Talk:History of the Hittites

Merge
The article should better be merged with the Hittites article! -JFK 15:57, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Mild Oppose. Especially given that this article should have more discussion of the hemming and hawing produced by the fragmentary nature of our understanding of the Hittites, I think it's better to have the Hittite article cover all of their culture, glossing their history, and this one go into further detail, esp. about the competing scholarship. -LlywelynII (talk) 11:52, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Reverts
I undid the last two changes to the article, as it appears to have been vandalised. Please make sure that the changes are correct, I am new to WP. Crohan 12:33, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Copyright vio?
The text
 * It is generally assumed that the Hittites came into Anatolia some time before 2000 B.C. While their earlier location is disputed, there has been strong evidence for more than a century that the home of the Indo-Europeans in the fourth and third millennia was in what is now Bulgaria and Ukraine. The Hittites and other members of the Anatolian family, then, came from the north, possibly along the Caspian Sea. The dominant inhabitants in central Anatolia at the time were Hattians. There were also Assyrian colonies in the country; it was from these that the Hittites adopted the cuneiform script. It took some time before the Hittites established themselves, as is clear from some of the texts included here. For several centuries there were separate Hittite groups, usually centered around various cities. But then strong rulers with their center in Boğazköy succeeded in bringing these together and conquering large parts of central Anatolia to establish the Hittite kingdom.

seems to be uncomfortably close to this page. -Djnjwd (talk) 00:05, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Edit
I've almost completely rewritten the article using Trevor Bryce's History of the Hittites. It now gives a clearer and much more detailed overview of the History of the Hittite Kingdom. -(Javierfv1212 (talk) 00:12, 21 March 2010 (UTC) )

Article Expansion
Article currently glosses right past Muwatalli's importance in the collapse of the Hittite state, only dealing with his involvement against the Egyptians. Apparently, he initiated a major androcentric and henotheistic religious and administrative reform, including a new capital, along the lines of Egypt's Akhenaton and his brother's decision to keep on his nephew as an subsidiary prince led to infighting. Source and more info here. -LlywelynII (talk) 11:52, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

I just realized that this article suffered severe degradation, losing all of the Old and Middle period, since last March. Apparently due to edits by. I have done a deep revert. We will need to review in detail whether any valuable content has been lost by this, but on the face of it is unacceptable to have an early Bronze Age section ramble about Indo-Europeans, and then jump to Tudhaliya I immediately. --dab (𒁳) 15:21, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Hittite Empire page
We need a seperate page for the Hittite Empire. Other Empires of this region have articles. Come to think of it, didn't we have a Hittite Empire page? what happened to it? (Toolen (talk) 18:25, 29 December 2010 (UTC))

Make things comprehensible--what's the use of just being correct?
What is the significance of the superscribed (Hittite URU Ḫattuša) at the beginning of the article? The object of writing an encyclopedia article is to inform the average well-informed reader, not to pander to the specialists who will already know what the relationship between "Hittite" and "Ḫattuša" is anyway.P0M (talk) 04:06, 7 April 2012 (UTC)