On Thursday, January 10, 2008 11:14 AM, sirreynaldo maestro <sirreynaldo@yahoo.com> wrote:
Part 3
|
![]() |
Seal of Ḫattušili III |
(Contemporary with Adad-nirari I and Šalmaneser I of Assyria (See Peter Machinist (1987)))
(Ascends to throne Year 14 to Year 17 of reign of Rameses II of Egypt. See Rowton (1960) 18)
Ḫattušili's
seizure of the throne sowed the seeds of the end of the Hittite Empire.
But even in its slow demise the empire would remain a great power for a
further two generations. In fact, it would see its greatest material
splendour under the reign of Ḫattušili's son. How, then, can we speak
of the the destruction of the empire at this early date? After all,
Ḫattušili was hardly the first member of the Great Family to usurp the
throne. What was so unique about his coup?
A comparison with
the coups of earlier rulers will reveal an extremely important
difference: armies. Without any known exceptions, previous usurpers came
to the throne through assassination, not civil war. The reason for this
was fairly straight forward. Until the empire, armies were led by
generals who were appointed by the king on a campaign-by-campaign basis.
Therefore a
general had
little opportunity to build up a power base against his sovreign.
The
vassal treaty system would ultimately undermine this system.
Šuppiluliuma I introduced the widespread use of the treaty to control
vassal kings. His reasons were undoubtedly sound. He made treaties with
kings of distant lands which he could not reasonably incorporate into
the closely controlled provincial system. But, from the very beginning,
this system demonstrated a dismal record for maintaining a vassal's
loyalty. Even worse, as we have seen, this system was internalized by
Muwattalli II when he created the kingdom of Ḫakpiš for Ḫattušili.
This may have meant a reduction in imperial expenditure on this deeply
troubled region, but it also meant that there was now an army whose
loyalty was centered around the vassal king, rather than upon the Great
King. Whether or not he realized it, Muršili III undoubtedly had the
right idea when he tried to eliminate this
threat to his
authority. In the end, however, Muršili proved unable to undo the
damage done by his father. Ḫattušili used the army of Ḫakpiš to defeat
the imperial army and seize the imperial throne.
Ḫattušili,
however, does not seem to have been aware of the threat that his own
actions were evidence for. For, as will be seen, the internalization of
the treaty system would continue under his reign. For the moment,
however, all he sought was to return the empire to the old status quo as
it was under his brother's reign.
In
this vein, the family of Ḫattušili's old benefactor Mittanna-muwa was
rewarded handsomely for its long-time support. Mittanna-muwa himself
appears to have grown far too old to play any sort of active role in the
government, but he had many sons whom Ḫattušili did not forget.
Aliḫḫešni became a ḫalipe-functionary, the role of which is
unclear. Walwa-ziti ("Lion-man") received his father's old
position as Chief of the Scribes. Two other sons, Adduwa and ŠEŠ-ZI
(reading uncertain) were also rewarded by Ḫattušili. All of these sons
swore an oath of loyalty and support to Ḫattušili, Pudu-Ḫepa, and
their descendents, in return for which Ḫattušili and Pudu-Ḫepa swore
that the welfare and positions of the descendents of Mittanna-muwa would
be perpetually maintained.
Another
man to benefit was Ura-Tarḫunta who, as we saw, had sided with
Ḫattušili against his own father, Kantuzzili. For this support,
Ura-Tarḫunta's house was exempted from taxation for his own lifetime
and down through the generations as well. It was further stipulated
that, even if some descendant of his should commit a crime which should
cause his estate to be seized, it could only be given to another of
Ura-Tarḫunta's descendents.
An Official Version of History
While
assassination may have
once been common among the royal family, it seems to have gradually
grown less and less acceptable. The last known assassination was that of
Tudḫaliya the Younger, the designated heir of Tudḫaliya III. The last
known Great King to fall at the hands of one of his subjects was
Muwattalli I, who had been killed over one hundred and fifty years
before Ḫattušili seized the throne. So there was no current tradition
of regicide in Ḫatti, and moreover, the Great King seems to have taken
on greater religious sanctity in the interim. This, along with his
family ties and his obvious desire to appear magnanimous in victory, may
have been what stayed Ḫattušili's hand in his treatment of his captive
nephew. Instead of execution, Ḫattušili followed the long standing
Hittite practice of banishment. Muršili was given fortified towns on the
edge of the empire - in the land of Nuḫašše - to rule over.
Having
removed his nephew far from
the presence of the imperial city, Ḫattušili launched a vigorous
propaganda campaign wherein he established the official justification
for his revolt and for his usurpation of the throne. The first of the
propaganda texts was probably the loyalty oath which the Men of Ḫatti
were required to swear to the new Great King and, after his reign, to
one of his descendents by Pudu-Ḫepa (KUB 21.37). In this oath they were specifically forbidden to seek after Muršili or his sons for kingship.
This
text also introduces all the elements of Ḫattušili's version of events
that would reappear in his other texts. Speaking to the men of Ḫatti,
he accuses,
"Urḫi-Teššup
attacked me, and [you] attacked me, and you humiliated me. So I was
hostile towards you. He who sided with me, and he who sided with
Urḫi-Teššup, [I conquered? them (all).] And I reunited the people - I did not harm
anyone."
(KUB 21.37, Archi (1971) 203ff.)
Other
official elements appear: how Ḫattušili took up Muršili when
Muwattalli died and made him Great King, how Ḫattušili was loyal to
Muršili, but Muršili broke his word to Ḫattušili and did wrong against
him, so that Ḫattušili revolted against this oppression. The judgment
of the gods made Ḫattušili victorious. All of these elements would be
elaborated upon in other documents.
Ḫattušili would never
forgive Muršili, nor his old nemesis, Arma-Tarḫunta. In later years,
his son Tudḫaliya reported that his father refused to take part in a
ritual which would have healed the estrangement between Ḫattušili and
the sons of those men.
Muršili's
defeat was the final crushing blow to the house of Arma-Tarḫunta. Half
of his estate had been dedicated to Šaušga of Šamuḫa during the reign
of Muwattalli II when he had been found guilty of black
magic and handed over to Ḫattušili. Now the plans of his son
Šippa-ziti had come to ruin, and the remaining half of the family estate
was seized and similarly dedicated to Šaušga of Šamuḫa. It is this
occassion which inspired Ḫattušili to write his famous Apology, which
has been the source of so much of our information about the reigns of
Muwattalli II and Muršili III. The Apology is actually the text granting
Arma-Tarḫunta's estate to the cult of Šaušga of Šamuḫa. Ḫattušili
has simply used the historical introduction, similar to those of vassal
treaties, to promote his own version of his life and his conflict with
Muršili III. In fact, the historical section was so greatly expanded
that the actual grant only covers the final three paragraphs of the
document.
According to the Apology, stelas and grain storage
facilities were set up in the houses and cities that previously
belonged to Arma-Tarḫunta. Šaušga was to be
sacrificed to as "Šaušga the Exalted". Ḫattušili further dedicated the
Bone House (i.e mausoleum) which he had built. He also installed his
son, Tudḫaliya, as the Priest of Šaušga. This may imply that Tudḫaliya
became the King of Ḫakpiš in his father's stead. Future generations
were forbidden to take away the descendants of Ḫattušili and Pudu-Ḫepa
from the service of Šaušga or to covet the cult's possessions. He also
freed those future Priests from goods and labor obligations. Finally, he
permanently elevated Šaušga's position in the royal cult by requiring
his descendants who would later sit on the Hittite throne to be reverent
towards her.
A Palace Worthy of a Great King1
![]() |
Plan of the 13th Century B.C. Hittite Citadel (T. Büyükkale) at Ḫattuša (Jürgen Seeher, Hattusha Guide; A Day in the Hittite Capital, 2. Revised Edition, 2002) |
The
entrance to the citadel in the southwest corner of the plateau seems to
have been the most
important. There were three gateways at this corner. On the western
edge of this corner, a gate and a long, narrow ramp led down through the
citadel wall to the Lower City (17). There was a spring at the base of
the hill near this gate, which probably served as the citadel's source
of water, as there isn't any in the citadel itself. Where the citadel
wall met with the city wall, there were two gates: One gate opened from
the Lower City to the exterior of the city wall (18), and the other,
immediately to its east, opened from the citadel to the exterior of the
city wall (2). Ramps led down to the lower level of the plain (1).
This
juncture seems to have served as the main entrence to the citadel , and
when one entered into the citadel from this corner from either the
Lower City or from outside the city walls one found himself in the
Citadel Entrance Court (3), which had an irregularly trapezoidal shape.
When you faced north, you faced a
long, flat wall, which
was actually the outside wall of the Southwest Hall. The hall was
pierced by a main gate (4), which a walkway paved with red marble slabs
led up to. If you went around this building's western corner, you would
wind up in a sort of "service" area which ran all along the back side of
the palatial buildings. To the east, a door blocked access to a long
paved corridor which eventually opened up at a rather important looking
water basin (16) which filled most of a courtyard surrounded by four
buildings. Ritual objects have been discovered in this water basin, so
at least one of the functions of this pool was religious.
If
you passed through the main gate in the Southwest Hall, you would find
yourself in a large courtyard known as the Lower Court (5). This was
surrounded by about half a dozen buildings of varying size. On the east
side, two of these buildings opened up on their opposite side to the
water basin. The building in the northwestern
corner of this
courtyard seems to have been some sort of storage facility (H). Two
buildings adjacent to this (B, C) may have been shrines. Building C had a
deep (2.3m) pool in its center, in which various ceramic vessels ,
believed to be votive offerings, have been discovered. The pool may have
been open to the sky. Since these buildings were accessed from either
the western service area or the Lower Court, and since this was the
furthest court from the royal apartments, the Lower Court was probably
an area for lower level court functionaries. One possibility is that the
royal guard ("Golden Spear Men") resided here as well. On the northern
face of the Lower Court was a gate (8) which led to a corridor which in
turn led to the storage building and the service area. Next to that
jutted out the Gate Building. By passing through this building (7), you
found yourself standing in the Central Court (9). ![]() |
Hypothetical reconstruction of the Hittite royal Audience Hall, located on the upper floor of "Building D". (U. Berlin after R. Naumann, from Jürgen Seeher, Hattusha Guide; A Day in the Hittite Capital, 2. Revised Edition, 2002) |
By
passing through another gate one entered the Upper Court (13), the
private domain of the Great King. It is a smaller, rectangular courtyard
with a colannade surrounded by a handful of buildings. Only those on
the western side are at all preserved. Buildings E and F are believed to
have been the private apartments of the Great King of Ḫatti, with
views over the city and across the valley. Building E also contained an
archive of tablets. Either grain silos or cisterns seem to have been
constructed on part of the eastern side of the courtyard (12).
It is this version of the citadel which is best preserved and which can be seen when you visit the site today.
Trouble in the West
Ḫattušili's
seizure of the
Hittite throne left the Hittites' vassal kingdoms in an uncertain yet
advantageous position. They were sworn to support the legitimate king,
and to attack an usurper. If ever a vassal wished to throw off the yoke
of Hittite rule, he was now presented with the perfect excuse to do so.
But obviously, political realities and personal ambitions determined the
actual position taken by each kingdom.
Aḫḫiyawa,
Ḫatti's rival for control of western Anatolia, would benefit from the
coup more than any other foreign power, as it now found an opportunity
to increase its influence in western Anatolia. Its policy seems to have
been supremely and rather coldly influenced by its own ambitions. During
the civil war, it had officially sided with Muršili, but apparently had
failed to actually support him. While Ḫatti's resources were
squandered on the war, Aḫḫiyawa could simply watch and wait. Muršili's
defeat released Aḫḫiyawa from
any friendly obligations towards the Hittite dynasty, and in fact it
would have been entirely proper for Aḫḫiyawa to declare war against
Ḫatti once Ḫattušili seized the throne. For Aḫḫiyawa, the civil war
was win-win, and their subsequent actions reveal that they were not slow
to take advantage of the situation.
In
the north the land of Wiluša seems to have slipped into the Aḫḫiyawan
camp. In the far south the Lukka Lands seem to have fallen into general
disorder. As in the north, it was the Aḫḫiyawans who benifitted. The
Lukkans transferred their allegiance to a man named Tawagalawa, a
brother of the King of Aḫḫiyawa.
Here
we find another possible connection with the world of the Homeric
epics. It has been proposed, if not proven, that the name Tawagalawa(s) can be transformed into the name Etewokléwēs, i.e. Eteocles, a figure from Homeric tales, the son of
Andreus, King of Orchomenos. While trying to directly equate Tawagalawa(s) with Eteocles
is probably too much for the evidence to bear, it would not be
unreasonable to draw an etymological connection between the two. There
are two strong reasons to do so. Where the Greek language has an e-grade in many words, in Luwian we would not be surprised to find it in an a-grade, an argument which could be used to transform Etewokléwēs into Atawoklawas. Further, in the Luwian language, initial a's are frequently dropped, thus further transforming the name into Tawoklawas.
From here, only a few more readily available arguments are needed to
fully transform the Greek name into the form found in the Hittite
document, Tawagalawa(s). But it should be noted that we have no reason to believe that a Hittite scribe hearing Etewokléwēs would ponder the neccessary transformations and then write the
name down as
Tawagalawa(s). The implication is that the Greek name had
undergone this transformation over time, which means that we find
ourselves with a Greek prince bearing a Luwian, or at least Luwianized,
name. Whether he bore this name as some sort of Lukkan throne name, or
whether it was actually his given name, we cannot know at this time.
Under
Tawagalawa's auspices, Lukkan warriors began attacking Hittite
territory. In fact, Ḫattušili rapidly lost control of the situation,
and Lukkan warriors burst into the Ḫulaya River Land. One of the
Hittite border districts belonging to this land, that centered on the
city of Ḫawaliya, rose in revolt along with the Lukkans at the frontier
districts of Nataš, Parḫa (Cl. Perge in Pamphylia), Ḫarḫaššuwanta,
and other lands whose names are only poorly preserved. Ḫattušili had
now lost not only the Lukka lands, but his entire southern coast west of
Kizzuwatna! These rebel lands
invaded and conquered Hittite border territories such as Wašuwatta and
Ḫarputtawana. It seems that at this time there was little that
Ḫattušili could do to stop them.
This weakness, of course,
opened the door for even further incursions. Either now or shortly in
the future in connection with these raids, the Hittite's old enemy
Piyama-radu reappeared and seems to have seen an opportunity to once
again further his own interests at the Hittites' expense. Apparently
based now out of the the city Millawanda, he began invading Hittite
territory. Naturally Ḫattušili sent a messenger to Piyama-radu
protesting his behavior. It doesn't seem to have accomplished very much,
since someone, presumably Piyama-radu, went on to essentially conquer
all of the Ḫulaya River Land, even managing to conquer at least part of
the Lower Land and penetrate as far east as the land Naḫita. All of
southwestern and south central Anatolia had been lost to
Lukkan
raiders operating under Aḫḫiyawan auspices. At no other time in
history had the Aegean kingdom's influence been felt so far eastward.
The Lukkan reach now extended eastward even farther than the Arzawans
had penetrated at the beginning of the reign of Šuppiluliuma I!
Ḫattušili
desperately needed to take control of the situation. Fortunately,
Hittite might proved more formidable than the Aḫḫiyawans anticipated.
Ḫattušili marched against the enemy and managed to push them back away
from the Lower Land and at least regain control of a part of the Ḫulaya
River, although he does not appear to have regained control of the
coast. On the west, his borders at this time probably did not include
the plain of Pamphylia. But it was a start, and Ḫattušili had other
problems that he needed to concern himself with. Faced with the dilemma
of how to reassert Hittite authority in the south and southwest while
not devoting too much
of his resources to the task, he apparently chose a solution that
resembled the solution his brother Muwattalli had used to regain control
of the northern Kaškan lands. Here in the south Ḫattušili created a
vast new kingdom, that of Tarḫuntašša, whose king would have the
responsibility of using his own resources in the reconquest of the lost
territories. The natural choice for the king of this new kingdom was
Ulmi-Teššup, the son of Muwattalli II whom Ḫattušili had raised in his
own household since childhood. So Ḫattušili secured a treaty with his
nephew which gave a detailed outline of Ulmi-Teššup's borders and
responsibilities towards the Great King.
Ulmi-Teššup's
borders with respect to the neighboring lands of Pitašša, Ušša, and
Ḫatti were fairly well established, but his south and southwestern
borders were more fluid, since Ḫattušili had not fully restored Hittite
prominence in these regions. So
Ulmi-Teššup was expected
to expand his dominion in this direction, so that,
"In
the direction of the city Šaranduwa, to whatever locality his armed
force should reach - that belongs to the land of the Ḫulaya River." (HDT #18B)
Although
the course of subsequent events in Tarḫuntašša remains somewhat vague,
we do know the ultimate outcome. By the reign of Ḫattušili's
successor, the borders of Tarḫuntašša would be pushed south to the
Mediterraenean Sea and west to the Kaštaraya River (Cl. Kestros) across
from the city of Parḫa (Cl. Perge), deep into the Pamphylian plain,
which was itself expected to fall into Hittite hands. Ulmi-Teššup would
soon take on a second, non-Hurrian name which he would come to be better
known by. Under the name of Kurunta, this son of Muwattalli would
acquire prominence in the west which Ḫattušili would seek to use to his
own advantage in his dealings with the kingdom of
Aḫḫiyawa.
Peace Among the Lands
Having
taken the imperial throne, it was now Ḫattušili's task to secure his
position in the eyes of Ḫatti's foreign neighbors. In the east
Ḫattušili made an effort to normalize relations with the rising power
of Assyria. Messengers and goods seem to have passed between the two
lands since at least the days of Muwattalli II. But there was the
occasional glitch. Muršili III seems to have maintained his father's
general antipathy towards Assyria, so when Ḫattušili seized the throne,
it's perhaps not surprising that the Assyrian king, probably
Adad-nirari I, failed to properly handle Ḫattušili's accsession. Not to
mention that Ḫattušili's accession wasn't exactly regular. Either
genuinely or strategically insulted by this, Ḫattušili presumed to give
the Assyrian an etiquette lesson;
"Did
[my brother (Muwattalli)] not send you
appropriate gifts of
greeting (when you ascended the throne)? But when I assumed kingship,
[then] you did not send a messenger to me. It is the custom that when
kings assume kingship, the kings, his equals in rank, send him
appropriate [gifts of greeting], clothing befitting kingship, and fine
[oil] for his anointing. But you did not do this today!" (HDT #24B)
As
a result of this social blunder, Ḫattušili detained the Hittite
messenger to Assyria and his counterpart, the Assyrian messenger
Bēl-qarrād.
Nevertheless,
Ḫattušili sought recognition, not war, and so he was not prepared to
let the insult endanger his hopes for good relations. In fact he was
willing to make some extraordinary concessions. To begin with, he sent
out the requests that the Assyrian had already made. He further tried to
assuage any fears that the Assyrian ruler might have that his messenger
was being ill treated during his detention, and at the same time he
managed to
put in a plug against Muršili III,
"The
messengers whom you regularly sent here in the time of Urḫi-Teššup
often experienced [...] aggrevation. Today, in [...], you should [not]
say, 'He is certainly experiencing aggravation as at that time.' When he
comes (back to Assyria), you shall not need to ask Bēl-qarrād whether I
treated him well." (HDT #24B)
If the scholarly
textual restorations are correct, then the type of trade highlighted in
this letter is interesting. The Assyrian king sought only one thing from
his Hittite companion: iron. He requested "good iron", which Ḫattušili
claimed was not available from his storehouse in Kizzuwatna because it
was "a bad time for making iron". This may imply that iron working,
still in its infancy, was a seasonal affair. It has been suggested, on
comparison with other cultures, that Hittite iron working was a sort of
cottage industry at this time.
The Assyrian king had
also sent suits of armor to the Hittite emperor, in return for which he
expected "blades [of iron]". Again, it was Hittite iron that the
Assyrians desired.
More frustrating is the fact that we have
no idea of the quantities of goods involved, which, in royal trade,
could be either staggering large or just as surprisingly small. How many
suits of armor did the Hittite king receive? How many iron blades did
the Assyrian receive? Given the scarcity of iron, its value, and the
fact that the technique of creating steel had not yet been discovered,
we may hestitatingly suggest that this was the trade of prestige goods,
to be distributed among the privileged classes, rather than basic
equipment for war. After all, relations between the two lands were still
in an awkward phase. Ḫattušili still carefully refrained from calling
his correspondant "brother". But relations between the two lands were
too important to him to disrupt.
This
same letter
contains other strong evidence of the warming relations between these
two distant lands and also how rapidly the Assyrian empire had grown
under Adad-nirari's care,
"[The
people of] the city of Turira are constantly plundering my land! [They
constantly plunder the land of] Kargamiš [on this side] and the land [of
Aštata(?)] on that side. The king of Ḫanigalbat keeps writing to me:
'[Turira] is mine!' And from there (i.e. Assyria) you(!) keep writing to
me, 'Turira is mine, or Turira is yours. It does not belong to the King
of Ḫanigalbat!' Do you not know about the matter of Turira? When
Turira plunders the land, they keep taking the booty to Turira. My
subjects who flee (from my land) also keep going up to Turira. If Turira
is yours, smash? it! But you shall not claim the possessions
of my subjects who are dwelling in the city. If Turira is not yours,
write to me, so that I may smash?
it. The possessions of your
troops who are dwelling in the city shall not be claimed. Why do the people of Turira sniff at? the gift of me, the Lion?"
The
Assryian empire had grown so rapidly that Adad-nirari wasn't even
certain whether or not Turira was a part of it! As for Ḫattušili, he
was willing to let the Assyrian handle the problem himself, even though
Kargamiš, his most important Syrian possession, was being continually
attacked!
Relations
with Babylonia became even friendlier, although Ḫattušili initially had
some problems in this area. Muršili, not content to remain passively on
his estates in Nuḫašši, planned to flee to Babylonia. But Ḫattušili
discovered his plans and banished him to "the seacoast" (i.e. Cyprus?
Helck, JCS 17, 38). Soon after, Ḫattušili was able to establish a
relationship of brotherhood and aid with Kadašman-Turgu. One wonders if
perhaps it was the King of Babylonia himself who exposed
Muršili's
plans. The new found brotherhood between these two kings was
dramatically confirmed when Ḫattušili's initial relations with Egypt
broke down.
Someone who Ḫattušili refers to as "my enemy"
escaped to another land and thence into Egypt. This "enemy" was almost
certainly the deposed king Muršili III. Ḫattušili wrote to Rameses and
demanded the extradition of his enemy, but Rameses refused. The result
was inevitable: "[Because of this, I and the King] of Egypt became angry
with one another." When Ḫattušili wrote to Kadašman-Turgu about these
hostilities, he got a more enthusiastic response than he probably
anticipated. The Babylonian king cut off the messenger of the King of
Egypt and further promised,
"[If
your troops] go against Egypt, then I will go with you. [If] you go
[against Egypt, I will send you] such infantry and chariotry as I have
available to go." HDT #23 §7
But Hattušili was not
prepared for anything other than a cold war with Egypt, and he never
called upon the Babylonian king's promised aid. In fact, relations
between the two lands were to turn for the better. Eventually, these
feelings would blossom into the most famous peace established in the
ancient world, where the two mortal enemies, Ḫatti and Egypt, finally
resolved their differences in a manner which would ring down the ages to
our own day.
Peace in the West
Ḫattušili's
efforts at war in the western half of his empire finally stabilized the
situation there. Kurunta, as King of Tarḫuntašša, established himself
as a ruler of some reputation in the west. The efforts of the
Aḫḫiyawans to dominate there seem to have resulted in little success.
Ultimately, they came to terms with Ḫattušili, and seem to have largely
abandoned all their Anatolian aspirations. The dispute over Wiluša was
resolved in Ḫattušili's
favor, returning the land of the Trojans once more to the Hittite fold.
In the south, Kurunta, acting on behalf of Ḫattušili, helped secure
Hittite interests, and even met with the Aḫḫiyawan king in the city of
Millawanda, one of the few Anatolian possessions which remained in
Aḫḫiyawan hands. Little else did, however, and as the Aḫḫiyawans
withdrew, the Lukka lands returned their allegiance to the Hittites. The
withdrawal of the Aḫḫiyawans resulted in the scrambling of the local
rulers to seek allegiance with the Hittites. Among these rulers was
Piyama-radu, who had spent a good portion of his career waging war
against the Hittites. Knowledge of his previous crimes against the
Hittites seem to have stirred feelings of paranoia in him, and his
actions became erratic. At first, like the other Lukkan leaders, he
decided to swear allegiance to Ḫattušili. To this end, as Ḫattušili
was riding to the Lukka lands
in order to assert his authority in the region, he wrote to him in the
city Šallapa,
"Take me in servitude! Send the Crown Prince to me. He will bring me to My Sun." (Piyama-radu Letter)
Ḫattušili
was willing, and so he sent the Crown Prince to Piyama-radu in the city
Millawanda, still under Aḫḫiyawan control under the leadership of
Piyama-radu's in-law Atpa, ordering him to ride back with Piyama-radu on
a chariot.
But by the time the Crown Prince arrived,
Piyama-radu appears to have had second thoughts, and could not bring
himself to trust his wellbeing to the Hittites. Further, it turned out
that the Crown Prince was nothing more than a boy. Piyama-radu's
confidence in Ḫattušili's sincerity evaporated. So, in spite of his
earlier request, he now refused to ride into Ḫattušili's presence. It
was a humiliation for the Crown Prince, and did little to endear
Piyama-radu to
Ḫattušili. But
Piyama-radu was still willing to subject himself to the Hittites, as
long as he could do so in friendly territory. So now he demanded,
"Give the kingship to me here in his (i.e. Atpa's) place! If (you do) not, then I will not come!"
Ḫattušili
was still willing to continue negotiations with Piyama-radu, but his
journey westward continued. He sought a sign of goodwill from
Piyama-radu, and so when he reached the city Wiyanawanda, he wrote to
him,
"If you seek my lordship,
then because I am about to come to the city Yalanda, let me not find any
of your people in the city Yalanda! You must not put anyone in (the
city) again! May you not appear(?) in my juris[diction(?)]! I will seek
my subjects [myself]."
Piyama-radu agreed, but his word
proved untrustworthy. As Ḫattušili approached Yalanda, Piyama-radu's
brother Laḫurzi ambushed him in three
places. The terrain was difficult, and
Ḫattušili had to approach it on foot, but even so he managed to secure
victory for himself. Yalanda paid for Laḫurzi's betrayal, and
Ḫattušili ravaged it and took control of the city itself. From here he
moved on to the city Apawiya, from which he wrote to Piyama-radu in
Millawanda, ordering him to come to him.
He also wrote to
his new ally, the king of Aḫḫiyawa, protesting Piyama-radu's behavior
and asking him whether or not he knew about it. The king's reply was not
as friendly as Ḫattušili had wanted, as it included no greeting or
gifts, but simply the bare statement by his messenger that,
"He wrote to Mr. Atpa, 'Put Pi[yama-radu] in the hand of the king of Ḫatti.'"
He
further gave Ḫattušili permission to bring Piyama-radu into his
prescence, on the condition that he would not take him away. Ḫattušili
agreed. Having gained the Aḫḫiyawan ruler's permission,
Ḫattušili began his journey to the city Millawanda. At each stop along
the way, he wrote to Atpa in Millawanda,
"Come!
Because my brother wrote to you, 'Go bring him there to the king in
Ḫatti!', bring him here! Just as he formerly betrayed(?) my word, he
will betray(?) your word! But if he says this, 'I am afraid!' Then I
will send one lord, or I will send (my) brother, and that (man) will sit
in his place."
But these assurances were still not enough
for Piyama-radu. The spectacle of the Crown Prince's journey weighed
heavily in his mind, and Atpa wrote to Ḫattušili on his behalf, "Does
My Sun give (his) hand to a boy?" It was an added insult to injury, and
Ḫattušili indignantly replied,
"[Because]
my brother gave [(his) hand to that (man), and [I] later [heard his
word,] even if he did very much, I would have left [that (man)] alone
[everywhere(?)] in
safe passage. I swore it to Mr.
[Atpa]. I gave him (my) hand."
Still expecting to resolve
the matter, he promised that, if he should come to him, he would resolve
all issues, and keep the king of Aḫḫiyawa informed of his comings and
goings. Yet it was not enough.
In spite of his growing
annoyance, he was still anxious not to offend his new ally, and to keep
his dealings with the Aegean king strictly on the up-and-up. So, he came
to Millawanda to present his case against Piyama-radu, declaring,
"What words I will say to Piyama-radu, may the subjects and my brother hear them!"
One
of these subjects was Tawagalawa, who came to Millawanda to meet with
Ḫattušili on this occassion. Atpa also heard Ḫattušili's protests, as
did another of Piyama-radu's relations, Awayana. But the presence of the
Hittite Great King himself in the city of his refuge was too much for
Piyama-radu to bear, and, declaring that he
still feared for his
life, he boarded a ship and sailed away.
It was all becoming a little too much for Ḫattušili to bear, and his protests to the Aḫḫiyawan king became more strenuous,
"When
he says this, 'I feared [a wor]d of killing!', did I not send my son,
the Crown Prince, into his prescence? Did I not give him this command,
'Go! Swear to him, take(?) him by the hand, bring him into my presence.'
From what word of killing was he afraid? Is bloodshed permitted in the
land of Ḫatti? It is not!"
Finally, Ḫattušili wrote
directly to the king of Aḫḫiyawa about the matter. The letter took up
fully three tablets outlining Piyama-radu's offenses and Ḫattušili's
attempts to deal with him fairly. Only the last tablet has been
discovered today.
In spite of his growing frustration,
Ḫattušili was still anxious to resolve the situation peacefully.
Piyama-radu certainly still retained
the
favor of Atpa, and presumably the king of Aḫḫiyawa still supported
him as well. So, in spite of Piyama-radu's growing offenses, Ḫattušili
still attempted to bring Piyama-radu to heel through diplomacy. In his
letter to the king of Aḫḫiyawa, Ḫattušili highlights the warm
relations that now existed between their two lands,
"Moreover,
for the sake of my brother [I did nothing] at all. If perhaps he
prevails upon my brother, "[I will go] to the King of Ḫatti - may he
put me on the road!" then I will promptly send Mr. Dabala-Tarḫunta, the
chariot driver. Is Dabala-Tarḫunta not a high ranking person? He, a
child, rides with me on the chariot as a chariot driver! He used to ride
[on the chariot] with your brother, Tawagalawa! I already
[gave] safe passage to Piyama-radu. In Ḫatti, safe passage is (assured)
thusly: If they send bread and a seal to someone, then they will not
take part in
evil (against) him. Beyond the safe passage, I further promised this,
'Come! Make a response! I will put you on the road! When I put you on
the road, I will write it to my brother! If your wishes are satisfied,
so be it! But if your wishes are not satisfied, then when you came, in
that same way my person will bring you back into the land Aḫḫiyawa! If
so, or if not, may this chariot driver sit in his place!' While he is
coming, and while he is coming back there, because he will hold the
chariot driver who is of the family of the queen - and in Ḫatti the
family of the queen is very great - is he not actually a brother-in-law
to me? May that (man) sit in his place while he is coming (and) while he
is coming back!
"Support him, my
brother! May your [person] bring him! Further, my brother, send to him
(i.e. Piyama-radu) (a guarantee of) safe passage being as follows, 'May
you not sin in some way against My Sun
again!' I will not turn
into [your land] again."
If Piyama-radu failed to make such
a promise, then Ḫattušili asked that the king of Aḫḫiyawa at least
return the 7,000 civilian captives that Piyama-radu had taken from
Ḫatti. Ḫattušili even agreed to establish a sort of panel which, under
Aḫḫiyawan auspices, would take testimony from these civilians. Those
who claimed they had fled from Ḫatti as fugitives would remain in
Aḫḫiyawan territory, while those who had been taken by force would be
returned to Ḫatti.
Piyama-radu's activities could not be
permitted to continue. Apparently, after he fled from Millawanda, he
sought his fortune once again in the north, where he began raiding
Hittite territory. This in spite of the peace established between Ḫatti
and Aḫḫiyawa. Ḫattušili had difficulty believing that his brother
would support such activity,
"He
keeps saying
this, 'I will go to the far side, into the land Maša and the land
Karkiya. Here I will leave alone his (i.e. the king of Aḫḫiyawa)
civilian captives, his wife, his children, [and] (his) house.' When he
said these (words), wherever he leaves alone the wife, children, and
house of my brother in the land, your land singled him out for special
attention. But he kept attacking my land! If I hinder it for him, he
will come back into your land. Do you, my brother, approve?"
![]() |
Empire after Hattusili III. The extent and nature of Ahhiyawan settlement in Maša and Karkiša is unknown. |
"'Get
up [along with your civilian capitives,] you wives, and your children.
Sit down in the other place. Wherever hostilities are for the King of
Ḫatti, be hostile (against that) other land! May you not be hostile
(against) my land! If his desire
is in the land of Karkiya (or) the land of Maša, then go there! In what
matter of the city Wiluša we, I and the king of Ḫatti, were hostile
(against) each other, he persuaded me in that matter. We made peace.
[Now(?)] hostilities are not permitted (between) us!' [Write] that to
him!"
The ultimate outcome of Ḫattušili's efforts is not,
of course, preserved in his letter to the king of Aḫḫiyawa. However,
we learn later, from Ḫattušili's son, that Piyama-radu apparently was
extradited to Ḫatti. Whether his fate was for the better or the worse,
his days of hostility against the Hittites seem to have finally ended.
Eternal Brotherhood
On
the 21st day, of the 1st month of the winter season, in the 21st year
of his reign (1259 B.C.), Rameses received in his capital city of
Pi-Ramesse a distinguished party of visitors. Accompagning his own three
Egyptian messengers came three Hittite
messengers; the 1st and 2nd messengers of Ḫatti - named Tili-Teššup
and Ramose, and the messenger of Kargamiš - named Yapušili. These
messengers bore a silver tablet which was the Hittite version of a
treaty of eternal brotherhood between the rulers of Ḫatti and the
rulers of Egypt. It was the culmination of months of negotiation between
the two rulers. Written in the Akkadian rather than the Hittite
language, it presented the words of the treaty as if Ḫattušili were
himself the speaker. Likewise, Ḫattušili received a version of the
treaty written as if Rameses were the speaker.
While
treaties were common within the Hittite empire, they were foreign
novelties in Egypt. Rameses took a great interest in this strange
document, later inscribing the version he received from Ḫattušili on
the walls of Karnak and at the Ramesseum in Thebes. The historical
section of the treaties are unfortunately meager, and instead the
treaties
quickly
move on to the establishment of brotherhood between the two rulers,
"Behold,
Ḫattušili, the Great Prince of Ḫatti, has set himself in a regulation
with User-maat-Re Setep-en-Re, the Great Ruler of Egypt, beginning from
this day, to cause that good peace and brotherhood occur between us
forever, while he is in brotherhood with me and he is at peace with me,
and I am in brotherhood with him and I am at peace with him forever." (ANET 199)
The
treaty went on to cover topics by now familiar from other treaties. The
two Great Kings agreed not to begin hostilities against each other or
take anything which belonged to the other. A defensive alliance was set
up in which either one of the Great Kings would himself come to the aid
of the other, or that he would at least send troops. Interestingly, only
Ḫattušili's sons were guaranteed support for when it was their time to
come to the throne. Also of
great interest are the
provisions concerning the extradition of fugitives. In the cuneiform
copies from Ḫattuša they appear as one long section of the treaty. But
in the Egyptian version they seem to reveal their real significance.
After the standard promise to return fugitives to each other's lands,
the divine witnesses, curses, and blessings are recorded. These items
normally indicate the end of the treaty. But after these items, another
section pertaining to the return of fugitives is recorded. And the
specifics of this section of the treaty are interesting. It begins with
fugitives from Egypt, but the parallel and more historically significant
passage from the Hittite perspective reads,
"If
men flee from the land of Ḫatti - whether he be one or two or three -
and they come to User-maat-Re Setep-en-Re, the Great Ruler of Egypt, let
Rameses Meri-Amon, the [Great] Ruler [of Egypt] lay hold [of them and
cause] that they be brought
to the Great Prince of
Ḫatti. The Great Prince of Ḫatti shall not raise their crime against
them, and they shall not destroy his house or his wives or his children,
and they shall not slay him, and they shall not do injury to his ears,
to his eyes, to his mouth, or to his legs, and they shall not raise any
crime against him." (ANET 201)
The
fact that this was included after the normal conclusion to the treaty
makes this seem like a special, last minute addition to the terms. It is
generally suspected that there was one particular person in mind when
this clause was written - Muršili III, currently residing in Egypt under
Rameses' care. Since Muršili had fled to Egypt before the drawing up of
the peace treaty, Rameses could hardly honorably agree to send Muršili
back to Ḫatti only to be executed, which probably accounts for the
extended description of how such a returned fugitive would be treated.
Although Muršili might be seen to be excluded from
the
provisions of the treaty altogether, since his arrival in Egypt
predated its formulation, Ḫattušili would nonetheless later use this
clause in an effort to get Rameses to send the deposed ruler back to
Ḫatti.
The novelty of the treaty also expresses itself in
the attention the Egyptians gave to the seals found on the treaty, which
they described in detail,
"What
is in the middle of the silver tablet, on its obverse: Inlaid figure of
the Storm God embracing the figure of the Great Prince of Ḫatti,
surrounded by a border inscription as follows, 'Seal of the Storm God,
Ruler of Heaven; seal of the treaty made by Ḫattušili (III), Great
Prince of Ḫatti, Hero, son of Muršili (II), Great Ruler of Ḫatti,
Hero.' What is within the surround of the outline-figure: 'Seal of the
Storm God, Ruler of Heaven.'" (Kitchen (1982) 79
It is easy
for us to imagine the general look of the treaty.
Land donations
bore the king's seal in their middle dating back to the Old Kingdom. We
have seen seals where the king is embraced by the god beginning with
Muwattalli II, although this is the only evidence we have that
Ḫattušili continued this practice. This also reveals that seals could
be commemorated for specific events, something that we have not known
before.
From the Hittite point of view, there is also
another extremely significant point. While the obverse contained a seal
depicting Ḫattušili in the embrace of the Storm God, the reverse
contained a seal depicting Great Queen Pudu-Ḫepa in the embrace of the
Sun Goddess of Arinna. Here we see Pudu-Ḫepa prominently taking part in
international relations of the highest order. Pudu-Ḫepa, although
always officially subordinate to the Great King himself, would prove
herself to be the real force behind the throne, as is revealed by the
letters that passed between these two courts after the
treaty
had been made.
![]() |
Seal of Great Queen Pudu-Ḫepa |
Pudu-Ḫepa
associated herself to all important documents of state. Even in the
letters written to the Egyptian court, there were occasions when one
letter was written by Ḫattušili and a matching letter was written by
Pudu-Ḫepa. Likewise, both Ḫattušili and Pudu-Ḫepa could receive
letters as well. But in truth, the families of both men became involved
in this exhuberant good will. Egyptian and Hittite princes would write
to their "fathers", Rameses' wife Nefertari wrote to Pudu-Ḫepa, and
even the King of Mira wrote to Rameses. Each letter, of course, was
accompagnied by sumptuous gifts - jewelry,
gold cups, fine garments, linen
clothes and bedspreads, and dyed cloaks and tunics. One of the Hittite
princes to become involved in these exchanges was Tašmi-Šarruma, who may
have been the future Great King Tudḫaliya IV.
But this
newfound friendship wasn't quite everything that Ḫattušili seems to
have desired. His nephew Muršili remained in Rameses' hands. Ḫattušili
seems to have wanted him extradited under the terms of the treaty, but
Rameses refused to budge on this point. Rumors about Rameses' intentions
seem to have begun circulating. At some point, Kupanta-Kurunta, a true
Methuselah who had been the King of Mira and Kuwaliya since the 12th
year of Muršili II's reign, wrote to Rameses to confront him about these
rumors. Rameses' reply seems to have been sent to the Hittite court,
where his reply letter was found. Why a vassal king was corresponding
with the pharaoh about affairs of state remains a mystery to us,
although at his age Kupanta-Kurunta may have
been held in
the very highest of regard. There is no mystery, however, in Rameses'
reply,
"No, concerning the
affair of Urḫi-Teššup, I [have] not [done] that which you wrote me
about. Now [...] The good relationship which I, the Great King, King of
Egypt, established with the Great King, [King of Ḫatti], my brother,
consists of good brotherhood and good peace. The Sun God and [the Storm
God gave it] forever." (HDT #22D)
But it was not only Kupanta-Kurunta who had been pressuring Rameses,
"{Ḫattušili}
writes to me repeatedly about him as follows: 'Let the Great King, the
King of Egypt, have his infantry and [his chariotry] exert themselves,
and let him expend his gold, his silver, his horses, his copper, [and
his garments] in order to take [Urḫi-Teššup to Ḫatti. He shall not
allow him to become strong] and to wage war [against Ḫatti...]" (HDT
#22D)
To all of these
rumors and demands, Rameses replied, "What have I done? Where would I
recognize Urḫi-Teššup (as ruler)?", and offered the stern opinion that,
"[The word] which men speak to you is worthless. Do not trust in it!" (HDT
#22D). Both Ḫattušili and Kupanta-Kurunta seem to have viewed Rameses'
reluctance to return Urḫi-Teššup as a violation of the terms of the
treaty, which Rameses vigorously denied, reiterating that he had taken
the oath of brotherhood and good relations and that he intended to stand
by it.
There was also the issue of Rameses overbearing tone
in his letters. The god-king was unaccustomed to having equals, and his
haughty words ruffled Ḫattušili's feathers, "Why did you, my brother,
write to me as if I were a subject of yours?" (Kitchen (1982) 82).
Rameses protested to this as vigorously as he did to the other
accusations,
"This
word my brother wrote to me, I resent! [...]
You have accomplished
great things in all lands; you are indeed Great King in the Ḫatti
lands; the Sun God and the Storm God have granted you to sit in Ḫatti
in the place of your grandfather. Why should I write to you as though to
a subject? You must remember that I am your brother! You should speak a
gladdening word, 'May you feel good daily!' And instead, you utter
these meaningless words, not fit to be a message!" (NBC 3934 rev 13-15. cf. Kitchen (1982) 82, Archi (1971) 209)
In
spite of these sensitive subjects, relations between the two courts
continued to warm over time. It was just as well for Ḫattušili, since
the situation in Babylonia soon deteriorated upon the death of his ally
Kadašman-Turgu. After an appropriate mourning period in which Ḫattušili
"wept for him like a brother", Ḫattušili dried his tears and fulfilled
his treaty obligation, writing to the Babylonians,
"If
you do not protect the
progeny of my
brother in regard to rule, I will become hostile to you. I will come
and conquer Babylonia. But if an enemy somehow arises against you, or
some matter becomes troublesome for you, write to me so that I can come
to your aid." (HDT #23)
But the new king,
Kadašman-Enlil II, was only a minor. His vizier, Itti-Marduk-balatu, did
not take kindly the Hittite king's interference, and leveled an
accusation against Ḫattušili which probably sounded a lot better to
Ḫattušili when he had been the one making it,
"You do not write to us like a brother. You pressure us as if we were your subjects."
So
relations with Babylonia became strained. It's also around this time
that relations with Assyria fell apart, although the particular causes
are not known. In all likelihood the problem was caused by disputes over
what was left of the once mighty Mitanni. Sometime shortly before the
death of
Adad-nirari I, Mitanni appears to
have freed itself from its Assyrian overlord. Whether this was with
Hittite aid is unknown, but this land clearly moved over into the
Hittite camp. The bad relations that this caused between the two lands
seems to have remained for the rest of Ḫattušili's reign.
Once
Kadašman-Enlil of Babylon came of age, Ḫattušili tried to mend the
breach between their two lands. He wrote to the Babylonian Great King
telling him how he had tried to support him when he was first raised to
the throne, and how his actions were misinterpreted by
Itti-Marduk-balatu, an "evil man" whom "the gods have caused to live far
too long."
He was
also concerned about the interruption of messengers from Babylon - a
sign of hostility - on account of the Aḫlamu, a people who would one
day come to play an important role in Near Eastern history. Ḫattušili
could not believe that they were the real reason that messengers no
longer came to Ḫatti, "Is the
might of your kingdom small, my brother? Or has perhaps
Itti-Marduk-balatu spoken unfavorable words before my brother, so that
my brother has cut off the messengers?" If the Aḫlamu weren't excuse
enough, Kadašman-Enlil stalled further by bringing in the Assyrians,
too, "The King of Assyria will not allow my messenger [to enter] his
land". Ḫattušili wasn't any more willing to accept that excuse,
"In
infantry and chariotry the King of Assyria does not measure up to [the
forces] of your land. Indeed your messenger by force [...] What is the
King of Assyria who holds back your messenger [while my messengers]
cross repeatedly? Does the King of Assyria hold back your messengers so
that you, [my brother], cannot cross [to] my [land]?" (HDT #23)
Ḫattušili
took several steps in an effort to placate his reluctant ally. He
assured him that he had no reason to object to messengers passing back
and forth
between Babylonia and
Egypt. He made arrangements to deal with various legal disputes, one of
which involved Bentišina, King of Amurru. He spoke of the death of a
Babylonian physician who had come to live in Ḫatti and who had married
one of Ḫattušili's own relations. Having heard that Kadašman-Enlil now
regularly went out on hunt but not for war, he encouraged the young king
to "go and plunder an enemy land in this manner so that I might hear
about it." Hattušili never names a specific land against which he wanted
the Babylonian to march, but when he encourages Kadašman-Enlil to "go
against a land over which you enjoy a three- or fourfold numerical
superiority," it sounds suspiciously as if Ḫattušili is hinting at
Assyria. The remainder of the letter deals with requests for a sculptor,
stallions which are taller than the ones sent by Kadašman-Turgu,
particularly foals, since old horses could not survive the harsh winters
in Ḫatti, and silver.
All
these
efforts seem to have eventually paid off. Relations between the two
lands were fully normalized, and at some point Ḫattušili sent one of
his daughters to Babylonia to marry the Babylonian Great King, and he
himself married a Babylonian princess. And what better way to
demonstrate friendship and brotherhood could there be? Such a marriage
generated great esteem. And if it could work with Babylonia, what about
an even more important neighbor?
š A Royal Wedding
Ḫattušili's
relations with Egypt continued to become closer and closer. The
correspondence between the two kings eventually turned to matters of a
marriage between one of Ḫattušili's daughters and Rameses. It was to be
a wedding beyond compare. So it was that in the 33rd year of Rameses'
reign, Ḫattušili promised Rameses that "greater will be her dowry than
that of the daughter of the King of Babylon, and that
of the
daughter of the King of B[arga(?)] ... This year, I will send my
daughter, who will bring servants, cattle, sheep, and horses to the
(Hittite border)land of Aya". At Aya Rameses arranged to have a man
named Suta, the governor of Kumidi in Apa, receive "these Kaškan slaves,
these droves of horses, these flocks and herds which she will bring".
From there Suta would escort the bride to Egypt.
But
after this, delays occured on the Hittite side. After having made such
extravagent promises concerning the size of the princess's dowry, the
Hittites had some trouble gathering everything together. This delay
pulled out an irritated response from Rameses, to which Pudu-Ḫepa
replied with an equally irritated defense. She claimed that a daughter
could not be sent at this time because the storehouse of Ḫatti was "a
burnt out structure", and that Urḫi-Teššup had given what remained to
"the Great God". If Rameses did not believe her, then he could
ask
Urḫi-Teššup himself, since he was still there in Egypt. Rameses'
blatant desire for the Hittite princess's goods did not sit well with
Pudu-Ḫepa, either,
"Does
my brother not possess anything at all? Only if the Son of the Sun God,
the Son of the Storm God, and the Sea have nothing do you have nothing!
But, my brother, you would enrich yourself somewhat at my expense! That
is worthy neither of renown nor of lordliness!" (HDT #22E)
Bureaucratic
snafus had also delayed things until winter came and put everything on
hold. Nevertheless, Pudu-Ḫepa promised that the marriage party would
move down as far as Kizzuwatna where they would pass the winter.
Pudu-Ḫepa herself had plans to visit Amurru, from which she would write
to Rameses.
We learn
incidentally from another letter from Rameses to Pudu-Ḫepa that
Tili-Teššup and Ramose, the 1st and 2nd messengers of Ḫatti who brought
the silver
treaty tablet to Rameses thirteen years earlier, were still the Hittite
messengers to the Egyptian court, where they now carried on the
correspondence dealing with the royal marriage and other matters. One of
these involved the sons of a man named Mašniyalli, Hittite subjects who
were currently residing with Rameses in Egypt. Tili-Teššup was told
that these two sons were to return to Ḫatti, but Ramose was not given
this message. In fact, no one but Tili-Teššup seems to have been aware
of this order. While Rameses was still willing to send back the boys
with Tili-Teššup, now it was Tili-Teššup who balked, saying, "No, I will
not take them until the tablet of the Great King, the King of Ḫatti,
together with the tablet of the Queen, arrives, saying 'Send them!'" So
Rameses duly requested that
No comments:
Post a Comment