Hurrian and Luwian Elements in the Kizzuwatna Religious Texts

1 Kizzuwatna, a Hurrian-Luwian Melting Pot

Anatolia’s political history of the Middle Hittite Period or Early Empire times, in the 15^th and 14^th century BC, is still partly unknown. After a period of consolidation of the Old Hittite Kingdom under king Telipinu (ca. 1500 BC), quarrels and disputes about succession to the throne coincide with loss of territories and also less documentation in the archives, so that large parts of this period’s history remain unclear. At some point in this period, perhaps at the beginning of the 15^th century, the region around the present-day Turkish city of Adana in the plains of Cilicia gained increasing importance as a kingdom known in Hittite Anatolia as Kizzuwatna.^[1] Its first attestations appear in treaties of several Hittite kings with their respective counterparts. These include: Telipinu with Išputaḫšu of Kizzuwatna (CTH 21); Taḫurwaili with Eḫeya of Kizzuwatna (CTH 29); Zidanza II with Palliya, King of Kizzuwatna (CTH 25); Tutḫaliya with Šunaššura of Kizzuwatna (CTH 41); and an unnamed Hittite king with Padditaššu of Kizzuwatna (CTH 26).^[2] These texts shed light on the changing balance of power in Kizzuwatna, reflecting the rivalry of Hittite Anatolia and the Hurrian kingdom of Mittani in Northern Syria. Around 1400 BC, Kizzuwatna became part of the Hittite Empire, as evinced by a strong Kizzuwatnean influence in Hittite texts from that time on, above all in the religious sphere. Van den Hout (2007: 227–228) puts it as follows: “Kizzuwatna was a mixed Luwian-Hurrian region from which a number of ritual compositions was incorporated into tablet collections of the capital Ḫattuša. It is also thought to have been responsible for the wave of Hurrian culture and texts that invaded those same tablet collections in the reigns of King Tudḫaliya I and his immediate successors at the end of the fifteenth and early fourteenth century. Ḫattušili III’s marriage to the Kizzuwatna priestess Puduḫepa in the late 1270s B.C. may have caused a second Hurrian wave in Ḫattuša.”^[3]

The texts on which this and similar opinions are based are mostly religious in nature. Among these are ritual and festival texts that name “authors” from, or settings in, Kizzuwatna and as such seem to reflect Kizzuwatnean religious practice. In addition to such clues, other data point to the same conclusion. Most notably, gods of Kizzuwatna or Northern Syria appear integrated into god lists of the Empire’s treaties.^[4]

Given that almost all written evidence of the Hittites was found in the archives of Ḫattuša, reasons to attribute some texts to other regions of the Hittite Empire include non-Hittite words in the texts themselves, recitations in languages other than Hittite, the mention of materials and rites that are exclusively found in texts related to a specific place outside Ḫattuša, or pertinent information to this effect in the respective colophons. The prominent influence both of Hurrian and Luwian traditions is evident especially in the magical ritual texts, numbered 471–500 (“Kizzuwatnean Rituals”) and 757–763, 770 (“Texts in Other Languages: Luwian”) in Laroche’s CTH.^[5]

One example of a Kizzuwatna ritual text with both Hurrian and Luwian elements is the ritual of Puriyanni, CTH 758, the edition of which constitutes a part of the Luwili Project.^[6] Its Middle Hittite tablet, KUB 35.54, which is missing its beginning, starts with an enumeration of the necessary ritual paraphernalia and first ritual actions, which are accompanied by recitations (obv. i-obv. ii 10′; cf. KUB 7.14+). The language of these recitations is Luwian. Moreover, the taluppi-object, denoting a piece of bread or clay, mentioned in one of the Luwian recitations, seems to belong to the Luwian sphere, as it occurs in Hittite and Luwian contexts (noted by HEG T 66), among others in the so-called Great Ritual (CTH 761). Its occurrence in the Kizzuwatna Ritual (CTH 479) points to a proximity to the Hurrian-Luwian mixed tradition of Kizzuwatna. On the other hand, the mulati-bread, listed among other necessary ritual utensils (KUB 7.14+ i 8), should probably be attributed to the Hurrian sphere, since it is known mainly from Hurrian and Kizzuwatnean rituals (cf. CHD L–N 328a). Examples of its occurrence include rituals attributed to Palliya (CTH 475) and Ammiḫatna (CTH 471), both men of Kizzuwatna, the ḫišuwa-festival (CTH 628), the tablets of which may have been brought from Kizzuwatna to Ḫattuša according to the colophon, the ritual for Mount Ḫazzi (CTH 785), referring to the mountain in North-western Syria and attesting to the influence of this area,^[7] or fragments referring to the Hurrian goddess Pirinkir (CTH 644). All these hint at Southeastern Anatolian and Hurrian influence. The list of metal objects enumerated within the ritual’s paraphernalia (KUB 35.54 i 8′–11′; cf. KUB 7.14+ i 13–16) is comparable only to the ritual of Aštu (CTH 490 – see Görke 2010: 199–201), which likewise demonstrates a mixture of Luwian and Hurrian rites and elements (Görke 2010: 297–300). Overall then, it is evident that Puriyanni’s ritual, like other ritual texts mentioned here, exhibits a mixture of Luwian and Hurrian elements.

This paper aims to bring festival texts with connections to Kizzuwatna into the discussion about the degree to which Luwian and/or Hurrian religious traditions are identifiable in texts originating in this region in Southeastern Anatolia. In contrast with ritual texts, which have been the subject of a good amount of research on links of various elements and rites with these traditions,^[8] comparable research on festival texts is still ongoing (see below). As is well known, Hittite festival texts mainly describe royal cults of the gods of state and local pantheons. This veneration was intended to secure the benevolence of the gods towards the royal family and the Hittite state and thus served to regularly renew or confirm the pact between gods and king, with hoped-for peace, growth, and prosperity to the country. During the large state festivals, such as the an.daḫ.šum^sar or nuntarriyašḫa-, the king traveled through central Anatolia in order to venerate the gods in several cities of the Hittite heartland. Other texts describe various offerings by the king to the Hittite gods during festivals, in either the capital or smaller towns, or on special occasions, such as the investiture of a royal successor or the absence of sufficient rainfall. Festivals from Kizzuwatna are also known, especially the ḫišuwa-festival (CTH 628), which queen Puduḫeba wanted to re-establish in Ḫattuša.^[9] The Hurrian purification festival texts, including those concerning itkaḫi and itkalzi, were also stored in the Hittite archives; these seem to originate in Northern Syria, to the southeast of Kizzuwatna.^[10]

The present paper focuses on those festivals that relate to Kizzuwatna and adjacent areas, listed as “Cults concerning Teššub and Ḫebat” (CTH 698–706) in Laroche’s Catalogue des textes hittites. Of particular interest here is the “Festival for Teššub and Ḫebat of Lawazantiya” (CTH 699), which is contrasted with texts concerning “Cults of Teššub and Ḫebat of Aleppo” (CTH 698) that originate in Northern Syria. Concerning these festivals and texts, the following questions are of special importance: Do these texts indicate, as in the case of some ritual texts, a mixture of Luwian and Hurrian traditions? Are there differences between texts said to be from Kizzuwatna and those from Northern Syria? Is there a difference between the Luwian and Hurrian elements in texts from Kizzuwatna and, if so, does such a difference refer to the frequency of particular occurrences or to certain elements (words, rites, morphological elements)? This article offers some preliminary thoughts to answer these questions.

2 Kizzuwatna: The Festival for Teššub and Ḫebat of Lawazantiya (CTH 699)

The first text group to be discussed, the Festival for Teššub and Ḫebat of Lawazantiya (CTH 699), consists of 11 fragmentary tablets, two of which were probably written down in Early Empire times.^[11] The main text is KBo. 21.34+ (New Script), which presents the third tablet of the festival according to its colophon: “Third Tablet. Not [comple]te. When the king calls the Stormgod (and) Ḫebat into the town Lawa[zant]iya to open the ḫaršiyalli-pithoi (ḫaršialliuš kenumanzi) and further into the town Aštuy[a]ra under the buxus trees in the [t]ime of the yea[r].” (KBo. 21.34+ rev. iv 39–43; cf. Waal 2015: 491). Interestingly, the phrase “opening the pithos” is a common expression in Hittite spring festivals mentioned in cult inventory texts (Cammarosano 2018: 39; cf. Bastici 2020: 133), which are often related to Central Anatolia and which describe local cults in the Hittite core area, as Cammarosano was able to point out (2018: 26–30). Lawazantiya, mentioned in KBo. 21.34+ as the location where the ritual is supposed to take place, however, is a town in the Cilician plain.^[12]

The main text itself describes offerings mainly to the Stormgod and Ḫebat. Various elements in this text point to its Southeastern Anatolian origin. Among the most striking are Hurrian words or words with Hurrian grammatical elements. These include keldi ‘well-being’, ambašši ‘burnt offering’ (KBo. 21.34+ i 3), or ḫubrušḫi ‘incense burner’ (ii 66, with the Hittite accusative ending), leli ḫašari ‘leli oil’ (i 22), purulli-ve ‘of the temple/house’ with the genitive ending -ve (i 18), Ḫebat-ve-na ‘those of Ḫebat’ referring presumably to the gods surrounding Ḫebat (i 44, 46), puri-ia ‘sight’, presumably with the essive-ending (ii 37, 57), alalu ‘cape’, here a Hittite loanword from Hurrian alali.^[13] Moreover, KBo. 21.34+ exhibits elements that are otherwise found only in rituals or festivals of Kizzuwatnean origin. Examples include the ḫarašpawant-bread (ii 24), which is attested from middle Hittite times on, often in texts of southeastern background such as the ḫišuwa-festival (CTH 628), the ritual of Papanigri (CTH 476),^[14] the festival for the goddess Ningal (CTH 494),^[15] or drink offerings for the throne of Ḫebat (CTH 701).^[16] The lallampuri-bread that appears in the text (ii 24, iii 35′, 52′, iv 5) occurs “only in Kizzuwatnean festivals and rituals” (CHD L–N 26b) and naḫḫiti-, an adjective modifying bread or cake, is of Hurrian origin (CHD L–N 343a).

Further hints of a southeastern origin to KBo. 21.34+ are given by the mention of katra-women also in the text (ii 10, 27), who are known to have come to Kizzuwatna and Anatolia from Northern Mesopotamia (Miller 2002), the iduri-bread (i 5, 26, ii 15, 36), mainly attested in the ḫišuwa-festival and texts concerning the cult of Teššub and Ḫebat (HW² I 307a), the laḫanni-bottle^[17] (i 8, 14, 36, 49, ii 40, 60, iii 45′, 56′, iv 20), which occurs only in Hurrian festivals and rituals (CHD L–N 6b) and the mulati-bread (i 9, 11, 31, 33, ii 23, 38, 57, 59), which also “occurs chiefly in Hurrian and Kizzuwatnean rituals” (CHD L–N 328a), as well as the rite of waving the ḫurri-bird (ii 29).^[18] Lastly, Bastici, who has presented a new edition of this text, proposed that parts, especially the description of a dialogue between the king and the goddess Ḫebat, may have served as forerunners for the ḫisuwa-festival (Bastici 2020: 138–142).

As for clear Luwian elements in KBo. 21.34+, one can cite the allattari-bread, whose Luwian background was pointed out by Starke (1990: 511–513),^[19] against earlier proposals for its accounting as a “Hurrian terminus technicus” (HW² A 57) or, even less decidedly, as “Hurrian in origin” (HED A 32).^[20] A connection to the Luwian sphere seems apparent in another, middle Hittite manuscript of the Festival of Teššub and Ḫebat of Lawazantiya KBo. 17.102+, which contains rites of the same festival that are different to the ones described in KBo. 21.34+. The rather fragmentary text makes reference to a ^munusištaḫatalliš ‘taster’ (KBo. 17.102+ rev. 17′; cf. HW² I 228), which exhibits the ending -(a)-t(t)alla- to the verb išta(n)ḫ- ‘taste, try (food or drink)’ (HW² I 228 with discussion of the stem). This ending is, according to Hoffner and Melchert (2008: 62 § 2.55 (4)), a modification for “‘agent’ nouns ... from a reanalysis of the ... Luwian suffix -alla/i-” that “spreads at the expense of the native suffix -ala-.” The text also may include the word ^gišpatiyalli- ‘leg, foot (of furniture)’ (KBo. 17.102+ obv. 8′; cf. CHD P 244) with the same modified ending, -alla- or -alli-, reflecting the Luwian adjectival suffix -alla/i- (§ 2.55 (3)).^[21]

We thus see that the Festival for Teššub and Ḫebat of Lawazantiya exhibits an overall strong Hurrian imprint, with only one or two possible Luwian elements. Given that the words with a modified Luwian morphology are fully integrated into the Hittite lexicon, it may be assumed that their appearance in texts with a strong Hurrian imprint marks a different level of influence, namely a stronger and longer lasting union of Luwian and Hittite, vis-à-vis materials connected with a Hurrian tradition or Hurrian words with Hurrian grammatical elements.^[22]

3 Syria: Cults of Teššub and Ḫebat of Aleppo (CTH 698)

The next example to be discussed is part of a text group relating to “Cults of Teššub and Ḫebat of Aleppo” (CTH 698). This group includes 32 fragmentary tablets, most written in New Script, some in Late New Script, and only one (KBo. 71.65) potentially in Middle Script.^[23] The main text, Kbo. 14.142+, describes daily offerings for Teššub and Ḫebat, arranged as lists. The text opens with the statement: “[For the Stormgod of Ḫalab the da]ily [offering ration] (is) as follows”, before moving on to various breads and beverages as donations for this deity as well as other Stormgods.^[24] With respect to the questions of Hurrian and Luwian elements in this text, the term ar-ga-pa in l. 13 (“1 thin bread to Argapa and the heroes of the Stormgod”) is noteworthy: seemingly Hurrian, it is written with a determinative for theonyms and may refer to a kind of decoration or weapon. It is also attested in the month name arkabinnu at Nuzi (cf. Richter 2012: 46; Schwemer 2001: 499 fn. 4090). Within the Hittite festival corpus it is attested in the ḫišuwa-festival (CTH 628) as well as in festivals for Teššub and Ḫebat (CTH 698 and CTH 706). Highly likely is the connection between the Hittite vessel ^(dug)dupanzakki-, written in l. 12 (“1 thin bread to the dupanzaki-vessel^? of the Stormgod”) with the determinative for “god”, and Hurrian dubanzigi ‘an attribute of Teššub’, denoting a vessel according to one attestation at Mari (cf. Schwemer 2001: 499 fn. 4089). A Hurrian background of the dupanzaki-vessel can thus be assumed even if it is as yet to be proven (cf. Schwemer 2001: 499 fn. 4089; Richter 2012: 472b).

Further words in this text and others belonging to the cults of Teššub and Ḫebat of Aleppo may well be Hurrian, among them the term kulamurši, denoting some sort of offering (cf. Richter 2012: 220), the makalti- or makanti-bread,^[25] the gangati-plant,^[26] or the expression ezen₄pudahaš, perhaps to be understood as ‘festival of creating’ (cf. Richter 2012: 332–333; according to HEG P 673–674 a countable item; for attestations, see CHD P 400). Thus far, Luwian elements in the “Cults of Teššub and Ḫebat of Aleppo” texts have not been detected, which accords with expectations of an origin in Aleppo, a religious center in Northern Syria.

4 Evidence of Other Southeastern Anatolian Texts

As can be seen, both the Kizzuwatnean and Syrian festivals presented here show very little Luwian influence or cultural imprint. A confirmation of this finding avails itself when one evaluates Luwian elements in other texts with a presumable Southeastern Anatolian or Hurrian background. Informative for this purpose is van den Hout’s list of those words that sometimes are marked by single or double Glossenkeile (van den Hout 2007).^[27] These words are very often Luwian, whereas Hurrian or West Semitic words were marked by Glossenkeile only rarely (van den Hout 2007: 230).

Within Laroche’s group CTH 698–706, which collects cults concerning Teššub and Ḫebat and which presumably has a southeastern background, van den Hout cites one Luwian word marked with a gloss wedge, unatiwala/i-, of unknown meaning,^[28] along with the following unmarked words (van den Hout 2007: 251, 254 – the indication “(hurr.)” according to van den Hout): allaššiya- ‘queenship’,^[29]šarrašša/i- (hurr.) ‘kingship’,^[30] kullit- a kind of vessel,^[31] gulza(i)- ‘draw’,^[32] ḫalal(i)- ‘pure’,^[33] irimpit- (hurr.) ‘cedar-(staff)’,^[34] alalu- probably a loanword.^[35] These terms can be classified as either Semitic or Akkadian loanwords,^[36] Luwian words,^[37] and the terms for queenship and kingship, which seem to be Luwian forms of Hurrian words.^[38] On this basis one may therefore conclude that, in addition to the above-mentioned two text ensembles, CTH 698–706 exhibit only a small amount of Luwian words, whereas by comparison Hurrian words in these texts are numerous. Roughly the same picture emerges in the ḫišuwa-festival of Kizzuwatna (CTH 628), which contains many examples of Hurrian influence or traditions, including recitations, words (ḫubrušḫi, ašḫušḫi), or the mention of Hurrian gods such as Ḫebat or Allani.^[39] Hints to Luwian are scarce, though one could think of the deities Ḫilašši^[40] and Maliya^[41] and the verbal form irḫattanza.^[42] On the whole, this text, originating in Kizzuwatna, seems to reveal almost no traces of Luwian.^[43]

Another group of religious texts with a probable origin in Kizzuwatna, the so-called Beschwörungsritualtexte, may help to further evaluate and interpret the preceding observations. Several magical ritual texts, found, like the vast majority of Hittite texts, in the archives of the Hittite capital, Ḫattuša, exhibit a mixture of Luwian and Hurrian elements, allowing for their organization in the following sub-groups (listing here only texts that mention a person by name and his or her origin in the incipit or colophon):^[44]

1. Rituals with Luwian elements and Luwian recitations: Zarpiya (CTH 757),^[45] Puriyanni (CTH 758);^[46]

2. Rituals with Hurrian elements and Hurrian recitations: Ammiḫatna (CTH 471, CTH 472 (with Tulbi and Mati)),^[47] Šalašu (CTH 788),^[48] Šapšušu (CTH 790);^[49]

3. Rituals with Hittite recitations:^[50] Kuwanni (CTH 474),^[51] Papanigri (CTH 476),^[52] Maštigga (CTH 404);^[53]

4. Rituals with no recitations included: Palliya (CTH 475),^[54] Muwalanni^? (CTH 703).^[55]

Melchert (2013: 166–168), in his attempt to explain the varying amount of Luwian in ritual texts, was able to show that at least the Luwian and Hurrian rituals that do not contain Luwian recitations and go back to early Empire times (like the ones of Ammiḫatna, Palliya, or Papanigri) do not exhibit any increase in the use of Luwianisms. Melchert also followed Yakubovich (2010) in assuming that the Hurrian-influenced Kizzuwatna rituals (e.g., Ammiḫatna’s (CTH 471) or Maštigga’s ritual (CTH 404)) likely originated in Kizzuwatna and were then copied by Hittite scribes in Ḫattuša (following Miller (2004)), whereas the rituals with Kizzuwatna Luwian incantations but no Hurrian elements, such as Tunnawiya’s ritual (CTH 409), may demonstrate a more direct contact between Kizzuwatna and Ḫattuša, perhaps reflecting the migration of practitioners (Melchert 2013: 169; Yakubovich 2010: 277; see also Gilan 2019: 183). To these a further group needs to be added, one which contains rituals without Luwian influence; an example of which is Šalašu’s ritual (CTH 788), since it shows various connections to Syrian and Mesopotamian rituals.^[56]

The festival texts from Kizzuwatna and Syria presented above in paragraphs 2 and 3 indicate little Luwian influence, although they contain many Hurrian elements.^[57] Among these elements are Hurrian words and recitations, along with rites typical for the Southeast, such as one rite involving the waving of the ḫurri-bird, or other rites concerned with cedar wood. The few Luwian elements noted above include lexemes and grammatical components including endings and suffixes that hint at a long-lasting contact with the Hittite language, to the effect that these words had been completely integrated into the Hittite lexicon. Concerning the purpose of CTH 699, the festival for Teššub and Ḫebat of Lawazantiya, Gilan (2019: 184) proposed a use in Kizzuwatna, based on the localization of the festival and the dating of an original Middle Hittite composition, the text thus being one example of “the needs of the neophyte Hittite religious administration in Kizzuwatna in the early phases of the Empire period” (Gilan 2019: 185–186). The Cults of Teššub and Ḫebat of Aleppo (KBo. 14.142+; CTH 698), on the other hand, seems to depict a decree of the royal Hittite administration concerning the tributes for the Stormgod of Ḫalab and his circle to ensure the cult in Ḫattuša and other towns of Central Anatolia.^[58] The inclusion of Anatolian gods, including the Sungoddess of Arinna, Mount Ḫulla and Mezzulla, as well as the mention of people from Central Anatolian towns such as Katapa or Šapinuwa, reveal the incorporation of Teššub cults in Central Anatolia (cf. Schwemer 2001: 500). The same may apply to the ḫišuwa-festival (CTH 628), whose descriptions of the cults of the gods Ḫilašši and Maliya (cf. above) demonstrate the integration of older Anatolian cults into that festival, in addition to the use of rites and paraphernalia typical of Kizzuwatna.

5 Towards an Interpretation of These Findings

How can all these findings be understood? Generally the archives of Ḫattuša have revealed a greater number of festival texts with Hurrian influences than those with Luwian: In addition to the above-mentioned Kizzuwatnean texts (CTH 699, ḫišuwa- CTH 628), there are also the two large Hurrian series of itkaḫi and itkalzi (CTH 777), texts concerning the cult of the goddess ištar (CTH 711–722), lists with Hurrian gods and offerings (CTH 704, 705), and other cultic texts for the veneration of Teššub and/or Ḫebat (CTH 700–701, 706); most of these presumably originate from the Hurrian areas in Northern Syria or Mesopotamia. Until now no effort has been undertaken to analyze whether these texts differ from the aforementioned Kizzuwatnean counterparts, which, if so, would indicate different Hurrian traditions. The Luwian materials in the archives include: the Ištanuwa and Lallupiya texts (CTH 771–773), the Luwian festivals for Stormgod and Sungoddess that mention the ašušatalla-men (CTH 665), and the cult of Ḫuwaššanna of Ḫubešna in the Lower Land (CTH 690–694). These Luwian festivals thus seem to be centered more in Central Anatolia.

To return to the situation in Kizzuwatna: recent attempts to explain the rich text corpus originating in that region and found in the archives of Ḫattuša in Central Anatolia have focused on the Hittite religious administration in Kizzuwatna (Gilan 2019) and the interest of the Hittite royal court (Campbell 2016; Trameri 2020: 404–413; Collins in press). These explanations are certainly based on a solid foundation. In this respect it may be wise to also take into account the difference between ritual and festival texts. Rituals, even if they are known only because of their storage in the royal court’s official archives, thereby offering a glimpse into their relevance for the official religion, were certainly also of significance for the “normal” or “private” population, which made use of healing methods originating in various parts of the country.^[59] These writings thus reflect the cultural diversity of specific environments. In Kizzuwatna some such rituals exhibit more Luwian elements, while others show more Hurrian influence; those with Hittite recitations perhaps already reflect a reconfiguration intended for use in Central Anatolia, whether as prescriptive texts for healing the royal family and other persons or as literary works for the archives.

The festivals deriving from Kizzuwatna clearly reflect Hurrian traditions. For one text presented above, KBo. 21.34+ (CTH 699), Gilan (2019: 285–286) proposed a local Kizzuwatnean use, whereas the other text, KBo. 14.142+ (CTH 698), seems to relate to a Syrian cult in Central Anatolia (cf. Siegelová 2019: 106–107). Hutter (2010) tried to argue that smaller festivals with a local connection are not necessarily only part of the Hittite official state cult but were also used by “private” people or a local community (Hutter 2010: 407). As examples for his claim he noted the Luwian festivals for Ḫuwaššanna (which mentions a “poor person” in the execution of the mentioned rites; see Hutter 2010: 403–404), the cult inventories, the Ištanuwa festivals, the ḫišuwa-festival, and the festivals connected to Aleppo. Hutter argued: “[i]n my opinion these festivals did not refer to the state cult – although the texts mentioning these festivals were found in Hattuša – exclusively, but also are festivals especially for the members of these ethnic groups or their social community. Therefore, these festivals give us a glimpse into religious practices of individual groups besides the state cult.” (Hutter 2010: 408). Even though one has to bear in mind that, given their mention of the king, an official function for most of these texts cannot be excluded, the idea is appealing that these also mirror religious thought of different groups besides the state cult. It is possible, then, that the numerous Hurrian festivals may have served the Hurrian community from Kizzuwatna and Syria in Ḫattuša in the celebration of their own festivals.^[60] To a certain degree this possibility would comply with the need of Hittite administration concerning the tributes for southeastern deities, as shown by Siegelová for CTH 698 (cf. above). For the Hittite royal court, however, the archiving of the Hurrian festivals may have offered a possibility to gain knowledge, to keep a close relationship to conquered regions by allowing their cults in the Hittite heartland, or perhaps even to control specific rites of these regions.^[61]

When one turns to the Luwian population, it seems as if it either did not feel the need to bring its rituals from Kizzuwatna to Ḫattuša or was perhaps longer a part of, and thus more integrated into, Hittite society – and thus not worthy of much attention by the royal court. By contrast, Luwian festivals from the Lower Land, such as the Ḫuwaššanna festival texts, were kept in Ḫattuša.^[62] Religious discourse thus appears more prevalent in the area of magical rituals, perhaps owing to their significance for the well-being of broader segments of the population. The interest in Hurrian texts gathered in Ḫattuša was certainly supported by the personal preferences of Hurrian queens, including Puduḫeba, who took interest in the traditions of her homeland in her new, Central Anatolian home.