“Een van de grootste mysteries van de Mediterrane archeologie is ontrafeld” (welingelichtekringen.nl)

Commentaar van een historicus:

Several things about this discovery inspire a lot of caution. First, Mellaart was the perpetrator of the well-known "Dorak treasure" hoax and played fast and loose with his discoveries at Çatalhöyük. He certainly produced valuable work, but his reputation will always be linked to shameful scholarly misconduct.

It is true, as Woudhuizen points out, that Luwian was not well understood until the 1960s/70s, but that certainly does not preclude the fabrication of a Luwian inscription, particularly if it was based on real inscriptions like the Yalburt inscription. It's hard to read the inscription in the article due to the resolution of the photo, but rather large chunks of the inscription appear to be simply lists of cities and regions. (In Luwian, a triangle is the determinative URBS, "city," and two triangles marks the determinative REGIO, "kingdom/territory/region." Note the long lists of places ending in these determinatives.) Add some known verbs from other inscriptions and known Hittite and Luwian names from seals (here's a seal of another King of Mira, possibly Kupanta-Kurunta's grandson) and boom, you have a forgery. It is also worth pointing out that the name and titles of Kupanta-Kurunta as written in this inscription (Ku-pa-tá-CERVUS2 LABARNA MAGNUS.REX; "Kupanta-Kurunta, Labarna, Great King") differ from the Suratkaya inscription that records a diminutive of his name (Ku-pa-ya MAGNUS.REX.FILIUS, "Kupaya, Great Prince"), though whether that supports or undermines the historicity of the inscription depends on your perspective. The Suratkaya inscription was found only recently, in the 2000s.

Second, the International Congress of Hittitology just took place (September 2017), and Woudhuizen was present. Why no mention of this text? Furthermore, why is this being published in the Proceedings of the Dutch Archaeological and Historical Society rather than the standard journals in the field like Anatolian Studies or the Journal of Near Eastern Studies? It is, after all, a major discovery -- if it's genuine.

Third, the Hittites were thriving and kicking until well after the reign of Kupanta-Kurunta, so this doesn't explain their collapse. We know from the Alaksandu treaty from the reign of Muwatalli II that Kupanta-Kurunta of Mira and Alaksandu of Wilusa were allies, with the Hittites serving as the overlord enforcing their alliance. Military action of Mira against Wilusa would have triggered a response from the Hittites, of which there is no indication. Later, King Alantalli of Mira served as a witness for the bronze tablet treaty between the Hittite king Tudhaliya IV and his cousin Kurunta of Tarhuntassa, indicating Mira was still a Hittite vassal after the reign of Kupanta-Kurunta. (Alantalli was probably his son.) Even later, one of the last Anatolian hieroglyphic inscriptions preserved from the Bronze Age records Hittite military actions against Masa, Lukka, Wiyanawanda (Greek Oenoanda), and other places in western Anatolia. Even if Kupanta-Kurunta had assembled some sort of military coalition, it certainly didn't do any terminal damage to the Hittites.

Finally, if it seems too good to be true, it likely is...

Nu komt het gevaar ook uit die hoek
Hopelijk zal de geschiedenis zich niet herhalen en worden we op tijd wakker (maar ik zie ze in de politiek nog niet wakker worden )

"De tekst vertelt hoe een grote vloot uit het westen van klein-Azië (nu grotendeels Turkije) de kuststeden in het oosten van het Middellandse Zeegebied binnenviel"

@1 Meest waarschijnlijk gingen ze door lange droogte in verval en als domino's vielen ze kort na elkaar om.