art 215
the royal family that is moving in parallel to the entrance.42 Insight into
the participants’ status and role can be gained not only by studying their
position in relation to the king, but also by examining how their attributes
conform to him. the image of the king apparently reflected and provided
a foundation for hierarchical relations in the upper echelons of society.43
Under King Bar-rakkab, who proved loyal to the assyrian power,
samʾalean monumental art experienced its last golden age in the late
8th century B.c. a creative balance was struck in the local visual tradition
that had developed under assyrian influence. In the two scenes depicting
Bar-rakkab on the throne, for example—both of which were prominently
displayed at the entrance to hilani Iv (“northern hall”)—two different
(craft) traditions were united at one site through the image of the throne
from assyria in the one scene and the representation of the throne from
local workshops in the other.44 the visual message that was sent to the
rather exclusive audience in the palace area on the citadel of samʾal was
probably understood to be an ideological one, even if we cannot recon-
struct this message in detail today. It testifies to the local rulers’ confi-
dent self-perception. It was only the violent subjugation of the city by
the assyrian king esarhaddon around 671 B.c. that led to a radical ban
on the local exercise of power and on these affirmations of identity. this
key event was followed by a transformation of the urban landscape, the
relocation or destruction of older sculptural works, and the creation of
new works of a purely assyrian character. the most impressive of these
latter works is the triumphal stele erected by esarhaddon at the main gate
of the citadel (gate D).45
2.1.2 Portal Lions
Monumental sculptures of lions in the tradition of hittite portal lions
were also erected as guardian figures in aramaean samʾal, as they were
42 Orthmann 1971: 548: Zincirli h/8. Of the reliefs on the eastern façade of hilani III,
only a few were found in situ, meaning that it is impossible to completely reconstruct the
succession of images. this difficulty is compounded by the fact that only ten orthostats
were transported to the museums in Berlin and Istanbul (Orthmann 1971: 547–549: Zincirli
h/1–h/10–11). the rest remained at the excavation sites and are lost today (pucci 2008:
71 n. 394).
43 see also Gilibert 2011: 186.
44 For a detailed description of the furniture and its cultural historical classification,
see symington 1996: 134f.
45 concerning the architectural changes carried out when the assyrians assumed
power, see Wartke 2005: 68f and pucci 2008: 80.