Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ

Ancient and ArchaeologyΒ  permalink

Removing the Hittite Dark age

• Message 1.Β 

  Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Wednesday, 4th January 2006

  Hi all
  
  Further to the problems of Greek Chronology, where the dark age should be drastically reduced this has a knock on effect on other dark age regions such as the Hittites. They were supposed to have ended about 1200BC then suddenly reappeared in 800BC and now called Neo Assyrians.
  
  I have moved the last dynasty of kings into my timeline for the periods of about 900BC to 500BC. This has revealed some very interesting data, not only about how the Hittites were mingled with the kingships of the Assyrians, but also how they were responsible for the start of the 19th Dynasty of Egypt.
  
  It is rather a long process though to relate the whole 400 years in one message and so will start with identifying some peoples involved.
  
  Firstly the Phrygians, Achaeans and Danaans.
  
  We know from historical records and archaelogy that they came from Thrace, later known as Macedonia. Moving over the Hellespont into western Asia Minor around the Troad region, forming cities and expanding eastwards. They are related to be tribes of the Moschi(Mukshi of Hittites) and Bryges. The Phrygians I now equate with the Achaeans. The indo-European root word 'pr' means 'begotten of' 'born of' and so became 'people of'. This is the same root of words such as per, par, phar, pahar, Br, Ber, Tr Ter, Thr etc.. In Egyptian `Per' it means House, ie the `House of' or 'people of' and is the root of Pharaoh. Also the root of Persians - Par-Sua - People of susa. Also root of Thracia Thr-Acia, Thr-Akiya.
  
  So Phrygia starts with the root 'Phr' people of Ygia. Now Ygia is the Greek rendering of Ikkiya. The later Greeks probly saw the word as Phur-Ykkiya. Now Ykkiya, is Ikkiya, is Akkiya which in turn is a rendering of the Hittite name for these western peoples Akkiyawa. You can see how archaic Greeks would have made this into Achaea, Achaean. Brygia is the same word with the same root this time Br-Ygia.
  
  So first proposition, not too radical is that Phrygians were Achaeans.
  
  Now the other people in a region soutwest of the Troad were called Arzawa. These occupied the Islands and coastal regions of Anatolia. These we know were another tribe of early Greeks from Macenonia and Greece itself. They became known as Ionians in later times. Now Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔr mentions another people related to the Greeks in his epic the Iliad. The Danaans. Now Arzawa is just a Hittite rendering of that name. Arzawa, Ardawa, Ardanya,Adana,Danaan.
  
  So second proposition. The Arzawa of the Hittites are the Danaans.
  
  Now a bit of my chronology, these are my dates for some kings :
  
  AmenhotepII and TutmosisIV (Egypt)825-782
  Tudhaliya(I/III) 800-770 (Hitite - possibly TutmosesIV- Djehutymes. I havn't as yet studied this possible link but it looks promising)
  Shalmenasser III Assyrian 858-824
  Adad-Nirari III Assyrian 810-783
  
  Now King Tudhalias in Hittite texts refers to the subjugation of Assuwa.(Arzawa)Towns allied with Assuwa are Taruisa(Teos?) and Wilusiya(Ilios -Troy). The gods of Wilusiya include Appaliunas.(Apollo or possibly Atlas). I dont think Taruisa can be Troy as its name is Illios, so Wilusiya is much better match. Teos is just down the coast from Ilium. This shows that from an early date the Achaeans and Danaans were allies in the face of the Hittite threat.
  
  AmenhotepIII 782-744 (Egypt father of Akhenaten)
  Suppiluliuma I 770 - 730 (Hittite)
  Tiglath Pilesar 744 -727 (Assyrian)
  766 First Olympic Games. Halleys Comet 766.
  
  Suppiluliuma I was a great Hittite King and expanded the empire greatly, pushing the emerging Achaeans back to the Troad. We know though that later after the death Suppiluliuma and his son Arnuwanda II from plague that the Phrygians/achaeans pushed eastwards into the void left by their deaths taking western Hati lands. More on all this later.....
  
  Will leave it there as this message is now already very long.
  

  Link to this forum: Removing the Hittite Dark age

  Report message1

• Message 2

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by Noggin the Nog (U195809) on Saturday, 7th January 2006

  Problem.
  
  You have Amenhotep III as 782-744, and therefore the end of dynasty XVIII at about 725 ish. You also have (elsewhere) Ramses III as Amasis II (570-525)
  
  This leaves just 155 years for dynasties XIX, and XXI through XXVI.
  
  How do you propose to fit them all in?
  
  Noggin

  Link to this forum: Removing the Hittite Dark age

  Report message2

• Message 3

  , in reply to message 2.

  Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Saturday, 7th January 2006

  Hi Noggin,
  
  It is challenge to fit them all in but not impossible. Here is some of my thinking on it. I havent as yet finalised the list. A big swathe of them are satrapy kings installed by Esarhaddon according to his inscriptions such as Necho(necho 1), Nech-ke(Nekauba) Petubastes(Pedubast),Horsieses(Orsokon), Sheshonk(SheshonkIII?), Tnephachtus(Tefnakt),Lamintu(Nimlot), Bukur-nip(bakenrenef) and about three possibiities for Pianki. Esarhaddon lists 20 satrapy kings, some of them re-instated by Ashurbanipal his son after he defeats Taharka.
  
  Also when horemheb takes power after the Amarna period he organises things by splitting the armies and having two viziers in control under the authority of the Pharoah. some of these Viziers may be listed pharoes. One such is Apries. we know that Amasis had to fight him for control. So in my scheme Ramses III would also need to have put down such a challenge, and he does:
  
  "For many generations, Egypt had two viziers, one governing Upper Egypt and anther official who oversaw Lower Egypt. Apparently there was a problem; perhaps even a rebellion involving the unnamed Lower Egyptian vizier and so Ramses III unified this high office under a single person named To (Ta)."
  
  So from the time of Horemheb there is the possibility of 3 people who may have been considered as Pharoahs, the King and his two Viziers. This practice was ended by RamsesIII as we can see from the text above.
  
  I also consider an overlap or co-existence for dynasties. We know that the 21st at Tanis and the 21st at Thebes overlap with the 22nd. I propose that the 25th belongs sometime towards the end of the 18th causing the problems that Horemheb had to sort out after the plague(more on this later) had weakened the Armana dysnasty. The 24th were probably viziers during the 19th. The 26th and 23rd were mostly Satrapies. In one insciption Takelot(Takelot III) is listed as son of Ramses.(III?)
  
  So this is how my thinking goes. Still alot of work to do though.

  Link to this forum: Removing the Hittite Dark age

  Report message3

• Message 4

  , in reply to message 2.

  Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Saturday, 7th January 2006

  Concerning now the plague, please read previous message as well if you have jumped in at this one.
  
  If I move the Hittite king Supililiuma I from 1380 BC to 770BC then when he and his son die from plague this should be repeated elsehwere in this timeline, ie there should be plague not only in my Egyptian timeline but also in the Assyrian. At the time of Supililiuma I, the other kings in my timeline are Amenhotep III(782-744 MC) and Ashur-Dan III.(772-755)
  
  So, was there plague during these times, my theory would fail if there was not. It turns out there was. First in Amarna period :
  
  'The capital of Amarna was abandoned. In 2004 it was reported that black plague bacteria was found in the remains of fossilized fleas from Amarna.
  (AM, 7/04, p.12)'
  
  
  and :
  Here is an excerpt from March 10th 2004 National Geographic article tilted Bubonic Plague Traced to Ancient Egypt:
  
  "In Egypt Panagiotakopulu combed the workers'-village site in Amarna, where the builders of the tombs of Egyptian kings Tutankhamun and Akhenaton lived. There, the researcher unearthed cat and human fleasβ€”known to be plague carriers in some casesβ€”in and around the workers' homes. That find spurred Panagiotakopulu to believe that the bubonic plague's fleaborne bacteria could also have been lurking in the area, so she went in search of other clues. "
  
  
  Now, to Assyria
  'The reign of Ashur-dan III (772-755) was shadowed by rebellions and by epidemics of plague. Of Ashur-nirari V (754-746) little is known.'
  
  So , Plague turns out to be my best friend. It is confirmed as a widespread problem and I think it was the real reason that powers in the area were weakened enough for the invasions of Phrygians(achaeans) Arzawans(Danaans) and other peoples. The Armana dynasty came to an end. The Assyrian dynasty came to an end, Tigaleth Pilesar being new blood, probaly Phrygian(possible the legendary Pelops) Gyges ended the western Hati by userping power in Lydia with hep of the Arzawa( Caria). Mursili escaped though going to Egypt to help Horemheb.
  
  This general who helped Horemheb is named Paramessu. We already know that para is pharoah or king, so he was King Messi(Mursili II, no L in Egyptian). Horemheb appointed this general to be next Pharoah and so he became Ramses I, already an old man.
  
  more to come....
  
  

  Link to this forum: Removing the Hittite Dark age

  Report message4

• Message 5

  , in reply to message 4.

  Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Sunday, 8th January 2006

  Hi all
  
  If this plague idea is correct there should also be evidence in the Bible. Zechariah is appointed king in 755 so to his time I must look and see if references to plague are there, and they are :
  
  'And this shall be the plague wherewith the LORD will smite all the people that have fought against Jerusalem; Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth.'
  

  Link to this forum: Removing the Hittite Dark age

  Report message5

• Message 6

  , in reply to message 5.

  Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Tuesday, 10th January 2006

  Hi all
  
  In reworking the timeline I came to an impasse. The problem being Suppliliuma I. He is mentioned by Shalmanesser in 858BC (old chronology - OC). Yet OC has Suppi in 1380BC. So how could Suppi have given tribute to Shalmanesser when he died 500 years before. And there are not any more Supililiumas.
  
  So naturally in moving the timeline down to where Suppi belongs is fine to start with. However Suppi is also known to have been in contact with Akhenaten and Tutankhamus wife. In my new chronological table Tut's death is around 727BC. So I now had a problem of Suppi having to have had contact with both of these people, seperated by at least nearly 100 years.
  
  The solution was quite simple in the end but has given me a headache. Assyrian chronology is based around the 9th year of Assur-Dan III linked to an eclipse. An eclipse in 763BC was decided as this year 9. At the time this was decided over 50 years ago, it created a problem with biblical chronology, there was now a 40 year problem in that chronology.
  
  The recent discovery that there was an eclipse recorded by the babylonians in 721BC should have started a new appraisal of this dating system. It didnt. So I have used 721BC eclipse as year 9 of Assur-Dan III. This reduces Assyrian history by 42 years, at one stroke wiping out the 40 year problem of the biblical.
  
  It also solves the problem of Gyges. check out Wikipedia history of Lydia:
  , Scroll down to the bottom to see the chronology. You will notice that Gyges is placed after Sadyattes, the very man he is supposed to have killed to aquire the thone. The reason for this nonesense? When an inscription linking Gyges to Assurbanipal was discovered, Gyges had to be moved from his proper place, after Sadyattes, to before, to line up with Assyria history. By using the eclipse of 721BC to date assyrian history Gyges can now be moved back to where he belongs as Assurbanipal has reduced his position by 42 years. The supposed son of Gyges Ardys is I think either non existent or had a very short reign. Looks like he was put there to fill the 40 year gap.
  
  Back to Suppuliliama now. By reducing assyrian history by 42 years and Adjusting Egyptian and Hittite timeline Suppi can now indeed by linked with both Akhenaten and Tutankamen and Shalmanesser.
  
  ShalmanesserI redate by 42 years to 816-782 BC
  Suppi I now date 817 -770
  Akhenaten 793-778
  Tutankhamen 778-769
  
  Another anomoly is the insciptions of Ashurnasirpal II (841 BC–816 BC(MC) , where the Hittite king is given more than once as Lubarna. Lubarna is the king listed as the first great Hittite king and reigned in old chronology in 1680BC!!!!! How could Adad Nirari mention defeating a king who had been dead for 800 years!!!!
  
  The translation of the text does have some mistakes, Gaza for one. The details of where this Gaza is (Near the Orontes) is not the Gaza we know of that is hundreds of miles farther south. So he has translated it wrongly, it must be Agade or Ikate os some such,ie Ugarit/Akkad by my reckoning.
  
  To say Lubarna is a mistranslation though is harder to justify. There have been no other Hittite kings named this and I cannot see how he could make a mistake with this. I have tried looking for alternatives with differing spellings but drawn a blank. The only explanation left is that Lubarna/Labarna belongs not in the 17thC BC but the 9th!!!. As yet I cannot decide what to do about this. This indicates he belongs in my timeline of 9thC BC.....
  

  Link to this forum: Removing the Hittite Dark age

  Report message6

• Message 7

  , in reply to message 6.

  Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Tuesday, 10th January 2006

  Hi all, please read previous message if jumped in here..
  
  If you are wondering how this affects my plague theory, it doesnt. The plague seemed to be around from at least the last 12 years of Amenhotep III in MC 781BC to the end of the Armana period in around 769 death of Akhenaten and even further back as plague is still mentioned 50 years later in the time of Sennacherib - 663Bc MC.. Plague was also mentioned in the time of Hittite king Mursili II in MC 769-736BC, so would tie in with Ashur-Dan III 730 - 713. In fact what this all may indicate is the direction the plague took. From Egyption possesions in Syria/Lebanon to Hati and thence to Assyria which makes sense.
  

  Link to this forum: Removing the Hittite Dark age

  Report message7

• Message 8

  , in reply to message 6.

  Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Thursday, 12th January 2006

  Hi all
  
  I think I have a solution to the hittite Lubarna probem noted above. There is one person in my timeline who it could be Hattusili II. Hattusili I was known as Taberna, Hattusili III as Uhri Teshub, so this would make Hattusili II the Lubarna of this iscription, fitting exactly where he should opposite Ashurnarsipal in my timeine.

  Link to this forum: Removing the Hittite Dark age

  Report message8

• Message 9

  , in reply to message 8.

  Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Thursday, 12th January 2006

  Sorry, one mistake in previous message. Uhri Teshub was Mursili III not Hatusili III, but I think the premise still stands.

  Link to this forum: Removing the Hittite Dark age

  Report message9

Back to top