Arthur Ernest Cowley

Sir Arthur Ernest Cowley, FBA (13 December 1861 – 12 October 1931) was a British librarian who was Bodley's Librarian (head of the Bodleian Library at the University of Oxford) from 1919 until a couple of months before his death. He was also a leading Semitic scholar. Quotes The Hittites (1920) We now call them Hittites, but it must not be supposed that the identification was self-evident, or that it is entirely satisfactory, or that we know much more when we have agreed to it. Lecture I, p. 5 By about 1500 B.C. Egypt had become the dominant power in Asia. Thothmes I had conquered Palestine and marched as far as the frontiers of Mitanni, then a powerful state at the north of Mesopotamia. His grandson Thothmes III, early in the fifteenth century, completed the conquest of Syria, defeated the Hittites there, and exacted tribute from them. Carchemish was taken, as well as Kadesh on the Orontes. . . . In a subsequent campaign Thothmes III developed his success. He broke up the confederacy of which Mitanni was the head, and thus the whole of western Asia from Mesopotamia to the sea became subject to Egypt. Lecture I, p. 10 The Tell-el-Amarna letters . . . are largely concerned with the intrigues of provincial governors in Asia and their difficulties in meeting the attacks of the Hittites. . . . When the letters begin they are still settled in the north of Syria, and gradually extend southwards towards the end of the period. . . . In the later letters, of the time of Amenophis IV, it is evident that the strength of Egypt is declining. Whether owing to troubles caused by that king's heresy, or for any other reason, troops were not sent when required to keep the unruly Syrian states in order. Partly in consequence of the disorganization of the country, the Hittite power began to grow as that of Egypt waned. The king of the Hatti . . . became the great king of a Hittite confederacy, with his capital at Boghaz-keui in the north, uniting the minor states represented by Hamath, Aleppo, Marash, Carchemish, Malatia., &c., and probably with more or less control over the rest of Asia Minor. It was a very formidable combination, with the best of reasons for holding together, since they were all threatened by Egypt on the one side and Babylonia on the other. Lecture I, p. 11 The fall of Carchemish in 717 B.C. marks the end of the Hittite empire as such, though, after the central power was gone, the population in various Hittite centres must have remained much as it had been — only paying tribute to Assyria instead of allegiance to its own Great King. . . . It was not till two centuries after . . . the capture of Carchemish, when one by one the related kingdoms had been reduced, when Nineveh was destroyed, Babylon captured, and Semitic civilization at an end, that the new Persian empire, with an even larger ambition than its predecessors, could stretch out its hands over Asia Minor, construct the great royal road from Susa to Sardis, bridge the Hellespont, and even enter Europe to attack Greece. Lecture II, pp. 19, 21 It would seem then that as their attention was more and more diverted from the west, Boghaz-keui gradually lost its supremacy, or perhaps succumbed to hostile attacks. If we put the decline of it roughly at 1200 B.C. when the archives cease, this coincides in a remarkable way with other events, some of which at least must have been connected with it. Those were stirring times. The defenceless state of Palestine made possible the entry of the Israelitish tribes. Soon afterwards, on the break-up of Cretan power, the south of Palestine was equally open to colonization by refugees from the island, who eventually gave their name to the country (Philistines). In the north-west as the Hittite power gradually contracted, or was diverted from the sea, the allied states were left to take care of themselves. Their old allies the Dardani of the Troad were attacked by the Greeks and their city destroyed in the Trojan war . . . . The object of the Trojan war was no doubt to promote colonization. At any rate it was soon afterwards that the Ionians began to establish themselves on the coast. The same cause, the removal of the suzerain power, led to the rise of various states in Asia Minor as independent kingdoms. Thus while the Hittite power, in its earliest period, protected the west from Semitic intrusion, its withdrawal from the west gave the opportunity for fresh developments there. Lecture II, p. 23 The old view was that their original home was in Syria, along with the other tribes associated with them in the Old Testament, and that they radiated from that centre northwards to Cappadocia and eastwards to Carchemish, &c. But the recent discoveries make this quite untenable. As far back as our records go we find the Hittites established in Cappadocia, making their capital at Boghaz-keui, and evidently with a long history behind them there. Where they came from and what their racial character was can only be discovered, if ever, by a thorough examination of all the remains of their art, their religion, and their language. . . . It has been suggested lately that the race originally came down from the mountains of Armenia or the Caucasus. . . . Sayce calls attention to the turned-up boots, or snow-shoes, as indicating a mountainous origin. Rostovtseff, . . . in studying the antiquities of the east end of the Black Sea, . . . finds that the earliest culture resembles that of Elam, and at a date which he roughly estimates at about 1500 B.C. he discovers a clear connexion with Hittite art; that is to say, the art developed in the same way as the Hittites developed it. Lecture II, pp. 23–4 The chief god seems to have been Addu, who is Hadad or Rammânu, Rimmon. He was primarily a storm-god, and was represented with lightning in his hand. But the place of honour belonged to a goddess, whose Hittite name is unknown. She is probably represented in the figure at Sipylos, and is certainly found in the Boghaz-keui sculptures in close relation to the god. Now it cannot be a mere coincidence that we find the worship of Cybele and Attys prevalent at a later date in Phrygia, and the mother goddess at Ephesus. Lecture II, pp. 27–8 The physical appearance of these people is shown by a number of portraits. For the early period we have those of the Egyptian monuments . . . . They are evidently faithful drawings from life, not merely conventional representations of foreigners. Note the curiously Mongolian type, no helmet, the pig-tail, the lack of hair on the face. We may reasonably assume that they do represent the prevailing Hittite type of the thirteenth century B.C., though it is also possible that the particular figures which happen to be preserved are those of some of the many confederate peoples, or even caricatures. Now for the later period (say ninth century B.C.) we have the native portraits at Carchemish — in a quite different style. The god at Ivriz also belongs to this later style, and no doubt represents the general type of the Hittite population of Cilicia. The representations of Hittites from north Syria on Shalmaneser's bronze gates give us little information, as they are evidently conventional. Thus we find two distinct types which would seem to represent different races. The Egyptian portraits look as if the people were dolichocephalic and probably of a Mediterranean stock. The native sculptures . . . never represent this type, but that of an apparently brachycephalic Armenoid stock. If then there were two races we might take the Egyptian pictures to represent an aboriginal race in Asia Minor, and the native sculptures to represent an intruding conquering race from the Caucasus, which ultimately dominated the aborigines. Lecture II, pp. 31–2 External links Category:1861 births Category:1931 deaths Category:Librarians from England Category:University of Oxford alumni Category:University of Oxford faculty Category:Fellows of the British Academy