Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2rsb6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-13T07:56:30.920Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Hittite Involvement in Western Anatolia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 December 2013

Jak Yakar
Jak Yakar
Affiliation:
Tel-Aviv University
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In addition to security considerations, the course of Hittite history can largely be explained by the economic motif, to control the sources and markets of metals.

The expulsion or departure of the Assyrian merchants from Anatolia at the end of Anittas' reign not only deprived the newly founded Hittite Kingdom in the central plateau of the organized trade which, among other commodities, supplied Anatolia with its imported tin (from. Assur), but also cut it off from the supply centres in the East Mediterranean and North Syria, by now under the control of the strong Yamhadian Dynasty.

In Anatolia itself the mineral-rich regions, which supplied both Anatolian and Mesopotamian provinces with copper, silver and lead, were mostly in the northern and eastern areas which the Hittites, due to the geo-political situation already pointed out by Mellaart, could not control or controlled with difficulty. This situation no doubt forced the Hittites to turn to alternative mineral-fields and supply centres in areas west of the plateau.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Anatolian Studies , Volume 26 , December 1976, pp. 117 - 128
Copyright
Copyright © The British Institute at Ankara 1976

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1 J. Mellaart recognized this main principle which guided the Hittites in their policies vis-a-vis their neighbours. See AS XVIII (1968), pp. 187–202Google Scholar.

2 The growing hostility of the Hurrians beyond the Euphrates would have prevented the Anatolian merchants from using the south-eastern route and reaching the tin sources beyond Assyria. See Mellaart, loc. cit. p. 191.

3 Ibid., pp. 191, 199–200.

4 Ibid., pp. 190–1.

5 The Hittites to prevent the seafaring Lukka from carrying on trade with the northern enemies such as the Gasga people; the Ahhiyawans to stop trade to Arzawa and the Hittites; the Arzawans to cut the trade route to Wilusa and/or divert the route into their own territory. See Mellaart, loc. cit., pp. 192–3. Macqueen, J. G., AS XVIII (1968), pp. 169–85Google Scholar. Reference to Lukka in the Alaksandus-treaty fits well into Macqueen's geographical pattern (see p. 172; The Hittites and their contemporaries in Asia Minor, London 1975, p. 40Google Scholar).

6 Mellaart in his speculation of “origin” regarding various objects found in Europe, Greece and Anatolia, questions the Mycenaean origin of certain finds but fails to demonstrate that they come definitely from an Anatolian provenance (loc. cit., pp. 193–5).

7 Muhly, J. D., “The Hittites and the Aegean World”, Expedition, 16, 2 (1974), pp. 3–10.Google Scholar; Simpson, R. H. and Lazenby, J. F., “Notes from the Dodecanese”, BSA 68 (1973), pp. 174–9.Google Scholar; Mellink, M. in AJA 75 (1971), pp. 168–9Google Scholar.

8 Mellaart, J. in Mélanges Mansel, TTKY, Ankara 1974, p. 502Google Scholar.

9 Steiner, G., “Die Ahhiyawa-Frage heute”, Saeculum 15 (1964), pp. 365–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10 The indictment of Madduwattas, his relationship with Arzawa, his conspiracy with Attarissiyas, the man of Ahhiya, against the Hittites and their joint attack on Alasiya, fall into the period (LHIIB–IIIA1) when the Mycenaeans were already established in Miletus and Iasus and were expanding towards Caria. This was the time when Knossos was under the “Linear B” regime and the Minoan settlement of Trianda in Rhodes came to a sudden end. See also Mellink, loc. cit. p. 169. The fact that Madduwattas was given the “Mountain-land of Zippasla”—according to Garstang and Gurney, to be identified with Murat Daǧ, or the “Land of River Siyanti”=Banaz Çayi—where he would be “near the Land of Hatti” (The Geography of the Hittite Empire, London 1959, pp. 91–2Google Scholar) suggests that the country he was formerly chased from was relatively more distant from the western Hittite border. Any tentative localization, of this former land near the south-western coast is no less valid than Mellaart's localization of the “Mountain-land of Zippasla” in the basin of the River Sakarya. Attarissiyas did not settle in the land of Zippasla but withdrew his small force after being confronted by the Hittite army. Mellink has a point when she suggests (p. 169) that “pieces of Mycenaean pottery cannot be expected in all sites where Achaeans set foot as traders, visitors or soldiers”. See also Simpson and Lazenby, loc. cit.

11 In “Anatolian evidence for relations with the west in the LBA”, Bronze Age Migrations in the Aegean ed. Crossland, R. A. and Birchall, A., London 1973, pp. 145–6Google Scholar.

12 Ibid., p. 152. This is in line with Güterbock's, view in 1st. Mitt. 17 (1967), p. 70Google Scholar.

13 Loc. cit., 1974, p. 512.

14 Ibid. p. 524. Bryce, T. R. in his recent article “The Lukka Problem—And a possible Solution”, JNES 33 (1974), pp. 395–404Google Scholar, suggests two groups of Lukka people, “one in the vicinity of Lycaonia, the other in Caria”. According to this view “Lycaonia was the original home of these people, some of whom later moved west, possibly along the Maeander valley, and established themselves on the Aegean Coast.”

15 Boysal, Yusuf in Anatolia, XV (1970Google Scholar) Ankara 1973, pp. 33–62., H.G. Güterbock loc. cit. (n. 12), Ten Cate, loc. cit. p. 161, and R. A. Crossland's remarks in the same article pp. 158–60. Also, Astour, M. in Hellenosemitica, 1965, pp. 355–6Google Scholar.

16 Muhly, J. D. in Historia 23 (1974), p. 4Google Scholar, regards the philological arguments as not decisive in themselves to prove or disprove the Achean identification. For a comment on opposing views see Diamant, S. in AJA 79 (1975), p. 288CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

17 Laroche, E., “Linguistique Anatolienne, II”, RHA 79 (1966), pp. 171–84Google Scholar.

18 Millard, A. R., “Cypriote Copper in Babylonia, c. 1745 B.C.”, JCS 27 (1973), pp. 211–13Google Scholar.

19 Hoffner, H. A. in JCS 22 (1968), pp. 34–44Google Scholar.

20 See Mellink, in AJA 78 (1974), pp. 113–14Google Scholar. Prentiss De Jesus, S., “Prehistoric Metallurgy—Another Look”, Anatolia XVI (1972), pp. 129–40Google Scholar; Archaeology 27, 3 (1974), p. 201Google Scholar.

21 Wertime, T. A., “The beginnings of Metallurgy”, Science 182 (1973), pp. 875–86CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMedPrentiss, , Anatolia, p. 139Google Scholar.

22 Mellaart, loc. cit., 1968, p. 201. Yakar, J. and Dinçol, A. M. in Tel Aviv, I, 3 (1974), pp. 85–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

23 Wheeler, T. S., Maddin, R. and Muhly, J. D. in Expedition 17, 4 (1975), pp 31–8Google Scholar.

24 Forbes, R. J. in Studies in Ancient Technologies, IX, Leiden 1972, p. 163Google Scholar.

25 Goetze, A., Kleinasien, Munich 1957, p. 78Google Scholar.

26 Forbes, loc. cit., VIII, pp. 214–15.

27 Muhly, J. D., “Tin trade routes of the Bronze Age”, Am. Sci., 61. 4 (1973), pp. 404–413Google Scholar; Copper and Tin, New Haven 1973Google Scholar; World Archaeology, V (1974), pp. 123–5Google Scholar; with Wertime, T. A., “Evidence for the sources and use of tin during the Bronze Age of the Near East”, World Archaeology, V (1974), pp. 111–22Google Scholar. Wertime, loc. cit., 1973.

28 Esin, U., Kuantitatif Spektral Analiz Yardımıyla Anadolu'da Başlangicindan Asur Kolonileri Çaǧina Kadar Bakir ve Tunç Madenciliǧi, Istanbul 1969, pp. 107–8Google Scholar. R. J. Forbes, loc. cit., IX, p. 141.

29 Mellink, loc. cit., p. 113.

30 Mellaart, loc. cit., 1969, pp. 201–2.

31 Forbes, loc. cit., IX, p. 141.

32 Ibid. H. L. Jones, The Geography of Strabo, VII, Cambridge, Mass., 1961, p. 145.

33 Sasson, J., “A Sketch of North Syrian Economic Relations in the MBA”, JESHO IX (1966), pp. 164–5Google Scholar.

34 Dossin, G., Revue d'Assyriologie 64 (1970), pp. 97–106Google Scholar. J. D. Muhly, loc. cit., 1974, p. 407.

35 Muhly, loc. cit., 1974, p. 407.

36 See Nougayrol, J. in Ugaritica V (1968), pp. 16–17Google Scholar.

36a Ibid., pp. 117–19.

37 Muhly and Wertime, loc. cit., pp. 111–22.

38 Underlying the three Mycenaean levels at Miletos, there is a Minoan level. According to Mylonas, this was a Minoan colony that in the course of time was taken over, as was the case with Iasus, by the Mycenaeans, . See in 1st. Mitt. 9–10 (1959–1960), p. 4Google Scholar. The recent discovery of a large and characteristic Middle Minoan building at Iasus, and large quantities of MM pottery and local Kamares wares suggested that Minoans from Crete settled in the south-west as early as the first half of the second millennium B.C. However, it is difficult to see the Minoan settlements at Iasus and Miletus other than as trading posts. Also: Mellink, in AJA 77, 2 (1973), p. 169CrossRefGoogle Scholar; 78, 2 (1974) p. 114; AS XXIV (1974), p. 34Google Scholar; Levi, Doro, “Iasos”, TAD XX, 2 (1973), pp. 91–5Google Scholar.

39 Alp, S., Konya Civarinda Karahüyük Kazılarında Bulunan Silindir ve Damga Mühürleri, TTKY, Ankara 1972, pp. 263–4Google Scholar.

40 Bossert, H. Th., Altanatolien, Berlin 1942, fig. 6Google Scholar.

41 Temizer, R., “Kalınkaya”, AJA, 78, 2 (1974), p. 109Google Scholar.

42 Laws, Hittite (KBo VI 3Google Scholar i 11) mention merchants travelling to Pala and Luwiya. See Otten, H., ZA 53 (1959), pp. 182–3CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

43 Sasson, J., “Canaanite Martime Involvement in the Second Millennium B.C.”, JAOS 86, 2 (1966), pp. 135–6Google Scholar.

44 Ibid., p. 135.

45 Ibid., p. 136. H. Hoffner, loc. cit.

46 Ibid., p. 137, n. 59. It seems that this incident happened in a Hittite port, presumably Ura. See also pp. 132–3.

47 Piggott, S, Ancient Europe, Edinburgh 1965, p. 134Google Scholar.

48 Ibid., p. 136.

49 Bouzek, Jan, “Syrian and Anatolian Bronze Age Figurines”, PPS 38 (1972), pp. 156–64Google Scholar.

50 For Mycenaean settlements in pottery in Anatolia see: Cook, J. M. and Blackman, J. M., “Greek Archaeology in Western Asia Minor for 1964–65”, Archaeological Reports, (1965), pp. 32–64.Google Scholar; “Archaeology in Western Asia Minor 1967–70” loc. cit., (1970–1971), pp. 32–62. Mallowitz, A and Schiering, W., “Der Alte Athena-Tempel von Milet”, 1st. Mitt., 18 (1968), 114 fGoogle Scholar. Kleiner, G., “Stand der Erforschung von Alt-Milet”, 1st. Mitt., 19–20 (1969–1970), pp. 113–23Google Scholar. Stubbings, F., “The Expansion of Mycenaean Civilization”, CAH Vol. II, xxii (a), (fasc. 26), pp. 18–22Google Scholar. Simpson and Lazenby, loc. cit. Mellink, M. in AJA 76 (1972), p. 175Google Scholar; 77 (1973), pp. 169, 177–8. Buchholz, G. and Karageorghis, V., Altägäis und Altkypros, Tubingen 1971, p. 28Google Scholar, map 129. Hanfmann, G. M. A., Letters from Sardis, Cambridge, Mass. 1972, pp. 186, 321, fig. 142Google Scholar.

51 For the Hittite figurines see Canby, J. V. in Hesperia, 38 (1969) pp. 141–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Hogarth, , Hittite Seals, Oxford 1920, p. 15Google Scholar. Hittite, flask in AS XXIV (1974), p. 42Google Scholar.

52 See Mellink, in AJA 78 (1974), p. 110Google Scholar; 79 (1975), p. 208.

53 The Lycian coast was important for shipping between the Aegean (also Crete) and East Mediterranean. It offered good harbours for refuge during storms and the possibility to get fresh supplies of food and water during the long journeys from Crete or Rhodes to Cyprus and other eastern ports (and vice versa). The shipwreck of Cape Gelidonya and finds of copper ingots (from other shipwrecks) found in the sea near Antalya may suggest that the Lycian coast was in the itinerary of the Aegean and East Mediterranean sailors. See, Nougayrol, J., “Nouveaux Textes Accadiens de Ras Shamra”, CRAI (1960), pp. 163–71Google Scholar; Ugaritica V, p. 88Google Scholar, n. 5. J. Sasson, loc. cit., 1966, p. 134. For the copper ingots see Bass, G., Cape Gelidonya: A Bronze Age Shipwreck, Philadelphia 1967Google Scholar.

54 The Cape Gelidonian ship was sailing west probably to Caria, Rhodes or Crete. See also Bass, loc. cit.

55 J. Sasson, loc. cit., 1966, p. 135, n. 53. Astour, M. C., “Greek names in the Semitic World and Semitic names in the Greek World”, JNES 23 (1964), pp. 193–201Google Scholar.

56 J. Sasson, Ibid., p. 135. M. C. Astour, loc. cit., 1965, pp. 106–7; n. 1.

57 M. C. Astour, loc. cit., 1964, p. 194.

58 Mellaart, loc. cit., 1974 pp. 504–5.

59 Holmes, L., “The Location of Alasiya”, JAOS 91 (1971), p. 427Google Scholar.

60 Buchholz, G., “Grey Trojan Ware in Cyprus and Northern Syria”, in Bronze Age Migrations, loc. cit., pp. 179–87Google Scholar. The Mycenaean ships which brought the Mycenaean merchandise to Troy may have also loaded Trojan goods contained in grey wares to be sold in the North Syrian and Cypriot ports.

61 A number of features in the architecture and art of Late Helladic Greece seem to have derived from Hittite Anatolia. Scoufopoulos, Niki C. in her study of Mycenaean Citadels, Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology, Vol. XXII, Göteborg 1971Google Scholar, points out some of these features (pp. 101–6). The Cyclopean masonry which suddenly appeared at Tiryns, Mycenae and other sites in the LH period may have been inspired by Hittite fortifications. The Mycenaean direct-access gate type has a predecessor in the gate near the postern passage of Büyükkale. Also, the galleries and underground spring passages at Tiryns and Mycenae are features which have a wide distribution and origin in Anatolia (in the postern passages of Alişar, Boǧazköy and Alaca Hüyük). As for the use of lions in the relieving triangle of the main gate at Mycenae in local style, this may suggest Hittite influence in the adaptation of the heraldic motif to symbolize the might of the royal residence.

It is very significant that, although these elements were not adopted by Western Anatolians, the mainland Mycenaeans incorporated them, after local modifications, into their own architecture. It is possible to assume that the Mycenaean colonies in south-western Anatolia promoted relations or contact between the two mainland powers. See also Frankfort, H., The Art and Architecture of the Ancient Orient, Baltimore 1969, pp. 54–8Google Scholar.

62 This attack took place after Arnuwandas I. For the distribution of MB–LB sites in the Konya plain and Eskişehir region see: Özgüç, T., Ankara-Konya, Eskişehir-Yazılıkaya Gezileri, TTKY, Ankara 1956Google Scholar. Burney, C., “Northern Anatolia Before Classical Times”, AS VI (1956), pp. 179–204Google Scholar.