631
- L
3.1 Procedure
As the Instructions to the Border Commander attest, a prospective
litigant must submit to the commander a sealed wood or clay tablet.
It is not clear whether this applied to all types of cases or only, for
example, to civil suits (a distinction in any case not expressly used
by the Hittites).^41 It appears that the draft had to be submitted by
the party making a demand and could also include punishment, that
is, the equivalent of a private prosecution. The subsequent proce-
dure is not known. The case must have been investigated, since evi-
dence was taken and a record kept thereof. Fortunately, an example
exists in texts dealing with a case of missing “implements” belong-
ing to Queen Puduhepa.^42 The queen herself is the plaintiff and
demands surrender of the “goods” in the manner of a modern civil
claim. The records are remarkably detailed, but the outcome of the
case is not known.3.2 Evidence
Testimony may lead to not only the witness but also the defendant
being required to take the oath, as HL 75 shows. The oath may be
ordered by the plaintiff. It takes place “before the face of the god.”
Documents may also be used in evidence, as a king orders that gifts
received by temple officials must be registered in writing before wit-
nesses.^43 The river ordeal is also attested: in instructions to courtiers,
because of the contamination of water in his basin, the king orders
that the culprit “should go to the river... If he is unclean, let him
die.”^44 It is not known how the outcome of the ordeal was determined.- P S
Güterbock’s remark, “The social structure of the Hittite state is not
clear,”^45 remains valid today. HL distinguish between a “free person”(^41) Haase, “Körperliche Strafen.. .,” 60.
(^42) Werner, Hethitische Gerichtsprotokolle, 3–20.
(^43) Sturtevant and Bechtel, Chrestomathy.. ., 255.
(^44) Schuler, “Hethitische Rechtsbücher.. .,” 125.
(^45) “Authority.. .,” 20.
WESTBROOK_f15–618-656 8/27/03 12:28 PM Page 631