The early period of the Hittite Kingdom lasted from about 1650 to 1500 BCE and is known as the Old Kingdom. The polity emerged after a group of Indo-European speakers migrated c. 2000 BCE from either the Causasus or the Bosphorus and Dardanelles and settled on a high plateau in western Anatolia known as Hatti.
[1]
[2]
The immigrants mingled with the indigenous people of Hatti and adopted many of their beliefs and customs.
[1]
Population and political organization
Before the mid-1st millennium BCE, the central Anatolian region was divided into many city-states.
[3]
Gradually, however, the Hittites began to conquer the neighbouring cities, founding a strong state around 1650 BCE.
[1]
[4]
Labarna I (17th century BCE) was the first known Hittite king.
[5]
The king was the supreme ruler and military commander, a chief judge and a priest in Hittite society.
[6]
He entrusted the management of major cities and provinces to officials who were often directly answerable to him,
[7]
and could bestow important military positions on members of his own family.
[8]
Vassal rulers were obliged to pay tribute to the king and take an oath of allegiance.
[9]
[1]: (Bryce 2002, 8) Bryce, Trevor R. 2002. Life and Society in the Hittite World. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/8JSUC58W.
[2]: (Stephens, Jr. 1979, 46) Stephens, Jr., W. Richard. 1979. “The Rise of the Hittite Empire: A Comparison of Theories on the Origin of the State.” Mid-American Review of Sociology 4 (1): 39-55. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/2MD3WV2T.
[3]: (Stephens, Jr. 1979, 41-42) Stephens, Jr., W. Richard. 1979. “The Rise of the Hittite Empire: A Comparison of Theories on the Origin of the State.” Mid-American Review of Sociology 4 (1): 39-55. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/2MD3WV2T.
[4]: (Stephens, Jr. 1979, 41049) Stephens, Jr., W. Richard. 1979. “The Rise of the Hittite Empire: A Comparison of Theories on the Origin of the State.” Mid-American Review of Sociology 4 (1): 39-55. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/2MD3WV2T.
[5]: (Bryce 2002, 34) Bryce, Trevor R. 2002. Life and Society in the Hittite World. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/8JSUC58W.
[6]: (Bryce 2007, 11) Bryce, Trevor A. 2007. Hittite Warrior. Oxford: Osprey Publishing. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/38EMV897.
[7]: (Bryce 2002, 16) Bryce, Trevor R. 2002. Life and Society in the Hittite World. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/8JSUC58W.
[8]: (Bryce 2007, 8-9) Bryce, Trevor A. 2007. Hittite Warrior. Oxford: Osprey Publishing. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/38EMV897.
[9]: (Bryce 2002, 43) Bryce, Trevor R. 2002. Life and Society in the Hittite World. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/8JSUC58W.
| 36 N |
| Hatti - Old Kingdom |
| Hittite Kingdom | |
| Hethiter | |
| Hittites | |
| Hetyci | |
| Hititler veya Etiler | |
| People of the Land of Hatti |
| Konya Plain - Late Bronze Age II |
| continuity |
| Preceding: Middle Bronze Age in Central Anatolia (tr_central_anatolia_mba) [continuity] | |
| Succeeding: Konya Plain - Late Bronze Age II (tr_konya_lba) [continuity] |
| unitary state |
| [11,000 to 14,000] people |
| [50,000 to 75,000] km2 | 1600 BCE |
| [150,000 to 200,000] km2 | 1500 BCE |
| [800,000 to 1,600,000] people |
| Year Range | Hatti - Old Kingdom (tr_hatti_old_k) was in: |
|---|---|
| (1650 BCE 1501 BCE) | Konya Plain |
Hethiter; Hittites; Hetyci; חתים; Hititler veya Etiler. "Of mixed ethnic origins - Indo-European, native Hattian, Hurrian, Luwian, and numerous smaller groups - they called themselves by the traditional name of the region in which they lived; they were the ’people of the Land of Hatti.’ [1]
[1]: (Bryce 2002, 3)
Hethiter; Hittites; Hetyci; חתים; Hititler veya Etiler. "Of mixed ethnic origins - Indo-European, native Hattian, Hurrian, Luwian, and numerous smaller groups - they called themselves by the traditional name of the region in which they lived; they were the ’people of the Land of Hatti.’ [1]
[1]: (Bryce 2002, 3)
Hethiter; Hittites; Hetyci; חתים; Hititler veya Etiler. "Of mixed ethnic origins - Indo-European, native Hattian, Hurrian, Luwian, and numerous smaller groups - they called themselves by the traditional name of the region in which they lived; they were the ’people of the Land of Hatti.’ [1]
[1]: (Bryce 2002, 3)
Hethiter; Hittites; Hetyci; חתים; Hititler veya Etiler. "Of mixed ethnic origins - Indo-European, native Hattian, Hurrian, Luwian, and numerous smaller groups - they called themselves by the traditional name of the region in which they lived; they were the ’people of the Land of Hatti.’ [1]
[1]: (Bryce 2002, 3)
Hethiter; Hittites; Hetyci; חתים; Hititler veya Etiler. "Of mixed ethnic origins - Indo-European, native Hattian, Hurrian, Luwian, and numerous smaller groups - they called themselves by the traditional name of the region in which they lived; they were the ’people of the Land of Hatti.’ [1]
[1]: (Bryce 2002, 3)
Hethiter; Hittites; Hetyci; חתים; Hititler veya Etiler. "Of mixed ethnic origins - Indo-European, native Hattian, Hurrian, Luwian, and numerous smaller groups - they called themselves by the traditional name of the region in which they lived; they were the ’people of the Land of Hatti.’ [1]
[1]: (Bryce 2002, 3)
1650-1175 BCE [1] c. 1650 BC: (Old Kingdom) The founding of the Hittite Kingdom. (Labarna I or Hattusili I) -c. 1175 BC: The fall of the Hittite state caused by the invasions of the Sea Peoples, and attacks the people of Kaskians and Assyrians. End date: the destruction of Hattusa.
[1]: Bryce T. R. (2005) The Kingdom of the Hittites, New York: Oxford University Press
Use of the Nesite (Hittite) language dates "to the dominance of an Indo-European group in the region during the so-called Assyrian Colony period. From its base in the city of Nesa, the leaders of this group gained control over large parts of the eastern half of Anatolia a century or so before the emergence of the Hittite kingdom. Indo-European speakers may have first entered Anatolia during the third millennium, or even earlier. After their arrival one branch of them intermingled with a central Anatolian people called the Hattians (hence the name Hatti), and to begin with, the Hittite population and civilization were primarily an admixture of Indo-European and Hattian elements." [1]
[1]: (Bryce 2002, 8)
Inhabitants.
Hattusa (Bogazköy)
Reconstruction of the population is very difficult. Researchers suggest very different populations. 15,000-20,000 inhabitants
[1]
or 9000-11,000
[2]
or 9000 - 15,000
[3]
Sarissa
5000 inhabitants
[4]
based on the capacity of the granary.
Lisipra
2400-3000 inhabitants
[5]
Even for sites which have been excavated more extensively, such as Bogazköy or Kusaklı, a realistic estimate of the number of inhabitants cannot be given yet
[6]
[1]: Bittel K. and Naumann R. (1952) Bogazköy-Hattusa I. Architektur, Topographie, Landes kunde und Siedlungsgeschichte Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, pp. 26 n. 16.
[2]: Mora, C. (1977) ‘Saggio per uno studio sulla popolazione urbana nell’Anatolica Antica. I. Hattuscha’. "Studi micenei ed egeo-anatolici" 18, pp. 227-41.
[3]: Bittel K. (1983) 1983: Hattuscha. Hauptstadt der Hethiter. Geschichte und Kultur einer altorientalischen Großmacht,Cologne, p. 85
[4]: Müller-Karpe A. (2002) ‘Kusaklı-Sarissa. Kultort im Oberen Land’,pp. 182[In:] Die Hethiter und ihr Reich. Das Volk der 1000 Götter, Katalog der Ausstellung, Bonn 18. Januar-28. April 2002, Bonn, pp.176-189. 2002, 176-89.
[5]: Alp S. (1991) Hethitische Briefe aus Masat Höyük (Turk Tarih Kurumu Yayinlari VI.35) Ankara, p. 119
[6]: Mielke D. P. (2011) Hittite Cities: Looking for a Concept, pp. 184 [In:] H. Genz and D. P. Mielke (ed.) Insights Into Hittite History And Archaeology, Colloquia Antiqua 2, Leuven, Paris, Walpole MA: PEETERS, pp. 184
People.
Turkey contained 1.5 million by the chalcolithic (2500 BC) and 3 million "during the course of the full Bronze age".
[1]
The polity territory isn’t anywhere near 750,000 km2 of Anatolia. If we assume at height the polity controlled 25% of the region that would be 750,000 people. This would be a lower limit if we further suppose that the Hittite region, being the most developed, would be the most densely populated.
[1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 133) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London.
1. Capital Bogazköy-Hattusa.
2. Large settlements (e.g. Masat Höyük-Tapikka, Ortaköy-Sapinuwa, Alaca Höyük, Inandıktepe).
3. Small villages and farmsteads 0,1-5 ha (very poorly investigated, data about their existence comes from field walking surveys, not regular excavation).
levels.
King1. "The king himself was not only his kingdom’s war leader, but also its supreme judicial authority and chief priest."
[1]
2.Priests SANGA (het. sankunni-). The distinction of priests of the great (SANGA GAL) and priests minor (SANGA TUR) was made.
[2]
Eg. priest GUDU, priestess "lady of daity" (EREŚ.DINGER), priestess "mother of God" (AMA DINGIR).
[3]
3. Different priests (eg. priest tazzeli, priest hamina-).
[3]
[1]: (Bryce 2007, 11)
[2]: Tarach P. (2008) Religie Anatolii hetyckiej, pp. 206, [In:] K. Pilarczyk and J. Drabina (ed.) Religie starożytnego Bliskiego Wschodu, Kraków: Wydawnictwo WAM, pp. 177-259
[3]: Tarach P. (2008) Religie Anatolii hetyckiej, pp. 207, [In:] K. Pilarczyk and J. Drabina (ed.) Religie starożytnego Bliskiego Wschodu, Kraków: Wydawnictwo WAM, pp. 177-259
1. King
king could "delegate military command to a subordinate, probably a member of his own family."
[1]
2. High Military Command / Chief of the Bodyguards"The king’s brothers often seem to have been appointed to high military commands immediately below the king and the crown prince, particularly if they held the highly prestigious post of GAL MESHEDI (chief of the Bodyguards).
[1]
2. ’Chief of the Wine (Stewards)’ Commander-in-chief"an unpretentious-sounding but in fact highly prestigious title. Its holder was assigned important military commands either under the general command of the king or as commander-in-chief in his own right. The use of such a term, which goes back to the early days of the Old Kingdom, no doubt reflects a time in early Hittite history when the king’s most trusted confidants and advisers were those who attended him in a range of capacities, some quite humble, on a daily basis."
[2]
3. Chief of the Chariot-Warriors of the Right / Chief of the Chariot-Warriors of the Left"usually of princely status"
[1]
"Each of these officers apparently commanded a brigade of 1000 men."
[3]
3. Chief of the Standing Army-Troops of the Right / Chief of the Standing Army-Troops of the Left"Each of these officers apparently commanded a brigade of 1000 men."
[3]
3. Chief of the ’Shepherds’ of the Right / Chief of the ’Shepherds’ of the Left."Each of these officers apparently commanded a brigade of 1000 men."
[3]
4. ???"The lower-ranking officers included, in descending order of importance, ’overseers of military heralds’, ’dignitaries’, and ’gentlemen’. There was a gradation of rank within the dignitaries category, raging (in modern equivalents) from captain to sergeant. The gentlemen were the lowest-ranking officers. Each officer’s importance was determined by the number of men he led. At the lower levels, some were in charge of 100 men, some of just 10."
[3]
5. Officer of 100 men"The lower-ranking officers included, in descending order of importance, ’overseers of military heralds’, ’dignitaries’, and ’gentlemen’. There was a gradation of rank within the dignitaries category, raging (in modern equivalents) from captain to sergeant. The gentlemen were the lowest-ranking officers. Each officer’s importance was determined by the number of men he led. At the lower levels, some were in charge of 100 men, some of just 10."
[3]
6. Officer of 10 ("Gentlemen"?)"The lower-ranking officers included, in descending order of importance, ’overseers of military heralds’, ’dignitaries’, and ’gentlemen’. There was a gradation of rank within the dignitaries category, raging (in modern equivalents) from captain to sergeant. The gentlemen were the lowest-ranking officers. Each officer’s importance was determined by the number of men he led. At the lower levels, some were in charge of 100 men, some of just 10."
[3]
7. Individual soldier
[1]: Bryce T. and A. Hook (2007). Hittite Warrior. Warrior. Oxford: Osprey Publishing. pp. 8-9
[2]: (Bryce 2002, 23)
[3]: (Bryce 2007, 7)
levels.
The Old Kingdom was a feudal and agrarian society.
1. The King
judge and a military leader.
_Court government_
2. "Chief of the Scribes"a powerful figure
[1]
- a professional official.
3. Scribes
[2]
[3]
???
2. The assembly (panku/tuliya)had a greater role in the Old Kingdom. It comprised of non-nobility, formed the bureaucracy and was subservient to the king
[4]
.
_Regional government_
1. Governors
[5]
Provincial administrators
[6]
appointed directly by the king?
2. "Council of Elders"Locally administered justice.
[7]
. Local council lowest identifiable judicial authority.
[8]
_Vassal states_
"Beyond the core territory of its homeland in central Anatolia, the Hittite empire consisted largely of a network of vassal states, whose rulers enjoyed considerable local autonomy but were bound by a number of obligations to their Hittite overlord, formalized in the personal treaties he drew up with them. In the latter half of the fourteenth century, direct Hittite rule was extended to parts of northern Syria with the establishment of viceregal kingdoms at Aleppo and Carchemish."
[9]
3.
[1]: Bryce T. (2002) Life and Society in the Hittite World. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 67
[2]: Burney C. (2004) Historical Dictionary of the Hittites, Lanham: Scarecrow Press, pp. 242
[3]: Bryce T. (2002) Life and Society in the Hittite World. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 11
[4]: Burney C. 2004 Historical Dictionary of the Hittites, Lanham: Scarecrow Press, pp. 35
[5]: Bryce T. (2002) Life and Society in the Hittite World. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 38-39
[6]: Bryce T. (2002) Life and Society in the Hittite World. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 33
[7]: Bryce T. (2002) Life and Society in the Hittite World. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 38
[8]: Bryce T. (2002) Life and Society in the Hittite World. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 41
[9]: (Bryce 2002, 9)
Palaces. The most important elements in the larger cities were palaces, which in textual sources are characterized with the Sumerogram É.GAL = great house. The palaces were a crucial element for the administration and organisation of the Hittite state.
Hittite palaces:
(1) Büyükkale/Bogazköy-Hattusa
[1]
(2) Masat Höyük-Tapikka
[2]
(3) Ortaköy-Sapinuwa, Building A
[3]
(4) Alaca Höyük
[4]
(5) Inandıktepe
[5]
[1]: Seeher J. (2002) ‘Großkönigliche Residenz - Mittelpunkt staatlichen Lebens. Die Palastanlage in der hethitischen Hauptstadt’, [In:] Die Hethiter und ihr Reich. Das Volk der 1000 Götter, Katalog der Ausstellung, Bonn 18. Januar-28. April 2002, Bonn, pp. 94-99.
[2]: Özgüç, T. (1982) Masat Höyük II. Bogazköy’ün kuzeydogusunda bir Hitit merkezi. Masat Höyük II. A Hittite Center Northeast of Bogazköy (Turk Tarih Kurumu Yayinlari V.38a)Ankara
[3]: Süel A. (2002) ‘Ortaköy-Sapinuwa’. [In:] K.A. Yener and H.A. jr Hoffner (eds.) 2002: Recent Developments in Hittite Archaeology and History. Papers in Memory of Hans G. Güterbock,Winona Lake, IN., pp 157-65.
[4]: Bittel K. (1976) Die Hethiter, Munich, Abb. 111
[5]: Özgüç, T. (1988) Inandıktepe. Eski Hitit çagında önemli bir kült merkezi. An Important Cult Center in the Old Hittite Period (Turk Tarih Kurumu Yayinlari V.43) Ankara.
Old Kingdom
Scribes
[1]
[2]
. The assembly panku/tuliya.
"Chief of the Scribes", a powerful figure
[3]
- a professional official.
New Kingdom:The Hittite Empire was probably more developed than the Old Kingdom.
[1]: Burney C. (2004) Historical Dictionary of the Hittites, Lanham: Scarecrow Press, pp. 242
[2]: Bryce T. (2002) Life and Society in the Hittite World. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 11
[3]: Bryce T. (2002) Life and Society in the Hittite World. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 67
"... the collection we have called The Laws ... consists of some 200 clauses, the earliest surviving version of which dates to the Old Kingdom, around 1650 BC. From references it makes to revisions to previous laws we know there must have been an even earlier version, probably going back to the reign of the original Labarna, the earliest known Hittite monarch... only one New Kingdom version, the so-called ’Late Parallel Version’, contains any substantive revisions."
[1]
Archaeological research in the twentieth century has produced interesting findings, demonstrating the existing legal culture of the Hittites. The result of this research is to find two pieces of code of the Hittite from the end of the XV or the beginning of the XIV century BC, and therefore subsequent to the Code of Hammurabi, early and from a set of assarynian law, including customary law. Also found Hittite texts of several laws and contracts concluded with Egypt. One of the pieces of that code was given to us in two editorial and this is the year 1390 BC and later contains only 22 articles. Recognition of specific issues in the code allows you to present as part of the most general laws of the Hittite.
[2]
Public Law
In terms of political system, the law regulates the powers and duties of Hittite warriors from the tribe of Manda presumably later Medes or would be the position of slaves who knows the different types (public and private). More specifically, however, deals with the Hittite code of criminal law. A feature of his in this area is greater than humanity criminal legislation of other peoples of the Ancient East . Penalties for offenses are too harsh and often meets next penalty fines for damages in nature. Qualification of murder and murder of passion or would be unintentional homicide near complete removal of private vengeance, argues with already developed legal concepts , but on the other hand, determination of penalties in a casuistic points to the primitive nature of the legislation.
[2]
Private Law
Family law is based on the exogamous patriarchal family organization, since endogamous marriage within the family is forbidden under death penalty. In the field of trade and commerce law, there are set prices for individual goods, thereby controlling the development of economic relations in the country. The uniformity of legislation throughout the Hittite is intended to more closely anastomosis various neighboring provinces of the country of Hatti.
[2]
[1]: (Bryce 2002, 34)
[2]: Hoffner H. A.Jr. (1997) The Laws of the Hittites: a Critical Edition, Leiden, New York, Köln: Brill
[1]
Level 2: Royal Courts
[2]
Level 1: the Council of Elders
[1]: Bryce T. (2002) Life and Society in the Hittite World. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 38-39
[2]: Billie J. C.(2007) The Hittites and Their World, (Society of Biblical literature archaeology and Biblical studies ; no. 7) Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, pp. 101-103
[1] [2] Public squares such as the Agora in Athens or the Forum Romanum are so far unknown in the Hittite period. Nevertheless, smaller squares, for instance for market places, surely must have existed [3] .
[1]: Hoffner H. A. (2002) Some Thoughts on Merchants and Trade in the Hittite Kingdom, [In:] T. Richter, D. Prechel and J. Klinger (ed), Kulturgeschichten. Altorientalistische Studien für Volkert Haas Zum 65. Geburtstag, Saarbrücken: Saarbrücker Druckerei und Verlag, pp. 179-89.
[2]: Bryce T. (2002) Life and Society in the Hittite World, New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 92.
[3]: Mielke D. P. (2011) Hittite Cities: Looking for a Concept, pp. 175 [In:] H. Genz and D. P. Mielke (ed.) Insights Into Hittite History And Archaeology, Colloquia Antiqua 2, Leuven, Paris, Walpole MA: PEETERS, pp. 153-194
The Hittites did not have its own ports, nor a fleet. They used the services of vassal states, such as Ugarit.
Irrigation canals, but these are not transport infrastructure.
The Citadel Büyükkale at Hattusa was connected to a system of stone viaducts and bridge with the Büyükkaya [1] Which period does this refer to?
[1]: Makowski M. (2009) Świat późnej epoki brązu. pp.157 [In:] A. Smogorzewska (ed.) Archeologia starożytnego Bliskiego Wschodu, Warszawa: Instytut Archeologii UW, pp. 151-187)
Remains of the Hittite language were found in excavations of Hattusa. Hittite cuneiform archives have been discovered at Ortaköy (ancient Sapinuwa), Kuşakli (ancient Sarissa) and Maşat (ancient Tapikka).
(1) The relief carvings: the Hittites also expressed some messages through relief carvings that were characteristic during the New Kingdom. Usually represent a single character (king or deity) or cult scene involving a ruler. Among some of the reliefs, especially those located at the communication routes, symbols of royal power were represented - e. g. Yazılıkaya, Sirkeli, Firaktin [1] . (2) Hittite royal seals - seals of punching are a distinctive type for Hittites. After period of medium bronze, cylinder seals were used sporadically. Royal seals can be clearly distinguished, showing the image of the monarch. In the Suppiluliumma, a distinctive cartouche appears, which also has the name of the ruler and his titulary. Sometimes the ruler is shown in the arms of one of the most important deities in the country or its tutelary deity. There are also royal seals with representations of the king dressed as a priest or a warrior, or together with the queen [2] . (3) Sculpture and bas-relief - Stone sculptures date primarily from the New Kingdom, and are represented by statues of lions and sphinxes made in sculpture semi-double, and partly in relief. They were part of the city gates (Gates of Lions at Hattusa, Gates of Sphinxes at Alaca Höyük) and temples’ entrances. Submit lions served as apotropaic and sphinxes emphasized a symbolic move from a profane zone to a sacred zone. [2] Eflatun Pınar Orthostates, quadrilateral stone slabs set vertically along the wall monumental buildings, usually decorated with reliefs. Orthostates are characteristic of Hittite art and decorated with temples, palaces, gates(Hattusa and Alaca Höyük).(4) Vessels relief - Vase from the vicinity of Inandik depicting a festival celebration.
[1]: Makowski M. (2009) Świat późnej epoki brązu. pp.162 [In:] A. Smogorzewska (ed.) Archeologia starożytnego Bliskiego Wschodu, Warszawa: Instytut Archeologii UW, pp. 151-187
[2]: Makowski M. (2009) Świat późnej epoki brązu. pp.164 [In:] A. Smogorzewska (ed.) Archeologia starożytnego Bliskiego Wschodu, Warszawa: Instytut Archeologii UW, pp. 151-187
For the most part, “Hittite” mythological narratives belong to either the Hattian or Hurrian traditions, but some compositions of Hittite origin are also identifiable. [1] There were also prayers. [2]
[1]: Collins B.J.(2007) The Hittites and Their World, (Society of Biblical literature archaeology and Biblical studies; no. 7), Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, pp. 147
[2]: Collins B.J.(2007) The Hittites and Their World, (Society of Biblical literature archaeology and Biblical studies; no. 7), Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, pp. 153
Correspondence present. Royal letters [1] [2]
[1]: Hoffner H. A. (2009) Letters from the Hittite Kingdom, Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature
[2]: Bryce, T. (2003) Letters of the Great Kings of the Ancient Near East-The Royal Correspondence of the Late Bronze Age, London and New York: Routledge, pp. 161-177
Money was not used as means of exchange in the Hittite period yet. Silver and iron were alike used as a medium of exchange. Articles used in local trade.
Hittite rulers had correspondence with rulers of the neighbouring countries. They needed an efficient system of couriers. [1] letters "dispatched by the king to his local officials" [2]
[1]: Hoffner H. A. (2009) Letters from the Hittite Kingdom, Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature
[2]: (Bryce 2002, 17)
(e.g. Hattusa) The fortification walls were built in a casemate system with a width of up to 8 m. Two parallel walls were connected by diagonal walls, and the compartments thus constructed were filled with rubble. Towers protruded at regular intervals from the outer face of the walls. The walls are always situated on earthen ramparts, which provided protection against battering rams. As usual in Hittite architecture, the foundations and the lower parts of the walls were made of stone, whereas the upper parts consisted of a timber-framed structure of mud-brick. The superstructure of the walls can be reconstructed with a high degree of certainty thanks to the discovery of vessels showing fortification walls with battlements and towers. The gates were always flanked by towers. The Lion’s Gate in Hattusa was approached via a ramp, which ran parallel to the wall to the right, thus exposing the unshielded side of potential attackers to fire from the wall. Every gate could be closed on the outer and inner side by heavy wooden doors, which could be bolted with copper bars. A peculiarity of Hittite fortifications is the so-called postern, a narrow tunnel of up to 50 m in length and 3-4 m in width and height that led through the earthen ramparts on which the fortification stood. According to one theory, these posterns may have served as sally ports, enabling the defenders to make quick sorties. The length and the narrowness of the posterns made them easily defendable against intruders who, on the other hand, were exposed to fire from the fortification walls during their approach. [1]
[1]: Lorenz J. and I. Schrakamp (2011) Hittite Military and Warfare, pp. 141 [In:] H. Genz and D. P. Mielke (ed.) Insights Into Hittite History And Archaeology, Colloquia Antiqua 2, Leuven, Paris, Walpole MA: PEETERS, pp. 125-151
The following code clearly states the walls were always made of mudbrick even if they were build upon stone ground it does not seem to be a ’stone wall’ so I have coded this as absent from a blank code and pasted in the following quote: ’(e.g. Hattusa) The fortification walls were built in a casemate system with a width of up to 8 m. Two parallel walls were connected by diagonal walls, and the compartments thus constructed were filled with rubble. Towers protruded at regular intervals from the outer face of the walls. The walls are always situated on earthen ramparts, which provided protection against battering rams. As usual in Hittite architecture, the foundations and the lower parts of the walls were made of stone, whereas the upper parts consisted of a timber-framed structure of mud-brick. The superstructure of the walls can be reconstructed with a high degree of certainty thanks to the discovery of vessels showing fortification walls with battlements and towers. The gates were always flanked by towers. The Lion’s Gate in Hattusa was approached via a ramp, which ran parallel to the wall to the right, thus exposing the unshielded side of potential attackers to fire from the wall. Every gate could be closed on the outer and inner side by heavy wooden doors, which could be bolted with copper bars. A peculiarity of Hittite fortifications is the so-called postern, a narrow tunnel of up to 50 m in length and 3-4 m in width and height that led through the earthen ramparts on which the fortification stood. According to one theory, these posterns may have served as sally ports, enabling the defenders to make quick sorties. The length and the narrowness of the posterns made them easily defendable against intruders who, on the other hand, were exposed to fire from the fortification walls during their approach.’ [1]
[1]: Lorenz J. and I. Schrakamp (2011) Hittite Military and Warfare, pp. 141 [In:] H. Genz and D. P. Mielke (ed.) Insights Into Hittite History And Archaeology, Colloquia Antiqua 2, Leuven, Paris, Walpole MA: PEETERS, pp. 125-151
The following code clearly states the walls were always made of mudbrick even if they were build upon stone ground it does not seem to be a ’stone wall’ so I have coded this as absent from a blank code(e.g. Hattusa) The fortification walls were built in a casemate system with a width of up to 8 m. Two parallel walls were connected by diagonal walls, and the compartments thus constructed were filled with rubble. Towers protruded at regular intervals from the outer face of the walls. The walls are always situated on earthen ramparts, which provided protection against battering rams. As usual in Hittite architecture, the foundations and the lower parts of the walls were made of stone, whereas the upper parts consisted of a timber-framed structure of mud-brick. The superstructure of the walls can be reconstructed with a high degree of certainty thanks to the discovery of vessels showing fortification walls with battlements and towers. The gates were always flanked by towers. The Lion’s Gate in Hattusa was approached via a ramp, which ran parallel to the wall to the right, thus exposing the unshielded side of potential attackers to fire from the wall. Every gate could be closed on the outer and inner side by heavy wooden doors, which could be bolted with copper bars. A peculiarity of Hittite fortifications is the so-called postern, a narrow tunnel of up to 50 m in length and 3-4 m in width and height that led through the earthen ramparts on which the fortification stood. According to one theory, these posterns may have served as sally ports, enabling the defenders to make quick sorties. The length and the narrowness of the posterns made them easily defendable against intruders who, on the other hand, were exposed to fire from the fortification walls during their approach. [1]
[1]: Lorenz J. and I. Schrakamp (2011) Hittite Military and Warfare, pp. 141 [In:] H. Genz and D. P. Mielke (ed.) Insights Into Hittite History And Archaeology, Colloquia Antiqua 2, Leuven, Paris, Walpole MA: PEETERS, pp. 125-151
‘judging from the fact that in the Late Bronze I (Period V B, 1750-1600 b.c.e.), a town gate was built in the Arslantepe earthen wall defense system, flanked by two bipartite quadrangular towers, which was highly reminiscent of similar central Anatolian gates, such as those at AliŞar or Boğazköy (Palmieri 1978). ... this fortification system arrangement remained unchanged throughout the imperial Hittite and Neo-Hittite periods’ [1]
[1]: Marcella Frangipane, ‘Arslantepe-Malatya: A Prehistoric and Early Historic Center in Eastern Anatolia’, The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Anatolia: (10,000-323 BCE), Edited by Gregory McMahon and Sharon Steadman, 2011, p. 985
gunpowder not invented at this time
(e.g. Hattusa) The fortification walls were built in a casemate system with a width of up to 8 m. Two parallel walls were connected by diagonal walls, and the compartments thus constructed were filled with rubble. Towers protruded at regular intervals from the outer face of the walls. The walls are always situated on earthen ramparts, which provided protection against battering rams. As usual in Hittite architecture, the foundations and the lower parts of the walls were made of stone, whereas the upper parts consisted of a timber-framed structure of mud-brick. The superstructure of the walls can be reconstructed with a high degree of certainty thanks to the discovery of vessels showing fortification walls with battlements and towers. The gates were always flanked by towers. The Lion’s Gate in Hattusa was approached via a ramp, which ran parallel to the wall to the right, thus exposing the unshielded side of potential attackers to fire from the wall. Every gate could be closed on the outer and inner side by heavy wooden doors, which could be bolted with copper bars. A peculiarity of Hittite fortifications is the so-called postern, a narrow tunnel of up to 50 m in length and 3-4 m in width and height that led through the earthen ramparts on which the fortification stood. According to one theory, these posterns may have served as sally ports, enabling the defenders to make quick sorties. The length and the narrowness of the posterns made them easily defendable against intruders who, on the other hand, were exposed to fire from the fortification walls during their approach. [1]
[1]: Lorenz J. and I. Schrakamp (2011) Hittite Military and Warfare, pp. 141 [In:] H. Genz and D. P. Mielke (ed.) Insights Into Hittite History And Archaeology, Colloquia Antiqua 2, Leuven, Paris, Walpole MA: PEETERS, pp. 125-151
Parallel walls joined by diagonal walls were part of the fortification: ’(e.g. Hattusa) The fortification walls were built in a casemate system with a width of up to 8 m. Two parallel walls were connected by diagonal walls, and the compartments thus constructed were filled with rubble. Towers protruded at regular intervals from the outer face of the walls. The walls are always situated on earthen ramparts, which provided protection against battering rams.’ [1]
[1]: Lorenz J. and I. Schrakamp (2011) Hittite Military and Warfare, pp. 141 [In:] H. Genz and D. P. Mielke (ed.) Insights Into Hittite History And Archaeology, Colloquia Antiqua 2, Leuven, Paris, Walpole MA: PEETERS, pp. 125-151
At the earliest times bronze was preferred and iron had mainly ornamental uses. [1] In Eastern Anatolia "the shift from bronze to iron was more gradual than abrupt" and in some areas bronze was used into the 750-400 BCE period. [2] Iron was used for weapons and tools, and by non-elites, from the Urartian period after about 850 BCE. [3] In nearby Georgia, a regional center for iron smelting, massive finds of iron tools and weapons appear from about 700 BCE. [4]
[1]: Angela Ryczkowski. April 25 2017. Weapons Used by Hittites. Sciencing.
[2]: Lori Khatchadourian. The Iron Age in Eastern Anatolia. Sharon R Steadman. Gregory McMahon. eds. 2011. The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Anatolia: (10,000-323 BCE). Oxford University Press. Oxford.
[3]: (Cifci 2017, 139) Ali Cifci. 2017. The Socio-Economic Organisation of the Urartian Kingdom. BRILL. Leiden.
[4]: (Gamkrelidze 2013) Gamkrelidze, Gela. Researches in Iberia-Colchology (History and archaeology of ancient Georgia). Braund, David. ed. 2012. Georgia National Museum.
Siege warfare is attested in Old Hittite written records. [1] . In Anatolia siege warfare was mentioned in Old Hittite records. [2] Presumably at this time the catapult was not used? In India, according to Jain texts, Ajatashatru, a 5th century BCE king of Magadha in North India, used a catapult "capable of hurling huge pieces of stone". [3] Marsden (1969) said archaeological records exist before the 4th century BCE. [4] The Achaemenids (c400 BCE?) are assumed to have had the catapult because the Macedonians did. [5] Pollard and Berry (2012) say torsion catapults first came into widespread use in the Hellenistic period 4th - 1st centuries BCE. [6] The Syracuse Greek Dionysios I invented a form of crossbow called the gastraphetes in 399 BCE which encouraged the development of large tension-powered weapons. [7] There is no direct evidence for catapults for this time/location. The aforementioned evidence we currently have covering the wider ancient world suggests they were probably not used at this time, perhaps because effective machines had not been invented yet.
[1]: Lorenz J. and I. Schrakamp (2011) Hittite Military and Warfare, pp. 144 [In:] H. Genz and D. P. Mielke (ed.) Insights Into Hittite History And Archaeology, Colloquia Antiqua 2, Leuven, Paris, Walpole MA: PEETERS, pp. 125-138
[2]: Siegelova I. and H. Tsumoto (2011) Metals and Metallurgy in Hittite Anatolia, pp. 278 [In:] H. Genz and D. P. Mielke (ed.) Insights Into Hittite History And Archaeology, Colloquia Antiqua 2, Leuven, Paris, Walpole MA: PEETERS, pp. 275-300
[3]: (Singh 2008, 272) Upinder Singh. 2008. A History of Ancient and Early Medieval India: From the Stone Age to the 12th Century. Pearson Longman. Delhi.
[4]: (Marsden 1969, 5, 16, 66.) Marsden, E. W. 1969. Greek and Roman Artillery: The Historical Development. Toronto: Oxford University Press.
[5]: (Dandamaev 1989, 314) Dandamaev, M A. 1989. A Political History of the Achaemenid Empire. Brill.
[6]: (Pollard and Berry 2012, 45) Pollard, N, Berry, J (2012) The Complete Roman Legions, Thames and Hudson, London Rives, J (2006) Religion in the Roman Empire, Wiley
[7]: (Keyser and Irby-Massie 2006, 260) Paul T Keyser. Georgia Irby-Massie. Science, Medicine, And Technology. Glenn R Bugh. ed. 2006. The Cambridge Companion to the Hellenistic World. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
The counter-weight trebuchet was first used by the Byzantines in 1165 CE.
The written sources do not allow us to draw any conclusions concerning the use of the sling in the Hittite army, whereas it seems likely that the enemies of the Hittites made use of this weapon [1] .
[1]: Lorenz J. and I. Schrakamp (2011) Hittite Military and Warfare, pp. 138 [In:] H. Genz and D. P. Mielke (ed.) Insights Into Hittite History And Archaeology, Colloquia Antiqua 2, Leuven, Paris, Walpole MA: PEETERS, pp. 125-138
[1] . The bow is regularly depicted as the weapon of the king. "Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders." [2]
[1]: Lorenz J. and I. Schrakamp (2011) Hittite Military and Warfare, pp. 131 [In:] H. Genz and D. P. Mielke (ed.) Insights Into Hittite History And Archaeology, Colloquia Antiqua 2, Leuven, Paris, Walpole MA: PEETERS, pp. 125-138
[2]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018.
The principal weapon of the Hittite chariot contingent was the bow and arrow. The bow was made of a composite of wood and horn glued together, which gave it a lot of strength and flexibility. [1] "Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders." [2] "The composite bows spread into Palestine around 1800 BCE and were introduced into Egypt by the Hyksos in 1700 BCE." [3]
[1]: Bryce T. (2007) Hittite Warrior, Oxford: Osprey Publishing, pp. 20
[2]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018.
[3]: (Roy 2015, 20) Kaushik Roy. 2015. Warfare in Pre-British India - 1500 BCE to 1740 CE. Routledge. London.
Examples of swords used by the Hittites: Tell Atchana, Ugarit, Tell es-Sa’idiye, Sarkoy, Warrior God from the King’s Gate in Bogazkoy (with a helmet, sword and axe) [1] . According to one military historian (a polity expert is needed to check its application here): "All armies after the seventeenth century B.C.E. carried the sword, but in none was it a major weapon of close combat; rather, it was used when the soldier’s primary weapons, the spear and axe, were lost or broken." [2]
[1]: Lorenz J. and I. Schrakamp (2011) Hittite Military and Warfare, pp. 128 [In:] H. Genz and D. P. Mielke (ed.) Insights Into Hittite History And Archaeology, Colloquia Antiqua 2, Leuven, Paris, Walpole MA: PEETERS, pp. 125-138
[2]: (Gabriel 2002, 26-27) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
[1] According to one military historian (a polity expert is needed to check its application here): Spear-using phalanx first used in Sumer 2500 BCE. The phalanx was in use until the 1st century BCE. [2]
[1]: Collins B.J.(2007) The Hittites and Their World, (Society of Biblical literature archaeology and Biblical studies; no. 7), Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, pp. 107
[2]: (Gabriel 2002, 25) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
Examples from Kiiltepe, Sivas and Bogazkoy
[1] . "The horse and light chariot were introduced into the Hittite world, as elsewhere in the Near East, probably around 1600..." [2] The efficiency and prowess of the Hittite army stemmed largely from the ability to use a battle chariot. A light horse chariot was an invention of the second millennium BC, quickly adopted by the armies of the Hittites and other peoples. The chariots were already mentioned in the relations of the early wars of the Hittites, but only in the late empire did this type of weapon achieve a high degree of efficiency by developing a system of dressage horses and adding a third chariot warrior.
[1]: Lorenz J. and I. Schrakamp (2011) Hittite Military and Warfare, pp. 139 [In:] H. Genz and D. P. Mielke (ed.) Insights Into Hittite History And Archaeology, Colloquia Antiqua 2, Leuven, Paris, Walpole MA: PEETERS, pp. 125-151
[2]: (Bryce 2002, 111)
The shields are either rectangular or of the figure-of-eight type [1] .
[1]: Lorenz J. and I. Schrakamp (2011) Hittite Military and Warfare, pp. 139 [In:] H. Genz and D. P. Mielke (ed.) Insights Into Hittite History And Archaeology, Colloquia Antiqua 2, Leuven, Paris, Walpole MA: PEETERS, pp. 125-151
Greaves: present. [1] According to one military historian (a polity expert is needed to check its application here): Greece c1600 BCE: "Early Mycenaean and Minoan charioteers wore an arrangement of bronze armor that almost fully enclosed the soldier, the famous Dendra panoply." [2]
[1]: Bryce T. (2007) Hittite Warrior, Oxford: Osprey Publishing, pp. 15
[2]: (Gabriel 2007, 78) Richard A Gabriel. 2007. Soldiers’ Lives Through History: The Ancient World. Greenwood Press. Westport.
Present. [1] Helmets were present in Egypt probably worn by charioteers by the 18th Dynasty c1500 BCE. [2] According to one military historian (a polity expert is needed to check its application here): Earliest known helmet dates to 2500 BCE in Sumer. After this time use of helmets became widespread. [3]
[1]: Bryce T. (2007) Hittite Warrior, Oxford: Osprey Publishing, pp. 15-16
[2]: (Hoffmeier 2001) J K Hoffmeier in D B Redford. ed. 2001. The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
[3]: (Gabriel 2002, 22) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
There was no Hittite fleet, and we do not know what ships were used for intercourse with the island of Cyprus, which the Hittites appear to have controlled. They used the services of the countries covered, especially Ugarit. However, the last king of Hatti, Suppiluliuma II actually boasts of victory in two sea battles (but does not describe them). [1]
[1]: Gurney, O. R. (1952) The Hittites, Penguin. pp. 103
In use: ’There was no Hittite fleet, and we do not know what ships were used for intercourse with the island of Cyprus, which the Hittites appear to have controlled. They used the services of the countries covered, especially Ugarit. However, the last king of Hatti, Suppiluliuma II actually boasts of victory in two sea battles (but does not describe them).’ [1]
[1]: Gurney, O. R. (1952) The Hittites, Penguin. pp. 103
’There was no Hittite fleet, and we do not know what ships were used for intercourse with the island of Cyprus, which the Hittites appear to have controlled. They used the services of the countries covered, especially Ugarit. However, the last king of Hatti, Suppiluliuma II actually boasts of victory in two sea battles (but does not describe them).’ [1]
[1]: Gurney, O. R. (1952) The Hittites, Penguin. pp. 103