Is Syria considered part of Mesopotamia

Catalog

18 The significance of the contract between Ramses II and H ˘ at- tušili III can hardly be overestimated. stands in a treaty tradition characteristic of the Hittites, for which over 30 state treaties with neighbors, especially in Anatolia and Syria, bear eloquent testimony. However, only the Egyptian-Hittite state and peace treaty can be described with certainty as equal. Due to certain formulations, it is possible that older agreements with the Kingdom of Kizzuwatna in the south-east of Asia Minor from around 1500 BC were already in place. Chr. Equal character. Otherwise, the traditional agreements are usually contracts of unequal counterparties, that is, the respective partners of the Hittite great king - be they independent princes or groups of people without a monarchical structure - were in a subordinate relationship to the Hittite king, so that it is with these contracts are so-called vassal or subordination contracts. 2 With a view to the cuneiform tradition of the ancient Near East as a whole, the Hittite treaties must be seen in the context of a Mesopotamian-North Syrian tradition of state treaties that went back to the 7th century BC. And its origins in the 3rd millennium BC. Chr. Lie. 3 In addition to the establishment of alliance obligations, the treaties of the 3rd and 2nd millennia BC regulated Among other things, the extradition of refugees, the treatment and legal status of locals and merchants of one contracting party on the territory of the other contracting party as well as the punishment of crimes against the named group of people. The traditional Neo-Assyrian state treaties from the 9th to 7th centuries BC BC and the mention of such treaties in other sources show that intergovernmental contractual agreements and the contractual safeguarding of expressions of loyalty were an important part of Assyrian rule. They served the territorial security of the empire, served trade policy requirements, regulated alliance and assistance obligations and ensured the dependency and loyalty to the Assyrian king. 4 It is true that most of the state treaties of Mesopotamia and Northern Syria in the Akkadian language date from the 2nd and 1st millennium BC. BC, but the few surviving examples of intergovernmental agreements in Sumerian, Akkadian and Elamite languages ​​from the 3rd millennium BC show. Chr. That already at this time one was familiar with the possibilities and effects of such contracts, not least aimed at conflict management, in the context of diverse diplomatic activities and thus the corresponding instruments were also used. 5 In terms of social history, this was linked to the political structures and socio-economic conditions that developed in the early period in southern Mesopotamia in the first half and the middle of the 3rd millennium BC. And with the subsequent formation and consolidation of larger territorial states in the second half of the 3rd millennium BC. BC, namely from the 24th to the 22nd century BC Existing empire of Akkade and the 21st century BC. BC the history of Mesopotamia and neighboring areas of the formative state of the kings of the III. Dynasty of Ur. 6 Both for the end of the so-called early dynastic period around the middle of the 3rd millennium BC. BC, with its fragmented world of states in Mesopotamia as well as for the period of the Akkade and Ur III empires, diverse, but depending on the geographical, political and socio-economic framework conditions can be identified.

Made with FlippingBook

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTMyNjA1