Investigation Engels 2024 Revision PDF

Investigation for a Study of the Mediterranean LBA Chronology Rudi Laatsch, December 2024 Haarlem, the Netherlands Revision Introduction The impetus for this study is to be found in a considerable doubt on the accuracy of the time tables of the Mediterranean archaeology. The search for information was quite often leading to a confusing situation when it came to time allocation. It often excited impediments, specifically for events in Hellas and Anatolia when accurate information was required. It is the meaning to draw attention again to the Mediterranean chronology which shows many of these weak aspects. This Investigation is meant to help developing a new timeframe by which mainly the Mycenaean-Greek city-states wil be involved, of which the chronology shows such a big Gap in the Early Iron Age. The Helladic chronology ultimately stumbles in the Four Dark Ages of Greece, when the Mycenaean Culture in the Late Bronze Age proceeds in emptiness. The problem of the Mediterranean chronology has been studied by various scholars. An important study was made by Peter James et.al., who studied the weak spots in the existing chronology at length, which then was published as Centuries of Darkness in 1992. Their research focussed on all the territories of the Mediterranean and the neighbouring areas, where in all of them a large problem of time was found. The authors concluded that lowering all data by 200- 250 years, meaning to a later date, would solve the problem satisfactorily and suggested to start developing a new time-frame by using the data from the latest kinglists of the Neo-Hittite Kingdoms in Northern Syria and build upwards into the past from a secure date, being the Assyrian conquest of Carchemish in 717 BCE. The Kinglists of the Neo-Hittite kingdoms in Northern Syria and of the Great Kingdom of Hatti in Anatolia should then further be used for the preparation of a New Chronology, supplemented with texts on the accessory events. This suggestion of Peter James et.al. will be the basis of this Investigation. However, it must be emphasized that the new timeframe is to be developed without using the Egyptian chronology, which the authors considered as being the main source of the problem. A process of building steps has been selected in this Investigation, whereby the subjects will be discussed while developing in the consecutive chapters. The contents will be dealt with in the following Chapters, with some additional notes: 1 Chapters I - The Current Mediterranaean Chronology and its Shortcomings In this Chapter the attention is drawn to the present Helladic Chronological System in which all the dating is brought together from most of the archaeological excavations in the Mediterranean Area by which Mycenaean artifacts were found. This Chronological System is up for discussion in this document. Many local cultures in the Mediterranaean, from Sardinia up to Cyprus and the Levant, show Gaps in time from the 13th – 12th century BCE up to the 8th, apparently lacking habitation. [Peter James et al. 1992] James et.al described in their book Centuries of Darkness a series of areas over the entire Mediterranaean having this same problem. Quite some attention will be given in this short Chapter to some specific Gaps in Hellas and Anatolia. Anatolia has been added mainly while this large peninsula did play a major role in the historical developments of the Aegean world. II - The Basis for a New Approach This chapter is meant to discuss details that are required to set up a new chronology which can withstand a critical view. This will be done on basis of the date that Carchemish in Northern Syria was stormed and destroyed by the Assyrians in 717 BCE. The Kinglists of both the Land of Hatti [“the Land of the Hittites”] and the two Neo-Hittite kingdoms in eastern Anatolia and Northern Syria are of importance for this subject, with kingdoms originally being part of the Land of Hatti. These two kingdoms finally ceased to exist after they were conquered by Assyria. Details of their chronology wll be used to build-up a new chronology from which the Mycenaean time-scheme can be composed. III - The Anatolian Coastline Cities along the Anatolian Westcoast appeared to be of great importance for long-distance trading-exchange of goods by sea, which was mainly done by the people of Ahhiyawa. Ahhiyawa appeared to have been a kingdom, located somewhere on the islands of the Aegean Sea and on the mainland beyond, however, in these circumstances of time the name Ahhiyawa, the Anatolian name, could certainly be read as to be a reference to a kingdom of the Mycenaeans. The city-state Millawanda was one of these seaports, probably the main harbour in this area, Troia (Troy) might have been another. Troia was of importance because of its location at the Dardanelles, with a view on trade with Black Sea cities. The Mycenaen merchants spent a lot of effort in increasing their influence on the trade by interfering with the administration of the towns, mainly concerning Millawanda and Troia, which led to political unrest. 2 All these Anatolian cities and towns factually were part of the Hatti Confederation, or more precisely The Great Kingdom of Hatti, which meant that the Hatti Kings regularly had to reinstate their authority after a revolt, which was not an easy task. The assistance of the army had to be called in in many cases. In the long run, however, the Mycenaeans proved to be able to have a lasting influence on all the cities on the West Coast of Anatolia, and mainly on the most important one being Millawanda. This came however to an end. The Kingdom of Hatti faced an almost impossible task. It was moreover not quite oriented towards the complex dynamic developments in distant areas. The Mycenaeans on the other hand were developing themselves in a large number of areas and had become part of an ever expanding network of trade and power. IV - The Mycenaean Cities and the New Chronology A large number of data have become available by making use of the Timeschemes of the last phases of the Land of Hatti before it collapsed, and of the Neo-Hittite kingdoms at a later date, which could be used for composing a Helladic Chronology with completely new dates. The Existing Chronology without time dates is essentially referential in origin and could therefore be applied again for the coherence of the Mycenaean history some 300 years later, as it might be expected to be broadly useful again in the Early Iron Age. The succession of disasters that struck many of the cities and towns in Hellas was elaborated by the Proceedings of the Conference of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna in 2022, concerning the Synchronization of the Destructions of the Mycenaean Palaces. The synchronization appeared to be of importance for the arrival of the Dorians in Hellas, and also for the effects of the downfall of Troia on later Archaic Greece. The disasters of Thebes, Dimini and Volos in those years might also have had some reference to those of the southern areas. V - Discussion VI - Conclusions VII - References 3 I - The Current Mediterranaean Chronology and its Shortcomings The Late Bronze Age in the Mediterranean stretched from about 1600 towards 1100 BCE. This period of time has also been named the Helladic period, while the Mycenaean-Greeks had trading centers from Sicily and Italy towards Anatolia and the Levant, which they also colonised sometimes. From their establishment in Greece the Mycenaeans had spread on almost all the coastal areas of the Mediterranean, applying their exceptional dynamic approach at the exchange of expensive goods over great distances. This Mycenaean period, 1600-1200 BCE, has chronological been subdivided in Middle- and Late Helladic, and further in shorter sections. This system has been used in detail for dating the found objects at the excavations. This chronological system is essentially referential, all finds culturely in relation with each other, while dates were assessed. This Helladic System has been connected in the past to the one of Egypt, the dating was adapted to the Egyptian dates, the latter being considered verified as of absolute value. These modified timeschemes were from then on decisive for all the Mycenaean excavation results. It has become evident meanwhile that these dates often differ significantly from the values determined by archaeologists at the proceeding excavations. The archeaological accepted values then resulted in deviations and gaps in the timelines, with periods with virtually showing no habitation anymore. Peter James, in collaboration with I.Thorpe, Nikos Kokkinos, Robert Morkot and John Frankish, studied most of these problem areas in the Mediterranean [Centuries of Darkness,1992] and concluded that the dating in a large number of areas had been assessed to a too high level and therefore were largely inaccurate. They became convinced that the Egyptian datinghistory was to be regarded as the cause of the irregularities in the Mediterranean and Mesopotamian history, as the chronology apparently had been inflated with almost three centuries upward, making all dates to appear older. The authors finally suggested to produce a new scheme of chronology, starting 717 BCE as being the date of the conquest of Carchemish by the Assyrians, and then work upwards by using available data of the kinglist of the Neo-Hittite kingdoms in Northern Syria. These kingdoms were located along the straight southwards flowing Euphrates, with the city Malatiya in the north and Carchemish in the south, both city-states originally marking the eastern border of the Land of Hatti (the Land of the Hittites). Their kinglists have become known, both from the earlier kings, which were assigned under the authority of the Great Hatti Kings, and as well from the nine kings reigning later in the period following the collapse of the Great Hatti Kingdom. The names of these latter kings have all been found at excavations. Carchemish was captured by the Assyrians in 717 BCE, from which a timeline could be made using the known Hatti kinglist, provided that the Gap, the correction for harmonizing with the official chronology, remained unused. [Peter James et al., 1992] 4 Hellas The Mycenaean civilisation completely collapsed around 1150 BCE. It is very likely that this was caused by heavy earthquakes, mostly on the Peloponnesos, followed by enemy incursions by tribes from far outside the area. Many populations in the eastern Mediterranean areas then became largely unstable, especially caused by the Trojan War and the destruction of Troia which led to a major social disruption in many areas. A great part of the Mycenaean population on the Peloponnesos abandoned their living quarters, many of them fled to northern Athens and further towards the Anatolian coastal areas. Many areas seemed to have been depopulated, leading to the impression of having come in poverty, while the cultural development appeared to have stopped. This depopulation is to be seen as quite remarkable, while the Mycenaean city-states initially were quite densely populated. The population of Mycenaean Thebes in Boeotia e.g. has been estimated at 30.000 to 50.000 people. A similar estimate has been made for Orchomenos in Lokris and Pylos in Messenia, the latter known as the residence of king Nestor. It is estimated that the greater part of Boeotia’s population disappeared, just like 70 % of the population of Argolis (on the Peloponnesos). Only Mycenae and Tiryns continued to exist to a limited extent after the disasters for some time. Prof. Anthony Snodgrass (1980) adressed this subject of the depopulation in Greece in the 12th century BCE, and the dramatic rise in population after 800 BCE. It appears that the population growth had a drastic increase around 750 BCE . This is graphically shown in the following diagram, where the figures have been based on burial counting. 5 A curtain of darkness was drawn all over the Mycenaean world in Greece which was to last over about a period of 400 years, untill 750 BCE. This period got the name of “The Dark Age of Greece”. Ultimately, the later population of the Greek civilisation resumed their life with full energy at about 750 BCE, in a manner which for the present observer would seem as if no interruption had taken place at all. The sudden great growth of population after 750 BCE is also to be seen as quite remarkable. The population practically ceased with constructing buildings after 1150 BCE, ashlar masonry and saw-cut blocks were therefore not encountered anymore at excavations, as building elements that used to be common. These were, however, being in common use again in the 8th century. It is most surprising to meet the use of writing again after these four ages. The lineair-B writing was admittely reserved in those remote days for a part of the population in the Mycenaean areas, but appeared to be mostly of importance for the administration, as well for the civil service and commercial interests. But there did not exist any writing during these Four Dark Ages. The Greek population started, however, using a completely new way of writing around the year 750 BCE, a script they had learned at the Phoenician coast. Maurice Bowra [1955] made the following note about this subject in his book Homer and his Forerunners: “There is no evidence whatsoever that the Mycenaean script continued anywhere in Greece after c. 1200. There is no trace of writing of any kind in the sub-Mycenaean and Protogeometric periods, or indeed before the middle of the eighth century, when the new and totally different reek alphabet makes its first appearance. Now, this is surely not an accident. A single scratched letter from this period would be enough to show that writing survived; but not one has been found. his is undeniably a most remarkable phenomenon, for which it is hard to find either a parallel or an explanation. A society seems suddenly to have become illiterate, and to have emained so for centuries. How and why this happened we do not know. “ [Maurice Bowra, Homer and his Forerunners, Thomas Nelson and Sons, Edinburgh, 1955] It has been accepted that the Greeks learned this script from the Phoenicians in the 8th century, who also were assumed to have started with this script in that same period, like the Greeks. The problem of a failing script during four ages has not, however, has not been solved by the introduction of this new script so much later, and is also not credible for a society that has so much been dependent on it. Linguists, moreover, are of the opinion that probably both the Phoenicians and the Greeks have copied this new script much earlier from the Canaanites in the Levant. But that shifts the problem, because the Canaanites are supposed to have lived in the 11th century, which is then part of another problem of Four Dark Ages in the chronology of the Levant. [P.James, Centuries of Darkness, 1992] Artisans in the Mycenaean times had developed a high artistic talent in the manufacture of objects, articles of ivory, gold and gems. They were masters in the design of representations of war, the hunt, mythology and religion. Most of these articles were small, which required a lot of artistic skill. Ivory had to be imported from Syria, which led to an intensive exchange of experience between the artisans of both areas. [E. Vermeule, 1972]. 6 With the collapse of the Mycenaean physical world and culture a gap developed of some 400 years, before handcraft was made again with the same former Mycenaean motifs, and again of similar high quality. As related to earlier, the production of ivory articles in the Levant also had been interrupted for four ages. [R.Barnett, 1948.] Shards of a large vase have been found at excavations in Mycenae which had their origin in the earlier LHIII period. This vase has been called the Chariot Vase, because of a representation of a chariot with two warriors. Although friezes of people in chariots were fairly common in Mycenaean art, both the spearmen and the drivers on those two sherds wear their shields in a manner “unique in chariot iconography” in the style of the earlier Myceanaean Age, but were found as iconography of the 8th – 7th century chariot. These eighth-century light-weight, manoeuverable vehicles looked like “direct descendants” of the twelfthcentury type of the Mycenaean age and thus appeared to have remained unchanged in the interval of 400 years. And there also has not been found any evidence of a chariot during those intervening centuries. It became evident that chariots had remained unchanged over this extremely long period. [H. W. Catling,1968.] Temples constructed in the 8th century BCE appeared to show typical Mycenaean characteristics in the architectural style, though temples appeared not to have been used in the intermediate Dark Ages. Religious ceremonies were apparently held in the open air in those times. It is noticeable that the Olympian Gods and Goddesses still occupied an important place in the religious life of the inhabitants of the later 8th century BCE . Therefore, the reappearance of the use of temples, the widespread building in stone, ashlar and other fine masonry, reminding of Mycenaean times, and the skills and the trained workmen to produce this all, how are these characteristic features to be explained? Anatolia Anatolia was under the authority of the Great King of Hatti for a very long time in the Late Bronze Age. The Land of Hatti is known in archaeology as the Land of the Hittites, with the capital named Hattusa, a large city in the eastern part of the country. It reigned over a great number of kingdoms in West- and South-West Anatolia, and it also had vassal kingdoms in Northern-Mesopotamia and Northern-Syria. This Great-Kingdom of Hatti accomplished its influence and power over this extensive territory from the 14th century BCE into the 12th. It finally collapsed around 1150 BCE, overwhelmed by great disasters. Apparently, Anatolia remained almost completely uninhabited after the disappearance of the Land of Hatti in the 12th century BCE until the middle part of the 9th century, which was the time the Phrygians migrated into it from the north-west. The Phrygians were an Indo-European population which earlier had migrated into the southern Balkan. That means that Middle Anatolia had stayed unhabited over a period of about three centuries. Another complication is to be mentioned. The eastern section of the Land of Hatti remained independent 7 and vital after the collapse of the Great Kingdom. It gradually became largely under the cultural influence of the Assyrian Kingdom. This remnant kingdom of the Hittite Empire in the east encompassed a combination of two rather large city-states, by name of Malatiya in Eastern-Anatolia and Carchemish in Northern Syria, both under the authority of one Vice-Roy, who originally was subordinate to the Great-King of Hatti. These two city-states remained independent for quite some time as cultural heir of the old kingdom of Hatti. Carchemish, as well as Malatiya, was destroyed in 717 BCE by the Assyrians. The list of kings that reigned this combined kingdom has become known starting from the first king Piyashili, son of Great King Shuppiluiliuma- I of Hatti, towards Kuzi-Teshub, the last king before the disintegration of the Great Kingdom of Hatti. The list of kings from the next fase of the combination of the two small kingdoms has been compiled at excavations by the British Museum early in the 20th century. It was Leonard Woolley who published it in 1952. These kingslists will be used in the following chapter. It appeared that many objects and articles that were found at the excavations such as sculptures and reliefs, had to be assigned to two complete different cultures, that appeared to be from the Land of Hatti in the Late Bronze Age, the 14th -12th centuries BCE, and also from the Assyrian culture in the 9th and 8th century BCE. It was then concluded that there must have been an Intermediate Period of 200 years in which Carchemish could not be identified in time and data. 8 II- The Basis for a New Approach Anatolia in the Iron Age appears to be highly important for investigating the Dark Age events and problems, in particular those relating to the so-called Neo-Hittite kingdoms. Around 1340 BCE, in the existing chronology, the Hatti king Shuppiluliuma-I marched with a large army eastward to attack Mitanni, a major country in northern Mesopotamia where some Hatti vassal states were threatened. He was marching through a mountainous area whch already had come under Mitannian influence, and then attacked Mitanni from the north. Shuppiluliuma conquered a large part of the Mitanni territories, and then continued his campaign a number of years later in the direction of Carchemish, Aleppo, the northern coastal cities and Nuhassaland, all areas to the west of the Euphrates. Part of these Hurrian territories had belonged to the sphere of influence of Mitanni, some others, also inhabited by Hurrians had belonged to Nuhassaland, actually being under the authority of Egypt. Shuppiluliuma conquered Carchemish and appointed Pyashili, one of his sons, to Vice-Roy of as well this citystate as of the northern Malatiya, while he also appointed individual kings to these two cities, each reponsible to the Vice-Roy. From that particular year on, around 1350 BCE, Carchemish was part of the Hatti Empire, with its king responsible to the Hatti Vice-Roy, up to the dramatic developments marking the end of the Great Hatti Empire in Anatolia around 1150 BCE, leading to a Dark Age of about 230 years in the current chronology. The Neo- Hittite kingdom, with both Malatiya and Carchemish, then came to life again as a combined kingdom around 970 BCE, and was finally conquered by Assyria in 717 BCE, whereby Carchemish was completely destroyed. Carchemish was partly excavated under the direction of David Hogarth, in a team with Leonard Woolley and T. Lawrence of the British Museum, after which Woolley published the final publication in 1952. David Hawkins, thereafter, compiled a complete list of all the kings of which information has been found on the remnants of the palaces in the centre of Carchemish, of kings ruling the city under the authority of the last Great Kings of Hatti and a Vice-Roy up to the end of the Empire, and further others as part of a separate NeoHittite Kingdom, which then was captured in 717 BCE. It required a “gap “ in order to have it in concurrence with the Mediterranean chronology. [J.D.Hawkins,2009] James, Thorpe, Kokkinos, Morkot and Frankish suggested in Centuries of Darkness [1992] to use these Kinglists of Carchemish as basis for the compilation of a New Chronology. This should be composed by using the date of 717 BCE as a start, and work further backwards in time by using these lists uo to the Hatti chronology. They suggested to start by using the Chart they published in their book, and then neglect the Gap in the timelist, because this was meant to link the dating to the Egyptian dating system. This Chart has been shown on sheet 11. 9 Piyashili was appointed to Vice-Roy by his father Shuppiluliuma-I at the end of the 1st Hurrian War, the war in which Mitanni was defeated, the land which earlier had sovereignty over Carchemish at the important river the Euphrates. That particular year should be found by adding the following data counting from 717 BCE upwards, to be read from the Chart on the next page: --- the reigns of the kings of the Neo-Hittite Kingdoms from 717 upto 970 , from Pisiri towards Suhis I. This totals 253 years on the Chart. --- the total of time of the Hatti Vice-Roys for ruling this city, up to and including Kuzi-Teshub. This totals to 100 year. Piyashili is then supposed to have been made king of Carchemish in 1070 BCE, in a new chronology. Obviously, no use had been made of the Gap, which had to be applied for connecting to an existing but different chronology. Sufficient data are then available to compose the complete Timelist of the Hatti kings from the early Shuppiluliuma-I up to Shuppiluliuma-II, the last king of the Great Kingdom of Hatti). [Trevor Bryce, 1999] The Hatti chronology determines also the Egyptian Kinglists of the 18th, 19th and 20th dynasties, because of the regular contacts between these two kingdoms in this period. The Timescheme with the new chronology for these two kingdoms together is shown at the end of this chapter on sheet 23 at the end of this chapter. Please see the note hereafter respective to a correction which was necessary. The chronology of the Hatti Kingdom on this combined Timelist is of great importance to find events in the Near East enabling testing and evaluation of the chronology for its reliability. The Kingslist of the New Assyrian Kingdom for instance appear to offer a number of events that are to prove some of the dates that have been listed. A major encounter appeared to have been a battle between the Assyrian king Tukulti-Ninurta II and the Hatti king Tudhaliya IV, which appeared to demonstrate a rather large difference in dating. This made it necessary to lower the date of that specific encounter with 70 years on the newly established timelist of Hatti, therewith enforcing all other dates on the new Combined Timelist to be corrected. The Timelist at sheet 23 represents the New Chronology for the two Kingdoms, in which this correction has been applied. Piyashili, then, was made king of Carchemish in the year 1000 BCE in stead of 1070 BCE. The following Notes detail the choices that have been made, while under Considerations some of them will further be detailed. 10 11 Note 1 Piyashili’s name is to be seen as relating to the year in which Hatti conquered the city Carchemish. This happened at the end of the 2nd Hurrian War, which lasted 5-6 years. Piyashili was appointed as Vice-Roy of a large area in the eastern territories in which the river Euphrates was the eastern border of the Land of Hatti. He had the disposal of al large army, and the date of his assignment must have been around 1000 BCE in the new chronology. His father, king Shuppiluliuma- ! died about 6 years after the end of this war, probably as a victim of a spreading epidemic which developed in a camp of captive Egyptian warriors. These 6 years appeared to have been a period of many major entanglements. Note 2 At the end of the 2nd Hurrian war, possibly slightly earlier during the siege of Carchemish, an important letter was presented to Shuppiluliuma-I from the Egyptian Queen, with the request to send one of his sons to Egypt to be her new spouse. This request led to great tensions between the Egyptian crown and the King of Hatti, because Shuppiluliuma did not have much confidence in the circumstances around this rather strange request and feared being tracked. He requested more assurances, messengers were sent and received. This all took quite some time. Shuppiluliuma eventuelly sent his son Zannanza to Egypt with a great armed retinue, but they were ambushed by a large Egyptian army unit in the south of Palestine and largely murdered. Shuppiluliuma then declared war to Egypt and sent a large army to the southern Levant and drove out the Egyptians. [Trevor Bryce,1999] It is now assumed that this event also concerned the death of Tuthankhamon, while the identity of the widow remained in the dark, although it is anticipated that probably the Queen- Mother Nefertite was the initiator of the letter. Zannanza was finally a victim of serious court intrigues. The corresponding date is of great importance for harmonizing the Egyptian Kinglist with the one of Hatti, and moreover verifying both. Note 3 The Kinglist of the New Assyrian Kingdom appears sufficiently reliable for testing data. It has already been mentioned earlier that the Hatti kinglist was tested with data of the reign of Tikulti-Ninurta II, especially because he reigned shortly after 900 BCE, and his reign fits into other general information. A very extensive text has been preserved on a large piece of building block of his palace in the area of Nineveh. It contained a summary of all his military campaigns into the territory north of Assur, in which he mentioned that he had attacked the Hurrian lands and had occupied important trade routes. He had conquered the Land of Nairi for a short while and also the border countries of Hatti in the eastern mountains. This was leading to a short crisis between Hatti and Assyria, even a disgrace to Tudhalya IV because he had to pull back his troops from the battlefield when challenged. This battle took place at the end of his reign, which lasted from 990 to 962 BCE. Please be reminded that the data have been made according to the New Chronology. De Assyrische Koningslijst provided for Tikulti-Ninurta II a reign: 890-884 BCE. The difference of approximately 70 years therefore had to be corrected. Please be referred to Considerations. 12 Considerations The Neo-Hittite Kings of Carchemish --- Talmi-Teshub and Kuzi-Teshub came on the throne of Carchemish after Piyashili’s grandson Ini-Teshub. It is known that Talmi-Teshub entered into a treaty with Shuppiluliuma-II, of which the contents are not known. Trevor Bryce supposed that it laid down that Talmi-Teshub was enabled to exercise an almost independent role in Syria. Talmi-Tesub’s son Teššub was his successor on the throne, and still subordinate to Great King Shuppiluliuma-II in Hattusa as Vice-Roy.in those years. Kuzi-Teshub was very likely the last Vice-Roy in the citystate. [T.Bryce,1999] Kuzi-Teššub took control of the regions west of the Euphrates up to the Land of Malatya, and also felt entitled to be the ‘Great King’, thereby setting a precedent for his successors, who continued to claim the same title for the following two centuries. [A.Gilibert,2015; A.Dinçol et All.,2014]. This cannot mean anything other than that the central dynasty at Hattusa had become defunct. Bryce clearlier stated that this was to mean that the Great Anatolian kingdom had disintegrated. It was also highly probable that Kuzi-Tezub’s domain at that time extended through no more than a part of the eastern territories of the original Syrian vassal kingdom, only stretching along the west bank of the Euphrates from Malatya through Carchemish to southern Emar. --- Carchemish was conquered in 1000 BCE, following the New Chronology, from which follows that some 283 years were left for the 14 kings to control the city-state up to the conquest and destruction of the city by the Assyrians. That means that these 14 kings on the throne had a mean time of reign of 20 years. It is known that Piyashili only reigned for 16 years. It is known that Sarri-Kusuh, his Hurrian name, took part in a meeting with his brother Murshili III in Kummanni, a town located east of the Anti Taurus Mts in Hatti, but he fell ill and died. That must have been in 954 BCE. Taking into account the relative young age at which people died in those ages, and therefore often could not have had a long reign, it may have some meaning to compare this mean time of reign of 20 years with two other long chains of kings. The chain of Egyptian kings from Ahmose up to Ramses- II also appeared to show a mean reigning time of 20 years. Please note that the exceptional long reign of Ramses II, 64 years not has been taken into account. Calculating the chain of Hatti kings from Shuppiluliuma- I up to tot his namesake – II, results in a total of 158 years, with an average of 17 years. ---- The adjustments to the existing chronology have led to the new view that the kingdoms of the Great Kings of Hatti extended much further in time than understood, and that the Syrian kingdoms could hold out in a dangerous and unstable world for a long time after. It may also be concluded that the existing kinglist of Carchemish unto the Assyrian conquest apparently suffices. 13 The Assyrian Kingdoms as a verification ---Tukulti-Ninurta –II Reliable data are not easy available for checking the newly made Royal Hatti Kinglist. The main cause is the lack of reliable dating of the objects, as found at the various excavations in the Mediterranean areas, because all these have been adapted to the Egyptien chronology. However, a part of the Assyrian kinglists are assessed as reliable, and in particular the Kinglist of the Assyrian Late Period and above all the data later then about 800-850 BCE. It was Tudhaliya-IV of Hatti who ended up in an armed conflict with the Assyrische king Tukulti-Ninurta–II. There is evidence that Tudhaliya IV already earlier was aware that a confrontation might be forthcoming. That became evident from a text in a Treaty that he concluded in Damascus with king Shausgamuwa of Aram, in which the Assyrian threat appeared to have been discussed. “As the king of Assyria is the enemy of My Sun, so must he also be your enemy. No merchant of yours is to go to the Land of Assyria, and you must allow no merchant of Assyria to enter your land or pass through your land. If, however, an Assyrian merchant comes to your land, seize him and send him to My Sun. Let this be your obligation under divine oath ! And because I, My Sun, am at war with the king of Assyria, when I call up troops and chariotry you must do likewise.” Tukulti-Ninurta –II reigned in the short period 890-884 BCE, he undertook a campaign to the north and conquered territories close to Nairi, in the montainous area south of Lake Van. Some of his letters which were sent to neighbouring lands have been preserved, letters in which he referred to Hatti and Ugarit. He therewith made explicit that he was a contemporary of king Tudhliya-IV. It has already been referred to that a large block of building stone has been found at Nineveh, in which he boasted about this campaign to the north. Thereby he had summed up all the lands he had attacked, the tremendous successes and booty he had obtained. [A.Yaseen Ahmad, 2000]. Tudhaliya must have been aware of the plans that were made in Assyria for this campaign. That was also evident from a copy of a letter which had been sent by Tudhaliya to the Assyrian capital Nineveh, as found in the archive of Hatti, and also from an angry answer from the Assyrian King received in Hattusa. Only a copy of this reply has been found in the Ugarit archive, which Tukulti-Ninurta had sent to the King of Ugarit. “I sent this message to the king of Hatti: Nihriya is at war with me. Why are your warriors in Nihriya? Legally you are at peace with me, not at war. Why then have your warriors fortified Nihriya? I am going to lay siege to Nihriya. Send a message ordering your warriors to withdraw from Nihriya.” It came to an armed encounter with the Assyrians at a moment of time when Tudhaliya hardly was able to assemble an army of sufficient strength. It was the wrong moment. He ultimately had to quickly withdraw his troops. An important reason was perhaps that he had had insufficient time and pressure on his vassalstates in 14 this eastern part of his empire for sending reinforcements to built-up the armed forces. The King of Isuwa in any case had promised to send troops but failed. It also might indicate that Tudhliya did not have the time and the opportunity to organize an army in expectation of this encounter to come. At this time of his reign he had come into too many demanding problems. All this led to a short but major crisis between Hatti and Assyria. However, Assyria appeared to have had other plans and turned the eyes to Babylon in the south, which resulted in some rest in Northern-Mesopotamia and Northern Syria. Tukulti-Ninurta –II even had sent a letter to Shuppiluliuma-II after Tudhaliya’s death, which confirmed this change in attitude. It is quite probable that Tudhaliya-IV had this confrontation with Tikulti-Ninurta II at the end of all his own efforts and was overburdened. He had all the campaigns to the Western Anatolian territories behind him, had had huge problems with a minor civilian war and a very taxing war on Alashiya, as Cyprus was named at the time. He had come in a large series of problems. He also was at the end of his life, but did not know this yet. In full detail Trevor Bryce has put these developments in the last phase of Tudhaliya’s reign in words. [T.Bryce,1999]. The Chronological Reconstruction made on basis of the Chart provided for Tudhaliya-IV the following dates of his reign : 990 -962 BCE, while the New Assyrian Kingslist supplied 890-884 BCE for Tikulti-Ninurta II in the Existing Chronology. These two periods are too far apart. It is unavoidable to correct the preliminary listing of the Hatti Kinglist with 70 years, resulting in Tudhaliya’s reign to be 920–892 BCE. ----Ashur-Uballit This Assyrian king did sent a letter to the Egyptian king Amenhotep IV, and shortly after another one to Akhnaton. Both these names concerned the same king, while Amenhotep- IV changed his name after his coronation, as he at the same time introduced a completely different religion with the Sun as the Centre. These letters have been found in El-Amarna. These letters therefore are now identified as the El-Amarna letters. [Amarna Letters, Wikipedia] These two letters now identify the year Ashur-Uballit wrote the letters till Akhnaton in the early years of the latters reign, around 1025 BCE in the New Chronology. Ashur-Uballit is assigned as king in the period 1360-1330 BCE in the conventional chronology. Because of the letters as part of this archive and their particular timing this is to lead to an adjustment of this king’s reign. Letter EA16 in these archives is quite extensive, describing the rich gifts which were sent from Egypt to him, the Assyrian king, and did not disguise that he certainly would be so kind to also receive a great amount of gold to be sent from the Egyptian pharao. He then referred to another dispatch of gold which was received in Malatiya by the king of Eastern Kapadokia, something he felt also to be entitled to. The letter then referred to all the security measures that would be taken for such a transport. [The Amarna Letters: Ashur-uballit, 2013, Letter EA16, translation A.H.Sayce, 1890] Interesting is to notice the Assyrian king mentioning the king of Khani-Rabbatu, a land which can be identified as Eastern Kappadokia. With the above mentioned situation in mind it is impossible to imagine that Kappadokia might have been part of Hatti at this time, as it is to be in a later phase of the Great Kingdom. 15 Shuppiluliuma-I started his first massive campaign, as will be known as the 1st Hurrian War, some 6-8 years after the beginning of Akhnaton’s reign, shortly after the correspondence between king Tushratta of Mitanni and Akhnaton came to an end. This start is supposed to have been around 1020 BCE, when Shuppiluliuma-I led his army eastward in the mountains and made the small kingdoms in the regions into a vassal status. The Amarna letters of Ashur-Uballit were clearly written between 1025 and 1020 BCE. ----Tikulti-Ninurta-I Another Assyrian king may be mentioned, because Assyria was to become an expanding and dangerous power in northern Mesopotamia. Three campaigns have become known of Tikulti-Ninurta-I, mainly from the Great Inscription, a lengthy text in which this king laid down his conquests in a large area north of Assur. This text has been published by the Israel Museum, inclusive elucidations. [Y.Bloch, L.Peri, The Great Inscription of Tukultu-Ninurta-I, King of Assyria, The Israel Museum, 2017] This text on the The Great Inscription makes it clear which kings were in power those days, and in which order. “Tukulti-Ninurta, king of the universe, king of Assyria, son of Shalmaneser, son of Adad-Nirari, kings of Assyria.” These three kings in the Assyrian Kinglists cause problems when these are to be assigned to the 11th century BCE, where the Kingslist mentions the following names for the period 1365-1196 BCE in the current chronology: Ashur-Uballit, Ashur-nirari, Adad-nirari, Shalmaneser and Tikulti-ninurta, in that order. But this would lead to the following comments following the New Chronology: --- Ashur-Uballit, as a contemporary of Akhnaton, should then be assigned to the last decade of the 11th century BCE in the New Chronology. --- Adad-nirari-I made great conquests in Northern Mesopotamia and enlarged the kingdom considerably. He himself or his son Shalmaneser ran into Hatti’s king Murshili III de veldtochten , which then should have taken place aroud 955 BCE. --- The campaigns of Tikulti- ninurta -I should then have taken place some years later. Tikulti-ninurta led various campaigns according to The Great Inscription, but the text also disclose that the state of Mitanni did not exist at that period, which means that these campaigns should have taken place after Suppiluliuma-1 ended the 1st Hurrian War around 1016 BCE, marking the end of Mitanni, while it is even possible they took place after his death some years later. Moreover, as Nineveh appeared to have been his capital, Tikulti- ninurta-I could only have been in that position in the later years of the Assyrian Kingdom. It is therefore more likely to assign Tikulti- ninurta-I to these later years, and certainly after Adad-Nirari and Shalmaneser. It is therefore very questionable to assign Tikulti- ninurta-1 to a kingship in the 14th century. Making this line of thought more complex: the Assyrian Kinglist marks the following kings in this century: Adad-Nirari II [911-891], Ashur-Nasirpal II [884-859] and Shalmaneser II [858-859] . 16 The Egyptian Relations --- Abdi-Heba in Jerusalem Abdi-Heba appears to have been appointed by the Egyptian King Amenhotep-III as chieftain of a settlement in the southern Levant. His name appears in the Amarna Archives. [Amarna Letters, Wikipedia] A total of 6 letters have been found, the first one to Amenhotep-III and the others to his son Akhnaton. This determines a bandwidth of time in which these letters were written. Archaeologists have also found some other letters which were sent to the Pharao in Egypt, but from a coastal city at the Levant, which were related to the same events as referred to in those from Abdi-Heba. Because of the relocation of the Egyptian 18th dynasty from the 14th century to the 11th BCE a verification will be necessary for the events in this new timephase. This will not only be related to the events specifically of value for Abdi-Heba, but also for the new geographical and social circumstances, even, when possible, aspects regarding the inhabitants of the country. The southern Levant, both in the hills and the coastal areas, were originally inhabited by the Canaanites in the 14th century, the original period of the events applicable to the Egyptian 18th dynasty. The Hurrians were supposed to have lived in the northern areas of Syria and Mesopotamia. Both Abdi-Heba and Jerusalem, the name of his settlement, were in a precarious situation at the time, which became evident from the letters. Jerusalem appeared to have been a small Egyptian military post in the southern hils, manned by a Chief with some servants and accompanied by a group of soldiers. Abdi-Heba was the Head-Man, the Chief, and was appointed by the Pharao, responsible for the protection of the Egyptian interests, both military and administratively. His military support had a size of 50 soldiers for the control of the area in the High Hills. But mostly the large coastal cities were of main interest for Egypt, this military post in the High Hills appeared to be of minor importance. These Hills were also scarcely populated, mostly by shepherds and their herds and their families, and sheep and goats. [Nadav Na’aman,2011] The Pharao appointed Egyptian administrators in the southern part of the Levant, as a part of Egypt. The administrator of Gaza was the highest in rank, where Gaza was the most important city in the territory. Each of these administrators/chiefs was allotted a section of soldiers of which the size was dependent on the importance of the city or settlement. Abdi-Hepa probably came into large problems when he stuck to a certain procedure for feeding and maintenance for his men, for which an authority was to be important. And the budget for it was also linked to this authority, while at the same time the cost of living and all the supplies tended to be quite high. The question then came to the surface: who has the main authority and would then be responsible for the payments of the supplies? Was that to be the local Chief or was that to be the Egyptian Overlord in Gaza? This led to a major crisis between Abdi-Hepa and the local military commander. The complete section of 50 soldiers and the commander then left the settlement and departed for the Headquarters in Gaza. Then Abdi-Hepa was all on himself, and more important: he was left without any protection in a minor post, a place in a large desolated area with the threat of being attacked and robbed by one of the many gangs of robbers. 17 This was the story he reported to the Capital City in Egypt, of which the language used made the impression that he viewed himself to be a trusted and a confident of the royal court, which suggested he probably previously had been in a special position in the Egyptian court. The Amarna letters from Abdi-Heba were written in Akkadian, the international language at the time, but also showed a marked Canaanite element. Abdi-Heba’s name also belonged to the Canaanite-Hurrian language. He had probably spent his youth in Egypt and felt acquainted with the life on the Egyptian court. [Nadav Na’aman,2011] After some time he started hiring men from the High Hills country to protect his post. These large outer areas were also populated by large groups of vagabonds and displaced people who had been ejected from their original societies and tryed to keep up a sort of living. Sometimes they hired themselves out as individuals, and at other times formed groups that subsisted on pastoral work. They were also frequently engaged in robbery, they extorted protection money, or offered their services to the settled population as mercenaries. [Nadav Na’aman,2011] Israel Finkelstein discussed the socio-political situation in this area during the Late Bronze Age, while referring to the Amarna Papers, and remarked that apart from the pastoralists large non-urban and nonsedentary groups were living in the region, the Apiru and the Shosu-Sutu. These were marginal elements , including nomads, being the backbone of the political and military power of the hill country entities. Most sites, moreover, were no more than small rural communities. The pastoralists could utilize the grazing areas of the steppe in winter time. [Finkelstein,1993] The settlement of Jerusalem was also vulnerable to threats from forces outside the territory, because of its remoteness from the government centres and the main sites of Egyptian interests in the country. [Nadav Na’aman,2011]. The above information is mentioned as an archaeological background for this region in the 14th century, the Late Bronze age, as was supposed to be the period of time in which these events had happened. In the mean time several excavations have been executed in Jerusalem aimed at identifying the oldest parts of the city. Most of the remains of this old city from the Bronze and Iron Ages were found in the hill south of the present city walls, and also at the south-eastern hill. Kathleen Kenyon led an excavation in 1967, fifteen years later followed by Y. Shiloh, and also E.Mazar. This had led to more clearness on the history of the place. In the Middle Bronze Age the executed place was only a small provincial town with a size of at most 1000 inhabitants, as a centre in an agricultural area. It is unknown why this town ceased to exist after a while. For the Late Bronze Age, ending around 1200 BCE, excavations have provided more information about the place of Jerusalem in the 14th century. Very few archaeological remnants appeared to have been left for this earlier settlement, as if the place contained no houses and no city wall. Margreet Steiner even stated that the conclusion seemed inevitable that the place of current Jerusalem was not inhabited during the Late Bronze Age, because the archeological evidence was failing for it. It might have been not other than a small estate, comparable with the one described in the Abdi -Heba Amarna Letters. [M.Steiner,1998] 18 It was actually shown that the settlement “Jerusalem” in the late 14th century was hardly inhabited, no traces of a fortified settlement have been found, there were no remnants of a walled city and houses, buildings were not found. Hardly any sherds were found in the layers of debris. Jerusalem of Abdi-Heba could hardly have been more than a fortified outpost in the 14th century. [M.Steiner,1998] Finkelstein remarked that Jerusalem ’s built-up area could not have comprised more than a modest place for the locally ruling family in the 14th century, with an adjacent temple and a few more houses at the time of the Amarna Letters. [Finkelstein,2001] Jerusalem in the 14th century should therefore not be defined as a military outpost representing the Egyptian Pharao, as it only appeared to have been a settlement of very minor importance. In the Early Iron Age, the period 1200-1000 BCE, Jerusalem was apparently inhabited, as appeared from the remnants of a small stronghold. Both Kenyon and Shiloh excavated a terrace system of at least seven steps, descending the slope of the hill and bounded by a solid stone wall at the south side of it. The whole structure was at least 20 meter high. Only the third terrace could have been used for a building. The dating of the fill of the system put it firmly into the Iron Age, the period 1200-1000 BCE. The small fortified building was probably the only one in the hill country in this period. This southern part of the Hill Country was evidenly still sparsely inhabited, and mostly pastoral. Canaanite life may have continued there for a considerable period of time. The dimorphic society still consisted of rural communities with large pastoral groups, however, with a relative sparse population. [Finkelstein, 1993] This minor place might have had some military value for Egypt, and even might have been called Jerusalem. ----The Copper Mines in the Southern Arabah Large Copper Ore mines were found not far from Eilat, which proved to be of great archaeological value. B. Rothenburg started investigating the mine shafts and galleries, which resulted in a excavation over many years. The mines turned out to be a complex system of horizontal galleries and vertical shafts, one of them to a depth of some 30 meters. Early Iron Age pottery, copper rings, beads and Egyptian glazed ware was found, and, of great importance, a small statue of Hathor, the Egyptian goddess of mining. These founds suggested that an Egyptian temple had been around. An enormous amount of votive objects were also excavated. Other objects were offerings with hieroglyphic inscriptions and cartouches with the names of Egyptian pharaohs, pharaohs from the Egyptian 19th and 20th dynasties. The copper mines appeared to have been operated by Egypt. [B.Rothenburg,Timna, Valley of the Biblical Copper Mines, 1972] All these objects were naturally important for dating purposes. The Egyptians might have used these mines during the 13th and 12th centuries BCE according to the existing chronology. The pottery indicated to the 10th up to the 8th century BCE. Three types of pottery were found, both in Timna and in some other places of excavation in the area. 19 The oldest model had earlier been found in Palestine, made on potter’s wheel, and was assigned to the Early Iron Age, 1200- 1000 BCE. Other pots and bowls found in Timna and elsewhere in the mining quarries of Arabah, simple hand-made and roughly shaped, had also been found in the Negev desert and therefore were called Negev Pots. And the third model was bichrome pottery which earlier had been found in northwestern Arabia and was called Midianite. The latter was nicely painted with geometric designs, stylized birds and other animals, all-in the colours red-brown and black, and assigned to the period 1000- 600 BCE. All this pottery in Timna had always been found together and therefore was generally dated to the period 1000-700 BCE. They had been found in the same grouping at some other mines and smelting-works in Alabah as well, also in some association with Egyptian activities in the past. Attempts for more details in the dating were not very successful because of the mixture of the various products. J. Bimson held a Tyndale Biblical Archaeological Lecture on the dating of these copper mines in Timna in 1980. He had come to the conclusion that on basis of a range of radio-carbon measurements that had become available the mining and smelting activities in the Arabah had taken place in the period of the 10th century BCE and later, may be even into the 7th or 6th century BCE. This would also correspond to the period to which Pof.Glueck previously had dated all the pottery in Timna and the surrounding desert areas. [J.J.Bimson, King Solomon’s Mines? A Reassessment of Finds in the Arabah, The Tyndale Biblical Archaeology Lecture, 1980] Ben- Yosef et al. appeared to only partly agree with J.J.Bimson, on basis of new radio-carbon measurements. They came to the conclusion that the mining under Egyptian command in Timna had been rather limited and had ended at the end of the 12th century BCE, while thereafter the intensity of production had increased drastically. After some time a major change in production technologies and organization had also occurred, likely during the second half of the 10th century B.C.E., which then became the main period of copper smelting in the southern Arabah. The copper production in the entire Arabah Valley then ceased at the end of the ninth century B.C.E. [Erez Ben-Yosef, et al , A New Chronological Framework for Iron Age Copper Production at Timna, University of California, San Diego, 2011.] The total space of time of the reigns of the Ramessides in the 20th Egyptian dynasty ends at around 800 BCE in the New Chronology, about halfway Iron Age-II. Egypt could then have had control of the Copper Mines in Alabah during the total period in which copperore was mined. It is hardly probable that Egypt further should have had interest in Palestine at the start of the new dynasty in Egypt. The conclusions of Ben- Yosef et al. are moreover not very convincing, though the new radio-carbon measurements were helpful in the analysis. ---- Pharao Ramses II on war in the Levant Ramses II started a campaign against Hatti in the 6th year of his reign, clearly with the objective to break Hatti’s power in Syria and the northern coastal areas. That happened in 948 BCE (New Chronology). Murshili, Hatti’s Great King, must have known of it somehow, for he was already busy to put together his own 20 army at maximum strength, and led it to a favourable location that would give him superiority in battle. The Great King of Hatti always was forced to make a call on his vassals to contribute with their infantry, archers, trained riders and chariots. That had taken time in the preparations. That turned out to be very necessary, while Ramses was leading a very large army north in the Levant in four large divisions. Ramses advanced northward in the direction of Carchemish with his four divisions, one after the other, Ramses with Division -1 in front. He had however failed to inform himself sufficiently on the local situation, the strength of his enemy and their strategy. Murshili lured him into a trap. His Division-1 was surrounded, and the other divisions could not reach him any more in time. Ramses barely escaped with the help of his elite warriors. Thereupon the whole Egyptian army fled south. Murshili then ordered his son Hattushili to drive the Egyptian army away from all the regions in the southern Levant. Ramses -II let write down the events of the battle in his own view in the “Poem of Pentaur”. “So then His Majesty went to look about him and he found 2500 chariots hemming him on his outer side….. they being three men on a chariot acting as a unit.” The Old Testament did not mention anything on this battle or their consequences. This might be obvious as the advance of the Egyptian army, the battle, and all the other resulting events mostly happened in stretches along the coast and in northern territories, in areas where Egypte was supposed to have authority anyway. ----The Phrygians The Phrygians immigrated at the NW side of Anatolia early in the 9th century, while the Land of Hatti went to rack and ruin around 1150 BCE according to the conventional chronology. From this may be concluded that a large part of Mid-Anatolia hardly or at all was populated, a stagnation of some 250 years. The Phrygians were a then unknown Indo-European population, who were assumed to have lived in the southern Balkan north of Troia. In the Ilias, Homeros mentioned the support the defenders of Troia received from the Phrygians during the siege of their City by the Mycenaean-Greeks. Soon after the destruction of Troia they probably moved to mid-Anatolia early in the 9th century, where they then consolidated their society and built their capital Gordion in the centre of the territory. Their language is still unknown, but it was probably related to Greek because both populations later on appeared to have had good contacts with each other. Their Capital Gordion was built with a Citadel Mound surrounded by a large stonewall with a hight of some 10 meter in which an extensive gate complex had been built. A great number of buildings were located at the east side of the mound which clearly were meant for the elite, of which some of the largest were designed as a Megaron type. They might have been used as administrative centre, and one of them as an audience hall. The large Terrace Building Complex was also located with eight connected buildings with a total lenght of ca.100 meter, apparently used for grinding of metal objects, weaving and storage. Gordion was located about 300 km east of Troia/Wilusa. The remnants of Gordion were excavated by the 21 University of Pennsylvania under the direction of Rodney Young in 1953 [R.S.Young, Gordion: Preliminary Report, American Journal of Archaeology, Vol 59,1953] The excavations at Gordion made clear that the architecture and building structure of the impressive Gate in the defensive walls of Gordion were very similar to that of Troia VI, although the citadel of the latter city was smaller. Rodney Young mentioned on this subject: “The Phrygian Gate had its closest parallel in the wall of the sixth city at Troy. Though separated in time by five hundred years or thereabouts the two fortifications may well represent a common tradition of construction in northwestern Anatolia.” A large part of the city of Gordion was destroyed by an immense fire. Scientists dated the destruction at around 800 BCE, based on dendrochronology and C-14 analysis of wooden remains. An enormous layer of clay covered a great part of the city, mainly on the eastern side of the Citadel Mount , also covering all the remnants of this tragedy. There is quite another aspect that needs attention. That concerns the enormous layer of clay that had come to lay on top of the ruins of the city. Rodney Young and mentioned in his report: “For purpose of dating the sherds from this layer of clay are of little use, they are almost entirely Hittite. They are clearly a deposit already in the clay when it was brought from elsewhere to be laid down over the surface of the Phrygian city mound.” A Hatti culture layer found above instead of under a Phrygian one should have been considered totally unthinkable, the Hittite Kingdom had disappeared 400-500 years earlier accordng to the existing chronology. It concerned an area of about 5 hectares, in height up to 4-5 meter of clay and rubble. It was suggested at the time that the population had begun to rebuild their city by first raising the devastated area themselves with clay and rubble over approximately 4-5 meter after the calamity. The aforementioned concept appears extremely unlikely. Apart from efficiency considerations, even the magnitude of it can not be imagined. One has to have in mind an area of more than five hectares that had to be heightened with 4 to 5 meters. That amounts to a weight of roughly 300,000 tons of clay and rubble. That does not sound credible, especially with the limited development of technology and machinery of that day in mind. And that leaves the implausible ratio of means and ends unmentioned. Geological investigation established that the meandering Sehiriya River shifted its course several times in history which led to major inundations. In a number of cases sediment then also was deposited up to thicknesses of 3 to 5 meters. The river appeared to have been a dangerous neighbour. It seems plausible that the ruins of the first city of Gordion was met by inundation after the Sehiriya River was forced to divert its course , and large amounts of sediment were deposited over the ruins of the city. It may be considered that the disaster was caused by a violent earthquake, fires were further destroying the 22 city, whereupon the river was diverted and deposited large amounts of sediment on the ruins of the city. The disposition of large masses of clay on the burnt remnants on the eastern side of the Citadel Mound appeared to have preserved highly valuable parts of buildings and large quantities of objects from the Early Phrygian phase, providing an astonishing insight in its architecture and character of the city. It also provided well-dated comparative material for other sites in the region while it appeared to function as a key point in Central Anatolian chronology. Rodney Young died in 1974, and the excavations were further directed by Kenneth Sams. It has meanwhile become clear that the Early Phrygian Destruction Level of Gordion, which is the burned layer of the excavated city, turned out to be of the utmost importance for the development of the Anatolian chronology, starting at the Phrygian Iron Age. A new program of radiocarbon dating and dendrochronological analysis of the objects in the Destruction Level started in 2000, which finally indicated that the date of the conflagration should have been appoximately 800 BCE. This date found confirmation in a further check of the artifacts from the Destruction Level by Voigt, in relation to the pottery and bronzes found in the tumuli in the region. [K.DeVries,Peter Kuniholm, Kenneth Sams, Mary Voigt, New dates for Iron Age Gordion, Antiquity Vol 77, no.296 June 2003] Another excavation at Kaman- Kalehöyük revealed the ruins of a similar city which was apparently built, inhabited and destroyed in approximately the same period as Gordion. The Japanese Institute of Anatolian Archaeology directed the excavations. The excavators concluded that the dendrochronical results suggested that the architecture of the destruction level at Gordion and the architecture of Kaman-Kalehöyük IId1, which is the oldest layer at the excavation, indicated that the two cities were rebuilt at nearly the same time, approximately 800 BCE as mentioned earlier. Locations to be found on the following map. Results of the ceramic research at Kaman-Kalehöyük on the AlişarIV painted pottery were also found to be in 23 agreement with those found in the Gordion Destruction Level, from which was concluded that the ceramic research confirmed the dendrochronical dating. Both cities were built as well as destroyed in the same years by the same cause, by fire, and this might as well have been caused by an earthquake. Manning, Kromer, Kuniholm and Newton have been working on an Anatolian Bronze and Iron Age radiocarbon dating system, which is designed to be in support of the floating full tree-ring sequence. They announced that it is regarded as highly probable that the Great Tumulus MM grave chamber in the area of Gordion had been constructed in the years 743-741 BCE, which was regarded as a confirmation of the dating of the new City. [Sturt Manning,Bernd Kromer,Peter Kuniholm,Maryanne Newton, Anatolian Tree Rings an a New Chronology for the East Mediterranean Bronze-Iron Ages. Science,Vol 294, 2001]. 24 New Chronology Hatti - Egypt Kingdoms -- Part Hatti X Time Scheme 1000 X X 1030 X 1028 X 1020 X 1010 X 1011 X 1000 X 1000 996 X X 1024 Shuppiluliuma-I Arnuwanda Egypt Carchemish 994-993 990 X 980 X 970 X 960 X 950 X 940 X 930 X 920 X 910 X Akhnaton Smenkhare Tuth ank Amon Ay Horemheb Murshili II X 967 X X 957 950 Muwatalli Murshili -III 969 967 954 X Ramses-I X Seti-I X Hattushili X 920 Tudhaliya- IV Arnuwanda X 892-891 Ramses-II 900 X 890 X 888 X 880 X 878 X 870 X 871 X 860 X 860 X 850 X 840 X 830 X 820 X Merenptah Shuppiluliuma-II Seti-II X 866 Three Kings Ramses-III 829 X 25 III - The Anatolian Coastline The Ahhiyawa The Ahhiyawa were enormously active in their trading activities with the city-states on the western Anatolian coast of the Hatti Empire. These cities had become prosperous over the years, with overseas exchange of goods with the Aechean traders who arrived from distant coasts. Ahhiyawa was the name of a territory or a land of the Mycenaean-Greeks on the other side of the Aechean Sea, this name being mentioned in the language of the Hatti archives. It has been suggested that this name might have been associated with Achaea as the name the Myceaean-Greeks applied for their own people in southern Hellas. These traders appeared to have gained more and more influence over time on the local city administration in these Anatolian trad It has meanwhile become clear that the Early Phrygian Destruction Level of Gordion, which is the burned layer of the excavated city, turned out to be of the utmost importance for the development of the Anatolian chronology, starting at the Phrygian Iron Age. ing-cities, even to the extent they were obtaining decisive power. However, all the city-states on the Anatolian Westcoast, from the northern important city Wilusa up to the southern Millawanda, later famous as Milete, were tributary to the Great King of Hatti, actually as vassal states. The royal court in Hattusa started to be seriously worried about this development, especially regarding the administration in Millawanda. The distance by road between the capital and Millawanda was about 500 km, and it will not be surprising that the Royal Court found it difficult to be informed in a timely and sufficient manner on the events in this remote area, courier services took time and were not always sufficiently informing. And then: rebellions broke out when finally the situation had become untenable. The Great King in Hattusa then gathered a large army and marched through the hilly landscape to the west to control the insurrections, but mainly in trying chasing away the Ahhiyawa. Such a process did occur several times and was then recorded in the Annals in the capital. Around 990 BCE The first time the Hatti army pitched their tents for the walls of Millawanda was during the reign of king Murshili-II. The king of Arzawa Minor, the most important and largest part of Arzawa, the complex of lands in Western Anatolia, had formed an alliance with the other Arzawa kings in the region in order to break their allegiance to Hatti. Thereabove, the rebelling lands appeared to have obtained the support and collaboration of the king of Ahhiyawa. This Hatti campaign must have taken place in about 990 BCE of the New Chronology. Murshili let write in the Annals: But when it was spring, because Uhhaziti joined the side of the king of the Land of Ahhiyawa, and the Land of Millawanda had gone over to the Land of Ahhiyawa …..I sent forth Gulla and Malaziti and troops and chariots, and they destroyed the Land of Millawanda. 26 This effort from the side of Hatti appeared to have had insufficient success, whereupon a new army under personal command of Murshili set out from the homeland for a major campaign in the west in order to settle the Arzawa problem definitely. This resulted in new treaties with the relevant kings, and the assignment of confidents and family members in those countries. A large amount of people that could not be trusted was also taken back to Hattusa. [T.Bryce,1999]. Around 965 BCE During the reign of Murshili’s son Muwatalli new problems arose in these western coastal areas. A dangerous adventurier by name of Piyamaradu already had gained control of the Land of Wilusa in the north-west of Anatolia, had driven away the king, and was then trying to get control of the neighbouring lands by force. Piyamaradu appeared aiming to establish a powerbase for himself within the eastern coastal city-states. There proved to be strong indications that also in this case the Ahhiyawa king was involved. The situation appeared to develop completely out of control when it appeared that the king of Millawanda had become confidant with the king of Ahhiyawa. Muwatalli was early in his reign at that moment, moreover, he had arrived in a very difficult situaton because he had reasons to envisage the possibility that Egypt was preparing for an invasion in the southern Syrian areas. But Muwatalli had no choice, the developments in the western areas were threatening. He first choosed to sent an army to Wilusa in the north-west under command of Gassu, with the objective to have control of that city again. Gassu was evidently succesful, but was not able to arrest Piyamaradu. Alaksandu, probably the son of the previous king, was then made king of Wilusa, and Muwatalli concluded a threaty with him on mutual military assistance. Muwatalli, however, was forced to accept that Milawatta (Millawanda) had become the most important base for Ahhiyawa’s influence in Western Anatolia, and thereby had to allow its increase in power in large areas around. [T.Bryce, 1999] Around 935 BCE In the course of his reign Hattushili was obliged to pay attention again to the western coastal regions in Anatolia. The situation had become specifically serious in the Lukka Lands, at the south-western coast of Anatolia. It was again Piyamaradu who had obtained power in these lands with troops and chariots, while he also had received support of a large number of rebels in Lukka. With the approach of Hattushili’s army a large number of them fled to the west and sought asylum with Tawagalawa, the brother of the Ahhiyawan king. Hattushili defeated the rebel troops in the whole area, therewith having as main task to catch Piyamaradu, but the rebel-leader of the uprising had meanwhile fled to Milawata. Hattushili then had apparently hesitations to enter Milawata with troops, in order not to further aggravate the relations with the Ahhiyawa king, but he persevered and entered the city. But it all went out to be a disappointment, as Piyamaradu had meanwhile fled to the western islands in the Ahhyawa territory. [T.Bryce, 1999] Milawata, in later years Miletos, was then already an important trade centre on the Anatolian coast, but 27 under a strong Mycenaean influence. It could even be considered a vassal city-state of Ahhiyawa. The Mycenaean king tried his utmost to expand his influence on the Anatolian Westcoast via Milawata, and found support from prominent dissidents. The Mycenaean interests were directed to the control of trade within the Aegean territories, and the disposal of raw materials and other resources,which only partly was successful. From about 915 BCE Tudhaliya IV did not have much choice early in his reign other than to lead a large army with troops and chariots to the western lands. At this time Seha River Land had come in revolt, a vassal state which was located north of Milawata at the coast and always hade been loyal to Hatti. It turned out that the revolt was instigated and supported by the Ahhiyawan king. Tudhaliya did not loose any time and crushed the rebellion completely. He had also expelled all the Ahhiyawa people from Milawata. He forcefully consolidated his authority in this part of the country and extended his stay by reorganizing the administration in and between the various Lands, in order to consolidate the position of the reigning kings and redefine their relations with Hattusa. Tudhaliya also installed a new ruler in Milawata, as he also had to do in Wilusa, but this time the latter was to be subordinate to Milawata. The king in Hattusa would then be much less involved in all the upcoming problems, as seemingly was the idea, when a strong local proHatti regime would be in control. The king then felt compelled to capture a large amount of people who he did not trust anymore, and put them on transport to the capital. From that moment on the king of Ahhiyawa did not have any commercial or political base anymore on the Anatolian mainland. Tudhaliya seemed finally to have succeeded in expelling the Mycenaeans, but he also had finalized all relations between Ahhiyawa and Hatti. The city--state Wilusa will be subject of a further discussion, because it turned out that the city was identical to Troia. From around 905 BCE Tudhaliya started a campaign against Alasiya, the name of Cyprus at the time. Not much information has been found about this rather unexpected battle, other than a text on a tablet in which the reader is informed that the inhabitants of Alasiya hed been forced to a vassal status. This text was the following: I seized the king of Alasiya with his wives, his children, and……All the goods , including silver and gold, and all the captured people I removed and brought home to Hattusa. I enslaved the country of Alasiya, and made it tributery on the spot. ( …. with a list of the tribute imposed and the goods he took away from the island) This remarkable heavy military campaign on a neighbouring vassal, long time functioning as an important partner in the overseas exchange of goods, will be further commented upon under the following Discussion. 28 Around 885 BCE Tudhaliya’s son and successor Shuppiluliuma-II undertook military expeditions to the south-western kingdoms in Anatoila. These were not written about on claytablets, but they were found in a building in the capital Hattusa. This building received the name “the Südburg Structure”, in which a large stone-plate room with reliefs and inscriptions, a room which probably was meant as an entrance to the Underworld. The inscriptions narrated the conquest and the annexation of the Lands of Wiyanawanda, Tamina, Masa, Lukka and Ikuna, all of them located in the Lukka territory in South-West Anatolia. Trevor Bryce [1998] indicated that these campaigns apparently were seen as necessary by Hattusa because of continuing unrest in this area, and then were meant to bring more stability and peace in the region. Around 875 BCE Very, very little is known about Shuppiluliuma-II. The archives in Hattusa appeared to be missing. Shuppiluliuma was forced to organize a military campaign against Alasiya, apparently meeting various antagonists. He had to battle in three naval battles, seemingly against the enemies of Alasiya. He could only been enabled to be involved in seabattles with the support of the seafaring nation Ugarit, which suggests that Ugarit might be considered to have been a partner in this war. This remarkable heavy military campaign on a neighbouring vassal, long time functioning as an important partner in the overseas exchange of goods, will be further commented upon under the following Discussion. Only the following text has been found on this subject, with the following content: My father […………..…] I mobilized and I, Shuppiluliuma , the Great King, immediately crossed the sea. The ships of Alasiya met me in the sea three times for battle, and I seized the ships and set fire to them in the sea. But when I arrived on dry land, the enemies from Alasiya came in multitude against me for battle. This text, however, calls up many questions. Discussion The Phrygians It is quite possible that the Phrygians founded their Kingdom around Gordion during the later phase of Shuppiluliuma’s reign, a period that was marked by the greatest confusion everywhere in Anatolia. Large groups of people moved along the western and then the southern coasts of Anatolia looking for a another place of home, and drove the original population into despair. Shuppiluliuma tried to the utmost to put a stop to these large flow of people and maintain his authority in his own land, but apparently had to fail, while he also had to deal with other big problems. The Phrygians may have come into Anatolia after the disaster around Troia, occurring at the end of the Trojan 29 War, which should be dated around 880-875 BCE (see hereafter), possibly first in small groups for making a reconnaissance inland. These activities then took place in the early years of Shuppiluliuma’s reign, when he first had to safeguard his throne and directly thereafter took an army down to the Lukka Lands for bringing stability in that south-western region, wherupon he recaptured the important Land of Tarhuntassa south of Hattasa. These activities may then have been around 885 BCE and some time after. If so, then Wilusa was not being besieged yet, which might lead to set the arrival of the Mycenaean-Greeks at Troia somewhat later than 885 BCE. The End of Hatti The climatic circumstances in the 1st Millenium BCE had drastically deteriorated. Serious droughts had come into existence on a large scale, such that probably the Anatolian highlands rendered unsuitable for farming. It is known that at some time Hatti had to import large amounts of grain from Egypt, which used to be sailed to and transhipped at the strategically located island Alasiya, for further transport to a south-Anatolian port. It is plausible that these grain transports to Hatti were seriously threatened, may be even had come to a complete stop, as the new Mycenaean warlords on the island might have had complete different interests. This surely should have brought the Court in Hattusa and the Land of Hatti into despair. The ultimate end of the Great Kingdom was wretched. This end was not caused by violence, direct threads have not been known. The whole population of Hattusa, the whole population of all cities and settlements disappeared with unkown destination with all their belongings. It might even be possible that they carried the most recent part of their claytablet- archives with them. The Ahhiyawa The Ahhiyawa had succeeded in obtaining quite some influence on the westcoast of Anatolia, where they could secure their considerable interests, mainly through the seaport Milawata, where they swayed the sceptre for a long time. That remained possible until Tudhaliya put an end to it around 915 BCE. It is of importance to draw this process into a broader perspective, because the conclusion may be taken that the Ahhiyawa are to be identified with the Mycenaean-Greeks, which had settled in southern Greece in the previous centuries. The Ahhiyawa operated in the 10th century BCE as a major kingdom, but may not directly be identified as the kingdom of Mycene. There hardly have become any more details known about the Ahhiyawa than their fierce encounters with the Hatti kings, and as representation of a population possessing navalforces, troops and chariots, meaning they were able to transport horses and equipment over sea and had a homeland somewhere. [T.Bryce,1999] 30 One of the Archive Letters in Hattusa, the Tawagalawa Letter, adresses the name of one of their king’s brothers, Tawagalawa, which has been identified as Eteocles, on basis of an older variant Etewoclewes. J.David Hawkins made the following comment on this subject in the British Museum Studies, 2009 : “The Achaean settlements in the Anatolian coast and the relevant diplomatic relationship with the Hittite Empire seems to be led by the Achaean city of Thebes. In the letter of Hattushili the name of Ahhiyawa’s Great King’ s brother is Tawagalawa, which is the Hittite version of the Achaean name Etefoklefes or Etewokleweios. These two occurrencies of the name in the Pylos tablets seem to supply a link between Tawagalawa and this early version of Eteokles, which is traditionally related with the Achaean kingdoms of Orchomenos and Thebes. Another evidence is in a letter from the Great King of Ahhiyawa to Hittite king Hattushili. In this document, written in Hittite, but with linguistic features of the texts confirming that the writer spoke Greek rather than Hittite as his mother tongue, the Ahhiyawan king calls himself heir of Kadmos, which is traditionally the founder of Thebes. This is archaeological reasonable the city of Thebes, before its destruction about 1250 BC.” The Siege of Troia – the Starting Date The Trojan War is an important part of this investigation in the context between the various events, mainly because the city-state Troia constituted a link between the Mycenaean-Greek world and Anatolia in this specific period, and then specifically the connection with the events in the Land of Hatti ( the Hittites). The Mycenaean-Greeks were preparing themselves in this period for a major war, known as the siege of Troia. There hardly can be any doubt about that they wanted to get hold of this node in the trade between Northern European countries and the Mediterranean world via the Dardanelles and use it for their own advantage. But the Mycenaean-Greeks were undoubtedly to consider a battle-field without the presence of a powerful Hatti army, because Troia was a part of the Hatti Kingdom, though with the name Wilusa. They must have studied and known the changing circumstances in Western Anatolia over the time, after all, it was the Hatti king Tudhaliya IV who defeated the Mycenaean Ahhiyawa in 915 BCE, and expelled them from the Anatolian coast. Tudhaliya-IV had been very active in a large part of his kingship, but it is very probable that his right to the throne urgently came under discussion some time at the end of his reign, likely after his invasion in Alasiya. Very probable it was his nephew Kurunta, king of the Land of Tarhuntassa, the Land in between, who attempted a coup and claimed the throne of Hatti for himself. An armed conflict developed, mainly in and around the capital Hattusa, between the two parties, which led to destruction of walls and parts of the city, and destructions to the temple quarter. Tudhaliya retained the power. The large and important Tarhuntassa Land, located along the southern seashore, of which Kurunta was king, had also come in revolt and had let known that it had broken away of the Great Kingdom. 31 Tarhuntassa had been of major importance because it was economically closely tied to Hattusa, while it also was a strategic junction for the trade with Egypt and other parts of the eastern coasts of the Levant. [T.Bryce,1999] In the following years Tudhaliya took care to renovate Hattusa, the Upper City was considerably enlarged, and much attention was given to the Rock Sanctuary in Yazilikaya. It is not conceivable that the Mycenaean-Greeks were considering starting a war during Tudhaliya’s reign preceding Hatti’s attack on Alasiya, not either during the rest of his reign in which Tudhalya permitted himself renovating Hattusa and devoting his personal attention for the further development of the Rock Sanctuary in Yazilikaya in a number of years. He might certainly have been able to order his generals to act, except for the short period of the rebellion. It is plausible to imagine the short reign of his son Arnuwanda for the start of the siege of Troia by the Mycenaeans, which short period was accompanied with quarrels and problems and suddenly this king ’s death around 890 BCE. But far more likely the start of the Trojan War is to be assumed in the early years of king Shuppiluliuma, succeeding his deceased brother. Shuppiluliuma needed the first years of his reign to safeguard his throne and to prepare himself for urgently reconquering the Land of Tarhuntassa, which was of major importance for the Great Kingdom. Around 885 BCE Shuppiluliuma undertook this major campaign by first forcing his authority on the southern part of the Lukka Lands, as these lands were troubled by uprisings, before entering the Land of Tarhunatassa from the west with his army, in that order, and conquering it again. And it became absolutely necessary thereupon to reorganize the administation in Tarhuntassa. The Siege of Troia might have started meanwhile, and then certainly Shuppiluliuma should have been informed, but undoubtedly the king could hardly have afforded to spend much energy on these troubles around Wilusa. He might have sent several hundreds of warriors to the city and have participated in the defense of the city. It appears that the year 880 BCE may be assumed as a proper date for the start of the siege of Troia. Naturally, these considerations led to a date which in principle is to have a factor of inaccuracy. The duration of the so-called Ten Years War should be considered with great doubt. The City Troia Much information has been published about this city since the excavations under direction of Manfred Korfmann, which started in 1988. Several levels of occupation have been found, which furnished increasingly a better image of the city in the many phases of habitation. It has meanwhile become acceptable that it was the best defended city, the city of Troia VIb, the city which also was destroyed by a heavy earthquake, was to be the city on siege. The ruined town stayed abandoned for a short while and was thereupon built up again for a new phase of living. 32 The early location of Troia is completely known presently. It was located at the NW coast of Anatolia, not far from the entry to the Dardanelles and the Black Sea further to the north. Two large rivers flowed at both sides of the city into a bay at that time. It has also become certain that this city-state Troia had been part of the North-west of the Great Land of Hatti, at the entrance of the Dardanelles, but under its own name Wilusa. It was an independent kingdom as member of a confederation of vassal states. Much information has become available through the archives in Hattusa, the capital. The name Wilusa shows a lot of similarity with the name Ilios, as was used by Homeros, when writing on the city in the Iliad. The relationship of names becomes explicit in the series Wilusiya – Wilusa – Wilios – Ilios, the second name of the city, as later on the -W- was not being used anymore in Greek. It is of interest to set eyes on the various archaeological layers of excavation of the city, supposed to have been identical with the buildingphases of the town. The Layer VI Late,or VI h, appears to have been belonged to the city described by Homeros, and was laid siege for by the Mycenaean--Greeks. Manfred Korfmann described this city as a citadel situated with enormous high massive zig-zag nine meter high walls. These walls had watch-towers and seven gates for allowing access to the centre of the city. Within these walls the major buildings and living quarters had been built, those for the elite in any way. The rest of the population was living in the important Lower Town, also surrounded by walls and a ditch, and giving place to workshops and storage buildings. All together a city for a habitation estimated to be 3.000 to 5.000 people. [P.Pavuk, Aegeans and Anatolians. A Trojan Perspective. 2005] [Joachim Latacz, Wilusa- Centre of a Hittite Confederate,2002]. Large pieces of the stone walls came down at the earthquake, buildings were destroyed, a fire broke out. The Fall of Troia Troia was the target of the immense Myceaean-Greek campaign as described by Homeros in his epos, opening a fascinating view of the world of the Myceanean-Greeks for many ages. They had assembled an enormous army and laid siege to the city located at the Dardanelles. Homeros narrated the last year of the war which should have lasted for 10 years. That extreme long time for such a war and the siege is hardly credible. The exact duration of the wartime, however, is of minor importance for this Investigation, where an assessment of it might provide a general impression of the events. Ultimately, city and land were dramatically destroyed. Homeros wrote the following passage in the Ilias: “Then terribly thundered the father of the Gods and men from on high; and beneath did Poseidon cause the vast earth to quake and the steep crests of the mountains. All the roots of many-fountained Ida were shaken and all her peaks, and the city of the Trojans, and the ships of the Achaeans. And seized with fear in the world below was Aidoneus, Lord of the Shades…. Lest above him the earth be cloven by Poseidon, the Shaker of the Earth, and his abode be made plain to view for mortels and immortels……So great was the din that arose when their Gods clashed in strife.” 33 Poseidon was of major important for the Mycenaean- Greeks, he might well have been the Head-God for them, but he also appeared to be the Shaker of the Earth, and the Protector of the horses, the animal being their main companion. The Horse is being mentioned here while it concerns a later addition to Homeros’s Epos, using a stratagem of a Wooden Horse to usurp the city, meaning that the Greek warriors themselves had taken the City in stead of the destruction by an earthquake. But it is much more trustworthy to assume that Poseidon with his enormous power was the driving force behind it. The Chaos The massive collapse of walls and buildings must have had an enormous effect. It is possible that not only the town was partly destroyed, but that also the direct environment was dramatically hit. The town had been a very important trade centre between territories laying at great distances from each other, and it also took part in the exchange of goods with products from the Anatolian coast. In no time all these activities came completely to a halt, whereupon the inhabitants had to find a way out to another future. They probably had also no idea what to expect of the presence of the Greek Army in the area. Most of the population would probably not have fled far away, but would have been looking for another house to live in, and then investigate what the ruined city then had to offer. The town had to be rebuilt, homes, buildings, storage magazines and large multiroomed houses were to be rebuilt. The catastrophe undoubtedly also hit the Mycenaean-Greek troops. The ships, the tents, the clothing, the stocks, all the property had likely been damaged of totally lost through the earthquake and the fires . Where did they have to go and by which means?. Their army with its safe organisation was certainly broken down. Most of their ships might have blown away in the sea and then had to be searched for anywhere along the coast. And where did they find food, other than at the farmsites in the area? It is quite possible that most of the Mycecaean-Greek warriors had no choice other than to try their luck southwards into the cities along the coast. Most certainly, this large outflow of people led to a great social and organizational disorder, and mostly in the kingdoms along the coast which were to be the destination. These were regarded to be part of the Hatti Kingdom, city-states where the political and social unrest already smouldered for quite some time, and this time the population had started to understand that everything was going to change, and that their societies were to be disrupted. The Trojan War, the Large Earthquake at Troia, Wilusa, might have been the motor of a large flow of people, warriors and civilans which then started and continued to flow for decades, and everywhere led to disruptions and chaos, and war. The disruptions were later aggravated by the collapse of the Land of Hatti in Anatolia, the collapse of the Mycenaean-Greek society in Greece, the ruinous developments on Cyprus and the earthquakes on the Levantine coast. 34 Four decades later, in 852 BCE, the eight’s year of the reign of Ramses III, he let write down on one of the templewalls in Medinet Habu the following text: The foreign countries endured conspiracies in their sealands. In no time these countries were dissolved in fray. No country could resist their arms, from Hatti, Qode, ….and Alasiya, being cut off at one time. One camp was set up in one place in Amurru. They desolated its people, and its land was like that which has never come into being. They were coming forward toward Egypt, while the flame was prepared for them. Their confederation was the Peleset, Tjeker, Shekelesh, Denyen and Weshesh. They laid their hands upon the land as far as the circumference of the earth, their hearts confident and trusting. “Our plans will succeed”. Cyprus A great number of immigrants had arrived as fugitives on the island, starting at the disastrous developments on the mainland of Greece during the second part of the 10th century BCE [LH III-B2], and in the aftermath of the siege of Troia in the early 9th century, following the dating of the New Time Scheme. These people were both Mycenean- Greeks and fugitives from the West- Anatolian coastal cities, while Mycenean traders already had a foothole on Cyprus for quite some time. It is therefore to be of interest to investigate some of the effects of the Reconstructed Chronology respective to Cyprus during the late 10th and the following 9th century BCE. The Mycenaean influence on Cyprus had sharply increased during the Late Cypriot- II period, which must have been clearly observed in Hattusa, the capital of the northern Land of Hatti. This had apparently caused major concerns because the food supply had been jeopardized as result of serious changes in climate in Hatti, primarily due to severe droughts in the highlands. Cyprus at the time was also the most important link in the overseas trade with Egypt, and mostly in grains. It is highly probable that the flows of trade had been diverted meanwhile by the Mycenaean trade partners of the Cyprian King, because of their ompletely different interests. Even the king of Enkomi, having been a long-term partner in trade with Hatti, might no longer have been able to further side with his important northern neighbour. As related in the previous chapter “The Anatolian Coast “, Tudhaliya-IV, the King of Hatti, decided at a certain moment to protect Hatti’s interests by force, which must have been at the end of the 13th century in the Standard Chronology, which is be around 910 BCE in the Reconstructed Chronology. He crossed the sea with an army and found himself in heavy warfare. On basis of the texts that were left behind this war left deep scars on Cyprus, it caused great destructions and the Hatti king let write down in the royal archive that “he took the king of Enkomi and the whole royal family to Hattusa, and enslaved everyone”. As a result, the relations between Hatti and Cyprus must have been seriously disturbed. Immediately after the destruction of Enkomi the city was rebuilt on a rearranged plan with massive fortifications using fine ashlar masonry, which resembled the Mycenaean citadels. The new inhabitants also left Late Helladic III-C pottery. Thereafter new immigrants of Aegean people arrived on the island. Many objects were found at excavations in settlements which were dated to the Early Part of Late Cypriot III-A. 35 Tudhaliya-IV was succeeded by his son Shuppiluliuma-II, who first had led his army towards western Anatolia in a failing attempt to regain control of these coastal regions, and shortly after found it necessary to march to Cyprus with an army. He had to fight fierce naval battles to get ashore, after which he suffered defeat after heavy fighting and had to withdraw all his troops. This event probably took place around 880 BCE. The following Hatti text has been found in cuneiform writing:: “My father [………] I mobilized and I, Shuppiluiuma, The Great King, immediately marched to the sea. The ships of Alasiya met me in the sea three times for battle, and I smote them, and I seized the ships and set fire to them in the sea. But when I arrived on the land the enemy from Alasiya came in multitude against me for battle” This text is open to multiple interpretations, but it is tempting to read this text as: Shuppiluiuma being forced to realize he could never achieve his goals on the island with a heavy bloody battle ahead. From the start of the Cypriot- IIIA Enkomi at the eastern coast of Cyprus had access to a nearby coppermine and was also important for long-distance sea-trade in the eastern part of the Mediterranean. The settlements of Kition and Paphos were also very successful with the metal industry, and especially with the production of carburized iron, the new process of producing steel. This period as seen with the Reconstructed Chronology was to start from 870 BCE. Massive monumental constructions were built in these three cities, indicating a centralized administration in each. These cities were very likely quite flourishing for many years, but the climate conditions slowly deteriorated, the harbours were also gradually silting up. This started a process in which new harbours were going to be used, which gradually led to Enkomi to transfer their naval interests to Salamis, located north of the town at the coast, a process that Kition already earlier had experienced. Some 70 years later, at the end of period Late Cypriot III -A, both Enkomi and Kition were very likely hit by a particularly violent earthquake, as were some other towns in the area. The cyclopean walls and bastions had tumbled down. The population of Enkomi then left the remains of the city and moved for Salamis, while Kition apparently was rebuilt. [Maria Iacovou, Ecole française d’Athènes, From the Late Cypriot Polities to the Iron Age “Kingdoms”: Understanding the Political Landscape of Cyprus from Within, Ecole française d’Athènes, Open Edition, 2018.] This earthquake should then have happened around 800 BCE in the New Chronology. From then on Salamis and Kition developed to be the major harbours of the east and south-east coast of Cyprus for some time, after which new political and economic stuations developed. 36 IV- The Mycenaen City-States and the New Chronology It may be assumed that all towns and settlements in Mycenaean Greece had approximately the same culture in this period, a great social and interweaved likeness, a culture in which the one of the city-state Mycene was the most determining. At various moments these cities were heavily destroyed by great catastrophes in the 10th and 9th centuries BCE which ravaged their society completely. This finally marked the end of the Mycenaean power and culture, whereafter the population had to find a new start in a different mode. An attempt is made to identify the last phase of the Mycenaean-Greek world in this ”Investigation of a Study” , by using the New Chronology which has been worked out in the previous chapters as well as by the existing Late Helladic Time Scheme, which made it possible to detail a new Time Scheme for “Mycene” for the last 2-3 centuries of its existence in the Early Iron Age. This Scheme is shown on the next page. Hereafter follows a brief review of the main Mycenaean cities plagued by the catastrophes, in order of time in the last centuries of their existence. These have been dated following the Late Helladic Time Scheme in its new phase, applied to the later centuries. The dates are to be considered as an approximation. This review of Cities will be interrupted once in a while by texts on the Mycenaean culture and the background of events. Mycenaean Cities during the last 2-3 Centuries of their Existence The sequence and the dating of the catastrophes of the Mycenaean cities follow exactly the publication of the Austrian Conference on this subject, named: . “The Proceedings of the Conference of the Austrian Academy of Sciences on the Synchronisatie of the Destructions of the Mycenaean Palaces”, Vienna, Austria, 2022. This conference was dedicated to develop this synchronisation for time and place of a range of Mycenaean palace-cities and for each of the Disasters in Hellas. The various descriptions have been offered in the same sequence. The dating of the events have been added on basis of the reports presented by the Conference where the Helladic Timescheme was applied, the time-dating has been assessed by means of the Reconstructed Timescheme. 37 38 The following Map of Hellas and the surrounding areas is meant to provide the geographic relations between the Mycenaean city-states as referred to in the texts. Evidently, the Mycenaean cultures were primarily located on the southern part of the Greek peninsula, while the map also shows the importance of the Aegean Sea as an essential element in the existence of the involved population. The right-hand part indicates to West Anatolia, with coastal cities as mentioned in the text, where Troia is shown at the entrance of the Dardanelles, with the Aegean Sea separating it from Hellas. The map as shown was evidently not meant to provide other information respective to the various city-states in western Anatolia, territories being vassal to the Great Kingdom of Hatti. 39 1015 BCE Pylos A light earthquake took place shortly after the start of LH IIIA-2, of which is determined that the palace was partly destroyed. It was then rebuilt and reused, as appeared from the unpublished finds from Blegen’s excavations in the Portico of the Megaron. [Salvatore Vitale,Sharon Stocker, Jack Davis, The Destructions of the Palace of Nestor at Pylos and its IIIA Predecessor,2022] This first catastrophe at Pylos, as ascertained during the excavations, should have taken place in about 1015 BCE. It is highly probable that this earthquake did not lead to major consequences for the functioning of the Kingdom. Mycenaean Culture Pylos was a important Kingdom in the Mycenaean-Greek world, as it appeared from the written claytablets which were part of the royal archives, saved at the violent earthquake that destroyed the palace many years later. The Land of Pylos was located in Messenia along the Ionian seacoast of the Peloponnesos, with Pylos as capital. The palace was located close to the city. The Land was divided in two large provinces, in which 16 coastal cities. These provinces also divided the land in two parts, separated by the Messenian Gulf, at which Cape Acritas was the deviding point. Because of the fire in the palace, following the earthquake, thousands of claytablets could be deciphered and translated in the 2nd half of the 20th century. It appeared to be archaic Greek, the script then being called Linear-B. The text appeared to be very informative on the political and economic structure of the Land, and the social structure in the Mycenaean world. It became clear that next to agriculture and stock-breeding it was mainly via the production of olive-oil and aromatic products that these could be exchanged on long distances. There was a lot of demand for these products that were shipped in large stirrup vessels to virtually all teritories in the Mediterranean. These claytablets provided a lot of information on the relation between landowners and tenants, on the position of the king in the society and the general administration. Towns, including the Holy City, and many noblemen, possessed land, but cities appeared to have collective ownership. The 16 cities were also tributary to the king, probably also because of the royal properties on the site of the city. This arrangement of the social structure, with an independent position of the Demos, the people, gives the impression of a certain stability in the country. L.Palmer, Mycenaeans and Minoans, Faber and Faber, London, 1961] The tablets also provided information on a number of religious aspects. The Land was dedicated to the God Poseidon. His name appeared on most of the tablets, whether it was related to lease contracts or land ownership. He was especially the God of the Earth, in a general meaning, while he also was God of the 40 Earth-Movements, the Sea and Navigation, the springs and the swamps. He appeared to be supreme for the population in all aspects. Poseidon appeared to be in close relationship with the Queen, the Mothergoddess, the two Mistresses, the Twin Goddesses, the Young God and the Newborn Son. All these Gods and Goddesses played a large roll in the life of the Mycenaeans, of which the mutual relationship remains unclear. The Young God arised in Springtime and then was symbol for the renewed fertility of the earth, which apparently included the restoration of the navigation and shipping, as the latter had to be stopped in wintertime. Spring gave cause for the start of a large ritual festivity which started with the “Opening of the Pithoi”, the appealing of the new wine of the year, being followed on the second day with ”The Spreading of the Couch”, as a symbol for the Holy Wedding of the MotherGoddess with her arisen Son, the Young God. All the other days in this week were a feast, with music and dance, and the end of the week was closed with “The Feast of the Thirsty Ones”, to be interpreted as “the Feast of the Deceased”. Terracotta figurines have been found of two women with one common shoulder on which a young child was sitting. This ritual week of festivities appears to be in likeness with the one in Athens, called “Anthesteria”. The Wanax, the King of the Land, played an important role in it. The MotherGoddess, the Twin Goddesses and the Young God played a very great role in the religion, while on a quite different level the Goddess Potnia had an important position in every day life. Poseidon was of major importance in almost every aspect of life of the Mycenaean population, however, the claytablets revealed that he sometimes was confused with the God Hippos, the God of the Horses. This revealed a link with the past, as specifically horses had been predominantly important for the ancestors of the Mycenaeans. The Mycenaean-Greek ancestors were used to coexist with horses, they were part of their life in the Siberian Steppes. Poseidon always had been their supreme God, in all aspects, but he might have been Hippos in an earlier world. L.Palmer, Mycenaeans and Minoans, Faber and Faber, London, 1961] 975 BCE Mycenae LH IIIA-2 In this year Mycenae was hit by a heavy earthquake resulting in great destructions, but the city was thereafter completely rebuilt. The inhabitants resumed their lives and their work again in an innovative and energetic way. The walled citadel and multiple slopes of the settlement had been heavily affected by the earthquake. During the excavations much of the remains of the previous buildings were found underneath the foundations of the later ones. Shunks of pottery, shards, wall fragments with part of frescoes were found which at the rebuilding had later been used again as building material. The construction with new buildings started on a large scale in the period following the catastrophe, by which the cultural value of the remnants was hardly taken into account. The effect of the catastrophe could also be assessed at the excavation of a relative large building, which was 41 given the name Petsas House. Petsas House was a building in which people lived, it was however mainly a potter’s workshop with store-rooms of large quantities of pottery, vases and figurines in all ranges. The building had completely been destroyed, walls had been jumped off of their foundations, floors of the upper floor had plummetted, the stored goods had come all crashing down, heavy fires had broken out on various places. People had tried to save valuable ceramic products where possible, to put the parts together in the hope they later might be able to try repairing the building, and resume work again. This then appeared to be completely impossible, after which this area was totally abandoned.. Large destructions were discovered everywhere in the city, it really had been a large-scale disaster. Also the overbuilding of the South Megaron of the Cyclopean Terrace Buildings was completely destroyed by fire. [Kim Shelton, On Shaky Ground: Petsas House and Destruction at Mycenae in LH III A2, 2022] The population developed an enormous energy to stand up to the catastrophe. This resulted in a tremendous amount of new constructions, not only within the citadel but also in the surrounding areas. It appeared that the architecture had taken a completely new direction. Moreover, the construction of the new buildings had become more heavy, likewise the supports of the terraces. It gave the impression as if another time had started, which also appeared to be expressed at the creative handycraft. From the archives It turned out that the social and political structure of the city-state Mycenae was largely comparable to the one of Pylos. Therefore, a centrally organized royal authority with the palace as the centre of it, and as authority in control of land, stockbreeding and long-distance trade, the king being supported by a number of faithful people in high positions. The exchange of goods over long distances was probably the major pillar of the economy and prosperity, not only with the coastal areas around the Aegean Sea, but primarily with Crete, with which the economic ties had become very close. Crete, in modern times the Land of Minos, had earlier been hit by an earthquake, but the Mycenaean-Greeks, mainly of Mycenae and Pylos, had colonized the land. The Mycenaean products , mainly parfumed oils and ointments, were also intensively traded with the Levantine coast and Egypt. This intensity of trade slightly fell back after the earthquake and the destructions, but Mycenae remained a prosperous city-state with a large population, though the circumstances had changed. [Reinhard Jung,Eleftheria Kardamaki, Mykenische Studien,2022; Kim Shelton, On Shaky Ground, 2022] 975 BCE LH IIIA-2 Dimini, Volos, Pefkakia Dimini was apparently hit by the same heavy earthquake in this time as Mycenae. The settlement was completely destroyed by fire. Immediately after the destruction the inhabitants started rebuilding the settlement using the same building plan and space lay-out as applied for the earlier city. Later it was expanding towards a surface of approximately 400 X 500 meter. Dimini was located at the coastal area of the Pagasitic Gulf, quite close to Iolkos, or Volos, which provided a large natural harbour. The excavations made clear that Dimini had been a rich Mycenaean city. It had evidently 42 played a prominant role in the Gulf area, as the settlement was well organised with a large administrative centre, and buildings showing a large diversification in construction. The houses were all built in stone blocks with the rooms constructed with wooden walls, coated with coloured plaster, in white and yellow-brown. Some of them appeared to have had a sewer system. The buildings and houses had all been single- storied , each in free space, located in straight line patterns of roads in the city, indicative of planning. The main road in the city was still showing traces of chariot wheels. Fragments of terracotta figurines of chariots and horseriding have been found in the trash of the central part of the town, while also vases were recovered depicted with chariots. A large administrative building appeared to have been located in the central area of the town, which must have offered facilities for trading with remote areas, probably the southern Greek mainland, Crete and the Palestinian coastal cities. Dimini was located at the coast in an agricultural environment, with fields producing cereals, wines, olive oils and aromatic oils, as well being used for maintaining livestocks. Workshops appeared to have been versatile, producing a range of metal artefacts. The craftmanshift revealed to have been of a high technological level. Jewellary was a prominant product, amongst weapons and utensils. One other large settlement was Volos, located on a short distance, which was in control of the large natural harbour. It has now been identified with the old Iolkos, the city known from legendary times, of which Kastro Palaia, the old city,. probably was part of it. This old city was also a prominant commercial and administrative centre on the Pagasitic Gulf, with a palatial type architecture. Pefkakia was located on the opposite side of the Gulf. It is understood that these three cities, located so close to each other and apparently also mutual dependent, coexisted quite peacefully, and very likely were interlinked by a network of alliances, using the large natural harbour of Iolkos in common. [V.Adrymi-Sismani, Dimini: An Urban City Settlement of the Late Bronze Age in the Pagasitic Gulf] Note: It was mostly Dimini that was excavated, however, it may be assumed that all these three sites suffered the same catastrophe at LH IIIA-2, because they were located so near to each other at the Gulf. 950 BCE LH III B-Middle Thebes The city-state Thebes in Boeotia had a very strategic position in the territory for control of the important trade routes over long distances in all directions. It was located near a large fertile agricultural land which supported the trade, and especially long-distance trade. Thebes already had access to two coasts and seas during the epoch of LHIII- A, through which the exchange of goods with the settlements at the Aegean coast became quite important, as wel as with the important harbours of Phoenicia, Canaän and Egypte. This resulted in a flourishing trade and prosperity. The number of inhabitants was considerable and on equal level with Mycenae and Pylos, which were estimated as 30.000-50.000 people. 43 Large amounts of Linear-B claytablets have been found In Thebes during the excavations. Thebes was hit by an earthquake around 950 BCE. There were major destructions of the fortifications, primarily on the east side of the Kadmeia, the Acropolis of the City, while also the House of Kadmos and some workshops were destroyed. It appears that this earthquake did not lead to a great disaster. The Thebans then strengthened their fortifications and buildings again. Primarily in the following period, Thebes was a fully developed palatial centre, which controlled the administration and the political, commercial and cultural functions in the region. It appeared that no other power center in southern Boeotia could challenge the control and supremacy of Thebes during the LH III phase of time. Its prosperity and prestige were also quite supported by its intensive contacts and trade activities with the Eastern Mediterranean coastal cities. [Vassilis Aravantinos, Old and New Evidence for the Palatial Society of Mycenaean Thebes, 1994.] [Vassilis Aranvantinos , Mycenaean Thebes: Old Questions , New Answers, 2010] 920 BCE Mycenae LH IIIB- Middle The whole area suffered again from a serious earthquake at the end of LH III B- Middle, more than 60 years after the former catastrophe, which now again led to major destructions. Many constructions as well within as out of the citadel were heavily hit. This included the so-called Ivory Houses, and a group of buildings, mentioned with their present names, as the West House, the House of the Sphinxes, the House of the Oil Merchant (a storage of oliveoil in vessels), and the House of the Shields. They all suffered from a complete destruction and a following fire. The Earth Quake also damaged the Cult Center and the House of the High Priest, the Service Areas and the Tempel. Many buildings inside and outside the citadel were affected by the destructions. The walls of the High Priest House in the Cult Centre collapsed, the mud brick walls were partly burned. One of the walls crushed a young man, his hands were stretched over his head, as a protection against parts falling from the wall, another wall had blocked the door. The wall appeared to have had large frescos. The Panagia Houses were apparently destroyed together with the “Ivory Houses” , as mentioned above, but not by fire. Vessels and pots had been smashed on the floor and in a doorway a middle aged woman had been killed when she was hit by a falling stone, whereafter she had been buried by the debris of the house. The doorway leading into the house was found in a collapsed state. House- I was badly damaged and was thereafter totaly abandoned. [Jacques Vanschoonwinkel, Earthquakes and the End of the Mycenaean Palaces, Les Etudes Classiques 70, 2002] 920 BCE LH IIIB- Middle Tiryns At approximately this time a river north-west of the citadel, running straight south to the Gulf of Argos, changed its course drastically, probably caused by an earthquake. This had caused the river banks and steep 44 slopes to collapse, whereafter the river freely meandered on large parts of the North-Western Lower Town of Tiryns. It deposited up to 4 meters of sediments of mud and gravel, thereby destroying the Town. It appeared that the course of the river was then diverted to the east with a lot of manpower, where it was to join another river, running south east of the Citadel. The city was built against a hill with an Upper Citadel, a Middle Citadel and a Lower Citadel, all of them surrounded by strong walls. The two palaces controlled the collection of taxes and tributes in the form of commodities. Trade and contacts with Aegina, Kythera, the Dodecanese, Cyprus and the Levant were the foreign parts of the commercial activities, the agricultural products from the Argolid were important for the exchange. Tiryns appeared to have been one of the most important junctions in the long- distance trade of the Mycenaean networks. There is evidence of its role in receiving diplomatic embassies, royal exchanges and inter-dynastic marriages, in addition to low-level commercial activities, dispatching of troops, and the exchange of specialists. Joseph Maran noticed that the two Megarons in the Citadel were constructed and located in two different ways and design, and therefore might have been used for different purposes, conceivable one special Megaron for religious processions and rituals and the other, in a different design, for the reception of important foreign guests or similar. These two Megarons might then also be regarded as important part of the political, religious and social relations of Tiryns with Myceanae, especially important for Tiryns in its function as the main harbour of Mycenae. [J.Maran, 2015] Tiryns was surrounded by Lower Town settlements of yet unknown proportions, as they have not all been discovered by excavations regarding the high layers of flooded sediments. All buildings in the Lower Towns were toppled in this catastrophe, and several meters of sediments were deposited, while at the citadel the Cyclopian walls were damaged. But new living quarters were later on constructed on top of the dried-out flood sediments, and on top of the previous settlements . The city turned out to have functioned as the main port of the Argolid and of Mycenae, judged by the precious and valuable goods that were traded here, being products from Crete, Cyprus and the Levant, possibly Italy. [Soňa Wirghová, Turning Points in the Ceramic Sequence of the Northern Tip of the Lower Citadel at Tiryns, 2022] 920 BCE LH IIIB- Middle Ayos Vasileios Ayos Vasileos appeared to be the place of a Mycenaean city in Laconia with a palace as a political and administrative centre, which appeared to have been an important junction in the long-distance exchange route of goods between Pylos and Crete. This palace in Laconia apparently functioned in controlling the important supraregional sea-transports from Pylos to the city of Cretan Kommos via the isle of Kythera, directly south of the Peloponnesos peninsula. That became obvious from the typical large transports containers that have been found, but also from the typical ceramic pottery that were used at the various points of transport. The palace of Ayos Vasileos was heavily destroyed by fire in LH IIIB Middle, during which the archive room in a stoa burnt down with all the Linear B clay tablets, in modern times offering extensive information. However, it 45 appears that after the catastrophe the population partly abandoned the town, did not repair and rebuild all the damaged buildings with the intention to continue their former way of life. It is quite plausible they did not further make use of written tablets during the later parts of the century, which might indicate that the administration of the agricultural production and the remote exchange activities had altogether be stopped. It is further remarkable that the following period, the period after the catastrophe of LH IIIB- Middle, coincided with the increase of Kytheran imports at Tiryns such as stirrup jars and pithoi. It was therefore suggested as conceivable that Tiryns, and therefore also the Argolid, gained more access and control to this very important trade route to Crete during LH III B2 after the destruction of Ayos Vasileos. [Adamantia Vasilogamvrou,Eleftheria Kardamaki,Nektarios Karadimas, 2022] [Vasco Hachtmann, Sofia Voutsaki, 2022] The Earthquakes With the following text the enormous impact of earthquakes on the Mediterranean cultures in this period will be discussed in more detail. The ruins of many of the excavated cities in the Aegean areas show traces of violence, as collapsed buildings and houses, destroyed citywalls and dams, mudslides and landslides. These were alloted as earthquakes as the result of seismological research on the movements of earthplates. Among others, Amos Nur and Eric Cline dealed with this subject in their publication in the Journal of Archaeological Science, 2000, in which they also indicated that the plate tectonics in the whole area should have been the cause of these catastrophes. The African and Arabian plates were moving for an unmeasurable time in a northern direction, thereby causing immense forces on the Anatolian and Asian plates. Their edges were being pushed underneath each other and caused a great instability. Great forces and tensions were generated in the crust of the earth, causing faults, while stone masses slided over each other. In between these great plates some smaller earthplates were locked up, like the Aegean Plate, but also the Anatolian. The latter was completely stuck and moved under an enormous pressure from the south-east in western directions with a speed of about 2 cm a year. The following important fault zones for Greece have been identified: ** The Northern Anatolian Fault Zone, along the northern coast of Anatolia towards Greece ** The Hellenic Fault Zone along the western coast of Greece. The Northern Anatolian Fault Zone separates the Anatolian Plate from the Eurasian Plate, by which the Fault lies deep under the Sea of Marmara, deep in the Aegean Sea in a south-western direction, whereupon it continuous right across southern Greece and the Peloponnesos. The Hellenic Fault lies west of and along the Greek coast, along the Peloponnesos in the direction of Crete, passing Crete on great depth, and continous via the Aegean Sea towards the southern Anatolian coast. Earthquakes of any magnitude that occurred in these areas in the 20th century appear all to be plottable 46 along these Faultlines. The many epicentres of these earthquakes in modern times have all been found along or near the edges of these earthcrusts. The Earthplates move apparently yearly with a speed of some centimeters. The tensions in the earthcrust increase gradually over long periods of time, and result in unloading at a certain moment in a series of earthquakes, in which each is to increase the tension for another one. The authors concluded that it is very likely that the geophysical and archaeological evidence indicates that these Faultzones were the cause of the heavy destructions in Mycenaean Greece, and they named them as “An Earthquake Storm”. [Amos Nur, Eric Cline, 2000] 880 BCE The Trojan War All the Mycenaean city- states went to war against Troia, probably in the year 880 BCE. This date has been estimated in comparing with historical events in the Hatti Timescheme and Mycenaean data from the various events in the New Mycenaean Timeframe. It is nevertheless an estimated date, which , however, is thought to approximate the local reality. Of course, it appeared to be of major importance that Troia earlier had been identified as Wilusa, an important coastal city being part of the Hatti Confederation. 47 880 BCE Troia It is apparently accepted that the events Homeros described in the Iliad and the Odysée are broadly regarded as being part of the Mycenaean history. The Mycenaean-Greeks assembled an enormous army, then sailed north and laid siege to Troia in order to get possession of the city. The Annals described the size of the army as large as 10.000 warriors, who in the 10th year of the war were preparing for the last battle. Both the large size of the army as well the length of the war should be considered as hardly credible. In these texts the length of this war will be taken to have been 3 to 5 years, taking into account the enormous weight it was given in the preparations and the maintenance which was required. For convenience sake the value of 5 years will be noted, the war then ending in 875 BCE. As far back as the early Bronze Age, Troia engaged in extensive trade. The city sat at the entrance to the Dardanelles—the narrow straits connecting the Aegean Sea and the Sea of Marmara, which led into the Black Sea through the Bosporus—and thus came to serve as a central entrepôt for trade with territories on the Black Sea and to the east. The Trojans were thus able to not only charge tolls for passage through the Dardenelles but also mooring fees. Because of the city’s location, much business was transacted at Troia, goods were exchanged, ships unloaded and reloaded. The city became an important trade center because of their pivotal location in all directions in the Late Bronze Age. The fall of Troia was celebrated as a great victory by the Mycenaean-Greeks, but should be regarded as highly doubtful. There is no doubt anymore on the cause of the collapse of Troia, it should have been an enormous earthquake, followed by fire. The earthquake must have been of an terrible force, also because a large part of the wall of the fortifications had come down, as its was torn from its place by the forces. The resulting chaos and the desorganization, the large crowds of flying people, the fear and terror, must have led to many people fleeing from the city and its surroundings. An enormous part of the Mycenaean fleet was probably also destroyed by the wild and savage sea during the quake, and likely did not leave much behind of tents and ships of the warfleet. A great many Mycenaean-Greek warriors were doubtless forced to look for other places to live in. 870 BCE LH IIIB Late/ LH IIIC Mycenae About this time the once powerful and proud Mycenaean City-State came to a dramatic end due to a violent earthquake. Both the Citadel and the Lower Town outside the acropolis were seriously damaged, while also many structures caught fire. Various buildings on the Citadel were destroyed. The Cult Centre was seriously damaged, the area of the Round Altar and the Gamma 1 Shrine was also heavily destroyed, as walls and slabs had slided away, where the south-west corner of the Gamma 1 Shrine was pushed out of position and the wall flanking the entrance to the Shrine with the Idols, also called Temple, bulged outwards. The Plakes House, 48 which was located some distance north of the Citadel, was also completely destroyed. Walls were displaced and corners in the structure were pushed out by the destructive forces. Several skeletons were found buried beneath the debris of the fallen structure. [Jacques Vanschoonwinkel,2002] The destructions, the disarray, the disorganization that followed, disrupted all the economic activities and marked the end of this great city. 870 BCE LH IIIB Late/ LH IIIC Tiryns Tiryns had been very involved in the long-distance trade with Cyprus and the harbour-cities in the Levant in the earlier parts of this time frame, which made it prosperous, in coherence with Mycenae. It was also a period of significant changes in building and architecture. The Cyclopean Wall was constructed, with some adjustments at the defense works. Large depots were also constructed, apparently for the storage of provisions, and elaborate arrangements were made to ensure access to safe water supplies inside the walls. Joseph Maran noted that it was in the Late Palatial Period that the city was transformed into a splendid new political centre by building a new palace with magnificent wall paintings, the Western Staircase and all the corbel vaults were terraced and rebuilt, the first Cyclopean fortification of the Lower Citadel was terraced and rebuilt. The city was to have two similarly furnished megara with separate systems of access, also differing in size as well as in the quality of execution. The new design suggested the use of the Little Megaron as the seat of a local deputy of the king in Mycenae. [J.Maran, 2015]. After the destruction of Ayios Vasileios in Laconia, previously having been such a prominent partner in the Long-Distance Exchange Line with Crete, Tiryns and the Argolid apparently gained more access to this Aegean Network for some decades by taking over this important exchange effort. Tiryns must also have suffered socially and economically of the catastrophe at Troia and the chaotic developments on the Anatolian Westcoast some years earlier, also while so many of her own inhabitants had been involved in the Trojan War. These developments should have led to quite a lot of unrest and difficulties, with effect on the trade connections with the Levant and Cyprus, and therefore on the economy of the Argolid itself. This city-state itself was suffering from a heavy earthquake and a great conflagration at the end of this period. A thick layer of ashes and burnt debris has been found on all places in the Upper Citadel and the Lower Citadel, while the Lower Settlements apparently all met the same fate. All buildings were entirely demolished , collapsed, burnt down. Several stone walls in the Lower Citadel presented undulating distortions or were tilted, terraces were shifted. After the structural collapse of the buildings and related conflagration inside the Tiryns citadel, the population continued to live at the site, although major changes were made. [Jacq. Vanschoonwinkel, 2002; Eleni Andrikou,2022; Joseph Maran,2017] 49 It matters to notice that the population started again to rebuild their city after the destruction of the palaces. New houses and other buildings were constructed around courtyards, by which they tried to resume the work. These new constructions remained in use until the end of the post-palatial period. Initially all the trade with Cyprus and the cities of the Levantine coast had come to a halt, but the range of ceramic shapes in the earliest Post-palatial phase appeared to be constant and seemed to continue for a while. The post-palatial Lower Town appeared even to have increased in size. They even constructed a new Megaron on top of the ruins of the Upper Citadel, though of smaller size. Judging by the jewellery found it appears they still had trade in the post-palacial town with Crete , Italy and Cyprus. After about 100-150 years years the settlement started dwindling down, and the acropolis was nearly totally abandoned finally. [Joseph Maran, Tiryns, Oxford Classical Dictionary, 2017, Oxford, U.K.] [Joseph Maran, Tiryns and the Argolid in Mycenaean Times, 2015] 870 BCE LH IIIB Late/ LH IIIC Thebes At the end of this period the fortified citadel was suddenly destroyed by a strong fire. Masses of drinking cups appeared to have fallen from their place in the heavily loaded pantries in the palatial building. At the excavations, the baked clay tablets from the Linear B archives were found in seven different places in the Kadmeia at considerable distances from each other. This catastrophe resulted in the break-up of the palatial system of Thebes. Thebes apparently did not recover from this catastrophe. [V. Aravantinos, Mycenaean Thebes: Old Questions, New Answers., 2010] 870 BCE LH IIIB Late/ LH IIIC Dimini At the end of LH IIIB2 Dimini was destroyd again by fire. The city and its centre, including the administration building were severely affected by the disaster. The population was apparently seriously discouraged and they proceeded by mainly constructing small houses thereafter. It appears they continued living at the place in the first decades of the Early LH III C period, after which the settlement was abandoned. [V.Adrymi-Sismani, Dimini: An Urban City Settlement of the Late Bronze Age in the Pagasitic Gulf] 850 BCE LH IIIC Early Pylos The Kingdom of Pylos in Messenia apparently had expected an attack from the sea shortly before the collapse of the palace and the following fire. That appeared from reading the claytablets from the devastated archives. Apparently the state of emergency had been declared and the country was preparing itself 50 organizationally for an elaborate defence against an enemy attack from the sea. These fully written claytablets had been put ready for distribution, all related to manning a dozen strategically choosen locations along the northern and southern coastlines by warriors. Each of them was assigned to an encampment for large numbers of troops, with military headquarters on three other places. Additionally orders were prepared for sending large numbers of warships to fleet stations along the coast, mainly south of Pylos, the main city. Camps were to set up in the coastal mountains for the safety of women and children. Orders had also been prepared for sending bronzesmiths, workmen, carpenters, construction workers to the military centres for support to the troops. An extensive distribution system for the supplies had also been prepared. All signs indicated it did not get to that point. Fires in the palace burned these tablets before they could be sent and distributed. All this affected not only the Palace, but also the settlements were seriously hit and destroyed. 850 BCE LH IIIC Early Mycenae The city was hit again by an earthquake, this time 20 years later. It is plausable that the city hardly had been built up since the previous disaster, while this later earthquake apparently only was of a small size . Athens LH IIIC Early This city was hardly hit by all the catastrophes destroying so many other Mycenaean cities in the many preceding decades, as it was virtually unviolated. The main city actually was a formidable fortress, built on a high level on top of the Acropolis and therewith offering relative safety to its occupants within high walls, which had been built around 920 BCE. At that time the availability of water was also secured. Sufficient space was made available on the Acropolis for the population of the surrounding villages, including part of the livestock. Athens had a direct access to the sea and was therefore independent of other parties. At this particular time the city was not really an important trade centre in the Mycenaean world, like Pylos, Mycenae, Tiryns and Thebes. It is quite likely that this should easier to be understood in connection with the particular organization of cities, towns and settlements in Attica. Athens in this part of the country was mainly a leading centre in a very large area of more or less independent settlements, which had united in an alliance protecting their mutual interests. The alliance took care in keeping the common religious ceremonies and festivals, in which the worship of Poseidon was of major importance. This common particular religious background only appears to be elucidated via legends. Probably, Athens was to be regarded as a flourishing city as the major centre in Attica from approximately this time in LH IIIC Early, while some other cities in Attica also started to gain more influence, like Perati. From this moment on Attica obtained widespread connections with Egypte and the Levant. 51 V - Discussion The Dorians From tradition it is known that the Dorians gained control of a large part of the Peloponnesos in Mycenaean times, however, it is not known at which time that took place and in which manner, except that violence had been part of it. A map has been kept since Classic Greek Times on which dialects have been marked which were spoken in Greece in those years. The map shows dialects spoken in Greece around 500-450 years BCE. The Dorian dialect covers the whole southern Peloponnesos on the map and additonally the islands from Crete up to Rhodos. Prof. Palmer considered the Arcado- Cyprian dialect as virtually the same as the Linear-B dialect of the Mycenaean-Greeks, to which may be added that the Mycenaean-Greek language was his speciality.. He was also of the opinion that all the Mycenaean dialects of the Peloponnesos, Thessaly and Boeotia should be considered as predecessors of the Aeolic and Arcado-Cyprus dialects on the map. [Leonard Palmer,Mycenaeans and Minoans,Faber and Faber, London, 1961] 52 It is further quite evident that the Dorian Greeks, with Sparta as their new homeland, considered complete Messenia as part of their own sovereignty. There are also strong indications that the Dorian Greeks did not grand the Messenian population their own rights after the conquest of that country on the western Peloponnesion coast. Nino Luraghi has gone to great lengths to gain insight into the historian background of the Messenians, but the Dark Ages were no part of it. It became quite clear that Messenia had ceased to exist. It was no other than a part of Sparta, which later on, in later centuries, led to insurrections, and even to wars with assistance of neigbouring countries, all with the purpose to obtain independence. [Nino Luraghi,2008] The Pylos archives of claytablets made it quite clear that the population was awaiting a hostile invasion, which actually is the only indication of military activities within the Mycenaean areas. In stead of war, a large earthquake is regarded as the source of the catastrophe which caused the final end of the Messenian Land of Pylos. Pylos was quite destroyed, but nothing has later been found that indicated to fighting. It is highly probable that the Dorians were expected to be the enemy on that moment of time, though still on a distance because nothing in Pylos indicated to an emergency. The Dorian army, so it has been interpreted later on, was still in northern areas moving south along the coast. They later came into a waisted land. It is quite interesting to imagine time and cause of this invasion, as far as information is at hand, while it also appears that the Dorian invasion in Pylos had been an once-only invasion in southern Greece in these years. Furthermore, neither a later nor an earlier arrival appears to have happened. It is very likely that the Dorian Greeks came from Southern Albania and were on their way to the Peloponnesos. The Dorian invasion appears to have taken place a short while after Pylos destruction in 850 BCE, also datable with the Mycenaean timeline as two decades after the beginning of LH III-C Early. The settlements thad already been destroyed and the population was in great confusion after the catastrophe at the time the Dorian warriors arrived at the palace. The hostile troops should also have forced very large flows of fleeing people. Mycenae did not really exist anymore more, which alltogether made it much more easier for the intruding enemy to act. With a view to the purpose of this invasion it is to be considered that the Land of Pylos had very close connections with Crete via long-distance commercial lines, even to the extent that Crete meanwhile had been colonized by both Mycenae and Pylos. Pylos had become a dominant power in the southern section of the island of Crete, with Laconia, on the most southern part of the Peloponnesos, as a very important intermediate trade station. These efforts in trade must have made the Land of Pylos very thriving, as it also had become a major target for the Dorians. A view on the map above will show that the Dorians did not hesitate to also bring Crete in their possession. Certainly, the palace of Ayos Vasileios in Laconia was not being used anymore because of the destruction a hundred years earlier, but Ayos Vasileios must still have been a major commercial station for Pylos in the years after. 53 The Dorians took the power in Pylos, but their newly established capital was to be Sparta in the southern mountain area of Laconia. Large amounts of people from Laconia and Pylos fled north in the years after, fleeing from the Dorians. Many of them stayed in Athens, but quite large groups of people fled further north to the city-states on the Anatolian West Coast and the Aegean Islands, to many areas that earlier had been part of the sovereignty of the Land of Hatti. The Peloponnesos impoverished not only by the destructions of a great culture, the collapse of agriculture and long-distance trade, but also by the massive emigration. The Earthquakes and the Alternatives It has been assumed in this Investigation that it is more than likely that all catastrophes in Hellas in this long period have been caused by either small or large earthquakes, especially while the whole Aegean Area appears to be located on the edges of these massive Earthplates, being constantly in motion. This hypothesis for earthquakes over some hundreds of years did not only find support in the specific location of the settlements in these dangerous tectonic areas, but also in side effects that pointed to the same direction. It appeared remarkable that time and again these quakes took place in the same vulnerable areas and then also in various places at the same time, occurring with very large forces on the earth’s surface. However, doubts apparently remained about the legitimacy of the hypothesis, mainly because either quite some other and different causes were suggested as a possible alternative, or the evidence was not considered sufficiently convincing. One of these suggested alternatives was warfare. This, however, was not very appealing. Hardly any action of hostilities among the various cities has been reported, while there also appeared to be a very great social connection between the various communities in a large space of time. Moreover, the Mycenaean city-states also kept a large uniformity in their social structure, which showed hardly any social ruptures. Hostile people from far outside the Mycenaean world has not been reported. Thereabove, the MycenaeanGreeks were most of these years on the top of their own military power, even in a way they took the risk to undertake a very large campaign on a great distance from their homeland, leaving it almost unprotected. The Dorians might be mentioned, but these people marched south after the great disaster of LHIII C – Late, which coincided with the total collapse of the Mycenaean culture. Troia Troia as the city in the “Trojan War” is an important part in the design of this Investigation and the design of the Mycenaean-Greek Timescheme, though it wasn’t a Mycenaean town. The Mycenaean warriors were arriving at the walls of the city shortly after approximately 885 BCE. It is assumed to have been happened at the time the military and political situation of the Land of Hatti had become extremely bad, keeping in mind that Troia actually was to be considered as the equivalent of Wilusa, a major city belonging to the Hatti confederation. The destroyed city appeared to have been the one with excavation layer Troia VI- h, as one of the phases of 54 its existence. Troia-VIII happened to be the last phase, and this city was mainly inhabited by a Greek population. Hereafter the effects on the chronology will be traced by viewing the various subsequent cities Troia. Troia VI This city was laying on a very strategic location at the Dardanelles. It played an important role for the exchange of goods between the Mediterranean and the areas in northern Europa and around the Black Sea. It had been built with a heavily walled Citadel with a fortified Lower City south of it. The total number of people has been estimated at 5000-6000, including the Lower City. It had very high and broad massive limestone walls, with towers and five entrance gates. The buildings within the citadel were constructed close to each other, with cobbled roads in between. Trade was maìnly directed upon the Anatolian cities on the westcoast, as also the material culture was part of the same teritory. Claytablets were used for the communication in writing enabling the organization of trade and economy. It appeared that the population made a lot of use of Mycenaean pots and bowls imported from overseas. The Mycenaean fashion, forms and styles became more and more popular, especially in special types like goblets and large stirrup jars. The greater part of this Mycnaean type ceramics, however, was made locally later on, while also the import from overseas areas stagnated, the material culture had clearly become the one from North-West Anatolia. This was the city which was heavily destroyed by a massive earthquake, and most certainly the one besieged by the Myceaean-Greeks at the year around 880 BCE. But it was also Wilusa, important as part of the Great Kingdom of Hatti, of which the ruling kings had the greatest difficulty keeping those remote areas under control, as they were vassal kingdoms on great distance from the capital city. Great-Koning Tudhaliya-IV finally succeeded in keeping the dominant Greeks outside the borders around 915 BCE. He therewith excluded them from having influence on the local governments when promoting their own interests, but that also led to a serious limitation of the foreign trade. Troia VII-a The excavation layer noted the reconstruction of the city after the destructions caused by the previous earthquake, as much material was reused again. The walls and the towers were also repaired. There was no question of a culturebreak, but the rebuilding was on a lower scale. Many buildings were added to the space within the citadel which made it very crowded, especially because it also involved large storehouses with large numbers of pithoi. Both the Citadel and the Lower City were still heavily walled and fortified. No culturebreak was noticed compared to the previous city, but the constructions were executed on a smaller scale. The population gradually increased both inside the citadel and in the settlements. Mycenaean ceramics were also imported again. This city was also destroyed, this time by large fires, whereupon the city was being rebuilt again, and the population remained. 55 Troia VII-b Its first phase was a continuation of the previous habitation but mainly inside the Citadel and with a significantly smaller number of people. Thereafter changes became apparent, indicating to a population with a new impetus but with an older form of culture, which might have belonged to immigrants from the northern regions of Middle Europe. A Mycenaean influence was also noticeable. The culture changed again but towards quite a lower material level. The ceramic production was handmade this time and of a low artistic level. It has been suggested that new immigrants had arrived after some time originating from south-east Europe. Finally, the remains of this former impressive construction were destroyed by fire. Troia-VIII This new city had been built on the ruins of the previous buildings quite some time later, and was inhabited by a population of a high cultural level, belonging to the Archaic Greek Culture, at a time estimated as around 750 BCE. [Peter Pavuk, Aegeans and Anatolians. A Trojan Perspective, 2005] [Peter Jablonka, Brian Rose. Late Bronze Age Troy. A Response to Frank Kolb, 2004]. Note: It appears that Troia VII-a probably existed approximately 70 years until 805 BCE, after its predecessor had burnt down in about 875 BCE. Afterwards Troia VII-b was inhabited bij successively three quite different groups of population, after which another fire burnt it down. Troia VII-b could not have existed longer than about 55 years, a period in which three populations were living in it. And also quite some years should be taken completely rebuild the impoverished city, as needed for the habitation of a totally new population in the city VIII in 750 BCE. This leads to the conclusion that the chronology of the cities of Troia supports the New Chronology as developed in this Investigation. Athens Athens appeared to have had a limited influence in the Greek-Mycenaean world. The city had long-distance trade connections to a limited extent, it had no relations which were able to accumulate great wealth for the city. It was mentioned earlier that Athens was a prominent member of the Organization of Cities, in Attica as well as in some adjacent areas, mostly those with harbours on the Aegean Sea. It is therewith remarkable that each of these settlements possessed a rather great independence, but would 56 be willing to adjust to goals that were important for all of them. It was a fairly close cluster of towns which also were close enough to make use of a communal citadel. The aspect of being part of a religious association was apparently also important for all of them. It was a community of cult, with a patron deity who was presiding. This required a central sanctuary, a common sanctified place, for all religious festivals and celebrations. These religious aspects must have been determining for a culture in which coherence was to be of great importance. As it used to be within the tribe in previous times. This appeared to have been a huge social change, wherein the attention, the bondage with a certain individual grave was gradually redirected towards the communal sanctuary. These new religious feelings gave rise to the building of great numbers of sanctuaries in the following centuries. With great probability this process started with Athens in this period, the time of the collapse of the Mycenaean-Greek culture and the rebubilding of a complete new society. [John Bintliff, The Greek Early Iron Age and the Concept of a Dark Age, 2012. The University of Edinburgh] [John Haberstroh, Disaster Averted: Studying the Survival of Athens, 2013] [Melanie Harris, The Delayed Development of Athens in the LBA, 2016. Brandeis University, Waltham, Massachusetts, U.S.A] Dating of the Mediterranean Archaelogical Sites All dating of the scientifical excavations of the Late Bronze Age archaeological sites has usually been made by using the Helladic Time Scheme, as already indicated in a previous chapter. This method has proven to be of great value after prolonged use for dating purposes, especially because of its accuracy. All the objects found could be compared and be related to each other, which finally led to a very reliable dating procedure. A small number of objects and as well certain events in the Mycenaean world appeared to have been related to the Egyptian society in the Bronze Age, which necessarily was to lead to combine the time schemes from both societies at a certain moment, which also was thought to be fortunate because the Egyptian chronology was considered to be of absolute value. Unfortunately, too many conflicts have arisen meanwhile between Mediterranean time-dating and scientific research. Practically, all archaeological finds in the Mediterranean world related to Mycene have been given an identification according to the Helladic Time Scheme, which essentially has a strong value in bringing details in relation with each other. This dating system therefore acquired a great reliablity and proved its importance. This coherence, these connections between characteristics, probably developed because of the enormous impact the Mycenaean-Greek culture had obtained in the whole of this large area during the Late Bronze Age, from Palestine in the east to Italy and Sicily in the west. There appeared to be hardly common grounds between the archaeology of the Mediterranean cultures and 57 those of Northern-Europe, however, in some cases, like in Northern Italy this led to great uncertainty on details of research. Radio-Carbon measurements have been applied in some cases, but they appear to have had a minimal impact. The Helladic Chronology System appears to have been used in all aspects of research and professional publications. The conference in Vienna held in 2022 aiming to synchronize the destructions of the Mycenaean Palaces in the Late Bronze Age, led to a report dating the results in het Helladic Time Scheme. This structure in dating with a Helladic System makes the impression that RC measurements not necessarily were considered as required over the many years because a reliable system already was at hand. 58 VI – Conclusions The Mycenaean-Greek population must have become desperate by those devastating disasters, whereby hope and despair alternated. These catastrophes should also have had very harmful effects on all the longdistance relations and the political and economic circumstances. The overseas trade undoubtedly had finally come to a full stop. The earthquake of 870 BCE in the midst of the Peloponnesos was very destructive, the earthquakes also repeated after 50 years and then a follow-up again after 20 years. The population had no choice but to seek refuge elsewhere, in areas that could offer peace and quiet, far away from the places where the disasters kept occurring. It is even conceivable that the God Poseidon lost most of his influence in these centuries, and gradually was replaced by Zeus, apparently a God who was able to offer better protection. Poseidon after all was considered to be God of the Earthquakes, while Zeus apparently protected the Harmony in Nature, the Social Order and the Family, values of a most prominant character in these later years. Archaic Greece is considered to have developed starting halfway the 8st century, with a huge revival in economy and culture, in which the population apparently took part with great energy. Between this enormous rise of prosperity and the earlier downfall of the Mycenaean society in the midst of the 9th century lies a period of roughly 100 years. It has been noted that the social order slowly established itself in this period, specifically in Attica around Athens, as far is known, while there might also have been an equivalent development elsewhere, probably in Argos and Thebes. A great number of villages united into a Polis with a common citadel and sanctuary for religious festivals and ceremonies, a development by which the population started a complete different social structure. The worship and sanctification of the deceased around individual tombs was going to be replaced by religious dedications and ceremonies at centrally located sanctuaries, not much later temples, as part of the Polis. The former economy in which the organization of labour and rewards only was alloted to a centrally organized bureaucracy, in which the social and economic organization of the society was controlled by the elite had completely disappeared in these last years of the Mycenaean society. The population had also spread over large areas and had begun to develop an entirely new pattern of social relations. [Anthony Snodgrass, 1981] The New Chronology gradually connects with the following Archaïc Greek world, in a transition of the cultural developments that appear to be trustworthy. 59 VII - References Vasiliki Adrymi-Sismani, Dimini: An Urban Settlement of the Late Bronze Age in the Pagasitic Gulf, Presses universitaires de Louvain, Louvain, Belgium. Vassilis Aravantinos, Old and New Evidence for the Palatial Society of Mycenaean coastal cities, 1994. Vassilis Aravantinos, Mycenaean Thebes: old questions , new answers. Maison de l’Orient et de la Méditerranée. 2010, Lyon, France. Eleneni Andrikou The Pottery from a Storeroom Destroyed at the End of the Mycenaean Palatial Period. Mykenische Studien, Austrian Academy of Sciences, Wien, Austria. Eleneni Andrikou Kadmeia,Thebes: The Pottery from a Storeroom Destroyed at the End of the Mycenaean Palatial Period. 2022. Mykenische Studien, Austrian Academy of Sciences, Wien, Austria. Sanna Aro Luwians in Aleppo?, Luwian and Hittite Studies, Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv 2010, Israel. R.Barnett, Early Greek and Oriental Ivories, Journal of Hellenic Studies, 1948 E.Ben Yosef, et al., A New Chronological Framework for Iron Age Copper Production at Timna, Atlanta, 2010, U.S.A. J.Bimson, King Solomon’s Mines, A Reassessment of Finds in the Arabah, The Tyndale Biblical Archaeology Lecture, 1980. John Bintliff, The Greek Early Iron Age and the Concept of a Dark Age, 2012. The University of Edinburgh, U.K. Yigal Bloch, Laura Peri, I Placed My Name There: The Great Inscription of Tukulti- Ninurta-I, King of Assyria. Israel Museum Studies in Archaeology, Jerusalem, 2017, Israel. Maurice Bowra Homer and his Forerunners, Thomas Nelson and Sons, Edinburgh, 1955,U.K.. Trevor Bryce, The Kingdom of the Hittites, Oxford University Press, U.K., 1999 H. W. Catling, A Mycenaean Puzzle from Lefkandi in Euboea, American Journal of Archaeology 72,1968. A.Dinçol, B.Dinçol, J.D.Hawkins, N.Marchetti, H.Peker, A New Stele from Karkemish: At the Origins of the Suhi- Katuwa Dynasty, Universita di Bologna, Italia, 2014. Müge Durusu-Tanriöver, Ways of Being Hittite: Empire and Borderlands in Late Bronze Age Anatolia and Northern Syria, Studia Orientalia Electronica, Bilkent University, Ankara, Turkey, 2021 Israel Finkelstein, The Rise of Jerusalem and Judah: the Missing Link, Levant, Tel Aviv, 2001, Israel.. Israel Finkelstein, The Sociopolitical Organization of the Central Hill Country in the Second Millennium BCE, 1993. Biblical Archaeology Today 1990, Jerusalem,Israel. Alessandra Gilibert, Sacred Landscapes of Hittites and Luwians, International Conference, Florence, 2014 , 60 Alessandra Gilibert Religion and propaganda under the Great Kings of Karkemiš, Firenze University Press, 2015. John Haberstroh, Disaster Averted: Studying the Survival of Athens, 2013 Vasco Hachtmann, Sofia Voutsaki , The Aias Vasileios Cemetery in the Palatial Period, 2022. Mykenische Studien, Austrian Academy of Sciences, Wien, Austria. Melanie Harris, The Delayed Development of Athens in the LBA, 2016. Brandeis University, Waltham, Massachusetts, U.S.A. J.David Hawkins, British Museum Studies, 2009 Maria Iacovou, From the Late Cypriot Polities to the Iron Age “Kingdoms”: Understanding the Political Landscape of Cyprus from Within, Ecole française d’Athènes,Open Edition, 2018. Peter James et all., Centuries of Darkness, Jonathan Cape London, U.K., 1992 Peter Jablonka, Brian Rose, Late Bronze Age Troy: A Response to Frank Kolb, American Journal of Archaeology, Vol. 108, 2004 Reinhard Jung, Eleftheria Kardamaki Mykenische Studien, 2022, Austrian Academy of Sciences, Wien, Austria. Joachim Latacz, Wilusa- Centre of a Hittite Confederate in North-Western Asia Minor, Universität Basel, Schweiz. Joachim Latacz, Wilusa- Centre of a Hittite Confederate in North-Western Asia Minor, Universität Basel, Schweiz. Sturt Manning ,Bernd Kromer, Peter Kuniholm, Maryanne Newton. Anatolian Tree Rings an a New Chronology for the East Mediterranean Bronze-Iron Ages, Science,Vol 294, 2001. Joseph Maran, Tiryns, Oxford Classical Dictionary, 2017 U.K. Joseph Maran, Tiryns and the Argolid in Mycenaean Times , Mycenaeans upto Date, Svenska Institutet i Athene, 2015, Stockholm, Sweden. Joseph Maran The Demise of the Myceaean Palaces:The Need for an Interpretative Reset. 2022, Mykenische Studien, Austrian Academy of Sciences, Wien, Austria Nadav Na’aman, Jerusalem in the Amarna Period, Jérusalem Antique et Médiévale, Peeters, Paris-Louvain-Walpole,MA, 2011 Amos Nur, Eric Cline Poseidon’s Horses: Plate Tectonics and Earthquake Storms in the Late Bronze Age Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean, 2000. Journal of Archaeological Science. Marco de Odorico, Compositional and Editorial Processes of Analistic and Summary Texts of Tiglath-Pileser-I; Instituto Universitario Orientale of Napoli, 1994, Italy. L.Palmer, Mycenaeans and Minoans, Faber and Faber, London, 1961. Peter Pavuk, Aegeans and Anatolians. A Trojan Perspective. 2005. Aegaeum 25. Annales d’archéologie égénne de Université de Liège UT-PASP, Liège, Belgique. Rothenberg, Timna, Valley of the Biblical Copper Mines, Thames & Hudson,London,U.K., 1972 61 Kim Shelton On Shaky Ground: Petsas House and Destruction at Mynenae in LH IIIA2, 2022, Mykenische Studien, Austrian Academy of Sciences, Wien, Austria. Anthony Snodgrass, Archaic Greece, The Age of Experiment, University of California Press, 1980, U.S.A Margreet Steiner, The Archaeology of Ancient Jerusalem, 1998,. Currents in Research: Biblical Studies, Vol.6. Margreet Steiner, The Evidence from Kenyon’s Excavations in Jerusalem. A Response Essay, Jerusalem, Bible and Archaeology , The First Temple Period. SBL Atlanta, 2003,USA. Margreet Steiner, Expanding Borders :The Development of Jerusalem in the Iron Age, 2003 Jacques Vanschoonwinkel, Earthquakes and the End of the Mynenaean Palaces Les Etudes Classiques 70, 2002, Université de Nice, France. Adamantia Vasilogamvrou, Eleftheria Kardamaki, Nektarios Karadimas The Destruction at the Palace of Aylos Vasileios and its Synchronisms Mykenische Studien, Austrian Academy of Sciences, Wien, Austria E. Vermeule, Greece in the Bronze Age, Chicago University Press, 1972., USA. Salvatore Vitale, Sharon Stocker, Jack Davis. The Destructions of the Palace of Nestor at Pylos, 2022. Mykenische Studien, Austrian Academy of Sciences, Wien, Austria. K.DeVries,Peter Kuniholm, Kenneth Sams, Mary Voigt., New dates for Iron Age Gordion, Antiquity Vol 77, no.296 June 2003. Soňa Wirghová, Turning Points in the Ceramic Sequence of the Northern Tip of the Lower Citadel at Tiryns.Mykenische Studien,2022, Austrian Academy of Sciences, Wien,Austria. A.Yaseen Ahmad, Excavation at Qadhiah: The Texts of Tukulti-Ninurta-II, Al-Rafidan Vol.XXI, 2000, Department of Archaeology, University of Mosul. Iraq. R.S. Young, Gordion: Preliminary Report, American Journal of Archaeology, Vol.59, 1953. 62