54 dagmar kühn
the short inscription Kai 203 from hamath verifies the skn byt mlkh. 109
the title skn is well-known already in the Late Bronze age. From ugarit,
we know a skn of the palace, a skn of the land, and a skn of the city.110 the
title is also found in the phoenician inscription on the sarcophagus of
King aḥirom (Kai 1) and in the old testament (isa 22: 15: sōkēn).111 the
different references hint at a highly placed official, who was perhaps in
charge of palace administration.112
the general title ʿbd mlk (servant of the king), likely also referred to
high dignitaries. this title honored the holder as a high dignitary, but
it was not connected with specific functions or a special office. all ref-
erences to the title113 show subordination to an important person. as
e. Lipiński notes, “this title ʿbd does not specify the function of the office
holder, it only expresses his dependence from the ‘lord’, the māriʾ.”114 the
holder of the title might bear a second functionary title. a good example
can be seen in a letter written by the governor of harran to Sargon ii.115 in
the akkadian letter the aramaean priest, Siʾgabbar from neirab is called
“servant of the king,” but in the inscription on his stele, Siʾgabbar calls
himself kmr (Kai 226: 1).
the use of the title ʿbd in the inscriptions of King Bar-rakkab and prob-
ably in the inscription of the recently found stele of Kuttamuwa116 sheds
new light on the meaning of the title. King Bar-rakkab calls himself ʿbd
tgltplysr, “servant of tiglath-pileser” (Kai 216 and certainly also Kai 217),
whereas Kuttamuwa calls himself ʿbd pnmw, “servant of panmuwa.” the
holder of this title therefore could have been a vassal or local dynast.117
this is the case for Bar-rakkab, King of Samʾal, vassal of tiglath-pileser
iii. if Kuttamuwa was in fact a local dynast rather than a royal official
and belonged to the inner circle of King panamuwa ii this would explain
109 Lipiński 2000a: 505 with n. 100 further mentions a stone weight with an inscription
that contains a skn.
110 See the references in del olmo Lete – Sanmartín^2 2004: 757–759.
111 For the evidence in the amarna Letters, cf. hoftijzer – Jongeling 1995: 786.
112 Lipiński 2000a: 505: “the chief minister in charge of the royal administration and not
only the steward of the royal residence or the administrator of the crown properties.”
113 Besides some stelae there are several seal inscriptions; cf. dion 1997: 275f and
Lipiński 2000a: 500.
114 Lipiński 2000a: 500.
115 cf. parpola 1985.
116 Struble – herrmann 2009; Schloen – Fink 2009c; pardee 2009a; id. 2009b.
117 cf. masson 2010: 51. masson sees, with reference to Jasink 1998, a parallel to the neo-
hittite titles tarwani and tapariyali mentioned in hieroglyphic-Luwian, which designate
local dynasts depending on a central power.