ClueBot NG Report Interface

// Report

Navigation

ID:1208770
User:92.70.169.90
Article:Hittites
Diff:
m (Dating maintenance tags: {{Cn}})
Line 15: Line 15:
 
Before the discoveries, the only source of information about Hittites had been the Old Testament (see [[Biblical Hittites]]). Francis William Newman expressed the critical view common in the early 19th Century, that if the Hittites existed at all "no Hittite king could have compared in power to the King of Judah...".<ref>Francis William Newman 1853 A history of the Hebrew monarchy: from the administration of Samuel to the Babylonish Captivity 2nd Edition. John Chapman, London P 179 note 2</ref> As archaeological discoveries revealed the scale of the Hittite kingdom in the second half of the 19th Century, Archibald Henry Sayce postulated, rather than to be compared to Judah, the Anatolian civilization "[was] worthy of comparison to the divided Kingdom of Egypt", and was "infinitely more powerful than that of Judah".<ref>The Hittites: the story of a forgotten empire By Archibald Henry Sayce Queen's College, Oxford. October 1888. Introduction</ref> Sayce and other scholars also mention that Judah and the Hittites were never enemies in the Hebrew texts; in the Book of Kings, they supplied the Israelites with cedar, chariots, and horses, as well as being a friend and allied to Abraham in the Book of Genesis.
 
Before the discoveries, the only source of information about Hittites had been the Old Testament (see [[Biblical Hittites]]). Francis William Newman expressed the critical view common in the early 19th Century, that if the Hittites existed at all "no Hittite king could have compared in power to the King of Judah...".<ref>Francis William Newman 1853 A history of the Hebrew monarchy: from the administration of Samuel to the Babylonish Captivity 2nd Edition. John Chapman, London P 179 note 2</ref> As archaeological discoveries revealed the scale of the Hittite kingdom in the second half of the 19th Century, Archibald Henry Sayce postulated, rather than to be compared to Judah, the Anatolian civilization "[was] worthy of comparison to the divided Kingdom of Egypt", and was "infinitely more powerful than that of Judah".<ref>The Hittites: the story of a forgotten empire By Archibald Henry Sayce Queen's College, Oxford. October 1888. Introduction</ref> Sayce and other scholars also mention that Judah and the Hittites were never enemies in the Hebrew texts; in the Book of Kings, they supplied the Israelites with cedar, chariots, and horses, as well as being a friend and allied to Abraham in the Book of Genesis.
   
The first archaeological evidence for the Hittites appeared in tablets found at the [[Assyria]]n colony of [[Kültepe]] (ancient [[Karum Kanesh]]), containing records of trade between Assyrian merchants and a certain "land of ''[[Hattians|Hatti]]''". Some names in the tablets were neither Hattic nor Assyrian, but clearly [[Indo-European languages|Indo-European]].{{Citation needed|date=February 2007}}
+
are you fucking serieus this is kanker goed godverdomme The first archaeological evidence for the Hittites appeared in tablets found at the [[Assyria]]n colony of [[Kültepe]] (ancient [[Karum Kanesh]]), containing records of trade between Assyrian merchants and a certain "land of ''[[Hattians|Hatti]]''". Some names in the tablets were neither Hattic nor Assyrian, but clearly [[Indo-European languages|Indo-European]].{{Citation needed|date=February 2007}}
   
 
The script on a monument at [[Boğazköy]] by a "People of Hattusas" discovered by [[William Wright (missionary)|William Wright]] in 1884 was found to match peculiar [[logogram|hieroglyphic]] scripts from [[Aleppo]] and [[Hamath]] in Northern Syria. In 1887, excavations at Tell El-[[Amarna]] in Egypt uncovered the diplomatic correspondence of Pharaoh [[Amenhotep III]] and his son [[Akhenaton]]. Two of the letters from a "kingdom of ''Kheta''"—apparently located in the same general region as the Mesopotamian references to "land of ''Hatti''"—were written in standard Akkadian cuneiform script, but in an unknown language; although scholars could read it, no one could understand it. Shortly after this, [[Archibald Sayce]] proposed that ''Hatti'' or ''Khatti'' in Anatolia was identical with the "kingdom of ''Kheta''" mentioned in these [[Egypt]]ian texts, as well as with the biblical Hittites. Others such as [[Max Müller]] agreed that ''Khatti'' was probably ''Kheta'', but proposed connecting it with Biblical [[Kittim]], rather than with the "[[Children of Heth]]". Sayce's identification came to be widely accepted over the course of the early 20th century; and the name "Hittite" has become attached to the civilization uncovered at Boğazköy.
 
The script on a monument at [[Boğazköy]] by a "People of Hattusas" discovered by [[William Wright (missionary)|William Wright]] in 1884 was found to match peculiar [[logogram|hieroglyphic]] scripts from [[Aleppo]] and [[Hamath]] in Northern Syria. In 1887, excavations at Tell El-[[Amarna]] in Egypt uncovered the diplomatic correspondence of Pharaoh [[Amenhotep III]] and his son [[Akhenaton]]. Two of the letters from a "kingdom of ''Kheta''"—apparently located in the same general region as the Mesopotamian references to "land of ''Hatti''"—were written in standard Akkadian cuneiform script, but in an unknown language; although scholars could read it, no one could understand it. Shortly after this, [[Archibald Sayce]] proposed that ''Hatti'' or ''Khatti'' in Anatolia was identical with the "kingdom of ''Kheta''" mentioned in these [[Egypt]]ian texts, as well as with the biblical Hittites. Others such as [[Max Müller]] agreed that ''Khatti'' was probably ''Kheta'', but proposed connecting it with Biblical [[Kittim]], rather than with the "[[Children of Heth]]". Sayce's identification came to be widely accepted over the course of the early 20th century; and the name "Hittite" has become attached to the civilization uncovered at Boğazköy.
Reason:ANN scored at 0.968624
Your username:
Reverted:Yes
Comment
(optional):

Note: Comments are completely optional. You do not have to justify your edit.
If this is a false positive, then you're right, and the bot is wrong - you don't need to explain why.