A research team led by Petra M. Goedegebuure from the University of Chicago has presented a groundbreaking study on the word used for “city” in the Luwian language, spoken in ancient Anatolia. This research, published in the academic journal Anatolian Studies, offers not only a detailed linguistic analysis of the word in question but also explores the cultural and social connotations of cities in ancient Luwian records, providing scholars with new insights to interpret urban life and territorial organization in ancient Anatolia.
Luwian, an Indo-European language of the Anatolian group, was the predominant language in central and southern Anatolia for several centuries. Together with Hittite, its sister language, it formed one of the main linguistic families of this region and survived the fall of the Hittite Empire in the 12th century BCE, extending its use to the small post-Hittite kingdoms until they were conquered by the Assyrian Empire in the 7th century BCE.
The Anatolian hieroglyphic script, which began to develop during the height of the Hittite Empire, is fundamental in the study of these languages, as it presents a logographic and partially syllabic system adapted to represent concepts and words. This script was used in monumental inscriptions and in administrative and ceremonial documents, though always in Luwian.

In the article, Goedegebuure explains that, although Hittite was mainly used for internal administration, Luwian was spoken in daily life and was the “public-facing” language. Scholars believe that this hieroglyphic script began to be used as a full writing system by the 14th century BCE, and around 300 inscriptions from different locations in Anatolia and northern Syria have been found to date.
The Enigma of “City” in Luwian: The URBS Logogram
One of the most striking findings of the research is the identification of the Anatolian hieroglyph URBS, which has been interpreted in contexts where urban life is described. However, until now, there was no consensus on the precise meaning of this logogram, partly because the Luwian term for “city” has no direct equivalents in other Anatolian languages like Hittite or Lycian. This has made its precise interpretation challenging.
Through a multidisciplinary approach that combines orthographic, morphological, iconographic, and archaeological analysis, Goedegebuure concludes that the word represented by the URBS hieroglyph could be allamminna/i- or allamminna, meaning “fortified settlement.” This word would not only be interpreted as “city” but also as a term that highlights the importance of defense and fortification in the concept of urban life in Luwian culture.

Scholars of Luwian texts have noted that cities frequently appear in monumental accounts, in which rulers boast of their conquests, the founding of settlements, and the reconstruction of fortresses. In these narratives, cities are not only centers of power and territorial dominance but also symbols of the stability and prosperity that kings claimed by establishing and defending these localities.
To understand the complexity behind the term allamminna and its representation in hieroglyphics, Goedegebuure studied the morphology of the inscriptions and the architectural features of Anatolian cities from that era. The author argues that the URBS logogram likely represents a merlon or battlement, a raised part of the wall’s fortification characteristic of defensive structures, reflecting in a single symbol the close connection between the concept of “city” and defensive structure in the Luwian mind. Thus, this hieroglyph not only symbolizes a city as an urban center but also as an entity strongly linked to its defensive structure.
To reach her conclusion regarding the Luwian word for “city”, Goedegebuure tackled the challenges presented by the analysis of Anatolian hieroglyphs. A peculiarity of the Luwian system is that many words, though common in inscriptions, are often written with logograms without complete phonetic representation. For example, the word for “house” appears mainly as DOMUS and “sheep” as OVIS, without accompanying phonetic signs. Similarly, the URBS symbol repeatedly appears without a full syllabic transcription, making its exact interpretation difficult.

The research details that the Luwian corpus is relatively extensive compared to other ancient Anatolian languages, despite being limited to a few hundred inscriptions and seals, in contrast to the abundant Hittite cuneiform documentation. Through contextual analysis, lexical combination comparisons, and etymological studies, knowledge of Anatolian hieroglyphs has advanced significantly in recent decades.
However, many hieroglyphs and words remain incompletely understood, like the term for “city”, which now seems to be resolved with Goedegebuure’s study.
Luwian remained the official language of the post-Hittite kingdoms in Anatolia and northern Syria, although its use gradually declined until it was eventually replaced under Assyrian rule. This gradual disappearance process occurred over roughly 800 years, making it a language with notable resilience and relevance in the region’s history.
SOURCES
Goedegebuure PM. The Luwian word for ‘city, town.’ Anatolian Studies. 2024;74:47-73. doi:10.1017/S0066154624000085
Discover more from LBV Magazine English Edition
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.