Kurustama Treaty

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Kuruštama Treaty was an intergovernmental agreement from the 15th century BC. Between the Egyptian Empire and the Hittite Empire . Parts of the contract have been preserved on cuneiform tablets from Hattuša , on the one hand as secondary sources in later tradition, on the other hand there is also a fragment of the original contract. It is the oldest preserved parity state treaty . The contracting partners are Tudhalija I on the Hittite side and Thutmose III on the Egyptian side . or, according to the older view, Amenhotep II . In the treaty, Egyptians and Hittites regulated the consequences of the emigration of residents from Kuruštama to the territory of the Egyptians. The treaty also appears to have included border regulations. It was valid until the Hittites attacked the Egyptian Amka at the end of the Egyptian 18th dynasty (approx. 1330 BC; see also Dahamunzu affair ). The city of Kuruštama was probably located in northern or northeastern Anatolia , but an exact location is not possible.

Lore

Geopolitical situation in the Middle East in the 14th century BC Chr.
Example of a Hittite cuneiform fragment with the "Mannestaten Šuppiluliumas "

In Hattuša , the capital of the Hittite Empire, archaeologists discovered the clay tablet archives of the Hittite kings. Among them were the so-called " Mannestaten Šuppiluliumas " (also called "Annals Šuppiluliumas"), which Mursili II , a son and successor of the Hittite great king Šuppiluliuma I , wrote. The so-called Dahamunzu affair is recorded in it . When Hittite troops invaded the Egyptian border area at the end of the Amarna period , the Egyptians got into a difficult position because the Pharaoh had just died. In this situation, the childless king widow (presumably Ankhesenamun ) wrote a letter to Šuppiluliuma I with the request for a son as husband who should rule over Egypt. Šuppiluliuma I then had the archives researched for earlier Egyptian-Hittite relations. A contract was brought to him in which the residents of Kuruštama play an important role, which is why it is known as the Kuruštama contract.

"[...] and then my father asked for the contract document. 'How earlier the weather god took the man from Kuruštama the Hittite and took him away to the land of Egypt and made them (!) People of Egypt; how the weather god made a treaty between the land of Egypt and the land of Hatti; how they were eternally friends: how one read the blackboard in front of them. ' Then my father said to them: 'From ancient times Hattusa and Egypt were friends. Now this also happened among us. The land of Hatti [and] the land of Egypt will continue to be freed from one another forever! '"

- Man's deeds of Šuppiluliuma I.

In the Dahamunzu affair, Šuppiluliuma I finally gave in to the wishes of the Egyptian king's widow and sent his son Zannanza to Egypt, but he was murdered. Šuppiluliuma led a retaliatory strike against Egypt, from which, however, the prisoners of war brought an epidemic (usually called " plague ") into Anatolia, of which Šuppiluliuma also died. In the so-called plague prayers , Muršili II tried to determine the reason for the anger of the gods and the associated outbreak of the plague through oracle inquiries. In the second plague prayer, the reason given was the invasion of the Amka plain and thus the breach of the Kuruštama treaty.

“[And I found] two ancient documents […] The second tablet about the city of Kuruštama: 'How the weather god of Hatti brought the people from Kuruštama to the land of Egypt; how the weather god of Hatti made them a contract, and they were then sworn in by the weather god of Hatti. ' And (regardless of the fact that the people of Hattusa and the people of Egypt were sworn in by the weather god of Hatti, the people of Hattusa came to gain the upper hand, and the people of Hattusa immediately broke the oath of God by doing so. My father sent troops and chariots and they attacked the land of Amka, the border country with Egypt. And he sent again and they attacked again. How I found the (just) mentioned tablet about the land of Egypt [...] "

- Second plague prayer

A fragmentary plague prayer ( CTH 379) also mentions the Kuruštama treaty:

"[It was a blackboard? about] Egypt. I have not added a word to this tablet, nor have I taken away. Oh gods, gentlemen, take note! I don't know if any of the kings before me added or took [a word] away. I don't know (about it) and I haven't heard a word about it (anymore) since then. I did not concern myself with these boundaries that were set for us by the storm god. These boundaries my father left me, these boundaries [I kept]. I wanted [nothing] from him [...] nor [I took something] from his border region. "

- Plague prayer CTH 379

By identifying the fragment KBo VIII, 37 (assigned to CTH 134) as part of the original contract, the evidence situation has improved significantly. In the meantime further fragments (CTH 134) have been added, some of which are more recent copies of the Kuruštama Treaty.

In the Egyptian-Hittite peace treaty between Ramses II and Hattušili III. around 1259 BC The renewal of an older contract is mentioned, which could be the Kuruštama contract.

Dating

Thutmose III. , who comes into question as an Egyptian contractual partner.

In prayer CTH 379 Mursili II mentions that he could not guarantee that other kings before him would not have changed the treaty. According to this, several kings must have ruled between the writing and the mention of Muršilis II, which means that there is no dating to the reign of Šuppiluliuma I. This also fits with Šuppiluliuma's statement that a contract has existed "from time immemorial".

Based on palaeographical and linguistic criteria, CTH 134 clearly dates to the 15th century BC. Other fragments and quotations also contain typical Middle Hittite spellings. Thus there is now consensus in research about dating to the Middle Hittite period . The literal quotation in the 2nd plague prayer of Mursili II also shows grammatical archaisms . The reign of Tudhalija I is most likely to come into question. After internal political turmoil, he became involved again in the Middle East for the first time, for example through contracts with Tunip (KBo IXX, 59) and Astata (KUB LVII, 18).

On the Egyptian side, only the kings Amenophis II and Thutmose III come for chronological reasons . in question. Itamar Singer spoke out for Amenhotep II. The government of Thutmose III. be too early. He refers to the Memphis stele, according to which Hatti and Sanger (Babylon) asked him for peace, which can be interpreted as an indication of diplomatic relations. However, according to Francis Breyer, little faith can be given to the texts of this king. Accordingly, he only tried to hide the fact that he was unable to build on the successes of his predecessors.

In contrast, synchronisms between Tudhalija I. and Thutmose III seem to be quite common . to pass. The conquest of Aleppo by Tudhalija I probably took place in the context of Mitanni's weakening through the activities of Thutmose III. Therefore, for Breyer as a contractual partner in the Kuruštama Treaty on the Egyptian side, only Thutmose III comes. in question. In the annals of Thutmose III. The first reliable occurrence of "Hattis" can also be found in ancient Egyptian sources. The expression Ḫt3 ˁ3 ("Gross-Hatti") is a specific term used in Hittite diplomatic texts. Further references to relations with the Hittite Empire are the toponyms jsy (Isi), tnj (Teni) and qtj (Keti), which are probably Anatolian place names.

Interpretations

The content of the tables shows that the migration of the residents of Kuruštama resulted in a contractual settlement between the Egyptians and the Hittites. The treaty also seems to have included border regulations that were valid until the Hittites attacked the Egyptian Amka at the end of the Amarna period . There is disagreement in research about any further reconstructions of content.

Dietrich Sürenhagen called the Kuruštama treaty a “dismissal treaty” and tried to work out that it differs from an earlier Egyptian-Hittite treaty mentioned in the texts. But it is probably the reason to enter into diplomatic relations with Egypt, since the people from Kuruštama are released from their previous subjects and "become people of Egypt". A temporal differentiation of the events is not possible, so this theory does not seem plausible.

According to Emil Forrer , the people of Kuruštama are refugees who were expelled as a result of the conquest of Syria by the Hittites and who sought asylum on Egyptian territory . Accordingly, one of the tasks of the Hittite envoy Hattusa-zidi in the Dahamunzu affair was to negotiate with the Egyptian side over this refugee problem. In comparison to the Arzawa letter EA 31 (see Amarna letters ), in which Kaškäer are required as workers, Eugène Cavaignac sees the Kurustameans as Hittite prisoners.

According to Breyer, the two great powers had come so close that a direct confrontation threatened, which is why they established diplomatic contacts. The Egyptians learned the cuneiform script in order to be able to communicate internationally. Even before the Amarna period, a kind of code of conduct for international relations was created. The beginning and intensifying contacts between the two cultures became tangible for the first time in the Thutmosid period: "Not only in diplomatic relations do you have to say goodbye to the beloved image of internationalization until the Amarna period - even the early Thutmosids were 'global players'. . "

literature

  • Francis Breyer : Egypt and Anatolia. Political, cultural and linguistic contacts between the Nile Valley and Asia Minor in the 2nd millennium BC Chr. (= Austrian Academy of Sciences. Memoranda of the overall academy. Vol. 63 = Contributions to the Chronology of the Eastern Mediterranean. Vol. 25). Publishing house of the Austrian Academy of Sciences, Vienna 2010, ISBN 978-3-7001-6593-4 .
  • Francis Breyer: Thutmose III. and the Hittites. Comments on the Kurustama Treaty as well as on Anatolian toponyms and a Hittite loan translation in the Annals of Thutmose III. In: Studies on Ancient Egyptian Culture. (SAK) 39, Hamburg 2010, pp. 67-83.
  • Detlev Groddek: "Egypt be an ally of the Hittite country!" On the creation of the text of two paragraphs of the Kuruštama Treaty. In: Göttinger Miscellen. 218, 2008, pp. 37-44.
  • Hans Gustav Güterbock : The Deeds of Suppiluliuma as Told by his Son, Mursili II. In: Journal of Cuneiform Studies . Vol. 10, No. 2, 1956, pp. 41-68; Vol. 10, No. 3, 1956, pp. 75-98, Vol. 10, No. 4, 1956, pp. 107-130.
  • Itamar Singer : The Kuruštama Treaty Revisited. In: Emilio O Forrer, Detlev Groddek, Sylvester Rössle (eds.): Šarnikzel. Hittite studies in memory of Emil Orgetorix Forrer. Verlag der Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden 2004, ISBN 978-3-86005-392-8 , pp. 591-607.
  • Itamar Singer, Harry A Hoffner: Hittite Prayers (= Writings from the ancient world. No. 11). Society of Biblical Literature, Atlanta 2002, ISBN 978-1-58983-032-5 .
  • Dietrich Sürenhagen : Parity treaties from the Hittite point of view (= Studia Mediterranea. Vol. 5). 1st edition, Iuculano, Pavia 1985, ISBN 978-88-7072-080-8 .
  • Dietrich Sürenhagen: Forerunners of the Hattusili-Ramesses treaty. In: The British Museum Studies in Ancient Egypt and Sudan. No. 6, 2006, pp. 59–67 ( online as PDF file ).

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ^ F. Breyer: Thutmose III. and the Hittites. Hamburg 2010, p. 83.
  2. ^ Trevor Bryce : The Routledge Handbook of the Peoples and Places of Ancient Western Asia. From the Early Bronze Age to the Fall of the Persian Empire. Routledge, London / New York, 2009, pp. 399-400.
  3. ^ A b c F. Breyer: Egypt and Anatolia. Vienna 2010, p. 141.
  4. ^ Bernhard Rosenkranz: Review of KBo VIII. In: Bibliotheca Orientalis 14, 1957, pp. 234-235.
  5. ^ F. Breyer: Egypt and Anatolia. Vienna 2010, pp. 142–143.
  6. ^ Dietrich Sürenhagen: Forerunners of the Hattusili-Ramesses treaty. In: The British Museum Studies in Ancient Egypt and Sudan Issue 6, 2006, pp. 59-67 ( online ).
  7. ^ F. Breyer: Thutmose III. and the Hittites. Hamburg 2010, pp. 69–70.
  8. ↑ Itamar Singer: The Kuruštama Treaty Revisited. In: D. Groddek, S. Rössle (Ed.): Šarnikzel. Hittite studies in memory of Emil Orgetorix Forrer. Verlag der Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden 2004, pp. 591–607.
  9. ^ F. Breyer: Thutmose III. and the Hittites. Hamburg 2010, pp. 72–73.
  10. ^ Stefano de Martino: A Tentative Chronology of the Kingdom of Mitanni from its Rise to the Reign of Tušrata. In: H. Hunger, R. Pruszinsky (Eds.): Mesopotamian Dark Age Revisited. Publishing house of the Austrian Academy of Sciences, Vienna 2004, pp. 35–42.
  11. ↑ Jörg Klinger: Synchronisms in the epoch of Suppiluliuma I. Some remarks on the chronology of Middle Hittite history. In: O. Carruba et al. (Ed.): Studia Mediterranea 9 (Atti Pavia 1993), Pavia, 1995, p. 246.
  12. ^ F. Breyer: Thutmose III. and the Hittites. Hamburg 2010, p. 67.
  13. ^ Dietrich Sürenhagen: Equal state treaties from a Hittite point of view. Iuculano, Pavia 1985, especially pp. 22-39.
  14. ^ F. Breyer: Egypt and Anatolia. Vienna 2010, p. 142.
  15. ^ Emil Forrer: The Hittites in Palestine. In: Palestine Exploration Quarterly 68, 1936, pp. 190-203.
  16. ↑ Eugène Cavaignac: Subbiluliuma et son temps. Belles Lettres, Paris 1932, p. 72.
  17. ^ F. Breyer: Thutmose III. and the Hittites. Hamburg 2010, p. 83.