The land of the Hittites — Story, Setting & Ideas

The Sphinx-Gate at Eyuk: A Case Study in Archaeological Reasoning

Garstang devotes considerable attention to the Sphinx-Gate at Eyuk, using it to illustrate both Hittite military architecture and the challenges of archaeological interpretation. He describes the gate's plan in detail: an outer and inner doorway, with the approach flanked by walls designed for enfilading fire. The width between the corner-stones is almost exactly twenty feet, reduced to a few inches over eleven feet between the great monoliths forming the jambs. Garstang notes that the alignment of stones remains almost intact, allowing the plan to be determined without much difficulty.

He then discusses the recent excavations by Macridy Bey, which confirmed that the frontage of the approach was the outer wall of a gate tower, external to the main wall. Garstang draws a parallel to Roman military forts and medieval European architecture, suggesting a continuity of defensive design. However, he also points out limitations: the excavators did not ascertain the line of the main wall's frontage, and no door openings were found to the chambers within the towers. Garstang refrains from speculation, noting that without a section showing relative levels, it is not possible to form an opinion about the chambers' function.

Comparing Gateways: The Lion-Gate at Boghaz-Keui

Garstang frequently compares the Eyuk gate to the Lion-Gate at Boghaz-Keui, the Hittite capital. He notes that the plan of the Eyuk gateway resembles closely that of the Lion-Gate on the acropolis at Boghaz-Keui. Both have an outer and inner doorway, with the projection of the walls flanking the approach serving to protect the gateway by enfilading fire from above. This feature, Garstang argues, is an established element of Hittite military architecture.

The comparison extends to specific measurements: the interval between the faces of the outer and inner monoliths at Eyuk is about twenty-six feet, which must have been approximately the distance from one door to the other. Garstang also notes that at Eyuk, the walls return at once on either side inside the inner gate, without any approach on that side corresponding to the one from without. This contrasts with the Lion-Gate, where the arrangement may have been different. By juxtaposing the two sites, Garstang builds a typology of Hittite gate design, showing both common principles and local variations.

The Role of Sculptured Blocks and Their Placement

Garstang's descriptions of sculptured blocks are meticulous, focusing on their physical features and positions rather than artistic merit. At Eyuk, the sculptures are found on the lowest part of the mound towards the south-east, about twenty yards from the cultivated plain. They decorated the lowest course of the façade of the gateway. Garstang lists the blocks by letters (A, B, C, D for the monoliths; a-g, l-n for the sculptured blocks forming the lowest course of the wall). He notes that some blocks are not in situ, such as h, i, k, o, p, though the place of h and k is ascertained.

One block has a rounded hole in one face, a feature noticeable in several instances at Boghaz-Keui. Garstang does not speculate on the hole's purpose but simply records it as an observation. The sculptures on the sides of the sphinx-monoliths are labeled q and r, and two recently found blocks are marked x and y. This systematic notation reflects Garstang's archaeological method: he treats each block as a piece of evidence, to be catalogued and compared, rather than as an object of aesthetic appreciation. The reader gains a sense of the painstaking work involved in reconstructing the gateway's original appearance.

Garstang's account is best read as a field notebook in published form, where the author's eye for structural detail and his willingness to acknowledge gaps in knowledge are the chief virtues. Readers interested in the Hittites will find here not a narrative history but a foundation of empirical observations—measurements, plans, and comparisons—that later syntheses depend upon. The book rewards those who enjoy following an archaeologist's reasoning as he pieces together the built environment of a lost civilization from stones and soil.

There’s something touching about Garstang’s patient, precise record of Hittite gateways—stones he measured by hand, knowing they’d outlast him. It makes me think of another kind of layering, the deep soil beneath our own feet, and I often find myself returning to London Before the Conquest — Background and Themes for that same quiet sense of time buried under the present. Both feel like old friends.