Back to the Report on the Stela by Elizabeth Carter

The Incirli Stela:
Its Digital and Photographic Recording

Please note that the following discussion about the contents of the Incirli Stela represents the earliest, and most preliminary, work done on this stela. Considerable progress has been made since then and all visitors to this site are cautioned that this page is no longer a fair representation of the translators' understanding of the text. As soon as their work is finalized, the information can be updated. Until then, this page is simply documentation of a work in progress.

In the summer of 1995 with the permission of the Turkish Department of Antiquities and Heritage and funding from the Ahmanson Foundation, Bruce and Kenneth Zuckerman of West Semitic Research were able to take photographs of the stela in the Gaziantep Museum in Turkey. We would like to thank Prof. Dr. Engin Özgen, the Director of Antiquities and Heritage of Turkey and Dr. Rifat Ergeç, the Director of the Gaziantep Museum, for their kind permission which facilitated work on the piece in the Gaziantep Museum.

Despite all obstacles, a good deal of progress has been made on the decipherment of the Incirli stele. Based on our preliminary readings, there can be little doubt that the Incirli text is one of the most important inscriptions ever discovered in Anatolia. The Incirli stele was photographed in the Antiquities Museum in Gaziantep Turkey in 1995 and 1996. In all, some 45 different views of the stele were made, using a large format camera and four types of large format (4 inch by 5 inch) film (color transparency, color negative, and two different high resolution black and-white negative films).

Condition of the Stela

The stele and its inscription are particularly difficult photographic subjects for three reasons: First, it is incised on a basaltic stone that contains innumerable pits and irregularities on its surface. Second, the original surface of the stone is almost entirely worn away; hence, where the incisions of the inscription are visible at all, one can only now see them on a substrate surface of the stone. In many cases, especially on the front face, no letter traces are visible at all, simply because the chisel did not penetrate deeply enough to leave its mark in the substrata. In all other cases, the incised marks that remain are relatively shallow and represent only the bottom parts of the original, chiseled grooves. Only on the lower left side do the chiseled letters begin to show any significant depth of the sort that would have been seen on the stone surface in its original, pristine condition. Finally, the inscription has been deliberately defaced. Most noticeably, a large inscription in Greek has been written across the original back of the stone which inevitably has destroyed important data from the earlier inscription. Beyond this, there are unmistakable indications that the original Phoenician inscription has been overwritten and/or defaced by a later scribe or scribes with the intent of changing the Phoenician text.

Approaches to the Recording of the Stela

As a consequence, it is a very difficult matter now to distinguish the "signal from the noise." Photographically we attacked this problem by employing two strategies. First, besides doing general reference shots of the front, back and both sides, we did more detailed shots of the rock surface by sections. Second, for every view of the inscription we did a minimum of two contrasting lighting set-ups, one with a dominant diagonal light from the upper left and one with a dominant diagonal light from the upper right. Since incised marks on a rock surface tend to disappear in light parallel to any given stroke, contrasting diagonal lights were deemed the best means of putting all the letters strokes in a shadowed relief. Either diagonal should be able to show essentially horizontal or vertical strokes into relief and, should a given diagonal stroke be lost from one lighting angle, the opposite lighting angle should be able to reclaim it. In all cases, the lighting set-ups were previewed using Polaroid films and the lights accordingly adjusted and fine-tuned for optimal effect.

This shows the same dalet photographed in different light.
Copyright © 1997 West Semitic Research Project. All rights reserved.

Processing the Photographic Information in the U.S.

In our view, without such a detailed documentation of the stele, the gaining of reasonably verifiable data would have been nearly impossible. On the over hand, having some 45 views of the text in four different films makes coordination of the data a daunting task. It was therefore decided that the only viable means of coordination was through the application of digital technology. That is, all the views were scanned at a relatively high resolution and converted into digital files. Because each of the photographs included a scale, we were able to resize every digital image to a common measure with great accuracy (a task that would have been essentially impossible employing any other means). Hence one could then compare matched images in contrasting lights and in great detail (since zooming in is an easy function with digital images).

Using standard computer imaging software, electronic drawings were made of individual letters in whatever image, in our view, showed them off most clearly. Then this graphic representation of each letter was moved into the other images in which that letter appears. Working in this manner, we have built up composite digital drawings for the entire text that can either be viewed in isolation or superimposed over the images of the text itself. Moreover, we have employed "templates" of indisputable letter forms from various parts of the text and have superimposed them over questionable readings in order to determine which choice the traces match the best. In all cases, the reading has been checked against the original transparencies and negatives which often have a subtlety (especially in terms of depth) that digital images cannot match.

Still, even with all these techniques at our disposal, we will be the first to admit that our readings remain (and many will probably remain) problematic and open to alternative interpretations. The trouble is that there is really too much data -too many imperfections on the stone surface - and, as a result, too my ways to read a given assemblage of traces and/or pseudo-traces.

Summary of Results

What we know so far regarding the contents of the Phoenician inscription can be tentatively summarized as follows:

The Incirli Stela contains a lengthy text written on all four sides of the stone in standard Phoenician of the late 8th century BCE. It is a commemorative boundary inscription marking the successful end of a territorial struggle between the kings of Cilicia (Que) and Kummuh and the various allied powers, presumably over the territory where the monument was originally erected. Since it seems clear that the monument was reused much later as a boundary stone with a Greek inscription of the Byzantine period, we cannot necessarily assume that the earlier text should be associated with the specific locale where the stone was discovered in 1993. Still, considering its size and weight, it seems unlikely that it had been moved very far from where it was first erected.

In the first part of the inscription, the subject whose exploits are commemorated in first person narrative (apparently, King Awarikku of Que, known previously from the famous Karatepe bilingual inscription) recounts two successive battles - an earlier battle serving essentially as a prelude to the conflict that is the main concern of the text. This earlier battle was instigated by Suppiluliumas of Kummuh against Que and the Danunites. The inscription provides totally new information about the Luwian city states of this period. Apparently, Que was originally a part of a larger kingdom (of the Danunites) centered at Tabal, for the last known king of Tabal - Wasurmas - was the father of the writer of the Incirli Stele and is described here as king of the Danunites. Tabal was conquered by the infamous Warpalawas (ally of Midas), leaving Que itself as the sole domain of the Danunites. It appears that the first war described in our text involves a recounting of this setback for the Danunites. According to our text, the king commemorated on this stele then killed Warpalawas, prompting the subsequent war described in the second half of the text.

Of particular importance for the cultural history of the Ancient Near East is the detailed discussion of the use of mulk-sacrifices of sheep, horses, and - if we read correctly - first-born humans in the process of the war, and the gods' reactions to those sacrifices. Classical historians had attested to the Phoenician practice of child sacrifice in times of distress, and archaeological evidence for child sacrifice has been found at Carthage and other Punic locations. However, the connection between the mulk-sacrifice and the sacrifice of humans has never been documented in a Phoenician text before, and many scholars have doubted the existence of the practice. This inscription provides that missing connection with apparent references to the mulk of a man, or a firstborn son. In addition, our inscription may clarify the meaning of the biblical practice of "passing children through fire" for molekh. The meaning of this practice in ancient Israel and its environs has been much debated. Some have proposed that molekh was a particular god that some ancient Israelites worshipped in the usual way, in violation of the commandment to worship only Yahweh. Others maintain that actual child sacrifice was involved, as mentioned in the biblical prophets, Although some scholars question the connection between the Punic practice of mulk-sacrifice and the biblical "cult of Molech" it is our belief that the Incirli inscription can provide insight into the conceptual underpinnings of a number of important ideas, narratives, and practices mentioned the Bible, including the prohibitions against "passing children through fire" for molekh.

A preliminary report on the inscription was given by the principle investigators at the Annual Meeting of the American Oriental Society on March 17, 1996, and it understandably stirred considerable excitement. Indeed, there can be no question that this text will be studied by scholars in great detail for many years to come and promises to be the most important Phoenician inscription to be discovered in his century.

Publication is planned.

Special Thanks

In conclusion, we would like to thank Prof. Dr. Engin Özgen, Director of Antiquities and Heritage and Dr. Rifat Ergeç, Director of the Gaziantep Archaeological Museum, for their efficiency and skill in purchasing the monument and installing it in the Gaziantep Museum. The Museum also provided us with an excellent working environment.

The stele was originally discovered in the village of Incirli in 1993 during the course of an archaeological survey, funded by the National Geographic Society and led by Prof. Elizabeth Carter of UCLA. The photographic and computer imaging aspects of this project were led by Bruce and Kenneth Zuckerman of the West Semitic Research Project of USC in collaboration with Stephen A. Kaufman of Hebrew Union College and with the assistance of Marilyn Lundberg. The photographic and computer imaging work were funded by the Ahmanson Foundation. These photos resulted in enhanced views of the figure and of the text and readings.

To send e-mail to Bruce Zuckerman, click here. To visit the website of West Semitic Research, click here.

Return to the Incirli Stela Main Page (with images)

Return to the Incirli Stela Main Page (no images)

This web page last updated on June 21, 1998.