From the donation of Queen Puduhepa to the Goddess Lelwani

‘The woman (called) Abba; 1 of her daughters called Niwa; 1 (other) daughter is dead; 1 son called Dudu. Total: 4 people. The woman receives a prisoner of war. (This family) was already assigned to the service of the temple (of Lelwani).

The woman (called) Mamma; 1 of her daughters called Shaushkatti; 2 of her sons called Teshmara and Yarraziti. Total: 4 people. Mamma receives a prisoner of war. She was already assigned to the service of the temple.

1 young girl named Titai I have given as fiance to Apallu; I have given to Apallu a young boy to raise, Tatili brother of Titai, but I have not released him yet.

1 newborn baby called Pitati; 1 boy called Temetti: given to Piya, son of Pitawiya, to raise them.

1 young boy named Tuttu: given to. . .; he has not been given yet.

1 woman called Utati (daughter) of Pitagatti; 1 young boy called Nuhati; 1 woman called Kattittahi (daughter) of Tatili; 1 daughter of her brother, also called Kattittahi; 1 woman called Utati (daughter) of Temetti; 1 young girl called Udati, daughter of the brother of her husband; 1 woman called Udati (daughter) of Zakap-pauti; 2 of her sons called Happanu and Sharaduwa; 1 woman called Utati (daughter) of Zaga. . .; 1 of her daughters called Mamma; 1 woman called Udati (daughter) of Piptarawashi; 1 of her sons called Pittatta; 1 young girl called Kumiya I have given to Mulla to raise. In total: 23 people (that) Haranaziti has brought from the expedition against the town of Zikeshara.’

Another type of movement of people pervading the Hittite evidence is the problem of fugitives. The latter were slaves, debtors, people who committed a crime, political opponents, and many other individuals from all strata of Hittite society. Naturally, the state receiving these fugitives had strong interests in keeping them. If they were from a lower social background, they could have been labourers. If they came from the elite, they could become useful political pawns for manoeuvres over neighbouring states. The reciprocal need for stability had led the Syro-Anatolian states of the sixteenth and fifteenth centuries bc towards a reciprocal practice of extradition. However, once the Hittites managed to rise above all other states in the area, and the population decreased even more, the practice became more one-sided. Therefore, Hittite fugitives had to be returned, while the Hittites kept foreign fugitives in their land.

Some temple inventories from the time of Hattusili III are a clear example of the demographic problem of the time. The problem had become particularly serious. Since women were often left alone, perhaps having been widowed by war, they were given a war prisoner as a replacement for their husband. Families were destroyed, and the numbers of children was not high enough to ensure an adequate generational cycle. If the assumption that this problem afflicted Anatolia as a whole is correct, then the crisis was particularly worrying.

Admittedly, Hittite history had been marked by a demographic and production problem from the start. A depopulated countryside necessarily brought difficulties in providing the most basic resources to larger urban centres. When demographic levels were the highest, we see Telipinu making sure that the agricultural centres owned by the elite were productive. However, at the lowest demographic levels, we see the great famine towards the end of the empire. Anatolia did not produce grain, which had to be imported from Syria (Mukish) and even Egypt. Ships from Ugarit were even sent to bring grain to the Cilician port of Ura. ‘It is a matter of life or death,’ said the Hittites to their vassals, while the Egyptian propaganda boasted of having ‘kept the miserable land of Hatti alive’

It is probable that the crisis did not affect all of Anatolia in the same way. The south-western regions (Arzawa), the Konya plain, the Cilician plain and the areas along the Euphrates seem to have been better off. However, Central Anatolia (Phrygia and Cappadocia) and northern Anatolia experienced a growing crisis. This internal crisis was closely linked to the fall of the empire. The sources (which will be considered later on) record the arrival of enemies, forcing the Hittites and their remaining vassals to engage in military campaigns, both on land and sea, in south-western Anatolia. Be that as it may, not long after this Hattusa was destroyed (or even abandoned) and the archives cease to provide any information. The fall of the capital caused the breakdown of the entire state, which was dependent on this centre and was already fragile and depopulated.

It is not sure whether the fall of Hattusa was caused by the Sea People. However, their presence so far north would seem a deviation from their attested route. Alternatively, it could have been the Kaska, who could have taken advantage of the concentration of Hittite troops in the south-west. Otherwise, it could have been the people arriving from the west, such as the Phrygians. Once written sources from the area reappear, the Phrygians would appear to be already settled in the area. Be that as it may, by the end of the thirteenth century bc the land was worryingly depopulated. It was only able to survive thanks to its great capital and its redistributive system. Once the Hittite state collapsed, new people from the west settled in Central Anatolia. The Luwians and Hittites moved to the south-east, the only area that had managed to survive the crisis and to be less affected by the arrival of new populations.