Wikipedia

Ḫilakku

(Redirected from Pirindu)
This article contains cuneiform script. Without proper rendering support, you may see question marks, boxes, or other symbols instead of cuneiform script.

Ḫilakku (𒆳𒄭𒋃𒆪[1]), later known as Pirindu (𒆳𒉿𒊑𒅔𒁺 and 𒆳𒉿𒆸𒁺[2]), was a Luwian-speaking Syro-Hittite state which existed in southeastern Anatolia in the Iron Age.

𒆳𒄭𒋃𒆪 (Ḫilakku: earlier)
𒆳𒉿𒊑𒅔𒁺 (Pirindu: later)
Unknown–713 BC
Ḫilakku among the Neo-Hittite states
Ḫilakku among the Neo-Hittite states
Common languagesLuwian
Religion
Luwian religion
GovernmentMonarchy
King 
• r. c. 858 BC
Piḫirim
• r. c. 718 BC – 713 BC
Ambaris
• r. c. 662 BC
Sandašarme
• r. c. 557 BC
Appuwašu
Historical eraIron Age
• Established
Unknown
• Disestablished
713 BC
Preceded by		 Succeeded by
Tarḫuntašša
Cilicia
Today part ofTurkey

Name

edit

Ḫilakku

edit

The native name of this kingdom is still unknown due to a lack of Hieroglyphic Luwian inscriptions from it during the Iron Age,[3] although it has been tentatively identified with the land of Hilikka mentioned in the records of Halparuntiyas I of Gurgum.[4]

Ḫilakku (𒆳𒄭𒋃𒆪[1]) was the name given by Neo-Assyrian Akkadian sources to this kingdom, and the name of the region which in Graeco-Roman times was called Cilicia was derived from that of Ḫilakku.[5][3]

Pirindu

edit

Following the collapse of the Neo-Assyrian Empire, the country of Ḫilakku reappeared in Neo-Babylonian Akkadian sources under the name of Pirindu (𒆳𒉿𒊑𒅔𒁺 and 𒆳𒉿𒆸𒁺[2]).[6]

The name Pirindu was derived from a Luwian name *Piruwandas, meaning lit. 'stony (place)', corresponding to the later Greek and Turkish appelations of this region as Kilikia Trakheia (Κιλικια Τραχεια) and Taşeli, which have the same meanings.[7]

It is uncertain whether the Neo-Babylonian name Pirindu is identical to the country of Pirundummeya (Hittite: 𒌷𒁉𒊒𒌦𒁺𒌝𒈨𒅀[8]) mentioned in the records of the Hittite Empire as a source of gold.[9]

Geography

edit

Location

edit

The kingdom of Ḫilakku was located in the western section of the territory which later in Classical Antiquity became known as Cilicia, more specifically in the part which was referred to as Rough Cilicia (Ancient Greek: Κιλικια Τραχεια, romanized: Kilikia Trakheia; Latin: Cilicia Aspera),[10][11][12][3][13] in the region of the Taurus and Bolkar mountains to the north and north-west of Ḫiyawa, between it and the Tabalian region.[14][15]

Ḫilakku's eastern boundary was located in the mountainous region between the southeastern Konya Plain and northern Tarsus, while its western border was the Calycadnus river,[16] whose valley linked it to the Konya Plain.[17]

By the Neo-Babylonian period, Pirindu had expanded to include the lands to the west of the Calycadnus river, where it reached Sallunê in the west and the Mediterranean sea in the south.[18]

Neighbours

edit

The neighbours of Ḫilakku were Ḫiyawa to its east and the kingdoms of the Tabalian region to its north,[11][19] hence why Neo-Assyrian records associated Ḫilakku with Que (Ḫiyawa) and Tabal.[14]

Cities

edit

Neo-Assyrian sources recorded the existence of a city of Ḫilakku, although this cannot be taken as evidence for the kingdom being a city-state, and its attempted identification with the city of Mazaka, corresponding to modern-day Kayseri is inaccurate. These sources also mention the existence of "21 strong towns and their surrounding villages" (Neo-Assyrian Akkadian: 𒌋𒌋𒁹 𒌷𒈨𒌍𒋙𒉡 𒆗𒉡𒋾 𒅇 𒌷𒈨𒌍 𒌉𒈨𒌍 𒁲 𒇷𒈨𒋾𒋙𒉡, romanized: 21 ālānišunu dannūti u ālāni ṣeḫrūti ša limētišunu[20]) in Ḫilakku.[14]

During the Neo-Babylonian period, the capital of Pirindu was Urā (or Urâ or Uraʾa), and another of its royal cities was Kirši.[21]

History

edit

Bronze Age

edit

In the Late Bronze Age, the region which would later become Ḫilakku was part of the kingdom of Kizzuwatna and later of the southeastern border regions of the kingdom of Tarḫuntašša.[12][3]

Iron Age

edit

Kingdom of Ḫilakku

edit

Some time during the early Iron Age, the kingdom of Ḫilakku was formed as a result of the disintegration of Tarḫuntašša,[18] although nothing is known about it during its early history except that [22]it maintained close cultural relations with Ḫiyawa and the other states to its east.[18]

In the 9th century BC, Assyria experienced a resurgence in the form of the fledgling Neo-Assyrian Empire, leading to the formation of various military coalitions by the various Syro-Hittite states in reaction to the campaigns of the Neo-Assyrian king Ashurnasirpal II in Syria during the c. 870s to c. 860s BC. The campaigns of Ashurnasirpal II's son and successor, Shalmaneser III would further lead to an intensification of activities in opposition to the Neo-Assyrian Empire in the kingdoms of Syria.[23]

After Shalmaneser III had defeated a coalition of Karkamis, Sam'al, Pattin and Bit-Adini in Sam'alian territory during his first campaign to the west in 858 BC, the king Suppiluliumas of Pattin convened the coalition again when Shalmaneser III threatened his own kingdom. In addition to the coalition forces, the Arab tribe of Yasbuq and the country of Yahan from the Aramaean kingdom of Bēt-Gūš sent reinforcements to these allied forces.[24][25]

And, although the Neo-Assyrian Empire was a more distant threat to Ḫilakku and its western neighbour Ḫiyawa which were located to the west of the passes of the Amanus Mountains, Shalmaneser III had erected a gigantic statue of himself at the foot of these mountains as a warning that they were not safe from his forces. Therefore, Ḫilakku and Ḫiyawa feared that Shalmaneser III would attack them next should Pattin fall:[24] during this time, Ḫilakku was ruled by the king Piḫirim, who along with his neighbour Katiyas of Ḫiyawa, also contributed troops to this alliance, which was however defeated by the Neo-Assyrian army.[26][11][27][28][3][25]

Katiyas of Ḫiyawa and Piḫirim of Ḫilakku had nonetheless manage to escape from this defeat with their troops unharmed, and Shalmaneser III at most only demanded tribute on them.[29]

Although Shalmaneser III campaigned against Ḫiyawa in 839 BC, into the Tabalian region in 837 BC, and later campaigned into Ḫiyawa again in 834 and 833 BC, he however made no attempt to attack Ḫilakku, which was further to the west of his campaign route, as well as because Ḫilakku was more isolated and inaccessible due to ts rough terrain.[14][11][3][13][30]

While both Ḫilakku and Ḫiyawa were mentioned in the records of the Neo-Assyrian king Tiglath-pileser III, Ḫilakku was not listed as one of his tributaries, showing that Ḫilakku had remained independent from Neo-Assyrian imperialism.[31]

Ḫilakku remained independent of Neo-Assyrian rule until the late 8th century BC, but both it as well as Ḫiyawa (under the name of Que) had become provinces of the Neo-Assyrian Empire at some point during the reigns of the Neo-Assyrian king Shalmaneser V or Sargon II.[11][32]

Between Assyria and Phrygia
edit

Following the union of the Phrygians and the Muški under the Phrygian king Midas,[33] this latter king was able to extend his kingdom to the east across the Halys river into the former core territory of the Hittite Empire[34] and build a large empire in Anatolia which reached the Aegean Sea in the west and the environs of the Euphrates and borders of the Tabalian region in the east and south.[34][35] The eastward expansionist ventures of Midas in the east soon led to his fledgling Phrygian empire becoming a major rival to Neo-Assyrian power in eastern Anatolia, especially when Midas initiated contacts with Neo-Assyrian vassals, causing the Tabalian region which bordered on Ḫiyawa to the north to become contested between the Neo-Assyrian and Phrygian empires.[33]

As part of his expansionist ventures, Midas attempted to connect his empire to the Mediterranean sea through Laranda and the eastern bank of the Calycadnus river valley.[18]

After this, Midas resorted to attempting to reach the Mediterranean sea through the route of Bozkır-Hadim-Ermenek to reach the sea passages of the mountainous regions to the west of Ḫiyawa.[18]

Since the Tabalian region was a subject of the Neo-Assyrian Empire, this Phrygian expansion increased the possibility of war between the two rival empires. Thus, the Tabalian region found itself wedged between the Neo-Assyrian and Phrygian empires, both of whom saw it as a strategically useful buffer zone to contain the other's expansionist ambitions.[36]

Therefore, Midas tried to persuade the still independent local rulers of the Tabalian region to switch their allegiances to Phrygia:[33] the loyalty of the Tabalian kings to the Neo-Assyrian Empire was unsteady, and those among them who were diplomatically approached by Midas might have preferred renouncing their allegiance to the Neo-Assyrian Empire and instead allying with Midas.[37] Thus, the kings of the Tabalian region found themselves having to choose whether aligning themselves with the Neo-Assyrian or the Phrygian empire was in their interests,[38] and several of them did accept Midas's offer.[33]

In addition to the wavering loyalty of the Tabalian kings, the possibility of an alliance between Midas and Rusa I of Urartu further threatened Neo-Assyrian power not only in southeastern Anatolia, but also throughout all of eastern Anatolia and in northern Mesopotamia.[39]

As part of Bīt-Burutaš
edit

To counter the threat of the rising power of Phrygia, Sargon II tried to establish a centralised authority under a ruler whom he could trust in the Tabalian region, and he therefore reorganised the kingdom of Tabal proper into the state of Bīt-Burutaš under the rule of the king Ambaris, who was himself the son of the former Tabalian king Ḫulliyas, to whom he had married his daughter Aḫat-abiša: as part of this arrangement, the new kingdom of Bīt-Burutaš consisted of the kingdom of Tabal which had been significantly enlarged with the territory of Ḫilakku, which had itself been offered to Ambaris as Aḫat-abiša's dowry.[40][41][42][43][44][45]

Since Ḫilakku was a country with a rough terrain and its inhabitants were extremely independent, the Neo-Assyrian rule on it was itself nominal at most, and it is unlikely that Ambaris would have had any significant involvement in managing Ḫilakku.[32][46]

However, Midas continued pressuring the western Neo-Assyrian territories and intensified his efforts to persuade the local rulers of this region to renounce their vassalage to the Neo-Assyrian Empire, and he even launched attacks until as far south as the territories of Ḫiyawa.[39] In addition to finding themselves pressured by Phrygia or Urartu, several of the western vassals of the Neo-Assyrian Empire might also have themselves initiated contacts with Phrygia and Urartu with the hope of freeing themselves from Neo-Assyrian suzerainty, thus leading to a series of anti-Assyrian uprisings by the Anatolian vassals of the Neo-Assyrian Empire during the rest of Sargon II's reign.[47]

Ambaris himself came under pressure from Midas, who attempted to persuade him to renounce Neo-Assyrian allegiance and join him, initially through diplomatic means and later through military threats.[48] This situation left Ambaris with little choice but to accept an alliance with Phrygia and renounce his allegiance to the Neo-Assyrian Empire. Facing increased pressure from both Midas of Phrygia and Argišti II of Urartu, Ambaris communicated with them seeking guarantees that they would protect him should he break his ties with the Neo-Assyrian Empire.[40][49][48]

Neo-Assyrian intelligence however intercepted Ambaris's messages to Phrygia and Urartu,[48] causing him to lose favour with Sargon II, who accused him of conspiring with these rival powers and consequently deported Ambaris, his family and his chief courtiers to Assyria in 713 BCE, after which a Neo-Assyrian governor was imposed on Bīt-Burutaš, Ḫilakku and Ḫiyawa by Sargon II,[33] with the first of these being Aššur-šarru-uṣur, who possibly as early as 713 BCE was appointed as governor of Ḫiyawa and also held authority on Ḫilakku and the Tabalian region.[40][49][50][51][52]

Thus, after the deposition of Ambaris in 713 BC, Ḫilakku and Bīt-Burutaš were both placed under direct Neo-Assyrian rule as provinces.[41][11][32][53]

Regained independence
edit

Ḫilakku was able to regain its independence during the several rebellions against the Neo-Assyrian Empire broke out in Anatolia after Sargon II's death,[11] with one Kirua who was city-lord of Illubru,[54] instigating a revolt in Ḫilakku. The Ḫiyawaean cities of Ingira and Tarsus also joined this rebellion and blocked the passes in the Amanus range which led to Ḫiyawa.[55][11][56]

In 696 BC, Sargon II's son and successor, Sennacherib, sent an army to suppress this rebellion: the Neo-Assyrian forces captured Ingira and Tarsus, before besieging Illubru and flaying the rebels after seizing it,[54] following which they deported Illubru's inhabitants and resettled it, and erected a stela dedicated to the Assyrian national god Aššur there.[57][58] However, Sennacherib was only able to deport some inhabitants of Ḫilakku and destroy their towns, showing that Ḫilakku was independent of the Neo-Assyrian Empire by then.[41]

Therefore, although the suppression of this revolt possibly allowed Sennacherib to reimpose a level of control on Que,[59][60] Ḫilakku was able to maintain its independence.[11][56]

According to records of the later Hellenistic Babylonian writer Berossus summarised by the Roman historian Eusebius of Caesarea, Ionian Greek pirates also participated in this rebellion, although Sennacherib appears to have failed at subduing them due to their greater mobility.[61][59]

Although Sennacherib's son and successor Esarhaddon claimed to have conquered the rebellious people of Ḫilakku,[11] his actions there only amounted to a raid against its population, whom Esarhaddon himself conceded was unruly and insubmissive.[41][56]

By the reign of Esarhaddon's son and successor Ashurbanipal, Ḫilakku was fully independent, and Ashurbanipal himself described Ḫilakku as not having submitted to his predecessors.[41][62][56]

Cimmerian invasions
edit

In 679 BC, Esarhaddon campaigned in the Tabalian region against the Cimmerians from his base in Que and Ḫilakku, resulting in the defeat and killing of the Cimmerian king Teušpâ in Ḫubišna and the annexation of a part of the territory of Ḫilakku and of the sub-kingdom of Kundu and Sissu in Que.[63][64] Esarhaddon appears to have reached Ḫubišna by passing through the Calycadnus river valley and bypassing the Anti-Taurus Mountains and Tabal proper.[65][33][66][67][68][69]

Despite this victory, and although Esarhaddon had managed to stop the advance of Cimmerians in Que so it remained under Neo-Assyrian control,[70] the military operations were not successful enough for the Assyrians to firmly occupy the areas around of Ḫubišna, nor were they able to secure the borders of the Neo-Assyrian Empire, leaving Que vulnerable to incursions from Tabal, Kuzzurak and Ḫilakku,[71] who were allied to the western Cimmerians who were establishing themselves in Anatolia at this time.[72] Thus, Esarhaddon was left remaining wary of possible attacks on Que by Ḫilakku or Tabal.[55]

Some time around c. 675 BCE,[73] the Cimmerians invaded and destroyed the Phrygian empire and sacked its capital of Gordion, due to which Midas committed suicide.[74][75] The Cimmerians consequently settled in Phrygia[64] and subdued part of the Phrygians[76] so that they controlled a large area consisting of Phrygia from its western limits which bordered on Lydia to its eastern boundaries neighbouring the Neo-Assyrian Empire,[77] after which they made the Tabalian region into their centre of operations.[78][79][80][81]

Neo-Assyrian sources from around this same time therefore recorded a Cimmerian presence in the area of Tabal,[82] and, between c. 672 and c. 669 BCE, a Neo-Assyrian oracular text recorded that the Cimmerians, together with the Phrygians and the Cilicians, were threatening the Neo-Assyrian Empire's newly conquered territory of Melid.[81][83][76][84] The Cimmerians were thus active in Tabal, Ḫilakku and Phrygia in the 670s BCE,[76] and, in alliance with these former two states, were attacking the western Neo-Assyrian provinces.[72][84]

Thus, the Cimmerians became the masters of Anatolia,[85] where they controlled a large territory[86] bordering Lydia in the west, covering Phrygia, and reaching Cilicia and the borders of Urartu in the east.[64][87] The disturbances experienced by the Neo-Assyrian Empire as result of the activities of the Cimmerians in Anatolia led to many of the rulers of this region to try to break away from Neo-Assyrian overlordship,[88] with Ḫilakku having become an independent polity again under the king Sandašarme[70][69] by the time that Esarhaddon had been succeeded as king of the Neo-Assyrian Empire by his son, Ashurbanipal (r. 669 – 631 BCE), so that by then the Cimmerians had effectively ended Neo-Assyrian control in Anatolia.[89]

The defeat of the Cimmerians by the Lydian king Gyges between c. 665 to c. 660 BCE weakened their allies, Mugallu of Tabal and Sandašarme of Ḫilakku, enough that they were left with no choice but to submit to the authority of the Neo-Assyrian Empire in c. 662 BCE,[90][91] forcing Sandašarme to send an embassy as well as one of his daughters with a large dowry to the Neo-Assyrian capital of Nineveh for the royal harem.[41][62]

Thus, Ḫilakku was beyond the limits of concrete Neo-Assyrian control,[14] and whatever control the Neo-Assyrian Empire might have had on it was weak and temporary at most, unlike Ḫiyawa, which the Neo-Assyrian Empire was able to keep as a province under three governors.[41]

Following the collapse of the Neo-Assyrian Empire, the kingdom's original name of Ḫilakku ceased to be mentioned in Mesopotamian records, and the state itself instead reappeared in the records of the Neo-Babylonian Empire under the name of Pirindu.[41][9][21][92] Due to its then geographical isolation, Pirindu was less influenced by the cultures of the polities to its east,[18] and, along with the Tabalian states, remained one of the last bastions of still existing Neo-Hittite culture after the end of the Neo-Assyrian Empire.[93]

According to a text from the reign of the Neo-Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar II, he had captured prisoners from Pirindu in 592 or 591 BC, during a campaign which might be recorded in a Neo-Babylonian text mentioning conquests "from Egypt to Ḫuwê (Ḫiyawa) and Lydia."[6][21]

Campaign of Neriglissar
edit

In 557 BC, the king Appuwašu of Pirindu attempted to attack the Syrian provinces of the Neo-Babylonian Empire, possibly as a result of tensions regarding the control of Ḫuwê.[9][94]

Nebuchadnezzar II's son-in-law, the Neo-Babylonian king Neriglissar, responded by marching to Ḫuwê, where Appuwašu launched a failed ambush attempt on him before being defeated, after which Neriglissar pursued Appuwašu into Pirindu itself, where he captured Ura and Kiršu, after which he marched till the sea at Kelenderis[18] and then to the island fortress of Pitusu, before marching till Sallunê, which was the most western city on the coast of Cilicia, and to the borders of the Lydian Empire before returning to Babylon.[9][94][21][92]

The aim of Neriglissar's campaign was not to dominate Pirindu, but to instead expel Appuwašu out of Ḫuwê. Neriglissar appears to have been successful, and Appuwašu was forced to retreat to the west of the Calycadnus river.[18]

Legacy
edit

In the 6th century BC, a native kingdom encompassing the territories of Ḫilakku and Ḫiyawa might have been established in southeastern Anatolia. The Ancient Greeks borrowed the name of Ḫilakku, under the form of Kilikia (Ancient Greek: Κιλικια; Latin: Cilicia), to designate this state, thus extending the name of Ḫilakku to the whole of the territories of both Ḫilakku and Ḫiyawa.[41]

Meanwhile, the Neo-Assyrian period distinction between Ḫilakku and Ḫiyawa was preserved in the Greek designation for the two sections of Cilicia: Kilikia Trakheia (Ancient Greek: Κιλικια Τραχεια, lit. 'Rough Cilicia'; Latin: Cilicia Aspera) corresponded to Ḫilakku, while Kilikia Pedias (Ancient Greek: Κιλικια Πεδιας, lit. 'Plain Cilicia'; Latin: Cilicia Campestris) corresponded to Ḫiyawa.[41][13]

Society and culture

edit

Population

edit

Like Ḫiyawa and the kingdoms of the nearby Tabalian region, the population of Ḫilakku was descended from the largely Late Bronze Age Luwian inhabitants of the region and remained so until the Hellenistic and Roman periods.[18][12][95][3]

Esarhaddon's description of the population of Ḫilakku as "evil Hittites" (Neo-Assyrian Akkadian: 𒇽𒉺𒋼𒂊 𒅆𒉡𒌑𒋾, romanized: Ḫattê lemnūti[20]) attests of the predominantly Luwian character of the population of Ḫilakku throughout the 1st millennium BC,[14] and Luwian personal names would remain attested in Ḫilakku until the Roman period.[12]

Phrygian influence

edit

The presence of a monument at Dibektaşi similar to Phrygian stepped altars or cult thrones of the goddess Kubeleya suggests that aspects of Phrygian culture such as the worship of Kubeleya had reached into Ḫilakku.[18]

Greek and Phoenician colonisation

edit

During the 9th and 8th centuries BC, Cypriots, Greeks and Phoenicians settled in cities founded by the native peoples of Ḫiyawa and Ḫilakku which were located on the maritime trade routes linking these regions to the western Mediterranean sea and also functioned as outlets for resources from the inner regions of Anatolia.[96]

An inscription dating from c. 625 to c. 600 BC attests of the presence of Phoenicians in Pirindu.[96]

The increased importance of these sites led to the Neo-Assyrian Empire taking interest in this region beginning with the successful campaigns of Sargon II, which led to a weakening of the cities to the east of the Calycadnus river. This pushed the Greek and Phoenician traders to the west of the Calycadnus river, beyond the control of the Neo-Assyrian Empire and its restrictions on control and cultural influence on Ḫiyawa and Ḫilakku, where they founded several settlements during the 8th and 7th centuries BC, such as Nagidos, Kelenderis, and Aphrodisias.[97]

These colonies were densely populated by traders over the course of c. 750 to c. 500 BC, and the population of Ionian Greeks and Cypriots in these colonies later increased.[98]

List of rulers

edit

References

edit
  1. ^ a b
    • "Hilakku [CILICIA] (GN)". Textual Sources of the Assyrian Empire. Open Richly Annotated Cuneiform Corpus. Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich.
    • "Hilakku [CILICIA] (GN)". Archival Texts of the Assyrian Empire. Open Richly Annotated Cuneiform Corpus. Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich.
    • "Hilakku [CILICIA] (GN)". Archival Texts of the Assyrian Empire. Open Richly Annotated Cuneiform Corpus. Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich.
    • "Hilakku [CILICIA] (GN)". Imperial Administrative Records, Part II: Provincial and Military Administration. State Archives of Assyria Online. Open Richly Annotated Cuneiform Corpus. Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich.
    • "Hilakku [CILICIA] (GN)". Imperial Administrative Records, Part II: Provincial and Military Administration. State Archives of Assyria Online. Open Richly Annotated Cuneiform Corpus. Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich.
  2. ^ a b Grayson 1975, p. 103.
  3. ^ a b c d e f g Bryce 2012, p. 161.
  4. ^ Weeden 2023, p. 968-969.
  5. ^ Bryce 2012, p. 39.
  6. ^ a b Streck 2005, p. 572-573.
  7. ^ Casabonne, Lebreton & Lebrun 2013, p. 91.
  8. ^ Kryszeń 2023.
  9. ^ a b c d Streck 2005, p. 573.
  10. ^ Streck 2005, p. 572.
  11. ^ a b c d e f g h i j Bryce 2009, p. 309.
  12. ^ a b c d Bryce 2012, p. 38.
  13. ^ a b c Bryce 2012, p. 240.
  14. ^ a b c d e f Hawkins 1975, p. 402.
  15. ^ Zoroğlu 1994, p. 301.
  16. ^ Zoroğlu 1994, p. 301-302.
  17. ^ Weeden 2023, p. 923.
  18. ^ a b c d e f g h i j Zoroğlu 1994, p. 303.
  19. ^ Bryce 2012, p. 49.
  20. ^ a b "Esarhaddon 001". Esarhaddon (680–669 BC). The Royal Inscriptions of the Neo-Assyrian Period. Open Richly Annotated Cuneiform Corpus. Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich.
  21. ^ a b c d Bryce 2009, p. 310.
  22. ^ Bryce 2012, p. 207.
  23. ^ Bryce 2012, p. 218.
  24. ^ a b Bryce 2012, p. 220-221.
  25. ^ a b Weeden 2023, p. 967.
  26. ^ Hawkins 2008, p. 191.
  27. ^ Bryce 2009, p. 583.
  28. ^ Bryce 2012, p. 155.
  29. ^ Bryce 2012, p. 222.
  30. ^ Bryce 2012, p. 329.
  31. ^ Hawkins 1975, p. 402-403.
  32. ^ a b c Bryce 2012, p. 162.
  33. ^ a b c d e f Bryce 2009, p. 685.
  34. ^ a b Bryce 2012, p. 42.
  35. ^ Bryce 2012, p. 277-278.
  36. ^ Bryce 2012, p. 41-42.
  37. ^ Bryce 2012, p. 280-281.
  38. ^ Bryce 2012, p. 43.
  39. ^ a b Bryce 2012, p. 281.
  40. ^ a b c Ebeling 1932, p. 93.
  41. ^ a b c d e f g h i j Hawkins 1975, p. 403.
  42. ^ Bryce 2009, p. 684.
  43. ^ Baker 2023, p. 298.
  44. ^ Bryce 2012, p. 279-280.
  45. ^ Weeden 2023, p. 999.
  46. ^ Bryce 2012, p. 280.
  47. ^ Bryce 2012, p. 232.
  48. ^ a b c Bryce 2012, p. 283.
  49. ^ a b Weeden 2010, p. 42.
  50. ^ Bryce 2012, p. 152.
  51. ^ Bryce 2012, p. 158-159.
  52. ^ Bryce 2012, p. 283-284.
  53. ^ Bryce 2012, p. 284.
  54. ^ a b Edzard 1980, p. 607.
  55. ^ a b Hawkins 2008, p. 192.
  56. ^ a b c d Bryce 2012, p. 292.
  57. ^ Kessler 1980, p. 60.
  58. ^ Weeden 2023, p. 1002.
  59. ^ a b Hawkins 2008, p. 192-193.
  60. ^ Bryce 2009, p. 584.
  61. ^ Röllig 1971, p. 644-645.
  62. ^ a b Bryce 2009, p. 309-310.
  63. ^ Ivantchik 1993a, pp. 57–61.
  64. ^ a b c Adalı 2017, p. 63.
  65. ^ Hawkins 2008, p. 193.
  66. ^ D'Alfonso 2012, p. 183.
  67. ^ Aro 2013, p. 390.
  68. ^ Aro 2023, p. 116.
  69. ^ a b Weeden 2023, p. 1004.
  70. ^ a b Adalı 2017, p. 68.
  71. ^ Ivantchik 1993a, p. 65.
  72. ^ a b Ivantchik 1993a, p. 123.
  73. ^ Ivantchik 1993a, p. 73-74.
  74. ^ Bryce 2012, p. 44.
  75. ^ Bryce 2012, p. 160.
  76. ^ a b c Ivantchik 1993a, p. 74.
  77. ^ Ivantchik 1993a, p. 69.
  78. ^ Grousset 1970, p. 8.
  79. ^ Phillips 1972, p. 136.
  80. ^ Sulimirski & Taylor 1991, p. 559.
  81. ^ a b Tokhtas’ev 1991.
  82. ^ Ivantchik 1993a, p. 73.
  83. ^ Ivantchik 1993a, p. 68.
  84. ^ a b Olbrycht 2000a, p. 92.
  85. ^ Diakonoff 1985, p. 95.
  86. ^ Parzinger 2004, p. 23.
  87. ^ Adalı 2017, p. 70.
  88. ^ Phillips 1972, p. 132.
  89. ^ Grayson 1991c, p. 145.
  90. ^ Ivantchik 1993a, p. 124.
  91. ^ Adalı 2017, p. 71.
  92. ^ a b Weeden 2023, p. 1005.
  93. ^ Weeden 2023, p. 1007.
  94. ^ a b Hawkins 2008, p. 194.
  95. ^ Bryce 2012, p. 49-50.
  96. ^ a b Zoroğlu 1994, p. 304.
  97. ^ Zoroğlu 1994, p. 304-305.
  98. ^ Zoroğlu 1994, p. 303-304.
  99. ^ "Pihrim [RULER OF HILAKKU] (RN)". The Royal Inscriptions of Assyria online. Open Richly Annotated Cuneiform Corpus. Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich.
  100. ^ "Pihrim [RULER OF HILAKKU] (RN)". The Royal Inscriptions of Assyria online. Open Richly Annotated Cuneiform Corpus. Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich.
  101. ^ "Ambaris [KING OF TABAL] (RN)". Ancient Records of Middle Eastern Polities. Open Richly Annotated Cuneiform Corpus. Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich.
  102. ^ "Sanda-šarme [KING OF CILICIA] (RN)". The Royal Inscriptions of Assyria online. Open Richly Annotated Cuneiform Corpus. Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich.
  103. ^ "Sanda-šarme [KING OF CILICIA] (RN)". Textual Sources of the Assyrian Empire. Open Richly Annotated Cuneiform Corpus. Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich.
  104. ^ "Sanda-šarme [KING OF CILICIA] (RN)". Textual Sources of the Assyrian Empire. Open Richly Annotated Cuneiform Corpus. Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich.
  105. ^ "Sanda-šarme [KING OF CILICIA] (RN)". Ancient Knowledge Networks online. Corpus of Ancient Mesopotamian Scholarship. Open Richly Annotated Cuneiform Corpus. Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich.
  106. ^ "Sanda-šarme [KING OF CILICIA] (RN)". The Royal Inscriptions of Assyria online. Open Richly Annotated Cuneiform Corpus. Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich.
  107. ^ Simon 2018, p. 127.
  108. ^ Grayson 1975, p. 103-104.
  109. ^ Glassner 2004, p. 232-233.

Sources

edit
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ḫilakku&oldid=1253373572"