Talk:Aratta

message: This entire section below was removed from the article page by Dbachmann; I know it needs citations and also needs serious trimming (eg mentioning Phraaspa certainly seems like undue weight and a long shot) but I still would like to see some kind of section specifically discussing this view, with the proper citations, if anyone can improve it.  I may get around to looking up citations myself if I get time to research it. 
===Urartu hypothesis===
:See also: Kura-Araxes culture
According to one theory, Aratta included the Northwest of Iran and present-day Azerbaijan. Its borders were purportedly from the Caucasus mountains to the Zagros mountains, and from the Caspian Sea to the Black Sea.
Aratta is thought to be related to the later kingdom of Urartu, because of its geographical location and name. The name also resembles Ararat, and the mountain is indeed located in the possible area of Aratta.
Aratta is often mentioned by modern historians in connection with the later regional powers of Mannai, Urartu and the Medes. Its legendary capital city may have been Phraaspa, site of a little Parthian-era castle recently discovered (in April 2005) near the river Aras River  along the Armenia-Iran-Azerbaijan border. However, the castle is firmly dated to the Atropatene (c. 300 BC) and Parthian (c. 200 BC) eras, thousands of years after the mysterious references to Aratta in Sumerian inscriptions.
Some  would more specifically locate Aratta on the eastern side of Lake Van near the Turkish-Iranian border. A significant population and a flourishing landscape is known to have existed there in the third millennium BC.
----
I will be happy to see a discussion of this "hypothesis", provided it can be attributed to at least a single halfway serious academic. This seems to be entirely based on "Aratta" sounding like "Ararat" though, with no evidence of lapis lazuli or anything to back it up(?) -- two names sounding somewhat similar a scholarly hypothesis do not make. Especially if both names are attested in cuneiform, and more than a millennium fully two millennia apart. dab (𒁳) 14:57, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it should be mentioned as the theory of not only the Armenian national historians like Movsisian, but also quite a few non-Armenian scholars including David Rohl. Til Eulenspiegel 15:02, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: sure, just cite where it is discussed, and don't try to sell Movsisian as "many historians". I must say I've really had it with this Armenian nationalist pseudohistory, and I am extremely bored with fantastical claims like Movsisian's. We have a separate article for this stuff. dab (𒁳) 15:10, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Section removed by Dbachmann

message: :See also: Kura-Araxes culture
According to one theory, Aratta included the Northwest of Iran and present-day Azerbaijan. Its borders were purportedly from the Caucasus mountains to the Zagros mountains, and from the Caspian Sea to the Black Sea.
Aratta is thought to be related to the later kingdom of Urartu, because of its geographical location and name. The name also resembles Ararat, and the mountain is indeed located in the possible area of Aratta.
Aratta is often mentioned by modern historians in connection with the later regional powers of Mannai, Urartu and the Medes. Its legendary capital city may have been Phraaspa, site of a little Parthian-era castle recently discovered (in April 2005) near the river Aras River  along the Armenia-Iran-Azerbaijan border. However, the castle is firmly dated to the Atropatene (c. 300 BC) and Parthian (c. 200 BC) eras, thousands of years after the mysterious references to Aratta in Sumerian inscriptions.
Some  would more specifically locate Aratta on the eastern side of Lake Van near the Turkish-Iranian border. A significant population and a flourishing landscape is known to have existed there in the third millennium BC.
----
I will be happy to see a discussion of this "hypothesis", provided it can be attributed to at least a single halfway serious academic. This seems to be entirely based on "Aratta" sounding like "Ararat" though, with no evidence of lapis lazuli or anything to back it up(?) -- two names sounding somewhat similar a scholarly hypothesis do not make. Especially if both names are attested in cuneiform, and more than a millennium fully two millennia apart. dab (𒁳) 14:57, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it should be mentioned as the theory of not only the Armenian national historians like Movsisian, but also quite a few non-Armenian scholars including David Rohl. Til Eulenspiegel 15:02, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: sure, just cite where it is discussed, and don't try to sell Movsisian as "many historians". I must say I've really had it with this Armenian nationalist pseudohistory, and I am extremely bored with fantastical claims like Movsisian's. We have a separate article for this stuff. dab (𒁳) 15:10, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Urartu hypothesis

message: The citations and tags in the second paragraph shouldn't be there because the only information on Aratta comes from myths. There is no objective evidence to cite.
Until some hard evidence surfaces (i.e. a cuneiform tablet documenting a shipment from Aratta), this place should be treated as fictional.
I would also like to point out that an obscure book on paganism is not a reliable source. Sources, even published ones, need to be vetted for reliability. I'm sure some source of that ilk could be found to equate Aratta with Atlantis as well! 
Sumerophile (talk) 01:20, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I get the feeling you have not bothered to read a single one of these sources that you are blindly passing judgement on and removing as citations from the sound of the title, would I be correct? Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 02:19, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mythical Aratta 

message: The Cambridge History of Iran is rather seriously misquoted  in the article.
In Max Mallowan's chapter on Cyrus' Babylonian campaigns 2000 years later, he suggests that Anshan might have then denoted an area south-east of Elam, not the whole Zagros mountain range.
And in the footnote, Mallowan mentions his view from 1969 that Anshan in Enmerkar's time was co-terminous with the modern Bakhtiari region, due east of Susa. (Later in the early 70's, Anshan was identified with Tepe Malyan, again southeast of Susa. )
Saying that Mallowan thought Anshan was the Zagros in general is like saying the state of Virginia is the Appalachians in general. Nor is any northerly direction implied in any of this.
Sumerophile (talk) 22:14, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cambridge History of Iran 

message: When page numbers are wanting from cites and things like that, on wikipedia, there are an abundance of appropriate tags we can use to mark the deficiencies and give other editors a courtesy period to look up the page numbers, rather than use this as a pretext to utterly haul and pull the cited information from sight.
In response to objections raised about the lack of page numbers for some scholarly references in this article, I have taken the trouble to research these authors and supply the wanting page numbers containing the relevant information. Since this is one of the issues behind the recent edit warring that has caused this page to become locked, I would ask any admin here to please review these scholarly references, and to incorporate them into the article, so that lack of page numbers can no longer be used as the pretext for concealing this information that is easily available elsewhere.  It will then remain to be seen if another, new pretext will then be found. 
*Note: These are all the same prominent scholars who have published their translations of the Sumerian epic, "Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta"; no more qualified and reliable sources than these can possibly be found:
*Samuel Kramer, 1963 The Sumerians, p. 275 (locates Aratta betwen Urmia and Caspian, Iran; his 1952 translation had suggested Luristan)
*Georgina Herrmann, 1968 Lapis Lazuli: the early phases of its trade, in Iraq p. 54 (locates Aratta nr. Caspian Sea, Iran)
*Sol Cohen, 1973, Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta, p. 55-61 (identifies Aratta with combined Hamadan-Nahavand-Kermanshah-Sanadaj areas, Iran)  (PhD dissertation; reviewed by several subsequent authors including Majidzadeh & Hansman)
*Yousef Majidzadeh, 1976 The Land of Aratta, Journal of Near Eastern Studies 35, 105-114 (located Aratta nr. Shahdad in Kerman province, Iran; same expert now investigating Jiroft, Iran as potential site) 
*J. F. Hansman, 1978 The Question of Aratta, JNES 37, 331-336 (locates Aratta at Shahr-i-Sokhta) 
All of this can be verified from the following links to the actual sources above; the two from JNES should provide most informative to any interested researchers or scholars who may be researching the historiography of the scholarship regarding Aratta.  It should be obvious to anyone from reading the freely available first pages of the two JNES (Journal of Near Eastern Studies) articles that all of these authors have been peer-reviewed by one another and by others in the field. 
With regards, Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 21:40, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources to be added to article, with TITLES and page numbers 

message: #Malati J. Shendge, 2003
#Alexander Jacob 2005
#D.D. Kosambi 1995
#Sanujit Ghose, 2004
This represents only those sources I can find accessible through Google-books; there are a great many more scholarly references there that are not accessible except in "snippet view", so clicking the above research pages is only scratching the surface. Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 12:18, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Since your response above is once again basically to assert your own expertise and authority as an editor over what the published sources say and act unilaterally as both judge and jury to 'disqualify' the significant viewpoint of scholars including D. D. Kosambi and Malati Shendge, and this behaviour has been going on for some time, my only recourse is to alert editors at both the Indian and Armenian noticeboards as well as the "Systemic bias" noticeboard that published viewpoints of Indian and Armenian scholars seem to be systematically excluded from this article.  Also please re-read WP:NPOV and Verifiability again.  It matters nothing if you have personally identified flaws in their scholarship.  It might matter more if you find a published source who has attacked the viewpoint expressed by these four authors, but I doubt one can be found.  Verifiability means we care about verifiability, not truth, all we need to do is verify that this is a published viewpoint by scholars and report on it neutrally.  The viewpoint exists, it is significant, and blocking out viewpoints because you or I personally disagree with them is the POV violation. Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 21:00, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No, read up on it some more, we actually care only about verifiability here.  And we already have standards for establishing what constitutes reliable evidence of a notable viewpoint, these things are not supposed to be determined by any single editor's fiat or whim. If those four references were not enough to convince you that there really has been scholarly discussion relating the Sumerian and Sanskrit Arattas, I can list quite a few more. It doesn't matter a bit what your or my own hypothesis may be, nor what our opinion of these several published authors' other statements is. The sources establish that the school of thought exists, and deserves to be mentioned as existing rather than suppressed. Also we aren't here to decide or declare any one school of thought the "truth" and exclude all others, that would be a blatant violation of NPOV, and making up arguments against the sources that do not appear in print, is a violation of OR.  So what we are supposed to do then is list ALL the significant, published POVs of scholars, and attribute them neutrally. Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 02:50, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Another important scholarly source contemplating the connection between Sumerian Aratta and the Indic Aratta is the book Update on the Aryan Invasion Debate by Dr. Koenraad Elst (1999), p. 116 (chap. 4.5.1). In the book he reviews his peer, Malati Shendge.  Is there any amount of further evidence that would fail to satisfy any wikipedia editor's personal standard that this has indeed been discussed in the published literature by scholars and experts. Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 03:24, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh yeah, another scholar who has written extensively on his view that Aratta was in Afghanistan / Indus valley, based on comparing both the Mesopotamian and the Mahabharata evidence, is Professor Michael Witzel, who is most certainly peer-reviewed. Eg. Aryan and non-Aryan Names in Vedic India (1999), also Autochthonous Aryans? The Evidence from Old Indian and Iranian Texts (2001) in the Electronic Journal of Vedic Studies, vol. 7, issue 3. We should definitely be able to mention that. Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 03:45, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Some of the many sources connecting Sumerian Aratta with Sanskrit Aratta

message: :Since your response above is once again basically to assert your own expertise and authority as an editor over what the published sources say and act unilaterally as both judge and jury to 'disqualify' the significant viewpoint of scholars including D. D. Kosambi and Malati Shendge, and this behaviour has been going on for some time, my only recourse is to alert editors at both the Indian and Armenian noticeboards as well as the "Systemic bias" noticeboard that published viewpoints of Indian and Armenian scholars seem to be systematically excluded from this article.  Also please re-read WP:NPOV and Verifiability again.  It matters nothing if you have personally identified flaws in their scholarship.  It might matter more if you find a published source who has attacked the viewpoint expressed by these four authors, but I doubt one can be found.  Verifiability means we care about verifiability, not truth, all we need to do is verify that this is a published viewpoint by scholars and report on it neutrally.  The viewpoint exists, it is significant, and blocking out viewpoints because you or I personally disagree with them is the POV violation. Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 21:00, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No, read up on it some more, we actually care only about verifiability here.  And we already have standards for establishing what constitutes reliable evidence of a notable viewpoint, these things are not supposed to be determined by any single editor's fiat or whim. If those four references were not enough to convince you that there really has been scholarly discussion relating the Sumerian and Sanskrit Arattas, I can list quite a few more. It doesn't matter a bit what your or my own hypothesis may be, nor what our opinion of these several published authors' other statements is. The sources establish that the school of thought exists, and deserves to be mentioned as existing rather than suppressed. Also we aren't here to decide or declare any one school of thought the "truth" and exclude all others, that would be a blatant violation of NPOV, and making up arguments against the sources that do not appear in print, is a violation of OR.  So what we are supposed to do then is list ALL the significant, published POVs of scholars, and attribute them neutrally. Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 02:50, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Another important scholarly source contemplating the connection between Sumerian Aratta and the Indic Aratta is the book Update on the Aryan Invasion Debate by Dr. Koenraad Elst (1999), p. 116 (chap. 4.5.1). In the book he reviews his peer, Malati Shendge.  Is there any amount of further evidence that would fail to satisfy any wikipedia editor's personal standard that this has indeed been discussed in the published literature by scholars and experts. Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 03:24, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh yeah, another scholar who has written extensively on his view that Aratta was in Afghanistan / Indus valley, based on comparing both the Mesopotamian and the Mahabharata evidence, is Professor Michael Witzel, who is most certainly peer-reviewed. Eg. Aryan and non-Aryan Names in Vedic India (1999), also Autochthonous Aryans? The Evidence from Old Indian and Iranian Texts (2001) in the Electronic Journal of Vedic Studies, vol. 7, issue 3. We should definitely be able to mention that. Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 03:45, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: POV dispute

message: Your latest well-referenced rewrite of Aratta shows a 100% improvement in quality of research at last!  Thanks for putting the effort into it!  I don't give barnstars, but I must say, I am happy to see that the earlier rancour over the older version did not discourage you completely!
When I was researching this myself, I noticed that there also seem to be plenty of refs for a view connecting it with the Vedic Aratta - which should have a write-up of its own somewhere on wikipedia anyway.  Some sources even went so far as to connect both of these with Harappa.  So, it wouldn't surprise me if someone added this in too, sooner or later. Cheers, Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 23:29, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: My conscience does not rebuke me for my trying to keep your earlier original research and reference-blanking out of the article, and I do not need you to be my judge - nor can you single-handedly constitute a "jury".  After I tried to give you a compliment for finally using references and cutting the OR, I am now quite dismayed to see that you are still lashing out as well as edit warring to the point of 3RR with an anonymous user to blank the earlier references -- but we do have extensive standards as to what references can constitute evidence of a POV existing, and you have not demonstrated that these refs fail our standards; rather you seem to be attempting assert WP:OWNership to keep your version intact and exclude those POVs you have unilaterally declared to be heretical or "nonsense".  Remember, anything you write is going to be edited and since these POVs are indeed well-referenced, it is only prudent to expect that they are going to crop up again and again down the road, so trying to maintain a single POV on a wikipedia article and pretend others do not even exist, usually ends up being fruitless.  If you are going to be on wikipedia for any length of time it would be wise to consider the benefits of working together instead of relentlessly ramrodding your own opinions, but after reading your latest words, I now fear that the only resolution for this would be arbitation on some level.  Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 16:54, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no consensus that the ten references you continually exclude do not meet our RS standard; they are evidence that this POV is published and seems to be several editors here who also hold this POV. You are now at 3RR, again. Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 18:17, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wow 

message: What would it take to get Sumerophile to understand that wikipedia's policies only care about what published authors theories are, but do not care what Sumerophile's, or my, or any editor's, theories are???
You can fill this page with rebuttals and counter-arguments to all these authors based on your own expertise or intuition until the cows come home, but Wikipedia does not even care whether your rebuttals and counter arguments are correct or fallacious.  It only becomes relevant if you find some published author who has made these same rebuttals or counter arguments.  
If you are truly interested in performing your own Original research, fortunately there is one WikiMedia project where I believe original research and editors' novel hypotheses are not only allowed, but encouraged.  You may find yourself at home there.  Check it out, it's called :v: (WikiVersity). Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 13:23, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  What would it take 

message: I added Jiroft Civilization to the list of candidates for Aratta based on wikipedia article Jiroft Civilization which mentions aratta--Gurdjieff (talk) 04:55, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  jiroft civilization 

message: http://www.arattagar.co.uk/Aratta/Aratta.html  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.87.0.110 (talk) 00:33, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aratta was in what is now modern day Ukraine 

message: I would Like to inform you that Arata or Aratta, the oldest civilization so far, has been uncovered in the year 2000 (video has been shown on BBC and BBC Persian and is available on youtube and elsewhere).The link I have is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMXYYGYS51U&feature=player_embedded. 
The archeological site is located in the southern mountains of Iran in a valley. It should be well documented by now. The dig, so far, has uncovered pieces 4000 years old and it is believed that the lower layers may contain objects up to 10,000 years old.
Jjyar 19:26, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aratta found in Southern Iran (Jiroft) 

message: Aratta is described as follows in Sumerian literature:
* It is a fabulously wealthy place full of gold, silver, lapis lazuli and other precious materials, as well as the artisans to craft them.
* It is remote and difficult to reach.
Lapis lazuli is a type of blue stone only found in Afghanistan but coveted in the wider world for thousands of years. It crops up in the jewellery of ancient Egypt, the art of the ancient near east and as far afield as the art of the Italian Renaissance.The British Museum blog
Archaeologists who investigated more than twenty thousand beads and other objects made of lapis lazuli retrieved from the Royal Tombs of Ur found that all had the same exact mineral compostition; hence all originated from the same mine. Indeed, after extensive cross-checking, it was found that virtually every piece of lapis lazuli used in the ancient Near East — many tons of material — all came from the same mountain range, the Sar-i Sang mines in Badakhshan province, deep in the Hindu Kush of Afghanistan. 
The lapis lazuli that arrived from the Sar-i Sang mines in Afghanistan to the great cities at Ur, in Mesopotamia, as well as to Egypt (where the blue stone was considered the height of fashion), about 2400 BC travelled along routes or exchange that had already been active for thousands of years.Ancient Afghanistan from Prehistory to the Medes 20,000-51 BC, Cultural Property Training Resource[see Clark (1986) p. 67
The wide fertile plains that stretched between the northern slopes of the Hindu Kush and the Oxus River during ancient times, the valuable Silk Road trading centers and rich gold, silver and lapis deposits in the nearby mountains made Bactria a highly prized satrapy (regional governorship) for the Achaemenid Persians.
Based on these information, Aratta mast have been in Badakhshan area in Afghanistan, or the ancient land of Bactria.--Artacoana (talk) 03:25, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you misunderstand the purpose of this project.  This isn't a lab where we do our own research in an attempt to "prove" what hypothesis may or may not be correct.  WP is more like a compendium listing impartially all the various hypotheses that are held by various schools of thought.  While one school of thought does indeed place Aratta in Afghanistan, others have placed it in Iran, Armenia, anywhere in between, or simply denied its existence outside of mythology.  We cannot give undue weight to one school of thought, however.  For more info on our policies, please read up on WP:NPOV, WP:OR, and WP:UNDUE.  And please keep in mind that the current version is the result of arbitration process, and would take a thorough consensus to overturn.  Thanks, Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 03:35, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aratta must have been in Afghanistan (somewhere in Badakhshan area or ancient Bactria) 

message: Aratta has no relation to Armenia and Armenians. Call at least one reasonable reason to add the category of Armenia?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.180.36.55 (talk) 15:08, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Armenia is one of the places that has a claim to be the site of Aratta.  You already know this perfectly well, don't you? Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 15:15, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

text: Your edits going first  to one extreme and then the other violate WP:POINT for being disruptive, that is not the way to accomplish anything here. This article has already been subject of one arbitration case.  Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 15:27, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aratta has absolutely nothing to do with Armenia 

message: I would like to add my book and theory regarding the possible location of Aratta. www.bjcorbin.com and my new book Seven Mountains to Aratta.
Thank you,
B.J. Corbin
bjcorbin@gmail.com
Location hypotheses
B.J. Corbin agrees with Sol Cohen's Ph.D. dissertation regarding the Hamadan, Iran region as the location for Aratta.  More specifically, Kuh-e Alvand mountain and the archaeological site of Godin Tepe.
Bibliography
Corbin, B.J. (2016). "Seven Mountains to Aratta".   — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bjcorbin2 (talk • contribs) 14:57, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Hi  you need to tell us exactly you want to edit. Please also ensure that your edit complies with Wikipedia's rules on advertising. st170etalk 14:36, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: In any case, as a self-published book it fails our criteria at WP:RS. Doug Weller talk 15:08, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 18 June 2016 

message: f.n. please distinguish the real homeland Aratta in Ukraine from smaller 10s of 1000s of years later Arataa in SE Persia ...
please add beginning all indo euro culture - aratta
luddite nano pico editors keep refusing to acknowledge the proven history of first writing and civilization c 40,000 to 20,000 bc in not mythical but real Aratta (not to be confused with add'l Aratta in SE Persia); pls add to article as founding culture of Gobekli Tepe and all Europe , Indo Europe all way to China etc 
::ref: Ancient History of Aratta-Ukraine (20,000 BCE - 1,000 CE) Paperback – January 29, 2015 by Dr Yuri Shilov (Author), Trishula Translations (Translator) 
about author / doctor - real ancient archeology pro dr yuri shilov ab author dr yuri shilov Editorial Reviews About the Author Dr. Yuri Shilov, born Zaporizhia region, Ukraine. Graduate of Moscow State University; doctorate, Ukrainian Academy of Science. Academic appointments: Professor of Ancient History; Professor of Ukrainian Studies, Kyiv; Cossack Military Institute. Head of several public organisations of ancient history and archaeology. Honorary Doctor of Historical Sciences; Professor of the Russian Right Slavic Academy and Inter-regional Academy of Humanities; Head of History, All-Slavic Council; Colonel General of the International Academy of Cossacks. Member of Ukrainian Academy of Original Ideas; International Academy of Humanities; New York Academy of Sciences. Author of hundreds of publications: over 30 books - scientific, journalistic and artistic. Member of the National Union of Writers of Ukraine and Russia.
Dr. Shilov's significant discoveries, gleaned over a lifetime of archaeological investigation of Ukrainian Steppe kurgans and graves, have revised academic understanding of the origins of Indo -Europeans, Aryans and Slavs. He has shown that civilization did not originate from slave-holding Sumer (c.3,200 BCE in Mesopotamia) but began from the community of Aratta (c. 6,800 BCE in the Danube-Dnipro region). For these discoveries he has received international and national honors with monuments in the city of Komsomolsk and the city of Sicheslav (Dnipropetrovsk). add'l book review: by JD I have waited years for a serious academic book to appear, written in English, that appraises the archaeological cultures that arose in the northern Black Sea lands many millennia before the Sumerian civilisation. This book far exceeds my expectations, not only in the almost encyclopaedic scope of time and territory that it covers, and richness of illustration, but particularly in the hundreds of references to all related and relevant research papers, monographs and textbooks that have appeared since the early 19th century explorations in this subject. Those alone give this book the stamp of authority that allows the critical reader to have complete confidence in the veracity of Shilov’s expansive and detailed understanding of his subject. 
This is a particularly difficult study to explore if you cannot read Ukrainian or Russian to access the wealth of information that is available on the internet in those languages. Personally, I have been awed by the archaeological exhibits of this archaic civilisation in both State and private museums across Ukraine, and purchased many books (in Ukrainian and Russian) by the foremost researchers of the ancient Trypillian civilisation, including the pioneering decipherment of proto-Sumerian petroglyphic texts discovered in Ukraine, but nowhere have I found a book in English that can even closely rival Shilov’s book on Ancient Ukraine. 
This book is almost like a “Rosetta stone” in opening up far more about this fascinating subject than I had ever hoped to find. Of course, sensational new discoveries tend to receive treatments that span a spectrum from applause to disbelief and Shilov’s research and discoveries have evidently attracted both polarisations, from East and West. However, do not be misled into thinking this book is heavily biased towards the Communist doctrines of historical materialism, of which Shilov is openly critical, and do not be surprised to see his scope of review covers research from academics in the US, UK, western and eastern Europe, and Asia. This is an astonishingly thorough book that will be my foremost reference text for many years. It is perhaps the most useful and best value book I have ever bought.
One of the strengths of this book is that it offers a chronology for the plethora of cultural periods of prehistoric Eurasia. Although the majority of academic historians and archaeologists will be perfectly accepting of the veracity of radiocarbon dating techniques that the author here has drawn upon (even though scientific claims for precision of absolute dating of artefacts can still be challenged), one can at least choose to interpret some of the precise dates within this book, such as archaeoastronomical dates, as an acceptable and significant guideline rather than an absolute. 
Perhaps the most exciting revelation in this book, for me, was to read of the discovery of identical archaic texts found in Ukraine and Catal Hoyak which give clear proof of their mutual cultural and spiritual connection across the Black Sea in the dawning of civilisation, radiocarbon dated to 6200 ± 97 BCE. Since those texts clearly predate the famous Romanian Tartaria tablets that have been radiocarbon dated to 5500 BCE and been claimed to be the earliest writing in the world, this book
clearly shows that Ukraine has an even more ancient history of civilisation that genuinely deserves attention.
173.3.131.209 (talk) 03:19, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I see he couldn't get a reputable publisher but had to self-publish through CreateSpace. One major indicator we should ignore it. The "Ukrainian Academy of Original Ideas" is a self-styled academy. Anyone can become a member of the New York Academy of Sciences, you just pay your membership fees. When his views starting receiving discussion in academic publications,which seems extremely unlikely, they might be mentioned. Not now. See also this.. Meanwhile, please stop using our talk pages to promote him. Doug Weller talk 14:00, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  please add real aratta 

message: Dr. Yuri Shilov, Professor of Ancient History and Ukrainian Studies at the Ukrainian Academy of Science in Kyiv, and doctoral graduate of Moscow State University, posits that ancient Arrata was located in the Black Sea region of Ukraine. Dr. Shilov believes that the Arratans eventually progressed into the neolithic Trypillian archaeological culture. Dr. Shilov has received international and national honours for his contributions to ancient history, with monuments in the cities of Komsomolsk and Sicheslav in Ukraine.
Yuri Shilov, "Ancient History of Arrata-Ukraine, 20,000 BCE to 1000 C.E.," Trishula Translations, 2015, ISBN-13: 978-1505241624 Vytfreedom (talk) 18:51, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the  template. This prose seems to be more about Shilov than Aratta. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:57, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I was trying to follow the style of the previous location hypotheses. I will rewrite to explain more of the thinking and discoveries behind the hypothesis. Also, it seemed relevant to support Shilov's work with his awards and credentials, since the lines I've requested for deletion above my edit "caution against overspeculation," pretty much stopping additional inputs on location. Do you disagree? If so, I will pull those out. Vytfreedom (talk) 19:13, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

text: Also, how do I establish consensus? I am referring to a book produced by a cadre of academics, isn't this consensus, or do you mean something different? Forgive my ignorance, I do not frequently edit Wikipedia and have never been held to such requirements. Vytfreedom (talk) 19:15, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: This page might help you understand it a bit more. They want you to talk about it with other Wikipedians, to see if your edit needs improving, needs more/less information.. etc. This process helps come up with a solution that works out for everyone. GameTriangle (talk) 23:53, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 8 March 2022 

message: Please remove these two sentences and replace with my previously submitted edit: "By 1973, archaeologists were noting that there was no archaeological record of Aratta's existence outside of myth,[22] and in 1978 Hansman cautions against over-speculation.[38]"
It is egregious to think that somebody put the kabosh on further discoveries regarding Aratta in 1978, when there are archeological sites that are still being excavated today that may end up being evidence of an archeological record for Aratta. It is even more upsetting that in 2022, a narrative from 1973 is being pushed. Research into the subject reveals academic bullying. Wikipedia editors who are pushing narratives and excluding other viable narratives should be denied editing privileges. Vytfreedom (talk) 18:59, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done for now: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source. Thanks. Dr.Pinsky (talk) 13:53, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 8 March 2022 (2) 

message: I would like to know why you haven't included the work of Dr. Yuri Shilov, who has been able to successfully place the kingdom of Aratta in Ukraine and specifically the Donbas and Crimean regions of Ukraine?
Is their perhaps some sort of political motivations involved with why his excellent work is not mentioned, due to Dr. Shilov being Russian. Surely this website is not so petty as to disregard his work based on this ridiculous political climate and instead base the information on merit and credibility? 
I'd appreciate an answer at your earliest convenience. 
Samuel N Fisher The real Sam Fisher (talk) 16:41, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yuri Shilov