territory of the other, and they agreed to seize such workmen forthwith,
and mutually restore them, but under the express condition that neither
they nor any of their belongings should incur any penalty for the
desertion of their country. It would be curious to know if all the
arrangements agreed to by the kings of those times were sanctioned,
as in the above instance, by properly drawn up agreements. Certain
expressions occur in their correspondence which seem to prove that this
was the case, and that the relations between them, of which we can catch
traces, resulted not merely from a state of things which, according
to their ideas, did not necessitate any diplomatic sanction, but from
conventions agreed to after some war, or entered on without any previous
struggle, when there was no question at issue between the two states.*

* The treaty of Ramses II. with the King of the Khâti, the
only one which has come down to us, was a renewal of other
treaties effected one after the other between the fathers
and grandfathers of the two contracting sovereigns. Some of
the Tel el-Amarna letters probably refer to treaties of this
kind; e.g. that of Burnaburiash of Babylon, who says that
since the time of Karaîndash there had been an exchange of
ambassadors and friendship between the sovereigns of Chaldoa
and of Egypt, and also that of Dushratta of Mitanni, who
reminds Queen Tîi of the secret negotiations which had taken
place between him and Amenôthes III.

When once the Syrian conquest had been effected, Egypt gave permanency
to its results by means of a series of international decrees, which
officially established the constitution of her empire, and brought about
her concerted action with the Asiatic powers.