The Fragility of Status

Ramessess II defeating the Sea People, taken from the Medinet Habu relief.

While the opening line of letters EA 35 and 38 are the same, the remainder differs slightly. While in EA 38 the King merely states “[f]or me all goes well,” in EA 35, the King of Alashiya details “[w]ith my houses, my wife, my sons, my chief men, my horses, my chariots, and in my lands, it is well. Why did the King feel the need to detail how each element in his kingdom was well? The answer comes later in the letter. The King asks the Pharaoh to not be “concerned that the amount of copper is too little, for in my land the hand of Nergal, my lord, has killed all the men of my land, and so there is not a single copper-worker.” Nergal was the Lord of the Underworld, the god of death, pestilence, and plague. The King is therefore at pains to stress everything that is well in his kingdom to lessen the blow to the copper industry in Alashiya. As demonstrated, the King’s seat at the table relied on his ability to provide copper, without that, he loses his status. Indeed, the King attempts to lessen the extent of the plight afflicting his country, at first stating his sons are well, but later revealing that “the hand of Nergal is upon my land and upon my house. My wife bore a son, who is now dead, my brother.” With no copper miners left, and his own son afflicted by whatever disease was spreading the land, the King was clearly nervous.

The King’s concern over his now vulnerable status as a Great King is evidence by his attempts to placate and reassure the Pharaoh in the remainder of his letter. The King goes on to state, perhaps fictitiously, “do not let my brother be concerned. Send your messenger along with my messenger quickly and all the copper that you desire I will send you, my brother.” With no copper workers left, this promise would appear difficult to keep. The King’s repeated use of brother becomes suspect when compared to other letters. In a letter to Akhentaten, Ashurt-uballit, king of Assyria, uses the term just twice. In EA 35, the King of Alashiya uses brother 28 times. It seems clear that the King sought to remind the Pharaoh throughout the letter of his status, undermining the impression that the King was confident in retaining his status. The king of Alashiya ends his letter on an almost sycophantic note. He states how “[w]ith the King of Hatti and the King of Shanhar you have not been placed on the same level.” Lastly, the king reminds the Pharaoh that apparently “whatever presents my brother has sent to me, I have returned to you double.” The King of Alashiya once again attempts to reinforce his ability to give more than is asked from him by referring to precedent, despite the current apparent state of his affairs.

It is interesting to note here how candid the King of Alashiya is. It’s possible that news of whatever it was afflicting Alashiya had already reached the other kings: the use of “do not let my brother be concerned” hints that perhaps the Pharaoh had written to the King of Alashiya. However, the fact that the King does not seemingly attempt to cover up any fact,  admitting he has no copper miners left and that his son had died, shows the level of respect that was present between the Great Kings in their correspondence.

While we do not know if EA 35 was a response, EA 38 clearly was, and demonstrates further insecurity on the part of the King of Alashiya. At this point in time, the Egyptians were being targeted by a group of Sea People, the Lukki, and the Pharaoh had written to the King of Alashiya clearly accusing the King of a having a hand in the attacks, directly stating “Men from your country were with them.” The reference to the Lukki is interesting, for as Cline explores, they have long been linked to part of complexity theory around why this very international age came crashing down at the end of the bronze age.[1]

The King of Alashiya begins defensively. He asks “[w]hy, my brother, do you say such a thing to me: “Does my brother not know this?” As far as I am concerned, I have done nothing of the sort.” The King claims that the Pharaoh could not have known if they were men from his country, stating “[y]ou yourself do not know men from my country. They would not do such a thing.” The King checks himself, however. He immediately states, “[b]ut if men from my country did do this, then you yourself do as you see fit.” He claims distance from the attacks by stating “[i]ndeed, men of Lukki, year by year, seize villages in my own country.” This could perhaps fit with an interesting theory, proposed by Sally Wachsmann however. Wachsmann suggests that it is possible Lukki raiders took hostages whenever they attacked, and absorbed these hostages into their fighting forces.[2] Contemporary references to Sea People fit with such a theory: the last Hittite King referred to the Sea People including “the enemy from the land of Alashiya.”[3] It therefore seems possible that there were Alashiyans present in the forces of the Lukki, but the agency of the King seems to be the question here. This is something the King clearly feels the need to address, as he adds on the end of his letter “[f]urthermore, which ancestors of yours did such a thing to my ancestors? So no, my brother, do not be concerned.” By ending the letter in such a way, the King of Alashiya once again claims his legitimacy as a Great King, clearly felt threatened by the letter from the Pharaoh, by referring back to their family histories.