,

/

(RA 90-1996] 145

LOOKING FOR THE PHARAOH'S JUDGMENT

JJY

NADAV NA'A MAN

In the vassal letters from Amarna, the noun dinu (" verdict, case, claim") appears

only in the correspondence of Rib-Hadda of Byblos.1 It appears eight times in reference

to the dispute over the property of Rib-Hadda, that h as been seized by YapalJ·Hadda of

Beirut, and the appeal to the Pharaoh to intervene and settle the matter (EA 105:34, 80,

117:64, 118:13, 119:45, 120:30, 39). An isolated reference appears in letter EA 89 (line 14).

Knudtzon read it u-ul di-na a-na-ti-su-nu ("Nicht wiirden ilue Vergehen gutgeheissen

sein"). E beling read it ti-ul ki-na a-na Tl-su-nu, and translated lines 13-14· "0 Konig, sind

meine Worte nicht recht? Wenn der Konig fiir ihr Leben sorgt, so ... " 2 In their article on

letter EA 89, Albright and Moran read line 14 u-ul ki-na a-na-ti-su-nu. (" Their words are

not true"), suggesting a scribal error of na for wa.3 This interpretation was accept ed by

other scholars.'1 However, the sign in Schroeder' s facsimile is definitely eli, as Knudtzon

read it. In my opinion, line 14 should be rendered tl.-ul di-na a-na TI (bala~i)-su-nu, and

translated as a rhetorical question: " I s there no judgment on theiJ.· lives?" Rib-Hadda

request s that the Pharaoh intervene and punish the murderers.

In what follows I shall analyse the two episodes in an attempt to clarify theiJ.· course

and shed more light on the way the Pharaoh handled the request s when making decisions

in political-judicial incidents.

I. For the publication of the Amarna letters, sec J. A. Knudtzon, Die EI-Amama-Tafe/11, Leipzig, 1915. The second

volume (EA T, II) is a commentary by 0. Weber a nd glossaries by E. Ebeling, with additional remarks by Knndtzon. A

facsimile of the texts from Berlin was published by 0. Schroeder, Die To11tafel11 vo11 EI-Amama i11 akkaclischer Sprache

( VS ll-12), Leipzig, 1915. A new translation of the A marna letters, with many notes and a remarkable progress in the

decipherment and understanding of the letters, was published by W. L. Moran, Les lettres ci'EI-Amama, Paris, 1987. The

English transla tion1>ublishcd fi ve years later (The A mama Letters, Baltimore and London, 1992), is the basis for the trans­la tions offered in this article.

2. EAT II, p. 1591.

3. W. F. Albright a nd W. L. i\loran, Rib-Adda of Byblos and the Affairs ofTyre (EA 89), JCS ·~. 1950, p. 165. 4. R. F. Youngblood, The A mama Correspoll(/e11ce of Rib-Hadrli, Pri11ce of Byblos (EA 68-96) (Doctoral Disserta­

tion), Philadelphia, 1961 , pp. 322, 330-31; i\loran , The Amama Letters, p. 162; A. F. Rainey, Ca11aa11ite ;, the Amama

Tablets, II , Lcidcn, 1996, p. 174.

l!evue d'Assyriologie, volume XC, p. 115 a 159, 211996

146 NADAV NA'A MAN [RA 90

THE COUP D'E TAT IN T YRE

Letter EA 89 was studied m det ail by Albright and Moran.5 According t o their

analysis, the p1·ince of TYI·e married Rib-Hadda's sister, and is described either by the

title " mayor" (!Jazannu), or as "my brother". His wife and sons were also killed, but "the

daughters were valuable property and hence presumably escaped the massacre". Rib­

Hadda gives his own version of the event, and warns the king against accepting the ver­

sion emanating from the usurper and his followers.

However, some of then· readings and part of the interpretation are not free of

doubts. Fil'stly , they render lines 22-24 thus: "My sist er's daugh <ter>s {a-!Ja-<ti>-ia)

I had sent to TYI·e away from 'Abdi-Ashn·ta." H ow could Rib-Hadda send his sister's

daughters from his town t o the island of TYI·e, the place where t hey were born and lived

safely, away from 'Abdi-Ashn·ta? Secondly , in lines 39-42 Rib-Hadda wrot e thus: "But if

you make inqun·y about my brother, then the city will say: This man is not a mayor!

lnqun·e, 0 king, about him!" How should we interpret t he city's claim t hat the murdered

1Jaza1mu (who is called 'brother', according to Albright's and Moran's interpret ation) is

not a mayor?

These difficulties disappear once it is understood that t he TYI·ians had murdered ,. both then· ruler and his family and Rib-Hadda's brother , who was staying then in the

town. The former is called by the title [tazannu, and once {line 33) by t he appelation a!Ju

(a ruler of equal st atus; see EA 92:44, 106:15, 20, 137:13); the latter is called by the fam­

ilial affiliation a!Ju (lines 13, 22, 39). Line 22 should not be corrected (as did Knudtzon

and his followers), but read a-!Ja-ia ("my brother"). The misunderst anding of the t ext is

due t o the use of t he noun a[tu in two different meanings, and by the omission of the

sign u ("and") in lines 13 and 22. Indeed, t here is a relatively large number of small

eHors in this letter, as will be apparent from the rendering of t he t ext.

Following is a new translation of t he letter (except the int roduction) and a commen­

t ary . These will be followed by an analysis of the letter and t he presumed reaction of the

Pharaoh to the act of usurpat ion.

(7-17) [Though] I keep writing like this [to the pal] ace, my words are not [taken to

he]art, and they go utterly un[hee]ded. Look at t he deed in TYI·e. On this account

I am afraid. Even now the king makes no inqun·y about his mayor <and> my

brother. May t he king h< eed> my words. Is there no judgment on then· lives? If the

king makes inqun·y, we will devote ourselves to your service.

5. J CS 4, pp. 163-68; see Weber, EA T II , pp. 1178-81.

1996] LOOKING FOR THE PHARAOH'S J UDG;\JENT 147

(17 -32) I made con nubium with TYI·e; they were on good terms with me. Behold

t hey have killed then· mayor , t ogether with my sist er and her sons <and> dan~ g~ters. I had_sent my brother t o Ty[re], away from 'Abdi-A[shn·ta, and they killed]

~u~ alo[ng With .. . If the king remains silent about my brother, then all lands will be

JOmed t~ the '_A~n·u ??. But if] t he king [makes inqun·y about my brother], then all lands [will be JOmed to the king, my lOl'd].

(33-39) ':ill ~he king not [make inquiry] about [my] b1·other, [for] the <c>ity

{<u>n u) [Is] Wit hout a g[rown hen·] (e[!- lu]) . [Indeed] , he sent again and again to the king, [but h]is w01·ds went unheeded. And so he died. I know it!

{39-4~) But if you make inquiry about my brother , then the city will say: "This

man Is not the mayor . Inqun·e, 0 King, about him. We are unable t o do anything." And they are afraid of me!

~44-59) Will the king not make inqun·y about the may01· ofTYl·e? For his property

IS as great as the sea. I know it! Look , there is no mayor's residence like t hat of t he

~-es_idence in TYI·e. It is like the residence in Ugarit. Exceedingly great is the wealth

mIt. ~ay t he king heed [t he word]s of <his> servant. May he send [P]N? that he will

stay [m the l]and, and [appoint a man] ([su-ku-un LO]) for t he office of mayor ( a-na

!Ja-za-nu-ti). May [no] property be handed [ove1· to] them.

(~9-63) Al~o [make inquiry? about t he com]missione1· of t he king. H e is t [aking fi] om the kll1g [the property] of t he lands [of the king]. I know <it>!

(63-67) Does the king approve [that 'Abdi-A]shn·ta has taken the sea [in] front of

them, and so they are at peace? May t he king [ter]rify them! Do I not continue to WTite about < the>h crime to the king?

N otes to the text

. Line. l 4:_ The subject of the plural pronoun -smm are the mayor of Byblos aud R ib-Hadd , b 1 .mentwned m hne 13. as rot ter

f L(idne)25: It is possible that some other members of the brother's family have been killed and were listed a ter qa n .

Lines 26-32: The long restorat' •I · I · II · · · . . 1011, \1 nc t IS natura y qmte uncertam, IS based par tly on the similarity m structure t o hues 33-43 aud part! th k f J · ' Hadda. y on e stoc o p trases repeated many times in the letters of Rib-

Line 33: To judge from Schroeder's facsimile, it is possible tha t the signs a-hi are written over an erased l!a-za. •

. Lines 34-35: I _restore . (1l i-ba-sa-at] URU i-na ba-li e[!· ln 1l,]. The URU sign was mistaken.! written Without the fust vertical wedge (compare the URU sign in line 41) Fo 'b •x t · fi y EA 84· 38· 10 . . . . · r I as~ a 111 re erence to a town, see

· , 5.10, ll6.9, 20. T he noun e(ht appears 111 another letter of Byblos (EA 74·26) d d ' d by 1\Ioran in his edition (p. 144, note 7· cf. EA 29·154) I t refi . th A I . an was •scusse · d bl ' · · ers Ill e marna etters to a young man who IS gr~wn up an a e to sit on the throne (see Moran's note I to EA 17), like talerdltennn in the texts of Nuzi Ugant a_nd I.;latt usha (see G. Wilhelm, UF 2 (1970), pp. 277-82). '

Lmes 54-57: For the restoration, see EA IO?:ll-24. The two texts deal with a similar situation, the

148 NA DAV NA'A;\IAN [RA 90

appointment of someone to a vacant post. In letter EA 107, Rib-1-Iadda advises the Pharaoh about the nomi­nation of a commissioner in $umur: "l\lay "'iljripita (i.e., the a rcher-commander) stay (yizziz) in $ nmur ... and then ... appoint (sukrm) as its commissioner someone respected by the king's mayors." For the verb sakiinu in reference to nomination to the office of mayor, sec EA 161:51-53.

The plural noun " mayors" (ljaza111ulti) is consistently preceded in the Amama letters by LU~rES .6 Only two references lack it (EA 89:57 12,k22), and they refer to the office of mayor (lja zcmll lllll; CAD IJ 165b-166a). The passage in EA 124:20-22 is broken, hut may he restored thus: "Who is t[his fellow, servant (and) dog), that he has taken the ci[tics of the king for himself], and [bas canccllcd1 the mayorship?" Moran trans­lated "and (even) mayor[s has killed)". But Aziru is never accused by Rib-1-Iadda of killing mayors. The accusation appears only in the letters of Ili-rapilj, Rib-1-Iadda's brother and heir to the throne of Byhlos, who deceitfully attributed to Azirn some misdeeds of his father, 'Abdi-Ashirta (EA 139:12-15, 140:10-12).

Lines 59-62: The corrupt mayor is probably Paljamnata, the commissioner of $unnu, who supported 'Abdi-Ashirta and whom Rih-1-Iadda accused of treacherous deeds (see EA 131:34-36, 132:41).

Lines 63-67: The translation and restora tion follow Moran's edition.

Letter EA 89 is well constructed and Rib-Hadda's case is clearly stat ed. He opens

with a general account of the event, asking for an inquiry and judgment. H e then goes

into details and relates how many members of the royal fa miles of T)'l·a and Byblos have

been killed. Investigation and punishment are necessary, b ecause if the murder is left

unpunished, more towns may follow the example and attack their mayors (compare

EA 73:23-33, 74:25-29, 75:25-34·).

Of the following three passages, t he fll'st and second discuss the possible results of

two opposite reactions of the Pharaoh: if he does not hold an inquiry, and if he does hold

one. The fll'st r efers to the situation in T)'l·e which is left without a grown heir; and the

second describes the embarassment of the city, in view of the murder of a foreign prince

and its fear of Rib-Hadda's vengeance. In t he thn·d passage Rib-Hadda alludes to what

the Pharaoh m ay gain from an intervention in the succession. H e emphasizes the wealth

of the ruler of T)'l·e, whose 1·esidence is " like t he residence of Ugarit", and calls on the

Pharaoh to instruct his officer to come to Tyre and set a new king on the vacant throne.

Citizens who killed then· lord should not enthrone then· own candidate nor gain any profit

from then· crime. The last two paragraphs are directed against his arch-enemy, 'Abdi-Ashirta of

Amurru, and against his supporter, the commissioner of $umm. Rib-Hadda creates an

artificial link between the citizens of T)'l·e and 'Abdi-Ashn·ta by suggesting that they

enjoy his misdeeds, and closes the letter with a reminder of then· crime.

At t he centre of the letter is Rib-Hadda's plea for judgment on the mmderers, who

6. S. lzrc'el (Amurm Akkadiau: A Liuguisric Study I, Atlanta, Georgia, 1991, pp. ll8-19) suggested tha t the final

vowel i in L(niES lja -za-uu-11-ti (EA 162:13) marks n singular ending. In this light he translates lines 12-13 as follows: " He

was staying in Sidon, and you have appointed him mayor (lit. you have given him to mayoralty) a t your initiative." HO\:·­ever, in the next line the Pharaoh wrote thus: " \Vcre you ignorant of the treacherousness of the men." "The men" ( LO~t r.:.) doubtless refer back to tO~t r.S ljaznmuiti, indicating that it is a plural form. Also, an accusation of Aziru of actually

appointing somebody as mayor is unlikely. It is evident that the dis tinction between plural and singular forms of the noun,

established by lzrc'cl for the Amurru Akkadian , is not applicable to Egyptian Akkadian.

1996] LOOKI NG FOR TilE PHAHAOH'S JUDGMENT 14·9

must have been his political opponents. His letter has a distinct political aspect, namely,

a request to promote some other candidate than the one suggested by t he conspn·ators.

The title aazannu ("mayor"), by which the local Canaanite rulers are called in the

con espondence, lacks the concepts of dynasty and succession. The1·e was only one king,

the Pharaoh, and according to Egyptian ideology, he could nominate his own candidate

~or every vacant throne. In reality , the dynastic principle was kept in almost every

mstance, and t he Pharaoh would have confirm t he succession of t he hen· to the throne.

On.l~ in .exceptional cases would the Pharaoh intervene and nominate (through his

official_s m Canaan) his own candidate. Such was t he situation after t he Egyptian

campaign to Amurru and the death of 'Abdi-Ashirta. His hen·, Azn·u, appeared with his

brothers in Damascus before the Egyptian authorities (EA 107:26-28). Only after

negotiations and an agi·eement, which included the dispatch of his two sons as hostages to

Egypt (EA 156), and the nomination of Y an}Jamu to supervise his actions from Surma·

(EA 157, 171), was Azn·u able to occupy his father's throne. H is recognition as m~yor is

e~pressed in one of his letters (EA 161:51-53): " But this is t he land of my lord, and the

king, my lord, made me (iskunanni) one of the mayors." H is rival, Rib-H adda, describes

the nomination in negative terms (EA 103:8-10): "The war of the sons of 'Abdi-Ashn·ta

against me is harsh. They have entered (the throne) of Amurru, and the entn·e count ry is

thei1·s" (for this interpretation of erebu, see EA 286:13, 316:20, cf. EA 102:11).

Another example of Egyptian intervention in an unusual succession is reflect ed in

letter EA 220. The 'Vl'iter's father was killed when t he city was attacked, and he

anxiously awaited the anival of a commissioner, to examine the case and decide whether

to approve his reign. 'Abdi-ljeba, the mayor of Jerusalem, spent h is youth in Egypt and

was nominated by the Pharaoh, possibly when circumstances invited a royal intervention in the su ccession to the throne.'

What was the Pharaoh's reaction to the crisis of succession inTyre? I t seems to me

that the murdered king was [ .. . ]-DI.KUD, the auth or of letter EA 295,8 and that his sue-

. · cessor was Abi-Milku, the author of letters EA 146-155.9 Indeed, in several letters Abi­

Milku emphasizes that h e was nominated by a Phara oh. F or example: "My presence will

be as pleasing to the king, my lord, as when the king, my l01·d, charged me ( ipqidni) with

guarding his city" (EA 148:18-22; compare 149:9-10, 151:6-7, 155:49-51). Abi-Milku was a

. 7. W. ~· i\ ~ora n , T.hc Syrian Scribe of the J erusalem Amarna Letters, i11 H. Goedicke and J, J. i\1. Rober ts (eds), U111t)' aud DIVersity , Baltimore and London, 1975, pp. 165-66.

8. Le.ttcr E~ 295 possibly refers to the conquest of the town of Usu by Yab(ni-... J, Zimrcdda's predecessor on the

t ~tronc. of SIClon. Lmes 1 2~18 lila)~ tentative!: be restored thus: " May the king, (my) lord, be i(nformed) of the dc(cd that]

1 ab[lll; .. ·• the rn.ler of S)rdon (d)rd to me. W[J~~n he plottc]d (i)-(uu-ma i-la-m i-u)a) evi(l, he ... ) and attacked (the town

of Usu J along \\·rth Ka[lbu, the ruler of Hazor"], a long with his brothers[ .. . )." For the associat ion of the rulers of Sidon and Hazor, sec E A 14 8:38-4 <~.

9. N. Na'aman, The Origin and His torical Background of Several A ma rna Letters, UF 11, 1979, PP· 673-76.

150 NA DAV NA'AMAN [RA 90

scion of the reigning dynast y of Tyre (EA 150:34-37) ,10 and his enthronement took place

under Amenophis III (EA 147: 57-60).1 1 H e designates himself by two Egyptian titles:

riibi~u (EA 149:14, 47-48) and "soldier" (EA 149:21, 151:69). Moreover, some of his let­

ters, in particular EA 147, show an Egyptian influence in their vocabulary and pluas­

eology.l2 It may be assumed that Abi-Milku was raised in Egypt, possibly as a hostage

(compare EA 156:9-12, 198:27-29, 254:30-35, 296:23-29), and that , following the mmder

of the ruler of T)'l·e, was selected by Amenophis III and nominated as the city's mayor.

How much he paid for that from his property, which, according to Rib-Hadda, was " as

great as the sea" , remains unknown. We may also assume that the murderers were pun­

ished, though this cannot be verified. Rib-Hadda's requested "judgment on then: lives"

must have been carried out, and so he got his revenege for the murder of his relatives.

ROYAL J UDGM ENT ON C ONFISCATION OF Two SHIPS

Early in the period covered by the Amarna letters, the relations of Rib-Hadda with

Yapa}J.-Hadda of Beirut were ordinary, though certainly not cordial. Rib-Hadda some­

times complan1ed about the cojlaboration between Y apalyHadda and 'Abdi-Ashirta and

his followers (EA 83:24-26, 85:41-43). In other letters he accused the mayors of some

coastal cities, including Beirut, of disobeying the orders of the Egyptian authorities

(EA 92:30-41, 101:20-25, 103:16-19, 106:18-21, 114:10-13). Following the dispute over the

cargo of two Byblian ships, the relationship grew into open enmity, and did not change

until the dispute was settled. Shortly afterwards, Yapa}J.-H adda died and was replaced by

Ammunira. The latter became Rib-Hadda's closest ally, with whom he formed an alliance

and in whose city he stayed after his tluone was usurped by his brother (EA 136-138).

What was the background of the dispute and how did it develop? The main obstacle

to the discussion is the documentation. We have only the letters of Rib-Hadda, who is

10. EA 150 is , in my opinion , Abi-milku's earliestleller and was sent to King Amenophis III. It was written shortly

aft er his enthronement, when the Pharaoh sent him soldiers to guard the city (lines 4-7). In his late lellers, on the other

hand, Abi-Milku keeps complaining about the absence of the Egyptian military. Lines 33-37 may tentatively be transla ted

thus: " From the ti[me1] ( i-ua tar· [~t]) [of P] N1 [he br]ought trees. It is much , 0 k ing, my lord, (what) you gave (in return)

[t]o my fathers, [un]tilmy fathers br[ou]ght across the c[ity' s] gods before the king, my lord." P rovided that the (highly

tentative) restoration of line 31 is correct, it may be compared with EA 221~, in which the author (Shum-Adda of Sham·

)Juna) mentions K usuna, one of his forefathers, in reference to a grain tax.

11. In letter EA 147:57-60 Abi-Milku writes thus: " I indeed said to the Sun, the father of the king, my lord, 'When

shall I see the face of the king, my lord?'" For the da te of EA 150, see note 10.

12. For the Egyptian influence on Abi-Milku's tellers, sec W. F. Albright, The Egypt ian Correspondence of Abi­

milki, Prince of Tyre, J EA 23, 1937, p . 190-203; C. Grave, North-West Semitic ~apiiuu in a Break-up of an Egyptian

Stereotype Phrase in EA 147, Or 51, 1982, pp. 161-83. For a different opinion, sec S. Gevirtz, On Canaanite Rhetoric. The

Evidence of the A marna Lellers from T yre, Or ~~2. 1973, pp. 176· 77; cf. i\Ioran, Uuily aud Diversity , p. 157, n. 3.

1996] LOOKING FOR TH E P HARAOH'S J UDGMENT 151

noto.ri.ous for his biased accounts of events and the extremely one-sided picture he paints.

A critical approach to Rib-Hadda 's letters, as well as inferences drawn from other sources

are necessary in order t o clarify the background of the episode and to reconstruct th~ chain of events.

To introduce the discussion, I will translat e sections of tWo letters in which Rib­Hadda describes the early stages of the episode.

(~) Letter EA 10~ '~as written some time afte1· Yan}J.amu was nominated to replace the_ fo1mer dead commiSSione1· of ~umur (EA 102; 106:21-22, 35-40; 107:11-24). Upon his

arnval at ~umm, he orde1·ed some neighbom·ing rulers to send their ships to the place. In

the first part of EA 105:5-31, Rib-Hadda answers that he is unable to get there because

of the blockade imposed by the sons of 'Abdi-Ashirta and the ships of Anvada. ~ similar excuse appears in a contemporary letter sent by Yapa}J.-Hadda of Beirut t o Yanh {EA 98). vamu

The second part of the lette1· is partly broken. Following is a translation of and com­ments on its t ext.

{31-45) YapaQ.-Hadda is at war with me because of [my] property m his pos­

session. Let us put the case before Amman-m[ a]di?, and DUi'IIV-biQ.a, and before

YanQ.amu, for they are the ones who know what is my due concerning m[y .. . ].

Bec_ause my property in his possession is considerable, therefo1·e he has waged war

agamst me. When I heard [abo]ut Ullasa, I indeed sent [an offici]aF ([LoGAJL?·mi

to him, but he has [p]lundere[d] [two] of m[y] sh[ips] ([uGu? 2 GIS]M[A]-i[a]) and

too~k t]hei[r property (la-q[aF a, [mi-im-mi S]a-a-[S]u-ni). H e has wa[ged war aga1]nst me.

( 46-78 broken.)

(:9-88) [May] the k[ing sen]d [a commissioner that w]e may put the case be[fore

lu~]- May [an]y property of mine in his possession be taken for the king, and let the

faithful servant live for the king. The Egyptians who got out of Ullasa are now with

~e, but t~ere is no [gr]ain for them to eat. Yapab-Hadda does not let my ships

[m]to Y arimuta, and I cannot send them to ~umur because of the ships of Anvada.

Look, he says, "Rib-[Hadda] ca[me forth1 (a·[~ali]); [he t]ook it." And so [he is at war1 against me.

Notes to the text

Lines 34-35· The tl · · . . · uee comnnssiOners were perhaps known for their support of Rib-Hadda. He did not mentiOn.lJatp, one of the commissioners of ~umur, who supported Aziru, his main adversary.

Lmes 40-41, 84-85: Ullasa was an Egyptian garrison city that was taken by Pu-Ba'la, Aziru's brother

152 NADAV NA'A~IAN [RA 90

(EA 104, 109:12-15, 44-50). The Egyptians who stayed in the town moved temporarily to Byblos, whose l'Uicr

was responsible for their supplies. . . Lines 40-42: Rib-Hadda emphasizes his loyalty, as opposed to the dtsloyalty of Ins opponent, by

noting that upon hearing of the fa ll of Ullasa, he tried to cooperate with an Egyptian commissioner, whereas

YapaiJ·Hadda took advantage of the situation and plundered his ships. . . _ . . Line 43: H alf of the MA sign is clearly seen in Schroeder's facsimile. The restoratton 2 eh~patt!a •s. sup­

ported by the parallel to EA 113:14, and by the appearance of the dual personal pl'Onoun sa-a-su-m (see

W. L. l\Ioran, BASOR 211 [1973], pp. 50-53). Line 79: The restoration is supported by EA 113:17, 117:66. Lines 81-82: Compare EA 113:19-21, 117:67-69. . . . Line 88: The restoration is ad sensum. I assume that the episode is concluded wtth words smular to

those with which it opened, and restores [(i-ti-pu-us) ltlt-KOn] a t the end (compare lines 31-32, 39-40, 45).

(B) Letter EA 113 is the second of a two-tablet letter. It may have been sent not

long after EA 105. Only the relevant passage (lines 11-23) is translated here.

What have I done to Yapab-Hadda that he plo[ts] evil upon evil against m[e]?

Indeed, he has plundered two of my ships, and my flocks and my property in his

possession are very great. May the king [se]nd his commissioner [to de]cide between

the two of you. [Everything] that [is ta]ken from him [belongs to the king]. [He (the

commissioner) should inqun·e] concerning [my] property [that] is in [his] possession,

[and concerning my1 captmed1] men. [I]fl ([sum-m]a?J Rib-Hadda [remains silent?,

then] [all (of it)] will be s[old] to the 'Apn·u. But t here is no one who [can ta]ke any­

thing belonging to him t';.om my [hand].

Notes to the text

Lines 20-21: The restoration [a-na LUGAL] is supported by EA 105:82 and 117:69 and by the dual per·

sonal pronoun in line 18. . . . . . Lines 21-26: Moran's translation runs thus: "Concenung [my] property [that] IS Ill [Ins] possessiOn [he

should inquire ot] my [me]n ... [ ... fr]om Rib-Hadda [and) for the 'Apiru has [all of it] be[ en ac(ruired]."

A detailed list of t he seized "things" (uniite) appears in letter EA 120:1-23. The pre­

ciseness of the list shows that t he cargo of the two ships was recorded before they sailed.

Moran translated line 19 "All of them pertain to [ ... ]", and suggested that it may he a d [CJ$ ' ] " • t summary remark. In this light, the lacuna may be restore lilA , ... pertam o one

[ship]". Of special interest is the note appended at the end of the list of " things" (lines 22-

23): "90-100 maidse1·vants (and) m anservants are missing." 13 In view of this, it may be

suggested that one ship (lines 1-19) canied only merchandise, and the other (lines 20-23)

carried servants and some goods. After the publication of Knudtzon, and Weber's analysis, in 1915, the episode of the

13. A different translation was suggested by i\Ioran, Tile Amnrnn Lellers, PI'· 119-200, note 12.

1996] LOOKING FOR TilE PHAR AOH'S JUDG~IEi\'T 153

plunder of the two ships was never discussed in detail, and the list of goods is missing from

all investigations of the trade in the eastern Meditenanean in the Late Bronze Age. The

ships must have sailed to Egypt or to Cyprus and stopped on then· way in Bei1·ut. The cargo

list may be compared with that found in the wTecks from Cape Calidonia and Ulan Burun.

It illustrates the craft and metallmgy ofByblos and its exports in the 14.th century nc. But

investigation in these directions is beyond the scope of this article.

Rib-Hadda's description of the episode m akes little sense. He does not explain why

Yapalj.-Hadda suddenly plundered his ships, nor the refusal of the commissioners to inter­

vene on his behalf. His words "because my property in his possession is considerable, he

h as accordingly waged war against me" (lines 38-40), do not make sense. Moreover, his

immediate willingness to transfer his property to the Pharaoh does not suit an incident of

piracy. His request for arbitration and judgment also indicates that something other than

piracy is involved in this case.

Yapal].-Hadda ostensible explanation of the blockade is cited at the end of letter

EA 105: "Rib-[Hadda] ca[me forth1 ; [he t]ook it. " The subject of "it" is intentionally

obscure. Yapal].-Hadda must have been afraid that Rib-Hadda would retaliate, and in

self defen ce cooperated with Azn·u, Rib-Hadda's arch-enemy.

What could h ave been the reason for Yapal].-Hadda aggression? I think that it was

his reaction to an unpaid debt that Byblos owed his city . Ben·ut acted as an inter­

mediary in the t ransport of grain from the land of Y arimuta to Byblos and ~umur.

Indeed, following its conflict with BeiTut, there was a severe shortage of grain in Byblos.

Note, fo1· example, EA 114:54-59, "Previously, my peasantry got provisions from the

land of Y a1·imuta, but now Yapa}J-Hadda does not allow them out" (compare

EA 105:83-87). Letter EA 98 further illustrates the role of Ben·ut in the transportation

of grain. YanlJamu, t he Egyptian commissione1·, ordered Yapab-Hadda to bring grain to

~umm·. The latter answered that Aziru stationed ships of Anvada south of ~umur, "so

grain cannot be brought into ~umur".

A passage in letter EA 85:23-30 may further support this assumption. Although it

is broken, it may be restored with the help of a parallel passage (EA 86:14-22).

Letter EA 85 was sent to the Pharaoh, while EA 86 was sent, at the same time, t o the

E gyptian officer Amanappa. The two passages are translated one after the ot her, so that

the similarity of vocabulary and contents is immediately apparent.

EA 85:25-30 As to YanlJamu having said: "I [ga]ve grain to Rib-Hadda", [I ga]ve

him [a servant, and da-x-x an]d skins of ... (Kus \[r,u-ta-ri-ma). [And] 40 men [con­

sumed1 the grain. W[ha]t did he give m <e>? And indeed, I deposited then· money

with Yapab-Hadda.

154 NADAV NA'A~IAN [RA 90

EA 86:14-22 Be[hold), you have [ind)eed said: "Yanbamu sent yo[u) grain." Have

not you heard? I g[ave h)im a servant, and d[a-x-x and) skins for his [ ... ). The1·e are

not ma[ni troop]s1 and not m[uch gold? and s]ilver in [my land] (Ia ra-b[a-(a)

ERfN1-' 1·]A? u Ia m[a-id KU.GI? it K)U.BABBARMES is-t(u KUR-ia]).

The source of the grain brought from the land of Y arimuta J.l was probably the Pha­

raonic lands in the J ezreel and Beth-shean valleys.15 The transport was organized by an

Egyptian commissioner and sent northwards by Canaanite ships via the por~ of Acco.

Formerly, it was brought to the Egyptian garrison city of ~umur, and a certam amount

of the grain was sold to Byblos (and possibly to other coastal towns} (EA 85:33-39, 86:31-

37). When ~umur was conquered by 'Abdi-Ashirta, the grain was shipp~d du·ectl~ to

Byblos. The transport under discussion was brought to Byblos by the sh1ps of Beuut.

Rib-Hadda gave certain gifts to Y anbamu, who organized the transport, and paid for the

grain to Y apab-Hadda of Beu·ut, who must have paid earlier for the delivered gi'ain. Rib­

Hadda got his money back from his citizens. The price of grain must h ave been quite high at this time, and Rib-Hadda kept

complaining that "our sons and daughters and the furnishings of the house are gone,

being sold in the land of Yarimuta for our provisions to keep us alive" (EA 75:11-14,

compare 74:15-18, 81:38-41, ~5:12-15, 90:36-39). It is evident ~hat some peasants were

even forced to give theu· wifes and children in payment of theu debt for the purchased

grain. This may explain the large number of servants mentioned in letter EA 120 (and

the la1·ge numbers of persons sent from Canaan to E gypt, according to ~h-e Amarna le~­t ers).l6 In the face of the grave situation, Rih-Hadda was unable (or unwillmg} to pay h1s

debt to Yapab-Hadda. The latter responded hy confiscating two Byblian ships anchOl'ed

in this harbour, an act which touched off the conflict between the two neighhoming

rulers. This reconstruction, admittedly hypothetical, fits well all the known data of the epi-

sode. It explains why the commissioners refused to intervene in the dispute, and why

Rib-Hadda was willing to transfer the confiscated goods to the Pharaoh. His position was

14. For the land of Yarimuta, sec Weber, EAT II, pp. 1153, 1159; W. Heick, Die Be•ie/umgerr Agypterrs ."' :order~ asierr im 3. urrd 2. ]altrtauserrd v. C/rr., Wiesbaden, 1971, p. 253, n. 48; F . Pintore, T ransiti di truppe e schcnu cprstola."

nella Siria egiziana dell'cta di el-Amarna, OA 11, 1972, pp. 114-15. Yarimuta is ~robab.ly a t~an,te for a large area Ill

nort hern P alestine, and may be identified with the mount/land of Yarmuta, mentwncd 111 Set1 I s stela of Beth-shean

(ANET, P· 255). Its name possibly survived in the biblical toponym J armuth in the ir.theritance of Issacl,tar ~J?~h .. 21:29). 15. N. Na'aman, Pharaonic Lands in the J ezreel Valley in the Late Bronze Age, rn i\1. Heltzer and E. ~tprnskt. (eds. ) ,

Society arrd Ecorromy iu the Eastem Mediterrarrea11 (c . 1500-1000 BC), Leuven, 1988, pp. 177-85; i\1. Livcram, Prestrge arrd

Empire Padova, 1990, pp. 238-39. 16. G. Dossin, Une nouvelle !cure d'El-Amarna, RA 31, 1934·, pp. 132-33; N. Na'aman, E conomic Aspects of the

Egyptian Occupation of Canaan, IE] 31, 1981, pp. 176-77.

1996] LOOKING FOR THE PHARAOH 'S JUDGi\IE NT 155

weak, and in order to regain part of his property he was willing to make far-reaching

concessions.

Rib-Hadda's next letters reflect his failure to regain his property. EA 114:15-17, 54-

59 reiterates what had ah·eady been said in letters 105 and 113. In letter EA 116:25-36 he

resumes his request for a judicial decision by officials sent from Egypt. " May what is due

to me [be gi]ven; it is very much ... If the king gives (it) to his servant, well and good! Or,

on the other h and, let the king take everything for himself' (lines 28-29, 34-36). The same

request is repeated in letter 118:13-20. It is clear that Rib-Hadda, believing that the Pha­

raoh was interested in obtaining his share of the confiscated property, did not lose hope

of regaining part of his property.

Letter EA 117 marks a change in Rib-Hadda's diplomatic effort s. " I have litigation

with Yapab-Hadda and .Jja<ip>. May the king send a com[ missioner to] decide between

us. Everything that is t aken from them belongs to the king. Let no one else take it for

himself. May it please the king" (lines 64-71) . .Jjaip is one of the commissioners of ~umur

who must have supported Yapab-Hadda, or even decided the case in his favour. The

court official that would come from Egypt is ask ed to decide against the mayor of Beu·ut

and the commissioner of ~umur. In view of this development, Rib-Hadda gave up all

hopes for regaining of his property and fought only for justification. The property is due

to the Pharaoh, provided the case was decided in his favour.

His new diplomatic line is clearly expressed in letter EA 119. "Now this case ( dinu)

is a case concerning my justice (din kittiya), which I have declared. All (my) property­

may the king, my lord, take [everythmg] for himself" (lines 44-49).

The arrival of 'Abdi-Hadda, the Egyptian official who was to hear and decide the

case, is discussed in letters EA 119 and 120. To persuade him to decide the case in his

favour, Rib-Hadda put the following proposal (EA 119:49-51): "[Bu]t my lord may give

the small [things)l7 to 'Abdi-Hadda, for this is not to be taken (u annu Ia laqe)."

At this stage, upon the anival of the royal messenger, Rib-Hadda prepared a detailed

_list of this things that were in Yapab-Hadda's possession (EA 119:55-59, 120:1-23). The

messenger was also sent to handle the sending of an unnamed woman, with her belongings,

to Egypt (EA 120:23-37) .

Lines 22-31 of EA 120 are badly broken, but may tentatively be restored thus:

23 ia-nu ri,-na pa-nu-te ur-si-[n]a?

24 r aC-te-[ e]r yi-tu-ra-na-si

17. T he restoration was already suggested by B. Bonkamp, Die Bibel im Lichte cler Keilsclrriflforsclwng, Rcckling­

ha usen, 1939, p. 274, n. l.

156 NADAV NA'Al\IAN [RA 90

25 tl. li-qi[t]hi·• nita"";

26 1 me ku.gi [u1la?·q[a?-(a}]

27 &a-ba-ht-ma zi-[ka?-re? tllqa-du1

28 a-[m-se ["'ia-pa-'1im? tt] 29 dan-na u ia-nu [h1] 30 sa-a yi-pu-su d[i-nu]

31 it-ta-Slt "'ir-dim [ dumu]

Notes to the transcription

Line 23: The reading un (basta)-si-[n]a was already suggested by B~nkan~p \~ee note 17), P· 275. An alternative reading is UR (basta) S(I]G, ( damqa) , "dignified (and) good-lookmg (g•rl) . I . d .

L' 24· Bonkamp collated the tablet in 1900, and in his book (p. 275, n. 1} he read the t m sign as

[L](J •t~cg tiJat "Die Nicderschrift, die ich mir damals anfertigte, zeigt ausscr den Querkeilen besonders , no m 1 · · F tl e hal form

noch die drei Senkrechten .. . " His observation supports my suggestion to rea< an 1r s•gn. •or 1e v r

alter, sec EA 148:36; 149:13, 31, 72. . ,. _ Line 24: The mistaken verbal form yitftra1w is probably due to a conflat1on of the verbal forms) Llura

and yit11TI11la. · 1 ") s Lines 26-27: Compare EA 254:16-17 yilm/u kar~iya habah1ma ("He denounces me unJust y · ee

Moran, P· 307, 11• 2. . EA 116 R'b H dd h com1>lained of

Lines 27-28: The restoration is ad sensum. Already m letter , . 1 - a a as . , YapalJ-Hadda's treatment to his m~ssenger (lines 27-28}: ":Vl~en my man arnved, he ~ound ~Ill:· f 'Abdi­

Line 31: Since Bin-azimi played no part in the negouauons, I assume that he \\aS the at 1cr o

Hadda.

Translation of lines 22-39

90-100 maidservants (and) manse1·vants are missing. Beforehand, I ordered the

return of the best-looking among them, to bring her back. And the gif[t]s of the men

is one hundred (shekels) of gold. [But Yapab.-Hadda] to[ok] unjustly the m[en ,

including?] her brother, [and] he is powerful, and there is no [one] who will b1·ing a

c[ase] against him. The king sent 'Abdi-Hadda [son of] Bin-azimi to fetch her, that

she will ente1· service (tidaggalu pana). And to 'Abdi-Hadda the king said, "Send

her things to her." And the king should know (y[i]-di), upon hearing [the case], no

decision was announced.

The connection between the best-looking (or, dignified and good-looking) girl and

"her things" to the episode needs explaining. It seems to me that the girl was selected as

a means by which Rib-Hadda's property, now in the hands of YapalyHadda, would be

delivered to the Pharaoh. Moran noted (p. 200, n. 13) the resemblance of this episode to

the royal letter EA 99, in which an unknown vassal was ordered to prepa1·e his dau ghter

1996] LOOKING FOH THE PHARAOH'S J UDG~IENT 157

for the king. Along with the girl he was to send her contribut ions: 20 fil'st-class slaves,

silver, cha1·iots, and first-class horses. The list of objects prepared by Rib-Hadda has

exactly the same function: bride-price (teryatu) sent by Rib-Hadda with the girl, who is

to enter the royal harem.

There was one obstacle to the execution of the plan: the judicial case had not yet

been decided. This is what Rib -Hadda stat es in lines 37-39. There should be an official

hearing and a royal decision in his favolll', a nd only then can the girl and the property be

sent to Egypt.

This is the last reference to the case in the correspondence of Rib-Hadda. Obviously,

the royal judgment was in his favour and so he obtained the justice which, as he asserted,

was the object of his efforts. He made the most of his lost property: he gained the favour

of the Pharaoh as a loyal vassal who sent h im a girl with a rich dowry (compare

EA 99:16-20).

But the case did not end there. Yapab.-Hadda died shortly after the royal decision,

and was replaced by Ammunira. In a letter sent to the Pharaoh, the new mayor wrote as

follows (EA 143:10-35):

The Icing, my lord, [sent] to his servant and his dirt at his feet. As to his order,

wherever that which was commanded by the Icing, my lord, the breath of my life,

may be, I shall search her o[ut] and send her on to the king, my lord, the breath of

my life. More[ove]r, note how, as soon as the ships of the king, my lord, [th)at have

sailed to Beirut come in, I shall send the maidservant of the king, my lord. Like one

danlara&-ornament (tar-[t]a-<ra> · ~a!J) withi[n a ... ], so is Beirut to the Icing, my

lord, and I am like a wanner t ·0tat?ralm) of the horses of the king, my lord. [ ... ] to

t he king, my lord. [Just as the king, m]y [lord, the brea]th of my li[fe, ordered?], I

shall s[ end her i]n the sh[ips of the king], my lord.

For the construct ion kima ... kinanna ... in lines 23-26, compare EA 105:8-10, 139:8-

.9, 195:18-23, 232:16-20.

It is evident that the maidservant was still in Beirut a short time after Y apal.J.­

H adda's death. Ammunira, who h ad just ascended the th1·one and whose position was

delicate, was willing to obey the royal order and send the maidservant to Egypt. Whether

the promise included the whole bride-price, or only a par t of it, 1·emains unknown.

158 NADAV NA'Ai\IAN [RA 90

CONCLUSIONS

The judgment of the Pharaoh in the affai1·s of his Canaanite vassals is well illus­

trated by the two episodes under discussion. The king had his own order of priorities and

was not interested in the cmrent affairs in his Asiatic province. Those he left to his com­

missioners in Canaan. He may have intervened in major events, or in affairs that could

increase his property or prestige. Rib-Hadda understood t his , and tried to incite the Pha­

raoh to act by emphasizing the loss of prestige caused by his silence, in view of what hap­

pened in Canaan. The two episodes discu ssed in this article show how Rib-Hadda tried to

entice the Pharaoh to make decisions by emph asizing the prospect of an easy profit. In

the fu·st episode he has stressed the great wealth of Tyre, and in t he second he pointed out

the way to deliver the confiscated property to the king. No doubt this was the standard

of the time;8 and Rib-Hadda was no different from other mayors in the 1·egion. The

decisions of the sun god were, to a certain extent, motivated by the prospect of profit,

and those who knew how to manipulate him, and what to offer in a given moment, were

able to direct his judgment in their favour.

ABSTRACT

NAO.AV NA"AMA!\", Faculty of Humanities,

Tel A viv U11iversity, P.O. B. 39010, Ramal Aviv, 69978 Tel Aviv, Israel.

The article discusses two episodes in which Rib-Hadda of Byblos requested an intervention and judgment {di1m) by the Pharaoh. The first appeal was made after a coup d'Etat inTyre, in which his brother and his brother-in-law, the ruler ofTyre, with his wife and children, were killed (EA 89). A second request for a royal decision was made when the ruler of Beirut confiscated two Byhlian ships, probably to collect an unpaid debt (EA 105, 113). The chain of events of the two episodes is reconstructed in detail, and Rib­Hadda's cunning diplomatic manipulations are made clear, partly by new readings suggested for difficul t passages (in particular, letters EA 85, 89, 105, 120, 143). The Pharaoh's policy in t he affairs of Canaan was, to a certain extent, motivated by the prospect of profit. Rih-Hadda realized tlus, and in each case he tried to move the Pharaoh to decide in his favour by emphasizing that his decisions might gain him easy profits.

18. A well-known Mesopotamian analogy is the sending of (iilu ("bribe") or su/m/iuu ("gift"), for political and judicial objectives. Sec J. J. Finkelstein, The i\liddle Assyrian su/mll11u-Texts, JAOS 72, 1952, pp. 77-80; H. Tadmor and i\1. Cogan, Ahaz and T iglath-pileser in the Book of Kings: Historiographic Considerations, Bib 60, 1979, pp. 499-502, with earlier literature inn. 34; i\1. Liverani, Kitru, kntaru , Mesopotamia 17, 1982, pp. 61-63.

1996] LOOKI NG FOR TI-IE PHARAOH'S JUDGi\IENT 159

RESUME

'u Cet a~ticle etudie deux episodes_ dans lesquels Rib-Hadda de By~los reclama une intervention et un J gement (dum) du pharaon. Le premier appel fut fait a pres un coup d'Etat a Tyr a d 1 f ' et son beau frer 1 . d , u cours uque son rcre d • e, e souveram e Tyr, furent tues avec sa femme et scs enfants (EA 89) U d

emande de decision royale fut faite quand le souverain de Beyrouth confisca deux navires deB b~e sccon e blement en vue de rembourser une dette restee impayee (EA lOS 113) L' I • d , ~ os, proba­deux e is d . , . . ' · enc Iamement cs evenements des

. P o es est reconstltue en detail, et les hab1les manipulations diplomatiques de Rib-Hadd , 1 · , partte, par de nouvelles lectures su , , d . . a ec auees, en 105 120 143) L . . ggerees pour es passages diffictles (en particulier, lcs lettres EA 85 89 par,la p;rspec~iv: x:'~~;~:s d~l~h:;a~; d~:•s les affaires_ de Canaan etait, jusqu'a uncertain point, mo;ive; t I ·. - a a, ayant compns, essaya dans chaque cas de pousser le pharaon a ranc Ier en sa faveur en soulignant que ses decisions pourraient lui procurer des profits faciles.