DOI Heft:
Nr. 1-2
DOI Artikel:Ramsay, William Mitchell; Hogarth, David George: Pre-hellenic monuments of Cappadocia, [1]
DOI Seite / Zitierlink: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.12259#0105
92
PRE-HELLEXIC MONUMENTS OF CAPPADOCIA
are followed by two figures on the same slab. Behind thèse there come eight more figures
on a separate slab on the left : and behind them are four enigmatic figures, two facing
left and two right, on a third slab.
Tins striking analogy leaves no doubt that the Fraktin sculptures also representtwo
libation scènes. The scène on the left is in itself obviously so; but that on the right is
more difficult, as the action of the priestess is not easy to understand. On the whole it
seems most probable that she holds ont an oinochoe in her right hand, and with lier left
raises some object towards her face. Alongobject which falls from lier left elbow toher
feet is peculiarly hard to explain. Similar objects are represented on the reliefs at Eyuk
and Boghaz Keui1. They are apparently intendedto represent the thicker border at the
outer edge of the cloak. The borders of the tunic worn by the priest at Ivriz are similarly
represented by a very prominent band in relief across the breast and on the arm.
If the preceding steps in our interprétation are correct, it follows that the left hand
scène represents a god with his priest offering sacrifice and libation to him. The two
figures, god and priest, are represented as wearing an exactly similar dress and tall bat,
girt with the sword at their side, andbearing acurved stick like a lituus in one hand.
The god bears this lituus in bis right hand over his shoulder, while the priest carries his
in lus left hand, in exactly the same attitude in which the priest at Boghaz Keui and Eyuk
carries a similar litunss. The priest wears the dress, and must therefore represent the
character of the god. When one of them appears alone in a sculpture, it must be difficult
to détermine which is meant; or rather the intention of the artist in some scènes is that
the priest is the incarnate god, embodied in visible human form to his worshippers.
At Fraktin a symbol is placed in front of the god's face : it stands alone, and the
perfect préservation of the surface shows that it neverwas connected with any other.
Similarly there are placed before the face of the goddess two symbols, one of which is
identical with that which is before the god. Even if Prof. Sayce had not already explained
the value of the symbol which occurs in both cases as the determinative prefix of divi-
nity, any one would naturally conjecture that at Fraktin it means ' God '. Before the
maie figure it is used, perhaps, as 6 0ed; is in the Greek inscriptions of Asia Minor at a
later period, to indicate the chief deity of the district; and before the goddess it is pre-
fixed to the symbol which indicates her name.
The analogy of Fraktin makes it clear that the symbols attached to many figures
in the sculptures at Boghaz Keui indicate their names3. The great group of gods whose
(1) V. Perhot, Eœpl. Are!)., pl. 40.45, 56 I, 59, etc. (Hist. de l'Art, IV, figs 312,313,328,333, etc.). M. Piïrkot
describes this object as " un bâton vertical ". We iuVntify it, in thèse doubtful cases, with the similar object
in pl. 42, 47, 50, E. a. 314, 321, where it is obviously the band or border of the garment falling from the uppor
arm.
(2) Prrrot. E. a., pl. 47, 50, 51, 56 (314, 321, 328) : see also our figure n° 4. The slight différence in the shape
of the Fraktin priest's stick is therefore duo to a fault of the sculptor, and is not intended to indicate any différence
in the character of the object.
(3) In the great majority of cases the symbols are not held in their hands, in some the précise relation to
the hands is doubtful, and in two cases the MS. notes made by Ramsay on the spot in 1S81 positively assert
that the symbol is grasped in the hand. In the A l/ienaeum, 1890, p. 518, he lias expressed himself inaccurately
on this point, in a letter written from memory.
PRE-HELLEXIC MONUMENTS OF CAPPADOCIA
are followed by two figures on the same slab. Behind thèse there come eight more figures
on a separate slab on the left : and behind them are four enigmatic figures, two facing
left and two right, on a third slab.
Tins striking analogy leaves no doubt that the Fraktin sculptures also representtwo
libation scènes. The scène on the left is in itself obviously so; but that on the right is
more difficult, as the action of the priestess is not easy to understand. On the whole it
seems most probable that she holds ont an oinochoe in her right hand, and with lier left
raises some object towards her face. Alongobject which falls from lier left elbow toher
feet is peculiarly hard to explain. Similar objects are represented on the reliefs at Eyuk
and Boghaz Keui1. They are apparently intendedto represent the thicker border at the
outer edge of the cloak. The borders of the tunic worn by the priest at Ivriz are similarly
represented by a very prominent band in relief across the breast and on the arm.
If the preceding steps in our interprétation are correct, it follows that the left hand
scène represents a god with his priest offering sacrifice and libation to him. The two
figures, god and priest, are represented as wearing an exactly similar dress and tall bat,
girt with the sword at their side, andbearing acurved stick like a lituus in one hand.
The god bears this lituus in bis right hand over his shoulder, while the priest carries his
in lus left hand, in exactly the same attitude in which the priest at Boghaz Keui and Eyuk
carries a similar litunss. The priest wears the dress, and must therefore represent the
character of the god. When one of them appears alone in a sculpture, it must be difficult
to détermine which is meant; or rather the intention of the artist in some scènes is that
the priest is the incarnate god, embodied in visible human form to his worshippers.
At Fraktin a symbol is placed in front of the god's face : it stands alone, and the
perfect préservation of the surface shows that it neverwas connected with any other.
Similarly there are placed before the face of the goddess two symbols, one of which is
identical with that which is before the god. Even if Prof. Sayce had not already explained
the value of the symbol which occurs in both cases as the determinative prefix of divi-
nity, any one would naturally conjecture that at Fraktin it means ' God '. Before the
maie figure it is used, perhaps, as 6 0ed; is in the Greek inscriptions of Asia Minor at a
later period, to indicate the chief deity of the district; and before the goddess it is pre-
fixed to the symbol which indicates her name.
The analogy of Fraktin makes it clear that the symbols attached to many figures
in the sculptures at Boghaz Keui indicate their names3. The great group of gods whose
(1) V. Perhot, Eœpl. Are!)., pl. 40.45, 56 I, 59, etc. (Hist. de l'Art, IV, figs 312,313,328,333, etc.). M. Piïrkot
describes this object as " un bâton vertical ". We iuVntify it, in thèse doubtful cases, with the similar object
in pl. 42, 47, 50, E. a. 314, 321, where it is obviously the band or border of the garment falling from the uppor
arm.
(2) Prrrot. E. a., pl. 47, 50, 51, 56 (314, 321, 328) : see also our figure n° 4. The slight différence in the shape
of the Fraktin priest's stick is therefore duo to a fault of the sculptor, and is not intended to indicate any différence
in the character of the object.
(3) In the great majority of cases the symbols are not held in their hands, in some the précise relation to
the hands is doubtful, and in two cases the MS. notes made by Ramsay on the spot in 1S81 positively assert
that the symbol is grasped in the hand. In the A l/ienaeum, 1890, p. 518, he lias expressed himself inaccurately
on this point, in a letter written from memory.