The inscriptions published here were recorded during the excavation at Şar, Comana Cappadociae, conducted jointly for the Ankara Archaeological Museum and the British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara by Mrs. İnci Bayburtluoğlu and the writer in August, 1967. A report of the excavation appeared in AS. XVIII, 1968, p. 149 ff.

The numerical sequence of the inscriptions continues that of “Tituli Comanorum Cappadociae” (AS. XVIII, 1968, p. 93 ff.) Again I give measurements, figures made from contact drawings of squeezes and photographs. Dimensions are in centimetres, width before height before depth.

3,08. Found outside the north side of the Kırık Kilise. Part of the top of a round limestone altar, centre hollow, 40 × 25 × 20. Top surrounded with a wreath of leaves. Inscription worn, broken left, 23 × 7; letters 2; possible traces of two more lines. Photograph Pl. Ia.

In this article I have presented the second synthesis of information and material gathered from surface survey in Western Anatolia. This article, in fact, completes the publication of the work that I undertook in 1959–60 when I was joint Scholar of the British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara. My aim in 1959–60 was to discover what prehistoric remains could be found, especially in the Akhisar/Manisa region but also in the area around Balıkesir. Both regions were archaeologically almost terra incognita—at least in the publications.

I have, therefore, felt that it is justifiable to publish the information that was recorded ten years ago although, at the same time, it must be admitted that aims and methods in archaeology have radically changed since 1959, and that methods of illustration and publication have changed along with the aims themselves. Much of modern archaeology is turning (? rightly) to the new approaches—the new “models”—but analytical archaeology, however propounded, is at the mercy of the data available for it. Data must still be collected, especially from sources where basic, primary information did not exist before. It is perhaps unfortunate that in Anatolia, until recently, scant attention has been paid to the accurate compilation of basic information.

The inscription under consideration is at present on exhibition in Niğde archaeological museum, where it bears the inventory number 369. For permission to publish it, as well as for every assistance in taking a squeeze and photographs I am much indebted to Bay Kemal Germiyanoğlu, the curator. While working on this inscription in Niğde, and on the Babil stele in Adana published below, I received the necessary permission and support from the Turkish Department of Antiquities, for which I am very grateful. My work was made possible by a travel grant from the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London.

The inscription is incised on a rectangular-faced block of white limestone approximately 130 cm. in length. The ends and the top of this block are only roughly smoothed, the top in fact sloping away towards the back. In this upper surface at either end a shallow groove is visible, such as would have held the metal clamps often used in antiquity to secure masonry. This would indicate that the block had formed part of a wall, with only the inscribed front face exposed.

The three fragments of a much worn Assyrian stele to be seen in Adana Museum were not, as might have been supposed, found locally in Cilicia. Instead they have been identified as pieces found by C. F. Lehmann-Haupt in the spring of 1899, in the course of a journey down the Tigris from Siirt to Mosul. They were discovered at the village of Babil, some 25 km. south-west of the modern town of Cizre, which is situated in south-eastern Turkey on the Tigris, at the point where the present Turkish-Syrian border joins the river. Babil also now lies directly on the Turkish border. Lehmann-Haupt related the site, circumstances and finds on two occasions in his published works. The finds included “eine Anzahl von Steinfragmenten mit assyrischen Inschriften”, six of which he described perfunctorily and with considerable inaccuracy. He correctly identified parts of a stele of Assurnasirpal II, but did not attempt any further reading of the worn and broken text.

The dating of the Neo-Hittite enclosure in Karatepe, discovered about twenty years ago by H. Th. Bossert and his Turkish colleagues, forms a problem of primary importance, the solution of which could have deep repercussions on wide fields of study. Even though Azitawadda, the builder and ruler of Karatepe, has left a relatively long bilingual inscription, it lacks the direct and conclusive evidence which might have proved its dating. It is not surprising, then, that several scholars differ widely on the date of Karatepe.

The dating generally accepted today is the one put forward by Bossert in 1948, who proposed that Karatepe was built, and Azitawadda reigned, during the second half of the eighth century B.C. This dating is mainly based on three arguments each of a different kind: firstly, it was assumed that “Awrikku king of the Dannunites” (Á-wa+ri-ku-s of the Hittite hieroglyphic inscription), whom Azitawadda mentioned as his benefactor, must be identified with “Urikki of Que” who, as related in the annals of Tiglath-Pileser III, paid a tribute to Assyria probably in 738 B.C. Secondly, a palaeographical analysis of the script of Azitawadda's Phoenician text indicated that the letters are of a rather “developed” and late type, a fact which points to as late a date as possible for this inscription. Thirdly, the artistic style of the reliefs seemed to be late, and as argued by E. Akurgal, to be much influenced by Assyrian art.

The following random lot of inscriptions was noted during three brief trips into the territory around Olba-Diocaesareia, in the spring of 1966, while we were guests at the British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara. These trips were part of a year of archaeological wandering made possible by the grant of the Olivia James Travelling Fellowship, administered by the Archaeological Institute of America.

1. Seleuceia-Korykos: This inscription was discovered by the able and energetic curator of antiquities at Silifke, Mr. Mehmet Belen, to whose great kindness we owe our knowledge of it. It is cut on a rock face above some faint traces of an ancient road from Korasion to Korykos, which runs parallel to the modern coast road at this point. About 19 km. east of Silifke, the modern road turns north away from the shore, and runs inland along the west side of a seasonal watercourse called Kuru Dere, “dry river bed”. Just north of the gravel bank at the mouth of Kuru Dere, at a point where the rock wall cuts back from the west side of the road to form a very small tributary stream bed, there are faint traces of rock cut steps some 5 metres above the road. Above these, on the south side of the tributary stream bed, a roughly dressed rectangular panel, 0·80 × 0·45 m., has been cut into the rock.

This article stems from the writer's discovery in 1955 of an inscribed sarcophagus at Prymnessus, the modern Süğlün, 8 km. south-east of Afyon. It had been intended to follow this up by a reexamination of the stone itself and by an intensive survey, on the ground, of the ancient topography of the valley of the Phrygian Caÿster. But the necessary field-work has been prevented by various considerations, both inside and outside Turkey, and it seems only fair to others interested in this part of Phrygia to publish the inscription and draw at least preliminary conclusions from it.

Süğlün; reused as a horse-trough in a fountain, Güvercinlik Çeşmesi, at the south end of the village. Pink trachyte sarcophagus, moulded above, buried below, with tabula ansata. Height 0·57 m. plus, width 2·07 m., thickness 0·83 m., letters 0·03–0·04 m.

Numerous interpretations of the meaning, function, and derivation of the Minoan “horns of consecration” have been put forward since Evans discovered the first object of this kind in his excavations at Knossos. As yet, not one of the various theories proposed has been universally accepted. Consequently, the authors of this article would prefer not to be so presumptuous as to claim that they have indeed solved the problem of the usage and origins of the Minoan “horns”; on the other hand they believe that excavations in the past twenty years have strongly suggested that the Minoan “horns” have their origins in Anatolia and that the object's function, originally at least, was a pot-support in a hearth.

In Anatolia, horned objects which we consider served as precursors of the Minoan “horns of consecration” fall into three classes. Examples of the first of these classes have been found in EB II hearths at Beycesultan and at Tarsus. Survivals of this type of “horns” are also found in Late Bronze Age [hereafter LB] Kusura C and Beycesultan III–II. The second class consists of the pot-stands or andirons connected with Khirbet Kerak ware in the 'Amuq, Palestine, north-east Anatolia, and the Caucasus.

The interesting village-site of Gerga was first described by G. Cousin in BCH XXIV (1900), 28–31. He was followed in 1933 by A. Laumonier, who published two articles in BCH LVIII (1934), 304–7 and LX (1936), 286–97; cf. Les Cultes Indigènes en Carie 446–51. The ruins, now known as Gâvurdamları or Gâvurpazarı, lie in the wild mountain country some 6 km. east-south-east of Eski Çine, above the valley of the Marsyas river. The nearest city is Alabanda 12 or 13 km. to the northwest. Both of the French scholars approached the site in what was then the natural way, from the west and north; but the fine new tarmac road from Çine to Yatağan has now made the approach from the south much easier, and on 6th October, 1968, I visited Gerga from this direction, crossing the Marsyas near the fine old Turkish bridge at Incekemer. The site proves to be a good deal more extensive than had previously been realised. It extends over two hills, which I call the eastern and western, though north-eastern and south-western would perhaps be more accurate. The principal centre, with the very handsome “funerary temple”, the strange statue, the curious pyramidal stelae and other features, is on the south slope of the higher eastern hill, and neither Cousin nor Laumonier seems to have penetrated much, if at all, beyond this.

In this article the historical importance of Lampron, and the architecture of the castle as it stands at present, are described. The work was done during the summer vacation of 1966.

For simplification of description in the text the longer axis of the castle is assumed to run north–south. The scale that appears in some photographs is marked in ½ metre divisions, with an additional short length at the top.

“… tous les seigneurs de ce château se révoltent parce qu'ils le savent imprenable.”

(Leo the Great of Cilician Armenia)

The fief was the source of medieval military authority. The castle at the centre of the fief was its focal point. From it the baron derived all his power. It was, in a disturbed world, his insurance of safety. Much depended on its strength.