Citatio: G. Torri, A. Carnevale & L. Warbinek, hethiter.net/: CHiL (31-10-2025)

Introduction to the Corpus of Hittite Laws (CHiL)

Introduction | Previous Editions | The Project | Editorial Notes

The aim of the Project is to provide a renewed digital edition of the various manuscripts belonging to the corpus of the so-called Hittite Laws (CTH 291 and CTH 292), the earliest copies of which date back to the 16th century BCE.

The corpus of Hittite Laws is divided into two distinct series, differentiated on the basis of their respective colophons, which bear as titles the expressions takku LÚ-aš (“if a man,” CTH 291) and takku ^GIŠGEŠTIN-aš (“if a vine,” CTH 292). These expressions correspond to the opening formula of the first line of each tablet (Waal W. 2015a, 258-261). The laws are structured through a series of paragraphs, each composed of a protasis, which presents the legal case, and an apodosis, which contains the penalty or fine. The first series (CTH 291) is attested in about fifty cuneiform fragments, while the second (CTH 291) survives in sixty-six, amounting to a total of more than two-hundred laws. Both series have been transmitted through numerous manuscripts, inscribed either on a single tablet or on two tablets; a lenticular label, ABoT 1.52, records the mention of the first series being preserved on three tablets. Current scholarship generally considers the two series as parts of a single corpus, in which the second may represent the continuation of the first. In this case, ABoT 1.52 might contain the first line of each of the roughly two-hundred laws preserved in CTH 291 and CTH 292. However, although the paragraphs in both series follow the same protasis/apodosis structure, there is still a lack of study on the context in which the corpus was compiled and transmitted, as well as on the way it evolved over time.

The syntax of the law is characterized by the use of conditional clauses for each case under consideration: the specific protasis, introduced by takku “if”, is followed in the apodosis by the corresponding penalty or sanction. This type of formulation is not an original feature of the Hittite text but rather a syntactic structure widely attested in the law codes of ancient Western Asia, from the Code of Hammurabi to Deuteronomy. The purpose of such formulation was clearly to cover all legal cases —or at least the majority of them— through the progressive use of conditional sequences. In all likelihood, the Hittite law corpus preserves earlier customary practices of the society it sought to regulate through specific norms and punishments.

The tablets date from the Old to the Late Hittite periods and thus exhibit variations and differences both in content and in linguistic-grammatical features. The earliest version known to us already refers to a previous legal phase, the modifications (or even “reforms”) of which are emphasized by the Hittites themselves through the formulas karū “formerly” and kinun=a “but now”. In such instances, the corresponding fines —expressed in units of silver weight (shekels and minas)— are reduced (often halved), while capital punishments are gradually replaced by severe penalties and compensations. It has been observed that these changes —and the emphasis the Hittite themselves placed upon them— reflect not only a desire to display clemency but, above all, the practical necessity of preserving the community's labor force.

The author of the promulgation and subsequent revisions of the Hittite law is not explicity mentioned in the extant tablets, all of which lack the incipit and begin directly with the first law. The colophon of the text KBo 6.6, belonging to CTH 291, refers to the “Father of His Majesty”: “Second tablet, completed. 'If a man', of the father of His Majesty (ŠA ABI ^dUTU-ŠI)”, recalling the structure of colophons in annalistic text (Waal W. 2015a, 215-219), in which the name of the king to whom autorship of the document is attributed is expressed in the genitive. Indeed, although certain sections confer legal authority on the king and the king's father in specific disputes, it never becomes entirely clear who acted as the actual administrator of justice, which was probably delegated to local institutions (i.e., the council of elders ^LÚ.MEŠŠU.GI, HL 71).

From a social perspective, the Hittite laws offer valuable insights, beginning with the distinction between “non-free” men and women (Sum. ARAD/GÉME) and “free” men and women (Hittite noun arawa-, adjective arawanni-, HW² I/A, 251-258). The latter are identified by the Akkadian ELLU(M)/ELLETU, a term whose primary meaning “pure” in the Mesopotamian context takes on in Hittite documents the legal and social sense of “free” (AHW I, 204-205; CAD E, 102-105). Although this “free/non-free” differentiation clearly emerges, it is by no means monolithic: instances of social mobility —mostly downward— are attested, raising the question of whether the “non-free” should be regarded as literal “slaves” or “servants”, or rather as individuals belonging to a lower social stratum that the fully “free”. Finally, the Hittite laws regulated with notable precision many of the same matters covered by modern civil codes, including marriage, divorce, dowry, property, and offspring. Despite presupposing the predominance of the male gender, the laws did not only explicity mention and consider women —a nontrivial feature in ancient societies— but also granted them a range of guarantees and rights enshrined in the legislation itself.

Previous Editions

The editio princeps of the Hittite Laws is more than a century old (B. Hrozný, Code Hittite provenant de l'Asie Mineure (vers 1350 av.J.-C.) 1re partie: transcription, traduction française, Paris 1922) and subsequent editions appeared only years later. E. Neufeld (The Hittite Laws, London 1951) provided an annotated translation in both English and Hebrew, while the first critical edition in German is owed to J. Friedrich (Die hethitischen Gesetze. Transkription, Übersetzung, sprachliche Erläuterungen und vollständinges Wörterverzeichnis, DMOA 7, Leiden 1959). A few years later, F. Imparati (Le leggi ittite. Con prefazione di Pugliese Carratelli G., Roma 1964) published an Italian edition of the Hittite laws, whereas R. Haase (Die Fragmente der hethitischen Gesetze. Transkribiert und nach Paragraphen geordnet, Wiesbaden 1968) attempted a reorganization of the newly discovered fragments. Between the 1970s and 1990s, a significant number of contributions related to individual aspects of the Hittite Laws appeared, focusing on social, economic, or linguistic issues. Finally, in 1997, H. A. Hoffner Jr.’s The Laws of the Hittites appeared, a substantial critical edition in English that updated and completed Friedrich’s work with the most recent epigraphic discoveries and advances in research.

The Project

The Corpus of Hittite Laws (CHiL) project seeks to produce a new critical edition of Hittite Laws (CTHs 291 and 292). This will be complemented by philological commentary and cultural-historical analysis, with the results made available through the Hethitologie-Portal Mainz (HPM). A primary objective is to produce a detailed digital edition of the manuscripts, utilizing the tool of Comparatio to bring greater clarity to the textual tradition of these significant compositions. Another key goal is to provide a robust foundation for lexical and thematic studies of Hittite Laws. Despite the value of previous contributions, many questions remain unsolved, particularly regarding the meanings of certain technical terms that reflect the roles and obligations of various social categories within Middle and Late Bronze Age Hittite society. Such uncertainties are mirrored in the technical vocabulary, which often lacks precise parallels in the corpus of Hittite texts.

Finally, we decided to provide an Italian translation of the laws for the CHiL project. This arduous choice was made for several reasons: first, the awareness that the translation of many legal cases as well as punishments requires a deep technical lexical knowledge to emphasize different shades of meaning; second, the agility and speed that only the native language could provide in translation work; and third, the pleasure to carry on the tradition of Fiorella Imparati exactly 60 years after her Florentine edition.

Editorial Notes

For this edition of the Hittite laws we have chosen to adopt a minimalist approach toward the lack of text and related integrations, with the aim of remaining as faithful as possible to the preserved text. Therefore, we have set aside extensive integrations in square brackets to reaffirm our commitment to the original tablets. This choice was encouraged by the tools available for the onlince critical edition: the Comparatio of the versions, as well as the Partitura of any version with all its manuscripts, allows one to note the different lacks preserved among the texts and deduce possible integrations.

The editorial policy of fidelity to the written text has been observed as closely as possible in the translation. In particular, any translation of a term has been kept as consistent as possible throughout CTH 291, version after version, specifying any possible variations in the footnotes. For this reason, the first and most general meaning of a term has often been preferred in order to cover all the nuances of meaning it could take on in that or other laws. For instance, here are the translation of some specific cases:

ARAD/GÉME: “servant” —— where the literal meaning “slave” seemed too restrictive for the social role probably held within the laws by these subjugated characters.

A.ŠÀ^(ḪI.A): “field” —— even though we know that in some cases it can mean “agricultural property”. The question is linked to the presence or absence of the plural determiner according to a discontinuous usage that pushes for a collective interpretation of the term, also in light of the verb form in the third person singular.

É: “house” or “property” —— even though we know that in some specific situations it can take on the meaning of “family”, “estate”, or “household”.

URU: “city” —— even though we know that the laws most likely refer to local communities structured as villages or settlements of various kinds.

Principal Investigator

Giulia Torri

Staff members

Livio Warbinek
Antonio Carnevale

Collaborators

Thesaurus Linguarum Hethaeorum digitalis (TLH^dig)
The Corpus of Hittite Festival Rituals (technical support and digital development)
Marta Pallavidini (Frei Universität Berlin)
Marco Ammazzini, Michelangelo Donnini, Martina Incani, Students of Hittitology (University of Florence, academic years 2023/2024 and 2024/2025); Dr. Mariateresa Albanese.

This edition is a spin-off of the SoRMHA project “Supply of Resources and their Management in Hittite Anatolia” (CUP B53D23031000001) funded within the framework of Bando PRIN PNRR 2022 (MUR, D.D. n.1409, 14/09/2022) within the National Recovery and Resilience Plan (NRPP), Mission 4 —Component 2, From Research to Enteprise— Investement 1.1 “Fund for the National Research Programme (PNR) and Projects of Significant National Interest (PRIN)”, funded by the European Union, NextGenerationEU, and based at the University of Florence.