from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Aḫḫijawa (also Achijawa or, mostly in English-language literature, Aḫḫiyawa ) is the name for a region, an empire or a confederation of states in Hittite cuneiform texts from the 15th to 13th centuries BC. Chr.

So far, almost 30 Hittite documents have been discovered in which the name Aḫḫijawa or Aḫḫija occurs. These documents indicate that Aḫḫijawa was west of the Hittite Empire. For a long time it was hotly disputed whether Aḫḫijawa refers to an area in Asia Minor , the Aegean Sea or mainland Greece. In Asia Minor, both Northwest and West and South Asia Minor were discussed as an area for Aḫḫijawa. In research it was and is often associated with the Achaeans , one of three names for Greeks in Homer . According to this, Aḫḫijawa was possibly a powerful Mycenaean empire or a larger Mycenaean confederation. The equation with or with a part of Mycenaean Greece is still not entirely undisputed; however, the vast majority of research now agrees with it. The ancient orientalist Gerd Steiner is currently speaking out against them.

Research history

The localization of Aḫḫijawa and a connection with the Greeks has been controversial since the 1920s. The name Aḫḫijawa is preserved on almost thirty cuneiform tablets in the Hittite language. Most of them came to light during the excavations of the Hittite capital Ḫattuša near Boğazköy , led by Hugo Winckler from 1905 to 1908 and 1911 to 1912 . In total, many thousands of clay tablets or their fragments have been discovered during the exploration of the capital, 2500 of them as early as 1906, during Winckler's first long excavation campaign. Aḫḫijawa was first mentioned in the literature in 1923 in the "Index of Hittite Names" of the British School of Archeology in Jerusalem, Supplementary Papers 1, 3 by Leo Ary Mayer and John Garstang , who linked it with the Cilician Anchiale .

Approximate spread of the Mycenaean culture in the 14th and 13th centuries BC Chr.

In 1924, the Swiss ancient orientalist Emil Forrer , who had had free access to the cuneiform tablets from Boğazköy kept in Berlin since 1917 , first published the theory that Aḫḫijawa with Achaeans, a name used by Greeks in Homer and originally a name for the population of part of Central Greece or an unknown older form of Achaia and the people from Aḫḫijawa are Greeks. He took an ancient form of Achaiw (i) a. He also saw Hittite forms of Greek names in some personal names. Forrer believed in a great Mycenaean empire that stretched from Greece to Asia Minor and also ruled parts of Pamphylia . Since most of the documents to which Forrer referred had not yet been published, the discussion was initially very limited; his theory was initially even received positively. That changed from the late 1920s, when the texts Forrer referred to were published and translated.

A very fierce, sometimes extremely sharp debate developed about the “Aḫḫijawa question”, which also contained personal attacks. On Forrer's side stood above all the Indo-Europeanist Paul Kretschmer , decisive opponents were the ancient orientalists Johannes Friedrich , Albrecht Goetze , who in the mid-1920s initially connected Aḫḫijawa with Greeks, and the highly respected Indo-European and ancient philologist Ferdinand Sommer , with whom Goetze and Friedrich maintained good contacts and who only actively intervened in the debate in 1932. Sommer tried to refute all 13 points that, according to Forrer, spoke in favor of equation and submitted other theses.

An important criticism of Forrer was strong philological problems against the derivation of Aḫḫijawa from Achaia or Achaiwia, a form that is very unlikely. Forrer's opponents considered Aḫḫijawa to be an empire in Anatolia, with mostly indigenous populations, the summer more in Cilicia , whereas Goetze located in northwest Asia Minor, in the area of ​​the Troas. The ancient historian Fritz Schachermeyr tried to take a more mediating stance , who considered parts of Sommers and Goetzes' criticism to be exaggerated, but who considered the equation of A mitijawa with Greeks to be unprovable but likely. When he accused both sides of basing their arguments on too many hypotheses, Schachermeyr got caught between the fronts. Even after years, the dispute was not resolved. Mostly in the following period the attitude was widespread that the Aḫḫijawa question could not be answered conclusively without new knowledge, whereby ancient historians and archaeologists were more inclined to equate them with Mycenaean Greeks, Hittitologists were more skeptical to negative.

In 1994 the geoarchaeologist Eberhard Zangger published a theory according to which Aḫḫijawa - as already assumed by Götze - was in northwestern Anatolia. Zangger assumes an important trading power, which was an important power factor especially in the 13th century - together with allied Luwian states in western Anatolia. The Trojan War was a war by the Mycenaeans against Aḫḫijawa and Aḫḫijawa had also opposed the Hittite Empire and was an important factor in the Sea Peoples movement .

Due to reinterpretations of some relevant texts in the 1970s and 1980s, archaeological research results and, in particular, the discovery or translation of new written documents in the 1980s and 1990s, not least because of the more secure geopolitical situation in South and West Asia Minor, the pendulum began to swing more and more in favor of one Equation of Aḫḫijawa with Mycenaean Greece. The evaluation of the state treaty between Tudḫalija IV. And Kurunta on the bronze plaque from Bogazköy discovered in 1986 confirms that the Lukka countries were located in southwest Asia Minor , west of Tarḫuntašša , to which Kizzuwatna joined to the east . Since the translation of the Karabel inscription by John David Hawkins proves that the area of ​​the Arzawa successor state Mira in western Anatolia extended to the Aegean coast, there is no longer any room for an empire Aḫḫijawa with its center in western or southern Anatolia. Because the localization of the Lukka countries in the southwest of Asia Minor (roughly corresponding to the ancient landscape of Lycia ) is now considered certain, a location of Aḫḫijawa in northwest Anatolia and / or Thrace is very unlikely, because some texts suggest that Aḫḫijawa is not far from the Lukka Countries must have been located (consequently Goetze and Zangger, among others, also localized them in northwestern Asia Minor).

Today, the prevailing research opinion assumes that Emil Forrer was right in his theory at least insofar as Aḫḫijawa is to be equated with an important Mycenaean empire whose center was west of Asia Minor. Even Hittitologists and philologists, despite still unresolved problems with the etymological connection of Aḫḫija (wa) with Achai (wi) a, meanwhile affirm or consider the equation to be very likely. However, it is still not undisputed; Above all, the ancient orientalist Gerd Steiner has consistently argued against the equation since the 1960s.

The dispute as to whether Aḫḫijawa can be connected with the Achaeans , i.e. Mycenaean Greeks, has therefore still not been entirely decided. While the vast majority of research now agrees with this theory, there are still critical voices. The focus of the debate regarding the Aḫḫijawa question has shifted for some time to the point that now mainly the center or the capital of A innerhalbijawa is being discussed within the Mycenaean cultural area.


Significant archaeological sites and approximate locations of settlements known from Hittite sources

Hittite sources

According to the Hittite texts, Aḫḫijawa had changeable relations with the Hittite Empire. The oldest text found so far that mentions Aḫḫija , which is usually equated in research with Aḫḫijawa, comes from the reign of the Hittite great king Arnuwanda I (approx. 1400–1375 BC). He describes events that took place during the reign of one of his predecessors, probably his father Tudhalija I (approx. 1430–1400 BC). Thus Aḫḫija (wa) was already at the latest by the end of the 15th century BC. In the field of vision of the Hittites. Aḫḫija attacked under the leadership of a certain Attariššija the area of Madduwatta , a vassal of the Hittites in western Asia Minor , who then fled. The Hittite great king therefore took to the field against Aḫḫija, defeated Aḫḫija and reinstated Madduwatta. During the battle, the Hittite great king managed to capture 100 chariots from Aḫḫija and to take several thousand warriors prisoner. Madduwatta later proved to be ungrateful, even allied himself with his former enemy A Feija, and attacked with him and others. a. Alašija ( Cyprus ) which was one of the interests of the Hittites.

Muršili II moved around 1315 BC. BC against the city of Milawanda , whose equation with Miletus is "more and more likely" due to recent research results. A thick layer of fire in the heavily Mycenaean Miletus, which marks the end of Miletus V, dates from around this time. The reason for the move against Millawanda was that Aḫḫijawa was one of Arzawa's allies , with whom Mursili was at war. The (last) Arzawian king Uḫḫaziti fled after the victories of the Hittites from the Arzawian capital Apaša (probably to be identified with the later Greek Ephesus ) over the sea to Aḫḫijawa. Detailed descriptions of these events can be found in the Annals of Mursilis II ( CTH 61). For the 13th century BC For the Aḫḫijawa question, the correspondences Muwattalis II. (1290–1272) and Ḫattušilis III. (approx. 1265–1238 / 35) of great importance, namely the Manapa Tarḫunta letter (CTH 191; KUB 19.5) and the Tawagalawa letter (CTH 181; KUB 14.3). In both letters, Piyamaradu , a rebel possibly of Arzavian origin, plays an important role. For many years he repeatedly attacked areas in western Asia Minor , mostly Hittite vassals and seems to have mostly operated from Millawanda, where Atpa was governor, who was also Piyamaradu's son-in-law. Atpa was probably involved in attacks by Piyamaradu on the Hittite vassal state of Šeḫa and on Lazpa ( Lesbos ). Since Millawanda was firmly under the rule of Aḫḫijawa again at that time, it can be assumed that the king of Aḫḫijawa also at least covered the activities of Piyamaradu.

The Hittite ruler Hattušili III. was, however, endeavored to maintain good relations with Aḫḫijawa and asked his king, whom he recognized as having equal rights, not to support the rebels and to hand them over. After his last raid in the Lukka countries (southwest Asia Minor), Piyamaradu had fled from the Hittite great king to Millawanda and escaped extradition by fleeing across the islands to the core area of ​​Aḫḫijawa. King Aḫḫijawas is addressed as a brother in the Tawagalawa letter, which was only given to important rulers such as the Egyptian pharaoh or the king of Babylonia . Amazingly, not only the king himself, but also his brother Tawagalawa , apparently a high representative of Aḫḫijawa, is dubbed a brother by the Hittite great king. A fragmented, unclear passage of the Tawagalawa letter can be interpreted to mean that Tawagalawa himself was previously king of Aḫḫijawa and on a fragment (KUB 23.93), which probably belongs to the Tawagalawa letter, Tawagalawa and his brother are possibly in the same breath referred to as brothers of the Hittite great king, from which it was concluded that there could have been a double kingship in Aḫḫijawa at that time. According to almost unanimous research opinion, Tawagalawa is the Hittite spelling of an old form of the Greek name Eteocles . Forrer had already represented this connection in 1924 and adopted an old form by Etewoklewe , which has now actually been documented in Linear B documents for the Mycenaean period. There are certain parallels with the Greek mythology to strive after the Boeotian Thebes , the two Oedipus Sons' Eteocles and Polynices shared the kingdom and should rule alternately. However, extreme caution is advised when using mythology for historical events. Under no circumstances can the saga of Eteocles and Polynices "be used as proof" that the interpretation of the critical passages in the Tawagalawa letter is correct, especially since it is uncertain whether there is any connection between the mythical Eteocles and the historical Tawagalawa and what a possible historical connection The core of the legend.

Spread of the Anatolian languages ​​during the late Bronze Age; in blue the Luwian languages in the broader sense

At the time of Tudḫalijas IV (approx. 1238 / 36–1215 / 09 BC) the ruler of Aḫḫijawa was subsequently deleted from a list of equal kings in the introduction to the Šaušgamuwa Treaty (CTH 105). One possible explanation is that Aḫḫijawa was now viewed as an enemy. This is supported by the further text of the treaty, in which the vassal in Amurru is asked to stop trade between Aḫḫijawa and Assyria in his ports . Against this interpretation, however, speaks that the ruler of Assyria, with whom relations were bad at that time, is also referred to in the preamble as the great king. Another explanation for the deletion is that Aḫḫijawa was already weakened at that time, at least no longer played a role in Asia Minor. This is supported by the fact that according to the so-called Milawata letter (CTH 182) the city of Millawata (probably identical to Millawanda) was apparently no longer under Aḫḫijawa control. This letter is also from the time of Tudḫallias IV.

Late Bronze Age Greece in Egyptian Sources

In connection with Aḫḫijawa and / or the Achaeans, the Ekweš (also transcribed Aqaiwascha ) are often brought up, who as mercenaries on the side of the Libyans in the Libyan War in the 5th year (approx. 1209/08 BC) of Pharaoh Merenptah against the Egyptians fight. They are thus assigned to the sea ​​peoples to which u. a. also include people from the Lukka countries who are also fighting on the side of the Libyans. The equation of the Ekweš with Achaeans, i.e. Mycenaean Greeks or Aḫḫijawa, is controversial and problematic, as they are shown cropped in the mortuary temple of Merenptah . However, circumcision was uncommon in Greece and was even considered offensive in classical antiquity.

The place name lists in the mortuary temple of the Egyptian pharaoh Amenophis (approx. 1390 / 88–1353 / 51 BC) also include a list of Aegean place names , sometimes also called "Aegean list", which is Keftiu (Crete) on the top left. , which was already under Mycenaean rule, names, including some place names of Crete. On the right side, places and regions of Tanaja are listed, which means either the Peloponnese (including Kythera ) or the entire Greek mainland. Mukana = Mycenae appears as the "upper center" . While research has meanwhile also located almost all other places in the Peloponnese - or close to it - ( Nauplia , Kythera, probably Messenia ( mi-ḏ3-n3-j ) and possibly Elis ( waileia or weleia )), di-qa- yes-s mostly identified with Thebes, but Tegea in the Peloponnese is also an option . Whether Tanaja, which can probably be connected with the Danaers , a name used by the Greeks in Homer, is a political or geographical indication, and how it stands in relation to Aḫḫijawa - e.g. B. a competing empire or just another name - cannot currently be assessed.

Archaeological evidence

The approximate geopolitical situation in the eastern Mediterranean around 1220 BC BC (Miletus, however, came under Hittite rule around 1230 BC, presumably)

The Mycenaean culture, which began in the 17th century BC. First appearing in the Argolis and Laconia BC and soon spreading to the entire Peloponnese and other parts of the southern Greek mainland, was on the one hand strongly influenced by the Minoan culture of Crete, on the other hand it was also in tradition to the mainland Middle Helladic culture. In the 15th century BC BC Mycenaean Greeks apparently conquered not only Crete, but also Minoan areas on the Cyclades, on Rhodes (e.g. Ialysos ), the Dodecanese and in southern western Asia Minor, such as Miletus and possibly Iasos . From this time to the 12th century BC Many finds of Mycenaean pottery come from western Asia Minor, from Troy in the north to Lycia in the south. In most cases, however, Mycenaean goods only testify to trade contacts. Miletus was, however, as the results of the excavations of the Bronze Age layers by Barbara and Wolf-Dietrich Niemeier in the 1990s and 2000s show, from the early 2nd millennium BC onwards. First a strongly Minoan, from the late 15th century BC onwards. A strongly Mycenaean settlement. Pottery kilns, in which Mycenaean ceramics were made, large quantities of Mycenaean utility ceramics and other typical Mycenaean finds prove that Mycenaean Greeks also lived here. In addition, the proportion of clearly indigenous, western Anatolian finds is relatively low. Milet V was born in the late 14th century BC. Destroyed by a layer of fire, which would go well with the campaign of Muršili II against Millawanda, although a destruction of Millawanda is not explicitly mentioned in the annals. Milet VI (approx. 1315 to 1100 BC) was initially also a strongly Mycenaean city, from the 13th century BC onwards. However, Anatolian elements increase very strongly. According to more recent findings, it is only around 1200 BC. BC built defensive wall typologically Hittite city walls, such as the Ḫattušas , much closer than the Mycenaean defensive walls of mainland Greece. In addition, Hittite swords are burial objects in the necropolis of Miletus from the late 13th century BC. And a vessel fragment from that time painted in the Mycenaean style shows a Hittite horned crown . These findings suggest that Miletus was from the late 13th century BC onwards. BC came under strong Hittite influence. This fits well with the Millawata letter from the last third of the 13th century BC. BC, after Millawata was now under Hittite suzerainty, provided that Miletus is equated with Millawata (or Millawanda), as the now clearly dominant research opinion. Mycenaean and older Minoan finds also came to light in and around ancient Teichioussa (about 4 km north of Akbük, located on a peninsula). In Iasos , about 40 km southeast of Miletus, the findings are not as clear as in Miletus, as the Bronze Age and Early Iron Age layers have so far been little explored. They suggest, however, that Iasos was initially a Minoan and from the late 15th century BC onwards. Was a Mycenaean settlement. In addition, 48 chamber tombs were discovered near Müsgebi (near the later Halicarnassus ), which mainly contained Mycenaean finds. The necropolis and the type of additions also show peculiarities that are not to be found on the Greek mainland and can be associated with western Anatolian elements. An associated settlement has so far been little researched, but possibly suggests a mixed Anatolian-Mycenaean population. In the vicinity of Ephesus graves with valuable Mycenaean additions were discovered, as well as Mycenaean ceramics and terracotta statuettes under the later Artemision , which suggest a place of worship also used by Mycenaeans; In addition, test excavations at the Ayasoluk produced not only predominantly western Anatolian finds, but also Mycenaean ceramics. These findings indicate strong trade relations and possibly also a certain proportion of the Greek population in Late Bronze Age Ephesus, which would fit with Hittite sources according to which Aḫḫijawa had relations with Arzawa and possibly also with the successor state Mira.

In summary, it can be said that the archaeological findings do not contradict an equation of Aḫḫijawa with a Mycenaean empire. The Millawanda base can very probably be equated with Miletus; the probably Mycenaean ruled area, which stretched from Miletus to Iasos or possibly to the Halicarnassus peninsula, does not contradict the information regarding Aḫḫijawa in Hittite sources. In addition, at least trade relations of the Mycenaean culture with various places from northwest to southwest Anatolia are proven. If Aḫḫijawa is not related to the Mycenaean culture, it would be surprising that it is not mentioned in Hittite sources.


For a long time the main question was whether Aḫḫijawa meant a Mycenaean empire or an Anatolian one. Attempts were made to locate the latter in Cilicia, western Asia Minor, the Troas or Thrace opposite the Dardanelles (see above, history of research). Since the vast majority of ancient historians, archaeologists and ancient orientalists now assume that a Mycenaean empire is meant, the focus of the Aḫḫijawa question has shifted to the location of the Aḫḫijawa center in the Aegean region for some time.

There are two principal views here. The much more common one presupposes a large Mycenaean empire, the center of which was on the Greek mainland and also ruled the Cyclades , Crete as well as the southeast Aegean and a coastal strip of the west Asia Minor mainland (with Miletus). It is disputed whether Mycenae or Thebes was the capital. Mycenae is supported by the fact that by far the most valuable imports were found there, especially from Egypt and the Near East. In addition, important production sites were located near Mycenae, in the Argolis , according to Berbati , where a large part of the 14th and the first two thirds of the 13th century BC Very uniform Mycenaean pottery was made. It is also pointed out that Mycenae plays a large role in mythology, especially in the works of Homer, in which Agamemnon - for Homer the king of Mycenae - led the army of the Greeks against Troy. Arguments for Thebes are the discovery of numerous cylinder seals , including many Cassite copies that may be a gift from the Assyrian ruler I. Tukulti-Ninurta were. Accordingly, this could have tried to win Thebes as an ally. Furthermore, the toponym Achaia was originally associated with central Greece and only came to the Peloponnese at a later time. In addition, a man of Miletus is on several Linear B - tablets (. Eg TH Fq 177, TH Fq 198) mentions from Thebes, which was probably fed on the farm, which could indicate links Thebes to Asia Minor Miletus. Furthermore, the legends about Thebes also play an important role in Greek mythology. In the ship catalog of the Iliad, the contingents and cities of Eastern Boeotia are mentioned first and the entire Greek fleet starts from Aulis , the port of Thebes, in the direction of Troy. However, the dating of the ship catalog is very controversial among experts.

The relationships between the individual palaces are unclear. The thesis of a Mycenaean empire centered on mainland Greece cannot be verified or falsified by Linear B documents. Judging by these, there were apparently smaller autonomous Mycenaean states, each controlled by a powerful palace center and centrally organized economically (see also palace economy ). In any case, the Mycenaean Pylos seems to have controlled only a large part of Messenia and the palace of Thebes in Eastern Boeotia and part of Evia . An overriding ruler to whom these states were subordinate cannot be grasped in the texts. In some regions - the so-called periphery of the Mycenaean palace period - such as Elis , western Achaia , western central Greece and probably also Thessaly , there were even still many hilltop settlements ruled by local princes, who controlled only a small area. A sovereignty of Mycenae, Thebes or even Orchomenos over the entire Mycenaean Greece, as was previously assumed, is not proven by the Linear B documents, but is not denied either. Researchers like Jorrit Kelder, Hans Lohmann , and Birgitta Eder have recently brought the thesis of a great empire back into play. The astonishing standardization of the linear B texts, as well as the uniformity of the Mycenaean culture, suggest a central regulatory power. However, it should be noted that the texts 1. only represent inventory and merchandise management lists that were important for the administration of the respective state, 2. correspondence or contracts with other states have not yet come to light, 3. most of the linear B documents from the early 12th century BC BC and from the last months before the destruction of the palaces. Far-reaching geopolitical changes for the years before are by no means unlikely in this time of crisis.

A lesser opinion assumes that behind Aḫḫijawa there is an East Aegean empire that comprised some eastern Aegean islands, including the Dodecanese , Mycenaean bases in western Asia Minor, such as Miletus and perhaps Iasos, and possibly parts of Crete . Arguments for this assumption are that such an empire and its center was much closer to the empire of the Hittites than Thebes or Mycenae; also the assumption that in the 12th century BC Some eastern islands and Miletus formed a cultural koine . The eastern Aegean region also remained from the destruction and upheaval that took place on the Greek mainland around 1200 BC. Occurred, largely spared. This theory is contradicted by the fact that neither on Rhodes, where Mountjoy and Benzi assume the center of Aḫḫijawa, nor in Miletus or other places in question, a Mycenaean palace has been found.


  • Gary M. Beckman, Trevor R. Bryce , Eric H. Cline : The Ahhiyawa Texts (= Writings from the Ancient World 28). Atlanta 2011. ISBN 978-1-58983-268-8
  • Robert Fischer: The Ahhijawa question. With an annotated bibliography (= Dresden contributions to Hethitology, Volume. 26) , Harrassowitz, Wiesbaden 2010, ISBN 978-3-447-05749-3 (helpful for research history and literature). Note the review by Birgitta Eder , the review by Jorrit M. Kelder .
  • Emil Forrer : Prehomeric Greeks in the cuneiform texts of Boghazköi. In: Communications from the German Orient Society in Berlin . Volume 63, 1924, pp. 1-24. ( online ).
  • Hans G. Güterbock : Hittites and Akhaeans. A new look. In: Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society. Volume 128 No. 2, 1984, pp. 114-128.
  • Susanne Heinhold-Krahmer : Albrecht Goetze and the Aḫḫiyawa question. In: Studi micenei ed egeo-anatolici. (SMEA) Volume 49, 2007, pp. 363-376. ( online version ) (as PDF).
  • Jorrit M. Kelder: Mycenaeans in Western Anatolia. In: JP Stronk, MD de Weerd (Ed.): TALANTA. Proceedings of the Dutch Archeological and Historical Society XXXVI-XXXVII (2004-2005). 2006, pp. 49-86. ( online at Academia.edu ).
  • Jorrit M. Kelder: Ahhiyawa and the World of the Great Kings. A re-evaluation of Mycenaean political structures. In: TALANTA. Volume 55, 2012, pp. 41-52.
  • Joachim Latacz : Troy and Homer. The way to solve an old riddle. 6th, expanded and updated edition, Koehler & Amelang, Leipzig 2010. ISBN 978-3-7338-0332-2
  • Gustav Adolf Lehmann : The political-historical relations of the Aegean world of the 15th – 13th centuries Century BC To Egypt and the Middle East. In: Joachim Latacz (Ed.): Two hundred years of Homer research (= Colloquium Rauricum. ) Volume 2. Teubner, Stuttgart 1991, pp. 105–126. ISBN 3-519-07412-5 .
  • Penelope A. Mountjoy : The East Aegean-West Anatolian Interface in the Late Bronze Age. Mycenaeans and the Kingdom of Ahhiyawa. In: Anatolian Studies Volume 48, 1998. pp. 33-67.
  • Wolf-Dietrich Niemeier : Hattusa and Ahhijawa in the conflict over Millawanda / Miletus. In: The Hittites and their empire. The people of 1000 gods. Theiss, Stuttgart 2002. ISBN 3-8062-1676-2 .
  • Wolf-Dietrich Niemeier: Greece and Asia Minor in the late Bronze Age. The historical background of the Homeric epics. In: Michael Meier-Brügger (Ed.): Homer, interpreted by a large lexicon. Files from the Hamburg Colloquium from 6.-8. October 2010 at the end of the lexicon of the early Greek epic (= treatises of the Academy of Sciences in Göttingen. New series volume 21). De Gruyter, Berlin 2012, pp. 141–180 ( [2] on pdfs.semanticscholar.org).
  • Robert Oberheid: Emil O. Forrer and the beginnings of Hittitology. A biography of the history of science. de Gruyter, Berlin 2007 ISBN 978-3-11-019434-0 .
  • Wolfgang Röllig : Achaeans and Trojans in Hittite Sources? In: Ingrid Gamer-Wallert (Ed.): Troia. Bridge between Orient and Occident. Attempto, Tübingen 1992, pp. 183-200. ISBN 3-89308-150-X .
  • Fritz Schachermeyr : Mycenae and the Hittite Empire (= Austrian Academy of Sciences, Philosophical-Historical Class. Meeting reports. 472 = Publications of the Commission for Mycenaean Research. 11). Publishing house of the Austrian Academy of Sciences, Vienna 1986, ISBN 3-7001-0777-3 .
  • Ferdinand Sommer : The Aḫḫijava documents. (= Treatises of the Bavarian Academy of Sciences, Phil.- hist. Dept. NF6 ). Munich 1932.
  • Gerd Steiner : The Aḫḫijawa question today. In: Saeculum . Volume 15, 1964, pp. 365-392.
  • Gerd Steiner: The Case of Wiluša and Ahhiyawa. In: Bibliotheca Orientalis. Volume 64, Nos. 5-6, 2007, Columns 590-611.
  • Eberhard Zangger : A new battle for Troy. Archeology in Crisis. Droemer Knauer, Munich 1994. ISBN 3-426-77233-7 .


  1. ^ Susanne Heinhold-Krahmer : On diplomatic contacts between the Hittite empire and the country of Aḫḫiyawa. in: Eva Alram-Stern, Georg Nightingale (Ed.): Keimelion. Elite education and elitist consumption from the Mycenaean palace period to the Homeric era. Files from the International Congress from February 3rd to 5th, 2005 in Salzburg. (= Austrian Academy of Sciences. Philosophical-historical class. Memoranda, Vol. 350), Vienna 2007, p. 195, note 458, counts a maximum of 28 items
  2. ^ Gary M. Beckman, Trevor Bryce , Eric H. Cline : The Ahhiyawa Texts. Society of Biblical Literature, Atlanta 2011, p. 3 f.
  3. Jörg Klinger: The Hittites. CH Beck, Munich 2007, p. 12.
  4. Heinhold-Krahmer 2007, p. 363, note 5.
  5. Emil O. Forrer: Prehomeric Greeks in the cuneiform texts of Boghazköi. Communications from the German Orient Society in Berlin 63 (1924), pp. 1–24; ders .: The Greeks in the Boghazköi texts , Orientalische Literaturzeitung 27 (1924) 113ff.
  6. This and the following, unless otherwise stated, according to Güterbock 1984; Heinhold-Krahmer 2007; Beckmann et al. 2011; Forrer, Prehomeric Greeks in the cuneiform texts of Boghazköi.
  7. Steiner 1964, p. 365.
  8. ^ Robert Oberheid: Emil O. Forrer and the beginnings of Hittitology. A biography of the history of science , Walter de Gruyter, Berlin 2007, p. 107.
  9. To this day the equation has caused problems, cf. u. a. Ivo Hajnal : Names and etymologies - only of limited use as evidence. In: Christoph Ulf , Robert Rollinger (Ed.): Was Troia in Kilikien? The current dispute over Homer's Iliad. Scientific Book Society, Darmstadt 2011, p. 250 ff.
  10. Fritz Schachermeyr: Hittites and Achaeans. Announcements of the Old Oriental Society 9.1-2, 1935; In much later publications, Schachermeyr tended even more towards equation.
  11. Eberhard Zangger: A new battle for Troy. Archeology in Crisis. Droemer Knauer, Munich 1994.
  12. s. Above all, Frank Starke : Troy in the context of the historical-political and linguistic environment of Asia Minor in the 2nd millennium. in: Studia Troica. 7, 1997, pp. 447-48; on the State Treaty with a translation and interpretation: Heinrich Otten : The bronze plaque from Boğazköy. A State Treaty of Tuthalija IV. Studies on the Boğazköy Texts. Supplement 1. Harrassowitz, Wiesbaden 1988.
  13. John David Hawkins: Tarkasnawa, King of Mira, Boğazköy sealings and Karabel Anatolian Studies, Vol. 48, 1998, pp. 1-31.
  14. Beckmann et al. 2011, p. 3 f .; see. also Wolf-Dietrich Niemeier: The Mycenaeans in Western Asia Minor and the problem of the origins of the Sea Peoples. In: Seymour Gitin, Amihai Mazar - Ephraim Stern: Mediterranean peoples in transition, thirteenth to early tenth centuries BCE, in honor of Trude Dothan. Jerusalem 1998, pp. 17-65, especially pp. 20ff.
  15. see below a. Ivo Hajnal : Names and etymologies - only of limited use as evidence. In: Christoph Ulf , Robert Rollinger (Ed.): Was Troia in Kilikien? The current dispute over Homer's Iliad. Scientific Book Society, Darmstadt 2011, p. 250 ff.
  16. Gerd Steiner: The Aḫḫijawa question today. Saeculum 15, 1964, pp. 365-392.
  17. Beckmann et al. 2011, p. 4: "Steiner (...) who remains almost the lone voice of dissent"
  18. ^ Gerd Steiner: The Case of Wiluša and Ahhiyawa. Bibliotheca Orientalis 64, No. 5-6, 2007, pp. 590-612 (accessed via De Gruyter Online).
  19. Niemeier 2012, p. 156
  20. On this issue in particular: Metin Alparslan: Some thoughts on the Ahhiyawa question. In: A. Süel (Ed.): Acts of the Vth Congress of Hittitology. Corum September 02-08 , 2002. Buasım Takihi, Ankara 2005, pp. 33–41, especially pp. 34–38, with additional documents.
  21. Niemeier 2012, p. 153, note 124.
  22. Niemeier 2012, p. 153.
  23. ^ Metin Alparslan: Some thoughts on the Ahhiyawa question. In: A. Süel (Ed.): Acts of the Vth Congress of Hittitology. Corum September 02 - 08, 2002. Buasım Takihi, Ankara 2005, pp. 33–41, especially p. 38 Note.
  24. Lehmann 1991, p. 112.
  25. Lukas Thommen: Ancient body history. vdf Hochschulverlag, Zurich 2007, p. 66.
  26. For the lists of place names see above all: Elmar Edel , Manfred Görg : The lists of place names in the northern columned courtyard of the mortuary temple Amenophis III. Hanstein, Bonn 2005, ISBN 978-3-447-05219-1 .
  27. ^ John Bennet : The Geography of the Mycenaean Kingdoms. In: Yves Duhoux , Anna Morpurgo Davies (Ed.): A Companion to Linear B. Mycenaean Greek Texts and their World. Volume 2, Peeters, Louvain 2011, p. 159.
  28. ^ John Bennet : The Geography of the Mycenaean Kingdoms. In: Yves Duhoux , Anna Morpurgo Davies (Ed.): A Companion to Linear B. Mycenaean Greek Texts and their World. Volume 2, Peeters, Louvain 2011, p. 160.
  29. See also Lehmann 1991!
  30. Jorrit M. Kelder provides an overview of the Mycenaean finds in western Asia Minor: Mycenaeans in Western Anatolia. In: JP Stronk, MD de Weerd (Ed.): TALANTA. Proceedings of the Dutch Archeological and Historical Society XXXVI-XXXVII (2004-2005). 2006, pp. 49–86, which is followed by the next, unless otherwise indicated.
  31. Niemeier 2012, p. 167.
  32. Niemeier 2012, p. 167.
  33. Alexander Herda: Karkiša-Karien and the so-called Ionian migration. In: Frank Rumscheid (Ed.): The Karer and the Others. International Colloquium at the Free University of Berlin, October 2005. Habelt, Bonn 2009, ISBN 978-3-7749-3632-4 , p. 69 ff., With reservations, goes from a Carian conquest of Miletus around 1200/1180 BC. BC, for which, however, contemporary evidence is missing. However, he also emphasizes that even after the late 13th century, Mycenaean traditions continued to live for a long time, despite the then strongly increasing Hittite-West Anatilian influence.
  34. Niemeier 2012, p. 167.
  35. Jorrit M. Kelder: Mycenaeans in Western Anatolia. In: Jan P. Stronk, Maarten D. de Weerd (eds.): TALANTA. Proceedings of the Dutch Archeological and Historical Society XXXVI-XXXVII (2004-2005). 2006, p. 61
  36. Jorrit M. Kelder: Mycenaeans in Western Anatolia. In: Jan P. Stronk, Maarten D. de Weerd (eds.): TALANTA. Proceedings of the Dutch Archeological and Historical Society XXXVI-XXXVII (2004-2005). 2006, p. 61 f.
  37. Restricting u. a. Kelder 2006 regarding strongly Mycenaean character Müsgebis: Jana Mokrišová: Minonisation, Mykenaeanisation, and Mobility. A View from Southwest Anatolia. In: Evi Gorogianni, Peter Pavuk, Luca Girella (eds.): Beyond Thalassocracies: Understanding Processes of Minoanisation and Mycenaeanisation in the Aegean. Oxbow Books, Oxford 2016, chap. 3
  38. Michael Kerschner: The ionic colonization in the light of new archaeological research in Ephesus. In: Eckart Olshausen, Holger Sonnabend (ed.): "We were Troians" - migrations in the ancient world. Stuttgart Colloquium on the Historical Geography of Antiquity, 8, 2002. Franz Steiner, Stuttgart 2006, pp. 366–369.
  39. Beckmann et al. 2011, p. 3 f .; Wolf-Dietrich Niemeier : The Mycenaeans in Western Asia Minor and the problem of the origins of the Sea Peoples. In: Seymour Gitin, Amihai Mazar - Ephraim Stern: Mediterranean peoples in transition, thirteenth to early tenth centuries BCE, in honor of Trude Dothan. Jerusalem 1998, pp. 17-65, especially pp. 20ff.
  40. ^ Gary M. Beckman, Trevor R. Bryce , Eric H. Cline : The Ahhiyawa Texts (= Writings from the Ancient World 28). Society of Biblical Literature, Atlanta 2011, ISBN 987-1-58983-268-8, p. 4.
  41. On the seal find, which consisted of a collection that also contained Cypriot , a Hittite and Mycenaean seals: Edith Porada : The Cylinder Seals Found at Thebes in Boeotia. Archive for Orient Research Volume 28, 1981/82, pp. 1-70.
  42. ^ Wolf-Dietrich Niemeier : Greece and Asia Minor in the late Bronze Age. The historical background of the Homeric epics. In: Michael Meier-Brügger (Ed.): Homer, interpreted by a large lexicon. Files from the Hamburg Colloquium from 6.-8. October 2010 at the end of the lexicon of the early Greek epic (= treatises of the Academy of Sciences in Göttingen. New series volume 21). De Gruyter, 2012, p. 157 (with further evidence).
  43. Klaus Tausend: Comments on the identification of the Ahhijawa. In: Gustav Adolf Lehmann , Dorit Engster, Alexander Nuss (eds.): From the Bronze Age history to the modern reception of antiquities , Syngramma vol. 1, Universitätsverlag Göttingen 2012, p. 153 f.
  44. An overview of the dispute about the age of the ship catalog and the different positions with a mediating opinion: Birgitta Eder : Once again: The Homeric ship catalog. in: Christoph Ulf (Hrsg.): The new dispute over Troy. A balance sheet. CH Beck, Munich 2003, pp. 287-308. Online version
  45. On the political structure of the various regions during the so-called Mycenaean palace period and the question of where palace centers arose and where not, see, among others, Jorrit Kelder : A Great King at Mycenae. An Argument for the wanax as Great King and the lawagetas as vassal ruler. In: Palamedes 3, 2008, pp. 49-74. [1] and Birgitta Eder : Reflections on the political geography of the Mycenaean world, or: Arguments for the supra-regional importance of Mycenae in the Late Bronze Age Aegean. In: Geographia Antiqua. XVIII, 2009, pp. 5-46. On-line.
  46. Forrer 1924 linked the name Tawagalawa with the Eteocles of Orchomenus, as he saw the name of his father Andreus in another document
  47. Josef Fischer: Who once sat on the Mycenaean throne? ( academia.edu [accessed August 9, 2020]).
  48. ^ For example, Penelope A. Mountjoy : The East Aegean-West Anatolian Interface in the Late Bronze Age, Mycenaeans and the Kingdom of Ahhiyawa. Anatolian Studies 48, 1998, pp. 33-67; Mario Benzi : Anatolia and the Eastern Aegean at the Time of the Trojan War Text. In: Franco Montanari, Paolo Ascheri (eds.): Omero Tremilia anno dopo. Rome 2002, pp. 343-409, especially pp. 367 ff .; Already hinted at by Gustav Adolf Lehmann : The 'political-historical' relations of the Agäis world of the 15th – 13th centuries. Jhs. v. About the Middle East and Egypt: some references. In: Joachim Latacz (Ed.): Two hundred years of Homer research. (= Colloquium Rauricum. Volume 2). Teubner, Stuttgart 1991, pp. 105 to 126.