they controlled city-states and kingdoms from the Zagros
Mountains to Lake Van and even to Assur, proving to be
loyal allies of Egypt. They suffered during the ’AMARNA
Period (1353–1335 B.C.E.), when AKHENATENfailed to
meet the challenge of the emerging HITTITESand their
cohorts and the roving bands of barbarians who were
migrating throughout the Mediterranean region. The
Ramessids, coming to power later, could not protect the
Mitannis either. By that time the Mitanni kingdom had
already been subjugated by the warriors of the hittites.
When TUTHMOSIS IIIcame to the throne in 1479 B.C.E.,
the Mitannis were still in power, and the Hittites were
consumed by their own internal problems and by wars
with their immediate neighbors.
He began campaigns in southern Palestine and in the
city-states on the Mediterranean Coast, eventually reach-
ing the Euphrates. Palestine and the Sinai had been under
Egypt’s control since Tuthmosis I. A confederation of
states threatened by Egypt, or in the process of seeking
total independence, banded under the leadership of the
king of KADESH. Tuthmosis III met them at AR-MEGIDDO,
near Mount Carmel, and laid siege. He then attacked
Phoenicia (modern Lebanon) and fortified the coastal
cities there, placing them all under Egyptian control.
Egypt, as a result, received gifts and tribute from Babylon,
Assyria, CYPRUS, Crete, and all of the small city-states of
the Mediterranean region. Even the Hittites were anxious
to send offerings and diplomats to the Egyptian court at
THEBES.
Tuthmosis III’s son, AMENHOTEP II (r. 1427–1401
B.C.E.) conducted ruthless campaigns in Syria and gov-
erned the provinces with a firm hand. His heir, TUTHMO-
SIS IV(r. 1401–1391 B.C.E.), did not have to exert himself,
because the tributary nations were not anxious to pro-
voke another Egyptian invasion. AMENHOTEP III (r.
1391–1353 B.C.E.)came to power in an era of Egyptian
supremacy, and he too did not have difficulty maintaining
the wealth or status of the nation. His son, Akhenaten (r.
1353–1335 B.C.E.), however, lost control of many territo-
ries, ignoring the pleas of his vassal kings and allies when
they were threatened by hostile forces instigated by the
Hittites.
The Hittites had arrived at the city of Hattus some-
time c. 1400 B.C.E. and renamed it Hattusa. This capital
became a sophisticated metropolis in time, with vast for-
tified walls complete with stone lions and a sphinx gate.
The Hittites conquered vast regions of Asia Minor and
Syria. They worshiped a storm god and conducted
administrative, legislative, and legal affairs ably. They
worked silver, gold, and electrum skillfully, maintained
three separate languages within their main territories,
kept vast records, and protected the individual rights of
their own citizens. Their legal code, like the Hammurabic
code before it, was harsh but just. The Hittites were war-
riors, but they were also capable of statecraft and diplo-
macy.
The son of Hittite king SUPPILULIUMAS Iwas offered
the Egyptian throne by TUT’ANKHAMUN’s young widow,
ANKHESENAMON, c. 1323 B.C.E. Prince ZANNANZA, how-
ever, was slain as he approached Egypt’s border.
HOREMHAB(c. 1319–1307 B.C.E.) who became the last
pharaoh of the Eighteenth Dynasty, was probably the one
who ordered the death of the Hittite prince, but when he
came to power he was able to arrange a truce between the
two nations. He needed to maintain such a pact in order
to restore Egypt’s internal affairs, greatly deteriorated by
Akhenaten’s reign.
The first Ramessid kings, all military veterans, were
anxious to restore the empire again, and they began to
assault Egypt’s former provinces. They watched the Hit-
tites begin their own attacks on new territories with
growing annoyance. The Hittites had conducted a great
Syrian campaign, defeating the Mitanni king and attack-
ing that empire’s vassal states as a result. The city-state of
Amurru also rose to prominence as the Amurrian king
and his heir conducted diplomatic maneuvers and state-
craft skillfully as agents of the Hatti. Many loyal Egyptian
states fell to them.
The Hittites next assaulted the Hurrian region, tak-
ing the city of CARCHEMISH. The Hurrians had come into
this territory from an unknown land, bringing skills in
war, horses, and chariot attacks. In time the Egyptians
were the beneficiaries of the Hurrian skills, as many of
them entered the Nile Valley to conduct training sessions
and programs.
When the Hittites began to invade Egyptian territo-
ries, SETI I(r. 1306–1290 B.C.E.)started a counteroffen-
sive. He easily overcame Palestine and Lebanon with his
vast and skilled army. He then advanced on Kadesh, a
Hittite ally, and consolidated his victories by reaching an
agreement with the Hittites over the division of lands and
spoils. The Hatti and the Egyptians thus shared most of
the Near East with Egypt, maintaining the whole of
Palestine and the Syrian coastal regions to the Litani
River.
Seti’s son, RAMESSES II, faced a reinvigorated Hittite
nation, however, one that was not eager to allow Egypt to
keep its fabled domain. The battles displayed on
Ramesses II’s war memorials and on temple walls, espe-
cially the celebrated “Poem” of PENTAUR, depict the clash
between the Hittites and the Egyptians. Ramesses II and
his army were caught in a cleverly devised ambush, but
he led his troops out of the trap and managed an effective
delaying effort until reinforcements arrived. This, the Bat-
tle of KADESH, resulting in heavy losses on both sides, led
to the HITTITE ALLIANCE.
From that point on, the Hittites and the Egyptians
maintained cordial relations. Both were suffering from
the changing arenas of power in the world, and both were
experiencing internal problems. It is significant that the
successors of Ramesses II fought against invasions of
Egypt as the Hittites faced attacks from enemies of theirEgypt and the East 125