Of course, Rameses chose to depict, on the walls of his temple, a stunning victory over the Hittite empire, thus the Egyptian “part” of the treaty reflected that. The Hittite “part” of the treaty made no mention of any past aggression with the Egyptians. Both sides wanted to show that they were family. For example, in a part of the Egyptian text, it says: “But in the time of Mutwattalli, the great chief of Hatti, my brother, he fought side-by-side with [Ramesse-mi-Amun] great ruler of Egypt.”
Also, we must analyze the effect of the Haberu peoples on Egypt. What needs to be understood is that a group called the Hyksos invaded and conquered Egypt5. They were a Semitic group not unlike the Hebrew [Haberu] peoples. After the revolt, led by Kamos and Ahmose, the Hyksos and Hebrew peoples that had enjoyed relative security now found themselves under Egyptian rule. The Egyptians were taking back their country. They could not very well let them [the Semitic peoples] flee into the Sinai where they might rise to be a threat again.
One side sent the other a draft of their terms to read and ratify and vise-versa. It was also believed that one-thousand Hittite and Egyptian gods witnessed the treaties signing. These gods witnessed the signing to ensure the life and health of the treaty. Furthermore, it aided in allowing the peoples of both nations to believe in the treaty if their national gods approved. The gods approving assured national pride, even though both rulers claimed Kadesh as their victory.
Even though the battle was a military draw, what if one side would have won the battle? Believe that if the Hittites had won the battle, the Exodus story would have probably been deleted and the text would not have seen it Greek alliteration…it would still be in Hittite. Furthermore, I believe western thought would have changed had the battle gone the way of a Hittite victory. The Israelites would have been subject to the Hittite polytheistic traditions thus losing Judaism, Christians would have never came about as the climate would have not been right for its coming.
This treaty was different in many ways. Unlike today's treaties, both sides did not have an advanced copy to read over and sign. One must remember that the battle supersedes the treaty in importance. This is because it ushers in the phase of independence for the region now known as Palestine. Nevertheless, this document provides a stunningly accurate look at “international” relations.
1 Decisive Battles- “Rameses II” Television Program. A&E Networks. October 15th, 2004
2 Decisive Battles- “Rameses II” Television Program. A&E Networks. October 15th, 2004
3 From: Tour Egypt.net http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/treaty.htm April 15, 2005
4 From Tour Egypt.net http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/treaty.htm April 15, 2005
5 Hyksos invaded and conquered Egypt in about 1680 B.C.E.
