5 the Men of Arwad, Mercenaries of the Sea 6
0993-8_BIOR_2008/1-2_01 21-04-2008 14:39 Pagina 5
5 THE MEN OF ARWAD, MERCENARIES OF THE SEA 6
HOOFDARTIKEL practically all archaeological traces (Badre 1997: 218; Lip- inski 2004: 281).
THE MEN OF ARWAD, MERCENARIES OF THE SEA 2. Written sources for the history of Arwad in the 14th century BCE: the Amarna Letters Jordi VIDAL*) In order to reconstruct the history of Arwad in the 14th The Amarna Letters describe a convulsive political sce- century BCE, the only information available is found in the nario in the 14th century BCE, with frequent disputes and Amarna Letters1). Arwad is attested in five of these letters: armed conflicts between the small kingdoms in the area. EA 98, 101, 104, 105 and 149. Unfortunately, none of these Within this context, the importance granted by some documents was sent from Arwad itself. Arwad is merely of these letters to the island of Arwad and its fleet is sur- mentioned in letters written in other cities, which happened prising. This paper seeks to describe the causes that explain to be its enemies. This must be taken into account when the military importance of Arwad, the war actions its analysing the documents. In the following lines we shall re- ships were involved in and the nature of the existing link examine the five letters in question, with special attention to between Arwad and the main military power of the time, those fragments where Arwad is mentioned: Amurru. • EA 101: Letter from Rib-Adda of Byblos to Amenophis III(?). It is the second tablet in a double letter. The first 1. Territory tablet is missing, so there is no absolute certainty about the names of either the sender or the addressee. However, tak- Arwad (present-day Ruwad) was a city located on a small ing into account palaeography and philology, we may island (ca. 40 ha), 2.5 km off the coast of northern Phoeni- include EA 101 among the Rib-Adda texts (Moran 2003: cia near the mouth of the river Nahr al-Kabir (Badre 1997: 227 n. 1). Moreover, recent petrographic analysis of the 218; Belmonte 2003: 53; Lipinski 2004: 281). It was an tablet has confirmed its Byblian origin (Goren-Finkelstein- almost impregnable site and of great significance for trade. Na’aman 2004: 147). In the letter, Rib-Adda asked for Along with Byblos, Tyre, and Asdod, Arwad was one of the Egyptian military intervention against Abdi-Asirta of main seaports in the maritime route linking Ugarit and Egypt Amurru (Liverani 1998b)2). Rib-Adda also mentioned the (Liverani 1979: 1330). The geography of Arwad helps us existing hostility of the ships of Arwad, so he asked the understand the important role played by its fleet during the pharaoh to hold back the ships that were still in Egypt, in Late Bronze Age. On the eastern side of the island, which order to prevent them from participating in acts of war faces the mainland and is protected from the prevailing against Byblos3): winds, there were two natural bays of a fair size, which served as safe anchorages (Belmonte 2003: 53; Lipinski [No]w, as soon as the ships of the (Egyptian) navy enter 2004: 281) (Fig. 1). Amurru, they will defeat Abdi-Asirta, since they (i.e. the Amorrites) do not have wool and he does not have purple gar- ments to give as a tribute to Mittani. Moreover, whose ships stood against me? Are they not the men of Arwad?4) Indeed, they are now with you. Seize the ships of the men of Arwad that are in Egypt! (EA 101: 3-18). • EA 104: Letter from Rib-Adda of Byblos to Amenophis III (Na’aman 2005: 44) or Amenophis IV (Liverani 1998: 199)5), dealing with the conquest of Ullasa, a seaport in the region of Tripoli, by Pu-Ba{li of Amurru, one of the sons of Abdi-Asirta. In a passage of the letter concerning the Amor- rite actions against Sumura, Rib-Adda pointed out that the fleets of Ambi, Sigata, Ullasa and Arwad prevented the ships of Byblos from reaching Sumura: What am I to do? I cannot go personally to Sumura. The cities of Ambi, Sigata, Ullasa (and) Arwad are hostile to me. If they hear that I am entering Sumura, there will be these cities with ships and the sons of Abdi-Asirta in the open country (EA 104: 36-48).
Fig. 1. The island of Arwad (A. Poidebard). 1) According to some scholars, Arwad is already mentioned in the archives of Ebla (MEE 3, p. 236 no. 197; ARES II p. 133) and Alalah (AT Unfortunately, even though archaeological study of 146: 22, 174: 3, 181: 12, 298: 43) (Xella 1995: 40; Badre 1997: 218, Lip- Arwad began in the 19th century (Renan 1864), we know inski 2004: 280f.). However, see Bonechi 1993: 46f.; Belmonte 2001: 39, 2003: 47. hardly anything about the ancient settlements in the island. 2) There have been many different interpretations of EA 101. See Liv- The continuous human occupation of the site has erased erani 1998b: 388 notes 4-13. 3) On the need for the pharaoh to control the fleet allied with Amurru, indicated by Rib-Adda, see Altman 1977: 9. *) I am grateful to Dr. Ester Blay, Dr. Wilfred Watson and Dr. Juan 4) Instead, Liverani 1998b: 389 n. 18 holds lines 12-13 are not rhetor- Antonio Belmonte for their help in writing this paper. Of course, responsi- ical but an assertion: “(Certainly) not (those of) the Arwad people!”. bility for mistakes is my own. 5) See also Campbell 1964: 79f. 0993-8_BIOR_2008/1-2_01 21-04-2008 14:39 Pagina 6
7 BIBLIOTHECA ORIENTALIS LXV N° 1-2, januari-april 2008 8
• EA 105: Letter from Rib-Adda of Byblos to Amenophis enemies of Byblos, Liverani identifies various features in the IV6), written shortly after the fall of Ullasa. Rib-Adda letters that may lead us to question whether the events described a joint attack by Amurru (by land) and Arwad (by described in them actually took place (Liverani 2004: 102ff.). sea) on Byblos. The role played by the fleet of Arwad con- Thus, for example, Rib-Adda often complains about the loss sisted in blocking the arrival of Byblian ships to Sumura. of cities, ‘taken’ by the enemies or ‘gone over’ to them by Moreover, Rib-Adda described one of the actions performed themselves. It is important to note how these cities always by the Arwadites: the interception of three Byblian ships appear in pairs. Their names vary but they are always two in heading to Sumura, where they were summoned by the new number: Sigata and Ambi (EA 74-76), Byblos and Batruna Egyptian commissioner, Yanhamu. (EA 79-81), Sumura and Irqata (EA 103). Liverani asserts The sons of Abdi-Asirta by land, and the men of Arwad by that this is undoubtedly a stylistic device rather than a pre- sea, are agai[nst me] day and night. I sent 3 s[hi]ps to Yan- cise figure. hamu, [but] the men of Arwad were (there) to intercept th[em], Liverani also points to the fact that the sequence of events and out they came! Consider the case of the men of Arwad. consisting in Rib-Adda at first progressively losing all his When the (Egyptian) troops came out, al[l th]ings of Abdi- cities to Abdi-Ashirta, then retrieving them after the chief of Asirta in their possession were not taken away, and their ships, Amurru died, and finally losing them again under the pres- by an agreement, left Egypt. Thus, they are not afraid. Now sure of Aziru is an unacceptable transposition onto a histor- they have taken Ullasa, and they strive to take Sumura (…) ical level of the cyclical view of events typical of Rib-Adda’s The Egyptians who go out of Ullasa are now with me, but there is no [gr]ain for them to eat. Yapah-Adda does not let milieu. my ships [int]o Yarimuta, and I cannot send them to Sumura To sum up, Rib-Adda often depicts a chaotic scenario, because of the ships of Arwad (EA 105: 11-24, 83-87). stressing the surrounding world’s hostility against Byblos in an exaggerated manner. This allows Liverani to conclude that • EA 98: Letter from Yapah-Adda7) to Yanhamu, the Egypt- the information reflected in all his letters could really describe ian commissioner of Sumura. Yapah-Adda asked for Egypt- a psychological state (“siege psychosis”) rather than a his- ian intervention in order to defend Sumura from attacks by torical situation. Aziru of Amurru, the most influential of Abdi-Asirta’s sons Liverani’s observations regarding the “enemy” in Rib- (Singer 1991: 148; Klengel 1992: 161). According to EA Adda’s letters are directly relevant to our study, for they lead 98: 13-18, Aziru led the fleet of Arwad. He placed the Arwa- us to question the historical value of the references to Arwad dite ships in the seaports of Ambi and Sigata in order to pre- in EA 101, 104 and 105. Thus, actions such as the blockade vent the arrival of grain supplies to Sumura. of the Sumura seaport (EA 104), the interception of Byblian [S]ay [t]o Yanhamu: Message of Yapah-Adda. Why have you ships and the conquest of Ullasa (EA 105), could have been been neglectful of Sumura, when all lands in the service of the expression of Rib-Adda’s siege psychosis, and not actual Aziru, from Byblos to Ugarit, are hostile? Sigata and Ambi historical events. Fortunately, there are references to Arwad are hostile. Now he has [st]ationed the ships of Ar[wa]d [i]n not only in the Rib-Adda letters, but as we have seen, Arwad Ambi and in Sigata so that grain cannot be brought into is also mentioned in a letter from Yappah-Adda and in Sumura. We cannot enter Sumura (EA 98: 1-20). another from Abi-Milki. It is interesting to observe how, • EA 149: Letter from Abi-Milki of Tyre to Amenophis IV8). according to EA 98, the ships of Arwad controlled the sea- The text refers to a confrontation between Tyre and Sidon for ports of Ambi and Sigata, while according to EA 149, the control of the lands south of the Litani river. In lines 57-63, ships of Arwad were involved in a war action against Tyre. Abi-Milki mentions the participation of the fleet of Arwad Therefore, EA 98 and 149 attest the military importance that and the army of Amurru as allies of Sidon (Vidal 2006). the Rib-Adda letters granted the fleet of Arwad. In any case, if Liverani’s observations were accepted, they would only Zimrida of Sidon, Aziru, the king’s rebel, and the men of Arwad have sworn and repeated the oath between themselves. question the historical character of certain particular actions They have assembled their ships, chariots and infantry to seize undertaken by the ships of Arwad, but not the well-attested Tyre, the maidservant of the king (EA 149: 57-63). importance of Arwad as one of the main actors in naval war- fare in the 14th century BCE. In a study on Rib-Adda, Liverani has pointed to the prob- lems posed by the use of his letters as a historical source. More precisely, and regarding the frequent reference to the 3. Mercenaries of the sea The scarcity of data concerning Arwad found in the Amarna Letters leaves many questions unanswered about its 6) According to Na’aman, EA 105 was written sometime between the Egyptian campaign against Amurru, that put an end to Abdi-Asirta’s reign, forms of government and the land it controlled in the 14th and the beginning of Akhenaten’s reign (Na’aman 2005: 45). Taking over century BCE. from a previous proposal by Weber, Moran links the complaint in EA 105: According to Briquel-Chatonnet, Arwad was not ruled by 20-21 about the ships of the Arwadites having been allowed to leave Egypt, a king. In the Amarna Letters, references may be found to to the request in EA 101: 15-18 about the Arwadite ships being seized (EA 9 II, 1203), and thus concludes that the time span between EA 101 and EA Arwad (URU er-wa-da) ), the “men of Arwad” (LÚ.MES 105 cannot have been very great (Moran 2003: 229). URU ar-wa-da)10), the “ships of Arwad” (GIS.MÁ.MES 7) Several authors point out that Yapah-Adda was a king of Beirut, pre- URU ar-wa-da)11) and the “ships of the men of Arwad” vious to Ammunira (Helck 1962: 179, 193 n. 29; Na’aman 2005: 56. (GIS.MÁ.MES LÚ.MES URU ar-wa-da)12), but there are no Instead, Belmonte 2003: 48f holds he was the king of Ardata). However it is necessary to note that the name of Yapah-Adda never appears linked to Beirut. It is also uncertain that the Yapah-Adda mentioned in the letters of Rib-Adda of Byblos was the very individual who sent letters EA 97 and 98 9) EA 104: 42. (Liverani 1998: 242). 10) EA 101: 13; EA 105: 12, 16, 17f.; EA 149: 59. 8) See Katzenstein 1997: 35 on the chronology of the letters of Abi- 11) EA 98: 13f.; EA 105: 87. Milki. 12) EA 101: 15f. 0993-8_BIOR_2008/1-2_01 21-04-2008 14:39 Pagina 7
9 THE MEN OF ARWAD, MERCENARIES OF THE SEA 10
references to the “king of Arwad”. According to Briquel- in these inscriptions. Thus, as we have seen above, the use Chatonnet, the fragment EA 149: 57-59 is particularly rele- of the determinative for country (KUR) is attested in one vant. In this passage, Abi-Milki describes the members of the occassion19), whereas Arwad is preceded twice by the deter- anti-Tyrian coalition that intended to conquer the Tyrian ter- minative for city (URU)20). In spite of the difficulties posed ritory south of the Litani river: Zimrida of Sidon, Aziru of by this changing use of the determinatives, these two last ref- Amurru and the men of Arwad. Therefore, in this list Abi- erences are particularly significant. Arwad appears there Milki put Zimrida, Aziru and the men of Arwad on the same alongside Tyre and Sidon, cities with a hinterland and which, level. It would then be reasonable to think that if a king of instead to Arwad, are preceded by the determinative KUR Arwad existed he would have been mentioned alongside Zim- (Briquel-Chatonnet 1997: 58ff. and 2000: 131). rida and Aziru (Briquel-Chatonnet 2000: 129). In this manner, if we add the absence of references to con- There are two additional examples of cities without kings tinental territories in the Amarna Letters and the usual iden- in the Amarna archive: Irqata and Tunip. The king of Irqata, tification of Arwad as a city and not as a country in the Aduna, was killed by the habiru13). After that the elders of the inscriptions of Tiglath-pileser I, it is reasonable to ascertain city (LÚ.MES si-bu!-ti-si)14) became the city’s main authority that Arwad did not control continental territories in the sec- (Artzi 1964: 163; Reviv 1969: 286ff.; Liverani 1974: 355; ond half of the second millennium BCE. Bunnens 1982: 135; Klengel 1992: 175; Belmonte 2001b: However, the absence of Arwadite agricultural lands opens 274). In the case of Tunip, its inhabitants (DUMU.MES URU a query on the economic viability of the occupation of the tù-ni-ip KI)15) wrote a message to the pharaoh at a time when island in 14th century BCE. As we pointed to before, Arwad there was no king in the city, asking for the return of the son has been described as one of the main Levantine seaports, of Aki-Tesub in order to occupy the throne (Artzi 1964: 161; alongside Byblos, Tyre and Asdod, in the maritime route Reviv 1969: 286; Liverani 1974: 355). linking Ugarit and Egypt (Liverani 1979: 1330), with a pow- However, the absence of a king in Tunip and Irqata was erful commercial fleet controlled by an aristocratic and col- an anomalous and temporary situation16). Instead, the absence legiate government (Briquel-Chatonnet 2000: 132). Accord- of a king in Arwad does not seem to have been a strange sit- ing to this reconstruction, then, the subsistence of Arwad is uation. In fact, it appears to be a typical and enduring feature decisively linked to international trade. of Arwad. In this direction Briquel-Chatonnet has pointed to Nevertheless, in our opinion this description leaves an an inscription of Tiglath-pileser I (1114-1076 BCE), who important question unanswered, that is, the military relevance again referred to Arwad (KUR ar-ma-da)17) and the “ships that the Amarna Letters grant Arwad. A different interpreta- of Arwad” (GIS.MÁ.MES-te sa KUR ar-ma-da)18), without tion may explain more satisfactorily how a commercial site any reference to a king (Briquel-Chatonnet 2000: 130). could develop one of the most important military fleets in the According to this scholar, the expression LÚ.MES URU ar- Levant in the 14th century BCE. As Briquel-Chatonnet points wa-da ought to be understoood as a reference to an aristo- out, Arwad must have been damaged from an economic point cratic and collegiate form of government, typical of Arwad of view by the Egyptian conquest of Ullasa and Sumura, dur- (Briquel-Chatonnet 2000: 132). ing the reign of Thutmosis IIII (Briquel-Chatonnet 1996: 64). The extension of the territorial domains of Arwad in the 14th Because of the Egyptian conquest Sumura became one of the century BCE is another open question. At first sight, it could be most important seaports in the Levant, to the detriment of thought that, as is the case with the island of Tyre at the same Arwad, controlling maritime routes and the land route to time, Arwad controlled continental possessions, which would inner Syria. Arwad, with no agricultural lands to provide for provide water, food, timber and could also serve as its grave- subsistence, and overshadowed by Sumura from a commer- yard. However, these possible Arwadite continental territories cial point of view, must necessarily have experienced a deca- are never mentioned in the Amarna Letters (Briquel-Chatonnet dence process and a readaptation to that new situation. 2000: 131; Belmonte 2003: 49). This does not necessarily The studies of Artzy about the role played by intermediaries mean that they did not exist. The lack of references to the con- in maritime transport in the Levant during the Late Bronze tinental territories of Arwad could be the result of the kind of Age are really useful to explain the process undergone by sources available, i.e. no letters written from Arwad itself. Arwad (Artzy 1997). Such intermediaries were groups The study of the determinatives of Arwad in the five employed as “economic mercenaries”. Due to their expertise Amarna Letters where it is mentioned does not answer the in navigation, they became an essential part of the trade net- question about the extent of its domains. As it happens with work, serving as transporters of goods and traders. With the all other sites in the Phoenician coast, be them kingdoms or profits gained with their activities these intermediaries could cities, Arwad is always preceded by the determinative for city improve their role and perform an actual “entrepreneurial (URU), therefore no territorial meaning might be deduced trade”. This is attested, for example, in Tel Nami and partic- from this fact. ularly in the Cape Gelidonya shipwreck. There, slab ingots It is more useful to analyse the determinatives of Arwad were found in the vicinity of the “captain’s cabin” alongside in the inscriptions of Tiglath-pileser I (1114-1076 BCE), texts other personal items for daily use, and far away from the other two and a half centuries later than the Amarna archive. A ingots (oxhide, bun). Taking into consideration where they changing use of the determinatives of Arwad can be observed were found, these slab ingots have been interpreted as proof that the captain of the ship and his tripulation were involved in a trade different from the main cargo of the ship for their 13) EA 75: 25f. 14) EA 100: 4. own benefit (i.e. entrepeneurial trade). However, when the 15) EA 59: 2. 16) Instead, Landsberger pointed out that EA 59 reflected Tunip’s repub- lican organization in the 14th century BCE (Landsberger 1954: 61 n. 134). 17) RIMA 2, p. 37, A.0.87.3: 20, 22. 19) RIMA 2, p. 37, A.0.87.3: 21f. 18) RIMA 2, p. 37, A.0.87.3: 21. 20) RIMA 2, p. 42, A.0.87.4: 27; p. 53, A.0.87.10: 32. 0993-8_BIOR_2008/1-2_01 21-04-2008 14:39 Pagina 8
11 BIBLIOTHECA ORIENTALIS LXV N° 1-2, januari-april 2008 12
economic situation was no longer advantageous and authori- the seizure of Ullasa (EA 105) and the control of the seaports ties could no longer provide the necessary material safety, of Sigata and Ambi in order to prevent the arrival of grain intermediaries reverted, according to their specialization, to supplies to Sumura (EA 98). In addition, the men of Arwad marauding practices and piracy as subsistence ways. also undertook actions on the high seas in order to disrupt the The situation of Arwad at the time studied fits well in the seaborne communications of Byblos. This is reflected in EA scenario defined by Artzy. Thus, the fleet of Arwad, which 105: 14ff., where an explicit reference to the interception of would have been in crisis due to the importance gained by three Byblian ships is found (Klengel 1992: 162)23). Finally, Sumura as the main seaport in the region, could have been EA 149 alludes to the farthest war action the men of Arwad compelled to marauding practices as a strategy for subsis- were involved in: the attack against the Tyrian city of Usu, tence, thus becoming true experts in sea war and in the attack led by Zimrida of Sidon. Some authors have pointed out that to coastal sites. This is obviously just a hypothesis since no the ships of Arwad blocked the seaport of Tyre (Bikai 1992: text explicitly mentions the men of Arwad as pirates. How- 14; Gestoso 1992: 59; Delcor 1995: 337; Katzenstein 1997: ever, this hypothesis would explain the military importance 37ff.; Belmonte 2003: 100ff.). However, there is no explicit of the fleet of Arwad as is reflected in the Amarna Letters. reference to that blockade in the letters of Abi-Milku. The Moreover, we must bear in mind the excellent geographical role played by Arwad in this conflict was probably limited conditions that the island of Arwad offered for marauding to transporting troops and disrupting the seaborne communi- practices (isolation, inaccessibility, refuge). cations of Tyre (Vidal 2006) (Fig. 2)24). This proposal enables us to address another relevant mat- ter, that is the nature of the relations between Arwad and Amurru. In the following lines we shall review the most important contributions to this topic. Singer, according to whom Arwad was a kingdom in spite of the fact that a king is never mentioned, pointed out that it was “a client kingdom of Amurru, perhaps with a semi-idependent status” (Singer 1991: 157). Klengel favoured a definition of Arwad as a con- federate city during the reign of Aziru (Klengel 1992: 164). Briquel-Chatonnet described a more complex situation, iden- tifying two different stages in the relations between Amurru and Arwad. First, in the time of Abdi-Asirta, Arwad was one of Amurru’s allied cities. Later, during the reign of Aziru, the balance of power would have varied favouring Amurru, that would have managed to place Arwad under its sphere of influ- ence (Briquel-Chatonnet 1996: 65). Finally, Belmonte has avoided specifying the precise nature of the relation; he just points out the existence of some kind of collaboration between Amurru and Arwad, with the main aim of Arwad being to gain access to a continental territory (Belmonte 2003: 50). The main problem posed by some of the above mentioned proposals is the difficulty of determining how Amurru could have controlled the island of Arwad, which moreover lacked any continental territories that could have been threatened by Amurru. Instead, we argue that in fact Arwad acted as a mer- cenary force21) under Amurru’s orders. Due to Amurru’s geography — the hilly territories in the Middle Orontes Val- ley (Liverani 1965: 268, 1998b: 392) — its infantry was powerful, but its army had neither a tradition nor any apti- tude for sea warfare. The sea was an alien environment for Amurru but one that it had to control within the framework of its expansionist strategy in the Levantine coast. In order to overcome its weakness on the sea, Amurru decided to engage a mercenary force, the fleet of Arwad, an old com- mercial fleet turned into a naval force devoted to naval and coastal attacks, because of the decadence of Arwad as a com- Fig. 2. Military actions in which the fleet of Arwad took part mercial seaport. Thus, the relationship between Amurru and according to the Amarna Letters. Arwad would not have been political (client kingdom, con- federate city, dependent city), but economic and military. 23) EA 105: 14-16: ù us-
13 THE MEN OF ARWAD, MERCENARIES OF THE SEA 14
The use of seafaring warriors serving as mercenaries was Belmonte, J.A. 2001b. Irqata. Un pequeño reino en el llano de a common practice in the Ancient Near East. A classic exam- {Akkar. In J.L. Montero-J. Vidal-F. Masó (eds.): De la estepa ple is that of the sardana, identified as a group of sea-raiders al Mediterráneo. Barcelona, pp. 271-288. confronting the Egyptians in an inscription of Ramesses II25). Belmonte, J.A. 2003. Cuatro estudios sobre los dominios territoria- les de las ciudades-estado fenicias. Barcelona. Due to their fighting qualities, they were also recruited as Bikai, P. 1992. The Land of Tyre. In M.S. Joukowsky (ed.): The mercenaries into the Egyptian armed forces (Sandars 1978: Heritage of Tyre. Dubuque, pp. 13-23. 50; Lehmann 1979: 485 n. 19; Redford 1992: 225f., 243; Bonechi, M. 1993. I nomi geografici dei testi di Ebla. Wiesbaden. Dothan 1995: 1267; Loretz 1995: 126 n. 6; Spalinger 2005: Briquel-Chatonnet, F. 1996. Arwad cité phénicienne. In E. Acquaro 236). The sardana are mentioned three times in the Amarna (ed.): Alle soglie della classicità il Mediterraneo tra tradizione Letters as LÚ se/i-e/ir-da-ni/u26). e innovazione. Pisa-Rome, pp. 63-72. The texts of Amarna attest more groups acting as merce- Briquel-Chatonnet, F. 1997. Arwad et l’empire assyrien. In: B. Pon- naries. The most important, besides the habiru, were the gratz-Leisten-H. Kühne-P. Xella (eds.): Beiträge zu altorien- Suteans (Heltzer 1981: 81ff.), who appear four times as mer- talischen und mittelmeerischen Kulturen. Festschrift für 27 Wolfang Röllig. Neukirchen-Vluyn, pp. 57-68. cenaries under Pahuru, commissioner of Egypt ), Biryawaza e 28 29 Briquel-Chatonnet, F. 2000. Le statut politique d’Arwad au II mil- of Damascus ), and the sons of Lab’aya of Shechem ). The lénaire. In Actas del IV Congreso Internacional de Estudios Amarna Letters refer to the Suteans as LÚ.MES (KUR) su- Fenicios y Púnicos. Cádiz, pp. 129-133. te/i(-ia). Buccellati, G. 1967. Cities and Nations of Ancient Syria. Rome. Therefore, in view of the examples of the sardana and the Bunnens, G. 1982. Pouvoirs locaux et pouvoirs dissidents en Syrie Suteans, we may conclude that the usual way to allude to au IIe millenaire avant notre ere. In Les pouvoirs locaux mercenaries in the Amarna Letters is by using the simple for- en Mésopotamie et dans les régions adjacentes. Bruxelles, mula LÚ(.MES) + (determinative for country/city) + name pp. 118-137. of the group/people. It is the same formula used to allude to Campbell, E.F. 1964. The chronology of the Amarna Letters. Baltimore. Arwadites (LÚ.MES URU ar-wa-da) in EA 101, 105 and Delcor, M. 1995. La fondation de Tyr selon l’histoire, l’archéolo- 149. Obviously, the presence of this sequence is not enough gie et la mythologie. Le problème de l’identité d’Usu. In Actes to define the men of Arwad as mercenaries, because it is one du IIIème Congrès International des Etudes Phéniciennes et of the current designations for a group of individuals in rela- Puniques. Tunis, pp. 333-346. tion to an organization, a city, a tribe, etc. (Buccellati 1967: Dothan, T. 1995. The “Sea Peoples” and the Philistines of Ancient 57; CAD A/2 pp. 56f.). However, we must add to the use of Palestine. In J.M. Sasson (ed.): Civilizations of the Ancient this formula the geographic features of Arwad, the crisis suf- Near East (Vol. II). New York, pp. 1267-1279. fered by the fleet of Arwad from the Egyptian conquest of Freu, J. 2006. Histoire politique du royaume d’Ugarit. Paris. Sumura onwards, and the war context where the men of Gestoso, G.N. 1992. La política exterior egipcia en la época de El Amarna. Buenos Aires. Arwad are usually mentioned. It is then plausible to define Goren, Y.-Finkelstein, I.-Na’aman, I. 2004. Inscribed in Clay. them as mercenaries. Therefore, again with reference to EA Provenance Study of the Amarna Letters and other Ancient 149: 57-59, it is really doubtful that Abi-Milki would have Near Eastern Texts. Tel Aviv. been describing government institutions (the monarchy, aris- Helck, W. 1962. Die Beziehungen Ägyptens zu Vorderasien im 3. tocratic rule) of the enemy force in a letter sent to the pharaoh und 2. Jahrtausend v. Chr. Wiesbaden. in order to inform him about the attacks against Tyre. It Heltzer, M. 1981. The Suteans. Naples. seems more reasonable to suggest that EA 149: 57-59 merely Katzenstein, H.J. 1997. The History of Tyre (2nd revised edition). contains the enumeration of Tyrian enemies: the kings of Jerusalem. Sidon and Amurru, and the men of Arwad, well-known as Klengel, H. 1992. Syria, 3000 to 300 B.C. Berlin. Lackenbacher, S. 2002. Textes akkadiens d’Ugarit. Paris. naval mercenaries in the Levant for their participation in Landsberger, B. 1954. Assyrische Königsliste und “Dunkles Zeit- actions such as the blockade of the port of Sumura or their alter”. Journal of Cuneiform Studies 8: 47-73. attacks on Byblian ships. Lehmann, G.A. 1979. Die Sikalaju — ein neues Zeugnis zu den “Seevölkern”-Heerfahrten im späten 13.Jh.v.Chr. (RS 34.129). Ugarit-Forschungen 11: 481-494. Bibliography Lipinski, E. 2004. Itineraria Phoenicia. Leuven. Liverani, M. 1965. Implicazioni sociali nella politica di Abdi- Altman, A. 1977. The Fate of Abdi-Ashirta. Ugarit-Forschungen Ashirta di Amurru. Rivista degli Studi Orientali 40: 267-277. 9: 1-11. Liverani, M. 1974. La royauté syrienne de l’âge du Bronze récent. Artzi, P. 1964. «Vox Populi» in the El-Amarna Tablets. Revue In P. Garelli (ed.): Le Palais et la Royauté. Paris, pp. 329-356. d’Assyriologie 58: 159-166. Liverani, M. 1979. Ras Shamra. Histoire. Supplément au Diction- Artzy, M. 1997. Nomads of the Sea. In S. Swiny-R.L. Hohl- naire de la Bible 9: 1295-1348. felder-H. Wylde Swiny (eds.): Res Maritimae. Atlanta, Liverani, M. 1998. Le lettere di el-Amarna. Brescia. pp. 1-16. Liverani, M. 1998b. How to Kill Abdi-Ashirta. EA 101, Once Badre, L. 1997. Arwad. In E.M. Meyers (ed.): The Oxford Ency- Again. In S. Isre’el-I. Singer-R. Zadok (eds.): Past Links. Stud- clopedia of Archaeology in the Near East. Oxford, pp. 218- ies in the Languages and Cultures of the Ancient Near East. 219. Winona Lake, pp. 387-394. Belmonte, J.A. 2001. Die Orts- und Gewässernamen der Texte aus Liverani, M. 2004. Myth and Politics in Ancient Near Eastern His- Syrien im 2. Jt. v. Chr. Wiesbaden. toriography. New York. Loretz, O. 1995. Les serdanu et la fin d’Ougarit. In M. Yon-M. Sznycer-P. Bordreuil (eds.): Le pays d’Ougarit autour de 1200 25) KRI II, 290.14. 26 av.J.-C. Paris, pp. 125-136. ) EA 81: 16, 122: 35, 123: 15. Moran, W.L. 2003. The Death of {Abdi-Asirta. In J. Huehnergard- 27) EA 122: 34, 123: 14. 28) EA 195: 29. S. Izre’el (eds.): Amarna Studies. Collected Writings. Winona 29) EA 246: R8. Lake, pp. 227-236. 0993-8_BIOR_2008/1-2_01 21-04-2008 14:39 Pagina 10
15 BIBLIOTHECA ORIENTALIS LXV N° 1-2, januari-april 2008 16
Na’aman, N. 2005. Canaan in the Second Millennium B.C.E. Winona Lake. Redford, D.B. 1992. Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times. Princeton. Renan, E. 1864. Mission de Phénicie. Paris. Reviv, H. 1969. On urban representative institutions and self-gov- ernment in Syria-Palestine in the second half of the second mil- lenium B.C. Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 12: 283-297. Sandars, N.K. 1978. The Sea Peoples. London. Sasson, J.M. 1966. Canaanite Maritime Involvement in the Second Millennium B.C. Journal of the American Oriental Society 86: 126-138. Singer, I. 1991. Appendix III. A Concise History of Amurru. In Amurru Akkadian: a Linguistic Study (Vol. II). Atlanta, pp. 135-195. Singer, I. 1999. A Political History of Ugarit. In. W.G.E. Watson- N. Wyatt (eds.): Handbook of Ugaritic Studies. Leiden- Boston-Köln, pp. 603-733. Spalinger, A.J. 2005. Warfare in Ancient Egypt. In D.C. Snell (ed.): A Companion to the Ancient Near East. Malden-Oxford-Carl- ton, pp. 229-242. Vidal, J. 2006. El enfrentamiento entre Tiro y Sidón durante los reinados de Abi-Milki y Zimrida. Ensayo de reconstrucción. Aula Orientalis 24: 251-259. Xella, P. 1995. Les sources cunéiformes. In V. Krings (ed.): La civili- sation phénicienne et punique. Leiden-New York-Köln, pp. 39-56.
Universitat de Barcelona, July 2007