The structure and political dependences of the Syro-Levantine states

Within the typically two-level political system of the Late Bronze Age, the entire Syro-Levantine region appeared as a land of small kings and the only region not to be politically unified under one great king (Table 19.1). After the collapse of the kingdom of Yamhad at the hands of Mursili I, the area became a highly desirable target for all the surrounding great powers. The latter were clearly trying to take advantage of the political fragmentation of the area. After the short-lived control of the area by the kings of the Old Hittite kingdom, from 1600 to 1200 bc the region was split between the Mitannians, the Egyptians and the Hittites, three completely different political entities.

The Mitannian presence in the area is not well attested. We know that Mitanni established its control in northern Syria when the Old Hittite kingdom collapsed. From there, Mitanni expanded further, conquering southern Syria. There, Tunip and Qadesh took advantage of Mitannian support to oppose the Egyptian campaigns in Syria. However, the Mitannian influence in the region was put to an end by the memorable expedition of Suppiluliuma against Tushratta. Mitannian control was based on the prestige of its charioteers (the maryannu), who spread from Mitanni to Syria. The military interventions of the Mitannians in Syria, however, are not documented. We can only catch a glimpse of them once they had already established their control over the area.

At that time, small Syrian kings like Idrimi (Text 19.1) could only rule if they were recognised by the Mitannian king. They therefore had to seal some sort of agreement with him, although the details of these treaties remain unknown to us. We know that it was a personal type of agreement of reciprocal loyalty between lord and vassal, forging a relation loose enough to allow small kings to seal treaties among themselves. This indicates that the Syrian states had a certain degree of freedom in their foreign relations. Nonetheless, the vassals also benefited from Mitannian support in case of external attacks, such as the Egyptian expeditions against Qadesh, and internal ones, such as in the case of Idrimi, a usurper who had to wait for ‘seven years’ to be accepted as legitimate ruler.

Shortly after, the Egyptians established their control through the expeditions of the first kings of the eighteenth dynasty, who had just defeated the last Hyksos rulers. The first military campaigns in Syria were demanding, since they reached almost the heart of the Near East. Tuthmosis I even left a stele along the

Table 19.1 The chronology of Syria and Anatolia, ca. 1350—1200 bc