Misplaced Pages

Talk:Mitanni: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 20:29, 2 August 2022 editCarlos Eduardo Aramayo B. (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users4,444 edits Merge?← Previous edit Revision as of 20:30, 2 August 2022 edit undoPloversegg (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users19,603 edits Merge?Next edit →
Line 40: Line 40:


{{ping|Ploversegg}} I considered the situation and suggest ] remain as a separate article. Although a stub, it's valuable for searching purposes of readers. The more items you have the better, and that stub can grow with more information in future. So the tag suggesting merging should be deleted, at least until we have a section in ] exclusively dedicated to Naharin.--] (]) 20:25, 2 August 2022 (UTC) {{ping|Ploversegg}} I considered the situation and suggest ] remain as a separate article. Although a stub, it's valuable for searching purposes of readers. The more items you have the better, and that stub can grow with more information in future. So the tag suggesting merging should be deleted, at least until we have a section in ] exclusively dedicated to Naharin.--] (]) 20:25, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

:I concur though for a different reason. I read the discussion ] from the last merge attempt and decided it was more contentious that I thought.] (]) 20:29, 2 August 2022 (UTC)


== Reshaping of the article == == Reshaping of the article ==

Revision as of 20:30, 2 August 2022

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Mitanni article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: Index, 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 6 months 

Template:Vital article

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconAncient Near East Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Near East, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of ancient Near East–related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ancient Near EastWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Near EastTemplate:WikiProject Ancient Near EastAncient Near East
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconSyria Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Syria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Syria on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SyriaWikipedia:WikiProject SyriaTemplate:WikiProject SyriaSyria
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconTurkey Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Turkey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Turkey and related topics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TurkeyWikipedia:WikiProject TurkeyTemplate:WikiProject TurkeyTurkey
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconIraq Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Iraq, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Iraq on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IraqWikipedia:WikiProject IraqTemplate:WikiProject IraqIraq
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconFormer countries (inactive)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesFormer countries

In 'People' section

In the second paragraph, after "The names of the Mitanni aristocracy frequently are of Indo-Aryan origin" please add the following reference link: https://www.azargoshnasp.net/history/Aryan/mitanniindoaryannames.pdf Johundhar (talk) 04:36, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

In "History" section

It might be pointed out that, as explained clearly in the 'chariot' wikipedia entry, Indo-Iranians developed the spoke-wheeled chariot around 2000, and the earliest traces of Mitanni (or possibly other Indic or Indo-Arian groups) occur not long after that. And then shortly thereafter, chariots start to become a major feature of war in much of the Mideast and Egypt. It is not too much of a stretch to suggest that the Mitanni were the first, or among the earliest, groups to introduce this game-changing technology into the region. Also note that many of the names refer to horses and chariots, and the Hittites brought in Mitanni to teach them about the same. Johundhar (talk) 04:51, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Further on the same from O.R. Gurney "The Hittites" (1962...yes, dated, but if anything, recent research would seem to reinforce his points, though I have not done a careful lit research to see what, if anything has been said on this recently), pp. 104-105: "The light horse-drawn chariot with spoked wheels belongs to the world which succeeded the downfall of the Amorites, and makes its appearance at about the same time in Kassite Babylonia, in the Egypt of the eighteenth dynasty, and in the new kingdom of Mitanni in the north...Hence we must conclude that ...brought with them their special knowledge of horse-breeding, and that it was from them that the art was learnt by the peoples of Western Asia." Johundhar (talk) 15:29, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Merge?

It seems like Naharin is a stub article that doesn’t need to exist. Anything that’s relevant in that article can be merged into this article. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 23:50, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Agreed.Ploversegg (talk) 19:10, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

An intesting quote from Amenophis II who called himself " Naharin, the one that laid waste Khatte, viol Babylonian , the Byblian maid, the little girl of Alalakh and the old crone of Arrapkha! And the Takhsians are nothing at all! —really what are they good for?" (in Redford, Donald B.. "CHAPTER EIGHT Asia in Egypt: Mosaic, Not Melting Pot". Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2021, pp. 214-238)Ploversegg (talk) 19:19, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

@Ploversegg: I considered the situation and suggest Naharin remain as a separate article. Although a stub, it's valuable for searching purposes of readers. The more items you have the better, and that stub can grow with more information in future. So the tag suggesting merging should be deleted, at least until we have a section in Mitanni exclusively dedicated to Naharin.--Carlos Eduardo Aramayo B. (talk) 20:25, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

I concur though for a different reason. I read the discussion Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Naharin from the last merge attempt and decided it was more contentious that I thought.Ploversegg (talk) 20:29, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Reshaping of the article

@Ploversegg: I see you are committed in the hard task of reshaping this article, I agree with you that it was necessary to change many things, especially in lead section, but I do not share all your choices, especially your deletion of recent Eva von Dassow essay (2022), and these two issues in other sections:

1) The table made based on Stefano de Martino's article (2014), because it's fundamental to understand what other kings around the region are considered contemporary to Mittani kings, even if some of them are only "tentative.", and

2) It should be included, once again, the first "mythical" king in the list of rulers, in order to have a wider vision of Mitanni's development and cultural beliefs.

On the other hand, Mitanni region was first known as Hanigalbat since at least around 1600 BC from Babylonian sources (See von Dassow 2022). Eva von Dassow is conservative in that view, because that term could be even older, not beginning with Assyrian sources, as was established previously in this article. Of course, Mitanni state, at least known by that name by its neighbours, could have been later, but it's necessary to start, as an antecedent with first attestation as Hanigalbat.--Carlos Eduardo Aramayo B. (talk) 19:29, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I've probably made some mistakes here but the article was such a hairball I didn't quite know how to start untangling the hair. Lots of unsourced 1911 type text too. So I will not be in any way offended by anything you wish to revert or change. My thinking on the ruler tables was that two was one too many. :-) The hard part is redoing the History section which is a mess and I'm not even sure I have the energy for the task. My thinking is that the long blurbs in the ruler sections should be merged into the History. The ruler articles have, or should have all that info anyway. And the section on the name seems way to technical for the article but it is cool so I hate to rm it. Oh, how do you feel about merging in Naharin?Ploversegg (talk) 20:10, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
I've added von Dassow's information in lead section, and I understand that you do not want two tables that could overload information, but maybe there could also be a way to not loose the valuable information in Stefano de Martino's source. Regarding Naharin, I think it would be good to merge it in Mitanni's article. Although, if it were a larger article, it would be useful to have it as an independent one related to the particular reference by Egyptians.--Carlos Eduardo Aramayo B. (talk) 00:53, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Am currently reading von Dassow 2022. Nice so far, though of course I have a few nits like the Kemune tablets are from after the destruction of the Mitanni city and are Middle Assyrian (and not yet published), if my memory is correct. :-) If you prefer, we could just go back to the Martino table instead of the current one (even though now that I think of it the current one was a copy of one I wrote for the now defunct Short Chronology Timeline article - thats ok). I will read your article changes after I finish Dassow. PS It might be in the reading but I am unaware of a source for Habigalbat back to 1600 BC. Kassite maybe?Ploversegg (talk) 01:19, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Eva von Dassow mentions "toward 1600 BC." It is at least some years before the fall of Babylon in 1595 BC, so prior to Kassite times there. These are her words: "Babylonia and Assyria: Here the kingdom of Mittani was called Hanigalbat. By this name, it is first mentioned in texts of the late Old Babylonian period (toward 1600 BC)"(von Dassow 2022:467). She also mentions in footnote 32. that it was Frans van Koppen (2004:21) who firstly found these references in Babylonian texts.--Carlos Eduardo Aramayo B. (talk) 02:07, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. This let me find it in an article "Koppen kindly informs me that the letter "is an expenditure of beer for dragomans of H.-troops as transliterated by Gelb. It comes from Sippar/Abü Habbah and dates to year 3 of Ammisaduqa"." - Da Riva, Rocío. “A New Attestation of Ḫabigalbat in Late Babylonian Sources.” Die Welt Des Orients, vol. 47, no. 2, 2017, pp. 259–64 This Dassow article is distacting. Like I read there was a mitanni tablet at mardaman which led to me adding a source to that article (and adding a goddess).:-)Ploversegg (talk) 02:25, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Yes, Rocío da Riva (2017) is a previous source, and Gelb (1968:97) is the earliest publication commenting on these texts.--Carlos Eduardo Aramayo B. (talk) 02:38, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

I am being briefly diverted by reading van Dassow 2014 which, though earlier, is a much better paper being intended for a technical vs encyclopedia audience. A good paper so far.Ploversegg (talk) 18:53, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

@Ploversegg: It's important to try to decrease the size of some sections, and you are doing a good job on this article. On the other hand, Eva von Dassow (2022: 467, footnote 32.) also mentions van Koppen (2017: 56, with footnotes 40 and 69) regarding the Old Babylonian texts. It seems the tendency in recent research, by von Dassow and van Koppen, is to retake studies from late Ignace J. Gelg from the 1960s, and from other scholars in the 1990s.--Carlos Eduardo Aramayo B. (talk) 01:07, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Thought you were done for the day. Hope I didn't step on some part you were working on. :-) I finished van Dassow 2022 (after reading her earlier papers). I've read a couple of van Koppen's papers like "van Koppen, Frans. “THE OLD TO MIDDLE BABYLONIAN TRANSITION: HISTORY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE MESOPOTAMIAN DARK AGE.” Ägypten Und Levante / Egypt and the Levant, vol. 20, 2010, pp. 453–63" and the 2017 one and thought they were good. For myself I have been just avoiding the hard job of doing a new History section to replace the current weak one (my thought was to use the ruler paragraphs as a basis). I replaced the Mitanni section in the Hurrians article and poked the Washukanni and Tell Fakhariya articles etc. And working the edges of the main article mainly cleaning out bits of encyclopedia fluff. If I overcleaned don't hesitate to fix or to tell me and I will. If you have thoughts on how this should go feel free to let me know. :-) PS I've read a number of impressive works by Gelb over the years.Ploversegg (talk) 01:27, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

@Carlos Eduardo Aramayo B.: Actually Spalinger, and a number of other authors use "naharain". I also see a lot of authors use "mittanni". No idea. Linguistics not my strong suit. Anyway, I am looking at building a ruler table that blends some of each original table. Need to see if I believe (ie. there is source support for) the synchronism with the first two Hittite kings first.Ploversegg (talk) 16:42, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

You are right, I was searching and found Yosef Mizrachy (2012) comments on two shapes of the word: Naharin and Naharina. But Spalinger uses Naharain.--Carlos Eduardo Aramayo B. (talk) 19:30, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Ruler table removed from article

The following is a tentative correlation of Mitanni with nearby kingdoms until the reign of Tusratta by Stefano de Martino:

Mitanni Egypt Hatti Alalah Kizzuwatna Terqa
Principate of Mittani Hattušili I
Rise of the kingdom of Mittani Muršili I
First attestation of Mittani Tuthmosis I
Kirta (?)
Šuttarna I (?) ? Qiš-Addu
Parattarna I ? Tuthmosis III ? Zidanza II Idrimi Pilliya Qiš-Addu
Sausadat (??)
Parsatatar
Sauštatar ? Tuthmosis III ? Tuthaliya I/II Niqmepa Šunaššura ? Qiš-Addu
Parattarna II (??)
Artatama I Tuthmosis IV
Šuttarna II Amenophis III
Artašumara (Uthi)
Tušratta Amenophis IV Šuppiluliuma I

For convienience and history.Ploversegg (talk) 19:17, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

  1. De Martino, Stefano, (2004). "A Tentative Chronology of the Kingdom of Mittani from its Rise to the Reign of Tusratta", in Mesopotamian Dark Age Revisited: Proceedings of an International Conference of SCIEM 2000, Vienna 8th–9th November 2002, Vienna, p. 40, Table 1.
Categories:
Talk:Mitanni: Difference between revisions Add topic