Die Zahl der sicheren Belege ist für das 18–17. Jh. v. Chr. jedoch so klein, dass
der erste nennenswerts Kampfeinsatz mit Streitwagen allgemein erst in die Zeit
um 1600 v. Chr. angesetzt wird, als hethitische Kräfte nach Halab, das heutige
Aleppo, vorstiessen.
Richter uses the low Mesopotamian chronology, 64 years lower than the middle.
22 It is unfortunate for historians that Hittite scribes, unlike their Egyptian counterparts,
left no records of the number of years that the various Hittite kings ruled, and Hittite
chronology is therefore unusually vague (see Beckman 2000). Mesopotamian
chronology is more helpful, and on the middle Mesopotamian chronology followed in
this book the city of Babylon was captured and sacked by Murshili, the successor of
Hattushili, in 1595 BC. If we assign Hattushili a notional 30-year reign, he would have
reigned from ca. 1640 to 1610 BC.
23 Forlanini 2004 makes a convincing case in overturning some traditional views on the
beginnings of the Great Kingdom of Hatti. Forlanini proposes that Labarna of Kanesh,
after conquering Hatti, rebuilt the ruined city of Hattusha and installed his brother as
the new city’s petty king. The brother, begetting a son, proudly named him Hattushili—
”the man of Hattusha”—and when the brother died Hattushili succeeded to the petty
kingship of Hattusha. Late in life, so Forlanini proposes, Labarna chose his young
nephew to succeed himself as Great King. It was thus that the Great Kingship moved
from Kanesh to Hattusha, bringing with it the language of Kanesh.
24 In his study of the Hittite military organization Richard Beal dealt with the title
UGULA 1 LI LÚ.MEŠŠÙŠat some length (Beal 1992, pp. 375–378). According to Beal,
“this title literally means ‘Overseer of One thousand Chariot fighters.’ ” Because in the
Old Kingdom of Hatti two such officers seem to have been in place at any given time,
Hattushili may have had—at least as an organizational ideal—2000 chariot fighters.
Even if we assume four men for each chariot (a driver, an archer, a runner, and possibly
a shield bearer) we would still be reckoning with an ideal chariotry of several hundred
vehicles. The “Anecdotes Text” is one of the earliest in which an Overseer of One
Thousand Chariot fighters is mentioned (Beal 1992, pp. 375–376). At p. 378 Beal says
that all attestations of the title “date to around the time of Hattušili I and Muršili I”
and that it was then superseded by another title, borne by a pair of officers who were
in charge “of the left” and “of the right.” In personal correspondence (June 11, 2013)
Beal tells me that he would now extend the first title’s usage down to the reign of
Telepinu, at the end of the Old Kingdom.
25 Beckman 1995 believes that the text is a “literary” composition, and that—in supplying
speeches for Hattushili and his subordinates—it magnifies the Great King by portraying
his underlings as incompetent.
26 See Beckman 1995, p. 27:
Numerous Hitticisms betray the native tongue of the author of CTH7, and several
portions of the text (rev. 14–15, 17) are indeed in Hittite. It is my view that the
present text is a translation of a lost Hittite original, made already in the Old
Kingdom, as shown both by the archaic script of the tablet and by a number of
Mari-like features of the Akkadian.27 Reverse, lines 1–9 (translation from Beckman 1995, pp. 26–27). Here Hattushili asks
his generals, “How was it? They captured the thirty chariots of the city Huruhhišwhich
entered into the city Ašihi.”
28 Reverse, lines 22–32 (translation from Beckman 1995, pp. 26–27).
29 Drews 1993a, pp. 121–122, with Plate 1.
30 For a translation of the “Anecdotes Text” see Beal 1992, p. 376.
31 Thoroughly studied, with a new translation and commentary, by Houwink ten Cate
1983 and 1984.
Chariot warfare and militarism 127