Talk:Syro-Hittite states

message: The sources I have read gave an earlier date than 800 BC for the innovation of alphabet reaching Anatolia.  Additionally, one of the peoples who flooded into the power vacuum left by the Hittites ca. 1200 BC, were the Mushki or Bryges, who renamed themselves to Phrygians, but were evidently pushed out by the Macedonians, and who were already using script similar to Phoenician.  See http://www.geocities.com/stojangr/index.html for a fascinating account... Although this site conservatively dates the Phrygian invasion from the Balkans to 900 BC, that seems inexplicably way too late to me, since the Assyrians encountered them (Mushku) on the Euphrates as early as 1160 BC. ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 18:53, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: what has that got to do with the alphabet? What are your sources for pre-800 Anatolian alphabetical writing? Sure, the Phrygians came in the 12th c., but without an alphabet. dab (ᛏ) 20:06, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What has that got to do with the alphabet?  Did you even read the site?  It shows an alphabetic inscription before the Phrygians even left the Balkans for ANatolia.  Give me a couple days to get back to the library, but I found a very good book about the Hittites written even before that inscription was found, that also says the Phrygians brought alphabet with them when they took over from the Hittites ca. 1200 BC. ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 20:11, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Codex, are you out of your mind? The geocities page you link to is a hoax, in fact it is such a bad hoax that it may be just a joke, not intended to deceive. When we discussed the site at Talk:Ancient Macedonian language some months ago, there was much hilarity. Did you look at the "inscription"? No expert could be fooled for as much as ten seconds. dab (ᛏ) 12:26, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

text: sorry. It exists only on geocities. The Greek of the inscription is a joke. Just forget it. See also here. dab (ᛏ) 14:19, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Date of Alphabetic writing in ANatolia

message: Dab, is your edit comment trying to say that the Phrygians and Mushki were not identical?  Because every source I've ever seen, whether ancient or modern, says they were identical, and I've yet to see a source that says they were not. --ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 20:21, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hm, I have never heard that they are, and our articles don't make the claim. On Mushki we say  they came from Cappadocia and entered a political union with the Phrygians in the 9th century, the Phrygians arriving from the Balkans in the 12th century. The article is lacking sources. With what right are we equating Biblical Meshech, Hittite Mushku, Greek Moschoi, Georgian Meskheti (and whence the variant Mushki)? So, please, cite one of your numerous sources, preferably adding it to the Meshech article. dab (ᛏ) 12:26, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I did a websearch and realized your Mushki correspond to the Mysi. I'm doing some cleanup now. dab (ᛏ) 12:45, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, like I said, please give me some time to get the reputable sources, because if you look in actual scholarly sources in a library, ones written by Anatolian experts, no one differentiates the Mushki and the Phrygians, they were quite the same people from the beginning, they had kings with names alternating between two different names for many centuries.  ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 13:37, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

text: right, I think I am getting the picture now. The Phrygians appear to have migrated to Phrygia from the Balkans, and the Moschoi to Cappadocia from Armenia/Urartu, both around the 12th century. As the Phrygian kingdom expanded to Cappadocia in the 8th century or so, the Moschoi entered a political unity with the Phrygians. But apparently Moschoi remained a term synonymous with "Cappadocians" (not with "Phrygians") until Byzantine times. For the purposes of this article, the  origins of the Phrygians and the Moschoi/Mushki are clearly distinct. dab (ᛏ) 14:15, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Ok, I just hope you will share what your sources are on the Mushki article, if they are websites or what, because I'm quite sure I have seen scholarly sources and books in the library written by experts and Hittitologists that will contradict some of that...ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 14:23, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I did myself place  on that article because I know it's crap. It's better than what we had before, but that's not saying much. You are more than welcome to remove inaccuracies and cite your scholarly sources. dab (ᛏ) 17:12, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

text: As a mater of fact, I'm just headed down to the library right now to see if I can find the excellent book on Anatolian history I had once before... Should be back in an hour or two... ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 17:19, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mushki and Phrygians 

message: Neo-Hittite is a language, the descendent of Old Hittite. This article means to cover Neo-Hittite culture. Successor states in Hittite territories that didn't share Hittite culture should be more carefully distinguished from Neo-Hittite culture. --Wetman 16:05, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Neo-Hittite" is just an adjective, it may refer to, confusingly, post-Hittite kingdoms, or to the language of the late Hittite empire. It's a matter of terminology. It's somewhat of a misnomer, but we still have to go with it. dab (𒁳) 16:22, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Nope, I am a professional hittitologist, and I can assure you that there is a distinction (although a confusing one). "Neo-Hittite" always refers to the Iron Age Luwian-speaking cultures and states, while "New Hittite" is the name of the phase of the Hittite language.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.84.130.10 (talk) 12:05, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: "Neo-Hittite"

message: Propose moving the page to "Syro-Hittite states" or a similar name to better reflect the subject. In any case "Neo-Hittite" sounds like an adjective rather than a noun. 144.92.44.143 (talk) 17:25, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Propose moving page to "Syro-Hittite states" 

message: Cyberbot II has detected links on Syro-Hittite states which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global
If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally.
When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags.
Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
*http://www.bible-history.com/ancient_art/orthostat_relief_hunting_scene.html
*:Triggered by \bbible\-history\.com\b on the local blacklist
If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.
From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:51, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blacklisted Links Found on [[Syro-Hittite states]] 

message: The title of this article is misleading. Most of the so called Syro Hittite states were not in Syria. As one can see in a map they were mainly concentrated in South Anatolia (present Turkey) . I think   Late Hittite states may be a better title. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 15:15, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: this isnt about what any one think.. syro-hittite is the academic most common name.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 01:15, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Oppose. This is the entire basis of your argument? That the empire was mostly in South Anatolia (modern Turkey)? No. This is academic.  TheDwellerCamp (talk) 17:01, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Better title 

message: It seems that there's nothing Hittite about the so-called Neo-Hittite / Syro-Hittite states. Can this be explained in the article?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2404:160:8010:5FF7:8CA6:3EE:BC78:2618 (talk) 12:50, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Some of them attempted to followed Hittite tradition. See Kummuh and Gurgum. --Voidvector (talk) 05:29, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The origin of the term X-Hittite ?