The Hittites

Author(s): D. D. Luckenbill
Source: The American Journal of Theology, Vol. 18, No. 1 (Jan., 1914), pp. 24-58
Published by: The University of Chicago Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3155035
Accessed: 07-03-2018 17:35 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to The American Journal of Theology

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE HITTITES

D. D. LUCKENBILL
University of Chicago

There can be no doubt that it was their interest in the B

their desire "thus to confirm the scattered references to the Hi
in sacred history,"' that led scholars in the past to devote so m
time and energy to the exploration of the lands of the Hi
and to the copying and decipherment of their inscriptions. W
no Hittite monument ever aroused the intense enthusiasm wh
followed George Smith's discovery in 1872 of the Babylon
account of the Deluge and led to redoubled efforts to brin
light the ancient civilizations which lay buried under the mou
of Mesopotamia, still the interest in the "sons of Heth" has
perennial. In passing judgment upon the work of the
scholars, many of whose conclusions have proved to be un
ranted, we must not forget that their sources were much
limited than ours and that they were often blinded by their z
for the cause in whose defense their efforts were put forth.
we are no longer defending the Bible but trying to understan
The task which the student of the Old Testament sets himself is
to trace the cultural and religious development of the Hebrew
people in Canaan, bearing in mind all the while that they must
have been influenced by their physical and social environments,
the same as any other people. It is of the greatest importance
that he be acquainted with the history of the civilizations with
which the Hebrews came in contact, namely, the Egyptian on the
Nile, the Babylonian-Assyrian on the Euphrates and Tigris, the
Hittite in Asia Minor, and the Minoan in the Aegean. Little
wonder then that the many problems of Hittite history which
still await solution are being vigorously attacked from every side.
As early as the year 1736, Otter found hieroglyphic inscrip-
tions at Ivriz, which lies across the Taurus range from Tarsus.
x Wright, The Empire of the Hittites, p. vii.
24

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE HITTITES 25

In 1812, the famous traveler Burc

Hama (Hamath) on the Orontes, a
Texier discovered some sculpture
Keui in northern Asia Minor., About all that could then be said
about these inscriptions was that the hieroglyphs in which they
were written were not Egyptian. In his Unexplored Syria, Burton
published the inscription found by Burckhardt at Hama, together
with similar ones from the same neighborhood. This was in 1872.
In the same year Dr. W. Wright secured all of the Hama inscrip-
tions for the museum at Constantinople. From this time until
the present day new monuments have been coming to light in
increasing numbers in Syria and Asia Minor. If the distribution
of their monumental remains gives any certain indication of the
extent of the territory occupied (more or less permanently) by
the Hittites (and this seems to be a reasonably safe assumption)
the boundaries of the Hittite lands are roughly these:
Our southerly frontier reaches to Hamath on the Orontes. Eastward
our boundary is the Euphrates, flowing past Malatia, Samsat, and Jerablus.
Westward the monuments follow the inner edge of Taurus as far as the Kara
Dagh, with not a single site under the southern slope of these mountains. In
the north we have no clear boundary. Eyuk and Boghaz-Keui are found in
the middle of the circuit of the Halys, with no places nearer than those which
lie in the valley of that river. Across the river a single line of monuments,
including Giaour-Kalesi, Yarre, Doghanlu, and Bey-Keui, seems to lead on
towards the Lydian coast, to where Sipylus and Kara-Bel are found between
Sardis and Smyrna.

In other words, the Taurkus ranges, with the Zagros spur running
off to the Persian Gulf, formed the boundary between the Semites
on the one hand, and the Hittites and other non-Semitic peoples
of western Asia on the othei; and, although it has been crossed
temporarily by tribes from either side, this boundary even today
separates the Semite from the non-Semite.

' Cf. Jensen in Hilprecht, Explorations in Bible Lands, pp. 755 f.

2 Garstang, The Land of the Hittites, p. 84. Herodotus (II, io6) saw two figures
which he was told were statues of Sesostris, the one on the road from Sardis to Smyrna,
the other on the road between Ephesus and Phocea. These were probably the Hittite
monuments which were rediscovered, the one by Renouard in 1839, the other by
Beddoe in i856; cf. Jensen, loc. cit.

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 26 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY

This brings us to the question of race. The older sch

were largely influenced in their conclusions as to the "nati
of the Hittites by the biblical genealogy of the tenth ch
Genesis, Where Heth is declared to have been the grandson
and by the language which their decipherment of the hier
led them to believe the Hittites spoke. So, for example,
in his The Empire of the Hittites (1884), concluded that the
were a non-Semitic people, and, in view of the biblical gen
that they were Hamitic in origin.' Conder, on the oth
in his Altaic Hieroglyphs (1887) and The Hittites and Their L
(1898), proved to his own satisfaction that the Hittites
Mongol tribe, and that their language was clearly Mon
and not Aryan or Semitic. Hommel connected them "w
Scythians, and the first appearance of the Iranians in hi
while Jensen found in them the ancestors of the modern A
and regarded their inscriptions as "the most ancient mo
of our Indogermanic speech."3 Still others connected th
the Pelasgi4 or the "White Syrians" of Strabo.s Without en
ing any more of the hypotheses put forth by scholars in t
hypotheses reared upon the most insecure foundations-
conclude this part of our discussion with a word on the th
the racial affinity of the Hittites which has found favor w
anthropologists of today.6
In prehistoric times, a brown-skinned, dolichocephalic ra
men occupied the whole Mediterranean basin, spreading to
on the west and India on the east. This is the "Brown" or
"Mediterranean" race of the anthropologists. North of the
regions occupied by this race there stretches a series of mountain
ranges, beginning with the Pamirs in the east, continued by the
Armenian Mountains and the Taurus ranges in Asia Minor, taken
1 Pp. 86 f.
2 Cf. Ball, Light from the East, p. i4o.
I Op. cit., p. 793.
4Cf. Ripley, The Races of Europe, pp. 448 f.
s Cf. Tomkins, Journal of the Anthropological Institute, XVIII, 227.
6 Cf. Ripley, op. cit.; Sergi, The Mediterranean Race; G. Elliot Smith, The
Ancient Egyptians; von Luschan, Archiv fiir Anthropologie, XIX.

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE HITTITES 27

up in Europe by the Balkans, and endin

nees to the west. Into these mountai
from the east (the highlands of the
dawn of history, a heavily bearded,
to anthropologists as the "Armenoid
as the earliest Egyptians were a pur
so it seems probable that the Hittites w
noid." We know that the "Semite" of historical times was a
mixture of the two. The anthropologist determines the race to
which a people belongs on somatological, not on linguistic grounds.
Working without any Rosetta stone, scholars arrived at the
most widely divergent results in their attempts at deciphering the
hieroglyphs of the Hittite monuments. Some of these have already
been noticed. Professor Sayce, who has worked most industriously
upon this problem for many years, has offered a number of decipher-
ments,' but, while many of his conclusions will probably stand the
test of future discoveries, his translations cannot yet be used in the
reconstruction of the history of the Hittites.
The problem has been simplified considerably by recent dis-
coveries. Among the Amarna Letters there were found two
documents written in the language of Arzawa,' and one in the
language of Mitanni.3 Like the rest of the Amarna Letters, they
were written in the syllabic cuneiform script of the Babylonians,
and consequently it was comparatively easy to determine the
structure of the languages in which they were written even if no
final translation was possible. As early as 1903, Professor Sayce
recognized the probable identity of the language of the Arzawa
letters and the non-Semitic, and evidently Hittite, language of
some fragments of cuneiform tablets which Chantre had found
at Boghaz-Keui in northern Asia Minor.4 This conclusion has
been confirmed by Professor Winckler's epoch-making discovery
of the capital of the Hittite state on this site.s Here there came

I In the different volumes of the Proceedings of the Society for Biblical Archae-
ology (abbreviated PSBA); cf. in particular, XXIX (9o07), 207 f.
SSee below, p. 42. 3 See below, p. 37. 4 PSBA, XXV (1903), i44.
s Preliminary report by Winckler in Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesell-
schaft, No. 35 (1907); hereafter abbreviated MDOG.

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 28 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY

to light a large number of documents written in the cu

script but partly in the Hittite, partly in the Babylonian l
containing the royal archives of a dynasty of Hittite k
far only a preliminary report on these documents has a
but when they are published in full, the Hittite langu
undoubtedly soon be as familiar to scholars as are the E
and Babylonian, and the decipherment of the hieroglyp
soon be accomplished. Furthermore, the determination
linguistic group to which the Hittite dialects belong should
a simple matter. Indeed, if the Mitannian and Hittite
are related, as there is every reason for supposing them to
problem has already been solved, for Professor Bork, by h
of the letter mentioned above, has shown that the lang
Mitanni was an ancient representative of the linguistic
known as the Caucasian.'
The Boghaz-Keui documents have also cleared up another
problem. It had long been recognized that many of the non-
Semitic personal names found in the Amarna Letters and in the
Assyrian inscriptions were clearly Aryan, and it was because they
made these names the starting-point of their investigations that
a number of scholars reached the conclusion that the Hittite
language was Indo-European. We are now able to account for
the presence of these names. It seems that a group of Aryans
succeeded in uniting a number of Hittite peoples into the state
known to us through a long period of history as Mitanni, probably
in much the same way as the Turks have since built up kingdoms
in the same region. As we shall see below, this state was organized
under its dynasty of Aryan kings some generations before the
northern Hittites were united into the kingdom of Hatti with
its capital at Boghaz-Keui. As guardians of the treaty whereby
the Mitannian state under Mattiuwaza became subject to
Subbiluliuma of Hatti, there are mentioned among others the
Indo-European deities Mithra, Varuna, Indra, and Nasatya."
SDie Mitannisprache, in Mitteilungen der Vorderasiatischen Gesellschaft, i4 (i909),
i f. Modern representatives are the Georgian, Circassian, Lesghian, etc., dialects.
Bork's work discusses the previous attempts at decipherment of the Hittite and
Mitannian languages.
2MDOG, No. 35, p. 51.

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE HITTITES 29

Any adequate discussion of the art an

would require much more space than
therefore, pass these by and proceed a
of the Hittite peoples.
Although, as we shall see presently, w
of their presence in western Asia at a m
first emerge into the history of the
of the twentieth pre-Christian centur
with events in early Babylonian histor
famous library of Assurbanipal of Ass
tantalizing statement: "In the reign of
[came] against the land of Akkad (B
was the last king of the First (Amorite
had reached its zenith in the reign o
greatest of a line of eleven kings. Th
recently been definitely established on
that we are now able to assign the ex
Shamsi-ditana.
Confirmation of this invasion of Babylonia by the Hittites
seems to be contained in an oracle (also from the Nineveh library)
to which Professor Sayce has called attention.3 It reads: "To the
land of the Hittites, I (Marduk) have gone; the Hittites I question;
the throne of my divinity I have set up therein; twenty-four years
therein shall the sons of Babylon [remain]." And, although we
are anticipating somewhat, we may call attention at this point
to another document which has received a new interpretation in
the light of the chronicle quoted. The Cassite king Agum II
(Kakrime), who reigned ca. I650 B.C., like Cyrus and other con-
querors, showed great zeal for the temples and cults of the lands
which he held in subjugation. In his inscription, which refers to
the restoration and endowment of Esagila, the Marduk temple of
Babylon, Agum tells of his bringing back to Babylon from the
land of Hani the statues of Marduk and his consort Sarpanit.4
I King, Chronicles concerning Early Babylonian Kings, II, 22.
2 Kugler, Sternkunde, II, 2, Heft I.
3 Sayce, Expository Times, XIX (i908), 379.
4 Schrader, Keilinsckriftliche Bibliothek, III, 1, 134 f.

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
30 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY

Hani is probably a shortened form of Hanigalbat,' another name

for Mitanni.
It has been conjectured that the Hittite incursion in the time
of Shamsi-ditana brought about the fall of the declining Amorite
dynasty and paved the way for the invasion of the Cassites, another
mountain people from the east, who established a dynasty at
Babylon a century and a half later (1761 B.C.). The similarity
between the personal names of the Cassites and those of the Hittite-
Mitannians, as well as the identity of some of their deities, has
been pointed out by a number of scholars,2 but any attempt to
draw conclusions as to their racial or political affinities must at
the present time be regarded as premature. The fact that it was
the Cassites and not the Hittites who established themselves in
northern Babylonia would indicate that the invasion by the latter
was for plunder rather than for the conquest of new territory.
It is evident that there was a considerable shifting of peoples in
the Near East during these centuries (twentieth to eighteenth
B.C.), but the course of events is as yet obscure. From the personal
names occurring in documents from Dilbat3 in northern Babylonia,
and dating from the time of the First Dynasty of Babylon (2225-
1926 B.C.), it is clear that a Hittite-Mitannian element was gradually
and no doubt peaceably invading Babylonia long before some
powerful chieftain led his followers thither in the time of Shamsi-
ditana. The building inscriptions from Ashur, the old capital
of Assyria, mention Ushpia and Kikia4 as the earliest rulers of that
city, the former as founder of the temple of Ashur, the latter as
builder of the city-wall. The form of the names of these kings
has suggested to Professor Ungnads the possibility that Ashur
was founded by Mitannians. Now the fifth of the known rulers
of Ashur, Ilu-shuma by name, was a contemporary of Sumu-abum,
the first king of the First Dynasty of Babylon. The date of
Sumu-abum is 2225-2212 B.C. Ushpia and Kikia must have lived

' For references cf. Meyer, Geschichte des Altertums, I, 2, ? 463.

2 See the literature cited in Clay, Personal Names of the Cassite Period, p. 28.
3 Ungnad, Beitrdige zur Assyriologie, VI, 5, I f.
4 See Luckenbill, American Journal of Semitic Languages, XXVIII (1912), 154.
S0Op. cit., p. 13.

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE HITTITES 31

at least a century earlier. Indeed it is

the arrival of the Semitic Assyrians (
of Subartu, which is the old name f
Assyria, was occupied--from tim
Mitannian tribes.
In resuming the discussion of the events of the period following
the Hittite invasion of Babylonia, we take up first of all the inscrip-
tion of Shamshi-Adad of Assyria. Professor Eduard Meyer has
assigned the approximate date of I6oo B.C. to this ruler, but the
writer,' on linguistic and other grounds, has suggested an earlier
date. Shamshi-Adad is the first of the rulers of Assyria known
to have used the title of king. His predecessors styled themselves
patesi. The inscription' opens with the words: "Shamshi-Adad,
king of the universe [shar KISH], builder of the temple of Ashur,
who devotes his energies to the land between the Tigris and the
Euphrates" (Col. I, i-8). After this short introduction, Shamshi-
Adad goes on to relate the story of the rebuilding of the temple of
Enlil; tells of his fixing standard prices for the city of Ashur;
and continues: "At that time, the tribute of the kings of Tukrish
and the king of the Upper Country, I received in my city Ashur.
A great name and a memorial stela I set up in the country of Laban
on the shore of the great sea (the Mediterranean)" (Col. IV, 4-18).
Professor Streck3 has proposed to identify Tukrish with Tigrish,
an Armenian city mentioned in a letter from the Sargonid (late
Assyrian) period, and it probably would not be regarded as too
daring to see in the "king of the Upper Country" some Hittite-
Mitannian chieftain. It is significant that Shamshi-Adad has
nothing to say of conflicts between himself and the Cassites with
whom his successors waged a chronic warfare, but that all of his
campaigns were conducted against the peoples to the north and west
of Assyria. The fact that he regarded himself as the guardian
of the territory between the Tigris and the Euphrates seems to
point to a date when the Babylonian dynasty was exhausted or
overthrown but when the Cassites had not yet succeeded in estab-
lishing themselves in the land.
" O. cit., p. 157, n. 17. SIbid., pp. 167 f.
3 Zeitschrift fur Assyriologie, XX, 460.

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
32 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY

We may note in passing that the Hyksos domination of Egypt,

which falls between 1788-1580 B.C., even if it does not represent
an actual invasion by the Hittites themselves as was suggested
years ago by Dr. Wright and others, was probably the result of
pressure brought to bear upon Egypt's subject states in Syria by
Hittite peoples who were encroaching upon their northern frontier.
But in spite of statements to the contrary, none of the Hyksos
names has yet been definitely identified as Hittite (or Mitannian).
Our earliest references to the Hittites in the Egyptian records
occur in the annals of the Syrian campaigns of Thutmose III
(I501-1447 B.C.), which accomplished the final overthrow of the
Hyksos power and the recovery of Syria to Egypt. That the
Hittites were probably known to the Egyptians at an earlier date
(2000 B.C.) has been shown on linguistic grounds by Professor
W. Max Miiller.'
In the annals of his eighth and sixteenth campaigns2 Thutmose
speaks of receiving the tribute of Heta the Great, and on the tomb
of his treasurer, Menheperreseneb,3 there is depicted a scene in
which this official of the Pharaoh is receiving the tribute of Asia
and Africa. Two lines of Asiatics bring forward vessels of silver
and gold. Among them is the chief of Heta. The superscrip-
tion, most of which has unfortunately been lost, contains the
acclamations of the Asiatics: "Thou hast overthrown the lands
of Mitanni; thou hast hacked up their cities, their chiefs are in
caves." This line seems to show that Heta the Great, which lay
in the interior of Asia Minor, although it was known to the Egyp-
tians of Thutmose's day, and even sent presents (for this is probably
all we are to understand by the word "tribute") to the victorious
Pharaoh, had not yet become a political factor in Syria, but that
it was the other branch of the Hittite peoples, the Mitannians,
with whom Thutmose and his immediate successors came in
direct contact in Naharin (northern Syria). This is borne out by
the trend of subsequent events and seems to be confirmed by
Thutmose's "Hymn of Victory."4 In this there is no reference to
'Orientalistische Literatur-Zeitung (hereafter OLZ), No. io (1909), 427 f.

2 Breasted, Ancient Records (hereafter BAR), II, ?? 485 and 525.

3 Ibid., ?? 772 f. 4 Ibid., ?? 655 f., 659.

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE HITTITES 33

Heta, but only to the lands of Mitanni-

(probably Crete) and Cyprus.
The seventeen Asiatic campaigns of
once more under the complete contr
from the subject provinces now flowed
treasuries of Egypt. The Egyptian em
And yet, on the death of Thutmose,
compelled to put down a serious reb
of Naharin and the north-Phoenicia
sure that it was the Mitannian princes
Indeed Rib-Addi (see below) of Bybl
(probably Amenhotep IV) of these d
of Mitanni was the enemy of your f
not abandon my fathers to their fate"
seems to have been able to crush the r
(I447 B.C.),' and in commemoration of
in Naharin as his predecessors had done
inscription from Karnak he tells us
came to him, their tribute upon their b
that there may be given them his swee
be sure that most of this is vain boa
Mitannian chiefs may have sent their
the Mitannians or the Hittites ever reg
as their overlord. Indeed it is quit
evidence of the Amarna Letters, th
gifts with these princes, hoping thereby t
ing upon the territory of his subjects i
rebellion among them. In fact Thut
after Amenhotep II, although he foun
campaign against Naharin,s saw the fut
warfare against his northern neighbor
in order to have a friendly buffer stat
Syria and Heta (Hatti), now rising t
central Asia Minor, negotiated a matr
tama, the Mitannian king, of whom we
'Ibid., ?H 780 f.
2Ibid., ? 804. 3 Ibid., ?? 86 f.

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
34 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY

Artatama's daughter became the mother of the next Pharaoh,

Amenhotep III.
We now enter upon a period in the history of the Near East
in which diplomacy took the place of the endless succession of
campaigns which had hitherto been the rule and when the powers
seem to have been content to try to maintain the status quo. Our
principal source of information for the events of the period is the
rich mass of diplomatic literature known as the Amarna Letters.'
Part of these letters form the correspondence between the Pharaohs
Amenhotep III and Amenhotep IV and their "brothers," the
kings of Babylonia, Assyria, Mitanni, Arzawa, Alashia (Cyprus),
and Hatti, but the bulk of them are letters to the Egyptian court
from the Syrian vassal princes. In 1907 our sources were con-
siderably augmented by the preliminary report2 of Professor
Winckler on the royal archives which he had discovered at Boghaz-
Keui. This village, which lies east of the Halys in central
Asia Minor, occupies the site of the classical Pteria (Herodotus,
I, 76), the more ancient Hatti, the capital of the Hittite state.
From the Boghaz-Keui documents Professor Winckler was able
to reconstruct a dynasty of Mitannian kings who ruled contempo-
raneously with the Pharaohs of the Eighteenth Dynasty from ca.
1450-1350 B.c. Their names follow.
Saushshatar

Artatama I
I
Shutarna

Tushratta Artatama
I I
Mattiuwaza Shutarna II (Shuttatarna)

We have already called attention to the fact that these names

are clearly Iranian and show the presence of an Aryan ruling class
in Mitanni. How much earlier the Aryans may have pushed int
Asia Minor we cannot tell. However, it has not been possible up
'We shall quote from Knudtzon, Die el-Amarna Tafeln, using the numbering of
this edition (Kn. 25:6= Knudtzon, No. 25, line 6).
2 See n. 5, P- 27.

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE HITTITES 35

to the present time to identify as A

names found in the Babylonian d
see above) of earlier date than the A
Saushshatar was probably a con
(I448-I420 B.C.). That he was an e
from a document of Mattiuwaza which records the fact that he
carried off from Ashur a "door of gold and silver" and set it up
in the palace of the city of Waraganni. Perhaps this was one of
the "doors of cedar, covered with gold and silver" which Shamshi-
Adad placed in the entrance to the temple of Enlil at Ashur.,
Mattiuwaza adds that Shutarna restored it to Ashur, together with
other valuables.
Whether the Mitannian kings actually held Assyria as a vassal
state from Saushshatar's day until after the death of Tushratta,
as a number of scholars hold, is still to be proved.2
We have already called attention to the fact that the daughter
of Artatama, the successor of Saushshatar, became the wife of
Thutmose IV (1421-1413 B.C.). Our evidence for this is found in
a letter of Tushratta to Amenhotep IV, which also gives some
interesting details of the Pharaoh's wooing. "At the time when
... . the father of Amenhotep III (Thutmose IV) sent to Arta-
tama, my grandfather, and asked him for the daughter [of my grand-
father, the sister of my father], he sent five times, six times, but he
would not give her. A seventh time he sent to my grandfather
and then he was constrained to give her" (Kn. 29:16 f.). The
meaning of this is evident. Thutmose thought it advisable to have
an ally in Asia in the person of a father-in-law. Artatama knew
this, but he had also heard wonderful stories of the gold of Egypt
which was said to be as plentiful as the dust of the streets. Hence
it required seven embassies from the Pharaoh ,to persuade the
Mitannian king to give up his daughter.
Artatama was succeeded by Shutarna, of whom we know little
except that he became the father-in-law of Amenhotep III, his
sister's son. According to Tushratta, who is again our source of
information, Amenhotep's wooing was not quite so long drawn
' See MDOG, No. 35, P. 38, and AJSL-, XXVIII, 169 (Col. II, 16-19).
2 See references in AJSL, XXVIII, i6o.

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
36 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY

out as that of his father. It required but six embassies to obtain

Shutarna's consent (Kn. 29:18 f.).
Tushratta is the best known of the kings of Mitanni. The
Amarna documents contain seven of his letters to Amenhotep III,
one to the widow of that Pharaoh, and three to Amenhotep IV.'
He came to the throne at an early age, but the regent, Tuhi (Kn.
17:II1f.), "had done something not good in that he killed the
ruler of the country, Artashumara" (evidently an older brother
of Tushratta), and prevented Tushratta from writing to the Pharaoh
at an earlier date. Once he was his own master, however, he
hastened to open correspondence with the Egyptian king in order
to re-establish friendly relations between Egypt and Mitanni.
He informed the Pharaoh that he had overthrown the Hittites
who had invaded his territory, and was sending him part of the
spoils as a gift. This was the beginning of a brisk correspondence
between the two rulers.
Through his ambassador Mane, Amenhotep sued for the hand
of Tushratta's daughter (Kn. 19:I6 f.). Tushratta readily gave
his consent but held back the girl. He was making the karashk
of his grandfather and needed much gold. Amenhotep understood
the meaning of this and made a better offer, but even this was not
satisfactory. Tushratta is unable to understand why the Pharaoh
should be so stingy. He is exceedingly polite but firm. Finally
the Pharaoh made a satisfactory offer and Tadu-Hepa was sent
to Egypt together with many good wishes and a large number of
costly presents for her future husband. One of the gifts was a
splendid rosary which Tushratta hoped might adorn the neck of
the Pharaoh for a hundred thousand years (Kn. 21:33 f.). In
spite of this pious hope, however, Amenhotep III died soon after
these negotiations came to an end. A hieratic note written on
another of the Mitannian's letters (Kn. 23) shows that it reached
Egypt in the thirty-sixth year of Amenhotep, that is, at the very
end of his reign. The letter accompanied the statue of Ishtar
of Nineveh to Egypt. The very plausible inference has been
drawn that the Pharaoh was suffering from what proved to be his
last illness and that Tushratta sent him a statue of the goddess
' Besides list of presents, Kn. 17-29.

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE HITTITES 37

whose healing virtues he held in

learn that the same statue had on
in the time of Shutarna.
Although requests for gold seem to be the principal burden of
the messages of Tushratta, there is one letter (Kn. 24) whose theme
is different. Like the rest of the Amarna Letters it is written in
the cuneiform script, but unlike them in the Mitannian language,
and it has formed the basis of the valuable study of this dialect
by Professor Bork.' Although it contains numerous passages
which are yet obscure, the letter seems to be taken up chiefly with
negotiations concerning two cities, Harwuhe and Mashrianni,
the former of which, together with the surrounding territory, was
to belong to the Pharaoh, the latter to Tushratta. In other words,
it forms part of the correspondence carried on between the two
rulers with reference to the demarkation of the boundary between
their domains.
On the death of Amenhotep III, Tushratta sent a letter to
Tiy (Kn. 26), the queen-mother, who wielded great influence over
the young Pharaoh, complaining that neither she nor the new
ruler had sent him any presents as Amenhotep III used to do.
He expressed the hope that she would use her influence toward
maintaining fraternal relations between the rulers of the two
nations. A letter to Amenhotep IV (Kn. 27) expresses similar
sentiments. We need not go into the details of a long correspond-
ence (Kn. 28-29) ibout some presents which the late Pharaoh
had promised Tushratta but had failed to deliver before his death.
Amenhotep IV had undertaken to carry out the promise of his
father but when the gifts reached Tushratta he found them of
inferior quality and protested vigorously. The death of Tushratta
brought the unfinished negotiations to an end. Of much greater
interest to us is a matter mentioned incidentally in one of these
letters (Kn. 29:173 f.), which gives us an insight into the diplo-
matic relations existing between the two countries.
Two Mitannians, Arteshupa and Asali, who had committed
some crime in Egypt, had been brought before their lady, evidently
Tadu-Hepa, in Egypt, and later the matter came before Tushratta
' See n. 2, p. 27.

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
38 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY

himself. Finally the criminals were deported to a border city but

for some reason escaped with a light punishment and were not
put to death as the Pharaoh had hoped they would be. Amenhotep
expressed his dissatisfaction with the mildness of the punishment
inflicted, but Tushratta merely replied that he had not in the first
place indicated the nature of the penalty he thought should be
imposed.
While the letters of Tushratta thus deal almost exclusively with
his personal affairs, such as the amount of gold he needs for the
completion of his grandfather's karashk, or the value of the presents
he is willing to receive for, and give with, his daughter, there are a
few indications in them of the troubled state of affairs in the world
of international politics. We recall the reference to his defeat
of the Hittites. On the other hand, in the correspondence carried
on between the princes of the subject states in Syria and the
Egyptian court, we are able to trace the rapid decline of Egyptian
authority in Asia and the rise to prominence of th.e northern
Hittite state. The Boghaz-Keui documents supplement the
Amarna Letters in every way. Indeed it was not until these
archives came to light that we discovered that the Hittite encroach-
ment upon Egyptian territory in Syria was part of the program
of conquest of a strong dynasty of Hittite kings who had established
themselves east of the Halys in central Asia Minor. The docu-
ments contain the royal archives of a line of seven kings extending
over five generations (from ca. 1400-1250 B.C.).
Hattusil
I
Subbiluliuma

Arandas Mursil

Mutallu Hattusil

I
Dudhalia

I
Arnuanta

The founder of the dynasty seems to have been Subbiluliuma,

who had a long and glorious reign. His father, Hattusil, who is

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE HITTITES 39

called king of Kussar, was probably th

petty city-states of the Hittites.' A
Mitannians with their dynasty of
Hittite (in the larger sense) Grossmach
become the vassals of Hatti by S
knowledge of the events leading up to
paragraphs of the treaty Subbiluliuma
the subject Mitannian king.2
It seems that Subbiluliuma had ma
(by treaty) with Artatama of Mita
becoming ruler of that country, "rose
Great King." The real meaning of this
Subbiluliuma marched against him,
left bank of the Euphrates, and to
Niblani mountain region. Tushratta
threatening to lay waste the Hittite k
bank of the river. Subbiluliuma wa
challenge. He crossed the Euphrates
Isuwa. Tushratta marched forth,
Incidentally an interesting bit of hi
nection with the account of these ope
In the time of Hattusil, the father o
ants of certain Hittite cities rebelle
biluliuma was sent against them. T
fled to Isuwa, evidently Mitannian ter
clients. When Subbiluliuma invaded
the challenge of Tushratta, he seized t
ished them, and sent them back to
Keui).
It was probably at this time, in the early stages of the warfare
between the two kings, that Tushratta succeeded in checking one
of the advances of the Hittites into his territory. We may be sure
that Subbiluliuma, like the Egyptian Pharaohs and the Baby-
lonian and Assyrian kings, did not believe that the record of any
reverses he may have met would make interesting reading, so he
I MDOG, No. 35, pp. 17 f.
2 Ibid., pp. 32 f., and OLZ (191o), 289 f.

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
40 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY

passed them over in silence. At any rate we know that his next
operations were directed against another quarter.' He crossed
the Euphrates and laid waste northern Syria from the river to
Aleppo and beyond. At Ni," the inhabitants of the city and the
surrounding country rose up against Takua their king. They
were led by Akit-Teshub, the brother of Takua. Subbiluliuma
intervened, put down the revolt, and handed over the government
of the city to Akia, king of Arahti. But the mariannu,3 Aryan
nobles or "barons," who evidently formed the military ruling
class here as well as in Mitanni, soon had Arahti in their own
hands, and Subbiluliuma was compelled to interfere again. He
now thought it advisable to take the leaders, Akia, who must
have gone over to the rebellious mariannu, and Akit-Teshub,
along with him to Hatti. At the same time he deported the people
of Katna4 to his capital-for what transgression we do not know.
Subbiluliuma now moved upon Nuhashshe.s Sarrupsi, the
king, who had on a former occasion asked the aid of the Hittite
king against Tushratta-an act which has always been regarded
in the East as recognition of overlordship-was now in rebellion.
But on the approach of Subbiluliuma he fled and one of his servants
was placed on his throne.
From Nuhashshe, Subbiluliuma advanced upon Abina,6 which
may have belonged to the "lands of Nuhashshe." On the way he
was compelled to make a detour against Kinza (Kadesh on the
Orontes) which he had not planned to attack until Sutatarra and
his son Aitakama came out to meet him with their troops. These
he drove back into their city and continued his march toward
Abina, besieging a few more cities on the way. Ariwana, king
of Abina, bravely marched forth to meet the Hittite king but
suffered defeat at his hands and was taken, together with his
nobles, to Hatti. On the return journey, the Hittite king stopped
' MDOG, No. 35, PP. 34 f.
2 Location not certain; but probably on the Euphrates, below Karkamish, where
the river bends toward the southeast.

3 Evidently the Vedic marya, "man," hero, cf. Winckler, OLZ (IgIO), 291.
4Location uncertain; but probably near Hamath on the Orontes.
s Probably near Aleppo.
s Written Abi and Ube in the Amarna Letters. The biblical Hobah.

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE HITTITES 41

at Kinza and took with him from t

the mariannu. We shall hear mor
Subbiluliuma sums up the accoun
by declaring that he was compelled
tries "in one year" on account of
ratta." Another passage makes c
ratta's insubordination.'
It appears that Tushratta's claim to the throne was contested
by his'brother Artatama, who had the backing of the Harri (Aryan)
element of the population and acknowledged the overlordship of
the Hittite king. This fact explains the anxiety of Tushratta to
maintain friendly relations with Egypt. Tushratta's position
cannot have been an enviable one. When he finally met his
death through a plot of his son and his servants, Sutatarra, the
son of Artatama, was proclaimed king of Mitanni; but Mattiuwaza
claimed his father's throne. Subbiluliuma watched with great
interest the civil war which ensued. For some reason Sutatarra,
whose father had acknowledged the Great King as his overlord,
received no aid from that quarter but was compelled to look else-
where for assistance. He gave back to Ashur the door of gold
and silver (see above) which Saushshatar had taken from there
years before, and squandered the "palace and the houses of the
Harri" (that is, their property) in his efforts to gain the support
of Assyria and Alshe. Finally he and the "barons" made an
attempt to assassinate Mattiuwaza, who now fled to the Hittite
king. Subbiluliuma regarded this as the opportune moment for
intervention, and consequently "the god Teshub decided in favor
of Mattiuwaza." Subbiluliuma "took Mattiuwaza by the hand"
and placed him upon the throne of his father; of course, as his
vassal. Rib-Addi of Byblos seems to refer to this final overthrow
of Mitanni as an independent state (Kn. 75:35 f.). "May the
king, my lord [the Pharaoh], know that the-king of Hatti has
conquered all the lands which belonged to the king of Mitanni
[written Mitta] even (?) the king of Naharin [written Nahma]."
Mattiuwaza received for his wife the daughter of the Hittite king
with the proviso that he was to give up his other wives; that
' Winckler, OLZ (19go), 294, and MDOG, No. 35, P. 36.

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
42 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY

Subbiluliuma's daughter alone should be queen and that her

should succeed to the throne.
There is an obscure passage' which relates the adventures of
a group of Harri people, who, as we saw above, fared ill at the
hands of Sutatarra. It reads: "But Akit-Teshub escaped with
two hundred chariots and betook himself to Babylonia. The
king of Babylonia seized upon the two hundred chariots which
Akit-Teshib had with him, together with their charioteers, and
pursued Akit-Teshub and his barons with the intention of putting
them to death. With the exception of Mattiuwaza, the son of
Tushratta, the king, he killed (?) them. Him (Mattiuwaza) I
(Subbiluliuma) rescued from his hand." From which it would
seem that Mattiuwaza had fled to the Babylonian king before
seeking refuge with Subbiluliuma.
According to the preliminary report of Professor Winckler,2
the land of Arzawa, well known from the Amarna Letters, is
frequently mentioned in the Boghaz-Keui documents, always as
closely related to Hatti. But that it was nevertheless an independ-
ent state seems probable from the fact that Tarhundaraba, king
of Arzawa, carried on a correspondence with Amenhotep III
(Kn. 31-33). Tarhundaraba was probably a contemporary of
Subbiluliuma. The preliminary study of the Boghaz-Keui archives
has also brought out the fact that the Hatti and Arzawa dialects
are closely related if not identical. But the location of Arzawa
is yet to be definitely established.
On the accession of Amenhotep IV to the throne, Subbiluliuma
sent him a letter (Kn. 41) urging the continuance of the brotherly
relations which had obtained between him and Amenhotep III,
but the Pharaoh does not seem to have cared to have anything
to do with him. Indeed it must have been evident to him that
most of the disturbances in Syria were due to the Hittite king's
agents.
It is at this point that we may conveniently take up the dis-
cussion of the effects of the Hittite aggression upon the domains
of the Pharaoh. For the most part our sources will be the letters
from the Syrian vassals to the court in Egypt. As aforesaid, these
1 Ibid. (OLZ), 294. 2 MDOG, No. 35, pp. 40 f.

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE HITTITES 43

letters form the bulk of the Amarn

them we must not at any time lose
exceedingly difficult for us to determi
which they should be arranged. How
this matter a large amount of attentio
subject with some confidence.
In order to furnish a setting for the
in the following paragraphs, it may be
words a general picture of the shifting
during the Amarna period.
At the same time that the Hittites w
northern portions of Syria and stirring
jects of the Pharaoh, there were steadi
regions of Syria and Palestine groups o
tribes from the desert and steppeland
themselves to any local dynast who
any free-lance who could guarantee the
creating havoc wherever they went. Th
number of waves of Semitic migration
time in the course of the centuries o
Arabia, "the cradle of the Semites,"
beduin down into the fertile river valley
or spreading them over the rich coas
ranean. Here they have settled down
Canaanites, Hebrews, Arameans, etc
rolling over Syria-Palestine in the A
Arameans into Syria, and the Hebre
Ammonites, Moabites, and Edomites
In the Letters these nomadic tribes m
We assume with most scholars that the
part of the Habiri.
Going back again for a moment to
that he found it necessary, in view o
Tushratta, to conduct a campaign into S
Ni, Nuhashshe, Katna, Kinza, Abina, an
' The identity of the SA-GAZ and Habiri of th
as probable, seems raised beyond doubt by the
MDOG, No. 35, P. 25.

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
44 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY

severely. Sutatarna and his son Aitakama of Kinza (Kadesh on

the Orontes) were defeated and carried captive to Hatti. But
it is evident from the Amarna Letters that Aitakama found favor
in the eyes of the Hittite king, for we find him back at Kinza looking
after his own and the Hittite's interests.
Akizzi of Katna, whose inhabitants, we remember, Subbiluliuma
had deported to Hatti, wrote a number of letters (Kn. 52-55) to
Amenhotep III asking for immediate aid from Egypt to save him
from Aitugama (Aitakama), who had, in company with the Hittite
king, come out against him and was "seeking his head." The
Pharaoh is also informed that Aitakama, assisted by Teuwatti of
Lapana and Arzauia of Ruhizzi, is devastating the land of Ube'
with fire and sword; that the kings of Nuhashshe, Ni, Zinzar,
and Tunanat2 are still loyal to the Pharaoh, but that, unless troops
arrive from Egypt at once, Aitakama will gain possession of the
whole country. Amenhotep evidently paid no attention to Akizzi,
and things went from bad to worse. When Akizzi was writing his
final letter, Aziru of Amurru was taking captive the inhabitants
of Katna, while the Hittite king had already carried off the ancient
sun-god of the city.
And so Akizzi, like many another Syrian prince who tried to
remain loyal to his overlord, found Egypt a broken reed. Whether
he followed the example of others and went over to the Hittite as
Aitakama kept urging him to do, or went under in the struggle,
we have no means of telling.
Nor is Akizzi our only witness to the activities of Aitakama and
his Hittite backer. His account of the devastation of Ube is con-
firmed by Namiawaza, ruler of one of its cities or possibly of the
whole district (Kn. 194-97). Furthermore, three governors, Bieri of
Hashabu, Ildaya of Hazi, and another whose own name and that of
his city have been lost-all of them located in Amki (the Beka, Coele
Syria)-complain in similar letters to the Pharaoh (Kn. 174-76)
that Aitakama has joined the troops of Hatti and is burning the
cities of the king. Again, Ilirabih of Byblos (Gubla, modern
Gebail) warns the Pharaoh that Aziru has sent his troops to help
Aitakama and is laying waste Amki (Kn. 140:24 f.).
' Cf. n. 6, p. 40. All cities of northern Syria.

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE HITTITES 45

From these and other letters it is clear that Aitakama was an

out-and-out pro-Hittite and a worthy successor of "that wretched
foe of Kadesh," whom Thutmose III succeeded in overthrowing
only after seventeen campaigns. Still he had the face to write
to the Pharaoh (Kn. 189), protesting his loyalty and insisting that
Namiawaza "had made him bad before the king" and was burning
his cities, beginning with Kadesh. But the Egyptian king was
probably at no time deceived by Aitakama's protestations of
loyalty. In fact in a letter to Aziru he reproves him severely
for having dealings with "the man of Kadesh (Aitakama)."
An even worse enemy, in the end, of the Pharaoh's interests
than Aitakama was Aziru of Amurru, who has already been men-
tioned a number of times. However, before taking up the account
of his doings, we must say a word about his father, Abd-Ashirta.
According to Abd-Ashirta's own letters to the Pharaoh (Kn.
6o-65), he was the "servant of his king, a dog of his house," and
guarded the whole land of Amurru for his lord. But when we turn
to the letters of Rib-Addi of Byblos, Abd-Ashirta is pictured as the
arch-enemy of the Pharaoh's loyal subjects. It used to be assumed,
in view of this discrepancy, that in addition to being a traitor
Abd-Ashirta was a consummate liar. But a new and certainly
more charitable interpretation' has of late been gaining ground
among scholars. It is now believed that Abd-Ashirta started out
as a loyal and faithful servant of the Egyptian king; that he was
appointed governor of the large district of Amurru, whose principal
city was Sumur; that he really defended Amurru and Sumur
from the enemies of the king, and that it was only after he had
been hard pressed by the Habiri and Hittites and had looked in
vain to the Pharaoh for help, that he made terms with the enemy
and became the terror of all northern Syria. His letters are, accord-
ing to this interpretation, to be placed before those of Rib-Addi
in point of time, and to be regarded as expressing perfectly genuine
sentiments of loyalty to his king.
Once turned enemy, Abd-Ashirta certainly seems to have
entered with whole-hearted zeal upon the task of spreading dis-
cord among the Pharaoh's subjects. Rib-Addi's early letters
SCf. Weber in Knudtzon, Die el-Amarna Tafeln, pp. x128 f.

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
46 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY

(Kn. 69-95) are almost exclusively devoted to the misdeeds of the

prince of Amurru. "Who is Abd-Ashirta, the slave, the dog,
that he should take to himself the land of the king ?" (Kn. 71:I6 f.).
"Who is Abd-Ashirta, etc. ? The king of Mitanni and the king
of Kashshi (the Cassites-Babylonians) is he in that he is attempting
to seize all the lands of the king" (Kn. 76:9 f.). And so Rib-
Addi goes on, reporting the capture of one city after another. He
finds his own situation in Byblos like that of "a bird in a cage."
Letter after letter is dispatched to Egypt but little attention seems
to have been paid them. In one of them he insists on some sort
of a reply: "Send me an answer, or I will make a treaty with
Abd-Ashirta as Yapa-Addi and Zimrida (of Sidon) have done
(Kn. 83:23 f.) . . . . . Furthermore, does it seem good to my
lord the king that all of his lands have joined themselves to Abd-
Ashirta, the dog ?" (Kn. 84:6 f.). After years of anxiety and
futile efforts to rouse the Pharaoh, Rib-Addi was finally permitted
to see a ray of hope dawning on a nearer horizon. "Abd-Ashirta
is sick, who knows but he may die" (Kn. 95:41 f.), he joyfully
writes the Pharaoh. But it was no illness which removed the
sheich of Amurru from the scene. A letter from a citizen of Byblos
(Kn. IoI:29 f.) shows that he met a violent death, probably at
the hands of some dissatisfied mercenaries. His removal may have
improved the situation of Byblos and other cities for a time, but
we soon begin to hear of the crimes of the "sons of Abd-Ashirta,"
of Aziru in particular. The cities which the father had captured
or persuaded to throw off their allegiance to Egypt had probably
for the most part fallen again into the hands of parties friendly
to the Pharaoh, but the sons of Abd-Ashirta gained them back
one by one. "Formerly," says Rib-Addi (Kn. o09:44 f.), "at the
sight of an Egyptian the kings of Kinahhi (Canaan) fled before
him, but now, behold the sons of Abd-Ashirta strike terror into the
Egyptians." "Who are the sons of Abd-Ashirta that they take
the land of the king ? The king of Mitanni are they, the king of
the Cassites, and the king of Hatti" (Kn. I16:67 f.). "I have
heard about the Hatti people that they are burning all the lands
with fire. I have written repeatedly, but have received no reply.
All of the king's lands are being captured by the enemy, and yet

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE HITTITES 47

the king holds back. Behold now the

from the Hatti lands to take Byblos"
Rib-Addi's situation grew most des
city as well as the members of his own
terms with the sons of Abd-Ashirta, b
went to Beirut for help, and on his re
city closed against him. The people had
brother, who was in favor of going ov
Rib-Addi was probably one of a few
Pharaoh-who seems to have been pain
seriousness of the situation-kept the
reward ? Loss of city, exile, and, proba
On the other hand, Aziru, who like h
alert to drive the best bargain, and
Hittite, now making his peace with the
if at times more exciting, career.
The loss of Byblos seems to have rou
The situation required desperate mea
opened with Aziru, who had by some u
been forced out of Amurru (Kn. 156
began the correspondence. He wrote
complaining that he had been prevente
earlier by the nobles of Byblos. Fur
was pressing him hard. The Pharaoh
Amurru and ordered him to rebuild Sum
during his struggle with Rib-Addi. H
the Pharaoh that he was acting in good
Aziru was unwilling or unable to carry
reference to Sumur. He offered as excu
of Nuhashshe (Kn. 6o0: 20 f.). The P
and among other things wants an e
dealings with the man of Kadesh
"Why," says the Pharaoh, "have you
sengers of the Hittite king ? My mess
tained" (Kn. 161:47 f.). Aziru is orde
in person or send his son (Kn. 162:47 f
to do, and he informs the Pharaoh t

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
48 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY

because the Hittite king has arrived in Nuhashshe and may invade
his territory at any moment. He is very anxious to look upon
the "beautiful countenance" of the king (Kn. 165:6 f.), but
circumstances prevent him from doing so. Finally he was unable
to put the matter off any longer, and went to Egypt. We learn
of this through a letter of one of his sons to an Egyptian official
(Kn. 169), who asserts that the kings of Nuhashshe have accused
him of selling his father to the Egyptian king for gold (11. I7 f.),
while the Sutu (Beduin) say, "Aziru will never return from
Egypt" (11. 25 f.). Before the discovery of the Boghaz-Keui letters
it was assumed that it was improbable that Aziru should have
fared well at the hands of the Egyptian king and that the predic-
tions of the Sutu had probably come true. But we now know
differently. Hattusil of Hatti writes: "At the time of Subbiluliuma
my grandfather, Aziru king [of Amurru] went over to Egypt (?),
but later threw himself at the feet of my grandfather Subbiluliuma.
My grandfather pardoned him. He made a treaty with him,
fixing the boundaries of Amurru as they had been under his fathers,
and gave it (Amurru) to him."' From this record it is evident
that Aziru had escaped from Egypt with or without the consent
of the Pharaoh. We know from the inscriptions of Ramses II
that Subbiluliuma entered into treaty relations2 with some king
of the Eighteenth Dynasty, possibly with Amenhotep IV himself.
The treaty must have fixed the boundary between the two nations,
but where this ran we do not know. It is not impossible that
Aziru's restoration to Amurru may have been one of the articles
of the treaty. The dynasty of Amorite kings henceforth ran
parallel with that of Hatti, and remained, in spite of occasional
friction, subject to it.
After the death of Subbiluliuma, his son Arandas ruled for a
short time and was followed by his brother Mursil.3 Although a
number of documents dating from Mursil's time were found at
Boghaz-Keui, our main source for the events of his own and his
successors' reigns are the inscriptions of the Pharaohs of the Nine-
teenth Dynasty.
1 MDOG, No. 35, P. 43.
2 BAR, III, ? 377. 3 MDOG, No. 35, pp. x8 f.

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE HITTITES 49

In Egypt the monotheistic sun-cult o

had been overthrown and with it th
kings of the new dynasty were agai
gave them abundant success in war a
III and his successors. Haremhab seems to have maintained
peaceful relations with the Hittites, but with Seti I began anew the
struggle for the mastery in Syria. During the fierce struggles of
the Amarna period the last vestige of Egyptian authority in Syria
had disappeared and it was the task of the Nineteenth Dynasty
to regain what the last kings of the Eighteenth had lost.
Seti's campaigns' were taken up with the pacification of the
Shasu-beduin (evidently the Habiri of the Amarna Letters) of
southern Palestine and the restoration of Egyptian authority in
the cities along the Phoenician coast. Cities northward of Simyra
(Sumur) and Ullaza are mentioned. But he does not seem to have
come into direct conflict with the Hittites: this was reserved for
Ramses II. The Hittites maintained Kadesh on the Orontes as
their southern outpost and their king Mutallu,' who had succeeded
his father Mursil, entered into a treaty with Seti.
On account of the limited space at our disposal, we must omit
details in our discussion of the struggle between Ramses II and the
Hittites.3
Like Thutmose III, Ramses' first move was to secure the
harbors on the Syrian coast. Meanwhile Mutallu was gathering
an enormous army, probably no less than 20,000ooo men, including
"all the old enemies of Egypt, the kings of Naharin, Arwad, Karka-
mish, Kode, Kadesh, Nuges, Ugarit, and Aleppo," together with
mercenaries from Asia Minor, Lydians, Mysians, Cilicians, and
Dardanians. Ramses collected an army of similar proportions
from all parts of his empire and in April of his fifth year (1288 B.c.)
set out for Syria. The two armies met outside of Kadesh, where
a terrible battle was fought. Both sides suffered severe losses,
the Egyptians more than the Hittites, and the chief glory of
Ramses was that he succeeded in extricating himself from a very
dangerous situation. In spite of the numerous inscriptions reciting,
I BAR, III, H 83 f.
'Ibid., ? 377. 3 Ibid., ?? 294 f.

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
50 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY

and reliefs depicting, the Pharaoh's mighty deeds of arms, which

are found on the walls of the temples at Abu-Simbel, Thebes,
Luxor, Abydos, etc., there is no mention of the capture of Kadesh.
Indeed it is quite evident that the Hittites had fought the Pharaoh
to a standstill. But after three more years of fighting, he seems
to have had better success. He conquered Naharin as far as
Tunip, and captured some cities in the Orontes valley. But while
he may have driven the Hittites back from northern Syria tem-
porarily, it is not probable that he held this region for any length
of time.
After some fifteen years of warfare, the Hittite king Mutallu
died and was succeeded by his brother Hattusil II, who entered
into a lasting treaty with the Pharaoh.' The caption of this treaty
follows: "The treaty which the great chief of Heta, Hattusil, the
valiant, the son of Mursil, the great chief of Heta, the valiant, the
grandson of Subbiluliuma, the great chief of Heta, the valiant,
made, upon a silver tablet for Ramses II, the great ruler of Egypt,
the valiant, the son of Seti I, etc., the good treaty of peace and
brotherhood, setting peace between them forever." After recalling
the former warfare between the two countries, the treaty states
that there shall be no hostilities between them forever. The
former treaties between Subbiluliuma, Mutallu, and the Pharaohs
are reaffirmed, and a defensive alliance is entered into. Provision
is made for the extradition of political fugitives from either country.
After some more articles covering points of minor importance,
the gods of Egypt and Hatti are called upon as witnesses to the
compact. A copy of this treaty in the Hittite language, but written
in the cuneiform, was found at Boghaz-Keui.
it has been regarded as very remarkable that the boundary
between the two countries does not seem to have been fixed by the
treaty. Perhaps it had been fixed in the treaties of Subbiluliuma
and Mutallu, and since these were reaffirmed, there was no occasion
for taking up the matter again. But since we know nothing more
about these former treaties than that they existed, we are not in a
position to say how much of Egypt's ancient Syrian domain fell
to Ramses. Thirteen years after the signing of the treaty the
SBAR, III, H? 370 f.

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE HITTITES 51

Hittite king (probably Dudhalia) vi

marriage of his oldest daughter to t
relations between Hatti and Egypt w
the long reign of Ramses, indeed it see
a second daughter of the Hittite king
A document from Boghaz-Keui, d
Dudhalia, the son of Hattusil II, th
upon the situation in Amurru in M
became king, the people of Amurru
king of Egypt....."3 Evidently du
Ramses and the Hittites the Amori
but when he was not able to maintain
back to Hatti (as is evident from the r
Shabili was set up as their king.4 Fr
relations existing between Hatti and A
details but these cannot yet be definite
found in other documents. However
liminary report of Professor Winck
Amurru after Subbiluliuma's day
After the death of Aziru, Temen-T
were kings of Amurru. The treaty
force. This was in the time of Mursil. When Mutallu came to
the throne in Hatti, he deposed Put-Achi, who had succeeded
Abbi-Teshub, evidently because of his relations with Egypt (see
above), and placed another (probably Shabili) on the throne.
Thereupon Hattusil persuaded his brother Mutallu to hand over
Put-Achi to him. He kept him in honorable confinement in the
city of Haggamissa, and later, on his accession to the throne,
restored him as ruler of Amurru. To cement the friendly relations
I Ibid., *? 4Io f.
SIbid., ?? 427 f., and Breasted, A History of Egypt, p. 44o.
3 MDOG, No. 35, P. 45.
4 Ibid. Amurru seems to have been a general term for the regions west of Baby-
lonia from earliest times, just as later the term Hatti-land was used for the whole of
Syria-Palestine. In the Amarna period it was evidently restricted to the region about
Damascus. Any more definite delimitation does not seem possible. The term
"Amorite" in the Old Testament seems just as indefinite.
s MDOG, No. 35, P. 43.

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
52 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY

between the two countries, he gave his daughter Gashuliawi to

Put-Achi, while his son Nerigga-Shams married the latter's
daughter. Of course, Amurru remained a vassal state.
Hattusil also maintained brotherly relations, by treaty and
marriage, with the Cassite kings of Babylonia.' On the death of
one of these, Kadashman-Turgu, his son had difficulty in gaining
the throne and Hattusil wrote the Babylonians a letter threatening
to invade their country if they refused to recognize the son of his
"brother" (Kadashman-Turgu) as their king. On the other hand,
if they did submit to the rule of Kadashman-Turgu's son and any
enemy threatened their country, they had only to call upon him
and he would come to their aid at once. The Babylonian minister
regarded this letter as an attempt on the part of the Hittite king
to interfere in the internal affairs of his country, and told him so.
"Babylonia is an ally (brother) of Hatti, but not its vassal." The
matter was amicably adjusted, the son of Kadashman-Turgu
recognized as king of Babylonia, and friendly relations were once
more established. The subject of much of the correspondence
between the two kings was the incursions of the beduin (Ahlami-
Arameans). The Assyrians also seemed to interfere with the
embassies sent from one country to another. Another section'
of the correspondence is concerned with a demand made by the
Babylonian king for damages, because some of his tradespeople
had been murdered on their way through Amurru. The Hittite
king replies that the deed had not been committed on Hittite soil,
but that the murderers would be handed over for punishment to the
relatives of those who had met their death. Even more interesting
is Hattusil's reply to the Babylonian king when he complained
that Banti-shinni "was raising disturbances in his land." From
other documents we know that Banti-shinni was the Hittite form
of the name of Put-Achi. Now Banti-shinni had had a claim of
thirty talents of silver against the Babylonians which he did not
seem to be able to collect by ordinary means so he began a series
of reprisals. Hence the letter of the Babylonian king. Hattusil
informs his brother that his vassal Banti-shinni shall be tried

1 MDOG, No. 35, pp. 22 f. * Ibid., p. 24.

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE HITTITES 53

"before the god," and that he himself

of the punishment if he is found guilty
my brother does he not also injure me
The queen-mother, Putu-Hepa, re
Dudhalia, the son of Hattusil. We p
ments from his reign, one of which
internal affairs of the kingdom, anoth
the king of Aleppo.,
The reigns of Hattusil and his son
Hittite state. The conquests of the Assy
(ca. I290 B.c.) and his son Tukulti-Nin
weakened or brought an end to the Hitt
Shalmaneser came into deadly conflict
The Assyrian says: "At that time
brought in submission to the feet
advanced against the land of Hanig
of Hani (vars. read Hanigalbat), the
Arameans (Ahlami) with him, I su
battle and accomplished their def
lands; 14,400 of them I overthrew a
Nine of his strongholds, his capital cit
and eighty of his cities to tells and
that time from the city of Taidi to t
Kashiari mountain region, to the city
of Sudi, the stronghold of Haran as far
the Euphrates, I captured their cities."
Shattuara, who is not mentioned i
ments--so far as the preliminary repor
of the successors of the dynasty of Sau
last kings were the vassals of the kin
is based upon the fact that the name
and that Hani or Hanigalbat is but anot
It would seem as if Mitanni once mo
the Hittite kingdoms. Although aid
tuara was no match for the Assyrian,
1 MDOG, pp. 27 f. 2 AJSL, XXVIII, z89.

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 54 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY

extended "from the border of the land of Uruadri (evidently Urartu-

Armenia) to the land of Kutmuhi (Commagene)." In addition to
rivaling the deeds of his father in these regions, Tukulti-Ninib
succeeded in capturing Babylon.
Arnuanta, son of Dudhalia, is the last king of the dynasty
founded by Subbiluliuma whose name has come down to us.,
Two fragments of edicts and a large land register are the only
documents from his reign which have come to light. The latter
is interesting because of the three seals attached to it. The first
of these contains the name of Arnuanta, the second those of "the
lady Tawashi" (the queen-mother ?) and "the lady Munidan, the
Great Queen." On the third stood the name of the daughter of
Dudhalia, but it has been lost.
The final overthrow of the Hittite dynasty was not, however,
accomplished by the Assyrians, although they had done much
to break its power, but by another migration of peoples. Once
more the Egyptian records come to our aid.2
For centuries, perhaps, the Indo-European tribes had been
crossing from Europe into Asia by way of the Balkan peninsula,
but it was not until the time of Ramses III (1198-1167 B.c.) that
they became a menace to the Hittite state and even to Egypt.
Along the coast in vessels and across the plains in heavy two-
wheeled carts, carrying their wives and children with them, they
came. "Lo, the northern countries," says Ramses, "which are
in their isles, are restless in their limbs, they infest the ways of the
harbor-mouths."3 They invaded Syria. "The countries . . . .
the northerners in their isles were disturbed. .... No one stood
before their hands, from Heta (Hatti), Kode, Karkamish, Arwad,
Alasa (Cyprus), they were wasted. They set up a camp in one
place in Amor (Amurru). They desolated his people and his land
like that which is not. They came with fire prepared before them,
forward to Egypt. Their main support was Peleset (the later
Philistines), Thekel, Shekelesh, Denyen (Danaans, Greeks), and
Weshesh."4 Ramses succeeded in turning these northerners back
' MDOG, No. 35, pp. 28 f. 3 Ibid., ? 75.
2 BAR, IV, H 59 f. 4 Ibid., ? 64.

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE HITTITES 55

from Egypt, but they had already swe

its position of supremacy in northe
Hittite states still lingered on in diffe
Syria for centuries, they were never a
line of kings such as the dynasties of
had been. After the redistribution of the "northerners" and the
peoples they displaced, the Mushki seem to have taken the most
prominent position in Asia Minor. Tiglath-Pileser (ca. 1100oo B.C.),'
at the beginning of his reign, met an army of 20,000 men of the
land of Mushki, led by five kings. They had advanced as far south
as Kummuh (Commagene). After defeating them, the Assyrian
king was compelled to meet the forces of the Kurte who came to
the aid of Kummuh. The names of their leaders, Kili-Teshub
and Kali-Teshub, are Hittite. The same is true of the name of
Shadi-Teshub, the son of Hattu-shar, the king of Urratinash, another
district plundered by Tiglath-Pileser. While he succeeded in
traversing and harassing the lands to the west of Assyria as far
as the Mediterranean, Tiglath-Pileser always found coalitions of
Hittite and other kings, as high as twenty and thirty in number,
waiting to dispute his progress. He did not succeed in establishing
a permanent hold upon the kingdoms of the West. The policy
of incorporating the conquered states as provinces of the empire,
whereby the later Assyrian kings succeeded in blotting out every
vestige of independence, was not yet adopted. "For something like
a century and a half, until about 950 B.c., some semblance of
Assyrian authority may still be traced on the near side of the
Euphrates, but in view of the history of these times it may be said
that during the tenth century B.C., until the revival of Assyrian
invasions (about 850 B.c.), the Hittite states of Syria were free,
and their works illustrate to us their latent vitality and the revival
of their traditions."'2 The gradual withdrawal of both Assyrians
and Mushki "was marked by a cycle of Hittite works which
proved how deep-rooted was their civilization ..... At Boghaz-
Keui a new palace, unadorned, however, with sculptures, sprang up
: King, Annals of the Kings of Assyria, pp. 35 f.
2 Garstang, The Land of the Hittites, p. 371.

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
56 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY

on the site of that of the Great Kings, which was now completely
ruined. It is possible that the great walls of the citadel as they
are now seen were the product of this age."' The sculptures and
inscriptions found in the neighborhood of Tyana point to a con-
siderable kingdom in the region later occupied by the Hilakku
(Cilicians). Eastward of this the Assyrians found a fairly large
state which they called Tabal. Other little kingdoms were Milid,
Gurgum (around the modern Marash), Yaudi, Samalla, Hamath
on the Orontes, and Karkamish. The boundaries of these king-
doms were shifting continually. Besides, the Arameans were
gradually gaining the upper hand in many of them.
Beginning in 885 B.c., the armies of Ashurnasirpal and his son
Shalmaneser visited the Westland year after year. At first some
of the Hittite kings sent tribute, but later Karkamish, Bit-Adini,
Gurgum, Samalla, Kue, and Hattina formed a league to check
the aggression of the Assyrians. While Shalmaneser's army was
away in Armenia, they crossed the frontier and invaded the Assy-
rian territory. After considerable fighting the league was broken
up, and henceforth, although there were occasional uprisings, the
almost yearly campaigns of the Assyrian kings kept the western
states from forming any dangerous leagues. The prestige lost
through the indecisive battle of Karkar (854 B.c.), at which Ahab
of Israel and the kings of Hamath and a number of other Hittite
states fought on the side of the king of Damascus, was regained
by subsequent successes. In 838 and 837, the kings of Tabal paid
tribute, while in 835, Shalmaneser claims to have received the
tribute of the whole Hatti-land (the Westland in general). But
the West was not yet conquered.
Another period of Assyrian decline followed the reign of Shal-
maneser, and a century later, when the revival came under Tiglath-
Pileser, the Hittite states were paying tribute to the king of
Armenia. In 743, Tiglath-Pileser met the armies of Sarduaris
of Armenia, and his Hittite allies from Agusi, Gurgum, Kummuh,
and Milid, and routed them with great slaughter. After some
more fighting they submitted to the Assyrian yoke. In 732 B.c.,
1 Garstang, op. cit., p. 79.

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE HITTITES 57

the fall of Damascus made oppositio

ever, in 718, Midas of Phrygia indu
revolt, but on the approach of Sargon
was made an Assyrian province. On
states lost their independence and
empire. In 709, Gurgum, the last of t
tain some sort of independence, w
the Cimmerian invasions of the seve
last vestiges of the Hittite states. C
(Boghaz-Keui) in the middle of the s
conquest by Cyrus, the Hittite lands c
There remains to be said a final word about some of the Old
Testament passages in which the Hittites are mentioned.
The Hittites were known in Palestine in the time of the kingdom
of David and Solomon. This is evident from the presence of Hittite
"soldiers of fortune," Ahimelech and Uriah, in the Israelite army
(I Sam. 26:6; II Sam. ii:3 f.; 23:39). Toi, king of Hamath,
whose name is identical with that of the vizier of Tushratta (Tuhi;
see above, p. 36) and who was probably the descendant of one of
the old lines of Hittite kings of northern Syria, is said to have sent
his son to David with gifts, "to salute and bless him, because he
had fought against Hadadezer and smitten him: for Hadadezer
had wars with Toi" (II Sam. 8:9 f.). Among the many foreign
women whom Solomon loved were women of the Hittites (I Kings
II:I). Solomon's merchants seem to have carried on a brisk
trade in horses which they brought from Musri (a Hittite state in
Asia Minor; see p. 53, above) and sold to the kings of the Hittites
(evidently of such states as Hamath) and the kings of Syria (I Kings
1o: 28 f.).'
That Hittite or Mitannian leaders had carved out petty king-
doms for themselves all over Syria and Palestine (after Egypt had
lost control in these regions) is evident from the Amarna Letters.
We think at once of Abdi-Hepa of Jerusalem whose name bewrayeth
him. The memory of these days is preserved in the traditions
' Read Musri instead of Misraim, and cf. II Kings 7:6, where the same correction
is to be made.

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
58 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY

which make the father of the faithful the contemporary of the sons
of Heth who lived at Hebron. Furthermore in almost every one
of the twenty-two passages' in the Old Testament where the pre-
Israelite inhabitants of Canaan are enumerated, the Hittites
(along with the Amorites and Canaanites) are given a prominent
position. Well might Ezekiel in reproaching Jerusalem say: "Thy
birth and thy nativity is of the land of the Canaanite: the Amorite
was thy father, and thy mother was a Hittite (16:3, 45)."
' Deut. 7: T; Jos. 3: Io; 24:II; Gen. 15:i8, 20; Exod. 3:8, I17; 23:23, 28; 33:2;
Deut. 20:17; Jos. 9:1; 11:3; 12:8; Judg. 3:5; Neh. 9:8; Exod. 13:5; Ezra 9:I;
I Kings 9:20; II Chron. 8:7; Exod. 23:28; Gen. 13:7; 34:30; cf. Bbhl, Kanaander
und Hebrder, pp. 63 f.

This content downloaded from 212.128.132.111 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:35:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms