Hello, first post on this lovely subreddit.
I went off into the deep end lately with the Bronze Age and its collapse and eventually stumbled upon the "Luwian Studies" seemingly headed by a Dr. Zangger since 2014. I am not a historian but I love reading and learning about history. The only book I possess on the subject is 1177 written by Eric Cline, but reading some of the sections on that site left me scratching my head and I have a feeling that their explanations are just too tidy and in some cases counter-factual.
I have searched for Zangger on here already just to see what the general opinion of him is, and it seems mixed. I have not seen any post about this site/foundation specifically so I apologize if it has already been discussed. Also I am aware that the texts clearly separate "current state of knowledge" and their suggestions, but suggestions/educated guesses are what build history until we reach some better explanation so I don't think that can be used a shield against critique.
My general feeling reading is that their explanations are very one-dimensional, usually Luwians did X -> led to established fact Y. Some examples: Luwians colonised Etruria (and seems to cite the Aeneid as a fact), Luwians destroyed Hittites, Alashiya and northern Syria, Luwians influenced Phoenician development, Luwians attacked Egypt, etc. It paints the picture that a king in Mira single-handedly set the events in motion that led to the Bronze Age collapse, an explanation that ignores much else that we appear to know now, such as ongoing environmental and social factors. If I did not know better I would guess that the authors were Luwian fanboys, but it feels so weird to talk of such in academia.
So what's the take among professionals? I understand that there is no, and can likely never be a, consensus regarding this period in history, but I would like to see if some of the more outlandish claims are as easily debunked as I suspect they are.
The Luwians, while the bronze age collapse, where a significant population. With the century old fixation on the Minoan city-states and the Hatti empire there is hardly to come by of information.
What is presently known of how the Luwians fit into the Agean civilisation? How many scriptures has been found and how much of this been translated and evaluated?
Iβve not been able to find any relevant sources on the differences between Luwian and Hittite - at least none both trustable and comprehensive. I am somewhat familiar with Hittite, but I am curious to how Luwian is different in regards to grammar.
Historically, what methods would have existed in his time to create a forgery in a language nobody on earth understood at that time?
Also why is this more likely than it simply being legit?
Why does the thread on /r/history overwhelmingly support the forgery theory despite every single article on the matter saying it would have been impossible to fake?
Ever since reading about Eberhard Zangger and his AMAZING theories, I've been totally hooked as far as Anatolia being my main specialty. I've heard the University of Chicago has an EXCELLENT looking program, but it seems to place emphasis on Hittite. Any programs, or series of classes I can take when I make it to the Graduate school level that would give me a good knowledge of the Luwian script and language?
I'm thinking of becoming one of the thirty-or-so people in the world that can read Luwian hieroglyphs! XD
1: Historically, what methods would have existed in his time to create a forgery in a language nobody on earth understood at that time?
2: Also why is this more likely than it simply being legit?
Bonus: Why does the thread on /r/history overwhelmingly support the forgery theory despite every single article on the matter saying it would have been impossible to fake? Should I avoid this subbreddit if I want accurate history in the future?
