (7.75).

Cappadocia

For Herodotus, Cappadocia seems to comprise the north central area ofAnatolia, extending all the way to the Black Sea: “the river Halys, whichruns northward into the Black Sea and forms the boundary betweenCappadocia and Paphlagonia” (1.7). He also considers the ethnic group






to be primary and to have given their name to the region. Their origin inthe south, presumably having moved into central Anatolia, is implicit inhis consistency in maintaining that although the Persians refer to them asCappadocians, the Greeks call them Syrians (1.76, 5.49). He carefully keepsthese Cappadocian Syrians distinct from the Syrians who live on the Syriancoast and contributed to the Persian navy (7.89).

Caria

Herodotus, as a native of Halicarnassus, brings firsthand experience ofthe ethnic complexity of Caria, the region where migrating Greeks mostintimately mixed with Anatolian populations. As already noted, at 1.171Herodotus claims that the entire west coast of Anatolia (i.e., Mysia, Lydia,and Caria) was at one point inhabited by one ethnic group, which dividedinto three “brother races” named after the brothers Myus, Lydus, and Car.Although probably fanciful, this origins narrative indicates his perceptionof the closeness of these three groups/areas. Herodotus’s penchant forproviding alternate explanations manifests itself here as well, as he discussesthe Cretan claim that the Carians were originally islanders in the time ofMinos, driven thence to Anatolia by the arrival of the Greeks on Crete.

The main Carian cities, Miletos and Halicarnassus, differ in their ethnicmakeup; Miletos was Carian in the Iliad but is considered Ionian Greekby Herodotus, whereas Halicarnassus, not mentioned in the Iliad, wasdeemed a Dorian settlement by Herodotus. The complex ethnic makeup ofthe Aegean coast, with speakers of three distinct Greek dialects minglingwith native Anatolians, especially Lydians and Carians, can be seen inHerodotus’s confusion about the ethnicity of the inhabitants of his owncity. He consistently refers to Halicarnassus as a Dorian city, which it mayoriginally have been; however Burn (1972:11) points out that two inscriptionsof the fifth century from Halicarnassus are in Ionian Greek, not Dorian.This changing Greek ethnic makeup is reflected in Halicarnassus beingexcluded from events in the nearby Dorian cities (1.144). Carian and Greeknames appear together in the inscriptions, so Halicarnassus was clearly amultiethnic community.

Other examples of the mixed Ionian/Carian nature of Caria after the Greekmigrations can be seen in Themistokles’s appeal to Ionian Greeks to remainneutral during Xerxes’s invasion, in which he not only implores the Ioniansto avoid fighting against their Greek brethren but also requests them to askthe Carians to do the same (8.22). Ionians and Carians are closely linked and




live together, yet are clearly separate. They allied with the Ionians duringthe Ionian revolt, hoping for the autonomy that success would have brought(5.117), yet the Carians of the interior received part of the territory of Miletoswhen the Persians parceled it out after the destruction of Miletos at the endof the Ionian Revolt (6.20). Their contributions to the Persian navy were alsokept separate by Herodotus and, apparently, by the Persians (7.93).

There are several references to Carian and Ionian mercenaries in Egypt,united by serving together in a foreign land, yet carefully kept distinct byHerodotus (2.152, 154, 163, 3.11). At 2.61–62 Herodotus provides an indexof the ferocity with which expatriate Carians living in Egypt held onto theirethnic identity. During the festival at Bubastis the Carians cut themselves onthe forehead to indicate that they are not Egyptian but foreigners. Distinctivetraits of the Carians include a unique cult: “The Carians are the only peoplewe know of who sacrifice to Zeus Stratius (Zeus of the Army)” (5.119). SeeBryce (chapter 15 in this volume), for the possible connection of the Hittitetoponym Karkiša, in western Anatolia, to Caria.

Caunians

The city of Caunus is well known today; Herodotus credits this area as hometo a distinct ethnic group, living close to the Carians and Lycians. Here isa group which apparently derived its name from its place, instead of theother way around. Although Herodotus thinks they are native to Anatolia,they claim an origin from Crete, and their language is much like Carian (orvice versa), according to Herodotus. They are probably a group of Carianswho created an autonomous city-state at Caunus. Although their languagehas come to resemble Carian, according to Herodotus their culture is verydifferent from that of the Carians, or indeed anyone. They apparently triedto maintain their cultural integrity by eliminating foreign cults from theirterritory by physically driving out intrusive gods (1.172), which may be anearly response to Greek cultural influence.

Cilicia

Herodotus hints at the possibly foreign origins of the Cilicians in hisdescription of their contribution to the Persian navy, noting that the swordthey carry as part of their arms closely resembles the Egyptian long knifeand, more importantly, tracing their origins to Phoenicia: “The ancient nameof the Cilicians was Hypachaei; their present name they took from Cilix,the son of Agenor, a Phoenician” (7.91). The name Hypachaei (Hypachaioi)





means “under-Achaeans” and reveals Herodotus’s desire yet again to seeAnatolians as Greek colonists/immigrants. See Oettinger (2008) on theHypachaioi. Given Cilicia’s location, the Cilicians could in fact be Phoeniciancolonists, or possibly took the name of Cilix the Phoenician when he cameto the southern coast of Anatolia. See the foregoing discussion for Homer’sdifferent description of the origins of the Cilicians, and Hawkins (2009)for epigraphic evidence on a possible connection between the Levant andCilicia. See Yakubovich (chapter 23 in this volume), for the Cilician royal titleSyennesis, which at 1.74 and 5.118 Herodotus mistakes for the name of theking, as evidence of continued use of Luwian in Cilicia.

Cimmerians

Although the Cimmerians, like the Persians, Greeks, Romans, and Turks,clearly originated from outside Anatolia, they successfully settled there,losing their ethnic identity quite early in antiquity. Chased into Anatolia bythe Scythians, they harassed Gordion (see Sams, chapter 27 in this volume)and then invaded Lydia in three waves, eventually occupying Sardis (exceptfor the acropolis). They were expelled by Alyattes two generations later.According to Herodotus, the Cimmerian capture of Sardis took place underArdys (1.15–16), although their invasion of Lydian territory began underArdys’s predecessor, Gyges, the first of the Mermnad kings. Herodotus claimsthat they settled along the southern coast of the Black Sea in the area ofSinope (4.11–12). They also raided all the way to the Aegean coast into Ionia,but did not settle there (1.6). See Harmatta (1990) for more on Herodotus’sunderstanding of the Cimmerians and Yakubovich (chapter 23 in this volume)for their participation in the destruction of Neo-Hittite civilization.

Colchis

On the edge of Anatolia, at the eastern end of the Black Sea, Colchis is atbest a frontier area of Anatolia. It was, however, incorporated into the laterAnatolian kingdom of Mithridates VI in the late second and early first centuryb.c.e. Herodotus certainly considers it part of Asia; at 1.2 he includes anarrative about the abduction of the Colchian princess Medea as part of thefeud between Europe and Asia, which helps explain the Persian invasionsof Greece. His separate entry for the Colchians in the catalogue of troopsindicates his conviction that they are distinct from other ethnic groups. Moreinterestingly, he is convinced that they are of Egyptian descent, based on afanciful tradition of an Egyptian army marching through Asia and leaving a







detachment of troops in Colchis. Shared cultural traits like circumcision and adistinctive way of weaving linen are adduced as evidence for this.

Dorians

The southernmost of the three Greek tribes which were supposed to havemigrated to the west coast of Anatolia were the Dorian Greeks. There wereof course many Dorian cities in mainland Greece as well, the most famous ofwhich was Sparta. The Dorian Greeks, like the Ionians, interacted most withthe Carians; as noted, Herodotus, a native of Halicarnassus, considers it tobe a Dorian city (2.178), despite the contemporary evidence of the Ionianinscriptions and membership in the Delian League. Knidos, on the Aegeancoast, was also Dorian according to Herodotus (1.174). The “Asiatic Dorians”provided thirty ships to the Persian navy; their Peloponnesian origins meantthat they were “armed in the Greek fashion” (7.93). Herodotus also mentionsthat Dorian (and Ionian) colonists controlled the Hellespont and Bosporus,whose towns contributed 100 ships to the Persian navy (7.95).

Ionia

The Ionians of Anatolia are the best known of the Greek immigrants to Asia(see Harl, chapter 34, and Greaves, chapter 21 in this volume). They settledmostly in Caria; see the foregoing discussion for their close relationship withthe Carians. Herodotus is meticulous about keeping the three Greek tribesdistinct from each other but acknowledges the complexity of ethnicity forthe Greeks of Anatolia. He is convinced that the Ionians came from Achaiain the Peloponnesos, driven out by the Achaians, and debunks the claimof the Anatolian Ionians that they have the purest blood of all the Ioniantribes by describing other admixing peoples from Euboea, Orchomenos, andelsewhere. Herodotus preserved the tradition that the Ionians took refugein Athens before their migration across the Aegean to the Anatolian coast,but points out that even those Ionians migrated without their families andtook Carian wives by force after their arrival in Anatolia (1.146), creatingan ethnic mix unacknowledged by the Ionians themselves. Thus for theIonians of Herodotus’s day, language and history trump lineage as theessential component of identity. Herodotus’s most fundamental definitionfor Ionians is Greeks living in Anatolia who “originate from Athens and keepthe festival of the Apaturia,” an Athenian festival for the phratries. This lastreminds us that Ionian identity was bound up not only in shared language(really dialect) and history but also in a common cult at the Panionion, anAnatolian shrine theoretically for all Ionians, although some were excluded






for various historical reasons (1.143, 147–48, and see Harl, chapter 34 in thisvolume). Herodotus also records an Ionian tradition that when they arrivedin Anatolia, some put themselves under native rule, accepting “kings ofLycian nationality, descended from Glaucus the son of Hippolochus,” whereasothers accepted rule by Greeks, “men of Caucones from Pylus, descendedfrom Codrus the son of Melanthus” (1.147). At 9.97 Herodotus gives creditfor the founding of Miletos to Neileus, son of this same Codrus, the famousand possibly last king of Athens. Taken together these passages suggest thatNeileus, one of the descendants of Codrus, apparently not only led the IonianGreeks to refuge on the Anatolian coast but remained to rule some of them.See previous discussion for Homer’s understanding of Miletos as a Cariancity.

Herodotus also acknowledges the diversity of dialect even within the Ioniandialect of Greek:

There are four dialects of the Ionic language, distributed asfollows: the most southerly of the Ionian towns is Miletus, withMyrus to the north of it, and then Priene, these three beingin Caria and speaking the same dialect. Ephesus, Colophon,Lebedus, Teos, Clazomenae, and Phocaea are in Lydia, andshare a common dialect quite distinct from what is spoken atthe places previously mentioned. There are three other Ioniansettlements, two being the islands of Samos and Chios andone, Erythrae, a mainland town. The two latter use the samedialect, Samos a peculiar one of its own. (1.142)

Several of the peoples noted in this passage are discussed as distinct groupselsewhere in this chapter.

Lycia

As already noted, the Lycians are prominent in the Iliad as allies of theTrojans, coming from the furthest away and actively aiding the Trojan cause.Herodotus’s account of the origins of the Lycians has them coming fromCrete, which he knows was originally inhabited by non-Greek peoples.According to him, Minos’s brother Sarpedon, having lost the contest for thethrone, was exiled, and sailed with his supporters to Asia, landing at Milyas,the “ancient name of the country where the Lycians live today, though itwas occupied then by the Solymi” (1.173). Sarpedon’s party was supposedlycalled Termilai in Crete and under his rule in Anatolia, but eventually whenLycus was exiled from Athens by his brother Aegeus, king of Athens, he took





refuge with Sarpedon and the Termilai. They later adopted his name andwere called Lycians. This does not, however, fit well with the existence of theLukka Lands (Lycia) already in the Hittite texts of the LBA. See Bryce (chapter15 in this volume) for a critique of Greek etymologies of the name Lycia andthe epigraphically attested Lycian self-designation Trm̃mili.

Although they apparently were influenced by Carian culture, and supposedlypreserved some Cretan culture as well, Herodotus considers them unusualin their matrilineal descent structure (1.173), for which there is littlecorroborating evidence. The “native” Solymi were presumably subsumedwithin the new ethnic stock of the Termilai/Lycians. In the catalogue of thenavy, Herodotus is consistent in reiterating that the Lycians originated inCrete, had earlier been called Termilai, and later took their name from Lycus,an Athenian. Despite all these accounts of ethnic takeover and name change,Herodotus still lists the Milyans as a contingent in the catalogue of troops,some of whom were armed with Lycian bows (7.77). Apparently some of theMilyans maintained their ethnic identity in some part of Lycia, despite thearrival of the Cretans under Sarpedon. See Yakubovich (chapter 23 in thisvolume), for the Lycian B dialect as “Milyan” and Houwink ten Cate (1961) forthe survival of Luwian in Lycia.

Lydia

Missing from the Iliad, Lydia in Herodotus’s time was the empire centeredat Sardis which had unified most of western Anatolia (see Sams, chapter27, and Greenewalt, chapter 52 in this volume). Herodotus describes theLydian Croesus as “king of all the peoples to the west of the river Halys,which runs northward into the Black Sea and forms the boundary betweenCappadocia and Paphlagonia” (1.6). Croesus also was apparently the firstnative Anatolian dynast to come into direct contact with the Greeks ofAnatolia, Ionian, Aiolian, and Dorian, by conquering and bringing them intohis empire. Thus, ironically, began the extension of Greek influence beyondthe western coast of Anatolia (see Harl, chapter 34 in this volume). Accordingto Herodotus, this empire included the following peoples, many of them,except for the Greeks, known already from Homer: “In the course of timeCroesus subdued all the peoples west of the river Halys, except the Ciliciansand Lycians. The rest he kept in subjection—Lydians, Phrygians, Mysians,Mariandynians, Chalybians, Paphlagonians, Thracians (both Thynia andBithynia), Carians, Ionians, Dorians, Aeolians, and Pamphylians” (1.28).









Herodotus also explains the absence of the Lydians from the Iliad. “Beforethe time of Agron, the reigning house had been of the family of Lydus, sonof Atys; hence the name ‘Lydians,’ the people being previously known asMaeonians” (1.7). Agron was the first of the Heraklidai who supposedly ruledLydia for twenty-two generations between the dynasty of Lydus and theMermnadai, the dynasty that ended with Croesus. Thus the Maionians ofHomer, who in the Iliad came from the area close to Mysia and from placesassociated with Lydia, became the Lydians of Herodotus.

In fact, Herodotus preserves some memory that the peoples of the entirewestern coast of Anatolia may “originally” have been one large group(pre-Greek migration): “In support of the claim [by the Carians] to beaboriginals, they point to an ancient temple of the Carian Zeus at Mylasa,the use of which is shared by Mysians and Lydians as brother races of theCarians—Lydus and Mysus, according to them, having been the brothers ofCar” (1.171).

Herodotus’s discussion of the social customs of the Lydians includes hisrevelation that all working-class girls in Lydia raise their own dowries throughprostitution, an occupation they pursue until marriage (1.193). However,despite singling them out as “foreigners” in another passage (2.167), heacknowledges that other than the practice of prostituting their daughters,Lydian society is much like that of the Greeks (1.94). The Lydians are alsoone of the eight or so major people of Anatolia listed by Herodotus in hiscatalogue of troops in the Persian army. Here again he notes that in ancienttimes they were called Maeonians and only recently took their name from theeponymous Lydus (7.74)

Mysia

As noted under Lydia, the Mysians were according to Herodotus one of thethree “brother races” of the west coast of Anatolia. Herodotus gives themcredit for being an ancient people, which accords well with their role in theIliad, in preserving a tradition that before the Trojan War an army of Mysiansand Teucrians crossed the Bosporus and conquered Thrace (7.22), a traditionpreserved also at 7.75, in which the Teucrians and Mysians are said to havedriven the Thracians of the River Strymon out of their home and eventuallyto Anatolia to be called Bithynians.

In Herodotus’s time, the Mysians had recently become one of the manypeoples of western Anatolia to be conquered by Croesus (1.128), who later




suffered the death of a son at the hands of the great boar of Mt. Olympusin Mysia, when the Mysians petitioned him for help against the savagebeast (1.36). The Mysians are grouped with the Lydians in the catalogue oftroops, where Herodotus claims that they are Lydian colonists known also asOlympieni after Mt. Olympus (7.74). See Beal (chapter 26 in this volume), fora suggestion that Mysia may be a survival of Hittite Maša.

Paeonians

Herodotus records the creation of a new people of Anatolia, when Paeonians,known from the Iliad as allies of the Trojans but living in Thrace, wereforcibly moved at Darius’s request from Europe to Asia. The Paeonianbrothers who engineered this deportation claimed that the Paeonians wereTeucrian colonists from Troy who had lived on the River Strymon close tothe Hellespont. If that is true, then they were originally Anatolians, whoimmigrated to Europe, and then were forcibly removed/returned to Anatoliaby Darius.

Pamphylia

This coastal region plays only a small part in Herodotus’s narrative. In thecatalogue of the navy they are listed as contributing thirty ships. Herodotuspreserves the tradition that after the Trojan War some Greeks, led by thediviners Amphilochus and Calchas, settled on the southern coast of Anatolia,and that the Pamphylians of his day were their descendants (7.91). Thiswould make them among the earliest Greeks to colonize Anatolia. Herodotusalso credits Amphilochus with founding Posideion on the border of Cilicia andSyria. See Sams (chapter 27 in this volume) for the similarity of PamphylianGreek to the Mycenaean Greek of the Linear B tablets, which lends weight tothe idea of Greek settlers in the LBA.

Paphlagonia

Also not prominent players in Herodotus’s narrative, Paphlagonia is includedas part of Croesus’s empire (1.6) and listed in the catalogue of troops. Theyare grouped with even more obscure peoples like the Ligyans, Matieni, andMariandynians, as well as the “Syrians,” that is, Cappadocians (7.72). SeeXenophon, Anabasis Book 5, for Paphlagonia’s importance to his march alongthe Black Sea coast at the end of the fifth century b.c.e.






Phrygia

One of the most famous episodes in Herodotus is his report on theexperiment conducted by the Egyptian king Psammetichus to determine themost ancient race in the world. Regardless of the validity of the experiment,we learn at 2.2 that the conclusion was reached that the Phrygian languagewas the most ancient language and that therefore the Phrygians wereconsidered more ancient even than the Egyptians. We know the Phrygiansprimarily from their capital at Gordion (see Voigt, chapter 50 in this volume),and what we know of their language does not corroborate their greatantiquity (see Roller, chapter 25 in this volume). The Midas of Herodotus’snarrative is the first non-Greek to dedicate offerings at Delphi (1.14),indicating how far Greek influence had penetrated into the interior ofAnatolia by the early seventh century b.c.e. Even after the destruction ofthe kingdom of Phrygia by the Cimmerians and the subsequent hegemonyof Lydia, the Phrygians remained a recognizable ethnic group, described byAristagoras as he tried to convince the Spartan king Cleomenes to invadethe Persian empire as “richest in cattle and crops of all the nations weknow” (5.49).

In the catalogue of troops, Herodotus provides his understanding of theorigins of the Phrygians: “This people, according to the Macedonian account,were known as Briges during the period when they were European andlived in Macedonia” (7.73; see Roller, chapter 25 in this volume). As notedabove, Herodotus also claims here that Phrygian colonists moving intoeastern Anatolia became the Armenians. See Tuna, Aktüre, and Lynch (1998)for discussion of Phrygian connections to Thrace; and Roller (chapter 25)and Sams (chapter 27 in this volume), for discussion of the archaeologicalevidence from Gordion for a Balkan homeland for the Phrygians.

Pisidia

Pisidians do not occur in the text of Herodotus as preserved, but they arerestored in the de Sélincourt translation in a lacuna that requires an ethnicname in the catalogue of troops (7.76). Their omission would be unusual,and since the missing group is described as carrying spears of Lycianworkmanship, which would make sense given the proximity of Pisidia toLycia, the restoration is quite tenable.









Pontus

Famous as a region and kingdom in the late second and first centuriesb.c.e. under Mithridates VI, this area along the eastern portion of theAnatolian coast of the Black Sea is subsumed for Herodotus under thearea of Cappadocia (1.7). However, he also mentions the Greeks of Pontus,acknowledging that within the land of Cappadocia are Greek colonies on thePontus or Black Sea. Sinope is one such colony, founded by Miletos. Althoughhe does not mention Trapezus, Xenophon’s account in Anabasis (4.7–8)makes it clear that it was also a well-established Greek colony by the fifthcentury b.c.e.

Scythians

Like the Cimmerians, the Scythians, while clearly originating from outsideAnatolia, do become an Anatolian people at least temporarily. The severalreferences to the Scythians, including information gleaned from the Greeksof Pontus, make it clear that the Scythians came into Anatolia in pursuit ofthe Cimmerians. Herodotus claims that they took “Asia” or “Upper Asia”away from Cyaxeres king of the Medes and ruled it for twenty-eight years(1.106, 4.1). How much of Anatolia they actually controlled and for how longis unclear, but they seem to have controlled at least the area of the AraxesRiver and elsewhere before eventually being driven out of much of Anatolia(4.11). See Harmatta (1990) on the Scythians in Herodotus.

Teucrians

There are several brief references to a people of Anatolia called theTeucrians, descendants of Teucer (Teukros), the ancestor of the kingsof Troy and the great-great-great-great-grandfather of Priam. See theprevious discussion sub Mysia for a reference to the Mysians and Teucriansinvading Thrace before the Trojan War (7.22, 7.75). A remnant of the ancient“Teucrians,” the Gergithes, apparently lived in the Troad among AiolianGreeks in the fifth century b.c.e., since they were crushed by the Persians inresponse to the Ionian Revolt (5.122). In the description of Xerxes’s visit toTroy, where he visits the citadel and hears its story from local informants, welearn that the army passes the “Teucrians of Gergithos” as they march fromTroy to Abydos to cross the Hellespont (7.44). Although they play essentiallyno role in the events of the fifth century b.c.e., other than getting caughtup in Persian-Ionian conflict in Anatolia, incredibly there does seem to be a




remnant of the Trojans living in the Troad in the fifth century b.c.e., with amemory of an eponymous ancestor of the LBA.

Conclusion

Anatolia in antiquity was a land rich in geographical, linguistic, andethnic diversity. Although its geography and topography remain relativelyunchanged and are still quite varied today, language and ethnic groupsmoved around within this landscape, being influenced by and influencingother groups. One of the most ubiquitous historical phenomena is anincrease in cultural and linguistic homogeneity over time, especially withimprovements in transportation and communication technologies, and thegrowth of larger and more closely unified polities. Despite this tendency,even two and a half centuries after Alexander, the relatively small kingdomwhich Mithridates VI consolidated in central Anatolia in the first century b.c.e.supposedly included twenty-two separate language groups (Pliny, HistoriaNaturalis 7.88; Quintilian, Institutio Oratoria 11.2.50); today perhaps fourlanguages are spoken in that same area.

The Greeks transform our understanding of the ancient geography ofAnatolia because they are as far as we know the first ancient people to seekknowledge or do research for its own sake, giving birth to disciplines suchas history, ethnography, and geography. Homer’s interest in the peoplesof Anatolia was localized and focused on his story of the Greek attack onTroy and its allies. Herodotus, using his interest in people, languages, andgeography in the service of his researches on the Persian invasion of Greece,reveals the more extensive understanding of the whole of Anatolia whichthe Greeks had acquired by the mid-5th century b.c.e. Neither Homer norHerodotus knew of the Hittite, Assyrian, or Urartian sources, discussed inthis volume, which describe some of the same people who occur in theirnarratives; they did not know of the origins of the name Lycia in the LukkaLands of the Hittite records or the Hittite treaty with Wiluša (Wilios) longbefore Homer wrote about Troy. They therefore tended to favor narrativesof origin that tied Anatolian peoples to Greek or Aegean origins, partlybecause they had none of the records we now have with which to critiquesuch narratives.

The natural tendency toward homogeneity in Anatolia was accelerated by atleast two factors after the Greeks came to Anatolia. One was the hegemonicnature of Greek civilization of the Archaic, Classical, and Hellenistic periods,which in contact with most other civilizations proved so compelling thatit was influential wherever people were exposed to it. This was true even




when the Greeks themselves were being conquered, by the Lydians, or bythe Romans, as the poet Horace pointed out (Epistles Book II.1.156). Thishegemonic character of Greek civilization, which would probably have spreadinexorably to most of Anatolia eventually, was dramatically accelerated byAlexander’s conquests of much of Anatolia and his deliberate Hellenizingefforts throughout his empire. The later Roman acquisition of the Anatolianpart of his empire continued the process of homogenization through anintentional policy of Romanization. The Iron Age native and Greek cities ofAnatolia, even a place like Sardis, capital of a major native Anatolian empire,now have such an overlay of Greek and Roman building and material culturethat it can be difficult to perceive or remember the great ethnic differencesof the people who lived in them before Alexander and the Romans broughtthem into the community of the Classical world. Discovering and elucidatingthis diversity of Anatolian cultures and languages before Alexander is thus amajor focus of the scholars who work on Anatolia, and of this Handbook.

References

Primary Sources

Citations of Horace, Pliny, Quintilian, and Strabo are from standard editions.Find This Resource

•• Worldcat• Google Preview

Herodotus. The Histories. Trans. Aubrey de Sélincourt. Revised withintroductory matter and notes by John Marincola. London: Penguin Books,1996.Find This Resource


Homer. The Iliad of Homer. Trans. and with an introduction by RichmondLattimore. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961.Find This Resource



http://worldcat.org/title/Pliny, Quintilian, and Strabo are from standard editions

http://books.google.com/books?q=intitle:Pliny+intitle:Quintilian+intitle:and+intitle:Strabo+intitle:are+intitle:from+intitle:standard+intitle:editions

http://worldcat.org/title/The Histories

http://books.google.com/books?q=The+Histories

http://worldcat.org/title/The Iliad of Homer

http://books.google.com/books?q=The+Iliad+of+Homer



Xenophon. The Persian Expedition (Anabasis). Trans. Rex Warner. London:Penguin Books, 1987.Find This Resource


Secondary Sources

Alp, Sedat. 1995. Zur Lage der Stadt Tarḫuntašša. In Atti del II CongressoInternazionale di Hittitologia, ed. O. Carruba, M. Giorgieri, and C. Mora, 1–11.Pavia: Gianni Iuculano Editore.Find This Resource


Burn, A. R. 1972. Introduction. In Herodotus, The Histories, 7–37. Middlesex:Penguin Books.Find This Resource


de Sélincourt, Aubrey. 1982. The World of Herodotus. San Francisco: NorthPoint Press.Find This Resource


del Monte, Giuseppe F. and Johann Tischler. 1978. Die Orts-undGewässernamen der hethitischen Texte. Répertoire Géographique des TextesCunéiformes VI. Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag.Find This Resource


Diakonoff, Igor. 1984. The Pre-History of the Armenian People. Trans. L.Jennings. Delmar, N.Y.: Caravan Books.Find This Resource


http://worldcat.org/title/The Persian Expedition (Anabasis)

http://books.google.com/books?q=The+Persian+Expedition+Anabasis

http://worldcat.org/title/Atti del II Congresso Internazionale di Hittitologia

http://books.google.com/books?q=intitle:Atti+intitle:del+intitle:II+intitle:Congresso+intitle:Internazionale+intitle:di+intitle:Hittitologia

http://worldcat.org/title/Herodotus The Histories

http://books.google.com/books?q=intitle:Herodotus+intitle:The+intitle:Histories

http://worldcat.org/title/The World of Herodotus

http://books.google.com/books?q=The+World+of+Herodotus

http://worldcat.org/title/Die Orts-und Gew�ssernamen der hethitischen Texte. R�pertoire G�ographique des Textes Cun�iformes VI

http://books.google.com/books?q=Die+Ortsund+Gewssernamen+der+hethitischen+Texte+Rpertoire+Gographique+des+Textes+Cuniformes+VI




Dinçol, Ali M., Jak Yakar, Belkıs Dinçol, and Avia Taffet. 2000. The Borders ofthe Appanage Kingdom of Tarhuntašša—A Geographical and ArchaeologicalAssessment. Anatolica 26: 1–29.Find This Resource


Forlanini, Massimo. 1998. The Geography of Hittite Anatolia in the Lightof the Recent Epigraphical Discoveries. In Acts of the IIIrd InternationalCongress of Hittitology, ed. Sedat Alp and Aygül Süel, 217–22. Ankara: NurolMatbacılık.Find This Resource


Harmatta, J. 1990. Herodotus, Historian of the Cimmerians and the Scythians.In Hérodote et les peuples non Grecs: Neuf exposés suivis de discussions,ed. Giuseppe Nenci and Olivier Reverdin, 115–30. Entretiens sur l’AntiquitéClassique, tome XXV. Geneva: Fondation Hardt.Find This Resource


Hawkins, John David. 1998. The Land of Išuwa: The Hieroglyphic Evidence. InActs of the IIIrd International Congress of Hittitology, ed. Sedat Alp and AygülSüel, 281–95. Ankara: Nurol Matbacılık.Find This Resource


Hawkins, John David. 2000. Corpus of Hieroglyphic Luwian Inscriptions,Volume I: Inscriptions of the Iron Age. Untersuchungen zur indogermanischenSprach-und Kulturwissenschaft, Neue Folge 8.1. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Find This Resource


http://worldcat.org/title/The Pre-History of the Armenian People

http://books.google.com/books?q=The+PreHistory+of+the+Armenian+People

http://worldcat.org/title/The Borders of the Appanage Kingdom of Tarhunta??a?A Geographical and Archaeological Assessment

http://books.google.com/books?q=The+Borders+of+the+Appanage+Kingdom+of+TarhuntaaA+Geographical+and+Archaeological+Assessment

http://worldcat.org/title/Acts of the IIIrd International Congress of Hittitology

http://books.google.com/books?q=intitle:Acts+intitle:of+intitle:the+intitle:IIIrd+intitle:International+intitle:Congress+intitle:of+intitle:Hittitology

http://worldcat.org/title/H�rodote et les peuples non Grecs: Neuf expos�s suivis de discussions

http://books.google.com/books?q=intitle:Hrodote+intitle:et+intitle:les+intitle:peuples+intitle:non+intitle:Grecs+intitle:Neuf+intitle:exposs+intitle:suivis+intitle:de+intitle:discussions

http://worldcat.org/title/Acts of the IIIrd International Congress of Hittitology

http://books.google.com/books?q=intitle:Acts+intitle:of+intitle:the+intitle:IIIrd+intitle:International+intitle:Congress+intitle:of+intitle:Hittitology




Hawkins, John David. 2009. Cilicia, the Amuq, and Aleppo: New Light on aDark Age. Near Eastern Archaeology 72.4: 164–73.Find This Resource


Hawkins, J. David and Donald F. Easton. 1996. A Hieroglyphic Seal from Troia.Studia Troica 6: 111–19.Find This Resource


Houwink ten Cate, Philo H. J. 1961. The Luwian Population Groups of Lyciaand Cilicia Aspera during the Hellenistic Period. Leiden: Brill.Find This Resource


How, W. W. and J. Wells. 1989. A Commentary on Herodotus in Two Volumes.Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find This Resource


Morpurgo-Davies, Anna. 1982/83. Dentals, Rhotacism and Verbal Endingsin the Luvian Languages. Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung 96:245–70.Find This Resource



http://worldcat.org/title/Corpus of Hieroglyphic Luwian Inscriptions, Volume I: Inscriptions of the Iron Age

http://books.google.com/books?q=Corpus+of+Hieroglyphic+Luwian+Inscriptions+Volume+I+Inscriptions+of+the+Iron+Age

http://worldcat.org/title/Cilicia, the Amuq, and Aleppo: New Light on a Dark Age

http://books.google.com/books?q=Cilicia+the+Amuq+and+Aleppo+New+Light+on+a+Dark+Age

http://worldcat.org/title/A Hieroglyphic Seal from Troia

http://books.google.com/books?q=A+Hieroglyphic+Seal+from+Troia

http://worldcat.org/title/The Luwian Population Groups of Lycia and Cilicia Aspera during the Hellenistic Period

http://books.google.com/books?q=The+Luwian+Population+Groups+of+Lycia+and+Cilicia+Aspera+during+the+Hellenistic+Period

http://worldcat.org/title/A Commentary on Herodotus in Two Volumes

http://books.google.com/books?q=A+Commentary+on+Herodotus+in+Two+Volumes

http://worldcat.org/title/Dentals, Rhotacism and Verbal Endings in the Luvian Languages

http://books.google.com/books?q=Dentals+Rhotacism+and+Verbal+Endings+in+the+Luvian+Languages



Oettinger, Norbert. 2008. The Seer Mopsos (Muksas) as a Historical Figure.In Hittites, Greeks, and Their Neighbors in Ancient Anatolia, ed. Billie JeanCollins, Mary Bachvarova, and Ian Rutherford, 64–67. Oxford: Oxbow.Find This Resource


Tuna, Numan, Zeynep Aktüre, and Maggie Lynch, eds. 1998. Thracians andPhrygians: Problems of Parallelism. Ankara: METU, Faculty of ArchitecturePress.Find This Resource


Wäfler, Markus. 1983. Zu Status und Lage von Tabāl. In Festschrift AnneliesKammenhuber, ed. Gabriella Frantz-Szabó, 181–93. Orientalia 32.Find This Resource


Notes:

(1) . All quotations are from the Richmond Lattimore translation of the Iliad,which preserves Greek spellings of personal and place names.

(2) . A good general introduction to Herodotus and his work, including hisunderstanding of Anatolian peoples and places, is de Sélincourt (1982). Seealso How and Wells (1989).


http://worldcat.org/title/Hittites, Greeks, and Their Neighbors in Ancient Anatolia

http://books.google.com/books?q=intitle:Hittites+intitle:Greeks+intitle:and+intitle:Their+intitle:Neighbors+intitle:in+intitle:Ancient+intitle:Anatolia

http://worldcat.org/title/Thracians and Phrygians: Problems of Parallelism

http://books.google.com/books?q=Thracians+and+Phrygians+Problems+of+Parallelism

http://worldcat.org/title/Festschrift Annelies Kammenhuber

http://books.google.com/books?q=intitle:Festschrift+intitle:Annelies+intitle:Kammenhuber

http://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195376142.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780195376142-e-2#oxfordhb-9780195376142-bibItem-7

http://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195376142.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780195376142-e-2#oxfordhb-9780195376142-bibItem-18

Documents

The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Anatolia ||