Cyprus & Alashiya

041

The following letter recently surfaced in the antiquities collection of a noble European family and is published here for the first time. The brackets indicate illegible text that has been restored by the translator.—Ed.

[Say] to the [goo]d Ambassador [Rob]ert Merrillees, my fath[er]: message of E[ric] Cline, your son. For me all goes well, and for you may all go well. For your household, for your wife, [f]or your family, for your horses, your chariots, and in your country, may all go ve[ry] well. For my household, for my wife, for my family, for my horses, my chariots, and in my country, all goes very well.

With all due respect and apologies, since I like and admire you very much personally and professionally, since you have been a guest in my house, and since I have been a guest in your [hous]e, I am concerned that your position that Alashiya was not ancient Cyprus is outdated and is very much a dead horse, or at least a horse that should be led out to pasture, preferably in the northern Levant, and left there.

Over the past few years, I have read the same set of articles and books [as you], all filled with new data pertaining to the possible location of ancient Alashiya. Unfortunately, I have reached precisely the opposite conclusion as you. In my opinion, the recent discovery of letters at Ugarit from the king and governor of Alashiya¹ and the recent petrographic analyses indicating that the clay of Amarna tablets from the king of Alashiya matches clay beds found only on Cyprus,² indicate that Alashiya was, or was part of, ancient Cyprus. The evidence—both scientific and textual—indicates that the island of Cyprus and Alashiya were one and the same.

I must say, though, that I am not surprised by your position, and that I admire 042[your] consistency, for you have argued this same position—that Cyprus was not ancient Alash[iya]—for the past thirty years. I went through graduate school and several decades beyond, all the while reading your arguments and the rebuttals to your position published by numerous scholars, including my own mentor James Muhly, with whom you loved to spar—academically speaking—over the years.

[Yo]u also maintain that we should not fall prey to the desire to link ancient names with ancient places. I, on the other hand, see no reason why we should not link ancient names with ancient places if the evidence suggests that such a connection is likely. It is more reasonable to link Alashiya with Cyprus than to look for an as-yet-undiscovered kingdom somewhere in the northern Levant. Your argument calls to mind that used in the search for another “lost” Bronze Age kingdom—that of Ahhiyawa, which I have no problem identifying with the Mycenaeans of mainland Greece, but which a minority of scholars would place in Thrace, precisely because there is room up there for an as-yet-undiscovered kingdom.

So, too, for Kaptara (Caphtor) and Keftiu, which I would argue are Bronze Age designations (in Mesopotamian cuneiform and Egyptian hieroglyphics) for Minoan Crete, but which a minority of scholars would prefer, ironically, to see as Cyprus.

I cannot present much new evidence that you have missed, for your research is, as always, extremely thor[ough.] For that, my father, I shall never cease to admire [you]. However, there are indeed natural harbors on Cyprus—I have seen them for myself. There is even one near the Bronze Age site of Ayios Dhimitrios (where I had the pleasure of being part of the excavation team in 1983 and 1987), on the coast at the mouth of the Vasilikos Valley, which is itself adjacent to the Kalavasos copper mines.

Moreover, I hardly need [to] point out that Yuval Goren and his colleagues found that clay sources located not far from Ayios Dhimitrios match the clay used in Amarna Letter EA 37—a letter sent from the king of Alashiya to the king of Egypt—and that they have suggested Ayios Dhimitrios may have been the main seat of power on Cyprus during the early 14th century B.C.³ And, pray, do not forget the Middle Bronze Age tombs that were found in nearby Kalavasos Village, which indicate an earlier phase of Bronze Age settlement in the area perhaps going back to the 19th century B.C., or that there are even earlier Neolithic and Chalcolithic settlements in the valley as well.⁴ Would that not fit the chronological period and geographical location for Alashiya (the city) as described in Akkadian, Egyptian, Hittite and Ugaritic texts?

But there is no need for additional evidence, for I would have thought that the most recent findings—of the letters from the Alashiyan ki[ng] Kushmeshusha found at Ugarit and of the petrographic analysis of the Alashiyan letters found at Amarna—would convince you to abandon your long-held position. Instead, you send as a greetin[g] gift one red her[r]ing, dismissing Yuval Goren and his colleagues for not examining sufficient samples and not being acquainted with the geology of the northeastern Levant. On the contrary, I found the full evidence laid out in their magisterial volume most convincing,⁵ but perhaps I am [still] young and na•ve.

043

Of course, it is possible that Alashiya lay in the northern Levant, as you arg[ue], but it is more plausible to suggest that Alashiya was ancient Cyprus, or a part thereof. From the ancient textual evidence we know many things about ancient Alashiya, but the three most relevant points here are:

(1) Ancient Alashiya had significant copper sources, and the Amarna letters sent from Alashiya mention large quantities of copper and specifically mention the “making” (that is, mining or smelting) of copper (Amarna Letters EA 33–36).

(2) Ancient Alashiya apparently had access to the sea, for it had quite a navy at times during the Bronze Age; for instance, a text of the Hittite king Suppiluliuma II, dating to the late 13th or early 12th century B.C., states that he defeated ships of Alashiya in battle at sea three times (KBo XII 38).

(3) Ancient Alashiya was located near Egypt, Ugarit in northern Syria, and both the Hittite and Lukka homelands in Anatolia.⁶

My father, I herewith send to you, as my greeting gift, Occam’s Razor. Behold, the simplest solution is [the] most likely. Cyprus, not the northern Levantine coast, was most probably ancient Alashiya, for the only coastal area near Egypt, Ugarit, and the Hittite and Lu[k]ka homelands that had large native sources of copper consistently being worked in the Late Bronze Age was Cyprus.

Where are your copper sources in the northern Levant? I know [of] none to match those of Cyprus. Perhaps I am easily confused, but do not the [very] points that you make regarding the copper sources on Cyprus help support my argument that Cyprus is Alashiya?⁷

And further, my father, why do you doubt that Cypriot copper reached Mari during the 18th century B.C.? Because no Cypriot objects have been found at the site? Does the cup always accompany the ingot? Do not objects perish and disintegrate over time? Are not imported raw materials [frequently] converted into objects of local design? No Minoan objects have been found at Mari [either]. Yet the same texts tell us that goods from Kaptara (Caphtor) were reaching Mari, and even beyond, to fabled Babylon and Hammurabi—he of the famous lawcode—at the same time as the copper from Alashiya.⁸ Do you not believe the words which our [fore]fathers themselves wrote? Or do you [also] argue that Kaptara/Keftiu is not Minoan Crete?

044

When one adds the new data indicating that the clay of the Amarna letters from Alashiya matches the clay found in beds on Cyprus, near the major Bronze Age Cypriot cities of Ayios Dhimitrios and Alassa, it seems clear that Cyprus (or a part thereof) and Alashiya must have been one and the same. My fa[ther], there comes a point when “plausible” and “logical” outweigh “possible,” and this seems to be that time.

But even I [your son] will admit that it is difficult to let go of an argument that one has defended for decades. In sympathy, then, I would ask you to write [me] and tell me what it would take to persuade you that Cyprus, or part of it, was ancient Alashiya? Whatever you request, I will send [it].

What if an inscription, an archive of tablets, or a letter from the Egyptian or Ugaritic king is found during future excavations at the Cypriot sites of Ayios Dhimitrios or Alassa? Could such a discovery be enough to demonstrate that Cyprus and Alashiya were one and the same? Would that please your hea[rt]?

In the end I must ask, my father, does any of this matter? Does anyone, besides a few dusty [archaeo]logists such as [our]selves, care whether Cyprus and ancient Alashiya were one and the same? My [f]ather, I say to you that the answer is “yes” … and the intense scholarly debates over such seemingly trivial details are a reflection of our need and desire to reconstruct the ancient world accurately. I salute you, my fa[ther], for your tenacious defense, but I fall at the feet of my lord, my Sun, seven times and seven times [over] and call upon you to admit that the new data renders your long-held position increasingly less plausible.

So an alliance should [be ma]de between the two of us, and my messen[g]ers should go to you and your messengers should come to me. And behold, I (also) send to you with my messen[ger] 100 talents of gold, two kukkubu-containers of sweet oil, and one [beam] of boxwood.

The following letter recently surfaced in the antiquities collection of a noble European family and is published here for the first time. The brackets indicate illegible text that has been restored by the translator.—Ed. [Say] to the [goo]d Ambassador [Rob]ert Merrillees, my fath[er]: message of E[ric] Cline, your son. For me all goes well, and for you may all go well. For your household, for your wife, [f]or your family, for your horses, your chariots, and in your country, may all go ve[ry] well. For my household, for my wife, for my family, for my horses, my chariots, and […]