art 217
gate e.51 It is only when we come to the individual lions found in the area
of hilani II and III that the stylistic parallels with the later lions from gate e
(inner citadel gate) become so pronounced that we can assume they
originate from approximately the same time.52 since the palace build-
ings whose entrances were probably once adorned with these lion figures
are linked to the construction activities of Bar-rakkab (ca. 733/732–713/
711 B.c.), these figures were probably produced during this time or shortly
afterward.
the portal lions thus stand for different phases in samʾal’s history as a
city. they demonstrate not only a change in style within this group of art-
works but, even more, the programmatic and dynamic embellishment of
this exclusive domain of samʾal with symbols of power. the ritual disposal
of the portal lions from the inner citadel gate (gate e) underscores this
function and was probably one of the diverse and drastic consequences of
the assyrian assumption of power in samʾal after 671/670 B.c.53
2.2 Guzanathere is no precise information available concerning the founding of
Guzana (now tell halaf ) as the capital of the aramaean city-state of Bit
Baḫiani, but it probably took place no later than the early 10th century
B.c.54 It is difficult to date the sculptures on the main building in the
western half of the citadel, the so-called Western palace or temple palace
of Kapara, since it remains unclear when this aramaean ruler lived, with
estimates ranging from the 10th to the 8th century B.c.55 In the inscrip-
tions on numerous sculptural works on the palace façade Kapara describes
himself as the builder of the palace, whereas the inscriptions on a number
of orthostats at the rear contain the phrase “temple of the storm-god.” as
a result, researchers assumed at an early stage that these so-called small
orthostats originally belonged to another building.56 the stylistic differ-
ences between these orthostats and the reliefs on the palace façade indeed
51 Orthmann 1971: 68–60: Zincirli D/1–52.
52 Orthmann 1971: 70f: Zincirli h/3 und J/1.
53 see also Ussishkin 1970: 125f and Gilibert 2011: 101.
54 novák 2009: 94.
55 regarding this discussion, see Orthmann 2002: 19–23; pucci 2008: 81 n. 455 and 125
n. 704.
56 the first researcher to make this assumption was von Oppenheim 1931: 126–128;
on the subsequent development of the discussion, see elsen-novák – novák 1994 and
Orthmann 2002: 21f.