ArticlePDF Available

Some Notes on the Evolution of the Hittite Royal Annals In: Zaphon Literary Change in Mesopotamia and Beyond and Routes and Travellers between East and West Proceedings of the 2 nd and 3 rd Melammu Workshops

September 2019

September 2019

Authors:

Vladimir Sazonov

Estonian Military Academy

Content uploaded by Vladimir Sazonov

Content may be subject to copyright.

Zaphon

Literary Change

in Mesopotamia

and Beyond

and

Routes and Travellers

between

East and West

Proceedings

of the 2nd and 3rd

Melammu Workshops

Edited by Rocío Da Riva,

Martin Lang and Sebastian Fink

www.zaphon.de

Proceedings of the 2nd and 3rd Melammu Workshops

MWM 2

Melammu

Workshops and

Monographs

MWM-2-Cover.indd 1 07.05.2019 15:13:29

Literary Change

in Mesopotamia and Beyond

and

Routes and Travellers

between East and West

Proceedings of the 2nd and 3rd Melammu Workshops

Edited by

Rocío Da Riva, Martin Lang and Sebastian Fink

Melammu Workshops and Monographs

Volume 2

Edited by

Sebastian Fink and Robert Rollinger

Scientific Board

Alberto Bernabé (Madrid)

Josine Blok (Utrecht)

Rémy Boucharlat (Lyon)

Eckart Frahm (New Haven)

Mait Kõiv (Tartu)

Ingo Kottsieper (Göttingen)

Daniele Morandi Bonacossi (Udine)

Sabine Müller (Marburg)

Simonetta Ponchia (Verona)

Kurt Raaflaub (Providence)

Thomas Schneider (Vancouver)

Rahim Shayegan (Los Angeles)

Shigeo Yamada (Tsukuba)

Literary Change

in Mesopotamia and Beyond

and

Routes and Travellers

between East and West

Proceedings of the 2nd and 3rd Melammu Workshops

Edited by

Rocío Da Riva, Martin Lang and Sebastian Fink

Zaphon

Münster

2019

The Melammu Logo was drawn by Rita Berg from a Greco-Persian style seal found

on the north-eastern shore of the Black Sea (Dominique Collon, First Impressions:

Cylinder Seals in the Ancient Near East (London: British Museum Publications

1987), no. 432).

Illustration on the cover: P.E. Botta / E. Flandin: Monument de Ninive, Bd. 1:

Architecture et sculpture. Paris 1849. Tf. 41.

Literary Change in Mesopotamia and Beyond and Routes and Travellers between

East and West. Proceedings of the 2nd and 3rd Melammu Workshops

Edited by Rocío Da Riva, Martin Lang and Sebastian Fink

= Melammu Workshops and Monographs 2

stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means,

electronic, mechanical, photo-copying, recording, or otherwise,

without the prior permission of the publisher.

Printed in Germany

Printed on acid-free paper

ISBN 978-3-96327-066-6

Table of Contents

Literary Change in Mesopotamia and Beyond

2nd Workshop of the Melammu Project,

University of Innsbruck, 13–14 October 2016

Edited by Martin Lang and Sebastian Fink

About a History of Ancient Near Eastern Literature: An Introduction

Martin Lang .......................................................................................................... 9

The Transformation of the Sumerian Temple Hymns

Peeter Espak ....................................................................................................... 15

Looking for Threads of Transmission and Change in II Millennium

Heroic Narrative

Simonetta Ponchia .............................................................................................. 23

Legends of Sargon: History to His Story: Forming the Warrior King

Archetype

Takayoshi M. Oshima ......................................................................................... 43

Some Notes on the Evolution of the Hittite Royal Annals

Vladimir Sazonov ................................................................................................ 57

The Evolution of the Festival of Dumuzi in the Light of Russian Assyriology

Vladimir Emelianov ............................................................................................ 89

Routes and Travellers between East and West

Cultural Exchange in the Ancient World

3rd Workshop of the Melammu Project,

University of Barcelona, 22–23 March 2017

Edited by Rocío Da Riva and Sebastian Fink

Introduction

Rocío Da Riva / Sebastian Fink ........................................................................ 107

Greek as Travellers in Near Eastern Sources

Paola Corò ........................................................................................................ 113

Assyrians and Babylonians in Classical Sources

Sebastian Fink / Kerstin Droß-Krüpe ............................................................... 135

6 Table of Contents

Invading Mesopotamia, from Alexander the Great to Antiochus VII

Julien Monerie .................................................................................................. 155

Travelers in Upper Mesopotamia during the Middle and Early Neo-Assyrian

Periods: Itineraries and Objectives, from East to West

Aurélie Paci ...................................................................................................... 187

The Sage’s Lehrjahre

Jaume Pòrtulas ................................................................................................. 221

Religious Networks and Cultural Exchange: Some Cases from the

Eastern Mediterranean and Aegean in the 3rd–1st Millennia BC

Ian Rutherford .................................................................................................. 229

Through the Middle Sea: An Overview of the Main Mediterranean

Sea-Routes in Antiquity

Christoph Schäfer / Pascal Warnking ............................................................... 241

Greek Mercenaries in Mesopotamia: The Visit of the Ten Thousand

Christopher J. Tuplin ........................................................................................ 259

Index ............................................................................................................... 285

Some Notes on the Evolution

of the Hittite Royal Annals

Vladimir Sazonov

1. Introduction1

It should be noted that Hittite historiographic texts have been analysed by several

Assyriologists and Hittitologists2 but they have still not paid enough attention to

literary changes in the Hittite annalistic tradition since the emergence of the annals

as a genre in the Hittite state (17th century – the Annals of Ḫattušili I) until the end

of Hittite kingdom. There exist several annals and fragments of Hittite annals and

res gestae (e.g., the Annals of Tutḫaliya, the Annals of Arnuwanda, Manly Deeds

of Šuppiluliuma I, the Ten Year Annals of Muršili II, the Extensive Annals of Mur-

šili II, etc). Many studies on Hittite historiographic texts (e.g., annals, royal edicts)

have concentrated either on analysis of a certain Hittite historiographic text (or

several texts) or on specific annals of certain kings (e.g., Ḫattušili I, Muršili II,

etc.)3.

There are some (but not many) studies which show the evolution of the Hittite

royal annals as a literary genre and chart changes which happened in the annalistic

tradition of the Hittites.4 For that reason, in the current article I will focus on some

1 This article was written with the financial support of grant PHVAJ17908. I am very

thankful for critical remarks to Prof. Dr. Gerfrid G.W. Müller, Dr. Mait Kõiv, Dr. Sebas-

tian Fink and the anonymous reviewer.

2 “Historiographic texts” is a modern term (Gilan, 2015: 11–13). The literature on Ancient

Near Eastern and Hittite historiography is vast – Archi, 2000: 2367–2377; Alparslan,

2013: 48–61; Beckman, 1995: 23–34; Bryce, 1983; Cancik, 1970; Cancik, 1976; Cancik,

1993: 115–133; Cancik, 2002: 74–81; Carruba, 1973: 37–46; de Martino, 2005: 225–230;

Devecchi, 2005; Devecchi, 2013: 3250–3252; Gerhards, 2013: 107–130; Gilan, 2010: 51–

65; Gilan, 2015; Götze, 1933; Grélois, 1988: 17–145; Güterbock, 1934: 1–91; Güterbock,

1938: 45–149; Güterbock, 1956: 107–130; Güterbock, 1964b: 107–115; Güterbock, 1983:

21–35; Haas, 2006; Hoffner, 1975: 49–62; Hoffner, 1980: 283–332; Hoffner, 1997: 182–

204; Kammenhuber, 1958: 36–155; Liverani, 2004; McMahon, 1994: 149–157; del Monte,

1993; Nemirovski, 2005: 3–14; Neu, 1986: 181–192; Klinger, 2001: 272–291; Klinger,

2008: 27–48; Klock-Fontanille, 2001: 234–239; Strobel, 2011: 245–274; Taracha, 2007:

659–664; van Seters, 1983; van Seters, 1995: 2433–2444.

3 E.g., Badalì, 1987: 43–44; Beckman, 1995: 23–34; Carruba, 1973: 37–46; Carruba, 2008;

Devecchi, 2005; Neu, 1974; Schmid, 1985: 1–21; Steiner, 1984: 54–73; Taracha, 1997:

74–84; Wolf, 1994: 159–164; Wilhelmi, 2016: 223–239.

4 One of the latest in-depth studies on Hittite historical literature (including annals and Res

Gestae) was published by A. Gilan in 2015.

58 Vladimir Sazonov

examples5 that show the evolution and changes of historical Hittite literary texts6

using examples from the royal annals as a genre throughout the whole of Hittite

history in the second millennium BC. I will also compare Hittite royal annals from

the Old and New Kingdoms in order to highlight some characteristic changes in

Hittite literature, using examples from royal annalistic texts from the 17th century

BC until the collapse of the Hittite kingdom (ca. 1190/1180 BC).

2. Some general notes on the annalistic literature of the Hittites

The ancient Near Eastern historiographic texts which we have from Ancient Mes-

opotamia7 have a long tradition which started in Early Dynastic Sumer (2800–

2335 BC). The Hittites were no doubt influenced in several fields by the Meso-

potamian cultural space but is difficult to say whether or not they were influenced

in the field of historiography (if so, then in which ways?)8. It is also possible that

5 Only from the annals.

6 See more on Hittite historical texts – e.g., Bryce, 1983; Carruba, 1973: 37–46; Carruba,

1977: 156–165; Carruba, 2001: 51– 72; Carruba, 2003; Carruba, 2008; Taracha, 1997: 74–

84; Cancik, 1970; Cancik, 1976; Cancik, 1993: 115–133; Cancik, 2002: 74–81; Gilan,

2010: 51–65; Gilan, 2015; Sazonov, 2017a: 179−182.

7 Grayson, 1980: 140–194; Carrena, 1989.

8 Hittite culture was influenced by several neighbouring states: Assyrians, Babylonians,

Syrian city-states (e.g., Richter, 2002: 295–322) and Hurrians. A. Ünal (1989: 138) writes

concerning the Hurrian presence in the Hittite world: “Hurrians first appear in the histori-

cal texts as enemies of the Hittites. Convincing evidence is lacking, but direct influence

may already have begun in the Old Kingdom. Visible influences are more readily observed

from the Early Empire period under Tuthaliya III and Arnuwanda I. By the time of Hat-

tusili III and his Hurrian wife Puduhepa, the Hurrian cultural invasion was well under way.

From the Early Empire on the Hurrian influence began to be felt so strongly that some

scholars believe the dynasty to be of Hurrian origin”. The Hittites probably adopted an

Old Babylonian (Alalaḫ?) form of the cuneiform script for writing texts in the Hittite lan-

guage (Collins, 2007: 142; Gilan, 2015: 14) and Gilan (2015: 16) argues: „Die altassyr-

ische Keilschrift, die zeitweise während der kārum-Zeit in Anatolien in Gebrauch war,

wurde bekanntlich von den Hethitern nicht übernommen. Wegen der Ähnlichkeit der he-

thitischen Keilschrift mit der altbabylonischen Kursivschrift aus Alalaḫ (Tell Açana,

Schicht VII) wird oft vermutet, dass der von den althethitischen Schreibern verwendete

Schriftduktus im Zusammenhang mit der Eroberung der großen städtischen Zentren Nord-

syriens während der Regierungszeit Ḫattušilis I. nach Ḫattuša gelangte”. In the II millen-

nium BC Hittite scribes tried accurately to translate and record disappearing literature in

the Hattic language which, at that time, was a dead language. Hittite scribes were also

working on learning and adopting Babylonian literary and writing traditions, including

poetry and composed bilingual texts which archaeologists have found in the Boğazköy

archive. J. Klinger (1998: 365–366) had some interesting thoughts on the origin of Hittite

cuneiform: “Schon aus der frühesten Zeit der Archive und Bibliotheken von Hattuša sind

reichlich Funde die verschiedensten Textgenres erhalten- und dies sogar in mehreren ver-

schiedenen einheimischen Sprachen. Klar ist jedoch, daß die Beantwortung der Frage, von

Some Notes on the Evolution of the Hittite Royal Annals 59

Mesopotamian influences on Hittite historiographic texts are, although still de-

tectable, not particularly significant.

Some very important historical Hittite texts were written in two languages:

Akkadian and Hittite (e.g., Bilingual Testament of Ḫattušili I.9). Hittite historio-

graphic texts include edicts (like the Proclamation of Telepinu10), royal annals,

and a few narratives of a more literary character.11 According to Gary Beckman

these historical texts (annals) share a single purpose: “the justification of kingship

and its current occupant in the eyes of both gods and men”.12 Hittite royal annals

are first-person or sometimes third-person narrations of the Hittite rulers’ military

campaigns organized by regnal year (but not always) and these annals “take the

form of a military itinerary in which military victories, the destruction of cities,

and lists of booty and captives taken are recounted.”13 Hittite historiographic

texts14 concentrate mostly on military matters but also include political history

and the fulfilment of religious duties.15 Propaganda16 and the justification of pol-

itics and military campaigns played an important role in Hittite historiographic

texts, just as they did in Ancient Mesopotamia.17

Generally, Hittite literature18 has a special place and its own role in the An-

cient Near Eastern literary legacy. It was strongly influenced by Ancient Meso-

potamian literary tradition (Assyro-Babylonian and Hurrian, Syrian, etc.), alt-

hough it had its own particularities.19 These particularities show some divergence

from Mesopotamian literary traditions and one very special Hittite-specific fea-

wem und vor allem wann die Hethiter schreiben lernten, von den ältesten Quellen ihren

Ausgang nehmen muß.” Klinger (1998: 374) also makes crucial conclusions about Hittite

script: “Mit der uns bekannten althethitischen Textüberlieferungen ist nicht gleichzeitig

der Beginn der hethitischen Schrift- und Schultradition gegeben, sondern nur der Beginn

der Archive in Hattuša. Es ist vielmehr längere Phase eigenständiger Entwicklung voraus-

zusetzen, die bisher aber nicht quellenmäßig dokumentiert ist”. See also Archi, 2010: 37–

46.

9 For more on the Testament of Ḫattušili I see Klock-Fontanille, 1996: 33–66. The literary

and verbatim similarity of the Testament of Ḫattušili I and the Proclamation of Telepinu,

make us wonder if the Testament of Ḫattušili I might have been an example for Telepinu,

when he wrote his Proclamation (see more Mõttus, 2018).

10 Hoffmann, 1984; Starke, 1985: 100–113.

11 Collins, 2007: 143.

12 Beckman, 1995: 32.

13 Collins, 2007: 143.

14 Kammenhuber, 1958: 36–155; Beckman, 1995: 23–34.

15 Hoffner, 1980: 283–332; Devecchi, 2013: 3250.

16 E.g., see about Hittite political propaganda in the Apology of Ḫattušili III – Schmid,

1985: 1–21: for more about propaganda see Hoffner, 1975: 49–62.

17 Hoffner, 1975: 49–62; Sazonov, 2016a: 23–50.

18 More on Hittite literature see Haas, 2006.

19 Güterbock, 1934:1–91; Güterbock, 1938: 45–149.

60 Vladimir Sazonov

ture was the invention of the annalistic genre.20 For example, the Annals of Ḫat-

tušili I21 is a historical chronicle written in an annalistic style, but in Mesopotamia

we know of no such chronicle from the same period. Hittite historiographic texts

were already different from Akkadian historiographic literature and M. Alparslan

argues:

“Compared to the Near Eastern parallels the Hittite historiography shows

some important differences. The Mesopotamian tradition was largely in-

fluenced by religious thought. For the Mesopotamians history was an eth-

ical discipline related with religion. Historical documents was a by-product

of one’s desire to attract god’s favor. By contrast, in Hittite historiography

the religious factor is far less prominent, rather, a desire to vindicate the

kings’ legal right on the throne is observed”.22

One can only agree with H.G. Güterbock who explains the importance of Hittite

annals as follows: “Hittites made original contributions in the field of historiog-

raphy”.23

Before we go deeper into this genre, some questions need to be addressed.

Firstly: what do we understand by the term ‘annals’?

Annals (from Latin: annāles, and annus, “year”) are a concise historical record in

which events are arranged chronologically, year after year.24 According to Gary

Beckman “annals, a term borrowed from Roman historical writing, are a genre of

historical text in which an account of events is presented year by year.”25 Amir

Gilan writes the following about Hittite annals: “Während die Hethiter selbst, dem

Kolophon zufolge, die Inschrift Ḫattušilis als pešnatar- ‚Mannestaten‘ bezeichne-

ten, hat sich in der modernen Forschung vor allem die Bezeichnung ‚Anna-

len‘ eingebürgert“.26 Like Shigeo Yamada, I prefer to use the plural term annals

for “a record of events arranged in yearly sequence”.27 According to Elena De-

vecchi, “Annals appear for the first time in the late seventeenth century as an

innovation of the Hittites, whose finest examples were produced in the late four-

teenth century”.28 Hittites called annals pešnatar (masculinity29), literally “manli-

20 Güterbock, 1934: 1; Ünal, 1989: 13.

21 Gilan, 2015: 215–229.

22 Alparslan, 2013: 50.

23 Güterbock, 1983: 171

24 Alparslan, 2013: 49–50.

25 Beckman, 2009: 237.

26 Gilan, 2015: 233–234.

27 Yamada, 2009: VIII.

28 Devecchi, 2013: 3250.

29 Alparslan, 2013: 50.

Some Notes on the Evolution of the Hittite Royal Annals 61

ness”, which means “Manly Deeds”30 and, as H.G. Güterbock correctly under-

lined, “If we say ‘Deeds’ for short, we should remember that the Hittite term is

not the same as res gestae, but rather has the connotation of virtues”.31 But of

course, there is a problem with using the modern term ‘annals’ to describe several

Hittite historiographic texts; several scholars, among them J. Klinger,32 M. Al-

parslan33 and A. Gilan34, studied this issue about using the terms annals and

“Deeds”.

Secondly: What are the functions of Hittite annals?

Gary Beckman states that the functions of the royal annals (and res gestae) of

Hittite kings are the following:

“The royal annals and res gestae functioned as reports by the ruler of his

activities on behalf of his para-human superiors. Even the literary material

may have been utilized in training the scribes necessary for the functioning

of the entire system. Or perhaps such texts provided entertainment and in-

struction for the ruler and his court, strengthening their will and capacities

for fulfilling their duties.”35

3. The evolution of historical texts and the emergence of the annalistic

genre in Hittite literature in the Old Kingdom

3.1. The Annals of Ḫattušili I (CTH 4)

The earliest known Hittite annals are the Annals of Ḫattušili I (CTH 4)36, which

30 See more on “Manly Deeds”: Bachvarova, 2010: 66–85; Hazenbos, 2006: 235–239.

31 Güterbock, 1983: 175.

32 Klinger, 2001: 276.

33 Alparslan, 2013: 49–50.

34 About the term annals (case of the Annals of Ḫattušili I) see Gilan, 2015: 234:

“Nichtsdestotrotz stellt sich die Frage, ob die moderne Bezeichnung ‚Annalen‘ auf die

‚Mannestaten‘ Ḫattušilis zutrifft. Wie Klinger zu Recht bemerkt, wird der Begriff ‚An-

nalen‘ übernommen, ohne dass eine methodologische Diskussion über seine Tauglichkeit

für das hethitische Material stattgefunden hätte. Jörg Klinger zufolge handelt es sich ledig-

lich ‚um eine forschungsgeschichtlich bedingte Konvention, die eben keine Rückschlüsse

auf formale Elemente, wie etwa verwendete Erzählerposition u. ä., zulässt‘. Deshalb

schlägt er vor, die ‚Mannestaten‘ Ḫattušilis eher als Chronik zu betrachten”.

35 Beckman, 2009: 225.

36 Hoffner (1980: 293) writes: “After the Anitta text the oldest Hittite text in annalistic

style is the text known as the manly deeds of Hattusili”. The newest translations: Haas,

2006: 32–41 and Beckman, 2006b: 219–222; See more on the Annals of Ḫattušili I – Cor-

nelius, 1958: 292–296; Kümmel, 1985: 455–463; Gilan, 2015: 215–248. See also Otten,

1957: 77–84; Imparati/Saporetti, 1965, 40–85; Beckman, 2009: 237; See more on Hittite-

Akkadian bilingual texts Kuyper, 1998: 93–98. For more on Ḫattušili I and his annals

(especially about CTH 13: The Extensive Annals of Ḫattusili I) see Kempinski, Košak,

62 Vladimir Sazonov

is basically a Hittite-Akkadian bilingual text, in which the Akkadian and Hittite

versions differ.37 It is not the earliest Hittite historiographic text.38 As correctly

remarked by H.G. Güterbock, “what distinguishes our text from others is its char-

acter: the text of Ḫattušili is an annalistic report, in contrast to the literary compo-

sitions known so far.”39 The annalistic report is a new literary genre and a new

invention in literary tradition, but not only in Hittite literature; it is a new phe-

nomenon in the whole of the Ancient Near East literary tradition. The Annals of

Ḫattušili I is the first annalistic text in history. This text provides an overview of

Ḫattušili I’s military campaigns in different regions (Anatolia and Northern

Syria).40

Like the Text of Anitta41 the Annals of Ḫattušili I can be divided into different

subchapters.42

1982: 87–116. A. Gilan (2015: 216), besides the Akkadian version (KBo 10.1) of the

annals, also listed 5 Hittite manuscripts (A–E): “A: KBo 10.2; B: Ba. KUB 23.31; Bb.

IBoT 3.134 (+) KUB 23.41; Bc. VBoT 13 + KUB 57.48; C: IBoT 4.264; D: KBo 10.3; E:

KUB 40.6 (+) KUB 23.33 (+) KUB 23.20)”.

37 For more on the Hittite version see De Martino, 2003: 21–79. On the Akkadian version

see Devecchi, 2005. On differences between the Akkadian and Hittite versions see foot-

notes in Beckman, 2006b: 48–64. For more on the differences see Melchert, 1978; Hou-

wink ten Cate, 1983: 91–109 and Gilan, 2015: 217.

38 At the beginning of Hittite historiography (Alparslan, 2013: 49) stands the Text of Anitta

(CTH 1) (Neu, 1974), which does not belong to the annals genre, however I think that in

some places the Text of Anitta is similar to the Hittite annals in content and structure

(Hoffner 1980: 291–293). For that reason the Text of Anitta does not belong to the annals

genre, so is not included here for deeper analysis. I did, however, analyse it in a previous

paper (Sazonov, 2017a: 179−182). With the Text of Anitta many things remain unclear and

complicated and, as L. Wilhelmi (2016: 232) correctly pointed out concerning such diffi-

culties: “A compilation of CTH 1 from more than one source adds a certain complication

to the question of the original language used, as it is theoretically possible that not all

sources were written in the same language. In any case, it is necessary to allow for a pro-

cess of evaluation and possible editing of the original sources. This invalidates the argu-

ment that the typical Boğazköy ductus, exhibited already in Old Hittite manuscript, could

only be accounted for if the composition was translated from a different language, as a

mere copying process could not explain the loss and original Old Assyrian ductus, which

would have been the only type of ductus available to the local Kaneš/Neša scribes at the

time”. See more on the Text of Anitta Starke, 1979: 47–120; Badalì, 1987: 43–44; Carruba,

2001: 51– 72; Carruba, 2003; Dercksen, 2010; Kimball, Slocum, 2017. Latest translations:

Beckman, 2006a: 216–219; Klinger, 2005: 139–141.

39 Güterbock, 1964a: 5.

40 Miller, 1999; Miller, 2001: 410–429. See also Cancik, 1970: 49f, Hoffner 1980: 293–

294.

41 The Text of Anitta consists of different literary subcategories (e.g., Haas, 2006: 28; Sa-

zonov, 2017a: 179−182). See also Hoffner, 1980: 291–293.

42 Based on KBo 10.2 = H; Gilan, 2015: 217 and Beckman, 2006: 219–221. For that reason

Some Notes on the Evolution of the Hittite Royal Annals 63

First Year (H i 1–14)43

The very first section is a preamble (introduction), where the official titularies44

of Ḫattušili I and his line of succession are contained. In some ways it is similar

to the beginning of the Text of Anitta.45 In the second section there comes a short

description of the first year of Ḫattušili I’s military campaign against the city of

Šanaḫḫuitta:

“I went to (the city of) Šanaḫḫuitta, but I did not destroy it; I destroyed its

countryside. I left forces in two places as garrisons, and I gave whatever

sheepfolds there were in that vicinity to the garrison troops”.46

And after destroying of the city Šanaḫḫuitta, Ḫattušili I went on to the city of

Zalpa and destroyed it as well.47 He carried off its deities (statues), gold, etc.48

Second Year (H i 15–21 § 4)

In the second year of the military campaign Ḫattušili I conquered and destroyed

Alalakh and captured the following towns: Alalaḫ, Waršuwa, Tašḫiniya and Ika-

the text was divided into six subchapters – years. Hoffner (1980: 295) remarks: “The deeds

of the king are organized according to the king's regnal years, of which only the first five

are included on this tablet. Because the colophon is broken where the notation ‘complete’

or ‘incomplete’ once stood, we do not know if originally there was a second tablet con-

taining events from later years. To be sure, the years are not actually numbered in the text”.

Kempinski and Košak (1982: 98) argue: “The discovery of KBo 10:1–3 provided us with

the ‘Six-years Annals’ of this king. Contrary to the communis opinio (e.g., Gurney in CAH

1973), it is more likely that these annals do not list a sequence of six years but are excerpts

from an extensive edition of his annals from which the most important six years of his

reign were chosen and written on the small golden statue which was offered to the Sun

god (KBo 10:2 iii 21). Looking at the six years recorded, one wonders how Hattusili, after

a short campaign to the north (Šanahuitta, Zalpa) was able to march straight forward to

Alalaḫ if the southern provinces were not already under his control”.

43 Beckman, 2006b: 219 (§ 1). A. Gilan (2015: 217) pointed out differences between Ak-

kadian and Hittite versions in this year: “Die Akkadische Fassung wechselt hier von einem

Bericht, der in der 3. Pers. Sg. gehalten ist, zu einem Bericht in der 1. Pers. In H besteht

der Feldzugsbericht gegen Šanaḫuitta aus fünf Zeilen. Die ersten drei schildern die

Ereignisse selbst, die zwei weiteren betreffen die Beuteverteilung. Ḫattušili vermag es

nicht, Šanaḫuitta zu erobern, zerstört nur ihre Ländereien und verteilt die Beute an die

Garnisonen, die er dort zurücklässt. Die militärische Aktion gegen Zalpa wird in lediglich

anderthalb Zeilen beschrieben, die Beuteliste umfasst dagegen fünf”.

44 About Hittite royal titulary see Sazonov, 2010: 157–217; Sazonov, 2009: 30–51.

45 Compare with Beckman, 2006a: 217, § 1 (A-1–4): “Anitta, son of Pithana, became king

of (the city of) Kušsara. He behaved in a manner pleasing to the storm-god in heaven”.

46 Beckman, 2006b: 219 (§ 1 A i 1–8).

47 Beckman, 2006b: 219 (§ 2 A i 9–11).

48 Beckman, 2006b: 219–220: (§ 2 A i 9–11, § 3 A i 12–14).

64 Vladimir Sazonov

kali.49 Here Ḫattušili I introduced the formula “in the following year” (MU.IM.

MA-an-ni=ma).50

Third Year (H i 22–45 §§ 5–6)51

In the third year of his reign Ḫattušili I (according to his annals in translation by

Gary Beckman) performed various actions and fought against Arzawa and Hur-

rians and others.

“In the following year52 I went to the land of Arzawa and took away their

cattle and sheep. But in my rear the Hurrian enemy entered the land, and

all the countries became hostile to me; only the single city Ḫattuša re-

mained. I am the Great King, the Tabarna53, beloved of the sun-goddess of

Arinna54. She placed me on her lap, held me by hand, and ran before me in

battle. Then I went in battle to (the city of) Nenašša, and when the people

of Nenašša saw me (coming), they opened up (their city)”.55

In this year the Hittite king Ḫattušili I describes his military activity and the battles

of his army against the kingdom of Arzawa which was located in the south-west-

ern part of Anatolia. He fought against the Hurrians (uruḪUR-RI)56, whom he des-

49 Beckman, 2006b: 219; § 4.

50 Gilan (2015: 217–218): “Das Sumerogramm, das eigentlich für das akkadische šad-

dagda („im vorherigen Jahr“) steht, wird in den „Mannestaten“ Ḫattušilis I. für den Aus-

druck „im folgenden Jahr“ verwendet”; Beckman, 2006b; 220, § 4 (A i 15–21); see De-

vecchi, 2005: 36–37, line 6: a-na ba-la-aṭ.

51 Beckman, 2006b: § 5 (A i 22–45); see also Gilan, 2015: 218–219.

52 Again the formula “the following year” (MU.IM.MA-an-ni=ma) was used.

53 For more on the royal title Tabarna see Soysal, 2005: 189–209; Sazonov, 2010: 175–

180; Sazonov, 2011: 18–25.

54 For more about Arinna see Popko, 2009.

55 Beckman, 2006b: § 5 (A i 22–34). A few notes on composition: “beloved of X goddess”

– it is quite an old and common motif, already well-known in Early Dynastic Sumer. One

of the first written records of the ruler as ‘beloved of the deity’ comes from Mesilim of

Awan (2600/2500 BC). Below is the beginning of one of Mesilim’s inscriptions: “Mesilim,

King of Kish, beloved son of Ninḫursağ” (RIME 1: Me-silim E1.8.1.3, p. 71, line 1.) The

motif of the goddess going before the king in battle is also well-known in Mesopotamia.

E.g., in A praise poem of Šulgi (A praise poem of Šulgi, Šulgi X: ETCSL http://etcsl.

orinst.ox.ac.uk/section2/tr24224.htm, last assessed 14.07.2018) we read: “42–48The lady,

the light of heaven, the delight of the black-headed, the youthful woman who excels her

mother, who was granted divine powers by her father, Inanna, the daughter of Suˀen,

decreed a destiny for Šulgi, the son of Ninsun: 49In battle I will be the one who goes before

you ...”. The motif of the deity who is going to battle before the king is used here in the

Šulgi text (Šulgi X). In the Annals of Ḫattušili I it is used for the first time in Hittite

literature and we also see it reappear later in Hittite annals – e.g., in Annals of Muršili II

(Goetze, 1933) from the late 14th or the beginning of the 13th century BC.

56 Gilan (2015: 219, f. 796) correctly pointed out that “KBo 10.1 hat hier kurḪa-ni-kal-bat.

Some Notes on the Evolution of the Hittite Royal Annals 65

ignated as “enemy” (KUR), who invaded the Hittite kingdom and conquered sev-

eral Hittite territories until “only the single city Ḫattuša remained”. Then the king

of Ḫatti also destroyed the city of Ulma (Ulluma) and gave a list of tributes. After

Ḫattušili I got control over the city of Šalliaḫšuwa, which surrounded him 57, he

then came back as victorious ruler to Ḫattuša, the capital of the Hittite empire.58

Fourth Year (H i 46–ii 10)

In the fourth year Ḫattušili I was focused on several military campaigns and ex-

pansion; he pursued military campaigns against different cities and lands, e.g.,

Šanaḫḫuitta, Takšanaya, Appaya, Alḫa and Parmanna, and these military actions

are briefly described. It ends with the destruction of Alḫa.59 The war with Šanaḫ-

ḫuitta takes more than five months, Ḫattušili I states that he destroyed Šanaḫḫuitta

in the sixth month.60 Here the king mentions the sun-god, who “appeared in the

midst of the lands” (Hittite version).61 However, in the Akkadian version the sun-

god is represented slightly differently: “The sun-god stood behind the lands”.62

Ḫattušili I also wrote in the Hittite version that “The many deeds that [I ...] I took

to the sun-goddess of Arinna.”63 But, again, in the Akkadian version this phrase

has another meaning: “Whatever I brought I dedicated to the sun-goddess of Arin-

na.”64 Further differences can be found when comparing Akkadian and Hittite

versions, which I here omit as they lie beyond the focus of my research.

Dazu jetzt Devecchi 2005, 39 Anm. 39 mit einem altbabylonischen Beleg, der zeigt, dass

Ḫanikalbat keineswegs einen Anachronismus für die Regierungszeit Ḫattušilis I. darstellt,

wie üblicherweise angenommen wurde. Vielmehr deutet diese Bezeichnung auf die Alter-

tümlichkeit von KBo 10.1 hin”. See Devecchi, 2005: 38–39, line 11.

57 Gilan, 2015: 219. This is described in a rather strange way: “The land of Šalliaḫšuwa

delivered itself with fire, why those persons (its inhabitants) entered my service” (Beck-

man, 2006b: 220). Beckman (2006b: 249) explained this fact in the following way: “This

probably indicates that the city demonstrated its submission through the destruction of its

own fortifications”.

58 Beckman, 2006b: 219, § 5.

59 Beckman, 2006b: 220, § 6; See also Gilan, 2015: 219–220.

60 Beckman, 2006b: 220, § 57 (A i 46–52).

61 Beckman, 2006b: 220.

62 Beckman, 2006b: 249.

63 Beckman, 2006b: 220; Hoffner (1980: 296): The phrase: “(the deity) took me/him by

the hand” also occurs in §§ 5 and 9. Mursili II’s Detailed Annals (KBo V 8 iii 41–42) has:

numu dU NIR.GÁL EN-IA ŠU-an ḫarzi naŠmu piran ḫuyanza “The mighty storm god, my

lord, holds my hand and runs before me”, and the Apology of Ḫattusili, 1 21: numu

dIŠTAR GAŠAN-IA ŠU-za IṢBAT “Ishtar mv 1ady held me by the hand”.

64 Beckman, 2006: 249. Gilan (2015: 220, footnote 800) observes: “Die akkadische Fas-

sung weicht an dieser Stelle ab: Vs. i 25–26: mi-im-ma ša ub-lam (26) a-na DUTU

URUTÚL-na ú-še-li ‚Alles was ich wegnahm, weihte ich der Sonnengöttin von Arinna‘.

Wird der Begriff ‚Mannestaten‘ in der hethitischen Fassung als Synonym für ‚Beu-

te‘ verwendet?”

66 Vladimir Sazonov

Fifth Year (H ii 11 – the end)

In the fifth year Ḫattušili I destroyed the land of Zaruna. The Hittite king also

mentioned an alliance between the people of Haššuwa and Aleppo who fought

against him, but over whom he was victorious:

“The people of Ḫaššuwa came against me in battle, and the troops of the

land of Aleppo were with them as allies. They came to me [in battle] and I

defeated them”.65

One interesting motif here is the appearance of the storm-god in the midst of the

land: Ḫattušili I mentioned this event when he engaged in battle with the city of

Žippašna.66 According to A. Gilan the motif of the sun, which appeared in the

midst of the land(s), was later common motif in the Annals of Muršili II.67

In this year Ḫattušili I mentioned crossing the river Euphrates and compared

himself to a lion68, striking fear into all his enemies: “And in a few days I crossed

the Euphrates River. I scattered the land of Ḫaššuwa like a lion with its paws”.

Ḫattušili I compared himself to a lion for a second time: “Like a lion, I frightened

off (the city of) Ḫaḫḫa with menacing gestures, and I destroyed Zippašna”. In that

same year the conquest and destruction of Haššuwa, Ḫaḫḫa and some other cities

took place.69

The fifth year text also contains an ‘epilogue’. In this epilogue Ḫattušili I men-

tions his long list of tributes from Ḫaššuwa and Ḫaḫḫa, and writes about freeing

slaves: “I removed the hands of its slaves from the sickle. I freed them from com-

pulsory services, and I ungirded their loins.”70 Freeing slaves is not a new motif

in Ancient Near East literature, but to my knowledge this is the only instance we

know, as it is never mentioned again in later Hittite annals. The epilogue goes on

to mention the fashioning of a golden statue of the king dedicated to the sun-

65 Beckman, 2006b: 220, § 10, line 31.

66 Beckman, 2006: 221, § 14.

67 Gilan (2015: 222): “Die Zerstörung Zippašnas gibt Anlass für die ‚Sonne‘, wieder in der

Mitte der Länder zu erscheinen. Darauf folgt die Beschreibung einer gleichzeitigen

Handlung, die später für die ‚Mannestaten‘ Muršilis II. typisch ist”.

68 Collins, 1998: 15–20. Already king Anitta was compared to a lion: “And like a lion [I

fell upon (?)] the land(s)”. Ḫattušili I (in fifth year of his annals) compared himself to a

lion: “I scattered the land Haššuwa like a lion with its paws” (Beckman, 2006b: 221, § 10).

In Ancient Mesopotamia this motif was also popular. What is more, one Akkadian legend

“Sargon, the Lion” (Westenholz, 1997: 94) describes Sargon of Akkad as a lion. In “Praise

poem of Šulgi” (Šulgi A) we read that Šulgi is mentioned as a “fierce-looking lion and as

the lion of Utu” (Šulgi A, http://etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk/section2/tr24201.htm, last assessed

14.7.2018). Ulanowski (2015: 255–284) provides a detailed overview on the motif of the

lion in Mesopotamian and Greek Civilizations.

69 Beckman, 2006b: 221, § 14–20.

70 Beckman, 2006b: 221, § 17.

Some Notes on the Evolution of the Hittite Royal Annals 67

goddess of Arinna,71 but the most interesting passage is probably the comparison

of Ḫattušili I to Sargon of Akkad:

“No one had crossed the Euphrates River, but I, the Great King, the Tabar-

na, crossed it on foot, and my army crossed it on foot behind me. Sargon

(of Akkad also) crossed it. [He] fought the troops of Ḫaḫḫa, but [he] did

not do anything to Haḫḫa. He did not burn it down; smoke was not visible

to the storm-god of Heaven. But I, the Great King, the Tabarna, destroyed

Ḫaššuwa and Ḫaḫḫa, and [burned] them with fire. I showed smoke to the

sun-god of Heaven and the storm-god. I hitched the king of Ḫaššuwa and

king of Ḫaḫḫa to a wagon”.72

Gary Beckman supposed that “the highlight of the work is the favorable compo-

sition of Ḫattušili’s accomplishments in Syria with those of Sargon of Akkad”.73

This is the culmination of the whole story, as V. Haas has remarked.74 It seems

that Ḫattušili I took the empire of Akkad and its legendary king Sargon as arche-

types when building his own empire.75 Akkadian legends about the kings of Ak-

kad76, popular in Assyria and Babylonia, were at that time already familiar to

Hittite scribal traditions.

The reason for comparing himself with Sargon of Akkad is simple: Sargon of

Akkad was the archetypical ruler in the Ancient Near East. We know that the

Hittites assimilated many Mesopotamian traditions, and Akkadian literature and

legends about Akkadian kings were well-known among the Hittites. In this text

there is another important ancient motif which should be mentioned: the motif of

the king crossing a river.77 This motif is represented in the Annals of Ḫattušili I

and in Šar tamḫari (King of Battle), where we can read:

19'–20'. “However, my lord, can they have informed thee! The soldiers of

thy god have brought thee (…). I have crossed the river”.78

Moreover, Ḫattušili I asserted that he was better than Sargon of Akkad because

Sargon was not able to destroy Ḫaḫḫa, whereas Ḫattušili I destroyed not only

Ḫaḫḫa but also Ḫaššuwa:

71 Beckman, 2006b: 221, § 10–20. See more on sun deities and the sun-goddess of Arinna

by Hittites Yoshida, 1996; Steitler, 2017.

72 Beckman, 2006b: 221, § 19–20.

73 Beckman, 2006b: 237. About mentioning Sargon by Ḫattušili I, see Güterbock, 1964a:

1–6; Beckman, 2001: 85–91.

74 Haas, 2006: 40.

75 Haas, 2006: 41.

76 Westenholz, 1997: 250; Haul, 2009: 253–302.

77 Güterbock, 1964a: 4–5. About kings crossing rivers in Mesopotamia see Rollinger, 2013.

78 Westenholz, 1997:127.

68 Vladimir Sazonov

“He did not burn it down; smoke was not visible to the storm-god of

Heaven. But I, the Great King, the Tabarna, destroyed Ḫaššuwa and Ḫaḫḫa,

and [burned] them with fire. I showed smoke to the sun- god of Heaven

and the storm-god”.79

Divine forces and theological justification

In this text the sun-goddess of Arinna and some other gods (storm god, goddess

Mezulla), are mentioned much more often than in the Text of Anitta.80

The Hittite king was first among the Hittites to be called ‘beloved of the X

deity’, in this case the sun-goddess of Arinna. She held Ḫattušili I by the hand and

ran before him in battle. This is also a new motif for the Hittites which will be

used again in later Hittite annals, e.g., by Muršili II.

We can see in the Annals of Ḫattušili I that Ḫattušili I captured several cities,

some of them burned and destroyed, but only with the permission of the sun-god-

dess of Arinna and other gods. For example, in the fourth year of his annals Ḫat-

tušili I declares:

“[Then] I destroyed [it] in the sixth month. I, the Great King, was satisfied.

The sun-god appeared in the midst of the lands. The manly deeds that [I ....]

I took to the sun-goddess of Arinna”.81

King Ḫattušili I mentions several times that he took the deities of conquered cities:

“[I took] its deities: the storm-god, Lord of (Mt.) Amaruk, the storm-god,

Lord of Aleppo, Allatum, (Mt.) Adalur, Lelluri, 2 oxen of gold, 13 (!) stat-

ues of silver and god, 2 model shrines, and rear wall. And I plated it with

silver and gold; and I plated the door with silver and gold”.82

At the end of text there are some other gods mentioned when Ḫattušili I proudly

declares destroying Ḫaššuwa and Ḫaḫḫa:

“But, I, The Great King, the Tabarna, destroyed Ḫaššuwa and Ḫaḫḫa, and

[burned] them down with fire. I showed smoke to the sun-god of Heaven

and the storm-god. I hitched the king of Ḫaššuwa and the king of Ḫaḫḫa to

a wagon”.83

However in the Text of Anitta we cannot find any comparison of Anitta with Sar-

gon of Akkad; there Purušḫanda is mentioned.84

79 Beckman, 2006b: 221; § 19–20.

80 For comparison with the Text of Annita on this topic see Sazonov, 2017a: 179−182.

81 Beckman, 2006b: 220, § 7.

82 Beckman, 2006b: 221, § 11.

83 Beckman, 2006b: 221, § 20.

84 Anitta wrote about his successful campaign against Purušḫanda and its ruler: “When I

went on campaign [against (the city of] Purušḫanda] the ruler of Purušḫanda [brought] me

Some Notes on the Evolution of the Hittite Royal Annals 69

Some notes on composition and style

The Annals of Ḫattušili I were written in a dry and enumerative style. We can say

that some other Old Hittite historical compositions (e.g., the Proclamation of Tel-

epinu) are very elaborate and more detailed. If we compare this text to the Text of

Anitta, we can see that the Annals of Ḫattušili I are slightly more detailed and

much longer, about 150 lines in total, structured year by year like annals.

Some notes in summary

We see that from 18th –16th centuries in the Hittite kingdom there emerged a liter-

ary canon, and within it historical literature as a separate genre. One could say

these were the first royal chronicles and annals.

It is remarkable that both texts, the Text of Anitta and the Annals of Ḫattušili

I, are in some ways quite similar. For example, both are descriptions of the deeds

of kings, especially their military campaigns, and both texts begin in a similar way

with an introduction where the titulary of kings, their genealogy, etc., are listed

(while Anitta mentioned that he is a “son of Pitḫana”, Ḫattušili stated that he is a

“brother’s son of Tawananna”85). In both texts both kings (Anitta and Ḫattušili I)

are compared to lions86. In the Annals of Ḫattušili I we can read:

“Like a lion, I frightened off the city of Ḫaḫḫa with menacing gestures, and

I destroyed Zippašna”.87

There are other similarities, but a number of differences too. For example, hunt-

ing88 was mentioned in the Text of Anitta, but in the Annals of Ḫattušili I there is

gifts: He brought me a throne of iron and scepter(?) of iron as presents. When I [came]

back to Neša, I brought the ruler of Purušḫanda with me. When he goes into the throne

room, he will sit before me on the right” (Beckman, 2006a: 218 § 19 A 73–79). Here we

can compare Text of Anitta with King of Battle (Westenholz, 1997: 102–104; 113, 118,

119) where Sargon of Akkad had led his military campaign against Purušḫanda or Puruš-

hattum; Dercksen, 2010: 71–75; Torri, 2009: 110–118.

85 For more on Tawananna see Bin-Nun, 1975: 105: “Hattušili’s introduction in the Annals

as Tawananna’s brother’s son seems to declare the king a legitimate successor”. Beckman,

2006b: 219: § 1; Devecchi, 2005: 34 and 35.

86 Anitta was compared to a lion in his text; see Beckman, 2006a: 217, § 6, A 20–26).

87 Beckman, 2006b: 221.

88 Text of Annita, line 59 (see also Neu, 1974: 14f, 44, 87). Hoffner (1980: 327) pointed

out: “Later Assyrian kings liked to portray themselves on hunts or at banquets. In his clas-

sic study of Hittite civilization the late Albrecht Goetze observed that, whereas the pre-

Old Kingdom monarch Anitta likewise described a hunt in which he took part, later Hittite

kings eschewed the mention of royal hunts, if indeed they ever participated in such. Anitta

not only lists the animals caught on the hunt, but informs us that before departing on the

hunt he made a vow to a deity: ‘I made a vow (to the deity) and [on] a hu[nt I went]’.” See

also Sazonov, 2017b: 153–154. This description of the hunt is unique in Hittite historical

texts. As G. Beckman correctly pointed out: “Although later Mesopotamian monarchs

70 Vladimir Sazonov

no mention of hunting at all. Moreover, the structure of both texts is quite different.

In the Text of Anitta we can see that events are mentioned and listed without any

proper chronological system. In the Annals of Ḫattušili I, on the other hand, all

Ḫattušili I’s conquests are presented year by year89. Of course, Ḫattušili I ruled in

17th century BC, about 100 years after Anitta, so we can see that this is something

new: a presentation of historical events in a yearly format. Ḫattušili I writes in

this way: “In the following year I went to the land Arzawa (…)”90, then “in the

following year I went in battle to the city of Šanaḫḫuitta (…)”.91 So, Ḫattušili I

lists his military campaigns year by year.

We can say that the Annals of Ḫattušili I differ from the Text of Anitta in sev-

eral ways92: the Annals of Ḫattušili I are basically a “report” of the king’s deeds

(military actions) for the sun-goddess of Arinna (“Rechenschaftsbericht an die

Sonnengöttin von Arinna”93) which are presented year by year (exactly 6 regnal

years of Ḫattušili I), but the Text of Anitta is probably not a “report” for a goddess

or god, and the role of gods is represented in the Text of Anitta in quite a modest

way. However, in the Annals of Ḫattušili I the gods (especially the sun-goddess

of Arinna) played a very significant role. If the Text of Anitta is an historical text

written in the form of a chronicle or royal inscription, then the Annals of Ḫattušili

I show new developments and were written in the annalistic style (year by year).

That said, these first Hittite annals were quite laconic, and the text written by

Ḫattušili I is more detailed than the Text of Anitta.

In the Annals of Ḫattušili I the culmination takes place when the king mentions

that he is not only as powerful as Sargon of Akkad, but that he even surpasses

him. I think this is the most important message of the text. The Empire of Akkad

often boast of their prowess in the chase, Anitta’s hunt (§ 16) is unparalleled in the histor-

ical accounts of Hittite kings” (Beckman, 2006a: 217). Moreover, we can find the motif

of the killing of lions during the hunt from later Mesopotamian sources (Middle and Neo-

Assyrian royal inscriptions; e.g., RIMA 2: Tiglath-pileser I A.0.87.1, p. 26, col vi, 76–84.).

89 Gilan (2015: 225) concludes that that more than half of the text (incl. Hittite and Akka-

dian versions) are about the conquest of Ḫaššu(wa), Zippašna, Ḫaḫḫum and tribute and

treasures which the Hittite king took from these cities.

90 Beckman, 2006b: 220, § 5.

91 Beckman, 2006b: 220, § 7.

92 Hoffner (1980: 293) writes about differences between the Text of Anitta and Hittite an-

nals: “The manner of designating years in the Anitta text is quite different from Hittite

annals. In Anitta the word ‘year’ occurs twice: in § 3 in the expression ‘after my father

Pithana (died), in the same year’ (šaniya witti); and in § 17 in the expression ‘in the fol-

lowing year’ (wettandannieššima). The latter might be compared with MU.IM.MA-an-

nima of the annals of Hattusili I and the MU(.KAM)-annima of the annals of Mursili II,

but the correspondence is incomplete”.

93 Haas, 1994: 13.

Some Notes on the Evolution of the Hittite Royal Annals 71

was well-known to the Hittites; the Hittite king Ḫattušili I, like many other kings

of the Ancient Near East, saw in Sargon an archetypical ruler.94

4. Some General Notes on Annalistic Literature of the New Hittite period

After the dark period in Hittite history (ca. late 16th –15th century)95 when texts

were scarce, we have historical Hittite texts from the period which started around

1400 BC until 1190/1180 BC, the period of so-called empire.96 Most historical

Hittite texts, annals included, originated from this period during which Hittite an-

nals really developed as a genre.

We have the following annals from this period: fragments of the Annals of

Tutḫaliya97 (first king of the New Kingdom) and of a similar text about his co-

regency with his son Arnuwanda I (the Annals of Arnuwanda98).99 From Šuppilu-

liuma I100 we have fragments of his annals, and the text Manly Deeds of Šuppilu-

liuma I which was written by his son Muršili II, narrator of the text.101

Then we have the Ten Year Annals of Muršili (II).102 Muršili II103 also wrote

another version of his annals known either as the Extensive Annals or the Com-

prehensive Annals.104 H.G. Güterbock pointed out very correctly about the Com-

prehensive Annals:

“Also, the Comprehensive Annals describes simultaneous events and how

they were related to one another”.105

There are also a few fragments which may be parts of the Annals of Ḫattušili III.

94 Liverani, 1993: 43–64.

95 The next step in the development of the genre of historical narration was taken by king

Telepinu (end of 16th or early 15th century BC), who in the introductory part of his proc-

lamation laid out all the earliest history of the Hittite kingdom. However, the Proclamation

of Telepinu does not belong to annalistic literature, although it still played a significant

role in the development of the Hittite historiographic tradition (see Mõttus, 2018).

96 Houwink ten Cate, 1970; Shelestin, 2014: 800–826: Seeher, 2001: 623–634; de Martino,

2010: 186–197.

97 CTH 142; see Italian translation by del Monte, 1993: 143–145. About the Annals of

Tutḫaliya see del Monte, 2003a: 14–16; Carruba, 1973: 37–46; Carruba, 1977: 156–165;

Neu, 1986: 181–192; del Monte,1993b: 45–49, 143–145; de Martino, 1996: 13–38; Tara-

cha, 1997: 74–84.

98 CTH 143.

99 Taracha, 2007: 660.

100 About Šuppiluliuma I see Stavi, 2011: 226–239; del Monte, 1993: 133–141; del Monte,

2009.

101 Hazenbos, 2006: 235.

102 Grélois, 1988: 17–145; del Monte, 1993: 57–72.

103 About Muršili II see e.g. Houwink ten Cate, 1995–1996: 51–72.

104 Del Monte, 1993: 73–132.

105 Güterbock, 1983: 176.

72 Vladimir Sazonov

4.1. The Annals of Tutḫaliya and the Annals of Arnuwanda106

In the Annals of Tutḫaliya I/II107 we read about deportations of people by the Hit-

tite ruler”.108 Deportation was not new phenomenon at this time in the Hittite

world and in the Ancient Near East. In Ancient Near Eastern sources we find

information about the deportation of people in the 3rd millennium BC109, but es-

pecially later in the Middle-Assyrian royal inscriptions of Adad-nārārī I, Shal-

maneser I, Tukultī-Ninurta I, or in the Neo-Assyrian annals and royal inscriptions,

e.g., in texts from Shalmaneser III, Tiglath-pileser III, Sargon II, Sennacherib and

other Neo-Assyrian kings.110

The Annals of Arnuwanda (I) (CTH 143) are also preserved only in fragments.

Unfortunately, we cannot say much about these annals – the Annals of

Tutḫaliya I /II and the Annals of Arnuwanda (I) – (e.g., regarding style, composi-

tion, narratives, etc.) because both texts are preserved only in fragments and many

lines are missing. It is for this reason I did not choose these annals for my analysis.

4.2. The Manly Deeds of Šuppiluliuma I

The Manly Deeds of Šuppiluliuma I111 is an historiographic text112 about Šuppi-

luliuma I’s reign (1344–1322 BC), but it was written by his son Muršili II (1321–

1295 BC) who is the real narrator of this text. Muršili II was very interested in

recording the history of his and his father’s reigns. For that reason, he allowed the

deeds of his father Šuppiluliuma I, a great conqueror, to be recorded. Generally,

the Manly Deeds of Šuppiluliuma I show us some differences from the Annals of

Tutḫaliya I /II and the Annals of Arnuwanda and the Annals of Muršili II and

according to M. Alparslan, “unlike the annals, the regal years are not counted, and

the narrative style is different from the Annals of Muršili. Complicated accounts

are absent and the campaigns are listed successively. Thus it can be seen as a

‘historical report’”.113

106 For Tutḫaliya and Arnuwanda see Carruba, 1977: 156–165.

107 Del Monte, 1993:143–145; Carruba, 1977: 156–163; Neu, 1986: 181–192; Taracha,

1997: 74–84; Carruba, 2005: 179–205.

108 Del Monte, 1993: 144.

109 RIME 2: Rīmuš E2.1.2.4, pp. 47–48, ll. 1–29, 38–72; Rīmuš E2.1.2.3, pp. 45–46, ll 1–

36; Rīmuš E2.1.2.2, pp. 43–44, ll. 1–17, 29–35.

110 On deportation in Assyria see Oded, 1979; Sazonov, 2012b; Sazonov, 2016b: 66.

111 Güterbock, 1956: 41–98; 107–130; del Monte, 1993: 40–45.

112 This text is also somehow ‘annalistic’, but different from other annals and as Alparslan

(2013: 59) correctly remarked, “The Deeds of Šuppiluliuma is also fragmentary, though

originally it comprised of at least seven tablets. In contrast to the annals, this document

uses the third person singular instead of the first”.

113 Alparslan, 2013: 60.

Some Notes on the Evolution of the Hittite Royal Annals 73

In the Manly Deeds of Šuppiluliuma I deported people are mentioned several

times:

“And the deportees, cattle, sheep and go[ods] which [the enemy held] he

took away from him and ga[ve] them back [to the Hittites].”114

The role of divine forces, theological justification and power ideology

Muršili II mentioned in the Manly Deeds of Šuppiluliuma I115 that gods helped his

father (Šuppiluliuma I) not only to win battles, but also to deport prisoners of war

and conquered civilians:

“While he was fortifying Almina, he sent forth Urawanni and Kuwatna-

ziti, the great “shepherd”, into the country of Kašula in order to attack. And

the gods of my father helped them, (so that) they conquered all of the

country of Kašula and brought its population, cattle and sheep before my

father. The deportees whom they brought were one thousand.”116

Like in all previous Hittite annals and the annals of Muršili II, the Manly Deeds

of Šuppiluliuma I is full of theological justification for the “deeds” and military

campaigns of Šuppiluliuma I, written in the following way:

“And the gods helped my father: the Sun Goddess of Arinna, the Storm

God of Ḫatti, the Storm God of the Army, and the Lady of the Battlefield,

(so that) he slew the aforementioned whole tribe, and the enemy troops

died in multitude.”117

Relations with Egypt

A new development which appears in the Manly Deeds of Šuppiluliuma I is rela-

tions with Egypt. It should be noted that in 14th century BCE (the period of the

Amarna letters) we have unique records of Hittite-Egypt relations which are re-

flected in the current annals.118 As H.G. Güterbock correctly remarked, “the most

famous episode is also the one told with greatest skill; this is the story of the re-

quest of the widow of Tutankhamon for a son of Suppiluliuma whom she wanted

to become her husband and king of Egypt”.119

114 Güterbock, 1958: 78 (G col. IV, 24'–26').

115 Hazenbos, 2006: 235–239.

116 Güterbock, 1958: 91 (KBo V 6, A i 31–37). Here is again mentioned deportation of the

people by Hittites.

117 Güterbock, 1958: 75 (The Deeds of Šuppiluliuma as told by his son Muršili II: (BoTE

37i). ll. 7'–10').

118 Güterbock, 1958: 96–97 (E3 III 24 – A iv 15).

119 Güterbock, 1964a: 10.

74 Vladimir Sazonov

4.3. The Annals of Muršili II

In fact, Muršili II120 wrote two versions of the annals: the Ten Year Annals and

the Extensive Annals.121 The Extensive Annals122 of Muršili II are more fragmen-

tary than the Ten Year Annals. 123

Because the Ten Year Annals is better preserved and both annals (the Extensive

Annals and the Ten Year Annals) were written by the same king (Muršili II), I will

focus mostly on the Ten Year Annals here.

The Ten Year Annals124

Probably the best example of the Hittite annalistic tradition is the first version

called the Ten Year Annals of Muršili II.125 They were probably written no earlier

than the 10th year of Muršili’s reign. The Ten Year Annals is a well-organized text

which summarizes king Muršili’s annual military campaigns in Anatolia. The end

of each year is summarized by a phrase such as “This I did in one year” and the

next paragraph follows with the opening “In the next year (…)”.126

The text of the Ten Year Annals is coherent while it “framed by prologue and

epilogue”.127 In the fairly long prologue of the Ten Year Annals, Muršili II gives

an introduction to historical events of the Hittite empire that took place when king

Šuppiluliuma I died (Muršili’s father), and then when his brother Arnuwanda died

and he, Muršili II, became king. In this introductory section Muršili II also in-

vokes the sun-goddess of Arinna, to whom he addresses a prayer; and the sun-

120 See on Mursili II e.g., Houwink ten Cate 1995–1996: 51–72. Alparslan (2013: 49)

pointed out: “... there is another very important historiographical document, i.e. the annals,

which, especially in the reign of Muršili II, became a genre closest to the ‘modern

historiography’.”

121 For more on Muršili’s annals see Nemirovski, 2005: 3–14.

122 Or “Comprehensive” or “Detailed” Annals – edited by Goetze, 1933. The Compre-

hensive Annals are about of events continues until the 21st year of the Muršili II and the

Comprehensive Annals gives “more detail and includes more campaigns not directly led

by the king” (Beal, 2003: 82).

123 We see that the beginning (CTH 61 II, 1 i: 2–10 ii: 1), the first year (KUB 19.29 obv.

I; AM 24 ff), and the fifth year (CTH 61 II, 3 i: 2–8) are not as well preserved as in the

Ten Year Annals of Muršili II. Indeed, the sixth year is entirely missing.

124 Consists of 366 lines. The Ten Year Annals of Muršili II tells about first ten years of his

reign – see Alparslan 2013: 57.

125 CTH 61 I; del Monte, 2003a: 27–32; Götze, 1933: 38–77; Grélois, 1988: 17–145; del

Monte, 2003b: 62–67; Beal, 2003: 82–90. Beal (2003: 82): “This composition is known

from five copies. The best preserved is KBo 3.4 + KUB 23.125. This appears to be a copy

from approximately the reign of Muršili’s grandson Tudhaliya IV (Grélois 1988: 38–44).

The other copies, KBo 16.1, KUB 19.38 (+) KUB 14.21, KBo 16.4, and KBo 16.2 (+)

ll3/e, appear to be slightly earlier (Grélois 1988: 38–44)”. The Ten Year Annals of Muršili

II describes events (military) during the first 10 years of Muršili II (Beal, 2003: 82).

126 Mineck, 2006: 254.

127 Alparslan, 2013: 57.

Some Notes on the Evolution of the Hittite Royal Annals 75

goddess hears his prayer and helps him. This is new in the Hittite annalistic genre,

an element never presented before that reveals the religious feelings of the king.128

It is another type of text which shows us that Muršili II was religious (like other

Hittite kings), offering prayers not only concerning several plagues but also con-

cerning his wife.129 Of course, we have prayers from other Hittite rulers too,130

but the prayers from Muršili II are most representative.

In the main text of the annals the ten years of Muršili’s reign are described in

detail, but in a rather laconic and dry style. The text ends with a short epilogue in

which Muršili II summarizes his ten years of reign:

“I have already been king for 10 years since I sat on the throne of my father.

I have conquered these enemy lands in 10 years by my own hand. The lands

that the princes and lords were conquering are not in this account. What

the sun-goddess of Arinna, my lady, extends to me I will accomplish it and

I will set it down (i.e., in word of tablet) ”.131

If we compare the Ten Year Annals of Muršili II to the Annals of Ḫattušili I we

can see many differences, similarities and a continuation of the annalistic tradi-

tion132. The Ten Year Annals of Muršili II are much longer than the first Hittite

annals, the Annals of Ḫattušili I, and are more profound and detailed in their de-

scriptions of military campaigns. We could even say that the tradition of annalistic

writing by the Hittites culminated in the annals of Muršili II. Harry A. Hoffner,

Jr. pointed out about differences between the Annals of Ḫattušili I and the Ten

Year Annals of Muršili II:

“To be sure, the years are not actually numbered in the text. No new section

commences with the words ‘in my ..-th year’. But then neither is this prac-

tice attested for the much more developed annals texts of Mursili II. The

introductory formula for each new year in the Hittite version is MU.IM.

MA-an-ni-ma, ‘in the following year’. In his Ten-Year Annals Mursili II

(c. 1330) employs MU-an-ni-ma and MU.KAM-an-ni-ma regularly to

128 Mineck, 2006: 254.

129 Singer, 2002: 47–79.

130 Sürenhagen, 1981: 83–168; Singer, 2002: 21–46; 80–24.

131 Mineck, 2006: 258, § 38.

132 Hoffner (1980: 296) summarizes the differences between these two annals as following:

“The phraseology of the Hattusili I annals is by no means so stereotyped as the greater

part of the Ten-Year Annals of Mursili, but it resembles in its greater variety of phraseol-

ogy the latter’s Detailed Annals and of col. IV of KUB 26,71 (d. [8.2]). The author does

not, for instance, find it necessary in enumerating each victory to credit the divine assis-

tance in some stock line such as ‘the gods ran before me and I smote the enemy’. Rather,

divine assistance is described in several ways and rarely in the same way twice. The Ak-

kadian version at § 5 speaks of the goddess placing the king on her lap.”

76 Vladimir Sazonov

mark the transition to the narration of a new year’s events.”133

In the epilogue of the Ten Year Annals of Muršili II we can read:

“I have already been king for 10 years since I sat the throne of my father. I

have conquered these enemy lands in 10 years by my (own) hand. The

lands that the princes and lords were conquering are not in (this account).

What the sun-goddess of Arinna, my lady, extends to me I will accomplish

it and I will set it down (i.e., in words on a tablet)”.134

M. Alparslan underlined, that the “statement in the prologue is repeated in a sim-

ilar way in the epilogue”135 and that “the last sentence also nicely illustrates the

religious aspect of Hittite historiography”,136 – “What the sun-goddess of Arinna,

my lady, extends to me I will accomplish it and I will set it down”. 137

The role of divine forces, theological justification and power ideology

Throughout his text king Muršili II attributed all of his military accomplishments

to divine favour and protection.138 This also makes both annals of Muršili II (the

Ten Year Annals of Muršili II and the Extensive Annals) quite different from the

Annals of Ḫattušili I. Muršili II repeated several times, even constantly, the name

of the sun-goddess of Arinna, patron of his dynasty, but also often mentioned

other deities and he constantly repeats that the sun-goddess of Arinna “ran before

him in battle”.139 The Annals of Ḫattušili I had already mentioned that the sun-

goddess of Arinna “ran before him in battle”140 but there is a difference: Muršili

II declares that not only the sun-goddess of Arinna ran before him in battle like

with Ḫattušili I, but also “the mighty storm god, Mezulla and all the gods ran

before him”.141 So here is an expansion of the old tradition142.

133 Hoffner, 1980: 295.

134 Mineck, 2006: 258, § 38.

135 Alparslan, 2013: 58.

136 Alparslan, 2013: 58.

137 Mineck, 2006: 258, § 38.

138 Mineck / van den Hout / Hoffner, 2006: 253.

139 E.g., Mineck 2006: 257, § 30.

140 Beckman, 2006b: 220, § 5.

141 Mineck, 2006: 256, Year 4; § 21. Beal (2003: 83) writes: “In Muršili’s view, it is the

gods running before his army that give him the margin of victory. In the Ten Year Annals

the repeated phrase is the ‘Sungoddess of Arinna, my lady, the victorious Stormgod, my

lord, Mezzulla and all the gods ran before me.’ In the Comprehensive Annals, on the other

hand, the phrase is somewhat different: ‘The victorious Stormgod, my lord, the Sungod-

dess of Arinna, my lady, the Stormgod of Ḫattuša, the Protective Deity (dLAMMA) of

Ḫattuša, the Stormgod of the Army, IŠTAR of the countryside, and all the gods ran before

me’.”

142 See the Annals of Ḫattušili I: “I am the Great King, the Tabarna, beloved of the sun-

goddess of Arinna. She placed me on her lap, held me by the hand, and ran before me in

Some Notes on the Evolution of the Hittite Royal Annals 77

The theological justification of deeds had been used by Hittite kings since

Anitta, but at the time of the New Kingdom it became more elaborate and com-

plex.143 As noted above, Muršili II tried to justify his wars and reign with the

support of the gods and emphasized that the gods made him victorious, like Darius

I did in his Behistun inscription more than 800 years later, constantly repeating:

“by the favour of Ahuramazda I am king in this country” or “by the favour of

Ahuramazda this I did” or “by the favour of Ahuramazda my army smote that

rebellious army exceedingly”.144 Divine forces play a bigger role in the Annals of

Muršili II than in the Annals of Ḫattušili I. So, we can conclude that theological

justification was very important to Muršili II.

Of course, there are also other new elements, e.g., just as there were some

changes in Hittite royal titulary after the Old Kingdom period, we see that these

changes are reflected in Muršili’s annals. Ḫattušili I began his texts with the for-

mula “I, the Great King, the Tabarna, Ḫattušili, king of the land of Ḫatti, ruler of

the city of Kuššar”, while Muršili II used a different titular formula at the begin-

ning of his introduction to the annals: “Thus says My Sun (My Majesty) Muršili,

King of Ḫatti-land, Hero, son of Šuppiluliuma, Great King, Hero”. His royal titu-

lar formula differs from other royal titular formulae of the first annals of the New

Kingdom – the Annals of Tutḫaliya and the Annals of Arnuwanda – because Mur-

šili II, like his father Šuppiluliuma I, used the royal epithet “My Sun”145 or “My

Majesty” (dUTUši). This was introduced by the Hittites before Šuppiluliuma I

(probably by Zidanta II)146 but Muršili II was one of the first to use this epithet in

royal annals. He also continued the usage of the Assyro-Babylonian royal epithet

“Hero” (UR.SAĞ)147, used by several kings before him, in the annals.

Mass deportation in the Hittite annals of Muršili II

In the fifth year of the Ten Year Annals King Muršili II mentions the deportation

of people and, of course, in relation to gods, the gods justified this act and even

helped Muršili II to accomplish it:

“The sun-goddess of Arinna, my lady, the mighty storm god, my lord, Mez-

zulla and all the gods ran before me and I conquered the entire land of

Arawanna. There were 3.500 civilian captives that I conducted to the royal

house”.148

battle” (Beckman, 2006b: 220, § 5).

143 Hoffner, 1975: 49–62.

144 See e.g., Schmitt, 1991: p. 49, DB I, § 5, 11–12; For more on Darius I see Sazonov/

Johandi, 2015: 329–352.

145 For more on the royal epithet “My Sun” see Sazonov, 2012a; Beckman, 2002: 37–43.

146 Beckman, 2002: 37.

147 For more on UR.SAĞ (akk. qurādu(m), qarrādu(m)) see Sazonov, 2010: 206–208: Sa-

zonov, 2016b: 97.

148 Mineck, 2006: 257, § 28.

78 Vladimir Sazonov

Some notes on the style of the annals of Muršili II

It seems that the style of the Ten Year Annals of Muršili II is still quite dry, but

not as dry as that of the Annals of Ḫattušili I or the Text of Anitta. It is longer and

more detailed and elaborate.

Both annals written by Muršili II, the Ten Year Annals of Muršili II and the

Extensive Annals of Muršili II, comprise a clear introduction or prologue, then

main text descriptions of military campaigns year on year, chronologically, and

then at the end a clear but short epilogue which does not exist in the previous

Annals of Ḫattušili I.

5. Summary

Although Hittite literature (especially myths) was strongly influenced by the Mes-

opotamian cultural space through the Hurrians who were mediators between Hit-

tite and Assyro-Babylonian culture (but in some cases directly from Assyria and

Babylonia), it should be noted that historical texts from the Hittite kingdom differ

from all preceding Mesopotamian literature, not least because the genre of annals

was invented by the Hittites.149 The influence of Mesopotamian traditions upon

Hittite historiographic texts is therefore visible, but unlikely to be particularly sig-

nificant.

Hittite annalistic writing as a unique literary genre in the whole Ancient Near

East started in the 17th century BC and the next 400 years saw it change and de-

velop until the fall of the Hittite kingdom (c. 1190/1180 BC). Generally, we can

say that historical Hittite prose was always quite laconic, annals included.

The Annals of Ḫattušili I (17th century BC) are the oldest example of the genre

of historical Hittite literature. At the same time, the Annals of Ḫattušili I followed

the tradition that began a century earlier in the Text of Anitta. Both texts (Text of

Anitta and Annals of Ḫattušili I) tell us about the heroic deeds of kings, Anitta and

Ḫattušili I, performed under the protection of gods and these deeds culminated at

the end of the texts with their greatest achievement. Ḫattušili I wanted to show

that he was not only as strong and powerful as the “king of the world” Sargon of

Akkad, but even stronger and more powerful than Sargon.

Several military campaigns waged by Hittite kings against cities in Anatolia

and Northern Syria were described in Hittite royal annals, of which some of the

best preserved are the annals of Muršili II (the Ten Year Annals of Muršili II and

the Extensive Annals).

We see that Hittite annals developed throughout the history of the Hittite king-

dom. Later Hittite annals (15th–14th/13th century BC) are more formulaic in their

expression than earlier examples. As B.J. Collins remarks “Ḫattusili I’s annals, in

keeping with the style of the texts from his reign generally, were not stereotypical

in their phrasing in the way that Mursili II’s were”.150 During the epoch of the

149 In Mesopotamia they were introduced much later than in the Hittite literary tradition.

150 Collins, 2007: 144.

Some Notes on the Evolution of the Hittite Royal Annals 79

Hittite empire (New Kingdom), annalistic literature developed in a more so-

phisticated way; descriptions of military campaigns were presented in greater de-

tail, as in the Manly Deeds of Šuppiluliuma I or in the Ten Year Annals of Muršili

II. They also created new phrasings, like the royal epithet “My Sun” introduced

by the Hittites in the 15th century (most likely by Zidanta II).151 The annals from

the New Kingdom are longer, with more detailed descriptions of battles, conquest,

deportations, looting of cities, etc.

Deportations, mentioned several times in the Hittite annals and res gestae (the

Annals of Ḫattušili I, the Annals of Tutḫaliya I/II, the Annals of Arnuwanda, the

Manly Deeds of Šuppiluliuma I, the Ten Year Annals of Muršili II, the Extensive

Annals), were of course not a new invention in the Ancient Near East and were a

well-known phenomenon far and wide. In the New Kingdom, however, deporta-

tions of people were mentioned more often in the annals and in other historio-

graphic texts compared to older historiographic Hittite texts from the Old and

Middle Hittite periods).

Diplomatic relations with Egypt appear for the first time in New Kingdom

annalistic literature in Manly Deeds of Šuppiluliuma I.

We can say that the tradition of historiographic writing that began with the

Text of Anitta, and the annalistic tradition which started with the Annals of Ḫat-

tušili I, culminated in the annals of Muršili II. They also depict the theological

justification of war, very well elaborated by Muršili II in his texts. The theological

justification of wars, deeds and kingly actions also developed throughout Hittite

history and is reflected in the annalistic genre. If in the Text of Anitta (not annals

but pertinent here nonetheless) we can see almost any theological justification of

his deeds, then Ḫattušili I who ruled 100 years later used this motif more elabo-

rately, evoking gods to justify his aggressive politics (the Annals of Ḫattušili I).

We find even more sophisticated and developed justification of war or ideology

of divine warfare by Hittites in the period of the New Kingdom (1400–1190/1180

BC), especially in the annals written by Muršili II.

As we can see, ideology and religion (theology) played a significant role in

warfare, especially in the justification of wars in Hittite Anatolia from as early as

ca. 1750 BC (or perhaps earlier). We have several pieces of evidence from Hittite

sources where the ruler used theological justification for his military campaign or

the invasion of another country. The ideology of (divine) warfare in the Hittite

world developed with the new period and became better formulated and more

complex over the course of history.

So the ideology of war is a very old and traditional phenomenon, continually

changing, developing, transforming with each new epoch or new period of rule,

yet still retaining many similarities to its earlier manifestations. If we compare the

theological justification of Muršili II with that of the period of Ḫattušili I we find

151 Beckman, 2002: 37.

80 Vladimir Sazonov

a lot of similarities and certain differences. For example, the theological justifica-

tion of deportation is a new phenomenon in Hittite texts which was only men-

tioned by Hittites in their annals from the period of the New Kingdom (in the

Annals of Tutḫaliya I/II, the Annals of Arnuwanda, the Manly Deeds of Šuppilu-

liuma I, the Ten Year Annals of Muršili II, the Extensive Annals of Muršili II).

Throughout his annals king Muršili II attributes all of his military accomplish-

ments to divine favour and protection.152 This also makes both Muršili II annals

(the Ten Year Annals of Muršili II and the Extensive Annals) quite different from

the Annals of Ḫattušili I. Muršili II repeats several times, even constantly, the

name of the sun-goddess of Arinna, patron of his dynasty, but also often mentions

other deities and he constantly repeats that the sun-goddess of Arinna “ran before

him in battle”. The Annals of Ḫattušili I had already mentioned that the sun-god-

dess of Arinna “ran before him in battle”153 but there is a difference: Muršili II

declares that not only the sun-goddess of Arinna ran before him in battle like with

Ḫattušili I, but also “the mighty storm god, Mezulla and all the gods ran before

him”.154 So here is an expansion of the old tradition.

Last but not least, annalistic writing at the time of king Muršili II had already

approximately 400 years of tradition of developing this genre. The Hittite annals

from the late period (New Kingdom) are more extensive and far more detailed,

with a long, clear introduction and epilogue. The introductions became longer and

more ideological as divine justification of royal deeds (e.g., military campaign,

annexation of countries, killing, deportation, etc.) became more elaborate. Here I

focused on some examples that have survived more or less intact, leaving aside

several other Hittite annals that remain only in small fragments and new texts

might change the picture given here.

Bibliography

Alparslan, M., 2013: “Recording the Past: Hittite Historiography”. In M. Al-

parslan / M. Doğan-Alparslan (eds.): Hittites: An Anatolian Empire. Istanbul.

Pp. 48–61.

Archi, A., 2000: “Hittite and Hurrian Literatures: An Overview”. In J.M. Sasson

(ed.): Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. Vol. 4. New York. Pp. 2367–

2377.

— 2010: “When Did the Hittites Begin to Write in Hittite”. In Y. Cohen / A.

Gilan / J.L. Miller (eds.): Pax Hethitica: Studies on the Hittites and Their

Neighbours in Honour of Itamar Singer. Studien zu den Boğazköy-Texten 51.

Wiesbaden. Pp. 37–46.

Bachvarova, M., 2010: “Manly Deeds: Hittite Admonitory History and Eastern

Mediterranean Didactic Epic”. In K. Raaflaub / D. Konstan (eds.): Epic and

152 Mineck / van den Hout / Hoffner, 2006: 253.

153 Beckman, 2006b: 220, § 5.

154 Mineck, 2006: 256, Year 4; § 21.

Some Notes on the Evolution of the Hittite Royal Annals 81

History. Waltham. Pp. 66–85.

Badalì, E., 1987: “Eine neue Lesung im Anfang des Annita-Texts”. Die Welt des

Orients 18, 43–44.

Beal, R.H., 2003: “The Ten Year Annals of Great King Muršili II of Hatti”. In

W.W. Hallo / K. L. Younger (eds.). The Context of Scripture: Monumental

Inscriptions from the Biblical World. Vol. II. Leiden. Pp. 82–90.

Beckman, G., 1995: “The Siege of Ursu Text (CTH 7) and Old Hittite Historiog-

raphy”. JCS 47, 23–34.

— 2001: “Sargon and Naram-Sin in Hatti: Reflections of Mesopotamian Antiq-

uity among the Hittites. In D. Kuhn / H. Stahl (eds.): Die Gegenwart des Al-

tertums. Formen und Funktsionen des Altertumsbezugs in den Hochkulturen

der Alten Welt. Heidelberg. Pp. 85–91.

— 2002: “My Sun-God”. In A. Panaino / G. Pettinato (eds.): Reflections of Mes-

opotamian Conceptions of Kingship among Hittites. Ideologies as inter-

cultural phenomena proceedings of the third annual Symposium of the Assyr-

ian and Babylonian Intellectual Heritage Project. held in Chicago. USA, Oc-

tober 27–31. 2000. Melammu Symposia 3. Milano. Pp. 37–43.

— 2006a: “The Anitta Text”. In M. Chavalas (ed.): The Ancient Near East: His-

torical Sources in Translation. Malden. Pp. 216–219.

— 2006b: “Annals of Ḫattušili I”. In M. Chavalas (ed.). The Ancient Near East:

Historical Sources in Translation. Malden. Pp. 219–222.

— 2009: “Hittite Literature”. In C. S. Ehrlich (Ed.), From an Antique Land. An

Introduction To Ancient Near Eastern Literature. Rowman & Littlefield Pub-

lishers. Pp. 215–254.

Bin-Nun, S.R., 1975: The Tawananna in the Hittite Kingdom. Texte der Hethiter

5. Heidelberg.

Bryce, T.R., 1983: The Major Historical Texts of Early Hittite History. Asian

Studies Momograph 1. Brisbane.

Cancik, H., 1970: Mythische und Historische Wahrheit: Interpretationen zu Tex-

ten der hethitischen, biblischen und griechischen Historiographie. Stuttgart.

— 1976: Grundzüge der hethitischen und alttestamentlichen Geschichtsschrei-

bung. Wiesbaden.

— 1993: “‚Herrschaft‘ in historiographischen und juridischen Texten der Hethi-

ter”. In K. Raaflaub (ed.). Anfänge politischen Denkens in der Antike. Mün-

chen. Pp. 115–133.

— 2002: “Die hethitische Historiographie”. In H. Willinghöfer (ed.): Die Hethi-

ter und ihr Reich, Ausstellungskatalog Bonn. Pp. 74–81.

Carrena, O., 1989: History of the Near Eastern Historiography and its Problems:

1852–1985. Neukirchen-Vluyn.

Carruba, O., 1973: “Die Annalen Tuthalijas und Arnuwandas”. In Festschrift

Heinrich Otten. Wiesbaden. Pp. 37–46.

— 1977: “Beiträge zur mittelhethitischen Geschichte I. Die Tuthalijas und die

82 Vladimir Sazonov

Arnuwandas”. SMEA 18, 156–165.

— 2001: “Anitta res gestae: paralipomena I”. In G. Wilhelm (ed.): Akten des IV.

Internationalen Kongresses für Hethitologie. Würzburg, 4.–8. Oktober 1999.

Studien zu den Boğazköy-Texten 45. Wiesbaden. Pp. 51–72.

— 2003: Annitae Res Gestae. Studia Mediterranea 13, Serises Hethea 1. Pavia.

— 2005: “Dokumente für die Zeit Tuthaliyas I. und Hattusilis II”. In Süel (ed.):

Acts of the Vth International Congress of Hittitology. Ankara. Pp. 179–205.

— 2008: Annali etei del Medio Regno. Pavia.

Collins, B.J., 1998: “Hattušili I, the Lion King”. JCS 50, 15–20.

— 2007: The Hittites and Their World. Atlanta.

Cornelius, F., 1958: “Die Annalen Hattušilis I”. OrNs 28, 292–296.

CTH: Laroche, E., 1971: Catalogue des Textes Hittites. Paris.

Dercksen, J.G., 2010: “Anitta and the Man of Purušhanda”. In Y. Hazırrlayan /

S. Dönmez (eds.): Studies Presented in Honour of Veysel Donbaz. Istanbul.

Pp. 71–75.

de Martino, S., 1996: L’Anatolia occidentale nel Medio Regno ittita. Firenze.

— 2003: Annali e Res Gestae antico ittiti. Pavia.

— 2005. “Old Hittite Historiographical Texts: Problems of Classification”. In A.

Süel (ed.): Acts of the V International Congress of Hittitology, Çorum, 02.–08.

September 2002. Ankara. Pp. 225–230.

— 2010: “Some Questions on the Political History and Chronology of the Early

Hittite Empire”. AoF 37, 186–197.

del Monte, G.F., 1993: L’annalistica ittita. Brescia.

— 2003: Antologia della letteratura Ittita. Servizio Editoriale Universitario di

Pisa.

— 2009: Le gesta di Suppiluliuma. Traslitterazione, traduzione e commento.

L’opera storiografica di Mursili II re di Hattusa. Vol. I. Pisa.

Devecchi, E., 2005: Gli annali di Hattusili I nella versione accadica. Studia Me-

diterranea 16. Pavia.

— 2013: “Historiography, ancient Near East”. In R.S. Bagnall / K. Brodersen /

C.B. Champion / A. Erskine / S.R. Huebner (eds.): The Encyclopedia of An-

cient History. Malden. Pp. 3250–3252.

ETCSL: Black, J.A. / Cunningham, G. / Ebeling, J. / Flückiger-Hawker, E. / Rob-

son, E. / Taylor, J. / Zólyomi, G., 1998–2006: The Electronic Text Corpus of

Sumerian Literature (http://etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk/). Oxford.

Gerhards, M., 2013: “Hethitische und biblische Historiographie”. Biblische No-

tizen / Biblical Notes 156, 107–130.

Gilan, A., 2010: “Epic and History in Hittite Anatolia: In Search of a Local Hero”.

In D. Konstan / K.A. Raaflaub (eds.): Epic and History. Chichester. Pp. 51–

65.

— 2015: Formen und Inhalte althethitischer historischer Literatur. Heidelberg.

Götze, A., 1933: Die Annalen des Muršiliš. Leipzig.

Some Notes on the Evolution of the Hittite Royal Annals 83

Grayson, A.K., 1980: “Histories and Historians of the Ancient Near East: Assyria

and Babylonia”. Orientalia N.S. 49, 140–194.

Grélois, J.-P., 1988: “Les Annales décennales de Mursili II (CTH 61, I)”. Hethi-

tica 9, 7–145.

Güterbock, H.G., 1934: “Die historische Tradition und ihre literarische Gestal-

tung bei Babyloniern und Hethitern bis 1200”. ZA 42, 1–91.

— 1938: “Die historische Tradition und ihre literarische Gestaltung bei Baby-

loniern und Hethitern bis 1200”. ZA 44, 45–149.

— 1956: “The Deeds of Suppiluliuma as Told by His Son Mursili II”. Journal of

Cuneiform Studies 10, 41–68, 75–98, 107–130.

— 1964a: “Sargon of Akkad Mentioned by Ḫattušili I of Ḫatti”. Journal of Cu-

neiform Studies 18, 1–6.

— 1964b: “A View of Hittite Literature”. Journal of the American Oriental Soci-

ety 84, 107–115.

— 1983: “Hittite historiography: a survey”. In H. Tadmor / M. Weinfeld (eds.):

History, Historiography, and interpretation. Studies in biblical and cuneiform

literatures. Jerusalem. Pp. 21–35.

Haas, V., 1994: Die hethitische Religion. Leiden / New York / Köln.

— 2006: Die hethitische Literatur. Texte, Stilistik, Motive. Berlin / New York.

Haul, M., 2009: Stele und Legende, Untersuchungen zu den keilschriftlichen

Erzählungen über die Könige von Akkade. Göttinger Beiträge zum Alten Ori-

ent 4. Göttingen.

Hazenbos, J., 2006: “CTH 40: Manly Deeds of Shuppiluliuma”. In M.W. Chava-

las (ed.): The Ancient Near East: Historical Sources in Translation. Malden.

Pp. 235–239.

Hoffner, H.A., 1975: “Propaganda and political justification in Hittite historiog-

raphy.” In H. Goedicke / J.M.M. Roberts (eds.): Unity and Diversity: Essays

in the History, Literature, and Religion of the Ancient Near East. Baltimore.

Pp. 49–62.

— 1980: “Histories and historians of the ancient Near East: the Hittites”. Orien-

talia N.S. 49, 283–332.

— 1997: “Hittite Canonical Compositions – Historiography. Proclamation of

Anitta of Kuššar”. In W.W. Hallo (ed.). The Contexts of Scripture. Vol. 1:

Canonical Compositions from the Biblical World. Leiden / New York /

Cologne. Pp. 182–204.

Hoffmann, I., 1984: Erlaß Telepinus. Heidelberg.

Houwink ten Cate, Ph.H.J., 1970: The Records of the Early Hittite Empire. Leiden.

— 1983: “The History of Warfare According to Hittite Sources: The Annals of

Hattusilis I (Part I)”. Anatolica 10, 91–109.

— 1995–1996: “The Genealogy of Mursilis II. The Difference Between a Legal-

istic and a Genealogical Approach to the Descent of Suppiluliumas I”. Jaar-

bericht van het Vooraziatisch-Egyptisch Genootschap “Ex Oriente Lux” 34,

84 Vladimir Sazonov

51–72.

Kammenhuber, A., 1958: “Die hethitische Geshichtsschreibung”. Saeculum 9,

36–155.

KBo: Keilschrifttexte aus Boghazköy. 1923ff. Osnabrück / Berlin.

Kempinski, A. / Košak, S., 1982: “CTH 13: The Extensive Annals of Hattušili I

(?)”. Tel Aviv 9/2, 87–116.

Kimball, S.E. / Slocum, J., 2017: “The Proclamation of Anittas (Old Hittite)”. In

Hittite Online. The University Texas at Austin. Linguistics Research Center,

https://lrc.la.utexas.edu/eieol/hitol/10 (last visited 4.08.2018).

Klinger, J., 1998: “‚Wer lehrte die Hethiter das Schreiben?‘ Zur Paläographie

früher Texte in akkadischer Sprache aus Boğazköy: Skizze einiger Überlegun-

gen und vorläufiger Ergebnisse”. UHKB 3, 365–375.

— 2001: “Historiographie als Paradigma. Die Quellen zur hethitischen Geschich-

te und ihre Deutung”. In G. Wilhelm (ed.). Akten des 4. Hethitologischen

Kongresses Würzburg 1999. Wiesbaden. Pp. 272–291.

— 2005: “Herrscherinschriften und andere Dokumente zur politischen Geschich-

te des Hethiterreiches. 1. Der sogenannte Anitta-Text”. In B. Janowski / G.

Wilhelm (eds.): Staatsverträge, Herrscherinschrifren und andere Dokumente

zur politischen Geschichte. TUAT Neue Folge 2. Gütersloh. Pp. 139–141.

— 2008: “Geschichte oder Geschichten – zum literarischen Character der he-

thitischen Historiographie”, In K.-P. Adam (ed.): Historiograhie in der Antike.

Berlin. Pp. 27–48.

Klock-Fontanille, I., 1996: “Le Testament Politique de Ḫattušili Ier ou les condi-

tions d’exercice de la royaute dans l’ancien royaume Hittite”. Anatolia Anti-

qua 4, 33–66.

— 2001: Les premiers rois hittites et la représentation de la royauté dans les

textes de l’Ancien Royaume. Paris/Budapest/Torino.

KUB: Keilschrifturkunden aus Boghazköy, 1921–1990. Berlin.

Kümmel, H.M., 1985: “Die Annalen Hattusilis”. In O. Kaiser (ed.): Texte aus der

Umwelt des Alten Testaments 1/5. Gütersloh. Pp. 455–463.

Kuyper, J. de, 1998: “Some Aspects Related to Hittite-Accadian Bilinguism in

Royal Inscriptions”. In H. Erkanal / V. Donbaz / A. Uguroglu (eds.): Relations

between Anatolia and Mesopotamia, XXXIVème Rencontre Assyriologique In-

ternationale, Istanbul, 6–10.VII.1987. Ankara. Pp. 93–98.

Liverani, M., 1993: “Model and Actualization. The Kings of Akkad in the Histor-

ical Tradition”. In M. Liverani (ed.): Akkad, the First World Empire. History

of the Ancient Near East: Studies 5. Padova. Pp. 43–64.

— 2004: Myth and Politics in Ancient Near Eastern Historiography. Ithaca NY.

McMahon, G., 1994: “History and Legend in Early Hittite Historiography”. In

A.R. Millard / J.K. Hoffmeier / D.W. Baker (eds.): Faith, Tradition, and

History. Old Testament Historiography in Its Near Eastern Context. Winona

Lake. Pp. 149–157.

Some Notes on the Evolution of the Hittite Royal Annals 85

Melchert, H.C., 1978: “The Acts of Ḫattušili I”. Journal of Near Eastern Studies

37, 1–22.

Miller, J.L., 1999: The Expeditions of Ḫattušili I to the Eastern Frontier. M.A.

Diss., Tel-Aviv University.

— 2001: “Ḫattušili I’s Expansion into Northern Syria in Light of the Tikunani

Letter”. In G. Wilhelm (ed.): Akten des IV. Internationalen Kongress für

Hethitologie, Würzburg, 4.–8. Oktober 1999. Studien zu den Boğazköy-Tex-

ten 45. Wiesbaden. Pp. 410–429.

Mineck, K.R., 2006: In Mineck, K. R. / van den Hout, Th. / Hoffner, H.A. Jr.

2006: “Hittite Historical Texts II”. In M.W. Chavalas (ed.): The Ancient Near

East: Historical Sources in Translation. Malden. Pp. 253–279.

Mineck, K.R. / van den Hout, T. / Hoffner, H.A., Jr., 2006: “Hittite Historical

Text II. Hittite Historical Texts II”. In M.W. Chavalas (ed.): The Ancient Near

East: Historical Sources in Translation. Malden. Pp. 253–279.

Mõttus, S., 2018: The Edict of Telepinu and the Hittite Royal Succission. Univer-

sity of Tartu Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Institute of History and Archae-

ology. Master’s thesis. Tartu.

Nemirovski, A.A., 2005: Немировский, А.А.: “«Пространные анналы»

Мурсилиса II – текстологическая условность?” ВДИ 1 (2005), 3–14.

Neu, E., 1974: Der Anitta-Text. Studien zu den Boğazköy-Texten 18. Wiesbaden.

— 1986: “Zum mittelhethitischen Alter der Tuthalija-Annalen (CTH 142)”. In W.

Meid / H. Trenkwalder (eds.): Im Bannkreis des Alten Orients. Studien .... Karl

Oberhuber zum 70. Geburtstag gewidmet. Innsbruck. Pp. 181–192.

Oded, B., 1979: Mass Deportations and Deportees in the Neo-Assyrian Empire.

Wiesbaden.

Popko, M., 2009: Arinna. Eine heilige Stadt der Hethiter. Studien zu den Boğaz-

köy-Texten 50. Wiesbaden.

Richter, T., 2002: “Zur Frage der Entlehnung syrisch-mesopotamischer Kulturel-

emente nach Anatolien in der vor- und frühen althethitischen Zeit (19.–16.

Jahrhundert v.Chr.) ”. In H. Blum / B. Faist / P. Pfälzner / A.-M. Wittke (eds.):

Brückenland Anatolien? Ursachen, Extensität und Modi des Kulturaustau-

sches zwischen Anatolien und seinen Nachbarn. Tübingen. Pp. 295–322.

RIMA 2: Grayson, A.K., 1991: Assyrian Rulers of the Early Millennia BC I (to

1115 BC). The Royal Inscriptions of Mesopotamia. Assyrian Periods 2.

Toronto / Buffalo / London.

RIME 1: Frayne, D.R., 2008: Presargonic Period (2700–2350 BC). The Royal

Inscriptions of Mesopotamia: Early Periods 1. Toronto/Buffalo/London.

RIME 2: Frayne, D.R., 1993: Sargonic and Gutian Periods (2334–2113 BC). The

Royal Inscriptions of Mesopotamia. Early Periods 2. Toronto/Buffalo/London.

RIME 3/2: Frayne, D.R., 1997: Ur III Period (2112–2004 BC). The Royal In-

scriptions of Mesopotamia, Early Periods 3/2. Toronto/Buffalo/London.

86 Vladimir Sazonov

Rollinger, R., 2013: Alexander und die großen Ströme: Die Flussüberquerungen

im Lichte altorientalischer Pioniertechniken. Wiesbaden.

Sazonov, V., 2009: “Hetiidi kuningate titulatuuri arengujoontest 1750–1190 saj

eKr/ Some remarks concerning the development of Hittite royal titles 1750–

1190 BCE.” Eesti Akadeemilise Orientaalseltsi Aastaraamat 2008, 30–51.

— 2010: Die Königstitel und -epitheta in Assyrien, im Hethiterreich und in Nord-

syrien (Ugarit, Emar, Karkemiš) in der mittelassyrischen Zeit: Strukturelle

Gemeinsamkeiten, Unterschiede und gegenseitige Beeinflussung. Tartu.

— 2012a: “Der hethitische Sonnenkönig. Einige Bemerkungen zu dem hethiti-

schen Königsepitheton „Meine Sonne“ (dUTUši)”. Forschungen zur Anthro-

pologie und Religionsgeschichte 43, 199–219.

— 2012b: “Mass deporations and terror in Middle-Assyrian and Neo-Assyrian

empires/ Küüditamis- ja terroripoliitika Kesk-Assüüria ja Uus-Assüüria im-

peeriumites 13–7 saj eKr”. Estonian National Defence College Proceedings

16, 180–202.

— 2010: Die Königstitel und -epitheta in Assyrien, im Hethiterreich und in Nord-

syrien (Ugarit, Emar, Karkemiš) in der mittelassyrischen Zeit: Strukturelle

Gemeinsamkeiten, Unterschiede und gegenseitige Beeinflussung. Tartu.

— 2011: “Tabarna/Labarna – imperiaalse idee reflektsioon ühe hetiidi kuningliku

tiitli näitel/ Tabarna/Labarna – Reflection of imperial idea Based on the Ex-

ample of Hittite Royal Title”. Tuna. Ajalookultuuri ajakiri 2, 18–25.

— 2016a: “Some Remarks Concerning the Development of the Theology of War

in Ancient Mesopotamia” In K. Ulanowski (eds.): The Religious Aspects of

War in the Ancient Near East, Greece, and Rome. Leiden. Pp. 23–50.

— 2016b: Die Assyrischen Königstitel und -epitheta vom Anfang bis Tukulti-

Ninurta I und seinen Nachfolgern. State Archives of Assyria Studies XXV.

Winona Lake.

— 2017a: “Some Notes on Text of King Anitta”. Nouvelles Assyriologiques Bré-

ves et Utilitaires 2017, 179−182.

— 2017b: “Some Notes On Royal Hunt in Mesopotamia and Anatolia”. Nou-

velles Assyriologiques Bréves et Utilitaires 2017, 153–154.

Sazonov, V. / Johandi, A., 2015: “Royal Titulary used by Darius I in the Bīsitūn

inscription: Mesopotamian influences”. In M. Läänemets / V. Sazonov /

P. Espak (eds.): When Gods Spoke. Series Nova Vol. VI. Tartu. Pp. 329–352.

Schmid, G., 1985: “Religiöse Geschichtsdeutung und politische Propaganda im

Großen Text des Hattušili III”. Zeitschrift für Religions- und Geistesgeschich-

te 37, 1–21.

Schmitt, R., 1991: The Bisitun Inscriptions of Darius the Great: Old Persian Text.

London.

Seeher, J., 2001: Die Zerstörung der Stadt Ḫattuša. In Wilhelm (ed.): Akten des

IV. Internationalen Kongresses für Hethitologie, Würzburg, 4.–8. Oktober

1999. Wiesbaden. Pp. 623–634.

Some Notes on the Evolution of the Hittite Royal Annals 87

Shelestin, V., 2014: The Foreign Policy of the Late Old Hittite Kingdom – the

Case of Amm una. In P. Taracha / M. Kapełuś (e ds.): Proceedings of the Eighth

International Congress of Hittitology. Warsaw. Pp. 800–826.

Singer, I., 2002: Hittite Prayers. Writings from the Ancient World 11. Atlanta.

Soysal, O., 2005: “On the Origin of the Royal Title Tabarna / Labarna”. Anato-

lica 31, 189–209.

Starke, F., 1979: “Halmašuit im Anitta-Text und die hethitische Ideologie vom

Königtum”. ZA 69, 47–120.

— 1985: “Der Erlaß Telipinus. Zur Beurteilung der Sprache des Textes anläßlich

eines kürzlich erschienenen Buches”. Die Welt des Orients 16, 100–113.

Stavi, B., 2011: “The Genealogy of Suppiluliuma I”. AoF 38, 226–239.

Steiner, G., 1984: “Struktur und Bedeutung des sogenannten Anitta-Textes”. Ori-

entalia 23, 54–73.

Steitler, Ch.W., 2017: The Solar Deities of Bronze Age Anatolia. Studies in Texts

of the Early Hittite Kingdom. StBoT 62. Wiesbaden.

Strobel, K., 2011: “Die Geschichtsschreibung der Hethiter und fruhe griechische

Historiographie, Wertungsfragen im Lichte der Anatolisch-Agaischen Kaine”.

In M. Hutter / S. Hutter-Braunsar (eds.): Hethitische Literatur. Überliefe-

rungsprozesse, Textsrukturen, Ausdruckformen und Nachwirken. Akten des

Symposiums vom 18. bis 20. Februar 2010 in Bonn. AOAT 391. Pp. 245–274.

Sürenhagen, D., 1981: “Zwei Gebete Ḫattušilis und der Puduḫepa”. AoF 8, 83–

168.

Taracha, P., 1997: “Zu den Tutḫalija-Annalen (CTH 142)”. WdO 28, 74–84.

— 2007: “More about Res Gestae in Hittite Historiography”. In D. Groddek /

M. Zorman (eds.): Tabularia Hethaeorum. Hethitologische Beiträge Silvin

Košak zum 65. Geburtstag. Wiesbaden. Pp. 659–664.

Torri, G., 2009: “Sargon, Anitta, and the Hittite Kings against Purušḫanda”. AoF

36, 110–118.

Ulanowski, K., 2015: “The Metaphor of the Lion in Mesopotamian and Greek

Civilization”. In R. Rollinger / E. van Dongen (eds.): Mesopotamia in the An-

cient World. Impact, Continuities, Parallels. Proceedings of the Seventh Sym-

posium of the Melammu Project. Münster. Pp. 255–284.

Ünal, A., 1989: “The Power of Narrative in Hittite Literature”. Biblical Archaeol-

ogist (June/September 1989), 130–143.

van Seters, J., 1983: In Search of History. Historiography in the Ancient World

and the Origins of Biblical History. New Haven / London.

— 1995: “The historiography of the ancient Near East.” In J.M. Sasson (ed.):

Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. Vol. 4. New York. Pp. 2433–2444.

Westenholz, J.G., 1997: Legends of the Kings of Akkade: the Texts. Mesopo-

tamian Civilizations 7. Winona Lake.

Wilhelmi, L., 2016: “Materiality and Presence of the Anitta Text in Original and

Secondary Context: Considerations on the Original Nature of the Proclama-

88 Vladimir Sazonov

tion of Annita (CTH 1) and its Transmission as Part of Hittite Traditional Lit-

erature”. In Th.E. Balke / Ch. Tsouparopoulou (eds.): Materiality of Writing

in Early Mesopotamia. Berlin/Boston. Pp. 223–239.

Wolf, H.M., 1994: The Historical Reliability of the Hittite Annals. In A.R. Millard

/ J.K. Hoffmeier / D.W. Baker (eds.): Faith, Tradition and History: Old Tes-

tament Historiography in its Near Eastern Context. Winona Lake. Pp. 159–

164.

Yamada, Sh., 2009: “History and Ideology in the Inscriptions of Shalmaneser III:

An Analysis of Stylistic Changes in the Assyrian Annals”. In I. Ephʽal / N. Na-

ʼaman (eds.): Royal Assyrian Inscriptions: History, Historiography and Ide-

ology. A Conference in Honour of Hayim Tadmor on Occasion of His Eighti-

eth Birthday. 20 November 2003. Jerusalem. Pp. vii–xxx.

Yoshida, D., 1996: Untersuchungen zu den Sonnengottheiten bei den Hethitern,

Schwurgötterliste, helfende Gottheit, Feste. Heidelberg.

Aspects of Royal Ideology and Religion in Sumer and Akkad in III mil. BCE

Book

Full-text available

Jan 2020

Vladimir Sazonov

Royal Titulary used by Darius I in the Bīsitūn Inscription: Mesopotamian Infl uences 1

Chapter

Full-text available

Jan 2015

The current overview concerns the question of the origins of royal titulary used by the Persian king Darius I in his famous Bīsitūn inscription. The authors of this paper use analyses of Teispid and Achaemenid royal titulary to try to show how the Old Persian traditions of royal ideology to some extent perpetuated the earlier Assyro-Babylonian traditions. The main aims of this paper are: 1. To look for the origin and usage of the royal titles used by Darius I in his Bīsitūn inscription amongst Mesopotamian sources from the third millennium BCE onwards. 2. To trace the possible intermediaries of these universalistic titles from the Mesopotamian tradition to the Teispids and Achaemenids. We propose that the phenomenon of universalistic titles may have been borrowed directly from Assyria. Additionally, the authors try to demonstrate that the traditional opinion of some scholars of the infl uence of Assyria as intermediated to the Persians by Urartu and/or Media could be overestimated. Since many historical sources show possible traces of Assyro-Persian relations , the authors suppose that there is suffi cient evidence for direct Assyrian infl uence on the development of Achaemenid and Teispid royal ideology, including the royal titulary.

Sazonov, V. (2012). Der hethitische Sonnenkönig. Einige Bemerkungen zu dem hethitischen Königsepitheton „Meine Sonne“ (d.UTU-ši). Forschungen zur Anthropologie und Religionsgeschichte (FARG), 43, 199−219.

Article

Full-text available