Labarnas I was the King of the Hittites from circa 1680 BC to circa 1650 BC.

Labarnas is the traditional founder of the Hittite Old Kingdom (flourished c. 1700–c. 1500 BC), though this is not certain. What little is known about him is culled mainly from the Edict of Telipinus, which states that he had his capital at Kussara in central Anatolia, extended his rule south to the Mediterranean coast, and installed his sons as governors in several cities including Tuwanuwa, Hupisna, Landa, and Lusna (these cities are unknown and thought to perhaps be Tyana, Cybistra, Laranda, and Lystra). Whether he was the first ruler of the kingdom or not, he was responsible for laying the groundwork for the Hittite empire that was to come.

Some recent scholars have suggested that there is evidence Labarnas was actually a title of the early Hittite rulers, rather than a personal name; and that many centuries later, Hittite historians mistook references to Labarnas as being a separate king before Hattusili I. According to this theory, Labarnas and Hattusili were really one and the same.

Son-in-Law(?) of PU-Šarruma

PU-Šarruma's intentions for the succession to his throne were temporarily frustrated by the actions of his servants and chief officers, who chose to recognize the rights of his son Papahdilmah instead, and therefore placed him on the throne instead of Labarna. Labarna, however, did not concede the point, and a struggle for the throne ensued between the party of Papahdilmah and that of Labarna. Nothing is known of the course of the conflict other than that Labarna emerged victorious and took the throne willed to him by his father-in-law. Papahdilmah's supporters were to pay a heavy price, so that years later, when Labarna's successor was himself proclaiming a new successor to the throne, he recalled Labarna's foes, and asked about them,

"But how many years went by? How many escaped? Where are the houses of the Chiefs? Did they not die?" (Succession Proclamation of Hattušili I §20)

What sort of a reign Papahdilmah might have had can only be speculated upon. But we know clearly how future generations of Hittites felt about the reign of Labarna. His name (If indeed it was his name and not his title) became synonomous with Hittite kingship. Just as later the Roman emperors called themselves "Caesar" after the name of their first emperor, so future Hittite Great Kings called themselves "Labarna". They certainly had just cause to do so. Under Labarna's rule, the Hittite state would emerge from being a small but powerful competing city state to the unquestioned master of much of central, northern, and southern Anatolia. The lands that Labarna would conquer would become the core lands from which future Hittite Great Kings would expand their growing state. His reign came to represent the beginning of a golden era that, during the troubled period that would follow the murder of his second successor Great King Muršili I, would come to represent the ideal of Hittite rule. This ideal would be expressed by a future Great King in the following words,

"Formerly Labarna was Great King. His [son]s, his [brother]s, as well as his in-laws, his relatives, and his troops were united.

"The land was small, but on whatever campaign he went, he held the enemy land in subjugation by (his) might.

"He destroyed each of the lands - he overwhelmed the lands and made them borders of the sea." (The Proclamation of Telipinu, §§1-3)

"The sea" mentioned here probably means at least the Black Sea, and probably the Mediterraenean as well, since later evidence would seem to indicate that, by the time of Labarna's successor, the Hittites already controlled the land of Adaniya (modern Cilicia). If this is true, then Labarna must already have begun what would become a well established pattern in Hittite rule of distinguishing the lands closer to the capital from those further away. For Labarna is further stated to have sent out his sons to rule in the lands of Hupišna (Cl. Cybistra, T. Ereğli), Tuwanuwa (Cl. Tyana, T. Bor), Nenašša, Landa, Zallara, Paršuhanta (Purušhanda), and Lušna (Cl. Lystra) (For discussion of place identifications see Garstang & Gurney (1959) pg. 63f.). None of these places are believed to have been on a coast, and can all probably be localized to what would soon be considered the land of Hatti proper and the Lower Land. Under Labarna's rule, the great cities of these lands were said to have prospered. The more distant coastal lands, not mentioned as being given over to his sons, must therefore have been controlled by some other means.

The empire after the conquests of Labarna I. The extent of Arzawa, and therefore the western reach of the empire, is unknown. Similar difficulties exist on trying to determine the other borders with any level of confidence.

As well as Labarna's conquest of the core territory of Hatti, the Lower Land, and the northern and southern coastal regions, it also seems that Labarna was able to expand his reach westward, into the land of Arzawa, part of which he was able to exert control over, as revealed incidentally in an anecdote stemming from his reign. It is unknown how far east Arzawa extended at this time. This rather sudden and vast expansion of Hittite power in Anatolia can only be wondered at until further information comes into our hands. It also raises the question whether or not the Hittite expansion interrupted, or inspired, similar centralizing tendencies elsewhere in Anatolia. Throughout the remainder of the history of the unified Hittite state, no state rose up to rival the might of Hatti in the central Anatolian lands. Only when one reaches the coastal regions of Anatolia, excluding the northern Black Sea coast, does one begin to see the development of states capable of rivalling that of Hatti. In the south, the land of Adaniya would briefly rise to the status of an equal of Hatti, although subsequent historical developments there soon destroyed that land's independence.

A closer watch must be kept on the western coastal region. For it is only here that a true, long standing rival kingdom rose up to challenge Hittite supremecy. The early history of the west remains obscure, but what very little evidence we have suggests that, like central Anatolia, the history of the west begins with a variety of fragmented, competing polities. Very little can be said about them, though. In the southwest, there were multiple polities that the Hittites came to group together as the Lukka Lands. In the north, there seemed to be a large number of similarly small polities with shifting coalitions or loyalties. The central region is not as clear. The early Hittites seemed to refer to all of the west in general as the land of Luwiya. But, even from the very beginning of the Old Kingdom, we find references to this same area as Arzawa. The importance of Arzawa in relation to the other western kingdoms cannot be properly ascertained at this time, but we must take note of this kingdom as soon as possible, since it would be the only western kingdom to emerge capable of competing with the Hittites for prominence in Anatolia.

The future history of this kingdom must be hinted at in order to try to understand its development, and its ultimate failure in the face of the Hittite threat. Its failure is almost certainly related to its inability to centralize its authority to the same extent that the Hittites achieved. Although the Lukka lands seem to have been early on subsumed under its authority, they never lost their identity, and when the kingdom of Arzawa disappeared several centuries later, they were able to reassert their former identity. More troublesome were the northern coastal regions, which Arzawa was never able to effectively control for an extended period of time. Our evidence for the nature of rule in all of these regions is, unfortunately, largely nonexistant until the Hittites moved in en force much later on. We have somewhat earlier evidence from those lands which lay in the zone of competition between Arzawa and Hatti. Here, we will see evidence for a great deal of independent spirit among the local rulers, which must have caused the Arzawans as many difficulties as it did for the Hittites, and probably more so.

Foreign Relations

Adaniya: (= Kizzuwatna = Cilicia) The Proclamation of Telipinu does not indicate that Labarna I controlled as far south as Adaniya, but The Annals of Hattušili I seem to make Hittite possession of this region under Labarna I likely. The better known name for this territory of "Kizzuwatna" is not attested to before the reign of Telipinu. Adaniya appears to have been the name for this Hittite province in Cilicia. An important city of Kizzuwatna later on was Lawazantiya, located in northern Kizzuwatna. It is unclear whether this city was initially considered a part of Adaniya's territory, and Beal (1986) 427 has argued that, at least during the first part of the reign of Telipinu, it was not. An important pass between Anatolia and Syria exists in Adaniya, making possession of this territory strategically important for ambitious Hittite kings. The eastern (Syrian) end of this pass (the Beilan Pass) was guarded by the city of Alalah. A good treatment of the history of Kizzuwatna can be found in Beal (1986).