Huzziya , 13th King of the Hittites II

• Preferred Name: Huzziya , 13th King of the Hittites II^{[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]}
  
• Gender: M
  
• FSID: GQGH-VVK
  
• Death: 1516 BC with note: GEDCOM data
  
• MilitaryService: killed by Muwatalli I, his Chief of the Royal Bodyguard, who seized the throne
  
• http://familysearch.org/v1/TitleOfNobility: king of The Hittites Of Khatti
  
• http://familysearch.org/v1/TitleOfNobility: 13th King of the Hittites - Middle Kingdom
  
• Birth: 1541 BC with note: GEDCOM data
  
• Notes:

  === Life Sketch ===
  Huzziya II was a king of the Hittites. He was killed by Muwatalli I, who seized the throne and was possibly the Gal Mesedi of the royal bodyguard.
  His wife was Queen Šummiri.
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huzziya_II

1. Tudhaliya ap ... 16th King of the Hittites I,     d. 1390 BC

1. Title: Wikiwand: Gal mesedi
   Author: From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
   Publication: Name: https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Gal_mesedi;
   Note: The "gal mesedi" was a Hittite military and administrative title literally meaning "chief of the royal bodyguards." He was in charge of the Mesedi, the personal bodyguard of the Hittite king. It is considered to be one of the most important and prestigious posts of the Hittite Kingdom. History The "gal mesedi" was a commander responsible for the safety of the king himself. On most cases he was a member of the royal family and sometimes the brother of the king, whom he sometimes succeeded as in the case of Hattusili III, who before becoming a king was the "gal mesedi" of his brother, King Muwatalli II. A "gal mesedi" also at times could command independent military units that weren't under the king's jurisdiction.
   
2. Title: Wikiwand: Zidanta II
   Author: From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
   Publication: Name: https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Zidanta_II;
   Note: Zidanta II (c. 1450) was a king of the Hittites (Middle Kingdom), c. late 15th century BC from 1480 to 1490 (short chronology). Life He was probably a nephew of Hantili II and had a wife Yaya. Zidanta made peace through the means of a parity treaty with a ruler named Pilliya, his counterpart in Kizzuwatna. This was the last parity treaty ever signed by a Hittite king to a king of Kizzuwatna. He was succeeded by Huzziya II although their relation remains unclear.
   
3. Title: "Officials and Administration in the Hittite World," by Tayfun Bilgin
   Author: Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG, Dec 3, 2018
   Publication: Name: https://books.google.com/books?id=eheBDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA69&dq=Harap%C5%A1eki&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=2#v=snippet&q=Huzziya%20II&f=false;
   Note: There are few studies that deal with an overall treatment of the Hittite administrative system, and various other works on its offices and officials have tended to be limited in scope, focusing only on certain groups or certain time periods. This book provides a comprehensive investigation of the administrative organization of the Hittite state throughout its history (ca. 1650–1180 BCE) with particular emphasis on the state offices and their officials. Bringing together previous works and updating with data recovered in recent years, the study presents a detailed survey of the high offices of the state, a prosopographical study of about 140 high officials, and a theoretical analysis of the Hittite administration in respect to factors such as hierarchy, kinship, and diachronical changes.
   
4. Title: Wikiwand: Muwatalli I
   Author: From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia "See also Muwatalli II"
   Publication: Name: https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Muwatalli_I;
   Note: Muwatalli I was a king of the Hittites. Biography Muwatalli killed his predecessor Huzziya II. He was the Chief of the Royal Bodyguard of Huzziya, but later he killed him. He may have been Huzziya's younger brother. Muwatalli's Chief of the Royal Bodyguard was called Muwa. Muwattalli himself was killed in a palace by Himuili, the Chief of the Palace Servants, and Kantuzili, the Overseer of the Gold Chariot Fighters. His wife was called Walanni.
   
5. Title: Wikiwand: Huzziya II
   Author: From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
   Publication: Name: https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Huzziya_II;
   Note: Huzziya II was a king of the Hittites. He was killed by Muwatalli I, who seized the throne and was possibly the "Gal Mesedi" of the royal bodyguard. His wife was Queen Šummiri.
   
6. Title: Wikiwand: Hittites
   Author: From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
   Publication: Name: https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Hittites;
   Note: The Hittites (/ˈhɪtaɪts/) were an Anatolian people who played an important role in establishing an empire centered on Hattusa in north-central Anatolia around 1600 BC. This empire reached its height during the mid-14th century BC under Suppiluliuma I, when it encompassed an area that included most of Anatolia as well as parts of the northern Levant and Upper Mesopotamia. Between the 15th and 13th centuries BC, the Empire of Hattusa, conventionally called the Hittite Empire, came into conflict with the Egyptian Empire, Middle Assyrian Empire and the empire of the Mitanni for control of the Near East. The Assyrians eventually emerged as the dominant power and annexed much of the Hittite empire, while the remainder was sacked by Phrygian newcomers to the region. After c. 1180 BC, during the Bronze Age collapse, the Hittites splintered into several independent "Neo-Hittite" city-states, some of which survived until the 8th century BC before succumbing to the Neo-Assyrian Empire. The Hittite language was a distinct member of the Anatolian branch of the Indo-European language family, and along with the related Luwian language, is the oldest historically attested Indo-European language, referred to by its speakers as "nešili" "in the language of Nesa." The Hittites called their country the "Kingdom of Hattusa" (Hatti in Akkadian), a name received from the Hattians, an earlier people who inhabited the region until the beginning of the 2nd millennium BC and spoke an unrelated language known as Hattic. The conventional name "Hittites" is due to their initial identification with the Biblical Hittites in 19th century archaeology. The history of the Hittite civilization is known mostly from cuneiform texts found in the area of their kingdom, and from diplomatic and commercial correspondence found in various archives in Assyria, Babylonia, Egypt and the Middle East, the decipherment of which was also a key event in the history of Indo-European linguistics. The Hittite military made successful use of chariots. The development of iron smelting once was attributed to the Hittites of Anatolia during the Late Bronze Age, with their success largely based on the advantages of a monopoly on ironworking at the time. But the view of such a "Hittite monopoly" has come under scrutiny and is no longer a scholarly consensus. As part of the Late-Bronze-Age/Early-Iron-Age, the Bronze Age collapse saw the slow, comparatively continuous spread of iron-working technology in the region. While there are some iron objects from Bronze Age Anatolia, the number is comparable to iron objects found in Egypt and other places during the period; and only a small number of these objects are weapons. Hittites did not use smelted iron, but rather meteorites. In classical times, ethnic Hittite dynasties survived in small kingdoms scattered around modern Syria, Lebanon and Israel. Lacking a unifying continuity, their descendants scattered and ultimately merged into the modern populations of the Levant, Turkey and Mesopotamia. During the 1920s, interest in the Hittites increased with the founding of the modern Republic of Turkey and attracted the attention of Turkish archaeologists such as Halet Çambel and Tahsin Özgüç. During this period, the new field of Hittitology also influenced the naming of Turkish institutions, such as the state-owned "Etibank" ("Hittite bank"), and the foundation of the Museum of Anatolian Civilizations in Ankara, 200 kilometers west of the Hittite capital and housing the most comprehensive exhibition of Hittite art and artifacts in the world. Archaeological discovery Biblical background See also: Biblical Hittites Before the archeological discoveries that revealed the Hittite civilization, the only source of information about the Hittites had been the Old Testament. Francis William Newman expressed the critical view, common in the early 19th century, that, "no Hittite king could have compared in power to the King of Judah...". As the discoveries in the second half of the 19th century revealed the scale of the Hittite kingdom, Archibald Sayce asserted that, rather than being compared to Judah, the Anatolian civilization "[was] worthy of comparison to the divided Kingdom of Egypt," and was "infinitely more powerful than that of Judah." Sayce and other scholars also noted that Judah and the Hittites were never enemies in the Hebrew texts; in the Book of Kings, they supplied the Israelites with cedar, chariots, and horses, and in the Book of Genesis were friends and allies to Abraham. Uriah the Hittite was a captain in King David's army and counted as one of his "mighty men" in 1 Chronicles 11. Initial discoveries French scholar Charles Texier found the first Hittite ruins in 1834 but did not identify them as such. The first archaeological evidence for the Hittites appeared in tablets found at the "karum" of Kanesh (now called Kültepe), containing records of trade between Assyrian merchants and a certain "land of 'Hatti.'" Some names in the tablets were neither Hattic nor Assyrian, but clearly Indo-European. The script on a monument at Boğazkale by a "People of Hattusas" discovered by William Wright in 1884 was found to match peculiar hieroglyphic scripts from Aleppo and Hama in Northern Syria. In 1887, excavations at Amarna in Egypt uncovered the diplomatic correspondence of Pharaoh Amenhotep III and his son, Akhenaten. Two of the letters from a "kingdom of 'Kheta'"—apparently located in the same general region as the Mesopotamian references to "land of 'Hatti'"—were written in standard Akkadian cuneiform, but in an unknown language; although scholars could interpret its sounds, no one could understand it. Shortly after this, Sayce proposed that "Hatti" or "Khatti" in Anatolia was identical with the "kingdom of 'Kheta'" mentioned in these Egyptian texts, as well as with the biblical Hittites. Others, such as Max Müller, agreed that "Khatti" was probably "Kheta," but proposed connecting it with Biblical Kittim rather than with the Biblical Hittites. Sayce's identification came to be widely accepted over the course of the early 20th century; and the name "Hittite" has become attached to the civilization uncovered at Boğazköy. During sporadic excavations at Boğazköy (Hattusa) that began in 1906, the archaeologist Hugo Winckler found a royal archive with 10,000 tablets, inscribed in cuneiform Akkadian and the same unknown language as the Egyptian letters from Kheta—thus confirming the identity of the two names. He also proved that the ruins at Boğazköy were the remains of the capital of an empire that, at one point, controlled northern Syria. Under the direction of the German Archaeological Institute, excavations at Hattusa have been under way since 1907, with interruptions during the world wars. Kültepe was successfully excavated by Professor Tahsin Özgüç from 1948 until his death in 2005. Smaller scale excavations have also been carried out in the immediate surroundings of Hattusa, including the rock sanctuary of Yazılıkaya, which contains numerous rock reliefs portraying the Hittite rulers and the gods of the Hittite pantheon. Writings The Hittites used a variation of cuneiform called Hittite cuneiform. Archaeological expeditions to Hattusa have discovered entire sets of royal archives on cuneiform tablets, written either in Akkadian, the diplomatic language of the time, or in the various dialects of the Hittite confederation. Museums The Museum of Anatolian Civilizations in Ankara, Turkey houses the richest collection of Hittite and Anatolian artifacts. Geography Main article: Hittite sites The Hittite kingdom was centered on the lands surrounding Hattusa and Neša (Kültepe), known as "the land Hatti" (URUHa-at-ti). After Hattusa was made capital, the area encompassed by the bend of the Kızılırmak River (Hittite "Marassantiya") was considered the core of the Empire, and some Hittite laws make a distinction between "this side of the river" and "that side of the river." For example, the reward for the capture of an escaped slave after he managed to flee beyond the Halys is higher than that for a slave caught before he could reach the river. To the west and south of the core territory lay the region known as "Luwiya" in the earliest Hittite texts. This terminology was replaced by the names Arzawa and Kizzuwatna with the rise of those kingdoms. Nevertheless, the Hittites continued to refer to the language that originated in these areas as Luwian. Prior to the rise of Kizzuwatna, the heart of that territory in Cilicia was first referred to by the Hittites as Adaniya. Upon its revolt from the Hittites during the reign of Ammuna, it assumed the name of Kizzuwatna and successfully expanded northward to encompass the lower Anti-Taurus Mountains as well. To the north, lived the mountainous people called the Kaskians. To the southeast of the Hittites lay the Hurrian empire of Mitanni. At its peak, during the reign of Muršili II, the Hittite empire stretched from Arzawa in the west to Mitanni in the east, many of the Kaskian territories to the north including Hayasa-Azzi in the far north-east, and on south into Canaan approximately as far as the southern border of Lebanon, incorporating all of these territories within its domain. History Origins It generally is assumed that the Hittites came into Anatolia some time before 2000 BC. While their earlier location is disputed, it has been speculated by scholars for more than a century that the Yamnaya culture of the Pontic–Caspian steppe, in present-day Ukraine, around the Sea of Azov, spoke an early Indo-European language during the third and fourth millennia BC. The arrival of the Hittites in Anatolia in the Bronze Age was one of a superstrate imposing itself on a native culture (in this case over the pre-existing Hattians and Hurrians), either by means of conquest or by gradual assimilation. In archaeological terms, relationships of the Hittites to the Ezero culture of the B..
   
7. Title: Hittites.info: Early Empire Commonly referred to as the Old Kingdom
   Publication: Name: https://web.archive.org/web/20131212014413/http://www.hittites.info/history.aspx?text=history%2FEarly+Empire.htm;
   Note: Early Empire Commonly referred to as the Old Kingdom Ḫattuša: Due to later construction, not much remains of the Old Kingdom city (Bittel (1970)). (The following begins the exploration of a hypothesis by the author that many Old Hittite rituals incorporated aspects of the early formation of the Hittite Old Kingdom and the rise of its dynasty. The dynasty's principle means of apology and justification was the subjugation of the ritual for secular purposes. I do not think that the Hittite dynasty was operating outside of a Ḫattian milieu when they did this. The first version of the myth/ritual concerning the Storm God and the Serpent I believe was a pre-Hittite dynastic founding myth which the Hittites incorporated into their own founding mythology. The whole thing is, obviously, highly speculative at this time.) The origins of Hittite kingship are still obscured by a lack of documentation and the sad state of preservation of our earliest documents dealing with this topic. We therefore stretch the limits of our resources in an attempt to form a least a shady picture of the historical development. Our three most important texts here are The Anitta Text - dealt with earlier, The Queen of Kaniš and the Tale of Zalpa, and A Ritual for the Construction of a New Palace. The last of these, the ritual, is preserved in several copies. The main copy dates from the Empire period and is almost undamaged. Clues in the language point to an Old Hittite origin for this text, and one Old Hittite fragment has also been discovered, confirming the early composition of this text. The connection between the ritual text and the Queen of Kaniš text is tantalizing but admittedly highly speculative. In the significant line, the king addresses his throne dias, which was also a goddess known as Ḫalmašuitt, to whom this ritual was dedicated; "Oh Ḫalmašuitt, you brought the light carriage to the king - to me - from the sea as (a symbol of) dominion. {The gods} opened the land of my mother. They called me, the king, 'Labarna!'" (KUB 29.1 i 23-25.) It's possible that the 'me' referred to here originally may have been Ḫattušili I (i.e. Labarna II), although in practice it would refer to whatever king was conducting the ritual. The "light carriage" was some sort of vehicle in which the king would ride when he was in the city of Ḫattuša, as opposed to whenever he left the city, when he rode in a chariot. Other than the king, only gods are attested riding in a light carriage, with perhaps a priest of the god who served to steady the god's idol. Clearly then, the "light carriage" was a potent symbol of power. But it is the line about the sea which is of greatest interest here. It could mean that the Hittite king perceived his power as truly originating from the sea, but Ḫalmašuitt is in no other way connected with water. In fact, in this ritual she is considered the proprieter of the trees in the mountains! This line is, however, reminiscent of lines from the other two Old Hittite compositions under consideration here, The Anitta Text and The Queen of Kaniš and the Tale of Zalpa. In The Anitta Text we read of "the sea of Zalpuwa" and of "Zalpuwa by the sea". The Queen of Kaniš and the Tale of Zalpa begins with the thirty sons of the queen of Kaniš being floated down a river which "carried them down to the sea, to the land of Zalpuwa," where, "the gods recovered the children from the sea and raised them." The text then goes on to relate how the sons returned to Kaniš and how the cities of Kaniš and Zalpa entered in to a sinful compact (through incestuous marriages). Just as the youngest son begins to denounce the sin, the text breaks. When the text resumes again, an unnamed Hittite king (Ḫattušili I?) is describing a conflict with Zalpa which continued through three generations of Hittite rulers. The text ends with the Hittite destruction of Zalpa. The temptation to connect a long term conflict between Ḫatti and Zalpuwa by the sea - which ultimately favored the Hittites - with the ritual's reference to a symbol of dominion being brought to the Hittite king from the sea is obvious. Perhaps we can recreate a scenerio in which the Hittites recognized some sort of Zalpuwan hegemeny in northern Anatolia which they struggled against. Then when they ultimately emerged victorious, they perceived it as a change from a Zalpuwan hegemeny to a Hittite hegemeny. So they incorporated a Zalpuwan symbol of power, the light carriage, as a symbol of their own power. It is frustrating to note once again a definite but completely opaque connection between Kaniš and the Hittite dynasty. The text begins with a description of relations between Zalpa and Kaniš, but ends with a description of relations between Zalpa and Ḫatti. The nature of the preserved segments makes it clear that the original, full text would have had to make the connection, but it is lost to us today! Having presented this hypothesis, we can go no further at this time. The evidence is simply not there. We shall have to set aside this speculative history for now, and turn our attention to the earliest Hittite rulers actually attested, who may go back fully three generations before the official beginning of the Old Kingdom under Labarna I. Developments elsewhere in the Mediterraenean: Crete (Castleden (1993) 79f.): Around 1700 BC, the era of the first temples on Crete came to an end when the temples and the towns around them were destroyed, possibly as a result of earthquakes. The destructions, while surely traumatic, was not fatal to the civilization, and both temples and towns were quickly rebuilt. During this New Temple Period, the rebuilt temples were enlarged, presumably indicating the continuation or even aggrandizement of their importance in Minoan communities. The towns themselves followed the settlement patterns of the previous period, but were themselves expanded as well. Most towns were located on or near the Cretan coast. In similar fashion to settlements elsewhere in the Near East, Minoan towns consisted of irregular blocks of houses separated by cobbled streets. The ground floors were used for storage, cooking, and other work activities while stairways led up to living and sleeping quarters. The towns of Knossos, Mallia and Zakro continued to grow in prominence. In addition to the major temple-palaces which dominated their towns, additional buildings - either houses or other sanctuaries - were built around them. These additional buildings are absent in other towns with temple-palaces such as Phaistos, Gournia, and Myrtos Pyrgos. The temple-palace of Knossos of the New Temple Period is the version seen at the ruins today, and, in its completed form of ca. 1400 BC, is probably the most ambitious building project ever undertaken by the Minoans. The famous Phaistos Disc appears to date from approximately 1700 BC. Tudḫaliya I It's not certain if Tudḫaliya ever ruled as a king. Ḫattuša was perhaps the Hittite capital again by or during the reign of Tudḫaliya I. A Tudḫaliya appears in the court of Zuzzu as the rab šaqē "Chief Cupbearer" (Hitt. GAL LÚSAGI), a high, non-military position probably held by members of the royal family (Beal, diss.). Chronologically, this could be the Tudḫaliya listed as the father of PU-Šarruma. If so, then we have a vital link between the Colony Period and the Hittite Period. (See Forlanini [1995]) Ḫuzziya 0 A Ḫuzziya is mentioned on the Cruciform seal of Muršili II (See Muršili II) before Labarna I, and is given the title "Great King." He might also be mentioned in the offering texts in a similar position. He is otherwise unknown. See Dinçol et al. 1993. The inclusion of Ḫuzziya on the Cruciform seal is very difficult to explain. The most likely scenerio is that this is a previously unknown ruler in Ḫattuša. However, one can perhaps think of Huzziya, king of Zalpuwa, defeated by Anitta. If so, then we find in the Cruciform Seal a direct connection between kingship in Zalpa and kingship in Ḫatti. While this must be considered rank speculation, it is not patently absurd. The Assyrian King List begins with a list of "kings dwelling in tents" and "kings who are the fathers". This may be the result of the Assyrians trying to insert their own dynasty into a list of recognized rulers in order to gain legitimacy. Perhaps at some point the Hittite rulers did the same, incorporating the Zalpan dynasty within their own. If Muršili came across such a document, it may have led to what we see in the Cruciform seal. PU-Šarruma, Son of Tudḫaliya I Virtually nothing is known of PU-Šarruma's life. Nevertheless, our continuous history of the Hittite dynasty begins with this shadowy figure. PU-Šarruma's sons were said to have turned against their father, so that, while he was in the city Šanaḫwitta, he named his son-in-law, Labarna, as his successor. However, this boded ill for the future, since one of his true sons, Papaḫdilmaḫ, still had support among the king's servants and chief officers. That the succession to the throne should be disputed between the two younger men, while perhaps not inevitable, is certainly not surprising. Papaḫdilmaḫ, Son of PU-Šarruma Name: Hattic Civil War against Labarna I. Labarna I (~1680~1650), Son-in-Law(?) of PU-Šarruma PU-Šarruma's intentions for the succession to his throne were temporarily frustrated by the actions of his servants and chief officers, who chose to recognize the rights of his son Papaḫdilmaḫ instead, and therefore placed him on the throne instead of Labarna. Labarna, however, did not concede the point, and a struggle for the throne ensued between the party of Papaḫdilmaḫ and that of Labarna. Nothing is known of the course of the conflict other than that Labarna emerged victorious and took the throne willed to him by his father-in-law. Papaḫdilmaḫ's supporters were to pay a heavy price, so that years later, when Labarna's successor was himself proclaiming a new successor to the t..