Talk:Middle Bronze Age migrations (ancient Near East)

References - non mainstream view??
I am not an expert, but this seems like a controversial theory presented as fact. The lack of references (only two papers from 50 years ago) seems to imply that, as does the recent provenance of the article. Unless this is corrected with either more references or with noting that the theory is a minority view, I will tag the article for inadequate citations and being unbalanced. Causantin (talk) 15:35, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

yes, this article is mostly original research. Trying to fix it or at least insert some caveats. --dab (𒁳) 12:40, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Inaccurate determination.
"For reasons unknown, the Hittites moved into Khattian Central Anatolia (Central Turkey), conquering the Hattians and later adopting their culture and name." Hittites, didnt adobt name of hatti, they called themselves Nesali. They just didnt change the name of region they conquered "lands of hatti". Which Biblical writers erroneously took as if it was their name. A modern example to the same phenomenon is Hungarians, although they call themselves Magyars. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.100.165.143 (talk) 01:55, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Hittite migration
"However, newer theories contradict the notion of supposed migration of the Hittites, suggesting that a Proto-Indo-Hittite languages dates back to fourth or eight millennium BC.[3]" < One book is not "newer theories". It seems the authors fell prey to the computations of Bouckaert et al., which are demonstrably mistaken and widely not accepted by archaeologists and linguists. At least a minimum abstract of the line of arguments is required instead of empty phrases. HJJHolm (talk) 16:49, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Obsolete theory
The article deals with a completely obsolete theory, needless to say that it should be written from scratch.Alexikoua (talk) 19:28, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Anatolian languages and peoples
In pp. 7f. of this paper, Melchert dates Proto-Anatolian to about 3000–2500 BC, but cautions that Proto-Anatolian could have been spoken outside of Anatolia. The possibility that it was spoken in the Balkans (Ezero culture?) instead should not be ruled out. Although there is evidence of Hittite and Luwian speech in Kültepe by the early second millennium BC, this does not contradict the possibility of a migration into Anatolia by about 2000–1900 BC, and Hittites suggests this as well. Admittedly, I cannot judge the material archaeological evidence for such a migration. But since a migration from the west (or anywhere else) into Anatolia does not seem to be supported for earlier times (like the fourth millennium BC), and the alternative possibility of indigenous origin of the Anatolian Indo-European languages is now disfavoured again, this looks like the best candidate for archaeological traces of the entry of the Anatolian languages into Anatolia. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 19:19, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Lazaridis et al. (2017)
It seems to me that Lazaridis et al. (2017) was misrepresented. I've made some corrections. This edit, edit-summary

changed

into

Is this an intentional distortion? Or just a misunderstanding? What Lazaridis et al. give as a possible explanation (p.55 suppl. info):

Not a hint of a migration from Iran. In the main article they state:

And further:

Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk!  10:30, 21 January 2020 (UTC)


 * I removed it but it was added again, what does it mean? 10,000 years ago? Mycenaeans were certainly an Indo-European people, Proto-Indo-Europeans themselves didn't exist thousands of years prior to the Bronze Age. MojtabaShahmiri (talk) 10:59, 21 January 2020 (UTC)


 * You removed it indeed; please read the quotes above carefully. Lazaridis et al. (2017) there was some gemtic contribution from steppe-related peoples, but the large bulk of Greek genes derives from neolithic farmers. Joshua Jonathan  - Let's talk!  11:05, 21 January 2020 (UTC)