Does anyone have an opinion or can they send me the link to the forum that hosted the debate?

thanks,

I have recently been researching approximately the same area and was forwarded the following information. It MAY be useful... My concern was for the term Cheta - although, as you shall see, Hittites were also implicated in this research... How conclusive is it ?? I am not sure and have had no opportunity to dig deeper into all the possible angles. If you come up with anything more please let me know!

you may find this link of use:
http://www.gaytoursturkey.com/turkey.html

(To quote from my recent e-mail)

"I have not researched it's bona fides, but it does provide some information that, while not answering your questions about "how Cheta - the tribal alliance that warred against Ramases II and Cheta the post Ashokan dynasty
could possibly be related - if they are indeed the same tribal unit ", may shed some light on the history of the times and the interactions among various ethnic groups:"....

(1) Cheta was a biblical term for the Hatti civilization - NOT the Hittites as reported in many other websites. The Hatti were a distinct people, ethnically and linguistically, but it appears from what I read here and what I recall from readings many moons ago in my research when we were discussing linguistics about "horse", that the Hatti were absorbed into the eventually dominant culture, and only traces of them remained (perhaps much like the Etruscans were later absorbed into the dominant Roman culture):

HATTI CIVILIZATION (2500 - 2000 B.C)

The remnants of the Hatti language, which we encounter in the texts of Hittite Civilization, has its own special structure and do not display any similarity with other language used at the very same age period.

Although the Hatti Civilization displays the effects of Mesopotamia culture and civilizations, they represent a strong originality in the fields of art and especially physical culture. The effects of Hatti Civilization had influenced Anatolia for approximately two thousand years which had demonstrated major riches in religion, tradition, mythology and art.

Therefore, Anatolia was called as the land of Hatti by the neighboring civilizations reigning between BC 2500 - 700 years. Again because of the same fact, the Hittites originated from Indo - Europe had mentioned Anatolia as The land of Hatti in their written sources during their history.

The meaning of Cheta in the Old Testament was understood to be the folk accommodating in Anatolia after the discovery and study of the Bogazköy tablets in the beginning of the century.

The Hatti Civilization was composed of small governmental states. These minor kings also bear the high priest title and assisted the creation of very original works of art in their states. The samples of these works of art were discovered in the region located in the curve of Kizilirmak River like Alacahöyük, Horoztepe and Mahmatlar and resembled gods in the shape of animals; the bulls depict god of storm, the deer depict his wife, the goddess Vurushemu and the banners of the kings represent the Universium. This universe symbol which generally stands at the tip of the horns of two oxen is the source of the folk tale "the world stands at the tips of the horns of an ox, and if the ox shakes his head, earthquake happens" which is still told in the villages.

***
The civilizatgion of the Hatti gives way, gradually, to settlement by the Hittites (an Indo-European speaking people coming in from the northeast) into Hatti lands, and a commingling of the two cultures. Many words from the Hatti language were incorporated by the Hittites:

(2) THE PERIOD OF HATTI - HITTITE CITY STATES (2000 - 1750 B.C)

The Hittites have reached Anatolia among Caucasia by the end of 3000 B.C during the great migration of the Indo - Europe nations travelling towards the warmer countries from the Northern Europe. But this migration of the Hittite tribes had occurred in the way of infiltration more than invasion.

The Hatti city-states were dominating Anatolia Region during the period of the first quarter of BC second thousand while the Indo-European originated city-states begin to be founded suddenly. The number of the Hittite cities states begin to increase and by the 1750 B.C. the Hittites invaded Anatolia totally and founded the Hittite State.

***

This is an interesting historical factoid - about the use of horse-drawn war chariots by the Hittites in the Battle of Kadesh in circa 1875 BCE:

In 1875 B.C, there was a great battle between Hittites and Egyptians at Kadesh, where the King of Hittites Muvattalli had used 3500 chariots which was the most powerful strike weapon of the age and defeated the rival army.

The text of the treaty which is written in the Hittite Language signed between Hattuþili IV and Rameses II is exhibited in the Istanbul Archeological Museum. This document is the first political treaty signed between the two major states in the history of the world.

***

(3) Don't forget the Hurrians, who provide a DEFINITIVE link to India for the Hittites, Hatti and Egyptians. Notice the reference to Mittani. Wasn't it a daughter of the Heretic Pharaoh Ahkenaten who, after his death, appealed to the King of the Mittani, proposing a marriage/alliance - only the Mitani Prince and his entourage were met along the way to Egypt and assasinated? :

HURRI CIVILIZATION

This civilization was founded nearly in the same period with the Hittites in the Eastern Anatolia Region and is reigned by a royal Indian family. Mitannis used the language of Hurri. This language forms a unique language
group and is used by the Urartus (900 - 600 B.C) which are encountered in the first period of 13th century. The Hittites were majorly effected by the Hurri civilization in the 13th century.
***

There is an overlap in the develop of the Hittites in Anatolia and the Mitanni (who spoke Hurrian), with their connections to northwestern India (or modern-day Pakistan)...

-------------------------------------------

OK - valleybldr - take everything posted here with a grain of salt. I am totally fresh in this area of research, have all the balls in the air and nothing I can attest to with ANY CERTAINTY. Also, most of this information comes by way of Turkey - and there is always an ethnocentric adder luking in everyone's historical garden. I suggest you take in other perspectives as a precautionary measure.

In the Hebrew book B*reshiyth, Hhittiy (hhet-thaw-yodh) may not
mean the Hittites of Anatolia. Hhittiy derives from Hheth. The
Hhittiy are more commonly designated by b*nei Hheth. These
Hhittiy are located far south at Hebron in Canaan circa 1750 BCE.
They have authority to transfer land ownership through a council
of equals.

Though it's possible these Hhittiy are connected somehow to the
Anatolian Hittites, they are clearly Canaanites to the Author
of B*reshiyth. Whenever a Hhittiy is given a name in B*reshiyth,
it's always a name in the language of Canaan. They are Hhamites.

The Anatolian Hittites with their major city Khattushash (Hattusa)
are the Khatti in their own Indo-European language Khattili. They
also had a language Neshili.

These are identified as Yaphetites in the Table of Nations.
Meshech is the Hebrew homonym for the Hatti name Mosokh -- founder
of their city Massukh or Massukhanda. Togarmah (son of Gomer)
and Tubal are the other Anatolian Hittite representatives in the
Table of Nations, residing opposite the Taurus mountains in the
Hatti heartland. There is a relief near Ivriz depicting the
Hatti king Warpalawa of Tubal worshipping his fertility god
Tarhund. Togarmah is the Tegarma (of cuneiform
inscriptions.

The Indo-European and presumed Europid/white/Caucasian Hatti
gave their name to the confederacy of peoples forming the Hittite
empire. Both Egyptian and Hatti iconography of Hittites shows
them of no one conforming phenotype. Presumably, the non-Europid
looking Hittites belong to the people conquered by the invading
Hatti at the middle of the 2nd millenium BCE. They appear to have
some affinities with Mongol types.