SOURCES

History begins in Anatolia with the records of the Assyrian trading colonies, described in the first volume (ch. XXIV) of this work. The period covered by these documents, hardly more than two centuries in all, closes with the disappearance of the colonies not long after 1780 b.c. The art of writing appears to have been temporarily lost, for it was an entirely different form of cuneiform script that was introduced by the Hittites about a century later. Of the many thousands of baked clay tablets unearthed by the German excavators on the site of the Hittite capital at Boǧazköy since work started in 1906, and constituting the Hittite royal archives, only a handful can be dated by their script as early as the seventeenth century b.c. However, many historical texts of this date have come to light in the form of later copies, inscribed like the greater part of the archives during the fourteenth and thirteenth centuries b.c., and such copies can be used confidently as a first-class source for much of the earlier period. Statements contained in them about events already past at the time of the original inscription are of course of less certain value, but in default of other relevant evidence they cannot be ignored.

THE RULE OF THE MILITARY KING

Out of the struggles to regain her independence and her ascendancy over the warlike nations of Western Asia, Egypt during the Eighteenth Dynasty emerged, for the first time in her history, as a predominantly military state under the rule of a king dedicated from early youth to the leadership of his army and navy and to the expansion and consolidation of his empire by force of arms.

Elevated while scarcely more than a boy to the rank of commander-in-chief of the armed forces, the heir apparent to the Egyptian throne under Tuthmosis I and his successors devoted a considerable portion of his early years to training himself in the arts of war. Proficiency as an archer, a charioteer, and a ship-handler, achieved under the supervision of his father's veterans, ranked high among the qualifications demanded of the future king and were the accomplishments in which throughout his life he took his greatest pride. Experience in actual combat followed shortly after the young ruler's accession to the throne, an occasion almost invariably seized upon by the princes of Nubia and Asia to revolt against their Egyptian overlord. Following the conquests of Tuthmosis III one or two campaigns usually sufficed to restore order throughout the empire and eliminated the need for further show of force on the part of the pharaoh. Nevertheless, the military point of view remained with the king throughout his reign and profoundly affected the nature of his government and the internal conditions of the land which he governed.

THE CAMPAIGNS OF KAMOSE

The literary tradition of the New Kingdom, represented by the Story of Apophis and Seqenenre, suggests that the clash between the Hyksos and the native Egyptian kings of the Seventeenth Dynasty occurred in the reign of Seqenenre (II ?), as the result of deliberate provocation on the part of the Hyksos ruler. The first sentences of the story tell the condition of Egypt at the time: Seqenenre rules in the Southern City (Thebes), while Apophis rules in Avaris; the whole of Egypt pays tribute to the Hyksos. Egypt is described as a divided land, and there is no suggestion that the whole of Egypt is occupied by the Asiatics. The evidence in support of a total occupation is slender and inconclusive; even the famous description of Hyksos devastation in the inscription of Hatshepsut in the Speos Artemidos specifies only that ‘the Asiatics were in Avaris in the Northland, roving foreigners being in the midst of them’.

It is generally assumed that the lost portion of this story described a struggle between the Hyksos and the Egyptians, the outcome of which may have been a limited victory for the Egyptians. It is also assumed that Seqenenre was killed in the course of this struggle, the evidence in support of this assumption being the shattered skull of the king's mummy. The fragmentary beginning of a New Kingdom romance is, however, an uncertain foundation on which to build an historical edifice.

The second millennium B.C. remains one of the most poorly known of all of the archaeological periods on the Persian plateau. Older excavations and limited surveys, summarized in several important articles and books, have yielded scattered information about pottery styles and burial practices. The limited nature of this information has encouraged a renewal of field work relating to the second millennium during the past decade. As a result, there is now sufficient new evidence to permit a tentative restructuring of some aspects of the interpretative problems involved, particularly in regard to the western and northern border areas of the plateau. In these areas many of the cultural patterns dating to the early second millennium had their inception in the third millennium, and had disappeared, or had been greatly modified, by the end of the first quarter of the second millennium. Many of the cultural patterns which then developed were in turn terminated in the third quarter of the millennium by the onset of the new ethnic movements and major political changes of the beginning Iron Age.

THE LATE THIRD AND EARLY SECOND MILLENNIA B.C.

During the late third and early second millennia b.c. the Persian plateau was divided into distinct cultural areas as indicated by the distribution of ceramic tradition: the Gurgan Grey Ware in Gurgan province in the north-east; the Giyān IV–III Painted Ware in eastern Luristān; and, between the two, the Yanik

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

With the establishment of the Eighteenth Dynasty, written evidence for events in Palestine becomes available to a far greater extent than ever before. The Egyptian rulers extended their power up the Mediterranean coast and into Syria, and the records of their campaigns contain many mentions of identifiable sites. There is therefore the possibility of interpreting events suggested by the archaeological evidence in the light of the written evidence, and in this way providing a historical framework. Another effect of the restoration of Egyptian power was a considerable development of trade in the eastern Mediterranean, and the appearance of foreign pottery and other objects is often of chronological assistance.

The first event that is likely to have affected Palestine was the expulsion of the Hyksos by Amosis (1570–1546 B.C.). The capture of the Hyksos capital Avaris came early in his reign. According to Manetho, this was followed by the exodus of a great number of the Asiatic Hyksos. Amosis's next step was to reinforce his position by a campaign in southern Palestine, in which the major event was the capture of Sharuhen after a siege of three years. It is suggested that Tell el-Fār'ah (South) is to be identified as Sharuhen. Such a length of siege does not suggest that Amosis's expedition was on a large scale. These events may have taken place in the first seven to ten years of the reign. It is probable that Amosis did not penetrate into northern Palestine until late in his reign.

ISOLATION OF MINOAN–MYCENAEAN LITERACY

If some fairly high degree of literacy, and at least a modest production of literature, are to be expected in an original and in other respects notable culture, such as the Minoan in its great days, then the Minoan culture must be considered odd. As with all peoples before a certain measure of literacy is attained, doubtless there was ‘oral literature’, but about Minoan oral compositions nothing much can be inferred. When at length writing had been learned, at least writing for some purposes, the writing down of creative literature seems not to have been one of the purposes. Of written literature, indeed, not one scrap survives, nor is there any evidence pointing to the existence of any written literature. Oral compositions may well have been common right down to the end. Certainly there was no high degree of literacy.

For the understanding of this, many necessary facts are known only partially, and many more are lost. Theory too is weak. About literacy itself, generally, as a phenomenon, knowledge is rudimentary. There is no published study that has both scope and value. We know little of what to expect, how to understand. This is particularly true of the earlier stages. Until enough is known so that sharp delimitations are possible, it seems best to include a wide range of graphic expression and communication.

SYRIA IN THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY B.C.

The march of Murshilish I and his Hittite army down the Euphrates, and pillage and destruction of Babylon, in the early years of the sixteenth century, marked the end of an epoch, and ushered in an era of great political change. Governments were overthrown and dynasties ended, and in the confusion which ensued, new peoples moved into the area which at one time used to be known as the Fertile Crescent. During the seventeenth century, a time when archaeology shows a decline in civilization and almost no written evidence has survived, the ethnic map of the Ancient Near East was redrawn, new city states were founded, and old ones declined and were abandoned, or grew prosperous and increased their territory. Though the changes appear sudden, they must have happened gradually, and had begun much earlier. Chief and most vigorous of the newcomers were the Hurrians, whose appearances in the Near East as early as the third millennium have already been mentioned.

From their homeland in the southern Caucasus and the mountains of Armenia these vigorous warriors had spread gradually south and west during the course of the third millennium and the first centuries of the second; they are found as the ruling class at Urkish in the time of the Akkadian kings, and this hilly region somewhere south of Diyarbakr remained a stronghold of Hurrian civilization throughout their history. In the mythological text known as the Song of Ullikummi, Urkish is named as the seat of Kumarbi, one of the great deities of the Hurrian pantheon.

EVENTS OF HAMMURABI'S REIGN

The sixth of his line, Hammurabi was the inheritor of a kingdom established by a century of peaceful succession, unimpaired by major calamities, but hardly grown beyond the pale which his ancestor Sumuabum had reserved for himself amid the tide of Amorite invaders. In the general equilibrium of weakness Babylon had lost its upstart character, but had gained little else than recognition as an abiding feature in a world of close horizons. Even the fall of Isin, to which the predecessor of Hammurabi had contributed, did not result in any apparent increase of Babylon's territory or importance, all the fruits being gathered by Rim-Sin of Larsa. The first five kings of Babylon ventured seldom abroad, and their date-formulae, which are virtually the sole authority for their reigns, show them occupied mainly in religious and defensive building, and the clearing of canals.

What extent of territory was controlled by the predecessors of Hammurabi is defined only by the places where tablets dated in the reigns of these kings happen to have been found. Most prominent among these is Sippar represented under all the early kings of Babylon; then Dilbat and Kutha, sometimes Kish, which however at other times was independent. In the date-formulae occur as conquests some more distant towns such as Kazallu, Akuz, Kar-Shamash, Marad, and Isin, after its fall. It was never, before Hammurabi himself, more than a diocese of about fifty miles radius about the capital city, and even this by no means tightly compacted, but subject to invasions and erosions on all its bounds.

THE CHRONOLOGY OF THE LATE PALACE PERIOD (c:. 1700–1380 B.C.)

The palaces at Cnossus and at Phaestus were destroyed time and time again, but on each occasion they rose more splendid than before, bearing witness to the resilience and optimism of the inhabitants. Any traces of defensive building disappeared at an early date, which shows that the catastrophes were due not to enemy attacks but to natural causes. After an earthquake about 1700 b.c. the palaces were rebuilt, but this in itself is not an indication of the end of a period. Indeed a similar catastrophe occurred about 1575 b.c. at Cnossus, and it was at this point that Evans placed the division between Middle Minoan and Late Minoan, thereby coinciding with a general historical break which occurred with the expulsion of the Hyksos from Egypt, the beginning of the Eighteenth Dynasty and the New Kingdom in Egypt. It is tempting to assign the seventeenth century in Crete to the preceding phase, but this gives a distorted picture.

It is vital to understanding of the Early Palace Period to realize that during it the Minoans made their own decisive entry into the circle of the civilized world. Their rise had been based on their isolation and their ships, and they had become a seapower by contemporary standards. The eastern states had then no interest in disputing the position of Crete, and the Aegean world from which she had emerged was as yet no match for her.

SHAMSHI-ADAD I

Scarcely thirty years ago the figure of Hammurabi, the unifier of Babylonia, still stood out in striking isolation. In fact, at the time he ascended the throne another centralized empire already occupied the whole of northern Mesopotamia: it was the personal creation of Shamshi-Adad I, to whom recent discoveries have made it possible to give his place in history.

Whereas Hammurabi had inherited a considerable territory from his father, Shamshi-Adad had more modest beginnings. He belonged to one of the numerous nomad clans which had infiltrated into Mesopotamia after the break-up of the Third Dynasty of Ur. His father, Ila-kabkabu, ruled over a land bordering on the kingdom of Mari, with which he had come into conflict. It is not well known what happened next. According to one version, the authenticity of which is not certain, Shamshi-Adad made his way into Babylonia, while his brother succeeded to Ila-kabkabu. Later on he seized Ekallatum; the capture of this fortress, on the left bank of the Tigris, in the southern reaches of the lower Zab, laid the gates of Assyria open to him. The moment was propitious, for Assyria had only lately regained her independence, having previously had to submit to Naram-Sin of Eshnunna, who had advanced as far as the upper Khabur. But Naram-Sin's conquests had been ephemeral: on his death, Assyria had shaken off the yoke of Eshnunna, only to fall beneath that of Shamshi-Adad. Once installed on the throne of Ashur, the latter soon set about extending his dominion in the direction of the West.

In a previous chapter the nomadic way of life of the inhabitants of Palestine during the period roughly equivalent to the First Intermediate Period of Egypt was described. It was sharply differentiated from the Early Bronze Age, for instead of people living in walled towns there was a population quite uninterested in town life, bringing with them new pottery, new weapons and new burial practices, of types best explained as those of nomads. In Syria there is a similar break, and there are many links to show that the newcomers in the two areas were connected. In Syria, there is documentary evidence to suggest that these nomadic intruders were the Amorites, and it can thus be accepted that it was at this time that the Amorites, described in the Biblical record as part of the population of the country, reached Palestine.

The break at the end of this period of nomadic occupation is as sharp as that at its beginning. Towns once more appear, and there are once more new burial practices, new pottery, new weapons, new ornaments. There is a most surprising lack of any objects or practices which, where the archaeological evidence is sound, can be shown to carry through from the earlier stage to the later. It is for this reason that it seems misleading to apply to the stage of nomadic occupation the term Middle Bronze I, as was done when the evidence of the period was first becoming apparent, though this is still used by many archaeologists in the United States and Israel.