[932] Quoting Hecatæus of Miletus (Polyhistor., ed. Mommsen, p. 129, c. 38, § 1 and ff.). This tradition formed the basis of many old theories about the Hittites, notably those advanced by Mordtmann, Lehmann, and Jensen, upon which we need no longer dwell.
[933] Professor Maspero (Struggle of the Nations, p. 668) seems to us to have traced the origin of the tradition in a confusion between the memory of the great kingdom of Khilakku and the fabled dominion of the Hatti kings.
[934] The inscriptions of Bor, Bulghar-Madên, and Ivrîz are clearly confined to two generations at most; cf. [p. 188].
[935] [P. 375.] In this map the Assyrian names of the states are used, and modern names are quoted in some cases where identification is possible. Capitals denote modern towns not necessarily Hittite but useful as landmarks.
[936] Cf. [the map to face p. 390].
[937] With Khilakku we incline to include Cilicia with Tarsus; Northeastern Cilicia seems to have been distinct under the name of Quë; see above, [p. 326, note 3].
[938] ‘Twenty-four kings’ are mentioned, c. B.C. 838.
[939] Identified by Ramsay with Faustinopolis, see above, [p. 61, n. 4]. The record is dated B.C. 718, by which time the power of the ‘Cilician’ kings in Asia Minor had probably been broken by the Phrygians.