Hittite Diplomatic Documents

Covenant formula, binding and oath and the vassal treaty

Allies and Enemies

And those who were already kings before me and who were on good terms with Hatti remained on the same good terms with me. They began to send me messengers, and they began to send me gifts. Such gifts as they continue to send me they had by no means ever sent to my fathers and forefathers. The king who owed me respect, respected me. But I prevailed over those lands which were my enemies. I added district upon district to the lands of Hatti. Those who had been enemies of my fathers and forefathers concluded peace with me. (Henry Otten Translation 1981:26-29).

The Need for Alliance

"This passage illustrates the Hittite belief that foreign lands were either enemies or friends; neutrality was not an option. The goal of Hittite foreign policy, whether carried out by peaceful or military means, was to reduce the number of hostile countries, thereby promoting both internal and international stability. Depending on factors such as their distance from Hatti, their level of culture, and their own military and economic strength, foreign lands could be rendered harmless either by annexing them to the Hittite empire as vassals, or by drawing them into an alliance as equals." (Gary Bekcham, Hittite Diplomatic Texts)

Binding and Oath. (Hittite išbiul and îingai-, Akkadian rikiltu/rikiStu/riksu and māmīîu) (Hittite Diplomatic Texts - sbl-writings-from-the-ancient-world, p. 23)

Bindings and Oaths

This designation refers to the two most important constituent elements of the agreements: the stipulations ("binding"), and the curses and blessings ("oath") by which the contracting parties invoked the gods as witnesses and guarantors of these provisions. It is important to note that the formal written instructions issued to Hittite officials within Hatti itself — for instance, to the mayor of the city of Hattusa or to the members of the royal bodyguard — were also known as išbiul. We may therefore conclude that the Hittites made no fundamental distinction between internal and external obligations to their king. (Gary Bekcham, Hittite Diplomatic Texts)

The Vassal Treaty

Since the Hittite monarch had to deal with many more subordinate rulers than equals, by far the most commonly attested variety of diplomatic agreement from Hatti is the vassal treaty, imposed by the Great King... The vassal was obliged to swear in the presence of numerous deities to observe its provisions. Thus, while the treaty text was a "binding" by the Great King, it was the "oath" of the vassal. In one text we find the explicit statement: "These words are by no means reciprocal. They issue from Hatti." (No. 13, §16). It must be stressed that only the vassal — and not the Hittite overlord — swore an oath in these instances. The text of the treaty presented to the subordinate was engraved in cuneiform upon a tablet of metal (sometimes of silver, but more often of bronze or iron). What archaeologists have recovered is in all but one case (No. 18C) the file copies written on clay. (Gary Beckham, Hittite Diplomatic Texts)

Table of Content
    Scroll to Top