| Luwian | |
|---|---|
 Luwian hieroglyph BOS (cow) | |
| Native to | Hittite Empire,Arzawa,Neo-Hittite kingdoms |
| Region | Anatolia (Turkey), NorthernSyria |
| Ethnicity | Luwians |
| Extinct | around600 BC |
Early forms | |
| Cuneiform Anatolian hieroglyphs | |
| Language codes | |
| ISO 639-3 | Either:xlu – Cuneiform Luwianhlu – Hieroglyphic Luwian |
xluCuneiform Luwian | |
hluHieroglyphic Luwian | |
| Glottolog | luvi1235 |
 Distribution of the Luwian language | |
| This article containsIPA phonetic symbols. Without properrendering support, you may seequestion marks, boxes, or other symbols instead ofUnicode characters. For an introductory guide on IPA symbols, seeHelp:IPA. | |
Luwian (/ˈluːwiən/), sometimes known asLuvian orLuish, is an ancient language, or group of languages, within theAnatolian branch of theIndo-Europeanlanguage family. Theethnonym Luwian comes fromLuwiya (also spelledLuwia orLuvia) – the name of the region in which theLuwians lived. Luwiya is attested, for example, in theHittite laws.[1]
The two varieties of Luwian are known after the scripts in which they were written:Cuneiform Luwian (CLuwian) andHieroglyphic Luwian (HLuwian). There is no consensus as to whether these were a single language or two closely related languages.
Several other Anatolian languages – particularlyCarian,Lycian, andMilyan (also known as Lycian B or Lycian II) – are now usually identified as related to Luwian – and as mutually connected more closely than other constituents of the Anatolian branch.[2] This suggests that these languages formed a sub-branch within Anatolian. Some linguists followCraig Melchert in referring to this broader group as Luwic,[3] whereas others refer to the "Luwian group" (and, in that sense, "Luwian" may mean several distinct languages). Likewise, Proto-Luwian may mean the common ancestor of the whole group, or just the ancestor of Luwian (normally, undertree-naming conventions, were the branch to be called Luwic, its ancestor should be known as Proto-Luwic or Common Luwic; in practice, such names are seldom used). Luwic or Luwian (in the broad sense of the term), is one of three major sub-branches of Anatolian, alongsideHittite andPalaic.[2]
As Luwian has numerous archaisms, it is regarded as important to the study ofIndo-European languages (IE) in general, the other Anatolian languages, and theBronze Age Aegean. These archaisms are often regarded as supporting the view that theProto-Indo-European language (PIE) had three distinct sets ofvelar consonants:[4]plain velars,palatovelars, andlabiovelars. For Melchert, PIE*ḱ → Luwianz (probably[ts]);*k →k; and*kʷ →ku (probably[kʷ]). Luwian has also been enlisted for its verbkalut(t)i(ya)-, which means "make the rounds of" and is probably derived from*kalutta/i- "circle".[5] It has been argued[6] that this derives from a proto-Anatolian word for "wheel", which in turn would have derived from the common word for "wheel" found in all other Indo-European families. The wheel was invented in the 5th millennium BC and, ifkaluti does derive from it, then the Anatolian branch left PIE after its invention (so validating theKurgan hypothesis as applicable to Anatolian). However,kaluti need not imply a wheel and so need not have been derived from a PIE word with that meaning, and the IE words for a wheel may well have arisen in those other IE languages after the Anatolian split.[citation needed]
Luwian was among the languages spoken during the 2nd and 1st millennia BC by groups in central and western Anatolia and northernSyria.[7] The earliest Luwian texts in cuneiform transmission are attested in connection with the Kingdom ofKizzuwatna in southeastern Anatolia, as well as a number of locations in central Anatolia. Beginning in the 14th century BC, Luwian-speakers came to constitute the majority in the Hittite capitalHattusa.[8] It appears that by the time of the collapse of theHittite Empireca. 1180 BC, the Hittite king and royal family were fully bilingual in Luwian. Long after the extinction of theHittite language, Luwian continued to be spoken in theNeo-Hittite states ofSyria, such asMilid andCarchemish, as well as in the central Anatolian kingdom ofTabal that flourished in the 8th century BC.[9]
A number of scholars in the past attempted to argue for the Luwian homeland in western Anatolia. According toJames Mellaart, the earliest Indo-Europeans in northwest Anatolia were the horse-riders who came to this region from the north and foundedDemircihöyük (Eskişehir Province) inPhrygia c. 3000 BC. They were allegedly ancestors of theLuwians who inhabitedTroy II, and spread widely in the Anatolian peninsula.[10] He cited the distribution of a new type of wheel-made pottery, Red Slip Wares, as some of the best evidence for his theory. According to Mellaart, the proto-Luwian migrations to Anatolia came in several distinct waves over many centuries. The recent detailed review of Mellaart's claims suggests that his ethnolinguistic conclusions cannot be substantiated on archaeological grounds.[11]
Other arguments were advanced for the extensive Luwian presence in western Anatolia in the late second millennium BC. In theOld Hittite version of theHittite Code, some, if not all, of the Luwian-speaking areas were calledLuwiya. Widmer (2007) has argued that theMycenaean termru-wa-ni-jo, attested inLinear B, refers to the same area.[12] but the stem *Luwan- was recently shown to be non-existent.[13] In a corrupt late copy of theHittite Code the geographical termLuwiya is replaced withArzawa[14] a western Anatolian kingdom corresponding roughly with Mira and the Seha River Land.[15] Therefore, several scholars shared the view that Luwian was spoken—to varying degrees—across a large portion of western Anatolia, includingTroy (Wilusa), the Seha River Land (Sēḫa ~Sēḫariya, i.e., the GreekHermos river andKaikos valley), and theMira-Kuwaliya kingdom with its core being theMaeander valley.[16] In a number of recent publications, however, the geographic identity between Luwiya andArzawa has been rejected or doubted.[17] In the post-Hittite era, the region of Arzawa came to be known asLydia (AssyrianLuddu, Greek Λυδία), where theLydian language was in use. The nameLydia has been derived from the nameLuwiya (Lydian *lūda- < *luw(i)da- <luwiya-, with regular Lydian sound changey >d).[18] TheLydian language, however, cannot be regarded as the direct descendant of Luwian and probably does not even belong to the Luwic group (seeAnatolian languages). Therefore, none of the arguments in favour of the Luwian linguistic dominance in Western Asia Minor can be regarded as compelling, although the issue continues to be debated.
Luwian was split into many dialects, which were written in two different writing systems. One of these was theCuneiform Luwian which used the form ofOld Babyloniancuneiform that had been adapted for theHittite language. The other wasHieroglyphic Luwian, which was written in a unique native hieroglyphic script. The differences between the dialects are minor, but they affect vocabulary, style, and grammar. The different orthographies of the two writing systems may also hide some differences.[19]
According to HittitologistAlwin Kloekhorst, Hieroglyphic Luwian may also be known as Empire Luwian or Iron Age Luwian, and is "closely related" to Cuneiform Luwian.[20][21] Similarly, Alice Mouton and Ilya Yakubovich separate Luwian into two distinct varieties: cuneiform and hieroglyphic – the latter of a more prestigious and elite use.[22]
| Cuneiform Luwian | |
|---|---|
| Kizzuwatna Luwian | |
| luwili | |
| Region | Anatolia |
| Ethnicity | Luwians |
| Extinct | around 600 BC |
Early forms | |
| Cuneiform | |
| Language codes | |
| ISO 639-3 | xlu |
xlu | |
| Glottolog | cune1239 |
Cuneiform Luwian (or Kizzuwatna Luwian)[23] is the corpus of Luwian texts attested in the tablet archives ofHattusa; it is essentially the samecuneiform writing system used inHittite.[24] In Laroche'sCatalog of Hittite Texts, the corpus of Hittite cuneiform texts with Luwian insertions runs from CTH 757–773, mostly comprising rituals.[25] Cuneiform Luwian texts are written in several dialects, of which the most easily identifiable areKizzuwatna Luwian, Ištanuwa Luwian, and Empire Luwian.[26] The last dialect represents thevernacular ofHattusan scribes of the 14th–13th centuries BC and is mainly attested throughGlossenkeil words in Hittite texts.
Compared to cuneiform Hittite,logograms (signs with a set symbolic value) are rare. Instead, most writing is done with the syllabic characters, where a single symbol stands for a vowel, or a consonant-vowel pair (either VC or CV). A striking feature is the consistent use of 'full-writing' to indicate long vowels, even at the beginning of words. In this system a long vowel is indicated by writing it twice. For example,īdi "he goes" is writteni-i-ti rather thani-ti, andānda "in" is writtena-an-ta rather thanan-ta.
| Hieroglyphic Luwian | |
|---|---|
| luwili | |
 Luwian hieroglyphs atHattusa | |
| Region | Anatolia |
| Ethnicity | Luwians |
| Extinct | around 600 BC |
Early forms | |
| Anatolian hieroglyphs | |
| Language codes | |
| ISO 639-3 | hlu |
hlu | |
| Glottolog | hier1240 |
Hieroglyphic Luwian (luwili)[28] is the corpus of Luwian texts written in a native script, known asAnatolian hieroglyphs.[29][30][31] It is recorded in official and royalseals and a small number of monumental inscriptions.[32] Once thought to be a variety of theHittite language, "Hieroglyphic Hittite" was formerly used to refer to the language of the same inscriptions, but this term is now obsolete. The dialect of Luwian hieroglyphic inscriptions appears to be either Empire Luwian or its descendant, Iron Age Luwian.
The earliest hieroglyphs appear on official and royal seals, dating from the early 2nd millennium BC, but only from the 14th century BC is the unequivocal evidence for a full-fledged writing system. Dutch HittitologistWillemijn Waal has argued that Luwian Hieroglyphic was already used for writing on wooden writing boards from the early second millennium BC onwards,[33] but the argument has not been widely accepted. The first monumental inscriptions confirmed as Luwian date to theLate Bronze Age, c. 14th to 13th centuries BC. After some two centuries of sparse material, the hieroglyphs resume in the EarlyIron Age, c. 10th to 8th centuries BC. In the early 7th century BC, the Luwian hieroglyphic script, by then aged more than 700 years, falls into oblivion.
The first report of a monumental inscription dates to 1850, when an inhabitant ofNevşehir reported the relief atFraktin. In 1870, antiquarian travellers inAleppo found another inscription built into the south wall of theAl-Qaiqan Mosque. In 1884, Polish scholarMarian Sokołowski [pl] discovered an inscription nearKöylütolu, in westernTurkey. The largest known inscription was excavated in 1946 inKaratepe. Luwian hieroglyphic texts contain a limited number of lexical borrowings fromHittite,Akkadian, andNorthwest Semitic; the lexical borrowings from Greek are limited to proper nouns, although common nouns borrowed in the opposite direction do exist.[34]
A decipherment was presented byEmmanuel Laroche in 1960, building on partial decipherments proposed since the 1930s. Corrections to the readings of certain signs as well as other clarifications were given by David Hawkins,Anna Morpurgo Davies and Günther Neumann in 1973, generally referred to as "the new readings".
A more elaborate monumental style is distinguished from more abstract linear or cursive forms of the script. In general, relief inscriptions prefer monumental forms, and incised ones prefer the linear form, but the styles are in principle interchangeable. Texts of several lines are usually written inboustrophedon style. Within a line, signs are usually written in vertical columns, but as inEgyptian hieroglyphs, aesthetic considerations take precedence over correct reading order.
The script consists of the order of 500 unique signs,[35] some with multiple values; a given sign may function as a logogram, a determinative or asyllabogram, or a combination thereof. The signs are numbered according to Laroche's sign list, with a prefix of 'L.' or '*'. Logograms are transcribed in Latin in capital letters. For example, *90, an image of a foot, is transcribed as PES when used logographically, and with its phonemic valueti when used as a syllabogram. In the rare cases where the logogram cannot be transliterated into Latin, it is rendered through its approximate Hittite equivalent, recorded in Italic capitals, e.g. *216ARHA. The most up-to-date sign list is that of Marazzi (1998).
Hawkins, Morpurgo-Davies and Neumann corrected some previous errors about sign values, in particular emending the reading of symbols *376 and *377 fromi, ī tozi, za.
| -a | -i | -u | |
|---|---|---|---|
| - | *450, *19 | *209 | *105 |
| h- | *215, *196 | *413 | *307 |
| k- | *434 | *446 | *423 |
| l- | *176 | *278 | *445 |
| m- | *110 | *391 | *107 |
| n- | *35 | *411, *214 | *153, *395 |
| p- | *334 | *66 | *328 |
| r- | *383 | *412 | |
| s- | *415 *433, *104, *402, *327 | - | - |
| t- | *100, *29, *41, *319, *172 | *90 | *89, *325 |
| w- | *439 | - | |
| y- | *210 | - | - |
| z- | *377 | *376 | *432(?) |
Some signs are used as reading aid, marking the beginning of a word, the end of a word, or identifying a sign as a logogram. These are not mandatory and are used inconsistently.
The reconstruction of the Luwian phoneme inventory is based mainly on the written texts and comparisons with the known development of other Indo-European languages. Two series of stops can be identified, one transliterated as geminate in the cuneiform script. These fortis and lenis stops may have been distinguished by either voicing or gemination. The contrast was lost initially and finally, suggesting that any voicing only appeared intervocalically.[36]
The following table provides a minimal consonant inventory, as can be reconstructed from the script. The existence of other consonants, which were not differentiated in writing, is possible.
| Bilabial | Alveolar | Palatal | Velar | Uvular | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nasal | fortis | *m:⟨mm⟩ | *n:⟨nn⟩ | |||
| lenis | *m⟨m⟩ | *n⟨n⟩ | ||||
| Plosive | fortis | *p⟨pp⟩ | *t⟨tt⟩ | *k⟨kk⟩ | ||
| lenis | *b⟨p⟩ | *d⟨t⟩ | *ɡ⟨k⟩ | |||
| Fricative | fortis | *s⟨šš⟩ | *x~χ⟨ḫḫ⟩ | |||
| lenis | *z⟨š⟩ | *ɣ~ʁ⟨ḫ⟩ | ||||
| Affricate | fortis | *t͡s⟨zz⟩ | ||||
| lenis | *d͡z⟨z⟩ | |||||
| Trill | *r | |||||
| Approximant | *w | *l | *j | |||
There are only threevowels,a,i, andu, which could be short or long. Vowel length is not stable but changes with the stress and word position. For example,annan occurs alone as anadverb asānnan ('underneath') but as apreposition, it becomesannān pātanza ('under the feet').
The characters that are transliterated as-h- and-hh- have often been interpreted as pharyngeal fricatives[ħ] and[ʕ]. However, they may have instead been uvular[χ] and[ʁ] orvelar fricatives[x] and[ɣ]. In loans to Ugaritic, these sounds are transcribed with <ḫ> and <ġ>, while in Egyptian they are transcribed with𓐍ḫ and𓎼g.[37] As both of these languages had pharyngeal consonants, the Luwian sounds are unlikely to have been pharyngeal.
In transcriptions of Luwian cuneiform,š is traditionally distinguished froms, since they were originally distinct signs for two different sounds, but in Luwian, both signs probably represented the sames sound.
A noteworthy phonological development in Luwian isrhotacism; in some cases,d,l, andn becomer. For example, *īdi ('he gets') becomesīri andwala- ('die') becomeswara-. Additionally, ad in word final position can be dropped, and ans may be added between twodental consonants and so*ad-tuwari becomesaztuwari ('you all eat') (ds andz are phonetically identical).
There were twogrammatical genders: animate and inanimate/neuter. There are twogrammatical numbers: singular and plural. Some animate nouns could also take a collective plural in addition to the regular numerical plural.
Luwian had sixcases:
The vocative case occurs rarely in surviving texts and only in the singular.
| Case | Singular | Plural |
|---|---|---|
| Nominative animate | -s | -anzi, -inzi |
| Accusative animate | -n, -an | |
| Nominative/accusative inanimate | -Ø, -n | -a, -aya |
| Genitive | -s, -si | – |
| Dative/locative | -i, -iya, -a | -anza |
| Ablative/instrumental | -ati | |
In the animate gender, an-i- is inserted between the stem and the case ending. In hieroglyphic Luwian, the particle-sa/-za is added to the nominative/accusative inanimate case ending. In the genitive case, cuneiform and hieroglyphic Luwian differ sharply from each other. In cuneiform Luwian the possessive suffix-assa is used for the genitive singular and-assanz- is used for the genitive plural. In hieroglyphic Luwian, as in Hittite, the classical Indo-European suffixes-as for the genitive singular and-an for the plural are used.[38] The special form of possessive adjectives with a plural possessor is restricted to Kizzuwatna Luwian and probably represents acalque fromHurrian.[39]
Because of the prevalence of-assa place names and words scattered around all sides of theAegean Sea, the possessive suffix was sometimes considered evidence of a shared non-Indo-European language or an AegeanSprachbund preceding the arrivals of Luwians andGreeks. It is, however, possible to account for the Luwian possessive construction as a result of case attraction in the Indo-European noun phrase.[40]
| Case | Singular | Plural |
|---|---|---|
| Nominative animate | -asis | -asinzi |
| Accusative animate | -asin | |
| Nominative/accusative inanimate | -asanza | -asa |
| Dative/locative | -asan | -asanza |
| Ablative/instrumental | -asati | |
Adjectives agree with nouns in number and gender. Forms for the nominative and the accusative differ only in the animate gender and even then, only in the singular. For the sake of clarity, the table includes only the endings beginning with-a, but endings can also begin with an-i. The forms are largely derived from the forms of the nominal declension, with an-as- before the case ending that would be expected for nouns.
In addition topersonal pronouns typical of Anatolian languages, Luwian also hasdemonstrative pronouns, the which are formed fromapa- andza-/zi-. The case endings are similar those of Hittite, but not all cases are attested for personal pronouns. In the third person, the demonstrative pronounapa- occurs instead of the personal pronoun.
| Personal pronouns | Possessive pronouns | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| independent | enclitic | independent | ||
| 1st person | singular | amu, mu | -mu, -mi | ama- |
| plural | anzas, anza | -anza | anza- | |
| 2nd person | singular | tu, ti | -tu, -ti | tuwa- |
| plural | unzas, unza | -manza | unza- | |
| 3rd person | singular | (apa-) | -as, -ata, -an, -du | apasa- |
| plural | (apa-) | -ata, -manza | apasa- | |
Possessive pronouns and demonstrative pronouns inapa- are declined as adjectives. All known forms of the personal pronouns are given, but it is not clear how their meanings differed or how they changed for different cases.
In addition to the forms given in the table, Luwian also had a demonstrative pronoun formed from the stemza-/zi-, but not all cases are known, and also arelative pronoun, which was declined regularly:kwis (nominative singular animate),kwin (accusative singular animate),kwinzi (nominative/accusative plural animate),kwati (ablative/instrumental singular),kwanza (dative/locative plural),kwaya (nominative/accusative plural inanimate). Someindefinite pronouns whose meanings are not entirely clear are also transmitted.
Like many other Indo-European languages, Luwian distinguishes two numbers (singular and plural) and threepersons. There are twomoods:indicative andimperative but nosubjunctive. There are twotenses: thepresent, which is used to express future events as well, and thepreterite.
The following activevoice endings have been attested:
| Present | Preterite | Imperative | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1st person | singular | -wi | -ha | – |
| plural | -min(a) | -han(a) | – | |
| 2nd person | singular | -si, -tis(a) | -ta | Ø |
| plural | -tani | -tan | -tanu | |
| 3rd person | singular | -ti(r), -i, -ia | -ta(r) | -tu(r) |
| plural | -nti | -nta | -ntu | |
The conjugation is very similar to the Hittiteḫḫi conjugation.
For themediopassive, the following endings are attested:[41]
| Present | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2nd person | singular | |
| plural | -ttuwar(i) | |
| 3rd person | singular | -ar(i), -t(t)ari |
| plural | -antari | |
A singleparticiple can be formed with the suffix-a(i)mma. It has a passive sense for transitive verbs and a stative sense for intransitive verbs. Theinfinitive ends in-una.
The usual word order issubject-object-verb, but words can be moved to the front of the sentence for stress or to start a clause.Relative clauses are normally before theantecedent, but they sometimes follow the antecedent. Dependent words and adjectives are normally before theirhead word. Enclitic particles are often attached to the first word or conjunction.
Variousconjunctions with temporal or conditional meaning are used to link clauses. There is no coordinating conjunction, but main clauses can be coordinated with theenclitic-ha, which is attached to the first word of the following clause. In narratives, clauses are linked by using the prosecutive conjunctions:a- before the first word of the following clause means 'and then', andpā, can be an independent conjunction at the start of a clause and the enclitic-pa indicates contrast or a change of theme.
The following example sentence demonstrates several common features of Luwian: a final verb, the particle chain headed by the conjunctiona-, the quotative clitic-wa, and thepreverbsarra adding directionality to the main verbawiha.
a=wa
and=QUOT
pihammi-s
glorified-NOM
sarra
over
a=wa api-n wattaniy-ati pihammi-s sarra awi-ha
and=QUOT DEM-ABL land-ABL.PL glorified-NOM over come-1.SG
"And I came over glorified from those lands." (Karkamiš A11b+c, line 14)[42][43]
The known Luwian vocabulary consists mostly of words inherited fromProto-Indo-European.Loan words for various technical and religious concepts derive mainly fromHurrian, and were often subsequently passed on through Luwian to Hittite.
The surviving corpus of Luwian texts consists principally of cuneiform ritual texts from the 16th and 15th centuries BC and monumental inscriptions in hieroglyphs. There are also some letters and economic documents. The majority of the hieroglyphic inscriptions derive from the 12th to 7th centuries BC, after the fall of theHittite empire.
Another source of Luwian are the hieroglyphic seals which date from the 16th to the 7th centuries BC. Seals from the time of the Hittite empire are oftendigraphic, written in both cuneiform and hieroglyphics. However, the seals nearly always are limited tologograms. The absence of the syllabic symbols from the seals makes it impossible to determine the pronunciation of names and titles that appear on them, or even to make a certain attribution of the text to a specific language.
After the decipherment of Hittite, Cuneiform Luwian was recognised as a separate, but related language byEmil Forrer in 1919. Further progress in the understanding of the language came after the Second World War, with the publication and analysis of a larger number of texts. Important work in this period was produced byBernhard Rosenkranz,Heinrich Otten andEmmanuel Laroche. An important advance came in 1985 with the reorganisation of the whole text-corpus byFrank Starke.
The decipherment and classification of Hieroglyphic Luwian was much more difficult. In the 1920s, there were a number of failed attempts. In the 1930s some individual logograms and syllabic signs were correctly identified. At this point the classification of the language was not yet clear and, since it was believed to be a form of Hittite, it was referred to asHieroglyphic Hittite. After a break in research due to the Second World War, there was breakthrough in 1947 with the discovery and publication of aPhoenician-Hieroglyphic Luwianbilingual text byHelmuth Theodor Bossert. The reading of several syllabic signs was still faulty, however, and as a result it was not realised that the cuneiform and hieroglyphic texts recorded the same language.
In the 1970s, as a result of a fundamental revision of the readings of a large number of hieroglyphs byJohn David Hawkins,Anna Morpurgo Davies, andGünter Neumann, it became clear that both cuneiform and hieroglyphic texts recorded the same Luwian language. This revision resulted from a discovery outside the area of Luwian settlement, namely the annotations onUrartian pots, written in theUrartian language using the hieroglyphic Luwian script. The sign
, which had hitherto been read asī was shown to be being used to indicate the soundza, which triggered a chain reaction resulting in an entirely new system of readings. Since that time, research has concentrated on better understanding the relationship between the two different forms of Luwian, in order to gain a clearer understanding of Luwian as a whole.
Luwian has been deduced as one of the likely candidates for thelanguage spoken by theTrojans.[44]
After the 1995 finding of a Luwian biconvex seal at Troy VII, there has been a heated discussion over the language that was spoken in Homeric Troy. Frank Starke of theUniversity of Tübingen demonstrated that the name ofPriam, king of Troy at the time of theTrojan War, is connected to the Luwian compoundPriimuua, which means "exceptionally courageous".[45] "The certainty is growing that Wilusa/Troy belonged to the greater Luwian-speaking community," but it is not entirely clear whether Luwian was primarily the official language or if it was in daily colloquial use.[46]
It is generally accepted that Cuneiform Luwian and Hieroglyphic Luwian are closely related, yet distinct, dialects.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of July 2025 (link){{cite journal}}:Cite journal requires|journal= (help){{cite journal}}:Cite journal requires|journal= (help){{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of July 2025 (link)
| Peoples |  | |
|---|---|---|
| Bronze Age | |
|---|---|
| Iron Age | |
| Classical Age | |
| International | |
|---|---|
| National | |
| Other | |
.svg)
