Mittani and Assyro-Mittanian

chapter 3 Mittani and Assyro-Mittanian

3.1 Introduction

The emergence of Mittani is unclear, but hints can be drawn from various documents and known historical events. Van Koppen (2004: 21) points out the occurrence of the name Ḫanigalbat in Late Old Babylonian, indicating that there was a Hurrian presence during this time. There are also general men- tions of continuous strong resistance by the Hurrians against the Hittites (De Martino 2014: 63). It has even been suggested that the Mittani Kingdom was already powerful in the 16th century. Old Kingdom documents such as KBo 3.46 and KBo 3.60 mention a ‘King of the Hurrian troops.’ Furthermore, a treaty between Ḫatti and Ḫalab (Aleppo) (CTH 75) has a historical introduction which describes manoeuvring the polities of Aštata and Nuḫašši between Ḫatti and Ḫanigalbat (obverse, line 15–20) (Beckman 1999: 93).1 Ḫalab had been part of the powerful Middle Bronze Age Kingdom Yamḫad, with vassals such as Alalaḫ, Ebla and Ugarit. The Hittite King Ḫattušili led sev- eral campaigns against Yamḫad, significantly weakening it. Ḫattušili died soon after the last campaign, but his grandson Muršili came back to destroy Ḫalab, and continued to even sack Babylon. However, upon his return to Ḫatti he was assassinated by his brother-in-law, inaugurating a period of social unrest amongst the Hittites. With Ḫalab, Ḫatti and Babylon now all struggling, the ris- ing Hurrian power found opportunity to expand. The name Mittani itself (Mtn) only occurs for the first time in an Egyptian source dated to the 15th century BCE (Tuthmosis I) (De Martino 2004: 35). Late Bronze Age archaeological records of the region show that Late Old Babylonian materials were gradually replaced by Mittani pottery (Reiche 2014; Soldi 2008). Although the precise geographical reach of the Mittani territory is not known, it eventually stretched up to Lake Van in eastern Turkey, followed the Upper Khabur in northern Syria, and spread down to modern Kerkuk and the middle Euphrates in Iraq (see Maps).2

1 However, while the events of CTH 75 are meant to have taken place around the 16th century, this tablet is a 13th century replacement and it is not unthinkable that the contents of the old and the new treaty are not identical. 2 Texts which describe Mittani domination over various areas, and treaties with neighbouring regions, include the Amarna letters (Paragraph 3.2.1) and KBo 1.2 (Paragraph 3.2.2). While Mittani and Middle Assyrian pottery are not always separated, it is now acknowledged that

Naming and describing the Mittani socio-political structure has been subject to debate: it has been called ‘Empire’, ‘polity’, ‘Kingdom’ and ‘state’ (Cancik-Kirschbaum et al. 2014: 2). In studying the Middle East, we typically see overarching political structures as imperial formations, which is why we most commonly refer to this structure as the Mittani Empire.3 At its greatest extent, the Mittani Empire encompassed various urban centres, including but not limited to Başiru (Tall Bazi), Taidu (Tell Hamadiya), Nawar (Tell Brak), Kaḫat (Tell Barri), Urkeš (Tell Mozan), Tell Bderi, Tell Chuera, Tall Munbaqa, and Tell Fekheriye, as well as the smaller Tell Arbid, Tell Beydar, Tell Hwesh and Tell Mohammed Diyab (Pfälzner 2007; Reiche 2014) (see Maps). Mittani also included at least the realms of Aššur, Alalaḫ, Arrapḫa, Kizzuwatna, Tunip, and probably Yamḫad (Ḫalab) and Ḫana (Terqa) (Von Dassow 2014). These were semi-independent, and sometimes ruled by their own Kings under the over- lordship of Mittani. Models of governance seem to have been adapted on a case-by-case basis. For example, the King of the land of Ḫana is mentioned alongside the Mittanian King (see Charpin 2002), while Ḫalab was assigned a governor (Von Dassow 2014: 20) and at Başiru documents address the (council of) people. Many of the mentioned Kingdoms were incorporated during the reign of King Šauštatar (Table 3.1),4 who features in tablets from Alalaḫ, Bazi, Nuzi and Umm el-Marra and which are currently some of the earliest Mittani tablets available for study. While Akkadian was the primary language used in official correspondence, it looks like the first language of major parts of the Mittani population was Hurrian.5 Hurrian is the earliest indigenous language attested in ancient Anatolia (Woodard 2008: 3) and Hurrian texts found at Tell Mozan (ancient Urkeš) date to circa 2100–2000 BCE.6 Although there is no firmly established pal- aeography for Old Akkadian, Maiocchi reasons the script used to write Hurrian

Nuzi ware, stump bases, fine painted goblets, red band plates, piecrust pot-stands, red-edged bowls, large shallow bowls and some distinctive painting styles may be associated with Mittani layers, and surveys identifying Mittani sites have been conducted throughout northern Syria and northern Iraq (see Koliński (2014: 180) for an overview). 3 According to the original Roman understanding of the word, an imperium referred to the geographical expansion and temporal extension of power. 4 Also described in CTH 51 (KBo 1.2). 5 Wilhelm (1989) provides a valuable 35-page history of the Hurrian people. In particular, a lot of research bases itself on tracing Hurrian personal names throughout history – with the footnote that linguistic derivation of a name does not lead to certainty about the nationality of its owner (Wilhelm 1989: 13). In addition, it is possible to detect Hurrian lexicon, grammar, and personal names even in Akkadian documents (Wilhelm 2008: 83). 6 Most famous of which is the Tišatal inscription, on display at the Louvre (August 2016).