EXCAVATIONS AT BOGHAZ-KEUI — WINCKLEE AND PUCHSTEIN. 689 



(though not to vacate) the city, and finally summoned him to appear 

 at court and defend himself. After many subterfuges and delays 

 he went to Egypt and succeeded in exonerating himself. But the 

 accusations of his opponents that he was in sympathy with Chatti 

 were as little unfounded as in the case of the Prince of Kinza. 

 Subbiluliuma and his successors themselves state that Aziri at last 

 became a faithful vassal of Chatti and so also remained his succes- 

 sors. The conditions of his country are touched upon in several 

 royal edicts and treaties — composed in Hittite and Assyrian — so 

 that we obtain a kind of chronicle of Amurri from the. time of 

 Subbiluliuma and Aziri down to that of their great-grandchildren. 

 Thus Mursil, addressing Abi-Teshub, the grandson of Aziri, says : 



Aziri, thy grandfattier, rebelled against my father. My father reduced him 

 to submission. When the liings of Nuhashi and Kinza rose against my father, 

 thy grandfather Aziri did not rise. When * * * ^y father made war 

 upon his enemies, thy grandfather Aziri liliewise made war on them * * * 

 And my father gave protection to Aziri and his laud * * * 300 (shekel) 

 of gold my father imposed upon thy grandfather as a present and tribute. He paid 

 them annually, never withheld them, never angered him * * * ^g thy grand- 

 father Aziri behaved toward my father, so he behaved toward me. When the 

 kings of Nuhashi and Kinza again rose against me, thy grandfather Aziri and 

 thy father Du-Teshub did not join them. 



In a document, written in the Hittite language, belonging to the 

 time of Dudhalia, the name of one of the Amurri Kings, Benteshina, 

 is the equivalent of the Assyrian Put-ahi, from putu^ front, and ahu, 

 brother. The name Benteshina is not " Hittite " in the narrower 

 sense (Chatti), but belongs to the other of the two known lan- 

 guages — the one which until now was designated as " Mitani." It is 

 therefore certain that the Amurri princes at that time bore names 

 in this language. 



From this fact maj^ be derived conclusions of great significance for 

 the ethnology of the countries here discussed. Until now the Semitic 

 constituents of the Syrian population, sufficiently known, were con- 

 sidered as the only or predominating factors in w^estern Asia. The 

 new information compels us to give also the other element, the " Hit- 

 tite," its due importance, and allows us to distinguish new components 

 in that general and indefinite ethnic name. 



The designation " Mitani " has been a provisional one. It can be 

 now established that the propagation of that language, and also of 

 the people, extended from the borders of Babylonia to Egypt. 

 This propagation must have been old. xVccording to a Babylonian 

 chronicle a great conquest by a people bearing the name of Chatti 

 took place at the end of the first Babylonian dynasty; that is, soon 

 after 2000 B. C, or, at the latest, at 1700 B. C. From this time on 

 the name Chatti must be connected with the populations that overran 



