he s per ia 90 (2021)
Pages 191–231
1. This article emerged from a Fall
2017 presentation of my preliminary
ideas at the 10th International Con-
gress of Hittitology at the University
of Chicago’s Oriental Institute. I am
indebted to Eric Cline, Jana Mokrišová,
Steve Karacic, Jeremy Rutter, James
Wright, and Salvatore Vitale for offer-
ing critical feedback. Simon Oswald
graciously assisted me with questions
© American School of Classical Studies at Athens
AHHIYAWA, HATTI,
AND DIPLOMACY
Im p l ic at ion s of Hi t t i t e
M i s p e r c e p t ion s of t h e
M yc e nae an Wor l d
A B S T R AC T
This article considers formal diplomatic relations between the Mycenaeans
and Hittites through analysis of the Hittite Tawagalawa Letter. Consensus
attributes that tablet’s authorship to Hattušili III (ca. 1267–1237 b.c.), who
˘
complained to the king of Ahhiyawa about a Hittite renegade named Piya-
maradu. The historical context of Hattušili’s foreign policy, particularly his
Treaty of Kadesh with the Egyptian˘ pharaoh Rameses II, supports a revised
understanding of his correspondence with Ahhiyawa. The Tawagalawa Letter
alludes to an existing nonaggression pact between Hatti and Ahhiyawa mod-
eled after the well-known Hittite-Egyptian contract. This new idea reconciles
the discrepancy between a unified Ahhiyawa and a politically fragmented
Mycenaean world. Such diplomacy can also account for technological simi-
larities that exist between Mycenae and Hattuša.
The archaeological and textual records of the Late Bronze Age (LBA)
Mediterranean and Near East attest to formal and informal trade, state
correspondence, and official diplomatic treaties across a wide geographical
area.1 The societies of these regions—notably the Minoans, Mycenaeans,
Cypriots, Hittites, Egyptians, Assyrians, and Babylonians—interacted
at varying levels, though the nature of their contacts is often vague
(Figs. 1, 2).2 Debate persists about the degree to which Aegean peoples
mingled with the Hittites, despite tablets from Boğazköy-Hattuša in
central Anatolia that mention the land of Ahhiyawa, undoubtedly refer-
encing the Myce­naeans. The issues related to the Ahhiyawa question have
about the Hittite text. Jorrit Kelder 2. The maps in Figures 1 and 2 rely
kindly shared prepublication works on extensive previous scholarship about
with me. I thank Editor Jennifer Sacher Late Bronze Age Aegean and Anato-
and the anonymous reviewers for Hes- lian geography; see Starke 1997, p. 449,
peria for improving this article through fig. 1; 2002, pp. 306–307; Hawkins
helpful suggestions about its orga- 1998, p. 31, fig. 11; Niemeier 1998,
nization and bibliography. Different p. 20, fig. 2; 2005, p. 18, fig. 37; 2007,
opinions and interpretations, however, p. 62, fig. 4; 2008, p. 299, fig. 1; Bryce
still remain on topics broached here. All 2005, p. 43, map 3.
remaining errors are my responsibility.