Anyone associated for twenty years and more with Anatolian archaeology through the British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara, and thus with Anatolian Studies, has ample reason for respect and gratitude for the long, patient and understanding editorship of this journal by Oliver Gurney. For many years he has proved that efficiency and humanity can go hand in hand; and that the light touch on the editorial helm is normally sufficient. Perhaps at some sacrifice of his own interests, he has a record of service to Anatolian scholarship quite unsurpassed in our time, for to him is due the shape of Anatolian Studies as we have long known it.

This necessarily brief appraisal of aspects of the work achieved in the area of the Keban Rescue Project, under the overall auspices of the Middle East Technical University, Ankara, concentrates its attention especially upon the excavations at one site. The results of these have now been published in part in final form, with praiseworthy speed. The writer is responding to a request for a review of these publications. To attempt such a review without reference to the other reports on this site of Korucutepe, or in total isolation from the many other excavations by different teams in the same area, would of course be of little value and less interest. Yet the literature is by now so great, if in some degree repetitive, and the cultural implications for surrounding regions are so far-reaching, that a definitive assessment can scarcely be approached, and must await the final publications of the other excavations.

In 1968 the Bezalel National Museum of Jerusalem, Israel — now incorporated into the Israel Museum — acquired a small but splendid and significant piece of ancient jewellery. As it came from the art-market in New York, it is thus unfortunately without provenance. I now publish it by kind permission of the Chief Curator of Archaeology, Mrs. Miriam Tadmor, and the Curator of the Department of Neighbouring Cultures, Mrs. Rivka Merhav.

Here is, first, the technical description of the piece.

A figure representing a goddess, nude, four-winged and facing frontally is holding in each hand a bunch of grapes. She is raised in relief from the background of an almost square electrum plaque, framed by a plaited wire border set between plain wire on each side. The frame is decorated on each of its four sides with large globules, numbering eight in all, surrounded by granulation. The goddess formerly had long hair falling in two locks of coiled wire one each side of her face (one of these — that on the right, which showed signs of being melted, has been lost before the object first appeared on the market, presumably in antiquity (Plates VIII, IXa)).

Hittite geography and Hittite religion have for many years been among Oliver Gurney's principal interests. It therefore gives me the greatest pleasure that this small contribution in his honour deals with both these subjects, especially since the text with which it is mainly concerned is one which I first studied many years ago under his supervision. Like so many others, I owe him a debt of gratitude which can never be adequately repaid.

For many years now it has been clear that in any attempt to locate the site of Nerik the most important fact to be kept in mind is that the town was for a long period in the hands of the Gasga-peoples. Their capture of it was allegedly in the reign of Hantilis, and it was calculated that five hundred years passed before it was recovered by Hattusilis III. More probably however it fell into enemy hands in the reign of Arnuwandas I and his queen Asmunikkal, shortly after 1450 B.C. But whatever the exact details may be, it has to be accepted that any town subjected to an extended period of Gasgan occupation must have been situated to the north of Hattusas, in the direction of the area known in Classical times as Pontus. More recently there has been further evidence pointing to a similar conclusion.

Much attention is currently lavished on the roles of the Mesopotamian core area relative to those of the periphery which surrounded it in a great arc. The periphery drew much of its cultural inspiration from the core, but not in any kind of monolithic way: present indications are that it was more often open to influence from what might be termed “Akkadian” than “Sumerian” traditions. In matters of script, language, calendar, legal terminology and numerous other features, it seems to have perpetuated innovations ultimately going back to Sargonic rule or inspiration. But it is equally clear that the direction of influence was not exclusively outward from the core to the periphery. As the example of the geographical atlas of the Ancient Near East attested at Ebla and at Abū Salābīk has already shown, it sometimes went the other way. The case of the royal titulary may provide a further example of the influence of the periphery on the Mesopotamian core.

Twenty-five years ago, I studied the evolution of the royal titulary in essentially historical terms, as I attempted to date the first appearance of each royal title within Mesopotamia. Only occasional suggestions were offered for the possible prehistory of some titles outside Mesopotamia. These suggestions can now be followed up and expanded in the light of additional data.