art 221
as to the identity of the gods they support. according to a local hurrian-
syrian tradition, the central figure on a bull could be teššub-adad, while
the figure to the right on a lion could be Šawušga-Ištar. the third figure
could be Šarruma, the son of the storm-god, although this assumption is
only supported by the hittite tradition.70 however, the iconographic idio-
syncrasies of the represented figures and the lack of recognizably divine
attributes in the case of the female figure make interpretation difficult.
the caryatids, in particular, seem to represent the thematic and probably
functional synthesis of different pictorial and architectural traditions that
was a specific characteristic of the workshop of Guzana.
2.3 Til Barsib and Hadattuthe problems inherent in attempting to formulate a concept of “ara-
maean art” are clearly evident in the case of the sculptural works found
in til Barsib (now tell aḥmar) and hadattu (now arslan tash). Both sites
were located approximately 30 kilometers from each other in the tribal
area of Bit adini. although they were settled by aramaeans for a longer
period and at times had aramaean rulers,71 as yet none of the monuments
found there—relief orthostats in til Barsib, portal figures and steles (see
section 3.1.2) at both locations—have been described as aramaean.
In the late 10th century B.c., the city of til Barsib, referred to as
Masuwari in Luwian inscriptions and located only 20 kilometers from
carchemish, probably came under the control of the adini tribe that had
long been settled in the area. however, previous scholarship has identi-
fied the short reign of aḫuni (ca. 870–856 B.c.) as the first evidence of
aramaean hegemony in til Barsib. Only recently has it been argued that
the rulers who took power in an earlier phase, hamiyata and his father
ariyahina, were also of semitic-aramaean descent.72 this would mean
70 regarding this discussion, see Bonatz forthcoming a: 14f and schwemer 2001: 616.
according to schwemer, the female divinity, a local Ištar figure, can be identified as
Šala, the paredra of adad. novák’s suggestion that the male divinity on a lion is the god
Ḫaldi, who was worshipped in western Zagros and in Urartu, remains hypothetical (novák
2002: 157).
71 On the history of hadattu, see Lipiński 2000a: 170f; on the history of til Barsib, see
below.
72 Dalley 2000: 80 and Bunnens 2009: 75f. as Bunnens argues here, the background to
this assumption of power had more to do with conflicts between rival semitic-aramaean
groups than with conflicts between aramaean and an ethnically Luwian segment of the
population. Lipiński presents a somewhat different interpretation of historical events and
the succession of rulers in til Barsib (2000a: 183–187).