ch02 Chapter Two - Hittite Ahhiyawa

TRUTH,FICTION,TRADITION:

HOMERANDTROY

RussellBuzbyUnlikePatroklos,wecannotbesocertainaboutmanyissuesconcerning,andrelatedto,theIliadanditscomposer,Homer.WecannotsaywithanycertaintythattheTrojanWarevenhappened.WedonotknowhowHomerknowsabouttheTrojanWarorwhetherhisversionofthewarisaccurateornot.Wehavelittleideaofwhatmighthavetriggeredsuchawar,orwhoitactuallyinvolved.DespitethissignificantdearthofevidencefromtheLateBronzeAge,makingargumentsexsilentioisunacceptable:thereisenoughextantevidencetosupporttheclaimthat,towardstheendoftheLateBronzeAge,therewasa

MycenaeanattackagainstthecityofTroy.

putawayinyourheartthisotherthingthatItellyou.Youyourselfarenotonewhoshalllivelong,butnowalreadydeathandpowerfuldestinyarestandingbesideyou,togodownunderthehandsofAikosgreatson,Achilleus.

16.851854

IntroductionUntiltherediscoveryofTroybyHeinrichSchliemannin1870,themostpertinentissueinarguingthecaseforaMycenaeanattackonTroywasthedearthofarchaeologicalevidence to lendweight toHomers Iliad.Sincethen,archaeologicalexcavationsaroundTurkeyandGreecehaveuncovered awealth of evidencewhich lendsweight to the argumentthatMycenaeans did launch an attack against the city of Troy. ThisevidenceincludingHittitetreatiesandlettersinBogazky,aswellasmorerecentworkdoneatthesiteofHisarlkalltendstosupportthehypothesis that there was a Mycenaean attack on Troy in the LateBronzeAge.WhencoupledwithevidenceacquiredfromtheIliaditself, RussellBuzbyisinhisthirdyearofaBachelorofArts/BachelorofLawsdegreeattheAustralianNationalUniversity,andisacurrentresidentofBruceHall.

Crosssections|VolumeII200612

onecanconfidentlyarguethecaseforanattackbyacombinedforceoftheMycenaeans against theTrojans and their allies.The evidence forthis proposition can be divided into two main categories: literaryevidence (from the Hittite documents and the Iliad) and thearchaeological evidence (from excavations atHisarlk and inGreece).This evidence can conclusively answer questions which have beendisquietinghistorians sinceTroywas rediscovered in 1870, including:Whatdoes the evidence available tousprove about theTrojanWar?WhattriggeredtheTrojanWar?Howcanwedismisstheobjectionsthatmany scholars have to the premise that the Trojan War was a realhistorical event? First, we must turn our attentions to the evidenceavailable to us in the Hittite documents, before we examine thearchaeological evidence from Troy itself, the archaeological evidencefrom mainland Greece and finally the evidence within the Iliad.Throughout this, the opposing arguments will, be discussed andrebuffed.ThemosttroublingissueforhistoriansstudyingtheIliad,Troyandthehistoricityof theTrojanWarhasbeen the identificationof the siteofHisarlk.CanweknowifHisarlkoncewasTroy?Asthearchaeologicalexcavations at Hisarlk cannot deliver to us the towns ancient ororiginalname,wemustturntoexternalwrittenevidence.Forcenturiesallwehadwasthereminiscencesofablindpoetwholivedatleastfivecenturies after the TrojanWarwas said to have happened. In otherwords

If neither the epic itself nor any other sources provide anyindication that Troy may be identified with one of thesettlements on the hill of Hisarlk, this means there is noevidence at all, since archaeology possesses absolutely noevidence.Furthermore, if the authenticityof the cityofTroyandtheTrojanWarcannotbeconfirmedintheepicitselforonthebasisofotherevidence,thismeansthatthequestionofthehistorical authenticity of the city and thewar is a false one,sincethereisnopossibilityofprooffromarchaeology.1

1RHachmann;citedbyJLatacz,TroyandHomer,(trans.byKWindle&RIreland),OxfordUniversityPress,Oxford,2004,p.18.

Truth,Fiction,Tradition:HomerandTroy|RussellBuzby 13

Unfortunatelywecandistilnothingfromarchaeologyalone.Yetthereislittle else tohelpus.There arenoLinearBdocuments,no cuneiformtablets,no stellaemarked Troy.The Iliad, combinedwith increasingprecision in the evaluation of the archaeological results and thus anarrowing of the gap between these and the textual information2pointed to Hisarlk being one and the same with Homers Troy.However, therewas still a severe lackof anypreciseproof regardingthis.ShortoffindingaTrojanarchiveorlibraryofclaytablets(inscribedwitheithercuneiformorevenLinearB),wehavenochoicebuttomakedowithwhat evidencewe have on hand: namely the Iliad, and theHittitedocumentsfromBogazky.

HittitesandMycenaeansThe firstsetofdocumentsweshallexamine is thecollectionofHittitedocuments consisting of letters and treaties made by theHittitekings to theircontemporaries,and found in thearchivesof theHittitecapital, Bogazky. The Hittites can provide a useful source ofinformation on an historical TrojanWar, as they flourishedwith theconjectured end of the Trojan civilisation. According to thearchaeological evidence, the Hittite empire stretched from theheadwaters of the Tigris in the east, to theOrontes and Syria in thesouth,andtotheAegeaninthewest.AccordingtotheOldTestament,Solomonexportedgoods to theHittites,while the Israelitescouldcallupon theHittite and Egyptian kings as allies in times ofwar.3 TheHittiteshavealsobeenidentifiedincontemporaryEgyptiandocuments,such as the account of the Battle of Kadesh, as well as diplomaticcorrespondences discovered in Tell elAmarna. Therefore, onewouldexpect theHittites to have had some contact, albeit limited,with theMycenaeans, especially considering their influence, and perhaps

2ibid.32Chronicles1:17,TheHolyBibleNIV,InternationalBibleSociety,ColoradoSprings,1984;2Kings7:6,TheHolyBibleNIV,InternationalBibleSociety,ColoradoSprings,1984.


conflict,on thewesternshoresofAsiaMinor.4Onewouldalsoexpectthatsuchacivilisation,basedasitwasonmainlandGreeceandwhichcouldlaunchandorchestrateanattackagainsttheheavilyfortifiedcityofTroywouldhavebeennoticedbyitsneighbours.Consideringthesecircumstances: that theGreekswere trading inportssubject toHittiterule,supplyingfriendsandenemiesoftheHittites,makingnewhomesonthefringesofHittitedominion[then]surelytherewasagoodhopethattheGreeksmight be found in ten thousandHittite documents.5 ButwhatweretheseHittitedocuments?Thousandsofclaytabletsmarkedwithanunknown IndoEuropean language,written inacuneiform scriptdiscovered in the Hittite palace at Bogazky are testament to theintricate international relations that theHittite kingdom hadwith itsneighbours. Theywere discovered between 1906 and 1908, byHugoWinckler,and finallydecipheredbyFriedrichHrozn in1915.Shortlyafterwards,in1924,EmilForrerannouncedthathehadfoundmentionoftheGreeks intheseHittitetablets.Thedebatebegan inearnest,andcontinuesstill.By translating the Hittite documents, scholars were able to discernpossiblementions of theGreeks of the Late BronzeAge. Thus, theyclaimed,theHittitescorrespondedwiththeMycenaeans,andthattheymentionedthelikesofAtreus,Paris,theislandofLesbos,perhapsTroy,andpossiblyeven theTrojanWar itself.6These referencesarederivedfromvarious toponymsdetected in theHittitedocuments,whichhavebeenattackedanddebunkedbymanyhistorians.These toponymsareclaimedtobeGreekwordsthathavebeentranslatedintoHittite(andviceversa)andintheprocessalteredslightly.SothatinsteadofIlios,wefindWilusa;insteadofAlexandros,wehaveAlaksandu,andinsteadofAchaia we have Ahhiyawa.7 This last elucidation derives from a

4 The Hittites were decidedly introverted and, being a continentallycentred empire,preferred to have little overseas contact;while theMycenaeanswere obviously a seafaringcivilisation:theirremainshavebeenfoundasfarawayasCreteandTroy.5DLPage,HistoryandtheHomericIliad,UniversityofCaliforniaPress,Berkeley,1959,p.2.Myemphasis.6ibid.7EmilForrerwas the first topropose the toponymargument. Itwas later revisedandconsolidated by Fritz Schachermeyr inHethiter undAcher; for an examination of theirtheses,seepp.26andpp.2326.


particular Hittite document a treaty for mutual protection madebetweenMuwatalliIIandtherulerofWilusanamelytheAlaksanduTreaty.8 In it, Alaksandu, the ruler of the vassal state of Wilusa, isthereafterobligedtomarchouton[Muwatallis]sidewithinfantryandchariotrywhile in return theHittite king promises to not abandon[Alaksandu]ifsomeenemyarisesforyouandIwillkilltheenemyon your behalf.9 This treaty also namesAlaksandu as the king of asmallvassalstateknowntousonlyasWilusa.Since1924thisstatehasbeen equatedwith theHomeric alternative for Troy, Ilios.10 Ilioswassimply a substitute to Troia, onewhichHomer used over a hundredtimes in the Iliad,11aswellasobviously supplying the titleofhisepicpoem. According to the rules of Greek phonetics, it has also beenestablished that, in preHomeric Greek dialects, there was often adigamma or w which was later dropped during the transition toHomericGreek.Thusitisestablishedbeyonddisputethattheoriginaltoponym [used] before Homer, was Wilios.12 By the time thatHomer composed his poem, the digamma had been discontinued inGreek; thus the name (W)Ilios predates Homers composition.Nonetheless, itseemsattractive toequateWilioswithWilusa,moresobecause the Hittite Alaksandu unmistakably echoed the GreekAlxandros,andAlexander (Paris) in the Iliad is the firstbornprinceofTroy.13Thusitistemptingtoaccepttheselinguisticequations:Wilusa=Ilios; Alaksandu = Alexandros; Ahhiyawa = Achaia; Millawanda =Miletos. However, on nothing more than this similarity, we cannotconfidently claim that we have surviving letters written toAgamemnonhimself,andatreatywiththerealAlexanderofIlios.14

8CTH76,sec.14,translatedbyFStarke,TroiaimKontextdeshistorischpolitischenundsprahlichenUmfeldesKleinasiens im2.Jahrtausend,StudiaTroica,p.7andp.472;citedbyLatacz,p75.9ibid.10PKretschmer,Alakandu,KnigvonVilua,Glotta,p.1320513213;citedbyLatacz,p.75.11Latacz,p.267.Iliosisused106times,whileTroyisusedmerely49.12Latacz,p.75.13ibid.,p76.14MWood,InSearchoftheTrojanWar,BBCBooks,London,2003,p.169.


IliosorWilusaorboth?There is more to this argument, though, than the mere phoneticsimilarity between Wilusa and Ilios. Kretschmers view has beensupported by the discovery of additional Hittite documents whichmentionWilusa. Scholars have thus far been reserved aboutwhollyembracinghis equationshypothesis:Gurneywrote,on theonehand,thatphoneticallynoneoftheseequationsisaltogetherimpossible.15Yetwe sense an overwhelming hesitation concerning the adoption ofKretschmers hypothesis. This is mostly due simply to Hittitegeography,or rather,ourvery sketchymapof theHittiteworld.TheHittitesmentionavastnumberofplacenames,whichmayormaynotbe the names of towns, cities or vassal states.We are not given anyindication of their location, direction or position, and so long as thegreaterproblemofHittitegeographyremainsunsolved,theargumentsforthelocationofWilusacannotberegardedasconclusive.16However,inthelastdecadeofexcavationsandstudies,thisobjectionhaslostitsvalidity.WenowknowforcertainthatWilusaandWiliosareoneand the same.17 This conclusion can be discerned from informationcouchedinthediplomaticAlaksanduTreaty:

Formerlyatone time the labarna (honorary titleof theHittiteGreatKing),myancestor,hadmadeallofthelandofArzawa[and]allofthe landofWilussa(political)clients.Laterthe landofArzawawagedwarbecauseofthis;butsincetheeventwaslong ago, I do not know from which king of the land ofHattusathe landofWilusadefected.But(even) ifthe landofWilussa defected from the land ofHattusa, they (the RoyalClan ofWilussa) remained on terms of friendshipwith thekings of the land of Hattusa from afar and regularly sentenvoystothem.18

15ORGurney,TheHittites,PenguinBooks,London,1952,p.57.16ibid.,p.58.17Latacz,p.76.18CTH76,sec.14,translatedbyFStarke,TroiaimKontextdeshistorischpolitischenundsprahlichenUmfeldesKleinasiens im2.Jahrtausend,StudiaTroica,p.7andp.472;citedbyLatacz,p.75.Myemphasis.


Onecanconcludefrom this thatWilusaandArzawahadsomesortofalliance,orat leastwereassociated in some sortofway,andat somepointinthedistantpastrebelledagainsttheirHittiteoverlords.Itisalsoobvious,fromthispassage,and laterreferences,thatfromthereignofTudhaliyaI(14201400BC)untilthetimeofwriting,duringthereignofMuwatalli II (12901272 BC), there existed a state of relative peacebetween theHittites and the vassal state ofWilusa, over almost 150years.Alsonoticeableisthenatureoftheirrelationship:itisonewhereWilusa was subordinate to Bogazky, instead of it being an equalpower.Despite this, it ismanifest thatWilusa remained independentand autonomous city, andmaintained contactwith theHittite capitalvia envoys. Finally, the treatymentions the conquest ofWilusa andArzawabytheeponymousancestoroftheHittitekings,Anitta,knownonlybyhisepithet,labarna.19Onecanconclude,therefore,thatWilusaandArzawawerelinkedsomehowintheeyesoftheHittites.Butwherewerethey?TheHittiteseithertooktheirlocationforgranted,orwehavesimply lost any listing which might hint at their locality. Garstangcogentlyputitforwardthat

The imperial archives of theHittite kings include numerousrecords [which] even when lucidly translated from theHittite idiom, remain for themost part unintelligible, or atleastdeprived of their essential value, forwant of a reliablemapwhereby thesettingandscaleof theepisodesdescribedmaybeappreciated.20

Ultimately, thegreatestextentofknowledge in thisareaderives fromlistsofplacenamesandextremelyvagueideasoftheirlocales.Decadesof effort, the use of toponyms and the discovery of new Hittitedocumentsstill leftscholarswithanunsatisfactorymapofat least thewestcoastofTurkey.TheAnnalsofTudhaliyaIprovidedalistofvassalstatesandpettykingdomswhich laytothewestof theHittiteempire,listing them inorder fromsouth tonorth.The listconcernsstates thatarepartofthelandsofAssuwawhichrevoltedagainsttheHittitekingafter his defeat ofArzawa. Butwherewere these lands ofAssuwa? 19Latacz,p.78.20JGarstang&ORGurney,TheGeographyoftheHittiteEmpire,p.vii;citedbyLatacz,p.79.


Somefactsmayelucidateananswer:(1)visibleamongthecollaboratorsare the realmsofLukkaandKarkisa,whichareknown tobenear thesouth coast; (2) these landsmust be extensive if they can oppose theHittiteking,andprovidehimwith10,000 infantryand600chariotsasprisoners;(3)mostofthenamesonthelistwereunknowntousatthetimeofthetabletsdiscovery,andtheonlybareexpanseonthemaplayin Asia Minors northwestern region, namely the Troad.21 Theconclusion is thatAssuwa lies to thenorthofArzawa.The listof thepetty kingdoms and vassal states that compriseAssuwa name thesefrom south to north, beginning with some vassals which borderedArzawa to thenorth, suchasShaandHaballa,andmovingnorth toourstillyetunlocatedsettingfortheIliad,Wilusa.This locatedWilusain theTroad; that is, in the region inwhich Ilios issaid tohavebeen,andHisarlkistoday.To continue this speculation ofwhether IlioswasWilusa is pointlesswithoutbeingsurethatIlios iswherewethinkit is.Thatistosay,themorepertinentquestionhere is: IsHisarlk thesiteof Ilios, thecityofTroy, the city that formed the backdrop to the Iliad? In answer, is itpossible thatHittite textswillyield theproof?.22And indeed theydo.Anymoredefinite identificationofWilusawithIlios [andofcoursewithHisarlk],givenourpresent stateofknowledge, remains fraughtwithproblems, frombotha linguisticandageographicperspective.23Thatis,untilFrankStarkeprovedconvincinglythatthepileofruinsontheDardanelles,whoseonceproudpredecessorHomer callsby turnsTroy and Ilios, reallywas the remainsof that centreofpower innorthwesternAsiaMinor,knowntotheHittitesasWilusa.24Recentlydiscovereddocuments,suchasabronzetabletfromBogazkywhichcontainedatreatybetweenTudhaliyaIVandhiscousinthatgaveaverydetailedexpositionofgeography inAsiaMinor,especially in thewestandnorthwestaswellasaletterfromthekingofShatoMuwatalliII

21Page,p.103f.22 JCobet, Gab es den TrojanischenKrieg?,AntikeWelt, vol. 25, 1994, p. 12; cited byLatacz,p.19.23SHeinholdKrahmer,Arzawa:Untersuchungen zu seinerGeschichtenachdenhethitischenQuellen,p.167;citedbyLatacz,p.81f.24Latacz,p.82.


concerning theadventuresof theswashbucklingPiyamaradu,allowedStarketomakehishypothesis.ThelatterpieceofevidencewasthattheislandofLazbawasvisiblefrombothWilusaandSha.Lazbahasbeenidentifiedas the islandofLesbos,which is still plainlyvisibleoff thenorthcoastofAsiaMinor.25 Itwas this finalpieceof information thatallowedus to come to the conclusion that had been eluding scholarsever sinceHrozndecipheredHittite: that the site inmodernTurkey,knownasHisarlk, wasknowninHittiteinthesecondmillenniumBCasWilusaandinGreekasIlios.26NowthatwecansafelysaythatthesiteofHisarlkwasTroywemustaskourselves:whendidthisTrojanWarhappen?Wecansafelyassumethat itoccurredbeforeHomerwrote the Iliad,buthowmuch earlier?Troywascontinuouslysettledfromaround3600BCthoughthemajorurbanisation of Troy only began in 2500 BC with Troy II andthroughout its history, has undergone a number of resettlements,includingaClassicalGreeksettlement,andaRomansettlementNewIlium.TheTroysthatconcernus,however,numberfromTroyIItoTroyVII.Conventionaldating,aswellasarchaeologicalrecordsfromaroundtheMediterranean,putsthedestructionoftheTroythatHomerwritesofsomewherebetween12501180BC; that is,atsomepointduring theLateHelladic IIIBperiodof theLateBronzeAge.Unfortunately, therearetwoTroysinthisperiodwhichshowsignsofmeetingaviolentend,both destroyed by fire.We can thus discount earlier hypotheses thatplaced theHomericTroy inTroy Ior II as far too early (respectively30002500 BC and 25002200 BC).27More recent studieshavenarrowedHomersTroytoeitherTroyVIorTroyVIIa.Theywerebothdestroyedat theendofLHIII,TroyVI in1300BC (theendofLHIIIB),andTroyVIIa only forty years later, in 1260 BC (the end of LHIIIB). Troy VI,discovered byWilhelmDrpfeld,was thought tohave beenHomersTroy:ithadagreattowerofIlios,28nexttoasetofSkaiangates,29neither

25ibid.,p.83.26ibid.27CBlegen,TroyandtheTrojans,Thames&Hudson,London,1966,p.174.28Homer,TheIliad(trans.ByRLattimore),UniversityofChicagoPress,Chicago,1961.29Il.6.393.


ofwhichwouldhavebeenvisibleinHomerslifetime.30Nevertheless,itis generally accepted that the next settlement,TroyVIIawas the oneinvolved in the TrojanWar. Blegen argues that only Troy VIIawasdestroyedbyman;31TroyVIwasdestroyedbyearthquake,andhastilyrebuilt.32Therewas no evidence of fighting or fire inTroyVI, yet inTroyVIIa therewasevidenceofagreatconflagration,aswellassomesmallfragmentsofhumanremains,suchasabodywithacrushedskull,leftinastreet.UsingFurumarksdatingsystemfrompottery,asBlegendoes,33we can safely conclude that,within reasonabledoubt,TroyVIendedat the transitionbetweenMycenaean IIIA to IIIB (that is,1300BC),andthatTroyVIIaendednotlongafter,in1250BC,ifnotearlier.34Whatever thedate, there is littledoubt that thesettlementofHisarlk,which was once known as Ilios, was destroyed violently by amaraudingforce,whomHomercallstheAchaians.

TheLandofAhhiyawa:AgamemnonsKingdom?Having conclusively proven thatHisarlk is Ilios isWilusa,wemustturn our attention towards the other side of the Trojan War: theAchaians.CanweprovethatAhhiyawawassimplytheHittitetermforAchaia, one of the three words that Homer uses to describe theattacking Greeks.35 Again, the simple phonetic similarity is just notenough;again itwillproveunacceptable toargue thatAhhiyawawasAchaiaduetonomorethantheirlinguisticresemblance.Byplacingtoomuchfaithinthesetoponyms,anhistoriancanbeleddowndangerouspaths.Pageplaysdevilsadvocatewiththisissue:supposethecountryinquestionhadsomequitedifferentnamenobodywouldthenhavelooked for connectionswith the Greeks andwe should not havefound in thedocumentsa single fact inconsistentwith thatopinion.36

30Wood,p.143.31Blegen,p.161.32ibid.,p144.33ibid.,p160.34TroyVIIahadmanyfragmentsofMycenaeanIIIA,butmostofthefindswereofIIIB.ItalsohasGreyMinyanWare,notdissimilartothatofPhaseVIh.Blegen,p.160.35Thatis,Achaians,Danaans,andArgives.36Page,p.4,whereheuses theargument fromFSommer, AhhijavundkeinEnde?,IndogermanischeForschungen,vol.55,1937,p.286f.


ButwherewasthislandofAhhiyawa?Yetagain,theHittitedocumentswill not prove to be conclusive or forthright in answering this. Theword Ahhiyawa ismentioned inonly twenty textsdisappointinglyfew considering the number thatwewould expect ifAhhiyawa andTroy(orrather,Wilusa)wereinvolvedinatenyearsiege.37Infact,themostcommonconclusionisdiscouragingforourhypothesis:nothingintheHittitetextsactuallyindicatesthattheHittites

knew anything about the structure of Greece or about thedetails of Mycenaean politics. It is quite clear from theextensive diplomatic records of the Hittite kings that theiractive international negotiations never reached mainlandGreece.There is nomention of any place or peoplewhich can besafelyconnectedwithGreece38

Anunexpectedsourcewillcometoouraidinthismatter:HomersIliad.UptothispointwehavestudiouslyavoidedHomer,tryingtoprovethecaseforaMycenaeanattackagainstTroysolelyusingexternalevidence.Here,though,hewillproveuseful.Asmentionedabove,heusesthreedifferent and interchangeable terms for the combined forces of theGreeksattackingTroy:Achaians,DanaansandArgives.39The firstwehavealreadymet;theothertwowewillshortlyusetofurtherourcase.First,though,wemustaskourselves:WhydoesHomerusethreetermsfor theGreeks that bear no relation to anywords theGreeks calledthemselves,40 andwhich had fallen out of general usage byHomerstime?41 The one logical conclusionwhich offers itself to us is that allthreenameshavetheiroriginsinthehistoricalbackgroundtotheTrojanWar,andwerepreservedassuchintheoraltraditionfromwherethey

37MIFinley,TheTrojanWar,TheJournalofHellenicStudies,vol.84,1964,p.4.38AE Samuel, TheMycenaeans inHistory, PrenticeHall,New Jersey, 1966, p. 123.Myemphasis.39Cf.Thucydides,Historyof thePeloponnesianWar (trans.byRWarner),PenguinBooks,London,1972,1.3.40Generally, theGreekscalled themselvesHellenes.Nowhere in the Iliad is thisused todescribetheunifiedGreeks; it isused insteadtodescribethemenfromapartofPeleuskingdomandunderthecommandofAchilleus(Il.,2.681685).41Latacz,p.121.Apparentlyitishighlylikelythatnone[ofthesenames]hadeverexisted[ascollectivetermsfortheGreeks]exceptinbardicpoetry.


reachusviaHomerandtheIliad.ThisissimilartothefactthatHomerhas two interchangeable yet discrete and unrelated names for thebesiegedcity;Troyand Ilios.Aswehaveseen Ilioscame tohim fromthehistoricalpasticheoftheLateBronzeAge,andwaspreservedforusby the Hittite documents. There was no conceivable motive forinventing any of these names, especially considering their historicalmilieu.Linguistically, itmustbe remembered that,duringMycenaeantimes, Achaia would probably have been pronounced with adigamma,muchthesameas(W)Ilios;thusHomersAchaiawouldhavebeenAgamemnonsAchaiwia.42WhilstequatingAhhiyawawithAchaiais now generally accepted, it must be noted that this acceptance isgenerally linguisticnotgeographic.That is,mostscholarswill recognisethatAhhiyawawastheHittitewordforapowerfulland,laterknownasAchaia.ThisnamewasusedbyHomer,centuries later,todescribethecombinedattackingforcesintheIliad.TheissueisthatHomerandtheHittiteswere possibly referring to completely different places.WhileAhhiyawamight have beenMycenaean, there is no tellingwhether itwas located on the Greek mainland, or on an island closer to AsiaMinor, such asRhodes, or possibly even on the coast ofAsiaMinoritself, suchasMiletos.43Thus the relationshipbetweenAhhiyawaandAchaiamustbebasedonmorethanmeresimilarityforAhhiyawatoactuallybeAchaia(thatis,theGreekmainlandandcentreofMycenaeanpower) itmustbeproven,using theHittitedescriptionofAhhiyawa,thatitcouldonlybemainlandGreece.44The twomain bases onwhich thishypothesis is founded are: (1) theHittitekingTudhaliyaIVcitesthekingofAhhiyawaasaGreatKing,anequalamongst thekingsofEgypt,BabyloniaandAssyria;and(2) thatthekingdomofAhhiyawaisoverseas.45Sommersetouttodestroythishypothesis by arguing thatAhhiyawa cannot beGreece.46He claimsthat nowheredo theHittitedocuments say thatAhhiyawa is located

42ibid.43Recentarchaeologicalfindshaveproventhatitwascertainlyacandidate,beingwithintheMycenaeansphereofinfluence.44Schachermeyr;citedinPage,p.4.45ibid.46ibid.,p.5


overseas.TheymaywellsaythatAhhiyawahadmaritimecontactswithSyria and Cyprus, and that it controlled parts of the coast of AsiaMinor,47but this couldbe applicable to anyof the small stateswhichlined thecoastofAsiaMinorduring theBronzeAge.This isaseriousproblemwithourcaseforaMycenaeanattackagainstthecityofTroy:itwouldappearthattheonlyexternalevidencethatwehave,theHittitedocuments,failtomentionGreece,whichwouldberemissconsideringtheGreekstateswereallegedlypowerfulenoughtolaunchacombinedattackagainstTroyandherallies.FinleyconcludesthattheAhhiyawawith whom the Hittite rulers were concerned was not across theAegean on the [Greek] mainland but near at hand, an independentisland or coastal state,most likely based on Rhodes and possessingsome territoryof itsown inAsiaMinor.48Yet thissimply ignores theevidence:intheAnnalsofMursiliII,hementionsarebel,Uhaziti,whojoined thesideof theKingofAhhiyawa.WhenMursiliadvancedonhisposition in the landofArzawa (whichweknow ison thecoastofAsiaMinor)Uhaziti fled,and wentacross thesea to the islands.Andthereinhe stayed. Furthermore, in the famousTawagalawa letter,theHittite kingHattusili III engages in lengthynegotiationswith theKingofAhhiyawaregardingtheextraditionofanotherrebel,thistimetheproblematicPiyamaradu,andgrandsonofUhaziti.49 In itHattusilivituperatesthekingofAhhiyawaforharbouringthisPiyamaraduinhislands, which at this time seem to include Millawanda. Hattusili isunderstandablyupset,becauseyourlandisaffordinghimprotectionwheneverIhavepreventedhim[fromraidingmyland]hecomesbackinto your territory. The letter is pepperedwith expressions such ascrossingoveror byship, indicatingthatthe landofAhhiyawamusthavebeenbeyondthesea,andnotpartofAsiaMinor.ItalsoappearedthatPiyamaraduwasable toquicklymove intoandoutofAhhiyawafromMillawanda.Combining thiswith informationgarnered fromaninscriptionnearIzmir,knownastheKarabelInscription,scholarshaveconcluded not only thatMillawandawasMiletos (yet another of ourtoponyms solved), but that there remains no place for this country

47Seeibid.,p.25.48Finley,p.4.49Latacz,p.124f.


[Ahhiyawa]on theAnatolianmainland.50Quite simply,Ahhiyawa isno longerwithin thesphereofAnatolianstudies: it isaGreek regionoutsideAsiaMinor,withbridgeheadsMiletosprincipalamongthemon the coast ofAsiaMinor.51Put simply, the only seapower in theeasternMediterraneanwasGreece.52 It isnowpossible to ruleoutallpreviousproposals for the locationofAhhiyawa,except for theGreekmainland,includingalargerareaencompassingtheAegeanislandsandcertainpartsofthesouthwestcoastofAsiaMinor.53

TheTrojanWar:WieEsEigentlichGewesenSofarwehaveestablishedthattheHittitesknewofacitycalledWilusa,whichHomerknewasIlios,andtodaywecallHisarlk.WealsoknowthattheoftmentionedlandofAhhiyawawas,infact,mainlandGreece.ThiskingdomwaspowerfulenoughtobeanequaloftheHittitekings,harbour Hittite rebels, and possibly launch an attack against theAnatolianmainland.SuchanattackismentionedintheIliad.CouldtheTrojanWarhave anhistoricalbackground in thediplomatic relationsbetween theHittitesandAhhiyawaduring theLateBronzeAge? Is itpossiblethattheHittitesevenmentionedtheTrojanWar,whichtothemwasnotatenyearsiegeofepicproportions,butsimplyaninsurgencyina rebelliousvassal state,aidedbyapowerful foreignpowerwhichwas taking advantage of the Hittites relative weakness? TheTawagalawaletterhintedatthekingdomsoftheHittitesandAhhiyawacomingtoblowsoverWilusa,thoughthetabletisratherfragmentedatthis point: TheKing ofHatti and [theKing ofAhhiyawa] in thatmatterof[Wilusa]overwhichwewereatenmity,hehasconvertedmeandwe havemade friends awarwould not be right for us.Thedating of this letter, during the reign ofHattusili III (12721250 BC),bringsusclose towhen theTrojanWar issaid tohavehappened.Butthe fact remains that the letter was fragmentary, and vague on thedetailsofthisenmity.Later,thelettermayhavementionedthatHatti

50 JD Hawkins, Tarkasnawa King of Mira: Tarkondemos, Boazky Sealings andKarabel,AnatolianStudies,vol.48,2000,p.2.51Latacz,p.125.52Samuel,p.125.53Latacz,p.125.


and Ahhiyawa came to a settlement over the issue of Wilusa, overwhich they had previously fought.54The story, though,does not endthere.InalettertoaHittitekingfromManapaDattas,kingoftheShaRiver land just south ofWilusa,we learn that theHittite army hastravelled toAsiaMinor,and that someone attackedWilusa.TheShaRiver land has been overrun by Piyamaradu,who has also attackedLazba.Theseweredarktimesindeed,reminiscentoftheLinearBtabletsfrom Pylos, which mention the movement of troops, hint at theapproachofanamelessenemy,andgiveinstructionsfordefendingthecoast.Anatoliawas an equally disturbed place at the same time: theHittitepowerwaswaningduetoexternalfactors,andthevassalstatesonitsfringeswerecompetingforthespoils.Welaterhear,intheAnnalsofHattusiliIII(12651235BC),thattheGreatKingofAhhiyawahimselfispresentonthecoastofAsiaMinor,leadingamilitaryforce,noless.Itreads;

ThelandoftheShaRiveragaintransgressed.[ThepeopleoftheShaRiver land then said:] HisMajestysgrandfatherdidnotconqueruswith the sword.Whenheconquered theArzawalands[the fatherofhisMajesty]hedidnotconqueruswiththesword.Wehave[noobligation?]tohim.[SotheShaRiverland]madewar.AndtheKingofAhhiyawawithdrew.Nowwhenhewithdrew,I,theGreatKing,advanced.55

This is surprisingly reminiscent of the tale of the Iliad, in whichAgamemnon leads a combinedAchaian force against the cityofTroy.While there is little doubt that this proves that theHittites, at least,knewoftheKingofAhhiyawaspresenceinAsiaMinor,theoperativewords translated byWood as withdrew can have severalmeanings,including relied on or take refuge with.56 This would change theentiremeaning of thedocument, thoughWood simply acknowledgesthis variance, and continues in his assumption that the king ofAhhiyawawaspresentinwesternAnatolia,andthathewaslending

54Wood,p.205.55ibid.56ibid.,p.206.


aidinwartoarebelagainsttheHittiteking.57PagesreconstructionissimilartothatofWoods,exceptfortheirdivergenceonthislastpoint.ForPage, the implication isaswe shouldexpect that theKingofAhhijaw depended on theHittites to preserve the peace inwesternAsiaMinor,andwasattackedbytherebelsasbeingfriendlytowardtoHittites.58 His complicated, and often confused, background to theTrojanWar, isstymiedbyhis faultydatingsystem,buthishypothesisremainsvalid: that in thevacuum left inAsiaMinorby the retreatingHittites, the local kingdoms, freed from the yoke of being a Hittitevassal state, were vying for preeminence in this fertile region, andeventually coalesced intoa leagueunder the leadershipofAssuwa. ItwouldbelogicalthatAhhiyawawouldsoonbecomeinvolvedinsuchastruggle, realising the economic potential to, say, the city ofWilusa,locatedasitwasneartheDardanelles.59ItwasinthiscontextthatTroyVIIa was destroyed. Finley, though, dismisses these allegations offhand.HerightlypointsoutthatitistheIliadwhichcausesustrouble.60Foronce,theevidencedoesnotsupportHomer,butdisagreeswithhim:therearelargeandobviousdifferencesbetweentheHittitedocuments,and the Iliad.61 Page points out that, at least in the Iliad, the leagueopposingtheAchaianswasledbytheTrojans,ratherthanAssuwa,andthat the attacking Achaians are not those from Ahhiyawa, who arefamiliar to theHittites,butanexpeditionary force fromGreece itself.62He acknowledges that these are only differences, not disagreements,though Finley would not agree. His reconstruction of the historicalbackgroundtotheTrojanWarisbasedonthesocalledSeaPeoples.AttheendoftheLateBronzeAge,attheturnofthe12thcenturyBC,thereweredisturbancesfromSicilyandLibya in thewest, toBabyloniaandAssyriaintheeast.TheHittiteempirehadcrumbledandtheEgyptianswere under attack. Finley blames thiswidespread disturbance on amassivepenetrationovera longishperiodbymigrating invaders fromthe north.63 In this context, themost economical hypothesis for the 57ibid.,p.205f.58Page,p.108.59ibid.,109f.60Finley,p.4.61Page,p.111.62ibid.63Finley,p.5.


destructionofTroyVIIaistoblametheSeaPeoples.64However,thisisno less speculative thanPageshypothesis,andpays littleheed to theHittite documents which clearly state that Ahhiyawa was directlyinvolvedwith the political andmilitary situation ofAsiaMinor. Themost reasonable conclusion is that,whilewemightnotyetbeable toprovethattheTrojanWarhappenedthewayHomersaiditdid,wecanprove thatat least something like it couldhavehappened,and in thesame region of Asia Minor.65 The Byzantine story left to us by theremainsoftheHittitedocumentsatleastcorroboratespartsoftheGreeklegend; the Iliad supplements these documents,without either beingmutually exclusive.But arewe still leftwith fundamentaldifferencesbetweenfactandfiction,historyandtradition?66TheanswerliesintheCatalogueofShips,thesecondhalfofBookTwooftheIliad.67

TheCatalogueofShipsSo farHomerhasbeena constant companiononour travels.Hewassilently lurking throughout our entire discussion on the evidenceavailable to us from the Hittite documents, and he led us andSchliemanntoHisarlk.Nowwemustaddresshimfully;wemustpullHomeroutoftheshadowsand intothespotlightofourargument,fornocasethatisarguingforaMycenaeanattackagainstTroyiscompletewithoutanexaminationof themostprominentevidenceof theTrojanWar available to us: the epic poem, the Iliad. Itmust first be noted,however,thatnotlongaftertheTrojanWarissaidtohavehappened,atsomepointjustafter1200BC,theMediterraneanwasplungedintowhatwas, essentially, a five century long Dark Age. This was hinted atearlier,inFinleysdiscussionoftheSeaPeoples.Duringthistimemuchknowledge, civilisation and learning was lost: writing became nonexistent and theMycenaeans disappeared completely under pressurefrom migrating groups looking for fertile land and larger groupsroaming from the north. The effects of this invasion cannot beunderestimated:theattacksinitiatedagreatwaveofmigrations,which

64ibid.65Wood,p.206.66Finley,p.4.67Il.2.494759.


repeopledmost of theGreek peninsula anddrove forthmany of theprevious inhabitants.68 Even Thucydides talks of this period in theintroduction to his History of the Peloponnesian War: there was aseries of migrations, as the various tribes, being under the constantpressureof invaderswhowere stronger than theywere,werealwaysprepared to abandon their own territory.69 These invaders, styledDoriansbyhistorians,

broughtwiththemahorrorofgreatdarkness,andshakingsoftheworld [during this time] therewasanendofbuildinggreat palaces and fortresses; an end of abundant commercewith the rich lands of the eastern Mediterranean. Preciousmetalsandstoneswerenolongercommonlyworked;luxurieswereno longer indemand; thewonderfulartsofMycenaeanGreeceweredisusedordebasedSowideandprofound isthegulfwhichdividesusfromtheheroicpastwhenwestandon thevergeofHistory in the 8th century BC: theglory thatwasMycenaeanGreece liesburiedunder thedismaldepositsoftheimpoverishedandparochialDorians.

Allliesburied;allbutasinglevoice,shininglikethehelmofAchilleus,70andilluminatingtheMycenaeansforus:Homer.But was Homers account of the Trojan War, strictly speaking,Mycenaeanininspirationandinessence?WehavealreadyseenthattheHomeric terms for the Greek aggressors, Achaians, Danaans andArgives,areessentiallyhistorical:theywerethewordsusedintheLateBronzeAge by foreigners, such as theHittites, todescribe theGreekpeoples. One would expect to find, in a poem dating from the 8thcentury BC, not these historical terms, but names thatwere current inGreeceatthetime,suchasAeolians,Ionians,orBoiiotians.ThepointisthattheseMycenaeantermsfortheGreeksarenotonlypresent[intheIliad], but are even functioning elements of a metrical substitution

68NGLHammond,AHistoryofGreeceto322BC,OxfordUniversityPress,Oxford,1977,p.72.69Thucydides,1.2.70Il.19.3812.


system.71Thismetrical systemobviouslyderives from thedayswhentheAchaians existed in historical reality, that is, theMycenaean age.That is not the only hint that Homer gives us. His names for thebesiegedcityhavealsobeenshowntobehistoricalinessence.Thefactthatheusestwo,lendsweighttotheirhistoricity. Troyand IliosaresimplyGreek variants ofHittite nameswhichwe have already comeacross, Truwisa and Wilusa.Concentrating on the less contentiousname,we find that the sitewhichwe have previously identified asWilusa is in fact Hisarlk, where excavations show that it wasabandonedfrom950BConwards.72MostscholarshavearguedthatthenameIlioswaspreservedbylocalinhabitantsforthefivecenturiesuntilHomers time. But why would the local, nonGreek, inhabitantspreservetheMycenaeannamefortheircity,insteadoftheirown.Thus,Ilioscannotbeasole survivoroftheDarkAges:itsurvived insituaspart of an epic traditionwhich dates fromMycenaean times. Lataczgoestosomelengthtoprovethispoint,quiteconclusively,byusingthemetricalevidencefromtheIliad.Apparently,outofthe106timesIliosisused,48ofthemmakemetricalsenseifandonlyifwesupplythelostMycenaeandigamma.Actually,inonly11oftheoccurrenceswouldthemetreofthelinebedestroyedifwereinsertedthedigamma.Fromthis,Latacz concludes thatHomerneither invented the sceneofhispoem,norlearntofitfromnonGreekinhabitantsoftheTroad;hecouldonlyhave heard it fromGreekswho used the dead digamma.73 ThemosteconomicalexplanationforthesurvivalofMycenaeantermsinHomerspoemisthattheyenteredGreekhexameterverseintheMycenaeanageitself.74 Thus the world of the attackers in the Iliad is distinctlyMycenaean,yetwecanadducethisfurtherbyexaminingtheCatalogueofShips.ThestartlingthingabouttheCatalogueofShipsisthatitpreservestheMycenaeanworldas itexistedbefore theDorian invasion. Itactsasabedrockoffact,fittoserveasourfoundation:theCatalogueofShips

71Latacz,p.216.72ibid.73ibid.,p.217.74ibid.,p.218.


completely ignores the Dorian invasion.75 The Greek world postinvasionwaspoliticallyverydifferent to thatwhich camebefore.YetHomers Catalogue mentions real, historical places from MycenaeanGreece.He talksofThebes,Mycenae,Argos,Tiryns,OrchomenosandsandyPylos.ArchaeologicalexcavationsatallofthesesiteshaveproventheirexistenceduringMycenaeantimes.AllofthesecitieswerethrivingcentresofcommerceandcultureintheLateBronzeAge.Whatismoresignificant,forourcase,iswhereHomerdivergesfromwhatweknowtodayfromarchaeology,towhatheknewoftheMycenaeancivilisationinthe8thcenturyBC.Itisevident,therefore,thatthisCatalogueofShipswas the product of an earlier age, rather than a late, bardic,reconstruction, similar to the fact that Ilios is not the result of laterrestoration,but a relic from theMycenaean age.Lataczproposes thatthisrelicwasintheformofaMycenaeanepicpoem,calledbyhim,theTaleofTroy.TheevidenceforthisMycenaeanpoem lies,aswehavealready said, in the Catalogue of Ships. For a Catalogue of this sortseemsoutofplaceinthenarrativeoftheIliad,whichisnotactuallytheTaleofTroy,buttheTaleoftheQuarrelofAchilleus.Bythelastyearof thewar, themaritimenatureof theexpedition is irrelevant;abattleorder for an assault against the walls of Troy which numbers thedivisionsofmenbyshipisbothoddandunnecessary.AttwopointsintheCatalogue,Homermentionsthecommanderofacontingentand,inthenextbreath, removes them from thenarrative.The firstof these isProtesilaos.

ThosewhoheldPhylakeandPyrasosoftheflowers,theprecinctofDemeter,andIton,motherofsheepflocks,Antronbytheseashore,andPteleosdeepinthemeadows,oftheseinturnfightingProtesilaoswasleaderwhilehelived;butnowtheblackearthhadclosedhimunder76

75Page,p.120.76Il.2.6959.


We are reminded thatProtesilaosdied at thebeginningof theTrojanWar, just after theAchaianshad landed, andwas the firstman tobekilled by a Trojan. The next occurrence of this almost instantaneousobliterationofacharacteroccursjustoveradozenlineslater.ThistimeitisthestoryofPhiloktetes,whofailedtoreachTroy,afterfallingillinLemnos thesacrosanct,where thesonsofAchaianshad lefthimafterbeingbittenbyawatersnake.77ToKirk,thisseemedtosuggestthattheCataloguewaspartofapoemwhichconcerneditselfwithastorylargerthantheQuarrelofAchilleus.ThesetwomissingAchaianswerepartoftheexpeditionaryforcewhichleftAulisforTroy,yetneverreachedit,78andassuchtheywouldhavebeenanintegralpartofthisearlyepictale,and had to be included in any poem related to Troy.Homer simplycircumvents this awkwardness by promptly removing them from histale.ThisCatalogue, therefore, cannothavebeen composed solely forthe context it currentlyoccupies.Thus a final anddecisiveproof thatthisCataloguewas, inessence,Mycenaean,wouldallowus,onceandforall,toshowthatHomerwasnotmerelyusingtheresourcespasseddown to him through the long centuries of theDarkAges, butwasactuallyutilising knowledge of theMycenaeanworld, preserved in aMycenaeanoralpoem.Pageputsforwardtheclaimthatwecanadducethis from the observation thatmany places named in theCataloguecouldnotbeidentifiedbytheGreeksthemselvesinhistoricaltimes:andthat someof themwereabandonedbefore theDorianoccupationandnever resettled.79 It isunsurprising to learn thatnearlyonequarterofthetownsandsettlementsmentioned intheCataloguehavestillneverbeen identified.80 From this, Page concludes that the names in theCatalogueaffordproofpositiveandunrefutedthattheCatalogueoffersatruthful,thoughselective,descriptionofMycenaeanGreece.81Hencewe can deduce that (1) Homers geographical description in theCatalogue derives fromMycenaean times; (2) the original catalogue,whichHomerbasedhison,wascompliedintheMycenaeanage;and(3) 77Il.2.7223.78GSKirk,TheIliad:Acommentary,CambridgeUniversityPress,Cambridge,vol.1,1985,p.231.79Page,p.121.80Finley,p.8,seemstodisagreewithPageonprinciple,ratherthanofferinganalternativeviewofMycenaeangeography.81Page,p.122.


therefore the entireTaleofTroy whichwouldhavehad some suchcatalogue, due to its maritime nature must have been composedduringMycenaeantimes.82ThesedeductionshavebeenprovenbeyondreasonabledoubtbyanewpieceofarchaeologicalevidencediscoveredinThebes. In 1994 aLinearB tabletwasunearthedwhich listed fourtowns as part of Theban territory: Eleon,Hyle, Peteon and Eutresis.These four towns have not been identified, nor have any postMycenaean remainsbeendiscoveredatanyconjecturedsites for thesetowns.ThefirstthreesettlementsarementionedtogetheraspartoftheThebancontingentintheCatalogue:theywhoheldEleonandHyleandPeteon.83Justtwolineslater,HomerincludesEutresisintherollcallofthe Theban contingent. This, then, provides the proof that manysettlementsHomermentionsdisappearedsoonafter1200BC,duringorjustafter theDorian invasions.Theirknowledgewas lost for the longcenturiesof theDarkAge,except for their survival in theMycenaeanTaleofTroy.

ConclusionSlowlyweseeHomercoalescingbeforeoureyesasavalidsource fortheTrojanWar.Nolongeramirage,theIliadhasbecomeouroasis.WehaveshownHomertohaveextensivelyusedaTaleofTroywhichdatesfromMycenaean times.We have seen thatHomers Troymust havebeenTroyVIIa,theonlyonewhichhadahumandestructionanddatesfromthetimewewouldexpect.Anylaterthanaround1250BC,andtheMycenaeancentreswerethemselvesfallingpreytoagroupofmigratingbarbarians,knownasDorians.TheseMycenaeansweredeeplyinvolvedwith the Hittites concerning the territory of Asia Minor. We haveidentifiedWilusawithTroy,asbeingoneandthesameasHisarlk.Theonly conclusion possible is that there is a kernel of historical truthburiedwithintheIliad.Andwhilewemaynotbeabletoconcludethatsuch a thing asHomers TrojanWar happenedwith the certainty ofPatroklosknowledgethatHektorwouldmeetFateandcruelDestinyatthehandsofAchilleus,wedoknow that therewas truthbehindwhatHomer said.Thishistorical truth concerned thedestructionofa large 82Latacz,p.238.83Il.2.500.


and powerful trading city in the Troad by the King of Ahhiyawahimself. Thismay have been in retaliation for the reconquest of theAhhiyawanMiletosbytheHittiteking.Perhapsitwasjustanattackofopportunityonapowerfulcity,leftweakbythewithdrawalofitsmainally,Hatti,duringthetumultuous13thcenturyBC.OrperhapsamightycoalitionofGreekssailedtogetheracrosstheAegeanandintohistory,inpursuitofthewomanwhosefacelaunchedathousandships.


ReferencesBlegen,CW,TroyandtheTrojans,Thames&Hudson,London,1966.Finley,MIetal., TheTrojanWar,The JournalofHellenicStudies,vol.84,1964,

pp.120.Gurney,OR,TheHittites,PenguinBooks,London,1952.Hammond,NGL,AHistoryofGreeceto322BC,OxfordUniversityPress,Oxford,

1977.Hawkins, JD, TarkasnawaKing ofMira: Tarkondemos, Boazky Sealings

andKarabel,AnatolianStudies,vol.48,2000,pp.131.Herodotus,TheHistories(trans.AdeSlincourt),PenguinBooks,London,1996.TheHolyBibleNIV,InternationalBibleSociety,ColoradoSprings,1984.Homer,TheIliad(trans.byRLattimore),UniversityofChicagoPress,Chicago,

1961.Kirk, GS, The Iliad: A commentary, vol. 1, Cambridge University Press,

Cambridge,1985.Latacz, J,TroyandHomer (trans.byKWindle&R Ireland),OxfordUniversity

Press,Oxford,2004.Page,DL,HistoryandtheHomericIliad,UniversityofCaliforniaPress,Berkeley,

1959.Samuel,AE,TheMycenaeansinHistory,PrenticeHall,NewJersey,1966.Thucydides, History of the PeloponnesianWar (trans. by R Warner), Penguin

Books,London,1972.Wood,M,InSearchoftheTrojanWar,BBCBooks,London,2003.

ch02 Chapter Two - Hittite Ahhiyawa

Documents

Transcript of ch02 Chapter Two - Hittite Ahhiyawa