Luwian Hieroglyphic Texts in Late Bronze Age Scribal Tradition.

• Author: Simon, Zsolt

Luwian Hieroglyphic Texts in Late Bronze Age Scribal Tradition. By FRED C. WOUDHUIZEN. Dresdner Beitrage zur Hethitologie, vol. 53. Wiesbaden: HARRASSOWITZ VERLAG, 2021. Pp. 343, illus. [euro]84 (paper).

The volume under review bears all credentials of a serious book: It has been published in one of the well-known Hittitological series by a leading publisher and purports to be a handbook of Hieroglyphic Luwian inscriptions from the Late Bronze Age (LBA). Such a book would be most welcome, considering that the long-awaited LBA volume of the standard edition of the Hieroglyphic Luwian inscriptions has still not been published (as of April 2023) and thus, all scholars must still compile their own corpora from the more or less outdated original publications.

At first glance, the book fulfills its promise. It consists of two parts: first, the main part, the texts themselves in transliteration and translation with detailed commentary (pp. 17-230), and second, the attested grammatical forms and a glossary (pp. 241-66). The book concludes with a sign concordance, bibliography, figures (usually low-quality scans from the original publications of the texts), and maps.

This is not the case, however. One could discuss innumerable minor issues: the choice of the texts (not all LBA inscriptions are included, but some Iron Age ones are here only because they show LBA elements); missing literature in the case of many inscriptions, despite the visible efforts of the author (e.g., Schurr 2010: 14-24 on YALBURT; van Quickelberghe 2013 on KARAHOYUK; Simon 2018a on KINIK, etc.); and every type of error from the funny (B. Hrozny as "Czecho-Slovak," p. 77) to the serious (Etruscan as a Luwian dialect, p. 141). Nevertheless, it does not make sense to dwell on these issues since more severe problems permeate the entire book.

As is well known, the author (who sadly passed away in 2021) was practically the only researcher who rejected the so-called new readings of the Hieroglyphic Luwian signs (even if he later admitted that next to the old readings they may be correct under specific circumstances). In addition, he maintained and continuously developed his own idiosyncratic transcription system, including many different logograms and syllabograms. As a result, his transliterations of names, historical, geographical or divine, are almost always completely wrong and, accordingly, none of his historical, chronological or geographical interpretations hold any water.

...