Pascal and Ochoin: You might find this academic talk to be of some use. [youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1DNyA90f_aw?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent%5D The question of whether the people of Wilusiya (Wilusa) were Luwian or Achaean in origin is hotly debated. The recent discovery of the oldest written inscription on a piece of jewellery/official seal discovered at Wilusa (assuming Wilusa is correctly identified as Troy/Ilium) would lead to a stronger case for a Luwian origin rather than an Achaean one for Troy. The other option, as Ochoin points out, is that there was an Achaean ruling-class ruling over an older established Luwian subject population or a more heterogenous subject population with strong Luwian representation. The argument that Wilusiya/Wilusa was a homogeneous kingdom of Achaean origin is much harder to make. The jury is still out on the degree of Achaean cultural penetration into Bronze Age Anatolia c. 2200 – 1400 BCE, so until more concrete archeological evidence is found we are building intellectual palaces on a bedrock of conjecture, hypothesis and informed speculation where archeology causes academic earthquakes in understanding and interpretation quite regularly. “Alaksandu of Wilusiya” may very well be a Luwian name which penetrated into the Achaean language, so using its appearance as evidence for Achaean linguistic penetration eastward may be getting the direction of cultural penetration backwards due to misplaced familiarity with names. Cheers. Rod Robertson.
Thanks, Rod. We’re a scholarly lot here at TWW.