Constantine ‘the Great’ and Judas Maccabeus

Constantine ‘the Great’

and Judas Maccabeus

by

Damien F. Mackey

“And just as Judas Maccabeus is promised divine aid in a dream before his victory 

over Nicanor, so Constantine dreams that he will conquer his rival Maxentius”.

 Paul Stephenson

Some of the Greek (Seleucid) history, conventionally dated to the last several BC centuries, appears to have been projected (appropriated) into a fabricated Roman imperial history of the first several AD centuries.

Most notably, in this regard, is the supposed Second Jewish Revolt against emperor Hadrian’s Rome, which – on closer examination – turns out to have been the Maccabean Jewish revolt against Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’, of whom emperor Hadrian is “a mirror image”.

See e.g. my series:

Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’ and Emperor Hadrian. Part One: “… a mirror image”

beginning with:

https://www.academia.edu/32734925/Antiochus_Epiphanes_and_Emperor_Hadrian._Part_One_a_mirror_image_

For more on this, see:

Judas Maccabeus – Judas the Galilean

https://www.academia.edu/people/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=judas+the+galilean

and

Judas Maccabeus and the downfall of Gog

https://www.academia.edu/37906894/Judas_Maccabeus_and_the_downfall_of_Gog

and

Maccabeans and Crusaders Seleucids and Saltukids Seljuks

(4) Maccabeans and Crusaders Seleucids and Saltukids Seljuks | Damien Mackey – Academia.edu

Now, last night (2^nd December, 2019), as I was reading through a text-like book on Constantine: Roman Emperor, Christian Victor (The Overlook Press, NY, 2010), written by Paul Stephenson, I was struck by the similarities between the Dyarchy (Greek δι- “twice” and αρχια, “rule”) – which later became the Tetrarchy (Greek τετραρχία) of the four emperors – on the one hand, and, on the other hand, the Diadochoi following on from Alexander the Great.

Concerning the latter, we read (The Jerome Biblical Commentary, 1968, 75:103): “With Alexander’s death, the leadership of several successors (Diadochoi) was ineffectual, and finally a fourfold division of the empire took place”.

Compare the Roman Tetrarchy with the “fourfold division” of Alexander of Macedon’s empire.

Added to this was the parallel factor of the ‘Great Persecution’ against Christians (c. 300 AD, conventional dating), and, of course, the infamous persecution of the Jews by Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’.

And I have already pointed to similarities between one of the four Roman emperors, of the time of Constantine, Galerius, and Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’.

But these are the sorts of similarities of which Paul Stephenson (author of the book on Constantine) is also aware (on p. 128 below he uses the phrase “the remarkable coincidences”).

1. 109:

Lactantius’ On the Deaths of the Persecutors is the best and fullest account of the period 303-13 and this is indispensable. But it is also an angry screed, with no known model in Greek or Latin literature, nor in Christian apologetic. Not only did Lactantius delight in the misfortune and demise of the persecuting emperors, he also attributed them to the intervention of the god of the Christians, defending the interest of the faithful. Such an approach rejected the very premise on which martyrs had accepted death at the hands of their persecutors: that their god did not meddle in earthly affairs to bring misfortune upon Roman emperors. This was the first step in articulating a new Christian triumphalist rhetoric, which we shall explore more fully in later chapters.

In doing so, Lactantius drew on an Old Testament model, the Second Book of Maccabees, which still forms an accepted part of the Orthodox canon. Thus, the opening refrain of each text thanks God for punishing the wicked, and the agonizing death of Galerius mirrors that of Antiochus Epiphanes (2 Maccabees 9). And just as Judas Maccabeus is promised divine aid in a dream before his victory over Nicanor, so Constantine dreams that he will conquer his rival Maxentius.

1. 127

Lactantius took great pleasure relating [Galerius’] death as divine punishment for his persecutions, describing his repulsive symptoms and the failure of pagan doctors and prayers to heal him.

Here I (Damien Mackey) will take the description from:

The most loathsome disease of the emperor Galerius

“And now when Galerius was in the eighteenth year of his reign, God struck him with an incurable disease. A malignant ulcer formed itself in the secret parts and spread by degree. The physicians attempted to eradicate it… But the sore, after having been skimmed over, broke again; a vein burst, and the blood flowed in such quantity as to endanger his life… The physicians had to undertake their operations anew, and at length they cauterized the wound… He grew emaciated, pallid, and feeble, and the bleeding then stanched. The ulcer began to be insensible to the remedy as applied, and gangrene seized all the neighboring parts. It diffused itself the wider the more the corrupted flesh was cut away, and everything employed as the means of cure served but to aggravate the disease. The masters of the healing art withdrew. Then famous physicians were brought in from all quarters; but no human means had any success… and the distemper augmented. Already approaching to its deadly crisis, it had occupied the lower regions of his body, his bowels came out; and his whole seat putrefied.

The luckless physicians, although without hope of overcoming the malady, ceased not to apply fermentations and administer remedies. The humors having been repelled, the distemper attacked his intestines, and worms were generated in his body. The stench was so foul as to pervade not only the palace, but even the whole city; and no wonder, for by that time the passages from waste bladder and bowels, having been devoured by the worms, became indiscriminate, and his body, with intolerable anguish, was dissolved into one mass of corruption.”

1. 128

… Already dying [Galerius] issued the following edict [ending persecution] ….

…. Lactantius cites the edict in full. The story has much in common with the account of the death of Antiochus, persecutor of the Jews in the Second Book of Maccabees. Lactantius must have been struck by the remarkable coincidences, and borrowed Antiochus’ worms and stench.

….

The plot now thickens, with the heretical Arius also dying a horrible (Antiochus-Galerius) type of death:

1. 275

Under imperial instruction, Arius was to be marched into church and admitted into full communion, but he never made it. Tradition holds that he died on the way, a hideous death reminiscent of Galerius’, which in Lactantius’ account drew heavily upon the death of Antiochus, persecutor of the Jews in 2 Maccabees. ….

Constantine more like ‘Epiphanes’  

Some substantial aspects of the life of Constantine seem to have been lifted

right out of the era of king Antiochus IV ‘Epiphanes’ and the Maccabees.

As briefly noted above:

Constantine’s victory over Maxentius is somewhat reminiscent of the victory over Nicanor by the superb Jewish general, Judas Maccabeus.

“And just as Judas Maccabeus is promised divine aid in a dream before his victory over Nicanor, so Constantine dreams that he will conquer his rival Maxentius”.

Other comparisons can be drawn as well.

For instance, Constantine’s army, too, was significantly outnumbered by that of his opponent.

Again, after Constantine’s victory the head of Maxentius was publicly paraded:

https://ehistory.osu.edu/biographies/flavius-valerius-constantinus-constantine-great

“His body was recovered, his head removed, then mounted on a lance and paraded triumphantly by Constantine’s men”.

Cf. 2 Maccabees 15:30-33):

Then Judas, that man who was ever in body and soul the chief defender of his fellow citizens, and had maintained from youth his affection for his compatriots, ordered Nicanor’s head and right arm up to the shoulder to be cut off and taken to Jerusalem. When he arrived there, he assembled his compatriots, stationed the priests before the altar, and sent for those in the citadel.

He showed them the vile Nicanor’s head and the wretched blasphemer’s arm that had been boastfully stretched out against the holy dwelling of the Almighty. He cut out the tongue of the godless Nicanor, saying he would feed it piecemeal to the birds and would hang up the other wages of his folly opposite the temple.

Prior to his battle with Nicanor, Judas, according to 2 Maccabees (15:15-16), received from the deceased prophet Jeremiah, in “a dream, a kind of waking vision, worthy of belief” (v. 11), a golden sword.

Stretching out his right hand, Jeremiah presented a gold sword to Judas. As he gave it to him he said, ‘Accept this holy sword as a gift from God; with it you shall shatter your adversaries’.

Could this be the origin (in part) of the Excalibur (King Arthur) legends?

For Constantine apparently occupies a fair proportion of Arthurian legend according to:

http://theconversation.com/here-are-the-five-ancient-britons-who-make-up-the-myth-of-king-arthur-86874

Constantine the Great, who in AD 306 was proclaimed Roman emperor in York, forms 8% of Arthur’s story, whilst Magnus Maximus, a usurper from AD 383, completes a further 39%. Both men took troops from Britain to fight against the armies of Rome, Constantine defeating the emperor Maxentius; Maximus killing the emperor Gratian, before advancing to Italy. Both sequences are later duplicated in Arthur’s story.

Earlier, I had likened somewhat the fourfold division of the empire of Alexander the Great and the tetrarchy of Constantine’s reign, including the case of the emperor Galerius with whom I had previously identified Antiochus IV ‘Epiphanes’.

And, as I pointed out in the following article, historians can find it difficult to distinguish between the buildings of (the above-mentioned) Herod and those of Hadrian:

Herod and Hadrian

https://www.academia.edu/36240747/Herod_and_Hadrian

Of chronological ‘necessity’ they must assume that, as according to this article:

In the later Hadrianic period material from the earlier Herodian constructions was reused, resetting the distinctive “Herodian” blocks in new locations.

But, of further chronological ‘necessity’, historians must also assume that some of Hadrian’s architecture, for its part, was “recarved” and “recut”, to allow Constantine later to make use of it: https://followinghadrian.com/2016/08/18/the-hadrianic-tondi-on-the-arch-of-constantine/

…. The first pair of roundels on the south side depicts Antinous, Hadrian, an attendant and a friend of the court (amicus principis) departing for the hunt (left tondo) and sacrificing to Silvanus, the Roman god of the woods and wild (right tondo).

Tondi Adrianei on the Arch of Constantine, Southern side – left lateral, LEFT: Departure for the hunt, RIGHT: Sacrifice to Silvanus

….

The first pair of roundels on the south side depicts a bear hunt (left tondo) and a sacrifice to the goddess of hunting Diana (right tondo).

….

On the north side, the left pair depicts a boar hunt (left tondo) and a sacrifice to Apollo (right tondo). The figure on the top left of the boar hunt relief is clearly identified as Antinous while Hadrian, on horseback and about to strike the boar with a spear, was recarved to resemble the young Constantine. The recarved emperor in the sacrifice scene is likely to be Licinius or Constantius Chlorus.

….

Tondi Adrianei on the Arch of Constantine, Northern side – left lateral, LEFT: Boar hunt, RIGHT: Sacrifice to Apollo

….

On the north side, the right pair depicts a lion hunt (left tondo) and a sacrifice to Hercules (right tondo). The figure of Hadrian in the hunt scene was recut to resemble the young Constantine while in the sacrifice scene the recarved emperor is either Licinius or Constantius Chlorus. The figure on the left of the hunt tondo may show Antinous as he was shortly before his death; with the [first] signs of a beard, meaning he was no longer a young man. These tondi are framed in purple-red porphyry. This framing is only extant on this side of the northern facade. ….

Fred S. Kleiner (A History of Roman Art, p. 326, my emphasis) will go as far as to write that “every block of the arch [of Constantine] were [sic] reused from earlier buildings”:

The Arch of Constantine was the largest erected in Rome since the end of the Severan dynasty nearly a century before, but recent investigations have shown that the columns and every block of the arch were reused from earlier buildings. …. Although the figures on many of the stone blocks were newly carved for this arch, much of the sculptural decoration was taken from monuments of Trajan, Hadrian …. Sculptors refashioned the second-century reliefs to honor Constantine by recutting the heads of the earlier emperors with the features of the new ruler. ….

The highly paganised (Sol Invictus) polytheistic worshipping, family murdering, Constantine makes for – somewhat like Charlemagne – a very strange, exemplary Christian emperor.

And Constantine’s rushed ‘conversion’ during his Persian campaign, just before his death: https://www.ukessays.com/essays/history/constantine-the-great-a-roman-emperor-history-essay.php “Since he was converted into Christianity later in his life, he was not baptized until a little time before his death. He died on May twenty second, A.D. 337 on the way to campaign against the Persians”, is something of a carbon copy of that of Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’, upon his flight from Persia, terminally ill. Besides all this, he would become a Jew himself and visit every inhabited place to proclaim there the power of God.

The whole account of it is, I think, vividly narrated in 2 Maccabees 9:1-29.

Recommended viewing:

The Deception of Constantine

Mitanni and Urartu the same place: Heathcotte

Mitanni and Urartu the same place: Heathcotte

“The second connection, Assuwa with Assur is also a no-brainer for the same reasons.

“Wa” can be pronounced “r” so Assuwa is pronounced the same as Assur”.

Brock Heathcotte

Taken from Tugdamme the Hittite, Brock Heathcotte (January 28, 2017, Chapter 13):

 

Identifying Other Enemies: Mitanni = Urartu and Assuwa = Assur

Barry Curnock explained all the evidence establishing that Mitanni and Urartu are the same place in great detail in his unpublished work, and it cannot be improved upon. Suffice to say there have only been two major Hurrian-speaking nations in the past three millennia—the Mitanni of Hittite records and Urartu of the Assyrian records.

The former was conquered by the Hittites, according to Hittite records, and the later was conquered by the Cimmerians, Scythians and Medes according to Assyrian records. 

Modern historians confused by mistaken chronology don’t know exactly where to locate the Kingdom of Mitanni on a map of the Mideast. They end up placing it geographically northwest of Assyria inside the bend of the Euphrates river. Everyone knows Urartu was on the northern border of Assyria. But mapping is of little consequence. Moving the Hittites to the time when Urartu was a major kingdom leaves no room for doubt that Mitanni and Urartu are the same place. The allegedly missing capital city of Mitanni, Wassukanni, is not really missing at all. It was the Urartian capital city of Rusakina. Recall that Hittite “wa” was pronounced, if at all, as “r.”

The second connection, Assuwa with Assur is also a no-brainer for the same reasons. “Wa” can be pronounced “r” so Assuwa is pronounced the same as Assur.

Assuwa is the Hittite name for a place mentioned in two documents, the Annals of

Tudhalia, and Ahhiyawa Text AhT 6. According to those documents, Assuwa was a late

8th Century leader of many small Anatolian nations or peoples. That sounds like Assyria under Sargon II. According to the Annals of Tudhaliya, the following sequence of events happened:

Tudhaliya defeated the 22 allies, apparently allies of Assuwa; 

Tudhaliya destroyed Assuwa; 

Someone named Kukkuli raised a large army from Assuwa and led an uprising;

The gods defeated Kukkuli and killed him; 

Tudhaliya was in the country of Assuwa to fight;  Kaskans entered Hatti behind him and devastated the land;  Tudhaliya returned to Hattusa and fought the Kaskans. 

Clearly Tudhaliya’s victory over Assuwa did not conquer a nation called Assuwa which seems to be a powerful place even after Tudhaliya “destroyed” it. Where did this land go? Why was it not mentioned again except in reference to the victory of Tudhaliya? It was probably not mentioned again because Assuwa was later written as Assur. Which means, of course, that it was mentioned again, just written differently.

Scholars say Assuwa was a confederation of western Anatolian kingdoms that was conquered by Tudhaliya and became the namesake for the land the Romans later called Asia. Assuwa = Asia. Their conclusion is based almost entirely on a desire that one of the 22 Assuwan allies called Wilusiya should be the same as Wilusa which they want against all odds to be the same as Ilios of the Homeric epics. But when you think about that it seems preposterous. The nation and name Assuwa was lost to history about 1400 but reappeared over a millennia later to become the Roman province of Asia, c. 130? Really?

Regardles of the wordplay, there was no such thing as a confederation of Asian monarchies predating the Greek Ionian and Aeolian leagues. The existence of such a confederation would imply the famous Greek leagues of city-states followed in the footsteps of petty Asian kings, which is patently absurd. Greek democrats invented citystate leagues, not Asian kings. 

Perhaps the Assuwa “league” was a group of Asian vassals led by a major power. But who was that major power? Not Lydia. We know their history well enough to know that can’t be, not before Gyges. Not Phrygia. It was never the hegemon of all western Anatolia. Not Ahhiyawa. They apparently were junior allies of Assuwa based on what’s written in AhT 6. Who was this major power of western Anatolia defeated by the Hittites in 1400? Nobody truly fits. 

There was a major Anatolian power defeated by the Hittites in the 8^th and 7^th Centuries—Assur. When you move the Hittites to the later dates advocated here, the land of Ahhiyawa must be found to be in Cilicia, as described earlier. And, if Ahhiyawa is in Cilicia, then Wilusa is in or near Cilicia too. (Eliaussa seems like a reasonable choice.) 

So, there is no reason to place the Assuwa “league” of allies in western Anatolia anyway. It should be near Cilicia. The Assyrian Empire was near Cilicia, and in fact, AhhiyawaQue was an Assyrian ally. It all adds up to Assuwa being Assur.

Which of the several Tudhaliyas wrote the Annals of Tudhaliya is another interesting question. Historians first believed it was Tudhaliya IV near the end of the Hittite New Kingdom. Later they changed their minds and declared it was Tudhaliya II at the very beginning of the New Kingdom. But maybe it was Tudhaliya III, grandfather of Mursili II. There are similarities between the campaigns described in the Annals of Tudhaliya and those described in the Deeds of Suppiluliuma involving Tudhaliya III. That question requires further study. ….

That Urartu has been a complete mystery is apparent from the following brief piece:

Ancient Kingdom Of Urartu Still Shrouded In Mystery – Will New Excavations Reveal Some Of Its Secrets? – MessageToEagle.com

MessageToEagle.com – The lost kingdom of Urartu is shrouded in mystery. Urartian artifacts created in this ancient region are puzzling, like for example the winged faceless sphinx or plate of the gods holding an unknown object in their hands.

Very little is known about this ancient place and the origins of its people.

Who were they? Where did they come from?

Still only a third to a half of the 300 known Urartian sites in Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Armenia have been excavated. At the same time, the prehistoric Urartian legacy is not satisfatorily protected from plundering by treasure-hunters.

The kingdom’s beginnings are lost in the mists of pre-history, but before it was destroyed, Urartu was situated in Eastern Turkey, Iran and the modern Armenian Republic. ….

Brock Heathcotte’s brilliant extension of King Gyges of Lydia to include Uhhazitis

Brock Heathcotte’s brilliant extension of King Gyges of Lydia to include Uhhazitis

“Lydia was allied with Ephesus and Mylasa.

Arzawa was allied with Apasas and Millawanda.

And the kings’ names, Gyges and Uhhazitis

come from the same Luwian root word for grandfather”.

Brock Heathcotte

Taken from Tugdamme the Hittite, Brock Heathcotte (January 28, 2017, Chapters 5-6):

Mursili’s Thunderbolt and the Sacred Stone of Ephesus

Still today, those promoting the antiquity and history of the city of Ephesus claim that a sacred stone “fallen from Jupiter” was kept in the original temple of Artemis, and that it was probably a meteorite that fell from the sky. The worship of a goddess at the later temple of Artemis at Ephesus dated to pre-Greek times, and the temple was destroyed and rebuilt several times throughout history. An early version of the temple certainly existed in the 7^th century BCE.

A later version of the temple was considered to be one of the seven wonders of the Ancient World. In that later temple, the image of Artemis “fallen from Jupiter” resided. This later image was likely of wood, not stone.

In “The Image which Fell Down from Jupiter,” C.C. Wylie and J. R. Naiden explored the question of meteorites and sacred images in antiquity, and the authenticity of the particular claim for the image of Artemis at Ephesus. They concluded that the ancient belief in the astral origin of such images was likely founded upon actual meteorites but whether each individual instance was evidence of a meteorite or a copy cat cannot be determined. It is certain that the wooden image of Artemis held sacred at a later version of the temple of Artemis at Ephesus did not actually fall from the sky. However, it remains possible, if not probable that the tradition of a sacred stone, not a wooden image, was carried forward by an actual meteorite event at Ephesus in earlier times.

            Which brings us to the one piece of literary evidence that might record an actual meteorite event at Ephesus, the Annals of Mursili, year 3. Mursili wrote,

As I reached the R. Sehiriya, the awesome Tarhunnas, my lord, manifested (his) grace: he hurled a thunderbolt. The land of Hatti saw it from behind, and the land of Arzawa saw it from the front. The thunderbolt itself hastened, and it struck Apasas, the city of Uhhazitis, and it hit Uhhazitis, and a bad sickness afflicted him. It broke his knee.

            Most historians have concluded that the city Apasas in Mursili’s annals refers to the city of Ephesus. Many historians have concluded that Mursili described a meteor strike in the above passage of his annals. The meteor struck Ephesus and was witnessed by Mursili’s army as he was marching west across Anatolia. One of Mursili’s subordinates reported that Uhhazitis, the King of Arzawa—Mursili’s enemy—was physically affected by the meteor strike. Mursili wrote,

As I reached Aura, Mashuiluwas, who held (…), hastened before me, and I questioned him. He spoke to me, “The thunderbolt of the god struck Uhhazitis, and a bad sickness has afflicted him, and it has broken his knee.”

This may have been the unluckiest meteor strike in world history because Mursili was at that very moment marching west to fight against Uhhazitis. If the events described can be taken literally, Mursili’s subsequent devastation of Ephesus couldn’t possibly be taken for anything other than divine wrath foretold by the meteor strike. It is clear from Mursili’s annals that many people fled from Ephesus before his army arrived. The survivors of his attack would almost certainly worship the sacred stone the lightning god hurled from the sky as an omen that destruction was approaching, particularly the ones who heeded the omen and escaped.

This matters for dating Mursili’s year 3 invasion because Apasas of the meteorite, must be Ephesus of the image that fell down from Jupiter. Most historians agree that Hittite Apasas and Ephesus are the same place. Mursili called Apasas the “city of Uhhazitis.”  But the archaeology and history of urbanized Ephesus began with the Greeks. So, if it was a city, and it was beholden to Arzawa, an Asian power described by Mursili, then we know from archaeology who that Asian power must have been—Lydia. The only archaeological evidence of foreign control of Ephesus after it became a Greek city but before the Persians conquered all of Ionia is Lydian. This suggests strongly that the country called Arzawa by the Hittites was known to the Greeks as Lydia. So Uhhazitis must have been a Lydian king.

Chapter 6

…

Gyges’ Knee and Ockham’s Razor

            King Gyges of Lydia, well known from Greek sources, has been recognized in some Assyrian texts with his name translated as “Gugu,” “Kuku,” and “Huhu.” That these names refer to Gyges is almost entirely undisputed. This seems rational because K and H were generally pronounced the same (hard C) whether spelled with a K, H, Kh, or Ch. Of course, pronunciation of G and K are very similar so when trying to spell words pronounced by a foreigner it is reasonable for them to be interchangeable. 

The word Gugu, being used as a name, regardless of spelling, has been translated from the Luwian language to mean grandfather. The name of Mursili’s opponent in his Arzawa war, Uhhazitis, sometimes hyphenated Uhha-zitis, is almost certainly derived from the same source because the Hittite language and other Luwian languages are closely related. The fact that Uhhazitis had sons who fought on his behalf during his war against Mursili, most probably means that he actually was a grandfather at the time.

In the early 7^th Century, Gyges seized and held the throne of Lydia with the help of his close allies Melas of Ephesus and Arselis of Mylasa. (Maspero 1900, pp. 389, 427; see also Plutarch.) Ephesus was the Aegean port city favored by Gyges to be the focus of Lydian trade with the Greeks and the far west. In addition to Lydian gold, goods from the east travelled the “royal road” through Lydia. Although Sardes was the Lydian capital, Ephesus was indeed, The City of Gyges in the same way Washington DC is the capital of the United States but New York City is The City of the United States. 

Interestingly, Mursili wrote that Apasas was the “city of Uhhazitis” but in his report of the war the Arzawans did not stand and fight for Apasas. Instead, they retreated to Puranda and fought there.

Apasas/Ephesus was a business center. Puranda/Sardes was a fortress. In the Persian language of a later time, Sardes was an important city and the Persians pronounced the name Sparda, a reasonably close version of Hittite Puranda.

Mylasa, on the other hand, was a military ally of Gyges controlled by the people called Carians. Millawanda was an ally of Uhhazitis. There was a time when some historians agreed that Hittite Millawanda referred to Mylasa, not the Aegean port city of Miletus as most do now. In the scenario described here, with the Hittites attacking Arzawa/Lydia in the 650s, it is not possible for Millawanda to be Miletus because there is a known history of Miletus for that time that doesn’t include being controlled by Lydia. And, Miletus was never conquered by the Cimmerians. Herodotus described numerous wars by Lydia against Miletus. The two nations had a very contentious relationship, probably in part because Miletus itself was impervious to attack by land, and the Lydians were land lubbers, as were the Cimmerians. So, there appears to be symmetry between Lydia and Arzawa. Lydia’s capital Sardes/Sparda was a fortress that was sacked by the Cimmerians. Arzawa’s capital Puranda was a fortress that was sacked by the Hittites. Lydia was allied with Ephesus and Mylasa. Arzawa was allied with Apasas and Millawanda. And the kings’ names, Gyges and Uhhazitis come from the same Luwian root word for grandfather.

Assyrian texts say that Gyges sought Assyrian aid against the Cimmerians, and even sent Cimmerian captives to Assurbanipal. There is no evidence that Assurbanipal or any other Assyrians ever did anything to help Gyges. Apparently, Gyges offended Assyria by sending soldiers to support Egypt during the time Egypt was asserting its independence from Assyrian overlords. Subsequently, Gyges was defeated and killed by the Cimmerians led by Tugdamme, which Assurbanipal thought was just and appropriate. This is all standard, commonly accepted history and can be found in any text book on Ancient Lydia.

Interestingly, one historical source says that Assurbanipal described Gyges at the time of his death as “this broken walking-stick.” (Dandamaev 1989.)

[T]he Cimmerians, headed by their chieftain Lygdamis (Tugdamme of the Assyrian sources), again attacked Lydia which now of course could no longer count on the help of Assyria, and between 657 and 654 B.C. Gyges himself (according to Assurbanipal’s graphic description, “this broken walking-stick”), who had not obtained help from Egypt, perished in battle.

As mentioned above, Mursili wrote of a lightning bolt from the sky that struck Apasas and injured Uhhazitis. In fact, Mursili’s vassal Mashuiluwas reported that it had “broken his knee.” Also of interest is that both Mursili’s Hittite report of Uhhaziti’s demise and Assurbanipal’s report of Gyges’ demise both imply that the dead king’s corpse was displayed before the conquering enemy, the Hittites and the Cimmerians respectively.

            It is quite bizarre for two leaders with such similar names, Uhhazitis and Gyges, who ruled over the same area, with the same allies, and suffered similar military defeats, to have been described in contemporary but unconnected sources one as having “broken his knee” and the other as “this broken walking-stick,” and both men’s corpses were mistreated after death. The odds against these two historical figures being two different men seem astronomical.

We would also be remiss if we did not notice that the range of dates given by Dandamaev for Gyges’ death (657-654) at the hands of Tugdamme overlaps with the range of dates for Mursili’s Arzawa war against Uhhazitis (660-655) deduced previously by using 657 as the date of Mursili’s Eclipse. Apply Ockham’s razor. Uhhazitis and Gyges were the same man. ….