The Kingdom of the Hittites
Trevor Bryce
554 pages including index
published in 2005

The nice thing about history is that there's so much of it, and so much still barely known. The Hittites are a case in point. Their existence was largely unsuspected until the late nineteenth century, when the first of their sites were uncovered in what is now Turkey and Syria. Here was a major Late Bronze Age civilisation and Near East superpower, an empire on par with Ancient Egypt or Assyria that lasted almost fivehundred years and nobody had a clue it existed. The sole cluess to their existence then known were some vague references in the Old Testament, from which they gotten their name as well as some mentions in the official correspondence of their rivals in Egypt, Assyria and Babylon but these were still largely untranslated when the first Hittite sites were found. The rediscovery of the Hittites is but one example of how much more complex ancient history is compared to the caricature we get of it in pop culture, which largely goes Sumeria > Egypt > Greece > Rome, with a sidestep to Israel.

What's also nice about history is how fluid it is. We think we know the history of given region or country until a chance archeological discovery turns everything upside down again. Especially with subjects as far removed in time from us as the Hittite Empire, which existed roughly from 1650 BCE until about 1200 BCE, our views of it can change surprisingly quickly, as can be seen in The Kingdom of the Hittites. Originally published in 1998, the second, 2005 edition has been thoroughly revised with sections of every chapter having been rewritten, based on new discoveries and other advances since the original publication. If less than a decade of progress can make such a difference in a textbook like this it's no wonder its author, Trevor Bryce, stresses that this is still only a preliminary history of the Hittites, subject to further revision.

As a textbook The Kingdom of the Hittites is firmly of the "kings and battles" school of history writing, with a companion volume dealing with society and daily life of the Hittites. Sadly the Amsterdam library didn't seem to have that in its stacks. No matter, this was enough to be going on with on its own as well. The book is set up in chronological order, it starts with the origins of the Hittites and an overview of the history of Anatolia just before the Hittite kingdom was established and ends with the last known Hittite king. The reign of each known Hittite king is looked at, but as Bryce makes clear throughout, of some kings much less is known than others. Indeed, for several kings not even the approximate dates of their reigns are known. Two appendixes, on the chronology of Hittite history and the sources available to historians, make this problem even more clear.

Bryce splits the history of the Hittites into two parts, the Old Kingdom, dating from roughly 1650 BCE to 1400 BCE and the New Kingdom, from 1400 to 1200 BCE. Other historians also distinguish a Middle Kingdom, dating from 1500 to 1400 BCE, mirroring the division of Egyptian history. However, as Bryce argues, the history of the Hittites is not so easily divided as that of Egypt, with the same close group of families ruling the kingdom throughout its history and no real breakpoints other than a period of confusion just before the start of what Bryce terms the New Kingdom (in the alternative chronology this period is covered by the Middle Kingdom).

The Hittites got their start at a time when the political situation in Anatolia was in turmoil. The region had been part of what you could call the Assyrian commercial empire for some two centuries, with Assyria having trade treaties with most of the important kingdoms and states in Anatolia and colonies of Assyrian merchants established there. This was a benificial relationship for both the local kingdoms and the Assyrians, but over time rivalries between the local kingdoms lead to increased warfare and ultimately the supremacy of one kingdom, Kussara, which was however shortlived and in the wake of which the region fragmented again, scaring away the Assyrian merchants, who depended on stability for their trade. In the aftermath the Hittites first rose to prominence, though Bryce argues they were not necessarily a new people, but rather a continuation of an earlier power, the kingdom of Hatti.

The core territory of the Hittite kindom was in the northern part of central Anatolia, within the curve of the Kizil Irmak river, the deep red part around Hattusa in this Wikipedia map. Vulnerable to attack from all directions, this vulnerability provided the drive for many of the Hittite conquests; the lighter red part of the map linked to above shows the greatest extent of the "empire", though that was only reached during the New Kingdom. Throughout its life the Hittite kingdom remained vulnerable, especially from attack from the north, the tribes there never completely subjugated and the west, where the kingdom of Ahhiyawa remained a threat for most of the Hittites' history. At times the kingdom was nearly overrun and moments of peace and stability on the whole were rare.

It was in the New Kingdom that the Hittites became a superpower, one of the four great kingdoms of the Near East, together with Egypt, Assyria and Babylon. Through the efforts of several strong, dynamic kings the Hittites managed to make their position in Anatolia as secure as it ever was, as well as vanquishing most of their early rivals, the most important of which were the Hurrians. during the New Kingdom succesive Hittite kings fought and won battles with Assyria and Egypt, dominating northern Syria for the lifetime of the kingdom. Their succes was not just due to military prowess, but also through clever diplomacy, concluding strategic treaties with each of the great powers against the others, as well as with the lesser powers of the region.

In fact, when we talk about the Hittite empire, it's wrong to think of it in terms of later empires, as a territory directly ruled by the Hittite king. Much of it was ruled by vassal kings or through viceroys, with only the core territories nder direct control of the king. Sometimes these vassal states fluctuated in their loyalty, but some remained part of the Hittite empire throughout its history. One thing is clear though, that despite the sophistication of the Hittites, they had considerable problems with extending their reign beyond certain limits, not just because of outside resistance but because they couldn't govern such remote territories. Hence the use of allies and vassals instead.

The Hittites disappeared in the general upheaval of the Late Bronze Ages that also engulfed the other major Near East civilisations like Egypt and Assyria. What caused this chaos is still not known; some blame the invasions of the Sea People, others natural disasters like earthquakes or a years long drought. But the Hittite history did not end with the Hittite kingdom; several sucessor states remained in existence for a few centuries more and the Hittites may have been an important conveyor belt of Assyrian and Babylonian ideas to the west.