The Hittites Concept of Treaty and Engagement

A Study of išhiya- "to Bind" and hamenk- "to Tie"

Abstract

For the Hittites, concluding treaties and arranging inter-dynastic marriages were two important methods of making alliances with other Great Kings, as well as subjugating vassal kings. The purpose of this paper is to understand how the Hittites viewed the relationships created by treaty and marriage through a philological study of two related Hittite verbs. I clarify and compare the meanings of the verb išhiya- "to bind" and its synonym hamenk- "to tie". A study of išhiya- is important for understanding of the nature of treaties, since the noun išhiul- "treaty" is derived from it. In addition, the verb hamenk-, which can mean "to betroth", gives a clue for understanding the Hittites' way of thinking about marriage.
　The relationships indicated by išhiya- and hamenk- seem to represent the two methods of Hittite diplomacy. The verb išhiya- when used with the sentence particle -šan or -kan means literally "to bind one thing onto another thing", and figuratively "to impose a burden on a person". The basic concept of the noun išhiul- is derived from this figurative meaning and means "something which imposes a burden on a person". Accordingly, a treaty is a document imposed by a superior on an inferior that stipulates the burden. The inferior person cannot escape from the bond of his own will. The verb hamenk-, however, both literally and figuratively means to connect two separate things. When used to describe the connection between a man and a woman, it can mean, "to betroth". Therefore, marriage, or at least engagement, is not a unilaterally imposed bond and may represent a horizontal relationship. Thus, the fundamental ties in Hittite diplomacy seem to be the vertical relationship through treaty on the one hand and the horizontal relationship through marriage on the other.