"[6] Astour provides a useful overview of the various attempts at placing Ḫattušili II within the chronological and genealogical sequence of Hittite kings up to 1989, concluding that he "is an extraordinarily elusive character" and should be discarded.
[15] Astour cited the discovery of seal impressions naming Šuppiluliuma I as the son of Tudḫaliya III as final proof of the non-existence of Ḫattušili II,[16] but this would only preclude the insertion of Ḫattušili II at this specific point in the chronological and genealogical sequence of monarchs.
Moreover, recent studies indicate that Šuppiluliuma was actually the son-in-law and perhaps adopted son of Tudḫaliya III,[17] although that does not necessarily have any bearing on the existence and placement of Ḫattušili II.
[22] Given the scarcity of evidence and the reference to Tudḫaliya II succeeding to his father’s throne at an early age, Freu posits a short reign, which he defines approximately as 1440–1425 BC.
[23] This reign corresponded to a recession in the Egyptian involvement in northern Syria, allowing for Ḫattušili II’s intervention in the affairs of Aleppo, Aštata, and Nuḫḫaši, and possibly amicable relations with Egypt.