When Trevor Bryce's article reached our editorial office, we decided that we could launch the first SMEA NS forum around it. Though it began almost a hundred years ago (Forrer 1924a; 1924b), the debate on Ahhiyawa still remains open in many respects and deserves to be kept alive. Five distinguished scholars, who cover some of the areas involved in the debate, were thus invited to write a response to Bryce's article. As expected, the collected texts, published in this volume of SMEA, represent an excellent overview of the achievements of the past twenty years and the questions that still remain unanswered. At the same time, they have the merit of introducing into the debate new lines of research that deserve to be widely known. It is thus worth providing a brief summary highlighting the knowledge gained and, above all, the new perspectives that have emerged thanks to this Forum.
FORUM ARTICLE_Postscript_Response to: The Kingdom of Ahhiyawa
2018
Abstract
When Trevor Bryce's article reached our editorial office, we decided that we could launch the first SMEA NS forum around it. Though it began almost a hundred years ago (Forrer 1924a; 1924b), the debate on Ahhiyawa still remains open in many respects and deserves to be kept alive. Five distinguished scholars, who cover some of the areas involved in the debate, were thus invited to write a response to Bryce's article. As expected, the collected texts, published in this volume of SMEA, represent an excellent overview of the achievements of the past twenty years and the questions that still remain unanswered. At the same time, they have the merit of introducing into the debate new lines of research that deserve to be widely known. It is thus worth providing a brief summary highlighting the knowledge gained and, above all, the new perspectives that have emerged thanks to this Forum.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
