The wooden writing boards frequently mentioned in Hittite texts have given rise to much debate, mostly regarding the scale on which they were used and the type of script that was written on them (cuneiform or hieroglyphs). In this paper, the evidence for the use of wooden writing boards in Hittite Anatolia will be (re-)evaluated. It will be argued that they were used for private and economic documents, and that they were written on in Anatolian hieroglyphs. Important indications of this are the distinct terms consistently used in connection with writing on wood, which point to a separate scribal tradition. Further, the form and nature of the hieroglyphic script itself and the fact that it survived after the fall of the Hittite empire confirm that the script must have been widely employed. It is thus proposed that two parallel scribal traditions existed in Hittite Anatolia: a (lost) hieroglyphic tradition on wooden writing boards used for private and daily economic records, and a Hittite cuneiform tradition reserved for palace administration.

In 2014, I proposed that the GUL-šeš deities may have to be identified with the Kuwa(n)šeš deities, a suggestion that has met with severe criticisms. Since now new evidence has come to light that confirms the equation of these deities, it seems opportune to re-address this debate, which also has important consequences for the use of hieroglyphic writing in Anatolia. In this article, I will present the new evidence, counter the critiques that have been given, and address the wider implications.

No abstract

This article discusses the origins of a group of four Hittite OS tablets, which share some unique and peculiar features with respect to their shape, spelling conventions and palaeography. It argues that these four tablets are the oldest documents of the Hittite corpus, and that they were not created in Ḫattuša, but have been imported from elsewhere. Originally, they belonged to an older writing tradition, predating the establishment of Ḫattuša as the Hittite capital. This implies that the royal tablet collections in Ḫattuša do not reflect the very first beginnings of Hittite cuneiform, but only the start of a royal administration there. The typical Hittite ductus was already created in the 18th century BCE – in Kuššara, Nēša or elsewhere in Anatolia.

No abstract